The "Sugarbush Thread"

[Cheetah440]

It's really comical on here. As certain as you are that the SBX was the most stupid thing done, others think it was the greatest thing done. And it is so easy to pass judgement on things done years ago with the best of intentions. if Sugarbush did what people are saying on here there would be so many lifts and trails that there would be no room for the beautiful woods that we have, the vibe would be gone and we would be like Sunday River or Killington with masses of people and huge traffic jams. No thanks. The real problem is the influx of people. I say we limit the people and everything would be better.

We aren’t a monolith that’s for sure.

 

[Cheetah440]

It's really comical on here. As certain as you are that the SBX was the most stupid thing done, others think it was the greatest thing done. And it is so easy to pass judgement on things done years ago with the best of intentions. if Sugarbush did what people are saying on here there would be so many lifts and trails that there would be no room for the beautiful woods that we have, the vibe would be gone and we would be like Sunday River or Killington with masses of people and huge traffic jams. No thanks. The real problem is the influx of people. I say we limit the people and everything would be better.

I have friends who bought in Stowe 20 yrs ago. They don’t even ski weekends anymore. I get ya, it’s always a fine line.

 

[thetrailboss]

One of the worst decisions in ski history. Shouldn’t have joined the two areas by lift, should have developed the way there. So dumb.

It was a compromise. You are assuming that Slide Brook would have been developed. That was no guarantee at all. Not with the Vermont environmental movement.

The idea was to make Sugarbush ONE ski area of over 100 trails instead of two distinct operations of half that. You have to see it from the POV of the mid-1990's and not with the benefit of now 30 years of hindsight.

 

[thetrailboss]

The opposition to the development in SB was deafening. The plans were awesome, a new base area and 4-5 pods that were connected. Les wanted to do something and the lift is what we got. The bears won. There was also tremendous opposition to the hotel being approved at the base of South- it was a Grand Summit back then and over by Easy Rider. It finally was approved and Win was able to amend the plan and build the base area that is there now. Can you imagine if we still had the old Gatehouse and the trailers everywhere? It was a dumpy base area. Change and progress was hard for people to take and when Les talked about putting a HSQ and snowmaking in on Castlerock that wound everybody up.

Could you imagine what SB would be like if he had built one of his infamous Grand Summit Hotels? And I remember the ASC "Base Village." That was interesting.

 

[NewEnglander77]

No that is not entirerly true. It was mentioned at community day that the location at Golf Course Road is being held up by abutters. The locaton at the former Mexican place below the Shark and next to the phone company lot is being held up because the AHJ want the culvert at the stream upgraded or fixed to protect it from siltation and the new parking and constuction. Evidently it will be very costly so they are looking at other different locations. And yes the price of real estate coupled with people renting everything out through apps had decimated the cheaper housing for employees. There is nothing nefarious being done by the mountain, state or town. Just the reality of the world we live in now.

While the other challenges you outlined to the housing development at the former Mexican place are real, the town certainly hasn't been a welcoming partner in seeing this through zoning etc...

Meanwhile, in Irasville there is much action to provide wastewater solutions that can support smart development. This is being supported at all levels including where the funding comes from, which is not local.

Warren just isn't being a great partner to the resort and the communities needs in my opinion. As a taxpayer in Warren who understands a healthy balance between maintaining the character and the town and supporting the resort as an economic driver which benefits the community overall I would like to see a different tone set.

 

[solar]

I say we limit the people and everything would be better.

As is usually the case but doesn't that also significantly limit revenue for things like lift repairs and snow making?

Coming out of the Community Day, it was also interesting that Hammond noted, "We don't want to be a 600,000 skier visits per year resort. We don't have the capacity, The Valley doesn't have the capacity. The product is going to evolve"

 

[thetrailboss]

While the other challenges you outlined to the housing development at the former Mexican place are real, the town certainly hasn't been a welcoming partner in seeing this through zoning etc...

Meanwhile, in Irasville there is much action to provide wastewater solutions that can support smart development. This is being supported at all levels including where the funding comes from, which is not local.

Warren just isn't being a great partner to the resort and the communities needs in my opinion. As a taxpayer in Warren who understands a healthy balance between maintaining the character and the town and supporting the resort as an economic driver which benefits the community overall I would like to see a different tone set.

It is not an amorphous thing known as the "Town", it is your neighbors and residents in Warren that are driving the decisions about development.

 

[thetrailboss]

As is usually the case but doesn't that also significantly limit revenue for things like lift repairs and snow making?

Coming out of the Community Day, it was also interesting that Hammond noted, "We don't want to be a 600,000 skier visits per year resort. We don't have the capacity, The Valley doesn't have the capacity. The product is going to devolve"

Fixed it for you.

 

[SkiTheEast]

No that is not entirerly true. It was mentioned at community day that the location at Golf Course Road is being held up by abutters. The locaton at the former Mexican place below the Shark and next to the phone company lot is being held up because the AHJ want the culvert at the stream upgraded or fixed to protect it from siltation and the new parking and constuction. Evidently it will be very costly so they are looking at other different locations. And yes the price of real estate coupled with people renting everything out through apps had decimated the cheaper housing for employees. There is nothing nefarious being done by the mountain, state or town. Just the reality of the world we live in now.

I didn't intend to imply anything nefarious was being done by the authorities (sure they each have best intentions) but even you just mentioned that it is the AHJ (so regulatory) that made the determination that that they couldn't proceed - maybe a valid concern - at the end of the day if its not this its something else.

For the Sugarcube project an article in the Valley Reporter seemed to suggest that they came to an agreement on the abutter issues (well/septic, etc) and legal objection from the abutter was dismissed with prejudice), and they are now waiting for Act 250 (regulatory) for construction permits.

I won't argue with you that STR are having an effect on the dynamics of the housing market (not just a VT phenomena) - hard to quantify what the effect is especially in a vacation area with a number of second homeowners who use their units. Generally speaking these second home owners may rent on Airbnb for the off weekend but this isn't housing that ever was or is currently going back to the long-term rental market (they use them to ski). Fact is its both a demand and supply issue and hard to argue that building housing of any kind in VT is a simple or straightforward process (for better or worse).

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

Coming out of the Community Day, it was also interesting that Hammond noted, "We don't want to be a 600,000 skier visits per year resort. We don't have the capacity, The Valley doesn't have the capacity. The product is going to evolve"

Does the gm have incentive comp for emptying more wallets?

 

[Tin Woodsman]

STR obviously a huge factor, but NH next door doesn't have quite the same issue, so it's clear that VT has to look in the mirror here. It has tied its identity to limiting development and now with a step change in the underlying market conditions - STR taking up all of the inventory - local and state regs are not designed to cope. They are slowly killing the golden goose of tourism and it will be a rock fight to change given the politics around it.

 

[thetrailboss]

As is usually the case but doesn't that also significantly limit revenue for things like lift repairs and snow making?

Coming out of the Community Day, it was also interesting that Hammond noted, "We don't want to be a 600,000 skier visits per year resort. We don't have the capacity, The Valley doesn't have the capacity. The product is going to evolve"

Serious question. Wasn't Sugarbush in the 450,000-500,000 skier day range pre-Alterra? If so, 600,000 is not THAT much more. And, frankly, IKON has been increasing skier days at established areas (I can't remember the exact percentage, but they were saying that it was like 15-20% or so). So I don't really understand his point. If he was saying that they don't want to be at 1 million then I understand.

 

[solar]

I'm not sure of his source but Mark at Homeowners Coalition shared;

I just got Sugarbush's Skier Visit data from last season. Sugarbush saw a positive 5% increase in skier visits, while Mad River Glen saw a 1% rise. Sugarbush surpassed its 2018-2019 record by over 8,600 visits while VT skier visits were down .5% overall. I have Sugarbush capturing ~2% more market share since 2018/19. For context, Killington does ~1MM skier visits/yr and Stowe is around 500K vs. Sugarbush at 424K.

Curious if @WinS thinks those sound directionally correct.

 

[Hawk]

As is usually the case but doesn't that also significantly limit revenue for things like lift repairs and snow making?

Coming out of the Community Day, it was also interesting that Hammond noted, "We don't want to be a 600,000 skier visits per year resort. We don't have the capacity, The Valley doesn't have the capacity. The product is going to evolve

I didn't intend to imply anything was nefarious was being done by the authorities (sure they each have best intentions) but even you just mentioned that it is the AHJ (so regulatory) that made the determination that that they couldn't proceed - so no shovels in the ground - at the end of the day if its not this its something else.

For the Sugarcube project an article in the Valley Reporter seemed to suggest that they came to an agreement on the abutter issues (well/septic, etc) and legal objection from the abutter was dismissed with prejudice), and they are now waiting for Act 250 (regulatory) for construction permits.

I won't argue with you that STR are having an effect on the dynamics of the housing market (not just a VT phenomena) - hard to quantify what the effect is especially in a vacation area with a number of second homeowners who use their units. Generally speaking these second home owners may rent on Airbnb for the off weekend but this isn't housing that ever was or is currently going back to the long-term rental market (they use them to ski). Fact is its both a demand and supply issue and hard to argue that building housing of any kind in VT is a simple or straightforward process (for better or worse).

I understand the frustration but invironmental impact and approvals are a part of constuction everywhere. Some people think that the AHJ may have came up with that to slow down the development. Thats not the case. They look at the plans, review the site and do what is in the best interest of the environment. There would not be such a time consuming process if shitty developers and home owners didn't screw things up in the past. The things that people got away with in the 50's 60's and 70's set the process in motion to fix the dammage. It is what it is. We live with the mistakes of the past.

As for the sugar cube that is good news, they made it past the initial hurdle, so maybe they get past Act 250 and proceed? I am not that informed on where that is going. Only what I heard back in October.

 

[thetrailboss]

I'm not sure of his source but Mark at Homeowners Coalition shared;


Curious if @WinS thinks those sound directionally correct.

Ah, OK. 400,000-450,000 or so was where I thought it was at.

 

[solar]

I understand the frustration but invironmental impact and approvals are a part of constuction everywhere.

Just to be clear, I believe I'm on the same page as you in that we need progress, just not in the Basin area.

 

[thetrailboss]

I understand the frustration but invironmental impact and approvals are a part of constuction everywhere. Some people think that the AHJ may have came up with that to slow down the development. Thats not the case. They look at the plans, review the site and do what is in the best interest of the environment. There would not be such a time consuming process if shitty developers and home owners didn't screw things up in the past. The things that people got away with in the 50's 60's and 70's set the process in motion to fix the dammage. It is what it is. We live with the mistakes of the past.

This is correct. The genesis for Act 250 was the rampant development in the Mount Snow area in the 1960's. Another interesting tidbit: the land use regulatory regime included the heavy-handed regulatory side (Act 250) as well as a development plan for the state (the goals of development, planned future development areas, etc.). Only the regulatory side was implemented.

 

[Hawk]

As is usually the case but doesn't that also significantly limit revenue for things like lift repairs and snow making?

Coming out of the Community Day, it was also interesting that Hammond noted, "We don't want to be a 600,000 skier visits per year resort. We don't have the capacity, The Valley doesn't have the capacity. The product is going to evolve"

So we did not have the capital to buy new lifts, goomers, install snowmaking and complete the overwhelming defered maintenence. That is why Win Sold to Altera. Supposedly they have big pockets. I was just at Palasades-Alpine and they have a brand new $65 M base to base gondola. So I ask, where is all of our investment? The plan was not for us to increase revenue/Skiers to pay for the upgrades. It was susposed to come from Altera. I think the focus is misplaced by blaming Sugarbush and the Management.

 

[djd66]

Holy schnikes,... I don't check the forum for like 2 hours and there's 3 more pages to the Sugarbush Thread! At this rate, we will break 1,000 by February.

 

[tumbler]

The Ikon blackouts have made the traditional holiday weekends and weeks empty. That a lot of visits there. I recall MLK pushing to almost 12,000 with cars parked all the way down the MT Ellen access road.