The United States’ representative democracy is built on the principle that elected officials make decisions reflecting the will of the people. While nationally there is polarization, locally, the community’s stance on Dakota Pacific Real Estate’s (DPRE) proposed high-density development on the Tech Park tract has been consistently unified. Since late 2021, residents have voiced overwhelming opposition, highlighting concerns that unite, rather than divide, the community.

While Utah’s status as a “land use state” requires Summit County to consider DPRE’s proposals, the ongoing discourse underscores several issues: what constitutes community benefit, and how to protect local land use authority from external influences. 

In March 2023, Summit County took legal action against DPRE and the state, challenging what it saw as legislative overreach. Although the county dropped the state from the suit to maintain a cooperative relationship, it secured a significant victory in the state’s Third District Court. The ruling affirmed that the Tech Center Development Agreement remains valid, countering DPRE’s legislative maneuvers.

Even with litigation paused, the county retains substantial leverage to reject any proposal not aligned with the community’s interests. DPRE’s latest plan remains largely unchanged, featuring 750 units — 500 market-rate and 250 affordable.

Although additional affordable housing is beneficial, it does not balance the increased demand for infrastructure, schools, and public services driven by the market-rate units, perpetuating a cycle of unmet affordable housing needs.

Many of the touted “community benefits,” such as a parking structure, appear negligible and seem to come at taxpayers’ expense.

Furthermore, residents have consistently emphasized that traffic infrastructure improvements should precede any new development, yet the project’s timeline is not contingent on UDOT’s actual work.

Finally, DPRE’s claim of reducing density from 1.8 million to 1.1 million square feet is less a genuine concession and more a recalibration, as the initial proposal exceeded DPRE’s development entitlements by over 40%.

Council members, many of whom campaigned against this project, have a mandate to reflect the community’s concerns. Both candidates for the contested Seat C, Ari Ioannides and Megan McKenna, expressed opposition to various iterations of DPRE’s plans.

A “no” vote would align with this overwhelming public sentiment. Some argue that denying the proposal could push DPRE back to the state Legislature. However, representing the will of the people and protecting local decision-making authority is paramount. Allowing developers to bypass local governance would set a concerning precedent, undermining Summit County’s zoning integrity.

While it is understandable that DPRE seeks returns for its investors, responsible development should benefit the community as a whole. It’s not about opposition to progress, but about ensuring that progress aligns with the area’s needs and values before changing land use zoning.

Since 2008, this land tract has been designated non-residential, and any change should have overwhelming benefits. We continue to believe that the tract presents an opportunity for John Miller and his DPRE team to work with local community members to create a profitable but legacy development that complements Park City, especially in the lead-up to the 2034 Olympics.  

In conclusion, we are continually inspired by the community’s passion, insight and dedication. We encourage residents to review the details of DPRE’s proposal ahead of Thursday’s public hearing and assess whether the benefits truly outweigh the costs. If not, we hope the council will exhibit the same courage and resolve shown by residents and just vote “no.”

Bonnie Parks, Eric Moxham, Van Novack, Jeff Revoy, Mitch Solomon and Fred Vallejo are members of Friends for Responsible Development for Greater Park City (FRD-PC.org)

. 

The post Guest Editorial: Just vote no on Dakota Pacific appeared first on Park Record.

As the leaves turn colors and kids ready their costumes, representatives of Dakota Pacific (DPRE) have returned, actively knocking on the door of Summit County and working behind the scenes to gain approval for their Kimball Junction development project. As a community, we must remain vigilant and do everything possible to ensure this project is never built.

In October 2021, the Summit County Council was poised to approve this massive project which would create significant negative impacts to residents of Park City and Snyderville Basin. As originally proposed, DPRE planned a “mixed use” project of 1,100 homes, a hotel, non-tech office, and commercial/retail.

A community effort to “StopDakotaPacific” culminated in 1,000 people attending a December 1,2021 public hearing and over 4,000 residents signing a change.org petition. The community successfully conveyed its intense opposition to Dakota Pacific’s proposed project and the firm subsequently paused their application.  

Despite having purchased the land with full knowledge that it was zoned as a tech park — and not for residential use — John Miller and DPRE have been unrelenting in their efforts to change the permitted land uses to residential. Why? Profits! 

This past spring, DPRE’s leaders underhandedly worked the back rooms of the Utah Legislature to get four lines added to a massive housing bill — HB 462 — that attempts to strip Summit County of its powers to determine land use. The inserted language was related to the creation of a Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone (HTRZ) specifically in Summit County. This legislation is intended to create affordable housing around transit sites in urban infill areas in Salt Lake Valley, but oddly places the same requirements on rural Summit County.

With a revised proposal coming from DPRE, it is clear the community will again need to demonstrate mass opposition, particularly given the firm’s clandestine tactics. DPRE’s “repackaged” application will continue to request a major “land use change” to accommodate massive residential housing units and non-tech commercial that will likely be pitched as a solution to our affordable housing and senior living issues.

That high density will add traffic to an area that is already characterized by the worst congestion in Summit County. In addition, the project will add to — not reduce — the deficit in Park City’s workforce and moderate-income housing by increasing the need for teachers, police officers, firefighters, and other service-level workers for local businesses. The thousands of new residents living in the project will also strain our overburdened infrastructure and natural resources (roads, trails, waste, water supply). Outside of the lucky few lottery winners who secure an affordable unit at the development, who, beside DPRE, will benefit from this project?

We want to put Dakota Pacific on notice that the community remains in total, unwavering opposition to their project, and we will not be fooled by what can only be called “fake affordable housing.” There are better ways for Summit County to address its moderate income and workforce housing needs.  Affordable housing is rightly top of mind with our local elected officials and over the next few weeks Friends for Responsible Development (FRD) will release an editorial outlining a variety of approaches that other mountain towns are implementing.

Given the scale of development forthcoming across Park City and Summit County, it is critical that as a community we take a balanced approach to promoting responsible growth while properly addressing our moderate income, workforce, and senior housing needs. County residents and our elected officials must work together to craft a comprehensive strategy and hold developers accountable to it.

The post Guest editorial: Dakota Pacific is back with more tricks and no treats appeared first on Park Record.