Talk:Disney's Mineral King Ski Resort

Deleted material
I deleted the following material out of the article, because it seems to violate both the WP:No original research rule and the WP:NPOV rule. I'll leave it here: if editors can provide citations to this data, and write it up in an NPOV way, it would be valuable.


 * That legislation eventually stopped the Disney Development Corporation from moving forward into the ski resort business ever again. 


 * The voracious Sierra Club funded local media campaigns that filtered throgh the towns and hamlets within Tulare County proposing huge crowds would put tremendous pressure on public man-made and natural resources. Sierra Club contracted tax and bond study proposals were paraded in the local newspaper, the Vislaia Times-Delta. Since the state did provide marginal approval of the project's enviromental impact, transportation was the number one hurdle Disney would have had to overcome to meet the public's access demand to the Mineral King Valley and the proposed resort. Over 2.1 million dollars were spent in study just to address the transportation issue. The study reccommended an expanded capacity electric monorail system between the local village Three Rivers, and the MK Valley itself some 25 miles away. One monorail transport was to ferry 250 people at a time to and from their parked cars in Three Rivers, with a total of up to 4 trains in operation at a time. The double width track was to be suspended through and above the treelines to offer majestic views of the surrounding western Sierra Nevada moutain slope. It would have been the most ambitious engineered transportation project in California at that time. Over 2,700 full time jobs would have been created by the 5 year monorail project alone. Had the project come to fruition, the tax base of Tulare County would have conservatively experienced an 85.9 million dollar boost after it's first full length open ski season.

hike395 03:45, 3 December 2006 (UTC)