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 scenic impact and visual simulations was consistent with and in compliance, procedurally and substantively with the TRPA Code of Ordinances. Comment 93-h: Comment Summary – SR-2: Alt. C. 2001 TRPA letter discusses concerns with scenic impacts of 3 SFR, so portions of 2 hotels and 24 units on Mariner site will be significant. As documented in DEIS Figures 2-4 (Alternative C site plan) and 2-11 (Alternative E site plan that includes the three single-family homes), the three single-family homes contemplated in the Tahoe Mariner Settlement Agreement are located in a different location than the structures proposed for Alternative C. The three single-family homes allowed for in the Tahoe Mariner Settlement Agreement would be located in an area with no natural tree screening and would be visible from Lake Tahoe. The proposed structures for Alternative C are located behind natural tree screening and are closer to the current Tahoe Biltmore. The visual simulations and scenic analysis have confirmed the Alternative C proposed structures are not visible from Lake Tahoe. Comment 93-i: Comment Summary - SR-3: Alt. C. Undergrounding utilities should not be applied as a benefit of the project. The project scale is not human-sized, with a 76 ft. structure and 10 buildings at 4x the sf from 45 to 75 feet high. Boulder Bay agreed to pay for the removal of above ground utilities in the project area at the time of application for the CEP. Their proposal to underground existing utilities is consistent with TRPA EIP project number 970. This EIP project is a direct benefit of the Project even though the work has already been completed with funding from Boulder Bay, LLC. Human scale design isn't related simply to the height of the proposed buildings, but the portion of the building design located at the ground level. Boulder Bay building design includes active uses on the ground floor that are consistent with human-scale design. Comment 93-j: Comment Summary - SR-C1: Alt. C. Significant new massing occurs and no massing study was performed, plus new height will be applicable to Crystal Bay Motel site. Please see response to comment 93-g. Comment 93-k: Comment Summary - REC-1: Alt. C. New population will result in the degradation of Speedboat beach. The 1800-2000 population will stress all beaches and project has no beach access. REC-1 recognizes that the Project has substantial ability to impact local beaches in the vicinity of the Project. It is unclear where the 1,800 to 2,000-person population increase numbers are derived from, as these are not the population numbers calculated and used in the DEIS (see Chapter 4.11). It is important to note that the management strategy for the NSCP is redirection. Per TRPA Code of Ordinances, Chapter 13, "the redirection of development designation is designed primarily to improve environmental quality and community character by changing the direction of development or density through relocation of facilities and rehabilitation or restoration of existing structures and uses." This means that commodities may be used in better locations than they came from to promote the overall health of the basin. While the goal of redirection is not to overburden existing recreational facilities, visitor numbers may increase on nearby public lands (e.g., area beaches) from redevelopment projects. Mitigation REC-1 states that shuttle service will not be provided to Speedboat Beach by Boulder Bay for guests. PAGE 8- 32 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 171-d for revisions to Mitigation Measure REC-1 that will further improve Boulder Bay coordination with area recreational providers. Comment 93-l: Comment Summary - REC-2: Alt. C. Kings Beach and Speedboat beach impacted by new population. IVGID beaches may be impacted if current beach access litigation settles in favor of Crystal Bay residents. Impacts to area beaches are analyzed in REC-1. IVGID beaches are only accessible to residents of Incline Village and guests of those residents. If access litigation settles in favor of Crystal Bay residents, access would still be limited to residents and not Crystal Bay or Incline Village visitors. Only people residing at the Boulder Bay resort (residents of affordable housing units, single-family residences, or possibly whole ownership units, as varies by Alternative) would be able to access IVGID beaches. These population numbers are not significant as discussed in the DEIS (Chapter 4.11). Comment 93-m: Comment Summary - CUL-1: Alt. C removes existing architecture and sign losing "Old Tahoe" identity. Please see response to comment 322-ad. Comment 93-n: Comment Summary - TRANS-1 and TRANS-2: Alt. C. 4x existing buildout increases traffic. Existing =1835 daily trips and Alt. C = 7963. See Master Response 2 related to baseline transportation conditions and a comparison with Alternative C. Comment 93-o: Comment Summary - TRANS-4: Alt. C will cause further congestion on existing transportation system and pedestrian facilities. See Master Response 2 related to baseline transportation conditions and a comparison with Alternative C., Comment 93-p: Comment Summary - TRANS-7: Alt. C - 130,000+ cf of material will need to be removed from site. An onsite concrete batch plant may need to be installed. The project description states that excavated material will be removed from the project site and that imported material will come from offsite locations. There is no plan to include a concrete batch plant onsite during construction. Comment 93-q: Comment Summary - TRANS-8: Alt. C new street circulation inconsistent with and is revision to scheme approved by Washoe County Commissioners in 2009. Concern over evacuation routes for upper Crystal Bay. Residents and pedestrians are forced into conflict with existing roadways, cars, underground garages. The North Lake Tahoe Fire Protection Department has submitted a letter to Washoe County based on their review of the Proposed Project stating that: 1. The proposed roadway alignments, widths and grades shown for both public and private drives meets the Fire District’s requirements for access and emergency response for the future Boulder Bay project site. 2. Parking will not be allowed by the District’s adopted Fire Code along either side of the 20-ft wide access driveway connecting Wassou Rd. and State Route 28. 3. The abandonment and proposed roadway realignment improves emergency vehicle access to the neighborhood north of the proposed Boulder Bay site. SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES PAGE 8- 33
Page 1 and 2: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
Page 31: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
Page 83 and 84:
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
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:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187:
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?