Industry News
The Friends of Squaw Valley’s mission is to advocate for environmental sustainability, economic viability, and development that is aesthetically compatible with our community’s character. – Friends of Squaw Valley
The Friends of Squaw Valley just released their recommendations for how they think the village at Squaw Valley should look. They are essentially asking Squaw to build the village less tall and less dense.  What do you think of their plan?
The recommendations below are in reference to the proposed Village Core Commercial district. We will comment at a later date on other zoning district guidelines, though many of these recommendations will apply in other districts also. – Friends of Squaw Valley
Please have a look at their recommendations:
Some towns like Aspen have a % of square footage quota that requires new developments to create employee housing. I’m. Not going to argue for that at squaw, I don’t think it is needed. But, I’d like to argue that the vertically integrated, one company owns most of the skiing experience reality we have really hurts the experience. A vibrant village with multiple local owned businesses creates the character that rises above the drudgery that many of the vail resorts embody. Is argue for a quota of local owned and operated business’s. It adds to the experience, the culture, the history, the future. A town of hourly foreigners or one season ski bums is easy labor to find but it doesn’t build the community. We need to bring back the squaw valley flavor in the form of the businesses and people that make a town real . That’s more important than incorporation. Willard’s, Chamois, Dave’s Deli etc let’s get the people back. A one company town is lame and so is the vacation experience.
There’s some real talent at SOV too. Here’s a clip from http://garydavisgroup.com/civil/17/53/Squaw%20Valley%20Ski%20Corporation
Squaw Valley Ski Corporation
Squaw Valley, CA
Gary Davis Group played a significant role in design and construction of the Funitel lift at Squaw Valley. For the lower terminal, GDG – in conjunction with Garaventa – designed the foundation with large rope loads for the Funitel cables and 20-feet deep retaining walls for basement. On the upper terminal, GDG designed the counter-weight shaft and super structure. GDG designed all of the Funitel tower foundations.
Gary Davis Group has also done extensive work at Squaw Valley – with BMP improvements on the mountain, as well as lift and ski run modifications.”
Nice to see Heidi and Vito talking on the commentaries to FoSv’s article. (But why does everyone assume the village buildings are like dirt real estate?
Vito Palermo
Heidi, the assessed property values and revenues quoted are from Placer County records for the tax year 2012-2013 since that is the base period used in the comprehensive fiscal analysis. Therefore they are actual numbers and in no way based on what may or may not be developed in the future.
Reply · Like · 1 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
Heidi Maier Deveau · Kindergarten Teacher at Fairmeadow School Palo Alto Ca
Ok good info. I am confused because the numbers that I have seen have around a 4 million budget for the town which is thin on contracted services and does not show a neutrality revenue and legal fees and only around 500,000 in excess. Could you speak to the budget?
Reply · Like · 12 hours ago
Heidi Maier Deveau · Kindergarten Teacher at Fairmeadow School Palo Alto Ca
Fred’s Statement: “Assessed property values in the PROPOSED town exceed 1.1 billion dollars and once again are on the rise. Property taxes and hotel bed taxes generate over 15 million dollars in revenue a year.”
I am assuming he referring to the village plan built out to completion.
When my husband and I (Yes… we were the couple in the Sierra Sun ad for SOV. We really do exist.) were discussing the concept of incorporation when it was introduced last year, we were intrigued by the idea of incorporating of Olympic Valley. But we were very skeptical that the town could have sufficient revenue to support existing services. If you look at the revenue tax if the entire project is built out, the town might have viability. There were a lot of “if”s in that statement. At it’s present state of revenues with all the costs of a town realistically added up, it does not appear to make sense financially.
Creating a town that would be dependent on “giving in” to building out the entire KSL project as proposed to float the expenses of an extremely small mostly resort town is not acceptable. In addition in future years, The Town of Olympic Valley would be dependent on the tax revenue of Squaw Valley USA. Why tie ourselves to a weather ski industry?
Creating a town wouldn’t really give us more benefits than we have now. Why do we want to burden ourselves with another layer of unnecessary government. My husband bought our house in Squaw (when single) with the sole purpose of being close to the mountain -skiing and hiking. It is about the mountain, not a town.
In my opinion, for whatever that’s worth, all this energy towards incorporating an area that doesn’t need a town would be better spent on getting better snow plowing, better road maintenance and other issues as a condition of the project’s approval through the entitlement process . Through this development approval process, we should be able to get some cool amenities, a healthier creek, better training facilities and a place where our community can come together.
I agree with Fred that The Friends of Squaw have done an excellent job on their well prepared NOP letter and 3-D drawings. If we could keep moving in this direction, there is hope for a mutually beneficial project.
If we (myself included) could sell negativity and nastiness, we would be richer than the KSL Corp. This topic has turned into a sideshow entertaining the basin and might be fittingly named on Bravo as The Real Gapers of Squabble Valley. We can do better in representing who we are as a Squaw community. Assuming positive intent from all stakeholders is a first step. Without it, we are no better than the person we lashed out against.
Hope you are listening, and hear us. Please take the initiative on this important matter of building design for the proposed village and apply it to your company’s development plans.
What do you really have to lose? Think about what you will actually gain by working with the local community this way.
Everyone may not get exactly what they want, but this is how the delicate art of compromise actually works.
Thank you.
When I went to base camp, I’m certain the KSL gent (who gave me his direct mobile and wished me to see Chevis Hosea) and our manager also said the model was out of date and the building near us would be shaved a floor to a max of 6 and step down to 2 floors. That was in late January 2014 shortly after the KSL Presentation. In other words, are the FoSV talking with KSL or is KSL happy to embrace ideas. I know we’ve got a 40′ set back from our boundary too, + a easement/restriction + a sliver of land to ensure it’l never be built on.
Great to see something constructive without name calling, innuendo or spin.
It’s a shame that KSL didn’t sit down with these ideas ages ago and at least consider building them into the latest plan.
With the Wet Amenity (what a name!!!!) weren’t they looking at an ice rink in there for ice hockey as a summer attraction?
Changing the orientation of the ice skating rink is brilliant. I also think it will help reduce the noise for the buildings. Stepped buildings look great.
This is good, open, educated and creative conversion. About damn time!
Do you think it’s a good idea to incorporate Olympic Valley into a town?
A. Yes.
51.96%
(252)
B. No.
40.00%
(194)
C. Undecided.
8.04%
(39)
Yesterday nearly 70% were in favor. I hope Fred’s letter in the press and facebook helps eople make up their mind.
It’s about time: thanks to Valleygirl and crew for calling out for 3D at the DRC. Thanks FoSV (and the consultants) for this. …and the pics are really really helpful! [KSL take note: 3D is amazing isn’t it. So’s a easy-to-read NOP with all the sub-issues set out clearly].