Jump to content


Mineral King Ski Resort


11 replies to this topic

#1 SkiBachelor

    Forum Administrator

  • Administrator II
  • 6,242 Posts:
  • Interests:Hi, I'm Cameron!

Posted 28 January 2004 - 10:27 PM

It looks like in 1966 that Disney actually had plans of building a multi million dollar ski resort of its time in the Sierras. Disney was planning on starting with 14 lifts and the mountain had 6 bowls. There would be underground parking, and American alpine lodges above. However, environmentalist put a stop to this resort before this place could ever get any magic. Many other ski areas were also opening like Aspen Snowmass and Mt. Snow. If this resort would have opened a few years earlier, this would be like one of the biggest ski resorts in North America today. I will try to dig some more info about this place. :D
- Cameron

#2 KZ

    Multipurpose Machine

  • Industry II
  • 2,087 Posts:
  • Interests:Howdy folks, Im Zack and I live in California.

Posted 29 January 2004 - 07:04 AM

sounds cool
Zack

#3 vancouverguy

    Established User

  • Member
  • 229 Posts:
  • Interests:Ski lifts, natrually.

Posted 29 January 2004 - 08:25 AM

Sounds like it could have been an amazing place.

#4 Kelly

    Established User

  • Administrator II
  • 3,085 Posts:

Posted 29 January 2004 - 09:04 AM

Wally Ballenger was the ski patrol director at Squaw Valley in the Early 70s. He nearly lost his life performing snow studies at Mineral King. He found that many avalanche paths go across this valley and up the other side! This might be another possible explanation for Disneys pulling the plug. I believe he wrote a few books about his industry experiences.
www.ropetech.org

#5 CAski

    Established User

  • Member
  • 363 Posts:

Posted 29 January 2004 - 03:40 PM

Do you know where this resort would have been?!!! It was planned to be right in the middle of Sequoia National Park!!!! If it had gone in, countless dozens of millenia-old sequoia groves would have been destroyed. Mineral King basin contains a high density of these groves. It truely would have been an environmental disaster! There are some areas that are too ecologically unique to be destroyed for the sake of a new ski resort.
"Quo usque tandem abutere, Catalina, patientia nostra?" -Cicero

#6 KZ

    Multipurpose Machine

  • Industry II
  • 2,087 Posts:
  • Interests:Howdy folks, Im Zack and I live in California.

Posted 29 January 2004 - 09:58 PM

Wow, you guys know so much about the place and i know nothing or have heard nothing about it. I would like to know more... it sounds very interesting.
Zack

#7 SkiBachelor

    Forum Administrator

  • Administrator II
  • 6,242 Posts:
  • Interests:Hi, I'm Cameron!

Posted 29 January 2004 - 10:11 PM

Total cost to built this resort was going to cost $80 million back in the 1960s. To build this resort would cost like $800,000,000 to a billion dollars to build today.
- Cameron

#8 SkiBachelor

    Forum Administrator

  • Administrator II
  • 6,242 Posts:
  • Interests:Hi, I'm Cameron!

Posted 29 January 2004 - 10:23 PM

Quote

Walt Disney was planning a ski resort for the valley, with access to be provided by a monorail. Disney, an avid fan of downhill skiing, had visited Mineral King in the 1950s, and had quietly asked the Forest Service if it was still interested in entertaining development proposals for Mineral King.
I guess this resort would have the Disney traditions. I wonder how a monorail would work in the snow. :---:

http://www.faultline...neralking1.html

Here is a picture of Mineral King.

Attached File(s)

  • Attached File  efork.jpg (16.77K)
    Number of downloads: 36

- Cameron

#9 KZ

    Multipurpose Machine

  • Industry II
  • 2,087 Posts:
  • Interests:Howdy folks, Im Zack and I live in California.

Posted 30 January 2004 - 07:02 AM

Very interesting. The sierra club wanted a resort, then when it was almost built, they filed a lawsuit. That sure would have been some resort.
Zack

#10 CAski

    Established User

  • Member
  • 363 Posts:

Posted 30 January 2004 - 12:16 PM

I don't know, even discounting the fact that the area is and was too ecologically sensitive for a resort, it seems to me that Disney probably have made it to commercialized, like disneyland. The descriptions in the article are also rather discouraging. It seems that there would have been too many lifts for the area, with many redundancies. It would not have been like Squaw: any extreme terrain would have been blasted to make it more accessable. The article mentions the blasting of boulders. Squaw has indeed blasted boulders, but only for lifts and not for the runs themselves, if I remember correctly. Also, it seems as though the lift system might have been more redundant than Squaw.
"Quo usque tandem abutere, Catalina, patientia nostra?" -Cicero

#11 SkiBachelor

    Forum Administrator

  • Administrator II
  • 6,242 Posts:
  • Interests:Hi, I'm Cameron!

Posted 30 January 2004 - 02:06 PM

I think many resorts blast to make runs down the hill. Blackcomb has this really cool section that you ski through when coming off the 7th Heaven or Glacier Express lifts.
- Cameron

#12 iceberg210

    Bald Eagle Lifts: Defying Gravity

  • Administrator II
  • 1,079 Posts:
  • Interests:42

Posted 01 February 2004 - 08:15 PM

Many hills are blasted to make access to runs as another person said that Internationa;e at Alpental the entrance anyway was blasted out as to gain access to that hill.
Erik Berg
Bald Eagle Lifts: Defying Gravity
http://www.baldeaglelifts.com





2 User(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users