Siding a contentious issue for SLT, developer
Plywood on a back wall of the Chateau project is likely to be temporary. Photo/LTN
By Kathryn Reed
In a rare moment, the South Lake Tahoe City Council said “no” to a request by attorney Lew Feldman when it came to the Chateau project.
While the discussion May 20 was civil, in the end Feldman did not get everything he requested in the “major design review permit revision.” He wanted part of the siding to be changed from cedar to plywood.
Mayor Hal Cole was the lead advocate to keep the cedar. For the time being the T-1-11 siding can stay.
The compromise is that if the pillars come out or future development is such that the 30-foot high siding would be visible, the cedar siding will have to be put on.
Feldman’s contention was, “If nothing happens and the columns remain, it would seem punitive.” Cedar is much more expensive than plywood.
The retail-nightclub project is costing $11 million.
Other changes allowed include increasing the window sizes along the highway, reducing the width of the Stateline Avenue sidewalk from 8½ feet to 6 feet, and modifying the door and window locations to appease retailers.
What retailers will occupy the more than 18,000-square-feet of space is still being withheld from the public. Stores should open this summer.
McP’s has served its last meal in its current location before it moves to the other side of the Chateau project in the round building at the corner of the highway and Stateline Avenue. Soon the old structure will be demolished.
Also to be taken down this summer is the Holiday Lodge.
Feldman said the entire site would be cleaned up this building season.
All of the parcels being built on now have been consolidated into one map. That is not the case for the properties that Owens Realty Mortgage bought early this year for $6 million from City National Bank. It does, however, make the 11-plus acreage site controlled by one owner for the first time.
Feldman said the owners have no intentions of selling off the parcels piecemeal.
“We now have site control, which is vital to advance future phases,” Feldman told the council.
While he would not promise future phases would be built next year, he said it is likely things will progress sooner rather than later.
When the project was first approved it was to include two hotels, a convention center, retail and open space. The city was going to be the operator of the center and take care of the common areas. Since the original developer filed for bankruptcy the city no longer has a financial stake other than collecting taxes.
Do it right, or don’t do it at all.
Went to the movies yesterday, and was noticing all the cheaply done stuff at that development that’s starting to show now after a few years. Things like the restrooms, where the sinks are peeling (?!) and falling apart, and other details that are starting to fail. That’s a huge problem here in SLT. We want to be 1st class, but we keep allowing it to be done on the cheap. Doesn’t work.
Agree, do it right, and yes, I have been in that Heavenly Village public bathroom, it is hideous compared to the rest of the village; which looks quite beautiful. Maybe the manager of the village is unaware of it?
Let’s keep in mind what was there before this redevelopment, I know it took a long time, but those old motels were awful. Even t111 is better than it was
Am I mistaken or does the article state that the request to change from cedar to plywood was denied and then turn around and state T-1-11 is being allowed to stay, but cedar could be required in the future? Sounds a bit confusing.
Gotta agree with Dog, the Heavenly project is gonna wind up looking like the usual Tahoe slum properties in about 10 years.
I think the reason the tenants have not been named is that they have not all signed leases for the available space. I’ve heard that the smaller spaces are still without a tenant. Wonder if the rent is as high as rumored. Anyone know what they are asking per SF?
Why would the city allow the sidewalk to be made smaller? Don’t we want a wider walkway for the thousands and thousands… sorry I meant to say tens of thousands… sorry again, 100’s of thousands of tourists these 6 retail shops will bring to our town?
The City has always been great at kicking things down the road. And the council members who stay on the council for decades and are nearing the end of the road (metaphorically speaking, needless to say) are great at having no memory of who kicked what. Or why.
The entire project has been a black eye for the Lake. Anything is better than the urban blight that was there before, and Tahoe needs to recognize reality when it comes to meeting the market.
I don’t know why a smaller sidewalk is needed as there is a lot of empty space behind the building!
An 8 1/2 foot wide sidewalk on Stateline Street is not necessary. A 6 foot wide sidewalk there is more than adequate.
‘Get the deal and then change the deal’ seems to be the theme of this project.
And just like with Vail and all the things it proposes with Heavenly, ask for more than what you really want. That way the powers that be can shoot some things down and give the appearance that the developer is not getting a blank check
An 8 1/2 foot wide sidewalk on Stateline Street is necessary for accessibility. A 6 foot wide sidewalk may or may not meet ADA.
Private property, oh I forgot that there isn’t free enterprise. Safety issues, yeah,…….There is no so called atmosphere zoning, such as historical that I know of in the area.
Perry R. Obray
Parker, Yes, you’re right, “Get the deal and then change the deal”. This happens all too often around here! The plan for a large developement in Meyers, “The Catalyst Project” was quickly shut down, only to be replaced by another big developement plan REAL fast. How many more real estate developement plans are in the works? Just waiting to be foisted upon an unsuspecting public! Meetings held behind closed doors, changing zoning without notification to the public, purchases of large chunks of land which end up being slated for residential / commercial developement.
The construction at stateline is just another example of things the residents and taxpayers don’t want. That property could be much better utilized than a string of retail stores. Ryan Payne, you hearin’ me? OUTDOOR EVENT CENTER! Too late now as that first row of t-shirt shops and tourist junk made in China is nearing completion.
As much as I love this place, sometimes I sure do hate it. Old Long Skiis, aka, the Grumpy OLS
I was getting use to the hole-in-the-ground. Now i have to look at actual new structures and with new narrow sidewalks. Wow what shall people complain about next? Oh wait its the crappy bathrooms across the street turn. I have never read so many negative comments on how things are ran.
Maybe if the parking measure gets passed we can you the extra money to pay for the up keep on current and previous redevelopment projects? Oh wait again lets make sure we cater to a few locals who like to complain and not charge for parking. I would like to see this measure pass because i want the bay area residents to start bringing back some of my money that i donated to parking over there.
I think the Mc P’s new conical roof looks too much like a castle and people may get confused where they are.
I agree with David Kelly. The larger sidewalk is necessary. A six foot sidewalk should not be allowed. Typical council decision, always looking short term while giving into Feldman and his heartbreak stories. After all of this time, it is hard to believe the size of a sidewalk is still an issue.
Isn’t this the same project that was approved in 2006 or 2007?
A six foot sidewalk is a joke. Fundamental to newer development is a much wider space between the street and the buildings. What makes the old casinos seem old and tired? THEY CROWD RIGHT UP NEXT TO THE ROAD. Nowhere to sit, stand or hang out. No room for landscaping, benches etc. Pure concrete. Old school. Total cop out by the council. Yeah, it’s all better than before but I find myself cringing while driving by seeing the junior Disney-esque finish work going on. Orange log work? Now junior sidewalks. One more missed opportunity agreed to by a council that seems to have no sense of space or aesthetic sensibility.
Now that the fence is down, has anybody else wondered why some of the new building and walking area is below street level? How did that happen? Makes no sense!
Extremely spendy lease rates are definitely reality and only those few local businesses making bank on $400 ski jackets will be filling those spaces.
In regard to the narrower sidewalks, the physically challenged, sue-happy, bitter, ADA compliance attorney has been making his rounds on North Shore, but I am sure will be down soon to check out every little compliance measurement.
Just happy, though, to see the fence down and something happening, should anyone be looking for a bit of positive in this beautiful Tahoe day.
Feldman’s contention was, “If nothing happens and the columns remain, it would seem punitive.” Cedar is much more expensive than plywood.
So basically, he is saying there is a chance that the developer will not continue to develop the site to what has been already agreed upon? And if that is not the case, then that slick lawyer just used an argument that has no basis in reality.
The reality is they are cutting corners to get it done on the cheap.
I openly wonder if that piece of land is worth more undeveloped (and having huge potential), than it will be worth when it has this unnecessary retail complex on it.
Maybe that’s why they are putting in smaller sidewalks? The developers have finally realized their folly and no longer expect this unnecessary retail complex to attract the numbers they originally predicted..?
OLS- let’s hope for the sake of this town that HARD ROCK HOTEL & CASINO takes the place of Horizon AND they have the gumption to build an OUTDOOR EVENT CENTER in the back parking lot area. Keep hope alive!
How many ‘big name stars’ come here to Tahoe to play a show in the back parking lot of a casino?
What does the venue say about our town to them?
What do they, in turn, say to their friends, families, and associates as people who may potentially visit here?
Ryan Payne says:
“…..then that slick lawyer just used an argument that has no basis in reality.”
Feldman slick? Nah. He just practices in South Lake Tahoe where the bar is set low.
Where is the parking? There is not an underground garage.
atomic, the buildings are already built so they cant move them closer to the street, so with a smaller sidewalk one must assume that there will be 2,5 ft more open space, this only seems to be on the stateline st side, not 50 where the people will be strolling.
I haven’t seen the “Chateau” since the fence came down but the last time I was there for a cursory look, it sure didn’t seem like the 40 foot setback from hwy 50 that was originaly planned, was in place.
Lou Perini is right. Where’s the parking? When I was there the construction workers parked down in the hole by the the construction trailers and heavy equipment.
I’m all for something going in there but as I said to a few friends “something is better than nothing”. Their response? “REALLY?”
So now, after giving it some thought, I’m beginnig to doubt my original sentiment.
Ryan Payne, Yes, I’m not giving up on an outdoor event center. I would like to see somethin REAL!!! Not sitting on plastic chairs in a gawd damn parking lot!!!
Does the Harvey’s summer concert series ring a bell? We could do much better and have a facility that we can be proud of and will draw big names and big crowds.
I’m with you on this Ryan! I see a nice amphitheater in a natural setting, but then, I’ve always been a dreamer, always have been and always will be. OLS
Last year the City Council approved construction to restart in stages on the original design which had been approved years earlier. Are they building what had been approved before? If not, they should be in violation and required to build only what was approved before.
Demand the City require the builder to follow the approved plans.
I’ve heard the anchor tenant will be McDonald’s and they will be introducing the “Tahoe Burger” which will have limited availability at other locations. It’s great to know that a major corporation is committed to our town, and that jobs are being generated by this project.
I see a lot of critics here who believe that they know how best to develop property. I don’t see those armchair developers putting any of their capital at risk.
You might recall that this site was nothing more than blight for a very long time. And certainly, the economic conditions today are not near as good as they were in 2006-2007.
When you’re willing to put your money on the line, take the risk, and put yourself through the brutal entitlement process in Tahoe, you have earned your right to an opinion on matters of this nature. Until then, keep your uneducated criticism to yourselves.
Why would anyone who watched the development of this screw up, orchestrated by the equally screwed up South Lake Tahoe leaders, now be surprised that the recovery is anything other than another, or, perhaps, a continuation of the original, screw up?
I lived in South Lake Tahoe for 25 years, long enough to know personally some of the long time City leaders. I no longer live there, but I have lived about 20 miles away for almost 20 years. And, truth be known, I care deeply about the place, although some might, accurately, deem me an outsider.
But why would the voters continue to elect scatterbrains to the City government and, even more importantly, re-elect the old timers who are historically complicit in the problems, and no longer even remember why they made their choices?
Your City council rarely actually governs. Rather, it postures and waits to see if the City staff comes up with something useable. Or the business interests have a “strong” opinion. With the influence to back it up.
Once in a while, perhaps being macho, it choses a total thug as City Manager, apparently in the hopes he (or, perhaps, she) will bail them out.
This forum is hardly a great example of intelligent and well thought out participative leadership, but the SLT voters need to quit laying back, assuming that everything will work out. There are also clearly intelligent citizens and voters, some of whom are likewise represented here, who need to make themselves heard in venues besides an anonymous forum.
Yeah Bitter-here’s another thing you don’t see along with me not having any money invested…YOU DON”T SEE MY NAME ON THE CONTRACT! Mr.Feldman, on the other hand, does have HIS name on the contract. He needs to build the project in the manner to which he agreed to build it, instead of trying a ‘bait and switch’ with the particulars of the contract.
Hey bitter, how many fingers are pointing back at you? At least 3. And your opinions are just that…
Seriously? We would WANT another McDonalds? We have two too many already. How about local owners hiring local employees to serve burgers made out of real meat? The only chains we need in Tahoe are for tires.
Yawn, complainers and armchair quarterbacks. Is this the start of the rumor mill about Macdonalds? I have wsen other BS rumors posted here about Trader Joes and In And Out – all poorly informed based purely on rumor – no substance. Go out side you grumpy lot, its beautiful out there (shutting down my computer now…)
The MCdonalds at the Y needs to repair there drive threw road its got holes in it, bad ,