Meyers plan to move onto environmental review
By Kathryn Reed
The vote by the El Dorado County Board of Supervisors on Monday regarding the Meyers Area Plan reflected that of the community – it wasn’t unanimous – just like there isn’t consensus among residents as to what should be done.
Many of the 17 people who spoke Aug. 31 believed it was necessary to talk more before moving on to the environmental phase. Just as many said it was time to take the next step.
Ultimately, the board voted 3-1 to start the environmental review. Supervisor Shiva Frentzen was the dissenting voice. Supervisor Sue Novasel was not part of the discussion or vote, having recused herself because she owns property in the area.
In the 3½ years that the Meyers Area Plan has been discussed three area plans on the South Shore have been completed. The Meyers plan is at least two years from being complete because it could take that long for the environmental documents to be finalized. The time frame will in part be determined by the level of review that is conducted. Then there will be five opportunities for the public to comment. Ultimately the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Governing Board will have the final say.
One of Frentzen’s hang-ups was not knowing how much the process would cost the county going forward. An environmental impact report could cost more than $100,000. She wanted a guarantee there would be a return on investment for that outlay of cash. It’s not something anyone can guarantee.
El Dorado County planner Brendan Ferry on Aug. 31 advises supervisors about the Meyers plan as about 30 people listen. Photo/Kathryn Reed
Brendan Ferry, county planner, pointed out that the county is not in the development business. While he said a goal of the plan is to attract economic development, there is no guarantee this will occur.
Fear of a large-scale development has gripped this small South Shore enclave ever since Norma Santiago when she was supervisor spearheaded the Catalyst project. That project was dead in the water almost as soon as it came to life. But just the thought of something of that magnitude still strikes fear with many.
However, many who spoke on Monday said it was apt to be locals who initiate any new development in Meyers.
Still, one thing that divides those who live there is whether a motel or bed and breakfast ought to be built. Currently, other than camping, there is no place for tourists to sleep in Meyers. The criteria in the proposed plan would allow for some sort of lodging – something the existing 1993 plan can no longer accommodate based on zoning regulations and commodities distributions.
The current plan, which is the fourth draft, contains:
· 42-foot height limit; this is the same as what’s in the 1993 plan.
· 34,150-square-feet of commercial floor area, with 17,500 dedicated to small businesses. The 1993 plan had 25,400 square feet. The difference is that Bob Dog Pizza did not use as much CFA as anticipated.
· 30 units per acre for a lodging property, 20 units per acre for multi-family residential; 1993 plan had 40 and 15 units per acre, respectively.
· One level of incentives for potential developers; 1993 plan had no incentives.
· Meyers Advisory Council will either be elected or appointed, be a formal body and must adhere to open meeting laws; 1993 had a loose knit group with zero power.
· 4 California Tahoe Conservancy lots will be classified recreation, while 5 will retain current zoning to allow for potential development.
The next step is for county officials – with the help of their legal staff and Tahoe Regional Planning Agency – to determine the level of environmental review.
—–
In other action:
· The board heard a presentation about the Community Wildfire Protection Plan, a basinwide effort to make the area less prone to catastrophic wildfire. When Supervisor Frentzen asked why the basin doesn’t have small fire safe councils, Lake Valley Fire Chief Gareth Harris chose not to tell her about the misappropriation of funds and how many contractors still have not been paid.
· South Lake Tahoe City Manager Nancy Kerry and marketing guru Carl Ribaudo talked about the legacy principles, which are designed to get all parties – public and private – on board with a shared vision for the area even if the means to get to the end is different. The overriding desire is to leave a legacy of sorts.
Thank you for a clear and easily understood report on this subject.
Interesting how these final drafts 2-4 were designed behind closed doors with special interest groups and not by Meyers Community.
I distinctly recall that the County and TRPA held legitimate public meetings and took votes – and established some limitations for the Meyers Plan before last year. But Brendan Ferry and Dave Defanti unilaterally chose to ignore and discredit all previous meetings and votes to design this plan behind closed doors.
County Supervisors have been made aware of these previous legitimate meetings and voting processes and also have chosen to discredit them. For this I believe all the County Supervisors have betrayed their constituency and should be removed from their seats !
The entire Meyers Planning process has been a scam dictated by special interests behind closed doors with the full cooperation of our County Planners and TRPA.
Toxic, I got to laugh with you and not at you. That is probably the most precise and concise no bs statement that has been made to date. All of it is true yet if I were to say that, and I have before, I am dragged through the ringer by the CR’s of the world and publically hanged for telling the truth. Maybe I should go back to being anonymous, nah. Thanks for your input.
What happened to the planning commission recommendations? Like where NOT to build- in the plan area. That all went down the tubes along the way – along with the comments and feelings of the residents. Total waste of time.
The county wants to “get on with it” and “get away with it.” They were going to approve it with out of district Supervisors regardless of opposition. By the time any proposals come forward it will be time for another election and there will be new Supervisors. The question is what the TRPA people are going to do now as far as selling out Meyers or protecting it.
Thanks Kenny ….
The question is – what can anyone do about it ?
If we let our local officials dictate our area planning with the help of special interests – where could this go ?
I have never seen such arrogance and omnipotence in public officials in my life as right here with this Meyers Area Plan
There is little to no “community” in Community Planning anywhere around the lake. The desperation to get newer projects on the ground is astounding. Yes, some of the older established properties could use a face-lift but not at the expense of community character. Bigger isn’t always better but the development community will tell you that is the only way to get a return on asset. If the community is interested in improvements then we have? to accept the proposals with no compromise or discussion.
Big surprise!! There’s “B” sitting directly behind El Dorado County employee Brendan– as if to say “I’ve got your back” Thanks for the photos Kae, – they give a proper perspective on how this got pushed forward.
“A picture speaks a thousand words”. How true!
1. TRPA sold out Meyers in 2012 and their staff person reiterated that at the BOS meeting.
2. If there are no big outside investors wanting to build in Meyers (as those pushing this agenda forward keep saying), why is there so much pressure against adopting a Plan that excludes the supposedly ‘impossible’ big stuff?
3. If new development will only come from locals, why does the Area Plan barely give lip service to helping local small businesses? And the plan includes nothing to help existing small businesses upgrade, but plenty to favor new big developments.
4. Yes, it is clear the Board and TRPA made up their minds long ago and don’t care what the community wants.
I am disgusted by the decision of the El Dorado County Board of Supervisors to move forward with the Meyers Area Plan. It is apparent to me that they had made their decision well before any public comments were heard with the exception of Supervisor Shiva Frentzen. Her concern was the economic impact on the County not the quality of life of Meyers residents. With Sup. Novasel recusing herself from the issue, we have NO representation. Gorman from Tahoe Chamber of Commerce assured the residents of Meyers that no large developers were interested in investing in Meyers. Let the language of the Plan reflect that assertion. I feel betrayed by Brendan Ferry. I thought we had come to a general consensus in June on most issues specifically height limitations and density only to be ignored and issued a new Plan #4. Our government is failing us.
The conservative SCOTUS ruled that corporations are people and money is speech in the Citizens United case- this Meyers developer farce shows how ‘We the People’ have been eliminated from deciding our own future on a local level-just like the purchase of government has occurred on a national level-it’s going to take movement politics, people standing up and screaming or we’re screwed
Somewhere, not in a public venue and not (YET) a matter of public record, there exists an agreement or agreements, or options which require the tenets of this now approved plan to become real and public.
We will just have to follow the money and watch the environmental review to see who and/or what entities are involved. And it will slowly become obvious.
My personal guess is one likely party to the farce we just witnessed is what I like to call the California Tahoe Conservancy and Real Estate Company. Is the timing of the recently announced land exchange between the US Forest Service and the Calif Tahoe Conservancy suspicious or what?
What ultimately happens in Meyers will not be all bad, but you can be certain that a significant increase in the tax base is prime on the list for the County and that TRPA is absolutely slavering over the potential studies/grants and permit fees which are likely to come down the pipe, thus further bolstering their reason for existence.
I can also project that the City of South Lake Tahoe is laying in the weeds wondering how to get their hooks into this looming source of possible revenue.
We have already seen the various public entities apparently playing fast and loose with the Brown Act regulations, and I submit that this is probably far, far worse than we realize.
Is it too late to reconsider grabbing onto some more local control by incorporating Meyers?
Teatotal and Cranky Gerald, Good comments about the Meyers plan! I’m not a resident of Meyers but I strongly oppose this developement. I’m of the view that many people who live in the area or within the city limits, as I do, are not in favor of it either.
Lets halt this huge project before they break ground!
Take care, OLS
!
How about let’s keep Meyers looking like alpine blight.. The naysayers complain the loudest. The majority is silent. I would like to see some improvements In my community. Or we can stop any forward progress because of a few. Keep complaining that’ll help us move forward.
Jlo,
No one has said we don’t want responsible improvements in Meyers …… but it MUST be with approval of “THE MEYERS COMMUNITY” ! – NOT Brendan’s investors and desperate agencies looking to sustain themselves …
Isee – GREAT Observation about the Nevada Chamber pushing this though Brendan !!
And wouldn’t you know it ? B-Gorman is also on Sue Novasel’s Facebook friends list …. Oh My What a nice tight -knit little group they are ….. all doing their best to help the community ….
government funded affordable housing.
as I look into the crystal ball that’s how I see it.
I wonder if some of these folks see smoke when they look in the mirror.
What really happened: http://meyersresident.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/MeyersRes-update-8.31.2015-BOS-vote.pdf
10 people wanted the plan halted for more public review, and only three from the Nevada Chamber ( why they’re even heard I’ll never know)wanted it to go to environmental review…….
What that tells me is there’s some behind the scenes connection with Brendan, The BOS and the Nevada Chamber to influence enough to blow off any past or present public review or previous voting !
This is very wrong people !
Why on earth the Nevada Chamber is being allowed to get its nose into Meyers’ community plan is beyond comprehension.
Steve,
It’s because the Nevada Chamber has members who smell development and consulting money in Meyers – and they have well organized “collaborative” tentacles in the pie.
This group of individuals have been planning their “pillaging” of Meyers with the help of TRPA and the Conservancy for quite some time now, and they’re not going to easily let their Golden Goose go……….
“When Supervisor Frentzen asked why the basin doesn’t have small fire safe councils, Lake Valley Fire Chief Gareth Harris chose not to tell her about the misappropriation of funds and how many contractors still have not been paid”.
Gareth Harris is a true example of “The Peter Principle” ……. unbelievable how some people are promoted to rise to the level of their incompetence – and how much they’re paid !