SAVE DONNER SUMMIT

Some General Questions on 5 topics

June 8, 2007

Crystal Jacobsen, Senior Planner
County of Placer
Community Development Resources Agency- Planning
3091 County Center Dr Ste 140
Auburn CA 95603

Dear Ms Jacobsen:

I own a lakeside cabin at XXXX Serene Road, Soda Springs, in the Serene Lakes community and am concerned about the Royal Gorge LLC development being proposed for Donner Summit. I have questions in five areas that I would like answered. These areas are flooding, snow removal, water demand, water supply and effects to Serene Lakes due to the water demands.

• 1) FLOODING: The land where Royal Gorge LLC plans to build "Ski-Camp" is in a flood prone area. The snow pack found in this area is sometimes 20 or more feet deep (see records from the Central Sierra Snow Lab in Norden). The snowpack, combined with a rapid spring snow melt, can suddenly send hundreds of acre-feet of water down through the ski-camp area. Such sudden run-offs are not unusual and have caused many floods around Serene Lakes. Twice during the 1990s the flood level was 4 to 10 feet above the normal lake level. The ski camp area is particularly susceptible to the flooding because it is in a bowl, surrounded on three sides by snow packed ridges, with only one drainage area out. While the Royal Gorge plans identify the summertime channel for the creek that drains the ski-camp area, it does not identify the high-water flood zone boundaries. My questions about flooding are:
• 1a) What is the historical high water mark for flooding in the Ski-camp area?

• 1b) Snow melt is much faster on buildings, impermeable surfaces such as roads, and in open areas such as ski runs, than in forested areas. The faster snow melt will increase the severity of sudden run-off flooding. How much worse will the ski-runs, buildings, roads, de-forestation and other impacts of the development, make the flood risk to the proposed ski-camp and to the existing Serene Lakes residents?

• 1c) What is the worst case high level flood zone in Ski-camp considering both historical data and increased sudden run-off due to the items mentioned in 1b)?

• 1d) Will the Developers and Placer County assume the liability for flood damage in the zone identified in 1c)?

• 1e) Will the Developers and Placer County assume the liability for flood damage to existing homes around Serene Lakes due to the increased flood hazards identified in 1b)?

• 1f) What is the silt debris and contamination content of the flood waters and how will they effect the lakes' purity and how much silt and debris will be deposited into the lakes each year?

• 1g) Will the Developers and Placer County assume the liability for cleaning up the lakes due to the problems identified in 1f)?

• 1h) Will there be a storm water management analysis for Ski Camp and the overall development?

• 2) SNOW REMOVAL: Royal Gorge will need to provide for the removal of snow from the roads, driveways and parking lots within their development. With annual snow falls of up to 70 feet, and snow packs of over 20 feet, snow removal can be a big problem in their development. The snow will need to be trucked away in high density areas, as there will not be enough room around condominium areas for snow blowing. My questions are:
• 2a) How much snow will need to be removed during the season?

• 2b) Where will the snow be trucked and dumped?

• 2c) What is the impact of trucking this amount of snow?

• 2d) What is the impact on the dumping area due to this amount of snow?

• 2e) Will an area need to be cleared to act as a snow dump?

• 2f) Will there be a snow management plan generated for the development?

• 3) WATER DEMAND: The water demand calculated by Royal Gorge for their development uses faulty occupancy and use data. The report claims that the water use is seasonal as evidenced by the following statement from the Royal Gorge water demand report dated May 17, 2007:

  "approximately 70% of SLCWD water use occurs in period of July through February. The remaining 30% occurs March through June."

  Since July through February is approximately 70% of the year, the statement says that 70% of the water use is in 70% of the year. Their statement is not only meaningless, it doesn't make any sense. In reality, most of the water use is during the summer months and the winter months, hardly any during the low occupancy months in the fall and spring.

  The report also uses a 46% occupancy number. It is entirely possible that the development will have 100% occupancy for many periods during the summer. If the whole summer approaches 100% occupancy, then, using Royal Gorge's own numbers, the water demand will be around 125 AF for the summer alone, which is over half of what they claim will be used during the entire year. If the current 800 Serene Lakes residences also approach 100% occupancy for the summer, which is entirely possible, then their summer water demand, calculated at 500 gallons per day (again using Royal Gorge's numbers), will be 112 AF. Add this to Royal Gorge's demand and the total demand on the water district for just 3 months will be 237 AF. This illustrates why Royal Gorge's total prediction of 235 AF for the whole year for their development is inaccurate. Water supply must be predicted using 100% occupancy, not 46% occupancy. My questions are:

• 3a) Using 100% occupancy, what is the water demand for the new development?

• 3b) Using 100% occupancy, what is the water demand for the existing residents?

• 3c) What is the assumption for the increase in water use during a particularly hot year when water consumption can be expected to be much higher than normal?

• 3d) How much water is needed for a hot summer when both water use is up and one would expect 100% occupancy (people going to the mountains to escape the heat)?

• 3e) Doesn't the state require that water demand be based upon 100% occupancy after the recent Vinyards Area Citizen's case?

• 4) WATER SUPPLY: Royal Gorge identifies several potential sources of water: Wells on their property, wells maintained by SLCWD, water from Lake Angela (DSPUD), water from reservoirs they will build on their property, and water from Serene Lakes (SLCWD). All of these sources except for the water from Serene Lakes are either temporary (DSPUD can only provide a temporary supply), non-existent (drilling for wells on their property failed), transient (SLCWD wells are not intended for sustained pumping) or needs filled by another water source (reservoirs). This last source, reservoirs, is also uncertain some years, because it assumes excess run-off into serene lakes can be tapped to fill the reservoir. There is no guarantee, however, that there will be any run-off from Serene Lakes during a drought year, as the snow melt will be needed just to refill the lake from the previous year's demand. This means the only viable source of water will be from Serene Lakes. The following questions assume all water must come from Serene Lakes during a low snowfall year, (such as this year, 2007), so that there is minimal run-off into the lakes after June 1st. My questions are:

• 4a) What will the lakes' water level be in September assuming the water demand in 3d)?

• 4b) What will the lakes' water level be in February under the conditions of 3d), and 100% occupancy for the rest of the year?

• 4c) Water usage can fluctuate on a daily basis, and not follow any set '500 gallons per day per house' average formula. This requires extra storage and water processing to meet peak fluctuations. What is the peak demand, and how long can the peak demand be sustained with current and proposed storage and processing capabilities?

• 5) EFFECTS ON SERENE LAKES: Serene Lakes is both a water supply and a recreational lake. The Royal Gorge water supply report dated May 17, 2007, predicts the lake's low level mark to be 4.5 feet below the dam;s spillway. My wife and I canoed around the lakes to see where the 4.5 foot low water mark would be. Using my 5 foot paddle as a depth gauge, I found:

  The low water mark is about 20 feet from the shore around most of the west shore of Lake Serena. Note that this is almost exactly the 4:1 slope mentioned in the RG water report.

  Around the islands the depth varied, but the low water mark was more like 30 to 40 feet from the shore or island. In some places the channels between islands or shore would either be dry or less than knee deep.

  On the east shore the low water mark was 50 to 100 feet from shore, perhaps more in places. These areas are probably where F/S will propose to dredge.

  The water intake pipe off of the north shore of Serena is visible (below the bleach bottle float) and is much deeper than 5 feet, it looks like 10 feet or more.

  Lake Serena's north shore low water mark is 30 to 40 feet from shore.

  The channel between the lakes will not dry up. It appears that after a 4.5 foot water level drop, there will be a 2 to 3 foot deep channel about 15 feet wide.

  Some spots along the west shore of Lake Dulzura have a low water mark of around 20 feet, but everywhere else the low water mark will be 30 to 50 feet away from shore. The east shore is very shallow and the low water mark is in places 200 feet from shore.

  All of the homeowner docks will be high and dry with over 10 feet of mud between them and the low-water shoreline. The Ice Lakes Lodge dock will be on dry land. The dock at the boat ramp will be dry. Half of the lot-1 dock will be on land, the very end of the dock will be in a foot or so of water.

  This is not scientific, but gives one the idea of what the lake would look like and it isn't pretty, and the muddy, wide shoreline all but ruins any chance of recreation. For recreational purposes, the lake's shoreline needs to be maintained very much as it is. My questions are:

• 5a) Where is the shoreline after a 2 foot drop in level, both before and after dredging?

• 5b) Where is the shoreline after a 4 foot drop in level, both before and after dredging?

• 5c) Where is the shoreline after a 6 foot drop in level, both before and after dredging?

• 5d) Where will the shoreline be, both before and after dredging, after the water level drop identified in 4a)?

• 5e) Where will the shoreline be, both before and after dredging, after the water level drop identified in 4b)?

• 5f) What will the water temperature rise be in the lakes as the water level decreases due to the effects of a shallower lake and less water volume? What will it be at a drop of 2 feet, 4 feet, 6 feet, 8 feet?

• 5g) What will the increased algae and aquatic vegetation growth be as a function of water temperature, and will the increased algae and aquatic vegetation increase the water temperature further?

Sincerely,

Joseph Gray

Back to top