Developer revises Silver Creek master plan to prioritize employee/affordable housing; commission presses for traffic, utilities, water and binding assurances

Developer Tony Tyler presented two alternative master‑plan concepts for the 30.07‑acre site at 7131 Silver Creek Road and asked the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission for feedback on circulation, scale and affordable‑housing commitments.

Staff opened the work session by outlining changes from the applicant’s March presentation: removal of a proposed drive‑through, a reduction in commercial/retail area and added pedestrian connectivity, trails and open space. Tony Tyler said he cut roughly 30,000 square feet of commercial space (from about 110,000 to about 80,000 sq ft) to reduce overall scale and shift focus toward housing. He described two Western‑parcel alternatives — a 64‑lot single‑family layout and a 45‑lot alternative — and said the larger layout yields more deed‑restricted affordable homes because fixed development costs are spread across more units.

On the Eastern mixed‑use parcels, Tyler proposed 154 residential units in the current configuration: 108 apartment‑style units he described as 100% affordable and 46 townhome‑style units around the edge (the applicant said 60–70% of apartment demand should come from employees on or near site). He described an early‑childhood hub of about 20,000 sq ft and said some apartment buildings could be up to three stories in the current concept (the NMU zone allows up to 45 ft). Tyler also said he was willing to explore more all‑electric building systems and heat‑pump water‑heater technologies if commissioners or staff can point to viable proofs of concept.

Public comment came from Megan McKenna of the Mountainlands Community Housing Trust, who urged the commission to recommend the project for county council consideration, stressing local workforce shortages and long waiting lists for affordable housing. “Housing is belonging, and belonging is what builds community,” she said.

Commissioners pressed for more detail on several topics before any formal application decision: an updated traffic study tied to the revised plan and the proposed Earl Street/roundabout reroute; clearer commitments on the mix of uses if the rezone runs with the land; precise yield numbers and the financial logic behind deed‑restricted totals; utility strategy (applicant said mains are a fixed cost and said he’s open to electric solutions); and a site‑suitability analysis and drainage/groundwater mitigation for the Western parcels (the applicant acknowledged local seasonal groundwater and said the plan keeps development on higher ground to limit impacts).

Staff and the applicant discussed procedural options to increase certainty after rezoning: Tyler offered to submit a concurrent final site plan and design standards or a recorded design book as part of a rezoning package so the county and public would have enforceable building footprints, heights and key design constraints. Staff asked the applicant to respond to the MPD narrative questions required by code (10‑18 MPD provisions) and to provide updated technical studies for the next staff report.

No vote was taken; the item was a work session. Commissioners signaled support for more study and encouraged the applicant to return with updated traffic and site‑suitability analyses, clarified affordable‑housing commitments and design controls that would limit unwanted future re‑mixing of uses.