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
Comment 322-if: Comment Summary - The Transportation portion of the EIS the baseline is not the
real baseline. The baseline should be what would be the case without the project.
Therefore there is an increasing use of energy.
Please refer to Master Response 2, which compares the Proposed Project and
Alternatives to an alternative existing baseline.
Comment 322-ig: Comment Summary - The energy report does not mention energy for snow melting on
roadways and paths, or snow removal and sweeping of interior streets and walkways.
It does not include the increase in carbon dioxide due to removal of mature trees and
replacement with smaller trees and other landscaping.
Please see responses to comments 93-u, 108-e and 112-a.
Comment 322-ih: Comment Summary - Unless you are a guest of the hotel the Wellness Center/spa,
convention area etc are not available to you. How does this restriction of use comply
with the CEP goal of "serving the local population"?
Please see response to comment 286-y. Although some features of the resort may not
be advertised separately from the hotel, there is no restriction in TRPA regulations
that require the visitors to the spa or meeting areas to be overnight guests of the hotel.
In addition to the spa and meeting spaces, the Boulder Bay project also includes other
uses that will serve the local population. For example, the park site is open to the
public as are the retail units, restaurants, and other commercial uses. The pedestrian
village is also open to the public as are bike service facilities, transit improvements,
and other transportation facilities. Landscaping and water quality improvements
serve the greater community by enhancing the roadway corridor and reducing
pollutants entering the lake. These are some of the Project features that "serve the
local population".
Comment 322-ii: Comment Summary - How does increases in traffic, congestion and noise, reduction
of air quality and open space, negative impacts on beach access and mountain view
benefit the CEP goal of net gain?
The Project (Alternative C) will not result in an increase in traffic based on a
comparison to baseline existing conditions (see Master Response 2). As such, the
Project will not result in increased air quality and noise emissions related to traffic.
Please see responses to comments 93-k and 171-d regarding increased demand for
recreational facilities. Please see response to comment 286-as regarding compliance
with CEP goals.
Comment 322-ij: Comment Summary - Why isn't a Community Plan amendment required for changes
in height in advance of a new high code amendment?
Please see response to comment 93-g.
Comment 322-ik: Comment Summary - The project doesn't quality as a "destination resort" since there
are not significant onsite recreational amenities or activities. Where is the analysis
of the ability to keep guests on property and out of their cars?
The Project includes a variety of amenities such as a spa/wellness center, pools,
casino, conference center, entertainment, restaurants, stores, park and hiking trails,
and children's club. These are all amenities proposed to keep guests on the property.
Visitors at various destination resorts are not confined to the property for the duration
of their stay, so it is unreasonable to suggest guests must be limited to the resort at
which they are staying. In a setting such as Lake Tahoe, where there is a vast array
SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES PAGE 8- 127