Protect
Our Washoe
Fighting
to save the Ballardini Ranch
and for a better quality of life
and for a better quality of life
|
Protect
Our Washoe
|
|
|
Fighting
to save the Ballardini Ranch
and for a better quality of life |
Protect Our Washoe was established in the 1970s and has worked on a wide range of public interest issues. We successfully opposed the "A-Line" route for U.S. 395 South between Reno and the Mt. Rose Highway. More recently, P.O.W. provided input to the 2030 regional transportation plan.
In 2002, we continued our longrunning efforts to preserve the Ballardini Ranch and successfully opposed attempts to increase the density of the neighboring ArrowCreek development.
We'll keep you posted. If you are not already on our mailing list, please request inclusion and please consider supporting our work by sending a contribution to the address, below.
Thank you.
BALLARDINI RANCH HEARING
PLEASE ATTEND
WASHOE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
TUESDAY, JUNE 29, 2004
6:30 P.M.
WASHOE COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBERS
1001 EAST NINTH STREET
RENO, NEVADA
TOIYABE RANCH ESTATES APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT
OF 600 SOUTHERN ACRES OF BALLARDINI RANCHPublic notice of the hearing is as follows:
PUBLIC HEARING: TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP CASE NO. TM02-005 (TOIYABE RANCH ESTATES) — To develop a 40-lot single-family subdivision on ±599.61 acres of a 1,019.1-acre parcel, as authorized in Article 608, Tentative Subdivision Maps, of the Washoe County Development Code. Lot sizes range from ±6.45 acres to ±32.66 acres, with an average lot size of ±14.64 acres. The project is located south of the terminus of Ridgeview Drive and west of the terminus of Lone Tree Lane. The subject parcel is designated Low Density Rural (LDR), High Density Rural (HDR), and General Rural (GR) in the Southwest Truckee Meadows Area Plan, and is situated in portions of Sections 2, 3, and 4, T18N, R19E, MDM, Washoe County, Nevada. The property is located in the Southwest Truckee Meadows Citizen Advisory Board boundary and Washoe County Commission District No. 2 (a portion of APN 220-080-01)Staff Representative: Paul Kelly (775) 328-3621
A hearing on the Application came before the Southwest Truckee Meadows Citizens Advisory Board (the "Advisory Board") on May 20, 2004. The Advisory Board UNANIMOUSLY REJECTED the Application for the development. The Staff Report of the Department of Community Development of Washoe County also RECOMMENDED DENIAL. Nevertheless, the matter comes before the Planning Commission on Tuesday, June 29.
Please contact the Planning Commission and let them know your views. At the end of this notice, information regarding the Planning Commission, and the method to contact them, is set forth.
It is very important, however, to attend this meeting. This is an important meeting because the recommendation of the Washoe County Planning Commission will have significant weight with the Washoe County Commission, when it is to consider this application.
Although the proposed density is acceptable in terms of seeking 40 lots on 549.61 acres (of the 1,019-acre parcel consisting of the entire Ballardini Ranch), the implications of the application are great. The Advisory Board, the Community Development Staff and the public, have raised a number of objections as follows:
A. Traffic Impact — Lone Tree Lane and collectors. The Engineering Department has not reported on the impact of the additional approximate 400 trips per day that will travel along Lone Tree Lane, and collectors, if the project is approved. Additionally, consideration should be taken to the fact that the Landmark/Cosmos Property (160 acres) that is nearby, has also begun to seek approval of a development that would increase its density over and above current approved density. Considered together, if approved, Lone Tree Lane would, as we understand it, have to be widened considerably. However, the Engineering Department has not yet passed on this. Although the owner has contended it is not required to provide a traffic study because the number of lots (40) are fewer than those required for a traffic study.However, the Advisory Board has recommended, consistent with the view of the public, that because of surrounding pending applications for development, the impact of each will have a significant impact on the overall requirements for widening Lone Tree Lane, Lakeside and the adjacent and contiguous roadways. This is especially so in view of the fact there is a potential link from the proposed development to McCarran at the intersection of Manzanita Boulevard, even though it is expressed as a ìfire exitî at this time. There would be nothing to prevent them from expanding the road from a ìfire exitî to a more sizeable road. However, no traffic study has been done, and the recommendation is that such a traffic study be done giving the public, and the public officials, full knowledge of the impact of not only this development, but also the pending developments.
B. Sensitive Stream Zone Issues — Especially Evans Creek. There is no clear information with respect to the extent of the compliance with sensitive and critical stream zones. In previous applications this information has been made available in more detail. This is especially important in view of the fact the applicant intends as a fire exit to cross Evans Creek, for traffic, which is, of course, a highly controversial and important stream and the purity of the stream is very important to be maintained. The application is, in the view of the Advisory Board, incomplete in that regard.
C. Water/sewer approval — not yet obtained. The Health Department has not yet approved [and probably cannot approve it, since the Truckee Meadows Services Area (TMSA) is not within that area] water and sewer for that area. Accordingly, the developer will have to get a variance to dig wells and provide sewer on each of the lots. This has not yet been done, and it is unclear whether it will ever perk. This being so, this means the developer is seeking substantial expense and time in approving a development that may not occur until services are available under the TMSA. There is no assurance that (a) the Department will ever grant approval for a variance outside the TMSA, and (b) the land may not permit water or sewer to be utilized as a basis for providing water and sewer in the area. For these reasons, we believe it is premature to approve the Application. In addition, as indicated below, the representative of the owner of the Ballardini Ranch has indicated that litigation may occur with respect to this issue.
D. Pending Litigation. There is pending litigation at this time between Washoe County and the owner of the Ballardini Ranch. The litigation is over the issue of whether or not there now exists of a public right-of-way (in view of a presumed public right-of-way) through the Ranch. The owner of the Ballardini Ranch denies its existence. The outcome of the litigation could significantly affect the variety, or appropriateness, of the configuration existing for the proposed development. Until the litigation is concluded, it is premature to consider a development through that area.
E. Potential Threatened Litigation. The representative of the owner of the Ballardini Ranch indicated at the Advisory Board hearing on May 20 that it might seek the remedy of litigation if issues could not be resolved with providing water and sewer to the Ballardini Ranch portion that is subject to the Application, notwithstanding the fact that it is not within the sphere of influence of the City of Reno. Accordingly, with the pending litigation, and potential threatened litigation, it is premature to consider a development through this area. The outcome of each of those pieces of litigation could significantly affect not only the configuration, but also the legal appropriateness, of such a development.
F. Fire Exit — Implications for the Future. The representative of the owner of the Ballardini Ranch acknowledged that the Advisory Board hearing that a fire exit was being proposed from the 600-acre southern portion of the Ballardini Ranch (which is subject to the Application called Toiyabe Ranch Estates) through the northern portion o of the Ballardini Ranch (which is within the sphere of influence of the City of Reno) to McCarran Boulevard, intersecting at Manzanita. This intersection at Manzanita, even though it is proposed as a fire exit, could (and will likely) serve as a precursor to Ridgeview (which will also have a connection to Manzanita in view of the recent decision to provide access to a new water tank that is being constructed nearby) and also through Lone Tree Lane. This is the beginning of a significant roadway network that will have implications in the entire Ridgeview/Lone Tree Lane areas.
G. Wetlands. Although the owners acknowledge that a wetlands exist, no wetlands study has been done.
H. Artifacts; Wildlife Study. Although it is recognized that there has been artifacts in the area over the years, there has been no study of artifacts at this time. Further, there has been no formal study with respect to the impact that would exist with development on the wildlife which have utilized the area for some time. The Advisory Board has recommended that both studies be done.
I. Gated Community. The applicant identifies it as a gated community. This means that further access to the Forest Service would be denied, based upon the current position of the owner. Although the spokesman for the owner at the Advisory Board hearing indicated an initial unwillingness to even broach this with the actual owner, the representative did indicate that some communication would be given to the Advisory Board. It is unclear at this time whether the owner would even consider opening up the development so that the public could get through, in an appropriate fashion, to have access to the mountains.
J. Public Trails. As indicated above, there is no plan for public trails at this time, which the County has requested. The representative of the owner has indicated it has not yet acceded to the request of the County, and this decision will be based upon whether or not the owner is ultimately advised that it is legally required to provide such access.
IT IS IMPORTANT MORE THAN EVER THAT ALL OF YOU COME OUT AND MAKE YOUR VIEWS KNOWN, OR AT LEAST KNOWN BY YOUR PRESENCE. WE LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU THERE.
Washoe County Planning Commission
Doxey, Robert M. Chair (Mail: 40 Sawbuck Road, Reno, NV 89509);
W: (Message Only) 328.3600; retired engineer
Salerno, Daniel N. Vice Chair (Mail: P.O. Box 7869, Incline Village, NV 89452);
H: 832.7613; retired architect
Frandsen, Florence (Marge) (Mail: P.O. Box 19280, Reno, NV 89511)
H: 857.7247; retired business professional
Rogers, Stephen D. (9070 Rain Dance Way, Reno, NV 89506)
T: 972.3672; retired engineer
Sanada, Mary (10750 Thomas Creek Road, Reno, NV 89511)
W: 841.8040; H: 853.3012; Fax: 841.8044; E-mail: mcsanada@gbis.com;
certified public accountant
Sullivan, Mark W. (Mail: 6855 Summit View Drive, Sparks, NV 89436)
W: 329.6116; H: 425.2626; business professional
Weber, William (Mail: P.O. Box 21330, Reno, NV 89515-1330)
T: 972.0200; Fax: 972.0200 (call first); E-mail: webercommish@aol.com;
property manager
UPDATE: The planning commission turned down the application. The developer's appeal is scheduled to be heard at 3:30 p.m. on Tuesday, July 27, 2004, before the Washoe County Commission.
MINNESOTA OWNERS BEGIN
ATTEMPT TO DEVELOP BALLARDINI RANCH
Man offers city, county loan to buy Ballardini Ranch
$20 million: Officials plan to reopen negotiations to buy Reno property, or consider condemning the parcel.
Reno Gazette-Journal 6-26-2004
Letter to the Washoe County Commission and Reno City Council from Steven T. Walther 6-25-2004"A race is on to find money to buy the Ballardini Ranch and preserve it as open space because the owners now are asking the Reno City Council to annex the northern portion..."
Reno Gazette-Journal Sept. 19, 2003
Ballardini
owner no longer wants to sell Reno
Council unanimously declines Ballardini annexation Don't
delay Ballardini acquisition
Washoe
commission agrees to Ballardini appraisal
Ballardini
owners ask City of Reno
Ballardini
Ranch Timeline 1997-2003 Proposed
annexation program gives Reno Task
force considers water well plan Backcountry
group targets southwest Reno foothills Financial
assistance possible for well owners Land
trusts large and small gaining momentum County
puts forth tougher land-use standards Ballardini
Ranch preservation takes major step Washoe
County officials say new land-use policies Effort
to save western foothills passes threshold, activist says In-depth
historical background and issues |
Protect
Our Washoe
P. O. Box 20397
Reno, NV 89515
You
may send your contribution to help fund the fight to the above address. Thank
you.
E-mail:
info@protectourwashoe.org
Back to Quick Index @ the top of this
page
Site designed
and maintained by Deciding Factors
Direct
comments and suggestions to webmaster
NevadaVista
photo at top of page copyright © 1984 Betty J. Barbano, all rights reserved.
