South Shore loop road down to 6 alternatives
By Kathryn Reed
STATELINE – While a decision has yet to be made as to whether a loop road beyond what exists today in the Stateline area should or will ever be built, the choices are being narrowed.
At a Dec. 13 meeting at Harveys there were six choices presented. This is down from the 16 that were talked about at the last two meetings. While people had the chance to write down their thoughts, no longer were they offered the chance to draw their own version.
Deanna Shoopman with Caltrans told Lake Tahoe News it is not unheard of in California to take a city street and make it a state highway and for the state highway to become a city street.
People study the various loop road alternatives on Dec. 13 at Harveys. Photo/LTN
That is essentially what proponents of the project want to do. While not everyone is convinced rerouting Highway 50 behind two or four of the casinos is necessary, the bigger arguments are about where the rerouting would start on the west side and whether it should be a half loop or full loop.
“Safety to the traveling public is our No. 1 priority,” Shoopman said.
For now, this is a Tahoe Transportation District project. Shoopman said her agency would formally weigh in on the project when the environmental documents come out.
Eric Guevin, fire marshal with Tahoe Douglas Fire Protection District, was perusing the maps Thursday afternoon, too. Traffic flow is what his department is concerned about.
“Intersections that are offset have more problems. There are visual barriers,” Guevin told Lake Tahoe News. “Squared intersections tend to be safer.”
Mike McKeen, who owns property in South Lake Tahoe that could be impacted depending on the route, believed the presentation was a charade, a propaganda campaign.
He took issue with the poster board that said 92 percent of the people favor moving forward, while 8 percent want the status quo.
Carl Hasty, TTD executive director, admitted those numbers were derived from the 118 people who attended the last two loop road meetings and that some of the same people attended both meetings and therefore were counted more than once.
What also isn’t in that number are the people who would vote to do nothing if their particular alternative is not selected.
Hasty said when his board next hears about the loop road, which could be March, that the history of the project will be told. This includes the various alternatives, not just what staff believes are the most popular.
It will be up to the TTD board to select which alternatives would be studied in the environmental analysis.
In the meantime, the economic analysis is ongoing. That, too, will be part of the environmental study.
TTD reps are also going business-to-business to talk to owners about their opinions.
That 92% figure is ridiculous. Taken from a small, non-random sample of self selected attendees of a workshop. Meaningless. Thank you for describing where that came from Kae. It’s what good journalists are supposed to do.
On a project this important, a reputable survey firm that knows what they’re doing needs to conduct a random telephone sample of at least 400-500 residents to get an acceptable margin of error for the results, ensure that they include cell phones or accepted adjustments for not including them, and have the questions reviewed beforehand by interested and qualified parties to ensure that they’re not biased or leading questions.
Only then will you get a more realistic sense of the populace’s opinions. And this will be a difficult one, because I imagine that it’s hard to describe the Loop option(s) over the phone to distracted people in a way that will make sure that their answers reflect a real understanding of the issues and questions.
I’m still undecided on this effort, but this statement by the transportation director is either biased or reflects a complete lack of understanding of meaningful statistics.
Maybe he should hire Nate Silver to evaluate the results. Ha!
Is there somewhere to find a detailed description of these 6 alternatives?
A single alternative showed no road at all from Heavenly Village through the casino corridor. I have seen this done in an inner city(Riverside Ca.) area. This provides a great venue for craft fairs, special events, ect… How many pedestrians have been killed in collisions with autos in that corridor?
This seems akin to shopping with no $s to spend. Might be interesting to analyze the situation, but where is the $s? A very cheap way to get autos out of the current 50 corridor is while traveling east is to have a right turn at Heavenly Village without stopping, and maybe no stopping until Kingsbury grade.
While there were 6 options still considered there were only 2 that were favored. They both routed the road behind the casinos and the main difference was where the road reconnected to Hwy 50 in CA.- either at the current Pioneer Trail intersection or further down the highway towards Skirun where the city owns property.
I heard one good addition to these with a pedistrian/bike bridge over the road to the Van Sickle Park.
Workshops that were bought and paid for by the taxpayer but were for the Hasty and TRPA to keep the public though full.
Thank goodness Tahoe Transportation District isn’t in charge of counting votes for state or national elections.
Current and last two TTD workshops performed by Wood Rodgers are a PR / propaganda presentation. Everything is biased to a loop road. Data is skewed – 118 total participants first two workshops. The same people – TTD/ Wood Rodgers employees, Edgewood, Opponents, and a very few public. Everyone could vote twice and no tally was given per plan. Not present in TTD’s presentation were two petitions presented this past summer – 106 SLT business owners and 278 residents signing NO loop road! Also missing was the latest City Council letter dated Sept. 25 “Strongly recommends to TTD that Alternative 2 be removed from consideration”. Fact is TTD has not and will not present city council letter to their board until all data is collected.
Time to redirect planning away from the destructive loop road and work on plans to eliminate five traffic stops in the corridor – smooth movement of traffic and pedestrian flow across the street. Solution may be though use of overpasses and improved flow onto Park Ave.
Smoke and Mirrors
Hmmmm…Personally, I am not sold on the idea of a new loop road. Why is it such a necessity? What is so terrible now that this is a must-do? I agree with those saying the figures reported (92%) favoring it are totally inaccurate. How about having all our residents weigh in on this. And should a plan be adopted, it should definitely include remedies for the hole or why bother. Hey everyone, have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Let the citizens of South Lake Tahoe vote on whether or not they want the Loop Road,Parking Meters, STPUD & Refuse increases. I can’t name one person on the TTD Board, who voted them in? Let’s make these decisions at the ballot box. Many of our elected officials are nothing but cronies for the Chamber of Commerce and the Gaming Alliance.
I also attended the openhouse at Harveys. The general vibe I got from those I spoke to was, “which do you like best?”. Many of those were from outside the basin, had a perplexed reaction when I mentioned some local landmarks and businesses.
The attitude I picked up on was that something was definitely going to be built, which one is the popular choice.
It seemed as if they picked the 6 “alternatives” that had the MOST impact.
They are wasting their time,and someones money. This project has little local backing from the California side, and eminent domain will not be used in South Lake Tahoe, nor will we fund this.
It seems more like “We know what’s best for you and Tahoe” Let’s vote on it and see what the citizens really want.
There is a process whereby anyone can get an initiative on the ballot. Go to the city offices and request infomation on how to proceed which will involve collecting registered voters signatures. If someone is really interested in getting a referendum vote, this is the way to have our voices heard.
“Safety to the traveling public is our No. 1 priority,” Shoopman said.
This is absolutely NOT what Caltrans said when it came to raising speed limits or when they are asked not to dump snow on pedestrian/bike paths thus forcing people to walk in the street.
Is this a diversion tactic or what? “If it ain’t broke, don’t try to fix it.” It is that simple, especially when there are bigger fish to fry.
Address the real issue: the HOLE!!! for the sake of the future of South Lake Tahoe!
Don’t let greed and expediency lead the way with empty promises based on shortsighted visions and don’t be afraid to use eminent domain to right the wrongs of the past if these power players try to move forward with the unsustainable plan they have proposed. They have already caused enough harm to this town and for far too long.
Good info. tahoeadvocate! We need to, and should have with many past matters, put a lot of our community issues before the voting public!
Ryan Payne you must have missed it, Randy Lane is once again heading an effort to build at The Hole.
Before any decision is made i want to know who gets the bill??? will it be me or the state Of Nevada and who wants the road built California or Nevada ? And who will maintain the 2 highway 50 we will be stuck with.
Thanks Steven, but my comment was actually directed at that disturbing fact….
My point is that the LOOP ROAD discussion is a waste of time that takes the focus away from the really big issue facing this city today: the future of the HOLE.
The city should not allow the developers to build whatever they want, just because they hold the deed.
A retail shopping center??? Who comes to Tahoe for the shopping anyway? Just look at the Factory Stores at the Y….
What if public workshops and economic studies were done regarding the HOLE in conjunction with the LOOP ROAD?
Would an OUTDOOR EVENT CENTER in the HOLE require different traffic flows to direct event goers to our under-utilized parking garage? Is it possible to ease congestion, revitalize our downtown, attract tourism, and diversify our economy all at the same time???
The answer is YES with the proper leadership and political will. Let’s not let this opportunity to secure the future success of South Lake Tahoe slip away!
One more huge advantage to an OUTDOOR EVENT CENTER: create actual demand for the city’s airport, because big stars fly to their next gigs and the wealthy fly to big events.