 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
bertie bassett, Weren't Intrawest supposed to be building the new place above Arc 1800? Can't see that happening now (not a bad thing). I know the second phase of the development we bought in up in Arc2000 that was suppsoed to be built this year has been delayed for a few years. Won't effect us on our side of the apartments just means the other side have a view of the whole of the Arc2000 bowl (ok Summer a sh*t hole but Winter, yummy) until it is blocked by a 4 storey block next to them (and they paid more for that?) 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
thefatcontroller, yes, Intrawest are/were due to build EdenArc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
rob@rar, I assume you won't shed a tear if it ain't built?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
thefatcontroller, I don't really mind one way or another. It won't affect my view up to Mont Blanc, the extra traffic won't be much of an issue for us (and will probably help clear the snow on the road from resort centre up to our part of the resort) and it might add some extra facilities such as bars and restaurants within walking distance of our place. I know MGM (who built our development) were very keen to acquire the same plot of land, so if Intrawest pull out I'd guess MGM would go for it again (especially as P&V own MGM). The mayor of BSM (who used to be one of the Spirit1950 instructors) won't let that plot of land go undeveloped, so something will get built there at some point in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Was wondering when this would come out.
AFAIK, the Edenarc land is still with ITW-Europe - P&V have only bought the Arc1950 and Flaine management rights ( and that is a promise de vente, not yet signed and sealed, although near as dammit), not the whole European operations, which include a Swiss area, and a Bordeaux plot of some considerable size.
Interesting time ahead. Any 1950 owners who have not received their Owners' Association email on this subject, drop me a PM.
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
good news, hopefully no more stage 2 in Flaine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| thefatcontroller wrote: |
| bertie bassett, Weren't Intrawest supposed to be building the new place above Arc 1800? Can't see that happening now (not a bad thing). |
Dunno about your own personal reasons for this comment but i have to say having stayed in Arcs 1950 last winter. In my opinion it's the only one of the 4 main resort centres in Les Arcs that isn't a complete eyesore. If intrawest are due to develop any more of les arcs it surely can't be any worse than the monstrose 70's & 80's architecture that dominates the rest of the les arcs area.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
frank4short, I tend to agree (although not everywhere is a complete eyesore, some of the outlying bits of all the villages are quite nice). While Arc 1950 might not be to everyone's tastes I think it improves the resort considerably.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
moffatross, I think they cut down several thousand trees in the process.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
norris, I would not bet on it.Mgm are having real trouble finding suitable buiding plots of any size, so next stage , mgm version , here we come. Flaine only has 9,000 beds anyway so what are you complaining about?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
moffatross, Interesting viewpoint though i beg to differ. All of the newer built resort complexes will be infinitely more environmentally efficient no matter what they look like. So why not make them nice looking no matter whether or not they look twey.
On the issue of environmentally friendliness what are you viewpoints on resorts with artificial snow making facilities? Cause nowadays when skiing other than the carbon footprint of getting to the resort artificial snowmaking is the real elephant in the room.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
moffatross, from the pictures it looks rather like a lot of Val Thorens - ie pseudo Alpine. Pity the French don't have the confidence to build in a genuine French mountain style - say like La Grave. Still, it's an improvement on some earlier French monstrosities like, um, Flaine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
achilles, I think that even if you build a wintersports holiday camp in the 'style' of an authentic community it will still end up feeling like a parody of the genuine article although it might be more photogenic than the concrete blocks i.e. being mothballed for 7 months and no cow sheds, no broken down old tractors and no village school etc. it will have no soul. Much better in my mind to either build compact efficient blocks and pretty them up with some nice wooden cladding (small footprints, easier to service, maintain & heat) but better still, for real mountain communities to endorse, commission and service a few smaller chalet blocks themselves. The approach taken at say St Jean D'Arves felt that way to me i.e. the few lowish rise chalet blocks don't look out of place amongst their stone and wood chalets, houses and their original farm buildings as opposed to the Flaine like blocks over the hill in La Toussuire. The municipal shopping centre look and feel of the holiday buildings close by the stunning little old villages of Serre Chevalier is another way to get it all wrong from the aesthetic point of view though.
frank4short, but the Arc 1950 approach takes up much more space per head than it needs to although granted, the glazing, insulation & heating is sure to be more efficient than anything above it in Arc 2000 built 2 or 3 decades ago. As for snowmaking, I'm a real advocate but have an idealistic notion that wind turbines should be erected to power them. It shouldn't be beyond the wit of technology and engineering to use the intermittent power generated to pump-store water high up the mountain in milder months so as to be mostly self sufficient. I'd like to see that approach in Scotland's ski centres too but I'm sure that local Highland whingers and armchair naturalists will moan like crazy for blighting their real or virtual views of the hills with anything so frivolous even though 150 meter high turbines are being dumped in their hundreds away from their own backyards or routes to their favourite holiday destinations.
Helen Beaumont, I'm sure the tree loss was not the end of the environmental damage either. The screes and moraines extending from the coire under the Aiguille Rouge must once have been a fantastic natural habitat but criss-crossed as they will be now by bulldozed tracks and dammed / redirected watercourses, I'd guess that most fauna would have tried to find new homes the other side of the hill. Having said that though, as more development / beds are needed, these ought to be built as close as possible to the existing ones rather than picking fresh new sites but planners should endeavour to keep their designs as compact as possible too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| moffatross wrote: |
| ...... but better still, for real mountain communities to endorse, commission and service a few smaller chalet blocks themselves. ... |
Good thought.
| Quote: |
| .........wind turbines should be erected to power them. It shouldn't be beyond the wit of technology and engineering to use the intermittent power generated to pump-store water high up the mountain in milder months so as to be mostly self sufficient. ......... |
Now that does make some sense. In general I oppose wind turbines because for the grid they are expensive - and additionally need conventional power stations running permanently on standby. Moreover, if the 'standby' stations themselves don't have some standby, then the nation's (and even Europe's) grid becomes vulnerable when there is a major area of high pressure/low wind. However, in the case you suggest here, those arguments do not apply.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| frank4short wrote: |
| If intrawest are due to develop any more of les arcs it surely can't be any worse than the monstrose 70's & 80's architecture that dominates the rest of the les arcs area. |
Its Corbusier influence daaahhhling - it's practically a modernist gem 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
moffatross, there was a post on here somewhere about the environmental impact of 1950. My apartment in Serre Chevalier is in a small development of small chalets. There are still cows kept under some of the properties in the main street. Fortunately, Monetier hasn't got it quite as wrong as Villeneuve and Chantemerle did, although it still has some bad architectural points.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
's, heading as far away from resort as possible is usually on my mind. 
