 |
ColoradoSkiHistory.com
Preserving Ski History Since 2002
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
brad
Admin Staff
Joined: 24 Jul 2003
Posts: 1843
Location: Denver, CO
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:21 am Post subject: Battle Mountain Ski Area |
 |
|
Looks like some progress in Vail...here are a few articles from the Vail Daily:
| Quote: | Sizing up Battle Mountain ski resort
Developers plan 1,700 homes; Bachelor Gulch and Arrowhead have 1,400
J.K. Perry
Vail, CO Colorado
January 31, 2007
MINTURN — Visualize Arrowhead and Bachelor Gulch — combined they have about the same number of homes that are planned for a private ski resort on Battle Mountain.
The Ginn Co. wants to build 1,700 homes within four areas south of Minturn, while nearly 1,400 homes or hotel rooms exist in Arrowhead and Bachelor Gulch.
“It’s a valid comparison in that it’s something to give you an idea what it’s going to be like,” Minturn resident and business owner Harry Gray said. “I think that stuff on Battle Mountain is going to be comparable to Bachelor Gulch.”
Two housing areas on Battle Mountain might look similar in design to Arrowhead, with condos located in a small village and houses extending outward that are comparable in size and spacing to Bachelor Gulch.
Other development areas around Battle Mountain include Bolts Lake, where 700 condos grouped next to the golf course are planned. Condos, a few houses and retail stores are tentatively planned where the abandoned Gilman mining town is now.
The design among Arrowhead, Bachelor Gulch and Battle Mountain might be similar in some ways, but the feel will be different, Ginn Company spokesman Cliff Thompson said. Battle Mountain is reserved for home owners only, while anyone can eat, shop and ski at Arrowhead and Bachelor Gulch. Thus, more people go to these public resorts and more employees are needed, Thompson said.
“There’s elements where you can’t draw comparisons, but there are some places you can,” Thompson said.
Ellen Eaton lives in Edwards and works at Smith Eaton Real Estate. She says she is opposed to the development because it will increase traffic and create jobs Eagle County can’t fill.
Eaton said the comparison with Bachelor Gulch and Arrowhead is understated because the Battle Mountain project would have 300 more homes.
“I feel like people need to get a clear picture of how big this is going to be,” Eaton said. “I have a clear picture in my head and I don’t like what I see.”
Yellowstone influence
Jerry Jones, a longtime ski industry executive, compared the Battle Mountain project to the Yellowstone Club near Big Sky, Mont. Both resorts require property ownership to become members, and offer activities skiing, fly fishing, golf and other activities.
“I would think that Ginn is probably fashioning his project after Yellowstone Club,” Jones said.
The Yellowstone Club is larger in acreage, but the density of homes is significantly less than what’s planned for the resort outside Minturn. The Montana club plans to build a maximum of 862 houses, condos and townhouses on 13,400 acres, while the Ginn Co. wants its 1,700 homes built on 5,400 acres.
And the homes on Yellowstone are scattered across the property, Yellowstone Club officials said.
The land the Ginn Company owns is currently zoned by state standards, which means one home can be built for every 35 acres. The Ginn Co. wants to annex the land into Minturn and convince the town to change the zoning so more homes can be built.
Eaton said she prefers the land be developed according to Eagle County standards because fewer homes equals less environmental damage.
Clusters and critical mass
Gray is “underwhelmed” with the information coming from the Ginn camp and what Minturn gets in return for approving the development. But he said the planning of homes around small villages is well done, unlike Vail and other patchwork resort development in the valley.
Building the homes in clusters is a good idea because it allows parking, shuttles and other services to be centrally located, he said.
“It’s better than spreading it out,” Gray said. “When you cluster, you take advantage of the land. It’s easier to serve, more efficient and more economical.”
The village concept is novel, but similar resort developments have scattered villages across mountains and failed to draw enough visitors to participate in activities such as golf and swimming, Jones said. The visitors were spread too thin at too many locations to make the activities profitable, he said.
The Ginn Co. must centrally locate activities at one village to be feasible, Jones said.
“If you have multiple villages it becomes more difficult, instead of having a critical mass where everybody goes,” Jones said. “You want to build a critical mass somewhere.”
The Ginn Co. plans to locate most activities near its “Icon Building,” which it wants to build next to the golf course. However, Thompson said critical mass isn’t necessary for success because the Ginn Co. doesn’t plan to make its money from the activities.
“Public resorts have to drive a lot of people through their doors to be profitable,” he said. “We’re not going to do that. We don’t have to drive thousands of people through to make it successful.”
Employee pressure
Eaton says she worries the employees a resort this size needs greatly exceed Ginn Co. estimations and will create more traffic. She said the window washers, snow plowers, plumbers and housekeepers must all drive into the resort.
“I’ve seen this time and time again,” Eaton said. “Developers paint a pretty picture because they want their project approved.”
But in its development plans, the Ginn Co. says these maintenance workers have been accounted for. The developer plans to hire 776 employees — 30 percent from Eagle County and the remainder from Leadville and Lake County to the south.
Vail Associates contracts with Bachelor Gulch and Arrowhead to provide the resorts’ gate attendants, snow plowers and other employees, said Tony O’Rourke, executive director of the Beaver Creek Resort Company.
Those employees are recruited across the world and have the option to live at River’s Edge or the Tarnes apartment complexes, O’Rourke said.
Former Minturn Councilman Darell Wegert said he wonders whether Eagle County can handle more new jobs. Wegert and Gray suspect the company might steal employees from other resorts, such as Cordillera and Vail. In the battle to keep employees, Gray said resorts need to up the ante.
“There will be more pressure on employers to pay more and provide more employee housing,” he said. |
| Quote: | Battle Mountain by snowmobile
Tour of development finds steep glades, home sites that will be hidden by the mountain
Ginn Development of Battle Mountain
Steve Lynn
Vail, CO Colorado
February 11, 2007
MINTURN — Drive past Minturn along the Eagle River a few years from now and you won’t see the Ginn Development Co.’s proposed private development on Battle Mountain — even if it’s built.
In the present day, continue a couple miles past Gilman village along Highway 24 and a black metal gate on the left blocks access to a winding, paved road that eventually turns into mud. The homes will sit farther up, tucked behind Battle Mountain facing Highway 24.
When the homes are built, you’ll only be able to see them from Camp Hale, miles away between Red Cliff and Leadville.
The company wants to build 1,700 homes on 5,400 acres on Battle Mountain, south of Minturn. In a process that takes several steps, Minturn has given conceptual approval to the plan, but has not yet formally approved housing developments on the land, purchased by the company for about $32.75 million, said Cliff Thompson, spokesman for the Ginn Development Co.
“The applications we’ve made to the town are voluminous — they must weigh about 40 pounds,” Thompson said.
Public input
The public gets a chance at 6 p.m., Wednesday, to express their opinions about the Battle Mountain ski resort. The meeting is at Minturn Town Hall, 302 Pine St.
Along the roadside beyond the gate lie a few piles of hundreds of neatly stacked trees. The company’s workers have been cutting them down because of bark beetle infestations in the region. Plenty of trees still stand — but one imagines some of the new groves are where the company will build homes.
You may never get to ski or snowboard along the development’s gentle, mostly pristine powder-filled slopes, where Thompson and Director of Security Mark Allen gave me and another journalist a snowmobile tour Friday. That is, you won’t get up there if Allen has anything to do with it.
It’s no secret that Battle Mountain is a great place to play. It’s evident from a lone, outlaw snowmobile track at the bottom of a 15-foot cliff at Fire Pit, the aptly named bowl near the Willow Creek drainage. Farther south along the drainage, a few cliffs of reasonable heights drop like stairs, an audacious line for even the most daring.
An inexperienced snowmobiler, I gunned a company snowmobile up a ferociously steep slope nearby. Just before the top, the tread slipped and so did the sled — back down the steeps despite my attempt at a Vulcan grip on the brake. I stomped my boots on the snow, but to no avail.
Thirty feet later, sled still tearing downward, I briefly considered jumping off and letting it plummet to the bottom. (I was later glad I stayed mounted, as I didn’t closely read the release form I signed earlier.)
Finally, the brake worked. With some help, I maneuvered the sled back to the trail.
The slope’s steepness is typical of much of the ski area — where houses will be interspersed among some of the runs — though gentler gladed hills are abundant, too.
Thompson, who’s lived in the Vail Valley for 27 years, said he the vertical drop of the longest ski run is about 2,900 feet. Most of the others are 1,200 feet, he said.
So if you’ve never been up on the private property, trust me that it’s a beautiful area, though some of it can be seen from Vail’s back bowls. Better yet, befriend someone who buys a house or condominium there — you’ll see. |
_________________
-Brad
ColoradoSkiHistory.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
brad
Admin Staff
Joined: 24 Jul 2003
Posts: 1843
Location: Denver, CO
|
| Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
from SAM
| Quote: | PRIVATE RESORT IN COLORADO WINS PRELIMINARY APPROVAL
May 24, 2007
SAM Magazine — Minturn, Co., May 23, 2007 — A private resort outside of Vail has won preliminary approval from the Minturn Planning Commission. Last night the Commission recommended that the Minturn Town Council approve the Ginn Development Company’s private ski and golf community located outside the town on Battle Mountain. The proposed ski area, which would incorporate the abandoned mining town of Gilman, is also a superfund site. As part of their development plan, the Guinn Company will assist in the restoration of areas contaminated from years of mining.
The approval from Minturn’s Planning Commission contains plenty of caveats, including addressing road safety and traffic volume on Highway 24, employee housing and wildlife concerns. The preliminary approval comes after 10 public meetings and sets the stage for the fourth ski area in an area, which already includes mega resorts Vail and Beaver Creek, in addition to more modest Ski Cooper. |
_________________
-Brad
ColoradoSkiHistory.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
porter
Expert
Joined: 28 Sep 2005
Posts: 358
|
| Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I've been looking for a conceptual trail map ... is there anything? I havent' seen one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brad
Admin Staff
Joined: 24 Jul 2003
Posts: 1843
Location: Denver, CO
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From Vail Daily
| Quote: | Private ski resort gets its first OK
Steve Lynn,
Vail CO, Colorado
February 21, 2008
MINTURN, Colorado — A proposed private ski resort received unanimous preliminary approval from Minturn town councilors Wednesday night after 21⁄2 years of meetings.
The vote is not final. Town councilors must vote a second time to annex the Ginn Development Co.’s more than 4,300 acres into the town of Minturn.
Ginn wants to build 1,700 homes and condominiums, a private ski resort and a golf course on and around Battle Mountain, south of Minturn.
Town councilors will not give residents the chance to vote on the annexation, said Gary Suiter, Minturn’s interim town manager. To have a referendum of Minturn residents, a petition with signatures from about 80 registered Minturn voters must be submitted to the town.
Town councilors voted with some reservation after a disagreement on how residents on Ginn’s property would be taxed and how that revenue would be used to make improvements to Minturn, such as a recreation center and a bike path.
Town councilors said they had asked Ginn to agree that the revenue for those kind of improvements in Minturn would flow into the town forever in case Ginn’s projections of its tax revenue to the town turned out too be not enough.
The conflict
Ginn did not want to commit to giving the town that money forever but agreed that Minturn should get a guaranteed amount of revenue for a certain amount of time, said Bill Weber, Ginn senior vice president.
Minturn and Ginn attorneys were told to work out an agreement before the next vote, scheduled for Feb. 27 at 7 p.m.
The conflict left some uncertainty as to whether councilors would vote the same way next week.
“I want to make sure everything’s funded,” Councilman Tom Sullivan said.
Cliff Thompson, director of communications for Ginn, said he hoped the difference would be resolved.
“Until there’s an agreement, it’s not a done deal,” Thompson said. “It’s still under negotiations. That’s all.”
Town Councilwoman Kelly Brinkerhoff asked town councilors to wait until the next hearing to explain their votes to Minturn residents.
“I think it would be best to hold off lengthy explanations,” she said.
What’s next
Minturn resident Kelly Toon, who has attended some of the Town Council meetings, said he trusted the councilors’ decision.
And if the annexation finally is approved, town councilors will be able to have some say on what Ginn’s property looks like in the end, Toon said.
“Minturn still has a chance to change and manipulate it,” he said.
Town councilors will vote again, probably later this year, to finally approve or deny the project, Suiter said. |
_________________
-Brad
ColoradoSkiHistory.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
trooper1556
Ski Patroller
Joined: 20 Sep 2005
Posts: 447
Location: Steamboat Springs, CO
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | GINN COMPANY SCORES MINTURN APPROVAL FOR PRIVATE SKI AREA
February 28, 2008
SAM Magazine—Minturn, Colo., Feb. 28, 2008—A major new ski area development proposed by the Ginn Company took a big step forward with the unanimous approval of the plans by the Minturn Town Council.
The Council approved both the annexation of the proposed development to the town and gave preliminary approval to the project. A second vote later in 2008 will give final approval (or deny) the project. At this stage, the town is expected to grant that final approval.
The small mountain town outside of Vail and Beaver Creek has been considering the development for nearly three years. Largely spared the high-dollar second home boom that has overtaken nearby Vail, Minturn has retained a down-home, funky character. There’s no doubt that the project will change that, to some extent. The Ginn Company expects to build 1,700 homes and condos in addition to the private ski resort. A golf course is expected complete the development.
But while some residents have expressed dismay over Ginn’s plans, there’s no doubt that Minturn will benefit from the project. Tax revenues for Minturn are expected to range from $6 million to $10 million a year. Plus, Ginn’s plans include employee housing, bike paths, a recreation center and additional cleanup of the former Superfund site of Gilman, which remains heavily contaminated from mining.
And, while the ski area will remain private, residents of Minturn and nearby Red Cliff are expected to have limited access to the slopes once the ski lifts are installed.
The proximity of the ski area to Vail also has some locals remembering the fate of the private ski/golf enclave of Arrowhead. That private ski area is now part of Beaver Creek. Could this new ski area end up linked with Vail? Stranger things have happened. |
I didn't know arrowhead was ever private. anybody know when it opened to the public? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scott
Expert
Joined: 19 Nov 2005
Posts: 257
Location: CO
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Arrowhead was a small private resort for years.
Beaver creek extended no further than strawberry park. 15 years ago Vail Resorts bought arrowhead and connected it to BC by building Bachelors Gulch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brad
Admin Staff
Joined: 24 Jul 2003
Posts: 1843
Location: Denver, CO
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
trooper1556
Ski Patroller
Joined: 20 Sep 2005
Posts: 447
Location: Steamboat Springs, CO
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Malamute
Beginner
Joined: 04 May 2008
Posts: 22
|
| Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So this area will be like "The Yellowstone Club?"
Does anyone know what some of the snowfall averages are up there? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brad
Admin Staff
Joined: 24 Jul 2003
Posts: 1843
Location: Denver, CO
|
| Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yea, trail map is kinda lame. oh well, i'm always happy skiing vail and beaver creek.
_________________
-Brad
ColoradoSkiHistory.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FLSkier
Advanced
Joined: 01 May 2008
Posts: 86
Location: South Florida
|
| Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The trail map is really lame. ill be happy with a basin and snowmass. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
trooper1556
Ski Patroller
Joined: 20 Sep 2005
Posts: 447
Location: Steamboat Springs, CO
|
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 8:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
i agree with the lameness... advanced & extreme terrain doesn't sell million dollar homes & condos though... groomed green/blue cruiser do  (yes malamute, it will be private like The Yellowstone Club, except Minturn residents will be able to ski it as part of the anexation deal)
Snowfall should be very similar to Vail & BC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
trooper1556
Ski Patroller
Joined: 20 Sep 2005
Posts: 447
Location: Steamboat Springs, CO
|
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_9335577
| Quote: | Minturn voters OK ski resort plan
By Jason Blevins
The Denver Post
Article Last Updated: 05/21/2008 02:26:40 PM MDT
Record voter turnout delivered developer Bobby Ginn a decisive victory for his planned private ski and golf resort above Minturn.
A record 367 voters cast ballots in Tuesday's special election and 87 percent supported the Minturn Town Council's February decision to annex the Ginn project.
Ginn, a developer of several luxury golf resorts in Florida and the southeast, plans 1,700 homes in three villages, a 1,200-acre private ski hill and a golf course on 5,300 acres above Minturn he bought in 2004 for $32.75 million.
He requested the town annex his Battle Mountain property. In exchange, Ginn promised $180 million in benefits to the town, including ski passes, a new community center, a bike trail, parks and a water treatment plant.
After three years of negotiations over 19 meetings, the Minturn Town Council in February unanimously approved Ginn's annexation request, with several conditions that included employee housing, traffic restrictions, mine clean-up and wildlife protection.
A group of local residents pushed the approval onto a town ballot, arguing the town's 1,000 residents needed a voice in the annexation decision. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FLSkier
Advanced
Joined: 01 May 2008
Posts: 86
Location: South Florida
|
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| trooper1556 wrote: | i agree with the lameness... advanced & extreme terrain doesn't sell million dollar homes & condos though... groomed green/blue cruiser do (yes malamute, it will be private like The Yellowstone Club, except Minturn residents will be able to ski it as part of the anexation deal)
Snowfall should be very similar to Vail & BC |
What about Aspen? Aren't there million dollar homes selling there? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brad
Admin Staff
Joined: 24 Jul 2003
Posts: 1843
Location: Denver, CO
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_12656796
Minturn residents wait out promises, delays, disappointment
Jason Blevins
The Denver Post
| Quote: | MINTURN — When Frank Lorenti walks his kids down the street to the park, they share a highway with semi trucks. When Liz Campbell fills a bath at her home, the water runs brown.
With their property taxes set to grow and the town's budget shriveling, Lorenti and Campbell — both longtime residents of this former railroad town of 1,100 — worry about sidewalks and clean water. And they wonder about a new recreation center, a bike path, a new sewer-treatment plant, college money for locals.
All are things Bobby Ginn promised to Minturn when the Town Council and voters overwhelmingly agreed last year to annex 4,340 acres of the Florida developer's mountain land above town. Ginn's plan for Battle Mountain includes 1,700
The abandoned mining town of Gillman is part of Ginn's proposed development above Minturn. (Andy Cross | The Denver Post)luxury homes in a private golf and ski community.
Bill Weber, Ginn's vice-president in charge of Battle Mountain, describes the pace of the project as "prudent."
But more than a year after voters approved Ginn's promise-laden project, there are no plans for a recreation center or water-treatment plant or new sidewalks. Town leaders are budgeting as if Ginn had never been to Minturn. And residents are left looking to Florida, where several Ginn communities are embroiled in bankruptcy, lawsuits and plummeting values.
"He's promised a lot and nothing has come to fruition," said Campbell, founder of the Radio Free Minturn station. "He did such a good job selling the council and then the council sold us his bill of goods. It's time we hold the council accountable."
In exchange for embracing the plan that would quadruple the town's number of homes, Ginn promised Minturn a $180 million package that included tax revenue, jobs, employee housing, funding for public land acquisition, new parks, bike trails and a scholarship fund.
Voters approved the council's deal with Ginn by an overwhelming 87 percent.
It was a hard sell to residents reluctant to have second-home mansions alongside their working-class houses. But Ginn pushed hard because annexation allowed him to develop at a higher density than county rules permit and gave the project access to Minturn's water.
Today, about the only sign of Ginn in Minturn is a surge of real estate speculation on the coattails of his project. Those sales led the Eagle County assessor to up Minturn's valuation by 35 percent this year, meaning property taxes will climb.
Ginn has given the town $11.6 million to start on upgrades and projects. But that money is locked in an escrow account pending the outcome of a land dispute lawsuit against Ginn by Eagle County landowner Jeff Tucker, who already has lost several cases involving his claim to the land.
The developer also last month pledged more than $30 million for Pueblo water rights for his Battle Mountain project.
"That translates to me as a commitment to the development of this project," Minturn's interim town manager, Gary Suiter, said.
Not everyone sees it that way.
Don "Toby" Tobin, a Florida real estate broker who closely follows Ginn's trouble in the Southeast, views the Pueblo water deal as a move to shine Battle Mountain for other developers interested in taking the reins from here.
Motives for Ginn's recent enlistment of a Canadian asset-management firm to help with the Battle Mountain project are also a matter of perspective: a sign he is either loosening his grip on the project or plowing onward in a down economy.
Default, liquidations by Ginn
Either
way, brewing trouble for Ginn in the Southeast, where he has defaulted on a $675 million loan and jettisoned three golf resort communities in liquidation sales, has some Minturn locals concerned about the Colorado project.
In March, Minturn's Town Council retooled the town budget as if there was no Ginn project and no Ginn revenues. The developer's monthly payments to the town — reimbursement of its cost for reviewing the project — have dwindled to about $15,000 per month from about $25,000 a month, Suiter said.
"We did a whole exercise to see if we can survive without Ginn," said Suiter, noting that the town carved $400,000 from its annual budget of about $1.5 million.
"We didn't want to have all our eggs in one basket, saying Ginn will come and save the day."
Weber acknowledges timelines have been delayed as the economy sinks but said no deadlines have passed. Ginn has two years — with a possible one-year extension — from the council's February 2008 annexation approval to submit a final development application.
Weber said he is working on a wildlife protection plan for the U.S. Division of Fish and Wildlife as well as a plan to clean up mining waste on the property — a portion of which is a Superfund cleanup site guarded by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Mike Holmes, project manager for the EPA's cleanup efforts at the old Eagle Mine site, said Ginn's wetlands impact water-storage plan for the company's recent water buy is all the EPA has seen from the developer in the past year.
"For a while we were talking about golf course development on the (Eagle Mine's) tailing piles, but they have backed off that now. Now it's just water-storage plans," Holmes said. Those plans include expanding Bolt's Lakes to increase storage capacity.
After the vote, free beer
Without seeing any tangible progress on Ginn's promises to Min turn, residents can only remember the round of drinks the developer bought at the local saloon after the annexation vote.
"It's like Manhattan. The Indians got beads and we got a free beer," said Lorenti, who helped push the council- approved annexation to a townwide vote and runs the told-you-so website minturntimes.com.
"The Town Council spent years on this project. Maybe they did get us a good deal, but where are the benefits? Where is the money? All we have now are empty promises. And we were blinded by those promises," Lorenti said.
Hilton Wiener, an investor and attorney who bought in Ginn's Tesoro and Reunion projects in Florida and now is part of the lawsuits against the developer, has sharp advice for Min turn residents.
"We . . . think the people in Minturn must be drinking some sort of Ginn-made Kool-Aid," Wiener said. "But don't listen to me. Get on a plane and go to (Ginn's struggling properties) Tesoro or Bella Collina and you will understand then that no one should take anything he says on faith. It's not opinion. It is fact he has not delivered."
Ginn has ceded some control of Battle Mountain by bringing in Montreal's Crave Real Estate. Crave, a management and development firm that is a division of Ginn's longtime financial partner, Philadelphia-based Lubert- Adler, recently took day-to-day management control of Ginn's Burke Mountain ski resort in Vermont.
Management groups have also taken control at Ginn golf resorts in Florida.
Weber said Crave is in Minturn to "help us manage our assets and assist the developer."
City prepared for a flip
Tobin sees the introduction of operational consultants like Crave as Ginn's getting phased out by Lubert- Adler, which contributes most of the funding for Ginn's projects and harvests a lion's share of the profits.
If Ginn does leave Minturn, it would not require a new deal with the town.
"From our very first meeting, I told Bill (Weber) that the town was going to approach all negotiations as if Ginn is going to flip the property," said town manager Suiter.
"He said they were not going to flip it . . . but that is very common in the development industry. So we drafted all the documents and ordinances so that this deal stays with the land, not the developer." |
_________________
-Brad
ColoradoSkiHistory.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
