TRPA grants Barton Ranch demolition permit
By Kathryn Reed
A segment of South Lake Tahoe’s past is about to visually disappear from the landscape.
A hearings officer with the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency today approved the demolition of all of the buildings at the old Barton Ranch at the Y. Slated for the wrecking ball are the barn, ranch house, guesthouses, cabin, cottage and shed.
Gary Midkiff, a land use and permitting consultant representing the Ledbetter and Mosher families who own the property and are descendants of the Bartons, spoke at Monday’s meeting. Despite a full room, Kirk Ledbetter was the only other person to talk June 29. He could not be reached after the meeting.
The family takes issue with people putting up signs that say “History vs. Greed”. The family’s contention is the usefulness of these buildings is long gone. Now vagrants are using them. Vandals are ruining what is still standing. Squatters are living there.
The family has been going through this process for more than four years.
The boarded up Barton Ranch buildings in South Lake Tahoe are likely to be demolished this summer. Photo/Bill Kingman
The landowners are open to people repurposing the buildings – whether turning them into historical museum-like structures or something else. No one has come forward with the money to make that a reality.
Part of the problem is these once iconic white and green buildings are full of graffiti, mold, mildew and lead-based paint.
TRPA is involved in the process and not just South Lake Tahoe officials because it is identified as a historical resource by the bi-state regulatory agency. This triggered a more involved process than a routine demolition permit.
The Bartons were pioneers in this area. In 1915, they moved to the South Shore, establishing a dairy ranch at what is now the Lake Tahoe Airport. Across the Upper Truckee River it is still known as the Barton Meadow.
They ran a milk route to Echo Lakes, Camp Sacramento, Twin Bridges, Tahoe Meadow and Beecher’s Country Club, where Harrah’s is now located.
Then they developed the acreage near the Y. At that time it was wide open – not full of commercial enterprises like today.
What becomes of this 4-acre site next to Raley’s remains to be seen. The demolition permit is good for three years. If the structures don’t come down in that time the property owners lose their rights to the commodities associated with the parcel. This includes 39,007-square-feet of coverage, two residential units and 5,631-square-feet of residential floor area. Those items will be banked and the owners able to use them on another site.
Conditions of the permit include revegetating the site and trying to obtain a recorded history of the one family member still alive who lived at the property.
If anyone appeals the demolition permit before the July 20 deadline, the Governing Board would then have the final say.
So sad that some kind of fair compromise apparently didn’t fly.
So the Barton Ranch house gets demolshed. Another bit of Tahoe history gone forever.
I guess nobdoy cares. It will molder away at the landfill. While we lose a historic building on South Shore. Antother one gone! Sad Old Long Skiis (SOLS)
The City destroyed the old Globin Pier instead of fixing it back in the 70’s and now because of TRPA regulations can not be replaced. That was dumb. If the city doesn’t buy the Barton Ranch they will be making a similar mistake, like the Globin Pier removal, that can not be undone.
The City needs to show some creative leadership and buy the property and hold it until it can find a group to refurbish the buildings.
Old buildings bring tourists. I think the Historical Society would be a good group to take care of the Barton Ranch.
The Forest Service saved Valhalla and then turned it over to the non-profit Tallac Assn and they turned it into the most valuable asset we have on the South Shore. (Its not in the City Limits)
Its time to pay the Ledbetters fair market value and lets get on with it. Figure it out.
This is an urgent job for the city.
Is the property for sale or lease? Maybe only a small part of this property can be carved out to preserve the historical buildings. In the current building location configuration, they will be sitting next to the new park, nice. This probably will leave a sizable chunk of what is most likely a very desirable commercial lot to be developed.
Les Wright, I agree with you 100% about the Barton Ranch.
It CAN be restored and be a valubale asset to our community. Brought back to its original condition it would be a great draw for visitors and locals alike.
Save Tahoe history!
Come on City of South Lake Tahoe,step up and do the right thing. If everyones property taxes went up to give the community LTCC 55 million, I think we could scrape up the money to save this old house and fix it up.
Make it something we can be proud of and maybe even generate a little revenue.
Lets hope this works out well for those who care about Tahoe History. Old Long Skiis
I find it interesting how people say “The City should do ….. whatever” with no regard from where that taxpayer money will come. The City government doesn’t have the money to purchase and renovate this site nor the staff to spearhead a time-consuming project like that. Take a look at our neighborhood streets folks—the City doesn’t have the money to fix our roads let alone what some people believe should be a historical site. City government derives their money from the taxpayers and unless the local residents are willing to tax themselves and visitors to this community for the purpose of this very expensive project it will never take place. This is the type of project that a dedicated group of local individuals needs to take on and then convince the masses of its importance and why they should dig into their pockets and pay for it. Tahoe-4-Tahoe organized and convinced people not to pay to park; LTCC organized and convinced people that education was a good investment and to approve a bond; and people who are passionate about saving Barton Ranch need to organize and convince people of the importance of preserving that site and to pay for doing so.
This isn’t a new topic and just posting on this blog that City government should use taxpayer money to do something won’t change anything. If this is important to you then go do something about it and if you’re successful you’ll get all the accolades.
How about this headline- “Barton Ranch grants TRPA demolition permit”
4-mer is on the money. Just to add to that, the best chance for preservation is to move some of the buildings to a city owned lot where they may be enjoyed. Maybe over by the museum? It will all cost money of course. Villifying the current owners and/or calling for the city to step in is a fools game and merely illustrates little real-world understanding of how things work.
The College has $55 million. They could by it and teach Tahoe History there !
Somethings just don’t work out like you had hoped. Our taxes went up to pay for more ball fields. We got one but the plastic grass is falling apart and has to be replaced at taxpayer expense. Redevelopment worked part way but the remaining part is unfinished and on the market going to the highest bidder. Our taxes went up to pay for a leaky roof at LTCC. From what I’ve heard of no roof repair, just a raise for the administrators and others at LTCC, all coming from taxpayers money.
When it comes to save a piece of history like The Barton Ranch too many people turn a blind eye. The cost of fixing the Barton ranch is a drop in the bucket compared to the 55 million to patch a leaky roof at LTCC.
Have a great day. OLS
Mammoth Lakes has the same 8% sales tax rate as SLT. However they also have a 1.5% Tourism Assessment on top of the 8% sales tax. The paved bike trails were perfect! The town looked great. Great free bus/trolley system. Some with trailers to carry 16 bikes. The population is reported to be in the low 8,000. The town was clean and appealing. Lots of published guides and maps to encourage visitors to experience the sights and what the town has to offer commercially as well. Smiling people. Seems to be a good model for SLT and the surrounding area. The extra 1.5% is an investment in the town and community.
I’d rather have my tax dollars go to the college than some ranch. The college, unlike the ranch, could drive the economy of the South Shore in a positive direction. Measure F passed. Get over it.
I’m all for preservation but I’m not sure this would be much of a tourist attraction.
Former has it right. People always want someone else to pay for something. Let’s just say not enough people in this town are willing to support a tax increase for this project so let’s move on.
With regard to mammoth they also have two measures R & U which are dedicated to recreation, arts, culture and mobility. They as acommunity have decided to tax ithemselves and use these funds for programs.
interested, Park city also invests in their tourism industry, SLT also used to pay 2% out of the 10% for increasing tourism, a number of years ago the city decided that they dont need to market South Lake Tahoe so they stopped paying that 2% and put it in the general fund.Luckily the Lodging properties decided to put together a tourism improvement district and self impose a tax on their guests.
Last time I checked, city of SLT gets a ,5% (1/2 cent)sales tax.
So some folks do not want to preserve a piece of Tahoe history like the Barton house. Do all older homes in the area face TRPA approved demolition?
Maybe Vikingsholm is next on the list.
If you don’t like Tahoe history…move somewhere else.
Take care, Old Long Skiis
“The landowners are open to people repurposing the buildings – whether turning them into historical museum-like structures or something else. No one has come forward with the money to make that a reality.”
Old Long Skiis:
You’re obviously very impassioned about saving Barton Ranch so why didn’t you do something to make that possible during the past four years and prior to this demolition permit being issued? Now you’re angry at others because they’re not doing what you want them to and telling them to move somewhere else? Life is pay as you go; it’s not a date where someone else picks up the tab for what you want. If this was so important to you then you should have initiated some action and done something about it. Now you’ll never know if you could have actually made a difference.
Did you ignore the fact that the buildings are infested with mold, old lead paint and are not structurally sound? Out with the old in with the new.
The owners of the property want be cashed out, I checked. I wish I had that kind of dough but I do not.
So down the building will go and will become a faint memory of times gone by. I’m sure something new and shiny will go in its place.
Oh well, as AROD said “out with the old in with the new.”
Take care , Old Long Skiis
OLS, the way i read this article, the buildings will be torn down and nothing will be put up there. Rather the coverage will be banked and then sold off. It would be interesting to know what the asking price the family wanted?
“The owners of the property want to be cashed out, I checked. I wish I had that kind of dough but I do not.”
It’s likely that very few individuals have the money to pay all the costs associated with a project of this magnitude. That’s why impassioned supporters don’t sit back and wait for someone else to do something but instead they get organized, get mobilized, and come up with a viable plan so they can then convince other people and non-profit grant making organizations of the importance of preserving something and to write checks to that end. That is initiating some action and doing something. In these days of the internet it’s not too hard to find out how to go about that process if one wants to spend their time on that endeavor.