General Plan Comprehensive Update
The comprehensive update to the General Plan is an opportunity to identify what we want to preserve and how we will evolve, grow, and develop in the coming decade and beyond, especially as we navigate regional development, consider the balance between visitors and residents, evaluate affordability and livability, and explore transportation solutions. Please scroll below to learn about where we are in the process.
The General Plan update is progressing through five phases, with the fifth phase currently in motion to finalize the plan. The goal is to have the final document ready for adoption by the end of the summer.
Existing Trends
As part of the existing conditions analysis, we have examined key drivers and trends affecting the community. The top of this section illustrates changes in Park City's geography and population over time. Over the next five years, population growth is expected to increase by approximately 1% under current trends. According to projections from the Mountainland Association of Governments, Park City’s full-time population is anticipated to grow by only 202 residents (2%) between 2030 and 2050. However, pipeline developments could lead to a higher growth rate if they proceed.
Park City experiences a significant daytime population increase of approximately 81% due to incoming workers, compared to a 14% increase for the County. This highlights that more individuals commute into Park City for work than those who commute out. The city’s daytime population consists of 80.55% commuters and 19.45% residents.
Employment projections indicate that by 2050, Park City is expected to have approximately 27,158 employees. This growth is expected to impact traffic and commuting patterns significantly, especially if additional workforce housing is not developed within the city.
Demographic trends suggest that Park City has an aging population, with a high percentage of empty nesters and senior households. While Summit County’s median age has decreased, Park City’s largest age group has shifted from the 25–29 age range in 2010 to the 60–64 age range today.
From a housing perspective, median home prices have continued to rise, and there has been a shift in the ratio of homeowners to renters. Of the 8,585 housing units in Park City, only 33% are occupied, compared to 52% for the County. This leaves 67% of Park City's housing units vacant, with 77% of these (4,438 units) designated for seasonal, recreational, or occasional use—accounting for more than half of the city’s overall housing stock.
In 2021, Park City had 651 affordable deed-restricted units, with 69% designated as rentals and 31% as owner-occupied. To support its workforce and middle-class residents, the city needs to develop an additional units over the next five years.
Community Engagement
Survey Summary
In the fall, survey invitations were sent via email and text message to a sample from the City’s residential utilities list which was supplemented with residents sampled from the publicly available Utah registered voter file to ensure we heard from Park City residents. Responses were collected from November 14 - 27, 2024. Responses were weighted to reflect the demographic composition of the city as a whole and were geocoded into City neighborhoods. The survey received 453 responses.
Takeaways:
Park City residents are split on the direction of the City. They see the City as a small town and enjoy the natural setting and the activities that it provides.
A sense of community is important to residents, followed by preservation efforts and a focus on the environment.
The biggest challenge in the eyes of the residents is traffic and congestion. The main issue they would like the City to focus on in the future is transportation services followed by redeveloping properties and local businesses.
Within the focus of transportation services, the residents prefer a focus on streets that have better walkability and transit services for workers and skiers. Residents experience the greatest impact from traffic for accessing events, accessing recreation, and accessing local businesses.
Preserving nature is a point of emphasis for Park City residents. The top priorities for them in the coming years are trail development, preservation of open spaces, and wildfire mitigation.
During the second Engagement Window, the City provided multiple ways for the community to interact and share their thoughts on project vision, scenarios and overall goals. A work session was facilitated with the City’s Youth Council on March 3 and a community Open House took place on March 4 at Miner’s Hospital. Focus Group meetings were also conducted with key Stakeholders and an on-line questionnaire was available from March 4 to March 25.
Along with the public outreach, a second round of discussions were held with the project’s Technical Advisory Committee and General Advisory Board to discuss the potential land-use and transportation scenarios. The feedback from this engagement window helped inform the final plan Vision Statement, preferred scenarios, and overall plan goals and recommendations.
Additionally, the City hosted neighborhood meetings to gather residents’ feedback on the 2014 General Plan recommendations for their neighborhood and updates they would like to make for their neighborhood. The Round 1 meetings were conducted between December 2024 and February 2025. Round 2 meetings took place between March 2025 to April 2025.
The March 4 General Plan Open House was well attended with approximately 77 people participating in the activities. Attendees were informed on the statistically valid survey results and were asked for feedback on the vision and mission statements for Park City. They were also presented with three land-use and transportation scenarios, along with potential strategies on sustainability and historic preservation.
Scenario 1: Neighborhood Infill Development
This land use strategy is ideal for a community looking to increase density thoughtfully through targeted infill, focusing on small-scale, medium-density projects that fit the local context.
By concentrating new development around existing commercial areas like Old Town, Bonanza Park, Resort Center, Prospector, and Quinn’s Junction, it emphasizes missing middle housing, employee housing, seasonal housing, and accessory dwelling units, while also incentivizing adaptive reuse. This approach supports vibrant, walkable neighborhoods, strengthens local economies, and aligns with Park City’s efforts to promote housing diversity, sustainability, and balanced growth.
Scenario 2: Transit Corridor Infill Development
This land use strategy focuses on transit corridor infill development by increasing density along key transportation routes like Highways 224 and 248. It envisions larger mobility hubs integrated with mixed-use nodes to create a more walkable, connected system that enhances pedestrian access and incentivizes public transit use. By incorporating smaller neighborhood transit access points, this approach improves overall connectivity, supports sustainable mobility choices, and aligns with Park City’s goals of linking land use and transportation to manage future development.
Scenario 3: Major Mixed-Use Node Development
This land use strategy focuses on major mixed-use node development, aiming for medium- to high-density growth anchored by a central commercial and mixed-use core with a new park-and-ride. It prioritizes strong transit connections to employment and recreation areas while identifying additional smaller mixed-use nodes to boost walkability and lessen vehicle dependence. This approach supports integrated, transit-oriented development that creates vibrant, connected neighborhoods while advancing Park City’s vision for sustainable and balanced community development.
Transportation Scenarios
Scenario 1: Moderate Adjustments
This transportation strategy is ideal for a community looking to make measurable improvements in mobility and accessibility without sacrificing flexibility. It prioritizes investments that can be adjusted over time, minimizes risk, and aligns with Park City’s ongoing efforts to manage growth, reduce congestion, and enhance transportation options without drastic upheaval.
Scenario 2: Pushing a modal shift
This scenario is ideal for a community ready to take a bold stance on reducing car dependency while fostering a livable, transit-oriented, and pedestrian-focused environment. It offers a decisive shift towards addressing the city’s congestion management goals while preserving its character and economic vitality. Though the transition may present political and logistical challenges, the long-term benefits of reduced congestion, improved public spaces, and a shift towards more sustainable modes may make it an attractive option.
Scenario 3: Transformational Change
This scenario is best suited for a community committed to a fundamental transformation toward sustainable, car-free mobility. It prioritizes people over cars, ensuring that visitors and residents alike can navigate Park City without relying on personal vehicles with consideration for the needs of residents. While the capital investment and political coordination required are significant, the long-term benefits of reduced congestion, improved public spaces, and extensive non-personal vehicle travel options make this a forward-thinking choice.
Key Takeaways
Vision and Priorities: Strong community agreement with Park City’s vision statement; top priorities include preserving open space, maintaining a welcoming, healthy community, and clearly defining the city’s future using real data to explain trade-offs.
Land-Use Scenarios:
Scenario 1: Mixed feelings, many support neighborhood infill, but some want architectural improvements and adjustments.
Scenario 2: Most favored, though concerns traffic; suggestions include neighborhood parking improvements, better circulation for ski visitors, and Richardson Flats upgrades.
Scenario 3: Strong support, especially for housing at Quinn’s Junction to reduce traffic and attract family-friendly jobs; emphasized first addressing transportation and enhancing the Richardson Flats park-and-ride.
Transportation Scenarios:
Scenario 1: Strong support for pedestrian/bike improvements, expanded transit, and modest street changes; mixed views on parking pricing, with calls to target fees mainly at tourists.
Scenario 2: Polarized reactions to parking reductions and high fees; strong support for expanded transit, mixed-use development, TDM strategies, car-free Main Street, better Salt Lake City connections, and investments in safe paths and crossings.
Scenario 3: Strong backing for major transit overhauls and active transportation, but concerns about gondolas, congestion pricing, and eliminating core parking; mixed reactions to car-free Old Town, with overall support for a cyclist- and pedestrian-focused network despite challenges like snow and steepness.
Historic Preservation: Strong enthusiasm for preserving Park City’s skiing, mountain resort, and 2002 Olympic heritage, especially ahead of the 2034 Winter Olympics.
Sustainability and Resiliency: High interest in water-wise landscaping, rooftop solar, recycling, composting, and decarbonization measures; moderate-to-high interest in dark sky lighting, wildfire protection, and community gardens; lower or mixed interest in greywater systems and smart metering; participants stressed focusing on practical, tangible sustainability actions.
Online Questionnaire
An online questionnaire was hosted on Qualtrics from March 4 to March 25th, promoted through the City website, Advisory Committee members, the Open House, and Neighborhood Committee members. The questionnaire invited participants to provide feedback on the new General Plan draft vision statement, proposed land use and transportation scenarios, and related topics. In total, 538 complete responses were received. In addition to questions about scenario preferences, respondents were also asked a set of demographic questions to better understand the backgrounds and perspectives of those participating in the survey.
Key Takeaways
The questionnaire indicated strong overall support among respondents for Park City's vision statement, particularly highlighting its small-town character, natural environment, open space, and recreation opportunities.
For the mission statements, the feedback highlights that preserving open spaces and conservation areas is the top priority for Park City residents, receiving the highest level of support.
There is also strong support for adopting multimodal transportation solutions as opposed to expanding road networks, emphasizing the community’s preference for sustainable traffic management.
Key Takeaways
Scenario 1 (Neighborhood Infill Development) received the highest proportion of first-choice rankings (38%), indicating strong initial support.
Scenario 2 (Transit Corridor Infill Development) was predominantly ranked second (48%), suggesting broad acceptance but not as the top preference.
Scenario 3 (Major Mixed-Use Node Development) was ranked third by nearly half (47%) of respondents, making it the least preferred option.
Overall, Scenario 1 emerges as the most favored, Scenario 2 as moderately supported, and Scenario 3 as least preferred.
The results suggest potential for combining elements of Scenarios 1 and 2 into a blended land-use approach.
Residents expressed clear preference for mixed-use development (62%), workforce housing (52%), and improved neighborhood transit access (45%).
Medium-density housing (39%) and neighborhood retail (35%) received moderate support.
Additional dwelling units infill (26%) and mobility hubs (34%) were less prioritized.
Commercial development received minimal support (7%), indicating limited community interest in further commercial expansion.
Results show a fairly even split in preferences across the three transportation scenarios.
Scenario 2 (“More Difficult”) received the highest preference at 34.63%, followed closely by Scenario 3 (“Most Difficult”) at 34.07%.
Scenario 1 (“Easier”) was slightly less preferred, with 31.30% of respondents selecting it.
Top 5 Transportation Strategies supported by Respondents:
Shared Parking Facilities
Transit Service Expansions
Pedestrian and Bike Network Enhancements
Improved Transit Connections to Salt Lake City
Mixed-Use Development
Least Popular Strategy: Commercial Tolls (Tolls for Vehicles to Enter Park City) – Received the lowest overall support, indicating limited public backing for pricing-based traffic deterrents.
Key Takeaways
Respondents showed the most interest in personal strategies such as changing landscaping to reduce water use and improve wildfire protection.
Strong support was also expressed for installing rooftop solar panels and using dark sky-friendly lighting.
Recycling, composting, and grey water reuse systems were well received.
Smart metering and community gardens generated moderate interest.
Community-wide challenges were the least popular, indicating a preference for home-based solutions over broader collective efforts
Q: Which city resources or policies would be most impactful to encourage you to take action on any of these energy reduction strategies?
Key Takeaways
Financial incentives such as rebates, tax credits, and low-interest loans were the most favored city-level tools to encourage energy-saving behavior.
Tiered pricing for water and energy use also received strong support.
Energy audits and free educational programs were moderately valued by respondents.
Recognition-based strategies like awards and competitions generated the least enthusiasm.
Historic Preservation preferences
Q: Park City’s transition from mining town to skiing/mountain resort is reflected in the homes, neighborhoods, landscapes, and commercial sites and structures that emerged alongside the recreation industry. How strong is your level of support to incentivize the preservation of resources relevant to the early skiing and mountain resort era?
Q: Park City welcomed the world for the 2002 Winter Olympics and is preparing to host the Winter Olympics once again in 2034. Art installations throughout the city and the plaza at the intersection of Park Avenue and Kearns Boulevard are key features representing this important era of Park City’s history. As Park City prepares to host the Winter Olympics in 2034, should the City evaluate designation of significant sites related to the 2002 Winter Olympics?
Key Takeaways
Strong public support was shown for preserving and recognizing Park City’s transition from a mining town to a ski resort, with the majority of respondents (143) giving the highest rating (5).
Identical levels of strong support (143 respondents rating 5) were recorded for initiatives tied to the city’s Olympic legacy and future 2034 Winter Olympics planning.
In both cases, support steadily increased across the rating scale, reflecting broad enthusiasm for honoring Park City’s cultural and historical identity.
How Did We Get Here?
From the silver mining days initiated in the 1860s to the thriving Main Street district that followed, to the mining decline and 1950s ghost town status, to the ski town era of the 1960s that led to two world-class resorts, the 2002 Winter Olympics, and the return of the Winter Olympics in 2034, Parkites have envisioned and shaped the future of our mountain town nestled in the Wasatch Mountains.
Park City’s 2014 General Plan was completed after a 2009 community visioning process that established the project’s mission: Keep Park City Park City. Four values shaped the goals and strategies of the 2014 General Plan: Small Town, Sense of Community, Natural Setting, and Historic Character.
Over the past decade, the City has implemented many of the 2014 General Plan recommendations, including established goals to increase protected open space through purchases of properties slated for development like the 1,534 Bonanza Flat acreage along the City’s southern boundary and the 125 acres of Treasure Hill. The City also annexed nearly 1,200 acres in the Southeast Quinn’s Junction area, zoning the property Recreation Open Space within the Sensitive Land Overlay.
While the City worked to create an open space buffer to preserve sensitive lands, protect mountain vistas, and enhance the quality of life and visitor experience along its perimeter, both the Park City Mountain Resort and Deer Valley Resort applied to develop their base area parking lots, proposing to infill long-vested density. Park City is reaching buildout. But perhaps most impactful is the anticipated growth within Summit County and Wasatch County—Utah's fastest growing county between 2010 and 2020—and the City’s proximity to the ever-expanding Wasatch Front just a short 35 minutes away from the Salt Lake International Airport, presenting regional challenges and opportunities requiring proactive planning and bold action.
The update to the General Plan will begin from the results of Vision 2020, the City's latest community visioning project that calls for embracing bold action as we look ahead and focuses on five pillars, including environmental leadership; art, culture, and local economy; sustainable tourism; transportation innovation; and affordability and equity.
