Sugarloaf Expansion

[wa-loaf]

Hopefully Burnt Mtn can make up for some of what's been lost.

 

[snowmonster]

I've been waiting for them to do something with Burnt Mountain. A few narrow trails, glades all over the place and the snowfields on top, that's all you need. My wish for Burnt is that it should look like Mad River Glen when you are directly below it in the sense that you can't really make out the trails. In a mountain in that part of Maine, glades are a great idea since it allows you to duck out of the wind and gives you definition when skiing in flat light or whiteout conditions. I skied Saddleback this year in a January fog and Casablanca made the whole experience enjoyable!

 

[riverc0il]

Wide trails: that is what happened to many places in the 1980's because of the increased crowds, the demand and need for more snowmaking (which doesn't work well on narrow trails), and the use of more groomers. You see that many places were "modernized" through widening including Sugarloaf, Killington, Mount Ellen, and parts of Jay (the 'Can-Am Supertrail' was haled as a superwide run). The downside of course is the wind issue. Also some of Sugarloaf's terrain is used for racing and in order to be FIS/NCAA certified, the terrain must be a certain width, etc. Dartmouth and Middlebury just had to widen their race trails...Dartmouth I believe did it under protest.

On the flip side, Burke is a big time racers mountain with an academy (just like CVA@Loaf) and trails certified for Slalom, GS, and Super G. But Burke has retained the classic charter type trails across the majority of the mountain with only two really wide race trails.

I don't think the contention with the Loaf is they are exceptional for having wide trails. We know when and why the trail widening happened. But rather the contention put forth is that the Loaf does not receive comments about how the majority of their trails lack character but rather the discussion focus has always been their limited amount of character trails. DHS was just pointing out a disconnect between reality and discussion presentation as it relates to forums that have a rep which made be over extended or at the least not inclusive of serious negatives which other mountains get bashed for. Counting the hits and ignoring the misses for the darling mountains, as it were.

 

[Mapnut]

http://www.snowjournal.com/page.php?cid=galimg29336

To aid our speculations, here's a Google Earth view of Burnt Mountain with a 450-acre area outlined. That would be just about all of the usable terrain. 450 acres is 7/10 of a square mile, maybe 3,000 feet wide by 6,500 feet long as shown here.

 

[wa-loaf]

http://www.snowjournal.com/page.php?cid=galimg29336

To aid our speculations, here's a Google Earth view of Burnt Mountain with a 450-acre area outlined. That would be just about all of the usable terrain. 450 acres is 7/10 of a square mile, maybe 3,000 feet wide by 6,500 feet long as shown here.

You have to include everything east of King Pine to Burnt. There's stuff beyond Can't Dog that folks already ski. And a connecting trail would prob be thrown in there.

 

[wa-loaf]

Check these out: http://sugarloaftoday.com/chat/viewtopic.php?t=1103&highlight=google

 

[jerryg]

While I know that Burnt is been in the future expansion discussions at SL for years, it reminds me a little of the Kton-Pico interconnect. Lots of talks over the years, but nothing ever happening.

That being said, it seems like SL's finally taking it a step further and moving forward. I still think that a lift up Burnt is a long way off when taking into account that they need to work on their lift infrastructure and existing terrain.

 

[wa-loaf]

I still think that a lift up Burnt is a long way off when taking into account that they need to work on their lift infrastructure and existing terrain.

If they replace the spillway chairs this summer you now have 2 decent fixed grip lifts available for moving around. Or even using one and keeping the other around for spare parts.

 

[deadheadskier]

While I know that Burnt is been in the future expansion discussions at SL for years, it reminds me a little of the Kton-Pico interconnect. Lots of talks over the years, but nothing ever happening.

That being said, it seems like SL's finally taking it a step further and moving forward. I still think that a lift up Burnt is a long way off when taking into account that they need to work on their lift infrastructure and existing terrain.

I think balance between maintaining what is and opening up what isn't it is the right plan. While replacing the Spillway lift with something more efficient would be a nice upgrade, it probably won't bring many more skier visits to Sugarloaf. Most of the increase I would think would be Sunday River skiers making the journey over a bit more.

Burnt on the other hand would.......if they make it something unique. If they turn it into King Pine part 2, it might bring in a few more skiers for a couple of years, but not long term. If the rumors of 450 acres of gladed terrain on Burnt is true, that would be a HUGE draw to expert skiers all over the east who normally wouldn't bother driving all the way up there. 450 acres is bigger than most entire ski areas in the east. would be really cool to see.

hope it happens.

 

[UVSHTSTRM]

This is a question to people who frequent the Loaf, and more to those who have skied or hiked burnt in it's current state. What is the terrain like? Does it have good steeps? How does the snow hold over there? I know the top above tree line or at least appears to, does it hold snow or does it blow off? What does Burnt have for vert?

Sorry for all questions.

Thanks

 

[deadheadskier]

those are good questions. I bet someone could give you good answers over here:

http://sugarloaftoday.com/chat/

 

[thetrailboss]

...And then there are some opinons coming from one side wondering just what is the essence of "character" to people...when it involves "owning/leasing" a mountain, blasting out rock, and cutting down its trees to make trails for some people who can't see the difference between relatively wild(still) areas and Coney Island with some pitch...
Thought I wouldn't mind it if a real-estate corporation wanted to expand....but the more I think about it, the more I wish it wouldn't happen, they're in it for the profit only...but then what corporation isn't.

What?

 

[wa-loaf]

...And then there are some opinons coming from one side wondering just what is the essence of "character" to people...when it involves "owning/leasing" a mountain, blasting out rock, and cutting down its trees to make trails for some people who can't see the difference between relatively wild(still) areas and Coney Island with some pitch...
Thought I wouldn't mind it if a real-estate corporation wanted to expand....but the more I think about it, the more I wish it wouldn't happen, they're in it for the profit only...but then what corporation isn't.

What?

LOL, he's having an argument with himself on whether he is OK with development.

 

[bigbog]

Correct wa-loaf!...;-)
Sorry if it seemed too serious in its nature..

 

[speden]

Not sure if this is new news or not, but I noticed on the Sugarloaf board that there is some recent activity towards adding glades at Sugarloaf.

In the public notice it says, "The application is for site activities including vegetation clearing and tree removal for the three–phased development of a new glade skiing area..."

See the thread here:

http://community.sugarloaf.com/forum/topics/new-glades-on-east-sideburnt

 

[wa-loaf]

That's the Burnt Mtn expansion.

 

[wa-loaf]

Check this thread out: http://sugarloaftoday.com/chat/viewtopic.php?t=3583

 

[Tin Woodsman]

That's the Burnt Mtn expansion.

At most, that appears to be the first step towards a Burnt Mtn expansion but the specific proposals outlined in that blog seem to be squarely within the realm of Sugarloaf Mtn.

 

[wa-loaf]

At most, that appears to be the first step towards a Burnt Mtn expansion but the specific proposals outlined in that blog seem to be squarely within the realm of Sugarloaf Mtn.

Sounds like they are clearing lines up and beyond cant dog to allow access to burnt. Might be hike-to or a cat track.

 

[deadheadskier]

Can't wait to get up there and check it out. Wonder if Sugarloaf will be participating in liftopia this upcoming season.