Auburn council approves development agreement for Rise Auburn student housing at 712 West Glenn Avenue

Auburn City Council on Aug. 5 approved an infrastructure development agreement with AU Tigers Properties 1 LLC for the Rise Auburn student housing project at 712 West Glenn Avenue, authorizing tower‑crane and related agreements and other negotiated off‑site work. The vote was taken by voice and the motion carried.

The development is a by‑right project in the West Glenn urban core, staff said, and the agreement authorizes specific construction activities and easements rather than rezoning. City Manager Ms. Crouch said, "It is a by right development." The development team, represented at the meeting by Mr. Basquin, described the project as a multi‑phase, high‑cost investment and said it will include significant utility and roadway work.

Why it matters: Council members pressed staff and the applicant on traffic, utilities, and long‑term maintenance where the site abuts Railroad Avenue. Several questions centered on public‑right‑of‑way encroachment during construction, the removal of on‑street parking on West Glenn during work, the timing of planned water and sewer upgrades, and who will pay for improvements beyond the immediate project frontage.

Councilman Griswold and others asked for specifics about the scope and duration of encroachment on West Glenn. Scott Cummings, executive director of development services, said the developer negotiated temporary use of a partial lane in the right of way to allow trucks to load and unload safely while maintaining two‑way traffic during most of the project. Staff said parking along sections of West Glenn will likely be removed during and possibly after construction for safety reasons.

The applicant and staff discussed Railroad Avenue, which abuts the project. City staff said the railroad owns the right of way and denied requests to permit improvements within the railroad corridor; the city and developer do not currently have authority to resurface or maintain Railroad Avenue without railroad permission. Scott Cummings said existing access from the development to Railroad Avenue will not be provided for vehicles, and the sidewalk on the rear of the property will remain on private property and be maintained by the developer for emergency egress.

Staff told Council the city is taking advantage of the upcoming construction to accelerate a multi‑phase water main replacement that predates this project. City staff said the water main work was part of a long‑range plan and would have been done in coming years; the developer and staff agreed to coordinate to avoid multiple disruptions. A city staff member said the water main in the area dates to the 1950s and the replacement was planned in phases.

On project costs, the applicant representative said during the meeting, "this project's probably playing $1,200,000 in water and sewer access fees to the water board for the water and sewer access fees," and separately characterized the total investment as likely in the "$110,000,000–$120,000,000" range. Those figures were presented orally by the applicant and were discussed as approximate.

Traffic work and safety improvements were debated. A traffic impact study required retiming signals at Donahue and Lehi and supported additional restriping and left‑turn storage at Glen and Donahue; staff said the intersection of Hemlock and Glenn showed adequate levels of service pre‑ and post‑development under the study criteria. Staff also said the city will pay for certain resurfacing beyond the immediate project tie‑ins because staff judged the extra length necessary for safe transitions at Hemlock.

Council members debated a small additional paving/striping cost the city would absorb (discussed in the meeting as about $11,700) to extend resurfacing and restriping beyond the developer's minimum obligations to provide safer transitions. The applicant described that sum as additional scope the city was asking for to provide a more consistent paving tie‑in at the end of the contractor's mobilization.

Council discussion also clarified that most development approvals for the area are by‑right under current zoning; the Council’s vote authorized the development agreement and tower‑crane and right‑of‑way encroachment terms rather than zoning approval. Staff noted the Council could ask for more time to review the agreement but that the city cannot compel the developer or the railroad to do work on property the city does not control.

The Council approved the development agreement by voice vote. Staff said construction is planned in multiple phases with a multi‑year buildout; one meeting exchange referenced a May 2028 completion estimate and described roughly a three‑year schedule, though attendees described that timeline as approximate.

Next steps: staff will continue negotiations with the railroad about Railroad Avenue maintenance and access, coordinate the utility phases with the developer, and implement the authorized tower‑crane agreement and other contract provisions. The development will proceed under existing zoning rules unless the Council later directs staff otherwise.