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 See Impact HYDRO-1 for the analysis of potential impacts to surface water quality from project construction and operations. See Appendix AB for supplemental analysis for total sediment, including fine sediments and nutrient load reduction calculations. Comment 244-c: Comment Summary - Water quality in relationship to water/sediment/pesticide run off. As stated in the project description in Chapter 2 on page 2-26, the Project will use native and TRPA-approved non-native shrubs and trees within the project area because these plants are most adapted to local conditions and require less irrigation and fertilizer. TRPA requires revegetation and landscaping to protect soils and lend stability to slopes. The high traffic areas will be groomed turf areas that are designed and located to allow for controlled irrigation and fertilization. Irrigation will be installed and managed to minimize the potential for runoff, but if runoff occurs it will be drain to stormwater treatment systems as part of the project area design. Fertilizer will be managed carefully and used in dry, slow release form when applications are necessary and applied as outlined in the TRPA Fertilizer Management Plan that is a required component of the TRPA Landscaping Plan (DEIS Appendix O). Pesticide use is not proposed. Comment 244-d: Comment Summary - Does the Biltmore fall under NV or CA regulation? The Project is located within Nevada and falls under Nevada regulation as well as TRPA regulation for the <strong>Tahoe</strong> Basin region that applies to both California and Nevada. Comment Letter 255 – Boyette, Susan, 02/03/2010 Comment 255-a: Comment Summary - Adding more units will not help traffic. Please see response to comment 122-b. Comment Letter 258 – Carrera, Ron, 02/03/2010 Comment 258-a: Comment Summary - Will there be ongoing monitoring of water runoff to the lake? As discussed in SP-9 in Chapter 6, there will be post-construction monitoring and reporting of stormwater quality. This monitoring will continue until it can be determined that runoff from permanent stormwater treatment facilities is in compliance with TRPA discharge standards. Comment 258-b: Comment Summary - Will management be held accountable for any pollution as long as the hotel is still in operation? Boulder Bay is held accountable for pollutants and is responsible for the quality of stormwater generated at the site. Comment Letter 259 – Casey, Liza, 02/03/2010 Comment 259-a: Comment Summary - Project should be downsized. This is not a comment on the content or adequacy of the DEIS. This information is passed on to the Project proponent and decision maker(s) for consideration. No further response to this comment in relation to the DEIS is warranted. PAGE 8- 64 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 264 – Elias, Bonnie, 02/03/2010 Comment 264-a: Comment Summary - An impact study needs to be done. How will it effect the natural setting of the area and the traffic in Kings Beach as well as Incline? The impacts of the Boulder Bay Project have been analyzed in the DEIS. Potential effects to the natural setting are described in Chapters 4.2 - Geology, 4.3 - Hydrology and Water Quality, 4.4 - Biological Resources, and 4.5 - Scenic Resources. Potential effects to traffic in Kings Beach and Incline are described in Chapter 4.7 - Transportation. Comment Letter 269 – Giorgianni, John, 02/03/2010 Comment 269-a: Comment Summary - North shore does not have the roadways to handle a large inflow of traffic. The traffic impact from the Boulder Bay Project is modeled along with traffic of other North Shore projects and communities in the cumulative traffic analysis, which is presented on pages 4.8-65 through 4.8-77. The cumulative impacts levels were determined to be less than significant after mitigation through measure TRANS-C1: Implement Intersection Improvements. Mitigation measure TRANS-C1 is detailed in Chapter 6 of the DEIS. Comment 269-b: Comment Summary - Project is too large. This is not a comment on the content or adequacy of the DEIS. This information is passed on to the Project proponent and decision maker(s) for consideration. No further response to this comment in relation to the DEIS is warranted. Comment Letter 274 – Hathaway, Wayne, 02/03/2010 Comment 274-a: Comment Summary - Wants guarantees from developer. This is not a comment on the content or adequacy of the DEIS. This information has been passed on to the Project proponent and decision maker(s) for consideration. The developer will secure construction financing prior to construction. Building inspections ensure that the structures are built according to the stamped plans. TRPA, as the monitoring agency, and other agencies with jurisdiction over the particular resource, ensure that mitigation and monitoring program is complete. No further response to this comment in relation to the DEIS is warranted. Comment Letter 284 – Miller, Joyce, 02/03/2010 Comment 284-a: Comment Summary - Opposes project as too big and not economically viable, and due to impacts to traffic and pollution; requests rebuilding with same number of existing units. Please refer to Chapters 4.8 and 4.9 regarding traffic and air quality. The DEIS analyzed two Alternatives (A and B) that would maintain the existing number of tourist units. This is not a comment on the content or adequacy of the DEIS. This information is passed on to the Project proponent and decision maker(s) for consideration. No further response to this comment in relation to the DEIS is warranted. SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES PAGE 8- 65
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: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
Page 63: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
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?