Yes, I'd imagine that they would need a lot more traffic to justify any terrain expansion. But still, the fact that they have plans is great.
-
Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!
You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!
A Sneak Peek at the Future Expansion of Sugarbush??
- Thread starter thetrailboss
- Start date
I'm wondering how many of those projects are doable. I thought I had asked about the area above Inverness in a previous challenge as there used to be something on an old Glen Allen map up there that I thought they were forced to remove? I know you can still make out the old lift line a bit.
Ah yes, an almost perennial discussion topic on SkiMRV. There was indeed a plan to develop that area by the former owners. You're referring probably to this map:
Or even this one:
And you can see the liftline in aerial images and topo maps:
My understanding is that this liftline was cut by the previous owners under the belief that they owned the land. However, once the cut was done, a surveying error was discovered and the project was abandoned because they in fact did not own a portion of the land up high (oops).
Now IIRC this was a distinct effort from Roy Cohen's efforts in the late 1970's early 1980's to purchase and incorporate MRG as an area of SB. He made a pitch to Betsy Pratt, hoping to connect the areas, and she turned them down. Read all about it in the MRG book that just came out.
By the way....BMM is the owner of the Sugarbush History Site, which is the source those maps and images.
Last edited:
I suppose it would be silly to put that all together if they didn't own/lease the land in question. Though, looking at the topo map, the new pod looks a little lower and farther west. Probably pretty darn close to MRG. Perfect striking range for snowboarders to poach 
The lift and trails between FIS and Tumbler would be what I'd be most excited about initially if for no other reason than to avoid the lower FIS run out.
What is also fairly striking is that at build out, it would appear that skiable acreage at both North and South would be about equal. I wonder if the traffic split would reflect that. As I've said many times, I do not understand why South gets more traffic. As great as Castlerock is, I still think North is overall the better skiing mountain.
The lift and trails between FIS and Tumbler would be what I'd be most excited about initially if for no other reason than to avoid the lower FIS run out.
What is also fairly striking is that at build out, it would appear that skiable acreage at both North and South would be about equal. I wonder if the traffic split would reflect that. As I've said many times, I do not understand why South gets more traffic. As great as Castlerock is, I still think North is overall the better skiing mountain.
Newpylong
Well-known member
I live in the city of Boston, I don't know many people at all that make the trek to Sugarbush from here. It would be nice if the Gap was in better shape. I have 4WD but don't bother - always go up to 100. Sugarbush has always had access issues...
I am usually not for expansion but those are some really nice expansion ideas. I like the one in the Lower FIS area best.
I am usually not for expansion but those are some really nice expansion ideas. I like the one in the Lower FIS area best.
I'm surprised more people don't make the Trek to SB over say Killington. The difference is only a half hour from my experience. 2:45 to Kton, 3:15 to SB
WWF-VT
Well-known member
My observation is that there are plenty of Boston area people making the trip to Sugarbush. My guess is about 70+% of out of state plates in the parking lot are from MA. My kids are in weekend programs and the vast majority of participants are from MA. The family demographic is making the trip farther north
+ 1. I noticed that as well. Ellen skis bigger than it looks on the map. As to why folks don't go there, it is because for most their rental home/condo is at LP and to drive the 2 minutes or take the SBX is "just too much of a hassle." Just as well. Ellen's vibe is different and more laid back...while the skiing is a big mountain experience with small mountain crowds. I've always thought that the resort was designed backwards--in that Ellen has the lifts and terrain to handle crowds, while LP does not have the terrain width or type for crowds. Trails at LP get skied out so fast.
billski
Active member
I can't imagine people daytripping SB from metro area. And drive to a remote outpost without facilities? I really doubt many would be interested.
The logistics remind me of Toll House double at Stowe. You can have rock star parking, boot up in the hotel, buy a ticket and (aside from the sloooooow lift) get mountain access and return. But hardly anyone uses it. I don't think most of the money would go for the remote outpost- it would be underutilized - they want/need a full service lodge, food, store, apres-ski happenings rentals and for many, slopeside lodging . aside from the bar and a few condos, there ain't much happening over at Toll House.
What are you saying is a 'remote outpost?' Have you been to SB lately? There are facilities. This doesn't look like a remote outpost to me:
Yeah Bill,
Not sure where you're going with that post. Sugarbush has had facilities for decades. It used to be THE PLACE in the 60-70s. Think the nickname was mascara mountain or something.
Things got antiquated prior to Win and the Claybrook development, but the town has always had at least some high caliber lodging, dining and entertainment options.
Never in my days have I thought of Sugarbush as a remote 'outpost'
Not sure where you're going with that post. Sugarbush has had facilities for decades. It used to be THE PLACE in the 60-70s. Think the nickname was mascara mountain or something.
Things got antiquated prior to Win and the Claybrook development, but the town has always had at least some high caliber lodging, dining and entertainment options.
Never in my days have I thought of Sugarbush as a remote 'outpost'
billski
Active member
Yeah, I go there a couple times a year. I mean a link up the backside (east) of the mountain. Or am I geographically challenged?
??????
Anyways, it is a challenge to get to SB from the east, as discussed, but I think that SB is able to still draw folks and it will be interesting to see if any of these terrain expansions take place in the immediate future.
I'm wondering if working on the existing snowmaking infrastructure, specifically getting more water for Ellen and increasing capacity at LP, would be prudent at this time.
I think all of the Northern Vermont areas will be stealing more of the 'Boston market' in years to come because that area is shifting. The 93 Corridor in NH is one of if not the fastest growing areas in New England. Manchester puts you within 2.5 hours of everywhere but Jay.
Similar threads
