Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSS - Attachments CITY OF ASHLAND Additional Background: ROD Decision and modifications to the existing ski area (see also attached map): · 11 new runs plus 5 extensions of those runs · plus widening of existing runs · 2 new chair lifts and 2 new surface lifts · 5 new facilities (buildings) · 220 new parking spaces and parking area expansion · 0.85 miles of new/improved unpaved roads (this primarily includes the summer work road and 200+ feet of new road for the new tubing facility) · power, potable water, wastewater, night lighting, miscellaneous infrastructure · new south ridge tubing facility · revised ski area boundary (does not change the SUP but does reduce conflicts/interaction of Nordic and downhill skiers relative to Alternative 2 on the southwest side ofMt. Ashland, and should potentially reduce the search and rescue operations) · multiple new watershed restoration projects · overall increase of 79 acres; 71 acres for traditional cleared runs, 4 acres for lift corridors and. staging areas, and 4 acres for the Tubing fc;l.c.i~ity. Significant ][ssues The FS Analyses identified seven significant issues (out of 45 that were addressed). Those that potentially irnpact the watershed are described in lTIOre detail: 1. Effe(~ts on Soil and Site Productivity (includes sediment loading, erosion, construction, landslide). This section was completely rewritten as a result of comments from the public and the need to better evaluate existing soils conditions. The FS technical staff used the WEPP - Water Erosion Prediction Project model to fully evaluate site-specific conditions. This model was then run on each of the four sub-watershed bas~ns. Worst case condition shows a first year sediment delivery increase of 5.3 cubic yards of material - even if this is off by 50%, the increase due to the ski area expansion would be less than 8 cubic yards of material, which is less than a truck load. This worst case loading decreases to 1.2 cu yds of additional sediment delivery the second year and 0.62 cu yds the following year. The effect of soil compaction has been minimized with the use of the lightvveight excavator. The excavator used to place logs (for reduced soil erosion) on ski runs 'will be the primary source of compaction, however as this is not a conventional excavator, the effects will be minimized. I..Jogs and slash are proposed to be left in place as soil cover and will reduce soil erosion. Overall, there are 79 acres of new disturbance, 13 acres are expected to have initial detrimental effects. Background sediment conditions add an additional 10.3 cu yds of material. 8 ~~, CC SS Mt Ashland FEIS 60CT04 CITY OF ASHL}\ND 2. Effects on Hydrologic Function (includes wetlands, stream crossings, flow rates, etc). In this section, the primary concern is water quality and wetlands impacts. vVater quality could be impacted with additional creek crossings (7 new crossings for ski runs - including one new bridge and one set of plastic arch culverts over wetlands areas), but the analysis and construction measures have significantly reduced the potential impacts. Moving the crossing to the Alternative 6 site has reduced the wetlands affects. Total impact to wetlands is 0.54 acres. The models show no measurable increase in flow due the ski area expansion (increases 1.4% in the east fork of Ashland Creek). This will be measured through the monitoring program. 3. Effects on Water Quality (pH, temperature, bacteria, turbidity, petroleum effects). The mitigation measures and best management practices (BMPs) during construction will have a great impact on the success of the anticipated minimal effects on water quality. The impacts on individual components (pH, temperature, bacteria, turbidity, petroleum effects) are being addressed though the mitigation measures and will be part of the monitoring plan. The cumulative effects analysis (using just the Equivalent Roaded Area methodology - see details in FEIS Volume 3, Appendix C) shows a 5% increase in overall risk percentage, but has an overall low risk ratio of 0.268 and is well below the caution or "yellow flag" levels of 1.0 (p. IV -95). The risk level further increases with the potential for the Ashland Forest Resiliency proj ect that is being proposed, but the ratio is 0.502, still well below the 1.0 threshold. 4. Effects to Englemann Spruce has been reduced with the changes in location of runs 14 and 12. The resulting proposal has 1 acre (37 trees) to be removed, which is 5.5 % of this particular stand instead of 10% previously discussed. The two largest spruce trees would remain uncut, as well as thousands of spruce trees in the east fork drainage area that would remain uncut. 5. Effects to Mt Ashland Lupine and Henderson's Horkela. Additional mitigation measures are in place to protect the small patches of Henderson's Horkela so that no individual plants are expected to be lost with the construction of the Moraine Lodge. There will be impact to approximately 3.5 acres of Lupine habitat but there are'mitigation measures (revised ski area boundary) to protect the other 25 acres. The 3.5 acre impact is limited to increased skier traffic, not ground disturbance (see ROD pg ROD-28). 6. Effects Associated with Human Social Values (roadless area, tree removal, etc.). The FEIS and the ROD documents the impacts to the roadless are as well as old growth trees, tree removal, and aesthetic qualities. The Forest Service recognizes that the decision changes the opportunity for hiking, hunting and plant identification in a pOl1tion of the headwaters of the East Fork of Ashland Creek. Opportunities for solitude '-'rould be limited in the expansion area dueto the presence of artificial openings and structures. As discussed in the ROD (ROD-29-32) many of these effects are based on personal values and cannot be quantified. 9 ri.' CC SS Mt Ashland FEIS 60CT04 CITY OF ASHLAND 7. Effects Associated with Economics. The FEIS and ROD detail the economic effects for skier demand, projected use of the expanded ski area, long term economic operational analysis and impacts due to drought, global warming and other effects. There is a detailed Economic Feasibility Analysis in FEIS Volume 3, Appendix 1. New Information: The FEIS has several new pieces of information and emphasis areas as a result of the public comment period. Changes from the DEIS: · WEPP: FS staff with additional expertise revised the modeling used to predict soil erosion rates and sediment yield predictions. They used a Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) model that provides a much more detailed set of soils parameter inputs (soil texture, slope gradients, slope lengths, soil cover, vegetative community types, climate date and disturbance types) to more accurately predict erosion rates and sediment yields. The FS team evaluated the alternatives for each proposed site-disturbance. As with any model, true erosion rates will vary with actual disturbances and will depend on the event (rainfall variations and rates), soil cover and vegetation changes. The accuracy of the model is at best plus or minus 500/0 (see the discussion above and also the detailed analyses in FEIS Volume 3, Appendix H). Overall, this analysis provides a much more site specific estimate of sediment yields and 'can also be used during the proj ect to better predict final sediment loads during construction. · Monitoring: This effort was significantly improved and well written. The monitoring plan was completely rewritten and both the required mitigation measures and the monitoring plan are included in the ROD (Appendices B and C). Specific BMPs are included in the lnitigation measures and will be further detailed in the final design of the ski area. The monitoring plan includes baseline monitoring as well as monitoring during construction and restoration monitoring. The City can help to emphasize monitoring efforts and help to ensure follow- though with any required adjustments and maintenance of mitigation measures. · Cumulative Affects (includes discussion of the Ashland Forest Resiliency Project): As mentioned above, the Cumulative Effects analysis included a discussion of the AFR project which was not a part of the DEIS. 10 ~~, CC SS Mt Ashland FEIS 60CT04 CITY OF ASI-1lLAND October 16,2003 John C. Schuyler U.S. Forest Service 645 Washington Street Ashland, OR 97520 Dear Mr. Schuyler: Enclosed are comments approved by the Ashland City Council on October 7, 2003, in response to the July 2003 Forest Service request for Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion. Also enclosed is a printout of all comments received by the City of Ashland related to the proposed expansion. These are being sent to you as background information. They do not represent the opinion of the City qf Ashland. I would like to thank you and your staff for the many hours that you have spent with city staff and the City Council assisting us with the review of the DEIS. If you have any questions regarding the City's comments on the DEIS please feel free to contact me. SiTfJ Gino Grimaldi City Administrator Enc: ADMINISTRATION 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 WVvW.ashland.or.us Tel: 541488-6002 Fax: 541488-5311 TTY: 800-735-2900 ~., PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER DEIS COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON October 7,2003 on the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS) MT. ASHLAND SKI AREA EXPANSION Ashland Ranger District Rogue River National Forest Jackson County, Oregon Scott River Ranger District Klamath National Forest Jackson County, Oregon The following cornments are provided by the City of Ashland (City) in response to the July 2003 Forest Service request for Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for thE~ Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion. These comments were approved by the Ashland City Council on October 7, 2003. Comments are organized under topic headings for ease of consideration. However, issues are interrelated and commonly impact or encompass other issues under other topic headings. Issues should not be narrowly construed or evaluated, based on topic headings. If additional information Or clarification is 'needed, '. please contact: Gino Grimaldi City Administrator City of Ashland, ()regon City Hall 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97~)20 541-488-6002 Fax: 541-488-5311 www.ashland.or.us I. WA TER QUALITY & QUANTITY - Any development in the Ashland Creek Watershed has the potential to affect water quality and quantity for the citizens of Ashland. Water quality and quantity is of the utmost importance to the City and the City urges the Forest Service to take all steps necessary to protect this resource. A. The Forest Service should require the Mt. Ashland Association (MAA) to hire an independent third party Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QAlQC) Team of 2-4 persons highly specialized in the soils and hydrology. The QAlQC Team should be selected by a community team of 6-9 persons, including City Staff, Forest Service Staff, and interested community groups. The QAlQC Team should be paid for by MAA and should n~port directly to the City and Forest Service and give direction to MAA and its contractor. The QAlQC Team should be hired prior to construction design completion so that the erosion control, mitigation, restoration/ remediation activities can be defined through a specific erosion and sediment control strategy prior to construction bidding. Once a contractor is selected, that contractor must understand the authority of the QAlQC Team and be responsive to its recommendations. . The QAlQC Team should monitor: 1. Effects of expansion on soils: QAlQC Team should analyze each specific area of construction impact to define the mitigation/restoration activities associated with each soils type. 2. 'Effects of erosion: The QAlQC Team snould provide specific BMP (bl3st management practices) to significantly reduce or control the negative irllpacts due to erosion. This set of BMPs must be specific to the alternative selected and be fully defined for the soils types. 3. Over-snow timber removal: It is recommended that this be the primary removal method and that if work cannot be completed over snow, then that proposal be submitted to the QAlQC Team for advice and approval. 4. Construction methods to control erosion and sedimentation: Just as standard erosion control strategies are in place, specific BMPs to control sedimentation . loading'should be included in the erosion a'nd sediment co nt rbt strategy developed by the QAlQC Team. 5. During construction and after construction completion, the QAlQC Team should define a monitoring strategy to ensure post-construction BMPs are in pllace to minimize disruption to restoration activities due to storms and snow melt. 6. To meet state and federal requirements, a Stormwater NPDES permlit must be provided. The permit will necessitate an Erosion Control Plan and a Stormwater Management Plan for construction. The QAlQC Team should develop this strategy for the Contractor. 7. To eliminate the potential for petroleum leaks from construction equipment, the QA/QC Team should evaluate the use of vehicle diapers or other petroleum containment practices. 8. The QAlQC Team should evaluate whether any work should be allowed in the mapped wetlands area. This will affect the construction of the bridge for options 2 or 6, and the QAlQC Team should make specific recommendations for that area of construction. If there is any impact (direct or otherwise), mitigation measures should be defined and directed to fully restore the wetlands. 9. Along with this wetlands area impact, the QAlQC Team may support the recommendation to complete work within the riparian reserve area to be cOlllpleted as an over-snow operation, or that work be completed toward the end of the dry season (end of summer) to minimize effects. 10. Whether there is complete vegetation clearing within the stream reaches should be clarified as a part of the construction design. This should be monitored by the QAlQC Team. If there is significant vegetation clearing, then mitigation mE~asures to restore vegetation should be defined and implemented. 11. Any significant use of blasting is to be discouraged and should be referred to the QAlQC Team for its analysis and recommendation. 12. The lifts have a straight haul rope and are typically cleared to a .width of 40. feet. As clearing can impact erosion, the width should be as narrow as practical to allow for maintenance and safety. 13. Erosion control methods should include silt fencing and fabric. These are only two of the BMPs available. The QAlQC Team should provide a detailed mitigation plan. 14. There may be areas to add seeding, mulching and re-vegetation to reduce erosion. The QAlQC Team should evaluate those opportunities. B. The Forest Service and the.MAA should be required to monitor.creek impacts (erosion and sediment loading primarily) at the 2060 Road at the crossing of the middle fork of the east fork of Ashland Creek. C. MAA rTlust provide assurances to the City and FS that they will take corrective actions as recommended by the QAlQC Team. II. FINANCIAL l~.ISK Financial commitments of the City and MAA for reclamation of the site, should the ski area ever be closed, need to be quantified and qualified in the final EIS. A. The EIS should address and quantify the reclamation costs for both the existing ski area and the selected alternative. The Forest Service should require from the city, as the permit holder, written assurance that it has agreed with the ski area operator that sufficient assets exist to cover the quantified reclamation costs. B. The EIS should specify the reclamation requirements or standards for the ski area. II. FIRE RISK The location, design and type of construction for additional ski an~a guest services buildings should take into consideration the need for fire protection features within these buildings to prevent the potential for building fires spreading to adjacent wildland resources. CITY OF ASI-ILAND October 22, 2003 John C. Schuyler U.S. Forest Service 645 Washington Street Ashland, OR 97520 Dear Mr. Schuyler: In a letter to you dated October 16, 2003, I transmitted the City of Ashland's comments regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed expansion of the Mt. Ashland Ski Area. At the City Council meeting of October 21, 2003, the City Council approved additional comments regarding the DEIS. Enclosed for your convenience are the comments previously submitted to you that were approved by the City Council at its meeting of October 7, 2003. Also enclosed are three documents that were approv,ed by the City Council at its meeting of October 21,2003. The titles of the three documents are as follows: . Additional City of Ashland Comment for Phased Construction and Detailed Study in the Middle Fork . A Resolu~io.n ~equesti~g the Forest Service to .consider a Community-Based Alternative in the Final EIS for the Mt. Ashland Ski Area ., . ..' . Amendments to DEIS Comments Submitted by the City of Ashland, Oregon on the US Forest Service Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion DEIS You should give all of the documents equal consideration despite the fact that they have come to you in various formats. Please note that the -Additional City of Ashland Comment for Phased Construction and Detailed Study in the Middle Fork" and the -Amendments to DEIS Comments Submitted by the City of Ashland, Oregon on the US Forest Servi~ Mt. .~hland Ski Area Expansion DEIS" represent additions and amendments to the original comments submitted to the Forest Service.' " . . . If you have any questions regarding the city of Ashland's DEIS comments, please let me know. 1!/fA Gino Grimaldi City Administrator Enclosures ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT 20 East Main Street Ashland. Oregon 97520 www.ashland.or.us phone: 541-488-6002 fax: 541-488-5311 tty: 800-735-2900 ~~, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER DEIS COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON October 7, 2003 on the . DRP~FT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT. (DEIS) MT. ASHLAND SKI AREA EXPANSION Ashland Ranger District Rogue River National Forest Jackson County, Oregon Scott River Ranger District Klamath National Forest Jackson County, Oregon The following comrnents are provided by the City of Ashland (City) in response to the July 2003 Forest Service request for Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the f\~t. Ashland Ski Area Expansion. These comments were approved by the Ashland ~ity Council on October 7, 2003. Comments are organized under topic headings for ease of consideration. However, issues are interrelalted and commonly impact or encompass other issues under other topic headin~Js..lssues should not be. nan:-o~y construed or evaluated, based on topic headings. If additional infonnation o'r clarification' is needed,' . please contact: Gino Grimaldi City Administrator City of Ashland, Oregon City Hall 20 East Main Streot Ashland, OR 97520 541-488-6002 Fax: 541-488-53111 'YWW.ashland.or.us -: Attachment II -:\ } I. WA TER QUALITY & QUANTITY - Any development in the Ashland Creek Watershed has the potential to affect water quality and quantity for the citizens of Ashland. Water quality and quantity is of the utmost imporlance to the City and the City urges the Forest Service to tBlke all steps necessary to protect this resource. A. The Forest Service should require the Mt. Ashland Association (MAA) to hire an independent third party Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QAlQC) Team of 2-4 persons highly specialized in the soils and hydrology. The QAlQC Team should be sele~ted by a community team of 6-9 persons, including City Staff, Forest Service Staff, and intE!rested community groups. The QAlQC Team should be paid for by MM and should report directly to the City and Forest Service and give direction to MM and its contractor. The QAlQC Team should be hired prior to construction design completion so that the E~rosion control, mitigation, restoration/ remediation activities can be defined through a specific erosion and sediment control strategy prior to construction bidding. Once a contractor is selected, that contractor must understand the authority of the QAlQC Team and be responsive to its recommendations. ' The QAlQC Team should monitor: 1. Effects of expansion on soils: QAlQC Team should analyze each specific area of construction impact to define the mitigation/restoration activities associated with each soils type. 2. Effects of erosion: The QAlQC Team should provide specific BMP (best management practices) to significantly reduce or control the negative impacts due to erosion. This set of BMPs must be specific to the alternative selected clnd be fully defined for the soils types. 3. Over-snow timber removal: It is recommended that this be the primary removal method and that if work cannot be completed over snow, then that proposal be submitted to the QAlQC Team for advice and approval. 4. Construction methods to control erosion and sedimentation: Just as stalndard erosion 'Control strategies are in place, specific BMPs to control sedimentation loading should be included in the erosion and sediment control strategy developed by the QAlQC Team. 5. During construction and after construction completion, the QAlQC Teal" should define a monitoring strategy to ensure post-construction BMPs are in pla(~ to minimize disruption to restoration activities due to storms and snow melt. 6. To meet state and federal requirements, a Stormwater NPDES permit must be provided. The permit will necessitate an Erosion Control Plan and a Storrnwater Management Plan for construction. The QAlQC Team should develop this strategy for the Contractor. 7. To eliminate the potential for petroleum leaks from construction equipment, the QA/C~C Team should evaluate the use of vehicle diapers or other petroleum contclinment practices. 8. The QA/QC Team should evaluate whether any work should be allowed in the mapped wetlands area. This will affect the construction of the bridge for options 2 or 6, and the QA/QC Team should make specific recommendations for that area of construction. If there is any impact (direct or otherwise), mitigation measures shou~ld be defined and directed to fully restore the wetlands. 9. Along with this wetlands area impact, the QA/QC Team may support the recornmendation to complete work within the riparian "reserve area to be completed as an over-snow operation, or that work be completed toward the end of the dry season (end of summer) to minimize effects. 10. VVhether there is complete vegetation clearing within the stream reaches should be clarified as a part of the construction design. This should be monitored by the QA/QC Team. If there is significant vegetation clearing, then mitigation measures to restore vegetation should be defined and implemented.. 11. Any significant use of blasting is to be discouraged and should be referred to the 'C~A/QC Team for its analysis and recommendation. 12. The lifts have' a" straight haul rope and are typically Cleared to a width of 40 feet. As clearing can impact erosion, the width should be as narrow as practical to allow for maintenance and safety. 13. Erosion control methods should include silt fencing and f~bric. These are only two of the BMPs available. The QA/QC Team should provide a detailed mitigation plan. 14. There may be areas to add seeding, mulching and re-vegetation to reduce erosion. The QA/QC Team should evaluate those opportunities. B. The Fore:st Service and the MAA should be required to monitor creek impacts (erosion and sediment loading primarily) at the 2060 Road at the crossing of the middle fork: of the east fork of Ashland Cre,ek. C. MAA must provide assurances to the City and FS that they will take corrective actions as recommended by the QA/QC Team. . II. FINANCIAL RISK Financial commitments of the City and MAA for reclamation of the site, should the ski area ever be closed, need to be quantified and qualified in the final EIS. A. The EIS should address and quantify the reclamation costs for both the existing ski area and the selected alternative. The Forest Service should require from the city, as the permit --~) holder,' written assurance that it has agreed with the ski area operator that sufficient assets exist to cover the quantified reclamation costs. B. The EIS should specify the reclamation requirements or standards for the ski area. II. FIRE RISK The location, design and type of construction for additional ski area guest services buildings should take into consideration the need for fire protection features within these buildings to prevent the potential for building. fires spreading to adjaoent wildland resources. Additional City of Ashland Comment for Phased Construction and Detailed Study in the Middle Fork Prepared by Kate Jackson, October 16, 2003 Concept To supplement the QA/QC team's efforts on the Forest Service approved alternative, IF the expansion includes the Middle Fork. To address broader concerns about water quality, quantity, forest health, wildlife: habitat and landslide hazard impacts in the Middle Fork of the East Fork of Ashland Creek. Assumptions The City of Ashland (City Council) and the majority of commenters from the community want to see Ski Ashland improved and survive ( even thrive) to serve the Rogue Valley as a viable economic and environmentally-sound, locally-owned business. The Council has adopted staff recommendations for a QA/QC team that would advise on any proposed work during the construction of a project approved by the Forest Service. Most relevant to this supple~enta~ proposal..are Ite~s 1.A.5, 1.A.8,. 1.A.9 an~ ~ .A.1.0. Questions remailn about impacts of new development (tree removal, surface exposure, human disturbance) both inside and outside the existing developed ski area, but particularly in the Middle Fork area. There is a long history of the City trying to clarify and enhance its working relationship with the Forest Service in our watershed. It is the City's intent to encourage further consultations and cooperative proj ects with the Forest Service in the watershed. The most recent city documents include: Memorandum of Understanding, May 1996; Ashlan.d Watershed Ste\vardship Alliance Comment on Ashland Watershed Protection Project DEIS~' November 19, 1999; letter to Linda Duffy from Ad Hoc Committee, Watershed Protection Project, September 18,2:000; and City of Ashland Public Works Department Memo to Council dated May 1, 2000 concerning "Comments on the DEIS Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion". Further, the City Forest Lands Commission Restoration Project Phase II established its Goals and Guiding Principles in February 2003. (Final report on council agenda Oct 21) Forest Service studies include the 1997 Level II Stream Survey of Ashland Creek, and the Mt. Ashland LSR Assessment. The City embraces the Valdez Principles. Statements 1 and 2 should be applied to the decision to expandMt. Ashland Ski Area. "Protection of the Biosphere: We will safeguard habitats in creeks, ponds, wetlands, natural areas..." "Sustainable Use of Natural Resources: We will make sustainable use of renewable natural resources, such as water, soils and forests. We will conserve nonrenewable 1 natural resources through efficient use and careful planning. We will protect wildlife habitat, open spaces and wilderness, while preserving biodiversity." Proposal Phasing of construction is already contemplated by MAA for the expansion project. This proposal requests that the Forest Service consider restricting activity in the Middle Fork until Phase Two but allows the installation of Chair LC-6 to proceed in Phase One. Data helpful to final decisions on development in the Middle Fork would be obtained from site-specific analysis during the interim. If an alternative is approved that allows installation of Chair LC-6, then the following sequence and activities should be undertaken: A. Ensure the base of the chair lift is outside the Englemann Spruce Grove to the t::ast of the vegetation associated 'Nith the wetlands (what G. Badura calls the Upland-appearing tiJ:nber stands with E. Spruce, soils w'ith high water tables), while still ensuring access from the west. If the associated wetlands v(~getation cannot be avoided, then the lift base should be as far east as possible and include design standards to minimize disturbance of the soils and the water regimt:: in that location and to enhance restoration of disturbed areas with native vegetation. B. Install Chair LC-6 per requirements of the upcoming Forest Service Record of Decisio~. . G. Install. runs to the east of the new chair line only. Delay installation of runs and crossing in . the MIddle Fo'rk, until Items D and E are completed, shared with the' Forest Service and QAlQC team, and the QAlQC team and Forest Service approve the final design details. D. The Middle Fork drainage has soil types, landslide hazard and hydrology that are different from the existing ski area. During the first phase of installation to the east, employ a ITlulti- disciplinary scientific team to assess the specific, local, forest health impacts of development, the current status of the \vetland/E. Spruce grove, and the cumulative effects of forest disturbance on wildlife and hydrology in the Middle Fork. This team should report to the FS (if it is not staffed by FS), and consult with the QAlQC team regarding suggestions for alteration of development plans for the Middle Fork. E. Use the infomlation and knowledge gained from mitigation and monitoring efforts during and after the east-side: construction phase (staff recommendation #5) to refine installation plans in the Middle Fork drainage, including location of runs and crossing, installation methods, mitigation measures to employ, and other recommendations of the QA/QC team. Monitoring should study effects from year-round weather events, not just winter and spring runoff. F. This phased installation could coincide with the MAA plan for Phase Two and begin four to five years into expansion. The QAlQC and multi-disciplinary teams are in the best position to determine the timeline. 2 Assurance of hnplementation One reason Staff and Council request independent QA/QC and scientific teams is that the City of Ashland wants assurance that these efforts will actually take place. Due to funding shortages, the Forest Service has not been able to provide the desired monitoring in the past. The ski area should fund those efforts related to the ski area Watershed Protection Projects outlined by the Forest Service in Chapter II, page 51 of the DEIS, and to the expansion project QA/QC teams requested by the City. 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2003- "6b A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE FOREST SERVICE TO C()NSIDER A COMMUNITY-BASED ALTERNATIVE IN THE FINAL EIS FOR THE MT. ASHLAND SKI AREA Recitals: A. The citizens of Ashland have a demonstrated need, interest and commitmlsnt to responsible watershed stewardship that protects the municipal water supply, B. The Forest Lands Commission prepared a 2003 City Forest Lands Restoration Project that ackno\tvledges "forest ecosystems are complex and dynamic and that we cannot understand completely how to manage the interlocking ecological funGtions of a healthy watershed;~1 the project directs that management activities be based on thorough site evaluations by experts; that we will continue to draw from the experience of the city's own site-work over the past six years; and that monitoring protocols will be continued and broadened to allow for adaptive management; and C. One of the goals adopted by the Ashland Watershed Stewardship Alliance in 1999 is to sustain and restore the watershed's capacity to absorb, store and distribute quality water by sustaining and restoring soil health, restoring native vegetation, especially . grasses and forbs, . re-establishing and mainta'ining sufficient and 'effective ground. cover, and lowering stream sediment loads; and D. The City of Ashland established a partnership with the US Forest Service jthrough a Memorandum of Understanding in 1929 and has cooperated on management of the watershed for water values since then; and E. A coalition of the Headwaters Environmental Center, ski area users and Ashland residents has draftE~d an alternative that modifies Alternative 3 in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and which is known as the Community Altelmative, the components of which are attached; and F. The Council determines that the Community Alternative merits analysis by the Forest Service as an additional alternative in the final Environmental Impact Statemlsnt. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: The Forest Service should analyze the Community Alternative as a separate alternative in the final Environrnentallmpact Statement for the Mt. Ashland Ski Area. This request is not intended to be an endorsement of the alternative itself. 1- Resolution G:\IegaI\PAUL\Skl Ashland\2003 DEIS\Headwaters alt43rnative reso.wpd This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashl<;1nd Municipal Code 92.04...cwO 0 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 2l ~( ~ .-4-1-. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder day of OcA-o\::~, ,2003. SIGNED and APPROVED this ;l;{ day.of Oe-+ ,2003. it:;;(J~ Paul Nolte, City Attorney ~ ~a.~~ Alan W. DeBoer, Mayor 2- Resolution G:\legaI\PAUL\Ski Ashland\2003 DEIS\Headwalters alternative reso.wpd Components of the Community Alternative: New Terrain Install the "Dream Ridge Lift" that runs along the ridge next to the Middle Branch area and provides lift access to the top of the Caliban run for beginner and intermHdiate level skiers as well as for wilderness backcountry skiers and snowboarders in the lv1iddle Branch area. Install the "North Ridge Lift" (from Alternative #5) and beginning terrain near the existing Sonnet run. This new lift would be located near other beginner terrain and the lodge, where beginners are more likely to use it. Install a lift and clear additional terrain in the Poma area to provide additional race training terrain. Install the LC-13 from the base of the Windsor lift to the top of the Caliban run to provide cross mountain access for beginner and intermediate skiers and sno'wboarders. Currently, beginners must navigate terrain that is significantly more challengil1g at the top of the Ariellift in order to get to the beginner and intermediate terrain of tile Dream and Cali ban runs. Extend the Caliban and Dream runs. and create new intermediate level te.rrain on the . -. . . ridge. . Alter the slope of the Sonnet run to remove the steep upper section for beginners. Widen existing runs to alleviate congestion and increase usable terrain. Diverse Recreational Exoeriences Build a snow tubing, facility and lift to offer lower to'st wrnter recreation oppontunities to the non-skiing and snowboarding public. We are advocating that this tubing facility be designed to take advantage of natural lanes in this area to reduce the impact to old growth trees and reduce the potential wind problems that tubers will face if the tubing facility is a large open c1earcut. Create the opportunity for wilderness, backcountry skiing in the Middle Branch that is accessible by lift. Allow experimental glading on part of the existing ski area tree islands to inclrease the ability of users to ski through the trees. SkierlSnowboarder Services Enlarge and remodel the existing lodge to accommodate current use as well as anticipated future increases in skier visits. 3- Resolution G:\IegaI\PAUL\Skl Ashland\2003 DEIS\Headwaters al1:emative reso.wpd Build ticket booths near the parking lot and a rental shop near the 10dgE~ to increase the efficiency of the customer service operations. Replace the expansion of the main parking lot with a shuttle that runs from the base of the access road on busy weekends and holidays. Build additional parking for the tubing facility and widen the road between the main parking lot and the back lot. SkierlSnowboarder Safety Provide an ernergency egress route from the base of Le6 to the bottoml of the Windsor chairlift to evacuate injured skiers. Widen the Aisle 2 area to reduce congestion and increase skier safety Phasina Initiate the restoration projects identified in the DEIS before any additional work is done on the proposal. Make upgrade~s to customer service (lodge, ticket buildings, etc.), add beginner terrain near the lodge, and widen Aisle 2 in the first phase. Record of Decision The Forest Service should analyze the Mt. Ashland Ski Area proposal in its entirety, but issue the decision for the proposed Mt. Ashland Ski Area expansion as two separate decisions. One decision will include th,e two most controversial aspects of the proposal - expansion into the Middle Branch area and expansion of the main parking lot. The other decision will include all other aspects of the expansion plan. This 'will have the effect of isolating the most controversial aspects of the plan while allowing the non- controversial aspects to proceed. 4- Resolution G:\Iegal\PAUL\Skl Ashland\2003 DEIS\Headwalters alternative reso.wpd Amendments to DEIS Comments Submitted by the City of Ashland, Oregon on the US Forest Service Mt Ashland Ski Area Expansion DEIS October 21, 2003 The following COlmments are offered as a supplement to Comments adopted by Ci1y Council October 7, 2003. 1. The QA/QC Team should consist ofa minimum of3 people 2. The soils and hydrology of Mt. Ashland and the proposed expansion are unique. Members of the QAlQC Team should have experience and knowledge of tbe hydrology and soils of the proposed expansion area. 3. To ensure the intent behind recommending the QAlQC team, the QA/QC team will be understood as having the authority to require the Mount AsWand Association (MAA) and its contractors to abide by the recommendations and direction of the team. 4. The purpose of the QA/QC team is to prevent increases in disturbance in water quality and water quantity of the City's water supply. 5. It is recommended that monitoring of water flows be added to the monitoring of sediment loading and erosion at the 2060 road crossing of the middle fork of the east fork of Ashland Creek. 6. The QAlQC team should monitor the construction design of plans for activity , within the reaches of streams, and if there is significant vegetation clearing, the team should prescribe mitigation ~easures to restore vegetation prior to actual COnstruction. 7. Due to the significant negative impact that a fire at the Mt. Ashland ski area could have on the city's watershed should a fire spread from ski facilities to the forest lands, it is recommend that the city of Ashland Fire Department review the fire protection plans for new facilities and that MAA be required to implement the recommendation of the Ashland Fire Department relating to fire protection. 8. There are a number of comments in the October 7, 2003 comments submitted to the Forest Service that were stated as issues for the QNQC team to monitor. Items # 3,4,6, 7, 8, 9, and 11-14 are better characterized as recommendations of the city of A.shland.