Author: Dave Noble
The IVGID Board of Trustees has begun investigating the potential replacement of Snowflake Lodge at Diamond Peak.
Unfortunately, a survey was sent out to community members two weeks ago that left some with the impression that the IVGID Board had already decided to construct a new Lodge that would cost $38 million with each parcel being assessed over $4,600—all of which are incorrect It should be noted that the survey was sent out on behalf of an individual who just so happens to be employed by Mt. Rose Ski Area, which is Diamond Peak’s closest competitor.
The information below provides what I believe is an accurate picture of what is really going on with Snowflake Lodge.
Why is the IVGID Board looking at a potential replacement of Snowflake Lodge?
Diamond Peak faces a significant food-service seating deficit. Existing capacity of around 500 seats is less than 50% of what it should be based on industry benchmarking. IVGID has known about this deficit for at least 40 years. Diamond Peak’s 1987 Master Plan proposed an additional 9,925 square feet of lodge facilities on the mountain to address the seating deficiency and meet demand. A 2015 planning document, meant to be an update to the 1987 Master Plan, similarly identified significant seating deficits, especially at Snowflake Lodge, contributing to crowded conditions at both the Base Lodge and Snowflake Lodge during peak periods.
The current Snowflake Lodge is sixty years old and has long passed its designed useful life. It is also past its functional life. There is no actual kitchen. All food must be prepared at the base facilities and transported up the mountain each day. The temporary outdoor bar and BBQ only operate in good weather. There is no dedicated food or trash storage area. The bathrooms are inadequate and do not comply with ADA accessibility requirements, and the building experiences frequent roof leaks among many other operational deficiencies. Finally, the building lacks any fire suppression system and does not meet other current health, safety or ADA standards, making any addition or remodeling infeasible. Once any of the walls are demolished or opened, the required cost to bring the facility up to current code would be prohibitive.
As a result, IVGID began a methodical and deliberate approach to determine whether and how to replace Snowflake Lodge.
What was the first step to determine whether and how to replace Snowflake Lodge?
The first step was to conduct a Needs Assessment to determine whether the past assumptions about seating deficits were still present and, if so, what sizing options to consider. In May of 2025, IVGID Staff, after following a public Request for Qualifications (RFQ) process, contracted with SE Group to conduct the Needs Assessment, which evaluated the existing facility, current winter operations, skier-service and seating needs, space programming, preliminary capital costs, operational requirements, and potential financial performance. As expected, the same seating deficit still exists at Diamond Peak, and in fact, has grown. The Needs Assessment also evaluated four conceptual scenarios, representing increasing levels of facility size, service, and operational intensity. The scenarios in the Needs Assessment were intended to assist the Board in evaluating potential options and did not establish a final building program, operating season, facility size, future use, or final cost. Importantly, the smallest base option evaluated would operate only during ski season to serve ski patrons and would fill approximately 50% of the existing seating deficit. The other three options built on the base option.
What was the second step to determine whether and how to replace Snowflake Lodge?
SE Group presented the Needs Assessment to the Board of Trustees at a public meeting held on March 25, 2026. The Board held further discussions on the underlying financial projections at a public meeting on April 8, 2026. Ultimately, the Board expressed interest in an approach between scenarios two and three (ski day lodge plus some winter + summer events) for purposes of moving forward in the process to replace Snowflake Lodge. The Board directed IVGID Staff to conduct a competitive architectural selection process.
The District issued a competitive RFQ for 30% architectural design services. Although some have questioned why the District did not solicit competitive fee proposals, Nevada law requires selection of architects based on professional competence and qualifications rather than competitive fees. NRS 625.530(3) establishes this selection process, and NAC 623.800 restricts the information architects may submit for evaluation on publicly funded projects. Fees are negotiated following selection, with the objective of reaching agreement on fair and reasonable compensation.
Twelve firms submitted qualifications and five were selected to advance to the second phase of the selection process, which included the submission of technical proposals and interviews. The District’s selection committee chose CCY Architects as the highest-ranked firm and proceeded to negotiate a contract, which was approved by the Board of Trustees at its public meeting on September 23, 2026. If a contract with CCY Architects could not be negotiated and approved, contract negotiations would shift to the second highest-ranked firm, but that was unnecessary in this case.
Importantly, no final building design, facility size, operating program, construction cost, or construction authorization has been approved at this stage of the review process.
What is the next step to determine whether and how to replace Snowflake Lodge?
The next step over the coming six to eight months is the most critical step to determine whether and how to replace Snowflake Lodge, in my opinion.
The professional-services contract with CCY Architects for the 30% design phase will be used to further evaluate and refine the building program, footprint, capacity, access, utilities, operating assumptions, preliminary project cost, and permitting requirements. Importantly, the design process will include opportunities for public and Board input and review. For example, CCY anticipates presenting the concept at a community engagement event in early 2027 and using the feedback from that engagement to inform the 30% design. Staff will also bring the design to the Board at a public meeting for review and direction.
The completed 30% design package will establish a proposed building program and design direction and provide a basis for future permitting work. Once that package is complete, the project team will prepare an Opinion of Probable Construction Cost—as part of its deliverables, the architect has retained an internal cost estimator to develop the Opinion of Probable Construction Cost. To aide in this endeavor, the District has also issued a request for proposals (RFP) for a contractor to assist the District in evaluating the Opinion of Probable Construction Cost. At the same time, IVGID Staff will prepare operating projections (revenue, expense, and operating income) for Diamond Peak with the addition of the proposed Lodge.
IVGID Staff anticipate returning to the Board with the design, cost estimate, and operating projections in spring of 2027 for direction on whether to proceed to the next phase, which would be the design development for construction documents. Following that next phase, IVGID Staff would issue a separate RFP to select a contractor to construct Snowflake Lodge.
What would be the cost to replace Snowflake Lodge?
While the needs assessment did include very preliminary capital cost estimates, simply put, it is too early in the review process to have reliable construction costs for the replacement of Snowflake Lodge. Those construction costs will be determined in the Opinion of Probable Construction Cost, referenced above.
Community members are often surprised at the cost of construction projects undertaken by IVGID. The biggest factor driving relatively higher costs for IVGID is the legal requirement that public agencies, such as IVGID, pay prevailing wages for all public works projects in excess of $100,000. (See Nevada Revised Statutes Chapter 338). This typically results in a 40-50% premium on capital costs. There is no way to avoid this requirement – IVGID cannot contract with a private party to construct the project on its behalf or enter into other creative arrangements as a workaround to this prevailing wage requirement.
However, there are certain construction materials and techniques that will be reviewed in efforts to reduce construction costs, while maintaining integrity, reliability, and longevity. One such example is mass timber construction, which is a building method that uses large, pre-manufactured engineered wood panels, columns, and beams instead of traditional steel and concrete, which reduces installation times and corresponding costs.
IVGID has also been successful in utilizing value engineering to bring down construction costs on other recent capital projects. For example, the recently completed effluent export pipeline project under HWY 28 was completed one year ahead of schedule and $13+ million under budget due in large part to value engineering between IVGID Staff and the contractor.
Community members often turn to their own experiences remodeling or rebuilding a residential home for cost comparisons, but that is not an apples-to-apples comparison. Constructing a public works facility that may see over a thousand visitors in a single day, such as a ski lodge, requires specialized materials and finishes that can withstand the daily use and abuse that no residential structure will ever have to withstand—such durability often comes at a hefty price.
How will construction costs be funded if replacement of Snowflake Lodge moves forward?
At this time, the Board has not formally discussed how the project would be financed. Given the nature of the project, it is likely that some form of bonding (borrowing) may be utilized. Bonding was infeasible for recent projects such as the Burnt Cedar pool (emergency replacement) and Incline Beach House (District on Fiscal Watch).
However, with IVGID’s dramatic improvement in compliance with all finance and accounting regulations, leading to a clean audit in FY 2025, with no exceptions or disclaimers, the Committee on Local Government Finance has indicated they expect to remove IVGID’s Fiscal Watch status upon completion of the timely audit for FY 2026 this November. That will allow IVGID to engage the bond market for potential funding of the replacement of Snowflake Lodge.
Bonding may be a more appropriate avenue to pursue, because revenues from the operation of the facility and Diamond Peak could be used to service the resulting debt payments. Thus, those that utilize the facilities effectively pay for the construction. In addition, it more closely spreads the costs of the facility over the life of the asset. Instead of paying for 100% of the costs in year one, bonding spreads the costs over a 20-30 year time period (a new Lodge should last 50+ years). That way, both current and future parcel owners and other Diamond Peak customers are paying the same fair share. Otherwise, future residents would be riding the coattails of current residents and unfairly enjoying a free ride when it comes to paying for the costs of the facility.
Why not just do nothing with Snowflake Lodge?
If the District does nothing to replace and expand Snowflake Lodge, closure or abandonment becomes imminent in the not-to-distant future. If that happens, IVGID will have lost its one opportunity to replace the existing Lodge with something that will address the existing seating deficit and contribute substantial revenues in support of the District’s recreational venues.
Diamond Peak is the only recreational venue in the District that consistently produces a profit for the District (typically ranging from $1-5 million annually depending on the quality of the ski season). Currently, 20% of the skier visits are residents and 80% are visitors. With a replacement of Snowflake Lodge, that ratio is not expected to change significantly. Given that and the heavily discounted rates for picture pass holders, the reality is that the District has and will continue to rely on visitors to heavily subsidize operations. Those profits have historically been used to offset the operating costs and capital investments for other recreational facilities (except beaches) in the District. That equates to approximately $120-600/year that parcel owners do not have to pay in annual recreational facility fees due to the profits generated by Diamond Peak.
Notwithstanding those annual profits, over the past 20 years, almost no monies have been spent on the skier experience at Diamond Peak. As a result, Diamond Peak has seen a consistent downward trend in skier visits. IVGID will never (and should not try to) compete with the Vail and Alterra-owned resorts, but IVGID must upgrade its lodges, lifts, and snowmaking infrastructure at Diamond Peak to stay relevant in its niche of the ski resort market. Otherwise, Diamond Peak will begin circling the drain and the golden goose will die, leaving residents with much higher annual recreation facility fees. North America is riddled with examples of ski areas that went belly up because of a lack of reasonable investment.
With its severe lack of seating capacity, Diamond Peak’s resort-wide realized performance in food and beverage revenue reaches only about 59% of comparable peers. More directly to the point, Snowflake Lodge contributes just a small portion of total food and beverage revenue for Diamond Peak. Doing nothing with Snowflake Lodge correspondingly does nothing to address this sizeable revenue shortfall.
Doing nothing also fails to leverage the Lodge as a place for events outside of the ski season. It makes no sense, in my mind, to let the Lodge sit vacant for seven months out of the year, if there are opportunities to develop net revenue that benefit the community. And those profits would help fund debt payments for years to come. Making the Lodge available for events outside of the ski season does not mean building a bigger Lodge. To the contrary, the capacity of the Lodge will be determined by the need to service skiers, which is the primary driver for undertaking this review in the first place.
What do I plan to do moving forward regarding Snowflake Lodge?
If reelected, I plan to continue to support the rational and methodical review of a potential replacement of Snowflake Lodge.
Some community members have chosen to peddle misinformation on social media to sew discontent and anger to try and sabotage the Board’s review process to determine whether and how to replace Snowflake Lodge. I do not pretend to understand their motivations, but their actions are a disservice to the community.
The Needs Assessment was a necessary first step to give the Board a starting point and to provide the architect some direction. The architect’s scope is organized into pre-design, conceptual design, and 30% design. The design process includes, among other things, proposed lodge programming, operational needs, site conditions, regulatory requirements, and project priorities, with multiple opportunities for both public and Board input and review.
Once the 30% design is submitted, the District will be able to have a probable construction cost estimate prepared and correspondingly determine what funding options are available. As I’ve stated above, once that information is made available to the Board in spring of 2027, a key Board decision will need to be made on whether to proceed or not. This will be based on all the information on size, cost, programming, and financing.
I have already spent hundreds of hours reviewing documents (master plans, reports, memos, assessments, etc.), participating in meetings, and talking with IVGID Staff and community members about the potential replacement of Snowflake Lodge. That holistic review is not something I would expect each community member to undertake, but it is certainly something that the community should expect of every Board member tasked with making a decision on the future of Snowflake Lodge and its impact on the District and the community as a whole—we have been elected to make those difficult decisions.
I encourage everyone who is interested to get informed and engage in the review process to determine whether and how to replace Snowflake Lodge.