Supes delay decision on Meyers plan
Brendan Ferry with the El Dorado County Planning Department briefs supervisors about the Meyers Area Plan on Oct. 28. Photo/Kathryn Reed
By Kathryn Reed
El Dorado County supervisors are not ready to sign-off on the Meyers Area Plan. Instead, they want the community to weigh in at one more public meeting.
The Meyers issue was the main item on board’s agenda during their annual meeting in Lake Tahoe on Oct. 28. It was clear the supervisors, except for Norma Santiago, were unfamiliar with this unincorporated area to the west of South Lake Tahoe. They asked about demographics, boundaries of the area, didn’t understand what a TAU (tourist accommodation unit), or CFA (commercial floor area) were.
Supervisor Brian Veerkamp asked more substantive questions pertaining to how things are working with Caltrans and water concerns. In response to one of the 18 people who spoke, Veerkamp cautioned people about wanting a traffic light on Highway 50. He said all they do in Placerville is create a greater backup, and that once they are in it’s near impossible to get one removed.
The four (Supervisor Ron Briggs was absent) agreed to have a board workshop in December in the basin to hash out the remaining issues concerning the area plan. Those include height limitations for new construction, how much can be built per acre (density), the ability to transfer commercial floor area square footage (looking at economic and environmental concerns), and the creation of an advisory council that would report to the supervisors and have to follow open meeting laws.
The county Planning Commission when it met last week went against staff’s recommendation and said the local working group should be more casual and not have to adhere to the Brown Act.
However, everyone who spoke to this concern on Tuesday said they wanted the group to have transparency. After all, some of the reason for Meyers’ becoming splintered of late is because of the perceived backroom deals made at meetings that were not publicized. Going forward all sides want the ability to hear what is being discussed before it seems to be a done deal.
The supervisors agreed.
Most of the public comments centered on the process for the past 32 months.
Brendan Ferry, planner with the county, gave a brief history to the board about the process that started in February 2012.
He had hoped to have a final draft of the area plan done in November. That won’t happen now that there will be a workshop. Also delayed is the start of the CEQA environmental review process.
I’m glad to see the El Dorado Supervisors are slowing down the Meyers plan abit. I think Angela’s suggestion of a survey of area residents is excellent! Let the people who live there decide what goes on in their own community! OLS
YIPEE…. glad to see the brakes are on! Kudos to the Meyers’ activists who keep on this issue… hard work, but it looks like you are finally getting some attention from the Board of Supervisors! Maybe they don’t want another Grand Jury investigation! Violations of the Brown Act are pretty serious! The dope on the Planning Commission needs to be re-trained or retired.
Thanks to all who attended and voiced their concerns and a special thanks to the Meyers advisory committee for keeping a spotlight on this! Hopefully our new supervisor will be more forthcoming than the current one.
Judging by this article the plan IS going to happen whether we like it or not.
“the supervisors, except for Norma Santiago, were unfamiliar with this unincorporated area to the west of South Lake Tahoe”.
Seriously?! And these people are trying to tell us what we need?!?! We don’t need this plan or them.
Stories like this and some of the other articles and letters we’ve read over the past few months regarding the County and it’s dysfunctions should lay to rest any thought of dissolving the City of South Lake Tahoe and ceding authority back to the County.
I’m afraid I have to agree with Irish and Gaspen…and I’m curious why they want more input from Myers residents when it appears the previous input from Meyers residents was ignored.
Unfortunately one more workshop will not replace what should be a restart of the plan update through a clear public process.
Supervisor Frentzen asked great questions which pointed out how little the community had been notified, let alone involved. Further, it was not the MCAC who has kept this in the spotlight. Half the MCAC has been absent from meetings for months, and members don’t agree. Some members were ready to see it adopted months ago, even after it became clear how many people in Meyers were unaware of it. The delay is good, but a survey and open process is what should be done.
A BIG Thank You to the three Supervisors attending from off the hill ! You three asked the right questions and truly listened to the public comments !
Your astute observation and questioning led to the decision for more genuine public review and another workshop ( much to the dismay of Brendan Ferry, Adam Lewandowski, and Norma Santiago- who desperately want to ram their own plan version through )
We can hope the Dec Board Workshop is advertised more timely than the last ( I received my notice after the first meeting ) and to a broader Meyers/ Tahoe Paradise audience.
It’s obvious we need a new MCAC with teeth and operating under the Brown Act and Calif. Open Meeting Laws.
The 35ft height and 15units/acre need to stay in place as legitimately voted on in prior workshops.
Good job on the article Kae.
Norma Santiago has failed us. She should have communicated to other board members the situation in Meyers.
At the previous meetings we arrived at a general consensus only to be ignored. The people have spoken to the issues of density, zoning, the incentive, program and height limitations.
I live in the Meyers area and have never been officially notified of a meeting. My only notification has been from the LTN website or word of mouth.
I believe they are required by the brown act to print meetings in the newspaper, my guess is they are doing it is the Tahoe Tribune.
I agree with several of the comments regarding the Meyers Plan. One being, little if any notification of public meetings. Sure there are private meetings but more transperency is needed. Decisions are being made behind closed doors which will affect us all in our day to day lives… you know , the people that live here!
Another thing is that when public input is allowed, it’s often ignored and not addressed by those who’ve taken control of this “plan”. The local residents are left out of the loop and are merely an afterthought by the people who have the most to gain by building unwanted developements. In other words a quick profit for the developer and the agencies that signed off on it. It’s all about the money!!!
So have a happy Halloween everyone! I’m going to dress up as a consultant with money over flowing out of my over stuffed pockets of cash. OLS
I’m a Meyers resident and agree NO more traffic lights. Plenty of room for round a bouts. How about synchronizing the traffic lights in town??? C’mon city… Get your $h!t in gear.
The developers used to ram these type of rezone plans through after greasing the correct wheels down in P-ville. The people caught onto the act and said enough and have put the M and O petitions in place to limit developers projects and rezones and greater density that are not wanted as are the thirty thousand houses developers want. This plan is similar in that people who live near it reject it. This should be delayed until next year sometime after the new Supervisors are in as this rezone by TRPA is not wanted as stated by many.
Tahoebluewire, About synchronizing traffic lights in town. Years ago, my freinds Dad had it down! He swore, and showed me, thru several drives, tnat if you kept that ol’ Willys Jeep at a certain speed goin’ down 50, you got green lights all the way thru town.
Coincidenec? Or was it just his good Swiss luck!
Hello, Placid Fuchslin, wherever you are!!!! OLS
The idea of a new stoplight is to provide a crosswalk for pedestrians to safely access both sides of HWY 50.
I would really hate to see another traffic light in Meyers. That would be terrible! The intersection of Highway 50 and Pioneer trail in Meyers should be changed to a roundabout. They just spent over a million dollars revising that intersection with new traffic lights. It didn’t improve traffic at all. Total waste of money! No more traffic lights please. People won’t walk a block out of their way to cross the street at a traffic light. Are you kidding???
Remember To Vote Remember To Vote Remember To Vote
If you have an absentee ballot and have not mailed it in, there is still a way to make sure your vote is counted! You can turn in your ballot at any precinct location on Tuesday. All precincts are open from 7 am to 8 pm. You can also hand deliver your ballot to the El Dorado County Elections Department, 2850 Fairlane Ct., Placerville or the El Dorado County Recorder-Clerk’s Office, 3368 Lake Tahoe Blvd., Suite 108, South Lake Tahoe. Ballots must be received by the Elections Department no later than 8 pm on Tuesday.
Below is a list of all locations in El Dorado County’s District V:
SOUTH LAKE TAHOE
– California Conservation Corps (CCC) – Meyers – 1949 Apache Dr.
– South Lake Tahoe Airport – 1901 Airport Rd.
– Sierra House Elementary School – 1709 Remington Trail (off Pioneer Trail)
– Calvary Chapel – 807 Emerald Bay Rd.
– South Shore Christian Assembly – 886 Glorene Ave.
– Presbyterian Church – 2733 Lake Tahoe Blvd.
– Lake Tahoe Commmunity College Aspen Room – 1 College Dr.
– Lake Tahoe Christian Fellowship – 3580 Blackwood Rd.
POLLOCK PINES
– Gold Ridge Forest Lodge – 4101 Opal Trail
– Pollock Pines Community Church – 6361 Pony Express Trail
– Sly Park Outdoor Education Center – 5600 Sly Park Road