Admin, any news from your grapevine about Burke finally getting a HSQ as part of its expansion plan? While it would be a huge plus for the owners, I'm wondering if this may turn into a "be careful what you wish for" item for skiers.
Burke, VT HSQ
- Thread starter jamesdeluxe
- Start date
riverc0il
New member
I think the only thing to be careful of here is another bankruptcy. Though a HSQ summit lift will absolutely bring a LOT more visits to Burke. It is the only thing any one complains about at Burke--and it is enough to keep many from coming back. Hell, even I will admit to occasionally bemoaning the summit lift while riding it... and I LIKE fixed grips!jamesdeluxe":3mivu540 said:
The big problem is riding the Willoughby Quad out of the base area and then immediately getting on the summit Quad. While one of the slowest lifts around, the High Speed to Fixed Grip juxtaposition continues to startle me. I don't think I noticed the lift speed of the summit lift quite so much as I do now that the lower mountain has the high speeder.
One perk even for those of us that enjoy our fixed grips: imagine how much more powder early risers could get on a mid-week powder day.
\
/
Nice! I'm one of very few skiers to have ridden that HSQ while it was at Ascutney. I think that they fired it up once every season. If that. :lol:Admin":2tb3o3ik said:
For those interested, here's a Snowjournal discussion of Ascutney. IMHO, it's interesting to compare where this HSQ currently sits and where it may end up.
riverc0il
New member
These documents were just linked to over on AZ:
http://www.anr.state.vt.us/site/cfm/act ... m?ID=25809
http://www.anr.state.vt.us/Imaging/Plan ... 20Plan.pdf
I am really uncomfortable with the trail widening and additions planned. I am all for a HSQ at Burke but if it is at the expense of every single curve on every single trail and butchering some of Burke's best glades, then they are going to go too far.
http://www.anr.state.vt.us/site/cfm/act ... m?ID=25809
http://www.anr.state.vt.us/Imaging/Plan ... 20Plan.pdf
I am really uncomfortable with the trail widening and additions planned. I am all for a HSQ at Burke but if it is at the expense of every single curve on every single trail and butchering some of Burke's best glades, then they are going to go too far.
Burke's current fans like things more or less the way they are, while the plans call for changes that will help them attract a different kind of clientele, and ensure that there's enough space for increased numbers of skiers. I think I've heard this song before.riverc0il":2rxr0cnf said:
Patrick
Well-known member
:-o ](*,) [-X :roll: ](*,)jamesdeluxe":2186rat9 said:
Heard that song too many times indeed.
The question is what demographic are they after? The location is less than ideal.
Canada market:
Montreal: They are further than Jay and Smuggs south of the border and much more closer.
Sherbrooke: Closer, but not the only game in town.
New England:
People have the cross major ski areas to get to Burke. Same issues as Smuggs/Jay, but less favorable location in term of market (Montreal).
When did Ascutney close? They used to come at the Ottawa Ski Show.
riverc0il
New member
Ascutney closed this season.
Burke is actually well suited to tap the Boston Metro market. Burke is closer to Boston than many (all?) of NoVT and mostly highway, another perk. And from the I-91 corridor, Burke is about the same drive time from the I89/I91 split as other NoVT resorts (I don't count K and Pico as NoVT). So as far as position and location, it is actually much better than NoVT strictly from a driving perspective, IMO. Yes, Boston metro via I-93, you do need to pass a lot of other resorts. But resorts along the spine of NoVT have similar drive perception obstacles to overcome in their being so much further than Mount Snow, Stratton, Okemo, Killington, etc. I don't think location is anything a HSQ and better marketing presence can not overcome. Unlike Ascutney, Burke needs a HSQ to offset it's only perceived drawback. And at least Burke will run that HSQ as it's primary lift, unlike how Ascutney used it (who wants to ride a triple that parallels a HSQ and look at the HSQ every single ride knowing its not being used to save expenses?).
As much as I stick my index finger down my throat when I see proposed expansion plans that includes cutting, I recognize that an open Burke is much better than a closed Burke. The mountain has momentum but that long slow fixed grip perception truly is something that keeps folks away. If you build it, they will come has not proven overly successful all the time, but I think in Burke's case, it is a poster child for that trite expression proving totally accurate.
Burke is actually well suited to tap the Boston Metro market. Burke is closer to Boston than many (all?) of NoVT and mostly highway, another perk. And from the I-91 corridor, Burke is about the same drive time from the I89/I91 split as other NoVT resorts (I don't count K and Pico as NoVT). So as far as position and location, it is actually much better than NoVT strictly from a driving perspective, IMO. Yes, Boston metro via I-93, you do need to pass a lot of other resorts. But resorts along the spine of NoVT have similar drive perception obstacles to overcome in their being so much further than Mount Snow, Stratton, Okemo, Killington, etc. I don't think location is anything a HSQ and better marketing presence can not overcome. Unlike Ascutney, Burke needs a HSQ to offset it's only perceived drawback. And at least Burke will run that HSQ as it's primary lift, unlike how Ascutney used it (who wants to ride a triple that parallels a HSQ and look at the HSQ every single ride knowing its not being used to save expenses?).
As much as I stick my index finger down my throat when I see proposed expansion plans that includes cutting, I recognize that an open Burke is much better than a closed Burke. The mountain has momentum but that long slow fixed grip perception truly is something that keeps folks away. If you build it, they will come has not proven overly successful all the time, but I think in Burke's case, it is a poster child for that trite expression proving totally accurate.
From that map the green section labeled "Dipper trail grading work" is the only part I see that would be widening/butchering. If so that seems a reasonable tradeoff for getting the new HSQ If there's a lot more than that I stand corrected.
Yellow is labeled "previously permitted clearing." I interpreted that as "existing cleared trails." River or someone else who has actually skied Burke can probably tell from the topo map whether that is true.
riverc0il
New member
The previously permitted clearing has not yet happened. That map is just updated to included the HSQ so probably focuses on clearing related to the lift. They did a little clearing done on Willoughby a few years ago, but that is it. They totally killed Willoughby. Used to be one of greatest cruiser trails in the east. Now it is merely above average.Tony Crocker":hrkod2ub said:
From_the_NEK
New member
The Yellow highlights are areas that were "approved for clearing" under the original approved Act 250 Ginn master plan. That was back when Ginn was going to dump a few hundred million $ into the mtn. I don't see that happening anymore ( [-o< ). Riverc0il is correct that the only widening that has taken place has been Lower Willoughby (to get better access to the snow making pipe) and another section near the summit on Camper's Carry (resulting in a wind scoured mess :roll: ).
That Green section is not widening but a smoothing effort of a very rough section of Upper Dipper that has a lot of stumps and rocks that take a lot of snowmaking cover before opening it. With this trail being one of the two main cruisers from the summit (the other being Willoughby), they will want to be able to have this trail open as soon as possible. It will likely become THE main cruiser from the summit as service by the new HSQ since the base of the new quad will be a bit of a slog to get to from Willoughby.
From the looks of things the only clearing that is going to take place at this time is the new liftline. Although the section where it crosses the top of the POMA lift is going to be another windscoured mess.
That Green section is not widening but a smoothing effort of a very rough section of Upper Dipper that has a lot of stumps and rocks that take a lot of snowmaking cover before opening it. With this trail being one of the two main cruisers from the summit (the other being Willoughby), they will want to be able to have this trail open as soon as possible. It will likely become THE main cruiser from the summit as service by the new HSQ since the base of the new quad will be a bit of a slog to get to from Willoughby.
From the looks of things the only clearing that is going to take place at this time is the new liftline. Although the section where it crosses the top of the POMA lift is going to be another windscoured mess.