Temple Har Shalom’s sign on S.R. 224 was vandalized over the weekend in what synagogue leaders are calling an antisemitic attack days before the Jewish community’s most important holidays.

Rabbi Jeff Dreifus said a synagogue administrator noticed the property damage on Monday and speculated the incident happened late Saturday night or Sunday. He said the sign’s letters had been ripped off and the Star of David was destroyed.

“It’s very disheartening because Jews have been part of Park City’s history and Park City’s community for so long and are so active in making this community better,” Dreifus said. “We call our synagogue our Jewish home in the mountains. For your home to be defaced by someone who clearly wants us not to feel comfortable and not feel safe in this community, it’s really sad.”

Temple Har Shalom President June K. Volk said the incident was additionally upsetting because it happened before Rosh Hashanah, one of the Jewish faith’s most important holidays. But the start of the High Holy Days, which begins with Rosh Hashanah on Friday night and will culminate with Yom Kippur toward the end of September, is also providing comfort in the wake of the vandalism.

“During these days, we do a lot of introspection, reflection, and we think about ways to make our world stronger and better,” Volk said. “We call that concept ‘tikkun olam,’ and that means ‘repairing the world.’ We look not only inward, but outward to do better for the coming year.”

Dreifus said the vandalism is “unfortunately not unexpected or surprising” considering the current political environment in the United States and the rise of anti-semitic conflicts over the past few years. His parents’ synagogue in Michigan, his cousin’s synagogue in Mississippi and his hometown synagogue in Tennessee have all been threatened with violence, which Dreifus said showcases the pervasive intimidation the Jewish faith is experiencing.

“This act was done by a person who doesn’t want us to feel safe in this community, but the Jewish faith and Jewish people are a people of joy and of finding meaning in life and of making the world a better place,” Dreifus said. “We’re not going to let this person’s act intimidate us or detract from our joy, especially in this season of the Jewish High Holy Days.”

Summit County Sheriff’s Office deputies are present for every synagogue event, and the building itself has cameras and security measures in place, Dreifus said. He emphasized Temple Har Shalom’s commitment to keeping the synagogue and its visitors safe, adding that more cameras will be installed to monitor the sign when it’s replaced.

“We have received so much support, and I think it’s important to keep that perspective,” Dreifus said. “Maybe there are a small few who want us to feel intimidated, but the vast majority of the people in Park City and the people in America and the people around the world are good neighbors and good friends and have love in their hearts. … We have a vibrant Jewish community, and we should be proud of that.”

Sgt. Skyler Talbot with the Sheriff’s Office said the department is investigating the vandalism, but it’s too early in the process to determine if there will be hate crime enhancements to any potential charges.

“Summit County is better than this,” the Sheriff’s Office said in a statement Friday morning. “Intentionally damaging another person’s property is unacceptable, and targeting an individual or group because of their religion makes the conduct even more concerning. Every member of our community should feel safe and respected. The Sheriff’s Office will not tolerate acts of intimidation, harassment or discrimination directed at members of our community.”

The post Temple Har Shalom vandalized days before Jewish community celebrates its holiest holidays appeared first on Park Record.

A proposal for a mixed-use neighborhood intended for residents 55 and older is moving to the Summit County Council for final approval after the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission unanimously forwarded a positive recommendation on Tuesday.

The 8-acre Silver Creek property is slightly southeast of Silver Creek Village. It is currently zoned as community commercial, but Bridgwater Consulting Group, which is helping develop the project alongside the property’s owners, requested a change to the neighborhood mixed-use zone to accommodate the project’s residential units.

The proposal includes plans for 74 residential units, with 30 of those earmarked as affordable housing. All units would be for sale rather than for rent, and the market rate units would be priced “consistent” with the Summit County and Park City area, according to the Bridgwater Consulting Group.

The consulting firm did not cite a specific price point for the affordable units, but the development team emphasized the community intends to serve residents 55 or older. 

The developers said they couldn’t legally restrict who moves in based on an applicant’s age, but the development’s marketing materials would target an older demographic. Bridgwater Consulting Group representatives said the neighborhood will provide older adults with an opportunity to downsize and stay in Summit County as they age.

In addition to housing, the proposal includes 6,300 square feet of commercial space and 5,600 square feet for indoor amenities. The development team is also coordinating with the county and High Valley Transit to install a transit hub to encourage residents to use public transportation, and trail connections would allow pedestrians and bikers to travel to Kimball Junction without a car.

The market rate units would have subterranean parking, while the affordable units would have surface parking. The developers said the difference in parking is due to the site’s layout and that expanding the underground garage would be too expensive and likely inconvenient for the affordable housing residents because of its location.

Developers also plan to build a park and amphitheater on the property, as well as a geothermal system underneath parking lots and walkways to melt snow in the winter and prevent residents from needing to shovel.

County planner Amir Caus said the county already contacted the Utah Department of Transportation about the development’s potential traffic impacts.

“We personally took UDOT on the tour of the entire Basin, but more particularly that entire neighborhood,” Caus said. “They’re taking into consideration resolving the current traffic issues, which we know are great, but also future projects as well, including this project.”

Planning Commissioner Spencer Young praised the developers’ decision to offer for sale affordable housing. Young said he supported a residential development in an area of the county dominated by commercial businesses, which was a concern Planning Commissioner Heather Peteroy raised.

“I actually think bringing a little bit of diversity to that area of the Basin isn’t a bad thing,” Young said. “It’s actually a healthy thing, so I don’t have a problem with that. The focus on mass transportation and active transportation seems really well thought out, and it is going to be helpful to the residents that live there, especially the residents they’re targeting. … I think the positives by far outweigh any negatives that would bring.”

The County Council will decide whether to rezone the property and approve the master plan development document, but a discussion had not been scheduled as of Thursday afternoon. If the County Council supports the project, staff will work with the development team to draft a legally binding development agreement.

The post Mixed-use neighborhood for residents 55+ heads to Summit County Council for final decision appeared first on Park Record.

Developers with projects in the Snyderville Basin may soon be required to submit a traffic impact study if the proposal is expected to generate more than 25 trips during peak hours.

The code amendment, which the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission forwarded to the Summit County Council with a unanimous recommendation, would mandate that developers provide a traffic impact study if the project will generate enough “trip ends” during peak hours.

Peak hours are typically from 7 to 9 a.m. and 4 to 6 p.m., but planning commissioners requested a change to 7 to 10 a.m. and 3 to 6 p.m. They cited ski traffic and the county’s large commuter population as reasons to expand the window.

The county uses the trip end metric to determine the impact of a project and how much a developer will need to pay in impact fees. Trip ends refer to a driver’s final destination, not any ancillary stops. For example, if a driver leaves their home, stops at a gas station and then goes to a retail store, the trip end is the retail store, not the gas station.

Developers with large projects in the Basin typically submit a traffic impact study, but county planner Ray Milliner said those submissions have been a courtesy, not a requirement.

“Currently, there’s nothing in our code that requires them to do a traffic study, so if a developer were to say, ‘I just don’t want to do it,’ we don’t have any teeth in our code to make them do it,” he said. “Generally, they just do it because they feel like, ‘Well, it’s probably in our best interest,’ but what we’d like to do is say, ‘OK, this is required at this level, and it’s in the code, and you have to do it,’ and off we go.”

Summit County Transportation Planning Deputy Director Eva de Laurentiis said the proposed code amendment would require developers to hire a third-party engineering consultant and prepare a traffic impact study if the project is estimated to generate 25 or more trip ends during peak hours. The developer would be responsible for funding the study in addition to hiring an engineer.

“Our goal with this is then to put a form on the website that outlines what is expected out of an impact study and creates clear guidelines for that so that we have some uniformity in the studies,” de Laurentiis said.

If a traffic impact study determines the development needs mitigation because of the amount of traffic, the developer would be responsible for funding and constructing that infrastructure, such as installing a new traffic light or building a roundabout.

De Laurentiis said 25 trips may sound small, but it’s a standard in the transportation industry and the same benchmark Park City Municipal uses. She added that the county didn’t want to mandate a study for fewer than 25 trips to help local businesses, as traffic impact studies often cost between $20,000 and $40,000 to conduct.

“We’re not going to require that small businesses or even mid-sized businesses or retailers do these (traffic impact studies) for the most part unless they’re going to a large space,” de Laurentiis said. “It’s really for the larger developments that are going to have an immediate transportation infrastructure impact to our community. … We don’t want to be a barrier to entry for them to expand their businesses.”

Developers would also need to include information on traffic changes throughout each phase of a project to give county officials an idea of how infrastructure will be affected as construction progresses.

The Planning Commission immediately expressed support for the change, with Planning Commissioner Tyann Mooney saying the board has “been begging for this for a while.”

The County Council will have the final say in whether the code amendment passes, but a vote has not yet been scheduled as of Thursday afternoon.

The post Developers may be required to submit traffic impact studies for large Snyderville Basin projects appeared first on Park Record.

Eric Mainord, a Summit County sheriff’s deputy who briefly ran for sheriff in Wasatch County, had at least three formal complaints filed against him during his previous employment with the Heber City Police Department, according to documents provided to The Park Record through a public records request.

Outgoing Wasatch County Sheriff Jared Rigby, who lost the primary election this summer to Wasatch County Director of Emergency Services Jeremy Hales, contacted Summit County officials in January to express concerns about Mainord’s involvement in the Kouri Richins trial. Mainord withdrew from the race on May 27.

Mainord announced his candidacy for Wasatch County sheriff on Jan. 7, and Rigby met with Summit County Sheriff Kacey Bates the following day. Rigby, now under investigation in Summit County for allegedly interfering with a criminal case, brought a list of 13 claims he said would damage Mainord’s credibility, all of which reportedly stemmed from his employment with the Heber City Police Department from 2013 to 2019.

The Park Record obtained documentation of complaints filed against Mainord while he was employed by Heber City through a Government Records Access and Management Act, which showed he was disciplined and placed on probation at least three times while a member of the Heber City Police Department.

On Tuesday, Mainord declined to comment on the complaints filed against him or the ongoing criminal investigation into Rigby’s actions.

A letter from the Police Department dated Aug. 3, 2015, said Mainord had acted in “an abusive manner” toward a citizen and called his behavior “angry, unprofessional (and) rude.” It also said Mainord threatened to cite or arrest the citizen for an incident “that did not occur” and that he “had insufficient evidence for charges.”

Three supervisors within the department investigated the complaint and determined Mainord had acted inappropriately, according to the letter.

“We are surprised and concerned over the anger you exhibited in the video and concerned with your personal wellbeing and potential stressors that may be aggravating your wellbeing,” the letter said. “We find also that the allegations are sustained and a violation of, or in conflict with, various policies and procedures.”

One policy infraction included a failure to read the citizen their Miranda rights, which inform people of their constitutional rights during a police investigation, the letter said. He also reportedly failed to activate his body camera as required by the department when a situation “becomes adversarial.”

The letter said department supervisors were concerned about Mainord’s behavior because of two previous incidents that caused him to be verbally reprimanded in 2013 and 2014.

Specifically, the document said Mainord cursed at a member of the public at a farmers market in 2013 and was “verbally counseled and warned to correct the behavior.” In 2014, he was again verbally reprimanded for arguing with a Wasatch County employee, according to the letter.

Mainord was asked to comply with a “fitness for duty examination” and follow any recommendations in addition to attending a required anger management class. He was also suspended from participating in special assignments, such as the SWAT team, and barred from receiving overtime unless approved by a supervisor for six months.

He violated the department’s corrective action plan less than two months after the first letter was issued, according to the document.

On Oct. 1, 2015, Mainord was reprimanded for a second time after he allegedly failed to follow orders, “used inappropriate force” and “acted unprofessionally in the presence of the general public by using unnecessary foul language.”

The letter said Mainord was asked to protect an underage girl during an “undercover takedown operation” involving an individual suspected of an inappropriate relationship with the minor. Mainord was ordered to stay with the girl while other officers apprehended the adult individual outside of a restaurant, but Mainord allegedly entered the establishment and contacted the suspect before he left the building.

“You drew your weapon on a suspect who was not posing any threat, whose arms were occupied with a package, and there was no specific information available indicating that there would be a threat,” the letter said. “While your weapon was drawn, you physically engaged the suspect without holstering your weapon while other officers were available to physically take the suspect into custody.”

The document said Mainord also “used foul language in front of uninvolved restaurant patrons and employees.”

Mainord’s supervisors wrote that he violated the city’s personnel policy by refusing to “comply with lawful instruction” and engaging in “insubordination” in addition to violating the Police Department’s procedures surrounding reasonable force and professionalism.

“The violations are further aggravated by recent discipline where mistreatment of another member of the public was addressed,” the letter said. “Because these types of incidents are continuing, a pattern of poor relations between you, the general public and neighboring agencies continues to bring discredit to the Heber City Police Department.”

The second incident led the department to place Mainord on probation for one year, which meant he was ineligible to participate in specialized or out-of-state training, as well as specialized assignments. He was removed from the SWAT team, and the active period for his corrective action plan was extended until May 2016.

Mainord was denied a merit pay increase for the year, too.

The department also mandated Mainord meet with a supervisor “bi-monthly” to “concentrate on (his) attitude and feelings pertaining to the general public, surrounding agencies” and the Heber City Police Department. The supervisor was responsible for documenting Mainord’s work performance and providing him with “coping mechanisms in dealing with stress and deescalating situations.”

Mainord was disciplined for a third time in 2017 after he was involved in a “verbal altercation” with a Utah Highway Patrol trooper, according to another letter in Mainord’s personnel file. The document said the trooper was removing debris from U.S. 40 when Mainord drove by and allegedly passed the trooper “too close,” which caused the trooper to make a rude hand gesture at Mainord.

Mainord then pulled over to talk with the trooper, but the “discussion quickly turned heated and generated a complaint” from the Utah Highway Patrol, the letter said.

Mainord’s supervisors wrote he “unnecessarily” stopped to interact with the trooper “who was obviously hostile” and chose to engage in an argument instead of apologizing, de-escalating the situation or ignoring the trooper. Mainord also cursed at the trooper and reportedly taunted him, based on body camera video the department reviewed.

“The altercation became so heated that (the trooper) called for backup units,” the letter said. “Regardless of our opinion of (the trooper’s) choice, this caused multiple emergency resources to be deployed unnecessarily to a ridiculous situation that you had every opportunity to avoid.”

The letter said Mainord showed a “continuing pattern of conduct” that is “further degrading relations” between Mainord, the public and other law enforcement agencies.

“This discredit has now become so pronounced that when the Wasatch County sheriff was called to testify on a legal action against you, his testimony was damaging,” the letter said, referring to former Wasatch County Sheriff Todd Bonner. “This despite the case being defensible in every other way.”

The document said Mainord was told to take days off with pay and “analyze (his) desire to remain with the department.” He was asked to provide a corrective action plan to his supervisors but failed to do so, which the letter said was “discouraging.”

Mainord was suspended without pay for five days and reassigned as a code enforcement officer and bailiff. He was placed on probation for one year and denied a merit pay increase.

The department also mandated that Mainord meet with a supervisor once a week to discuss his feelings about the job and learn coping strategies. Mainord also received another body camera, which he was directed to activate “anytime a contact becomes ‘adversarial.’”

Mainord appealed the disciplinary actions associated with the Utah Highway Patrol incident, but former Heber City Manager Mark Anderson upheld the department’s findings after reviewing statements from Mainord and the state trooper, body camera footage and internal city reports.

“As I contemplated what a fair outcome would be, the issue that I have to grapple with is the fact that there is a documented pattern of confrontational behavior that has caused harm to the Heber City Police Department’s reputation and enhanced potential liability/risk to the city,” Anderson wrote. “As we discussed, the public is more likely to file suit against the city if the officer involved in an incident has a history of documented aggressive behavior. The risk is increased if other law enforcement agencies view the officer as a problem officer that is difficult to work with.”

Anderson added that he was “confident” Mainord had “the work ethic to be very successful in code enforcement” and encouraged him to view the reassignment as a way to “have a huge positive impact on the appearance of our community.”

“Lastly, Eric, please be aware that the city acknowledges that you have made progress in this area, and that you have solved several high profile crimes through tenacious work effort and … good judgment in many instances,” Anderson said. “The city also appreciates your continued loyalty you have shown. I hope that you will address the issues identified by police leadership, as you have the potential to make a big difference in the department and the city.”

Rigby had not responded to a request for comment as of Thursday afternoon.

The post Heber City Police Department disciplined former Wasatch County sheriff candidate Eric Mainord multiple times, personnel file shows appeared first on Park Record.

The Summit County Council unanimously approved the redevelopment of Junction Commons into a residential and commercial hub on Tuesday, which marks the first use of the Snyderville Basin’s neighborhood mixed-use zone since its creation more than five years ago.

“We’re really happy and impressed that you’re able to use that NMU zone,” County Council Chair Canice Harte told the developers after the vote. “We’re excited to see what this brings. The blend of residential mixed with the enhanced commercial experience is something that I think the community will benefit from.”

Singerman Real Estate purchased the outlet mall in 2018, three years before the County Council created the neighborhood mixed-use zone. The neighborhood mixed-use zone accommodates projects with at least three land uses, such as commercial, residential and recreational areas. It also requires at least 50% of the development’s housing units be earmarked as affordable.

The approval this week authorized a rezone of the Junction Commons property from the town center zone to the neighborhood mixed-use zone. The County Council also voted in favor of a master plan development document, which will be further refined as the county government and Singerman Real Estate work to draft a legally binding development agreement before construction begins.

The proposal to redevelop the outlet mall outlines plans for 370 residential units, 220 of which will be earmarked as affordable housing. Of those affordable units, 188 will be priced around the 80% area median income, or AMI, mark. The remaining 32 units will be priced around the 60% AMI mark.

The developers said they plan to use a system that averages the AMIs of the affordable units, allowing for more flexibility. For example, if a resident in an affordable unit receives a pay raise, their AMI would increase, and the rent payment would rise in proportion to their new salary. This permits the developer to lease the next affordable unit at a lower AMI, according to Singerman Real Estate representatives.

The project also reduces existing commercial space on the property by approximately 56,000 square feet. The residential units, which are a mix of townhomes and apartment buildings, will be integrated into commercial spaces.

The site plan for the Junction Commons redevelopment has been downsized since it was first presented to the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission. The original proposal included 433 residential units, with 205 units set aside as affordable housing.

However, the County Council expressed concerns about the project’s density and traffic impacts, especially in combination with other Snyderville Basin developments, such as Altus Park City or the Utah Olympic Park expansion.

The reduction in units amounted to a 14% decrease from the original proposal.

The post Junction Commons redevelopment marks first use of Snyderville Basin’s mixed-use zone appeared first on Park Record.

The Summit County Council appears poised to revoke the permit allowing Spoil to Soil to operate a recycling facility and tree farm in Browns Canyon, but a final decision has been delayed for at least three weeks after the county’s legal counsel suggested meeting in a closed session.

The County Council in October ruled the business had six months to fix violations that county staff reported on the site. Councilors last heard an update on the process in February, with a final decision scheduled for May. However, the vote on whether to permanently revoke the property’s conditional use permit was delayed until this month due to an ongoing lawsuit Spoil to Soil filed against the county in Third District Court.

Amir Caus, a county planner, on Wednesday said there had not been “any substantial changes to the property” since February and provided councilors with a staff report recommending they revoke the conditional use permit.

But Spoil to Soil’s attorney, Kyle Reeder, argued that the county improperly alerted the business to the alleged violations, most of which he claimed had either been fixed or were in the process of being resolved. He said remaining issues on the site shouldn’t be grounds for revoking the permit because of the improper noticing system, adding that financial struggles are also making it difficult to clean the property.

“At this point, it’s a cost issue,” Reeder said. “They’ve been shut down since October. They don’t have the machine anymore or the funding to go through the compost without being able to sell the compost itself.”

The County Council questioned Reeder about Spoil to Soil’s inability to acquire a permit from the Utah Department of Environmental Quality authorizing the property to operate as a composting site. Reeder, who provided councilors with copies of letters from the state agency, said the delay was the result of staffing changes and that Spoil to Soil shouldn’t be penalized for the state’s actions.

“This is outside the control of my client,” he said. “This is something that’s a process with the state. As long as the state takes, that’s how long the state takes.”

However, County Council Vice Chair Roger Armstrong pointed out that the letters said Spoil to Soil was consistently failing to provide the necessary documentation.

“This thing gets weirder and weirder and weirder,” Armstrong said. “I’ve read the DEQ letters. The DEQ letters say that they’ve repeatedly asked you for information, and you have repeatedly provided incomplete information. That doesn’t sound like an application in good faith. … Convince me that you’re trying to do the right thing here.”

The staff report also listed engineering problems on the property, including a discrepancy between the approved site plan and the company’s current operations, but Reeder argued that the stop work order in October prevented Spoil to Soil from finishing construction on key aspects of the project.

“A lot of these … engineering issues can be cured by allowing the continued building of the (tree farm) platforms,” he said. “That’s where a lot of the issues arise is from an uncompleted and unfinished project.”

The conditional use permit required Spoil to Soil to widen portions of Lower Bowl Road to accommodate commercial traffic, which had not been completed when county staff last inspected the property in April. However, Reeder said a neighboring property owner had widened the road over the summer, which satisfies the conditions outlined in the permit and nullifies the alleged violation.

“In our view, this is a moot point,” Reeder said. “The road has been widened. If the county believes that there needs to be something else done with the road, we ask to have discussions and figure out what they need.”

But Caus said the road had not been widened to the county’s knowledge, and engineering staff confirmed no permits had been requested or granted authorizing an expansion of the road.

Reeder called a revocation of the property’s conditional use permit a “disproportionate remedy.” He suggested keeping composting and recycling operations suspended until the Department of Environmental Quality issues a permit while still allowing the company to open the tree farm and finish construction work.

“The reason it’s out of compliance with code is because we stopped construction mid process and that if we were to continue to be allowed to build out the tree platforms, that wouldn’t be an issue,” Reeder said. “But it’s out of compliance because they showed up to do an inspection on a half-completed project, and we were told to stop the project.”

The County Council overwhelmingly disagreed with Reeder’s assertions that Spoil to Soil had engaged in the process “in good faith,” with County Council Chair Canice Harte saying the company’s arguments showed “a consistent pattern of blaming other people for (its) inaction.”

“We thought we gave you an exorbitantly long amount of time to get yourself in compliance, so I think what you’re saying is you chose not to get into compliance for financial reasons, which is part of doing business,” Harte said. “Everything is always someone else’s fault, so let’s skip past that because that’s not going to help us.”

Armstrong said he was concerned about what would happen to the property if the County Council were to revoke the permit because the lack of a binding reclamation agreement, which governs how commercial or industrial land will be restored, is one of the company’s alleged violations.

“If we revoke this permit and do a reset, there’s an unlicensed landfill, as far as I can tell, on that property,” Armstrong said. “If we revoke the (conditional use permit), how do we ensure that the material that’s illegally there is removed?”

Chief Civil Deputy David Thomas suggested the County Council meet in a closed session on Sept. 16 to discuss potential paths forward, especially legal options relating to the reclamation of the land. Councilors plan to hold another meeting and announce a verdict the following week on Sept. 23.

The Eastern Summit County Planning Commission revoked Spoil to Soil’s conditional use permit last year after county officials presented a 55-page report detailing dozens of reported violations on the property, including unauthorized trash and animal carcasses.

The business appealed the decision to the County Council, which led to councilors’ offer to give Spoil to Soil six months to fix outstanding violations. The deadline was on April 15, the same day Spoil to Soil filed a lawsuit against the county government.

The post Summit County Council poised to revoke Spoil to Soil’s permit pending legal advice appeared first on Park Record.

The Summit County Council postponed a vote on the proposed Junction Commons redevelopment to next week after the county’s legal counsel said the agenda item had been noticed incorrectly and needed to be rescheduled.

Singerman Real Estate, the company that purchased the outlet mall in 2018, submitted plans to rezone the property from the town center zone to the neighborhood mixed-use zone, which encourages developers to build affordable housing alongside commercial stores.

The proposal outlines plans for 370 residential units, 220 of which will be earmarked as affordable housing. Of those affordable units, 188 will be priced around the 80% area median income, or AMI, mark, while the remaining 32 units will be priced around the 60% AMI.

The developers said they plan to use a system that averages the AMIs of the affordable units, allowing for more flexibility. For example, if a resident in an affordable unit receives a pay raise, their AMI would increase, and the rent payment will rise in proportion to their new salary. This permits the developer to lease the next affordable unit for a lower AMI, according to Singerman Real Estate representatives.

The project also reduces existing commercial space on the property by approximately 56,000 square feet. The residential units, which are a mix of townhomes and apartment buildings, will be integrated into the commercial space.

County councilors overwhelmingly expressed their support for the project on Wednesday and were poised to make a motion approving the development’s master plan until Chief Civil Deputy David Thomas said the agenda item had been noticed incorrectly, which halted the process.

Specifically, the agenda item was marked as a possible approval of the master plan development rather than the rezone request, which the developers need to obtain before the larger plan advances.

The County Council will instead meet virtually at 8:30 a.m. on Tuesday to vote on the rezone and master plan document during a special meeting. If the master plan is approved, the county will then negotiate with Singerman Real Estate to draft a formal development agreement.

The site plan for the Junction Commons redevelopment project has been downsized since it was first presented to the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission. The original proposal included 433 residential units, with 205 earmarked as affordable housing, but the County Council expressed concerns about the project’s density and traffic impacts, especially in combination with other Snyderville Basin developments, such as Altus Park City or the Utah Olympic Park expansion.

The reduction in units amounted to a 14% decrease from the original proposal.

The post Summit County Council postpones Junction Commons vote after noticing mistake appeared first on Park Record.

A Park City dentist has been charged with two felonies and multiple misdemeanors after he allegedly engaged in “unlawful sexual conduct” with a teenager and provided her with illegal drugs.

The 16-year-old girl reported Benjamin James Wilson, a dentist with Mountain High Family Dental, to the Summit County Sheriff’s Office. She told investigators that Wilson had given her alcohol, “molly, weed and shrooms” when she was visiting Park City in June.

The teenager also disclosed that Wilson had given her nitrous oxide at his dental office and asked her to “measure his” genitals in exchange for more drugs, which she did.

The Summit County Attorney’s Office filed charges against Wilson on Thursday. He is facing two second-degree felonies for the distribution of a controlled substance, a Class A misdemeanor for unlawful sexual conduct with a teenager, a Class A misdemeanor for giving alcohol to a minor and a Class B misdemeanor for “contributing to the delinquency of a minor.”

Third District Judge Richard Mrazik signed a warrant for Wilson’s arrest, and he was scheduled to attend court in an initial appearance on Friday.

Second-degree felonies carry a potential prison sentence of one to 15 years and up to a $10,000 fine.

Mountain High Family Dental had not responded to a request for comment, including details on Wilson’s employment status with the business, by the time of publication.

The post Park City dentist charged for alleged sexual misconduct with teenage patient appeared first on Park Record.

The Summit County Council approved a proposal to build a mixed-use neighborhood with 90 residential units in Silver Creek on Wednesday, but only after a lengthy debate between councilors about the percentage of affordable housing that qualifies as a community benefit.

Columbus Pacific Development purchased the land on Silver Creek Road in 2021 and submitted plans for a development, dubbed Crossroads at Silver Creek, two years later. But planning commissioners expressed concerns about the project’s scope, which included 146 residential units and almost 300,000 square feet of commercial space.

The company revised the project and presented an updated site plan to the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission earlier this year. The downsized design includes 90 residential units, 20 of which are earmarked as affordable housing, and 32,000 square feet of commercial space in addition to a 4,000-square-foot building that the developers hope to donate to PC Tots for use as a childcare center.

However, the land is currently zoned as rural residential, which encourages the development of single-family homes instead of a mixed-use neighborhood. That spurred Columbus Pacific Development to submit a rezone request to change the property to community commercial, allowing commercial and residential development in the same area.

The Planning Commission forwarded a unanimous positive recommendation in July, and the project appeared before the County Council for the first time this week.

“This one’s close to me, both personally and professionally,” said Tony Tyler, a Silver Creek resident and Columbus Pacific Development partner. “My family and I live in the neighborhood behind this one, so we’re very close, and I drive by this almost daily. For me, it’s more of a passion project than a traditional development.”

Tyler said the Snyderville Basin General Plan in 2015 outlined the area in Silver Creek where the development is proposed as a future commercial space or mixed-use neighborhood despite its zoning as rural residential. He said the proposed neighborhood park, trails and childcare center will benefit the Silver Creek community at large, while the affordable housing offerings will bring families to the area and help Summit County’s housing disparities.

One resident voiced his opposition to the project at the public hearing, saying he thought it would change Silver Creek forever because of the development’s density compared to surrounding neighborhoods.

However, other speakers said they liked the project and were excited it would bring new services to Silver Creek.

“My opinion is that Silver Creek and Park City in general could use a lot of this product that’s being proposed,” said resident Tim Anker. “I think that the density and the product type are measured and appropriate for the location that’s being proposed here. … It’d be great to have some commercial services that would keep you from getting on the freeway and having to move around town just for simple commercial services.”

Meanwhile, Bev Harrison emphasized the importance of using mixed-use developments to tackle the area’s housing issues and praised Tyler’s track record of building affordable housing, including Slopeside Village.

“He’s not in the business to make tons of dough. He’s in the business to get families to live in our community,” Harrison said. “Affordable housing is for cool people who do all the sports and recreational activities we wealthier people do, but they cannot afford to live here. Give them a chance and give our community some vibrancy.”

However, County Council Vice Chair Roger Armstrong expressed his displeasure with the project. Armstrong said he expected more, adding that Tyler typically submits proposals with a higher percentage of affordable housing.

“I’m generally very impressed by your developments because I think you tend to go above and beyond,” Armstrong said. “This is backwards, and it’s unlike you. You’re usually the other way, and I’m surprised that you didn’t find a way to make that (work), and I’m frankly disappointed.”

Armstrong said the development would also lead to more congestion because the site plan doesn’t have enough space to build stores that would prevent people from needing to travel outside of Silver Creek.

“There’s nothing in this that will keep people here,” he said. “They’re still going to have to go to Kimball Junction to grocery shop. They’re still going to go into Kimball Junction for restaurants or entertainment.”

County Council Chair Canice Harte agreed with Armstrong, saying he didn’t think the development showed that it met the required “compelling countervailing public interest” outlined in the General Plan to warrant rezoning the land. He said he liked the direction of the project, but the affordable housing options were too limited to consider the project an overwhelming community benefit.

“I’m not hostile to the idea,” Harte said. “I just don’t think it’s hitting the benchmark that we’re looking for right now.”

Tyler said he could add four affordable units in the apartment complexes, but his company has already spent too much time and money to add more without risking the project’s financial stability.

Specifically, Tyler said the county’s lengthy and intensive rezone process has affected the project’s budget. He said that’s why he advocated for the passage of an ordinance changing how developers obtain a rezone in the Snyderville Basin, which the County Council passed in a 3-2 vote earlier the same day.

“The concern I have here is that I have squeezed this every way from Sunday to try to get more out of it from an affordable housing perspective,” Tyler said. “It doesn’t exist. If I start restricting more of the individual townhomes, the whole (thing) breaks. I can’t afford to build it.”

Tyler said he’d be willing to consider changing the affordable housing apartments from for-lease to for-sale, but he couldn’t convert 24 of the townhomes into affordable or attainable housing, which Robinson had suggested as a compromise.

“I can’t pull additional revenue from nowhere, so I want a project I can actually build,” he said. “If the intent is to try to get another 24 units out of it, I can tell you that’s an impossibility.”

County Councilor Tonja Hanson said she supported the rezone request, calling the plan “thoughtful” and praising Tyler’s intent to donate land to PC Tots.

“While it’s not perfect, and we’ve all established the problem and we’re working toward making that process better, I would hate to see us lose this opportunity at this point,” agreed County Councilor Megan McKenna.

The County Council voted to approve the request in a 3-2 vote, with McKenna, Robinson and Hanson in favor of the rezone while Armstrong and Harte opposed it.

Columbus Pacific Development and the Summit County government will now draft a development agreement for the project, which will include details on the number and price of affordable housing units, as well as whether they are for sale or for lease.

The post Silver Creek property rezoned to accommodate mixed-use housing project appeared first on Park Record.

Developers in the Snyderville Basin now have a new process to obtain a rezone after the Summit County Council narrowly passed an ordinance removing the requirement that “construction-level drawings” must be included alongside an application.

The Snyderville Basin is largely zoned for low-density neighborhoods, which means developers need to request permission to build apartment complexes, mixed-use buildings or other large-scale projects.

But Community Development Director Peter Barnes has repeatedly said the requirement to include engineered plans in an application prevents the public from learning about a project early enough to provide meaningful input. He speculated that developers are less likely to change site plans based on community feedback when they’ve already spent time and money consulting with engineers and architects.

The requirement to include construction-level drawings also burdens county staff, who need to review and sign off on pieces of the project each time the County Council or Planning Department requests a modification, Barnes said.

The ordinance, which the County Council passed on Wednesday, changes the process and mandates developers submit a “concept development plan” along with a rezone application. Barnes explained that the plan includes information on density, land use, open space and traffic but without engineering schematics.

“The object of this exercise is to adjust the order of events in which information is provided in a rezoning application,” he said. “All the information that will be required prior to receiving any kind of development permit, building permit, before anything happens, before a shovel goes in the ground, all the normal and usual information will be provided.”

In addition to easing the burden on county staff and developers, Barnes said he hoped the process would increase transparency and offer residents a chance to get involved in projects earlier, which is more effective in encouraging changes in a proposal.

“It makes for a more predictable, more efficient methodology for all concerned,” he said. “That’s the sole reason why we’re here.”

The Planning Department initially suggested a “pre-application public hearing” to give community members an opportunity to hear about a project and submit comments before the request is officially sent to the county.

However, Chief Civil Deputy David Thomas said the county can’t require a public hearing before an application is submitted. He said the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission could hold a work session and invite public input, but the county could not force developers to engage in a hearing without a valid application.

County Council Vice Chair Roger Armstrong questioned the ordinance’s benefits without the ability to hold pre-application hearings. He said he was under the impression that expanding the public’s opportunities to comment on a proposed project was the legislation’s key selling point.

“Zoning is, and should be, one of the hardest things we do,” Armstrong said. “It is the vision of what this community should look like based on the people who elected us to be here. … Disturbing that should be a robust and very difficult process.”

Armstrong said he opposed the ordinance because he was concerned it would reduce the County Council’s oversight of rezone requests. Specifically, details like negotiations over community benefits and affordable housing are often left until the end of the development process, and Armstrong worried the County Council would not have the same level of involvement in ironing out those details if the ordinance were adopted.

“The time-saving pieces of this are some of the pieces that could affect traffic. It could affect a variety of other things that we’re not seeing,” Armstrong said. “We’re not necessarily getting the bigger picture. … This is an incomplete data set for us to make the decision.”

But County Councilor Chris Robinson said the County Council could still include granular details in a development agreement, which would be required for any property seeking a rezone. He also pushed back against Armstrong’s statements questioning whether the ordinance would create “unintended consequences” for Summit County, such as unwanted state involvement in local land use matters.

“(The current process) leaves (developers) hanging, and it exposes us, I think, to unintended consequences where reputationally and otherwise we get a bad rap for being impossible to deal with and that we’re not straightforward,” Robinson said.

Robinson, whose company owns and manages more than 1 million acres in the Mountain West, added that other counties in Utah already have a similar process to the proposed ordinance.

He made a motion to approve the new rezone process, which passed in a 3-2 vote. Robinson and county councilors Tonja Hanson and Megan McKenna voted in favor of the ordinance, while Armstrong and County Council Chair Canice Harte opposed it.

The post New ordinance changes rezone process in Snyderville Basin appeared first on Park Record.