| Pages 1-67 Pages 67-142 Pages 67-122 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Alternative 3: Preferred Numerous visitor and employee facilities are located within Curry Village. This alternative would remove 253 tent cabins from the talus zone. The reduction of tent cabins would reduce the number of visitors and employees within the talus and rockfall zones, resulting in a local, long-term, major, beneficial impact to public health and safety. However, the tent and wood cabins remaining within these hazard zones would continue to be a risk to public health and safety and would remain a local, long-term, moderate, adverse impact to public health and safety. The redevelopment of the guest parking areas in the talus and rockfall zones would adhere to the Yosemite Valley Geologic Hazard Guidelines because new miscellaneous structures (parking) may be within the talus and rockfall zones, resulting in a local, long-term, moderate, adverse impact to public health and safety. Redevelopment of facilities within the common area of Curry Village (which includes Curry Pavilion, the historic visitor registration, retail facilities, and employee facilities such as housekeeping, maintenance, and employee lounge facilities) would be within the rockfall zone. All of these facilities are considered standard occupancy, except the Curry Pavilion, which is considered special occupancy. The retention of Curry Pavilion in the rockfall zone would result in a local, long-term, moderate, adverse impact to public health and safety. Construction would occur intermittently over a 20-year period. Infrastructure improvements would be completed in the early phases, followed by construction of lodging units and other visitor-serving facilities. Construction of new facilities in the talus or rockfall zones would involve earthmoving and trenching that would not be expected to trigger rockfalls, resulting in a short-term, negligible, adverse impact to public health and safety. Maintenance of utilities in Curry Village could occur within the talus or rockfall zone. Construction activities associated with underground utility and roadway repairs would include utility trench excavation, pipe removal, minor grading, engineered backfill placement and compaction, and asphalt concrete removal and replacement. These activities would not be expected to trigger rockfalls, resulting in a short-term, negligible, adverse impact to geologic resources and public health and safety. Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Construction of the campground is expected to occur as part of Phase 2, following the installation of utilities. Construction of new facilities in the talus and rockfall zones would not be expected to trigger rockfalls. Construction activities would include grading, vegetation and tree removal, trenching, and compaction. These activities would result in a local, short-term, negligible, adverse impact to public health and safety. Upper Pines Campground Construction of the new campsites and facilities is expected to occur as part of Phase 1, following the installation of utilities. Construction of new campsites would occur outside the talus and rockfall zones. Construction activities would include grading, vegetation removal, trenching, and compaction. These activities would not be expected to trigger rockfalls, resulting in a local, short-term, negligible impact to public health and safety. Construction activities would include maintenance and repair of existing utility infrastructure in Upper Pines Campground, which could occur in the talus and rockfall zones. Since the utilities are underground and within existing utility corridors, maintenance activities would be expected to have a local, short-term, negligible, adverse impact on public health and safety. Construction impacts could be mitigated by minimizing the area disturbed and implementing Best Management Practices during construction. Lower Pines Campground Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Under Alternative 3, the level of risk to life and property would be reduced from existing conditions because of the overall decrease in the number of standard and miscellaneous occupancy structures in the talus and rockfall zone, resulting in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact to public health and safety. Remaining structures in Curry Village, South Camp, and Upper Pines Campground (with the exception of Curry Pavilion) and all above-ground utility infrastructure would be in conformance with the Yosemite Valley Geologic Hazard Guidelines. Essential facilities, such as the Curry Village fire station, would be located out of the talus and rockfall zones, in accordance with Yosemite Valley Geologic Hazard Guidelines. The facilities that remain in the talus and rockfall zones would result in a local, long-term, moderate, adverse effect on public health and safety. The risks increase from moderate to major as the period of time from the last rockfall event approaches or exceeds the recurrence interval for future rockfall events. Unmitigated seismic hazards consisting of frequent, small seismic events would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to people and property. Infrequent, moderate to large seismic events would result in a local, long-term, moderate, adverse impact to people and property. Construction activities associated with maintenance of existing utility infrastructure and construction of new facilities and campsites would not be expected to trigger rockfalls. These activities would have a local, short-term, negligible, adverse impact on public health and safety. Cumulative Impacts The steep granite walls of Yosemite Valley are the primary geologic
resource affecting the project area. Trail maintenance or road work
requiring the use of explosives could potentially trigger rockfall
events, which would be an adverse impact. To maintain the current
level of risk, impacts would be evaluated, park explosive guidelines
followed, and blasting activities monitored. Cumulative trail maintenance
and road work activities would result in local, short-term, moderate,
adverse impacts on public health and safety. Alternative 3 would slightly improve public safety compared to Alternative 1 by removing 253 tent cabins from the talus and rockfall zones, which would affect the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3, in combination with the cumulative projects, would result in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact with respect to public safety due to an overall reduction in the density of people and facilities in the talus and rockfall zones. Impairment Soils Cabin construction activities would take place within development areas that have been previously disturbed. Soil excavation could result in the disturbance of the soil profile, interrupting the natural chemical, physical, and biological processes in the soil. The localized removal of vegetation and use of heavy equipment could increase soil erosion and result in soil compaction in these areas. Construction impacts could be mitigated by minimizing the area disturbed; salvaging the existing soils for use as backfill; and implementing Best Management Practices, such as the use of soil compaction, silt fences, soil mats, and other soil retention devices, which would reduce impacts to a moderate intensity. In addition, impacts to soil resources would occur within the relatively small area of site development. The construction of cabins would have a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact on soil resources, with the application of the mitigation measures such as silt fences, sedimentation basins, and other erosion control measures to reduce surface scouring, and discharge to water bodies. Development of new transportation corridors (such as multi-use paved trails and roadways) would have the potential to affect several soil types. Generally, trail construction would occur adjacent to existing linear corridors, such as roads or utilities, or would be upgrades of existing informal trails. New trail construction would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to soil resources, because the impacts would primarily occur in linear segments of previously disturbed soils. New trails would be constructed to accommodate surface and subsurface water flow. Additionally, upgrades to existing trails would decrease erosion in high-use areas. Overall, the construction of new roads and trails would have a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to soil resources. Maintenance and repair of the existing utility infrastructure would occur in already disturbed areas. The repairs to utility infrastructure would have a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to soil resources, with the application of the mitigation measures such as silt fences, sedimentation basins, and other erosion control measures to reduce surface scouring, and discharge to water bodies. Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Construction of the campground is expected to occur as part of Phase 2, following the installation of utilities. Construction activities in this area would include construction of new campsites, roadways, and parking areas, and removal of existing vegetation to enable development of South Camp. Development would occur in a new development area designated in the Yosemite Valley Plan. Impacts to soil resources would be similar to those discussed for Curry Village. The application of mitigation measures discussed for Curry Village would further reduce the potential adverse impacts to soil resources. Upper Pines Campground Lower Pines Campground Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Construction, demolition, and vegetation removal activities would temporarily disturb soils within the designated development and redevelopment areas, resulting in a local, short-term, moderate, adverse impact to soil resources. However, removal of campsites from the River Protection Overlay, consolidation of development in already disturbed areas, and employment of Best Management Practices would result in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact to soils. The construction of new roads and trails would have a local, short-term, minor, adverse effect on soil resources. Cumulative Impacts Development projects intended to serve park visitors and employees in Yosemite National Park have included hotels and visitor centers, campgrounds, bridges with associated roads and parking lots, employee housing, utility facilities, maintenance yards, and supply storage areas. Past facility development has contributed to the overall degradation of soil resources in the park (i.e., soil erosion on unpaved trails and campsites from foot traffic). Certain projects could result in increased degradation of soil resources, such as construction projects related to lodging, employee housing, and other facilities. However, other projects related to habitat restoration (as described in Alternative 1) would have long-term, beneficial impacts on soils. Although these types of projects may have slight site-specific, short-term, adverse effects on soils these projects would restore and manage natural resources and reduce soil degradation. For example, full implementation of the Yosemite Valley Plan would restore approximately 177 acres of soil, of which approximately 136 acres would be high-value resource soils. The cumulative projects would result in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial, cumulative impact on soil resources. Alternative 3 would enhance the cumulative impact to soil resources by removing campsites from the River Protection Overlay. Although Alternative 3 would avoid the more extensive effects of soil erosion and bank destabilization compared to Alternative 1, it would not affect the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3, in combination with the cumulative projects, would result in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial, cumulative impact on soil resources. Impairment Hydrology, Floodplains, and Water Quality Construction would occur intermittently over a 20-year period. Infrastructure improvements would be completed in the early phases, followed by construction of lodging units and other visitor-serving facilities. Construction activities in Curry Village would have the potential to increase erosion and sediment discharge, resulting in a localized, short-term, minor impact to water quality, in the absence of the mitigation measures presented in this report and included in this project proposal. The use of heavy equipment presents a potential for accidental releases of fuels or other hazardous substances that could affect local surface water or groundwater quality. New underground utility connections to new structures could impede groundwater movement perpendicular to the infrastructure and create the potential for wastewater leaks. Ongoing maintenance and repairs to existing infrastructure would take place in Curry Village outside the floodplain. The areas that would be affected are within existing corridors that have been previously disturbed. Construction impacts could be mitigated by minimizing the area disturbed, salvaging existing soils for use as fill, and implementing Best Management Practices during construction to reduce the potential for water quality impacts associated with soil erosion and construction equipment releases. Restoration of vegetation upon completion should minimize the potential for adverse impacts to local hydrologic processes and water quality. Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge It is anticipated that the amphitheater would be constructed as part of Phase 3, following removal of the concessioner operation. Construction activities would occur within the existing concessioner parking lot, an already disturbed area. Construction of the amphitheater, access trail, and restrooms would involve grading, trenching, and soil compaction, which would have the potential to increase erosion and sediment discharge. Impacts to hydrology and water quality related to construction activities would be similar to those discussed for Curry Village. The application of mitigation measures discussed for Curry Village would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to hydrology and water quality. Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Construction of the campground is expected to occur as part of Phase 2, following the installation of utilities. Construction activities would occur in areas not previously disturbed, but designated by the Yosemite Valley Plan for new development. Removal of existing vegetation and construction of the new campsites, roadways, and parking areas would involve grading, trenching, and soil compaction, which could increase erosion and sediment discharge. Impacts to hydrology and water quality related to construction activities would be similar to those described for Curry Village. The application of mitigation measures described for Curry Village would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to water quality. Upper Pines Campground The addition of new campsites, parking areas, and roadways would increase the amount of impervious surface in the area, increasing the potential for nonpoint-source pollution, which would result in a local, long-term, minor, adverse impact to water quality. Underground utility connections to new campsite development could result in a local, long-term, minor to moderate, adverse impact by impeding groundwater movement perpendicular to the infrastructure and causing potential wastewater leaks. Construction of the new campsites and facilities is expected to occur as part of Phase 1, following the installation of utilities. Construction activities would occur in areas not previously disturbed, but designated by the Yosemite Valley Plan for new development. Construction of the campsites and parking area would result in short-term effects related to loss of vegetation and soil erosion. Construction of the bridge across the tributary to the Merced River would have a short-term, moderate, adverse effect on river flow and water quality due to the intrusion of construction personnel and equipment into the tributary. The use of heavy equipment near the river could result in accidental releases of fuels or other hazardous substances, thus affecting water quality. Construction impacts could be minimized by limiting work within the river to low water periods, undertaking construction during the dry season, and implementing Best Management Practices during construction to reduce the potential for water quality impacts associated with soil erosion and construction equipment releases. Construction activities would include maintenance of existing utility infrastructure. The areas to be affected are within utility corridors that have been previously disturbed and are currently developed as a campground. Construction activities would include grading and trenching, resulting in a short-term negligible impact to soil resources. Construction impacts could be mitigated by minimizing the area disturbed and implementing Best Management Practices during construction. Lower Pines Campground Construction of the new campsites and facilities is expected to occur as part of Phase 1, following the installation of utilities. Construction activities would occur in areas already disturbed and designed by the Yosemite Valley Plan for redevelopment. Demolishing and removing campsites from the River Protection Overlay could temporarily increase erosion from this area, which would introduce sediment into the river. Impacts to hydrology and water quality would be similar to those described for Curry Village. The application of mitigation measures as discussed for Curry Village, with special attention to erosion control measures during removal of existing campsites from the River Protection Overlay, would further reduce the potential adverse impacts to hydrology and water quality. Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Alternative 3 would remove campsites from the River Protection Overlay, resulting in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact on hydrology and floodplain values. The removal of parking spaces from Curry Orchard and the road through Stoneman Meadow would also reduce the potential sources of nonpoint pollution that occur in areas with concentrated vehicle use, which would have a long-term, minor, beneficial impact on water quality. Development of campsites and restrooms in the floodplain would result in a local, long-term, minor, adverse impact to floodplain values. Construction of facilities in the floodplain could increase erosion and sedimentation, but would be mitigated by the use of Best Management Practices. Alternative 3 would increase the amount of impervious surface throughout the project area, increasing the potential sources of nonpoint pollution, which would result in a local, long-term, minor, adverse impact to water quality. Cumulative Impacts Reasonably foreseeable future projects that would have beneficial impacts on hydrologic processes and water quality include restoration actions identified in the Yosemite Valley Plan and described under Alternative 1. Cumulatively, these projects would be anticipated to have beneficial impacts on hydrologic processes and water quality of the Merced River. Alternatively, adverse impacts could occur from the projects including construction of additional lodging and a visitor transit center in Yosemite Valley. Overall, the effect of implementing the projects would have a long-term, beneficial effect on river hydrologic processes, floodplains, and water quality. The Merced River Plan protects river-related natural resources through the application of management elements. While some of the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects along the Merced River in Yosemite Valley would ultimately remove constrictions to streamflows, enhance water quality, rehabilitate eroded streambanks, and reduce degradation of stream characteristics in the Merced River, others would result in adverse water quality impacts and bank erosion. Thus, the cumulative projects would result in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact to hydrologic processes and water quality. Alternative 3 would enhance the cumulative beneficial impact by removing campsites from the River Protection Overlay, but would reduce the cumulative impact with respect to water resources and flood hazards by developing campsites and the amphitheater within the floodplain. The removal of the parking spaces from Curry Orchard, Stoneman Meadow, and roadside areas throughout the Yosemite Valley would reduce a source of nutrients, coliform, turbidity, and other water pollutants to the Merced River. The net effect of these impacts would not change the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3, in combination with the cumulative projects, would result in a regional, long-term, minor, beneficial impact on hydrologic processes and water quality. Impairment Wetlands The relocation of the Mountain Shop in Alternative 3 would affect another wetland. This wetland feature appears to be associated with another wetland farther south, which is not connected however, as buildings occur between the two areas. The wetland affected by the Mountain Shop is designated as palustrine emergent, palustrine forested, and riverine intermittent streambed. The palustrine forested wetland known to be inundated by normal high-water or flood flows is well outside of the river corridor or 1997 flood extent boundary. These wetlands appear to be receiving inundation from runoff from the adjacent higher elevations. It is assumed that development of the Mountain Shop in this area would provide for diversion of runoff that would no longer be accommodated once this area is filled. The size of the proposed building and the staging required during construction would result in a loss to the wetland feature. Although the wetland would be lost, because of its size and isolation, loss of the wetland would not impact Stoneman Meadow or the river. The loss of this wetland feature would result in a local, long-term, moderate, adverse effect on wetlands. Application of the mitigation measures such as protection of wetland areas, minimization of disturbance areas, and control of runoff to prevent downstream contamination and sedimentation would further reduce the impact to this wetland. Construction would occur intermittently over a 20-year period. Infrastructure improvements would be completed in the early phases, followed by construction of lodging units and other visitor-serving facilities. Construction impacts could include temporary diversion of flows during installation of the culvert and paving of the parking lot. Construction activities associated with utility and roadway maintenance also could affect wetlands in Curry Village. Siltation of wetlands during grading activities in areas adjacent to the stream corridor could also occur. The application of mitigation measures , specifically those related to the protection of wetland areas, minimization of disturbance areas, and control of runoff to prevent downstream contamination and sedimentation, would reduce the potential adverse impacts to wetlands. With the application of mitigation measures, construction impacts would be local, short term, minor, and adverse. Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Filling portions of the wetland would permanently alter hydrologic function and wetland vegetation and result in direct habitat loss and potentially habitat degradation of wetlands and waters downstream if flow into adjacent areas is reduced. Park visitors and maintenance personnel are likely to make short and directed visits to the proposed facilities; therefore, indirect impacts associated with unintended access to surrounding wetland areas are not expected, thus resulting in a local, long-term, moderate, adverse impact to wetlands, in the absence of the mitigation measures presented in this report and included in this project proposal. The affected wetlands are in a high-use area and do not likely support a high level of functions and values relative to other wetlands farther from development. Application of mitigation measures such as protective fencing of wetlands during construction, diversion of excavation groundwater from wetlands, and native revegatation would reduce the intensity of the impact to minor. Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Construction of the campground is expected to occur as part of Phase 2, following the installation of utilities. Potential construction impacts include temporary diversion of stream flow and siltation of wetlands during grading and other earthmoving activities. The application of mitigation measures discussed above,, specifically those related to the protection of wetland areas, minimization of disturbance areas, and control of runoff to prevent downstream contamination and sedimentation, would reduce the potential adverse impacts to wetlands. If such impacts occur, they are anticipated to be local, short term, minor, and adverse Upper Pines Campground The proposed walk-in Camp A and parking areas would be located adjacent to a large braided area of intermittent stream (figure II-6). The service road and pedestrian path would cross this wetland in two locations, requiring installation of a small bridge that would cantilever the wetlands and prevent alteration of wetland hydrology and vegetation. Construction of the new campsites and facilities is expected to occur as part of Phase 1, following the installation of utilities. Potential construction impacts include sedimentation of wetlands and waters during grading, excavation, and other earthmoving activities. Additional impacts could include intrusion of construction personnel and equipment into wetlands surrounding the project footprint. Construction would include measures to allow for maximum protection of the wetland area, as described for Curry Village; therefore, if these impacts occur, they are anticipated to be local, short term, minor, and adverse. Construction activities would include maintenance and repair to existing utility infrastructure in Upper Pines Campground, which are within existing utility corridors. Construction activities would include grading and trenching, resulting in a short-term, negligible impact to wetland resources. Construction impacts could be mitigated by minimizing the area disturbed and preventing runoff from entering wetlands during construction as described for Curry Village. Due to the proximity of proposed development, human visitation to the wetlands would likely increase, which would result in some trampling of vegetation and erosion of streambanks, potentially increasing sedimentation into a large area of wetland habitat. The area of effect would likely be greater than the area of effect for Alternative 2 since the campground area would be larger, and would border more of the intermittent stream. However, given that there would be no direct fill of these wetlands, the impacts would be local, long term, moderate, and adverse, in the absence of mitigation measures presented in this report and included in this project proposal. The application of the mitigation measures provided for Curry Village would reduce the intensity of this impact to minor. Lower Pines Campground Alternative 3 would remove existing campsites and access roads in the River Protection Overlay. The redevelopment of Lower Pines Campground under Alternative 3 would avoid all wetland areas and enhance the Merced River corridor through the removal of built features adjacent to the river, potentially expanding the wetlands adjacent to the campsites being removed. Removal of existing campsites from wetland habitat would have a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial impact to wetlands. Construction of the new campsites and facilities is expected to occur as part of Phase 1, and would not require utility upgrades. Potential construction impacts include sedimentation of wetlands and waters during removal of existing campsites in the River Protection Overlay. Additional impacts could include intrusion of construction personnel and equipment into wetlands surrounding the project footprint. The application of mitigation measures as described for Curry Village would reduce the potential adverse impact to a minor intensity. Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Alternative 3 would result in local, short-term, minor, adverse construction impacts to wetlands. Removal of campsites in Lower Pines would somewhat offset wetland loss and degradation at Curry Village and Upper Pines. Additional wetland fill to accommodate the Mountain Shop would likewise be essentially offset by the preservation of similar wetland types in South Camp. Therefore, the long-term impacts to wetlands would be local, moderate, and adverse. Cumulative Impacts Wetland and riparian systems of the Merced River corridor have been substantially altered by development and visitor activities. These changes have negatively influenced the size, form, and function of wetlands and the plants, wildlife, and aquatic species that inhabit them. Cumulative beneficial effects on wetlands include wetland restoration, rehabilitation projects, and ecosystem management. Cumulative adverse effects would be related to increased facilities, regional growth, and visitor demand such as those proposed by this project. Reasonably foreseeable future actions within Yosemite Valley are considered to have an overall beneficial effect on wetlands. For example, the Merced River Plan protects river-related natural resources through the application of management elements. Implementation of the Yosemite Valley Plan would result in a net gain of wetlands in Yosemite Valley through actions described under Alternative 1. Some Yosemite Valley Plan projects, such as construction of a replacement footbridge at the Happy Isles area and construction of a vehicle bridge across Yosemite Creek near Yosemite Lodge, have the potential to adversely affect local wetlands. These projects would be designed to ensure the long-term protection of wetlands consistent with the Merced River Plan, the Clean Water Act, and Executive Order 11990: Protection of Wetlands. Construction of some of the reasonably foreseeable projects planned or approved within Yosemite Valley as described under Alternative 1 could result in local, short-term, moderate, impacts on wildlife. The adverse impacts of these projects would be localized and short-term in nature, and primarily relate to disturbance of wildlife habitat during construction activities in the project area. The intensity of the adverse effects from construction would range from minor to moderate, depending on which, if any, of the construction projects occurred simultaneously. The cumulative projects discussed for Alternative 1would have a local, long-term, major, beneficial impact on wildlife patterns in Yosemite Valley because of the restoration of wildlife habitat and implementation of measures to reduce effects of visitor use on wildlife habitat and patterns. Construction activities associated with the cumulative projects, however, would reduce the intensity of the beneficial impact to a minor or moderate level in the short term. Construction activities proposed under Alternative 2 would intermittently occur over the 20 year life of the project and could adversely wildlife patterns due to disruption of habitat in the project area. The intensity of the adverse impact would range from minor to moderate, depending upon the sequencing and simultaneity of the projects. Construction mitigation measures, such as planning construction activities to avoid habitat fragmentation, limiting light and noise on adjacent habitat, - providing wildlife escape routes, and avoiding breeding areas during breeding season would reduce the intensity of the impacts and minimize the likelihood of simultaneous construction in areas adjacent to wildlife habitat. Construction of some of the reasonably foreseeable projects planned or approved within Yosemite Valley as described under Alternative 1 could result in local, short-term, moderate, impacts on wildlife. The adverse impacts of these projects would be localized and short-term in nature, and primarily relate to disturbance of wildlife habitat during construction activities in the project area. The intensity of the adverse effects from construction would range from minor to moderate, depending on which, if any, of the construction projects occurred simultaneously. The cumulative projects discussed for Alternative 1would have a local, long-term, major, beneficial impact on wildlife patterns in Yosemite Valley because of the restoration of wildlife habitat and implementation of measures to reduce effects of visitor use on wildlife habitat and patterns. Construction activities associated with the cumulative projects, however, would reduce the intensity of the beneficial impact to a minor or moderate level in the short term. Construction activities proposed under Alternative 3 would intermittently occur over the 20 year life of the project and could adversely wildlife patterns due to disruption of habitat in the project area. The intensity of the adverse impact would range from minor to moderate, depending upon the sequencing and simultaneity of the projects. Construction mitigation measures, such as planning construction activities to avoid habitat fragmentation, limiting light and noise on adjacent habitat, providing wildlife escape routes, and avoiding breeding areas during breeding season would reduce the intensity of the impacts and minimize the likelihood of simultaneous construction in areas adjacent to wildlife habitat. Implementation of the projects under Alternative 3 would enhance the beneficial impact of the cumulative projects by improving habitat for wildlife in the project area. These improvements would not, however, affect the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3 and the cumulative projects would result in a local, long-term, minor to moderate, beneficial impact on wildlife in Yosemite Valley, assuming that timing of construction projects precludes numerous construction activities occurring simultaneously. Impairment Vegetation Construction would occur intermittently over a 20-year period. Infrastructure improvements would be completed in the early phases (Phases 2 and 3), followed by construction of lodging units and other visitor-serving facilities (Phases 4 and 5). Potential adverse construction impacts to vegetation associated with grading, excavation, and tree removal include trampling of understory vegetation and the spread of dust and debris into areas adjacent to construction sites. Mitigation measures would be implemented to reduce the occurrence of adverse impacts, including dust abatement, controlling the spread of non-native seeds, and preservation fencing. With implementation of these measures, impacts would be local, short term, minor, and adverse. Permanent beneficial impacts would include the removal of Southside Drive from Stoneman Meadow, which would eliminate fragmentation in that area and result in a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial impact to vegetation. The removal of tent cabins from the talus zone would allow for greater continuity of upland stands of canyon live oak, resulting in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact to vegetation. Permanent adverse impacts would include direct loss of trees and understory vegetation as well as long-term trampling of vegetation due to increased foot traffic around new wood cabins. Beneficial impacts would reduce the overall effect of vegetation loss and trampling in Curry Village, resulting in a local, long-term, minor, adverse impact to vegetation. Construction activities associated with maintenance and repair of existing utility infrastructure could include utility trench excavation, minor grading, engineered backfill placement and compaction, and asphalt concrete removal and replacement. These activities would affect vegetation in Curry Village, as described above. With the application of mitigation measures described above, the impacts would be local, short term, minor, and adverse. Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Construction of these facilities is expected to occur as part of Phase 2, following the installation of utilities and relocation of Curry Village Road. Construction impacts to vegetation would be similar to those described for Curry Village, but would occur in a smaller area, thus resulting in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact. The application of mitigation measures as discussed for Curry Village would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to vegetation. Permanent impacts would also be the same as those described for Curry Village, although only a small increase in foot traffic would be likely to occur around the campground check station and dump station. Therefore, development and operation of these facilities would result in a local, long-term, minor, adverse impact to vegetation. The application of the mitigation measures as discussed for Curry Village would further reduce impacts to vegetation. Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Upper Pines Campground Lower Pines Campground Summary of Alternative 3. Alternative 3 would result in a local, short-term, moderate, adverse impact to vegetation due to construction-related activities. Implementation of Alternative 3 would require the removal of approximately 850 to 1,300 trees, mostly ponderosa pine. Although ponderosa pine and montane hardwood are not considered a limited resource in Yosemite Valley, the number of trees to be removed represents a large amount of vegetative biomass and would reduce nutrient input into the local environment, the local seed bank, and the canopy cover for understory vegetation. Furthermore, vegetation removal and disturbance would occur throughout South Camp and adjacent to high-value wetland and riparian habitats in Upper Pines, where vegetation is relatively undisturbed. Although removal of the road from Stoneman Meadow and campsites from Lower Pines would somewhat offset the intensity of these impacts, they would be local, long term, major , and adverse, in the absence of mitigation measures presented in this report and as part of the proposed project. Application of mitigation measures such as, salvaging vegetation, revegetating the area, and implementing a monitoring plan would reduce the intensity of the adverse impact to moderate. Cumulative Impacts Vegetation in Yosemite Valley has been substantially altered by development and visitor activities. Cumulative beneficial effects on vegetation include restoration, rehabilitation projects, and ecosystem management. Cumulative adverse effects would be related to increased facilities and visitor demand. Reasonably foreseeable future actions within Yosemite Valley are considered to have an overall net benefit to vegetation. For example, the Merced River Plan protects river-related natural resources through the application of management elements. Full implementation of the Yosemite Valley Plan as described under Alternative 1 would restore over 100 acres, of which a substantial amount would be high value resource vegetation in Yosemite Valley. Although certain Yosemite Valley Plan projects have potential to adversely affect local vegetation, overall the cumulative projects would increase the size, connectivity, and integrity of vegetation within the watershed, resulting in a long-term, major, beneficial cumulative effect on vegetation. Although Alternative 3 would have a local, long-term, moderate, adverse effect on vegetation with mitigations, the cumulative projects would overshadow the effects of Alternative 3 due to a substantial net gain of high value riparian, California black oak, and meadow habitat resulting in a net long-term, major, beneficial effect on vegetation patterns. Alternative 3 would not affect the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects would have a long-term, major, beneficial effect on vegetation patterns in Yosemite Valley. Impairment Wildlife Construction would occur in five phases intermittently over a 20-year period. Infrastructure improvements would be completed in the early phases (Phases 2 and 3), followed by construction of lodging units and other visitor-serving facilities (Phases 4 and 5).Construction activities would introduce heavy equipment and personnel, which would create noise, visual, and vibration disturbance within construction areas and potentially within several hundred feet of construction limits, thus decreasing the amount of available habitat for most species of birds and mammals during construction. Ground-disturbing activities, including trenching, excavating, and grading, would have the potential to bury and trap organisms such as invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, and small mammals. Sedimentation into wetlands and waterways could adversely affect aquatic invertebrates and amphibians by degrading water quality. Construction-related impacts in ponderosa pine habitat north of Curry Village are likely to adversely affect the greatest diversity of species and number of individuals, because this area is largely undeveloped and therefore more likely used by sensitive wildlife. These activities would result in a local, short-term, moderate, adverse impact to wildlife, in the absence of the mitigation measures presented in this report and included in the project proposal. Construction impacts could be mitigated by the incorporation of measures such as preconstruction surveys, timing construction to avoid disruption of breeding, and covering excavation areas. Given implementation of these measures and the fact that the majority of construction would occur in already disturbed areas, the impacts would be local, short term, minor, and adverse. Construction activities associated with underground utility and roadway repairs would include utility trench excavation, pipe removal, minor grading, engineered backfill placement and compaction, and asphalt concrete removal and replacement. These activities would affect wildlife in Curry Village, as described above. With the application of mitigation measures described above, it is expected that impacts would be short term, local, minor, and adverse. Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Upper Pines Campground Lower Pines Campground Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Development of new cabins, campsites, parking lots, roads, and buildings would affect wildlife during construction, primarily due to noise and sight disturbance. Permanent loss of habitat due to new development would affect wildlife by reducing the amount of foraging, breeding, and resting areas available, as well as by conditioning wildlife to human food sources. Development would also fragment habitats and increase habitat disturbance, which would result in sight and noise disturbance as well as impede wildlife movement. However, removal of campsites in Lower Pines and tent cabins in Curry Village, as well as road realignment, would improve habitats, thus reducing the level of effect. Therefore, Alternative 3 would result in an overall local, long-term, moderate, adverse impact to wildlife. Cumulative Impacts Historical practices such as logging, fire suppression, rangeland clearing, grazing, mining, draining, damming, diversions, the introduction of non-native species, animal trapping, and the feeding of animals have manipulated wildlife communities almost since the inception of the park. Past and ongoing activities include recreational use and construction of bridges, diversion walls, roads, pipelines, riprap, buildings, campgrounds, and other recreational features. Reasonably foreseeable future actions within Yosemite Valley are considered to have an overall net benefit to wildlife. Implementation of the Yosemite Valley Plan would restore 141 acres of river-associated wildlife habitat in Yosemite Valley. The Merced River Plan protects river-related natural resources through the application of management elements, which would help reduce adverse effects of visitor use on wildlife habitat and patterns. Cumulative actions would have a local, long-term, moderate to major, beneficial effect on wildlife within Yosemite Valley because of the habitat restoration provisions of the Yosemite Valley Plan. Thus, past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions would have a net local, long-term, moderate to major, beneficial effect on wildlife patterns. The intermittent construction activities over the 20-year length of the project could adversely impact wildlife through the disturbance of their habitat over time, resulting in a moderate adverse construction impact. Alternative 3 would improve habitat within the River Protection Overlay and Stoneman Meadow, while reducing habitat at South Camp and in parts of Curry Village, which would affect the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects would have a net long-term, minor to moderate, beneficial effect on wildlife patterns within Yosemite Valley. Impairment Special-Status Species Development in Curry Village would directly disturb potential habitat for the special-status invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, raptors, bats, and plants addressed in Appendix C. Development of cabins-with-baths could also indirectly increase trampling and foot traffic within wetland habitat, potentially resulting in erosion of streambanks and loss of vegetative cover. These impacts could further degrade wetland habitat where future recovery efforts for California red-legged frog could occur (USFWS 2000). Impacts would occur in areas that are already disturbed, although the area of effect would be slightly greater than for Alternative 2 given the disturbance of wetland habitat associated with development of the Mountain Shop. However, impacts would be partially offset by the removal of Southside Drive from Stoneman Meadow, which would improve upland habitat for special-status amphibians. Permanent impacts would be local, long term, minor, and likely to adversely affect Cooper's hawk, American peregrine falcon, and special-status bats, which are expected to occur in Curry Village. Permanent impacts associated with loss of habitat would be local, long term, negligible, and are not likely to adversely affect other special-status species addressed in Appendix C. Those species have less mobility and are more restricted to the forest floor, which greatly reduces their potential to occur in Curry Village due to the high volume of foot traffic and human disturbance. Construction would occur intermittently over a 20-year period. Infrastructure improvements would be completed in the early phases, followed by construction of lodging units and other visitor-serving facilities. Construction noise and vibration could further disrupt or preclude use of Curry Village by special-status bats or raptors that at times may roost, nest, or forage in the area. Construction grading and excavation activities have the potential to injure or remove special-status plants, western pond turtles, amphibians, and invertebrates if these species do occur. Construction impacts to special-status species could be mitigated by limiting the work area, covering excavation areas, timing construction to avoid disruption of breeding activities, and conducting preconstruction surveys. With incorporation of these mitigation measures, construction impacts would be local, short term, minor, and not likely to adversely affect any special-status species. Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Removal of trees and understory and increased foot traffic in areas around campsites would permanently reduce roosting and nesting habitat for bats and raptors, which have a high potential for occurrence. Campsite development and increased visitor access throughout South Camp are especially likely to reduce foraging and roosting opportunities for spotted owls recently reported in adjacent forested talus habitat. New development and increased disturbance would remove potential habitat for martens, although this species is believed to be very rare in Yosemite Valley, generally occurring at elevations near 7,000 feet (NPS 2000a). However, the reduced area of parking and number of campsites would result in less habitat loss and disturbance for special-status species as compared to Alternative 2. Removal, fragmentation, and human disturbance of emergent wetland would potentially affect recovery of special-status amphibians that could use intermittent streams and seeps as temporary refuges and migration habitat. During certain years, these wetlands may also pond water long enough to support breeding activities for special-status amphibians. However, the configuration of campsites outside of one wetland area would reduce the level of effect to potential habitat for amphibians and foraging bats as compared to Alternative 2. Permanent loss and disturbance of habitat in South Camp would be local, long term, moderate, and likely to adversely affect peregrine falcon, spotted owl, Cooper's hawk, and special-status bats, which are expected to occur in the project area. Permanent impacts would be local, long term, negligible, and not likely to adversely affect other special-status species addressed in Appendix C, since these species are less likely to occur, would occur in very small numbers, or would occur only occasionally. Upper Pines Campground Permanent impacts include loss of understory and overstory vegetation that has the potential to provide foraging and nesting habitat for raptors, bats, and western pond turtles. These species have a moderate to high potential of occurrence in Upper Pines Campground, given the proximity of wetland and riparian habitat. Indirect impacts from campsite development would be associated with visitor access to surrounding wetland habitats, including more than 1,000 feet of intermittent stream habitat and riparian habitat along the Merced River. The area of disturbance would be increased as compared to Alternative 2, given the larger area of the campground. Visitor access could cause erosion of streambanks, trampling of vegetation, as well as an increase in the level of noise disturbance, which could in turn degrade the quality and suitability of habitat for special-status amphibians, western pond turtles, bats, raptors, and plants. Expansion of Upper Pines Campground would be local, long term, moderate, and likely to adversely affect pond turtle, peregrine falcon, Cooper's hawk, spotted owl, and special-status bats, which are expected to occur in the project area. The amount of habitat and the area of disturbance would be greater than described for Alternative 2. Permanent impacts associated with loss of habitat and visitor disturbance would be local, long term, negligible, and not likely to adversely affect other special-status species addressed in Appendix C, since these species are less likely to occur, would occur in very small numbers, or would occur only occasionally. Lower Pines Campground Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Alternative 3 would result in construction impacts that would be local, short term, moderate, and not likely to adversely affect special-status species. Permanent impacts would have the greatest potential effect on spotted owl, Cooper's hawk, peregrine falcon, western pond turtle, and special-status bats, , since these species are expected to occur. Although Alternative 3 would remove supporting habitat for special-status species, most of these species do not likely make more than occasional use of the project area, or are most likely to occur in small numbers. Additionally, in accordance with the Yosemite Valley Plan, implementation of the alternative requires conformance with avoidance and protection measures, which would reduce the potential to harm or disturb special-status species or their habitat. Furthermore, habitat restoration in Curry Village and Lower Pines Campground would offset some loss of habitat, making impacts local, long term, minor, and likely to adversely affect special-status species expected to occur in the project area. Cumulative Impacts Natural habitats have been manipulated almost since the inception of the park through historical practices related to logging, fire suppression, rangeland clearing, grazing, mining, draining, damming, diversions, and the introduction of non-native species. Past and ongoing activities that affect special-status species include recreational use and construction of bridges, diversion walls, roads, pipelines, riprap, buildings, campgrounds, and other recreational features. Reasonably foreseeable future actions within Yosemite Valley are considered to have an overall net benefit to special-status species. For example, the Merced River Plan protects river-related natural resources through the application of management elements. Full implementation of the Yosemite Valley Plan would increase the size, continuity, and integrity of habitats, especially meadow, riparian, black oak, and upland habitats, for special-status species in Yosemite Valley. Although certain Yosemite Valley Plan projects, as described under Alternative 1, have the potential to adversely affect local special-status species, full implementation of the cumulative projects would have a long-term, moderate, beneficial effect on habitat for special-status species by enhancing habitat connectivity, size, and structure within Yosemite Valley. Alternative 3 would adversely affect some habitat for special-status species while also enhancing habitat by removing roads, campsites, and other facilities in the project area. These localized effects would not affect the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, would have a net long-term, moderate, beneficial effect on habitat for special-status species. Impairment Air Quality Curry Village Alternative 3 would construct new buildings and parking areas, demolish tent cabins, remove Southside Drive from Stoneman Meadow, and redevelop the Curry Orchard parking lot. Construction would occur in five phases intermittently over a 20-year period. Infrastructure improvements would be completed in the early phases (Phases 2 and 3), followed by construction of lodging units and other visitor-serving facilities (Phases 4 and 5). Air quality impacts from these activities would relate primarily to construction equipment emissions and dust generated during the planned construction, demolition, and repair activities. Emissions from construction equipment would occur in the vicinity of specific projects. Many projects would be timed during the fall and winter, when visitor levels at the park are at their lowest. Use of Best Management Practices (e.g., site watering, covering stockpiles, covering haul trucks, or vehicle emission controls) to reduce both tailpipe and fugitive dust emissions would be made a condition of construction contractor agreements, resulting in a local, short-term, moderate, adverse impact to air quality. Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Upper Pines Campground Lower Pines Campground Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Alternative 3 would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact associated with construction, demolition, and renovation activities, but a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact associated primarily with the reduction in vehicle traffic and associated emissions due to the reduced parking, as well as the overall reduction in lodging facilities. Cumulative Impacts Air quality conditions within the park have been influenced by statewide surges in population growth and associated emissions from industrial, commercial, and vehicular sources in upwind areas. Since the 1970s, emissions sources operating within the park, as well as California as a whole, have been subject to local stationary-source controls and state and federal mobile-source controls. In the 1980s, a Restricted Access Plan was developed for use when traffic and parking conditions in Yosemite Valley are over congested. The plan has the effect of reducing the number of incoming vehicles and their related emissions until the traffic volume and parking demand in Yosemite Valley decrease sufficiently (as visitors leave the Valley) to stabilize traffic conditions. The Yosemite Valley Plan proposes to enhance the quality of the visitor experience in Yosemite Valley by reducing automobile congestion and limiting crowding through traffic management systems and the use of Valley-bound shuttle buses. The Yosemite Valley Plan would have a long-term, moderate, adverse impact on nitrogen oxide emissions from using diesel buses through 2015, but long-term, minor to major, beneficial impacts to volatile organic compounds, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter emissions. In addition, the Merced River Plan would provide protection of natural resources, thereby benefiting air quality. Reasonably foreseeable future actions proposed for Yosemite Valley as described in Alternative 1 could have beneficial or adverse impacts on air quality. While the National Park Service's Shuttle Bus Replacement Project would have local, short-term, minor, adverse air quality effects, the general goal of the project is to relieve congestion and to provide for alternative means of transportation and would have a regional, long-term, minor, beneficial effect on air quality. In addition, over the next 15 to 20-years, substantial reductions in emissions would result from the gradual replacement of older vehicles with newer, lower-emission vehicles, resulting in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact on air quality. Other reasonably foreseeable future National Park Service projects are not anticipated to have a net long-term adverse or beneficial effect on air quality. Although cumulative growth in the region would tend to adversely affect air quality, implementation of ongoing state and federal mobile source control programs would ameliorate this effect to a degree. With respect to particulate matter, conditions in the Valley would be determined by both regional sources and local sources and could be beneficial or adverse. Considered with the adverse impacts associated with regional air quality influences, the cumulative projects would have a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial impact on air quality in Yosemite Valley. Construction of some of the reasonably foreseeable projects planned or approved within Yosemite Valley as described under Alternative 1 could result in local, short-term, moderate, adverse impacts on air quality. The adverse impacts of these projects would be localized and short-term in nature, and primarily relate to increased emissions from operation of construction equipment, and construction-generated traffic on roadways serving the project sites.. The intensity of the adverse effects from the construction-related emissions would range from minor to moderate, depending on the scheduling and magnitude of the construction projects. Activities related to the construction of reasonably foreseeable projects would result in a local, short-term, moderate, adverse impact to air quality. The cumulative projects discussed above would have a local, long-term, major, beneficial impact on air quality in Yosemite Valley. Construction activities associated with the cumulative projects, however, would reduce the intensity of the beneficial impact to a minor or moderate level in the short term. Construction activities proposed under Alternative 3 would intermittently occur over the 20 year life of the project and could adversely impact air quality in the project area. The intensity of the adverse impact would range from minor to moderate, depending upon the scheduling and magnitude of the construction projects. Construction mitigation measures such as a dust abatement program, traffic control plan, scheduling construction during non-peak visitation seasons, and emissions avoidance measures would minimize the emissions generated during construction and the cumulative impact. Implementation of the projects under Alternative 3 would enhance the beneficial impact of the cumulative projects by reducing the overall number of parking spaces and improving the roadway configurations to improve traffic flow, which would improve air quality in the project area. These improvements would not, however, affect the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3 and the cumulative projects would result in a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial impact on air quality in Yosemite Valley, assuming that timing of construction projects precludes numerous construction activities occurring simultaneously. Under Alternative 3, additional transportation improvements would be implemented to realize the substantial reduction in vehicle miles projected by the Yosemite Valley Plan; thereby additionally improving air quality. Impairment Noise Construction and demolition activities would result in short-term increases in noise levels throughout the project area. Construction and demolition equipment and transport vehicles could temporarily generate substantial noise. Noise generated by construction work crews also has the potential to affect existing noise levels. Table IV 8 shows the noise levels associated with various equipment and activities.
Curry Village Construction and demolition activities throughout Curry Village, including roadway realignment, parking area relocation, removal and renovation of lodging units and other buildings, and existing utility infrastructure maintenance and repair, would require the use of heavy equipment, which could generate substantial amounts of noise, as indicated in table IV 8. Construction would occur in five phases intermittently over a 20-year period. Infrastructure improvements would be completed in the early phases (Phases 2 and 3), followed by construction of lodging units and other visitor-serving facilities (Phases 4 and 5). Construction activities could occur within 10 to 15 feet of existing structures and other sensitive receptors in Curry Village. The most intensive construction activities would involve removal of the tent cabins and construction of the new cabins-with-bath. Construction noise associated with the removal of Southside Drive from Stoneman Meadow would occur at a distance of over 700 feet from Curry Village. Noise in the area of construction activities would vary depending upon a number of factors, such as the amount and type of equipment in operation on any given day, usage rates, the level of background noise in the area, and the distance between sensitive uses and the construction site. Construction noise would be loudest immediately adjacent to the construction area, but due to generally low background sound levels in Curry Village, the noise could be audible a long distance from the source. Some construction equipment can produce sounds in excess of 100 decibels, typically in short bursts over the duration of the project. During construction of the new lodging units and demolition of the tent cabins, nearby units would not be rented in order to reduce the noise intrusion upon guests at Curry Village. Construction activities would not occur during weekends, evenings, or holidays. Construction would likely be scheduled in the fall and winter, when visitor numbers are low. Construction activities would result in a local, short-term, major, adverse impact to the noise environment in Curry Village. Construction noise would be mitigated by measures such as implementing a schedule that minimizes impacts to adjacent noise-sensitive uses and use of the best-available noise control techniques whenever feasible to a moderate level of intensity. Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Construction of the campground is expected to occur as part of Phase 2 (within 10 years), following the installation of utilities. Construction would occur within 200 feet of campsites in Upper Pines Campground and approximately 400 feet from tent cabins in Curry Village. During construction, visitor use of tent cabins and campsites closest to the construction area would be restricted. Construction activities would likely be scheduled in the fall and winter, when visitor numbers are low. Construction would not occur on weekends, holidays, or in the evening. The additional application of mitigation measures, as described for Curry Village, would result in a local, short-term, moderate, adverse impact on the surrounding noise environment. Upper Pines Campground Lower Pines Campground Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Alternative 3 would result in a local, short-term, minor adverse impact on the project area's noise environment associated with construction, demolition, and renovation activities. Limiting visitor use of the immediately adjacent campsites would reduce noise impacts during construction. The campground improvements, new amphitheater, and expanded visitor services in Curry Village would result in a local, long-term, minor to negligible adverse impact to the noise environment. Cumulative Impacts The Yosemite Valley Plan proposes to enhance the quality of the visitor experience in Yosemite Valley by reducing automobile congestion and traffic, limiting crowding, expanding orientation and interpretive services, traffic management systems, and the use of Valley-bound shuttle buses. Overall, general sound levels associated with traffic along most roadways in Yosemite Valley would be reduced, resulting in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact. In addition, the Merced River Plan proposes to protect natural resources and maintaining visitor-intensive uses in the appropriate management zones and would have additional local, long-term, minor, beneficial impacts on the noise environment. Reasonably foreseeable future actions proposed in the Yosemite Valley Plan could have beneficial or adverse impacts on the Valley noise environment. While the National Park Service's Shuttle Bus Replacement Project would have local, short-term, minor, adverse noise effects, the general goal of the project is to relieve congestion and to provide for alternative means of transportation and the project would have a local, long-term, minor, beneficial effect on noise. The anticipated beneficial effect would depend upon ridership levels, the corresponding number of automobile trips that would be avoided, and the technology selected for the busses. Other reasonably foreseeable future National Park Service projects, as described in Alternative 1, are not anticipated to have a net adverse or beneficial impact on the ambient noise environment except for short-term, localized impacts during construction. The cumulative actions would result in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact on the noise environment. Construction of some of the reasonably foreseeable projects planned or approved within Yosemite Valley as described under Alternative 1 could result in local, short-term, moderate, adverse impacts on noise. The adverse impacts of these projects would be localized and short-term in nature, and primarily relate to noise generated from construction activities and construction-generated traffic. The intensity of the adverse effects from the construction-related traffic noise would range from negligible to minor, depending on which, if any, of the construction projects occurred simultaneously. Activities related to the construction of reasonably foreseeable projects would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to noise. The cumulative projects discussed above would have a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact on noise conditions in Yosemite Valley. Construction activities associated with the cumulative projects, however, would reduce the intensity of the beneficial impact to a negligible level in the short term. Construction activities proposed under Alternative 3 would intermittently occur over the 20 year life of the project and could adversely impact the noise environment in the project area due to operation of construction equipment, construction activities, and construction-related traffic. The intensity of the adverse impact would be minor, depending upon which project occurred simultaneously. Construction mitigation measures, such as noise-abatement and noise-reducing measures, scheduling of construction during standard daylight working hours, a traffic control plan, and avoidance of idling vehicles would reduce construction noise levels and minimize the likelihood of simultaneous construction activity in a heavily used area during the peak visitor season. Implementation of the projects under Alternative 3 would enhance the beneficial impact of the cumulative projects by eliminating the day-visitor parking and improving the roadway configurations to improve traffic flow, which would reduce traffic-generated noise. These improvements would not, however, affect the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3 and the cumulative projects would result in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact on noise in Yosemite Valley, assuming that timing of construction projects precludes numerous construction activities occurring simultaneously. Under Alternative 3, additional transportation improvements would be implemented to realize the substantial reduction in vehicle miles projected by the Yosemite Valley Plan; thereby improving the noise environment in the project area.
Cultural Resources Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Upper Pines Campground Lower Pines Campground Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. With the exception of additional walk-in campsites and the redistribution of restrooms at Upper Pines, the impacts on archeological resources due to implementing the Yosemite Valley Plan actions at Curry Village, the campground-serving facilities, South Camp, and Lower Pines Campground would be the same as described f0r Alternative 2. The development of 14 additional walk-in campsites at Upper Pines Campground would locate campsites within an existing archeological site, in contrast to Alternative 2, which would locate campsites adjacent to an archeological site. The redistribution of restrooms under Alternative 3 (not proposed under Alternative 2) would affect a recorded archeological site. Under Alternative 3, proposed development, redevelopment, and relocation of park facilities in Curry Village would involve ground-disturbing activities that have the potential to directly impact two known archeological resources, and two sites for which archeological deposits are suspected, but have yet to be located. The two recorded sites possess limited data potential, and therefore the impact would be local, permanent, and minor to moderate. Other ground-disturbing activities associated with redevelopment and development within Upper and Lower Pines Campgrounds, relocation of the amphitheater, and extension of utilities would directly impact three sites with limited data potential, and possibly another for which archeological deposits have yet to be located. Increased visitor usage associated with campground development and redevelopment and relocation of the amphitheater would increase pedestrian traffic and the potential for unauthorized collection, increasing the potential for indirect impacts to two additional sites. Because the five identified sites possess limited data potential, these actions would result in a local, permanent, negligible to moderate, adverse impact to archeological resources. Mitigation involving the use of barriers or fencing to protect sensitive areas adjacent to staging areas, avoidance through project redesign and planning, and monitoring of ground-disturbing activities would minimize these impacts. Where necessary, recordation, and data recovery consistent with the 1999 Programmatic Agreement would reduce these impacts to negligible. Regarding potential subsurface deposits associated with the three unidentified resources, testing prior to project implementation coupled with monitoring during ground-disturbing activities would minimize the impacts. Cumulative Impacts In general, archeological resources within Yosemite Valley are the result of thousands of years of human occupation. Previous development, operation, and maintenance of facilities within Upper Pines and Lower Pines Campground, as described for Alternative 1, have disturbed, destroyed, or compromised numerous archeological resources. Surface and subsurface archeological deposits within and in the vicinity of the historic Camp Curry have sustained a local, permanent, negligible to minor, adverse impact as a result of past maintenance activities. These past actions have had a local, permanent, minor to moderate, adverse cumulative impact on archeological resources. Alternative 3 could adversely impact identified and unidentified archeological resources by disturbing intact deposits, many of which possess unknown data potential. To mitigate these impacts, the park would either avoid known archeological resources or implement data recovery to retrieve important information, in accordance with the 1999 Programmatic Agreement, avoiding adverse effects to archeological resources to the greatest extent possible through the use of barriers or fencing, monitoring of excavations in sensitive areas, and project redesign. Where avoidance is not possible, data involving prehistoric and historic lifeways would be recovered through recordation and data recovery. It is anticipated that these actions would result in a local, permanent, negligible to minor, adverse cumulative impact to archeological resources. Alternative 3 would not change the management of archeological resources in Yosemite Valley and would continue to mitigate any localized adverse impacts in accordance with the 1999 Programmatic Agreement. Alternative 3 would affect the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3 and the cumulative projects would result in a local, permanent, negligible to minor, adverse cumulative impact on archeological resources. Impairment Ethnographic Resources Curry Village Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Upper Pines Campground Lower Pines Campground Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Adverse impacts to an ethnographic gathering area associated with the renovation of Lower Pines Campground and removal of the amphitheater would be mitigated in consultation with American Indian groups. Any site-specific planning and compliance actions would be conducted in accordance with stipulations in the park's 1997 agreement between the National Park Service and the American Indian Council of Mariposa County, Inc. for conducting traditional activities, to develop appropriate mitigating strategies for effects to ethnographic resources. As part of mitigation, a tribal representative would participate in the site-staking and design phase of the project to identify particular sensitive areas. If avoidance of these areas is not prudent or feasible, the topsoil would be set aside and restored at the end of the project, thereby minimizing adverse impacts to sensitive ethnographic resources. Therefore, no measurable impacts to ethnographic resources would occur as a result of this alternative. In conjunction with future consultation with American Indian groups, the action has the potential to enhance the growth and diversity of native species, possibly resulting in a negligible to minor beneficial impact to one ethnographic gathering area. In the absence of an identified archeological component, the ethnographic villages of Toolahkahmah and Ummataw would not be affected by these actions. Cumulative Impacts Ethnographic resources and their traditional cultural associations have been lost or damaged in Yosemite Valley through past development, visitor use, natural events, and widespread disruption of cultural traditions. In general, the ethnographic resources within the vicinity of Curry Village and Lower and Upper Pines Campgrounds are the result of thousands of years of human occupation. Development, operation, and maintenance of facilities within Yosemite Valley have disturbed, destroyed, or affected the integrity of numerous ethnographic resources, which has had a local, permanent, minor, adverse cumulative impact. Reasonably foreseeable future actions proposed in the region that could have an adverse cumulative impact on ethnographic resources in Yosemite Valley include development-related maintenance projects. Traditional gathering areas would be further disturbed by visitor use and natural events that would continue to have a local, permanent, minor, adverse impact on ethnographic resources. Several planned projects, as described under Alternative 1, could restore native plant habitat, which would have a local, permanent, minor, beneficial impact on ethnographic resources. The National Park Service would continue to consult with culturally associated American Indian tribes according to stipulations of the Programmatic Agreement and specific agreements, as described under Alternative 1, to develop appropriate mitigation strategies for impacts to ethnographic resources. The cumulative projects in Yosemite Valley would result in a local, permanent, minor, adverse impact on ethnographic resources due to the disturbance of the remaining resources. Alternative 3 would not change the management of ethnographic resources, and in combination with the cumulative projects, would result in a local, permanent, minor, adverse impact on ethnographic resources. Impairment Cultural Landscape, Historic Sites and Structures Historic Land-Use Patterns Historic Circulation Systems A new circular entrance loop would be created for Curry Village, restoring both the drive-in entry experience and the meadow landscape in the area, for a local, long-term, permanent, minor, beneficial impact on the Camp Curry Historic District. The removal of the road from Stoneman Meadow would also have a local, long-term, permanent, minor, beneficial impact. Historic Structures Curry Village and the Camp Curry Historic District The historic Curry Orchard, the Curry Orchard parking lot, and 253 historic guest tent cabins would be removed, resulting in a local, long-term, permanent, major, adverse impact on the historic district. The intensity of this impact would be reduced through site design, and by retaining the general configuration of the remaining 174 tent cabins around the central core of the Village, in keeping with the historic design and extent of Camp Curry. Under this alternative, all tent cabin removal would occur on the east side. The 45 tent cabins west of the Village core would remain at their historic locations. The 253 tent cabins on the east side would be removed from the deepest portion of the talus zone. The remaining 129 eastside cabins would retain their historic layout along "streets," thus maintaining the historic configuration in the area. As in Alternative 2, there would be selective removal of tent cabins along these streets to provide a buffer around the restrooms and to open up several crowded cabin groupings. Historic restrooms would remain, for use either as restrooms or for storage. Historic restroom structures that served the cabins being removed, also indicated for removal in the Yosemite Valley Plan, would be retained and used either for housekeeping or as bear-proof storage facilities. The intensity of this impact would also be reduced by documentation of historic structures, as described in the 1999 Programmatic Agreement. In this manner, although the physical structures would be lost, a historical record would be preserved; thus, the intensity of these adverse impacts would be moderate. Other actions in the Camp Curry Historic District would result in the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of several individual historic buildings, including Mother Curry Bungalow, the Tresidder Residence, Huff House, Stoneman Lodge, the 48 cabins-with-bath (bungalows), Cabin 90A/B, Cabin 819, and the lounge. Rehabilitation of these buildings would be accomplished in keeping with The Secretary's Standards, and thus the impact on the individual buildings and the historic district would be negligible. In order to meet current and future program needs for Curry Village guest services, the existing registration building would be rehabilitated for an alternate public use, and a new registration building would be constructed to the east, adjacent to the Curry Pavilion. Rehabilitation of the historic registration building, including removal of later additions, would have a local, permanent, minor, beneficial impact on the historic district, while the new construction would have a permanent, major, adverse impact on the historic district. The intensity of the adverse impact of a new registration building on the historic district would be reduced to moderate through the use of compatible design, in accordance with the Architectural Character and Site Design Guidelines for Yosemite National Park. Construction of 54 new cabins-with-bath, an employee cafeteria, an expanded service area, new recreational retail facilities, a new bathhouse for the Curry Village pool, and two new parking areas (one at the west end to serve the bungalows, and one at the east end to serve the tent cabins) would add nonhistoric facilities within the historic district, resulting in a local, permanent, major, adverse impact on the district. This impact would be mitigated through the use of compatible design for all new construction, in accordance with the Architectural Character and Site Design Guidelines for Yosemite National Park. The distribution of the 54 new cabins differs from that under Alternative 2, with 5 rather than 10 cabins adjacent to the historic bungalows and the remaining 49 cabins to the north. The siting and design of the new cabins would reflect the appearance and arrangement of the original Camp Curry bungalows. The construction of these and other new structures in the historic district would be performed in accordance with the Architectural Character and Site Design Guidelines for Yosemite National Park, as in Alternative 2. The parking areas would be designed to continue the present linear parking configuration of double-loaded bays, with vegetation screening them from adjacent guest areas. Construction of the new campground check station and recreational vehicle dump station would introduce additional nonhistoric facilities adjacent to the historic district, potentially resulting in a permanent, moderate, adverse impact. In addition to the new campground check station and recreational vehicle dump station, a new central shower facility for the campgrounds would be constructed adjacent to the historic district. The impact of these new nonhistoric buildings would be reduced through the use of compatible design and appropriate screening, thus reducing the intensity of the impact from moderate to minor. The new seasonal ice rink, its rental structure, and the new Mountain Shop would be closer to the central core of Curry Village than in Alternative 2 and thus would have a greater impact on the historic district. The ice rink would approximate its historic location, north of the present Curry Pavilion, thus restoring the historic function of the area, for a long-term, minor, beneficial impact. The Mountain Shop would be constructed between the east parking lot and the housekeeping and maintenance service area and would visually continue the Village retail frontage along Curry Village Road. The permanent, major, adverse impact on the historic district of a new building at this location would be reduced in intensity to moderate through use of compatible design and appropriate screening. Table IV 9 summarizes the proposed actions under Alternative 3, as they would affect historic resources within the Camp Curry Historic District. The table describes the impacts of each of these actions on the contributing buildings or structures and the mitigation measures that would be taken, in accordance with the 1999 Programmatic Agreement, to reduce the intensity of the impact on the Camp Curry Historic District to the levels indicated above. Because the historic district would also be affected by actions taken on nonhistoric buildings and structures within the district, these actions are also summarized in the table. Historic Orchards Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Under Alternative 3, removal of elements in the project area from the Merced River Protection Overlay and restoration of Stoneman Meadow would have a permanent, minor to moderate, beneficial impact on the natural systems of the Valley. The expansion of campgrounds would have a negligible impact on historic land-use patterns. Changes to historic circulation systems would create a long-term, minor, adverse impact, although removal of Southside Drive from Stoneman Meadow would have a beneficial impact. The loss of Curry Orchard and the 253 tent cabins under Alternative 3 would result in a local, permanent, moderate, adverse impact. Removal of employee housing from historic buildings and of all temporary employee housing would have a permanent, moderate, beneficial impact on the historic district. The removal of the temporary ice rink and its ancillary facilities would create a long-term beneficial impact on the district, while the transformer in the bungalow area would remain a minor visual intrusion.
The construction of the new registration building would have a permanent, moderate, adverse impact on the historic district, but the impact could be mitigated by designing the building in accordance with the Architectural Character and Site Design Guidelines for Yosemite National Park. The introduction of additional new buildings for maintenance, housekeeping, and employee services would have a permanent, minor, adverse impact on the historic district, if designed according to the Architectural Character and Site Design Guidelines for Yosemite National Park. Taken as a whole, rehabilitation of historic buildings and structures in Curry Village and construction of new buildings, as described in table IV 9, would result in a permanent, minor to moderate, adverse impact on the historic district, when mitigated in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement. Short-Term Impacts Removal of tent cabins and rehabilitation of tent cabins, wood cabins, and historic accommodations would involve minor to moderate disruptions in the historic district due to noise, dust, debris, and temporary alteration of pedestrian circulation patterns within the district. Construction of new cabins within the central part of the historic district would have a major adverse impact for the same reasons. Construction of the cabins on the present ice rink site would have a lesser impact. Construction of new buildings to the north of Curry Pavilion would have a similar adverse impact on the tent cabin area. Development of the new ice rink site would cause a major short-term disruption due to its location at the center of the historic district. All of the short-term impacts would be mitigated by undertaking construction outside of the peak summer season. In addition, the short-term adverse impacts would be reduced by implementing Best Management Practices. Cumulative Impacts The previous designation of the Camp Curry Historic District, implementation of the Yosemite Area Regional Transportation System and the Yosemite Valley Shuttle Stop Improvements, and the potential establishment of the Yosemite Valley Cultural Landscape Historic District are actions that would cumulatively affect the historic resources within the project area. Adverse impacts would be reduced with mitigation stipulated in the 1999 Programmatic Agreement and the application of The Secretary's Standards and the Architectural Character and Site Design Guidelines. The cumulative impact of the future projects would be local, long term, minor, and adverse. Alternative 3 would not change the management of historic resources and would mitigate adverse impacts in accordance with the 1999 Programmatic Agreement. Alternative 3 would not change the magnitude of the cumulative impacts. Alternative 3 in combination with other cumulative projects would result in a local, long-term, minor, adverse impact to historic resources. Impairment Section 106 Summary These historic properties consist of contributing elements of the Curry Village Historic District, the Yosemite Valley Archeological District, ethnographic resources, and historic cultural landscape features. Six known archeological sites (CA-MRP-15, CA-MRP-80, CA-MRP-747H, CA-MRP-1530H, CA-MRP-1541H, and CA-MRP-825H) and possibly three additional sites (CA-MRP-84, the historic cabin site of Etienne Manet, and archeological remain associated with the Yosemite Stage and Turnpike Company and the Yosemite Transportation Company Stables), for which an archeological component has yet to be identified, could be adversely affected. In addition, one ethnographic gathering area would be affected; however, the proposed redevelopment in the Lower Pines Campground has the potential to enhance the diversity of botanical species, resulting in no net adverse effect. With the exception of adverse effect associated with the removal of 253 of 427 tent cabins, completion of the proposed actions under Alternative 3 would enhance characteristics of the affected contributing elements to the Curry Village Historic District. Therefore, other than the action associated with removal of the tent cabins, there would be no adverse effect to historic resources within the Camp Curry Historic District. Retention of Stoneman Bridge would not affect the characteristics that qualify the resource as significant. However, demolition would result in an adverse effect. The historic concessioner stable would be adversely affected if removed prior to construction of the amphitheater. In accordance with National Park Service policies and procedures, the park would continue to protect cultural resources to the greatest extent allowable under present funding and staffing levels. If the archeological sites could not be avoided through the use of barriers, fencing adjacent to staging areas, project redesign, or other prudent or feasible alternatives, treatment would involve data recovery carried out in accordance with the 1999 Programmatic Agreement to retrieve important information from the disturbed resources. To resolve any adverse effects to traditional cultural properties, park staff would consult with culturally associated American Indian tribes under the 1997 agreement for traditional uses, during both the staking and the detailed design phase of the project, to identify plants, areas to be avoided, or areas that require treatment. For all proposed actions affecting historic buildings or structures or the Curry Village Historic District, the National Park Service would follow guidelines of the 1999 Programmatic Agreement, avoiding adverse effects to the greatest extent possible. Rehabilitation projects would follow The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes and new construction would be performed in accordance with the Architectural Character and Site Design Guidelines for Yosemite National Park to minimize its effect on the historic district. Adverse effects to historic resources would be mitigated through Historic American Buildings Survey/Historic American Engineering Record documentation, rehabilitation in accordance with The Secretary's Standards, and/or salvage and reuse of historic elements. Social Resources Development proposed for Curry Village would occur almost entirely in a B-scenic area (48 acres). The redesign and development of the Curry Orchard parking lot and removal of Southside Drive through Stoneman Meadow represent the only development within an A-scenic designation. These activities would result in a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial impact to visual resources. Curry Village development would be reconfigured under Alternative 3. The most noticeable visual change related to lodging would be the removal of 253 tent cabins and the addition of 54 new duplex cabins. The removal and addition of lodging at Curry Village would result in a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial effect to visual resources. Site design and layout integrating the new and old cabins in a visually appealing manner (informal clusters) would ensure that this visual impact remains beneficial and moderate. Park visitors would quickly become accustomed to the visual changes associated with the new development, due to the large amount of development at Curry Village that would remain unchanged. The additional permanent structures proposed for Curry Village, including the recreational retail building, Mountain Shop, and redesigned housekeeping/maintenance facility, would be easily noticeable, resulting in a local, long-term, minor, adverse impact to visual resources. The removal, relocation, and creation of new parking facilities would also constitute a visual change to the Curry Village area. The adverse impact of these new structures on the scenic quality of Curry Village would be mitigated by designing structures in accordance with the Architectural Character and Site Design Guidelines for Yosemite National Park. Landscaping would be developed in accordance with the Landscape Guidelines for the Curry Village Historic District (ARG 2003). Construction would occur intermittently over a 20-year period. Infrastructure improvements would be completed in the early phases, followed by construction of lodging units and other visitor-serving facilities. The construction-related visual impacts would mainly result from the introduction of heavy equipment, the dust created by earthmoving and grading, and the building of new structures. Construction of the new cabins-with-bath would disrupt internal views across the parking lot from the existing cabins-with-bath, but would not appreciably affect views from Curry Village towards significant scenic features such as Half Dome and Glacier Point. Removal of the tent cabins would likewise affect internal views from the existing tent cabins and parking areas nearby, but would not appreciably affect views towards significant scenic features. Views towards Stoneman Meadow would be temporarily interrupted by the restoration of Curry Orchard and reconstruction of the Curry Village entry roadway. With implementation of standard dust reduction measures, measures to reduce unnecessary emissions,, as well as Best Management Practices, Alternative 3 would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to visual resources in Curry Village. Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp The primary visual change associated with development of South Camp would derive from the removal of 300 to 500 trees and the resulting conversion of the view from forest to developed campground. The Yosemite Valley Plan envisioned development at South Camp as part of an overall plan for Yosemite Valley, and the removal of trees and resulting alteration of the view were anticipated by the plan. The alteration of the view in the C-scenic portion of the development area is not considered adverse. The alteration of the view in the B-scenic portion of the development area is considered a local, long-term, moderate, adverse impact to visual resources. Construction of the campground is expected to occur as part of Phase 2, following the installation of utilities. The impacts to visual resources associated with construction activities would be most noticeable from the tent cabins in Curry Village and the Upper Pines Campground campsites. The substantial tree removal associated with the construction of the new campground would significantly alter the existing views from these areas. It is anticipated that limited visitor use of the tent cabins and campsites closest to the construction activities would reduce the numbers of visitors with direct views into the construction area. Construction activities would result in a local, short-term, moderate, adverse impact to visual resources. Upper Pines Campground The addition of these campsites and associated facilities would alter the existing visual character of the immediate area, but would not alter the overall visual character of the east Yosemite Valley campground area. Upper Pines Campground is bordered by South Camp and Lower Pines Campground. The primary visual change associated with development of Upper Pines Campground would be the removal of 275 to 400 trees and the resulting conversion of the immediate view from forest to developed campground. The Yosemite Valley Plan envisioned development at Upper Pines as part of an overall plan for Yosemite Valley, and the removal of trees and resulting alteration of the view were anticipated by the plan. The alteration of the view in the B-scenic area is considered a local, long-term, moderate, adverse impact on visual resources. Impacts to visual resources associated with construction activities would be similar to those discussed for Curry Village. The application of mitigation measures, as described for Curry Village, would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to visual resources. Construction of the new campsites and facilities is expected to occur as part of Phase 1, following the installation of utilities. Construction of the new campsites would be most noticeable from the immediately adjacent campsites and roadways. The conversion of the forested area to drive-in campsites would substantially change the character of the immediate views towards this area, but would be consistent with existing views of adjacent areas. The anticipated limited visitor use of adjacent campsites during construction would reduce the number of visitors with direct views into the construction area. The construction activities would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to visual resources. Lower Pines Campground Construction of the new campsites and facilities is expected to occur as part of Phase 1, following the installation of utilities. Construction activities would take place close to existing campsites, which would introduce additional dust and mechanical equipment into the visual environment. Although construction activities would be temporary, some campers could conceivably experience construction activities during their entire stay in the park. Scheduling construction during the winter season when visitor use is low and restricting visitor use would reduce the number of visitors affected by the construction activities. Construction activities would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse effect on visual resources. Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Under Alternative 3, changes to scenic resources in the project area are generally improved through the consolidation of development within the core Curry Village and campground area and removal of the road through Stoneman Meadow. The reduction in tent cabins in Curry Village would lessen the amount of development that could be seen from above the project area, and the redeveloped parking lot in Curry Orchard would provide screening, using an "orchard grid" of trees to block views of the parking lot from visitors looking into Yosemite Valley from Glacier Point. The amount of intrusion into Yosemite Valley scenery would be reduced, which would enhance the National Park Service A-scenic designation. Alternative 3 would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to scenic resources during construction, demolition, and tree removal activities in Curry Village and the campgrounds. The substantial tree removal that would occur in South Camp and Upper Pines Campground was anticipated by the Yosemite Valley Plan and would result in a local, long-term, minor, adverse impact to the immediate viewshed. However, the impact would not be considered adverse in the context of the Yosemite Valley Plan, because the removal of other campground sites in more highly valued scenic areas within Yosemite Valley outside the project area would balance the campground development impacts of the project. Cumulative Impacts Scenic resources have been affected by numerous past actions since the inception of the park. Primary among these is the alteration of natural communities caused by Euro-American settlers who lived in the park. For example, agricultural activities and the development of tourism have affected vegetation patterns along the Merced River, resulting in a local, long-term, moderate, adverse effect on scenic resources. Reasonably foreseeable future actions that would have a net beneficial cumulative effect on scenic resources include those that improve the general health of ecosystems viewable from or within the Merced River corridor as described under Alternative 1. In addition, the Merced River Plan prescribes the restoration of degraded areas of the Merced River corridor, resulting in a local, long-term, major, beneficial impact on scenic resources. Reasonably foreseeable projects that would have an adverse effect on scenic resources include development-related projects as described in Alternative 1. The local, long-term, adverse effects of these reasonably foreseeable projects would be related to the potential introduction of new structures and/or infrastructure that would intrude into views of important scenic resources within, or viewable from, the Merced River corridor. The cumulative projects within Yosemite Valley would result in a local, long-term, major, beneficial impact on scenic resources because of the overall emphasis on restoring disturbed or development land to natural conditions. Alternative 3 would contribute to the cumulative beneficial impact by restoring disturbed land and improving ecosystem health. These contributions would outweigh the impacts associated with the increased development in Curry Village and the east Yosemite Valley campground area. In combination, these actions under Alternative 3 would not affect the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3 and the cumulative projects within Yosemite Valley would result in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact on scenic resources in Yosemite Valley. Impairment Park Operations and Facilities Implementation of Alternative 3 would include the construction of new utility connections to facilities to be constructed and to several facilities to be upgraded or expanded, including restrooms, showers, cabins-with-bath, and new buildings and facilities. New connections would be from existing or proposed utility mains to new or upgraded facilities and would be sited and designed to both minimize the length and amount of infrastructure required and to avoid trees, existing buildings, and other resources and facilities that would be affected during construction or operation, to the degree possible. In addition, connections would be sited to meet all Federal and State regulations. The exact number and location of utility connections to be constructed under Alternative 3 is yet to be determined, but it is anticipated that the majority of facilities requiring new utility connections would require one connection each to the nearest electric, water, and wastewater mains and that connections would be provided as necessary (Taylor 2003). Though Alternative 3 would result in an increase in the demand on project area utilities, this alternative would not result in an overall increase in demand for utilities or solid waste and recycling services. Increased utility demand associated with increasing the number of campsites, the size of visitor facilities, such as the grocery store and cafeteria, and construction of new facilities, including the campground registration building and recreational vehicle dump station, would be offset by the reduction of the total number lodging units. Impacts to utilities and solid waste and recycling services would therefore be primarily associated with the construction of new connections, including temporary service interruptions during construction activities, increased operation and maintenance requirements, and relocated infrastructure and facilities. Curry Village Reducing the number of lodging facilities in Curry Village without increasing other visitor uses in the area would reduce the amount of solid waste and recyclable materials generated in the area. Although changes in the layout of buildings and roadways could require changes in pickup locations, Alternative 3 would have a local, long-term, beneficial impact on solid waste and recycling in Curry Village. Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Upper Pines Campground In addition to adverse impacts from construction of additional connections, the additional campsites would also increase the demand on utilities, resulting in a long-term, minor, adverse impact to park operations. Alternative 3 would also require additional solid waste and recyclable materials collection from Upper Pines Campground, resulting in a local, long-term, minor, adverse impact to park operations. Lower Pines Campground Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Alternative 3 would result in a local, short-term, moderate, adverse impact on utilities associated with installation of new connections and possible relocation of existing lines, and a regional, long-term, moderate, adverse impact associated with increased water and sewer demand. Alternative 3 would also result in a regional, long-term, negligible, beneficial impact on solid waste and recycling services associated with the decrease in overnight accommodations in Curry Village. Cumulative Impacts Implementation of the Yosemite Valley Plan would result in a slight increase in demand on utilities and solid waste and recycling services throughout the park, resulting in regional, long-term, minor, adverse impacts on utilities, solid waste, and recycling. Throughout Yosemite Valley, removal, construction, and relocation of a number of employee housing units and other park facilities as described in Alternative 1 would result in significant changes and disruption to utilities infrastructure, which would result in local, short-term, moderate, adverse impact. Temporary interruption to utility services during construction would be a local, short-term, negligible to minor, adverse impact, while removal or abandonment of outdated or unused utility infrastructure would result in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact on utilities. Relocation of a large number of park employees currently residing in Yosemite Valley to out-of-Valley housing areas would result in local, long-term, moderate to major, beneficial impacts on utilities by reducing demand on utilities in Yosemite Valley. Implementation of the East Yosemite Valley Utilities Improvement Plan would substantially benefit utility infrastructure and service throughout Yosemite Valley, resulting in a long-term, major, beneficial impact on utilities. Utility infrastructure improvements would include the construction of consolidated utility corridors and would address demand and service reliability requirements. Construction of the new infrastructure would, however, require temporary interruptions to service in some areas, resulting in a short-term, minor to moderate adverse impact on utilities. Overall, the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions would have a local, long-term, minor, beneficial cumulative impact because the new infrastructure would meet any increased demand. Alternative 3 would include improvements to utilities that would enhance, but would not change the magnitude of the cumulative impact. The cumulative impacts, in combination with Alternative 3, would result in local, short- and long-term, minor beneficial impacts on utilities because of the improvements to the utility infrastructure. Impairment Transportation Planning The transportation program included designated parking, improved signage, expanded shuttle bus service, and vehicle management to reduce private vehicle circulation in Yosemite Valley. The elimination of day-visitor parking in Curry Village and the allocation of parking throughout Curry Village were established by the Yosemite Valley Plan. Parking ratios for walk-in and group campsites were also established in the Yosemite Valley Plan. Curry Village Historically, Curry Village was entered along a road in direct alignment with the Camp Curry sign, and visitors proceeded through the gateway to registration. Over time, registration parking and a curvilinear access road were added, along with new trees and shrubs, which partially obscure the Camp Curry sign. The circular configuration of the main entry drive would simplify the entry sequence and provide clear direction to lodging and other facilities, which would improve vehicle flow into and through Curry Village. The removal of the campground check station from Curry Orchard would eliminate an area of congestion in the Village, and the realignment of the Curry Village Road, separating it from the parking lot, would more efficiently direct traffic through Curry Village. These improvements would result in a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial effect on traffic circulation in Curry Village. In conjunction with an improved entrance roadway configuration, changes in the proposed parking for Curry Village would also result in a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial effect. Alternative 3 proposes a total of 637 parking spaces: 172 spaces for tent users, 90 for tent and other users, 225 for cabin users and arriving guest spaces, and 150 spaces in the Curry Orchard parking area for wilderness users. These redesigned and relocated parking areas would be placed strategically near the activities they are intended to serve. The improved parking design would further reduce the amount of traffic congestion that currently exists in Curry Village. The elimination of the day-visitor parking would reduce the number of vehicles traveling to and from Curry Village. Overnight guests would be discouraged from driving private vehicles after arriving in Curry Village, because parking would not be available at most attractions. Construction would occur intermittently over a 20-year period. Infrastructure improvements would be completed in the early phases, followed by construction of lodging units and other visitor-serving facilities. Reconfiguring the entrance roadway and maintenance of repair of existing utility infrastructure would require rerouting of traffic along this highly traveled road, resulting in a local, short-term, moderate to major, adverse impact on traffic circulation. Construction activities would result in temporary increases in traffic on access roadways related to work and material transport to construction sites. Construction projects could result in short-term changes to traffic circulation and result in traffic delays in the vicinity of construction activities. A visitor communication and protection plan would be developed prior to each project to ensure that visitors are safely and efficiently routed around construction areas. This plan would include means for communicating construction and closure schedules to the public, adequate barriers to keep visitors clear of active construction areas, and clear signage to direct visitors to changed traffic circulation patterns during construction. Additionally, as part of the construction management plan, a traffic and pathways diversion and circulation plan would be developed to reduce disruption to vehicle and pedestrian traffic flow. This plan would be reviewed by park resources, operations, and visitor safety staff prior to park approval. Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Upper Pines Campground Lower Pines Campground Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Reconfiguration of existing roadways, circulation patterns, and parking spaces would have a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial impact to traffic flow and congestion. Development of South Camp would increase vehicle trips to the area, resulting in a local, long-term, minor, adverse effect on traffic flow and congestion. Construction activities would result in a local, short-term, minor to moderate, adverse impact on traffic circulation in the project area. Cumulative Impacts Transportation conditions within the park have been influenced by statewide surges in population growth. In the 1980s, a Restricted Access Plan was developed for use when traffic and parking conditions in Yosemite Valley are over congested. The plan has been effective, resulting in a long-term, major, beneficial, impact to traffic flow on El Portal Road and Big Oak Flat Road. As described in Alternative 1, the Yosemite Valley Plan proposes to reduce automobile congestion and limit crowding through various traffic management systems and options. Implementation of the Yosemite Valley Plan would result in a substantial decrease in traffic volumes and a major improvement in traffic flow resulting in a local, long-term, major, beneficial impact to traffic flow, access and circulation. Construction of some of the reasonably foreseeable projects planned or approved within Yosemite Valley as described under Alternative 1 could result in local, short-term, adverse impacts on transportation. The adverse impacts of these projects would be localized and short-term in nature, and primarily relate to construction-generated traffic on roadways serving the project sites or construction-related trip delays. The intensity of the adverse effects from the construction-related traffic would range from minor to moderate, depending on which, if any, of the construction projects occurred simultaneously. Activities related to the construction of reasonably foreseeable projects would result in a local, short-term, minor to moderate, adverse impact to traffic flow. The cumulative projects discussed above would have a local, long-term, major, beneficial impact on transportation conditions in Yosemite Valley. Construction activities associated with the cumulative projects, however, would reduce the intensity of the beneficial impact to a minor or moderate level in the short term. Construction activities intermittently occurring over the 20-year life of the project could adversely impact traffic flow in the project area. The intensity of the adverse impact would range from minor to moderate, depending upon which project occurred simultaneously. Implementation of the projects under Alternative 3 would enhance the beneficial impact of the cumulative projects by eliminating the day-visitor parking and improving the roadway configurations to improve traffic flow. These improvements would not, however, affect the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3 and the cumulative projects would result in a local, long-term, major, beneficial impact on transportation conditions in Yosemite Valley, assuming that timing of construction projects precludes numerous construction activities occurring simultaneously. Under Alternative 3, additional transportation improvements would be implemented to realize the substantial reduction in vehicle miles projected by the Yosemite Valley Plan. Impairment Visitor Experience Changes in parking access could affect some visitors' ability or willingness to undertake some recreational activities. Without their vehicles, visitors would need to carry recreation gear, load and unload it on shuttle buses, and possibly store it in designated areas during the day. Moderate to major adverse impacts would be experienced by day visitors undertaking equipment-intensive activities; impacts would vary depending on the equipment needed, the availability of storage space or rental equipment, and many other variables. Access for overnight visitors would be increased by the addition of 30 more overnight wilderness parking spaces in the Curry Orchard parking lot, which would result in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact. Access for disabled visitors would improve with the provision of shuttle stops in Curry Village and the campgrounds, as well as the rehabilitation of lodging units to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. In addition, more programs, recreation areas, and facilities would be developed for disabled visitors, resulting in a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial impact. Changes to circulation throughout Curry Village would lead to simpler navigation, resulting in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact. The new 54 cabins-with-bath would be typical duplex cabins, identical to the existing cabins. There is a high demand for economy units with private baths, and these new cabins would help meet that demand, resulting in a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial impact. Improvements to visitor facilities at Curry Village would consist of the expansion of the grocery store and Mountain Shop and relocation of the seasonal ice rink. An employee cafeteria would be constructed, helping to alleviate congestion in the main cafeteria. These improvements would result in a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial impact to the visitor experience. Construction would occur intermittently over a 20-year period. Infrastructure improvements would be completed in the early phases (Phases 2 and 3), followed by construction of lodging units and other visitor-serving facilities (Phases 4 and 5). During construction activities, access to various facilities within Curry Village would be rerouted. People visiting or staying in the project area during construction could experience construction-related noise, odor, or other adverse impacts. Construction activities would have a local, short-term, minor to moderate, adverse impact on the visitor experience near construction sites. A visitor communication and protection plan would be developed prior to each project to ensure that visitors are safely and efficiently routed around construction areas. This plan would include means for communicating construction and closure schedules to the public, adequate barriers to keep visitors clear of active construction areas, and signage to direct visitors to changed traffic circulation patterns during construction. Additionally, as part of the construction management plan, a traffic and pathways diversion and circulation plan would be developed to reduce disruption to traffic flow and to protect sensitive resources. This plan would be reviewed by park resources, operations, and visitor safety staff prior to park approval. Amphitheater at Clark's Bridge Campground Check Station and Recreational Vehicle Dump Station Central Shower/Restroom Facility South Camp Although the new South Camp development is intended to be located outside the waste accumulation area, should further study indicate that waste remediation is needed in areas near developed campsites, those campsites would be temporarily closed during the remediation process. Remediation activities would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to the visitor experience. Upper Pines Campground Lower Pines Campground Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. The increase in cabins-with-bath and provision of group campsites, recreational vehicle campsites and walk-in campsites would improve the quality of the visitor experience in the project area, resulting in a local, long-term, minor, beneficial impact. The new amphitheater would provide a larger facility for visitor participation in park programs and would be located in an area with dramatic views of Half Dome and other scenic features, resulting in a local, long-term, major, beneficial impact to the visitor experience. Improved visitor programs, including multi-user trail facilities and an enhanced natural environment experience for visitors, would result in a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial impact to the visitor experience. Construction activities would result in a local, short-term, minor, adverse impact to the visitor experience. Cumulative Impacts Visitation to the park is expected to increase due to projected increases in population within the state. If visitation continues to increase and the main mode of travel in the park remains by private vehicle, problems with traffic congestion, access, and parking would continue. Examples of reasonably foreseeable future actions that could have a beneficial cumulative impact on the visitor experience include projects under the Yosemite Valley Plan, as described under Alternative 1. Although these projects could result in short-term disruptions of visitor activities due to construction, in the long-term, they would provide expanded recreational opportunities in Yosemite Valley and improved transit service distributing visitors to more park destinations. The Merced River Plan would have a beneficial cumulative impact on recreation in Yosemite Valley by protecting and enhancing a spectrum of recreational opportunities available in the Valley. The cumulative projects would have a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial impact on the visitor experience due to expanded recreational opportunities in Yosemite Valley and improved transit service distributing visitors to more park destinations. Construction of some of the reasonably foreseeable projects planned or approved within Yosemite Valley as described under Alternative 1 could result in local, short-term, moderate, adverse impacts on visitor experience. The adverse impacts of these projects would be localized and short-term in nature, and primarily relate to construction-generated interference with visitor movement through the project area, construction-generated noise, and construction-related trip delays. The intensity of the adverse effects from the construction-related traffic and noise would range from minor to moderate, depending on which, if any, of the construction projects occurred simultaneously. Activities related to the construction of reasonably foreseeable projects would result in a local, short-term, moderate, adverse impact to visitor experience. The cumulative projects discussed above would have a local, long-term, negligible, beneficial impact on visitor experience in Yosemite Valley. Construction activities under Alternative 3 associated with the cumulative projects, however, would negatively impact visitor experience in the short term. Construction activities would intermittently occur over the 20 year life of the project and could adversely impact the visitor experience from the interruption to visitor activities and increased noise in the project area. The intensity of the adverse impact would range from minor to moderate, depending upon the scheduling and timing of the construction projects. Construction mitigation measures, such as dust abatement and noise-control, traffic control plans, a visitor communication and protection plan, signage, and the scheduling of construction during non-peak visitation periods, would reduce impacts during the peak visitor season and minimize the likelihood of simultaneous construction activity in heavily used areas. Implementation of the projects under Alternative 3 would enhance the beneficial impact of the cumulative projects by expanding recreational opportunities and increasing lodging and campsites available to the public. These improvements would not, however, affect the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3 and the cumulative projects would result in a local, long-term, negligible, beneficial impact on visitor experience in Yosemite Valley, assuming that timing of construction projects precludes numerous construction activities occurring simultaneously. Impairment Socioeconomics Visitor Population
Alternative 3 would add 97 campsites in the project area, creating a total of 500 campsites in Yosemite Valley (an overall increase of 25 campsites). This represents a 5.3% increase from the existing 475 Yosemite Valley campsites. Based on pre-flood visitor demand for Yosemite Valley campsites, it is estimated that the additional campsites would have an average occupancy rate of nearly 95%, and that they would operate between mid-April and mid-October. Accordingly, approximately 4,300 overnight stays in campsites would be gained, an addition of 17,200 annual overnight visitors to the Valley (assuming an average of four overnight visitors per campsite), resulting in a local, long-term, moderate, beneficial impact. Regional Economics Summary of Alternative 3 Impacts. Alternative 3 would change the
visitor population and regional economics of the area. Alternative
3 would have a regional, long-term, negligible, beneficial impact
on the regional economy and a local, short-term, major, beneficial
impact on the regional economy during construction. Reasonably foreseeable future projects by the National Park Service that could have a beneficial cumulative impact on the regional economy are related to construction activity, including projects proposed in the Yosemite Valley Plan and other projects as described in Alternative 1. Private development projects such as the Yosemite Motels Expansion just outside the park entrance at El Portal and other facilities constructed under the Mariposa County General Plan update would also result in short-term spending in the construction sector. The cumulative planning, transportation, facility improvement, and development-related projects, as identified under Alternative 1, would generate construction-related output, employment, and income (including secondary output impacts) in the regional economy. The total construction-related spending in the affected region associated with the cumulative projects would be highly noticeable when compared with the total output of the construction industry in the affected region and would have a short-term, major, beneficial impact on the regional economy. Some projects would increase the amount of visitor overnight accommodations in or near the park, including the Yosemite Lodge Area Redevelopment and Yosemite Motels Expansion. Increased overnight accommodations from these projects would result in a beneficial impact to employment, output, and taxable retail sales in the long term. The effect of this increase would be negligible because the total increase in overnight accommodations would not substantial in comparison to existing accommodations. Therefore, cumulative actions would result in a local, long-term, negligible, beneficial impact to the regional economy. The cumulative projects within and in the vicinity of Yosemite National Park would result in a local, long-term, negligible, beneficial impact to the regional economy, and a local, short-term, major, beneficial impact during construction. Alternative 3 would contribute to this local, short-term, beneficial impact due to the temporary spending on the Curry Village and campground improvement projects. This contribution would not, however, affect the magnitude of the cumulative impact. Alternative 3, in combination with the cumulative project, would result in a local, long-term, negligible, beneficial impact to the regional economy and a local, short-term, major, beneficial impact during construction. Impairment
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Main - Environmental Assessment Errata - Letter from the Superintendent - Abstract - Executive Summary - Table of Contents Purpose and Need - Alternatives - Affected Environment - Environmental Consequences - Merced Wild and Scenic River - Consultation and Coordination List of Preparers and Reviewers - Glossary - Bibliography - Appendices |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
