Mayor: counteroffer for Treasure woul...

Mayor: counteroffer for Treasure would be 'fruitless' - The Park Record

There are 32 comments on the Park Record story from Dec 27, 2011, titled Mayor: counteroffer for Treasure would be 'fruitless' - The Park Record. In it, Park Record reports that:

Real estate negotiations typically go something like this: one side puts a number onto the table, the other side makes a counteroffer and the buyer and seller then attempt to negotiate a price.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Park Record.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Tits Mcgee

United States

#21 Dec 28, 2011
Please tell me there was a Taco Bell within the building in the origional proposal.
Utter stupidity

West Jordan, UT

#22 Dec 28, 2011
What did the attorney's conclude after they studied this issue repeatedly over the past 5 years?

When will our hired attorney's fully disclose their opinions on this mess?

I am sure if they supported our cause to stop or alter the sweeney's current proposal we would have heard about their opinions in addition to what we know and heard from them... "Sweeney's have the right to build".

I cannot imagine that our city cowards failed to get our legal eagles to ascertain a legal opinion on the sq. footage issues/fight being discussed after reviewing the numerous documents.

Does anyone know what the "Park City Tax Payers attorneys" concluded with regards to the sq footage issue?

Let them build what they are legally entitled to build,

STOP WASTING MY MONEY!
What do you think

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#23 Dec 29, 2011
Check out the website www.treasureparkcity.com to see what they propose and decide if you like it or not.
To save time, look at the pdf under presentations dated 8-25-2004. They have proposed photos of how the development will look from varying points in the city.
concerned

Salt Lake City, UT

#24 Dec 29, 2011
What do you think wrote:
Check out the website www.treasureparkcity.com to see what they propose and decide if you like it or not.
To save time, look at the pdf under presentations dated 8-25-2004. They have proposed photos of how the development will look from varying points in the city.
I think more up to date renditions of what Treasure would look like are in the Submitted Docs tab. Take a look at V.22 on down. Really gives one an idea of the impact on our views, traffic, density and life in Park City.

To suggest somehow "oh well, the Montage was built and didn't disrupt PC" and say this is any comparision is ridiculous. As an aside I recall at one Planning Commission meeting hearing someone guestimate how many thousands of truckload would be needed to haul dirt away versus the number of truck loads needed for the Montage. Whatever number it was I really don't recall, but it was many times that of the Montage.
Thanks for posting the site. Again it is http://www.treasureparkcity.com/subdocs_a.htm...
Enough

Park City, UT

#25 Dec 29, 2011
another PC local wrote:
<quoted text>
Old Timer, I really appreciate the benefit of your years of wisdom and local knowledge. But before you elect yourself as local historian, I've been skiing here as a visitor far longer than you've lived here. I remember too when the town was very different from what it is today. I have neither the time nor the inclination to verify, but I sincerely doubt what you say regarding "well over a million square feet" below Heber Ave. But I will say this; IF in fact you think the visual and living impact of the Treasure project wouldn't be substaintially worse than the building and extension of main street you should have attended a few Planning Commission or City Council meetings. And if you had, you'd have seen a million square feet of blight on the mountainside. One structure was 10 stories carved into the side of the mountain. In no way shape or form would any sane person compare that to the buildings on lower main, the addition of a town lift and the rest. You really should have seen for yourself the mess that the Sweeneys propose. One other point. If you think the accessibility up and down Marsac, in snow or not, even compares to the accessibility up and down say Empire in old town you need to get a clue.
You are clearly a "growth at any cost" guy. And there are plenty of you I suppose. Lots of knuckleheads in these forums. But I'd ask this. What % of Old Town residents would think building Treasure will benefit their lives? Who of them think this will make PC a better town? Additionally, please lend your wisdom to the real question. No one is denying that the Sweeneys have rights. The question remains, why are we even responding to their quest for a million square feet when they've been granted 400 odd thousand?
OK sport here are the facts - Marriott Mountain Resort is over 600,000 square feet above grade with 280 parking spaces and support underground. The Caledonia / Town Lift development is 400,000 square feet above grade with over 100 underground parking space and support. The Town Lift is 90,000, Sky Lodge 100,000.

As to the impact of these developments above - when this was first proposed it was heralded by folks like you that it would "ruin'" the spirit Old Town - as a matter of fact and record the town lift and ski bridge were fought for years as they would be eyesores and would never be financially successful. I bet you have used both. In the end would you want these facilities torn down?

As for "development at any cost" that is a simple minded slam by a person who has no stake in this town as a resident. Our town is a tourism center - plain and simple. Without tourism we have no industry to feed ourselves and to provide a future to our children. On the other hand you have been coming here for more years that I have lived here. Answer this - would you want to return to the days when PCMR was Treasure Mountain and DV was a third rate local ski resort? Or do you like being able to ski the #1 and $5 rated resorts, have a choice of over 50 restaurants on Main Street alone, go to the Egytian, see something at the Ecceles, have over 400 miles of trails in summer, or the simple pleasure of a free - repeat free - bus ride wherever you want? My bet is that you like it like it is today. Well those facilities take money to develop and operate and all the restaurants, stores, theaters, bars take people to be able to survive, As to the free services and expansive amenities you enjoy in our city that took money to build and provide and it is all provided by our tourism industry. I never said development at not cost I clearly stated development with control, thought and vision.

BTW were do you live? Somewhere urban I bet with lots of pavement. How is that working for you? If well then what is your point in this discussion. If not then why not put your energy and efforts into shaping where you live and once you get that just right come on down and play in our town.
Townie

Ogden, UT

#26 Dec 29, 2011
Great News wrote:
If they do a shift to PCMR then they need to provide unnderground parking for their guests.
Townie, do you agree with the setiment this was all play for a buyout?
I don't. If St Regis and Montage are making it with far less disirable locations, this place will do well. Waking distance to main street and slope side will give them a unique advantage.
I don't think it was a play for a buyout. The Sweeneys honestly believe their project is good for town, particularly Main St. I'm ok with some project there as that was the agreement for the 90% open space. However, that project needs to conform to the 1984 agreement (and Code in place at the time) as well. The current application does not conform in many respects. The Sweeneys should also be doing everything they can to mitigate traffic not increasing parking (if you build it, they will come) and generating traffic with a conference center (not allowed by the 1984 MPD). Visually, there are two buildings that are more obtrusive than the others, in my opinion. Moving half (or so) of the density to the PCMR base would be a good thing, also in my opinion. Get the application to conform to the '84 MPD and then have detailed discussions. The whole closed door negotiations were premature.
another PC local

Salt Lake City, UT

#27 Dec 29, 2011
Enough wrote:
<quoted text>
OK sport here are the facts - Marriott Mountain Resort is over 600,000 square feet above grade with 280 parking spaces and support underground. The Caledonia / Town Lift development is 400,000 square feet above grade with over 100 underground parking space and support. The Town Lift is 90,000, Sky Lodge 100,000.
As to the impact of these developments above - when this was first proposed it was heralded by folks like you that it would "ruin'" the spirit Old Town - as a matter of fact and record the town lift and ski bridge were fought for years as they would be eyesores and would never be financially successful. I bet you have used both. In the end would you want these facilities torn down?
As for "development at any cost" that is a simple minded slam by a person who has no stake in this town as a resident. Our town is a tourism center - plain and simple. Without tourism we have no industry to feed ourselves and to provide a future to our children. On the other hand you have been coming here for more years that I have lived here. Answer this - would you want to return to the days when PCMR was Treasure Mountain and DV was a third rate local ski resort? Or do you like being able to ski the #1 and $5 rated resorts, have a choice of over 50 restaurants on Main Street alone, go to the Egytian, see something at the Ecceles, have over 400 miles of trails in summer, or the simple pleasure of a free - repeat free - bus ride wherever you want? My bet is that you like it like it is today. Well those facilities take money to develop and operate and all the restaurants, stores, theaters, bars take people to be able to survive, As to the free services and expansive amenities you enjoy in our city that took money to build and provide and it is all provided by our tourism industry. I never said development at not cost I clearly stated development with control, thought and vision.
BTW were do you live? Somewhere urban I bet with lots of pavement. How is that working for you? If well then what is your point in this discussion. If not then why not put your energy and efforts into shaping where you live and once you get that just right come on down and play in our town.
Hey Old Timer-I guess you don't read so well. I live here in Park City.
Buy Buy

Azusa, CA

#28 Dec 29, 2011
Utter stupidity wrote:
What did the attorney's conclude after they studied this issue repeatedly over the past 5 years?
When will our hired attorney's fully disclose their opinions on this mess?
I am sure if they supported our cause to stop or alter the sweeney's current proposal we would have heard about their opinions in addition to what we know and heard from them... "Sweeney's have the right to build".
I cannot imagine that our city cowards failed to get our legal eagles to ascertain a legal opinion on the sq. footage issues/fight being discussed after reviewing the numerous documents.
Does anyone know what the "Park City Tax Payers attorneys" concluded with regards to the sq footage issue?
Let them build what they are legally entitled to build,
STOP WASTING MY MONEY!
Ha, ha, they don't care about your money and the reason they shift all of the descisions to consultants and outside legal advice is because they do not want to be accountable for making descisions. So if sht hits fan Tom Baklay and Mayor Williams can shift the blame to somebody else and not take responsiblity. Between the two of them, they are the cowardly team to ever occupy city hall.
Utter stupidity

West Jordan, UT

#29 Dec 29, 2011
What happens if we don't do a deal for this proposed hotel?

What happens to the 90% OPEN SPACE agreement if we turn down this plan?

What happens to Old Town with that hill littered with mansions and NO open space? Is that what you want?

Property owners have rights and we should let them build and get them to do all the off site improvements we need to make this work best. Looking back the town lift fight was rediculious - what a tremendous asset this is to our town, Deer Crest went to court and was approved by a judge leaving the cities and counties compromised when THE DEVELOPER WON !!!

90% open space forever or ... who knows what down the line?

LET THEM BUILD - they seemily have done everything by the book and have made lower Main what it is today.
Buy Buy

Azusa, CA

#30 Dec 29, 2011
My advice to the Sweeney's, invest in the next election, audit the city's spending habits, flush out the corruption, educate the citizens, and send Williams back to being a real estate agent or Mary Kay salesman. The re-visit the project with a reasonable person with common sense.
Great News

Salt Lake City, UT

#31 Dec 29, 2011
Townie, thanks.

I would you let them bounce to 600 K if it included below ground parking. Convention centers attract summer traffic and bankers. Both are good for our town.

I agree traffic logistics are bad on that hillside, but I bet most of the tourists using a place like this will be taking shuttles. It would be interesting to see numbers for the montage and Stiens for their traffic. They seem to be competing for the same $$'s and customers.
Townie

Ogden, UT

#32 Dec 29, 2011
Great News wrote:
Townie, thanks.
I would you let them bounce to 600 K if it included below ground parking. Convention centers attract summer traffic and bankers. Both are good for our town.
I agree traffic logistics are bad on that hillside, but I bet most of the tourists using a place like this will be taking shuttles. It would be interesting to see numbers for the montage and Stiens for their traffic. They seem to be competing for the same $$'s and customers.
A total square footage of around 600K makes sense and is what they proposed in 2004 excluding parking. Parking is costly to build and has no return so I would want as little as possible if I were the developer. Yes, many guests at other properties use the shuttles and the free City buses. But the Sweeneys are proposing additional parking and that makes no sense. No question that a convention might work here and be good for the town. It is just not allowed by the zoning and the '84 agreement at Treasure. At PCMR or Bonanaza Park, go for it.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Park City Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
dispen-sary 24/7 A d d y s IRs n XR etc May 15 Moleba 1
dispen-sary 24/7 A d d y s IRs n XR etc May 15 Puissan jay 1
Solitude Apr '18 Heavenly 1
News More Dogs on Main Street - The Park Record (Jun '09) Mar '18 IN Kouts 7
News Imagine Dragons singer in Sundance film about L... Mar '18 Pete 3
News Imagine Dragons front man advocates for LGBT Mo... Jan '18 Seriously 2
News Imagine Dragons singer in Sundance film about L... Jan '18 Christsharian Dee... 3

Park City Jobs

Personal Finance

Park City Mortgages