• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

Utah LCC Gondola

Decreed_It

I'd rather be skiing
Skier
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Posts
905
Location
Northern Beaches, Sydney, Australia
Same if you are staying up in LCC and you can't get out to catch your flight home because of a storm. The gondola option taking a sheltered line up the center of the canyon adds more certainty that you'll get the experience you came for and reliable access up and down the canyon through fair and foul weather.
Southeastern "skier" here - we take an annual trip (or more) out to LCC as well. I don't have much of a dog in this hunt but very interested in this discussion because we love Alta and Snowbird, how could you not? It has become somewhat of a winter home away from home. As a travel in resort skier - I don't think we've ever been shut out of a resort night (not being able to get UP the Canyon), or even missed a flight home (get down) because of storm timing, probably just lucky <knock on wood>. We have been Interlogen multiple times and, gotta say for south easterners that is one of the most magical things about the place. I've not been there for multi-day plus interlogens though and know friends that have, that could get a little old.

Anyway - I was thinking about this idea you expressed Jim and watching the videos - looks like the intent is you park, get ready for ski, gear, backpack - and hop on the Gondola at the canyon base. I.e. replacing the big lots of AltaBird portion of your day, not to mention the potentially hrs long bumper to bumper stress grind up the canyon.

By contrast, I don't see showing up via taxi/uber/bus from Airport with the kids and a bunch of suitcases and ski boxes and jump on the gondi to get off at your condo/hotel - in fact that seems very impractical if not impossible. Seems clear us ski tourists that stay at the resorts or in local houses/condos are the targeted "market" here. So I'm inclined to think the experience degredation argument due to "reliable" overcrowding is a legitimate one.

Edit to add - I'd take the gondola at least once or twice anyway because I always gape and gawk up and down LCC and wish I could see more of it, slower.
 

Marshall

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Posts
18
I’ve been making 2-3 trips per year to Utah for the last 20 years from out of state. Utah skiing is still great but the overall experience has changed. Skiing Utah was a convenient affair in the past, but crowds, congestion and road access problems are growing disincentives for people like me and I assume others as well.

My 2¢: Utah has done a great job of promoting the city and the Utah ski experience, and now Utah is a victim of their own success. Blaming IKON, Alta, Snowbird, out of state visitors or climate change doesn’t make any difference. Unfortunately, there is no going back in time to the way things used to be. More people want to recreate in the mountains and terrain is limited.

It seems to me that both the proposed train and gondola solutions are very expensive band aids, that will take a long time to implement and once built, don’t offer a long term solution. The bus plans are cheaper, can be implemented quickly, offer much more flexibility for scheduling & future changes - this makes the most sense to me. If I were a local taxpayer, that is what I would vote for.
 

DanoT

RVer-Skier
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,788
Location
Sun Peaks B.C. in winter, Victoria B.C. in summer
Bus traffic only on LCC during ski season makes the most economic sense.

Perhaps public access in the evening and downhill bound in the morning for departing on- mountain hotel guests or some other similar exception for registered guests on their arrival/departure.

Or they could make hotel guests arrive by bus like everyone else.
 
Last edited:

Wasatchman

over the hill
Skier
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Posts
2,324
Location
Wasatch and NZ
If I were a local taxpayer, that is what I would vote for.
There is no vote on the matter. UDOT is soliciting input from the public but UDOT will be able to decide whatever they want to do. A lot of people I know feel the public input is completely meaningless for this reason.

Some people in the Friends of Alta organization told me they are gearing up for a lawsuit but I don't know much detail or if it is even viable to fight it with a lawsuit.
 

Slim

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Posts
2,972
Location
Duluth, MN
Bus traffic only on LCC during ski season makes the most economic sense.

Perhaps public access in the evening and downhill bound in the morning for departing on- mountain hotel guests or some other similar exception for registered guests on their arrival/departure.

Or they could make hotel guests arrive by bus like everyone else.

I love to take a bus to stay in the canyon, since the rental car mostly stays parked once you are up the canyon.
The reason I have not done so, is scheduling (not enough bus times) and congestion (hard to squeeze onto a packed bus with all your luggage). Both could easily be solved with more busses.
 

Daniel

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Jun 27, 2017
Posts
529
Location
Cottonwood Heights, Utah
The SL County Mayor, SLC Mayor, and Alta Mayor speak out against political heavyweights Chris McCandless and Wayne Neiderhauser's plan for building a gondola up LCC. The latter two individuals recently purchased the La Caille property located near the mouth of the canyon, where they propose the taxpayer-financed lower gondola station, 1,600-vehicle parking garage, and restaurant/pay lockers would be located. UDOT plans to decide between the two finalists for its transportation solution to LCC's often brutal congestion before the end of the year.

 

Jim Kenney

Travel Correspondent
Team Gathermeister
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 27, 2015
Posts
3,587
Location
VA
Not a surprise, esp given the strong opposition by local non-skiing tax payers to any expensive fixes. Sounds like they are going to impose tolls so that those who use the road the most; that is skiers, are forced to pay or carpool. Only after trying that for a few years will they consider enhanced busing. Gondola sounds like a non-starter for the foreseeable future. Too bad. Selfishly, as a skier I would have liked a new gondola AND more buses . :ogbiggrin:
 

Daniel

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Jun 27, 2017
Posts
529
Location
Cottonwood Heights, Utah
Actually, there's huge opposition to the gondola and more tepid opposition to the enhanced busing/canyon road widening by massive amounts of local skiing taxpayers. For starters, there are thousands and thousands of backcountry skiers and split boarders residing along the Wasatch Front. One only needs to drive by the large number of backcountry trailheads in BCC and the far lesser amount in LCC on a powder day, holiday, or weekend to ascertain backcountry skiing's popularity. And that doesn't include all the trailheads located north and south of the CC's access points. Lots of backcountry skiers/riders use the ski buses due to the fact that they enter and exit the mountains at two different locations. Check out the peaks and out-of-bounds terrain around the Wasatch when skiing at a local resort or traveling up or down the canyons after a storm. Those tracks you see are overwhelmingly being left by the armies of backcountry skiers/riders. A small amount are there as a result of heliskiing operations that have a permit to access certain terrain but they've been in a battle with the more militant of the backcountry crowd for decades. Some fanatical skiers live by the code "Ski heliskiing terrain first", which is available to all users but has caused lots of conflict between the two crowds of competing users. You should see how many backcountry users show up at a public meeting in protest of the renewal or expansion of a heliskiing operation's permit from the National Forest Service. I've never met one who favors the gondola transportation solution, since they were never given a meaningful voice/were marginalized when it came to proposed solutions to resolving the congestion issue. Huge numbers were pushed out of Solitude's carparks a few years ago and now the same will happen at Alta's carparks this coming season. See the websites for the Wasatch Backcountry Alliance and Save Our Canyons for backcountry skiers/splitboarder's stance on the matter.

I also know quite a few local resort skiers/taxpayers who are definitely against the gondola for a plethora of reasons. The number one transportation solution most prefer to see implemented is enforcement of the state's traction laws. Virtually everyone agrees that clueless tourists/recently relocated locals are the number one cause of long, long delays in getting up or down the canyon where road conditions are challenging. A somewhat distant second is tolling (in both canyons - BCC is frequently more congested than LCC nowadays) on weekends, holidays, and days when a specified amount of snow has fallen the prior 12 hours or is forecast the upcoming 12 hours. The feeling is that the toll needs to be impactful enough to take cars off the road and move their occupants to ski buses. Twenty-five to $40 per day are the numbers I see and hear most frequently. Lots of skiers/boarders use the canyons year round. Few wish to see an unsightly gondola spanning over 8 miles while road biking, mountain biking, rock climbing, hiking, or trail running in a near-pristine environment. The amount of corruption/political influence involved with the gondola is a whole other can of worms that I won't bother expanding upon but is found to be highly repugnant by a very significant amount of the local taxpaying population.
 

Jim Kenney

Travel Correspondent
Team Gathermeister
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 27, 2015
Posts
3,587
Location
VA
Thanks Daniel for your informed perspective!
 

DanoT

RVer-Skier
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,788
Location
Sun Peaks B.C. in winter, Victoria B.C. in summer
IMO, the 1,600 pay parking garage with restaurant and lockers can still be built at the base of LCC but without the Gondola. Restricted private travel on LCC during daylight hours or whatever is appropriate, offset by increased busing. This would be the least costly, least environmental as well as aesthetic impact solution.
 

Nathanvg

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
525
Actually, there's huge opposition to the gondola and more tepid opposition to the enhanced busing/canyon road widening by massive amounts of local skiing taxpayers. For starters, there are thousands and thousands of backcountry skiers and split boarders residing along the Wasatch Front. One only needs to drive by the large number of backcountry trailheads in BCC and the far lesser amount in LCC on a powder day, holiday, or weekend to ascertain backcountry skiing's popularity. And that doesn't include all the trailheads located north and south of the CC's access points. Lots of backcountry skiers/riders use the ski buses due to the fact that they enter and exit the mountains at two different locations. Check out the peaks and out-of-bounds terrain around the Wasatch when skiing at a local resort or traveling up or down the canyons after a storm. Those tracks you see are overwhelmingly being left by the armies of backcountry skiers/riders. A small amount are there as a result of heliskiing operations that have a permit to access certain terrain but they've been in a battle with the more militant of the backcountry crowd for decades. Some fanatical skiers live by the code "Ski heliskiing terrain first", which is available to all users but has caused lots of conflict between the two crowds of competing users. You should see how many backcountry users show up at a public meeting in protest of the renewal or expansion of a heliskiing operation's permit from the National Forest Service. I've never met one who favors the gondola transportation solution, since they were never given a meaningful voice/were marginalized when it came to proposed solutions to resolving the congestion issue. Huge numbers were pushed out of Solitude's carparks a few years ago and now the same will happen at Alta's carparks this coming season. See the websites for the Wasatch Backcountry Alliance and Save Our Canyons for backcountry skiers/splitboarder's stance on the matter.

I also know quite a few local resort skiers/taxpayers who are definitely against the gondola for a plethora of reasons. The number one transportation solution most prefer to see implemented is enforcement of the state's traction laws. Virtually everyone agrees that clueless tourists/recently relocated locals are the number one cause of long, long delays in getting up or down the canyon where road conditions are challenging. A somewhat distant second is tolling (in both canyons - BCC is frequently more congested than LCC nowadays) on weekends, holidays, and days when a specified amount of snow has fallen the prior 12 hours or is forecast the upcoming 12 hours. The feeling is that the toll needs to be impactful enough to take cars off the road and move their occupants to ski buses. Twenty-five to $40 per day are the numbers I see and hear most frequently. Lots of skiers/boarders use the canyons year round. Few wish to see an unsightly gondola spanning over 8 miles while road biking, mountain biking, rock climbing, hiking, or trail running in a near-pristine environment. The amount of corruption/political influence involved with the gondola is a whole other can of worms that I won't bother expanding upon but is found to be highly repugnant by a very significant amount of the local taxpaying population.
Very insightful thoughts. I have also heard the traction law enforcement thought but it seems so short sided to me. It's tribal: appealing because it forces "someone else" to change while "we" keep doing the same thing. I think it would not have a positive impact. Lines for checkpoints are typically horrendous and often the crashes are people going to fast with proper traction. And traffic will continue to grow.

Tolling on peak days makes more sense. Parking reservations or fees have the same effect. Both make busing more appealing as well as justifying more buses and a dedicated bus lane or other way to prioritize bus traffic.

I have driven and bused a lot over the years. Most days, driving works just fine so I really hope they don't mess that up. Storm days and other peak days can be bad. 4 hours is the longest it's taken me to get down which is brutal. Buses are usually fairly empty but there are plenty of peak days where buses go by full or you end up standing in a cramped bus in ski boots for over an hour. More buses with some type of priority is the best solution I know of.
 

Daniel

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Jun 27, 2017
Posts
529
Location
Cottonwood Heights, Utah
IMO, the 1,600 pay parking garage with restaurant and lockers can still be built at the base of LCC but without the Gondola. Restricted private travel on LCC during daylight hours or whatever is appropriate, offset by increased busing. This would be the least costly, least environmental as well as aesthetic impact solution.
I like your thinking but there's this conflicting issue. The two well-connected politicians who recently purchased the 20-acre La Caille property have threatened to develop it with housing if the gondola proposal is not chosen as the transportation solution for LCC. Prior owners and employees of the property made the local news from time to time for cocaine usage/addiction and suicide, which I believe ultimately led to it going on the market. The property is home to a very well known restaurant serving French/Belgian fare for mucho dinero. I've never dined there but did a search online and found that the starting price for serving a group of 50 is $18,000 or $360 per person for the basics. I couldn't determine whether that price is current or years old. I live nearby and have visited the property in the past. It includes vineyards and French-style manors one can rent for weddings, corporate events, etc. Fruit trees and gardens, along with lots of elaborate landscaping and natural, undisturbed vegetation fill out most of the acreage. There are heaps of peacocks roaming around and many ducks, geese, and other wildlife are commonly seen on the grounds. I believe that land in that location would conservatively sell for a minimum of $1 million per acre and likely much more. What remains of open space in the Salt Lake Valley is rapidly being developed and the current owners seem to be attempting to leverage the current popular refrain of "no more residents/no more tourists" to their advantage. Nobody wants to see La Caille become the next Giverny, a recently developed housing estate only a quarter mile north of La Caille.
 

DanoT

RVer-Skier
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,788
Location
Sun Peaks B.C. in winter, Victoria B.C. in summer
I like your thinking but there's this conflicting issue. The two well-connected politicians who recently purchased the 20-acre La Caille property have threatened to develop it with housing if the gondola proposal is not chosen as the transportation solution for LCC. Prior owners and employees of the property made the local news from time to time for cocaine usage/addiction and suicide, which I believe ultimately led to it going on the market. The property is home to a very well known restaurant serving French/Belgian fare for mucho dinero. I've never dined there but did a search online and found that the starting price for serving a group of 50 is $18,000 or $360 per person for the basics. I couldn't determine whether that price is current or years old. I live nearby and have visited the property in the past. It includes vineyards and French-style manors one can rent for weddings, corporate events, etc. Fruit trees and gardens, along with lots of elaborate landscaping and natural, undisturbed vegetation fill out most of the acreage. There are heaps of peacocks roaming around and many ducks, geese, and other wildlife are commonly seen on the grounds. I believe that land in that location would conservatively sell for a minimum of $1 million per acre and likely much more. What remains of open space in the Salt Lake Valley is rapidly being developed and the current owners seem to be attempting to leverage the current popular refrain of "no more residents/no more tourists" to their advantage. Nobody wants to see La Caille become the next Giverny, a recently developed housing estate only a quarter mile north of La Caille.

So, to quote Joni Mitchell, it sounds like "they want to pave paradise and put up a parking lot".:nono:

Maybe they should build the parking garage at an existing Park N Ride in Sandy and have a bus controlled access gate at the start of LCC.
 

Daniel

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Jun 27, 2017
Posts
529
Location
Cottonwood Heights, Utah
Very insightful thoughts. I have also heard the traction law enforcement thought but it seems so short sided to me. It's tribal: appealing because it forces "someone else" to change while "we" keep doing the same thing. I think it would not have a positive impact. Lines for checkpoints are typically horrendous and often the crashes are people going to fast with proper traction. And traffic will continue to grow.

Tolling on peak days makes more sense. Parking reservations or fees have the same effect. Both make busing more appealing as well as justifying more buses and a dedicated bus lane or other way to prioritize bus traffic.

I have driven and bused a lot over the years. Most days, driving works just fine so I really hope they don't mess that up. Storm days and other peak days can be bad. 4 hours is the longest it's taken me to get down which is brutal. Buses are usually fairly empty but there are plenty of peak days where buses go by full or you end up standing in a cramped bus in ski boots for over an hour. More buses with some type of priority is the best solution I know of.
UDOT started a program last fall intended to alleviate some of the congestion at the canyon checkpoints. One brings their vehicle to the UDOT maintenance shed (the same shed I'm told that was always featured on a cable television show about battling avalanches in the canyons) near the mouth of BCC for a pre-season inspection and, if it passes, a UDOT employee places a sticker on the windscreen of said vehicle. Those driving a vehicle with this sticker are waved through the canyon checkpoints. Priority for UDOT stickers is given to canyon residents and resort employees and the remaining allotment is issued to others on a first-come, first-serve basis. My experience is that speed is very rarely an issue in the canyons during heavy snowfall, as traffic is either stopped or crawling up or down canyon. It's always some gaper with inadequate transportation or driving skills who gets sideways in the lane of travel or slides into oncoming traffic (at slow speed while spinning tires). I'll agree that traffic will continue to grow. Utah was the fastest growing state during the recently completed decade and visitors here for a ski holiday will likely return once they've had a taste of our snow quality, snow quantity, and terrain.

Tolling does make a lot of sense, if the intent is to take cars off the canyon roads. With Solitude heading for their third year of parking fees and Alta soon to start their first year, it's only a matter of time before the other two join the ranks (although this coming season Snowbird is selling expensive season parking passes for some of the premium parking locations).

I have ridden the bus (or hitchhiked) almost exclusively during the 3.5-plus decades I've lived here. I always have 1 to 3 lockers (one for ski gear, one for snowboard gear and one for my wife's gear) at the resort every season. I reside within walking/cycling distance of a ski bus stop or the mouth of the canyon, so my car rarely gets used in the winter. When it does, it's normally to drive to Deer Valley or Park City, where I have free lift privileges. That's bad luck taking 4 hours to get down the canyon. I've only exceeded that time period 3 times and tied it once during all my canyon commutes and I agree, it's brutal. Beginning about ten or so years ago, one had to start strategizing more to hopefully avoid (1) time consuming trips and (2) standing despite UTA expanding their bus schedule several times to meet ever-increasing demand. Based on last season's all-time record attendance at Utah resorts, UTA needs to continue to add buses to their schedule.
 

Wasatchman

over the hill
Skier
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Posts
2,324
Location
Wasatch and NZ
Putting my personal feelings aside about gondola vs bus and widening, it is disappointing to me that UDOT wants to immediately move to radical changes (gondola, road widening) without first trying other easier, less costly, and less environmentally impactful options. Especially as it is abundantly obvious that the current bus system could be improved in so many ways from increased parking and increased frequency to start with. And as @DanoT says, bus only up the canyon like Zion has done is another option that could be implemented.

As @Daniel points out, there are more local people in the ski community that are opposed to the gondola than many would think. Meanwhile, I still don't think there has been enough consideration as to what a reasonable max capacity in the canyon even is. One of the local universities (Utah State or Weber State I forget which) is doing such a study but it will be a year before it is completed.

I think UDOT seems to be trying to rush a huge decision when there are a lot of measures that could first be tried to alleviate the situation.

@Jim Kenney. Despite the opposition that has recently come out, I wouldn't assume the gondola is a non-starter decision for a few years. Quite a few political heavyweights want a gondola. There is no formal voting process on the issue. So it wouldn't be all that surprising if UDOT announces the gondola option is chosen.
 

jmills115

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Posts
1,158
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah
UDOT started a program last fall intended to alleviate some of the congestion at the canyon checkpoints. One brings their vehicle to the UDOT maintenance shed (the same shed I'm told that was always featured on a cable television show about battling avalanches in the canyons) near the mouth of BCC for a pre-season inspection and, if it passes, a UDOT employee places a sticker on the windscreen of said vehicle. Those driving a vehicle with this sticker are waved through the canyon checkpoints. Priority for UDOT stickers is given to canyon residents and resort employees and the remaining allotment is issued to others on a first-come, first-serve basis. My experience is that speed is very rarely an issue in the canyons during heavy snowfall, as traffic is either stopped or crawling up or down canyon. It's always some gaper with inadequate transportation or driving skills who gets sideways in the lane of travel or slides into oncoming traffic (at slow speed while spinning tires). I'll agree that traffic will continue to grow. Utah was the fastest growing state during the recently completed decade and visitors here for a ski holiday will likely return once they've had a taste of our snow quality, snow quantity, and terrain.

Tolling does make a lot of sense, if the intent is to take cars off the canyon roads. With Solitude heading for their third year of parking fees and Alta soon to start their first year, it's only a matter of time before the other two join the ranks (although this coming season Snowbird is selling expensive season parking passes for some of the premium parking locations).

I have ridden the bus (or hitchhiked) almost exclusively during the 3.5-plus decades I've lived here. I always have 1 to 3 lockers (one for ski gear, one for snowboard gear and one for my wife's gear) at the resort every season. I reside within walking/cycling distance of a ski bus stop or the mouth of the canyon, so my car rarely gets used in the winter. When it does, it's normally to drive to Deer Valley or Park City, where I have free lift privileges. That's bad luck taking 4 hours to get down the canyon. I've only exceeded that time period 3 times and tied it once during all my canyon commutes and I agree, it's brutal. Beginning about ten or so years ago, one had to start strategizing more to hopefully avoid (1) time consuming trips and (2) standing despite UTA expanding their bus schedule several times to meet ever-increasing demand. Based on last season's all-time record attendance at Utah resorts, UTA needs to continue to add buses to their schedule.
Cars without proper equipment and a lack of enforcement of the traction law would be a great place to start followed by a toll for all cars entering the canyon.
I wish this would have been checked on one of my 85 days last season.

C1BBF11C-6AA2-4632-9478-FD01365F315D.jpeg
 

Nathanvg

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
525
UDOT started a program last fall intended to alleviate some of the congestion at the canyon checkpoints. One brings their vehicle to the UDOT maintenance shed (the same shed I'm told that was always featured on a cable television show about battling avalanches in the canyons) near the mouth of BCC for a pre-season inspection and, if it passes, a UDOT employee places a sticker on the windscreen of said vehicle. Those driving a vehicle with this sticker are waved through the canyon checkpoints. Priority for UDOT stickers is given to canyon residents and resort employees and the remaining allotment is issued to others on a first-come, first-serve basis. My experience is that speed is very rarely an issue in the canyons during heavy snowfall, as traffic is either stopped or crawling up or down canyon. It's always some gaper with inadequate transportation or driving skills who gets sideways in the lane of travel or slides into oncoming traffic (at slow speed while spinning tires). I'll agree that traffic will continue to grow. Utah was the fastest growing state during the recently completed decade and visitors here for a ski holiday will likely return once they've had a taste of our snow quality, snow quantity, and terrain.

Tolling does make a lot of sense, if the intent is to take cars off the canyon roads. With Solitude heading for their third year of parking fees and Alta soon to start their first year, it's only a matter of time before the other two join the ranks (although this coming season Snowbird is selling expensive season parking passes for some of the premium parking locations).

I have ridden the bus (or hitchhiked) almost exclusively during the 3.5-plus decades I've lived here. I always have 1 to 3 lockers (one for ski gear, one for snowboard gear and one for my wife's gear) at the resort every season. I reside within walking/cycling distance of a ski bus stop or the mouth of the canyon, so my car rarely gets used in the winter. When it does, it's normally to drive to Deer Valley or Park City, where I have free lift privileges. That's bad luck taking 4 hours to get down the canyon. I've only exceeded that time period 3 times and tied it once during all my canyon commutes and I agree, it's brutal. Beginning about ten or so years ago, one had to start strategizing more to hopefully avoid (1) time consuming trips and (2) standing despite UTA expanding their bus schedule several times to meet ever-increasing demand. Based on last season's all-time record attendance at Utah resorts, UTA needs to continue to add buses to their schedule.
Yeah, I got unlucky with that 4 hour bus ride and it's rare for the ride to be more than an hour but peak days happen. I also agree, driving mistakes/incompetence lead to crashes. The hard part is 99.9% of trips go just fine but identifying that last 0.1% is impossible and the act of checking has cost and delay consequences too.

Two other thoughts struck me as I thought about this more. First, the budget for the gondola and other solutions is 500M+ For that kind of cash, might there be a simpler solution like dedicating more plow trucks on peak days (maybe 5 or 10?) and expanding the parking lot? Maybe a few turn lanes at Snowbird. A clear and flowing two lane road actually has pretty high capacity. Maybe use some websites and signs to alert when the road is buried by an avalanche and sell some pizza/beer.

The second thing that struck me is that more lodging in the canyon could reallly reduce traffic. Less commuting tourists and some locals who stay for a second ski day. I know that people, myself included, like the canyon in as natural as it can be but we have to share this canyon. I think i'd rather have more hotels and less traffic.


hotels
 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top