A Resort in Malan's Basin?

In April 2006, fourteen months after he acquired the 1440-acre Malan's Basin property, Mr. Chris Peterson confirmed the rumors that he wishes to construct a resort in Malan's Basin. According to Peterson, the resort will include a pedestrian village, approximately 350 condominiums, a ski area, and a gondola for public access. This resort has become the centerpiece of a plan to "lift Ogden" by attracting tourism and ski-related businesses. But before investing public assets in this resort, citizens have a right to know whether it is feasible. What sort of a resort can actually be built in Malan's Basin?

So far, Peterson has not provided any actual plans for the resort--only an artist's sketch of the proposed style of architecture and some verbal descriptions of the locations of the gondola and chairlift terminals. The drawing below is based on these descriptions. (Click here for a straight-down view, which also shows the boundaries of Peterson's property.) Now, let's consider some of the challenges in realizing such a plan.

• Access. It's fine for the general public to ride a gondola up to Malan's Basin, but what about access for construction, emergency services, and evacuation? Lately, Peterson and his supporters have given the impression that he can build the resort without any road at all--without actually promising there won't be one. So at this time we don't know what the plan (if any) is for access to this remote valley that sits 2000 vertical feet above the city. Let's consider each possibility in turn.

  If there is to be a road to Malan's Basin, it won't be easy, cheap, or popular. A road ascending directly from the west is essentially impossible, due to the quartzite cliffs of Malan's Peak and Waterfall Canyon. A road from any other direction (Taylor's Canyon, Strong's Canyon, or Snowbasin) would have to traverse wide slopes in excess of 70%, requiring extensive cuts, fills, and retaining walls. The cost of building such a road would be enormous. Such a road might also be politically impossible, because it would have to cross adjoining National Forest lands where road construction is prohibited by the current management plan. So it's no surprise that Peterson would prefer not to have to build a road.

  But how do you build a large resort complex without a road? Apparently a "contruction tram" would be rented and used to lift most of the materials and workers to Malan's Basin. To install this tram, and to lift anything too large for it to carry, there would have to be extensive use of helicopters. What such an unconventional construction project would cost, and how long it would take, is anyone's guess. Peterson has not provided any details.

  In this roadless scenario, the construction tram would be replaced by the passenger gondola after the resort has been built. From then on, all supplies would be brought in by gondola. Emergency access and evacuation would also be by gondola, or by helicopter. Peterson has also said he would like to construct a ski trail coming down the mountain from Malan's Basin; this trail could be used for access by pickup truck, ATV, or snowmobile. He has not described the proposed alignment of this trail, and again, it appears that it would have to traverse very steep terrain on National Forest lands.

• Slope angles. In Weber County, any commercial property steeper than a 30% slope is considered undevelopable (County Ordinance 26-2-9). Residential lots of one acre or more are permitted on slopes up to 40%, but all lots with slopes above 25% are considered "restricted," requiring a Hillside Review to be conducted to determine if the lot is buildable. Ogden City's ordinances are even more restrictive, with a Sensitive Area Overlay Zone in which no development at all is permitted on slopes steeper than 30%.
  

  The vast majority of the 1440-acre former Malan property is steeper than 40% and hence undevelopable. The principal exceptions are narrow strips along valley bottoms and ridge tops, as shown on the map above. Any "pedestrian village" in Malan's Basin would necessarily be confined to locations that are within a reasonably easy walk from the gondola station. Let us assume that the resort will be centered on the former site of the historic Malan resort, adjacent to the creek at an elevation of 6800 feet. A typical tourist might be willing to walk to facilities within a quarter mile and 200 vertical feet of this site. The following table shows the amount of developable land in each County-defined slope category within this range, calculated from USGS digital elevation data:

  Unrestricted	Less than 25% slope	4.6 acres
  Restricted, commercial permitted	25% to 30% slope	3.4 acres
  Restricted, 1-acre residential only	30% to 40% slope	16 acres

  Furthermore, nearly all of the "unrestricted" land consists of the creek channel and the saturated wetlands immediately adjacent to it, where flooding would be a hazard during spring runoff. The only significant exception is the actual site of the historic resort itself, less than one acre in size.

  The County's Hillside Development Ordinance is not a mere political obstacle; it is necessary because most steep slopes in Weber County are unstable. The valley walls surrounding Malan's Basin are no exception. A geological map of the area shows that the valley walls consist of "colluvium": loosely aggregated material of variable size and depth that is gradually making its way down to the valley floor. Any disturbance or removal of vegetation can set this material into motion. While it may be possible to build isolated structures on slopes as steep as 40%, the cost of the foundations and retaining walls needed to prevent landslides would be considerable.

  Given the topographical and geological constraints, it appears highly improbable that a resort complex with 350 condominiums will be constructed in Malan's Basin.

• Water. The only surface water in Malan's Basin is the creek that becomes Malan's Falls, fed by a spring in the upper part of the valley. Although the creek normally flows year-round, it often becomes a mere trickle in the late summer and early fall. To meet the needs of a resort of any size, a reservoir would probably have to be constructed. Drilling wells might also be possible, but this would be an additional expense and could lower the water table, drying up the creek and the waterfall. Pumping water into Malan's Basin from elsewhere would also be expensive. Under all circumstances, issues of water rights would need to be resolved.

• Waste water disposal. Even more difficult than acquiring water will be disposing of it after use. There is no room in Malan's Basin for septic systems to serve 350 condominiums, and a sewer system coming down off the mountain is also impractical. The plan is therefore to build an on-site sewage treatment plant that would discharge treated water into the creek (and hence the waterfall). Solids from the plant would be packed out on the gondola.

• Other utilities. An electrical power line going up the mountain would need to be constructed. This is certainly feasible, but it would not improve views of the mountain from Ogden. Natural gas service to Malan's Basin is probably not feasible, so most heating would have to be by electricity. There isn't enough sunshine in Malan's Basin to make significant use of solar heating in mid-winter. A limited amount of firewood could be cut on-site, and additional firewood could be brought in by gondola, but hundreds of wood-burning stoves would produce a great deal of air pollution, and create safety hazards.

• Fire protection. The original Malan's Basin resort was destroyed by fire. Periodic wildfires are a natural ecological process throughout most of the West, and a century of fire suppression has increased the risk of catastrophic wildfires in the coming years. In order to lessen the threat of fire, any structures in Malan's Basin would have to be surrounded by fire breaks that are cleared of natural vegetation; Firewise.org recommends a clearing width of 30 feet on all sides. Unfortunately, clearing away natural vegetation can also increase the chance of landslides.

• The gondola. The feasibility of building an aerial tram or cableway from Ogden's east bench to Malan's Basin is not in question. However, the feasibility of the particular technology and alignment proposed by Peterson has not been documented. The 1998 Mt. Ogden tram feasibility study rejected a single-cable gondola technology because it is especially susceptible to wind and its towers would have to be placed too close together for the rugged terrain on the west side of the mountain. Instead the study recommended a traditional jigback tram or a more expensive funitel technology. That study also recommended (for a variety of reasons) two alignments that differ considerably from the one now proposed.

  Two aspects of the proposed gondola seem especially in need of study and documentation. One is the proposed intermediate station overlooking Waterfall Canyon, which would apparently be perched atop the craggy ridge southwest of the waterfall. It isn't clear how room would be made for such a station whose footprint would be 180 feet long by 30 to 50 feet wide. The other awkward aspect is the need to operate the gondola for long hours, 365 days a year, because it would apparently be the sole means of resident and employee access. At typical installations such as ski areas, there is an off-season when the gondola can be shut down for routine maintenance.

• The ski area. The proposed ski area in Malan's Basin would be highly unusual. The "basin" is really a west-facing V-shaped valley, whose walls face generally northwest and southwest. The southwest-facing wall would offer very poor snow, so the ski area is proposed for the northwest-facing wall, as shown in the illustration above. However, this valley wall is quite a bit steeper than a typical ski slope--almost entirely above 50%, with large portions above 60%. Anything steeper than 40% is generally considered expert terrain. For less advanced skiers there would also be the west-facing ridge at the top of this slope, and the west-facing gulch at the bottom (along the creek channel). Snow quality along these west-facing runs would be inferior, due to their exposure to afternoon sun.

  Proponents of the project have pointed out that the total vertical drop of this ski area would be a respectable 1800 feet. But it would have only two lifts and a handful of runs, with a total area of only 180 acres. (For comparison, Snowbasin has 2650 skiable acres.) With the ski area accessible only via a 35-minute gondola ride (to the base) from downtown Ogden, it seems unlikely that it could effectively compete with Utah's many larger, better-situated, and more accessible ski areas.

  Peterson has also described two possible expansions to the ski area. Above his property, he would like to add some high-elevation terrain on National Forest land. This terrain is again very steep; it is also wind-swept and avalanche-prone. Like road construction, ski area development in this area is prohibited by the current Forest Service management plan. The other expansion would be below the Malan's Basin resort, where Peterson has said that for 60 to 80 days each winter, it will be possible to ski all the way down to the golf course. We're frankly baffled by this claim. A direct descent from Malan's Basin would go over the waterfall or the adjacent cliffs, while a circuitous route to the north or south would involve south-facing slopes and very rugged terrain, as well as being in conflict with the Forest Service management plan.

• The Snowbasin connection. The Malan's Basin ski area would perhaps be irrelevant if there were a convenient and reliable gondola connection between Malan's Basin and Snowbasin, on the east side of Mt. Ogden. Connecting to Snowbasin has been a goal of gondola proponents ever since Mayor Godfrey and Chris Peterson began working together on the proposal six years ago. The current version of the proposal would put the connection on the ridge somewhat south of the Mt. Ogden summit, on National Forest land. Again, this would require an amendment to the Forest Service management plan which currently prohibits any such development in that area. Furthermore, Snowbasin spokespersons have repeatedly emphasized that they do not support such a connection for a variety of reasons. It seems highly unlikely that the Forest Service would amend its plan to accommodate this development without support from Snowbasin.

  But even if such a connection were made, it would hardly be convenient or reliable. The full two-gondola trip from Ogden's Intermodal Hub to the top of Snowbasin would take 45 minutes--longer than driving via Ogden Canyon. The descent routes from the ridge into Snowbasin are marked on Snowbasin's trail map as double-black-diamond runs, and this portion of the ridge is not served by any lift on the east side. Also, high winds and avalanche danger would frequently prevent the gondola to the ridge from operating.

• What's the attraction, exactly? As thousands of Ogden residents know, Malan's Basin is a lovely hiking destination. It's one of the very few spots on the west side of Mt. Ogden where there are good campsites near water. The maple, aspen, and fir trees are as pretty as anywhere, especially in the fall. (Update: Many of the maples and aspens, including those in the foreground of the photo below, were removed in late fall 2005 in order to clear a trial ski run paralleling the creek.)
  

  Still, we don't understand what about Malan's Basin would bring out-of-town tourists to Ogden. Many more trees would have to be removed to make way for the resort, infrastructure, firebreaks, and ski runs. Besides the trees and a closer view of Mt. Ogden, the basin does not offer much in the way of scenery. To view Ogden City and the Great Salt Lake, visitors would have to hike a quarter mile uphill from the basin toward Malan's Peak. The gondola ride over Malan's Falls would be dramatic but brief, and an additional 24-minute gondola ride above the city would not necessarily add to the attraction. Would a Malan's Basin resort be unique? Sure, but resorts are ubiquitous across the West, and every resort is unique in some way or other.

  We suspect that the results of the 1998 Ogden Tram feasibility study would apply equally well to a Malan's Basin resort. That study concluded that a tram would attract a considerable number of riders from the local population and from visitors who are already in town for other reasons, but that it would not induce tourists to come to northern Utah in the first place. The 1998 study pointed out that to be successful, the tram would require a 600-car parking lot at its base and several further amenities at the base and/or summit. Under these conditions, the study predicted that rider fares would be sufficient to pay the cost of a jigback tram--the least expensive available technology, requiring the longest wait between departures. There is no evidence that gondola riders would spend enough money in Malan's Basin to pay for the resort itself and the infrastructure needed to support it. The idea that tourists bound for Malan's Basin would become an "economic engine for downtown Ogden" is pure speculation.

  We suggest that proponents of the gondola and the resort hire an objective, credentialed consultant to perform a technical and economic analysis of the Malan's Basin resort and all associated developments and infrastructure. We would be happy to modify our assessment in light of any credible additional facts.