Mt. Whitney Portal Store & Hostel Forums General Mt. Whitney Portal Store Message Board The Portal Preserve development

Just wondering what peoples views / opinions were of the new housing development starting on the Portal road.

Hi Jim Walters and Christina and I hiked up the Mountaineers Route several weeks ago to check the conditions of the snow on the backside,from the summit we talked about his project and the years of hiking in the Sierra ,his position on the site control and the future of Lone Pine and the recovery of the local economy that now exists of tourism and the loss of the youth that can not stay in the area unless they work at fast food or clean rooms for a living, the rest of the work force is made up from County, State or Federal and City of LA (DWP) Jobs and if hired from locals mostly seasonal.

The County is in a very serious fiscal crisis and many dollars and Employee hours are spent on law suits with the City of Los Angelese from past water issues, leadership that once lived in the Valley have moved on since the closing of the larger companies and no land to build exist around the towns that isn't owned by the City Of Los Angeles and they will not sell until a land release from 1992 is settled (75 ac.) not enough to meet the needs of the existing housing shortage and many people live in housing that was the houses from Mananzar that closed in 1945 and houses moved into local towns and some are now apt. houses with garden hoses from one room to the next for water,
Take a side trip off 395 and see the existing structures and the condition of the streets and lack of curb and gutter and sidewalks or the conditions of the County buildings or the schools.
Will the 27 lots make a difference , no but the seed may be planted that someday we can have a middle income construction force, a hope of a future that isn't based on tourism and part time work and a place where people can move from the over crowed cites and bring buisnesss to our area and built a great example planned land use that serves the needs of the area and the people living here.
We have a saying here if you don't have three generations living here you won't understand the Valley. Now some go as far as three generations in the ground ,
I liken this Valley to a future TVA study some day . This is Rural America without the farms and a base economy.
So if you live in a house in a city, drive a new car and have more than one store to shop and a doctor with in a hour or a dentist, worry about how we can get some of these things not about Jims 27 lots that are zoned for his projected site
or help us get land released around the existing towns so we do not need to develope out side of town. We drive through your towns and can see what sprawl has created , we may be able to help with some of your problems like the air quality that overflows into this area, Stand on the summit and look 360 degrees and see the haze in all directions, If you live in the Reno area we see a major truck traffic problem in the coming years hauling supplies to your area through our towns and the need to consider bypasses to keep the towns livable , as the growth in the central valley moves trucking into our area also.
Please consider your area and what is has become ,we can learn a great deal from the great examples that have been cast for our study of how we can move our small part of the picture into the future and make this a greater place for Cayden (our grandson and his grandsons to live) Thank You Doug

I had the chance to drive past the area of development a couple of times this week, and was quite surprised to find other housing within 1/2 mile, including designer homes. I was under the impression that the area was far, far away from anything, but that is not the case.

The concept that we have Americans living in recycled concentration camp housing gives me considerable pause.

Doug: Wisely stated, and obviously from the heart. The world could use a few more like you, one who cares about their community, wherever it is, and is willing to be their cheerleader. You are a good person, as many of us know.

It seems to me that the east side of the sierra has the potential for tremedous growth in the future (you may not want that). However, the fundamental problem is and will continue to be jobs. You may need some high tech startups to invigorate your area.

It was not long ago that Bend, Oregon was just another small rural town. That has changed dramatically in the last 10-15 years. Now it is too darn expensive to buy there.

I think the challenge in the future will be how much growth is too much. Southern California keeps getting more and more populated. Sooner or later that is going to move north. Perhaps this is the start of something good (or bad) depending on your point of view.

It also seems like the Owens Lake pollution problem needs to be solved in order for the area to prosper in the future.

I believe the fundamental problem for development along 395 in the Eastern Sierra is........ W A T E R !!!!!
It is my understanding that Mr. Mulholland and his friends from Los Angeles bought up most all of the water rights from the naive landowners in the early part of L.A.'s development, correct me if I am wrong................steve

I love the Lone Pine area and have been visiting it since the early 1950's. I got my first trout ever in Lone Pine Creek and still remember the exact hole.

Development is a tough issue for me particularly in the wide open, more rural areas. I hate visiting Montana where many hillsides are scarred with five acre plots and a house. No more real wilderness, just someone who wants isolation and is willing to carve up the available land to get it.

I worry about this new development in that the housing will probably be high end second homes for the wealthier from L.A. I would love to see more development in town but I can appreciate the land ownership issues. That's where I would like to fight the housing battle. Keep people living in one area and the wilderness in another. As our population grows, we all have decisions to make as to how to handle it. I love Doug's new place in town and hope tourism and light industry will help with the local issues. Tough issues. Thoughtful comments by Doug. A lot of meandering by me.

Hey Doug-

I live in Reno/Sparks area and know what you mean about the trucking thing. The truck traffic on the south end of Sparks is already pretty bad, and with that new industrial complex just east of town (where Walmart just opened a gigantic warehouse), things are only going to get worse.

SeanB
Sparks, NV

Thanks for your input Doug. It's great to hear the prespective of one who is so vital and respected in the community.
I'm assuming by your response that you are in favour of the development, as I am, and I am on the waiting list to purchase one of the property lots.
Now if only the people of 'Save Round Valley' and the 'Sierra Nevada Alliance' could only truly envision responsible growth and development, albiet I respect their concerns.
You state that "this is rural America without the farms and a base economy", maybe more advertising should be done in a place like Vegas as a day trip option for travellers to see Death Valley and Whitney, as opposed to the Grand Canyon.
This development could assist with you getting a such infrastructure as a doctor, dentist. I know the Expresso Parlour has some of the best coffee I've ever had...Starbucks who?

This case is now with the California Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Appellant, Save the Round Valley Association (SRVA), filed their brief Jan 8, 2007, Inyo County and the developer filed their reply brief Feb 7, 2007, and now, the reply brief of SRVA is due Feb 27, 2007. If anyone cares to follow this case's progress online, here is the link to this case on the court's website.

CaT

After all briefs had been submitted earlier this year, oral arguments were finally had before the Court yesterday (Nov 6). The Court's opinion will be filed Feb 4, 2008.

CaT

After coming here for years on vacations, I fled LA and moved here last year to get away from smog, crowds, crime. I came here only to find the meth problem from LA is going just hot and heavy and fine here too, thank you. Mammoth's crime is out of control...you just won't hear about it. They are putting in 'workforce housing' up there. Meanwhile, no snow....I was there today....everyone is panicked up there....for sale signs everywhere, shops on the verge of shutting down. Opening day is tomorrow. Some joke; what snow? If its a bad year, kiss the revenue from tourists goodbye in Lone Pine all the way up the valley. It is a dominoe effect.

I rent one of the many vintage Manzanar houses in this valley - it's really more of a tiny cottage - the wood floors are still intact and gorgeous - and my place is anything but crude. Very vintage and very cool. No hoses between rooms in my case. There are two more like mine for rent and very affordable. Sometimes I think people are either too picky, or don't look hard enough to find places. There are TONS of affordable places for rent, you just gotta look for them.

I see the continued widening of 395 and those who want to put a huge expansive four lane running through Indy as the beginning of the end of another town's character. It ruined Big Pine, now, they want to do it to Indy and it will destroy it's character; it only facilitates their racing to Reno and Mammoth faster yet the locals don't seem to get this.

I'm all for educated and land/resources sensitive development, but it seems to be more few and far between, than the norm, and yes most of it is way out of my middle class league.

In Chalfant there are a couple of developers hell bent on putting in more housing tracts. One I know for certain will be million-plus dollar homes for the rich. In Chalfant of all places - it's a fricking dust bowl out there. I don't want the Owens Valley to become Fresno. We curse and swear at DWP yet folks, if it were'nt for them owning all this land....we'd be plastered with billboards and the place would be another Bakersfield or LA by now because some locals don't know how to manage what they have. I've seen plenty of ate-out pastures around here to know some local ranchers are anything but savvy about wise range management. It sucks. Its a catch 22. Yes we need more housing for 'poor folk'but with that comes other development...like strip malls. There are plans for a huge one behind Mammoth Airport. Ouch. There goes the neighborhood. I dunno - I'm not anti-development - I totally see Doug's point - yet I've yet to see sane planning come out of Inyo. Too much politics and good ol' boy syndrome going on here at times.

I work for a law enforcement agency. I see what is happening crime wise, most of which is not public. It is out of control. We are on the cusp of a seachange here and the locals still want a local guy with a nightstick patrolling the high school in Big Pine and knowing the kids by name - get real. They don't get it. They don't get it that many locals are the seed of the problem - their kids run wild and vandalize. Will development cure this? No. Only responsible parenting. The problems here are way deeper than just yes or no to building.....

Doug is right. The issues should be considered and deceided by those affected the most.Best of luck to the good folks of Lone Pine and hope all is settled soon and for the best.

In the record year for snow (2005/2006) only 30 inches were received by the end of November. I am hoping for the best for all the people who depend on it to make a living (plus all the flora and fauna).

Well, a final decision in this appeal was issued Monday, December 17 (much earlier than the original February 4, 2008 date mentioned above).

On appeal by Save our Round Valley Association, the case was reversed and sent back to the lower court with specific instructions (see relevant quoted portions below for specifics).

I have reproduced below, first, the two paragraphs of the decision's "introduction" for overview and context, and then below that, the single final paragraph that spells out the "conclusion" of the decision. The decision, in its entirety, including the 46 pages of facts and legal reasoning sandwiched between the Introduction and the Conclusion, can be found here.


CaT

Thank you very much for taking the time to stay on top of this and keep us informed about it!

You're welcome.

I work for one of the largest downtown law firms in Columbus, OH. I am also very much pro-environment, to say nothing of being an unabashed Whitney/Sierra lover and a California boy at heart (California is my home state, and I grew up in SoCal, including the Palmdale area, my first 28 years). So following this case has been of significant personal interest.

In the law firm I work for, as fate would have it, I was paired up to work for one of Columbus' top land use and real estate development attorneys, for whom I have now worked for 8+ years. I mention that less than exciting fact only to illustrate that I have more than a passing knowledge of real estate development and zoning issues. With that in mind, my personal .02 on this development project is that, if it continues to go forward, I hope a land swap can be worked out. A similar piece of land may not have precisely the same view of Whitney and the mountains, but it will have a view of Whitney and the mountains, and would likely only be a very short drive away from the currently proposed site -- I mean, anywhere in the Lone Pine area is going to have a great view of Whitney and the mountains!! If the developer is worried about splitting hairs between different Lone Pine views of Whitney and the mountains, he should come and live out here for a week...! So, build the project and get whatever limited local economic benefit might come from it; but build it in a location that doesn't permanently screw up a far less local, gorgeous, one-of-a-kind national treasure by the development's mere presence in such a sensitive and mostly pristine landscape.

OK ... I'm done.

CaT

I'm a card carrying liberal, a Sierra Club leader, and life-long conservationist and trained environmentalist. I mention that ONLY because I want to point out that I have credentials to talk about this.

Let's not parse words, the legal action has NOTHING to do with environmental impact. It has to do with using a legal tool to prevent someone from using their land. Ruin the view? Drive an extra five minutes, or, GASP, walk an extra 15 minutes. This is about taking someone's land away from them, without compensating them, because people are too lazy to walk or drive, at all.

In fact, the "proposed legal solution", which is a fiction....as it will be fought tooth and nail if anyone were to actually do it....is actually a bigger assault on the land.

The area of concern is ALREADY developed, with a number of things built in the area. So rather than concentrate the impact in this area that is NOT pristene and NOT untouched, someone has the bright idea to take away PUBLIC, PROTECTED land that is pristene, untouched, and undeveloped. This is commonly referred to in planning circles as "sprawl". Any fool that thinks they know how best for OTHER people to use their land, should look at where THEY live and see what THEY have done to destroy things.

I don't want my public land swapped and used. I don't want urban sprawl exported to rural areas.

The EIS will be done. It will pass legal muster. The development will be built. And the opposition will have exactly accomplished its goals: make the development more expensive; have a cause and win that it can point to, to solicit more money, and accumulate more power.

"I don't want urban sprawl exported to rural areas." Amen.


I wonder if it has ever been considered to make the Owens Valley a National Park ?

recommended reading:
Encounters with The Archdruid - John McPhee's book about Brower/Sierra Club and the impossible and endless task of dealing with developers
http://www.amazon.com/Encounters-Archdru...2921&sr=8-1

Desert Solitaire - Edward Abbey (Ranger at Arches Nat Park before paved roads) and his recommendation to make it HARDER for people to come. ie, DON"T BUILD IT SO THEY DON'T COME
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b/102-0070585-4419353?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=desert+solitaire&x=18&y=16

Harvey

I'm proud of you Ken. It seems to me that you have looked at this issue from both sides, and you came to the conclusion that people do have property rights; as long as they don't intrude on the rights of the rest of the population, then get out of the way! To bad all of the people can't set aside the emotional responses and look objectively at the issue. Thank you Ken.