Ski area traffic

This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web. We have fun here, come on in and be a part of it.
User avatar
Montana St Alum
Posts: 1163
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2020 6:42 pm
Location: Wasatch, Utah
Ski style: Old dog, new school
Favorite Skis: Blizzard Rustler 9/10
Favorite boots: Tx Pro
Occupation: Retired, unemployable

Re: Ski area traffic

Post by Montana St Alum » Mon Jan 17, 2022 8:49 am

spopepro wrote:
Sun Jan 16, 2022 8:02 pm
The LCC gondola was going to wreck a bunch of boulders and climbing routes and was *only* going to benefit Alta and snowbird. I believe it was stopped because it was making a very multi use canyon less multi use.
I've done some bouldering and climbing in LCC. It did seem as though the climbing community was dead set against it. I was a bit perplexed by their argument, but I think the issue is settled and a gondola system is out of the question. I didn't see the routing and spacing of the towers as an issue in either the small bouldering fields or the slabs on the canyon walls.

Now it appears that they will head up and widen the canyon road to the extent that they can. Some of the prime bouldering, I'd guess, will be covered as earth movers shift debris and the exhaust from the increased traffic will be even worse.

The gondola was electric of course, and even though much of that power comes from coal and gas, it does so from areas that don't have the inversions and topography of the Wasatch Front which appears to be a "perfect storm" of geology and weather for terrible air quality in the winter - a north/south ridgeline rising 6000' abruptly combine with westerly flow combined with the Great Basin that creates high pressure systems.

Using the energy produced in Wyoming, Vs. producing it in Salt Lake is a bit like the difference between sitting in your driveway with the car idling and doing it in your enclosed garage.

And, with the avalanche situation in LCC, they'll all be idling at a dead stop for the time it takes to clear the slides. I thought it was pretty short sighted as there would be more parking available between the canyon entrance and Snowbird for those who want to recreate in that corridor because so many bodies would just be carried up and over the area. Less traffic, less smog, more parking at trail heads and enough reduction to have bus stops at trail heads.
Last edited by Montana St Alum on Mon Jan 17, 2022 11:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
fgd135
Posts: 470
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:55 pm
Location: Colorado
Ski style: Yes, sometimes.
Favorite Skis: Most of them
Favorite boots: Boots that fit
Occupation: Yes

Re: Ski area traffic

Post by fgd135 » Mon Jan 17, 2022 9:56 am

Colorado front range skier traffic has always been intense; even in the early 1980's we'd sit out on the balcony at our "chalet" above Silverthorne and watch the endless lines of traffic in and out of the Ike tunnel on the weekends.

Fairly recently, we made the mistake of stopping an hour for a late lunch in Dillon on the way home from a long Steamboat comp-tix tele extravaganza holiday weekend; traffic seemed light, so why not? Back on I 70, traffic had turned ugly--we got stuck in a huge conga line and bad weather eastbound. The normal travel time from there to Denver area is about an hour and a half; five hours later we finally pulled into the garage! The turns at the 'boat were worth it, though.

I worked in the Bay area in the mid 80's and I remember similar extremely heavy traffic on the weekends heading to/from Tahoe. And Yosemite, for that matter. In fact, it seemed worse at the time than Colorado traffic.

IF I go west on I70 from the Denver area, skiing or otherwise, overnight, it's always on a non-holiday weekday; if a weekend related thing, unlikely as it is, I'll stay over an extra night, whether at a TMTA hut or hostel or even a campground, and return the morning after the weekend, or after the holiday is over, as generally traffic is light.

Btw, if you're trying to get to Breck or Summit from Denver and the I 70 corridor is blocked, you can make an end run a couple different ways--the long way south via I25 to US 24 to CO 9, but usually a wide open drive, or US 285 to CO 9, which sometimes works, esp returning. For Steamboat, you can always take the longer drive over Cameron Pass and avoid I70 altogether, and have a spectacular drive to boot.

Fwiw, that "rolling coal" thing is more the Fort Collins/CSU cowboy redneck experience; in Boulder we just don't see it that much...I'm in Boulder almost every day, my office looks out on Broadway and U hill; don't see it.
Last edited by fgd135 on Mon Jan 17, 2022 11:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
"To me, gracefulness on skis should be the end-all of the sport" --Stein Eriksen



User avatar
bauerb
Posts: 732
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2019 9:37 am

Re: Ski area traffic

Post by bauerb » Mon Jan 17, 2022 10:51 am

I grew up in a small town in Vermont. now I live in a small town in PA that has a ski resort and 2 water parks. the town is split down the middle: tourist on one side, redneck on the other. I live in the tourist side, but grocery shop on the redneck side. the interstate runs through( actually over) the middle of town. that highway comes to a standstill on nice summer weekends and big ski weekends. if I had to drive the highway to get there or get around, I would be cursing it. as a local, I drive the local roads and its fine. the best part about being a local is seeing the brake lights on the interstate and knowing I don't need to use the highway.



User avatar
joeatomictoad
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:20 pm
Location: Houston, Texas, U.S.A.
Ski style: Yes, please.
Favorite Skis: Nordica Enforcer 93; Icelantic Saba Pro 117; 22D HH & Vice
Favorite boots: Scarpa T1
Occupation: I make sure ships float.

Re: Ski area traffic

Post by joeatomictoad » Tue Jan 18, 2022 9:32 pm

fgd135 wrote:
Mon Jan 17, 2022 9:56 am
...the long way south via I25 to US 24 to CO 9, but usually a wide open drive...
Google Maps recommended this for the drive into Leadville (not CO 9, but you know what I mean). Wide open is a fair assessment. 1.5 to 2 hours longer from DEN airport, but super chill drive. Wifey gets stressed with crazy traffic, and she really appreciated this nice drive.

Next time, maybe I'll try to include skiing at Monarch. Doesn't look too far off that route, and I've never been.



User avatar
joeatomictoad
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2020 9:20 pm
Location: Houston, Texas, U.S.A.
Ski style: Yes, please.
Favorite Skis: Nordica Enforcer 93; Icelantic Saba Pro 117; 22D HH & Vice
Favorite boots: Scarpa T1
Occupation: I make sure ships float.

Re: Ski area traffic

Post by joeatomictoad » Tue Jan 18, 2022 10:13 pm

Montana St Alum wrote:
Mon Jan 17, 2022 8:49 am
...a gondola system is out of the question. I didn't see the routing and spacing of the towers as an issue in either the small bouldering fields or the slabs on the canyon walls.

Now it appears that they will head up and widen the canyon road to the extent that they can.
For the LCC discussion/decision, I can see a big tram car, packed with passengers like a tin of sardines, would not be the 1st choice of conveyance in today's "germ-o-phobic" climate... and that's a fair argument.

I certainly am not privy to all the details, but to my simple mind... the construction of, and operation of, a terrestrial roadway just seems higher impact to any/everything in the area when compared to constructing/operating an aerial tramway. <shrug>



User avatar
Montana St Alum
Posts: 1163
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2020 6:42 pm
Location: Wasatch, Utah
Ski style: Old dog, new school
Favorite Skis: Blizzard Rustler 9/10
Favorite boots: Tx Pro
Occupation: Retired, unemployable

Re: Ski area traffic

Post by Montana St Alum » Wed Jan 19, 2022 8:04 am

joeatomictoad wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 10:13 pm
Montana St Alum wrote:
Mon Jan 17, 2022 8:49 am
...a gondola system is out of the question. I didn't see the routing and spacing of the towers as an issue in either the small bouldering fields or the slabs on the canyon walls.

Now it appears that they will head up and widen the canyon road to the extent that they can.
For the LCC discussion/decision, I can see a big tram car, packed with passengers like a tin of sardines, would not be the 1st choice of conveyance in today's "germ-o-phobic" climate... and that's a fair argument.

I certainly am not privy to all the details, but to my simple mind... the construction of, and operation of, a terrestrial roadway just seems higher impact to any/everything in the area when compared to constructing/operating an aerial tramway. <shrug>
They are also talking about a $billion diesel cog train. I suppose I don't have a dog in this fight though, so I'll have to leave it up to the Salt Lake-ians to figure out.



Post Reply