HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 12/16/2008 *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
DECEMBER 16, 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,
Yvonne J. Knaack, and H. Phillip Lieberman
ALSO PRESENT: Ed Beasley, City Manager; Pam Kavanaugh, Assistant City
Manager; Craig Tindall, City Attorney; and Pamela Hanna, City
Clerk
1. GLENDALE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN UPDATE
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Cathy Gorham, Director of City Manager
Relations, and Judy Skeen, Airport Administrator
This is a request for the City Council to review and provide guidance regarding the draft
Glendale Municipal Airport Master Plan Update.
The proposed airport master plan addresses the City Council's goals of providing high
quality services for its citizens and one community with quality economic development.
The Glendale Municipal Airport Master Plan provides guidelines for the airport's overall
development, maintenance, and operation. The plan update includes an evaluation of
the airport's capabilities, a comprehensive review of the forecasts of future aviation
demand, and provides recommendations to plan for the timely development of new or
expanded facilities that may be required to meet that demand.
A primary objective of the master plan is to provide the community and its leadership
with guidance for operating the airport in a safe and efficient manner and determining
what actions should be taken to meet the aviation needs of the region.
Objectives that have been addressed in the proposed master plan include preservation
of public and private investments, assurances that future development will not
negatively impact Luke Air Force Base's mission, safety enhancements, multiple public
participation opportunities, corporate aviation and the airport's changing role as a result
of the developing Sports and Entertainment District.
The previous master plan update was completed in 1997 and approved by the Council
in 1998.
1
The Glendale Municipal Airport Master Plan is the guiding document upon which the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Arizona Department of Transportation
(ADOT) base their decisions in awarding multi-million dollar grants to complete capital
improvements on the airport property. This grant funding is critical to the ongoing
maintenance and development of the airport's infrastructure and enables the city to
leverage its funds to ensure the aviation community's needs are being met. Many
improvements at the airport would be delayed without an updated master plan in place.
As part of the development of the master plan update, a Planning Advisory Committee
(PAC) was formed and included community members, airport stakeholders, Aviation
Advisory Commission representation, Luke Air Force Base representation and city staff.
This 18-member group provided input to the consultants through a series of three public
meetings and a review of phased reports.
Following two of the PAC meetings, the general public was invited to attend public
information workshops and provide input. These workshops were advertised in the
local media and on the city's website. Attendance at these workshops totaled 70
people.
Additionally, the consultants met with the Aviation Advisory Commission several times
over the last two years to discuss the plan and get their input.
On October 8, 2008, the Aviation Advisory Commission recommended forwarding the
draft Airport Master Plan Update to the City Council for approval.
The recommendation was to review and provide guidance on the Glendale Municipal
Airport Draft Master Plan Update so it can be brought forward for formal approval.
Ms. Gorham provided a brief overview of the master plan update. She introduced Mr.
Jim Harris of Coffman Associates and Airport Administrator Judy Skeen as part of the
presentation panel. Ms. Gorham indicated that the Master Plan Update was a timely
reassessment of the vision for the airport, as many changes have occurred in the
aviation industry and in the local economy over the last decade. She noted the
importance of updating the master plan as it was in direct relationship to the city's ability
to finance capital improvements at the airport. The FAA encourages airports to update
their plans every five to 10 years due to the importance of 95% federal funding provided
through grants to airports. By identifying capital projects for five years, 10 years or long-
term, Ms. Gorham said the city is able to plan for its 2.5% grant matches. Two
elements of the Master Plan Update are specifically reviewed and approved by the FAA:
the aviation demand forecast and the airport layout plan.
Ms. Gorham also noted that the update was timely due to the changing role of the
airport as it relates to the economic development efforts taking place in Western
Glendale and the increase in corporate business jet traffic. She described the key
objectives of the master plan noting the preservation of public and private airport
investments, assurances that planned future development will not impact the mission of
Luke Air Force Base, and a focus on safety enhancements.
2
Ms. Skeen updated the Council on public input and participation. She stated that a
Planning Advisory Committee was formed and included community members, airport
stakeholders, representation from the Aviation Advisory Commission, Luke Air Force
Base, ADOT — Aviation Division, and city staff. She stated this group provided input to
the consultants throughout the study to help ensure that a realistic, viable plan was
developed and master plan issues were fully addressed. She stated that there had
been a series of three public meetings and workshops. In addition, the consultants met
on six different occasions to brief the Aviation Advisory Commission and local pilots on
the Master Plan Update. She acknowledged the Planning Advisory Committee
members that were in the audience. She then turned the presentation over to Mr. Jim
Harris, of Coffman Associates.
Mr. Harris stated he was very pleased to have the draft Master Plan document here for
discussion. He discussed the previous master plan update that was completed in 1997
and approved by the Council in 1998. He stated that the methodology and how a plan
is put together are no different today with regards to the specific guidelines set forth. He
said the Master Plan was not unlike other planning the city does. This is a long range
development plan for the airport, looking out 20 years, setting forth a vision for the
airport and how it will serve aviation users. He commented on the many changes that
have occurred in the area. He reviewed the aviation demand forecast. The airport
currently experiences approximately 150,000 annual operations. However, by the long
term planning period, the airport is forecast to reach nearly 234,000 annual operations
in landings and takeoffs. He added that operations by transit aircraft are also expected
to continue to grow substantially. He noted airport forecasts were reviewed and
approved by the FAA during the master planning process. He also reviewed the
financial process and safety agendas.
Councilmember Lieberman commented that the report had been very extensive and
informative. He remarked that since the previous report, the city has filled in part of the
riverbed on the south end of the runway. He asked if they anticipate extending it
further. Mr. Harris stated the safety areas proposed do not involve adding any more fill
to the riverbed. Councilmember Lieberman had questions about the lease of the
hangers south of the terminal building and their current limited use. Mr. Harris asked
Ms. Gorham to explain. Ms. Gorham stated they were under a long term lease and the
owner of the hangers was meeting his obligation in terms of his lease payments to the
city. She added that Councilmember Lieberman was correct in his assumption that the
hangers could easily be filled by aircraft. She noted they will be taking a closer look at
the lease.
Councilmember Lieberman commented on the Deer Valley Airport having a waiting list
for their hangers. Apparently, hanger business has gone there because it was too
difficult to work with the owner at our airport. He asked Ms. Gorham if there had been
any discussions about trying to buy this owner out so the city can control the hangers.
Ms. Gorham reiterated that the owner has been meeting his financial obligations to the
city; however, the city will be taking a closer look at the lease. Mr. Harris remarked that
the Master Plan did not address that particular topic; however, it did consider that most
hangers in the airport will be developed privately. He noted for Council's information
that any capital expenditures on hanger facilities was not eligible for federal or state
assistance. Councilmember Lieberman stated he agreed with the conclusions reached
in the report.
3
Vice Mayor Martinez thanked Mr. Harris, staff and the members of the advisory
commission for this very comprehensive report which had a lot of good information. He
discussed the runway lengths and safety aspects. Mr. Harris stated that the strip was
developed to fully comply with all the FAA standards and to maintain as long a runway
length as possible in the confines of the airport. Vice Mayor Martinez commented that
he was pleased with the ambitious plan to go after federal and ADOT funds as
necessary. He added he fully agreed with all the recommendations.
Councilmember Clark stated she had several technical questions that she will ask at a
later time. She indicated she had a question on page 5.2 regarding a statement which
read that they will only be able to meet FAA defined design standards to the greatest
extent practicable. She asked what that meant. Mr. Harris replied that since the FAA
has added new additional standards, they are aware that often times, because the
airport was built under previous standards, it might not be easy to upgrade and conform
to the highest degree possible; therefore, their terminology is to the greatest extent
practicable. He added they try to comply with the highest degree possible and the FAA
does recognize that when reviewing.
Councilmember Clark remarked that in reading the recommendations, the one that
seems the most immediately achievable was updating the declared distances with little
or no cost. In addition, it will yield some results in terms of providing greater information
to both general aviation and corporate jet traffic as to the allowable distances of the
airport. Mr. Harris stated she was correct. He noted that even before this Master Plan
was started; those requests to the FAA had been submitted by the city. Councilmember
Clark commented that she had some concerns regarding funding. She said even if they
gain FAA and ADOT funding for every recommendation in this report, the cost will be
$67 million for projects identified through 2025. The city's portion is $3 million. She
questioned if this was a good investment when they would only be able to
accommodate 75% of the business aircraft, provided they are willing to take-off at a
60% load. Mr. Harris explained that design standards used to develop the runway
lengths are based on certain percentages of the fleet. He stated they were trying to
meet the majority of the business aircraft needs. He noted the FAA finds this Master
Plan a typical methodology of designing an airport, maximizing the length as much as
possible. He explained that the dollars illustrated were based upon the demand and the
plan itself is intended to be demand based. He added it was a reasonable program for
this size airport and he was comfortable with the numbers.
Councilmember Clark commented that the crushed concrete beds at the end of the
runway create a critical level of safety for all aircraft. Mr. Harris explained they will
typically be used for the larger aircraft that require the thousand foot runway safety
area. Councilmember Clark commented on the Very Light Jets (VLJ) plans. Mr. Harris
explained the FAA was forecasting relatively strong growth; however, he does not
believe it will become a dominant aircraft.
Councilmember Clark questioned gate access. She stated she had heard from several
Glendale pilots that it was a problem. She asked if this plan incorporates any resolution
to that issue. Ms. Skeen explained that this Master Plan did not; however, they were
addressing that issue through other security studies at the airport. Councilmember
Clark indicated she would like to see this issue resolved as to how they provide
adequate access to the pilots. Mr. Gorham interjected that the Master Plan is not
designed to address this specific of an issue and that staff has been exploring gate
security options for several months and will report any findings.
4
Mayor Scruggs asked to follow-up on Councilmember Clark's question of whether this
was a good investment of $67 million from the FAA and ADOT, when they would only
be able to accommodate 75% of the business aircraft, provided they are willing to take-
off at a 60% load. She stated the airport was chartered as a general aviation reliever
airport; therefore, it provides certain functions within the overall national airport scheme
and plan. She asked if business jets were considered part of GA reliever business. Mr.
Harris replied that they were: they were components of the general aviation fleet.
Mayor Scruggs commented that as a reliever airport, a great hope within the FAA was
that the airport would off load some of the GA traffic from Phoenix Sky Harbor. She
asked if that had changed over the years. Mr. Harris replied that as a reliever airport, it
was considered very important in the sense that it provides the capability to keep
general aviation closer to the community, instead of adding it to the mix at Sky Harbor.
Mayor Scruggs agreed and added that any enhancements made for traditional general
aviation is part of an overall national plan. Mr. Harris remarked that Glendale was
named general aviation many years ago and the FAA still recognizes how important the
airport is for general aviation.
Councilmember Goulet asked a question regarding capacity in the future for business
use as well as passenger use, since Glendale has become such a popular destination
on the west side. Mr. Harris discussed the volume capacity which was evaluated in the
Master Plan. The airport can accommodate the level and volume that has been
projected. He stated they had also evaluated delays and taxiways. He explained that
taxiways are very important in minimizing delays and help minimize runway occupancy
time. In addition, fleet mix, such as faster and slower aircraft, was taken into account
when they evaluated the capacity. Their determination was that they can enhance the
capacity enough to where the delays were not at a significant level that would be
bothersome. He noted that as far as the future of the airport runway, new aircraft
technology will make the demands for long runway length lessen as they have recently.
Mr. Harris noted that Glendale Airport is not certified for commercial passenger airlines.
Councilmember Lieberman thanked Ms. Skeen, Ms. Gorham and Mr. Harris for their
work on this project and for serving the public well. He noted he had not seen a single
complaint on this project.
Councilmember Knaack commented that she had learned a lot in reading this report.
She thanked them for their efforts. She asked a question regarding helicopter pads and
current traffic. Mr. Harris explained there had been a lot of helicopter traffic in the form
of training; however, it has since decreased significantly, therefore, Master Plan
evaluations determined not to choose a fixed location. Councilmember Knaack also
inquired if fire department response was of any concern, with them being over three
miles way. Mr. Harris responded that the FAA does not require fire and rescue
capability at this general aviation facility and was at the discretion of the community to
provide whatever level is appropriate. He added that considering growth and future
development in the area, they may want to consider a co-located facility on the airport
with a quick response vehicle. Councilmember Knaack commented that she had visited
the improved airport café and had discovered it to be clean with good food and service.
Councilmember Frate commented this was a natural transition from a community airport
to an airport that now will handle corporate jets. He discussed how their vision five
years ago was being introduced step by step. He commented on the plans discussed
for the next five to ten years. He said they know the airport will continue to grow and
they were planning for its future. He thanked everyone involved in the project.
5
Councilmember Clark asked a question regarding building heights surrounding the area.
She asked if they had looked at adjacent commercial developments and how it could
impact the airport and its flight capabilities in terms of adjacent building heights. Mr.
Harris replied they had looked at required air space protection areas first and their
threshold. He noted they have to be very protective of those areas because airspace is
critical to Luke operations as well as Sky Harbor and other airports in the vicinity. He
noted the FAA would use the air space thresholds to evaluate if there were any
concerns with building heights.
Councilmember Clark commented on the fire and rescue aspect in regards to the
airport. She explained that with the added business traffic, it has made it necessary to
consider providing some kind of fire station capability on the airport. She noted that if
they were going to go after a certain market, they should consider providing a
necessary level of safety to aircraft traffic coming in. Mr. Harris reiterated that although
it was not a FAA requirement, it was reflected in the recommended concept to have a
location preserved for an aircraft rescue and fire fighting facility. Councilmember Clark
thanked all who worked on this project. She said the report was well done and she
appreciated all their efforts. Mr. Harris thanked the planning advisory committee for
their dedication and commitment to this project.
Mayor Scruggs asked Ms. Gorham what was the next step in this process. Ms. Gorham
replied they will be bring this back for formal approval in early 2009.
Mayor Scruggs thanked Ms. Gorham and her staff as well as Mr. Harris and the
advisory committee for their work on this project.
2. GLENDALE CENTERLINE UPDATE
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Ed Beasley, City Manager
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's efforts to enhance
the vitality of the Glendale Avenue Corridor and create a vibrant city center. This is the
third 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 Fiscal Year
2008-2009. The primary objective identified by Council was a desire to create a clear
vision for redevelopment and revitalization within the city. Aspects included in this
objective are a focus on infill development throughout the city and creating a vision and
action for downtown Glendale.
6
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 workshops
throughout 2008 to facilitate the discussions that will lead to a comprehensive strategy
policy direction by the 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.
In May 2008, research visits were completed by the Mayor, Council, and staff to cities in
Southern California, the greater Denver area and the greater Portland area. These
visits will assist in the development of 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 March 18, 2008 and August 12, 2008 City Council Workshops, the Council
engaged in dialogue facilitated by Richard Bowers regarding the City Council's efforts to
enhance the vitality of the Glendale Avenue Corridor and create a vibrant city center.
These were the first and second of a series of four planned Council Workshops on this
topic.
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 Fiscal Year 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.
7
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.
Revitalization and redevelopment plans will provide for more effective 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.
On October 22, 2008 a Small Group Workshop, conducted by ASU, was held at the
Glendale Adult Center with a combination of volunteers, community leaders, residents,
and businesspersons who participated in a small group workshop starting with a student
presentation followed by focused questions and brainstorming.
On October 18, 2008 a Visioning Fair was held at Murphy Park to engage the public in
creating a vision for the Glendale Avenue Corridor.
On September 20, 2008 a Congress of Neighborhoods was held at the Glendale Civic
Center to inform and gather input from a group of community members.
On September 16, 2008 a Business Breakfast was held at the Glendale Civic Center to
engage the local business community in the Glendale Avenue Corridor initiative. All
Councilmembers attended and participated.
Council workshops are planned throughout 2008 and 2009 to facilitate the necessary
discussions that will provide for a comprehensive redevelopment strategy developed
through policy direction by the Council.
As part of the Fiscal Year 2008-09 budget process, the Council approved funding a total
of $220,000 for the Redevelopment Planning and Program budget. The budget of
$220,000 includes funding for one FTE, a downtown redevelopment manager, and
funding for contractual services such as Redevelopment Consultants.
The recommendation was to provide updates regarding the information gathering and
public input process to date.
8
Mr. Bowers provided the summery. He provided additional information on the ASU
School of Design pending report. He stated that at the end of the report, they will see a
recommended set of principals and specific types of designs on how the Centerline
might flow, and from that point suggestions will become more specific in design. He
noted that this will happen within the next eight to twelve months. He explained they will
have a plan that is well structured with community support. He stated they were pretty
much on schedule as per discussions in March. He acknowledged some of the people
that were on the ASU team. He added there will be a continued interaction with the
community as well as continuing to work with staff.
Councilmember Frate commented on Mr. Bowers' enthusiasm with this project as well
as the collaboration with the ASU team. He explained he likes that this project is being
viewed by fresh eyes without limitations on what could be. He discussed how change
was difficult to accept at times, however, in this case, it was for the success of the area.
He talked about the limitless possibilities that can occur in the downtown area. He said
he was looking forward to seeing the decision theater where they have the mark-up of
how Glendale Avenue will look like while walking or driving down the Corridor.
Councilmember Clark commented that what she was looking for was a consensus from
most citizens rather than hoping for a specific development. She stated that all this was
very exciting to her, especially with what the students have done to date to capture the
stakeholder's comments. She explained she believes the next step is to turn those
ideas into reality using created models that people can see and touch. She said it will
go a long way in seeing something that is concrete instead of offering nebulous ideas.
She added she was very excited about where this project was going, especially hoping
this will lead to the one component that has been missing from downtown Glendale,
which was the energy to form a business district that is willing to partner with the city in
leading the implementation of the city. She thanked the students for working on this
project.
Vice Mayor Martinez thanked Mr. Bowers for a great presentation. He commented that
he had attended a session at the decision theater. He noted he had been very amazed
with the work they do and the potential it had for the city. He remarked that he had
attended the event held in the park and had talked to several residents who had
expressed excitement about the plan. He stated he had great hopes that the plan will
be implemented and will change the face of the Corridor for the better with great
success for the city.
Mayor Scruggs asked Mr. Bowers about an area on the map she has been interested in
which shows up on the map as a big purple area. Mr. Bowers stated he was not certain
of the area, however, will find out and get back to her. Mayor Scruggs indicated that
she had been concerned they will continue to focus on the same areas and not some of
the areas in purple. She asked Mr. Bowers what they should tell business owners as
they wait out 2009 to come up with a plan. She asked if there were any concrete
statements they can openly discuss. She indicated she has seen a lot of interest in
businesses and does not believe they are going to wait until the end of 2009 since
discussions have been extensive regarding the Centerline project. She wondered how
9
they ought to answer questions from business owners as to what comes next and what
they should recommend to them about selling or modifying structures while waiting.
Mr. Bowers commented that it was a good question. He stated it was exciting to hear
there was a certain energy that was building-up and possibly some urgency. He noted
that part of this project is to engage the business community in conversations. He
recommended possibly creating a congress of businesses were they bring as many of
those leaders together to have a discussion to both answer questions and to seek input.
He added that throughout this spring, there will be numerous opportunities for much
greater communication with the business community because they are starting to
become energized in the process. Mayor Scruggs reiterated her concerns regarding
the business community needing answers for their businesses. She explained that we
needed to create a way to engage them in a more meaningful way regarding their
concerns, issues, ideas, hopes and dreams.
Mayor Scruggs related a saying which she had heard at a recent meeting. The saying
was "a vision without resources was an illusion". She stated she believes the city has
great resources within the city such as businesses and the community that can create a
real vision, not an illusion.
Councilmember Lieberman asked for people who own property or businesses in the
audience to please stand. Many stood. He stated that the Mayor and Council were
eager to hear their opinions and concerns. He said they were all here willing to listen.
He thanked them for being here today.
Councilmember Goulet asked when they can expect to receive the report from ASU and
evaluate their recommendations. Mr. Bowers responded it should be sometime around
the first of the year. Councilmember Goulet noted that he agreed with the Mayor in
reaching out to the property owners and getting them involved in the process. He asked
if the report will cover the entire Corridor or just the sites on the board presented. Mr.
Bowers replied that the first semester report will be more representative of the
informational board presented. He added the next class will focus more on the design
aspect.
Councilmember Knaack thanked Mr. Bowers for his presentation. She commented on a
bullet point on the board that said to be patient, but persistent. She said many have
been patient and persistent for years and want this to come to fruition. She noted she
likes the pace set and understands they really cannot go any faster. She thanked the
business owners here today because it was extremely important for them to be
involved.
Mayor Scruggs agreed with Councilmember Knaack. However, she would like to
augment the pace with continued involvement. She would like to set-up a mechanism
with existing business communities in order to communicate on a more frequent basis.
She commented she would also like information on if they were looking at 51St Avenue
going east and the whole entire stretch.
10
Councilmember Frate commented on their discovery trips and the visions and ideas
they acquired. He stated that in each city, they started with developing certain areas of
the city which eventually encompassed the whole city. He said that was what will
happen with the Corridor project. He noted this project will take several years to
implement and be completed over many years. He believes things are moving fairly
quickly and will move much faster when all the plans and visions come together.
Councilmember Clark commented on other Master Plans that had been created
throughout the years to revitalize the area, with nothing ever coming to fruition.
However, for the first time, she does see the possibility that they will see concrete
actions, realistic plans and implementation of this plan. She explained that having the
support of the entire Council, the business community, as well as the help of ASU,
ensures that issues will move forward. She added she was not concerned with the
pace and looks forward to the next phase of the process, which is the visual design
aspect. She reminded everyone that a process such as this does not happen overnight.
She stated that the process will continue to be on-going, even when they finally get
there, only to decide they still need to add.
Mayor Scruggs stated they were all committed to getting to the same goal even if they
see things differently. She remarked that she took exception to Councilmember Clark's
comment that nothing ever became of the other Master Plans that came before this one.
She informed them she was on the Council at that time and can account for 90 new
businesses developed in downtown Glendale as a result of their plan. She said they
had gone from most buildings having bars on the windows and graffiti on the walls to
starting an antiques district. They also started having all the different festivals
downtown to spark interest in the area. She conceded that the "Magnetic Mile", as the
plan was called, did not expand past 59th Avenue to the west or past 57th Avenue to the
east. She added she believes they have had some success with past visions and
goals.
Councilmember Lieberman remarked that this was actually the 4th attempt in revitalizing
the area. He noted that the big difference with this endeavor was that for the very first
time, the entire Council was firmly behind the Centerline project.
Councilmember Lieberman stated he wanted to recognize Mayor Scruggs' great efforts
in the early founding of the new Glendale airport when she was on the original
transportation commission, which found the airport's location. He had forgotten to
mention it earlier, however, wanted it to be known.
Mayor Scruggs stated she and the Council were 100% behind this project. She asked
Mr. Beasley if he had anything to add.
Mr. Beasley stated he was pleased with the discussion today, however, wanted to add
from staff's standpoint that patience was one thing, but they would rather be persistent
and make something happen as quickly as possible.
11
Mr. Bowers commented that Vince Lombardi was once asked what made a great coach
and he had responded very simply, it was great players. He commended the Glendale
staff for always being on point and ready to go at every step along the way. He added
that the ASU students would have the same accolades.
Mayor Scruggs suggested taking the business community to talk to the ASU students
sometime. Mr. Bowers agreed.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:30 p.m.
12