Perry Companies proposes moving 600 canyon homes to lower parcels; council presses on infrastructure, traffic and quarry grading

Perry Companies representatives told the Lehi City Council they want to move roughly 600 entitled residential units from West Canyon down to remaining developable parcels along SR‑92 and onto adjacent Riverbend holdings.

The proposal presented by Matt Swain said moving the units “out of the canyon” would allow the company to dedicate the canyon portion to permanent open space and avoid additional residential traffic on hillside roads near schools, churches and parks. Perry also asked to rezone a small parcel near Central Utah Bank along SR‑92 as commercial to reflect “highest and best use” near the highway.

Council members and staff pressed Perry on technical details the presentation did not include. Questions focused on three clusters: (1) grading that Geneva (a third party operator) has already performed in West Canyon and who authorized it; (2) capacity of culinary water, pressurized irrigation and sewer if several hundred units are moved to the lower area; and (3) traffic and emergency‑response impacts, especially at Morning Vista and Timpanogos Highway.

Perry said it does not own nor control Geneva’s sand/gravel operation and that Geneva had contractual rights to grade the hillside. The developer repeated it intends not to build homes in West Canyon and that, once Geneva’s activities are finished, Perry would pursue a perpetual open‑space dedication for that acreage. Council members said residents have raised concerns that the hillside will be visibly altered and that regrading and revegetation plans would need to be part of any long‑term solution.

On utilities, city staff said initial review suggests sewer and water could likely support additional units but further capacity studies would be required. The city noted there are already planned improvements, such as paving and widening of Flight Park Road that are programmed in the capital budget. Staff also flagged that additional on‑site infrastructure — internal roads, water tanks, fire flows and other systems — would be the developer’s responsibility.

On traffic, city planners and the public works director said a traffic study would be required before detailed approvals and pointed out that moving density down to SR‑92 would change trip patterns: instead of many trips traveling through hillside streets, vehicles would be routed to Timpanogos Highway and Morning Vista. The city said mitigation could include signalization, median treatments and additional east‑west connectors; staff and some council members emphasized studies rather than assumptions.

Several council members warned the council and developer that the proposal raises long‑standing sensitivities. The West Canyon area was controversial when the area plan was approved years ago; some council members and residents said it is difficult to accept a change now after substantial grading has occurred. Perry replied it had been discussing the relocation concept with city staff for months and that one goal is to create denser, more transit‑oriented housing closer to SR‑92 and the planned transit station.

Council members asked Perry to return with more concrete materials: a proposed area‑map amendment showing parcel‑level allocations, a traffic and utilities capacity study, conceptual regrading/revegetation options for the canyon area (to be coordinated with Geneva), and a clearer legal explanation of the rights Geneva holds to mine or grade. Several council members said they were open to the idea in principle but not to approving conceptual changes without studies and a community outreach plan.

Ending: Perry left the meeting with a direction to continue coordination with staff, to supply the requested technical studies and to engage Geneva and Riverbend on access, grading and timing. The council did not take formal action at this meeting and asked staff to return analysis and options once studies are ready.