Dear Friends:

The onslaught of more large and primarily luxury projects being approved, modified, or proposed in the North Tahoe region, even as our roads are at or over capacity, our public services are spread thin, and our local workforce can’t afford housing, has prompted an increase in activism by community organizations and individuals. From OpEds published in local papers to a citizen-led public meeting to discuss concerns, people are speaking up. Examples of local activism and discussion include the publications below (click on article title links to read).

• Tahoe needs to be saved from watchdog agency created to protect it

• TRPA no longer serves the environment or “us”

• North Tahoe Preservation Alliance raises over-development concerns at recent meeting

• Carrying capacity should determine environmental action

• Traffic’s imperfect storm

• Incline Village residents voice concerns over mobility hub location

• This Tahoe ski resort may become a private millionaires club

As always, we will keep you updated on West Shore activities and other projects in our bi-monthly newsletters. We look forward to your continued feedback and support, and encourage you to contact us with any additional ideas or questions you may have.

Sincerely,

Homewood Mountain Resort (HMR)

TRPA:

TRPA has continued to update their website with new information on HMR’s proposed privatization and other modifications. TRPA notes:

"TRPA has not held any public meetings regarding the new proposal…While Homewood representatives have released information to the public and made early presentations in the community, the agency has not received the necessary application and information to begin the process to amend the master plan. As part of the process, the agency will ensure community input is gathered and collaboration with partner agencies and organizations continues.”

Placer County:

In our last newsletter, we reported that the Tahoe Basin Design Review Committee (TBDRC) had voted against recommending approval of the second proposed phase of the HMR development. We are currently waiting to see what alternatives will be pursued.

Regarding changes to the overall Master Plan, in a recent article, Placer’s Deputy Director for Tahoe was quoted: “If [the new plan] results in changes to what was approved by our board in 2011, we would need to know about it…As they continue to build out their project, they will need to describe what each one of those lots is doing … to date, we haven’t received anything about what the programming looks like or if it’s changing.”

Keep Homewood Public (KHP) community group:

The community-led KHP group has held two sign-waving gatherings to date and continued to educate the public regarding Homewood’s privatization plans, which they believe are not consistent with the approved Master Plan. More information is available on their new website and Facebook page.

Meeks Bay Ave. Development/Vacation Rentals

Community members have raised concerns about a project in Meeks Bay whereby the second of two historic homes (ca. 1932) under shared ownership will be torn down and rebuilt into a significantly larger residence (the first home was torn down last summer despite enormous community opposition). Combined with the rebuild of the first home, the two homes - which both hold Vacation Home Rental (VHR) permits - will total 14 bedrooms and 17 bathrooms. While EDC has recently adopted VHR regulations that would prohibit two adjacent VHRs, the existing VHR permits are ‘grandfathered’ in. Concerns include:

• Inconsistency with the character of the neighborhood which is solely residential

• Extremely limited onsite parking

• Access for emergency vehicles and/or evacuations

• Impacts to the Meeks Bay Ave. intersection with Highway 89, and

• Other neighborhood impacts that often occur with large groups staying in vacation rentals.

Although the first home has been approved and is under construction, a lot line adjustment is required in order to approve the second larger home. Concerned parties do not believe TRPA’s “findings” (which include neighborhood compatibility) can be met to approve the adjustment and are circulating this letter and asking others to send comments to the TRPA and El Dorado County staff below. The more the public speaks out the better, otherwise projects like this will likely continue to be approved around the lake. You can copy and paste from their letter (here is a Word version) or write your own.

Brandy McMahon: bmcmahon@trpa.gov
Paul Nielsen: pnielsen@trpa.gov
Wendy Jepson: wjepson@trpa.gov
Melanie Sasha: melanie.shasha@edcgov.us
Supervisor Brooke Laine: bosfive@edcgov.us

Vacation Rental Forum

El Dorado County District V Supervisor Brooke Laine is hosting a Vacation Home Rental (VHR) public forum for the residents of Meeks Bay, Tahoma, and the surrounding area on Thursday, May 25 from 5:30 p.m. – 7 p.m. at the Meeks Bay Fire Station located at 8041 Highway 89. The purpose of this forum is to present to the public the presentation on VHR updates, and to receive questions and comments; it is solely an information-gathering exercise. Supervisor Laine is also assembling a VHR Advisory Committee and is currently seeking applicants.

Meeks Bay Resort Restoration Project

Project proponents and Caltrans have been coordinating the SR 89 bridge replacement with the Resort project. A recent update from project leaders states:

“The consultant team…will incorporate changes, including responses to public comments and edits to produce the Final EIS/EIS/EIR and Record of Decision. The agencies aim to release this document Summer 2023 for a 60-day objection period. Shortly after the release of the Final Joint Environmental Document, the Stakeholder Forum will be convened for its final meeting…This meeting will be followed by TRPA public hearings in the Fall/Winter 2023/2024.”

More information is available on the project’s website.

Meeks to Cascade Lake Pedestrian/Bike Path

The final Feasibility Study was posted online in late April with what appears to be only minor text modifications. Ignoring the increased traffic and parking problems that have been generated by the East Shore Trail from Incline Village to Sand Harbor, which were raised in comments on the draft study, the report appears to dismiss environmental and scenic concerns in favor of the unproven claim the trail will reduce congestion and improve public safety.

“All parties involved in the development of this feasibility study acknowledge that constructing a new multi-use trail within the SR 89 corridor will require trade offs…[the] new improvements may [be] visible from SR 89, the surrounding forests, and Lake Tahoe. However, the addition of a multi-use trail will provide an alternative means of travel through the corridor, thus reducing congestion, improving safety by moving pedestrians off the highway, and increasing access to the corridor’s amenities. The goal is for the trade offs associated with the trail to result in an overall benefit for the corridor, its users, and resources.” (p.7)

TRPA sent this update on 5/10, stating the report is finalized and will be integrated into future environmental studies for the larger SR 89 Corridor Plan that will begin in 2024. We know from past experience that once included in studies such as this, proposals in future project applications tend to refer back to such documents to justify projects. We will monitor future proposals and keep you updated on opportunities to engage.

Tahoe Basin Area Plan Amendments

A public workshop (in-person only) was held on 3/23. According to reports from Mountain Area Preservation and North Tahoe Preservation Alliance, Placer and TRPA are making some changes as a result of community concerns, including lowering the proposed increase in height in areas of Kings Beach and Tahoe City and adopting more stringent requirements regarding affordable housing caps (so that affordable housing units are truly limited to locals who need them).

However, most of the other amendments initially proposed in 2022 have not changed. Placer stated that the amendments are expected to be brought back to the Placer County Planning Commission this summer.

Olympic Valley - Palisades Tahoe

Sierra Watch recently released a report reviewing and summarizing comment letters submitted on the revised environmental impact report last January. Of the 2,629 letters submitted, 2,621, or 99.7%, expressed opposition to the project. You can learn more from Sierra Watch and Mountain Area Preservation and access the draft RDEIR here. County staff anticipate releasing the final REIR this summer.

Water Quality Concerns

Hazardous Algae Blooms
Last year, members of FOWS supported the efforts of community members and researchers to raise funding and conduct water and air quality sampling for toxins produced by Hazardous Algae Blooms (HABs) in Lake Tahoe and nearby Serene Lakes. There is a suspected link between HABs and neurological disorders such as ALS, and the Lake Tahoe and Serene Lakes areas have exhibited an above-average percentage of these disorders. Extremely high concentrations of the toxins in both air and water samples were found at both lakes. Researchers and community members are seeking help to fund additional monitoring this summer to further investigate these toxins, and have once again set up a GoFundMe page at: https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-research-the-cause-of-als-in-the-tahoe-area.