Zip Line, Gondola, and Pump House Conditional Use Permit Resources
Findings can’t be made for Snow King’s gondola, zip line, or pump house
Snow King investors are pushing to add yet another amusement park ride to our beloved Town Hill: a zip line. This additional thrill ride, if it goes hand-in-hand with what they’ve proposed on the rest of the mountain, will further degrade the character of our local ski hill – and it is far more than a “nuisance.” Not only does it break federal rules and Forest Service policies (which is why they’re putting it on private land), a zip line contradicts our local Land Development Regulations and it presents serious safety concerns. And most importantly, it doesn’t meet the vision of our Comp Plan to remain a community first, resort second.
The zip line (along with various other pieces of the resort puzzle, such as the gondola, operating hours for the summit and the base, and the pump house for snowmaking) will appear before the Town Council for a Conditional Use Permit. With your help, we can urge the Council to vote no, so that Snow King can succeed as our Town Hill, not an amusement park. This is a chance for our local representatives to hold the line, especially after they’ve left too much on the table with the master plan, and after the Forest Service released a terribly-flawed environmental impact statement.
But, there’s no time to waste – Town Council will take public comment at their meeting on July 6. Get in touch with Clare at clare@jhalliance.org if you believe a better future for Snow King is possible!
- Alliance letter to Town Planning Commission asking that they deny the zip line
- Snow King’s Gondola and Zip Line Conditional Use Permit
- Staff report for Town Council
- Staff report for Planning Commission
- Conditional Use Approval Process
- Conditional Use Permits in the Town’s Land Development Regulations
Forest Service FEIS and Draft Record of Decision Resources
- Snow King Objection Writing Workshop
- Email chelsea@jhalliance.org for a link to view the virtual workshop, co-hosted by Susan Marsh and the Alliance about best practices for filing an objection
- Objection Process handout
- A breakdown of the logistics and details necessary to file an objection – info on how to file by Nov 23! *Note that only individuals who have previously submitted comments (either DEIS or Scoping) are eligible to file an objection. If you haven’t previously submitted a comment, write in to Town Council and ask them to object!
- Public Comment Reading Room
- Find your DEIS comment, as well as read others, to reference in your objection letter
- A Citizen’s Guide to NEPA
- A helpful resource to help you navigate the NEPA process
- Legal and Administrative Direction Handout
- A breakdown of the legal and procedural details important for filing an objection
- Reference List
- A list of citations categorized by issue, for referencing bird species see the Teton Raptor Center DEIS comments
- Snow King Landslide Information
- Helpful resources about the access road and the potential for avalanches
- Final Environmental Impact Statement – Forest Service
- View the FEIS released by the FS on October 9, 2020
- Draft Record of Decision – Forest Service
- View the ROD released by the FS on October 9, 2020
Forest Service DEIS Resources
- Issues document
- View the list of issues that are being analyzed in the DEIS
- Timeline document
- View the timeline of the NEPA process
- Project overview
- View the USFS project
- Draft Environmental Impact Statement comment submission portal
- Submit your public comment to the Forest Service here
- Snow King DEIS Summary Handout
- View our analysis of the DEIS, including legal bases for your concerns with the USFS analysis and process. This document will help you simplify the complex DEIS and connect the dots.
- West Elk Decision
- Read about similar story to Snow King
News articles
- 2020 pieces:
- Town wants more ‘gives’ for King’s gondolas – September 11, 2020
- “Snow King plan hits home stretch” – January 8, 2020
- “Snow King expansion examined” – January 31, 2020
- “Snow King alternatives frustrate some stakeholders” – February 19, 2020
- “Forest asked to extend comment deadline for Snow King Resort expansion” – March 4, 2020
- “Town calls for more variety in Snow King analysis” – March 6, 2020
- “Forest Service gives more time to comment on Snow King” – March 10, 2020
- “Wildlife pros have reservations for Leeks Canyon plans” – March 11, 2020
- 2019 pieces:
- “Snow King hits potential setback” – December 18, 2019
- “Some question Snow King backside skiing” – December 11, 2019
- “Snow King inches closer to winning approval of a new master plan” – December 4, 2019
- “Planners: Snow King fee doesn’t need to fund recreation” – November 24, 2019
- “Planning Commission to ponder final Snow King details” – November 20, 2019
- “Public review of Snow King plans starts anew” – November 6, 2019
- “Town seeks rationale for Snow King expansion alternatives” – October 9, 2019
- “Snow King takes second shot at new master plan” – August 28, 2019
- “Snow King presents new master plan proposal” – August 7, 2019
- “Forest Lays our issues to be assessed in Snow King plan” – July 3, 2019
- “Bridger-Teton works with resort to modify expansion plan” – June 30, 2019
- “Town-King negotiations on hold indefinitely” – March 13, 2019
- “Snow King pulls out of town negotiations” – March 11, 2019
- “Snow King hits pause on town, looks to forest for approval” – February 4, 2019
- 2018 pieces:
- “County resists letting Snow King get bigger” – September 26, 2018
- “Longtime King skier battles new road idea” – September 12, 2018
- “Scoping Snow King’s big plans” – September 12, 2018
- “Snow King reconfigures base area map in response to feedback” – August 23, 2018
- 2017 piece: “New luxury condos take shape at Snow King”
- 2016 piece: “King pushes growth to thrive”
- 2013 piece: “Town to review Snow King zipline proposal”
Town Resources
- Film of public comments from December 2, 2019 Town Council meeting – Item IV B4, starting around 1h39m
Alliance posts
- January 8, 2020: Alliance comments to town before their approval of amended plan
- December 16, 2019: “Transportation solutions needed for Snow King”
- December 14, 2019: “The win-win solution for Snow King”
- July 1, 2019 the current waiting game
- February 5, 2019: Town Council meeting notes on Snow King discussion
- January 15, 2019: “Snow King holiday roundup”
- August 28, 2018: Alliance blog post on Snow King’s massive development proposal that needs your input
- May 16, 2018: Stakeholder scenarios & controversial elements
- April 17, 2018: Alliance blog post on SKRMA: the deal our community made with Snow King 18 years ago, and what happened – or didn’t happen
- Alliance balanced vision for Snow King
Alliance comment letters
- April 28, 2020: Alliance to Town Council: there’s still a win-win opportunity if we place a fee on commercial activities
- March 31, 2020: Alliance comment letter to Forest Service on Snow King’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement
- November 1, 2019: Alliance comment letter to to planning commission re: SKRMA fee
- October 24, 2019: Alliance comment letter to Forest Service on historic preservation
- February 3, 2019: Alliance comment letter – Dear Town Council, don’t support Snow King development on Forest Service land
- October 4, 2018: Alliance scoping comment letter to Forest Service about Snow King on-mountain improvement projects
- September 18, 2018: Alliance comment letter to Town Planning Commission about Snow King’s base area master plan
- September 17, 2018: Alliance comment letter to Town Council about Forest Service scoping
Opinion pieces
- Skye’s guest shot about how we want Snow King to succeed (March 2018)
- Noah Osnos’ excellent letter to the editor about the impacts of what Snow King proposed (March 2018)
- Great Guest shot by stakeholder Geneva Chong re: road, design, SKRMA, etc (May 2018)
- Letter to the editor re: the finances – Glen Esnard (May 2018)
- Geneva Chong’s letter to the editor about “pink unicorns” (June 2018)
- Sam Petri’s guest shot on zipline (August 2018)
- Kyle Kissock’s letter to the editor on saving the ballpark (September 2018)
- Kirk Davenport’s letter to the editor & comments to the Town and Forest Service (September 2018)
- Paul Hansen’s piece on the proposal and maintaining habitat and character (September 2018)