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 Comment 108-g: Comment Summary - Alts. C and D state undergrounding of utilities as a benefit. Please see response to comment 93-i. Comment Letter 109 – Breternitz, John, 12/17/2009 Comment109-a: Comment Summary - Why was Boulder Bay allowed to forego its BMPs? This question was raised during the DEIS hearings and was responded to by Joanne Marchetta as follows: When the project proponent bought the property, TRPA decided to work with Boulder Bay, LLC to improve upon the future project area rather than waste resources by requiring a retrofit that was anticipated to be removed a few years later. TRPA and Boulder Bay, LLC came to the agreement: to maintain the existing BMPs and stormwater system; install site-specific temporary BMPs; design the permanent BMPs to the proposed project area; and work to create environmental gain and synergy in the NSCP area by integrating project area stormwater treatment systems with existing and proposed upslope and downslope projects to create regional stormwater management systems. The temporary BMPs constructed by the project proponent include, full drain inlet cleanouts of the existing stormwater BMPs, landscaping and mulching of exposed dirt areas on site and installation of F-rails for slope stabilization at the back of the Biltmore parking lot. Please see supplemental information for DEIS Appendix P in Appendix AB for detailed plan sets. Comment Letter 110 – Delaney, Tim, 12/17/2009 Comment 110-a: Comment Summary - Supports project if there is a guarantee or insurance policy to complete project if developer goes bankrupt, a specific number of TAUs designated to the Crystal Bay/Incline Village area, and no rule changes for the East Shore/Emerald Bay. The commenter is concerned the Project will go bankrupt, leaving an unfinished project area, that TRPA Code amendments will affect other areas of the lake, and that the Project would develop more TAUs than are allowed in Crystal Bay. Boulder Bay intends to secure financing for the Project before beginning construction. TRPA does not have a mechanism to require the developer to arrange for financing of the entire approved Project, but does require the payment of a sizable security for the permit. In regard to Code amendments affecting other areas of the lake, the height amendment includes language to limit its applicability to the NSCP area only. Please see response to comment number 93-b. It should also be noted that the existing height of Tahoe Biltmore structures is 76 feet and maximum height allowed under the proposed amendment would be less than this height, but over a larger area of the Project. Future height amendment proposals for other areas around the lake are subject to TRPA review and approval. Because this Project does not affect the East Shore or Emerald Bay as alluded in the comment letter, a federal "written agreement" regarding these two areas is unrelated to this Project and outside the scope of this EIS. Finally, the number of TAUs designated for the project area is outlined in the NSCP. The limit expressed in the NSCP is only related to bonus units from the NSCP allocation pool. The ability to transfer in other special project bonus units or existing units is not subject to the NSCP limit. The Project does not exceed TAU limits or allocations per TRPA policies. PAGE 8- 46 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 Comment Letter 112 – Nichols, Ann, North Tahoe Preservation Alliance, 12/17/2009 Comment 112-a: Comment Summary - The energy use assumptions underlying the GHG analysis are considered inadequate and inaccurate, and requests an objective carbon footprint analysis. A Carbon Footprint analysis is not required as part of a TRPA EIS per the Code of Ordinances and Rules of Procedure. The analysis completed by ARUP North America, Ltd was provided by the applicant as additional information to quantify the potential benefits of LEED green building practices. The study was completed by licensed professional engineers. The design criteria were developed by comparing utility data from existing or demolished facilities (owned by Boulder Bay) with energy simulation results from the new Boulder Bay development. The new site was modeled using eQuestTM, a graphical interface used to link with the Department of Energy (DOE) 2.2 whole building simulation calculation engine. eQuestTM is accepted by both LEED and California Title-24 as acceptable software for predicting relative energy performance. eQuestTM uses hourly weather information, hourly load and control schedules, and robust HVAC system modules to approximate energy use at every hour of the year. Since the model for Boulder Bay consists of multiple buildings, only residential, casino, and fitness end uses were modeled explicitly, to reduce the size and duration of the simulation. Non-typical and non-building energy uses were estimated with spreadsheets and added to the eQuestTM results to generate overall anticipated site energy for comparison with the existing buildings. The primary source related to the green house gas analysis is mobile sources (autos) and the primary factor is vehicle miles of travel. The DEIS indicates that Alternative C will generate less traffic/VMT than Alternative A, which was used as the baseline for traffic comparisons. An alternative baseline condition is evaluated as described in Master Response 2. Alternative C generates less VMT than the alternative baseline existing condition. Comment Letter 117 – Shankle, Samantha, 12/29/2009 Comment 117-a: Comment Summary - Disregard for their property - due to height amendment they will lose their view according to Viewpoint 16 Figure 4.5-15. Figure 4.5-15 depicts potential building massing under Alternative D as viewed from Lakeview Road. The impact to viewpoints from Lake Tahoe and to Lake Tahoe from the adjacent public roadways has been identified as a significant impact for Alternative D as discussed in Impact SR-2. Under Alternative C, building rooftops are lower and would not block existing views of Lake Tahoe from public roadway viewpoints (see Figure 4.5-14). Comment 117-b: Comment Summary - Noise from construction will create an impact with construction being 6 days a week from 6 am to 6 pm. Please see response to comment 93-w. Comment 117-c: Comment Summary - Traffic studies need to include increased Traffic on Lakeview and Wassou, and parking in the surrounding neighborhoods. The traffic analysis evaluates trip distribution characteristics for each project Alternative based on existing traffic volumes, the location of complementary land uses such as where a guest might travel from or where off-site amenities are located, and the location of parking and driveways to the site. Vehicle traffic on Wassou SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES PAGE 8- 47
Page 1 and 2: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
Page 45: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
Page 97 and 98:
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
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

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

Delete template?

Save as template?