Proposed Ordinance - 1/31/2023SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. _____ of 2023
(Adopting the Northpoint Small Area Plan)
An ordinance adopting the Northpoint Small Area Plan as part of Salt Lake City’s general
plan.
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a hearing on December 14,
2022 on a petition by the City Council to adopt an update to the Northpoint Small Area Plan as a
geographically-specific part of Salt Lake City’s general plan required by Part 4 of Utah Code
Chapter 10-9a; and
WHEREAS, at its December 14, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor
of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) on said
petition; and
WHEREAS, after holding a public hearing on this matter, the City Council has
determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Adopting the Northpoint Small Area Plan. That the Northpoint Small
Area Plan provided in Exhibit “A” attached hereto is adopted as part of Salt Lake City’s general
plan as required by Part 4 of Utah Code Chapter 10-9a.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
first publication.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ______________,
2023.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 2023.
Published: ______________.
Ordinance adopting the Northpoint Small Area Plan
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date:__________________________________
By: ___________________________________
Katherine D. Pasker, Senior City Attorney
December 16, 2022
EXHIBIT “A”
Northpoint Small Area Plan
1. CHRONOLOGY
Northpoint Small Area Plan
Project Chronology
PLNPCM2022-00687
May 2021: Contract with the consultant, Logan Simpson, finalized
July 22, 2021: City Council briefing
August 2021: An informational postcard was mailed to property owners within the study area
informing them of the project and stakeholder interview opportunities
August 2021: Logan Simpson (consultant) held one-on-one meetings
August 2021: Logan Simpson and Salt Lake City Planning Staff attended the Westpointe
Night Out event.
August 12, 2021: Steering Committee meeting
November 10, 2021: Westpointe Community Council presentation
February 17, 2022: Steering Committee meeting
April 4, 2022: Steering Committee meeting
April 29, 2022: An informational postcard was mailed to property owners within the study
area informing them of the upcoming workshop and providing them with a QR code to obtain
more information and take a property owner questionnaire.
March 2 – 30, 2022: Property Owner Questionnaire
March 9, 2022: Westpointe Community Council presentation
May 16, 2022: Draft Concepts public workshop
May 17 – June 30: Draft Concepts Online Questionnaire was available to the public
June 27, 2022: Steering Committee meeting
July 22, 2022: Draft Plan published and noticed for public review
July 27, 2022: Planning Commission briefing
August 2, 2022: Logan Simpson and Salt Lake City Planning Staff attended the Westpointe
Night Out event.
September 20, 2022: City Council briefing on the draft plan
October 18, 2022: Revised Draft Plan published for Planning Commission public hearing
October 26, 2022: Planning Commission Public Hearing
November 9, 2022: Westpointe Community Council presentation
November 16, 2022: Revised Draft Plan published for Planning Commission public hearing
December 14, 2022: Planning Commission Public Hearing and Recommendation
December 15, 2022: Ordinance request sent to City Attorney’s Office
December 16, 2022: Signed ordinance received from City Attorney’s Office
2. CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2022-00687 – Northpoint Small
Area Plan – A request by the City Council to revise and complete an update to the Northpoint
Small Area Plan. The Northpoint Small Area Plan is a land use plan for the land that is generally
located between the Salt Lake City International Airport and the northern boundary of the city
along the 2200 West corridor. The Northpoint Small Area Plan was adopted in April 2000. The
updated plan will provide guidance on existing and anticipated development in the area, as well as
annexation-related issues. As part of the plan update, the Salt Lake City Major Streets Plan will be
amended to reflect recommended roadway alignments. Information on the proposal can found on
the City’s webpage for the proposal at the following link:
https://www.slc.gov/planning/2022/10/13/northpoint-small-area-plan/
As part of their review, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive
comments regarding the petition. During this hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council
concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be held
electronically:
DATE:
TIME: 7:00 p.m.
PLACE: Electronic and in-person options.
451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah
** This meeting will be held via electronic means, while also providing for an in-person
opportunity to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located at 451
South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. For more information, including WebEx
connection information, please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings. Comments may also
be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an email to
council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the
Council and added to the public record.
If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call
Krissy Gilmore at 801-535-7780 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday or via e-mail at Kristina.Gilmore@slcgov.com. The application details can be accessed at
https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/ , by selecting the “Planning” tab and entering the petition number
PLNPCM2022-00687.
People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include
alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least
two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at
council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. (P 19-19)
4. NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN DRAFT
NORTHPOINT
Small Area Plan
Salt Lake City
Adoption Draft, January 2023
DRAFT
2
CONTENTS
Chapter 1 Introduction ....................................................4
Location .................................................................................................................6
Plan Context and Purpose .....................................................................................7
Guide to this Plan ...................................................................................................8
Executive Summary .............................................................................................10
Chapter 2 The Vision ....................................................12
Constraints to the Vision .....................................................................................14
Land Use Categories ............................................................................................15
Vision Map ...........................................................................................................16
Design Standards ................................................................................................18
Chapter 3 Implementation ...........................................30
Critical Path Implementation Items ....................................................................32
Additional Implementation Items ........................................................................34
Chapter 4 The Toolkit ....................................................36
Using the Toolkit ..................................................................................................38
Land Preservation Tools .......................................................................................40
Financial Implementation Tools ..........................................................................46
DRAFT
Appendix A Existing Conditions
Appendix B Public Input
Appendix C Constraints Analysis
Appendix D Full Financial Analysis
Appendix E Major Streets Plan Amendment
DRAFT
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
6
Location
The Northpoint Plan Area is located just north of
Downtown Salt Lake City, near Farmington Bay
and the Great Salt Lake. The Plan Area is bounded
to the east by Interstate 215 and is comprised
of mainly agricultural, industrial and residential
uses.
Northpoint lies within the northwest quadrant
of Salt Lake City, adjacent to vital environmental
resources including the Jordan River and playas
and wetlands associated with the Great Salt Lake.
Over half of the property in Northpoint is currently
under the jurisdiction of Salt Lake County and
consists of agricultural uses, business park
development, industrial and commercial zoning.
Environmental considerations greatly influence
the future growth and development of the area.
Directly south of Northpoint is Salt Lake City
International Airport, which provides opportunities
for and constraints to the potential development
within Northpoint. The airport continues to expand
through ongoing renovations and is currently
being guided by the 2022 Salt Lake International
Airport Master Plan. Its proximity is a defining
factor of the Plan Area.
Northpoint is also adjacent to several recreational
areas including the Wasatch Mountain Range,
with its many trails, the Jordan River OHV State
Recreation Area, and the Salt Lake City Regional
Athletic Complex.
Introduction Overview
Graphic 1.1 | Northpoint Plan Area
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 7
Esri,H ERE,Garmin,(c)OpenStreetMapc ontributors,andt he GISu serc ommunity
Jurisdiction
Plan Context and Purpose
In 2000, a Northpoint Small Area Plan was
adopted with goals to eliminate potential land
use conflicts between the Salt Lake International
Airport, future development, and the existing
agricultural lifestyle. Other notable planning
efforts for this region include the 1992 Northwest
and the Jordan River/Airport Plan which address
the Northpoint Plan Area, the Great Salt Lake
wetlands and Jordan River, the Salt Lake Airport,
and surrounding land; the 2020 Blueprint Jordan
River Plan which illustrates a cohesive vision
for the River as it stretches through multiple
jurisdictions; the 2021 Salt Lake City International
Airport Master Plan; and the 2021 Salt Lake County
West General Plan.
The northwest portion of Salt Lake City is
limited by multiple layers of constraints, mostly
environmental, but also due to airport activity,
connectivity, and social equity issues. It is one
of the largest growth areas for the City, but quite
possibly, the most difficult to develop. This
Plan addresses the natural environment, built
environment, and community attributes. Many
factors contribute to constraints facing the area,
however many attributes act as opportunities.
The Northpoint Small Area Plan Update is a
response to the rapid pace of growth and change
in the northwest portion of Salt Lake City and the
anticipated new business park and light industrial
uses in the area. The key goals of this Plan are to:
»Identify appropriate future land use and
development characteristics for the area
that can coexist with the wildlife habitat
and natural environment of the Great Salt
Lake, and the operations of the Salt Lake
City International Airport.
»Update future annexation potential for
unincorporated land within Salt Lake
County.
»Identify appropriate infrastructure
requirements, including utilities and
roadways, to support the future land use in
the area.
»Identify appropriate buffering, building
design, and development characteristics
to reduce the impacts to residential and
agricultural uses, important wildlife habitat,
and other uses within the plan area.
»Recommend methods to reduce the
negative impacts that future land uses may
have on air quality, water quality, noise, and
light.
Graphic 1.2 | Northpoint Jurisdictions
Salt Lake City
Salt Lake County
DRAFT
8
Guide to This Plan
Plan
Salt Lake
Northpoint
Small Area Plan
Land Use Code and Zoning
Ordinances
Design
Standards Incentives Tools and
Actions
Introduction
This document is intended to support Salt Lake City’s overarching vision established in Plan Salt Lake
while also providing tailored tools to help the Plan Area grow appropriately. Once the Northpoint Small
Area Plan is adopted, its supplemental recommendations will guide applicants to develop within
the scope of the Community’s Vision. This plan should be referenced when discretionary land use
decisions are being made. These recommendations include, design standards, land acquisition tools,
regulatory tools, and incentive based tools.
Master plans detail the vision, policy, and framework of the community that will guide growth and
development over time. As the plan area transitions from greenfield and rural residential to industrial
and business park, this plan outlines specific design standards and action steps the City can implement
to mitigate the impact of new development on the surrounding natural habitat and existing residential
properties.
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 9
Public Process
This planning process included one-
on-one interviews with residents,
developers, environmental
groups, and City and ounty staff,
a public open house, two public
questionnaires, and a property owner-
specific questionnaire. With several
applications active in the Plan Area
at the time this project started,
it became apparent early on that
habitat preservation and residential
quality of life were primary concerns.
This shaped the Plan, shifting focus
from land use recommendations to
tools available to the City to preserve
habitat, mitigate impacts of new
development on residents, water and
air quality, and wildlife, and determine
appropriate improvements to existing
infrastructure.
195
820
DRAFT
10
Executive Summary
The Northpoint Small Area Plan is a detailed master plan for the Northwestern Community of Salt
Lake City. The Plan Area contains large amounts of underdeveloped land, nestled between wetlands
from the Great Salt Lake to the west and urban growth to the east. Additionally, parts of the Plan Area
are fragmented with unincorporated County land and airport-owned property. A clear plan is needed
to address the development pressures in the Plan Area, which continue to increase despite natural
constraints. The Northpoint Small Area Plan aims to guide future development based on the previously
adopted community plans and future land uses that the City has identified as appropriate to the area.
While many property owners intend to retain their property as agricultural land, redevelopment and
new development is anticipated to be primarily light industrial and manufacturing. The Plan contains
three elements to guide growth into the future:
Vision Map
The Northpoint area has experienced growth that can conflict; industrial development adjacent to
agriculture and residential uses, and developments adjacent to or abutting critical habitat areas
(i.e. wetlands and upland). Industrial development has begun, and is expected to continue, to creep
into this area of Salt Lake City. Understanding this reality, the Northpoint Vision is to balance the
anticipated growth of light industrial and manufacturing uses with the existing and continued
residential and agricultural uses of the area. This will be accomplished through outlining mitigation
strategies for high-impact development directed at preserving quality of life for residents and the
natural environment.
Design Standards
The design standards are directly connected to the anticipated future development in the area.
Building and site design have the ability to affect built environments in impactful ways. When applied
with a clear vision in mind, design standards can shape development that reduces visual and physical
land use conflicts. The standards touch on each land use designation and provide clear direction as
to how the area should be built. Although the standards are separately outlined in the plan, they are
implied to be implemented with the other action items.
Implementation
What separates the plan from a design standards manual, is the comprehensive action items that are
addressed in the implementation chapter. The action items range from strategies to best preserve
open space and critical habitats, recommends further study for service and infrastructure needs,
annexation of unincorporated properties within the Plan Area, and funding tools that will help the Plan
Area grow responsibly. These elements can be applied to the area as a whole and provide different
initiatives aside from traditional zoning regulation guidance. There are three action items identified as
“critical path”, being the most critical to complete once this plan is adopted. These action items are:
»Services and Infrastructure | Evaluate Funding Solutions to Redesign 2200 W and Construct
2900 W
»Built Environment and Design | Adopt Development Code Updates and Codify the Design
Standards Herein
»Natural Environment and Preservation | Evaluate the Feasibility of Acquiring Sensitive Lands as
City-Owned Open Space
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 11
Goals of this Plan
»Identify appropriate future land use and development characteristics for the area that can
coexist with the wildlife habitat and natural environment of the Great Salt Lake, and the
operations of the Salt Lake City International Airport.
»Update future annexation potential for unincorporated land within Salt Lake County.
»Identify appropriate infrastructure requirements, including utilities and roadways, to support
the future land use in the area.
»Identify appropriate buffering, building design, and development characteristics to reduce
the impacts to residential and agricultural uses, important wildlife habitat, and other uses
within the corridor.
»Recommend methods to reduce the negative impacts that future land uses may have on air
quality, water quality, noise, and light.
Vision Map Categories
See more on page 16
Key Design Standards
See more on page 20
Critical Implementation
See more on page 32
NATURAL OPEN SPACE
Areas where development is limited
to passive recreational amenities
TRANSITIONAL
Areas that are currently residential.
New development will be subject to
impact mitigation measures
BUSINESS PARK/INDUSTRIAL
Areas anticipated to develop as
Business Park and Light Industrial
AIRPORT
Areas owned by the Salt Lake City
International Airport
Limit maximum building frontage
along 2200 W
Maintain buffers between new
development and existing
wetlands, canals, drains, and the
Jordan River
Maintain a 65-foot buffer
between new development and
existing residential
Allow clustering of buildings to
maximize buffers
Emphasize appropriate building
materials and encourage native
landscaping
Services and Infrastructure
Evaluate funding solutions to
redesign 2200 W and construct
2900 W
Built Environment and Design
Create a Northpoint specific
development code and codify the
Design Standards
Natural Environment/Preservation
Evaluate the feasibility of
acquiring sensitive lands as
city-owned open space
How Will We Get There?DRAFT
CHAPTER 2
THE VISION
14
Constraints to the Vision
As discussed in Chapter 1, the Plan
Area consists of several development
constraints ranging from sensitive
wetland habitat to airport influence
zone regulations. Mapping these
constraints is a crucial first step in
determining the areas most suitable for
new development and identifying areas
that should be preserved as habitat
and open space. The Constraints Map
illustrates the results of this analysis
and may be used to prioritize sensitive
lands for preservation or acquisition.
For a detailed analysis of development
constraints and opportunities used
in this analysis, see Appendix C.
Constraints reviewed in this analysis
included:
»Designated Wetlands
»Salt Lake City International
Airport-Owned Properties
»Utility and Open Space Easements
»Airport Influence Zones (A, B, C)
»Viable Agriculture
»Airport Noise Contours
Using the Vision Map and
Design Standards
The Vision Map in this chapter is intended to show where additional standards are necessary to
ensure future development is compatible with existing residential, agricultural, and sensitive habitats.
To use this chapter, review the Vision Map and accompanying Design Standards. It is intended that
the following design standards be incorporated into Salt Lake City Zoning and Development Code to
apply to new development in the Plan Area.
The Northpoint Vision Overview
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community
¯
Most suitable
for development
Least suitable
for development
NORTHPOINT CONSTRAINTS MAP
Graphic 2.1 | Constraints Analysis for Northpoint
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 15
Natural Open Space
Purpose: Natural Open Space areas are those that should be preserved as natural open space
and prohibit development. The Natural Open Space district aims to connect critical habitats in
the least fragmented way possible considering development trends in the Plan Area.
Applicability: These areas include designated wetlands, uplands, existing recreational amenities,
and areas connecting them. All designated wetlands, uplands, and other sensitive lands fall
under the Natural Open Space district.
Use Standards: Development in these areas should be limited to passive recreational opportunities,
trailheads, and small parking areas to serve recreational uses. Adjacent land uses will be subject
to mitigation.
Transitional
Purpose: The purpose of this zone is to mitigate the impacts of Business Park/Industrial
development on residential and agricultural properties.
Applicability: New development is anticipated to be primarily light industrial with a focus on
manufacturing land uses. There are no properties in the Plan Area that are identified for new
residential development.
Use Standards: Residential properties shall be subject to natural habitat impact mitigation
standards such as buffering critical areas from all development. Should any residential
properties transition to BP/Industrial, all BP/Industrial standards will apply.
Business Park/Industrial
Purpose: Business and light industrial development is anticipated in the Plan Area. The majority
of the Plan Area will convert to light industrial, manufacturing, or business properties.
Applicability: The BP/I district applies to properties that do not contain significant constraints
such as wetlands, uplands, existing residential, or other major limitations.
Use Standards: Development in these areas will be reviewed closely for impact to existing
residents and sensitive lands and may require additional mitigation designs focused on
protecting the natural environment and quality of life of existing residents.
Airport
Purpose: These areas are owned by the Salt Lake International Airport, though there are no plans
currently to develop these areas.
Applicability: The Airport district applies to properties that are owned by the Salt Lake International
Airport.
Use Standards: Development in these areas should be limited to passive recreational opportunities,
natural open space, and utility and infrastructure needed for the Salt Lake International Airport.
Land Use Categories
DRAFT
16
Protected
Open Space
22
0
0
W
29
0
0
W
W Center St
32
0
0
W
(
u
n
p
a
v
e
d
)
3200N
2670N
2100N
1700N
3130N
J
o
r
d
a
n
R
i
v
e
r
R
u
d
y
C
a
n
a
l
Recla
i
m
a
t
i
o
n
D
i
t
c
h
Ci
t
y
D
r
a
i
n
W
e
s
t
B
r
a
n
c
h
Le
g
a
c
y
P
k
w
y
Rocky
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
Power
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
Roc
k
y
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
Pow
e
r
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
215
215
Graphic 2.2 | Northpoint Vision Map
NORTHPOINT VISION MAP
Water
Designated Wetland*
Natural Open Space
Business Park / Industrial
Transitional
Land UsesProtected
Open Space
22
0
0
W
29
0
0
W
W Center St
32
0
0
W
(
u
n
p
a
v
e
d
)
3200N
2670N
2100N
1700N
3130N
J
o
r
d
a
n
R
i
v
e
r
R
u
d
y
C
a
n
a
l
Recla
i
m
a
t
i
o
n
D
i
t
c
h
Ci
t
y
D
r
a
i
n
W
e
s
t
B
r
a
n
c
h
Le
g
a
c
y
P
k
w
y
Rocky
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
Power
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
Roc
k
y
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
Pow
e
r
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
215
215
Airport
*Wetlands include both jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetlands. The Vision
Map is intended as a general guide for wetland areas, but specific wetland
delineation should be done when land is developed. Identification of wetlands
primarily involves the determination of three factors: the predominance of
wetland vegetation, hydric (wetland) soils, and signs of hydrology.
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 17
Without Design Standards With Design Standards
Smaller buildings facing existing residential and major roadways, largest buildings in the middle of development.
Greater attention to building design (i.e. building materials, lighting, landscaping, etc.).
Allow clustering of buildings in favor of preserving connected habitat and critical open space.
No restrictions on building size near/facing existing residential.
Typical industrial development styles can disturb natural habitat with disruptive materials, lighting, hazardous landscaping and fencing, etc.
Minimum lot sizes and open space requirements force buildings to be oriented in an inefficient way, taking up more native land than needed.
EFFECT OF DESIGN STANDARDS
DRAFT
18
Design Standards
Land Use
Business Park/
Industrial Transitional
Minimum Setback of New Development
Designated Wetlands up to 300 ft1, 2 75 ft1, 2
Canals and Drains 75 ft 75 ft
Jordan River 100 ft1, 2 75 ft1, 2
Existing Residential 65 ft 65 ft
Maximum Continuous Building Frontage on 2200 W 400 ft 250 ft
1 | Should preserve uninterrupted connection between wetlands and uplands
2 | Should include and maintain a planted stormwater mitigation element such as a bioswale
Setbacks and Buffers
Buffers and setbacks are intended to reduce the adverse impacts of adjacent land uses and provide important habitats for wildlife that utilize buffer areas. While setbacks shown in this document are intended to extend from the natural feature (i.e., designated wetland or canal) to any impervious built surface of new development (i.e., sidewalks, parking lots), specific details will be determined when the setback is adopted into code. Setbacks from natural features may include landscaping and stormwater management.
Required setbacks for new development adjacent to existing residential are intended to extend from new structure to existing residential structure(s). Setbacks from residential structures may include sidewalks, parking lots, etc.
A maximum building length along 2200 West is recommended to reduce the impact of large-scale industrial development on longstanding agricultural and residential uses, as well as maintain habitat connections.
Smaller setbacks in the transition area are intended to allow flexibility for residential development under the existing zoning. As development intensity increases with the development of business park or light industrial land uses, the greater setbacks apply.
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 19
Preferred Buffer for Development Adjacent to Wetlands/Uplands
* When buffer is applied during development of a property the City must consider the potential
for a regulatory taking of property. DRAFT
20
Design Standards
1 | Habitat Mitigation Standards
1.1 | Grading Limitations
Considering limitations to grading can help
minimize impacts to native vegetation. It is
important for only areas planned for development
to be cleared and graded as it can allow for natural
drainage courses to be maintained and reduces
the need to manage stormwater flows.
◊ Soil cover or ramps shall be included to
allow for movement of wildlife through the
drainages.
◊ Excavation methods such as installation of
underdrains should be considered.
◊ Vertical drop structures and concrete lined
channels should be avoided.
◊ Use of large angular rip-rap for erosion control
should be limited.
◊ Non-structural features that also provide
riparian habitat should be considered.
◊ Where possible, development should relate
the building to the natural site by stepping
buildings and avoiding mass leveling of the
site.
1.2 | Fencing and Walls
Fences and walls can be barriers to wildlife and
impede the movement of wildlife between habitat
areas. Although fencing can be used to exclude
wildlife, it should be applied in very specific areas
that do not restrict larger wildlife movement
and migration patterns or access to food, water,
shelter, or potential mates.
◊ Fencing shall be permeable to allow for the
safe passage of animals and facilitate wildlife
movement through existing or constructed
wildlife corridors.
◊ Natural barriers for privacy purposes shall
consist of natural materials where possible,
such as boulders, densely-planted vegetation,
or rip-rap.
◊ Decorative fencing features that could be
hazardous to wildlife shall be prohibited
including:
»Pointed or narrow extensions at the top of
fences.
»Wires that may entangle animals.
»Hollow fence posts that are open at the
top when birds or other small animals may
become entrapped in an open cavity.
Standards for All New Development
Graphic 2.3 | Native Landscaping
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 21
1.3 | Dark Sky Lighting
Lighting is an important element in built environments that allows for a perceived sense of safety
at night. However, without appropriate design and placement, outdoor light fixtures can sometimes
be inefficient. Outdoor lighting in the Plan Area should be designed in a way that benefits the built
environment without negatively impacting the natural environment. Artificial lighting can disrupt
wildlife’s natural patterns and behaviors.
Graphic 2.4 | Dark Sky Friendly Lighting
◊ Lighting in non-functional spaces is prohibited
(i.e. architectural and landscape lighting is not
necessary for function of built environments).
◊ Light fixtures with motion or heat sensor may
be used to keep lights off when lighting is not
required.
◊ Lighting should consist of International Dark
Sky Association (IDA) approved fixtures.
◊ Electronic message centers (EMC) shall
be switched off completely after 11pm (or
30 minutes after the close of business for
on-premises signs, whichever is later), and
remain off until one hour before sunrise.
◊ EMCs applications for traffic and safety
information shall be exempt from
curfew.
◊ Light fixtures shall be selectively placed and
fully shielded (i.e. light shall only be emitted
downward and not above an imaginary
horizontal plane passing through the light
source).
◊ Lights shall be directed away from natural
areas.
◊ Lighting shall use timers to automatically
turnoff outside of hours of operation.
◊ Outdoor lighting shall be a color temperature
of 3,000 kelvin or less.DRAFT
22
Design Standards
2 | Water Conscious Development
2.1 | Landscaping
Regulating native species in landscape design
can lead to low-maintenance and water-wise
environments that reflect the natural environment
in the built environment. Additionally, habitat
value can be increased when landscaping isn’t
overly manicured. However, weeds and invasive
species should be controlled so that they do not
compete with native species for necessary water
and nutrients.
◊ Landscaped areas shall follow Low Impact
Develpoment (LID) principles.
◊ Landscaping shall consist of native, adaptive,
and drought-tolerant plantings.
◊ New construction shall follow the Salt Lake
City Tree Protection and Preservation Policy.
◊ Landscaping shall not require modifications to
the native soil.
◊ Minimize irrigated landscape areas and utilize
naturalized swales.
◊ Fertilizers and herbicides shall be prohibited.
◊ Development adjacent to wetlands
and uplands shall adhere to the buffer
requirements herein and include on-site
stormwater management.
Graphic 2.5 | Stormwater Runoff Design
2.2 | Stormwater Management
As undeveloped land becomes developed with
hard surface materials, loss of permeable
surfaces will have a direct affect on stormwater
runoff. It is essential to avoid stormwater contact
with industrial materials and activities and to
avoid point-source pollution and degradation of
the wetlands, uplands, and other natural habitat.
There are comprehensive best management
practice guides that can help applicant navigate
the best solution for the specific use.
◊ Significant new development resulting
in a change of land use shall include
environmental impact mitigation measures
and align them with current executive orders
and master plans.
◊ Embankments and spillways shall be
designed and approved by engineers that
specialize in stormwater management and
ecologically friendly design.
◊ Stormwater systems shall not diminish water
flow to wetlands.
◊ Sedimentation systems may be used.
»Sediment systems are more efficient with
pollutants associated with metals, organic
compounds, and other oxygen-demanding
substances. There are limitations with
sediment systems as small particles do not
always settle therefore the substances in
the industrial stormwater discharge should
be evaluated prior to implementation.
◊ Detention ponds may be utilized with an
underdrain to outlet to allow water to slowly
release into proper stormwater systems.
◊ Retention ponds may be utilized to regularly
contain water on site and via infiltration.
◊ Infiltration systems may be utilized to capture
and infiltrate runoff in order to reduce runoff
volume.
»i.e. Infiltration Trenches, basins, bio-retention
systems and underground infiltration tanks.
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 23
Graphic 2.9 | Porous Surface Street Edge
Graphic 2.8 | Native Landscaping
Graphic 2.7 | Bioswale
Graphic 2.6 | Bioswale
3 | Airport Conflict Mitigation
Aviation adjacent to the Plan Area has been around for many
years. Similarly to the rest of Salt Lake Valley, the Airport, too,
has grown and anticipates further growth into the future. It is
important to account for current and future impacts.
3.1 | Noise
Regulation programs like Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part
150 Noise, should be implemented on airport owned properties as
to mitigate the impacts of noise. This program was established
by the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 and
sets forth the measure that a specific airport operator has taken
to reduce the impacts of noise.
3.2 | Land Use Compatibility
Local land use planning such as this plan can better prepare for
the implications of planning around airports, and other airport-
related development. Land use decisions around the airport
properties should account for the impacts and determine
whether the proposed use is appropriate. This can be hindered
when multiple jurisdictions regulate the surrounding lands,
however, there are tools such as annexation to consolidate
regulatory authority and ensure that only appropriate land use
decisions are made.DRAFT
24
Graphic 2.10 | Natural Design Elements
Graphic 2.11| Natural Building Materials
Graphic 2.12 | Interior Courtyard
4 | Visual Design
Conscious design can help enhance compatibility
between various uses and ensure that development fits
in with the surrounding natural environment as best as
possible.
◊ Units (and open space required by code) shall be
organized or “clustered” in an efficient manner on
properties where doing so will allow for larger habitat
buffers.
◊ Building frontages along 2200 W shall not exceed
400 ft in length.
◊ Uninterrupted horizontal expanses of 100 ft in length
of any opaque material, including opaque glass,
shall be prohibited on building frontages visible from
public streets.
◊ Natural building materials, colors, and other contrast
mitigation building and landscape features shall be
included in the exterior of buildings to mitigate the
contrast of the built and natural environment.
◊ Mirrored or highly reflective glass is prohibited.
◊ Mechanical systems/equipment shall be shielded
with barriers such as foliage and fences.
◊ Common design elements shall be included in
Business Park-zoned development.
»Designs should have a variety of unit sizes to
accommodate different uses and the structural
layout should also allow for flexibility.DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 25
Standards for Transitional Areas
Development within Transitional Areas will be held to the standards previously mentioned with the
following additional standards.
1 | Industrial Land Use Mitigation
As industrial developments increase in the Plan Area, it is
essential to recognize the compatibility issues associated
with industrial land uses and be able to mitigate issues
through building and site design. Industrial developments
intrinsically contain issues with noise, odor, dust, traffic, light,
air quality, and visual/design elements, therefore mitigation
is necessary.
1.1 | Noise
Industrial uses can have implications on noise that can
affect adjacent land uses and also the natural environment.
Noise can be classified into two different types: airborne and
structure borne. Airborne is from the source to the receiver
and can travel in all directions whereas structure-borne is
vibrations through materials. Regardless of noise type,
mitigation efforts should be in place prior, during, and after
development. The following strategies are ways to mitigate
the unwanted and unnecessary noise impacts due to industrial development.
◊ Noise impacts shall be mitigated by absorption, barriers, and/or damping.
»Absorption works towards dissipating airborne acoustic sound waves. The best sound-absorbing
materials are acoustic foam, fabric panels, or underlayment. Common building materials do
not absorb most sound whereas softer materials, such as carpet, foam padding, and fiberglass
insulation are more efficient in dissipating noise.
»Physical barriers such as a berm or spatial separation that account for height, distance, thickness,
and material type can contribute to the extent of mitigation.
»Damping reduces acoustic vibration within a structure or wall.
◊ Building masses such as U or L shaped forms are preferred as they can contribute to noise
mitigation through spatial separation.
◊ Interior courtyards or garden spaces should be incorporated as they can be an effective noise
mitigation strategy by providing quiet and light-filled spaces.
◊ Vegetation should be high and dense when used for noise mitigation for significant effectiveness.
◊ Air-conditioning units should be substituted for pressurized plenum space where possible. A
plenum is a separate interior space provided for air circulation for heating, ventilation, and air-
conditioning.
Graphic 2.13 | Existing Residential in the Plan AreaDRAFT
26
Design Standards
1.2 | Odor
Unlike other externalities of industrial uses, odor can be difficult to measure due to its subjective
nature. However, there are some measures that can be taken to address the duration, frequency,
intensity, and location of noxious odors.
◊ Mitigating odor should start at the source of the emitter, such as food operations, traffic
emissions, chemical facilities, mechanical equipment pollution, and material handling.
Operational and engineering best practices can mitigate odors prior to being released in the
environment.
◊ If emissions cannot be prevented, various solutions can be applied such as:
»Plantings and trees to absorb and mask unpleasant smells as well as act as visual screening.
Additionally, plantings can act as ozone generator which eliminates odorous substances through
oxidation and are low maintenance. (Odor mitigation foliage include field maples, peace lily,
serviceberry, sansevieria).
»Dispersion to reduce consolidated emissions. Dispersion can look like increased separation
between odor source and receivers to allow for dilution or contain the dispersion in an enclosure
to prevent odors dispersing.
»Location of open tanks and storage piles. Limit the presence of smells such as locating open
tanks and storage piles away from residential and high-occupancy areas.
»Structure design elements. The operability and placement of windows and doors can also
prevent intrusion of odors.
1.3 | Air Quality
Encouraging and supporting occupants that engage in sustainable processes and produce minimal
emissions is the most effective way to mitigate air quality issues. In circumstances where this is
unavoidable, exhausting air with ventilation can be effective and dilution can be used to mitigate the
impacts ventilation can have on the surroundings.
◊ Apply in-room air cleaners and vegetation barriers to help mitigate localized air pollution.
◊ Use air filters and electronic air cleaners such as ionizers in duct-mounted and portable cleaners.
»i.e. activated carbon is an adsorbent media air filter.
◊ Green roofs may be incorporated to address on-site and off-site disturbances.
◊ Extensive venting should be used when possible.
◊ Operable windows should be used to provide direct ventilation where they do not conflict with
noise mitigation strategies.
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 27
1.4 | Traffic and Loading
Industrial development brings different vehicular traffic
expectations. The challenge lies in balancing street level,
building, and occupant needs. It is essential that industrial
land uses contain loading and unloading infrastructure as
the traffic associated with the use can have compatibility
issues with adjacent non-industrial uses. Certain elements
such as parking, loading bays, elevators, access points,
noise, and aesthetic can have implications on the area.
Establishing design standards can allow for the mitigation
of incompatibilities between the movement of people,
vehicles, and goods.
◊ Spatial Separation: Land uses that produce heavier traffic scenarios shall be placed away from
residential units.
◊ Vertical Stacking: Flat-roof style structures may be implemented for upper-floor parking and
loading.
◊ Access: Access shall be allowed from more than one side of a site to allow for better separation
of pedestrian, cycling, and vehicle access to reduce the risk of collisions and large distribution
vehicles.
◊ Laneways: Laneways shall be sensitive to pedestrian spaces by carving out walkable space
in the building mass. This includes vegetation, dark sky-friendly lighting, and amenities for
pedestrian use.
◊ Shared lobbies: Mixed-use buildings (including industrial and/or office spaces) may require
shared lobbies to foster community and interaction among tenants.
»It is important to ensure that there are not substantial conflicts between uses that have safety
implications.
◊ Location: Additional considerations for industrial and non-industrial compatibilities includes
proximity to future public transit which can reduce parking demands and activate streets for
more complete neighborhoods. These locations should be evaluated if public transit plans are
implemented in the Plan Area.
Graphic 2.14 | SLC Air Quality
DRAFT
28
Design Standards
Standards for Natural Open
Space
Natural open space consists of critical habitat, regionally
significant agriculture, and connecting open spaces.
Development in these areas is restricted to passive
recreational amenities.
1 | Wetland Design Standards
1.1 | Planting
Wetlands are home to very beneficial habitats that can
support carbon sequestration and improve water quality. As
development increases, mitigating the impacts on wetlands
is essential for the area. Plant species is an example of
a simple design standard that can be incorporated into
properties in a close proximity to this critical habitat.
◊ Encouraging and/or requiring native plant species
can promote healthy wetland habitat in the face of
increasing development.
◊ Non-native/invasive species mitigation: Upkeep of
vegetated areas should be a continuous effort of
property owners. This includes proper management of
invasive and non-native plant species that may have a
negative impact on the natural wetland habitat.
»Utilizing natural mitigation techniques should be
encouraged as to avoid run-off from herbicide and
pesticide product.
Graphic 2.15 | Outdoor Pavilion
Graphic 2.16 | Natural Landscaping
Graphic 2.17 | Nature-Inspired Design
Graphic 2.18 | Birds at the Great Salt Lake Graphic 2.19 | Education Center
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 29
1.2 | Trails and Boardwalks
Integrating boardwalks and trails adjacent and into wetlands can
provide educational and leisure activities for the community in
and beyond the Plan Area. Access to these critical areas must
be designed in a way that protects the natural habitat while also
providing experiences that are otherwise experienced by only a
few individuals. It is important to take inventory of the wetland
and partner with ecologists before implementing a trail system.
◊ Working group: Educational and recreational programming is
a welcomed amenity, however, start up can be difficult without
willing partners and active volunteers. Establishing a working
group can help implement a well-rounded, comprehensive
wetland program.
◊ Trail Kiosk and Parking: Integrating educational and
recreational opportunities with the wetlands can benefit those
beyond the Plan Area. Therefore, establishing a trail kiosk
and parking area will provide more convenient access to this
amenity area.
◊ Connectivity: Connecting the wetlands to the upland
environment can help the user experience the relationship
between the two environments.
◊ Signage: Creating a recognizable sign program can help users
identify the trails and remain on trail. The program can also
include interpretive signage that indicates points of interest,
or educational information about the wetlands and uplands.
◊ Trail type: It is important to evaluate what type of trails
are appropriate in and around the wetland to mitigate the
impacts on the natural environment. Purposeful design can
also help mitigate unnecessary costs for development and
maintenance.
»Trails rather than boardwalks are appropriate in areas where
there is raised ground through the wetland or around the
wetland. Soft-surface trails require little investment.
»Boardwalks are needed where adjacent lands are flat
(vegetation is tall) and allows for the ground beneath to
remain somewhat natural.
Graphic 2.23 | Wildlife Viewing and Fishing Access
Graphic 2.22 | Informational Signage
Graphic 2.21 | Boardwalk-Style Trail
Graphic 2.20 | Natural Multiuse Trail
DRAFT
CHAPTER 3
IMPLEMENTATION
32
Implementing the Vision
Implementation refers to the actions Salt Lake City should take to ensure the Plan Area develops in a
way that is consistent with the community’s vision. The most time-sensitive implementation actions
are included as critical path items. Following the critical path items is a list of additional action items
recommended to achieve the vision of this Plan.
A critical element in planning for any area is considering water sources and needs. Any development
in this area must adhere to Salt Lake City water-related plans and policies.
Critical Path Items
Critical path items are actions that should be abided by the City prior to and as development occurs.
Each critical path item will fall into at least one of the following categories: built environment/design,
services and infrastructure, and natural environment/preservation. These categories were identified
throughout the planning process and are integrated into the various sections of the Plan. The following
items are classified as an immediate need, as development pressures area already present in the Plan
Area.
Services and Infrastructure
Evaluate Funding Solutions to Redesign 2200 W and Construct 2900 W
Timeframe: Immediate
Responsibility: Various City Departments
2900 W is intended to be developed with the Scannell-Swaner Subdivision and will serve as an additional
major arterial road in this Plan Area. The redevelopment of 2200 W and the construction of 2900
W should consider increased vehicle volumes and incorporate pedestrian and biking infrastructure.
Below is a list of potential funding opportunities for this action. For a detailed analysis of these tools
and their applicability in the Plan Area, see the Financial Implementation Analysis in Appendix D.
»Tax Increment Areas
»Public Infrastructure Districts (PIDs)
»Special Assessment Areas (SAAs)
»Impact Fees
»Municipal Energy Tax
Natural Environment/Preservation
Evaluate the Feasibility of Acquiring Sensitive Lands as City-Owned Open Space
Timeframe: Immediate
Responsibility: Salt Lake City Council
There has been a large amount of support for the preservation of open space in the Plan Area, as it
serves as a cultural and historical landmark for the region and critical habitat for wildlife. Acquiring
and preserving available open space in this area for passive recreation is a high priority. Land adjacent
to the Jordan River and open land and wetlands adjacent to 3200 West should be a high priority for
preservation. For a list of recommended land acquisition tools, see Chapter 4.
Implementation Overview
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 33
Built Environment/Design
Adopt Development Code Updates
Timeframe: Immediate
Responsibility: Salt Lake City Council
There are several zoning designations within the Plan Area including Light Manufacturing (M-
1), Business Park (BP), and Agricultural/Rural Residential (AG-2, AG-5, and Salt Lake County A-2).
Although some properties will likely remain agricultural or rural residential, it is anticipated that this
area will slowly redevelop into primarily light manufacturing with some preserved open space areas.
General Development Code Updates
The simplest way to encourage development consistent with the City’s vision for the Plan Area is to
adopt minor edits to these zoning categories. While the City Council may eventually adopt an overlay
for the Plan Area, the following Zoning Code updates are “low-hanging fruit” the City can quickly
implement.
»Review landscape requirements to prohibit turf lawns and encourage native plantings in keeping
with wetland preservation, particularly in interface areas.
»Consider a reduction in minimum lot size if clustering for preservation areas.
»Reconsider setbacks in the zoning code if preserving native habitat, allow more flexibility of the
building envelope.
»In the BP zone, eliminate the requirement of an agricultural buffer in favor of an environmental
buffer (keep residential proximity protections when agriculture is a residential use).
»Amend the Riparian Corridor Overlay zone to include wetland protection buffers.
»Amend the Lowland Conservancy Overlay zone to include canals and drains in the Plan Area.
Northpoint Specific Development Code
The preferred approach to implement the vision for the Plan Area is a Northpoint-specific development
code. A Northpoint-specific code should include:
»Adopting the Design Standards from Chapter 2 of this document, which includes the recommended
setbacks and buffer areas, landscape requirements, building materials and design standards,
etc.
»Incentive-based tools for preserving open and sensitive lands, such as allowing an increase in
the maximum building façade length if preserving a larger amount of open space or buffer area
than required.
DRAFT
34
Create a local area utility plan
Timeframe: Immediate
Responsibility: Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities
Require a local area utility plan to determine future Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities
(SLCDPU) service availability and to ensure utility services can be provided based on the anticipated
future land use associated with new development. City policy is that upon the development of a
property, the developer will be required to identify and provide all utilities necessary to serve their
development, including water, sewer, and stormwater. A local area utility plan shall be provided to
SLCDPU for review to support any development application, to ensure adequate service availability,
and to identify impacts on existing systems.
Amend the Major Streets Plan
Timeframe: Immediate
Responsibility: Salt Lake City Planning Department and Transportation Division
Amend the Major Streets Plan to reflect the removal of 3200 W as a major road. While shown as a
local road on the proposed amended map, it is anticipated that 3200 W will remain an unimproved
dirt road and barrier for adjacent wetlands to the west. New development should be prohibited from
facing 3200 West. Additionally, the amended map includes the proposed roadway alignment of 2900
W and the realignment of 2100 North to access the airport. See Appendix E for the recommended
amendments.
Develop environmental impact standards and align them with current executive orders and master plans.
Timeframe: Short Term
Responsibility: Salt Lake City Planning Department
Create standards for new development that mitigate the impact of said development on nearby habitat
and sensitive areas. These standards may include elements such as water saving best practices, dark
sky ordinances, landscaping requirements, etc.
Additional Implementation Items
The following list includes recommended key action items to achieve the vision for the Northpoint
Plan Area.
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 35
Require a buffer of at least 75 feet between wetlands/uplands and any site development (e.g. buildings, parking, site features, and amenities) within the Northpoint Plan Area.
Timeframe: Short Term
Responsibility: Salt Lake City Planning Department
The Great Salt Lake is a complex and delicate ecosystem and impact to this habitat area by new
development should be carefully mitigated. A critical part of this mitigation is ensuring there is an
adequate buffer between development and the wetland/upland ecosystem. Wetlands include both
jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetlands. The Plan identifies up to a 300 foot buffer from wetland
areas. This should be implemented through either an update to the City’s existing Riparian Overlay
Zone or a new Northpoint specific development code.
In developing the updated code, the City should consider identifying priority wetland areas and applying
the maximum buffer to the highest priority wetlands. Reduced buffer widths may be appropriate based
on the condition, function, and goal of the specific wetland buffer. Additionally, the City should allow
flexibility of wetland buffers through incentive based tools. For example, the buffer width could be
reduced through mitigation measures that include native vegetation restoration.
Coordinate with Salt Lake County to provide efficient police and fire services in the Plan Area.
Timeframe: Short Term
Responsibility: City Council
To provide adequate emergency services to this area, the development of a joint Police/Fire station
may be required in the Plan Area. Coordinate with the Police and Fire Department to acquire funding
and land in the Plan Area for a new shared facility.
Support the annexation of contiguous parcels within the Plan Area.
Timeframe: Ongoing
Responsibility: Salt Lake City Planning Department
The City supports the annexation of contiguous parcels in this Plan Area for future development and
redevelopment.
DRAFT
CHAPTER 4
TOOLKIT
38
Using the Toolkit
The Northpoint Small Area Master Plan process spanned
fifteen months and included one-on-one interviews,
workshops, and other public events. As expressed by project
participants, key desired outcomes for the future of the Plan
Area include:
»Create a program to support a variety of incentives to
maintain or improve property values while preserving
open space.
»Identify a future land use plan that allows industrial
and business development while maintaining quality
of life for existing residential areas and preserving
natural habitat.
»Locate future development in a manner that can
support the efficient provision of city services.
»Identify appropriate buffering, building design, and
development characteristics to reduce impacts to the
environmental features and wildlife habitat associated
with the Great Salt Lake.
»Recommend methods to reduce the negative impacts
that future land uses may have on air quality, water
quality, noise, and light.
»Recommend tools to acquire and/or preserve open
space.
»Recommend strategies to improve traffic flow and
safety on 2200 W.
These desired outcomes suggest that while development
in the Plan Area is in high demand, policies and strategies
need to ensure that development is designed and arranged
in a manner that respects the area’s sensitive landscape.
Toolkit Overview
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 39
A variety of tools have been developed to protect
natural open space and locate, configure, and
design new development in a manner that
protects both existing habitat and natural open
spaces. The preservation tools described and
analyzed in this Chapter represent existing and
potential strategies for the protection of habitat
and open space in the Plan Area. Tools have
been categorized as regulatory, incentive, or land
acquisition. This is not an all-inclusive listing of
tools, but an inventory that details each potential
tool, and provides examples.
In addition to land preservation tools, this
chapter covers financial tools available to fund
improvements to or reconstruction of 2900 W.
The benefits and limitations of each tool have
been compiled from a number of sources,
including university research, other localities’
experiences, practical knowledge, and reports by
individuals who have made their own evaluations.
The implementation tools presented in this
Chapter constitute a menu of options that can be
considered to achieve the objectives of this Plan.DRAFT
40
Land Preservation Tools
Regulatory based tools may be used to protect sensitive lands and agricultural areas within
the Plan Area. These tools could be implemented by Salt Lake City through adoption of new
zoning and subdivision ordinances.
Development Code Updates
Code updates establish supplemental land development requirements within a specific area requiring
special attention, such as an environmentally sensitive area.
Clustering of Lots and Open Space/Cluster Development
Clustering is defined as a development pattern typically for residential use, in which homes are grouped
together rather than evenly dispersed over the land as in a conventional development.
Benefits Limitations
»Easily implemented
»Allows flexibility in design for developers
»Can apply to multiple areas within a city
»Time and cost effective
»Additional zoning requirements
»Not a permanent solution to protect land
from development pressures
Benefits Limitations
»Protects the natural resources of an area
»Creates wider wildlife buffers
»Creates opportunity for greater profits by
consolidating required open space into larger,
more impactful sizes
»Reduces impact of development on
watersheds
»Reduces cost to provide municipal public
services depending on how clustering is
accomplished
»Additional zoning requirements
»Not a permanent solution to protect land from
development pressures
»May not be a mandatory tool; thus there may
not be assurance that desired project designs
will be implemented by developersDRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 41
Special Standards and Design Guidelines
Additional regulations in new development or redevelopment projects can include standards for
elements like lighting, landscaping, building materials, noise, and landscape buffers.
Benefits Limitations
»Helps mitigate impacts of new development
on existing habitat and wildlife
»Easily implemented
»Allows flexibility in site design while preserving
area character and sensitive lands
»Additional zoning requirements
»May not be a mandatory tool; thus there may
not be assurance that desired project designs
will be implemented by developers
»Can be difficult for local officials to enforce
unless bonus criteria are clearly spelled out in
an ordinance or policy document
Sensitive Landscape Studies
Studies can determine additional steps that should be taken to mitigate impact of new development
to existing habitat.
Benefits Limitations
»Helps mitigate impacts of new development
on existing habitat and wildlife
»Easily implemented
»Offers insight into specific site requirements
for mitigation
»Additional zoning requirements
»Can be difficult for local officials to enforce
because requirements and study results may
vary based on specific sites
of participants were in support
of clustering lots and open space
of participants were in support
of development code updates
of participants were in support
of sensitive landscape studies
of participants were in support
of special standards
47%
30%
62%
37%
Regulatory Based Tools
DRAFT
42
Incentive Based Tools
Conservation Easements
Conservation easements are voluntary and legally binding agreements between a landowner (public
or private) and a qualifying organization (also public or private), in which permanent limitations are
placed on a property’s use and development. Conservation easements limit land to uses identified in
the easement, and thus protect it from development.
Benefits Limitations
»Permanently protects land from development
»Landowners may receive income, estate, and/
or property tax benefits
»Land remains in private ownership and on the
tax rolls
»Tax incentives may not provide enough
compensation for many landowners
»Since program is voluntary, it can be
challenging to preserve large tracts of
contiguous land or specific areas to be
protected
Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
TDRs are tools that establish areas within a community for preservation (sending zones), and
additional growth (receiving zones). Sending zones can be areas of agricultural land, open space, or
other properties important to preserve. Receiving zones are areas that the community has designated
as appropriate for additional or increased development.
Benefits Limitations
»Permanently protects land from development
pressures
»Landowner is paid to protect their land
»Local government can target locations
effectively
»Utilizes free market mechanisms
»Land remains in private ownership and on tax
rolls
»Can be complex to administer
»Receiving area must be willing to accept
higher densities
»Can be a difficult program to establish,
especially in areas without city zoning
»May require cooperative agreements among
several local governments to establish sending
and receiving zones
Incentive based tools are voluntary and mostly based on the willingness of the landowner
to sell title or an easement on their property. Where public access and use are desired, fee-
simple ownership control is preferred through donation, purchase, or bargain sale of land to
a government entity, conservation organization, or public charity.
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 43
Purchase of Development Rights (PDR)
PDRs refer to the purchase of development rights on certain parcels of land by a unit of government
or a non-profit entity. Once purchased, a conservation easement is placed on the property.
Benefits Limitations
»Permanently protects land from development
»Landowner is paid to protect their land, while
allowing for ongoing use
»Local government can target desirable locations
effectively
»Land remains in private ownership and on the
tax rolls
»Program is voluntary
»Can be costly for local unit of government,
therefore land is generally protected at a
slower rate
»Land remains in private ownership, typically
with no public access
»Because the program is voluntary, it can
be challenging to preserve large tracts of
contiguous land
Preferred Development Sites
Also known as priority or target development areas, these are locations that have been identified
by a local government as favored for residential, commercial, and office growth based on adopted
growth management policies and plans. Development can involve new construction, redevelopment,
and/or adaptive reuse of buildings. Local governments may offer incentives, such as reduced fees or
increased housing density to developments in these areas in order to make them more attractive to
developers.
Benefits Limitations
»Land remains in private ownership and on the
tax rolls
»Local government can target locations
effectively
»Can be low cost to local unit of government
»Can be a difficult program to establish and
administer
»Not a permanent solution, delays development
in sensitive areas
»Tax incentives may not provide enough
compensation for many landowners
of participants were in support
of conservation easements
of participants were in support
of TDR Programs
of participants were in support
of PDR Programs
of participants were in support
of Preferred Development Sites
56%
30%
47%
25%
DRAFT
44
Land Acquisition Tools
Mutual Covenant
A mutual covenant is an agreement between adjoining landowners to control future land uses through
mutually agreed upon restrictions.
Lease
A lease is an agreement between agency and landowner to rent the land in order to protect and
manage sensitive resources.
Benefits Limitations
»Permanent covenants can be enforced by any
of the landowners or future landowners of the
involved properties
»Significant incentive to comply with restrictions,
since all parties are aware of use controls
»Can reduce property taxes
»Loss in market value from mutual covenants
does not qualify as a charitable deduction for
income tax purposes
»High cost
Benefits Limitations
»Low cost approach to site protection
»Landowner receives income and retains
control of property
»An alternative for preservation-minded
landowners not ready to commit to sale of
permanent easement
»Restrictions can be included in the lease to
direct the activities of the conservation agency
on the land
»Short-term protection strategy
»Leases are not permanent
Acquisition and management of open space can be combined with regulatory measures to
broaden the effectiveness of a preservation program. These tools preserve open space and
their functions in the long-term. Although typically the most expensive solution, acquisition
is the strongest and surest means of protection.
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 45
Land Exchange
Land exchange is the process by which land sought to be protected may be exchanged for another
parcel that is more suitable for development
Benefits Limitations
»Lower acquisition costs
»Scattered properties can be exchanged for a
single, larger parcel
»Complicated process
»Not widely known and rarely used
»Subject to IRS regulations
»Property owners must be willing to participate,
and properties must be of equal value
»High cost
Land Banking/Land Purchase
Land banking occurs when land is purchased and reserved for later use or development. Land could be
leased for immediate use (e.g. agriculture or athletic fields) or held for eventual resale with restrictions.
The local government functions as a land trust.
Benefits Limitations
»Local government proactively identifies and
purchases resource land
»Lowers future preservation costs by working
as a defense against future increases in
land prices, speculation, and inappropriate
development
»High cost
»Requires large upfront expenditures
»Public agency must have staff to handle land
trust functions of acquisition, management,
lease, or resale
of participants were in support
of Lease Agreements
of participants were in support
of Mutual Covenants
of participants were in support
of Land Banking
of participants were in support
of Land Exchange
29%
31%
27%
38%
DRAFT
46
Financial Tools
Overview
Northpoint represents an opportunity for Salt
Lake City to encourage economic development
that is compatible with the unique natural and
built environment of the area, including proximity
to the Salt Lake City International Airport. This
area is best suited for business park and industrial
development yet is hampered by the lack of
significant infrastructure including transportation
options and high-quality fiber broadband to the
area. To realize its potential, the area requires
substantial infrastructure improvements.
Funding options for these improvements are
discussed in this section of the report.
It is a challenging time to fund infrastructure as
construction costs are rising rapidly, along with
interest rates. Infrastructure is generally needed
before development can occur, which means
that revenues generated by the project are not
available for funding at the time they are most
needed. Rather, other funding means must be
identified, with revenue streams generated from
development used later as a payback mechanism.
Economic development is a key component
of generating new revenue streams and is
addressed in the full Financial Implementation
Report in Appendix D. This chapter contains with
the potential funding mechanisms that such
development could enable.
Market Analysis
Northpoint is suitable for industrial and
agricultural use, with limited residential. The area
is proximate to the Salt Lake City International
Airport and, as such, experiences high noise levels
that make residential development difficult.
The industrial market is strong in Salt Lake
County, with a vacancy rate of only 2.2 percent
and rising lease rates which have increased from
an average (NNN) rate of $0.53 in 4th quarter
2020 to $0.63 in 4th quarter 2021. Total Salt
Lake County inventory approximates 135 million
square feet, with 9 million square feet of space
under construction. In the northwest quadrant of
Salt Lake County, the vacancy rate is 2.65 percent,
with year-to-date (YTD) absorption of 7.5 million
square feet and an average asking rate of $0.60
(NNN).
Based on vacant acreage in the Plan Area that
the Salt Lake County Assessor’s Office currently
classifies as industrial, the area could absorb an
additional 650,000 to 1,000,000 square feet of
industrial space. This appears reasonable given
current absorption patterns and the shortage
of industrial space in the market. The biggest
obstacles to industrial development appear to be
supply chain shortages, rising construction costs
and rapidly escalating interest rates.DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 47
Financial Tool | Tax Increment Areas
Through the creation of a tax increment area, tax revenues generated within the designated Plan Area
are split into two components:
»(i)Base Revenues | The amount available before the tax increment area is established. Base
revenues are shared among a mix of local governments that have the power to assess taxes
such as schools, cities, counties, and special districts; and
»(ii)Incremental Revenues | These are tax revenues in excess of the base revenues that are
generated by new growth in the Plan Area. If a Plan Area is created, the incremental tax revenues
can flow to the Plan Area for a period of time to encourage economic development.
Some states, including Utah, allow incremental local sales tax revenues, as well as property taxes, to
flow to a Plan Area for a period of time. By giving exclusive use of incremental revenues to the Plan
Area, the creation of a successful tax increment area generates a new revenue stream that can be
used to pay for projects, provide incentives to developers, or collateralize tax increment bonds.
The most common uses of tax increment have been for infrastructure such as roads, utilities,
telecommunications, electrical upgrades and burying power lines, and parking structures. Tax
increment has also been used for demolition, tenant improvements, land acquisitions, environmental
cleanup, trails, lighting, signage, playgrounds, incentives to developers, economic development
activities and housing.
Utah currently allows for the enactment of three types of tax increment areas:
»Community Reinvestment Areas (CRAs)
»Transportation Reinvestment Zones (TRZs)
»Housing & Transit Reinvestment Zones (HTRZs)
Of these three types of tax increment areas, CRAs and TRZs could be used as financing tools for
the Plan Area. HTRZs rely on density of housing and this type of development is not suitable for
Northpoint.
DRAFT
48
Community Reinvestment Areas (CRA)
In Utah, tax increment areas have been known by a wide variety of names over time – RDAs, URAs, EDAs,
CDAs, and now as CRAs or Community Reinvestment Areas. As of 2016, the Legislature combined all
types of Plan Areas—urban renewal, economic development, and community development into a new
single “Community Reinvestment Plan Area” (CRA). Existing Plan Areas will be allowed to continue,
but all new Plan Areas will be known as CRAs.
The CRA Budget may either be approved by a Taxing Entity Committee (TEC) or through Interlocal
Agreement with taxing entities, except where the Agency chooses to conduct a blight study to
determine the existence of blight and to utilize limited eminent domain powers, which requires the
approval of the TEC of both blight and the budget.
If there is a finding of blight, 20 percent of the tax increment must be set aside for affordable housing.
For all other projects, 10 percent of the tax increment is required to be set aside for affordable housing,
if the annual increment is over $100,000. However, housing funds may be spent for affordable housing
statewide and are not limited to being spent within a Plan Area. Noticing and hearing requirements
apply with the CRA designation.
After the tax increment collection period has expired, the tax increment dollars that previously flowed
to the CRA will flow to the taxing entities that levy the property taxes within the Plan Area. In most
cases, taxing entities receive more property tax revenues annually following expiration of the tax
increment collection period than before, as property values are likely to have increased significantly
through the redevelopment process.
Benefits Limitations
»Creates a new revenue stream. »Requires cooperation of other taxing entities.
»Relatively easy to create. »10% of revenues must be directed to
affordable housing.
»Flexible uses of funds. »Revenues may take years to build up as
development occurs over time.
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 49
Transportation Reinvestment Zone (TRZ)
A TRZ is one type of area that can be formed where tax increment can be used to accelerate development
within the defined Plan Area. According to Utah Code §11-13-103(22), “Transportation Reinvestment
Zone” means an area created by two or more public agencies by interlocal agreement to capture
increased property or sales tax revenue generated by a transportation infrastructure project. TRZs
are ideal for projects such as Frontrunner, light rail, or major arterials that span multiple jurisdictions.
Any two or more public agencies may enter into an agreement to create a transportation reinvestment
zone but one of these entities must have land use authority over the TRZ area – in other words, Salt
Lake City must be a partner in this endeavor.
Benefits Limitations
»Creates a new revenue stream. »Revenue directed to transportation projects
will not be available to provide other services.
»Relatively easy to create. »Requires cooperation between at least two
entities.
»Projected to produce substantial revenue
stream over time.
»Must find a nexus with transportation projects
to justify use of the increment.
»No affordable housing requirement. »Revenues may take years to build up as
development occurs over time.
DRAFT
50
Tax Increment Bonds
Tax Increment Bonds were developed in California in 1952 as an innovative way of raising local
matching funds for federal grants. They became increasingly popular in the 1980s and 1990s, when
there were declines in subsidies for local economic development from federal grants, state grants,
and federal tax subsidies (especially industrial development bonds).
Tax Increment Bonds are collateralized by the incremental growth in property taxes within a given
Plan Area. They capture the future tax benefits of real estate improvements to pay the present cost
of those improvements. It is a financing strategy designed to make improvements to a targeted Plan
Area or district without drawing on general fund revenue or creating a new tax.
Benefits Limitations
»Create a new revenue stream that can
fund capital improvements and economic
development.
»Tend to carry higher interest and costs of
issuance.
»Creating entity does not have to bear financial
burden alone but can share it with other taxing
entities within a Plan Area.
»Often require the cooperation and agreement
of multiple taxing entities to generate
sufficient incremental revenues to finance the
desired infrastructure.
»Tax increment revenues can be used to pay for
administrative expenses.
»Bonds can’t be sold unless the tax increment
is already flowing or is imminent and
nearly certain to flow or is enhanced by a
government’s credit or other mechanism.
»Financial and legal liability is limited by having
a redevelopment agency.
»Typically take longer from start to finish than
other financing types.
»Creating entity may gift tax revenues
or property to provide incentives for
development.
»Critics of Tax Increment Bonds sometimes
assert that tax increment is just a reallocation
of tax revenues by which some municipalities
win, and others lose.
»Creating entity may be able to encourage
or accelerate the timeframe of desired
development types through offering tax
increment incentives to the developer.
»Mortgage on the property can also be given
as bond security under Utah law in addition to
incremental revenue.
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 51
Financial Tool | Public Infrastructure Districts (PIDs)
PIDs are generally most successful in larger, undeveloped areas where there are significant
infrastructure needs. Because the unanimous consent of all property owners is required for the creation
of a PID, it is difficult to establish PIDs in areas with numerous property owners. However, portions of
the study area could be included – especially those areas with larger parcels, fewer property owners,
and significant infrastructure needs.
If created, a PID can be combined with other revenue sources such as tax increment and those revenues
could be used to pay the PID bonds. These funding tools may further facilitate development and
increase property values, which may in turn provide for more opportunities to fund basic infrastructure
(through tax increment financing or general tax collection). The PID tool allows for creation of a
separate taxing entity in order to fund public infrastructure. Ultimate users of the property pay for the
improvements via the taxing entity through property assessments. These assessments permit for
bonding, allowing for covering upfront infrastructure expenses that are repaid over periods typically
near 30 years. This tool results in higher property taxes for property owners/users in the defined
district.
Benefits Limitations
»Create a new revenue stream that can
fund capital improvements and economic
development.
»Tend to carry higher interest and costs of
issuance.
»Any debt issued is not on the books of the
local government entity.
»Cities may feel it limits public support for
future tax rate increases or bond elections due
to the perception of already-high rates.
»Can raise a significant amount of revenue with
legally-allowed tax rates of up to 15 mils.
»Requires unanimous support of all taxing
entities to put in place.
»Accelerates development timeframe through
upfront funding for capital costs.
»Ongoing PID governance
»Can reduce the need for impact fees. »Competitiveness of site with other sites given
higher tax rates
»Mortgage on the property can also be given
as bond security under Utah law in addition to
incremental revenue.
»Cost is much lower than other development
financing.
DRAFT
52
Special Investment Areas (SAAs)
Special Assessment Areas (“SAAs”), formerly known as Special Improvement Districts or “SID”s, are
a financing mechanism that allows governmental entities to designate a specific area for the purpose
of financing the costs of improvements, operation and maintenance, or economic promotion activities
that benefit property within a specified area. Entities can then levy a special assessment, on parity
with a tax lien, to pay for those improvements or ongoing maintenance. The special assessment can
be pledged to retire bonds, known as Special Assessment Bonds, if issued to finance construction of
a project. Utah Code §11-42 deals with the requirements of special assessment areas.
The underlying rationale of an SAA is that only those property owners who benefit from the public
improvements and ongoing maintenance of the properties will be assessed for the associated costs
as opposed to other financing structures in which all City residents pay either through property taxes
or increased service fees. While more information about SAAs is included below, it could be difficult
politically for the City to obtain support from a large number of property owners.
Benefits Limitations
»Bonds are tax-exempt although the interest
cost is not as low as a GO or revenue bond
»Forty percent of the assessed liability, be it one
property owner or many could defeat the effort
to create the SAA if they do not want to pay
the assessment
»No requirement to hold a bond election but the
City must hold a meeting for property owners
to be assessed before the SAA can be created
»Some increased administrative burden for the
City although State law permits an additional
amount to be included in each assessment to
either pay the City’s increased administrative
costs or permit the City to hire an outside SAA
administrator
»Only benefited property owners pay for the
improvements or ongoing maintenance
»The City cannot assess government-owned
property within the SAA
»Limited risk to the City as there is no general
tax or revenue pledge
»Flexibility since property owners may pre-pay
their assessment prior to bond issuance or
annually thereafter as the bond documents
dictate – if bonds are issued
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 53
Impact Fees
Impact fees are one-time fees paid by new development to offset the capital costs associated with
new development for basic utilities such as water, sewer, storm water, public safety, roads and parks/
trails. In order to collect impact fees, cities must carefully follow the requirements of Utah Code 11-
36a which includes the following major steps.
»Prepare and pass a resolution authorizing study of an impact fee
»Conduct an impact fee study to determine the appropriate amount of such a fee
»Provide public notice of the possible fee 14 days prior to the public hearing
»Hold a public hearing to take comment regarding the proposed fee
Salt Lake City has already established impact fees that could be used to generate revenues on projects
developed within its City boundaries. However, Salt Lake County would need to charge impact fees
on the unincorporated areas of North Point. Impact fees collected would need to be spent on capital
projects listed in each respective entity’s Impact Fee Facilities Plans (IFFPs). Therefore, careful
coordination would need to take place between Salt Lake City and the County to ensure that the costs
of needed projects are fairly allocated between the two entities.
Benefits Limitations
»New development pays for its fair share of the
costs incurred by new development
»Adds additional costs to development
»Impact fees are generally paid when building
permits are issued; therefore, funds are often
not available upfront when infrastructure
needs are greatest
»Impact fees cannot be used to cure existing
deficienciesDRAFT
APPENDIX A
EXISTING CONDITIONS
56
Water and Air Quality
Air Quality
Salt Lake City is often faced with some of the
worst air quality in the world. Major declines in air
quality typically occur during the summer or winter
due to the Salt Lake Valley’s unique geographical
makeup and position. In the summer, wildfire
smoke often travels east from California, Oregon,
and the region’s mountain ranges adding to
pollution from cars, industry, and other elements
leading to harmful ozone levels. In the winter,
close proximity to the Wasatch Mountains leads
to temperature inversions in which cold air gets
trapped under a layer of warm air, acting like a
lid keeping pollutants from escaping. During the
winter, air pollution sources are transportation
(50%); area sources (e.g. gas stations, auto-body
shops, etc.) (35%); and industry (15%).
The Plan Area experiences these same seasonal
issues with air quality, as well as consistent
impacts due to proximity of both the Salt Lake
City International Airport, and I-215.
I-215 limits connectivity to residential
neighborhoods and services in both Salt Lake City
and North Salt Lake City. With few daily services,
such as grocery stores, within the expanded area,
residents contribute to higher trips and higher
mile traveled, exacerbating air quality issues.
Graphic 1.3 | Regional Air Quality | Source: AirNow.Gov Graphic 1.4 | SLC Air Quality | Source: Scott Winterton Deseret News
Existing Conditions
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 57
Water and Wetlands
The presence of wetlands adjacent to the Jordan River
Delta and at the edge of the Great Salt Lake is the most
pertinent environmental issue in the area. Roughly 75% of
Utah’s wetlands surround the Great Salt Lake, providing
environmental and socioeconomic benefit.
The wetlands surrounding the Northpoint Subarea are part
of an intricate and diverse ecosystem. Wetlands benefit
the environment by acting as sponges to capture, store,
and slowly release water, storm buffers, groundwater and
aquifer recharge, and sediment traps. Wetlands also serve as
critical habitat areas by providing food, shelter, and resting
places. Wetland benefits extend to provide recreational and
agricultural opportunities.
Graphic 1.5 | Wetlands Surrounding Northpoint | Source: National Wetlands Inventory
A portion of these wetlands are
designated playas, categorized by
their dry, hollowed-out form that fill
with water during rainstorms and by
underlying aquifers. The Great Salt
Lake is the largest saltwater lake in the
Northern Hemisphere, meaning as the
playas fill and eventually evaporate,
they leave large salt deposits behind.
Freshwater forested and shrub
wetlands are found adjacent to the
area, and are typically associated with
woody plants such as willows.
The current historic high water
elevation for the Great Salt Lake is
4,211 feet last reached in 1986, and
causing dramatic flooding. As of
November 2021, the Lake’s water
level has dropped to the lowest in
recorded history at 4,190 feet, likely
due to the extreme drought conditions
the state is facing. In response to
the unpredictability of the Lake,
most planning agencies identify the
contour of 4,217 feet, as the limit of
safe development. There are no sites
within the Plan Area that fall below
this elevation. DRAFT
58
Soil Types
The soil types within Northpoint vary and provide
considerations for the types of development that
can be accommodated in the Plan Area. The soil
types dominating the area are fine sandy loam,
silt loam and silty clay loam. Most of these soils
have a water table depth between zero and fifty
inches and are subject to the effects of frost.
These high water table depths affect drainage and
compressibility which impact new development
potential. In addition, the soil types that dominate
the area can cause problems for septic systems
and filter fields, making it harder to maintain water
quality.
Natural Environment
Graphic 1.6 | Recreational and Natural Landmarks Near Northpoint
Graphic 1.6 | Prime Agricultural Soil | Source: National Resource Conservation Service
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 59
Hazards
The greater Salt Lake City area faces natural
hazards that impact rate and location of
development. As climate change continues to
exacerbate extreme weather events, planning
with these common hazards in mind can
help maintain the safety and comfort of the
community.
Clean air and water supply are among the top
concerns of Salt Lake residents. In August
of 2021, Salt Lake City was ranked the worst
air quality of any major city in the world by
IQAir.com, prompting residents to take extra
precautions. The Salt Lake County Health
Department released tips to stay safe during
extreme air conditions such as staying indoors
with windows shut, avoiding exercise, and
wearing masks outdoors.
The area, along with many other parts of the
state, is currently under exceptional drought
conditions, with fire restrictions and irrigation
allotment reductions in place. Salt Lake City
also experiences threats of extreme heat,
wildfire, debris flows, flooding and earthquakes.
Graphic 1.7 | Utah Drought Conditions | Source: National Drought
Mitigation Center at University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 2021.
Summer 2021 Drought Conditions
The City of Salt Lake has proposed land use amendments to prevent large water users from being located within The City that may have a significant impact on The City’s water resources. The new limit for industrial and commercial land uses is 300,000 GPD (based on an annual average) of potable/culinary water. The limit applies to existing and new uses on a temporary basis until January 2022.
DRAFT
60
Wildlife and Habitat
The Great Salt Lake and surrounding wetlands
are a crucial habitat for many species of animals.
With 400,000 acres of wetlands, birds of regional
and national importance are drawn to the area as
a sanctuary for breeding and eating. Every year,
millions of birds from 338 different species stop
here to feed during migrations. Among the most
common species observed in the Plan Area are
the European Starling, Red-winged Blackbird,
Yellow-headed Blackbird, Northern Pintail, and
Canada Goose.
Although the Farmington Bay area is classified
as freshwater, the northern-most regions of the
Great Salt Lake can be composed of nearly 28%
salt. This creates a wide diversity of habitats
for many different plants, invertebrates, reptiles,
amphibians, mammals, birds, and insects such
as the Monarch Butterfly which is now on the
endangered species list.
European
Starling
DOMINANT BIRD TYPES IN
NORTHPOINT
Canada
Goose.
Red-winged
Blackbird
Yellow-headed
Blackbird
Northern
Pintail
DWR Bird Habitat Boundaries
Graphic 1.8 | Dominant Bird Species in Northpoint Graphic 1.9 | Bird Habitat | Source: Department of Wildlife Resources GIS
Data
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 61
Organizations
There are many organizations with interest in the
Plan and surrounding areas, including the Duck
Clubs, Salt Lake City International Airport, and
Friends of the Great Salt Lake. The Friends of Great
Salt Lake is a nonprofit organization founded in
1994 to protect the Great Salt Lake ecosystem
and increase public awareness and appreciation.
The Rudy Duck Club, founded in 1909 and named
after the original land owner Frank Rudy, acquired
land and associated water rights in the early
1900s to preserve the ecosystem for private duck
hunting.
Agriculture
The top producing crops in Salt Lake City,
according to the 2017 Census of Agriculture, are
wheat, hay, vegetables, pumpkins, and sweet corn.
Within the Plan Area, current residents also own
a variety of livestock. The majority of the housing
stock supports the agricultural uses surrounding
them. Within these lots there has been a pattern
of subdividing larger lots into small lots for family
members. There is a rich history of the agricultural
lifestyle within Northpoint that the community
desires to be preserved. According to the State
Soil Conservation Service, the Plan Area contains
prime farmland located north of 2800 North on
the eastern side of 2200 West.
Water Related Land Uses
Graphic 1.10 | Water-Related Land Uses | Source: ESRI Living Atlas
DRAFT
62
Built Environment
Airport
The Salt Lake International Airport, located just
south of the Plan Area, is one of the busiest airports
in North America. The airport is also a major hub
for Delta airlines and provides approximately 370
flights per day from its location. As the airport
inherently produces high noise volumes and air
quality issues, it has a significant impact on the
surrounding areas and determining appropriate
land uses in Northpoint.
The Salt Lake Airport recently adopted a new
Master Planing process, the first since 1998, to
provide guidelines for future airport development
and to optimize existing facilities for future
aviation demand and increase airport capacity.
The resulting strategic vision illustrates locations
for a third parallel runway and Concourse C which
are not anticipated to be built within the next
twenty years.
The City has formally regulated the land uses
surrounding the airport to protect the greater
community and reduce negative impact. In 1971,
zoning ordinances were adopted allowed within
Northpoint and in 1983, the zoning ordinances
were supplemented with regulations that
prohibited incompatible uses like residential
housing.
Development Constraints
Existing development within Northpoint
experience consequences from their proximity to
the airport and overhead flights. Some existing
residences face increased risk for airplane
crashes and high noise levels from the consistent
flights. The Department of Airports recommends
limiting the number of new residences allowed
in Northpoint to reduce harm for the community
in the future. The Federal Housing and Urban
Development Department (HUD) does not provide
any assistance, subsidy or insurance for projects
located in Runway Clear Zones, Clear Zones and
Accident Potential Zones. As a result, this Plan
considers alternative uses within those zones.
The Salt Lake International Airport and Salt Lake
City own several parcels surrounding the airport
that were purchased to preserve as undeveloped.
This, along with noise contours and influence
zones limits development potential in the Plan
Area.
Northpoint lies within Influence Zone A/B
meaning, the aircraft noise from overhead flights
can interfere with daily living activities including
sleep, conversations and listening to media. The
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires
that each airport study the noise impacts and
create a Noise Compatibility Program associated
with alleviating noise issues.
The Salt Lake City Noise Compatibility Program
has implemented measures to increase
compatibility with surrounding land uses
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community
NORTHPOINT
BOUNDARY
SLC Airport-Owned Parcels
Graphic 1.11 | Parcels Owned by the Salt Lake City International
Airport | Source: Assessors Parcel Data
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 63
including maximization of flight times between
7am and 10pm. It has also implemented adjusted
flight routes in pursuit of reduced disruption.
As residential uses should be limited in Northpoint
because of these constraints, there are other uses
and opportunities for development that are more
compatible with the airport.
Economic Contribution
The Salt Lake City International Airport, is a key
driver of the local and regional economy. Through
protecting airport infrastructure and facilities
from adjacent land uses that reduce or eliminate
its ability to function at the highest capacity, the
Salt Lake City International Airport can continue
to act as an asset to the greater community.
SLC Airport Noise Contours SLC Airport Protection Overlays
Graphic 1.12 | SLC Airport Noise Contours | Source: SLC GIS Data Graphic 1.13 | SLC Airport Overlays | Source: SLC GIS Data
DRAFT
64
Land Use
Industrial and Business Uses
Within the Plan Area, there lies existing manufacturing zoning (M-1) that serves as a buffer between
the airport and Interstate 215 (I-215). In July 2016, the City Council changed the zoning of properties
located along 2200 W between 2100N and North Temple Street to Light Manufacturing (M-1) to
implement area master plans and maximize economic development potential.
Light Manufacturing (M-1) allows for light industrial uses that produce little to no impact on neighboring
properties and results in a clean, attractive industrial setting. This use is compatible with the adjacent
airport and is less impacted by the negative aspects of nearby I-215 than residential uses. The M-1
designation allows more types of business than the Business Park (BP) designations. The more
significant differences between the two zoning districts are related to open space and building location
requirements. The BP designation requires 15% open space, while M-1 requires no open space. M-1 also
has reduced setback requirements.
Approximately half of the Plan
Area is designated BP. The intent
of the BP designation is to provide
an attractive environment for
modern offices, light assembly and
warehouse development, and to
create employment and economic
development opportunities in a
campus-like setting.
Graphic 1.14 | SLC and SLCo Zoning | Source: SLC, SLCo, and North Salt Lake GIS Data
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 65
Agricultural and Residential Uses
The Plan Area contains several agricultural
zones under both City and County jurisdiction,
including Salt Lake City’s (SLC) AG-5 and AG-2,
and Salt Lake County’s (SLCo) A-2 zone preserves
agricultural uses on lots no less than two acres
and, similarly, AG-5 provides for agricultural uses
on no less than five acres. The A-2 zone allows for
low-density residential and supporting agriculture
as a conditional use, on a minimum lot size of one
acre.
Zone Minimum
Lot Area
Front
Setback Primary Uses
M-1
(SLC)
10,000
sq.ft.15 ft.Light
Manufacturing
BP
(SLC)
20,000
sq.ft.30 ft.Business/
Office
AG-2
(SLC)2 acres 30 ft.Agriculture/
Single-Family
AG-5
(SLC)5 acres 30 ft.Agriculture/
Single-Family
A-2
(SLCo)1 acre 30 ft.Single-Family
Graphic 1.15 | Residential in the Plan Area
DRAFT
66
Utilities
Broadband
The Plan Area is serviced by a mix of fixed wireless and wireline (cable, dsl and fiber)broadband
internet. Within the census tract that Northpoint occupies, 10.60% of households are without internet
access. The companies serving the area are Centurylink for local exchange, Rocky Mountain Power for
electric utility territory and Dominion Energy for natural gas. The Utah Broadband Plan adopted in
January 2020 set a goal to “Utilize best practices to encourage continued expansion of broadband
deployment and increase speeds for everyone to 25 Mbps or better in communities throughout Utah”.
The Plan Area currently has network speeds of 90.47/28.05 Mbps and its max advertised consumer
download speeds are 10,000.00 Mbps.
Active Building Permits and Recent Development
There are currently a few active building permits within
Northpoint that congregate along the 2200 W roadway
and fall under the M-1 and BP zoning designations.
A new development called Moonlake Farms has an
active engineering permit and is among one of ten
active permits for growing cannabis in Utah. There is
also a new Industrial Building being built just north
of the Sherwin Williams. Along the 2100N roadway,
two new multi-tenant warehouse building have active
permits as well.
A key development proposal currently is the Swaner
Subdivision, a 434-acre master planned development
with about 5 million square feet of industrial on the
C shaped parcel shown to the right currently zoned
BP. This development would likely be cause for
improvements on 2200 West to account for new
increase in traffic.
Another development conversation in this area is
an proposed annexation petition for the land in the
northeast section of the plan area. This proposed
annexation was initiated by the landowners who wish
to annex their land into Salt Lake City for the purpose
of light industrial. A prior annexation conversation
contemplated residential, however, that annexation
was not pursued since Salt Lake City has determined
that new residential would not be supported in the
Plan Area.
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community
Ut
a
h
I
n
l
a
n
d
Po
r
t
A
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
Proposed Swaner
Subdivision
Proposed North
Salt Lake
Annexation
22
0
0
W
2100 N
3200 N
Graphic 1.16 | Active Applications DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 67
Industrial Wastewater
The Salt Lake City Corporation’s pretreatment
program oversees industrial wastewater
discharged into the City’s sanitary sewer system.
Industrial wastewater treatment, to reduce or
eliminate conventional and toxic pollutants, prior
to discharge into to the POTW (publicly owned
treatment works) is required and regulated under
the Clean Water Act.
Salt Lake City is also undergoing redevelopment
of its Water Reclamation Facility. The wastewater
system will address new regulation from the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
Utah’s Department of Water Quality to reduce
pollution and transform aging infrastructures.
The Water Reclamation Center is located about a
mile to the east of Northpoint and is replacing the
old structure, which was 55 years old.
Service Areas
The Salt Lake City Public Utilities service area
covers most of Northpoint with the exception of
a portion to the north, just south of the Jordan
River and a portion on the southern boundary.
The remaining area is considered unincorporated
territory. Though there are few sewer lines to
this area, development is encroaching from the
southeast and slowly extending utilities with it.
Many residential and agricultural properties in
this area rely on septic sewer systems.
Street Lighting
Public Utilities within Salt Lake manages and
maintains more than 15,000 street lights,
including those in Northpoint. The few residences
and commercial customers within the area
support street lighting through a monthly user fee,
included in the bill for drinking water, wastewater,
stormwater and sanitation services.
The initial capital improvement program for street
lighting in 2012 included a metric of converting
the City’s entire inventory to high-energy efficiency
LED lamps by the end of 2021. The continuous
lighting maps do not extend into the Plan Area
likely due to the lack of development in the area
and the irregular Salt Lake City boundary.
Irrigation Canals
There are several irrigation canals running through
Northpoint that serve the greater Salt Lake City
area. The Rudy Drain runs diagonally across the
study area from its connection to the Greater Salt
Lake in the upper northwest quadrant to the lower
southeast quadrant. Running along the western
boundary is the Salt Lake City Canal Sewage. The
southern boundary has a Reclamation ditch just
north of the international airport.
Graphic 1.17 | Utilities in Northpoint | Source: SLC GIS Data
DRAFT
68
Transportation
The eastern edge of the Plan Area runs along I-215, which
acts as the main transportation route for the larger area.
As Northpoint currently has little development beyond a
small portion of residential housing to the northwest and
light industrial to the south, the transportation routes
within the Plan Area consist mainly of gravel roads. 2200
W divides the area into clear sections which suggest
an informal development boundary along the roadway.
Recent development in the area has almost exclusively
been, between the roadway and I-215. Other roads in the
2019 Average Annual Daily Traffic Counts
Plan Area include 3200W, a gravel
road with minimal traffic that serves
as the western boundary of the Plan
Area, 3500N at the northern boundary,
2100N at the southern boundary, and
several gravel and paved residential
and commercial driveways.
The main entries to the Plan Area are
the exit from I-215 to 2100N from the
south, and Center Street/3500N from
the north. With increasing development
pressure in the Plan Area, it will become
increasingly important to make
improvements to these interchanges
and enhancements to 2200 W.
Public Transportation
The public transportation options that
connect the Plan Area are limited. The
454 Green bus line extends to Airport
Station on the south side of Salt Lake
City International Airport but does not
reach the Plan Area. The closest bus
line to the area is the F522 Line running
north/south on 2200 W. This bus line
reaches the southern boundary and its
final stop is near the Boeing warehouse.
This bus line offers access to the light
industrial and commercial businesses.
This accessibility suggests that
increasing the amount of industrial and
commercial centers within the southern
half of Northpoint would be supported
by public transportation.
Route 200 extends along Redwood
Road to the southeast of Northpoint.
However, this adjacent route is not
Graphic 1.18 | Average Annual Daily Trips | Source: UDOT
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 69
accessible within a 15-minute walk of current
homes of businesses within Northpoint.
Bike Accessibility
The major bikeways extending through the Plan
Area are the Jordan River Trail, Parkway Trail,
and a bike lane along 2200 W and 2100N. The
bikeways along 2200 W and 2100N are designated
medium comfort by Bike SLC. The painted bike
lane disappears as the surroundings become
more rural moving northbound through the Plan
Area. These routes do not have high traffic but
bikers must share the roads with vehicles in the
same lanes.
Economic Impact of Transportation
Limited access to public transportation and the
barrier of I-215 require households in the Plan Area
to rely on personal vehicles or rideshare options
to commute to and from work, errands, and
schools. The Center for Neighborhood Technology
recommends a household spend no more than
15% of their annual income on transportation.
For a regional-typical household in this area, that
means no more than $9,329. Households in this
census block spend an average of $16,167- 175%
higher than this benchmark. This is also higher
than the Salt Lake City average of $13,211.
Graphic 1.19 | Annual Driving Costs per Household | Source: Center for
Neighborhood Technology
Graphic 1.20 | Utah Transit Authority Bus
DRAFT
70
Less ResidentsM ore Residents
70
Northpoint Community
Demographics
Over the last decade, Salt Lake City has grown
by roughly 14,000 new residents. Most of this
growth has been concentrated in downtown Salt
Lake City, Central City, and Sugarhouse, each of
which grew by over 2,000 residents between 2010
and 2020. Northpoint falls within the Westpointe
Community Council area, which saw a population
decrease (-1.6%) over the last decade.
Approximately 140 people live within the Plan Area
in roughly 60 households. City Council District 1,
which encompasses the Plan Area boasts the
largest share of Hispanic or Latino Population
(48%) of all Council Districts.
Economy
105 people are employed within the Plan Area
but live elsewhere, and 74 Northpoint residents
commute out of the area for work. No residents
both live and work within the Plan Area.
Of the jobs within the Plan Area boundary,
Wholesale Trade (30% of the jobs) and
Transportation and Warehousing (22%) are the
most common industries. In 2018, about 54% of
those jobs within the Plan Area boundary provided
less than $40,000 per year in salary, roughly 63%
of the median household income for overall Salt
Lake City residents at $63,971.
105 People Commute
IN for work
74 People Commute
OUT for work
0 People Live and
Work in the Area
Population by TAZ
Graphic 1.21 | Commuting Patterns and Population | Source: U.S. Census 2019
Less Residents More Residents
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 71
Within and immediately outside of the Plan
Area, major employers include the Salt Lake City
International Airport, Amazon, and the Salt Lake
Mosquito Abatement Center.
Those who live in the Plan Area have a higher
median household income than the City as
a whole at $75,791 and tend to work in the
service industry, transportation and utilities, or
manufacturing.
Housing
There are about 60 homes within the Plan Area
and 1,487 housing units in the associated census
tract. Housing is concentrated east of 2200 W due
to environmental constraints and airport impacts.
Housing within the Plan Area is comprised entirely
single-family housing units, some of which are
agricultural properties.
The Plan Area has a high rate of owner-occupied
units at 85.4% and an average home value of
$438,000. This is higher than the median price for
the zip code as a whole at $346,900. The zip code
saw a 24% increase in home prices between 2020
and 2021.
The Center for Neighborhood Technology
estimates that households within the Plan Area
are spending on average, 47% of their income on
housing and transportation costs every month.
As Salt Lake County grows and expands west,
combining housing and transportation costs
into one number offers an expanded view of
affordability by showing the impacts of a longer
daily commute on the affordability of a community.
The Center for Neighborhood Technology sets a
housing and transportation spending benchmark
of no more than 45% of a household’s income,
rather than using the traditional rule of no more
than 30% on housing alone.
Funding the Future
Salt Lake City Council approved a 0.5% sales tax
increase in May 2018. This increase will typically
generate about $34 million a year in ongoing
funding and is the first part of a funding strategy
to address street conditions, affordable housing,
public transit, and neighborhood safety. The Plan
Area could benefit from funding for an affordable
housing program and increased neighborhood
safety.
47%
Housing: 23%
Transportation:
24%
Graphic 1.22 | Housing and Transportation Costs as Percent of Income Per Household | Source: Center for Neighborhood Technology
DRAFT
72
Community Amenities
The Plan Area is bordered by the Jordan River
connecting Utah Lake to the Great Salt Lake,
and passing through three counties. Many
sections of the Jordan River have access trails
running parallel to the river and connect nearby
parks. Although the Plan Area lies adjacent
to the River, the formal trail stops to the to the
east of I-215. Directly east of the Plan Area are
the Regional Athletic Complex, Jordan River
OHV State Recreation Area, Westpointe Park,
Northstar Elementary School, and Northwest
Middle School. Only one crossing of I-215 allows
for access to these areas. As shown below, I-215
severely limits access to community resources
like schools, religious organizations, recreation,
and other gathering areas.
JORDAN RIVER OHV
STATE RECREATION AREA
JORDA
N RIVER
CENTER STREET TRAILHEAD
COLISEUM FITNESS
SPECTRUM ACADEMY
FOXBORO
ELEMENTARY
NORTHWEST MIDDLE SCHOOL
NORTHSTAR
ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
ROSEWOOD PARK
GUADALUPE SCHOOL
SALT LAKE CENTER FOR SCIENCE EDUCATION
REGIONAL ATHLETIC COMPLEX
UNITY BAPTIST CHURCHWESTPOINTE
PARK
Graphic 1.23 | Amenities near the Plan Area
I
2
1
5
B
A
R
R
I
E
R
DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 73
Graphic 1.24 | Trailhead map of the Jordan River
DRAFT
APPENDIX B
PUBLIC INPUT
Appendix B: Public Input
The public input process included various opportunities for engagement. One-on-one
interviews with residents, developers, environmental groups, and city and county staff were
conducted throughout the summer of 2021. Over 30 people attended a public open house in
the spring of 2022, and two public questionnaires and a property owner-specific
questionnaire were distributed over the course of the Northpoint Small Area project.
The following is a record of the engagement and materials from the open house and survey
results.
Open House and Questionnaire Comments
Report for Northpoint Property
Owner Questionnaire
Completion Rate:85.7%
Complete 18
Partial 3
Totals: 21
Response Counts
1. What is your relationship with the Northpoint area? (select all that
apply)
Percent
I own property here I live here I own a business here I work here
0
20
40
60
80
100
Value Percent Responses
I own property here 100.0%17
I live here 70.6%12
I own a business here 17.6%3
I work here 11.8%2
2. In the Northpoint area how important is the conservation of habitat
and ecosystems to you?
77% Highly Important77% Highly Important
6% Somewhat Important6% Somewhat Important
12% Neutral12% Neutral
6% Somewhat Not Important6% Somewhat Not Important
Value Percent Responses
Highly Important 76.5%13
Somewhat Important 5.9%1
Neutral 11.8%2
Somewhat Not Important 5.9%1
Totals: 17
3. In the Northpoint area how important is commercial and residential
development to you?
41% Highly Important41% Highly Important
6% Somewhat Important6% Somewhat Important18% Somewhat Not Important18% Somewhat Not Important
35% Highly Not Important35% Highly Not Important
Value Percent Responses
Highly Important 41.2%7
Somewhat Important 5.9%1
Somewhat Not Important 17.6%3
Highly Not Important 35.3%6
Totals: 17
4. Would you support conservation methods and tools that could
provide financial compensation to landowners for the preservation of
natural lands and habitats instead of development?
59% Highly Support59% Highly Support
6% Somewhat Support6% Somewhat Support
24% Neutral24% Neutral
12% Highly Not Support12% Highly Not Support
Value Percent Responses
Highly Support 58.8%10
Somewhat Support 5.9%1
Neutral 23.5%4
Highly Not Support 11.8%2
Totals: 17
5. Would you support the continuation of existing land uses such as
grazing, agriculture, habitat conservation, rural residential, and
wildlife?
77% Highly Support77% Highly Support
6% Somewhat Support6% Somewhat Support
12% Neutral12% Neutral
6% Highly Not Support6% Highly Not Support
Value Percent Responses
Highly Support 76.5%13
Somewhat Support 5.9%1
Neutral 11.8%2
Highly Not Support 5.9%1
Totals: 17
ResponseID Response
4 No.
7 I am highly against any further building on the agricultural land out here.
8 The area is too close to the airport not to take advantage of this proximity to
lessen the burden on existing infrastructure and lessen pollution. This can
be done preserving habitat closer to the Great Salt Lake.
10 We need clean air and less big heavy trucks in this tiny road. We can't handle
it. We pay our taxes just like everyone eon the east side we deserve more
from the city.
13 Just because land in the area has always been zoned Business Park, it does
not mean it should stay that way. I don't see how it was ever zoned BP or
anything other than conservation when it is directly next to ecosystems that
will be negatively impacted by development. I appreciate you asking for our
opinions and for keeping the survey short, but I am somewhat disappointed
in this survey as it feels lacking. It's not ideal to ask double barreled
questions in surveys if you want honest answers. For example, my answer to
supporting residential development is different than my answer to
commercial development, but this survey can't reflect that.
14 I operate a recording studio off of 2200w and construction of anything will
shut me down during construction and possibly forever.
15 Construction on 2200w is dangerous without some sort of alternate
construction road in place before construction begins.
16 The area of 2200 west to 3200 west and 2100 north to 3300 north is a bird
and wildlife refuge and one of the last open spaces in SL county. It needs to
be preserved and not just overdeveloped like the rest of the valley is
becoming. Thank you for your time. Robert Taylor
17 It would be the advantage of the area and ecology to think about NOT
developing every lat inch of open space. This is a sensitive area. There is a
high saturation of wildlife, migration and nesting areas here. It's a wetland.
In a meet the committee was surprised to hear about the existence of
wildlife. We see and experience it everyday. The delineation of preexisting
residential areas should be recognized. This area was settled by ranchers
and farmers who understood the doom of development. This area is a
treasure and should be left alone OR very thoughtfully and carefully
developed. The rate with which it is occurring now is always met with
contempt and disagreement. There is another way and we should make a
plan of best outcomes.
6. Is there anything you'd like to add?
20 I think the area can do both commercial and have some open space.. This
area is not for residential? My opinion. I have seen residential next to
airports and it's not nice at all..
21 My family has been here for over 100 years. A lot of the older homes were
built by family. Now with the restrictions of building and septic use. You can't
let your children build a house on a 1/4 acre lot. I have had to have children
move to wood cross to have there own home. The current restrictions render
the ground useless for building anything. Yet keeping some space still for AG
use. The bigger lots have all ready been sold to developers, the people left
will be left with your open space weed patch and no money to move any
where.
ResponseID Response
7. Are you interested in recieving further information about this project
and ways to get involved?
78% Yes please78% Yes please
22% No, thank you22% No, thank you
Value Percent Responses
Yes please 77.8%14
No, thank you 22.2%4
Totals: 18
Report for Northpoint Small Area
Plan Questionnaire
Completion Rate:54.7%
Complete 41
Partial 34
Totals: 75
Response Counts
1. What is your affiliation with the Northpoint area?
Percent
I am a resident I work in the
area
I own property I am interested
in owning
property
I am a business
owner
I visit the area Other - Write In
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Value Percent Responses
I am a resident 29.7%19
I work in the area 17.2%11
I own property 31.3%20
I am interested in owning property 18.8%12
I am a business owner 9.4%6
I visit the area 25.0%16
Other - Write In 14.1%9
2. What is your level of support for special standards and design
guidelines as a regulatory conservation tool?
Percent
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
3. What is your level of support for requiring sensitive landscape
studies as a regulatory conservation tool?
Percent
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
10
20
30
40
4. What is your level of support for development code updates as a
regulatory conservation tool?
Percent
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
5. What is your level of support for the clustering of lots and open
space as a regulatory conservation tool?
Percent
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
6. What is your level of support for conservation easements as an
incentive-based conservation tool?
Percent
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
7. What is your level of support for purchase of development rights
(PDR) as an incentive-based conservation tool?
Percent
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
8. What is your level of support for transfer of development rights as an
incentive-based conservation tool?
Percent
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
9. What is your level of support for preferred development sites as an
incentive-based conservation tool?
Percent
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
10
20
30
40
10. What is your level of support for lease agreements as a land
acquisition conservation tool?
Percent
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
10
20
30
40
50
11. What is your level of support for mutual covenants as a land
acquisition conservation tool?
Percent
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
10
20
30
40
50
12. What is your level of support for land banking as a land
acquisition conservation tool?
Percent
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
10
20
30
40
13. What is your level of support for land exchange as a land
acquisition conservation tool?
Percent
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
14. What open space interaction elements would you like to see in the
Northpoint Area? (select all that apply)
22% amenitizedtrailheads2.jpg22% amenitizedtrailheads2.jpg
49% Multi-Purpose Natural Trails49% Multi-Purpose Natural Trails
59% Fishing Access Along the
River
59% Fishing Access Along the
River
37% Wildlife Viewing Areas37% Wildlife Viewing Areas
49% Trails Along Natural
Resources
49% Trails Along Natural
Resources
22% Interpretive/Education Center22% Interpretive/Education Center
27% Interpretive/Educational
Signage
27% Interpretive/Educational
Signage
29% Boardwalks29% Boardwalks
Value Percent Responses
amenitizedtrailheads2.jpg 22.0%9
Multi-Purpose Natural Trails 48.8%20
Fishing Access Along the River 58.5%24
Wildlife Viewing Areas 36.6%15
Trails Along Natural Resources 48.8%20
Interpretive/Education Center 22.0%9
Interpretive/Educational Signage 26.8%11
Boardwalks 29.3%12
ResponseID Response
My emphasis on maintaining open-space natural area rather than developing
a park-like area.
None
Great ideas for the community.
This is such a treasure that is Salt Lake City. The land needs to be preserved
for future generations, plus people are not having children there may not be
the need for more development such as empty commercial buildings. Once
you destroy land for development, you cant reverse the damage.
All of the above amenities are wonderful. However, who maintains them and
fronts the development costs? The land being discussed does not naturally
produce any of the above items pictured. We are old salt flats that grow
things with a lot of encouragement. We have been trying to improve the
ground for 50 years and have done a lot of good. However, one year of not
planting and working hard takes away 50 years of work. The farms out here
would not be successful if all of the farmers did not have other larger farms
somewhere else or other businesses that help support the farm. I support
whatever developments come to this area that give the land owners the best
benefits of their property. I know everyone wants what improves their
community but don't forget the land owners and the work they have done for
lifetimes and they need their rights reserved as well.
This ground work for homes and businesses family like the Rudy's
.Drechsel's.Swaner's Hinkley's family farmed this ground but it's no longer
feasible for making a living and the ground is there retirement you want to
take it from them shame on you
None - not appropriate in industrial areas.
none - not appropriate in industrial areas
None. Not applicable for an industrial area.
Restrooms. Solar panels on roof. Art. Shade
none, not appropriate for industrial area
none, not appropriate for industrial area
none not appropriate on my land no water or for industrial area
Most of these are not appropriate for an industrial area.
15. What open space interaction elements would you like to see in the
Northpoint Area? (select all that apply) - comments
None, not appropriate for industrial area
none-not appropriate for industrial area
ResponseID Response
16. When imagining the future of the Northpoint area, how do you want
to see 2200 WEST improved or enhanced? Which do you think may be
most appropriate to the Northpoint area? (select all that apply)
15% Painted Bike Lane15% Painted Bike Lane
12% Buffered Bike Lane12% Buffered Bike Lane
17% Roundabout with Integrated
Trail Alignments
17% Roundabout with Integrated
Trail Alignments
22% Street with Flat Drain Pan
Edge
22% Street with Flat Drain Pan
Edge
49% Street with Porous Surface
Edge
49% Street with Porous Surface
Edge
29% Parkways Planted with Native
and Low-Water Species
29% Parkways Planted with Native
and Low-Water Species
5% Crosswalks with Striping and
Planters
5% Crosswalks with Striping and
Planters
20% Typical Curb and Gutter
Street
20% Typical Curb and Gutter
Street
Value Percent Responses
Painted Bike Lane 14.6%6
Buffered Bike Lane 12.2%5
Roundabout with Integrated Trail Alignments 17.1%7
Street with Flat Drain Pan Edge 22.0%9
Street with Porous Surface Edge 48.8%20
Parkways Planted with Native and Low-Water Species 29.3%12
Crosswalks with Striping and Planters 4.9%2
Typical Curb and Gutter Street 19.5%8
ResponseID Response
Most of these options do not seem appropriate for 2200 West. What ever the
design needs to implemented consistently rather than in piecemeal blocks.
Such approach expensive and dangerous.
We really don't need curb and gutter or sidewalks unless this area gets over
developments by commercial buildings then we will need more for the
residents.
I do not think traditional curb and gutter are needed for the area, but some
sort of drainage is needed. It is a popular biking path that needs more safety
for cyclists.
17. When imagining the future of the Northpoint area, how do you want
to see 2200 WEST improved or enhanced? Which do you think may be
most appropriate to the Northpoint area? (select all that apply) -
comments
18. What design elements are appropriate for new business and
industrial development in the Northpoint area?
22% Integration of Community
Solar or Solar Gardens
22% Integration of Community
Solar or Solar Gardens
24% LID/LEED Elements (i.e.
Green Roofs)
24% LID/LEED Elements (i.e.
Green Roofs)
51% Wildlife-Friendly Lighting51% Wildlife-Friendly Lighting
27% Two-Story Live/Work
Industrial Residential
27% Two-Story Live/Work
Industrial Residential
29% Increased habitat/Wildlife
Buffers
29% Increased habitat/Wildlife
Buffers76% Integrated Xeriscape and
Native Landscaping
76% Integrated Xeriscape and
Native Landscaping
34% Wildlife-Friendly Fencing34% Wildlife-Friendly Fencing
29% Noise Mitigation Design
Elements (e.g. textured noise
walls)
29% Noise Mitigation Design
Elements (e.g. textured noise
walls)
22% Thematic Sitting Areas
Blended with Landscape
22% Thematic Sitting Areas
Blended with Landscape
24% Natural Building Materials24% Natural Building Materials
Value Percent Responses
Integration of Community Solar or Solar Gardens 22.0%9
LID/LEED Elements (i.e. Green Roofs)24.4%10
Wildlife-Friendly Lighting 51.2%21
Two-Story Live/Work Industrial Residential 26.8%11
Increased habitat/Wildlife Buffers 29.3%12
Integrated Xeriscape and Native Landscaping 75.6%31
Wildlife-Friendly Fencing 34.1%14
Noise Mitigation Design Elements (e.g. textured noise walls)29.3%12
Thematic Sitting Areas Blended with Landscape 22.0%9
Natural Building Materials 24.4%10
ResponseID Response
Empyhasis on keeping natural habitat and implementing "green" approaches
Wildlife and nature are friendly.
dense and limited cars/roads
One of the major safety issues would be for the migratory birds, because this
area is wetlands that is being destroyed. You would have to put the lights
and windows in consideration.
Again, all very nice, all of the ideas that have been presented over the last
several years get voted down. It seems impossible to present something
that people will get on board with. I want the land owners to be able to
develop their properties with the highest value and regular farming is just
not a viable option economically.
Walkable design. Sustainable design. No grass.
19. What design elements are appropriate for new business and
industrial development in the Northpoint area? - comments
ResponseID Response
5 Place a moratorium on development until the plan is in place.
6 The construction of 2800W to pull traffic off of 2200W
7 3200 West should remain unpaved. There should be a buffer/natural area
along the eastern side of 3200 West.
10 Affordable Housing. Salt Lake City is missing a big opportunity to fill the gap
in affordable housing by using the acreage in this area. We are in a housing
crisis, there is almost no land left to build in Salt Lake, this is a HUGE
opportunity that Salt Lake could miss to build more units that are
desperately needed. This is not the time for us to complain about open
space. Look at the Governor's initiatives and play your part. The mayor and
city council of Salt Lake are all about helping the homeless, but if we don't
build more housing units the homeless population will only rise. I think the
direction that it appears we are heading with this questionnaire needs to be
reconsidered to include more, dense residential units for Salt Lake City and
Salt Lake County
12 Need to address annexation issues and multi-jurisdictional service
coordination issues NEED TO SAVE CROSS E RANCH possibly by having SL
County purchase property with funding from a variety of institutional
entities including USU, LDS Church, SLCity, Davis County, NSLCity, and Open
Lands foundationsl Need 6 mo. moratorium on new development until
Northpoint Small Area Plan is completed.
13 Plan is a waste of tax payer dollars. The market will decide the highest and
best use of land in the area.
16 Ive researched what has been going on out here over the last few years, with
some property owners exploring being annexed into North Salt Lake because
of the regulation barriers that Salt Lake City has shown. Find compromise
with the landowners or SLC may lose some of this unincorporated land and
development opportunity in this area.
19 This is an industrial area and business park zoning already exists and makes
sense for this project. There are already protections in place of wetlands and
habitats of threatened and endangered species. 2200W is already master
planned with a 90' ROW road section. Developers who develop with frontage
along 2200W are already required to improve and widen the sections of 2200
W that abut their property. Many of the single family home-owners in this
area are already under contract to sell their property to business park
developers. There is no reason to plan this area with the preservation of
existing single family homes as a goal.
20. What else should the Northpoint Small Area Plan address?
22 The valley and particularly the westside is already saturated with air quality
issues. Any commercial development should exclude air pollution inputs.
Additionally, water supply and quality are major issues for the state and
communities which callks for restrictions on water use and waste.
24 Update the community.
26 density and walkability is best for wildlife
28 Wetlands and the fact that they are endangered. There is becoming less
space for wildlife. USDA has programs for Urban Agriculture.
31 Please don't forget about the residents! This survey was focused on business
development and none of the questions focused on also preserving the
residential zoning in the area. We are already being bullied by developers to
sell our land so they can rezone for business. PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW
REZONING FOR BUSINESSES IN THE VERY SMALL REMAINING RESIDENTIAL
ZONED AREAS. There are plenty of open spaces for developers to build that
don't require forcing us out of our homes.
33 Setbacks and landscape areas along major roads.
34 Three points: 1. Leave 3200 West unimproved. 2. Restrictions on zoning
changes until master plan is complete 3. Set aside buffer/open space lands
clustered east of 3200 West.
37 The small area plan needs to think about both sides. There are a lot of
neighbors talking about conservation of their lifestyle but I'm pretty sure
none of them is making their living from farming. I love this area more than
the average person but, I also know the realities of farming and maintaining
a farm and or open space. The county could maintain or develop some trails
and require certain landscaping. I know that those kinds of requirements
exist in all developments. I prefer they allow the land owners the right to
sell/develop their properties. There are many options for good development
in this area. Residents (37ish houses) along 2200 west have been against a
business park development, industrial, and residential. They want it to
remain the same as always. However, that cannot happen nor should it.
39 The homeowner and people that own businesses out there
48 Zoning of specific areas to BP or M1
52 Designate this land as light industrial in the future land use map.
54 Designate this land as light industrial in the future land use map.
ResponseID Response
58 This area should be light manufacturing/industrial. With the 435 acres of BP,
this whole area should follow suit. More tax basis for city, great area for
business, less water usage than farmers, etc.
59 Water use.
60 Designate this land as light industrial in the future land use map
61 Designate this land as light industrial in the future land use map
63 Designate this land as light industrial in the future land use map
64 Designate this land as Business Park and/or Light Industrial
67 With the business park areas that have been approved, it makes the most
sense for SLC to default to Business Park zoning for this North Point area.
70 Designate this land as light industrial in the future land use nap
71 Designate this land as light
75 Do we have the water to build more? How will building in this area further
impact the Great Salt Lake? Very concerned about maintaining open space
and not further taxing our diminishing water systems.
ResponseID Response
21. Would you like to stay involved with this planning process? Please
leave your email below!
APPENDIX C
CONSTRAINTS
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community
Legend
NorthPoint_Boundary
-9 to -8
-7 to -6
-5
-4 to -3
-2
-1
0
1 to 2
3 to 4
5 to 7 ¯
Northpoint Opportunity Areas
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community
Legend
-10
-9
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
NorthPoint_Boundary ¯
Northpoint Constraint Areas
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community
Wetlands (-3)Airport Owned (-3)Easements (-2)
Airport Influence Zones (-2, -1)Prime Ag Soil (-1)
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community
Noise Contours (-1)
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community
Legend
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
NorthPoint_Boundary ¯
Northpoint Opportunity Areas
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community
Proximity to Services (+3)Underutilized (+2)Vacant (+1)
Large Parcels (+1)Access to Transportation (+1)
APPENDIX D
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
1
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND FUNDING OPTIONS
Northpoint represents an opportunity for Salt Lake City to encourage economic development that is
compatible with the unique natural and built environment of the area, including proximity to the Salt Lake
City International Airport. This area is best suited for business park and industrial development yet is
hampered by the lack of significant infrastructure including transportation options and high-quality fiber
broadband to the area. To realize its potential, the area requires substantial infrastructure improvements.
Funding options for these improvements are discussed in this section of the report.
It is a challenging time to fund infrastructure as construction costs are rising rapidly, along with interest
rates. Infrastructure is generally needed before development can occur, which means that revenues
generated by the project are not available for funding at the time they are most needed. Rather, other
funding means must be identified, with revenue streams generated from development used later as a
payback mechanism.
Economic development is a key component of generating new revenue streams and is addressed in this
report, along with the potential funding mechanisms that such development could enable.
MARKET ANALYSIS
Northpoint is suitable for industrial and agricultural use, with limited residential. The area is proximate to
the Salt Lake City International Airport and, as such, experiences high noise levels that make residential
development difficult.
The industrial market is strong in Salt Lake County, with a vacancy rate of only 2.2 percent and rising lease
rates which have increased from an average (NNN) rate of $0.53 in 4th quarter 2020 to $0.63 in 4th quarter
2021. Total Salt Lake County inventory approximates 135 million square feet, with 9 million square feet of
space under construction. In the northwest quadrant of Salt Lake County, the vacancy rate is 2.65 percent,
with year-to-date (YTD) absorption of 7.5 million square feet and an average asking rate of $0.60 (NNN).1
Based on vacant acreage in the Northpoint area that the Salt Lake County Assessor’s Office currently
classifies as industrial, the area could absorb an additional 650,000 to 1,000,000 square feet of industrial
space. This appears reasonable given current absorption patterns and the shortage of industrial space in
the market. The biggest obstacles to industrial development appear to be supply chain shortages, rising
construction costs and rapidly escalating interest rates.
1 Source: Colliers, Salt Lake County Industrial Market Report 4Q 2021.
2
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
COMBINED COMPONENTS FOR FUNDING OPTIONS
The available tools and issuing entities discussed in this report may be combined in a variety of viable
options to arrive at the desired funding level for the Northpoint area. Possible funding mechanisms include
the following, each of which is discussed in more detail in following sections.
Tax Increment Areas
o Community Reinvestment Areas (CRAs)
o Transportation Reinvestment Zones (TRZs)
o Tax Increment Bonds
Public Infrastructure Districts (PIDs)
Special Assessment Areas (SAAs)
Impact Fees
Municipal Energy Tax
TAX INCREMENT AREAS
Through the creation of a tax increment area, tax revenues generated within the designated project area
are split into two components:
(i)Base Revenues – The amount available before the tax increment area is established. Base
revenues are shared among a mix of local governments that have the power to assess taxes
such as schools, cities, counties, and special districts; and
(ii)Incremental Revenues – These are tax revenues in excess of the base revenues that are
generated by new growth in the project area. If a project area is created, the incremental tax
revenues can flow to the project area for a period of time to encourage economic
development.
Some states, including Utah, allow incremental local sales tax revenues, as well as property taxes, to flow to
a project area for a period of time. By giving exclusive use of incremental revenues to the project area, the
creation of a successful tax increment area generates a new revenue stream that can be used to pay for
projects, provide incentives to developers, or collateralize tax increment bonds.
The most common uses of tax increment have been for infrastructure such as roads, utilities,
telecommunications, electrical upgrades and burying power lines, and parking structures. Tax increment
has also been used for demolition, tenant improvements, land acquisitions, environmental cleanup, trails,
lighting, signage, playgrounds, incentives to developers, economic development activities and housing.
Utah currently allows for the enactment of three types of tax increment areas:
Community Reinvestment Areas (CRAs)
Transportation Reinvestment Zones (TRZs)
Housing & Transit Reinvestment Zones (HTRZs)
3
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
Of these three types of tax increment areas, CRAs and TRZs could be used as financing tools for the
Northpoint area. HTRZs rely on density of housing and this type of development is not suitable for
Northpoint.
COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AREAS (CRAS)
In Utah, tax increment areas have been known by a wide variety of names over time – RDAs, URAs, EDAs,
CDAs, and now as CRAs or Community Reinvestment Areas. As of 2016, the Legislature combined all types
of project areas—urban renewal, economic development, and community development into a new single
“Community Reinvestment Project Area” (CRA). Existing project areas will be allowed to continue, but all
new project areas will be known as CRAs.
The CRA Budget may either be approved by a Taxing Entity Committee (TEC) or through Interlocal
Agreement with taxing entities, except where the Agency chooses to conduct a blight study to determine
the existence of blight and to utilize limited eminent domain powers, which requires the approval of the
TEC of both blight and the budget.
If there is a finding of blight, 20 percent of the tax increment must be set aside for affordable housing. For
all other projects, 10 percent of the tax increment is required to be set aside for affordable housing, if the
annual increment is over $100,000. However, housing funds may be spent for affordable housing statewide
and are not limited to being spent within a project area. Noticing and hearing requirements apply with the
CRA designation.
After the tax increment collection period has expired, the tax increment dollars that previously flowed to
the CRA will flow to the taxing entities that levy the property taxes within the project area. In most cases,
taxing entities receive more property tax revenues annually following expiration of the tax increment
collection period than before, as property values are likely to have increased significantly through the
redevelopment process.
TABLE 1: COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AREAS – ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
Advantages
Community Reinvestment Areas
Disadvantages
Community Reinvestment Areas
Creates a new revenue stream.Requires cooperation of other taxing entities.
Relatively easy to create.10% of revenues must be directed to affordable
housing.
Flexible uses of funds.Revenues may take years to build up as development
occurs over time.
The Northpoint area contains roughly 1,323 acres and five tax districts. All of the tax districts are within Salt
Lake City, with the exception of Tax District ACT that is found within unincorporated Salt Lake County.
4
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
TABLE 2: NORTH POINT EXISTING MARKET VALUES AND ACREAGE
Property Values # of Parcels Total Market Value Residential Market Value Acres
Tax District 13 63 $74,752,600 $30,700,900 666.83
Tax District 13 Q 3 $7,927,300 17.37
Tax District 13 I 3 $51,954,200 27.26
Tax District 13 R 14 $21,076,200 $1,529,600 27.01
Tax District ACT 47 $27,957,700 $12,251,900 584.37
TOTAL 130 $183,668,000 $44,482,400 1,322.84
Although there are five separate tax districts, districts 13 and 13Q include the same taxing entities; districts
13I and 13R also have the same taxing entities. The taxing entities and their tax rates are as follows:
TABLE 3: TAX DISTRICTS AND TAXING ENTITIES
Tax Rate
Tax District 13 and 13Q
Figure 1: Northpoint Tax Districts
5
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
Tax Rate
Salt Lake County 0.001777
Multi-County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000012
County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000196
Salt Lake City School District 0.004809
Salt Lake City 0.003424
Salt Lake City Library 0.000652
Metropolitan Water District Salt Lake 0.000253
Salt Lake City Mosquito Abatement 0.000115
Central Utah Water Conservancy District 0.0004
TOTAL 0.011638
Tax District 13I and 13R
Salt Lake County 0.001777
Multi-County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000012
County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000196
Granite School District 0.007105
Salt Lake City 0.003424
Salt Lake City Library 0.000652
Metropolitan Water District Salt Lake 0.000253
Salt Lake City Mosquito Abatement 0.000115
Central Utah Water Conservancy District 0.0004
TOTAL 0.013934
Tax District - Unincorporated
Salt Lake County 0.001777
Multi-County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000012
County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000196
Granite School District 0.007105
Central Utah Water Conservancy District 0.0004
Salt Lake County Municipal-Type Services 0.000051
Unified Fire Service Area 0.001594
Salt Lake Valley Law Enforcement Service Area 0.001973
Salt Lake County Library 0.000474
TOTAL 0.013582
The market value of the property is much higher than the taxable value in the area for several reasons.
First, primary residential development is taxed at 55 percent of market value. Agricultural property is in
greenbelt status and taxed at extremely low rates, and public properties are tax exempt. Therefore, while
the market value is nearly $184 million, taxable value is estimated at roughly $67.9 million.
6
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
TABLE 4: ESTIMATED NORTHPOINT TAXABLE VALUE
Estimated Taxable Value
Tax Districts 13 and 13Q $37,500,000
Tax Districts 13 I and 13 R $20,400,000
Tax District ACT $10,000,000
Total Taxable Value $67,900,000
Taxable value will increase as development occurs in Northpoint. Of the 1,323 acres in Northpoint,
approximately 437 acres are either vacant or held in agricultural use.
TABLE 5: VACANT ACRES
Vacant Acres Tax Districts 13 and
13Q
Tax Districts 13I and
13R Tax District ACT Total
Residential 8.34 19.81 28.15
Industrial 17.40 14.19 42.56 74.15
Agricultural 111.68 223.04 334.72
TOTAL Acres 137.42 14.19 285.41 437.01
For purposes of estimating future tax revenues, this study assumes that the residential and industrial
vacant acres are developed as residential and industrial respectively and makes no assumptions about
future development of the agricultural property.
TABLE 6: PROJECTIONS OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
Amount
Residential Development
Undeveloped acres 28.15
Units per Acre 2
Units developed 56
Average market value per unit $600,000
Average taxable value per unit $330,000
Total residential taxable value $18,480,000
Industrial Development
Undeveloped acres 74.15
Floor area ratio 0.2*
Taxable value per sf $200
Estimated taxable value $129,193,733
*If the floor area ratio (FAR) can be increased to 0.3, then the estimated total taxable value would increase to
nearly $194 million
For purposes of analysis, this report assumes that the majority of the development takes place in the
unincorporated County, as it has the largest amount of vacant acres. The table below shows projections of
roughly $2 million per year in additional property tax revenues from this area.
7
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
TABLE 7: PROJECTIONS OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
Tax Rates - ACT Incremental Revenues Generated
Salt Lake County 0.001777 $262,416
Multi-County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000012 $1,772
County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000196 $28,944
Granite School District 0.007105 $1,049,222
Central Utah Water Conservancy District 0.0004 $59,069
Salt Lake County Municipal-Type Services 0.000051 $7,531
Unified Fire Service Area 0.001594 $235,392
Salt Lake Valley Law Enforcement Service Area 0.001973 $291,360
Salt Lake County Library 0.000474 $69,997
TOTAL 0.013582 $2,005,705*
*If the industrial development assumptions are increased to a FAR of 0.3, rather than 0.2, then annual incremental
property tax revenues generated increase to nearly $2.9 million annually.
A portion of these revenues could be allocated to a CRA for a period of time in order to pay for needed
improvements and infrastructure in the area.
TRANSPORTATION REINVESTMENT ZONE (TRZ)
A TRZ is one type of area that can be formed where tax increment can be used to accelerate development
within the defined project area. According to Utah Code §11-13-103(22), “Transportation Reinvestment
Zone” means an area created by two or more public agencies by interlocal agreement to capture increased
property or sales tax revenue generated by a transportation infrastructure project. TRZs are ideal for
projects such as Frontrunner, light rail, or major arterials that span multiple jurisdictions.
Any two or more public agencies may enter into an agreement to create a transportation reinvestment
zone but one of these entities must have land use authority over the TRZ area – in other words, Salt Lake
City must be a partner in this endeavor.
8
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
A TRZ is much like a Community Reinvestment Area (CRA) in that a portion of tax increment is pledged to
the project for a specified period of time. The agreement between the two or more public entities must
include the following, as specified in Utah Code §11-13-227(2):
Define the transportation need and proposed improvement
Define the boundaries of the zone
Establish terms for sharing sales tax revenue among the members of the agreement, if sales tax is
to be included
Establish a base year to calculate the increase of property tax revenue within the zone
Establish terms for sharing any increase in property tax revenue within the zone
Hold a public hearing regarding the details of the TRZ
Property tax revenues that are shared between members of the agreement are required to be incremental
(Utah Code §11-13-227(2)(e). In order to identify incremental revenues, a “base year” needs to be
established. The law clearly allows for the sharing of both sales tax and property tax revenue among the
members of the agreement.
There are advantages to governance with TRZs, as compared to CRAs, for projects that span multiple
jurisdictions. In fact, there are only a few redevelopment areas in Utah that currently overlap multiple
communities. While such are allowed by law, governance can be tricky. For example, in a CRA spanning two
cities, each city would have its own redevelopment agency. Who then governs the project area? Joint RDA
board meetings can be held, each agency board can meet separately, or there can be a MOU designating
one of the RDA boards as the lead agency. Experience dictates that concerns often arise when more tax
increment is generated in one jurisdiction of the project area than in another. There are often concerns
about equity in spending funds in the same jurisdiction from which they come. Each redevelopment agency
involved has to submit its annual report detailing the increment generated and how funds were spent,
further exacerbating this concern.
The TRZ overcomes many of these problems. First, with a TRZ, there is no requirement for RDA
involvement, and therefore no need for RDA meetings. The TRZ is simply governed by an interlocal
agreement signed by the parties. TRZs have proven effective in other states when projects cross multiple
jurisdictions. With a TRZ there is no requirement to measure in which community increment is generated
and where funds are spent. The purpose is simply to achieve an overall project. And only one annual report
has to be filed for the TRZ – not separate reports for each participating entity.
Another advantage to TRZs is the ability to obtain the commitment of transportation agencies, such as
UDOT or UTA, for specific projects. Interlocal agreements between the public entity with the land-use
authority and a transportation agency will identify the specific projects associated with the TRZ. This will
add another level of certainty to local planning efforts and will give these public entities some additional
leverage in prioritizing needed transportation projects.
9
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
Advantages and Disadvantages
The following table lists the advantages and disadvantages of funding transportation projects with tax
increment generated in Transportation Reinvestment Zones:
TABLE 8: TRANSPORTATION REINVESTMENT ZONES AS A FUNDING SOURCE FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS.
Advantages
Transportation Reinvestment Zones
Disadvantages
Transportation Reinvestment Zones
Creates a new revenue stream.Revenue directed to transportation projects will not be
available to provide other services.
Relatively easy to create.Requires cooperation between at least two entities.
Projected to produce substantial revenue stream over
time.
Must find a nexus with transportation projects to justify
use of the increment.
No affordable housing requirement.Revenues may take years to build up as development
occurs over time.
TAX INCREMENT BONDS
Tax increment Bonds were developed in California in 1952 as an innovative way of raising local matching
funds for federal grants. They became increasingly popular in the 1980s and 1990s, when there were
declines in subsidies for local economic development from federal grants, state grants, and federal tax
subsidies (especially industrial development bonds).
Tax Increment Bonds are collateralized by the incremental growth in property taxes within a given project
area. They capture the future tax benefits of real estate improvements to pay the present cost of those
improvements. It is a financing strategy designed to make improvements to a targeted project area or
district without drawing on general fund revenue or creating a new tax.
Ratings on tax increment bonds are tied to the performance of the area or district, not to the creating
government’s general fund. As a result, the ratings differ from those of the creating entity’s general
obligation rating. The rating of tax increment bonds hinges on local economics, trends, and taxpayer
diversity, with taxpayer diversity being the most highly correlated statistic.
Rating agencies evaluate whether the tax increment revenues could survive the loss of one or more top
taxpaying property owners, how debt service could be managed in the case of broad-based decline of
assessed value, real estate trends and historical assessed values in the designated area, and the types of
properties located or being developed in the tax increment area. The assessed value of hotels is the most
volatile, followed by warehouses, commercial, condos, and last residential.
Many issuers opt to offer tax increment bonds on a non-rated basis. It is virtually impossible to secure a
rating for or sell a tax increment bond before the increment is actually flowing, unless there is recourse to
the local government’s credit or some other enhancement.
10
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
Typically, tax increment bonds carry longer terms (anywhere from 10 to 30 years) and are purchased at a
fixed rate using larger denominations of $100,000. There is usually no recourse to either the issuer or the
developers who may benefit from the bonds. Pledged revenues vary, but a typical pledge is a senior
security interest in the tax increment revenues as well as any debt service reserve funds. The bonds are
often offered via a limited public offering and most often sold to institutional buyers (primarily mutual
funds and occasionally property/casualty insurers) using a limited offering memorandum.
It is typical to see interest capitalized for at least two to three years to allow increment to begin flowing
before debt service payments are required from that increment. Unspent proceeds, capitalized interest and
reserve funds are held by a Trustee. Debt service coverage covenants vary based on type of tax increment
revenue and other security features associated with the bonds, but minimum coverage requirements are
almost always at least 1.25 times annual debt service.
Advantages and Disadvantages
The following table lists the advantages and disadvantages of funding with tax increment bonds:
TABLE 9: TAX INCREMENT BONDS AS A FUNDING SOURCE
Advantages
Tax Increment Bonds
Disadvantages
Tax Increment Bonds
Create a new revenue stream that can fund capital
improvements and economic development.Tend to carry higher interest and costs of issuance.
Creating entity does not have to bear financial burden
alone but can share it with other taxing entities within a
project area.
Often require the cooperation and agreement of
multiple taxing entities to generate sufficient
incremental revenues to finance the desired
infrastructure.
Tax increment revenues can be used to pay for
administrative expenses.
Bonds can’t be sold unless the tax increment is already
flowing or is imminent and nearly certain to flow or is
enhanced by a government’s credit or other
mechanism.
Financial and legal liability is limited by having a
redevelopment agency.2
Typically take longer from start to finish than other
financing types.3
Creating entity may gift tax revenues or property to
provide incentives for development.
Critics of Tax Increment Bonds sometimes assert that
tax increment is just a reallocation of tax revenues by
which some municipalities win, and others lose.4
2 An RDA is a separate political subdivision which can enter into agreements with developers and issue the bonds.
3 It is difficult to estimate the time required for the “political” side of the process, which often requires significant information sharing
between local government and developers, including a public hearing for approval of the Project Area Plan and Budget. Setting aside
the political requirements, the bond issuance process usually takes three to five months.
4 Critics of Tax Increment Bonds sometimes assert that some or all the increment is not attributable to the creation of the tax increment
area and that the new property value growth would have occurred anyway.
11
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
Advantages
Tax Increment Bonds
Disadvantages
Tax Increment Bonds
Creating entity may be able to encourage or accelerate
the timeframe of desired development types through
offering tax increment incentives to the developer.
Mortgage on the property can also be given as bond
security under Utah law in addition to incremental
revenue.
PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE DISTRICTS (PIDs)
PIDs are generally most successful in larger, undeveloped areas where there are significant infrastructure
needs. Because the unanimous consent of all property owners is required for the creation of a PID, it is
difficult to establish PIDs in areas with numerous property owners. However, portions of the study area
could be included – especially those areas with larger parcels, fewer property owners, and significant
infrastructure needs.
If created, a PID can be combined with other revenue sources such as tax increment and those revenues
could be used to pay the PID bonds. These funding tools may further facilitate development and increase
property values, which may in turn provide for more opportunities to fund basic infrastructure (through tax
increment financing or general tax collection). The PID tool allows for creation of a separate taxing entity in
order to fund public infrastructure. Ultimate users of the property pay for the improvements via the taxing
entity through property assessments. These assessments permit for bonding, allowing for covering upfront
infrastructure expenses that are repaid over periods typically near 30 years. This tool results in higher
property taxes for property owners/users in the defined district.
Consequently, benefits beyond the improved infrastructure can be included in the area. This can be in the
form of better landscaping, street lighting, public spaces, parks, trails, finishes, etc. These benefits aid in
creating property appeal, property value increases and in attracting top quality businesses.
The PID tool also represents a valuable option for cities who are reticent to bond with property tax
revenues in a standard tax increment collection area. Bonding permits for upfront infrastructure costs to be
covered, oftentimes expediting development that may not have otherwise occurred. A city may create a
PID with no increase in the tax rate and use the PID as a conduit to issue bonds. In this approach, the city is
not financially responsible for the bond payments, and the bonding does not affect the city’s credit rating.
The process for starting a Public Infrastructure District begins with a citywide policy. This represents a
“30,000-foot” view of the tool for the municipality and merely outlines the guidelines as to how a
developer should submit for a PID. The PID policy may incorporate specific goals and vision statements of
the city. Once a policy is adopted, a developer may submit a letter of intent to create a PID. This is reviewed
by the city, and if approved, governing documents are required to be submitted and approved
12
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
by the City Council. The simple passing of a general PID policy does not require the City Council to approve
governing documents or letters of intent.
Consequently, the PID policy represents another tool that can be used when appropriate. As of 2022,
several cities throughout Utah have adopted PID policies and multiple public infrastructure districts have
been formed.
TABLE 10: PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE DISTRICTS AS A FUNDING SOURCE
Advantages
PIDs
Disadvantages
PIDs
Create a new revenue stream that can fund capital
improvements and economic development.Tend to carry higher interest and costs of issuance.
Any debt issued is not on the books of the local
government entity.
Cities may feel it limits public support for future tax rate
increases or bond elections due to the perception of
already-high rates.
Can raise a significant amount of revenue with legally-
allowed tax rates of up to 15 mils.
Requires unanimous support of all taxing entities to put
in place.
Accelerates development timeframe through upfront
funding for capital costs.Ongoing PID governance
Can reduce the need for impact fees.Competitiveness of site with other sites given higher tax
rates
Mortgage on the property can also be given as bond
security under Utah law in addition to incremental
revenue.
Cost is much lower than other development financing.
The current taxable value of North Point is approximately $68,000,000. The maximum mill rate allowed by
Utah law is 0.015; however, districts are choosing to enact much lower rates. Politically, it would be nearly
impossible to obtain the consent of the entire Northpoint area to create a PID. However, smaller sections
that are wanting to encourage economic development could be developed as PIDs. The table below shows
the amount of annual property tax revenues that could be generated for such a district given varying
taxable values and varying tax rates up to the maximum of 0.015.
TABLE 11: PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE DISTRICT ANNUAL REVENUES BASED ON VARYING MILL RATES AND TAXABLE VALUES
Property Taxable Values 0.015 Mill Rate .0075 Mill Rate .004 Mill Rate
$10,000,000 $150,000 $75,000 $40,000
$20,000,000 $300,000 $150,000 $80,000
$30,000,000 $450,000 $225,000 $120,000
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREAS (SAAs)
Special Assessment Areas (“SAAs”), formerly known as Special Improvement Districts or “SID”s, are a
financing mechanism that allows governmental entities to designate a specific area for the purpose of
13
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
financing the costs of improvements, operation and maintenance, or economic promotion activities that
benefit property within a specified area. Entities can then levy a special assessment, on parity with a tax
lien, to pay for those improvements or ongoing maintenance. The special assessment can be pledged to
retire bonds, known as Special Assessment Bonds, if issued to finance construction of a project. Utah Code
§11-42 deals with the requirements of special assessment areas.
The underlying rationale of an SAA is that only those property owners who benefit from the public
improvements and ongoing maintenance of the properties will be assessed for the associated costs as
opposed to other financing structures in which all City residents pay either through property taxes or
increased service fees. While more information about SAAs is included below, it could be difficult politically
for the City to obtain support from a large number of property owners.
While not subject to a bond election as is required for the issuance of General Obligation bonds, SAAs may
not be created if 40 percent or more of those liable for the assessment payment5 protest its creation.
Despite this legal threshold, most local government governing bodies tend to find it difficult to create an
SAA if even 10-20 percent of property owners oppose the SAA.
Once created, an SAA’s ability to levy an assessment has similar collection priority / legal standing as a
property tax assessment. However, since it is not a property tax, any financing secured by that levy would
likely be done at higher interest rates than general obligation, sales tax revenue or utility revenue bonds.
Interest rates will depend on a number of factors including the ratio of the market value to the assessment
bond amount, the diversity of property ownership and the perceived willingness and ability of property
owners to make the assessment payments as they come due. Even with the best of special assessment
credit structure, if bonds are issued they are likely to be non-rated and therefore would be issued at rates
quite a bit higher than similar General Obligation Bonds that would likely be rated. All improvements
financed via an SAA must be owned by the City and the repayment period cannot exceed twenty (20) years.
Whenever SAAs are created, entities have to select a method of assessment (i.e. per lot, per unit (ERU), per
acre, taxable value, market value, by linear foot frontage, etc.) which is reasonable, fair and equitable to all
property owners within the SAA. State law does not allow property owned by local government entities
such as cities or school districts to be assessed.
TABLE 12: SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREAS AS A FUNDING SOURCE
Advantages
SAAs
Disadvantages
SAAs
Bonds are tax-exempt although the interest cost is not
as low as a GO or revenue bond
Forty percent of the assessed liability, be it one
property owner or many could defeat the effort to
create the SAA if they do not want to pay the
assessment
No requirement to hold a bond election but the City
must hold a meeting for property owners to be
assessed before the SAA can be created
Some increased administrative burden for the City
although State law permits an additional amount to be
included in each assessment to either pay the City’s
increased administrative costs or permit the City to hire
an outside SAA administrator
5 Based on the method of assessment selected, i.e., acreage, front footage, per lot, etc.
14
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
Advantages
SAAs
Disadvantages
SAAs
Only benefited property owners pay for the
improvements or ongoing maintenance
The City cannot assess government-owned property
within the SAA
Limited risk to the City as there is no general tax or
revenue pledge
Flexibility since property owners may pre-pay their
assessment prior to bond issuance or annually
thereafter as the bond documents dictate – if bonds are
issued
IMPACT FEES
Impact fees are one-time fees paid by new development to offset the capital costs associated with new
development for basic utilities such as water, sewer, storm water, public safety, roads and parks/trails. In
order to collect impact fees, cities must carefully follow the requirements of Utah Code 11-36a which
includes the following major steps.
Prepare and pass a resolution authorizing study of an impact fee
Conduct an impact fee study to determine the appropriate amount of such a fee
Provide public notice of the possible fee 14 days prior to the public hearing
Hold a public hearing to take comment regarding the proposed fee
Salt Lake City has already established impact fees that could be used to generate revenues on projects
developed within its City boundaries. However, Salt Lake County would need to charge impact fees on the
unincorporated areas of North Point. Impact fees collected would need to be spent on capital projects
listed in each respective entity’s Impact Fee Facilities Plans (IFFPs). Therefore, careful coordination would
need to take place between Salt Lake City and the County to ensure that the costs of needed projects are
fairly allocated between the two entities.
Advantages and Disadvantages
The following table lists the advantages and disadvantages of funding projects with impact fees:
TABLE 13: IMPACT FEES AS A FUNDING SOURCE
Advantages
Impact Fees
Disadvantages
Impact Fees
New development pays for its fair share of the costs
incurred by new development Adds additional costs to development
Impact fees are generally paid when building permits
are issued; therefore, funds are often not available
upfront when infrastructure needs are greatest
15
Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options
Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022
Advantages
Impact Fees
Disadvantages
Impact Fees
Impact fees cannot be used to cure existing deficiencies
MUNICIPAL ENERGY TAX
Salt Lake City has enacted the municipal energy tax to the full 6 percent allowed by law on all taxable
portions of electric and gas bills. Therefore, any development that takes place in Salt Lake City would
generate this additional revenue that could be used to assist with economic development and
infrastructure costs in Northpoint. The municipal energy tax applies only to development that occurs in Salt
Lake City and not in Salt Lake County.
APPENDIX E
MAJOR STREETS PLAN AMENDMENT
2100 N
~2900 W
3200 W
2200 W
3300 N
3500 N
2950 N
Salt Lake Ci ty Major Street Plan Amendm en t for Nor th p oin t A r ea
¯
Legend
Designation
Arterials
Loc al Streets
Propos ed Arterial Streets
0 640 1,280 1,920320
Feet
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED
The first public draft of the Northpoint Small Area Plan was online and available for public comment
from July 26, 2022 – September 19, 2022. The plan received 685 views and 195 total comments during
this time. The majority of the comments were left directly on the draft using the software Konveio and
can be viewed by visiting this link:
https://acrobat.adobe.com/link/review?uri=urn:aaid:scds:US:9d257aa8-60d8-39d9-ab70-
8aa9c2005923
All other written public comments are included in either the Staff Report published on October 26,
2022 or the Staff Report published for the December 14, 2022 meeting. Public comments that were
received following the publishing of those staff reports are included on the following pages.
From:cindy cromer
To:Norris, Nick; Oktay, Michaela
Cc:Martinez, Diana; Gilmore, Kristina
Subject:(EXTERNAL) Fw: request to recall: Northpoint Small Area Plan
Date:Tuesday, January 10, 2023 7:39:08 AM
Please forward to members of the Planning Commission, via their e mail addresses if
possible.
To Chairman Bachman and Members of the Salt Lake City Planning Commission
From Cindy Cromer
RE your vote on the Northpoint Small Area Plan, 12/14
I am asking the Commission to recall its vote on the Northpoint Small Area Plan on 12/14 (5-2)
prior to approving the minutes at your meeting on 1/11. I have made a similar request once
before, in July 2021, but in that case, the Commission had failed to follow the adopted
ordinance. I knew that you had to consider my request and you did. In the case of the Small
Area Plan, you have not violated any ordinances but have instead set the stage for
consequences in the foreseeable future which I doubt that any of you would support and
which I know the overwhelming majority of Salt Lake's voters would not support. There are
two issues which have led me to ask you to recall your vote.
The first issue is the relationship between Northpoint and the Inland Port. Of greatest
concern was the Commission's decision to ignore the staff recommendation regarding
distribution centers. That change led me to ask about the history of Northpoint relative to the
Inland Port. According to people involved for decades, Northpoint was previously part of the
Port. Former City Council Member James Rogers was also the City's representative on the
Inland Port and had Northpoint removed. He then initiated the Small Area Plan with funding
through the City Council. That must have been in 2019.
Inserting distribution centers as an allowed use into the Small Area Plan creates the potential
for Northpoint to resemble the Inland Port as it redevelops and be annexed back into the Port
by the State. Given what has already happened, this possibility is real. Given the resources
that the City has devoted over the past 2 Administrations to protecting the City's interests in
the Port, it is unconscionable that the Commission would do anything to facilitate the future
expansion of the Port.
Secondly, in the executive session a member of the Commission speculated that there was
rampant cultivation of alfalfa and significant waste of water in current agricultural uses. So
far, I have been able to identify 1 property owner growing alfalfa and the water being used is
untreated, not water from Salt Lake City Public Utilities.
My criticism of your recommendation began 1/3 at the City Council's meeting and is included
below (last paragraph). You have failed to protect Northpoint from predictable overreach by
the State government, if not now, then in the foreseeable future. You failed to seek
information about the basis for the staff recommendation regarding distribution centers and
instead dismissed the staff recommendation. You appeared to accept inflammatory, generic
statements about the cultivation of a crop which as far as I can determine is not grown
commonly in Northpoint. You failed to verify the relevance of those generic statements to a
highly specific planning document. These are shortcomings from my perspective which are
not prohibited by the City's ordinances.
You can of course ignore my cautions, as you did my comments on 12/14, and persist with
your recommendation to the City Council. I am writing to let you know that I too can persist in
my objections and will continue to ask the members of the City Council to ignore your
recommendation of 12/14.
From: cindy cromer
Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2023 4:07 PM
To: Petro-Eschler, Victoria <victoria.petro-eschler@slcgov.com>; alejandro.puy@slcgov.com
<alejandro.puy@slcgov.com>; dan.dugan@slcgov.com <dan.dugan@slcgov.com>; Fowler, Amy
<amy.fowler@slcgov.com>; Mano, Darin <darin.mano@slcgov.com>; Chris Wharton
<chris.wharton@slcgov.com>; Valdemoros, Ana <ana.valdemoros@slcgov.com>
Cc: Fullmer, Brian <Brian.Fullmer@slcgov.com>; Pantle, Brian <Brian.Pantle@slcgov.com>; Benson,
Jenna <Jenna.Benson@slcgov.com>; Tuuao, Priscilla <priscilla.tuuao@slcgov.com>; Thomas, Blake
<blake.thomas@slcgov.com>; Gilmore, Kristina <Kristina.Gilmore@slcgov.com>;
michaela.oktay@slcgov.com <michaela.oktay@slcgov.com>; cindy gust-jenson <cindy.gust-
jenson@slcgov.com>
Subject: Fw: Northpoint Small Area Plan: comment to the City Council 1/3/23
40 Years of Showing Up Late or Not at All: The Northwest Quadrant
In the late 1980's, the Northwest Quadrant was the only part of the city without a master
plan. At some point during the early 1990's, Doug Wheelwright on the Planning staff wrote a
proposed plan with traditional single-family houses. Then, Genevieve Atwood presented the
findings of her dissertation (published 2006). I was standing next to Doug at the back of the
room during Genevieve's presentation. He only said, "This changes everything." Nothing
else.
Through the 1990's and early 2000's, Salt Lake City still did not have a plan for the Northwest
Quadrant. Then the State started talking about relocating the prison. Once again Frank Gray
came to the City's rescue and drafted a plan for the Northwest Quadrant adopted in 2016.
The State proceeded with the relocation of the prison any way. And then the State decided
to locate the Intermodal Hub near the airport. Once again the City mustered its best
arguments after the fact. Then James Rogers got the funding for the small area plan, but the
effort stalled with the RFP. I am still trying to piece together the City's response to a proposed
annexation.
My point is that the City has always failed to plan for this area in a timely manner. It shows up
late over and over again. At times, it has had talented planners and attorneys assigned to the
task. They have attempted to outmaneuver the State.
The City has criticized the State for the Inland Port, but now the Planning Commission appears
to put its blessing on a similar redevelopment of Northpoint. I am hoping that someone will
explain to me how the development of distribution and manufacturing in Northpoint is
different from the Inland Port in any way except that the City would retain, only for the
immediate future, receipt of the property taxes. That of course assumes that the State
doesn't swoop in and claim them, as it has with the Inland Port. I have no doubt that if
Northpoint resembles the Inland Port in the future, the State will intervene again. I am asking
you to ignore the recommendation from the Planning Commission. The Commissioners seem
oblivious of the predictable outcome.
4858-3336-8894
NorthPoint Small Area Plan
Salt Lake City
PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN DATED OCTOBER 2022.
The undersigned supports the amended NorthPoint Small Area Plan as presented to the Salt Lake City Planning
Commission on October 26, 2022 and request that the Planning Commission approve such plan on the meeting
to be held on December 14, 2022 with no additional limitations on distribution uses. The undersigned attests
that they are residents of the NorthPoint Small Area located in Salt Lake City, have personally signed this
petition on the date indicated, and reside or work at the stated address.
Signature: ____________ ___________________
Address: ________________________________
Date: ________________________________
DocuSign Envelope ID: 568F1AB3-E460-43A1-A68A-1E452DE9445C
12/3/2022
2680 N 2200 W Salt Lake City, UT 84116
Krissy Gilmore
Salt Lake City
Senior Planner
kristina.gilmore@slcgov.com
Victoria Petro Eschler
Salt Lake City
District #1 Councilmember
victoria.petro-eschler@slcgov.com
RE: SUPPORT FOR THE NORHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN
As a resident of the NorthPoint Small Area, I am writing to document my support for the Northpoint
Small Area Plan as presented to the Salt Lake City Planning Commission on October 26, 2022. I would highly
recommend the Planning Commission approve the plan with no additional limitations to distribution uses in its
December 14th meeting and that City Council adopt this plan as currently scheduled in January 2023. The
Northpoint Small Area Plan outlines several reasons to transition the land use from agricultural to industrial
while allowing landowners to participate in the economic growth of the area.
Additionally, to ensure the greatest potential for economic growth in the area, we encourage the
Planning Commission and/or City Council remove any limitations on the distribution uses allowed in the area.
Not only would these limitations exclude the vast majority of small businesses seeking industrial space, but
they would continue to drive rental rates higher for already struggling small businesses. Any limitation
imposed on distribution uses would devalue the land, restrict economic growth, and increase rental rates for
small businesses in the area.
Thank you,
Signature: ________________________________
Address: ________________________________
Date: ________________________________
DocuSign Envelope ID: 568F1AB3-E460-43A1-A68A-1E452DE9445C
12/3/2022
2680 N 2200 W Salt Lake City, UT 84116
From:Denise Payne
To:Planning Public Comments
Subject:(EXTERNAL) Denise and John Payne 2848 North 2200 West
Date:Wednesday, December 14, 2022 2:34:50 PM
My husband has lived on 2200 west for 45 years and I have lived here for 33 years. I oppose
the transitional land use verbiage in the Master Plan and I oppose the annexation, rezoning or
Area Master Plan changes which changes current zoning M1 or BP. This would jeopardize
open space along the Jordan River with agriculture becoming industrial areas. Such changes
not only significantly impact North Point residents but the residents of surrounding westside
neighborhoods. As stated in the Tribune the West side is the highest in air pollution in the
area.
Industrial zoning around our home condemns is to a lower quality of life, decreases our
property value and will force is to move. This does not support new housing at all income
levels.” This housing gap/shortage dwarfs the city’s apparent desire for more warehouses and
other commercial structures. City Council just approved funding for affordable housing.
Approving M1 is going against new affordable housing.
Other negative impacts to the entire westside include:
Increased air pollution, noise pollution, light pollution
Unsustainable traffic
Watershed pollution and destruction of natural habitat
Reduction of home ownership in the city
--
Have an awesome day.......
Denise Payne
From:
To:Planning Public Comments
Subject:(EXTERNAL) Northpoint Small Area Plan Comments for Dec. 14
Date:Wednesday, December 14, 2022 3:26:06 PM
Attachments:Northpoint Small Area Plan Comments 12-13-2022.docx
Hello,
FYI, Attached are the comments I submitted yesterday to Krissy Gilmore.
I understand that comments will be read to the planning commission if they are under two minutes.
Below are the comments I would like to have read at the meeting tonight.
Dear Salt Lake City Planning Commission Members, My name is Wayne Martinson. I worked for National Audubon Society for25 years, retiring in 2016. During this period, I worked extensively onissues regarding the Great Salt Lake, including the Gillmor Sanctuary, thenorthwest quadrant plan and the south shore of Great Salt Lake. Last night I submitted comments to Krissy Gilmore. I hope you considerthose comments in full. The following provides three specific comments:
1. I support the Westpointe Board statement on the Proposed NorthPoint Small Area Plan. In particular, I support their statement in theletter dated January 11, 2022, that the Planning Commission is urged“to continue to table action on the North Point Master Plan until suchcitizen input can be incorporated into the plan.”
2. I support the comments made by Heidi Hoven, ConservationSpecialist, Gillmor Sanctuary, National Audubon, in her letter to you,dated Dec. 2, 2022. The following comments in particular should befully addressed: “The wetlands bordering the west side of Northpoint Small Area shouldbe treated delicately and provided a minimum buffer of 300 feet, whichcan be backed by studies that consider ecological preservation and theother functions that wetlands provide. Likewise, the Jordan Rivershould also be treated as highest priority as it is a major source ofwater to Great Salt Lake and its wetlands with a 300 foot buffer(highest quality buffer recommended in Blueprint Jordan River).
3. Regarding the minimum buffer of 300 feet, it could be useful to puttogether a committee that would fully address this buffer. Thiscommittee could work on the wetland buffer during the same timethat citizen input is being incorporated into the plan.
Thank you for considering these comments. Wayne Martinson
Dec. 13, 2022
Kristina Gilmore, AICP
Senior Planner
Planning Division
Department of Community and Neighborhoods
Salt Lake City Corporation
kristina.gillmore@slcgov.com
Dear Kristina:
Subject: Northpoint Small Area Plan Comments
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Northpoint Small Area Plan
The following provides Personal Background and then General and Specific
comments.
Personal background:
From 1991 to 2016, I worked for the National Audubon Society, first as Utah
Wetlands Coordinator and then as Utah Important Bird Areas Coordinator.
Much of my time was focused on the Great Salt Lake, including working with
Ella Sorensen regarding the Gillmor Sanctuary as well as the wetlands on the
south shore of Great Salt Lake. I have been a resident of Salt Lake City since
1978.
General Comments:
Some of the first meetings I attended when starting with National Audubon in
the early 1990’s were about the Northwest Quadrant Plan. Some of the last
meetings I attended in 2016 were related to the completion of the Northwest
Quadrant Plan. It can take a long time to complete a plan.
One of the major components addressed in the Northwest Quadrant Plan was
developing the Natural Areas. These Natural Areas provide a buffer for the
wetlands of the Great Salt Lake, including the areas owned and managed by
Kennecott Copper (Inland Sea Shorebird Reserve) National Audubon Society
(Gillmor Sanctuary) and the duck clubs. Numerous meetings were held
between landowners who wanted to develop and landowners who wanted to
preserve the wildlife values before an agreement was reached regarding the
Natural Areas.
The value of natural areas in or adjacent to the Northpoint Small Area Plan is
very high. Often when I was asked about the major issues regarding the Great
Salt Lake, my response was (and still is) water quantity, water quality, and
preserving wetland and upland buffers for the Great Salt Lake.
The Northpoint Small Area Plan has similarities to the Northwest Quadrant
Plan. One of them is that development is proposed right next to the wetland
and upland areas that are managed for wildlife. Every attempt should be
made to become familiar with and supportive of these wetland and upland
buffers.
Specific Comments:
1. I support the Westpointe Board statement on the Proposed North Point
Small Area Plan. In particular, I support their statement in the letter
dated January 11, 2022, that the Planning Commission is urged “to
continue to table action on the North Point Master Plan until such
citizen input can be incorporated into the plan.”
2. I support the comments made by Heidi Hoven, Conservation Specialist,
Gillmor Sanctuary, National Audubon Society, in her letter to you, dated
Dec. 2, 2022. The following comments in particular should be fully
addressed:
“The wetlands bordering the west side of Northpoint Small Area should be
treated delicately and provided a minimum buffer of 300 feet, which can
be backed by studies that consider ecological preservation and the other
functions that wetlands provide (e.g., groundwater recharge, improved
water quality, flood attenuation, dissipation of noise, motion, and light
disturbances to wildlife, and many habitat benefits to wildlife). Likewise,
the Jordan River should also be treated as highest priority as it is a major
source of water to Great Salt Lake and its wetlands with a 300 foot buffer
(highest quality buffer recommended in Blueprint Jordan River).
3. Regarding the minimum buffer of 300 feet, it could be useful to put
together a committee that would fully address this buffer. This
committee could work on the wetland buffer during the same time that
citizen input is being incorporated into the plan.
In summary, the Northpoint Small Area Plan should be tabled until citizen
input can be more fully considered and incorporated into the plan. Also, the
wetland and upland areas that are part of and/or are adjacent to the
Northpoint Small Area Plan are an important component of the Great Salt
Lake wetlands. Every effort should be made to preserve and protect these
areas.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment:
Sincerely,
Wayne Martinson
Cc: Heidi Hoven, Conservation Specialist National Audubon Society
Ella Sorensen, Gillmor Sanctuary Manager, National Audubon Society
Dorothy Owen, Westpointe Community Council Board of Directors
Jack Ray, Rudy Duck Club