Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How low-cost housing lost in Anaheim - LA Times, 2/15/07

Collapse

Ad Widget

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How low-cost housing lost in Anaheim - LA Times, 2/15/07

    LA Times, 2/15/07
    How low-cost housing lost in Anaheim

    Full Story: How low-cost housing lost in Anaheim
    Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

  • #2
    Re: How low-cost housing lost in Anaheim - LA Times, 2/15/07

    I'm not too familiar with all the politics behind this issue, but I'm wondering exactly why did they have to propose the low cost housing to be in that specific place? Couldn't they have picked another area that is within a reasonable distance from there.

    And the one low wage earner that was quoted, saying that she has to drive a four hour commute. I'm thinking maybe they should try to implement more commute choices, like putting a Metrolink station around there - just make it easier to get to the area on public transportation for those that are far away.

    I have to admit though that I'm glad this isn't going through for the Resort area.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: How low-cost housing lost in Anaheim - LA Times, 2/15/07

      Originally posted by TikiRoomLiz View Post
      I'm not too familiar with all the politics behind this issue, but I'm wondering exactly why did they have to propose the low cost housing to be in that specific place? Couldn't they have picked another area that is within a reasonable distance from there.
      Probably because that parcel is already zoned for residential; a mobile home/trailer park currently occupies that land.

      So where exactly will the current residents in those mobile homes relocate to? No way they will have the financial means to afford one of those new condos, since most folks who live this way are typically on fixed incomes, retirement or disability. And that mobile home park has been there for decades.

      Instead of dealing with the issue of affordable housing in Anaheim, this pushes it further into the toilet. NIMBY is alive and well at the Disneyland Resort.
      "Dope smoking insects and reckless driving always work." -- Cousin Orville

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: How low-cost housing lost in Anaheim - LA Times, 2/15/07

        Originally posted by BlueSkyDriveBy View Post
        Probably because that parcel is already zoned for residential; a mobile home/trailer park currently occupies that land.

        So where exactly will the current residents in those mobile homes relocate to? No way they will have the financial means to afford one of those new condos, since most folks who live this way are typically on fixed incomes, retirement or disability. And that mobile home park has been there for decades.

        Instead of dealing with the issue of affordable housing in Anaheim, this pushes it further into the toilet. NIMBY is alive and well at the Disneyland Resort.
        NIMBY is the status quo nowadays, unfortunately.
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: How low-cost housing lost in Anaheim - LA Times, 2/15/07

          Originally posted by TikiRoomLiz View Post
          I'm not too familiar with all the politics behind this issue, but I'm wondering exactly why did they have to propose the low cost housing to be in that specific place? Couldn't they have picked another area that is within a reasonable distance from there.

          And the one low wage earner that was quoted, saying that she has to drive a four hour commute. I'm thinking maybe they should try to implement more commute choices, like putting a Metrolink station around there - just make it easier to get to the area on public transportation for those that are far away.

          I have to admit though that I'm glad this isn't going through for the Resort area.
          There is plenty of dirt poor low income housing just about six miles away in Santa Ana, with easy public transportation to the resort area. Why would anyone drive four hours to get to a low paying job?
          Fight On!:sc: Beat the Red Wolves!

          Tom Chaney Memorial Debate Lounge Quote of the Week:

          [None]
          The brick walls are there to stop the people who don't want it badly enough - Randy Pausch

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: How low-cost housing lost in Anaheim - LA Times, 2/15/07

            Thanks BlueSkyDriveBy for answering my question. I'm not familiar with the area beyond Disneyland, and the information you provided now makes me understand the issues behind this whole thing. But, I guess Anaheim really likes that Goose and the Golden Eggs it supplies.

            Steamboatpete though makes a good point. Santa Ana does have affordable housing and is close by to make a very tolerable commute. Personally when I would look for jobs I'd limit my search to those that are not more then an hour away - my farthest job being in Santa Monica (from Los Angeles). There is no way I'd ever pick a job that sends me so far out of my way.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: How low-cost housing lost in Anaheim - LA Times, 2/15/07

              I'm not sure it's fair to say "big deal, it's a trailer park right now". In Orange county I'd say most of the trailer inhabitants are retired folks just looking to pay little in rent.

              With trailer parks you have a mix of people, with low income housing it attracts a different type of clientel. NIMBY is absolutely true all over, ask the proposed El Toro airport backers. Much like you don't want a liquor store near a school, not wanting low-income housing near a family themed park is a close comparison.

              Chad

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: How low-cost housing lost in Anaheim - LA Times, 2/15/07

                Any type of residential real estate development (low income or fair market value) in the resort district is really inappropriate. The needs for both will clash.

                Regardless of type of "homes" that go in there, at some point, they will begin to complain about the traffic and noise - things that go with a business area.

                I certainly would hope that Disney and Anaheim could work together to build some affordable housing in a part of Anaheim that is better suited to a residential project.
                The Mur
                ______________________________________________
                Two different worlds.....we live in two different worlds

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: How low-cost housing lost in Anaheim - LA Times, 2/15/07

                  Coalition seeks housing, wage standards for Anaheim development

                  Twenty groups and labor unions unite to compel builders in sports district to pay a 'living wage' and build low-cost housing and child-care facilities.

                  By Dave McKibben
                  Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
                  February 21, 2007



                  A coalition of 20 faith-based organizations, environmental groups and labor unions has created a community development agreement that would compel builders in the Anaheim sports district to meet prevailing wage standards and construct low-cost housing and child-care facilities.

                  The deal would be similar to one in San Diego in which homes, shops and offices were built around the Padres' new downtown baseball stadium, Petco Park. Although the covenant has not been ratified by any of the three builders being considered for developing lofts, office towers and retail districts on city-owned land next to Angel Stadium, one builder plans to meet with the coalition this week.

                  "Their vision for that site seems pretty compatible to ours," said Eric Heffner, vice president of Windstar Properties. "We want to build a sustainable community for the long term.

                  "A community is a whole bunch of different factions coming together to do what's best for the community. What defines a community is not the buildings but the spirit. We welcome this group's participation in the process."

                  The coalition formed last summer when the 53-acre parcel was being offered as one of two potential Southland sites for a National Football League stadium. As talks with the NFL stalled, city officials began entertaining offers from developers interested in building retail and office space, housing and possibly a stadium on the property.

                  The coalition, which calls itself Orange County Communities for Responsible Development, includes Los Amigos of Orange County, a Latino Advocacy group; the Dayle McIntosh Center, a Garden Grove agency that helps the disabled; Unite Here, a hotel and restaurant workers union; and Clergy & Laity United for Economic Justice.

                  "The stadium project is an important, symbolic site, and there's going to be a huge investment of public resources," said Eric Altman, the coalition's executive director. "There is a broad coalition of groups that don't necessary always work together, but they all have a common vision for what could happen on the site."

                  The land is part of the so-called Platinum Triangle, a still-developing, high-density commercial and residential hub envisioned as the city's future downtown.

                  About 9,500 housing units are expected to be built in the Platinum Triangle, but none are designated as low-cost housing. Last week, the Anaheim City Council rejected a controversial residential project that included low-cost housing in the city's resort district. Disney and various business leaders vigorously opposed the plan.
                  http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,2162722.story
                  "If you don't know how to draw, you don't belong in this building" - John Lasseter 2006

                  Comment

                  Ad Widget

                  Collapse
                  Working...
                  X