Hotel on Mt Washington??!!

[peakbagger]

I'm assuming that these changes, to the county zoning ordinance -- if they were to be proposed -- would require first a series of public hearings, and then eventual approval/adoption by the governing body (residents of the county)? Right?

You are correct. Unfortunately, there are not a lot of folks who participate in County government, someone like Fred King who is hotel supporter could push these changes through. Even if the changes in the zoning laws are not made the state supreme court tends to give the local jurisdictions a lot of leeway on variances and the wording of the zoning laws does give some weasel wording that could justify a variance. I believe that unlike the towns, changes would not go to a general election for county voter approval, rather it would probably be the county commissioners who decided and they are decidedly pro development (and reportedly quite willing to do back room deals).

As for Greenmountain goats comment, permitting is actually not that hard once they get past the county planning and zoning hurdles. The fed has no control over it and the State has pretty minimal requirements plus potentially would encourage it as it solves the sewerage issue on the top of Mt Washington. The Fed can make it difficult by opposing a slackening of the setback requirements as the primary abutter but they generally try not to mess with local policies. The current WMNF supervisor is retiring and it will be up to his successor to decide policy. Given that the WMNF is regarded as a retirement post, the supervisors tend to be big on good PR but rarely want to rock the boat as they don't want to end up with temporary assignment to a forest service hellhole because of bad PR from messing with local politics.

 

[sierra]

I caught a thread on FB the other day, that made me think of the Hotel and it's potential pitfalls. Some people who were not that experienced on steep trails, intended to take the Cog up, to access LOTC for a nights stay. Now don't get me wrong, they can certainly do as they wish, but the Cog eliminates the need to have the skill's to get up there, thus dropping them off in some pretty gnarly terrain if it's a bad day. I mean they leave the comfort of the train and now have to traverse in bad weather in potentially dangerous terrain. I can see people staying at the hotel, wandering off towards the Northern Peaks in city clothes, when a storm system slams the ridge all of a sudden. What was a " intended stroll " turns into an SAR event. Maybe a moot point, if I was a betting man, (actually I am) I'd put good money there will not be a hotel up there.

 

[NHClimber]

Mt. Washington is already a zoo. I don't really see a small hotel on the cog meaningfully changing anything. I am somewhat agnostic I guess. If they build it, hopefully is like the many European summit hotels/hostels. Same with the Balsams -- while I enjoy the current state of the north country, I'm not a local looking for work and in any event do not feel I am entitled to decide local policy.

 

[Driver8]

You are correct. Unfortunately, there are not a lot of folks who participate in County government, someone like Fred King who is hotel supporter could push these changes through. Even if the changes in the zoning laws are not made the state supreme court tends to give the local jurisdictions a lot of leeway on variances and the wording of the zoning laws does give some weasel wording that could justify a variance. I believe that unlike the towns, changes would not go to a general election for county voter approval, rather it would probably be the county commissioners who decided and they are decidedly pro development (and reportedly quite willing to do back room deals).

So do you think this hotel is going to be built, pb? If so, odds on how many years before it goes up in flames, like so many of its New England mountaintop predecessors?

 

[peakbagger]

I am definitely on the fence if a hotel can be built and may come down to health and safety regulations and insurance companies.

Many of the white mountain hotels were burnt intentionally or by accident after they ceased to be worth running, they were built cheap with no regard for fire codes. The last major burn was the Glen house ski area lodge and it burned as it was built with little or no regulatory oversite. It took a hundred years but they Glen House finally figured out that sprinklers might be good idea considering the past history of multiple structures.

The proposed cog hotel is a commercial entity with overnight lodging. The county has finally enacted regulations with teeth and I expect the insurance companies are not going to write a policy unless there is quite a lot of oversight. I expect the cost is going to be quite significant to the point where the economics may go south.

 

[Scubahhh]

Weren't most of those old grand hotel fires attributable either to burning coal or arson?

Say what you will about the Presbys; they do have a vested interest in the area and know what they['re doing.

 

[Driver8]

The proposed cog hotel is a commercial entity with overnight lodging. The county has finally enacted regulations with teeth and I expect the insurance companies are not going to write a policy unless there is quite a lot of oversight. I expect the cost is going to be quite significant to the point where the economics may go south.

That's my feeling. A fool's errand. That summit cone's already burdened enough.

 

[CaptCaper]

I do work for the Cog at times.. I can tell you they are jamming with business now. And I know they would build a very stylish hotel there if they do. Not only safe but they will be successful. Great views from the Skyline area. Easy to walk and hike out. As much as I hate seeing any changes..It won't bother my view feelings at all of Mt.W. Not any worse then the Lake of the Clouds Hut, the expansion of AMC at Highland and other places they want to go or towers that stick up into air or the mess up there at the summit. The hotel would not even be visible most days and when it is most won't see it as it will blend in and be faint to pick up. Heck... I would even try a night there. The price at the summit is out of my budget.

 

[JoshandBaron]

. The price at the summit is out of my budget.

FWIW, the proposed rates for the hotel ($350-$500) are pretty much the same as the OBS ($399-$475)

 

[Raven]

While we have been discussing the potential hotel above tree line, they have already broken ground on the 68 room hotel going in at the base of the auto Road.

http://www.unionleader.com/business...-Hotel-at-Mount-Washington-Auto-Road-04182017

 

[egilbe]

While we have been discussing the potential hotel above tree line, they have already broken ground on the 68 room hotel going in at the base of the auto Road.

http://www.unionleader.com/business...-Hotel-at-Mount-Washington-Auto-Road-04182017

That doesnt bother me as much. Not sure why they feel the need for another overpriced hotel in the valley, but whatever. I would hate to hike the Presidentials and look out over urban sprawl.

Does it make me a bad person that while hiking alongside the cog railway, I was fantasizing about all the trains crashing into each other and and falling to a fiery crash at the base of the mountain?

 

[peakbagger]

The hotel at the base of Mt Washington replaces a prior cross country skiing facility that incidentally burnt to the ground. Unfortunately the new hotel was supposed to be located on the east side of the road but ended up on the west side on in one of the nicer view spots. It was going to be built during the last real estate boom and may be an indication that we are nearing the peak on the current boom. They are building it "green" they are upgrading the existing hydroelectric system already present at the base station and putting in geothermal heating. The odd part is I don't see a restaurant in the current plans.

 

[Raven]

The hotel at the base of Mt Washington replaces a prior cross country skiing facility that incidentally burnt to the ground. Unfortunately the new hotel was supposed to be located on the east side of the road but ended up on the west side on in one of the nicer view spots. It was going to be built during the last real estate boom and may be an indication that we are nearing the peak on the current boom. They are building it "green" they are upgrading the existing hydroelectric system already present at the base station and putting in geothermal heating. The odd part is I don't see a restaurant in the current plans.

**Momentary Discussion of Base Hotel**
Glad they are using geothermal heat...and glad glad to see you used quotes around "green" for hydroelectric. Sustainable? Maybe. Green? Absolutely not. But if it's an existing system at least it's likely not destroying an existing riparian ecosystem like creating new hydroelectric has a tendency to do. "Upgrade" is a watchword. I had understood this was replacing the old ski building. Although for the record, I'm okay not replacing previously existing buildings and letting the environment revert back to a more natural state. I think this is an ideal goal for the summit itself. We only have one Mount Washington. Progress.

Lack of a restaurant in the plan would surprise me too. There's not much competition for food in the notch. I do like the PNVC restaurant but the breakfast is meh standard buffet breakfast. (and I saw the most unlucky restaurant locale in Gorham is out of business.....yet again).
**End Discussion**

OK, not trying to drive this thread off topic. Back to discussing the above treeline fantasy hotel. Dinner cruise around Lakes of the Clouds anyone?

Dining al fresco? There's a lovely breeze this evening.

Pardon me sir, do you have any Grey Poupon? Mine just blew away.

Peakbagger - always appreciate your detailed knowledge of the North Country goings-on and willingness to share on the board. Hope you are enjoying the new wood lot.

 

[NHClimber]

As long as the population continues to expand, there will be a corresponding expansion of facilities in the whites in order to accommodate the additional people. Pretty easy math.

 

[skiguy]

As long as the population continues to expand, there will be a corresponding expansion of facilities in the whites in order to accommodate the additional people. Pretty easy math.

Also the demographic is certainly playing a big part in the continued expansion along with the Internet and Social Media. An aging population some having been outdoorsman and some not will IMO seek experiences that entertain the outdoors without the physical effort required in their younger years. Therefore the potential success of the now either already being built or proposed to be built hotels is certainly possible as these facilities will cater to that mentality.

 

[peakbagger]

Also the demographic is certainly playing a big part in the continued expansion along with the Internet and Social Media. An aging population some having been outdoorsman and some not will IMO seek experiences that entertain the outdoors without the physical effort required in their younger years. Therefore the potential success of the now either already being built or proposed to be built hotels is certainly possible as these facilities will cater to that mentality.

AMC came to this conclusion long ago. At one point in the long history of VFTT, someone gained access to an internal long range study by AMC which realized that their membership was aging and a tent sites in the woods was not what the membership wanted. The Highland Center was reportedly one of the results of the study and the accommodations purchased by AMC for the North Woods initiative are either being rebuilt and upgraded or new upgraded facilities are being built. I expect the ill fated Crystal Cascade Hut would have had a higher level of accommodations.

The target demographics are selling experiences without the work. Retiring baby boomers will go to relive past adventures and younger affluent folks will book a room and think they had an adventure. No matter what, it will look good on the facebook feed.

 

[egilbe]

I ate lunch at the Highland Center on Wednesday after our hike. LLBean branding in a few places, but thats to be expected considering the sponsorship. Still seems like a work in progress. A couple hikers we met in the Presidentials got rooms at the lodge.

 

[peakbagger]

Of course if someone really wants to "slum" it there is always the Shapleigh lodge.

 

[sierra]

I grew up hanging out at Pinkham and the old cottages at the Crawford site. I frequent the Highland center for coffee and the bathroom's and it may just be me, but it does not give off a hikers vibe. It's a nice building, but it's so generic. I agree with the above statements in regards to an aging AMC. When I see an AMC sticker on car, 90% of the time, they are senior citizens. I think they would have been better served, making the Highland center more Hut in style. They could have built sections with bunks, offering just bunks and no food, making the cost more conducive to hikers that just want to crash, then go hike. Bringing in younger people, might grow their base. But, a lot of younger people and some older hikers, don't want to drop 75 bucks on a night. I would love to know the occupancy numbers for the HC.

 

[skiguy]

Unfortunately the Vulgarian nature never took hold of the appys in the Whites. Things would have been a lot different. Bottom line there is a lot of money to be thrown around by the aging demographic. They can't take it with them. As far as the Hotel on Washington the players in local government don't seem to be putting a whole lot of resistance up against the effort so far. Economical diversification has been the tone now for a few decades as a means of survival. Even in tough economical and even War times it is a proven fact that people still want to recreate. Everyone needs a diversion now and then for one's mental health. This Hotel could play into that realm.