TRPA to fine SLT hotel for illegal tree cutting
By Kathryn Reed
The Landing Resort & Spa got caught illegally cutting down trees after much speculation that such activity had occurred from the onset of renovation at the South Lake Tahoe site.
The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Governing Board on Thursday is set to approve a settlement agreement that calls for a $40,000 fine and planting of four mature 15- to 20-foot Jeffery pines in the location where the ones that were removed were located.
The staff report for the March 26 meeting says, “The four planted trees shall be inspected after two years for survival and may not be removed without TRPA approval. If any of the trees die within the first two years, a new tree shall be planted and monitored for two years after planting. The four trees shall be planted no later than May 31, 2015.”
TRPA staff in July received a complaint that the South Lake Tahoe hotel had illegally removed the trees. The trees that were removed were 14 to 24 inches around at breast height, according to TRPA. Per TRPA rules, all trees more than 14 inches in diameter must have a permit for removal.
“… TRPA staff found that the previous general manager directed a tree service from out of the area to remove the trees in order to improve the view from the resort. Multiple permits for tree removal have been issued to the Landing over the past few years and TRPA staff therefore believes that the Landing representative did this work with full knowledge of TRPA’s permit requirements,” the staff report says.
In 2013, the year the hotel – which had been the Royal Valhalla – opened, there was speculation that trees had been poisoned at the property so then a permit could be obtained for their removal.
Jim Demetriades, owner of the hotel, is the one being fined. He will have 30 days to pay it after the board approves the agreement. He has already signed the agreement.
—–
Other newsworthy items on the TRPA agenda:
• A briefing on California Pacific Electric Company 625 and 650 Electrical Line Upgrade Project. CalPECO is the parent company of Liberty Utilities, which is seeking to upgrade electric lines on the North Shore and Truckee. No action is expected. This will be heard March 25, no earlier than 1pm when the board meets at the Chateau in Incline Village.
• Expected approval of amending Heavenly Mountain Resort’s master plan to accommodate summer activities like Epic Discovery. To be heard March 26, 9:30am at the Stateline TRPA office.
• Aquatic invasive species update – March 26.
• Boat inspection fee schedule – March 26.
Burn ’em good like the Angora fire burned and destroyed
over 500,000 trees. Every tree is so precious.
The TRPAestapo continues doing good in the name of the state.
The latest trpa awesomeness was the snowmobile tour guy. Bad snow season, guy invested in snowmaking equipment and the trpa shut him down because the people walking across the field to the snowmobiles were considered coverage…go figure. I bet the trpa guys still received a paycheck.
I find it interesting the forest service can cut thousands of trees and not a peep but this guy gets a $40,000 fine.
What a crock!One more example of an entity in ElDoCo having too much power. They are about as crooked as someone who would poison a tree to get rid of it.
Private property rights?
What are those?
remember when the City cut 400 trees at the Airport.
no fines no nothing.
This is like looking into a window on the world of people with money. Regulations aren’t made for them- don’t you know. I viewed the fireworks from a party at the ‘Landing’ in the recent past. Total waste of money except for the nice folks who we sat with. Lousy food. People didn’t dig those darn trees for blocking the view of the fireworks. No surprise what Demetriades did. The $40,000.00 fine should go to the Sugar Pine Foundation instead of TRPA. They should have known this was continuing.
I remembers me some guy in a bar in Alaska telling us(and anyyone else within earshot, vein throbbing on his florid forehead as he sprayed dribbles of beer onto his beard-and everyone around him) that ‘there wuz trees from here to ‘@#%$%-in’ forever so I’sa don’t want no government @#%$% tellin’ me where I can and can’t dump the oil from my truck-uuurrrpppp-I’ll dump it whereever I ‘@#%$%-in’ want!’
Here’s my opinion, you praisers of Golden-Goose rapers and roasters….Grow up. If the regulation says don’t cut a tree over 14 inches in diameter without a permit, then don’t cut a tree over 14 in diameter without a permit. Unless you want to be fined…and become a local hero among the local anti-gubmint unintelligensia. Bundy-ville or bust!
All this sort of thing does is guarantees their salaries for another couple of weeks.
Hmmm that’s funny…. And as much as hate over regulation I kinda agree. Without fiscal penalty and repercussion everyone will just do whatever they want and this place would be garbage. If it was an accident or just a mistake then there may be more tolerance but this is plain negligence. If you have money you can just pay the fine and for most with money that’s a small cost which unfortunately screws only the little guy. 40k for a sweet view and sun.. Peanuts
I like the way they make them plant 4 mature Jeffry’s, make sure they grow healthy for 2 years. All so they can get permission from TRPA and cut them down the right way.
^^^ only comment worth reading
Don’t forget the 100 + trees cut to “pave paradise – put up a parking lot!!. . .” for the Harrison Street project. . . the only thing accomplished there was an instituted fee/charge for themselves, less ground cover. . .& no additional “customers”.
Ken Curtzwiler says – Posted: November 25, 2013
I am the Tree Service contractor that removed the trees and they were not poisoned as suggested in the article. All permits were in place with the TRPA giving final approval. The South Lake Tahoe Fire department was initially contacted as was the City building department and they referred the permitting to the TRPA as they have ultimate jurisdiction. The Fire department did a Fire Safe inspection and recommended several of the trees that were overhanging the building be removed but only with approval of the TRPA. The other trees that were removed were either marked by the TRPA or fell under the 14″ DBH rule and were perfectly within the rights of the owner to remove. The tree that had to be removed due to the trenching was marked by the TRPA before the trenching began and the owners wanted to save it by trenching on the other side but it had to be removed anyway as it was causing damage to the building. Everything was done according to the law and MOU the City has with the TRPA and Fire Department, nothing was poisoned nor taken out without all permits in place prior to removal. I have been a Tree contractor in this town since 1981 as well as an Arborist and do not skirt the law as we and I am heavily scrutinized in this town. I also did tree trimming on the house next door at the same time without any problems. As far as the house with the fence is concerned the owner of the new hotel was well within his right to do what he did and the homeowner was contacted prior to removal. To the best of my knowledge the homeowner could not see the lake in the first place as there is a building in front. There is only one house next door that can see the lake. Everything was permitted, legal and all documents were in place prior to removal. We also did all the construction debris removal from the interior buildings for the contractors on site to complete their work. All of my workers were local and they made decent wages which were spent in town. I have every license required by the Federal, State and local level entities including OSHA, DOT, Lead Certified, EDD, Contractors Board, City Business Lic, El Dorado County Business License and Workmans Comp. Thank You for allowing me to clear this up. Ken Curtzwiler owner operator of Skibumfamily Inc. dba K & K Tree Services. Established in 1981 by Kenny and my son Kaleb.
Posted March 20, 2015
As far as the trees in question we did get a request to remove those but refused to do without a permit. They were located in front of the glass windows of the dinner house and would have improved the lake view when gone. It was at that point the owner stated ” I can get a tree guy from Mammoth to do it” which they did. Those trees were removed with the full knowledge and permission from the owner. It will be interesting to see if that is the location where the new ones will go.
Interesting, if this was some rich glenbrook property owner the court of public opinion would want the property owner strung up for being arrogant and doing whatever they wanted without regard for the “laws or rules” but because its some south lake tahoe business person its all good and ok that they chose to do what they want. Hmmmm is right, the rules are the rules and thats how it works in a lawfull society. If you dont like it, move to some country where its different…IMHO
Nature I agree with you completely.
Funny how the lefties always eventually resort to, “if you don’t like it, you should leave. . .”
We used to have private property rights in this country. My land, my rules. Until the socialists took over under disguise of ‘environmentalism’.
Green is the new Red.
It’s NOT your land. It belongs to Spirit, God, Yaweh, Gaia, The Creator, The Great God and Goddess, The Future, Life, whatever you want to call it. It is not YOUR land. Gotta start thinking and making decisions beyond our little greedy selves. We are not the only ones that inhabit this planet, and we can’t go it alone. That concept seems to be lost on you, Dogula.
“Funny how the lefties always eventually resort to, “if you don’t like it, you should leave. . .””
Ms Dogula, wasn’t it hard core right wingers that would sport the “America, Love It Or Leave It” bumper stickers back in the 70’s?
Dog illogic, ok, if it was your way and the guy next door to you decided to start dumping his used motor oil next to your well that shared a fence line, you would have no problem with that? How about the guy who builds a huge house next door and decided to rent it out to a very loud and vulgar group of people for the summer. You would have no problem with the noise or the cars or the loose dogs or garbage spread around by the bears? Yeah for private property rights, no rules or laws apply to your little postage stamp piece of the earth. What about the people that own lots in Meyers that want to build a 5 story building that might obstruct your view if Hwy. 50? No rules on that one either. Keep dreaming dog….
Level you are correct. I also remember that ‘Red’ was the color used to represent Communism. ‘Better Dead than Red’ was also a catchphrase.
Mammon is the God of Libertarians, Republicans and Teabaggers.
Nature, I mostly agree with your last comment. You can’t do whatever you want without permission. You need to check with the people it might impact. However, it’s easy to take this too far and say that the government should have authority over everything. I think somewhere in the middle is best.
As far as the trees, if they were a fire danger and needed to be removed, the TRPA has no right to fine them. Making it difficult to establish defensible space just leads to more homes being lost in fires. Oh well, just another example of the TRPA trying to establish a dictatorship over Tahoe…
Every tree in the tahoe basin is a fire hazard, so we should cut all of
The trees in the basin down to avoid a potential fire? Really? No where in the above article does it state the trees were removed for defensable space.
See Kenny’s comment: “The Fire department did a Fire Safe inspection and recommended several of the trees that were overhanging the building be removed.”
You are totally putting words in my mouth. Get it: the reason trees are removed near buildings is to provide defensible space, in case of fire. If a building caught fire, wouldn’t it be nice if the fire didn’t spread to the trees and then to neighboring buildings? What about wildfire? Having defensible space makes it much easier to save the building.
I never said that we should cut down all the trees, and I don’t think we should, however I do believe in thinning overgrown forests. You are acting like a typical environmentalist, trying to attack me for things I didn’t say. Read my comment carefully, and be reasonable about what you read into it.
Just because I do not agree with everything you think, doesn’t mean that I am wrong, and it surely doesn’t give you the right to viscously attack my post. Comments like yours sure decrease my faith in humanity.
Basically, we have two options: Lose an insignificant amount of trees to thinning, or some day lose the whole forest because of a fire. Which do you prefer?
Has anyone shed any tears for the 50-70 (many very large) trees killed to make room for the bike trail next to Saw Mill Road?
Of course not. Because that is one of THEIR projects. What it comes down to is, if you have money and connections, you can do anything, but for the small guy, forget it.
You don’t like bike trails? Did you guys see what the USFS is doing below elks club on the upper truckee river. Out of sight out of mind.. Hundreds of trees.
Skibum, I hope you have provided the Landing’s attorney with your statement.
advocate: The TRPA contacted me several months ago as to the situation as well as the Landing representatives. I produced all the documents and permits including pictures I took. Bottom line is what the Landing owner did was wrong, he was not from Tahoe and did not want to follow the rules and was very cocky about the whole thing, hence the fine. If he would have just sucked up and admitted what he did was wrong this would have never gotten as far as it did. End result was he got what he wanted and bought his way out of it as so many others have. I only hope the TRPA plants the trees where they were taken from. For speaking up and refusing to do something wrong I have lost several jobs over the years but I sleep just fine at night. There is always a wanna be contractor willing to step in and do what the owner wants and then leave town. I live here. btw, how are things in SF?
Just like most things in life both parties and their supporters feel they are right. Money doesn’t change people’s minds. People have to live with themselves, it’s called rationalizing.
In the article above the reasons mentioned for removal of the trees was for enhancing the views. Im not attacking you, im just giving opinions like everyone else.
also, I dont like having any trees cut down if it can be avoided. The forest is my favorite place and trees are sacred to me however I do know that trees are illegally cut every single day around the basin and some people get caught and some dont. I also know that the authorities justify tree removal for all kinds of reasons, many of which are pathetically rationalized. I believe in karma and I think that NATURE BATS LAST.
greengrass- I hope your valuables are packed and ready to go. You’re dreaming if you think the ‘thinning’ that’s been done will prevent a wildfire here. Apparently, you weren’t in the middle of the firestorm when it happened. The forest becomes more dry when they thin and what’s left seems to be all the same height. Be prepared and hope for the best.
The Landing aka Royal Valhalla on Stateline Avenue across from the private beach needed the trees removed for “fire danger,” I don’t think so.
As for Dogs “My land, my rules.” If I want to build a six story Mosque out in Meyers, I am sure NOBODY would care. LOL!
Nature, I agree, removing trees that don’t need to be removed is just plain stupid and wrong. But if they removed the trees because they were a fire hazard, I think that constitutes a need for the trees to be removed. Taking out a few trees could save the entire forest If the building ever caught fire, and it could also help save the building in a wildfire.
Isee, open your eyes. And your mind while you’re at it. Thinning may or may not prevent a wildfire, but it makes it much, much easier to stop the fire once it is started. “The forest becomes more dry when they thin” Umm, taking out unhealthy trees leaves more water for the healthy ones. “what’s left seems to be all the same height” Brilliant! It’s about reducing fuel not reducing the height of the trees.
All the people around Tahoe who say that they war the forests to be natural, so we shouldn’t thin, are really contradicting themselves. The forests here are not natural, because when forests are clearcut, they grow back way thinker than what is natural. Similarly, the tree huggers are contradicting themselves, because thinning destroys a minuscule number of trees compared to a large wildfire. “Don’t thin!” “Save the trees!” Then millions of trees burn down in a wildfire.
P.S: I do have plans in case I have to leave. Everyone who wants to have the best chance at saving themselves, their home, and their belongings should. Anyone ever heard the “Get a kit, make a plan” radio commercial? They’re not running that ad for no reason.
here is the link to the video of the Landing Resort cutting down a 100’+ tree on the 2nd of July last year. You can see the 4th decorations in the background. They didn’t want it blocking the fireworks or view from the owner’s favorite room. And to the local contractor (Kenny), He was very upstanding. It was a tree service from mammoth, that came in after 5pm that day to cut the tree down.
http://youtu.be/RQS7hw8TjzU
It’s amazing how some outsiders, can come in with their money, and expect to get any thing they want. We have a duty as stewards of this GEM in the Sierras to protect our Tahoe. Say what you want about the TRPA, but what would this town look like with out their over sight?
TRPA – I would love to see the 4 trees go back in this spot!
ex manager; I agree all 4 trees in that same area so as to make a wall from the lake and his favorite room.
the rest of the tree removal video
https://youtu.be/30JPse21Fwk
https://youtu.be/lfsvfRMxdZc
Buck – exactly, we have to do something that he will notice, the fine is just a drop in the bucket for him. They paid the out of area tree cutters more than 40k! He knew it was going to cost money and get him fined. His response at the time was “who do I make the check out too” When you have billions, you have to punish with something beside money. Trees back in the view will get his attention, and make him think twice next time. Plus I don’t think the rest of us want to look at his resort – while we’re on the lake!
Hmmm… says –
It’s NOT your land. It belongs to Spirit, God, Yaweh, Gaia, The Creator, The Great God and Goddess.
Then why are the Gods not paying the property taxes or mortgage? I’m pretty sure it’s our own land that we purchased, own, and pay taxes on.
They should have fined the pr*ck $400K for each tree
that would make him think twice about even using his hedge trimmers next time!
Reposted in the correct story.
Kenny (Tahoe Skibum) Curtzwiler says – Posted: March 29, 2015
“similar location” Got a million dollar view for only $40,000. I would call that a One for the Landing, tie for the TRPA and a loss for the community.
The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency unanimously approved the settlement agreement with The Landing Resort and Spa on Wednesday for the unauthorized removal of four trees near the lake.
The resort removed the trees without approval last year to allegedly improve the property’s view of Lake Tahoe. The trees ranged from 14- to 24- inches wide.
As per the settlement agreement, the resort’s owner, James Demetriades, is required to pay a $40,000 fine and plant four 15- to 20-foot Jeffrey pine trees in a “similar location” to where the trees were removed.
has anyone driven up 89 towards emerald bay lately, there were quite a few trees taken down there lately.