August 23 editorial
Doesn’t it seem odd, at a time when Parkites are spending so much time and money on their local trail system, that the city is eliminating parking spaces at some popular trailheads? The latest to go are the four valuable places at the Iron Canyon trailhead at the northern edge of Park City.
Even though we’re aware of a smattering of complaints from homeowners about illegal parking in the area, we have to wonder if this isn’t a knee-jerk reaction to the problem. After all, if someone parks in a restricted zone on Main Street, do we react by eliminating parking on downtown streets?
What, exactly, will be the ultimate result of eliminating those spaces besides increasing animosity between hikers and homeowners? It won’t stop people from using the trail. If no spaces are provided, they’ll just park on neighborhood streets. Is that the answer?
If Iron Canyon were a gated community, and its roads were maintained by the homeowners, then eliminating parking would be a different issue. But the last time we looked, the subdivision was still part of Park City and city plows were still clearing the streets.
Although there have been changes in the alignment of the trail, hikers have been wandering through Iron Canyon’s magnificent aspens for decades long before the subdivision was developed. It must be particularly galling for veteran hikers already mourning development of other scenic areas to see access limited at another of their favorite trailheads.
Some areas seem to have found ways to accommodate hikers and bikers while mitigating their impact on the surrounding neighborhoods. One example is the the Glenwild trailhead in the Snyderville Basin. Another creative solution when people were parking along State Route 224 was the construction of a parking area across from the McPolin barn.
At a time when Park City is winning so much praise for its trail system, we think that the arbitrary elimination of trailhead parking sends the wrong message.
Support Local Journalism
Support Local Journalism
Readers around Park City and Summit County make the Park Record's work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.
Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.
Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User
The opposition to a proposal for a development at Park City Mountain Resort has enlisted a veteran of the intense dispute regarding Treasure, which unfolded over the course of years and offered some parallels to the talks regarding the PCMR project.