FEIS - Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
FEIS - Tahoe Regional Planning Agency 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 ROWs through onsite in stormwater treatment galleries, and basins and offsite on the California parcel (infiltration gallery 9). The Project will minimize stormwater contributions from the project area and effectively removing this volume of runoff from "pass through discharge". Impact HYDRO-3 details the proposed stormwater treatment systems and provides See responses to comments 337a though 337n. Please see response to comment 93-e regarding CEQA review of the Lower Brockway water quality project. Comment Letter 339 - Kientz, Richard, 02/04/10 Comment 339-a: Comment Summary - Requests an adequate traffic analysis to describe impact of atmospheric deposition of particulates on Lake Tahoe. Requests a quantification of water quality benefits and fine sediment load reduction, and a description of why expansion of coverage is a benefit. Please refer to Master Response 2, which compares the Proposed Project and Alternatives to an alternative existing baseline. Please refer to Master Response 1 regarding fine sediment load reductions and water quality benefits. Comment Letter 352 - Roane, William, 02/04/10 Comment 352-a: Comment Summary - Concerned about room rates with the project. Room rates are generated by the property owner in response to market demand and value and are subject to fluctuation. This is not a comment on the content or adequacy of the DEIS. This information is passed on to the Project proponent and decision maker(s) for consideration. No further response to this comment in relation to the DEIS is warranted. Comment Letter 357 - Sell, John, 02/04/10 Comment 357: Comment Summary - Opposes project as too big, inconsistent with TRPA compact. A Regional Plan and public transportation system should come first. Please see response to comment 40-a. Comment Letter 363 - Kuchnicki, Jason, 02/05/10 Comment 363-a: Comment Summary - Would be beneficial for EIS to provide quantitative comparison of the Alternatives so that the relative benefits of each Alternative could be discerned. Keep in mind that the no project Alternative would still be required to be retrofitted for BMPs as required by TRPA code. Would recommend using either the Load Reduction Planning Tool or Pollutant Load Reduction Model. The comment is noted that the No Project Alternatives are required to retrofit the project area to comply with TRPA codified regulations. The stormwater treatment systems and permanent BMPs proposed for Alternatives A, B and E are described on pages 4.3-36 and 4.3-37. The design plans were submitted to TRPA in December 2009 and are provided as supplemental information for DEIS Appendix P in Appendix AB. These design plans illustrate the narrative approach detailed on pages 4.3-36 and 4.3-37. See Appendix AB for LSPC model predicted sediment and nutrient load reductions. Alternatives A, B and C are quantified under Existing Conditions (no BMPs) and E20 (existing project area retrofitted with water quality PAGE 8- 160 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 BMPs and stormwater treatment systems sized for the 20yr/1hr storm total runoff volume). Alternative C is quantified under C20 (Alternative C built to comply with TRPA codified regulations to treat the 20yr/1hr total runoff volume) and C100 (Alternative C built with BMPs, LID strategies and stormwater treatment systems sized for the 100yr/1hr total runoff volume). Table 2 and 3 present the loads by pound (lb) for a variety of water year conditions. Comment 363-b: Comment Summary - Conceptual/preliminary water quality mitigation plan for the preferred Alternative appears quite robust. Hope that the project proponents will remain open to the possibility of conducting future monitoring studies at the site to measure the effectiveness of these improvements from LID techniques. The comment supporting the implementation of LID strategies and techniques is noted. The Project commits to conducting post-project monitoring as a standard practice of the Project. See SP-9 in Chapter 6. The monitoring program will be developed based on the selected Alternative and submitting to NDEP and TRPA for approval during project permitting. The monitoring program will be designed to measure compliance with State and Regional discharge limits, qualify and quantify performance of LID strategies and techniques and for further calibration of the LSCP model assumptions. Comment 363-c: Comment Summary - DEIS states that Project will participate in EIP project 732 but does not describe how. Please clarify what the word participate means. Will Project capture and treat offsite flows from EIP project 732 or do intend on contributing funding to help design/construct EIP project? If the latter, how much has been or will be contributed? The Project EIP commitments are outlined in the CEP Resolution Letter (February 4, 2008) Environmental Improvements/ Environmental Improvement Program (EIP): 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." The EIP Projects are listed on page 2-18 of the DEIS, but are not detailed in this section. Boulder Bay's portion of EIP Project No. 732 will be located on the California Parcel and will construct underground infiltration gallery 9 of the stormwater treatment system described for Alternatives C and D. EIP Project No. 714 will also be located on the California Parcel to establish and manage the NSCP lake Vista Mini-Park on the site above the infiltration gallery. The Project will capture and treat onsite and offsite (from contributing watershed areas from Washoe County and SR 28 roadway and ROW) runoff in the proposed stormwater treatment system within the project area. Since the system is designed linearly, overflow from infiltration gallery 8 will reach gallery 9 on the California Parcel. Runoff from the NDOT portion of this area will continue to be treated by the existing treatment vault located at the corner of SR 28 and Stateline Road. Runoff from Washoe County portion of this area (Stateline Road) will be treated with the use a new treatment vault with sand and oil separators prior to infiltration in galley 9. The Project will fund the construction of this project and has submitted draft agreement to TRPA concerning funding for long-term SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES PAGE 8- 161
- Page 109 and 110: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 111 and 112: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 113 and 114: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 115 and 116: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 117 and 118: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 119 and 120: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 121 and 122: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 123 and 124: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 125 and 126: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 127 and 128: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 129 and 130: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 131 and 132: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 133 and 134: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 135 and 136: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 137 and 138: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 139 and 140: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 141 and 142: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 143 and 144: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 145 and 146: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 147 and 148: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 149 and 150: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 151 and 152: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 153 and 154: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 155 and 156: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 157 and 158: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 159: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 163 and 164: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 165 and 166: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 167 and 168: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 169 and 170: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 171 and 172: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 173 and 174: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 175 and 176: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 177 and 178: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 179 and 180: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 181 and 182: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 183 and 184: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 185 and 186: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 187: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- 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
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS<br />
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<br />
BMPs and stormwater treatment systems sized for the 20yr/1hr storm total runoff<br />
volume). Alternative C is quantified under C20 (Alternative C built to comply with<br />
TRPA codified regulations to treat the 20yr/1hr total runoff volume) and C100<br />
(Alternative C built with BMPs, LID strategies and stormwater treatment systems<br />
sized for the 100yr/1hr total runoff volume). Table 2 and 3 present the loads by<br />
pound (lb) for a variety of water year conditions.<br />
Comment 363-b: Comment Summary - Conceptual/preliminary water quality mitigation plan for the<br />
preferred Alternative appears quite robust. Hope that the project proponents will<br />
remain open to the possibility of conducting future monitoring studies at the site to<br />
measure the effectiveness of these improvements from LID techniques.<br />
The comment supporting the implementation of LID strategies and techniques is<br />
noted. The Project commits to conducting post-project monitoring as a standard<br />
practice of the Project. See SP-9 in Chapter 6. The monitoring program will be<br />
developed based on the selected Alternative and submitting to NDEP and TRPA for<br />
approval during project permitting. The monitoring program will be designed to<br />
measure compliance with State and <strong>Regional</strong> discharge limits, qualify and quantify<br />
performance of LID strategies and techniques and for further calibration of the LSCP<br />
model assumptions.<br />
Comment 363-c: Comment Summary - DEIS states that Project will participate in EIP project 732 but<br />
does not describe how. Please clarify what the word participate means. Will Project<br />
capture and treat offsite flows from EIP project 732 or do intend on contributing<br />
funding to help design/construct EIP project? If the latter, how much has been or<br />
will be contributed?<br />
The Project EIP commitments are outlined in the CEP Resolution Letter (February 4,<br />
2008) Environmental Improvements/ Environmental Improvement Program (EIP):<br />
For allocations to be reserved and projects to be approved, CEP projects are required<br />
to commit to substantial environmental improvements, which must include<br />
specifically identified EIP projects. Your project proposes a number of environmental<br />
benefits/improvements; however, TRPA requires a written commitment regarding the<br />
funding, construction, and overall maintenance/monitoring for these EIP project<br />
contributions in order to ensure the projects are implemented. The EIP concerns<br />
listed in TRPA’s January 16, 2008 letter shall be addressed." The EIP Projects are<br />
listed on page 2-18 of the DEIS, but are not detailed in this section.<br />
Boulder Bay's portion of EIP Project No. 732 will be located on the California Parcel<br />
and will construct underground infiltration gallery 9 of the stormwater treatment<br />
system described for Alternatives C and D. EIP Project No. 714 will also be located<br />
on the California Parcel to establish and manage the NSCP lake Vista Mini-Park on<br />
the site above the infiltration gallery. The Project will capture and treat onsite and<br />
offsite (from contributing watershed areas from Washoe County and SR 28 roadway<br />
and ROW) runoff in the proposed stormwater treatment system within the project<br />
area. Since the system is designed linearly, overflow from infiltration gallery 8 will<br />
reach gallery 9 on the California Parcel. Runoff from the NDOT portion of this area<br />
will continue to be treated by the existing treatment vault located at the corner of SR<br />
28 and Stateline Road. Runoff from Washoe County portion of this area (Stateline<br />
Road) will be treated with the use a new treatment vault with sand and oil separators<br />
prior to infiltration in galley 9. The Project will fund the construction of this project<br />
and has submitted draft agreement to TRPA concerning funding for long-term<br />
SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES PAGE 8- 161