TOURISM
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The CBJ Mining Ordinance standards for issuing a large mine permit do not specifically identify tourism. Instead, tourism may be addressed under:
49.65.135(a)(4). "The operator conduct all mining operations...so as to...control and mitigate impacts on the public...such as from noise...unsightly visual aspects..."
Policy 2.12 of the CBJ Comprehensive Plan (1996) states:
This staff report briefly discusses the tourism activities in the general vicinity of the proposed mine, and focuses on the potential for visual impacts on tourism. The potential noise impacts are discussed elsewhere in the staff report on Noise.
BACKGROUND
Tourism is Juneau's largest private sector industry and plays an important role in the economy of this community. Visitors can be divided into several categories, including package tourists and independent travelers. Twenty-five cruise lines brought about 450,000 cruise ship passengers to Juneau in 1996 -- a 44 percent increase over 1993. Independent visitors arrive via scheduled airlines or state ferries, and usually spend more time in Juneau than people traveling on package tours. In either case, these tourists contribute significantly to Juneau's economy, with tourist expenditures exceeding $87 million in 1994 (Juneau's Visitor Industry, 1996).
During the five years since the Kensington mine was analyzed in the Final EIS (1992) there has been a significant expansion of the adventure cruise and day boat aspect of tourism in Juneau. Several companies provide tourists water-based adventures in the waters north of Auke Bay. Wildlife watching trips typically depart from Auke Bay and reach as far north as Yankee Cove during 2 - 4 hour trips. Some tourists take three-day trips between Juneau and Glacier Bay aboard small yachts or catamarans which cruise up Lynn Canal offshore of the Kensington mine site. Small private ferries operating between Juneau and Haines during the summer months also cruise by the mine site.
ANALYSIS
The potential visual impact of the Kensington project on tourists depends on how visible the mine is and also on an individual tourist's reaction to seeing an industrial development in a largely pristine, undeveloped environment. It is estimated that the visitors aboard vessels in Lynn Canal would pass by the mine at a distance of one to two miles offshore, and would view the site for approximately ten minutes (Final EIS, 1992). People flight seeing or traveling by air to and from Haines and Skagway over the site would be exposed to it for a shorter period of time. Those viewing the site for a short period of time from a boat or plane will be aware of the visual and aesthetic aspects of the mine and its associated structures (i.e., buildings, roads, dry tailings facility, and lights at night).
Plans for the Kensington project incorporate ways of minimizing visual and aesthetic intrusions as a result of mine development. The applicant will minimize the visibility of the mine during the construction and operation phases by maintaining vegetated buffers, attention to lighting and building color, and interim reclamation of exposed areas. The predominant visual feature will be the proposed dry tailings facility, and a sequential approach to the use and reclamation of "cells" within the facility will reduce its visibility (Final SEIS, 1997). A reclamation plan is proposed to remove buildings and recontour and landscape the mine area using native plant species following cessation of operations. The applicant is required to submit a reclamation bond to ensure adequate site restoration efforts do take place, pursuant to agreement with the U.S. Forest Service and CBJ.
An Alaska Tourism Marketing Council 1996 survey reported that "beautiful scenery" was the most common response made by people (37 percent), when asked what they were looking for as they considered visiting Alaska in the next five years (Maling, personal communication). Clearly, Alaska has marketed its pristine viewshed and from this perspective, efforts should be made to minimize the Kensington mine's visual impacts. Opinion surveys of tourists to Alaska have not asked questions designed to discover how visitors might respond to seeing a large mine development along the coast. Anecdotal comments from some Juneau water-based tour operators indicate that they typically provide a brief discussion of the Kensington mine project to passengers as their boat cruises by the mine site. They note that many tourists are curious about the mine, particularly if it is presented as a way some Alaskans make a living. Similarly, the naturalists on the cruise ships and Alaska Marine Highway System ferries point out the mine project to passengers. It is possible that the brevity of the exposure to such a site would not create any adverse impressions. It could also be that the existence of an industrial complex in an otherwise undeveloped area would be somewhat unexpected and cause a negative reaction in some, while being of interest to others.
The independent tourists who take advantage of recreational opportunities in and around Berners Bay will not see the mine, located several miles north along the coastline. These travelers may experience the noise impacts associated with employee helicopter flights to and from the mine site. This transportation noise will be intermittent, and mitigation measures to limit the potential impacts are considered in the Noise staff report.
Policy 2.12 of the 1996 Comprehensive Plan of the City and Borough of Juneau is to "...encourage tourism...through the development of appropriate facilities and services, while protecting Juneau's natural and cultural attractions for local citizens and visitors..." Mitigating measures that reduce the visual impacts of the proposed Kensington mine strive to bring the project in conformity with the comprehensive plan. It is likely that the project will have an insignificant impact on tourism in the Juneau area.
STAFF FINDINGS
Yes. Adequate information is available for staff review and recommendation.
2. Will the mine project endanger the public health or safety while engaged in tourist pursuits? (CBJ 49.15.330(f)(1))
No. The risk analysis conducted as part of the hazardous materials analysis concludes that the public (non-mine workers) are generally not at risk from the project.
3. Will the anticipated impacts to tourism by the proposed project decrease the value of or be out of harmony with property in the neighboring area? (CBJ 49.15.330(f)(2))
No. The project will not decrease the value of or be out of harmony with property in the neighboring area with respect to tourism primarily because passing tourists' view of the mine site will be of limited duration. During the life of the mine, elements of the project will be out of harmony with the surrounding, largely pristine landscape, but recommendations in staff reports on Visual Resources, Noise, and Reclamation will minimize the disharmonious aspects of the project. In the long term, the mine will not impact neighboring property with respect to tourism provided the operator's Reclamation Plan and recommendations in the staff report on Reclamation are implemented following mine closure.
4. Will the proposed mine project be in general conformity with the comprehensive plan, thoroughfare plan, or other officially adopted plans as they may apply to tourism? (CBJ 49.15.330(f)(3))
The proposed mine project will comply with CBJ Comprehensive Plan Policy 2.12 which addresses tourism and, among other things, the protection of natural attractions. Visual and noise impacts of the mine project within a largely pristine, undeveloped area will be minimized during construction and operations and when the mine site is reclaimed after closure through mitigating measures identified in the Amended Plan of Operations (August 1997), Reclamation Plan (August 1997), and staff recommendations in the reports on Visual Resources, Noise, and Reclamation.
5. Will the mining operation be conducted in such a way as to mitigate adverse general welfare impacts as reflected in tourism? (CBJ 49.65.135(a)(1))
Yes. The project is anticipated to have limited adverse impacts on tourism. Visual and noise impacts on tourism will be minimized through implementation of staff recommendations listed in the staff reports on Visual Resources, Noise, and Reclamation.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of this aspect of the project, subject to the recommendations presented in the staff reports on Visual Resources, Noise, and Reclamation.
Return
to Kensington Mine Review Page
Return to the
Capital City Home Page
Our URL is http://www.juneau.lib.ak.us/cdd/Kensingt.htm