ESTABLISH OR PRESCRIBE

IMPLEMENT

 

CONSTRUCT

CONVERT

INCREASE/EXPAND

REDUCE

RELOCATE

Natural Resources

This alternative would link highly valued natural resource areas that have been degraded or fragmented (such as the Merced River and its tributaries, wetlands, meadows, and California black oak woodlands) into one large, contiguous, and dynamic river-governed ecosystem (see Vol. Ic, plate D, Highly Valued Resources). Most facilities and infrastructure in highly valued natural resource areas would be removed, making the restoration of these areas possible in the east end of Yosemite Valley. The environmental cost would be the construction of a new visitor/transit center and parking at Taft Toe (approximately 54 acres), in a previously undeveloped, mixed conifer community in the mid-Valley near El Capitan crossover, and the development of out-of-Valley parking areas.

MERCED RIVER ECOSYSTEM
(INCLUDING TRIBUTARIES, WETLAND, RIPARIAN, AND MEADOW AREAS)

As described in Actions Common to All Action Alternatives at the beginning of this chapter, the River Protection Overlay prescribed in the Merced River Plan would be implemented for Yosemite Valley and El Portal. The River Protection Overlay would provide a buffer area for natural flood flows, channel formation, riparian vegetation, and wildlife habitat and would protect riverbanks from human-caused damage and associated erosion. Above 3,800 feet in elevation (including Yosemite Valley), the River Protection Overlay is 150 feet on either side of the river, measured from ordinary high water. Below 3,800 feet in elevation (including El Portal), where the river gradient and characteristics change, the overlay is 100 feet on each side of the river, measured from ordinary high water.

Meadows are an important part of the Yosemite Valley ecosystem and cultural landscape. Naturally high water tables in meadows protect them from conifer invasion. When development or encroachment has altered water tables, and restoration of natural water processes is unlikely, a program of prescribed fire and mechanical clearing would be employed to prevent conifer invasion into meadows.

The Merced River corridor, riparian vegetation, wetlands, and meadows are a central component of the Yosemite Valley cultural landscape. River restoration, riparian area revegetation, and meadow management would also rehabilitate these important landscape resources.

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, roads would be removed from Stoneman Meadow and the southern end of Ahwahnee Meadow. After the roads are removed, the natural topography of the meadows would be restored, and disturbed sites would be replanted (if necessary) with appropriate plants of the same local genetic makeup. The roads and utilities through Bridalveil, El Capitan, and Cook's Meadows would be evaluated and, if needed, realigned or reconstructed to restore critical surface water and shallow subsurface water flows that sustain the native meadow vegetation and wildlife and discourage conifer invasion. Parking lanes would be removed from Northside Drive through El Capitan and Cookís Meadows to reduce impacts associated with current levels of use in the meadows.

As described for Alternative 3, at Housekeeping Camp all accommodations would be removed from the River Protection Overlay and highly valued resource areas, including potential riparian and wetland areas, reducing the number of units from 264 to 52. The area would be restored to riparian communities.

As described for Alternative 3, parking would be removed from the Camp 6 area near Yosemite Village and placed in an area outside the floodplain at Taft Toe, in the mid-Valley. Camp 6 would be restored to a mosaic of meadow, riparian, and California black oak woodland communities.

Southside Drive in the Bridalveil Fall area would be reconstructed to improve water movement through the braided stream system (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

The historic Cascades Diversion Dam on the Merced River west of Pohono Bridge (near the intersection of the Big Oak Flat and El Portal Roads) would be removed to restore natural channel grades and hydrologic processes along this segment of the river (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3) (see Actions Common to All Action Alternatives at the beginning of this chapter).

As described for Alternative 3, four historic bridges‹Sugar Pine, Stoneman, Housekeeping, and Superintendent's‹would be removed to allow for the unconstrained flow and meandering of the Merced River at these locations. Adjacent riverbanks would be restored. As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, all bridges west of Happy Isles to Swinging Bridge affect river dynamics, and each has been evaluated to determine the severity of these effects as well as the importance of access to and across the river (under other provisions of this alternative). Ahwahnee Bridge would be retained to provide a nonvehicular connection between Yosemite Village, the campgrounds, and Curry Village. The multi-use trail between the Ahwahnee Bridge and Sugar Pine Bridge would be removed and the area re-contoured. If necessary, a new bridge or bridges would be constructed over the cutoff channels southeast of Ahwahnee Bridge to facilitate a pedestrian trail and multi-use paved trail connection to the Lower Pines area.

The recreational vehicle dump station at Upper Pines would be relocated outside of the River Protection Overlay, and the area would be restored to a riparian community (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, the areas that were formerly the Upper River, Lower River, and the northwest end of Lower Pines Campgrounds would be restored to a mosaic of meadow, riparian, and California black oak communities. Restoration would involve removing tons of imported fill that was used to level the campgrounds, contouring the sites to match natural topography, and replanting the sites, if necessary, with appropriate plants of the same local genetic makeup as neighboring plant communities. The road and utilities in the Upper and Lower River Campgrounds, plus the southern part of Ahwahnee Meadow, would be removed and realigned along transportation corridors. All of North Pines Campground would be removed, fill material would be removed if necessary, and the area would be restored to riparian/California black oak communities. The former Group Campground and existing Backpackers Campground along Tenaya Creek would be removed, and the areas would be restored to riparian/upland communities.

The Swinging Bridge Picnic Area and associated parking would be removed and the area restored to riparian communities (same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

Also as described for Alternatives 2 and 3, the human-built rock-rubble pile in Yosemite Creek, directly downstream from the bridge at the base of Yosemite Falls, would be removed. This would restore natural water flow in the western channels of Yosemite Creek.

The area between the bike path at Yosemite Lodge (the proposed realignment of Northside Drive) and the Merced River, the site of former Yosemite Lodge cabins, Pine Cottage, and employee housing, would be restored to riparian communities.

The historic concessioner stable and related employee housing would be removed and the area restored to riparian/California black oak communities (same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

As described for Alternative 3, the Art Activity Center (former bank building) would be removed, and the area would be restored to riparian communities. The historic Concessioner Headquarters Building would be removed and the area restored to a mosaic of meadow/California black oak communities.

Radiating use from the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center and day-visitor parking could affect adjacent riparian areas. In El Portal, the establishment of housing and administrative facilities would affect riparian areas.

The sand pit in El Portal would be removed from operational use and restored to riparian communities.

CALIFORNIA BLACK OAK WOODLAND

The historic tennis court at The Ahwahnee would be removed and the area restored to California black oak woodland (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

California black oak habitats would be affected in Yosemite Valley by construction of employee housing west of Curry Village, development of campsites east of Curry Village, and the construction of a fire station at Yosemite Village. Construction of new lodging units at Curry Village could result in the loss of some oaks. In El Portal, areas of black oaks would be affected by development of housing and administrative facilities.

UPLAND COMMUNITY

As described for Alternative 3, houses along the edge of Ahwahnee Meadow (the historic Ahwahnee Row houses) would be removed, and the area would be restored to a mixture of upland, California black oak, riparian, and meadow communities.

The administrative/utility area to the east of The Ahwahnee would be restored to upland/California black oak woodland (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

The area of the former service station at Yosemite Lodge would be restored to upland/California black oak woodland.

The development of a visitor/transit center and day-visitor parking at Taft Toe would have an effect on upland habitats. Other developments that would affect this habitat type in Yosemite Valley include new campsites east of Curry Village, north of Tenaya Creek, and north of Upper Pines Campground; construction of employee housing west of Curry Village; construction of new lodging units at Yosemite Lodge and Curry Village; and widening of Southside Drive and the addition of an adjacent multi-use path. Upland areas outside of Yosemite Valley would be affected by construction of housing in El Portal; expansion of facilities at South Entrance and Big Oak Flat Entrance; construction of houses at Foresta; and moving of stable operations to McCauley Ranch.

Cultural Resources

This alternative would retain to the degree possible the historically significant sites, structures, and landscape features in Yosemite Valley, where such preservation does not conflict with natural resource restoration goals. Archeological sites and ethnographic resources would be protected wherever possible, and traditional uses by culturally associated Indian people would be encouraged. Large tracts of the Valley's meadows, California black oak woodlands, and the riverís riparian corridor would be restored to a more natural condition, enhancing these important components of the cultural landscape of Yosemite Valley. To achieve these natural resource restoration goals, four historic bridges would be removed, and other individually significant structures and historic buildings that contribute to the Valleyís cultural landscape would be removed. Some historic structures would be rehabilitated and adaptively reused. The three historic orchards would neither be removed nor cultivated. Although changes would occur in the vicinity of the three National Historic Landmark structures, they would be protected from actions that would affect their historic significance. The Yosemite Museum collection (including research library and archives) would be consolidated in Yosemite Valley.

ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES

Archeological sites would continue to be preserved in place as much as possible. The most highly valued sites (those with high research potential) would be avoided during new construction or development wherever possible. No new development would occur in areas where human burials are known to exist. Existing development that is causing ongoing site degradation would be removed or rehabilitated, wherever possible. The abandoned wastewater treatment plant in the Rancheria Flat area of El Portal would be removed from a prehistoric cemetery. A building and asphalt would be removed from a burial site in Yosemite Village.

Where special opportunities exist, prehistoric and historic archeological resources would be interpreted to visitors. In the Lower Yosemite Fall area, a large and important prehistoric village site would be protected. Surface prehistoric and historic archeological features, along with local American Indian traditions, would be interpreted through wayside exhibits along the Lower Yosemite Fall loop trail.

ETHNOGRAPHIC RESOURCES

Through existing agreements and ongoing consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, access to and use of special resources in Yosemite Valley would continue. The National Park Service and culturally associated American Indian groups would continue to develop a parkwide gathering plan for the tending and use of traditional plant resources. Access would continue to be provided for American Indian participants in traditional and ceremonial activities. American Indians conducting traditional activities in Yosemite Valley would not be restricted to day-visitor parking and shuttle transit. Special provisions would be implemented to allow parking in short-term turnouts. Burial areas, where previously identified, would continue to be protected. These areas (the last American Indian village and all known burial areas) are considered among the valued resources of American Indian people, and they were so considered during this planning effort. Where previously unknown burials were discovered, provisions outlined in the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and its implementing regulations would be followed. Other important areas, such as gathering locations, historic American Indian villages, and areas of spiritual or traditional importance, would be protected as much as possible.

The park's Programmatic Agreement for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act also includes provisions for including culturally associated American Indian tribes in the park's planning process. This agreement stipulates that the park and associated American Indian tribes develop an agreement for government-to-government relations, protocols for official consultations regarding issues of concern and park actions that may affect traditional resources, and park-specific guidelines for implementing provisions of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.

CULTURAL LANDSCAPE RESOURCES
(INCLUDING INDIVIDUALLY SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES)

Yosemite Valley

Under this alternative, many of the historically significant natural characteristics of the proposed Yosemite Valley Cultural Landscape Historic District would be rehabilitated and enhanced. General landscape characteristics such as natural features, views, and vegetation would be retained and rehabilitated. However, historic patterns of land use, spatial organization, the Valley's circulation system, some individually significant historic structures, and many structures that contribute to the Valleywide cultural landscape would be altered or removed.

The overall character of Yosemite Valley's spatial organization would be perpetuated. Key natural resource restoration actions, such as implementation of the River Protection Overlay and restoration of the associated natural river processes and adjacent meadows, would enhance natural features and vegetation that are characteristic of the landscape in Yosemite Valley. However, physical historic structures that have modified the river and meadows (such as Sugar Pine, Stoneman, Housekeeping, and Superintendent's Bridges, riprap and other river revetment structures, meadow ditches, etc.) would be removed in order to achieve these restoration objectives. Although the majority of concentrated visitor development would remain in the east Valley, this historic spatial organization would be altered through development of the Taft Toe area for day-visitor parking and a visitor/transit center.

The historic circulation system that encircles the Valley floor would largely be retained. However, the use of this system would change with the closure of a portion of Northside Drive to motor vehicles, the conversion of Southside Drive to two-way traffic, and the relocation of visitor parking and orientation to the mid-Valley at Taft Toe. Portions of both Northside and Southside Drives (both contributing circulation structures in the Valleywide cultural landscape) would also be realigned, and a portion of Southside Drive would be widened. Some noncontributing circulation structures would be removed, such as the roads across Stoneman and Ahwahnee Meadows.

Valleywide land-use patterns would continue, although the location of some activities would change. Camping would continue in Yosemite Valley, but campgrounds themselves (which are not contributing resources) would be relocated away from the river. Stable operations would be relocated outside Yosemite Valley. Access to historically significant views would be retained and enhanced.

Of the many individually significant historic structures, three would be removed. Sugar Pine and Stoneman Bridges would be removed to restore a more natural river flow. The Superintendent's House (Residence 1) and its associated garage would be removed and the area restored to California black oak woodland community.

Changes would occur in the Yosemite Village area. The historic NPS Operations Building (Fort Yosemite) would be retained, although other historic maintenance shops and the Camp 1 complex (all contributing elements in the Valleywide cultural landscape) would be removed and the areas redeveloped for district operations. The Camp 6 area of Yosemite Village and the area of the Ahwahnee Row houses and apartments would be restored to natural conditions. As part of the redevelopment in the Yosemite Village area, some contributing elements of the Valleywide cultural landscape would be removed. These include the Concessioner Headquarters Building and the Village Garage and its associated apartment.

The designed landscape in the Yosemite Village Historic District would be rehabilitated. All the historic structures, which are contributing elements of this historic district, would be retained. The Yosemite Museum/Valley District Building (the historic Museum Building) would be rehabilitated and converted to serve entirely as a cultural history museum. The historic NPS Administration Building would be rehabilitated for a new use as a natural history museum. No changes would occur at the National Historic Landmark Rangersí Club. Other central structures in Yosemite Village, including The Ansel Adams Gallery and associated structures, the Yosemite Village Post Office, and the historic Pohono Indian Studio (current Wilderness Center), would be retained. Historic views within Yosemite Village would be re-established, and the California black oak community would be stabilized and protected in the historic residential area. A new fire station would be constructed at the edge of the historic district housing area, designed to be compatible with the district. Hutchings Orchard would be retained, although the trees would not be maintained. A genetic conservation program would be initiated to salvage cuttings and establish representative plants at an appropriate facility outside Yosemite National Park. Once the trees have died, the area would be restored to natural conditions.

The Ahwahnee is both a National Historic Landmark and a National Register historic property. No changes would occur to the National Historic Landmark hotel structure or its setting. The employee dormitory, a contributing element of the larger National Register property, would be rehabilitated. Three nonhistoric employee tent cabins would be removed. The tennis courts, which are also contributing elements of the larger National Register property, would be removed in order to restore a California black oak woodland community. The western portion of the parking area, which lacks historical integrity, would be reconfigured.

In the Curry Village area, all employee tent housing would be removed. The fruit trees at the historic Curry Orchard would be neither removed nor cultivated. A genetic conservation program would be initiated to salvage cuttings and establish representative plants at an appropriate conservation facility outside Yosemite National Park.

At the Camp Curry Historic District, visitor services would remain concentrated in the central portion of the district, and significant historic buildings such as the Lounge (original registration building) and Registration Building (original post office) would remain. Of the existing 427 historic guest tent accommodations, 150 would remain (277 would be removed). The 48 architecturally significant historic bungalows, as well as Cottage 819, would be retained in their original configuration for continued use as guest lodging. The Mother Curry Bungalow would be retained, but other significant historic structures (Huff House and Tresidder Residence) would be removed. New cabins-with-bath (204 units) would be constructed within the historic district to the north and east sides of the bungalows. Guest parking would be relocated from the historic Curry Orchard area.

At Lower Yosemite Fall, the historic footbridge at the base of the fall would be rehabilitated, three footbridges would be removed, two would be relocated, and one would be rehabilitated or rebuilt (all are contributing elements to the Valleywide cultural landscape). New facilities (a restroom and a shuttle stop) east of Yosemite Creek would be designed to be compatible with the adjacent Yosemite Village Historic District.

The historic concessioner stable and associated facilities would be removed. The Nature Center at Happy Isles (historic Happy Isles Fish Hatchery) would be used year round.

At historic Camp 4 (Sunnyside Campground), the five westernmost campsites would be removed to provide a buffer for the proposed Indian Cultural Center. Thirty-two existing campsites and other important historic features would be retained.

No changes would occur at the National Historic Landmark LeConte Memorial Lodge. No changes would occur at the Bridalveil Meadow historic site.

Fruit trees would neither be removed nor cultivated at the Lamon, Curry, or Hutchings Orchards (all of which contribute to the Valleywide cultural landscape). A genetic conservation program would be initiated to salvage cuttings and establish representative plants at an appropriate facility outside Yosemite National Park.

Merced River Gorge

The segment of the El Portal Road between the intersection of the Big Oak Flat/El Portal Roads and Pohono Bridge would be rebuilt. This reconstruction would be designed to be compatible with other segments of the road and would retain the important historic characteristics of this National Register property.

Six of the remaining seven components of the Yosemite Hydroelectric Power Plant, a property determined eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, would be removed. The six to be removed are: (1) the diversion dam, (2) the screenhouse and associated features, and (3) the four Cascades residences.

El Portal

In El Portal, final decisions regarding the location of new facilities and retention or removal of some historic structures would be deferred until site-specific development planning. The three historic National Lead Company residences would be retained as housing and rehabilitated. The historic railroad residences and the old El Portal Store (all privately owned historic structures on leased National Park Service lots) would be retained as housing. The historic El Portal Chapel (the old El Portal School) and the Yosemite Research Center (Murchison House) would be retained. The El Portal Hotel would be studied for rehabilitation and possible adaptive reuse. If it would not be feasible to reuse this building and meet park needs for this area of El Portal, it would be removed. The current El Portal Market would either be retained or removed and the area redeveloped as part of the commercial core of El Portal.

MUSEUM COLLECTION
(INCLUDING ARCHIVES AND RESEARCH LIBRARY)

As described for Alternative 3, the Yosemite Museum collection would be housed in a new facility adjacent to the existing visitor center's West Auditorium. The West Auditorium would be adapted to house the park's archives, and the research library would be housed in the remodeled existing visitor center. These facilities would allow for increased visitor access to the museum collection by moving all parts of the collection into a facility remodeled or constructed to meet preservation needs and located next to the Yosemite Museum.

Visitor Experience

Key distinguishing visitor experience elements of this alternative include:

As described for the other action alternatives, management of the number of vehicles entering the east end of Yosemite Valley on any given day would be a substantial change from existing conditions. Traffic in the Valley would be reduced, and pedestrians and bicyclists would be better dispersed from mid- to east Valley. While access into Yosemite Valley for visitors with reservations for overnight accommodations in the Valley would not change significantly, access for day visitors (including visitors staying overnight elsewhere in the park) would change. Valley day visitors would drive to and park their cars at Taft Toe (capacity of 550 vehicles) or at out-of-Valley parking areas and arrive in the Valley on an out-of-Valley shuttle bus. Other visitors would arrive by tour and transit buses. Visitors would then travel by shuttle buses or other means to destinations within the east Valley. Fifty short-term parking places would be provided at Taft Toe for visitors with overnight accommodations in Yosemite Valley. This would allow them to access the visitor center upon their arrival in the Valley. Once these visitors check into their overnight accommodations, they would be required to use the in-Valley shuttle bus service to access Valley destinations, including the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center.

In the Valley, a spectrum of recreational activities and experiences would continue to be available under all alternatives, and new opportunities for experiencing portions of the Valley without vehicles would be found. Under this alternative, as visitors arrived at Taft Toe, they would find themselves centrally located at the new Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center. From there, visitors could become oriented and choose their mode of travel (hiking, bicycling, concessioner tours, or in-Valley shuttle buses). While extensive touring in personal vehicles would no longer be an

option under any of the action alternatives, park shuttle buses would serve the entire Valley rather than just the east end. Visitor use would be dispersed throughout the Valley, with increased use of existing trails in the west Valley and a new multi-use paved trail connecting mid-Valley to east Valley. There would be fewer campsites and lodging units than at present, but they would continue to provide a range of prices and opportunities for a diversity of experiences. Orientation and interpretive services would be expanded.

ACCESS FOR VISITORS WITH DISABILITIES

The method of access by visitors with mobility impairments would temporarily remain similar to existing conditions, with controlled access available for personal vehicles to, and parking at, specially marked spaces at principal Valley features. As described for Alternative 3, vehicular access to the sections of Northside Drive closed to automobile traffic would not be available. Eventually, as buses became fully accessible, visitors with disabilities could use them to access Valley destinations. Overnight users could drive directly to their lodging or campsite. As implementation of the Yosemite Valley Plan occurs, accessibility needs would be analyzed, and an accessibility plan would be developed to provide the best-feasible access for visitors with disabilities. Improvements in access to structures, features, and programs would continue, based on this new plan. New facilities would meet accessibility guidelines.

VISITOR USE AND LAND MANAGEMENT ZONING

As described under Actions Common to All Action Alternatives, this alternative would accommodate visitation levels established in the 1980 General Management Plan. The National Park Service would conduct a Visitor Experience and Resource Protection Study (VERP) within five years of a Record of Decision to identify existing and desired conditions for natural resources, cultural resources, and visitor experience. Based on VERP, the National Park Service would (1) establish management zoning that complements the management zoning established in the Merced River Plan; (2) develop indicators to measure visitor experience and resource conditions; (3) develop standards that define acceptable measurements for each indicator; (4) develop an assessment program to monitor standards; (5) develop a decision-making process to be used in identifying management actions necessary to maintain or restore desired conditions; and (6) develop visitor-use level recommendations for each zone.

TRAVELER INFORMATION AND TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

As described under Actions Common to All Action Alternatives, this alternative would include the design and implementation of a traveler information and traffic management system that would use a variety of techniques to assist visitors in planning their trips, to encourage efficient use of available transportation facilities and services, and to assure that vehicle volumes do not exceed the capacity of roads and parking.

ORIENTATION AND INTERPRETATION

As described for the other action alternatives, orientation opportunities would remain decentralized, but they would be expanded to include improved visitor centers at or near entrance stations. Orientation would be provided sequentially, starting with improved resources for use before starting a visit, including the parkís web site and pre-visit publications. Greater emphasis would be placed on supporting gateway joint-agency visitor centers, particularly to provide current information on access and reservation availability.

Once at the park, visitors would find expanded or new visitor centers near each entrance station, contributing to their sense of arrival and their ability to discover and take advantage of parkwide offerings. At these visitor centers, visitors would receive assistance in planning their visits; obtaining maps, publications, wilderness, and other permits; and making or confirming reservations for overnight accommodations. The park orientation film would be shown in these facilities. Similar to Alternative 2, visitors parking in the out-of-Valley parking areas would find orientation to the shuttle bus operations at these parking areas.

Similar to Alternative 3, once visitors arrived in the Valley, they would find a new full-service visitor center at Taft Toe. Visitors with overnight accommodations in Yosemite Valley would find new, small, unstaffed orientation facilities at their lodge or campground, and campground hosts in each campground. These visitors could also take a shuttle bus to the visitor center at Taft Toe. All staffed orientation centers sell orientation and interpretive publications by the parkís cooperating association.

As under the other action alternatives, information at shuttle bus stops would be improved, with clear and consistent signs posted throughout the Valley to enable visitors to use the system with ease and efficiency.

Interpretive services and facilities (e.g., ranger programs, tours, exhibits, school programs) offered by the National Park Service, concessioner, and other partners would be increased above current levels, as proposed in the General Management Plan. This would enhance understanding of park themes, contribute to resource stewardship, and would accommodate visitors touring park features. The variety and locations of interpretive programs would be increased to meet the needs of various visitors, including those with disabilities or those speaking languages other than English. As described for Alternative 3, interpretive programming would be offered in both the east and west Valley. New programs at popular views and on trails would be emphasized, including talks, short walks, bicycle tours, and occasional half-day or all-day programs. The Valley Floor Tour would no longer have access to Northside Drive between Yosemite Lodge and El Capitan Bridge, but turnouts on both sides of Southside Drive east of Taft Toe would be retained and reserved for use by these buses and trams. Ticketing and boarding areas for the Valley Floor Tour would be available at Taft Toe, as well as Valley lodging areas and Yosemite Village.

Yosemite Village would become a hub of interpretive activity. As described for Alternative 3, a small information desk in a museum lobby would replace visitor center functions for Yosemite Village. Theater productions and special programs would be presented in the current visitor centerís upgraded East Auditorium. In-depth interpretation of parkwide themes and the museum collection would be found at two museums: a natural history museum in the majority of the present NPS Administration Building, and an expanded cultural history museum in the present Museum/Valley District Building. The Indian Village of Ahwahnee would continue to serve its present interpretive function. The Wilderness Center function would be transferred to the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center, and the Art Activity Center would be relocated to its former location in the current Wilderness Center.

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, the present informal gathering and program area near the Visitor Center would be redesigned and relocated. The park's research library and photo collection would be housed in the rehabilitated existing visitor center, while the remainder of the extensive museum collection (including historical, archeological, archival, and natural objects) would be stored in the rehabilitated West Auditorium and a new collection storage facility adjacent to the West Auditorium. A research room and a teacher resource center or classroom would be included in this curatorial facility. Some space in the existing NPS Administration Building would serve as an information center and administrative facility for the Valley district interpretive operation in order to maintain a historic administrative use of this building.

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, interpretive amphitheaters at lodging areas would remain at their present locations. The Lower Pines amphitheater would be replaced by a new amphitheater in the vicinity of the current concessioner stable parking lot to reduce noise conflicts with adjacent campsites. The existing Lower River amphitheater would be removed and the area restored to natural conditions. The Nature Center at Happy Isles would be operated as a year-round facility.

A Valleywide exhibit plan would be produced to evaluate the locations of existing outdoor exhibits, as described for Alternatives 2 and 3. It would recommend new exhibits and interpretive trails, focusing on new pedestrian and bicycle trails. The plan would also include recommendations for view maintenance and for some exhibit shelters that could be used for cover during inclement weather.

A program of sociological studies would be implemented that would routinely examine the effectiveness of interpretive and orientation services and media offered by the National Park Service, concessioner, and other partners (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

RECREATION

The mode of accessing parts of the Valley in order to conduct many recreational activities would be altered as a result of changes proposed in this alternative. As described for the other action alternatives, access all year to most recreation sites and activities in Yosemite Valley would be by shuttle bus, bicycle, or on foot rather than by private vehicle. Visitors riding shuttle buses would carry their recreational gear and supplies throughout the Valley or store them in variably sized lockers (including bear-resistant lockers for food) that would be provided at Taft Toe and at major shuttle bus stops and destination areas. Shuttle buses would be outfitted to transport recreational equipment, such as bicycles, backpacks, coolers, skis, and climbing gear.

As described for Alternative 3, the traveler information and traffic management system and the consolidation of parking would reduce opportunities for touring Valley features by private vehicles and would eliminate private vehicle use in the east Valley for day visitors. While some turnouts would be removed, other turnouts would be retained for emergency use and to provide for short-term viewing of outstanding scenic features, particularly historic views. Auto touring would be replaced by guided tours (vehicular and walking), shuttle bus riding, bicycle touring, and walking. The in-Valley shuttle bus system would be expanded to include stops between the east Valley and Bridalveil Fall, and shuttle bus stops would be added to increase access to Valley destinations.

Trail Use

As described for the other action alternatives, the development of interpretive trails and the interpretation of features more easily accessed by bicycles or on foot would be emphasized. Publications and exhibits to facilitate self-guided experiences would continue to be developed for hikers, bicyclists, and bus riders; these would be available at all visitor centers. Ranger-led programs would be scheduled for the convenience of visitors, with varying starting times, program lengths, and distances walked or bicycled.

Walking, Hiking, and Bicycling

As under the other action alternatives, improved and additional trails for walking and bicycling would be available throughout Yosemite Valley, and bicycle touring and hiking would be encouraged. Trails in some areas, including Yosemite Lodge, Curry Village, and the former Upper and Lower River Campground areas, would be realigned or converted to multi-use. In some cases, realignments would be adjusted during the final site design process. Most multi-use trails would be 12 feet in width to accommodate hikers and bicyclist. However, along segments of trails such as the segment between Yosemite Village and Yosemite Falls, trail width may be up to 16 feet to accommodate higher use. Trails would be clearly marked with directional and mileage signs. Conflicts between pedestrians and bicyclists would continue, but would be reduced by separating trails in some developed areas and eliminating guided stock trips. As described for Alternative 2, trails previously shared by hikers and stock between Yosemite Village and Lower Yosemite Fall would be reserved for pedestrian use only.

Multi-use trails would be expanded west from Yosemite Lodge to El Capitan crossover and Taft Toe. On the north side of the Valley, similar to Alternatives 2 and 3, this paved trail would use the converted Northside Drive (which would be closed to vehicles) from Yosemite Lodge to El Capitan crossover. On the south side of the Valley, a new multi-use paved trail would be constructed adjacent to Southside Drive from Swinging Bridge west to El Capitan crossover and Taft Toe. A new multi-use trail would be constructed to connect Southside Drive across Sentinel Bridge to Yosemite Village along Sentinel crossover. East of Yosemite Lodge, the historic Yosemite Creek vehicle bridge would be converted to a multi-use trail after the new Yosemite Creek vehicle bridge is constructed and Northside Drive is rerouted to the south of Yosemite Lodge.

As described for Alternative 3, for access among Yosemite Village, the campgrounds, and Curry Village, a realigned or new multi-use paved trail would be provided through the area of the former Upper and Lower River Campgrounds, continuing across Ahwahnee Bridge, through Lower Pines Campground, and connecting with the existing bicycle path (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-5). There would be another new multi-use paved trail from The Ahwahnee to the east connecting with the existing paved bicycle path in the Sugar Pine Bridge area. The informal trail from Ahwahnee Bridge along the north side of Stoneman Meadow to the Southside Drive/Curry Village Road intersection would be improved as a hiking trail.

As under Alternatives 2 and 3, access to Bridalveil Fall would be via the existing Valley Loop Trail (for pedestrians and stock). There would be no multi-use trail to Bridalveil Fall. New trails accessible to wheelchair users would be provided at Sentinel Beach, the new North American Wall Picnic Area at El Capitan, and other areas determined by the proposed accessibility study and plan. Seating would be provided along trails and at shuttle bus stops.

Bicycle rentals would be available at Taft Toe, Yosemite Lodge, and Curry Village, as described for Alternative 3. The extension of rental hours and periods (e.g., multi-day bicycle rentals) would be evaluated and implemented if feasible. Bicycle racks and lockers for gear and food would be located at major destinations throughout the Valley.

Off-pavement bicycle use, because of the damage it causes to the natural environment and conflicts with other users, would continue to be prohibited (the same as under the other action alternatives). To promote safe bicycle use, lane designations would be provided where appropriate and as necessary on multi-use paved trails to reduce pedestrian and bicycle conflicts and mishaps. Potential environmental damage caused by increased bicycling and pedestrian use would be minimized through trail design, messages in interpretive programs, and management action.

Lower Yosemite Fall

Access to the Lower Yosemite Fall area would be by shuttle bus, bicycle, or on foot (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-3). As described for Alternative 3, the existing parking lot would be removed and the area restored, and new shuttle bus stops would be located on both the north and south sides of Northside Drive east of the Yosemite Creek Bridge. As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, access to the base of the fall would be by foot on either a rehabilitated Western Channel Trail (the present main access) or a better-defined and hardened Eastern Channel Trail; both trails could be combined into a loop trip. Access to the base of the fall for visitors with mobility impairments would be by the redesigned and hardened eastern trail. At the base of the fall, the historic bridge across Yosemite Creek would be rehabilitated and the viewing area enlarged. The human-built rock-rubble pile downstream from this bridge would be removed from the western creek channel.

As described for Alternative 3, restrooms would be replaced near the existing parking lot. Two of the historic bridges along the eastern trail would be rehabilitated or rebuilt. Bridge 1 would be relocated; bridge 2 would be relocated to provide a wheelchair-accessible trail to pass south of the historic Hutchings Sawmill site; bridge 3 would be rehabilitated or rebuilt to maintain access to the Muir plaque and Clark bench; and bridges 4, 5, and 6 would be removed. A seventh bridge would be constructed to replace a bridge that was once located east of bridge 3. The pedestrian/bicycle bridge north of and parallel to the current Yosemite Creek Bridge would be replaced with a new bridge to provide access and disperse use in this heavily used area. The section of the historic Valley Loop Trail approaching the fall northwest of the existing restroom would be rehabilitated for continued pedestrian use. Interpretive exhibits and seating would be added to both the Western and Eastern Channel Trails. An informal viewing area would be provided east of the shuttle bus stop on the north side of the road, and an informal gathering and viewing area would be would be located on the Western Channel Trail.

Wilderness Access

Much wilderness hiking would continue to originate in the Valley. Wilderness permits and trip planning would be available for Valley trails at all park visitor centers, including new entrance station visitor centers and the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center. Pre- and post-trip walk-in campsites, as well as 150 parking spaces in a lot east of Curry Village, would be available for overnight wilderness users holding permits for Valley trailheads.

Climbing

Climbing in Yosemite Valley would continue and, as described for Alternatives 2 and 3, the number of climbers would not be limited under this planning process. Day climbers would access the Valley in the same manner as other day visitors. For overnight climbers with wilderness permits, parking spaces would be available in the wilderness parking area, located east of Curry Village. Overnight climbers could also access the Valley by regional transportation. Once in the Valley, access to climbing routes would be by shuttle bus or on foot.

Stock Use

As described for Alternative 2, although the National Park Service continues to support stock use in the park, commercial trail rides in the Valley would be eliminated and the concessioner stable would be removed from a highly valued natural resource area. The impacts it has on this area include water pollution, erosion, trail degradation, and attraction of non-native cowbirds.

Due to unacceptable conflicts between commercial horse use and other trail users, the National Park Service proposes to eliminate commercial rides in the Valley based on safety and aesthetic reasons. However, private stock (e.g., horse) use would continue in Yosemite Valley. A new, unstaffed corral for day-use staging of stock would be located east of Curry Village. Parking for private stock trailers would be available at the day-use corral. There would be no facilities for keeping private stock overnight in Yosemite Valley. Horse trails would be maintained in the Valley, but the segment of the Valley Loop Trail between Mirror Lake Road and Yosemite Lodge would be closed to stock use to reduce pedestrian/stock conflicts in busy areas. Swinging Bridge would become a new connector between the Northside and Southside stock trails; if necessary, Swinging Bridge would be widened or reconstructed to accommodate hikers, bicyclists, and stock. In addition, National Park Service and concessioner administrative stables in the Valley would be relocated outside Yosemite Valley (see Park Operations).

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, the kennel operation currently associated with the concessioner stable would be discontinued. Visitors would be encouraged through pre-visit information sources to board their pets in facilities outside of the park.

Picnicking

Picnic areas would continue to be available in the Valley (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-1), but picnicking would change from car-oriented (the use of large coolers and grills) to less equipment-intensive modes. Under this alternative, the picnic area at Cathedral Beach would be improved, and it would be accessible by foot from the day-visitor parking area at Taft Toe. The Swinging Bridge Picnic Area and its associated parking would be removed and restored to natural conditions (the river at that location would still be accessible from the north side of the bridge). Picnicking facilities would remain at the Church Bowl area east of Yosemite Village, and a restroom facility would be constructed there under this alternative. A new picnic area would be constructed in a portion of the Curry Orchard. The historic Superintendentís House (Residence 1) would be removed, and the area within the River Protection Overlay would be restored to natural conditions; a picnic area would be developed at that site adjacent to Cook's Meadow. The picnic area at Sentinel Beach would be retained and made accessible by shuttle bus. The existing El Capitan Picnic Area would be available to bicyclists and hikers using Northside Drive. The parking area located at the El Capitan Picnic area would be removed. To accommodate users of the El Capitan area, a new picnicking and viewing areaóthe North American Wall Picnic Areaówould follow the old road alignment at El Capitan (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3). Picnickers could carry food and gear on the Valley shuttle bus, where bins and overhead racks would be available, or could obtain picnic supplies in Yosemite Village or other retail facilities in the Valley.

Other Activities

The historic tennis courts at The Ahwahnee would be removed (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3) and the area restored to natural conditions. As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, ice skating would continue to be available at a new ice rink north of the Curry Village Pavilion. A new facility that concentrated recreational activities (rental of ice skates and skis in the winter and bicycles and rafts in the summer) into one area would be developed at the ice rink. The sport/mountaineering shop would also be relocated to this facility.

No changes to rafting on the Merced River would take place under this planning process; rafting would continue to be managed by other park resource-based plans. Swimming would continue to be available in summer at lodging pools. Swimming and angling in the Merced River would continue, but they would be directed toward river areas most able to withstand heavy use, such as sand and gravel bars.

Visitor Services

CAMPING

Some campground locations would change (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-2), and the number of campsites would be reduced by 34, from 475 to 441 (see table 2-37). As explained for Alternative 3, this would be done to avoid, to the greatest extent possible, replacing campsites in highly valued natural resource areas, the Merced River floodplain, and rockfall zones, and to allow for the removal of campsites from the 150-foot-wide River Protection Overlay (see Vol. Ic, plates D and E). Many campsites closest to the river would no longer have direct river access due to riverbank restoration and revegetation. River use would be directed toward access points in areas most able to withstand heavy use, such as sand and gravel bars. Relocated campsites would provide a range of camping experiences, from walk-in to those that would accommodate recreational vehicles. Campground orientation, parking,
and circulation would be improved.

Visitors would arrive at all campgrounds except Camp 4 (Sunnyside Campground) by driving through Curry Village (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3). The size of the camp store at Curry Village would be increased, and other camper services would be augmented. One campground check station and office would be at the east end of Curry Village. The Upper Pines Campground recreational vehicle dump station would be moved away from the river and placed near this check station. The Lower Pines amphitheater would be relocated to the current site of the concessioner stable parking area (the stable would be removed). Showers would be added to campgrounds wherever feasible for convenience and to reduce crowding at other Valley shower facilities.

Campgrounds would be redesigned to better separate sites by using natural and design features as described for Alternatives 2 and 3. Campsite density (the number of sites per acre) would generally remain the same as at present. Some designated recreational vehicle sites in Upper Pines and possibly Lower Pines would have utility hookups to reduce generator use and associated noise. Walk-in sites would have parking available nearby, except for the new Tenaya Creek walk-to sites, which would have no associated parking and would be available only to campers entering Yosemite Valley by means other than a private motor vehicle (e.g., bus, bicycle, hiking).

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, campsites at the former Upper River and Lower River Campgrounds, as well as a portion of Lower Pines Campground, which were damaged by and removed following the 1997 flood, would not be reconstructed. These areas would be restored by re-establishing natural topography, hydrology, and riparian or California black oak communities, as described for Alternatives 2 and 3. North Pines Campground, which was also affected by flooding in January 1997, would be removed to preserve and restore highly valued natural resource areas. New walk-in and walk-to campsites would be constructed in Upper Pines and along Tenaya Creek. New group sites and a backpackersí campground would be established east of Curry Village.

At Camp 4 (Sunnyside Campground) under this alternative, 32 existing sites would be retained, and the five sites west of the intermittent creek would be relocated to provide a buffer for the proposed new Indian Cultural Center (see Volume II, Appendix H, Considering Cumulative Effects). The area of the former service station would be restored to an upland/California black oak woodland community. Camp 4 (Sunnyside Campground) would continue to be managed as a first-come, first-served campground, but visitors would be able to secure a site at entrance station visitor centers as well as at the campground.

Yellow Pine Campground would continue to be used as an unimproved group campground for park-sponsored volunteer groups.

LODGING

A total of 982 overnight lodging units would be available in Yosemite Valley (see table 2-38, and Vol. Ic, plate 4-2). Accommodations would continue to be provided with a range of styles and prices, including 202 rustic, 387 economy, 270 mid-scale, and 123 deluxe units (see Vol. Ib, Glossary, for definitions of room types). The number of units available to commercial tour operators and conference/group meetings would continue to be capped to ensure the availability of lodging to independent travelers.

Housekeeping Camp

Housekeeping Camp provides visitors the opportunity to rent developed camping shelters adjacent to the Merced River. Beds and a picnic table are provided in each unit. As described in Alternative 3, Housekeeping Camp would be redesigned to accommodate 52 individual housekeeping units, all at the rustic level. All 212 units within the River Protection Overlay and highly valued resource areas would be removed (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-5).

Curry Village

Originally known as Camp Curry, this complex has been in operation since 1899 and has offered rustic lodging facilities to generations of Yosemite visitors. Curry Village would provide activities and services similar to those currently offered, although there would be changes in circulation, facility locations, and number of lodging units (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-5). Some lodging facilities would be improved, while others would be relocated outside the rockfall zone. As with Alternative 3, the total number of lodging units would be reduced from 628 to 420 (see table 2-39).

Overnight guests would continue to have the option of staying in rustic tent cabins (150 units), cabin-with-bath units (252 units), or in Stoneman Lodge rooms (18 units). In response to visitor demand, to provide for winter use, and as prescribed in the 1992 Concession Services Plan, cabin-with-bath units would replace all cabin-without-bath units. The registration building (historic Camp Curry Post Office) would remain, and the lounge (historic Camp Curry registration office) would be used as an information center as well as a lounge. Of the 420 lodging units at Curry Village, 150 would be rustic and 270 would be economy units.

Yosemite Lodge

Yosemite Lodge would provide activities and services similar to those currently offered, although circulation, facility locations, and numbers of lodging units would change (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-3). As with Alternative 3, existing and replacement lodging units would total 387 rooms, an increase of 142 rooms over existing levels (see table 2-40).

As previously described, the January 1997 flood damaged four motel structures that were temporarily repaired and are still in use at Yosemite Lodge. These four motel buildings (Maple, Juniper, Alder, and Hemlock) would be removed,
along with Laurel and Birch, to accommodate rerouting of Southside Drive and redesign of the Yosemite Lodge. Motel buildings remaining would include Cedar, Elderberry, and Manzanita. Cottage units remaining would include Aspen, Azalea, Cottonwood, Dogwood, Tamarack, and Willow.

Three 3-story motel buildings and five 2-story cottages of similar architectural design and appearance to Pine and Oak Cottages would be constructed. A total of 117 lodging units at Yosemite Lodge would be economy units, and 270 units would be mid-scale.

The Ahwahnee

The opportunity to stay at The Ahwahnee, Yosemite Valley's grand National Historic Landmark hotel, would not be changed under this alternative. The Ahwahnee would provide activities and services similar to those now offered, but there would be some changes in circulation and parking configuration. Its existing 123 deluxe lodging rooms (99 hotel rooms and 24 cabin/cottage rooms) would be retained (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3). The one Ahwahnee cottage that is within the River Protection Overlay would be retained, as it is a contributing element to The Ahwahnee National Register historic property.

FOOD AND RETAIL SERVICES

Taft Toe

Limited food and retail services would be provided at the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center.

Yosemite Lodge

The interconnected buildings at the center of Yosemite Lodge would continue to be the location of food and retail services (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-3). The three restaurants and one gift shop would remain unchanged; the Mountain Room Bar would be redesigned as a public lobby and lounge. The main gift store would be permanently reduced in size, matching its present winter configuration.

The swimming pool, bicycle rental stand, and snack bar would also remain in their current locations. All facilities could be redesigned over time to improve guest services. The post office building would be removed (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, a new building would be constructed for lodge registration, and the existing registration building would be adaptively used for informal seating, administrative and interpretive functions, information, and Valley tour reservations. The Cliff Room and the outdoor amphitheater in the courtyard would be improved and would continue to be used primarily for evening interpretive programs, group meetings, seminars, and other special functions.

A new maintenance and housekeeping facility would be constructed behind the cafeteria and restaurant complex to replace the facilities damaged by flooding. All housekeeping, storage, maintenance, and associated management space would be consolidated in this new facility, as described for Alternatives 2 and 3.

The service station would not be replaced. A mobile repair truck, designed to deal with minor emergency services and to provide gas on the road, would continue to be operated; this service would be expanded as needed. Service stations at other park locations would be retained.

Yosemite Village

The Village Store building would continue to be used for its present purposes (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-4), but gift sales and the grocery function would be reduced; the deli operation would be moved here from Degnanís. A short-term locker/storage facility where visitors could check their belongings would be designed into the building. Recycling, ATM, check cashing, and transportation kiosk functions would be retained. As described for Alternative 3, the Village Grill would be expanded for more indoor seating. The sport shop function would be incorporated with the sport/mountaineering shop at Curry Village.

As described for Alternative 3, the Degnanís building, which currently houses a deli, restaurant, grill, and retail gift sales, would be redesigned for expanded food service. The present gift shop would be removed. Inside seating would be increased.

The historic Village Garage building would be removed; public garage functions would be relocated to El Portal (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

The Art Activity Center would continue to provide artistic activities for the public, but it would be moved back to its previous location at the existing Wilderness Center. The former bank building, which currently houses the Art Activity Center, would be torn down and the area restored to natural conditions (the same as under Alternative 3).

The historic Ansel Adams Gallery photography and gift shop, the medical and dental clinics, and the historic Yosemite Post Office in Yosemite Village would be retained (the same as Alternative 3).

The Ahwahnee

The Ahwahnee dining room, gift shop, sweet shop, and bar would remain. Services offered
at The Ahwahnee would remain much as they are and would not take on a more resort- or spa-type character.

Happy Isles

The ice cream/snack stand (destroyed by rockfall in 1996) would not be replaced; no food service would be available at Happy Isles (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

Curry Village

The Curry Pavilion and Meadow Deck food service areas would be redesigned as proposed in the Concession Services Plan. As under Alternatives 2 and 3, the grocery and gift functions in the Meadow Deck building would be separated to reduce congestion. The grocery would be substantially expanded to include deli operations and a camp store.

The outdoor amphitheater, lounge, and pool would be rehabilitated or replaced. The lounge (historic Camp Curry registration office) would be rehabilitated and remain in use; it would be used for information and interpretive functions (the same as under Alternative 2) as well as a lounge.

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, the Curry Ice Rink would be relocated north of the Curry Pavilion and Meadow Deck buildings. The Mountain Shop, along with bicycle and ski rentals, would be relocated to the ice rink area to consolidate space and recreational uses. Raft rentals would occur seasonally at this location. A short-term locker/storage facility where visitors could check their belongings would also be designed into the building.

The seasonal post office would be removed; mailboxes would be provided at employee housing, the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3. Registration would remain in the present registration building (the historic Camp Curry Post Office).

Transportation

The major transportation actions that distinguish this alternative include:

This alternative would result in a major reduction in vehicle travel in the eastern portion of Yosemite Valley. Day-visitor parking would be located near the El Capitan crossover. All day-visitor traffic, tour buses, regional transit buses, and shuttles from parking areas outside the Valley would stop at Taft Toe. Only tour buses carrying overnight visitors would travel to the east Valley. Day visitors would only travel to the east Valley on shuttle buses. The number of vehicles passing the Yosemite Chapel on Southside Drive near Sentinel Bridge would be reduced from about 7,200 vehicles on a typically busy day (1998) to about 2,360 vehicles. About 330 of these would be new shuttle bus trips from the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center.

TRAVELER INFORMATION AND TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

The broad goals of Yosemite's General Management Plan include the reduction of traffic congestion and crowding in Yosemite Valley. Progress toward achieving these goals would be accomplished by developing a traveler information and traffic management system to provide visitors with information about where to park and whether overnight accommodations were available in the Valley well before they arrive in the Valley. The system would use incentives to encourage visitors to use out-of-Valley parking, and it would assist visitors in selecting the best means of travel for their specific needs. If required, to assure that the number of vehicles east of El Capitan crossover did not exceed available parking, a traffic check station would be developed at Taft Toe (see Actions Common to All Action Alternatives at the beginning of this chapter).

YOSEMITE VALLEY AND OUT-OF-VALLEY PARKING

Day-Visitor Parking

Day-visitor parking facilities in the Valley would change. Under this alternative, a new parking area for 550 day-visitor vehicles and a new visitor and transit center would be constructed at Taft Toe near the El Capitan crossover (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-1). From the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center, shuttle buses would transport visitors to Valley destinations; no day-visitor traffic would travel east of the Taft Toe parking area. All day visitors arriving in private vehicles would park their vehicles in the new facility, as under Alternative 3. However, under this alternative, when parking was not available in the Valley, day visitors arriving at park entrance stations would have the option of parking in out-of-Valley parking areas, where shuttle service to the Valley and other park destinations would be provided.

The out-of-Valley day-visitor parking areas would be at Badger Pass (about 415 spaces for visitors using the South Entrance), South Landing (about 805 spaces for visitors using the Big Oak Flat or Tioga Pass Entrances), and El Portal (about 370 spaces for visitors using the Arch Rock Entrance) (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-8). Each area would be equipped with small transit facilities that would incorporate restrooms and visitor information. The out-of-Valley parking areas would not be used during periods of lower visitation, normally, November through March.

Regional transit buses and tour buses carrying day visitors would travel directly to the visitor/transit center at Taft Toe and unload their passengers. Up to 16 bus bays would be provided at Taft Toe for tour buses, regional transit buses, and out-of-Valley shuttles. Visitors would then board shuttles to travel to destinations in the east Valley. Visitors could also travel by bicycle or on foot on paved and unpaved trails from the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center.

Overnight Parking

As described for Alternative 3, overnight visitors with lodging or camping reservations or wilderness permits would drive directly to their lodging or campground, or to the Wilderness parking area east of Curry Village (see table 2-41). To allow overnight guests the opportunity to stop at the visitor center as they enter the Valley, 50 short-term parking spaces would be provided at Taft Toe for visitors with overnight accommodations in the Valley. To reduce traffic congestion, parking for overnight visitors would no longer be provided at other destinations or along Valley roads. Vehicles would remain parked in assigned areas unless they were needed for travel to out-of-Valley destinations. Travel within the Valley to trailheads, activity areas, and facilities would be by shuttle bus, bicycle, or on foot. As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, parking for new walk-in campsites and Camp 4 (Sunnyside Campground) would be provided within walking distance of the sites. No parking would be provided at the Tenaya Creek walk-to campsites, as they would be designated for overnight campers arriving in the Valley by means other than private vehicle.

Some overnight visitors would arrive by commercial tour bus. These buses would drive visitors directly to their lodging or campground areas and would then park at one of 15 designated parking spaces at Yosemite Lodge (the same as Alternatives 2 and 3).

Employee Parking

Parking for National Park Service, concessioner, and other employees residing in the Valley would be located at or near each residence.

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, most employees commuting from outside the Valley would be required to use an employee transportation system. Employee shuttle service could be provided with the same buses that would serve as out-of-Valley shuttles at other times of the day. Alternatively, buses could be dedicated to employee transportation services, if desired. This system would be developed to meet the needs of employees with different schedules and could include regional transit options or car and vanpools. Approximately 1,300 workers would commute to work in the Valley in the summer.

Employees who live west of El Portal along the Highway 140 corridor and work in Yosemite Valley could drive to a parking area in El Portal and take employee shuttles into the park. Approximately 60 parking spaces would be provided at El Portal for this purpose. Some employees (e.g., late-night and early-morning shift workers) would still drive their private vehicles to the Valley and park in designated spaces as prescribed in the traveler information and traffic management system. (These actions are the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3.)

YOSEMITE VALLEY ROADS

Summary of road and circulation changes:

Bridge summary:

Valley Access via El Portal Road

As described in Actions Common to All Action Alternatives at the beginning
of this chapter, the section of El Portal Road between the El Portal and Big Oak
Flat Road intersection and Pohono Bridge would be improved. Road improvements would be designed to minimize the chance of road failure during flood events, to improve safety, and to minimize damage to riparian areas by focusing visitor use.

West Valley (El Capitan Bridge to Pohono Bridge)

As under Alternatives 2 and 3, minimal changes to road circulation would occur in the western half of the Valley. Southside Drive from Pohono Bridge to El Capitan crossover would continue to be a two-lane, one-way road eastbound, and Northside Drive would be a two-lane, one-way road westbound. El Capitan crossover would be one-way northbound across the Merced River at El Capitan Bridge between Southside and Northside Drives. Turnouts would be retained for emergency use and short-term viewing of scenic features.

Under this alternative, as part of the traveler information and traffic management system, a traffic check station may have to be constructed on Southside Drive in the area of El Capitan crossover (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-1, and Actions Common to All Action Alternatives). Day visitors or visitors with overnight reservations in the Valley would continue eastbound on Southside Drive. When the Valley day-visitor parking area was full, day visitors would proceed across El Capitan crossover to Northside Drive to continue out of the Valley to other park destinations or to out-of-Valley parking facilities.

East Valley (El Capitan Bridge to Curry Village and the Campgrounds)

Southside Drive from El Capitan Crossover to Curry Village and the Campgrounds

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, Southside Drive from El Capitan crossover east through Curry Village would be converted to two-way traffic, with one lane in each direction (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-1). This section of roadway would be widened to no more than 26 feet, accommodating 11-foot lanes and 2-foot paved shoulders on each side of the two-way road. From the Yosemite Chapel to Sentinel Bridge, the road would be realigned to improve the approach to Sentinel Bridge and facilitate traffic circulation. Near Curry Village, the portion of Southside Drive that crosses Stoneman Meadow would be removed, and all traffic would be rerouted along a realigned Curry Village Road. This would provide two-way access to Curry Village and the campgrounds. Curry Village Road would be realigned along the south edge of the historic Curry Orchard, following an existing access road through Boys Town to the campgrounds and Wilderness parking. The access road to Southside Drive at the west edge of the Curry Orchard would be removed. The one-way loop road to Curry Village registration and parking would remain, although the parking area would be redesigned.

Southside Drive to Yosemite Village and Yosemite Lodge

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, traffic from the west Valley or from Curry Village would cross Sentinel Bridge to reach Yosemite Village, The Ahwahnee, and Yosemite Lodge (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-2). This road, the Sentinel crossover, would be two-way, with one lane in each direction.

Yosemite Lodge Area

Northside Drive in the Yosemite Lodge and Camp 4 (Sunnyside Campground) area would be relocated south of the Lodge, as described for Alternatives 2 and 3, to reduce conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians and to provide safer pedestrian access between the Lodge and Yosemite Falls (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-3). Vehicular circulation to Yosemite Lodge would be routed across Yosemite Creek via a new motor vehicle bridge just south of the Yosemite Creek Bridge. West of the site of the proposed Indian Cultural Center, Northside Drive would be closed to vehicles and converted to a multi-use paved trail for bicycles and hikers (it would also be available as an emergency route).

TRANSIT

This alternative would provide 550 parking spaces for day-visitor vehicles at Taft Toe. Additional day-visitor parking would be provided at three out-of-Valley locations in the park: Badger Pass, El Portal, and South Landing. Out-of-Valley shuttle buses would transport day visitors to and from the Valley, and in-Valley shuttles would transport day and overnight visitors throughout the Valley. The out-of-Valley parking areas and shuttles would not operate from November through March or on other days when visitor use was low.

Shuttles operating within Yosemite Valley would provide service year-round. Generally, the peak visitation season for Yosemite National Park occurs from mid-June through Labor Day weekend. April, May, September, and October are the shoulder season months, with intermediate levels of visitor use. Visitation is lowest from November through March. The operating hours of the shuttle routes and the frequency of service would be adjusted within each season as required to meet visitor needs, and visitation would be managed so as not to exceed the carrying capacity of visitor use areas.

Shuttles from out-of-Valley parking sites to the Valley would not operate from November through March, when parking in Yosemite Valley would be sufficient to serve day visitors. Service on out-of-Valley shuttle routes would start in April, beginning with the weekends. As visitation increased, the amount of service would be expanded, reaching a maximum level on weekends in the summer. Service would be reduced in the fall as the need decreased, with shuttles to out-of-Valley parking areas operating only on weekends in the last weeks of the season in October.

In-Valley Shuttles

The in-Valley shuttle system would provide transportation for day visitors parking at Taft Toe; those who ride regional transit buses, tour buses, or out-of-Valley shuttles; and for overnight visitors. As described for Alternative 3, the shuttle system provided for this alternative would consist of four separate shuttle routes, all of which would cycle through the new Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center:

These four routes would converge at the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center. In-Valley shuttle buses would use a separate loading area adjacent to the 16 bus bays provided for tour buses, regional transit buses, and out-of-Valley shuttles. This facility would provide transfer and interpretive/orientation opportunities.

In-Valley Shuttle Services

During the busiest times of the day in the peak season, in-Valley shuttle buses would circulate through the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center as follows: one bus approximately every 7.5 minutes for the Ahwahnee Connector, approximately every 5 minutes for the Yosemite Lodge Connector, approximately every 6 minutes for the Happy Isles Connector, and approximately every 15 minutes for the Bridalveil Circulator. Peak-season shuttle service would be provided between early morning and late evening (hours could be expanded during special events). Table 2-42 presents estimated characteristics for the proposed in-Valley shuttle system under this alternative.

In-Valley Shuttle Vehicles

The shuttle buses used on routes operated within Yosemite Valley would be designed to operate over the gentle grades on Valley roads and to allow passengers to get on and off the bus easily at the many stops. Buses would use the best-available fuel and propulsion systems designed for the special characteristics of travel within Yosemite Valley. Buses would be selected to minimize noise and air pollutant emissions, while providing sufficient capacity and cost-effective, reliable service. Buses would be replaced or modified to take advantage of advances in fuel propulsion technology as they became available.

Out-of-Valley Shuttles

While out-of-Valley shuttle buses would not be ordered for several years, the National Park Service would evaluate new technology and alternative fuels when selecting and purchasing buses. Out-of-Valley shuttles under this alternative would provide service between the new Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center and parking facilities at Badger Pass, El Portal, and South Landing. Once in the Valley, the out-of-Valley shuttles would go to Taft Toe, where passengers could transfer to in-Valley shuttles to access Valley destinations. From the visitor center, passengers could walk or bicycle to destinations within the Valley.

Out-of-Valley Shuttle Services

During the peak season, out-of-Valley shuttle buses would serve the out-of-Valley parking areas as follows: one bus approximately every 12 minutes for the Badger Pass route, approximately every 12 minutes for the El Portal route, and approximately every 6 minutes for the South Landing route. These three routes combined would result in one bus arriving at the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center approximately every 3 minutes. Peak-season shuttle service would be provided between the hours of 5:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. (hours could be expanded during special events). Table 2-43 presents estimated characteristics for the proposed out-of-Valley shuttle system.

Out-of-Valley Shuttle Vehicles

Buses used on out-of-Valley shuttle routes would be designed to provide relatively high-speed service over roads with steep grades and sharp curves. These buses would provide storage areas for recreational equipment (such as bicycles) carried by visitors, including under-floor storage if needed. Out-of-Valley shuttle buses would use the best-available fuel and propulsion system technology to minimize noise and air pollutant emissions, while providing sufficient capacity and cost-effective, reliable service to visitors. Because the operating conditions for out-of-Valley shuttles would be different than those required for in-Valley shuttles, these buses could use a different fuel and propulsion technology than the in-Valley shuttle buses.

Regional Transit

Day visitors who do not park in the Valley or in one of the out-of-Valley parking areas may have the option of traveling to the Valley on regional transit or other modes of transportation not requiring parking. These modes would deliver passengers directly to the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center.

Commercial Tour Buses

Commercial tour buses would continue to bring about 14% of day visitors and lodging guests to Yosemite Valley in the summer. Tour buses carrying day visitors would load and unload at the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center, and park at Taft Toe. Overnight tour buses would park at Yosemite Lodge.

Summary

Combined in-Valley shuttle and out-of-Valley shuttle operations would equate to one bus at the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center every 1.1 minutes during the busiest times in the peak season.

Park Operations

National Park Service operations in Yosemite Valley would be scaled down to the level of district operations, similar to Tuolumne Meadows and Wawona. Both the National Park Service and concessioner headquarters would be removed from the Valley and relocated to El Portal (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, National Park Service and concessioner administrative stables operations, as well as the parkwide trails operation, would be relocated to McCauley Ranch in Foresta. Since McCauley Ranch was identified as a possible Wilderness addition in the 1984 California Wilderness Act, a Wilderness suitability assessment would be prepared. If the McCauley Ranch addition is determined to be suitable for designation as Wilderness, stable operations would be supported in the current National Park Service stable facility. If located at this site the consolidated stable operation would support only district stable and trails operations and not parkwide trails operations. If the consolidated stable operation is moved to McCauley Ranch, then the access to the area would be improved by widening the road and possibly replacing the bridge over Crane Creek to allow for stock trailers and hay trucks. Access improvements would be identified during the site design process, which would allow for the participation of National Park Service and concessioner employees, residents of Foresta, Mariposa County officials, and other interested parties. A corral at the current National Park Service stable would provide a staging area for limited National Park Service and concessioner operations; the staging area would have parking for five trailers.

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

In Yosemite Valley, the NPS maintenance area would be redesigned to accommodate essential district offices and maintenance shops (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-4). Under this alternative, the historic NPS Operations Building (Fort Yosemite) would be retained, but the associated shops would be removed. NPS administration and headquarters functions would be relocated to El Portal within the existing NPS operations area at Railroad Flat in the western portion of El Portal. Depending on land development constraints in El Portal or other considerations, the relocated headquarters functions for both the National Park Service and concessioner could be relocated to neighboring communities. If the National Park Service pursued this opportunity, appropriate environmental review would be completed.

The following functions and offices would be removed from Yosemite Valley (the same as under Alternative 3):

The following functions and offices and would remain in Yosemite Valley (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3):

The historic Superintendent's House (Residence 1) and its garage, at the edge of Cook's Meadow, would be removed under Alternative 4, the area within the River Protection Overlay restored to natural conditions, and a picnic area developed at the current site. As described for Alternative 3, a new fire station would be constructed at the south edge of the Yosemite Village Historic District to house the National Park Service and concessioner fire engines and emergency service operations. Yellow Pine Campground would continue to be used as an unimproved group campsite for park-sponsored volunteers.

Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center

As described for Alternative 3, the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center would provide visitor orientation and limited visitor services, but under this alternative it would only provide parking for 550 day-visitor vehicles, as well as a transportation hub for shuttle, transit, and tour buses, which would require up to 16 bus bays. Fueling, light maintenance, and associated vehicle storage for Valley shuttles would also be provided at the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center. Shuttle bus heavy maintenance and associated vehicle storage would be provided in El Portal. For regional transit and tour buses, the National Park Service would provide layover areas for daytime use at designated locations, but overnight vehicle storage and maintenance would be the responsibility of the service provider.

Shuttle Employee Requirements

Under this alternative, a total of 242 additional employees would be required to operate the in-Valley and out-of-Valley shuttle systems (see table 2-44). Of these employees, 80 supervisors and drivers would be dedicated to the in-Valley shuttle, 102 supervisors and drivers would be dedicated to the out-of-Valley shuttle, and the remaining 60 personnel would support both shuttle systems. Off-season operations (October, April, May) would require 77 Valley shuttle drivers and supervisors, 94 out-of-Valley shuttle drivers and supervisors, and 57 shared employees between the two systems, for a total of 228 employees.

CONCESSIONSER AND OTHER ENTITIES

The administrative headquarters for the park's concessioner would be relocated to new facilities in El Portal, or at the option of the concessioner, to another out-of-park location, as in Alternatives 2 and 3. The Concessioner Headquarters Building would be removed, and the area would be restored to natural conditions (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-4; compare to plate 1-4, No Action Alternative). The concessioner would retain the warehouse building in the Valley to support operations, including inventory and supply distribution, building maintenance shops, security, recycling, uniforms, personnel, payroll, housing, and computer support. A new fire station would be constructed at the south edge of the Yosemite Village Historic District to house the National Park Service and concessioner fire engines. With the removal of the historic Village Garage facility, shuttle bus servicing functions would be relocated to Taft Toe (the same as Alternative 3). Heavy maintenance of concessioner vehicles would be relocated to a new garage facility in El Portal; site-specific locations for these facilities would be evaluated and determined during the site design and development process (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

Employee Housing

Housing is necessary to accommodate employees who are responsible for natural and cultural resource protection, serving the needs of park visitors, and meeting the operational requirements of the park. During the summer, over 18,200 people per day may visit Yosemite Valley. Only by providing employee housing at or within a reasonable proximity to Yosemite Valley would resources be protected and the needs of these visitors be met.

HOUSING PROGRAM OVERVIEW

This alternative would provide up to 1,964 total employee beds to support Yosemite Valley district functions (National Park Service, primary concessioner, and other partners). The housing would be distributed as follows:

HOUSING OBJECTIVES

Yosemite National Park is committed to following the direction set by National Park Service policy that seeks to reduce the government's role in providing employee housing while reserving the ability to provide housing when appropriate and necessary. At Yosemite National Park, one way of reducing the government's role is to facilitate the private acquisition of housing by employees. To this end, under this alternative the National Park Service would actively pursue and facilitate policies, programs, and arrangements that would: (1) encourage National Park Service and park partner employees to find private housing in the region, and (2) work with county governments and, as appropriate, the private sector, to develop strategies to house National Park Service and park partner employees in the region.

Additionally, the National Park Service would develop housing policies and programs as allowed by the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996. The act states that the National Park Service shall consider actions to:

This alternative identifies locations that can be used for employee housing within Yosemite National Park (Yosemite Valley and Foresta) and the El Portal Administrative Site. These locations have been identified in order to guide potential future land use. However, to the greatest degree possible the National Park Service would attempt to facilitate the private acquisition of housing in the region for a reasonable portion of the National Park Service and park partner workforce. Prior to the construction of housing, the National Park Service would encourage employees to find private housing in the region, and work with county governments and, as appropriate, the private sector, to develop strategies to house Yosemite National Park employees collectively.

Because the National Park Service does not have authority over the use of private lands in the region outside Yosemite National Park and the El Portal Administrative Site, and because an ample supply of housing is not guaranteed, the National Park Service would be prepared to meet housing needs within areas under its jurisdiction in Yosemite Valley, El Portal, Wawona, and Foresta. If an adequate supply of employee housing were not available in the local region, then the National Park Service would construct housing in these areas. Furthermore, the National Park Service recognizes that active involvement in the appropriate county and state government processes, and compliance with county ordinance and state government laws and regulations (such as the California Environmental Quality Act) would be required and essential when considering land use options outside the boundaries of Yosemite National Park.

Presently, during the peak season, the combined total workforce serving Yosemite Valley is approximately 2,183¹ and housing is provided for a total of 1,620² employees Therefore,
approximately 563³ employees (or 26%) of the total workforce is housed privately within the region, including privately owned homes on National Park Service leased land in Old El Portal.⁴

This alternative could increase the Yosemite Valley related workforce by 273⁵ employees up to 2,456⁶ employees to accommodate increases in staffing levels associated with alternative actions. To meet the needs of this additional workforce this alternative would provide an additional 273 employee bed spaces.

Again, because the National Park Service does not have the authority over the use of private lands in the region outside Yosemite National Park, the number of beds proposed in this alternative would meet housing needs within Yosemite Valley, El Portal, Wawona, and Foresta if housing were not available in the region.

SITE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

Upon completion of this plan, site-specific design studies would be prepared to evaluate design options for new housing and administrative facilities. These studies would include, if necessary, additional environmental review, evaluation and compliance, archeological surveys and data collection, ethnographic resource inventories and evaluation, historic resource studies, biological assessments, erosion control plans, geologic assessments, and the development of architectural guidelines. Housing types and densities, and support facility locations might change if site-specific constraints were identified, if National Park Service or concessioner staffing programs changed, or if housing program requirements change in response to changes in the demand for housing.

The site design and development process would allow for the participation of National Park Service and concession employees, residents of El Portal, Wawona, and Foresta, Mariposa County officials, and other interested parties in the preparation of site development studies for housing, administrative functions, and community or commercial facilities. These processes would consider appropriate county and/or town planning area specific plans and would prescribe development characteristics and criteria that would be compatible with the character, density, and scale of existing development. Site-specific environmental review, evaluation, and compliance would also be completed as appropriate during the site design process on a project-by-project basis.

HOUSING PROGRAM

A total of 689 National Park Service, concessioner, and other park employee beds would be located in Yosemite Valley. This represents an application of criteria proposed in the 1992 Draft Yosemite Valley Housing Plan.

Under this alternative, 1,149 employee beds would be located at the El Portal Administrative Site. Of these, 290 are existing, although 104 would be relocated from the Village Center and the Trailer Village (Hennessey's Ranch) to allow for redevelopment. Employee housing to replace those beds relocated from Yosemite Valley (574 beds) and from Cascades and Arch Rock (12 beds) would be constructed, as would facilities for an additional 273 beds to accommodate present unmet needs and potential future growth as a result of the operational changes associated with this alternative.

Of the 1,964 beds in Yosemite Valley, El Portal, Foresta, and Wawona, 1,537 would be allocated for the primary concessioner, 336 for the National Park Service, and 91 for others (see table 2-45). The total number of beds was determined by evaluating the specific operational requirements of this alternative and then projecting the related staffing requirements.

Following the January 1997 flood, temporary concessioner housing (345 beds) was established at several locations in Yosemite Valley, including the Yosemite Village area (80 beds), Yosemite Lodge (82 beds), and Curry Village (183 beds). All of these temporary beds would be replaced.

Minor adjustments to the housing number, type, and density for each location may be needed in response to the site design process, or constraints or conditions not identified during this planning process. If significant adjustments are required, additional site-specific environmental review may be necessary.

Yosemite Valley Housing Actions

Three principal locations are identified for 689 employee beds in Yosemite Valley: Curry Village, Yosemite Village, and The Ahwahnee. A total of 588 employee beds would be removed from Yosemite Valley (see table 2-46). Yosemite Valley housing numbers (beds), locations, and distribution by employer are summarized in table 2-46 for this alternative.

All temporary housing in Yosemite Valley would be removed and replaced with permanent structures, either in Yosemite Valley or El Portal (the same as under Alternative 3). Areas in Yosemite Valley to be used for employee housing are generally within existing developed or disturbed areas. This alternative would remove some housing from highly valued resource areas and the rockfall zone and relocate it. Concentrating housing in multi-level (two- or three-story) buildings would minimize building footprints.

Yosemite Lodge

The temporary modular housing in the parking lot (82 beds), and cabin beds (8 beds) would be removed (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

Yosemite Village

As described for Alternative 3, the historic Ahwahnee Row houses and apartments (22 beds) adjacent to Ahwahnee Meadow, plus the Indian Creek apartments (14 beds), would be removed and the areas restored to natural conditions. The Y Apartments (8 beds) would be removed, and the area would be restored. The historic apartment next to the Village Garage (1 bed) would be removed, and the area would be redeveloped (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-4).

Three historic dormitoriesóLower Tecoya (234 beds), Hospital Row (12 beds), and Lost Arrow (36 beds)ówould be retained, as would the Upper Tecoya houses (26 beds) and the Middle Tecoya houses and dormitories (13 beds near the medical clinic). The apartments above the post office (4 beds), apartments adjacent to the Lost Arrow dormitory (3 beds), apartments behind The Ansel Adams Gallery (3 beds), and the Yosemite Elementary School Teacherage (3 beds) would also be retained. These actions are the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3.

The temporary Lost Arrow cabins (80 beds) would be removed from the Yosemite Village Historic District (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3). The historic cabins at Camp 1 (3 beds) and the historic house (1 bed) behind the current visitor center would be removed (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

Housing in the Yosemite Village Historic District and at the Rangers' Club (72 beds combined) would be retained (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

The Ahwahnee

The historic Ahwahnee dormitory would be retained but remodeled; it would accommodate 13 fewer beds (reduced from 43 to 30 beds). The three tent cabins (6 beds), which do not contribute to The Ahwahnee National Register complex, would be removed, and the area would be restored to natural conditions (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

Curry Village

Two new dormitories (up to three stories and 253 beds) would be constructed adjacent to the Camp Curry Historic District in the Huff House area. A total of 37 beds would be removed (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-5). As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, these include Cooks' cabins (12 beds), Cooks' tents (8 beds), Huff House studios (4 beds), Huff House trailers (6 beds), Curry Village manager housing (Cabin 101 [1 bed]), Tresidder Residence studios (2 beds), and Mother Curry Bungalow studios (4 beds). Some historic structures could be adaptively reused. Temporary housing in the historic district would be removed: Huff House tent cabins (50 beds), Huff House cabins (104 beds), and Boys Town cabins (29 beds). The historic Boys Town tent cabins (178 beds) would be removed and the area redeveloped. The historic Terrace (156 beds) would be removed.

Concessioner Stable

Two houses (2 beds), three apartments (3 beds), seven cabins (14 beds), and 10 tent cabins (30 beds) at the historic concessioner stable would be removed and the area restored to natural conditions (see Vol. Ic, plate, 4-5; the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

Housing Support Facilities

In Yosemite Village, areas have been set aside and designated for necessary community support facilities. These include the post office, fuel service, and a medical and dental clinic. As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, the employee wellness center, housing management office, and housing-related storage space would be located at the new Huff House dormitories in Curry Village. A new employee cafeteria would be constructed in
the Curry Village area to reduce seating and use conflicts with park visitors. If possible, the same kitchen would service both the guest and employee cafeterias. The employee cafeteria at Curry Village would also serve as a community center.

Utilities

Water would be obtained from existing wells in Yosemite Valley. All sewage would be treated at the
El Portal Wastewater Treatment Plant. Electrical and phone service would be upgraded to accommodate
the additional loads.

El Portal Housing Actions

Legislation in 1958 established the El Portal Administrative Site for the purpose of locating utilities, facilities, and services required for the operation of Yosemite National Park. Much of the available land suitable for development within the El Portal Administrative Site would be used for housing (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-6). Housing needs in El Portal could change based on the potential for some employees to obtain private housing in the region, in which case the overall need for housing in El Portal might be reduced.

Under this alternative, there would be 1,149 total beds within the El Portal Administrative Site, including 290 existing beds (104 of which would be relocated within El Portal), 574 beds relocated from Yosemite Valley, 12 beds relocated from Cascades and Arch Rock, and 273 new beds to accommodate present unmet needs and projected growth.

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, this alternative considers six locations in El Portal as suitable for employee housing or other facilities: Hillside East, Hillside West, Village Center, Old El Portal, Rancheria Flat, and Hennesseyís Ranch (includes Trailer Village and Abbieville; see table 2-47).

Hillside East

A total of 40 apartments or studio apartments (40 beds) would be constructed (the same as under Alternative 3).

Hillside West

Thirty single occupancy houses (30 beds) would be constructed.

Hennessey's Ranch (Trailer Village and Abbieville)

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, all existing trailer and modular housing (59 units/68 beds) would be removed, and the area would be redeveloped as employee housing and parking. Employees living in these housing units would either move to new housing constructed in El Portal or find other housing outside the El Portal Administrative Site. As described for Alternative 3, Hennessey's Ranch would be redeveloped with 656 beds in apartments, studios, and/or dormitories. The Abbieville houses would be removed. The redevelopment could be phased as the Trailer Village closes.

The area would be protected from flooding by extending and raising the existing dike. This would place the area out of the 100-year floodplain, as defined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Structures would be engineered and elevated to withstand flood inundation.

Old El Portal

A total of 17 one-, two-, and three-bedroom homes (1 bed each) would be built on available lots. The 71 existing single-family homes (1 bed each) are privately owned on federally leased property (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

Rancheria Flat

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, a total of seven new two-, three-, or four-bedroom, single-family detached homes (7 beds) would be constructed. The 19 homes (1 bed each) constructed between 1995 and 1997 (Phase 2) would be retained. The existing Mission 66 homes (21 beds) and apartments (58 beds) would be retained. The two duplexes (4 beds) would be retained. The three historic National Lead Company houses would be retained and rehabilitated. Twelve new one- and two-bedroom apartments (12 beds) would be constructed adjacent to the Phase 2 apartment complex. Under this alternative, 63 studio units and 29 dormitory units would be constructed in the Rancheria Flat area.

Village Center

Under this alternative, a total of 113 one- and two-bedroom apartments, studios, or dormitories (138 beds) would be constructed. The nine privately owned houses (four of which are historic) on federally owned land (9 beds) would be retained, and the Motor Inn cabins (24 beds) would be removed. The historic El Portal Hotel (12 beds) would no longer be used for housing, but would be removed or adaptively reused.

Housing Support Facilities

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, general land-use designations are included for housing and housing support facilities to be located in the El Portal Administrative Site. The size and exact location of the support facilities, as well as the specific locations and size of employee housing units, are beyond the scope of this plan. These details would be formulated during the site design and development process. If necessary, additional environmental review would be completed as a part of the site design.

The Village Center has been designated for necessary support facilities and commercial services. These could include a community center, post office, medical clinic, enlarged grocery store/deli, laundry, recreational facilities, wellness center, hair care, office spaces, and gas station. Where feasible, park and open space areas, such as a town square, would be provided.

A multi-use (pedestrian/bicycle) paved trail would be developed from Rancheria Flat through Hennessey's Ranch, to the Village Center (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3). This trail would also include two footbridges across the Merced River, one between Village Center and Hennessey's Ranch and another between Hennessey's Ranch and Rancheria Flat. If feasible, one link of the multi-use paved trail, between the Village Center and Hennessey's Ranch, could be via a modified Highway 140 vehicle bridge (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-6).

An employee dining and recreation facility with a swimming pool would be constructed at Hennessey's Ranch (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

An employee child care facility would be provided in El Portal, possibly adjacent to the elementary school in Rancheria Flat (the same as under Alternatives 2 and 3).

Utilities

As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, water would be obtained from additional wells in the El Portal area. All sewage would be treated at the El Portal Wastewater Treatment Plant. Electrical and phone service would be upgraded to accommodate the additional loads. The abandoned wastewater treatment plant in Rancheria Flat would be removed.

Wawona Housing Actions

No new housing would be built in Wawona. Government-owned housing would continue to be used for park and concession employees. Future land-use planning in Wawona would be in accordance with the Wawona Town Plan.

Foresta Housing Actions

A total of 14 houses were lost in the 1990 A-Rock Fire. As described for Alternatives 2 and 3, 14 houses would be reconstructed in Foresta and be used to replace beds removed from Yosemite Valley (see Vol. Ic, plate 4-7).

Cascades and Arch Rock Housing Actions

Four historic houses (four beds) would be removed from the Cascades area and the beds relocated to El Portal. Eight beds in two buildings would be removed from Arch Rock and relocated to El Portal; the historic structures at Arch Rock would be adaptively reused (the same as Alternatives 2 and 3).

Development Costs

It is estimated that the development costs for Alternative 4 would be $441,690,000 (see table 2-48). These costs would be in addition to the current park operations costs identified in Alternative 1. See Vol. II, Appendix M for the sequencing of development proposed for Alternative 2, the Preferred Alternative.