THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

Opinion: Public should contribute to loop road alternatives


image_pdfimage_print

Publisher’s note: This letter was read at the Aug. 21, 2012, South Lake Tahoe City Council meeting by the author, longtime South Lake Tahoe resident Gloria Hartoonian, and is reprinted with permission.

At the very end of the Aug. 21 City Council meeting, I heard Councilman [Hal] Cole suggest that our Tahoe Transportation District representative, Miss [Angela] Swanson, return to this council with five additional options for the loop road project. Out of the five, a subcommittee of the City Council would narrow the choice to three alternatives. And of these three, participants of a public workshop would then consider and choose the alternative that would be implemented by the TTD.

In this way Mr. Cole suggests that the city can reassert ownership of the loop road process on behalf of its citizens.

We should remember, however, that among the 50 alternatives, all but one was discarded by the TTD, so we will be considering already rehashed and discarded ideas. And by asking the TTD to send us five of these already discarded alternatives, the TTD, not you and the community, retain ownership of the loop road project.

The TTD could send back five ideas all unacceptable except the best of the bad that being the one our community has already rejected.

I don’t know what the solution to this problem is, but several council meetings ago many business and homeowners came forward and offered new possible ideas for the implementation of the road. To my mind these citizens were already trying to take ownership of the process by offering new ideas.

The upcoming workshop should be open to fresh possibilities from the community or else a subcommittee of this City Council — two of you — will have already narrowed the choices the rest of us may or may not want.

How this council shapes the public workshop — the openness and flexibility it allows — will determine its outcome.

Please avoid making the workshop manipulative, delivering a loop road alternative that pleases perhaps not even the majority of yourselves.

— Gloria Hartoonian

image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (51)
  1. Mike McKeen says - Posted: August 22, 2012

    Thank you for your excellent view at city council – what a shock the workshop is now canceled. Our elected members are not listening to the community. Two are supported by Nv interests – this will be disclosed by publication of funding sources.

  2. John says - Posted: August 22, 2012

    Mike, you are of the small Tahoe mindset that pits Nevada vs California/SLT. There are a lot of us who ignore the stateline and want to see a vibrant entertainment core without a US highway running through the middle of it. This has never been Nevada v. California, this is about being able to move on from gaming towards other forms of entertainment that leverages Heavenly and the hotel rooms around the stateline to draw huge crowds. Getting the US highway out of the middle of our entertainment district makes sense.

  3. Mike McKeen says - Posted: August 22, 2012

    John – please identify yourself and your connections to Stateline . Our group first and utmost wants a vibrant South Lake Tahoe. Nv has awesome plans and I hope they proceed but not at the expense of SLT business. Please call me – we can discuss alternatives that will benefit both communities.

  4. John says - Posted: August 22, 2012

    Mike I live in California and work in Nevada but I have absolutely no financial or other interest in any organization involved in Stateline. I have been to Europe, South America, Boston, Savannah, San Antonio and other tourist places. One thing I have seen over and over is that the key entertainment district doesnt have a US highway running right through the middle of it. Europe has its beautiful squares, well that isnt going to happen of course, but close could happen. But we have to get the highway out of the playground. I can imagine a Snowglobe happening there with only a minimum of complaint. Then there could be car shows, true weekend long music fests, food, etc. It could be huge and it would benefit all of South Lake.

    Mike, tell me publicly. How in the world can this place thrive without benefiting both Stateline and South Lake? I dont even understand why we would try. But I sure dont see how it could be successful.

  5. Chief Slowroller says - Posted: August 22, 2012

    John they do not want this place to thrive

    that was the old days

    we are suposed to be LIKE ASPEN

    if you were not so new to town you would know that

  6. John says - Posted: August 22, 2012

    We could pull off Telluride. A week long jazz fest in the middle of summer. A couple big weekend parties for Memorial and Labor Day. Then take advantage of Hot August nights. I guess we would have to be nice to the bikers in the Fall but I would write every one of them a ticket for loud pipes personally. We would definitely need a bigger jail.

    Yeah I am still new enough to town to have hope. Im sure it will be dashed soon.

  7. thing fish says - Posted: August 22, 2012

    John, don’t fall into their trap. I understand why people are jaded, but to give up on this place the way some do is part of the problem. Lots of outside influences, as a local, the worst thing you can do is throw your hands in the air and give up.
    One more vote for jazz fest. If we can’t go to the Village Vanguard or Smalls, lets bring them to us.
    Let’s scare some white people.

  8. Loop says - Posted: August 23, 2012

    South Lake Tahoe Resident in favor the loop road!!!! sick of having to drive past gapes every time I drive to NV..

  9. Biggerpicture says - Posted: August 23, 2012

    Loop, don’t you already have a choice of using loop road so as not to have to drive past any ‘gapes’? Or is there a gape in your thought process every time you drive to Nevada?

  10. lou pierini says - Posted: August 23, 2012

    John, Give me a call and I will discuss what’s happened to my family, my business, and this town the last 40 years I’ve been here. We must know each other but I don’t know your name, come on give it up.

  11. Johnny says - Posted: August 23, 2012

    Who is going to pay for this stupid loop road and how much will it cost? There is already a loop road. Things look fine down there as it is. How about the people that are for it open up thier own bank accounts and pony up for it. Last time I checked CA is very broke!

  12. 4-mer-usmc says - Posted: August 23, 2012

    Probably the one topic on which everyone can agree is that we all want the South Shore community to economically succeed and prosper so that everyone living here can do well and at least be comfortable. I believe accomplishing that objective will require embracing an all-inclusive, long-term perspective of what our entire area wants for itself and what we can do to move from our current season to season existence toward more uniform economic stability. There is not just one isolated piece to this puzzle but numerous pieces that need to be integrated, one of which is the perceptual elimination of the Stateline and the attitudinal delineation of “us versus them”, or South Lake Tahoe v. Douglas County. I support the Highway 50/Loop Road realignment and can envision a communal “Main Street” that goes from Highway 50/Pioneer Trail to Edgewood with slowed one-lane traffic in either direction, diagonal parking the length of that roadway, and is pedestrian friendly where winter festivals, summer festivals, street fairs, musical events, celebratory parades, community events, etc., could all take place by closing off that road to vehicle traffic. Doing so requires taking Federal and State Highway 50 out of the middle of what could be a really great civic center concept that could be as enjoyable for the locals as Lakeview Commons. As a community we need to decide what we want; do we want to live hand-to-mouth at Trout Creek or do we want to own a home and be comfortable. I firmly believe that Douglas County and the Edgewood Corporation have no intention of economically backsliding toward poverty and that they intend to work toward prosperity, with or without South Lake Tahoe. Economically the South Shore community is the Titanic and South Lake Tahoe can either continue rearranging the deck-chairs and go down with the ship or we can get in the lifeboats and survive. Doing so will require a vision for our community that will entice capital investment by people who recognize an opportunity for success, but what we can’t do is expect anything to improve by doing more of the same. With risk can come accomplishment, success and well-being; doing nothing guarantees stagnation.

  13. John says - Posted: August 23, 2012

    And just like Lou has pointed out, some people are going to get hurt. There is no doubt this is going to be an ugly process, made more ugly by the fact that the City is almost completely incompetent. But we have to move on from gaming and we cant with a highway running through our entertainment district.

  14. Headroom says - Posted: August 23, 2012

    Johnny,

    I have heard that the loop will cost seventy million dollars. That may or may not include the full cost of relocating homeowners, businesses and apartment house owners. And then there are unplanned-for legal expenses.

    I guess federal money will pay for the project.

    It is important to attend the Sept. 14th TTD meeting to be held at TRPA, 9:30 A.M. You will have an opportunity to speak and ask questions. Being there and looking Carl Hasty in the eye as you speak your mind matters.

  15. Chief Slowroller says - Posted: August 25, 2012

    yo Sarge I do not belive that you have a firm grip on the reality of Tahoe

    you seem to belive the propaganda pumped out by Ribaudo and his cronies

    the longer you live here the more you will see the truth

  16. headroom says - Posted: August 25, 2012

    Yo Chief,

    I’ve lived up here so long it scares me. But its the same everywhere; complaining to each other and about each other which happens so often in blogs and also wherever we might meet up with each other face to face does no good. ACT! DO SOMETHING! Ribaudo and his cronies, as you call them, didn’t get a firm grip on South Lake Tahoe-if that’s what they have- by complaining themselves into those influential positions.

    I don’t mean to lecture you so don’t be mad. Go to the meeting or do something. Just showing up with a real name and a real face is half the battle.

  17. Tom Wendell says - Posted: August 25, 2012

    O.K….here it is…AGAIN. Discussion about diverting Hwy.50 around the casino core has been going on as long as I have lived here full time (26 years). That statement alone demonstrates how the Tahoe Basin has been mired in a mudhole of planning and expensive consultants with very little actual implementation to show for it. THAT is a root cause of many of our current problems.

    Creating a walkable, bikeable, public transit served, special event friendly center is not only a great idea, IT IS ABSOLOUTELY NECESSARY to achieve the economic and environmental revitalization we all want and need. With the Hwy.50 diversion now finally a front burner issue, the question becomes: “how exactly to we make that a reality without tearing out 90+ businesses and homes on the CA. side?”

    On Jun 12 of this year, I offered the following suggestion:
    “Splitting the through traffic between the mountain and lake side of the casinos makes much more sense. We already have virtually all the road width we need to route eastbound through traffic to the mountain side and westbound to the lake side. This still gives access to all the back entrances of the casino parking lots. 2 lanes of local traffic through the current alignment provide access to the valet parking entrances and the new CVS building. Using existing roadways virtually eliminates the need to take out any housing or businesses. There would no doubt have to be some compromise to make for a smooth transition, but nothing on the scale of what is being proposed.
    Additionally, putting four lanes of traffic between the back of Crescent V / Heavenly Village / Harrahs and the entrance to the brand new Van Sickle park creates a formidable barrier to access the park unless you put a light there which would defeat the purpose of improving traffic flow. The only other solution would be a tunnel or pedestrian overpass…more $$$.”

    To that I’ll add that we should combine an aerial photo of that area with all the traffic data available and feed it to a computer with a CAD program which could combine all that info. to produce a design that would most effectively achieve the objective. This takes all the politics and nimbyism out of the equation. Then we could debte the merits of that plan along with the many others that have been put forward. What say ye?

  18. Careaboutthecommunity says - Posted: August 25, 2012

    Keep 50 open, but make the side streets better, without tearing places down, so when you want to hold a function, and close 50 to traffic, you can easily divert the traffic, and it will not become a big traffic jam, like it did for those opening of summer festivals.

  19. Tahoeadvocate says - Posted: August 25, 2012

    Tom— Your suggestion about splitting the traffic was presented many many years ago and was elimiated as a possiblity about 10 years ago by the TRPA. Don’t move traffic closer to the lake and cause more sediment to enter it.
    The route on the mountain side makes sense from that prespective, the unfortunate situation is that homes and businesses must be moved to accomodate it. I understand the TTD is working with property owners to move them before they would remove the existing buildings. That is reasonable.

  20. Tom Wendell says - Posted: August 25, 2012

    Tahoeadvocate,

    That may have been true 10 years ago, but there is new leadership at the TRPA and more advances in road runoff treatment. Several weeks ago, I presonally went right to the top, to the executive director and asked if the mountain side option was still preferred for that reason.
    The answer: “We will consider any plan that achieves the objective”.

    So that arguement is a moot point. I stick by my suggestion that we look at ALL alternatives including a computer generated design.

  21. 4-mer-usmc says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    Chief:

    First of all, my thoughts and opinions are not influenced by anyone. I’ve observed the economic beating this community has taken which granted was exacerbated by the recession, but the majority of changes I’ve witnessed in the 12-years I’ve lived here are the continued increases in empty storefronts from failed businesses, the continued deterioration of the City’s infrastructure, and the decline in revenues both in the public and private sectors. There’s no propaganda at play here, it’s what I see every time I leave my home and drive on Highway 50. While I may not have that 20-30-40 year longevity of living in Tahoe that you seem to think prevents people from seeing your “truth”, that doesn’t preclude me from recognizing the slow death of our town, where I also happen to live and pay taxes.

    Chief, you’re continually saying that “they do not want this place to thrive” and “they want to shrink the town”. I’ve asked you this before but never got a response so I’ll ask it again: Who is “they” and why do “they” want the town to fail and to shrink the town? Also, I’ve not seen your suggestions for improving the economic viability of this community and would be interested in hearing your ideas.

    The same old-same old won’t work any longer, and if we’d continued on that path there wouldn’t be a Lakeview Commons where the long-time local boys can enjoy rubbing elbows with Tom Davis. What I have learned in my 68 years is that everything changes, and if you don’t identify what it is you want and implement a plan to get there you won’t have any control over those changes, and they will end up being the proverbial “rudderless boat” where s**t just happens.

    This town needs new vision if it is to endure and the old blinders need to be removed. The “that’s good enough” and “that’s how we’ve always done it” mentality don’t cut it. Just because someone has lived here for a long time doesn’t mean they have all the answers for future prosperity.

  22. Biggerpicture says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    4-mer, Let’s extrapolate your point one small step further:

    Sometimes a fresh set of eyes can see the root of problems AND possibly a new set of solutions, whereas SOMETIMES those who have been staring at these problems for years and years have become immune to seeing things from a different perspective.

    I enjoy your well thought-out AND articulated posts.

    P.S. Personally I don’t care just how long someone has lived here. If you contribute to the community in a positive fashion, THAT makes a person a local in my book!

  23. Chief Slowroller says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    yo Sarge the reality is that the TRPA is at the top of the pile

    there objective is to lower the number of residents and visitors

    if you look at the things that have been done starting in 73 then 77 again in 85 and 95 and in 05 you will see that its true

    89 the start of redevelopment take out 2000 motel rooms to put in 700

    the new rooms are more expensve to equal the same tax base

    that’s the equation they are still using and plan to use for the future

    old Ribaudo told me that we have 1,350,000 visitors per year thats who pays TOT and the goal is to drop it to 900,000

    if you were here when the town was thriving 1965-1975 100,000 visitors per day 39 gas stations in the city limits

    the target group then was the Nickel slot player

    but mowing down a whole neighbor hood and re routing the Hy Way will not bring that back

    it only fits the City’s goal of SHRINKING the TOWN

  24. headroom says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    Biggerpicture, I’m with you. Even if you came in on this mornings stage and have something useful to say or do then your as local as anybody and your presence here is no less important.

  25. 4-mer-usmc says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    Chief:

    I first began coming to Tahoe in 1958, and in my wife’s family their Tahoe treks began with her Great-Grandfather bringing her Grandfather, then her Grandfather bringing her Dad, then her Dad bringing his children, so the nearest we can figure is her ancestors started coming here sometime in the very late 1800’s. (She’s 4th generation California born with the most recent successive generation now being 6th.) I don’t know what was done in ’73, ’77, ’85, ’95, and ’05 that you’re referring to but we (my spouse and me) were some of those people who regularly came to Tahoe in the 1960’s and 1970’s when you say the town was “thriving”, and at that time gaming was pretty much limited to Nevada and New Jersey. Since then Indian gaming has voraciously spread in about 46-states which has severely impacted the hold that Nevada held on gambling and there have been some fairly serious economic recessions, both of which have hugely contributed to Tahoe’s economic woes and have caused the shrinking of the town. You’re right Chief, those 60’s and 70’s heydays will never return to their previous levels, so we better figure out a new plan to bring tourists and their money to Tahoe so this community can be rebuilt and survive, and that’s going to take having a vision for the future and the guts to take the risk. With the exception of a few pocket areas the majority of our town looks rundown and people with money don’t want to look at something that’s rundown, that doesn’t lift the spirit. South Lake Tahoe’s natural environment is exquisite and most of the built environment is not. If this town is going to hang our hat on tourist dollars then it better be a place where tourists want to come, and that means change and not more of the same that isn’t working any longer.

  26. 4-mer-usmc says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    Biggerpicture:

    I totally agree that oftentimes a fresh set of eyes can see what someone who has been staring at the same thing for an extended time period doesn’t. Thanks for your nice comments on my posts—I also enjoy your posts.

  27. John says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    Bigger, I think your history of how we got here is excellent. The TRPA and League wanted to limit the number of people coming to the Lake as a way to limit environmental impact (right or wrong, I leave that for others to decide). They made commodities of hotel rooms and coverage. And they then controlled architucture along all of the highways. So today, you can have a run down property but it is economically impossible to upgrade a property. TRPA has created a perverse incentive to do nothing. And we have reaped the benefits of that.

    It seems like the new leadership at TRPA gets it. I hope anyway. Economics is simple in theory even if the math is esoteric. We only have to identify the existing incentives and identify and implement incentives to achieve our goals. What could be easier?

    One challenge to you though Bigger. What is our future market? What do you want people to do when they come to Tahoe tomorrow? The nickel slots are gone forever, what is our tomorrow?

  28. 4-mer-usmc says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    John:

    I agree with your comments and think you’ve asked the million dollar questions: “What is our future market and what do we want people to do when they come to Tahoe tomorrow?” This is where really smart people with a vision for the future become imperative. Let’s hope the TRPA’s Regional Plan Update eliminates the existing disincentives to perform upgrades so that all aspects of the City’s crumbling infrastructures can be reversed and the built environment can be improved, which should also help the goal of improving lake clarity.

  29. Biggerpicture says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    Well John if I was smart enough, and had some form of formal education in my life, I would be able to give you a coherent answer! But since I am not, I’ll give you my slant. First off in years past the activities and wonder of our area (arguably the most beautiful on the planet!) were truly nothing more than an amenity to gaming. Well, 48 states have some form of legalized gaming, so that ship has sailed in the sense of being in the driver seat. My feeling is that now we need to flip the old marketing plan upside down and primarily promote the outdoor activities and use gaming as an amenity to those activities.

    BUT I do think we are missing the boat by not carefully nurturing the medical mj gig, even possibly (and I know I will take some heat for this) somehow becoming the Amsterdam of American medicinal mj.

    Anyway, that is my short and sweet take.

  30. Tom Wendell says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    Recent, well-reasoned posts have steered this discussion into a very interesting and productive review about how we got into this mess and ideas on what we must do to get out of it….BUT…it has gotten waaaay off topic of loop road alternatives.

    This project is vitally important as it will set the stage, if you will, for the re-invented economy and infrastructure improvements we’re all in agreement are the ultimate goal here. This project also encompasses ‘the hole’ which needs to be part of the loop road plan. As at least some business would need to be relocated to accomodate new intersections and travel patterns, the hole would be a logical place for them as other posters have already suggested. Once we make this major commitment to a walkable, bikeable, etc. ect. center, the rest of the town will have to plan to work in harmony with that.

    -off topic alert-
    And what is our target market in the future? Well the Basin Prosperity Plan needs to be implemented with enhanced visitor services, health and wellness related businesses and green building innovation. Aside from those who will come to a re-invented SLT for expanded outdoor sports activities including: SAFE and scenic bike riding, ball sports tournaments, paddle sports, etc., there is an emerging demographic of eco / geo toursim. Tahoe is ripe for this and efforts have been underway to tap into this market segment. I have written about this in reference to the last snow globe opinion piece..check out the link there. Also check out the Tahoe Expo, a geotourism showcase rolling out it’s adventure tracks for the second year. Here is an example of dedicated volunteers and their partners and sponsors taking ACTION to change the status quo.
    http://www.tahoeexpo.com/tracks/

  31. 4-mer-usmc says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    Biggerpicture:

    I too have no formal (college) degree but I learned a long time ago that education does not equate to intellect. Some of the most illogical people I’ve ever known were highly educated with advanced degrees but if it wasn’t for Velcro they wouldn’t have been able to attach their shoes to their feet.

    I agree with your comments and add what I’ve been saying for a long time, which is that we need to diversify from having only tourism as our economic generator. I think our economic survival will depend on multiple economic components and obviously outdoor activities and gaming are two of those, but I think we need to add a different business model such as offices where individuals can work in computer call-up tech centers, medical insurance call-up centers, or environmental and other non-profit agencies for example, and can be paid a decent wage, receive benefits, the crumbling old buildings could be re-constructed or restored to updated office buildings, and the associated monies would be recycled back into the community. In this way when tourism takes the financial hit that it always does there will be an alternate economic generator so we don’t get totally creamed (as opposed to partially creamed) every time the economy dips.

    MJ’s not a bad idea either, but that would depend on the lone remaining collective in town being smart enough to become a model for that industry.

  32. Dogula says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    I know this is a totally simplistic view, but after months of talking about the “loop road” (years, actually) and seeing tau’s gone from California to Nevada in exchange for a small park, the Chamber of Commerce for the whole area being absolutely biased toward Nevada, I’m starting to think that, if it’s something Stateline wants, South Lake Tahoe California had best be extremely suspicious of the motivations and the cash flow potential.
    That’s all.

  33. John says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    Here is a link to the Prosperity Plan. http://www.tahoeprosperity.org/images/documents/LTBPPFinalReport_11.24.10.pdf

    And here is the Vision Statement: The Lake Tahoe Basin is a world class center of innovation around green tourism, green building and sustainable design, scientific research and applications for environmental resource renewal and management, renewable energies, and health and wellness. “It is the sustainability powerhouse of the nation.”

  34. John says - Posted: August 26, 2012

    So if this is it, we dont need a loop road, we have everything already in place and we need to downsize to the revenue of this type economy. Critical bottlenecks include the elimination of SNPLMA funding for science, a lack of parking near the lake, lack of opportunity for renewable energy and an unrealistic (says me, others disagree obviousely) vision of what day spas add to an economy.

    Tom, this is a nice eutopia but it isnt going to feed the chickens. It is a very very small economy. Now that is a choice, but there is no reason to have a loop road. We would be better off purchasing and razing delapidated buildings so we can get downsized to the infrastructure necessary to support that type economy.

    See figure 10 of the prosperity plan. Unfortunately there is no analysis in the prosperity plan that would quantify the levels on that chart. But that chart is market analysis 101. Unfortunately the prosperity plan doesnt even take a crack at it.

  35. Tom Wendell says - Posted: August 27, 2012

    John,

    Why do you insist that in order to have an economy based on innovative, sustainable tourism, technology and high-level wellness we would need to downsize?
    What we have to do is discard old, out-dated business models and start thinking like futurist Alvin Toffler who famously said: “The illiterate of the 21st Century will not be those who cannot read or write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn and relearn.” And perhaps more to the point: “Idea-assassins rush forward to kill any new suggestion on the grounds of its impracticality, while defending whatever now exists as practical, no matter how absurd.”

    The prosperity plan is but a framework, not the entire building. Obviously there would still be segments of the “old economy” that still bring in revenue like gaming. Special events including music festivals which are always a big draw are piece of the pie. The prosperity plan recognizes that more people are embracing human powered sports as a way to combat obesity related illnesses, pollute less and save $ on gas. Tahoe is ideally suited for such sports. And don’t forget ball sports tournaments. Carson City is making hay hosting tournaments and we should be too. If you doubt that this is true, read this:

    https://www.laketahoenews.net/2012/07/carson-city-economy-growing-with-sports-tourism/

    Now getting people around the area is a major problem here. Limited transportaion options are a serious roadblock to sustainability and are FINALLY being seriously addressed. Everything from water taxies to expanded walking / biking infrastructure to coordinated traffic signals are at long last getting more serious attention. A properly done loop road project would improve traffic flow, greatly enhance walk/bike-ability in our current bed-base AND…if we dare think big, re-imagine the hole as a place not only where businesses relocated for Hwy 50 realignment can thrive, but also a HUGE, green constructed, high-tech multi-purpose building that could be configured for everything from conventions to large music venues THAT WOULD NOT DISRUPT THE ALPINE SERENITY that so many who live and visit here seek. Part of a re-imagined economy is to attract a demographic that is more environmentally conscious and has more disposable income. That may sound somewhat elitist, but it’s not about downsizing the economy by cutting out day-trippers, it’s about offering a more diverse menu.

    In closing, I urge anyone reading this to seriously consider what kind of future you see for the Tahoe Basin. Do we want more parking lots near the lake? NO! That’s 1950’s thinking and won’t work in the 21st century and certainly won’t help improve lake clarity. That’s more of the same or as Toffler puts it: “Instead of anticipating the problems and opportunities of the future, we lurch from crisis to crisis”. I for one am DONE with that type of approach. We need to “boldly go where no one has gone before” or we will remain mired in a mindset that just puts us further behind forward looking resort destinations who are out-competing us in attracting the 21st century tourist.

  36. Tom Wendell says - Posted: August 27, 2012

    John,
    Why do you insist that in order to have an economy based on innovative, sustainable tourism, technology and high-level wellness we would need to downsize?
    What we have to do is discard old, out-dated business models and start thinking like futurist Alvin Toffler who famously said: “The illiterate of the 21st Century will not be those who cannot read or write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn and relearn.” And perhaps more to the point: “Idea-assassins rush forward to kill any new suggestion on the grounds of its impracticality, while defending whatever now exists as practical, no matter how absurd.”

    The prosperity plan is but a framework, not the entire building. Obviously there would still be segments of the “old economy” that still bring in revenue like gaming. Special events including music festivals which are always a big draw are piece of the pie. The prosperity plan recognizes that more people are embracing human powered sports as a way to combat obesity related illnesses, pollute less and save $ on gas. Tahoe is ideally suited for such sports. And don’t forget ball sports tournaments. Carson City is making hay hosting tournaments and we should be too. If you doubt that this is true, read this:

    https://www.laketahoenews.net/2012/07/carson-city-economy-growing-with-sports-tourism/

    Now getting people around the area is a major problem here. Limited transportaion options are a serious roadblock to sustainability and are FINALLY being seriously addressed. Everything from water taxies to expanded walking / biking infrastructure to coordinated traffic signals are at long last getting more serious attention. A properly done loop road project would improve traffic flow, greatly enhance walk/bike-ability in our current bed-base AND…if we dare think big, re-imagine the hole as a place not only where businesses relocated for Hwy 50 realignment can thrive, but also a HUGE, green constructed, high-tech multi-purpose building that could be configured for everything from conventions to large music venues THAT WOULD NOT DISRUPT THE ALPINE SERENITY that so many who live and visit here seek. Part of a re-imagined economy is to attract a demographic that is more environmentally conscious and has more disposable income. That may sound somewhat elitist, but it’s not about downsizing the economy by cutting out day-trippers, it’s about offering a more diverse menu.

    In closing, I urge anyone reading this to seriously consider what kind of future you see for the Tahoe Basin. Do we want more parking lots near the lake? NO! That’s 1950′s thinking and won’t work in the 21st century and certainly won’t help improve lake clarity. That’s more of the same or as Toffler puts it: “Instead of anticipating the problems and opportunities of the future, we lurch from crisis to crisis”. I for one am DONE with that type of approach. We need to “boldly go where no one has gone before” or we will remain mired in a mindset that just puts us further behind forward looking resort destinations who are out-competing us in attracting the 21st century tourist.

  37. Careaboutthecommunity says - Posted: August 27, 2012

    We always will need enough parking lots to park the cars that people come here in, the loop road will not make people ride a bus here.

  38. Tom Wendell says - Posted: August 27, 2012

    Care,

    I think you’ve missed the point here. We have covered virtually all the ground that we’ll ever cover with parking lots. Covering even more ground with parking lots is a thing of the past. While the loop road itself has nothing to do with busses or any other alternative to the personal auto, there are numerous entities working in their various sectors to reduce reliance on personal autos. This is both a lake clarity issue and a quality of life issue. Try to picture the following: You arrive at your lodging–most of which is centeralized near Stateline–by car. Once a comprehensive transit system is in place, you can elect to bike or walk to the beach (or wherever)or to a water taxi at Lakeside, Ski Run, Timbercove or Camp Rich or board a land based shuttle (which by then would have to run every 15-20 min.) and head to wherever you plan to spend the day or continue your biking or walking, skiing from wherever you disembark. No waiting in a line of ideling cars or fees for parking. You still have the option of taking your car to the existing parking, but a good number of people are tired of the traffic and parking hassles because they went on vacation or moved here to get away from that stress.

    More parking lots are not the answer in the 21st Century and especially not in the Tahoe Basin.

  39. dryclean says - Posted: August 27, 2012

    Seems to me that the one person with the most to gain by fighting the loop road is Mike McKeen. The more he holds out, the more he gets paid for his property. Everyone in town knows that Mike’s commercial holdings are rather large and that he is in business to make $$. So Mike, come clean, like the NV side, you are in this to make $$. No one who knows you ever mentions how comapssionate and charitable you are because you are not. Like so many others you don’t even live in the city, employ lots of people, work to clean up the enviornment, or support the city. So stop trying to influence our election and our lives. You want a vote, move into the city. Otherwise, please go away and stop being a hypocrite.

  40. John says - Posted: August 27, 2012

    Dryclean, we have a pretty good discussion going without any personal attacks. Please limit your comments to the tone set above.

    Thanks, and now back to our regularly schedule dog fight….

  41. Dogula says - Posted: August 27, 2012

    Hmmmmm. Dryclean’s comment reminds me of the attacks on Mr. Amacker. The left has succeeded in destroying most people’s understanding of the right of private property, which is FUNDAMENTAL to our Country, our Constitution, and our American way of life.
    Way to go.

  42. John says - Posted: August 27, 2012

    Tom, I do absolutely embrace your vision for the hole and for the core. And in my mind the loop road makes some pretty incredible events possible. There is the easy stuff; music festivals, car shows, conventions etc. But then there is quintesstial California and Nevada activities that could be awesome. Western days type events representing Nevada or maybe a best of California agriculture festival.

    If we want that, and I think that is the direction for our community, then the loop is absolutely mandatory. We do need better parking and we need to help the budget hotels remodel. Basically that means just streamline permits, and maybe some grants or low interest loans.

    Now as far as the human powered recreation and then other health services. Well to some extent I guess. I sure dont see another 1000 people a day on our mountain bike trails. I would be pissed off frankly. We do not have the same soils they have in Utah / Colorado that can support that kind of traffic. Rock climbing; maybe, hiking; no parking, paddle boarding; no parking, lake access; no parking. Where is the money going to come from to completely reinvent transportation?

    Some of the stuff in the prosperity plan is just insane though. We want patients families to pay to stay in resort hotels while their family member is being treated? There goes the budget.

    And now the real fly in the soup. SNPLMA is gone. All of that funding for fancy environmental projects. Well its history. And there is no, and likely will not be another Tahoe Restoration Act. Folks, Uncle Sugar aint showing up with his wallet in his hand this time. We better get this figured out quickly.

  43. Biggerpicture says - Posted: August 27, 2012

    “We better get this figured out quickly.”

    Amen John!

    BUT not so quickly that our judgement would equate to a knee jerk reaction. Whatever changes we make in how this town approaches the future MUST be tempered and implemented in a timely manner. And what I mean by that is in a well thought out, and implicated in a realistic time frame (neither rushing NOR dragging our feet).

  44. Tom Wendell says - Posted: August 28, 2012

    Ahhh..now we’re getting somewhere. Agree with most of the content in recent posts, especially about keeping the discussion civil. Personal attacks only make it more difficult to find the consensus that we absoloutely must achieve in order to move forward QUICKLY!
    In that spirit, I apologize for my own recent transgression. Chief, I’m sorry I lashed out as I did…your remark, while off-base, did not warrent such a strong response from me. Mea Culpa.

    We are in a bad situation and the loss of SNPLMA funding is a major setback to be sure. Govt. grants are scarcer and much more competitive but I believe there is a work around…IF…and this is key…we as a community can come to agreement on what we want the future economy and infrastructur to look like. Only then will private capital start flowing and that in turn will help secure grants as matching funds and community solidarity are mandatory for securing large grants. I freely admit this is an over- simplification and I have no background in economics and finance, but I’ve heard and read this from people who are well versed in these disciplines. If anyone has some expertise on this, please chime in.

    As for lake access and parking…if we expand parking beyond what already exists and what is in progress (ie: Lakview Commons), we will be opening the door to even more summertime traffic which is already one of the chief complaints of visitors and locals alike. To be sure, you can’t take paddleboards and kayaks on busses or water taxies
    and people will continue to use their private autos…BUT as that market continues to expand, I see the expansion of the already busy bike / hike shuttle business to include paddle sports. Local jobs, no waiting and looking for a parking space, just get dropped off and picked up right near your launch site. This is part of enhanced visitor services.

    I don’t want to see another 1000 mountain bikers on our local trails either. Agree wih the your comment about soils as I’ve ridden Moab etc. With so many great trails between Truckee and Kirkwood and new and planned trails connecting to Carson and Reno, I could easily see that many spread out over that expanse. One of the principles of geotourism is to steer people away from already overused areas. New trail construction techniques minimize erosion and maximize safety and enjoyment. TAMBA is doing a great job on that front.

    I agree that the resort hotel / medical center approach would not work as well here as in India or Thailand where it is booming becuase of higher medical costs and wages here. But wellness oriented spa hotels would attract the extended stay, high disposable income visitor who is a vital part of a re-invigorated economy.

    This discussion is a model of exactly the kind of discorse we need to be having in order to move forward. Let’s hear some more!

  45. Tom Wendell says - Posted: August 28, 2012

    Ahhh…..now we’re getting somewhere! Agree with most of the content in recent posts, especially about keeping the discussion civil. Personal attacks only make it more difficult to find the consensus that we absoloutely must achieve in order to move forward QUICKLY!
    In that spirit, I apologize for my own recent transgression. Chief, I’m sorry I lashed out as I did…your remark, while off-base, did not warrent such a strong response from me. Mea Culpa.
    We are in a bad situation and the loss of SNPLMA funding is a major setback to be sure. Govt. grants are scarcer and much more competitive but I believe there is a work around…IF…and this is key…we as a community can come to agreement on what we want the future economy and infrastructur to look like. Only then will private capital start flowing and that in turn will help secure grants as matching funds and community solidarity are mandatory for securing large grants. I freely admit this is an over- simplification and I have no background in economics and finance, but I’ve heard and read this from people who are well versed in these disciplines. If anyone has some expertise on this, please chime in.
    As for lake access and parking…if we expand parking beyond what already exists and what is in progress (ie: Lakview Commons), we will be opening the door to even more summertime traffic which is already one of the chief complaints of visitors and locals alike. To be sure, you can’t take paddleboards and kayaks on busses or water taxies
    and people will continue to use their private autos…BUT as that market continues to expand, I see the expansion of the already busy bike / hike shuttle business to include paddle sports. Local jobs, no waiting and looking for a parking space, just get dropped off and picked up right near your launch site. This is part of enhanced visitor services.
    I don’t want to see another 1000 mountain bikers on our local trails either. Agree wih the your comment about soils as I’ve ridden Moab etc. With so many great trails between Truckee and Kirkwood and new and planned trails connecting to Carson and Reno, I could easily see that many spread out over that expanse. One of the principles of geotourism is to steer people away from already overused areas. New trail construction techniques minimize erosion and maximize safety and enjoyment. TAMBA is doing a great job on that front.
    I agree that the resort hotel / medical center approach would not work as well here as in India or Thailand where it is booming becuase of higher medical costs and wages here. But wellness oriented spa hotels would attract the extended stay, high disposable income visitor who is a vital part of a re-invigorated economy.
    This discussion is a model of exactly the kind of discorse we need to be having in order to move forward. Let’s hear some more!

  46. fromform says - Posted: August 28, 2012

    let’s create a regional alternative transportation valet system…overwhelm visitors with options…employment, infrastructure, worldwide notoriety! the duck tours are the start, though many could be human powered, a frenzy of options…i see it now…

  47. Tom Wendell says - Posted: August 29, 2012

    fromform,

    What’s with the snarky, tongue-in-cheek comments? We, as a community, have reached a hyper-critical crossroads and finding solidarity as to which course WE AS A COMMUNIY should take to secure a more stable and sustainable future is of critical importance RIGHT NOW.

    Let’s dispense with the non-productive banter on this thread.
    WE HAVE SERIOUS WORK TO DO!

  48. Tom Wendell says - Posted: August 29, 2012

    fromform,

    What’s with the snarky, tongue-in-cheek comments? We, as a community, have reached a hyper-critical crossroads and finding solidarity as to which course WE AS A COMMUNIY should set to secure a more stable and sustainable future is of critical importance RIGHT NOW.

    Let’s dispense with the non-productive banter on this thread.
    WE HAVE SERIOUS WORK TO DO!

  49. fromform says - Posted: August 29, 2012

    i am on board for positive change. my comments will hence reflect this…

  50. Tom Wendell says - Posted: August 29, 2012

    Kay, Gloria and everyone,

    Gloria Hartoonian’s timely call to the community to give input on the Loop Road proposal hits the bullseye. A community sourced and approved project could help shape the way we re-think and rehabilitate our town. This thread was evolving into a very civil and sober exchange of ideas.

    Kay, what would you think about creating an on-going forum where people can weigh in with their thoughts and ideas about how we shape SLT and the Tahoe Basins’ future??

    From Loop Road to lake access, snow globe to sidewalks, this is the kind of discussion we need to have happening community-wide. Until ‘we the people’ find a high level of consensus and solidarity on a direction and plan to improve economic, environmental and social parity, the revitalized economy and infrastructure we ALL desire will remain clouded by the dust of our squabbles.

  51. Tom Wendell says - Posted: August 30, 2012

    Kay, Gloria and everyone,

    Gloria Hartoonian’s timely call to the community to give input on the Loop Road proposal hits the bullseye. A community sourced and approved project could help shape the way we re-think and rehabilitate our town. This thread was evolving into a very civil and sober exchange of ideas.

    Kay, what would you think about creating an on-going forum where people can weigh in with their thoughts and ideas about how we shape SLT and the Tahoe Basins’ future??

    From Loop Road to lake access, snow globe to sidewalks, this is the kind of discussion we need to have happening community-wide. Until ‘we the people’ find a high level of consensus and solidarity on a direction and plan to improve economic, environmental and social parity, the revitalized economy and infrastructure we ALL desire will remain clouded by the dust of our squabbles.