Members of the Sandy City Council voted to reject a proposal that sought to add dozens of townhomes along 9000 South.
Plans to build up to 86 new townhomes in Sandy were voted down Tuesday night in a 4-2 vote, as council members moved to deny a request to execute a development agreement for the Canyon Gate project located at 825 E. 9085 South.
The plan sought to convert the Canyons School District’s Technical Education Center into a slate of new townhomes, much of them slated to be for-sale units. The property totals 7.15 acres on a single parcel.
Going into the Tuesday meeting, the council was slated to vote on three ordinances of the proposed development — a general plan amendment to change the future land use designation from Institutional to Medium Density Neighborhood; a zoning change from the R-1-8 Single-Family Residential zone to Planned Unit Development 12, which allows up to 12 units per acre; and an ordinance that contained the development agreement.
However, members of the council voted down the project in a single vote.
Council Member Kris Nicholl motioned to deny the development agreement, which was seconded by Council Member Brooke Christensen. The two were joined in the vote by council members Alison Stroud and Cyndi Sharkey. The two votes against the motion to reject were by council members Aaron Dekeyzer and Marci Houseman. Council Member Brooke D’Sousa was not in attendance during the Tuesday meeting.
The development agreement would have allowed for a maximum of 86 attached townhomes to be built on the site, according to a memo sent to Sandy City by Tracy Cowdell, an attorney working with both Sandy City and the Boyer Company on the proposal. Each townhome would have been on their own platted fee simple lot, which would allow for each unit to be individually owned.
As part of the proposed deal, Boyer would be mandated to sell at least 69 of the 86 units to “bona fide end purchasers,” the memo says, as the developer and its affiliate companies, “may not collectively lease or rent more than 17 units while those requirements remain applicable.”
The 7.15 acre parcel is still owned by the Canyons School District, and the memo states that Boyer would have to purchase the property before Dec. 31, 2027. If that didn’t happen within the time frame outlined, the development agreement and concept plan would be automatically terminated, unless the date was extended in writing.
The Canyons Technical Education Center is still operating at the site, though the school district announced back in 2024 that it would purchase the old eBay campus in Draper to expand its technical education programs.
Details of the townhomes show a mix of two- and three-story townhomes, with the taller homes slated to be built along the south side of 9000 South. The plans didn’t say how many bedrooms each unit could hold. The plans show the units would be accessed via Scirlein Drive and 9085 South. Plans do not show an egress point from 9000 South.
Jake Warner, a long range planning manager for Sandy City, outlined prior to the Tuesday vote that the council heard this proposal twice in July. On July 7, he said, the council motioned to approve a change to the general plan amendment, which resulted in a 3-3 vote, meaning it failed. He said the general plan change to medium density future land use would be consistent with most of the land’s surrounding area.
The council opted to bring the proposal back for the proposed rezone application, but the council later voted 6-0 to direct staff and all parties to prepare a development agreement, Warner said, which set the table for Tuesday’s hearing.
Cowdell, who was in attendance Tuesday, told the council he worked with Boyer and the city attorney’s office, including Sandy City Attorney Lynn Pace, on the development agreement proposal.
“The document that you’re seeing is a project with legal counsel for Boyer, the city attorney’s office, and me,” Cowdell said. “I’m comfortable with the draft, and I know Lynn (Pace) wouldn’t have forwarded it along if he wasn’t.”
Cowdell added that while the agreement says 17 units (around 20% the total units) can be rentals, Boyer had every intention of selling all of the townhomes to be owner-occupied.
“They are not planning on being in the landlord business and keeping these for rental units,” he said. “They’re just not sure if they’re going to be able to move them all at once. They want to be able to have them on the market if they’re not being sold.”
Following the motion to deny, Houseman said she was in support of the development agreement, adding that she appreciated Boyer’s willingness to do a development agreement in the first place. She said the agreement would allow the city to have more of a say on what is allowed on the site.
“I support the development agreement,” she said. “I think we’ve demonstrated an appropriate degree, I believe, of back and forth. I think this is the right use for this property.”
Sharkey, on the other hand, said she supported the motion to reject, “not because I don’t like the development agreement — it’s because I don’t like the project.” She said she accepted the fact that Boyer didn’t want to place deed restrictions on the property, but she didn’t support the project. She added she had no issue with development agreements, saying the city will see more in the future.
Nicholls said she loved the project, but the lack of an owner-occupied deed restriction was her hangup. She said, “our community wants ownership opportunities, not more rentals, and they’ve made that very clear. I love the project, but we just couldn’t be on that one little part.”
No other council members made comments prior to the 4-2 vote to reject the proposal.
0 Comments