KUER0%

2028 is UDOT’s target date for buses and tolls in Big and Little Cottonwood 15%

By Pamela McCall0%

6/16/2026, 1:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Post Hoc (False Cause), and Overconfidence Bias, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 15.9% saturation with 145 hits. Analysis detected 862 faulty-reasoning hits from 914 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 30.9% and a BS Rank of 15% (18,765 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 85.70% of the article peer group.

In May, the Utah Transportation Commission voted to buy a parcel of land to build a base for a Little Cottonwood Canyon gondola. 
They’ll pay Quail Run Development nearly $8 million for the property at 3662 East Highway 210 in Cottonwood Heights. 
It’s part of the Utah Department of Transportation’s decision to eventually build a gondola in the picturesque canyon to ferry skiers to Snowbird and Alta ski resorts in the winter. 
In the meantime, there will be phased solutions to tackle winter traffic congestion. 
Phase one plans for both Big and Little Cottonwood canyons include building a transit center and a parking structure, launching UDOT bus service and imposing winter tolls for people who choose to drive. 
Phase two would widen Wasatch Boulevard outside the mouths of the canyons and build snow sheds to protect roads and passengers from avalanches. 
Phase three is the Little Cottonwood Canyon gondola. 
So why buy land for a gondola that faces pending lawsuits from opponents and is not yet fully funded? 
Project manager Devin Weder said it’s a common practice for UDOT. 
“We want to try to buy those properties when they go for sale rather than trying to get them all at once when the project gets funded. 
So, anytime a project is identified, we start to keep an eye out on parcels that go up for sale by an owner,” he said. 
Weder conceded that if phases one and two manage to solve the traffic congestion problem, the gondola might not proceed. 
“The Legislature chooses what, when to fund things, and the Transportation Commission approves the funding out of the Transportation Investment Fund. 
So it really comes down to if there isn't congestion, if there's no problem getting to the ski resorts, it's hard for me to say that anyone would want to fund it, because it is a lot of money.” 
In the meantime, UDOT intends to have the fully funded phase one of their transportation plan operational in the fall of 2028. 
Buses 
For the first time in UDOT’s history, it will start its own bus service, and the Utah Transportation Authority will stop servicing the canyons. 
“We'll be buying our own buses, developing all the infrastructure at the base of the canyon and in the canyons to support those buses,” Weder said. 
Right now, UTA buses run every 30 minutes, and that won’t likely change until 2028. 
“We're hoping to get that down to every 10 or 15 minutes, and that's just to start with. 
In the future, we hope to increase it even more, so that you're seeing buses every, you know, maybe up to every five minutes, going to every resort,” he added. 
They’ll also build new bus stops at Solitude, Brighton, Snowbird and Alta. 
“We're looking to make it so those buses don't have to go into the parking lots of the ski resorts, because that's where the buses lose a lot of their time, because they're stuck behind everyone trying to park.” 
As for where those bus stops will be built? 
“Most of that is on forest service land, or almost - I would say all of it is on forest service land. 
And through the forest, we have a good path to get that property, work with the ski resorts. 
We're all working together really well,” said Weder. 
Parking Structure 
The parking structure is slated to be built in a large, undeveloped gravel pit near the entrance of Big Cottonwood Canyon from the north on Wasatch Boulevard. 
“That gravel pit is not going to be in operation for very much longer, so we're talking to the owners about purchasing some of that. 
So that purchase is yet to happen. 
It's one of the only areas that isn't developed in that, in the entire Cottonwood Heights Sandy area, and so it's a really key property for us.” 
The parking structure would have 1,750 public parking stalls, with additional employee parking. 
“It’s roughly 70 feet tall, so that's four to five stories. 
We'll be breaking ground, ideally next spring, so spring of 2027 and the fall of 2028 for starting operations. 
You know, ideally, we finish the structure sooner than that.” 
Tolls 
People who still want to drive to the resorts will have to pay for it. 
“We tried to target that toll to affect only the people who are creating the most demand. 
So 90% of people who enter the canyon in the winter go to the ski resorts. 
So we targeted that toll to be only in the upper canyon ski area part of the canyon, so both in Little Cottonwood and Big Cottonwood, the toll would start just before this first ski resort.” 
The toll rate will be set by the Transportation Commission, but has yet to be determined. 
“We want it to be whatever it takes to get you out of your vehicle and into transit. 
So, if transit costs $5, it needs to probably cost more than $5  but between $5 and, you know, $25, whatever it takes in that range to get you out of your vehicle.” 
And they envision the process to be automated. 
“You might have a little transponder in your car that says, ‘Hey, you know, send me the bill at this location.’ 
Or it could read your license plate and send you the bill, like you see on many toll systems in other states.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 1.9%Pamela McCall: 2.0%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias1.9%This article: 1.6%Pamela McCall: 1.4%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias1.6%This article: 2.4%Pamela McCall: 2.7%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic2.4%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.7%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.1%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Pamela McCall: 2.6%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias6.1%This article: 4.0%Pamela McCall: 6.6%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect4.0%This article: 3.6%Pamela McCall: 1.8%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion3.6%This article: 2.6%Pamela McCall: 1.0%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias2.6%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 15.9%Pamela McCall: 6.5%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias15.9%This article: 2.2%Pamela McCall: 2.3%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias2.2%This article: 5.0%Pamela McCall: 5.4%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias5.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.5%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.7%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.9%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.3%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.9%Pamela McCall: 1.8%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect0.9%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.3%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.1%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.2%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.7%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 5.9%Pamela McCall: 3.0%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority5.9%This article: 4.3%Pamela McCall: 3.2%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma4.3%This article: 2.0%Pamela McCall: 0.2%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope2.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 4.7%Pamela McCall: 5.2%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization4.7%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 3.7%Pamela McCall: 0.4%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon3.7%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 6.5%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.6%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 7.0%Pamela McCall: 1.5%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)7.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 2.1%Pamela McCall: 0.4%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof2.1%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.5%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.3%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.9%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 9.2%Pamela McCall: 1.9%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)9.2%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.3%Pamela McCall: 1.0%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote2.3%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 1.1%KUER: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 3.3%Pamela McCall: 2.2%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice3.3%This article: 3.6%Pamela McCall: 2.4%KUER: 1.6%Indoctrination3.6%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.0%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 0.5%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pamela McCall: 1.2%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

914 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker60%attributed speech367writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 11 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 27 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 21 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 18 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 22 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 18 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 25 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 7 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 11 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 19 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 17 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 16 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 18 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageDevin Weder • 21 words • 100.0% coverageDevin Weder • 22 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Devin Weder

78%flagged-word coverage
547 attributed words100% of attributed speech52% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Indoctrination-9.0 ptsWriter: 9.0%Devin Weder: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-8.2 ptsWriter: 8.2%Devin Weder: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote+3.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Devin Weder: 3.8%3.8%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.