2021 GENERAL PLAN White City Metro Township - New Cover Image to be Voted on at 2021 General Plan Open House - Utah.gov
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
[New Cover Image to be Voted on at 2021 General Plan Open House]
2021 GENERAL PLAN
White City Metro Township
Acknowledgements Table of Contents
General Plan Steering Committee Planning Commission
Tyler Huish (Chair) Weston Millen (Chair)
4 Executive Summary
Greg Shelton (Vice Chair) Christy Seiger-Webster (Vice Chair)
6 Key Recommendations and Goals
Josiah Halverson Antoinette Blair
8 Chapter 1 - All About Planning
John Hoggan Robert Frailey
12 Chapter 2 - Community Engagement
James Lucas Chris Spagnuolo
14 General Plan Engagement Major Events Timeline
Caitlyn Miller Gene Wilson
28 Chapter 3 - Community Background
Dave Quinney
30 White City At a Glance Infographic
Renee Sutton Council
32 Chapter 4 - Land Use
Steve Wrigley Paulina Flint (Mayor)
40 Zoning
Zachary Zundel Kay Dickerson
46 Character Areas
D. Scott Little
68 Future Land Use Map
Greater Salt Lake Municipal Services District Allan Perry
72 Chapter 5 - Transportation
Bart Barker (General Manager) Linda Price
94 Future Transportation
Brian Hartsell (Associate G. Manager)
98 Chapter 6 - Lifelong Communities
Lupita McClenning (Director of Planning Others
104 Governance
and Development Services) Madeline Franciso-Galang (White City Engineer)
106 Aging in Community
Mikala Jordan (Project Lead, Long Range Planner) Thomas McMurty (Avenue Consultant)
109 Economic Opportunities
Wendy Gurr (Planning Coordinator) Todd Andersen (Economic Development
114 Resilience and Sustainability
Maridene Alexander (Communications Manager)
Specialist) 120 Chapter 7 - Work Program
Jim McNulty (Planning Manager)
Jay Springer (Land Use Attorney) 136 Chapter 8 - References and Resources
Paul Ashton (White City Attorney)
Kate Davies (Senior Long Range Planner)
Kayla Mauldin (Long Range Planner)
All Participating Members of the Public Appendix A: Glossary and Frequently Asked Questions
Alex Rudowski (GIS Analyst/Planner)
Appendix B: Survey Results and Public Comments
Travis Hair (Planner II)
Appendix C: Moderate Income Housing Plan
Appendix D: General Plan Steering Committee Meeting Reports
White City General Plan - Page 2 Table of Contents - Page 3
Executive Summary
CONTEXT - This 2021 General Plan is a first EXISTING CONDITIONS - Home to 5,810 people, Improvement District. Additionally, White City
for White City, Utah. In this Plan, readers find White City consists of 432.7 acres in the south- enjoys amenities offered in nearby Sandy City.
information about the planning process and eastern part of Salt Lake County, Utah. Uniquely, KEY STRENGTHS AND CHALLENGES - Key
community context, methods of data collection, White City is an island community completely strengths include White City’s strong culture of
the public engagement process, three topical surrounded by Sandy, a city of 96,385 people. public participation; its groundwater source; the
elements—land use, transportation, and lifelong Additionally, White City is bisected by a coun- small-town feel; affordable housing; the fami-
communities—and a work program tailored to ty-run park, Dimple Dell Regional Park, that ly-friendly environment; its relative location
each element. residents utilize for recreation. While White to major transportation corridors, recreation
City’s surroundings feel more urban, White City opportunities, and job hubs; and its retention of
This Plan addresses the current conditions and
has retained its close-knit, small-town feel. agricultural land. Key challenges include being
future aspirations of the community and is
intended to guide community decision-making. White City is more affordable than nearby completely built out, few sales-tax generating
This Plan should be used by elected and places in the Salt Lake Valley. For example, commercial properties, gaps in pedestrian infra-
appointed officials, staff, and the public to 2021 estimates put the median home value at structure that support walkability, limited places
understand on-the-ground conditions, the $338,931 for White City, compared to $406,810 for community gatherings and interactions,
community’s collective vision, and how to take for Salt Lake County as a whole. In the latest ACS worn infrastructure, and fear of government and
appropriate actions to realize that vision. 5-Year Estimates, White City’s median household planning efforts.
income was $63,446, which was significantly KEY OUTCOMES - Among diverse and sometimes
This Plan is heavily driven by public feedback
lower than the county-wide median household conflicting viewpoints, this Plan sought to
and by data collection and analysis. In fact,
income of $74,865. Residents value their more nurture a collective vision that all residents
public participation is one of White City’s
affordable lifestyle and often cite it as a means could stand behind. As such, this Plan focuses on
greatest strengths as a community. While a small
of attracting young families and first-time home- preservation of White City’s existing character
community of 5,810 people, over 744 written
owners. and suggests small, gradual, and targeted
comments were collected from surveys, emails,
virtual comment boxes, and paper comment In White City, land is used primarily for residential changes aimed to increase White City’s access
boxes throughout the two-year process. Four purposes: 94.7 percent of land is zoned single- to opportunities and bolster residents’ quality of
in-person workshops and over thirty public family residential, and 5.2 percent is zoned life. The next pages (6-7) outline the Plan’s five
meetings were held to discuss the Plan. The agricultural. Only one property is zoned for key recommendations and nineteen goals. The
public’s knowledge of the community is supple- commercial uses; however, 34 business licenses specific actions to accomplish these recommen-
mented with credible, comprehensive resources were issued in 2020, indicating the presence of dations and goals can be found at the end of the
such as the U.S. Census Bureau’s American home-based occupations. Other land uses and document in the Work Program.
Community Survey and Esri’s Community resources of particular community value are Photo credits, from top to bottom: Mikala Jordan, GSL-MSD;
Analyst Program, which provided many of the the 14.6-acre Big Bear Park, the White Towers Maridene Alexander, GSL-MSD; Maridene Alexander, GSL-MSD;
Google Street View; Maridene Alexander, GSL-MSD; Google Street
statistics. Swimming Pool, and the White City Water View.
White City General Plan - Page 4 Executive Summary - Page 5
families and the housing needs of the Lifelong Communities (LC)
Key Recommendations and Goals Salt Lake valley.
LC1: Foster transparency, collaboration,
LU3: Promote a sense of pride and and clear communication among officials,
identity in the community through staff, the public, and other agencies.
Five key recommendations emerged maintaining and enhancing place-
from this Plan. These areas guide the making infrastructure. LC2: Enhance and expand digital infra-
focus of implementation moving structure to support home-based work,
forward. LU4: Establish landscaping and mainte- entertainment, and education opportu-
nance standards that make White City nities.
1) Focus on area-specific, small-scale a distinctly scenic, fun and appealing
infrastructure improvements that place to live and visit. LC3: Support small-scale local and
incorporate place-making; these will home-based businesses with access to
enhance the day-to-day experiences LU5: Enhance recreational amenities resources for financial assistance and/
of residents on their land and in public and access to public parks and open or business training and education.
spaces. Goals: spaces.
LC4: Ensure that the built environ-
2) Update land use codes to be tailored LU6: All land use decisions include ment supports people of all ages and
The following goals were developed
to White City’s specific wants and efforts to maintain or improve air and abilities, allowing safe and easy navi-
in the public Steering Committee
needs. water quality. gation within the community as well
meetings for each element of the Plan.
These goals provide a broad direction as access to important places outside
3) Work toward implementing street-
toward how White City moves forward the community.
scape improvements that increase
the safety of all modes of travel, the with land use, transportation, and Transportation (T) LC5: Strengthen resilience through
aesthetics of the public right-of-ways, lifelong communities decisions. T1: Provide good access to and smooth, emergency preparedness and
and the walkability of White City. safe transitions between key locations response.
4) Work toward infrastructure imple- within and outside of White City. LC6: Improve the quality of the natural
mentation that supports successful Land Use (LU) T2: Make transportation areas more environment and mitigate negative
aging in community, community LU1: Ensure that effective land use aesthetically pleasing, environmen- environmental impacts in built envi-
resilience to natural hazards, and envi- planning is kept in balance with tally friendly, culturally interesting, ronment decisions.
ronmental sustainability. preserving the freedom and rights of and health-conscious. LC7: Maintain and make needs-appro-
5) Increase sales tax revenue to support individual landowners. T3: Achieve well-maintained transpor- priate improvements to infrastructure
desired projects by a) supporting LU2: Maintain and promote White tation infrastructure. to support the resilience of the built
at-home businesses through resources City’s neighborhood-scale housing environment.
T4: Provide adequate and safe parking.
and fast internet speeds and b) character (primarily detached resi- LC8: Preserve the heart of White City’s
updating land use ordinances to allow dences) while also promoting a quality T5: Increase pedestrian and bicyclist character.
small, quiet, local businesses in future of life that attracts and sustains new access, safety, and comfort.
mixed-use areas.
White City General Plan - Page 6 Key Recommendations - Page 7
and as of the 2021 legislative session, even the The MSD provides the member municipali-
CHAPTER ONE: same powers of taxation. The Metro Township ties with planning and development, business
does not have the power to enact a property tax. license, and code enforcement services as
ALL ABOUT PLANNING White City is a member of the Greater Salt Lake
Municipal Services District (GSL-MSD or MSD).
part of its membership agreement. The White
City Council appoints a Planning Commission,
working with MSD planners, to make recom-
The MSD is a local district, created in 2015 under
mendations regarding land use decisions to the
the “Special District Code 17B 2a-11” (Provi-
What is a General Plan? ties, and goals, communities avoid change
sions, 2014). The MSD is comprised of five metro
Council.
“just happening” to them.
A General Plan is a document that guides future townships (Copperton, Emigration Canyon, During the making or updating of General
development in a place. Through the planning ◊ Plans enhance decision-making: syncing Kearns, Magna, White City), one town (Brighton), Plans, the White City Council (WCC) appoints a
process, existing conditions are examined, data, local knowledge, and on-the-ground and unincorporated Salt Lake County. General Plan Steering Committee (Figure 1). This
desired future conditions are established, and conditions enable decisions to be compre- Steering Committee, composed of residents
hensively informed. Utah Code 10-2a-4 allows townships to be
a path is laid out to bring a community from representative of White City’s different back-
recognized as municipalities (Municipal Incor-
its present state to its envisioned future. Deci- ◊ With plans, communities can bolster grounds and ideas, works with MSD Long Range
poration, 2015). The Metro Townships gained
sion-makers, residents, and other stakeholders strengths, achieve goals, minimize and Planners on the development of White City’s
official recognition as municipalities on January
can and should use the General Plan to coordi- resolve problems, and prevent threats. General Plan. The Steering Committee and MSD
1, 2017 through a general election of the citizens
nate and implement decisions about land use, planners produce a document that the Steering
◊ Through the establishment of common in 2015. The MSD, together with the govern-
infrastructure, parks, recreation and open space, Committee then passes to the Planning Commis-
goals, the planning process brings together mental alliance of the Metro Townships, has
city services, housing supply and affordability, sion. The Planning Commission, at a public
various community members. formed the first district of its kind in the United
and other public resources. As such, a General hearing, makes recommendations to the Council
States. The MSD is empowered to levy a property
Plan is a living, fluid document that should be Planning Authority tax on real or personal properties located within
regarding the adoption and amendment of the
regularly reviewed and updated. General Plan. The Council, at a public meeting,
White City became an independent municipality its boundaries, through the decision of the indi-
can adopt, reject, or revise the General Plan.
Why make a General Plan? with its own governing authority in 2017 after a vidual metro townships and the MSD board.
vote of White City residents in 2015. The munic-
Municipalities make plans for many reasons. The
ipality is governed by an elected legislative Figure 1: The general planning process (adapted from http://www.ruralplanning.org/assets/
main purpose of a General Plan is to aid a com-
council, one of whom is selected by the others general-plan-guide.pdf ).
munity in defining and achieving its desired fu-
to be the Mayor. The Mayor serves as the chair
ture. More specifically, municipalities make Gen-
of the Council. The Metro Township Council
eral Plans because:
has the authority to enact laws and ordinances
to carry out its responsibilities such as land use
◊ Utah State Code 10-9a-401 requires each
and development regulations (zoning) as long
municipality in Utah to prepare a General
as these laws and ordinances are consistent with
Plan (LUDMA, 2019).
the Utah Municipal Code and other state statutes.
◊ Plans strengthen community autonomy: The Metro Township has all the municipal
by establishing a community vision, priori- powers allocated by the Utah Municipal Code,
White City General Plan - Page 8 All About Planning - Page 9
What is in this document? Section four has the Work Program. It includes Data Gathering & Methodology analyzed using Geographic Information Systems
the major takeaways and action items from the (ArcPro). The tables of information on acreage,
There are five sections in this document. Each is other chapters. This General Plan utilized several reputable market value, housing built years, and more
further divided into chapters. sources and softwares to gather and analyze included in each Character Area also utilized this
◊ Chapter 7 - Work Program: displays the information on White City’s existing condi-
Section one consists of the acknowledgments, data source.
tangible actions, with info such as cost and tions. Several resources assisted in the data
table of contents, executive summary, and key funding source, that support the accom- Data for the mapping and analysis of parks and
gathering for most of the chapters. One of these
recommendations. plishment of the goals, priorities, and vision. trails came from the State of Utah Automated
is the United States Census Bureau’s American
Section two provides the background informa- Community Survey 2019 5-Year Estimates, Geographic Reference Center. Additionally,
Section five provides additional information:
tion that supports the content in section three. which provide information about population Geographic Information Systems geoprocessing
It includes Chapters 1-3: ◊ Chapter 8 - References and Resources tools were used by staff to trace the section of
size, demographics, economic traits, commuting
◊ Chapter 9 - Appendix A - Glossary traits, housing conditions, household sizes, and Dimple Dell Park between 700 E and 1300 E.
◊ Chapter 1 - All About Planning: explains Geoprocessing tools were also used to identify
what a general plan is and White City’s & FAQ, Appendix B - Survey Results, more. ESRI Business Analyst Online reports were
Appendix C - Moderate Income Housing also used frequently; these reports utilize Census buffers of various distances around the State of
authority in making one, as well as what is in
Plan, Appendix D - GPSC Meeting Reports. data as well as ESRI’s own spatial and consumer Utah trails and parks layers.
the document and how to use it. It outlines
the data-gathering methodology too. analyses to provide current conditions as well as TRANSPORTATION - Information regarding
How do I use this document? project future trends for a host of topics. the functional classes of roads in and around
◊ Chapter 2 - Community Engagement: White City comes from the Utah Department
This document uses visual clues to help guide the COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT - Surveys were
details how, where, and when public
reader. Text differences indicate the following: created and taken virtually through the program of Transportation (UDOT, n.d. A). This infor-
feedback was collected and incorporated.
mation was visualized using ArcPro. Data on
◊ Chapter 3 - Community Background:
Section Title Survey1-2-3. The Long Range Planning website,
Sego Lily parking, speeding, and other condi-
Section Subtitle which housed all virtual information for the
summarizes White City’s existing demo- General Plan, was hosted via the MSD using the tions comes from the unpublished Sego Lily
graphic and economic conditions. PARAGRAPH TOPICS Corridor Study. This study was conducted by
program ArcHub. Once the website was created,
Emphasized text/Figure captions White City engineers and Avenue Consulting,
Section three is the meat of the plan; each of surveys were linked to on this website.
Normal content text and the preliminary results were shared at a
Chapters 4-6 delves into a specific topic: COMMUNITY BACKGROUND - Statistics came
Additionally, pages (normal letter print sized White City Council’s June 4, 2020 meeting and
◊ Chapter 4 - Land Use: delves into how from the United State Census Bureau’s American with planning staff. The accessibility analysis
paper) or spreads (screen view, two pages
White City’s land is used now and envisions Community Survey, 5-Year estimates from was conducted by the Wasatch Front Regional
together) follow visual structures:
future land use by character areas. 2019, including tables: DP02 - Selected Social Council for all land within their service area,
Look to these boxes... for background information on Characteristics, DP04 - Selected Housing Char- including White City.
◊ Chapter 5 - Transportation: examines acteristics, DP05 - Demographic and Housing
planning concepts or ideas.
modes of transportation, infrastructure, Estimates, and S2001 - Earnings in the Past 12 LIFELONG COMMUNITIES - As an interdisciplinary
connectivity, and accessibility. Months. topic, this chapter pulled information from many
Look to purple Takeaway text... for the main idea
sources, including the United States Census
◊ Chapter 6 - Lifelong Communities: from a section. The Takeaway suggests how to move LAND USE - Data regarding parcel-based land use Bureau, Salt Lake County Health Department,
examines White City’s conditions and needs forward with the information presented. came from the Wasatch Front Regional Council’s Utah Governor’s Office of Economic Develop-
related to governance, economic opportu- 2018 Salt Lake County Parcels file geodatabase.
Look to white boxes with black text for quotes ment, and ESRI Business Analyst.
nities, aging in community, and resilience This information was accessed, displayed, and
from residents or survey responses.
and sustainability.
White City General Plan - Page 10 All About Planning - Page 11
IN-PERSON EVENTS - In addition to the standard What types of public
public meetings, four in-person Open Houses
CHAPTER TWO: and Workshops were hosted as well. Find details
engagement are there?
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
about the noticing, attendance, and outcomes The gold standard for understanding public
of these events on pages 16-23 of this chapter. engagement processes is called the IAP2
Spectrum (IAP2, 2018). It categorizes five types
SURVEYS - Especially after the emergence of the
of engagement--inform, consult, involve, collab-
COVID-19 pandemic, the Steering Committee
orate, and empower--based upon the public’s
The Importance of Community As a living document, the hope is that future and staff utilized public surveys to gather
increasing ability to impact decisions. With
updates and related outreach and education
Engagement utilize both in-person and virtual engagement
community feedback. Three surveys were
informing, the public has the least impact on
distributed to the public: Transportation and
Community engagement, together with data on methods, which have both been successful. decisions; staff provides the public with infor-
Land Use, Land and Character, and Area Needs
existing conditions, forms the backbone of any mation. With empowering, the public has the
MEETINGS - The WCC appointed a General and Priorities. All together, 197 sets of responses
good plan. This is especially true for this General most impact on decisions; the final decision is
Plan Steering Committee (GPSC) to lead the were collected from these surveys. For each
Plan, White City’s first ever, which lays out a path in the hands of the public, and the public has
charge on this General Plan. The GPSC started survey, every household in White City received
to achieve the community’s future vision. been working with staff throughout the process.
with 20 members; due to the switch to remote a postcard in the mail detailing the content and
During this general planning process, all five
Why? A valid community vision cannot be iden- meetings and changes in White City’s legisla- purpose of the new survey and how to access it.
levels of public engagement were utilized at
tified without community input. Broad outreach tion on committees, the process finished with OTHER WRITTEN FEEDBACK - Once any chapter different times. For instance, staff communicated
is necessary to gather this input, especially ten members. Between January 2019 and April of this General Plan was drafted*, it was posted information on planning concepts (inform), and
because there is no single opinion on any given 2021, 25 GPSC meetings occurred as well as 3 on the White City Long Range Planning website, members of the public created the goals for
topic. Occasionally, strong, conflicting opinions updates at Planning Commission (PC) meetings along with a virtual comment box. This allowed each chapter during meetings (collaborate).
on White City’s future arose during the General and 9 updates at WCC meetings. All meetings anyone to access the chapters and provide
Planning process. Understanding that different were open to the public, and members of the feedback to the Steering Committee. Addition- Following the Process:
opinions exist and why, and providing opportu- public did attend. Meeting agendas were posted ally, planning staff shared their phone numbers Starting in December 2019, after GPSC meetings,
nities to discuss these opinions was essential to on the Utah Public Notice website and linked to and emails, and fielded questions, comments, staff sent out a report summarizing the meeting’s
producing a robust General Plan that addresses on the White City Long Range Planning website and concerns via those mediums. purpose, attendees, process, and outcomes.
everyone’s concerns. more than 24 hours prior to meetings; directions
*Except the Housing Chapter: this was added to the website later. Reports were sent to the GPSC to ensure docu-
for accessing meetings were communicated via
Knowing this, the White City Council (WCC) and mentation of meeting efforts and enable a clear
the Newsletter, on the website, and by postcards
planning staff prioritized obtaining broad and written record that committee members could
mailed to all White City households.
substantial community input, and community easily reference to jog their memories between
input drove this General Plan and its outcomes. LONG RANGE PLANNING WEBSITE - In August 2019, meetings.
a website for the General Planning process was
The Engagement Process established. Draft plan documents, a timeline of
Additionally, official meeting minutes and/or an
auditory meeting recording were posted on the
Due to the COVID19 pandemic, the public the plan’s progress, topical information, active
Utah State Public Notice website.
engagement process looked different than surveys, survey results, maps, and more were
planned. Virtual methods of engagement posted on the website. The website was adver- Find the meeting reports in Appendix D.
Photo credit: Mikala Jordan, GSL-MSD
replaced open houses and in-person workshops. tised on postcards mailed to every household.
White City General Plan - Page 12 Community Engagement - Page 13
General Plan Engagement Major Events Timeline
17 JAN 2019: General 14 NOV 2019: Moder- 3 NOV 2020: Area THROUGHOUT
Plan Kick-off Event, ate-Income Housing Needs and Land
1 6 11
including SWOT &
APAE, occurs.
Element is adopted. Priorities Survey is
launched.
25 General Plan Steering
Committee meetings
3 Updates at Planning
23 APR 2019: GPSC 30 JAN 2020: Trans- 5 JAN 2021: GPSC Commission meetings
meetings start, portation Values meetings begin
2 approximately one 7 Workshop occurs. 12 occurring twice per 9 Updates at Council
per month. month. meetings
24 APR 2019: Commu- 8 APR 2020: Transpor- 13 APRIL 2021: Last
nity-wide Workshop, tation and Land Use GPSC meeting occurs.
3 including Top 6 Priori- 8 Survey is launched. 13
ties, occurs. T O TA L S
752+ written comments
25 JUNE 2019: Vision 8 AUG 2020: Land and ? ?? 2021: PC hears 197 submitted surveys
Statement is created Character Survey is public comments
4 at GPSC meeting. 9 launched. 14 and provides a plan
recommendation.
5 online feedback
opportunity boxes with
13 submissions
28 SEPT 2019: Moder- 11 AUG 2020: Long ? ?? 2021: WCC hears 5 in-person workshops
ate-Income Housing range planning and public comments and
5 10 15
Open House, with
voting on strategies.
general plan website
is launched.
votes on the plan.
7 mailers with updates to
residents
White City General Plan - Page 14 Community Engagement - Page 15
General Plan Kickoff Throughout this plan, the SWOT and APAE
comments related to each chapter’s topic are
On January 17th, 2019, White City held its pulled out and presented in that chapter.
General Plan Kickoff event at Eastmont Middle
School. This open house started off the process White City residents gather around the “Threats”
for White City to create this General Plan. worksheet during the General Plan Kickoff event.
As part of the open house, residents shared
their impressions of White City. First, residents
completed a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportu-
nities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis. They listed
any ideas or observations that came to mind
when they considered White City’s strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities, and threats as a
community. This analysis aims to understand
a community’s needs and possibilities. The
list to the right showcases all of the residents’
comments.
Photo credit: GSL-MSD
Then, residents participated in an Achieve,
Preserve, Avoid, and Eliminate (APAE) analysis.
This analysis looks at the interplay between “yes”
and “no.” Community members answer yes or
no to the questions: “Do we have it?” and “Do we
want it?” The answers to these questions guide
whether a particular condition, event, or charac-
teristic should be achieved, preserved, avoided,
or eliminated. The list to the left includes all
resident comments for the APAE.
Together, SWOT and APAE analyses provide the
baseline understanding of the community from
which the plan is built. The analyses reveal a
community’s understanding of its current condi-
tions and desired future. The SWOT and APAE
show the value White City places on accessing This diagram illustrates the interplay between
amenities, keeping infrastructure well-main- “yes” and “no” with regard to “Does White City
tained, walkability, and being family-friendly, have it?” and “Does White City want it?”
community-oriented, and affordable.
White City General Plan - Page 16 Community Engagement - Page 17
Community-Wide Workshop Top 6 Priorities General Plan Steering
White City hosted a community-wide workshop Committee Meetings
on April 24, 2019 in the auditorium at Eastmont The General Plan Steering Committee meetings
Middle School. 107 people attended. The goal are where the bulk of the plan creation occurs.
of this workshop was to process the SWOT and Here, appointed, volunteer members and any
APAE lists as a community and derive the main, members of the public in attendance work
overarching ideas from them. Residents voted together. They develop knowledge of existing
on the relative importance of these ideas. Thus, conditions and of public opinions. They first use
an understanding of the community’s top prior- this knowledge to develop an understanding of
ities emerged. where White City wants to be ten, twenty years
1. Preserve single family housing 4. Preserve natural resources
down the road. Then they ideate ways (policies,
What is blight? Photo Credit: Google Maps. Photo Credit: Maridene Alexander, GSL-MSD.
actions, and projects) to make that future vision
“Eliminate blight” emerged as the second highest possible.
priority for White City. So what exactly is blight? Do
When the Committee was happy with drafts,
any properties in White City fall into this category?
they were shared with the Planning Commis-
According to Utah State Code 17A-2-1221, blight
sion (PC) and Council (WCC). The PC and WCC’s
is an area with two or more of a list of ten charac-
feedback was collected at their meetings. The
teristics, including issues regarding construction,
Steering Committee discussed this feedback
overcrowding, dilapidation, and inadequate venti-
and determined which suggestions to act on.
lation or sanitation, among others (Senate Bill 53,
1997). Vision Statement
When residents mentioned blight in Steering 2. Eliminate blight 5. Walkability A vision statement summarizes what a
Committee meetings or during other public outreach Photo Credit: Steve Hardy, The Advocate. Photo Credit: Flickr, Complete Streets. community aspires to be and to embody. It gives
processes, they talked about maintenance issues. an idea of a community’s desired future. White
Roofs, siding, or fences needing repair; over-veg- City’s vision statement was created during a
etated yards; and junk in yards were commonly GPSC meeting on June 25, 2019. The Steering
discussed problems. As the fifth characteristic in the Committee used the SWOT and APAE results as
State Code includes “deterioration” and “dilapida- well as the Top 6 Priorities to derive the vision
tion,” some properties may meet one, but not two, statement. It declares:
of the characteristics of blight. Therefore, “eliminate
blight” as presented in this plan refers to mainte- “White City is a safe, affordable,
nance and upkeep issues, as opposed to an official close-knit, family-oriented, and
legislative definition of blight. Often, these issues
3. Horse property 6. Explore neighborhood commercial
unique community with access to
arise from aging, illness, or financial struggles of the
amenities that meet the diverse
householder. Photo Credit: Google Street View. Photo Credit: Google Street View.
needs of its residents.”
White City General Plan - Page 18 Community Engagement - Page 19Moderate-Income Housing PART 3 - Community members then voted on
their top three preferred Menu Items prescribed
Open House by Senate Bill 34. These items were listed in large
A Moderate-Income Housing Open House print on easels. Each community was assigned a
occurred on 28 September 2019 for White City, different color sticker for planning staff to record
Kearns, and Magna. Each household in White those items preferred by each community. White
City received a mailed flyer that advertised the City residents voted for 14 of the 23 items (Figure
event. The Open House flyer was also posted 2). Additionally, a Comments Box was provided
to the State of Utah Public Notice and White for the public to leave opinions not captured
City municipal websites. The Council, Steering by the voting exercise, or people could email
Committee, and Planning Commission were comments. Sixteen White City residents left
emailed and provided information on the open written comments for the Housing Element. The
house, and they were asked to invite friends Housing Element was adopted on November 14,
and neighbors. Local and state agencies and 2019.
non-profits concerned with housing were
Figure 2: All 14 menu items that received votes.
invited as well.
The top five are highlighted in pink.
PART 1 - At the Open House, Salt Lake County
Regional Development spoke about home
repair initiatives. White City could partner Part 2 of the Open House - Collaborating:
with these kinds of programs to strengthen its Residents gathered around this map and
moderate-income housing supply. Following The Open House Flyer.
discussed the moderate-income housing strate-
this presentation, People + Place, LLC spoke with gies most appropriate for White City.
residents about community needs, including
regional housing concerns.
PART 2 - Participants were then asked to provide
feedback and share their opinions. Planning
staff worked with communities in break-out
sessions. Large printed maps of current zoning,
housing, and transportation systems were used
as visual aids. Attendees discussed the 23 Menu
Items presented by the State of Utah in Senate
Part 1 of the Open House - Informing: Residents
Bill 34 as potential strategies for providing
listen to presentations about planning for moder-
moderate-income housing. They talked through Part 3 of the Open House - Empowering:
ate-income housing, moderate-income housing
what they thought could be implemented and Residents vote for up to their three favorite
programs, and regional housing concerns.
what they thought would be effective. They moderate-income housing strategies.
Photo Credit: GSL-MSD.
expressed concerns over zoning changes. Photo Credit: GSL-MSD.
White City General Plan - Page 20 Community Engagement - Page 21Transportation Planning Values PART 3 - The breakout groups were assigned one local ones, both are strengthened. One, the
of the top five most voted for values. Each group exchange of specific, localized information and
Workshop discussed some principles that might help to broad, overarching information supports depth
On January 30, 2020, members of the Greater clarify the values and how transportation plans of knowledge presented in both plans. And two,
Salt Lake Municipal Services District gathered could be implemented in alignment with those the alignment of various plans makes imple-
to discuss transportation values and principles values. mentation of those plans more feasible.
applicable to all the GSL-MSD communities. The
RELEVANCE - Because transportation planning This workshop was summarized to the General
Council, Planning Commission, and Steering
crosses jurisdictional boundaries, regional Plan Steering Committee, and the values
Committee were asked to represent their
coordination and collaboration regarding trans- generated from the workshop were found to
communities in this workshop. Additionally, the
portation is important. At the same time, local align with the transportation goals identified by
workshop was open to members of the public. Three White City residents chat before Part 1 of
transportation conditions and needs differ. For the Steering Committee.
The workshop had three objectives: the Transportation Values Workshop begins.
these reasons, when local plans understand
◊ to provide background information on regional ones, and when regional plans consider
transportation trends and innovations to key
GSL-MSD decision makers
Figure 3: Top Transportation Values picked by GSL-MSD Municipal Representatives
◊ to produce a suite of key transportation
values that can be used to guide transporta-
tion planning across the GSL-MSD, and
◊ to produce a suite of key transporta-
tion principles that can be used to link the
GSL-MSD to surrounding areas.
PART 1 - Speakers from the Wasatch Front
Regional Council and Salt Lake City Division of Residents from different municipalities,
Transportation Planning provided background including White City, sit together in Part 2 of the
information on transportation. workshop. They share their thoughts on local
and regional values that inform transportation
PART 2 - Participants formed breakout groups to
planning in the MSD-areas.
share their thoughts on values in the GSL-MSD.
A list of values categorized as environmental, Photo Credits: Mikala Jordan, GSL-MSD.
social and cultural, economic, or process-based
was provided to assist with brainstorming. After
discussion and rounds of voting, staff tallied the
results (Figure 3).
White City General Plan - Page 22 Community Engagement - Page 23Transportation and Land Use Land and Character Survey Please upload pictures of, or describe, places/
Survey BACKGROUND - land use planning includes under-
features of White City that you like, and think
should be preserved. Some submitted images
BACKGROUND - A Transportation Workshop standing a community’s character (unique traits)
included White Towers Swimming Pool and the
for White City specifically was planned for and its design preferences. This visually-based
agricultural properties:
March 2020. A flyer for the event was mailed survey aimed to understand how residents expe-
to each household. However, when the novel rience White City: do parts of White City differ
Coronavirus-19 broke out, the workshop was from each other, and therefore require different
postponed. When it became obvious that an planning efforts? It asked residents to upload
open house would not be possible for an indef- pictures of places or characteristics of White City
inite period, staff and the Steering Committee Figure 4: How important are the following trans- that they liked, didn’t like, wanted preserved,
portation concerns? Not important, Important, or wanted prevented. Residents could upload Images submitted by unknown White City residents.
agreed to gather widespread public opinion on
transportation needs with a survey. or Very Important? example images or submit written descriptions.
Figure 5: Select the mixed use building designs
The second part of the survey showed images of
PROCESS - The Transportation and Land Use that fit the character of White City.
built environment features and asked residents
Survey launched April 8 and closed on August which images they preferred.
21, 2020. It was distributed using electronic
and paper methods. It was sent to the Council, PROCESS - The Land and Character Survey opened
Planning Commission, and Steering Committee on August 8 and closed on October 1, 2020. Like
via email, posted on the GSL-MSD website and the Transportation and Land Use Survey, it was
social media (with paid advertising), and posted distributed using electronic and paper methods.
on the White City municipal website. Two flyers It was sent to the Council, Planning Commis-
with the link and QR code were sent to each sion, and Steering Committee via email, posted
household. The survey was also mentioned in a on the GSL-MSD website and social media, and
blurb in the White City newsletter. posted on the White City municipal website. A Figure 6: In the future, where do you think it
flyer with the link and QR code was sent to each would be most appropriate to allow mixed use
RESULTS - 70 sets of responses were collected, household, with contact information if a resident areas in White City?
with 208 written comments. The responses needed assistance with the survey.
correlated closely with Steering Committee
discussions. Findings conveyed that residents RESULTS - 53 sets of responses were obtained,
value safe neighborhoods and would like to see leaving 247 written comments and 33 pictures.
better maintained infrastructure, more public White City’s small town feel and residen-
transportation options, and increased walk- tial character were emphasized. Results also
ability. See highlights in Figure 4 to the right, or indicated varying opinions on incorporating
find the entire survey in Appendix B. mixed use. However, responses about built envi-
ronment standards can guide design regardless
of development type. See highlights in Figures
5 and 6, or find the entire survey in Appendix B.
White City General Plan - Page 24 Community Engagement - Page 25Area Needs and Land Priorities RESULTS - When the survey closed, 74 sets of Figure 8a: Feedback Appearance on Website
“Share Your Thoughts”: Online
responses had been collected, with 273 written
Survey comments. Land use considerations regarding Comment Boxes
BACKGROUND - This survey asked residents to natural resources, residential opportunities, BACKGROUND - When draft chapters (elements)
identify specific likes and dislikes in five different property rights, and home businesses are of this General Plan were produced, they were
areas within White City. It also asked residents all viewed as important, to varying degrees. posted on the White City Long Range Planning
about land use policies and priorities. Residents identified distinct characteristics of, Hub site.
and future visions for, each area. Responses for
PROCESS - The Area Needs and Land Priorities PROCESS - Comment boxes were provided so
the Canal Corridor, Sego Lily Corridor, and Resi-
Survey launched November 3 and closed on that residents could leave feedback on the
dential Neighborhoods areas illustrate a highly
December 10, 2020. Like previous surveys, it was draft chapter (Figures 8a and 8b). Additionally,
unified vision for each of those areas. Responses
advertised using electronic and paper methods. a version of this question was posed for each
regarding the Southern Spur and 10600
It was posted on the GSL-MSD website and social chapter: “Does the draft element generally
Corridors convey more than one vision for each
media, and posted on the White City municipal reflect your preferences for the future of [that
of those areas. See highlights below in Figure 7,
website. A flyer with the link was mailed to each element] in White City?” This question was asked
or find the entire survey in Appendix B.
household. for the Transportation, Land Use, and Lifelong
Communities elements. When mailers were sent
Figure 7: The graph below depicts the number of “Very Important” responses to five themes: Preserving to residents to inform them of new surveys,
White City’s agricultural land, especially the ability to raise and ride horses; Preserving the single-family the opportunities to leave feedback on draft
bungalow, ranch, and minimal traditional style housing characteristic of White City; Supporting at-home elements were included as well.
businesses whose sales tax revenues help fund capital improvement projects in White City; Protecting
and valuing natural resources, such as the parks and trails; and, Respecting individuals’ rights to use RESULTS - Thirteen sets of responses were
their properties. submitted, including eight written comments.
Figure 8b: Feedback Survey
Of the sixteen responses regarding whether a
chapter generally reflected a residents’ prefer-
ences, eleven agreed or strongly agreed, three
were neutral, and two disagreed or strongly
disagreed. Comment boxes for individual
chapters closed on March 24th, 2021. Upon
the closing of the individual comment boxes, a
comment box for the entire plan was activated
on the website. This comment box is accessible
throughout the formal public comment process
that happens after the Steering Committee
passes the fully drafted plan to the Planning
Commission and before the Planning Commis-
sion hosts their public hearing to consider
recommending the plan.
White City General Plan - Page 26 Community Engagement - Page 27Figure 9: White City, Utah
CHAPTER THREE:
COMMUNITY BACKGROUND
History (Salt Lake Surveyor’s Office, 1933), and in 1950,
Sandy had 2,092 residents (Salt Lake County
Native American hunter-gatherers first inhabited Surveyor’s Office, 1951).
what would become Utah as early as 10,000
B.C.E. (Lewis, n.d.). In approximately 400 C.E., the In the 1950s, settlement in the Salt Lake Valley
Fremont peoples made northern and eastern began to pick up again. Two developers, Ken
Utah their home (Ibid). Later, the Shoshone, White and Cannon Papanicholas, began building
Paiute, Goshute, and Ute peoples lived in parts in an area that Ken White dubbed “White City”
of the Salt Lake Valley (SLCo, n.d. A) and likely (White City, n.d.). White City soon became a
traveled in what is today White City. census-designated place. The community grew,
becoming an unincorporated township in 2006
In 1847, pioneers of the Church of Jesus Christ and an incorporated metro township in 2017.
of the Latter-Day Saints entered the Salt Lake
Valley. Some farms were established in the Today
southeastern area of modern day Salt Lake
White City today is a community of 5,810 people
County; otherwise, the area experienced limited
located in the southeastern part of Salt Lake
development until the 1860s. In 1864, silver was
County, Utah (United States Census Bureau,
discovered in Little Cottonwood Canyon (Notar-
2019) (Figure 9). White City is surrounded by
ianni, n.d.). This discovery spurred the building
Sandy City but retains a distinct, unique identity.
of mills and smelters in the area. Additionally,
Find a summary infographic of demographic
railroad expansion, including the Denver and
and economic trends on pages 30-31; it uses
Rio Grande Railroad’s Little Cottonwood Branch,
data from the United States Census Bureau’s
encouraged development (UtahRails.net, 2019).
“American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates,“
Sandy City was the first community in the area 2019. For a thorough report on White City’s
to incorporate, in 1893 (Notarianni, n.d.). Growth recent existing conditions, look at the 2019
in Sandy and the greater southeastern Salt White City Technical Assessment which predom-
Lake County area remained low during several inantly uses 2017 American Community Survey
decades of a “bust,” when mining operations data (GSL-MSD, 2019 B).
slowed. In 1930, Sandy had a population of 1,436
White City General Plan - Page 28 Community Background - Page 29WHITE CITY AT A POPULATION HOUSING 47.2% have lived in White
City for 20+ years
GLANCE
There are 362 one-person
432.7 acres 1,929 households $338,931* households and 1,522
family households.
0.67 square miles median house value
119 households are without
Southeastern 1,674 a vehicle
5,810 people
Salt Lake County, owner-occupied units 962 people aged 65+ years
Utah
255 7.5% of households are a
person 65+ years living alone
renter-occupied units
$63,446 3.0 is the average
median household income household size
86.8% speak only English at
EDUCATION home
$50,692 34.8% of households
male median earnings have at least one child 13.2% speak a language
under 18 years old 87.3% other than English at home
$33,400 high school graduate or 7.4% speak Spanish at home
female median earnings 3,398 people higher
91.2% identify as white
are in the labor force
24.9%
452 people and 8.9% of 2.7% identify as two or more
families live below the bachelor’s races
poverty line 15.7% or graduate
degree 2.7% identify as Asian
of people have a disability
*2021 Estimate from Esri Community Analyst; All other data
Data from United States Census Bureau, 2019. presented was derived from United States Census Bureau, 2019.
White City General Plan - Page 30 Community Background - Page 31The Importance of Land Use What does the State Code say
CHAPTER FOUR: about Land Use?
The Land Use Element establishes a vision for the
LAND USE future pattern of development in a community.
It is the single most important element of the
The state of Utah acknowledges the importance
of land use regulation to community develop-
General Plan, bridging each of the plan’s unique ment and wellbeing. To comply with state law,
sections together. Understanding current land Utah municipalities must incorporate a land
use challenges and planning for future land use use element into the General Plan. According to
opportunities is critical because land use is part Utah State Code 10-9a-403, General Plans must
of the fabric of a community. Why? Land use include in the land use element:
impacts everything: housing, transportation,
economic opportunities, access to daily needs, “The long-term goals and the proposed extent,
and quality of life. general distribution, and location of land for
housing for residents of various income levels,
For example, thoughtful land use ensures that business, industry, agriculture, recreation,
households have access to transportation and education, public buildings and grounds, open
recreational amenities, that schools are not space, and other categories of public and private
Photo credit: Maridene Alexander, GSL-MSD located near sources of pollution, that local busi- uses of land as appropriate” (LUDMA, 2020).
nesses receive the traffic they need to stay afloat,
Key Recommendations: (primarily detached residences) while also
and that municipal services and infrastructure Additionally, the land use element may include:
promoting a quality of life that attracts and “a statement of the projections for and standards
Focus on area-specific, small-scale can be provided efficiently. The pattern of land
sustains new families and the housing needs of population density and building intensity
infrastructure improvements that use in a community is thus a major determinant
of the Salt Lake valley. recommended for the various land use catego-
incorporate place-making; these will of area character and quality of life. Even though
ries covered by the plan” (LUDMA, 2020).
enhance the day-to-day experiences ◊ LU3: Promote a sense of pride and identity White City is entirely built out, having a well-in-
of residents on their land and in public in the community through maintaining formed, community-driven land use element is This chapter of the General Plan meets and
spaces. Update land use codes to be and enhancing place-making infrastructure. essential for the community to realize its vision exceeds these requirements. Various land uses
tailored to White City’s specific wants for itself. are analyzed and discussed, and standards for
◊ LU4: Establish landscaping and main-
and needs. Throughout this chapter, the connections density and intensity for different areas are
tenance standards that make White City a
between White City’s land use and the afore- proposed. Additionally, a clear vision, with both
distinctly scenic, fun and appealing place to
Goals: live and visit. mentioned topics are explored through qualitative and quantitative descriptions, is
data-analysis, public feedback, and on-the- provided for each area, in order to ensure that
◊ LU1: Ensure that effective land use ◊ LU5: Enhance recreational amenities and development decisions align with the commu-
ground experiences.
planning is kept in balance with preserving access to public parks and open spaces. nity’s wants and needs.
the freedom and rights of individual land-
◊ LU6: All land use decisions include efforts
owners.
to maintain or improve air and water quality.
◊ LU2: Maintain and promote White City’s
neighborhood-scale housing character
White City General Plan - Page 32 Land Use - Page 33Who is involved with land use What does the community have
planning in White City? to say about land use?
White City has land use authority over the areas MEETINGS - Nine GPSC meetings focused on land
within its boundaries. White City has an elected use (May 2020 - January 2021). GPSC meetings
body, the Council, and an appointed body, tackled controversial topics, such as private
the Planning Commission, both of which are property rights and how much land use change
involved with land use decisions. The Planning should occur in White City’s future; committee
Commission makes recommendations to the members represented various opinions on these
Council regarding General Plans, zoning, land topics.
use ordinances, and subdivision applications.
SURVEYS - White City residents expressed their
The Council has final land use authority and, as
thoughts on land use via three surveys described
the legislative body, determines land use ordi-
in the Community Engagement Chapter: Trans-
nances.
portation and Land Use, Land and Character,
and Area Needs and Land Priorities. In total, 197
unique responses on land use were collected via
these three surveys. Surveys showed a desire to
maintain White City’s primarily residential feel
and to improve land use aesthetics via mainte-
nance and landscaping. Surveys also revealed
some desire for increased business opportuni-
Photo Credit: White City Metro Township
ties, such as by allowing small-scale mixed-use
(commercial or institutional and residential)
Land use planning occurs at local, regional, properties in specific areas.
and state levels. White City contracts with the
GSL-MSD to provide land use services, including VISION STATEMENT - White City’s Vision Statement
planning and ordinance development. However, emphasizes the values placed on community
land use values relevant to White City appear in and on neighborliness; these values can and
state and regional spaces, such as the regional should be supported by land use decisions.
Takeaway: Exploring small-scale commercial
plan, Wasatch Choice 2050 (WFRC, 2019). It is PRIORITIES: - The Top 6 Priorities all relate to land
development is viewed both negatively and posi-
important to recognize these values, as aligning use and indicate interest in a predominantly tively; it appears under “threat” and “avoid,” yet
White City’s goals with regional and statewide residential community with a mix of other uses. the lack of commercial tax base is a “weakness”
values increases the likelihood of acquiring Takeaway: White City should maintain its resi-
SWOT AND APAE ANALYSES - Both the SWOT and annexing businesses is an “achieve”: finding
funding and successfully implementing projects. dential, neighborhood feel, explore options to
and APAE analyses convey multiple issues and a balance is important.
improve community aesthetics, protect property
opportunities related to land use. Find the public
rights, and protect outdoor amenities.
comments from these analyses on page 35.
White City General Plan - Page 34 Land Use - Page 35Figure 9: White City developed from the northwest down to the southeast.
A Brief History of Land Use in pattern with few outlying structures, there have
been few rebuilds in White City up to this point.
and around White City
Through this time, White City’s boundaries have
While two White City structures were built
experienced some change. In 1980, White City
before 1900 (one farmhouse on the corner of
was a community but not a recognized township
Buddlea Drive and Columbine Circle, and one
and included additional land below 10600 South
on 10600 South), development of White City
but no land above 9400 South (Figure 10). The
took off in 1955 (Figure 9). The first part of White
boundary around S Dolomite Lane and E Cobalt
City to be settled was Galena Drive. Develop-
Lane also shifted. Today’s boundaries were
ment continued around Galena, in the area west
established in 2006 when White City became
of the Canal Trail between Emerald Drive to the
an unincorporated township. Dimple Dell Park
north and Larkspur Drive to the south, and east
bisects White City but is is not under the juris-
of the Canal Trail around Antimony Lane and
diction of White City nor within its boundaries.
Barrium Lane. The majority of the rest of White
City developed before 1980. Based on the clear
Figure 10: Boundaries from 1980
Map Credit: Salt Lake County Surveyor’s Office.
White City General Plan - Page 36 Land Use - Page 37Parcel-based Land Use GOVERNMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL - 24.5 acres Figure 11: Current Land Use
(4.4%) are used for government and institutional
Land use varies at the parcel level (Figure 11). purposes, including one school and several
Variation among parcels can occur within churches.
the same zone. For example, within a single-
Parcel count: 16
family residential zone, one parcel might have
a two-story home, while one adjacent parcel is Median parcel acreage: 0.14 acres
vacant and another hosts a school. Grouping Median building square feet: 2,006
parcels allows land use patterns to emerge. Median parcel value: $160,650
The WFRC produced a dataset in 2018 that Earliest & latest year built: 1969, 2018
uses aerial imagery to categorize how parcels
COMMERCIAL - 1.7 acres (0.3%) of land are used
are used. While this system is not guaran-
for commercial purposes.
teed to reflect uses with 100 percent accuracy,
comparing the relative amount of parcels per Parcel count: 2
land use category provides an overall picture of Median parcel acreage: 0.95 acres
land use in the community. Median building square feet: 6,364
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - Land is primarily Median parcel value: $575,400
used for single family residential purposes. In Earliest & latest year built: 1968, 1996
fact, 386.0 acres, or 70% of White City’s 551.5
ROADWAYS AND UTILITIES - 114.1 acres (20.7%)
acres, is used for single family residences. An
and 50 parcels are taken up by roads and utilities.
additional 0.55 acres (0.1%) are associated single
family parcels. VACANT - 1.4 acres and 8 parcels register as
Parcel count: 1,889 vacant via the aerial imagery analysis.
Median parcel acreage: 0.19 acres OTHER - 1.8 acres and 2 parcels are used for other
Median building square feet: 1,972 uses, including the pool.
Median parcel value: $222,900 NEARBY LAND USES: While land near White City is
primarily single family residential as well, there
Earliest & latest year built: 1903, 2017
is a greater mix of other uses. Commercial and
OPEN AND/OR PARK SPACE - White City land is government/institutional properties are concen-
also used for open and/or park space. Big Bear trated in the State Street and I-15 Corridors
Park and the Canal Trail together take up 21.5 to the west, the 700 E Corridor, and between
acres (3.9%). 8600 S and 9400 S. These commercial areas are
Parcel count: 26 likely frequented by White City residents. Several
Median parcel acreage: 0.13 acres large, regional parks are located in the vicinity
too - most notably, Dimple Dell Park.
Median parcel value: $6,450
White City General Plan - Page 38 Land Use - Page 39You can also read
