Estimated read time: 6-7 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
OREM — The Orem City Council narrowly approved a State Street development project Tuesday night after an intense meeting with concerned citizens.
The City Council voted 4-3 to approve a settlement agreement between Wright Development Group and the city, for the development of the property at 841 S. State Street.
The Wright Development Group submitted a site plan application to develop a mixed-use project in July 2021 at the property in accordance with zoning rules, city attorney Steve Earl said during the meeting. The project would have been seven stories tall, containing 335 residential units and 42,000 square feet of commercial area.
Shortly after, the council instated a moratorium on residential development along State Street, which halted the project. The Wright Development Group in response filed a lawsuit in September 2021 challenging the validity of the moratorium and the city has been involved in the litigation since.
The council heard from the public Tuesday, on the proposed agreement from the developers, where developers would, instead, build a four-story apartment complex with no commercial space to reduce traffic and parking demand, with around 25 fewer units and increased parking, and, if that plan is approved, the lawsuit would be dropped.
The city planning commission unanimously recommended to deny the proposal in a Nov. 15 meeting.
"It's not a question for the City Council tonight of whether you want to see high-density residential development on the property or not. If that were the only question, I think the answer to that would be obvious," Earl said. "But it's really do we want to mitigate the city's risk and achieve what we think is the best possible compromise we've been able to reach in order to avoid the potential downside if we were to lose the lawsuit."
Earl said he recognizes it is a difficult situation and thinks very few people would want to see a high-density residential project on the property, "but it's a matter of is it in the best interest of the city to resolve the lawsuit by entering into this proposed settlement agreement."
The agreement was approved by the City Council, with approving members expressing dismay that it was necessary. Developers will have three years to get an official site plan approved for the project. The proposal is not set in stone and developers can change the layout and development plans.
The City Council's decision
Mayor Dave Young made it clear his No. 1 choice was not to approve the development.
"I feel like I'm up here with one hand behind my back because I can't tell you the whole story of what's going on here. There's more to this story. At some point we can tell you the full story but at this point, we can't," the mayor said.
He said city attorneys advised the council, from a risk standpoint, the city is better off settling.
"We don't want to. It makes us sick, but that's what we're advised legally," Young said.
Young alleged the difficult situation happened because of the previous city mayorship, who Young said approved more than 3,000 apartments from 2012 to 2021.
He and the City Council members who were elected at the end of 2021 each vowed to stop additional high-density housing. Young said if the current City Council was in place back when the project was initially proposed, it would never have been approved.
The mayor said his personal preference is to not move the project forward, but because there are others factors, "we have to choose between two bad options."
"It's my responsibility to take the option that minimizes the risk to our taxpayers and citizens," Young said.
The mayor encouraged the development group to "seriously think" about its plan and consider adjusting it to have the least possible impact on the neighborhood, as the developers heard the outrage from the citizens during the meeting. But ultimately, the mayor did vote "yes" on approving the settlement agreement.
Councilman Jeff Lambson agreed with the mayor's sentiments and said the city will do what it can with signage or curbing to help mitigate traffic in the neighborhoods.
Councilwoman Debby Lauret said the council's decision two years ago was intended to protect neighborhoods from being developed into high density and instead push it onto State Street. Lauret, Lambson and Councilman Tom Macdonald voted yes for the agreement.
Councilman Terry Peterson said he was "so darn angry" about the situation. He hoped the city would not cave to the "high-density developer" and expressed concern about how apartment complexes never have adequate parking.
Peterson said the council values commercial use along State Street and wishes it was not residential being developed.
Councilwoman LaNae Millett said she ran for City Council against high density and that the neighborhood already provides "owner-occupied affordable housing."
"This proposed development is the definition of high-density apartments encroaching on a neighborhood," Millett said.
She pointed out that other apartment complexes on State Street do not have access to the neighborhood, and because this one does, it would reduce the quality of life and increase emotional distress in residents.
Millett said when the property was purchased, it was zoned for commercial use and the developers should "be a good neighbor" and only build commercial.
Councilman David Spencer said he hopes the developers will in "good faith" work with the neighbors to come to a solution and change the development plan.
"I don't like high density on State Street and I never will," he said.
Peterson, Millett and Spencer all voted against the agreement and residents cheered every time a council member said no.
"This is really one sad day for Orem city," Peterson said. The mayor agreed it was a sad day, but the motion still passed.
Resident response
Several residents from the neighborhood located east of the property expressed their concern, anger and disapproval of the development. Various attendees during the meeting frequently interrupted the developers' presentation, calling out with comments of disapproval and yelling out questions, before the meeting's public comment period.
Neighborhood resident Tamara Rodriguez said a lot of commuters often circumvent State Street by driving through the neighborhood and with a potential 650 additional cars, she is worried about the traffic impact the project would have.
"Our neighborhood unfortunately has been methodically and systematically swallowed by high-density housing and is rapidly on the decline. If this single mom could afford it, I'd be gone," she said. She added that she feels the city doesn't care about developers "squeezing people out."
Heather Dancliff voiced her concern for the 50 kids who live on the block next to the property. She said the children already have to cross 800 South to get to a park, and having 600 strangers live next to them would take away the kids' "possibilities of playing."
"It takes away the joy of our neighborhood," she said. Dancliff said she wanted the city to fight the lawsuit because there will be significant impact whether it's a four-story or seven-story complex.
Others called the project a "major disaster," a "disappointment," and "not a reflection of Family City USA," and said it puts the safety of the neighborhood in jeopardy and is just a way for the developers to bully the city into letting it build. Many contended that apartments are not for families.
Correction: In an earlier version, LaNae Millett's first name was incorrectly spelled Lanae.
