By Mary O’KEEFE

Last week’s monthly meeting of the Montrose Shopping Park Association (MSPA) was very well-attended. Most were there to hear a presentation concerning a possible housing complex that the City of Glendale proposes be built on the parking lot between Honolulu Avenue and Florencita Drive – specifically on the large parking lot behind the businesses in the 2200 block of Honolulu (behind Tom’s Toys). 

However, before Glendale representatives made their presentation, which was definitely what most – if not all 50-plus attending audience members – were waiting for, there were other speakers who had information concerning the shopping park.

Glendale Police Officer Eggiman gave an update on law enforcement issues in the area, including a man cited for drinking alcohol in public, a traffic collision at Honolulu Avenue and Ocean View Boulevard that ended in the arrest of a driver under the influence, and hidden cameras found in the restrooms at Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf. The discovery of cameras is under investigation by the Glendale Police Dept.

Eggiman also spoke about e-bikes and e-motorcycles along Honolulu Avenue, specifically those being ridden on sidewalks. He said GPD has a zero tolerance policy for those operators not following traffic laws. 

There were updates shared by Tony Chriss of Glendale Economic Development, which is the city’s liaison with MSPA.

“The parklets are one of the items I wanted to talk about. Along [Honolulu Avenue in the shopping park] we do have several restaurants that are occupying the City’s right of way,” he said. “We’ve just created a new contract with new numbers for insurance.”

Glendale City Attorney Michael Garcia has generated a new application for parklet use with the new insurance requirements, which includes higher premiums. Chriss said the city will be sending emails to businesses that use the parklets and, if they decide to pay the cost increase and provide the insurance, those carved out dining areas will stay in place; if not, they will revert to parking spaces. The City is giving businesses/restaurants about two weeks’ notice to make a decision. 

MSPA board members mentioned the continuing problem with people outside the shopping park businesses who use the large trash bins for their private disposal  use, dumping large items into the bins that spill onto the parking lot where they are located. 

Andre Ordugegian, MSPA president, said members had met with Athens, the shopping park’s debris collection company, and discussed possibly creating a contained area for the trash bins. The discussion is ongoing between Athens and the City of Glendale. 

Another presentation was made by the City concerning new designs for the circular seating found throughout the shopping park. Three specific circular benches have been chosen for new designs. The designs presented include painted flowers, and bright and pastel colors. 

“We selected three of the circular benches that are just brick benches. We [thought] that would be a great way to create more engaging spaces for the public,” said artist Kassia Rico. 

The City had put out a notice to artists who may be interested in designing the benches; CVW will follow up with the designs.

Then it was time for the subject everyone in the room was waiting for: updated information from the Glendale General Plan and the Draft Land Use. 

The presentation was made by Vilia Zemaitaitis, deputy director of Community Development/Long Range Planning at the Glendale Community Development Dept. (CDD), and Teresa Santilena, principal planner with the City. 

Having a General Plan is a state requirement for all cities and counties in California. The plan is to establish “a citywide vision and consistent direction for future development. It reflects community priorities and values and includes supporting goals, policies and implementation measures to achieve the community visions,” according to the City’s website glendaleplan.com.

That latter description regarding community priorities and values was mentioned several times during the presentation’s question and answer period with most people saying the plan to build apartments in the parking lot did not take into consideration their needs or values. 

The presentation began with a bit of a hiccup as the prepared PowerPoint could not be shared due to technical difficulties. From there the presentation seemed to spiral downward. 

Before the presentation local activist Patrick Murphy, who announced he is running for the Glendale City Council in the upcoming election, shared his opinion during public comment regarding the land use issue. Murphy lives in the area and is a small business owner. 

“My wife and I are [in Montrose] several times a week. I am running [for office] because I want to help Glendale fix the issues that are so pressing in our community,” he said, “and one of the biggest ones is engaging the public.”

He cited the lack of City outreach regarding the discussion of the land use issue and the proposed building of a housing complex.

“You’re going to see this land use element that’s going to be presented. The first meeting that I went to was [on] Dec. 9 and it was called a ‘scoping meeting.’ There were four members of the public there,” he said. He added there were more staff and consultants at that meeting than the public. 

Another meeting held on July 15 also had little public response.

“There were three call-ins and two speakers … the meeting was at 3 on a Tuesday afternoon,” he said. 

Those types of unsuccessful outreach efforts by the City were repeatedly referred to throughout the meeting. 

Zemaitaitis stated that her department is a newer division of the Community Development Dept. She asked the audience if they knew of this plan prior to hearing about its presentation at the MSPA meeting. Few raised their hands, so she explained what the General Plan was including that it is a “high level overarching plan.” 

“These are our goals and aspirations for the city moving forward,” she said. “The General Plan includes multiple topics [that] include land use, mobility, open space and conservation … Land use is a big component because it obviously affects the City, where our use is located, what are the densities.”

“Densities” is in regard to what percentage of acre per land can be developed. 

“We are here before you because I think the majority of you are really interested in the land use element,” she said. 

She said the land use element uses land maps, which are being updated in certain locations including in Montrose. 

Zemaitaitis spoke about some issues that are being worked on in downtown Glendale. Then it was time for the Montrose specific plan. 

“I think the issue at hand is the proposed City-owned residential overlay that refers basically to an overlay, which would not change the existing General Plan land use designation or the zoning, but would allow the City to develop residential [housing] on its parking lot, on the City-owned parking lots,” she said.

The proposal would be to build a low-density development on the parking lot between Honolulu Avenue and Florencita Drive. The lot is zoned for commercial use so the City would need to change that zoning restriction. 

Zemaitaitis assured the audience the City would not just approve any developer and that no one would purchase the land from the City … meaning the City would own the land.

In addition there would be no parking spaces lost, she said.

None of these assurances calmed the nerves of the residents and business owners in the area, including all members of the MSPA. 

Questions and comments from those in attendance were fairly consistent: Small business owners were concerned how adding an apartment complex to the parking lot would affect their businesses. Many were certain the construction alone would affect their customers and many stated they would most likely have to close. 

Small businesses are already facing challenges with online companies as well as higher rents. One business owner whose shops are adjacent to the parking lot said she would not survive the construction let alone the addition of a housing complex. 

Concern about parking, historically an issue in Montrose, was also raised. If the proposed site would not take away any parking from the lot, as according to Zemaitaitis, the assumption was that parking would be within the complex and not underground. This caused concerns that the developer would charge for parking in the lot. Currently the lot offers free parking for three hours. 

Another concern was that the proposed building would have to be several stories high to accommodate the displaced parking spots. 

Another issue was regarding fire and traffic. Those who live and shop in Montrose know what happens when an accident, or fire, closes part of the Glendale (2) or the 210 freeways. Traffic is backed upon surface streets in all directions, including on Florencita and Honolulu. The concern is the increased housing would add to the existing fire issues facing the community, including insurance costs and cancellations. 

The one issue that both residents and business owners did consistently complain to City officials was its outreach. Many echoed Murphy’s problem stating that they did not get any notice about the meeting from the City, either via its website or on social media. 

Zemaitaitis said the CDD had reached out via social media; however, MSPA vice president Gigi Garcia said the board was only notified of this presentation two days before the meeting; she had searched social media posts but found nothing. 

“I just posted it on my Facebook [account] and that is why so many people showed up,” she said. 

None of the people at the meeting said they received any notice from the City about the meeting. Zemaitaitis added there are plans to have future informational meetings in the area at locations such as Sparr Heights Community Center.

A question that was important to those present concerned the size and scope of the proposed development; however, Zemaitaitis could not answer how many units are planned for the site. 

Local realtor Robbyn Battles also shared her concern about the notice of the General Plan and Land Use. She said that knowing the square footage of the parking lot area that would be used was crucial information that should have been provided.

Battles was wondering why outreach was so poorly done, especially since the close of public comment was scheduled for Aug. 19. 

Ordubegian added that he was at a meeting with the City on another issue when the staff presented an example of a “high percentage” of respondents who were positive about an issue; however, when he asked how many had responded he was told eight. He pointed out eight people does not represent a high percentage of the community and he was concerned this process for the proposed development could go down the same road.

Ordubegian told those present, and urged them to tell others, the best way to make sure their voices were heard was to comment at https://tinyurl.com/3km9rand, or send an email to GlendalePlan@GlendaleCA.gov. People can also get comment cards at Mountain Rose Gifts, 2328½ Honolulu Ave. Comment cards can also be dropped off at Mountain Rose Gifts.  

For more information visit www.GlendalePlan.com.

MSPA has since provided flyers with information on how to comment. Zemaitaitis stated that she would try to get an extension on the deadline for public comment from Aug. 19 to Aug. 29.