RA1963/06/24REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
June 24, 1963 (7:00 P.M.)
PRESENT: Mr. Coons, Chairman; Mr. Dutton; Mr. Schutte and Mr. Krein.
ABSENT: Mr. Chandler.
PRESENT: SECRETARY: Dene M. Williams.
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Mr. Richard Reese.
SENIOR PLANNER, URBAN RENEWAL: Mr. Clarence Dingman.
URBAN RENEWAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE: Mr. Harry Horn, Chairman
Mr. Morris Martinet, Jr,
Mr. James Morris
Mr. Jay DeDapper.
Mr. Lawrence Henderson
Chairman Rector L. Coons called the meeting to order.
Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency was called pursuant to notice of said meet-
ing sent by the Secretary.
ECONOMICS RESEARCH ASSOCIATION REPORT 01 ECONOMIC POTENTIAL OF THE ANAHEIM CENTER
CITY AREA " : Chairman Coons introduced Mr. Harrison A. Price, President of
Economic Research Associates.
Mr. Price advised that the study began approximately six or
seven months ago with the team of Phillip S. Stukin, project leader, William
S. Lund and J. Richard McElyea, project managers, together with other con-
sultants, and represents a total research effort of two man years.
inquiry:
He advised that the study includes the following lines of
1. Analysis and evaluation of general economic trends in Orange
County. Northern Orange County and Anaheim, including pro-
jections of population and employment in these areas.
2. Analysis and projection of demand for major land uses, includ-
ing residential retail, office, and industrial.
3. Determination of realistic support levels for major land uses
in the Center City area to 1980.
4. Projections of space requirements for the proposed new city
hall.
5. Projections of acreage requirements for major land uses in
the Center City area.
6. Analysis of appropriate locational factors for the various
land uses.
7. Locational recommendation for the proposed city hall.
8. Presentation of a schematic land use model of the Center City
area.
9. Development of an appropriate implementation program.
Mr. William Lund, project manager, addressed the Agency advising
that when they undertook this study, the primary objection presented to them
was what steps could be taken to revitalize and stimulate the center city
area of Anaheim. He stated the entire scope of work has dealt not only with
the center city area, but with a broader geographic, political and economic
area surrounding the city to evaluate how this study area fit into the over-
all economic growth patterns taking place in the larger geographic area.
Redevelopment Agency, June 24. 1963 - Continued
Mr. Lund noted many of the factors taken into consideration in the
study, such as the present and projected population for Orange County, the
population of the City, and specifically, the 617 acres in the study area;
the characteristics of the center city area, the employment and income factor;
the average family size, future projected commercial and office space, medical
and retail sales and service, civic administration building, off - street park-
ing requirements, future school requirements and hospital facilities.
In summary, the area projected for commercial - office space was
that area from Harbor Boulevard to Los Angeles Street, and from Lincoln Avenue j
to Broadway; the area projected for multiple development was that area east
of Los Angeles Street, north of Lincoln Avenue, and the area surrounding
Harbor Boulevard, east and west, north of Lincoln Avenue; later increasing
multiple development density east of Los Angeles Street, south of Lincoln
Avenue.
From a planning point of view, for major land use and development,
the following factors must be alleviated:
1. Traffic congestion and traffic flow, for better ingress and
egress to the area.
2. Preparation of a detailed physical plan for the center city
area, indicating which area should be developed first, and
serving as a guide line for future development.
In conclusion, Mr. Lund advised that there was a tremendous
potential for the downtown area to become a healthy self - supporting central
business district, that how much of this economic support is directed and
captured by this area was dependent upon the steps the local citizens and
government take to provide a stimulus for this development.
In answer to a question concerning alleviating traffic conditions,
Mr. Lund advised the problem be referred to a traffic engineer, and briefly
outlined some of the steps that a traffic engineer might consider after
survey, such as better signing, one -way traffic, etc.
Mr. DeDapper asked how the population figures compared with those
of Stanford Research Institute,made in 1958.
Mr. Lund advised that the projections were the same, with minor
variations; that their estimate for 1970 is slightly greater than those of
Stanford Research Institute.
Mr. Schutte reported an incident wherein a land developer attempted
to acquire property in the vicinity of Pearson Park for a multiple family struc-
ture, and was advised that the cost of the land being as high as $50,000.00 for
a 50 -foot lot prohibited the development. He asked how developers could be
attracted to this area facing such circumstances.
Mr. Lund replied that the land cost was reflected in the cost per
unit, and by constructing high -rise structures, increasing the density, the
land cost per unit would be reduced.
Mr. Dutton asked if they had any experience where a land assembly
program of approximately 12 acres has acted as a catalyst for development?
Mr. Lund replied, normally where this has been undertaken, it has
been on a major scale and it has been successful and substantially upgraded
the area. He further explained that what they were trying to accomplish in
Anaheim was to achieve the same results without going into a major land
acquisition program; however, the method to be used is a decision to be made
internally.
Redevelopment Agency, June 24, 1963 - Continued
Mr. Silverman (from the audience) asked if there was a figure
that could determine the percentage of people who could afford the high
rent necessary in the center city area.
Mr. Lund referred Mr. Silverman to page 29 and 30 of the report.
Mr. Phillip Stukin advised that this was not a high -rise
exclusively, and astronomical rents were not needed for a profitable
apartment house development, and reference was made to page 64 of the report.
Question was asked from the audience concerning the ratio of
parking required for a high -rise apartment project.
Mr. Lund replied that 1.75 and two parking spaces per apartment
unit for a high -rise development is recommended, and that this recommenda-
tion is from a practical point of view in renting the units.
Mr. Price briefly reviewed actions taken by the City of St.
Louis and City of Detroit, and the problem in these two cities that
Economic Research Associates are presently working on. He stated that
approximately forty acres in one city and thirty acres in the other of
extremely blighted area was being redeveloped by private programs; however
in both cases, the power of eminent domain, even though the percentage
has been low, is being used.
On motion by Mr. Krein, seconded by Mr. Schutte, the report of
Economic Research Associates was received and referred to the Advisory
Committee for review and recommendation. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT On motion by Mr. Dutton, seconded by Mr. Schutte, said meeting
was adjourned, 8:35 P.M. MOTION CARRIED.
SIGNED:
ec etary, Redevelopment Agency