Sierra Colina Village
P. O. Box 129
Lake Tahoe, NV 89448

Planning for...
LEED* Green Certification
Energy Star Rating
Pedestrian & Bike Trails
All Fire Sprinklered Homes
Preserving Open Space
Moderate Income Homes

Yes. A subdivision of a multifamily project would only be considered by the TRPA Governing Board in conjunction with the approval of a project associated with an approved transfer of development, and then only after the prior approval by the Governing Board of the multi-family project (hence, the name, “two-step subdivision”). The Sierra Colina DEIS in Table 4.8-2 (Land Use Policy and Consistency Analysis) at pages 4.8-14 through 4.8-15 expressly concluded that the Sierra Colina project is eligible under the TRPA Code to be subdivided via a two-step subdivision:

“All land uses proposed under Alternatives 1 – 5 are expressly permissible under PAS 073. Alternatives 1, 3, and 4 include a two-step subdivision of the parcel once construction is complete. The two-step subdivision would be implemented in a manner consistent with Chapters 41 and 43 of the TRPA Code of Ordinances. The two-step subdivision process includes first subdividing the site as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and a portion of the property turned over to a public entity for conservation. This subdivision would take place following the completion of all project components, including the LPFs. The second step would be to further subdivide the development area into individual parcels associated with each residential unit to facilitate individual home ownership. (See Chapter 2, Project Description and Chapter 3, Alternatives, for additional information regarding the two-step subdivision process.)

Subdivision of the project site under Alternatives 1, 3, and 4 would not result in changes to the primary land use classification or permissible land uses on the project site nor would it create development potential beyond that already planned for the site. Additionally, Alternatives 1, 3, and 4 include proposals for the creation of permanent open space, thereby limiting future development potential on the site.”

In Table 4.8-2 (Land Use Policy and Consistency Analysis) at pages 4.8-14 through 4.8-15 of the Sierra Colina DEIS, the EIS explains the express legality of the two-step subdivision of the Sierra Colina Village project:

“TRPA confirmed the legality of two-step subdivisions, including their compliance with TRPA Code of Ordinances Chapters 41 and 43 and the 208 Plan, in an August 22, 1995 Memorandum by the TRPA Legal Division, entitled “TRPA’s Two-Step Subdivision Process for Post-1987 Residential Projects.” (Sierra Colina DEIS Exhibit I) Subdivisions like the Sierra Colina Project are permitted in the TRPA Code of Ordinances through the two-step process and are consistent with the following goals of the Regional Plan detailed in the 1995 TRPA Legal Division Memo:

• 1.       Promoting the infill of development on high capability lands: All of Sierra Colina Village is located on urban infill, high capability land, except for a small square footage of TRPA verified existing LC1b coverage on the parcel being relocated to equal or higher capability land on the parcel.
• 2.       Redirecting development to more suitable areas: Sierra Colina is urban infill land; has been zoned multi-family since October 1992; and satisfies the applicable transient oriented development criteria articulated in the Code;
• 3.       Retiring sensitive parcels through development transfers: Sierra Colina has obtained 44 SEZ Existing Residential Units of Use (ERUs) from a restored SEZ parcel in Stateline and plans to transfer the majority of these ERUs to Sierra Colina; and
• 4.       Avoiding the creation of new street networks: Sierra Colina does not create a new street network, but instead, it provides one single ‘loop’ 20 foot wide access roadway to the homes, effectively functioning as a common driveway to connect Sierra Colina to the existing Lake Village Drive. Sierra Colina’s access roadway (which is also proposed linear public facility-Easement #3 on BSA Sheet 4.0) contains 21,783 square feet of drivable roadway, which equates to only 436 square feet of drivable roadway per home (21,783/50), a ratio far lower than what is typical for a new street creating access to homes and certainly does not constitute a ‘new street network’.
• 5.        The 1995 TRPA Legal Division Memo similarly notes that ‘one of the management strategies for the 1987 Regional Plan is ‘redirection of development.’”

Table 4.8-2 (Land Use Policy and Consistency Analysis) of Section 4.8-3 of the Sierra Colina DEIS at pages 4.8-15 through 4.8-16 notes that the two-step subdivision process achieves the following goals, and determined that the Sierra Colina project complies with each of these criteria:

• 1.       “’insuring that post-1987 subdivisions do not create the potential for more coverage than that permitted by the Bailey coverage coefficients’: The Sierra Colina Village multi-family dwelling project’s allowable coverage is based on a TRPA approved land capability study;
• 2.       ‘limiting post-1987 subdivisions to high capability lands’: Sierra Colina Village proposes coverage on high capability land;
• 3.       ‘prohibiting subdivision of land in non-urban areas’: Sierra Colina is urban in-fill land; is located in an urban area (as defined by Code Section 2.2); and is surrounded by existing residential, commercial and governmental development and uses;
• 4.       ‘limiting subdivisions of post-1987 projects to PASs which permit multi-residential and single-family uses’: Since 1992, Sierra Colina’s Special Area #1 of PAS 073 has provided for both multiple family and single family dwellings as allowable and permissible uses on this urban parcel in the heart of Stateline;
• 5.       ‘creating receiving projects for transfers of development’: Sierra Colina will transfer development rights to the parcel in order to obtain the necessary units of use for the proposed multi-family project;
• 6.       ‘limiting development potential to that existing in July 1987’: This is a Basin wide standard with which the Sierra Colina Village proposed multi-family dwelling project complies.

Subdivisions must be consistent with the applicable provisions in Chapter 43, Subdivision Standards in the TRPA Code. Master Response C at pages 2-245 through 2-247 of the Sierra Colina Final EIS notes that TRPA Code of Ordinances Section 43.4 provides subdivision standards for projects approved following adoption of the 1987 Regional Plan. The following subdivision standards would apply to the proposed Sierra Colina project.

►              The subdivision must occur in an urban area;

►              The new use must be a permissible use for the applicable plan area statement;

►              If multi-residential bonus units are allocated to the project, the resulting affordable or moderate income housing                   units must be deed restricted for moderate income or affordable housing:

►               The subdivision shall comply with the applicable density standard based on guidance provided in the                    applicable Plan Area Statement;

►              The subdivision shall comply with the basic services standards in Chapter 27 of the TRPA Code;

►              The subdivision shall comply with the parking standards for the land use
                   (see Chapters 24, 30 and Ordinance 87-8);

►              The subdivision shall comply with the applicable signage standards in Chapter 26 of the TRPA Code;

►              An air quality mitigation fee shall be assessed based on the resulting increase in vehicle trips;

►              TRPA may require covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs), or deed restrictions to ensure                                     compliance with the Code and conditions of approval; and,

►              The subdivision shall comply with general standards including, but not limited to, signage, BMPs, design                   review, parking, and driveways.

•               This section is not to be construed to permit the transfer or modification of an approved multi-residential                  project to a lot and block subdivision.

•               A final map or similar document for an approved subdivision shall contain a signature block for TRPA to                 document regional approval

•               TRPA shall only approve subdivisions of post-1987 projects after approval of the underlying project.

As discussed in the Sierra Colina DEIS, the project as proposed either satisfies each of the above subdivision standards or would be the subject of a condition requiring such compliance (e.g., complying with the signage standards of Chapter 26) (See also Master Response C at pages 2-245 through 2-247 of the Sierra Colina Final EIS). Thus, the Sierra Colina project is eligible to be subdivided via a two-step subdivision.

*LEED is a registered trademark of the U.S. Green Building Council