Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Redevelopment Jrm topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultants present three redevelopment options for JRM site; council questions retail demand and road costs
Summary
Design consultants showed three conceptual land‑use scenarios for the JRM property near the Cultural Center, estimating modest retail absorption but substantial housing potential and noting high lease costs under the overhead power corridor; council members urged more green space and cautioned about private‑road/HOA implications.
Consultants returned to the West Valley City Council Oct. 28 with three conceptual scenarios for the JRM redevelopment site adjacent to the Cultural Center, laying out options that range from lower‑density single‑family and townhome neighborhoods to a mixed‑use corridor with four‑ to five‑story residential buildings fronting 3300 South.
Ben Levenger and Ryan Wallace summarized market test fits: retail demand in a half‑mile radius appears limited (analysts estimated roughly 6,000–9,000 square feet of retail and 2,600–3,700 square feet of restaurant space), while housing demand could support hundreds of multifamily units (consultants presented ranges of about 325–450 units depending on density). “By the numbers, that’s anywhere from 6,000 to about 9,000 square feet of retail — it’s not even a standard strip‑mall size,” a consultant said, cautioning that presented retail layouts likely exceed realistic absorption.
Council members raised several practical constraints: the power‑line corridor bisecting the site carries very high annual lease costs if developed beneath (consultants cited roughly $28,000 per acre per year in lease estimates), which limits feasible uses under the easement. Some members favored increased public green space over larger buildings and asked staff to ensure road‑access standards (public vs. private roads) match city code; consultants noted that private‑road layouts increase buildability and unit yield but have led to past disagreements about maintenance obligations.
On the eastern parcel, consultants described a gateway opportunity at 3300 South where mixed‑use development could provide wayfinding and a stronger arrival experience. Several council members said they preferred options that preserved more open space and avoided very tall, monolithic buildings visible from the veterans’ memorial and neighborhood edges.
No rezoning or formal approvals were requested; staff and consultants will refine layouts (including public‑road alternatives, parking, garage configuration and green‑space tradeoffs) and return with updated visualizations in roughly 45–60 days.
