Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    30

    Wrangling over the Breck Peak 6 expansion

    So the wrangling over Peak 6 continues. The latest word is the Forest Service will issue a draft EIS in January, with a "Peak 6-lite" alternative: A shorter lift, less trail clear-cutting, more glading ... still lots of wildlife and forest health issues, and some local sidecountry skiers lamenting the loss of close-in terrain. You can see a little more detailed update here: http://summitcountyvoice.com/2010/06...n-peak-6-lite/

    In town, a task force formed to address the socio-economic impacts of the Peak 6 expansion, and resort expansion in general, presented its suggestions to the town council and the country commissioners, who played hot potato with the whole thing. If you're interested, here's an update: http://summitcountyvoice.com/2010/10...for-consensus/
    Last edited by bberwyn; 10-09-2010 at 12:26 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    wherever my car takes me
    Posts
    1,718
    At this rate it's going to take forever to get a lift all the way to Peak 1.
    Quote Originally Posted by wintermittent
    And furthermore. What is up with turkey bacon? Healthy bacon? Unpossible.
    Quote Originally Posted by snowsprite
    That is like masturbation. People resort to it when they can't have the real thing!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Vail
    Posts
    629
    Not counting any of the details of Snodgrass itself (about which I have no opinion), Makes sense to me, to expand Breck, Keystone, A-Basin, Vail. Breckenridge is very close to I-70, the largest road in the state going through the mountains and close to a million people in Denver. Imho, it makes sense with the existing infrastructure to build near I-70, closer to Denver, but keep a smaller footprint further south. CB is at the end of a two lane road? Why not keeps some of it's small town charm. Wouldn't it be nice if we kept the mega resorts along I-70 and tried to keep some of the cool small town character of southern colorado?

    Quote Originally Posted by oXyGenDEprIveD View Post
    I love how we get to watch 6 build out and CB keeps getting their package turned down by the forest service.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Three-O-Three
    Posts
    15,411
    Quote Originally Posted by oXyGenDEprIveD View Post
    I love how we get to watch 6 build out and CB keeps getting their package turned down by the forest service.
    This was my first thought. CB can't even get a review process moving, but Breck has no issues. Very hypocritical of the FS, regardless of your stance on the expansion in CB.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    30
    Thanks for the feedback, everyone, it's always interesting to hear what real skiers think about this stuff instead of the political hacks, the resort honchos and the Forest Service rangers. The I-70 "sacrifice zone" idea isn't new, and the FS outlined it in the 2002 White River Forest plan, when they said pretty much the same thing PowTrees said, in slightly different language. Not sure how I feel about living in a sacrifice zone, but if it helps protect some other place from the over-development we have in Summit, then I can live with it. Keep the comments coming.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    30
    Breckenridge town council is discussing and voting on this Peak 6 expansion MOU tonight. I'm at the meeting, may do some live blogging/tweeting over at http://www.summitvoice.org.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Paradise
    Posts
    5,190
    CB doesn't have the money that those front range mountains have. I just finished reading In Search Of Powder, interesting look into Vail resorts.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Paradise
    Posts
    5,190
    The Greed Machine keeps on eating it's way across the mountains. Has anyone learned from their time in the mountains what is really important? Obviously the corporate ski company execs don't ski very much.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by RaisingArizona View Post
    Obviously the corporate ski company execs don't ski very much.
    Of course he does...


  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Eagle County
    Posts
    12,609
    where does it end? Leave peak 6 alone and leave Snodgrass alone too for that matter. If you open a can of worms...it's already been opened.....you can't shut it.
    ROLL TIDE ROLL

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    30
    The Breck town council passed the MOU unanimously. Remember, this isn't a green light for the actual expansion. that's up to the Forest Service, which recently said it might have a draft EIS done by January 2011.

    What the MOU does is establish something of a formula for addressing the so-called social impacts of expansions - in other words, if Peak 6 adds "X" number of employees, Vail Resorts commits to adding "Y" number of new affordable housing units, and so on. I'll post a story at Summit Voice a bit later.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Ten Mile Vistas
    Posts
    4,022
    Quote Originally Posted by Six&Six View Post
    Of course he does...

    Berwyn's best buddy.
    (not really)
    Old's Cool.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    30
    Yah, we're SOOOO tight!

    Anyhow, it's kinda wonky, but here's what the council had to say about this MOU with the resort, posted in a story at Summit Voice:

    http://summitcountyvoice.com/2010/12...s-peak-6-deal/

    Basically, the ski area agreed to NOT do a bunch of stuff they couldn't do anyway, like develop real estate at the bottom of Peak 6 where there is no real estate to develop. And they agreed to keep doing a bunch of stuff they already do ...

Posting Permissions

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