starting a ski area on Forest Service land

[highangle]

Just locally, existing resorts have added areas equivalent to several new ski resorts in the last 5-10 years. I know there's more acreage than that on the drawing boards. I don't track CO resorts as closely, but it sounds like the same thing is going on.

That's the real problem for start-ups - a glut of existing ski resort land and plans, soaking up tourist skiers and investor dollars, eliminating the perceived need, generating enough opposition to stifle anything but the richest, most well-connected and entrenched connivers.

And no matter what the starting concept is, it ends up going for high-density year-round development and slopeside / base-area real estate cash. Pavement wins.

Thank you for being the smartest son of a bitch here.

(or at least the most observant... )

[BFD]

I've been thinking of starting a ski resort up the Snow River on Paradise peak. Hopefully some of these links will be helpfull.

[highangle]

I've been thinking of starting a ski resort up the Snow River on Paradise peak. Hopefully some of these links will be helpfull.

Ya right Fuck You!

That was almost a good troll.

Would you put a tram from Ptarmigan over Snow River Pass, or just pave from the trestle at 13 Mile to the Upper Cabin?


You could start smaller though up the S Fork behind Tiehacker. Less light, but you can pave over the section of the Iditarod from Bear Lake to the river.

[BFD]

Actually I am thinking about a fly in earn your turn type lodge. cabins are kind of in a lousy spot.

[mitch_cumstein]

Just locally, existing resorts have added areas equivalent to several new ski resorts in the last 5-10 years. I know there's more acreage than that on the drawing boards. I don't track CO resorts as closely, but it sounds like the same thing is going on.

That's the real problem for start-ups - a glut of existing ski resort land and plans, soaking up tourist skiers and investor dollars, eliminating the perceived need, generating enough opposition to stifle anything but the richest, most well-connected and entrenched connivers.

And no matter what the starting concept is, it ends up going for high-density year-round development and slopeside / base-area real estate cash. Pavement wins.

high or low density? Does anyone here actually know the difference?

[mitch_cumstein]

Again, peckerwood, this aint about me. What the fuck is so goddamn hard about that?

Jesus

Just finish your first semester?

[highangle]

Actually I am thinking about a fly in earn your turn type lodge. cabins are kind of in a lousy spot.

These guys might be some help.

Watch the clip.
Even though they compound a Warren Miller with a Damien Rice, the yumping works....

[telelebowski]

Perhaps you missed philosophical undertones in the references to Nietzsche and particularly Kant?

No, I caught it, but in the frame of your intial quote the rhetorical question is senseless. Asking how Zarathustra would square with Kant is like asking how an anarcho-syndicalist would square with capitalist society. Zarathustra, if he were stronger than Kant, would go up to him and cut his throat, thereby re-establishing the primordial ascendency of the aristocratic over the priestly class detailed in Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals.

[highangle]

Just finish your first semester?

No, little CAD driver, I hold a BS in Mathematics and a MS in Geodesy from a hayseed little rinkydink state college whose mascot is a goddamn tree seed.
And if you insist on making this about me from the authority of your senior project at CSU, I'll tell you about how I consult for ESRI and Intergraph from time to time, as well as a lot of others.
I did a little work with statistical mechanics and point cloud resolution as an undergrad, and published a paper detailing seemingly minor phase shifts in GPS timings due to relativistic effects such as gravity lensing in which i introduced a functional that more accurately specified certain geometries, hence position calculations, formed by the GPS constellation.
That same functional has since been applied in papers on subjects as varied as hydrology, biological emergence, topological manifolds, and GIS.

So please, let's compare dicks. Go ahead, argue my smugness from the authority of your superior education.

You make a much better case when you stick to objective things Mitch. Look at how that subjective night putting thing went for you. Now look at this.

[highangle]

No, I caught it, but in the frame of your intial quote the rhetorical question is senseless. Asking how Zarathustra would square with Kant is like asking how an anarcho-syndicalist would square with capitalist society. Zarathustra, if he were stronger than Kant, would go up to him and cut his throat, thereby re-establishing the primordial ascendency of the aristocratic over the priestly class detailed in Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals.

I don't think it's fair to limit Blurred's W2P in this instance, on this subject. To put it on a mathematical foundation, I wouldn't underestimate the degrees of freedom inherent in th Appolonian/Dionysian interplay.
In short, the chiaroscurian contrast between Blurred and the solons of the public lands, to wit the USFS, was precisely the film noir I was after.
Your thoughts thus represent more of an affirmation than a rejection of my theses.

Thanks though.

[JONG SLAUGHTER]

No, little CAD driver, I hold a BS in Mathematics and a MS in Geodesy from a hayseed little rinkydink state college whose mascot is a goddamn tree seed.
And if you insist on making this about me from the authority of your senior project at CSU, I'll tell you about how I consult for ESRI and Intergraph from time to time, as well as a lot of others.
I did a little work with statistical mechanics and point cloud resolution as an undergrad, and published a paper detailing seemingly minor phase shifts in GPS timings due to relativistic effects such as gravity lensing in which i introduced a functional that more accurately specified certain geometries, hence position calculations, formed by the GPS constellation.
That same functional has since been applied in papers on subjects as varied as hydrology, biological emergence, topological manifolds, and GIS.

So please, let's compare dicks. Go ahead, argue my smugness from the authority of your superior education.

You make a much better case when you stick to objective things Mitch. Look at how that subjective night putting thing went for you. Now look at this.

IT'S USUALLY THE DUMBEST FUCKS OF ALL TIME THAT POST HOW SMART THEY ARE ON THE INTERNET ABOUT INCREDIBLY BORING SHIT.

WE'RE REALLY IMPRESSED, MORON.

[JONG SLAUGHTER]

I don't think it's fair to limit Blurred's W2P in this instance, on this subject. To put it on a mathematical foundation, I wouldn't underestimate the degrees of freedom inherent in th Appolonian/Dionysian interplay.
In short, the chiaroscurian contrast between Blurred and the solons of the public lands, to wit the USFS, was precisely the film noir I was after.
Your thoughts thus represent more of an affirmation than a rejection of my theses.

Thanks though.

MAN, THOSE ARE REALLY BIG WORDS......PUT DOWN THE THESAURUS DOUCHEBAG.

WE'RE NOT IMPRESSED.

[highangle]

.

WE'RE NOT IMPRESSED.

WE'RE REALLY IMPRESSED, MORON.

Okay, are you impressed, or not? I'm confused.

I know your dirty cumguzzlin' mother was damn impressed when I shot my load in her tatooed face.

Wanna taste her?

[JONG SLAUGHTER]

Okay, are you impressed, or not? I'm confused.

I know your dirty cumguzzlin' mother was damn impressed when I shot my load in her tatooed face.

Wanna taste her?

WAY TO KEEP EDITING YOUR POST YOU LITTLE PEDANTIC DUMBFUCK.

[HellgateBasement]

Not to break up the circle jerk, but I could get you some legal help if you decided that it was something you wanted to really pursue. Would only be law students, but it might be helpful for some of the procedural stuff.

[rideit]

Biological emergence...isn't that just a cum-shot?

[mitch_cumstein]

No, little CAD driver, I hold a BS in Mathematics and a MS in Geodesy from a hayseed little rinkydink state college whose mascot is a goddamn tree seed.
And if you insist on making this about me from the authority of your senior project at CSU, I'll tell you about how I consult for ESRI and Intergraph from time to time, as well as a lot of others.
I did a little work with statistical mechanics and point cloud resolution as an undergrad, and published a paper detailing seemingly minor phase shifts in GPS timings due to relativistic effects such as gravity lensing in which i introduced a functional that more accurately specified certain geometries, hence position calculations, formed by the GPS constellation.
That same functional has since been applied in papers on subjects as varied as hydrology, biological emergence, topological manifolds, and GIS.

So please, let's compare dicks. Go ahead, argue my smugness from the authority of your superior education.

You make a much better case when you stick to objective things Mitch. Look at how that subjective night putting thing went for you. Now look at this.

So..you're unemployed then.



You're just fucking with us right?

[highangle]

So..you're unemployed then.
You're just fucking with us right?

Bitchez iz bitchez and bidnez iz bidnez. I take care of both.

Are you not entertained?






So tell us, should everyone clear and grade and change the hydrology on a couple hundred acres of NF land if they figure they can make a buck off it?

[mitch_cumstein]

Bitchez iz bitchez and bidnez iz bidnez. I take care of both.

Are you not entertained?






So tell us, should everyone clear and grade and change the hydrology on a couple hundred acres of NF land if they figure they can make a buck off it?

It's equally ignorant and short-sighted to think a ski area cannot be created without major detrimental impact to an ecosystem. Surely, there are always impacts, but nearly everything we do as humans has some impact on our environment. It is typically in the best interest of all involved in a project like this to be in-line with natural systems.

The designer has little involvement in the political end. We are given a set of program requirements and charged with assimilating the data. We can only mitigate impacts and make it a good place for people. Any engineer can sketch in a road and grade all the paved surfaces to within 5%, pave with concrete or asphalt, put the river in a pipe, site the buildings, and leave a cancer on "your" land. This is the world we've become accustomed to; highly engineered, architrash ecogarbage. Why? Because what we can hold in our hands or touch is easily quantified, has a given value, function, cost, and potential profit. I get it, even with my state university education.

By definition, the landscape architectural design process is immersive and highly subjective, but we make ideas tangible. Some people just have ideas or empty words, some just talk because they think they are the smartest folks in the room, and some are so ignorant they just believe what someone else told them or something they read in a book.

Being arrogant and presumptuous doesn't do anyone any good.

[covert]

i think, perhaps, the time has come to delete this thread. fatally cunted.

[highangle]

So tell us, should everyone clear and grade and change the hydrology on a couple hundred acres of NF land if they figure they can make a buck off it?

It's equally ignorant and short-sighted...

OK Good, you answered the question. That's the important thing.

to think a ski area cannot be created without major detrimental impact to an ecosystem. Surely, there are always impacts, but nearly everything we do as humans has some impact on our environment. It is typically in the best interest of all involved in a project like this to be in-line with natural systems.

...Like you are saying, a ski hill will obviously impact the land it's on...

Then you go on to apply a standard that is weak for private property, much less public land with wilderness value. "To be in-line with natural systems" can mean many things, but I don't think it means "Exactly like it was before we used it to make munny."

I have zero problem with people using public lands, even to make lots of money, but a whole different standard needs to apply to public lands than on private property. Farm it, graze it, mine it, log it, build ski hills - but don't leave it worse than you find it; especially if you are a profit driven group.

The designer has little involvement in the political end. We are given a set of program requirements and charged with assimilating the data. We can only mitigate impacts and make it a good place for people. Any engineer can sketch in a road and grade all the paved surfaces to within 5%, pave with concrete or asphalt, put the river in a pipe, site the buildings, and leave a cancer on "your" land. This is the world we've become accustomed to; highly engineered, architrash ecogarbage. Why? Because what we can hold in our hands or touch is easily quantified, has a given value, function, cost, and potential profit. I get it, even with my state university education.

Ther designer has massive involvement, Mr Architect . The designer's concepts, at the highest levels, are what puts the art in architecture. YOU are supposed to be the creative and clever one in this process; only to compromise if you must. THAT is how you earn your drinkin munny, Howard Roark.

It seems you ken this at some dim level though...

By definition, the landscape architectural design process is immersive and highly subjective, but we make ideas tangible.

One of the first things they should teach Landscape Architects is why builders and engineers hate them.
Precise specs and quantities protect the builder from some of the massive exposure to liability he has to bear. A number on a plan is objective and something he can use to cover his ass.
Precise specifications are the hallmark of good engineering. We've all seen examples of where this is taken to the Nth degree. Something has to be well built in our minds before it can be well built on the ground.
Another factor is cost. Sure, any engineer can build a road, but a good engineer can build the most aesthetic road for the least cost. (BTW, you'll see road grades spec'd out to .01' or to a hundredth of a percent. You will also learn why engineers spec out circular curves to a second of angle in roads instead of irregular curves - economics)

Many a developer and builder has gone broke on the dirtwork of a job following around a LA who says, "Make that a little lower. That a little higher."
Golf courses and ski hills are notorious for this, BTW. The Forrest Service plays this bullshit with the Rainbowers every year after a gathering -as much to bust their balls as to reseed a meadow full of pioneer annuals.

Not raggin on LAs. I think it's a great profession and art that more than earns its keep.
But I would like to see everyone take a more enlightened approach.
Particularly with respect to Public Land.

Being arrogant and presumptuous doesn't do anyone any good.

It doesn't? Really?

[BFD]

Highangle maybe a 2 stroker posing as a greenie, but he definitely understands landscape architects. My last two large projects were a Forest Service Campground and Coast Guard Housing. When you see the design by a landscape architect you can be pretty sure your just getting a pretty autocad drawing.

[mitch_cumstein]

OK Good, you answered the question. That's the important thing.





...Like you are saying, a ski hill will obviously impact the land it's on...

Then you go on to apply a standard that is weak for private property, much less public land with wilderness value. "To be in-line with natural systems" can mean many things, but I don't think it means "Exactly like it was before we used it to make munny."

I have zero problem with people using public lands, even to make lots of money, but a whole different standard needs to apply to public lands than on private property. Farm it, graze it, mine it, log it, build ski hills - but don't leave it worse than you find it; especially if you are a profit driven group.





Ther designer has massive involvement, Mr Architect . The designer's concepts, at the highest levels, are what puts the art in architecture. YOU are supposed to be the creative and clever one in this process; only to compromise if you must. THAT is how you earn your drinkin munny, Howard Roark.

It seems you ken this at some dim level though...



One of the first things they should teach Landscape Architects is why builders and engineers hate them.
Precise specs and quantities protect the builder from some of the massive exposure to liability he has to bear. A number on a plan is objective and something he can use to cover his ass.
Precise specifications are the hallmark of good engineering. We've all seen examples of where this is taken to the Nth degree. Something has to be well built in our minds before it can be well built on the ground.
Another factor is cost. Sure, any engineer can build a road, but a good engineer can build the most aesthetic road for the least cost. (BTW, you'll see road grades spec'd out to .01' or to a hundredth of a percent. You will also learn why engineers spec out circular curves to a second of angle in roads instead of irregular curves - economics)

Many a developer and builder has gone broke on the dirtwork of a job following around a LA who says, "Make that a little lower. That a little higher."
Golf courses and ski hills are notorious for this, BTW. The Forrest Service plays this bullshit with the Rainbowers every year after a gathering -as much to bust their balls as to reseed a meadow full of pioneer annuals.

Not raggin on LAs. I think it's a great profession and art that more than earns its keep.
But I would like to see everyone take a more enlightened approach.
Particularly with respect to Public Land.



























It doesn't? Really?

Watching "The Fountainhead" once in your high school ethics class doesn't qualify you to pretend to know what an architect or landscape architect does and how we work and think. You're out of your territory.

Horizontal alignment has little to do with economics. Do you have any practical experience with anything you're talking about or are you just wiki'ing stuff online? Because you're really way off base and making yourself look silly.

[mitch_cumstein]

Highangle maybe a 2 stroker posing as a greenie, but he definitely understands landscape architects. My last two large projects were a Forest Service Campground and Coast Guard Housing. When you see the design by a landscape architect you can be pretty sure your just getting a pretty autocad drawing.

"pretty autocad drawing?" Really? What do you do exactly? I hope you're not responsible for building these plans considering the way you talk. There is no such thing as a pretty autocad drawing. Autocad is drafting software for contract drawings, not so much art.

It sounds like you have very little experience working with LA's. Here are a few projects designed, documented, and administered by Landscape Architects:

1. Central Park, NY-Olmstead (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Law_Olmsted)
2. Beijing Games, China-Sasaki (http://www.sasaki.com/what/portfolio...=204&service=1)
3. Blue Ridge Parkway, NC-Abbott
4. Lower Downtown Denver- Design Workshop (http://www.designworkshop.com/WhatWeDo.aspx)
5. Aspen (Snowmass Village and Downtown)-Design Workshop
6. Whistler, BC Village- DW (http://www.designworkshop.com/WhatWeDo.aspx)
7. Stowe, VT- SEGroup (http://www.segroup.com/projects/moun...ing/tamarack_/)
8. Reno Civic Plaza- PWP (http://www.pwpla.com/prj_project.php?prjid=14)
9. Tokyo Midtown- EDAW (http://www.edaw.com/whatWedo/project....aspx?search=y)

The list goes on...

Seriously, is this a blurred alias?

But really, please take a look at the links before you stick your foot in your mouth again. If you're as involved as you imply you are in the building trades industry it may be in your best interest.

[BFD]

Mitch here is some constructive criticism. Alot of surveyors and construction people still use plans. Many construction projects are still bid from plans. Many survey programs are set up to work off of plan and profile alignments that work off the same stationing. I think landscape architects may be to focused on making a pretty picture for their client, rather than creating construction drawings that work for the contractors.

pretty autocad drawing?" Really? You REALLY have no idea what you're talking about. For one, there is no such thing as a pretty autocad drawing. If you don't think LA's have an important positive impact on the world around you, you're just ignorant or misinformed, for which I don't blame you. Olmstead-Central Park (There is nothing natural about central park, it was a landfill). Beijing Olympics-Sasaki of Boston (All the planning and urban design was done by a group of landscape architects before the birds nest and water cube were perhaps ever conceived). Aspen...Design Workshop (Denver). SE Group if you checked my earlier links is almost entirely a group of landscape architects who did a little place called Stowe. The list goes on. Lower Downtown Denver..Design Workshop. Really though, the list goes on.

got an ego Mitch
Personally I don't give a shit about lanscape architects. All I see locally are two projects that cost way more than they needed to, with none of the additional costs benefiting locals. Thankfully when I go outside god is still the creator of the world around me.