DV-25-00001 Suncadia Resort Master File

Home Browse Search

6 A B C D E Commenter Name Date Public Comment Excerpt / Summary Topic Area Applicant Response 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 No Name "Suncadia DA Comment 1" The Development Agreement includes important commitments related to infrastructure, public access, environmental mitigation, and performance standards. Before additional time or entitlements are granted, the County should verify that these commitments have been met.Compliance / Accountability The Applicant acknowledges the request for a documented compliance review. The Development Agreement has been administered through ongoing County oversight, and obligations have been addressed through applicable approvals. The proposed extension does not excuse unfinished obligations. Response to Comments Received after the cutoff date/time Ed Marshall January 26, 2026 As a homeowner at Suncadia, I believe the proposed extension should be denied unless and until the developer demonstrates full compliance with the existing Development Agreement. Unresolved obligations should not be carried forward through an extension. Doing so places the burden on residents and the County. I ask the County to require a documented compliance review identifying unmet obligations and ensuring they are resolved prior to any extension decision. Accountability is fundamental to responsible development Compliance / Accountability The Applicant acknowledges the request for a documented compliance review. The Development Agreement has been administered through ongoing County oversight, and obligations have been addressed through applicable approvals. The proposed extension does not excuse unfinished obligations. Ira Astrachan / Community follow up comments January 26, 2026 One of the biggest threats to the success and future of the MPR relates to water rights. We believe in the future, absent a change in the permitted number of units, there is build significant potential for the MPR to have insufficient water rights available to serve all residents Water Rights Please refer to the separate letter regarding water rights: "2026-0130 Suncadia response letter water rights" Ira Astrachan / Community follow up comments January 26, 2026 B-17, B-18, and B-19: Water Supply (previously discussed). These sections are of vital importance and given the previous discussion should be carefully examined Water Rights Please refer to the separate letter regarding water rights Ira Astrachan / Community follow up comments January 26, 2026 B-43(a): During development of the last three plats, several of the developer’s construction vehicles did not have the required operable fire extinguisher on board. The developer was notified and stated an exception had been granted by the County Fire Marshal; however, the DA specifies three individual entities must examine the request, not just the Fire Marshal DA Conditions The applicant will ensure compliance during future plats and developments. Ira Astrachan / Community follow up comments January 26, 2026 B-44: During the development of every plat since 2019, we have consistently observed trucks transporting dusty materials without covered loads. While the developer may require, via contract or other means, these truck drivers to cover their loads, there appears to be no enforcement DA Conditions The applicant includes this condition as part of contracting and works to enforce. This is an ongoing commitment that the applicant works to meet. Based on the commenter providing previous comment to the county on this topic, the Applicant set up a complaint email for owners to submit complaints regarding this topic (or others). No complaints have been received. Ira Astrachan / Community follow up comments January 26, 2026 C-12: Requires the County Public Works Director to review the MPR road system (and restrictive gates) in conjunction with subdivision application. We believe a threshold or timeline should be considered for removing the restrictive gate at Firehouse Road with an eye toward public safety.DA Conditions The Firehouse Road gate is not an official entrance to Suncadia as allowed under the DA and as such, is gated. As discussed with the County, the gate can be opened for emergency egress should such emergency arise. Ira Astrachan / Community follow up comments January 26, 2026 C-16(e): As the development nears conclusion, it would be helpful for the developer to address the damage caused by the construction vehicles inside the MPR per this section such that they can plan to repair them (Suncadia Trail, Swiftwater Drive)DA Conditions Arterial roads within the MPR have worn over time due to many factors. Suncadia Trail and Swiftwater Drive are owned and maintained by the Suncadia Community Council and that entity has reserve funds to repair these roads at the appropriate time. Ira Astrachan / Community follow up comments January 26, 2026 C-17: The 2025 Traffic Monitoring Reports contains several inconsistencies. Page 13 states “roadway segments operate at LOS C or better in 2025” however the referenced chart clearly shows one road segment operating at LOS “D”. To be fair, the same paragraph also states “These calculations include some directions operating worse than LOS C”. More importantly, the entire report fails to address all items in section (h) of C-17. Taken together, these issues suggest the Traffic Monitoring Report would benefit from some refinement DA Conditions The applicant completes yearly traffic monitoring and shares the data with the County. Ira Astrachan / Community follow up comments January 26, 2026 C-30: To measure the effect of the MPR on public services, has the developer filed the proper reports within the last five years as required in this section?DA Conditions Yes, all required reports have been submitted. Ira Astrachan / Community follow up comments January 26, 2026 C-31: There does not appear to be a security force operating at the MPR. While a company provides monitoring services, this does not appear to meet the DA’s requirement for “security.”DA Conditions Suncadia has hired Allied Security to fulfill security patrol within the MPR. Ira Astrachan / Community follow up comments January 26, 2026 C-48 / C-51: The requirement for a “solid waste management plan” includes establishing recycling facilities. With the exception of cardboard, there is no recycling facility in the MPR.DA Conditions The applicant worked with Waste Management over the past 2 years to bring residential recycling to the MPR and that recycling is now in place. Waste Management is unable to support commercial recycling.