10 years from now.....

[4aprice]

hmmm, not sure about the madonna side of Morse. That could be possible. All I know is I took a ski area management class at UVM and at the time smuggs was looking to extend the lifts and terrain on Morse to it's summit, but there was a beech stand within 500 yards, so it was a no go. we actually hiked up in there for class to look at the trees and see all the claw marks on them from the bears. The Madonna side might be far enough away to expand though.

ski area expansion is tough business with all the environmentalists out there. If I had it my way, I'd have a gondola connecting from the base of Spruce Peak un and over to the base of Madonna and ski trails down the back side of Madonna to create the most massive ski experience in the east.

...but that's just me

Deadhead:

You just hit dead on what I think is the biggest mistakes both those resorts are making. The combination of those two resorts would give the greatest skiing this side of the Mississippi. When I was young we had a seasonal rental in the (at that time Madonna Mt) village at Smugglers. We used to ski over to Spruce and buy a single ride back up it was easy and fun. Can you imagine now with the Villages on both sides, the transfer lift between Spruce and Mansfield. This would be the best version of what the Europeans call a ski safari. I could see skiing over to the Toll House for a lunch and skiing back could fill up a whole day. I was really bummed when I saw the alignment of the new Spruce lift knowing that the connection was probably gone. (I know it was done for wind) I also understand that the two resorts hate each other.

Alex

Lake Hopatcong, NJ

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

Kenny -

The simple answer is that the Tree Island Pod on that map was renamed the Lookout Pod, presumably for marketing reasons. I'm not sure how seriously the terrain covered by the "Lookout Pod" on that map was considered for expansion. The 25 mile limit would have had to be lifted/modified in order to go forward with both expansions, so I suspect it was more of a dream than anything else.

Tin, don't take this the wrong way, but you always seem to set yourself up as an expert on the terrain of every mountain in the Northeast, even mountains you don't ski like Whiteface. Is it something to do with what you do for a living, you just like maps, whats your deal? Again this is not an attack, I'm just curious.

 

[kingslug]

When you look at the expansions the ski areas run by NYS are undertaking it's hard to blame the private ones for being resentful.

That said, I think the better NYS areas become the more ski business will stay in state and that's a good thing for the state economy.

Plus, there is no on site lodging at Belleayre as compared to Hunter and Windham, close by but only small inns. I think Hunter and Windham are worried about losing their monopoly on that in the area...too bad.

 

[arik]

I read through this thread and am going to repeat my comment from August 2007 as it seems a bit more possible now.

Mount Snow could be the most improved area in the Northeast if the water project goes through, they continue on the good course they have charted this year in terms of improving the snowmaking, they might just make enough money to reopen to Haystack and connect the two areas into a fantastic large open high ski area close to lots of people.

I have seen so many improvements at Mount Snow this year that I think it's possible. The terrain between the two areas looks really sweet and Haystack has it's own water.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

Tin, don't take this the wrong way, but you always seem to set yourself up as an expert on the terrain of every mountain in the Northeast, even mountains you don't ski like Whiteface. Is it something to do with what you do for a living, you just like maps, whats your deal? Again this is not an attack, I'm just curious.

No offense taken. I don't think I "set myself up as an expert" and I certainly don't claim to be - note the caveats in my Lookout Pod post like "presumably" or "I suspect". The re-branding of the Tree Island Pod as the Lookout Pod in particular, however, is hard to dispute given where the lift/trails are known to be going in. AS a general rule, I've just always had a huge fascination maps/geography/topography/geology as well as the sport and design/planning aspects of skiing, Kind of a bulls-eye in the center of several of my passions. I will admit to collecting copies of just about every master plan I've come across and I've spent more hours than I care to recount tooling around on Topozone. Whenever I go skiing at my home mountain (SB) or other hills, I always take time to study the topography and weather issues so I can have a head start in sniffing out where the best pockets of terrain may be on any given day.

In short, when I know something, I'll say it. When I'm not sure about something, but feel strongly, I'll provide my opinion and make my case. And when I'm not sure about something but am interested, I'll give my $0.02 with the proper caveats. I probably over-reach sometimes, but no one is perfect.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

I read through this thread and am going to repeat my comment from August 2007 as it seems a bit more possible now.

Mount Snow could be the most improved area in the Northeast if the water project goes through, they continue on the good course they have charted this year in terms of improving the snowmaking, they might just make enough money to reopen to Haystack and connect the two areas into a fantastic large open high ski area close to lots of people.

I have seen so many improvements at Mount Snow this year that I think it's possible. The terrain between the two areas looks really sweet and Haystack has it's own water.

I thiink that's really, really unlikely to happen, though it would be pretty cool. Haystack appears as though it's going to be mired in uncertainty for a while, and if Mt. Snow gets the West Lake project done, that pretty much obviates the need for the Haystack water. The environmental obstacles to an interconnect would be substantial, and I suspect that Peaks is far more content to optimize and harvest profits from what they know (roughly the current Mt. Snow footprint) than to take a HUGE gamble and buy Haystack while committing to the massive capital that would be required to interconnect (at least two high speed lifts and 10-20 trails, most/all with snowmaking - that's about $20MM not including the purchase of Haystack).

 

[drjeff]

I read through this thread and am going to repeat my comment from August 2007 as it seems a bit more possible now.

Mount Snow could be the most improved area in the Northeast if the water project goes through, they continue on the good course they have charted this year in terms of improving the snowmaking, they might just make enough money to reopen to Haystack and connect the two areas into a fantastic large open high ski area close to lots of people.

I have seen so many improvements at Mount Snow this year that I think it's possible. The terrain between the two areas looks really sweet and Haystack has it's own water.

I think that 10 years from now, Mount Snow will be a very well polished machine, but on the outside, very little dramtic terrain change. Sure, they'll be LOTS of fan guns and likely 100% snowmaking, and some upgraded lifts, but you'll still have the majority of what's there now, and I'm fine with that. You *might* also see some significant base area redevelopment too.

The Haystack thing, well I'd say that it's as likely to happen as Mount Snow drawing 2 MILLION skiers/riders per season in the next 10 years. The number of hurdles they'd need to jump to pull something like that off is almost endless, and if all the planets aligned and they could get over all the hurdles, then realistically you'd be looking a one HUGE capital expenditure to pull it off (The numbers I've heard from a few real estate agents recently about Haystack is that you could buy the place yourself as is currently for somewhere around 15 million - and IT NEEDS work now to reopen it given the basically 1 giant partially finished construction area that the main base area currently it).

I'd LOVE to see major positive changes at Mount Snow in the next decade, not just for my skiing enjoyment, but also for the value of the real estate I own up there But my hunch is that while what they use to make snow and where they get their water from will change alot, the topography and location of where that snow is going will be very similar to what it is today.

 

[from_the_NEK]

Thanks.. That map does seem to be drawn poorly, especially since even HPD finds it hard to follow. It flattens everything out too much making it mighty confusing (at least to me).

Does this help visualize?
The terrain in the "Lookout Pod" does not look all that interesting, IMO.

 

[kcyanks1]

Does this help visualize?
The terrain in the "Lookout Pod" does not look all that interesting, IMO.

Thanks, that is very helpful! Makes it far clearer how the Tree Island Pod is distinguishable from the Slides, and makes me see where Tin is coming from better. Seems like the Lookout Pod is over a ridge--connecting to the main trails would be quite an expansion.

 

[from_the_NEK]

Thanks, that is very helpful! Makes it far clearer how the Tree Island Pod is distinguishable from the Slides, and makes me see where Tin is coming from better. Seems like the Lookout Pod is over a ridge--connecting to the main trails would be quite an expansion.

Another view...

Only 900 ft of vert over 3300 ft of distance (~15 degree slope) and a long way back to the bottom of the mtn. That would be a very expensive expansion (monetarily and environmentally) for some questionable terrain. I would guess this would never happen.

 

[tjf67]

You clearly know more than me about Whiteface, so I won't try to push the point about Tree Island != Lookout beyond this post. If you look at the PDF I posted before, there is this image:

http://www.vinsweb.org/assets/pdf/ORDA2004.pdf

This seems to show that the Tree Island Pod is to looker's right of the current trails on Whiteface Mountain, in the vicinity of the slides, whereas the Lookout Pod is even further to looker's right (presumably on Lookout Mtn, but Tin suggested maybe not). While I seem to have been completely wrong about 2 new peaks, this at least has the idea of 2 separate considered expansion areas. Seems like they are only going with 1 of the two -- Lookout but not Tree Island.

Maybe I'm reading the picture wrong though or the picture is based on misinformation, and it's really all the same thing.

Tree Island POD and Lookout POD were combined into what was ultimately approved as Lookout Mountain POD or (mountain expansion) lookout mtn is the high hump immediately adjacent to lookers right of slide 5.

On that map replace tree island pod name w/ lookout, forget about that second expansion area labeled lookout pod. the pod labeled tree island pod on that map pretty much represents what is approved as lookout mtn however the trials that are shown there have all been reconfigured.

the new lift base will be just below where facelift drops you off. it will bring you to the top of lookout mtn about 500 feet above and lookers right of the top of slide 5. (side note it will be a shot trek to the memorial highway just below what people call the Wilmington turn..)

what was approved included two expert trails that will run pretty much fall line down to about 300 feet below and skiers left of the current summit quad - on easy way. One more expert trail will shoot off the intermediate trail and drop right down the fall line to the new lift (pretty much where its mapped on your jpeg). the intermediate trail will follow the second ridge line and plummet down to right above kids campus dropping out onto lower boreen almost at the same elevation as where the terrain park starts. If you follow the black line on your map that represents the boundary between those two pods you will basically be following what was approved for the intermediate trail.

when looking right from the summit quad out over the slides the first high point after slide 5 is lookout mtn and where the new lift will drop off and all trails start. two expert trails will run on opposite sides of the lifeline and come together approximately 500 feet above the new lift base. the intermediate trail will start at the lift summit (lookout mtn) and follow along the second ridge line you see from the summit quad before descending to above kids campus.

intermediate trial is over two miles long. vertical feet will run from 1800 to 2200 depending on which trial you use w/ the intermediate being the most vertical drop (mostly due to distance)

all trails will be narrow - width limited to 80-100 feet.

glades is hardwoods mostly sugar maples and faces east, north east so will not get blasted w/ sun.

snow making also approved for all trials. piped going in this summer.

http://www.whiteface.com/newsite/onmtn/trailmap.php use this more accurate. I'll send U a jpeg from the UMP

This is from a man that knows

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

The 60 acres of new glades is going to be off to the right (as you look up) of the blue ridge trail and I believe skiers will have to come back into the trail to exit.

 

[kcyanks1]

Tree Island POD and Lookout POD were combined into what was ultimately approved as Lookout Mountain POD or (mountain expansion) lookout mtn is the high hump immediately adjacent to lookers right of slide 5.

On that map replace tree island pod name w/ lookout, forget about that second expansion area labeled lookout pod. the pod labeled tree island pod on that map pretty much represents what is approved as lookout mtn however the trials that are shown there have all been reconfigured.

the new lift base will be just below where facelift drops you off. it will bring you to the top of lookout mtn about 500 feet above and lookers right of the top of slide 5. (side note it will be a shot trek to the memorial highway just below what people call the Wilmington turn..)

what was approved included two expert trails that will run pretty much fall line down to about 300 feet below and skiers left of the current summit quad - on easy way. One more expert trail will shoot off the intermediate trail and drop right down the fall line to the new lift (pretty much where its mapped on your jpeg). the intermediate trail will follow the second ridge line and plummet down to right above kids campus dropping out onto lower boreen almost at the same elevation as where the terrain park starts. If you follow the black line on your map that represents the boundary between those two pods you will basically be following what was approved for the intermediate trail.

when looking right from the summit quad out over the slides the first high point after slide 5 is lookout mtn and where the new lift will drop off and all trails start. two expert trails will run on opposite sides of the lifeline and come together approximately 500 feet above the new lift base. the intermediate trail will start at the lift summit (lookout mtn) and follow along the second ridge line you see from the summit quad before descending to above kids campus.

intermediate trial is over two miles long. vertical feet will run from 1800 to 2200 depending on which trial you use w/ the intermediate being the most vertical drop (mostly due to distance)

all trails will be narrow - width limited to 80-100 feet.

glades is hardwoods mostly sugar maples and faces east, north east so will not get blasted w/ sun.

snow making also approved for all trials. piped going in this summer.

http://www.whiteface.com/newsite/onmtn/trailmap.php use this more accurate. I'll send U a jpeg from the UMP

This is from a man that knows

Wow, thanks!

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

I'm going to be 38 in 10 years..I'll have 54,000 posts and hopefully be done with match.com and be married to a smart attractive skier..and live in a large suburban house with 2.3 children and a dog..lol

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

I'm going to be 38 in 10 years..I'll have 54,000 posts and hopefully be done with match.com and be married to a smart attractive skier..and live in a large suburban house with 2.3 children and a dog..lol

This looks about right.

 

[Greg]

This looks about right.

POTD! :beer: :lol:

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

This looks about right.

Big women need loving too..and I have better teeth than him..lol

 

[twinplanx]

This looks about right.

Looking at the mass transit thread got me thinking...Requesting more current information on the ski train to Gore, HPD or any one else like to chime in?

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

Looking at the mass transit thread got me thinking...Requesting more current information on the ski train to Gore, HPD or any one else like to chime in?

Ask on SKIADK, Gore forum. Those guys should know the latest.

 

[mattchuck2]

I'd say Gore will change the most. Hopefully for the better.

There will definitely be some pluses . . . ample party opportunity, good bands every once in a while, increased work and tips for me.

One thing Gore has going for it is that the mountain is kind of separated into quadrants . . . so if there is a lot of people in one area of the mountain, there will be less in another. When I went to Smugg's, I thought that the "family" reputation that the mountain had would mean that there were a lot of umm . . . sub-par skiers all over the mountain. But the mountain itself is so good at segregating people, you can get off at the top with a gaper, duck into the trees, watch him choose a groomer, and never see him again until you're riding up the lift.

Also, I'm not worried about the new terrain being of lower elevation than the rest of the mountain. New trails are able to be planned out with snowmaking already included and automated so that the snowmaking on newer trails is better than that which has been retrofitted to older trails. Plus, it's not as if the base of the North Creek Ski Bowl is THAT low . . . I think it's like 900' (Base of Gore is 1500'). . . Higher than the base of West, Holiday Valley, Pat's Peak, Sundown, and Sunday River.