Tram proposed to link Canyons and Solitude

[EMSC]

The simplest, least obtrusive PC-BCC connection is Jupiter to Great Western.

Which is exactly why the Canyons is pre-emtively proposing this tram idea. They don't want to be left at the end of the interconnect ed reosrts on the PC side where few will bother to go. They want anyone and everyone who wants to do the interconnect to cross through their resort and have Deer Valet be the end of the chain on their side. And if it also happens to create an excuse for a few more McMansions part way up the hill, all the better...

Even most of the enviro's admit that some form of linkage is going to happen eventually and Canyons is trying to shape the discussion out front to their advantage.

 

[mbaydala]

Don't think anyone has really touched on this yet but the "Sidecountry" options would be expanded big time now at the Canyons. As most of you know the Canyons has some super lame terrain as do most of the Park City resorts but the Backcountry options outside of the Canyons are awesome. The real beauty behind the Canyons and the reason most serious skiers here in Park City get a Canyons season pass is because of the access the resort provides to the backcountry. You can ski BCC or LCC style shots just outside of the resort boundaries and then take a lift and be back up on top of the crest in 10 minutes ready to do another lap. We are excited for the tram more for skiing the terrain between Solitude and the Canyons and then being able to take a tram back home should you decide to ski down into BCC. In the past when we've dropped all the way into PC you have to hitch it home which is always a pain in the ass...

I've posted 5 videos below all shot in the Canyons Sidecountry last season.

[facebookvideo]http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=2004935722972[/facebookvideo]

[facebookvideo]http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1769917487663[/facebookvideo]

[facebookvideo]http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1763840175734[/facebookvideo]

[facebookvideo]http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1864849740910[/facebookvideo]

[facebookvideo]http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1941584819239[/facebookvideo]

 

[Marc_C]

We are excited for the tram more for skiing the terrain between Solitude and the Canyons and then being able to take a tram back home should you decide to ski down into BCC.

Actually, from the proposal, it's entirely unclear and unconfirmed whether skiing on the north side of BCC, down from the PC ridgeline, would even be allowed. Nor was it confirmed that there would be a load/unload station on the ridgeline.

 

[mbaydala]

Actually, from the proposal, it's entirely unclear and unconfirmed whether skiing on the north side of BCC, down from the PC ridgeline, would even be allowed. Nor was it confirmed that there would be a load/unload station on the ridgeline.

Marc how can they determine who can ski in the backcountry or not, are you suggesting they could close the north side of BCC to backcountry skiers? No one is excited about them putting trails in, we are just excited to have a return trip back up to the Canyons once the day is over. The unload station on top of the crest doesn't matter either. You would still take 9,990 up, hike or skin to your destination then ski on down to the road in BCC . With a short walk or skin up the road to Solitude. Am I missing something?

 

[Marc_C]

Actually, from the proposal, it's entirely unclear and unconfirmed whether skiing on the north side of BCC, down from the PC ridgeline, would even be allowed. Nor was it confirmed that there would be a load/unload station on the ridgeline.

Marc how can they determine who can ski in the backcountry or not, are you suggesting they could close the north side of BCC to backcountry skiers? No one is excited about them putting trails in, we are just excited to have a return trip back up to the Canyons once the day is over. The unload station on top of the crest doesn't matter either. You would still take 9,990 up, hike or skin to your destination then ski on down to the road in BCC . With a short walk or skin up the road to Solitude. Am I missing something?

Nope - I wasn't being clear. I was thinking avi controlled skiing, possible trails, etc. Obviously if they keep it entirely side country as it is now, then no big deal. I do think that a lot of people will assume and interpret it as an expansion that includes additional ski resort style terrain in what is currently back/side country.

 

[Marc_C]

A little more info from a Trib article:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/52648875-90/wilson-canyons-lift-talisker.html.csp

Ted Wilson, who has been Talisker’s director of government affairs for two months, said Tuesday the plan is early in the development stage. But it is envisioned as a way of linking the two resorts without causing the kind of problems that have undercut previous interconnect proposals.

"We won’t put anybody on the mountain. It’s strictly transportation over the top of the [Wasatch Mountains] ridgeline to Solitude," said Wilson, a former Salt Lake City mayor who was an environmental adviser to Gov. Gary Herbert before joining Talisker. "We wouldn’t be affecting backcountry skiing, which has always been one of the complaints about the interconnect."

Not everyone buys Wilson’s argument.

"I don’t believe that whatsoever," said Carl Fisher, executive director of Save Our Canyons, whose board showed little enthusiasm for the plan after receiving a briefing from Wilson earlier this month.

 

[jamesdeluxe]

When the going gets tough, the tough build tunnels.