Enough of Park City, time to flame one wasatch

[bigdude2468]

OK, so assuming the connection from BCC to LCC is a new lift from Solitude what is the terrain going to be to access Alta? Is this going to require grading and installation of snowmaking so that GG has early season snow and cat tracks for intermediate skiers?

[glademaster]

If they're going to link up all the resorts, I don't really understand the thought behind this layout. Having 2 lifts dropping people off at the top of the east wall of Honeycomb will ruin that inbounds terrain, first of all. It seems like there are better alternatives for linking up BCC and LCC, but what do I know.

Secondly, why are they not considering an idea that would link BCC to PC via a gondola that could run on extended hours? It sure would be nice to vacation out here, stay in upper BCC, yet be able to hop on a gondola in the evening to head into PC for dinner. If part of the motivation is separating tourists from their $$$, why limit yourself to doing it from 9am-4pm?

[Dickeymotto]

It will probably keep people away from Snowbasin, so fuck it, I'm game.

[Bromontana]

If part of the motivation is separating tourists from their $$$, why limit yourself to doing it from 9am-4pm?

Because they are morans. Hopefully public support will keep the focus on easing the logistics of transporting ppl quickly and reliably between PC, BCC, and LCC. Less cars and better public transit will allow sustainable growth with minimal environmental sacrifices. And it takes little away from the ski options.

A chairlift based connection would be neat but degrade a lot of forest without much gain in mobility.

If Utah wants to be a big swinging dick in the mega resort space, they will need to publicly fund transportation upgrades. Resort funded solutions will inherently be geared towards maximizing margin. The resorts will not spend a dollar to improve actual transportation as there's not much money in providing that service.

[Canada1]

Canyons sidecountry certainly is a shit show. While I love the idea of opening up the entire wasatch as one ski area, I am cognizant of the increased dangers it brings with it. That Guardsman B lift opens up some very dangerous terrain. If not controlled, it can present problems.

That stuff is blasted every day by snow mobiles high marking. I've stood there with my boys taking bets on who would cause it to break. The connection to Brighton as the first interconnect that makes actual logistical sense. As far as a transportation solution, I don't see it. I was against Ski link to the point I actually got off my but and did something about it. Barring unknown facts coming to light, I do not mind the Brighton to PCMR chair. It is the logical solution that Talisker attempted to avoid by circumventing the forest service public debate process and bribing our congressmen. The stuff between the two cottonwoods will be much more controversial. That is some prime backcountry.

[Sirshredalot]

That stuff is blasted every day by snow mobiles high marking. I've stood there with my boys taking bets on who would cause it to break. The connection to Brighton as the first interconnect that makes actual logistical sense. As far as a transportation solution, I don't see it. I was against Ski link to the point I actually got off my but and did something about it. Barring unknown facts coming to light, I do not mind the Brighton to PCMR chair. It is the logical solution that Talisker attempted to avoid by circumventing the forest service public debate process and bribing our congressmen. The stuff between the two cottonwoods will be much more controversial. That is some prime backcountry.

The thing that annoys me is that this proposal is pitched, at least in part, as a public transit enhancement that can reduce traffic. As currently proposed, that's just not true. At a minimum, public transit would mean a bi directional gondy that stays open late. I've read stuff from people pushing for a tunnel with a train, but my guess is that pushing a tunnel boring machine through there would be really really expensive.

[criscam]

It will probably keep people away from Snowbasin, so fuck it, I'm game.

apparantly you haven't heard of the the 2nd installment of the plan...

still trying to understand how ticket prices/passes would work. esp for locals.

[F#*k you cat]

Sir Shred
FYI
there is already a tunnel linking Honeycomb to Alta. It is an old mining tunnel. The whole range is riddled with old shafts and tunnels from all the late 1800's and early 1900's mining. Not saying that I approve of this hell brained idea...just saying the difficult work has already been done by the silver prospectors back when Emma, Catherine, Mary, Martha were all sluts.

CAT

[Sirshredalot]

Sir Shred
FYI
there is already a tunnel linking Honeycomb to Alta. It is an old mining tunnel. The whole range is riddled with old shafts and tunnels from all the late 1800's and early 1900's mining. Not saying that I approve of this hell brained idea...just saying the difficult work has already been done by the silver prospectors back when Emma, Catherine, Mary, Martha were all sluts.

CAT

Yeah I've heard that, but I can't imagine the old mining tunnels could work for modern public transit without sinking a ton of cash into rebuilding them.

[bigdude2468]

Yeah I've heard that, but I can't imagine the old mining tunnels could work for modern public transit without sinking a ton of cash into rebuilding them.

Did a search and FWIW Seattle built a tunnel in 2005 for a subway, cost was about $600 million per mile. One consideration would be in the Wasatch the boring is rock versus typical coastal soils and just the process of getting a boring machine on site at several thousand feet. Pretty expensive proposition for essentially seasonal use. Also think about how you dispose of the excavated material? Hey its just money but honestly the problem with transportation in my view in not PC to LCC or BCC, its the traffic in the canyons from us locals and tourist staying in the valley. On a typical weekend what % of LCC skiers are from further than 20 miles from the mouth of the canyon, that or a similar number must be out there with all the studies that have been done.

[Johnny Deep]

Pack a lunch in your pack.

Why do so many of you insist on covering the whole interconnect in a day? That's not the point. Connecting two or three in a day is just fine. Then the next day connecting a couple more or whatever. Ya ya buying one day ticket at 100+ to traverse 6 ski areas sounds dumb because it is but what about skiing two in a day to ski right to the lodge you are staying at that night? Then the next day going to another area to do the same thing. This sounds like a super cool ski vacation experience that we don't have yet in the US.

Don't think for a moment that $100+ lift ticket will get you into all those resorts. SB/Alta is already $100+ Dail DV into this mess and it will mostlikely end up being $200+

[Sirshredalot]

Did a search and FWIW Seattle built a tunnel in 2005 for a subway, cost was about $600 million per mile. One consideration would be in the Wasatch the boring is rock versus typical coastal soils and just the process of getting a boring machine on site at several thousand feet. Pretty expensive proposition for essentially seasonal use. Also think about how you dispose of the excavated material? Hey its just money but honestly the problem with transportation in my view in not PC to LCC or BCC, its the traffic in the canyons from us locals and tourist staying in the valley. On a typical weekend what % of LCC skiers are from further than 20 miles from the mouth of the canyon, that or a similar number must be out there with all the studies that have been done.

You're right that most people are probably driving up from Salt Lake and it's close-in suburbs. Just improving bus/TRAX service is almost certainly the most cost-effective thing to do. Of course, enhanced bus service doesn't get you publicity from Ski Magazine.

But if the resorts/tourism industry are hell-bent on connecting the resorts directly, we could at least get some sort of benefit in better transit from it. I MIGHT take a bi-directional BCC to PC gondola, and tourists and old town PC residents definitely would to one degree or another. The lifts as currently proposed on Guardsman have 0 appeal as transit.

[glademaster]

Don't think for a moment that $100+ lift ticket will get you into all those resorts. SB/Alta is already $100+ Dail DV into this mess and it will mostlikely end up being $200+

It can't be priced like that if they're hoping to sell any. Even linking all 7 resorts doesn't net you a whole lot more skiable acreage than Whistler/Blackcomb, and they aren't charging $200/day.

There needs to be a transit link from PC to BCC for this idea to make any sense at all, whether it is a Gondola that goes up and over, or a train that runs over Guardsman. That would involve repaving that road, but it would certainly be Euro.

[Grape_Ape]

I have never skied in Utah, but I would be interested in hopping around euro-style between different valleys. Having Big Sky and Moonlight Basin on one pass is real cool as sometimes different parts of the mountain get different snow/sun/shade/wind. I don't know Wasatch weather, but I assume the same applies ?

I live in Baltimore, which makes me a LCC/BCC regular.

Yes, it applies.

I am pretty sure that LCC gets shitloads more snow than BCC.

Did big sky purchase MB?

[Canada1]

You're right that most people are probably driving up from Salt Lake and it's close-in suburbs. Just improving bus/TRAX service is almost certainly the most cost-effective thing to do. Of course, enhanced bus service doesn't get you publicity from Ski Magazine.

But if the resorts/tourism industry are hell-bent on connecting the resorts directly, we could at least get some sort of benefit in better transit from it. I MIGHT take a bi-directional BCC to PC gondola, and tourists and old town PC residents definitely would to one degree or another. The lifts as currently proposed on Guardsman have 0 appeal as transit.

Anyone who says this is a transportation solution is a liar. Its a the cottonwoods don't have enough lodging solution. It's an I want the trophy wife to get to show her boob job and mink at zoom and grapa while still getting to ski some terrain I can brag about at the next conference solution. To say this is going to make any impact on traffic is marketing garbage.

[Bcohen5055]

To be honest I'm not too familiar with the area so I may be wrong but if you are a snowboarder at Snowbird wouldn't you have to ride Alta to make it to any of the other resorts?

[Sirshredalot]

I live in Baltimore, which makes me a LCC/BCC regular.

Yes, it applies.

I am pretty sure that LCC gets shitloads more snow than BCC.

Did big sky purchase MB?

Big Sky bought out MB a year or two ago.

To answer Harry's question: there is plenty of variety in aspect and elevation within the existing resorts. Some sort of interconnect won't really aid in that too much.

Depending on the direction storms come in from, they can get "stuck" and wring themselves out in one drainage or another, and that has a bigger effect on snow quality. More often than not, the storms come in from the west on a track that favors little cottonwood canyon. Hence Alta and Snowbird tend to get better snow. Sometimes they come in from a direction that favors big cottonwood canyon and the park city ridgeline, etc. But it's not so much about aspect and sun or shade. That variety already exists within current resort boundaries.

[glademaster]

To be honest I'm not too familiar with the area so I may be wrong but if you are a snowboarder at Snowbird wouldn't you have to ride Alta to make it to any of the other resorts?

Makes sense to me that the interconnect lift ticket would only be available to skiers, just like an AltaBird pass.

[Skistack]

Anyone who says this is a transportation solution is a liar. Its a the cottonwoods don't have enough lodging solution. It's an I want the trophy wife to get to show her boob job and mink at zoom and grapa while still getting to ski some terrain I can brag about at the next conference solution. To say this is going to make any impact on traffic is marketing garbage.

This. It's about putting more heads in beds and nothing else.

[raisingarizona13]

Makes sense to me that the interconnect lift ticket would only be available to skiers, just like an AltaBird pass.

I bet if this happens Alta is going to allow snowboarders or at least on certain areas for the connection.

[glademaster]

I bet if this happens Alta is going to allow snowboarders or at least on certain areas for the connection.

Of all the "justifications" Alta could use for opening to snowboarders, doing it for the good of the interconnect has to be the worst.

[Johnny Deep]

It can't be priced like that if they're hoping to sell any. Even linking all 7 resorts doesn't net you a whole lot more skiable acreage than Whistler/Blackcomb, and they aren't charging $200/day.

There needs to be a transit link from PC to BCC for this idea to make any sense at all, whether it is a Gondola that goes up and over, or a train that runs over Guardsman. That would involve repaving that road, but it would certainly be Euro.

I think that point will be the sand in the Vaseline. W/BC is all owned by the same party. This conflagration has a lot of sticky fingers involved.

[Swine]

However, I'd bet a lot of skiers would get into LCC and take UTA back to the PC area. The other alternative is just try to get into the next canyon, not all 3, in one day.

Riding a slow bus for 1.5 hours still in gear at the end of the day sounds terrible, but maybe you're into that kind of thing.

.....Say you start at Snowbird. Ride the Peruvian, then the tunnel, ski down to Baldy Express and ride it, cross to Alta and ski down it. How long does that take the average skier, 45 minutes with no lines? Then ride the new Grizzly and Honeycomb lifts, and ski down to the base of Brighton - another 30 minutes? Ride the great western lift, ski down to Guardsmen B, ride it to the top of PCMR - another 30 minutes. So, less than 2 hours later, you're at the top of PCMR (this is dumb), having skied 4 runs and ridden 7 lifts. Interesting.

Don't forget that on big days pdog will be on hold until 11 AM now, that should make this clusterfuck of a plan even more fun.

Looks ok but impossible to ski in one day so I bet it's pretty gay!

You've officially solidified yourself as an idiot, congratulations moran.

This is a bad idea.

Snowbird, Alta, Solitude and Brighton are awesome for skiers interested in terrain and snow. Park City resorts have decent terrain and snow, but pale in comparison to the Cottonwood Canyons. What Park City can provide, that the Cottonwoods cannot (so much), is luxury lodging and dining, etc.. Furthermore, the Cottonwoods resorts are very near downtown SLC. So you can stay in downtown SLC which has great dining/nightlife opportunities (for Utah) and drive or take public transportation to Snowbird, Alta, Solitude and/or Brighton. Those resorts are about 30 minutes away. I should probably also mention that Alta and Snowbird are already connected as are Solitude and Brighton; however, those connections are rarely utilized as each of those resorts deserve at least a whole day (if not more) of exploration.

I was previously a devoted, repeat tourist before I moved here and I promise you that this interconnection will do nothing for you.

What it does do is permanently reclassifies natural mountain forested terrain into clear cut, access road, ski lift bullshit. The central Wasatch range is small - I can run (human power) North to South or East to West across the area encompassing these ski areas in a half day. It is so small. We need to preserve what is left. We have 10 world class ski resorts with an hour or so drive of SLC airport. That's not enough?

You're not allowed to have an opinion, SFB says so and he's ubercore. Hey Dibbs, maybe you should preface all your posts here with a disclaimer about who writes your checks/kicks you free gear. Also, if you can please inform us on how OneWasatch is a step in the right direction, we're all ears.

It will probably keep people away from Snowbasin, so fuck it, I'm game.

Mostly true, except I'll abandon LCC/BCC/PC and you'll have one more to add to SB/Powmow.

I live in Baltimore, which makes me a LCC/BCC regular.

Yes, it applies.

I am pretty sure that LCC gets shitloads more snow than BCC.

Did big sky purchase MB?

The last few years Big vs. Little has been around 40 - 60" difference, not shitloads in my opinion, especially with the crowds in Little. Boyne is taking over the world (they bought Moonlight - so yes, Big Sky purchased MB).

Anyone who says this is a transportation solution is a liar. Its a the cottonwoods don't have enough lodging solution. It's an I want the trophy wife to get to show her boob job and mink at zoom and grapa while still getting to ski some terrain I can brag about at the next conference solution. To say this is going to make any impact on traffic is marketing garbage.

Truth right there.

For anyone who doesn't live here; try to be circumspect with your opinions. This is a tiny little slice of mountains that is already heavily pressured by the SLC metro area. Attracting even more people to this area to vacation turns this place into even more of a shitshow than what it already is; I mean, the fucking backcountry has bumps and predictable skier compaction. And gone are the days that you can drop into the cirque after noon and still get a fresh line. Infinite growth is not possible. Having said that, a sustainable transit solution is desirable, but as others have noted, this is not one. It is a thinly veiled PR campaign to bring in more tourists, sell more condos, install more "ammenities", clog up the resorts, eliminate backcountry, and string lifts through public land.

[raisingarizona13]

It was a sarcastic comment toward the comments that the interconnect should be skied within a day to be valuable. And.......there is no a in moron.

[bigdude2468]

This. It's about putting more heads in beds and nothing else.

I have been saying this from the start, but this is what I don't understand. If you are Vail and you get control of PCMR why in the fuck do you want to send skiers that are lodging in Park City (your properties or someone else's) and have them get on a chair and high tail it to BCC or LCC for the day? I would assume anyone with an Epic pass could walk up, get on a chair and end up spending their money somewhere else for the day. The whole Epic pass concept is to get them to your resort and watch the cash registers spin from everything else they purchase. The big winner ends up being Alta who owns no lodging, has minimal lodging on site and a whole bunch of people show up and buy lift tickets, lunch and trinkets which is how they make their money.

Somebody tell me what you think the terrain would be like getting into Alta from where the proposed Honeycomb lift would drop you off? I ski GG but as I said before south facing early in the year could be a challenge, have to have substantial snowmaking.