Following what is becoming a familiar script of over-turning Planning Commission and Planning Department recommendations in regards to major Dayton Valley land use applications, the Lyon County Commissioners on Thursday voted 3-2 (Roberts, Hunewill opposed) to approve changing the Master Plan land use designations for the Santa Maria Ranch.  The Planning Commission on October 12, 2009 voted 5-1 in recommending denial.

The Santa Maria Ranch is located between the Carson River, Ophir Mill Road and Highway 50 in Dayton.  It is the former Winter’s Ranch. It was originally sold to North Tahoe Investment Group and in February 2003 the county approved a 554 single family residential Planned Unit Development on the 665 acres.  Phase I is currently under development.

The applicants, Dayton Land Developer, LLC, bought the property from north Tahoe Investment Group. Representatives say the changing economy has made the current PUD restricting the number of homes economically unfeasible and that the market the Santa Maria Ranch was originally designed for is gone because the lot sizes are too big.

Commissioners Joe Mortensen, Don Tibbals and Larry McPherson supported the request to change the Master Plan from Open Space, Low Density and Medium Density residential on approximately 665 acres to a Specific Plan, PUD, which is proposed to include commercial, senior community, multi-family dwellings and high density residential lots.

The Specific Plan was not adopted as presented, but continued to a later date to allow staff to work with the applicants and come back with a Specific Plan more to the liking of the Planning Department.  County Code requires any land application of over 160 acres must have a Specific Plan.

Consideration of the Planned Unit Development was also postponed until the Specific Plan is reviewed and adopted.

The decisions came after more than three hours of testimony and debate.

Commissioner Don Tibbals spoke in support of the approval, noting the smaller lots will make the homes more affordable in a county with very high unemployment rates, “So let’s put some people to work and build some houses.”

Commissioner Larry McPherson also advocated the proposal, stating “Growth is inevitable.  We should be able to control it.  This sounds to me like a hell of a project.”

Prior to the opening of the presentation, Commissioner Chuck Roberts stated he had recently been approached by representatives of Dayton Land Developers, offering one indirect and one direct offer to do private business with them.

“I discussed this with the Ethics Commission and with the District Attorney.  I believe it (the offer) creates an inference of impropriety.  I did not respond to either offer and I feel I can set it aside and consider this matter,” Roberts stated.

The presentation of the proposal was similar to that given to the Planning Commission.  Applicant representatives stated the project would be of benefit to the community, offering needed affordable housing, senior housing and assisted living facilities, a commercial center in the Mound House area, open space and horse migration paths.  They presented studies showing the current zoning and PUD with larger lot sizes are not saleable in today’s market.

Planning Director Rob Loveberg reiterated the current underlying zoning on the property allows one residential unit per acre.  The West Central Lyon County Land Use Master Plan  (approved November 2002) would allow approximately 77 homes in Low Density Residential, 460 homes in medium residential and 128 acres Open Space, allowing between 928 to 1747 dwelling units on the 650 acres.

Loveberg stood by his prior recommendation to the Planning Commission and recommended denial of the Master Plan Amendment and the Specific Plan, stating the goals and objectives of the proposal are not in compliance with Master Plan and the wishes and vision of those who created it. 

Following the 3-2 passing of Commissioner Tibbals’ motion to approve the Master Plan amendment, he made a motion to approve the Specific Plan.

During discussion of this motion, Commissioner Phyllis Hunewill asked Loveberg if he could support the Specific Plan it in its current form.  Loveberg again emphasized the Specific Plan was not adequate to protect the County’s ability to enforce in coming years.  This prompted a frustrated Commissioner Hunewill to say in reference to the three votes against planning recommendations in regards to the requested M/P changes:

“But who cares what you think.  That’s what we are getting here.  We have a planning department and a planning commission.  It comes here and look what we get.”

Tibbals motion failed 2-3, and a subsequent motion to continue a decision on the Specific Plan to a future time passed 5-0.

Audra Miller, Planning Manager with Lumos & Associates, concurred with Loveberg’s views of both the M/P and Specific Plan proposals, stating “This will bring a huge change.  I cannot recommend supporting it.  It does not give the County the framework and a proper map.”

Planning Commissioner Larry Wahrenbrock told the commission he was in full support of Loveberg’s recommendations to deny, noting the increase in number of residential lots from 568 to 2192 “is not only dramatic, but beyond any anticipated land use for this area.....the cuts and fills indicated in the proposal are substantial and will significantly alter the landscape....I must also recognize the Dayton area’s consistent desire to remain a rural community, something this proposal radically disrupts.”

He averred the proposal is far too much, far too fast and will bring impacts “we can’t even conceive,” and in effect, if approved would be creating a city within itself.

County Commissioner Chuck Roberts was in full support of Wahrenbrock’s opinion and that of the planning staff.

“The Master Plan is a vision of what the community wanted.  This change is significant.  I don’t think we (the County) are at a level of sophistication to enter into a 20-year agreement.  The (applicant’s) are between the edge of a cliff and being out of money.  The actions we take will be paid for by future taxpayers....which is where we are today....Larry Wahrenbrock is right, it would not be responsible for us to do this.”

A summary of the votes:

• Voted 3-2 (Roberts, Hunewill against) to approve the Master Plan amendment, creating a Specific Plan.
• After defeat of Commissioner Tibbal’s motion to approve the Specific Plan failed 2-3, (Hunewill, Roberts, Mortensen against) the commission voted 5-0 to postpone making a decision on the Specific Plan until further review between staff and the applicants. 
• The commission then voted 5-0 to delay making a decision on the PUD until further review by the planning commission and county commission.