Park City ignores disputed homework over PCMR development, critic says

[ad_1]

The Marsac Building.Park Record archive photo

In mid-August, after more than a year of discussions by the Park City Planning Commission on a major development proposal in the base area of ​​Park City Mountain Resort, opposition to the project remained dismayed.

Critics had long been looking at issues such as the heights of the proposed buildings, the amount of traffic the project is expected to generate, and the overall design. The opposition movement spent months sending correspondence to city hall officials and members of the town planning commission, and testifying against the project.

In the middle of the afternoon of August 17, Deborah Hickey, one of the opponents, emailed members of the Planning Commission, Director of Planning Gretchen Milliken and Alexandra Ananth, the town planner assigned to the project. The correspondence was sent in anticipation of a Planning Commission meeting the next day.

Hickey, in the brief email, referred to the heights of the buildings, calling them outrageous and said the lack of a traffic plan was enough to stop this project immediately, saying the project would ruin Park City. The subjects are similar to those seen in correspondence at the town hall during discussions between the town planning commission and a developer from Provo called PEG Companies who is continuing the project.

But Hickey in his review also mentioned Ananth by name, which is unusual in Planning Commission proceedings. City hall planners assigned to projects tasked with drafting reports weighing a development proposal against the municipal code and making presentations to the town planning commission are generally not the target of criticism, even if they do. have a significant influence on the cases before the panel. In the case of the Hickey match, however, the planner herself is interviewed.

I have read the latest staff report for tomorrow’s meeting and find the information presented unfair and inaccurate. PEG does not meet the city’s criteria and planner Ananth is ignoring her homework to follow Park City codes and laws, according to Hickey’s correspondence. Why are you promoting such a horrible plan? What is the motive here?

The town hall declined to comment.

Hickey in an interview claimed that the city government agreed with the developers’ claims on some issues related to the project which she said have not been resolved. She listed transportation plans and building heights as two of those issues.

Many people think there is not enough information to accept these articles, she said.

Hickey, as an example, cited the concept of a looping circulation pattern around the base area. She also noted the impact on neighboring properties and said the build heights proposed by the developers were pushed and accepted.

Hickey lives on Lowell Avenue near the PCMR base and is a member of an opposition group known as the Responsible Resort Area Development Coalition. She was one of the main members of the group, which is called RRAD.

The planning committee seems to be preparing to vote in the coming months on the project. PEG Companies previously reached an agreement with Colorado-based PCMR owner Vail Resorts to acquire the parking lots for a project. An agreement would only be finalized after a vote. A former owner of PCMR in the 1990s obtained comprehensive development approval from the town hall for the base area, and the rights to that approval remain attached to the land. The Planning Commission must decide whether the PEG companies’ proposal fits with the previous approval.

Rhetoric in the dispute has appeared to sharpen recently with the likelihood of a vote looming. Hickey’s correspondence followed just over two weeks after City Hall received an email describing the proposal as obscene rape of our resort.

[ad_2]