Proposed Irvine Development Initiative

Thing are about to get pretty exciting in Irvine. According to the OC Register, a group called, Irvine for Responsible Growth introduced an initiative requiring voter approval of major real estate development in the city. It will be similar to Measure Y passed by Costa Mesa voters last year. I can see TIC/5P and every RE developer/builder and their political cronies will try to KILL IT with everything they have. Interesting days ahead.
http://www.ocregister.com/2017/09/0...ce-initiative-to-control-growth-developments/

Facebook Page of Irvine for Responsible Growthhttps://www.facebook.com/irvineliving.org/

Costa Mesa Measure Yhttps://www.costamesaca.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=22788

x

Burn That Belly said:

This will never happen. Corruption is rampant and this will never see the light of day.

Click to expand...

I agree it will be an uphill fight. It will pit millions of dollars of developer/RE money vs a grass roots effort. But it is a viable model that has been proven successful in Costa Mesa. Developers and the Costa Mesa City Council attempted to defeat Measure Y with their own counter initiative (Measure Z) and failed. It can be done!

Here are the links to the Costa Mesa advocacy groups who helped pass Measure Y:https://www.costamesa1st.comhttps://www.savecostamesa.com

x

Irvine for Response Growth better watch out for YIMBY groups. I can totally see TIC/5P backing a small non profit YIMBY group to defeat their initiative.
http://www.ocregister.com/2017/09/1...s-join-the-battle-in-california-housing-wars/

I would totally join a Talk Irvine YIMBY Club.

nope i'd be opposed; it only favors those who live here, vs those who want to move in. If you don't have a property, you'll be SOL and prices would be even higher if it wasn't for new homes (not that prices are already insane).  it'll stifle overall development and the ability of people to move here.

Strong cities need to grow - right now for Irvine that means to use available land.  In 30 years it'll mean to more efficiently use land (i.e. build upwards) and consider better public transportation options.

Cities generally don't get consensus on much - if you pass this it will literally kill nearly all development.  People are always for the development until they get their property/nearby shopping center and then they are opposed to it.

Anyone who lived here in the 1980's will remember the slow growth initiatives that made their way to the ballot. Each one of them died a quiet death with only one getting close to passing from what I recall.

Slow to no growth initiatives are primarily for people with strongly held opinions to expend vast quantities of time and effort only to end up with little to show for it. Wish this energy was re-directed into finding solutions for other needs within the community. For example, TIC has built a number of overhead walking pathways. Why not get the City to build a few more of these? They make for a safer, and less traffic jammed community IMHO

My .02c

Burn That Belly said:

The developers have more time, money and lawyers than the citizens combined and they are giving kick-backs bribes ("donations") to those parties that stand in their way. It is no different than the Colombian cartels paying off government officials. Of course these are serious allegations and I cannot prove this but I don't need to because history has already shown when tens and hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake, there are "deep and rampant" corruption that the average citizen will never know about.

Let's put it this way, as the saying goes...this is beyond all your pay grades.

Plenty of examples:http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-ln-palm-springs-investigation-20170216-story.htmlhttp://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep/11/local/la-me-0911-temple-city-20100911http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/b.../fl-talabisco-trial-day-2-20150521-story.html

Click to expand...

Agree.  But it is not just the developers , there is a whole ecosystem of mortgage bankers, investors, agents etc and everyone benefits from more (not less) development , in the longer run at least .  Only those who have to actually live in the homes have to suffer the poor quality of life with increased traffic / pollution / strain on existing resources.