Some more details on Kingston Subdivision

By Deb Murphy

Few details are available on the Kingston Subdivision, the subject of a public hearing at Monday’s Bishop City Council meeting.


The 15-home development is planned for the 2.75-acre parcel now occupied by Bishop Nursery on Home Street. The only specifics available are outlined on the tentative tract map showing a single street, 42-feet wide, running west off Home Street with lots, ranging from 5,100 to 8,300 square feet. The proposed grading and utility plan includes pad sizes of 4,184.3-square feet on each lot. That pad size does not mean the homes will be that size according to Planning Director Gary Schley.

The Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, required by the California Environmental Quality Act, is just that, Schley said, “a draft.” “A determination (of no impact) has not been made yet,” he said. The primary mitigation included in the document is a requirement that developer, Bob Kingston of Santa Barbara, apply for a conditional use permit “setting aside right of way and roadway design requirements per Bishop Municipal Code.”

A second public hearing will be held at the City Council’s Aug. 10 meeting with Aug. 15 the deadline for written comments. “We will address all the comments made,” Schley said “and incorporate then, if possible,” in the environmental documents. The City Council will make the final determination.


, , , ,

15 Responses to Some more details on Kingston Subdivision

  1. High Water July 20, 2015 at 1:37 pm #

    Kingston Subdivision. Is that a play on words?
    I never, ever would have thought that cramming 15 homes (apartments) on less than 3 acres would be called a SUBDIVISION

    California dreamin where subdivisions are in reality, apartments for low income folks some u.s. citizens, most are not(l illegally!)

    California dreaming where subdivisions are created, followed by zero job creation.

    California dreaming where Bishop continues population growth and employers and employees stays the same.
    21 century gold rush!!!! Future is BRIGHT

    • RandyKeller July 21, 2015 at 8:52 am #

      If California Dreaming means we continue to spread out with half acre lots for everybody and continue to expand and expand and expand by paving over the nature we all need for life support, I’d say you’re having a nightmare.

    • What? July 21, 2015 at 11:02 am #

      Your comment does not even make sense.

      “Subdivision” refers to a subdivision of land, for example, into 15 lots. What do you think subdivision means? Each lot is between 5,000 and 8,000 sf, which is approximately similar to all the other properties in the neighborhood ( a little smaller on the 5,000 sf side).

      What illegal immigrants will be able to buy these single family residences on 5,000 sf lots? No one is talking about apartments. These will most likely be homes for middle income families.

      Building the homes will create lots of jobs in our community, and may allow for entrepreneurs to relocate to our area.

      Finally, Bishop has seen practically zero population growth in 30 years, particularly in comparison to everywhere else in the state. Even with this project, let’s say 4 people per family, it would add 60 people, which would add ~1% population growth to a town of 4,000 people.

      I’m not advocating for or against the project, but let’s at least have a meaningful dialogue about it. I will admit that this modest growth in our community may be a good thing for increasing our dearth of housing (that will allow for younger families to live here), and frankly, it’s better that development occur within the mostly already developed area than encourage sprawl. Since change is the only thing that is inevitable in the world, what change would you like to see in Bishop?

      On that note – @City of Bishop, will the developer be providing Developer impact fees for schools/parks/utilities/public art/other? What are the benefits to the community? Will contractors and materials be provided by local businesses, and can that be a requirement of approval?

      • High Water July 21, 2015 at 5:52 pm #

        Thanks for questioning my post. Yes, technically your correct it is being subdivdived. My point is when I hear the word subdivision I immediately think of that heavy synthesized driven classic song by Rush called’ Subdivisions’ lol! the song was about the cookie cutter vanilla boring geometric borders of this idea of giving people something different than the city. a nice size lot with houses that look alike everyon has a square backyard , you know the suburbs!

        Why can’t they just call this what it really is?
        An apartment complex or how bout condos or townhouses? 15 homes on 2.75 acres! Really? The Kingston subdivision? Lol!
        Just saying!
        And my other point is what housing crisis?
        Is there a homeless problem here I didn’t know about? If everyone in Bishop has a roof to sleep under tonite and the homeless shelters are are turning folks away where’s the crisis?
        Here’s the truth! This is a tax grab by the city! We want are share! Let’s shove as many units we can on every available piece of property in our constrained city limits . since will never ever have a new business or industry locate to our area. let’s get creative to increase our tax Revenue! Lots of healthy retirement packages coming down the pike for our employees. Sorry to those who hate to hear that. It is a fact!
        If people stopped paying taxes govt . employees would not get paid! Right?
        And yes we would lose are services also….
        Blah blah yada yada! But you know what I mean. This is not directed at you Mr. What!
        Mean no disrespect to any of you who will read this. But I do have mucho problems with govt. From local all the way to the worlds largest thieves in Washington D.C.
        Its out of control and when it says it has your best interest at heart. but trust me you! It most certainly does not.

        And if this is not true please anyone who can set me straight please do. I will gladly apologize if I’m wrong.

        • What? July 22, 2015 at 7:50 am #

          I’m sorry, I just have to point out a couple more technical corrections.

          They aren’t building townhouses or apartments. The proposed density is well within the bell-curve of single family housing, and as I said previously, is approximately similar to the properties on Rome, Sierra and Yaney. The proposed density is about 6.5 units/acre. The average density of townhouses is about 15 units/acre, or more than twice what is being proposed.

          Secondly, you are correct, we do not have a huge homeless population. What we do have is a huge imbalance between our well-funded public sector retiree population and young families trying to buy homes. There just isn’t really any new housing stock in Bishop, nor is there much land or opportunity to develop it, courtesy of LADWP. We also have a hard time attracting young job creators or skilled employees, because there isn’t much housing, and the housing we do have is pretty expensive for what it is in comparison to other places. In short, we don’t have a well balanced economy or demographics, and like it or not, housing is part of a well-balanced community diet.

          Finally, will the City get taxes from this? Yes. The taxes will go, in part, to cover the services required by the slight increase in population, in addition to providing services we already receive, like sewer, water, airports, libraries and schools.

          If you want to stand behind your libertarian philosophy that there shouldn’t be any government, then back it up with: “this development is proposed on private property, therefore, the developer should be able to do whatever he wants on his private property.”

  2. NO H20 July 20, 2015 at 10:41 pm #

    “No water” for homes with water meters,
    Plenty of water for new homes and new water meters..

  3. Lorijellybean July 21, 2015 at 10:27 am #

    Coming from an “Affordable Housing” career background it’s interesting to watch “Smart Growth” happening in Bishop, and so rapidly.
    The reactions are interesting. It would seem that the consensus wants this. Curious to watch how it will pan out. (Pass the popcorn)

  4. High Water July 22, 2015 at 4:30 am #

    Lorijellybean a former “affordable housing” employee said pass the popcorn.
    Told ya! Quit hatin on HighWater so much.

    Quit shootin the messenger. I’m not the bad guy! When 1/3 of a country (mexico) have migrated here (illegally ) it is a fact , and I shouldn’t have be careful so no ones feelings are hurt.

    Subsidized housing for illegals! Not good! Not good! Kingston subdivision. Lol! To the person with the name what. Mr. What now do understand what my previous post meant? I know the dictionary version of the word subdivision. My question to you is can you read between the lines? Wish you well on that .

    TODAY WE USE SUBDIVISIONS, AND SANCTUARY CITIES. california dreaming, right Randy Keller? I don’t mean the entire country in pavement. Dont let your govt. Get away with telling us whatever they want. A founding father, i can’t remember which one, said QUESTION EVERYTHING!!! I BEG YOU PLEASE QUESTION EVERYTHING. He knew how this game would play out. Question Everything.
    Cause its always always a lie. That’s what they do . ain’t lying ain’t trying.

    • Low-Inyo July 23, 2015 at 6:06 am #

      High Water….Your post sounds like something Donald Trump would rant about….

    • Lorijellybean July 26, 2015 at 3:45 pm #

      I wasn’t just a mere “employee”, I was in charge of multi-million dollar projects.
      Also, I never said this was gonna be low-income housing, I said I recognized “Smart Growth” happening in Bishop, and my former career gives me a unique insight to see that.
      Don’t put words in my mouth.
      BTW, the have their “consensus” just like I said they would. The project is moving forward.

  5. What? July 22, 2015 at 12:59 pm #

    Okay, you baited me and I just can’t resist. Truthfully, I’m ashamed of myself.

    @High Water – you understand the Government isn’t the developer of the project, right?

  6. Trouble July 22, 2015 at 1:49 pm #

    High Water , where did you get th Jay one third Mexico now lives here. It’s less then 8 percent.

    • High Water July 24, 2015 at 7:23 pm #

      Trouble- govt. Says 11 to 12 million are here illegally. Just like unemployment numbers, the govt never gives the correct number. I have read that its more like 20 million . mexico population is around 100 million. Anyway you look at it, its a big percentage. Our govt made laws on immigration. Were a nation of laws if there here illegally then its illegal. Right?
      Look if I was poor and Mexican and I knew if I could get to america and get a debt card and a drivers license, IM GONE! who wouldn’t right?

      • Trouble July 26, 2015 at 6:47 am #

        There is over a hundred and thirty million people in Mexico and not all illegals are from Mexico. Anyway, Did you know that over three fourths of the quote ” illegals” that come here enter totally legally. Bye saying they are coming here on vacation or a work visa”s?

  7. Trouble July 22, 2015 at 1:49 pm #



Leave a Reply

KSRW · 1280 N. Main St. Suite J · Bishop, CA 93514 · 760-873-5329
Positive Projections Web Design