In a split decision Wednesday, the governing board of the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency said the issue needed to be resolved and acknowledged that lawsuits are likely over the plan critics on both sides say is flawed.
"The litigation potential is high no matter what we do," said Allen Biaggi, Nevada director of Conservation and Natural Resources and a TRPA governor. "We've got to move this forward. The time has come."
"To think we're going to make everybody happy is totally unreasonable," agreed Norma Santiago, El Dorado County appointee to the agency.
Under the adopted plan, up to 138 new piers could be built around the lake, 10 of them publicly owned. No more than five private piers could be built during a single year. An additional 1,862 buoys could be placed on the lake.
Most new pier construction has been prohibited at Tahoe since 1987, when TRPA left the controversial issue out of the agency's regional plan guiding Tahoe land use.
What followed was an on-again, off-again effort to agree on new shoreline regulations. After studies showed piers had little impact on fish, attention shifted to such touchy issues as boating pollution, public access and scenic impacts.
Many of those issues remained in play Wednesday. Lawyers for Earth Justice, representing the Sierra Club and the League to Save Lake Tahoe, urged delaying the regulations until TRPA approves a proposed "blue boating" program to address such issues as boat pollution and invasive species transported by pleasure boats.
The TRPA governors are scheduled to discuss that plan in March.
"We don't know how much the blue boating program is going to reduce pollution at the lake," Earth Justice lawyer Wendy Park said.
Al Garcia, a member of the Washoe Tribe, said approval of a plan allowing more shoreline development is premature considering the many ecological problems faced at Tahoe.
"The lake's dying, and we're talking about piers," Garcia said. "We need to heal our lake first before we move on to buoys and piers."
Jan Brisco of the Tahoe Lakefront Owners Association, which has some members who have waited decades to build a pier, said more time is needed.
"I really think we need to take a deep breath and a step back here," Brisco said. "The document is incomplete."
Much of Wednesday's discussion involved public access provisions. Proposals requiring new or modified piers not to interfere with public access were attacked by property owners, who said the agency was reaching beyond its authority. The board ultimately agreed the states of Nevada and California have overriding authority in that area.
Post a Comment