OK, there is already a thread started on this, but the headline that was used wouldn't attract many viewers...
I heard this on TV last night. The proposed plan would include closing the ice rink and the horse rental, and would fix the awful intersection near Yosemite Lodge with a pedestrian underpass.
http://www.fresnobee.com/2013/01/08/3126062/yosemite-plan-would-limit-visitors.html#storylink=mirelated
"The proposed changes, which would cost $235 million, would reroute traffic to make it flow more smoothly and create a pedestrian underpass connecting Yosemite Lodge with the trail to Yosemite Falls, an area of heavy foot traffic that results in lengthy traffic jams."
"Under the plan, the park would increase the number of campsites in the valley by 37 percent - from 466 to 640 - by opening up new areas and rebuilding on higher ground some sites lost to flooding in 1997. The Sugar Pine Bridge, one of three historic stone bridges spanning the river, would be removed.
Park planners sought to eliminate non-essential activities such as ice skating, bike and raft rentals and the valleys' equestrian concession in an effort to add more parking and campsites in a place where lodging is at a premium"
It's not clear from the story whether this is related to the old scheme to put two-way traffic back on Southside Drive and close Northside Drive west of the Lodge, or not.
The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (56% of Full)
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink
All posts are those of the individual authors and the owner
of this site does not endorse them. Content should be considered opinion
and not fact until verified independently.
|
Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 09, 2013 06:43PM | Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 755 |
January 09, 2013 07:02PM | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 398 |
"...eliminate non-essential activities such as ice skating, bike and raft rentals and the valleys' equestrian concession in an effort to add more parking and campsites..." I understand the need for more camping spots, and somewhat on the parking issue, but these activities are pretty popular too.
January 09, 2013 07:02PM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
Quote
wherever
...I heard this on TV last night. The proposed plan would include closing the ice rink and the horse rental, and would fix the awful intersection near Yosemite Lodge with a pedestrian underpass....
I have a simple fix for that; take out that picnic area and put in a parking lot. DUH!
January 09, 2013 07:05PM | Admin Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 17,050 |
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 09, 2013 08:01PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
Quote
Dave
Quote
wherever
...I heard this on TV last night. The proposed plan would include closing the ice rink and the horse rental, and would fix the awful intersection near Yosemite Lodge with a pedestrian underpass....
I have a simple fix for that; take out that picnic area and put in a parking lot. DUH!
Isn't that like Joni Mitchell's song?
I think that riding a bike is a great way to see the park and not everyone can bring their bike with them so I am going to contest that removal. Ice skating at Curry is a long time tradition and I would hate to see it go away.
January 09, 2013 09:10PM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
It's no paradise when one has to wait a half hour for the traffic to clear because a constant streams of visitors just walk out into the street and expect traffic in the whole park to come to a standstill just because they are too rude to let a few cars go by.Quote
parklover
Isn't that like Joni Mitchell's song?
The tradition of no iceskating at Curry was established long before they put the rink there. Let's go back to the original tradition. It would not bother me one bit to see the rink and the horses go away. But I say that about the pizza joints and the beer halls too. It's a national park, not Disneyland.Quote
I think that riding a bike is a great way to see the park and not everyone can bring their bike with them so I am going to contest that removal. Ice skating at Curry is a long time tradition and I would hate to see it go away.
January 09, 2013 09:29PM | Admin Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 17,050 |
January 10, 2013 09:21AM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
Quote
eeekQuote
Dave
It's a national park, not Disneyland.
Disneyland = $87 for one day
Yosemite = $20 for one weekI'll take Yosemite.
Or $1,100 or more for one night in a Yosemite hotel. It wasn't the cost I was referring to but the man made "attractions" such as beer halls, pizza parlors, rides, rinks, etc.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 10, 2013 12:13AM | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 84 |
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 10, 2013 10:17AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
Quote
LVRAY
Quote
Dave
Quote
parklover
It's a national park, not Disneyland.
Two thumbs up!!
In my opinion, the Valley was sacrificed long ago and I can't stand going there accept in the off season.
Dave was the one that said that it is a national park not Disneyland not me.
I have been reading about the history of the park and if you want to see over commercialization, over building and unnecessary activities, you should see what it was like from the late 1800's to around the 1930's and 40's and even into the 70's. Before every one jumps on me, let me be clear. I am not saying there shouldn't be any changes now but just the fact that some people think the park is at it's worse now and that is not the case. It has been worse but it also can be better than it is now.
January 13, 2013 01:51PM | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 4,173 |
Quote
parklover
Ice skating at Curry is a long time tradition and I would hate to see it go away.
The Firefall from Glacier Point was a long time tradition at Yosemite and far more popular than the Curry Village ice rink ever was, and the Park Service for good reasons eliminated that back in the late 1960's.
If people really want to keep an ice rink at Curry, they should construct a temporary one on the eastern third of the main Curry Village parking lot since all that parking isn't needed at Curry in the winter.
.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 13, 2013 06:17PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
With the trampling of meadows and massive traffic jams, the fire fall had more environmental impacts then the rink does. Not that it means that the ice skating rink should stay.
I agree that a temporary rink would be a viable option if people get adamant about its removal. I grew up in PA and in my town we had an outdoor ice rink that was a temporary thing. The had removal low concrete barriers that they put in place each winter, put a liner in, added the cooling coils and then laid down the ice. In the summer it was a parking lot for the swimming pool.
I agree that a temporary rink would be a viable option if people get adamant about its removal. I grew up in PA and in my town we had an outdoor ice rink that was a temporary thing. The had removal low concrete barriers that they put in place each winter, put a liner in, added the cooling coils and then laid down the ice. In the summer it was a parking lot for the swimming pool.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 10, 2013 05:44AM | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 409 |
A. Underpass at that intersection? Oh HELL yes.
B. Getting rid of the stables/horses? Yes, esp. since compared to the land they require/how many people use those 'services', it could be put to much better use.
C. Ice rink? I have very fond childhood memories of it, and it doesn't really take up that much valuable space, and I've seen it pretty packed in winter, so I'm rather neutral about it.
D. If any pizza joint is to go, let it be Degnan's. Everyone rational knows that Curry Pizza is the best in the Valley ;-)
B. Getting rid of the stables/horses? Yes, esp. since compared to the land they require/how many people use those 'services', it could be put to much better use.
C. Ice rink? I have very fond childhood memories of it, and it doesn't really take up that much valuable space, and I've seen it pretty packed in winter, so I'm rather neutral about it.
D. If any pizza joint is to go, let it be Degnan's. Everyone rational knows that Curry Pizza is the best in the Valley ;-)
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 10, 2013 08:52AM | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 688 |
Quote
tanngrisnir3
A. Underpass at that intersection? Oh HELL yes.
B. Getting rid of the stables/horses? Yes, esp. since compared to the land they require/how many people use those 'services', it could be put to much better use.
C. Ice rink? I have very fond childhood memories of it, and it doesn't really take up that much valuable space, and I've seen it pretty packed in winter, so I'm rather neutral about it.
D. If any pizza joint is to go, let it be Degnan's. Everyone rational knows that Curry Pizza is the best in the Valley ;-)
1. As long as they put up signs to make sure the deer use the crossing also this is a good idea
2. I have fond memories of the mule/horse trips including one where my boy got bit by another horse who was protecting its place in line as my son's mule/horse tried to pass. It actually was pretty funny.
3. The ice rink seems like it would be a great attraction in slower winter months.
4. The comment on the pizza really cannot be improved.
5. Not sure how getting rid of the bikes would help traffic or anything else in Yosemite
6. Again not sure how getting rid of the rafting trips would help. Would getting rid of bikes and raft rentals really help with parking and lodging concerns? (Besides the fact that less people may show up---which is perhaps the goal)
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 10, 2013 09:35AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 259 |
Quote
tanngrisnir3
A. Underpass at that intersection? Oh HELL yes.
)
I think that is the best response I have heard yet.
Quote
chicagocwright
1. As long as they put up signs to make sure the deer use the crossing also this is a good idea
2. I have fond memories of the mule/horse trips including one where my boy got bit by another horse who was protecting its place in line as my son's mule/horse tried to pass. It actually was pretty funny.
3. The ice rink seems like it would be a great attraction in slower winter months.
4. The comment on the pizza really cannot be improved.
5. Not sure how getting rid of the bikes would help traffic or anything else in Yosemite
6. Again not sure how getting rid of the rafting trips would help. Would getting rid of bikes and raft rentals really help with parking and lodging concerns? (Besides the fact that less people may show up---which is perhaps the goal)
Just because mule rides and the ice rink are fun/memorable/etc attractions for some visitors doesn't mean they should remain. All activities have impacts and I for one think their benefits are far outweighed by their impacts.
Raft trips have a huge impact on the river's ecology, so I surmise that is the reason they are getting rid of it. Plus the plan states a desire to reduce commercial services.
Not sure what the rational is for the bike rental removal. It does seem rather odd, considering that they are keeping the bike paths and you would think it helps reduce congestion. I guess it might be part of the goal of reducing commercial services.
January 10, 2013 11:14AM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
Then lets put in a water slide at Mirror Lake, an elevator to the top of Half Dome. I'm sure those would benefit quite a few people.Quote
buster
Just because mule rides and the ice rink are fun/memorable/etc attractions for some visitors doesn't mean they should remain. All activities have impacts and I for one think their benefits are far outweighed by their impacts.
A raft on the water would have one tenth the ecological impact of one horse trip, or one one hundredth the impact of one day of a pizza parlor. The commercial services available can be done quite well outside of the park.Quote
Raft trips have a huge impact on the river's ecology, so I surmise that is the reason they are getting rid of it. Plus the plan states a desire to reduce commercial services.
That could only be a good thing.Quote
Not sure what the rational is for the bike rental removal. It does seem rather odd, considering that they are keeping the bike paths and you would think it helps reduce congestion. I guess it might be part of the goal of reducing commercial services.
A quote from the National Park Service Organic Act: ...The service thus established shall promote and regulate the use of the Federal areas known as national parks, monuments, and reservations hereinafter specified by such means and measures as conform to the fundamental purpose of the said parks, monuments, and reservations, which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.
In Yosemite they have forgotten the preservation part.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 10, 2013 11:46AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 259 |
Quote
Dave
Then lets put in a water slide at Mirror Lake, an elevator to the top of Half Dome. I'm sure those would benefit quite a few people.
Huh? How is getting rid of the ice rink and mule rides related to absurd new developments?
Quote
A raft on the water would have one tenth the ecological impact of one horse trip, or one one hundredth the impact of one day of a pizza parlor.
The impact rafters have is not really when they are floating, but when they stop along the way. They then walk along the riverbank, stop at 'beaches', trample vegetation, etc.
January 10, 2013 01:45PM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
What's the difference? The point was about appropriateness, not newness.Quote
buster
Huh? How is getting rid of the ice rink and mule rides related to absurd new developments?
Just like the mule rides, ice rink, pizza parlors, beer halls, they have an impact on the environment and aesthetics. The impact from the tons of garbage from the pizza and beer joints and the huge impact from the mules far outweigh the impact of rafters.Quote
The impact rafters have is not really when they are floating, but when they stop along the way. They then walk along the riverbank, stop at 'beaches', trample vegetation, etc.
January 10, 2013 11:05AM | Moderator Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 1,876 |
What is really needed is a separate entrance next to each of the park entrance gates strictly for day hikers and backpackers. It will lead to another version of the park in a parallel universe where there is no traffic, no litter, hardly any visitors, zero mosquitos, and forever pleasant weather. 
January 10, 2013 02:02PM | Admin Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 17,050 |
Quote
tomdisco
What is really needed is a separate entrance next to each of the park entrance gates strictly for day hikers and backpackers. It will lead to another version of the park in a parallel universe where there is no traffic, no litter, hardly any visitors, zero mosquitos, and forever pleasant weather.
An entrance exam might be just about as good.
January 11, 2013 12:45AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 133 |
I must admit to you that I am a very big fan of wawona. In the merced river plan I read that they would like to replace the restrooms in the wawona gift shop parking lot (at the pioneer village history center). I would like to mention that this is something that is greatly needed. in the summer there are long lines to the current restrooms throughout the entire day. the reason is the current restrooms are two separate small restrooms that serve one person at a time. replacing with larger restrooms would be very beneficial
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 11, 2013 01:33PM | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 668 |
I've for the last 20 yrs. been trying to point out to the NPS in Yosemite that the problem with the afternoon backup of traffic to the Curry 4 way is due to the pedestrian problem at the Yosemite Lodge/Yosemite Falls crossing. Recently they sometimes stationed some crossing guards to control the pedestrians from constantly crossing and stopping traffic, but they didn't do it right. There would be no traffic problems to make headlines about if there were some sort of traffic control for the peds. at the Yosemite lodge/Yosemite Falls crossing, as a suggested underpass would take care of.
Limit the weekend and Holiday entrance of day use vehicles; give them the choice of taking a shuttle from the entrance (once the the daily limit has been met), or turn around and go home. Plenty of room to build a parking lot at the hwy 41 entrance, but it would be interesting to try to work out a parking lot near the Arch Rock entrance.
Limit the weekend and Holiday entrance of day use vehicles; give them the choice of taking a shuttle from the entrance (once the the daily limit has been met), or turn around and go home. Plenty of room to build a parking lot at the hwy 41 entrance, but it would be interesting to try to work out a parking lot near the Arch Rock entrance.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 11, 2013 05:19PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
Traffic also backs up when they will not let cars turn left at Sentinel bridge to get to Northside Drive. People who want to leave the park are forced to drive all the way to Stoneman Bridge then head back. This causes the traffic to not only back up around Sentinel bridge and all the way past Housekeeping, but also jams up the intersection near the day use parking with traffic that would not have had to go past there if they could have used Sentinel Bridge. It does not make sense for people to have to sit in traffic for that extra distance spewing out exhaust when all they want to do is leave by as direct of a route as they can.
It didn't help either that they kept removing parking spots, informal road side parking and places to pull off the road to look at things. I can't tell you how many times that people in the car in front of me went past a scenic area that no longer had a pull off and would just stop in the middle of the road to look or take pictures.
It didn't help either that they kept removing parking spots, informal road side parking and places to pull off the road to look at things. I can't tell you how many times that people in the car in front of me went past a scenic area that no longer had a pull off and would just stop in the middle of the road to look or take pictures.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 11, 2013 05:31PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
Quote
mtn man
Plenty of room to build a parking lot at the hwy 41 entrance, but it would be interesting to try to work out a parking lot near the Arch Rock entrance.
If you have looked at the plans for the 41 entrance, some of the alternatives have a parking lot, staging area and possibly a information site that will be built there to handle people wanting to go to Mariposa Grove. They want to decrease the amount of people parking in Wawona that are going to the grove and also remove parking at the grove. The area near the entrance is not big enough to handle that and satellite parking for the valley unless they go into some environmentally sensitive areas.
January 11, 2013 10:17PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 133 |
Quote
parklover
If you have looked at the plans for the 41 entrance, some of the alternatives have a parking lot, staging area and possibly a information site that will be built there to handle people wanting to go to Mariposa Grove. They want to decrease the amount of people parking in Wawona that are going to the grove and also remove parking at the grove. The area near the entrance is not big enough to handle that and satellite parking for the valley unless they go into some environmentally sensitive areas.
this is true. there are several plans being considered right now to build a new parking lot in the south entrance area due to all of the parking congestion in wawona. And the current parking lot in the grove may be removed. Currently, due to limited parking in the mariposa grove, many cars are being sent to wawona so that they can use the shuttle bus; the problem now is with the amount of visitors and traffic that has increased, parking in wawona becomes limited and congested. I personally would like to see more parking on glacier point road for the sentinel dome/taft point parking lot.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/11/2013 10:23PM by marmot.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 11, 2013 10:55PM | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 141 |
If I recall correctly, the Curry Village ice rink dates from the late 60's/early 70's. Prior to that, the Curry Village parking lot was closed off, flooded with a fire hose and allowed to freeze. I'm just grasping at hearsay, but I believe the Wawona Grove parking lot used to be a campground. For parking, there used to be a Camp Hoyle development (including a gas station) located between Wawona and Wawona Campground and I wonder if any of the federally-owned land in Yosemite West can be utilized for a parking lot. One plan in the early 70's was to build a large parking lot in Foresta, but I haven't heard much talk of that for a long time.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 12, 2013 08:37AM | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 864 |
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 12, 2013 10:04AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
I read that the first time a parking lot was used as a rink was in 1928 when one was flooded by the Yosemite Winter Club. I don't know when the present ice rink was made.
Yosemite West is a private development and there is no federally owned land inside it.
Last summer they used Badger Pass as a staging area for vehicles that wanted to go to Glacier Point. You had to wait there until a parking spot opened up. I have not heard of a plan to use it as overflow parking for the Valley but that does not mean that it has not been considered.
Yosemite West is a private development and there is no federally owned land inside it.
Last summer they used Badger Pass as a staging area for vehicles that wanted to go to Glacier Point. You had to wait there until a parking spot opened up. I have not heard of a plan to use it as overflow parking for the Valley but that does not mean that it has not been considered.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 12, 2013 07:25PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 285 |
January 12, 2013 08:28PM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
The underpass won't work. Pedistrians won't like it. The park will have to put up too many ugly barricades to force people to use it and they'll have to have someone stationed at both ends to assure they use it. The visitors will just cross closer to Superintendents Bridge and cause even more delays. There are only two solutions that will work; either put the parking lot back where it was, or put the road closer to the Lodge.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 12, 2013 08:51PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
I agree, I don't like the idea of the underpass. For some reason I think of what the entrances to New York subways are like - smelly, dark and dirty. Much of the pedestrian issue is because they removed the parking lot and also the fact that the tour buses drop people off at the parking lot near the lodge registration and then you have a hoard of people going from there to the falls. People are not going to like being funneled through a tunnel and will start crossing the road in multiple other places which is worse than everyone crossing at the intersection. Think of the impact that is going to be done in the area to construct the tunnel. Will animals also use the tunnel and then you have man v.s. wild incidences?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/12/2013 08:57PM by parklover.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/12/2013 08:57PM by parklover.
January 12, 2013 08:54PM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
January 13, 2013 01:46PM | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 4,173 |
I know Park Service tends to have strong aversion to stoplights, but adding stoplights to the intersection of Northside Lodge and Yosemite Lodge Drive is simply the most logical and cost-effective solution to this problem. Why build an underpass when stoplights would effectively regulate pedestrian and vehicle traffic at a fraction of the cost?
The Park Service should also replace the stop sign on Northside Drive at Yosemite Village with stoplights too.
.
The Park Service should also replace the stop sign on Northside Drive at Yosemite Village with stoplights too.
.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 14, 2013 07:59AM | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 409 |
Quote
plawrence
I know Park Service tends to have strong aversion to stoplights, but adding stoplights to the intersection of Northside Lodge and Yosemite Lodge Drive is simply the most logical and cost-effective solution to this problem. Why build an underpass when stoplights would effectively regulate pedestrian and vehicle traffic at a fraction of the cost?
The Park Service should also replace the stop sign on Northside Drive at Yosemite Village with stoplights too.
.
That's a bit optimistic. My job involves to some degree vehicle traffic and pedestrians in Los Angeles and pedestrians think they're immortal and refuse follow the rules, walk/run against lights, jaywalk, etc... all the time.
There's no reason to think they won't in Yosemite as well.
January 14, 2013 10:15AM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
Quote
tanngrisnir3
That's a bit optimistic. My job involves to some degree vehicle traffic and pedestrians in Los Angeles and pedestrians think they're immortal and refuse follow the rules, walk/run against lights, jaywalk, etc... all the time.
There's no reason to think they won't in Yosemite as well.
From my experience there are some very good reasons to think that that vision of immortality would be magnified in Yosemite. Let's take those same pedestrians in LA and put them in Yosemite. They are out of their natural habitat. Their brain is not functioning at it's normal level. They make MORE unsafe decisions in Yosemite than they would in LA.
January 14, 2013 10:21AM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
January 14, 2013 04:03PM | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 4,173 |
Quote
tanngrisnir3
Quote
plawrence
I know Park Service tends to have strong aversion to stoplights, but adding stoplights to the intersection of Northside Lodge and Yosemite Lodge Drive is simply the most logical and cost-effective solution to this problem. Why build an underpass when stoplights would effectively regulate pedestrian and vehicle traffic at a fraction of the cost?
The Park Service should also replace the stop sign on Northside Drive at Yosemite Village with stoplights too.
That's a bit optimistic. My job involves to some degree vehicle traffic and pedestrians in Los Angeles and pedestrians think they're immortal and refuse follow the rules, walk/run against lights, jaywalk, etc... all the time.
There's no reason to think they won't in Yosemite as well.
Some will, no doubt, not obey the stoplights but the vast majority probably will. And with stoplights installed, it would be less likely that drivers will stop for pedestrians wanting to cross the road if the drivers have the green light.
And once a line of vehicles start driving through the intersection (when they have the green light) it's far less likely that any pedestrian would take their lives in their on hands and start crossing against a red light in the middle of moving traffic.
The other thing that the Park Service could do is expand Northside Drive between Superintendent's Bridge (the bridge over Yosemite Creek) and Camp Four to three lanes (two westbound, one eastbound).
The stoplights with the small road expansion to three lanes would probably still cost far less than building an underpass below Northside Drive.
.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 14, 2013 06:31PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
Expanding Northside drive from Superintendents bridge to Camp four would open another kettle of worms. There would have to be another environmental impact study done since the existing bridge is not wide enough for three lanes and would have to be removed and replaced and that would required altering the creek banks. Unless the parking along Cook's Meadow would be removed, there would be impact to the meadow to put in another lane and hence another study. Removal of parking in that area would force cars that usually park there to find spots somewhere else and there is already a shortage of parking. Widening the road to fit another lane from the bridge and past the falls to the intersection would require removal of some lodge parking or the road would have to expand towards the bike path and the bike path either eliminated or moved into the area (old parking lot) that they restored during the Yosemite Falls Project.
January 14, 2013 07:17PM | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 4,173 |
I think you grossly misunderstood my post.
I was suggesting to expand Northside Drive WEST of the bridge to three lanes, not on the bridge itself nor on Northside Drive through Cook's Meadow.
The purpose of the second westbound lane WEST of the bridge would be to expand the holding capacity of Northside Drive when traffic on it is stopped at pedestrian crossing by the Yosemite Lodge.
The bridge itself would remain just two lanes (one lane in each direction) as would Northside Drive through Cook's Meadow.
.
I was suggesting to expand Northside Drive WEST of the bridge to three lanes, not on the bridge itself nor on Northside Drive through Cook's Meadow.
The purpose of the second westbound lane WEST of the bridge would be to expand the holding capacity of Northside Drive when traffic on it is stopped at pedestrian crossing by the Yosemite Lodge.
The bridge itself would remain just two lanes (one lane in each direction) as would Northside Drive through Cook's Meadow.
.
January 14, 2013 08:47PM | Admin Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 17,050 |
January 14, 2013 11:21PM | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 4,173 |
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 24, 2013 11:27AM | Registered: 11 years ago Posts: 194 |
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 24, 2013 01:22PM | Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 755 |
Quote
Royalist
Quote
eeek
It'd be better just to undo the screwup, i.e. put the parking lot back.
Ah - so it's not just me who thinks that!That project discouraged me from donating to the Yosemite Fund, because they kept using it as an example of the kind of thing they would use the money for.
Right. I haven't given the Yosemite Fund a penny since they acted so proud of having completely screwed up the parking at the lodge. Like, turning the lot directly opposite the Registration desk (and next to many of the rooms) into a bus only lot. Then taking the next lot over and turning almost half of one side and doing the same, buses only. Finally, the dirt overflow lot beyond that then posted as "no guest parking...employees and buses only". And, of course, the small lot behind the cafeteria has always been employees only.
What idiot came up with that plan? Is this a personal grudge against lodge guests, or what? Posting the far overflow lot, which is never full, against parking is just mean and stupid. If you complain, you are told to try to find parking at Camp 4!
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 14, 2013 08:55AM | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 864 |
Quote
plawrence
The Park Service should also replace the stop sign on Northside Drive at Yosemite Village with stoplights too.
I believe the preferred alternative for the MRP includes re-routing Northside Drive around the south end of the Camp 6 day-use parking, so the intersection above would no longer exist.
As for the Yosemite Falls underpass, I suspect the old parking lot was removed in anticipation of the former Yos. Lodge redevelopment plan, which included re-routing Northside Drive either through the lodge or around the southeast side of the lodge. This would have allowed pedestrians to access the falls from the lodge area or Camp 4 w/o crossing Northside Drive.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 13, 2013 08:46AM | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 70 |
The National Park Service is allowing a python hunt to help get rid of the invasive species in Big Cypress National Preserve. There is a lot of news right now about a new hunt that just opened.
http://www.nps.gov/bicy/parknews/secretary-salazar-announces-renewed-commitment-expanded-programs-to-eliminate-pythons-from-everglades.htm
Obviously we don't want to fix the problem in Yosemite with a hunt like in Big Cypress National Preserve... but why don't they just put closed gates at the entrances to the valley and only allow people (other than native indians) to view the valley floor from an area that will have a lesser impact. Kind of like the Grand Canyon is like. You can only hike down into the valley.
http://www.nps.gov/bicy/parknews/secretary-salazar-announces-renewed-commitment-expanded-programs-to-eliminate-pythons-from-everglades.htm
Obviously we don't want to fix the problem in Yosemite with a hunt like in Big Cypress National Preserve... but why don't they just put closed gates at the entrances to the valley and only allow people (other than native indians) to view the valley floor from an area that will have a lesser impact. Kind of like the Grand Canyon is like. You can only hike down into the valley.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 13, 2013 09:50AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
January 13, 2013 10:00AM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
Quote
Max
Obviously we don't want to fix the problem in Yosemite with a hunt like in Big Cypress National Preserve... but why don't they just put closed gates at the entrances to the valley and only allow people (other than native indians) to view the valley floor from an area that will have a lesser impact. Kind of like the Grand Canyon is like. You can only hike down into the valley.
The NPS Organic Act says that the NPS must; "...conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations." While that might work for the Grand Canyon, it won't work for Yosemite. There is a fine line between leaving something "unimpaired" and "enjoyment." Yosemite can be enjoyed without the extreme measure of closing down the Valley.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 13, 2013 11:53AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
You are so right Dave. It is not only about adhering to the Organic Act but the fact that each park is different and what works for one will not work for others. The goal here is to come up with a plan that improves Yosemite that is not on either extremes of the spectrum. It is not realistic to think that the Valley can be restricted to the point that almost everything man made is removed and only backpackers can go there and you also can't have more development and more crowding.
I sometimes wonder what the people who want to close the park to only back packers position would be if, like me, they had an accident in their twenties that would stop their ability to backpack or when they are too old to backpack. Would they be altruistic enough not to want things to be changed back to allow other means of seeing the Valley if they could no longer hike to the Valley?
I sometimes wonder what the people who want to close the park to only back packers position would be if, like me, they had an accident in their twenties that would stop their ability to backpack or when they are too old to backpack. Would they be altruistic enough not to want things to be changed back to allow other means of seeing the Valley if they could no longer hike to the Valley?
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 13, 2013 08:51AM | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 70 |
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 28, 2013 12:43PM | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 1,697 |
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 13, 2013 10:28PM | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 14 |
A remote parking lot on Big Oak Flat road near the entrace would also be welcome. Alternative-5 talks about a 200-space remote parking lot at El Portal only.
These shuttles need to be very frequent and must have expanded schedules (early morning to late night).
Better valley shuttle routes will help ease traffic quite a bit. Most day-use visitors go to mirror lake, happy isles, visitor center area, yosemite falls, bridalveil falls, roadside parking to watch climbers on el capitan. In particular, most day-use visitors do not need to stop in curry village or ride through curry village.
The number of cars in the valley during summer is so high that I would support a plan like charging more for those that drive in, and transfer that extra money in the form of discount coupons to those that use public transportation.
These shuttles need to be very frequent and must have expanded schedules (early morning to late night).
Better valley shuttle routes will help ease traffic quite a bit. Most day-use visitors go to mirror lake, happy isles, visitor center area, yosemite falls, bridalveil falls, roadside parking to watch climbers on el capitan. In particular, most day-use visitors do not need to stop in curry village or ride through curry village.
The number of cars in the valley during summer is so high that I would support a plan like charging more for those that drive in, and transfer that extra money in the form of discount coupons to those that use public transportation.
January 13, 2013 11:11PM | Registered: 11 years ago Posts: 299 |
Quote
rpf123
Most day-use visitors go to mirror lake, happy isles, visitor center area, yosemite falls, bridalveil falls, roadside parking to watch climbers on el capitan. In particular, most day-use visitors do not need to stop in curry village or ride through curry village.
I don't know about most, but I end up there (Curry Village) quite a bit. When I come in by YARTS, It's the closest stop to Happy Isles and the first stop on the way out of the park. When I'm driving, I'd rather find a parking spot in the Curry area than use the crowded, dusty Day Use lot.
Since Curry Village lodgers (and Lower Pines campers) are likely to want to go to a lot of the same places where day-use visitors go, they'll need to be included in the shuttle service somehow. It sounds unnecessarily complicated to have some shuttle routes bypassing Curry Village while others go through it.
If bike and raft rentals eventually get eliminated, it may be possible to drop shuttle stops 13A and 21 as well. That would leave two eastbound stops and one westbound.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2013 11:14PM by gophersnake.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 14, 2013 09:12AM | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 864 |
Quote
rpf123
A remote parking lot on Big Oak Flat road near the entrace would also be welcome.
There was some discussion of a parking lot at Hazel Green awhile ago--mostly as a reaction or alternative to the ill-received multi-story in-valley parking structure once proposed (Taft Toe?). This would require cooperation from the landowner, who may have other plans for this property...? http://yosemitenews.info/forum/read.php?3,58317,58317#msg-58317.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 15, 2013 07:15AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 157 |
I was in Yosemite over New Year's and I haven't had a chance to weigh in on this yet.
I can see how raft rentals and horseback trips adversely affect the river. Did the plan spell out how bike rentals were affecting the Merced adversely? The shuttles are too crowded in summer and getting people to explore the valley without their cars would make bikes a good alternative. People who drive from home to the park can bring their own bikes but people who fly there cannot easily.
If the goal is to eliminate 'non-essential' activity then eliminating some of the activities at the Ahwahnee like the Bracebridge dinner and other culinary events and exhibitions could be eliminated also. Those sorts of activities can be done in any hotel. They bring in people who are in Yosemite for purposes other than enjoying the scenery.
This next statement will be sacrilege to many of you, but I prefer the Tuolumne region over the valley. (I'd rather see the long view than granite walls). At New Year's with few people the valley was okay. We hiked the west end of the valley and didn't see any other hikers all day. Another day we hiked around Mirror Lake and once off the road, there were only a few people. But in the summer, visiting the valley is a nightmare. I can't wait to get out of there.
The easiest way to cut down visitors in the valley in the summer would be to have a reservations system limiting the number. No need for more construction which has adverse affects on the environment with heavy trucks and equipment, etc. The number of people there on New Year's Eve was about right. No problem parking anywhere. No crowds on the shuttles.
I can see how raft rentals and horseback trips adversely affect the river. Did the plan spell out how bike rentals were affecting the Merced adversely? The shuttles are too crowded in summer and getting people to explore the valley without their cars would make bikes a good alternative. People who drive from home to the park can bring their own bikes but people who fly there cannot easily.
If the goal is to eliminate 'non-essential' activity then eliminating some of the activities at the Ahwahnee like the Bracebridge dinner and other culinary events and exhibitions could be eliminated also. Those sorts of activities can be done in any hotel. They bring in people who are in Yosemite for purposes other than enjoying the scenery.
This next statement will be sacrilege to many of you, but I prefer the Tuolumne region over the valley. (I'd rather see the long view than granite walls). At New Year's with few people the valley was okay. We hiked the west end of the valley and didn't see any other hikers all day. Another day we hiked around Mirror Lake and once off the road, there were only a few people. But in the summer, visiting the valley is a nightmare. I can't wait to get out of there.
The easiest way to cut down visitors in the valley in the summer would be to have a reservations system limiting the number. No need for more construction which has adverse affects on the environment with heavy trucks and equipment, etc. The number of people there on New Year's Eve was about right. No problem parking anywhere. No crowds on the shuttles.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 15, 2013 10:08AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
I also don't understand how having bike rentals affects the Merced but I think that it is part of the lawsuit's requirement that the park cuts down on commercial activities and their support systems in the park.
Off season visitation, especially during the winter months is low. Part of the reason that they have things like the Vintner's events and other such things is that they need to attract visitors during the slow times for economic reasons.
Off season visitation, especially during the winter months is low. Part of the reason that they have things like the Vintner's events and other such things is that they need to attract visitors during the slow times for economic reasons.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 24, 2013 06:00AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 37 |
Quote
Mom
People who drive from home to the park can bring their own bikes but people who fly there cannot easily.
Before I left Texas I search on craigslist for a used bike shop. After talking to one they agreed to "buy back" the bike for 70% of its original cost. He was only about 10 miles from the airport. I picked it up, rode it for 7 days and then returned it. It cost me about 30 bucks, I had a really nice bike to ride for the week and reduced my impact of vehicular travel while in the valley.
I also never left the park, so having the commercial facilities available is a good thing for me. I dropped over a grand in the valley that week (including a curry tent).
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 23, 2013 08:59PM | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 101 |
The link to the article no longer works, so I have to ask...
Regarding the ice rink, what is the plan to replace the ice rink? Will it be a meadow or a parking lot? What problem are they trying to solve?
A number of things exist in the winter to increase visitation. The park tries to shift usage away from summer. The ice rink and events at the Ahwahnee fit in this category.
Regarding the ice rink, what is the plan to replace the ice rink? Will it be a meadow or a parking lot? What problem are they trying to solve?
A number of things exist in the winter to increase visitation. The park tries to shift usage away from summer. The ice rink and events at the Ahwahnee fit in this category.
January 24, 2013 03:06AM | Registered: 11 years ago Posts: 299 |
Quote
RobE
The link to the article no longer works, so I have to ask...
Regarding the ice rink, what is the plan to replace the ice rink? Will it be a meadow or a parking lot? What problem are they trying to solve?
A number of things exist in the winter to increase visitation. The park tries to shift usage away from summer. The ice rink and events at the Ahwahnee fit in this category.
Here's the NPS page with the links to the actual Merced River Draft Plan Document. I noticed several mentions of the ice rink in this portion. I haven't dug deeply enough into the document to figure out just why they want the ice rink gone.
January 24, 2013 09:16AM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
It is "not a vital visitor experience." They're trying to reduce the commercial activities from the Valley. Since the ice rink is not vital, it should be removed. I could not find what they are going to put in that spot, but the plan says that more than 200 acres of meadow will be restored. I would hope that area, and the bike/raft rental area, will be part of that 200 acres.Quote
gophersnake
Here's the NPS page with the links to the actual Merced River Draft Plan Document. I noticed several mentions of the ice rink in this portion. I haven't dug deeply enough into the document to figure out just why they want the ice rink gone.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 24, 2013 01:25PM | Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 755 |
Quote
Dave
It is "not a vital visitor experience." They're trying to reduce the commercial activities from the Valley. Since the ice rink is not vital, it should be removed. I could not find what they are going to put in that spot, but the plan says that more than 200 acres of meadow will be restored. I would hope that area, and the bike/raft rental area, will be part of that 200 acres.Quote
gophersnake
Here's the NPS page with the links to the actual Merced River Draft Plan Document. I noticed several mentions of the ice rink in this portion. I haven't dug deeply enough into the document to figure out just why they want the ice rink gone.
I'm confused. I've only ever rented a bike at the lodge, by the swimming pool. Did they take that rental stand away, or something? There certainly isn't any meadow to restore next to the pool.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 24, 2013 03:14PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 24, 2013 06:40AM | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 165 |
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 24, 2013 08:58AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
Quote
snorkus
The obvious problem is that there are too many people going to Yosemite. They should limit trips allowed per year into the park at two.
Also, the impact from the bars and pizza places is probably little. It is not as if they are dumping the trash in the valley as they used to do.
Around 4 million people visit Yosemite each year and only a small percentage visit the park multiple times a year so limiting the number of visits would not make a difference. Summer is the busiest time of the year and that is when the issue of the number of visitors come into effect, The plan is not to restrict the total number of visitors/year but how many are in the Valley during the busy season. If someone goes to Yosemite more than twice a year but only during the slow season, they are not part of the issue that the plan is trying to address.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 24, 2013 09:06AM | Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 755 |
Quote
parklover
Quote
snorkus
The obvious problem is that there are too many people going to Yosemite. They should limit trips allowed per year into the park at two.
Also, the impact from the bars and pizza places is probably little. It is not as if they are dumping the trash in the valley as they used to do.
Around 4 million people visit Yosemite each year and only a small percentage visit the park multiple times a year so limiting the number of visits would not make a difference. Summer is the busiest time of the year and that is when the issue of the number of visitors come into effect, The plan is not to restrict the total number of visitors/year but how many are in the Valley during the busy season. If someone goes to Yosemite more than twice a year but only during the slow season, they are not part of the issue that the plan is trying to address.
He's just trolling, to see if a chicken can bite one's head off. As you say, it wouldn't make any difference at all, so ignore the suggestion...
January 24, 2013 09:23AM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
Quote
snorkus
The obvious problem is that there are too many people going to Yosemite. They should limit trips allowed per year into the park at two.
That's not feasable, reasonable, nor helpful. Those that visit on busy summer days are not repeat visitors. Those that come here often know to avoid those days.
Quote
Also, the impact from the bars and pizza places is probably little. It is not as if they are dumping the trash in the valley as they used to do.
The impact is their commercial activity. I would say that pizza and getting drunk at the beer hall are definately NOT a "vital visitor activity."
January 24, 2013 10:17AM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 7,421 |
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 24, 2013 10:58AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 201 |
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 25, 2013 06:44AM | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 165 |
January 25, 2013 07:59AM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 7,421 |
The real solution is web-based. Put up a few more webcams and just lock everyone out.
Why you need to go there when you can see it on your TV?
And if you've seen it once... I mean just like my mom sez "saw it once, don't need to see it again".
Those trails are too steep and have rocks all over them anyway. In the past they
were smart enough to pave all the trails out of that valley. But not now.
Obviously we are de-evolving. Prob. end up flightless eventually.
* btw... I heard it was 2 days... not 2 trips... so see you in 2014
* and obviously I'm just kidding
Why you need to go there when you can see it on your TV?
And if you've seen it once... I mean just like my mom sez "saw it once, don't need to see it again".
Those trails are too steep and have rocks all over them anyway. In the past they
were smart enough to pave all the trails out of that valley. But not now.
Obviously we are de-evolving. Prob. end up flightless eventually.
* btw... I heard it was 2 days... not 2 trips... so see you in 2014
* and obviously I'm just kidding
January 24, 2013 11:53AM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 28, 2013 01:22PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 157 |
If they are trying to increase visitation in winter, ie by having special events at the Ahwahnee then why get rid of the ice rink? Skating as a winter experience is not 'vital' but having wine tastings and Bracebridge dinners is?
If 'not a vital visitor experience' is the criteria, then why have the swimming pools at Curry and the lodge? That's not a 'vital visitor experience' either since it is incidental to the park.
And why have the tennis courts at the Ahwahnee? Also not a 'vital' visitor experience to me. Yet they want to get rid of a pleasant way to see the valley, that is, the bicycle rentals.
There doesn't seem to be a lot of logic behind some of these proposals.
If 'not a vital visitor experience' is the criteria, then why have the swimming pools at Curry and the lodge? That's not a 'vital visitor experience' either since it is incidental to the park.
And why have the tennis courts at the Ahwahnee? Also not a 'vital' visitor experience to me. Yet they want to get rid of a pleasant way to see the valley, that is, the bicycle rentals.
There doesn't seem to be a lot of logic behind some of these proposals.
January 28, 2013 01:55PM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
The two ideas are not linked. They are trying to REDUCE commercial operations, not justify them. Getting rid of the rink, the rafts, the horses, is just a start.Quote
Mom
If they are trying to increase visitation in winter, ie by having special events at the Ahwahnee then why get rid of the ice rink? Skating as a winter experience is not 'vital' but having wine tastings and Bracebridge dinners is?
Those could be next.Quote
If 'not a vital visitor experience' is the criteria, then why have the swimming pools at Curry and the lodge? That's not a 'vital visitor experience' either since it is incidental to the park.
And why have the tennis courts at the Ahwahnee? Also not a 'vital' visitor experience to me. Yet they want to get rid of a pleasant way to see the valley, that is, the bicycle rentals.
To reduce the commercial operations in the Valley. That seems logical to me.Quote
There doesn't seem to be a lot of logic behind some of these proposals.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 29, 2013 11:31AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
Quote
Mom
If they are trying to increase visitation in winter, ie by having special events at the Ahwahnee then why get rid of the ice rink? Skating as a winter experience is not 'vital' but having wine tastings and Bracebridge dinners is?
If 'not a vital visitor experience' is the criteria, then why have the swimming pools at Curry and the lodge? That's not a 'vital visitor experience' either since it is incidental to the park.
And why have the tennis courts at the Ahwahnee? Also not a 'vital' visitor experience to me. Yet they want to get rid of a pleasant way to see the valley, that is, the bicycle rentals.
There doesn't seem to be a lot of logic behind some of these proposals.
I addressed the wine tastings and Bracebridge in another post earlier.
I just finished reading the huge binder for the TRP so I have not started the MRP in detail yet. However, I quickly looked through volume 1's maps to find a quick answer. The pool and the tennis courts at the Ahwahnee are to be removed in all alternatives, the lodge pool in some of the alternatives but I could not find anything about removing the Curry pool. One good thing about keeping the Curry pool is that it lessens the amount of people trying to swim in the Merced. It gets really hot in the valley and people need to find relief from the heat some way since there is limited AC in the valley. Less people in the Merced means less damage to the river banks and decreases the chance of drowning. I don't like the removal of bike rentals since not all people can bring a bike to Yosemite and it is a way for people to see the park and not use a car, get exercise and a easy way to just stop and get off the bike and check out the view. However, there is a infrastructure in having bike rentals so that is why they want to remove them.
As for going in the summer, yes it is hot, crowded and too much traffic, however, there are places in the valley that you can go to that don't have a lot of people. The west end of the valley is an example. Or you can go early in the morning and leave before it gets crowded.
Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but discussions of having a reservation system in plans were to limit the amount of cars entering the valley and not to limit the amount of people in the valley (as a wilderness permit does) and have them take shuttles. To implement a reservation system has it's own issues with having to build a infrastructure for outside parking, a reservation system set up (and we all know what kind of fiasco that can be, think what happened with campground reservations), more extensive shuttle system, etc and that also cost millions.
Raising the entrance fees during the busy season is unprecedented, I have never heard of a park doing that. Doing that would impact lower income families ability to come to the park and will not control the amount of people because there is always someone that is willing to pay the higher fee.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 28, 2013 02:23PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 157 |
What I am saying is that the NPS needs to have a consistent standard for what they are doing regarding the Merced River plan and the Tuolumne River plan.
If the standard is not vital to the visitor experience, obviously a very squishy standard, then all activities not related to scenery viewing, hiking or wildlife viewing activities should be axed. If the skating rink takes up space that could be used for meadows, then so do the tennis courts. If bicycle rental is not vital, then neither is swimming in the pools.
I don't go to the Valley in the summer at all. It is a miserable experience. I hate the crowded shuttles. I hate the tour buses. I hate the milling crowds. Two things could be done that wouldn't have required multi-million dollar plans the more millions to implement them. Either institute a reservation system for entering the valley. Or raise the entrance fees. Higher charges in the summer, higher still on holiday weekends, lower fees in the off season.
If the standard is not vital to the visitor experience, obviously a very squishy standard, then all activities not related to scenery viewing, hiking or wildlife viewing activities should be axed. If the skating rink takes up space that could be used for meadows, then so do the tennis courts. If bicycle rental is not vital, then neither is swimming in the pools.
I don't go to the Valley in the summer at all. It is a miserable experience. I hate the crowded shuttles. I hate the tour buses. I hate the milling crowds. Two things could be done that wouldn't have required multi-million dollar plans the more millions to implement them. Either institute a reservation system for entering the valley. Or raise the entrance fees. Higher charges in the summer, higher still on holiday weekends, lower fees in the off season.
January 28, 2013 09:38PM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
They do. Reducing doesn't mean "removing all."Quote
Mom
What I am saying is that the NPS needs to have a consistent standard for what they are doing regarding the Merced River plan and the Tuolumne River plan.
Quote
If the standard is not vital to the visitor experience, obviously a very squishy standard, then all activities not related to scenery viewing, hiking or wildlife viewing activities should be axed. If the skating rink takes up space that could be used for meadows, then so do the tennis courts. If bicycle rental is not vital, then neither is swimming in the pools.
Not "vital" is only one standard. The official plans give more detailed explanations than I gave here. I suggest you read them.
That's your loss. I'm there most days in the summer and many are fine days with no crowds at all. I don't "hate" any of those things you mentioned. I concentrate about what I love about Yosemite, not about hateful things.Quote
I don't go to the Valley in the summer at all. It is a miserable experience. I hate the crowded shuttles. I hate the tour buses. I hate the milling crowds.
Quote
Two things could be done that wouldn't have required multi-million dollar plans the more millions to implement them. Either institute a reservation system for entering the valley. Or raise the entrance fees. Higher charges in the summer, higher still on holiday weekends, lower fees in the off season.
A reservation system is out of the question and not feasable. The entrance fee might go up, but there is much resistance to that within the park and the surrounding businesses. The fee program cannot change prices as you suggest. It just wouldn't work.
February 01, 2013 06:30PM | Admin Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 17,050 |
February 01, 2013 09:26PM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink February 04, 2013 09:56PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
February 04, 2013 10:14PM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
February 04, 2013 10:43PM | Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 4,173 |
February 05, 2013 08:45AM | Moderator Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 1,634 |
The blatant hypocrisy is amazing. They (the park service) says they want to reduce the amount of commercial operations in the Valley, so, what do they do? They provide more parking for the employees of the commercial operation. That parking and housing over there is not for park service employees, but for DNC employees.
I've seen a bumper sticker on several cars around the park; "Save Yosemite From The Park Service"
I've seen a bumper sticker on several cars around the park; "Save Yosemite From The Park Service"
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink February 05, 2013 10:16AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
The parking lot is for the employee housing that is replacing temporary housing with permanent housing.
The preferred alternative is going to add more employee housing in El Portal. However, for visitor safety and other reasons, some employees have to live in the valley.
I highly suggest that people read at least Alternative 5, the preferred alternative, so they can get an idea of the changes that might be made. If you don't want to read that whole section, at the end of the section are drawings and a small explanation of what might happen in the developed areas. I have also found that participating in a webinar is helpful in understanding the plans that are out. During the webinar, you can ask questions about what you are not clear about when you look at the plans. If the timing of the webinar does not fit into you schedule, it is recorded so you can watch it at a later date.
The preferred alternative is going to add more employee housing in El Portal. However, for visitor safety and other reasons, some employees have to live in the valley.
I highly suggest that people read at least Alternative 5, the preferred alternative, so they can get an idea of the changes that might be made. If you don't want to read that whole section, at the end of the section are drawings and a small explanation of what might happen in the developed areas. I have also found that participating in a webinar is helpful in understanding the plans that are out. During the webinar, you can ask questions about what you are not clear about when you look at the plans. If the timing of the webinar does not fit into you schedule, it is recorded so you can watch it at a later date.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink February 05, 2013 10:47AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 201 |
Apparently there is a webinar today. From the Yosemite FB page:
"Join us at 1pm PST today (February 5th) for a short presentation via webinar on the Preferred Alternative of the Merced Wild and Scenic River Draft Plan and EIS. The presentation will be followed by Q&A. Sign us at http://yose.webex.com/ "
"Join us at 1pm PST today (February 5th) for a short presentation via webinar on the Preferred Alternative of the Merced Wild and Scenic River Draft Plan and EIS. The presentation will be followed by Q&A. Sign us at http://yose.webex.com/ "
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink February 05, 2013 12:05PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
Quote
KatyAnderson
Apparently there is a webinar today. From the Yosemite FB page:
"Join us at 1pm PST today (February 5th) for a short presentation via webinar on the Preferred Alternative of the Merced Wild and Scenic River Draft Plan and EIS. The presentation will be followed by Q&A. Sign us at http://yose.webex.com/ "
For those who don't know this - If you go into the planning section at www.nps.gov.yose there is a place where you can sign up to automatically get email updates on plans and when webinars and open houses are being held. A great way to keep informed on what is going on.
January 29, 2013 04:33PM | Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 84 |
$235 million seems a lot to me.Quote
wherever
"The proposed changes, which would cost $235 million, would reroute traffic to make it flow more smoothly and create a pedestrian underpass connecting Yosemite Lodge with the trail to Yosemite Falls, an area of heavy foot traffic that results in lengthy traffic jams."
I am curious to see a breakdown of these money.
Is it not a joke that government organization can easily spend any amount?
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 29, 2013 05:22PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
Although it appears that wherever was saying the $235 million was for the pedestrian underpass, it is the estimation of what it would cost to do the whole project and implementation would take years. I am just starting the MRP reading so I don't know if there is a breakdown listed. I doubt it because they have never done that for these large plans.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 30, 2013 05:21PM | Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 755 |
Quote
Yury
$235 million seems a lot to me.Quote
wherever
"The proposed changes, which would cost $235 million, would reroute traffic to make it flow more smoothly and create a pedestrian underpass connecting Yosemite Lodge with the trail to Yosemite Falls, an area of heavy foot traffic that results in lengthy traffic jams."
I am curious to see a breakdown of these money.
Is it not a joke that government organization can easily spend any amount?
Quote
parklover
Although it appears that wherever was saying the $235 million was for the pedestrian underpass, it is the estimation of what it would cost to do the whole project and implementation would take years. I am just starting the MRP reading so I don't know if there is a breakdown listed. I doubt it because they have never done that for these large plans.
No. That's not what I said. The changes would cost $235 million. The changes would reroute traffic, etc, among other things. You'll also note the quotation marks...that text is from the Fresno Bee news article. They never implied that $235 million was for the underpass.
|
Re: Yosemite plan would ease traffic, shut ice rink January 30, 2013 06:05PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
Quote
wherever
Quote
Yury
$235 million seems a lot to me.Quote
wherever
"The proposed changes, which would cost $235 million, would reroute traffic to make it flow more smoothly and create a pedestrian underpass connecting Yosemite Lodge with the trail to Yosemite Falls, an area of heavy foot traffic that results in lengthy traffic jams."
I am curious to see a breakdown of these money.
Is it not a joke that government organization can easily spend any amount?Quote
parklover
Although it appears that wherever was saying the $235 million was for the pedestrian underpass, it is the estimation of what it would cost to do the whole project and implementation would take years. I am just starting the MRP reading so I don't know if there is a breakdown listed. I doubt it because they have never done that for these large plans.
No. That's not what I said. The changes would cost $235 million. The changes would reroute traffic, etc, among other things. You'll also note the quotation marks...that text is from the Fresno Bee news article. They never implied that $235 million was for the underpass.
That is why I said "although it appears" because I knew that you were not stating that the cost was for the pedestrian underpass only and I had thought that yury thought that it was for the underpass only. sorry, my bad.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
