Improving Killingtons Efficiency

[b-5]

Replace any outdated lift with Poma lifts and turnstile ticket counters.

You could monitor skiers via video as they get on and off the Poma's.

Low labor, low maintance, and low capital expenditure.

Extend a Poma off the north side of K and one up Mendon Mountain and all the bitching will end.

You'd need the GUT of Hulk short ski Hogan, they would be over 2000' long.

[rogman]

I think you have to keep in mind that the current mindset is that they have to run too many lifts to service all the terrain, and that midweek, that isn't cost effective. Efficiency to these guys means return on investment. If they can replace two lifts with one, that's a huge savings in labor.

South ridge area is underutilized, but I don't think additional trails off Juggernaut are possible. Agreements with the bear huggers. There has been a plan floating around to replace the SRT with a lift that runs to the peak. That might help early season skiing problem, except for its southern exposure.

Removing DF is a no brainer, as is replacing the Snowshed quad with a 6 pack, and scrapping the other two double chairs. It curbs weekend costs (but not midweek), and would be an easier load than the fixed grips, which are forever starting and stopping.

While Ramshead could use a 6 to decrease the crowding there, but really, if they ever learn how to run a corral it would be better. I don't know who dreamed up the plan for last year, but they got it 180 wrong. More efficient loading, not more capacity is the key there. Needs someone with a loud voice and a bullwhip.

Snowdon could use a single HS quad. Moving the start further towards Ramshead would kill Low Rider. There are other glades, but it would be a shame to lose that one. Again, replacing 2 with one, only helps their weekend costs, not midweek.

Burying the access road for a stretch between Ramshead and Snowshed, only makes sense if you can better utilize the land. It's a massive and expensive reconfiguration. If they end up with more land (for condos) and a better footprint for the village, it will happen. Making Killington more efficient will merely be a by-product.

They aren't going to build the Interconnect until they build the village. That is their trump card in the negotiations with the town. Ultimately, pragmatic and cooler heads will prevail. The town will get a revitalized Killington with a lot more skier visits. SP gets their village. The good news is, and this requires totally ignoring the fact that the 2nd home market has tanked, that with a lot more properties up here, the economics of running Killington change dramatically for the better. I think POWDR is just treading water until that happens.

[Tin Woodsman]

South ridge area is underutilized, but I don't think additional trails off Juggernaut are possible. Agreements with the bear huggers. There has been a plan floating around to replace the SRT with a lift that runs to the peak. That might help early season skiing problem, except for its southern exposure.

Didn't know that about the limitations up there. I had figured that whatever was within the boundary defined by Juggernaut was fair game. Anyone have the definitive beta? Regardless, extending the lift to the peak doesn't do much for them, IMHO. You only gain access to Catwalk and maybe the very top portion of Cascade that's rarely open anyway. As long as you can take Hi Road over to the Canyon, you're good to go. As you pointed out, the southerly exposure makes Southride a lousy candidate for early/later season.

Removing DF is a no brainer, as is replacing the Snowshed quad with a 6 pack, and scrapping the other two double chairs. It curbs weekend costs (but not midweek), and would be an easier load than the fixed grips, which are forever starting and stopping.

Couldn't agree more. Somewhere in the recesses of my mind, there is a solution to Needles Eye/Skyeship 2 dilemna, but I can't think of it rightnow.

While Ramshead could use a 6 to decrease the crowding there, but really, if they ever learn how to run a corral it would be better. I don't know who dreamed up the plan for last year, but they got it 180 wrong. More efficient loading, not more capacity is the key there. Needs someone with a loud voice and a bullwhip.

If they are really building the village there, and eventually the interconnect too, RH has to be a HSS. You need large capacity to get everyone out of your primary base and also to get people up to a p;lace where they can ski over to either the Snowdon pod or the interconnect pod. That lift simply becomes too important if/when the village goes in to remain a quad.

Snowdon could use a single HS quad. Moving the start further towards Ramshead would kill Low Rider. There are other glades, but it would be a shame to lose that one. Again, replacing 2 with one, only helps their weekend costs, not midweek.

Not sure I agree here. I think you keep Triple in place as is and only run during Saturdays and holidays ala Valley House double at Sugarbush. If you want to de-emphasize the KBL base and drive traffic to your new core lower down, you need to have the primary access for Snowdon from the RH base area. And when I look at a topo, it indicates to me that the liftline need not be re-aligned much at all to effectuate this move. Perhaps the very bottom of Low Rider would get shaved by 10-15 feet, but it would have more of an impact on Great Bear and its environs and even that would be modest - certainly nothing like what the K-1 did to the Flume/Cascade area.

Burying the access road for a stretch between Ramshead and Snowshed, only makes sense if you can better utilize the land. It's a massive and expensive reconfiguration. If they end up with more land (for condos) and a better footprint for the village, it will happen. Making Killington more efficient will merely be a by-product.

Agreed. It will be expensive, but you can't make the Village the center of gravity if it is bisected by a busy road from 7:00 to 5:00. You need to go below grade and stick something on top linking the two sides - residential, a plaza, ice skating rink - whatever.

They aren't going to build the Interconnect until they build the village. That is their trump card in the negotiations with the town. Ultimately, pragmatic and cooler heads will prevail. The town will get a revitalized Killington with a lot more skier visits. SP gets their village. The good news is, and this requires totally ignoring the fact that the 2nd home market has tanked, that with a lot more properties up here, the economics of running Killington change dramatically for the better. I think POWDR is just treading water until that happens.

I think it's folly to believe the Village can get fully or even mostly built without substantially increasing the value proposition from a skiing perspective. Look at the example of EVERY eastern ski area that has already or is contemplating major real estate at the base. Okemo, Stratton, Sugarbush, Stowe, Jay, Burke, Sunapee, and even Loon - all of them sunk major dollars into improving and expanding the on-hill product before finishin or, in some cases even starting, their real estate play. Not sure why these guys think K-Mart is different.

[Bubba]

A couple of comments on the village plan. Having seen the most recent iteration less than a month ago, I can tell you the following:

1. The access road is to be moved toward the slopeside of what is now the Ramshead parking lot. The road will not go under the existing layout.

2. The Ramshead and Snowshed base lodges will eventually be torn down and a new combined complex will be built as part of the village.

3. The Snowshed doubles will be replaced by a new lift that will extend further downhill to improve access from the village.

Nothing is carved in stone as they're currently putting together cost estimates to see if what they've planned makes economic sense.

[rogman]

With respect to land issues, the parties agreed that a growth center concept, “where development is concentrated and large areas of open space protected from future development for conservation purposes” should direct the planning process.With these ideals in mind, and to mitigate future concerns over the anticipated resort village, Killington exchanged approximately 3,000 acres of land owned by ASC above 2,500 feet, known as Parker’s Gore, for 1,073 acres of land owned by the State below 2,500 feet near the base of Killington Peak. Additionally, Killington (ASC) contributed $375,000 towards the purchase of additional conservation lands protecting the “Western Bear Corridor” to the State of Vermont. As a result of the “land swap,” ANR agreed to generally support future development of Killington-owned lands within a defined growth center area. Significantly, in consideration of the bear habitat protection gained through the agreement, ANR asserted a position that future development in the designated growth center area will not imperil necessary wildlife habitat for black bears. All the parties agreed on the necessity of an easement and forestry management plan for the newly protected areas, and accordingly, Killington took efforts to work with Rutland, and the NPS to obtain a 900 acre scenic and wildlife easement as part of the agreement. Further, Killington agreed to limit its annual use of the one and only ski trail [Juggernault] near the protected area to Dec. 1 through April 1, and along with ANR, developed a plan to restrict access to Parker’s Gore over the trail for the rest of the year.

The above is from an article that appeared a few years back in the Vermont Law Review. This is from an earlier draft that can be found on line. The entire document is a very interesting and must read for anyone who wants to understand how and why things are the way they are...

Bottom line: Running a ski area ain't like it use to be. The existing quid-pro-quo's represent a real mine field for anyone contemplating development. A lot of NGO's all with their own axe to grind. Parker's Gore got traded for the Interconnect. That isn't what it says, but that is what was agreed to.

[Gangsta Rider]

A couple of comments on the village plan. Having seen the most recent iteration less than a month ago, I can tell you the following:

1. The access road is to be moved toward the slopeside of what is now the Ramshead parking lot. The road will not go under the existing layout.

2. The Ramshead and Snowshed base lodges will eventually be torn down and a new combined complex will be built as part of the village.

3. The Snowshed doubles will be replaced by a new lift that will extend further downhill to improve access from the village.

Nothing is carved in stone as they're currently putting together cost estimates to see if what they've planned makes economic sense.

Any word on how the bathrooms will look? I hear that plays a big factor in why people choose a certain ski resort these days.

[Bubba]

A couple of comments on the village plan. Having seen the most recent iteration less than a month ago, I can tell you the following:

1. The access road is to be moved toward the slopeside of what is now the Ramshead parking lot. The road will not go under the existing layout.

2. The Ramshead and Snowshed base lodges will eventually be torn down and a new combined complex will be built as part of the village.

3. The Snowshed doubles will be replaced by a new lift that will extend further downhill to improve access from the village.

Nothing is carved in stone as they're currently putting together cost estimates to see if what they've planned makes economic sense.

Any word on how the bathrooms will look? I hear that plays a big factor in why people choose a certain ski resort these days.

No, but I do know there willl be appropriate signage pointing people toward them. Chris stated, in the first meeting I attended right after he came on board, that there were few if any signs directing people to the bathrooms when he first walked into Snowshed base lodge. He stated three key areas in running a ski area (and I can't make this up)...."You need to park 'em, poop 'em and lift 'em." In other words, people need to be able to park conveniently, find their way to the bathrooms and get lifted up the mountain in order to ski. Those were the keys.

[Snowjob]

Have a great ULLR weekend everyone.

[rogman]

He stated three key areas in running a ski area (and I can't make this up)...."You need to park 'em, poop 'em and lift 'em."

So Nyberg really is marketing to the rich and clueless... I can't believe I ever complained about Allen Wilson.

[millerm277]

South ridge area is underutilized, but I don't think additional trails off Juggernaut are possible. Agreements with the bear huggers. There has been a plan floating around to replace the SRT with a lift that runs to the peak. That might help early season skiing problem, except for its southern exposure.

Didn't know that about the limitations up there. I had figured that whatever was within the boundary defined by Juggernaut was fair game. Anyone have the definitive beta? Regardless, extending the lift to the peak doesn't do much for them, IMHO. You only gain access to Catwalk and maybe the very top portion of Cascade that's rarely open anyway. As long as you can take Hi Road over to the Canyon, you're good to go. As you pointed out, the southerly exposure makes Southride a lousy candidate for early/later season.

I believe the idea is/was to have it just go up a bit further toward the peak, such as to the hill right at the bottom of the lodge, so you could get to the Peak Lodge from it, along with eliminating another traverse (Home Run).

In addition, while they can't develop in the Juggernaut area, they can probably cut some nice, fairly steep trails between The Jug and Solitude. I know Highway Star has the maps that show the boundary between the preservation society's land, and K's leased land.

My idea would be:

Install a new lift, running up a bit further, to do what I said above, as well as probably cut the ride time significantly. (Although, it will be sad to lose that lift).
Have it start a bit further down in the basin. (700ft or so).
Cut trails between The Jug and Solitude, let them run naturally, which would allow one or two to run down into the basin, which would take them out a little after the start of Falls Brook (but before the bottom of the new lift).
Thanks to the new placement of this lift, you could also probably cut a couple narrow trails, mark a few new glade areas, or make a new regular trail or two, coming off the back of Bear, going down to this lift as well.

Go on Google Earth, tilt it down, and look up toward the peak from a little below the current base of the South Ridge Triple, and you'll see what I'm talking about.

[the Disemboweler]

A couple of comments on the village plan. Having seen the most recent iteration less than a month ago, I can tell you the following:

1. The access road is to be moved toward the slopeside of what is now the Ramshead parking lot. The road will not go under the existing layout.

2. The Ramshead and Snowshed base lodges will eventually be torn down and a new combined complex will be built as part of the village.

3. The Snowshed doubles will be replaced by a new lift that will extend further downhill to improve access from the village.

Nothing is carved in stone as they're currently putting together cost estimates to see if what they've planned makes economic sense.

Any word on how the bathrooms will look? I hear that plays a big factor in why people choose a certain ski resort these days.

No, but I do know there willl be appropriate signage pointing people toward them. Chris stated, in the first meeting I attended right after he came on board, that there were few if any signs directing people to the bathrooms when he first walked into Snowshed base lodge. He stated three key areas in running a ski area (and I can't make this up)...."You need to park 'em, poop 'em and lift 'em." In other words, people need to be able to park conveniently, find their way to the bathrooms and get lifted up the mountain in order to ski. Those were the keys.

PPLE???? i like the convenient parking....what about the skiing surface & crowds????

[newpylong]

I wouldn't do a damn thing different.....


well said.

Expansion to the south (Parker's Gore, Mendon Peak) or to the West is a pipe dream. You would be best served not to waste the calories even thinking about it.

Unless they are going to permanently close trails that lead to the traffic flow problems, I'm not sure that the answer will come from within the current trail system.

That said, within the current footprint, a few ideas stick out.

1) Upgrade the South Ridge lift, commit to making large amounts of snow on its easier trails, commit to operating it full time, and highlight it in your marketing collateral. Maybe even consider cutting a few new trails off Juggernaut on the south side of Falls Brook for lower skill levels. It is a delightful, high-elevation pod for beginners and intermediates. It is also a way to help alleviate the inevitable crowding at the Superstar/Skye Peak Quad/Skyeship Stage 2 junction b/c it offers a convenient alternative to get over to the Basin from the Bear side.

2) Remove the DF quad. It has no purpose now and isn't run anyway.

3) Upgrade Skye Peak quad to a HSQ (not 6 - there's enough crowding at the top as it is). This has the advantage of shortening that lift ride while not adding any capacity.

4) Re-align the Snowdon quad so that it starts in the RH/Lower Vale area and replace it with a HSQ or, more likely, a 6-pack. If you really want to have RH/Shed as the focus of your village development and base activities, then you need to have attractive lift options to get people out of there. Who the hell wants to deal with the stupidity of Snowshed or the inevitable insanity at RH if those are the only two options out of the main base area/village? Skiers will just want to keep heading up to the KBL where the K-1, Superstar and Snowdon Triple offer quick access to the best terrain on the mountain.

5) Take Killington Access Road below grade for several hundred yards in the Snowshed/RH base area. If that's your core, make it seamless without the physical and visible barrier of a busy road splitting it in two.

Ultimately, what these guys don't seem to understand is that there is in fact a magic bullet here. Quite simply, the Pico interconnect offers the best high-elevation cruising terrain in the Coolidge Range. It enables you to kill three big birds with one stone. First, it dramatically increases their % of real intermediate terrain - a well-known deficiency for ages. Second, it spreads out the hordes who currently flock to Snowdon and runs like Bittersweet, Needles Eye and Cruise Control b/c of the top to bottom intermediate terrain there. Third, it enables you to legitimately utilize Pico as a key base area/entry point. Pico is massively underutilized with great, empty terrain and efficient, empty lifts. Even better, this massive new slice of terrain can be served with the current lodge footprint at RH and Pico. Maybe you add a small cabin in the middle ala the base of Needle's Eye, but that's it. Regardless, you could increase skier visits by 20-30% and the trails would be, on average a lot LESS crowded b/c people would actually be at Pico and on the interconnect instead of cheek by jowl up in the Basin. This would probably entail upgrading the RH quad to a 6-pack, as it will be your primary people mover to both RH and up into the interconnect from the base village.

Invest in the on-hill product first has always been the golden rule of skiing real-estate. The village isn't going to sell itself - the mountain will sell the Village, if you let it. At least that's one man's opinion.

[laseranimal]

He stated three key areas in running a ski area (and I can't make this up)...."You need to park 'em, poop 'em and lift 'em."

So Nyberg really is marketing to the rich and clueless... I can't believe I ever complained about Allen Wilson.

I told everyone last year that we might actually be wishing for ASC to come back

[BadDog]

Chris stated, in the first meeting I attended right after he came on board, that there were few if any signs directing people to the bathrooms when he first walked into Snowshed base lodge.

WTF?

You've got to be joking! Have you ever heard about anyone ever complaining that they couldn't find the bathrooms at any lodge at Killington? Ever?

This joker can't find the bathrooms -- how's he gonna find his way around the slopes on "The Beast of the East"?????

[rogman]

Chris stated, in the first meeting I attended right after he came on board, that there were few if any signs directing people to the bathrooms when he first walked into Snowshed base lodge.

WTF?

You've got to be joking! Have you ever heard about anyone ever complaining that they couldn't find the bathrooms at any lodge at Killington? Ever?

This joker can't find the bathrooms -- how's he gonna find his way around the slopes on "The Beast of the East"?????

Houston, we have a problem....