Press enter to see results or esc to cancel.

How many more multi million dollar homes do we need?

We saw a story in the online magazine The Observer entitled, “Live Like It’s Always Sundance at This Chic New Park City Development.”

When we read the following line in the article, we took notice, “Those who happen to adore the locale not just for that celebrity-infested period in January might want to check out developer Columbus Pacific’s new Apex Residences Park City, a luxe mountain resort on ten acres in Canyons Village. But back to the Apex Residences, which will be comprised of 63 three- to five-bedroom homes. The residences will range in size from 2,080 square feet up to 3,800 square feet. The luxe collection of homes ranges from $1 to 3 million, with the option of overlook, plaza, or clubhouse level residences.”

Sixty three $1MM-$3MM residences? Wow.

We always knew that the Canyons were only 25%-30% built out but maybe we were so naive that we didn’t consider that the remaining 75% of the land would be filled with $2 million condos.

Of course, they have the development rights to build it. What we question is if they build it, will they come? Of course, they’ve already sold 23 of them, so maybe the answer is yes.

Perhaps the better question is, how many people are out there willing to spend $2 million on a second home in Park City? Perhaps more than we thought.With building like this, we better hope so.



Resort Town

last time I checked, most of us all chose to live in this resort town. It was a resort town WAY before most of us moved in.

Guess what, resort towns attract visitors and homeowners that want to buy second homes to enjoy the amenities of a resort town.
Heaven forbid that they build resort residences on a resort for people to buy that can afford it.

The best part, second homeowners pay full property taxes!
All residences in the Canyons do not get a homestead exemption and Second Home and Investment Property Owners Carry the Tax Burden for Local Services.
A quick and dirty estimate is that these new residences will bring in about $600,000 to a million dollars in revenue and that is money that YOU WILL NOT HAVE TO PAY.

Yea, we could use these nice residences that will be built in the RESORT CORE.
I’ll take their property tax money.



@Resort Town-

I somewhat agree with what you are saying. If development is going to happen, I suppose the resort centers are the place for it. I also have liked the tax dollars that second home owners have brought to this community. However, I think it’s a really complicated issue.

As another commenter just said, the rich can push out the poor (through higher housing prices, etc). We don’t need to look any farther than Jackson Hole to see how that works out. However, that’s a personal preference. Some people would argue that’s just the natural progression of things. However, I don’t think it can be argued that pushing out the middle and lower economic classes will change the makeup of Park City. Again, some may argue no big deal and some would argue it’s a very big deal (likely along the lines of how long you’ve been here).

As for additional taxes that second home owners bring, I used to think that was the ideal scenario… Lots more taxes with fewer people here. However, everything is a tradeoff. Maybe I’d feel better about it if I felt taxes were spent more wisely on needs and not wants. I’m starting to wonder if the tradeoff of having a whole bunch of second home owners is worth it. I also wonder what happens during the next big recession, when many of these multi million dollar homes will likely drop more dollar-wise than less expensive primary residences. If our community has become dependent on this because we’ve built 10 transit centers around Snyderville Basin or we are paying school administrators twice what they make now, who is going to have their taxes raised to fulfill our commitments? You and Me.

Finally, I think the argument about us being a resort town and therefore anything resort is OK, is a slippery slope. If that’s true, we should likely tell the Sweeney’s and the the boys from New York that we’ve changed our minds and we are going let them build twice as big of a structure on Treasure Hill. Then when they sell the development rights to Vail, Vail can build the REAL OVERLOOK HOTEL™. Just think of the taxes a monstrosity overlooking Old Town could bring in. I mean, we are a resort town, and what’s a bigger part of our resort than Main Street? Damn those poor fools who bought in Old Town 10 years ago. They should have know it was a resort town.

I don’t really know the answer. It’s complicated. But I do worry that there will be too many multi million dollar homes. Again, they have the right to build them, but it doesn’t mean it’s a good thing.

Resort Town

Your Sweeny argument is apples to oranges:

Fact is, these APEX units that are being built were planned for way back when our previous County Leaders developed the Canyons SPA. That square footage was anticipated back in the 90’s.

No one is pushing out anyone on this particular development by economic class. The SPA was designed to mitigate housing with a trigger now in effect for Vail to explain how they are going to meet their obligation for affordable housing, and very soon Vail will need to begin that construction.

This is triggered I believe at 33% build out of the Canyons SPA which is VERY soon.
I think it is safe to say that it may be practically impossible for Canyons to build to 100% of their density due to terrain, current build-out, etc. (but when a developer is involved, there always appears to be a creative way)

Do we have an affordable/attainable housing issue? Oh yeah.
Economic diversity is key to a healthy community.
But you need to change the mindset around here as well. Most people agree that we need affordable housing, but as soon as the county leaders or Mountainlands Community Trust pick a spot, the next door neighbors scream, “not in my backyard”. Don’t believe me, join and read some of those awful posts.

Back to Sweeny, that is a mess for the PC Planning Commission dealing with an entitlement from the 80’s and trying to understand it’s defining language.

My point is, our county leaders in the 90s decided that the Canyons was the appropriate area for this type of development and that is exactly what is happening.

Again, ParkRag, there are what-if’s everywhere.

What if we complete the SkullCandy building that was rammed through the Commission and now may never be occupied by the tenant that demanded their parking over the agreement and is now owned by a company in Provo?

What if our snow declines and we cannot make snow due to higher temperatures and have a shortened snow season. You’re going to pay more then too.

My point is, be grateful that the extra income to the County. Be grateful that we live in a place that is pretty amazing and that people want to visit.

The County and City are different places even though most people think the Basin is all Park City.


I agree. Bring in the rich. Leave out the poor.


You know, unless you lived here prior to the 1970s, Park City has *always* been a resort community full of rich people. And, to be frank, it’s been just about the lamest of any of the major ski towns in the US in terms of art, music, culture, etc. It’s a white bread ski town with mostly moderate terrain that attracts rich tourists, plopped down in the middle of Utah.

Now, I like it here a lot. But I don’t have any illusions about the town being cool or having some kind of inherent character that’s being ruined by rich people and fancy houses. If that really bothered you, you would never have moved here.

Complaining about a ski resort building luxury condos seems bizarre. Of course a ski resort is building luxury condos. Derp.



While I may have gotten far afield in my response to another comment, my point wasn’t to ask the question, “why would Vail build luxury condos at its resort.” The question is how many do we need? I was surprised that someone would start to build 63, multi million dollar condos, in one spot? Maybe even more surprised that 20 had already sold.

So, it made me wonder what the demand here is for multi million second homes in the next 5-10 years? 60? 100? 1000? As many as can god-damn be built? I know we as citizens have little control over that for entitled land, but I still think it’s a worthwhile question.

That said, I do think we will all have a problem on hand if our “benevolent” developers experience irrational exuberance.


IMO, we “need” lots. As many as Vail wants to build. Those people are only around 2 weeks a year, and they pay us a fortune in taxes and employ us. Win. Without them, the town would not exist. Full stop. If you’re saying there is some ideal number (probably “no more than we have now”) then you need to explain why.

Bluntly, there are a million mountain towns *without* ski resorts out there with gorgeous views and nobody around. If you want to live at a ski area, you pretty much know what you’re signing up for. I can overlook the drunk Russians arguing loudly at 2am in exchange for amazing public facilities and access to a ton of outdoor opportunities.

John rex

Based on current forecasts, somewhere in the next 10 – 15 years the permanent snow level will be at 8000 feet and above, nothing below. That is the elevation of the Red Pine lodge at Canyons, the Mid Mountain trail, Silver Lake at Deer Valley. Nothing below that will be “ski in – ski out”, including these Apex units. Plus the ski season will be shorter with much less water available for snow making. How do think that is going to work out? Apparently this fact has lead to the short term mentality of “get as much of the money out now as possible” before the shit really hits the fan. It also could be creating a bubble in the local market. AKA the greater fool theory.

Leave a Comment