Utah’s Lieutenant Governor’s Office has rejected a petition to begin forming a new local government for Echo Canyon, the new name of the proposed Kane Creek development, determining the filing did not comply with state law.
The petition, submitted March 20 by lead developer Craig Weston, sought to incorporate the project as a preliminary municipality — a legal designation under Senate Bill 258 that allows developers to establish temporary land use and zoning authority in unincorporated areas before meeting the requirements to form a fully incorporated town.
The process bypasses county-level review and grants temporary authority over land use, zoning and infrastructure decisions — but no taxing power — for up to six years, or four years after the first certificate of occupancy is issued. To fully incorporate, the area must reach 100 permanent residents and voters must approve incorporation in a local election.
The development was previously filed under the name Kane Springs Preservation and Development but was recently renamed Echo Canyon in the incorporation petition filed in March.
On May 5, the lieutenant governor’s office rejected the petition, stating that the boundary descriptions it contained did not match those submitted with the original feasibility study request filed on May 1, 2024. State law requires the legal descriptions in both documents to be identical.
The development is also separately advancing through Grand County’s traditional land use approval process, which involves a separate subdivision review. A spokesperson for the developers said the boundary mismatch stemmed from a more detailed property survey completed during that local process.
According to the spokesperson, the updated map reflected a refined survey of the property’s edge along the Colorado River, which Grand County Planning and Zoning staff requested as part of the plat review. The revised version was submitted to the state with an explanatory letter from the project’s engineer, but officials asked that the original coordinates be used instead.
“We’re not perturbed by the state,” the spokesperson said. “We don’t view it as a setback other than the time. Both answers are technically right … but we totally understand the state is following the statute exactly.”
The spokesperson expects the developers to resubmit the corrected petition ahead of the state’s June 4 deadline.
Kane Creek Development Watch, a citizens group that has vocally opposed the project, said the petition’s rejection raises questions about the developers’ competence and accountability. The group pointed to the boundary mismatch as a failure of basic legal compliance and argued it reflects broader concerns about the project’s oversight.
“If they can’t handle basic legal compliance, how can anyone trust them to manage the far more complex challenges of building a massive luxury development on a fragile floodplain?” the group said in a statement.
They also reiterated concerns about long-term environmental and infrastructure risks, public costs if the project fails and potential impacts on housing affordability.
The project’s preliminary plat was conditionally approved in March through an administrative decision, according to Interim Zoning Administrator Cristin Hofhine. She said the county-level process has experienced multiple delays over the years, with developers submitting significantly revised applications since the original filing in May 2021.
Over that time, the development encountered a number of setbacks, including zoning appeals, utility permitting challenges and application revisions that restarted the review process multiple times, according to Hofhine. Developers also successfully appealed a denial of a conditional use permit for a proposed wastewater system, which county officials initially said conflicted with the general plan.
Under the current timeline, Hofhine said the developers have 12 months from the preliminary plat approval to submit a final plat that addresses all conditions set by the county. That final plat must be reviewed by the Grand County Commission under the 2021 land use code in effect when the application was first submitted.
The spokesperson for the development said the initial final plat will likely cover the development’s lower section and include detailed, construction-ready drawings. While some conditions — such as infrastructure improvements — may be bonded and completed after final plat approval, the spokesperson noted they must be fulfilled before any certificate of occupancy is issued.
The Times-Independent recently filed a GRAMA request seeking the full set of approval documents related to the preliminary plat that is under review.
The proposed development spans approximately 176 acres along Kane Creek Boulevard southwest of Moab. Current plans include 478 residential units, 102 overnight accommodations, and 67,000 square feet of commercial space.
Developers have said they are pursuing both the traditional county process and the state incorporation process to determine which path will allow the project to move forward.
Incorporation under SB258 requires a state-certified feasibility study, followed by a public hearing and a successful petition.
A hearing held March 5 at Star Hall drew more than 230 attendees and over 30 speakers — a required step in the process that allows the public to comment on the feasibility study’s findings. Nearly all public comments voiced opposition, raising concerns about housing affordability, infrastructure, flood risks and the potential loss of tax revenue to Grand County.
The incorporation feasibility study for Kane Creek concluded the proposed town could financially sustain its municipal services under projected tax revenue and population growth. However, under Utah law, such studies must assume that the development will occur as proposed — including full buildout of housing, high occupancy rates and expected commercial activity.
The analysis does not assess whether the development is viable, appropriate or likely to succeed — only whether a municipality could function financially if the developer’s assumptions come to pass.
An official from the Lieutenant Governor’s Office emphasized after the public hearing that community input does not affect the study’s conclusions. Indeed, elected bodies in Utah are required to not consider public clamor when acting on conditional use permit applications or making other administrative decisions.
Echo Canyon is one of several Utah projects advancing under the SB258 process, which allows developers to establish temporary land use authority in unincorporated areas.
Donate to the newsroom now. The Salt Lake Tribune, Inc. is a 501(c)(3) public charity and contributions are tax deductible