Provo developer says PCMR proposal won’t be significantly altered, calls for a vote
Firm makes strong statement regarding desire for a decision after 1 1/2 years of discussions
The Provo developer pursuing a major project at Park City Mountain Resort on Wednesday signaled the proposal will not be significantly altered and indicated it wants a City Hall panel to cast a vote shortly, capping another lengthy discussion about the concept to reshape the base area.
The statement from PEG Companies came toward the end of a Park City Planning Commission meeting and was perhaps the strongest statement to date regarding the firm’s desire for a decision.
The president of PEG Development, Robert Schmidt, addressed the topic toward the end of a Planning Commission meeting that stretched toward 10 p.m. The Planning Commission and critics of the project have concerns about a broad range of issues 1 1/2 years after the discussions were launched.
There are deep-rooted worries about crucial topics like traffic, parking, the height of the proposed buildings and the overall design. PEG Companies sees the plans as addressing the worries through a variety of measures such as alterations to the architecture spurred by the criticism and plans for a paid-parking system that, the developer’s side says, would curb traffic.
The comments by Schmidt on Wednesday were broad in nature as he encapsulated an assertion that the PEG Companies’ side has made modifications throughout the talks with the Planning Commission in response to the concerns.
“What we’ve proposed, I think, is an excellent plan and, frankly, it’s the best plan that’s been proposed in 20 years, and we’re ready to move forward,” he told the Planning Commission. “We would like the commission to go into deliberations, go through the findings of fact, conditions of approval and take a vote. It’s time.”
Findings of fact and conditions of approval are the documentation that provide the basis for a Planning Commission decision.
Schmidt also said the development proposal is “on the table” and “we don’t foresee any major changes at this point.” He acknowledged the PEG Companies’ side could still address certain topics like a park-and-ride lot but not core issues like the layout and the buildings.
“Our proposal’s in. It’s a great proposal. It makes a ton of sense for the city. And we’re going to let it stand and we’d ask you to consider that,” Schmidt said.
The Planning Commission did not address the comments by Schmidt in any detail. The comments were notable nonetheless, though, as the developer essentially told the panelists they will need to consider a decision based on the current proposal rather than working on the possibility of further modifications.
The discussions with the Planning Commission started late in the spring of 2020. City Hall toward the beginning of the talks outlined a tentative timeline of Planning Commission meetings that identified the possibility of a vote in October of that year. Although that timeline appeared aggressive, the talks have extended more than a year beyond that schedule with a vote seeming to be at least several months away.
PEG Companies in the spring of 2019 reached an agreement to acquire the PCMR parking lots from resort owner Vail Resorts. The deal would not close until after a decision is made on the project.
A previous owner of PCMR in the 1990s secured an overall project approval for the base area that allows significant development on the parking lots. The Planning Commission is tasked with deciding whether the proposal jibes with the 1990s-era approval rather than whether development is allowed at the location at all.
The 10-acre proposal from PEG Companies involves a hotel, condominiums, retailers and restaurants. Housing for employees and other housing set aside as affordable is also included.
The opponents of the proposal, who have organized into a group known as the Responsible Resort Area Development Coalition, continue to press concerns about issues like traffic and the designs. Testimony on Wednesday was overwhelmingly in opposition to the project, as has been the case throughout the Planning Commission talks. Speakers on Wednesday raised issues like whether the project, as designed, is pedestrian friendly and that the development would add concrete and glass to the location.
The Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled to return to the discussions about the project at a meeting in January.
A yellow hat. A green water bottle tucked into a backpack. A black roller suitcase accompanied by a brown paper bag filled with canned food. A framed children’s painting of “The Starry Night.” These are the things one Park City resident would bring if she had to evacuate.
Support Local Journalism
Support Local Journalism
Readers around Park City and Summit County make the Park Record's work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.
Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.
Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.