Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Sale topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council weighs options for 19 state‑owned Sunnyside lots, asks staff to return with purchase scenarios
Summary
Council members discussed 19 platted Sunnyside subdivision lots owned by the State of Utah and requested options including phased purchase, developer partnerships, appraisals, and alternatives to low‑income restrictions; staff said the state indicated lots could be sold but if retained by the state they must serve households at 80% AMI.
Milford City staff told the council April 21 that the State of Utah currently owns 19 platted lots in the Sunnyside subdivision and had told city representatives the lots would be required to meet low‑income housing criteria if the state retained ownership. Staff said the AMI threshold discussed was 80% (during the meeting the 80% AMI level was cited alongside a figure of $73,500 used in council discussion).
Staff (S4) said the state indicated willingness to sell the lots — possibly in phases — and that sale terms could include restrictions intended to ensure timely development rather than leaving lots idle. Council members discussed options: the city purchasing lots to allow different affordability mixes; contracting with a developer to build workforce housing; or buying a small number of lots first and scaling purchases later. Appraisal estimates mentioned in discussion ranged from roughly $25,000 per lot (local appraisal reference) up to a figure staff said the state had suggested near $75,000; staff said the state would do more research and provide a refined valuation.
Why it matters: The property has been platted for housing for years but remains undeveloped; council members framed the sites as potential opportunities to expand ‘‘middle’’ or workforce housing (households above low‑income program thresholds but below high‑end market prices). Council asked staff to return with options and more precise cost estimates and appraisal information.
What remains unresolved: Whether the city will pursue purchase, partner with a developer, or keep the state ownership/low‑income restriction depends on follow‑up negotiations and formal appraisals. Staff said additional meetings are scheduled and further details will be brought back to council.
