Saturday, August 14, 2004

Citizens' Advisory Committee Meeting Report

The following is reprinted here with the permission of the Mammoth Times:

Wednesday, August 11, 2004 11:12 AM PDT

June Lake Advocates State Their Case?
"We don't want to be like Mammoth!"

By Wally Hofmann
Managing Editor

It's a good thing the June Lake fire marshal stayed home from the Citizen's Advisory Council (CAC) meeting last week. If these anti-development meetings get any more people they're going to have to start building bigger places to meet.

"We don't want to be like Mammoth," was the chorus from the June Lake Community Center. The lyrics would have received a standing ovation, but that half the audience was already standing in the back.

"We're not tree-huggers, NIMBYs, or anti-development whackos," said Scott Davis, president and/or board member of the June Lake Advocates (JLA). "We want development done in an environmentally-sensitive manner and a development that is consistent with the General Plan and the community."

Davis was making a 10-minute presentation that laid out the position of the local advocates who said they represented 400-plus June Lake residents who are demanding compliance with June Lake's Area Plan with Intrawest's "Rodeo Grounds Specific Plans" to build a 900-unit, 90-acre resort across from June Lake Mountain Area. The project includes single-family units, duplexes, fourplexes, and the option for secondary, or "mother-in-law" units. In addition, the project could include up to 50,000 square feet of commercial space and a gondola crossing Hwy 158. The most contentious topic is the potential of 90-foot structures and a claimed density of 2,610 people.

The project is the vision of Intrawest, developers of The Village at Mammoth Lakes.

Representatives of JLA say they sent out 900 surveys asking June Lake homeowners, basically: Do you agree with Intrawest's plans for development in June Lake?

The JLA received back about 435 replies. About 400 rejected Intrawest's plans, although it's not clear what details the respondents were rejecting. Other than heights and densities, specifics of the plan were not provided to respondents. However, it was clear from the survey's numbers, and Davis' comments followed by rounds of supportive applause, that he represents a collection of concerns about how development in June Lake could change the face of life in an undesirable way.

Danny Roberts, the June Lake CAC chairman for more than a decade, reminded the audience that Intrawest's plan was only a wish list, and that it was much too early to be alarmed.

"All we want know," asked longtime resident and JLA board member Igor Vorobyoff, "is, Will you represent the wishes of a majority of June Lake residents?"

At first, the answer was indirect, yet determined. "Of course, it is my job to be responsive," Roberts said.

CAC board member Vicki McGee-Bauer tried to add clarity, saying, "We come to these meetings day-in and day-out to listen to the community. Of course we'll represent you. And if the community's wishes and (Intrawest's) plan are compatible, there won't be a problem."

"The (June Lake 2010: June Lake Area) plan already represents the community after many hours of work over a long period of time," Roberts added. Indeed, the June Lake 2010 Plan represents more than 16 years of residents developing guidelines for future land use.

Scott Burns, Mono County Community Development Director, explained to the crowd that the planning process for this project could take more than a year. "First, Intrawest submits an application, then makes a sizable deposit, and then the County hires consultants to study the application," Burns said. "Then an Environmental Impact Report, Environmental Assessment, and a draft plan will be prepared, followed by a two-month public review. Written comments will be accepted and the consultants will be asked to respond to these comments in writing. A final draft will be published, the CAC will function as a design review board to insure that the proposal complies with the June Lake Design Guidelines, and then the Planning Commission will make their recommendation to the (Mono County) Supervisors to either adopt, adopt with changes, or not adopt."

Burns added that the Supervisors will hold at least one public hearing, as well.

He also explained that the CAC is simply responsible for advising the Planning Commission. "They're job is to be sure that the proposed plans are, indeed, in compliance with the June Lake Area Plan."

Magee-Bauer echoed Burns' sentiments, saying, "It's all very early still. All we've done is to scope the plan."

As with other area plans, all of the policies are not spelled out definitively, there is room for variances. The height limit can be increased with a Use Permit, which in Mono County can, and has, allowed buildings up to 60-foot heights. Heights beyond the 35-foot limit will need to be mitigated, however, to reduce the visual impacts.

Pam Rake, a longtime June Lake resident, one of nearly 500 residents who didn't return the Advocate's survey, said she disagreed with it. Rake, who's husband Don Rake is a former Supervisor, said, "I want to comment when Intrawest has a more specific plan of what they want to build, not a wish list."

Down-canyon Double Eagle Resort owner and CAC board member Ron Black held up a copy of the June Lake Area Plan and said he too would study Intrawest's proposals in the light of the plan. "But we haven't heard all the evidence," he said.

Dwight Hoelscher repeated those words as he left the standing-room-only building. Hoelscher, a 22-year June Lake second homeowner makes the trek to this sleepy "Diamond in the Sierra" resort about a dozen times a year for a cool respite from his Rancho Mirage residence near Palm Desert.

"It doesn't look like much is going to be accomplished here tonight," he said in the starlit parking lot. A Mono County sheriff officer recognized the part-time local. "What kinda trouble you causing, Dwight!" said the green clad officer. The good- natured ribbing and clear air outside were a welcome relief to the tensions and contentious air inside.

"There are lots of people moving here from Mammoth because they're tired of the congestion," Hoelscher added. "I think we should buy the land and give it back to the US Forest Service."

Although some June Lake Advocates claimed that rejection of Intrawest's plans (for a 90-foot limit and 2,610 density numbers) was a unanimous refrain, there were those at the meeting who, publicly and privately, voiced their concerns that the Advocates were getting too confrontational, too fast.

"Hiring lawyers already? Give me a break! Have we sat down with Intrawest and told them, specifically, what we even want?" asked one resident who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "I didn't return the survey because I don't want to create friction between my family and my neighbors. And more residents didn't return the survey than those who did? What does that say? I love this town just as much as anyone here, but not everyone here has the same idea of what should happen in June Lake. We're all different. I don't like the idea of a group going off like this? we should be more patient, learn what Intrawest is asking for, and then make our wishes known."

At the end of the night, it became increasingly clear that both groups, or the many viewpoints represented, wanted the same thing: A community that maintained June Lake's unique character.

Intrawest's proposed Rodeo Grounds Specific Plan is available for review on the Mono County web site: www.MonoCounty.ca.gov (see Community Development Department/Planning Division). Larry K. Johnston and Burns of the Mono County Planning Department are both familiar with the project.

The June Lake Advocates web site is: www.JuneLakeAdvocates.org.

Copies of Intrawest's proposal may also be purchased for $12 at the Mono County Planning Division, 437 Old Mammoth Rd., Suite P, Mammoth Lakes, CA 93546, or phone (760) 924-1800. -MT

Wally Hofmann
Managing Editor, Mammoth Times
Sierra Center Mall, 2nd Floor
452 Old Mammoth Road
Box 3929, Mammoth Lakes, CA 93546
760.934.3929 w
760.934.3951 f
760.937.3929 c
Wally@MammothTimes.com

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home