Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Provided Information - 5/5/2026CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLC.GOV/COUNCIL TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Kate Werrett Budget & Policy Analyst DATE:May 5, 2026 RE:GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT AT APPROXIMATELY 346, 350, 354, 370 SOUTH 800 EAST, AND 775 EAST 400 SOUTH PLNPCM2025-00660 and PLNPCM2025-00641 ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will be briefed on a proposal to amend the zoning of the properties at approximately 346, 350, and 354 South 800 East from RMF-35 (Moderate Density Residential Multi-Family) to MU-5 (Mixed Use 5). The proposal would also amend the Central Community Plan Future Land Use Map of the properties at approximately 346, 350, 354, 370 South 800 East and 775 East 400 South from Medium Density Residential (15-30 dwelling units/acre) and Medium Density Transit-Oriented Development (10-50 dwelling units/acre) to High Density Transit Oriented Development (50 or more dwelling units/acre). The proposed amendments would allow the construction of a mixed-use building encompassing 109 total residential units and ground-floor commercial space, which includes 2-,3- and 4- bedroom units. The properties currently contain three existing residential buildings, including seven apartment units. In addition to the requested amendments, the applicant is seeking design review approval to exceed the maximum building façade length of 200’, which the Planning Commission will reconsider after the Council takes action on this proposal. The project is within Council District 4. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed master plan and zoning map amendments during its November 12, 2025 meeting and held a public hearing at which eight people spoke, sharing concerns about solar blockage to neighboring lots, the bulk and height of the proposed building, and incentivizing neglect. Planning staff recommended approval of the proposed amendments. For the zoning plan amendment, the Planning Commission voted 4:3 to recommend City Council approval. Those opposed to a positive recommendation for the zoning plan amendment were concerned the proposed zone was not suitable for the location, building length concerns, Linden Street width, and shading caused by the building height on Linden Schedule: Page | 2 Street homes. The Planning Commission voted 6:1 to recommend denial of the general plan amendment because evidence was not provided demonstrating the proposal complies with Consideration 3: Applicant’s Community Benefit, Unit Replacement, and Tenant Displacement Proposals. Zoning map with proposed amendments Image courtesy of Salt Lake City Planning Division Page | 3 General Plan Amendment Map Image courtesy of Salt Lake City Planning Division Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed general plan and zoning map amendments, and determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to discuss whether they want the Central Community Plan to reflect medium density residential and medium density transit oriented development or high density transit oriented development residential development in this area. 2. Is the Council supportive of the proposed zoning map and general plan amendments? 3. Is the Council interested in formalizing any tenant displacement and relocation requirements in the a development agreement? ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Council is being asked to consider rezoning the subject properties and amending the future land use map within the Central Community Plan. The applicant submitted a Design Review application, PLNPCM2025- 00856, which the Planning Commission will take action on after the City Council determination on the rezone and general plan amendment. The following table summarizes the proposed amendments for each of the subject parcels. Page | 4 Current Zoning Proposed Zoning Current General Plan Designation Proposed General Plan Designation 346 S 800 E RMF-35 MU-5 Medium Density Residential (15-30 units/acre) High Density Transit Oriented Development (50 or more dwelling units/acre)* 350 S 800 E RMF-35 MU-5 Medium Density Residential (15-30 units/acre) High Density Transit Oriented Development 354 S 800 E RMF-35 MU-5 Medium Density Residential (15-30 units/acre) High Density Transit Oriented Development 370 S 800 E MU-5 MU-5 Split- Medium Density Residential & Medium Density Transit Oriented Development High Density Transit Oriented Development 775 E 400 S MU-5 MU-5 Medium Density Transit Oriented Development (10-50 units/acre) High Density Transit Oriented Development * The 400 South Livable Communities Plan supports higher densities along 400 South and permits 137 units/acre proposed by the applicant. KEY CONSIDERATIONS Planning staff identified four key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 12-23 of the Planning Commission Staff Report and summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the staff report. Consideration 1: Compliance with City Goals, Policies, and General Plans Planning staff reviewed how the proposed zoning and plan amendments align with the Central Community Plan, Plan Salt Lake, 400 South Livable Communities Project, and Housing SLC. Planning staff believes goals and objectives from several plans show the applicant's compliance with Salt Lake’s vision for the 400 South corridor. Central Community Plan: The Planning Commission staff report includes the Central Community Plan objective to have “the highest residential densities and most intense land uses” in the area of these applications. Planning staff also commented on the vicinity of the project parcels to transit, and this Transit Oriented Development direction within the community plan: “Transit Oriented Development can target specific properties, such as those along the 400 South corridor, for redevelopment that do not affect the historic character of the neighborhood. New development should occur on vacant or noncontributing sites and should be compatible with the historic district. The goal is to allow higher density structures where commercial zoning exists to meet the desired population density in TOD area while eliminating demolition pressures on contributing historic structures.” Plan Salt Lake: Planning found that the Plan Salt Lake notes goals for neighborhoods, growth, housing, transportation & mobility, and air quality, which these applications support. 400 South Livable Communities Project: Planning staff shared that this plan encourages mixed-use development within ½ mile of transit stops. The project parcels are designed to be mixed-use and are less than ¼ mile from a heavily used transit stop. Additionally, planning staff shared that the proposed development could be considered a “transition” from the Central Business urban core to the adjacent Page | 5 urban neighborhoods. The 400 South Livable Communities Project calls for density in the application area. Housing SLC: Planning staff found the general plan and zoning map amendments are consistent with Housing SLC’s goal of increasing the city’s housing stock, as it provides units with varying unit sizes near transit. Consideration 2: RMF-35 vs. MU-5 Zoning District Comparison Two of the five subject properties are currently zoned MU-5 and the applicant hopes to rezone the three northern parcels from RMF-35 to MU-5 with this application. The remainder of the block is zoned MU-5. Prior to the October 2025 zoning consolidation, several parcels on this block were TSA-UN-T. The three parcels that the applicant applied to rezone are proposed to have multi-family residential units only. Zoning Building Envelope Building Comparison Image courtesy of Salt Lake City Planning Division Planning staff provided the following table in Attachment D (pages 121-124) of the Planning Commission staff report. It is replicated here for convenience. Zoning Standards RMF-35 (existing for 346, 350, 354) MU-5 (proposed for 346, 350, 354, in place for 370 & 775) Maximum Building Height 35’55’ maximum Front/Corner/Side/ Rear Yard Setback 20’/10’ 10’ interior 25’ rear 10’ minimum, 20’ maximum 0’ side minimum 10’ minimum Buffer Yard Buffer required when abutting single or two-family district. Buffer required when abutting single or two-family district. Minimum Lot Area 26,000 Sw. Ft. for more than 12 units n/a Landscaping & Buffering (21A.48) Front, Corner side and interior.All areas not occupied by buildings, plazas, terraces, patios, parking areas, or other similar feature shall be landscaped. Design Standards RMF-35 MU-5 Ground Floor Use Not required 75% Building Materials Not required 70% ground floor 70% upper floor Page | 6 Ground Floor Glass Not required 40% Upper Floor Glass Not required 15% Building Entrances Not required Every 40 feet Maximum Length of Blank Wall Not required 200’ Upper Floor Step Back Not required Lower-level interior Lighting Exterior Not required Required Screening of mechanical equipment Not required Required Parking Garages or Structures Not required Required Public Improvements Not required Required Land Uses Use RMF-35 MU-5 Bar Establishment Not Permitted Permitted Use Brewpub Not Permitted Permitted Use Distillery Not Permitted Permitted Use Tavern (more than 2,500 square feet in floor area)Not Permitted Permitted Use Winery Not Permitted Permitted Use Antenna, Communication Tower Not Permitted Permitted Use Bed and Breakfast Not Permitted Permitted Use Office Not Permitted Permitted Use Restaurant Not Permitted Permitted Use Retail, Services or Goods Not Permitted Permitted Use Dwelling, Single-family detached Permitted Use Permitted Use Self Storage Not Permitted Permitted Use Parking, Off site Not Permitted Permitted Use Parking RMF-35 MU-5 within ¼ mile of fixed rail transit Minimum Parking (Multi-family) Studio & 1 Bedroom: 1 space per DU 2+ bedrooms: 1.25 spaces per DU *Could request a reduction at this location due to its proximity to a transit stop No Minimum Maximum Parking (Multi-family) All Contexts: Studio & 1 Bedroom: 2 spaces per DU 2+ bedrooms: 3 spaces per DU Minimum Bicycle Parking 1 per 4 units 1 per 3 units Page | 7 As outlined in the Planning Commission staff report, the Planning staff concluded that the design review standards reduce the impacts of increased development. Consideration 3: Applicant’s Community Benefit, Unit Replacement, and Tenant Displacement Proposals Community Benefit Tenant Displacement Unit Replacement Consideration 4: Façade Length Requirements Page | 8 As determined by Planning staff, design review is required under Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.37.060 and Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.59.050 due to the project’s noncompliance with the maximum façade length standard. Specifically, the proposed building exceeds the 200-foot limit for a street-facing façade, measuring approximately 273 feet along 800 East. This standard ensures building massing remains consistent with the city’s historic development patterns. Façade Length Mitigation Analysis of Factors Attachment E (pages 125-136) of the Planning Commission staff report outlines master plan and zoning map amendment standards that should be considered as the Council reviews this proposal. It is Planning staff’s opinion that the proposed master plan amendment changing the future land use map from Medium Density residential and Medium Density Transit-Oriented Development to High Density Transit Oriented Development fulfills the intended outcomes of policies within the Central Community Master Plan. Please see the Planning Commission staff report for additional information. The table below summarizes Planning Consideration Factors, additional information is available in the Planning Commission attachment. Factor Finding Whether a proposed map 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 map amendment furthers the specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Complies Whether the proposed development requires a shift that calls for either a new plan or a revision of the current adopted plan. Complies The Central Community Plan was adopted in 2005. Whether the goals, policies, or implementation actions of the plan to be amended have been achieved, are no longer relevant to or capable of Complies Page | 9 addressing the current issues or needs of the neighborhood or the city, or are no longer aligned with policies in citywide plans. For petitions submitted by a property owner, the extent, effectiveness, and proportionality of the public benefit proposed by the petitioner to the increase in development potential if the proposal were to be adopted by the city council. Complies The potential for displacement of people who reside in any housing that is within the boundary of the proposed amendment and the plan offered by the petitioner to mitigate displacement. Complies The potential for displacement of any business that is located within the boundary of the proposed amendment and the plan offered by the petitioner to mitigate displacement. N/A The potential impacts on properties in the immediate vicinity of the proposal. Complies The potential impacts on the city to provide safe drinking water, storm water, and sewer to the property based on the additional development potential of future development. Complies Public Utilities reviewed the application & have no specific infrastructure concerns. The potential impacts to public safety resources created by the increase in development potential that may result from the proposed amendment. Complies Police & Fire reviewed the application; any issues will be addressed during building permit review The potential impacts to any other city service, infrastructure, or resource that may be impacted by the increase in development potential that may result from the proposed amendment. Complies Zoning Map Amendments Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with and helps implement the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the city as stated through its various adopted planning documents. Complies Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the applicable purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Complies The extent to which a proposed map amendment will affect adjacent and nearby properties due to the change in development potential and allowed uses that do not currently apply to the property. Complies Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with the purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards. Complies The adequacy of public facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, including, but not limited to, roadways, parks and recreational facilities, police and fire protection, schools, stormwater drainage systems, water supplies, and wastewater and refuse collection. Complies Transportation reviewed the zoning amendment and raised no roadway capacity concerns, noting only the reduction in minimum parking requirements. The status of existing transportation facilities, any planned changes to the transportation facilities, and the impact that the proposed amendment may have on the city's ability, need, and timing of future transportation improvements. Complies The proximity of necessary amenities such as parks, open space, schools, fresh food, entertainment, cultural facilities, and the ability of current and future residents to access these amenities without having to rely on a personal vehicle. Complies Page | 10 The potential impacts to public safety resources created by the increase in development potential that may result from the proposed amendment. Complies Police reviewed the application and found no significant safety impact. The potential for displacement of people who reside in any housing that is within the boundary of the proposed amendment and the plan offered by the petitioner to mitigate displacement. Complies The potential for displacement of any business that is located within the boundary of the proposed amendment and the plan offered by the petitioner to mitigate displacement. Complies The community benefits that would result from the proposed map amendment, as identified in Section 21A.50.050.C. Complies Community Benefit Standards (see 21A.50.050.C) Types of Community Benefit The proposed community benefit(s) shall be within any of the following categories: a. Providing housing that aligns with the current or future needs of the community as determined by the general plan. Needs could include the level of affordability in excess of the number of dwellings that exist on the site, size in terms of number of bedrooms, or availability of housing for purchase; b. Providing commercial space for local businesses or charitable organizations; c. Providing a dedication of public open space; d. Providing a dedication or other legal form of protection from future development of land that is adjacent to a river, creek, wetland, floodplain, wildlife habitat, or natural lands; e. Preserving historic structures not otherwise protected; f. Expanding public infrastructure that expands capacity for future development. Complies The application includes Community Benefit A. Community Benefit Standards (21A.50.050.C.2) For proposals that are intended to increase the housing supply, the level of affordability of the additional density that may be allowed if the proposal were to be adopted. Complies The percentage of space allocated to commercial use compared to the total ground floor area that could be developed on the site. Complies The size of the public open space compared to the total developable area of the lot, exclusive of setbacks, required landscaped yards, and any open space requirement of the proposed zoning district. N/A The relative size and environmental value of any land that is to be dedicated. N/A The historic significance of the structures proposed to be preserved.Complies The amount of development that could be accommodated due to the increase in public infrastructure capacity compared to the general need for the area. N/A The input received related to the community benefit during the 45-day engagement period. Complies Policies in the general plan that support the proposed community benefit. Complies City Department Review During the City's review of the petitions, no responding departments or divisions expressed objections to Page | 11 the proposal, but stated additional comments would be provided during building permit review if the property is developed. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY July 2, 2025 – Application for a Zoning Map Amendment, General Plan Amendment July 16, 2025 – Application for a Zoning Map Amendment was accepted. July 16, 2025 – Petitions PLNPCM2025-00641 and PLNPCM2025-00660 assigned to Grant Amann. July 17, 2025 – o A petition notice was sent to the East Bench Community Council Recognized Community Organization (RCO). o Property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the alley were provided early notice of the proposal. o An early notice was sent to property owners and residents within 300 ft of the applicant parcels. An online open house was posted and remains available. o The applicant posted an Early Notification sign on the properties. August 14, 2025 – Applicant proposal presentation at a East Central City Community Council meeting August 28, 2025 – Accepted Design Review Application. September 18, 2025 – Petition PLNPCM2025-00856 was assigned to Grant Amann. October 8, 2025 – MU zoning consolidation went into effect. This changed the subject property's existing zoning from TSA-UN-T to MU-5, and the applicant’s request from TSA-UN-T to MU-5. October 29, 2025 – Public hearing notices were posted on the City and State websites, and posted on the Planning Division listserv. November 1, 2025 – Public hearing notice signs were posted on the property. November 6, 2025 – Planning Commission Staff Report was posted. November 12, 2025 – Planning Commission held a public hearing and made a recommendation to the City Council to approve the proposed map amendment and deny the general plan amendment. November 21, 2025 – Ordinance requested from Attorney’s Office February 2, 2026 – Ordinance received from Attorney’s Office. February 25, 2026 – Transmittal received in City Council Office. ATTACHMENTS 1. Transmittal: General Plan and Zoning Map Amendment at Approximately 346, 350, 354, 370 South 800 East, and 775 East 400 South 2.Planning Commission Staff Report 3.Planning Commission Agenda – November 12, 2025 4.Planning Commission Approved Minutes – November 12, 2025 5.November 12, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting Recording (1:43) 6.Salt Lake City Zoning Map 7.Plan Salt Lake 8.Central Community Plan 9.400 South Livable Communities Project (Transit-Oriented Development) 10.Housing SLC 11.Off Street Parking Ordinance (Chapter 21A.44)