• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

Utah UDOT Proposes Three Options To Ease Little Cottonwood Canyon Traffic

mdf

entering the Big Couloir
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
7,217
Location
Boston Suburbs
Some type of bus solution is by far the best cost to benefit ratio. My biggest problem with a dedicated bus lane is that the traffic is worse on snowy days and on those days the lane likely wouldn't be plowed or would be very expensive to maintain.
They already have a dedicated bus lane -- the whole road -- on an emergency ad hoc basis.
Last January the road was closed several times for extra avalanche mitigation in the afternoons and evenings. When it reopened, there were multi-hour backups but they stopped traffic and waved the buses through.
 

ZionPow

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Oct 3, 2016
Posts
598
Location
Wahsnatch
My concern with the gondola option is that it would traverse many avalanche slide paths. The gondola would be at risk for damage from slides during avy mitigation. Most Gondolas are located outside of slide paths due to personnel safety and damage risks. I don't think there is a good way to protect a gondola and we have seen what large slides do in LCC. Could you imagine having to perform lift evacuation of a full Gondola line during a blizzard if it broke? Who would perform the evac? It would take a long time to evac a lift that long!
 

dbostedo

Asst. Gathermeister
Moderator
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Feb 9, 2016
Posts
18,096
Location
75% Virginia, 25% Colorado
My concern with the gondola option is that it would traverse many avalanche slide paths. The gondola would be at risk for damage from slides during avy mitigation. Most Gondolas are located outside of slide paths due to personnel safety and damage risks. I don't think there is a good way to protect a gondola and we have seen what large slides do in LCC. Could you imagine having to perform lift evacuation of a full Gondola line during a blizzard if it broke? Who would perform the evac? It would take a long time to evac a lift that long!
And based on the numbers given in the table posted earlier, at least it would only be 30 cabins to evacuate (at 35 people each).
 

Nathanvg

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
525
View attachment 104183
Agreed about the bus comments, but this puts a dedicated bus lane as the most expensive option (as proposed). The roadway expansion that was envisioned seems very costly.
I don't think you created that graphic but it doesn't make any sense. How can the 2nd bus option have less O&M cost despite the same number of buses and the added cost of expanding the roadway.

I looked it up and buses cost about 500k, so at 12 buses (assuming half of the buses exist today) that's only 6M of the 283M capital cost. I also found estimates of about $100M for snow shed work which even in the gondola plan is 2/3 the capacity and the only ambulance capacity so I would think you'd have to do that regardless of the option. So you're looking at base captial costs of 277M for all three options. If you ignore that since you have to spend that no matter what, the additonal cost for the three options are:

Option 1: 6M
Option 2: 193M
Option 3: 316M

When you look at those numbers, option 1 looks a lot better and adding even more buses for an option 1b start to look great.

Lastly, I sure hope they don't mess up every day to deal with peak days. Even now, most days I drive to Alta in 25 minutes without issue. If they put big tolls in for non-peak days or force bus/gondola riding, we could be looking at lot of wasted money and a lot of over an hour travel times despite clear roads (due to bus to gondola transit time as defined by UDOT)

I've also been stuck on the bus for hours on powder days so I know we need a solution to those peak days.
 

TheArchitect

Working to improve all the time
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Dec 4, 2016
Posts
3,383
Location
Metrowest Boston
When I was there last season I took the bus up for 1 day to Snowbird. I had to stand in ski boots holding my skis for a very long time and I decided I'd drive up the rest of the days. The buses work well but are unappealing to people like me who don't want to stand on a bus for very long periods, like on a powder day. So, if buses turn out to be a major part of the solution then I think finding a way to customize buses so every passenger has a ski holder would be a good start. I know the buses used to have some ski storage but I'm talking dedicated interior retrofit so that at every seat you sit down and drop your skis into a slot right next to you. For those standing they get a dedicated storage rack. There's no way to avoid people needing to stand, especially at the end of the day going down the canyon, but more buses and a dedicated lane helps to alleviate that issue.
 

mdf

entering the Big Couloir
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
7,217
Location
Boston Suburbs
When I was there last season I took the bus up for 1 day to Snowbird. I had to stand in ski boots holding my skis for a very long time and I decided I'd drive up the rest of the days. The buses work well but are unappealing to people like me who don't want to stand on a bus for very long periods, like on a powder day. So, if buses turn out to be a major part of the solution then I think finding a way to customize buses so every passenger has a ski holder would be a good start. I know the buses used to have some ski storage but I'm talking dedicated interior retrofit so that at every seat you sit down and drop your skis into a slot right next to you. For those standing they get a dedicated storage rack. There's no way to avoid people needing to stand, especially at the end of the day going down the canyon, but more buses and a dedicated lane helps to alleviate that issue.
I've never been on a LCC bus, but it doesn't sound like a good experience. But I loved riding buses at Aspen/Snowmass/Highlands. So what's the difference?
-dedicated bus lanes
-frequent, not too crowded buses
-eazy walking distance to bus stop. No driving to ride.

Buses can work, but they have to be done very well.
 

dbostedo

Asst. Gathermeister
Moderator
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Feb 9, 2016
Posts
18,096
Location
75% Virginia, 25% Colorado
I've never been on a LCC bus, but it doesn't sound like a good experience. But I loved riding buses at Aspen/Snowmass/Highlands. So what's the difference?
-dedicated bus lanes
-frequent, not too crowded buses
-eazy walking distance to bus stop. No driving to ride.

Buses can work, but they have to be done very well.
You forgot that Aspen busses also have exterior ski racks... drop your skis and just get on with your poles. Much better, and I don't know why all busses in ski towns aren't like that.
 

DanoT

RVer-Skier
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,788
Location
Sun Peaks B.C. in winter, Victoria B.C. in summer
I've never been on a LCC bus, but it doesn't sound like a good experience. But I loved riding buses at Aspen/Snowmass/Highlands. So what's the difference?
-dedicated bus lanes
-frequent, not too crowded buses
-eazy walking distance to bus stop. No driving to ride.

Buses can work, but they have to be done very well.
LCC buses are great. They have a inside ski/board storage area on the opposite wall from the rear exit doors, so both seating and standing passengers have a separate place for their skis it they want. There are several Park N Rides and the bus is free for Ikon pass holders.

Why don't Alta and Snowbird do something like Jackson Hole: Pay parking but free if you car pool?

Lets not forget though, that the Gondola option frees up some of the former parking lots for residential and commercial real estate development and summer tourism. Summer tourists will line up and pay for the" World's Longest Gondola Ride" and then spend $$ on lunch and souvenir stuff once at either mountain, hike around a bit, followed by another exciting gondola ride back to town.
 
Last edited:

TheArchitect

Working to improve all the time
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Dec 4, 2016
Posts
3,383
Location
Metrowest Boston
I've never been on a LCC bus, but it doesn't sound like a good experience. But I loved riding buses at Aspen/Snowmass/Highlands. So what's the difference?
-dedicated bus lanes
-frequent, not too crowded buses
-eazy walking distance to bus stop. No driving to ride.

Buses can work, but they have to be done very well.

LCC buses are great. They have a inside ski/board storage area on the opposite wall from the rear exit doors, so both seating and standing passengers have a separate place for their skis it they want. There are several Park N Rides and the bus is free for Ikon pass holders.

My first trip to Utah I was on a bus that had that storage you describe and yes, it was a good experience. The bus I was on this past February didn't have it. Maybe I'm nuts but I seem to remember reading that in order to add capacity to the buses they were going to take out the storage racks.

If I was sure I didn't have to stand in slow traffic then I would take the bus every time. It's easy and you can sit and relax. You can go up early and be pretty sure of getting a seat but going down the canyon after the lifts close is a different experience, at least it was for me. I know that I have a very, very small sample size ogsmile
 

mdf

entering the Big Couloir
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
7,217
Location
Boston Suburbs
You forgot that Aspen busses also have exterior ski racks... drop your skis and just get on with your poles. Much better, and I don't know why all busses in ski towns aren't like that.
I think they gave up. Back in the day, all skis were more-or-less the same (skinny) width. I've ridden old parking-lot-shuttle buses were half of the skis did not fit in the outside racks on the side of the bus. Twin tips and rocker are a problem. too. And of course, snowboards never fit.

Also, some planners probably think (mistakenly, in my opinion) that stashing the skis outside slows down loading and unloading.

Think of how much trouble some people have loading their skis for a gondola.

Don't get me wrong, I'm in favor of side-of-the-bus racks. But I understand the difficulties.
 

SSSdave

life is short precious ...don't waste it
Skier
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Posts
2,516
Location
Silicon Valley
LCC1.jpg

Don't know anything about these issues and have only been up the canyon or in SLC once decades ago. However just looked at the topo, Google Earth, and satellite images. The obvious thing to do as some seem to be posting is convert the highway into a bus service only during peak hours while blocking personal car access at those key times of day. To do so would require parking right at the foot of the canyon so as not to require going through any city traffic on streets westward. So that is the first question. Is it even possible to have parking for 8,000 vehicles in that highly developed zone?

Satellite shows route 210 as a modern graded 2 lane highway with wide shoulders. Not surprisingly I see luxury home developers have gone nuts developing properties in that zone to the extent there isn't enough flat land available in any one spot for parking for 8000 vehicles without multi story garages. And what there is would likely have all those late coming rich home locals throwing a fit and calling their lawyers. But hey they deserve it.


Google Map with contours:

Google Maps satellite with contours:

Some websites show 150 vehicles per acre is a reasonable parking lot size thus an acre is 1/640 sq mile or 208.7 feet on a side as a square. Thus parking for 8000 vehicles might require (8000/150) = 53.33 acres or 0.083 sq miles or 7.30 acres on a side as a square or 1524 feet. Nothing in that zone of that size is about undeveloped flat land.

What there is on the east side of N Little Cottonwood Road, a moderately steep hillside of lower gradient next to the highway where homes have not been allowed to be built where yes expensive parking could be developed by letting Timmy's little bulldozers go to work.

I do like the idea of allowing only bus traffic up or down that road during select times of day during ski season activity. That way a fleet of buses could speed up or down the canyon quickly unimpeded at peak periods. They would need to allow employees, infrastructure, etc access but I can't imagine that would amount to that much. In canyon lodging guests could be limited to off peak hours to get there if by private vehicle. The middle of the day could relax traffic restrictions with whatever works like maybe 11am to 1pm or not enough to encourage those just interested in a short ski day. The system could be set up to only run during times of year when traffic was likely heavy thus not early or late season determined each winter dependent on conditions. Way more visitor lockers and such for ski storage up the canyon at reasonable prices way below what most ski areas tend to charge in this era.
 
Last edited:

dbostedo

Asst. Gathermeister
Moderator
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Feb 9, 2016
Posts
18,096
Location
75% Virginia, 25% Colorado
Think of how much trouble some people have loading their skis for a gondola.
But gondolas are moving, which throws people off. Much easier with the busses. Fit is a problem though, for some twin tips in particular - but I seems to recall that they had snowboard slots like gondolas do too, so that wasn't a problem.
 

mdf

entering the Big Couloir
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
7,217
Location
Boston Suburbs
What there is on the east side of N Little Cottonwood Road, a moderately steep hillside of lower gradient next to the highway where homes have not been allowed to be built where yes expensive parking could be developed by letting Timmy's little bulldozers go to work.

The area around the existing parking lot is relatively level and un-developed. Twenty years ago there wasn't much there but the 7-11. Missed chances.
Capture.PNG
 

SSSdave

life is short precious ...don't waste it
Skier
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Posts
2,516
Location
Silicon Valley
Yeah measured that area where parking already exits and is not near enough space unless they build some tall parking garages and Timmy's bulldozers increase available working space up the steep slope. But yeah that is what they have to work with. Also some areas lower down in that GE Sniping Tool capture I made. Those huge home owners down there will love it.
 

Daniel

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Jun 27, 2017
Posts
529
Location
Cottonwood Heights, Utah
You forgot that Aspen busses also have exterior ski racks... drop your skis and just get on with your poles. Much better, and I don't know why all busses in ski towns aren't like that.
For many, many years all the UTA ski buses had exterior racks, preceding when I moved to SLC in 1984. It stayed that way for a long time, ending perhaps around 2010 or so (never paid much attention or used them since, although I usually ride the bus, I've always had a locker or two for all my gear and had no need to haul equipment up and down canyon). UTA transitioned to having a couple large square compartments mid-bus at some point that served as a community gear area and it remained that way until this past season. Due to the enormous crowds that came with the advent of the Ikon Pass and the rapid population growth of the Wasatch Front, UTA converted the community gear area to additional seating and also added about 25 to 30 more buses to their expanded schedule. This resulted in everybody on board storing their gear wherever they could find space or just holding on to it for the duration of the ride.
 

Daniel

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Jun 27, 2017
Posts
529
Location
Cottonwood Heights, Utah
The area around the existing parking lot is relatively level and un-developed. Twenty years ago there wasn't much there but the 7-11. Missed chances.
View attachment 104330
There's never been a 7-11 anywhere in the area shown on the embedded map. I think you're confusing the mouth of LCC with the mouth of BCC. During the winter years ago, the large plot of land behind the 7-11 at the mouth of BCC may have looked like vacant, undeveloped land to a tourist, but underneath all that snow were around 26 tennis courts, most outdoor but some indoor (a little further up Wasatch Blvd). This was the Canyon Racquet Club, which later became the Snowbird Racquet Club. The land eventually was partially developed into an upscale condo complex and now the rest is being developed into several different commercial properties and a multi-story parking garage.

The undeveloped land on the north and east sides of LCC road shown on the map is owned by various entities and its value, which was already pricey, has skyrocketed in the past 3 or 4 years. I believe some of it is owned by a land conservation group for the purpose of green space preservation. Repurposing land in this area into vast car parks or multi-level parking garages will be met by intense pushback from locals, whose numbers include some very influential and powerful individuals formerly or presently in legislative positions in the state government.
 

New2

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
May 3, 2017
Posts
728
Location
Spokane
I don't think you created that graphic but it doesn't make any sense. How can the 2nd bus option have less O&M cost despite the same number of buses and the added cost of expanding the roadway.
It's the same number of buses per hour. To way oversimpify, if the extra lane allows each bus to do 1-hour round trips, then it'll take 24 buses per day (each with its own driver). If the plan that doesn't include the extra lane ends up meaning 2-hour round trips, then it'll take 48 buses per day (each with its own driver) to provide that same 24-bus-per-hour coverage. And twice the buses & drivers would cost twice as much. Not to mention the extra overtime expenses when the big backups occur.
 

TheArchitect

Working to improve all the time
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Dec 4, 2016
Posts
3,383
Location
Metrowest Boston
For many, many years all the UTA ski buses had exterior racks, preceding when I moved to SLC in 1984. It stayed that way for a long time, ending perhaps around 2010 or so (never paid much attention or used them since, although I usually ride the bus, I've always had a locker or two for all my gear and had no need to haul equipment up and down canyon). UTA transitioned to having a couple large square compartments mid-bus at some point that served as a community gear area and it remained that way until this past season. Due to the enormous crowds that came with the advent of the Ikon Pass and the rapid population growth of the Wasatch Front, UTA converted the community gear area to additional seating and also added about 25 to 30 more buses to their expanded schedule. This resulted in everybody on board storing their gear wherever they could find space or just holding on to it for the duration of the ride.

Thanks for confirming I wasn't nuts in thinking they took out the mid-bus racks.
 

SSSdave

life is short precious ...don't waste it
Skier
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Posts
2,516
Location
Silicon Valley
Some more visuals of what we are discussing about difficulty of available level space for parking lots for 8,000 vehicles. If the current LCC parking lot is about 500 by 120 feet as I crudely measured, (see second image with red square) then one would need another 30 or so like sized lots to accommodate that many vehicles. The GE view looking up the canyon shows that is not available and note those slopes are steeper than they appear on that pseudo view. Only the narrow slopes by the road are practical. Multi level parking garages are of course expensive that would mean they would likely need to offset costs by charging unpleasant parking fees. All this is why I suspect it was not part of the 3 plans. In any case my input herein was fast and crude without personal knowledge of the area, so more might be possible with creative brainstorming. In hindsight, someone should have seen this coming decades ago and reserved level land in this zone if not for the ski areas, then for public parks, now where the real estate developers have mutilated that otherwise wonderful riparian river zone for little benefit except their own and wealthy newcomer buyers. But hey that is the usual American way.

LCC2.jpg

LCC3.jpg
 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top