Foothills Sentry July 2024

Foothills Sentry Page 4 JULY 2024 Circulation … 40,000 Published on the last Tuesday of each month and distributed to residences, businesses, libraries and civic centers. Printing by Advantage, Inc. 714-532-4406 Fax: 714-532-6755 foothillssentry.com 1107 E. Chapman Ave., #207 Orange, CA 92866 © Foothills Sentry 2024 Publisher/Editor Anita Bennyhoff 1969-2013 Editor Tina Richards editor@foothillssentry.com Sports Editor Cliff Robbins sportseditor@att.net Graphic Designer Jef Maddock graphics@foothillssentry.com Advertising Sales Andie Mills advertising@foothillssentry.com 714-926-9299 Office Manager Kathy Eidson officemanager@foothillssentry. com The street where we live Dear Editor: As are the rest of my neighbors, I am shocked by the unanimous vote to approve modern 48 multi- story homes on Katella and Cambridge, where the current AT&T building is located. Why the city council refused to heed the recommendations and denials of this project, by both the Orange Design Review Committee and the Planning Commission, is unfathomable. In an era of an enormous city budget deficit, I am surprised that this commercially zoned property was allowed to have its zoning changed to housing. More tax money is generated by commercial sites than housing. These homes will impact traffic on an already challenging corner, and during the Santa Ana Winds season, will allow fourth story decks to have their furniture and belongings blow into six-plus lanes of traffic on Katella and the surrounding areas. When election season arrives, I will be voting my conscience regarding our city council and mayor. Joyce Hays Orange Dear Editor: On May 28, our way and quality of life on E. Carleton Avenue changed forever for my neighbors, friends and me. Orange city officials, specifically the city council members, had the power to do right by their residents but instead cowed to developer Intracorp Homes. I would like to thank the City of Orange Council members for completely disregarding our quality of life, home values, privacy and parking and traffic concerns. Thank you for disappointing all of us who had faith in you to uphold the city's Small Lot Subdivision Guidelines and Municipal Codes. Thank you for showing the lack of compassion for your hard working, taxpaying, existing residents and for choosing a foreign developer over us. Thank you for teaching my neighbors, friends and me that we can no longer have faith or trust in our city officials. And specifically, thank you Kathy Tavoularis for showing us how the game of politics is played. Lastly, thank you for robbing me of my pride of ownership and the pride I had for the past 20 years to tell friends and family "I live in Orange, come and visit!" That's all gone now, and been replaced with embarrassment. Janet Majick Orange Dear Editor: I am writing this letter to express my disappointment with the Orange City Council for approving a housing development at the corner of Katella and Cambridge. Intracorp presented a plan to build 48 two- and three-story (with rooftop decks) units on the AT&T lot (roughly 2.7 acres). The City of Orange Design Review DID NOT approve the plan, the Planning Commission DID NOT approve this plan, but the City Council (unanimously) approved the plan. How can it be? This doesn't make sense. The council listened to many residents' concerns, but set those concerns aside. They listened to a company that wants to make money and has no concerns regarding the neighborhood. They will build and move on to the next project. I am not against the building of homes on the AT&T property; but so much more could have been done to help out the City of Orange residents. David Stuetzel Orange Dear Editor: On May 28 the City Council of Orange voted to allow 48 homes to be built on the old AT&T property at Katella and Cambridge. It is a devastating blow to those residents of Carleton Avenue, where the two to three-story homes will be built in their back yards thus changing the landscape forever. A large number of residents of both Carleton and the surrounding neighborhood pleaded with the council not to allow this. Their pleas fell on deaf ears. The entire council voted to build! It's hard to understand the lack of compassion and sensitivity these council members displayed. Residents of Carleton and the surrounding area are now faced with dramatic changes in their life styles. So sad! Hope we all remember these council members and the mayor of Orange next election day. Although too late for those Orange residents who pleaded with the council at the meeting. Laurence Hamlin Orange Dear Editor: I am absolutely heartbroken that the city council approved this project; it was denied by the Design Review Committee and the Planning Commission. It did not meet the requirements in the SmallLotSubdivisionGuidelines. The planner told us over and over that there were some things left up to interpretation. What? Why weren’t they enforced? 48 homes on 2.7 acres. Not low income, but a big million dollar-plus price tag for each. And an HOA. We all read the guidelines, and could not understand how anyone could misread the basics for Neighborhood Context/Scale and Massing: do not build two- story homes next to single-story homes. “Small lot subdivision development should follow the established size, shape, and form of the surrounding neighborhood through the use of similar proportions and details.” We’ve got to live with two- story homes 10 feet from our back walls. And a lot of shade and zero privacy. Next are the three- story homes with rooftop decks. We will have to find a way to deal with more noise and light, and stuff flying off those fourth floor decks during Santa Ana Wind events. Not enough parking, so they will gravitate to our street. No sidewalks or driveways in this development. The applicant has all of the rights. Existing neighborhoods do not. The city council met with the applicant. Did they set up a time to meet with us? No. Some met with the mayor. It was difficult to set up a meeting with our own council person, and it ended up being a phone conference the morning of the council meeting. Their minds were made up to support this project. When your own council person suggests to the developer that they should dedicate something at the project to our first female mayor, we knew she/they were all going to vote yes. The traffic studywas a complete joke. There is an entrance on Katella and on Cambridge, and it will be okay to turn left and right out of both of those driveways, even when they are so close to the Katella/Cambridge signal. It is hard to turn left going out of our street, and then add this project and the blind curve, and you’ve got accidents. One council person asked the developer how many concessions were made for the neighbors? The developers said 50. No concessions were made for the neighbors, they were changes made to the plans to meet the guidelines that were enforced. No rebuttal for us. The developer told them, and us, that they are involved in the community and that they met with numerous neighbors at their homes and coffee shops. Not true. They met with one neighbor multiple times because their house will be impacted greatly by two homes behind it. Their garden will be in the shade. I am sad to say that our city council and the planning department totally failed where this project is concerned. They failed to protect our privacy and our own slice of Old Towne charm, let alone our property values. Jamie Fingal Orange Dear Editor: I wish to address the Orange City Council’s May 28 meeting, where the council unanimously approved Intracorp’s 901 E. Katella project. The approval means putting 48 two- and three- story homes in that little lot -- 10 feet from our backyards, much to the dismay of residents. Neighbors have worked months to rally against this horrible proposal. My neighbors have spent countless hours, time and money trying to stop this proposal from happening. It is so disappointing that our voices were never heard. Sure, the mayor says he met with us and listened to our concerns, but actions speak louder than words. How can the Design Review Committee deny the proposal twice, and the Planning Commission as well, and we end up with the 6-0 unanimous vote to approve this project? The council put $ over people! It is a shame and a sham. We have been fighting this for over six months, and it is so disheartening at this final decision and vote. At the meeting which lasted until midnight, the council members only asked Intracorp minor questions, and agreed with everything they claimed, without doing their own research. The design does not even meet the city’s Small Lot Guidelines. This is going to set a bad precedence for future development projects, where commercially zoned land can be converted so easily for housing in Orange. What is the point of these review committees if that is the case, and the council holds the final power and say? The council’s request for a tree program for the East Carleton residents, implementing permit parking on the street and a two- year traffic study, post-build, does very little to address the concerns and problems that will result with this planned development. In addition, these contingency items are putting it again on the backs of the existing Orange residents to implement, not on the developer to change their bad development plan that will cause privacy concerns, increased parking issues and traffic problems. It is an absolute ludicrous vote. Profit over people are the results. We are in complete shock, sadness and mourning. Jenny Tom Orange Dear Editor: This is in response to the Orange City Council approving the 901 E. Katella development by Intracorp. The process DOES NOT work. My neighbors and I spent hundreds and hundreds of hours collectively working for six months doing research, printing signs, making packets, dropping off over 2,500 letters to surrounding neighborhoods, and attending four extremely lengthy meetings, late into the night on a weeknight, skipping dinners. The thought was that if we gave good information, the city would make an educated decision based upon all our findings. However, the city let Intracorp’s scare tactic of AB2011 bias them into approving the plan as revised (minimally). Realistically, the space is way too small for a large high-density high-rise building. According to the 2021-29 Housing Element that was already approved and reapproved by the State of California on January 2, 2024, the City of Orange has met and exceeded its allocation requirement of the number of housing units planned (including low income). The proposed plan DOES NOT meet the Small Lot Subdivision Guidelines. If the council members truly listened and cared, they could have approved the project with the condition of having Intracorp make further revisions to adhere to the guidelines set forth by the City of Orange. In their approval, each council member said pretty much the same thing, it was the lesser of two evils. If the city would just have told us that from the start, it would have saved everyone lost time that could have been spent with family at home or being more productive at work. I have lost faith in the system, and believe that big business will always win over the little guys. Rosalie Huynh Orange Dear Editor: If only there were words to describe the frustration I feel towards our city council for not listening to the Carleton Avenue residents and, instead, unanimously approving a housing project that will forever change our neighborhood. The rich Intracorp developers seemed to know their project was a slam dunk from the beginning, as they could care less that both the City Planning Commission and Design Review Committee voted NO on the project. All they needed were yes votes from Dan Slater and company, and they had that in the bag. This sets such a dangerous precedent, as now basically any commercially zoned area in Orange can be redesignated as residential for new high-rise, million-dollar, small lot homes. The very next DAY after the council approval meeting, the neighboring bank listed themselves “for sale.” This will happen again and again across the city. But since it’s not directly impacting the council members’ neighborhoods, they’re more than happy to approve these completely congested housing projects. Our privacy, our street parking, our safety when turning onto an already congested road, just made a horrific turn for the worse. And it’s our city council leaders to blame. Katie Polzer Orange Cash ciaos Dear Editor: Councilwoman Arianna Barrios is proposing to tax students at Chapman University $100, and students at Santiago Canyon College, $25 each. This is her solution to balance the city's budget, which is showing a $19 million deficit. Students are already struggling to build themselves a better life without having to pay even more because Arianna Barrios can't think of better ways to balance the city's budget. I am a trustee at Rancho Santiago Community College