HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 3/18/2008 *PLEASE NOTE: Since the Glendale City Council does not take formal action at
the Workshops, Workshop minutes are not approved by the City Council.
MINUTES
CITY OF GLENDALE
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MARCH 18, 2008
1:30 P.M.
PRESENT: Mayor Elaine M. Scruggs, Vice Mayor Manuel D. Martinez, and
Councilmembers Joyce V. Clark, Steven E. Frate, David M. Goulet,
and Yvonne J. Knaack.
ABSENT: H. Philip Lieberman
ALSO PRESENT: Ed Beasley, City Manager; Pam Kavanaugh, Assistant City
Manager; Craig Tindall, City Attorney; and Pamela Hanna, City
Clerk
Vice Mayor Martinez presented a Certificate of Excellence to Judge Finn for her five
years of dedicated service to the City of Glendale. He acknowledged all her
accomplishments and thanked her for her service to the community. He noted that in
her five years, she had made many positive changes. Judge Finn thanked the Vice
Mayor and Council for their kind words. She added that she looked forward to many
more years of service to the city.
1. REDEVELOPMENT & REVITALIZATION STRATEGY
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. Richard Bowers
Pursuant to City Council direction this is a request for the City Council to engage in
dialogue facilitated by Richard Bowers regarding the City Council goal to enhance the
vitality of the Glendale Avenue Corridor and create a vibrant city center. This is the first
of a series of four planned Council Workshops on this topic.
The Revitalization Strategy addresses several Council Strategic Goals, which include
the following:
o Strong neighborhoods
o Quality economic development
o Vibrant city center
o A city that is fiscally sound
At the Glendale City Council Goal Review and Strategic Planning Retreat held on
November 26, 2007, the Council discussed key objectives and goals for 2008-2009.
The primary objective identified by the Council was a desire to create a clear vision for
redevelopment and revitalization within the city. Aspects included in this objective are a
1
focus on infill development throughout the city and creating a vision and action for
downtown Glendale.
In order to develop a strategy for achieving this objective, the Council agreed that
substantial discussion would be needed to set the foundation for a downtown visioning
and revitalization process. In order to achieve this, the Council requested quarterly
workshops throughout 2008 to facilitate the discussions that will lead to a
comprehensive strategy policy direction by Council.
Implementation of the Council's direction will include developing tools, conducting
research, and formally engaging content experts to assist with benchmarking,
community involvement, branding, design, and action plan concepts.
One component of research will include the Council data gathering visits to select
benchmark communities in the western states. These research visits will aid the
Council in developing a set of core principles, policy options and images that will help
define the downtown vision and create a frame of reference for continued dialogue.
The Council has directed that an open and ongoing dialogue with citizens be developed
as a component of the effort to assure that the community has input, is kept informed,
and is pleased with the direction to be forged. Ultimately, the Council's policy direction
will provide a framework for staff to implement the strategy and provide measurements
of progress.
Currently, the City of Glendale encompasses approximately 56 square miles and has a
population of almost 250,000. As the city has grown, shopping and employment areas,
including the downtown and commercial corridors, have developed, matured, and
changed their orientation. Smaller parcels often overlooked by developers are now
becoming more attractive for infill development. As a result of these changes, the
downtown area and commercial corridors, such as Glendale Avenue, have become
underutilized and are in need of comprehensive revitalization and redevelopment.
At the Glendale City Council Goal Review and Strategic Planning Retreat held on
November 26, 2007 and facilitated by Richard Bowers, the Council discussed key
objectives and goals for 2008-2009.
Objectives and goals discussed at that time focused on downtown redevelopment and
revitalizing the Glendale Avenue Corridor, which is encompassed by the City Center
Master Plan (CCMP).
The Council adopted the CCMP on July 23, 2002 by Resolution No. 3602 New Series.
Resulting vision, plans and action will provide an enhanced sense of place, a
destination, and an identity for Glendale that will strengthen the sense of community,
enhance Glendale's image and attractiveness throughout the region and nation, and
strengthen the city's economic foundation.
2
Revitalization and redevelopment plans will provide for more efficacious uses of many
properties to better support residential, commercial, and public facilities development at
appropriate locations and diminish incompatible uses.
Revitalization, infill, and redevelopment of the downtown and existing commercial
corridors will permit Glendale to continue to be the focus of the West Valley. These
efforts will offer a fresh vision of downtown as the center of a vigorous and growing
community and will result in high-quality public and private investment along the
Glendale Avenue corridor and other commercial corridors.
Infill, by utilizing vacant or empty lands in developed areas, will achieve economies
including taking advantage of existing infrastructure and ensuring that new development
activities work in concert with each other to achieve the vision of downtown.
As part of the Redevelopment Strategy a comprehensive Citizen Participation effort will
take place to involve citizens, neighborhoods, property owners and developers in the
formation of a dynamic plan.
It is anticipated that a series of open houses will be held with posting of the meetings in
the Glendale Star and other means of notification such as KGLN, Channel 11.
Council workshops are planned on a quarterly basis throughout 2008 to facilitate the
necessary discussions that will provide for a comprehensive redevelopment strategy
developed through policy direction by Council.
Funding is necessary in order to set up the Redevelopment Strategy. This would
include fees for consultants to assist the Council with process logistics, preparing a
detailed strategy and action plan and the funding for several select programs for initial
aesthetic improvements. Funding implications for the Redevelopment Strategy will be
presented as part of the Fiscal Year 2008-2009 budget process.
Staff requested that the Council provide guidance on developing a process to achieve
the Council Strategic Goals and Objectives noted above.
Mr. Ed Beasley introduced Mr. Richard Bowers.
Mr. Bowers addressed the Council's goals on the redevelopment and revitalization of
the Glendale Avenue Corridor. He stated that today they will review the primary
objectives. The first is to discuss Council's direction on moving forward on the key
objective to create a vibrate city center. The second would be to agree on a starting
point of the initial phase, to begin the process with City Council, as well as with citizen
involvement. He said he would like to discuss establishing a schedule for those initial
phases.
Mr. Bowers explained there was no simple formula for this implementing the City
Council's Key Objective of "Creating a Vibrant City Center". He said this project must
relate to how the city sees the community and it must be determined in the context of
the community. He stated that most of the common themes found in research and
3
through experiences were accomplished through well very thought-out plans, as well as
a policy body who takes the lead to make sure the plan is understood by all. He said
that once an area was developing in its vibrancy, the city's management would be
evident in that process as it moves forward as a consistent procedure. He said the city
would have to identify a brand that is true to the community as well as a variety of
attractions that make urban cities lively. He discussed the residential revitalization
aspect as an important part.
Mr. Bowers provided a slide presentation and discussed the phasing and timing
process. He noted that he would like to concentrate on the first four phases. He said
benchmarking will start in April/May with community engagement in May/June. He
stated that after the information was received, they would include quarterly meetings
addressing all the information gathered.
Mr. Bowers noted that he had had some exploratory conversations with Arizona State
University. The University has two areas where they were actively involved in the
community. He said that advanced students work on projects under the leadership of
the facility. He explained that he would like the Council to consider the possibility of
aligning with ASU. This would bring a tremendous amount of resources to this project.
He explained that there was much interest on the part of ASU. He stated that once this
information was gathered and examined, they could start engaging in a more specific
plan such as creating a time line with detailed resources that would have the greatest
impact in the shortest period of time. He stated that this plan was a very aggressive
one year plan of action.
Mr. Bowers discussed the benchmarking process. He stated that Council's direction
had been to be very actively involved in the process. The suggestion was that the
Council be divided into three or four teams with two Council members and one staff
member to help with logistics and visit specific areas. The groups would meet with
senior leaders in the community and evaluate that area/city. He stated that this was a
lot of work; however, the meetings would be well structured. He asked them to take
along a camera to photograph the things they liked or didn't like. He said that after the
teams visited the areas in question, they would come back to a work session and
discuss their findings. What he envisioned was that the Council would be on the road
for two or three days touring selected California cities. In addition He provided slides of
suggested areas to tour in Colorado, Nevada, Oregon and Texas. He noted that the
Council was anxious to start the process; therefore he suggested this process start in
April or May.
Mr. Bowers explained that after the information was gathered and examined, they
would start the community involvement process in an open session with a featured
speaker or a panel of experts that could speak to the economics, architectural and
urban opportunities. He said they would also have a community input forum where
people were invited to identify leaders and experts in the business and residential
community. He added that this part of the process was structured to harvest ideas and
create conversation within the community. He noted that they would start to observe
through a variety of source information, common themes and common energy.
Mr. Bowers discussed the last piece of the introductory component as the Vision Fare.
He explained that the Vision Fare was an outdoor open event with booths from many
non-profits departments. This would create an area of fun, excitement and information
sharing. He said this would be a simple and direct opportunity for citizen input of any
age. He stated that phase one was very doable, inexpensive and he felt very
comfortable that it provided a lot of information for Council as well as for the community
4
to be too engaged in the process. He said the next steps would be to become more
specific with plans and data collected, as well as look to the ASU collaborative method.
He said as they incrementally acquire added structure, the data will begin to fall into
place and a plan will begin to evolve. He added he believes a year from now they will
be discussing a budget for this project.
Mayor Scruggs opened the floor for discussion.
Vice Mayor Martinez thanked Mr. Bowers for his detailed and informative presentation.
He stated that it would make great sense to create an alliance with ASU. Mr. Bowers
stated that he agrees and would like conversations to start this summer in order to have
the student's engaged by September and plan accordingly once school starts. He
stated that this program was structured in such a way that the students would support
the Glendale Avenue Corridor as their only project. He suggested that someone from
ASU come and explain their plan for this project to the City Council. He said he was
currently involved in discussions with an ASU representative and was totally impressed
by them and the value it could bring to this project. Vice Mayor Martinez agreed to start
discussions as soon as possible. Mr. Bowers reiterated that there was significant
interest on ASU's part.
Councilmember Goulet commented that Mr. Bowers's presentation was very well
thought out and had provided him with a lot of ideas. He said he had presented a very
ambitious schedule. He stated he would like to touch on possible roadblocks as well as
discussing partnership involvement and setting specific goals, while remaining flexible
as things changed. He related some discussions with the Planning Department on
zoning changes, density, and impact on services from Light Rail.
Councilmember Goulet explained that the downtown area was a little unusual, being 1
linear rather than square. He said whatever was done to that area; they needed to be
very sensitive to the surrounding residences. He added that to make this project a
success, they would have to examine different results, while also keeping with the
atmosphere or the sense of what people like about the downtown area. Mr. Bowers
agreed with Councilmember Goulet's points. He said the political and regulatory
structures may have to be adjusted or adapted. He added that critical components
would become evident after the tours and communications with other communities.
Councilmember Clark thanked Mr. Bowers for a very comprehensive presentation. She
said it was a very exciting opportunity for the entire community to improve the
downtown area and envision what could be done. She said his presentation made her
eager to go out and visit a city and see what could be brought back to the table. She
stated that she and Vice Mayor Martinez had attended the ASU's Decision Theater and
were incredibly impressed by the work being done. She added it was critical for them to
get in line and obtain a place for next fall.
Councilmember Frate stated that he was excited about having the citizens involved, as
well as input from the community. He said he believes working with ASU will be a great
asset because of all the knowledge, research and data information they bring to the
table. He said it will assist them in making informed decisions. He added that as far as
the Decision Theater, he believes it would have to wait until they obtain all the data and
information first and wait for the Decision Theater to be closer to the end of the project.
He stated that their decision to partner with ASU was a smart thing to do because it was
a wonderful asset to have. He said the Council knows that a city was only as
successful as their center area. He noted that he was a proponent of having more
people living in the downtown area in order to have more business opportunities open
5
up as a result of residents. Mr. Bowers commented that should they decide to
incorporate the ASU plan, as a result ASU would manage the Decision Theater.
Mayor Scruggs inquired if they were being asked to get on board before September to
be included in the Phoenix Urban Research Program, not necessarily the Decision
Theater. Mr. Bowers stated that she was correct. He said they would use the class as
a tool throughout the course of the semester.
Vice Mayor Martinez inquired how this project would fit in with the City Center Master
Plan. Mr. Beasley stated that staff believes this to be a great opportunity for community
involvement. He explained that the decision was made to let this process lead them
instead of having two procedures proceeding at the same time. He added that this
process might lead them in a different direction than was originally planned.
Mayor Scruggs commented on Glendale Avenue and likened it to Bell Road. She said
that Glendale Avenue was very different depending on where you were. She listed the
avenues and the potential differences from one section to another, starting at 43r1
Avenue. She noted that it was really no different than some of the sections on Bell
Road. She said she had some concerns that this process only addressed the small
downtown area and not all the aspects as a whole. She stated that the population of
Glgndale rias looking for a much larger redevelopment, not only the downtown area of
56 to 59tAvenues. She noted that a major focus in neighborhood meetings had been
the redevelopment of 43r1 to 5151 Avenue which was not being addressed today. She
said she still did not have a comfort level with the discussion today. She stated that she
needs to feel more confident that when they tour other cities, they were not only looking
for ideas for downtown. She said their focus should not only be the revitalization of
downtown, which already had a good start, but also to also address parts of downtown
to the east and west which still needed a solid foundation. She explained that the
citizens needed assurances that they will get beyond only addressing the small
downtown area.
Mr. Bowers stated that the geography was ultimately the Councils decision. He
explained that the city center in Glendale was Glendale Avenue, which was the
signature street. He stated that whether the identification of geography was done today
or after the tours, the identification of geography was a fundamental point. He added
that the commentary today was not to exclude any sections because any
redevelopment in the center of downtown becomes a natural extension of the city's
center connector. Mayor Scruggs inquired if any of the cities that were suggested for
touring were similar to Glendale Avenue. Mr. Bowers stated that some possibly were,
however, he recommends not only visiting the downtown areas but also the residential
and businesses adjacent to it to weigh the implications as well as the repercussions.
Mayor Scruggs commented that she had grown up in Pasadena, California where the
downtown area was similar to Glendale, which was now a vibrant area with lots of
restaurants and businesses. She asked if it would be appropriated to visit that area.
Mr. Bowers stated that Pasadena was actually a good example and one that they
should tour.
Mayor Scruggs asked for Mr. Bowers to confirm that this project would encompass the
entire Glendale Avenue corridor, not just the small area of downtown. Mr. Bowers
stated his agreement; however the whole Council was also required to declare that
interest. Mayor Scruggs agreed.
6
Councilmember Clark stated that her intent had always been to redevelop the entire
Glendale corridor. She noted that if they were to really look to the future, they should
look at the entire Glendale Avenue corridor from to 43 d Avenue to 915 Avenue. The
redevelopment should start at old town Glendale and out to the entertainment district to
create a linkage and create a vibrant corridor.
Councilmember Frate stated that his focus has always been to redevelop starting from
43'dAvenue to at lest 67 Avenue. He added he still believes that the focus should be
the older part of 43 to 51st. He said he believes that area had the most opportunity.
Councilmember Goulet stated that they should address the entire corridor from 43`d
Avenue and forward. He said it would make for better opportunities than just to focus
on the downtown area. He explained that it would present some challenges, however,
he believes they have a better chance of succeeding and making the whole thing work,
focusing on the whole corridor.
Councilmember Knaack stated that she was in agreement with both Council members
Clark and Goulet. She said she actually believes more work is needed at 59th and 83'
Avenue. She added that they also must get away from the word "downtown area" and
instead address it as the City's Center or the Glendale Corridor. She said that
addressing it as such would eventually change the mind set of people only seeing it as
a small area next to City Hall or Murphy Park. She thanked Mr. Bowers for his great
presentation.
Vice Mayor Martinez stated that he agrees they should address the downtown area as
the Glendale Corridor.
Councilmember Goulet asked Mr. Bowers if he had any ideas of introducing any plans
to the section from Maryland to Glendale Avenue which is 59 h Avenue south of
Glendale. He said the area was a very critical component in getting to Glendale's
Center. He said they should consider the possible opportunities of north and south as
they assess moving east and west of Glendale Avenue. Mr. Bowers commented that it
was a possibility, although he hesitates to define it specifically because those doors and
windows will open up incrementally along the way as the process evolves. He stated
that this process might take them beyond 59 Avenue south of Glendale.
Mayor Scruggs inquired how long the ASU students attended the study research
program because this project was expected to be on going until a date that was
undetermined. Mr. Bowers stated that the students tend to be students that have
already reached a senior degree level and only typically stay on for one semester. He
said they would be receiving continuity from the professors not necessarily from the
students. He said the professors were the key because they were the test of what was
produced.
Mayor Scruggs stated that the Council agreed with the plan presented by Mr. Bowers.
She said the plan was acceptable in its entirety and would like to give direction to move
forward. She said this was all very exciting, although there will be people commenting
that they would like to see something happen this year. However, the magnitude of this
project is enormous and they only get one chance to do it right. She added that she
likes and approves of the fact that the Council stays active on this project.
Vice Mayor Martinez asked for a copy of the plan. All Council members agreed to
receive one as well. Mr. Bowers responded that they will all receive copies.
7
Mayor Scruggs asked Mr. Beasley for any closing comments.
Mr. Beasley commented that the city would be working very closely with Mr. Bowers to
identify any areas of interest as well as the scheduling of tours and preparation of
materials needed.
In hearing no objections or further comments, Mayor Scruggs adjourned the workshop
meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 2:40 p.m.
8