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 • NOISE -3A: Time of Day Construction Restrictions and Noise Barriers; • NOISE -3B: Equipment Location Guidance; • NOISE -3C: Noise Compliant Coordination and Response; • NOISE -5A: Mechanical Equipment Noise Level Specification and Sound Control; • NOISE -5B: Loading Dock and Truck Circulation Design; and • AIR-2/TRANS-1: Traffic and Air Quality Mitigation Program. See Chapter 6 of the DEIS for detailed mitigation measures and Chapters 4.9 and 4- 10 for discussions of how mitigation measures reduce potential impacts from noise and to air quality to levels of less than significant. Potential traffic impacts during construction are analyzed under Impact TRANS-7 (page 4.8-58 of DEIS) and the level of impact is less than significant. The potential affect of the Project to viewsheds (e.g. Scenic Corridor) is addressed under Impact SR-1. Mitigation measures SR-1A: Modify Proposed Code Chapter 22.4.E Height Amendment and SR-1B: Redesign Building A are necessary to reduce impacts from Alternatives C and D to a level of less than significant. Alternatives A, B and E cannot be mitigated and impacts to scenic corridors remain significant and unavoidable. See items number 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 of the PMA for additional information regarding the project applicant commitments to SWC. Comment 196-b: Comment Summary - Requests traffic calming mitigation measures on SR 28 near Stillwater Cove: two solar controlled speed identification panels, middle turn channelization lane, repaving to attenuate road noise, removal of parallel parking. The traffic and noise analysis impacts do suggest installation of solar controlled speed identification panels, repaving to attenuate road noise, or removal of parallel parking. The Proposed Project (Alternative C) includes an extension of the existing center left-turn lane of SR 28 from Stateline Road to Wellness Way (north of the Stillwater Cove Driveway. See item number 1 of the PMA for additional information regarding the project applicant commitments to SWC. Comment 196-c: Comment Summary - Requests noise attenuation sound wall/barrier along SR 28. No significant noise impacts were identified along SR 28. Therefore, noise mitigation measures were not included. See item number 2 of the PMA for additional information regarding the project applicant commitments to SWC. Comment 196-d: Comment Summary - Requests park should be a public park but without large gatherings, concerts At this time no outdoor concerts or events are planned for the park area associated with the Project. See item number 3 of the PMA for additional information regarding the project applicant commitments to SWC. PAGE 8- 60 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 196-e: Comment Summary - Requests no construction staging on the Mariner property, and staging areas should have noise and light attenuation provisions, hours of operation, and limited activities to reduce noise, light impacts. This comment is noted. Specifics on staging areas have not been detailed. This comment can be considered in the construction noise control program. See item number 4 of the PMA for additional information regarding the project applicant commitments to SWC. Comment 196-f: Comment Summary - Requests the developer provide guarantees of sufficient funding to complete project and mitigation measures. Developer funding guarantees are not an EIS requirement. While this could be requested during the project approval process, it is not required documentation of an EIS and does not need to be included in the text of the document. This is a matter for TRPA to consider separately from the EIS. See item number 5 of the PMA for additional information regarding the project applicant commitments to SWC. Comment 196-g: Comment Summary - Requests full mitigation of noise and light impacts to Stillwater Cover be fully mitigated by setting back, reducing in height, and screening Building A; access road landscaping installation and maintenance. Where noise impacts have been determined, mitigation measures have been included. Mitigation measures were identified in the DEIS to increase setbacks or reduce height of Building A. Proposed landscaping to the park access roadway is shown in simulations provided in DEIS Chapter 4.5. See item number 6 of the PMA for additional information regarding the project applicant commitments to SWC. Comment 196-h: Comment Summary - Requests new landscaping at Crystal Bay Motel site that shown on p. 4.5-41. The removal of the existing Crystal Bay Motel is proposed as part of the Project. With the removal of the structure, the site will require restoration to ensure the protection of water quality. While there are no plans for redevelopment of the existing Crystal Bay Motel site in the current Project, the current proposal would not preclude future development on the former Motel parcel. However, if future development were proposed, the future Project would require a TRPA permit and associated environmental review. See item number 7 of the PMA for additional information regarding the project applicant commitments to SWC. Comment Letter 212 – Marlow, David, State of Nevada, Division of State Lands, 02/02/2010 Comment 212-a: Comment Summary - On p. 4.3-8, it is unclear what is meant by the statement that SR 28 runoff shows the poorest water quality in the project area, since in Table 4.3-3 primary roads do not show the highest loading. The Boulder Bay EMCs incorporate samples from the entire project area, including samples from monitoring sites reflecting runoff from SR 28. The table reports the EMC results from six storm events that were captured. The column for Primary SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES PAGE 8- 61
- 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 and 20: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 21 and 22: 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: 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
- Page 71 and 72: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 73 and 74: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 75 and 76: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 77 and 78: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 79 and 80: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 81 and 82: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 83 and 84: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 85 and 86: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 87 and 88: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 89 and 90: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 91 and 92: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 93 and 94: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 95 and 96: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 97 and 98: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 99 and 100: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 101 and 102: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 103 and 104: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 105 and 106: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 107 and 108: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
- Page 109 and 110: 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 />
Comment 196-e: Comment Summary - Requests no construction staging on the Mariner property, and<br />
staging areas should have noise and light attenuation provisions, hours of operation,<br />
and limited activities to reduce noise, light impacts.<br />
This comment is noted. Specifics on staging areas have not been detailed. This<br />
comment can be considered in the construction noise control program.<br />
See item number 4 of the PMA for additional information regarding the project<br />
applicant commitments to SWC.<br />
Comment 196-f: Comment Summary - Requests the developer provide guarantees of sufficient funding<br />
to complete project and mitigation measures.<br />
Developer funding guarantees are not an EIS requirement. While this could be<br />
requested during the project approval process, it is not required documentation of an<br />
EIS and does not need to be included in the text of the document. This is a matter for<br />
TRPA to consider separately from the EIS.<br />
See item number 5 of the PMA for additional information regarding the project<br />
applicant commitments to SWC.<br />
Comment 196-g: Comment Summary - Requests full mitigation of noise and light impacts to Stillwater<br />
Cover be fully mitigated by setting back, reducing in height, and screening Building<br />
A; access road landscaping installation and maintenance.<br />
Where noise impacts have been determined, mitigation measures have been included.<br />
Mitigation measures were identified in the DEIS to increase setbacks or reduce<br />
height of Building A. Proposed landscaping to the park access roadway is shown in<br />
simulations provided in DEIS Chapter 4.5.<br />
See item number 6 of the PMA for additional information regarding the project<br />
applicant commitments to SWC.<br />
Comment 196-h: Comment Summary - Requests new landscaping at Crystal Bay Motel site that shown<br />
on p. 4.5-41.<br />
The removal of the existing Crystal Bay Motel is proposed as part of the Project.<br />
With the removal of the structure, the site will require restoration to ensure the<br />
protection of water quality. While there are no plans for redevelopment of the<br />
existing Crystal Bay Motel site in the current Project, the current proposal would not<br />
preclude future development on the former Motel parcel. However, if future<br />
development were proposed, the future Project would require a TRPA permit and<br />
associated environmental review.<br />
See item number 7 of the PMA for additional information regarding the project<br />
applicant commitments to SWC.<br />
Comment Letter 212 – Marlow, David, State of Nevada, Division of State Lands,<br />
02/02/2010<br />
Comment 212-a: Comment Summary - On p. 4.3-8, it is unclear what is meant by the statement that SR<br />
28 runoff shows the poorest water quality in the project area, since in Table 4.3-3<br />
primary roads do not show the highest loading.<br />
The Boulder Bay EMCs incorporate samples from the entire project area, including<br />
samples from monitoring sites reflecting runoff from SR 28. The table reports the<br />
EMC results from six storm events that were captured. The column for Primary<br />
SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES PAGE 8- 61
Change language