Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutPublic Comment #4 (Martin)1 September 2, 2013 TO: Truckee Town Council FROM: John N. Martin, 14909 Northwoods Blvd., Truckee, CA 96161 RE: Tahoe Donner Revised Plans Background I am writing as a property owner in Tahoe Donner and as a professional in environmental studies. When I am not in residence in Truckee, I am a professor of environmental ethics, writing and teaching at the graduate level about the relation of development to conservation. Since its first public exposure I have been very concerned about the details of the proposed renovations at the Tahoe Donner Marina. For the reasons laid out below, I would like to urge the Council, in the interest of the community, to confirm the Commission’s unanimous ruling and require Tahoe Donner to revise its plans in fundamental ways so as to make it compatible with the natural setting and ecology of Donner Lake. The Commission’s Unanimous Rejection As you know, the Commission rejected the plans for a long list of reasons: • The proposed retaining walls at the west end of the beach, which not only would not prevent erosion (as claimed) but which violate ordinances governing slopes greater than 30%. • The placement of the patio, pathways, and lawn, which would necessitate very significant earth movement, entailing the removal of six large health Jeffery pines, and which would endanger the remaining trees. It would also violate ordinances governing slopes greater than 30%. • Extensive lighting, which not only would be six time greater than the minimal limit required by ordinances but which would entails extensive trenching that would endanger existing trees • The enlarged patio that would reduce pedestrian traffic lanes and small boat staging areas, endangering those using the Marina. • Perhaps most significantly, the difficulty of formulating enforceable restrictions that would prevent Tahoe Donner from using the enlarged dinning and meeting areas for large, non- recreational events like weddings and after dark gatherings. Tahoe Donner and the Environment. Normally, Tahoe Donner is a good environmental custodian, and its environmental record is exemplary, for example, in the purchase of land like the Euler Valley for preservation, its near textbook perfection of the management of Tahoe Donner’s forests, its policies on the environmentally friendly removal of biomass, the excellent trail system open to the public, and the shuttle service to cut down car usage. But, the three-time failure of Tahoe Donner to obtain approval before the Planning Commission, the extremely detailed critical analyses by the Planning Commission Staff, the nearly unprecedented public objections to the proposal, and the unanimous rejection by the Commission of the latest proposal should make it abundantly clear that the Marina project is an exception to this general rule The root causes of the controversy, in my judgment, are two: 2 • Architectural Plans. The first is a problem with planning, specifically in the directions given to the landscape architect in drawing up the original plans. The original plans laid down enlarge dinning and meeting areas – a greatly enlarged dinning patio and upper lawn area – in a crude rectilinear scheme of straight line extensions of existing facilities with little, if any, concern for the impact of the construction on the existing Jeffrey pine grove, on the physical alteration of the land mass, or on natural lighting. Unfortunately, except in minor ways, the Tahoe Donner Management has been adamant in refusing to redraft these original details in the face of public outrage and criticism by the Planning Commission. • Non-Recreational Uses. The second problem has been in the evident intention of the Tahoe Donner Board and Management to extend the usage of the Marina to large events not connected with daylight waterfront recreation. There has been a long series of inconsistent and contradictory statements, both in writing and in speech, both informally and at formal meetings, including on the Association’s web pages, about the intended use of the future Marina. Many of these statements describe significantly expanded non-recreational uses, so much so that the Board and Management have created a very serious atmosphere of distrust and skepticism of its sometime assertions that it plans no expanded uses – a skepticism that was voiced very clearly by the Planning Commission itself at its meeting at which it unanimously rejected the current set of plans. I urge the Council, if it approves the plans at all, to adopt the suggestion of Stephen Ramos, Chair of the Commission. He pointed out that, once the facilities were expanded, it would be very difficult to limit large gatherings to so-called “member based events,” as mooted in the current Staff review, because that criterion is vague and open to expansion. Instead he proposed to limit “events” to those consisting of “a small number” of people, and to implement this rule by using the language the Staff suggested in its previous report, in its so-called Condition 26: No commercial events (i.e. weddings involving more than 10 people, concerts, corporate retreats, events incorporating amplified sound or PA systems or similar type events) are approved, nor are they allowed within the marina facility. In general, commercial events include those which are made available to Tahoe Donner property owners or non-Tahoe Donner property owners that fall outside the normal parameters and uses of a private, marinal recreational facility for Tahoe Donner property owners. This requirement does not apply to small-scale events available to Tahoe Donner property owners which have historically occurred at the marina facility, including birthday parties, family events, day camps or similar type events. The Trees The rejected plans call for the removal of 12 Jeffrey pines of diameter greater than 6 inches and numerous smaller trees. Of the12 large trees marked for removal, six are to be removed because they are judged by the Tahoe Donner forester to be unhealthy or dangerous, and six because they conflict, by only a few feet, with the current construction plans. The Council should be aware that Tahoe Donner’s “Forester’s Report” (2/15/13) has been disputed in documents submitted to the Planning Commission by independent arborists. It is criticized for two reasons: for being less detailed that it should be in the evaluation of individual trees, and for the evaluation standards used in condemning trees. Instead of using the criteria appropriate for evaluating tree removal in setting of special environmental beauty and value, or for trees in the contexts of an urban forest, it uses the more generous culling standards that are used to remove trees in a broad open forest. Before approving Tahoe Donner’s plans for tree removal, I strongly urge to Town to require, as the Planning Commission’s latest report sketches, that the Town employ and independent arborist or urban forester to provide an independent assessment of the health and safety of the trees marked for removal, and to access the dangers to the trees that would remain from the extensive earth movement that is planned. 3 Conclusion The proposed plans are, in short, very poorly designed from the perspective of harmonizing the Marina with the natural environment of Donner Lake. Despite the Management’s intransigence, it should be required to send the design back to the architect, and to come up with a redesign that is much more environmentally appropriate. Secondly, in approving the redesigned project, the Town must be very careful in putting into place a mechanism or restrictions to insure that the Marina’s uses are restricted to those for which it is approved, namely, daylight waterfront recreation, and that they not extend to events that are large in number, occur at night, or that are commercial.