Subdivision opponents can't convince supes that local resort falls short

Posted by Sierra Nevada Alliance Weekly

February 20, 2008

Kirkwood Mountain Resort is "in substantial compliance" with mitigation measures and conditions and can proceed to develop the Martin Point subdivision, the Amador County Board of Supervisors decided Tuesday after a lengthy hearing.

The one area where the developer is clearly not yet in compliance, according to county planner Nathan Lishman, is in the matter of wood-burning stoves or fireplaces. But, Lishman said, planners in Alpine County are working on a draft ordinance on wood-burning fireplaces to recommend to Amador and El Dorado counties, and it is expected that an ordinance will be brought to the board of supervisors for consideration this spring.

Nate Whaley of Kirkwood Mountain Resort said the company had been working with county staff to comply with all 159 mitigation items. "This is a tremendous level of scrutiny," Whaley said, noting that the company has implemented the very extensive mitigation program.

But Reid Bennett, president of Friends of Kirkwood, disagreed, holding up eight strips of paper that he said represented eight power outages that occurred during his recent absence from Kirkwood. Each time the power goes out, he said, his fax machine resets and spits out another piece of paper. "This is just one example of weak infrastructure that threatens the long-term viability of Kirkwood I have observed over the years," Bennett said.

He also complained that traffic reports had not been filed annually as required and that parking at Kirkwood is inadequate and is dramatically overstated by the resort. With inadequate parking, he said, traffic backs up on Highway 88 leading into the resort. Bennett charged that the Tri-County Technical Advisory Committee inadequately scrutinized reports submitted by the resort and suggested that an independent third party be asked to review the reports.

Bob Leitzel of Mokelumne Hill told the supervisors that he had measured parking spaces at the resort, and that they are not wide enough for the large vehicles that are popular now, such as Ford Explorers or Toyota Tundras. "If you park these cars next to each other, you can't get out of the cars," he said. While many parking spaces are 8 feet wide, he said, a Ford Explorer is 7 feet 1 inch wide, from mirror to mirror.

Also speaking in opposition to finding the resort in compliance was Chris Wright, executive director of Foothill Conservancy, who told the supervisors that it is necessary to "have all the ducks in a row for mitigating future development projects."

Attorney Tom Infusino told the supervisors that a "punch list" of impacts still remains to be dealt with, including soil and water resources, construction dust damaging the meadow and a well that is drying up parts of Kirkwood Creek.

But David Likins, CEO of Kirkwood Mountain Resort, insisted the company takes "all these things very, very seriously. We have heard them all before. We are also running a business here."

Power has been off less than five hours a year in the last two fiscal years, Likins said, though it was off for 45 minutes last Saturday because of a mechanical failure.

On the issue of parking, he noted that every parking space they lack is a customer they don't have. And even though the target is about 2,500 parking spaces, he said, they have actually parked more than 3,000 cars this year. Sometimes the snow removal equipment can clear more spaces, he said, while sometimes it cannot. During the first weekend in January, Likins said, traffic did obstruct Highway 88. A new California Highway Patrol officer was doing traffic control, he said, and to make his job harder, 18 spinouts on Highway 88 delayed the officer's arrival for directing traffic at the resort.

In the past, Kirkwood Mountain Resort has not always complied, county planner Lishman told the supervisors. But, Lishman said, "This last year, they have been extremely willing to work with us."

County Public Works Inspector Robert Wurm, under questioning from District 4 Supervisor Louis Boitano, agreed. "When I asked them to do something," Wurm said, "95 percent of the time, somebody was mobilizing immediately, sometimes within an hour. It's done. It's over with."

He said it has been "kind of nice to see it turn around up there," noting that about eight years ago, he was up at the resort "quite a bit," and that there has been "a huge change up there."

The supervisors' acceptance that the resort is substantially in compliance means they can now go forward with a 34-lot development at Kirkwood Meadows that is known as Martin Point. Last June, the board agreed that the developer had to demonstrate compliance before any subdivision map could be recorded.

The new lots, for 33 single-family homes and one duplex, are to be located on 14.4 acres south of the Kirkwood Meadows area and north of Timber Creek Lodge. It was previously known as "Ski-In/Ski-Out North."

In June, Katherine Evatt, president of Foothill Conservancy, told the supervisors that when it is built out, Kirkwood will have a population of 6,500 - more than the combined populations of Amador City, Sutter Creek and Jackson in 2003.

Kirkwood Mountain Resort received the lowest grade again this year from the Ski Area Citizens' Coalition in Colorado, which ranks ski resorts according to their environmental friendliness.

Autumn Bernstein, the California representative of the coalition, said Kirkwood has suffered in the rankings for its use of diesel fuel and its plans to develop on sensitive wetlands.

But Likins attributed his resort's ranking to a bias on the part of the panel against any and all development.

"We've been on the bottom of the list for a number of years, and I guarantee we'll be on the bottom of the list for a number of years in the future," Likins said. "Those of us who are in a growth mode are at the bottom of the list because of an inherent anti-growth bias in the compilation of scores."

Story appeared in the Amador Ledger Dispatch by Judie Marks
February 15, 2008