What will the future of Vermont ski towns look like?

Submitted by The_Idealist_Realist t3_11vuxq9 in vermont

Vermont needs to grow, and building more housing is necessary to accommodate a larger population.

The Vermont Senate is working on legislation to ease zoning restrictions that could enable greater development within the footprint of the existing built environment. Act 250 modifications are also being discussed.

Killington's TIF district has been approved and can now construct a new water system (!!), access road, and the first phase of a village in its existing parking lots.

These changes are exciting and are important for the next phase of Vermont's history. As Vermont begins a period of leveling up, what would you like the villages surrounding Vermont's ski mountains to look and feel like?

Will the state allow new developments to be built on a walkable scale rather than rely on car dependency?

31

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

vermont4runner t1_jcv0i1r wrote

It’s Vermont. The land itself tends to not be walkable friendly from a development standpoint. Unless you plan to flatten the entire area like Pennsylvania or Massachusetts things will be mostly car dependent.

−2

Unique-Public-8594 t1_jcv5lkh wrote

Would like to see more housing in walkable zones but also require developers to build something charming, not ugly.

25

JaxBratt t1_jcv99gr wrote

Vermont does not “NEED” to grow and accommodate a larger population. Some may WANT it to.

36

czo79 t1_jcvaerv wrote

Replying to JaxBratt (#2,273,069)

Seriously. The whole reason Vermont is special and is what it is today is because anyone with a brain left and went west after John Deere invented the steel plow, and there's never been much of a reason to come here since. You have to love it. But we've also avoided a lot of the worst of endless growth and boom and bust economic cycles. I'm afraid the future is bleak, and there's probably not much that can be done about it.

19

Necessary_Cat_4801 t1_jcvaora wrote

The future of VT ski towns will probably like the future of VT. Continuing to get older and wealthier.

50

Illustrious-Study237 t1_jcvbk43 wrote

No, Vermont does not NEED to grow. It’s fine the way it is. Full stop. From an NH resident with love for Vermont xx

−2

clonezilla t1_jcvex76 wrote

Whatever happens STR needs to be addressed appropriately. Them alone and those that invest in them are the biggest blockers for first time home buyers right now.

8

Jerry_Williams69 t1_jcvfjtt wrote

It really depends on if the new housing ends up helping locals and transplants. If it mostly ends up benefiting wealthy vacationers and investors, we will end up with areas like Gatlinburg, TN and Severville, TN. Over the top tourist traps with poor surrounding communities respectively. If locals and transplants get priority in new housing, there will be some urban sprawl around bigger towns like Burlington, Montpelier, and Middlebury. Those communities could end up being pretty strong. Doubt the more rural parts of the state would change much. Same goes for the ski resorts. The Stowe area in general might explode.

10

wasowka t1_jcvirrd wrote

Wouldn’t it be nice if development took into consideration the needs of people and the protection of the environment instead of the needs of commerce and profit making. Certainly under a capitalistic model, commerce and profit link people with jobs that they need to survive (not thrive)- but wouldn’t it be amazing to build a whole new way of living. A whole new way of life and true liberty. Just imagine.

15

Alive_Net464 t1_jcvkhgg wrote

Whether or not people like it, housing needs to be built. High end homes are constantly being built with no push back. And while high end home building and remodeling keeps me employed, it doesn’t help keep a literal roof over my head.

25

huskers2468 t1_jcvo1h5 wrote

The parking permit/payment worked this year for Stowe to keep the traffic down. First and foremost, Stowe needs public transit such as a tram to allow for easier travel between downtown and the mountain. There are no Ubers out here, which puts a limit on local business.

Additionally, I hope they build both condominiums and apartments for workers.

That's all. Keep it feeling open.

3

No-Ganache7168 t1_jcvwcdi wrote

Reminds me of years ago when Stowe Mountain Resort (now Vail) got the permits for its new village. If you're a millionaire you can afford a ski-in, ski-out villa or a share in the grand hotel. None of the development has provided housing for locals. If anything, the expansion of the resort made stowe more attractive to second n, pushing more locals out.

75

WinstonAtlas t1_jcw22xy wrote

I hope we can learn from some other rural tourist dependent places and build a little bit of rail accessible travel.

Having a smol train come once an hour on some single track mountain lines, like is done to serve ski towns in Switzerland or Japan, could really take the toll off of rural roads that get overwhelmed with tourists during peak seasons. More walkable towns with 5-7 story buildings where both locals and tourists can afford to stay, and less $30 per day parking spaces in the mountains.

9

Badbadluuck t1_jcwadtx wrote

There are studies projecting that many vt ski resorts will cease to operate by 2050 due to a lack of snow.

So there’s that

18

ResponsibleExcuse727 t1_jcwixfw wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,275,244)

Will go back to old fashion work force housing. Forcing us locals to live in company owned houses to serve the wealthy. Musk is doing it in Texas it’s only a matter of time before someone finds this as the “solution” to the housing crisis up here.

4

tensleepmcgee t1_jcwqfec wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,276,400)

Yes, live in Wy, spent chunks of my life in NE. I was checking the VT sub because oddly enough im thinking through lately….

New England has many overlaps with what drew people west, but with sane politics but more importantly safe water access.

The political craziness with come and go in the mtn west, but the water issues won’t.

Where is 10-100+ acres of land with a beautiful farmhouse and barn, close-ish to metros, mountains, no/low taxes, … but also safe water and under $500k (or much less).

New England. People will start doing the math as the water crisis lands. Only counterbalance I could see is if NE loses its snow such that the skiing drops off.

And to the point here - ya that amount of inbound interest will do craziness to the states that receive it. When the resorts and airport proposals start, best to do highly skeptical reviews locally Colorado and Montana went first, I think Wyoming is a bit more on guard now.

14

The_Barbelo t1_jcwx78h wrote

Absolutely, we need walkable towns!!! and I HATE the zoning problem.

Ive been watching a lot of shows that take place in Asia lately (Old Enough on Netflix is adorable, i highly recommend it) and one thing I notice is how they incorporate shops into neighborhoods. You’d think it would look trashy because we are so used to strip malls and corporate areas here but I’m talking mom and pop shops. Specialty stuff, independent shops…I’d love for us to try something like that. I think there are a lot of European towns set up like this too.

It would also be incentive to push out corporate chains. Though, I was just at Newbury street in Boston today and noticed that even with certain chains, you can still have some of them around under apartments in a way that looks pleasant and inviting.

11

The_Barbelo t1_jcwzjos wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,277,057)

Well…I don’t know, a lot of things I wish would change here are pipe dreams. I don’t know why the downvote. OP asked what we’d like the new towns to look like so…I answered.

9

kellogsmalone t1_jcxkdyw wrote

Replying to tensleepmcgee (#2,276,595)

Dude...

If my brain was a dartboard. Bullseye. But I had this realization back in 2016 while Vermont was still net a population loss. The secret was out after the pandemic. My wife and I finally made it work though. And yes, things are expensive, but they're that way everywhere. Housing is expensive everywhere. The problem is Vermonts inventory is just so so low. It's tough for people to get here. That's not necessarily a bad thing.

6

dmccullum t1_jcxmj2u wrote

Replying to JaxBratt (#2,273,069)

Vermont has the second worst homelessness crisis in the nation, so yes we need to grow to accommodate people unless we’re okay with just letting disadvantaged people get chewed up and spit out on the street.

1

dmccullum t1_jcxmtxj wrote

Replying to vermont4runner (#2,272,593)

We don’t need to “pave Mount Mansfield and put up a parking lot.”

There is PLENTY of room in our existing cities and towns to build dense, walkable housing. Just get rid of lot minimums and stupid zoning restrictions.

Vermont can have abundant wild spaces AND housing.

9

HayrideTrail t1_jcxn029 wrote

Replying to WinstonAtlas (#2,274,913)

So you want to build a train station, parking., access roads, an electric catenary, a power sub station and put this on an easement built through town with flashing safety lights. Is this the idea?

1

Snatchwranglerr t1_jcxs29f wrote

Ha… VT is the third most expensive state to live in… so bring a wheelbarrow full of cash if you even want a modest home … along with a healthy amount of tolerance for the excessive amount of drug addicts and scumbags flocking here for our ridiculously generous welfare program.

−1

wampastompa09 t1_jcxw70q wrote

Your very first words are, “Vermont needs to grow…”

Why does Vermont need to grow?

What is the obsession western society has with growth?

3

vermont4runner t1_jcxwnwx wrote

Replying to dmccullum (#2,278,089)

There’s really not. Those existing cities and areas are built on very old infrastructure that wasn’t designed for denser development. There is far more to urban planning than just zoning regulations.

Prime example. My town has sidewalks that need to be rebuilt. The 1/2mi stretch will cost millions to do because modern sidewalks have very different drainage requirements than old slate ones. Many in town just say “pave over them” but it’s not possible because it’ll flood the rest of the town. There is so much more behind the scenes work.

Burlington would require whole new sewage and water systems coming up in the billions of dollars just to shove a few more units per block in. That’s money nobody has.

2

677536543 t1_jcxyvys wrote

Whatever happens, it needs to be done with a car-less future in mind. Walking paths and/or electric monorails over every notch. Don't believe me? Just ask the people of Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook how monorails worked for them!

−2

The_Barbelo t1_jcxz053 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,277,565)

The way this guy talks to people in his other comments I read… he seems to like to think everyone else is an idiot and that he knows best because he is a professional. I don’t think anyone can convince him to think imaginatively when it comes to others, or jump into someone else’s shoes to consider things from others’ perspective. What kind of planning can you even do around here?!? He won’t even tell us!!!

Instead of teaching people about what he knows in a kind way, he just sounds angry. I hope he’s ok…but I think it’s pointless for anyone to keep talking to him.

−2

Necessary_Cat_4801 t1_jcy42fa wrote

Replying to dmccullum (#2,279,009)

They have a higher vacancy rate, meaning more available housing, and it's more affordable than here if you consider wages.

California is one of the only blue states that is warm year round, that's why it has so many homeless.

4

Climate_Face t1_jcy4ac3 wrote

Until air bnb/vrbo is capped or banned, ski towns will die

2

vttale t1_jcya08o wrote

I don't know whether you're right or wrong, yet it has to be observed that you start out with an unproven assertion, that Vermont needs to grow. While continual growth is the mantra of one branch of economics, it is also questioned by other economists as not necessarily being a necessary foundational principal of a healthy society.

3

SVTer t1_jcyco63 wrote

Just need to look at places like Jackson and Telluride. Resort towns will only get more expensive and elite. Those that actually depend on local jobs and wages will be pushed to low income regional hubs (Barre, Newport, Springfield, etc). Land and homesteads are quickly becoming out of reach for Vermont wages hence all the talk around the state about “developing downtowns”.

5

AlexG55 t1_jcydvgn wrote

Replying to WinstonAtlas (#2,274,913)

There's an active railroad that goes through Okemo ski resort, with chairlifts and bridges with ski trails going over it. It doesn't have passenger service at the moment- I sometimes daydream about whether it would be possible to run a sleeper service there from New York.

1

SmoothSlavperator t1_jcyeh0r wrote

Replying to czo79 (#2,273,128)

Skip ahead a few years. Its the post war era.

The stone industry contracted and VT heavily resisted infrastructure upgrades to allow other industry to fill the vacuum (Interstate 92 anyone?). Skip ahead a few decades and we have a brain-drain problem since anyone with a skillset leaves to regions that offer jobs in the skillset. You can't open a business without importing your own employees since none of the locals have the skillsets to be employed and you're stuck in a death spiral of strip malls and dollar stores that looks more like the midwest than new england. Burlington only survives because it has the captive-college thing the Boston has going on but like Boston, the cost of living is going to drive grads out but with a smaller population, it will be less fault-tolerant. The church street derelicts are just the beginning.

4

Necessary_Cat_4801 t1_jcyi8gw wrote

How many more years until they're no longer ski towns due to climate? 20? 30?

1

Loosh_03062 t1_jcylegy wrote

Replying to AlexG55 (#2,279,721)

Unlikely, considering the once-daily-each-direction Vermonter doesn't (outside of major problems)) do overnight6 runs and doesn't have sleeper cars in the consist. The closest it gets to Okemo is Bellows Falls and the best anyone could hope for would be a shuttle bus making the trip up and down 103 to connect to the Amtrak route. Even Killington doesn't justify more than a shuttle from Rutland when the Ethan Allen goes through. I don't think anyone sees enough potential return on investment from building a Jackson Gore station, upgrading the infrastructure, and conning anyone into running scheduled passenger service.

2

GimmieJohnson t1_jcymn6q wrote

Replying to Necessary_Cat_4801 (#2,279,976)

I would say right now.

Vermont needs to stop relying on ski towns for a boost of revenue. Find something else. Develop more into lakes, towns and cities. Relying on out of state money isn't gonna cut it. Get rid of or severely loosen up act 250

1

xmanpit t1_jcyp7ep wrote

Honestly, I left Vermont because there is no decent work to be done aside from restaurants and grocery stores, and I couldn't find any housing, but I couldn't afford it if I did. A big fuck you to Hannafords for the 12.15 an hour and 24 hours a week. Now I live in AZ and work from home selling insurance, making about 26$ an hour. My other gripe is there's not a lot to do. Being from Rutland and losing our movie theater, it just feels like there's no youth culture aside from hiking. If I was lucky, I could go to Burlington, but shits expensive there.

5

AlexG55 t1_jcyuu5o wrote

Replying to Loosh_03062 (#2,280,182)

This would have to be a private excursion-charter service like they have in Europe (for instance there's a weekly sleeper from the Netherlands to the Alps in winter which isn't a regular scheduled service and isn't run by a normal operator).

Sadly I think the financial and regulation environment in the US make it impractical to run something like that at a price people would pay.

1

booksareadrug t1_jcyvvku wrote

I grew up in Vermont and now live in central New York state. I've started looking for a house out here and I check the Vermont real estate market occasionally to see what prices are. It's ridiculous and will only get more so unless more housing gets built.

So yes, Vermont needs to grow. Or else the population will drop as no one will be able to afford to live there.

−2

wampastompa09 t1_jcywnan wrote

Replying to VermontRox (#2,279,828)

I asked the same question and got downvoted.

Our society is self-obsessed, and output-obsessed.

Year-over-year growth is bad for the planet. We can’t just keep growing and expect the planet to sustain our “way of life.”

It’s neocapitalist bullshit.

Ethical capitalism is possible, and we need not be obsessed with growth.

4

wampastompa09 t1_jcyyhmh wrote

Replying to GimmieJohnson (#2,280,280)

Well, as the sea levels rise and people continue to obsess over growth and ignore what scientists are screaming about…we can examine what ecosystems to disrupt to put up billboards in the name of growth.

Continuing to follow the path we’ve been on as a collective species is just a path of insanity, arrogance, and ultimately destruction.

3

jsudarskyvt t1_jcz1lxk wrote

Unless humans kick their fossil fuel addiction there won't be ski towns in Vermonts future.

0

Plus-Birthday1987 t1_jcz3tjp wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,279,528)

i love these people that just rather bitch about where they live than move 😂 we live in a tiny, mountainous state, theres not a lot thats going to make it more “walkable” other than the towns that already are.

is VT supposed to just start adding sidewalks along miles of rural routes? lol

1

Krusch420 t1_jczjynj wrote

Vermont ski towns need public transportation.

−3

wasowka t1_jd04crb wrote

Replying to wampastompa09 (#2,281,144)

I’m so with you on this and I so want a better world for our children. What an tragedy for humanity and for the planet that we are forced to exist under such an exploitative system that permeates everything.

2

dmccullum t1_jd0621i wrote

Replying to Alive_Net464 (#2,273,789)

I think this is the core of the argument. Rich people will have no problem getting homes built wherever they want… the only question is whether Vermonters are willing to build affordable housing for the rest of us.

1

Plus-Birthday1987 t1_jd0i5j6 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,284,546)

“they can decide it for themselves”

seems like they have a hard time deciding anything on their own tho 😂 some people just prefer to be miserable-ists. they get off on complaining about things instead of just taking matters into their own hands and finding a solution

2

Plus-Birthday1987 t1_jd0zpad wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,285,658)

i actually started a kickstarter, gained $200K, then forced my town of 236 people to put in sidewalks along dirt roads and rural routes! now that my kids can walk, they LOVE the 12 mile walk to and from school each day! and on a warm sunny weekend afternoon, the 9 mile walk to the grocery store has never been easier!

/s

2

The_Barbelo t1_jd16a33 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,285,598)

Is having local businesses right by where people live not a good enough proposition. Who ever said i meant Vermont as a whole?! There are a lot of things I’d like to see change that i know won’t be feasible. You still aren’t trying to teach me. You’ve already written me off as an idiot so why should I even try? I was only talking about the ski town, what they could build…no one said anything about ripping down Vermont. Seriously read my comment again. The post is about developing the ski town, OP asked what we’d like to see IN THE FUTURE SKI TOWNS. I WAS ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE SKI TOWN.

In animation we call what I was doing spitballing. People very rarely make entire animated films from one spitball conversation.

0

ANTI-PUGSLY t1_jd36pnz wrote

Replying to clonezilla (#2,273,428)

I've driven an hour south to Killington a dozen times this winter and see the same houses with dead Christmas wreaths on the doors for the last 3 months. Imagine having a ski home you don't even visit during ski season? Drives me crazy.

3

Necessary_Cat_4801 t1_jd4cmvf wrote

Replying to SmoothSlavperator (#2,279,748)

This is already happening. Hiring in Vermont is an absolute disaster and theres plenty of reason to expect it to get worse and no reason to expect it to get better.

If the current gentrification trend continues its hard to imagine how VT will staff anything relying on local labor in ten years, if not sooner.

1

dmccullum t1_jd4dv79 wrote

Replying to Necessary_Cat_4801 (#2,294,215)

I guess I’m just more optimistic on this point, although I respect your right to disagree. I don’t see this as being set in stone. Housing is a human right that’s worth fighting for, even if the odds are long.

1

WinstonAtlas t1_jd62ao8 wrote

Replying to AlexG55 (#2,280,825)

I think you could justify running extended Empire Corridor train per day past Okemo in the winter, if it wasn’t too expensive to upgrade the tracks. Definitely a limited amount of people to use it and it’s a small resort. But maybe it would grow with a promise of rail service.

1

WinstonAtlas t1_jd62uo7 wrote

Replying to HayrideTrail (#2,278,093)

I think you’d avoid creating new lines. See what you can serve with existing rail ROW, and if some resort investor wants to bring it to Stowe, then you could think about what the best alignment is. Generally you want to avoid going through towns, because eminent domain is expensive

1

The_Barbelo t1_jd7q0zg wrote

Replying to Necessary_Cat_4801 (#2,279,095)

Other red places also buy the homeless bus tickets to California, and the only reason they won’t ship them off here is exactly what you said. Clearly from this thread we can’t even agree on stuff because there are a few harsh realities Vermonters are unwilling to face and no one knows what the solution is. Someone here asked me why I just don’t move out if I don’t like it, to a more “walkable” place. It isn’t that simple, I didn’t feel like I need to justify myself to him but you know exactly what the problem is so I’ll tell you…I was homeless for 6 months during Covid. With a job/ decent income because of the crisis, and we weren’t the only displaced family…what I didn’t tell that guy who has since deleted his responses to me.. is that my husband and I ARE working on moving out. We just have to save up where money (a difficult thing to do in Vermont) And you bet I have some pretty harsh criticisms for how a lot of people are in Lala land here. I love this place, a lot…I just can’t keep living here and have a passable quality life anymore.

2

Necessary_Cat_4801 t1_jd8zqkh wrote

Replying to dmccullum (#2,294,350)

I don't disagree, but moving to a place that wants people other than old rich people to live there makes a lot more sense than trying to find a place here. Finding a job in another state is easier than finding quality housing in VT.

1

Necessary_Cat_4801 t1_jd908sz wrote

Replying to The_Barbelo (#2,303,044)

That's it. Even this sub is all posts about pretty snow or dogs playing in snow or "vermonting", whatever that is.

The reality is lots of people, even those making good money, are on the edge of homelessness because they're living in a dumpy VT rental that could fail inspection at any time.

The quality of life here for people who aren't making at least six figures is really, really low.

2

The_Barbelo t1_jd9crcu wrote

Replying to Necessary_Cat_4801 (#2,306,816)

Yes. Thank you. I’m glad there are a few here who understand.

I’ll put it into perspective for other people…I make as much as an X-ray technician. In most other states I’d be living pretty comfortably. Here… I’m living low class. I can save about $200-$400 a month, unless we have an emergency, like my dog contracting lime or car repairs…Then there goes a bunch of it. To move out we need to pay an awful lot. First, last, and security of the new place on top of a moving rental, enough to pay a few months of rent while we find jobs, enough for a few months worth of food for 2 grown adults, two cats, a dog. I have multiple health issues, including type 1 diabetes. I need a few months worth of meds and an emergency supply.

I can not stand when people aren’t willing to see things from the perspectives of those who are struggling, forgotten, and downtrodden. My mother acts like this, she’s getting everything payed for by my stepdad who makes a good amount…and she’s in Lala land about the world. I’m pretty fucked up because of her… And this thread proves to me exactly what Ive noticed about certain Vermonters offline.

1

Paid-Not-Payed-Bot t1_jd9csey wrote

Replying to The_Barbelo (#2,307,793)

> getting everything paid for by

FTFY.

Although payed exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:

  • Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. The deck is yet to be payed.

  • Payed out when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. The rope is payed out! You can pull now.

Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.

Beep, boop, I'm a bot

1

kellogsmalone t1_jda6161 wrote

Replying to Necessary_Cat_4801 (#2,306,740)

I think Vermont has always been pretty exclusive...like since it's inception. It fell between the British colonies and the French water routes and so it never got attention until Benning Wentworth started the New Hampshire grants, even then it was disputed territory. Seems the history is alive and well in some form or fashion.

1

Loudergood t1_jdasjeq wrote

Replying to The_Barbelo (#2,276,923)

Just build more brick block buildings in downtowns and villages, 3 or 4 stories with commercial on the ground level. There's something that incentivizes landlords to keep those commercial spots vacant rather than cheap though, and we'd have to solve that.

1

Loudergood t1_jdatpsh wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,279,907)

This is honestly a big failure of restaurant owners. If they can't afford to pay workers enough to stay(lots of them are reducing hours and therefore restaurant table availability) then they need to raise prices because demand is outstripping supply.

1

Loudergood t1_jdayf4e wrote

Replying to vermont4runner (#2,311,868)

You're wrong on that, they do lots of miles every year and major upgrades to the plant about once a decade.

The overflows are caused by the same thing that causes increased farm runoff, stronger storms.

0