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 Conformance to Washoe County seismic, building and safety codes is required for all projects in Washoe County to avoid and minimize known seismic (also termed geologic) hazards related to earthquakes, landslides, and avalanches. Washoe County reserves the right to require additional requirements for maintenance of public safety. Comment 322-ab: Comment Summary - Impact BIO-6 is rated LTS for Alt C, but this is significant with 61% tree removal. Should be SU. Impact BIO-6B (Alternative C) is less than significant because the trees to be removed are allowed by TRPA Codes (24" or less) or findings have been made to allow for their removal. The statement that the removal of trees is inconsistent with the Regional Plan is incorrect as the Regional Plan allows for tree removal within Community Plans pursuant to the required findings, and limits their removal within forested non Community Plan areas. Comment 322-ac: Comment Summary - Impact SR-1 should not say that site improvements are not feasible for Alts A and B. Since utility undergrounding already occurred it can't be applied to the project. Please see response to comment number 93-i. It is correct that the improvements associated with undergrounding of utilities are also a benefit of Alternatives A and B since the work has already been completed. However, other improvements associated with the removal of the existing Biltmore facility would not occur under Alternatives A and B. Comment 322-ad: Comment Summary - Impact SR-1: NSCP calls for redevelopment not reconstruction and for "Old Tahoe" architecture, which is what the existing Tahoe Biltmore reflects. Alt A is No Impact and C is SU. The NSCP vision lists two primary community design components; architecture should reflect that of old Tahoe with a feeling of alpine elegance and the built and natural environments should complement one another. The vision states that structures should be made of wood, stone, timber and glass, a reflection of the original buildings at Tahoe. The Plan doesn't specify that the existing buildings must be preserved, but that the elements of "old Tahoe" architecture included in the original buildings should be used (e.g., wood siding, stone work, pitched roofs, dormers, etc.). Building design for Alternative C includes these design elements. Comment 322-ae: Comment Summary - Impact SR-2 Alt C should be SU. It relies on Mitigation SR-1b to reduce the height of Building A, but does not quantify the reduction. Mitigation measures SR-1a and SR-1b require that Building A be limited to no more than 3 stores, or setback further from SR 28 to reduce visibility from SR 28. The measures also require revised simulations for TRPA approval prior to final project permitting. These requirements will reduce the potential impact to a less than significant level. Comment 322-af: Comment Summary - Impact SR-2 results in massing along SR 28 and conflicts with SQIP, which recommends maintaining natural appearing landscape and commercial areas that retain a small-scale character. The only natural appearing landscape within the Boulder Bay project area is located north of the former Tahoe Mariner site. This area will be maintained as open space under all Alternatives. The proposed commercial development along SR 28 includes ground floor retail with enhanced pedestrian connection consistent with small-scale commercial character goals. PAGE 8- 88 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 322-ag: Comment Summary - SR-2: Scenic Improvements from the Crystal Bay Motel removal can only be considered temporary since future redevelopment is not restricted under Alt. C New development of the existing Crystal Bay Motel site will depend on whether project area land coverage will be available as it is unclear whether it will be banked or permanently retired as a part of the project approval process. The outcome of parcel consolidation or project area deed restriction may also impact future development possibility at the existing Crystal Bay Motel site. However, any future development of the Crystal Bay Motel site will require a TRPA permit and associated environmental review. Comment 322-ah: Comment Summary - SR-3 uses improper justifications and analysis and it is not clear how setbacks were measured for Alternative C. Please see responses to comments 322-ac to 322-ag regarding concerns cited for the scenic analysis. Setbacks are measured from the SR 28 edge of pavement to the base of the proposed buildings. Comment 322-ai: Comment Summary - REC-1 uses ineffective mitigation for Alt. C. The analysis of access to Lookout Point does not include off-street parking impacts. Alt C is SU not LTS. Please see response to comment 286-aq. Comment 322-aj: Comment Summary - CUL-1: The Biltmore is a potentially eligible National Register property. The NV State Historical Preservation Office determined the Biltmore building eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places at the local and state levels of significance. Alt C is SU. This also applies to CUL-C1. As documented in the DEIS, the Tahoe Biltmore Hotel and Casino structure has been determined to be a potentially eligible property on the National Register of Historic Places by the NV SHPO and TRPA. TRPA Code Chapter 29 does not prohibit the demolition of resources determined to be potentially eligible for the Register, but requires protection or documentation to properly record the contributing elements of the identified resource. Code Subsection 29.2.D requires the implementation of an approved resource protection plan prior to demolition of identified resources. A draft plan (Mitigation Measure CUL-1A) has been prepared by the Historic Resources consultant and reviewed by TRPA staff for Nevada SHPO approval. If the plan is not approved as submitted, Boulder Bay will be required to work with the Nevada SHPO and TRPA staff to draft revisions acceptable to the Nevada SHPO office. Comment 322-ak: Comment Summary - TRANS-1 baseline numbers are not realistic. There is a VMT increase for Alt. C. The DEIS indicates that Alternative C will generate less traffic and VMT than Alternative A, which was used as the baseline for traffic comparisons. Master Response 2 provides information related to an alternative existing baseline analysis. Comment 322-al: Comment Summary - TRANS-7 is unrealistic as heavy truck traffic in the summer months will cause a SU impact. As discussed in the DEIS, the construction period of the Project will generate 200 truck trips per day, which is less than the number of daily trips generated by the Alternatives. To further explore effects of truck traffic, traffic engineers estimate passenger car equivalents. A typical passenger car equivalent factor is 2.5, which SEPTEMBER 8 , 2010 HAUGE BRUECK ASSOCIATES PAGE 8- 89
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:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
Page 87: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIS B
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?