Updated July 9, 2026

Introduction

Developers Bryan Bayles, David Osmond, Spencer Shumway, and others have requested rezoning several parcels of land inside the mouth of Provo Canyon. They hope to build the Vesper Amphitheater on about half of that property—including a 20,000-seat concert amphitheater, a hotel with several buildings, shops for fast food and concert memorabilia, and surface and underground parking. The other half of that land, approximately 50 acres, will be put in a conservation easement, which will connect to trails above the site on Forest Service land. Conserve Utah Valley is open to smart development, but we are concerned about the size of the venue and how it will impact human recreational use of the canyon. The canyon, the river, and the parks are treasured greenspace within minutes of where most Provo citizens live. This space is open to all demographics, including underserved populations, but on evenings when the venue is full, for two to four hours the canyon will be taken over by concert attendees.

We encourage Utah Valley residents to engage with city officials as this application goes through the approval process. Whether the people of Utah Valley are for or against, they can educate themselves, email the Provo City Council, and attend local meetings: 

• Planning Commission Meeting—June 24 (Commission voted 5-2 to not recommend the project to City Council)

• City Council meeting—August 11.

 

Details of the Application and Proposed Venue

Bryan Bayles has requested a Zone Map and General Plan Amendment, and a Concept Plan approval to transition 100.7 acres located at 6622 N. Highway 189 from Agricultural (A1.5), Public Facilities (PF), and Open Space, Preservation, and Recreation (OSPR) zones into Shopping Center (SC3) designation for the purpose of building an entertainment and hospitality development. This area is directly across the highway from Canyon View Park. Steve Turley owns the A1.5 property (24 acres) and has operated a gravel pit there for several decades. Provo City owns the other parcels, and uses the public facilities part for road equipment and materials storage. Vesper wants to purchase Provo City’s land, combine it with Turley’s, and build an amphitheater on about half of the acres. Vesper plans to leave the rest as green space, building hiking and biking trails to connect to those higher up on public land.  We requested that the developers change the rezoning application so that about 25 acres of the Provo land stays in open space designation. June 16 Bryan Bayles told us that this is now their plan. 

The amphitheater will have 8,000 indoor seats connected to 12,000 more for summer concerts. They plan on parking for 7,000 vehicles, most of which will be underground. When the venue isn’t holding a concert, Vesper will reserve some public parking for bikers and hikers. They state that the venue would only be used 10 times a year for the full 20,000 seats and 120 times a year total, however, there would be a smaller amount of daily traffic for patrons of the hotels, restaurant, and shop. In addition, their development plans call for “convention” use which normally isn’t in the late evenings. Other than basic due diligence they are doing now to make sure the venue is feasible for them, the developers said they want to complete exhaustive studies about the impact of the venue on the environment, the stability of the hillside, traffic and other issues, but can’t commit money until after the rezoning is approved. This news report from KSL contains maps of the Vesper plan.

Areas of Concern

Before a meeting with Mr. Bayles on May 27, we emailed him a detailed list of concerns with the project and suggested studies that should be performed before the first shovelful is dug (see Appendix A). In summary, we talked about the threat to wildlife and human outdoor recreation; light, sound, and vehicle pollution; traffic tangles; and the possible geologic instability of the location. Any one of these elements might be ameliorated, but we are also concerned about the cumulative effect. 

Provo Canyon is the primary corridor for traffic between Utah and Wasatch counties. Despite a two-lane highway in each direction, Provo Canyon has maintained an identity focused on wild outdoor recreation and environmental preservation. When the highway was widened, the community insisted that it impact the river as little as possible. The mouth of the canyon is minutes away from the urban landscapes of Orem and Provo and leads into a sanctuary enjoyed by hundreds of thousands of fly fishers, hikers, cyclists, tubers, kayakers, and wildlife enthusiasts a year. It is a Blue Ribbon flyfishing river, and the Provo and Jordan River Parkway Trail follows the river. The canyon holds half a dozen parks where people camp and picnic. The river also gives pleasure to rafters, tubers, and kayakers. Provo City owes it to these people to take supreme care before undertaking any development that threatens the known “brand” or identity of the canyon. 

If the venue impacts the environment negatively it will also impact the economics of the river. The river supports approximately 28,000 angling hours per mile and is actively fished by 6,957 registered anglers per mile annually. Conservative economic baselines established by the Blue Ribbon Fisheries Advisory Council ($10.50 per hour or $84 per standard day), fly fishing alone injects $294,000 to $300,000 per mile annually directly into the local economy. This venue will probably not damage the river or endanger trout, but it could change people’s perception of the canyon as a place of outdoor recreation. On the other hand, if done carefully the venue might enhance the canyon’s reputation. Funneling 5,000 to 10,000 vehicles into a narrow canyon corridor via Highway 189 during peak concert hours could create unprecedented traffic bottlenecks. 

 

The Primary Risk

After careful study, we believe that while they are important issues, that primary danger is not from damage to the environment or disruption of wildlife. The footprint of the amphitheater closely matches a map of land that has already been disturbed by the gravel pit or the public works facility. Provo Canyon contains a major highway, six family parks, and a campground, and every temperate day the trail is full of people biking, running, or walking, and the river is full of people floating. If animal feeding, mating, and giving birth are not disturbed by a major highway and a gravel pit, they may be able to work around a concert venue. Sound pollution is not the greatest problem. Light pollution? Lights can be subdued and directional. 

We think traffic and its impact on the use of the canyon for outdoor recreation are problems that cannot be ameliorated to our satisfaction. For details of this analysis see Appendix B. Because most people arrive in the hour before a concert, we  estimate that traffic heading to the amphitheater for a full-capacity concert will ultimately overwhelm the corridor, causing massive backups onto the streets of Orem and Provo and throughout the canyon. We estimate that it will take over an hour and a half to clear the venue after the concert–an inconvenience for anyone needing to drive past the venue. In the event of a wildfire, this long evacuation time could prove disastrous. The developers plan is to have employees (1,600 for a concert) park at Splash Summit and ride shuttles to the venue, construct stacking lanes where backed-up vehicles can get off the highway, and an overpass so that exiting patrons won’t have to turn left. All of these will help. The developers are also working with UDOT to explore redesigning the interchange where 800 North and University Parkway feed into Highway 189. Bryan Bayles told us in our 16 June meeting that because the new system will benefit all users of the canyon, not just concert goers, the developers hope that the public will pay much of the cost of the construction of a new interchange. 

How often will traffic clog the highway? The developers’ project 10 times a year at first, but Mr. Bayles says that the developers hope for more big concerts in the future. In the summer, Red Rocks Amphitheater, which is similar to the Vesper project, has events almost every day in the summer. When will bad traffic happen? Between 5 and 7 p.m., when people often go up the canyon in the evening to walk or picnic, and between 10 p.m. and midnight when some are returning from trips to Strawberry, Park City, or the Uintah Mountains. While the canyon will clog during a small portion of the hours in a day, users will be impeded during the time they want to use the canyon. If conventions are held at the venue, the traffic congestion could be all day long, not just in the evening.

What it comes down to is this: a choice of who gets to enjoy the canyon in the evening. No one has to pay to enjoy the parks, the trail, and the river. Both wealthy and non-wealthy residents can use it. How many people in towns the size of Provo have such easy access to this kind of green space? Now imagine who will go to a concert. Because Live Nation controls the price of tickets across the country, it will be someone who can drop between a hundred dollars and several hundred dollars on a concert. Will they come early to lounge at the beautiful resort? Probably. So the traffic will start early and continue—right at the time people want to go to the canyon and watch the river, or fish, or just get up out of the pollution. With this amphitheater, we will trade wide demographic use for narrow demographic use. Which kind of a city does Provo want to be?

 

The Developer’s Perspective

After reviewing a previous draft of this position document, Bryan Bayles gave CUV a statement which we include here:

“Thank you for sending this over for review. If this response is included in the CUV’ response to the Proposed Vesper Amphitheater, it should be understood as Vesper’s perspective and should not be represented as our agreement with the rest of the document.

We respect you and Conserve Utah Valley’s mission to protect this beautiful place. We share the belief that Provo Canyon deserves great care, which is why we believe the public discussion should begin with a balanced and accurate description of the site as it exists today. The proposed Vesper site is not pristine open space or untouched wilderness. It is an active gravel mining and construction-material recycling operation with no public access, no public trails, and a long history of truck traffic, dust, visible mountain scarring, slope disturbance, and blasting at the gateway to Provo Canyon.

That current condition matters. The question before the community is not simply whether Provo Canyon should be protected. We agree that it should. The question is what should happen next with this long-disturbed property. Vesper’s vision is rooted in stewardship, restoration, and reuse. The intent is to replace industrial extraction with a focused reuse footprint, restored open-space areas, trail connections, conservation easements over appropriate restored areas, native landscaping, canyon-sensitive design, dark-sky compliant lighting, natural materials, and meaningful public access. Rather than turning away from the canyon, the project is intended to reconnect people to it and create a long-term investment in the land’s future.

We welcome rigorous review and public input, and we understand that traffic, wildlife, sound, lighting, water, geology, and public access all deserve careful study. But we also believe the community deserves a discussion that evaluates the project against the site’s actual condition today, not against an idealized version of a landscape that has been actively mined and disturbed for decades.”

 

The Mayor’s Perspective

We also include a letter Provo City Mayor Marsha Judkins sent to CUV regarding the proposed development: 

“The gravel pit is private property, and because of state protections surrounding gravel mining, the City has no ability to regulate or stop that activity. The cost of both acquisition and restoration has been prohibitive. Many of the residents who have contacted me are under the mistaken belief that the gravel pit is bounded–that it has reached its size potential. This is not true. If the current or a future owner decides to expand production, the federal government, which owns the 100s of acres to the south and southeast, has proven to be ready and willing to lease their land to mining production. It is extremely important to me that we preserve as much of this land as we can, and this gravel pit is a ticking time bomb. 

This development is concentrated within the existing disturbed gravel pit footprint while placing the majority of the surrounding acreage (60 acres) into a conservation easement. This would restrict any future developments in this area. 

I understand and share the concerns around traffic congestion in Provo Canyon, and have emphasized the need to work with UDOT, UTA and other transportation partners to ensure that traffic solutions are implemented for the venue to open. For what the organizers of this project want to do, they must go through: zone map and general plan map changes, council and planning commission reviews, building permit process (involving relevant environmental and sustainability code requirements), building license process, collaboration with UDOT, federal partners, Provo City, Orem City, Utah County, and other stakeholders to make sure the project meets all requirements and is high-quality. Residents can follow this process and hold us accountable. It is not just a “trust us” scenario. You can verify and raise questions at every step.”

 

Conclusion and Asks 

CUV believes that the Vesper Amphitheater project may be incompatible with the current use  of Provo Canyon. The studies that both Vesper and Mayor Judkins say will be performed after  rezoning may prove this. The commercial and recreational benefits the venue offers must be weighed against costs of loss to other users. Provo citizens value the canyon: “According to a survey of residents, Provo Canyon is the city’s most visited and iconic natural feature. Overall, residents would like to see the hillsides and canyons preserved as they are, with minimal additional development beyond improvements to basic amenities” (Provo City Hillsides and Canyons Plan, adopted 2023). But this is not an easy decision. As Mr. Bayles has told us, the current gravel pit is probably also incompatible with the identity of Provo Canyon. In a perfect world, we wouldn’t have to choose between, there would be other options.

Conserve Utah Valley calls upon the Provo City Planning Commission and City Council to protect our shared natural heritage. Mr. Bayles and Mayor Judkins have both promised us that rezoning approval would contain language guaranteeing that if the Vesper Amphitheater project proves unfeasible, the land will revert to its current zoning status. We ask that the City Council ensure that this language is in the development agreement. We also ask the mayor and the city council to take care that the sale of city property to the Vesper group is conditional. As a community, we can’t afford this land to be resold for the building of any other development. We urge the city to use other means, such as the various approvals required for any development, to ensure that they will assess environmental impact, conduct with DNR a formal wildlife migration study, a multi-agency traffic impact analysis, and conduct rigorous hydrologic and geological studies in a timely manner so they can be reviewed by the public. 

Below is a list of contact information and the times and locations of the meetings. We encourage residents of Utah Valley to write to the Planning Commission and City Council and to attend the upcoming meetings in person or via Zoom to speak out, protect our canyon, and defend our water and land forever.

Write to:

• Provo City Council at council@provo.gov
• Provo Planning Commission at dspublichearings@provo.gov
• Senator Keven Stratton kstratton@le.utah.gov
• Mayor Marsha Judkins marsha@provo.gov

Attend a meeting: 

• City Council Meeting—August 11 (City Hall, Council chambers, 445 W Center Street, Provo). We will let you know whether this zoning change will be discussed at the work meeting (4:00) or the general meeting (5:30p.m.).

 

Appendix A

The following is a list of questions CUV has sent to both the Mayor and the developer concerning concerns we have and studies that should be completed. 

Location 

• Your Zone Change, Concept Plan, and General Plan Map Amendment says you ask that Provo City rezone 100.7 acres, but Steve Turley only owns 24 acres at his gravel pit. Where will the other acres come from? 
• The area taken up by the shooting range is not just the square yardage of the range itself, but buffer zones with signs that warn hikers about the dangers. The shooting range currently affects where people can hike. Will the city need to move the shooting range? 
• You are planning construction on an area with steep slopes and an underground parking garage that may compromise slope stability (rockfall, landslides, slope creep, freeze-thaw instability, earthquake amplification, avalanche, etc.). What engineering firm have you hired and what have they told you about this project? We will encourage the city to require a full geotechnical study before the Planning Commission or the City Council consider rezoning. 

• A 20,000-person venue could create multi-hour exit times, gridlock extending miles downstream, air pollution inversion effects, and emergency response delays. The public may ultimately subsidize hundreds of millions in road widening and traffic mitigation for a private entertainment development.
• What downstream intersections fail under projected loads?
• What taxpayer-funded improvements are anticipated?
• What are the long-term maintenance costs for these highway improvements?
• Who pays for snow removal during events?
• What studies have you requested from UDOT for traffic issues? Specifically, what is the current Level of Service and what is the projected LOS during sold-out events? We will encourage the city to require such studies. 
• What easements will you need from the Forest Service? Have you begun the process with them?
• What is your plan for water and wastewater? What will the tax liability be to Provo City residents for this infrastructure?
• The architectural drawing is preliminary and not so detailed. What plans has your architect made for emergency staging areas, ride-share queues, bus loading/unloading, ADA overflow, and fire evacuation?

 

Environmental Impact

• We will encourage the city to require a complete environmental impact study before the planning commission and the city council consider rezoning. We hope such a study will include consideration of how the resort will affect wildlife migration, breeding, and genetic connectivity. Has the DWR modeled these displacement effects? How much will wildlife vehicle collisions increase? What effect will the increased impervious surfaces have on water flow?
• What is your estimate for the peak decibels during concerts? How much will this affect migratory bird orientation? 
• What is your estimate for peak and average light pollution? How will the loss of dark sky conditions disrupt nocturnal wildlife behavior?
• How much do you estimate air pollution will increase from vehicles and buildings (heating and cooling) not just the 120 days for concert traffic, but the daily traffic of visitors to the hotels, restaurants, and shops?

 

Need and perceived need for such a venue

Conserve Utah Valley does not oppose smart development, and every act of development requires balancing opposing values. Because this development will profoundly affect the identity of the canyon, we ask what feasibility studies you’ve completed: 

• Provo already has concert venues at BYU, Covey Center for the Arts, SCERA, the Ruth, and Sundance summer theaters. What economic analysis have you conducted to measure the need for another concert venue and resort?
• Your promotional materials say that 98% of Provo residents are in favor of the resort. How did you calculate that number? What public surveys have you conducted?
• What other areas have you considered for this resort?
• You are a local company but the entire music industry is controlled by Live Nation Entertainment. What are your prospects for selling this venue to them?

 

Appendix B

Vesper Amphitheater Traffic Analysis

As the proposed Vesper Amphitheater moves through public hearings, project engineer Greg Nelson outlined two primary solutions in an official video statement to address community concerns regarding canyon traffic: a “speed ramp loading” to pull arriving vehicles off the highway during ingress, and an egress bridge over US-189, designed to split departing traffic between Provo and Heber.

Project applications state a maximum capacity of 20,000 seats. Assuming an aggressive carpool average of 3.0 people per vehicle, a sold-out event at Vesper will require accommodating approximately 6,667 total vehicles.

 

The Ingress Funnel

Vesper’s proposed 20,000 capacity is more than double the size of Red Rocks’ 9,525-seat footprint. To accommodate their guests, the 868-acres of Red Rocks utilizes at least five spread out parking lots and four distinct entrances/exits around the park. 

Standard traffic engineering data suggests that roughly 65% of concertgoers (4,334 vehicles) arrive within a single peak hour preceding the event. US-189 through Provo Canyon has a capacity of 4,000 vehicles each direction per hour. Data from a UDOT Counting Station in the canyon shows that traffic flows at 2,430 vehicles per hour from 6 – 7PM. Putting an additional 4,334 vehicles onto US-189 will be pushing the limits of the highway, but will likely create a bottleneck at the Vesper property as concertgoers search for parking and maneuver within the property that could stretch onto the highway.

 

The Egress “Split”

The proposed bridge aims to split traffic between Provo and Heber. However, the vast majority of the population lives along the Wasatch Front, thus, traveling east toward Heber is an unrealistic detour. Let’s say at least 85% of departing vehicles – 5,667 – will travel south down the canyon toward Orem and Provo.

However, the merging vehicles must merge into existing traffic. Real-world counts show that late-night (11 p.m.-Midnight) traffic thins out to 389 vehicles per hour. With a capacity of 4,000 vehicles per hour, subtracting the background traffic leaves 3,611 vehicles per hour available for the venue. Assuming that Vesper’s internal parking structures can perfectly clear vehicles after a show, it would take at least 1 hour and 34 minutes for the last vehicle to enter the highway. 

Assuming that departing traffic splits equally across three primary municipal arterials (1,889 vehicles each), local street designs create severe secondary gridlocks:

• Orem 800 North: With an operating capacity ranging from 1,600 to 2,700 vehicles per hour, per direction, absorbing traffic from an event at Vesper requires an additional 42 to 71 minutes.
• Orem Center Street: With identical limits of 1,600 to 2,700 vehicles per hour per direction, it adds another 42 to 71 minutes of delay. 
• North University Avenue (Provo): The segment from University Parkway to the mouth of Provo Canyon has an operating capacity of 2,700 to 3,600 vehicles per hour, per direction. Processing traffic from Vesper would require 31 to 42 minutes of continuous throughput to clear the congestion.

The math is clear – Provo Canyon, and the surrounding roads in Orem and Provo, cannot handle the traffic of a venue like Vesper. Pushing this project forward without proper studies will ensure serious gridlock throughout Utah Valley.