WSP09805 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Aspen Highlands Ski Area A Visual Quality Objective (VQO) of Modification was established for the ski area by the Forest Plan. This standard acknowledges that some level of development and landscape alteration will be necessary to accommodate certain winter activities. Visual impacts are most often associated with: tree removal or alteration of vegetation patterns; soil disturbance: construction of structures (buildings, lift lines. utility lines); and ecological changes (slope failure, fire, disease. insect infestations). Facilities authorized for construction on NFS lands will be designed to meet Forest Service visual management objectives. which include but are not limited to; blending with the scenic environment through the use of colors and construction materials indigenous to the site; low level structures, designed for efficient energy use; the use of non-reflective glass; and architectural design in context with the landscape (i.e., rustic, craftsman. and country lodge styles). Appropriate siting of these facilities is also important in order to maximize mountain operation efficiency, provide quality experiences for skiers. and maintain scenic quality. The Steeplechase and Thunderbowl lift will be designed to blend into the landscape by imitating the natural fonn and line contrast adjacent to the areas of disturbance. The new patrol headquarters building will be located such that it will be difficult if not impossible to identify from a distance. The Highland and Maroon bowls are not authorized for any development and therefore will maintain their current visual quality. The views from the Olympic chairlift will be slightly different, but not necessarily any less in quality as the relocation of the chair approved in the Decision Notice for the Aspen Highlands EA. The concern about the retention of the old base lodge is not within my jurisdiction as this lodge is located on private property and owned by the Aspen Skiing Company. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT DRAFT EIS COMMENTS The public comment period for the Draft EIS began immediately after a Notice of Availability was published in the Federal Register on October 2, 1996, and approximately 240 copies of the Draft EIS and 144 copies of the Summary were circulated to individuals, organizations, and agencies. The initial forty- five (45) day comment period was extended to December 10, 1996, allowing a sixty (60) day time frame in which to provide input on the Draft EIS. Reference copies of these documents were also sent to libraries in Pitkin, Eagle, and Garfield Counties. Copies were also sent to Colorado Mountain College campuses in Aspen, Basalt, Carbondale and Glenwood Springs. In addition, Forest Service offices in Silverthorne, Minturn, Eagle, Glenwood Springs. Rifle, Meeker, Carbondale, and Aspen, Colorado also maintained copies of the Draft EIS for public review. A total of 74 letters were received during the comment period on the Draft EIS. Of the 74 letters received, 61 letters (82 percent) were from respondents in Colorado and of those. 22 letters (36 percent) were /Tom respondents in the Roaring F ork Valley. INTERAGENCY COORDINATION All of the agencies and jurisdictions noted below participated in the processes leading to preparation of the EIS. Future coordination will also occur as it is important that development proceeds in an orderly fashion and in a way that protects the area's resource values. 36 Pubbc In\.'olvement Interagency Coordination