This home at 1395 Van Buren Avenue, which has since been torn down, could be the future home of up to 35 housing units as part of a rezone request. Image via Google Maps
Some Salt Lakers expressed disdain following a Salt Lake City Planning Commission vote Wednesday, with a handful voicing their frustration at the outcome while donning shirts that had the word “rezone” crossed out.
The planning commission voted 4-2 to forward a positive recommendation to the city council on a proposal to rezone three parcels in the Glendale neighborhood from R-1-7000 to RMF-30. The proposal seeks to rezone the site and pave the way for a slate of new, for-sale units.
The three parcels in Glendale are located at 1379 and 1395 W. Van Buren Ave. and 1384 W. Harris Ave., and together the units total around 1.25 acres. Prior to the rezone proposal, there are two homes on the parcels. One home is slated to remain untouched while another has already been torn down.
Depending on the building type used on the parcels, which hasn’t been finalized, between 26 and 35 units could be built on the site within the RMF-30 zone, according to a staff report. Buckley said that if the zoning didn’t change, the parcels could total up to 28 units via a planned development agreement and the city’s Affordable Housing Incentives program.
Since the proposal was last discussed before the planning commission in July, city planner Ben Buckley said, the plans have evolved slightly. The applicants are now proposing only 40% lot coverage for each parcel, and while 50% lot coverage is allowed in the RMF-30 zone, the land owners want to keep with the lower number, as that is the requirement in the R-1-7000 zone.
Buckley said the proposal also commits to having each unit contain two or more bedrooms, and building heights would be capped at 30 feet for the pitched-roof structures. Buffer yards are included as part of the proposal in order to keep parking requirements as is, he said.
Most notably, the project will not seek Affordable Housing Incentives, which could’ve allowed for additional units. However, the plans do still call for making all units affordable as part of its community benefit.
According to the staff report, half of all the units built will be sold at 80% AMI or less. The report says 25% of units would be sold at 100% AMI or less and the remaining 25% would be sold at 120% AMI or less.
Commissioner Anna Sullivan questioned why the developer would go the route of a rezone instead of using the current zoning, as Buckley said the plans will likely have to go through the planned development process anyway. Aside from an additional two feet of height from 28 to 30 feet, she questioned why the applicants were going through the hassle.
Hunter Huffman, a principal at HigherDesign who is designing the project, told the commission the rezone would allow the project and units to be designed holistically rather than lot by lot.
“Essentially, through AHI, it would allow us to get up to seven individual single-family home lots, and then essentially build four units per lot on each one of those, which wouldn’t allow us, in a development and planning perspective, to design a continuous and open green space,” Huffman said. He added the green space could be an added community benefit.
Despite the explanation, Sullivan said she was skeptical of the proposal, adding the plan seems like spot zoning in an area that didn’t match city plans. She said the Westside Master Plan talks about putting multifamily housing along busier streets as a transitional zone between a busy roadway and single-family homes, and this project is far from that objective.
“(It) doesn’t make sense to me,” Sullivan said. “It seems to go against what the ideals set in both Plan Salt Lake and the West Side Plan.”
The lots subject to a rezone proposal in Glendale are highlighted in yellow. Image via Salt Lake City
Commissioner Lilah Rosenfield said while she has issues with spot zoning, she believes this is a larger site in a beautiful neighborhood and the proposal makes sense to her.
“I think it is very worthwhile for us to approve this project,” she added later.
Commissioner Richard Leverett said there are other infill projects that can harm a community from an environmental standpoint, while offering few public benefits. This is not one of those proposals, he said, and while the infill proposal isn’t perfect, there has to be a middle ground between brand new projects and existing neighborhood feel.
“It works for multi-generational housing in the neighborhood,” Leverett said. “It gives an opportunity for ownership in the neighborhood that makes sense, more so than five or six massive homes would in that spot.”
When it came time for a vote, Commissioner Ben Raskin abstained from casting his ballot, as Wednesday was his first meeting. That left six votes.
Brian Scott and Sullivan voted against the proposal.
Sullivan said she thought it made more sense to do a planned development. Commissioners Rosenfield, Leverett and Aimee Burrows voted yes, and the vote came down to Commissioner Jeffrey Barrett.
After a labored pause, Barrett voted yes, which broke the tie and preceded some in the audience to scoff.
The rezone vote has been a hot topic in the Glendale neighborhood. Some attendees wearing anti-rezoning shirts walked out of an overflow room shaking their heads after the vote.
The Glendale rezone was just one of the reasons residents packed into the City and County Building on Wednesday, as people filled the main planning commission room 326 and others filed into the main council chambers, which was used as the overflow room.
Following the rezone discussion, the commission heard public comments and discussed the pending Expanding Housing Options ordinance — which has also been a source of heated debate around the city.
City staff noted, however, that due to an issue with the public notice ahead of the Wednesday hearing, the commission would not be voting on the EHO ordinance as originally planned. That vote could be held later this month. The commission did accept public comment on Wednesday, which led to dozens of speakers both for and against EHO.
0 Comments