Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 112
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    S.L.T.
    Posts
    746
    Which 87.338% of people can't ski safely. And that is a generous figure.
    Quote Originally Posted by Conundrum View Post
    I'm the most extreme skier in my office. I'll see your III and raise you one level of radness.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Cruzing
    Posts
    9,033
    Quote Originally Posted by skier666 View Post
    Let say it could happen where would it go? Over to Sentinel Bowl (easy saddle there), and Thunderbowl is super raw but super aesthetic.
    When ever I imagined a Euro style resort with a Silver Lake base, I imagined a gondi or tram up and over the south facing chute and buttress to the to of Thunder Bowl. That terrain down to the lake would still be hard to access (it is hard from the top of V-tree) and require lots of snow. But that would provide access. And I imagine a chair going to the top of Thimble with a base down that drainage. A second lift would terminate at the Sentinel saddle, with a base down that drainage. And a T-bar to the top of Glove Rock. Lake front castles with a village climbing up the low angle at the bottom. A a few chairs down low just to get around.

    Besides the Pali lift to Martin's, you would also want to put in a lift from Emigrant to the top of Cali, as well as one from Fourth of July Lake to Stovepipe. Of course, a surface tow to bring you back to Sunrise bowl, and chair 3 would want to go down toward Caples, where another, more quaint base would be located. Lots of great beginner terrain back there, and few more lifts to be built, with one to the top of the false peak on your way from the bottom of Life on the Edge. A connection to CP and Deadwood Cirque will need to wait. Some fun, low angle sunshine stuff behind Radio Tower should be developed as well.

    Hughy, I'm not suggesting the viability, or good sense of such a plan, but just playing. But I disagree that it is just more of the same. There is a lot of variety out there, especially when you consider aspect.

    BTW, I thought the Pali lift was not in the approved plan, and just a pipe dream added after the review. If that is the case, OP, do you know if Vail has found a way around this?

    I've heard "good things" have been in the talking and are in line with Dick's plans.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    29,074
    Quote Originally Posted by LongShortLong View Post
    I heard Vail has a development grant from Amador County and is pursuing federal highspeed rail money. They're gonna build a high speed scenic monorail, with stops in Jackson, Silver Lake, and Kirkwood. Using the Caples Creek drainage means they avoid avalanche paths at Carson Spur. Alpine County votes next month on a possible extension to Sorensen's.
    That would be the most impressive ski area transportation system the Sierra has had since the trains went from Oak and Sak to Sugar Bowl and Truckee. It would also answer the density population base Hugh talks about.

    North Shore is getting a roller coaster, though....

  4. #29
    Hugh Conway Guest
    when I imagine a "euro style lifts there" I stack two Kirkwoods on top of each other, and tie in a bunch of adjacent ridges that funnel back to a couple of areas reasonably well connected by transportation. As is more lifts = tracked out quicker, more dead infrastructure mouldering on weekdays.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Cruzing
    Posts
    9,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh Conway View Post
    when I imagine a "euro style lifts there" I stack two Kirkwoods on top of each other, and tie in a bunch of adjacent ridges that funnel back to a couple of areas reasonably well connected by transportation. As is more lifts = tracked out quicker, more dead infrastructure mouldering on weekdays.
    That would be killer, but do you know how expensive it would be, not to mention the environmental impact, to stack two Kirkwoods on top of each other. Seriously, that is just not plausible.

  6. #31
    Hugh Conway Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Ottime View Post
    That would be killer, but do you know how expensive it would be, not to mention the environmental impact, to stack two Kirkwoods on top of each other. Seriously, that is just not plausible.
    But think of all of the brand new slopeside home real estate kirkwood would have to sell!

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Livermore, CA
    Posts
    191
    From a business standpoint, Vail wants to open up more intermediate terrain. That's where the money is.

    And they need to tackle the highway situation or make Kwood a destination resort.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    14,769
    Quote Originally Posted by tsproul View Post
    And they need to tackle the highway situation or make Kwood a destination resort.
    What does tackling the highway mean?

  9. #34
    Hugh Conway Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by 4matic View Post
    What does tackling the highway mean?
    like how they are "fixing" the power. getting the taxpayers to pony up, or guarantee, spending? Dunno. It's in the middle of nowhere comparatively, ain't ever going to change. That's it's appeal.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Cruzing
    Posts
    9,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh Conway View Post
    But think of all of the brand new slopeside home real estate kirkwood would have to sell!
    Good point. Maybe they should consider the stacking option. More vert is dearly needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by 4matic View Post
    What does tackling the highway mean?
    Sliver Lake to Kirkwood tunnel. 3 lanes to Lodi, 4 lanes to Livermore and 5 lanes to the city. Maybe a Tunnel from Meyers as well.

  11. #36
    Hugh Conway Guest
    I'd settle for some Lockeford sausage at the overpriced concessionaires. Mmmmm brats.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Presidio
    Posts
    1,380
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh Conway View Post
    like how they are "fixing" the power. getting the taxpayers to pony up, or guarantee, spending? Dunno. It's in the middle of nowhere comparatively, ain't ever going to change. That's it's appeal.
    QFT

    You cant change the fact that KW is in the middle of a bunch of fucking mountain ranges nowhere near an interstate...

  13. #38
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Back in SEA
    Posts
    9,526
    Quote Originally Posted by RockChalk View Post
    QFT

    You cant change the fact that KW is in the middle of a bunch of fucking mountain ranges nowhere near an interstate...
    as long as we are talking about stacking 2 KW's, why not move the whole double-stack closer to 50?
    ... jfost is really ignorant, he often just needs simple facts laid out for him...

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Livermore, CA
    Posts
    191
    Quote Originally Posted by 4matic View Post
    What does tackling the highway mean?
    Make it possible for tourists to access Kwood when there are storms. I'm no transport enginerd. It might be roadway, it might be mitigating avy danger at the passes, etc.

    It would be very surprising if Vail bought Kwood with the idea to keep it a small (in terms of visitor numbers) resort. My money is that they will turn it into a destination resort. Add a hotel or two and several restaurants, more condo/fractional development and spread the skiing out to the backsides - chair 6? The highway situation is probably intractable - both $ and beaurocratic nightmares trying to get the gvmt to do anything.

    They may also have bought Kwood as a hedge bet that the winter Olympics will return to Tahoe. If they do return, there will be a lot of public funds spent and our tax monies will make it less risky for Vail to develop Kwood. If the Olympics don't return to Tahoe in the 2020's, Vail can probably dump Kwood for twice what they paid. Maybe Disney will buy Kwood. Then the Sugarwood pass will return!

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    P-tex, CA
    Posts
    8,191
    Remember people...we never thought high speed quads would ever make it to Kirkwood, AND NOW THEY HAVE TWO!!!

  16. #41
    Hugh Conway Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by tsproul View Post
    Add a hotel or two and several restaurants, more condo/fractional development
    1999 called it wants it's blow back. even the vaunted "silver lake" doesn't add that much more destination worthy terrain.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Livermore, CA
    Posts
    191
    I think Pat has all the blow. Used it to make the Kusala in time for Gordy.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    4,115
    regarding the power project, from December 2012:
    KMPUD is expecting to go out to bid in early 2013.
    http://www.co.amador.ca.us/Modules/S...cumentid=13362

  19. #44
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    29,074
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh Conway View Post
    1999 called it wants it's blow back. even the vaunted "silver lake" doesn't add that much more destination worthy terrain.
    But that's looking at it from a Euro resort point of view. Here, stats and perceptions make shit bragworthy.

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    20sickness
    Posts
    485
    Three homewood developments stacked= two kirkwoods stacked??

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    12,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh Conway View Post
    1999 called it wants it's blow back. even the vaunted "silver lake" doesn't add that much more destination worthy terrain.
    that would depend on what they did. it could easily triple kirkwood's acreage. more importantly it puts a base 20 minutes closer to west coast money. it prevents spur closures from hurting business. it provides an area outside the valley where they could develop without worrying about how ugly the rest of the mismatched condos are. there is an area of relatively flat land around the northeast side of the lake that is roughly the size of kirkwood valley. personally, i think the area in between silver lake and the spur also makes sense since there is more north facing terrain draining towards it, and huge amounts of flat land there as well.
    and before you right off silver lake, consider that they have already installed a Starbucks on the ridge between kirkwood and thunder bowl.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	kirkwood-dangberg-017.jpg 
Views:	376 
Size:	356.2 KB 
ID:	131955  
    powdork.com - new and improved, with 20% more dork.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    12,239
    Quote Originally Posted by jfost View Post
    as long as we are talking about stacking 2 KW's, why not move the whole double-stack closer to 50?
    but 50 isn't an interstate. it's no better a road than 88.
    powdork.com - new and improved, with 20% more dork.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    29,074
    You know what I like about the Swiss Alps?
    They have fucking trains you drive your car onto to go skiing.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Huh?
    Posts
    10,938
    Quote Originally Posted by powdork View Post
    that would depend on what they did. it could easily triple kirkwood's acreage. more importantly it puts a base 20 minutes closer to west coast money. it prevents spur closures from hurting business. it provides an area outside the valley where they could develop without worrying about how ugly the rest of the mismatched condos are. there is an area of relatively flat land around the northeast side of the lake that is roughly the size of kirkwood valley. personally, i think the area in between silver lake and the spur also makes sense since there is more north facing terrain draining towards it, and huge amounts of flat land there as well.
    While the skier in me thinks this would be cool, the mountain biker in me hates this idea.
    "I knew in an instant that the three dollars I had spent on wine would not go to waste."

  25. #50
    Hugh Conway Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by powdork View Post
    that would depend on what they did. it could easily triple kirkwood's acreage. more importantly it puts a base 20 minutes closer to west coast money. it prevents spur closures from hurting business. it provides an area outside the valley where they could develop without worrying about how ugly the rest of the mismatched condos are. there is an area of relatively flat land around the northeast side of the lake that is roughly the size of kirkwood valley. personally, i think the area in between silver lake and the spur also makes sense since there is more north facing terrain draining towards it, and huge amounts of flat land there as well.
    and before you right off silver lake, consider that they have already installed a Starbucks on the ridge between kirkwood and thunder bowl.
    Hitting the hype bong hard tonight. It's not 20 minutes closer and 3x more crap is still crap

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •