Background Information for Mountain Accord—Transportation
The following information has been compiled from previous studies. The
Mountain Accord Executive Board has not made any decisions, and none of the
recommendations from these previous studies have been endorsed or adopted
by Mountain Accord.
I’ve pulled the following information from the various studies that have been completed, with
public input, over the last few years, which pertain to transportation and parking. I’ve tried to
extract mostly that information which is relevant to the Granite area and Little Cottonwood
Canyon (LCC). Some info is included just to try to explain some options and concepts presented
in the survey. This information is organized as follows: 1. Intro to Mountain Accord; 2.
Transportation info related to Granite; 3. Existing conditions and transportation info related to
LCC; 4. Transportation modes, costs, and improvement strategies; and 5. Studies used by
Mountain Accord Transportation System Group. Most of the following information was extracted
from the Mountain Transportation Study and the Cottonwood Canyons Parking Study. Because
this is a somewhat lengthy document, I’ve added hyperlinks to make it easier to find items of
interest.
Mary Young
1. Intro to Mountain Accord: Given expected population, traffic and usage growth, the
Mountain Accord reflects a mandate to explore options to handle that growth in the areas of
transportation, environment, economy and recreation. These will all be considered using a
systems approach to optimize solutions to caring for all these interests. Many scenarios are
being looked at, but NO ONE has made any decisions yet and it will be a lengthy public
process. The expected timeline is to develop ‘preferred scenarios’ by January 2015.
You can post comments online here: http://mountainaccord.com/Get_Involved.php.
2. Transportation info related to Granite
Transportation Mode Improvements through Granite and in LCC:
Improved Bus
Improved bus (also called enhanced bus) means improvements to the local bus system without
major capital improvements. There are no exclusive lanes for buses—they share the existing
roadway with cars (no roadway widening is required).
Potential improvements could include the following:
 Increased bus frequency
 Shelters with seating
 Better/newer vehicles (optional, not required)
 Transit signal priority (bus gets priority over cars at traffic signals)
 Next bus information
 Off-board fare collection
 More doors (allows for quicker boarding)
 Fewer stops (quarter- to half-mile spacing in urban areas)
 Integration with other transit facilities (e.g., timed with connecting rail)
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
BRT is similar to light rail, except with rubber wheels. In general, BRT stops less frequently
compared to bus in order to keep travel time down. BRT systems can include all of the
1
improvements described above for improved bus. For the purpose of this report, BRT assumes
the following in addition to improvements listed for improved bus:
 Exclusive lanes
 Stations (similar to rail)
 Snow sheds at White Pine Chutes #1 to #4, White Pine, and Little Pine
Utah Transit Authority (UTA) opened the first BRT system in Utah (called MAX) along 3500
South. UTA is planning additional BRT projects along 5600 West and in Provo/Orem.
BRT Concept in Little Cottonwood Canyon
To provide exclusive lanes for BRT in Little Cottonwood Canyon, the existing road would have
to be widened (see Figure 37). It could be widened to accommodate one exclusive lane in each
direction, or it could be widened for one exclusive lane serving both directions (either with
passing areas, or reversible).
Figure 37: BRT Cross Section
Issues and Concerns for BRT
Issues and concerns that would have to be evaluated in more detail during future National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) studies include the following:
 Impacts to private property, Utah Dept. of Transportation (UDOT) right-of-way, U.S. Forest
Service (USFS) land, and wilderness
 Visual impacts of earthwork, walls, and stations
 Avalanche risk (for avalanche paths not protected with snow sheds)
 Watershed (potential impacts from construction and increased use/development)
 Park-and-ride facilities
Rail
UTA currently operates threefive TRAX light rail lines in Salt Lake County... The existing TRAX
lines operate on a dual track (one in each direction), but it is possible to construct a single track
with places for vehicles to pass (passing lanes). Light rail vehicles are powered by overhead
electric systems.
Rail Concept in Little Cottonwood Canyon
Previous studies have found numerous modes of rail (Maglev, heavy rail, commuter rail,
monorail, and funicular) to be infeasible due to terrain and high cost.
UTA evaluated a conceptual design for light rail in Little Cottonwood Canyon (see Figure 38).
Light rail is feasible in the canyon if vehicles are equipped with pinion wheels for rack trackway
(cog rail) on grades steeper than 7 percent. The assumptions for light rail in Little Cottonwood
Canyon, based on UTA’s concepts, are as follows:
2


Single track with passing lanes
Light rail vehicle equipped with pinion wheels for rack trackway (engage at grades steeper
than 7 percent)
Primary alignment adjacent to Little Cottonwood Rd. (SR-210) at grade
Alternative alignment generally following the existing valley trail, transitioning to SR-210
Standard light rail four-car stations
Snow sheds at White Pine Chutes #1 to #4, White Pine, and Little Pine
Standard overhead contact system for electrical power





Figure 38: Rail Cross Section
Parking study: recommended focus areas in LCC: Sandy/Granite, Grit Mill, Lisa Falls, White
Pine.
Focus Areas…
14. Sandy Granite (at/near the Orgill/Bell Canyon trailhead parking lot on Little Cottonwood Rd)
15. Grit Mill & Vicinity
16. Lisa Falls & Vicinity
17. White Pine & Vicinity
Wasatch Boulevard Corridor
Mouth of the Canyons
Near-Term Improvement (with long-term considerations) Recommendations
Goal: Increase parking capacity at the mouth of the canyons and reduce the number of trips up
the canyons by providing enhanced transit/carpooling opportunities. Reduce the burden on law
enforcement and improve roadway safety and mobility by eliminating the standing queues
during the canyon closures.
Recommendations: Pave and stripe new parking areas with bus stops on Wasatch Boulevard
(5 opportunity locations are identified below) to provide additional capacity for carpooling and
transit use. Provide year round transit for both canyons at headways1 matching demand (i.e,.
shorter headways in morning and evening) in an effort to reduce traffic congestion and parking
demand in the canyons. Modify signals at three locations on Wasatch Boulevard (Wasatch &
Big Cottonwood, Wasatch & Wasatch, and Wasatch & Little Cottonwood) to divert traffic away
from the canyons during canyon closures. Install U-turns to accommodate type WB-502 vehicles
at closure gates in order to send traffic back down the canyons during closures (this will
eliminate the incentive/ability to wait in a standing queue on closure days).
1
2
From Wikipedia: Headway is a measurement of the distance or time between vehicles in a transit system
Trucks with wheelbase of 50 ft.
3
East of Sandy Granite Lot- Parking Both Sides—Pave/stripe shoulder parking to create 45 new
parking spaces.
Safety & Pedestrian
 Provide additional bike lanes along Wasatch Boulevard that will connect both canyons
 Consider bus stops on both sides of the road near new parking (if safe pedestrian crossing
is feasible)
Amenities & Site Management
 Consider installing additional VMS3 signs to give advanced notice of closures and parking
statistics
 Formalize pull-out and chain-up areas for both canyons
 Direct drivers to large Park-N-Ride, overflow lots, or other venues until alerted that the
canyon is open
. Improvement Recommendations
Little Cottonwood Canyon Improvement recommendations (long-term)
Goal: Increase pedestrian safety and increase capacity to better accommodate existing parking
demand by providing new parking capacity that minimizes overflow parking onto unsafe
shoulder areas.
Recommendations: Expand parking for Sandy Granite to address unsafe spillover onto some
unimproved shoulders, to improve pedestrian safety, and to more efficiently utilize the parking
lot at the trailhead. Establish one-way traffic circulation in the parking lot to allow for additional
stalls. Pave and stripe the nearby pullout for Salt Lake County's Gilbert Geologic View Park4
and the shoulders directly to the east of the trailhead lot to provide overflow capacity. Provide
pedestrian crossings and walking paths to connect the overflow supply to the trailhead. Prohibit
parking in unimproved areas to increase safety (bikes/pedestrians) and to consolidate demand.
Location
Sandy Granite - Trailhead Lot
Existing
32
Proposed
36
Notes
Improve parking lot
North Shoulder - East of Trailhead
Lot
20
0
No parking
Geologic View Park Pullout
31
40
Convert to parking lot
South Shoulder - East of Trailhead
Lot
South Shoulder Across From
Geologic Park
25
20
18
0
Improved shoulder
parking
No parking
126
96
Amenities & Site Management
 Consider installing additional VMS signs to give advanced notice of closures and parking
statistics
 Formalize pull-out and chain-up areas for both canyons
3
4
From Wikipedia: Variable-message sign, an electronic traffic sign often used on highways
Located at the northwest corner of Wasatch Blvd. and Little Cottonwood Rd.
4

Direct drivers to large Park-N-Ride, overflow lots, or other venues until alerted that the
canyon is open
Grit Mill5 & Vicinity
Long-Term Improvement
Goal: Reduce traffic and parking at other locations and disperse parking demand more evenly
throughout the canyon by attracting new users to underutilized sites through capacity and safety
improvements and through the implementation of way-finding signage.
Recommendations: Develop Grit Mill as a new destination in Little Cottonwood Canyon by
creating a historic monument, parking lot, trailhead, and transit stop. Construct a parking lot at
the old Grit Mill site and improve pullout and shoulder parking across the street to accommodate
dispersed demand. Consider including additional amenities to accommodate recreation users.
Provide signage and trail access to the Little Cottonwood Trail on the south and signage for
nearby climbing routes.
Location
Pullout at Grit Mill
Pullout across from Grit Mill
North Shoulder - East of Grit
Mill
North Shoulder - West of Grit
Mill
South Shoulder - West of Grit
Mill
Total:
Existing
4
2
Proposed
35
5
Notes
Convert to parking lot
Convert to shoulder parking
13
5
Improved shoulder parking
37
5
Improved shoulder parking
16
12
Improved shoulder parking
72
60
Parking
 Demolish the Grit Mill building and create a historic record or monument.
 Prohibit parking in unimproved areas to increase safety (bikes and pedestrians) and to
consolidate demand.
Safety & Pedestrian
 Evaluate acceleration, deceleration, and turn lanes for the proposed Grit Mill recreational
site
 Evaluate a pedestrian crossing zone with advanced signage to improve safety of highway
crossings
Amenities & Site Management
 Create pedestrian trails to connect parking with existing trails systems and climbing routes
 Advertise this site to divert demand from higher use locations such as Gate Buttress and
White Pine
 Install trailhead and advanced turnout signage
 Consider installing restroom facilities
Return to Intro.
5
The Grit Mill is located in Little Cottonwood Canyon east of the Park-and-Ride and across from the entrance to
Wasatch Resort.
5
3. Existing conditions and transportation info related to LCC
Existing conditions in LCC:
 Little Cottonwood Canyon has the highest Avalanche Hazard Index of a major roadway in
North America.
 It is not uncommon for canyon visitors to spend up to three hours in their cars or on a bus to
exit Little Cottonwood Canyon on a peak traffic day.
 Bus transit service from the Salt Lake Valley to Big and Little Cottonwood Canyons is only
provided in winter months to the ski resorts (except two round trips per day in Little
Cottonwood Canyon in the summer).
 Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS): Communication with the traveling public is
accomplished through a variety of means including: variable message signs, CommuterLink
cameras, the 511 automated phone message system, websites, and other phone lines.
 In Little Cottonwood Canyon, peak traffic days experience 1,200 vehicles per hour.
UTA provides bus service to the resorts in Big and Little Cottonwood Canyons usually from midDecember to mid-April. Multiple trips to and from the 7200 South and 10000 South TRAX
stations are run each day, as well as one trip to and from downtown Salt Lake City, the
University of Utah, and the 4500 South TRAX station. The 2011–2012 one-way fare for ski bus
service was $4.25 by the end of the season. UTA has a current operating fleet of 40 ski buses.
Additional bus service operates in the summer months to serve work trips in Little Cottonwood
Canyon, consisting of one trip in the morning and one in the evening.
Little Cottonwood Canyon (LCC)-specific issues:
Because traffic congestion and avalanche hazards are worse in Little Cottonwood Canyon than
in Big Cottonwood Canyon, more information is provided for alternative concepts in Little
Cottonwood Canyon. Various transportation modes were considered, including the following:
 Roadway improvements to increase efficiency of existing infrastructure, not widening for
additional lanes
 Improved bus
 Bus rapid transit (BRT)
 Rail (light rail)
 Aerial systems
Projects in the Adopted 2011-2040 Wasatch Front Regional Transportation Plan:
Alta-Mouth Little Cottonwood Canyon: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT 3). Phase: unfunded (2040+)
There are four site-specific improvements and concept designs identified within Little
Cottonwood Canyon. These improvements include a canyon gateway and transportation hub at
the mouth of the canyon, redesign of several sites to provide transit stops and parking, and
redesign of recreation sites.
The modes were bus, BRT, rail, or aerial. All four locations were considered for bus and BRT,
but only Little Cottonwood Canyon was considered for rail or aerial improvements.
6
Table 3: Wasatch Canyons Tomorrow Recommendations and Status (excerpts)
Study feasibility of parking passes to Big and
No change
Little Cottonwood Canyons
Maintain and enhance avalanche safety
Ongoing
Expand transit from winter only to year-round
Some summer worker service
Improve road-cycling safety
Ongoing – project planned for Little
Cottonwood Canyon in summer 2012
Update corridor avalanche control plans
Ongoing
Study feasibility of transit hub along canyons
No change
Express bus service between SLC central
Complete and in place
business district and Park City
Feasibility study of extending rail up Little
Ongoing
Cottonwood Canyon
Recommendation Status
Table 7: Potential Transportation Segments
1 7200 South TRAX to mouth of Big Cottonwood Canyon
2 9400 South TRAX to mouth of Little Cottonwood Canyon
3 Mouth of Big Cottonwood Canyon to mouth of Little Cottonwood Canyon
4 Mouth of Big Cottonwood Canyon to Brighton
5 Mouth of Little Cottonwood Canyon to Alta
6 Alta to Brighton
7 Brighton to Park City
Note: These represent general areas where improvements could be made; they do not
represent specific alignments.
Roadway Improvements
Improvements were considered for SR-210 (Little Cottonwood Canyon) to optimize the
efficiency and/or safety of the existing road. The goal of this study is to evaluate alternative
transportation options in Big and Little Cottonwood Canyons. Widening for additional through
lanes was not considered. See Figure 36.
Figure 36: Roadway Improvement Cross Section
Parking Lot Metering
At the end of a busy ski day, operations on SR-210 break down when cars leaving resort
parking lots alternate every other with cars traveling down the canyon. This is not the most
efficient way to move traffic down the canyon. Metering would improve operations by holding
cars back in the parking lots as necessary to keep SR-210 flowing smoothly. Parking lot
metering at the parking lot entrances (Snowbird entrances 1, 2, and 4, and Alta Wildcat Base) is
one alternative concept that could improve efficiency. Metering could be manual or automated.
7
Passing Lanes
Passing lanes could improve efficiency by allowing slow vehicles to be passed. Specific
locations for passing lanes were not determined.
Snow Sheds and Avalanche Turnarounds
Snow sheds and avalanche turnarounds have been recommended in previous studies and
could improve safety as well as efficiency by decreasing the closure time for avalanche control
work. Avalanche hazard is inversely proportional to vehicle speed—risk increases as cars sit or
travel slowly under avalanche paths. Alternative concepts include snow shed structures at White
Pine Chutes #1 to #4, White Pine, and Little Pine. Snow sheds are also included in other
transportation concepts (e.g., rail).
Snow shed on Highway 550 (Colorado)
Location
Little Cottonwood Canyon Road
Description
Avalanche Snow Shed at White Pine Chutes
Phase
3 (2031–2040)
Avalanche turnarounds are bulb-outs located away from avalanche paths that allow for cars to
turn around in the event the road needs to be closed for control work or if an avalanche crosses
the road while it is open.
Rail Concept Connecting to Park City/Summit County with a Tunnel
A concept was considered that would continue the light rail up Little Cottonwood Canyon to
Brighton and Park City/Summit County. This concept assumes one tunnel from Alta to Brighton
and a second tunnel from Brighton to the east side of the Wasatch Mountains (southeast of
Park City). From there, the track would be at grade continuing on to Park City. This alignment is
for planning purposes only. The assumptions for the Park City/Summit County connection are
as follows:
 Single track
 Light rail with vehicle pinion
 Standard overhead contact system
 Single bore tunnel with vertical concrete partition to create a parallel emergency walkway
Return to intro.
8
4. Transportation modes, costs, and improvement strategies:
Table ES-1: Example of Transportation Mode Comparison
Characteristic Auto
Enhanced
BRT
Bus
Capacity
2,000–4,800
60-200
120–600
(people/hour)
Travel Time
(minutes)
14–24
36–63
20–28
Rail
Aerial
480–2,400
1,080–3,000
13–25
43–54
Capital Cost
30–40
10–20
110–150
510–680
220–280
($ millions)
Canyon to
Table 14 is a recommended list of improvements that can be done in the next five years. These
will help to either shift more canyon visitors to an alternate mode, namely bus, or better manage
the existing traffic. These projects do not depend upon a future large environmental study and
can be planned, designed, and implemented with little impact.
Table 14: Recommended Short-Term Improvements
Measure
Real-time bus information
Increase express service to Alta
Consider express service from University of Utah area
Permanent parking driveway management metering in Little Cottonwood
Canyon
Consider HOV priority parking at ski areas
Parking study recommendations
Transit priority at signals/intersections along Wasatch Boulevard
Transit amenities
Table 11: Travel Time Comparison by Mode
Segment Travel Time by Mode (minutes)
Description
Length
Auto
Enhanced
BRT
(miles)
Bus
9400 South TRAX to mouth
6.1
10–19
20-30
18–23
of Little Cottonwood
Canyon
Mouth of Little Cottonwood
8
14–24
36–63
20–28
Canyon to Alta
Mouth of Big Cottonwood
4
7–12
10–14
10–14
Canyon to mouth of Little
Cottonwood Canyon
Alta to Brighton
2.2
**
N/A
N/A
Responsible
UTA
UTA
UTA
UDOT/Resorts
Resorts
Salt Lake County
UDOT/UTA
UTA/Resorts
Rail
Aerial
11–15
N/A
13–25
43–54
6–9
15–19
(24–30
for
D8G*)
3–5
13–16
*D8G is a detachable 8-passenger gondola (only considered for the segment connecting the
mouths of the canyons).
**Auto travel time from Alta to Brighton is about 50 minutes (without a tunnel over 26 miles).
9
Auto and rail are the fastest modes, followed by BRT and enhanced bus. Aerial systems are the
slowest.
Table 13: Cost Comparison by Mode
Segment
Description
Capital Cost ($ Million)
Road
Enhanced
BRT
Bus
N/A
11–13
80–90
380–500
N/A
Mouth of Big Cottonwood
Canyon to mouth of Little
Cottonwood Canyon
N/A
7–8
50–60
230–310
70–90
Mouth of Little Cottonwood
Canyon to Alta
30–40
10–20*
110–
150
510–680
220–280
9400 South TRAX to mouth of
Little Cottonwood Canyon
Rail
Aerial
Alta to Brighton
N/A
N/A
N/A
390–510 60–80
Note: N/A means not considered
* $40M to $60M including avalanche sheds
Snow sheds (at White Pine, Little Pine, and White Pine Chutes #1 to #4 in Little Cottonwood
Canyon) were included in the cost estimate for auto, BRT, and rail. They were not included in
the enhanced bus estimate shown in Table 13. The estimated cost for these sheds is $30
million to $40 million. Enhanced bus with snow sheds would cost $40 million to $60 million from
the mouth of Little Cottonwood Canyon to Alta.
Conclusion
No alternatives have been screened out or eliminated as part of this study. However, the
transportation concepts presented here represent proven technologies with successful
examples around the world. There are pros and cons for each mode that have to be weighed
against costs and impacts.
Canyon Wide Improvement Strategies
 Do nothing
 Restrict ADT6 in canyons
 Prohibit parking improvements everywhere to restrict access to canyons
 Prohibit parking improvements in some areas to control access
 Prohibit parking in all undesignated/unimproved areas
 Canyon parking fee for all areas except resorts
 Annual canyons parking pass (does not apply to resorts)
 Improve parking areas to control availability
 Expand transit service
 Advance turnout signage for all improved areas
 Shift demand from high-use areas to underutilized attractions
 More visible trailhead signage
 Advanced turnout signage for lesser known sites
 Parking fees for high use areas
6
ADT seems to mean average daily traffic in other County planning documents
10










Provide trail and parking info at Park-n-Rides and transit stops
Expand interpretive/destination signage
Provide uphill bike lane to minimize conflicts with shoulder parking
Expanded rest facilities
Open and plow lots now closed in winter
Provide designated carpool areas
Year-round rest facility access
Implement summer gate closures to restrict access
Utilize electronic kiosks for trail and parking info
Implement parking detection technology and parking apps (ITS)
Focus Area Improvement Strategies
 At-grade road re-alignment to create space for parking
 Road re-alignment using structures to create space/facilitate connections
 Strategic improvement of pullouts and shoulders
 Pave/stripe shoulder parking
 Pave/stripe parallel parking
 Improve/stripe parking lots
 Grade-separated pedestrian crossings
 Expand parking lots
 Reconfigure parking lot
 Expand Park-n-Ride Lots
 New parking lots
 Use retaining walls to expand parking areas
 Provide new transit stops
 Advance turnout signage
 At-grade pedestrian crossings with advanced warning/flashers
 More visible trailhead signage
 Advanced turnout signage for lesser known sites
 Consolidate pedestrian crossing locations
 Provide pedestrian connections between dispersed parking locations
 Provide new parking and short trail connections to existing trail systems
 One way traffic circulation in parking lots
 Acceleration, deceleration, and turn lanes for major improved parking areas
 Provide turnaround areas in lots for transit/fire/patrons
 Lots for climbing access including rest facilities
 Expanded rest facilities
 Open and plow lots now closed in winter
 Add lanes for vehicle storage during canyon closures
 Provide parking that accommodates trailers
It is important to note that these strategies were not all unanimously received by members of the
Steering Committee as being universally acceptable for application throughout the canyons. It is
also important to note, however, that no member of the steering committee was willing to
remove any of the strategies from this list based on concerns or objections to potential
application problems at specific sites, or even based on application difficulties within the
canyons as a whole.
Return to Intro.
11
5. Studies used by the Mountain Accord Transportation System Group:
Mountain Transportation Study (2012): A study conducted to assess feasibility of alternative
transportation modes in the Big and Little Cottonwood Canyons. The study recommended that a
formal evaluation of a long-term significant transportation investment considered within the
context of land use, conservation, development, and watershed protection be initiated; leading
to Mountain Accord.
Cottonwood Canyons Parking Study Recommendations (2012) “Parking study for Big and Little
Cottonwood Canyons to determine existing parking conditions, evaluate current needs, and plan
for future parking needs.”
Little Cottonwood Canyon SR-210 Transportation Study (2006) This PowerPoint presentation
presents recommendations including: optimize the parking, better traffic management, more
road conditions to users, better transit information, and improved communications among
agencies. This deals with problems in the canyons, including avalanches, parking, and vehicle
movement.
Wasatch Choices 2040: A Four-County Land Use and Transportation Vision (2010) This study
was commissioned to “to explore potential futures relative to growth patterns, transportation
solutions, and the environment.”
Wasatch Front Regional Council 2011-2040 Regional Transportation Plan (2011) This presents
the “Salt Lake-West Valley and the Ogden-Layton Urbanized Areas’ fiscally constrained plan
for highway, transit, and other facility improvements designed and programmed to meet the
growth in projected travel demand over the next several decades.”
Return to Intro.
12