Dear Friends,

As discussed in detail below, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency is pushing a third round of “Affordable Housing” code amendments. The first two phases of amendments that the agency claims will provide more affordable housing have been approved, despite significant public opposition and concerns about bringing more people into the Basin without first addressing existing traffic and peak conditions (among other concerns).

As the agency has continued to cater to pro-development interests over the years, a common question we hear is “Wasn’t TRPA created to protect the environment?” The original TRPA Compact that created the agency emphasized environmental protection; while social and economic conditions were included in the original Compact, it was recognized that an agency charged primarily with environmental protection was necessary. Local jurisdictions had been making decisions based on economic factors leading to environmental degradation. However, after the pro-development Regional Plan Update was approved in 2012, political and development interests led to the 2016 amendment of the TRPA Compact to include more focus on economic considerations:

Unfortunately, the agency continues to approve more development despite threats to the environment and public safety. This is why the public must continue to remain diligent and speak up to the agencies.

As always in our bi-monthly newsletters, we will keep you updated on West Shore activities and opportunities to participate in land use planning activities. 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,

Placer County Tahoe Basin Area Plan (TBAP)

After the Placer County Board of Supervisors adopted the Phase 2 amendments on 11/18/2025, FOWS, TahoeCleanAir.org, and North Tahoe Preservation Alliance filed a second lawsuit against Placer County for failing to prepare a full Environmental Impact Report as required by California law. Learn more here.

The hearing for the lawsuit against the Phase 1 amendments was held in Auburn on December 11, 2025, at the old Courthouse in Auburn. On 1/7/2026, the Judge issued the ruling which denied the Petition (in other words, the ruling favored Placer County). However, the ruling provided important feedback and guidance for our current lawsuit regarding the Phase 2 amendments, which authorize real growth in numbers - increased height, density, and coverage in Town Centers and beyond. It expands entitlements and highlights emergency evacuation concerns. An initial settlement conference for the Phase 2 litigation is scheduled for February 4 between Placer County and the three Plaintiffs.

The TRPA housing amendments are mandated for adoption by all counties. While TRPA is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), local jurisdictions within California must follow CEQA requirements.

TRPA Housing Amendments

The ‘3rd phase’ of housing amendments (termed “Cultivating Community, Conserving the Basin” by the TRPA) recommend policies that further strip away environmental protections and ignore the impacts to public safety associated with packing more people and vehicles into the Basin. TRPA staff have prepared a proposed package of policies to evaluate in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and are asking their Board to approve the package and release of the Notice of Preparation for the amendments at their January 28 meeting (view agenda and materials here). FOWS encourages you to submit written comments to publiccomment@trpa.gov (include “Agenda Item VII.A” in the subject line) and/or attend the meeting online or in-person and request that TRPA includes more policies that would utilize existing development and vacant housing to provide more affordable/workforce housing (read FOWS comments to the Board).

FOWS is concerned the proposed policies are skewed toward significant increases in development and urban sprawl without actually resolving the housing issue. Other organizations like the Mountain Area Preservation and League to Save Lake Tahoe have raised similar concerns about how the ‘incentives’ would be used. The policies would also bring more people into areas that already experience gridlock during peak periods, further contributing to danger during wildfire and other emergency events.

TRPA’s proposed policies include, but are not limited to:

• Allowing local jurisdictions to expand Town Center and urban area boundaries;

• Allowing up to four-plex units to be constructed in single family residential neighborhoods;

• Increased height and density outside of Town Centers;

• Allowing/encouraging housing to be developed on public/institutional lands;

• Allowing “Bonus Unit” development rights that are supposed to be reserved to incentivize affordable housing and environmental improvement projects to be used toward market-rate (non-deed-restricted) housing;

• Allowing larger developments to proceed without environmental reviews; and

• Converting development rights for recreation uses to create more housing units - resulting in a net increase of over 1,400 residential units above the number of units analyzed in past environmental documents.

Although presented as “options” that are merely being analyzed in the EIS, history shows us that TRPA’s EIS’s tend to support the agency’s favored “options” in the end. Further, the exclusion of options that focus on better utilizing existing development and maintaining Transit-Oriented development patterns means such options will not be analyzed in the EIS and therefore could not be considered and approved by the Board.

Homewood Mountain Resort (HMR)

TRPA is still working with HMR to obtain a deed restriction to confirm the property will be for recreational use only. HMR and the North Tahoe Fire Protection District have not yet reached agreement on the requirements to fulfill equipment and staffing commitments.

USFS Plan to allow E-bikes

The U.S. Forest Service has approved the plan to allow Class 1 E-bikes on many dirt trails around the Tahoe Basin National forest Lands. FOWS joined others, like the Sierra Club, to file Objections in response to the original USFS Record of Decision and a meeting was held with FOWS and others last January. Concerns include the lack of enforcement personnel and failure to include mechanisms to increase enforcement staff, public safety concerns, and environmental impacts. The USFS recently posted a brief response document and the Revised Environmental Assessment on the project’s website. Unfortunately, only minimal revisions were made with regards to FOWS’ concerns. All documents can be found here.

Other updates

• The Boatworks at Tahoe: The project developers, MJD Capital Partners, recently told the Sierra Sun the company is targeting approvals, permitting, and entitlements for 2026 with project demolition to commence shortly after.

• Tahoe El Dorado Area Plan (“TED”): There are no new updates at this time.

• Lake Tahoe West Forest Restoration –The project aims to improve forest health and public safety through methods such as forest thinning, prescribed fire, aspen/meadow restoration, construction of forest access roads, and related activities. Work is anticipated to begin summer 2026.

** Volunteers needed! **

FOWS is seeking volunteers to help us improve our use of social media for education and outreach. Please contact us if you are interested and available!