HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-1006 Study Session PacketCITY OF
H LAN D
Council Communication
Study Session - Mt Ashland Record of Decision (ROD)
and Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) Discussion
Meeting Date:
Department:
Contributing Departments:
October 6, 2004
Public Works - Paula Brown
Legal, Finance, Fire
Proposed Agenda / Outline
Purpose of the Study Session Item: 5 min
This item is meant to inform Council of the Forest Service decision on the Mt. Ashland Ski Area
Expansion and encourage Council discussion.
Review of Staff Report: 30 min
Review FS response to key items from Council letters
1. QA/QC Team
2. Monitor Creek Impacts / 2060 Road
3. Reclamation Costs
4. Fire Risks/Building Materials
5. Phased Construction / Middle Fork
6. Community-Based Alternative
Review Staff Recommendations
Council Questions of Staff- others: 30 min
Staff comments on proposed next steps (new - not in packet): 15 min
Staff to perform design review at the 60% and 90% design
Staff to evaluate monitoring results of USGS monitoring prior to construction
Staff to develop revised agreement with MAA to address financial implications
Council Discussion: 30 min
Staff consolidates Council discussion/follow ups: 10 min
Conclusion - 2:00 pm
CC SS Mt Ashland FEIS 6OCT04 agenda
CITY 'OF
~S H LAN D
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
AGENDA
Wednesday, October 6, 2004 at 12:00 p.m.
Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street
1. Mt. Ashland Record of Decision (ROD) and Final Environmental Impact
Statement (FEIS) Discussion.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in
this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number
1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I).
CITY OF
H LAN D
Council Communication
Study Session - Mt Ashland Record of Decision (ROD)
and Final. Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) Discussion
Meeting Date:
Department:
Contributing Departments:
Approval:
October 6, 2004
Public Works
Legal, Finance, ~
Gino Grimaldi ~
Primary Staff Contact: Paula Brown,
552-241 t, brownp~ashland.or.us
Secondary Staff Contact: Mike Franell,
552-2090, franellm~ashland.or.us
Statement:
This item is meant to inform the City Council of the US Forest Service (FS), Rogue: River-
Siskiyou National Forest decision on the Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion. It will fitrther
provide a review of the City's comments to the prior Draft Environmental impact Statement
(DEIS) and denote the FS published response to those comments in the Final Environmental
Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD). This item is being presented at a study
session and is meant for Council discussion.
The City is not the decision maker for the Mt. Ashland Ski Expansion. The Forest Service has
the responsibility and obligation to analyze the proposed expansion on federally managed lands
to determine the appropriateness of authorizing the action. The City may accept the FS decision
and continue to work with the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (RR-SNF) and Mt Ashland
Association (MAA) throughout the implementation stages, or the City may file an administrative
appeal of the FS decision.
Background.:
The Mount Ashland Ski Area (MASA) is a winter recreation area on Mount Ashland On Federal'
FS lands, within the purview of the RR-SNF. The ski area was constructed in 1965. The City
holds a Special Use Permit for the ski area and leases the operation of the ski area to Mt Ashland
Association (MAA).
The City has had a long-standing relationship with the FS, dating back to the original 1929
agreement. The City's primary concern is the fact that Mt Ashland serves as the municipal
watershed and is the City's primary source of quality drinking water. Protection of the
watershed is paramount for both the City and the Forest Service. The City has commented on
several different processes regarding the ski area since the decision to expand with:in the special
use permit area was accepted through the 1991 Master Planning efforts (including a formal ROD
and FEIS).
CC SS Mt Ashland FEIS 6OCT04
/s!oj/ptrelqsmm~u!mreld/no.( .r,4s!s/9s/sn'poj'sJ 'AxA~Oa//:dllq
lU qOAX oql UO pOAXO!A oq .(urn sluoumoop aqljo IIV 'ssaoo~d uo!loOlOS oqljo Sl!Ulop Otll
ssnos!p o; olqUl.mAU oq lI!Ax JJmS clNS-~{>{ oq£ 'uo!ssos ,(pms oql lu OlqUl!UAP. aq Il!Ax sdum ptm
poqoull~z s! dmu uo!sIoop iumJ Oq.l. 'O8I um zoj ~u!p]zIi9 oql ptm 6[ uru poppu ptm [ Ium poloiop
lox '9 OA!lumolIu u! uAxoqs s~ sum pis Otll jo Xl.uo.fum oql sosn luql C OA!lUmol[u ,,po~j!pom,,
u uodn posuq s! uo!s!oop $~I oq£ 'spoqs~oluAx oql u!ulu!um ~oql.mj ptm oaolsoa ol so!l!unl~oddo
jo oSul~pu'o~l o; oslu p~ sog[I[OUJ uo~luo~oo~ OS~OA[p ~oJ spoou oql soBpoI~O]~ KII~ S~
°qz 'SI~ o~ u[ poloIdmoo s[sXlu~ oql uo posuq p~dxo ol uo[spop o¢ sluom:,op GO~ oqg
· luoumoop s!ql jo 8 o~d uo i~u!tm!~oq uo!laos puno~:8>IO~H i~uo!l!ppv
poqo,zllV oql ut. am uo!s!oap Sci Iuu!J ptm SI2tcI oql u!ql.~ so:Stmqo i~u!px~i~o.x uo!lmmoju!
l~UO.n!ppv 'momnoop S.all u! ol poJ~ajoz oq li.~ sluommoo imouo~ p~ poqomm :am (i[) s~olloI
luommoa i~tmoj oqz 'uo!stmdx~t ~o~v' .P4S Ptmlqsv 'lin posodo~d oql :[oj (£00'C ~,qmoldos)
ssooo~d SI2tG lsol~I oql i~u.unp sluommoo lmmoj op~m i!ounoD XI!D oq; 'Xiluooo~ lSOlAI
ONV"IHS
=mo
CITY OF
dkS H LAN D
leS ROD / leEIS Responses:
The FEIS is very detailed in its Response to Comments section (see FEIS- Volume 3, Appendix
A). The FS has specific jurisdiction and responsibilities within federal regulations to review and
implement decisions. There are some things that the FS can do, others that they cannot do, and
other interpretations that provide the FS with broader options for implementation. The strongest
changes between the DEIS and the FEIS and subsequent requirements identified in ~the ROD are
those that deal with environmental impacts and show up as specific mitigation measures and are
in the monitoring report. As stated in the ROD (p. ROD-5), "...all practical means 'to avoid or
minimize environmental harm from the alternative selected have been adopted." This is in
accordance with federal NEPA guidance, and is the basis for protection of our watershed.
QA/QC Team: The FS has also stated that it is their obligation and responsibility to provide all
quality control and quality assurance for the implementation and subsequent effects of the
construction related to their decision. It is their interpretation that they cannot delegate or give
that responsibility to an independent QA/QC Team. The FS further states that they have the full
capabilities on staffto provide the technical review and i.nspection of the construction,
monitoring and mitigation measures. [for specific FS comments, see FEIS p. A-43 and p. B-3]
It is staff's interpretation of both the 1929 agreement and successive MOU and the iNorthwest
Forest Plans that the City has the responsibility to continue to provide input and direction to the
FS to ensure the p~otection' of'the watershed and the City's primary drinking water source.
Although the responsibility of administering the land belongs to the FS, the joint communication
and coordination of the Ashland watershed is paramount to both.
Staff's continuing discussions with the FS are extremely positive and we look forward to
increasing the informal cooperative partnerships to jointly ensure the protection of the
watershed's water quality and quantity. The City has been able to use the technical, skills of the
interdisciplinary technical team for questions regarding long-term bank stabilization at the dam,
to re-establish the gauging stations at the east and west forks of the reservoir, discuss monitoring
protocol at Mt Ashland and other informal discussion relating to watershed protection. The FS
staff welcomes the opportunity for this continuing relationship.
In addition to the FS' willingness to invite the City to actively participate, MAA is actively
seeking staff review during the design phase and is willing to have City staff participate as a part
of their internal quality control as they monitor construction activities. MAA acknowledges that
the City requires assurances of water quality/water quantity protection and desires 'the technical
support from the City through an informal QA/QC effort. MAA intends on hiring a QA/QC
consultant as part of their design and construction process to ensure they are doing the right
things and doing them correctly. Ongoing monitoring and corrective actions are MAA's
responsibility and the City could assist with observations and recommendations in that effort as
well. Many of the details will be defined as part of the final design and with the required quality
assurance plan and the annual operating plan required of MAA by the FS.
CC SS Mt Ashland FEIS 6OCT04
1701909 SIB4 puelqsv lin SS
· osuos [~uo!lmodo tm u! Oo~ld soh-m~
l~q~ jo oA!ld.uosoad oq ol lou 'so,tmqams!p punoal8 ol oA!l~lOa oA!l~moll~ qo~, jo soouonbosuo,
I~'lu,muo~!Auo ~ ozXImm ol ~il!I!q!suodsoa a!oql s! 1! lmtl polms Sci otLL '(9~"['g-¥ 'd oos)
sso,o~d i}mdo,s uo!lomlsuoo ptm u:8!sop oql q~lnoatl omjop ol WIN aoj Bu!s~qd +joI J[iimouoS Sci
oql mq '~o~ lmanos u~ possoapp~ s~ uo~lo~suoo po~qd :~ao~ alpp~~ / uoB~nalsuoD p~s~qd
ONV'IHS P
ao Amm
CiTY OF
LAN D
It is staff's further interpretation that the intent of the Council's comment was to gain additional
knowledge of the Middle Fork area to avoid or minimize construction damage to the surrounding
environment, especially the wetlands. One of the comments was the intent to use the monitoring
data to better refine installation plans. The FS commented that they support the "adaptive
management" concept and in several cases they identify where there may be reasons to change
construction BMPs and mitigation efforts based on monitoring results.
The FS decision includes very specific construction techniques as a result of the significant
public comment regarding environmental effects. The FS is requiring revised mn configurations
of 12 and 14 similar to those provided for in alternative 6 to reduce the impacts of development:
reduce the impact to the spruce trees (reduced the cut from 1.8 acres to 1.13 acres; or
5.5% of the stand instead of 10%) and eliminates cutting two of the larges~t trees
· reduced direct effect on wetlands (from 0.8 acres to 0.5 acres)
· requires lightweight, low ground pressure machine for run clearing (see derails on FEIS
p. II-34) .,
· requires the use of an alternate design for the bridge footings (IM-3; details on FEIS p.
II-32) for the wetlands crossing at the base of runs 12 and 14. The bridge footings are
made of logs and will support the bridge decking which can be steel girders with
wooden decking. Seasonal large slotted plastic arch culvert sections would bb used
above the bridge for the second creek crossing to allow for skier passage, but not
restrict stream flows or runoff.
In addition, the FS requires that MAA prepare and submit a phased development plan (annual
operating plan including a Summer Work Plan) for FS approval prior to development. During
recent informal discussions with MAA, they acknowledge that there will be a portion of the
development phases that will be phased to ensure that they are able to accomplish a quality
construction job that fit within the practical limits of a shortened construction sease,n on the
mountain. Their detailed engineering plans will show the construction phasing. Detailed
mitigation measures are identified in ROD. Attachment B. The mitigation measures along with
the Monitoring Plan will define the process. The City can help to review these processes to
ensure water quality and water quantity protection.
Community-Based Alternative: Council direction requested the FS to analyze the Community
Based alternative as a separate alternative. The analysis of the Community Alternative submitted
by the Headwaters organization and some additional comments made by the City was fully
evaluated and are described in Appendix D "Actions and Alternatives Considered bnt
Eliminated". Although the FS did not specifically review the Community Alternative as a
"separate" alternative, each element of the community-based alternative was considered. The FS
considered that many of the elements of the community-based alternatiVe were similar to
Alternative 3. Because of that, a separate or new alternative was not created for additional
review. The elements specified in Council's comment, "Components of the Conm~unity
Alternative" were considered. However, as the FS did not select Altemative 3, many of these
CC SS Mt Ashland FEIS 6OCT04
9
I~0J. DO9 SI~t:t puulqs¥ lin SS DD
ptm UOI.;I~tI[IIA0 pom. qmoo ~ ol OA.BdoooI ,I~;IOA 011~ ptm ldoouoo otI1 Jo ~m. ldooo~ o~ VVIA[
ptm SA otI1 qloq '~u!~tu uo!s.toop ~oj umo£ D~/V~ otI1 o; ldooo~ o~ pou!ioop Sd aq; qi~noqllV
· uo!spop SdSfl o~ jo Ieodd~ aA!lmls!u!mpe tm o[~j J[~m KI!D oql ~o 'soSms
uo!l~luomoldm! oql ;noqi~no-n41 (V~V~) uo!l~!oossv ptmlqsV ;IAI ptr~ (~INS-~I) lsa,sod I~uo!l~N
noKpIs!S-:~OA.~I oni~o~I oql ql.t~ ~o~ ol onu!luoo ptm uo!s!oop S~ISFI oql ldooo~ .4:~m -~I!D
· uo!lomlsuoo jo ~eoX ls~ oql ql!,~x luoJ_mouoo
:~o ozojoq pololdmoo oq plno~ sluomoAo~dm! uo!lmolsm poqs~ol~A~ '[lO~X s~ popnpu! s~m
8 I-~t mu o; ~AX s~o~po~I mozj (DR I-~I) um pop~i~ ~ 'popniou! s~x .~x.r,4s oql s~ 'puV 'ssooo~
~ouo~omo :~oj 9-D~I jo os~q o~ 1~ lods!Ioq ptm ~xpls o~jo uo!l!pp~ oql opnF~u! p!p S~I oq£
'9 I-£ I-O 'O x!puoddv ptm g'e ol 8i~-V soiled uo SI~t~I aql u! pozilmm
O~OAx OA.II~mollt~ ~.ttmmmoa oql jo sluouodmoa oql ol sluommoo oql jo Xl.uofem ot[L 'poloofm
mq po~op!suoo ozo~x £ OA!I~molIV ol suo!l~og!pom s~ popp~ uooq o^~q plnoo lmll sluomoIo
CIN¥'IHSXP
CITY OF
H LAN D
recommendation process. It is apparent that the FS takes its responsibility very seriously as the
"Responsible Official". They accept the obligation for environmental protection.
Staff recommends that we continue to be a part of the design review, construction monitoring
and evaluation of mitigation measures, as the City also takes its responsibility seriously to
specifically protect the water quality and water quantity elements of the watershed.
The ongoing valuation Of the ski area assets beyond cash and investments for liquidity will
remain an issue for the life of the MAA agreement. Staff recommends that an agreement be'
developed establishing a total reclamation value in current (2004) dollars. A final financial
consideration is that MAA agrees to a review by the City before any borrowing is done that
pledges MAA assets as collateral. Further, it is recommended that MAA's auditor ~mnually
report to the City the following:
a. What percentage of expansion is completed and the estimated amotmt of the total
reclamation cost that is applicable.
b. That no new or additional reclamation exposure has been created through new
construction, changes in the expansion or operations.
c. That a valuation of net assets'has been done and sufficient "liquid" assets are held
by MAA to pay for the current estimate of reclamation costs.
d. That no financing or other obligation has been done by MAA that entcumbers the
net assets considered liquid to pay for reclamation costs.
Potential Motions:
As this is a study session, it might be out of the ordinary to propose potential action~ item
motions, but staff would like a general consensus on direction and is providing options for
Council to consider.
1. No motion- continue to support staff efforts and recommendations.
2. Request additional information on the informal processes as defined by staff and have
this information brought to a future Council Meeting.
3. Propose a consultant prepare an independent analyses of the FS decision.
4: Disagree'with the Forest Service decision and have a consultant prepare-an administrative
appeal.
Attachments:
Additional Background Information (continuation of staff report)
ROD Decision Map - Modified Alternative 2
City of Ashland letter to John Schuyler, USFS, of October 16, 2003
City of Ashland letter to John Schuyler, USFS, of October 22, 2003
CC SS Mt Ashland FEIS 6OCT04
7
8
P0£DO9 SI~t~I pu~lqsv IBI SS D3
.!
;~q; osoq.L
:[!mop ozom u[ poqFtasop axe poqs~oleA~ aha lo, dm[ ,qI~[luolod
· (possmpp, o:to,,,x l~tll gl, jo mo) sanss[ ltma[t[u~[s UOAOS po~!luop[ sos~I~uV S~t °tl,.L
sanss][
· ,(l[f.roej i~u[qn,L oql ~oj smo~ 1~ ptm 's~ox~ ~m.~ms'ptm stop.moa lJ[I ~oj
'sum pox~Ola i~uo!l[p~.n ~oj sma~ I L .'so:o~ 6L jo ,s,o:ou[ IlmOAo ·
:punoJlblaglt IgUO!l!ppv
ONV"IHS'
CITY OF
H L/MN D
Effects on Hydrologic Function (includes wetlands, stream crossings, flow rates, etc).
In this section, the primary concern is water quality and wetlands impacts. Water 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 thc crossing to the Altemativc 6 site has reduced thc 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 cast fork of Ashland Creek). This will be
measured through the monitoring program.
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 project that is being proposed, but the ratio is
0.502, still well below the 1.0 threshold.
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 °A 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 ,cea that
would remain uncut.
Effects to Mt Ashland Lupine a~td Henderson's Horkela. Additional mitigation
measures arc in place to protect thc 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 arc-mitigation
measures (revised ski area boundary) to protect the other 25 acres. Thc 3.5 acre impact is
limited to increased skier traffic, not ground disturbance (see ROD pg ROD-28).
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 portion of the
headwaters of the East Fork of Ashland Creek. Opportunities for solitude would be
limited in the expansion area due.to 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.
CC SS Mt Ashland FEIS 6OCT04
OI
~70£DO9 SI~Id pu~lqsv ;IN SS DD
:uo!~maojuI staN
~N¥~HS~
-£
CiTY OF
-AS F! LAN D
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 Gity of Ash!and.
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.
Si~ .~,~...
Gino Gdmaldi
City Administrator
Enc:
ADMINISTRATION
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Om~m 97520
mew.ashland.or, us
Tel: 541488-6002
Fax: 541.488-5311
TTY: 800-735-2900
PRINT[D ONRECYCLED PAPER
:loe~uoo eseeld
.. 'pepeeu s! uo!leogpelO Jo uo!leuJJoju! leUO!~!ppe Jl 's6u!peeq o!do~ uo.peseq
'pelenleAe JO penJlsuOo/~lMOJJeU eq lou plnoqs sensei 's§tqpeeq o!dol Jeqlo
Jepun senss! Jeqlo ssedLuooue Jo 1OedLu! ~lUOUJUJOO puc peleleJJelU! eJe sense!
'JeAeMOH 'uo!leJepisuoo jo esee JOj s§u!peeq o!dol Jepun pez!ue~Jo eJe slueuJuJOO
'800~ 'Z Jeqoloo uo I!ounoo/~1!0 puelqsv eq]
/~q peAoJdde eJeM sluewwoo eseqi 'uo!suedxa eeJV !:~$ puelqsv 'lin eql JOj ]uewelel9
loedLUl lelUeUJUOJ!AUa l~eJQ eql uo slueuJuJOO JOj lsenbeJ eo!AJeS lee Jo4 '900~/~ln¢
ol esuodseJ u! (~i!O) puelqsV jo/~l!O eql Xq pep!AoJd eJe s~UeLUUJOO §U!MOIIOJ eqJ.
uoeeJO '/~lunoo uos~oer
lseJo-I leUOlleN 41eUJelN
lOpls!a Je6Ue~l JeA!~ 1-1008
uo0eJO '/~lunoo uos~oer
1se JO-4 leUO!leN JGA!M en§oM
lo!JlS!a Je6Ue~l PUelqsv
NOISNVclXq Va~lV I)48 QNV-IHSV 'Lin
(SIqO) INBIAIqlVIS IOVdiNI qVINIINNO~:IIANE] l._-IV~:tO
eql uo
~00~ 'Z Jeqoloo
NO93~10 'ONV-IHSV -IO AIlO 3HI ,kS OB I I IIAISriS
SINaiNINOO 8130
I. WATER QUALITY & QUANTITY- Any development in the Ashland Creek Watershe,d has the
potential to affect water quality and quantity for the citizens of Ashland. Water quality a.r~d
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 (QNQC) Team of 2-4 persons
highly specialized in the soils and hydrology. The QA/QC Team should be selected by a
community team of 6-9 persons, including City Staff, Forest Service Staff, and interested
community groups. The QNQC Team should be paid for by MAA and should Feport
directly to the City and Forest Service and give direction to MAA and its contractor. The
QA/QC 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 pdor to construction bidding. Once a contractor is
selected, that contractor must understand the authority of the QA/QC Team and be
responsive to its recommendations.
The QA/QC Team should monitor:
1. Effects of expansion on soils: QNQC Team should analyze each specific area
of construction impact to define the mitigation/restoration activities associated with
each soils type.
2. 'Effects of erosidn: The QNQC 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 and be
fully defined for the soils types.
3. Over-snow timber removal: It is recommended that this be the prima~¥ removal
method and that if work cannot be completed over snow, then that proposal be
submitted to the QA/QC 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 1se inclUded in the erosion and sediment'control stcategy develoPed
by the QNQC Team.
5. During construction and after construction completion, the QA/QC Team should
define a monitoring strategy to ensure post-construction BMPs are in place to
minimize disruption to restoration activities due to storms and snow me~lt.
6. To meet state and federal requirements, a Stormwater NPDES permit must be
provided. The permit will necessitate an Erosion Control Plan and a Stormwater
Management Plan for construction. The QA/QC Team should develop this
strategy for the Contractor.
),!LuJed eql se '/~!o eql LUOJJ eJ!nbeJ plnoqs eo!AJeS IseJo-I eql 'eA!leuJelle pe),OeleS eql pue egJe
!~s §up, s!x9 9q~, q],oq JOj si, soo uop, eUJelOa~ aql Xjp, uenb pue ssg]ppe Plnoqs SI:I aql 'V
leug e~ll u! peg!lenb pue peg!luenb eq ol peeu 'pesolo eq JeAe eeJe Rs e~/l plno4s 'ells
eq~ jo uo!~euJelOeJ Joj WIN pue ~!O e~tl ~o slueuJ~!uJu~oo le!oueu!d ),lSl~] "IVIONVNI=! '11
· uJeel OONO eq~, ,4q pepueLut, uooeJ se
suop, oe eA!iOeJJOO e~e~, IlI~/~eql ),eq~, S_-I pue/q!C) eq~, ol seoueJnsse ep!AoJd lSnLU WlAI '0
· ~lee. lO puelqsv jo
~,see eq), jo ~oj elPp!uJ eq~, jo 6u!ssoJo eql le peo~l 090~ eql ~,e (XlpeuJ!Jd 6u!peol lueuJ!pes puc
uo!soJe) s),oeduJ! ~leeJO'JOl!UOUJ ol peJ!nbeJ eq plnoqs VVIAI-eql puc eo!AJeS .lsaJo::t eqI
· seil!unlJoddo esoq), m, enle^e plnoqs Lueel OONO eql 'uo!soJe
eonpeJ ol uo!le~,eBe^-eJ pue BuiqolnuJ '§u!pees ppe ol seeJe eq/~eLU eJeql '~l,
'ueld
uop, eBp, iuJ pal!re, ap e ep!^oJd plnoqs weal C)ONID eql 'elqel!e^e SdlAl8 eql .,to ()Mi
,qUO eJe eseql 'o!Jqej puc Bu!ouej ll!S epnlou! plnoqs spoqleuJ IO.quoo uo!soJ3 'g i.
:/9,ejes pue eoueuelu!euJ JOt MOIle
O1 leOp, oeJd se MOJJeU se eq plnoqs qlp!M eq~, 'uoisoJe loeduJ! ueo Bu!JeelO sv 'l,@eJ
-0'¢ ,to LIlpI~ eol patella '/~lleO!d~ eJe pue edoJ Ineq lq§!eJ),S e eAeLI sl-J.!l eMI '8 I.
· uop, epuewwooeJ pue s!s/qeue sl! Jot wee100NID ,a4~,
ol peJJej, eJ eq plno4s pue peBeJnoos!p eq ol s! 8u!lselq ,to esn ~,ueoy!u§!s/~u¥ 'l. I.
· pelueuJelduJ! pue peuyep eq plnoqs uop, e~,e§e^ 8JO:j$@J o), se~nse,aLU
uop, eB!i!uJ ueq), 'Bupeelo uop, e~,eBe^ ~,ueoy!u§!s s! eJeql ,ti 'uJeel C)ONID eql/~q
peJm,!uoLu eq Plnoqs s!qI 'u§isep uo!lonJ),SUOO eql jo lJed e se pey!JelO eq plnoqs
seqoeeJ LueeJlS eH), U!HI!M §u!Jeelo uop, ele§eA e~,eldLuoo s! eJeql JeqleqM '0 i.
· sloejJ, e ez!w!u!w ol (~ewwns jo puc) uosees/up eq:l jo
puc eql p~eMm, pe~eldwoo eq ~pOM ],eq~ Jo 'uo!1e~edo ~ous-~e^o ue se peleldu~oo
eq o~, ease eAJeSej uepedp eql u!q1!~ ~po~ e~eldwoo ol uop, epuewwo2eJ
eql iJoddns ,~ew wee_L 0ONE) eql 'loedw! ee~e spuep, e~ s!q), q~,!~ §UOl¥ '6
· spuelle~ eq), eJO~,SeJ XIInJ 01 pm, oeJ!p pue pauYep eq plnoqs
seJnseeuJ UOp, eB!I!LU '(eS!MJeqlo JO ]OeJip) loedLu!/~ue s! eJeql Jl 'uop, onJlsuoo jo
eeJe ~,e4~, Joj suoilepueuJuJooeJ oy!oeds eHew Plnoqs weeI OONO eM), pue 'cj JO
~ suop, do Jot eSppq eql jo uop, onJlsuoo eq~, loej.je II!M s!qI 'eeJe spuelleM peddeuJ
eq), u! Pe~Olle eq Plnoqs ~lJO~ ,~ue Jeqleq~ elenleAe Plnoqs uJeei OONO eqj. '9
· seo!loeJd lueuJu!eluoo
uJneloJled Jeqlo Jo sJede!p elo!qeA jo esn eql elenleAe plnoqs LUeel OONO
eql 'luewd!nbe UO!lOnJlsuoo woJj s~teel wneloJled JOj le!luelod eql eleu!w!le oj. 'Z
holder, written assurance that it has agreed with the ski area operator that sufficient assets exist
to cover the quantified reclamation costs.
B. The ElS should specify the reclamation requirements or standards for the ski area.
II. FIRE RISK The location, design and type of construction for additional ski a/;ea 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
wi/d/and resources.
October 22, 2003
CiTY OF
1-! LAN D
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 approved 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.ti0n Requesting !he Forest Service to .Consider a Community-Based Altemative in the
Final ElS 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 Service Mt...Ashland Ski Area Expansion DEIS" represent, additions and amendments to the
odginal comments submitted to the Forest Service. '
If you have any questions regarding the city of Ashland's DEIS comments,.please let me know.
Gino Gfimaldi
City Administrator
Enclosures
ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
w~wv.ashland.or.us
phone: 541-488-6002
fax: 541-488-5311
try: 800-735-2900
PfllNTED ON RECYCLEO PAPER
II :3uemqo ¥
:~uoo eseeid
· .'pepeeu s! .UO!1~o~ep Jo uo!)eu~oju! leuo!~.ppe Jl 's§u!p'eey o!dol uo peseq
'pelenle^e JO perulsuOO ~o~eu eq ~ou plnoqs senssl"'sl~u!'peey o!do3 Je~o
~epUn~s~nss! ~eq~o ssedmooue JO ~edu~! ~lUOmmOO puc Pe3'ele,,elu! eJe senss~
'Je^e~OH 'uo!leaep!suoo jo esee JOj sBu!peeq o!do3 ~epun pe~..UE~O eJe sIuemLu~
'SO0~ 'Z Jeqo~o uo I!ounco ~.0 PUelqsv eq1
~q pe^oJdde eJe~ sluemu~oo eseq/'uolsuedx~ eeJV !~S puelqsv '1~1 eql Joj lueu~el~S
~oedLul lelueu~uoJ!^u3 ~eJa eql uo SlUetULUOO JOJ lsenbej eo~,ueS lsejo~ £OO~ ~lnp
o1 esuodseJ u! (~!O) puelqsV jo ~!O eql ~q pep!^oJd eJ~ ~UeUJLUOO §U.~OIIOJ
UO§eJO '~unoo uos~oeF
3seJO~ leuo!3eN q3eLUelN
3op3s!Q Je6Ue~ Je^!~ ~oos
uo§e~O '~unoo uos~o~r
lse~o~ leUO!3eN ~eA!~l en§o~
3oM3s!Q ~eOue~ PUelqsv
I. WATER QUALITY & QUANTITY- Any development in the Ashland Creek Watershed ~as 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 a=n
independent third party Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QNQC) Team of 2-4 persons
highly specialized in the soils and hydrology. The QA/QC Team should be selected by a
community team of 6-9 persons, including. City Staff, Forest Service Staff, and interested
community groups. The QNQC Team should be paid for by MAA and should report
directly to the City and Forest Service and give direction to MAA and its contractor. The
QNQC Team should be hired pdor 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 QNQC Team and be
responsive to its recommendations.
The QA/QC Team should monitor:.
1. Effects of expansion on soils: QA/QC 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 QA/QC 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 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 QA/QC Team for advice and approval.
4. Construction methods to control erosion and sedimentation: Just as standard
erosion'~x3ntroI Strategies are in place, specific BMPs to control sedimentation
loading should be included in the erosion and sediment contrOl strategy d[eveloped
by the QA/QC Team.
5. Dudng construction and after construction completion, the QA/QC Team should
define a monitoring strategy to ensure post-construction BMPs are in place 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 StonT~water
Management Plan for construction. The QA/QC Team should develop thiis
strategy for the Contractor.
l!LuJed eql se '/qp eql tuoJj ed!nbaJ Plnoqs aOlAdes lsado:l aq.L 'e^!leLUelle peloeles eql puc ease
Pis §u!ls!xe eql qloq Joj slsoo uo!letueloa~ eql ~!luenb puc sseJppe plnoqs SFI eq.L 'V
'~13'
leUg mil u! peg!lenb pue peg!~uenb eq ol peeu 'pesolo eq JeAe ee.~e !>ie aLII PlnO~te 'eI!.e
etl7 jo uo!lemeloaJ Joj WPI pue XI!.O ml7 jo eTUeLU~LULUO0 le!oueu!:~ ),15~1~1 'lVlONVNI::! '11
· Lueal O0/VO eql 4q pepUeLULUO0e~ se
suo!loe e^!loa~JOO a~tel II!~ Xeql ieql S=! puc/q!O eql Ol seouednsse ep!^o~d lsnLu WiAI '0
· ~laaJO puelqsV jo
1sea eql jo ~oj elpp!LU aql JO §UISSOJO eql le peo~l 090;: aql le (,(I.UeLu.ud Bu!peol lUatu!pas pue
UO!SOJa) sloedtu! ~laeJo JOltUOtU ol peJ!n .baJ eq plnoqs ~ ay1 puc ao~es lsaJo-I eqj. '8
· se!l!unlJoddo eSoql elenle^e plnoqs tuea. L O0/V'O etLL 'uo!so~e
eonpeJ ol uo!lele§e^-eJ puc 5U!tlOlntu '§u!pees ppe ol seeJe eq Xetu eJeq. L '~1.
'ueld
UO!le§!I!LU Pel!elep e ep!^oJd Plnoqs LUeal OONO eq/ 'elqel!e^e SdlAIE! eql j.o o~1
XlUO eJe eseq.L .opqej puc Bu.rouej ll!S epnlou! plnoqs spoqleLU IOJlUO0 UO!SOJ3 'S L
:/qejes puc eoueuelu!eLu Jo~ ~Olle
Ol leO!loedd se ~oueu se eq plnoqs qlp.~ eql 'uo!soJe lOedLu! ueo §u.ueep sv 'leej
Off Jo qlp!M e Ol pedee, lO. XlleO!d/q..ed.e pge edoJ Ineq lqB!eJlS e.eAeq slJ!l ell1 'g I,
· uo!lepueujLUoom pue s!s,(leue sl! doj Lueej. OONO. eql
ol peJJejeJ eq plnoqs pue peBejnoos!p eq ol s! Bu!lselq ~o esn lUeO~UB!S ~uv' ~ L
· sloe~je eZ!LU!U!LU 01 (JeUJLUnS ~0 pua) uosees/up eql ~o
puc aLI1 pJe~ol peleldLU°° eq ~o~ leU1 Jo 'uo!leJedo ~ous-Je^o ue se peleldtUoo
eq Ol eeJe GAJGS~)J. ue!Jed!J e41 U!q1!M )LIOM eleldwoo Ol UO!lepuewcuooeJ
eLI1 lJoddns/~eLU uJee_L OO/VO eql 'loeduJ! eeje spuelleM SILl1 LII!M BUOlV '8
· spuelle~ eql eJOlSeJ/~llnJ Ol PalOeJ!p pue peuyep eq plnoqs
seJnseeLu uo!leB!l!UJ '(eS!MJeLI10 JO lOad!p) lOedLU! ,(ue s! a JeLl1 ~tl 'UO!lOnJlSUOO ~o
eeJe leql Joj suo!lepueLuLUoom oy.roeds eNetu Plnoqs uJee.L OO/VO eql pue '9 ~o
~ suo!ldo Jo~ eBppq eql ~o UO!lOnJlsuoo eLI1 loe~Je II!~ s!q.L 'eede spuelle~ peddeLu
eLI1 U! pe~olle eq plnoqs ~pOM/~ue Jeqleq~ elenle^e Plnoqs Luee.L OO/VO eq.L '~
· seo!loeJd lueLuu!eluoo
LuneloJled Jeqlo JO sJede!p elo!qe^ ~to esn eql elenleAe Plnoqs LueaL O;ONO
eLI1 'lUeLUd!nbe UO!lOnJlSUOO uJoJj sqeel tuneloJled Joj le!lUelOd eLI1 eleu!tu!le O.L 'Z
holder,' written assurance that it has agreed with the ski area operator that sufficient assets exist
to cover the quantified reclamation costs.
B. The ElS 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 adjacent
wildland resources.
olqe~aua.mou o~asuoo i[!~ ark 'slsaaoj ptre si!os '.~o~eax s~ qons 'saoanosaa [mn~eu olq~axouoa jo ash
olq~u!~*sns a3I~tU II!~ ark :savanosa~ [mn~NJO osffl alq~u!~lsn$ .... '"seaa~ imn~u 'spu~llaax 'spuod
's~looao u! s~!q~q p.mn~o$~s il!ax OA~ :o.~oqdso!~[ oq~ jo uo!~oo~Oad,, 'eo~W PIS pu~lqsv 'lin pu~dxo
ol uo.ts!oop oql ol po!Iddg oq pinoqs Z pug !
olPP!IAI oql u! Xlaulno!laud lnq 'eoxe !>Is podoloAop Su!ls!xo oql op!slno ptm op!su! qloq (ootreqxnls!p
tremnq 'o.msodxo ooej.ms 'ieAomo.~ oo:/l) luomdoIoAOp axou jo sloedm! lnoqe utemo.~ suo!lson~
· '0 I'V' I pure 6'V'I '8'V' I 'g'V' I six/ali o~u:iesodo~d i~luomoiddns s.rql
ol lueaoIo.~ lSOlA[ 'O0!A-~OS lSOJO~I Oql ~(q poaoJdde loo.foJd e jo uo!lomlsuoo oql Su.unp >iio~x posodold
,gtr~ uo os!ape plnoax lei. Il ttr~ol ~)~)/¥~) e loJ suo!lepuommoooJ jjels poldope ~5eq i!ounoD
· ssou!snq poUaXo-Xlleoo! 'Punos-,qlmuomUo.~!auo
ptm otmouooo oiqe!a e se ,(oIIeA oruSo~I oql OAaOS O1 (o^.mI1 uoao) oa~ns ptm poao.~dm! ptmlqs¥ !>IS
oos ol lueax ,(l!unmmoo oql mo.tj s:~oluommoo jo ,(1.uo.fem oql ptm (i!ounoD ~(I!D) ptmIqsv jo ~(I!D
suo!ldmnss¥
· 3ioo~D ptmlqsV jo 5I~O2t lse~t oql jo ~I:o~I oIpP!IAI oql u! sloedm! 'pa~z-uq op!ispueI
pue lel!qeq oJ!IPI!A~ 'qlIeoq lso.~oj '~(l!luenb '~(l![enb .~OleA~ lnoqe stuoouoo :~op,eo.~q sso:ppe o£
'31-~%I olPP!IAI oql SOl:,nlou! uo~su~dxo
oql ~[I 'OA!lemol[e poAo~dde OO!AiOS lso:~oA oql uo sl-~ojjo s,meol D~/V~) oql luomoIddns o,1.
ldoouoD
g001~ '91 .~oqoloo 'uos~IoUf ole],I ,(q poaudo.~d
~IJod olPP!BI
oql u! ,(pnls pol!gloO pug llO.l~:)liJ:)$11o~) posgqd JOj luommoD puglqsv jo ~01£) IgUOll!PPV
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 east of the
vegetation associated with the wetlands (what G. Badura calls the Upland-appearing timber stands
with E. Spruce, soils with high water tables), while still ensuring access from the west.. If the
associated wetlands vegetation cannot be avoided, then the lift base should be as far e~st as possible
and include design standards to minimize disturbance of the soils and the water regime 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 Decision.
.. C. Install..runs to the east of the new chair line only. Delay installation of runs and crossing in
the Middle Fork, until Item~ D and E are c6~plet6d, shar6d with ~he'Fore'~t Service and QA~QC
team, and the QA/QC 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 rnulti-
disciplinary scientific team to assess the specific, local, forest health impacts of development, the
current status of the wetland/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 QA/QC team regarding suggestions for alteration of development plans for
the Middle Fork.
E. Use the information 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 shc,uld 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 QA/QC and multi-disciplinary teams are in the best position to
determine the timeline.
2
oql ~q polsonbo.[ sttreol D~/'vr~ loo.fo~d uo/suedxo oql ol ptre 'SI~{Q oqljo I ~ og~zd 'II .[oldeqD u!
o3!,~0S lso.[od oq~ ,(q pou!llno sloo.foad uo!loo~o~d poqs.[ol~z~ eo~ ?Is oql ol pole[o~ sl~o3olo osoql pun$
plnot[s ~o~ ?Is oqj~ 'l~d otI1 u! ~u.uol!uotu po~!sop oti1 op!Ao~d ol oIqu uooq lou suq oo?_[oS lso~od
oql 'so~u~oqs ~u!pur[I ol on(] 'oo~ld o21131/~[[~znloe [[!A~ sl.locIJo osoql 113ttl ootr~.mss~z slul~ ptm[qs¥
.lo ~1!3 oql l~q3 s! sttmol oU!luo!os ptm 3~/'vr~) luopuodopu! lsonboa l!ouno3 ptm JJ~zlS uosuoa ouO
uo!leluouxoidcuI jo oou~nssv
RESO. LUTION NO. 2003-'2-.~'~
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE FOREST SERVICE
TO CONSIDER A COMMUNITY-BASED ALTERNATIVE IN
THE FINAL ElS FOR THE MT. ASHLAND SKI AREA
Recitals:
A. The citizens of Ashland have a demonstrated need, interest and commitment to
responsible watershed stewardship that protects the municipal water supply,
B. The Forest Lands Commission prepared a 2003 City Forest Lands Restoration
Project that acknowledges "forest ecosystems are complex and dynamic and that we
cannot understand completely how to manage the interlocking ecological functions of a
healthy watershed;" 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 protoc~31s 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 maintaining sufficient and 'effective ground.
cover, and Iowedng stream sediment loads; and
D. The City of Ashland established a partnership with the US Forest Service 'through 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 drafted an alternative that modifies Alternative 3 in the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement and which is known as the ~mi'nunity Alternative, the
components of which are attached; and
F. The Council determines that the Community Altemative medts analysis by' the Forest
Service as an additional alternative in the final Environmental Impact Statement.
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
The Forest Service should analyze the Community Alternative as a separate alternative
in the final Environmental Impact Statement for the Mt. Ashland Ski Area. This request
is not intended to be an endorsement of the alternative itself.
1- Resolution GNegaI~PAUL~Skl Ashland~2003 DEIS~-Ieadwaters alternative reso.wpd
pd~'oseJ e^.rl~'U~elle sJei~Peal-I~Sl~Q [:O0;b~lOUelqsv I)IS~'II3VcI~IeI~elV9 uoilnjose~] -~
JO~eiAI 'Jeoaea 'M uelV
~eu~o]]v XlI!O 'ellON Ined
jo',{ep 'C~ s!q~, a3AO~lddV pue a3N91S
JepJooe~l ,~,!0 'uesue),spqo eJeClJe8
~--/. s!q~ CI~I.I. clOCIV pue a~iSSVcl Alnp O~O'tO'~§
ePOO led!o!un~ puelqsv LI),JM eouepJoooe u!/[lUO ell!l/;q peeJ $1BM uojlnloseJ s!q/
'JO~elhl eql ,{q I~ulul~ls uodn ),oejje Se>lei uop, nloseJ s!q/
Components of the Community Alternative:
New Terrain
Install the "Dream Ridge Lift" that runs along the ddge next to the Middle Bra~nch area
and provides lift access to the top of the Caliban run for beginner and intermediate level
skiers as well as for wildemess backcountry skiers and snowboarders in the Middle
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 challengi~ng at the
top of the Adel lift in order to get to the beginner and intermediate terrain of tl3e Dream
and Caliban runs.
Extend the Caliban and Dream runs and create new intermediate level terr.ain on the
ddge.
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 Experiences
Build a snow tubing facility and lift to offer lower bo'Stwinter recreation opporlunities 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 clearcut.
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 increase the
ability of users to ski through the trees.
Skier/Snowboarder Services
Enlarge and remodel the existing lodge to accommodate current use as well as
anticipated future increases in skier visits.
3- Resolution GNegaI~PAUL~Ski Ashland~2003 DEIS~Headwaters allemafive reso.wpd
pd~'oseJ e^,q~Uelle s~e}~pee~Sl:aa CO0;b~Ouslqsv IHs¥1rIvd~I~IVE) uop, nlosa~J -~
· peeooJd o), s),oedsl.~ le!SJe^OJ~,UOO
-uou eq~, §U!MOII8 eI!HM ueld eH), Jo m, oedse I~!SJ~)AOJlUOO :[SOLU eH), §U!!),elOS! JO ),oeJJe
eq~, eAeq II!M s!qJ. 'ueld uo!suedxa eq~, jo sloedse Jeq~,o lie epnlou! II!M UO!S!Oap Jeq),o
eq.I. '~,01 8u!~ed u!etu eq~, Jo uo!suedxe puc eeJe qoueJ8 elPP!I~I eq~, o~,u! uo!suedxe -
lesodoJd eql jo s~,oedse le!SJe^OJ),UOO ),sore ot, q ~q~, epnlou! II!M UO!S!Oep ~)uo 'SUO!S!Oep
e~,eJedes o/vq se uo!suedxe eeJV PIS puelqsV '11~1 pesodoJd eql JOj uo!s!oep eq~, enss!
lnq ',{),eJp, Ue sl! u! lesodoJd eeJV PIS puelqsv '),IAI eq~, e7_,~leUe plnoqs eoFu:as ),seJo_-I eq/
uo!s!oeQ jo pJooe~
· aseqd lsJg eql u! ~ els!V uep!~ puc ';~Bpol eql JSeU
u!eJJel JeUU!Seq ppe '('ale 'sBulpl!nq le~lo!l 'e§pol) eokues JeuJolsn3 o), s~peJSdn e~lel~l
· l~sodoJd aq~, uo
euop s! ~o~ I~UOp,!ppe ,~ue eJojeq SI~Q aql u! peyp, uap! s),oa[oJd uop,~JolsaJ aq~, e~,ep, lUl
6uiseqcl
~lejes Japls eseaJou! puc uop, saOu°° aonpaJ o~, eaJe 8 als!V eq~, uap!AA
· sJe!~is p~Jn[u! elenoeA~ ol iJ!P!eqo
Jospu!M eql ~o tuolloq eq), o), 90-1 jo aseq eql u~oJ] m, noJ sseJBa ,{oueBJ~JUe ue ap!AoJd
,~.eJes .~ep.~eoq~ou S/.Je!~IS
'),Ol >loeq aq~, pue 1Ol OUplJed
u!eLu eq~, uee~leq peo~ eql uep!~A puc ~l!l!OeJ Ou!qm, eql JOj OupIJed leUO!l!ppe pi!n8
· s,~ep!loq puc spue~lee~A ~snq uo p[:o~ sseooe e41
jo eseq e41 woJj sunJ 1e41 elilnqs e 41!~ lOl Oupped u!ew e41 jo uo!suedxe e41 eoelde~l
'suo!leJedo eo!AJeS JeLUo),sno aq), jo ~ou~g!Ol~)
eql eseeJOU! o), eOpol eqi Jeeu doqs le),ueJ e pue ~,Ol Oupped eq), JeIgu sqlooq ),a~lOp, Pl!n8
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 comments are offered as a supplement to Comments adopted by City
Council October 7, 2003.
o
The QAJQC Team should consist of a minimum of 3 people
The so/Is and hydrology of Mt. Ashland and the proposed expansion are unique.
Members of the QA/QC Team should have experience and knowledge of the
hydrology and soils of the proposed expansion area.
To ensure the intent behind recommending the QAJQC team, the QA/QC team
will be understood as having the authority to require the Mount Ashland
Association (MAA) and its contractors to abide by the recommendations and
direction of the team.
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.
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 &the
east fork of Ashland Creek
The QA/QC 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 measures to restore vegetation prior to actual
construction.
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.
There are a number of comments in the October 7, 2003 comments submittexl to
the Forest Service that were stated as issues for the QA/QC team to monitor.
Items # 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 11-14 are better characterized as recommendations of
the city of Ashland.