Results 3,876 to 3,900 of 4250
-
07-14-2021, 04:49 AM #3876AF
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Location
- Sandy by the front
- Posts
- 2,345
-
07-14-2021, 08:54 AM #3877
Good point. Is any portion of Park City or Canyons on leased federal land (i.e. National Forest or BLM land)? From my map search, it doesn't appear so. So any kind of interconnect lift system would be mostly on private land, but paid for by taxpayers?
-
07-14-2021, 09:22 AM #3878
Has anyone brought up that UDOT did the EIS and they are also the contractor for any road improvements. Church lady says how convenient.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
07-14-2021, 09:27 AM #3879
Follow the money. Don't even think a second that neidenhoser snowbird udot all have hands in the cookie jar. Why do you think the La Caille option trumped the LCC park and ride. Because someone is getting a big payout.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
07-14-2021, 09:29 AM #3880
Let's retrace all the failed options. One Wasatch. Ski link. MTN accord And others I can't recall
How much money has been thrown at this problem over the years.
Now our best option is a taxpayer funded UDOT controlled option?? Or a Gondi that slaps save our canyons in the face.
Remember all the uproar about ski link. Where are those people now?
Sent from my Pixel 2 using TapatalkLast edited by F#*k you cat; 07-15-2021 at 12:48 AM.
-
07-14-2021, 09:33 AM #3881
-
07-14-2021, 09:44 AM #3882Registered User
- Join Date
- Aug 2019
- Posts
- 136
-
07-14-2021, 03:53 PM #3883
In the original EIS UDOT evaluated multiple other base station/parking locations in the 210/209/Wasatch triangle. They all failed to get through the screening process because they failed to reduce congestion on 210/209/Wasatch. That's how they ended up with no parking at the P&R base station in the original gondola concept. Then the La Caille option comes up and somehow sails right through.
-
07-14-2021, 05:46 PM #3884
"somehow sail right through". Money to be made.
-
07-14-2021, 06:09 PM #3885
I’d like to see an analysis of where the cars are coming from that drive up the canyon.
What percentage are from salt lake county that need 210 to get up the canyon
What percentage are from utah county that would be better served by a new resort up AF/SF or even a road up AF to MB?
What percentage are from Wasatch/summit counties that would be better served by a resort up ant knoll, a ski link, or a road to AF that connects to MB?
What percent come from out of town that could be diverted to something like ski link?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
07-14-2021, 07:39 PM #3886
-
07-14-2021, 07:47 PM #3887
-
07-14-2021, 08:21 PM #3888
Measuring that would involve asking every driver where they live, or scanning plates. That is no excuse, the information is a prerequisite for properly understanding the problem, but if it turns out not to have been done I’m not going to be surprised.
-
07-14-2021, 08:23 PM #3889
-
07-14-2021, 09:36 PM #3890
-
07-14-2021, 10:32 PM #3891Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Location
- SLC
- Posts
- 73
Dug up this graphic from a MtnAccord report:
Much of it was based on the Mtn Transportation Study. (2012) I'd guess there are more Summit County trips to the Cottonwoods now with the Icon pass. UDOT points to these previous studies, and doesn't include a broad transportation analysis. Kind of surprised they don't really get into it in the cumulative impacts chapter. Anyway, this narrow scope is a common complaint, but the piecemeal approach has better odds of getting through all this to implementation.
What percentage are from utah county that would be better served by a new resort up AF/SF or even a road up AF to MB?
-
07-14-2021, 10:35 PM #3892
I bet this also includes the large number of cottonwood canyon visitors that originate their transport at the Salt Lake City airport - technically salt lake county, but may be amenable to staying elsewhere if it had access to those resorts.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
07-14-2021, 11:30 PM #3893
-
07-15-2021, 12:49 AM #3894
-
07-15-2021, 09:17 AM #3895
That guy is such a kook I feel sorry for him. When the Tibble Fork blowout happened he was trying to claim that there were astronomical levels of heavy metals in the released sediments and UDEQ was engaged in a conspiracy to cover it up. Except, he didn't realize that he was looking at UDEQ sample results that were reported in ug/kg and comparing them screening levels that were in mg/kg, so the metals concentrations in the sediment samples were 1,000x lower than he thought they were.
-
07-15-2021, 09:32 AM #3896
while my mine expertise is limited to a friend that owns one and a bit of reading
im super skeptical of bros widening the road will create the mother of all mega superfund sites claim
seems to me if there was a lot of shit to be mined road side
why would they bother humpin shit up the emmas or davenport black bess etc"When the child was a child it waited patiently for the first snow and it still does"- Van "The Man" Morrison
"I find I have already had my reward, in the doing of the thing" - Buzz Holmstrom
"THIS IS WHAT WE DO"-AML -ski on in eternal peace
"I have posted in here but haven't read it carefully with my trusty PoliAsshat antenna on."-DipshitDanno
-
07-15-2021, 09:34 AM #3897
-
07-15-2021, 09:59 AM #3898Registered User
- Join Date
- Apr 2021
- Posts
- 2,895
"Salt Lake County Mayor Jenny Wilson this week spoke out against a gondola and said she favored the bus route. The gondola option isn't "flexible enough," the mayor told The Salt Lake Tribune's editorial board, and she noted people will have to be bused anyway to the gondola's base station.
"I question whether we need a public investment to support two ski resorts," Wilson told the Tribune. "... Might we be better off to just work with the Forest Service to put in some limits and accept that there's 10 days a year when the snow is really coming down, the risk is too high and we just close the resorts? That, to me, is a better alternative."
She's right. IMO it should be more than that: Put limits on access to LCC at the base, close the canyon a lot more often than 10 days, and THEN consider widening the road for a bus lane is my opinion. And have the town of Alta/SB build a 24 hour clinic for medical emergencies (does this already exist?), and let the ski areas and business deal with the THEIR problem of employees getting stuck up there. The hotels are already built with rooms for this. So make SB/Alta more self sufficient, put road workers in less danger, make shit more rugged and remote NOT more accessible and friendly.
-
07-15-2021, 10:18 AM #3899
jen should be more worried about how much monies lettin her po po sic their dogs on unarmed compliant suspects is gonna cost her city and yeah maybe a few homeless peeps issues
can she even see the canyon from her office or even shed the sik gnars"When the child was a child it waited patiently for the first snow and it still does"- Van "The Man" Morrison
"I find I have already had my reward, in the doing of the thing" - Buzz Holmstrom
"THIS IS WHAT WE DO"-AML -ski on in eternal peace
"I have posted in here but haven't read it carefully with my trusty PoliAsshat antenna on."-DipshitDanno
-
07-15-2021, 10:48 AM #3900
I said it before. Ask yourself who stands to gain? Gond =i Snowbird reason= Olympics plus the land holders at La Caille.
Road widening UDOT. Plus Wadsworth construction or who ever wins the bidding process.
As a skier I just want to recreate in our public land.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Bookmarks