4.1. Public Hearing to consider a proposal to redevelop a commercial site with 49 two-and three-story single-family small lot homes located at 901 E. Katella Avenue; and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
(General Plan Amendment No. 0004-22, Zone Change No. 1307-22, Tentative Tract Map No. 0051-22, Major Site Plan Review No. 1111-22, Design Review No. 5092-22, Administrative Adjustment No. 0293-23, and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1882-22).
I must express vehement opposition to the current design and planning of this project. The development, as proposed, is a high-rise structure ranging from three to four stories. This is starkly incongruous with the character of the surrounding neighborhood, which primarily consists of single-story family homes. The deviation not only undermines the aesthetic and architectural harmony of the area but also raises significant concerns regarding privacy and the quality of life for existing residents.
The crux of the opposition lies in the developer's apparent strategy to maximize profit margins at the community's expense. By attempting to squeeze an excessive number of units into this development, the project falls short in providing adequate parking spaces, inevitably leading to parking overflow into the adjacent neighborhood. More distressingly, the elevated structure of the new houses poses a serious privacy invasion, enabling new residents to overlook into the backyards of existing homes. This not only infringes upon the privacy of current residents, creating undue anxiety and discomfort but also stands to depreciate the property values within our established community.
While we are not opposed to the development of additional housing in principle, it is imperative that any new construction takes into full account its impact on the existing neighborhood. Development should be approached with sensitivity and respect for the current residents' rights and well-being, ensuring that any new project blends harmoniously with the character and dynamics of the area. Should the City of Orange fail in its duty to safeguard the interests of its residents by cooperating with the developer in this contentious manner, we are fully prepared to escalate this matter to the state level, seeking intervention to ensure that development practices within our community adhere to principles of fairness, respect, and legal compliance.
The design review committee has already recommended denial of this project. We ask the planning commission to do the same, please deny this project.
The Mass and scale of this project does not fit within the city’s policies and guidelines. Why is it moving forward?
Intracorp, the developer, are to trying force this unwelcoming, ugly, massive scale project onto the existing residents of Orange. The developer is who all about profit and not our privacy, not our safety, not our quality of life.
If this project is approved, the developer leaves with profit in their pocket and will never live with or look at this Massive Ugly Development ever again, while the residents of Carleton and Orange will be forced to look and live with this Oversized Development that will diminish the our quality of life.
It simply does not fit in this location. Please vote No.
I am writing on the behalf of my concerns with the proposed property on 901 East Katella Ave. With being a direct neighbor behind this proposed property and knowing this area, I have a number of concerns with the proprosed property.
First off, I don't think it's appropriate to have homes 2 story only 10 feet from our wall especially without any raising of our wall. If we were to add on and make our house a 2 story we have to have a 20 feet setback, the same rule should apply to the new buildings. My son loves to run around in the sprinklers naked, and I don't want to have to worry about our privacy being compromised from these new buildings. Also the 3 story units proposed with a rooftop decks will also be an huge invasion of privacy. It's not just one house that can look into our backyard, but all the 3 store units with rooftop decks as well as the houses with 2 story windows. Not to mention all these units so close to us will block so much sunshine and the beautiful skyline for my son.
My second concern is the traffic. Cambridge is curvy and really hard for us to turn out of already because of the curvy road. It's a blind spot for us coming out and speeding cars coming down it. During traffic hours, it is especially challenging to turn out of our street with the blind curves. With 49 units - a minimum of 100 cars, the traffic will increase tremendously. The left turn lane from Cambridge onto Katella already backs up as it is. I saw the approved traffic notice for this property was from July 2020. That doesn't make sense to me to have that being the timeline during summer and a pandemic. I definitely think traffic needs to be re-evaluated and also to evaluate how that great increase of cars will affect my street as well.
My third concern is parking. With 49 houses and only 30 guest parking spots, we are the closest street for extra parking and we will get a lot of their overflow parking. Especially since the proposed properties don't have driveways or street parking for them to park on, if they fill their garages with storage, then they will park in the guest parking spots. Yes currently it states they will have to park in their garage but as we've found out after 2 years the HOA can change the rules for parking and allow parking other areas. We also already get cars parking on our street from the Cambridge apartments, so this will make it much worse. Also, the very most importantly it will add alot more traffic where our kids play.
* My fourth concern is this proposed 49 units doesnt fit it and make sense of our quaint, quiet neighborhood. We really researched neighborhoods to get that family friendly atmosphere and these properties will make it more New York style, not the part of Orange we moved into.
Continued in next comment
The Developer is for Pure Profit…
The residents of Carleton, were willing to work with the developer and asked them to reduce the number of dwellings, As well as reducing the mass scale in size of the two stories to single stories, and the three stories to two stories. We asked if they could redesign to have a 20 foot setback from the existing property lines along Carlton, the current standard for all single-family residential homes in the city of Orange. The developer told us no because it would impact their profit margin.
When PRIVACY was addressed about the INTERIOR Living space of our homes, the developers solution was to CLOSE OUR CURTAINS or use window coverings to have privacy!!! They do NOT care because they do not live here. They will build, walk away with a huge profit in their pocket and leave behind a tidal wave of disaster Crushing the quality of life for the existing residents of Carleton Ave, the surrounding neighborhood and the entire City of Orange. Please remember, this project design will set precedence for all future small lot subdivision projects within our City of Orange.
Please do not let the developer destroy what others before us have built and left behind for us to respect and enjoy. Please do not let them destroy our quality of life, privacy and home Sanctuaries that we worked so hard for.
The developer has made it very clear that they do NOT care about the existing residents of Orange! The developer only cares about its bottom line and that’s pure profit!
PLEASE deny this project as it is currently presented. It is massive in scale to the existing homes only 10 feet from the property line. The existing families did not purchase their properties with the mindset that their children would be playing with Massive buildings built behind them, looming over them and watching over them. And ask yourself, if you lived in one of these properties on Carleton up against a 10 foot setback, how would you feel? Would you be asking the city help by denying this project? Would you be fighting the developer?
We are not saying no to new development. We are not saying no to new homes. We are saying no to a project of this size, scale and mass. It doesn’t fit the location.
We asked the planning Commission to show you care about the residence of Orange and vote NO on this project!
Take a moment to consider the reality in your daily routine. Think of your Safety and the Safety of others.
There are virtually NO Sidewalks!!! There are NO Driveways!!!
The Private Drive/Fire Lane thoroughfare that is only 25’ wide (at ground level) for this project will be utilized by ALL at the same time = Pedestrians, Children Playing, Cyclist, Personal Cars, Delivery Trucks, Fire Trucks, Emergency Vehicles, Trash Truck, etc... Also add in the redeem driver trying to shortcut their way through from Katella to North bound Cambridge by avoiding the stopped bus or the line of cars backed up at the red light...
How did this get overlooked??? There are NO Sidewalks/designated pathways to the proposed 12 dwellings that will be up against the Homes on E Carleton Ave.
The proposed design does not adhere to the City’s General Plan Land Use Policies 1.2, 1.4, and 1.6 listed on page LU-4 and Policy 6.1 on page LU-8 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan listed below:
Policy 1.2: Balance economic gains from new development while preserving the character and densities of residential neighborhoods.
Policy 1.4: Ensure that new development reflects existing design standards, qualities, and features that are in context with nearby development.
Policy 1.6: Minimize effects of new development on the privacy and character of surrounding neighborhoods.
Policy 6.1: Ensure that new development is compatible with the style and design of established structures and the surrounding environment.
The proposed design does not adhere to the City’s Small Lot Subdivision Guidelines listed below:
Goals
» Ensure that new small lot subdivisions fit into the existing neighborhood context.
Design Guidelines
A. Neighborhood Context
1. Scale and Massing
Buildings within a small lot subdivision should respect adjacent buildings by responding to their scale, massing, and need for light, natural ventilation, and views. Small lot subdivision development should follow the established size, shape, and form of the surrounding neighborhood through the use of similar proportions and details.
a. Design small lot homes to be similar in scale and to have similar forms and shapes to nearby and surrounding buildings to avoid the appearance of being overwhelming or disproportionate in comparison and to maintain existing massing patterns.
THERE are so many things wrong with the design of the proposed project... SAFETY, MASSIVE Units, 4th floor level rooftop decks (the danger just waiting to happen).
Respect the Residents who already call Orange Home!
I am writing in opposition of the proposed project. I am a lifetime resident of Orange and the third generation living in the home my grandparents built in 1932 on Cambridge. As such, I have seen tremendous growth and development and watched the City work to merge the needs for growth with the quality of life for existing residents. I have reviewed the proposal, read the staff report, and read the Orange Small Lot Subdivision Guidelines.
The City Guidelines include goals for high quality design. First, to "ensure that new small lot subdivisions fit into the existing neighborhood context." I submit that the proposed high-density, multi-story development is in direct contrast to the neighboring R-1 residential zone. Homes are established single story family dwellings. The proposed structures will create fully shaded properties, views into previously private yards and homes, and add significant traffic hazards to the subdivision entrance.
The Guidelines also require that new developers "introduce new dwellings and a new housing typology that maintains and responds to the existing urban form." Your recent decision to add the 55+ residential development east of this proposed site significantly altered the environment. While staff now call the area "eclectic", I submit that thiss is no excuse for overdeveloping this piece of property. The 55+ development has the advantage of access to an existing traffic signal, providing safe ingress and egress. This corner property has no such safe access on either Katella or Cambridge. Staff suggest that a sign requesting residents to only turn right will mitigate the problem. I suggest that you watch traffic as parents leave the school drop-off points along Cambridge. While posted signs say right turn only, many drivers ignore the signs and turn left. Of this who do turn right, many drive down the block and turn around in residential driveways, adding a different but equally dangerous traffic hazard. Cambridge curves just north of Katella, creating traffic dangers which will only be exacerbated by high-density development
Further in the Guidelines document, policies are listed, including the following:
"Policy 1.6: Minimize effect of new development on the privacy and character of surrounding neighborhoods". I believe that this development , as proposed, directly violates this policy. This development, as currently designed, brings drastic change which impacts all residents of adjacent properties and surrounding neighborhoods.
"Policy 6.1: Ensure that new development is compatible with the style and design of established structures and the surrounding environment." Again, I submit that this project is over-developed, containing too many units with too much of a height difference between the new and existing buildings to allow compatibility. There is insufficient green space to allow shared use and dependence on balconies and roof-top decks atop three story buildings, again increasing visual and noise encroachment on neighboring homes.
In summary, I ask you to vote NO on all proposals included in this agenda item. Maintain the existing Commercial zoning until the time in which you have an appropriate commercial or residential plan before you. Maintenance of the existing zoning provides future developers the opportunity to bring forward a variety of plans both compatible with the neighborhood and supported by the community.
As former Planning Commissioner, this all starts with the CEQA document. Does it tell you everything you need to know about project impacts or not? If not, it needs to be addresses. Please see my separate letter to you on this issue.
As to the project itself. It needs a GPA. You have no obligation to grant that. I think changing the land use here has merit. But should it be Medium Density Residential or another option? What are the community benefits? What are the short and long-term impacts. What about the loss of sales tax with the commercial ($$) land use going away?
The Small Lot Subdivision regulations are new. This is the first project to use them. Your DRC team are the experts in getting the details correct on all projects and they said its not there yet. They found SLS findings cannot be made. I would require a lot of proof on why I should go the other way. With this being the first project of this type, you need to consider if the regulations need further adjustments. One of the challenges with the SLS is lots can be whatever size you want. The proposed lot sizes here are from 1,700 to 2,004 square feet. That's very small and I don't think we have lots this small anywhere in Orange. Add to that its next to a neighborhood with 7,000 square feet lots.
Next, where are other R-3 sites in Orange that could use the SLS regulations next. I know the property between Collins and Mayfair along Shattuck Place is R-3. There is a church there, but in the future it could leave and this project could ask to go there. The staff report notes that 501 E. Katella is R-3, is where the Grove House Apartments are. They are one-story and I believe it has an overlay zoning of R-3a so it could go there if one-story is maintained. Where else in Orange are there R- 3 and R-4 site next to R-1 where it could occur. That inventory should be done. Should the SMS regulations be expanded to include the mixed use zones or not allowed next to R-1?
I hope you all take the time you need to consider this project. Don't rush. Is there a project like this you and the community can tour? Get all your questions answered.
This development is not appropriate for this location. Most of the homes in the area are one story and high rises and so many of them will degrade the neighborhood in every way. There will be traffic, too many people crammed into a small area and it's an overdevelopment that should not be considered.
Traffic. This may not be a main thoroughfare in the Traffic Study, but it is a main thoroughfare for anyone who has a child in any of the four schools (3 elementary and 1 middle school) along Cambridge. Parents drive their kids to and from school. It is also the street that most people use driving to Old Town from this neighborhood. People use Cambridge instead of Tustin Ave.
When Katella gets bogged down at Cambridge, how many people are going to cut through the Intracorp project to get to Cambridge? Hope it’s not on trash day.
Two entrances out of this proposed project and the choice to turn left or right. I can’t even imagine the impact of allowing residents to turn left onto Katella or onto Cambridge, as it is too close to the signal.
Katella gets backed up certain times of the day, and it will be even more so when Katella Terrace rents out their low income senior housing with 74 units.
Intracorp claims that since the blind curve is a pre-existing condition, that it does not have to address the increased traffic load. In reality, this development will add 50+ trips a day (going to work, taking and picking up kids to and from school, etc) especially at peak traffic hours that will completely overload Cambridge, or as we call it ‘The Cambridge Raceway.’
I'm not in favor of this plan to squeeze in so many homes in an area simply not capable of supporting them from roads, access, schools and so on right on down the line. This development seems to be piggy backing on the other project to the east on Katella Av. and how that one got through with approval is troubling. Utilizing unused space is certainly a good thing but not at the expense of the neighborhood and the surrounding area/businesses.
As the Planning Commision please hold fast against this kind of strategy of profits first and foremost and consideration for quality of life of all City of Orange citizens affected at dead last.
This project should be redesigned to trim it down significantly starting on the 4th stories and continued on down. Or it should be scrapped entirely to allow for more thoughtful proposals. Thank you.
The DRC Committee in a 5/2 vote recommended against this project to the Planning Commission. I hope the members of the planning commission takes this into consideration and follows suit. Let’s call this 901 E Katella Project for what it is. This project is a greedy, ill designed for profit proposal by Intracorp to build 49 2 and 3 story high density homes in a small lot with a 10 ft set back to the existing neighborhor’s yards with no parking, an invasion of privacy, as well as a disregard for the existing design of the Orange community. This is NOT OK. This project will cause increased traffic, congestion, parking problems and accidents on Katella and Cambridge. It will take away the privacy of the existing residents on E Carleton as well as take away sun in the backyards more than 4 months out of the year. Look at the set backs of the existing commercial properties already there, at least a 100 ft set back and a parking lot between the homes , not 10 ft!!!!! Nothing about the project is building a community like Intracorp says on their website , this project is going to destroy a neighborhood and community. Do not set a precedence by approving a badly designed housing project here in Orange. We live here. Build like you live here. Hold developers accountable that they cannot just build anything for pure profit.
Every outcome regarding this project proves a disaster. The losers: The residents of Carlton (big time),the surrounding neighborhoods, the privacy, the traffic and potential for greater traffic accidents, parking, City-scape, and home values. Only one entity comes out a winner: the developer.
If this project passes, great is the concern that this project will open the flood gates to other high density horrors. Please City of Orange support your citizens.
My name is Steve Fingal, and I have lived on Carleton Avenue for 45 years.
Based on Santa Ana wind conditions, the approval of 37 rooftop decks is an inherently dangerous condition, and it is an almost statistical certainty, that if approved, these rooftop decks will be the cause of multiple deaths and serious injuries to the citizens of Orange.
1. Santa Ana winds generate winds from 25 miles an hour to wind in excess of 65 miles an hour.
2. Santa Ana winds always blow from the north east to the south west.
3. There are an average of 10 Santa Ana wind events per year lasting between three and eight days per event. Using minimum numbers, that is 30 Santa Ana wind days per year, 300 Santa Ana wind days in a 10 year period. And over 1,500 Santa Ana wind days over a 50 year life of the project.
4. Intracorp proposes to build 37 fourth story rooftop decks within 20 feet to 60 feet of the north side of Katella Avenue and the east side of Cambridge Street. This means that any items blown off these patios will be deposited on the sidewalk or in the middle of Katella Avenue or Cambridge street.
5. The Santa Ana winds are strong enough to blow umbrellas, patio furniture, patio tables off the rooftop decks and onto people below. But there is an even more likely danger based on the location of the project. Tablecloths, towels, blankets, sweaters, toys, etc., if left on the patios will be blown onto Katella or Cambridge, any item that lands on the front windshield of a vehicle will block the drivers vision and may cause accidents, including head-on collisions, which are likely to cause serious injury or death.
6. NO law, ordinance, CC&R restriction or homeowner association action can prevent danger. There is no practical way to police these fourth floor decks. Sadly, most of the problems will be based simply on the lack of the homeowners knowledge that Santa Ana wind are coming.
7. Here are the odds: there are 1500 Santa Ana wind days over the 50 year lifespan of the project. There are 37 separate rooftop launching points which equals 55,500 chances that something will blow off one of these decks and injure or kill someone.
8. So, why take the risk? What is the purpose of these rooftop decks? The answer is simple. The sole purpose of these decks is to make the developer more money by increasing the density of the project. The Orange building code requires a minimum area of personal space for each home. The only way to cram 49 houses on this small parcel is to move the required personal space from the ground adjoining these homes, to the “air“ thus the creation of the fourth floor deck. The developer is asking you to choose its profits over the safety of the people of Orange. In my mind, your duty is clear.
My name is Jamie Fingal and I have lived on E Carleton Ave for over 37 years.
My comments are based on the City of Orange’s Small Lot Subdivision Guidelines, there are areas in this proposed project that don’t meet the criteria:
Ensure that the new small lot subdivision fit into the existing neighborhood context. This project does not because they have 2 and 3 story homes with 4th floor roof top decks towering over 1 story homes and backyards.
Minimize effects of new development on the privacy and character of surrounding neighborhoods They haven’t minimized our privacy and their buildings are not in line with the character of our neighborhood.
Ensure that the new development is compatible with the style and design of establish structures and the surrounding environment. This development is not compatible to our neighborhood of mainly 1 story homes that were built in the 60’s.
New lot development needs to occur through compatible, massing and thoughtful design. Small lot homes to be similar and scale NOT, and have similar forms and shapes to nearby and surrounding buildings to avoid the appearance of being overwhelming or disproportionate. In the comparison, and maintain existing masking patterns. This proposed development is overwhelming and disproportionate and will loom over Katella, Cambridge and our neighborhood. Build a dozen one story homes with yards and driveways that compliment the neighborhood.
Where the scale of proposed small lot homes, exceeds that of the immediately surrounding lots, use transitional design elements, such as architectural elements and features, stepping back upper floors, varied forms, or articulated messing, or vertical and horizontal projections to provide a human scale and visual relief. Intracorp stepped back the second story a short distance, but still has a large picture window on the side which can easily take away our privacy. The three story homes with 4th floor roof top decks will tower over us and take away our privacy in our homes, kids playing outside, our routines, our lifestyles and our slice of old town charm.
Intracorp was asked to give us a shade study in two hour increments of an entire day. They gave us 7:30-9:30am. Unacceptable. What happens at 2:00pm?
Creation of a safe environment should be considered when planning the orientation of buildings in a small lot subdivision. Arrange window configurations that break the line of sight between the houses. How much can people see when they stand on the edge of their 4th floor decks into our yards and households? Who is going to protect our privacy?
Use translucent glazing, such as a glass block or frosted glass and windows and doors facing openings on abutting structures (not in the plans)
Roof decks must, however, we designed with the privacy of residential neighbors in mind (no appropriate study was done about this).
Also, traffic. There are four schools (3 elementary and 1 middle school) along Cambridge. It is a main thoroughfare for them. Parents drive their kids to school. Two entrances out of this proposed project and the choice to turn left or right. I can’t even imagine the impact of allowing residents to turn left onto Katella or onto Cambridge, as it is too close to the signal. Accidents.
Katella gets backed up certain times of the day, and it will be even more so when Katella Terrace rents out their low income senior housing with 74 units.
I strongly urge the Planning Commission to require at least 10% of the proposed units be used for affordable housing in response to the RHNA targets the City has. The City has the opportunity to require this of the developer in return for the requested change in zoning. This would provide a needed community benefit to the City.
The proposed 49-unit development at 901 E. Katella Should not be approved as it will have major negative impacts on the surrounding area and the city.
The proposed houses are only 10 feet away from the rear property line and the adjoining backyards. Thie will impact the privacy of these people. The two-story structures will, also, throw a shadow on these yards for a considerable part of the year.
Only having a two-car garage for a four-bedroom house is in adequate as there will most likely be more than two cars per household. These additional cars will use up the on-site parking places and leave inadequate parking for guests. This will result cars parking on adjoining streets (Carleton Ave.) which has existing impacts from the apartments on Cambridge.
The added traffic from this development will create more problems for the vehicles exiting and entering Carleton Ave., just to the north. We will not be able to see any traffic exiting the proposed development. The sight distance on the inside of the curve prohibits Carleton traffic from seeing any traffic exiting the development. There are already problems for us exiting Carleton Ave. as it is now with the amount of traffic on Cambridge increasing., especially during rush hours.
The proposed deign for the development is not compatible with the surrounding area which is suburban in nature not urban. The roof silhouettes do not match anything in the area.
The roof top patios on the three-story houses poses a real danger from items that could be blown off in a Santa Ana wind or things that children might throw of the roof while playing there. There is also a danger to children playing the as they could fall off. These roof tops will be a main area for outdoor play as the houses have no yards.
I believe that the small lot development guidelines were meant for smaller development fill in projects not one of this size.
This project is putting too much in too little space and does not deserve to be approved.
I must express vehement opposition to the current design and planning of this project. The development, as proposed, is a high-rise structure ranging from three to four stories. This is starkly incongruous with the character of the surrounding neighborhood, which primarily consists of single-story family homes. The deviation not only undermines the aesthetic and architectural harmony of the area but also raises significant concerns regarding privacy and the quality of life for existing residents.
The crux of the opposition lies in the developer's apparent strategy to maximize profit margins at the community's expense. By attempting to squeeze an excessive number of units into this development, the project falls short in providing adequate parking spaces, inevitably leading to parking overflow into the adjacent neighborhood. More distressingly, the elevated structure of the new houses poses a serious privacy invasion, enabling new residents to overlook into the backyards of existing homes. This not only infringes upon the privacy of current residents, creating undue anxiety and discomfort but also stands to depreciate the property values within our established community.
While we are not opposed to the development of additional housing in principle, it is imperative that any new construction takes into full account its impact on the existing neighborhood. Development should be approached with sensitivity and respect for the current residents' rights and well-being, ensuring that any new project blends harmoniously with the character and dynamics of the area. Should the City of Orange fail in its duty to safeguard the interests of its residents by cooperating with the developer in this contentious manner, we are fully prepared to escalate this matter to the state level, seeking intervention to ensure that development practices within our community adhere to principles of fairness, respect, and legal compliance.
The design review committee has already recommended denial of this project. We ask the planning commission to do the same, please deny this project.
The Mass and scale of this project does not fit within the city’s policies and guidelines. Why is it moving forward?
Intracorp, the developer, are to trying force this unwelcoming, ugly, massive scale project onto the existing residents of Orange. The developer is who all about profit and not our privacy, not our safety, not our quality of life.
If this project is approved, the developer leaves with profit in their pocket and will never live with or look at this Massive Ugly Development ever again, while the residents of Carleton and Orange will be forced to look and live with this Oversized Development that will diminish the our quality of life.
It simply does not fit in this location. Please vote No.
I am writing on the behalf of my concerns with the proposed property on 901 East Katella Ave. With being a direct neighbor behind this proposed property and knowing this area, I have a number of concerns with the proprosed property.
First off, I don't think it's appropriate to have homes 2 story only 10 feet from our wall especially without any raising of our wall. If we were to add on and make our house a 2 story we have to have a 20 feet setback, the same rule should apply to the new buildings. My son loves to run around in the sprinklers naked, and I don't want to have to worry about our privacy being compromised from these new buildings. Also the 3 story units proposed with a rooftop decks will also be an huge invasion of privacy. It's not just one house that can look into our backyard, but all the 3 store units with rooftop decks as well as the houses with 2 story windows. Not to mention all these units so close to us will block so much sunshine and the beautiful skyline for my son.
My second concern is the traffic. Cambridge is curvy and really hard for us to turn out of already because of the curvy road. It's a blind spot for us coming out and speeding cars coming down it. During traffic hours, it is especially challenging to turn out of our street with the blind curves. With 49 units - a minimum of 100 cars, the traffic will increase tremendously. The left turn lane from Cambridge onto Katella already backs up as it is. I saw the approved traffic notice for this property was from July 2020. That doesn't make sense to me to have that being the timeline during summer and a pandemic. I definitely think traffic needs to be re-evaluated and also to evaluate how that great increase of cars will affect my street as well.
My third concern is parking. With 49 houses and only 30 guest parking spots, we are the closest street for extra parking and we will get a lot of their overflow parking. Especially since the proposed properties don't have driveways or street parking for them to park on, if they fill their garages with storage, then they will park in the guest parking spots. Yes currently it states they will have to park in their garage but as we've found out after 2 years the HOA can change the rules for parking and allow parking other areas. We also already get cars parking on our street from the Cambridge apartments, so this will make it much worse. Also, the very most importantly it will add alot more traffic where our kids play.
* My fourth concern is this proposed 49 units doesnt fit it and make sense of our quaint, quiet neighborhood. We really researched neighborhoods to get that family friendly atmosphere and these properties will make it more New York style, not the part of Orange we moved into.
Continued in next comment
The Developer is for Pure Profit…
The residents of Carleton, were willing to work with the developer and asked them to reduce the number of dwellings, As well as reducing the mass scale in size of the two stories to single stories, and the three stories to two stories. We asked if they could redesign to have a 20 foot setback from the existing property lines along Carlton, the current standard for all single-family residential homes in the city of Orange. The developer told us no because it would impact their profit margin.
When PRIVACY was addressed about the INTERIOR Living space of our homes, the developers solution was to CLOSE OUR CURTAINS or use window coverings to have privacy!!! They do NOT care because they do not live here. They will build, walk away with a huge profit in their pocket and leave behind a tidal wave of disaster Crushing the quality of life for the existing residents of Carleton Ave, the surrounding neighborhood and the entire City of Orange. Please remember, this project design will set precedence for all future small lot subdivision projects within our City of Orange.
Please do not let the developer destroy what others before us have built and left behind for us to respect and enjoy. Please do not let them destroy our quality of life, privacy and home Sanctuaries that we worked so hard for.
The developer has made it very clear that they do NOT care about the existing residents of Orange! The developer only cares about its bottom line and that’s pure profit!
PLEASE deny this project as it is currently presented. It is massive in scale to the existing homes only 10 feet from the property line. The existing families did not purchase their properties with the mindset that their children would be playing with Massive buildings built behind them, looming over them and watching over them. And ask yourself, if you lived in one of these properties on Carleton up against a 10 foot setback, how would you feel? Would you be asking the city help by denying this project? Would you be fighting the developer?
We are not saying no to new development. We are not saying no to new homes. We are saying no to a project of this size, scale and mass. It doesn’t fit the location.
We asked the planning Commission to show you care about the residence of Orange and vote NO on this project!
Take a moment to consider the reality in your daily routine. Think of your Safety and the Safety of others.
There are virtually NO Sidewalks!!! There are NO Driveways!!!
The Private Drive/Fire Lane thoroughfare that is only 25’ wide (at ground level) for this project will be utilized by ALL at the same time = Pedestrians, Children Playing, Cyclist, Personal Cars, Delivery Trucks, Fire Trucks, Emergency Vehicles, Trash Truck, etc... Also add in the redeem driver trying to shortcut their way through from Katella to North bound Cambridge by avoiding the stopped bus or the line of cars backed up at the red light...
How did this get overlooked??? There are NO Sidewalks/designated pathways to the proposed 12 dwellings that will be up against the Homes on E Carleton Ave.
The proposed design does not adhere to the City’s General Plan Land Use Policies 1.2, 1.4, and 1.6 listed on page LU-4 and Policy 6.1 on page LU-8 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan listed below:
Policy 1.2: Balance economic gains from new development while preserving the character and densities of residential neighborhoods.
Policy 1.4: Ensure that new development reflects existing design standards, qualities, and features that are in context with nearby development.
Policy 1.6: Minimize effects of new development on the privacy and character of surrounding neighborhoods.
Policy 6.1: Ensure that new development is compatible with the style and design of established structures and the surrounding environment.
The proposed design does not adhere to the City’s Small Lot Subdivision Guidelines listed below:
Goals
» Ensure that new small lot subdivisions fit into the existing neighborhood context.
Design Guidelines
A. Neighborhood Context
1. Scale and Massing
Buildings within a small lot subdivision should respect adjacent buildings by responding to their scale, massing, and need for light, natural ventilation, and views. Small lot subdivision development should follow the established size, shape, and form of the surrounding neighborhood through the use of similar proportions and details.
a. Design small lot homes to be similar in scale and to have similar forms and shapes to nearby and surrounding buildings to avoid the appearance of being overwhelming or disproportionate in comparison and to maintain existing massing patterns.
THERE are so many things wrong with the design of the proposed project... SAFETY, MASSIVE Units, 4th floor level rooftop decks (the danger just waiting to happen).
Respect the Residents who already call Orange Home!
I am writing in opposition of the proposed project. I am a lifetime resident of Orange and the third generation living in the home my grandparents built in 1932 on Cambridge. As such, I have seen tremendous growth and development and watched the City work to merge the needs for growth with the quality of life for existing residents. I have reviewed the proposal, read the staff report, and read the Orange Small Lot Subdivision Guidelines.
The City Guidelines include goals for high quality design. First, to "ensure that new small lot subdivisions fit into the existing neighborhood context." I submit that the proposed high-density, multi-story development is in direct contrast to the neighboring R-1 residential zone. Homes are established single story family dwellings. The proposed structures will create fully shaded properties, views into previously private yards and homes, and add significant traffic hazards to the subdivision entrance.
The Guidelines also require that new developers "introduce new dwellings and a new housing typology that maintains and responds to the existing urban form." Your recent decision to add the 55+ residential development east of this proposed site significantly altered the environment. While staff now call the area "eclectic", I submit that thiss is no excuse for overdeveloping this piece of property. The 55+ development has the advantage of access to an existing traffic signal, providing safe ingress and egress. This corner property has no such safe access on either Katella or Cambridge. Staff suggest that a sign requesting residents to only turn right will mitigate the problem. I suggest that you watch traffic as parents leave the school drop-off points along Cambridge. While posted signs say right turn only, many drivers ignore the signs and turn left. Of this who do turn right, many drive down the block and turn around in residential driveways, adding a different but equally dangerous traffic hazard. Cambridge curves just north of Katella, creating traffic dangers which will only be exacerbated by high-density development
Further in the Guidelines document, policies are listed, including the following:
"Policy 1.6: Minimize effect of new development on the privacy and character of surrounding neighborhoods". I believe that this development , as proposed, directly violates this policy. This development, as currently designed, brings drastic change which impacts all residents of adjacent properties and surrounding neighborhoods.
"Policy 6.1: Ensure that new development is compatible with the style and design of established structures and the surrounding environment." Again, I submit that this project is over-developed, containing too many units with too much of a height difference between the new and existing buildings to allow compatibility. There is insufficient green space to allow shared use and dependence on balconies and roof-top decks atop three story buildings, again increasing visual and noise encroachment on neighboring homes.
In summary, I ask you to vote NO on all proposals included in this agenda item. Maintain the existing Commercial zoning until the time in which you have an appropriate commercial or residential plan before you. Maintenance of the existing zoning provides future developers the opportunity to bring forward a variety of plans both compatible with the neighborhood and supported by the community.
As former Planning Commissioner, this all starts with the CEQA document. Does it tell you everything you need to know about project impacts or not? If not, it needs to be addresses. Please see my separate letter to you on this issue.
As to the project itself. It needs a GPA. You have no obligation to grant that. I think changing the land use here has merit. But should it be Medium Density Residential or another option? What are the community benefits? What are the short and long-term impacts. What about the loss of sales tax with the commercial ($$) land use going away?
The Small Lot Subdivision regulations are new. This is the first project to use them. Your DRC team are the experts in getting the details correct on all projects and they said its not there yet. They found SLS findings cannot be made. I would require a lot of proof on why I should go the other way. With this being the first project of this type, you need to consider if the regulations need further adjustments. One of the challenges with the SLS is lots can be whatever size you want. The proposed lot sizes here are from 1,700 to 2,004 square feet. That's very small and I don't think we have lots this small anywhere in Orange. Add to that its next to a neighborhood with 7,000 square feet lots.
Next, where are other R-3 sites in Orange that could use the SLS regulations next. I know the property between Collins and Mayfair along Shattuck Place is R-3. There is a church there, but in the future it could leave and this project could ask to go there. The staff report notes that 501 E. Katella is R-3, is where the Grove House Apartments are. They are one-story and I believe it has an overlay zoning of R-3a so it could go there if one-story is maintained. Where else in Orange are there R- 3 and R-4 site next to R-1 where it could occur. That inventory should be done. Should the SMS regulations be expanded to include the mixed use zones or not allowed next to R-1?
I hope you all take the time you need to consider this project. Don't rush. Is there a project like this you and the community can tour? Get all your questions answered.
Adrienne
This development is not appropriate for this location. Most of the homes in the area are one story and high rises and so many of them will degrade the neighborhood in every way. There will be traffic, too many people crammed into a small area and it's an overdevelopment that should not be considered.
Traffic. This may not be a main thoroughfare in the Traffic Study, but it is a main thoroughfare for anyone who has a child in any of the four schools (3 elementary and 1 middle school) along Cambridge. Parents drive their kids to and from school. It is also the street that most people use driving to Old Town from this neighborhood. People use Cambridge instead of Tustin Ave.
When Katella gets bogged down at Cambridge, how many people are going to cut through the Intracorp project to get to Cambridge? Hope it’s not on trash day.
Two entrances out of this proposed project and the choice to turn left or right. I can’t even imagine the impact of allowing residents to turn left onto Katella or onto Cambridge, as it is too close to the signal.
Katella gets backed up certain times of the day, and it will be even more so when Katella Terrace rents out their low income senior housing with 74 units.
Intracorp claims that since the blind curve is a pre-existing condition, that it does not have to address the increased traffic load. In reality, this development will add 50+ trips a day (going to work, taking and picking up kids to and from school, etc) especially at peak traffic hours that will completely overload Cambridge, or as we call it ‘The Cambridge Raceway.’
I'm not in favor of this plan to squeeze in so many homes in an area simply not capable of supporting them from roads, access, schools and so on right on down the line. This development seems to be piggy backing on the other project to the east on Katella Av. and how that one got through with approval is troubling. Utilizing unused space is certainly a good thing but not at the expense of the neighborhood and the surrounding area/businesses.
As the Planning Commision please hold fast against this kind of strategy of profits first and foremost and consideration for quality of life of all City of Orange citizens affected at dead last.
This project should be redesigned to trim it down significantly starting on the 4th stories and continued on down. Or it should be scrapped entirely to allow for more thoughtful proposals. Thank you.
The DRC Committee in a 5/2 vote recommended against this project to the Planning Commission. I hope the members of the planning commission takes this into consideration and follows suit. Let’s call this 901 E Katella Project for what it is. This project is a greedy, ill designed for profit proposal by Intracorp to build 49 2 and 3 story high density homes in a small lot with a 10 ft set back to the existing neighborhor’s yards with no parking, an invasion of privacy, as well as a disregard for the existing design of the Orange community. This is NOT OK. This project will cause increased traffic, congestion, parking problems and accidents on Katella and Cambridge. It will take away the privacy of the existing residents on E Carleton as well as take away sun in the backyards more than 4 months out of the year. Look at the set backs of the existing commercial properties already there, at least a 100 ft set back and a parking lot between the homes , not 10 ft!!!!! Nothing about the project is building a community like Intracorp says on their website , this project is going to destroy a neighborhood and community. Do not set a precedence by approving a badly designed housing project here in Orange. We live here. Build like you live here. Hold developers accountable that they cannot just build anything for pure profit.
Every outcome regarding this project proves a disaster. The losers: The residents of Carlton (big time),the surrounding neighborhoods, the privacy, the traffic and potential for greater traffic accidents, parking, City-scape, and home values. Only one entity comes out a winner: the developer.
If this project passes, great is the concern that this project will open the flood gates to other high density horrors. Please City of Orange support your citizens.
My name is Steve Fingal, and I have lived on Carleton Avenue for 45 years.
Based on Santa Ana wind conditions, the approval of 37 rooftop decks is an inherently dangerous condition, and it is an almost statistical certainty, that if approved, these rooftop decks will be the cause of multiple deaths and serious injuries to the citizens of Orange.
1. Santa Ana winds generate winds from 25 miles an hour to wind in excess of 65 miles an hour.
2. Santa Ana winds always blow from the north east to the south west.
3. There are an average of 10 Santa Ana wind events per year lasting between three and eight days per event. Using minimum numbers, that is 30 Santa Ana wind days per year, 300 Santa Ana wind days in a 10 year period. And over 1,500 Santa Ana wind days over a 50 year life of the project.
4. Intracorp proposes to build 37 fourth story rooftop decks within 20 feet to 60 feet of the north side of Katella Avenue and the east side of Cambridge Street. This means that any items blown off these patios will be deposited on the sidewalk or in the middle of Katella Avenue or Cambridge street.
5. The Santa Ana winds are strong enough to blow umbrellas, patio furniture, patio tables off the rooftop decks and onto people below. But there is an even more likely danger based on the location of the project. Tablecloths, towels, blankets, sweaters, toys, etc., if left on the patios will be blown onto Katella or Cambridge, any item that lands on the front windshield of a vehicle will block the drivers vision and may cause accidents, including head-on collisions, which are likely to cause serious injury or death.
6. NO law, ordinance, CC&R restriction or homeowner association action can prevent danger. There is no practical way to police these fourth floor decks. Sadly, most of the problems will be based simply on the lack of the homeowners knowledge that Santa Ana wind are coming.
7. Here are the odds: there are 1500 Santa Ana wind days over the 50 year lifespan of the project. There are 37 separate rooftop launching points which equals 55,500 chances that something will blow off one of these decks and injure or kill someone.
8. So, why take the risk? What is the purpose of these rooftop decks? The answer is simple. The sole purpose of these decks is to make the developer more money by increasing the density of the project. The Orange building code requires a minimum area of personal space for each home. The only way to cram 49 houses on this small parcel is to move the required personal space from the ground adjoining these homes, to the “air“ thus the creation of the fourth floor deck. The developer is asking you to choose its profits over the safety of the people of Orange. In my mind, your duty is clear.
My name is Jamie Fingal and I have lived on E Carleton Ave for over 37 years.
My comments are based on the City of Orange’s Small Lot Subdivision Guidelines, there are areas in this proposed project that don’t meet the criteria:
Ensure that the new small lot subdivision fit into the existing neighborhood context. This project does not because they have 2 and 3 story homes with 4th floor roof top decks towering over 1 story homes and backyards.
Minimize effects of new development on the privacy and character of surrounding neighborhoods They haven’t minimized our privacy and their buildings are not in line with the character of our neighborhood.
Ensure that the new development is compatible with the style and design of establish structures and the surrounding environment. This development is not compatible to our neighborhood of mainly 1 story homes that were built in the 60’s.
New lot development needs to occur through compatible, massing and thoughtful design. Small lot homes to be similar and scale NOT, and have similar forms and shapes to nearby and surrounding buildings to avoid the appearance of being overwhelming or disproportionate. In the comparison, and maintain existing masking patterns. This proposed development is overwhelming and disproportionate and will loom over Katella, Cambridge and our neighborhood. Build a dozen one story homes with yards and driveways that compliment the neighborhood.
Where the scale of proposed small lot homes, exceeds that of the immediately surrounding lots, use transitional design elements, such as architectural elements and features, stepping back upper floors, varied forms, or articulated messing, or vertical and horizontal projections to provide a human scale and visual relief. Intracorp stepped back the second story a short distance, but still has a large picture window on the side which can easily take away our privacy. The three story homes with 4th floor roof top decks will tower over us and take away our privacy in our homes, kids playing outside, our routines, our lifestyles and our slice of old town charm.
Intracorp was asked to give us a shade study in two hour increments of an entire day. They gave us 7:30-9:30am. Unacceptable. What happens at 2:00pm?
Creation of a safe environment should be considered when planning the orientation of buildings in a small lot subdivision. Arrange window configurations that break the line of sight between the houses. How much can people see when they stand on the edge of their 4th floor decks into our yards and households? Who is going to protect our privacy?
Use translucent glazing, such as a glass block or frosted glass and windows and doors facing openings on abutting structures (not in the plans)
Roof decks must, however, we designed with the privacy of residential neighbors in mind (no appropriate study was done about this).
Also, traffic. There are four schools (3 elementary and 1 middle school) along Cambridge. It is a main thoroughfare for them. Parents drive their kids to school. Two entrances out of this proposed project and the choice to turn left or right. I can’t even imagine the impact of allowing residents to turn left onto Katella or onto Cambridge, as it is too close to the signal. Accidents.
Katella gets backed up certain times of the day, and it will be even more so when Katella Terrace rents out their low income senior housing with 74 units.
I strongly urge the Planning Commission to require at least 10% of the proposed units be used for affordable housing in response to the RHNA targets the City has. The City has the opportunity to require this of the developer in return for the requested change in zoning. This would provide a needed community benefit to the City.
The proposed 49-unit development at 901 E. Katella Should not be approved as it will have major negative impacts on the surrounding area and the city.
The proposed houses are only 10 feet away from the rear property line and the adjoining backyards. Thie will impact the privacy of these people. The two-story structures will, also, throw a shadow on these yards for a considerable part of the year.
Only having a two-car garage for a four-bedroom house is in adequate as there will most likely be more than two cars per household. These additional cars will use up the on-site parking places and leave inadequate parking for guests. This will result cars parking on adjoining streets (Carleton Ave.) which has existing impacts from the apartments on Cambridge.
The added traffic from this development will create more problems for the vehicles exiting and entering Carleton Ave., just to the north. We will not be able to see any traffic exiting the proposed development. The sight distance on the inside of the curve prohibits Carleton traffic from seeing any traffic exiting the development. There are already problems for us exiting Carleton Ave. as it is now with the amount of traffic on Cambridge increasing., especially during rush hours.
The proposed deign for the development is not compatible with the surrounding area which is suburban in nature not urban. The roof silhouettes do not match anything in the area.
The roof top patios on the three-story houses poses a real danger from items that could be blown off in a Santa Ana wind or things that children might throw of the roof while playing there. There is also a danger to children playing the as they could fall off. These roof tops will be a main area for outdoor play as the houses have no yards.
I believe that the small lot development guidelines were meant for smaller development fill in projects not one of this size.
This project is putting too much in too little space and does not deserve to be approved.
.