PROJECT OVERVIEW WHAT IS THE GENERAL PLAN? WHY UPDATE THE PLAN? THE GENERAL PLAN WILL: WASATCH CANYONS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE

Similar documents
System Group Meeting #1. March 2014

PROPOSED ACTION South 3000 East Salt Lake City, UT United States Department of Agriculture

Central Wasatch Visitor Use Study STEVEN W. BURR, PH.D. AND CHASE C. LAMBORN, M.S. INSTITUTE FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION AND TOURISM UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY

Preferred Recreation Recommendations Stemilt-Squilchuck Recreation Plan March 2018

Draft Transportation System Existing Conditions. System Group Recommendations

UTA Ski Service Redesign. Christopher Chesnut Sr. Manager of Integrated Service Planning Utah Transit Authority Salt Lake City, UT

EPPERSON INDUSTRIAL PARK

SOUTH INTERCHANGE AREA

A CASE FOR COMPLETING THE JORDAN RIVER PARKWAY: A

10/25/2013. What is the SCORP?! 2013 Local Government Survey 2013 Statewide Public Survey Advisory Group Priority Areas Your Suggestions!

Map 1.1 Wenatchee Watershed Land Ownership

Longmont to Boulder Regional Trail Jay Road Connection DRAFT FINAL REPORT

TransAction Overview. Introduction. Vision. NVTA Jurisdictions

CHAPTER 5. Chapter 5 Recreation Element

Decision Memo for Desolation Trail: Mill D to Desolation Lake Trail Relocation

ENVISIONING AUSTIN s Airport of the Future

South Colony Basin Recreation Fee Proposal

TOOELE MULTI-TENANT INVESTMENT OFFERING

HEBER EXCLUSIVE LISTING HEBER CITY, WASATCH COUNTY, UTAH

McLean Citizens Association Transportation Committee Project Briefing

±10.23 ACRES MOUNTAIN VIEW CORRIDOR AB 71

Arlington County Board Meeting Project Briefing. October 20, 2015

Welcome and thank you for being here! Kick-Off Public Workshop November 19, 2014

Airport Planning Area

Public Information Meetings. October 5, 6, 7, and 15, 2015

I-95/395 HOV/Bus/HOT Lanes Project Overview

Section 1 Introduction

Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest Salt Lake Ranger District

FINAL TESTIMONY 1 COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. July 13, 2005 CONCERNING. Motorized Recreational Use of Federal Lands

Wilderness Stewardship Plan Scoping Newsletter Winter 2013

Resort Municipality Initiative Annual Report 2015

MAPLEWOOD VILLAGE CENTRE AND INNOVATION DISTRICT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN & DESIGN GUIDELINES. November 6, 2017 Regular Meeting of Council

State Park Visitor Survey

State of the Shared Vacation Ownership Industry. ARDA International Foundation (AIF)

Sibley LUPA. Board Executive Committee Meeting December 7, 2017

5 Rail demand in Western Sydney

Clearwater Lake Provincial Park. Draft Management Plan

Welcome to the future of Terwillegar Park a Unique Natural Park

9 TO 71 ACRES INDUSTRIAL

Stage 2 ION: Light Rail Transit (LRT) from Kitchener to Cambridge

4.0 Context for the Crossing Project

FORECASTING FUTURE ACTIVITY

ECONOMIC PROFILE PARK CITY & SUMMIT COUNTY, UTAH

Word Count: 3,565 Number of Tables: 4 Number of Figures: 6 Number of Photographs: 0. Word Limit: 7,500 Tables/Figures Word Count = 2,250

±20 ACRES AVAILABLE IN HIDEOUT, UT

AB 172 AB 154 AB 68 AB 202 AB 201 AB 171 AB 111 AB 173 BEST NEW OPPORTUNITY IN MAGNA CITY MAGNA, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. Subject

October 23, 2017 Council Workshop

Indicators of Sustainable Development for Tourism Destinations

PROUDLY BRINGING YOU CANADA AT ITS BEST. Management Planning Program NEWSLETTER #1 OCTOBER, 2000

MONTEREY REGIONAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN TOPICAL QUESTIONS FROM THE PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND TOPICAL RESPONSES

KANANASKIS COUNTRY PROVINCIAL RECREATION AREAS MANAGEMENT PLAN DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE - November 20, 2007

DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENT, FLEET, & SOLID WASTE UPDATE: REGIONAL RIDESHARE PROGRAM RECOMMENDATION

Risk Assessment in Winter Backcountry Travel

Section II. Planning & Public Process Planning for the Baker/Carver Regional Trail began in 2010 as a City of Minnetrista initiative.

Connie Rudd Superintendent, Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park

Chapter 1: Introduction Draft

Mount Pleasant (42, 43) and Connecticut Avenue (L1, L2) Lines Service Evaluation Study Open House Welcome! wmata.com/bus

Briefing Paper: USFS Wilderness and Other Federal Designations

Shelf Road Recreation Area 2015 BLM Annual Report of Rocky Mountain Field Institute Stewardship Under BLM Agreement L12AC20483 November 19, 2015

Chapter 1: Introduction

A summary of Draft Makara Peak Mountain Bike Park Master Plan

13.1 REGIONAL TOURISM ISSUES AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

MT. H O O D & T H E G O R G E T O U R I S M L I S T E N I N G S E S S I O N O V E R V I E W

MINUTES ALTA TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 8, 2015 ALTA COMMUNITY CENTER ALTA, UTAH

Land Use. Grasslands and Rangelands National Parks and Reserves. Thursday, October 9, 14

Parkland County Municipal Development Plan Amendment Acheson Industrial Area Structure Plan

2014 STATEWIDE COMPREHENSIVE OUTDOOR RECREATION PLAN

Pinellas County Environmental Lands

DRAFT Appendix A Appendix B. Planning Process & Public Participation

School Group Permits for Kananaskis Country Parks and Protected Areas-Memo

1/2 ACRE LOTS STARTING AT $85,000 - ALL INFO INCLUDED WASATCH COUNTY, UTAH

CHAPTER FIVE PROSPECTS FOR FUTURE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

ECONOMIC PROFILE. Tourism

LA Metro Rapid - Considerations in Identifying BRT Corridors. Martha Butler LACMTA, Transportation Planning Manager Los Angeles, California

Opportunities for Solitude in Salt Lake Ranger District Wilderness Areas; Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest

Recreational Services Plan. Gatineau Park. Phase 1: Planning Framework

BST Coalition Annual Report 2012 Table of Contents

Chapter 2: Summary of Existing Open Space System

Gold Coast. Rapid Transit. Chapter twelve Social impact. Chapter content

Business Item No

City of Durango 5.8 FUNDING TRAILS DEVELOPMENT

The Future of the Road to Revolutions. A Battle Road Scenic Byway Public Forum November 9, 2010

IL 390 Station. Wood Dale Open House Summary 5/18/17

ROAD AND TRAIL PROJECT APPROVAL

A TRANSPORT SYSTEM CONNECTING PEOPLE TO PLACES

Land Management Summary

US 380 FEASIBILITY STUDY

BST Coalition Annual Report 2005

Recreational Carrying Capacity

Appendix 1: Best Management Practices For Hang Gliding and Paragliding in Jasper National Parks

Wallace Falls State Park Classification and Management Planning Stage 3 Preliminary Recommendations July 18, 2018 Sultan City Hall

April 10, Mark Stiles San Juan Public Lands Center Manager 15 Burnett Court Durango, CO Dear Mark,

WASHINGTON STATE PARKS LAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

Dover Park Master Plan. Community Design Event Tuesday, May 22, 5 7 pm

RELATED SANTA CLARA SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA. RELATED SANTA CLARA Santa Clara, CA

Mechanized River Valley Access Public Engagement Report. April 2015

Thank you for this second opportunity to comment on the proposed revisions to the Coconino National Forest Management plan.

Alternative 3 Prohibit Road Construction, Reconstruction, and Timber Harvest Except for Stewardship Purposes B Within Inventoried Roadless Areas

National Outdoor Recreation Conference April 2018

Trail # NW Tuesday, June DESIGN. Provide an Review the Provide an. Project Goals: System system. wayfinding

Transcription:

WASATCH CANYONS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PROJECT OVERVIEW WHAT IS THE GENERAL PLAN? The General Plan establishes goals and policies as a basis for land use and development regulations, transportation planning, housing, recreation, and economic development. As a long-range vision, the Plan identifies how the Canyons should change or be preserved over the next 20 years. THE GENERAL PLAN WILL: ARTICULATE A LONG-RANGE VISION for the Wasatch Canyons; ESTABLISH A POLICY AND PRIORITIES FRAMEWORK for future County initiatives and decision-making; ESTABLISH A FRAMEWORK for coordinating with the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest and other jurisdictional and service-providing entities; and IDENTIFY IMPLEMENTATION STEPS for the community to make this vision a reality. WHY UPDATE THE PLAN? Because Utah State Code requires cities and counties to have General Plans and update them periodically. The Wasatch Canyons General Plan was first adopted in 1989 and much has changed since then; To include residents of the community in the planning process and ask for input; and To define realistic implementation strategies to achieve the community s vision. The Plan Update will build upon and integrate previous planning efforts to create a roadmap for the future.

WASATCH CANYONS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE SCHEDULE PROJECT PROCESS SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING SUMMER FALL WINTER FOUNDATION VISION CHOICES STRATEGIES PLAN 2017 2018 2019 BACKGROUND RESEARCH OF EXISTING PLANS EXISTING CONDITIONS SNAPSHOTS STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS LAUNCH PROJECT WEBSITE * PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE/KICK-OFF * * * * PUBLIC WORKSHOPS ONLINE AND IN PERSON SURVEYS PUBLIC WORKSHOPS ANALYSIS--STRENGTHS,WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, & THREATS PRESENT CHOICES PRIORITZE GOALS AND STRATEGIES DEVELOP DRAFT VISION DOCUMENT MAPS AND PUBLIC INPUT ON CHOICES POLICY RECEOMMENDATIONS FINALIZE VISION DOCUMENT DEVELOP DRAFT PLAN DEVELOP DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DRAFT FINAL PLANS PUBLIC REVIEW AND OPEN HOUSE EVENTS * PUBLIC REVIEW ONLINE ADOPTION PROCESS * Key Public Engagement Opportunities WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU! The planning process puts strong emphasis on ensuring participation of residents in every stage of decision-making, and your involvement is paramount to the success of the General Plan Update! Our process will include focus groups, public workshops, and events held in-person and online. These opportunities are designed to allow everyone to share their opinions for the Central Wasatch Canyons. SLCO.ORG/WASATCH-CANYONS Visit the project website for project updates, upcoming meetings/events and opportunities to get involved. WHAT ARE THE THREE BEST WAYS TO REACH YOU DURING THE PLANNING PROCESS? Online Surveys Paper Surveys Community Events County Website Social Media Direct Emails Monthly E-Newsletter Other

WHERE ARE YOU FROM? To help us visualize where those in attendance are coming from, please pin your neighborhood or general location. AREA NOT ON THE MAP? North Salt Lake NORTH OR SOUTH OF SALT LAKE COUNTY OUT OF STATE UV 65 UV 186 UV 268 80 80 Salt Lake City UV 172 89 UV 89 89 282 UV UV UV 269 270 282 EAST OR WEST OF SALT LAKE COUNTY UV 202 UV 172 UV 154 215 215 UV 71 UV 186 80 UV 201 UV 201 UV 68 80 UV 186 UV 171 West Valley City South Salt Lake UV 171 89 Millcreek UV 195 UV 172 UV 266 UV 266 UV 266 Taylorsville UV 173 15 15 89 Murray UV 152 UV 152 Holladay UV 152 UV 190 Midvale Cottonwood Heights Park City West Jordan UV 210 UV 190 UV 48 UV 209 UV 154 UV 111 UV 154 South Jordan UV 151 UV 68 UV 151 Sandy UV 71 Riverton 89 Herriman UV 154 UV 154 Draper Tooele Bluffdale UV 140 Alpine N

WASATCH CANYONS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OPPORTUNITIES WHAT DO YOU LOVE MOST ABOUT THE WASATCH CANYONS?

WASATCH CANYONS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OPPORTUNITIES WHAT WOULD YOU IMPROVE ABOUT THE WASATCH CANYONS?

QUICK FACTS RECREATION What We re Hearing The quotes below are from Online Survey #1: Stakeholder Survey participants. I love the access of the Wasatch mountains. It is rare that you have as large a metropolis at the foot of such stunning mountains, and still have the ability to get lost and not see a soul if you really want to. Accessibility of a world-class mountain range and all the activities that go with it to a major city and metro region. No other city in the country has this type of proximity and accessibility! Ability to go hiking and skiing with entire family (kids/ grandkids). Hunting areas and public lands. Protect ethical hunting. Beautiful hiking, peace and quiet, flowers, birds. I want the trails and quiet to remain free from development. I love the scenic views and challenging recreational opportunities that are so close to my home. I appreciate the user groups that seem to get along. If we have more developed picnic areas, for example, that might suffice to keep people close to the road and out of the Wilderness! Restoration of old climbing bolts! Project Facts The number of recreation visitors to Millcreek Canyon, Little Cottonwood, and Big Cottonwood was estimated at 4.5 million in 2015. For comparison, this is similar to Yellowstone and Zion National Park. Source: Chace C. Lamborn, Steven W. Burr, Institute of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, Utah State University, An Estimation of Visitor Use in Little Cottonwood, Big Cottonwood, and Millcreek Canyons (2015) Utah residents participate in outdoor recreation at a higher rate than the national average. Source: Utah Governor s Council on Balanced Resources (2013) Outdoor recreation is a primary driver for Utah s tourism industry. In 2015, spending by tourists reached $8.2 billion, generating $1.15 billion in direct tourism-related tax revenue. Additionally, tourism employs an estimated 142,000 people in our state. Source: Jennifer Leaver, M.A., Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute Millcreek Canyon is the only canyon in the study area that collects user fees. Dogs are permitted on even-numbered days and must be on a leash at all times. Odd-numbered days dogs are allowed offleash on trails only. By 2050, Utah is expected to nearly double its population adding 2.5 million people to its current 3 million. As the population of the Salt Lake Valley and Utah continues to grow, the demand for recreational uses will also grow which puts great stress on this ecologically sensitive and limited geographical area. Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute In 2011, an average of 18 cyclists per hour entered Millcreek Canyon during Pioneer weekend (July 23 - July 25th). On that same weekend, dogs were observed in 15% of vehicles on odd days. WHO ARE THE VISITORS? Salt Lake County Utah County Summit County Other Utah Areas Out of State 61% 3% 5% 5% 26% Most users of Wasatch Canyons are coming from Salt Lake County. By The Numbers 255 Total Miles of Trails within the Wasatch Canyons 25 Picnic Areas within the Wasatch Canyons 5 Developed Campgrounds within the Big and Little Cottonwood Canyons MILLCREEK CANYON MANAGEMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM THE FOREST SERVICE/SALT LAKE COUNTY FEE PROGRAM PARTNERSHIP IN MILLCREEK CANYON BENEFITS THE PUBLIC THROUGH SUSTAINABLE FACILITIES AND ENHANCED RECREATION EXPERIENCES. 2015 PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL RECREATION USE BY CANYON* 12% WHAT ARE YOUR TOP PRIORITIES FOR RECREATION IN THE CANYONS? This data is from Online Survey #1: Stakeholder Survey. This survey was intended to provide a snapshot of current perceptions of the Wasatch Canyons to provide a basis for the project moving forward. This is not statistically valid. 39% 49% * This study did not include Parley s Canyon. Source: Chace C. Lamborn, Steven W. Burr, Institute of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, Utah State University, An Estimation of Visitor Use in Little Cottonwood, Big Cottonwood, and Millcreek Canyons (2015). 30% RECREATION ACTIVITIES MAIN RECREATION ACTIVITY SURVEY RESPONDENTS REPORTED PARTICIPATING IN WITHIN THE WASATCH CANYONS PROJECT AREA 70% IN THE WASATCH CANYONS 70% OF YEAR-ROUND VISITOR USE IS AT DISPERSED RECREATION AREAS, WHILE 30% IS AT THE SKI RESORTS. Source: Chace C. Lamborn, Steven W. Burr, Institute of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, Utah State University, An Estimation of Visitor Use in Little Cottonwood, Big Cottonwood, and Millcreek Canyons (2015).

QUICK FACTS ENVIRONMENT What We re Hearing The quotes below are from Online Survey #1: Stakeholder Survey participants. Foremost, any action which affects the quality of water should not be allowed. What makes the Salt Lake valley uniquely attractive is the ability to drive a few minutes and be in the heart of wilderness. We become just like any other location if the city continues to move into the canyons. Air quality [is my top concern]. I m sure this is not a simple issue to tackle, but there must be improvements that can be made. We need more toilets to protect watershed and have them open in winter too. Allow dogs into Big and Little Cottonwood, increase penalty for littering in canyons (dog poo bags included, biodegradable or not). We need patrols to ticket illegal behavior, littering, dogs off leash or in restricted watershed, and cross cutting of trails. Quality of sound [is important to address], especially highway noise caused by loud vehicles. Project Facts The canyons provide a vital source of clean affordable drinking water for more than half a million residents of the Salt Lake Valley. These canyons have a watershed management plan, stream health monitoring plan, and laws to protect both the water and habitat values. Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities, Salt Lake Valley Health Department, Salt Lake County, and the US Forest Service all work together to protect this vital resource. Source: Envision Utah, Wasatch Canyons Tomorrow (2010) The economic impact of replacing the 18,000 acre-feet of water supplied by Little Cottonwood Creek would cost an estimated $125 million. Source: Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake & Sandy [MWDSLS] (2014) The Salt Lake City Watershed Ordinance (Salt Lake City Code 17.04) establishes guidelines for existing water agreements for the use of surplus water. Each agreement establishes a volume of water available and the geographic area in which the water can be used. These agreements cannot be expanded. Salt Lake County is considered an air quality maintenance zone for ozone, and non-attainment area for small particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). Source: Utah DEQ (https://deq.utah.gov/pollutants/a/air pollutants/index.htm) Much of the vegetation in the project area is experiencing ongoing stress. Ecosystem function is affected by fragmentation, invasive plants, and habitat loss effects that are typically strongest near developed areas and human activities. Climate trends likely to emerge in Utah during the 21st century include a reduction in natural snowpack and snowfall in the early to late winter, which could mean longer shoulder seasons and increased summer resort recreational uses. Source: Blue Ribbon Advisory Council on Climate Change 2007 By The Numbers 500,000 Over half a million people depend on the Central Wasatch Canyons Watersheds for their drinking water supply. Source: Salt Lake City Public Utilities 50 sq miles Big Cottonwood Canyon is the largest watershed for the Salt Lake Valley, providing about 18% of the valley s water. Source: Salt Lake City Watershed Management Plan (1999) 2,923 acres of open space in Salt lake County. Source: Salt Lake County DWQ ASSESSMENT OF STREAM AND RIVER SEGMENTS CHANGE IN POPULATION DENSITY BY SUBWATERSHED (2011-2040) WHAT ARE YOUR TOP PRIORITIES FOR THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE WASATCH CANYONS? This data is from Online Survey #1: Stakeholder Survey. This survey was intended to provide a snapshot of current perceptions of the Wasatch Canyons to provide a basis for the project moving forward. This is not statistically valid. VEGETATION DISTURBANCE FIRE RISK SOUND IMPACT DARK SKIES BLUE: LOW DISTURBANCE, RED: HIGH DISTURBANCE GREEN: LOW RISK, ORANGE: MEDIUM RISK, PURPLE: HIGH RISK BLUE: LOW IMPACT, RED: HIGH IMPACT BLUE: LOW IMPACT, RED: HIGH IMPACT VEGETATION DISTURBANCE HIGHLIGHTS WHERE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS OR VEGETATION CLEARING HAS OCCURRED BETWEEN 2001-2011. THE FIRE RISK MAP SHOWS THE HISTORICAL AVERAGE PERIOD BETWEEN FIRES. THIS IS HELPFUL IN ASSESSING FIRE RISK AREAS. THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE MODELED EXPECTED NATURAL SOUNDS AND THE IMPACT OF NON- NATURAL SOUNDS ACROSS THE NATION. THE RESULT SHOWN ABOVE IS THE NET IMPACT OF NON-NATURAL SOUNDS ON THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. DARK SKIES ARE CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO HABITAT. THIS IS A ISSUE OF IMPORTANCE, AND AREAS RECEIVING THE MOST IMPACT INCLUDE RESORT AREAS (WHICH ARE THE MOST DEVELOPED).

QUICK FACTS TRANSPORTATION What We re Hearing The quotes below are from Online Survey #1: Stakeholder Survey participants. It is so hard to travel through the canyons most weekends now because of an insane amount of traffic and overcrowding. Canyon access should switch to being done by passenger vehicles and have more public transit available to certain areas to help cut down on vehicle traffic. Keep limited parking, which limits number of users. We need a very solid mass transportation plan with decades of foresight. Particularly consider rail transit up the canyons. The one thing I d like to see out of this plan is more parking or improved shuttle options from park and ride lots. Consider avalanche sheds in key areas to assist with better traffic flow in/out of LCC. Alleviating congestion of traffic on snow days will place less pressure on adjoining communities who get grid locked under these circumstances. We don t want to make it easier for cars - we want to reduce the number of cars by providing other options. Utilize parking and transit solutions as tool to restrict over use, traffic congestion and further degradation. Have those solutions support higher density use areas. Project Facts Peak days can generate over 11,000 vehicles in each Big and Little Cottonwood Canyon. UDOT projections for annual average daily traffic (AADT) show significant increase in the number of vehicles in all canyons. The mouth of Parleys Canyon saw 24,630 AADT in 1995, 59,100 in 2015, and a projected 75,525 AADT in 2030. Sources: 1995 and 2015 numbers: UDOT. 2030 Projection: Envision Utah, Wasatch Canyons Tomorrow (2010) A ski bus is available for access to the resorts in the winter. In the 2015-16 season, the ski bus system accounted for about 4-5% of trips to the resorts. While there a UTA bus that runs from Salt Lake City to Park City year-round, there is virtually no bus service in the summer/fall to Little or Big Cottonwood Canyons. Source: WSP/PB Short Term Transportation Memo The Big and Little Cottonwood Canyons are high-frequency avalanche areas, which impacts the reliability of canyon roads. An average of 33 avalanches a year may affect Little Cottonwood Canyon Road (average 11 days/year with road closures (1949-1999); 13 from 1999-2014). Source: Mountain Accord Transportation Existing Conditions Report Crashes are a major concern in all Canyons. In 2015, Parley s had more crashes than Big Cottonwood or Little Cottonwood, yet fewer crashes per year per length of roadway. In the Cottonwood Canyons, parking is at or near capacity on peak winter days (15-20 days per year). Parking congestion is increasingly becoming a concern in Millcreek Canyon. Constrained by slope and public land designation, the primary transportation routes follow the base of the canyons in the Wasatch Canyons. WHAT ARE YOUR TOP PRIORITIES FOR THE WASATCH CANYONS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM? This data is from Online Survey #1: Stakeholder Survey. This survey was intended to provide a snapshot of current perceptions of the Wasatch Canyons to provide a basis for the project moving forward. This is not statistically valid. By The Numbers 78% of visitors to ski areas arrived by private or rental vehicles. Source: Ski Utah Survey Data 1.7 Average Vehicle Occupancy in Little Cottonwood Canyon in 2015. 9,600~ there are around 9,600 formal and informal parking spaces in BCC and LCC. Source: WSP/PB Short Term Transportation Memo Source: Ski Utah Survey Data 3x Millcreek Canyon vehicle traffic was at least 3x higher in summer than in winter. Source: Mill Creek Canyon Transportation Feasibility Study, 2012 PARLEY S 1 mile East of I 215 Interchange AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC BY MONTH (ADT) AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRIPS (AADT) Vehicles Per Year Vehicles Per Day 5% OF ALL WINTER TRIPS IN BIG COTTONWOOD AND LITTLE COTTONWOOD ARE MADE USING PUBLIC TRANSIT. COTTONWOOD CANYONS SR210 at mouth of Little Cottonwood SR190 at the mouth of Big Cottonwood Canyon AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC BY MONTH (ADT) CRASH MAPS WINTER 2015/2016 SUMMER 2016 PARLEY S CANYON PARLEY S CANYON Vehicles Per Day MILLCREEK CANYON MILLCREEK CANYON AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRIPS (AADT) BIG COTTONWOOD CANYON BIG COTTONWOOD CANYON Vehicles Per Year LITTLE COTTONWOOD CANYON LITTLE COTTONWOOD CANYON

QUICK FACTS LAND USE What We re Hearing The quotes below are from Online Survey #1: Stakeholder Survey participants. Develop other canyons with trails so that the cottonwood canyons don t have to serve the entire expanding valley. Concentrating here only amplifies the problem. People are looking for places to go and we are surrounded by mountains. Maintain the existing balance between development and backcountry use. Allow resorts to expand base areas and freeze all development everywhere else. Limit development of ski areas, housing, and commercial areas. Make more dog friendly access. I know that the cottonwood canyons are watershed areas, but it would help to spread it out. We need employee housing to limit traffic. Keep limited parking, which limits number of users. No more new building!!! This includes ski lifts and buildings, as well as, tree cutting. Project Facts The Central Wasatch Canyons only make up 1.2% of the residential units in Salt Lake County. Source: American Community Fact Finder, 2000-2015 Very few people live in the Wasatch Canyons year-round. Census population estimates show that there was very slow growth in the canyons between 2000 and 2010 from 8,537 residents to 8,816 residents. However, the 2015 American Community Survey estimates show that growth is increasing sharp between 2010 and 2015. Source: American Community Fact Finder, 2000-2015 While the population only grew by 279 people between 2000 and 2010, there were 815 new homes within the project area. In 2010 1/3 of the total homes in the project area were vacant. Of that 1/3, almost 90% are seasonal or recreational homes. The 2015 census estimate is showing that 1/3 of the homes are still vacant, but of that 1/3, seasonal use may be dropping. Source: American Community Fact Finder, 2000-2015 The Salt Lake County Foothills and Canyon Overlay Zone Ordinance (FCOZ) was officially adopted in 1997 and most recently updated this year. It came about partially as a result of the 1989 Canyons Master Plan and replaced the County s Hillside Protection Zone. The Ordinance applies to all land in unincorporated areas of Salt Lake County with slopes over 30%. Source: Salt Lake County Land-use approvals on properties within the FCOZ involve a multi-agency review process during which the County Planning office works with the Salt Lake Valley Health Department, the Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities, the U.S. Forest Service and other agencies to ensure that all developments within the foothills and canyons meet certain standards. Source: Salt Lake County In Little Cottonwood Canyon there are no stand-alone commercial areas outside the resort areas besides the LDS Church storage vault and a record storage facility run by a private company. Big Cottonwood Canyon, although limited in size, has several areas of commercial development. Millcreek Canyon has two restaurants. By The Numbers 199,506 project area acres 21% of Big Cottonwood Canyon land is privately owned 36,408 acres of designated wilderness within the project area 36% of Parley s Canyon land owned by Salt Lake City for watershed protection EXISTING AND PROJECTED (2030) HOUSING UNITS COMPARISON OF ACREAGE ZONED RESIDENTIAL, DEVELOPED AND UNDEVELOPED EXISTING HOUSING UNITS PROJECTED 2030 UNITS Source: Envision Utah, Wasatch Canyons Tomorrow (2010), updated in 2017 with Salt Lake County Parcel Data RESIDENTIALLY ZONED DEVELOPED ACRES (TOTAL) RESIDENTIALLY ZONED UNDEVELOPED ACRES (TOTAL) 75% OF JOBS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA ARE IN THE ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES, OR ARTS, ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION SECTORS. 2% OF LAND IN THE PROJECT AREA IS ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL USES PROJECT AREA POPULATION GROWTH AND HOUSING GROWTH PROJECT AREA OWNERSHIP 0.2% 19% 65% 19% Source: American Community Fact Finder, 2000-2015

WASATCH CANYONS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE UPCOMING EVENTS SAVE THE DATE! JOIN US AT THESE UPCOMING EVENTS! VISIT SLCO.ORG/WASATCH-CANYONS FOR MORE INFORMATION. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 14 PROJECT INTRODUCTION BOOTH AT OKTOBERFEST, SNOWBIRD RESORT, 10:00 AM 6:00 PM WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 18 VISIONING OPEN HOUSE, COTTONWOOD HEIGHTS CITY HALL, 7:00 9:00 PM SATURDAY, OCTOBER 21 VISIONING BOOTH AT DOWNTOWN FARMERS MARKET, 8:00 AM - 2:00 PM MONDAY, OCTOBER 23 VISIONING BOOTH AT WHEELER FARM S DOG DAYZE TREAT ALLEY, 6:00 8:00 PM SATURDAY, OCTOBER 28 VISIONING OPEN HOUSE, LOCATION TBA, 10:00 AM 12:00 PM WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 1 VISIONING OPEN HOUSE, 5:00 7:00 PM, CORNER CANYON HIGH SCHOOL TECH ATRIUM