Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council takes straw‑polls on MU zoning consolidation: stepbacks, parking, Sugar House, and implementation timing
Summary
Council provided staff direction via straw polls on multiple outstanding issues in the MU zoning consolidation, including stepbacks on narrower streets, uses in the transitional overlay, Green Street zoning, and an implementation window for the new code.
Planning staff presented the MU (mixed‑use) zoning consolidation project and walked through outstanding questions raised in prior public hearings. Staff outlined options for setbacks adjacent to landmark sites, parking requirements tied to transit proximity, buffers where MU adjoins low‑scale residential zones, Sugar House height and stepback alternatives, and rules for transitional overlay areas.
Council provided direction via a series of straw polls (nonbinding guidance to staff) on multiple items: a citywide standard requiring a 10‑foot stepback after 30 feet on streets under 90 feet in width (straw poll reported unanimous), retaining MU‑8 for the Midas block parcels rather than reverting zoning (unanimous straw poll to retain MU‑8), adding three new conditional/permitted uses to the transitional overlay (outdoor storage/equipment rental and outdoor contractor yard as conditional, contractor yard/office indoor as permitted — unanimous straw poll), selecting MU‑3 instead of MU‑6 for a Green Street strip‑mall parcel adjacent to Trader Joe’s (unanimous straw poll), and allowing applicants to choose to use the old or new code for a transition window of 6 months (straw poll to allow both codes for 6 months, subject to attorney’s office confirming the process, unanimous).
On Sugar House height and stepback issues, staff proposed raising core height to 125 feet in certain blocks to align with realistic construction costs; councilors debated canyoning effects and whether to apply a larger stepback in targeted Sugar House blocks or more broadly. The council’s direction favored the street‑width approach described above (10 ft after 30 ft on streets <90 ft width). Council also discussed parking changes in the proposal (parking requirements tied to transit proximity) and staff noted MU‑2 and MU‑3 (low‑scale residential adjacencies) would hold current parking levels.
Planning staff noted adoption could be scheduled after staff has prepared ordinance text reflecting these directions; the attorney’s office will advise on the legal mechanics for any dual‑code transition period. Staff said if changes are requested, they will prepare a final ordinance for possible adoption the following week once legal review and notification requirements are satisfied.
