The general area of Kimball Junction that the Dakota Pacific project will develop if given the 'green light' sits to the west and south of the Skullcandy building. Photo: Dakota Pacific

PARK CITY, Utah — After years of public debate and an ongoing legal challenge, a proposed development from Dakota Pacific Real Estate is proceeding under recently enacted state laws, which have significantly changed the approval process compared to previous years.

Summit County will hold a public hearing on Monday, July 28 to review the Park City Junction Administrative Development Agreement, a large mixed-use project proposed by Dakota Pacific in Kimball Junction. The hearing will be conducted by Summit County Manager Shayne Scott, who now holds final approval authority under Senate Bill 26 (SB 26)—a state law passed earlier this year that significantly limits local control over certain development approvals.

A map of the Dakota Pacific Development from a recent staff report published by Summit County. — A map of the Dakota Pacific development from a recent staff report published by Summit County.

The hearing comes weeks after Dakota Pacific submitted its latest application for the project, which looks very similar to the project agreement approved by the County Council in December 2024. It includes two major components: a public-private partnership redevelopment with High Valley Transit and Summit County, and a large residential buildout. The plan spans more than 64 acres and proposes:

Referendum effort and state intervention

The July 28 hearing is happening in a dramatically changed political and legal environment. The Summit County Council’s 4–1 vote last December to approve the amended development agreement triggered a wave of public backlash, including a citizen-led referendum effort. Petitioners collected thousands of signatures, but the referendum was declared insufficient for the ballot after the Summit County Clerk Eve Furse rejected dozens of packets over what it called a “binding technicality.” Referendum supporters are fighting against that decision in Third District Court. A hearing on the matter is scheduled for August 18. It is not clear how the outcome of the referendum lawsuit will affect forward movement on the Dakota Pacific project.

“I don’t think there’s anything the referendum can do to hold up this process,” Scott said in a previous interview.

Summit County officials have previously fought state attempts to override local planning control—successfully challenging SB 84 in court in 2023. But this year, they opted not to challenge SB 26 or SB 258, a related bill that allows some developers to pursue self-governed town status.

“This time, while the process wasn’t perfect, we ended up with something the council was comfortable with,” Scott said in April.

Still, he acknowledged the concern about eroding local authority. “We’ll continue working with legislators and organizations like the Utah Association of Counties and Utah League of Cities and Towns to prevent further loss of control.”