Major Park City sites in play in mix-and-match talks
November 19, 2010
Park City officials on Tuesday are slated to continue their talks about creating a program that would allow landowners to shift developments to ground owned by someone else, a scenario that proponents see as a means to protect prized land as open space.
The city’s Planning Commission is scheduled to meet at 5:30 p.m. A public hearing is not scheduled, but the panel sometimes allows public input even if a formal hearing is not taking place. The meeting is scheduled at the Marsac Building.
Programs like the one under consideration are known in bureaucratic circles as transfer of development rights or transfer of density rights, with some people referring to them by the acronym TDR.
City Hall does not have such a program in place, and officials are worried the Legislature in early 2011 could tighten state laws that regulate the transfers. Park City wants to have a program under consideration prior to the January start of the legislative session. There could be another Planning Commission meeting about a program in December, but it is not yet clear when the panel might cast a vote on the proposal.
Officials have drafted a list of places where development could be shifted to and from. The list, though, could be adjusted later, a City Hall attorney has told the Planning Commission.
Places on the list where development could be moved away from include the Treasure acreage on a hillside overlooking Old Town and undeveloped lots on the periphery of Old Town. The places are known as ‘sending zones,’ meaning that development set for those locations would be sent elsewhere.
Recommended Stories For You
The places on the list where the development could be shifted toward, known as ‘receiving zones,’ are Park Bonanza, the parking lots at Park City Mountain Resort and Deer Valley Resort’s Snow Park parking lots.
Silver Lake Village, previously mentioned as a possible receiving zone, did not make the list. Katie Cattan, the City Hall staffer assigned to the discussions, said information will be provided about Silver Lake Village, though. She said staffers see there being an adequate amount of development either built or proposed at Silver Lake Village.
There is typically a price tag attached to an agreement to shift development from one parcel to the other.
The Planning Commission started its discussions at a recent meeting, crafting a preliminary list of the two types of zones. There was little interest from the landowners or rank-and-file Parkites at that meeting, but a program could have wide-ranging implications on growth in the city.
Katie Cattan, the City Hall planner assigned to the discussions, said she hopes landowners with holdings in the sending and receiving zones attend on Tuesday. She said officials will provide information about the amount of development that has been approved at each site but has not yet been built. She will also detail the amount of development the underlying zoning allows at the sites.
Cattan, meanwhile, said she anticipates there will be discussion about the effects of a program on City Hall-required work force housing at the sites.
The talks come as City Hall and the Sweeney family continue negotiations about a conservation deal for all or some of the Treasure land. A Treasure agreement could require the existence of a planning tool allowing development shifts like the ones contemplated under the proposed program. Many Parkites hope an agreement is reached that leaves the Treasure land undeveloped.
People who want additional information about the Tuesday meeting or the program may contact Cattan via e-mail. Her address is firstname.lastname@example.org.