Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1\ :'\', 1'1? 3 <br />o;;J~-.J"" <br /> <br />ChPpter 2 . The Alte17lDli.... <br /> <br />Parameter <br /> <br />.......;~:i;~e~~~~~'t:~~i~f:O~~:T=:~~~:::r~.,p~lrJO~;.rw.r~r~.' <br /> <br />Total Diff=nce I % increase <br /> <br />rali1e2A; <br />...'.i........'.' .., <br />.... . .... <br />... .. <br />. ........ <br />. .".... <br />. .... <br />, " <br /> <br />Totsl area or skiable polygons (acres) <br />Altaoative A; No Action 669 . - <br />Alternati.e B 1,495 826 123% <br />Altaoative C 1,253 584 87% <br />Total area or skiable terralD (acres) <br />Altcmativc A:. No Action 577 . - <br />Altaoative B 1,118 54t 94% <br />Altaoati.e C 932 355 62% <br />Beginner (15 skiers/ae) <br />Altaoati.e A; No Action 98 . - <br />Alternati.e B 93 (5) -5% <br />AltaoativeC 93 (5) -5% <br />Intermediate (10 skiers/ae) <br />Alternati.e A; No Action t86 . - <br />Altaoati.e B 225 39 2t% <br />Alternative C 225 39 2t% <br />AdvDDeed (8 slders/ac) <br /> -' <br />Altemari.e A; No Action 90 . - <br />Alternative B 202 Il2 , t24% <br />Altemari.e C 180 90 100% <br />Expen (10 slders/ae) <br />Alternative A:. No Action t80 - - <br />AlIernati>e B 572 392 2t8% <br />AlIernati>e C 405 225 t25% <br />Transrer routesleatwalks <br />Alternati.e A; No Action 23 - - <br />Alternati.e B 26 3 13% <br />Alternative C 29 6 26% <br /> <br />Alternative B would increase the total skiable area by 541 acres (94 percent increase) while Alternative C would <br />increase it by 355 acres (62 percent increase), the primary difference being the inclusion of primarily expert <br />terrain in Maroon Bowl under Alternative B but not under Alternative C. The increase in skiable terrain under <br />these two alternatives consists primarily of the addition of advanced and expert ski \arain. <br /> <br />As a result of the increase in ski area. terrain carrying capacity would increase sigoificantly under both Alternative <br />B and Alternative C (81 and 53 percent, respectively). However, under all alternatives, the total ski lift pod <br />capacity is more than 40 percent lower than the total terrain capacity. This is due mainly to the restriction of <br />slcilift capacity to maintain skier density well below terrain capacity. However, in the Exhibition II and Cloud <br />Nme lift pods, the estimated terrain capacity is lower than the pod capacity. The practical mountain capacity is, <br /> <br />Comparison of Altern.aljlles <br /> <br />2-17 <br />