Get email alerts on the Kimbell Station Public Concern topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors press commission on Kimbell Station deviations, traffic study; staff says counts done during school hours
Summary
A resident urged the commission to reconsider code deviations and to require a completed traffic study during school hours; staff said the developer completed updated counts in May and an independent consultant reviewed the study, and that the development does not trigger required off-site improvements.
Get email alerts on the Kimbell Station Public Concern topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
During the public hearing for Kimbell Station, Denise Smith, who identified herself as living across the street, urged planners to reconsider several deviations approved with the development agreement and to ensure the traffic study is completed and reviewed before final approvals.
Smith said she was present when another development was denied over similar deviations and argued the city should reassess whether the proposed density and deviations produce a ‘‘livable development.’’ She challenged unit counts, saying, "25 units per acre across 21 acres is 525 units, while the proposed plan includes 560 units." Smith also asked that traffic counts be done during school hours to reflect typical peak conditions.
Staff responded that the developer updated the traffic study and performed school-hour counts in May; an independent consulting firm reviewed the analysis. Staff (Brian) said the study found the peak impact during the morning commute and that the development itself does not trigger requirements for off-site improvements. He advised residents that existing stacking and congestion on 7th East and near the tracks predate this project and are part of broader UDOT planning, for which no firm schedule was available.
Developer Paxton Guymon acknowledged public concerns but said some deviations were negotiated as part of a trade-off to provide a mix of housing types and open space. Guymon also said the project includes workforce-housing set-asides and owner-occupancy requirements intended to serve local buyers, and that the developer will make engineering adjustments (e.g., shifting buildings, removing an awning) for final compliance.
The commission confirmed its role is to determine compliance with the development agreement and codes rather than to reopen negotiated deviations approved by the council.
AI generated
The text on this page is AI generated. Summaries, highlights, analysis, and video transcripts are all produced from the original source material.
AI can make mistakes, so if you spot one, and we will fix it for everyone.
Note: the source content is unaltered by us. Any content source we link to, be it a video, an audio recording, or a document, is presented exactly as its publisher released it. That publisher is usually a government body, sometimes an individual official or another organisation.
