Avenues residents vow appeal of housing project that would bring tightly packed new neighbors

Neighbors opposed to a new housing development in the Avenues are vowing to continue their fight after a critical phase of the 21-home project won approval by Salt Lake City’s planning commission.

A community group called Preserve Our Avenues Zoning coalition said Thursday it will formally appeal the vote clearing plans to fill one of the last patches of open space in the upper Avenues with a tightly clustered mix of single-family and twin homes, each with an optional accessory dwelling inside.

Dozens spoke out late Wednesday against homebuilder Ivory Development’s latest designs for Capitol Park Cottages at about 675 F Street, as they have since the idea first surfaced in 2021. The new housing will be too large, awkwardly configured and crammed together on “shrunken” lots leaving little yard space, well-organized opponents told the commission.

Residents and community council leaders argued that even after many redesigns, plans for seven detached single-family homes, 14 twin homes and up to 21 accessory dwellings were still too packed and out of character and scale with surrounding neighborhoods.

They’ve also highlighted recurring worries over parking, narrow road access and loss of open space and wildlife habitat, as well as perceived flaws in the engineering of building on the site’s sloping hillside.

“This is a highly cramped, congested development,” said resident Larry Perkins. “Please, please, please send Ivory back to the drawing board to produce something that looks like the Avenues, not this architectural Frankenstein.”

Officials with Ivory, its consultants, city planners and other proponents of the F Street subdivision countered that the new subdivision is smartly designed within city zoning constraints and dovetails with goals to expand the selection of home types in Utah’s capital and lift permitted home densities in some areas.

“The city’s housing plan,” said Ivory Development’s Chris Gamvroulas, “has been the guiding principle of our application.”

The F Street project also addresses the state’s housing crisis, he and other backers said, by taking greater advantage to build more units on what little land remains in more affluent east-side neighborhoods such as the Avenues. This version of the designs, according to Ivory, also clusters homes to yield more shared green spaces and creates a much-sought mix of choices, including accessory dwellings offered as rentals or for senior living.

‘Different realities’ on housing

Although public testimony ran decidedly against this latest iteration — as it has at prior hearings — the homebuilder drew approval to treat the construction as a planned development and an initial green light on subdividing the land under city code, clearing a major hurdle for it all to proceed.

The commission voted 7-1 in favor, with member Richard Tuttle the lone vote against.

Planning commissioner Amy Barry at one point echoed a resident’s comment about there being “a lot of different realities for different people” in the face of an ongoing crisis of escalating rents and shortages of all types of homes, particularly more affordable ones.

“We need different solutions for those different realities,” Barry said of Ivory’s F Street plans. “And I think that this is a fairly good one.”

Peter Wright, who heads the grassroots coalition of opposing neighbors, said Thursday the group had pieced together small donations from residents to hire an attorney for a formal appeal. He said the decision from city planners was “disappointing” and “really hurts.”

“They chose to completely ignore the opinions of hundreds of Avenues residents and instead favored the interests of a rich, powerful, politically connected developer,” said Wright. “There’s very much a feeling that the commission paid lip service to all of the comments made, and the decision was actually made long, long before the meeting started.”

Under city code, the planning commission’s ruling can be appealed to a city administrative appeals officer within 10 days of Wednesday’s vote.

‘Sounds good to me’

Having won a major rezone on the 3.2-acre property in late 2022, Ivory Development sought added concessions in the request aired Wednesday, including smaller lot sizes, bigger home footprints and reduced setbacks from property lines.

The city’s planning staff had recommended approving the planned development and the subdivision request, with conditions that one of the project’s accessory dwellings face some use limits and remaining open space in the project have signage indicating it was accessible to the public.

Chris Nelson, a professor of urban planning and development expert based at the University of Arizona, spoke on behalf of Ivory’s proposal, noting that the city’s official housing plan called for construction of up to 10,000 new residential units by 2027. He called that “a very aggressive path” of development.

The city, said Nelson, “is doing so because it needs to expand housing opportunities for moderate-income households. And the Capitol Park project is the very kind of project the city needs.”

In terms of affordability, opposing residents have pointed out that purchase prices on homes in the Capitol Park project will probably top $2 million, with its accessory dwellings likely renting for at least $1,500 per month. Ivory and city officials have noted the city currently needs new homes at all price points.

The pro-housing advocacy group SLC Neighbors for More Neighbors praised Ivory’s plan, saying it would boost housing diversity in a highly desirable neighborhood, raise density and offer a positive example of infill construction on an underutilized piece of ground.

A few residents spoke Wednesday in favor of the project’s creative approaches to zoning, design and accessory dwellings in making more housing units available.

“I keep hearing about how bad setbacks are and smaller lots are,” said Brooklyn Lindsey, a third-year law student, longtime renter and part-time employee for Ivory Homes. “But the data is out there. It has been for years.”

Modifying land use law, she said, paves the way for lowering home prices, even if the houses in this case crack a million dollars.

”And when a one-bedroom apartment nowadays is going for almost $2,000,” Lindsey added, “an ADU rental for $1,500 sounds good to me.”