Shuttered South Tahoe hotel may be turned into park
By Kathryn Reed
Edgewood Companies will have the rooms it needs to build a lodge on its Stateline golf course and South Lake Tahoe will have a park to replace a blighted, boarded up hotel.
That’s the proposal on the table. The City Council is scheduled to make the final decision when it meets Tuesday at 9am at Lake Tahoe Airport.
City Manager Tony O’Rourke and Edgewood’s project manager Brandon Hill separately told Lake Tahoe News the agreement is an excellent example of a public-private partnership that benefits the South Shore community aesthetically and economically.
The proposed Bonanza Park. Rendering/Design Workshop
What the council has to decide June 7 is if the development rights Edgewood has regarding tourist accommodation units in the city can be transferred to Stateline.
Because the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency has set an arbitrary number for how many hotel rooms can ever be built in the basin, these TAUs are now a commodity. It also means to be able to build something a developer needs to secure the TAUs before permitting would be allowed.
Edgewood is in the process of creating a hotel on its Stateline golf course. It has 194 TAUs in the city limits. One hundred forty-four of those have already been approved for transfer. They come from Redevelopment Area 3, a Ski Run project and the old Colony Inn. The remaining 50 are before the council. They are from the C&M Lodge on Bonanza Avenue.
Edgewood bought that property near the Y (nearest cross street is D Street) in November for $850,000 with the sole purpose of wanting the TAUs.
O’Rourke said a long-term benefit to the city is the Edgewood Lodge guests – who are expected to be at an income level not often seen on the South Shore – are projected to bring in more than $2 million in sales tax over a 30-year period.
To sweeten the deal Edgewood is proposing to pay for the demolition of the hotel that still sits on the nearly 1-acre parcel and turn it into a park.
The defunct hotel on Bonanza Avenue may become a park. Photo/LTN
The company has met with stakeholders, including the city’s Sustainability, Parks and Recreation, and Latino Affairs commissions. Then they went to the neighbors. This area is really a residential area, with apartment complexes and single-family residences.
“We invited over 200 people to the two outreach events in May and over 100 participated in the feedback process. Two-thirds of the participants were actual residents from the Bonanza neighborhood,” Hill said. “The process we used was, with the help of Design Workshop, a very hands-on approach. We sat, we listened, we gathered people around tables and asked them to draw what they would like to see in the park based on the following success factors: a) it would be well used; b) it could be implemented this year; c) it would use sustainable strategies; d) it would be cost-effective to maintain.”
What Edgewood proposes to build is a park that includes a children’s play area, grass play area, picnic pods, half-court basketball court, and a fenced-in dog park area.
The city for a number of years has talked about creating pocket parks so residents have a place within walking distance for gathering and limited recreation. Available land and the cost of creating them have stalled the process.
This would be the first one – and at no cost to the city except for eventual upkeep.
O’Rourke estimates it will cost the city about $7,000 a year to maintain what is being called Bonanza Park.
Hill expects it to cost his company about $200,000 to build the park. The plan is start demolition on the hotel as soon as the council gives the go-ahead. The goal is the park will be ready to be used before next winter.
“Upon completion of the park improvements, the land and park improvements will be dedicated or conveyed to the city,” Hill said.
A park there would be really nice. This end of town has been treated like the red-headed step-child for so long. . .we get nothing but low income housing and industrial areas. It’s time for something nice!
Sounds like a win-win situation.
What’s unfortunate is that campaign contributions had to be made to certain city council candidates to ensure the plan’s success.
Steve:
Who gave what amount of contribution money to whom to make this happen? Thanks for your anticipated clarification.
This does sound like a win-win situation and I’m hopeful it’s approved.
2010 City council campaign contributions-
https://www.laketahoenews.net/2011/02/final-campaign-finance-statements-released/
Note “Park PAC” in these documents.
3 Council members received a large donation from PAC (Park Corporation). This actually might be a good thing but it would be better to have it where the Mikasa building is or replace Runnels with a park. Put it somewhere where tourists can notice also on our gateway to Tahoe. The old Meyers gas station is probably the best choice.
The trasfer of TAUs from Project 3 (TAHOLE) really worked well. Let’s do it again. Anyone thinking that upkeep on a park is only $7000/year shouldn’t be budget planning for our tax dollars. So let’s see how this is win-win. The city no longer as the possibiity of collecting TOT from 194 TAUs and wants 50 more. The city has a hole in the ground in the heart of our tourist area and now assumes an added cost of maintanence using tax dollars it has given away. The only winner is Edgewood.
Why must some of you always try and pull the negative aspect into everything that happens? The Edgewood project has been years in the making, long before PAC made any contributions to the current city council.
There is a lot of blight in this town, lets be happy when green projects or rebuilding comes in.
I think you’ll see something good happen soon over at the Miller’s Outpost building!
The council will also discuss vacation rentals in our neighborhoods. Why eliminate exterior signs? If there is a problem with noise or to many people or sprinklers running constantly, a person should be able to see the property is a vacation rental so the appropriate authorities can be called. Who is behind eliminating these signs?, Vail and Tom Davis? In case you didn’t know, Vail now owns Accomodation station rentals, and Tom Davis owns vacation rentals.
Next, why are “functions” allowed at vacation rentals? These are not convention centers, these are homes in our neighborhoods! They should be restricted at all times to the permitted overnight guest number!! Keep our neighborhoods quiet and traffic free!!
And restricting parking to on site spaces is great. Keep our streets traffic free. This goes along with limiting the number of permitted guests. How can you have a “function” without parking available!!?
As per the Tribune, this is what’s happening at the council meeting, “Vacation rentals
What’s the issue?”
“South Lake Tahoe’s vacation rental ordinance was created in 2003 to regulate the impact of vacation rentals on residential neighborhoods.
What’s happening?
City staff have recommended several changes to the ordinance, including eliminating the need for an exterior sign, restricting parking to on-site spaces, implementing a 30 percent late fee and limiting the number of people who can be present at vacation rental functions to twice the total number of permitted overnight occupants
What’s next?
The council will discuss and possibly give approval to the changes at its Tuesday meeting. If approved, final adoption would take place at the council’s June 21 meeting.”
The only reason the Mikasa new tenants are keeping everything hush hush is because there could possibly be some opposition as to what exactly is going in there. An upscale thrift store is still a thrift store. Of course they will neither confirm nor deny.
Thank you 30yrlocal.
The transfer of TAU’s is one of the key mechanisms to remove blight and achieve environmental gains with new economically viable projects. We would benefit from more of this revitalization.
Let’s see. Nevada benefits big and SLT, as usual, takes it in the shorts. Nothing new here. I’m sure friendhips, business relationships, and campaign help played no part in this.
Tony, if 7000 bucks per year for the park doesn’t cut the grass will you make up the difference?
I love the park idea! I (as the President-elect of the S. Tahoe Association of REALTORS) worked with the city Parks and Rec department last year to try and build one of these “pocket parks” in the sierra tract neighborhood. We ran into a lot of road blocks at the time and couldn’t find the appropriate vacant space to build the park.
The “pocket park” is something our neighborhoods could really use, especially the areas where there are a lot of young children. They add to the happiness of our community and make it look nice… it’s a win-win.
Ditto to Mike Bradford and 30yr local….sounds like a great plan…exciting.
I agree that this is a good thing to happen, at least we are not “giving” away the farm as in the past and getting something for our investments. As far as the maintenance they could allocate the $7000.00 to an outside service for about a third of that and get better results.
Hey Paul, I don’t know if you remember Dave Vienz or not, he was one of the KM with Mike Berns. Anyway, the idiot never got out of the drug scene and was on a binge and shot and killed his wife, great. Schnaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaapss
Sounds good.. With all the strom drain issues in area is it possible to create an infiltration basin to help reduce stormwater volumes? Helps with water quality and flooding. If so then u have a win win win win.
Just to set the record straight: Yes, Edgewood Companies has made political contributions to several candidates at the City, County and State levels in both CA and NV, some of which sit on City Council today. We also contribute to many local non-profits organizations and serve on non-profit Boards. We are proud of our community involvement and contributions and see this as a positive, not a negative.
Skibum, not that I’d mind a park at Mikasa too, but why does it matter whether we have a park where tourists can’t see it? Can’t this city do SOMETHING that is for its citizens instead of it always having to be part of marketing the place to visitors? If there’s an opportunity for a park on a back street, I say YAY!
And why would you want to tear down a working business (Runnel’s) to turn into vacant land? I thought you were pro-business. Am I mistaken?
I am pro business but I just feel that if we are going to get a park out of the deal , and this is my opinion only, it should be in a showcase area that will benefit all tourists and residents. Our entryway to our town is in shambles, run down and generally an eyesore. Runnels was just an example and I think the city needs to relocate or remove him. John runs a great business and God only knows how the city has treated him in the past. I am sure that whatever takes over Mikasa will also benefit us but they are an eyesore to the community. This is the perfect opportunity to remove those dilapidated buildings. You can’t have community events in a park located in a residential area without getting some complaints about traffic, noise and illegal activity not to mention extra police patrols at night. Sad situation but that is the reality of the world we live in. Yes there is illegal activity in our open areas now but I have yet to see any “tagging”. Have an open visble area to nail the little batsa#*. Anyway , it was just an opinion as there is bound to be some opposition from the nimbys and I can’t say I blame them, I would not want a park in my area either, once again, my opinion only.
To get that old run down building out of our neighborhood is a good thing. To also be able to do it with out cost to our community with the exception of upkeep is another good thing. We need neighborhood parks in this community, As a 48 year Tahoe resident I applaud this effort. This new addition should be for our residents and not have the focus on our out of town visitors.
All politics aside, I love this idea. I have lived in this neighborhood for 19 years and am thrilled that our area is getting some attention and a much needed upgrade. This park will be something we can be proud of. I think Edgewood went above and beyond by going door to door in my neighborhood, asking people to come to a BBQ at the old C & M so they could hear what WE want there. While some may be critical of Edgewood for one reason or another, you have to admit that this project will make a huge visiual improvement for those of us who live around the park, kids can play hoops, families can gather,jobs will be created, and maybe some pride in our community will result.
This proposed project represents many opportunities….Ellen has very succinctly mentioned several. Additionally, from a sustainability standpoint and in sync with the Basin Prosperity Plan, this project has the potential to be a model for a larger scale reinventing of our ailing community. Rather than demolishing the the building, de-constructing it would demonstrate several sustainability and green buiding principles. Many of the windows in the building are newer, double pane windows and should be salvaged to be used in energy retrofit projects in the neighborhood. Much of the wood could be salvaged for fencing material, raised garden beds, tool shed and possibly a small greenhouse. This would also provide work for local contractors and laborors. The increased cost of deconstruction vs. demolition would be at least partially if not wholly offset by savings on new material as well as transport and landfill costs. This type of deconstruction and re-use of materials on site has already been successfully done at the 968 Park Hotel.
A small scale community garden would be a wonderful addition as it would be very educational in demonstrating composting and local food production especially if a greenhouse could be included.
The dog park represents an opportunity on how to deal with our escalating dog waste problem. Many parks have employed dog waste digesters to provide everything from compost to electricity from methane. This technology should be considered for this and any other community dog parks.
This is the kind of project and cross-community cooperation that we should be encouraging and supporting. I look forward to seeing it come to fruition.
Park is a great idea. Sad there is a Collective there though where children will play.
Minor detail- Is all the tax revenue from the “Edgewood Lodge” going to stay on the Nevada side?? It seems to me, since the TAU’s are coming from Calif and So Shore they should share in the taxes generated from the old Calif motel units being moved to Nevada- Does anyone disagree and how would that be fairly divided ?? I am thinking like 25% ??