Quantcast
Home » News
Home » News

Foes of proposed Cache Valley ski area complain about cutting of trees

Published October 16, 2012 8:34 am

Compliance • Opponents ask Cache County to keep close eye on proposed Cherry Peak Resort.
This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2012, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Opponents of a proposed Cache Valley ski area have complained to Cache County that trees were cut down on projected runs in violation of the resort's conditional-use permit, which is on hold while it is being challenged in court.

The Bear River Watershed Council said Cherry Peak Ski Area developer Logan Checketts cut down "a large swath of trees" on the proposed 203-acre resort in the foothills east of Richmond. Council Chairman Dan Miller said the logging, which the council documented in a photograph on its website, http://www.BRWCouncil.org, ran counter to the conditional use permit approved in February by the Cache County Planning Commission.

That approval specified "no portion of the Cherry Peak Ski Area may be constructed until the above conditions are met and the permit is recorded,"Miller said. Permit completion has been suspended, however, awaiting an April 2013 hearing in Utah's 1st District Court on a council-supported lawsuit challenging Cache County's approval.

"This is a blatant disregard for the law," he added. "It is now apparent the county needs to be super vigilant in their supervision of any work that occurs and extra diligent in their enforcement of the conditions."

In a news release, Miller said he brought the matter to the attention of Cache County Development Services Director Josh Runhaar. He claimed Runhaar was aware of the situation and assured Miller no more trees would be cut down.

Runhaar did not respond to multiple requests for comment from The Salt Lake Tribune.

A county development services employee who declined to be identified said the allegation was not a big deal, simply a misunderstanding by the developer who thought the ban applied only to work on the road for the resort.

Checketts did not return Tribune requests for comment.

mikeg@sltrib.com

Twitter: @sltribmikeg —