Despite pleas from residents on a variety of issues concerning water, schools, transit and sprawl growth, the board said this is a planned community approved by the cities of Reno and Sparks and that it does not conflict with the goals of the 2007 regional plan.
Spring Mountain is planned west of Pyramid Lake, about 30 miles northeast of Reno. About 12,000 homes would be zoned on 6,105 acres.
Erik Holland, president of Voters for Sensible Growth, appealed the Regional Planning Commission's Feb. 11 decision and gave a presentation before the governing board Thursday.
"I appealed this because the regional plan requires concurrency and the numbers don't show it," he said.
Holland said he contacted the Regional Transportation Commission to get data on impact fees and the massive growth expected along Pyramid. He said the development could create up to 117,000 trips along Pyramid per day.
"I couldn't get an answer from the planning commission, but I know they want to limit their trips to 27,000," he said. "But this is a wild guess. This is a citizen crunching some numbers."
Water, Holland said, is also an issue that makes the project premature for conformance.
"I gather the developers would assume those water rights would be sold back to them, but there are problems with depleted aquifers in Warm Springs," Holland said.
Holland also disagrees with the idea of Reno annexing Spring Mountain. Many residents in the past opposed Reno's jurisdiction of the non-contiguous land.
"Annexation may or may not happen," Holland said. "But it's an uphill battle. ... I just really think that some hard thought needs to be given to this. I've become a familiar face to many of you in these procedures. It's been a disaster; the public has been warped. Environmentally, it's been a disaster and financially it'll be a disaster unless the numbers change."
Other residents expressed different reasons for their opposition.
Sandy McGill, representing herself, her husband and the Rancho Haven valley, said she has fought against Spring Mountain for three years. McGill said she was concerned about local education planners' intent to build three new middle schools and a high school in the area.
"Wouldn't it make more sense to use education spending to upgrade current school systems and rejuvenate existing ones instead of building out here in the boonies where most students wouldn't be able to go except those privileged few of Spring Mountain?" McGill said. "The voters of Washoe County expressed their concern about unchecked sprawl. Please help us stem unneeded growth."
Bob Fulkerson, state director of Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada and a community activist, said he's attended many hearings on the project and felt it was wrong that the developers believe they're "entitled" to the project.
"I've been out there (to Winnemucca Ranch) since I was 1 year old," he said. "Anything they do to that area is not going to improve it. I also know they have a right to develop the area. Right now, it's one house to every 40 acres. If they build 12,000 new homes, that's an 80-fold increase in density. ... Sprawl growth threatens the natural environment. Let's start growing inside out instead of outside in."
Arlo Stockham, general manager of the project, said his developers have done more than necessary as a gesture of good faith to make sure all details have been considered and planned.
"We've gone overboard in contributing to traffic funding," he said. "We've gone quite a bit further in a whole series of traffic mitigation measures, first getting the capture rate and counting the trips and how many leave the site."
Stockham said the testimony at Thursday's meeting ignored the adopted plans and made many false assumptions about the project.
"Everything complies with all adopted plans and approval," he said. "We received a 9-0 vote from the commission."
After the governing board unanimously approved the project's conformance, Dave Aiazzi, chairman of the governing board, said he expected the matter would go to court.
"The Sparks City Council heard this and I understand if they've heard it and if they don't see a problem with it, I don't, either," he said. "I listen to what the Sparks council says, but as for the water, I agree with public comment."
Aiazzi said where the water would come from is not in the board's purview.
"That's what the water engineer’s job is to do," he said. "The water engineer decides where the water goes."
Post a Comment