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

In its April 2006 application to TRPA for the proposed Sierra Colina Village, Sierra Colina set forth its community outreach activities in Exhibit 41 to the application, which stated as follows:

Exhibit 41:  COMMUNITY OUTREACH DURING EVOLUTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT

We have spent the past year meeting with interested stakeholders in the community about our property.  Our community outreach has included discussions related to finding a possible conservancy to purchase the entire parcel to preserve as open space, to meetings with local housing advocates who see an urgent need in the Tahoe Basin to build more reasonably priced, quality workforce homes.  Highlights of our community outreach are discussed in the attached Exhibit “41” (Community Outreach During Evolution of Proposed Project).

            Trust for Public Land:  As soon as escrow closed on our purchase of this parcel, at the request of local environmentalists, we began discussions with local conservationists to explore whether some entity might want to purchase our entire parcel to preserve it as open space.  The League to Save Lake Tahoe suggested that we discuss this option with the Trust for Public Land.  The results of our discussions with the Trust for Public Land are summarized in Exhibit “26”.  The Trust for Public Land indicated that this parcel did not meet the conservancy acquisition criteria of the Tahoe Conservancy, and that the Trust’s communications with Nevada Division of State Lands regarding Sierra Colina, likewise, did not lead to conservancy acquisition prospects.

            Terra Firma:  During the Fall of 2005, we also met with Terra Firma, a Nevada company that specializes in facilitating its clients’ efforts to seek federal funds available through the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act (“SNPLMA”) to sell land that is deemed suitable for conservancy to a federal agency.  Terra Firma considered our request and did its own assessment of the prospects of the Sierra Colina parcel being desirable to be nominated for federal acquisition using SNPLMA conservancy funds.  The results of Terra Firma’s evaluation are summarized in Exhibit “27”.  Terra Firma declined to pursue a conservancy acquisition of Sierra Colina because Terra Firma viewed Sierra Colina as better suited for responsible development than for public acquisition.

            Granite Crest Estate:  Through the Sierra Club, we met an investor with Granite Crest Estate who offered to explore potential interest on the part of other local conservancies in Sierra Colina.  Granite Crest Estate informed us that it contacted the Nature Conservancy, which responded that Sierra Colina does not meet its criteria for conservancy acquisition.  Granite Crest Estate also informed us that it discussed Sierra Colina with certain members of the Board of Directors of the Nevada Land Conservancy to determine whether the Nevada Land Conservancy might consider Sierra Colina to be a “project of interest.”  The Nevada Land Conservancy declined interest in Sierra Colina. (Exhibit “28”).

The U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service:  Soon after we became the new owners of this parcel, one community activist suggested to us that the Forest Service currently viewed Sierra Colina as a priority acquisition parcel.  Because Sierra Colina shares a portion of its eastern boundary with the U.S. Forest Service, and because we wanted to investigate the Forest Service’s current views on our parcel, we met with its senior staff (see Exhibit “4”). 

We apprised the Forest Service of the status of our Sierra Colina Village project proposal and sought its input and reactions.  The Forest Service indicated to us that in the light of the Santini Burton Act provisions, the potential for the Forest Service to have any acquisition or land donation recipient interest in all or part of Sierra Colina is negligible due to the numerous public access and conservation easements and encumbrances which will encumber the Sierra Colina land for the benefit of the public and the environment.

Furthermore, the Forest Service indicated that it is supportive of our Sierra Colina Village proposed project and is receptive to our proposed idea that Easement #2 in our public linear facilities application (see “Community Benefits of Sierra Colina Village” included in Exhibits “1” and “45” attached), linking the Round Hill bike path (through Forest Service land) with the Kahle Community Recreation Center (through Sierra Colina land) makes good sense for public access and recreational trail use on Sierra Colina (Easement #2 on Exhibit “17” and BSA Sheets C1.0 and C4.0). 

            Sierra Club:  Through attending its regular monthly meetings, we have kept the Sierra Club informed of the status of Sierra Colina since we acquired the property.   At the request of the Sierra Club, we have made presentations to local members regarding our plans for the property (Exhibit “29”).  We are grateful for the input we have received from its members during the past year in terms of issues of concern on Sierra Colina.  We recognize that the Sierra Club generally prefers that open spaces remain open spaces.  We also understand that the Sierra Club acknowledges the need for workforce housing as an important community issue here at Tahoe.  Our project proposes to: meet a portion of the need for moderate-income deed restricted homes here at the Lake; initiate the design of water quality treatment on Sierra Colina which will hopefully exceed local standards; and set aside approximately two thirds of Sierra Colina for public, recreational and open space/conservation uses. 

            League to Save Lake Tahoe:  As supporters of the League to Save Lake Tahoe, we naturally have sought the League’s input concerning Sierra Colina (Exhibit “30”).  In the past, the League has opposed development on this site.  In terms of having a significant role in Pathway 2007, we believe the League also appreciates the need for affordable homes here in the Basin, as providing our local workforce the opportunity to live near where they work.  Such would be a significant factor in reducing traffic in the Basin, which the League clearly views to be a major source of polluting the Lake.  During the EIS for our proposed project, we welcome additional input from the League with respect to how Sierra Colina might become a model project for responsible, sustainable development here at the Lake (Exhibit “30”).

            Lake Tahoe Housing Coalition:  As local advocates for affordable housing, we belong to the Lake Tahoe Housing Coalition.  The Lake Tahoe Housing Coalition aspires to give input to locally elected policy makers on issues that impact the regulatory difficulties associated with trying to resolve the shortage of affordable homes in the Tahoe Basin.  The Housing Coalition recognizes that this project is an effort to help meet a need for moderate-income deed restricted homes in Douglas County, of which there are none at the time of the filing of this application.

            Lake Village Homeowners’ Association:  The property adjacent to Sierra Colina on its north side is the 56-acre, 325-home Lake Village.  Several times during the past year, we have presented status updates to the Lake Village homeowners and their homeowners’ association Board of Directors regarding current activities and future plans for Sierra Colina (Exhibit “31”).  We are enthusiastic about the Lake Village Environmental Improvement Project (EIP) that is just getting underway on our neighbors’ property, and we look forward to cooperating with our neighbors in terms of resolving some of the storm water runoff problems that exist with respect to Douglas County’s Lake Village Drive right of way which runs between Lake Village and Sierra Colina.  We have received many favorable comments form Lake Village homeowners regarding our efforts to improve our property, and we look forward to their continuing input and cooperation as we progress into the EIS for Sierra Colina.

            Quigley Investment Co.:  During the Fall of 2005, we met with members of the Quigley family who operate Quigley Investment Co., the entity which owns and manages the Shady Lane Industrial Complex located at the southeast corner of Sierra Colina (Exhibit “32”).  Because the Quigley family has both residential and commercial structures on its property, we found the Quigley family to be respectful of our private property rights.

            St. Joseph Community Land Trust:  During this past year of community outreach, we have become acquainted with the St. Joseph Community Land Trust.  It is a 501c3 charitable land trust whose mission is to provide homes for individuals and families, aligned with people’s resources.  We applaud the mission of the St. Joseph Community Land Trust.  The Trust has recently acquired title to land from the City of South Lake Tahoe on which the Trust intends to construct the first deed-restricted moderate-income home in the City.  We’ve had numerous discussions with various member of the St. Joseph Community Land trust with respect to whether or not it would be a suitable recipient for a charitable donation of land underneath the moderate-income deed-restricted homes proposed in Sierra Colina’s project application (further discussion of the St. Joseph Community Land Trust follows in the section entitled, “Community Benefits of the Proposed Project” included in Exhibits “1” and “45”).

            The Washoe Tribe of Nevada & California:  We have met with the Chairman and members of the Washoe Tribe to discuss the history and philosophy of the Washoe Tribe and to walk together around Sierra Colina.  We appreciated the generosity of their time and the many insights members of the Tribe shared with us about the Washoe Tribe’s repatriation efforts in the Lake Tahoe Basin.  In conjunction with our project application to TRPA, we will request that TRPA prepare at our expense a complete Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).  We look forward to the involvement of the Washoe Tribe in the cultural resources assessment to be conducted as part of the EIS.  We desire to continue exploring opportunities for us to participate with the Washoe Tribe to honor and protect the Washoe Tribe’s culture and history here in the Lake Tahoe Basin, and on other matters that may be of importance to the Washoe Tribe with respect to Sierra Colina (see Exhibit “33”).

            Douglas County, Nevada:  Because Sierra Colina shares much of its southern boundary with Douglas County’s Kahle Park & Recreation Center, we have met a number of times with senior staff at Douglas County (including Commissioner Tim Smith; Dan Holler; Mitch Dion; Mimi Moss; Scott Morgan; Carl Ruschmeyer) to apprise the County of our proposed projects and to seek their input and reactions.  Douglas County has indicated that it is supportive of both the Sierra Colina multifamily dwelling project and its proposed linear public facilities (see discussion below in section on “Community Benefits” included in Exhibits “1” and “45”).  Douglas County recognizes the strategic benefits to the proposed linear public facilities Applicant proposes.  In addition, Douglas County has expressed its interest in being the land donation recipient for a proposed Sierra Colina open space land conveyance.

Communications with the above organizations resulted in no offers to purchase the land for conservation purposes. Some organizations listed above responded that the property did not meet their criteria for potential public acquisition lands or was not suitable for public acquisition based on research of the property and comparison to specific criteria. The USFS appraised the property as a single family estate and made an offer to purchase it in early 2005, when it was under previous ownership. However, since Sierra Colina has owned the property, there have been no offers by the USFS or other agencies to purchase this property. Additionally, at the TRPA Governing Board hearing on August 28, 2008, a representative of the U.S. Forest Service Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit (USFS) stated that there is no current interest on the part of the Forest Service to acquire the property (see Master Response E to Sierra Colina Final EIS at page 2-249), nor is Sierra Colina on any list of future potential acquisition interest at the USFS.

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