WSP09805 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Aspen Highlands Ski Area SUMMARY OF THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION I believe that implementation of my decision will significantly improve the quality of the recreation experience for visitors to the Aspen Highlands Ski Area and the White River National Forest. I am also convinced that my approval of certain elements of this project will allow for much more efficient use of both on-mountain and local community infrastructure, without substantially increasing peak-day skier numbers. With the opening of the Deep Steeplechase area, I believe that separation of intermediate skiers from expert skiers will be enhanced. The additional acreage of skiable terrain that would be provided by the development that I have selected, approximately 319 acres, would also help to achieve a niche the for Aspen Highlands Ski Area within the four mountains of the Aspen area. The EIS clearly displays the considerable opportunity that exists to build skier visitation during shoulder and ofT-peak portions of the ski season. I am persuaded that the skiing opportunity that will be offered in the Steeplechase area, and the improvements and upgrades to the remainder of the Aspen Highlands Ski Area will be of a caliber that will provide the necessary impetus to build visitation during these ofT-peak times. This redistribution of skiers will enable the ski area to make more efficient use of its lifts, restaurants, and other facilities. I see the same type of benefits available for many local merchants and businesses. ASSOCIATED ACTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING The EIS contains a comprehensive discussion of potential mitigation measures. including the agency or entity that would be responsible for ensuring implementation of mitigation and monitoring requirements. The Forest Service is responsible for ensuring that mitigation for most impacts that will occur on-site (i.e., on National Forest System lands) is completed. However, for certain actions on NFS lands, other agencies have statutory jurisdiction, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for wetlands impacts and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment for storm water discharge from construction sites. For impacts that may occur ofT-site, the EIS includes mitigation and monitoring measures that could address potential adverse effects. Other agencies with jurisdiction will be responsible for implementing and administering these measures. In certain cases, the Forest Service will delay approval for implementation of on-site actions until the appropriate commitments and agreements are secured by the permittee and presiding agency. The definition of "implementation" will vary according to the issue or impact of concern. For example, for wetland impacts, no ground-disturbing activities can occur prior to the permittee completing Section 14 Associated Actions and Requirements Required Aliligalion and Monitoring