OCVibe Approved by Anaheim City Council.

[CaptinEO]

Writing off homelessness as purely a drug-driven issue is disingenuous and I firmly believe it's an argument used simply to dehumanize the homeless.

I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that rent in CA is second-highest in the nation, or that the median rent in LA County is 37% higher than the national.

Many people can get priced out of the area they are in, but I'd imagine a lot of people end up moving elsewhere to lower living expenses.

 

[MoonRakerSCM]

Having personally worked with both Orange and LA County officials who work on the Santa Ana and LA rivers daily (some for decades), I always go off what they tell me. Every person out there long term is so by choice. They are heavy drug users, mentally unstable, or refuse to adhere to any societal structure.

The gentleman who has spent every day of work on the LA River for the past 20 years has never encountered a person out there who ended up with bad luck and couldn't get help within days and on the road to get back on their feet. This was as of ~1 year ago last I was out there with him.

He personally has received thankyous from people months or years later because he was the one who first noticed them setting up on the river and talked with them and gave them information on where ro go for help/services.

 

[TP2000]

Having personally worked with both Orange and LA County officials who work on the Santa Ana and LA rivers daily (some for decades), I always go off what they tell me. Every person out there long term is so by choice. They are heavy drug users, mentally unstable, or refuse to adhere to any societal structure.

The gentleman who has spent every day of work on the LA River for the past 20 years has never encountered a person out there who ended up with bad luck and couldn't get help within days and on the road to get back on their feet. This was as of ~1 year ago last I was out there with him.

Thank you for the insight!

I think it's clear when you drive by these homeless encampments on the streets of LA that this is not a "I couldn't find a roommate" problem but is instead a "I have long term drug addiction and mental health issues" problem.

The question is what the heck are they going to do about it to clean it all up before the Olympics? California taxpayers have spent over $17 Billion on homeless programs (that mostly don't work) in just the past 4 years, and the city of LA spends over $1 Billion of taxpayer money per year alone. And it gets worse by the week, not better.

The Olympics start in less than 5 years. So... what's the plan???

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/11/us/california-homeless-spending/index.html

 

[Phroobar]

The Olympics start in less than 5 years. So... what's the plan???

 

[denyuntilcaught]

Many people can get priced out of the area they are in, but I'd imagine a lot of people end up moving elsewhere to lower living expenses.

Absolutely. I'm just making a point that the high cost of living is indeed a factor in the equation as well. The proposed law to cap security deposits to one month's worth of rent is a step in the right direction at least - these landlords are out of their minds.

 

[Consumer]

Absolutely. I'm just making a point that the high cost of living is indeed a factor in the equation as well. The proposed law to cap security deposits to one month's worth of rent is a step in the right direction at least - these landlords are out of their minds.

Prices are determined by the market. If people are willing to pay extreme prices, then that’s the value of the property. If they’re not, then the market will reflect that and the landlords will lower their rent. Believe it or not, landlords do not want empty rentals. The government has no right to tell a man what he can or cannot do with his own property and if he wants to charge high rent it is entirely within his rights to do so.

 

[denyuntilcaught]

Prices are determined by the market. If people are willing to pay extreme prices, then that’s the value of the property. If they’re not, then the market will reflect that and the landlords will lower their rent. Believe it or not, landlords do not want empty rentals. The government has no right to tell a man what he can or cannot do with his own property and if he wants to charge high rent it is entirely within his rights to do so.

Sure, I completely understand that, but let's not deny there's an element of greed at play here. We call it the free market, but that's just what we call it to feel better about ourselves.

The formula is fundamentally flawed.

 

[Disney Irish]

Prices are determined by the market. If people are willing to pay extreme prices, then that’s the value of the property. If they’re not, then the market will reflect that and the landlords will lower their rent. Believe it or not, landlords do not want empty rentals. The government has no right to tell a man what he can or cannot do with his own property and if he wants to charge high rent it is entirely within his rights to do so.

Landlords will intentionally raise rates to try to get lower income families out of their rentals, its very common and completely against the law. I've seen landlords even keep units vacant just to get around this, so they can then claim they have to raise rates in order to cover vacancies. Many landlords, especially those that use it as an investment, are very shady and will do anything including breaking the law.

So yes the Government most certainly can tell an owner the max amount they can raise rent at one time and how often, all part of anti-price gouging statutes.

 

[Consumer]

Sure, I completely understand that, but let's not deny there's an element of greed at play here. We call it the free market, but that's just what we call it to feel better about ourselves.

The formula is fundamentally flawed.

 

[Phroobar]

You got to remember these homeless people aren't exactly working at a job. Do most of them have the mental capacity to even work minimum wage? If they don't have a job, they can't afford housing. Rent control is not the solution but maybe fifteen steps later. First is rehab. Second is job training and education. Should their be government run facilities for care of people that can't take care of themselves? That never ever ends up well.

 

[Disney Irish]

That worked out so well for Gordon, he ended up getting like a 25 year prison sentence by the end of the movie for insider trading.

 

[TP2000]

At a Christmas party this weekend, I chatted with an old friend who worked in OC commercial real estate for decades. He told me this OC Vibe project is dead as a doornail currently, problems with financing, and obviously won't be "starting construction in 2023" as they once claimed in 2022. Even if you spell it ocV!BE, it's still dead. Not a single Woonerf in sight.

Also, the adjacent "Anaheim Riverfront" still looks like this going in to 2024...

 

[MoonRakerSCM]

Not even a whisper of a peep on my end.

 

[NobodyElse]

At a Christmas party this weekend, I chatted with an old friend who worked in OC commercial real estate for decades. He told me this OC Vibe project is dead as a doornail currently, problems with financing, and obviously won't be "starting construction in 2023" as they once claimed in 2022. Even if you spell it ocV!BE, it's still dead. Not a single Woonerf in sight.

Also, the adjacent "Anaheim Riverfront" still looks like this going in to 2024...

I think they need a new set of renderings, depicting Woonerfs embellished with Cabochons. That would put things right back on track.

Oh, and proper marketing practically requires this be termed "Anaheim Riverfront at ocV!BE powered by (insert sponsor here).

 

[Phroobar]

Anaheim Riverfront at ocV!BE powered by Disney Magic the Ride! - an Employee Owned Co-Op.

 

[TP2000]

Not even a whisper of a peep on my end.

Yup. And my friend told me that Anaheim even extended $400 Million in city bonds to pay for construction of the multiple parking structures that were supposed to be built alongside the freeway. So basically, the project got free parking structures.

And still, it's currently dead in the water, a victim of rising interest rates and no financing.

Something tells me the Olympics events at the Honda Center will need to rely on heavy use of decorative banners and a fresh homeless sweep to pull off a "festive" look for '28.

 

[TP2000]

I think they need a new set of renderings, depicting Woonerfs embellished with Cabochons. That would put things right back on track.

Oh, and proper marketing practically requires this be termed "Anaheim Riverfront at ocV!BE powered by (insert sponsor here).

Thank you for the Monday laugh!

I love that idea. So many possibilities for good branding...

Anaheim Riverfront at ocV!BE, Powered by Western Concrete & Gravel Company

 

[TP2000]

The OC bankers and developers all returned to their offices this week after their long holiday vacation.

And in early 2024 this project is still dead as a doornail.

The LA Summer Olympics start in 1,647 days. Is it too early to order extra vinyl banners to hang up along the "riverfront"?

 

[October82]

Prices are determined by the market. If people are willing to pay extreme prices, then that’s the value of the property. If they’re not, then the market will reflect that and the landlords will lower their rent. Believe it or not, landlords do not want empty rentals. The government has no right to tell a man what he can or cannot do with his own property and if he wants to charge high rent it is entirely within his rights to do so.

Not trying to pick on you @Consumer, but I wanted to go back to this post after reading the rest of the thread pointing out that this development is moving very slowly. These things are not unrelated.

While it's nice to say that the "government has no right to tell people to do with their property", that just isn't how things work, especially in Southern California but really throughout the US. If housing markets actually worked this way, something like the following would happen:

1. Property owners realize that they can charge more for property
2. Renters pay more for housing
3. The price of housing increases above the cost to develop a new property
4. New properties are built
5. With increased supply, property owners lower rental prices to compete
6. Average rents either increase slowly or come down in real terms.

What we actually seen places like Southern California is that rents largely increase in real terms and much faster than other expenses. We do not see a great deal of development in response to those increases because we strongly regulate the production of new housing through zoning, counter-productive tax incentives, and other kinds of onerous regulations on development. This is almost all done at the local level. Profitable (high density) developments just haven't been legal in much of Southern California.

Even where it's legal, it's often not possible to build profitably because of parking minimums and long timelines for planning approval. Even with extreme levels of demand for properties relative to supply, California just doesn't build enough housing. This has the effect of producing a widespread shortage, which as, @denyuntilcaught pointed out, is the root cause of homelessness.

To bring this back on topi. If OCV!be is struggling to find financing even after $400 million in (poorly spent, IMO) subsidies for parking infrastructure in one of the most expensive real estate markets in the country, that should speak volumes about the need for reform in how we regulate development.

While I agree with you that property owners should (mostly) be able to do what they want with their property, the fact of the matter is that they largely can't. If they could, housing would be much less expensive than it is and projects like OCV!be (and DisneylandForward, for that matter) would move much more quickly.

 

[Consumer]

Not trying to pick on you @Consumer, but I wanted to go back to this post after reading the rest of the thread pointing out that this development is moving very slowly. These things are not unrelated.

While it's nice to say that the "government has no right to tell people to do with their property", that just isn't how things work, especially in Southern California but really throughout the US. If housing markets actually worked this way, something like the following would happen:

1. Property owners realize that they can charge more for property
2. Renters pay more for housing
3. The price of housing increases above the cost to develop a new property
4. New properties are built
5. With increased supply, property owners lower rental prices to compete
6. Average rents either increase slowly or come down in real terms.

What we actually seen places like Southern California is that rents largely increase in real terms and much faster than other expenses. We do not see a great deal of development in response to those increases because we strongly regulate the production of new housing through zoning, counter-productive tax incentives, and other kinds of onerous regulations on development. This is almost all done at the local level. Profitable (high density) developments just haven't been legal in much of Southern California.

Even where it's legal, it's often not possible to build profitably because of parking minimums and long timelines for planning approval. Even with extreme levels of demand for properties relative to supply, California just doesn't build enough housing. This has the effect of producing a widespread shortage, which as, @denyuntilcaught pointed out, is the root cause of homelessness.

To bring this back on topi. If OCV!be is struggling to find financing even after $400 million in (poorly spent, IMO) subsidies for parking infrastructure in one of the most expensive real estate markets in the country, that should speak volumes about the need for reform in how we regulate development.

While I agree with you that property owners should (mostly) be able to do what they want with their property, the fact of the matter is that they largely can't. If they could, housing would be much less expensive than it is and projects like OCV!be (and DisneylandForward, for that matter) would move much more quickly.

I think we're in agreement here - when the government sticks its nose into the marketplace, bad things happen.