Laserfiche WebLink
<br />early and late season, the additional snowmaking expansion would occur on high <br />use trail segments that link upper mountain slopes with the base area. <br /> <br />Snowmaking coverage would vary from year to year I depending upon weather <br />conditions. The system would be sized to produce 18 inches of coverage per acre, <br />except in Alternative E in which it would be 24 inches per acre, The total <br />amount (acreage) of snowmaking would vary by alternative. The existing portable <br />snowmaking facilities and equipment would be largely replaced with a modern, <br />state"of-the-art system. <br /> <br />In all action alternatives, three million gallons of water storage for snowmaking <br />would be provided. The stored water would also be used as a backup domestic and <br />firefighting water source for the SWSD, h 1.5 million gallon storage pond would <br />be constructed for water metering and buffering by enlarging a small pond near <br />the water treatment plant at the bottom of the Coney Glade chair lift. The <br />remaining storage would be provided by a new impoundment or enlargement of <br />existing ponds to the west of the Elk Camp lift. Snowmaking water would be drawn <br />from Snowmass Creek ata rate that would not exceed 6 cubic feet per second (cfs) <br />or 2,690 gallons per minute (gpm) , --~ <br /> <br />d. Off-Site Development <br /> <br />At the request of the TOSV Town Council in its comments on the DEIS (Resolution <br />#15, Series of 1993), a common off-site residential and commercial development <br />scenario is analyzed in each alternative to ascertain potential cumulative <br />impacts and because elements of this buildout scenario are connected actions. <br />This dff-site scenario defines the level of development anticipated during the <br />planning period on private lands at the East Village area at the base of Burnt <br />Mountain and elsewhere within TOSV, For purposes of assessing long-term impacts, <br />it is assumed that off-site residential and commercial development in Alternative <br />A would be ,equivalent to that in the action alternatives. Certain facilities <br />proposed by ASC for inclusion in the new MDP would be located both on NFSL ~nd <br />within the East Village development, The common off-site buildout scenario for <br />all action alternatives would be as follows: <br /> <br />Table S~3: Off-Site Development Scenario, All Alternatives <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />Existing <br />Future East Village <br />Future Other TOSV <br /> <br />Number of <br />Res. units <br />3,517 <br />134 <br />500 <br /> <br />Amount of <br />Commercial S,P. <br />177,725 <br />15,500 <br />80,000 <br /> <br />TOTAL BUlLDOUT <br /> <br />4,151 <br /> <br />273,225 <br /> <br />The Town Council has also requested that a parking scenario be analyzed which <br />represents no more than a ten percent increase in the amount of public parking <br />in TOSV. The distribution of parking would vary by alternative, as shown below; <br />however, the maximum number of public parking spaces would total 2,150 in all <br />alternatives, <br /> <br />Summary . 8 <br />