Locals pout over Powder Mountain
Some Cache Valley residents are vehemently against development of the Powder Mountain Recreation Area.
Negativity flowed freely from residents of the south end of the valley at the Cache County Council meeting Tuesday night. The council set up a public hearing for residents to speak their minds. Most individuals who spoke before the council were strongly against development of Powder Mountain.
The council recently approved a new zoning ordinance allowing for development of resort and recreation zones (r-zones). Movements are being made by Powder Mountain developers to zone approximately 3,580 acres as r-zone land.
Jim Steitz, forest coordinator for Utah State University’s Ecological Coalition for Students, led a group of USU students with signs and T-shirts that read, “What part of ‘no’ don’t you understand?”
Steitz delivered to the council an emotional speech, which received applause from the partisan crowd.
“It’s almost like a bad dream,” he said. “The public opinion is clearly, overwhelmingly against this.”
Steitz spoke out against the man behind the proposed Powder Mountain development, Brent Ferrin. He criticized the council for ignoring the public by not answering to Ferrin’s actions.
“We have seen what happens when you allow a ski resort to turn into a four-season resort,” he said.
Steitz said the future of Cache Valley could be compared to Park City or Jackson Hole, Wyo. if this development were approved.
Emily Shoemake, a junior studying English, attended the meeting with the ecological coalition.
“I don’t want it to become too overgrown and too developed with all of the additional development,” she said.
Ericka Kulzer-Gillette, a freshman studying bio-veterinary science, added to Shoemake’s sentiments.
“I don’t think it’s acceptable at all,” she said. “It’s not going to benefit the community with all of the people that already don’t want it.”
The majority in attendance at the hearing was strongly against development, but there were some who supported Powder Mountain development, including Beth Hunsaker, a senior in family consumer sciences.
“As someone who enjoys skiing, as well as places like Park City and Jackson Hole, I would love for Powder Mountain to become more developed,” she said.
Cache Valley already has limited entertainment options, Hunsaker said, and an improved Powder Mountain with Cache County access would be a boon to residents valley-wide.
Resident Tom Jensen said he believed rezoning the land would allow for more control by the council.
“There are issues to resolve. There is no question about that. But the way to control it is under the resort and recreation zone,” Jensen said. “Under no change, you don’t have the control, but the development still will occur.”
Jensen mentioned control of culinary water, open space, drainage, wildlife and placement of buildings as items the council would be able to manage if the property were rezoned.
One major issue impeding Cache County’s approval of the rezoning is fire control.
Ted Black, fire marshal for the Weber Fire District, resolved the issue by claiming his department would cover the Cache County portion of the development.
“Brent Ferrin and company have been very accommodating. They have done everything we have asked. We would be happy to provide fire protection for this development,” he said.
Many Avon and Paradise residents are frightened by the prospect of increased traffic throughout the area.
Avon resident Jennifer Gines pleaded with the council.
“I moved my family here to get away from the masses,” she said. “Please don’t bring them to me.”
If development were improved, a larger road with more traffic through the south end of the valley would certainly come with it. That is not a bad thing to supporters like Hunsaker.
“It would be great to have another way out of the valley other than Sardine Canyon,” she said.
The council will meet again Wednesday, Sept. 24 at 5 p.m. to vote on the issue.
Steitz said, “We will not let this project happen.”
-str@cc.usu.edu