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 The existing Regional Plan remains in effect until the Regional Plan update is adopted. The Boulder Bay Project is located within the NSCP and meets the resolutions outlined for participation in the CEP. Speaker 17 – Scott Teache, North Tahoe Preservation Alliance Comment 17-a: Comment Summary – Project is too big. The Alternatives are not reasonable to the Alternative C project. Wants the unused gaming space to be permanently retired. Please see responses to comments 286-bo, 286-bp, 322-bn, 322-cj, 322-co, 322-dq, 332-i, 332-j, 332-k, 332-aw, 332-ax and 338-n. DECEMBER 9, 2009 TRPA ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING Speaker 1 – Ann Nichols, North Tahoe Preservation Alliance Comment 1-a: Comment Summary – EIS does not identify significant impacts. The DEIS identifies significant impacts where the analysis indicates a significant impact has the potential to occur. Please refer to Table S-1 in the Summary Chapter of the DEIS for a quick reference to the significance of each Alternative by impact. Comment 1-b: Comment Summary – EIS uses category F for density calculations – should use category E. The note below the Table in TRPA Code Subsection 21.4.B(1) states that "Any other combination of uses, including three or more uses in a project area, is assigned to Category F." The Project includes tourist accommodation, multi-family residential for sale, multi-family residential for rent (affordable) and commercial uses. Comment 1-c: Comment Summary – No guarantee that gaming will be kept at 10,000 sf. Another 9,900 sf could be used in the future. In order for gaming floor area to be expanded over the 10,000 square feet proposed in Alternative C, Boulder Bay or another future applicant would have to apply to TRPA and the Nevada TRPA for a new permit, which would require additional environmental analysis. Comment 1-d: Comment Summary – Height could be used at the Crystal Bay motel site. And also gaming space. The proposed height amendment does not apply to the Crystal Bay motel site. The text of the amendment limits the additional height to that portion of the Project Area located north of SR 28. In order for gaming floor area to be expanded over the 10,000 square feet proposed in Alternative C, Boulder Bay or another future applicant would have to apply to TRPA and the Nevada TRPA for a new permit, which would require additional environmental analysis. Comment 1-e: Comment Summary – No sidewalks above the development on neighborhood streets. Sidewalks are proposed within the project area but are not proposed on neighborhood streets because of insufficient pedestrian traffic. Please see response to comment 322-cn. Comment 1-f: Comment Summary – Height goes up on Stateline Road. PAGE 8- 168 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 Please see response to comment 322-p. Comment 1-g: Comment Summary – The wellness center should not be considered an accessory use. Speaker 2 – Joy Dahlgren Please refer to Master Response 4. Comment 2-a: Comment Summary – Doesn’t see how VMT can be reduced for Alternatives C and D. EIS should better support assumption for method to identify existing traffic. Raw trip generation is similar for each Alternative. Reductions for internal trips, nonauto trips, etc. vary by Alternative. Assumptions for trip reductions need better explanation. Speaker 3 – Margaret Martini Please refer to Master Responses 2, 3, and 4. Comment 3-a: Comment Summary – Height amendment will create precedence for other areas. Please see responses to comments 322-hg and 338-i. Comment 3-b: Comment Summary – TAU transfers are significant. Please see responses to comments 322-w, 322-at, 322-ff, 322-fk, 322-ic, 332-aa, 332ag, 332-as and 332-bg. Comment 3-c: Comment Summary – EIS should identify significant impacts. The DEIS identifies significant impacts where the analysis indicates a significant impact has the potential to occur. Please refer to Table S-1 in the Summary Chapter of the DEIS for a quick reference to the significance of each Alternative by impact. Comment 3-d: Comment Summary – Where are the technical studies? DEIS is subjective. Technical studies are included as references to the DEIS when necessary, submitted to TRPA as required special reports, and listed as references at the end of each resource chapter. Impact analyses bring in quantitative data and information from the reports whenever required or relevant. Comment 3-e: Comment Summary – Adding Crystal Bay Motel to project area should not be allowed. Please see responses to comments 93-d, 286-i, 332-z, 332-am, 332-ay and 332-az. Comment 3-f: Comment Summary – Why isn’t August 2008 traffic considered peak? Just because of the low numbers? Please see Master Responses 2, 3 and 4. Comment 3-g: Comment Summary – Employment growth is not substantiated. Table 4.11-16 in the DEIS presents the projected employment by alternative. Between 131 and 214 job positions (presented as number of employees) would result depending on the alternative selected. Comment 3-h: Comment Summary – BMPs should be in place already. Please see response to comment 109-a. SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES PAGE 8- 169
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:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
Page 167: 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
show all

FEIS - Tahoe Regional Planning Agency

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?