Loop road proponents looking at community impacts
By Kathryn Reed
Federal law dictates what happens to people who might be displaced if the Tahoe Transportation District ever reroutes Highway 50 on the South Shore. But fair market value today is another story.
One man at Thursday’s TTD meeting brought up the fact that he would have to fully disclose to a potential buyer that the loop road could one day take out his property. He said he would not be able to get fair market value today because of this fact.
Alfred Knotts with Tahoe Transportation District looks over one of the loop road maps with Angie Watson who owns apartments in the project area. Photo/Kathryn Reed
A real estate broker in the audience confirmed that everyone with property that could be affected by the project now has to tell a buyer about the loop road. This scenario is the same thing that for years left those in the path of the convention center project not wanting to improve their properties for fear of not getting a return on investment and unable to sell based on the threat of the parcel being consumed for what became a hole.
Officials are trying to bring transparency to the loop road by talking relocation and acquisition, but some in the audience said notices that have gone out seem more like scare tactics.
This project, though, would not become a hole because it cannot start until all the funding is in place.
There are four alternatives being studied, along with a do-nothing option. The one the TTD prefers would start on the west side in South Lake Tahoe at the vacant lots the city owns before the junction with Pioneer Trail and then go behind Harrah’s and MontBleu, coming out at Lake Parkway where a roundabout would be put in. Another starts at the Pioneer Trail intersection. One calls for Highway 50 to be one way and the loop on the mountain side to go in the opposite direction. Then there is the skyway option to move pedestrians around, but would not address the traffic concerns proponents want to improve.
Goals of a loop road include making what is now Highway 50 in the tourist core a city-county street that would be more pedestrian-bike-transit centric, have wide-inviting sidewalks, and feel more like a downtown.
About 30 people turned out for the July 25 meeting – about half of what officials had hoped for.
Mike Lahodny with Bender Rosenthal, a commercial valuation and right-of-way services company, went over the laws that dictate what can happen to property owners, business owners and tenants.
No appraisals or acquisitions can occur until the TTD board certifies the environmental document. But part of the environmental document is the Community Impact Study (CIS), with the Relocation Impact Study (RIS) being a component of that.
The RIS is expected to be completed by the end of August and the CIS in the fall.
Lahodny said even though the information being collected today will be outdated three to four years from now when appraisals may actually occur, the data is designed to let planners project out what could happen.
The draft environmental documents could be released in spring 2015, with the final document out in fall 2015. It is on the draft enviro docs that the public will be able to make the most comments, though officials are always taking comments.
South Lake Tahoe and Douglas County electeds will have to sign-off on the environmental documents, along with the TTD board. The one place the city and county could derail the project would be to not approve the permits to do the work within their jurisdictions.
The information Lahodny discussed is expected to be on the TTD website today, along with more detailed maps of the parcels that could be affected.
Put this on the ballot before any more public funds are spent. Let the voters and taxpayers decide if they want another costly community boondoggle.
The loop road will effect all property in the valley to some extent, some bad some good
As an attorney who has practiced in eminent domain law, I am concerned for our local property owners’ compensation if there is a “takings” of their property, now when the market is at rock bottom. The government need only pay fmv for highest and best use of their property at the time of the takings, not future potential. So just as values are starting to turn around, these poor long time local businesses are forced to sell at rock bottom prices. Hmmmmmm. I like the idea of putting it to a vote.
To reiterate: the City Council has voted against eminent domain.
One of my concerns last night was that this project appears to be presented as a “done deal.” That has multiple repercussions, not the least of which is that property owners in the affected area now have to disclose the uncertainty of this project, thereby lowering their property values.
Even if they wanted to sell to the TTD, that money is not concrete, in fact, it has not even been sought, much less secured.Yet, our homeowners and business owners have already felt the impact of the damage.
The amount that would be offered to business owners, if they chose to relocate, is so far below what an average business would be valued it is amazing.
Joann, don’t you think the property owners where there is now parking permits and meters also have to disclose that fact? Why are you suddenly so concerned about the effect on property values?
No more city staff time, should be used for this project. The city can do this now!
interesting observation, john.
I believe the Skywalk alternative does address the traffic concerns.
Don’t move the traffic to a new location, move the pedestrians above and allow the traffic to pass below. This structure would improve vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian safety by providing a glass plaza the full width of Hwy 50 today just for pedestrians and bicycles and it would create a “sense of space” by allowing open views of the lake and the mountains.
It would be a community gathering place for year around events while taking the foot and bicycle traffic away from the cars and trucks.
It would cost less than building a new highway, you wouldn’t have to buy anyone out of their homes or businesses and the existing Hwy 50 would not have to be rebuilt.
A landmark like this running from Mont Bleu to Park Ave. would set South Tahoe above other tourist destinations.
Deborah, what you said is absolutely incorrect. Primarily appraisals of commercial property are conducted on the income approach. That is a net present value calculation that discount the value of a stream of cash flows to the present value. Obviousely there will be negotiations over what discount rate should be used and over the payments included in the analysis. That wraps up most of the properties. Then the residential properties will be valued based on comparable sales. That makes sense because the property owner will be able to go purchase a comparable property. The property owners have no right to upgrade properties because of the transaction.
Finally, the vote thing is not even an idea because more than just the city is affected by this. So how do you put together a vote between Nevada, the city and county?
I could also see a sky walk in that area, but then I think about the Snow, what happens when we get one of those 6 ft dumps of snow? Where would you push all of it?
And even in summer how much skywalk? what would it smell like up there with all the traffic below. With all the fresh mountain are why subject yourself to that?
I was just looking at google earth, there is already a road behind the casino’s!! Looks like it gets little use!! why not push some people friendly activities back into all the open space West of the Casino’s and the Stateline stuff, Wide open road, tons of parking and quite a bit of open land, seems that would make more sense, I think the loop road is a bunch of C@#$P Why would TRPA and Resedents even allow another big ass 4 lane road in the Basin, Its the worst kind of coverage and has a direct effect on the Lake
I think a skywalk/tunnel option is the least disruptive, and would be agreeable to the majority.
John, This issue is more subjective than you think. The City of SLT, where apx. 80% of the money will be spent does have to approve this and the Feds and State of Ca. will not likely overrule their decision.
I kinda like the skywalk idea.
JoAnn- This project has been in multiple planning documents for decades. If disclosure is in fact required, then the property owners should have already been disclosing the project for years.
I like the 3 lane one way east bound with a two land west bound behind horizon. Instead of a skywalk which would have problems in the winter and ada issues, what about another tunnel like the one between harveys harrahs
I am unclear how the skywalk provides any benefit. It is a walkway to no where. Unless the adjacent businesses make significant modifications to their store fronts, you wouldn’t even be able to access them. Basically you would walk up on to the skywalk, walk around in a circle and then go back down.
It only took me 45 min to find it, for those of you who are as inept as me at finding info?
http://www.tahoetransportation.org/current-capital-projects/us50-south-shore-community-revitalization-project
The skywalk would be interconnected to the main businesses (casinos, hotels, etc.) at both the elevated level as well as through ramps (stairs, biking and escalators or moving sidewalks) from the ground sidewalks.
Although the writer is correct that the Loop Road has been kicked around for decades, it didn’t always include the ‘scope & scale’ of a freeway-look – I believe that is because of the possible inclusion of Federal highway money at this point, plus the current availability of monies with which to “plan”.
The simple wordsmithing of a postcard that went out to affected parties, with a wide boundary (added 1500′ around the perimeter, to be safe, as described by Project Manager Alfred Knotts) can be very telling indeed – as its’ intent appears to have backfired a bit.
City Council person Joann Connor watched enough of the proceedings last night to conclude that one of ” (her) concerns was that this project appears to be presented as a ‘done deal’ “.
Credit her for patiently watching enough before arriving at that conclusion, as the postcard probably sounded to some of those affected (i.e., tenants) as if they better make plans to move elsewhere, as it never mentioned that this was a 2-4 year (to nowhere ?) process.
Kae’s comment within her article was that “the Relocation Impact Statement is expected to be completed by the end of August and the Community Impact Statement in the Fall” just solidifies Joann’s thoughts as to the plans somehow being on a fast track, which in turn probably fortifies the anxiety of those who interpreted the postcard’s words as “get ready now”, in turn causing consternation, if not more cynicism, for the “process” as it’s now unfolding.
August and the “Fall” are not that far away, and merely adding translators in both Spanish & Tagalog didn’t do too much to satisfy those communities anyway, as they were in short supply (zero) in attending this meeting.
Therefore, Angie the landlord of several of the apartment buildings (“in the way”) was probably correct to conclude that a number of her tenants are now ‘forewarned’ (if not prematurely, a meet-planning strategic mistake, in my estimation) . . . the bell cannot now be unrung.
The conduct has echoes of NYC’s legendary Robert Moses ‘steamrollling’ through the burroughs to build freeways out to suburbs that didn’t yet exist at the time. . .and was defeated by the equally-renowned Jane Jacobs in her support for the ethnicities of neighborhoods. . .which created the community vibrancy that New York is so well-known for…
We should be so lucky…given Tahoe Meadows pristine perpetuity issues just across the road from the beginning of this ‘direction’, the design sensibility is quite askew…wrong scale, wrong scope – and not “build-it-and-they-will-come”, either. . .
From looking at the adjacent buildings, I am not sure how the skywalk could connect without significantly remodeling the buildings. For example, the second floor of Harvey’s is conference rooms and the casino area in Harrahs has a raised ceiling so there is nothing to connect to.
I also find it interesting that many of the outspoken advocates for the skywalk are the same people who complain that the project is only being proposed to satisfy Nevada Gaming interests. The skywalk is almost entirely in Nevada and I haven’t heard a whole lot of support from any of the Nevada folks.
Keep the pedestrian area the same, level with existing structures. Dig a tunnel underneath the roadway for the road. Go under at Lake Pkwy, come back out at Park Ave. If you are going to a business within that area, you need to divert behind the casinos on the access road loop: Lake, Park, and Pine. Only need to move the Harvey’s Harrah’s tunnel. No eminent domain, no land purchase for a road, because you are using existing road, smaller area of construction, less materials, more accepted by public, only drawback is it probably will cost more, but then again maybe not, with all the purchase of property off the table.
TahoeDonkey- you are identifying a few of the design challenges which would need to be addressed but nothing which would eliminate the concept. Handling of snow is another one but again nothing which would be a deal stopper. As far as the current design alternative it is almost entirely in Nevada. I recommend extending it to Park Ave. and connecting to the Marriotts, the Gondola, the Stardust and whatever will be built at Project 3.
Careaboutthecommunity- I would rather be in a glass skywalk where I can see the lake and mountains instead of in a dark tunnel.
I was at the meeting last night, and thought it was well done for the most part. They addressed owners and tenants who live in/own property in the possibly affected area. It was made very clear that condemnation (eminent domain) is NOT what they plan to use… they want to use individual negotiations to get the property needed to complete the project.
It doesn’t seem like the proposed road would be anything like a freeway. Seems just like a normal highway similar to what we already have on Lake Tahoe Blvd. And speed limits would stay similar to what is already in place (35-40mph) on the new road.
Change is scary, especially when it affects you directly. But we need to keep in mind the bigger picture, such as how the stateline area will be once (or if) the convention center project gets completed and many more pedestrians fill the area. How nice it would be to walk around between the two sides of the road in the “city center” plan they are working towards.
Darn. I was in town and would have enjoyed attending this meeting. Just how do they go about getting the word out about such meetings? Really surprised that more didn’t attend? I suspect they wanted to.
MTT, you’re right. There is a substantial road back there called Lake Parkway. In fact, though the connecting streets are a bit smaller than envisioned, the entire “Loop Road” already exists in its entirety. I use it all the time as a short cut getting to my Nevada property from CA. Start by bypassing most of SLT by using Pioneer Trail from just outside of Meyers to the town center. But just before the intersection with 50, take a right onto either Moss or Echo Roads and take them up to a Left turn onto Montreal Road, which becomes Lake Parkway. Voilà, Loop Road!
For all of the pain involved, I’m finding it difficult to see the grand benefit of replacing a road going through the casinos, and an existing loop road, with a road going through the casinos, and a loop road in the same place as it exists today.
I favor the do nothing option, unless something else entailing far bolder vision is presented, which includes eliminating the current 50 stretch from Park Ave to Lake Pkwy entirely.
But there is a “Do-Nothing Option B” available. Just recognize the loop road that already exists, and make incremental minor improvements on all the roads involved, perhaps taking bigger steps when more property becomes available in its own time. This really doesn’t require a billion $s, or acts of multiple congresses, or a final comprehensive compromised solution that everyone ends up hating.
Doug,
LTN announced the meeting: https://www.laketahoenews.net/2013/07/loop-road-proponents-ready-to-meet-about-relocation/.
LTN staff
Is the Loop Raod going to benefit Nevada and the Casinos more than California ? Is the proposed expense proportionally spread between the two ?
Are the 250 acres of additional high density recreational development at Friday’s Station taken into consideration ?
Are these two additional developments good for the community – and Lake Tahoe ?
Doug – well said. We already have a Loop Road, and all the “pain” could be alleviated with money spent to fix up the existing area.
Amanda – to your comment “It doesn’t seem like the proposed road would be anything like a freeway. Seems just like a normal highway similar to what we already have on Lake Tahoe Blvd. And speed limits would stay similar to what is already in place (35-40mph) on the new road.”
You are right, we already HAVE the highway and those speed limits you speak of would be routed through residential neighborhoods instead of through a business district.And, many homes and jobs would be lost. Property values, with the recent activity on this project, have already declined and affected a number of our residents.
John – to answer your question, no, the expense is not proportionately spread between the two, and no, it would not be good for South Lake Tahoe, and here is the reasoning:
South Lake Tahoe has spent millions of dollars upgrading the Village Center and Heavenly Village areas, as have other business owners in that area, like the Park Hotel and Holiday Inn Express. We have now approved the advancement of the Chateau Project (the hole) to finally have sidewalks, landscaping, lighting, and shops on that side of the road improved as well. We have successfully negotiated with CalTrans and are getting sidewalks, with ADA cuts, and lighting from the Y to Stateline, and down Pioneer to Ski Run (completed next year).We have landscaped, and have attractive areas where locals and tourists alike can already walk and bike around shops, an ice rink, a movie theatre, and restaurants. We have safe crosswalks, which are used frequently, to get from one side of the street to the other. We have small events there as well.
The majority of our TOT and sales tax revenue comes from this area for the City of South Lake Tahoe. If you cut access to this area, you cut revenue, which affects services for the entire City.
Therefore, the cost is not proportionately shared, the major hit would be to South Lake Tahoe and it’s citizens.
I guess I just don’t understand the suggestions that the state line and Heavenly Village areas will take a financial hit from the Loop Road. It must be based on current street visibility only. There is no access or parking to those areas now. And if a drive by guest all of the sudden decided that they just had to go to North Face or Burger King don’t they have to make a huge effort to try and find the underused parking garage?
The argument that this benefits the casinos is really difficult to add up. The Heavenly Village and the foot traffic there is almost all from the surrounding hotel rooms. “Embassy Suites” is not sitting around and hoping someone turns into their driveway and books a room. Besides, there would still be street access through that corridor from east bound traffic.
Move the traffic behind the casinos. Make the state line area amazingly pedestrian friendly. If it benefits the casinos it benefits all of us. Press on!
SC – most people who are unfamiliar with an area drive down the road and look at what is available for shopping or eating. That is what we have now – visibility of the businesses, and they can turn into the Village Center directly from the highway if they see something they like. Or, if they turn towards the Heavenly Village, they can find parking.
If you divert that traffic away from the store fronts and all they see are the backs of buildings, they are not as likely to turn in and go look. Additionally, some of those businesses in that area will not have direct access from the Loop Road and will actually lose their driveways, like the Holiday Inn Express.
I guess if what you say is true then there should not be a problem with the parking garage. Unless of course the curious visitors you speak of are just parking in the casino lots and walking over. And there are several businesses that do not have direct access now. The Holiday Inn will be accommodated. No one is trying to kill business.
My argument is that the majority of the stateline and Village guests are already here or had plans to be here. There would still be road access to those areas. I think there is a failure to understand that most people do not think that crossing a five lane highway is very vacationy or relaxing. Hasn’t the argument been to get the folks out of their cars, give them a reason to walk, ride bikes, stroll and shop etc?
If the traffic is rerouted there will need to be new directional signage, some new business signage, some retraining to be had. But most do not drive to Union Square. They take all the different modes of transportaion to get to the area which is packed with high end everything and a city center.
Additionally, the casinos are a draw and we need to stop making them the devil. Even though they are corporate behemoths we need to help steer them in the direction we want them to go…and in my opinion they are starting to see the light. The concert series are better than ever and now that Mount Bleu has got back into the game the draw is even better. The casinos are not going anywhere, Edgewood is doing what everyone else wants to do but can’t, because it’s easier for them, and who can blame them. Vail is doing everything they can to drive business into this area. SLT needs to continue to step up their game. The new sidewalks and lighting, Lakeview, are all great steps and need to continue.
The loop road will add guest traffic to the area through the casinos to Pioneer trail because people want to get out of their cars. Commercial business and values would increase. Jobs would increase. Doing nothing is short sighted and fearful. The ‘skywalk’ proposal missed the point entirely. The tunnel idea isn’t so bad but I will bet there are engineers with great ideas of why not to that in a heavy snow, high water table, flood prone area and there is probably not enough room once you factor in safely and ventilation.
Ms. Conner:
I’ve never seen comments posted on this blog by any of the other four sitting City Council members or the City’s staff regarding the proposed Highway 50 Realignment/Loop Road Project. For the sake of clarity would you identify if your remarks posted are representative of the City of SLT and the City Council, or if they are in the capacity of a private citizen voicing their personal opinion.
Thank you.
SC:
Thank you for providing a balanced counter-opinion to the opposition positions on this proposed project.
SC – you cannot guarantee what you say will happen and, just like the economic study of this project, the words “could and might” are not convincing enough to our citizens and business owners to take a chance that this “might” all be great 5-15 years after this is built.
Most business people today are looking for more concrete answers and are understandably cautious in our uncertain economy.I also don’t agree that everyone wants to get out of their cars and walk long distances, especially the elderly, the disabled, and the young families.We serve everyone.
4-mer – you probably won’t see the other Council members or staff post here, and I do not post as much as I used to for good reasons. Most posters do not use their real names and some are outright vicious and insulting in their attacks.
For example, it has been written several times that we “do not listen to the people.” Which people? There are people who feel strongly on both sides of every controversial issue, but no matter which side we feel has the strongest argument or the most representation, we are accused by the other side of not listening, and often, not very nicely either. We are human too, and believe it or not, are just trying to do the best we can for the majority of citizens we were elected to serve.
My comments are my own as a Council Member,based on numerous conversations and meetings with citizens,and have been stated in this forum, public forums, print, on TV, and recorded at Council meetings.
JoAnn, you don’t have the education to form an opinion about a complex economic analysis. But beyond that, the sun might come up tomorrow. Yes most likely, but there is a level of uncertainty in all documents produced by professionals that is expressed with those terms. The reason we need educated people in your position is so that you have the education and experience to evaluate the level of uncertainty.
On its current path, and with a great deal of certainty, we know the economic engine of this community is dying. You have no alternative that that has undergone the level of analysis that has been performed on the loop. But you prefer a less certain alternative. Great.
I am betting on the sun tomorrow.
JoAnne – Thank you for your thoughts regarding the proportionality of expense for the Loop Road and benefits derived. I am in agreement with you.
I’de like to present a bigger picture here…….
I think what most everyone here fails to understand is that this Loop Road begins to define what “Destination Lake Tahoe” turns into.
In reading most of the comments – it appears that it’s all about centralized commerce and the money.
Granted – I too love making money and to a certain degree sold a little of Tahoe to do so.
But what happens when we all lose sight of what “Destination Tahoe” really could be ?
Could it be less marketing for mass tourism and accomodations and access, or should it be more classy development with slightly less accomodations ? Would the later future concept actually invite a better quality of visitors willing to spend a little more for a unique and classy Tahoe experience. Or, do we just proceed down the same old path that more is better – and hope to reach a “Destination Las Vegas” result ?
Do we want to lose the uniqueness of what Lake Tahoe used to be, have worsening HWY 50 traffic jams to and from Stateline ? Do we want to further pollute the lake and sell out everything we all originally moved her for – for the sake of progress and money ?
Certainly I am not exempt for critism for what I did for profit, but after all these years I am beginning to see a bigger picture of forward thought for protection of this beautiful area we live in.
My comments here are not meant in an offensive manner to anyone who commented here – but just as food for thought.
JoAnn,
I do not live in SLT, in-fact I probably only drive to South Lake a couple times a year. I get close (Spooner Summit area more often)
That said; I find it admirable that you chose to come here and share your thoughts online. It is not fair the way some react to your posts. You read and you stat you opinion or the facts as you believe them to be.
You are one of a small but growing number of public officials or corporate stake holders who are interacting with the population online.
I believe you are at the forefront of what will be a common practice in years to come.
Thank you for having a thick skin and sticking it out.
At some point those who have used the anonymous internet to attack and shout down people with whom they disagree, will scurry back into the dark like cockroaches when the kitchen light comes on.
And again for people really looking at this, think about the end game, who is try to get what? And why?
Just looking at Google earth it seems California and SLT could spend that money in small and smart ways to improve traffic flow shop exposure and access, all on existing roads without disruption to the area and private property West And South of State line. But it really does not affect me, other than the though of a future where I stand up on the mountain above and see more City sprawl next to the most beautiful Lake in the World. If you create another High Way it will just be lined with more development like the existing highway.
It does not matter what we all think. The powers to be will do whatever they want, as usual. How often do locals use the new stores, ice rink etc? If you do use them, where do you park? We tried to go to a movie one afternoon, and the parking garage was totally full. I am in agreement with those who do not want to radically change Stateline and So.Lake Tahoe-moved here 24 years ago, loving the way it was back then. Improvements are usually nice, but not radically changing an area.
John, I don’t think Joanne really cares about a classier and more affluent type of clientele for one simple reason. The people who live here and vote, key word, vote, are not affluent. Exclude the houses in the Keys, the ones by the water, and there are not too many houses worth north of $300k. In fact, many of the houses within the city limit are pretty shabby and tired from years of owner neglect and a housing market that does not warrant investment. Its hard to get value by improving your real estate when you are surrounded by much lesser homes. I would also guess that more voters in the city limits live in these fairly neglected and tired rentals than in homes, apartments or condos they own.
Joanne is a renter, not a home owner. She is more like the voters and that is probably why she got elected. I don’t fault her for that. Nor do I fault her for being fairly uneducated about business matters like John says above. Like many people here in town who have lost jobs and wages as the casino business has dwindled away, Joanne is just trying to make ends meet.
She is only serving her voters in the manner she feels they want to be represented. She should know, she is more like them than any other member of the city council.
JoAnn- if I remember correctly, I believe that I heard from someone who was at a public meeting that you were the one who came up with the Skywalk (that is entirely within Nevada). If that is in fact true, it seems like your actions may be contradictory to your trying to position yourself as the savior of SLT.
To all the pro loop road people: What happens to the business and people displaced? I’ve walked that walk and there is no place to relocate in the area they are being displaced from. Think about it if you were in their shoes. Think about the people first. We all have 1st amendment rights even city council members.
JoAnn-I am one homeownwer voter that supports your effort to prevent the plan that Douglas Co. businesses want. The plan that funnels Hwy. 50 traffic away from So. Lake Tahoe’s businesses and our tax base and conveniently delivers that traffic and tourist spending across the line to their planned developements.-Keep up the battle and please ignore the supercilious twits and their supposed educational superiority.-They’ve been wrong about economic matters their entire lives.
Ms. Conner:
Thank you for clarifying that the comments you post on this blog are your own as a Council member.
I agree that no matter what the City Council or the City staff do there are always those individuals in the public who will make the accusations that the City Council/staff are incompetent, lazy, overpaid, do not listen, don’t care what the public thinks or wants, don’t really care about the City, are self-serving, etc., etc., etc. Without a doubt these are some of the most unfortunate hazards of working in government and serving the public, and lest we not forget the verbal abuse and complete disrespect that some members of the public feel they are entitled to dispense to the City staff and to the City Council (including at their meetings–I think certain recurring speaker may spring to mind) since as these people like to say, “they are paying the staffs salaries and benefits.” I am acquainted with many current and past City employees and know firsthand that the City staff and the City Council work very hard on behalf of the community of South Lake Tahoe, and for all their efforts and dedication they oftentimes receive very little thanks or respect. Serving the public is possibly the most thankless job/endeavor one could undertake, and I frequently wonder why anyone would choose to work or serve in government. While I generally agree with most of the actions of the City Council I do not always agree with every City Council member all of the time. In the future I will make every effort to verbalize my disagreements on topic and in what I believe an appropriate manner, sans glibness.
Teatotal, I seem to often be on the opposite side of an issue from you, but in this case I agree 100%.
those Casino’s and a few near by properties are now in the hands of very large cooperate interests. (Another ***** of mine) But anyone who thinks they are not deeply involved in this would be a fool. In addition they do not care about Tahoe’s long term future, the residents or individual property owners in Nevada or California. They want Short term profit or a perception of profit to drive up a stock price. They will bribe, steal and lie to get there agenda through. I suspect there are many layers to this, LLC’s with property holdings affected by the Loop road. Other future maps with a loop road.
To the average citizen who cares about Tahoe , where is the upside?
I could go on and on, just look at the properties, the zoning. Talk to some small business owners (The few who still exist) see what they think.
This does not pass the smell test.
And keep looking at the frikin hole!!
Could the loop road end the same way. Kick people out / Take the property. Tear it all down, then change the deal?
Here we go loop de loop
Here we go loop de li
Here we go loop de loop
On a saturday night
Is it just me, or do these loop road discussions seem to be playing on an endless loop?
Biggerpicture:
“Is it just me, or do these loop road discussions seem to be playing on an endless loop?”
It’s not you.
JoAnne-
I guess, looking forward, I can give the same guarantees that anyone else can.
What I can do is sit at one of the sidewalk tables at the Brewery or Echo and imaging how much nicer it could be if there was some green grass, live music, bikes,people enjoying the day as opposed to the current 4 lanes of dead stopped traffic sitting in front of me sharing their tunes:)
SC:
I can relate to your vision of sitting at a sidewalk table, looking out on some green grass and landscaping, hearing live music, etc., as opposed to the current four lanes of traffic filled with vehicles spewing exhaust fumes.
Fourteen years ago I moved from the SF Peninsula to SLT. El Camino Real runs the length of the Peninsula and beyond and has a minimum of two lanes of traffic in each direction with both left and right turning lanes and is at least as wide as Highway 50. El Camino is lined with businesses and is a main thoroughfare and as such is not conductive to any type of community gatherings, festivals, celebratory events, etc. Most cities and towns on the Peninsula that have a commercial core (aside from El Camino) all have a main street type of road with one lane of through traffic in either direction that is substantially slowed; parking on either side of the street which benefits those local businesses; are pedestrian, bicycle and shopping friendly; and they have the ability to close off that road and conduct parades, festivals, and other community gatherings and events. Plus they offer the ability for individuals to comfortably sit outside and dine or have a beverage without being subjected to the noise of thoroughfare traffic and massive quantities of choking exhaust from automobiles and big rig diesels. A few days ago I heard a young woman tourist from San Francisco tell a store clerk that all she sees at home in San Francisco is buildings, traffic, and pavement. That is only one of the reasons that these main street types of roads are so successful in Peninsula cities and towns, plus they provide a sense of community. I still have fond memories of meeting Bill Walsh at a Menlo Park street fair on Santa Cruz Avenue and enjoying some pleasant conversation with him.
Like Bill Crawford always says “We don’t have a City Hall.” How about at least having a main street that will provide a sense of community for the people who live here to enjoy in the shoulder seasons when the town comes back to us. Some people have suggested Harrison Avenue for such a gathering place but the Harrison Avenue parking lot just isn’t long enough, and running parallel to Highway 50 it still has all the traffic noise and exhaust fumes.
Clearly the Loop rode benefits Stateline, NV while potentially hurting SLT. There are so many obvious transportation deficiencies in the Basin it is a shame that the TTD is wasting precious resources while pursuing this divisive issue. There was gridlock all around the lake today and the Loop wouldn’t improve that at all.
TahoeDonkey—– The Skywalk concept was presented to the TTD at one of their community outreach meetings. They asked people to draw alternatives on maps which they provided. The drawing I saw had the structure running from Mont Bleu to either Pioneer Trail or Park Ave. in California. It looks like the TTD took that suggestion and shortened it so it only covers the highway in between the casinos. I would think the full length concept would be better.
Tahoe Reader—- The purposes of the loop road doesn’t address gridlock around the lake, only in the local area. It is meant to create a “main street” community gathering place friendly to pedestrians, bikes, etc. while improving safety and local congestion.
How about the people displaced, you all?
Two of the 5 alternatives don’t displace anyone.
“Follow the money ladies and gentlemen, follow the money.”
My family has been here 59 years,I’m 57 and I have seen alot, trust me. It has ALWAYS been ALL about: THE CASINO’S – HEAVENLY – LODGING – and the “GOOD ‘OL BOY” network. EDGEWOOD and the PARK CORPORATION are also “quiet” players in the game.
THAT HAS NOT CHANGED.
Don’t fool yourselves, if you haven’t lived here for at least 35+ years and paid attention to things that have gone on, then you don’t really know how things work around this town.
I know many of you are really good people, and you really care, but there is alot of hot air blowin’ around on this forum……………
Grunts, Well said.
Grunts, My thoughts exactly. Who benefits and who has the most to lose?
The casinos, Edgewood,Vail / Heavenly, Park holdings all win should this loop road be approved. Local businesses lose, as traffic is diverted away from their properties. Home omwners and renters lose as they are forced out of their homes. All for the construction of an un needed road.
We already have a loop road! I oughta know, I use it all the time.
Grunts, like you, I’ve been around here quite awhile myself and it’s easy for me to see who benefits should this project go thru… AND IT AIN’T US! Old Long Skiis
37 years here ……. I’m in with Grunt – well said !
Take it a step further and add TRPA – “In Bed with the Good Old Boys” and “it’s all about the money”
Hey – here’s an idea – why not save the money for the Loop Road and put in a Monorail over the City to the Casinos. That way visitors can look out the windows while flying over the “urban blight”.
Amen Grunt’s!
How is the traffic today? You have the Kick Off for Hot August nights at Stateline, cant get much more traffic than that. I bet you are surviving. Enjoy
MTT-
Yes, hwy 50 looked like a parking lot today. It’s ok that many do not get the idea that moving away from that picture might be an improvement. However we just seem to be continually distracted by what Nevada might do or not do, or how they benefit or not benefit. At the end of the day we are only hurting ourselves because regardless of how the loop proposal turns out Nevada will be just fine, continue their improvements and growth while we wonder why we cut off our noses. Mind blowing really.
This summer traffic has been heavy almost all times of the day, every day of the week, all along Lake Tahoe Blvd, clear down to the “Y”. None of the Loop road proposals will solve that, it will just push the bottleneck to a new location at best.