RA1975/12/1675 -126
ANAHEIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
December 16, 1975, (1 :00 P.M.)
Council Chamber
Anaheim City Hall
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley (entered 1 :10 P.M.),
Sneegas and Thom
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
PRESENT: ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT: John Harding
CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts
SECRETARY: Alona M. Hougard
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR: Knowlton Fernald
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY: Malcolm Slaughter
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR - PLANNING: Don McDaniel
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ECONOMIST: Sybil Silverman
Chairman Thom called the Regular Meeting of the Anaheim Community
Development Commission to order at 1 :03 P.M. for the purpose of
sitting as the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency and the Anaheim Housing
Authority.
MINUTES On motion by Commissioner Sneegas, seconded by Commissioner
Thom, minutes of the Regular Meetings held December 2 and 9, 1975,
were approved. Commissioner Pebley absent. MOTION CARRIED.
REPORT - FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
Demands against the Redevelopment Agency and the Housing Authority,
in the amounts of $22,084.22 and $1,187.48 respectively, in accordance
with the 1975 -76 Budget, were approved. •I
I. ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Community Development Director
Knowlton Fernald commented on the first two items to be considered by
the Redevelopment Agency, i.e. reports and recommendations by the
Redevelopment Staff and Community Redevelopment Commission pertaining
to the Anaheim Intracity Transportation System Study and the Energy
Conservation and Resource Management Study proposal for downtown
Project ''Alpha ". He advised that both studies were highly signifi-
cant; and, in the case of the energy proposal, a severe problem in
development of the downtown area could result from new energy legis-
lation and implementation of Environmental Protection Agency require -
ments. In the past, the E.P.A. has recommended a reduction of
vehicular parking and limitation of parking facilities. One of the
solutions offered in the past was the implementation of a Parking
Management Plan for the city, and in conjunction therewith, both
energy management and transportation can be a great asset.
.The soaring costs of energy and fuel will continue to be a
problem in the feasibility of constructing new buildings; office
structures more than three stories in height are not feasible at
present, in many cases. Engineers and architects are learning to
cope with some of the new federal and state legislation governing
energy.
It was Mr. Fernald's expectation that the proposed studies would
add a great deal of attraction and excitement to the marketing of
Downtown Anaheim, allowing the area to be presented as a city which
has coped with this type of problem: and found innovative solutions,
and present environment where some kinds of projects may flourish
when their feasibility might be in question in other locations.
Further, the study results would provide the opportunity to develop
a showcase for energy management, as a need exists to illustrate the
use of federal funds for these purposes and what can be accomplished
for monies spent.
75 -127
Community Development Commission Minutes - December 16, 1975, 1:00 P.M.
Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, Continued
Solar energy for heating office buildings has been discussed in
the past, and it might be possible to add solar energy to existing
heating and cooling plants. Parking structure roofs would be a con-
venient location to install solar collection devices.
(Commissioner Pebley entered the Council Chamber, 1 :10 P.M.)
Reorganization of existing transportation systems together with
additional systems would assist in getting people to their jobs. In
addition, there is an opportunity to create new value and interest
in residing near the downtown area. The role of the Redevelopment
Agency in both studies is catalytic. By initiating studies and sys-
tems programs to support the development of downtown Anaheim, the
Agency may assist in some fashion with construction, but not the
operation, of facilities. It is likely that the major construction
of these facilities would be accomplished by other City departments
or by some other method.
The following matters were considered by the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency:
ANAHEIM INTRACITY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY Mr. Fernald advised it
was the recommendation of the Community Redevelopment Commission that
the proposed Anaheim Intracity Transportation System Study and analysis
be conducted to offer alternatives to the automobile within the "Twin
Triangles" area of Anaheim. This area is defined as consisting of a
large triangle bounded by the Santa Ana, Riverside and Orange Freeways,
and a similar triangle bounded by the Santa Ana Freeway on the South-
west, and the Garden Grove Freeway on the South, encompassing the
Disneyland /Convention Center area. Also recommended was a funding
ratio for the study of 75% by the Redevelopment Agency and 25% by the
City, with costs expected to run between Fifty and Seventy -five
Thousand Dollars.
Since the time the proposed study was referred to the Redevelop-
ment Department for study, there have been reviews by the staff with
the Planning Department and two joint meetings between the Community
Redevelopment Commission and the Intermode Committee. Located in the
Twin Triangles area are nearly 80% of the City's employment, and
nearly one -half of the City's population, plus the tourism factor
which attracts more than ten million visitors per year. The area
also contains a complete range of services and shops, together with
school facilities, etc.
The purpose of the study would be to identify and analyse poten-
tial corridors with alternative transportation modes including
reorganizing existing modes, use of trams, minibuses, and possibly
a fixed guideway link from the Convention Center to the downtown.
Other possibilities include a sub - system running from Anaheim Plaza
to the downtown and on to shopping and service facilities at Lincoln
Avenue and State College Boulevard; all retail facilities in those
areas would thus be interconnected.
Commissioner Seymour pointed out that the last time the proposed
study was discussed, including the funding ratio, it was stated the
study would include the transportation linkage and the transportation
center. It had been his understanding that the designation of a
location for the center was the justification for the City paying
25% of the study costs. There seemed to be no mention of that in
today's report and draft for the necessary Request for Proposals
(R.F.P.). He inquired why this was apparently deleted from the study.
75 -128
Community Development Commission Minutes - December 16, 1975, 1:00 P.M.
Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, Continued
Assistant Director - Planning, Don McDaniel explained that the
transportation system study has been expanded beyond the initial
at'a n "A f nrirr -1" T Y'imar— hat f•'}�o Ctt.r�cr .,..,,l.i 1..,
a portion of a larger scope. The study will not only investigate
the link between Downtown and the Convention Center area, but also
from Disneyland to Anaheim Stadium, plus some expansion of service
in the Downtown district, and will be looking at all corridors in
the "twin triangle" area.
Commissioner Seymour called attention to the fact that although
the "twin triangle" concept indicates a potential Multi -Modal Trans-
portation Center, the report does not describe where a center would
be located.
Mr. Fernald noted that it was not intended to eliminate the
transportation center from the study, but to add subsystems to
serve areas. Perhaps the R.F.P. did not adequately reflect that
intent.
Mr. McDaniel noted that the specific location of the terminal
has not been identified by anyone, and the Orange County Transit
District would work with the City of Anaheim to locate the facility,
with final determination expected by the time the study is commenced.
Commissioner Seymour was of the opinion that the recommendations
presented did not define the premise of the terminal location as a
basis for the City's funding 25% of the study costs, and if there
has been a change in the original concept, he wanted to know whether
the change was initiated by the Community Redevelopment Commission,
the Intermode Committee, or someone else. It was clear that there
was a de- emphasis of the involvement in the study of the Multi -Modal
Transportation Center, and he read from the proposed R.F.P. submitted,
pages 4 and 5, Section III -A, Phase II Anaheim Intracity Transporta-
tion System, Study Outcomes and Objectives, items 1 through 4. He
noted that no mention was made of a possible linkage between
town Redevelopment Project Alpha and the Disneyland /Convention Center
area; only of evaluation of data on the existing and potential demand, -
alternatives and interfaces with existing and potential system
linkages, etc.
Redevelopment Staff Economist Sybil Silverman reported that the
study is projected in two phases; Phase I to be an overview study
considering all potential and feasible links in the "twin triangles"
area. This would include the Disneyland and Convention Center area
to Downtown; and links connecting the Convention Center to the Stadium,
and Anaheim Plaza to the shopping center at Lincoln Avenue and State
College Boulevard. Various transportation modes would also be
studied, and the results would include a list of evaluations and
priorities for projected corridors. In Phase II, the primary link
is the Disneyland area to Downtown, and there probably would be
subsequent phases with additional links. The Multi -Modal Transpor-
tation Center is not omitted, but is inserted into a broader picture.,.,.,
Commissioner Seymour stated that before he could approve an
R.F.P., it would have to be rewritten to more specifically delineate
the need, or the expression of necessity, to study the impact of the
transportation center, as well as more in -depth language relative to
the Anaheim Plaza link. He asked whether the proposed R.F.P. sub-
mitted had been approved by the Intermode Committee.
Mr. McDaniel replied that it had, and no particular concern
had been expressed as to a lack of study being applied to the
transportation center. He stated that the study being conducted
75 -129
Community Development Commission Minutes - December 16, 1975, 1:00 P.t-J.
Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, Continued
by Daniel, Mann, Johnson & Mendenhall• ultimately would result
in defining the location of the terminal. It seemed to him that the
changes added by Redevelopment would allow necessary flexibility to
attempt linking the terminal with systems that come to the Downtown.
Commissioner Seymour indicated he would not vote for approval
of the R.F.P. as proposed unless the Agency absorbed the entire
cost of the study.
Commissioner Sneegas was of the opinion that item 3 of the R.F.P.
sections previously read by Commissioner Seymour, i.e. analysis and
evaluation of the interphases of the Disneyland /Convention Center
link to Downtown Transit Link, with the existing transportation/
circulation system and potential system linkages to the intracity
transportation system,would preclude the concerns expressed.
Commissioner Seymour clarified that his complaint was that the
Multi -Modal Transportation Center is so generally alluded to that
the R.F.P. contractor might give it only a passing acknowledgment.
If the justification for the City's paying 25% of the study costs
was that the study would view specific transportation needs else-
where in the city, he failed to see 25% worth of value to the City.
Chairman Thom stated that his memory generally paralled that of
Commissioner Seymour concerning initial discussions of the proposed
study. Daniel, Mann, Johnson & Mendenhall had been requested to
investigate the viability of a Multi -Modal Transportation Center in
that particular vicinity, and since the subsequent feeder - connector
link and the "twin triangle" concept came up, they have had equal
status of importance in discussion. In viewing the R.F.P., the
equal importance is not apparent.
Ms. Silverman reiterated that the "twin triangle" area - contains
approximately 80% of the jobs and 40% of the population of the City,
and advised that all corridors within this area would link different
areas and major activities of the city together. In this manner, a
wider number of people and businesses than just the Downtown would
be served; therefore, the center is of equal importance. If the
Agency feels the Multi -Modal Transportation Center has been minimized
in the R.F.P., it could be modified to call out the center as a par-
ticular area for study in the first phase, and brought back to the
Agency for further consideration.
By general consent, the staff was instructed to make such modi-
fication for additional consideration by the Redevelopment Agency.
DOWNTOWN URBAN ENERGY AND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT STUDY: Pursuant to his
preliminary presentation, Community Development Director Knowlton
Fernald reported on recommendation by the Community Redevelopment
Commission that the Aerospace Corporation, E1 Segundo, be selected
to perform two tasks for the Redevelopment Agency. The first would
be the preparation of a handbook containing energy conservation
criteria for Redevelopment Project Alpha, with guidelines for con-
struction of buildings and rehabilitation of existing structures
for energy efficiency. This would consolidate concise and comprehen-
sive accounting of existing policies and standards into a single
source containing all information and guidelines for development re-
lated specifically to the downtown development area. These policies
and standards are currently scattered throughout many documents and
publications, and the information is needed prior to the initiation
of any redevelopment. The cost for such handbook preparation would
amount to approximately $15,000.
75 -130
Community Develooment Commission Minutes - December 16, 1975, 1.00 P.M.
Anaheim Redevelopment Agency - Continued
Coordination, administrative and consulting services for the
initiation of Energy Conservation and Resource Management Study for
downtown, and to form a multi-organization energy team was also
recommended, which would entail the preparation of graphs, charts,
supporting texts and realistic funding plans to assist the Agency
in presenting preliminary plans to funding agencies in Sacramento.
and Washington, D.C.
Mr. Fernald briefly outlined the summary of the staff report P..
on the Energy and Resource Management Program submitted, advising
that fourteen firms had been interviewed, providing a broad spectrum
of companies representing the full range of sizes, expertise and
orientation, and it was felt that many of those interviewed might
have something to offer further along in the program.
It was further reported that timing is critical with regard to
funding agencies, and preliminary review of the City's program in
Washington, D. C. by early 1976 would be important in order to
achieve early application funding. The initial study would produce
an overview study pertaining to the potential of Anaheim and what
the needs would be; then would attempt to apply a real program in
order to expedite funding. The best approach appeared to be working
h the new energy with w e gy to coordinate :effort uttin
P g
together a package for review with the funding agencies, making any
modifications and proceeding with funding application. Based on
qualifications and expertise in presentations already made to the
review committee and the Community Redevelopment Commission, it was
recommended that an agreement be executed with Aerospace Corporation
in the total amount of $25,000.
own%
In conclusion, Mr. Fernald advised that several of those who
worked on the program were present to answer any questions of the
Commission: Dr. Owen Griffith, Science and Technology Advisor;
Hank Wiley, of the Utilities Department; Paul Hayes, Energy Coordi-
nator; and Bob Hodges, Grant -in =Aid Coordinator.
Commissioner Seymour referred to the study memorandum included
in the report on the proposal, wherein the purpose and objectives
of the study were outlined. He inquired whether this memorandum
was furnished to the consulting firms interviewed, noting there
seemed to be no direction contained therein as to the proposed
preparation of a handbook.
Mr. Fernald reported that the memorandum was forwarded to the
fourteen firms, however it was not a Request for Proposals; that the
interviews conducted with the firms were thorough, and the purpose
of the interviews was to seek the best starting point for the City.
Commissioner Seymour stated that to him, the handbook should
give information on how to conserve energy in the construction pro-
cess, and how to utilize energy in actual operation. He inquired
why an expenditure of $15,000. was proposed to prepare such a"'
handbook when the information is undoubtedly available on the market.
Ms. Silverman reported that the construction industry and all
agencies and utilities have available handbooks containing general
information, or lists of helpful hints. The one proposed for the
redevelopment area would give criteria and guidelines relating
specifically to that area and what the City will be attempting to
achieve downtown. It would be a single source of information, in
place of the large stack of materials which currently would have to
be utilized.
75-131
Community Development Corunission :Minutes - December lb, 1975, 1.00 P.m.
Anaheim Redevelopment Agency - - Continued
Ms. Silverman noted some of the factors which affect energy
efficiency, such as building orientations and placement of windows
cLs ULte UU1 (.1 L1g CU1eLLe5 LU d11UL11C1 , WLLIUUW aceab , solar rights and
construction standards. This phase of the study would be oriented
to an assessment of energy requirements of, and impact on the down-
town redevelopment area, trash which would be generated, etc.
Commissioner Kaywood inquired whether the handbook was something
the City Utilities Department could compile.
Ms. Silverman indicated this was a possibility. In response to
question by Commissioner Sneegas, she concurred that the proposed
handbook would omit all excess information which would not pertain
to the downtown development. Although the construction industry is
working on a similar guide, it would not pertain to any one locale,
or type of government.
Mr. Fernald reported that the American Institute of Architects
have adopted a policy that will have a great deal of impact on
legislation within the State; this organization is attempting to
formulate standards more particularly oriented to performance than
by prescription. This would be of great benefit to the City as it
would mean standards can be established which would be more particu-
larly suited to our location and requirements.
Commissioner Seymour stated he could support the portion of
the recommendation dealing with an energy and resources management
study, on the basis that it is possible there could grow out of that
an integrated central energy plant in the system to service the
redevelopment area. However, it is difficult to justify a $15,000.
plus printing costs expenditure to prepare a handbook for developers
and property owners, when this material is obviously available from
other sources, including utility companies.
Mr. Fernald was of the opinion that it is an important part
of moving forward with the implementation and consolidation of
redevelopment to make the information available, and advise what is
expected of developers in the beginning. The criteria would not
dictate what will be done, but would provide information as to what
the flexibilities are through one source of information.
Ms. Silverman pointed out that unless there is one set of stan-
dards and criteria for all developers, the result may be incompatible
structures within the redevelopment area.
Commissioner Thom stated that although the cost would be substan-
tial, he agreed that there should be something to delineate the rules
for the area and speed up the redevelopment process; and he thereupon
moved that the staff be instructed to prepare an agreement with
Aerospace Corporation for preparation of the handbook containing
energy conservation criteria and guidelines for construction and
rehabilitation of buildings for energy efficiency, and for coordina-
tion, administrative and consulting services for the initiation of
an Energy Conservation and Resource Management Study for downtown,
in the total amount of $25,000. Commissioner Sneegas seconded the
motion, noting that although a sizable sum would be required to
prepare the handbook, it would be a small amount when compared to
the problems which would arise without such a guide.
To the foregoing motion, Commissioner Seymour voted "No ", for
the reasons previously stated. He felt that all the information to
be contained in the $15,000. handbook was currently available, with
the exception of that material referring "to the use and conservation
of energy within a 200 acre parcel.
75 -132
Community Development Commission Minutes - December 16, 1975, 1:00 P.M.
Anaheim Redevelopment Agency - Continued
Commissioner Sneegas expressed the opinion that someone must
have the authority and responsibility to set out the rules for this
multi- million dollar redevelopment project, and to enforce those
rules.
MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. CDC75 -55 - AGREEMENT, URBAN PROJECTS, INC. On report
and recommendation by the City Attorney, Commissioner Seymour
offered Resolution No. CDC75 -55 for adoption, authorizing execution
of an agreement with Urban Projects, Inc., for consulting services
and preparation of a relocation plan in connection with the imple-
mentation of Redevelopment Project Alpha; at a fixed fee of $17,420.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ACTING AS THE
ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACCEPTING THE TERMS OF AN AGREEMENT FOR
CONSULTING SERVICES AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION THEREOF. (Urban
Projects, Inc.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
Chairman Thom declared Resolution No. CDC75 -55 duly passed and adopted.
' ADJOURNMENT : Commissioner Kaywood moved to adjourn to Tuesday, Decem-
ber 23, 1975, 10 :30 A.M. Commissioner Thom seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED. WIM
ADJOURNED 2 :05 P.M.
ALONA M. HOUGARD�,,' SECRETARY