FEIS - Tahoe Regional Planning Agency

More documents

Recommendations

Info

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B o u l d e r B a y C o m m u n i t y E n h a n c e m e n t P r o g r a m P r o j e c t E I S Comment 322-cm: Comment Summary - Compare public vs. private amenities by Alternative. What is the location, use, and size of CFA available to the public. CFA is publicly accessible space. Table 2.7-1 summarizes the CFA proposed by Alternative. Private amenities would be available to guests or residents of the Boulder Bay resort and include facilities located within the hotel and residential buildings (e.g., pool areas, health and wellness center, fitness center, etc.). Comment 322-cn: Comment Summary - Provide additional pedestrian amenities along Stateline Rd/Lakeview. Pedestrian traffic on Stateline Road, Wassou Road, and Lakeview Avenue will be limited to residents of upper Crystal Bay (approximately 7 homes within ¼ mile of the Proposed Project). Sidewalks do not currently exist on Stateline Road, Wassou Road, and Lakeview Avenue. There are no project area driveways on Lakeview Avenue or Wassou Road or direct access to the project from SR 28 via Lakeview Avenue or Wassou Road; therefore, traffic volumes will be associated with residents of upper Crystal Bay. Given the low traffic volumes and low pedestrian traffic on Lakeview Avenue and Wassou Road, sidewalks are not warranted. Pedestrians on Stateline Road that are destined for the project can enter the project area and utilize the pedestrian facilities that are internal to the site. Comment 322-co: Comment Summary - What is being done to preserve the "Old Tahoe" gaming facilities and the character of the past? Mitigation measure CUL-1A requires Boulder Bay to prepare a photograph/text interpretation of the history of the Tahoe Biltmore Resort and Cottages for permanent display within a public area within the project, and to sponsor and produce a booklet regarding the history of Crystal Bay for public distribution. Comment 322-cp: Comment Summary - Alt. C doesn't reflect "Old Tahoe" as peaked roofs are a façade and pitch is 3:12. The buildings have been designed to show the components of "old Tahoe" in the visible portion of the viewpoint. The 3:12 pitch sections of the main roof do not dominate the viewpoint from the ground based vantage points. Comment 322-cq: Does affordable housing replace workforce housing? Are there negative social impacts for housing located next to a casino? Affordable housing can include housing for employees. Existing housing along SR 28 in this area is near casinos. To decrease dependency on vehicles and increase pedestrian activity, housing should be located near workplaces and commercial centers. There are no identified negative social impacts in the EIS. Comment 322-cr: Comment Summary - Are there guarantees the project will be finished? Project funding is outside the required scope of the DEIS and environmental documentation and analysis. The addition of financial data does not improve the environmental analysis in the EIS; however, decision maker(s) may use financial information to arrive at a decision. Funding and financial information may be requested by the Agency separate from the EIS for decision-making purposes. The project proponent has indicated full funding for the Project will be secured prior to construction to ensure completion. Comment 322-cs: Comment Summary - What are impacts of underground cuts and is dewatering or stabilization mechanisms needed? PAGE 8- 100 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B o u l d e r B a y C o m m u n i t y E n h a n c e m e n t P r o g r a m P r o j e c t E I S Potential impacts from excavations are analyzed in Impact GEO-3 (pages 4.2-27 to 4.2-32) and Impact HYDRO-4 (pages4.3-48 to 4.3-50). The need for dewatering actions is not expected but a dewatering plan has been developed for the project area as required by NPDES permitting. Geologic hazards (i.e. seismicity) are analyzed in Impact GEO-2 (pages 4.2-23 to 4.2-27). Comment 322-ct: Comment Summary - Is boat parking/storage provided? There is no dedicated boat parking/storage areas included in the Boulder Bay parking design. Comment 322-cu: Comment Summary - Snow removal not adequately discussed. Are sidewalks heated? Where will snow storage occur? Can heated roads keep up with accumulation during storm? Do other roads in area use this method of snowmelt? Snow removal is discussed on page 2-18 of Chapter 2, Project Description. Snow melting systems are used throughout the pedestrian circulation system and promenade. Snowmelt will be collected, transported and treated in the stormwater management system onsite. Snow storage areas are illustrated on the civil plans and will require approval by TRPA as part of project review and permitting. Mechanical removal will be necessary. Interior heated roadways, driveways and pedestrian walkways have been implemented throughout the Lake Tahoe Basin, notably and most recently through the South Shore Redevelopment Project in South Lake Tahoe, California. Comment 322-cv: Comment Summary - Discuss impacts to adjacent properties due to massing of structures. It will block view on Lakeview Road. Please see response to comment 117-a. Comment 322-cw: Comment Summary - There are 10 buildings and not 8 under Alt C (Building A = 3 structures). Building A is one structure. The bottom three floors are contiguous. Comment 322-cx: Comment Summary - Lack of access to shoreline not discussed. And 20' setbacks or less are not discussed. The lack of access to shoreline is discussed under REC-1. Setbacks are discussed in Chapter 4.5-Scenic and include a discussion of building setbacks and NSCP requirements and exemptions. Comment 322-cy: Comment Summary - Tree removal not adequately discussed. Why isn't 61% removal significant? Please see response to comment 322-ab. Comment 322-cz: Comment Summary - Shadowing conditions caused by tall buildings should be analyzed. Please see response to comment 169. Comment 322-da: Comment Summary - Light, glare, and nighttime lighting are not adequately discussed, especially with 4x the existing buildout. While the size of the project will increase compared to the existing building footprint, lighting impacts addressed in Impact SR-3 are not considered to be significant because the project will replace existing non-conforming signage and exterior SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES PAGE 8- 101
Page 1 and 2:
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
Page 99: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187:
Page 190 and 191:
REVISIONS TO THE DEIS B o u l d e r
Page 192:
REVISIONS TO THE DEIS B o u l d e r
show all

FEIS - Tahoe Regional Planning Agency

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?