[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6052918,"mediaKeyId","3377512-512fd3fb9de55a7cb61f5edc7be49088","parentId",3377512,"title","Planning commission backs changes to city center overlay step‑back rules, asks staff to refine map and standards","audioSeconds",5079,"startMs",1721000,"endMs",6800000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3377512-512fd3fb9de55a7cb61f5edc7be49088&start=1721&end=6800","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3377512-512fd3fb9de55a7cb61f5edc7be49088/thumbnail_1721000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6052918/Utah/Planning-commission-backs-changes-to-city-center-overlay-stepback-rules-asks-staff-to-refine-map-and-standards","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6052918-d52d028c4904af96bf06ed3b4c14a656/orig.mp4?Expires=1770738621&Signature=EZDdTPSzO9qAW8yBvzdzYF837Ho1DiceLnaRbnbHkfRQHODEK-CCXwO2aPqA81XhHV0iy06f5JCmXYGGxjUoVhiNSHcKo2Vybww-9uKNkr4g9RoB-OhBKfNUs2Un-gOf4eolgfPWJNQuReTWj0QDGLm3O0CtT9a-~-gPxE~PqrJUCHg04eabVeff1BF~CxGBbzkjMYI~REuBBxaXjCwjEWnt53ue7-h0x771-0Vt~LiaZRAcRBYyqP5z1UqXeCheL20DvaY03jsfq-ni1Bb4JJT6CWbGDm7vPDIF2qDwL-gQ5cWIuIwwHKXHGUU-QLK78bpQI~d3B2hxRGNPWEkqag__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Millcreek City, UT","date","2025-03-19T00:00:00Z","article","The Millcreek City Planning Commission recommended approval of ZT25002, a text amendment to the city center overlay zone that would revise building step‑back requirements for buildings taller than 40 feet. Commissioners directed staff to refine the overlay map, pare down subjective design enhancement options, scale public‑benefit thresholds to project size, and explore a development‑agreement option to allow additional flexibility in exchange for defined public benefits.

Staff planners Robert and Francis summarized that the current overlay requires approximately a 20‑foot step back above the second floor (or two 10‑foot notches) on eligible frontage, and that the amendment would offer alternatives — design enhancements, a boxed limit on massing, or a public‑benefit option delivering shared parking, open space or other amenities in exchange for reduced or modified step backs. Staff said the public‑benefit alternative was intended to be meaningful and to capture benefits such as structured/shared parking, enhanced open space, or other civic improvements rather than small aesthetic treatments. Staff also noted a discrepancy between draft materials (50 vs. 100 parking spaces and 500 vs. 1,000‑square‑foot open‑space thresholds) and clarified the working numbers as 100 parking spaces and 1,000 square feet for the public‑benefit option.

Discussion among commissioners covered where flexibility should be allowed on the map (some commissioners urged keeping the blocks immediately adjacent to Mill Creek Common and the 30‑Third corridor as required step‑back areas), how to make alternative standards objective rather than subjective (several commissioners asked staff to pare down or quantify art, cultural and historic amenity options), and whether affordable housing should remain an option under the public‑benefit approach (one commissioner urged retaining it). Commissioners also reviewed height limits in the overlay (base height cap generally 75 feet; limited additional non‑occupiable height exceptions for mechanical/elevator elements) and asked staff to consider scaled thresholds for projects of different sizes so small developments would not face the same public‑benefit requirements as large projects.

Commissioner Vance moved a motion recommending approval of ZT25002 but removing the staff’s “option 1,” keeping the boxed (“option 2”) and public‑benefit approaches, and directing staff to draft a third option that uses a development‑agreement framework with defined minimum standards and scalable thresholds for parking and open space. The motion also requested that staff reduce subjectivity in the design enhancement list, tie eligible enhancements to districts or blocks where those enhancements make sense, and return to the commission with refinements between City Council’s first and second readings. Commissioner Lofgren seconded. The commission then took a roll‑call vote in which commissioners Anderson, Soul, Lamar, Reid, Vance and Lofgren voted in favor and the motion passed.

The commission’s action was a recommendation to City Council; it does not itself change the code. Staff said it would prepare a revised draft for City Council’s first reading and return to the commission with additional input before the council’s second reading so the commission’s refinements could be considered before final adoption.

Key details: the proposed amendment focuses on buildings over 40 feet, retains existing height caps (generally 75 feet plus limited non‑occupiable exceptions), and would allow alternatives to a single 20‑foot step‑back requirement through defined design enhancements or through a public‑benefit exchange. Commissioners asked that staff make thresholds (for example, 100 shared parking spaces or 1,000 square feet of open space) scalable to project size and reduce subjective items in the public‑benefit menu.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Millcreek City Planning Commission - March 19, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Millcreek Planning Commission recommended approval of text amendment ZT25002 to revise building step‑back standards in the city center overlay, keeping a boxed design alternative and a public‑benefit alternative, eliminating one open option, and asking staff to craft a development‑agreement approach and more objective standards.","taxTitle","Millcreek City Planning Commission , Millcreek, Salt Lake County, Utah","taxId",67160,"location","Utah","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":44,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6052923,"Millcreek planning commission approves five‑lot subdivision SD 24015 with underground utility condition",1172,549000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3377512-512fd3fb9de55a7cb61f5edc7be49088&start=549&end=1721","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3377512-512fd3fb9de55a7cb61f5edc7be49088/thumbnail_549000.jpg","/articles/6052923/Utah/Millcreek-planning-commission-approves-fivelot-subdivision-SD-24015-with-underground-utility-condition","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6052923-6864ae4722096b7459cf44f30ecd8d18/orig.mp4?Expires=1770738621&Signature=F4KlFGMCAqCD9Q5NMT9~M03ShV3CzAaI2QWsolDBa4bIkW8UQz8eXK-pwfhWr7QIpeNP35gpOslPMMRcgGVnK7qJxnfIOQ7x1y8XwLDDgVxYIyjhfIRYYUYU2TCdMjh6dkwCeVCRXBbu5f8iSmyvyec8fWA4TtdUBpDZZFP9~1FBAEJGb4UvbseprKPAeL7QneSvif4MW6HAUkfUXCaLMMn1xYQP-YUYEFJUZLrXTCPcoc~k1TRPVuBQMwAhUylvDOe8sp-9cbq5RVznu0b5yy3xSb6SoKUkA0CZ0eFz6KEOYtQnUOe1JQSBDEtdXRuazCQIGLGmYLpXpF0v1uwwVQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Millcreek City Planning Commission voted to approve application SD 24015, a major subdivision to create five single‑family lots at properties near 815 and 839 East (around 4200 South), conditional on relocating an existing overhead communications utility line underground before final approval and plat recordation.

Staff presented the proposal as a major subdivision of two parcels totaling about 0.84 acres in the R‑15 zone to create five lots, each above the 5,000‑square‑foot minimum for R‑15 (most lots under 6,000 square feet; Lot 3 is an exception). The proposed access is a cul‑de‑sac extending from 4170 South designed to eventually connect to Grand Cayman Drive if adjacent parcels develop. Staff identified an overhead utility line on the plat that, after follow‑up, appears to be a communications line; staff recommended the line be placed in the public utility easement and ultimately undergrounded so any easement would not bisect buildable areas. Staff recommended approval subject to resolution of the communications utility line and completion of standard technical review.

Applicant Brooke Moore told the commission she is working with Lumen and CenturyLink “to get that placed in the PUE. I was hoping to get their written approval before tonight, but they’re super slow but we are in the works and we plan on having that completed by the time approval happens.” A single resident speaker, Joffrey Bird of 4162 South Megan Circle, asked about home orientations and expressed concern that the new street would be close to his bedroom and questioned whether fire apparatus could turn on the proposed stub street; staff confirmed Unified Fire Authority reviews access in technical review.

Commission discussion focused on the utility relocation requirement and coordination with the applicant and utilities. After discussion Commissioner Reid moved to approve SD 24015 “with the condition that the communications utility line be relocated underground prior to final approval and plat recordation.” Commissioner Lofgren seconded. The commission conducted a voice vote and the motion passed. Staff noted the subdivision remains subject to technical review before final plat recordation.

Because the plat approval is conditioned on relocating or undergrounding the communications line and completion of technical review, staff said the recordation of the final plat will not occur until those items are satisfied. The commission’s action provides direction to staff and the applicant but does not itself complete technical review or recordation.

Votes at a glance: the commission approved SD 24015 with the stated condition; staff will not finalize the plat until the communications line has been addressed and technical review is complete.","The Millcreek City Planning Commission voted to approve a five‑lot major subdivision, SD 24015, for property near 4200 South, with a requirement that an existing overhead communications line be relocated underground prior to final plat recordation.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission backs changes to city center overlay step‑back rules, asks staff to refine map and standards

Millcreek planning commission approves five‑lot subdivision SD 24015 with underground utility condition