The Salt Lake City-based real estate firm may finally get a “yes” or a “no” Wednesday, Dec. 18, five years after applying to amend its development agreement with Summit County.
Dakota Pacific’s final offer is a 725-unit neighborhood adjacent to the Skullcandy headquarters in Kimball Junction. About a third of those would be reserved for lower income earners.
And more negotiation could happen at the Summit County Council’s Dec. 18 meeting before the project gets to a vote.
There are basically four possible outcomes: a “yes” to what’s on the table, a “yes” to a different version of the project — which Dakota Pacific could find unacceptable — a “no” or delaying the vote again.
“[If there is a "yes"] the next step would be the joint venture agreement: how we're going to work together in all the different ways,” County Manager Shayne Scott said. Then there’s the matter of getting permits to build.
This year, the two sides debated a public-private partnership after councilmembers asked the developer to help redesign the Kimball Junction Transit Center and replace the DMV and library building on state Route 224.
The partnership is part of the development agreement the county council may vote Dec. 18. Scott told KPCW a “no” is the least likely outcome.
“The council will be more likely to take a positive vote, even if that's one that's not completely acceptable to Dakota Pacific,” he said.
A “no” vote would almost certainly restart a lawsuit that’s been on hold at state legislators’ request.
Dakota Pacific has won favor at the statehouse, where lawmakers passed laws in 2022 and 2023 aimed at hurrying development along.
Summit County sued over the latter law.
It’s unclear what a “yes” vote on an agreement that Dakota Pacific finds unacceptable would mean for the lawsuit. Court records indicate the stay on litigation expired Oct. 8.
And if the council’s decision isn’t unanimous, depending on the number of “yes” votes, residents could hold a referendum.
Numerous residents opposed to the development have attended public hearings over the years.
Their most common concern has been traffic. The county has been having parallel discussions with the Utah Department of Transportation about options for redesigning Kimball Junction.
Residents have also asked why the county would still be considering Dakota Pacific’s project if there is loud opposition.
Besides the threat of a bill vesting the development rights anyway, the county is legally required to process and vote on applications.
The Dec. 18 meeting is not a public hearing, so public comment will not be taken.
