Opinion: Loop road is essential to South Shore
By Carl Hasty
The South Shore of Lake Tahoe is divided by lines. These state, county, and city lines work well on a map, but they do not define the day-to-day reality of the people who live and work in this community. In the last decade we have seen definitive projects reshape South Shore – Heavenly Village, Lakeview Commons, Harrison Avenue streetscape. We have seen new bike trails and the opening of a bi-state park.
Tahoe Transportation District’s Highway 50 South Shore Community Revitalization Project is the next step. It goes well beyond transportation to building the community we want to live and work in, and like the projects before it, it won’t be easy, but things that matter rarely are. The future potential gains are worth it for our residents, businesses, and visitors.
Carl Hasty
We only need look to the North Shore and the success of Kings Beach, the Incline Gateway, and the construction that will start this summer on both Highway 89/Fanny Bridge Community Revitalization and the Highway 28 National Scenic Byway to see the future. By realigning Highway 50 from Pioneer Trail in California to Lake Parkway in Nevada behind the casinos on the mountain side, we open the possibility for a “complete street” transformation to include everyone, not only motorists, but pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transit users.
We open the potential for economic development and business revitalization. We add an avenue to respond to the resident’s housing needs with improved, attractive, affordable, mixed use housing projects to replace the combination of retired housing and business units: 53-97 depending on the chosen alternative.
Highway 50 South Shore Community Revitalization Project has suffered at times from the long shadow of failed projects of the past. Many have asked if this project is doomed to repeat the mistakes of its predecessors. The answer is no.
We have learned and listened. Since January 2012, public comment has been garnered through a series of 140 community open houses and workshops, service club presentations, business and community review committees, and eight City Council presentations.
South Shore community members know what they want:
· A more attractive community to complement the surrounding mountains and lake;
· Less traffic congestion and environmental impacts — a previous study indicated that 70 percent of the pollutants impacting Lake Tahoe’s clarity come from transportation systems and developed area run-off;
· Economic improvement and health with opportunities for businesses large and small to flourish;
· Safer streets and more walking and biking paths;
· Better and affordable housing for our workforce.
The community also has concerns:
· The construction will take away businesses and homes that will not be replaced for years;
· It will cost the city taxpayer revenue and it will disrupt businesses and the community like past project holes;
· Other areas of the city need attention.
All of these are legitimate concerns, but there are solutions. This project can be done in phases. Rights-of-ways can be acquired without tearing down structures. Replacement housing could be completed before the current infrastructure is demolished, thus ensuring no lax in property tax revenues for the city and minimal disruption to the community as possible. Do other areas need attention? Yes. This project is just one in a string of projects working to improve South Shore.
From where will the funding for this bold, new South Shore be derived? Federal and state funding will make up the bulk with private sector and some local government funds from Douglas County. We are not looking to the city of South Lake Tahoe to finance this project.
Will everyone support this project? No. In fact, some people would rather put this to a vote. They would abandon the public project process that has directly shaped this plan to date. Others think since the current infrastructure works for them, why do anything at all? Yet, there is a cost to doing nothing. The community can’t afford to paralyze the positive momentum that’s been moving South Lake Tahoe forward these past few years as a more desirable community to live and visit.
The “Nevada versus California,” “big versus small” contention is a non-starter and a red herring. It’s long gone, overplayed, overdone and divisive. This community depends on each other. This project is about the entire South Shore and what locals want in their future. It’s a catalyst and one in a series of transportation enhancements to create a connection system not only for South Lake Tahoe but the Tahoe Basin.
The five alternatives for Highway 50 are currently undergoing an environmental impact report on the environment, costs, benefits, and concerns. Public comment will be accepted for 60 days after the draft is released. We are going to take the next couple of months to continue to work with the community and business owners to address these concerns.
We welcome the public’s opinions – as we have the past four years. These proactive opinions and suggestions have guided and impacted this project in a positive way.
Examples of the benefits of “complete street” projects like this one can be found across the United States, and in cities and towns comparable to South Lake Tahoe. This is not speculative. This is fact.
Is this going to be hard? Yes. Is this going to be smooth? No. Will it be worth it? Absolutely, and with community involvement we can accomplish it.
Be a part of the continued renaissance of South Shore and get involved. Your time will help shape our collective future.
For more information, go online.
Carl Hasty is district manager of Tahoe Transportation District.
Most think that they’ve been lied to, the Hole is but one of the multi $MILLION$ examples and want to vote on this issue.
Tired of the State and Federal government controlling their lives.
State and Federal money = State and Federal CONTROL or are we the people misinformed about that?
VOTE VOTE VOTE
Is the ‘paper’ not taking comments on this article?
I made a comment earlier and it has disappeared:(
VOTE VOTE VOTE
Robin your about 50 years too late with regard to state and federal control. I don’t think that will ever change. We have received over a billion dollars for environmental improvements, fire prevention, recreation, roads, health care, mental health, education, the airport etc. Never heard a peep from people about getting that money.
What about all the ‘local’ money that has been lost because of, for example the hole?
Malfeasance by ‘local’ politicians has cost multitudes of local’s to loose their money and livelihoods.
For exmple, parking meters and strange people paying to park in your front yard. Money not to go to the homeowner or fixing potholes.
The city needs to present the voters with a debt free balanced budget BEFORE it it allowed to spend anymore $DOLLAR$.
VOTE VOTE VOTE
Some people just don’t like change, I think in some ways that’s human nature.
I understand the people who’s business or home may be directly impacted by this have understandable concerns.
The bigger picture though is I think how this project would transform the South Shore area.
Moving all the thru traffic behind the casinos would I think greatly improve traffic flow in town. Any local knows how backed up highway 50 gets on busy weekends and holidays. Sometimes backing up all the way to Safeway.
So my thought again is think of the bigger picture. If this project ever gets approved we would be a better town for it.
Just one mans opinion
These are local issues and have nothing to do with federal and state funding. Your point about federal and state funding is simply what I said we have been getting this funding for eons and for billions of dollars worth. This funding is what locals have wanted as the often claim that Feds should pay for a federal lake. Without state and Federal funding locals would be on the hook for all of it. You can’t have it both ways.
With regard to malfeasance please be specific.
Carl
Not an attorney or a politician here, however, by reading many of these comments it is understood that ‘many’ papers that should have been signed by contractors etc, something about a ‘performance’ bond for the hole as an example HAVE/WERE NOT signed at the time.
There were plenty of lawyers in that mess…which I believe is still a mess?
Has it been resolved and people paid their due or are they supposed to be swept under the rug and left to rot? Let’s not talk about that…MOVE on as long as it is not your livelihood or family!
All those projections and all that money for the community is where?
Also be aware that phasing means many years of disruptions. Funding is never a guarantee as evidenced by the process going on in Kings Beach Core Improvement Plan which was supposed to only take two seasons. We are on #4 and once approved the decisions made to truncate project are solely made by the County with no public input
Whether or not this provides other ‘benefits’, this project WILL increase traffic – not only at Stateline, but through Meyers, the SLT Y, and along Pioneer Trail. California is currently changing how transportation projects are evaluated because the state has learned that increasing highway capacity (as the Loop Rd. will do) leads to MORE vehicles and congestion: https://www.opr.ca.gov/s_sb743.php.
In looking arc traffic counts over the past 20!years according to TRPA there is a clear decline in traffic counts. I believe that decline was caused by a multitude of reasons including a declining lodging infrastructure but more importantly an increase in tribal gaming destinations and non gaming destinations. I would be very interested to see if widening the road will increase demand for the road.
Carl, in 2006 Hal Cole and the entire city council ignored the advice of Gene Palazzo, the city’s redevelopment manager that the public/private partnership between the city and Lake Tahoe Development Co. needed a performance bond to protect the community. Hal Cole was part of the council that ignored his advice. A municipality entering into a partnership without a performance bond is unheard of, except in South Lake Tahoe. Carl, is that considered an example of malfeasance?
Carl,in 2007, City Manager/Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency, David Jinkens representing the city signed an idemnification agreement with Lake Tahoe Development Co.that was never made public and buried in a city file. Many consider the agreement a “back room deal.” David Jinkens was never questioned about the deal. To this day, no city manager or city council member has ever conducted a public investigation into what went wrong with the “hole.” Carl, is that considered an example of malfeasance?
Lake Tahoe Development Co. was allowed to start the project without financing. They were allowed to tear down buildings, excavate and rip out public streets and utilities. They were allowed to do all of this without consolidating the 29 parcels. This was all done with city approval. Carl, is that an example of malfeasance?
My family and several other original property owners lost between six and eight million dollars because of the city’s actions. Carl, is the city not following its own rules and regulations an example of malfeasance?
Carl, the redevelopment project, now known as the Chateau project was suppose to be a public/private partnership. The city has its name on the permits as a partner with Lake Tahoe Development Co., and yet they chose to not protect the original property owners, nor the community. Carl is this malfeasance?
Carl, do any of the above examples fall within your definition of malfeasance?
Robin, yes the city has made a very clear choice to let several of us original property and business owners continue to rot.
MALFEASANCE: Law
The performance by a public official of an act that is legally unjustified, harmful or contrary to law; wrong doing (used esp. in an act in violation of a public trust).
Thanks for posting I do now recall reading about this and perhaps the former city manager would care to comment and confirm the record. I am not an attorney but am not clear if a city can require a performsnce bond between private parties as Palazzo suggested. Maybe an attorney can comment. I assume the aggrieved parties are pursuing legal action against the former developer. Thanks.
Carl
The ‘former’ developer/s are still ‘active’ in the city and any legal action would necessarily include all the city officials involved.
Some of these city ‘officials’ have been ‘passed’ from the aforementioned officials and many of these ‘developers are themselves ‘local’ attorneys.
Very dirty and probably criminal if you follow the money/favors.
ASS U ME
Carl, in your op piece you correctly state that county, state and city lines work well on a map yet not in day to day reality. Where your argument falls apart is when state that a “complete street” transformation will benefit everyone including public transit users.
The Loop Road concept is to reduce traffic congestion. The first step in reducing traffic congestion is to have an efficient public transportation system in place.
The public transit in the South Lake Tahoe area needs to be addressed prior to giving the automobile a priority thoroughfare to the Stateline area. Right now we have a very ineffective transit service that services very little of the area it purportedly serves. Looking at the transit map it mainly serves the Highway 50 corridor between Stateline and the “Y”. Yes it serves Barton Hospital, the community college, and some of the Bijou area but little else. The “Greater South Tahoe” area is perfectly set up for a very efficient transportation system that would service the entire community. Pioneer Trail to Meyers. North Upper Truckee to 50 to Stateline creates a loop which with regular scheduled buses in both directions would encourage local residents and visitors alike to leave their cars in their driveways to utilize local businesses. Couple that with a neighborhood van feeder system that services Hwy 89 to Camp Rich, Sierra Tract and Black Bart, Al Tahoe and the College, the Al Tahoe neighborhood and the entire community has transportation.
On any busy weekend or high traffic period simple observation shows that the greatest majority of the traffic is between the “Y” and Stateline. Once at Lake Parkway most of the traffic has dissipated having arrived at it ultimate destinations at the Heavenly Village, the casinos or the Raley’s Center. Timing the traffic lights and posting the speed that they are timed for would help ease this congestion.
You state that South Shore Community members want ” Less traffic congestion and environmental impacts — a previous study indicated that 70 percent of the pollutants impacting Lake Tahoe’s clarity come from transportation systems and developed area run-off” The two ideas I presented would help make headway towards that goal.
Perhaps your organization should establish a track record of successful completed projects in our community that have actually shown positive results and increase public confidence. Up until now you have only shown us expensive studies that will only benefit and improve a 1/4 mile stretch of very private commercial enterprise. What about the rest of the Highway 50 corridor?
Stating that ” We add an avenue to respond to the resident’s housing needs with improved, attractive, affordable, mixed use housing projects to replace the combination of retired housing and business units: 53-97 depending on the chosen alternative.” Where is that avenue? Where do you propose to build this housing and with what money? How do you plan to compensate the 53-97 business and home owners at fair market value when you yourselves state that you not currently have the money to do that. These business and home owners currently have no outlet to sell for legally they have to disclose that they might be taken by a future project. Who wants to purchase a business or home that may be razed for a future highway project.
You have failed in these respects up to this date. Why should the public trust that you will do the right thing in the future.
This is from an earlier post on the LTN website:
Rick says – POSTED: FEBRUARY 28, 2016
Robin Smith, my family owned the Driftwood Lodge for over 30 years. My family and several other original property and business owners lost a combined six to eight million dollars, because of the city ignoring its own rules and regulations with the “hole.” Their disregard for protecting the community and original property owners helped create the “hole.” No one within the city has ever been held accountable for any of their actions.
Mr. Jinkens would never discuss the “hole” because he was part of a what many of us considered a “back room” deal in 2007 along with several other individuals. An indemnity agreement with Jinkens signature was never made public in 2007. These other individuals are still involved in our community. Several of us original property owners would never have done our deal with the Randy Lane/Lew Feldman group had we known of this so called “back room” deal.
Current and former city council members have never shown any interest in a full and complete investigation of what happened back in 2007. Nancy Kerry has never shown any interest in helping the original property owners, nor investigating what went wrong. Are they afraid of what they may uncover? The current council still could care less about correcting mistakes of the past and helping us original property owners get the money we are owed.
Well Mr. Jinkens, how about telling the community of your involvement in the so called “back room” deal. You get to be a prominent and involved member in our community, while many original property and business owners are thrown under the bus by the city and face financial devastation.
How about it Mr. Jinkens, isn’t it time to clear your name in this horrible chapter in the city’s history. Why not use this public forum to tell the community your side of the story.
Didn’t David Jenkins et al pass the city manager position to Nancy Kerry?
It seems that the City should be STOPPED from doing any public/city business until ‘they’ are cleared of all these suspicious dealings.
Tony O’Rourke was the city manager in between Jinkens and Kerry.
The City Council hires the city manager.
LTN staff
Robin
I am not sure where the nexus is between the loop road which is a Federal and State project which have their own set of laws etc. and Randy Lane is? Completely different projects, agencies, funding etc.
If there was a problem as Rick above suggests and there a legal issues and damages I hope legal recourse has been taken.
TY LTN
B Gorman was asked at her Chamber meeting/luncheon a few weeks ago at Lake Tahoe Resort about her/Chambers’ position on the Bruce Grego, Bill Crawford, John Cefalu and Laurel Ames’ intention to circulation a petition to vote on the loop road.
Her reply was that she ‘doubted’ the loop road would be up for a vote therefore she/Chamber did not need to take a position. (paraphrasing her reply from an article)
I commented about this answer at the time.
Always tell the truth, this will gratify some and amaze the rest. Mark Twain
Always tell the truth, it’s easier to memorize. 3rd grade teacher
We as a community cannot move forward until a complete and thorough investigation of what the city did or did not know in regards to the City of South Lake Tahoe and their relationship with the Lake Tahoe Development Co./Randy Lane/Lew Feldman group. We need a thorough history of the “hole,” so we do not make the same mistakes. Does history repeat itself? Are the same players involved today? The following is from my previous post:
Rick says – POSTED: JANUARY 26, 2016
The chances of Lake Tahoe freezing over will happen before any of the original property owners who lost millions will receive any money.
The city used a loophole in the redevelopment law to ignore their responsibility to the original property owners. What happened to my family is morally reprehensible.
What should be scary for everyone is almost nine years later, some of the same players who were involved in what many have called a”backroom deal,” are still doing business as usual in our community.
David Jinkens: President of Rotary Club of SLT and
collecting a pension.
Lewis Feldman: Attorney for Chateau project, along with
many other projects around the lake.
Randy Lane: Paid consultant for Chateau project
Michael McLaughlin: Chairman South Shore Chamber of Commerce
Board of Directors. Attorney for many
on South Shore.
Stacey Sheston: Attorney representing Nancy Kerry in the
JoAnn Conner lawsuit. Previously, hired
as outside council for the South Lake Tahoe
Redevelopment Agency.
Justice? You be the judge! Again, anyone in the area of the proposed loop road project be aware. The power brokers know our community has a short term memory and usually get what they desire.
I believe that was an opinion it remains to be seen.
How about the Hodge/Feldman ski run/hy 50 hole in the ground in 1989 to 1995. The city gives Hodges 16 million worth of property he encumbers it, then files BK. Let hope the city doesn’t repeat itself 3 times.
Dale, Thanks for the post.
Lou, you are welcome. If more people would do research, the needs vs the wants of the community would surface. Then we would all benefit.