THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

Sierra Colina project in Stateline resurrected


image_pdfimage_print

By Kathryn Reed

STATELINE – Similar, yet different. That’s one way to describe what the latest version of the Sierra Colina subdivision in Stateline looks like.

“The original Sierra Colina project was going to be the premier project in the entire Lake Tahoe Basin. It’s unfortunate it ended up in litigation. Everyone lost,” Douglas County Commissioner Nancy McDermid said.

She singled out how the previous project included nine moderate-income deed restricted single-family residences that would have been ideal for local workers.

The property borders Lake Village, Highway 50 and the commercial area with Sushi Pier and Azul restaurants. Today it is vacant land.

Commissioners on Jan. 21 unanimously agreed to subdivide the 18-acre parcel into 47 parcels on which 13 single-family residences and 34 duplexes will be built. They will be smaller units – the smallest being 1,546-square-feet – than what was proposed more than six years ago. All will be built to LEED standards. There will also be a homeowners’ recreation building and trails. The road through the development will be private.

“We are gratified with the votes cast by the Douglas County Board of Commissioners (Thursday) in support of the Sierra Colina project. Because the county approval process is still ongoing, out of respect for that process, we reserve further comment until it is completed,” Gail Jaquish told Lake Tahoe News.

Jaquish with her husband, Steve Kenninger, who live locally, acquired the property in 2005 in a foreclosure sale. Four years later they obtained approval from the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency to build 50 units.

Soon thereafter the League to Save Lake Tahoe filed a lawsuit that ultimately derailed the project. The appellate court in 2012 sided with the environmental group, which had challenged TRPA over the coverage issues for the Sierra Colina project. Coverage is a TRPA creation dictating how much land can be paved in order to contend with erosion issues.

Since that decision came out Jaquish and Kenninger have been deciding how to go forward. Neither attended this week’s meeting.

The six members of the public who spoke at Thursday’s meeting were all in favor of the project. Many pointed out how the couple has put more time and money into this project when someone less determined would have walked away.

The project will be built in four phases. The first will be to put the utilities underground.

Before the second phase begins improvements to the intersection of Lake Village Drive and Highway 50 will be made. These include left and right turn lanes onto the highway, and an accelerator lane on the highway for those turning left.

image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (8)
  1. Lou pierini says - Posted: January 22, 2016

    Here we go, more congestion. At least it’s not an Embassy deal.

  2. sunriser2 says - Posted: January 22, 2016

    Glad to see someone fix Lake Village Dr. The worst lefthand turn in town.

  3. Cranky Gerald says - Posted: January 22, 2016

    At least it is in Nevada and the City of SLT will not have an opportunity to screw it up.

    Or at least not any more than TRPA etal already have.

    More coverage on absolutely vacant land. Where there is money there will be a way.

  4. ljames says - Posted: January 22, 2016

    “Today it is vacant land.”

    Is that really some sort of problem? – well it isn’t really vacant is it, it’s just no one is making money off it? Whether growth and real estate development is 10% a year or 1% a year, it all gets to the same place eventually – all we keep doing is putting off the inevitable which is coming to grips with overpopulation and not dealing with what the area really needs, which is the modest remodeling of existing substandard housing rather than building on “vacant land”.

  5. Benjamin Pignatelli says - Posted: January 22, 2016

    In 2004, the USFS closed the sweet downhill mountain bike trail above this land. A loss to recreation and a possible win for water quality.

    There is a $2M+ environmental improvement project (EIP) planned just downstream of this currently vacant property. This is already an impaired watershed.

    Why would we let those public investments go to subsidize this private construction project?

  6. luna49 says - Posted: January 22, 2016

    This plan sounds even worse than the first one. Now a beautiful track of natural forest will become pavement and development. The more Douglas County Commissioners can develop pristine natural lands to add to their tax base, the more they can finance big projects elsewhere. Watch the build out continue and the natural beauty of Tahoe be further eroded. When will Tahoe actually get a county commissioner who lives in the area and represents the values of the majority of citizens living here, not just the ones paid to show up at meetings and represent their clients.

  7. Lou Pierini says - Posted: January 22, 2016

    Can’t open the school anymore. Really 50 units to 81 Ms D, your first approval was nullified in federal court and this one looks worse.

  8. John says - Posted: January 22, 2016

    I never thought I would say this.The TRPA needs to slow some of this development down to many new projects moving forward without looking at the future impact on traffic and the quality of life for our locals and our visitors as well and once these projects are done. That could spell disaster as then we can’t turn the clock back.
    I remember years ago the TRPA was not going to allow any new subdivisions. Well that of course is subject to change with an appropriate check being written to the TRPA.

    Remember folks this bowl we live in can only hold so many people.