The Block hotel changes hands with plans to reopen
By Kathryn Reed
The Block, the infamous one-time snowboarder hotel near Stateline, is going to open its doors again.
The San Francisco-based owners have obtained a building permit from South Lake Tahoe to renovate the rooms, put on a new roof, and bring things up to code.
A fire damaged the roof in September when heat tape and pine needles came into contact with each other.
The Block hotel in South Lake Tahoe is being renovated. Photo/LTN
“The lobby and a couple of the rooms will be brought up to ADA standards. Overall it is a minor fix it to get the place open,” Hilary Roverud, director of Development Services, told Lake Tahoe News.
The owners, operating under the name 4143 SLT LLC, did not return multiple calls. The address of the hotel is 4143 Cedar Ave.
The 50-room hotel used to be two hotels. In 2003, they were consolidated into one.
Eneliko “Sean” Smith had owned The Block and Cedar Lodge hotels, but lost both to creditors. BMR Funding LLC took over The Block and First Credit Bank owns Cedar Lodge.
Smith was in and out of court for failing to pay the city the hotel tax.
“We have not been paid the back TOT taxes,” City Attorney Patrick Enright told Lake Tahoe News.
Smith is supposed to pay $500 month, but hasn’t paid a dime. The total he owes is $134,000.
It is not known when the new hotel will open or if the name is staying the same.
Owners have called the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, but no one has submitted an application.
“What they would have to pay would depend on what they would propose to do at the hotel. At a minimum there would be an air quality mitigation fee,” Kristi Boosman, TRPA spokeswoman, told Lake Tahoe News.
She added that the owner mentioned to TRPA staff about putting in bike-pedestrian walkways or electric charging stations in order to reduce those air mitigation fees, but with no paperwork being submitted, the TRPA doesn’t know what the hotel owners want to or will do.
What is an “air quality mitigation fee”? And why would this hotel be required to pay it?
Let’s hope the new owners are successful in remodeling the property and improve the look of the area which the TAHOLE has damaged.
An air mitigation fee is assessed by the TRPA on all new construction and on in basin car rental. (though, if you live in Tahoe they can waive this fee when you rent a car since you would have been driving another vehicle, or so they assume)
TRPA uses the fees collected in “achieving and maintaining environmental thresholds for transportation, air and water quality.” Another fee to pop onto people who are building in Tahoe. They figure out the cost as to how many daily trips the occupants of the new dwelling will be making a day, thus adding pollution into the air. There is also a water quality mitigation fee. I hope these fees collected are actually going to make the air and water better!
If a business/storefront hasn’t been operated in two years the TRPA requires that a traffic study be performed in addition to paying air quality mitigation fees. Seems like extortion to me, and needing to pay TRPA’s extra fees contributes to discouraging new investment in the community. With all the empty storefronts in this town it makes you wonder if any of them will operate again given these additional fees.
the Contractor is from Lodi and all the Money is going out of town
typical as to how the projects are done here in our little Town
snowroller, how do you know the contractor is from Lodi. And who cares, a property owner can hire whomever they want. Why is everything a complaint. I’m thrilled someone bought that run down place and is going to remodel it, hire people to work there, and help improve that street. Rather than complain about who the owner is hiring to fix it up, be glad it’s being fixed up.
TRPA needs to get with reality. If someone has to pay for traffic study, how about just agreeing there will be no more traffic than was there when it was the exact same business before. TRPA Is out of their mind.
Although it may be a darn shame Chief, isn’t that why it’s called a free market system? While it may be somewhat understandable to put rules into effect increasing the odds of a local contractor getting the job on municipal projects, private enterprises should and can do as they will when it comes to purchasing provided services.
Maybe local contractors should be more competitive and try harder at pursuing business. The “Build it and they will come” business model doesn’t normally work to well. The same could be said about the marketing of our town as a destination resort.
why aren’t tot fees included in the foreclosure process? Aren’t property taxes? The city is getting hosed again.