close
close

Apre-salomemanzo

Breaking: Beyond Headlines!

Summit County Residents Asked for Their Opinion on Dakota Pacific Proposal
aecifo

Summit County Residents Asked for Their Opinion on Dakota Pacific Proposal

Summit County residents will finally have the chance to voice their opinions on a proposed development near the Park City Tech Center after months of anticipation.

The County Council is moving forward with its timetable for renegotiating a potential development deal with Dakota Pacific Real Estate in the Kimball Junction neighborhood as officials work to clarify the final elements of a plan intended to bring benefits to the community in the region, by organizing a public hearing. at 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, November 7 at the Newpark Hotel.

County Council President Malena Stevens said officials will spend about 15 minutes explaining the details of the project. There’s the developer’s proposal to build affordable apartments and single-family homes on land behind the Skullcandy building, as well as a public-private partnership concept that could include an assisted care center, civic space, retail retail, underground parking, a new public transportation center. , a public library, and public gathering spaces such as an amphitheater. Then feedback will be collected for the remainder of the meeting.

This will be the first time the community will be allowed to officially comment on the proposal. The county council planned to hold a public hearing earlier this year, but it was regularly postponed amid lengthy discussions and multiple counterproposals.

Ultimately, a subcommittee was formed in the spring and conversations took place behind closed doors. Specific elements of the public-private partnership were unveiled last month.

Steve Borup, director of business development for Dakota Pacific, met with the county board Wednesday to explain some additional details of the proposal, including the gradual approach to build 750 housing units and the likelihood that public funds will be allocated.

Borup suggested phasing how units are built based on a stage or a certain amount of time. He said Dakota Pacific could not allocate design funding without first knowing occupancy plans because the initial 80 to 90 percent of units primarily recovered the initial project costs, which did not generate a profit for the company. land business.

The phased release would be based on the early stages of construction, not just when development begins or when housing is occupied. Full occupancy typically takes two and a half to three years after a project receives entitlement approval.

The first step is expected to take place in December, if the county council approves the revised development agreement. Dakota Pacific would then build up to 170 units of affordable housing, with full occupancy expected in 2027.

The next phase can begin when the SR 224 project is added to the Utah Department of Transportation’s State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) list. Borup estimates that this could happen in 2025 if the momentum of collaboration and finding a solution for the corridor continues. He said state officials may be forced to move forward with the project if the housing is built near a transit center, as is proposed under the public-private partnership.

If this happens, an additional 170 homes would be built, with full occupancy expected between 2027 and 2028.

The same number of units would be given the green light in 2026 and 2027 after the project remains on the STIP for one to two years. Full occupancy is estimated around 2028-29 for the first wave and 2029-31 for the second.

Development would stop after the first stage if the SR 224 project never makes it to STIP.

“The worst thing that could happen is we ended up with 170 affordable housing units, and that’s all that would be released at that time,” Borup said. He estimated that about half of the 250 designated affordable housing units would be built by stage three.

When construction on SR 224 is halfway complete, 70 units could be built. Borup wasn’t sure what year that might happen. It is also possible to create 90 deed-restricted senior housing units if an assisted living facility is not feasible in the area. These units would be removed from the developer’s count.

A timeline shows the proposed timeline for the public-private partnership with Dakota Pacific. Credit: Summit County

The county is also considering building its own housing in the area through a public-private partnership, which could bring the total number of units to about 915. No information has been shared on when those housing could be built.

STIP funding is crucial for Dakota Pacific to eliminate some of the risks, according to the development company. Once this happens, there is assurance that the project will move forward despite any changes in the schedule.

County Councilman Roger Armstrong advocated for Summit County and Dakota Pacific to work together with UDOT to ensure the more substantial improvement project moved forward.

County staff prefer widen the roadway and build a viaduct to connect the two sides compared to other alternatives proposed by the state, such as building a split diamond interchange to divert traffic.

However, it is unclear whether the design will be changed. UDOT staff plan to make a formal presentation this winter, and a final decision could be made next summer.

The public-private partnership could cost Summit County $39 million. Podium parking is estimated at $20 million, a transit center at $11 million and a pedestrian bridge at $4 million. The authorities are considering several sources of financing to finance this project.

Other expenses would be shared with Dakota Pacific, but the county board wanted to better understand what that cost split looks like and how some of the square footage was used.

Once the details are worked out and public comments are collected, the Summit County Council will be able to vote on Dakota Pacific’s proposal. This could happen by the end of the year, according to the current schedule.

Voting to amend the development agreement would only affect the Tech Center land and does not guarantee construction will take place on the Sheldon Richins parcel under the public-private partnership.