Dakota Pacific project nears a decision as continued litigation looms

A view of the Skullcandy building, which was purchased by the county this year and a view of the Utah Olympic Park in the vicinity of the proposed Dakota Pacific housing project. Photo: Marina Knight // TownLift

The council could vote on the controversial project as early as Dec. 11

SUMMIT COUNTY, Utah – Ongoing negotiations over the proposed development agreement between Dakota Pacific Real Estate (DPRE) and Summit County reveal a rift between county officials and developers as they attempt to finalize terms for the major housing and infrastructure project in Kimball Junction. While some progress has been made in recent weeks, significant disagreements over unit counts, affordability, funding contributions and project phasing continue to stall negotiations.

During the latest round of public talks, held Wednesday, Summit County officials again proposed reducing the number of market-rate units in the project from 400 to 350, a sticking point for Dakota Pacific. The developer has insisted that 400 is the minimum number necessary for the project to be financially viable.

“We’re 50 units apart, and that might be where we’re stuck,” said County Manager Shane Scott.

Dakota Pacific is proposing to build 750 total units, including 250 affordable units, 100 of which are classified as “attainable” under higher area median income (AMI) brackets. Other key points of contention include phasing the project in alignment with traffic improvements to SR 224 and the developer’s financial contribution to shared public infrastructure, such as an amphitheater, library, and pedestrian bridge. While Dakota Pacific has offered $3.5 million, the county is holding firm at $5 million.

Developers expressed concerns about the proposed terms, citing escalating costs and reduced revenue opportunities. “What you’re asking for does not feel tenable,” said DPRE CEO Mark Stanworth, who emphasized the need to maintain economic feasibility.

Stanworth continued by pointing out that the county has added several million dollars in additional cost and taken several million dollars more of revenue away. “We kind of have a baseline that we need in order to make economic sense, and now those are continuing to be pulled apart double time,” Stanworth said.

During Wednesday’s meeting, county officials stressed the importance of tying the project to measurable progress on SR 224 improvements, reflecting public concerns about traffic implications.

“We want to tie that phasing to a very clear part of this process, which is traffic and the improvements on 224, so whatever they come up with, I think that we are open to hearing that, but that phasing has got to be tied to Kimball Junction,” Scott said.

As the county continues to weigh a decision, continued litigation looms

The Dakota Pacific project has drawn public criticism, with many Summit County residents opposing residential development in an area originally zoned for a tech park.

The stakes are heightened by the involvement of the Utah State Legislature, which is closely monitoring the process. County officials hold concern that rejecting the project could result in legislative intervention or prolonged litigation. “We’re technically still in litigation,” Scott noted, referring to a stay on legal proceedings while negotiations continue. “I think we’re just weighing all the options here, also with the Utah State Legislature, watching this exercise very carefully,” Scott said.

With the possibility of a December vote looming, both sides are expected to refine their proposals in the coming weeks. The next scheduled meeting will determine whether a compromise is within reach or if litigation—and potentially legislative action—will dictate the project’s future.

Meetings are scheduled for December 11 and, if necessary, December 18, with the aim of reaching a resolution. County Attorney David Thomas confirmed that updated drafts of the development agreement will be shared to keep negotiations moving forward.