HomeMy Public PortalAboutPublic Comment #14 (Tahoe Area Sierra Club)
April 8, 2013
Jenna Endres
Associate Planner
Community Development
Truckee Town Hall
10183 Truckee Airport Road
Truckee CA 96161
RE: Comments on Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for
the Tahoe Donner Association Marina Facility Expansion Project [Application
12-020/AMND-DP-UP
Dear Ms. Endres:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration and the Tahoe Donner Association proposal for Marina Facility
Improvements at 12915 Donner Pass Road, Nevada County Parcels 18-340-06, -07
and -08. This development project would include logging about half the mature
trees at the site and also include extensive grading, trenching, and pathway
construction within the root zones of remaining trees. On behalf of our members,
including those who live in the Tahoe Donner Association residential community
and the Town of Truckee, we submit the attached report and comments for your
consideration. The report raises serious questions about the accuracy of the project
proponent’s determination regarding the number of trees that are diseased and the
survival of the remaining trees given the extensive compaction, excavation and
trenching at the site.
As indicated in our September 14, 2012, comments on virtually the same proposal
and incorporated here by reference, a full environmental impact review is needed to
disclose, identify, and mitigate the significant impacts of the project. The initial
study and mitigated negative declaration, while an improvement, still is insufficient
to satisfy California state law and local zoning code. Further, the proposed
mitigation measures and future uses do not protect the Truckee Community from
the cumulative impacts of this proposed project.
April 8, 2013 2
At the heart of evaluation of any project such as this is an accurate characterization
of the baseline and existing conditions. The MND assumes, apparently without data,
that existing stormwater control measures are operating and in place and that
additional erosion and contaminants from new activities will be confined to the site.
Observation of current conditions indicates pavement runoff is currently being
discharged to adjacent State Park Lands and to Donner Lake. There are no data
provided to ensure that the additional activities will not further exacerbate this
significant impact and that existing stormwater runoff controls are sufficient to
handle the additional uses proposed by the project to ensure polluted runoff from
the site is controlled and treated on-site.
It appears the ultimate goal of the project is to expand use at the site to include a
wedding pavilion and an event center, although the use is not expressly stated.1 All
the functions that would accompany an event center, such as formal dining with
glass wind shields, extensive lighting, and expanded terraces, are part of the existing
proposal. The public remains in the dark about this proposed expansion.
What is the baseline of existing uses at the site? Without an accurate baseline, the
public and decision makers cannot make an informed decision as to the range of
alternatives and impacts proposed by the “new project.” As noted in the MND the
existing Conditional Use Plan for the facility was adopted sometime around 1998 for
a project which, at that time, was zoned Single Family Residential (R1). Marina
recreational facilities needed a conditional use permit.2 Under a CEQA exemption
in 1998, the State Land Commission issued TDA a lease that did not include
swimming, and only boat launching was approved.3 In 2010, the SLC lease was
amended to include swimming, but the state lease prohibits commercial use and
requires public access from the high water line both over and upon State Lands and
any adjoining State Lands, such as the adjoining State Park land.4 (See Figure 1.)
The MDN @ 7 shows that, under existing conditions, rental boats [in yellow] limit
such required public access. The impacts of addressing this required public access
and new accessibility rules have not been disclosed. Without such information it is
impossible to determine if the impacts of the proposed access elements of the
project will not be significant. This is especially important given that one of the
stated project purposes is improved access. State law needs to be enforced and
public trust values should not be degraded.
1 http://www.tahoedonner.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Exhibit-A-Beach-Club-
Marina-Master-Plan.pdf
2 MND @7
3 On January 22, 1998 the SLC approved another dock and altered the existing boat ramp. The Site
Map approved with the project indicates the path to be “meandered to avoid native trees.”
4 http://archives.slc.ca.gov/Meeting_Summaries/2010_Documents/12-10-10/Voting_Record.pdf
April 8, 2013 3
Figure 1- Rental boats [in yellow] limit required public access.
Approximately 20 mature Jeffery Pines will be removed and about 20 native species
planted. Some of the slopes proposed for excavation are greater than 30%. The
concrete wall installations, trenching, and excavation are just beyond the high water
mark where the site joins Donner Lake, which is a major source of drinking water,
recreation and other beneficial uses.
We are concerned that the excavation, trenching, and tree removal will cause water
quality, noise, and light-pollution impacts, and potentially add to cumulative air
quality impacts. Attached is an independent report by a certified arborist that
documents the inaccuracy of Tahoe Donner Association’s claim that a number of the
trees slated for removal are diseased and therefore must be removed. The report
also calls into question the survival of the remaining native pine forest given the
extensive trenching, grading and excavation proposed at the site. These impacts to
the scenic resources and noncompliance with local ordinances designed to protect
native trees and scenic values have been ignored or underestimated by the project
applicant and the MND.
The proposed best management practices are intended to protect the drinking
water and beneficial uses of Donner Lake and to ensure compliance with the
Lahontan Water Quality Control Basin Plan. No data or documentation is provided,
however, to demonstrate that even existing runoff at the site is contained and does
not pollute the lake or adjacent state park lands, much less the new proposed
expansion. Collection systems seem to be in disrepair or removed, allowing sheet
flow onto State Park lands and Donner Lake from the parking area, which covers
over half the site. The removal of the native vegetation is inconsistent with the
aesthetic qualities of the area and design guidelines for such an important natural
area. The removal of so many mature native trees will have noise and air impacts
that have not been accurately identified or provided. Furthermore, the proposed
mitigation measures largely rely on existing stormwater runoff controls and, thus,
do not control stormwater runoff, which is allowed to sheet-flow onto adjacent State
Park land and into Donner Lake. Thus, the project is likely to have ongoing and
April 8, 2013 4
mounting water-quality impacts. No monitoring is provided to ensure impacts are
not significant.
Clean Water Act permits, which are required for the discharge of the rock and fill
materials to Donner Lake contained in the amended State Lands Commission lease
adopted December 2010 (with a CEQA exemption), could not be located.
Furthermore, no Army Corps of Engineer 404 permit, Lahontan Water Quality
Control Board 401 permit, or a Fish and Game 1601 permit for the alteration of
Donner Lake could be located. (See Figure 2.) The impacts of this continuing
discharge, expanded swimming uses, and recent advertizing for wedding events5 at
the Marina have not been disclosed nor the impacts analyzed. Since the last
conditional use issued around 1998, the 4 month summer use of the facility has
approximately doubled6 to 39,407 in 2011.7 The impacts from even greater use
under these “new” incremental project changes, especially with regard to parking,
congestion, air pollution, and community services, have not been analyzed or
disclosed. We are skeptical that the proposed project will not result in even more
use of a site that is already approaching or exceeding capacity.
Finally we remain concerned that these changes are being presented to the Town of
Truckee in such as way as to avoid compliance with county, town and state laws that
are designed to protect the environment and these scenic values.
Figure 2. Rock and riprap added to Donner Lake bed & shoreline—No Fish and
Game or Army Corps required permits found.
5 http://www.tahoedonner.com/weddings/rates/
6 Truckee River Operating Agreement Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact
Report http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/documentShow.cfm?Doc_ID=3015 “Tahoe-Donner
Homeowners’ Association, east end of lake (1988-93): annual summer usage varied from 16,680 to
26,456 people.”
7http://www.tahoedonner.com/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2012/05/TDNews_2011AnnualRep
ort.pdf p. 34.
April 8, 2013 5
There are less environmentally damaging alternatives that need to be weighed and
considered before approving a marina expansion project. This project will have
significant impacts on the adjacent State Park uses including wildlife, recreation,
fishing, raptor use of these mature pines for foraging and winter habitat for other
wildlife. The continued congestion and traffic changes to an iconic historical trail—
Donner Pass Road—and its residents have not been analyzed or disclosed. Perhaps
this “hidden” event center that has the potential to shroud the area in nighttime
light and amplified music will carry on the ironic tradition of this historical site’s
history. Charles Graydon, a Nevada County historian, points to an irony in the
course of events that illustrates how we remember history, and the people who
make it.
"It is a tribute to the trail judgment of Elisha Stephens and his party that the
Central Pacific Railroad, the Liberty Highway, U.S. Highway 40, and finally
Interstate 80 all cross the Sierra close to the route they all pioneered. It is ironic
that the name Stephens soon went down into oblivion, while the pass that he
opened is known only as Donner Pass, named after a party that never made it."8
Hopefully the Tahoe Donner Association project will join the ranks of those who
never made it, because the Planning Commission will do the right thing and deny
this unnecessary and damaging project. We urge the Planning Commission send a
message that zoning rules have teeth and are meant to be followed. The TDA has
operated for years outside of local zoning laws, paid penalties due to trespass on
state lands and skated by with CEQA exemptions and lax enforcement. There has
been little or no monitoring of existing water quality protection measures at this site
and limited mitigation measures. The MND identifies potentially significant
environmental impacts and yet, there is no evidence that TDA has agreed to these
revisions. For example it is against local zoning rules to excavate in native soils in
excess of 20% slopes. Some areas of the project—specifically the proposed beach
rockery walls are still included in the project and yet proposed to be excluded as
mitigation. The impacts have not been analyzed nor have the proposed changes
been agreed to by the applicant. [See Section 21064.5 of CEQA.] It is true the
impacts from this specific excavation and tree removal on native slopes would be
avoided by removing it from the project, but there is no evidence the applicant has
agreed to these revisions. The walls are included in the site plans and proposal.
The other areas of excavation and extensive tree removal to create an expanded
“picnic terrace and lawn area” have not been mitigated to insignificance. As the
attached certified arborist report documents the proposed project’s extensive
excavation, trenching, lighting, soils compaction, tree removal, demolition and
expansion of the terrace area on slopes exceeding 20% will have potentially
significant effects.9 The replacement of mature native trees with native trees is an
improvement, but hardly sufficient to reduce these impacts to insignificance. Peer
review of the proposed lighting to ensure zoning requirements are followed is also
8 http://www.gorp.com/parks-guide/yuba-donner-scenic-byway-outdoor-pp2-guide-
cid402587.html
9 See Section 15071 CEQA Guidelines
April 8, 2013 6
an improvement. The proposed native tree preservation plan and logging plan
needs to be peer reviewed. None of these proposed measures, however, mitigates
the impacts by all this activity to insignificance.
Finally, there is little data or analysis provided to assume the successive CEQA
exemptions over a 20-year time period for all the projects and changes at this site of
the same type over two decades are not significant. As mentioned earlier, the
impacts of this expanded use and damage to habitat next to a State Park and the
management of the interstate drinking waters of Donner Lake along with
cumulative traffic and congestion warrant project level analysis and a cumulative
impact analysis.
Given the sensitivity of the area, its proximity to Donner Lake State Memorial Park
and Donner Lake, we request a complete environmental report be completed to
analyze the potential impacts from the project—including the light pollution, native
tree removal, impacts to winter habitat, excavation, trenching, installation of pavers
and expanded formal deck dining areas, which would likely have both immediate
and long term cumulative impacts upon the surrounding and adjacent areas of
significant statewide value.
Respectfully submitted,
Bob Anderson, Chair
Tahoe Area Sierra Club