The revised plans still equals
NO privacy,
NO sunlight,
NO quality of life.
Increase of injury and dangers for residence current and future, the unknowing pedestrian walking by or driving by on a windy day with items flying off of rooftop decks.
Bottom line. This project does not belong in this location.
As a resident of Carleton Avenue, we strongly oppose the housing project for 901 Katella. The proposed high-density housing units represent an incompatible use of the property in question. The nature and scale of the planned development do not align with the current use of the land and the surrounding neighborhood. Such a project could disrupt the established harmony and functionality of the area, potentially leading to a decline in the overall livability of our community. Placing 49 units on two acres of property consisting of 12 two-story units, 10 feet from our wall and neighbors, in addition, to building 37 three-story units with rooftop decks is an incompatible use of property. The rooftop decks are an invasion of privacy in both our front and back yards and create increased noise and light pollution.
Lack of Privacy Measures: The current building plans for the proposed two-story and three-story high-density units do not include provisions for shielding walls or the planting of high privacy hedging/trees. These elements are essential for maintaining the privacy and visual separation between existing residences and the new development. The absence of such measures exacerbates our concerns about privacy invasion and the loss of a peaceful residential environment. The absence of this crucial measure could potentially mitigate the privacy issues arising from the high-density proposed development.
Impact on Solar Efficiency: Many residents in our neighborhood have invested in solar panels to reduce their carbon footprint and energy costs. The proposed high-density homes could cast shadows and obstruct sunlight, significantly reducing the efficiency of these solar installations. This obstruction not only affects the economic benefits of solar energy but also undermines our collective efforts toward sustainability and renewable energy. As a homeowner, we have invested in solar energy and the high density development affects our ability to harness clean energy efficiently.
Traffic Congestions: The introduction of more homes will inevitably result in increased traffic congestion. Our roads are already struggling to handle current traffic volumes, and additional housing will exacerbate this issue, leading to safety hazards in the community and neighboring streets.
Insufficient Parking Allocation: The proposed housing development plans lack adequate provisions for parking spaces. High-density housing typically results in an increased demand for parking, yet the current plans fail to allocate sufficient parking areas for the anticipated number of residents and their visitors. This oversight could lead to a surge in street parking, congesting our neighborhood roads and creating safety hazards for pedestrians and drivers alike. This is a safety concern within the community and neighboring streets.
Community Character and Aesthetics: Our neighborhood has a unique character that will be altered significantly by the introduction of high-density housing. This change may diminish the appeal and charm that attracted many of us to live here in the first place. On the City of Orange website, it states “Orange, CA, is a great place to live, work, and shop. From the Plaza to our top-rated hospitals, schools, and parks, we’re a “Slice of Old Towne Charm”, our community would like to keep with that statement and motto.
I opposed this the first time this development was on the agenda for the DRC in 2023. I still oppose it today. I'm not sure why this developer can suggest this type of proposed community when nothing surrounding it is remotely resembling its style or other dwellings. The privacy issues it would cause for me, and my neighbors is unnerving. We could never leave windows open if they faced the property, especially at night when the lights are glowing from inside to the streets. The parking and traffic would cause huge headaches.
I think Intracorp needs to completely redesign their proposal and try something with less homes, less floors, and less potential residents/cars. It would be a joy to see the development resemble that of the local residential blocks.
I am against the proposed 901 Katella project . In all aspects , it is poorly planned and designed in our Orange neighborhood. The builders have a reckless arrogant disregard for the existing neighborhood and families already there. They have not cosidered peoples privacy, the existing space and what this dense development project will do to the E Carleton Ave families.
The risk to the people that live around the proposed area will be greatly impacted by the increased traffic. Traffic is difficult at best now. Was a traffic study done? I understand the need to develop vacant land but why not put in a dog park or a senior center. Build something that can improve the quality of life to the surrounding area not density housing.
My name is Steve Fingal and I am a resident of Carleton Ave. The Design Review Committee’s first priority is the safety of the citizens of Orange. The 37 fourth floor open decks proposed for this project constitute an inherently dangerous condition which cannot be remediated by any CC&R for local ordinance. No law can prevent a resident from forgetting to bring in dangerous items from their deck prior to a wind storm.
The Santa Ana Winds occur on 20 or more days a year. The frequency and severity of these winds have been consistently increasing since year 2000. Assuming a fifty year life span of the project that is at least 10,000 Santa Ana Wind days over the life of the project and multiplied by 37 decks, it equates to 37,000 chances for something to go wrong.
The Santa Ana Winds blow from the Northeast to the Southwest. This means that any items blown off the patios will land on the project, adjacent sidewalks, or in the middle of Katella Avenue or Cambridge Street. Remember, Santa Ana Winds blow as hard at night as they do in the daytime.
An item blown off these roof decks does not need to be patio furniture or an umbrella to cause serious injuries. A ball, toy, towel, tablecloth, jacket or sweater falling on the windshield of a car can result in catastrophic damage.
It is almost a statistical certainty that during the life of the project multiple serious injuries and deaths will occur caused by items blown off these 37 launching sites.
The question is: is there any benefit for the construction of 37 fourth floor patios to the citizens of Orange to justify their use?
The simple answer is no. The sold purpose of these patios is to provide ‘personal space’ for each resident, thereby allowing the developer to increase the density of the project, thereby increasing the developer’s profit margin from the project.
Increasing the developer’s profit margin does not justify risking the safety of the citizens of Orange.
In my opinion, this proposed inherently dangerous condition requires that you reject this project in order to do your duty to keep the people you serve safe.
I am not opposed to new housing developments. I strongly oppose the project as designed because 2-3 story units with rooftop decks does not match the existing neighborhoods. These units would not only invade our privacy with a 10 foot setback but they would also interfere with any natural plant growth due to zero sunlight for a fair amount of the year. If the proposed development would be modified to have single story homes against the existing single story homes and 2 story homes on the 2nd and 3rd row, I'm sure no one would oppose that. Rooftop decks do not belong in such close proximity to existing single story neighborhoods when Katella is a main wind alley which could whip up umbrellas, patio sets, etc sending them like projectiles to unsuspecting cars and persons.
As an E. Carleton Ave. resident, I strongly oppose this project and have grave concerns related to the Intracorp application of building a high-density small lot subdivision adjacent to our R-1 zone property.
The primary purpose of zoning laws is to separate incompatible uses of property. These 2, 3, and 4 story buildings will tower over our homes blocking out the sun, increase traffic issues, devalue our homes, and rob us of our privacy. Putting 49 units on two acres of property consisting of 12 two-story units ten feet from our fences and allowing 37 three-story units with 37 roof top decks which can be lighted and used day and night less than 50 feet from our single-story homes is an invasion of our privacy and will create horrible environmental impact. This invasion of privacy would affect us inside of our homes, and in both our front and back yards, as well as, create substantial noise and light pollution, parking overflow onto our block, less sunshine for our yards and gardens, etc. In short, this density project on a 2-acre parcel of land is the definition of an incompatible use.
This project will create serious traffic problems and additional dangers to our families as residents of East Carleton Avenue. The Cambridge street adjacent to the AT&T property is incredibly poorly designed with a curve in the road that makes it impossible for drivers on East Carleton to see cars in the curve that are going north, while attempting to make a left turn onto Cambridge. This project seriously increases this dangerous driving condition with a higher likelihood for traffic accidents and most importantly increases safety risks to us, our children and pedestrians.
Rather than approving a General Plan Amendment to allow this small lot subdivision next to single family zoned property, the General Plan should be amended to prohibit small lot subdivision from being allowed next to R-1 zoning anywhere in Orange. Such a General Plan Amendment would relieve other neighborhoods in Orange from the necessity of fighting this incompatible use in the future. I did not choose to move my young family to this beautiful city with high property taxes to live next to 4-story buildings with roof top decks invading the privacy and sanctity of our home.
Please reassess this plan and consider these grave concerns.
According to the City of Orange website, the AT&T parcel is not even considered for housing. It’s not on the map. A Zone change would be needed. Why even consider this project if it isn’t in keeping with the charm of our established neighborhood? According to the City’s own guidelines stating that they care about privacy. We don’t want this huge project looming over our single story houses and yards. Why should we have to suffer because a developer thinks that money is more important than what we’ve built here? What about our rights as homeowners? This proposed development would de-value our homes. Why would anyone want to buy a house that has a 10 foot setback from two story homes? And three story homes with 4th floor decks? What about our quality of life?
The revised plans still equals
NO privacy,
NO sunlight,
NO quality of life.
Increase of injury and dangers for residence current and future, the unknowing pedestrian walking by or driving by on a windy day with items flying off of rooftop decks.
Bottom line. This project does not belong in this location.
PEOPLE over profit. PRIVACY over profit. PRIORITIES over profit. Build like you live here in Orange.
As a resident of Carleton Avenue, we strongly oppose the housing project for 901 Katella. The proposed high-density housing units represent an incompatible use of the property in question. The nature and scale of the planned development do not align with the current use of the land and the surrounding neighborhood. Such a project could disrupt the established harmony and functionality of the area, potentially leading to a decline in the overall livability of our community. Placing 49 units on two acres of property consisting of 12 two-story units, 10 feet from our wall and neighbors, in addition, to building 37 three-story units with rooftop decks is an incompatible use of property. The rooftop decks are an invasion of privacy in both our front and back yards and create increased noise and light pollution.
Lack of Privacy Measures: The current building plans for the proposed two-story and three-story high-density units do not include provisions for shielding walls or the planting of high privacy hedging/trees. These elements are essential for maintaining the privacy and visual separation between existing residences and the new development. The absence of such measures exacerbates our concerns about privacy invasion and the loss of a peaceful residential environment. The absence of this crucial measure could potentially mitigate the privacy issues arising from the high-density proposed development.
Impact on Solar Efficiency: Many residents in our neighborhood have invested in solar panels to reduce their carbon footprint and energy costs. The proposed high-density homes could cast shadows and obstruct sunlight, significantly reducing the efficiency of these solar installations. This obstruction not only affects the economic benefits of solar energy but also undermines our collective efforts toward sustainability and renewable energy. As a homeowner, we have invested in solar energy and the high density development affects our ability to harness clean energy efficiently.
Traffic Congestions: The introduction of more homes will inevitably result in increased traffic congestion. Our roads are already struggling to handle current traffic volumes, and additional housing will exacerbate this issue, leading to safety hazards in the community and neighboring streets.
Insufficient Parking Allocation: The proposed housing development plans lack adequate provisions for parking spaces. High-density housing typically results in an increased demand for parking, yet the current plans fail to allocate sufficient parking areas for the anticipated number of residents and their visitors. This oversight could lead to a surge in street parking, congesting our neighborhood roads and creating safety hazards for pedestrians and drivers alike. This is a safety concern within the community and neighboring streets.
Community Character and Aesthetics: Our neighborhood has a unique character that will be altered significantly by the introduction of high-density housing. This change may diminish the appeal and charm that attracted many of us to live here in the first place. On the City of Orange website, it states “Orange, CA, is a great place to live, work, and shop. From the Plaza to our top-rated hospitals, schools, and parks, we’re a “Slice of Old Towne Charm”, our community would like to keep with that statement and motto.
I opposed this the first time this development was on the agenda for the DRC in 2023. I still oppose it today. I'm not sure why this developer can suggest this type of proposed community when nothing surrounding it is remotely resembling its style or other dwellings. The privacy issues it would cause for me, and my neighbors is unnerving. We could never leave windows open if they faced the property, especially at night when the lights are glowing from inside to the streets. The parking and traffic would cause huge headaches.
I think Intracorp needs to completely redesign their proposal and try something with less homes, less floors, and less potential residents/cars. It would be a joy to see the development resemble that of the local residential blocks.
I am against the proposed 901 Katella project . In all aspects , it is poorly planned and designed in our Orange neighborhood. The builders have a reckless arrogant disregard for the existing neighborhood and families already there. They have not cosidered peoples privacy, the existing space and what this dense development project will do to the E Carleton Ave families.
The risk to the people that live around the proposed area will be greatly impacted by the increased traffic. Traffic is difficult at best now. Was a traffic study done? I understand the need to develop vacant land but why not put in a dog park or a senior center. Build something that can improve the quality of life to the surrounding area not density housing.
My name is Steve Fingal and I am a resident of Carleton Ave. The Design Review Committee’s first priority is the safety of the citizens of Orange. The 37 fourth floor open decks proposed for this project constitute an inherently dangerous condition which cannot be remediated by any CC&R for local ordinance. No law can prevent a resident from forgetting to bring in dangerous items from their deck prior to a wind storm.
The Santa Ana Winds occur on 20 or more days a year. The frequency and severity of these winds have been consistently increasing since year 2000. Assuming a fifty year life span of the project that is at least 10,000 Santa Ana Wind days over the life of the project and multiplied by 37 decks, it equates to 37,000 chances for something to go wrong.
The Santa Ana Winds blow from the Northeast to the Southwest. This means that any items blown off the patios will land on the project, adjacent sidewalks, or in the middle of Katella Avenue or Cambridge Street. Remember, Santa Ana Winds blow as hard at night as they do in the daytime.
An item blown off these roof decks does not need to be patio furniture or an umbrella to cause serious injuries. A ball, toy, towel, tablecloth, jacket or sweater falling on the windshield of a car can result in catastrophic damage.
It is almost a statistical certainty that during the life of the project multiple serious injuries and deaths will occur caused by items blown off these 37 launching sites.
The question is: is there any benefit for the construction of 37 fourth floor patios to the citizens of Orange to justify their use?
The simple answer is no. The sold purpose of these patios is to provide ‘personal space’ for each resident, thereby allowing the developer to increase the density of the project, thereby increasing the developer’s profit margin from the project.
Increasing the developer’s profit margin does not justify risking the safety of the citizens of Orange.
In my opinion, this proposed inherently dangerous condition requires that you reject this project in order to do your duty to keep the people you serve safe.
I am not opposed to new housing developments. I strongly oppose the project as designed because 2-3 story units with rooftop decks does not match the existing neighborhoods. These units would not only invade our privacy with a 10 foot setback but they would also interfere with any natural plant growth due to zero sunlight for a fair amount of the year. If the proposed development would be modified to have single story homes against the existing single story homes and 2 story homes on the 2nd and 3rd row, I'm sure no one would oppose that. Rooftop decks do not belong in such close proximity to existing single story neighborhoods when Katella is a main wind alley which could whip up umbrellas, patio sets, etc sending them like projectiles to unsuspecting cars and persons.
As an E. Carleton Ave. resident, I strongly oppose this project and have grave concerns related to the Intracorp application of building a high-density small lot subdivision adjacent to our R-1 zone property.
The primary purpose of zoning laws is to separate incompatible uses of property. These 2, 3, and 4 story buildings will tower over our homes blocking out the sun, increase traffic issues, devalue our homes, and rob us of our privacy. Putting 49 units on two acres of property consisting of 12 two-story units ten feet from our fences and allowing 37 three-story units with 37 roof top decks which can be lighted and used day and night less than 50 feet from our single-story homes is an invasion of our privacy and will create horrible environmental impact. This invasion of privacy would affect us inside of our homes, and in both our front and back yards, as well as, create substantial noise and light pollution, parking overflow onto our block, less sunshine for our yards and gardens, etc. In short, this density project on a 2-acre parcel of land is the definition of an incompatible use.
This project will create serious traffic problems and additional dangers to our families as residents of East Carleton Avenue. The Cambridge street adjacent to the AT&T property is incredibly poorly designed with a curve in the road that makes it impossible for drivers on East Carleton to see cars in the curve that are going north, while attempting to make a left turn onto Cambridge. This project seriously increases this dangerous driving condition with a higher likelihood for traffic accidents and most importantly increases safety risks to us, our children and pedestrians.
Rather than approving a General Plan Amendment to allow this small lot subdivision next to single family zoned property, the General Plan should be amended to prohibit small lot subdivision from being allowed next to R-1 zoning anywhere in Orange. Such a General Plan Amendment would relieve other neighborhoods in Orange from the necessity of fighting this incompatible use in the future. I did not choose to move my young family to this beautiful city with high property taxes to live next to 4-story buildings with roof top decks invading the privacy and sanctity of our home.
Please reassess this plan and consider these grave concerns.
According to the City of Orange website, the AT&T parcel is not even considered for housing. It’s not on the map. A Zone change would be needed. Why even consider this project if it isn’t in keeping with the charm of our established neighborhood? According to the City’s own guidelines stating that they care about privacy. We don’t want this huge project looming over our single story houses and yards. Why should we have to suffer because a developer thinks that money is more important than what we’ve built here? What about our rights as homeowners? This proposed development would de-value our homes. Why would anyone want to buy a house that has a 10 foot setback from two story homes? And three story homes with 4th floor decks? What about our quality of life?