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
The Project is required by TRPA to contain and treat peak runoff volumes from the
20yr/1hr design storm. The Project, as a participant in TRPA's CEP Program, agreed
in the February 4, 2008 Resolution "for allocations to be reserved and projects to be
approved, CEP projects are required to commit to substantial environmental
improvements, which must include specifically identified EIP projects. Your project
proposes a number of environmental benefits/improvements; however, TRPA
requires a written commitment regarding the funding, construction, and overall
maintenance/monitoring for these EIP project contributions in order to ensure the
projects are implemented. The EIP concerns listed in TRPA’s January 16, 2008 letter
shall be addressed." In commitments to substantial environmental improvements, the
Project will help fund EIP Project 732 and for CEP Alternatives C and D proposes a
more regional stormwater system to maximize the capture and treatment of runoff
from the contributing watershed areas beyond the immediate project area. The
commenter requests quantification and documentation of hydrology beyond that
affected by the project area.
Comment 337-h: Comment Summary - Quantify and document the 100-year rainfall event watershed
tributary area runoff.
See Appendix AB for the supplemental surface water quality analysis, which details
the modeled, predicted runoff volumes (including the 100yr/1hr storm) and
corresponding sediment and nutrient loading from a variety of water year conditions.
See responses to comments 337d-g above for discussions on contributing watershed
areas. The project area and contributing watershed areas up gradient from the project
area that contribute runoff to the project area will not continue to contribute to the
"pass through discharge" from the greater watershed tributary area.
Comment 337-i: Comment Summary - Analyze the entire watershed tributary area and hydraulic
calculations for existing and proposed drainage systems in Nevada and California
and document how Caltrans drainage concerns will be addressed.
The request for complete hydrologic calculations for the entire watershed tributary
area and hydraulic calculations for the existing and proposed drainage systems within
the State of Nevada and State of California is outside the scope of the Project because
the Project does not have the authority to address runoff issues outside of the project
area. The Project addresses the existing and potential impacts (project area
contributions to runoff) to existing and proposed Caltrans drainage systems.
Comment 337-j: Comment Summary - Correct the DEIS to state the existing 18-inch drainage pipe
crossing beneath SR 28 will be replaced by a larger pipe accommodating all excess
100-year return event flows.
The commenter requests the replacement of the 18-inch drainage pipe. See response
to comment 337d.
Comment 337-k: Comment Summary - Table 4.8-2: Note the peak month ADT is 44% higher than
ADT near the Stateline Road intersection. While the intersection analysis was during
a peak month, it did not address all the peak times.
The traffic analysis was performed for the Friday PM peak hour during the summer,
which is considered the peak traffic period for Lake Tahoe. Peak month traffic
volumes in the Lake Tahoe region occur in July and August. Traffic volume data
was collected at the study intersections in August.
PAGE 8- 154 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010