Interview With Jim Litchfield, Part I

I generally agree with your opinion but you are way off on Charles McNeely. He has been on a massive land grab mission for revenue purposes which has destroyed trails, scenic view etc. Their land grab - annexations - over the past years is unbelievable. If they approve the annexation of Peavine and the Virginia highlands, we will know that their recent ‘Open Space Plan’ is lip service.

The Kings Inn needs to come down.

Hello, could you please be more specific on what trails have been destroyed, scenic views lost, etc.? I believe the City of Reno has created more open space, more trails & more parks in the past 10 years than in the history of Washoe County. I am biased but I have an open mind and that is why I crave specifics on general rants.
It may be interesting to note that the Washoe County Commission approved Arrowcreek, Damonte Ranch, Double Diamond, and a lot of the Spanish Springs development. We inherited the planning.
I agree with Myrna, Charles has been a wonderful addition to the City. As the City Manager he has been charged with finding the funding for all of the projects in Reno over the past 10 years.

Also, Myrna, the funding for the whitewater park was interesting as it originally had it’s roots with TMWA and got bridge funds from Harrahs and the Eldorado and the City of Reno. And it all goes back to the 1997 flood…….

I suspect that we’ll look back twenty years from now at the whitewater park and recognize it as the catalyst of Reno accepting it’s “adventure destination” brand positioning and a positive attitude towards downtown redevelopment.

It seems that the uptake in private and public investment in downtown was timed to the whitewater park completion.

Myrna, thanks for the great read. Jim, thanks for the vision. Can you extend that vision all the way thru Sparks and on out to Pyramid Lake? What about a barbless catch-and-release flyfishing park mixed in there, too?

Dave,

Thanks to you and the entire council for your forward thinking on the importance of revitalizing the Truckee River channel and implementing ReTrac to tuning around downtown.

Great Work, and your new “Priority List” will only make it better. Bravo!

Dave - The trail systems I’m talking about are in Somersett and Juniper Ridge. Trail access (non paved trails) in Somersett plan are extremely difficult to find if they exist at all. Same thing with the Juniper Ridge trail access. Houses in Somersett are now visible from I80 when the original plan was that they would not be visible.

Myrna - Reno has been on an annexation tear for the past 5-10 years. They are picking up areas in outlying districts with zoning of 1-40 houses per acre and developing the projects into 3 houses per acre. This has created a lot of property tax revenue. Right now they’re considering a property called Winnemucca Ranch which is not even close to Reno. What’s next? Winnemucca itself? It’s revenue driven and reminds me of Bush’s spending. Our grandchildren will pay for it - i.e. we need the money now and we’ll let our grandchildren figure out where the water will come from when wells run dry.

Oops - made a mistake in my last post. Should be zoning is being changed from 1 house per acre to 1 house per 40 acres into 3 houses per acre

Great interview Myrna! I’ll link to it from my site.

On a sidenote, how coudl you not notice the graffiti? Graffiti hasnt affected the central core too much, but just outside, like around the South Virginia/Liberty area or further up north toward UNR, Graffiti is running rampant. Last week, Arterra’s sign was graffiti’d and left that way for days (just recently it was replaced), as well as the Waterfrton Towers Making it Great signs.
The City is working hard to stem this problem though….Dave, do you know if the Legislature passed those stiffer graffiti penalties?

Dave, I have a few comments and a question regarding the 10 North parcel.

I attended last Wednesday afternoon’s redevelopment meeting and have been pondering the proceedings for a few days.

The council spent a significant amount of time trying to “picture” exactly how the plaza will be used when it is not in “skating rink” mode. Will it be used for musical performances - and if so, what kind? Council seemed to agree that “major performances” would not take place because offsetting the high cost of attracting big-time performers would require selling tickets and the open nature of the property would not work for controlling entry. For “mid-level” performances, questions were raised about not wanting to “duplicate” what takes place at the Wingfield Park stage. On the “what use question”, a speaker (not sure of her name) came before the council and indicated that the original concept for the plaza was to make it a sort of “town square” where those who live and work downtown can gather and mingle - NOT as a performance venue.

As I mulled those thoughts the last few days, I came up with this.

One of the sticking points for the (many) REA “building proposals” seemed to always be the city use of the ground level for an low cost ice rink service facility. Parks and Rec obviously needs a facility and seasonal staff to manage the ice rink. But, for three seasons of the year, that PRIME RETAIL SPACE that COULD BECOME THE HEART of the “town square” concept “might” largely sit idle.

Consider this thought. What if the retail developer is allowed to seek quality retail for the ground floor that is consistent with using the plaza during the spring thru fall as a gathering place - perhaps Coffee, Ice Cream and and/or sandwich shops. Then, what if parks and rec installs seasonal tables and benches on the covered portion of the plaza to allow folks to sit, eat, chat and just enjoy the plaza. And, on one end, they might install a small raised platform with just power - and maybe some minimal speaker wiring - to allow a single musician or small group to provide occasional music.

This would seem to make the plaza consistent with the original “town square” concept.

But, where could the seasonal rink support be located?

It could continue to be in a temporary trailer, perhaps parked on the south edge of the plaza backed up to the river.

Or, might it possibly be built into the southern row of parking spaces in the Cal Neva garage with new sidewalk access steps from the First St sidewalk? I don’t know if a temporary modular building or trailer could be backed up the Center st exit ramp and into the garage or if a permanent building addition would be needed, but this space is directly across first st from the rink and would seem to be a perfect place for that kind of support function.

Small restaurants and shops on the bottom floor with a nice restaurant like the earlier Garwoods group proposal above would seem to make 10 North into exactly the kind of town square gathering place that was originally intended.

Does this make any sense or am I overlooking some important aspect of the 10 North plan?

Hello,
Regarding Somersett, the houses you see are NOT a part of Somersett but a project between Mogul and Somersett and were approved by the County. Commissioner Galloway had the same concerns and put it on the Commission agenda and could have had breakfast with the egg on his face when he found out that he had actually approved those houses. On the parks and trails in Somersett I met with bicyclists, hikers, four wheel drive groups, wildlife groups, NDOW, etc before the last change to Somersett. They all came to an agreement as to where the trails would go, what kind they would be (paved, not paved, etc) and signed a document attesting to their agreement. I took this agreement to Blake Smith (the evil developer) and even though it meant he had to remove houses, change routes, he agreed and the trails are there. If you can’t find them that’s something I can do as I recall that part of the motion was that the City would be responsible for signage and if we haven’t done a good job, well that’s on us.
Regarding Juniper Ridge you’ll have to be more specific because if I am thinking about the area, again, that is in unincorporated Washoe County NOT in the City.
I’m not dodging the issue just hopefully clearing up a few misconceptions. I can change what we control, but I can’t do anything in the unincorporated County.

Steve,
These are all very good comments. You may also know that because of the issues, we formed a sub-committee to look at both 10 N Va and the Truckee River. That committee is tentatively scheduled to meet Monday the 19th at 4:00. It is (of course) a public meeting.
In my opinion the problem with REA was that they agreed to one thing and kept trying to change the deal. Originally, we “got cheap rent” because the taxpayers were going to “give” the property to REA. We were paying it forward. Later the developer wanted us to give the land AND pay market rent. I had agreed to pay market rent if he paid the market rate for the land. He agreed to that just last year. Then when the appraisal came in over a million dollars he started backing off (again).
It might be interesting to note that your ideas are probably more tied in with the fate of the Virginia Street Bridge than the building on the east side.

Dave, I absolutely love the Post Office conversion concept with its wonderful proposed connection down to the river. It will be terrific.

But, the 10 North plaza across the river is equally important. And, if it also contains a lot of pedestrian friendly restaurant amenities it would seem to help it create some of the original “town plaza” concept. If the rink is temporary, why not the support facility as well? Particularly if the current support trailer could be brought in from Center St and would fit in the wide spot south of the rink (on the rink parcel, not the building parcel) and could be moved in and out at the same time as the rink walls and rubber flooring? I would think that the new developer would pay significantly more for the new parcel if he thought he could attract high paying restaurants that could have “free use” of a nice public outdoor dining area.

I would personally be spending a lot more time on that new “town square” if it was adjacent to morning breakfast/coffee and afternoon lunch providers - and so would city staff, I suspect

And, who knows, the various restaurant operators might band together and finance quite a bit of outdoor music to pull it all together.

Dave,

After re-reading your post, I think I may have completely misconstrued your “fate of the Virginia Street Bridge” comment.

I jumped to the conclusion that you meant that if the bridge is repaired (by spending $40 million) that the Post Office access to the river might not be done - because of the necessity (I assumed) of having to build the big undergroud storm diversion piping system - so then more restaurant/retail might be needed on the 10 North plaza.

But, after re-reading, I realized that my assumption could be completely wrong. What was the intended meaning of your “fate of the Virginia Street Bridge” comment?

Or do I need to go to the meeting on the 19th to find out

BTW, for what my opinion of one is worth, I think replacing rather than repairing the bridge is a no-brainer. Because, even if the extra $30 million is spent, that center support of the old bridge WILL STILL tend to dam up with trapped debris and necessitate the use of big equipment to clear the jam every time we have high water conditions.

Please, build a nice new and well designed - retro looking if you wish - bridge that both accomodates high water conditions conditions and allows expanded recreational access to the river.

Then, create a small fund to give a modest ceremonial ring to every new divorcee to toss off the new bridge. The kids playing below will love scrambling to look for them

Steve, the comment about the bridge has more to do with your proposal to temporary place the ice rink support facility at 10 NVA. If the bridge is saved, a good chunk of the plaza will disappear. Regarding the Post Office I believe that the proposed project could accomodate either scenario for the bridge.

“If the bridge is saved, a good chunk of the plaza will disappear.”

Excellent additional argument for a new bridge

Thanks.

Litchfield for City Council?

Awesome post! I feel totally protective of the park. I’ll never forget ditching summer school in college to go there back in 2000, and seeing all those big cement blocks and trash in the river, with bums everywhere, and signs saying to stay out of the water. We used to like *fantasize* about intertubing there like in Tahoe City.
Also, there’re are a lot of hopes and dreams in the Whitewater groups about building a wave in the new stretch instead of more holes… I picture it like this, but who knows. I don’t know much about this stuff. http://flickr.com/photos/garbs/366990060/

Here is a link to the downides of “surfing” that exact wave.
http://radiofreemike.com/nonfiction/surfing-munich-the-eisbach-gang