极速168赛车官方网站图片
The proposed Lost Creek municipality would have been in the Browns Canyon area near Park City and Hideout. Credit: Courtesy of the Utah Lieutenant Governor's Office

Ivory Homes will need to work with the Summit County government to develop 490 acres in Browns Canyon after the Utah Lieutenant Governor’s Office declined to initiate a feasibility study for the developer’s proposed preliminary municipality, Lost Creek.

A spokesperson for the Lieutenant Governor’s Office on Wednesday confirmed the department had already received multiple filings for preliminary municipalities in other parts of the state by the time Ivory Homes filed its application for Lost Creek on Jan. 1.

State law only allows two preliminary municipality filings per calendar year, meaning Lost Creek was automatically disqualified from consideration.

A preliminary municipality can transition to, and incorporate as, a new town under a state law that went into effect in 2024. The law amended the Utah Municipal Code to provide for a pilot program for the incorporation of a preliminary municipality, giving “all the powers and duties” of a town, including zoning and land use decisions.

The law applies to land that is privately owned by three or fewer people who intend to develop it with at least 100 people while meeting certain affordable housing benchmarks in the first five years of the preliminary municipality’s existence.

The Browns Canyon proposal was submitted by Ivory Homes, Garff-Rogers Ranch and EBR Management. It was the second time Summit County had seen a request for a preliminary municipality, with Dakota Pacific Real Estate filing a similar application for a town named Park City Tech last year as a safeguard for its planned development in Kimball Junction.

The three companies listed on the application own 490 acres in the Browns Canyon area, which is about a mile away from Park City and Hideout. The developers said they intended to build “a mix of residential unit types, including affordable housing, open space, park space and commercial/mixed-use” areas in addition to installing “necessary public and private infrastructure” and a municipal building space, according to documents obtained through the Government Records Access and Management Act.

In total, the proposed preliminary municipality would have had 193 single-family homes, 127 townhomes, 190 cottage homes and 10,000 square feet of retail space by the end of the project. The application also mentioned 255 nightly rentals on the south side of the development area.

Approximately 642 full-time residents were predicted to live in Lost Creek following its last phase of construction.

A development in Browns Canyon is still a possibility, though, depending on negotiations with the county government.

Community Development Director Peter Barnes previously confirmed the county had received its own application proposing an amendment to the code to allow for a new zone in relation to the Browns Canyon proposal.

The application has not yet been made public, but Ivory Development President Chris Gamvroulas, who was listed as the preliminary municipality’s primary sponsor, said the company already hoped to work with the county rather than pursue incorporation.

Specifically, Gamvroulas said in an interview with The Park Record last week that the preliminary municipality served as a “backstop,” or safeguard, for the development if proceedings with the county weren’t moving along at a “timely and predictable” pace. However, he said his preference was always to create and implement a new zone in Browns Canyon under county code to develop the residential neighborhood, which now appears to be Ivory Homes’ only route for approval.

Rep. Tiara Auxier, a Republican who represents part of Summit County, recently filed a bill during the ongoing general session to change how preliminary municipalities function. 

A group of nonprofit organizations in Moab has also sued Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson, a development company and a preliminary municipality near the Colorado River over the implementation of preliminary municipalities in Utah. They claimed Senate Bill 258, which created the pilot program, is unconstitutional because it removes local land use control from the hands of elected officials and gives it to the state and private development companies.