 |
SERVICES
SPOTLIGHT
SPECIAL SECTIONS
NEWSPAPERS
VISITOR INFO
|
|
|
|
|
Letters to the editor: Boulder Bay and rec passes
May 4, 2008
 Print  Email
County should deny Boulder Bay variance
I support the Boulder Bay resort developer’s right to redevelop this site, but oppose the granting of any variance by Washoe County for the project as currently designed. The redevelopment project includes occupancy totals that are substantially greater than the existing occupancy. Increases in density will negatively impact Crystal Bay and have a cumulative negative impact on the Tahoe Basin.
While density is the main issue, the proposal claims are mysterious and questionable. The Nov. 7, 2007 Tahoe Regional Planning Agency project summary indicates that the existing parking spaces at the Biltmore number 296 and the proposed development number is 821. Although the developed number of parking spaces is 2.7 times greater than the existing, the developer claims reduced vehicle trips. I just can’t fathom this conclusion given the increased number of parking spaces. Does the developer seriously think that people will drive in and then stop using their cars in favor of the “multimodal transportation” mentioned in the project summary?
The site details section of the plan indicates a 10 percent to 15 percent reduction in site coverage. With so much of the current area being asphalt, it may be accurate that the impervious coverage is reduced; however, the aggregate building footprints are vastly increased.
The TRPA project summary states that this development is “located on the crystal clear shores of Lake Tahoe.” The actual near shore location of this development means that future residents and guests will want to take advantage of public beaches, none of which are within walking distance of the lake except for the public beach at the foot of Speedboat Avenue in Brockway. With the increase of density proposed, this development is likely to cause even more overcrowding at this small and heavily used beach.
In the long run, overcrowding of the Tahoe Basin should not be encouraged and certainly not through the granting of county variances to promote a larger development project. If you agree, please come to the Washoe County Planning Commission meeting on May 6, 2008 and be heard.
John Bosche
Brockway neighborhood owner
Editor’s Note: According to Boulder Bay’s March18 TRPA application, the project will have 670 underground parking spaces.
Keep number of recreation passes
From reading the Bonanza, I recently learned that a committee set up by IVGID is proposing to take away three of the five recreation passes that we currently have as Incline homeowners.
As I understand the proposal, my wife and I would receive the only two passes, as title holders to the house. My children, who live in Reno and use the house far more than we do, would lose the passes that they currently have. Net result: the younger members of our family would forfeit one of the primary benefits that prompted us to purchase the house in the first place, even though they are quite honestly the real contributors to the local community and economy.
How does this make any sense? If, as I suspect, the committee’s real concern is with limiting use of the Championship Golf Course so that they can get a tee time, then deal with that problem directly and not by taking away long-vested rights held by the rest of us who don’t happen to be golfers.
William C. Holmes
Incline Village
Editor’s Note: The Incline Village General Improvement District has not finalized any recreation pass ordinance changes, and is holding two public hearings this summer on the issue.
|
|
|
P/SUNNY 56°
