I agree with Anaheim on this one, based on what's written in this article.  I hate it when I hear about a Walmart that comes into a small town and makes life harder for the little mom and pop stores that used to thrive there.  Sounds like Disney was doing the same to Anaheim.  The city has the right to fight back and try to get a piece of that action.

Jim!  WHAT A CROCK!!  Did you ever bother to check this "source" out before you mounted this attack on Mickey?? "Nobody ever visits the Mom & Pop stores anymore?"  GIVE ME A BREAK!  I used to live out there before, during and after the construction!  Have you ever tried to get into the McDonald's located across the street from the Magic Kingdom during breakfast, lunch or dinner?  Has anyone ever seen that 7-11 on the corner of Katella and Harbor boulevard ever empty?? No, because they are all doing very, very good business thanks to the DLR.  People will stream out of DLR and visit those eateries on Harbor and Katella simply because of the high price and often low quality of the food found inside the parks.  It has always been this way.  Your "source" used you to twist this story completely around.  The City Council has been wrong from the beginning on this!  Why would any thinking person put low-income housing right next to a bustling, noisy, thriving theme Park tourist destination.  You know that in a few months or years these very same "home owners" will be suing Disney, Anaheim or both to quite the noise around their new property.  It's like buying a house near an airport and then getting ticked off at the noise and traffic and the expansion the airport has to have to service all those new flyers.  DID THESE PEOPLE NOT KNOW THAT THEY WHERE PUTTING THEMSELVES IN A SITUATION THAT WOULD EVENTUALLY BITE THE HAND THAT FEEDS THE CITY COFFERS?  I cannot understand how your story ever got published.  It is so biased against DLR!  But that is how your stories seem to be lately.

I want to know - where am I suppossed to go?

The surrounding area has always been a bit dicey. Today there are new plants and a fresh coat of paint in the immediate vicinity, but mostly it's still lipstick on a pig. I would not want mom, sis, wife walking on those streets alone, especially after dark. Alright , so there's no wife, but you get the idea.

There used to be several restaurants that were always on the Disney trip list. One was on the corner of Chapman and Harbor (can't remember the name) and as soon as you walked in you saw their huge desserts. One was a fancy place with dancing in the evenings on Ball Rd north of the park. One was a great Italian restaurant. All these places, and probably more that I never discovered, closed several years ago. This wasn't due to the "walled" Disney property holding tourists against their wills. Usually, the founders had passed away and their kids didn't want to continue the business, or it made better financial sense to sell the property.

Today, I either stay at the Disney Californian, or an all-suites off site, depending on what the purpose of the trip is. I enjoy the restaurants in Downtown Disney, but don't go there every night, regardless of where I am staying. Once off Disney property, there are very few unique restarants anymore. Some folks want the familiarity of a chain, but when I travel, I usually want to try something besides a chain restaurant available 5 minutes from my house. Now, I'm driving into L.A., or Long Beach, or Irvine for the unique restaurants that used to be around the park.

Same story with shopping - many of the unique gift stores are gone. They started to go, as in many towns, when the internet provided more affordable collectibles.

The city seems content to cater to chain restaurants, chain hotels, and chain stores. Everytime I drive Harbor, I see people waiting in line to get into these establishments, so if tax revenue is decreasing, that looks like an area of potential investigation for the city leaders.

As far as Disney Co goes, that strawberry patch was quite a large purchase, saddled with unknown variables, that doesn't seem to be recouping its costs any time soon. Hope those pesky analysts don't hear about it - they might stop focusing on the acquisitions that are actually making money for the company.

I'm a resident of Anaheim.  This story makes absolutely no sense to me.  First of all, it lacks the crucial component of any issue that would concern a City Council: numbers.  Specifically, is the "walled city" hurting tax revenues?  Are the tax receipts from DCA mitigating any decreased revenues that we're seeing as a result of less patronage of the surrounding businesses?  Is this decreased patronage a reality, or have the traditional visual representations of it (read: garish paint and neon signs) just been mitigated?  L.A., with its dense population and uneven demographics, has limited tourism appeal to many non-locals -- has improving the aesthetic appeal of the resort area overall made Anaheim a more attractive / less hostile place to visit?

If you think the City Council is out to "get" its largest source of tax revenue you're out of your mind.  First and foremost, council members have budgets to fund, sewers to build, constituents to appease, and so on.  In the end, Mickey's dollar speaks for itself.

I wonder if the people in Orlando feel the same about their "Walled City" Walt Disney World?

Jim, I am a big fan of your site, but I really have to disagree with you here.  Are you really saying that there are Anaheim business leaders that actually believe this?!!  Look at the Anaheim skyline.  See all the craines?  Why would Billion dollar corporations like Hilton, Marriot, and all of the retailers and dinning establishments be building in the Resort district?  Gardenwalk alone is a multi million dollar venture.  Do you honestly think that a bank would fund this venture if there were not the numbers to back it up! All large commercial projects require site and demographic studies before they are funded.  What do you think these studies reveal? Look at the pedestrian traffic on a Friday night on Harbor.  All of those people are not parked in the parking structure.  You must have had to look long and hard for the person you are quoting. (They weren't by chance pushing a shopping cart down Katella were they?)

I can see Anaheim's point here, may not completely agree, but can see it.

I'm sure Disney expressed to the city how much tax revenues would increase as a result of all the new infrfastructure put in for Disneyland's expansions. I'm sure they expressed it as new people visiting, having a direct economic impact on the surrounding community. But, with the enclosed nature of the resort, many of those people don't visit the surrounding area. I know when I went there about 5 years ago, I spent 3 days at DLR and never left the grounds (much like how I visit Orlando). But this was probably not the story they heard from TDA management at the time.

So, Anaheim is trying to make up for some of that lost revenue by putting housing in the area. Housing equals people who need to shop, eat, and purchase goods and services. This would help pay off the improvements and allow for expansion of that part of the city. My guess is that if Disney truely wanted to be the "gated community" that they feel it has become, then no one will even notice what's outside the berm.

So, is Anaheim hurting from the expansion...no.

Are they seeing all the benefits that they were told would happen back 15 years ago when the expansion started...no.

Do they not have any trust in TDA...yes.

Looks like some fence-mending may have to take place as a result of past business practices before this one can be settled.

Wow.  This is the most insane thing I have ever read on your site.  And that is saying a lot.  Harbor and Katella around Disneyland are not places I would ever shop.  The little stores there are sketchy looking.  I do not stay on Disney property when I drive down from Salt Lake City, UT so I see plenty of Anaheim.  I usually visit the Block at Orange and shop there.  I would eat off property more if there were a little better restaurants nearby.  I have a Mimi's Cafe and a Tony Roma's within minutes of my house.  I am not going there on vacation.  

As soon as the Gardenwalk opens they will see my money too.  I love Bubba Gump and I also look forward to having some nice shops available.  Downtown Disney is nice but I don't eat or shop there much.  We pretty much hit the World of Disney then we will walk up and down.  They certainly don't stop me from spending money off property.  The fact that there is nothing but junky shops and common restaurants does.

curmudgeon said: Alright , so there's no wife, but you get the idea.

;)

Jim, if the city council was really looking to stick it to Disney, they would have voted to put the SunCal backed measure that would have required voter authorization of any zoning change to the strawberry field (which is currently zoned for farming and parking) on the same ballot. That did NOT happen.

This is all about the nuts on the Anaheim City Council.  I have heard through a friend that the City planning staff (along with the mayor) think they've lost their heads.

What's happened is the developer and two "property rights" Republicans ("I can do anything I like with my property") persuaded a loony Democrat to join them with a promise of low-cost housing.  It's a proposed 1,500 unit complex with only 225 low-cost units.

Disney invested $1 billion in Anaheim based on establishing a tourist zone with no residential housing.  That was the deal.  Anaheim should honor it.

If the businesses in the area want more tourist traffic, they should ask for a hotel on that site (which Disney would not oppose).  They'd do a lot better in that regard if there was a 1,500 room hotel instead.

This story makes absolutely no sense. First of all the people driving in from the 5 are not tourists, they are locals. Locals don't tend to spend as much money off property because they can pack their own lunches and go home if they want. The tourists stay at hotels in the area and eat and shop at restaurants near their hotel. Secondly Downtown Disney generates a huge amount of tax revenue for the city. The tax dollars aren't disappearing, they are simply getting shifted from Harbor and Ball to Downtown Disney. The amount of tax money getting generated is the same. This official's explanation makes no sense whatsoever.

1.  Anaheim in the resort district is doing business just fine.  All you have to do is walk up along Harbor Blvd. and see the number of people parked at the various hotels, eating at the sundry restaurants, getting gas at the local stations...it has nothing to do with business count.  Plus, you don't even go into the new Garden Walk complex being built on the East Side of the Disneyland Resort area across from the Pumba parking area and down to Katella behind Clementine Street - a second "downtown Disney" without the Disney name on it - with cinemas, restaurtants, specialty shops, and, privatized time shares for vacationers to the Anaheim area...which is going to also bring money to the coffers of Anaheim in the near future as well.

What this is about is fair priced and equitable housing in the region.  And, more of it.  What bothers the business folk in the area is that it is lower income based housing...and, what they don't acknowleldge is that such housing is still too darned expensive for the people who work at the resort and surrounding businesses to afford to live in! So you wind up with multiple family usage of one unit (in order to afford the monthly cost of living near the place you work) and higher number of lower income based dwellers and their children in the area...people who have to focus upon paying their rent and making their food and bills over the luxuries of being a local citizen and supporting the local businesses with their income...which they don't have. The obvious solution of Disney and the local resort oriented businesses giving their people a livable wage (Without having to work a 60 hour week for the required overtime to make the ends meet) with appropriate benefits to care for themselves and their families is so repulsive to corporate and private enterprise mentality that you can bet your bottom dollar it will never happen!

The land-locking and housing issue around the resort district of Anaheim has been a growing problem for years.  The need to house people is a reality, and, the need to affordably house people even more so.  With this matter and the way it is progressing, Disney is going to lose their political toehold on the realm of Anaheim.  Let it go.  

You briefly, Jim, mentioned the Long Beach 'Port Disney' project and forerunner of the 'DisneySea' Theme Park line.   Rather than focus on further development of the Anaheim area (Save for, perhaps, the considered water-park based resort that is on the "highly considered" list of options for the next phase of development post DCA repairs...), maybe it is time for the Corporate to return their considerations to the sea side resort complex...with an American version of 'DisneySeas' (long over due), as well as a central port of call to operate the Disney Cruise Line outlet on the West Coast from.  And, yes, even that venue will have limitations of space and growth potential, but, it will give a needed plus to the Disney presence in Southern California, and, develop new growth for higherend tourism (cruise line fans) who wish to indulge higher expenditures for their pleasure at a Disney property in California.

I have talked with several people who have been long-term cast members in California, and, some of them are speculating that the Magic Kingdom may not even exist here in California in another 10-20 years.  That corporate will no longer see a profitable reason to keep the California resort open and turning money day to day...all due to the constraints of the local area housing needs, and, the fact that they (the corporate) refuse to pay worthy wages and benefit compensation to retain a level of worker they desperately need inhouse to keep the resort property running.  Of course, this is all well and good as the corporate has the Florida based resort to make their money from should California fail to continue to produce the way they want it to.  And, as most have noted, the emphasis is on Florida over California any given day of the week, any way.

Had Disney wanted to truly protect their California investment then, several years ago, when the Irivine military base complex went up for public land grab (now the "Great Park") the speculative rumor that Disney was going to buy that parcel and rebuild the west coast Disney Resort Property in totality should have been followed through upon.  But, they didn't have the desire to take the financial risk and follow through with such a major plan.  And, now the dice have rolled and they are trapped in their corner of Anaheim with the needs of the people who live there outweighing the needs of the company that builds there.   And, once again, the corporate empire refuses to admit to the needs of the people it uses  in order to secure it's control and financial wealth to the mouse's private empire.

Curmudgeon - the eatery with the amazing deserts and sumptiously large serving meals was Belisle's.  They were originally built to give the construction workers building Disneyland back in the early 1950's a reasonably priced establishment to get their meals at and easily get back to work.  The expansion of the resort district took them out of buisness.  Even though they were offered restaurant space with one of the newer hotels going up, the family decided that they had a good run and it was as good enough time to retire as any.

Looks like you are being played a bit Jim.

Cars directly to parking a problem......if this didn't happen, people would be up in arms about the traffic on the public streets (which is already plenty busy enough!)

Seems that your "source" is part of the SunCal crew looking to change the zoning to put residential property in the resort district. As residential property is worth more than commercial property on a per acre basis, they have are very motivated to flip this property.

Whether it was Disney or not, residential development does not belong in a business/resort district. As soon as you let home owners in, the complaints will begin about noise and other services and the next thing you know the economic engine for Anaheim is crippled.

Dig deeper Jim. Look into this SunCal deal. Find out why some City Council members want to ignore the rules. This is an interesting story but I think you have the wrong bad guy identified.

As often as I think we legitimately have gripes about some of Jim's articles, give the guy a break.

Jim did not invent this. He spoke to someone and relayed what was said and then asked us what our thoughts were. Isn't that part of his job? I don't think Jim presented this as HIS thoughts... or as what EVERYBODY thinks.

Don't blame Jim for someone else's stupid thoughts.

Read. Think. Respond.   not Read. Respond.......

Moving on... I have been to Disneyland 100's of times. I have never stayed on property. I get breakfast off property every morning. I probably eat half of my dinners off property. While in town I have caught an Angels game as well as a Ducks game.

Were it not for Disneyland I never would have gone to Anaheim in the first place.

I think this 'source' has a hidden agenda. Someone has a bug in his ear and thinks they can get more money from this.

Do they forget that without Disneyland, Anaheim would probably still be groves of trees? Slight overstatement, but you get my point.

"People would still be making money. Nowadays it's only Disney that's making any real money off of the resort. The rest of us have to settle for whatever foot traffic trickles out onto Harbor & Katella."

I don't know, I see an awful lot of people coming across Harbor, out of DLR and down past Tony Roma's, Dennys, etc.  The McDonald's there always seems to be crowded and so does Mimi's Cafe.

As an Anaheim resident of 20+ years, I think they haven't gone far enough to clean up the resort.  They've gotten a good start, but there's still a lot of the Zaby's Motor Lodge type sleaze around the resort area. Take a look at the OCRegister or Anaheim Bulletin for crime listings in those motel dives.

Sorry, but for some reason, I can't see those places as "local color".

As to Anaheim making Disney help out in funding low-cost housing in the area, I wonder if the city fathers have tried the same strong-arm tactics on Boeing (formerly Rockwell), or any of the other large employers.    Where's the low-cost housing for Anaheim Stadium and Honda Center employees?    I seriously doubt that those that work in those venues will be able to afford housing in the "Platinum Triangle", or quadrangle, or whatever its called.

Whats the point of putting lower income housing in the area?  A big mac at the Mcdonalds accross the street from DLR is $3.95 .... goto the Mcdonalds 1 mile down the road and it's $2.95. Who thinks the people living right next to Disneyland are stupid enough to actually shop and eat right next to Disneyland?

Please ...

And the tourists ... why pay $4.95 for a big mac inside California Advanture? To lazy to walk a few hundred yards?

I go with the idea that there are plenty of patrons for everyone on any given day down there. The entire 1 mile radious of that area is a money pit for the average person and a gold mine for any business located there. Even a laundrymat would be overpriced.

Over here on the East Coast it's a bit of a different story.  Our resort didn't seem to pop up in the middle of a city.....it is its own city.  The biggest SIMILAR problem on our end is that Universal Studios Florida (USF), Sea World of Florida (SWF), etc. all whine and complain when Walt Disney World (WDW) comes up with the next great idea to capture the tourists.  First it was WAH WAH WAH when the Disney Cruise Lines came out and docked at the Cape and used - *shock* - WDW buses to transport their guests between the port and the parks.  I mean, what are these people supposed to do?  They fly down from Whereverville, USA to Central Florida and catch a WDW bus the port at Cape Canaveral where they then catch a cruise and return to port.  Upon their return, they're whisked off to WDW for the rest of their week to spend their hard-earned cash on property.

Another one that really ticked off the other parks was back in December of 2004 when WDW announced their "Disney's Magical Express" which was a service to resort guests flying into Orlando International Airport.  Upon arrival to the baggage claim area of the airport, guests are met by Cast Members in white Mickey gloves and signs for their cool service which takes the guests and their luggage directly from the airport and deposits them to their resorts without the hassels of the "outside world".  What is even better is that they'll send a guest's luggage to their resort and the guest to the parks where the guest can start his/her fun immediately and then they can pick up the luggage later when they check in after a nice day at one of the MANY parks.

Now, I think it's a great idea to have the HUGE amount of land over here with the parks all nestled in and lots of room to move.  I also think it's a great idea to have a bus service directly to the resort without the bother of the "outside world".  That is smart.  It's not a way to see how they can screw the local t-shirt/seashell shop!  It's a way to capture more money for the resorts to make the experience even better.

"Do they forget that without Disneyland, Anaheim would probably still be groves of trees? "

Actually, without Disneyland, Anaheim would be Garden Grove. And the City Council should never forget that.

strumbanjo said:

I wonder if the people in Orlando feel the same about their "Walled City" Walt Disney World?

I don't know about Orlando, but I live in Kissimmee and a drive down the former tourist corridor shows you closed off-site attractions such as waterparks, haunted houses, etc. . . Closed restaurants, and closed hotels.  Mostly the only restaurants that are open are chains.  Gift shops are beyond tacky and all sell the same thing.  Most of the more unusual stores have long since closed.  With Disney's Magical Express taking guests from the airport to the resort, there is no longer really any reason at all for a guest to visit Kissimmee, so it's turning into a desperate, half-empty tourist ghost town populated by low paid Disney cast members, chain restaurant and fast food  servers, and Wal-Mart employees.

So yes. WDW is just as much of a walled city as DLR.

Oh please, the basis of that article is just making excuses. Disney property isn't walled in any more than the reasoning of the stupid Anaheim City Council. Never once have I been told by Disney that I can't leave the park or resort to walk accross the street for a dinner at Denny's (please). And as people have mentioned, there isn't too much to Anaheim other than the Resort district anyway. Can you blame Disney for expanding and creating more entertainment for its visitors? Sure, visitors stay on property, but it's not like tourism around the resort has vanished and everyone has gone bankrupt. Why aren't people down there grateful for the beautification that Disney (together with Anaheim) has brought to the area?

Mur (& others) - the proposed location is an old mobile home park (residential primarily) that is now wanting to be developed as a permanent structure (residential) area.  The fact that it was residential prior to all this nonsense seems to be escaping a lot of the idea going on about the resort zoning district.  And, there are apartment complexes across the street from the proposed area in question, alongside the proposed area in question, and, behind the proposed area in question.  It already is a primary residential area. One small tract of land is not that big of a difference in the recipe here.  The "K" lot Cast parking area has, at it's back corner, apartments behind it.  This is directly across the street from the proposed housing development/trailer park in question.  The "Strawberry fields" that is the hyped expansion for the third park and resort area has apartment complexes behind it and along it's far side.  Housing is already imminent in the area.  It isn't like there is "huge tracts of land" open for pushing this into.  If Disney really wants to expand, then, Anaheim is going to have to declare "imminent domain" and foot the bill for the displaced families and individuals who will lose current housing already established for the expansion of this "resort area"....families who earn their income from working either at the Disneyland Resort proper or at the businesses in the area (for a large demographic count).  

Had Disney wanted to prevent this, they could have really gone serious in their push for land development back in the 90's when they secured the right to progress with the Anaheim resort expansion rather than playing it safe and only buying certain parcels that were prominent in placement near the current property boundaries.  The company did not do this.  And, the housing zones that were already established then retained their hold and standing on the surrounding environment.

Housing has been developed around Disneyland ever since the park opened and people moved into the area.  Civic complaints about the fireworks and noise and parking have risen steadily since that point.  Control of the situation was lost almost as soon as the park opened.  It has been a losing battle since then.

And, the population growth and expansion would have pushed forward from Los Angeles and the San Diego regions along the coastal corridor, anyway, as has been established by many studies of regional growth and development demographics.  If there is a question on this, look at the Bay Area of Northern California and how San Francisco spread the smaller cities of San Jose, Morgan Hill, Gilroy - as well as the entire spread that wraps from East Bay around to West Bay...into one major metropolitan arena of highly impacted urban dwelling.  The same has happened around Chicago, New York, and, Los Angeles.  Urban sprawl is a reality that would have come to pass in due time, no matter had the Disneyland Resort been built or not.  The Resort merely helped speed it along by giving a central iconic magnet to draw people to the area in search of ready and reasonable employment and affordable homes...in the economic era of the late 50's and early 60's. Since then, the country's economy and corporate greed mentality has really scorched the toast.

I'd like to make a couple of points that i don't think have been made about why this "insider tip" sounds ridiculous.  i've been coming to disneyland - from  the north and south - since 1976. i even lived in Anaheim for a while in the early-80s.  in all those trips, i have only been interested in visiting offsite establishments a handful of times, mostly to buy gas, which i still do when i need to.  i'm coming there for Disneyland, and when i leave, i want to get home as fast as i can.  i'm not looking for other shopping/eating experiences nearby.  Disneyland has MADE Anaheim.  before Dland, that entire area was agricultural fields.   talk about a bunch of ingrates, if that is the way the majority of business owners feel.  i'm not so sure about that.  from the way the article was worded, i suspect that this council member is also a business owner, and has a very personal bone to pick with the Mouse that has nothing to do with the overall benefit of the community.  

As someone who works very closely with local governments on tourist tax dollar issues (in Florida none-the-less) I can honestly say that there is no way this "source" is accurate. Any CVB or TDC is first and foremost concerned about tax recovered to the city and county. As long as people are flowing into the park, the money will keep flowing back into the local economy. No council person in their right mind would try to "stick it" to a set up such as this. To a city council, a $1 recovered in taxes is just as good if it comes from Disney or if it comes from Mom and Pop.

Also, Disneyland is a completely different animal than WDW. Whereas WDW truly is a city unto itself, with hundreds of thousands of guests staying on their property at anyone time, Disneyland, with its limited number of on property hotels, spreads out the love a bit more. To claim that the thousands of people staying across the street from Disneyland aren't pumping money into the local economy is beyond absurd.

Lastly, concerning Orlando residents view of the "wall city" of WDW, I don't think they view it the way the Anaheim source claims they see it. While the average local doesn't go near WDW, they also certainly don't complain about the tax dollars coming in because of it. Most people are smart enough to know that 99 % of the local economy is a direct result of the park. So while they don't enjoy the traffic and the bad drivers everywhere, they don't mind the huge boost it is to the economy.

I don't think SunCal is interested in developing a mobile home park.

The land in question is zoned for commercial development. Of course the existing use is grandfathered in and yes it is currently residential.

But SunCal wants to develop the property to include a large number of very expensive homes with some affordable housing. The zoning currently does not allow for that. Anaheim did a lot of good work creating a masterplan and cleaning up the area. Invesment by Disney and other companies has been made based upon this plan. The parcel may not be large in the context of the entire resort area but all it takes is one small change and every developer will want to make a small exception.

I just took my family to DLR three weeks ago (we live in the Sierras near Lake Tahoe and flew to Orange County.)  We stayed at an area hotel (not Disney-owned), took the Anaheim Resort shuttlebuses to DLR, and ate several times out at local restaurants (because the price of food is so high inside DLR.)  The restaurants were crowded with Disney tourists.

If there is any truth to this story at all, however, perhaps this is where Anaheim can use some leverage concerning the planned Third Park (aka the Strawberry Field Park.)  Since the Third Park is not on contiguous property with the existing resort people would have to leave the Disneyland/DCA/Downtown Disney complex and cross Harbor to get to the new park.  If Anaheim wants people spreading out to local businesses along Harbor and Katella perhaps they should *encourage* the Third Park.  On the other hand, from a visitor perspective, one would hope DLR would run the monorail out to the Third Park for ease of "Park Hopping."

Sorry, I forgot to add this to my former comment:

Even IF this source was correct in its assessment of the council's anger at Disneyland, how exactly it this a solution? If the problem was the Disney is getting too much of the money, Anaheim needs more of the pie, I don't see how building low income housing is going to solve this. I don't exacly see it as some huge tourist mecca.

Hopefully the Anaheim council wouldn't be so obviously petty and short sighted as to hurt itself just to stick it to the big bad company.

Mur - I wasn't trying to state SunCal wanted to develop a residential mobile home park.  All I stated was that was what was currently upon that current lot in question.  And, based upon what I have read in the papers around here, the housing that SunCal wanted to develop were what they considered "affordable" housing for lower and moderate income families to purchase and or rent for the living needs within the area.  I had not gotten any drift of the "Very Expensive Homes" - but, given the current rent cost of any living in the Orange County/SoCal area - most housing is "very expensive" ... even at what is considered "reasonable" rates of cost. ;)  Even the apartment/condos down near Anaheim Stadium are starting aroun $ 1700 a month for a single bedroom unit.  That is far too high for an average worker at the resort to afford...which is what SunCal is toting their housing development is oriented towards...the average worker at the resort to afford housing.

All I stated is that the land in question is currently residential, and, that can be retained through grandfather usage...and fought for by the needs of the community, if need be.  And, given the needs of the community, it seems to "need be."

As for changes to the overal resort area, again, the entire expansion plan is already surrounded to the gills with housing developments.  No matter the issues this one small piece is currently raising, the imposition of expansion and development upon the other existing residential areas around the strawberry fields and otherwise will be a limiting impact upon the Disney Company and other major developers looking to cash in on the Anaheim Resort market.

I don't think the surrounding shops would have any problems, if there were any places decent to shop at. (A Starbucks and a Camera shop on Harbor Blvd. across from DLR would be great, and would be huge money makers).

I don't think the surrounding hotels and restaurants are suffering at all.  In fact I think they did more business then they could imagine they wold ever do during the 50th anniversary of Disneyland.  I don't have any data, or proof of this except for what a saw during the 14 months that the 50th was celebrated.  It seems that the crowds have kept up in numbers after the 50th, and are still spending money in the resort district, that is not just in the DRL but at surrounding establishments as well.

If this source is really relaying the city councils true feelings on the subject, they need to look at the numbers again.

Obviously what has changed is the market.  That section of Anahiem has become a successful higher end tourist destination.  What people want are finer things to spend their money on.  When you zoom down the 5, as previously mentioned, you see a lot of high rises under construction.

I think what they should do is offer higher end retail & dining and possibly other forms of entertainment off the strip of disneyland which would then cause people to wander off property.  They're building that new shopping center which is a start, but between Downtown Disney and that other place I'm sure you won't have everything so there's always more that you could add.

Anahiem is looking at this the wrong way.

I love how all of this is ignoring the fact that Walt Disney intended for those tacky tourist areas around Disneyland to never exist in the first place.  The intention was to keep the Disney experience contained in order to preserve the quality of service or "magic".  All the company is doing is trying to meet the ultimate realization of his goals and dreams.  Also they want to make money doing it.  It's not their fault if they're hurting the mooches and price gougers who they didn't want near the parks in the first place.  Newsflash:  to Disney, THEY'RE THE ENEMY.

Tuck (and others) the issue is NOT about the City of Anaheim or other businesses around Disneyland Resort getting their share of the take of the profit margin.  The issue IS about moderate to low income housing being built to facilitate the needs of the people who work at Disneyland Resort as Cast Members in the area.  The issue is about a relatively small plot of land that is already surrounded by moderate to low income apartment complexes that also already enclose the proposed resort expansion area (Strawberry fields) on most sides.  

This is about homes and housing for people who need them...and, about a place (an old mobile home park that is being slowly and ascertainly closed) that had provided a form of housing for the same people who needed it then.  

It's about housing for people, not profit margins in the city or local business coffers.  The only profit margin that stands to plus from not developing the housing is Disney themselves.  And, the people that they are trying to push back a couple of more blocks from Katella to hide the reality of being there are still going to be there.  The people who live in the area and work at the Resorts...the people who make the magic that each of you and all the countless other guests enjoy when they go to Disneyland.

Won't the Garden District or whatever they're building provide a non-tacky-yet-still-off-disney-property area for guests to visit? Also, just because restaurants are there anymore, there are dozons of hotels in the area that comfort tourists vising disneyland.

The comments from this "insider" are not exactly the whole story.  I live in the area and every morning there is tide of people making their way up Harbor Blvd to visit the Resort.  They are walking, or riding the ART (Anaheim Resort Transit) busses.  The Disney hotels are so full the Cast Members get very little discount because there are very few extra rooms to be had, and the overflow IS going to the multiple hotels in the area.  The Convention Center is active most of the time.  (btw - the parking structure is, as I have heard, city owned.)  While it is true that the traffic flows off the 5 and back on to the 5 directly from the structure, can you imagine how mad the residents would be if that crowd went through their neighborhood every day?  

There are numerous new businesses growing in the area.  Many years ago San Diego started work on the Gaslamp Quarter.  The area was not a boomtown right away.  Over many years (almost 30, if my memory serves), the area has come to be a hub of activity centered on the tourist trade, but distinctly attended by residents.  

As one speaker said at the Council Meeting on Tuesday night, this company has made a huge investment in area, based on promises made to them by the City of Anaheim.  They have the right to expect that their trust will not be falsely placed.  

The Resort District began because the SunCal Company decided to make an offer to buy this property that was not zoned the use the construction that they want to do.  They have no history of building 'affordable housing' in any of their developments.  They are, btw, one of, if not THE largest land developer in the nation.  They are not the pitiful little guy going up against the big bad wolf; the Walt Disney Company.  the City's planning commission told them "no" when they sought a zoning change, then they went to the City Council and 3 members went against Staff recommendation.  Jim has lots of sources and maybe he could entertain us with a report on the SunCal Companies, Frank Elfend, SunCal Platinum Pointe LLC, and Bruce Elieff.  

The 'affordable housing' is a ruse by this developer to win the hearts and minds of people, for whom they are unlikely to deliver.  They have NO history of including ANY 'affordable housing their developments.  You should see some of the stuff that they mail out.  In one mailer, they called WESCOT the "2nd major theme park".  If this developer SCC Acquisitions had a plan to build 'affordable housing' then they should have presented the black and white plans that they have, so that the residents can see concrete evidence of their intention.  Right now they offer 15% (approximately 250 units, which will displace 300 current residents) of this massive development as 'affordable', without definition of what affordable means in real dollars.  

Anaheim City Documentation can be found at  "http://www.anaheim.net/article.asp?id=283" or "http://209.234.149.20/weblink7/Browse.aspx" as 'Filed Campaign Statements' from the City Clerk's section of the site.  

skipperwest said "The issue IS about moderate to low income housing being built to facilitate the needs of the people who work at Disneyland Resort as Cast Members in the area."

You can't be serious. Developers DON'T CARE about Disney CMs or low income housing UNLESS they are getting government kick-backs. Greed. That's the driving force here. Not loving feelings for CMs.

You want to stick it to Disneyland?... get SIX Flags to build a Mega-Coaster park right next door. That will get the kids out into the streets. Build Monorails that take you from Disneyland to Knotts Berry Farm and everystop in between.  Build a giant shopping mall and movie theater complex. Get wild ... make the whole area a playground. Bring in the competition. Make it look like the Las Vegas Strip. (Minus the Casinos). In vegas ... each resort is like a walled city so to speak.... there are still people walking from one to another.

This is complete bullshit,

what shops and restuarants was this so-called insider talking about?

The sleezy prosittue rat infested junk that was teher and is still in some areas along Katella?

Nobody ever stopped in any of these places.  The majority of the people going south on the 5 would take the harbor exit and straight main parking lot entrance.  No one felt like they had to drive around Anaheim to eat or buy anything.  People went there to go to the park.

Tourist on the other hand had the choice to stay in tick infested prostitute driven motels that were lined along katela and Harbor.  When they walked to the park there main goal was to get to the gate as soon as possible and on their way out they rushed back to get out of the street.

At least now Tourist have the luxury of seeing a nicely landscaped street with clean new restuarants and eateries as well as staying in newer updated hotels and motels that have pushed out the prostitutes and bad karma

So many comments to choose from so little time...

I'm going to agree with Institude's interpretation of how the City of Anaheim's reacting to Disney. As more than a few posters have already established, there are plenty of people staying at the non-Disney hotels and eating off-property. However, considering all the cash that Anaheim taxpayers had to lay out to pretty up the Resort area and all the incentives they probably had to promise Disney to "win" the resort expansion, they were probably hoping for a lot bigger boost in tax revenues than they got. The City sees a chance to get a nice chunk of money in property taxes and development fees from several proposed housing developments in or near the resort area, and all they're hearing from Disney is "Please don't build housing. Trust us, you'll see a big boost in tax revenues if... we mean, when... we build our third theme park."  The City's elected officials may be getting tired of waiting for Disney to make good on its current and past promises.

In the old days when day guests had to drive down Harbor or Katella to get into and out of the parking lot, there were probably a lot of folks stopping on the way in or on the way out for a quick meal or to top off their gas tanks. With those same folks now traveling on the overpass to get to Mickey and Friends or driving down Disney Way to get into the Lion King lots, there's almost certainly a lower percentage of people doing that now. People want to take the path of least effort when they go play; a lot of folks that might have stopped to eat or shop when they passed right by a store on Harbor or Katella might not be doing so now that they have to drive a little out or their way to do so.

While several people here have pointed out that there are a lot of people crossing Harbor to eat at McDonald's or Denny's,  how many people is that relative to the number of people visting the DLR every day? It's easy to point to the McDonald's or the Denny's and say that all is well, but I've been to other restaurants farther up Harbor like the Overland Stage, Baker's Square, and Carl's Jr.,  and I don't recall ever seeing them filled to capacity. I've also seen a lot of restaurants and shops farther up and down Harbor, Ball, and Katella close. Maybe the numbers for the Anaheim Resort aren't as rosy as the anecdotal evidence may lead you to believe.

I bought into the "affordable housing" argument Suncal was bringing up at first, but at this point it sounds like another set of promises that won't be fufilled. Suncal's not building a charity project, folks; only a small percentage of those townhomes will meet the "affordable" label, and I'd be willing to bet that when Suncal says they'll be "affordable", they mean relative to the full-priced townhomes that'll be up for sale - which will probably still be out of reach to most of the service industry workers that the Anaheim Resort depends on.

As far as the long-time CMs who insist that Disney will pack it in in the next 10-20 years? Don't bet on it. The increased number of visitors to the DLR they've seen since the 50th has pretty much convinced them that the DLR has the potential to provide a little more revenue to WDP&R - in terms of new hotels and DVC units, at least. I don't think they see that growth potential anymore at WDW - hence the Four Seasons and Western Way deals where the Company wants and additional growth to be done on someone else's dime.

It shouldn't be too difficult to research the tax revenues before and after the resort expansion.  

What was the impact of the "lost" hotel rooms (and subsequent hotel room taxes) when hotels were torn down for the new parking structure/lots?  Other hotels, sensing a decreased supply, increased their prices (and the accompanying hotel room tax revenue).

I can see how the walled resort mentality may come into play for the infrequent guest who will want to get the most Disney experience for their dollar, but for frequent visitors, they all know to go outside the park to enjoy meals outside the walls.  And given that most overnight visitors are staying off property, the chance they'll see and therefore stop by McDonalds for breakfast or Denny's for a late night snack, will always be there.

What is expected revenue increase to the city by having the housing development in the area?  Property tax?  I have to think they'd get more property tax income (and hotel tax revenue) from a deluxe hotel instead of some homes.  Increased spending in the local economy by the folks who now live there?  Correct me if I'm wrong, but there aren't any "real people" shopping near there are there?  No Ralphs, Target, WalMart, Home Depot, etc etc.  So, these people will be adding to the local economy by eating at Carl's Jr and Taco Bell?

Like others posting here, I don't get it.  Sounds like whoever Jim's crew talked to is floating balloons to see what may shake up Disney.  But I've gotta think Disney (and anyone else with an inkling of interest) will dig out the numbers and do some projections of tax revenue increases based on different scenarios, showing putting down some houses is not the one most likely to bring Anaheim its tax revenue lottery winnings.