Attachment C – 11/13/2013 APC Public Comments Letters The following public comment letters were received at the November 13, 2103 Advisory Planning Commission Meeting. AGENDA ITEM NO. VII.A Lake Tahoe Visitors Authority November 1,2013 Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Governing Board P.O. Box 5310 Stateline, NV 89449 Dear TRPA Governing Board: At its October loth meeting, the Lake Tahoe Visitors Authority (LTVA) Board ofDirectors discussed the merits ofthe South Lake Tahoe Tourist Core Area Plan. The unanimous decision of the board was in support ofthe plan and this letter is submitted to the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Governing Board to encourage its approval. The Tourist Core Area Plan will help the LTVA to better promote Lake Tahoe's South Shore and increase visitation. The plan outlines strategies to help connect visitors to recreation opportunities, a tactic that would dramatically improve the overall visitor experience. Additionally, the plan encourages redevelopment and improved transportation options, both essential elements to turning Tahoe South into a world class destination. The LTVA Board ofDirectors commends the TRPA Governing Board for its recent approval ofthe Douglas County Area Plan. The approval ofthe Tourist Core Area Plan is the necessary next step to implement the Regional Area Plan. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, -'.- e-- ~ Patrick Ronan Jerry Bindel Tom Davis Lakeshore Lodge & Spa Aston Lakeland Village City ofSouth Lake Tahoe 1t71~~~ Tamara Hollingsworth Tahoe Beach & Ski Club DO ll gl a~u nty Heavenly Mountain Resort California Location: 3066 Lake Tahoe Boulevard South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150 530-544-5050 phone 530-541-7121 fax Nevada Location: 169 Highway 50 / P.O. Box 5878 Stateline, NV 89449-5878 775-588-5900 phone 775-588-1941 fax TahoeSouth.com Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Board of Governors P.O. Box 5310 Stateline, NV 89449 November 11, 2013 Re: Tourist Core Area Plan The Board of Directors for the Lake Tahoe South Shore Chamber of Commerce (TahoeChamber) supports the approval of the South Lake Tahoe Tourist Core Area Plan. It is the necessary subsequent step to see through the implementation of the Regional Plan. The TahoeChamber Board supported the concept of Area Plans during the TRPA’s regional plan update process in the belief that the Area Plan with its reduction of duplicative permitting processes, will assist in stimulating some reinvestment of the built environment. Without this reinvestment our community will continue to lag and decline in appearance, profitability and environmental stewardship. In other words – doing nothing is not an option. The tourist core area is one of concentrated development and therefore has the greatest potential for environmental and scenic improvements through the enhanced design standards. With smart planning as that envisioned under the plan, the tourist core area will better connect visitors to the world-class recreation opportunities that our community boasts. Enriching visitor experiences through improvements in both the built and natural environments is critical to the future prosperity of the region as whole. We encourage the TRPA Board of Governors to consider the overwhelming merits of the Tourist Core Area Plan which warrant its approval. Sincerely, Betty “B” Gorman, A.C.E. Tamara Hollingsworth President & CEO Chair of the Board Page 1 of 2 Tahoe Regional Planning Agency PO Box 5310 Stateline, NV 89449 Date: November 12, 2013 To: Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Advisory Planning Commission From: The League to Save Lake Tahoe Re: Findings for the Tourist Core Area Plan Dear Members of the Advisory Planning Commission, The League to Save Lake Tahoe (the League) appreciates the opportunities we have had throughout the planning stages of the Tourist Core Area Plan (TCAP). The League commends the work of both the City of South Lake Tahoe and Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) staff. The League supports the Area Plan and all of its policies, but has comments regarding the associated TRPA Findings. The following comments address the Chapter 13 Findings within Attachment I – Motions, Findings, & Ordinance of the TRPA packet for the Advisory Planning Commission Meeting November 13, 2013. TRPA is required to make findings for any amendment to the Regional Plan Update (RPU) to demonstrate how thresholds will be achieved and maintained. These are outlined in the Chapter 4 Findings for the TCAP and specify the policies NCR-2.1 and NCR-4.1.1 These two policies were vetted throughout the planning stages of the TCAP and discussed at length at the Regional Plan Implementation Committee (RPIC) on October 24, 2013. They were ultimately updated to include more specific language on how the TCAP will achieve Sensitive Environment Zone (SEZ) restoration and reduction in coverage.2 These specific policies should be called out in the Chapter 13 Findings for the TCAP. Chapter 13 of TRPA Code of Ordinances requires that Area Plans demonstrate how they are in conformance to the RPU. The RPU is based on incentives to encourage SEZ restoration and coverage reduction. It includes many goals and policies on how this will be achieved. Policies NCR-2.1 and NCR-4.1 in the TCAP help demonstrate how the TCAP is in conformance to the RPU and will be critical tools during the TCAP annual review. There are other SEZ and coverage policy cited in the Chapter 13 Findings. For consistency and adequacy all SEZ and coverage policy should be cited in Chapter 13 Findings. Policy NCR-2.1 should be included under the Chapter 13 Finding to “Protect and direct development away from the Stream Environment Zones and other sensitive areas, while seeking opportunities for environmental improvements within sensitive areas. Development may be allowed in Disturbed Stream Environmental Zones within Centers only if allowed development reduces coverage and enhances natural systems within the Stream Environment Zone.3” Policy NCR-4.1 should be included under the Chapter 13 Finding to “Identify an integrated community 1 APC 11/13/13 Packet, Attachment I, Chapter 4 Findings, 4.C (Soil Conservation), p 14 of Attachment I. 2 APC 11/13/13 Packet, Attachment F- TCAP Modifications, p. 2 of Attachment F. 3 APC 11/13/13 Packet, Attachment I, Chapter 13 Findings, 1.A.7. p. 21 of Attachment I. Page 2 of 2 strategy for coverage reduction and enhanced stormwater management.4” Again, the policies not only demonstrate how the TCAP is in conformance to the RPU, but will be used in identifying how the TCAP is achieving RPU goals during the annual review. Sincerely, Shannon Eckmeyer Policy Analyst League to Save Lake Tahoe 4 APC 11/13/13 Packet, Attachment I, Chapter 13 Findings 1.B.5. p.23 of Attachment I TRPA Advisory Planning Commission November 12, 2013 128 Market St. Stateline, NV 89449 Subject: Comments on City of South Lake Tahoe proposed Tourist Core Area Plan Dear Members of the Advisory Planning Commission and TRPA staff: The Friends of the West Shore (FOWS) and the Tahoe Area Sierra Club (TASC) appreciate the opportunity to provide additional comments on the proposed City of South Lake Tahoe (City) Tourist Core Area Plan (TCAP), and all related documents. As our collection of previous comments on the TCAP show, we have been extremely diligent providing comments, technical references, and recommendations to TRPA and City staff, the RPIC, TRPA APC, TRPA GB, SLT City Council, and SLT Planning Commission. Most comments and attachments have been included in GB packets. 1 The responses provided by staff in the “Attachment E, Response to Comments,” unfortunately still fail to address many of our concerns and questions, and with great disappointment, fail to respond to most of the technical information we provided from several of Tahoe’s most reputable scientific institutions (e.g. TERC, TSC, DRI) regarding matters which affect not only water quality, but public health and safety. In order to achieve and maintain TRPA’s thresholds, and to protect public health and property, we request the APC recommends TRPA staff to take the following actions, discussed in greater detail below, and recommends these same revisions be made in the relevant sections of the City’s TCAP. 2 Additional recommendations are included in the attached comments, including the incorporation of new nearshore information. Our recommendations for TRPA and the City’s TCAP include: 1) Update Chapter 35: Natural Hazard Standards to address current flood hazards 2) Revise Code to remove variances that will allow degradation of the natural scenic quality 3) Evaluate the impacts of the off-road mobile sources of ozone precursors and adopt measures to reduce emissions to obtain the public health ozone standard in the immediate future (ozone standards are not long term standards such as mid-lake clarity); The information available from the RPU/RTP EIR/S and EIS, and the TCAP’s environmental documentation is inadequate and as a result, TRPA’s threshold-related findings can not be made. Further, conforming to the RPU, which itself lacks adequate environmental review, does not ensure that public health and safety or environmental standards, will be achieved and maintained as required by the Compact. Please feel free to contact Jennifer Quashnick at [email protected] or Laurel Ames at [email protected] if you have any questions. Sincerely, Laurel Ames, Susan Gearhart, Jennifer Quashnick Conservation Co-Chair, President, Conservation Consultant Tahoe Area Sierra Club Friends of the West Shore 1 See 10/21/2013 Comments, included in Attachment D: Public comments. 11.12.13 FOWS&TASC Comments on CSLT TCAP for 11/13/13 APC 11/12/13 Attachments (links provided for easy reference and due to large file size): - 2012 TRPA BMP Handbook (available at: http://tahoebmp.org/BMPHandbook.aspx ) - 2NDNATURE, 2006, Tahoe Basin BMP Monitoring Evaluation Process: Synthesis of Existing Research prepared for USFS Tahoe Basin Management Unit.