Entity Staff Report - 10/19/2021CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM:Brian Fullmer
Policy Analyst
DATE:October 19, 2021
RE: 1945 South 1300 East Zoning Map Amendment
PLNPCM2020-01022
The Council will be briefed about an ordinance to amend the zoning map for property located at 1945 South
1300 East from its current RMF-35 (Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential) designation to RMF-45
(Moderate/High Density Multi-Family Residential). The proposed amendment is to accommodate a new
multi-family residential development with potentially 46 residential units.
The current site configuration including 24 residential units with a swimming pool, and on-site parking
was developed in the late 1950s and has been in continuous use since then.
A concept plan was submitted to City Planning by the applicant to provide staff with an idea of what is
planned for the site if the zoning map is amended. Concept elevations are included on page 8 of the
Planning Commission staff report. It should be noted the plans are not approved and may not be an
accurate representation of what might be developed on the site. In addition, any redevelopment of the
property is not part of this proposal. It is the Council’s role to determine if the proposed zoning map
amendment is appropriate for the property.
Several people spoke at the July 14, 2021 Planning Commission public hearing or emailed Planning staff
about the proposed zoning map amendment. Most were opposed, expressing concerns about traffic,
parking, existing building maintenance, and loss of affordable units. The Sugar House Community Council
Land Use and Zoning Subcommittee sent a letter to Planning staff expressing opposition to the proposal.
The Planning Commission forwarded a 5-2 positive recommendation to the City Council for this proposed
zoning map amendment.
Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed zoning map amendment, determine if the Council supports
moving forward with the proposal.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: October 19, 2021
Set Date: October 19, 2021
Public Hearing: November 16, 2021
Potential Action: December 7, 2021
Page | 2
POLICY QUESTIONS
1.Rezoning this property to RMF-45 will increase the value and allow the applicant to put more
housing units on the parcel. The Council may wish to ask if any affordable units are included in
the proposed development and at what percentage of AMI.
2.The Council may want to discuss with Planning which other zones may be appropriate if the
density of units on RMF-45 would be too much for the neighborhood.
3.The Council may wish to ask Planning about current/ future planning efforts that would
increase multi-family housing density in certain locations, and whether this requested rezone
is consistent with those evaluations and potential changes, especially in terms of location,
neighborhood compatibility, traffic mitigation, etc.
4.Is the Council supportive of the proposed zoning map amendment?
Vicinity map with subject parcel shaded in yellow.
(Image courtesy Salt Lake City Planning)
Page | 3
Vicinity zoning map with subject parcel outlined in red.
(note: the triangular shaped parcel to the east of the subject parcel
is not included in this proposed zoning map amendment.)
KEY CONSIDERATIONS
Planning staff identified four key considerations which are summarized below. For the complete analysis,
please see pages 3-9 of the Planning Commission staff report.
Consideration 1: RMF-35 and RMF-45 Zoning District Comparison
The proposed zoning map amendment is to redevelop the site for higher density multi-family residential
use. Most land uses permitted in the RMF-35 district are also allowed in RMF-45. Differences in
conditional and permitted uses for the districts are summarized in the table below.
Zone
Community
Recreation
Center
Adult
Daycare
Center
Large
Assisted
Living
Center
Large
Residential
Support
Dwelling
Boarding
House
Dwelling
Twin- &
Two-
Family
Dwelling
Nursing
Care
Facility
RMF-35 C C P
RMF-45 C P C C P
Building height
The major difference between the current RMF-35 and proposed RMF-45 zoning districts is maximum
building height of 35’ and 45’ respectively.
Yard Requirements
Yard requirements for the current and proposed zones are similar and summarized in the table below. Note
the differences in front and rear yard minimums between the zones. The subject parcel is approximately
190’ deep so front and rear yards would be 25’ and 30’ respectively with RMF-45 zoning.
Zone Front Yard Min Interior Side Yard Corner Side Yards Rear Yard
RMF-35 20’10’10’25% lot depth
(max 25’)
RMF-45 20% lot depth
(max 25’)10’20’25% lot depth
(max 30’)
Page | 4
Parking
Parking standards are the same for both districts requiring 2 parking spaces for 2-bedroom units, 1 parking
space for 1-bedroom units, and ½ parking space for single room occupancy dwellings.
Landscape Buffers
Both zoning districts require landscape buffers when a site abuts a single-family residential district. A 10’
landscape buffer is required on any property line abutting a single-family district. As shown in the zoning
map above, the north and northeast property lines would require landscape buffers as they abut R-1-5,000
zoning.
Design Standards
RMF-35 and RMF-45 have no required design standards. Both zoning districts have front façade controls
found in Chapter 21A.24.010 Salt Lake City Code as the only architectural requirement. This addresses
entrance doors, windows, balconies, porches, etc. on a building’s front façade.
Consideration 2: Compatibility with Master Plan Policies
The subject parcel is within an area covered by the 2001 Sugar House Master Plan. The plan outlines
general land use policies and guidelines for the community and the associated Future Land Use Map has
more specific guidelines for neighborhoods within the larger Master Plan area.
The Master Plan’s Future Land Use Map lists the subject property as Medium-High Density Residential
with between 20-50 dwelling units per acre. Planning staff found the proposed RMF-45 zoning district
matches this density range and meets the intent of Medium-High Density Residential Land Use.
Planning staff noted the Sugar House Master Plan states the following:
“Although few areas in Sugar House are suitable for Medium-High Density housing, it should be
encouraged where feasible.”
“Support opportunities for conversion and infill development of Medium-High Density housing
while requiring appropriate design and location to minimize land use conflicts with existing
single-family development.”
With its location just north of the Sugar House Business District, the subject property is in an area that
transitions from commercial uses to single-family housing. Planning staff quoted the Sugar House Master
Plan which states:
“Higher density residential redevelopment within or on the periphery of the Sugar House
Business District is desirable. Examples of zoning districts that can be used it implement this
density are C-SHBD, RO, RMF-35, and RMF-45.”
Plan Salt Lake, the citywide plan, provides guidance and outlines initiatives to support and guide growth in
the city. It is Planning’s opinion the proposed rezone and development would be supported by Plan Salt
Lake by providing residential access to nearby transit service on 1300 East and 2100 South. It also would
create additional residential units that facilitate aging in place and accommodates increasing housing
needed in the city.
Consideration 3: Zoning Compatibility with Adjacent Properties
The subject parcel has 24 residential units, and the anticipated development would have 46 units. Planning
staff does not anticipate significant impacts to surrounding property owners and occupants.
Page | 5
Building Height
If the zoning map amendment is approved the most significant change will be building height. The current
RMF-35 zoning district allows buildings up to 35’. Under the proposed RMF-45 zoning buildings could be
up to 45’ in height.
An adjacent building to the south of the subject site is zoned RO (Residential/Office) district. This district
allows building height up to 60’. Single family residential houses are to the north and east of the subject
site and across 1300 East. Buildings can be up to 28’ in these areas.
Planning staff believes the proposed RMF-45 zoning district is appropriate for the site. They noted a 45’
multi-family residential building height would act as a buffer between the more intense RO zoning to the
south and the lower density single-family residential homes to the north. In addition, properties to the east
of 1300 East have a slight elevation increase toward View Street. This would somewhat mitigate effects on
most properties surrounding the subject site.
Parking
As noted above, parking requirements for both the current RMF-35 and proposed RMF-45 zoning districts
is the same. If the zoning map amendment is approved and the number of residential units is increased, a
corresponding number of parking spaces depending on unit size would also be required.
Building Setbacks and Landscape Buffer
As noted above, landscape buffers between the subject parcel and abutting single-family residential
districts are the same under either RMF-35 and RMF-45 zoning districts. A 10’ landscape buffer is required
between the subject property and the single-family residences to the north and at the northeast corner.
Consideration 4: Concept Plan
When concept plans are submitted by applicants it provides an idea of what proposed zoning map
amendments will accomplish. While helpful, applicants are not obligated to use the concept plan. Whether
the zoning map amendment is approved by the Council or not, development on the subject site would still
need to meet all applicable zoning standards and be reviewed through the building permit process.
ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS
Attachment E (pages 25-26) of the Planning Commission staff report outlines zoning map amendment
standards that should be considered as the Council reviews this proposal. Planning staff found the
proposed amendment complies with all applicable standards. Please see the Planning Commission staff
report for full details.
PUBLIC PROCESS
• April 26, 2021-Notice concerning the proposed zoning map amendment sent to Sugar House
Community Council Chair.
• May 17, 2021-The proposal was discussed at the Sugar House Community Council meeting.
Comments at that meeting were primarily concerns about existing building and property
maintenance, 1300 East road construction, and construction timeline.
• July 1, 2021-Public hearing notice mailed to neighbors within 300’ of the subject site. Notice was
also published in the newspaper.
• July 14, 2021-Planning Commission public hearing. As noted above, several people spoke at the
hearing expressing opposition to the proposal. Concerns cited were loss of affordable housing
Page | 6
units, lack of benefit to the community, compatibility with surrounding neighborhood, loss of
parking spaces for visitors to adjacent businesses to the south. The Planning Commission voted 5-
2 to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for the proposed zoning map
amendment.