Update on Heavenly Master Plan

[char]

Old growth is not and should not be defined by the age of the trees. Species composition, horizontal and vertical distribution, size, quality, density, etc all come into play. Old, big trees do not necessarily make an old growth stand.

I seriously doubt that removing a liftline worth of trees from a place like Heavenly is going to have much, if any effect on the already degraded and fragmented environment there.

[TahoePowShredder]

The fact that the TRPA actually approved something makes this news interesting to me.

very true, comes to show how when you're a huge corporate giant (VAIL), with money you can have everything in your back pocket. I have heard of resorts battling for years to even replace old lifts with new ones, replacing! building a new lift all together, out of the question.

[amydalayna]

an update in today's paper...

Facing the possibility of litigation, the alignment of a proposed high speed quad chair lift in Heavenly's North Bowl may receive further scrutiny by the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency's Governing Board if a recent request by several board members is headed.

Board members Norma Santiago, Jerome Waldie, and Mara J. Bresnick sent a letter to TRPA's Executive Director John Singlaub on Wednesday that requested the reconsideration of the board's Feb. 28 dismissal of Alternative 4A in Heavenly's Master Plan amendment.

While the Sierra Nevada Alliance hopes that litigation will not be the necessary to overturn the board's choice of alternative 4, "nothing is off the table," said Autumn Bernstein, land use coordinator for the Sierra Nevada Alliance.

4A has been favored by basin environmental groups because of its inclusion of an angled mid-station lift that would avoid bisecting a stand of large red fir trees estimated to be between 200 to 500 years old.

Numerous requests by Santiago's El Dorado County constituents, the lack of full board participation in the last vote, difficulties experienced by board members participating in the meeting by phone and a desire to again compare the environmental impacts of Alternatives 4, 4A, and 5 were the reasons cited in the letter for the request.

Waldie also felt that Heavenly's bottom line was too much a part of the discussion leading up to the approval of alternative 4.

"I thought there was too much attention paid to the desire of Heavenly to save costs by going through a grove of ancient trees," said Waldie. "Obviously, it would be my hope that we would reverse the vote that was taken."

[gimpy]

Hey amydalayna they totally made X-mas valley better! you can ride up it now which is so cool, plus I don't get hurt anymore on the way down

BLASPHEMY!!!!

[amydalayna]

BLASPHEMY!!!!

i KNOW!

i shed a little tear the first time i rode down and there were no more stairs.

[Arty50]

Ok, sorry to play devil's advocate.

I don't see how you can lament the loss of Xmas valley, and then criticize Heavenly for environmental factors. Believe me, I'm right with you guys on Xmas valley. It was my favorite mountain bike trail; yes even over Toad's Porcupine Rim, etc. I really, really miss it. But the reason for killing it was the erosion into the streambed. That still doesn't excuse the way they cut the reroute, but still I guess something had to be done.

There's also one issue that people are forgetting about the new lift. Power. It's scarce up here, brownouts and surges are common. Putting one new lift in saves energy over the other two options. Two lifts will obviously use more power than one, but even a kinked lift will require more energy. Take the new Collins chair at Alta as an example. At the kink, the chairs drop off the high speed line, run slow through the mid station, and then pick up on the high speed line. I'm sure Heavenly would have used a similar setup. So you basically have an extra fully operational terminal in the middle.

Which brings up another point that's not necessarily related to this discussion. I have no idea how Heavenly is running on 100% wind power. I have yet to see any windmills even remotely close to the area.

[skimoore]

Which brings up another point that's not necessarily related to this discussion. I have no idea how Heavenly is running on 100% wind power. I have yet to see any windmills even remotely close to the area.

Maybe they bought out the Altamont pass?

[stupendous man]

Heavenly most likely purchases wind power offsets, either through purchasing renewable energy credits or directly investing with wind energy operations. The power is bought and used elsewhere, the idea being that it negates or mitigates Heavenly's use.

[Sierra Cement]

I'm with you guys on a lot of these issues, but this particular comment:

Proving once again that whoever makes lift construction and routing decisions at Heavenly is a retard.

IS NOT TRUE.

[amydalayna]

Ok, sorry to play devil's advocate.

I don't see how you can lament the loss of Xmas valley, and then criticize Heavenly for environmental factors. Believe me, I'm right with you guys on Xmas valley. It was my favorite mountain bike trail; yes even over Toad's Porcupine Rim, etc. I really, really miss it. But the reason for killing it was the erosion into the streambed. That still doesn't excuse the way they cut the reroute, but still I guess something had to be done.

losing xmas valley and losing north bowl trees aren't in the same category. they just are both special to me and not having them makes me sad.

[Duffman]

About the wind power issue stupendous man is correct. Vail resorts purchases wind power offsets for all of it's holdings in Colorado too, and then claims that they are 100% wind powered. Kind of misleading, but I guess better than nothing.

[Arty50]

Do you really think environmental issues are at stake with Heavenly's desire to do this? I kinda doubt it.

Oh no, that's not what I was saying at all. They undoubtedly want the easiest, cheapest route. Otherwise, they'd find a way to use the existing lift routes.

[Spats]

I'm with you guys on a lot of these issues, but this particular comment:

IS NOT TRUE.

Fair enough, I'll restate: the lift routing decisions are retarded. It's possible for non-retarded people to make retarded decisions.

Do you have any insight into why things ended up the way they have?