The idea behind inclusionary zoning is simple: the government requires a residential developer to build a certain number of affordable units as part of any new project. Or, the developer can pay a fee and only build market rate units.
In 2022, state lawmakers made it illegal for local governments to impose such requirements.
That change confused Summit County officials who may have wanted to consider the policy on the eastside.
The Snyderville Basin has inclusionary zoning grandfathered in. But that means the Summit County Council can’t revise requirements or change the developer fee to respond to market changes.
“Thank you very much,” then-Council Vice Chair Tonja Hanson said to Deputy Civil Attorney Dave Thomas, after he rehashed the situation last August. “That’s disturbing.”
Although Utah developers have said they’re against a blanket ban on inclusionary zoning, they say the policy can also be used “to extort concessions from developers and builders at the expense of affordability.”
The Utah Property Rights Ombudsman called Wasatch County’s 10% inclusionary zoning policy an “illegal exaction” in 2018.
In 2022, Utah took mandatory inclusionary zoning off the table entirely.
This year, a bill supported by the Utah League of Cities and Towns, the Utah Association of Realtors and the Property Rights Coalition is an effort to bring it back — only in a voluntary capacity.
Taylorsville Republican Rep. Jim Dunnigan’s House Bill 37 would allow for bonus density.
As drafted, cities and counties will be able to let developers build an extra eight units per acre in any residential zone. But the units must be reserved for people earning up to 120% of the area median income and must be owner-occupied for up to five years.
“State law currently does not allow a city, in the base zoning, to require that certain units be sold at a certain price point. You can do that through a development agreement, because then it's a bargained-for exchange between the property owner and the city,” said Cameron Diehl, Utah League of Cities and Towns executive director, during Feb. 13 committee debate. “What this is addressing is that in-between space.”
Because HB37 is opt-in, both Park City and the Snyderville Basin officials would still have to make do with current rules if they want mandatory affordable housing.
Park City’s policy requires 20% affordable housing, as does the basin. The actual calculations get complicated, and developers can avoid that if they simply pay a fee.
Summit County Community Development Director Peter Barnes worries that is what the expensive resort-area market incentivizes.
“The current fee in lieu, we'd say, is horrendously low,” Barnes said in August.
According to an interim legislative session report, 11 other states had banned inclusionary zoning to some degree before Utah did in 2022.
Urban planning researchers call it “preemption,” and say it frequently happens in conservative states with liberal cities.
Besides ideology, researchers at Northern Illinois University and Cleveland State University found states with fewer full-time legislators and a lower number of renters pass more laws preempting local affordable housing policies.
Dunnigan’s HB37 unanimously passed out of committee and was awaiting a vote on the House floor Feb. 18.
