With fewer than five regular Summit County Council meetings remaining this year, officials maintained they’re still planning to vote on the contentious Dakota Pacific Real Estate development proposal by Dec. 31.The tight timeline is compressed because of Thanksgiving next week and Christmas Day falling on the last regular December meeting, leaving limited opportunities for final discussions before the decision. There is not another public hearing scheduled before the future vote.County Council Chair Malena Stevens told Dakota Pacific CEO Marc Stanworth and Steve Borup, director of commercial development, that there would be a significant amount of time set aside during the Dec. 4 meeting to parse through the remaining issues. Dave Thomas, the county’s chief civil deputy, has been crafting a draft development agreement based on the latest proposal for the County Council to vote on. County Manager Shayne Scott planned to forward it to staff for review before the next meeting.County Councilor Chris Robinson, who served on the Dakota Pacific subcommittee formed earlier this year, said the draft proposal would have several reservations and stipulations that could change based on the next few weeks of negotiations. His co-councilor, Roger Armstrong, was clear that the document did not reflect any intent to approve the project, it’s just an early example of what could be voted on.Dakota Pacific is seeking to amend the existing 2008 development agreement at the Park City Tech Center, which limits what can be built on the 50 acres there to offices or research-related buildings, to allow for a mixed-use development. The development firm’s proposal involves constructing a 750-unit neighborhood with community amenities such as green space and a clubhouse west of the Skullcandy building.Dakota Pacific Real Estate wants to build a 750-unit residential neighborhood west of the Skullcandy building in Kimball Junction. Then, the development firm would partner with Summit County to create a mixed-use town center near the existing Richins Building. Credit: Dakota Pacific Real EstateIf the Summit County Council approves the zoning change, Dakota Pacific will enter into a private-public partnership to help create a town center with dedicated senior housing or a medical facility, commercial and retail businesses, civic buildings and a new transit center near the Richins Building. The details of that would be voted on at a later time.Community members have cited traffic and density as their top issues, and the County Council has been trying to determine whether the project offers enough of a public benefit to offset those concerns. Last week, Summit County asked Dakota Pacific to cut its market-rate unit count from 500 to 400. Stanworth on Wednesday said there’s no wiggle room for reductions. Instead, he proposed placing deed restrictions on 100 of the units. Half would be reserved for households earning up to 100% of the area median income, and the other half for those making up to 120% AMI, for 20 years. This means the restricted units would be available to couples earning between $122,400 and $146,880 annually, or a family of four making between $153,000 and $183,600.That’s in addition to the 250 affordable units that would exist in perpetuity. Most apartments, 165 units, would be reserved for residents at 60% AMI, with 65 designated for 44% AMI and 20 units for 80% AMI.Stanworth emphasized the importance of including affordable housing in the development, saying it’s a critical need for providing workforce housing and creating an integrated, livable community. Converting market-rate units to affordable units would also bring significant subsidy costs, making it more difficult to invest in the public-private partnership.Armstrong asked whether the size of the units could be tweaked to address the number of people that might be living in the neighborhood, reducing the number of cars that might be driving in the area. He suggested building more studio apartments or one to two-bedroom units rather than apartments with three bedrooms.Dakota Pacific couldn’t speak to the specifics of the idea, but Stanworth said he wants to help families find housing in Summit County.Robinson also pushed his colleagues to decide whether or not they wanted to incentivize and build affordable housing at this site. “I think that that is a fundamental issue that the council needs to decide is … do we want you to build affordable housing because it’s a value, you say you want it because it’s a value to you, but do we want you to? And do we want to build some on our own account or is that too many bodies? …. Too many people? Figuring that out, I think, is really key,” he said.Dakota Pacific Real Estate’s latest plan for the Park City Tech Center involves around 750 units of the developer’s housing being constructed on the western portion of the site. The east side would be used for public amenities. Credit: Dakota Pacific Real EstateThe county councilor acknowledged the high density. There would be 350 deed-restricted units from Dakota Pacific plus a possible 165 from Summit County as part of the public-private partnership. It creates a total of 915 units in the area when market-rate units are added in, but 56% of housing would be affordable or attainable — well within the mandates of the state’s moderate-income housing plan. Policy 2.3 within the Snyderville Basin code also requires new developments to have “a compelling countervailing public interest.”Another potential option discussed was a land swap to allow the county to save a portion of the property for future development. However, Dakota Pacific warned it could take some time to work through all the economic considerations involved.The County Council advised Dakota Pacific to prepare for further discussions about how to create a balanced phasing plan and the role of affordable housing at the Tech Center site.The post Summit County Council considers development details as Dakota Pacific project nears vote appeared first on Park Record.