WEEK 2 ENDS

Just about two weeks into the legislative session and still waiting to see some of the major land use bills that have been talked about forever.  Today is the last day any new bills can be requested, so any pending legislation will have to appear in one of the bills already listed as being in progress.  When those will come out, though…

Though I titled this as week 2 ends, some more bills may pop out later today, in which case I’ll send out another quick update, so stay tuned.

Miranda Jones Cox at WFRC has put together an excellent summary of what SB140 – Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone Amendments does.  In case you haven’t seen it, here it is:

  • Allows HTRZ to be proposed around a light rail or BRT station (currently HTRZ is only allowed around FrontRunner commuter rail stations). This is intended to encourage housing and mixed-use “transit oriented development” around more stations.
    • Limits the size of a proposed HTRZ around light rail or BRT to 1/4 of a mile and no more than 100 noncontiguous acres (currently HTRZ around FrontRunner is limited to 1/3 of a mile and no more than 125 noncontiguous acres).
    • Limits the period of value capture for HTRZ proposed around light rail or BRT to no more than 15 consecutive years within a 30-year period (currently HTRZ around FrontRunner is limited to 25 consecutive years within a 45-year period).
    • Limits the maximum number of HTRZ in any given county to eight around light rail and three around BRT (there is no limit for FrontRunner stations).
  • Currently, an HTRZ is required to have a minimum of 50 units per acre. SB140 changes units/acre to “equivalent dwelling units”/acre (“EDU”). An EDU is one legal sleeping room. This is intended to encourage units with more bedrooms, suitable for larger families.
  • Clarifies that the 50 EDU/acre requirement applies to the portion of the HTRZ that is dedicated to residential development (not to the entire HTRZ area).
  • Currently, the maximum tax increment capture a city can propose is 80%. SB140 would reduce this to 60% if 40 EDUs are proposed/acre, and 40% if there are 30 EDUs proposed/acre.
  • Requires that a city HTRZ proposal include:
    • an evaluation of the proposed HTRZ impact on parking availability.
    • possible benefits to active and public transportation availability and impacts on air quality.
  • Requires that the HTRZ gap analysis evaluate the proposed density and increment capture needed to ensure a reasonable return on the investment, and the minimum amount of potential public financing needed to achieve the HTRZ objectives.
  • Modifies the HTRZ review committee composition to add representatives with financial expertise – with individuals from the State Treasurer’s office and Tax Commission.
  • Requires that the zoning for an HTRZ be in place before the HTRZ committee takes final action, rather than before the city submits the proposal.
  • Clarifies that municipalities are required to participate at the same rate of tax increment capture as the county.

Check in to the blog here this weekend sometime, I will take some time to write about the recent surveys by Envision Utah and the Utah Foundation about housing character, what residents like and don’t like, etc. Interesting stuff