Land Battle Splits Residents of Resort Town

Residents of this Eastern Sierra resort town are used to walking their dogs and riding their bikes across 25 thickly forested acres owned by the U.S. Forest Service in the middle of town.

Hikers have carved dirt trails through the pine trees and grassy glades known as the Shady Rest tract. But now the land has become the object of an intense tug of war over plans to build 172 units of affordable housing on the last large patch of open space left in the town’s central area.

Some locals have formed a preservation group called Heart of Mammoth to try to keep much of the Shady Rest tract as is. Residents are sharply divided over the issue, with some backing the town’s development plan and others supporting the drive to preserve the forest.

The dispute over the tract fits into a larger debate between growth and no-growth advocates and others here over the future evolution of the town.

“When you start driving into town, one of the things you notice are the trees,” said Pat Savage, a member of the preservation group. “It’s a magnificent natural setting. With the town’s current plan, a good part of that townscape will be gone.

“People have been using that parcel, taking walks with their dogs, bird-watching, picnicking. To me, it’s just poor land use and poor planning.”

But the majority of the five-member Town Council that advocates the housing plan said that building on the acreage is the only feasible way for the town to address its housing needs and satisfy state housing requirements. The debate has turned acrimonious at times, with advocates of the plan attributing some opposition to racism and opponents accusing the town government of mismanagement. The council is split 3 to 2 over the issue.

“We’ve designated that site for affordable housing because we feel there is a segment of our housing market here that we’re seriously missing, housing for families at the entry level,” said Town Council member Kathy Cage. “That is what the Shady Rest housing project is meant to address.”

Under the town’s plan, Mammoth Lakes developer Bob Tanner would trade land that he owns--or would acquire--to the Forest Service for the Shady Rest parcel, where he would build 52 houses and 120 apartments in a series of three-story buildings. Tanner would receive tax credit financing and federal grants to develop the moderate- to low-cost housing. A park would be located on the remaining seven acres.

The Forest Service is eager to swap the parcel inside the town limits for privately owned land in the Golden Trout Wilderness and other environmentally sensitive acreage within national forests.

Tanner, who has lived in the area for 47 years and owns Red’s Meadow resort and nearby horse pack stations, said the forested acreage is not essential to residents because the town is surrounded by vast areas of national forest.

“Bishop and Mammoth are two cities that have as much public land surrounding them as anywhere in 49 states,” he said, referring to the nearby Eastern Sierra town. “Only Alaska has more public open space around than what these two towns enjoy. To say that Shady Rest is so vital to their survival and the only pristine place--how greedy are they?”

The preservation group has put together an alternate plan for the property in an initiative that is headed for the November ballot. Under the plan, 172 units of affordable housing would be built on only eight acres, leaving the remaining 17 acres as open space. The group has held a fund-raising dinner and a parking lot sale and has sold raffle tickets to raise money for the initiative.

“We’re trying to be reasonable and yet assure the community of a good project,” Savage said. “Rather than people looking out and seeing a sea of asphalt, we’re trying to minimize that with clustered housing and underground parking.

But town and Forest Service officials insist that the initiative plan is unworkable and could never be built. “All of the things thrown in there make it just about an unachievable project,” said Thom Heller, a Forest Service official.

A previous initiative put together by the group that would have preserved the entire property was struck down in court. Tanner also could attempt to derail this initiative with legal action.

“There’s a lot of division,” said Town Council member David Watson, who favors the development plan. “The issue has created a coalition between people who authentically would like to see it be left as open space and have no other agenda, and people who would be loosely characterized as anti-growth. . . .

“Then there’s a darker element that has become concerned about the rapid rise of the Hispanic population in town. There has been testimony right in front of [the] council which has been racist in nature.

“There [also] is a fear that snowboarders, who are predominantly white and have a skinhead element to them, will move into the affordable housing,” Watson said. “There actually has been a kind of snowboard-skinhead element in town this last year that has created disruption for police in some of the bars.”

Tanner said previous plans for affordable housing developments at several other sites in Mammoth have been abandoned. A 1980s plan to develop low-cost housing at another site was blocked when a developer with a neighboring project objected, he said.

Town officials said that moderate- to low-cost housing would become increasingly important as the town expands commercially. Plans are in the works for the construction of three or four large resort hotels to be surrounded by shops and restaurants, an expansion at Mammoth Mountain Ski Area, and the possible addition of a second ski resort in the town.

Those commercial developments would greatly increase the number of service workers and other employees in town, who would be unable to find affordable housing here unless it is available.