© 2025 KPCW

KPCW
Spencer F. Eccles Broadcast Center
PO Box 1372 | 460 Swede Alley
Park City | UT | 84060
Office: (435) 649-9004 | Studio: (435) 655-8255

Music & Artist Inquiries: music@kpcw.org
News Tips & Press Releases: news@kpcw.org
Volunteer Opportunities
General Inquiries: info@kpcw.org
Listen Like a Local Park City & Heber City Summit & Wasatch counties, Utah
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations

Where do ski resort boundaries end? Brighton struggles to draw the map

Cars drive past a sign, seen here along South Guardsman Pass Road near Brighton on Tuesday, July 15, 2025, that opposes the requested 593-space parking lot for Solitude Mountain Resort that would be in an aspen grove across SR-190 from the ski area's main village. The lot would require steep retaining walls and the removal of hundreds of trees, could also damage Salt Lake City's watershed, further snarl traffic in the canyon and be a visual blight.
Bethany Baker
/
The Salt Lake Tribune
Cars drive past a sign, seen here along South Guardsman Pass Road near Brighton on Tuesday, July 15, 2025, that opposes the requested 593-space parking lot for Solitude Mountain Resort that would be in an aspen grove across SR-190 from the ski area's main village. The lot would require steep retaining walls and the removal of hundreds of trees, could also damage Salt Lake City's watershed, further snarl traffic in the canyon and be a visual blight.

If Town of Brighton officials are going to be expected to navigate the issue of whether to permit Solitude Mountain Resort’s proposal to build a controversial parking lot across the highway from the ski area, they’re going to need a map.

And if they do eventually approve the 593-space lot in what is currently an aspen grove, they might need an exit route.

The Brighton Planning Commission met this week to consider recommending the city make zoning changes that would restrict a ski area’s development to within a resort’s approved boundaries. By the end of Wednesday’s meeting, two things became clear: 1. The amendment enjoys strong and vocal public support, and, 2. No one knows where those boundaries lie.

“It all collapses down to the definition of the resort boundaries,” said commissioner John Carpenter, who joined the discussion but recused himself from voting on the issue because of a familial conflict. “And it doesn’t sound like it’s as simple as the land that Solitude owns or Brighton owns or leases. I think, unfortunately, that’s going to be a heavy lift [to compile those maps], and I’m not sure there’s any way around it at this point.”

After taking into account the more than 120 letters the commissioners said they received, as well as input from some of the 50 or so people who attended the meeting in person or online (Brighton’s population is less than 400), the commissioners unanimously voted to recommend the change. However, they agreed they won’t forward that support onto the town council until after city planners create current and accurate maps that meet the commission’s approval.

The commission ordered the maps drawn with input from the Forest Service and the two Big Cottonwood Canyon resorts, Brighton and Solitude, in time for its next meeting on Oct. 15.

Read more at sltrib.com.

This article is published through the Utah News Collaborative, a partnership of news organizations in Utah that aims to inform readers across the state.