Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Agreements topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves development agreement with Sunpro Corporation for Suntana Raceway parcel
Summary
Council approved Resolution 2025-17, a development agreement and sale terms with Sunpro Corporation for roughly 28 acres of the former Suntana Raceway property, including a $10,057,000 purchase price (less subdivision improvements), a 15 acre‑foot water credit, city payment of certain electrical extension fees, and a 30‑month performance window.
Get email alerts on the Development Agreements topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Springville — The City Council approved a development agreement and related resolution with the Sunpro Corporation to sell and develop approximately 28 acres of the former Suntana Raceway property. The council approved Resolution 2025‑17 after staff described the proposed sale price and the key development terms.
Deal terms described to the council: - Purchase price: $10,057,000 (gross). Staff said that after subdivision improvements the city’s net proceeds are estimated to be about $9,070,000, though costs are still being finalized with the developer. - Subdivision and improvements: Sunpro will complete subdivision requirements and install public improvements; staff listed estimated subdivision improvement costs around $879,000 plus contingency, but said the developer has refined those numbers during due diligence and final figures will be verified. - Water credit: as part of the transaction the developer requested a 15 acre‑foot water credit to support landscaping; staff explained the city received water with the property and the credit aligns with the landscaping plan. - Electrical extension fees: the city will pay electrical extension fees for the subdivision as part of the development agreement; staff described electrical extension fees as a normal part of subdivision improvements and said the city’s power department calculated the cost estimate. - Performance clause and buy‑back: the agreement includes a performance timeline requiring the RCM use to be operational within 30 months; if Sunpro does not operate the required retail commercial manufacturing use within that period the agreement creates a buy‑back option for the city with language accounting for any development costs invested by the developer.
Staff said the buy‑back clause originally contemplated a fixed repurchase amount but was revised to account for developer investment so the city would not be able to buy the property back at the initial purchase price if the developer had put substantial capital into the site.
The development agreement also addresses billboard lease rights of first refusal, indemnity, notices and typical subdivision obligations. Staff noted two remaining surplus lots (about 12 and 5.5 acres) that could be sold separately if the deal closes; those lots are adjacent to 1600 South.
Rail spur and logistics: the developer representative, Greg Flint, said Sunpro is working with Union Pacific on a dual rail spur sized for six cars; he said the project has passed an initial review and will proceed to engineering with Union Pacific.
Vote: The council approved Resolution 2025‑17 by roll call. During discussion several council members noted conflicts of interest and abstained from some related actions; the roll call on the development agreement recorded affirmative votes from participating council members who spoke during the vote.
Quotes: “Finally, I think this week, the subdivision plat is ready to be approved,” John (staff) told the council. Developer representative Greg Flint added: “We’ve been working with Union Pacific to get a dual spur off of that that can hold 6 cars … we’re going to the next step with them, which is engineering.”
Next steps: Staff will finalize subdivision improvement costs, verify final engineering and execute the purchase and development agreement consistent with the resolution. If the developer meets performance milestones the subdivision and construction will proceed; if not, the buy‑back provisions would become operative.

