Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Sparks residents urge council to deny Red Hawk development, cite loss of Audubon‑certified golf course

Sparks City Council · March 24, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Multiple Wingfield Springs residents told the Sparks City Council they oppose Red Hawk Land Company applications PD26‑001 and PD26‑002 and a related comprehensive‑plan change, raising wetlands, water and traffic concerns and urging an independent impact study.

At the March 23 Sparks City Council meeting, residents from the Wingfield Springs area urged the council to reject development applications filed by Red Hawk Land Company, saying the proposal threatens an Audubon‑certified championship golf course and local wetlands. "We respectfully urge the council to deny these applications," said Ernie Brandy, identifying himself as a Wingfield Springs resident, who listed traffic, water availability, sewer capacity, life‑safety during a multi‑year construction period and loss of open space as grounds for denial.

Another resident, Brian Moore, who said he is chairperson of the Redhawk ambassador program and a member of the Wingfield Springs HOA board, described his family's deep reliance on the course and club amenities and asked council to "dig a little deeper" into the impacts on residents' lives. Kim Sazinski told the council an online petition opposing the project has 4,364 signatures and said the community has 900 hand‑signed petitions ready to present to the city.

Speakers asked the council to require an independent study covering traffic, hydrology and water availability, sewer and wastewater capacity, emergency services and construction noise. "Once open spaces are removed, it does not come back," Brandy said, urging protection of promises made to the community and to environmental authorities.

Council members did not take action on the development applications at the meeting; they heard the public comments during the public‑comment period and moved on to other agenda items. The comment period captured residents' organized opposition and requests for further analysis ahead of any formal council consideration of the Red Hawk applications.