Great Park Homeless Shelter

Compressed-Village said:
This is suppose to be a GP commercial construction debris while the development of the Great Park sport park is being built and other main infrastructure of the park develop The ideas is to relieve, congestion of sand cayon and portola traffic to the bowman. The debris will then transport  to an alternative location at off hours when less motorist on the road.

How do you know? You work in the industry?
 
eyephone said:
Compressed-Village said:
This is suppose to be a GP commercial construction debris while the development of the Great Park sport park is being built and other main infrastructure of the park develop The ideas is to relieve, congestion of sand cayon and portola traffic to the bowman. The debris will then transport  to an alternative location at off hours when less motorist on the road.

How do you know? You work in the industry?

I oversee the operation.
 
Yes, I am. More folks should attend to show opposition.

More info on the agenda item at http://irvine.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=1174&meta_id=78169
 
Irvinehomeseeker said:
Yes, I am. More folks should attend to show opposition.

More info on the agenda item at http://irvine.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=1174&meta_id=78169

Are you going to raise the roof? (Town hall meeting style) jk
 
eyephone said:
Irvinehomeseeker said:
Yes, I am. More folks should attend to show opposition.

More info on the agenda item at http://irvine.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=1174&meta_id=78169

Are you going to raise the roof? (Town hall meeting style) jk

We should all get some Talk Irvine Tshirts.  TI APPROVED!
 
I will be there as well.  This will be my first time attending such a meeting. Not sure what the format is, or how we can represent ourselves.
 
Sakred said:
I will be there as well.  This will be my first time attending such a meeting. Not sure what the format is, or how we can represent ourselves.

This will be first for me as well...not sure what the format is. Just reading on the city website, I think there is a way for you to address your concern:

Speaker's Card/Request to Speak:  If you would like to address the City Council/Board of Directors on a scheduled agenda item, including a Consent Calendar item, a Regular Council/Board Business item, a Public Hearing item, or Public Comments, please complete the "Request to Speak Form." The card is at the table at the entrance to the City Council Chamber. Please identify on the card your name and the item on which you would like to speak and return to the City Clerk. The "Request to Speak Form" assists the Mayor/Chair in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the City Council/Board of Directors are recognized. It also ensures the accurate identification of meeting participants in the City Council/Board minutes. Your name will be called at the time the matter is heard by the City Council/Board of Directors. City policy is to limit public testimony to up to three minutes per speaker depending on relevant circumstances (unless the time limit is extended by the Mayor/Chair), which includes the presentation of electronic or audio visual information. Speakers may not yield their time to other persons.

I would atleast like to be there to hear and get a sense of city's stance and next steps.

When I read the City's response to the proposed shelter, I got the impression that the city is opposed citing safety & other reasons. Some excerpts from the document that I think represent's the city's current reponse:

Public Safetv Implicat?ons
This proposal places what appears to be a very loosely regulated homeless shelter with
little to no formal services in an area adjacent to residential neighborhoods, large vacant
buildings and the OC Great Park. The vacant buildings may become further blighted
should any of the clients seek shelter in them. The OC Great Park may see significant
loitering and panhandling nuisances from clients that are seeking activity and income.


There is also the possibility for significant community backlash should this proposal
become a reality. The perception of a poorly regulated homeless shelter could
complicate the community's perception and support for City and Land Trust affordable
housing efforts, and harm broader City goals of effectively serving low-income
populations.




Based on a review of all information provided by the proposal and supplemental staff
research, which is outlined in the attachment to this memo, Supervisor Nelson's
proposal is wholly unsatisfactory and could present significant nuisance and public
safety concerns for both on-site clients and lrvine businesses and residents in the
surrounding area.
 
So I managed to record the part of the meeting where they discussed the shelter. It was a topic of priority. Below is the youtube link. Its about 11 mins of discussion. My take after hearing what our reps had to say, is that everyone is on the same page when it comes down to this proposal. Everyone is also very cautious about terminology when it comes down to saying the obvious .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lx3CSQnIJsM
 
It seems this risk of homeless shelter on the proposed site will be around until something else gets built there. If someone is considering a home purchase around that area then they need to be concerned.
 
Irvinehomeseeker said:
It seems this risk of homeless shelter on the proposed site will be around until something else gets built there. If someone is considering a home purchase around that area then they need to be concerned.

So did you step up to the mic and voice your concern? (Bring a banner) *just asking  ;)
 
Irvinehomeseeker said:
It seems this risk of homeless shelter on the proposed site will be around until something else gets built there. If someone is considering a home purchase around that area then they need to be concerned.

What makes you think that? The meeting clearly stated that this was proposed by ONE supervisor and hasn't gotten any other traction from anyone else....

Based on what I'm currently seeing, it doesn't seem to be a major concern as of right now.
 
Prototype said:
Irvinehomeseeker said:
It seems this risk of homeless shelter on the proposed site will be around until something else gets built there. If someone is considering a home purchase around that area then they need to be concerned.

What makes you think that? The meeting clearly stated that this was proposed by ONE supervisor and hasn't gotten any other traction from anyone else....

Based on what I'm currently seeing, it doesn't seem to be a major concern as of right now.

Like the cemetery.. just really doubt it happens.  Just an odd place to build.
 
irvinehomeowner said:
Yaliu was only concerned about dead people.

Unless homeless people are now bad for Feng Shui.

we should just tout feng shui here at TI.. will probably show up on OC register.
 
Prototype said:
Irvinehomeseeker said:
It seems this risk of homeless shelter on the proposed site will be around until something else gets built there. If someone is considering a home purchase around that area then they need to be concerned.

What makes you think that? The meeting clearly stated that this was proposed by ONE supervisor and hasn't gotten any other traction from anyone else....

Based on what I'm currently seeing, it doesn't seem to be a major concern as of right now.

Let's say in next few months or a year the proposal get stalled, what if it get picked up again in a year or 2?

The proposed land belongs to the county. If it stays vacant, the county can thrust it down the city to build the shelter. Even the city has indicated somewhere in the docs that this 100 acre land could be used for temporary housing.

Let's assume IP and GP builders can push this off until all homes are built( i.e. builders made their money),then who is going to exert the influence to prevent this shelter from being built?

 
Irvinehomeseeker said:
Prototype said:
Irvinehomeseeker said:
It seems this risk of homeless shelter on the proposed site will be around until something else gets built there. If someone is considering a home purchase around that area then they need to be concerned.

What makes you think that? The meeting clearly stated that this was proposed by ONE supervisor and hasn't gotten any other traction from anyone else....

Based on what I'm currently seeing, it doesn't seem to be a major concern as of right now.

Let's say in next few months or a year the proposal get stalled, what if it get picked up again in a year or 2?

The proposed land belongs to the county. If it stays vacant, the county can thrust it down the city to build the shelter. Even the city has indicated somewhere in the docs that this 100 acre land could be used for temporary housing.

Let's assume IP and GP builders can push this off until all homes are built( i.e. builders made their money),then who is going to exert the influence to prevent this shelter from being built?

For what reason would this particular piece of land be a good fit for a homeless shelter?  There are no jobs in close proximity of that area, there is no public transportation, and it's right next to a massive park and many residential neighborhoods are located - where kids reside.  To top it off, there is no large homeless population currently residing in the Irvine vicinity.
 
Back
Top