Future Forum>

What will the valley and surrounding areas look like in the future? Discuss future infrastructure, transportation & growth topics here.

Future Forum>

Postby mattyboombatty » Mon Nov 20, 2006 7:44 am

1.In 20 years will there be lifts on burnt mountain?

2.Will we get more or less snow in the future?

3.Will there still only be a half a dozen resturaunts on mountain?



my awnsers
1. yes
2. more
3. I love geppetos..........................
:shock:
http://www.hemp.com/
User avatar
mattyboombatty
floating in a wooden shoe
 
Posts: 336
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 3:37 pm
Location: Earth

Postby andy » Mon Nov 20, 2006 4:25 pm

1.) Yes.

2.) Depends how far in the future, in the near future, next 20 years or so, I would say less, but after that its anyones guess. It's all about cycles.

3.) Probably a few more, but nothing overwhelming.

Good forum/thread.
andy
 

Postby jimskime » Mon Nov 20, 2006 7:40 pm

Burnt, yes.

Much less snow, unfortunately. Anybody who thinks global warming is not gonna happen has their head up, oh never mind.

Who cares, we have enough for mid-week. :lol:
jimskime
 

Postby k2trav » Mon Nov 20, 2006 10:22 pm

Image

This pic was taken probably 5 years ago

They would most likely go in by Snowbrook, there is already a road that goes to the base of Burnt from when they were logging

Sugarloaf Owns Burnt Mtn

The initial plans do not call for a base lodge

It would be a lot of advanced and intermediate terrain
http://www.sugarloafoutside.com
User avatar
k2trav
Sugarloafer For Life
 
Posts: 1181
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 10:41 pm
Location: Sugarloaf

Postby k2trav » Tue Nov 21, 2006 12:13 am

Im not sure what the elevation of the bottom of the lift is, but that lift would be a high speed quad and the other would be a double

The trail heading west would connect back to Cross Haul so you could get back to the base

Back when they were talking about doing this plan, they said it would cost more than $5million
http://www.sugarloafoutside.com
User avatar
k2trav
Sugarloafer For Life
 
Posts: 1181
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 10:41 pm
Location: Sugarloaf

Postby k2trav » Tue Nov 21, 2006 12:36 am

The quad wouldnt go to the top because of wind, they figured if they invested that kind of money, they might as well do it so the lift could run as often as possible

Back when they were explaining the map, they said that trail is actually downhill and would connect to cross haul so you wouldnt get stuck at the bottom at the end of the day
http://www.sugarloafoutside.com
User avatar
k2trav
Sugarloafer For Life
 
Posts: 1181
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 10:41 pm
Location: Sugarloaf

Postby loafnut » Tue Nov 21, 2006 1:09 am

k2trav wrote:The quad wouldnt go to the top because of wind, they figured if they invested that kind of money, they might as well do it so the lift could run as often as possible

Back when they were explaining the map, they said that trail is actually downhill and would connect to cross haul so you wouldnt get stuck at the bottom at the end of the day


Looks like its downhill to me by the lines on the topo. Burnt would be an awesome expansion. Lots of expert terrain. They would have to keep the trails narrow too because of the wind. just a dream...
loafnut
 

trail

Postby gamway73 » Tue Nov 21, 2006 8:36 am

Burnt should be one lift up and then one giant glade down, except for the area underneath the lift. Ok, that won't happen, but it'd be nice.
gamway73
 

Postby beedro » Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:21 pm

Very true gamway...the glades would hold the snow just fine. Burnt Mt. would be so sweet. More appealing to the upper level skiers/riders. Unfortunately, the west mt development makes more sense financially being more family focused with beginner/intermediate terrain, and dual usage of facilities with the golf course.
User avatar
beedro
Sugarloafer
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 1:41 pm
Location: TBL


Return to Future Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests