Published by Paul Ivinskas · Politically neutral. No endorsements.
Wednesday, November 4, 2026

Utah, on the record.

Same sections for every candidate. Every fact linked to its source. How we stay neutral →

Salt Lake City development tracker

Sugar House former Wells Fargo site

Proposal for a new MU-15 form-based mixed-use zone and Sugar House Master Plan amendment to convert a former bank branch on 1.22 acres to mixed-use residential. The Planning Commission forwarded a negative recommendation.

In reviewStatus as of Dec 3, 2024

Type
Zone change
Location
About 1095 East 2100 South
Size
1.22 acres
Applicant
Snell & Wilmer for Harbor Bay Ventures

In brief

Sugar House former Wells Fargo site appears on one recorded agenda: the City Council work session meeting of December 3, 2024.

Follow the money and project delivery

Sugar House former Wells Fargo site

In review

  1. Council action

    In review according to the dated project source. Record → · Dec. 3, 2024

  2. Money in the record

    No itemized amount linked in the records collected.

  3. Signed agreement and payments

    Execution and project-level disbursements are not verified by this tracker. They require separate records; meeting approval alone does not establish either.

  4. Work and operating costs

    Check the linked records for completion and recurring operating costs; this tracker does not verify them. Record →

Every hearing and vote

  1. December 3, 2024 · City Council work session

    Sugar House master plan, zoning map and text amendment at 1095 East 2100 South

    No action

    The briefing on a proposal for a new MU-15 form-based mixed-use zone and Sugar House Master Plan amendment to redevelop the former Wells Fargo bank branch on 1.22 acres into mixed-use residential was not held and was postponed. The Planning Commission forwarded a negative recommendation, so ordinances have not been drafted. The petitioner is Snell & Wilmer for Harbor Bay Ventures.

    • Applicant: Snell & Wilmer for owner Harbor Bay Ventures
    • Acres: 1.22
    • Planning Commission: negative recommendation
    • Council District 7