The Summit County government asked a judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed last month over the recent approval of a series of amendments to the Utah Olympic Park development agreement, with county attorneys arguing that the matter is not eligible for review under state law.

The Sun Peak Homeowners Association sued Summit County in May, alleging the County Council violated the Snyderville Basin General Plan and other local guidelines by approving a development that did not provide a “public benefit.” Specifically, the Third District Court complaint focused on proposed affordable housing units that would only assist employees, coaches and athletes rather than the community at large, as well as claims that the Snyderville Basin and wildlife in the area would be negatively affected by an increase in traffic.

But the Summit County Attorney’s Office filed a motion to dismiss the case last week, saying the legal agreement is unique and “provides for uses, densities and configurations” that are not found elsewhere in the County Code. They argued that the original development agreement and the amended version passed earlier this year are exempt “from any conflicts” with the County Code or the Snyderville Basin General Plan as a result.

Specifically, county attorneys said the Utah Olympic Park agreement is a “land use regulation” under state law. Land use regulations are legislative decisions enacted by an ordinance, meaning they must be approved and adopted by the County Council and could include “the adoption or amendment” of zoning maps.

“Unlike an administrative land use decision, wherein a local government must simply apply the existing laws to a specific property … this is a case where local government created new laws and made broad policy determinations about the Utah Olympic Park,” the motion said.

The County Council took six months to approve the amended development agreement, scheduling multiple public hearings and negotiating with the Legacy Foundation to obtain more specifics on the project before issuing a decision, and county attorneys emphasized in court filings that the government followed the proper legislative process.

Specifically, the document mentioned public hearings at Snyderville Basin Planning Commission and County Council meetings and the adoption of an ordinance. The attorneys called development agreements “highly discretionary in nature” and said the County Council fulfilled its obligation to community members by negotiating with the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation and considering public comments throughout the six-month process.

The motion also said the amendments should be considered a legislative action, not an administrative action, and that only administrative actions are eligible for review.

Administrative actions do not require an ordinance because the County Council applies existing zoning laws to a property. In contrast, legislative actions require the County Council to adopt an ordinance because councilors are technically creating a new set of laws that only apply to a specific property, such as the Utah Olympic Park.

“In not understanding the difference between a land use decision and a land use regulation, the (Sun Peak Homeowners Association) makes the County’s case for it,” the motion said.

The document concluded by requesting Third District Judge Richard Mrazik dismiss the case and award Summit County attorney fees. The Sun Peak Homeowners Association has not yet responded to the motion in court, and no hearings were scheduled as of Wednesday afternoon.

The original development agreement regulating the Utah Olympic Park parcel was created in 2011 and was intended to be revisited throughout the years as the Legacy Foundation refined its vision for the park. The agreement outlined allowable uses on the property, such as a hotel, employee and athlete lodging, maintenance facilities and ski runs.

The new agreement is similar to its previous iteration, but with specific plans outlining the hotel and lodging developments. Foundation staff said the amendments were to help the park narrow the scope of its project and construction as it prepares to build the proposed facilities this summer.

However, the Sun Peak Homeowners Association repeatedly expressed concerns about the park’s expansion, including possible disruptions to wildlife, increased traffic issues and the economic viability of the project. The group also pushed back against the Legacy Foundation’s decision to open the back gate to certain affordable housing occupants living on the park property, saying it would add to the number of cars in the Sun Peak neighborhood and potentially create an unsafe situation for pedestrians and residents.

The post Summit County asks judge to dismiss HOA lawsuit over Utah Olympic Park development agreement appeared first on Park Record.

The Sun Peak Homeowners Association is suing over the Summit County Council’s decision to approve a series of amendments to the Utah Olympic Park development agreement.

The complaint, filed in Third District Court last week, said the Summit County ordinance approving the agreement claimed it was in the best interest of residents. But the lawsuit alleged the Utah Olympic Park proposal would bring no benefits to the general public, meaning the County Council approved the ordinance based on “inaccurate” information.

The original development agreement was created in 2011 and was intended to be revisited throughout the years as the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation refined its vision for the park. The agreement outlined allowable uses on the property, such as a hotel, employee and athlete lodging, maintenance facilities and ski runs.

The new agreement is similar to its previous iteration, but with specific plans outlining the hotel and lodging developments. Foundation staff said the amendments were to help the park narrow the scope of its project and construction as it prepares to build the proposed facilities this summer.

However, the lawsuit claimed neither the hotel nor the affordable housing development would benefit local Summit County residents, arguing that the County Council erred in approving the amendment based on community benefits to the Snyderville Basin.

“The addition of affordable housing that is restricted to athletes, coaches and Olympic park employees (as opposed to the public at large) is not a public benefit and is inconsistent with (Summit County Code),” the complaint said.

The document also claimed the County Council violated the Snyderville Basin General Plan by approving the development agreement, pointing to a policy that tells councilors not to approve any entitlements until all existing entitlements are “significantly exhausted.” It further alleged the County Council’s decision wasn’t consistent with the General Plan because councilors “did not address the issues raised by the Division of Wildlife Resources” despite the General Plan’s requirement to protect the natural environment and open space.

“The changes … allow for significant density increases without any evidence of the creation of an additional tax base or economic enhancements,” the complaint added.

The lawsuit mentioned Bear Hollow Drive, too, which was a point of contention between the Legacy Foundation and Sun Peak residents throughout the nonprofit’s negotiations with the County Council.

Specifically, the Sun Peak residents expressed concerns that the Utah Olympic Park would open its back gate and encourage traffic to flow through Bear Hollow Drive instead of the current entrance, with the complaint saying the County Council did not consider mitigating factors to prevent “all fiscal and service impacts” to the road.

The complaint pushed back on the idea that the new development agreement won’t affect public health, safety or traffic in the area, saying there was a need for the County Council and Legacy Foundation to obtain an updated traffic study to analyze the effect of construction and access through the gate on Bear Hollow Road.

The lawsuit also included concerns regarding the allowed uses on the property, arguing that “athlete support” was too vague and “could include essentially any use, commercial or otherwise, related to the operation of a winter sports park.” Specifically, the document said the Homeowners Association was worried the park could build more affordable housing units without county oversight as long as it’s classified as “athlete support.”

The Homeowners Association requested Third District Judge Richard Mrazik declare the ordinance illegal and reverse the County Council’s decision, in addition to awarding attorney fees.

Summit County has not responded to the lawsuit in court or to a request for comment as of Tuesday afternoon.

The post Sun Peak Homeowners Association sues county over Utah Olympic Park development agreement appeared first on Park Record.

The Summit County Council unanimously approved amendments to the Utah Olympic Park’s development agreement on Wednesday after six months of negotiations between officials and the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation.

The original development agreement was created in 2011 with the intent that the document would be revisited throughout the years as the Olympic Legacy Foundation refined its vision for the park. The agreement outlined allowable uses on the property, such as a hotel, employee and athlete lodging, maintenance facilities and ski runs.

However, Snyderville Basin residents, especially those living in the Sun Peak neighborhood, quickly opposed the Olympic Legacy Foundation’s latest amendments to the development agreement in October.

The proposal indicated the foundation’s intent to build a hotel near the base of the park in addition to temporarily closing the pool for maintenance work. The updated plans also showed blueprints for affordable and attainable housing on the property, which Olympic Legacy Foundation President and CEO Colin Hilton said were geared toward athletes, coaches and employees.

But neighboring residents said they were concerned about the growth of the park, the financial viability of the Olympic Legacy Foundation’s business model and increased traffic through the back gate bordering Sun Peak.

Hilton and his team have since made concessions to earn the County Council’s approval, including the removal of a ski run near the Sun Peak ridgeline and a “good faith” commitment to keeping the pool open during maintenance unless a closure is necessary for safety purposes.

The Olympic Legacy Foundation also added a back gate policy to the development agreement, which prohibits Utah Olympic Park staff from using the rear entrance for maintenance or construction vehicles unless those vehicles are unable to make the turns on Olympic Parkway. However, the foundation may still use the back gate as an entryway for special events as long as it obtains the proper permits from the county.

One of the parcels near the back gate is slated for the future development of affordable and attainable units to be used by athletes, coaches and employees. Residents in those eight units will also be allowed to use the back gate because it would be an easier access point for the homes, but Hilton previously said the Olympic Legacy Foundation has postponed the development of that area.

Olympic Legacy Foundation staff said that the version of the master plan included in the amended development agreement adds approximately 168 residential units to the property.

“We’re trying to make this a long-term, dynamic sports and recreation campus,” Hilton said shortly before the County Council voted. “I think amendments are appropriate to do over time, and I just appreciate your consideration for approval on this.”

The County Council made a few minor changes to the agreement on Wednesday, with Vice Chair Roger Armstrong suggesting a stipulation that the Olympic Legacy Foundation cannot change infrastructure to impede access to Olympic Parkway. Armstrong said he wanted the amendment added to ensure the back gate does not replace Olympic Parkway as the property’s most convenient access point.

The development agreement also classified the hotel at the base of the park as a low-impact project, meaning the Olympic Legacy Foundation will not need to seek a conditional use permit for construction.

Low-impact permits still require oversight from the county, with Chief Civil Deputy Dave Thomas previously telling councilors the biggest difference between a low-impact permit and a conditional use permit is the public hearing requirement.

However, the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission retains the right to hold a public hearing and revert to the typical permitting process if there are too many questions about the development.

The post Summit County Council approves amended Utah Olympic Park development agreement after months of negotiations appeared first on Park Record.

Four alpine ski racers at the 2026 Winter Olympics came through the same Utah-based program: Rowmark Ski Academy. 

Those athletes include Team USA’s Breezy Johnson, a three-time Olympian who won gold in the women’s downhill, Katie Hensien, a two-time Olympian, Mary Bocock, who made her Olympic debut, and Madison Hoffman, a two-time Olympian competing for Australia.

Now in its 44th year, Rowmark, which is based out of Salt Lake City-based private school Rowland Hall, has sustained an Olympic presence at every Games since 1988, and continues to expand its reach at the highest level of the sport.

So what is it about the school that keeps producing Olympians?

According to Rowmark Ski Academy Program Director Per Lundstam, the system that builds those athletes is not centered only on results. It is a structure that asks athletes to manage competing demands of academics, training and travel while developing the independence to help them fulfill big goals — in sport or otherwise.

“Our mission statement itself is to create really good humans and create humans the world needs,” said Lundstam. “That is a big part of our DNA.”

There are only around 35 athletes in the academy, a scale that allows for a higher coach-to-athlete ratio and more individualized attention across both training and academics. Coaches and teachers work in close coordination, adjusting schedules, offering additional sessions and maintaining constant communication to keep athletes on track.

“We are trying to help the athletes through this dynamic mechanism to help them and support them, and teachers go way beyond what they normally do to teach these students, and the same goes for the coaching staff. So it is a pretty amazing and unique program that way,” said Lundstam.

As a K-12 school, Rowland Hall allows academy athletes to share classrooms with students outside the ski program, while giving families the option to keep siblings in the same school as they support their racers’ development at Rowmark.

“I wanted to be somewhere I could still have a high level of academics, while also ski racing,” said senior Alden Rhodes. “And also have friends outside of skiing.”

During the winter, athletes attend classes from 8:30 a.m. to midday before heading to the Utah Olympic Park for afternoon training, often followed by strength work, before they return home for several hours of homework.

For student athletes like Ruby Rosh, senior and team captain on the Rowmark team, evenings can stretch late, especially for athletes commuting back to Salt Lake City. Much of the academic work gets done immediately after training to avoid sacrificing weekends.

“It just takes a lot of commitment and discipline,” she said.

At the Utah Olympic Park, Rowmark athletes train alongside collegiate teams and, at times, World Cup racers — occasionally former classmates who have moved through the same program. Coaches can set courses and shape snow surfaces to replicate the conditions athletes would face in higher levels of competition.

“It’s super cool to be able to share the venue with some really high-level ski racers, and try to emulate that,” said Rhodes. “It is cool to see those athletes in training and to be able to try to reach for that.”

In the gym at the Utah Olympic Park, chalkboard walls are covered in the signatures amd names of athletes and teams from around the world who have trained there, marking different Games cycles and training camps, turning the room into a running log of elite performance. 

It’s the same space where bobsled and skeleton athletes warm up to compete on the world stage, where international teams prepare for World Cups and their Olympic debuts, and where Rowmark athletes now lift and train as part of their daily schedule.

For Rosh, it’s a daily reminder of what’s possible.

“You almost feel it,” she said. “The athletic greatness, and that everything has happened here, and you’re literally a part of it.”

That proximity reshapes how Rowmark athletes see the sport. Olympians aren’t distant figures; they’re recent graduates and training partners, like Elizabeth and Mary Bocock, who joined the World Cup circuit together in 2023, the same year Elizabeth graduated from Rowmark Ski Academy. 

“They were literally me three years ago,” Rosh said. “It makes it feel so much more attainable. We’ve trained with Breezy a couple times, and just seeing them competing on the world stage, it’s crazy to see how easy they make it look.”

Ski racing may be an individual sport, but Rowmark leans heavily on the team bond and shared progress, said Rhodes and Rosh.

“There’s definitely competition,” Rosh said. “But in a way where we’re all trying to push each other to be better and we’re always having fun, even within our own rivalries.”

Rhodes agreed: “Everyone genuinely wants to see each other succeed on this team, and I think that’s actually pretty rare.”

Rosh missed large portions of two seasons after multiple shoulder surgeries, setbacks that can often isolate athletes from their teams. Instead, she described a system that kept her fully integrated, even when she couldn’t train.

“I was still very much a part of the team,” she said. “People were checking in on me. It never felt like I was on the outside.”

Older athletes mentor younger ones through the program when they can, Rosh said, helping them navigate the same pressures they once faced.

“When you’re younger, everything feels like the biggest deal,” Rosh said. “And then you realize it’s not, so it’s a lot of working with shared experience and talking through things, and offering a lot of encouragement. I think that has been really impactful for them, but also for me, being able to give the advice that I wish I had got at that age.”

Lundstam said the program is shifting to better support how athletes improve over time, starting to bring age groups together more often in training and keeping a consistent approach across all levels to help them develop faster.

“We really want to have the same methods — the Rowmark DNA and science — going into all the different age groups. We really want to accelerate athletes’ trajectories and make sure that they get exposed to the absolute best predictive development,” said Lundstam.

That system is backed by a coaching staff with experience at the highest levels of the sport, along with ongoing development that brings in national and international perspectives. Looking ahead, the program is also expanding its use of sports science, with new facilities designed to mirror the kind of testing and performance analysis used at the national team level.

“We have a very strong coaches development program in place. We’re getting exposed to world-class ideas,” said Lundstam. “I think we have a lot of merging factors that will continue to fuel us as a very strong team.”

For the director, those pieces are what allow the program to produce results that outpace its size, especially as they are built on a system that gives coaches the ability to individualize training and focus on each athlete’s development.

“It’s the ratio with phenomenal coaches and very strong ability to look at the athletes and pay attention to details, be a lot more focused on their development and put more time into each athlete, and then also the amazing facilities that we have around us in Utah,” he said.

As Rosh looks ahead to college, what stands out from her time at Rowmark is how prepared she feels to handle what comes next — skiing or otherwise.

“I can’t control the weather. I can’t control the conditions,” she said. “But I can control how I ski and how hard I choose to work.”

Years of balancing school, training and competition have forced her to get comfortable operating in uncertainty, and knowing that, regardless of anything else, hard work will help her reach her goals. 

“It’s one of those sports where you get back what you give to it,” she said. “I love that the harder I work, I can literally see it paying off. And there’s just no better feeling than going super fast down the side of the mountain. It’s like being on a roller coaster.” 

Not every Rowmark athlete follows the path to the world stage. Some continue skiing in college, others step away from competition entirely. Rosh and Rhodes are both headed to college next year with a focus on academics, but are excited to keep skiing in whatever capacity they choose, whether on a team or not.

The post How does Rowmark Ski Academy keep producing Olympians? appeared first on Park Record.

The Summit County Council delayed voting on a series of amendments to the Utah Olympic Park’s development agreement for a second time on Wednesday after councilors expressed concerns about the economics of the project.

Snyderville Basin residents, primarily from the Sun Peak neighborhood, had told the County Council they were worried about the development’s scope, as well as back gate access to the park from Bear Hollow Road and a potential closure of the pool.

However, the county cannot legally consider the pool’s closure when deciding whether to approve the amended development agreement because the pool is operated by the nonprofit, not the county government.

Chief Civil Deputy Dave Thomas said there was a lengthy history between the Sun Peak neighborhood and Utah Olympic Park regarding access to Bear Hollow Road, but the only time the road was strictly designated for residential use was during the 2002 Winter Olympic Games.

The park’s development agreement from 2011 did not include any restrictions on the use of the back gate, and the county decided to not put any conditions on access because a traffic study at the time said it wasn’t necessary.

Thomas said an updated traffic study, which the county engineer had also reviewed, did not recommend any additional conditions for Bear Hollow Road access, even with the proposed development at the Utah Olympic Park.

However, Thomas said the County Council has a “wide amount of discretion” to impose conditions if necessary through the amended development agreement.

County Councilor Chris Robinson asked Utah Olympic Foundation CEO Colin Hilton to add specific details to a back gate policy Hilton created to assuage the fears of Sun Peak residents, telling Hilton he viewed the policy as too vague since it allowed residential traffic and “deliveries” through Bear Hollow Road.

Generally though, the County Council did not seem concerned about the pool or Bear Hollow Road access on Wednesday and instead focused on the foundation’s financial status and if the proposed development agreement would help the nonprofit, which is currently losing between $3 million and $4 million annually, with its long-term economic health.

The Utah Olympic Foundation largely operates using funds generated during the 2002 Games, but the monies are quickly dissipating as venues continue to need upgrades, maintenance and staffing to function.

“We’re eating away at that principal (amount), and we can’t do that,” Hilton said. “Getting the Games to come back is going to help, but … a place like the Olympic Park is operating on a highly subsidized basis.”

As part of the amended development agreement, the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation suggested a future partnership between the nonprofit and the county to pursue a “major sporting event venue” designation, which was recently created by the state Legislature to provide financial assistance and taxing tools to qualifying venues.

The designation would allow the Utah Olympic Park to engage in tax increment financing, so tax dollars generated on the park’s property would go back to the park to build a self-sustaining Olympic venue.

“There’s been concern voiced in the community about what this would do to take money away from the county and give it to the Olympic Park,” Hilton said. “Today, as a nonprofit, we are not paying property taxes, and we have limited sales tax collections. … When we get innovative and create some for-profit functions, like a hotel and a conference center and a restaurant, that’s generating new revenues. What we’re asking for is consideration for some of those new tax collections to help us operate and sustain the park. It’s not taking away from any existing tax revenue because that is not occurring.”

Robinson said he didn’t like the proposed approach because Hilton estimated it would generate $1.2 million annually, which is not enough to cover the foundation’s multimillion dollar shortfall.

“I was hoping that what we were going to see was some elegant thing that was going to provide long-term cash flow,” Robinson said.

Hilton said there were multiple components to the foundation’s strategy to bolster its finances, and the Utah Olympic Park developments were only one piece of the puzzle. The foundation manages two other venues in addition to the park — the Utah Olympic Oval and the Soldier Hollow Nordic Center — and Hilton also mentioned fundraising efforts and corporate partnerships as potential revenue sources.

“In this first 10-year period, we only acted on a need for affordable housing for employees and stakeholders of the park,” Hilton said. “We have not acted on those elements that would be generating income because there are a lot of factors at play. It’s only now that we feel it’s time to act.”

He also said he appreciated the County Council’s interest in the nonprofit’s future, but he reminded councilors that his request was to consider the specific items in the proposed development agreement.

“That was the purpose … to lay the groundwork so that I can address this big picture of sustainability at the Olympic Park,” Hilton said. “We don’t have to solve all of this through this process today.”

County Council Chair Canice Harte suggested postponing a vote on the development agreement for at least another week to give county staff a chance to draft conditions of approval, but councilors were not clear on what those conditions might be.

County Manager Shayne Scott said there will likely be a work session to discuss the development agreement in more detail next week, with a vote tentatively scheduled for the following week.

The proposed amendments to the development agreement outline new ski runs on the eastern side of the property, as well as the location and size of parcels intended for future developments, including a hotel, storage facilities, office space and employee housing. It also requested the county grant low-impact permits for the park’s construction rather than attach a conditional use permit to each piece of the project.

Low-impact permits still require oversight from the county, but the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation would not need to hold a public hearing. However, the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission may opt to hold a public hearing and revert to the typical permitting process if there are too many questions about the development.

The post Summit County Council delays vote on Utah Olympic Park development agreement for second time appeared first on Park Record.

The Summit County Council delayed making a decision on a series of proposed amendments to the Utah Olympic Park’s development agreement after Sun Peak residents voiced concerns about the scope of the project during a lengthy public hearing on Wednesday.

The original development agreement was created in 2011, with the intent that the document would be revisited throughout the years as the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation refined its vision for the park. The agreement outlined allowable uses on the property, such as a hotel, employee and athlete lodging, maintenance facilities and ski runs.

Foundation CEO Colin Hilton has repeatedly said the amendments don’t change the heart of the agreement, but they instead serve to make development more efficient for both the county and the nonprofit.

Dozens of Summit County residents have opposed the move, however. They expressed frustrations with ongoing construction and traffic in the Snyderville Basin, which they said would only be exacerbated by affordable housing on the park’s property, as well as specific concerns regarding the scope of the development as a whole and its effect on wildlife in the area.

The conflict spurred a handful of open houses with Utah Olympic Park staff to discuss the proposed changes with Summit County residents, especially those living in the Sun Peak neighborhood, which borders the park.

“We’ve had, in our opinion, progress on a number of fronts there,” Hilton told the County Council. “I don’t think we have solved everybody’s concerns, but I believe we will show you a pattern of having listened and adapting our plans as a result of the last six months of going through this process.”

The Snyderville Basin Planning Commission unanimously forwarded the development agreement amendments to the County Council with a positive recommendation earlier this month. The County Council then held its own public hearing on the topic on Wednesday, and while many speakers said they supported the Utah Olympic Park’s mission, they said they felt the park’s team still wasn’t being transparent or fully considering the community’s needs.

“Cooperation is not just holding a meeting,” said Meta Haley, the president of the Sun Peak Master Homeowners Association. “It is listening to the outcome and working together to find a solution.”

Many Sun Peak residents were specifically worried about access to the park through its back gate on Bear Hollow Drive. They said the road is already unsafe, and homeowners already deal with speeding drivers and illegally parked cars as visitors often use the neighborhood to reach nearby trailheads.

Hilton had previously committed to including a back-gate usage policy in the amended agreement, which outlined the park’s intent to use the gate in case of an emergency, during special events or for residents living in employee or athlete housing on the property.

But Haley and other Sun Peak homeowners said the policy was too vague and didn’t assuage any of their fears.

“We’ve tried to engage with the UOP to come to a written agreement that is mutually beneficial to both parties,” said James Duckworth, another Sun Peak resident who lives a few hundred feet from the back gate. “To date, nothing has come of these efforts. In contrast, in the most recent staff report that we received just prior to this meeting, there was a definitive statement that basically says the UOP has claimed that they already have resolved this issue and that they have a right to use the road.”

The pool was another major concern for most speakers Wednesday night. Hilton had previously told the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission that he had revised his plans to allow the pool to remain open for half of the summer rather than shutting it down entirely for construction.

However, residents appeared mixed on the decision, with some thanking Utah Olympic Park staff for modifying their plans while others pushed for construction to happen during the off-season to prevent a closure at all.

“Closing the freestyle pool for an extended period of time, especially this close to the Olympics we’re hosting, doesn’t feel like it matches the reasons why the park was made,” said Brooks Voorhees, a 12-year-old athlete who addressed the County Council. “Even one season of closure is a whole year we can’t get back. There isn’t another place like this for us. Kids would fall behind, and some kids might stop altogether.”

Chris Haslock, a former Olympian and current action sports director for Park City Ski and Snowboard, disagreed with the idea that closing the pool would detrimentally affect young athletes preparing for the 2034 Winter Olympics. He pointed out it’s common for an athlete to experience an injury or a setback that removes them from training or the competitive season entirely, and they’re often able to bounce back, even with taking a season off.

“This is what the park was designed for,” Haslock said. “These guys are professionals. They know exactly what they’re doing, and the reason why they’ve chosen to try and do it in the summer is because a post-Olympic year is the best year to try and make any alteration like this. … The longer we wait, the more likely it is to have a much more major impact.”

The County Council ultimately held off on making any decisions regarding the amendment development agreement, with multiple councilors citing a desire to dive deeper into the issue brought forth by residents. County Councilor Tonja Hanson specifically said she was interested in exploring the economic pieces of the Utah Olympic Park proposal while County Council Vice Chair Roger Armstrong said he needed more details on the site’s planned affordable housing developments.

“We have a lot of hotel product available at any given time, and adding another hotel provides revenue to you, I get that, but it will result in a lot of unused rooms,” Armstrong added. “There are environmental impacts of heating unused rooms, the staff necessary to maintain a hotel facility that’s not at full capacity. … It’s my least favorite idea of a product that we need in the Snyderville Basin right now and in Park City.”

The amended development agreement outlined new ski runs on the eastern side of the property, as well as the location and size of parcels intended for future developments, including a hotel, storage facilities, office space and employee housing. It also requested the county grant low-impact permits for the park’s construction rather than attach a conditional use permit to each development.

Low-impact permits still require oversight from the Planning Commission, but the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation would not need to hold a public hearing. However, the county’s legal counsel on Wednesday said the Planning Commission is able to require public input and revert to the typical permitting process if there are too many questions about the project.

The County Council said it plans to hold a work session with Utah Olympic Park staff to further discuss the details of the amendments, but no meeting has been scheduled as of Friday morning.

The post Summit County Council declines to vote on amended Utah Olympic Park agreement in favor of future work session appeared first on Park Record.

The Summit County Council will soon decide whether to finalize a series of amendments to the Utah Olympic Park’s development agreement after a monthslong conversation between the park’s operators and the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission.

The original development agreement was created in 2011, with the intent that the document would be revisited throughout the years as the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation refined its vision for the park. The agreement outlined allowable uses on the property, such as a hotel, employee and athlete lodging, maintenance facilities and ski runs.

Foundation CEO Colin Hilton in October told the Planning Commission that the amendments didn’t change the heart of the agreement and only served to make further development more efficient for both the county and the nonprofit.

However, multiple residents opposed the initial proposal. They expressed frustrations with ongoing construction and traffic in the Snyderville Basin, which they said would only be exacerbated by affordable housing on the park’s property, as well as specific concerns regarding the scope of the development and its effect on wildlife.

But the county’s legal counsel has since directed the Planning Commission to disregard some of those concerns, saying commissioners are only able to consider the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation’s application when making a decision. As a result, traffic congestion in the Snyderville Basin, access to Bear Hollow Drive via the park’s back gate, and the nonprofit’s financial information were not allowed to factor into the commissioners’ recommendation to the County Council.

Hilton still addressed a few of the more controversial points surrounding the proposed amendments last week, though. He said the new development agreement, if approved, would include a provision limiting the use of the gate on Bear Hollow Drive as a general entrance for the public.

However, the provision allows Utah Olympic Park staff to use the gate in certain situations, including operational and maintenance access, emergency access, construction access on a case-by-case basis, pedestrian access and residential access. The road also serves as an emergency exit route for the Sun Peak neighborhood in case of a wildfire.

Legacy Foundation staff additionally brought maps and renderings of the proposed future developments on the Utah Olympic Park property. The renderings were from the perspective of major intersections in Kimball Junction and intended to show the Planning Commission that the buildings slated for construction won’t prominently alter or obscure the skyline.

The map is similarly meant to assuage concerns about wildlife by detailing where the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources’ protected wildlife habitats are in comparison to the park’s property. The wildlife habitat specifically overlapped with two parcels earmarked for affordable and attainable employee housing, but Hilton said the Foundation has already committed to working with the Division of Wildlife Resources to comply with mitigation requirements.

The partnership with the Division of Wildlife Resources was also added to the amended development agreement as a condition of approval.

Hilton also said parcel 6-A and parcel 6-B, which were both located near the ridgeline bordering the Sun Peak community, were moved back to their original spot further down the mountain based on neighbors’ concerns. The two parcels will likely become affordable housing for employees and athletes in the future, but Hilton said the park is holding off on solidifying plans for those parcels for now.

Around 257,000 square feet of the property is slated for commercial development, with the largest piece earmarked for Parcel 3, which is where the 190,000-square-foot hotel will be built. The rest of the commercial space will go toward offices for Legacy Foundation staff and partnering sports organizations.

The Utah Olympic Park’s master plan also includes 96,980 square feet for affordable housing and 75,000 square feet for “attainable housing,” or housing that does not meet the definition of affordable housing but is still sold or rented at a lower market rate.

Another 139,850 square feet will be dedicated to operational support buildings to house equipment.

“We’ve reduced the amount of commercial and added affordable and attainable housing because it’s what we feel is the best use for what we’d like to develop there,” Hilton said.

One of the major amendments to the development agreement was a request that the county issue low impact permits for the park’s construction rather than attaching a conditional use permit to each development. Low impact permits still require oversight from the Planning Commission, but the Legacy Foundation would not need to hold a public hearing, expediting the process for both the nonprofit and county staff.

The Planning Commission unanimously forwarded a positive recommendation to the County Council regarding the amended development agreement. The County Council is set to discuss the document and hold another public hearing at 6 p.m. on Jan. 28 at the County Courthouse in Coalville.

The post Utah Olympic Park’s amended development agreement heads to Summit County Council appeared first on Park Record.

The Snyderville Basin Planning Commission postponed its decision on a series of amendments to the Utah Olympic Park’s development agreement after commissioners said they were uneasy about the lack of specifics in the proposal.

The original development agreement was created in 2011, with the intent that the document would be revisited throughout the years as the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation refined its vision for the park. The agreement outlined allowable uses on the property, such as a hotel, employee and athlete lodging, maintenance facilities and ski runs.

Foundation CEO Colin Hilton in October told the Planning Commission that the amendments didn’t change the heart of the agreement and only served to make further development more efficient for both the county and nonprofit.

Multiple residents opposed the proposal last month, however. They expressed frustrations with ongoing construction and traffic in the Snyderville Basin, which they said would only be exacerbated by affordable housing on the park’s property, as well as specific concerns regarding the scope of the development and its effect on wildlife.

Community members also decried the temporary closure of the pool, which is used by many organizations and clubs to train athletes during the summer months.

But the county’s legal counsel on Tuesday informed the Planning Commission that certain aspects of park operations — including the nonprofit’s financial information, potential pool closure and access to Bear Hollow Drive via the gate at the top of the hill — were not within commissioners’ purview to consider in making a decision.

Hilton still addressed those issues, though, saying he and the foundation had received a plethora of feedback from the public during two open houses earlier this month. As a result, the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation now plans to add language to the development agreement restricting gate access to Bear Hollow Drive in perpetuity.

“My commitment is, no matter what the process, we are going to communicate with the Sun Peak (Homeowners Association) about exactly what we propose to do,” Hilton added.

Summit County residents were also worried about the location of Parcel 6 near the ridgeline, which is tentatively earmarked for “attainable housing” for athletes and coaches. “Attainable housing,” Hilton explained, is housing at a lower cost than market rate that may not necessarily be deed-restricted like a traditional affordable housing complex.

The map shown to the Planning Commission last month showed Parcel 6 had combined Parcels 13 and 14 from the 2011 development agreement and shifted its location to the northeast. Community members were not in favor of building 10 single-family homes on Parcel 6, as outlined in the proposal, because of its proximity to the ridgeline, suggested building height and potential impacts on roaming wildlife in the area.

Hilton on Tuesday said the foundation understood residents’ concerns, adding that the 10 homes would not be built for at least another six years. Because of the opposition, however, he said the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation would not focus on developing Parcel 6 for now. 

Instead, he said the nonprofit will refine its strategy and return to the Planning Commission when there is more information on how the homes will be purchased and lived in by athletes and coaches, including the creation of an “attainable housing” definition, which does not currently exist within Summit County code.

Hilton said he had worked with county staff to restrict density changes on Parcels 6, 7 and 8, giving the park the flexibility to modify its developments toward the base of the hill while preventing the foundation or future operators from increasing density on the lots closer to the ridgeline and the Sun Peak neighborhood.

Despite the foundation’s clarification on key concerns from the October meeting, Summit County residents still largely opposed the development during Tuesday’s public hearing.

They claimed the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation hadn’t done enough to demonstrate that the development would not harm wildlife, with two residents specifically claiming Parcels 6, 7 and 8 were within the county’s protected wildlife habitat. 

However, the county staff report on the proposed amendments said, “The current proposal does not impact any wildlife habitat or migration areas as defined in the Snyderville Basin General Plan and the State of Utah Department of Natural Resources.”

Hilton said the Utah Department of Natural Resources is working on a “fuller” wildlife report, which will be brought to the Summit County Council at a later date.

Other public comments focused on a perceived lack of details in the development agreement, as well as the closure of the pool, despite the county’s legal counsel telling the Planning Commission the pool could not be considered.

Both parents and athletes spoke in favor of keeping the pool open, telling park staff that even a temporary closure would negatively affect kids’ training schedules and potentially disrupt their chances of competing in World Cups and the 2034 Winter Olympics.

One parent pointed out the rebuild of the pool in 2014-15, which was finished in the winter months before the summer training season began. Residents questioned why it wouldn’t be possible to do something similar with this proposal, but Hilton said the process is more complicated because large pieces of underground equipment will need to be removed and installed on a different site.

“The idea, much like we did in 2015, is perhaps we can find a way to not (demolish) the whole building, isolate the filtration system, do some work that we have to do for new road access and try to keep the pool open as long as possible until it gets unsafe to properly have kids coming and going to the pool,” Hilton said. “We will commit to looking at it, but we will not ever put kids in unsafe conditions.”

Hilton said he understood the inconvenience of a potential pool closure, but he called the 2026 season the best time to undergo the project. The construction would affect fewer athletes than if the development were postponed because many skiers will have lighter training schedules after the Winter Olympics in February, he said.

Planning commissioners said they weren’t necessarily opposed to the amended development agreement by the end of Tuesday’s meeting, but they expressed similar concerns as residents regarding the lack of details and confusion around how the proposal differs from the 2011 agreement.

“Inside me are two wolves, and one of them is so proud of our community, and the other is a stickler for documentation,” joked Planning Commissioner Heather Peteroy.

Utah Olympic Park staff said they were sympathetic to the Planning Commission’s and community’s frustrations, but they also said they expected most of the details to be ironed out with the Summit County Council as the process progresses.

The Planning Commission ultimately decided to delay making a recommendation and asked Hilton to return in December with 3D maps showing the differences between the foundation’s proposals, as well as a comprehensive packet containing information from the nonprofit’s previous work sessions with the county.

Hilton said he was committed to sending the requested details to the Planning Commission “by the middle of next week,” with the hope that the amendments are placed on the commission’s Dec. 9 agenda.

The post Utah Olympic Park development delayed after lingering questions from Planning Commission, residents appeared first on Park Record.

The Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation plans to hold at least one open house concerning plans to build a hotel and attainable housing for employees at the Utah Olympic Park following community backlash.

Residents complained at a Snyderville Basin Planning Commission meeting last week about proposed amendments to the park’s development agreement to allow for the construction.

The original development agreement was created in 2011, with the intent that the document would be revisited throughout the years as the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation refined its vision for the park. The agreement outlined allowable uses on the property, such as a hotel, employee and athlete lodging, maintenance facilities and ski runs. It also included a provision allowing the foundation to change which parcels are used for which developments at any time, as long as the developments were classified as an allowable use.

Foundation CEO Colin Hilton said the amendments don’t change the heart of the established development agreement and only serve to make the process more efficient for the county and the nonprofit. 

Residents who attended the meeting disagreed, though. They staunchly opposed the changes, saying further development would create more traffic congestion, disturb wildlife and harm the mission of the organization.

Because of a misunderstanding between county staff and the foundation regarding how the size of the buildings is measured, the proposal initially indicated that developers would build more than 1.4 million square feet of office space on the property.

However, Hilton clarified that the plan is to install roughly 230,000 square feet of commercial space, most of which will belong to the hotel. The rest of the square footage will be dedicated to offices for sports teams and the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation.

Overall, Hilton said the total planned square footage of park facilities, including buildings already on the property, is around 690,000 square feet — less than originally anticipated in 2011.

In 2011, for example, the master plan included 40,000 square feet for medical offices, but the updated 2025 plan bumped that number down to 15,400 square feet. Instead of setting aside 103,710 square feet for general office space, the new master plan accounts for 50,900 square feet, about a 50% decrease.

The updated conceptual master plan for the Utah Olympic Park shows eight developable parcels, significantly less than the 14 parcels mapped in 2011. Most of the development projects, including the hotel, are centered near the base of the hill. Only the sixth parcel, which is currently earmarked for single-family residences, is elevated and near the ridgeline.

The amendments encompass a request to approve the updated master plan, designate the site as a major sporting event venue to earn more tax revenue, issue a low impact permit for the ski lifts and hotel construction, update the affordable housing calculations, update building height limitations, and clarify parcel and building pad locations.

However, residents overwhelmingly opposed the amendments during a public hearing, expressing concerns over the park’s financial status and questioning the motive behind having a hotel on site. They compared the situation to the controversial approval of Dakota Pacific Real Estate’s project in Kimball Junction and said they felt blindsided by the plan to further develop the Utah Olympic Park property.

Community members speaking said they were worried about the effect construction would have on wildlife in the area, namely breeding moose that tend to populate the hills where the single-family residences are proposed. They also bemoaned the possibility of drivers using the park’s back gate near the Sun Peak neighborhood to bypass Kimball Junction traffic during the winter if the gate were to open for residential access to the ten single-family housing units.

There were questions about the housing aspect of the project, too, with many residents asking about who would rent the units and if the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation intended to turn the park into a “year-round real estate venture.”

Hilton clarified after the public hearing that he does not plan on ever having the back gate open to the public because of the detrimental effects it would have on the Sun Peak neighborhood. 

“When I hear about worries of ski traffic coming off Kimball Junction through the UOP and out our back gate, I’m blown away,” he said. “How would anybody ever think we would allow that to happen? We have control gates at both locations. The internal road is just for staff vehicles. No, we’re never going to have the public use it as a thoroughfare through the UOP. Not in my lifetime.”

Hilton also said the single-family homes would be owned by national governing bodies, such as U.S. Ski & Snowboard, which would be responsible for rotating athletes, coaches and their families into and out of the homes based on training schedules, eligibility and other factors.

He added that the hotel is intended to serve athletes’ families, not the public, and is a key component in making the park a self-sustaining facility. The housing units are also limited to athletes, coaches and foundation employees, although around 10% will be listed at market value to help earn more revenue.

“We’re four times busier today in use of the facilities like the Olympic Park than we were right after ’02,” Hilton said. “There are kids and visiting teams and athletes wearing down our facilities faster than we can maintain them. Do we need more facilities to support them? Absolutely. The demand is every day. We feel it, and we’re trying to fill that need and pay for that need without having it be paid for by local tax dollars.”

The Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation plans outsource management of the hotel to a hospitality company, with a portion of the proceeds going toward the foundation. If the hotel doesn’t generate money, Hilton said the responsibility will fall back on the developer and operator, not the park or greater Summit County community.

“We have a whole variety of other board members with lots of business experience who have grilled (the developers) about the viability of a hotel,” Hilton said. “We did a hotel study and had them report on the results of that to the revenue committee of our board, so do know we take revenue generation very seriously. We have a lot of resources to access, but we run a nonprofit. We run a mission-based organization, and our metrics are more about the participation of young people in our programs than it is about profitability.”

Hilton said during a Park City/Chamber Bureau event in late summer that the improvements are part of early preparations for the 2029 Bobsleigh World Championships, but will be spanned out over the next 20 years or so. The goal is to move from an “Olympic training site” to an official “Olympic Training Center.” The focus is on supporting athletes, coaches and the community.

Summit County Community Development Director Peter Barnes said county staff and the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation are generally in agreement on the amendments, but he urged against forwarding a recommendation to the Summit County Council if the Planning Commission still had questions, especially since the County Council likely won’t have time to hear the proposal until January as members work through the 2026 budgeting process.

The Planning Commission unanimously decided to hold off on a recommendation until Nov. 25, giving the foundation time to gather answers to residents’ questions and hold the open house to engage further with community members.

No date for the open house had been set as of Thursday afternoon.

The post Utah Olympic Park to hold open house on proposed development after community backlash appeared first on Park Record.

The Anti-Gala garnered community support for the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation last week with its annual fundraiser, which supports the foundation’s scholarships and Healthy Communities program.

Between fire pit reunions and inner tubing down the ski jumps, supporters at the ninth annual Anti-Gala on Aug. 7 reflected on the foundation and the Utah Olympic Park as a place they see as both a springboard for Olympic dreams and an open playground where local kids can discover sports that can shape their futures.

“It’s just part of the community, it’s wonderful,” said Vanessa Conabee, a longtime local and former Nordic ski coach at Soldier Hollow. “They do so much for the town, too. The accessibility for people is insane. My kids grew up on the Nordic course.”

Conabee explained that the Soldier Hollow Nordic Center, one of the foundation’s three local facilities, has been a staple of her family’s life for years. For Conabee, the foundation is a rare and valuable community organization for a town where skiing can otherwise be prohibitively expensive.

“Think about what you have to do today to go train at Park City Mountain or Snowbird. It’s very difficult. It’s very hard. And this gives a lot more access to training day and night. It’s great, especially since they’ve opened up the West Hill. That is huge,” said Stephen Balog, an alpine racer in the masters program, who trains weekly at the park.

The Balogs live in Sandy but make the trip to the Utah Olympic Park all year to train. As a masters racer, Stephen Balog said one of the highlights is sharing the hill with national teams and university athletes from around the world. The experience made the park a space where young and old athletes could see and learn from the best in the world on their local hill. 

“When the French alpine team was here, Stephen just loved watching them, because they’re watching their form and technique. It’s not only fun for the kids to see stuff like that, but also old folks love it,” said Kimberly, Stephen’s wife.

Greg Schmidt bears no personal connection to the facilities or the sports they support. But for him, the foundation is a community gathering place for friendship and opportunity. 

“It’s great to support an amazing opportunity for kids to train and young people to get outside. It’s part of Park City,” said Schmidt. “We just come here to join our friends and spend some time together. It’s a worthy cause and worthy of being supported.”

Dr. Stuart Willick is a sports medicine physician at the University of Utah Health and a veteran attendee of the annual event. Willick has seen these venues from multiple angles, he said, as a parent, a doctor and a sports administrator.

“The Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation is an extraordinary group that does great things for us. The three venues under the umbrella of the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation are truly world-class facilities. The Olympic and Paralympic movement is an extraordinary worldwide movement that promotes not just elite sport, but physical activity, health and wellness and recreation for everybody, and it’s great to be a part of it,” said Willick.

Willick’s ties to the Olympic movement run through every part of his life. His kids have trained at the park, and he’s worked the sidelines of countless events, including 10 Olympic and Paralympic Games as a physician, researcher and administrator. For him, the foundation is the backbone that keeps the Olympic spirit thriving long after the Games have moved on.

“Having the Games come to your town, which we did in 2002, is an experience like no other, and so many people are so excited about having the Games come back; it’s going to be phenomenal,” Willick said. “The Olympic and Paralympic movements are good for all. To see countries like Israel, Iran, Iraq march together, compete together and socialize together in the village is just so important.”

For Susan Ring, her connection to the Utah Olympic Park also started with her love of the Olympic Games. She arrived at the height of the 2002 Games preparations after moving to Park City in 1999, and her husband served as the venue manager for Soldier Hollow. 

“For the next Olympic Games, we’ll be volunteers because we’ll be too old to do anything else,” she joked. 

In the years since, Ring said she’s seen firsthand how those facilities continue to shape the region by boosting tourism, giving local kids access to world-class training grounds and offering non-athletes the chance to try Olympic sports. 

“They are very, very important, absolutely. For tourism, as well as for the community itself, leading people to the Olympics, and also for people who are not even into that, they all have the opportunity to try everything out,” said Ring.

After ziplining, ski jump descents and food trucks, the crowds gathered around the stage to hear from the evening’s speakers, Olympians Shannon Bahrke and Chris Mazdzer, and a lineup of local athletes on whom the foundation has had a profound and lasting impact. 

In the spirit of trying everything, local skiers Alli and Lauren Macuga recalled their childhood years spent at the Utah Olympic Park with the freedom to play, learn, and try any sport they chose. 

Today, Lauren is a member of the U.S. Alpine Ski Team and Alli competes on the U.S. Moguls Team. Both credit their rise to the opportunities they had growing up in a town where world-class training venues doubled as a community playground.

“Almost every day,  growing up, all four of us would come here. Our parents would just kind of throw us all in the pool and say, “All right, go do some tricks.” It was amazing. It’s really fabulous. It’s made for us,” said Lauren.

Alli remembered trying nearly every winter sport possible before narrowing her focus to moguls, the event she felt combined almost every one of them. 

“So I tried a lot of sports growing up. I had to go back and remember all of them, and it was about 10 winter sports. At the Utah Olympic Park, I tried slopestyle, I tried half pipe, aerials, big air moguls, obviously, even ski jumping and racing and ski cross. I tried everything. It was so fun to be able to have that opportunity, and so cool to be able to say that now,” said Alli.

Growing up just miles from the Utah Olympic Oval, national speed skater Casey Dawson first learned the sport through local development programs. Dawson now holds the world record in team pursuit and a bronze medal from the 2022 Winter Games. 

Dawson’s path embodies both the foundation’s mission and Park City’s Olympic legacy, where, for him, access to world-class venues was able to turn childhood curiosity into elite achievement.

“I’m a product of Park City, pretty much,” said Dawson. “The Olympics are coming up fast, and I think having these events, having visibility, is just awesome. My goal is to inspire the next generation, keep speed skating on the map, and make something of this community.”

Following in the footsteps of skaters like Dawson is Ezra Mangum, a young speed skater and Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation athlete already setting his sights on the 2034 Games. 

“The speed skaters lit a fire in my heart, and that fire was telling me to do it and be positive,” he said. “The skaters inspired me, so I started, and now I try to inspire people and light a fire in their hearts, too. Remember what makes you special!”

With Olympic dreams to meet, the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation CEO Colin Hilton said the funding and energy that will come with hosting the Olympics again will directly translate into more opportunities for youth programs, athlete development and community recreation.

“It was about a year ago we got awarded the Games to come back in 2034. How does that impact us? More interest, more support, more ability to have legacy impact, and more ability to help our youth engage in sport, which has so much value to build life lessons like setting goals, building confidence,” said Hilton. 

The post Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation builds springboard for futures at Anti-Gala appeared first on Park Record.