Brice Wallace
If the Utah Department of Transportation has its way, a gondola — not a widened road — will eventually get skiers and others to Little Cottonwood Canyon’s resorts.
UDOT recently identified the gondola as the preferred option to ease traffic congestion along State Route 210, but a final decision will be made later.
Its choice, part of an environmental impact statement (EIS), “best meets the project purpose and need and provides the highest travel reliability for the public,” UDOT said.{mprestriction ids="1,3"}
The gondola development is years away and filled with many questions, and UDOT is giving the public a 45-day review and comment period on the EIS that ends Oct. 17. After that, UDOT will identify the final alternative, expected to be issued during the upcoming winter.
The gondola, estimated to cost $550 million or more to construct, would move patrons from the Wasatch Boulevard area to Snowbird and Alta Ski Area.
“We know how important this study is to so many canyon users, as the amount of public participation and comments we’ve received far surpasses any previous environmental study in UDOT’s history,” Josh Van Jura, UDOT project manager, said in announcing the preferred option.
“With numerous studies over many years as the starting point for addressing the transportation challenges in Little Cottonwood Canyon, we relied on the EIS process of in-depth technical analysis and environmental assessment, along with agency and public input, to identify Gondola B as the preferred alternative in the final EIS.”
In the wake of the announcement, gondola opponent Salt Lake County Mayor Jenny Wilson called for the public to express their views to UDOT but said she is concerned about the gondola’s cost and impacts on the canyon, including its “visual impact.”
Wilson said a better option would be for the Utah Transit Authority to invest in electric buses, carpooling, multiple regional transit hubs for buses, traffic restrictions, and having motorists pay more if their vehicle is not full.
“The idea of one big parking lot at the base of the canyon is, in my mind, a recipe for disaster,” she said.
“We have been chasing a train or gondola for as long as I have been in public life,” Wilson said. “What we have not done is recognize and invested in advancing technology. Wouldn’t it be great to know that we could actually dial in and see, in real time, where the congestion is and make a decision on whether we decide to go skiing on that given day?”
The county mayor said that for a traffic congestion problem that exists 15-20 days a year, “this level of cost is excessive.” Also, a gondola system, once it is built, is not flexible, whereas a busing system could be altered if conditions in the future warrant.
State Rep. Suzanne Harrison, D-Draper, noted she has opposed the gondola “from Day One.”
“If taxpayers are going to pay for transportation projects, they should benefit all of us, not just the ski resorts,” she said. “I’m running for County Council to support common-sense solutions, and this gondola isn’t one of them.”
Among other opponents of the gondola concept is the Wasatch Backcountry Alliance, which also is against widening of S.R. 210. In a recent op-ed in The Salt Lake Tribune, Brad T. Rutledge, a co-founder and board member, said the UDOT process outcome will be expensive and that “the wrong solution threatens to permanently scar the canyon while not solving the problem.
“The gondola is not a transportation solution,” Rutledge wrote. “It’s a fancy ski lift serving to boost the profits of two private companies, and will only operate during the winter ski resort season.”
Rutledge said that “some people roll their eyes at buses, but Utah has never invested enough resources to make the canyon ski bus system truly effective.”
Gondola Works, coalition of stakeholders, canyon users and businesses supporting the gondola, has said the canyon has over 2 million visitors annually, and the number is growing. The canyon road has up to 7,000 vehicles per day. A gondola, it says, would allow traffic in the canyon in all weather conditions, even if the highway were temporarily closed to vehicles.
The coalition includes Snowbird, Alta Ski Area, POWDR and Ski Utah.
While the gondola’s construction would be a state government-funded project, the gondola’s operation and maintenance would be paid by users, the coalition says. The gondola would be a year-round option and even be its own attraction for people to experience the canyon, it says.
Alta has supported the gondola option because it “is the least impacted by weather, the primary cause of traffic congestion and delays in Little Cottonwood Canyon,” Alta says on its website.
Identifying the gondola as the preferred choice is just one step in its development. UDOT has acknowledged it may take years to secure federal, state and/or private funding for full implementation of the gondola. It is proposing a phased implementation plan, starting with components of increased and improved bus service, with no widening of the canyon road, as well as tolls or restrictions on single-occupancy vehicles and the construction of mobility hubs.
“Currently, UDOT does not have funding to implement the proposed preferred alternative,” Van Jura said. “We are proposing the phased implementation plan to alleviate mobility, reliability and safety concerns that exist today while addressing the long-term transportation need in the canyon.”
The gondola system would include a base station with 2,500 parking spaces near the mouth of Little Cottonwood Canyon. Each gondola cabin would hold up to 35 people, and travelers could expect a cabin to arrive every two minutes.
“The gondola can operate independently of S.R. 210, avoiding delays related to adverse weather, crashes, slide offs and slow-moving traffic,” UDOT said. “This alternative has the highest visual impacts but low impacts to the watershed, wildlife movement and climbing boulders.”
UDOT estimates winter operations and maintenance costs of $4 million per year, a number that would rise by $3 million if summer service were to be implemented. “While the initial construction cost is the third-highest of the alternatives,” UDOT said, “the overall 30-year life cycle cost is the lowest,” UDOT said.{/mprestriction}
