Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 108

Thread: LP development

  1. #31

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Waitsfield, VT
    Posts
    124
    Consider the parking implications of reducing access.



    Another major point to leaving the top of the Village Double with access to Out to Lunch is that several hundred people use that for home and condo access. They will now drive to the parking lot if they can't get home at the end of the day or if it becomes inconvenient because they have to take GH.

    The publicity material states Sugarbush's desire to integrate Rice Brook and the base area into the Old Sugarbush Village. If access is reduced to the Village homes, Row Houses, Villager, Forum, Mountainside, Castlerock, Clariere, etc condos, it may do the opposite. We know several families who own Summit and Unihab condos who use Out to Lunch and walk down East Rd to get home. As full-time residents, we see a surprising amount of traffic on this trail and every morning we welcome skiers entering at our trail spur opposite East Rd which feeds Out to Lunch.

    If the powers that be are in doubt, I am happy to document this with photographs of happy guests with ski-in/ski-out access and smiles on their faces.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Only go where the hobbits roam....
    Posts
    97
    I don't own a condo in the Village and I don't plan on buying one of Win's new places, but why is they new development and changes to the VD a slight on the village itself? SB doesn't own the village any longer, so what does SB owe the village? If SB were walling up Out to Lunch and building hedge rows between the village and the base area I could see people have an issue, but the plan keeps the existing trail, updates a slower-than-hell-erector-set-style lift and puts a significant investment back into the valley (again).

    I would challenge the owners of the Village to ask what are they doing to make the place better? What are their development plans? How are they going to attract all these owners to walk north when they want a pint? The village looks rundown and a bit trashy (sorry to the owners). Broken concrete, overgrown plants, buildings in need of intensive repair / replacement. Seems to me that the village residents has a huge benefactor next door who's investment will only improve the value of the village.

  3. #33
    + 1 muddy hollow.
    It seems to me SB has made every effort to make the Village happy by adding 75 parking spacing and making sure there is connectivity to the
    Village. If I were a business owner in the village I would be very happy with the plans - as they will directly benefit more than anyone.

    Although I enjoy the village and it's proximity to where I live, the place is in need of some major capital improvements/maintenance,.... Looks like nothing has been done since the 60's.

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Waitsfield, VT
    Posts
    124
    Hi Muddy, the resort owns all the roads in the Village, including the Old Village parking lot "Gaza Strip" area, and does, IMO, a minimum of maintenance to get by. I routinely write to get potholes fixed, signage repaired, and regarding water issues - though they do respond reasonably quickly. They charge property owners about $400 a year to maintain roads alone. It is not up to the property owners to maintain, but up to the Resort. It is actually written in our deeds that we pay dues to SB for roads, water, and sewer. The annual fees for my home to the resort are about $3,000 on top of taxes. They have deeded responsibility for infrastructure and run it as a business. For example, private wells and septic systems are prohibited by deed.

    How is it that we benefit (huge benefactor next door) from the resort, when all the dollars we spend to live here go to service the Resort? Additionally, almost all homes or condos in the Village area, nearly every property served by the Access Rd or German Flats, are available for rent - the sole purpose being lodging for skiers and riders, wedding guests, golfers, etc. at the Resort. The exception is about 40 year-round families, ours included. When we bought in 2002, there was no Clay Brook, Rice Brook, or other resort-owned property developments. It is hard to say whether there has been any real influence on our property value from Clay Brook or the new base area improvements. It is good for the Resort as a whole however, and there is probably reciprocal value for us too as such.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Saratoga Springs, NY
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by djd66 View Post
    + 1 muddy hollow.
    It seems to me SB has made every effort to make the Village happy by adding 75 parking spacing and making sure there is connectivity to the
    Village. If I were a business owner in the village I would be very happy with the plans - as they will directly benefit more than anyone.

    Although I enjoy the village and it's proximity to where I live, the place is in need of some major capital improvements/maintenance,.... Looks like nothing has been done since the 60's.
    Fair points about the village needing to take care if itself and the potential benefit to the village as a result of the development. There are a lot of condos up there and I am always suprised that there are not business that can make it work over there. The owners pay dues for the roads, and as I understand it, the parking so they have a legitimate interest in the changes there. As for the easy rider trail and lift, it does not seem like the optimal situation to further limit beginner terrain and worsen the ease of access between the condos and the base. The situation is less than ideal now, so if possible, don't make it worse. I also think the new condo owners will want/expect to easily travel between the village and the base so Sugarbush should have an interest in the viability of the village and accompanying condos. The both will beneift from a cohesive base area with enhanced ski in/ski-out and more convenient foot travel. In fact, many planners will tell you that people will pay more for a home (purchase price or rent) for walkability and as sense of place in "urban" like development. There are also "green" benefits and a potential alleviation of parking issues by having enhanced connectivity by ski or foot. Maybe the cost is prohibitive? Maybe the space limitations don't allow it?

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Only go where the hobbits roam....
    Posts
    97
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post

    MH, as Ducky points out, we do pay money to the mountain for maintance. They do very little. When Win was asked a couple of years ago in the Community day meeting if they were going to fix the roads, the statement back was" We are not in the road business". I guess at that point we sould have rebelled and stop payiing our fees for the road. Right? You know I do live here and I bought here so anything that is taken away just plain sucks to me. It's a matter of perspective.

    I own up the road and I pay my road, water, and sewer fees like the rest of the condo owners, the value vs. dollar spent was not the point of my original post. Personally, I think it's expensive and considering the number of condos there it's probably a net plus for the resort. I don't care for the DPW in my town either and think there's to many hangers on to the tax-tit for the amount of work. Oh well...

    I think it's great to see an investment into the valley during this *really* crap economy and at the end of the day the area (not just the village) will benefit when (if) the real estate market starts to return from the investment from Summit Ventures (across the board). But in my opinion, the Village has the most to gain (because of proximity) and the best opportunity to capitalize on all the potential new foot traffic. Sure, if Summit Ventures owned the village outright, there might be better maintenance or a unified plan. Someone else owns the property and shame on them for letting it go into disrepair. I got to Chez Henri, Pizza Soul, Mtn Side, and the Pinetree but it doesn't mean I'm blind to the fact that the owners are doing a disservice to the condos and the businesses that are there because it looks poor and is maintained poorly. Even smells old.

    I guess I don't understand the magnitude of what you're loosing. You still have access to Out to Lunch but you might have to do some extra huffing and puffing to get to the base area. Anyways, let's hope the hot tubs at Rice Brook are filled with bikini clad ladies that way you'll give that little extra skate effort as you pass by

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Saratoga Springs, NY
    Posts
    74
    Muddy and Stan -- agree with both of your points (especially bikini clad young ladies). Certainly, SB should "maximize" the limited development opportuity in a way the benefits its bottom line and the Village is a debacle. I am generally pro-development and fully in support private property rights and the right to develop the land in the way in which you deem appropriate. However, my concern is the long term view and that the improper connectivity will be much harder to fix after construction. Revitalization of the Village, while in no way SV's obligation, will benefit the mountain and the current owners of it. SV does own and operate the Day Care over there so I think revitalization is also a concern for SV. The decision to keep it over there are not intergrate at the Schoolhouse was unfortunate and makes things unnecessarily difficult for people with 2, 5, and 7 year olds (multiple drop offs and shuttling around). Many times these are the people the mountain is trying to attract and cultivate as long term customers or better yet, Rice Brook owners. My points are merely suggestions to improve the plan and by no means intended to crticize SV.

    By the way, does anyone know if there is walkway to connect the village to the base? I could not tell from the map but it looks to me that there is not. If there is not a walkway, I think it is short-sighted and mistake.

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by sgottmann View Post
    Muddy and Stan -- agree with both of your points (especially bikini clad young ladies). Certainly, SB should "maximize" the limited development opportuity in a way the benefits its bottom line and the Village is a debacle. I am generally pro-development and fully in support private property rights and the right to develop the land in the way in which you deem appropriate. However, my concern is the long term view and that the improper connectivity will be much harder to fix after construction. Revitalization of the Village, while in no way SV's obligation, will benefit the mountain and the current owners of it. SV does own and operate the Day Care over there so I think revitalization is also a concern for SV. The decision to keep it over there are not intergrate at the Schoolhouse was unfortunate and makes things unnecessarily difficult for people with 2, 5, and 7 year olds (multiple drop offs and shuttling around). Many times these are the people the mountain is trying to attract and cultivate as long term customers or better yet, Rice Brook owners. My points are merely suggestions to improve the plan and by no means intended to crticize SV.

    By the way, does anyone know if there is walkway to connect the village to the base? I could not tell from the map but it looks to me that there is not. If there is not a walkway, I think it is short-sighted and mistake.
    i think there is a walkway on the plans, but i still dont see where the relocated lift ends.

    fwiw-we made the same point about the day care in discussing the planning for the schoolhouse.

    and yes, more bikini clad woman

  9. #39
    Hawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Just ahead of you in the woods....
    Posts
    1,823
    Ya I don't know why this turned into a road and taxes discussion. I just want the new lift to go about 50 yards higher so I can avoid using Gate House. Pretty simple. and Yes on Bikini clad women.
    The walkway is on several of the drawings on the link. Just open and enlarge and see. I really have no issues with the village layout. Why they are concentrating on realestate in a down market it beyond me but hey, they are the experts I guess.
    Trouble with you is the trouble with me,
    Got two good eyes but we still don’t see!

  10. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    Ya I don't know why this turned into a road and taxes discussion. I just want the new lift to go about 50 yards higher so I can avoid using Gate House. Pretty simple. and Yes on Bikini clad women.
    The walkway is on several of the drawings on the link. Just open and enlarge and see. I really have no issues with the village layout. Why they are concentrating on realestate in a down market it beyond me but hey, they are the experts I guess.
    I think the reason they are moving on this in an uncertain market has been touched upon in the discussion above. connecting sb village to the base is vital to the resort as a whole. the day care is over there. a fine restaurant, bar/pub, pizza shop, deli and ski shop are marooned over there. if you're staying at claybrook and you love timbers, there's only so many times you're going to eat there. they wanted to do this at the same time as claybrook but couldnt. so they are taking the risk to start this spring.

  11. #41

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Waitsfield, VT
    Posts
    124
    Just to be sure we all understand, SB is actually taking away public parking spaces in the Village lot. Yes, they are adding 75 dedicated underground spaces for Rice Brook, however they are reducing the existing number of public spaces from 75 to 59. The Village businesses are concerned, especially about late night parking availability for female employees being too far away.

  12. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by ducky View Post
    Just to be sure we all understand, SB is actually taking away public parking spaces in the Village lot. Yes, they are adding 75 dedicated underground spaces for Rice Brook, however they are reducing the existing number of public spaces from 75 to 59. The Village businesses are concerned, especially about late night parking availability for female employees being too far away.
    I'm sympathetic to your concerns about the lift terminus but the parking plan, even with fewer spots, would be a huge upgrade for the SB village businesses. the existing lot is a freaking disaster area. war veterans mistake the potholes for foxholes and take shelter from imaginary mortar rounds. you can barely walk there. making the lot traversable for vehicle and pedestrian traffic will be a big boost to all the village businesses. if they have to sacrifice a few parking spots, that's hardly much to ask.

  13. #43
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Behind That Tree
    Posts
    1,627
    Quote Originally Posted by HowieT2 View Post
    I'm sympathetic to your concerns about the lift terminus but the parking plan, even with fewer spots, would be a huge upgrade for the SB village businesses. the existing lot is a freaking disaster area. war veterans mistake the potholes for foxholes and take shelter from imaginary mortar rounds. you can barely walk there. making the lot traversable for vehicle and pedestrian traffic will be a big boost to all the village businesses. if they have to sacrifice a few parking spots, that's hardly much to ask.
    Have to agree there. You lose 16 public spaces but you gain 100-200 warm pillows and a beautiful new development on your door step in place of a wasteland. Net/net, sounds like a good tradeoff to me.

    The Village double story is a separate issue alltogether, IMO.

  14. #44
    I agree with Tin and Howie, its a very fair trade off regarding parking and even the general design. The absense of continued direct lift access to out to lunch and utilization of the full ez rider slope is a bit disconcerting.

  15. #45

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Saratoga Springs, NY
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    Ya I don't know why this turned into a road and taxes discussion. I just want the new lift to go about 50 yards higher so I can avoid using Gate House. Pretty simple. and Yes on Bikini clad women.
    The walkway is on several of the drawings on the link. Just open and enlarge and see. I really have no issues with the village layout. Why they are concentrating on realestate in a down market it beyond me but hey, they are the experts I guess.
    I see the walkway now -- on the survey map I thought it was for vehicles. That leaves easy rider and lift as my concerns. Thanks.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Ski Gear | Snowboard Gear | Cycling Gear | Camping/Hiking Gear | Ski & Snowboard Racks | Gear Outlet | Men's Clothing | Women's Clothing | Kids' Clothing

Ski Vermont | Whiteface / Gore Message Boards