LA Times article on Lone Pine
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:39 pmThanks for posting, Ernie.
I really hope they don't put in a giant development there. The real estate prices down there used to be higher than Bishop but not any more.
SummitPost.org
Climbing, hiking, mountaineering forum
https://www.summitpost.org/phpBB3/
LA Times article on Lone Pine
https://www.summitpost.org/phpBB3/la-times-article-on-lone-pine-t55150.html
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:39 pmPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:45 pmPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 12:34 amI might buy that lot for $59,000. Wait, I prefer Carl's Jr.
Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 2:03 amDougb wrote: It has no jobs...
So it's no different than a lot of the country
Seriously, I'd hang on to your real estate there as well.
Sure hope it never comes to pass that Whitney Portal Rd is lined with luxury condos.
Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 3:50 amSince there are really no jobs there and since the second home market wont' recover for years, many years, I have to laugh a little at the notion that everyone is scared of development there. Think we are safe on that one. You can buy finished high end developments in the best resort areas of the country for pennies on the dollar out of foreclosure. It'll take a while to work off the inventory. In the meantime, it'd be great if someone bought the ranch and held it for the next generation...
Re:
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:46 amDougb wrote:n/t
I always wonder about folks who post than delete. Weird mind games going on, I guess.
Over the years I have changed my views about the east side.
I now think that it's a good thing that the DWP owns about 80% of everything.
The DWP is nice and lets all of us roam over 99% of what they own.
If no DWP, the whole east side would be one huge city, farming town, with 90% of it fenced off and covered with "no trespassing" signs.
Like Dorango, Colorado.
and that would suck.
Late
Re: LA Times article on Lone Pine
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 6:53 amGuyzo, that's funny. I agree.
The "evil" Department of Water and Power has become the hero? Ha ha ha.
There is nothing worse than a gigantic mega-ranch which blocks all access.
There are places in other western states where there is NO ACCESS to certain mountain ranges for distances of 20 or 30 miles or more.
The West side of the Sierra has escaped this fate only because of the huge amount of National Forest buttressing it.
But then again, there is so much wild land to explore, we'll never see even a micro-percent of it. So why would anyone care if a bit of it gets blocked and/or developed?
And there's always the "long way around" for the truly desirous.
The "evil" Department of Water and Power has become the hero? Ha ha ha.
There is nothing worse than a gigantic mega-ranch which blocks all access.
There are places in other western states where there is NO ACCESS to certain mountain ranges for distances of 20 or 30 miles or more.
The West side of the Sierra has escaped this fate only because of the huge amount of National Forest buttressing it.
But then again, there is so much wild land to explore, we'll never see even a micro-percent of it. So why would anyone care if a bit of it gets blocked and/or developed?
And there's always the "long way around" for the truly desirous.
Re: LA Times article on Lone Pine
Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:05 pmJack, I guess your right.
Who would really care if access was blocked?
I mean, once you have climbed a mountain, you realize that they are pretty much all the same. 
Just like trees.
Late
GK
Who would really care if access was blocked?
I mean, once you have climbed a mountain, you realize that they are pretty much all the same.
Just like trees.
Late
GK