| OCR Text |
Show discharged his job ot comparing com-paring the submitted plans against this simple check list and announcing them as being in compliance. So, since the Planning Commission Commis-sion has abrogated its responsibility to you, the City Council, it is respectfully respect-fully submitted that you grant this appeal and reverse their action." "In passing, I wish to commend to you your City Planner and Merrill Sanchez and Kurt Nelson of the Planning Commission for their efforts to table this project after the foregoing problems were brought to light, to afford the city time to resolve the dangers and problems inherent in the area and assure the success of this and all other future development-imminent in the emerging area involved. They saw their duty and 'they done it.' I expect no less from you gentlemen and Miss Bennett." Mary Lehmer Appeals Deer Valley 8-Plex ed for any questionable real estate so that "disastrous results such as the City has , permitted to happen on the south end of Woodside Avenue will not again be permitted to happen." j Mrs. Lehmer "further maintains in her appeal that the road to serve the eight-i eight-i plex is ' inadequate and should be made adequate, safe and accessible before any further building increases increas-es traffic flow on the road and compounds existing problems. Again, she supports this charge with personal experiences. exper-iences. She cites in her . appeal the constant winter traffic accidents on Olive Branch Road and the many instances in which the road was impassable. Finally, Mrs. Lehmer advises ad-vises that "the City should not permit the building of this eight-plex or any other construction in Park City until adequate sewer treatment treat-ment facilities are available for such building." However, she does not mention the fact that the Snyderville Basin Sewer Treatment facility is nearing final phases of , completion which should give the area adequate sewer treatment for years to come. In concluding her appeal, Mrs. Lehmer states: "In conclusion, it is regrettable that three members mem-bers of the Planning Commission, Com-mission, having been made obviously gun-shy i by v the Mayor and City attorney of law suits, for the wrong reasons, felt it obligatory to grant this petition, to avoid being sued, if the applicant had met the bare-bones requirements of being in the proper zone, met setback .requirements, etc., the Commission Com-mission thereby choosing to ignore and buck to the City ; Council their obligation to deny the project if overall shortcomings of lack of water, fire protection, sewer treatment, erosion, traffic viability and accessibility for emergency, fire, and an increasing number, of. vehicles, vehi-cles, should be addressed jpefore ? a disaster area was created. No city every lost a suit where it demonstrated it could not accommodate further fur-ther building because of loack of water or inadequate fire protection roads or sewer treatment facilities or similar vital amenities." "The 3-member majority of the Planning Commission approved this project be- , cause they viewed their responsibility as a planning commission ended and that their approval was mandatory manda-tory upon their being satisfied satis-fied that the owner's plans met the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and building build-ing code requirements only. If this were indeed the Planning Commission's sole function, then the planning commission is superfluous and should be disbanded, as the City Planner had already Acting in-what she claims is. the "best interest of Park City residents," controversial controver-sial former City Councilman Mary Lehmer .fas formally "appealed the March 21, three to two vote of the. Planning Commission ap -proving Jack Johnston's proposed eight-plex located at 428 Olive Branch Road in Deer Valley. Mrs. Lehmer. who resides ' at 674 Deer Valley Road (which has been re-named Olive Branch), bases her '-.V appeal to the City Council on v j the grounds that the "City i has inadequate water to provide adequate fire protection protec-tion or domestic culinary water to existing buildings and dwellings in Park City, and should immediately cease any further building until it has developed present pre-sent and future water sources sourc-es sufficient to protect its citizens from the present . peril to their health,, comfort, t lives and property' ; : Mrs. Lehmer supports this charge with personal testimony testi-mony that on occasions her Deer Valley home had been without water and that she had been told by City employees the condition? prevailed because there wasf no water in .'the-City reservoirs: ' ' , . Other residents have com-, plained of lack of water or pressure during several instances in-stances during the winter. City Manager Wayne Matthews Mat-thews however maintains that these shortages were m caused, by periodic broken lines and that there is no general lack of water in the Park City area. - The former City Councilman Council-man also told the Record she had heard that during the Snowflower Condominium fire last month , City Maintenance Mainte-nance Director Leon Uriate had told Fire Chief Paul Kofford to "take it easy 6n the water or we'll pump the reserv&irs dry." When contacted con-tacted by the . Record, Kofford Kof-ford admitted that Uriate had said something to the effect of ' 4 Don't use more water than you have to' Despite conflicting reports, Kofford adamently maintains that there was indeed adequate water pressure and supply to fight the blaze that leveled the 42 unit condominium complex "If we didn't have . adequate water, we wouldn't have been able to get the fire out nor save any of the buildings adjacent to the Snowflower site, " he said. - The Record also contacted Rex Larson, an area engineer for the Weber River Drainage Drain-age Area out of the State Water Rights Office, who said that his office had received complaints from bona fide water right owners who maintain that the recent building boom in Park City has forced the City to pump more water in their system than water rights permit. Larson said his office is currently making a survey of the Park City area to determine if such is the case. Although Mr. Larson had no i evidence to the effect, he speculated that he thought Park City had enough water to serve present residents, but also thought there might not be enough for any substantial future develop-ments develop-ments providing new sources are not developed. VYaynetMtthews assured ' the Record that Mr. Larson is equating Park City with the entire West County area. He admitted that there might be problems with water in some of the mammoth developments develop-ments planned for Snyderville Snyder-ville and other outlying areas but maintained there was no y such problem in Park City itself .The City is , currently pursuing the acquisition of water rights and the develop- ment of new water sources; specifically, the Spiro Tun-; Tun-; ner source which will provide water to the Deer Valley , development, plus other future projects. The second charge in Mrs. Lehmer's appeal is that the ground underlying the proposed pro-posed eight-plex development develop-ment is unstable and "any ; further construction thereon poses an immediate and present danger to the area and surrounding areas ' This assumption is primarily primar-ily based on personal accounts ac-counts of problems Mrs. Lehmer has faced with recent improvements to her Deer Valley home. She maintains that a retaining wall constructed in 1971 moved two feet and that an addition constructed in 1977 settled and shifted to a point where it is now completely out of plumb. In conclusion of Section II of her appeal, Mary Lehmer implores the City Council to revise its ordinances so that soil studies are required prior to approval of projects propbs- |
