Sherie Harding owns property on Three Kings Drive close to the Park City Mountain Resort parking lots, one of numerous owners on or close to the perimeter of the lots.
Like many others who live or own properties close to the PCMR lots, Harding is closely monitoring the talks about a major development proposal. Harding, though, is worried that the people with properties close to different sections of the expansive lots are not coordinating as they craft their concerns about the project.
In a late-August letter to the Park City Planning Department, Harding contended the discussions have pitted “neighbors against neighbors.” The department released the letter and other correspondences as the Park City Planning Commission readied for another meeting about the proposal scheduled on Wednesday, Sept. 23.
“It is becoming apparent that neighborhoods are working against each other. This may not be a conscious effort, but it is what is happening,” the two-page correspondence says.
Harding describes some of the input regarding the number of parking stalls that will be built in garages at various locations within the project as she outlined her argument. The layout of the parking and the number of stalls could have greater impact on some nearby properties than others, she says.
“Is it a strategy of the developer to pit surrounding neighbors against each other? Rather than divide neighborhoods into fragments let us work together for the good of all,” she says in the correspondence.
Harding addresses a series of other topics like the historic operations of the lots and the impacts of the project on views from nearby properties, but the idea of competing interests between neighborhoods that are in such close proximity to one another is an intriguing angle of the ongoing discussions about the project.
In an interview, Harding said there are talks about creating a coalition involving people who live in the neighborhoods surrounding the lots or who own properties there. A coalition could be formed at some point after the Planning Commission meeting on Wednesday, she said.
Detailed information about a coalition was not available early in the week. It was not clear what sort of support one would generate and whether the membership would tend to be centered in the area surrounding the lots or whether a coalition would draw supporters from elsewhere in Park City and into surrounding Summit County. Coalitions have been formed during previous debates about large development proposals, such as Empire Pass and Treasure.
A coalition formed in upcoming weeks, though, would debut months into the talks between Provo developer PEG Companies and the Planning Commission about the 10-acre development proposal. The project involves residences, a hotel, retailers and restaurants. The public input has been heavily weighted against the proposal.
A previous owner of PCMR in the 1990s secured an overall development approval for the base area that included rights attached to the parking lots. The lots and attached development rights went to Vail Resorts when it acquired PCMR. PEG Companies earlier reached an agreement with Vail Resorts to acquire the lots for the development and is waiting to finalize the deal until after the talks about the project. It seems the Planning Commission could be prepared to cast a vote as early as late in the year, but a precise timeline is not clear.
The Planning Commission meeting on Wednesday is scheduled to be held virtually starting at 5:30 p.m. The Planning Commission will take public input via an e-commenting system. More information about the commenting system and materials for the meeting are available on the City Hall website, parkcity.org. The direct link is: granicus_production_attachments.s3.amazonaws.com/parkcity/992b378ab819113cb92330964e5c507e0.pdf.