Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the General Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff unveils draft Snyderville Basin general plan amendments and aggressive review schedule
Summary
Staff presented an 80‑page draft of general plan amendments compiled from open houses and department input, and proposed a series of chapter‑by‑chapter work sessions with the goal of finishing review before the council by year’s end.
Planning staff introduced draft amendments to the Snyderville Basin general plan at a work session on Jan. 27, telling commissioners the document “represents basically all of the information and data that staff has gathered” from open houses, summit meetings and departments.
Ray, the staff lead, told the commission the draft is currently in "draft form" and that staff intends to bring two chapters per upcoming work session so commissioners can give focused feedback. “What we’d like to do is introduce the document to you kind of at a high level,” Ray said, adding staff’s aim to complete the process in time for council action later in the year.
The draft groups material into standard general‑plan chapters — land use, housing, transportation, natural and cultural resources, open space, community health, water and public facilities — and includes maps and appendices staff said will hold much of the technical data. Lousetha, a planning staffer who spoke during the session, recommended moving detailed strategies into an implementation chapter so the main text stays accessible: “for each chapter we could have just the goal and then strategies, policies, and then we'll move each strategy to the implementation section,” she said.
Commissioners pressed staff on the appropriate level of detail. One commissioner urged keeping the plan concise so the public and council can quickly identify the county’s priorities without wading through charts and technical appendices. Staff agreed and said they will use appendices for supporting data while front‑loading the plan with clear conclusions and visualizations illustrating what proposed densities and mixed‑use areas would look like.
Staff also said they will provide more and clearer maps — including refined future land use maps that distinguish county jurisdiction from Park City and county‑owned open space — and emphasized that the land use chapter will be the subject of the next work session.
The commission did not take a final vote on plan text at the meeting. Staff said future sessions will address chapters in detail and that a public hearing will follow a full round of work sessions.
