Loading...
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.