Developers seek RM‑25 rezoning for 825–865 E. 4800 South; council asks for more traffic and transit detail

MURRAY, Utah — Developers asked Murray City officials Tuesday to amend the general plan and rezone a property at 825–865 East 4800 South from general office (G‑O) to R‑M‑25 (multi‑family, high density). The application covers roughly 2.9 acres and would allow a base density of 22 dwelling units per acre, a staff presentation said.

David Rogers and Chad Wilkinson of Murray planning staff briefed the committee on the Lotus development application and explained the project’s history. Wilkinson said the applicant removed a neighboring long, thin parcel after neighbors raised concerns; the refined proposal is roughly 2.8–2.93 acres and was the subject of a unanimous positive recommendation from the planning commission.

Staff noted the zoning change would permit multifamily development consistent with higher‑density parcels nearby and that the site fronts two major corridors (48th South and Van Winkle), making it a candidate for residential density. Chad Wilkinson told the committee the RM‑25 designation allows up to 22 units per acre by right and that higher densities can be attained through design and affordability incentives; at three acres, 22 units per acre would yield a theoretical maximum of about 66 units under the base density calculation.

Several council members emphasized unresolved technical questions. Members asked for a traffic study and pointed to potentially needed turn‑movement restrictions or other changes to access. Engineering, power and wastewater departments had provided preliminary comments; staff said those comments would be refined in the site‑plan and engineering review process. Wilkinson said the department comment packages were the formal departmental responses and that detailed infrastructure matters would be addressed in site planning if the rezone proceeded.

Neighbors and council members also asked about transit access. Staff did not confirm a nearby frequent‑transit stop; Wilkinson said staff would research bus routes that serve the parcel and return with that information before council action.

Councilmember questions repeatedly returned to process and timing. Staff indicated the council will not vote on the rezone until the February 18 council meeting; in the interim, staff agreed to gather additional information the committee requested, including: the applicant‑commissioned traffic study that was shared with neighbors, detailed engineering feedback, and existing transit route data. No final council decision was made Tuesday.