THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

Tahoe making case for federal transit dollars


image_pdfimage_print

By Kathryn Reed

Tahoe Transportation District officials are in Washington, D.C., this week on a mission to convince lawmakers to pass the federal transportation bill that would bring money to the Lake Tahoe Basin.

The Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan and Coalition is a loose coalition of six California jurisdictions and five from Nevada that have an economic interest in a functioning regional transit system.

“We will have more of a benefit working together instead of competing against each other,” Carl Hasty, executive director of TTD, told Lake Tahoe News.

With state and federal highways surrounding the basin and being the conduits to enter and exit the basin, local officials want a bigger piece of the financial pie.

But the region has long been shortchanged on its share of funding because it is considered a rural area. And while the permanent population fits the rural description, what isn’t part of the equation is the tourist population. With those added vehicles on the roads, it puts a strain on infrastructure that was not designed to sustain them. The local dollars plus what comes from the two states and feds are not enough to maintain the roads or create a transit system that functions for everyone.

The TTD board on Feb. 13 heard a presentation about the Trans-Sierra plan as well as an update on Lake Tahoe’s Highway Corridors and Inter-Regional Long-Range Transit Plan.

The staff report said, “Given the physical and environmental constraints of Lake Tahoe and the region, increased investments in transit will be key for getting a growing number of visitors and workers to and from their destinations with less congestion and fewer environmental impacts. Improved bus service, light rail transit, bus rapid transit, water taxis and ferries, and services for our senior and disabled friends and neighbors are all part of the Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan.”

It would take $35 billion to do all of the projects the jurisdictions have on the books. Hasty said $19 billion is realistic number for what could be funded. Included in that is the loop road on the South Shore and Fanny Bridge replacement in Tahoe City.

That sort of investment would increase the odds the region would be able to attract large events like the X Games or the Olympics. A coalition is still working on bringing the Winter Games to the area in 2026.

Information from staff said, “The wide open spaces and attractions of the Trans-Sierra Region straddle what has been dubbed the Northern California megapolitan, the fast growing urban area stretching from San Francisco, through Sacramento, to Reno. The Northern California megapolitan is home to some 15 million people today, and this number is expected to increase by an estimated 25-30 percent by the year 2035.”

Hasty and Alfred Knotts, TTD planner, will be talking with folks in the administration as well as congressional staff about Lake Tahoe’s needs.

“There is all kinds of talk going on in D.C. What there isn’t talk about is any growth in the program,” Hasty said.

The corridor concept is a layered approach to planning where transit, bike-pedestrian issues and roadways are all considered. It considers recreation, commuter, tourist and public transportation. And in doing so it means engaging a slew of stakeholders to make it all work.

Highway 28 in Incline Village is the corridor that received the most attention and work to date. Each corridor is different and will need different things.

All of this will be incorporated into the update of the Regional Transportation Plan that is due in 2016. It must be updated every four years. But instead of TTD or the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency doing so in a silo, components of the plan that are already being worked on by other entities will be compiled into the document so it is a collaborative, comprehensive document without redundancy.

image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (17)
  1. Dogula says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    Mo’ money mo’ money mo’ money mo’ money!!

  2. Seriously? says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    It would be a shame to see Tahoe turn into a megopolitan area. We moved here because of the slower pace and small historic town charm.

  3. Isee says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    Go Carl Go! TTD needs funding past the planning stage, so go for it. In the mean time, I don’t know anyone who wants a loop road around the California businesses at Stateline. Go back to the late ’70’s, early 80’s and it may have been needed then, but that’s a long time gone.

  4. 4-mer-usmc says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    Dogula:

    I’m curious on what you think is worthy enough to spend tax dollars. Since we’ve paid tax monies, what do you think should be done with them? Please know that I’m not attempting to be confrontational—I’m honestly curious.

    Thank you.

  5. Chief Slowroller says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    the Marvelous Makeover marches on.

  6. Steve says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    Timely memo to self: contact congressional representatives to urge them not one dime for TTD’s fantasy ferry.

  7. Old Long Skiis says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    TTD. Just speaking for myself and those I’ve talked to, we do not want a loop road and it’s proven the ferry idea simply won’t work! A ferry was tried and could’nt attract enough passengers to pay for itself. The loop road? We already have one and we don’t need to make a huge new roadway displacing people from their homes and hurting local businesses.
    Thank you for your time. OLS

  8. Cautious and Skeptical says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    AGREED! no loop road at South Shore needed! At one time it would have been a good idea for Kings Beach to have a bypass. Now instead we will have grid lock in the summer (and when we ever get snow) with lane reduction and not one, but two roundabouts (not traffic circles that move cars)with pedestrian crossings less than 1/2 mile apart. To truly have a successful transportation system (not) the TTD must understand that the locals do not use the transit system to get from North to South (visa versa) and many work off the mountain. The tourism folks send a mixed message by stating see the the entire lake whilst the developers of large hotels/resorts insist if they build it the people will stay on site.

  9. Buck says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    Can anyone tell me if you owned a business in the biggest commercial area of town, why you would want traffic to go around your business? Please tell me why TTD!!!

  10. J&B says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    They are willing to spend $30 million in tax dollars on the Fanny Bridge bypass they don’t need, even more tax dollars on the Loop Road to benefit NV/Edgewood, and close to $50 million in tax dollars on the heavily-polluting and uneconomical Ferry project…but are still begging for transit dollars (which is the same ol’ situation going on decades now, it seems)? What’s wrong with this picture? Let’s spend a lot less and invest in a better bus system, stop adding more roads that will draw more traffic…and keep REALITY in mind. And we agree – we moved here to get away from the metro areas and now the agencies want to bring them here!?!

  11. dumbfounded says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    Buck, I doubt that they (affected business) are driving this deal. What is driving it is the speculators who purchased property that would be bought through eminent domain. Guaranteed profit and rid of those pesky tenants. The City gets blight removed and doesn’t have to pay for it. Property owners get profit and don’t have to put a dime into their “investment” (tenement buildings). This will eliminate some rental properties which raises the prices for those remaining. Perfect win-win, unless you are a taxpayer. Once again, taxpayers pick up the tab…

  12. Perry R. Obray says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    ” Buck says – Posted: February 17, 2015

    Can anyone tell me if you owned a business in the biggest commercial area of town, why you would want traffic to go around your business? Please tell me why TTD!!!”

    With thousands of beds (high income earners beds) within walking distance of the commercial core, ect…, supposedly the economy will be better there without autos.

    I personally don’t like the current plan, but apparently getting those autos out of the corridor will make quality of life and businesses do much better.

  13. Buck says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    Perry the key word is apparently, where is the proof? Also show me the money before you start. Good luck getting people out of cars, only place I have seen do this is Disney World with great transportation anywhere every 15 minutes.

  14. Dogula says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    4-mer, if government regulations were relaxed you might have private companies who would be willing, on their own dimes, to provide transportation.
    So many things the government forces us to pay for that could be done (if it was actually necessary) by the free market. But government makes it difficult with protectionist licensing and regulations.
    Government has a few things it SHOULD do well: mail, courts, defense, even some roads. But beyond that, they overstep, and are inefficient and top heavy to boot.
    In a tourist town, of all places, the resorts should be able to chip in together (or individually) to provide shuttle services or other transport. Especially in a situation like this, where we’re trying to get Federal funds, should we be soaking the taxpayers in Oklahoma for stuff we “need”?

  15. Sunriser2 says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    We can’t even get the kids to ride the school bus. But we want our wealth tourists to ride a bus with our working poor and homeless?

  16. 4-mer-usmc says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    Dogula–

    Thanks for the reply.

  17. Slapshot says - Posted: February 17, 2015

    The loop road is a no brainer. The sooner the better.