Solitude Mountain Resort (Amber Broadaway)
Amber Broadway Solitude. I thought maybe I would just correct a few things that came up:

One is the Nordic Center we own that, that’s our building we own it; so if we want to tear it down and remodel it, that could be something that happens in the future. So just want to be sure you all understand

The Solitude Village: Solitude owns a lot of the land in the village. Carrie may not understand that but most of the SVMA land easements are the land underneath that is owned by the resort: we own the Inn, we own the admin building. And then as far as parking across the road, I appreciate that recommendation, but there is precedent for that, they have that at Snowbird

I think for some online, the boundary maps are there for different reasons. This boundary map that you’re trying to put in place is not going to give the resort anymore authority over private property owners, that’s not going to change.

What we’re trying to do here is come up with a with some sort of location in which whether or not we’re going to be subject to CUP (“Conditional Use Permit”) process or legislative process for development requests, right?

So I think it’s really important that those of you online understand this boundary map is not going to give the Resort anymore authority to do anything on your private lands than exists now and I think there seems to be some confusion. And I don’t know if you all agree with that or not.

I guess my take is this: we talked about when this first got started you talked about how to address what these zoning and these definitions we’re going to apply, you propose bringing in our Forest Service boundaries which are invisible lines drawn for a particular set of reasons, and those reasons made sense for why they excluded The Village, because The Village was private land. But they’re invisible lines and they have different intentions.

I think it’s quite interesting that you’re taking our existing Forest Service SUP (“Special Use Permit”) map and you’re cutting it up. You’re cutting it up for reasons that you think makes sense, which to me seems no different than my request for you to include a map that includes our lands.

I would think at the very least if you’re going to move forward on a map it should the lands that we have. It should include our current Forest Service boundary. It should include the lands that we own and then we acquired based on the zoning, and the zoning and the actual use at the time of acquisition.

And so I don’t think there’s any difference between the map that we recommended. And what you’re attempting to do is slicing and dicing our existing Forest Service boundary map, and I think it’s really important that you think about that. And I also don’t know but I think you should make sure you understand what are the risks here, to downgrading and downzoning privately held lands. If those no longer have the value that they had at the time of acquisition, what are the liabilities that are related to that?

But the town should probably understand before they move on something. So I would just ask that you please consider again the lands that, all of the resort lands, and we believe Ski Resort support facilities should be something that’s allowed in all of the zones within the lands that we own and that are part of our Forest Service boundary.

And I would also encourage you to please make sure that you are not going to create non-conforming. Please don’t do something that’s going to create our existing operating facilities that are now out of compliance.

Thank you.

Brighton Resort (Mike Doyle)
Most of what is on that [the MSD boundary map] we agree with. We do still have private parcels that are not on that map. I’ve been working with our surveyors to get that information to the MSD. My biggest concern and something that I would like to have on public record, is that this does not completely lock down a ski resort. Through Conditional Use Permits there are avenues that we can still expand onto private property, when the time is right and the conditions are right.

That’s really all the input I have.