LA TIMES: City of Anaheim to vote on Disney-opposed housing plan.

[DisneyIPresume]

http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister...le_1579139.php



If you look at this map, you can see the proposed area was right next door to the "third park" property Disney owns.

And from yesterday's OC Register editorial...

http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister...le_1577471.php

Can you please point out exactly where the third park is going? I have looked at the map. The proposed area was bordered by Katella, Haster, and I-5. The only two places I see a park going in at is directly across the street on Haster, but that is only maybe a half-block that would be right next door, or diaganally to the Northeast on Katella and Haster, but this really isn't right next door either.

[Belle626]

Great, more locals to complain about the noise from a theme park that's been in the same spot for 50+ years.

Couldn't agree with you more!!

[Rex Dopey24]

Im gonna go with the housing becaue its very important to some people out there who needs shelter and plus the population is growin.

[The Mad Hatter]

You can't tell me that there is absolutely no place else in Anaheim to build this low income housing.

[MrLiver]

You can't tell me that there is absolutely no place else in Anaheim to build this low income housing.

Of course there are lots of places they can build it - that's not the point. The point is they had a developer who wanted to build on this plot of land. Now that the city council won't change their plans, the mobile homes will probably end up staying for years to come.

Maybe it makes sense in the long term - maybe 10 to 15 years from now, but I don't see developers lining up to build entertainment venues in Anaheim (and the last thing the area needs is another DTD/Block clone).

For all of those who were against the housing: What do you want to see built in this area instead?

[Pisces]

I'd like to see a park with lots of tall trees, and green open spaces.

It's nice that the Anaheim City Council listens to their constituents.

The voters don't want low-income housing.

I don't know why the City is obligated to provide housing for Disney employees.

South Coast Plaza doesn't provide housing for its employees. And a majority of workers at South Coast Plaza are minimum wage. Gee, how come Costa Mesa isn't building low-income housing?

I don't see any low income housing in Laguna Niguel, Mission Viejo, or Newport Beach. And, there are plenty of low-income people who commute in to minimum wage employment in those areas.

How interesting that the majority of low-income housing needs to be in North County, and Anaheim is forced to be saddled with the bulk of it.

I think Newport Beach, Costa Mesa, and Laguna ought to step up to the plate and start building their fair share.

[bananabelle]

Katella and Haster? Right by the 5? I don't see anything wrong with it. There are houses there, and you'd have to be stupid to complain about Disney noise if you're going to relocate there.

[Morrigoon]

You guys are acting like Anaheim is some kind of standalone city and if employees can't live in Anaheim they have to live in Riverside or something. That's not the case in a "sprawl" area like Southern California.

There's a place in Orange County for low-income housing. It's called Santa Ana. It's not that far away.

[ExJungleSkipper95]

I've read a few of you mentioning that there is not enough housing in Anaheim. I have one thing to say about that. DO SOME RESEARCH BEFORE MAKING A STATEMENT LIKE THAT.

I recently was looking to move out of Anaheim Hills because the place I was living at was increasing the rent and I thought that paying 1250.00 per months for a one bedroom was a bit too much. I would use several websites that would allow you to put in the price range you were looking for as far ans rent and the location. I did searches in Anaheim for apartments in the 800-1000 per month range and found PLENTY to choose from. Anaheim isn't lacking in housing. Housing is there. The people who can't find it are either too stupid to drive around and see dozens of apartments in the area with huge banners and balloons "NOW LEASING!" and "NOW RENTING!". Yes, some are more expensive then others but you get what you pay for. If you want to live in a nice complex with pools and a gym then you will pay more. Currently I work with a gal who lives not too far from Disneyland on Lincoln and Euclid. Her complex has no pool, no gym, no fancy ammenities and she pays about 400 dollars less rent than I do. Yes, I can pay less rent by moving to such a complex but I choose not to.

To sum it all up: There is plenty of affordable housing in Anaheim. There is no need to build more. If you can't afford to live in Anaheim there are two choices. Get a better paying job or move to where you can afford to live and find another job there.

I used to live in Riverside and paid 800 a month in rent. The commute sucked but I did it for a while before I decided to move to Anaheim Hills where my job is. I knew it would involve sacrafice by paying more rent and not having as much free spending cash but that was my choice. These people complaining about not enough housing have a choice too. Love it or leave it!

[TP2000]

If the land isn't rezoned, the optimal solution is for Disney to develop high-density, efficient, and economical housing on that property and make it exclusively available to company employees.

I have to disagree with you here. Disneyland is a private business, it is not a social service agency.

If Disneyland provides subidized housing for it's employees, what about other Orange County business? Boeing in west Orange County? General Electric in Anaheim Hills? Ford Motor in Irvine? What about the sales clerks at Nordstrom at MainPlace? The baristas at the San Clemente Starbucks also need cheap housing, why leave them out?

Expecting Disneyland to buy up valuable land in the Resort District and "develop high-density, efficient, and economical housing on that property and make it exclusively available to company employees" would be so far beyond the core mission of Disneyland as to be laughable. Seeing as how it's also a concept that borders on Socialism, it would also have a staunch Republican like Walt Disney spinning in his grave.

Disneyland needs to pay their front-line CM's a bit better. It also needs to treat them better backstage and serve them a decent meal in the cafeteria. Things, by the way, TDA isn't even able to handle right now. Many hourly CM departments have an annual turnover rate over 100% right now, which is pathetic and simply abysmal.

Let's have Disneyland tackle those simple Human Resources Department basics before we rewrite the social contract of American private enterprise with a massive subsidized housing project for Jungle Cruise Skippers and Churro Hostesses.

[TP2000]

For all of you posters cheering the decision about turning down the low income housing plan... think about the future of the resort, when gasoline prices will be at ridiculous levels, and no one will be willing to drive one hour each way to work at DL for the measly rates TDA pays.
.

You sound like a college professor I had in 1979 during the Energy Crisis. The smart folks back then were convinced we'd have $5 a gallon gasoline by 1982 and then run out of oil by 1990. Funny thing is American Free Enterprise and human ingenuity stepped in, found ways to extract oil from places never dreamed of just a few years earlier, and the Energy Crisis went the way of bell bottoms and Disco Duck.

We shouldn't plan the future around doomsday scenarios that never seem to pan out.

In the words of Edina Monsoon; "Cheer up, it may never happen!"

[BlueSkyDriveBy]

You sound like a college professor I had in 1979 during the Energy Crisis. The smart folks back then were convinced we'd have $5 a gallon gasoline by 1982 and then run out of oil by 1990. Funny thing is American Free Enterprise and human ingenuity stepped in, found ways to extract oil from places never dreamed of just a few years earlier, and the Energy Crisis went the way of bell bottoms and Disco Duck.

We shouldn't plan the future around doomsday scenarios that never seem to pan out.

In the words of Edina Monsoon; "Cheer up, it may never happen!"

You are absolutely correct. It may never happen.

But TDA has a massive turnover rate RIGHT NOW. And affordable housing for most cast members is not nearby. Transportation costs are an issue for many CMs, living paycheck to paycheck.

So if transportation costs rise even a small amount while paychecks do not... the turnover rate will increase even further.

And as far as furnishing affordable housing for DL workers... the affordable housing that could have been built on that parcel would be open to all eligible workers in Anaheim, and not just DLR. Anaheim is fiscally dependent upon the business that DLR generates, so it's in the city's best interest to help those businesses succeed. Keeping family vacations affordable by keeping labor rates as low as possible promotes profitibility, which keeps businesses in Anaheim.

Either increase labor rates to increase the pool of applicants or offer alternatives to the long commute for affordable housing. Or else the increasing turnover rate will never reverse.

[PragmaticIdealist]

You sound like a college professor I had in 1979 during the Energy Crisis. The smart folks back then were convinced we'd have $5 a gallon gasoline by 1982 and then run out of oil by 1990. Funny thing is American Free Enterprise and human ingenuity stepped in, found ways to extract oil from places never dreamed of just a few years earlier, and the Energy Crisis went the way of bell bottoms and Disco Duck.

We shouldn't plan the future around doomsday scenarios that never seem to pan out.

In the words of Edina Monsoon; "Cheer up, it may never happen!"

This has to be the most unintentionally ironic thing I have ever read posted on MiceChat. We are currently living in an energy crisis beyond anything anyone in 1979 ever dreamt.

[TP2000]

This has to be the most unintentionally ironic thing I have ever read posted on MiceChat. We are currently living in an energy crisis beyond anything anyone in 1979 ever dreamt.

Really? We were paying $1.30 for gasoline back in '79. http://www.randomuseless.info/gasprice/gasprice.html That was when the California minimum wage had just been raised to $2.90

I just filled up for $2.45 tonight. We just raised the minimum wage in California to $7.75. In 10 months it goes to $8.25.

Adjusted for inflation, the gallon of 1979 gas I paid $1.30 for to put in my 1977 Cutlass Supreme that got 18 miles to the gallon and belched out smog should be $3.75 in todays money. But even with the recent run-up in gas prices, and subsequent fall-off due to market demands, gas is much cheaper today. Using 1979 as the inflation data point, we are paying just .80 cents for a gallon of gas now.

And American Free Enterprise now allows me to drive a luxury V-8 car that gets 28 miles to the gallon while emitting barely any particulate matter and providing me with a driving experience that is lightyears beyond the 8 Track Tape and vinyl seats a fancy car had 30 years ago. Today a college kid could drive a modern car equivalent in style to my disco '77 Cutlass, say a '07 Honda Civic Coupe, and get 38 miles to the gallon! (You'd have to get an aftermarket supplier to install the 8-Track though, Honda only installs CD players, XM Radio, and satellite navigation in their Civic line for '07.)

Things only get better and better! And gas is cheaper today too!

Cheer up, it may never happen.

Or, as a very wise man once said, "There's a great, big beautiful tomorrow, shining at the end of every day!"

[MrLiver]

I'd like to see a park with lots of tall trees, and green open spaces. It's nice that the Anaheim City Council listens to their constituents. The voters don't want low-income housing.

Was this taken to a vote by the city? I thought just the city council voted on it (and they were tied as it were and had to default to a previous decision).

If you want tall trees and green open spaces - there's a park down on the corner of Haster and Orangewood, about a block away from the proposed housing development.

I don't know why the City is obligated to provide housing for Disney employees.

I don't know where anyone got the idea that this was going to be housing for Disney employees. That couldn't be further from the case. This was going to be a very expensive condo/apartment complex with only a few residences set aside for low income housing (and I believe that stipulation was only added because the housing it would be replacing is currently low income mobile homes).

This wasn't going to be an act of charity. This was a developer who was trying to get a prime location for housing and develop land that is currently being under utilized, and made some promises to sweeten the deal.

Here's the problem now though: now that the deal has fallen through, what is going to happen to the land? Is it just going to remain a mobile home park? Will it just become an empty lot? Is it just going to sit there for another 10 years like Garden Walk did?

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I honestly think that the Anaheim Resort is a joke, and I don't know why Disney keeps pushing so hard for something that just will never be able to compete (or why the city of Anaheim bends over backwards to give them whatever they wish - even when it seems to contradict what's best for the city).