Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

uses as appropriate um and approved in certain zones subject to meeting um specified requirements conditional this is from state code conditional use shall be approved if reasonable conditions are proposed or can be imposed to mitigate the reasonably anticipated detrimental effects of the propos proposed use to reasonably mitigate anticipated detrimental effects does not require elimination of the detrimental effects um and then finally a land use a land use Authority's decision to approve it or deny a conditional use is an administrative land use decision um it's not subject to a public hearing like a legislative action um but you are free to accept public comment at your discretion and we'll we'll talk about that here in a second so more specifically on the the two conditional uses that are the subject of our first two applications in 2016 Snowbird obtained um a conditional use permit for uh accessory ski lifts and Associated Mountain Resort facilities and those um approvals generally included to replace or realign the existing mineral Basin Express lift um a proposed ski patrol facility on Hidden Peak a proposed lift equipment facility lift operator shelter in Mineral Basin um proposed Avalanche control devices both in Mineral Basin and Mary Ellen gch proposed Mary Ellen lift in Mary Ellen gch proposed Sunday saddle lift in Mary Ellen gch and proposed warming Huts one near the Mary Ellen lift and one near the Sunday saddle lift um this conditional use went through three separate meetings uh with much public input and comment um and then after those meetings the conditional use was approved on April 7th

2016 subject to 20 conditions uh copies of those of that action report that identifies that action and those conditions were included in your packet um and those conditions as we just discussed were to help mitigate reasonably anticipated detrimental effects some of those conditions addressed the following um that the property uh be identified as a Utah County assess parcel or Parcels U just a little background that Snowbird owns the property but they patented mining claims which are um centrally assessed by the the State Tax Commission and patented mining claims convey certain surface rights and as once a surface right is utilized or a structure is built on it on the surface then for the county to assess that as a county assess paral it would need to be um converted into a a County parcel through uh the creation of a legal description and a deed so that was a condition of one of of the approval um an extensive water quality monitoring plan which required regular ongoing water quality monitoring prior to construction to establish a baseline during construction and post construction uh size limits on the proposed structures um GE prior to construction geologic assessments for proposed towers and structures to ensure no impact or any mine waste dump piles or subsurface mine shafts tunnels or other workings are Disturbed um construction operation and maintenance of the approved conditional use was not to directly Disturbed mind tailings and then the original these aren't all the conditions these just kind of a summary um the original termination date um and that date is the date to obtain a permit pursuant to an approved conditional use was set as April 7th 2020 and I'll I'll kind of explain the nature of that termination date here in

a second um and part of that was to account for the requirement to establish a baseline of water quality over a certain period of time several years so there was no ability to get a permit prior to that to establish that Baseline and then uh appeal 1553 is associated with this this is specific to the actual height of the support towers for the ski lifts um at the time the the ordinance allowed an unoccupied structure to be up built up to 40 ft above 40 ft um required a approval of a conditional use so the proposed um lifts had several support towers that were over that 40 ft and so it necessitated an additional conditional use and that was approved on the same date with several conditions one was that that no Tower was to exceed 75 ft another condition was that the lifts and Towers were to comply with the US Forest Service built environment image guide um so that gets us to those two approvals um in 2019 the applicant came in and asked for an extension of that um original approval of their termination date to obtain a permit um the land ordinance sets the termination date as one year but allows the board or a commission to establish a different termination date to ensure uh substantial Justice can be met so as you recall the original approval required the applicant to do some baseline testing over a period of years so they needed to extend that original uh termination date beyond that one year um the ordinance generally or also allows the applicant to request an extension of the termination date um after the initial meeting to ensure that they have um substantial Justice pursuant to their

U their application and so in 2019 the applicant utilized that provision and came to the board of adjustment to ask for an extension of five five years to 20 to April 7th 2025 and uh at the time the applicant indicated the extension was needed to accommodate further analysis of adding lifts and marel and gch explore additional Environmental Protection measures and ensure a thoughtful implementation of potential ski resort infrastructure in the area and that extension was approved that termination date was set as April 7th 2025 which gets us to our current request um the applicant is now asking for an additional five years um to April 7th 2030 they have indicated um several uh reasons necessitating this request and those have been included uh in your application um the applicants here and and I imagine we'll expand on on the the current request um they've also included some information in their in their application about the measures they've taken over the last five years and I'll let them kind of expand on that so just a couple reminders and I'll finish up um this is not a rehearing of the original approval of the condition use uses there's two of them and or their conditions of approval um and then only fact factual matters related to the need of substantial Justice necessitating this requested extension should be considered um couple other things so we talked about public Comon a little bit um conditional uses or administrative land use decision uh do not require a public hearing I know you've received emails you haven't receiv emails that have been sent to our Planning Commission email um regarding this item including some uh request to speak which is at your discretion um you can decide to take public comments but again comments

should be limited to the current uh request as as was stated earlier um if you decide to accept public comments which the Planning Commission is generally done um on conditional uses if people are wanting to talk uh the piece the Planning Commission has adopted um a resolution for uh the comments that we've set some time the Planning Commission has set time limit for individuals um also the provision if if there's a a spokesperson for a group that can articulate their group concerns um they have a little more time uh and then also uh comments shouldn't be repetitive um if someone agrees with what's been said earlier they can say I I agree and um we've got four or five different applications tonight and one of which is a public hearing so we want to be respectful other people's time and I'm not sure how many people here are wishing to speak tonight but uh keep those keep that in mind as you consider allowing comments on these first two items I have a time limit too so I hope I stuck underneath it think I did but um any questions I do have a question would you like no go ahead go first okay um in reading through the packet substantial Justice is a term that is used as something that we need to weigh heavily on but I didn't quite see a connection to what would constitute substantial Justice or what the parameters are for that is that something you can explain I can't but the guy sitting next to me [Laughter] will it is an undefined term and it's not a uh a term that's been uh interpreted by our courts so it there really isn't a good answer um here here's kind of the way I I knew this question was coming here and here's the here's the way I would Pro if if I were sitting in your chair here's what I would do according to our law the question is years ago a

conditional use permit was granted by Utah by the Utah County Planning Commission they believed it was a safe legal and desirable project to allow now the app applicant is before you for an extension of that permit to bring it to fruition your decision is whether an extension is necessary to do substantial J Justice to this land use it's already proved it uh it it can be built it can be done um the question is does additional is additional time necessary to give this project substantial Justice now that can be all kinds of different considerations but but that is in essence the decision you have to make tonight um substantial Cal Justice is um have there they need more time why do you need more time if that's a reasonable Fair request that would be just then you would allow the extension does that help at all so it's more like what would make this a fair and Equitable consideration that's that's where the definitions and the case law go it's just what's fair and right okay and my my my question actually kind of piggybacks on that and and that is is why is there you know I like to try to make things so that there's not as you know at least amount of possibility of contention so why why is there an extension or a deadline put on these in the first place is I I assume that it's there because if there was no deadline somebody could a hundred years later after everybody's dead nobody knows about it could then keep trying to do it I mean but what's the purpose do you of

the of the deadline kind of in the code absolutely I can handle that um one of the main reasons is to ensure that if you recall a conditional use is to it's a use that's contemplated to be allowed but you want to look at the specific conditions of the area to see what the impacts are going to be on the surrounding area um potentially adverse uh impacts and so part of having that deadline is to ensure that the circumstances or the neighborhood whatever it may be haven't significantly changed or changed much since the original approval specifically related to the reasonable anticipated detrimental effects of the proposed use many are and again this is this is applied everywhere where we approve conditional uses and as you're aware many areas in the county um especially out in the valley or open space or agricultural areas that are subject to potential annexation and and further development and so you know a conditional use um that hasn't been utilized or come to fruition within a number of years and and all of a sudden the area around it gets built up that you know that could be a significant change from the original approval and you know that you want to capture the conditions as closely as you can to that original approval um if if the surrounding property or neighborhood is is the same you know a longer termination or those anticipated detrial effects are similar or the same a longer termination date is generally usually warranted we have found that the one year is too too short for for anything and so we're going to take it we've been contemplating this independent of this this um application of of looking taking a look at that and and adjusting that but also realizing we need to probably put a cap at some point um on on these extensions at some point it's just it's time to revisit it so does that help thank you yeah so was it kind of like um as far as our decision tonight

what would no matter which way we go they're still permitted and able to do what is in their conditional use permit we're just looking at the timeline of when that would happen yes um they are but they do have a a hard deadline of April 7th of this year to obtain a permit a permit pursuant to their approved conditional use so they would take some action for them to bring their conditional use to fruition fairly quickly yeah additional questions so yeah your I your next step will probably be uh the applicant and then decide how you want to handle comment the applicant like to come up at this time thank you good evening my name is Dave Fields I'm the president and general manager at snow bird and I appreciate this time to be before you this evening I've been at Snowbird almost half of my life and I take a lot of pride in working for this company I also love the mountains the Canyons where I live and work and the recreation that these great utile lands provide both locals and visitors alike I'm presenting tonight to ask for an extension to the previously unanimously approved conditional use permit for ski lifts Tower Heights and various Associated Mountain Resort facilities on our private land in American Fork within Utah County this do we have the next slide this slide will y let's go back this orients you to the area we're talking about the valley on the right is mineral Basin and the two existing chairlifts and on the left is a picture of marel and gch and the

two lifts were proposing to put in there on our private land in the canyon I would also like to clarify misunderstandings about snowbird ski lift plans Mariel andul is located approximately 6.5 miles from tibble Fork Reservoir as seen in this slide is it the next one sorry snowbirds plans remain unchanged skiing in marel and gch will not be accessed through American fort Canyon access will be exclusive ly from Little Cottonwood Canyon and Snowbird remains committed to the intent and requirements outlined in the ce1 critical environmental Zone we will continue to protect the canyon Mountain riparian Zone and other areas of environmental concern in Utah County approval of these ski lifts and Facilities follow the intent of the zoning requirements by protecting the sensitive environment of the area and conserving water recharge areas vegetation soils wildlife and other natural resources when Snowbird requested the conditional use permit in 2016 the greatest concern was how building two ski lifts could impact water quality we began immediately to work with stakeholders including American Fork City Utah County division of water quality and the three irrigation companies with water shares in the American Fork drainage for the past nine years snowbert has sampled the water quality in marelen gch regularly providing the samples to an independent lab and sent our test results to all the public entities Snowbird also worked with trout and limited EPA and the Utah Division of oil gas and Mining to voluntarily make significant improvements to the area surrounding the live Yankee mine if improvements include caution signage fencing and barriers

discouraging and restricting Recreation access to the waste rock piles the riparian road was closed to motor vehicle ACC access resulting in notable water quality improvements the area has also shown major vegetation growth as seen in the next slide further protecting the Watershed the results of these Collective efforts are that water quality conditions have substantially improved snowboard continues to conduct water quality sampling quarterly and per the conditional use permit agreement we will continue to do so monthly during construction periods since the first extension was granted the EPA and the Utah Division of water quality were were able to complete their comprehensive environmental assessment of the live Yankee mine both agencies concluded that the live Yanke live Yankee area does not pose imminent or immediate environmental danger in 2022 dwq discontinued the pursuit of a Utah pollutant discharge elimination system permit in 2021 the EPA ALS Alo concluded that there was no need for other comprehensive environmental response compensation and liability act uh commonly known as super fund this confirmed the epa's 2002 no further remedial action plan determination the discussions and results of these Studies have influenced Snow's decisions on the best locations for placement of ski terrain and the loading and lift areas since the original application in 2016 snowbert has Contin to offer Recreation to the public from American Fork Canyon Snowbird is currently evaluating how to improve the connection between marel and gch and mineral basins snowb Bird's intent is to create an ATV Loop that is accessible to the public in the summer months that connects these two areas utilizing snowbirds private roads and US

Forest Service land this option will allow for a better Recreation experience as well well as better protecting and preserving of the natural environment Snowbird is actively researching new and emerging lift Technologies to ensure that the most efficient and modern lifts are constructed marelen gch next slide please an example from to ski valley can be seen here these new technologies include high-speed lift systems digital control systems for safety and Energy Efficiency and RFID gate technology the purpose of providing these systems is to improve the ski experience while providing efficiency and sustainability these technologies will influence the final placement of the lifts and location of the towers to reduce visual impairment Snowbird has used these past 5 years to complete our pre-planning stages including water quality sampling assessments by state and federal agencies create Watershed improvements and research lift efficiencies Over The Last 5 Years preparation and installation steps oh excuse me over the next 5 years preparation and installation steps are extensive the process begins with site assessment then we will select the best lift technology available which has been improving over time an engineering firm will be engaged to design the lifts and our final design will be submitted to Utah County for permitting an approval once approval is obtained we will begin the site preparation because of the remote location we will have to upgrade existing roads to complete the necessary clearing and grading the lifts and Associated equipment will be transported by existing roads or flown into the location by helicopter the lift manufacturer will complete the installation which includes foundation work Tower erections cable installation

and Station construction the manufacturer will complete testing with final adjustments then finally the installation will be certified for operations and the lifts will open this process will take multiple years to complete as the location is only snow free for 3 to 4 months a year as you can see there's still a lot of work to be completed now that we have a solid Baseline for understanding and maintaining water quality and higher environmental standards I appreciate you all for allowing me to share what we've been doing and our plans for the future I'm pleased to answer any questions if you have questions from the commission okay so your you mentioned construction access will any of that construction access uh be done through American fort Canyon we don't know that right now a lot of the people I talk to in the lobby are the off-road community and it's their desire that any modifications to the road to get anything up there would not result in smoothing out the road and making it something a Subaru could drive up to use their term uh they like it rough and it Mar gch and mineral Basin are both very rough off wheeel off-road vehicle uh roads which we would uh put back in place if we were to need any access through Mariel and gch but most of this is done by a helicopter um followup question and I and I'm I haven't been up AF Canyon for a while but isn't there a section of the road up there somewhere that's been damaged from runoff or something like that does this does this take through that area yes okay this is not any of the area we would ski on but that is the part above tble Fork that has been closed now and there are plans in place uh to repair that this summer it sounds

like okay so they would be repairing that that wouldn't be something necessarily that Snowbird might participate in I've offered our help because we have a lot of experience building roads in these kinds of environments and it's going to take a lot of work to get that done yeah I I have a question uh why do you see I mean was it feasible for you to get the information that you needed in the five years we needed time to complete all the work with the state and federal agencies before we were comfortable moving forward we now have that done we're liking some of the new lift technology that's coming out we think it can be a better installation so we didn't need this time to do the work we did where we're happy with where uh the improvements we've made on the riparian road the water quality has improved and we intend to keep it that way what remains to be done you've asked for an extension what takes place over that time period just those items I mentioned yeah finding the right lift getting uh ready to go getting the site prep and then permitting it'll come back through the county and we're ready to start can we go back to the slide that showed the Peaks so just making sure I understand because I've never been skiing um I'm not a I'm not familiar with so you've got the two lifts that already exist yeah so the one on the left goes up to the top of the snowbird tram that's called Hidden Peak and the gondola would go from Hidden Peak where there's a 23,000 Square ft building and um a chair lift

that unloads right there and then it would come down we do not go to the top of the American Fork Twin Peaks that termination spot is on the shoulder of the American Fork Twi twins on the far side of mar Ellen Gulch okay and so currently people are skiing in all of these areas right here most of our skiing takes place in Mineral Basin today so not in Mary Ellen Gulch that's what we want to provide okay so it's a expansion of skiing into the Mary Ellen gch area on our private property I heard you say the facility at the top of the trim was 23,000 ft but is that accurate or is it 2,300 squ ft² th000 what's that in Salt Lake County okay is it 23,000 foot facility there okay it's a restaurant our ski patrol headquarters that's at the top of the tram and all this is accessed via Little Cottonwood Canyon right skiers would not get to these lifts through American fort Canyon what about emergency access routes where are sorry my microphone's off uh where are your emergency access routes if you were you're looking at a Mary Ellen gch versus mineral Basin do you change that at all no no okay any injured guests would come out via the lift we put them on the lift and bring them out and take take a toog and down to Mineral Basin and up to the tram okay that's currently how it works if you're injured in Mineral Basin

you're in a tobogan on the back of the chair Li so anyone who's responding goes up the LIF and skis down to the injured person yeah we have Patrol throughout the mountain and they take toboggans to the injured people okay or I assume if it's seriousness you helicopter yes if the weather is cooperating any additional questions for the applicant okay thank you thank you for the time okay so as was mentioned this is an administrative item that does not require public hear we do have a number of people who have requested to have the opportunity to address the commission um we can take a vote on whether or not you would like to entertain a motion to uh open a public hearing or if you would like to uh move on to discussion you have a motion one way or the other uh I move that we open it up uh to the people that are a public hearing do we have a second it's not a public hearing it's just public comment Public public comment yes public participation I I would second that but but would you be okay if we have follow the time guide and restrictions per ordinance as well yes okay I second that then do we have a list of like a number how many people are signed up about 15 okay it Madam chair it might be worth asking if any want of them want to consolidate their time to see if a spokesperson can capture that that gives that spokesperson a little additional time maybe maybe worth exploring that option with those that wish to speak do we need to establish rules for public comment prior to taking the vote no

those have already kind of been established um there's a timer we have a timer it'll be three minutes um generally is what we allow per person if if more than three want to combine their time then it could be up to seven minutes for a spokesperson okay again we have other items tonight so we kind of want to not be here all night but in respect those other other um items tonight yeah and and can I just ask those that are here to speak uh just one question if does anyone that wants to speak um do they understand the difference between an administrative decision and a legislative decision oh we can ask um Bryce to cover that if you'd like yeah if because um you know my experience in public service that there is a big disconnect when people don't understand that that people don't understand that we are bound by certain U by the law uh we have a certain amount of a freedom to choose in a legislative but but less if if somebody meets the administrative we really have no choice but uh I don't know if Bryce or uh council could take just a minute to explain that that might help ease some of the frustration that I think people might experience tonight sure I'll I'll start and and Mr Eric can kind of help out um again a a conditional use is an administrative land use decision um the uh legislative process happened when it was determined that this was an appropriate use in certain zones anywhere in the county subject to meeting those requirements and if an applicant can show that they can meet those requirements and any adverse um anticipated uh detrimental effects can be reasonably mitigated not eliminated but mitigated then they're

entitled to approval um those type of uh applications are not subject nor should they be subject to um public clamor people don't want it that's been established um to Mr herod's point a legislative act is maybe the more appropriate time there's more latitude for considering um public clamor for lack for better term or or public wishes on whether or not um this area should be zoned a certain way that's an example of of legislative decision we have a a text Amendment later tonight that establishes rules not not administers rules when you're you're trying to establish what the the governing rule will be relative to a land use then that's the legislative um function and and is subject to a public hearing and and those type of um feelings and comments can be considered and Council what uh what is what what happens to the county if we don't follow that what happens does that put the county and the taxpayer at a certain risk if if we don't follow state code exactly well you're not following the law therefore there is litigation and therefore there's liability that that's what happens an administrative decision is an application of the law and you can get that wrong that that's where mistakes are made legislative is creating law and rarely do courts uh second guess a body creating law if if that's what your representatives want to create then they create it but the application is much different we take a law that's been already been passed and we apply it to a set of circumstances and that can be second guessed by a judge and so that's what would happen if we don't follow the law um we can be liable for that

so that that's why it's it's like you said the discretion is somewhat more narrow because we're limited to that law which rice really explained well so it would be good if all if the comments were mostly focused on should this be extended why or why not do you feel this way exactly uh as BR as Bryce mentioned this this is not a rehearing of the conditional use PR that was passed that is law it is an allowed use that can't be debated now it can't be changed now there is nothing you can do tonight to change that permit the only question is should it be extended to allow for substantial Justice to be done to this project having had a motion in a second we'll take a vote uh starting on this end I I I I Okay so we are going to do public comment period And how it's going to work is I will read off the people who are on this list who already asked to speak and like we've been discussing here there will be a time limit and we'd ask that if somebody goes before you and they say what you were going to say feel free to just stand up and raise your hand that you agree with that you don't need to uh restate what was already stated and we'd also like to remind you that comments that are outside of what we are able to address tonight are not comments that we are able to consider in our decision so if your comments are as we've been talking about related to the conditional use permit that's not something that's at our discretion it's not what is on the agenda tonight and we are not able to make any changes to what has already been decided prior to

tonight so we'd ask that your comments be um toward the item on the agenda of really the the time frame that we're going to that the applicant is able to move forward on the project that has already been approved so with that we'll invite and I apologize in advance if I get anybody's name mispronounced or anything I am so sorry it looks like Holly McKinley Madam chair I think some people signed up for a later item this item is one and two right thank you we she can still talk if she wants woohoo okay this is item one so that would be Dave Fields sorry I had my chance yes you did and the other two people are also with you so we'll skip down to Holdman [Music] thanks guys for taking the time to hear public comment that's pretty important to me I think I kind of feel like your hands are tied you're kind of giving that impression to everybody tonight here these guys and you guys saying this isn't about this this about we got to follow the law but I kind of want to give a little background I think it's important to have a kind of a broader view of everything I'm kind of like a youth speaker with the high councilman so I got to try to hurry um back in 2011 snowber proposed bringing a ski resort in America Fort King with the tram to the top of the famous Twin Peaks that can be seen from all of Salt Lake Valley and Heber Valley along with the chairlift and Mary Ellen shortly after that the mountain of cord is created in 2015 to make critical decisions and

Implement solutions to preserve the Central wasach and ensure its long term Vitality during this mountain Accord and Snowbird orchestrated a land swap that would give Snowbird land in Utah County's American fort Canyon in exchange for lands in Little Cottonwood Canyon do you guys remember that mountain Accord any of you no with this expansion came a new idea to bring a tram all the way down to tibble Fork essentially creating a private and for-profit ski resort in American for Fort Canyon a few caught wind of these developments and suggestions and started a social media page to get the word out to the public what was going on many governments in Utah County had no idea this was going on we had an overwhelming response from local user groups that were alarmed and got involved in preserving our Canyon for a more natural fee free Recreation experience through the efforts of many the tram idea was eventually shot down although they pursued their development in additional ski chairs and zip lines in Mary Ellen which you guys had that proposal mountland Association of governments formed an organization mostly funded by Snowbird in the tune of 50,000 for a scoping of this proposal they also provided a survey to the public although many of the questions were kind of skewed a little bit to for their development of the canyon there were answers that were quite clear there was a clear winner and there's a lot of the hiking Community here and this is why the highest reason people visited the canyon were hiking and walking at 67% followed by viewing Wildlife Birds fish natural features scenery flowers Etc was 38% relaxing and hanging out in the can were 32 2% photography which is my favorite one was 26% exercising was 19% you kind of move up the list you see what's kind of going on here putting in 70 foot ski poles to accommodate ski chairs and zip lines across the highest points in AF Canyon

are not conductive conducive to any of the forementioned reasons people recreate in the canyon I'm sure you guys saw that picture there I sent you some photographs of the Twin Peaks you can see it just goes like right across the on the Twin Peaks right to that Ridge line there and um that's going to be seen from all over in the canyon mer Fort Canyon Heber Valley and Salt Lake a little bit um that's three minutes that's your three minutes thank you for your comments I hope you just consider all people have to say and it's going to be tough but make a good decision thank you uh next on the list is Brad Frost thank you very much uh it's always good to know what it feels like on this side um this microphone and so if I run out of time uh I just want to in advance thank you for what you do I know it's a thankless service um and it's just out of good goodness of your heart you give of your time um I want to bring up a couple uh ideas okay because I I do think that there is boxes that have been checked and and rightfully so I don't feel like uh I was a little worried about public clamor tonight that it might be a little bit more felt I'm I'm glad it's a little more subdued it's out there they're just not here right now and so but I have always been American Fork is that is not part of our city the canyon we don't even touch its boundary but with a great sense of Pride I've always loved that it's called after a city that I grow up and and have led and and done certain things at certain times good or bad news it's on the you know it comes up American for Canyon something happened and so it's uh it's very very sacred to

a lot of people for for a lot of different ways the one thing that I was encouraged that I heard tonight from Dave is the the ability to have um Public Access that was kind of a new one for me and as it was stated through him I I think that you have the discretion to include that in a motion if that's where you're going um to say okay uh let's have Public Access do not deny the public the ability to go up there and use it but I would I think that this is not a a simple mask question there is some complexity to it and I think that this decision is before you how long is enough you know again as Willie explained this has been going on for a very long time and there's a really you know very very dirty pass to it uh that has caused a lot of discontent amongst public um and Dave said this and I know it probably wasn't on purpose for any reason I would be take it for uh something prideful again he said it's part of mar Fork it is not this is under the County Stewardship your stewardship and so I would just say do you have to give it another five years why not give it a smaller period or why not look consider everything that's going here one of my biggest concerned is nobody has been able to provide any insurance to me whether it's by paper or by um something legal that below this and as a crow flies not very far is the heart of our culinary water source we have a spring and with the capacity and the amount of water that is up there in those mind if something breaches this you could put in Jeopardy um 35,000 people to 50,000 people their culinary

water source not their outdoor water use so again thank you so much thank you next up is Elizabeth Meltzer sry that's me but I didn't think I marked that box I'm sorry oh yeah just said one and two okay uh Troy Smith or Greg Jackson three and four there we go um karino thank you can I allow my time okay sorry you're not sicking me yet I just want to finish up she offered so I didn't want to take her time but I think the biggest thing is again is they had they extended it twice twice this is will be the second time they've had 10 years and you guys mentioned Bryce mentioned like they need more time a year a year and then they mention well we need these five years to do this what about the previous five years I mean it's been 10 years is there an expiration date here you know things expire things change you I have a lot of concerns about this this goes over to Mary Ellen and I talked to Dave a little bit about this is like way over there's going to be no access from American fort Canyon I'm just I'm a big skier I ski back country and resort ski a lot never missed a powder day I ke Snowbird I like it but I think there needs to be a balance here but just to try to get people out of that back to Snowbird I mean you have to leave like I don't know 1:30 2 o00 to get them out there and what about safety issues of skiers getting trapped so far away from the base of snowbird that's a big concern as well so it's true you guys are here to make a decision whether you're going to extend this conditional use permit but that's a decision that you can make and if you do make the decision that it doesn't seem like it's a very valuable option anymore they've had 10 years to do it nothing was done that's something you need to consider

um there is one thing that they talked a little bit about and they said that they've done all these things to fulfill their requirment but the biggest thing they haven't done yet is perform they haven't really performed yet on any of these special uses additional use permits they hel ski in there they cat ski on their property already it's a great way to use their lands in a low impact way for winwin for the general public and private property owner I would just say stick to the code do not extend another 5 years to snowb to further let the camels NOS in the tent so to speak you know it started at Minal Basin a long time ago when Governor Herbert was a commissioner now it's coming to marelen they keep saying we're not going to come down to table Fork well we kind of see the history here what's going on um you know it's just stick to the code do next another 5 years let snowboard further let let their camel into the tent eventually kicking US public people out of that I think that's very important because we all recreate there and we enjoy that already fee free and that's going to affect a lot of users in the area thank you thank you Lena Bush I agree with my thank you um Tina Bean marked Snowbird there are two items for snowbird you're welcome to come up now if you'd like okay thank you for letting us speak and I just want to I'm just here on behalf of all the many different users we have a big hiking group on Facebook with 36,000 local hikers that just download photos every day of where they're hiking and we have so many users in this Canyon that's what makes it so different from the Cottonwood Canyons is in fact we have let me just State all the types of users you've got hikers rock climbers snowmobilers mountain bikers cross country skiing back country skiing Road cycling camping fishing

hunting off-roading which we do a lot of horseback riding dirt biking and photography and painting up the canyon and so we care a lot about this Canyon because it is the last um Canyon that is close to the city that we can access in 30 minutes or less to get away and decompress and not be denied access into the areas way back in the canyon and so with the onslaught of high density housing throughout this Valley and single family homes being built that have backyards smaller than a family room people and children need somewhere wild to escape from it all and American fort Canyon provides that but over the past decade I've been hiking a lot in these canyons and I've seen a big change up the cottonwoods I'm sure many of you have um that we've witnessed and of what the ski industry can do to our wild places we have seen how ski resorts encroach little by little into our Canyons the saying less is more and more is less would be a good rule of thumb for development when you de velop a new area of a ski resort say Mar Ellen Gulch it creates more the need for more energy more roads more infrastructure and more money to support the use of that new area when you add in infrastructure for one type of use it's pushing out other ones or degrading their experience perhaps developing a little less could help Snowbird make a profit by using minimalism and wildness as part of their ski resort over 6 million people use the ski resorts in Utah and the cost of the 1.2 billion gondola up Little Cottonwood Canyon which we never thought would happen will likely fall on taxpayers in the future and it only serves a privileged class of skiers and Wealthy tourists from out of state even though tens of thousands of utans wrote emails in opposition to the gondola they weren't even heard and their concerns were ignored which is why we're here today we don't want that to happen we're just going to be a voice here today to say we don't want encroachment by Snowbird and it sounds like Mr Fields has a sincere heart I I'd like to believe that there'll never be encroachment where we're just setting out a message of what we don't want um

personally marelen Gulch is one of the prettiest parts of the canyon I'd hate to see Towers in that um most of us do not want to see lift Towers buildings condos Road widenings or anything like this in the future that could be seen as a type of encroachment we urge you to not extend the permit I don't think it'll hurt Snowbird to do something different outside the box and find a more minimal way to use this land on their property we hope that you will listen to the people whom you were elected to serve and we don't want to sacrifice one wild space for small group of skiers when a whole group of people are using it for over 15 uses so that's all I have to say thank you Doug Bailey uh you also wrote down Snowbird Doug Bailey okay if not then we'll move to Brian Jones who wrote down snowbird thank you I'd like to thank the commission and and and everybody here who showed up for this important topic um including Snowbird for showing up and and presenting their proposal um I'm wearing a cardigan that was knitted in my great-grandfather's knitting Mill in Los Angeles in 1940 um you might think that I should put this away in a drawer or or frame it and and protect it so it never gets used but I'm wearing it which means I I may damage it but it means that also I get to use it um so it raises to me the question of what does what does the word preserve mean um and a lot of us here are concerned about preserving a place that is very special to us as people have mentioned um many of the reasons why it is special the house I live in in Cedar Hills um is near the mouth of

American fort Canyon that house used to be Wilderness uh so I recognize that um living as as people we encroach on Wilderness all the time as a skier climber and Trail Runner I value multi-use natural areas especially in American fort Canyon I recently put together a 110 mile course to run in a single day in a single go to take me through the entire American fort Canyon um from uh from box elder Peak over to the American Fork twins over to the mineral Basin area over uh Miller Hill and back over towards Mount toogas and then uh out finishing in Pleasant Grove I love that Canyon I live in that Canyon even though my house is not in that Canyon I appreciate that snow bir's proposal may fall within a reasonable balance of preserving and using um unfortunately as has been mentioned a warming Hut expands into flush toilets expands into a cafe which expands into a lodge um I also commend Snowbird for emphasizing that they have no intent to access mineral Basin skiing via the North Fork Road through American Fork Canyon but of course the construction access is going to take place over many years and have a major impact thus my question is what else can Snowbird propose and and explain to this Committee of where the limit of their encroachment uh is so what I would urge this committee to do is to use this opportunity to seek greater detail here um from Snowbird uh not about what is currently on the table but what will

never be on the table thank you thank you uh Colby Rollins hi hi Kobe Rollins um I sit on the board at Snowbird and I I'll just address actually some of the questions that people have been bringing up since I have time uh first of all all the land that we're proposing these two LTS to be on our private property and the only private land that Snowbird has is in Mar and gold mineral Basin and so the idea of somehow obtaining property for the 6 and a half down to T fork and have access to get up the canyon it's just not it's not feasible it's also Wilderness Area and um and it's public lands so the idea that somehow we're encroaching somewhere else is is just unrealistic um especially if you understand the C1 Zone and the purpose of it and it's very limited on what we can do you can't have running water and some of those things so it really truly is only to do two ski lifts some warming Huts that are in that area also like to uh discuss briefly what's happened over the last nine years I think Dave did a pretty good job of talking about it but we spent a lot of time with American Fork City and with Utah County uh really getting a Baseline and understanding the water quality that's up there and I'll tell you today the water quality is better than it was nine years ago and that follows the same stewardship that snowber shown over the last 50 plus years in Little Cottonwood Canyon Little Cottonwood Canyon and the 26 plus years they've been running lifts in American fort Canyon and now you've got 9 years of Baseline study that shows all the uh different metals that are in marel and gold so uh there's been an extensive amount of work that's been done to better understand the water quality there so that as we build lifts in the future we can do so safely and protect the environment now as it relates to the next five years there is

a significant amount of uh work that has to be done and it and it starts with planning which we've done some of that but to move roads and uh and I and I think I I can't speak for Dave but uh the likelihood that we can travel a bunch of equipment up those up that Canyon it's pretty challenging I would suspect that most of that's going to come via helicopter um the building at the top that you'd asked about the 23,000 fot building 100% of that was brought up the mountain from The Little Cottonwood Canyon side and and a vast and a good chunk of it was helicoptered in so I think the process is the same for that as well uh it it's going to take a couple years you only have three or four months of of dry time to put pads down and to get that lift get those lifts up and so our request for five years is intentional it's to have that done in the fiveyear period And as we mentioned to Bryce if the if this extension for five years is the end and we have to be completed in five years we will'll make a commitment that we're done and we will not ask for another extension so thank you for your time thank you Vanessa stanfil of those previously concerned about detrimental effect construction long thank you uh JZ Stanfield similar I also agree thank you Mark whose last name begins with an F I am so sorry I'm not sure why that's my poor handwriting so if you'd like to state your name into the microphone that would be helpful my name is Mark Flickinger I'm a local attorney I'm also a Utah County

resident I'm here to speak to the concerns the extension of the permit the conditionally use permit is not unlimited it's conditional and it has time limits by Design two extensions that have already been granted are a lot 10 years is a long time to still yet have unanswered questions that have been brought up by concerned citizens that have been mentioned by Snowbird about the use of the trails and we're still here 10 years afterward and we don't have clear answers about what might happen with the trails whether they'll be used if so to what extent how it will impact the water um we still have haven't established how that will be impacted nor has Snowbird given any explanation as to why more time after 10 years is needed to determine whether that will in fact take place it makes it very difficult for the commission to know whether the use is in fact unreasonable whether the detrimental impact will be excessive or uh will still continue to uh uh cause problems with the water quality and so I would submit to the commission that 10 years is just simply too long and doing another extension when the when snowbert is here and still is yet to provide answers to those key questions as to how the trails will be impacted or whether they'll even be used at all uh simply leaves too many questions unanswered after 10 years time submited on that basis thank you thank you okay that concludes our list of people who have signed up to speak on the item so looks like we have one somebody might have come in or do you want to would you like to extend to additional comments you may not have put the X if

you'd like to come up but you didn't put the X that's fine yeah can state your name please yep my name's Brian tman I'm a lifelong resident of Utah County growing up in Lyon uh started out on my own in Orum now I live in Lehi and I own a business there I represent uh bore Offroad we're a 501c3 nonprofit in Lehi consisting of members who donate their time equipment expertise and Trail maintenance and user education largely throughout the whole state but largely in Utah County um our group's experience and excuse me our group's experience and American fort Canyon's unique we are the trail adoption group for FR 085 that's that road with the wash out you were just discussing this is the main thoroughfare from tile Fork to Midway it connects all the trails in the canyon including Mary ens Miller Hill mineral Basin among others our group has loged thousands of hours in the canyon over the last 10 years with the forest service and in the upkeep and preservation of these areas I remember excuse me I remember well during the tip of fork Dam renovation project they accidentally allowed a portion of heavy metals that were trapped behind the dam to go Downstream this killed all the fish in the river and resulted in fines for the North Utah County Water Conservancy District this was a warning shot across our bow of the dangers in expansion and building in the canyon from tailing piles runoff and the risk of disturbing these heavy metals that expansion will only add to uh it was mentioned that this has been mitigated over the last few years well I remember the mitigation they rerouted the runoff away from the mind tailings and called it good the mind tailings are still there the potential is still there we talked about in know

uh the extension of this permit and now in a 100 years everyone will you know can't let it go forever well we don't have to wait 100 years here we are8 years later I I don't think any of you were at that original meeting that we were at 8 years ago um so you don't really know the backstory to be making these decisions unfort Ely um but if we do believe that the original commission was correct in their approval of this original permit then we should also believe that the time they set out should be correct as well they did give them an extension on top of that time we should stick to that if we the people originally involved in this set those we should stick with it excuse me not a public speaker um the last thing I'll just say is that um Snowbird is based in Salt Lake County I implo you to listen to your local residents such as myself who want to see our County and our best interest protected I don't want the risks of them putting in with this extension I think it's time for the extension's over I think it needs to go back through a commission when they're ready when they're finally ready they they need more time they need more time okay come back when you're ready let's run it through a commission that's involved from beginning to end get that EXT get their permit in place then and go from there thank you thank [Applause] you all right any additional comments sure coming up thank you my name is Joseph kosa I just wanted to make the point um I know that all you guys are concerned about is the extend or not and um when asked why is it necessary a point was made that newer TRS were being reviewed um but I don't feel like that should factor into the equation because that logic can

always be applied so in five years they could say again newer technology was being reviewed um on and on and so I just feel like in your consideration for extension that point doesn't seem very valid to me so thank you thank you yeah would you like to come up thank you I I'm only going to need maybe one minute at best so I think another concerning thing this is not a hell Mary I want you to know that but early on everything we talked about was aligning with the EPA the current federal regulations which this permit is under I think we run a risk to If by extending this we hear what um things that are happen happen in Washington it's a very real thing that a lot of the things that this is based on could change therefore I would implore you to just say exactly I couldn't say it any more than what was said or give a very small extension uh to consider that some some things could change I think that's relevant in the discussion thank you thank you okay uh do we need a motion to conclude public comment okay um so I guess a question that I'd have would be what are we even able to do at at this point there's been questions of whether or not we can change the conditions that were applied or whether or not we can change the timeline are any of those things that are even on the table or we restricted to what is presented to us right now you can't go back and change the previous approved conditions um what you're looking at is whether or not the standard of

substantial Justice is you feel has been met if there are um I guess potentially if there are conditions that related to that uh potent or substantial Justice you can you can apply that as part of any approval um it's you can approve a lesser amount that's been requested that's you know an option Deni if you don't fill those um standards been met you can deny deny also so youd have to make that finding that uh you know a specific findings as to why that that's not met are we are we the deciding body on this or is it go okay we are this this this is the uh L's author you are the L's Authority on this so as of last year thank you very much are there any other questions anyone would like to to ask of either the applicant or staff I I I have a question you know one one of the conditions was that uh you know my biggest concern is always um with American fort Canyon and for people that I've talked to is is water quality but how how long is it but but a baseline was requested and and uh how long is do you need normally for a baseline on water quality I mean is there anybody here that could answer I do we have an engineer a water engineer here because um you know um for me that's kind of the issue is I I I don't know how you could do it shorter uh without having some type of Base I mean a baseline by its very definition takes a number of years and if and if half their time was wasted to determine a baseline is that is that fair to to count that against them I guess

but but we don't have nothing in staff reports or anything like that what what's a baseline required so there's no water engineer at this table but uh I I was um involved in the the previous hearings and the water quality monitoring plan that was approved involved as I recall um representatives from the state division of water quality and uh other professionals that um determined that the original approved Baseline was two years I believe um it may have been three but before any construction could happen so I think they established at that time that's what was an acceptable Baseline um for the the requirements that they were hoping to accomplish um and so that's why I think the original approval included that extension to 2020 when it was approved in 2016 to accommodate that Baseline where no construction could happen you're right I think for my stats classes that seems unusually short I mean obviously a longer sample sample period is probably maybe more accurate but so is a fair to say this is a a layered approach a has to be met before B before c and so with each extension it's we have to meet these requirements which take time before we can move to these requ have take time before these um specifically on the conditions of approval that were done in 2016 that hasn't existed in the um extensions I think that was that was um contemplated in the original 2016 approval the the extensions were more based on um circumstances that may have changed after that approval at the applicant's request okay

so question about the Mining rights these mining claims or whatever uh if an individual who owns those claims felt a desire to mine and and execute on those claims are they allowed to take any types of equipment in there to to M those claims or are there restrictions there um so specifically the property in in question that's the subject of this application um all of the patented mining claims are owned by Snowbird and so the entire project area is is owned by Snowbird I know there are other mining claim patented mining claims in the area that are owned by other entities and I would imagine that they're entitled to whatever rights those claims give them additional questions think he had some comments or I don't know if that's appropriate to have the well we got the applicant we can bring back up if you have questions for the applicant do you have some comments many of the claims up in Mineral base and Maran gure are surface claim rights not mineral rights just so you know could you expand on what surface claim rights includes well surface claim rights you can't mine so if you have mineral rights you could mine but that's that's the difference between the two you Mo most of the state is just surface correct well most up there and if you haven't looked at a map it's pretty interesting because there's there's even claims where they're overlapping but uh what we're talking about surface rights I guess I've got a question of I'm I'm trying to see like most of us for far-reaching consequences

trying to understand the impact of this decision and I guess I'm I'm wondering if if we were to for example say no to this extension where does that leave Snowbird what is snowbird going to do then what if we were to say yes where does that leave I guess don't have a really well- worded question I'm just thinking out loud here um I can't speak for the applicant but I can speak for the ordinance requirements um if an extension was not granted then their previously their previous approval would expire on April 7th of this year when by expire means they have not obtained a permit pursuant to the conditional appr um the approved conditional use I would guess that they would probably work quite uh quickly to obtain a permit pursuant to that to memorialize that approval if they did not if they did not meet or obtain a permit at that date then their approval would uh I guess go away and and any future projects that there would have to start over and come for new conditional use theoretically they would still then uh it would be approved I mean if if because nothing it's already been approved it's already been approved it would it would be a new application but it' be subject to the same provisions of a conditional use and they're entitled to that use if you know certain conditions can be applied that mitigate any adverse effects and so it it it fall under under the same uh principles of of uh that those type of conditional uses which is not an application that would need to come back before us it would be just within your office it' be

coming back to you would okay plan commission and at that now we're talking about a new conditional use correct not a billing permit we're talking about if we were to decline tonight and they moved forward with needing to take the next steps in order to oh correct yes then that would just be an administrative um submitt like anyone else in the county that's trying to obtain a permit for a use or structure that would just come to Community Development staff and we' review it and all the applicable agencies like I'm giving you an aneurysm over here this is true if we denied the extension and their conditional use permit expired and they came back to apply for another conditional use permit it would come back before us at that time though even if we denied it at that time it would still go before the County Commissioners it would not go before the county Comm Ms that time no we're still the you are the final answer okay until they change it again at the state but if they were to try and get get the permit before the deadline is cut off they still have the ability to move forward from that's correct so so really I guess I'm I'm trying to get this down to the Core US voting to deny doesn't change the fact that they could get it and US voting to approve extends it out potentially helping them to study the situation more get things better prepared correct that would it would extend their time to obtain that permit they would still have to go to the work and get that permit to utilize that original approval in 2016 subject to that new termination date that was established at this at that point once they if they were to

move forward today with obtaining the the permit to go forward uh what kind of timeline are they looking at as far as having to complete the project or a permit running out obtaining it an extension on that permit it's April April 7th 2030 they have to the that's kind of a nuanced question you know this is a a conditional use that has multiple structures that would probably potentially be phased and go through different projects once a permit is issued you know um the building code requires progress measured by inspections every six months or so and so there'd be have to be progress for each utilized or each issued permit but they' be free to time their subsequent PE permits um at their own pace there's currently no condition built in to say the entire project has to be completed this point it's kind sometimes these projects get a little too complex to to do that any additional questions I'm just going to make some comments here I've made a few notes from some of the comments have been made and and uh um so I'm not for building and creating a resort per se in American fort Canyon um I do feel like Snowbird has been a good partner for the public I think and and I would think that it would be within their rights as private property owners they could fence this property off and exclude the the public access is that correct generally yes um and this was a topic that came up uh a lot in the original approval there are County class D roads public roads that do Traverse

their property and those are subject to Public Road Rules but each side of that road I mean I'm going to the far way out there I mean even though those roads have to remain open or should remain open whatever in theory they could be fenced on every side you'd have a road to nowhere that would allow no Public Access so I feel like Snowbird has been a good partner for the public in the past uh I've accessed some of those areas on a four-wheeler and I actually rolled a four-wheeler over wasn't very fun um so I feel like Snowbird has been a good partner allowing Public Access us to enjoy the canyon uh on their property um are there concerns that I have absolutely uh mayor Frost brought up uh water quality and stuff like that I'm a water guy um I would like to see you know I I realize that in some of the stipulations they're required to do monitoring during construction stuff like that uh I would like to see I don't know what happens after that what regulations are because you're not a water system so there's probably no state requirements to monitor that water but I would like to see something in place to a continuation of of some type of of water monitoring I do want to State for the record though that that uh based on my uh understanding the project that the rebuilding the tible fork Dam had nothing to do with the snowbird uh development and that release that happened there had nothing to do with with Snowbird so I would just want to make sure that that's clear because uh sometimes I get confused used on on how things happen um uh could I ask you real quick just could you describe hellis and Cat Ski to give the public you know a little bit more definition of how that happens when

it happens and maybe how often it happens or something like that sure when weather and Avalanche conditions provide we have helicopter skiing through waset p po bird guides um or powder bird as it is now known and they have a permit to ski throughout the wasach and marelen Gulch is one of the areas that they ski um it's not the most frequently used area and then we also have a snowcat operation that mostly skis in lower mineral basins so our skiers go down to the base of the mineral Basin lift and then get in a snowcat and the snow cat takes them up the mountain and they ski back down are there conditions that prohibit that or you know limit that ability to Avalanche conditions are the biggest factor and snow pack you have to have enough snow pack to run the snow cat on and just to your question we have nine years of water data for that area and it's ongoing okay thank you um some other thoughts that I had and pardon me sometimes my my brain might not act or function like a normal person but uh uh one of the concerns is about increased traffic in the canyon um and as was pointed out the continued growth of the Utah County does not limit the the amount of traffic that goes up American fort Canyon sometimes it's kind of disgusting because there's a ton of traffic that goes up American fort Canyon this application is not going to prevent that that that traffic is going to continue to increase whether snowb bird skis up there or not so I just wanted to kind of make that point um there was a talk about ski Towers being viewed uh from Mountain sides and stuff like that is that an ideal thing maybe not but neither are the high high power line

poles that go across from Mountain Top to Mountain toop in various parts of the state that you know could be considered destruction of a beautiful view um so uh again so some of those are some of my thoughts um uh and I think let me just one other thing um is it within the the stipulations already that uh a certain amount of Public Access is already retained with this conditional use permit and stuff that that I I didn't see it but we can't change D roads I there was nothing specific to ensuring certain Public Access other than what ex exists through rights of the public Roads Legal if you don't mind got one one clarifying comment I know it's been brought up several times the current land use ordinance does not allow utilization of this conditional use or access for um facilities associated with this conditional use through American fort Canyon all access has to be through the existing Resort so I want that to be clear that's that's built into the ordinance that's an ordinance requirement ready yes a motion or any additional comments if there's any additional comments I'll you know we have to start somewhere so is there if there isn't further comment if I were the king of the county I yeah I would I would do things one way but I I just don't think I I think that um what we can do here is um work with Snowbird to um you know be good citizens be good

stewards of that area up there that they own and um you know try and be good partners and that that seems to me to be the common sense solution um you know they've they've got it approved they could get a permit right away I think it would be makes more sense to try and work with people and and um yeah so I guess that's my where I've reached and I if if we have a better outcome by going slower then I tend to decide with going at a pace that allows for better consideration of impact and ways to do things better I I am very happy to have lots of water data before moving forward on a project and that can impact water and if that means that we they took time to get that water data then you know that's part of being a good Steward of the environment so so we at least start we can see where people are um I would make the motion that we approve the extension uh the fiveyear extension uh uh I would if it's possible if I can make that uh that um that it is our bias that this be the last extension on this project I don't know uh um I don't know if we can bind we can't bind a future uh Planning Commission but um I would state that and and here are my reasons is I I do I am concerned about PRI private property rights uh um um they do own this property outright and and so concerns of whether it even be scarring or other things is there I've seen lots of scarring up and down I I do believe that

they've may put a good faith effort to move forward and and as um um Karen has has said um you know I I I think more is better and I I'm concerned that if we if we make everybody who who goes a little bit further I think PE people will tend not to do that and push things faster than than and maybe we'll get a project that shouldn't have been approved or or moved but I would rather have more data but I I think they've made that that effort and I think for for me I think this actually protects the uh the taxpayer U because I think this is um um I do think that they have done just an what was the term just substantial Justice substantial Justice uh and so I that's the motion that I put forward would you like to simplify your motion to uh yes if I I couldn't find the P yeah it took me a second too under recommendations uh right right here that the Utah County uh Planning Commission approved the extension of the termination date for appeal uh 1552 a conditional use request for Access ski lifts and various Associated Mountain Resort facilities subject to staff findings in included in section four of the staff report and the conditions included in the two uh 2016 and 2019 action reports restated with updated code references and approval uh dates as follows that the board finds that the conditional use meets the standard found in section 16.94% you don't have to read them all you're free to and the rest apologize I just want you to know

that's an option you can say as stated um as as the staff recommended can I I I I hate to interject where you guys are delting but can I you mentioned the ability to um include an expectation that this you know be considered to be the last type of extension you're correct you can't bind a future Planning Commission but I think that's an appropriate finding um staff's findings kind of contemplated that that you know this should be enough time to to do that obviously conditions in the world can change and we don't know that but um so I I think that's captured in those findings okay but you can articulate a little clearer if you'd like just that that that it is this board's uh expectation that uh it should be able to be Inc completed in the five-year extension and I think a future Planning Commission can take that into consideration okay right it would be included in their packet if it ever came back all right we have a motion do we have a second another comment do you feel like with the discussions that have been had and presented from snowboard uh that U um the public access with their ATV Loop and stuff that's created is sufficient Public Access I I'm concerned I'm not the attorney I I I'm concerned that we can't necessarily impose things more you know my greatest concern is I'm I'm a great lover of Little Deer Creek I grew up riding Little Deer Creek and and a a property owner bought it and moved the the the class D Road and I don't consider it a Class D Road it's it is I'm a pretty good Rider and I struggle to ride when they moved it and so I would hope um I I think they've been good partners so far I would hope they would keep the road where it is that they don't because you just have to have the rideway uh and so I think that they've shown that they're good partners so I don't think that we can add

additional things uh but I would you know plead with uh the property owner that they continue to to to open it and uh not not move it and and block it off on both sides do we have a second to the motion I'll second motion okay having been seconded we'll take a vote starting with commissioner herd uh I I yes I okay that motion passes and we move to the next item on our agenda which is also Rel is snowbird so I think we already discussed it so unless you have further questions specific to the tower Heights um you just make a similar motion okay do we have any questions or everybody this just like the last one it doesn't change anything it's just an extension of what was already approved correct yeah and and this one you have to they have to proceed with the first one to to utilize this one because they they'll be building Towers at that point so this is specific to Heights of um Towers um I guess I'll motion to approve this one as well as stated okay second having a motion in a second we'll start with commissioner solivan love I and then I I I that motion also passes okay item number three is Quicksilver solar uh request to amend a previously approved conditional use and to everyone who came just like to thank you for participating in the public process it's important as a staff I would I would Echo that I think that was um you know

very very good dequorum and very good respect in in the participation so um I'm glad you pointed that out and appreciated all of the public comment that was emailed ahead of time I read through every single one thank you thank you okay do we have a presentation from yeah Greg will take this one Greg Robinson uh Community Development staff so this is a uh an amendment to an existing conditional use that was uh granted um in sorry in oh I don't remember what is granted oh was just granted a year uh last year sorry um next slide this is the pro propos the so this is the area originally it was proposed uh the areas that are being amended are the applicant is requesting to amend this application by adding additional properties the properties are identified in that in those two areas one on the the west side and one on the E or three Parcels on the east side the um area that is being included or added to this is an additional 4 480 Acres um next slide if you wouldn't mind so this area is also adjacent to other conditional uses that were approved um through this process um the those were um approved for approximately 1600 acres for the Quicksilver one and uh 1750 45 exact uh precisely um for the Quicksilver 2 project um the total area um of the

amendment now would now be um just under 2,000 acres the um facility is for a a solar project it is a utility scale solar project that um is anticipated to be 440 megawatts um producing for this facility um the excuse me sorry the original approval was granted um last year and the expiration date on that was um in 20 29 they did not ask for an additional um time on their EX on this approval so um we maintained the original um approval date of of May 21st 2029 as the expiration date for this amendment um this amendment includes um like I said uh four additional Parcels um those Parcels um on the Eide will create to because of the other approvals and the configuration of of those will create an additional two islands that are within the approved area for this entire facility um originally the first approval um did create an island and if you want to go to the next um slide this is kind of an uh zoomed out area kind of showing you where it is in the next slide please so this is um the site plan that was submitted by uh Quicksilver they show an access a reserved access route for the parcel on the North the the site plan did not include

a reserved access route for the two Parcels that would be created the two islands in within that would be created staff is recommending that that um the site plan include for any Island created um reserved 56 foot ride of way or not it's not a ride of way but an access road or access area to be able to allow those properties access in the future um to those areas for those property property owners um the property owners within the that are within those islands would need to create would need to work with the applicant or the property owners that own the property to get to those their property um they would need to work with them to obtain access easements for those properties um this is private property there are no public roads that are adjacent to this um access to this site um is and and property surrounding it is generally done through um access easements or understandings between Property Owners to access their property there are not public roads that the county maintains in this area um so there are no rights to access that um through a County Road um the applicant um has indicated that this will not be an occupied facility um which if it were an occupied facility it would require paved access to this propert or to this site um so as far as any improvements or Road improvements required to get to this site they could be done through internal roads that they have access through their other

approvals um this area is is adjacent to um Fairfield City it is not within any annexation policy plans for either um Fairfield or for eagle Mountain meaning the the anex annexation policy plans generally look out 20 years as far as what will be annexed into their jurisdiction within 20 years and um neither city um that is the nearest adjacent City have this area included in an annexation policy plan um the conditions of approval have remained the same um for this except for the added require or added condition that that staff has added on number nine that a 56 56 56 foot reserved access route must be maintained for properties that are um completely surrounded by the S solar facility um and then it lists those specific Parcels any questions so those blank spots right there are the ones that are the is that what I'm understanding if you want to go back um one so if you can see so the blue area that I've highlighted is the new um addition additional areas the areas within that blue that are isolated and the gray are the islands that are kind of created the the first one on the North the northern Mor Island was original to the approval and they included an access route for that the other two are created because of the additional area and the addition the other approvals that exist do you know why they're not why those are islands um so generally the um

the facilities are trying to get as many Property Owners to participate um it's up to the property owner to whether or not to either um sell their property or to lease their property for the for that facility um in these cases um we I did hear from one of the property owners I believe that they are here they probably are here today to speak to that um that um they have been contacted by the applicant and they have been have not been able to work out an agreement or um terms that they would they would agree with to either lease or sell their property um so the as I'm sure the applicant can can speak to they do try to get contiguous areas so that they can don't have interruptions in their facility however it's up to the individual Property Owners to decide whether or not to participate so the applicant doesn't own any of this it's the applicant does I think either owns it or or has companies that own that property a majority of that property the additional properties they do not own one is owned by the state and others are privately owned okay we can ask the applicant about that the sear yeah I have a a question for Council if I may ask I I I I guess I'm still blown away so I thought all property had access right so that's not the case it is not the case up to the owners you you buy property in the middle of nowhere you can fly in by helicopter but that's that's your only guarantee right is yeah well they can also Al use a historical use you know if there's been a historical use there they might have a prescriptive easement but yeah it's it's up to the property owners to to make sure they have access to their property

before they buy it my grandparents own property up West Canyon the only way to get to it is hiking on foot so you still had to craft somebody else at yep agreement in place yeah any additional questions for staff before we invite the applicant okay the applicant is present and would like to come up thank you my name is Adrien Bell I'm with Holland and Hart and I'm here representing Eno renewable energy um we have a couple of slides that we could show um and really just the one might be helpful just to provide an overview I would just go to the second slide that one that gives an overview of um the the request tonight to extend the approved conditional use permit boundaries for the phase three project which is shown in the darker blue the the the added Parcels are in the lighter blue and then you can see the approved area from um under phase one which is in the green and that shows you where the the reserved access route would be located to provide um access to those inh holding Parcels uh Greg did a did a good job going over the the basics of The Proposal um I don't have much more to add to that but I'm happy to respond to any questions and we have others from the from the company who are here who might be able to ask answer some questions about negotiation with property owners if you have those questions as well okay any questions for the applicant so do the two projects uh are they do they work together Quicksilver and the mosida

energy with the power plant yes these are all Affiliated entities under Eno renewable energy and will be developed as as a larger so the quick solar facilities won't be occupied but that power plant will have Staffing only correct yeah and we can talk more about the power the the gas power plant when we when we get to that application MH additional questions okay okay thank you I'm sorry did you have one no I was going to make a motion okay yeah is there any further comments if not I'm ready to make a motion um I sorry I I think that there there are some people that have contacted us um wanting to um speak to this item if if you want to entertain U public comment kind of the same situation as the previous one you don't have it's not a public hearing but if you want to hear from some people that want to speak you can go through the same process okay if it's the uh feel of the commission to allow more um feedback from the public then we'll take a motion on that I think it's important to hear from those affected um so I would say yes a motion to public comment I'll second that okay Motion in a second uh starting with you commissioner her uh I I I I okay that passes and and there's a number of you who signed up for three and four so at this time if you'd like to come up and address the commission if you could limit your comments to three uh just this item on the quick silver solar uh that will be helpful for us as far as separating the two in your comments and like before we will use the timer and

like you to state your name into the microphone so if you'd like to come up then please do I am mayor mcken from we need you to speak into the mic pictures that I sent you not yet okay they're coming right here um I will try to make it quick and be under three minutes so could you say your name into the microphone H mcken mayor mcken from Fairfield so I have actually had problems with these solar Fields not this one in particular but the only way that these solar Fields can access this Valley is through this road right here on this p on this paper that I'm showing you it's not designed to accommodate these heavy trucks and so when the Faraday project went into the very south end of of the cedor valley they probably like tripled amount of traffic and what they did is they came in and they started getting gravel from out west to towards Five Mile Pass and they were bringing it into our town but because of that sharp corner right there on the road they can't make that turn and so I gave you this picture here that has that puddle right there I can't get you dot to fix this corner because I have arsenic in my valley and so they don't want to put a covert under there because then it will run into our stream and it causes issues there they're working on it but just one more thing like my road is not built to accommodate this yesterday as we speak I had a truck that went off the road and what happens when they come down this road they have to so I I think it's important to understand too is they have two major landfills out in my town and they carry large trucks that come from Inner Mountain Regional Landfill and then they also come from

North Point Landfill and so it's a heavy amount of trucks that come out there those two landfills actually pay to maintain our road as you can imagine we're a small town our budget is small and we have you know if I had to pave that road out of our budget it would take everything that I had it's not feasible for us to do this but it's worked in the past until this these solar Fields started coming in um but what they have to do is they actually have to stop out west and they have to watch all the traffic that's coming in so if a truck is coming from one way in Fairfield they have to actually stop on the highway that truck has to cross into oncoming traffic and then it has to the other truck coming from the landfill or the solar Fields they have to stay back and let the trucks go so it's like they're they're operating their own traffic signal anyway we put in a million dooll water line just we finished it up in January and this truck is continually they're all continually running over it I can't get UD do to help me to fix it they're working on it but you know UD do Fairfield is the last of their concerns and so it's really frustrating but our road is just not built to handle these solar fields and it is the only way out there and uh contrary to what you guys have been told we do have an annexation policy and those do actually they do fall in within our annexation policy policy um I don't believe that we were given adequate notice for this and the reason that it it also frustrates me is like this is being permitted for a pond and then asking for a lake like we're covering massive amounts of land out there this is one of several solar fields that are being permitted out there and the only way to access them is through Fairfield and we're not getting any of the revenue off of it and so

we're just being abused by it and I'm not saying that it's Quicksilver annual that's doing it but they have several applications in and that is exactly what they're doing right now is they're adding onto a conditional use permit by more land and so next thing you know we've got thousands of Acres down there that are being covered by um solar fields and it's not being watched closely but I don't believe that we were given legal notice uh I barely got the notice yesterday so I actually didn't have time to to get a response in um the county should be a force to adopt the highest standard of ordinance in surrounding properties which would be fairfields we have spent a lot of time and money making these ordinances is there any way I can continue where there is multiple things that affect my town list can use my minutes from okay I'm okay with that okay uh they should be forced to use our ordinance we have spent a lot of time money making this ordinance and then our conditional use permit as well um you know did they do an environmental study why do we keep allowing all these solar Fields just to cover this massive amount of land uh Utah code 17-27 a506 allows the county to impose reasonable conditions on land use applications in order to mitigate the anticipated detrimental effects of the proposed use the solar fields are large they take years to build and they are covering thousands of Acres they are utilizing roads that were not designed to accommodate heavy Freight traffic at this volume I would like conditions added that would require them to obtain easements from Property Owners needed for the width that required that accommodate large heavy trucks this was another problem Faraday came in and they're at the very south end of

Fairfield right at fairfield's border um right where they're surrounding that that piece of land they just came in and they took a 6 foot wide swath of land it wasn't their easement to take there's a 30 foot prescriptive easement there and so they just widened it they just came in and did it nobody watched him nobody knew about it I've tried to contact Faraday well the project that was originally permitted has been sold out like three times and so it's really hard to find anybody to even talk to there so they're they're using land they don't have the ements that are required for these pieces of property they have not contacted them to get the easements um so that needs to be required and then a concern besides the roads in Fairfield um in our conditional use permit we require them to have a decommissioning plan that provides what the specs are for those particular panels um we w we asked them to provide where they're manufactured and so they can give us this for the reasons of what chemicals are in those panels and where can they dispose of them because right now the two landfills that they're located next to one is the minici use the other one is a CND landfill they can't take the they can't take them because of the chemicals that are used in these panels so we'd like to have them tell us what panels are in there what is required for decommissioning that and then to also make sure of where they are being produced that they're not using child labor to produce these um it it does have a huge impact on my town and I hope you guys will consider that when you keep conditional approving these solar Fields it does they have to come through Fairfield or they have to go through Eagle Mountain and neither city is prepared to take it there's sometimes that the units that they bring in close down this road and so then I have semis backed up on the highway I've got semis backed up waiting to get on

because the units that they are bringing in are so large that they cover the whole amount of road so that's all I have to say but we do care we are fighting against this we just have not been able to get to the right person to fight it thank [Music] Youk any further comment this is my least favorite place to be let me let you know that um my name is Brent alt um my family are longtime land owners in that Cedar Valley area um I am an active farmer of quite a bit of property in that area um my big concern along with mayor mckinn um two years ago when the first project started um I was notified by one of my workers that dozers were going through one of my grainfields and so I drove out there I contacted Utah County Roads Travis said I'll meet out there I don't know his last name sorry but his boss came with him and I said you're aware that this is a prescriptive easement you do not own the road and he said yeah we own 30 ft and I said no I pay the property tax on the property under the road you have a prescriptive easement and Travis said well we'll work on remedying that situation so as of yet I haven't heard anything but they widened that from 30 ft fet to we measured it close to 80 ft with no legal action to Wi that easement um

they took part of my crop never compensated me for that so my concern is that Utah County needs to remedy that situation me personally I'm affected they took over a mile of I own from where the prop the island Ranch Road um sorry I'm a little nervous where Allen's Ranch Road leaves Fairfield and enters Utah County I own the first mile of that um on both sides and they widen that road from my property line all the way through for the full mile um I just want to I have a minute left uhoh it locked oh okay I just want to read this this is these are my neighbors so I own property adjacent to IRL um landfill um they just want to express serious concerns regarding the proposed amendment to Quick Sellar solar solar conditional use permit which could would expand the project to 480 Acres IRL is an is adjacent to this project and we've already seen firsthand how heavy truck traffic can impact our roads a previous customer Faraday caused significant issues including Road Weare without contributing to maintenance as well as unsafe driving behavior such as speeding passing garbage trucks with full loads and ignoring stop signs with this expansion the impact on our roads and Community will only increase it is crucial to ensure that Quicks silver solar is held accountable for contributing to road maintenance and thank you sorry I'm so nervous but I appreciate you taking time

to listen to us so oh thank you for your comments it's totally we get nervous too so anybody else good evening uh Greg Jackson I'm resident of Lehi my property is the one that's down there on the bottom it's enclosed on three sides um I'm also the chairman of the Lehigh Planning Commission so I I know the drill here um and uh so first let me say historic use definitely a thing uh second staff has recommended uh access via roads that is within your power I certainly understand the difference between administrative and legislative deal with this again every single week Lehigh grows like a weed this is feels like a full-time job though I'm told I'm a volunteer that's within your power I would highly recommend that you exercise that conditional use yes you have to grant that when it's zoned accordingly but it's upon you to also make decisions that ensure that the property rights of other adjacent property owners are respected otherwise there's no point to zoning we should just get rid of the whole concept altoe uh and I mean personally if I were to be blocked in I'd eventually end up before a judge to make sure I have access to my road or excuse me to my property so that's a legal battle just waiting to happen I would argue if you're not ensuring that those property owners have uh ready access surveying uh I'd like to see the assurances that Utah county is taking proper precautions to ensure that all of our property is being properly uh protected given Mr Al example I don't think that it's beyond the pale to worry that um fences start going up not exactly where they should if there's been some sloppiness already and where those roads are going um I'm sure other property owners beond myself have thought about and considered getting some surveys out there I mean it's a bunch of uh dirt and weeds for the most part apart from where you do have some some dry farming going on so you're going to need surve to ensure that everything falls where it should um

honestly I will say I was qu kind of shocked at not at the approval of this but at the board of adjustments lack of imposing um pretty much anything on Quicksilver to ensure the protection of other properties and also note that you know in kicking this open uh it has very much given direction to how this area will develop we're looking uh at doing solar panels as well because I mean what am I going to do with my property now the way that it's locked in and that is incumbent upon Utah County to think about how that development goes of course Property Owners they have their rights and you need to let them and you have to respect that that is a constitutional right that needs to be respected also you know to the same reason why we use zoning we do design a little bit how Leigh Falls and that falls upon you as a county to think about that uh from my experience out here it really does feel like it's been more of the Wild Wild West um and given the plans I've seen and looked at on on Lehigh City uh Planning Commission with what the state has planned for roads and uh the expansion of towns and whatnot uh it's an interesting choice that uh we're opening Pandora's Box in the way that we are here so in summation I would really encourage uh listening to staff on roads I would think about others like my own property which is almost enclosed um at the very least and surveying those are if I were in your shoes those would be conditions I'd impose thank you thank you any other comments and you need to come forward hi I'm Valerie Manning and I own that Island up at the top of that blue Mass which is a monopoly um I'm all

enclosed there um when you first initially um okay the first phase um you put in an access road well that's no guarantee to me without a signed easement that's recorded of In-N-Out access to my property um also there are concerns regarding the surveys is it all going to be you know honestly surveyed what about the environmental aspects of the area the ecosystem um I would like a six to 10 foot fence around my lot um because I would like to do something with my property as a freedom and a right of the Constitution to own property to use it freely um and and I have tried to contact Quicksilver to see if I couldn't uh begin with easement agreement and all I got back was they offered me Pennies on the dollar to sell my property it's not for sale it's never been for sale I don't intend to sell it then they offered me pennies to lease the property ridiculous I want to use my property I have dreams for that property and therefore I would ask that you would consider my property and my rights thank you thank you any additional comment okay and we'll bring it back to the commission for discussion on the

item well I just I have question for staff that's my understanding is uh isn't part of the conditioning print isn't there have to be a survey is there is that is that not in has that not been put in County ordinances or things like that no it is not required by a County ordinance um property um obviously uh each legal description is supposed to be um not overlapping but that doesn't always exist in the county um it is incumbent upon the property owners and the developers and adjacent Property Owners to ensure that that that accurate survey is in place um there there are possibilities to require additional surveying if if that is is needed um but um this just to give you an idea this area recently the air one of the parcels in here um well let me give you a little B overview so as you can see this is this is a partial map and you can see that there some areas there aren't overlaps other areas um there are definitely some issues with overlaps um the property owner would be liable for any any issues with overlapping property owner uh another property owner's property however um it's also there's also a lot of surveying that may not be completely accurate from one property to another and it's not necessarily um the C's um the county hasn't necessarily required that in every situation um but it is something that you could um ask for additional surveys or um but the

problem is that if the applicant thinks that their survey is correct and the other property owner thinks that their surve survey is correct it's not the county isn't is going to get pulled into the middle of that argument and it's not generally the County's position to to be in the middle of that argument you know the re the reason I asked is you know I I i' I've done a couple you know years ago you know when I could afford land uh but but anytime I've ever done a subdivision in the city there was always a survey that was required correct that's for subdivisions they they are required to Plat that and if then they are also um required to ensure that they have title to that property and that and we and in that process we do require a title report to ensure that they're listed as a sole property owner of that property to develop that property um that is something that um could be added as a condition again um it it's difficult for the county to be in the middle of that position because it I mean it is something that they could require um surveying but again if there are discrepancies between overlapping properties is what the problem becomes how does the county get is the County supposed to be involved in that um process and I I'm guessing that you probably saw reaction but well the I mean the problem is anybody that surveyed knows that uh there's once you start surveying I mean lines move I mean I I know even within cities will move 10 feet and so but corre but um but so if if you go down the line I guess is you know how

are you protecting uh you know somebody that has if they think the fence is on their yard then then it's up to them then they have the rights to go through court and sue for that and I mean is that is that how Justice is correct supposed to be done so the applicant has title to that property that they are going to want to develop if there is a discrepancy it is a dispute between property and there is not the county that's a that's a priv that's considered a private but but there is a there is a way for them to seek Justice and that's through the court that's through the court system correct anything else any additional questions for staff um I don't know about staff questions for staff but I'm mayor of Fairfield brought up some really important points I think that would be good to be addressed by the applicant if possible sure the applicant would like to come up I am happy to respond to uh the comments um that were raised during the the public comment period so um in terms of access our project biases infrastructure that is on the Eastern side of the project so in addition to the property that is owned or leased in Utah County um uh Neo has property also through Eagle Mountain and so the project actually starts in Eagle Mountain near the Mercer substation in continues down our access route will be through Eagle Mountain improving Lake Mountain Road which we'll discuss um with the next application and um biasing traffic and uh infrastructure on that boundary we're

not planning to go through Fairfield I understand there were issues with the with another project uh and construction traffic that's that's not our intent and we don't anticipate any issues in that regard um in terms of surveying we will do our own surveys as part of this project these projects um you know they are hundreds of millions of dollars in value any investor or lender will require that we locate all of our improvements within our property um and that we're not encroaching or um otherwise uh extending Beyond where we have legal rights that's just a a part of project development um and and will be part of the process um in terms of access we've agreed uh with access route we've agreed to the the 56 foot um access set aside uh that that that Greg included in a staff report so um from that perspective uh we're fine with that condition and and I think that addresses the concern with allowing access to reach some of those inholding Parcels the other thing I want to um raise is that many of these Parcels are subject to restrictive covenants you can't do anything with this property unless you legally subdivide it um to remove the restrictive covenants because they were illegally subdivided many years ago and all that can be done on them is is agriculture no no structures or development can happen until a subdivision is approved to remove the the restrictive covenant or until the property is Consolidated with another property that is not subject to a a a restrictive covenant and therefore made whole so to speak so in order to subdivide under the County's current requirements you have to provide paved access to that parcel and that is why this portion of the

County uh zoned Mining and grazing it's intended for types of development that are not near urban areas or other parts of the county um access is limited couple coupled with the restrictive covenants that were put in place as a result of illegal subdivisions in the past there are a lot of her to development that have nothing to do with our project so I just want to flag that as as an issue um we worked for many years to resolve that issue for for the project site and we worked with Greg on consolidating um the parcels and removing the restrictive covenant so it is possible to do it but it takes a lot of time and it takes a lot of money to do so can you map out the access rout that you intend to take from Eagle Mountain so it's hard to tell on that map um so if you see where the yellow I'd actually go back to the other site the map that was just up that satellite on the one map that you were showing the interactive map but we could do that you're right but it would basically follow Lake Mountain Land road which is to the east which is right around in that location and we go up into um Eagle Mountain are you looking for the access the paved access of the the for the for them are you looking for access to the individual Islands the anticipated

access to the project area oh it would be Lake Mountain Road let me P this up what is your plan to uh enforce that access that it's only I mean I drive trucks so I could be considered a dumb truck driver you know and I know truck drivers take the route they want to for the most part what's your how are you going to regulate that I I think given where our project is located that makes the most sense it wouldn't make sense to go all the way across into Fairfield and then cut back down and around AC Crossroads that are of even lower quality than what lake Mountain Land is or lake Mountain Road is apologies so you're talking about taking this road that is yellow with some red not the one that is yellow green so the they access um so on the on the right side they access I'm not showing that you can't see way in there so their access comes through Eagle Mountain right and then um that they worked with Eagle Mountain um for that road then it leaves Eagle Mountain here um actually here um Comes This is Lake Mountain Road comes down Lake Mountain Road and then leaves Lake Mountain Road there to access their project there um let me and give you go back to here so we're talking um project area that is in this area correct and comes down goes out to eag uh uh yeah sorry it would be straight down there the the it would come down to Eagle Mountain and then come to the South and then we'd connect in so so Lake Mountain Road is here comes when it leaves um Eagle Mountain it um um comes to

here down and then it leaves Lake Mountain Road in somewhere in this area and then we would have I mean we don't know the details yet but we would have access points for the project depending on uh you know where it works with the layout correct the pavement would have to be from an existing paved road all the way to their project this is crossing over into the other conditional use application but um that paved access would have to be paved all the way to um the natural gas facility so all the way to their project which um that project is all of this area the solar and um the natural gas facility does that help it does would it be I don't know permissible for us to put that as a condition that they that the access would be on a road that is designed for large vehicular traffic um I believe it's already not it's so on this conditional use it is um not on there on the next conditional use there is a requirement that they um uh construct and maintain that road as a Class B Road within the county and a Class C Road within the city so item seven says the applicant shall be responsible for any road improvements and or maintenance of County Roads does that not apply to this one it it does apply if they were only doing the solar project they would still be required but not necessarily required to pave it they would have to improve it but the pavement requirement kicks in under the next conditional use where it's an occupied structure but not is something that we would add to the first one to say well we'll take this route or you'll take that route so it it is yeah there's not

that whatever route that they use to to access their project they would have to maintain and after the project was completed they would have to return that to that state to they they'd have to fix any any issues that they've created with the with the road and this Lake View Mountain I'm sorry I don't remember what it's called but that road is that a UD Lake Mountain Road Lake Mountain Road it's a county yeah it's a County unpaved Road currently the so it is a Class B road but it's unpaved um this is again crossing over to the next conditional use as part of that project they will be required to pave that to County standards and maintain that for the duration of that project and completion of the construction of that project once that project is complete um again crossing over to the next next item that project is intended to have um if I remember 15 to 20 employees and that would be the traffic that would exist for that project um again with u um I know that this is talking about the faay project but the after the faad day project is complete traffic on that road will be minimal and they will have to be they will be required to um do any improvements that from the damage caused to that road um using it for the construction of that project does the county have any assurances from the project owner that those improvements will happen like a monetary it would be required I mean it would be something um to get the certificate of occupancy it would be a condition that the Public Works would review the road and generally they would

um go out and assess whether not there were any um improvements that would need to be done based on the construction of that project so yes there are assurances based on permitting processes okay um additional questions so it was mentioned that it was not part of an annexation policy plan but there's been a an opposing viewpoint on that what's the process to verify annexation plans and include them we try to maintain all current annexation policy plans um our GIS department does a an excellent job this is currently what we show as an annexation policy plan for that area is in the hash marks yes the hash mark so um so the med spill boundary let me take off yeah take those off so this is Eagle Mountain this is what we currently have on um based on our records for Fairfield that may differ um based on their approvals but this is what we have on record the annexation process requires landowner agreement or does the annexation policy plan has does um they do not have jurisdiction over that property um they they do not have rights to deny any improvements or any any development of that property it is only a plan that identifies in the next 20 years this is the area that that um they anticipate annexing within their jurisdiction but they can't Annex it unless the proper owner wishes to be annexed there are different Pro processes but generally most accepted way the most accepted way is for a property owner to seek annexation of that property

okay any additional questions for the applicant thank you thank you would it be appropriate to review the next application before we vote on this one because they are they seem like there's a lot of overlapping or things that kind of work together as then you consider um your vote for one based on the information and the other that's good question um has has Eagle Mountain weigh in on the increased traffic there um we did not receive um I was contacted by um the planning department and Eagle Mountain they did not have comment from us they are aware of the project they are participating with Quicksilver um they kind be um with improvements and development plans within their jurisdiction um um so they are aware of what's what's going on and they have um and I'm sure the applicant probably talk to this more more clearly but they have some agreements in place for the improvements of that road and access to their their facility that's for the quicks silver project but it but the other project I guess doesn't it kind of rely on those improvements it does it would be required so if item three fails item four or is generally it would be a requirement so it would be a condition of approval so they would have to have uh a Class B pav a paved Class B Road in place in order for them to meet the conditions of the approval if they do not get that in place that um they they cannot won't be forward they would eventually like if

they couldn't get in place before the expiration date the conditional use would expire so as as it's currently written the approval of that um of the next conditional use would be reliant on them improving that road and Paving that road to another paved um road to their and all the way to their project and having that be a a dedicated um County Road so the area that they or or City Road sorry so the area that they leave the existing County Road they would have to have that area um paved improved and um dedicated to the county for access to that project and and so it would have to be also accepted by the County Commission so they would have to go through a process to amend the official County road map to um show that that road and have that road exist um basically on on the and accepted by the county help so with the discussions we had in the previous applications with time limits and stuff like this this I think is is showing a fiveyear time limit is that correct um currently um it is 2029 that was the original approval um there was not an a request to extend that approval from what was originally granted right and so I guess you know with the with the previous in mind where they've had five years you know to do this kind of stuff is that something we feel comfortable sticking with or I mean is that I mean we could modify that if we wanted to right that was their request um but yeah so that it is up to the county Comm or sorry the Planning

Commission to determine whether that request is is something that would be acceptable and um reasonable to to Grant generally and and the applicant probably can speak to this better than I can um there is a longer process that they are required to go through um through connecting to um the existing power lines that takes an extended period of time for them to get through that process so that's why they've um every development that we've had come through for solar has requested an extended approval time um so I guess one other concern that was brought up is um the probability or not probability but the the potential of U contamination or whatever from you know solar panels that could be damaged during the decommissioning process or anything like that what what safeguards are in place to to address that potential so as part of our uh original conditional use permit we have a decommissioning plan plan requirement and um we'll prepare a decommissioning plan and submit it as part as our building permit application that will address how the site will be decommissioned how uh the materials will be either recycled or disposed of and how the the property will be reclaimed so that will all be Spilled Out at the time we know what what panel type we're using what actual facilities will be located on the property and usually there's a bond associated with that yes we we have a bond in our I believe we do have to double check I think that's right under the conditions under number eight there is a decommissioning plan that would be required um and that there is um the the language in in here uh a

decommissioning plan shall include Provisions for the removal of all structures foundations electrical equipment internal or perimiter access roads restoration of soil and vegetation of disturbed areas along with the plan accept the count County ensuring Financial Resources will be available to fully decommission the site right and to address one of the other concerns about studies and and stuff like that in the packet I'm pretty sure I saw there were some extensive studies with you know groundwater monitoring uh Wildlife corridors and stuff like that if I'm not mistaken isn't that correctly as part of the original conditional use permit um application that you all reviewed about a year ago we did submit extensive um environmental site assessment studies and looked at a number of issues uh which is standard for the development of a project of this size so all we're asking um at this time is to extend the project to include to you know those two additional areas um all of the other elements of the project remain the same right any other questions for the applicant okay thank than you again thank you okay um as to your question of whether or not to hear the second item we have had connected items where we've gone back and reconsidered so yeah um if there's no objection from staff I I think that may be in in order here to go to that second presentation sure um let me just pull the map where the not all

right uh this is an also an application for conditional use um this is for a an electrical um Power Generation facility um the parcel that it's um the proposed subject parcel boundaries kind of indicated on the map however the area and that that acreage is about 1,00 acres for that parcel however the project area that they're looking to develop is only on um approximately 34 Acres of that of that project area or subject parcel um this is kind of just showing where it is in in reference to the proposed and existing approvals um again a little farther outout this uh facility is proposed to include 12 turbines um the applicant has indicated that the these may be phased depending on power demands and um and the need for those turbines to be in place to generate enough uh Power to um accommodate the off-taker so the applican has also indicated that the these turbines are anticipated to run um 20 to 40% of the time so it's not they're not going to be running full-time based on the applicant's application but they will be run in conjunction with the rest of the facility to to maintain adequate power to supply the off-taker is what has been indicated the applicant has also requested that their termination date um um be extended 5 years to 2030 um again this area is not included in an acation plan as far as our records

indicate um and uh so just to go over a couple staff review items the facility is in in is going to be an occupied facility um 15 to 20 employees will be on site at the completion of the development of this project um as an occupied facility this will be required to include the paved Road access again that kind of is shown somewhat here um through Eagle Mountain um onto Lake Mountain Road and then um to their facility um a total distance of about six miles is what um is anticipated there this facility um the turbines are are anticipated to have stacks that exceed our minimum height requirement um those are and the applicant can speak to this probably better than I can um but based on their application those are um the final height of those have not been determined but are dependent upon air quality requirements um in order to make sure that they um are able to meet whatever air quality requirements are um are exist for that project they also have an indic have indicated that they will have a water tank um both of these are additional conditional uses um that have that um I was not aware of when when first um the height of those Towers or the water tank um and so I wasn't able to let them know early enough in this process to um help them submit an application for both of those as well so that those applications

will have to come to you um at a later date they can be put on the same application but they will re will be required to receive separate approvals for the water tank and the stacks um the condition or sorry so there have been a number of conditions that have been included um there are many state and federal federal um licenses and permits um and requirements that would need to be met those have been indicated in the conditions um the improvements to the um Road have been included the applicant has um indicated mitigation measures in their application um 13 different mitigation measures that they've indicated they have also been included as um required conditions of of this application um and then the separate conditional use um requirements for the additional height if you have any questions I'll be happy to answer those I just well we might not are the power purchase agreements already in place or I mean this is it's it's a for people that don't understand the power industry I mean I I just kind of know it just because I tried once in a a previous license a lot of this you have to have this in place before you can even start to negotiate power purchase agreements you got to have your line agreements and and so but but you have to have all the stuff in place is it is that my understanding you've got to have all your ducks in a row before um so that it's not a certainty this goes in but you have to go through all the work before that is that's kind of how it is that may be a good question for after the applicant comes up oh sorry sorry I forget uh this is they have come back up y would you like to reset your question after the app uh yeah

uh any questions for staff so I guess a question for Greg um we're we're going through this process without knowing the height of the stacks exhaust stacks and stuff um which seems to me if we approve this then the chances of us denying that approval later would be kind of so again a conditional use is a a permitted use that um you're require you're allowed to add reasonable um restrictions to mitigate um negative impacts so it it they know that it's going to be over 40 feet um and if you feel like there is something about that that you're not comfortable with then then it doesn't this doesn't tie your hands for future approvals um they would be required to obtain that conditional use however um I wanted to make you aware so that that that anticipation of those Stacks or the water tank um will be coming in a future application yes uh I guess my my question to that if you ask council is is that you know we already have these I mean it would be very hard for us to have justification to deny it is that correct because we already have several power plants in the valley um um yeah you'd probably you would be hardpressed to deny it but uhing conditions we can put reasonable conditions on exactly that that's where you want to focus your effort yeah devising conditions is is one of the most important things you can do on

these uses M are there power plants in the county though aren't they in municipalities aren't there isn't is pacent is that have some Springville does for example so I guess is there a difference between I mean if if nothing if there's not an existing power facility in the county then you know that's that's different so we don't yeah we do not have an existing power plant within unincorporated within the unincorporated area everything all of them that I'm a familiar with are in Incorporated areas correct yeah I think that last meeting we had somebody brought up the power supply and it was like Rocky Mountain and potentially one other provider if I remember correctly yeah there there are several different suppliers um but but Rocky Mountain Power is the one that would probably be the the lines that they the transmission lines for this project are owned by them any more questions I don't think so not right now there will be more there will be so we'd like to invite the applicant to come up and if have one question so far if you'd like to address that as part of your presentation I do okay great thank you madam chair Commissioners good evening I'm Greg propest uh consultant for the applicant um we can go to the next slide this project was originally intended to be a a large scale solar project to address power needs of some of the data centers that would logically be interested in um obtaining green power and being able to show to their customers that they were um getting

green energy in the process of developing this facility we historically became aware of a problem that Rocky Mountain Power Pacific or has which is that they're not going to be able to construct the sort of interconnection facilities that not only our project but any other significant solar or for that matter any other significant size power project would need they're not going to be able to construct them until uh 20 uh 31 is what we have uh most recently been told that has has put the entire community of data centered developers in a awful position at least one has already cancelled their intent to go forward what we're trying to We were originally trying to provide a a good um quantity of solar and battery storage Pro uh Power to a data center project so that they would have the flexibility to be able to work with the utility for the balance of the of the demand and use our uh Renewable Power to show that they were partly at least uh a green facility now in light of the inability to get constructed in a timely uh manner it's put them in a terrible position there's been a huge Hub up at at the legislature on this subject with competing bills and and not much satisfactory um resolved to the from the point of view of the community but in view of of the problem of delivering um only part of the load

for a data center customer what we started to work on was a substitute process where we would um have not only the solar and the battery uh uh storage to be able to move part of that solar power into the evening hours but also have ADD turbines so that we could provide uh uh load during all the evening hours as well and and uh firm power Round the Clock to the customer r viable and so that they would be in a position to be able to finance their sort of facilities um in the interim before 2031 comes along so what we have that is driving the situation is sort of a development nightmare um and with terrible adverse consequences for all those companies that are trying to do that sort of business we're trying to support those efforts to to just uh speak about our project we're trying to do a combined project that will give 500 megaw approximately Around the Clock power that means we need to have about 1,000 megaw of solar 800 megaw of battery backup and a uh turbine uh combustion turbine natural gas fuel facility that will handle somewhere over 5 to 600 megaw so that we can provide Rel reliable round thee clock power for these customers that are going to need it um so it's it's to put us all into a position where these facilities will be in a in a a uh position to go forward um

build the data centers provide the extra uh tax uh base for the uh broader community of mun in the county and so what we're trying to do is support that process and that's the reason that we've added the uh gas facility to the pre-existing uh solar facilities that we've already been before this body several times to get approvals on and what we've had to do is to grow the facility to put us into a position to have sufficient solar sufficient battery sufficient uh backup uh uh gas fuel generation such that we can meet this 500 megawatt firm round thee clock power now it's possible that we may not end up needing all of that it is possible that maybe we our deal ends up being 300 megawatts for the uh first couple of data customers so we might end up building in phases but fundamentally we're trying to put ourselves into a position to make sure that we can address the the real needs that these customers are going to have and that's what's driving us so um could you look at the next slide great could look at the next slide thanks this is a concept site plan that shows we would have um we'd have up to 12 combustion turbin um and related facilities we'd have a a Control building we'd have a warehouse we'd have ammonia storage

place we'd have a gas facilities um we'd have everything that we need in order to uh produce um the backup power that we need to firm up all the solar and the and the battery um energy that we're getting ready to provide for customers it is possible that we might be able to um do the project with less than 12 turbin as we've previously described to uh Greg and his staff we're hopeful that we can do that that is a that turns on a very sophisticated and long-term modeling process that you have to to consider WEA what solar facilities behave like in the winter on short days and in Cloudy conditions and on the other end of the spectrum what they behave like in the summer time with long days and lots of sunshine you have to be able to adjust to all those different circumstances to to end up with a flat 500 megawatt product that your customers can to toally rely on for their multi-billion dollar financing because if it's not reliable they'll never get their financing so that's the the goal and the the point of the project in the big picture so this facility would be actually around three and a half miles south of Eagle Mountain City boundary line and we'd be using um Lake Mountain Road for Access down to the um uh gas facility uh there's a couple of more miles another good two and a half almost

three miles that we'd be Paving inside of of uh Eagle Mountain I want to kind of uh take a little bit of a detour just for a second and address a couple of other points you know uh on the previous application we can access the the solar project we have a part of it up in Eagle Mountain we can access that directly from uh Pony Express Road which is a paved Road and and a related point is that we just got a an agreement approved uh by Eagle Mountain City two weeks ago uh Pony Express Road will be paved right up to the solar project at the North End in Eagle Mountain City we're really looking at a situation here where we're working partly in Eagle Mountain City partly down in into the county property but um for Road access we'll be constructing about a six milei long road and we'll need to have a road agreement both with Eagle Mountain City and with the county and we fully plan on doing that we don't do anything until we get those Road access agreements um totally negotiated agreed and approved that's a foundation for being able to move ahead and especially in this case where um it's it's a long road we have two jurisdictions and um we also have to uh at the very uh southern end of where uh Lake Mountain Road curves we have to turn west on a small easement and go another uh mile south South um to the location actually about a mile and a

half to the location of our power plant so this will all be paved and um in terms of Water Supplies for the project we already have a th000 acre feet uh that came with the wres for 1,000 acre feet that came with a a parcel that we have up in Eagle Mountain we do have the ability to uh build a water pipeline to supply the project with that quantity of water we actually are not going to need any like that quantity of water um and I'll explain it a little bit later when we talk about the turbines but we may if we need to build a uh water pipeline from the location the point current point of diversion and the or the the uh City system up Eagle Mountain all the way down to the project facility and also put a a Wastewater return line all the way back to uh Eagle Mountain facilities for disposal of Wastewater now the other alternative on Wastewater is that um we may take a look at um on on water uh we may take a look at working with the state engineer and seeing if we can put in a well down in the vicinity of our power plant and move the point of diversion from that Eagle Mountain Property down to uh the vicinity of our power plant put the well in there and not have to run the the pipeline all that distance if we do run the lines in general we would run both the pipeline and the waste the water line and the waste water line along the Gen uh generally parallel to the um intended

route for our high voltage transmission line that will be moving back up to um Eagle Mountain to an existing substation Pacific or substation where we actually have a signed interconnection agreement with the utility already to interconnect in one of the Bays uh on their existing substation um on the on the waste water um as I indicate in the in the slide we we will treat Wastewater on on site we will either hold it and uh uh either truck it or pipe it to Eagle Mountain City uh in the case of the sanitary waste water we would be doing probably uh septic on on site in the case of uh looking at natural gas um the Kern River pipeline runs down uh within a few hundred feet of our intended uh plant location um and we've been coordinating with uh Kern River already U we believe that um that supply for gas for this uh facility is uh going to be very achievable um the electric transmission you see on the map the the route that's the the transmission line going up to the uh existing substation as I mentioned so um the this is the the sort of infrastructure that would be involved in making it possible to put in you know a substantial gas fuel facility now on oh okay uh I'll indicate just generally

that on air quality matters we are fully meeting both the Technology based standards and the ambient standards we're we'll be using um lm6000 uh PF plus turbin with dry low emission technology which is cleanest technology um that I believe is available um we've been very involved in working with the daq already on the permitting process we have our permit applications in we've been working on dispers erson modeling we um have dispersion modeling results back and we know that we can meet the air quality standards and not have a violation of either hourly standards or annual standards um we've already purchased emissions offsets so that uh we won't have any increase in in uh emissions um I would just indicate in terms of project benefits that that um we're going to be a very reliable source of energy uh we're going to be uh creating a lot of uh Financial opportunity in the area there'll be uh 3 to 500 people working on the project as it's being constructed there'll be 10 to 15 uh permanent employees onsite um there'll be a lot of tax benefits um for the uh County and um I think frankly that constructing the improvements on Lake Mountain Road will open up an area and make it possible to do additional development down into the cord or that

would be served by Lake Mountain Road down in that vicinity and in just in general I just indic we're not going to be a major source of air emissions we're going to be a minor Source staying under the required thresholds um we've got plans to make sure we're not going to be uh generating uh dust we're not going to be using prime agricultural land um we're not going to be placing huge demand on County infrastructure over the long term it's a very modest number of employees a very efficient uh facility and it makes makes it possible for us to provide the quality power that our customers are going to need out into the future so um and so modest uh traffic as well so happy to answer any questions you might have okay um before we go to questions from the applicant given the length of the meeting I move that we take a five minute recess and then reconvene for questions here here second second all in favor yes let's do this

e e e e

e e e e

e e e e e

this back to order and reconvene um um if the applicant would like to return to the podium and if we have questions from are there questions for the applicant I'm I'm okay you're good okay either of you have questions so I guess uh the one question I had is is I guess I was confused originally it was showing the water line being extended from Eagle Mountain and a Wastewater line back but that's that's is that cooling water going back to Eagle Mountain yes Greg do you want to talk about the the water and waste water how it operates in the because it just wouldn't be viable to to try to push your Sewer back to Eagle Mountain so that the Wastewater line is that cooling water that would be returned to Eagle Mountain there's a relatively small amount of Wastewater quite honestly uh in in this this is simple cycle technology we're not going to run combined Cycles we're not going to have a a steam Loop and a whole lot of of water disposal that needs to happen the only water disposal will be uh the inlet cooling blow down um during hotter than 60 Dees you need to have um uh it's like same as a swamp cooler you could think about it like that you introduce uh vapor into the inlet of your uh combustion turbine it drives the temperature way down you get more power out of the turbine that way so that blowdown from the cooler is the only thing we really have to dispose of everything else is uh it it can be taken to sanitary on site and and the other water that goes into the machine is spray intercooling technology and and it just uh increases the power coming out of the machine but there's no disposal of waste water

involved so it's very minor in fact it's probably only ballpark around 20 acre feet a year so very modest amount thank you additional questions okay thank you to the applicant all right um I think we have a few people who may have come for this item the commission would like to um accept comment from the audience we can move to that or is there any objection to to that okay then at this time the commission will hear public comments on this item if anyone from the public would like to address the commission you're welcome to come forward and state your name into the microphone mayor mcken again just want to make sure that you guys do understand we did pass an annexation policy August 14th I'm not sure why you don't know about that but it does incl that area um I know there's a power issue in the valley I know that there's solar Fields coming all I'm asking is please keep in mind the impact that it does have on Fairfield and that it does have on Eagle Mountain because I know that all the construction that goes to Facebook which is just North of their solar Fields that's I also think it's fair to understand too that they are permitted about 380 Acres in Fairfield to have solar Fields adjacent to that is their battery storage which was allowed in Eagle Mountain and so what they want to do is go through Facebook to get to that battery storage any construction that comes to Facebook they have to come they most of their gravel comes from west of Fairfield and then it goes down Tiffany Lane and then over to Facebook because

Eagle Mountain does not want them going through City Center because of the congestion that's already on Eagle Mountain Boulevard and I'm sure you guys have heard about the traff in Eagle Mountain um but I think that it I think it's fair to say that the condition should be that they have allowance from the towns that they're going to go through so they don't impact them like our town has done I also think that you guys should consider that we've worked with enel for years and they actually provided a conditional use permit to us that was one of the most thorough ones that our attorney Todd Sharon has ever looked at we've had WC3 look at it and go over it is there a reason that you guys could not adopt that conditional use permit knowing that it's had several eyes on it and that we know exactly what's in it instead of wondering what's permitted and what's happened I mean it might be a good thing for you guys to look at and say yeah let's adopt that and adopt our ordinance that that is for solar and for battery because they help develop it you know they're they know exactly what's in it but it's gone through a lot of eyes looking at it so anyway I'm just asking just just be mindful of what this is doing to my town and because the Faraday one has impacted us a lot and you know and I don't know those other two pink Corners that's right next to the landfill are they solar fields too the dark pink all of that yeah those aren't solar Fields what are they highlighted for research just for your GSI because there are solar fields planned up there do you guys have any solar fields that are planned to go on that side of Airfield anyway they're all connected so just just keep that in mind of what you're doing to towns around it or let us Annex them in so thank you for everything you guys

do I know it's a thankless job I understand that fully so you just think this all right any additional comments from the public okay seeing none well that painting is crooked in the back uh bring it back to the commission so the quick silver is an is amending an already existing conditional use permit so trying to go back and combine is is that right yes there it's it is an amendment U most of the conditions are similar to what what was existing the only additional um addition to the conditions for that permit or for that approval was let me get to that really quick the um requirement for the 56 foot rideway reservation for access to the islands and then just the kind of another side question um when we get properties that straddle boundaries County and cities and stuff is there a a procedure who takes precedent you know what what's the procedure in those situ are separate approval processes they have to they um generally they don't cross over um we have been in uh as far as um some of the other um things going on in Eagle Mountain we have been contact with their planning department regarding some of those things however um they cannot impose conditions on us and we do not compose uh impose conditions on them

however in working through this process um any generally um we try to work together with other jurisdictions to make sure that um if there are certain requirements overlap or like Road improvements or things of that nature um we try to um ensure that the City's requirements are the ones that because sometimes our requirements are less restrictive and theirs are more restrictive and generally we try to um ensure that if that property is going to be within that jurisdiction then we try to ensure that they meet their requirements for development so kind of setting the stage for if the property was annexed that it would be a smooth process correct a lot of times this happens when there are islands within jurisdictions and um that haven't been annexed and and so they will come and ask for improvements or um development of their property and we generally con um rely on the surrounding jurisdiction to um for their development standards in order to develop those that infrastructure roads or improvements to to their conditions rather than ours so in this case there's not overlap between the two jurisdictions um for this for this for the approvals of this process Eagle Mountain is going through their own process to um for the development of this project in the county is going through their own as well okay so on condition number nine of maintaining the 56 foot reserved access route uh that seems pretty vague um is there I mean I guess if if my property was the one being the island there and and knowing I guess there's no requirement to provide access um I mean I would hope that I

don't know that that would at least be traversible that access 56 foot but there's nothing there that requires that is that right as far as the as far as installing an access road right um there again this is this is private property it's um there's not a County Road there um generally there are going to be internal roads that the the developer will probably have um I don't know they can speak to that the reason that it wasn't specified is there are multiple routes that they could use to get that and I didn't want to um include a requirement that forced them into a specific alignment of that road um to give the existing Property Owners both the developer and also the property owners within there to kind of agree to the the right access for that so there's no exist access we're trying to preserve it's that they need to make sure that there is access yeah so not that we have as far as our records go there might be again as as um our Council has indicated there might be individual agreements there might be existing accesses that are um prescriptive in nature however um there are not any existing roads um and I'm not aware of easements that are in place for access to those properties so um that is something that that the developer and the property owners would need to work out together have any additional questions I don't think so okay any other questions for staff or the applicant I think we've already done that part so okay uh so we have the two items which will need separate motions um but we can look at the conditions that have

been attached to each one are there any additional conditions that commission would like to explore or either item the point was brought up that a lot of the trucks are coming from the west and that's why they take the one route there do we know for sure that the that they're going to take the route that is going to be paved there or can we put a condition in place to say yeah is there anything that we can require I mean we can't tell truck drivers necessarily what to do but I don't know so probably a couple things to that point um there are not like the as you can see the red areas are where the county has um roads um on the official County road map access from the West would have to be granted by the individual property owners in order to cross their property for access to that the access to this site is um obviously kind of what they're going to develop and have to maintain um to address some of those concerns the the I um you could include a condition that the maintenance and restoration of any roads used for the construction of the facility um would have to be assessed at the beginning of the project and and um restored at the end of the project well and I would think that the the owner uh developer could uh they could create a barrier to prevent traffic coming across any areas they could and that that way you you just couldn't access it especially with the truck so you know and there you could add a condition that an approved access construction access be maintained that they submit a

access route and they maintain that access route is submitted access route to the county and that needs to be approved yeah so I would leave it up to Public Works um mainly because Public Works has probably the experience to to um be able to assess and and make sure that the route is suitable um they could work with the adjacent jurisdiction if necessary um to look at that route um to make sure that it is acceptable to the adjacent jurisdiction and then to maintain that as either the develop have the improvements completed before the development of the project or Andor um and generally that's probably going to be the case because fire um fire requirements would require an access road that's meets their qualif their requirements in order to start development of a project so they would those improvements would have to generally be done prior to starting a construction of that project um but you could include a condition that that access construction access be approved by public works and that the maintenance of that road I think that's a reasonable request I'm not sure we're going to remember all the things that you just suggested in there yeah can we is there a way to get that written um sure I would probably just say that the Ana sure I I mean yeah and an access a preferred access route be approved by public appr by public works and any Ro that are impact to be maintained and input from a adjacent cities or something I mean something so that you know so that fair for you is at

least consulted in coordination with adjacent jurisdictions is that something we can do um with the in I mean in I I would probably restricted it in consultation um if you require the adjacent jurisdiction to have an approval then that very difficult for that to work so and and we try to we as much as we can we try to consult adjacent jurisdictions and obviously they're definitely times and that doesn't work out adequately but we do our best to to try and consult with other jurisdictions as much as possible well and I would hope that because the applicants have heard the concerns from Fairfield and and they would you know much like we express the concern to to Snowbird and stuff to to continue to be good neighbors and stuff like that to to do the best in their abilities to uh respect the concerns that Fairfield has even though if you're not having trucks go through there you know just you know everybody wants good neighbors and I think that's a reasonable request and I feel like you guys would would honor that you know so should we uh I'll make a motion that we approve with that additional um condition and all the conditions is listed already on on there for um for the quick silver solar application may need to be just a little bit more specific on that condition so we can refer to the minutes or to the staff recommendation on it but we need to put something in there to know what what condition we're referring

to okay um do you have something written um so the three additional conditions are you talking about just the additional conditions and okay so um the first one would be that an access route be approved by Public Works the second one that um adjacent jurisdictions um be consulted when um developing that access route and the last one would be that the maintenance and restoration of any roads used for the construction of the facility accurate sounds about right yeah anybody catch anything else that needs to go that's good I think that okay okay so now I move to approve the recommendation with those additional conditions in addition to the ones listed already here okay we have a motion is there a second to that motion a second okay um then let's start with commissioner love I I I hi okay so that was the Quicksilver item number three and now we move move to item number four which also needs a motion um there are several conditions that are included for that one um including there's a R Construction use agreement for the construction of Lake Mountain Road so that is in there and so is the decommissioning plan so I know both of those are brought up um on-site vehicular traffic maintenance you see any other conditions that would be appropriate the only question I have about it is the one that we don't really have an answer to Is How high the the building would be and I'm not sure how we could at this point impose a condition

on it I yeah there there isn't a way that's a separate conditional use application um and um you as as that application comes to before you that conditions can be applied specific to those okay those requests I mean and this is question more for the applicant stuff like that is there is there a timeline that you guys are looking at that you you have any idea how quick that can come in because again my opinion is is is if we approve this then we're our hands are going to be basically tied to allow some type of a height you know we we're we're going to it's going to be difficult for us to restrict the height of your exhaust stxs if we approve this in my opinion you know and so I'm kind of like well the height is currently restricted to the the limit in the code so we're we're fixed by 40 feet correct so we we can't go higher than that currently when we come back which we hope to do within the next month or two with the request to go potentially up to 80 feet then at that point you would have the opportunity to evaluate the additional height um and whether there are conditions uh that are appropriate to impose in connection with that application and approval but we're we're the the range that we're talking though is between 40 and 80 we're not talking North Salt Lake kencott th000 feet no no okay okay yeah I don't have any concerns any from you all right then someone like to make a motion on this item it's probably written here toward the end made the last

two that'll make motion okay that the Utah County Planning Commission approved conditional use application CU 205 25-01 a request for a natural gas power plant as an electrical power generation plant located approximately 14400 West and 2200 South in the Cedar Valley area of of unincorporated Utah County subject to staff findings included in section four of Staff report and the following minimum conditions items 1 through n okay we have a motion do we have a second second okay uh commissioner her I I I I okay motion passes for mosida energy item number four which brings us to our public hearing item the land use Amendment for Sundance Mountain Resort and we begin with a presentation from staff and once again we thank everyone who came to comment on this issue for your contributions to our discussion so Greg has this one also um I'll let him get notes organized there and you sent them over there this time yeah I came over here to speed this thing up just kid where were you two hours ago seriously um just as a reminder that as we mentioned this will require a public hearing but we can do the uh the staff presentation first the applicants here has sat through all this and his gets his chance in the spotlight so we'll let him make any uh um proposals or uh presentations and then open up for public hearing um where is the applicant if the applicant would like

to good job it's a long wait thanks for staying okay again Greg Robinson for Community Development um so 4.06 or 4.60 is our requirements for off street parking um currently our ordinance requires that all parking for a use or facility um uh be maintained on site um as you know uh the applicant Sundance has a resort they have a lot of seasonal uses and a lot of um Peak parking demand B based on their location um being in narrow canyons and um in kind of less developable areas um which is kind of the point and where where they're being located the applicant is is looking to utilize off street off-site parking in order to um meet the parking requirements for their uses um and to minimize the impact on the roads and the Canyons that they're going to be located that the recck resort would be located in um those changes um we've worked back and forth with the the staff has worked back and forth with the applicant and come up with language um for those they include additional definitions for seasonal parking and seasonal recreational uses um then um these are some minor changes to the existing ordinance but then down below in section three is where all of the changes are included they include um a a a restriction on the amount of offsite parking to 40% a total of 40% um so the rest of it would have to be maintained on site that an engineered

plan be produced um to identify for the parking plan um and later the the seasonal parking um be limited to one seasonal recreational use um and that that use not exceed 150 days um in the any shared parking agreement would have to be maintained for any use of other parking facilities um and that oh sorry that um that the uh facility or use be inform the uh sorry the patrons of the Recreational Resort where that off site parking Bel Lo is located transportation from those off-site locations to to the use um the the that they receive um approval verification from the whatever jurisdiction that off-site location is located and that um that Transit be available to them to reduce the amount of parking required for um those uses that they um have exper or they are experiencing uh this is something that supported by staff um this is a reasonable request for for a resort to um have that I think that the applicant can speak to the fact that there are many other Resorts that have this option available and it's just something that um the county hasn't in included in the past so this is just um to allow that flexibility for the for the uh for Sundance and and recreational Resorts if you have questions I'll be happy to answer those

does this require a shuttle service sorry does this require a shuttle service to provide transportation from the offsite parking it requires them to provide some kind of transportation from the offsite locate offsite parking locations to the the resort yes and that would be found in um in e at the method of transportating transporting Recreational Resort patrons from uh must be provided for all approved offsite locations are there maximum distances these offsite parkings can be we discussed that um it's difficult to anticipate how far away those can be we expect that most of those are reasonable because they're going to have to provide transportation to those locations um we we didn't want to necessarily restrict that at this point um but yes we discussed that um and it didn't seem like it was necessary for this by on staffs per perspective at least I don't think they're going to be busing anyone from Eagle Mountain probably not and if they do then Eagle M support well given the challenges of development in an area like that developing or finding offsite parking that's really close is probably limited so we were looking Maybe off of the mountain a little bit Yeah currently they they've indicated they've been um working with um Oram and Provo to utilize Park um parking facilities that are not utilized during the winter months um as as intensely so they utilize areas of parking that um generally don't get utilized in in the time that they need it so sounds mutually beneficial

and the applicants here I'd love to hear from the applicant yeah okay the applicant would like to uh come to the microphone and uh state your name and where you're from yeah my name is Zar Johnson I'm the Chief Operating Officer of Sundance Mountain Resort and uh kudos to you guys for enduring such a such a long evening I appreciate it um as always I think Greg did a really good job articulating um kind of what our our needs are and what we're looking for is uh Utah County continues to grow and the popularity of Sundance continues to grow we're looking for ways to be able to accommodate anyone that wants to participate up there as you guys have all indicated um we're limited on land and and development even with that um over the last three years we have been able to add about 350 additional parking spots but we're kind of maxed out um for multiple years we have been providing off-site parking we have contracts with both orm City and Provo City Orum specifically with Palisade park at the mouth of the canyon the soccer fields there um as well as tonoga Park uh where the storytelling festival takes place and then with orm specifically Canyon Glenn Park which is the parking lot just kind of right south of or sorry west of brid bille Falls um UTA provides access from those well from the Palisade parking lot as well as they have a bus stop at Harmon and the mall um and then we provide um complimentary um what we call Park and Ride service from the other two lots um for our guest any season passholder any date ticket guest uh can park at those lots and on our peak days not seven days a week but on our peak days we offer complimentary service um up to Sundance um we have good utilization on that the

UTA um on a peak day will average uh 300 up the mountain um our parking ride on its busy day will'll do 250 to 260 gas um up to the mountain from those parking lots those are contracted we pay um both Provo and orm city for the use of those during the December through uh April 15th is the duration of those contracts currently so I appreciate that you've cut my uh drive time for my kids from uh it's only it's 12 minutes normally but it's only 6 minutes I drop him off at one of those so thank you yeah of course and and Bishop bow was he was my Bishop when uh okay Bishop Brent Beck y yeah so he's my neighbor he was my neighbor grown an amazing family great guy so so sounds like you're already doing this and we're just updating code to make it yeah so we have we have a couple projects in well one in progress right now we're building an an inn um and we're looking at um at adding an additional lift um to our to our Mountain um as we started conversations with the county on that project it's two years out but as we started conversations on that one of the things they asked us to look at is a parking study um so it's really through the process of the parking study um that formerly it was identified that we're short um a few parking spots to be able to meet our Peak demand um and the parking study indicated that with our offsite parking that we currently have we more than meet the demand we have a surplus of parking when you include all those additional off-site spots um because the county or the land use ordinance isn't currently or currently requires the lots to be adjacent and owned um we worked with the

county to go through the process to hopefully get your guys' approval to amend that to allow for lots that aren't ajent um so that's what we're here to do and that's what triggered the um the request for this who monitors the those contracts to ensure that they always have those yeah that's that's actually built into this that that yeah will be required every year to submit to staff okay our our agreements and those those agreements currently are annual so we do meet with both Provo and orm annually and um negotiate those agreements um with this now we're going to go to them and see if we can get some longer term um agreements with them um but for sure annually we'll submit to staff those agreements they have those on on record and it's I I don't remember what number but I think it's Incorporated in the proposed amendment language so I didn't think to ask a snowbird but are you connected at all or do you anticipate being connected to the Olympics and any from that yeah I mean we'll see we won't post any events due to um our size Snowbird I know for sure um uh is the same situation these tight Canyons Big Little Cottonwood and North Fort Canyon just can't accommodate the the volume of traffic but um in 2002 when we hosted the Olympics um Sundance was a really popular spot for a lot of corporate groups that would bring guests in to to participate and and enjoy the Olympics so we anticipate being involved in that way and certainly as a as a ski resort in the state of Utah will be proud and excited to to be a part of that that experience so do you anticipate any additional changes to this ordinance in order to be able to

accommodate that I I don't yeah no I don't know yeah I mean do we need to do more than here yeah what what happens a lot of time times well what happened in 2002 is that our our lodging product was really popular but the ski mountain was was quiet cuz people were out participating in the events and going to the events people were staying at Sundance because of the beauty and what Sundance is um but the skier visits the the participation on the mountain actually reduces it's the same effect that Park City gets during the film festival um lodging gets filled up with um guests that are off doing other things and not necessarily skiing um so I don't anticipate anticipate a need for that and again our offsite our our current parking plan um shows that we with the offsite parking that we do have that we have just under 300 um additional parking spots than what the peak demand shows that we need so we do have we do have a pretty decent buffer as long as we can maintain those three those three parking parking lot so um and we're we're looking for other things we're uh Frasier Park um you guys are probably familiar with that in the canyon we're in conversations with that family to see if we can lease that land during the winter time puts the proximity whoever ask that question it puts the proximity much closer to Sundance and a lot more efficient for us and that land kind of sits empty during the summer so we're constantly and will continue to look for opportunities to um provide additional parking make access easier it's in our best interest to make it as easy as possible for people to to get to the resort and to limit the congestion in that Canyon so okay any additional

questions okay when are you're ready for a motion I have thank you we have to Public public hearing so we need a motion to open the public hearing so be it second all in favor I hi public hearing is now open on this item if anyone from the public come on somebody come forward come up she been here the whole time okay seeing none um I think we can move to a motion let's maybe close the public hearing yeah okay too so move to close public hearing do we have a second second all in favor I I public hearing is now closed there's no you going to make it yeah good is it your turn uh uh I move Mo approval that the Utah County uh Planning Commission recommend approval to the Utah County Commission of the proposed amendments of the Utah County Land Ordinance section uh 4.60 to allow Recreation resorts to utilize offsite parking locations to meet parking space requirements along with any applicable renumbering or reformatting based on findings listed in section uh five of the staff report before we take a second on that I did notice one typo on number six have three then ab56 there's a a lonely T after parking okay with grammatical Corrections is my motion all right we have a motion is there a second second oh yeah we got a roll call uh I I I I motion passes uh is there any additional business from the county thankfully no okay thank you for everyone's participation and making this happen tonight so yeah and thank you to staff as usual thank you to Marie for putting together together this massive packet with little divider things and

everything that's a lot of work so thank you do we we we do have just why we got you here we will have at least one item for April so clear your calendars what is it you say we will have a meeting in April okay so we do have some applications adjourned uh we need ation motion to adjourn some moved second all in favor I say I Chris Chris we don't have a quum say I I'm still here say I I thank you good job what's that