Talk:Mountain House, California

California: San Francisco Bay Area Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	San Francisco Bay Area portal This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in California may be able to help!

The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Comment

can we get a picture of the actual town?Cholga^talK! 01:24, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New York Times, 11/11/2008 - features Mountain House: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/11/business/11home.html?hp —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.80.226.125 (talk) 14:33, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Feature on French Canadian Television

This community was recently featured on the program "Une heure sur le Terre" on Télévision Radio-Canada as a part of a series on the economic meltdown in California. It looked pretty bleak. The report is available on the network's website (in French only), but interviews are conducted in English.--Larry G (talk) 03:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Predicted development, advertisementlike tone, and "future"

About the appearance of flowery, adlike statements and future-predicting content in this article, and why I moved the page from "Future Mountain House Community" back to "Mountain House, California":

Mountain House is a place in existence today. It has houses, people, and things. It is not a "future community." Wikipedia does not talk about the "future," as what's in the future does not exist today. A major plan, something like legislation, that would affect the future may be notable enough to have a WP page. Community development plans are not notable in that way. Thousands of communities all over the place have such plans. They are usually not notable. And Mountain House's is only notable in the context of the "Mountain House, California" page that already exists. And even then, the Mountain House plan should not be treated as the "future," because the plan could change. It would suffice perfectly well to say that the plan calls for X number of houses, Y acres of commercial development, Z this and that, and spend a paragraph or two on the plan. Beyond that, the article needs to stay limited to a description of what is there right now and its history, and completely omit all this future nonsense that hasn't come true yet. This is to say nothing of the flagrant advertisement-like tone of much of the writing that's been appearing on this page. See WP:NOTCRYSTAL and WP:NOTADVERTISING -- this page is here neither for peering into the future nor for advertising this lovely place called Mountain House. Michael Patrick (talk) 18:39, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

how is that copyright? (Quentinwllcs (talk) 16:41, 25 October 2009 (UTC)).[reply]

Copyright problem removed

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://www.ci.mountainhouse.ca.us/community-profile.asp and http://www.ci.mountainhouse.ca.us/history.asp. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. MLauba (talk) 10:24, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

cleanup

how does article need to be cleanup eveything seem fine on here new refs were added (Las vegas kid (talk) 16:13, 21 July 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Proposed edits

Edits include the addition of new residential and school construction. My previous edit attempts had been reverted and deemed non neutral, so below are my updated proposed changes.

Add sentence to end of lead paragraph: "In 2013, Mountain House is experiencing economic recovery." http://www.builderonline.com/master-planned-communities/long-climb-pays-off-for-builders-at-nocals-mountain-house.aspx

Revise and add text after third sentence under Mountain House plan: "Today’s Mountain House includes the established villages of Altamont, Bethany and Wicklund and the developing fourth village of Questa. Completed construction through the end of 2012 brings to approximately 3,500 the total number of homes in Mountain House. Some 15,500 households or approximately 40,000 people are anticipated when Mountain House is fully completed. Also anticipated are onsite jobs, to be generated by a future business park. Planned Village Centers and a Town Center will provide shopping and other services to Mountain House residents. Construction at Mountain House began in 2001, but expansion stopped because of the [late 2000s economic recession]]. Development activity through 2011 and 2012 has accelerated. Questa has six neighborhoods in various stages of construction and new home sales, and three additional neighborhoods scheduled for 2013 openings. Expansion of existing neighborhoods is planned in the village of Altamont. Developer Shea Mountain House, LLC also plans a 2013 start of the fifth village, not yet named. Also completed is Questa’s K-6 school and a village park. Under construction is Mountain House High School, slated to open for the 2014-2015 academic year, to serve students throughout Mountain House. All schools are part of Lammersville Unified School District."

Add the following to the Notable dates section: "July 2012 – Mountain House High School breaks ground January 2013 — New development announced for Questa and Altamont; 5th village start announced"

Add the following to Media section: "San Francisco is the major media market for Mountain House, with television and radio; local online media includes social media avenues devoted to Mountain House residents."

Revise second paragraph under Financial downturn section: "CalPERS, the California Public Employee Retirement System, is the owner of large portions of the Mountain House community through Shea Mountain House, LLC. Shea Homes/Northern California manages the development on behalf of CalPERS. CalPERS made its investment in Mountain House in 2005 through 2008, purchasing land on which to develop approximately 9,000 residential lots from Trimark Communities LLC. By May 2010, the $1.12B investment by CalPERS had been reduced to 18% of that figure: $200M.[13]Though home values dropped significantly from their peak in mid 2005 and subsequent recession of 2008 – 2010, CalPERS determined that it would hold onto the investment in Mountain House, counting on a recovery of the housing market."

Add section after Financial downturn section: "Economic Recovery: An uptick in economic performance at Mountain House was noted September 2011, by Big Builder, a trade magazine of major land and housing development published by Hanley-Wood. http://www.builderonline.com/big-builder/cover-story--the-road-goes-on.aspx This has been followed by the introduction of four additional neighborhoods in Questa, the 4th village; and by the expansion of two existing neighborhoods at Questa. Mountain House development for 2013 is also planned to include the start of the 5th village." Roxstar245 (talk) 05:32, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see a few non-neutral suggestions here, and some text that is not supported by published sources. You wish to cite the article "Long Climb Pays Off for Builders at NoCal’s Mountain House" (April 2012, Big Builder) but you only the the reader one positive conclusion. The article is more nuanced than that. You did not suggest we include the facts about how some of the existing Mountain House tract layout is seen as "obsolete" by Geoff Le Plastrier, president of LDC Advisors, adviser to CalPERS. You did not suggest that we tell the reader there was little retail business and few jobs in April 2012 when the article was written. Adam Hieb, VP of Shea Homes, said that the marketing of Mountain House promised a lot but did not deliver.

Your bit about 3500 homes completed is unsupported by a reference. The rest of that paragraph is marketing conjecture, and inappropriate for the encyclopedia.

The January 2013 "new development" announcement is not referenced.

The bit about major media and social media is unreferenced.

Your suggested sentence "Shea Homes/Northern California manages the development on behalf of CalPERS" needs to be trimmed down to "Shea Homes manages the development on behalf of CalPERS." The "Northern California" bit is not in the cited source. As well, your revision of the paragraph about CalPERS ignores the part about how CalPERS thought they were buying a sure thing in 2005 but were caught in the downturn.

You wish to cite the article "Cover Story: The Road Goes On" (December 2011, Big Builder) but you ignore the negative things it has to say. For instance, it says there's no golf course or supermarket. It says that the master plan for Mountain House "is arguably not only out of date but out of synch with the realities of the post-housing crash world." The article points out that, even though there is a desire to rewrite the master plan, major parts of it are already instituted and not flexible to change. It says that CalPERS had to pay for an entire elementary school to get the ball rolling on its plan to attract more residents.

I think that this article needs objective prose, not marketing agency prose. Binksternet (talk) 07:47, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1. Your issues with the Big Builder article "Long Climb Pays Off for Builders at NoCal’s Mountain House" (April 2012, Big Builder) - This reference article from Big Builder contains many positive assertions as well as the negative, which I did not include in the proposed new content. Examples include: Le Plastrier indicates a high degree of flexibility on semi-finished and raw land; Le Plastrier has received inquiries from multiple builders interested in building in Mountain House; Hieb and Le Plastrier think the future of Mountain House’s success depends on CalPERS’ willingness to invest further in the project; residents worked together to maintain the yards of foreclosed homes during the recession to keep the community looking well-kept; and Shea Homes never seriously considered exiting the project because of their significant infrastructure investment. The main points conveyed in this article are that the 2008 housing crash did indeed hit this community very hard, and that conditions have improved measurably since that time. Is the link to the entire discussion contained in this piece insufficient, i.e. should I add more exact content from the article in the body copy, both negative and positive? If yes, how much is enough? Must we go line by line through the entire piece to ensure each positive and negative nuance is included?

2. My bit about the 3500 homes - http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2013/03/mountain-house-a-bay-area-community.html?page=4. Household, jobs and town/village center information can be found in the last updated Mountain House Plan here, Chapter 3/Land Use, pages 3.2 and 3.12 - http://www.sjgov.org/commdev/cgi-bin/cdyn.exe?grp=planning&htm=mhmasterplan. 2013 expansion - I cannot find a published source for this, so I will omit until I can find something.

3. January 2013 new development - I can't find a published source for this, so I will omit.

4. My bit about major media and social media. Major media - Mountain House is actually within both San Francisco's and Sacramento's media markets, http://transition.fcc.gov/dtv/markets/maps_current/San_Francisco-Oakland-San_Jose_CA.pdf and http://transition.fcc.gov/dtv/markets/maps_current/Sacramento-Stockton-Modesto_CA.pdf. Social media connections for Mountain House residents include Facebook, Twitter, You Tube and Pinterest, via http://www.mountainhouseliving.com. Also accessed through this site are additional community links, such as the Lammersville School District, the Community Services District and the Mountain House Community Forum http://mhvillages.com/forum/default.asp, used by residents and guest visitors for event information, club calendars and discussions.

5. Shea Homes Northern California vs. Shea Homes. Yes, the reference does not include Northern California so I will omit it. My revisions to the CalPERS paragraph is not really all that different from what is already published.

6. As with the other Big Builder reference, I can take this article section by section and add both negative and positive nuance. Or, I can include this more current reference, and add information such as long commutes and the debate about Mountain House as an East Bay community: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2013/03/mountain-house-a-bay-area-community.html Roxstar245 (talk) 05:17, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we have to go line by line through the Builder articles but it would be most appropriate to select a wider range of facts including both positive and negative. Regarding major media and social media, there is no WP:Secondary source describing this so the media aspect should be left out. Binksternet (talk) 14:47, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What about the FCC documents is unacceptable? Roxstar245 (talk) 05:16, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You were proposing to use the primary source FCC documents to make a novel conclusion, that Mountain House is served by various broadcast stations. None of the documents say this directly. What you need to find is a secondary source describing the media environment of Mountain House. Binksternet (talk) 05:37, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot find a secondary source that says this directly. I suppose I can revise it to "Metropolitan media outlets closest to Mountain House include those of San Francisco and Sacramento." This is geography. Here is a more nuanced approach to discussing the Big Builder articles "An up tick in economic performance at Mountain House was noted in September, 2011, by Big Builder, a trade magazine of major land and housing development published by Hanley-Wood. Acknowledging the New York Times 2008 article that branded Mountain House as the most underwater community in America, Big Builder also chronicled a grass roots commitment by Mountain House residents to keep their neighborhoods looking well kept by mowing neglected lawns of homes in foreclosure, short sales or simply abandoned. This community spirit helped persuade CalPERS to hold onto its Mountain House investment, despite the drawbacks of a 1994-vintage land plan, termed “out of synch with the realities of the post-housing crash world.” Helping to balance the challenges of the land plan was the level of established infrastructure and homebuyers motivated by affordable pricing, proximity to job centers and traditional neighborhoods.In April of the following year, Big Builder again reported on the community, noting more robust first-quarter sales, new lot offers, and flexibility for semi-finished and raw land in terms of future development. Still on the drawing board is the Town Center, which depends in part on sufficient population growth to support planned retail and commercial elements. In 2012 and 2013, Mountain House has seen ongoing increases in new home sales, the introduction of four additional neighborhoods, and the expansion of two existing neighborhoods." Roxstar245 (talk) 13:43, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to also add the following proposed edits:

Add to the bottom of Notable Dates section: July 2012 – Mountain House High School breaks ground March 2013 — New development announced for Questa and Altamont

Edit sentence under Mountain House Education/ Higher Education section: A new high school 9-12 campus is in development, intended to serve the district. High school students are currently served by the Tracy Unified School District.

Change to: Mountain House High School, a new 9-12 campus, is under construction. High school students are currently served by the Tracy Unified School District.

Rationale for the edit is that the high school is no longer intended; it has a name and is currently being built. Roxstar245 (talk) 01:34, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mountain House, San Joaquin County, California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6AWvvJTCE?url=http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0649582.html to http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0649582.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:44, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mountain House, San Joaquin County, California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:41, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New article (source)

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/mountain-house-city-18373918.php -- John Broughton (♫♫) 23:59, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]