Sutton - the untold story .... untold no more

M

Max

New member
Ok there seems to be some interest concerning Sutton... So here is some information concerning the development projects of the mountain. Some may be more or less true than others, as the local rumor mill is my main source of information. <BR> <BR>It is a fact that the Boulanger family (the founders) owns enough land to triple the area in size, as well as add a few hundred - thousands?- lodging units. Indeed, the doubling of terrain almost hapenned in the mid '80s. <BR> <BR>Here's the story: in the early 1980s, the weather pattern made it such that snowmaking was becoming more of a necessity. The ski areas grouped themselves and asked the gov't to fund part of the new snowmaking systems they were building to keep up with competition. The gov't agreed but put a condition: the areas had to build condos. Most areas complied and built the condos. Sutton started building condos on the hill between Mont Sutton and Dos d'Orignal (the mountain in front when skiing). <BR> <BR>Early in the development, a group of French investors came in and proposed to fund the development of the mountain. They projected that the condos would in fact be a first-class hotel/chalet concept - Val-Sutton. <BR> <BR>They planned building a gondola that would have gone up the valley from chair #2, stopping at Val-Sutton, and up again to the small peak beside of Round Top, East of actual chair #7. Another "base lodge" would have been built beside chair #5, with its own beginner lift, the #6. Dos d'Orignal would have been developped, as well as the backside and (I think) the area southeast of Round Top, down the top of the gondola to the Missisquoi River. <BR> <BR>The Boulanger family enthusiastically bought the project and proceeded with adding facilities at Val-Sutton (including a reception hall, an indoor pool and a tunnel system between the units) as well as building the foundations of the new base lodge. The problem, though, was that the French investors bailed out at the last minute, and that the Boulanger got stuck with a first-class hotel that couldn't even offer ski-in/ski-out (without a gondola), and an unfinished base lodge with no beginner lift (this explains why the alt. 520 lodge looks like a bunker... there was supposed to be a few stories over that). <BR> <BR>The Val-Sutton concept survived 2 or 3 years - a time during which Sutton added / changed a lot of lifts (6 in total) and built its snowmaking system. Yet, as many other ski areas after building the condos nobody but the gov't wanted, Sutton came short of liquidity, and the Caisse Pop [financial coop in Qc] told the Boulanger to stop developping. <BR> <BR>But that didn't mean nothing was going on behind the curtains. <BR> <BR>In the early 90s, big fat Intrawest comes along with its Whistler dollars to build a destination resort in Quebec. They examined which ski area would fit well in their hand, and rapidly located 2 ski areas relatively isolated (a must when you want to build a village) within an hour drive of Montreal: Tremblant and Sutton. So those two areas went to planning. For Sutton, Intrawest sees bigger than the French did. Not much on skiing (who cares about that anyway), but on real estate. <BR> <BR>According to the plans, the whole valley from below chair #2 to Val-Sutton would have been coloured by THE village. A gondola would have gone from new parking in the actual village of Sutton (the one that's 200 years old), 4 km up to the area. The same areas as the French projected would have been developped, with one cool twist though: a tram would have gone from the top of chair #4 to the top of Dos d'Orignal!!! [For those who don't know the layout, think of a kilometer-long ride @ half a kilometer from the ground]. <BR> <BR>Very fortunatly for me, Intrawest decided that the Tremblant plans were nicer and left Sutton alone. <BR> <BR>From 1992 to 1996, the Boulanger tried to keep the debt in control. When a tiny bit of money was available in 1996, Denis Boulanger (son of Réal, the visionary behind Sutton and its non-boulevard trails) proposed its family to add a trail on the backside. The Fantaisie came to life. <BR> <BR>Yet, Denis' mind was still full of projects, and was frustrated by the impossibility to have funding for his ideas (a family argument might have frustrated him further, though this is really a rumor). So he quited Sutton and was hired by Orford. Suddenly, new runs started coming out of everywhere at Orford: Frank, your favourite extreme runs over there come from this individual. [For the record, Denis then left Orford, came skiing back at Sutton, but helped Bromont designing its new runs and side] <BR> <BR>In the meantime, Sutton, with the help of a general manager imposed on the family by the Caisse Pop, succeded to pull out a marketing campaign that maid some sense. At least enough so that they could have $ to improve maintenance in the last years, as well as come out with development ideas again. But first, they know they have to improve what they have, as parking, main lodge, snowmaking and lifts are all at capacity or exceeding. <BR> <BR>This created a huge clash between the president of Sutton and its Board of Governors last year. The president wanted to extend the main lodge on the eastern side (chair #2), but the board wanted the western side (chair #2West), as this would not block the machinery access road. The board agreed on the later ... but the president had the building's money used to create a new machinery access road and small parking (beside chair #3). So there was no more money to enlarge the lodge, but there was a road that was no longer needed... <BR>And as the Board felt it was useless, it resigned altogether. <BR> <BR>(It's also interesting to note that they did ask for a permit to build the new access road and got cought by the gov't agency!!!) <BR> <BR>This year, the rumor said Sutton would build Chair #0 (on map) to build slopeside condos beside it and benefit from the Real estate boom. The director of operations said this was not the case for this year, and that the betterments to the lodge and replacement of lifts were a more important priority. Latest rumors say that chair #5 would become #0 and that a Quad would replace it. <BR> <BR>As for my opinion concerning all of this, well I think Sutton could be better managed, though its true that extending simultaneously, in a context of limited space and money, parking, lodging, snowmaking and chairlifting (haha new word invented here) is really difficult to do. I do not wish that they extend lift capacity to much, as I think slope capacity will be reached soon. I'd like to see, though, a high-speed 6 replace both chair #4 and #5 (or even a 8-seater to replace 4, 5 and 4W), as this would make access faster while keeping lift capacity constant. <BR> <BR>And finally, my personal dream for Sutton? Well, let's just say it would be technically possible to carve one single area that would go from former Mt. Écho, passing by Sutton, across the border and down to the Jet at Jay Peak. This international area would include a few peaks over 2000 feet, a few dozen chairlifts, a lot of snow and one happy skier. <BR> <BR>That's not for tomorrow, though.
 
A fascinating account, Max. I for one appreciate the time you spent to compose it.
 
Thanx a LOT for this story Max ! <BR> <BR>Sutton and Jay Peak would be a little bit far to be linked (lol) but about Mt Echo, I always wondered if it was possible to lift-link them, cause I think they're not so far and Mt Echo was 1500' of vertical, which is not so bad at all ! It's the biggest lost ski area in Quebec actually, if I don't mistake. <BR> <BR>It's really sad, for the project of the French group. But damn it's good for the project of Intrawest. A tram from the 2 mountains, that would have been ridiculous. Imagine that running over half a mile long at 1500' over the ground. I don't think it would be really popular, especially after the incident in Europe few years ago that made something like 200 deads. <BR> <BR>About the development, it was surprising to see how it stopped in the late 90s. In fact, they kept the same trail map during over 10 years without making any change (Fantaisie is not on maps). The very first change was that they removed the dotted line for a continuous one on upper Boubou, in 2001-02. (just that was a sufficient reason for me to go back to the mountain) <BR> <BR>About the trails by Denis Boulanger, a big thanks to him, so. Effectively, it's near 1996 that most of the good trails were built at Orford. The first one have been the Lloyd Langlois in 1996-97. In 1997-98, they finished to build the Nicolas Fontaine, which was quite longer than now, with a fork that is now the Lower Lacroix and the other that is its actual one. They also "built" La Passe de l'Ours, but all have been destroyed by the ice storm. In 1998-99, they went back with 4 new glades on the Giroux side : Lacroix / Labrecque / Boogie / Dubreuil + a tiny one on the main side which is no longer official anyway, although funny to ski. The other new official glades (Porc-Epic / Ecureuil) just opened in 2001-02, so I imagine it's not from him, but his presence could effectively explain the glades build from 1996 to 1998 ! About Contour, if I don't mistake, it have been built by Jack Rabbit Johannsen himself in the early 1940s (with Trois-Ruisseaux). <BR> <BR>Back on Sutton, It will be a good start if they finally do the 0 chairlift, as it's on the trail maps since 15 years in dotted lines. There is lot of condos that will be built this summer at the bottom of mountain, so they will need an extra chairlift and few other trails for those extra skiers. About a eight seater, I don't think we'll see that soon, although there is now a first one, not in Europe, at Perisher / Blue resort, Australia. <BR> <BR>A 6 seater could be interesting, but there is just one problem. Where to put it ? The normal place would be where is actually the chair 5, cause there is a base lodge there, but it's a long walk, from Youppe Youppe, to reach the chair 5. So they would be obliged to keep the "4 west" and the Dynamique will look pretty empty, without chairlift. They couldn't put a high speed on the 5 and to keep a quad on the 4, cause the 4 have a really bigger terrain than 5 which just deserve few trails (only Miracle + Alpine in the "normal ones") So the optimal solution (although surely pretty expensive) would be to put the actual chair 5 to lift 0. To move the chairlift 4 where there was #5 and to put a new high speed quad on Dynamique. For 4 west, they could remove it to have the same lift capacity. With that, they would have their chairlift for #6 if they develop the base lodge. Hmm... that's a huge move ! <BR> <BR>Well, it's to see !!
 
I have a topographic map that I'll post today to show you, but for now, I can say this is at 5km from Sutton, according to my map. It's just east, at Sutton Junction. It's a ski area that it's strange that we never hear about it today, as it was a big one before to close in 1978. In my book of the Quebec ski areas of 1972 (where I discovered there was a ski area there) it's indicated they had 1500' of vertical, 12 trails (Sutton had 22 in that time), 3 chairlifts + 1 poma, with all the usual services, but... there was no snowmaking and it's possibly what killed them, as there have been few really bad snow seasons in those years ! (this is pure speculation)
 
Frank, <BR>I skiied there in the early 70s, however it was not a memorable experience - if I do back, it might come back to me. We were more Sutton skier in the early 70s, before we had a cottage near St.Jovite close to Tremblant in 1972-73(?).
 
This is the topographic map. It's really poor quality cause it was really hard to pass it under 40kb and I had to use a drastic way. <BR> <BR>Mt Echo is on right, with a little green circle around it. <BR> <BR><IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/messages/8/2517.jpg" ALT="Topo Sutton">
 
Anyway, Patrick, this is probably too far for link the 2 mountains. I imagine the old ski area is facing north, so looking to the topo map, to worth a link, they should develop first "le Dos d'orignal" on front side (south west if I don't mistake). They could reach 1300' vertical with that long mountain side, if they were able to reach the bottom of the actual side. After, they should develop the backside of le dos d'orignal and from the bottom of that side, they could be enough close to put a lift to Mt Echo, so I think we just can forget that ! More chances to develop the Round Top, which have thousands of possibilities ! <BR> <BR>You went there... how was it, any souvenirs ? (I know you were really young in that time) If you have a trail map of this place, I would pay for that <IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":)"> lol
 
No memories what so ever about the mountain and trails. I have a vague recollection of what the base looked like. If I would go back, memories of the mountain might come back. I skied there probably once or twice - I don't think I have a map. <BR> <BR>I skiied Mt.Glen in the early 70s (ie. prior to 1973) probably as often as Echo. I didn't remember anything of Glen until I went back in 2001, then it came back to me. Mind you, I was probably aged between the age of 5 and 8 when I skiied there. <BR> <BR>The only thing I remember related to Echo was that my best friend's family were gone skiing there, and we joined them. Like I mentioned, Sutton was the place in the Townships for us back then (prior to 73). <BR> <BR>About Development: <BR>As much as I love skiing, I am generally against any major development in ski areas in Quebec or elsewhere in the East. There is enough places to ski, we don't need a ski area at every possible mountain. Especially ski area development as a huge impact on the environment, because nowadays, it's not done for the skiing, but for the real estate and investments, etc. <BR> <BR>From what I read from Max, the Sutton development would be a disaster. Lift leaving the town of Sutton!!! Crazy.
 
Thanks for posting that map, Frank. It really cleared in my head the way everything was set up -- apart from Dos Orignal, which I can easily picture in my mind, I didn't know where anything else was.
 
I somehow agree with your point Patrick. In fact, it really depends of the mountain. As I don't have a special mythical love of Mt Sutton, I would like some new things on it. There is just 2 little trails that I really like there. Ok, I'm not sure if it would be a super great thing to develop the Dos d'orignal and going to Mt Echo, cause it would be so big that I could definitively kill Mt Glen and Shefford... and may be even Orford. Owl's Head is now getting so much more popular year after year that I wouldn't count this one like "in danger" even if it's close to Sutton. <BR> <BR><I><Contour still doesn't understand why Owl's Head is popular, except the view></I> <BR> <BR>But about Sutton, one thing that I really would like that they develop is the backside. It would be so much easy, they would just have to put a t-bar or something like that just to avoid the giga-long walk to get back to #2 ("Coucou"). I wonder if it's longer than the ex-summit walk to reach the ex-"42" at le Massif. It's probably longer. <BR> <BR>Anyway, that's it, the side could be almost as big as the main side, but just need a lift completely at bottom of the valley off Round top, to bring the skiers back to the Alleghanys. it would be crazy to just do some glades, except if they put a chairlift to get back from there. It wouldn't be a so much big cost, doing glades into that and it wouldn't be too bad for the environment. Imagine that, an entire side of mountain of glades, chutes, lines, I would certainly go back, that's sure, and often, even if it was just a t-bar to get back from there !!! <BR> <BR>I just skied la Fantaisie on this side and only 3 times, so it's tough for me to know if there is some possibilities to start from chair 7 and to reach the end of La Fantaisie, passing by the valley under the Round Top. If that was possible, it would be more than incredible !!!
 
It's a pleasure, Marc ! <BR> <BR>And by the way, everybody, don't forget the chat of tomorrow night (wednesday at 9h pm) east time. <BR> <BR><A HREF="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/chat2.shtm" TARGET="_top">http://www.firsttracksonline.com/chat2.shtm</A>
 
I'd like to add a few comments about Sutton. I have been a long time Sutton skier, over 20 years. I ski it less often now and don't buy a seasons pass anymore. But it's by far my fav resort. <BR>It was tough to see over a decade with zero development after 6 new lifts in the mid-eighties. I never even knew the whole story, so thanks Max for putting it down. All I knew is that the ski area was in a difficult financial shape. The management was terrible and didn't seem to respond to the problem areas in running the resort. <BR>The potential for this mountain is really incredible. I kinda think those plans that were dreamed up in the eighties would have been over development for a sleepy town like Sutton. If the ski area really does own land right down to the Missisquoi river, this would be the place to concentrate on development. Of course first you would have to create an access to the summit of Round Top on the backside of the current sutton ski area. Then some consistent runs of 2000 vertical feet could be cut down to the valley. The total vertical would be 2600' to the Missisquoi River. But the last part (600') would be nothing more then a beginner run out. I would create a new mini-Intrawest village in this gorgeous valley and leave Sutton village as is. Even though this is South facing, it wouldn't be an obstacle. For early or late season sutton could concentrate on the existing area. And mid-winter thanks to the lattitude South facing isn't an issue. <BR> <BR>The other big concern about making a big development at Sutton are the area roads. After you exit autoroute 10 they are bad, then South of Cowansville the 139 is even worse it's dangerous and out dated. But I would hope the provincial gov't would be willing to rebuild it as a condition of the whole project going ahead. <BR>As far as creating a link with Jay Peak, once you have a lift down to Missisquoi River, its only one ridge away to North Jay which is an area Jay Peak will be expanding too in coming years. Who knows? <BR>And Mt.Echo, I never skied it, but I have hiked it. The middle part seems really flat, but the upper part is prime ski terrain. A link with Sutton is very possible with only one lift running up the back side of Dos D'Orignal. Who knows again? <BR>As a start to development, Sutton should expand the terrain around Fantasie on the backside. Those runs could be extended right to the valley floor and build a small lift to return to the current area. Would still be a long slog to do laps (3 lifts and some traverses) but atleast some new terrain and would keep crowds low.
 
Wow, Suttonskier, 2600' high, do you imagine that ! I just looked to my topo map and effectively, the Missisquoi river is at 160m and the summit is at 968m. So 808m of vertical is exactly the vertical drop of Sugarbush North. (2650'). The 2 times I went to the round top in summer, looking to the Missisquoi river, it looked too much steep for ski trails, but there is possibly other ways to go down. <BR> <BR>I can't believe Jay is so close to Sutton (what's the distance in km or miles ?) About Mt Echo, glad to see it would be possible from the backside of le Dos d'Orignal, but it would take a really crazy developper to try to link all the mountains. It would be 2-3x bigger than Killington & Pico. <BR> <BR>For now, just hope for the backside in the coming years !!
 
I agree that all of this interconnect chatter is daydreaming - fun, but still just hopeless daydreaming. But Jay's summit and the summit of Round Top can't be more than 10 miles apart as the crow flies. However, 1) there's a big environmental preservation movement in the Sutton Range, IIRC; and 2) not only would you have to cross the Mississquoi, but also the Glen Sutton Road & VT 105 over N Jay Pass as well. While Jay's master plan calls for a lift/trail pod in the West Bowl, I'll believe it when it happens, and it's still a good half to 3/4 mile along the ridge to North Jay. There's a strong anti-development mentality here, too, as the Long Trail follows that ridge. they've never forgiven Wayerhauser for blasting 40 ft off the top of Jay to create the Sky Haus, and assuredly won't capitulate again. All of that said, however, the south face of Round Top looks eminently skiable. Two drainages bisect the ridge in the form of an inverted "V", and you could easily cut easier terrain along each flank. I'll see tonight if I can find a photo taken from Jay.
 
WOW, I hope it, Marc (for the photo). I never thought that Jay and Sutton could be so close ! It's sad that it's a south side in the townships, cause the natural snow is probably not really sticking on the slopes late in season. In the southern QC, I think the only ski area facing entirely south is Val Saint-Côme. The mountain get 35% less snow than the neighbour Garceau + la Reserve. As they're enough far in the north and as they have a very good snowmaking system, they don't have too much problems to operate, but the glades fastly become unskiable on spring. A side facing south in the townships would require a lot of snowmaking, I think... especially if it go down to 500' of elevation at bottom. On this level, if they were building a side there (dreaming Marc, just dreaming), they would be better to stop the main trails & Chairlifts & lodge on top of the flat at bottom (reference to suttonskier) and to have another chairlift going down to the real base of mountain. So they could operate above the flat longer during spring. <BR> <BR>Anyway, this is fun to dream, but I don't think we'll ever see that, although it would be fun and if Sutton was really big, they could keep a trail like "Stade de Slalom" open super late just like Superstar. The vertical is enough great, this is less long than Dynamique. It have a chairlift not too expensive to operate just beside and there is a base lodge not so far from there. La Dynamique could also be good for that, in fact, as it was skiable this year up to may 11.
 
I took several panoramic pictures from the top of Jay March 18 (not digital) as there were spotless blue skies. The 3 hills north of Jay looked like relative pipsqueaks, but perhaps that's my western bias. I was told later at NASJA that they were the Townships areas, but I didn't notice ski trails, which were presumably on the opposite sides. Burke's trails were very visible from the top of Jay. <BR> <BR>The Jay marketing guy, Scott, who skied with me in the morning, made it sound like the West Bowl development was imminent.
 
On last "expoglisse" at Montreal, the employees of Jay Peak told me that it was coming really soon too for the West Bowl. They told me next year (2003-04), but I'm not sure they had the real information. Anyway, they put it on the trail map, last season, so I think we have some chances to see it for the 2004-05 season. If someone have information about it, it would be really appreciated ! (Marc ?) <BR> <BR>And yes, the mountain we talk, Round top, is the mountain just behind Sutton. In fact, it's the same mountain as from chair #7, you just go down may be 200' high before to hike up to the summit of 3175' high. So from Jay Peak, you have the south side of Round Top (2650' high). After that, there is the West side of the round top (I guess nearly 2000' high to the end of the valley). Just beside, you have the south side of Mt Sutton, which one we call the "backside" where is located la Fantaisie. The Fantaisie have about 800-900' high before to reach the comeback. It would be a little more to reach the valley which runs far below that point. After that, on the north side, we have the actual Mt Sutton.
 
It might be my age... and my once youthful enthusiasm as been tempered by the changes I have seen. <BR>The first time I drove to Killington - we saw a huge mountain off I-89, a friend and I had a dream of seeing one day a major ski resort with a full network of trails. We later found out that this mountain was Camel's Hump. <BR> <BR>Younger, I would of dream of the Pico-Killington connection, but I don't want it now. <BR> <BR>I am against almost any development mentioned above. Keep it simple. A whole new side, is it really necessary? It you great on a map, but once you cut the trails, add the lifts. The whole dynamic and the atmosphere of the mountain is going to change. Sutton trails would have to be widden, Alleganys larger would be very ordinary if not boring. <BR> <BR>I have seen some of the best eastern skiing trails massacred to improve the flow of skier. Tremblant's Kandahar and Grand Prix were amazing trails 25 years ago, now they are not impressive. Widdening and removing the twist of the runs as made them seem smaller and shorter. Definately, not as fun. <BR> <BR>Anyway, I don't think it will ever happen - some developper try to get a ski area started at Mt.Pinnacle near Sutton, it was shot down.
 
I didn't see Kandahar, but I'm 100000% agreeing for Grand Prix at Tremblant. It's on my list of the "nice ones lost". About Sutton, first I must say that I wouldn't be for changing the actual network of trails. For the backside, this wouldn't mean nothing really special for the actual trail. It would just be another complete wild side (I hope) with a lift to avoid the walk at the end. They just have to make it come back in front of St-Bernard and to put more snowmaking in that trail under the chairlift "1" and they wouldn't need to enlarge any trail. This development should stay intact the actual trail network. <BR> <BR>About Camel's Hump, it's funny to hear that. The time we went to climb it, passing on I-89, we found it looked like a little mountain. After walking 12 miles on the mountain during that day on over 2600' of vertical, especially on the Long Trail, we found the mountain wasn't so little finally ! LOL. It was october 1, 1994 and there was about 2 inches of snow on the summit... not bad ! <BR> <BR><I><Contour really misses the 3 feet wide long pass to reach Tremblant's GP until early 90s></I>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top