Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Change Of Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Placer County approves minor use permit recognizing multifamily use at North Lake Boulevard property after notice questions
Summary
The zoning administrator approved PLN25-0000336 to change the land-use classification of 8020 North Lake Boulevard from tourist accommodation to multifamily residential, aligning county records with TRPA verification of longstanding residential units; neighbors raised concerns about mailed notice, and staff will follow up to correct noticing lists.
Get email alerts on the Change Of Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Placer County Zoning Administrator on March 12 approved a minor use permit (PLN25-0000336) to recognize and convert an existing duplex and primary residence at 8020 North Lake Boulevard from tourist accommodation to multifamily residential use.
Patrick Dobs of Planning Services told the hearing the two buildings were originally permitted in 1937 as motel units, functioned as tourist accommodations through the 1970s and were informally converted to residential units decades ago; TRPA verified three residential units and on-site land coverage in 2019. Staff recommended approval under the Tahoe Basin Area Plan and Placer County Code as the proposal does not create nonconforming development for setbacks, height, coverage or parking, and the project was found categorically exempt under CEQA §15301 for existing facilities.
Applicant representative Wyatt Ogulvie said TRPA had verified residential use in 2019 (and earlier records indicate residential utility accounts dating to the 1980s) and that a pending TRPA teardown/rebuild application would proceed only after the county’s minor use permit decision.
Neighbor Glenn Lynch, representing six co-owners at 8016 North Lake Boulevard, said none of the owners received mailed notice and learned of the hearing only by finding the placard on the property. Staff reviewed noticing records during a short recess and confirmed 38 adjacent properties were mailed notice; staff acknowledged the county’s mailing did not list 8016 and agreed to follow up. Jacobson approved the county action but asked staff to contact Mr. Lynch to ensure the ownership list and notices are corrected for subsequent hearings (TRPA and Planning Commission reviews may follow). Because someone testified at the hearing, a 10-day appeal period remains open.

