Azusa's troubled Rosedale project get...

Azusa's troubled Rosedale project gets new developers

There are 18 comments on the San Gabriel Valley Tribune story from Sep 1, 2010, titled Azusa's troubled Rosedale project gets new developers. In it, San Gabriel Valley Tribune reports that:

After years of stalled construction, a new company has acquired the Rosedale housing community, officials said Wednesday.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at San Gabriel Valley Tribune.

imo

Duarte, CA

#1 Sep 2, 2010
"Of the 1,250 homes planned for the site, only 125 are built and occupied and many of the amenities planned are either unopened or haven't been started." In the meantime, residents are required to pay their HOA dues (close to $400 a month) for amenities that are not available.

"As master developer, Rosedale Land Partners is responsible to build many of the improvements promised the homeowners in 2006, City Manager Fran Delach said.
"They take over the development agreement and elements of the development agreement that include several public and private amenities," Delach said.
One such improvement includes a recreation center, which would be built after 225 homes are built."
A fire station, school, and 10 parks are all part of the plans for the community." So the people that have homes and have been paying their dues for the plast 4 years now have to wait for another 225 homes to be built before recieving their amenities that they were promised???

"It is a very good sign the project will restart and ... construction will take place and homes will start selling," he said. "It is a very positive thing for the local economy and for the city." Are you high? There are so many homes readily available in nicer areas that aren't selling, what makes you think that these homes will sell???

I wonder if the mayor has taken in to consideration the Vulcan mining issue and the crime, both of which may turn off home buyers.
imo

Duarte, CA

#2 Sep 2, 2010
^s/b "dues for the past 4 years"
yep

AOL

#3 Sep 2, 2010
imo wrote:
"Of the 1,250 homes planned for the site, only 125 are built and occupied and many of the amenities planned are either unopened or haven't been started." In the meantime, residents are required to pay their HOA dues (close to $400 a month) for amenities that are not available.
"As master developer, Rosedale Land Partners is responsible to build many of the improvements promised the homeowners in 2006, City Manager Fran Delach said.
"They take over the development agreement and elements of the development agreement that include several public and private amenities," Delach said.
One such improvement includes a recreation center, which would be built after 225 homes are built."
A fire station, school, and 10 parks are all part of the plans for the community." So the people that have homes and have been paying their dues for the plast 4 years now have to wait for another 225 homes to be built before recieving their amenities that they were promised???
"It is a very good sign the project will restart and ... construction will take place and homes will start selling," he said. "It is a very positive thing for the local economy and for the city." Are you high? There are so many homes readily available in nicer areas that aren't selling, what makes you think that these homes will sell???
I wonder if the mayor has taken in to consideration the Vulcan mining issue and the crime, both of which may turn off home buyers.
It was the constant bickering and second guessing of past council members concerning the number of houses to be built that delayed this project. Once Rosedale finally got the green light, they went right into the recession. Those that had committed to the new development (both developers and homeowners) were stuck. It has been the homeowners that have paid dearly through the years for this as the former developers walked away. No pool, clubhouse or school which was part of the original agreement was ever completed but HOA fees continue. It was so bad in Rosedale concerning tumbleweeds and growth it was dubbed a ghost town. It was not until the matter was abated that it was cleaned up.
I welcome new developers and a jump start, but I'm concerned that these homes will not bring the top dollar as previously expected and homeowners will be shafted again.
Plus something has to be done with the entrance on 9th street, this is enough to turn your car back around.
Rose Dud

Norwalk, CA

#4 Sep 2, 2010
This development will be a failure. The school district is low performing, the mining issue. There are too many short sale homes available in better areas for cheaper. Ever notice how things start to appear to be progressing when election time is close. A little more vaseline and stroke me faster, I'm all most there

“The Ravaged Canyon City”

Since: Feb 10

Azusa

#5 Sep 2, 2010
I was not involved in the original struggle to avoid high density, but when I drive by I wonder why those huge houses are so close to each other and the yards are so small. Oh yea, developer's profits are some people's primary concern. I can understand that some people do not want a yard, but shouldn't there be an option? I'll take my answer off the air.....
yep

AOL

#6 Sep 3, 2010
BruceBKind wrote:
I was not involved in the original struggle to avoid high density, but when I drive by I wonder why those huge houses are so close to each other and the yards are so small. Oh yea, developer's profits are some people's primary concern. I can understand that some people do not want a yard, but shouldn't there be an option? I'll take my answer off the air.....
I agree there should be an option...If I remember right some of these houses close to 9th street were suppose to be "mixed use". They were to have a business on the bottom and living space above, but this I'm sure will not transpire either.
resident

Azusa, CA

#7 Sep 3, 2010
yep wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree there should be an option...If I remember right some of these houses close to 9th street were suppose to be "mixed use". They were to have a business on the bottom and living space above, but this I'm sure will not transpire either.
That was an idea that was floated around, for the condos that will be located near the Gold Line Station by Citrus Avenue (not so much by 9th Street). But it was stricken from the plan before it was approved... Unfortunately the sizes are what they are now. They should have been roomier lots, certainly. But having lived here through it all, let me tell you it could have been much worse.

In regards to 9th Street, I really think - WHILE THEY STILL HAVE THE CHANCE - they should open up the connection at 10th STREET, a much nicer area that some people say didn't get connected because the former mayor didn't want extra traffic by her house (she lives on 10th). But I think it would be fine, because it would allow the existing neighborhood to connect and drive through to Glendora without having to go Sierra Madre or dirty 9th Street apartments... and would let the Rosedale residents have a way OTHER than Sierra Madre & Palm to exit their neighborhood to go to Target, Downtown Azusa, etc.

By the way, even though this article has something that is clearly good news for the area (given the dismal circumstances of the last two years!), I just KNEW that we'd actually have some people COMPLAIN about getting new developers. What, do they want it to STAY a pile of dirt? It amazes me that there are people out there that feel better when things remain miserable.
yep

AOL

#8 Sep 3, 2010
resident wrote:
<quoted text>
That was an idea that was floated around, for the condos that will be located near the Gold Line Station by Citrus Avenue (not so much by 9th Street). But it was stricken from the plan before it was approved... Unfortunately the sizes are what they are now. They should have been roomier lots, certainly. But having lived here through it all, let me tell you it could have been much worse.
In regards to 9th Street, I really think - WHILE THEY STILL HAVE THE CHANCE - they should open up the connection at 10th STREET, a much nicer area that some people say didn't get connected because the former mayor didn't want extra traffic by her house (she lives on 10th). But I think it would be fine, because it would allow the existing neighborhood to connect and drive through to Glendora without having to go Sierra Madre or dirty 9th Street apartments... and would let the Rosedale residents have a way OTHER than Sierra Madre & Palm to exit their neighborhood to go to Target, Downtown Azusa, etc.
By the way, even though this article has something that is clearly good news for the area (given the dismal circumstances of the last two years!), I just KNEW that we'd actually have some people COMPLAIN about getting new developers. What, do they want it to STAY a pile of dirt? It amazes me that there are people out there that feel better when things remain miserable.
I agree...10th street would of been a much more appealing entrance then 9th. I myself am happy a new developer will take off where the others left off, for the sake of those living there can finally achieve the amenities they have long waited for. Hopefully we can also complete the track at Citrus Crossing (Ross store) also.
imo

Duarte, CA

#9 Sep 3, 2010
resident wrote:
<quoted text>
That was an idea that was floated around, for the condos that will be located near the Gold Line Station by Citrus Avenue (not so much by 9th Street). But it was stricken from the plan before it was approved... Unfortunately the sizes are what they are now. They should have been roomier lots, certainly. But having lived here through it all, let me tell you it could have been much worse.
In regards to 9th Street, I really think - WHILE THEY STILL HAVE THE CHANCE - they should open up the connection at 10th STREET, a much nicer area that some people say didn't get connected because the former mayor didn't want extra traffic by her house (she lives on 10th). But I think it would be fine, because it would allow the existing neighborhood to connect and drive through to Glendora without having to go Sierra Madre or dirty 9th Street apartments... and would let the Rosedale residents have a way OTHER than Sierra Madre & Palm to exit their neighborhood to go to Target, Downtown Azusa, etc.
By the way, even though this article has something that is clearly good news for the area (given the dismal circumstances of the last two years!), I just KNEW that we'd actually have some people COMPLAIN about getting new developers. What, do they want it to STAY a pile of dirt? It amazes me that there are people out there that feel better when things remain miserable.
I don't think people are complaining about new developers, of course folks don't want to see the area undeveloped-it's an eyesore. Unfortunately, the economy is not in any shape to warrant new homes at this time.

“The Ravaged Canyon City”

Since: Feb 10

Azusa

#10 Sep 3, 2010
I agree that it is a good thing that development will start up again. I also agree that a 10th Street access would be an improvement.
Cindy

Monrovia, CA

#11 Oct 19, 2010
Wow, I can't believe that the developer would just leave and not complete what they promised... Were the residents who did move in given any type of compensation?
imo

Duarte, CA

#12 Oct 19, 2010
Cindy wrote:
Wow, I can't believe that the developer would just leave and not complete what they promised... Were the residents who did move in given any type of compensation?
Rosedale was a great concept with poor execution (yes, I know-the economy). The only thing the residents got were empty promises, tumbleweeds and $400 monthly HOA dues.
dan

Atlantic City, NJ

#13 Jan 7, 2011
why pay half amil to live in azusa..with hoa...with the melaruse tax or whtever the hell that is,when u can live in glendora for 350,000...azusa is a toilet and will always be one. We lived in azusa for four years thinking it might gentrify into something nice...didnt happen so we got out and live in glendora...
NO an A

Azusa, CA

#14 Jan 7, 2011
Glendora would probably never allow Vulcan to mine their hillsides. Sometimes I think Vulcan owns Azusa and Irwindale.
Frito Bandito

United States

#15 Jan 7, 2011
It's Mello-Roos, and you're right. Why pay $500K to live in Azusa (with the Assoc dues and the Azusa schools) when you can spend less and live in a better area. I work in Azusa, but God as my witness, I'd never live here.
Azusa is my home

La Puente, CA

#16 Jan 7, 2011
dan wrote:
why pay half amil to live in azusa..with hoa...with the melaruse tax or whtever the hell that is,when u can live in glendora for 350,000...azusa is a toilet and will always be one. We lived in azusa for four years thinking it might gentrify into something nice...didnt happen so we got out and live in glendora...
Did it ever occur to you that the filthy scumbags like you are the real problem? Its good to hear that you and your family are finally out of here.
My home II

Azusa, CA

#17 Jan 7, 2011
Scumbags ...interesting description. How about Vulcan's Canyon City Alliance and their kowtowing flunkies? How easily some people sell their souls for the perception of acceptance. Something is rotten here in Denmark for sure. Restored hills? Restricted Mining? Moved away from Azusa residents? Hidden? C'mon, we're not that gullible are we?
NO on A

Azusa, CA

#18 Jan 8, 2011
In 2005, Vulcan attempted to mine the entirety of the site. This meant that they wanted the 80 westernmost acres above the current west side mining scar. Many people were against it. Now, they have renamed that effort "a swap". The east side of Fish Canyon had ceased to be mined for over 30 years. Azusa Rock did not want to mine there for their own reasons. Vulcan has not mined there for the 12 years they've owned the property. Now they offer to not mine there. Does this really make sense to anyone? Why did people change their minds because the grab was renamed?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Brookfield Homes Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Off-grid suburb a 'perfect storm' for energy gi... (Dec '15) Dec '15 Solarman 1
News Houses might be built on former Ontario dairyla... (Feb '10) Oct '11 Snoman 3
News Dixon planners to mull size of housing development (Oct '10) Oct '10 William 3
News State chooses Brookfield Homes to develop Nelle... (May '10) Jun '10 Mark Stephens 15
News State chooses Brookfield Homes to develop Fred ... (May '10) May '10 Ray Brower 4
News Ontario revises specific plan within New Model ... (Feb '10) Feb '10 test 2
News Economy has halted dairies' departure to greene... (Jul '09) Jul '09 uncle_vito 3
More from around the web