FEIS - Tahoe Regional Planning Agency

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
TRPA's February 4, 2008 Governing Board Resolution for the Boulder Bay CEP
project (item 2 on page 2 of the resolution) requires land coverage reduction for the
additional height contemplated for the CEP project in item 1 of the resolution. The
proposed Code Chapter 22 height amendment (DEIS Appendix U) requires the
project to reduce land coverage by a minimum of 10 percent to earn additional
height. The percentage reduction in land coverage does not directly correspond to a
percentage increase in height. Appendix AC presents the revised language for the
proposed special height amendment to clarify that the Crystal Bay Motel portion of
the project area is not eligible for additional height per the proposed amendment.
Comment 322-fd: Comment Summary - Crystal Bay Motel coverage removal is only temporary since
the developer reserves the right for future development. This should not be counted
as permanent coverage reduction.
Please see response to comments 322-dt and 322-dy. Future development within the
Crystal Bay Motel portion of the project area is limited by excess land coverage
mitigation proposed for this Project. The project applicant has agreed to permanently
retire the maximum amount of land coverage available within the NSCP following
TRPA’s selection of an Alternative.
Comment 322-fe: Comment Summary - The transfer of development out of South Shore to the North
Shore appears to be a shell game played with entitlements and has far-reaching
consequences and impacts that have not been adequately addressed in and
environmental document. Where is the physical effects analysis in the EIS? How
will transfer of development from South Shore to North Shore be a positive
environmental benefit to the North Shore?
The transfer of development from South Shore is analyzed in Chapter 4.1 (See
Impact LU-2 page 4.1-25). Removal of units in the South Shore results in less over
coverage and SEZ impacts in the Basin. The NSCP is a Transfer of Development
Rights (TDR) receiving area. This means that the NSCP area has indicated a desire
to grow through the transfer of development rights and existing development. The
analysis of this transfer is found throughout the document for each environmental
topic since these transferred units are part of the Proposed Project development. The
environmental benefits and impacts are presented in the DEIS.
Comment 322-ff: Comment Summary - 4.1-24. The proposed acquiring of TAU's is extremely
confusing. Please provide a chart breakdown. How many TAU's currently existing
on the project area? The DEIS says 189 TAU's will be increased within the project
area?
TAUs are listed in a chart on page 4.1-23 and in Table 4.1-6 on page 4.1-24. The
DEIS states on page 4.1-23, "The Boulder Bay proponents currently own 150 Tourist
Accommodation Units (TAUs) associated with the Biltmore Hotel (95), the Crystal
Bay Motel (19), the former Baltabrin Casino (19) and 17 units banked on the Sierra
Park parcels." These are all located within the project area and NSCP. In addition,
Boulder Bay owns or has options for up to 148 additional TAU from seven properties
located outside of the NSCP in Washoe and El Dorado Counties, which is shown on
the chart on page 4.1-23. As shown in Table 4.1-6, bonus TAUs are available to
Boulder Bay as a result of SEZ restoration match from the TRPA Special Project
Pool (up to 40) and from the NSCP bonus Pool (up to 31). On page 4.1-12, the DEIS
states that 300 hotel units are proposed under Alternative C, which is an increase of
189 units over the existing number of 111 hotel units currently in use within the
project area (e.g., Tahoe Biltmore and Crystal Bay Motel).
PAGE 8- 112 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010