Results 101 to 125 of 786
Thread: Friends of Squaw Valley
-
06-16-2013, 03:04 PM #101
-
06-16-2013, 07:41 PM #102
They're not thinking about skiers at all. Their stated plan is to develop the valley and sell the place to someone else. The only thing KSL cares about is the real estate.
Right now most of the opposition is from current residents and hotel owners in the valley. Obviously KSL is keeping quiet about parking because if they make their plans known they'll have opposition from all the day skiers. In the meantime they offer just enough on the mountain improvements--new Red Dog, hints about connecting to AM--to keep the skiers on their side. Not that any of that matters--this will be decided on environmental grounds and will depend on whether or not the opposition is able to finance a court fight and who's side the judge is on. I can't see Placer County turning them down.
-
06-16-2013, 10:15 PM #103
Here is the breakdown of Capital Expenditure spending for this summer. Interestingly, both Red Dog and Granite Chief chairs are not included in the improvements.
http://snowbrains.com/8-million-in-i...oney-is-going/
-
06-16-2013, 10:52 PM #104glocal
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 33,440
Kirkwood sold real estate based on a model like that. It was pretty. They had a chair going to the top of Palisades and another going to the Caples Crest restaurant that wasn't built. Still waiting on those chairs, too. All that got built was a hodgepodge of poorly done condos and lodges. Not that such a thing could ever happen at Squaw. But those models are pretty.
-
06-17-2013, 03:02 AM #105
-
06-17-2013, 09:43 AM #106
that model at kirkwood always baffled me. the fact that 3 counties jointly bought into the development scheme is also baffling.
i have no idea about how it "usually" happens, but my understanding was that one of the blighted condo projects that was half-developed for a long time (maybe it still is not complete) at kirkwood was not owned by kirkwood real estate, but by an independent developer. this developer pulled out, stopped paying invoices to the contractor, got sued, etc. maybe kirkwood real estate sold the parcel to the developer, idk?
-
06-17-2013, 11:08 AM #107
-
06-17-2013, 01:24 PM #108
-
06-17-2013, 01:27 PM #109
You mean you aren't stoked about the new home furnishings store????
-
06-17-2013, 01:37 PM #110
-
06-17-2013, 02:11 PM #111glocal
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 33,440
Most of those condos built at Kirkwood in the last 13 years required significant rebuilding due to weather related items the contractors screwed up. Kirkwood just sold the property. But the people who bought condos ended up paying more than they bargained for.
Having been a carpenter on the village at Squaw, I can say the project was meticulously done. If something wasn't framed right or even if the lines on the board and bat siding wasn't visually perfect, it got redone. In the best comparison to another Intrawest project, Whistler's village, I totally prefer Whistler's. Mammoth's village has the same feel of over utilization of space as Squaw's does. I simply think the streets of Whistler are better done, more spacious and, even though the place gets packed sometimes, it feels more comfortable because it feels a bit roomier when moving about and it all flows to the lifts, not the furniture store.
Andy, are you listening?
-
06-17-2013, 04:25 PM #112
it seems to me if KSL does everything they want, they'll have an empty village on their hands 90% of the time...
i don't know that squaw will ever be a true destination resort (and i hope it doesn't).
i've lived in california for 13 years and my relatives still ask me "how is colorado?" when i go home.
when money-spending tourists want to ski, they don't think of squaw.
they think of colorado, utah, and all the places that don't have horrible snow like we do ;-)Still waiting...
-
06-20-2013, 02:20 PM #113
Well, they were supposed to release it by June, but it looks like SVPSD's Water Supply Assessment is still only 23% complete: http://www.svpsd.org/pdffiles/Agenda...rrWest_WSA.pdf
That's annoying. I was looking forward to a little light reading this month.
-
06-21-2013, 08:58 AM #114Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2003
- Location
- none
- Posts
- 8,334
-
06-21-2013, 10:58 PM #115
-
06-24-2013, 11:10 AM #116
-
07-01-2013, 03:35 PM #117
-
07-01-2013, 10:26 PM #118
The soul-less, cookie cutter facade faux village makes my stomach turn.
-
07-08-2013, 03:33 PM #119
-
07-09-2013, 10:13 AM #120
I tried on Friday, but I guess the space is closed after 5pm. For those who are trying to find it, it's just to the right of the new Wanderlust yoga studio.
not counting days 2016-17
-
07-09-2013, 06:00 PM #121
-
07-09-2013, 11:05 PM #122
KSL rethinks proposal
It seems like our message and movement is working!
http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/new...village-sierra
Squaw Valley working on updated expansion proposal
OLYMPIC VALLEY, Calif. — Squaw Valley is reworking its proposed 101.5-acre capital improvement plan for an expanded village.
The updated plan will take into account comments received at more than 200 meetings Squaw officials have held with local organizations, groups and individuals, said Chevis Hosea, vice president of development for Squaw Valley.
Further, feedback has been received from more than 1,500 people who have visited the expansion model set up at the resort’s village.
“Many groups in the Tahoe region have shown their willingness to engage in a community dialogue, and their voices will be reflected in the revisions of our plans,” Hosea said. “We are very thankful for their feedback and hope more groups will join our conversation.”
There is no release date for an updated plan, a Squaw spokesman said this week, and specific changes were not revealed.
The current plan, which outlines the addition of 1,093 lodging units, 47,000 square feet in commercial space and new amenities at the west end of Squaw Valley, has drawn criticism.
Sierra Watch recently came out against the proposal, citing concerns with its size and scope.
“It clearly doesn’t fit into Squaw Valley,” said Tom Mooers, executive director of the regional conservation organization based in Nevada City.
Similar concerns have been expressed by the Friends of Squaw Valley, a grassroots group of locals and longtime Olympic Valley residents.
“We acknowledge the existing village needs to grow and improve,” said Ed Heneveld, a member of the Friends of Squaw Valley steering committee and a 35-year Olympic Valley resident. “The ... project as currently proposed would be too dense, too large and out of scale with the acreage available. ... The end result would be an urbanized city, not a rural alpine village.”
In a statement, Sierra Watch said Squaw has long been appreciated as a great Sierra setting where natural scenery — its meadow and mountains — provides a unique sense of place.
Hosea countered that 95 percent of the proposed development would be on already “significantly disturbed areas,” most of which are surface parking lots.
“We find it surprising that Sierra Watch would voice its opposition to a sustainable, community-wide planning effort that would redevelop paved-over brownfields,” he said.
In the current proposal, parking would become covered in connection with proposed lodging additions — consisting of hotel rooms, condominium units and fractional ownership cabins.
Additional units would give resort-goers a chance to stay overnight, reducing the dependence on ski destination experience by car, Hosea said previously.
However, concerns regarding traffic, noise, light pollution and water availability, among others, persist.
“The (Friends of Squaw Valley) mission statement advocates for development that is environmentally sustainable, economically viable and aesthetically compatible with the existing community character and culture,” Heneveld said.
Mooers said better development plans are created when conservationists, developers and landowners come together.
“Our hope, whether immediately or in the long term, is (the resort) is open to changes that would really create the best possible plan we can come up with for Squaw Valley,” Mooers said.
A draft Environmental Impact Report is currently being prepared. The project is proposed in four phases, and is estimated to take between 12 and 15 years to complete.
To learn more about the project, visit www.squawrenaissance.com.
-
07-10-2013, 07:24 PM #123
Talk is cheap. We'll see what they actually come up with. And day skiers will have to park somewhere, which means that while the proposed development may be on already disturbed land, undisturbed land will be paved over for new remote parking. Squaw just isn't acknowledging that.
-
07-10-2013, 08:38 PM #124
Squaw Valley Listens to Community & Modifies Village Plans
http://snowbrains.com/squaw-valley-l...village-plans/
“Many groups in the Tahoe region have shown their willingness to engage in a community dialogue, and their voices will be reflected in the revisions of our plans. We are very thankful for their feedback and hope more groups will join our conversation.” - Chevis Hosea, vice president of development for Squaw Valley/Sierra Sun.
Squaw Valley officials have held over 200 community meetings and have gotten over 1,500 comments all concerning their current 101.5 acre village plan. Squaw Valley has announced that they’ll be modifying their current plan based on comments and feedback they’ve gotten back form the community the past 3 months.
Squaw’s actual village right now. All that parking lot and more will be village in the current plan
Squaw Valley’s existing plans for their new village have come under a lot of scrutiny and criticism. The Sierra Club, Friends of Squaw Valley, Sierra Watch, and more have come out against the current village plans.
“We acknowledge the existing village needs to grow and improve. The … project as currently proposed would be too dense, too large and out of scale with the acreage available. … The end result would be an urbanized city, not a rural alpine village.” - Ed Heneveld, a member of the Friends of Squaw Valley steering committee and a 35-year Olympic Valley resident/Sierra Sun
NEW SQUAW VILLAGE PLANS:
- Squaw hasn’t released any of the details yet
- Squaw has stated that there is no release date for the new plans
CURRENT SQUAW VILLAGE PLANS:
- Squaw Creek would be restored and have a walkway put in next to it at a cost of $1.5 million
- Grand Camp = a 132,000-square foot building with indoor aquatic center, indoor play structures, interactive gaming
- The Olympic House would be destroyed & The Chammy would be awkwardly saved
- Ice Rink near funitel
- 1,093 lodging units, 47,000 square feet in commercial space and new amenities
- Will take 12-15 years to complete in 4 phases
It will be very interesting to see how Squaw modifies their current village plans and what they’ll be willing to give up. We’re hoping that the new plans are available to the public before the start of the coming winter season. Once they’re available, we’ll make sure to pass the information on to you.
-
07-10-2013, 09:02 PM #125
Bookmarks