Required DLR Annual report to be approved by the Anaheim City Council on Dec. 5th

[Darkbeer1]

As part of the 1996 Development Agreement between the DLR and the city, an Annual Report is required. I will be sharing all the info submitted by the city, along with the city staff's recommendations.

Here is the staff report.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15990/Staff Report15990.pdf

>>Staff has carefully reviewed the Development Agreement and Disney’s Annual Review letter and found the property owner to be in full compliance with its obligations. Staff recommends that the City Council determine that the property owner has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the Agreement for this review period. <<

And the DLR submitted report.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15992/2. Anaheim Jobs Program15992.pdf

And the very long original Development Agreement from 1996.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15993/3. Development Agreement15993.pdf

A map showing all Disney owned property in the Anaheim Resort District.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15994/4. Disney Properties in Anaheim Resort Map15994.pdf

And the city staff's Annual Report.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15998/5. Annual Review Development Agreement Report15998.pdf

Alas, this is Agenda Item 8 on Tuesday Night's meeting, and is part of the consent calendar. It is expected that Mayor Tait and/or Councilmember Moreno will pull the item for discussion, even though the Agenda has a lot of Homeless issues on the Agenda, to nitpic and make political comments about housing, jobs, and needing more tax revenue, even though it is clear Disney has let alone met all the conditions set back in 1996, but has exceeded them.

The meeting can be watched live on Tuesday evening, December 5th at 5 PM PST at Anaheim.net. I expect due to the large amount of public speakers expected to discuss the homeless issue at the start of the meeting, that item 8 won't be discussed until 7 PM or later.

 

[britain]

As part of the 1996 Development Agreement between the DLR and the city, an Annual Report is required. I will be sharing all the info submitted by the city, along with the city staff's recommendations.

Here is the staff report.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15990/Staff Report15990.pdf

>>Staff has carefully reviewed the Development Agreement and Disney’s Annual Review letter and found the property owner to be in full compliance with its obligations. Staff recommends that the City Council determine that the property owner has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the Agreement for this review period. <<

And the DLR submitted report.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15992/2. Anaheim Jobs Program15992.pdf

And the very long original Development Agreement from 1996.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15993/3. Development Agreement15993.pdf

A map showing all Disney owned property in the Anaheim Resort District.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15994/4. Disney Properties in Anaheim Resort Map15994.pdf

And the city staff's Annual Report.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15998/5. Annual Review Development Agreement Report15998.pdf

Alas, this is Agenda Item 8 on Tuesday Night's meeting, and is part of the consent calendar. It is expected that Mayor Tait and/or Councilmember Moreno will pull the item for discussion, even though the Agenda has a lot of Homeless issues on the Agenda, to nitpic and make political comments about housing, jobs, and needing more tax revenue, even though it is clear Disney has let alone met all the conditions set back in 1996, but has exceeded them.

The meeting can be watched live on Tuesday evening, November 5th at 5 PM PST at Anaheim.net. I expect due to the large amount of public speakers expected to discuss the homeless issue at the start of the meeting, that item 8 won't be discussed until 7 PM or later.

I'm assuming you mean December everywhere it says November.

 

[Darkbeer1]

I'm assuming you mean December everywhere it says November.

I am cleaning the oven at the same time, so blame it on the fumes. Will edit it. Thanks!

 

[truecoat]

As part of the 1996 Development Agreement between the DLR and the city, an Annual Report is required. I will be sharing all the info submitted by the city, along with the city staff's recommendations.

Here is the staff report.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15990/Staff Report15990.pdf

>>Staff has carefully reviewed the Development Agreement and Disney’s Annual Review letter and found the property owner to be in full compliance with its obligations. Staff recommends that the City Council determine that the property owner has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the Agreement for this review period. <<

And the DLR submitted report.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15992/2. Anaheim Jobs Program15992.pdf

And the very long original Development Agreement from 1996.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15993/3. Development Agreement15993.pdf

A map showing all Disney owned property in the Anaheim Resort District.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15994/4. Disney Properties in Anaheim Resort Map15994.pdf

And the city staff's Annual Report.

http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/14780/14810/14811/15989/15998/5. Annual Review Development Agreement Report15998.pdf

Alas, this is Agenda Item 8 on Tuesday Night's meeting, and is part of the consent calendar. It is expected that Mayor Tait and/or Councilmember Moreno will pull the item for discussion, even though the Agenda has a lot of Homeless issues on the Agenda, to nitpic and make political comments about housing, jobs, and needing more tax revenue, even though it is clear Disney has let alone met all the conditions set back in 1996, but has exceeded them.

The meeting can be watched live on Tuesday evening, December 5th at 5 PM PST at Anaheim.net. I expect due to the large amount of public speakers expected to discuss the homeless issue at the start of the meeting, that item 8 won't be discussed until 7 PM or later.

Looks like we have a definitive map of Disney owned properties. Is there a possibility of a property owned under a dummy corp?

 

[Darkbeer1]

Looks like we have a definitive map of Disney owned properties. Is there a possibility of a property owned under a dummy corp?

As I understand it, any entity with over 50% Disney ownership would have to be disclosed. So no. Note, this map only shows property owned inside the Resort District. But I have no knowledge of other Disney owned property inside of the city of Anaheim.

 

[truecoat]

As I understand it, any entity with over 50% Disney ownership would have to be disclosed. So no. Note, this map only shows property owned inside the Resort District. But I have no knowledge of other Disney owned property inside of the city of Anaheim.

Ok, I was only alluding to inside the resort district. I've read rumors about different locations supposedly owned by Disney in the resort district but this map clears this up.

 

[Darkbeer1]

I know what you are referring to, and repeatedly posted Disney owns no other Hotels, trailer parks, apartments, etc.

Disney might have looked into some properties, but never bought any of them.

 

[spacejockey]

So, I guess the rumor that Disney owns the Candy Cane Inn is not true.

 

[Darkbeer1]

So, I guess the rumor that Disney owns the Candy Cane Inn is not true.

Correct. Disney has tried to purchase the property multiple times. But the family that owns it actually has a clause in their wills that states the property should never be sold to Disney.

In fact, many family owned properties in the Resort District have similar clauses.

Decades ago, Disney was trying to buy properties, and used some "dirty" tactics that upset the local business folks, which communicated with each other as an unofficial business group. They contacted a lawyer to help come up with ways to prevent a transfer through "middlemen".

Back in the 1990's, Disney talked to the city to try and use them to buy selected properties for expansion, that also went nowhere.

 

[NobodyElse]

It's a little bit interesting that Disney owns the land under the power lines. Presumably they can't do much (structure-wise) with those lots as there would need to be clear access for maintenance.

 

[sirstude]

Didn't most of the land under the power lines used to be Strawberry fields? I remember visiting a buddy in Orange a few years ago and we bought Strawberries from under the power lines.

 

[floridagirl57]

It's a little bit interesting that Disney owns the land under the power lines. Presumably they can't do much (structure-wise) with those lots as there would need to be clear access for maintenance.

There is likely an easement under the power line, so even though Disney "owns" that land they don't really own it. A survey would illustrate that definitively.

 

[sirstude]

Correct. Disney has tried to purchase the property multiple times. But the family that owns it actually has a clause in their wills that states the property should never be sold to Disney.

In fact, many family owned properties in the Resort District have similar clauses.

Decades ago, Disney was trying to buy properties, and used some "dirty" tactics that upset the local business folks, which communicated with each other as an unofficial business group. They contacted a lawyer to help come up with ways to prevent a transfer through "middlemen".

Back in the 1990's, Disney talked to the city to try and use them to buy selected properties for expansion, that also went nowhere.

Kind of interesting how all the business on Harbor are unhappy about the formerly proposed parking garage and how rotten Disney is, but looks like it is a bit of a two way street there. I know this is not the eastern gateway discussion, but I can't get the quote from here to work no that one.

 

[TP2000]

Didn't most of the land under the power lines used to be Strawberry fields? I remember visiting a buddy in Orange a few years ago and we bought Strawberries from under the power lines.

There's still lots of small farms and plant nurseries under the Edison power lines east of Disneyland. You were probably just west of the Orange Freeway near the Honda Center, where there's a strawberry field and roadside farm stand on the Edison easement. There are plenty of little plots of land east of Disneyland towards Orange and Villa Park where it still looks like 1958 with roadside berry stands and such.

 

[TP2000]

There is likely an easement under the power line, so even though Disney "owns" that land they don't really own it. A survey would illustrate that definitively.

Yeah, I'm not a total expert on this, but as I understand it the "Edison easement" means that you can own the land beneath the power lines, but you can't build anything on it that is more than semi-permanent (think plywood berry stand, or mini-golf snack bar). And it has to be land use that Edison can roll its trucks and equipment onto in an emergency to tend to the power lines and the property owners have no right to object to that.

The Edison easement land near the Eastern Gateway along Disney Way that now shows as Disney property used to be a mini-golf course until the late 1990's. Now it's just empty land covered in bark, that apparently Disney owns.

For those not here in Orange County, we are talking about the main trunk line of SoCal Edison's distribution network. They run on massive towers right through Anaheim, heading east towards a distribution center on the border of City of Orange and Villa Park on Tustin Avenue. They are a defining feature of the central Orange County landscape. East of Anaheim they feature small family farms and nurseries beneath them.

And from 1955 until about 1998 they ran directly across the Disneyland parking lot as they marched westward towards Long Beach and Edison's major distribution center there. They were cleaned up and rerouted south in the late 90's as part of DCA construction and Anaheim's big Resort District beautification project of 1997-2000.

 

[Disney Irish]

Yeah, I'm not a total expert on this, but as I understand it the "Edison easement" means that you can own the land beneath the power lines, but you can't build anything on it that is more than semi-permanent (think plywood berry stand, or mini-golf snack bar). And it has to be land use that Edison can roll its trucks and equipment onto in an emergency to tend to the power lines and the property owners have no right to object to that.

The Edison easement land near the Eastern Gateway along Disney Way that now shows as Disney property used to be a mini-golf course until the late 1990's. Now it's just empty land covered in bark, that apparently Disney owns.

For those not here in Orange County, we are talking about the main trunk line of SoCal Edison's distribution network. They run on massive towers right through Anaheim, heading east towards a distribution center on the border of City of Orange and Villa Park on Tustin Avenue. They are a defining feature of the central Orange County landscape. East of Anaheim they feature small family farms and nurseries beneath them.

And from 1955 until about 1998 they ran directly across the Disneyland parking lot as they marched westward towards Long Beach and Edison's major distribution center there. They were cleaned up and rerouted south in the late 90's as part of DCA construction and Anaheim's big Resort District beautification project of 1997-2000.

You would think that Disney would pay to have those lines put underground. Its a very common practice to get rid of those large towers.

 

[truecoat]

You would think that Disney would pay to have those lines put underground. Its a very common practice to get rid of those large towers.

20-30 years (probably sooner), they'll be able to take them down. Solar will be so cheap, most people will power their own homes.

 

[Disney Irish]

20-30 (probably sooner), they'll be able to take them down. Solar will be so cheap, most people will power their own homes.

Unless wireless power becomes a real thing large scale, there will still be a need to transport power over long distances. So there will still be a need for these high power lines at least in the medium to long term. It would be better to bury these line underground, which is actually a common practice.

 

[truecoat]

Unless wireless power becomes a real thing large scale, there will still be a need to transport power over long distances. So there will still be a need for these high power lines at least in the medium to long term. It would be better to bury these line underground, which is actually a common practice.

The need for high power lines like this will go away as will most power companies that generate the power.

 

[Disney Irish]

The need for high power lines like this will go away as will most power companies that generate the power.

One would hope, and that is a utopian dream. But I think it longer off than 20-30 years. Again until wireless power becomes a large scale real thing high power lines will continue to be used to transport power. Tesla (not the car company) proved it was possible, but never for large scale. And as far as I know, granted I'm no expert, no real investment has been made to make it a large scale technology.