The Park City Planning Commission voted unanimously in October to approve a workforce housing project on Homestake Road, with some members praising various aspects of the development.
But last week, some commissioners raised objections to ratifying a development agreement for the project, saying they are concerned about the potential risk to residents of electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure from a Rocky Mountain Power substation next to the Homestake project. Some of those concerns centered on updates to EMF information made after the October approval.
At an April 12 meeting, Planning Commission Chair Laura Suesser recused herself from the vote, saying she could not be impartial.
“I have a conscientious objection to the project because of potential adverse health impacts on residents living in such close proximity to the transmission facility and especially one that may possibly be upgraded at some point in the future,” Suesser said.
Despite their concerns, the commissioners voted unanimously to ratify the development agreement after Mark Harrington, senior city attorney, reminded them that they were not allowed to revisit the terms of their prior approval. The scope of their review was limited to making sure the agreement is consistent with their 2022 approval and the Land Management Code requirements, “no more, no less,” he said.
Harrington also said the commission had no evidence in the records that showed adverse impacts based on the distances of the units from the substation.
“I think most of you have been asked this question when you were evaluated in terms of Planning Commission appointment: ‘If you have a project which you can’t stand but it meets the Land Management Code approval, what do you do?’ That’s the reason why the Council sometimes asks that question, and it’s a hard one because hopefully all of us love this community and want to do the utmost for it,” Harrington said.
The development agreement now goes to Mayor Nann Worel for her signature. The mayor is under the same limitations as the Planning Commission and would need a reason based on code to not sign the agreement.
The city and developer are negotiating a ground lease, which will go to the Park City Council for action once the document is finalized. City Council members must approve a lease for the project to move forward and they could decline to sign it for multiple reasons.
“The City Council could hear your concerns that aren’t based on your October actions and any other from the community,” Harrington said. “There are active negotiations and financial considerations. All that’s still to be yet considered.”
The project, at 1875 Homestake Road, is a public-private partnership of Park City, which owns the land, and J. Fisher Companies. The plan calls for 123 units, with 80% of them workforce housing and the rest market rate, on a nearly 1.9-acre parcel. Under the proposal, the four-story, 180,000-square-foot secure building will have 128 underground and 12 surface parking stalls.
Residents will have to qualify through their incomes.
The Homestake condominiums, the Boneyard Saloon & Wine Dive, the Blind Dog Restaurant & Raw Bar, the Kimball Art Center and RecycleUtah are in the surrounding area.
Rocky Mountain Power says there are currently no plans to upgrade the voltage of the substation, which will continue to operate at 46,000 volts. The EMFs generated from the power lines are non-ionizing and classified as extremely low-frequency (ELF-EMFs), according to a Park City Staff report.
“There is general scientific consensus that non-ionizing ELF-EMFs have not been shown to cause adverse human health outcomes,” the report says.
In a Nov. 5 email to his fellow commissioners, John Kenworthy said the health and safety of residents might be achieved only by moving the proposed apartment building away from its current proximity to the power lines.
“We have all been told repeatedly that electromagnetic fields like those from power lines decrease dramatically as you move or live farther away from them,” he said in the email. “So, my remaining questions are still quite simple. How far away from ‘these abutting power lines’ are we comfortable with for both current and future EMF levels? And who is willing to sign off on the distance that the applicant is requesting when the experts are not willing to do so?”
At last week’s meeting, Kenworthy said desperation to create more workforce housing in Park City was a motivating factor in the effort to get the project approved.
“Desperate is not in the Land Management Code,” he said. “But desperate was pushing this.”
Commissioner Henry Sigg, who was appointed to the Planning Commission a few weeks before the October vote, said studies at the front end would have led to different site planning.
“It seems to me like the most fundamental way to solve these distancing issues with the low voltage radiation is to pull those units a little bit further away from the substation,” Sigg said.
Commissioner John Frontero said he is concerned about the inconclusiveness of some of the reports.
“I’m going to make a public comment that really is addressed to City Council,” he said. “I would like to see additional review of the EMF and to see if City Council can find further mitigation going forward.”
Commissioner Sarah Hall said she was frustrated because a lot of the discussion was irrelevant to what was in the commission’s scope of review.
“We hear so often that the Planning Commission is required to follow the LMC and not our conscience and not vote our heart or our personal preference,” Hall said. “We’re just supposed to apply an application to the LMC for compliance. We did that in October and we had unanimous approval for that.”