Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Santaquin previews East Bench development; proposes land trade to secure debris basin and shared parking
Summary
Council heard an informational presentation on a proposed East Bench development (about 21 acres, roughly 30 lots and 9 townhomes), including a property trade to obtain 6 acres for a debris basin, two small commercial parcels fronting Main Street, and a shared parking/trailhead concept; project will proceed through DRC and planning commission with no action taken tonight.
At a Nov. 18 work session the Santaquin City Council reviewed a conceptual development proposal for the East Bench that would pair a developer'city land trade with acquisition of property for a debris basin and create commercial frontage along Main Street.
Staff described the property as roughly 21 acres yielding about 30 single-family lots (10,000-square-foot minimum parcel sizes in the current zone), plus a block of nine townhomes fronting Main Street and two commercial parcels of about 1 and 1.3 acres each. Developers at the meeting, Caleb Washburn and Chris Berger, said they would trade portions of their ownership for city land needed for a debris basin and provide a shared trailhead and parking area that would connect to the Bonneville Shoreline Trail.
Staff stressed the concept is preliminary and no council action was requested. The city intends the trade to secure roughly 6 acres needed to construct the debris basin; staff said funds for property acquisition exist (storm-drain/impact-fee funds and potentially county corridor-preservation funds) but that construction of the debris basin will depend on downstream NRCS approvals and additional funding.
The council focused on practical details: parking adequacy for the commercial parcels and townhomes, whether shared parking agreements would meet the city's code, and how the state's WUI mapping might affect the development. Staff said the development agreement would require the project to meet code requirements (water, sewer, roadway widths, parking) and would go to the planning commission and DRC for formal land-use review and public hearing before any approval.
Staff outlined several options for the required frontage road (900 East): (1) use county corridor-preservation funds for property acquisition and UDOT reimbursement later; (2) have the developer construct frontage if they build early; or (3) wait for the UDOT interchange project, which staff estimated could be funded in a 2026—2031 timeframe. Staff said corridor-preservation funds are earmarked for property acquisition and are commonly used for projects of this type.
No votes were taken. Staff said notice of formal land-use proceedings would be sent this week or next and that the planning commission could consider the land-use elements as early as its Dec. 9 meeting.
