Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
GRAND TARGHEE RESORT MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN EIS UPDATE
▶GTR background
▶Base area master plan evolution
▶Master Development Plan proposal: EIS
▶The EIS process so far, as of February, 2021
GTR HISTORY:IMPORTANT DATES
▶1969: GTR opens
▶1997: Booth Creek Ski Holdings
(controlled by Gillette family) takes ownership
▶2004: 120-ac base area private land exchange approved by
FS
(for 400-ac Squirrel Meadows)
GTR:CURRENT DEVELOPMENT▶96 accommodation units
▶5 chair lifts
▶37,000 sf commercial development +
amenities
▶USFS Special Use Permit area: 2,400
ac
▶3,000 visitor carrying capacity
GTR BASE AREA ASPIRATIONS:ORIGINAL 2004 PUD APPLICATION
▶875 residential units
▶59,964 sf commercial space
▶118,248 sf resort services / amenities
AMENDED GTR PUD Approved in 2008 by Teton Co., WY
▶450 residential units
▶150,000 sf commercial
▶118,248 sf resort services / amenities
2017-2019: GTR & TETON COUNTY, WY RENEGOTIATE BASE AREA MASTER PLAN
▶Intended to create “clustered resort center” ▶Updated for market conditions▶“a destination ski area”▶“Provide an efficient arrangement of … development
and amenities at a scale and program size that will fit physically, environmentally, and economically with the mountain.”
▶Teton Co., WY intent was to concentrate commercial development at the base area (not on the mountain)
2019 BASE AREA MASTER PLAN
▶Supersedes 2008 Master Plan
▶Four building phases
▶Expires 5 years after effective date (2019)
▶Link to 2019 Base Area Master Plan
2019 BASE AREA MASTER PLAN
▶Total 450 lodging units
▶20% (90)within RAPA
▶80% within RPCA
▶645,510 sf of development permitted in RPCA
▶3,500 Avg. Peak Occupancy
RAPA: 8.5 ac
RAPA: 75.8 ac
RPCA: 35.7 ac
CURRENT NEPA PROPOSAL, 2018-2021:MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN (MDP)
▶Submitted in 2018 under:National Forest Ski Area Permit Act of 1986 & Ski Area Recreational Opportunity Enhancement Act of 2011
▶These laws have “greased the skids” for ski area expansions
▶GTR Purpose & Need statement identifies
“a need to improve the recreational experience and address shortcomings in their terrain offerings and operations in order to remain viable in the competitive destination skier/rider market.”
▶Link to EIS announcement, Outline of Project
MDP PROPOSED ACTION: Lifts & Boundary Changes
▶Lifts within existing permit area:
-2 new chairlifts (not including already approved Peaked chair)
-Shoshone extension & re-alignment-platter surface lift
-2 additional “magic carpet” conveyors
▶Special Use Permit (SUP) Adjustments:
-South Bowl and Mono Trees “pods” (1,200 ac, 50% increase to permit area, 4 lifts)
-Will require Forest Plan amendments.
MDP PROPOSED ACTION:Additional Infrastructure
▶Terrain and On-Mountain Infrastructure: terrain development, glading and grading; road construction; 57 acres of new snowmaking coverage; Fred’s Mt. and Sacagawea restaurants, a yurt, 2 warming cabins and one basic warming hut.
▶Non-Winter and Alternative Activities: construction of summer recreation trails; canopy tour/fly line, zip line, aerial adventure course and re-location of the disc golf course; alternative winter activities like a snowtubing facility and expansion of existing Nordic, snowshoeing and fat biking offerings.
▶Project details, Story Map link
POTENTIAL CHANGES FROM CURRENT STATUS:
(ASSUMING FULL EIS PROJECT APPROVAL + BASE AREA BUILDOUT)
▶96 accommodation units to 450 units▶7 new chairlifts + surface lifts
(including approved Peaked chair)▶37,000 sf to 650,000 sf+ resort/commercial
development▶2,400 ac to 3,600 ac permit area
(JHMR is 2,500 ac)▶Comfortable Carrying Capacity
from 3,000 to 7,000 visitors (comparable to JHMR)
NEPA EIS TIMELINE: THE PROCESS GETS ROLLING JUNE, 2020
▶M.O.U. between USFS and Grand Targhee
▶Teton County, ID & Teton County, WY granted Cooperating Agency status in EIS process.
▶Neither the USFS nor GTR had formally reached out to the community at this point in time.
NEPA EIS TIMELINE:PUBLIC SCOPINGSEPTEMBER -NOVEMBER, 2020
▶Scoping Period: 384 letters submitted▶Predominantly skeptical comments▶Driggs, Teton Co., ID express support of GTR
as economic partner, but question scale of proposal
NEPA EIS TIMELINE:TETON COUNTY, ID ENGAGESSEPTEMBER -NOVEMBER, 2020
▶Commissioners from both Teton Counties meet to discuss EIS and explore avenues for cooperation
▶Teton County & Driggs meet with GNAR(Gateway& Natural Amenity Region Initiative, UT State Univ.)
▶GNAR proposes Situation Assessment, socio-economic analysis, identify Community/GTR mediated collaboration opportunities.
▶Rob Marin appointed County representative on USFS Inter-disciplinary (ID) team
NEPA EIS TIMELINE:INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM FIRST MEETING NOVEMBER 23, 2020
▶ID Team meetings hosted by project consultant, SE Group▶Review of scoping comments▶Top 5 concerns:
-Wildlife (Bighorn Sheep, wolverine, birds)
-Scenery (wilderness / valley views, night skies)
-Traffic/Parking (not addressed in proposal at all)
-Socio-economic impacts (housing, labor public services)
-Recreation (b/c skiing, Teton Canyon impacts)
NEPA EIS TIMELINE: SECOND & THIRD ID TEAM MEETINGSDECEMBER 11, 2020 & JANUARY 21, 2021
▶Draft EIS alternatives so far:
1) No Action
2) Approve development within existing SUP boundary (possible removal of individual components).
3) Proposal within existing SUP + South Bowl only ▶ (with 1-chair configuration, a 400-acre expansion)
4) Proposal within existing SUP + South Bowl only ▶ (with 3-chairlifts, a 600 acre-expansion)
5) Proposal within existing SUP + Mono Trees only ▶ (1 chair, a 600-acre expansion)
6) Full project approval
Info shared included:
-Teton Co. Comp Plan
-Workforce trends (ID Dept. of Labor)
-Teton Co.Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
-Teton Co. Transportation Planand road improvement costs
-recent real estate reports
-current rental inventory
NEPA EIS TIMELINE:SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT TEAM MEETING(SE GROUP, USFS, TETON COUNTY, ID)JANUARY 8, 2021
SOCIO-ECONOMIC INDICATORS FOR ANALYSIS
▶Population, employment (part-time seasonal employment vs. full-time), wages
▶City/County tax revenue, two-state problem▶Housing, affordable housing, short-term rentals,
winter & summer▶Use of public/social services, public transportation
and infrastructure, airport, schools▶Visitor spending▶Compliance with Environmental Justice and
Executive Order 12898(minority, low-income impacts)
▶Qualitative discussion of the values, believes, and attitudes held within both counties
ORIGINAL TIMEFRAME FOR NEPA PROCESS(overly ambitious)▶Completion of specialist reports
- December, 2020 ▶Development of Draft EIS
- January, 2021▶Initiation of official comment period
- March/April, 2021▶Development of Final EIS,
- October, 2021▶Objection period
- December, 2021▶Record of Decision issued
- January, 2022
CURRENT TIMEFRAME ESTIMATEFOR NEPA PROCESS
▶Completion of specialist reports - May, 2020
▶Development of Draft EIS- June, 2021
▶Initiation of official comment period- August, 2021
▶Development of Final EIS - January, 2022
▶Objection period - March, 2022
▶Record of Decision issued - June, 2022
We are here in the process as of February, 2021;draft alternatives mostly established, EIS analysis in progress.
Late Summer, 2021?
Mid-2022?
GOING FORWARD
▶EIS process may not yield what we’re hoping for
▶Community to GTR direct engagement?
▶Role of non-profits & citizen groups vs local government
▶VARD: possible “Q&A” with GTR?
▶Hire outside mediation?
▶Strong possibility of litigation: nobody wins
DOES GTR HAVE THE FINANCIAL WHEREWITHAL TO MAKE ALL THIS DEVELOPMENT HAPPEN?
▶Lack of base area development for years
▶Peaked chair has been in the works for over a decade
▶Parking / Transportation issues unaddressed
▶If GTR builds it, will they come?
▶Is this project designed to attract deeper-pocketed investors?
