Project would change North Shore landscape

Proposed project sites are outlined in red.

Proposed project sites are outlined in red.

By Kathryn Reed

Placer County and the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency are putting together the notice of preparation to develop a segment of the Martis Valley and adjacent land in the Lake Tahoe Basin.

From there the environmental documents will be prepared.

Even though the Truckee Land Trust saved thousands of acres in the area, members are now behind East West Partners plans to develop a significant chunk of land and are not concerned with the 112 acres in the Lake Tahoe Basin that would be developed.

Some conservation groups are calling developing this Tahoe acreage precedent setting because there are currently no timeshare-condo developments on a ridge on the North Shore.

The project area is located between Truckee and the North Shore on both sides of Highway 267. Most of it is not under the purview of the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency. All but a small part is in Placer County; the other is in Nevada County.

The proposed project consists of a specific plan, TRPA area plan and various entitlements and approvals associated with approval of these plans.

The public has until April 28 to comment on the proposal.

The proposed project would shift 760 units and 6.6 acres of commercial from the allowed development of 1,360 units and 6.6 acres of commercial on the East Parcel to the West Parcel. In the process 600 units would be retired.

The West Parcel is approximately 1,192 acres next to Northstar ski resort. The area plan would apply to the 112.8 acres of the West Parcel that are located within TRPA’s jurisdiction and would designate this land resort recreation.

In the West Parcel 775 acres would be rezoned from timberland production to residential and neighborhood commercial. This would allow for 760 residential units and 6.6 acres of commercial. The remaining 417 acres on the West Parcel would remain forest.

The 670 acres of the East Parcel currently zoned for development would be designated forest. A conservation easement would be placed over the entire 6,376 acres, or it would be sold fee simple to conservation groups. Approximately 216 acres of the 6,376-acre East Parcel are located within Nevada County.

Build-out is expected to take 25 years.

An intersection on Highway 267 would be created to accommodate future development.

Hiking and biking trails are also part of the plans.

Other info:

• Comments may be emailed to

• More info is available online.

• Scoping meeting on April 16 at 1pm, Cedar House Sport Hotel, 10918 Brockway Road, Truckee.

• Scoping meeting on April 16 at 5:30pm, North Tahoe Event Center, Kings Beach.

• TRPA Advisory Planning Commission, April 9 9:30am, 128 Market St., Stateline.

• TRPA Governing Board, April 24, 9:30am, 128 Market St., Stateline.


About author

This article was written by admin


Comments (12)
  1. Sally says - Posted: April 3, 2014

    We have to battle with trpa to get an extra 10 feet of coverage. There is something wrong with trpa. a political deal? A favored developer?

  2. Perry R. Obray says - Posted: April 3, 2014

    We are looking at a possible future Olympics venue area. Northstar holds high profile winter events that might rationalize the added housing.

    If something to the tune of zero emissions, zero waste policies are enacted,……..

  3. A.B. says - Posted: April 3, 2014

    Note the salient facts – outside of the Town of Truckee, no oversight from TRPA, located in unincorporated Placer & Nevada counties.

    You’re looking at the future of Lake Tahoe, being built outside the basin on the north shore. Northstar has been extremely successful with their development plans. Why? No government extortion to stop them.

  4. Old Long Skiis says - Posted: April 3, 2014

    Watch out North Shore! The developers with deep pockets are headed your way. They are looking for sparsely populated, unicorporarted areas to snatch up, rape the land once they gain ownership, destroy the envioroment, build a bunch of god awful “gated communities” and commercial buildings and leave you with a mess you never wanted, while they(the developers) laugh all the way way to the bank!
    They did it to So. Shore and now they’re doing it to Meyers here on this end of the lake.
    Follow the money! Be strong! Organize! Get legal help!
    Please don’t let them ruin any more of Lake Tahoe!!!
    I hope this project will be stopped. Old long Skiis

  5. J&B says - Posted: April 3, 2014

    How many people want to see townhomes lining our ridgelines? ANYONE? Because once they start, it will be a precedent.

    This was part of a last minute deal made by TRPA where the RPU allowed two areas with Resort Recreation (Vail and Edgewood) but they slipped a little side exception into a different document (that most people were not looking at, plus it came out at the last minute) that allowed more rezoning like this. Predictable from the get go it would be by Northstar (throw in CalPeco, for starters), and so obviously and logically counter to TRPA’s claims that the RPU focuses on infill instead of developing natural land. Developing our forested ridgelines is about as far from infill as one can get.

    It’s all about selling out Tahoe for corporate resort development – forget about protecting the environment and supporting local businesses and residents.

  6. Old Long Skiis says - Posted: April 3, 2014

    J&B, Sorry for the bad spelling on my earlier post but I believe we are on sort of the same page on this north shore proposal. Could you enlighten me to who CalPeco is? I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but what’s “infill”?
    Lastly, if they can get away with this, is the east shore next? Everything from Incline to Cave Rock?
    You seem to have a grasp for whats going on so I’m just asking. Thanks, OLS

  7. J&B says - Posted: April 3, 2014

    OLS – The CalPeco is a very expensive Electrical “upgrade” project by Liberty in NLT (although ALL Liberty customers will be paying for it) but it is really about increasing power capacity for the ski resorts and corporate developments up there. Several things have converged on NLT over the past few years that all appear very related – there’s a summary at OR for more details on CalPeco, NTCAA has really been following it:, especially regarding the costs us Liberty customers will be stuck with.

    “Infill” is building up the remaining open areas in existing towns – it is based on a strategy that came from big metro areas like LA to build new residences in town instead of building subdivisions on undeveloped lands 10, 20, etc. miles out of town (one reason is to reduce driving) = probably one reason it hasn’t been a common word around here! But it has been twisted and misapplied in Tahoe and apparently used by the TRPA RPU to justify more big development, and giving Vail and Edgewood the freebies in 2012 (Resort Recreation rezoning). The mixed use/high density zoning in the RPU comes under the guise of ‘sustainable communities’ – which has been used by the agencies to get grant funds, among other things (and to steamroll Meyers). This Martis Valley Area Plan would be the opposite of the “infill” concept (and the claimed ‘redevelopment’ of rundown areas) the sustainable communities – and TRPA’s RPU – supposedly support.

    After this 112 acres is rezoned, about 200 more can be rezoned before Jan. 2017 (this was part of the last minute change snuck into the 208 Water Quality Plan- you can find it on TRPA’s website – see the Resort Recreation section in Chapter 10), then after 1/2017, it’s pretty much a free for all.

  8. Old Long Skiis says - Posted: April 3, 2014

    Thank you J&B, I had had a feeling this was a bad deal to our our friends on the North Shore. Your information confirms my worst fears. They(the developers along with TRPA approval) are going to f%&*
    us!!! It looks like we’re being attacked by developement on all sides of the lake!!!
    I’ll be dammned, I ain’t sittin’ still for this s#&*!!! Stand up North Shore, don’t let them get away with this!!!
    Spread the word! Their coming to take your property and what little is left of Tahoe’s beautiful alpine scenery and open areas.
    If you care about your neck of the woods you gotta speak out, otherwise they just steamroll over you and then you’ve got a bunch of unwanted developement.
    On this end of the lake we weren’t asked if we wanted developement or not in Meyers, instead we were asked how high the buildings should be and how many people can be crammed in there!
    Don’t let them fool you with slick talk! It’s all about making a quick buck and then leaving town.
    Don’t believe me? Look what happened to So. Shore!!!!
    Be strong and loud, Old Long Skiis

  9. A.B. says - Posted: April 3, 2014

    OLS, know that I don’t have an ax to grind with you or anyone else. But perhaps you didn’t read the article nor my post above.

    Development is occurring outside the basin. Why? For starters, TRPA has NO say in the matter. Neither does the League to Save Lake Tahoe, the Town of Truckee, the City of South Lake Tahoe, or any other restrictive entity that would challenge this matter. This is why developments have been successful in and around Truckee. Those developments have created jobs and a stable economy.

    The other reasons these developments are moving forward there are due to the transportation in and around the area. An interstate highway, a successful airport, and airlines in Reno only 30 minutes away make the Martis Valley THE place to develop next.
    Nothing is going to stop it. The location is outside of the regulatory burdens placed upon South Tahoe.

  10. Old Long Skiis says - Posted: April 3, 2014

    AB. No offence here my friend, I just wanted to warn the good folks north of here as to whats comin’ their way. Sure there will be short term rewards as in any developement, but then it dries up along with the jobs and it all goes downhill after that. Much like the gold rush days… boom,then bust. The ones that get in early make some big bucks but alot of others get left behind, eating their others dust.
    And so it goes, another land grab, another pie in the sky and another finger poked in the eye.
    I better mosey off to check on the neighbors cat, (I’m cat sitting) as that old tabby always cheers me up, and thats that, an old cat sittin’ in my lap. OLS

  11. A.B. says - Posted: April 3, 2014

    I don’t disagree with you OLS, in fact, I agree with you. No need to develop more empty homes. But there’s really nothing that can be done to stop it.

  12. sunriser2 says - Posted: April 4, 2014

    The water line and storage improvements in Zephyr Cove along with the sewer and water infrastructure for Genoa Lakes were paid for with bonds on the benefited parcels. How come rate payers have to pay for these power up-grades?