| OCR Text |
Show Map becomes focus of Snyderville Basin Master Plan debate by Rick Brough Arguments over density irr the Snyderville Basin continued, but took a different turn, at the Jan. 22 public hearing on the Basin Master Plan held in Parley's Park Elementary Elemen-tary School. In the last month of hearings critics have said the point system in the plan did not allow enough density in Snyderville development. Those comments weren't heard at the Tuesday meeting, where county planning director Jerry Smith presented a revised "density bonus" plan that would allow coverage of a site up to 50 percent in return for desirable elements in the development. develop-ment. Multi-family units, Smith said, could build "16, 17, even 18 units an acre." But a new argument appeared when residents said the Basin Plan's point system cannot be used along with a proposed "compatibility map." The map designates suggest ed uses in the Basin area through color coding. Attorney Lee Kapaloski said the map was essentially the same zoning system the county was now discarding. "You're back to the same problem. You cannot mix the apples and oranges of the map and the point system." But planning commissioner Lamar Pace said that without the map, high densities could be placed all over the Basin area. "Would everybody want the whole valley with 16, 20, 30 units an acre? Either that, or you designate areas. Then you have to go back to the map." Smith told the Record that, instead of using a map, the county now will define specific criteria under which compatibility is judged. Those will be presented at a Parley's Park Elementary School hearing on Jan. 29 at 1: 30 p.m. Smith unveiled a change in the plan on "Impervious Coverage" that vould be allowed on a development site. Projects would be allowed a "base coverage" of 30 percent. That could be raised to 50 percent coverage under the density bonus. (The past plan proposed a base coverage of 25 percent and a maximum of 30 percent with bonuses. ) Under this, a. builder can receive positive points for providing desirable desir-able elements specilied in the plan. Projects will gain one percent additional coverage 'ud to the maximum i for each additional positive point. Smith also presented the compatibility compati-bility map, which included industrial areas (represented as purple), pockets suggested for high-density and including Kimball Junction (hmwn) and a mediumlow density area (yellow) covering most of the central flat area ol the Basin. Park City planner Bruce IXfker said, "You oughta throw out the compatibility map." He said that when he studied the point system as a Park City official, other cities cautioned against using a map with it. "People are used to looking at it as a zoning map." Developer Bob Harrington pointed out the map was stamping two neighboring nayfields with different colors. A label put on his undeveloped land, he said, puts the burden on him to argue for a change to the label. "I know what's it's like to overcome a presumption 'You started yellow and that's where we want to keep you.' ' But ParkWest developer Jack Roberts said zoning should be respected for projects already developing. It would be a comfort to know the system will not take away what exists, he said. "You should start the permit system based on something, or perhaps in the future there will be people on the planning commission who don't want a ski resort in Summit County." Kapaloski seconded his comments. Other residents argued a project density should also depend on the area, not just on its number of positve points. Resident Lucy Murphy supported the map and said approval of a project should be received from neighbors, who are affected the most. Bill Ligety. Park City Planning Director and a Basin resident, said that under the point system, the 17unitacre density could be done in the flat Basin area DensMv. he said, would be guided by market demand. Ligety suggested the county take an inventory of building lots now standing vacant. Park City planner Dave Boesch also asked how the new plan correlated with the master plan approved for the basin in l;78. But the meeting al" heard a fervent protest from Boh Harrington. He argued that when a person owns real estate ana brings out a reasonable proposal, his property rights should be respected. "There's a lot of amimosity about developing real estate from this end of the county, and I'm fed up with it. It's not a fun business," he said. Referring to Park City, he said, I've never seen anything so over-regulated and over-guarded and it's a mess. I don't want to see that in the county." His comments brought applause from about half a dozen people in the audience. Smith told the audience the county had planned to approve the Basin Plan on Feb. 5, but lie did not know if it would meet that schedule. Under the current plan, compatibility compati-bility is listed as an Absolute Standard (required), but it will pro!..l:iy change to Relative status (encouraged). Both Smith and Kapaloski said court decisions have ruled against requiring compati-l.ilily |
