Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

RIP Eclipse Snow Park

profile picture
pghjibber
Posts: 1298 - Karma: 329
commissioners just now after 5 years decided to deny the proposal to open eclipse snow park, weak sauce


http://www.theskichannel.com/news/skinews/20100623/Coors-Brewery-descendant-shocked-as-board-rejects-plan-for-new-Colorado-ski-area
Jun 23 2010 3:47PM
27 17
profile picture
j.bird
Posts: 6680 - Karma: 15
yeah I never really understood what was going on there. They always had level 1 shoots, but it wasnt open to the public as far as I knew?

So not only did they blow a bunch of money on shoots and marketing stuff, he is also now out the almost 1.5 million he paid for the land?

They even started rezoning the land, and then said mmmm nevermind. I dont see how increased traffic can be such a bad thing. A safety issue? More of a stagnant traffic issue? Having more cars on the road does not cause accidents, poor driving habits, distractions, and driving too fast for conditions cause accidents. in this economy we should be promoting business growth, not stifling it.
Jun 23 2010 3:55PM
0 0
profile picture
pghjibber
Posts: 1298 - Karma: 329
yeah i feel like this last-minute rejection shit is becoming a disturbing trend in ski area expansions...

giant teases and then they pull the rug out from under you
Jun 23 2010 3:57PM
1 0
profile picture
Sklar
Posts: 8863 - Karma: 31,577
i had no idea there were level one shoots there until now
Jun 23 2010 4:05PM
0 0
profile picture
Dntel.
Posts: 1026 - Karma: 21
such a bummer, the road up there is sketch, but no more dangerous than say, loveland pass? It would see far less traffic than the pass even with Eclipse in full swing. Its so close to boulder too!
Jun 23 2010 4:06PM
0 0
profile picture
Dntel.
Posts: 1026 - Karma: 21
sorry for the dub post, but the last hit in that edit was MASSIVE. borderline "oh-shit" massive!
Jun 23 2010 4:08PM
0 0
profile picture
McLeod
Posts: 1762 - Karma: 1,582
you sir are a ra tarrrrd
Jun 23 2010 4:12PM
2 6
profile picture
pghjibber
Posts: 1298 - Karma: 329
thanks number #1 fan
Jun 23 2010 4:13PM
3 0
profile picture
j.bird
Posts: 6680 - Karma: 15
...?
Jun 23 2010 4:24PM
0 0
profile picture
pghjibber
Posts: 1298 - Karma: 329
he quotes every post i make bc i ripped him apart one time and had no worthy response, dont mind him he just has a man crush on me
Jun 23 2010 4:30PM
5 0
profile picture
j.bird
Posts: 6680 - Karma: 15
lol, he seems like an idiot. If someone says something dumb, then by all means call em out, but what you said made perfect sense.

i think he needs a life!
Jun 23 2010 4:32PM
0 1
profile picture
skiingpimp
Posts: 1176 - Karma: 31
I never understood where people were going to park. I have seen McDonalds with bigger lots than Eclipse. And it is illegal to park on the streets up there.
Jun 23 2010 4:33PM
0 0
profile picture
3mania
Posts: 2559 - Karma: 9,858
Why with all these mountains can Colorado not have a summer skiing center?
Jun 23 2010 4:41PM
0 0
profile picture
pghjibber
Posts: 1298 - Karma: 329
Woodward at Copper has an on-snow and off-snow summer camp.
Jun 23 2010 4:44PM
0 1
profile picture
3mania
Posts: 2559 - Karma: 9,858
I'm talking about a legit ski area with lifts that are open to the public. Not a private camp.
Jun 23 2010 4:47PM
1 0
profile picture
Mike.Records
Posts: 1311 - Karma: 756
I'm not arguing with you, but my understanding is that the issue with traffic was with the people who currently live up there. The bought property up there because the liked that it was quiet, and didn't want that to change. Which is kinda understandable, but it is inevitable that people will want to go to cool places. I remember eclipse used to have a website with a forum that was just filled with people who lived up there hating on Michael Coors.
Jun 23 2010 5:43PM
0 0
profile picture
j.bird
Posts: 6680 - Karma: 15
yeah. So it isnt a safety issue, its the local people not wanting more traffic.

I see what you are saying, and i see their POV, but I still think it is whack.
Jun 23 2010 5:46PM
0 0
profile picture
Piste.Off
Posts: 11586 - Karma: 1,861
the people that live on that land owned it way before eclipse came along. its their decision in the end.
Jun 23 2010 6:05PM
0 1
profile picture
meeesh
Posts: 353 - Karma: 56
no snow.
Jun 23 2010 6:45PM
0 0
profile picture
Mike.Records
Posts: 1311 - Karma: 756
This is definitely a hard question. No one lives on the land that eclipse would have been on they just live near the access road. If you live somewhere first do you really have the right to shut others out because you want it to yourself? Its understandable that they want it to themselves, but I feel like it has happened everywhere in the mountains. People discover a cool place, and then other people move their because its cool. I wonder if the other mountain towns wanted ski areas at first also.

An unrelated comment. I feel like things like this happen alot in the mountains: A small vocal minority is able to exert their will over the group at large, with very real questions as to whether the final decision is in the benefit of the majority.
Jun 23 2010 6:54PM
0 0
profile picture
Shpadoinkle
Posts: 10437 - Karma: 84
It would cost A LOT of money to do that. Also, the forest service wouldn't allow it. Keystone, for example, is leased.
Jun 23 2010 7:10PM
0 0
profile picture
3mania
Posts: 2559 - Karma: 9,858
Yeah, whatever, did you see this dude's last name. COORS. i'm pretty sure money is not an issue for the right people. And you people need to stop using the forest service as your excuse for all early closings. Extensions can be applied for and approved. I know some of you just showed up here in Colorado but there are place where there's snow all summer.
Jun 23 2010 8:38PM
0 0
profile picture
Mike.Records
Posts: 1311 - Karma: 756
So true! I hate the forest service permit excuse.
Jun 23 2010 8:42PM
0 0
profile picture
meeesh
Posts: 353 - Karma: 56

Forest service extension = mucho $.

Regardless, we can tell you that there is no snow. I felt ambitious last weekend and hiked to get some turns... hiked to almost 14,000... and only got about 1,500 vert. The resort areas are naked.

Jun 25 2010 2:45PM
0 0
profile picture
selkirks
Posts: 1978 - Karma: 59
No one realizes that this was originally a ski area. St. Mary's Glacier was once a small ski area. Similar to Squaw Pass (which closed and then was re-incarnated into Echo Mountain), Eclipse seems like a modest proposal.

Dangerous road? Try driving the Going-to-the-Sun Road in Glacier National Park, Montana.
Jul 14 2010 2:43AM
0 0
profile picture
HoesJaws
Posts: 1 - Karma: 7
Well lemme tell all you folks, that as a person who lived in close proximity to this proposed development- & lobbied against it, there are many issues that never saw the light of day. This was a deeply corrupt process from the get-go, influenced by the Coors' family wealth and political ties.

Former US Congressman/ Senator Mark Udall introduced legislation that would have given Coors' the federal land he sought (and needed) to develop this park in one fell swoop. An immediate grant of federal property- Bingo. Well, for common citizens such as myself, the process for purchasing federal lands that are potentially available for sale requires a minimum process of 12 years. I communicated extensively with Udall concerning the obvious double standard, and eventually convinced him his position was flawed. He withdrew the legislation.

That in of itself doomed Coors' plans. He did not want to open up a ski park on par with what had been there back in the old days. He wanted something much more extravagant. As for the road (Fall River Road)- if you have not driven it in the winter, after a storm, then you've no idea of what you are talking about. It is deadly, period. Often, evacuations are needed to get people out of St. Mary's/ Alice region (where Coors' land is located). The switchbacks on this road do not conform to state or federal standards- yet, it is designated as a state highway.

That Coors' spent $1.5 million on this property is no one's fault but his own, and was a clear indication that an Ivy League education in business does not necessarily translate into business acumen. Coors' spent that money BEFORE seeking approval of any permits. An experienced businessman would have either leased the property with an option to buy, or better yet, made the purchase contingent upon permit approvals. Instead, Coors' pissed his money down the drain.

It was an expensive lesson for him- and I suspect he has learned from it.
Jan 3 2016 10:33AM
1 4
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
HoesJawsWell lemme tell all you folks, that as a person who lived in close proximity to this proposed development- & lobbied against it, there are many issues that never saw the light of day. This was a deeply corrupt process from the get-go, influenced by the Coors' family wealth and political ties.

Former US Congressman/ Senator Mark Udall introduced legislation that would have given Coors' the federal land he sought (and needed) to develop this park in one fell swoop. An immediate grant of federal property- Bingo. Well, for common citizens such as myself, the process for purchasing federal lands that are potentially available for sale requires a minimum process of 12 years. I communicated extensively with Udall concerning the obvious double standard, and eventually convinced him his position was flawed. He withdrew the legislation.

That in of itself doomed Coors' plans. He did not want to open up a ski park on par with what had been there back in the old days. He wanted something much more extravagant. As for the road (Fall River Road)- if you have not driven it in the winter, after a storm, then you've no idea of what you are talking about. It is deadly, period. Often, evacuations are needed to get people out of St. Mary's/ Alice region (where Coors' land is located). The switchbacks on this road do not conform to state or federal standards- yet, it is designated as a state highway.

That Coors' spent $1.5 million on this property is no one's fault but his own, and was a clear indication that an Ivy League education in business does not necessarily translate into business acumen. Coors' spent that money BEFORE seeking approval of any permits. An experienced businessman would have either leased the property with an option to buy, or better yet, made the purchase contingent upon permit approvals. Instead, Coors' pissed his money down the drain.

It was an expensive lesson for him- and I suspect he has learned from it.


You sound like a grumpy anti-development old man with nothing better to do than be a super-citizen pain in the ass to everyone around you.
Jan 3 2016 1:10PM
4 2
profile picture
Static
Posts: 8491 - Karma: 4,059
californiagrownYou sound like a grumpy anti-development old man with nothing better to do than be a super-citizen pain in the ass to everyone around you.


Seems like he just called them out on their backdoor land deal.
Jan 3 2016 1:41PM
3 0
profile picture
Rparr
Posts: 5352 - Karma: 42,173
StaticSeems like he just called them out on their backdoor land deal.


Pretty Much
Jan 3 2016 2:08PM
0 0
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
StaticSeems like he just called them out on their backdoor land deal.


thats how most big development projects get pushed through. big developments are rare enough and different enough from one to the other that the process isnt a set in stone flow chart type thing. Much of the time it is a give and take between the developer and the regulatory agency. eg improve that road on the developers dime and the DOT/County etc lets them speed up the proccess.


IDK, the guy makes it sound super one sided and these issues never are.
Jan 3 2016 3:23PM
2 1
profile picture
leprechaunsissy
Posts: 645 - Karma: 237
McLeodyou sir are a ra tarrrrd


Your post does not make sense
Jan 4 2016 3:06AM
1 0
profile picture
artrud
Posts: 598 - Karma: 1,471
californiagrownthats how most big development projects get pushed through.


you sure about this? Maybe think about why some have moved so quickly? Perhaps it's so people dont have a chance to grasp that land set aside for them is being sold without their consent.

Sure there needs to be efficiency, so moving quickly for business is important but the sale of federal land to private entities is something that needs to run through the proper channels. Coors got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.
Jan 4 2016 3:01PM
0 0
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
artrud23you sure about this? Maybe think about why some have moved so quickly? Perhaps it's so people dont have a chance to grasp that land set aside for them is being sold without their consent.

Sure there needs to be efficiency, so moving quickly for business is important but the sale of federal land to private entities is something that needs to run through the proper channels. Coors got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.


Happens both ways. Whitewolfe got bought out from underneath squaw by a random local Tahoe guy... Who sat on the land for 30 years and only recently entered into a lease? Agreement with KSL.

Similar thing happened to that PA hill a few years ago, and a thread was recently made when the resort and the landowners tried to strong arm each other.


In this case, whom did the federal govt promise the land to? As far as I know, ya don't own the land, till ya own the land.

And developers move quickly because of money. The want their money back ASAP.
Jan 4 2016 4:09PM
0 0
profile picture
artrud
Posts: 598 - Karma: 1,471
californiagrownHappens both ways. Whitewolfe got bought out from underneath squaw by a random local Tahoe guy... Who sat on the land for 30 years and only recently entered into a lease? Agreement with KSL.

Similar thing happened to that PA hill a few years ago, and a thread was recently made when the resort and the landowners tried to strong arm each other.


In this case, whom did the federal govt promise the land to? As far as I know, ya don't own the land, till ya own the land.

And developers move quickly because of money. The want their money back ASAP.


There's a difference between private land sale to a private owner VS federal land sale to a private owner. Federal land is public land that isn't supposed to be for sale. It can be leased by a ski resort, etc... but again, there is a process for this. Environmental impacts need to be conducted, proposed land community meetings. Swap out ski resort trying to buy federal land with oil drilling company trying to buy (protected) federal land. See where I'm going with this?

I'd be pretty pissed if the government sold land that belonged to my community without letting me weigh in....which is what almost happened in this specific case.
Jan 4 2016 7:02PM
0 0
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
artrud23There's a difference between private land sale to a private owner VS federal land sale to a private owner. Federal land is public land that isn't supposed to be for sale. It can be leased by a ski resort, etc... but again, there is a process for this. Environmental impacts need to be conducted, proposed land community meetings. Swap out ski resort trying to buy federal land with oil drilling company trying to buy (protected) federal land. See where I'm going with this?

I'd be pretty pissed if the government sold land that belonged to my community without letting me weigh in....which is what almost happened in this specific case.


The land doesn't belong to your community. Additionally, just because a private company owns the land doesn't mean they can do what they like with it, lol.

You are getting waaaaaay ahead of yourself with all the studies that need to be conducted. That only happens during the development process which is a long ways down the road from just buying the land.


I'd have absolutely no problem with an oil company or chemical plant buying the property next door. Wanna know why? Cause they still couldn't build anything other than a residential home.



What likely happened to this project, judging by the date, is the money for high risk investments like a ski resort dried up along with the economy.


Don't be so negative towards development. Get involved and make sure it is smart development, but understand that development is happening.
Jan 4 2016 7:22PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)