HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Provided Information - 8/12/2025CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM:Brian Fullmer
Policy Analyst
DATE:August 12, 2025
RE: Parking Regulations in the Downtown Zoning Districts Text Amendment
PLNPCM2025-00008
BRIEFING UPDATE
During a July 1, 2025 briefing Council Members discussed the reasons for current building cladding
requirements found in City code. Planning responded by saying they are to align with other sections of the
code, improve building design, and enhance the pedestrian experience. It was further noted that these
requirements can make it unfeasible to include upper-level parking in buildings, which may lead to more
surface-level parking. The proposed changes will accommodate parking while creating aesthetically
pleasing buildings.
A Council Member commented the proposal strikes a balance between providing parking in a smaller
footprint for those who wish to drive, with transit availability into the downtown area.
The following information was provided for the July 1, 2025 briefing. It is included
again for background purposes.
ISSUE AT A GLANCE
The Council will be briefed about a proposed text amendment from the Administration related to parking
regulations in the Downtown and Gateway zoning districts. Design standards for these regulations are
found in three sections of City code. The proposal consolidates them into the design standards section of
City code for ease of use, and to eliminate conflicts. Some obsolete review process requirements are also
Item Schedule:
Page | 2
proposed to be eliminated. These changes are summarized in Key Consideration 2 found later in this
report. Affected areas are shown in the image below.
The Commission voted unanimously to forward a positive
recommendation to the City Council.
Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed text amendment and determine if the Council supports
moving forward with the proposal.
POLICY QUESTION
Zoning districts affected by the proposed text amendment
Image courtesy of the Salt Lake City Planning Division
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
D-1 (Central Business District)
D-2 (Downtown Support District)
D-3 (Downtown Warehouse/Residential District)
D-4 (Downtown Secondary Central Business District)
Page | 3
G-MU (Gateway-Mixed Use District)
Currently, parking lots are only allowed behind buildings. Under the proposed changes new parking lots
must be co-located with a building, limited to 40 spaces, and would be allowed either behind or to the side
of the building. Lots located to a building’s side would be limited to a single parking row and aisle and set
back at least 25 feet from the front or corner side lot line. This setback area would be subject to applicable
landscaping requirements.
Under the proposal parking lots in these zoning districts would only be allowed when associated with a
building on the property. Existing lots may continue but would need to comply with new standards if the
property is redeveloped.
KEY CONSIDERATIONS
Planning staff identified two key considerations related to the proposal, found on pages 5-13 of the
Planning Commission staff report, and briefly summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the
Planning staff report.
Consideration 1 – How the Proposal Helps Implement City Goals & Policies Identified in
Adopted Plans:
Planning staff believes the proposed changes align with principles and concepts found in Plan Salt Lake,
the Downtown Master Plan, and the North Temple Boulevard Master Plan. The proposal aims to provide
quality design while meeting the need for parking in a dense pedestrian-oriented environment. It also
seeks to simplify City code making it easier for the public and staff to understand and use.
Consideration 2 – Key Changes
Key changes found in the proposal are generally in two categories: design standards, and parking use and
location regulations. These are briefly summarized below. Please see the Planning Commission staff report
for additional information.
Design Standards
Proposed changes to the design standards focus on upper floors because ground floors of most buildings
with a street-facing façade in these zones are required to have active uses such as restaurants and retail
establishments that draw people into the building rather than parking.
Issue: Parking on Upper Building Levels
The Off-Street Parking, Mobility and Loading Chapter of City code (21A.44) for Downtown and
Gateway zones requires all floors of buildings to be wrapped with uses other than parking. Of
concern is the vagueness of this requirement which can lead to varied interpretations and result in
hallways, storage, or stairwells wrapping buildings rather than a more beneficial use.
Proposed Change:
Planning staff recommends removing the requirement for upper floors to have a use other than
parking. It is their opinion that ground floor requirements in the Downtown and Gateway zones
improve the streetscape and pedestrian experience. Screening requirements will remain for
upper floors to ensure quality building design.
Issue: Upper Floor Glazing
Upper floors of street facing building facades in the Downtown and G-MU zoning districts are
required to have glass. This requirement may result in unintended consequences of increased costs
Page | 4
and limiting needed ventilation for parking garages which could lead to more surface parking.
Additionally, parking garage design standards are intended to screen the garage’s interior from
view. Requiring glass can counteract the screening’s intent.
The following table from the Planning Commission staff report shows the percentage of required
upper-level glass. Boxes with an X indicate when the requirement for parking garages and
structures applies. (Note-changes to chapter 21A.37 proposed in the commercial and mixed-use
consolidation are included in the table.)
DistrictStandard
(Code section)D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4 G-MU
Glass: upper floors (%)
(21A.37.050.C.2)50 50 50 50 40
Reflective glass
(21A.37.050.C.3)50 50 50 50 50
Parking garages or structures
(21A.37.050.L)X X X X X
Proposed Change:
Planning staff recommends portions of buildings in the Downtown and G-MU zoning districts
used for parking are exempt from providing upper-level glass.
Issue: Upper Floor Building Materials
Like the glazing requirements above, minimum percentages of upper floor street-facing facades
(excluding windows and doors) need to be clad in durable building materials such as stone, brick,
textured or patterned concrete, cement board or similar materials. Parking garages adjacent to
streets or other public spaces are required to have external screening that conceals ramps and
parked vehicles and improves the structure’s appearance. These screening materials include heavy
gauge metal screen, precast concrete panels, live green or landscaped walls, laminated or safety
glass, decorative panels or other materials that match the building’s materials and character.
Currently the code doesn’t specify which requirement, for glass or durable building materials, on
upper floors take precedence for parking garages. When both material types are applied it limits
ventilation necessary for parking garages and increases costs as with the requirement for upper-
level glazing noted above.
Proposed Change:
Planning staff recommends requiring a minimum of 50% of each street facing façade to be
wrapped in one of the solid materials listed above. Planning believes this will conceal parked
vehicles and ramps, allow design flexibility, and ensure upper floor parking garages are feasible.
Parking Use and Location Regulations
Issue: Parking Uses Prohibited When They Result in Building Demolition
Under current City code parking lots that are proposed as a single principal use of property in the
Downtown and G-MU zoning districts are prohibited only when they would result in a building
demolition. Planning staff found that it was easy to skirt this by demolishing a building and then
later apply for permits to build a parking lot. Proving the building was demolished for parking
would be difficult.
Page | 5
Proposed Change:
Planning proposes only allowing parking lots in the Downtown and G-MU zones when they are
associated with a building on the property.
Issue: Parking Lot Location
City code currently requires parking lots to be located behind buildings and limits the lot size and
configuration. Some building designs are not square or rectangularly shaped, which can present
difficulties determining where to locate a parking lot. Additionally, parking lots for buildings on
corner lots with two street frontages would be visible from one of the streets.
Proposed Change:
As discussed in the additional information section above, Planning recommends allowing parking
lots on the side of a building (with additional standards) as well as behind buildings.
ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS
Attachment D (pages 26-27) of the Planning Commission staff report outlines zoning text amendment
standards that should be considered as the Council reviews this proposal. The standards and findings are
summarized below. Please see the Planning Commission staff report for additional information.
Factor Finding
Whether a proposed text amendment is consistent with
the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the city as
stated through its various adopted planning documents.
Complies
Whether a proposed text amendment furthers the
specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance.
Complies
Whether a proposed text amendment is consistent with
the purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay
zoning districts which may impose additional standards.
Complies
The extent to which a proposed text amendment
implements best current, professional practices of urban
planning and design.
Complies
The impact that the proposed text amendment may have
on city resources necessary to carry out the provisions
and processes required by this title.
Proposal is intended to
streamline the
application process and
likely won’t increase
impact on City
resources.
The community benefits that would result from the
proposed text amendment, as identified in 21A.50.050.C.
Only applicable to
privately initiated
amendments. (Mayor
Mendenhall initiated
this text amendment.)
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Page | 6
• January 6, 2025 – Zoning map amendment application received by Planning Division and
assigned to Rylee Hall, Principal Planner.
• February 6, 2025 – Notice sent to all registered recognized organizations, beginning 45-day
comment period.
• February 18, 2025 – Proposal posted to the Planning Division online open house page.
• March 12, 2025 –Planning Commission public hearing notice posted at Main Library.
• March 14, 2025 – Planning Commission public hearing notice posted on City and State websites,
and notices sent via Planning Division listserv.
• March 17, 2025 – Planning staff presented the proposal to the Sugar House Community Council.
• March 23, 2025 – 45-day comment period ends.
• March 26, 2025 – Planning Commission briefing and public hearing. The Commission voted
unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council.
• April 21, 2025 – Ordinance requested from the Attorney’s Office.
• June 3, 2025 – Ordinance received from the Attorney’s Office.
• June 5, 2025 – Transmittal received in City Council Office.