Little Cottonwood Canyon Gondola
"The great use of a life is to spend it for something worthwhile that outlasts it." -- Dick Bass
Is a 10-mile, $560 million Gondola up Little Cottonwood Canyon in Salt Lake City worth it? Alta and Snowbird ski resorts reside in Little Cottonwood Canyon ("LCC") on the southeast side of Salt Lake City, Utah. Because of the popularity of the two world-class skiing destinations, extreme traffic problems have been a problem for the city and the road to the resorts for decades. State agencies have been proceeding on a long decision process to devise solutions to this problem, one of which is a massive Gondola project.
Before we dive deeper into the pros and cons of the potential Gondola construction, I have to disclose that I have a clear bias for this project — my grandfather, Dick Bass, was one of the co-founders of Snowbird, and members of my family are still involved in Snowbird as a company. Importantly, my opinions expressed in this writing are entirely my own. Snowbird has absolutely zero affiliation to this writing.
Despite this conflict of interest, I believe my point of view adds a unique perspective that I will draw upon. I will do my best to consider all opinions and perspectives as I lay out my thoughts in this post. I intend to approach this writing with as much empathy for differing opinions as possible.
I also want to note that from reading a wide variety of the comments and criticism for the potential Gondola project that are available online (see link below), I have a strong hunch that many of the loudest voices have not fully done their research on the proposal. My guess is that they formed an opinion without fully understanding the data, facts, pros, and cons of each option for fixing the traffic problem. I am open-minded and more than happy to discuss further with those who disagree with my stances, but please understand the full context if you want to discuss.
Here are the sources to learn more about the details covered in this post:
(This is where I could tell most commentators had not done their homework... Some commentators make excellent points, but many are cursory, uninformed, and emotionally-charged).
Background
The traffic problem arises from a unique geographical challenge — Little Cottonwood Canyon is home to one the of the most dangerous, avalanche-prone roads in the country, State Route 210 ("SR-210"). The unique geology of the Wasatch mountains carved out a narrow canyon with dramatic, steep mountain slopes on each side, and the steep grade requires drivers to climb 3,500 feet of elevation gain. This terrain constrained the options for constructing the road to travel up the canyon over the years, and SR-210 has always been a one-lane road each way. With this combination of a narrow road and frequent road closures necessary to mitigate avalanche danger, the highway has traffic jams that can last hours. The danger of the road is also personal — one of my family members had a very serious car accident on this road during icy conditions. They luckily were not injured, but the danger of this road is no joke.
This unique geography is a double-edged sword — since the terrain is dramatic, the skiing is special and very attractive for expert skiers looking for some of the best Big Mountain skiing in the world. LCC can receive huge amounts of snowfall in a given year (they already have received 465" this season!). For those who have skied two-feet of fresh powder, they know that skiing powder is “the most addicting drug on earth.” With the unique terrain and snowfall, as well as a growing popularity for skiing over the years, the traffic problem continues to worsen.
This graphic and video from the "Gondola Works" website is very helpful to understand the facts and scope of this challenge:
Local residents of Salt Lake City and the surrounding area do not disagree that the traffic problem needs a solution, but residents have fiercely debated what that solution should be. Throughout the last decade, considerations for traffic solutions have been on the mind of legislators and residents. Many proposals have been considered. These discussions intensified over the last few years as the Utah Department of Transportation (“UDOT”) narrowed the options down to 2 main ones — 1) a Gondola and 2) a SR-210 renovation and dramatic Bus system improvement. On August 31 this past year, UDOT announced support for the Gondola project after a fierce public debate with many dissenters for the project.
This announcement is a major step toward a solution, but just the beginning. Now, legislators need to secure the funding to pay for the estimated cost of $560 million for the project as well as to solidify the zoning, legal, and construction plans. If public officials struggle to secure the funding, the project has the possibility to lay dead in the water.
Most of the negative criticism against the Gondola proposal focuses on a few major areas:
A Gondola is an industrial eye-sore in nature that should be preserved.
Gondola construction could be a danger to the water source coming from the canyon.
A Gondola will obstruct existing climbing and bouldering routes.
A Gondola would cost way too much, and enhanced busing and tolling should be tried first.
If you improve the bus system, it can solve the problem without a Gondola.
A Gondola would stuff more people in an already too-crowded place to visit.
The parking and logistics of the Gondola proposal are still not optimal.
Corrupt, commercial interests are driving this decision process.
I will cover each argument below and my thoughts on each point. Importantly, I am assuming that some sort of construction project will need to be done in Little Cottonwood Canyon over the next 10 to 30 years. This is an important detail to my stance because others may make the assumption that UDOT should just improve the bus system and implement a toll system on the road and that no construction will be needed. I believe that is a short-sighted assumption. Over the coming decades, the traffic problem is sure to get worse; Salt Lake City is one of the Top 10 fastest growing cities in the US. Ikon and Epic passes have drawn a new population of young, active generation into skiing and snowboarding. Skiing popularity will keep increasing as young generations build families. Making small incremental changes does not seem like the best path forward for future generations.
So let's dive in.
A Gondola is an industrial eye-sore in nature that should be preserved.
True. To those who care deeply about preserving the natural landscape, a Gondola would add an industrial insertion. That said, a big human mark has already been made upon LCC through the existence of SR-210 and the developments at Alta and Snowbird. Although some may disapprove of all development entirely, there is no doubt that Alta, Snowbird, and LCC development has been a positive contributor to the growth of Salt Lake City and transformed recreation access in this one-of-kind canyon. Adding a gondola would not be a drastic defilement to the natural landscape compared to what has already been done. There are also positive externalities of exposing more people to nature. I have been visiting Snowbird and LCC ever since I was born, and I have grown to deeply appreciate nature and the importance of preserving it through sustainability efforts. In the short term, a Gondola would add some industry to the nature. In the long term, more convenient access may inspire support for preserving nature for future generations like the access to LCC has done for me.
A Gondola could be a danger to the water source coming from the canyon.
Alta and Snowbird already are extremely conscious about sustainability and preservation from their operations, doing everything in their power to maintain the environment (including the water source) and to use sustainable power. Both resorts work closely the the National Forest Service to meet sustainability standard. Continuing the focus on sustainability is a priority for the Gondola project. The proposal for the Gondola project and all other potential solutions to the traffic challenge all include maintaining the water quality standards that are necessary for safe drinking water. Part of the high costs of the project are to avoid any damage to the water source through creative construction strategies like using helicopters for delivery of materials.
A Gondola will obstruct climbing and bouldering routes.
This point has truth to it and is an unfortunate side-effect that hopefully could be mitigated. If the Gondola plan is implemented, the development team should do everything in its power to avoid obstructing these routes. The intention of the project is to fix the huge transportation problem, not to negatively affect outdoors options. If no Gondola is constructed, and UDOT eventually decides to renovate the road, it is very likely a road renovation would create negative repercussions on climbing routes as well.
A Gondola would cost way too much, and enhanced busing and tolling should be tried first.
UDOT should and is beginning to make efforts to improve the busing system and to experiment on changes to the road infrastructure. UDOT estimates that an "Enhanced Bus" project would have capital costs of $355 million and that the annual winter operating costs would be $14 million. Comparatively the estimates for the Gondola are $561 million capital costs and a cheaper $9.5 million winter operating budget. Over a long time period, the cheaper operating costs of the Gondola present a big advantage. Spread out over 30 years, the estimated operating costs of the enhanced bus system are $420 million compared to $285 million for the Gondola. With a long-term viewpoint, the advantages of the Gondola become clearer.
This point is one that most of the loud commentators that object to the Gondola don't understand. Any solution to the problem will cost a significant amount of taxpayer dollars. Imagine if they attempt the Enhanced Bus project without a Gondola over the next decade or so, and it does not solve the problem. Then that is a $350 million expense that could have been put toward a better solution. So, the "let's try improving the bus system" first argument has some flaws. UDOT should continue make smaller improvements and tweaks to address the big problems in cost-effective ways, but thinking with the long-term in mind is better for arriving at the best solution. And, long-term thinking is better for taxpayers.
If you improve the bus system, it can solve the problem without a Gondola.
I believe a big source of the problem currently is that a solid percentage of LCC visitors do not want to ride a bus at all. They would prefer to drive themselves and to deal with the traffic. I am not being critical of this stance as I also would rather not ride a bus to get up the canyon. In an ideal world, if the majority of the people were willing to ride buses, this problem would clearly be solved by an enhancement to the busing system. The problem is: our world is far from ideal. People make transportation decisions based on what they think is in their own best interest (driving their own car), which is completely understandable. A new bus system will not significantly affect people's transportation decision process. A lot of people will still hop in their cars each morning they want to ski.
If this line of reasoning is true, improving the busing system has inherent flaws. If huge amounts of capital are invested in an overhauled bus system, I believe that many people will still not want to utilize the new system. Even with improvements to buses and the roads, those brand-new buses still will wait in long lines of traffic on weekends, holidays, and powder days. A Gondola would be more comfortable and efficiently avoid the road altogether. Riding a Gondola that does not have any traffic constraints and is the same logistics every time is an easier choice than a bus that is unpredictable due to traffic (and avalanches!) and perhaps crowded. My hunch is that most of the commentators who vehemently oppose the Gondola are the residents in Sandy and Cottonwood Heights, the neighborhoods closest to the base of LCC. I am empathetic to their opposition... I would not want a large construction project to begin in my neighborhood. But if the problem goes unaddressed, these residents also suffer from the worsening traffic problem.
A Gondola would stuff more people in an already too-crowded place to visit.
Many of those Sandy or Cottonwood Heights and other Salt Lake City residents live there for the convenient access to the mountains. It is understandable that those residents would want to avoid more people crowding into the canyon. In this view, putting more limits or charging tolls on visitors to LCC would be a preferred option, but I do not think that limiting visitors is realistic. If visitor limitations were implemented, the negative uproar could exceed that for the Gondola.
Instead, my belief is that this unique slice of nature should be accessible to more people. My life perspective has been greatly influenced for the better by visiting Snowbird and LCC over my lifetime. I feel a deeper connection to nature and a deeper desire to be a positive force for sustaining our country's natural wonders for future generations. Although any solution to this problem will likely drive more people into LCC each year, I view this as a positive not a negative. LCC should be a place that can be appreciated by all visitors. As access increases, UDOT, Alta, and Snowbird can continue to manage the higher visitor count in sustainable ways as these organizations have done well for decades. Perhaps, the easier access provided by a new Gondola will spark that deep connection that I have developed by visiting LCC my entire life for new visitors. Or maybe I'm full of BS...
The parking and logistics of the Gondola proposal are still not optimal.
This is true. The current gondola proposal involves a parking location that is not next to the proposed base station of the Gondola and would require a short shuttle from the parking lot to the Gondola. I understand that this aspect of the plan is because of location constraints, and the desire to avoid huge traffic problems at the Gondola base. That said, this part of the plan should be reconsidered. I hope some creative planners will be able to devise a better solution.
Corrupt, commercial interests are driving this decision process.
Yes, Snowbird has an undeniable commercial bias in this decision. (I can only speak with knowledge about Snowbird on these points, so I am leaving Alta out of the discussion here). However, dismissing this decision process as "corrupt" and a "money grab" is not true or fair. Snowbird also wants what is best for Salt Lake City residents and LCC. Why would Snowbird want to make a poor decision for its home and its visitors? Snowbird leadership is incredibly thoughtful in their support for the Gondola, and I have confidence that no corruption exists. These organizations working together are simply trying to devise the best strategy for future generations and the next 50 to 100 years in LCC. Period. Why do people immediately assume the worst intentions? Most people have far more positive intentions than people give them credit.
Negative, misguided assumptions are also not fair to the UDOT team that has worked so hard on this decision process for years. UDOT exists to serve the public's needs. Rather than criticizing UDOT's hard work, LCC visitors should have deep gratitude for the thankless work that their team does to mitigate avalanche danger every winter. UDOT works 24/7 and puts its team members in dangerous places to keep LCC visitors safe.
Importantly, a good business decision does not mean the decision is bad for society. This decision can be a win-win. I believe what is best for Snowbird is also best for the residents of Salt Lake City and taxpayers. As Americans, it is easy to take for granted the history that made our country a thriving democracy with incredible opportunity to live well. Economic prosperity is a primary reason that US citizens are even able to enjoy easy access to the outdoors in the first place. I do not value the opinions of people who fail to contextualize the incredible fortune we have to live at this point in history and in this country.
Another important reminder regarding the "corrupt, commercial interests" stance is that corporate "profits" are not a part of most of Snowbird's history. Snowbird lost money on operations for 40 years and did not turn a profit until about 2010. Dick Bass and his team took on considerable financial risk including massive amounts of debt throughout the years in order to make Snowbird a reality for the citizens of Utah, the US, and the World. A business eventually needs to make money to survive. I think most LCC visitors, including the Gondola dissenters, are happy that Dick and his team took on huge risks to create a business out of Snowbird. Dick would have spent his money on other ventures if he was motivated by profit.
Other Important Factors: Safety and Economics
Despite, all of the differing opinions in this debate, I believe that one factor should trump all: safety. As I mentioned above, a member of my family had a car accident that easily could have been life-threatening. UDOT does an INCREDIBLE job working tirelessly to mitigate avalanche danger and to keep people off the road when danger is high, but UDOT cannot control for all risks. A Gondola provides an alternative with clear safety advantages. Gondolas are designed to operate effectively in storm conditions and can keep passengers out of danger even if an avalanche occurs. A lot of people may still feel comfortable on the road, but having a safe alternative, especially for employees of the resorts who travel on the road daily, would be game-changing. The arguments countering the Gondola proposal carry less gravitas if safety is the number one priority. Part of the Enhanced Bus system proposal seeks to address safety concerns through avalanche sheds for buses. I am sure these would work pretty well, but I would still much rather be in a gondola way above ground than under an avalanche bus shed on the road if a big avalanche falls. Speaking of avalanche sheds, that sounds like a pretty big construction project and eye-sore to me...
I have alluded to the more favorable economics of a Gondola project throughout this post, but I will mention a few other thoughts. As mentioned, I believe a Gondola is the most efficient use of taxpayer money to solve this problem, but this project could have other economic benefits for SLC residents. First, doing a big project like this will bring many new jobs to the region, and state agencies can utilize this opportunity to maximize local job creation. Second, in the long-term, easier access to LCC will bring in more tax revenue from out-of-state visitors. Third, and perhaps most importantly, a Gondola will raise housing values for homeowners who live nearby. Although many homeowners in Sandy and Cottonwood Heights have good reasons to not want the Gondola, an upward swing in their property and home values may be a nice benefit to ease the pain.
________
My Final Diatribe - We Need Bolder Visions for America's Future
Dick and Snowbird's motivation from the beginning have been to make Snowbird a destination for the "enhancement of body, mind, and spirit." This vision is quite romantic and perhaps foolhardy, but I know it has been true in my life. From dozens of conversations with visitors on Snowbird lifts over the years, I also know that many others would agree that Snowbird and LCC have been a huge positive influence in their lives.
When Dick would unleash his orations about his ambitions for Snowbird, a contagious energy and spirit moved through him. Dick's eyes would light up and his dreams would stir his listeners' imaginations. Snowbird was created by a man and a team motivated by purpose and grand vision for human recreation, not profit. As Dick said, "My dreams of the future sustain me in my present agonies." Dick went through a lot of "agonizing" ups and downs to make the dream of Snowbird a reality, and I know how he would feel about this decision process if he was still with us.
Our country used to be the home of bold projects and even more daring dreams. Americans built thriving cities, vast networks of highways to traverse cross-country, and even rockets to fly to the moon. I think our generation could use a little bit of that energy that built the American identity. A Gondola in LCC is nothing compared to what we have done before, so the squabbling over this decision is almost comical in a historical context. If more people had a bias toward solving our problems rather than arguing over them, imagine how refreshing a change of pace that would be. We have enough negative commenters in this world.
Maybe a project like the Gondola can be a little spark to ignite more of the imagination that built our country. Or maybe my point of view is a romantic aspiration with no grounding. Either way, Gondola or no Gondola, I would rather be a dreamer like Dick and carry on his legacy of pursuing bold creative visions that “outlast us.”
Other References: