KTVZ

KTVZ

www.ktvz.com
Central Oregon's News Leader
Which side do you favor: Residents or Home builders?
KTVZ Asked by KTVZ
2,042 Votes

Which side do you favor: Residents or Home builders?

I support the homeowners.

37

I support the construction of new homes.

0

I support the homeowners.

33 Comments
Nels Peterson
4
Nels Peterson

Residents purchased their homes based on being on a golf course & paid golf course prices. They don't deserve to all of a sudden live in the middle of a residential neighborhood, with no golf course.

Reply
CMac
3
CMac

Community was built & sold as a golf community - look at the streets (17th Tee, Fairway Heights, etc. ) & how all of the homes were marketed. This should not change after many people have made their biggest (and most important life decision) and the same builder made lots of money off them

Reply
DeBacker Melis
1
DeBacker Melis

Have b lived in Bend over 40 years. Sad to say, Bend sucks, no it really does.....

Reply
DeBacker Melis
DeBacker Melis

Minus b + f

Ltk Man
1
Ltk Man

If the homeowners win their fight (and I hope they do), I would hope each and every one pay for membership at the golf course to insure it stays in business. It's only reasonable.

Reply
k san
1
k san

MOST DEFINITELY the homeowners!!! Those people spent hundreds of thousands of dollars for their homes to be in a golfing community, and no one should be able to just change the rules of the development w/o agreement from them. I suspect they will win their lawsuit, and I hope they do!!

Reply
Brad Livsey
0
Brad Livsey

I vote for the support of the owner of record of real estate owned in that development

Reply
Teri Stamos
0
Teri Stamos

I have lived on Awbrey Butte for 25 years. To think more housing will ruin what I have appreciated and taken advantage of (my whole family are golfers) just makes me angry. Bend needs this public golf course. Greed cannot continue being the driving force in the ruination of Bend.

Reply
Richard Dillard
0
Richard Dillard

If the builders had their way they would build homes so close you would have a hard time opening your door.

Reply
Ann Proctor
0
Ann Proctor

Residents bought their home because it was on a golf course. They deserve to keep that status!

Reply
Marily Sylva Badger
0
Marily Sylva Badger

This scenario has played itself out all over the country at the expense of the homeowner! Every money grubbing developer and builder is clambering over themselves to build MORE HOMES! Enough is enough already! How fast do you want to ruin what’s left of a once quiet little town?

Reply
DeBacker Melis
DeBacker Melis

Right! So sad!

Bob & Ranotta Walker
0
Bob & Ranotta Walker

The developers do whatever they want to in this town. Look at : Hidden Ridge, property at McClain and Shevlin, corner of !5th and Reed Makt, the corner of Halfway LN. and OB Riley . They CLEARCUT ALL NATIVE TREES TO PUT HOUSES IN. That doesn't have to be that way, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS!!

Reply
Susan Castle Agli
0
Susan Castle Agli

Since the beginning when River House or River Edge Investments sold homes or lots they were marketed as golf course homes. I do not think Rivers Edge Investment ever intended to try to sell the golf course as a golf course. Pahlisch announced they had purchased so everyone would assume it sold.

Reply
CampusWall Support
0
CampusWall Support

We believe the homeowners have a strong case as serious misrepresentations and deception occurred. We look forward to the homeowners prevailing in their suit to protect the community, the course, and the wildlife and beauty of River's Edge and Awbrey Butte.

Reply
Martie King
0
Martie King

They paid for a golf course view, they should get a golf course view. Otherwise, the builder/buyer should buy them out at top dollar rate.

Reply
Lloyd Corliss
0
Lloyd Corliss

I don't live on the course but I do use Mt. Washington Dr. and the impact of additional cars would be huge.

Reply
Rick Allen
0
Rick Allen

I support the home owners, eliminating the golf course would lower their property values and increase their immediate population. IT would certainly degrade their neighborhood.

Reply
Patti
0
Patti

These homes were advertised and sold as golf course community homes. There is a fair and reasonable expectation that this community will remain in tact. People purchased homes here precisely because of the golf course and because there would be no future development.

Reply
Bryce Lenzi
0
Bryce Lenzi

They have been selling homes for 2 years stating golf course views all the time knowing that the course is going away. Bait and switch comes to mind. Where is the environmental impact study and how about the traffic study. Mt Washington is already busy. I cry fault

Reply
Bend Teacher
0
Bend Teacher

Bend doesn't have a housing problem, it has a people problem.

Reply
MB Oregon
0
MB Oregon

Phalish hid their plans to develop this property when selling houses "in a golf community" to families. They promised golf, views, nature, and more. Now they want to destroy everything that they promised purely in the name of profit. Deceiving people in this way is disgraceful. Shame on Phalish.

Reply
George Robirts
0
George Robirts

Because im one myself. And i remember that one time a land owner next door wanted to turn his property into a cinder pit , so he had to petition all thevother land owners around them. And there is no cinder pit next door. The people had their say and it stands to this day.

Reply
Kurt Miller
0
Kurt Miller

Pahlisch sold homes with golf course views in a golf course community while knowingly negotiating to purchase the golf course and build home. That is fraudulent.

Reply
Andy Rykels
0
Andy Rykels

Open public recreation space is important for the community, especially one that is based on outdoor activity. Once they're gone they won't be coming back. .

Reply
Melissa Olson
0
Melissa Olson

This project will add 4,00 daily trips to Mount Washington. Creating a traffic nightmare.

Reply
Melissa Olson
Melissa Olson

Correction 4,000 daily trips on Mt Washington

Bill Pitcher
0
Bill Pitcher

To hold developers and the City to what they represented to buyers years ago, and because their cosmetic solutions to middle housing will result in just the most expensive middle housing in Central Oregon at the cost of destroying Rivers Edge.

Reply
lstanislowski@yahoo.com
0
lstanislowski@yahoo.com

This project has been in planning stages much longer than the developer or Pahlisch Homes cares to admit. Read the CCRs for Majestic Ridge.

Reply
Fred Guajardo
0
Fred Guajardo

If we get rid of recreation areas and build and pave these areas we will ruin our beautiful city

Reply
Kenneth Emmrich
0
Kenneth Emmrich

The homeowners that border the golf course have a legal right to protect the value of their properties. We'll see if Palich Homes can bribe the right Officials to pull off another "Profit Only" subdivision similar to what Brooks Resources has done for decades.

Reply
Rick Martinson
0
Rick Martinson

Pahlish doesn't support Bend. They only support the opportunity to make money at the expense of our quality of life. Rampant development for the sake of the developer needs to end.

Reply
JB 1105
0
JB 1105

We're in the River Edge area, and when we heard about the proposed sale of the golf course and the insane amount of homes being proposed for the land we were shocked. The beauty of living here is the balance of open spaces to homes. If developers are able to cram in homes, like is done in California

Reply
JB 1105
JB 1105

Then we all suffer.

I support the construction of new homes.

0 Comment
No one has commented yet
Should there be better vetting of candidates and reporting in the voters pamphlet?

Should there be better vetting of candidates and reporting in the voters pamphlet?

Yes

2

No

0

Yes

2 Comments
Lisa York
0
Lisa York

EVERYTHING submitted by the candidates for inclusion in the voter's pamphlet should be thoroughly vetted!!!

Reply
Marie Gilbert
0
Marie Gilbert

Because he is an elected official and should be 100% honest.

Reply

No

0 Comment
No one has commented yet
Should a judge block the May first closure of China Hat road?
KTVZ Asked by KTVZ
1,004 Votes

Should a judge block the May first closure of China Hat road?

YES

3

NO

21

YES

3 Comments
Louis Vaday
0
Louis Vaday

This made an error! I voted NO and it recorded yes! They shouldn't {and ALL} shouldn't be allowed on all public land because they do not follow rules! Dumping garbage, open flames during fire season, over extending time stay, etc. And now because of them our insurance is going up and land value goin

Reply
Brad Hunter
0
Brad Hunter

Because they are steam rolling the homeless

Reply

NO

21 Comments
Tammy Salka
1
Tammy Salka

The homeless are not residents, they are squatters!

Reply
Kayla Sulak
1
Kayla Sulak

These people have had MONTHS of notice. Nobody ever told them it's acceptable to post up long-term there, so they shouldn't have planted their belongings out there if they have no way to move it. This sets a bad precedent if they're allowed to stay.

Reply
Richard Williams
1
Richard Williams

I can no longer use this area of public land for fear of walking into a homeless camp or being attacked by their "pets". This land is for all of us to use, not just the homeless.

Reply
Joanna Lee
1
Joanna Lee

Safety should be the biggest concern here. If these people are homeless, they can travel to another area to reside. Forest service doesn't always implement preventative measures. So this being one of the times they do. Its important to make sure it happens. Before there is anymore devastating fires.

Reply
Shane Murray
1
Shane Murray

The homeless have trashed the forest out there. It makes me sick

Reply
Greg Deadbolt Leach
1
Greg Deadbolt Leach

Time to move these people to the Attorneys and Judges front lawns!!!

Reply
Karen Thrower
1
Karen Thrower

The China Hat area has been badly damaged and disrespected by campers.

Reply
Jeannie H.
1
Jeannie H.

How is this their "home"? Have they paid property tax like the rest of us? How is this state even justifying this?!?!

Reply
Nancy
1
Nancy

They’ve had plenty of time to move. Why can the homeless trash/burn our beautiful forest? Tax paying citizens are only allowed to camp for 14 days! What about the homeowners rights near China Hat, they need to feel safe in their own community! This has gone on way too long and I’m surprised!

Reply
Lynn Marie Leehmann
1
Lynn Marie Leehmann

If you look at the Federal Regulations for camping on Federal land it states only 14 days. These people have over stated their welcome, they need to go and they have known about this for at least six months.

Reply
Brad Aimone
1
Brad Aimone

It is ironic the Bend Equity Group has filed a lawsuit to block the closure. Where is the indignation for the horrible environmental damage done by these campers who’ve violated the USFS long standing limit of a 14 day stay in a primitive camp site?

Reply
Nancy Roquero
1
Nancy Roquero

This has gone on too long. The forests near Woodside community and other neighborhoods need fire protection and protection from the homeless with guns and vicious dogs and the garbage left behind. The homeless have had plenty of notice.

Reply
Lisa York
1
Lisa York

the USFS has been planning this burn since Oct 2019... more than enough time for the homeless/advocacy groups to come up with a plan to move...

Reply
Debbie Boyd
1
Debbie Boyd

This has been going on for way too long & it is ridiculous to postpone as they have known this needs to be done. The forest needs to be protected & these do gooders are too late to the game & so much time & money spent on homeless with ZERO results. We need DOGE. for Oregon!

Reply
Marie Gilbert
0
Marie Gilbert

We live near China Hat and the fear of fire and crime is constant. Plus the forest is being destroyed by illegal cutting of trees, garbage and toxins

Reply
Bendlover
0
Bendlover

I haven't felt safe hiking or biking there for years due to the aggressive homeless people out there.

Reply
Pam
0
Pam

We need to ensure that the lands are managed for the enjoyment/needs of all peoples, not a select few

Reply
pamcuny
0
pamcuny

I worry every year WHO is in the woods starting fires, whether deliberate or unintentional consequences…

Reply
Jeff Sanders
0
Jeff Sanders

I live near China Hat and used to love going out the with my dog. Once weapons started be pulled on people that stopped. I want my forest back. Good riddance to the whole lot. Don't ever come back.

Reply
Latterdaysaint
0
Latterdaysaint

There needs to be more homeless shelters in the city!

Reply
Kim Kahl
0
Kim Kahl

The danger of fire starting in this area is incredibly high and impacts large subdivisions. It is mandatory to close this area for the safety of all. This should not be a place for camping to be allowed as it has been.

Reply

We use cookies to ensure you get the best possible experience on our website. Learn more OK, GOT IT