I am making these "GIS analysis" when I can, but I will be going at about 1-2 resorts per week. Appalachian Ski Mountain is on my portfolio but will be copied to this blog (as it is easier/quicker to modify than using Dreamweaver). For this entry I will be covering the highest ski resort on the east coast, Beech Mountain.
 |
| Ski Beech Proposed. Description is below. |
I have skied at Beech Mountain and this resort has some great potential. Sitting at a base elevation of 4700' (that's not a typo) and a peak elevation just under 5500', Beech Mountain's elevation CLEARLY passes my GIS test of both being on a peak above 5000' and having a resort base above 3500'. The peak elevation minimum of 5000' ensures that there is sufficient orographic uplift for a Northwest Flow Snowfall. Now, this peak elevation is not an essential. Poga Mountain barely tops out at 4300' yet still racks in heavy upslope snowfall. A big part of this is having nearby peaks that are above 5000' (Snake Mountain, Roan Mountain, Sugar Mountain, Beech Mountain).
Since orographic snowfall can constitute up to 50% of a season's snow content, every tangible factor which increases this snowfall total is critical. Since Beech Mountain is on the western periphery of the Appalachian Mountains, the moisture content is undiluted and thus maximizes in orographic snowfall. Areas east of here receive far less snowfall, with Deep Gap (just 20 miles away) receives far less snow from an upslope flow. This is because upslope events have little moisture to work with and with this being a stable air mass, vertical uplift is unlikely to occur past the initial windward slopes. For a perspective, there is often a capping inversion between the 725mb and 750mb levels. Above this layer the relative humidity sharply decreases. That is shallow my friends. And that's during peak conditions. I have seen a moisture layer as shallow as the 850mb level (4700') that STILL produced measurable snow. Northwest Flow Snowfall however does not have a very high liquid to water content, so this snow compacts and melts faster than a southerly tracking system. We have had Northwest Flow Snow events range from a 10:1 snow ratio to an outrageous 70:1 ratio (70" of snow to 1" of rain water). I can sweep that off my deck for crying out loud!
With a low density like that, this snow type is likely to have snow drifts associated with it if there is any significant wind. This is a disadvantage for Beech Mountain, as some of the snow is simply blown off the slopes. They tried really hard to make every slope face northward to decrease sun exposure, but this is a case where it takes away another benefit. Had the resort oriented its runs towards the Northeast instead, like Hawksnest, then snow blown off the summit would actually be deposited on the resort side. This happened at Poga Mountain where a rotor kept the highest winds above our research station and actually helped to keep our snow around. The same snow blown off of the summit of Beech is deposited in the town of Beech Mountain.
Another disadvantage to making every slope face north - sometimes the mountain slope is not quite oriented towards the north. Many of Beech Mountains main runs have a double fall line where the left side of the slope is 15' higher than the right side of the slope. Ouch.
Beech Mountain has clear advantages over the other resorts. Higher elevation = cooler and enhanced Northwest Flow Snowfall = more snow. Wide runs give skiers more room to work with and having a high speed quad is really nice.
But has anyone tried to come up here in a bus? Not only do you have to drive up to the summit, you have to go down the other side as well. The other side has much sharper curves and is somewhat sheltered from the wind, increasing snow drift chances. The images I have below are Google Earth derived and are not actual plans but a "what if" scenario.
 |
| Proposed Beech Mountain. Red = new lodge/village, gray = parking lot (proposed), purple = new terrain, black = reclassified ski run |
This is just a proposal using geospatial analysis. The beautiful thing about using GIS and Google Earth is the ability to quickly render a map of almost any variable. One can quickly use these tools to find the most favorable locations for ski runs on a mountain, and use the tools to classify the ski rating for the terrain (based on slope).
Notes about what you're proposing: The defunct cross-mountain ski trail is not in use partly because it has beginners and lower intermediates crossing in the middle of the headwall of two black diamonds and a hard blue.
ReplyDeleteRobin's Run is currently the race trail.
The old lift (Southern/Robins double) no longer exists.
The resort doesn't own the land that you're proposing to build the new lodge on, and you've cut their base area size to less than a third of what it currently is. In fact, I think that's Town Hall.
Oz Run is very difficult to keep snow on - while most of the mountain is open about a hundred days in a year, Oz only opens for forty to sixty days in a good year. In bad years it never opens at all.
Now, I grant that relocating the base, or at least adding a day lodge for the weekend, in the town center would be wonderful, as would finding a different place for the progression park, installing a lift (I'd like to see a magic carpet, but you'd need to modify the trail a lot to accommodate it, and you couldn't put it by the slopeside housing. They might have to close off the middle entrance, replant trees.
I'd like to see them reforest the summit, as well. Look at all of the wide trail before Lightning gets steep - surely that could be a narrow cat track, that widens up before the headwall? It'd probably save a fortune in snowmaking. It's also hard to tell what trail you're getting on at the beginning, and more trees up there would certainly help hold snow when it's windy.
The proposed cut from Lightning to Southern Star makes sense - that might be as steep as the Lightning headwall, and would let them open the trail without making snow on the bottom flat section - but it creates a problem where the trails merge. High speed skiers, you see. That could be managed, though.
If Beech were to add the blue off of Robins Run, I'd hope it would be narrow and a bit turny. That would add some variety to their map.
One other change I'd like to see is, off the double double beginner lift, when you unload and turn right, there's no clear trail. Why not plant trees and make a narrow, easy green run that's sheltered and separated from the traffic coming through the main green run? It would cut off the upper edge of that run, dividing it with trees, and once you've traversed the top, you'd turn right again and be back on the main slope.
If we're really wishing, how about an experts-only lift serving a couple of narrower black diamonds off to skiers left of Lightning?
I'm impressed you took the time to read through the entire article. Thank you!
ReplyDeleteEstablishing a day lodge and moving the entire village is probably the most unrealistic thing I have proposed for any ski resort I have done an analysis for. I do agree with your trail assessments. Robins Run can still have the trail split shown above, but used for options rather than for specific functionality.
The southern star lift is actually something I put back in, but neglected to put this in a different color (to show as a new lift). I should have probably indicated that in the map that this is a new lift.
You've hit the nail on the head about the "wind" issue. It really is tough though that the slopes all have a double fall line. May end up redoing the map above to remove the beginner trail. Realizing that isn't a good option, with the large gradient in skier speed.
The nice thing about Beech is that the trails are fairly wide and they widen substantially at the bottom. It may be costly snowmaking but it gives skiers room to move around. Probably my most realistic "reformatted" resort is the Sugar Mountain one.