The Treasure partnership is set to restart its talks with the Park City Planning Commission on Wednesday, the first in what is expected to be a series of meetings about the development proposal that will almost certainly personify a deep divide between the partnership, panel members and the neighborhood that has persisted for more than a decade.
The developers in the spring of 2004 engaged the Planning Commission with Treasure. The project is envisioned as approximately 1 million square feet of residences, commercial space and additional space needed to operate a major lodging property. The land is on a hillside overlooking Old Town along the route of the Town Lift. The Sweeney family in the 1980s secured development rights on the Treasure acreage and nearby parcels of land in a broad agreement with the Park City leadership at the time, opting to locate the development toward the base of the hillside rather than on the hillside itself. The acreage is now held by an equal partnership of the Sweeney family and a firm called Park City II, LLC. The Sweeney family, the traditional owner of the land, has largely represented the project publicly.
Over the course of the 12 years since the spring of 2004, the talks have started and stopped several times as the project was redesigned or as Park City leaders unsuccessfully attempted to reach a conservation deal involving the acreage. The Planning Commission last addressed Treasure in 2010. It appeared the panel at that time was moving toward a ‘Nay’ vote based on a series of issues such as traffic and the design of Treasure. Only one member of the Planning Commission, Adam Strachan, remains from the last time the project was in front of the panel.
“I feel good about getting on with it, just because it’s been a long time,” said Pat Sweeney, who represents the Sweeney family in the discussions with the Planning Commission. “This is a very concrete step going through the Planning Commission process and completing that.”
Sweeney said the partnership is no longer considering alternatives to the development proposal itself nor is it willing to again discuss the possibility of shifting some of the development rights attached to the Treasure acreage to another location, something that was once considered. He said Treasure, as envisioned and approved in broad terms in the 1980s, reflects the growth desires of Park City of today. Sweeney said much of the hillside is protected from development and carbon emissions are limited as a result of opening ski terrain that links the Park City Mountain Resort slopes and Old Town.
“I think it was way ahead of its time,” Sweeney said, adding, “It clearly fits right in with the essence of what green is.”
Treasure side confident
Sweeney said he is confident Treasure will be approved, either by the Planning Commission or a three-person panel that was instituted to hear any appeal of a Planning Commission vote. An appeal is anticipated by the Treasure partnership if the Planning Commission casts a ‘Nay’ vote while project opponents would likely appeal a ‘Yea’ vote by the Planning Commission. If an appeal panel sides with the Treasure opposition, Sweeney said, a lawsuit would follow to settle the matter.
The upcoming Planning Commission meetings regarding Treasure could consistently draw some of the larger crowds of recent years. There has been intense interest over the years, particularly by people who live on streets like Lowell Avenue and Empire Avenue. The meeting on Wednesday has been moved from the Park City Council chambers at the Marsac Building to the more spacious Santy Auditorium at the Park City Library to accommodate the expected crowd.
The Treasure side will be given time on Wednesday to make a presentation while the Planning Department will also present. The presentations are expected to involve overviews of Treasure. Detailed discussions about individual topics such as traffic and the designs are expected at later meetings. A hearing is also scheduled on Wednesday.
“Tough to know what to expect. I hope the public turns out,” Strachan, the chairman of the Planning Commission said. “I think it’s an important project.”
Strachan said he wants to delve into the timeline of the Treasure talks during the meeting on Wednesday. The Treasure side has outlined a timeline ending in the fall while the Planning Department envisions a much longer schedule prior to a vote. Strachan said issues that will be discussed over the course of the Treasure talks include the size and placement of the Treasure buildings, the scale of the project, retaining walls, traffic and the need to remove contaminated soils from the excavation zone. He said the Planning Commission will also address the commercial square footage proposed as part of the project, such as whether it would exclusively serve people at Treasure or a mix of people at Treasure and those coming from elsewhere.
Opposition prepared
The Treasure opposition is prepared for the new round of discussions, which are scheduled at a pace of one Planning Commission meeting per month. Treasure opponents have cited a series of issues as they argued against the project, including traffic and the building designs. An opposition group, called the Treasure Hill Impact Neighborhood Coalition, has monitored the discussions for years. It involves a core group of approximately 15 people and upward of 500 others who participate at some level. Brian Van Hecke, the founder and a resident of Empire Avenue, said the issues remain from the earlier discussions.
“We’re extremely disappointed. We had great faith the Sweeneys would do the right thing find a compromise,” Van Hecke said.
Van Hecke said it is important the Planning Commission review the previous Treasure meetings, including the input from the public. He said there are “ample reasons that the project did not work.”
“Traffic, safety, the historical integrity of Park City, we think this project would have a significant detrimental impact on all of that,” Van Hecke said.
The Planning Commission meeting is scheduled to start at 5:30 p.m. in the Santy Auditorium. A public hearing is planned at the meeting. There is parking at the library and in a public lot across Park Avenue.