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 projects. It is anticipated that ITE will incorporate this methodology into the next update of the Trip Generation Handbook. Internal Capture/Alternative Mode Reduction Methodology The internal capture and Alternative mode reductions for the Boulder Bay project were calculated using two sources: the Fehr & Peers mixed use development model (mixed-use equations) and surveys conducted by LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2007) at the existing Tahoe Biltmore. The mixed-use equations calculate the number of Alternative mode trips and determine the split between internal (walking, bicycling, or taking transit between uses on the site) and external (walking, bicycling, or taking transit to a use off the site) Alternative mode trips. The overall Alternative mode reductions (internal and external) were applied to the “raw” trip generation of each land use included in the project Alternatives. LSC conducted surveys of the existing hotel and casino guests at the existing Tahoe Biltmore to determine Alternative mode and internal capture percentages for those existing uses. Local information was included in the trip generation analysis, where available. The total percentage of internal capture and Alternative mode trips provided in the “Trip Generation Spreadsheets” does not exactly match the “Overall Trip Reduction Percentage” provided in the Mixed Use Development Trip Generation Model results, provided in DEIS Appendix W, because the LSC survey data was also used in the analysis, to incorporate local data for the land use interactions available at the current site. As shown in the Trip Generation Tables in Appendix W of the DEIS, the following uses interact internally with each other for each Alternative: Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C • Casino – Hotel • Casino – Retail/Restaurant • Hotel – Retail/Restaurant • Casino – Retail/Restaurant • Casino – Residential • Residential – Retail/Restaurant • Casino – Hotel • Casino – Retail/Restaurant • Casino – Residential • Hotel – Retail/Restaurant • Residential – Retail/Restaurant Alternative D Alternative E • Casino – Hotel • Casino – Retail/Restaurant • Casino – Residential • Hotel – Retail/Restaurant • Residential – Retail/Restaurant • Casino – Hotel • Casino – Retail/Restaurant • Casino – Residential • Hotel – Retail/Restaurant • Residential – Retail/Restaurant The number of internally captured walking trips between the project land uses was calculated by balancing the trips to correspond with the capacity of the lower trip generating use. The exhibit PAGE 8- 20 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 below provides a visual representation of how internal walking trips were estimated for Alternative C. Source: Fehr & Peers, 2010 Note: Numbers may differ slightly from Trip Generation Spreadsheet due to rounding. As shown in the exhibit above, 21% of casino guests will also be staying in the hotel. To be conservative, the internalization rate between uses was always applied to the lower trip generating use. As an additional example, the retail/restaurant uses generate fewer trips than the casino, and therefore the 85% internalization was applied to the retail/restaurant trip generation number (e.g., 85% of 132 retail/restaurant trips equals 112). Please refer to the Trip Generation Spreadsheets in Appendix W of the Boulder Bay DEIS for the internal interaction between land uses for Alternatives A, B, D, and E. Different Internal Capture/Alternative Mode for Different Alternatives The internal capture percentages were determined based on the type and size of each land use included in the various Alternatives. The interaction between uses changes depending on the sizes and types of the interacting uses. For example, if you have two projects, one with 100 residential units and 5,000 square feet of retail, and one with 100 residential units and 50,000 square feet of retail, the project with 50,000 square feet of retail will have a higher potential for walking trips between the retail and restaurant uses than the project with 5,000 square feet of retail. The 50,000 square feet of retail use will have more product and therefore a greater opportunity of providing the needs of the customer. The 5,000 square foot retail use does not have the capacity to provide a wide variety of products and therefore customers will have to travel outside of the project area for their shopping needs. SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES PAGE 8- 21
- Page 1 and 2: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 3 and 4: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 5 and 6: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 7 and 8: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 9 and 10: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 11 and 12: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 13 and 14: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 15 and 16: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 17 and 18: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 19: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 23 and 24: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 25 and 26: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 27 and 28: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 29 and 30: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 31 and 32: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 33 and 34: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 35 and 36: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 37 and 38: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 39 and 40: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 41 and 42: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 43 and 44: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 45 and 46: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 47 and 48: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 49 and 50: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 51 and 52: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 53 and 54: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 55 and 56: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 57 and 58: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 59 and 60: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 61 and 62: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 63 and 64: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 65 and 66: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 67 and 68: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 69 and 70: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
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 />
projects. It is anticipated that ITE will incorporate this methodology into the next update of the<br />
Trip Generation Handbook.<br />
Internal Capture/Alternative Mode Reduction Methodology<br />
The internal capture and Alternative mode reductions for the Boulder Bay project were calculated<br />
using two sources: the Fehr & Peers mixed use development model (mixed-use equations) and<br />
surveys conducted by LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2007) at the existing <strong>Tahoe</strong><br />
Biltmore.<br />
The mixed-use equations calculate the number of Alternative mode trips and determine the split<br />
between internal (walking, bicycling, or taking transit between uses on the site) and external<br />
(walking, bicycling, or taking transit to a use off the site) Alternative mode trips. The overall<br />
Alternative mode reductions (internal and external) were applied to the “raw” trip generation of<br />
each land use included in the project Alternatives. LSC conducted surveys of the existing hotel<br />
and casino guests at the existing <strong>Tahoe</strong> Biltmore to determine Alternative mode and internal<br />
capture percentages for those existing uses. Local information was included in the trip generation<br />
analysis, where available.<br />
The total percentage of internal capture and Alternative mode trips provided in the “Trip<br />
Generation Spreadsheets” does not exactly match the “Overall Trip Reduction Percentage”<br />
provided in the Mixed Use Development Trip Generation Model results, provided in DEIS<br />
Appendix W, because the LSC survey data was also used in the analysis, to incorporate local data<br />
for the land use interactions available at the current site.<br />
As shown in the Trip Generation Tables in Appendix W of the DEIS, the following uses interact<br />
internally with each other for each Alternative:<br />
Alternative A<br />
Alternative B<br />
Alternative C<br />
• Casino – Hotel<br />
• Casino – Retail/Restaurant<br />
• Hotel – Retail/Restaurant<br />
• Casino – Retail/Restaurant<br />
• Casino – Residential<br />
• Residential – Retail/Restaurant<br />
• Casino – Hotel<br />
• Casino – Retail/Restaurant<br />
• Casino – Residential<br />
• Hotel – Retail/Restaurant<br />
• Residential – Retail/Restaurant<br />
Alternative D<br />
Alternative E<br />
• Casino – Hotel<br />
• Casino – Retail/Restaurant<br />
• Casino – Residential<br />
• Hotel – Retail/Restaurant<br />
• Residential – Retail/Restaurant<br />
• Casino – Hotel<br />
• Casino – Retail/Restaurant<br />
• Casino – Residential<br />
• Hotel – Retail/Restaurant<br />
• Residential – Retail/Restaurant<br />
The number of internally captured walking trips between the project land uses was calculated by<br />
balancing the trips to correspond with the capacity of the lower trip generating use. The exhibit<br />
PAGE 8- 20 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010
Change language