Dakota Pacific Real Estate will likely have to cut its original proposal at the Park City Tech Center in half for Summit County officials to consider approving the mixed-use development.
The County Council on Thursday set specific standards for the project, which included reducing the density to 500 units, restricting most construction until after S.R. 224 is improved, and the creation of community benefits such as new parking facilities and a continuing care retirement community.
Dakota Pacific representatives seemed surprised by the new guidelines. CEO Marc Stanworth said the requests may not be feasible.
The development firm initially asked the County Council to approve 1,100 units on the 50-acre parcel west of Kimball Junction. It was later reduced by 30% to 727 units. Stanworth has said it’s not economically viable for the project to be cut further despite council requests to do so.
This week, the County Council affirmed it wasn’t likely to approve any more than 500 apartments at the site. Half of those must be affordable, Chair Malena Stevens said. An equal number of those units would be restricted to households earning 40% of the area median income, 60% AMI and 80% AMI.
The county also wants Dakota Pacific to keep 20 units of deed-restricted “attainable” housing for households earning between 100% and 120% AMI. The average AMI in Summit County for a family of four is $148,600.
One-third of the market rate units would be reserved for seniors. The development firm must also commit to creating a medical facility for seniors as well as partner with the county to create a capture lot or parking structure. No nightly rentals or fractional ownership would be permitted across the development.
The county did not propose any changes to the 266,000 square feet of commercial density.
Construction will be dependent on the S.R. 224 improvement project receiving Statewide Transportation Improvement Program funding. Once that happens, Dakota Pacific could build one-third of its development. Work would have to stop if the state transportation award is pulled.
Dakota Pacific would not be allowed to build the rest of its development until an alternative for the Kimball Junction and Interstate 80 interchange is completed. The Utah Department of Transportation has proposed three alternatives for S.R. 224, but it will take about a year for one to be chosen. Then, funding has to be awarded before years of construction can begin.
Stanworth expressed concerns about the feasibility and timeline of the plan, which the CEO said would compound costs.
County Councilor Chris Robinson said the parties had hoped to reach an agreement under a compressed timeline so they might receive funding for a transportation fix before the legislative session ends on March 1.
However, Robinson felt the timing was a bit premature as details still haven’t been agreed on. He added the county needs certainty that a traffic solution is coming.
Traffic is the No. 1 issue, the County Council agreed. The number of residents living at the development, estimated to be around 1,600 people, is also a great concern.
County Councilor Roger Armstrong noted the impact that could have on county services like police and fire as well as additional stress on amenities such as child-care providers and trail systems. He said the County Council has an obligation to do what’s best for the community.
Dakota Pacific representatives asked if the county was willing to trade commercial density for residential, allowing it to build more housing and less retail space. Stanworth said the project loses leverage for state support help when housing is cut.
The County Council said it was unlikely to support much more density at the site, and only if it was affordable. The council acknowledged its tough set of terms created a gap between its proposal for Plan D and the most recent iteration of the Dakota Pacific project.
The development firm was asked to return on Tuesday to discuss the county’s requests in greater detail. Representatives were skeptical they would be able to rework the project by then because of the discrepancies.
Officials are expected to postpone a public hearing and decision scheduled later this month to allow for more discussions. The parties have agreed to pause a lawsuit over the land until June.
The next public meeting is scheduled from 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. on Feb. 13 at the County Courthouse in Coalville. A tentative work session is set for 3:30 to 5 p.m. on Thursday, Feb. 15. The hearing scheduled for that evening will likely be moved.
Each meeting can be attended virtually on Zoom at https://zoom.us/j/772302472.