STATELINE, Nev. – Water quality, wildlife, helipad noise, and scenic quality were among some of the many concerns of those attending the scoping meeting for the new Barton Hospital location. The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) requested that Barton complete an environmental analysis, which is more exhaustive than the previous environmental checklist that was completed. To ensure the public had a say in what to focus on, Barton and TRPA held a scoping meeting on Thursday, with a comment period lasting until the end of the month.

The meeting was well-attended, with representatives from Douglas County, Barton Health, TRPA, as well as civil engineer Rob Anderson and lead on the environmental analysis, Rob Brueck.

Brueck, who has worked on several projects including the Tahoe Blue Event Center, was the lead presenter regarding the environmental analysis. To build the hospital, there have been proposed amendments to the South Shore area plan, which would add a healthcare subdistrict, allow additional height, and modify permissible uses of the area.

---

---

The environmental analysis would include a review of the need for the project, potential alternatives, environmental impact, mitigations, and the list of agencies and persons consulted. The public was highly encouraged to submit comments regarding alternatives, environmental impact, and potential mitigations they would like to see. Public comment was announced in late December, so some comments have already been received—but have spanned further back, as people have submitted complaints and concerns to TRPA even prior to the decision to require an environmental analysis.

The scoping report would release in late February and the environmental analysis would take approximately three to four months to complete, meaning the draft would be out in May or June. If all goes well with the environmental analysis, the tentative project approval and the South Shore Amendment Hearings are slated for late summer.

---

---

The key issues to be studied are water quality and hydrology, biological resources, scenic resources, land use, recreation, geology and land capability, cultural/tribal resources, neighborhood compatibility, population and housing, transportation and parking, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, noise, cumulative impacts, and offsite impacts like at the California campus.

While the scoping meeting was scheduled to have a brief presentation, then a break for people to speak with representatives separately, the crowd attending was more interested in commenting and asking questions collectively.

Though it started with general questions, tempers flared as some attendees questioned if they could trust TRPA, commented that the area plan was bending to accommodate Barton, and the matter of property taxes arose. Others pointed out the impact that the additional height would have on the scenic corridor and the surrounding neighborhood, as well as the potential impact on wildlife and fire evacuation in the region.

Some suggested that there be a comprehensive environmental impact study done in the Basin as a baseline, while others requested a more detailed methodology and failure modes and effects analysis to be included.

Chris Proctor, director of community benefit and business development at Barton, clarified to the attendees that the scoping meeting was intended to get their feedback, not for them to comment on a plan that was already completed. “We need to hear from the community to effectively modify the plans—these are going to change as we gather more information from the community and from the environmental analysis.”

Brueck told the Tribune that so far, the biggest feedback has been on the height of the hospital, which is proposed to be 85 feet when the current allowable height is 56 feet. Other points of concern have been water quality and groundwater, the scenic impact, noise pollution, and neighborhood compatibility.

Some attendees questioned how the environmental checklist noted that vehicle miles travelled (VMT) were down 50% when travelling to the new site would be a longer trip for many residents of South Lake Tahoe. Brueck clarified that the VMT and trip generation numbers were based on the previous use of the Lakeside Casino and Inn, and that Barton received TRPA credit for having less miles travelled. However, the environmental analysis would provide more detailed information.

Proctor told the Tribune that he understood the worry from the community that the current proposal is what will be built. However, he emphasized again that Barton and the other partners have been making active effort to capture the trends, themes, and concerns that have been brought to them.

He also spoke on the reasons for the height for the building. One major reason is because of the groundwater—when Barton demolished the Lakeside Inn and Casino, they discovered that the building was noncompliant and took steps to mitigate the groundwater pollution. To build an appropriately sized state-of-the-art facility, they cannot extend the construction underground, so proposed additional height to compensate.

The size of the facility would also provide more privacy, better circulation and infection control, and room for advanced medical equipment that would provide improved care, especially in the operating room. “We really want to build a facility that matches our great providers,” said Proctor.

The comment period is still open until January 31. Written comments can be emailed to BartonProject@trpa.gov or mailed to the TRPA office.

Eli Ramos is a reporter for Tahoe Daily Tribune. They are part of the 2024–26 cohort of California Local News Fellows through UC Berkeley.