Traffic in Little Cottonwood Canyon is a problem. On powder days especially, driving up S.R. 210 is absolute gridlock. Lately, the dreaded “red snake” has even appeared on weekends when it hasn’t snowed. Not only are these traffic woes annoying, they’re also dangerous. With 64 slide paths along the road, roughly half of the canyon’s length is threatened by avalanches. To mitigate that danger, the highway is often closed for control work, which causes traffic snarls at the canyon’s mouth. To address these issues, UDOT has put forth a Draft EIS with two options: widening the road for an enhanced bus service in the shoulder lane during peak-periods, or a Little Cottonwood Canyon gondola that goes from the mouth of the canyon at La Caille to the ski resorts with stops at Snowbird and Alta.
I don’t like either of these options, but I’m especially against the gondola. Here’s why:
Little Cottonwood Canyon Gondola Option
A gondola in Little Cottonwood Canyon sure would be awesome, wouldn’t it? I really like the idea of being able to ride from the bottom of the canyon to the top, looking out at the scenery without worrying about traffic on the road. However, I think the gondola option would come at too great a cost, both financially and environmentally.
My first concern is that the gondola would serve only one type of canyon user: resort skiers and snowboarders. There are many other recreationists that use the canyon such as backcountry skiers, snowshoers, fly fishers, rock climbers, mountain bikers, hikers and more. But the gondola will only have stops at Snowbird and Alta. Therefore, the gondola is not a canyon transportation solution at all. It is only a way to get more skiers to the resorts, which only benefits the resorts. The gondola is nothing more than an expensive gift to the ski resorts, funded by tax payers.
Second, the Little Cottonwood Canyon gondola would be an eyesore. The Draft EIS shows gondola towers would reach up to 230 feet in the air. To put that in perspective, the 13-story Cliff Lodge at Snowbird is 157 feet tall. Just imagine a row of 20 towers, taller than the Cliff Lodge, lined up through the bottom of the canyon. This would destroy the viewshed and urbanize one of the Wasatch Mountain’s most treasured canyons.
My third issue with the gondola is that the towers would threaten world-class rock climbing and bouldering routes in Little Cottonwood Canyon. The gondola tower’s placements could possibly destroy the boulders near the mouth of the canyon, as well as trail access to the crags. I’ve spent many days on those routes and would be devastated to lose them.
Fourth, a gondola only serves Little Cottonwood Canyon. But neighboring Big Cottonwood Canyon has traffic issues that are nearly as bad. UDOT is not taking traffic going to Solitude and Brighton into consideration here. I feel like any transportation plan UDOT puts forth should encompass the entire Tri-Canyon area to alleviate all resort traffic. Enhanced bus service is something that can be employed in both LCC and BCC.
Finally, gondolas are an easy target for sabotage. Just look at what happened to the Sea to Sky Gondola in British Columbia. Vandals cut the cable not once, but twice in six months. Both instances destroyed the cabins as they crashed to the ground, costing between $5 million and $10 million in damages. Who’s to say the same can’t happen here? A cut cable would end UDOT’s “transportation solution” real quick, and for as long as it would take to repair (again at taxpayer’s expense).
Enhanced Bus Service Option
I prefer the enhanced bus service option. However, I do not support widening the road. Adding another lane would cause as much, if not more environmental damage to the canyon and would also likely take out the aforementioned bouldering spots. A better option is to explore ways to decrease single-rider cars in the canyon. Making S.R. 210 a toll road is one way to do this. There could be a graduated level of rates – single passenger vehicles would pay a much higher cost than vehicles with 4 people or more. Busses, of course, would be less expensive, if not free for resort season pass holders.
While I don’t like widening the road for environmental reasons, I do prefer it over the gondola because it won’t destroy the viewshed as much, and it would serve all canyon users, not just resort skiers and snowboarders.
So What’s the Solution?
In general, I agree with much of what the Wasatch Backcountry Alliance and the Salt Lake Climber’s Alliance has proposed for Little Cottonwood Canyon solutions. Such ideas include:
- Tolling to incentivize use of public transportation and manage canyon capacity
- Reduced or free bus ticket prices on busy weekends
- Increased funding to support more buses
- Increased funding to create/operate express bus routes from locations all across the Wasatch Front
- Managed and reversible-lane alternatives during peak traffic periods
Furthermore, I think the canyon’s traction laws should be in effect every day during ski season – not just when it snows. All too often cars without 4WD or snow tires somehow get up the canyon, and authorities do a terrible job of checking and enforcing tire laws. So many traffic jams happen because of passenger cars sliding off the road. Those vehicles should not be allowed up the canyons, no matter the weather conditions… period.
All of these options are strategies that UDOT can try before committing to a hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars gondola or road expansion.
I’m a skier, both at resorts and in the backcountry, and I know how frustrating it is to try and get to the upper canyons on a powder day. There is no doubt that something must be done to alleviate traffic congestion on powder days and weekends. But both the gondola and road widening options go too far at this point in time. I question why UDOT insists on taking the nuclear option where there will be no going back from, when there are less expensive and less intrusive ways to decrease the amount of vehicles going to ski resorts. Let us try those options first, before going nuclear in our beloved Cottonwood Canyons.
To submit your own opinions and ideas to UDOT, the Draft EIS is taking public comment until September 3rd. Be sure to make your voice heard while you can.
1. Additional bus lanes are also an eyesore.
2. On days when we need transportation up to the resorts the most during storms or when the road is closed buses will not work.
3. Snow sheds are called for with the bus proposal. They are ugly.
4. We are trying to solve a problem in Little Cottonwood Canyon. This has nothing to do with big Cottonwood Canyon where it is not as vulnerable to avalanches and is often open when little cotton would Canyon is closed.
David, I don’t think you read the article. They do not support widening the road either. Basically both of the proposed alternatives should not be implemented until all possible actions are taken to mitigate traffic with existing infrastructure.
To your first point, of course it would serve resort goers. There’s no red snake in the summer time. The only reason the conversation is happening is because of the resort.
I also disagree that the gondola would be an eyesore. Many people stood in complete awe when the canyon’s gondola was completed, and many of us are proud to call it a part of our home terrain.
There are literally thousands of bouldering and sport climbing routes up that canyon, a big pole is definitely not going to stop climbers from getting out there.
Having the gondola would definitely help mitigate traffic to BCC to a degree because more people would find their way to LCC instead when the traffic got busy.
All of your arguments seem like they come from a selfish point of view because you don’t want people up _your_ canyon.
Busses suck ass, we need a gondola. Stop fearing change and embrace the possibilities. Nearly every other major resort area around the world is powered by epic gondolas that people love to ride and see the beauty of this world from a new perspective.
The gondola is the better solution, but the planners have overlooked
The gondola is the way to go! And the ski areas need to expand
Totally agree with the author! Gondola is a terrible option that only serves Alta and Snowbird. If they want to pay the cost 100%, then maybe I’d consider this option more seriously. But the current proposal has taxpayers footing the bill for a service that they may never use and funnels all the benefits to private business. Kind of a joke if you ask me.
The reality is the Cottonwoods are becoming too popular for their own good. As responsible stewards of the land, we need to bite the bullet and realize we might have to give up driving our precious SUVs up and down the canyon to go skiing. Take a look at the Zion NP model; no personal vehicles allowed in the main canyon and yet everything seems to operate just fine. I think this is the only sustainable reality for the Cottonwoods.
Everyone has their own opinion on this, but I am curious as to the previous commenter who suggested that many other resort areas are powered by “epic gondolas”. I take a fair amount of road trips and can’t think of one spot (maybe PCMR with the cabriolet??) that uses gondolas to transport people TO the mountain. And it’s definitely and eyesore, just as much as an oil derrick in canyon country or a pile of trash on a reservoir beach.
Busses all day baby, forget the cash grab gondola!!
Lol UDOT must not know wind hold is a thing that happens all the time. Honestly hella toll the canyon and the people will end up using the buses. For people saying the buses don’t work on crazy snowy days, I work at snowbird full time and my fiesta with snow tires literally drives up perfectly. It’s sad to see that they aren’t trying other options first. Also, the base of the gondola is going to be a shit show with parking.., that’ll make people want to drive instead.
A 2 track cog railway would eliminate all cars & trucks except for emergency vehicles. You can have express trains and local trains that would stop at all the trailheads.
Completely agree with Mike. Has anyone traveled to Zermatt? There are a lot more options than buses and Gondola’s. More creative solutions need to come forward, as Zermatt is a good model for the future. They have underground rail leaving almost no eyesore, and all their traffic is electric train. More people and way more efficient than anything proposed here.