At its core, upzoning is a change in land-use rules to give property owners more options for how they use their property. Most of Salt Lake City was zoned decades ago to allow only a narrow range of house types to be built on most properties. Upzoning is a shorthand term for updating those rules to allow a wider variety of home options—like duplexes, townhomes, and backyard cottages. Upzoning creates flexibility for builders and property owners to choose home types that reflect our city’s changing needs.

Infill development means building new homes on vacant or underutilized land within existing neighborhoods—building “in” rather than “out.” It’s about making better use of the space we already have. Infill allows us to create more home options near where people work and shop, reducing sprawl into our open lands and providing homes at more attainable prices. Infill development means new homes can plug into—and pay into—existing infrastructure systems, like roads and water lines, instead of needing new infrastructure construction, which helps keep city services affordable for everyone. Infill development also significantly benefits the environment—promoting more connected neighborhoods and shorter commutes, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions by decreasing vehicle miles traveled.

Missing middle housing refers to home types such as duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes, cottage court apartments, townhomes, and other smaller, multi-unit home types. It is “middle” because it occupies an important set of housing options between the single-detached house and the midrise apartment, and “missing” because across most of the United States, including Salt Lake City, they have become an endangered species due to exclusionary zoning rules. These home types used to be legal and can still be found in many older neighborhoods, but became largely illegal to build in the early-to-mid 20th century, as cities sought to segregate people by race and class.

Missing middle home types are often more affordable than single-detached houses because each home tends to be smaller, and they enable the sharing of land and infrastructure costs across more households. 

• The U.S. Census shows that, across the country, the median monthly cost of a single-detached house—legal to build on essentially any residential lot in the country—is 17-18% higher than a home in a 2-to-9-unit middle housing complex, which is banned by zoning in the vast majority of American residential land.
• In Utah, the median sales price of condos, townhomes, and twin homes was approximately $150,000 less than that of a single-family home, according to a recent report by the Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute.
• In addition, extensive research from places that have legalized missing middle housing, such as Durham, Portland, Arizona, Houston, and Minneapolis has shown that housing prices drop as more homes come onto the market. After reforms were implemented in Austin, TX, rents saw the greatest decline (11%) in older non-luxury apartments that cater to lower-income renters.

The Expanding Housing Options proposal focuses on adding homes where sewer, water, stormwater, and other infrastructure systems are already available and have capacity to accommodate more homes. Allowing modest home types like accessory dwelling units or duplexes in existing neighborhoods means new construction will be at a small scale, and will be spread out over a wide area, so no single system is overwhelmed. This kind of slow and steady growth can be carefully planned for. Routine monitoring can detect capacity issues in advance, and give engineers and planners time to adjust if anything changes in the future.

Developers do make a profit, but when restrictive rules limit what can be built, only expensive homes are feasible and get built. Prohibiting certain home types and imposing costly approval processes doesn’t make sense for builders, for families, or for our city. Outdated rules on what and where you can build add untold costs to builders, making it nearly impossible for them to build anything other than a McMansion, thus driving up prices for prospective homebuyers. When not enough homes get built, we end up with a seller’s market, and landlords and sellers have leverage to exploit competition between buyers and renters. Making it easier to build more home types levels the playing field because more building projects get completed, and our families, seniors, and workforce can find homes at price points they need. 

Allowing more home types also creates more opportunities for local builders. Small businesses are eager to meet their communities’ demands for more affordable housing options, but are either banned from building anything but “McMansions” or get caught up in the opaque, discretionary bureaucratic processes that are nearly impossible to navigate for all but the largest companies with lawyers on deck. Expanding building opportunities means more local businesses can grow and contribute to the local economy.

No, Salt Lake City has many single-family neighborhoods, and single-family detached homes will continue to be an option. This proposal is about adding choices, not subtracting neighborhoods. By modifying standards for lot dimensions, setbacks, building heights, and lot coverage, EHO will enable modest home types like duplexes and townhomes that are compatible with existing, established neighborhoods and attainable to buy or rent. Homeowners would not be required to change their property, and builders would not be excluded from building single-family detached homes. Instead, homebuyers would have the flexibility to choose a smaller single-family home—providing new, more affordable starter home options—and a small-scale homebuilder would be able to create a townhome that fits the look and feel of a neighborhood street. 

It’s a testament to Salt Lake City’s quality of life that so many residents love their neighborhoods. Everyone deserves a chance to live in a neighborhood they love, whether they are lower-income, middle-income or higher-income—there should be room for everyone to find an option that works. But right now, approximately 77% of Salt Lake City's residentially zoned land allows only large single-family homes, limiting who can afford to live in those neighborhoods. Expanding Housing Options aims to add modest home types in neighborhoods with good amenities, jobs, and access to opportunities so more residents have a fair shot at finding a home they can afford  in a neighborhood they love. 

Highly unlikely. National research highlights how large national investment corporations are buying up older, single-detached homes in need of repair and renting them out, often at higher prices. Researchers have found that, in memos to their investors, private equity firms identify housing scarcity as the main driver of their investment strategy and that they avoid areas with abundant housing. Additionally, mega-investors appear to specifically target homes averaging 1,850–2,000 sq ft, built after 2000, in fast-growing metro areas—predominantly Sunbelt suburban subdivisions. Small-batch infill construction spread across Salt Lake City’s urban neighborhoods is structurally incompatible with that model. 

Houston's record is particularly instructive. The city's lot-size reforms enabled more than 34,000 new townhomes between 2007 and 2020. And according to Houston Chronicle data (2026), large institutional investors accounted for only 1.9 percent of cash home purchases in the Houston metro in 2025—the largest such investor submitted 4,314 bids but completed just 105 purchases. 

Every reasonable person agrees that corporate entities outcompeting individual buyers is a problem. But it is the scarcity created by restrictive zoning that makes residential properties attractive to investors in the first place. National evidence points toward expanding the supply of homes as the primary solution, not restricting investors. Salt Lake City's housing affordability crisis — 16% of homes within reach of median income, 9th most expensive state market — is a supply crisis, not primarily an investor crisis. Expanding Housing Options, allowing more homes to be built in our communities that are naturally more affordable, addresses the root cause. 

When the population grows and homebuilding doesn’t keep pace with demand, housing prices go up. Housing becomes unaffordable for many residents, especially lower-income residents and those on fixed incomes. Over half of Salt Lake City’s renter households are rent burdened, spending more than one-third of their income on housing. When they are unable to keep up with rising rents or home prices, people are displaced: they move to a different neighborhood, a different city, or, tragically, to the street. Allowing more homes across the city, including in areas of high opportunity—wealthier neighborhoods with access to grocery stores, good schools, and parks—reduces the pressure on the housing market and on at-risk neighborhoods. 

People our communities rely on—like teachers, childcare workers, and service and retail workers—can't find homes they can afford in Salt Lake City. And when there are not enough homes, people move further out to find housing, creating sprawl, longer commutes, and more climate-warming pollution. Expanding Housing Options can support the City’s climate and water conservation goals. 

Increasing homes near jobs and transit means people can spend less time and fuel commuting to work or amenities. Transportation is one of the largest contributors to carbon pollution in Salt Lake City, with nearly 56% of greenhouse gas emissions coming from motor vehicles. By increasing infill development, we will reduce car trips and carbon emissions, also improving local air quality

Adding more middle housing options like townhomes and duplexes helps reduce sprawl by allowing slightly taller, compact development that grows up rather than out. This protects our open spaces and farmland.

Infill development makes use of existing infrastructure, giving it a lower environmental footprint. Compared to suburban alternatives, infill housing in Salt Lake City would result in less driving and lower energy and water consumption per home. At a time when water is scarce, we should encourage more home options that don’t have large yards to water and maintain – like modest middle housing options on smaller lots – to ensure we can weather the drought.

Expanding housing options is an effective way to support Salt Lake City’s public schools. Salt Lake County schools are struggling with declining enrollment. When families have to move away, they take their tax dollars with them. Adding more affordable home options in the school district will bring back young families and keep our classrooms and our budget steady.

Historically, some cities and towns have used zoning to enforce the segregation of people of color from communities with well-funded public services, access to good jobs, and a healthy environment. For decades, local governments have limited the diversity of allowed home types to prevent lower-income residents from living in certain neighborhoods. Expanding housing options in Salt Lake City can improve housing affordability and advance racial equity. 

Being able to stay in your home or neighborhood as you get older is called “aging in place.” Right now, home prices in Salt Lake City are increasing significantly. If this trend continues, the seniors who have lived in this community their entire lives will be forced to move as property taxes increase alongside rising home prices. Additionally, many older adults in Salt Lake City live in large single-family homes that are difficult to maintain and no longer suit their needs, but there are no smaller, more affordable options in their communities for them to move into. If we want a community where people can downsize and stay near loved ones, with walkable neighborhoods near needed-services, we need to allow more home types. Duplexes, townhomes, and other new home types can help stabilize both for-sale and rental prices.