SALT LAKE CITY — A group of individuals and non-profit organizations filed a lawsuit against the Utah Department of Transportation over the agency's decision to install a gondola in Little Cottonwood Canyon.
The lawsuit is spearheaded by Canyon Guard, Inc., a nonprofit that is seeking to "facilitate finding sensible transportation solutions in Little Cottonwood Canyon."
Craig Heimark, the chairman of Canyon Guard and the designated spokesperson for the lawsuit's plaintiffs, said they're hoping the suit creates a "pause" in the gondola planning and construction process, allowing for more time for other options to be considered to mitigate the canyon's traffic problems during the winter.
“[We] expect the lawsuit will create the time and space for Utah legislators to review and direct UDOT to consider and test cheaper and more effective transportation solutions by using the $150M recently authorized BEFORE allocating additional taxpayer dollars or making a final decision," Heimark said in a statement Monday.
Heimark pointed out that the Gondola Project is "opposed by over 80% of the public respondents and all the affected areas’ mayors.”
The suit challenges UDOT's process in selecting the gondola plan and reviewing the other options.
The plaintiffs allege that UDOT failed to do the following:
• "identify an appropriate purpose and need for the transportation concerns to justify the Gondola Project impacts and costs;
• "consider reasonable alternatives and present unbiased analyses;
• "adequately scope their Environmental Impact Statement to analyze impacts to views, wildlife, air and water quality, roadless areas, hazardous waste sites, and impacts to areas outside Little Cottonwood Canyon as required by law;
• "substantively respond to public comments throughout the NEPA process, including those related to the above impacts and full/accurate costs of the Gondola Project;
• "properly coordinate with the United States Forest Service, which manages nearly all of the land through which the Gondola system will be constructed and operate; and
• "comply with the 1966 Transportation Act enacted to protect our public recreation area, our trails, and our local climbing areas."
The full complaint document can be viewed HERE.
“It is a very expensive proposal, and I don't think it'll solve the transportation problem that UDOT has posited as the basis for it,” Margaret Bourke, the secretary of Canyon Guard, said Tuesday.
“Little Cottonwood Canyon is used by a multitude of outdoor recreationists,” Bourke added. “There's climbers, there's backpackers, there's photographers, and this benefits only two ski areas because that's where the gondola would stop.”
“The bulk of the culinary water for Salt Lake County comes from the watershed from there,” said Kody Fox, the executive director of Friends of Alta. “The installation of the towers and then everything that goes into the gondola risks contaminating that water in a big way, in a real way, and that is extremely problematic.”
“They're actually going to have to back up what they say, and they're going to have to defend their decision here, and for us, I think that's very important because they really had not had to do that up to this point,” Fox continued.
While Snowbird and Ski Utah did not make comments Tuesday, they have previously told FOX 13 News they’ve been supportive of the gondola plan from the beginning and said that it’s the only way to solve the traffic problems in Little Cottonwood Canyon.
UDOT spokesman John Gleason issued the following statement regarding the lawsuit:
"We are currently in the process of reviewing the challenge to the Little Cottonwood Canyon EIS Record of Decision and cannot comment on specifics of the litigation.
"In coordination with our agency partners, we have been working toward implementation of Phase 1 in Big and Little Cottonwood Canyons. Phase 1 includes improved & increased bus service along with a mobility hub, resort bus stops and tolling. Phases 2 and 3 are currently unfunded.
"Our goal is to have Phase 1 bus service operational by the 25/26 ski season but implementation may be delayed due to the legal challenge.
"At this time, we do not know the full impact the legal challenge will have on our implementation of improvements such as bus service and tolling. We will continue to assess potential schedule impacts to Phase 1 as we work through the legal process."
