Park City Soils Facility Overview

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

Updated September 8, 2022

On September 15, Council will discuss and provide input on possible alternatives for the future of the soils temporarily stored on the “Gordo” property. We anticipate several discussions over the next few months in anticipation of a Spring remediation plan. This item is scheduled for discussion beginning at 4:30 p.m. Please find a link to the staff report here and presentation here. Information on meeting participation can be found here.

Council welcomes your feedback via email: council_mail@parkcity.org or comments can be submitted for Thursday's Council meeting via the eComment registration link here.



Updated October 11, 2021


Updated September 2, 2021

At the August 19, 2021 City Council Work Session, Council agreed to not proceed with the soils repository and will not pursue the UDEQ permit application.


Updated August 17, 2021

Park City Council Work Session, August 19, 2021

Park City Council will meet in a Work Session (5:15) for a follow-up discussion regarding the July 15, 2021, Park City Solis Management Facility Public Hearing and briefing. Additional information is available via the Staff Report link below:


Updated May 10, 2021

We’ve received a lot of inquiries lately about our plans for a Park City Soils Management Facility. This Engage Park City page will be our central landing spot for information and updates so that we can respond to questions that come up and provide clear answers. As a follow-up to the information posted recently, check out this comprehensive project summary prepared by the project team. And as always, if there’s something you think we’ve missed or should clarify further, please don’t hesitate to contact us either via this EngagePC page or any other way you like.

CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY: The Park City Bevill Waste Soils Management Facility

Do you have questions about the Park City Soils Management Facility? Please plan to attend one of our upcoming public information events to learn more about the project, ask questions, and provide feedback to Park City Municipal's elected officials, project staff, and environmental experts.

Please find more information, and a complete list of our previous information events with links to video recordings, in the Key Dates section on this page, or contact linda.jager@parkcity.org.


June 28, 2021

Virtual Community Panel Discussion and Q&A

6:30 - 7:30 p.m.

Virtual event on Facebook Live (@ParkCityGov't) and Zoom.

Do you have questions about the Park City Soils Management Facility? Join Park City Municipal elected officials, staff, environmental experts, and community members for a presentation and panel discussion about the Park City Soils Management Facility. The presentation and panel discussion will be followed by a Q&A session. Questions can be sent in advance to linda.jager@parkcity.org


July 13, 2021

Coffee with Council

6:00 - 7:00 p.m.

Virtual event on Facebook Live (@ParkCityGov't) and Zoom:

Meeting Recording



July 15, 2021

Park City Council Public Hearing

Council Work Session begins at 4:30 p.m.

Staff report linked here

Public hearing will begin at 6:00 p.m.

Participation instructions are available here

Meeting Recording






Updated September 8, 2022

On September 15, Council will discuss and provide input on possible alternatives for the future of the soils temporarily stored on the “Gordo” property. We anticipate several discussions over the next few months in anticipation of a Spring remediation plan. This item is scheduled for discussion beginning at 4:30 p.m. Please find a link to the staff report here and presentation here. Information on meeting participation can be found here.

Council welcomes your feedback via email: council_mail@parkcity.org or comments can be submitted for Thursday's Council meeting via the eComment registration link here.



Updated October 11, 2021


Updated September 2, 2021

At the August 19, 2021 City Council Work Session, Council agreed to not proceed with the soils repository and will not pursue the UDEQ permit application.


Updated August 17, 2021

Park City Council Work Session, August 19, 2021

Park City Council will meet in a Work Session (5:15) for a follow-up discussion regarding the July 15, 2021, Park City Solis Management Facility Public Hearing and briefing. Additional information is available via the Staff Report link below:


Updated May 10, 2021

We’ve received a lot of inquiries lately about our plans for a Park City Soils Management Facility. This Engage Park City page will be our central landing spot for information and updates so that we can respond to questions that come up and provide clear answers. As a follow-up to the information posted recently, check out this comprehensive project summary prepared by the project team. And as always, if there’s something you think we’ve missed or should clarify further, please don’t hesitate to contact us either via this EngagePC page or any other way you like.

CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY: The Park City Bevill Waste Soils Management Facility

Do you have questions about the Park City Soils Management Facility? Please plan to attend one of our upcoming public information events to learn more about the project, ask questions, and provide feedback to Park City Municipal's elected officials, project staff, and environmental experts.

Please find more information, and a complete list of our previous information events with links to video recordings, in the Key Dates section on this page, or contact linda.jager@parkcity.org.


June 28, 2021

Virtual Community Panel Discussion and Q&A

6:30 - 7:30 p.m.

Virtual event on Facebook Live (@ParkCityGov't) and Zoom.

Do you have questions about the Park City Soils Management Facility? Join Park City Municipal elected officials, staff, environmental experts, and community members for a presentation and panel discussion about the Park City Soils Management Facility. The presentation and panel discussion will be followed by a Q&A session. Questions can be sent in advance to linda.jager@parkcity.org


July 13, 2021

Coffee with Council

6:00 - 7:00 p.m.

Virtual event on Facebook Live (@ParkCityGov't) and Zoom:

Meeting Recording



July 15, 2021

Park City Council Public Hearing

Council Work Session begins at 4:30 p.m.

Staff report linked here

Public hearing will begin at 6:00 p.m.

Participation instructions are available here

Meeting Recording






Questions and comments

Questions and comments on the Park City Soils Repository are welcome below. This page is monitored daily, and we will do our best to respond to questions promptly. 

loader image
Forgot password?
Didn't receive confirmation?
Register Now
Seems like you are already registered, please provide the password. Forgot your password? Create a new one now.
  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    I support the proposed project for a number of reasons. I'm thrilled to see the number of people engaged in this conversation - as they should when dealing with a matter this serious. However, this issue has been around for a long time and needs a solution - now. The proposed repository is scientifically sound and economically feasible. I'm absolutely opposed to trucking the waste out. It is against our equity values and perpetuates environmental injustice. This is our inheritance - for better or worse - and it is our responsibility to take care of it. Additionally, there is a huge opportunity cost to trucking (both environmentally and with other projects). I'd rather see those funds support affordable housing or another critical priority. I've been active in environmental issues in Park City for a long time and I'm a former Soils Commissioner. There are no easy answers when dealing with problems from the past. However, this is well thought out and feasible and has my support. I've read through many smart suggestions, but the reality is that many of them are not feasible due to the EPA or other considerations. I appreciate the hard work of City staff in finding a solution to this challenge - finally! And as someone who lives in Prospector, I look forward to having a safe place to take soils when I want to do something as simple as plant a new tree. Let's move forward!

    KatieW. asked over 2 years ago

    Thank you for your feedback.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    I oppose the proposed project. I don't believe it is the right use of the property at one of the portals to Park City. We should be beautifying our entrances to PC, not creating an eyesore. I understand a berm with vegetation is planned. I don't believe a berm will create the image we should be striving for. We also spend significant dollars maintaining open space but turn around and spoil the open space when it seems convenient for the City. I'd prefer to see using the property to better support local housing, which, as we all know, is not available in general for our entry level workers. Let's partner with private industry to address those needs and deal with the soils in an area not so highly visible to our visitors. Terry N.

    tnolan51 asked over 2 years ago

    Thank you for your comments.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    My wife and I have lived in Pinebrook full time for 11.5 years. While we can not vote in the PC elections, we have financially supported all the Open Space Initiatives over the years which have benefited the town. We, like all our neighbors, are strongly opposed to the Gordo site. PC has no right to pollute one of the most heavily used recreations sites in Summit County. The Arts and Cultural District must abide by the same rules as a large commercial development like the PCMR parking lots. . You would never even consider opening such a dump for Altera or Vail. The A&C District should be dropped if the "cost" is the Gordo dump. This is the worst proposal we have seen since we moved here in early 2010 and, what makes it even worse, is that it is "self generated" - not an outside developer or the State doing this.

    rickeichner asked over 2 years ago

    Thank you for your comments.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    I support the proposed project. It may not be perfect, but I see this as the LEAST BAD option. The reality is we live in wonderful, historic mining town and one of the implications of that is the presence of contaminated soils in our area from the mining era. We have to have somewhere to store the soils we are required to dispose of. The contaminated soil is already there, and we need somewhere for future contaminated soils. I wonder where those opposed to the project would suggest we store it? If there is a better location that aligns with state and federal laws, let's hear it, but just opposing the proposed project without concrete alternative proposals isn't helping in the least.

    Frank W asked over 2 years ago

    Thanks for your comment, Frank.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    I would like to express my complete dissatisfaction with the proposed soil repository on RTE 248. This is too near a water way, sports fields, hiking and cross-country trails, a water reclamation site, a dog park and homes. There is a very good place to deposit soils if necessary in Tooele, UT. If someone wants to develop a place that needs remediation they need to pay to have it trucked to Tooele. This plan is NOT in the Park City Community's best interest! I do not know anyone who is in favor of this site for a contaminated soils repository. I am a full time resident of Park City for 17 years and a registered voter within city limits.

    Linda m asked over 2 years ago

    Thank you for your comments, Linda.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    Why did Park City's landfill permit application NOT disclose that Silver Creek is a "stream" within 1,000 feet of the proposed landfill? Utah Admin. Code 315-302-1(2)(a)(i)(D) states no new facility, including Class I Landfills, shall be located within one thousand feet of a stream, lake of reservoir.

    ChrisG asked over 2 years ago

    During the preliminary siting of the landfill, the footprint was smaller and further to the north and east, outside of the 1000’ radius. However, as site planning developed, the proposed footprint expanded (to reduce the overall height) and moved south (to accommodate other uses on site and comply with required setbacks from SR248). At that time, the UDEQ conducted a site visit with the project team and supported the City moving forward with the application. Exemptions to the location standards are permissible in some situations, and the City is considering applying with the Director of UDEQ for an exemption as allowed for by Utah Admin. Code 315-302-1(3) because the facility is proposed to be lined, monitored, and managed carefully to prevent material from leaching. 

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    It's hard to believe that the City can't go back to the "Responsible Party" to get some relief for the costs of such a project. What is "Superfund" all about! It's also hard to believe that the "Government entity responsible for regulating it" (the contaminated soils) will not cooperate with the City. What's going on? My suggestion is to use the contaminated soils as source for compaction medium in the local landfill that should already have a similar liner configuration (probably better) than the liner being proposed for Gordo. After all, the soils are "not hazardous waste" as contended via. the Beville exemption. Why not coordinate with Summit Count where you may find a suitable alternative to what is being proposed? Thank You, Fred

    Fred asked over 2 years ago

    The soils to be stored are coming from excavation as part of City projects on City-owned land, including the 35,000 cubic yards (cy) of material that is at the site now (from two pedestrian tunnels and a bus barn that the City built in the last few years), along with at most an additional 85,000 cy from anticipated roadway projects, housing projects, and the proposed Arts and Culture District. The City spent over 10 years negotiating with the EPA and United Park City Mines Company but could not agree on a solution that would permit the City to continue using the (unlined) Richardson Flat repository.  As with any other property owner in town within the Soils District boundary, the City is responsible for complying with the City Code regulations that apply to when soil is disturbed. 

     

    Historically, Summit County has not accepted soils from within the City’s Soil Ordinance boundary.  

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    Is the federal penitentiary fencing permanent? What a beautiful entry to the city. Toxic dumps and razor wire fencing. Is this a traffic mitigation strategy? Genius

    Brian asked over 2 years ago

    Thank you for your feedback.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    Why not consider selling the site to pay for soil to be removed to previously and properly developed facility outside Park City? Perhaps a member of the community would like to sponsor a park or recreational site for our community's benefit. Contaminating valuable Park City land that is essentially part of Quinn's Junction during a land rush in a town that is supposedly environmentally consious seems counterproductive to Park City's values. Additionally not using a previously built toxic waste site results in lost revenue for the community that already built a waste site to handle contaminated soils. Keep Park City land environmentally safe for our kids and for our community.

    ParkCity90 asked over 2 years ago

    The estimated cost to haul the soils currently on the Gordo site along with future, projected projects (120,000 CY) is $21M.

    The City used Richardson Flat soil repository for mine impacted soils generated within the soils ordinance boundary for many years, however that facility became unavailable to City projects in 2010. The City then attempted to negotiate a 3 party agreement with the EPA and Mines Company to find a permanent storage facility in the region. When this process failed, the City attempted to further negotiate to move the temporary soils at Gordo to Richardson Flat, but ultimately failed. Because we could not get cooperation from the party responsible for creating the mine soils and the government entity responsible for regulating it, the city faced the reality of locating a repository on its own property.


     

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    Can you put this proposal to a community vote? This impacts many and not just for this project, because what’s on the table, acts as a guideline for future mitigation and toxic clean up. We need to have a plan that this community understands and supports for this projects and future initiatives.

    KimD asked over 2 years ago

    There is no plan at this time to submit this project to a ballot measure.  

Page last updated: 15 Sep 2022, 08:56 PM