Thursday, October 4, 2007

Is O.C. parks debate a power play?

Supervisors will examine a plan to change how the county’s parks are managed. The Irvine Co.’s influence may be a factor.
By Christian Berthelsen, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer October 2, 2007
When Orange County officials first reviewed a plan by the Irvine Co. to drain runoff from its massive Santiago Hills housing development into county-owned Irvine Regional Park, they were deeply troubled.

Parks administrators thought the arrangement amounted to a “gift of public funds” because it granted the development firm exclusive use of public property that would benefit its private 1,750-home development, according to documents and correspondence provided to The Times. At a minimum, they reasoned, the Irvine Co. should pay for the land, and they drafted a letter to the company saying as much in April 2005.

But after a series of hand-written changes by senior directors at the county’s Resources and Development Management Department, the county’s position changed diametrically.

A large “X” was drawn through the paragraph demanding the company provide “overriding public benefits” in exchange for the land. The final version said the county found the drainage system was in the public interest and made no mention of compensation. Supervisors unanimously gave final approval earlier this year, over the objections of environmentalists, homeowners and some of the county’s staff.

Now, that episode is serving as a backdrop to a debate over a plan for future management of the county’s parks.

One option calls for turning over management of some of the county’s parkland to a private trust established by Irvine Co. Chairman Donald L. Bren and overseen by executives of the development firm.

In August, the county’s Harbors, Beaches & Parks Commission narrowly voted against endorsing the parks plan, in part because it did not grant the parks agency autonomy from the more business-friendly resources department. The resources department oversees county facilities and ultimately signed off on the drainage deal. Supervisors are scheduled to take up the parks management proposal today.

The debate comes at a critical time for Orange County’s park system, which has suffered in recent years as officials diverted nearly $150 million from parks in the last decade to cover other costs, such as the county’s bankruptcy debt. In 2005, an Orange County Grand Jury report found the park system underfunded and understaffed, and recommended it be afforded higher status in the county bureaucracy.

More than anyone else, the Irvine Co. and Bren are the architects of the image of modern Orange County, with its meticulously planned communities and tidy, tree-lined streets.

To the Santiago Hills drainage plan’s opponents, the county’s acquiescence demonstrates that the firm wields quiet but powerful influence over county affairs.

“I don’t think the public interest was served here,” said Kevin Thomas, the county’s former parks director who was a critic of the proposal and was fired last year.

“I was not an obstructionist. I did not object to the development. I believed the Irvine Co. had every right to develop the property,” he said. “I just didn’t believe it had the right to put something on the backs of the public without paying for it.”

County officials defend their handling of the matter. Bryan Speegle, head of the Resources and Development Management Department, said the county had never required developers to compensate the county for the use of public property to handle runoff, and that county lawyers rejected the notion that it was a gift of public assets.

Supervisor Bill Campbell, whose district includes the project and the park, said the Irvine Co. had rights under a 110-year-old land deed that could have allowed it to build its drainage system through more popular areas of the park. Other officials note the final proposal was approved by state and federal wildlife officials, and that Orange’s approval of the project has been upheld thus far by the courts despite a legal challenge.

For its part, the Irvine Co. said its project did not constitute a taking of public land and was a product of compromises after much community discussion. The company also notes the environmental group Coastkeepers endorsed the ultimate plan.

“We are not taking public land,” said John Christensen, an Irvine Co. vice president.

The 114-acre parcel where the drainage facility is planned was bought by the county in 1972 — from the Irvine Co. — for nearly $400,000. Roughly 30 years later, the company decided it wanted some of it back.

As the developer pursued approval from Orange to build the second phase of Santiago Hills, it filed a runoff management plan with the county. Almost immediately, its central premise — to divert runoff from the development into the county park — raised hackles in the bureaucracy.

The first draft would have used acreage thick with California coastal sage-scrub, the habitat of the federally threatened California gnatcatcher, according to an Aug. 26, 2004, memo from Thomas. Five gnatcatchers had been observed there just weeks earlier. There were also concerns that heavy rains could wash out park trails.

In a March 4, 2005, memo, Cathy Nowak, a parks official, noted the company had accepted some changes to minimize effects on the natural habitat and the views of neighboring homeowners, but that it was resisting paying for the property.

Then came the series of letters in which the county first insisted it receive compensation for the land, only to ultimately approve the proposal without that condition. Speegle said he did not know who edited the letters, but acknowledged he signed the final version.

Earlier drafts also said the proposal would have to be vetted through public hearings, but the final one said no hearings were necessary. That rankled nearby homeowners, who said they never even knew of the plan until it was practically a done deal.

“We had no notice whatsoever of anything,” said Cynthia Burns, the president of the Hillsdale Community Assn., which represents homeowners in a development where several views look out directly onto the park where the drainage facility will be built.

Speegle said the parks officials were overruled because their sentiments were not consistent with the law or the county’s historical practice.

Orange gave final approval to the development plans in November 2005, but the Irvine Co. still needed a series of approvals from the county after that.

As the process dragged on, documents show, county resource managers repeatedly complained they were not receiving proper documentation from the company for its plans.

They also said the company had agreed to changes in the drainage plan, only to submit new designs that did not reflect the compromises. In one Feb. 28, 2006, exchange, a county engineering specialist complained to an Irvine Co. consultant that the county had not received approved tract and topography maps it requested, only to be told that Speegle — her ultimate boss — had told the company it didn’t have to comply with the request.

In an interview, Speegle acknowledged he may have done that, but only because Orange had agreed to assume responsibility for the facility, thus relieving the county of oversight for it.

As the Irvine Co. sought final county approval of its permit and plans, county parks officials continued to press for compensation for the land. If the shoe was on the other foot, Thomas said he asked Irvine Co. officials during a meeting in the fall of 2006, would the company ever give land to the county for free?

Within seconds, according to Thomas’ account, the executives, and Speegle, stood and left the room, ending the meeting. He was fired in December and believes the dispute played a role in his dismissal. Speegle says he does not recall the meeting or the comment and declined to comment, citing personnel matters.

The final plans, approved in March, moved the drainage facility and shrank its size to about 1 1/3 acres, to address concerns about the gnatcatcher habitat, and added trees and shrubbery to cover fencing and piping from neighbors’ views.

The runoff from the development would empty into to the park through a 6 1/2 -foot-wide pipe.

christian.berthelsen@ latimes.com
 

Posted by M at 17:38:35 | Permalink | No Comments »

Friday, September 21, 2007

Orange County to get new area code

Residents soon will be dialing 657. The Public Utilities Commission voted to create an overlay in the 714.

By David Haldane and David Reyes, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
September 21, 2007
State regulators decided Thursday to create an area code overlay in the 714 section of Orange County, establishing the second such blended telephone zone in California.

The California Public Utilities Commission’s 5-0 vote means that, starting late next summer, callers in the current 714 area will need to dial 10 or 11 digits to complete a local call. Existing telephone customers adding new numbers might wind up with phones in different area codes.

Doubling up

The new code — 657 — will cover the Anaheim resort district as well as other communities in northern and central Orange County, including Fullerton, Orange, Santa Ana and Yorba Linda, along with the coastal community of Huntington Beach.

PUC officials acknowledged that requiring cellphone customers making local calls to dial 10 digits and land-line customers to dial 11 digits — a 1 followed by the area code and individual phone number — can be inconvenient.

What’s more, it will apply to everyone in the 714. So, a phone customer who keeps a 714 number and who calls someone else with a 714 number also will need to dial 10 or 11 digits.

Still, with 714 numbers running out, commissioners said it was the best solution.

Although dialing that many digits “takes some getting used to by consumers, we believe this action is necessary,” Commissioner Rachelle Chong said in a news release.

She noted that phone customers in the 714 area will have to reprogram equipment with stored phone numbers, including fax machines and burglar alarm systems, to accommodate the dialing of the new, longer local numbers.

PUC officials have pointed out, however, that overlays can be less of a nuisance than splitting an area into two codes.

That would force customers in the new area to change to an entirely new telephone number, requiring them to notify their friends and clients, and print new business cards and office stationery.

Still, John Nicoletti, a spokesman for Anaheim, expressed the concern that the Orange County overlay will “create lots of visitor and tourist confusion.”

He noted that 45 million people a year visit the city’s resort area, including many foreign tourists drawn to such attractions as Disneyland.

He said that if, for instance, a new restaurant opens by Disneyland with a 657 area code, instead of the existing 714, “people from other areas won’t realize that they are right next to each other.”

Nicoletti also pointed to Anaheim Garden Walk, an outdoor retail and entertainment center under construction in the resort area.

Businesses moving in will want to promote their proximity to established tourist destinations but, Nicoletti said, having varying area codes “will make it difficult to have a consistent marketing message.”

“There is the potential for confusion,” he said. “What every resident is facing — the consternation that there could be a different [area code] next door — will be faced by businesses that have to market themselves” to visitors.

But officials in Buena Park, which has its own entertainment corridor along Beach Boulevard that includes such well-known attractions as Knott’s Berry Farm and Medieval Times, appeared less worried.

Though there is likely to be some confusion early on, said Aaron France, a city spokesman, it will all work out over time.

“I think change is tough for anybody,” he said, “but eventually people will kind of conform and they’ll deal with it.”

Likewise, a spokeswoman for South Coast Plaza in Costa Mesa said she didn’t anticipate major problems.

“We have a main switchboard that can transfer to any store, and we have an 800 number,” she said.

Under the timetable set by the PUC, callers can start making 10- or 11-digit calls within the current 714 area in April and will be required to use 10 digits in August.

The first new phone numbers with the 657 area code will be issued in September.

For decades, the 714 area code — which has more than 7.3 million phone numbers — has been synonymous with Orange County. But the rapid spread of cellphones, computers and fax machines has caused the 714 to “just run out” of numbers, said Susan Carothers, a PUC spokeswoman.

The 657 area code will be the county’s fourth. Customers in the county’s existing 562 and 949 areas will not be affected by the change, officials said.

Thursday’s decision follows a similar vote by the PUC two years ago to place the state’s first area code overlay into the 310 area, serving the South Bay and Westside. Officials started assigning the new 424 area code last year.

The PUC is considering an overlay for the San Fernando Valley’s 818 area and for the 760 area covering parts of Riverside and San Diego counties.

david.haldane@latimes.com

david.reyes@latimes.com

Times staff writer Stuart Silverstein contributed to this report.

Posted by M at 18:33:32 | Permalink | No Comments »

Thursday, September 13, 2007

Garden Grove council rejects casino plan

Unanimous vote followed emotional public comments, especially from Vietnamese, against the proposal. A hotel complex is OKd for the land instead.
By Dave McKibben, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer September 13, 2007
The Garden Grove City Council voted unanimously late Tuesday to kill a casino proposal that promised $70 million in annual tax revenue and college scholarships to every high school graduate, forcefully ending the central Orange County city’s three-year dance with casino backers.

“We made a very strong statement with that 5-0 vote,” said Councilwoman Dina Nguyen. “It will give the casino developers a hint that it will not be that easy to get into Garden Grove again.”

In bypassing the Gabrielino-Tongva Indian tribe’s proposal for a 40-acre Harbor Boulevard parcel near Disneyland, the council instead will offer most of the land to a Colorado-based developer. The project would include an upscale hotel with an indoor-outdoor water park, meeting space, two parking garages, shops and restaurants.
“I am still intrigued by the casino, but it is a long way off,” said Councilman Mark Rosen. “We needed to start producing revenue on that land now. The hotel project is not going to get off immediately either, but at least we can start moving on it.”

The McWhinney Enterprises project was approved for 25 acres, leaving the door ajar for a casino in the future.

“I think there’s still room for other things, including a casino if they can get over all their hurdles,” Rosen said.

Much of the emotional and critical testimony during the three-hour hearing came from Vietnamese Americans. Many warned of potential dire social effects of a casino, such as increased crime, more traffic and even more suicides. There were also some subtle — and some not so subtle — reminders of the potential voting power of the Vietnamese community.

“The Vietnamese community realized they can vote, and now they’re simply going onto the next level,” Nguyen said. “They are understanding their constitutional rights and the responsibility that goes with that. I think the result last night gave the Vietnamese community a lot of faith in the democratic process.”

Councilman Bruce Broadwater said he believed the strong showing by the Vietnamese community was a factor in the 5-0 vote.

“You have 200 or 300 Vietnamese people screaming at you,” he said. “You can only take that heat for so long.”

Broadwater said he was convinced the casino was unrealistic because the Gabrielinos had too many obstacles to overcome. There are about 2,000 Gabrielinos in the state, but the tribe is not federally recognized and is split into at least five factions, complicating and possibly dooming efforts to build a casino. Because the Gabrielinos have no land, the tribe would have to have a statewide ballot measure passed allowing state-recognized tribes to build casinos.

“There was nothing there, nothing tangible to touch,” Broadwater said. “They had a dream, but there was nothing to go with it.”

Jonathan Stein, chief executive of the Gabrielino faction pushing the casino, argued that the tribe could open a casino in Garden Grove with proper legislation and a negotiated compact with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

This is the second time Garden Grove has considered a casino. Three years ago, city officials met with a different tribe and Las Vegas casino mogul Steve Wynn about building a casino-hotel, but the plan quickly fell apart.

Garden Grove Mayor William Dalton said he had considered the Gabrielino proposal, but he ultimately decided the economics of the project were “too pie-in-the-sky.” Dalton said he believed a casino would never be built in Garden Grove.

“I don’t think you’ll ever get the majority of the residents to go along with it,” he said.

Councilman Steve Jones said he was bothered that the casino proposal overshadowed the hotel-water park plan.

“We’re getting a 1,200-room, high-end themed hotel around a water park; this project alone could put Garden Grove on the map,” he said. “It’s an awesome deal and hardly a consolation prize. I think parents are going to have a hard time pulling their kids out of this water park to go to Disneyland.”

Posted by M at 13:22:45 | Permalink | No Comments »

Thursday, September 6, 2007

From Frontierland to your frontyard

 
Glenn Koenig / Los Angeles Times
A basket of petunias and ipomoea hangs outside of Sleeping Beauty Castle in Disneyland.
Disneyland’s themed landscapes offer ideas for most any garden, whether it’s tropical, edible or even gothic.
By Tony Kienitz, Special to The Times September 6, 2007
HERE’S an interesting fact: Only 100 feet divides Adventureland from Frontierland. While one land drips with banyans and bromeliads, the other sizzles with cactus and sage.

It’s within this great divide that perceptive visitors can find their own garden inspiration — one of many masterfully conceived mini-landscapes at Disneyland whose design just might work at home.

The Gardens of Disneyland

That’s right. Now that the summertime crowds are starting to ebb, put on the mouse ears and head to Anaheim.

Aptly named horticulturist Karen Hedges, who oversees the day-to-day upkeep and artistry of the park’s gardens, provided a behind-the-scenes tour one recent morning, before the gates opened to the public. What she and her gang of nearly 150 gardeners pull off every day is nothing short of Herculean.

“It’s 6 a.m., and we just got through laying 10,000 square feet of new sod,” she notes cheerfully, adding that her crew deadheads the gardens of Disneyland, California Adventure, Downtown Disney and three Disney hotels every day.

Sure, most visitors don’t come for the landscape design, but take a look at that garden separating the entrances to Adventureland and Frontierland, and you’ll see a fantastic example of color usage, plant juxtapositions and water-wise design.

There beside a duck pond grows a deep spray of ruddy yellow rudbeckias, tawny yarrows, gaillardias, salvias, sunflowers and swaying golden fountain grasses. The sunset hues set a romantic tone, a Wild West where men crack bullwhips and madams snap garters. Some of these flowers are hot-weather annuals, whereas the grasses and sages will hold up for years to come.

In fact, using visually dynamic perennials as the bones of a garden is a classic design technique. Annual flowers can be shucked in and out as the seasons change (and they do change here, occasionally). Designing a garden with perennials first, annuals second, results in a landscape that’s almost always beautiful, easier to maintain and, because you’ll buy fewer plants as time goes by, kinder to your wallet.

The plants in this part of Disneyland are all distinctively shaped. Each one has a slightly different leaf and sends its own message to the eye. If you live in a Spanish-style bungalow or a California Craftsman, take a close look, me ‘earties, because the vibrant and expertly blended colors here are perfect for pirating.

NATURALLY, there’s more. This is Disneyland. Virtually every ride in the park comes with its own landscape look, a design that creatively overcomes the challenges of its space.

Perhaps you live in an apartment or condo, your only garden the hodgepodge selection of pots on a balcony or patio. A jaunt over to New Orleans Square provides some fine examples.

Throughout the narrow alleyways of the square are dozens upon dozens of beautifully rendered pots. Spilling and coiling from these urns are densely packed collections of begonias, variegated plectranthus, English ivies, coleus of all colors, azaleas, fuchsias and caladiums.

Each pot is a garden in its own right, abiding by a basic rule of landscape design: something spiky, something round, something dazzling, something subtle. Taken as a whole, no single pot is more dominant than another. Together, they speckle the dour, aged colors of New Orleans Square with bright, jazzy hues.

The trick to these pots is threefold: They’ve been stuffed full with fairly mature plants, they rely on the contours and colors of foliage rather than flowers to make their statement, and they grow simultaneously upward and downward, away from the confines of the pot.

There are more ideas to borrow over in Tomorrowland. As in all parts of the park, here Hedges’ crews perform the daily magic of “color call-outs,” deciding which annual flowers need to be replaced and what “instant landscaping” might be required. But it’s the people with Disney’s Imagineering unit who come up with the grand, big-picture ideas.

Imagineer Tony Baxter is credited with dreaming up Tomorrowland’s edible landscape, and if you’ve ever wondered how a hedgerow of clipped kumquats might look in your yard, this is where you’d find out. Stroll past Buzz Lightyear Astro Blasters and you’ll see espaliered apples, cute rows of peppers, sheared rosemary, lavender and santolina.

Another twist and turn in the path reveals strawberries, artichokes, dwarf pomegranates and a perfectly sculpted persimmon tree.

“It took some time to figure out the best combinations in the edible gardens,” Hedges says. “Tomato plants, as any gardener knows, are not usually very ornamental. So we’ve substituted red peppers into Tony’s designs.”

Again, long-lived plants establish the structure of the garden, and annuals provide outbursts of colors and variations in plant dimensions.

It’s immensely useful to see an edible landscape in a finished form. Too often these gardens are photographed in bite-size pieces. In Tomorrowland, gardeners can appreciate the idea as a whole and more readily see how easily these plants can be incorporated at home.

The clean, French lines of the edible landscapes are also worth noting — something one doesn’t often see in Southern California vegetable gardens.

EVEN Disneyland gardens that are a bit themey and theatrical have ideas worth borrowing. The gothic garden of the Haunted Mansion takes advantage of new hybrid colors available for familiar plants. Here, just inside the moss-green wrought-iron fencing, low-growing heucheras sport leaves in unusual shades that could be best described as dried Grey Poupon mustard and day-old lox. They bob above dark tufts of black mondo grass.

Ground covers of black ajuga and vermilion ipomoea trail around headstones. Small weeping mulberries, contorted willows and shimmering coprosma serve as the garden’s midsize plants, while dappled sunlight falls through classic Southern magnolia trees arched overhead.

The Haunted Mansion’s garden may be one of the most cleverly planted arrangements you will see. If you were to swap the colors of the plants — say, trade the washed-out heucheras for ones in vibrant Cabernet colors, switch the ajugas to variegated pinks and greens, and change the ipomeas to purple and pinks — you would have created a garden that was traditionally beautiful. The color palette that visitors see here does create a forlorn sense of decay, but the shapes and combinations of leaf and branch are what make this garden worth studying.

The list of such lessons here is long. There are the tropical gardens in Adventureland, perfect for a poolside landscape.

Around the darker rides in Fantasyland, you’ll find wonderfully coifed boxwood hedges and thick plantings of traditional European annual flowers. Expansive succulent gardens emulate underwater seascapes near Ariel’s Grotto and the new Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage. Nicely crafted gardens featuring California native plants await in Downtown Disney.

As Hedges’ morning tour stops at the animal topiaries crafted along the banks of It’s a Small World, one of the lead landscape gardeners, Mike Buhrmester, pauses to report that the blue lobelia he had been planting is rife with hookworm.

Hedges immediately asks which grower supplied the plants, and she and Buhrmester quickly figure out how to stretch their resources and still make the garden Disney-worthy. It takes all of a minute for them to devise a solution.

That, she says, is her wisest secret for creating a wonderful landscape. “We just try our best,” she says, leading the way to the next garden on the map. “It always seems to work out.”

In other words, relax. Don’t fuss. Have fun. That is the golden garden rule.

Tony Kienitz is author of “The Year I Ate My Yard.” Send comments to home@latimes.com

Posted by M at 13:08:04 | Permalink | No Comments »

Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Disney, housing developer get more time to talk

During Anaheim council meeting, protesters pitch tents to show support for affordable housing.

By SARAH TULLY and ERIK ORTIZ; The Orange County Register; Tuesday, July 31, 2007

ANAHEIM - A home developer and Disney have three more weeks to strike a compromise on a dispute about whether homes should be allowed in the Anaheim Resort tourist area around Disneyland.

A representative from SunCal, the company that wants to build homes in the resort, sent a letter two hours before the meeting to ask the City Council for more time to talk with officials from the Walt Disney Co., which has launched ballot measures and sued over the 1,500-home project with 225 affordable apartments.

The City Council voted 3-2 to again delay decision on an election date for a referendum on the issue. Mayor Curt Pringle and Councilman Harry Sidhu voted against the postponement.

A Disney-funded group, Save Our Anaheim Resort, vowed to push to get an election date immediately, possibly by taking legal action. SOAR collected enough signatures to force the referendum to overturn the city’s previous approval of residential zoning in the resort area.

“Any further delay beyond next week’s meeting is not acceptable,” said Todd Ament, SOAR co-chairman.

Disney spokesman Bob Tucker declined to say what the company wanted to happen Tuesday but said the company wants an “agreement or election as soon as possible.

Councilwoman Lucille Kring said she assumed it would take more than the two weeks that the council allowed at its last meeting for the parties to come up with a solution. It took six days for SunCal and Disney just to work out a confidentiality agreement and the parties are still discussing possible solutions, Kring said.

She said she prefers to see if something can be resolved before taking the issue to voters.

In addition to the referendum, SOAR is also collecting signatures for an initiative that would require voter approval of any housing complex within resort boundaries. To qualify for the February ballot, signatures must be submitted by Aug. 8 – before the next time the council will consider the matter.

“I personally feel the voters want to get on with it,” Mayor Curt Pringle said.

Tuesday’s meeting was calmer than the previous meeting when more than 60 speakers gave testimony for about two and a half hours. Only about 14 speakers got up, mostly against the residential zoning plan.

Some were frustrated with the lack of a resolution on the issue that has dragged on for more than a year. “Make a decision one way or another. Get this back on track,” said resident Patrick Pepper.

Most housing supporters stayed outside, demonstrating their stance by pitching about 100 red-domed mini tents to show the need for more affordable housing units throughout Orange County. Demonstrators said they support housing on a plot of land across from Disneyland where SunCal seeks to build homes. Disney is fighting the creation of residential housing, made possible by a zoning change.

More than 45 workers in the city’s resort area and members of affordable-housing advocacy groups took part in a skit meant to illustrate the need for affordable housing in Anaheim.

Some demonstrators dressed as Disney villains who refused to let workers set up their tents in an area designated as “Disneyland.” The workers were also forced from an area dubbed “Nimby-land.”

A chorus of “Si se puede!” or “Yes, we can!” concluded the spectacle.

Garden Grove resident Eddie Chavez, a bellhop at the Disneyland Hotel for 20 years, said he took part in the tent rally to show that the affordable housing needs are not being met in Anaheim for workers of the resort area.

“The community is never part of the equation,” Chavez said. “We want to show a visual that we are part of this equation.”

Posted by M at 22:14:58 | Permalink | No Comments »

Sunday, July 29, 2007

O.C. club faces the music in quest for permit

The Doll Hut’s new owner was stunned to learn it had operated illegally for years. Anaheim could decide the venue’s fate next week.
By Dave McKibben, Times Staff Writer; July 29, 2007

 

When Juan Reynoso purchased the Doll Hut in Anaheim six months ago, he thought he was getting a storied club known nationally for nurturing upstart Southern California rock bands to prominence.

But shortly after taking over, he discovered his historical haunt had been operating illegally — for two decades.


City officials told Reynoso that unless he met conditions to obtain a $250 “public dance hall” license, he would be unable to charge customers to see live music.

At the risk of being fined for violating a city ordinance, Reynoso dropped his cover charge and stopped paying the local punk, rockabilly and alternative bands that had been filling the tiny former truck stop almost nightly.

Seven nights a week of live music deteriorated to two or three, and Reynoso began wondering what he had gotten himself into.

“Without the bands, I don’t have the customers,” he said. “Most nights, this place is dead.”

Within a week, the Doll Hut’s fate could be decided. The city’s planning commission is expected to rule Aug. 6 whether the Doll Hut qualifies for the permit that allows bars to charge for live music.

As word of the club’s struggles spread, the Doll Hut’s close-knit community rallied around it. Local bands who have a history with the place volunteered to fill vacant dates and bring in crowds to keep the bar afloat.

“Fortunately, there are bands who’ve had a history with the Doll Hut who don’t care if they make a dime,” said manager Dirk Belling. “We toyed with the idea of not charging for admission, but asking customers for a donation to give to the band. But we decided those waters were going to be too murky to navigate.”

E-mails pleading for city officials to show the Doll Hut mercy came from as far away as Amsterdam and Australia.

“It always smelled of stale beer, cigarettes and sweat,” a devotee from Colorado Springs wrote, “but for over 12 years you could see and hear talented folk like: The Offspring; Blink-182, Weezer, Social Distortion and Brian Setzer.”

Blues artist Candye Kane, on tour in Milwaukee, wrote: “In this day and age, with live music played by human beings being replaced with DJs playing electronic music, it is more important than ever for live music venues to exist and to receive community support. The Doll Hut represents an era of music that will be wiped out entirely, if the city of Anaheim doesn’t recognize its cultural significance.”

Linda Jemison, who owned the business from 1989 to 2001, said she was surprised to learn that the Doll Hut’s lifeblood — charging admission to hear live music — had been against city code all these years.

“I had no idea…. how punk rock is that?” said Jemison, who transformed the bar from a seedy dive into a folksy hangout for local bands in the early ’90s. “Of course, I would have abided had I known.”

Anaheim officials say they were unaware that the Doll Hut was charging admission until Reynoso mentioned it while reapplying for an entertainment permit.

“I’ve been around here 32 years and I’ve never known they’ve had prominent bands that played there,” said planning department official Bill Sell. “During our inspections, we were never there when they were charging a fee. If we were, they’d have been required to have the proper permit.”

Jemison said it was widely known that her club charged admission — ads and listings in The Times, OC Weekly, and the Orange County Register listed cover charges ranging from $5 to $10.

“We didn’t charge a cover for the first three or four years,” said Jemison. “But we were getting the dregs of society. We found if we charged a cover we could afford better talent and get better clientele.”

At a time when many local music venues required fledgling bands to pre-sell tickets before they played, the Doll Hut took a different approach. The bands received the entire take from the door; the bar got everything else.

“We never played into the pay-to-play policy,” Jemison said. “We figured people are paying to see the band, they deserve the money.”

The club has changed hands several times since Jemison sold it, and every owner has continued to advertise its admission charge in fliers and newspapers. Jemison said it’s possible unauthorized shows were overlooked because the bar was tucked away in an industrial area near Interstate 5.

“We did fly under the radar, probably because we took care of our own issues,” she said. “We didn’t have a lot of problems or fights. All those years, we only had one (liquor license) violation and that was for a video game that had too much nudity.”

But now that the Doll Hut is on the spot, new owner Reynoso is doing everything he can to comply with the city’s requirements. He has spent thousands of dollars sprucing up the outside by striping the parking lot, adding plants and painting the building’s exterior. Inside, a new air conditioning system and a carpeted stage have been installed and a new sound system is coming.

Sell, the Anaheim planning department official, said his staff is recommending that city planners approve the public dance hall permit.

But Belling, the club’s manager, is taking no chances. He says he will be at the planning commission meeting to argue that the Doll Hut is a musical landmark the city can’t live without.

“We’ve got a piece of undeniable Orange County rock history,” Belling said. “The list of bands that have gone through the Doll Hut and gone on to greater things is significant. We want to make it clear that it will be really hard for the Doll Hut to survive if the owner can’t charge admission. Quality entertainment comes at a price.”

Posted by M at 16:40:21 | Permalink | No Comments »

Friday, July 27, 2007

Counties’ routes to commute fixes diverge

The difference between Orange and Los Angeles counties’ approaches to traffic issues is “night and day.” O.C. has focused on freeways; L.A. has invested in rail. Now they must agree on one standard for carpool lanes.
By Rong-Gong Lin II and David Reyes, Times Staff Writers; July 27, 2007

Los Angeles and Orange counties have long taken different paths when it comes to how to deal with traffic.

Los Angeles has invested heavily in rail. Orange County has shunned rail, arguing that freeway improvements are the best way to tame traffic. O.C. has embraced toll roads, while many L.A. officials have remained wary.

Now, the two counties are debating how motorists can access carpool lanes — and the outcome could have implications for freeway commuters across Southern California.


Orange County wants to, in essence, partially deregulate carpool lanes. One idea is to open the lanes to short-term travelers by removing the double yellow lines that bar access except at certain entry and exit points. The county also wants to allow solo motorists to use carpool lanes during off-peak hours, when officials say the lanes are underutilized.

Officials at the Orange County Transportation Authority argue that motorists are smart enough to handle such changes and that the changes would improve traffic flow. On Thursday, they took a rare trip north to make their case to the L.A. County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s Board of Directors.

Some officials in Los Angeles County at the California Department of Transportation say they will consider the idea. But they wonder whether opening up the lanes could worsen traffic by having more people change lanes, which slows down the flow on freeways.

“Every time a car needs to weave across a regular lane in order to get into a carpool lane, it creates a certain amount of congestion,” said Doug Failing, district director of Caltrans for L.A. and Ventura counties, in a recent interview. “If a person weaves across into that carpool lane and they cross … four or five lanes, you want them to be there for a long time and travel a long distance.”

There is general agreement that Los Angeles and Orange counties will have to settle on a single standard for the carpool lanes to avoid confusing motorists. Officials in the Inland Empire have already expressed interest in Orange County’s concept.

The meeting Thursday was cordial, with both L.A. and Orange County officials vowing to discuss the matter further and agreeing about the importance of reaching some kind of agreement.

But the two counties have a history of marching to different drummers.

Orange County has widened the 5 Freeway through much of the county, and plans to finish the project in Buena Park by 2010. But the 10-lane superhighway will narrow to a 1950s-era six-lane road at the county line, creating a major bottleneck because L.A. County has not yet begun a widening. A similar bottleneck could emerge on the 405, where Orange County plans a major widening and reworking of the 405-22-605 interchange in Seal Beach.

L.A. County, meanwhile, has invested heavily in rail and bus service, hoping to provide a meaningful alternative to driving. But Orange County rejected plans for a light-rail line, known as CenterLine, and voters in November renewed a half-cent sales tax that will widen nearly every freeway in the county.

They “have very different transportation philosophies,” said Genevieve Giuliano, director of the National Center for Metropolitan Transportation Research at USC. “It’s night and day.”

Thanks in part to Orange County’s focus on freeways, many of them are also lined with carpool lanes, and officials have now focused attention on how to more efficiently use the lanes.

Last year, Caltrans officials in Orange County announced the launch of a pilot program to allow continuous access to a carpool lane on the 22 Freeway, a busy east-west route between Seal Beach and Orange that was being widened.

The program began in December when the carpool lanes were opened up, and Caltrans and OCTA officials say they are planning to expand the program to the 405, 91 and 57 freeways.

An OCTA-commissioned poll released Monday showed that nearly two-thirds of surveyed motorists supported allowing solo drivers to use carpool lanes during off-peak hours, and 71% believed they should be allowed to enter and exit carpool lanes at will.

Orange County officials also believe they can cut commute times if carpool lanes are open to solo drivers during non-peak hours. A recent Caltrans report sent to the federal government found that many of Southern California’s carpool lanes are congested during rush hour. But backers argue that at other times of the day, traffic would be smoother if the carpool lanes were available to all.

Orange County officials pointed out that the San Francisco Bay Area has long allowed solo motorists to use carpool lanes during off-peak hours, and lets motorists enter or exit the lanes whenever they want.

“Why the difference? Does Northern California have better drivers than we do? Are they smarter? … I don’t think that’s true,” said Carolyn Cavecche, mayor of Orange and chairwoman of the OCTA. “This is a common-sense approach to carpool lanes.”

Kia Mortazavi, another OCTA official, said the problem with Southern California’s approach is that bottlenecks form at the entrance and exit points to carpool lanes. Allowing continuous access would relieve the chokepoints, he said.

“You don’t have this tension of ‘Where can I get in? Where can I get out?’ ” Mortazavi said in a recent interview. “You can focus more on your driving.”

A UC Berkeley study prepared for Caltrans showed that limiting access to carpool lanes as is done in Southern California appeared to “offer no safety advantages” compared to the Northern California’s open model. “That is clearly a green light for expanding the concept to other Southern California freeways,” Cavecche told the MTA board.

Others are not so sure.

MTA board member John Fasana, a Duarte city councilman, expressed concerns about the Orange County model but said he would consider it.

“I’m somewhat concerned about people merging in and out of [carpool] lanes where you have gridlock in adjoining lanes, and you want the carpool lanes to move more quickly,” he said. “If you’re driving in a carpool lane at 65 mph, what if a car cuts over in a carpool lane — would you ever be able to stop in time?”

Fasana said he was also dubious about why solo motorists would want to use carpool lanes during off-peak hours. “Frankly, when traffic is lighter, why is there a need for people to be in a carpool lane?” he said.

David Fleming, an MTA board member who is also chairman of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce board, wondered whether opening carpool lanes to solo motorists during off-peak hours would make much difference on L.A.’s most congested freeways. “On the 405, it seems like 24 hours a day is peak time,” he said, adding that the idea could work on L.A.’s less crowded freeways.

Kymberleigh Richards, a spokeswoman for Southern California Transit Advocates, a Los Angeles-based nonprofit advocacy group, thinks what works in Orange County might not work in L.A.

“Orange County has traffic issues, but we have them a lot worse,” Richards said. “Rush hour in Los Angeles County is now 5 a.m. to 9 p.m. We don’t have off-peak hours anymore.”

Times staff writer Jeffrey L. Rabin contributed to this report.

Posted by M at 16:38:42 | Permalink | No Comments »

Thursday, July 26, 2007

Irvine is told to accommodate 35,000 homes in 7 years

The city must absorb the housing under terms of a local government group. The city calls the decision unfair.
By Tony Barboza, Times Staff Writer July 25, 2007

More roofs needed


They can build vertically. It doesn’t have to be sprawl, and it doesn’t have to be single-family housing.
Victoria Basolo, UC Irvine planning professor

Irvine is being required to accommodate within seven years the second-largest number of new homes by a Southland city, trailing only Los Angeles, according to a housing plan approved this month.

Irvine must plan for 35,660 homes by 2014, according to the Southern California Assn. of Governments. Some would be designated for low-income families.

But Irvine officials say they don’t have enough land to meet those goals.


“This is not equitable,” said Housing Manager Mark Asturias, who said Irvine was dealt a disproportionate share — 43% — of Orange County’s immediate future housing.

Every five to seven years the state Department of Housing and Community Development sets housing quotas under a program called the Regional Housing Needs Assessment.

It is up to SCAG officials to determine where in Southern California those homes should be built. SCAG membership comprises 187 cities and six counties — Orange, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura and Imperial.

Cities and counties are required to accommodate the construction through zoning changes and other policy decisions.

Advocates of lower-cost housing say the quotas are necessary to force cities and counties to designate areas for low-income residential use and keep the median price of those homes from soaring.

About 40% of the 700,000 new homes slated for the Southern California area must be designated as intended for low-income or very low income families, according to the plan.

More than 150,000 homes are expected to be built in unincorporated areas of the six SCAG member counties, according to the plan.

For Irvine to meet its quota, Asturias said, the city would need to find 1,100 acres that he said do not exist.

The idea that Irvine has an abundance of available land is a misperception, he said, because many areas that appear vacant are locked into development agreements.

“From what we see, the choices are limited,” said Mike LeBlanc, senior vice president of the Irvine Co., one of the city’s largest landowners.

He said nearly all of the company’s land had development plans in place.

The quotas are meant to assure that all cities share the responsibility of building low-cost housing and are based mostly on available space and anticipated job growth, said Jeff Lustgarten, a SCAG spokesman.

It’s no surprise that many of the cities being asked to provide large numbers of new homes — Lancaster, Palmdale and Irvine — were recently ranked by the Census Bureau as among the nation’s 25 fastest-growing cities over 100,000 population.

But the quotas have at times been controversial.

In 2000, SCAG initially rejected the state’s mandated number of homes based on complaints by Inland Empire communities that said they were being forced to take on too much of the region’s low-cost housing.

Cities and counties that do not make plans to meet the housing quotas can lose certification from the state and become ineligible for state housing funds.

They also make themselves vulnerable to lawsuits by developers and low-cost housing groups.

This year, 46 cities appealed the number of homes they were assigned, but only 12 secured reductions.

Irvine appealed the order but was denied.

Developed as a master-planned community in the 1960s, Irvine has grown rapidly into a city of 200,000.

At 46 square miles, it is Orange County’s second-largest city by area.

It does not have the high density of its older, more populous neighbors such as Santa Ana and Anaheim, but has increasingly seen construction of high-rise condos — a departure from its suburban past.

Its new housing quota may force the city to plan for even more apartments and condominiums.

That may be the only way to keep up with its job growth as land becomes more scarce, said Victoria Basolo, associate professor in the department of planning policy and design at UC Irvine.

But the city may have to move away from the suburban villages that have become its signature, she said.

“They can build vertically,” she said.

“It doesn’t have to be sprawl, and it doesn’t have to be single-family housing.”


tony.barboza@latimes.com

(INFOBOX BELOW)

More roofs needed

Irvine must plan for 35,000 new dwellings by 2014 to house a growing population, according to the Southern California Assn. of Governments. The six-county region must accommodate 700,000 homes, and Los Angeles tops the needs list.

Southern California cities with housing needs exceeding 9,000 units*

Los Angeles: 112,876

Irvine: 35,660

Palmdale: 17,910

Lancaster: 12,799

San Jacinto: 12,026

Hemet: 11,243

Riverside: 11,381

Desert Hot Springs: 9,923

Santa Clarita: 9,598

Long Beach: 9,583

Anaheim: 9,498

Hesperia: 9,094

Total housing need, by county

Los Angeles: 283,927

Riverside: 174,705

San Bernardino: 107,543

Orange: 82,332

Ventura: 26,534

Imperial: 24,327

*San Diego County is not part of the study area. A report released in 2005 said the San Diego region would need to zone for 107,301 homes by 2010.

Sources: SCAG, San Diego Assn. of Governments. Graphics reporting by

Tony Barboza

Los Angeles Times

Posted by M at 07:03:00 | Permalink | No Comments »

Monday, July 16, 2007

O.C. attraction goes up, up but not away

Hundreds take rides in a tethered balloon on the inaugural day of the first completed feature at the Great Park on the former El Toro base.
By Yvonne Villarreal and Tony Barboza, Times Staff Writers; July 15, 2007

Percy Liles’ aged fingers grasped a post for balance as he arched his head back to look at the 75-foot-diameter orange balloon towering over him at the former El Toro Marine base.

“Look at that,” the 85-year-old retired naval aviator said. “We’re in the shadow of the balloon. It’s amazing.”


Saturday marked the inaugural launch of the Great Park Balloon, attended by more than 5,000 people hoping to ride the giant $5-million tethered helium orb. It is the first completed feature at the urban park being built at the base.

But only the 665 people lucky enough to score tickets got to go up in the gondola as it ferried them 300 feet above the ground.

“I kind of figured that not everyone who attended would get to go on a ride,” said Bob Roara, 67, of Palm Springs. “Since there are so many people here, they kind of have to ration who gets on.”

Initially about 22 people were taken up per trip, but that number fell to 10 as winds reached 20 mph by noon. “The stronger the winds get, the less people we can take,” said Rod Cooper, operations manager for Great Park, explaining that the lower number is necessary to maintain stability.

Each ride lasted about three minutes.

The balloon will need to average about 250 riders a day to draw the estimated 50,000 that Irvine officials hope to attract each year.

If Saturday was any indication, that might not be a problem, though some riders complained of plans to charge adults $20 and children $13 to board the 10-to-15-minute ride, starting in January.

“It’s such an Irvine thing to charge $20 for a balloon ride,” said Debra Rocha-Dunham, 50. “I probably wouldn’t pay $20. It’s a lot of money, and what is the money being used for?”

The fees will go toward the $1.6-million annual cost of the attraction, which is expected to lose about $850,000 its first year, according to the Irvine City Council. The city, which is developing the 1,350-acre Great Park, has considered advertising the balloon rides to help offset some of those losses.

On Saturday, riders got panoramic views of Huntington Beach, Newport Beach, Lake Forest and Foothill Ranch as the balloon cast its huge shadow on the maze of runways and old hangars below.

Construction crews worked 12-hour days over the last several weeks to complete the five-acre balloon site in time for the flights, which are to be offered four days a week from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. starting Thursday.

Soon workers will demolish, grade and landscape what is now a flat expanse of runways, hangars and barracks — transforming it into one of the nation’s largest municipal parks.

Designer Ken Smith envisions the balloon as a vantage point from which visitors will see a constantly progressing landscape.

“The public is going to see us building and growing a park,” he said. “While parts of it are going to feel unfinished, I think it’s exciting.”

Posted by M at 06:36:51 | Permalink | No Comments »

Saturday, July 14, 2007

O.C.’s Great Park takes off

The first attraction of the planned suburban oasis is a balloon ride that takes visitors to 500 feet for a panoramic view of the county.
By Roy Rivenburg and Tony Barboza, Times Staff Writers
July 13, 2007

Rising UpInflated

As they float skyward this summer aboard a $5-million tethered helium balloon ride at Irvine’s Great Park, passengers on the free attraction might notice some unusual amenities on the ground:

•  a $300,000 tent — designed to resemble an airplane hangar — that costs $75,000 a year to clean;

•  a four-person visitor center crew hired under a $370,000 annual contract;

•  a series of orange dots painted along the park’s entrance road at a cost of $14,000.

When the 15-minute voyage ends, a French-trained pilot earning a six-figure salary will use a remote control to lower the craft to earth.


The helium-filled airship attraction is expected to lose about $850,000 its first year, partly because the Irvine City Council — which is developing the 1,350-acre Great Park — plans to allow passengers to ride free of charge until January. From then on the city will charge $20 for adults and $13 for children.

The red ink doesn’t worry Great Park spokeswoman Marsha Burgess. “I wouldn’t characterize it as a deficit,” she said.

Burgess calls the cash outlay “the cost of operation,” saying the balloon is an integral piece of the suburban oasis’ design.

Irvine officials plan to spend more than $1 billion transforming the former El Toro Marine base’s cracked airstrips and dusty terrain into a dramatic landscape of lakes, orchards, athletic fields, museums and a rugged, man-made canyon. When completed, the expanse will be among the nation’s largest urban parks — larger than Manhattan’s 843-acre Central Park and San Francisco’s 1,017-acre Golden Gate Park, but smaller than Los Angeles’ 4,200-acre Griffith Park.

The ride’s expected deficit has disconcerted some Irvine officials who worry that if the park’s first endeavor is a money loser, the city might have to cut corners on other planned features such as the 60-foot-deep canyon, a botanical garden and a sports complex.

“This is a microcosm of how this park is run,” said Councilwoman Christina Shea. “We are going to be hitting a wall sometime and we are going to be upside-down financially, and we are not going to have the park we all envisioned.”

On Saturday, the Great Park’s balloon is scheduled to begin flying from a 5-acre plot inside the former Marine base, which is being converted to housing tracts, businesses and the Great Park.

Planners are banking on 50,000 passengers a year, roughly equal to ridership on the Philadelphia Zoo’s tethered helium balloon, which operates in a venue visited by 1 million people annually.

The anticipated shortfall has led the City Council to consider placing ads on the balloon, including a banner ad on the balloon surface, smaller ads on its gondola, and plants trimmed into the shape of corporate logos. Irvine estimated it could make as much $880,000 a year.

That has led the council to debate balancing the desire to recoup some expenses with the prospect of the craft looking overly commercial.

“We live in a very commercial society. The park should be a respite from the onslaught of advertising,” said Ken Smith, the park’s designer. “To put ads on it would be a mistake.”

The cost to operate the balloon and visitor center doesn’t include start-up charges, such as $1.6 million for site design and landscaping, and $1.9 million — donated by the Lennar Corp. — to buy the helium-filled ship, install a landing pad and get FAA clearance to fly the craft. Lennar is developing housing tracts around the park.

Irvine officials also have tacked on $838,000 to build a road to the balloon, plant citrus trees and buy a special 50-by-50-foot tent that will serve as the visitor center.

Smith’s team specified that the tent “emulate an aircraft hangar” by having an angled roof, taller at the entrance and sloping to the back. “No deviations or substitutions are acceptable,” the design team said.

Several of Irvine’s balloon project contracts were awarded without competitive bids.

For instance, Automotive Marketing Consultants Inc., which runs a car test track at El Toro and hosts corporate shindigs at the site, will receive $75,000 to wash the outside of the visitor center tent six times a year and clean the interior weekly.

Tim Watson of Clean Awn, an industrial-fabric maintenance company in Lakewood, said he would have been happy to do the job for $54,000.

Burgess had no comment on Watson’s pricing.

Automotive Marketing Consultants will also be paid $370,000 to staff the visitor center with four full-time employees — more than $90,000 per position. The company will receive an additional $64,000 to manage the balloon’s website and telephone call center.

Another big payout — $380,000 — goes to Aerophile, a French balloon manufacturer, to pilot the helium ship and operate the diesel-powered winch that hoists and lowers it.

Aerophile’s contract calls for two full-time pilots and a hostess. After subtracting maintenance costs, that works out to more than $100,000 per pilot.

In contrast, Aerophile’s main competitor, the Great American Balloon Co., which flies a tethered craft at Niagara Falls, pays pilots $21,000 to $52,000 a year.

“It’s not like they need a college degree,” said Shaun Asbury, the general manager of Great American Balloon.

Irvine officials said they didn’t seek competitive bids because Aerophile made their balloon and might void the one-year warranty if the craft isn’t maintained and operated to company standards.

Tethered balloons trace their roots to the 1800s, when gas-filled airships on leashes were used for military observation and as tourist attractions in such cities as Paris, Budapest, Rome and Chicago.

In modern times, outfitted with gondolas that can carry 30 passengers, the balloons have enjoyed a global renaissance. But only a few hover over the U.S. — at Niagara Falls, the Philadelphia Zoo and the San Diego Wild Animal Park.

Most make a profit. Philadelphia’s helium-filled behemoth charges half as much per ticket as the Great Park plans to but makes money by letting a corporate sponsor put a logo on the craft. In San Diego, a private balloon company pays all costs and gives a cut of ticket revenue to the Wild Animal Park.

But some tethered balloons have gone bust. The Niagara Falls airship originally flew over Las Vegas, but left town because of poor attendance.

And a Baltimore balloon closed in 2005 after a mechanical snafu stranded 16 passengers in the air for two hours, according to the Baltimore Sun. The Baltimore ship now soars over an Asian resort.

Liability insurance for tethered balloons can be steep. The Great Park is paying $110,000 a year for its policy.

The Philadelphia Zoo paid even more — $150,000 — but then found a broker specializing in high-risk policies who eliminated the fee by rolling balloon coverage into the zoo’s overall insurance package.

Burgess acknowledged that the balloon might stay in the red beyond its inaugural year. However, that doesn’t mean it’s a balloondoggle, she said.

Great Park officials hope their airship — which is set to fly 24 hours a week, Thursdays through Sundays — will eventually make money.

But they say it’s more important to follow the vision of park designer Smith, who floated the balloon concept as one of the site’s signature elements.

Not included in any budget is how much publicity balloons can generate, said Philadelphia Zoo spokeswoman Gretchen Toner. “Ours has become a city icon,” she said. “People have even proposed on it.”

Officials have similar aspirations for the Great Park balloon, which will be visible for miles as a symbol of the military base’s future makeover.

But turning a profit? That’s a different matter.

“If you could make money on parks,” Burgess said, “the private sector would be building them.”


tony.barboza@latimes.com

(Begin text of infobox)

Up in the air

Starting Saturday, visitors to Irvine’s Great Park will be able to rise 500 feet aboard a tethered helium balloon. The ride will operate four days a week and offer free rides until January.

Some costs associated with the balloon’s operation:

•  $380,000 a year for two balloon pilots, a hostess and maintenance.

• $370,000 a year to staff the visitor center with three full-time employees and a supervisor.

• $300,000 to buy a 50-by-50- foot tent intended to simulate the appearance of an aircraft hangar. An additional $75,000 a year will be spent to clean the tent.

• $100,000 a year for a balloon replacement fund. The lifespan of a balloon is five years, so money will be set aside every year for a new one.

• $94,000 a year for portable restrooms.

• $52,000 annually for security between 1 and 5 a.m.

• $30,000 a year for trash removal.

Source: Orange County Great Park, Irvine, Aerophile

Posted by M at 04:07:49 | Permalink | No Comments »