Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironweed
My question Orlando, is why in the world does SLC have an archaic, stubby, silly, 375' building height limitation in the first place? What 🤡 posse came up with that?!
|
It's not that buildings over 375 aren't allowed in D1 zoning (in SLC proper), it's just that they are subject to a conditional use design review if they are. My understanding is that it's not that they don't want buildings taller than 375', it's that they want more control over the design and placement of tall buildings, so they are subject to more scrutiny if they are over 375'. Which actually makes some sense to me, at least in principal. Something that tall will have a significant effect on the skyline and airspace/shading of the surrounding area, so they want to make sure those structures go through additional vetting. In practicality it may not work out that nicely, and is actually an impediment to vertical construction.
Now, the D4 convention center overlay may actually have a hard cutoff at 375', I'm not sure on that one. Which would be silly. I think it would probably be a good idea to revisit all the zoning height maximums to make sure they still make sense in an actively growing city in this day and age, one that is trying to reinvigorate/reinvent its downtown core.