Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tempe leaders press for broader outreach as draft downtown historic‑core guidelines advance
Summary
City council and the Historic Preservation Commission urged more inclusive, in‑person stakeholder engagement, clearer public summaries and better visuals for the draft downtown historic core plan; staff said consultants have drafted guidelines, expect a full draft by May and will continue tribal consultation and outreach.
Tempe city officials and members of the Historic Preservation Commission pressed staff and consultants on outreach and clarity for draft guidelines of a proposed downtown historic core plan during a joint meeting, while staff said a full draft is expected by May and will be presented to the council in summer.
The discussion centered on process and participation rather than final design rules. Dr. Lechner, who briefed the council and commission, said consultants MIG and PMM have moved into drafting and have held multiple rounds of meetings with staff, the Development Review Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, tribal communities and business and property owners. “We have a goal for the consultant to complete a full draft of the plan by May,” Dr. Lechner said, adding that the timeline could shift as staff ensures ample opportunity for input.
Council members and commissioners repeatedly urged broader, in‑person engagement and clearer public communications. “I would encourage we get people in the same room at the same time,” Council Member Hajj said, arguing stakeholders who often seem opposed actually want to work together. Multiple elected officials asked staff and the consultant to produce a digestible one‑page summary and better visuals so residents can understand who was consulted, where the process sits and what the next steps are. Dr. Lechner confirmed an outreach summary is posted on the city website and said staff will ask the consultant to prepare updated public materials.
Commissioners emphasized specific content priorities. Several urged expanded tribal consultation and stronger protections for archaeological resources; Commissioner Railen Williams asked that traditional cultural places and the city’s visual relationship to the Oid be considered. Commissioners also noted at‑risk properties — including the Gonzalez‑Martinez house and Farmer Goodwin building — and warned against “demolition by neglect.”
On tools and tactics, several participants said adaptive reuse and storytelling should be central features of the plan. Commissioner Sonat and others recommended incorporating oral histories and heritage‑tourism elements that can both preserve local memory and support small, independent downtown businesses. Commissioner Learner and others urged convening mixed stakeholder design sessions — rather than isolated electronic surveys — so preservationists, developers and residents negotiate tradeoffs in person.
Staff answered detailed questions about outreach: Dr. Lechner listed groups contacted (property owners; downtown developers and business owners; the ASU office of the campus architect; downtown organizations such as DTA, the Chamber of Commerce and Tempe Tourism) and acknowledged shortcomings in the first round of contact, including a missed outreach to Tempe Sister Cities that staff intends to remedy. He also cited one participation metric: 19 respondents out of 96 invitees for a single stakeholder group. Dr. Lechner said staff and the consultant will produce a matrix showing public comments and how the draft does or does not incorporate that feedback.
On process and next steps, speakers urged the city to convene broader, often in‑person, community discussions (design charettes or a project area committee), to work directly with developers on compromise solutions, and to craft a clear road map that ties preservation goals to implementation and funding. Dr. Lechner also reported separately that the city has executed a programmatic agreement with the State Historic Preservation Office to streamline Section 106 reviews for HUD‑funded projects and is preparing a memorandum of understanding with tribal partners; he said the city will seek tribal signatures and place the MOU on a future council agenda.
The meeting concluded with an agreement to continue outreach, clarify public materials and to bring an updated draft and additional visuals back to commissions and council in coming months. The council and commission adjourned after the exchange and Dr. Lechner’s updates.
