Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Abercrombie Kent Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Abercrombie & Kent presents revised master plan for tented lodge; application is incomplete, helipad will be emergency-only if allowed
Summary
Abercrombie & Kent updated the commission on its A&K Sanctuary Moab project, showing a rockfall-driven re-layout that keeps the previously approved room count but shifts footprints into lower-risk areas. The company said a helipad would be used only for medevac; staff said the submission is incomplete and will return after missing technical documents are provided.
Abercrombie & Kent representatives joined by Zoom to present revisions to the A&K Sanctuary Moab, a tented-lodge project previously approved in 2024 with a zone change and development agreement.
Adriana Granato, the project's architect (Studio Ibsen), explained that a recent rockfall and geotechnical assessment required moving the guest footprints into areas identified as low risk (green zones) and away from higher-risk rockfall areas (red/orange zones). She said the revised master plan keeps the same number of rooms and overall guest capacity while relocating structures and adding internal circulation limits so guest vehicles would not operate beyond a single access road; guests would use golf carts inside the main area.
Granato described the proposed tented units as rigid-walled, dismantleable structures (dry joints) built from timber and lightweight materials for sustainability. She flagged fire-safety concerns for kitchen and back-of-house areas and asked whether the code would allow conventional roofing for the kitchen. Commissioners emphasized that life-safety matters will shape the final technical review.
Christina Lehi, CEO of Abercrombie & Kent, clarified that the helipad was proposed for medevac and emergency use only and not for commercial guest transport; she said the company would remove the helipad feature if county regulations prevent it.
Commissioners praised the project's attention to view corridors and rockfall risk but repeatedly noted that the application before the commission was incomplete: staff and multiple commissioners identified missing items such as site-engineering specifics (roads, traffic analysis), water resources, railroad crossing permissions, conversion of metric units to US customary units, and other technical submittals. Staff said the county will work with the applicant to identify missing materials and that legal counsel must determine whether final site-plan approval will be administrative or should be heard by the planning commission; if certain changes alter the previously approved development agreement (for example, plunge pools or other new features), county-commission amendment may be required.
No formal land-use action was taken. The commission asked staff to return with a checklist of missing materials and legal guidance on which elements require administrative review versus commission action.
