The Utah State Legislature, whose members routinely balk at what they deem federal government overreach — particularly with respect to land — have decided to summarily override Summit County’s land-use authority.
Just days ago, the Legislature rushed through and quickly passed S.B. 84 having one purpose only: to make it possible for Dakota Pacific Real Estate to amend a development agreement carefully and thoroughly negotiated 15 years ago, in 2008, between the county and another developer, The Boyer Company.
The agreement determined that a 58-acre parcel of land at Kimball Junction would become a research park (or in today’s words, a tech park), to help diversify Park City’s mostly tourism-based economy. Public officials and local residents envisioned leading-edge tech companies moving to our area providing high-quality, high-paying jobs.
Years later, Dakota Pacific bought that same tract of land, understanding the development agreement governing it. But Dakota Pacific wasn’t about to let that agreement stand in its way; it had other plans for the parcel. Dakota Pacific rejected the idea of a Tech Park for something much bigger and much more lucrative – a huge, urban-style, high density residential development featuring 1.75 million square feet (more than the 1.3 million square feet of predominantly commercial space entitled in the development agreement).
Recently, after receiving significant community opposition, Dakota Pacific has proposed a revised development that features 727 residential units, housing an estimated 2,000-plus adults and children, and adding thousands of cars to an already crowded Kimball Junction. In addition, the project includes 341,000 square feet of commercial office and retail space bringing the aggregate project square footage to 1.32 million.
Local residents have asked many relevant questions about the developer’s plan. Has the additional water need been accounted for, given our parched county and state? Will taxpayers cover the cost of added services, including fire and police? Where will the residents’ children go to school? How will increased traffic be addressed? Specific answers have been few.
The Utah State Legislature, knowing full well that Summit County was under no obligation to amend the 15-year-old development agreement, figured out a way to help Dakota Pacific get what it wants without having the original agreement amended. The legislature ripped Summit County’s land-use authority away, just for this one project. Just to grant a special favor to one developer.
How would the Legislature react if Washington did something similar to Utah state land? I think we can all agree on that answer. We could hear the collective howl from here.
As Summit County Council member Roger Armstrong put it, “… the assault of local legislative land-use control is unprecedented.” Former Summit County Council member Sally Elliott, who helped negotiate the 2008 development agreement, said the legislature’s action “reeks of all the favoritism, greed and legislative special interest that is so often the subject of the criticism of our ‘one-party’ state.”
Despite our legislature’s brazen action, Summit County Council will move forward with two public hearings on Dakota Pacific’s amended development application, one on Wed., March 1, and the second Wed.,, March 8. Both will be held from 5:00 to 8:30 p.m. at Ecker Hill Middle School. The Council then plans to deliberate and likely vote to approve or reject Dakota Pacific’s application Wed., March 15. Additionally, there is a Summit County work session with Dakota Pacific Wednesday Feb. 22 from 4-6 p.m. at the Richins building, open to the public but without public comment allowed.
As citizens, we should stand up for our community and county, ask tough questions of Dakota Pacific’s representatives, and make our voices heard.