Developers reintroduce 60‑unit mixed‑use plan near Silver Summit under NMU zoning; planners press on height, transit, affordability

Developers presented an introductory master plan development (MPD) work session for a proposed mixed‑use project at the Silver Summit exit, asking to rezone the parcel to NMU‑1 and apply the MPD process for roughly 60 residential units and supporting commercial space.

The project team, led by Clive Bridgewater of Bridgewater Consulting Group and the managing partner Roger, said the scheme would deliver market‑rate units targeted to an active over‑55 demographic alongside integrated workforce/affordable units required under the NMU ordinance. Bridgewater described the current proposal as “about 60 units” with approximately 14,000 square feet of commercial and amenity space. He said the project aims to provide roughly 29–30 affordable unit equivalents (AUEs) integrated across five buildings and about 46 market‑rate units, while acknowledging the exact AUE calculation was still being reconciled with staff.

Commissioners and staff pressed on several technical and policy items that would affect whether the commission ultimately recommends the rezoning and MPD to county decision‑makers. Key issues raised included:

- Affordable housing calculations and AUEs: County staff and the applicants said different preliminary methods for counting amenity space and employee generation produced inconsistent AUE totals. Staff reported a current regulatory calculation of 35 AUEs but the applicants’ latest plan produces about 29.5 AUEs; the applicants said they were working with staff and a University of Utah consultant to align methods. Bridgewater said the project would consider the MPD provision allowing up to a 25% reduction in required AUEs if affordable units receive occupancy certificates before market units.

- Requested height exception: The NMU code allows the county to consider a height exception to a maximum of 60 feet for projects that include affordable housing or structured parking. The applicants requested two main buildings (B and C) reach 60 feet (five stories) while stepping down to 2–3 story buildings around the perimeter. Commissioners asked for visual and massing justification and whether mechanical screen walls exceeding roof height had been included; the team said roof height would be 60 feet and taller screen walls would be treated as code exclusions.

- Commercial mix and transit: The team proposed two ground‑floor commercial spaces in Building A—a flexible co‑working/office space and a small restaurant—but said they had reduced commercial area from earlier designs because nearby projects (Silver Creek Village and others) add new commercial capacity. Commissioners urged stronger transit commitments and noted the NMU guidance anticipates a transit hub or substantial transit infrastructure; staff and the applicants said bus service in the immediate area was limited today and that transit stops and an e‑bike station were included on the site plan, with the developers expecting transit service to expand as Silver Creek development proceeds.

- Site design and shading/massing: The applicant emphasized placing the taller massing in the middle of the lot to create buffer zones and larger setbacks (40–100 feet) from the frontage road and freeway, arguing that the approach yields a softer pedestrian experience than a continuous 45‑foot building line along the street.

Commissioners also discussed operational questions for an over‑55 marketing strategy (whether occupancy rules would be enforced), potential restrictions on short‑term rentals, parking counts and underground parking, and the role of the development agreement in capturing commitments such as deed‑restricted affordability or rental limits. Staff said NMU/MPD applications are discretionary and that council ultimately must interpret code provisions such as height exceptions.

The applicants asked for feedback at this work‑session stage and indicated they would return with updated drawings and finalized AUE calculations in subsequent staff reports. No formal decision or motion was taken at the work session; the presentation was advisory and intended to identify issues to resolve if the applicant files for formal action.