East County Planning Commission To Hear Proposed Amendment To South Pointe Development Agreement
A revised proposal for the South Pointe phase of the large Promontory development, goes to the East County Planning Commission Thursday night for a public hearing and possible recommendation.
The East Side Planning Commission meets at the Coalville Courthouse at 6:00 pm to consider an amendment for the Promontory Specially Planned Area Development Agreement, and for the South Pointe Development Agreement.
The property was the object of controversy the past two years when the applicants proposed about a thousand residential units, 190,000 square feet of commercial, and other features.
County staff planner Amir Caus said that proposal has gone away.
Currently the property is entitled for 285 residential lots. Caus said 45 more will be transferred in from elsewhere in Promontory—coming to a total 330 units. Also, some 10,000 square feet of commercial/retail or hotel will be transferred into South Pointe.
The applicant is proposing to cluster the residential more by reducing the Estate lots to a minimum of one-third of an acre, and the minimum house size to 2,000 square feet.
The proposal would also stipulate the South Pointe accesses onto Brown’s Canyon Road, but the rest of Promontory wouldn’t have a road connection through there.
The project has a plan to meet Promontory’s obligation of 35 employee housing units. Five of them would be constructed within one year, in or out of Promontory boundaries. The building of the remaining 30 would take place within five years from the first plat in South Pointe.
Caus said that’s an item the county’s been requesting for several years.
“That decision does fall upon county council. The county council directed the applicants last time around when the bigger amendment was being proposed and during the clubhouse entitlements.” Caus said, “The county said okay dear developer please go ahead and come up with a plan. The development agreement says within a reasonable time frame and they found 17 years to be within a reasonable time frame to come up with a plan. So as far as the plan and county liking the county council will be the ultimate authority on that.”
We also asked if the affordable units will be integrated into the project. Caus said that will be a question for the County Council to address.
“The current Promontory development agreement very much so wishes to integrate those units around the resort core near where the employment generators are.” Caus continued, “In the case of transferring all of that to South Pointe that may not be the case at least not initially. There are some concerns that staff raised as far as connectivity of the road. If that road is ever separated internally and you have to access from Brown’s Canyon onto U.S. 40 and then back into Promontory. You might have an aerial mile worth of distance between the workplace and where the employees are living but there might be 15 miles of driving. So that is an aspect that will need to be discussed with the county council.”
The applicants are also proposing a change to 100 Resort Units in South Pointe. They’re asking to lift a restriction that no one resident can stay there longer than six months. We asked if that change would make them primary residential units.
“It would make the possibility of them becoming primary units.” Caus said, “The assessor’s office has raised a concern not a final calculation. It would result in an annual lose of $57,000 in county revenue.”
The project would drop a planned golf course in South Pointe, at the request of the applicants, due to changes in the industry.
“That’s what the applicant has stated.” Caus explained, “The business model of golf community is changing quite a bit. They’re asking to amend that to a different kind of amenity. We don’t have any specific amenities that are being proposed. So, we don’t know if they’re going to be equal to or better than a golf course. Again, we are requesting a discussion with the planning commission and later the council on this subject.”
For Thursday’s meeting, the developers have asked the East County Commission to consider a vote.
“We’re still receiving service provider comments.” Caus continued, “So far, we’ve only got the assessor previously mentioned. County engineer they’ve got some concerns about the elimination of Brown’s Canyon roads and not having enough details to determine whether the proposed roads would meet county standards. Since they are being proposed as county roads and then another big comment was from Park City Fire Department. Saying hey we’ve got some concerns about the proposal. We will need an all-weather road. The proposed layout with only one access into the community is not acceptable to them. Also the location of the project exceeds the Park City Fire Department response standards. They will require that the developer provide a fire station as part of the developments.”