TTD outlines transportation goals for basin
Lake Tahoe News staff report
One of the obstacles with securing funding for transportation projects in the Lake Tahoe Basin is that the area is considered rural.
But congestion defies that rural status when there are more than 5 million visitors vying for a spot on the road.
“On an average busy day there are more than 200,000 residents and visitors in the basin,” Carl Hasty, executive director of the Tahoe Transportation District, said in his presentation last week to the South Lake Tahoe City Council.
His agency’s goals include getting the rural designation changed, creating a regional transportation system, installing bike trails, all while keeping an eye on environmental concerns.
Hasty said there will be workshops this summer on the loop road project. This project would change the alignment of Highway 50 on the South Shore so it goes behind Harrah’s and MontBleu and then turns the current highway into a city street. The draft environmental documents should be released this fall.
Councilwoman JoAnn Conner reiterated her concerns about displacing local businesses and residents, saying she believes the millions of dollars this project would cost could be better spent.
The ferry project that would service Ski Run Marina and one in Tahoe City is moving forward. TTD sees this as a commuter vessel and one for tourists.
Mayor Hal Cole said he could envision this as a recreation item, not something people would use daily.
Planning is progressing on the north end of the Stateline-to-Stateline bike trail. It will eventually hook up with the route already completed on the South Shore that goes from Kahle Drive to Round Hill Pines Beach.
This summer 0.6 miles of bike trail will go in from the southern boundary of Sugar Pine Point State Park to Meeks Bay Resort.
Construction of the Highway 89 bypass around Tahoe City will start in 2015. This is so highway traffic avoids the seismically challenged Fanny Bridge. It will turn the bridge and approach to it into a city street.
Thirteen agencies are collaborating to create a scenic byway on Highway 28 near Incline Village.
There are far better uses for this money, IMHO.
If the Ferry is to be either a ‘commuter’ or ‘recreation’ vehicle, it needs to include cycling as a planning item (i.e., included) at both ends, as the transit connections at the North end are going to be better than at the South end, and there are no viable ‘car rent/borrow’ places to bridge the gap between those who are happy to cycle either way & those who will not use it (the “commute” that Hal disparages) absent a vehicle. . .
But as a recreation/ visitor amenity, the Ferry offers a way to “bisect” the 70-miles around-the-Lake to both 30+ mile directions instead – a further draw to justify the ride on the water – a beautiful one. . .
One thing needs to get straight, however, if funding is to be applied for: various people at various agencies use different estimates of how many ‘Visitors’ there actually are – the hopeful & wishful thinking end @ 5,000,000 plus the many others now used “2,000,000”, “several” million, etc., etc. It is hard to be accurate in planning if one doesn’t know what exactly they’re to plan for. . .
“Build-it-and-they-will-come” shouldn’t mean “build-it-and-then-MAYBE, MIGHT, or PERHAPS-they’ll-come”. . .
I thought Highway 28 (Spooner-to-Incline, at least) was already designated a ‘Scenic Byway” a number of years ago. . . 13 agencies ??
Not to state the obvious with respect to a ferry to the south shore. But there isn’t sufficient water depth to facilitate a ferry at ski run without influencing the environment. Low lake levels like we are seeing now are not unusual. A ferry needs a deep water terminus which means either a much longer pier than currently exists, or dredging in the near shore, or finding a location where water is deeper which means not ski run.
Hasty still pushing the “Loop Road” project as hard as ever.
Mr.Hasty, Stop pushing the loop on us, it’ a pipe dream at best, along with the ferry. Where is your eminent domain authority coming from? This question has been asked for years and YOU have never answered it, Why?
Lou, who do you represent? Because when TTD shows up with a check book those people with the dilapidated houses are going to be happy to sell their little POS rentals. They will get more $$$ then they would with a private sale. Unless they are just foolish, they will sell. The NPV of those houses plus $1 = a sale price they will jump on.
Moral, How about the people displaced, Where would they go, motels? Affordable housing before displacement, should be dealt with and I don’t,see it.
Moral Hazard:
I totally agree with your comments and would further ask why we want to keep that dilapidated housing that would never pass any type of code or safety inspection and are a hazard to live in. If those rentals were to remain the City should go in and perform inspections and force those slumlords to make safety upgrades to those firetraps not only to protect the occupants but to protect the surrounding environment. And while the City’s at it, they should address those antiquated firetrap motels that are now being used as illegal long-term housing and are overloading their electrical circuits with microwaves, refrigerators, hot plates, etc.
Those believing that area shouldn’t be demolished and a loop road constructed should take a stroll through there at night with Joanne Conner and see how safe you feel in that drug dealing neighborhood, or better yet, move in over there. And all those community members so concerned about “affordable housing” for our workforce should show equal concern for “DECENT affordable housing” and not be so accepting of a decaying ghetto for our workforce.
Lou, JoAnn doesn’t understand this concept, so she drones on about the rentals; but here is the truth:
Leases have value just like real estate. It is in fact a valuable contract. A contract can be purchased for value; and here is the point, and MUST be purchased for value. Unless the tenant has a month to month lease, the tenants lease MUST be purchased for fair market value. Who sets FMV you ask? Why the owner of the lease, the renter in other words.
Basically JoAnn is protecting those renters from getting more than enough money to move and from putting some cash in their pocket.
Moral, The city did that in phase 1 and 2 of redevelment. They gave people 2 to 5 thousand each to vacate not to relocate. The city paid them off so they could avoid providing replacement housing.
Lou the city cant know if you are going to relocate. So if they gave money for relocation, it would be fair to ask if the business was going to relocate. If you pay a person to vacate, well that pretty easy to see. The city cant provide replacement housing because they cant force a person to live where they don’t want to. Instead you give them a check and they theoretically go somewhere else.
What do you think happens when a homeowner decides to sell their rental? I have only ever sold 1 house, but the renter got a notice to vacate and didn’t get a dime from me. Not because I am ruthless, but because it was the end of their lease and I had no moral and legal obligation to pay for their move.
Same goes for this situation.
You got paid thousands just to move. Its a relocation payment regardless of the description on the paperwork.
If they have willing sellers I say go for it. I will never accept, people being forced to move.
I’d like to see more bike trails around the Lake too.