or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Connecting Park City to Canyons.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Connecting Park City to Canyons. - Page 3

post #61 of 73

The radio (KPCW Park City) said this morning that there will be a gate accessing Pinecone Ridge that will be patrolled and open when conditions permit. PC Ridge ain't open all that much, but I'm thinking with the easy access and Vail running things, they'll open it more often. It's more of a stroll than a climb from that end, but it's not short and the best skiing is at the far end, so, like much of PCMR's best terrain, you gotta be willing to work a little, which thins out a lot of skiers. This could be great. I wish it were open right now. 

post #62 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Woodsman View Post

Guess I don't quite understand that comment given that the map is oriented with due north at the top. Certainly some of the terrain in that blue box faces south (especially towards the bottom of the ridge) but the majority appears to be north of east.  I sort of colored in the areas that appear to be north of east, but I guess if it doesn't hold snow then it doesn't hold snow.

I've been through there as apparently has Mr. Crab and we are in agreement on this as to exposure. Here are a couple of clues. That side of the ridge is opposite the runs presently cut in the Motherlode, Prospector and King Con areas. The aspects are even more southerly than Willie's and Erika's which aren't that skiable except during storm windows most years due to their overly southern exposure/altitude. Can they cut runs in there? Of course. might there be a few gullies with opportunities for trails? Absolutely. But they still have more south to them than has proven to have good conditions at that elevation and location. It works at The Bird due to higher elevation and snow patterns etc. but you can get to the area in question already from Jupiter - I have as has Mr. Crab and I can see the area in question as I type this. The better way to understand this is not from your topo but from the area map I've linked.
post #63 of 73

I'm pretty stoked about the other changes too. Some of the locals love the Motherlode triple chair 'cause it's so long and so slow that Motherlode Meadows and the trees hold their powder longer, but, ahhh, It's a looong ride. The new high speed lift will open up all those runs- Glory Hole, Ford Country. Lower Single Jack.- as well as the trees. This has been a neglected area for a long time. Also, Willys & Erica's Gold, Silver King, etc. on the front side have largely been left to top to bottom crusty bumps. With a little more grooming, they could be as great as Silver Skis and Crescent, which are nearly adjacent. That front is great early on a powder day, but useless pretty much every other time. There are better bumps elsewhere. If there's better grooming, exposure will matter less- also it takes a good couple feet of fresh to bury those bumps. Nothing like hitting corduroy under 6 inches of powder on a long top to bottom screamer.

post #64 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorenzzo View Post


I've been through there as apparently has Mr. Crab and we are in agreement on this as to exposure. Here are a couple of clues. That side of the ridge is opposite the runs presently cut in the Motherlode, Prospector and King Con areas. The aspects are even more southerly than Willie's and Erika's which aren't that skiable except during storm windows most years due to their overly southern exposure/altitude. Can they cut runs in there? Of course. might there be a few gullies with opportunities for trails? Absolutely. But they still have more south to them than has proven to have good conditions at that elevation and location. It works at The Bird due to higher elevation and snow patterns etc. but you can get to the area in question already from Jupiter - I have as has Mr. Crab and I can see the area in question as I type this. The better way to understand this is not from your topo but from the area map I've linked.

while I'm sure your personal observations are valid, it's simply untrue that the exposures I highlighted are more southerly than Willie's and Erika's.  In fact, none of those are "southerly at all".  Perhaps less "northerly", but all face north of a line due East or West.  I would also argue that the issues with Ski Team face are magnified due both to lower elevation (they are about 400' lower in elevation vs. that section of Pinecone Ridge) and location (they are further to the north, directly above town vs. back up in the mtns/canyons where the snows tend to linger a bit longer).

 

As for the map you've linked, I'm not sure I understand the value, unless I'm looking at the wrong thing.  The yellow area in which they put Pinecone Ridge also includes Jupiter and swings around halfway to Thaynes.  That is a basic representation to provide your typical destination skier with a rough view of how to think about the mountain.  It doesn't have a place in a discussion about exposures on the actual compass.

 

Regardless, as I mentioned above, local knowledge likely trumps the topo here.  If it doesn't hold snow, even on the abundant northeasterly aspects, then it doesn't hold snow.

post #65 of 73
I think you are misinterpreting counters as facing north and there's also an issue as to true north. In any event I'm tired of arguing with you on this enjoy your beliefs. Those of us who live here, hike here and ski here all the time are obviously wrong. Too bad you weren't around when they cut the original trails you could've shown them how they were on the wrong side of the canyon.
post #66 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Woodsman View Post
 

As I mentioned above, local knowledge likely trumps the topo here.  If it doesn't hold snow, even on the abundant northeasterly aspects, then it doesn't hold snow.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorenzzo View Post

I think you are misinterpreting counters as facing north and there's also an issue as to true north. In any event I'm tired of arguing with you on this enjoy your beliefs. Those of us who live here, hike here and ski here all the time are obviously wrong. Too bad you weren't around when they cut the original trails you could've shown them how they were on the wrong side of the canyon.

 

I'm not misinterpreting anything.  Regardless, reading is fundamental, Lorenzzo.  You should try it some time.

post #67 of 73


Regardless of exposure, they will cut a trail or trails as part of the $50 expansion/upgrade, and most of the tourists probably won't care if there is coverage throughout the entire season.  The marketing benefit will be enormous with many tourists clamoring for what they always do, finding the biggest or best resort that is practicable to visit.  Next season PCMR will be the "It Girl" that many east coast skiers will desire.

 

We all know much of Canyons is never skied by 1 or 2 day visitors.  It is too spread out or two confusing for first time visitors, and they will never, ever find the best runs.  This new gondola will get people to the parts of Canyons--which will be officially called PCMR next season--that have no lift lines. 

 

The issue, of course, is getting additional tourists up from the base.  The new proposed lifts should address this at PCMR.  The Canyons side is pretty good right now, assuming enough people don't mind starting on the Orange Bubble thing. 

post #68 of 73

Maybe the below image will help.  Color coding is computer generated with:

N blue (315-45 degrees)

S red (135-225)

slightly south of E and W orange (90-135 & 270-315)

slightly north of E and W no color (45-90 & 225-270)

 

What's clear pretty quickly is that not much of the new terrain faces S or north.  Of the E and W terrain, most faces more southerly than northernly which is not a good sign.  It appears there may be some ways through though that avoids the bad 90-270 aspects

 

 

 

post #69 of 73
Good map properly showing aspects. I'd almost think it would eliminate the stream of incessant niggling and confused posts on this but...wink.gif
post #70 of 73
Quote:

Originally Posted by nathanvg View Post
 

 

What's clear pretty quickly is that not much of the new terrain faces S or north.  Of the E and W terrain, most faces more southerly than northernly which is not a good sign.  It appears there may be some ways through though that avoids the bad 90-270 aspects

 

Thanks for posting this! Can you do something similar for the next stretch of land north? Based on what Vail's made public, I don't think the gondola/new terrain will be within this map:

 

- The start and end points are at the base of King Con and the northeast terminal of Flat Iron. Regardless of where the summit is, I think a map showing these will help.

- The illustration posted on the Park City & Canyons websites (and earlier in this thread) shows the gondola summit a bit north of where your map cuts out. I know the illustration isn't meant to be exact, but I think it's likely to be about right.

- The summit on the map makes for some nice-looking northish-facing intermediate slopes on the Canyons side leading down to connect with Upper White Pine trail. Conversely, a summit farther south will require much longer and flatter terrain, probably bulldozed traverses, to reach either end of Flat Iron.

- I'm sure of the various costs of an 8-person gondola, relative length isn't too big a concern--but what advantage would Vail gain from stretching this gondola significantly farther south? It would make the rides longer, cost more, make for worse terrain on the Canyons side, and serve existing hike-to terrain rather than opening anything new on the Park City side.

 

Google street view has a neat "skier view" tool, too. Here's my best guess for the gondola alignment looking south from the Upper White Pine run (that hill, while small, is pitched nicely for a couple blue runs).

 

 

And here's my best guess looking west from the Broadway run at Park City, right near King Con. I labeled Iron Mountain to give perspective. Whenever these photos were taken looks like lousy snow conditions, but that gully below what I think will be the gondola summit looks like it could be a great advanced run in the right conditions and with a little clearing (that gully corresponds to the second northernmost orange area that Tin Woodsman highlighted).

 

post #71 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by New2Utah View Post
 

 

Thanks for posting this! Can you do something similar for the next stretch of land north?

 

 

sure.  I agree this second image is closer to where the gondola will likely go.  Aspects are a little better here but still not great.


Edited by nathanvg - 12/17/14 at 8:14pm
post #72 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanvg View Post
 

sure.  I agree this second image is closer to where the gondola will likely go.  Aspects are a little better here but still not great.

 

 

Cool, thanks for posting! Yeah, gates definitely make sense at least to start... if they add snowmaking and put in the maintenance effort, though, it looks reasonable to make this connection last through a good chunk of the season. It looks like the new runs on the Canyons side, though, might be skiable much of the season from the very start. Not too bad--most visitors will be able to do this connection with only one download.

post #73 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by New2Utah View Post
 

 

Cool, thanks for posting! Yeah, gates definitely make sense at least to start... if they add snowmaking and put in the maintenance effort, though, it looks reasonable to make this connection last through a good chunk of the season. It looks like the new runs on the Canyons side, though, might be skiable much of the season from the very start. Not too bad--most visitors will be able to do this connection with only one download.

Vail will make it work no matter how much they will have to spend on snowmaking. Too much sun?  No big deal, a solution will be found because it has to be found. Advertising the biggest resort in the USA demands that it works.  It will take 3-4 days to explore the two resorts (soon to be one resort), and that is exactly what Vail Resorts wants.  After 4 or 5 days the EPIC Pass pays for itself, right? Come ski PCMR while lodging in luxury at Canyons at Park City or PCMR, either walk or hop on a free shuttle to whatever base you want to start skiing, spend your $ on the hill munching down darn good food (assuming PCMR rises to Canyons standards), rent equipment from Vail Resorts at the base(s), stay in properties managed well by Vail, and the shareholders get laid due to the steady stream of cash flow coming from the early EPIC Pass sales.

 

How does Deer Valley fit in?  Coattails.  And tourists don't even need a car for DV to win.  That lift (it could be a gondola) bridging DV to the top of Main Street will be built in 2016.  Want to dine, shop or ski in DV?  Walk to the top of Main (or a better location if it can be found) and take a ride.

 

At some point DV and PCMR will drop their ropes (they border each other), PCMR will connect to Brighton which will connect to Solitude (which DV now owns), AltaBird will connect to Brighton, and we are off to the races with One Wasatch.


Edited by quant2325 - 12/18/14 at 9:20am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Connecting Park City to Canyons.