• 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

Nathanvg

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
525
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.

Interesting but it still doesn't add up. I think you're saying "24 buses per hour" means "24 buses departing Alta per hour" With the dedicated lane of option B, it does make sense that less buses would be needed due to higher bus speeds for B. In fact we can define exactly how many less because they mention round rip travel times of 92 and 74 minutes for options A and B respectively. So we should expect 19.6% less bus O&M bus costs. We don't know what percent of the 9M O&M costs for option A are buses, but even at 100%, that would make option B 1.8M cheaper, not 2.8M as stated. That also assumes that the lane is speedier 100% of the time (<30% in reality) and non-bus costs are likely 50% (parking lots maint, gas, tires, bus stops, etc. With those adjustments, the savings is less than 0.27M.

And the biggest factor excluded, the cost to maintain the new lanes (repaving, extra snow removal, etc.) is at least 1M MORE for option B. (road resurfacing alone is half of that at $.63M per 2-lane flat mile at standard 15 year intervals. Mountain roads are often much more prone to maintenance with snow, melt water damage, freezing, chain damage, avalanche damage, etc.)

So long story short, I'd expect option B to be between 1 and 4 million more per year more expensive than option A.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Philpug

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,624
Location
Reno, eNVy
For those looking for more information...

Dear Alta Skier,

As part of the Environmental Impact Statement process, the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) is seeking public comment regarding three draft transportation alternatives for improving safety, reliability and mobility in Little Cottonwood Canyon. The three alternatives are:

•​
Enhanced bus service​
•​
Enhanced bus service with road widening​
•​
Gondola​

Detailed information regarding each alternative and UDOT’s decision process can be found at littlecottonwoodeis.udot.utah.gov

While Alta continues to support UTA bus service and carpooling, we see the need for additional transportation improvements that will reduce congestion, accommodate growth, and improve safety, reliability and access to recreational opportunities in Little Cottonwood Canyon. We have reviewed the three proposed alternatives and support a modified version of the Gondola alternative. It is the only alternative that provides badly needed additional ingress/egress for the Town of Alta and is impacted less by weather conditions than the other alternatives. It is environmentally cleaner than vehicle options, will have less impact on our natural resources to implement and will provide a more comfortable, convenient and scenic trip than the other alternatives.

We have requested UDOT to modify the proposed gondola alternative by adding a parking structure at the base gondola station rather than requiring all gondola users to park at the gravel pit lot and bus to the gondola station. We believe this change will facilitate and encourage use of the gondola and allow more of its capacity to be used.

We encourage you to become familiar with the three alternatives and let UDOT know what alternative you prefer, as well as, any adjustments you feel should be considered. Thank you in advance for doing so.

Your voice matters,

Michael R. Maughan
President and General Manager
Alta Ski Area
 

Daniel

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Jun 27, 2017
Posts
529
Location
Cottonwood Heights, Utah
A fourth option has been proposed: a higher volume/capacity and longer gondola originating somewhat further from the mouth of LCC (next to the La Caille property). Allegedly, a couple of high-profile former politicians are the movers and shakers behind this idea. Being Utah, that likely means said individuals own the land the development would be constructed on.



This proposal will require an additional angle station and ~1/2 mile longer travel distance to UDOT's proposed gondola alignment, in addition to the gondola base station and large parking facility.
 

Wasatchman

over the hill
Skier
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Posts
2,324
Location
Wasatch and NZ
A fourth option has been proposed: a higher volume/capacity and longer gondola originating somewhat further from the mouth of LCC (next to the La Caille property). Allegedly, a couple of high-profile former politicians are the movers and shakers behind this idea. Being Utah, that likely means said individuals own the land the development would be constructed on.



This proposal will require an additional angle station and ~1/2 mile longer travel distance to UDOT's proposed gondola alignment, in addition to the gondola base station and large parking facility.
Gotta love politics. First they zone a commercial office building at the base of the Cottonwoods a few years ago. Now because of traffic politicians want to create this monstrosity. Haha.
 

Phelmut

German for Northeasterner
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Feb 15, 2016
Posts
1,049
Location
New Jersey
A fourth option has been proposed: a higher volume/capacity and longer gondola originating somewhat further from the mouth of LCC (next to the La Caille property). Allegedly, a couple of high-profile former politicians are the movers and shakers behind this idea. Being Utah, that likely means said individuals own the land the development would be constructed on.
Pretty sure that would be standard political conflict of interest anywhere nowadays.
 

Wasatchman

over the hill
Skier
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Posts
2,324
Location
Wasatch and NZ
Still possible to get away with in Utah
Haha. Money talks. Everywhere and Utah certainly is no exception. The golden rule. He who has the gold rules. When the opposition is also well funded then it gets to be a more interesting fight. Decent chance there will be well funded opposition to the gondola ideas but we'll see.

Edit: opposition has started. Just got this flyer on my door. Looks like all expansion is being opposed by some. Gondola is going to have a lot of opposition in particular I think noting even a wider road is seeing opposition.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20200707_174844.jpg
    IMG_20200707_174844.jpg
    172.9 KB · Views: 3
Last edited:

Sponsor

Staff online

  • Dwight
    Practitioner of skiing, solid and liquid
Top