BAT Response to BallPark Next

The Ballpark Action Team is a grassroots organization of neighbors and businesses all about building connections and celebrating the unique spirit of our neighborhood. Our events and public meetings bring neighbors together, spark conversations, and showcase the heart of Ballpark. We want to inspire pride and ensure everyone feels a sense of belonging here. Whether we’re advocating for smart urban development or just creating spaces for fun and collaboration, our goal is to uplift our community. 

This memo summarizes our feedback to the Ballpark NEXT Community Design Plan. 

BAT is genuinely encouraged by the release of the Ballpark NEXT Community Design Plan. After years of uncertainty, we’re thrilled to see a vision that begins to reflect the hopes and priorities of our neighborhood. The plan includes many exciting features that will strengthen the Ballpark as a vibrant, inclusive, and connected community. 

We remain deeply concerned about the pace of progress. Two and a half years after the Bees announced they were moving to Daybreak, the team is long gone and already playing in their new stadium, the state has created two new special districts focused on sports downtown, and the city has moved ahead with plans for the Green Loop.  In contrast, we are just now receiving a plan for what comes next for the Ballpark neighborhood. Its release is a welcome step forward, but the absence of a clear implementation timeline leaves us worried that momentum could stall once again. Without defined milestones, it’s difficult for residents to hold the city accountable or to feel confident that this vision will become reality any time soon.

We are encouraged by the plan’s emphasis on housing diversity and affordability. The inclusion of multiple ownership models and attainable housing options is a major win for the neighborhood. It should be noted, however, that many in our community voiced opposition to using these public assets for any housing, knowing full well that the developers in the area would fill that need. If the plan is to include so many housing structures, we request that you require a large percentage be designated for home ownership. As you know, just 16% of our neighbors own their homes, compared to 66% in the metro area. Given that the housing will be built on publicly owned land, the City should focus on creative means to grow homeownership, with long term renters and residents, essential workers, families, artists and others who add to our neighborhood a priority.

We have two additional concerns around the built environment of this plan.

• Large stand-alone parking garages go against multiple design guidelines laid out for this process. They fail to activate the ground floor, block views of the mountains and are counter to the transit orientation of this plan. BAT recognizes the need for additional density, but we believe that underground parking structures combined with a larger use of the footprint for missing community assets like a child care / community / rec center would be a better fit for our public transit dense neighborhood. 

• The height and size of some of the buildings are totally out of place. This is especially true in the north parking lot section facing West Temple and along 1300 South, where buildings of 120 and 200 feet will dwarf existing structures, block daylight, and risk turning parts of Ballpark into a new 400 South. 

  
  

The proposed multi-use field and new park space are exciting additions that will bring much-needed recreational opportunities to the area. However, there is simply not enough green space.

• Green space was the #1 request of neighbors at all community meetings. A playing field, a small park in the north section, a tiny plot by a possible library and a walkable path do not create anywhere near enough green space or a larger tree canopy. We are losing a potential 14.6 acres of greenspace for 3.5 acres of small parks, walkways and a playing field. This is unacceptable. 

• We are concerned that the placement of the largest building on the north end of the field could limit visibility and reduce safety—especially without active storefronts facing the park. This could generate the same safety issues that have long plagued Jefferson Park, this neighborhood’s only other major greenspace.

  
  

Connectivity is another area where we see both promise and room for improvement. Key standouts from the plan are the reconnection of Richards Street on the south end of the lot and the strengthened mid-block crossing on 1300S. 

• While the focus on walkability and biking is greatly appreciated, the plan fails to describe how this will tie into existing community infrastructure such as the TRAX station and bike lanes on Main St. and 300 W. 

• Additionally, 1300 S is a high-traffic corridor and this plan fails to address whether this street will undergo traffic calming measures like 900 S to make crossing the road easier for pedestrians or if it will be treated like 300 W, where the addition of bike infrastructure helps, but cars still dominate the road. This road, like the freeway and the underpass at Mead, cuts our neighborhood in half and we would like the plan to more fully address this barrier.  

  
  

This plan has delivered on several much-needed and highly requested community resources to the neighborhood, such as a new library, a new green space / sports field, a new park with a daylighted creek (very exciting!), a concert / event venue, and the potential for a local produce market and festivals. The addition of affordable retail space is another win for the community and we look forward to hearing plans about how the city will use these spaces to lift up entrepreneurs from the neighborhood. These are meaningful investments that strongly reflect the community input in this process. However:

• The promise of addressing the social determinants of health are not met here. There is no mention of health care access, child care, cultural centers or a rec center, which the residents supported during community engagement sessions and which were a feature of prior iterations.

• Although not final, the current location of the (potential?) library also appears to severely limit the number of retail locations that could serve alcohol in any form, which further restricts the types of businesses that could take advantage of these new retail spaces. Residents have consistently prioritized restaurants and bars as activators and economic development tools. 

• We also hope to see a stronger commitment to delivering a grocery store and the addition of a splash pad to the playground area to make the area more family-friendly and healthy during the summer months. More trees are essential. 

• Commercial spaces should prioritize businesses being displaced by redevelopment, including restaurants, businesses that drive foot traffic like bars and art galleries, and should have entrances on the street as well as internal to the stadium space.  

We are concerned that the seating in the re-use of the stadium is too small and that the view is obstructed. We heard that the missing middle in venues is around 6,000 seats. This plan is for closer to 4,000. While additional seating is available on the field, this runs counter to the stated plan to have the X Games and other sporting events. And the current plan includes a view of a parking garage, not the mountains! 

Lastly and perhaps most significantly, we feel that this plan fails to acknowledge the history of this area. While we love the partial reuse of the stadium, the drawings fail to show anything that would feel familiar to residents. Reusing the steel and concrete bones of the structure while putting up educational placards in the park is not enough to pay homage to Salt Lake’s original working-class neighborhood’s rich sports and cultural legacy. Will you use the original seating? If you remove the name “Ballpark” from these plans, we do not see enough to create a sense of place that’s grounded in our history. 

More public art, (including the art that is already a part of the stadium), could elevate that rich and diverse history. Recognizing the deliberate redlining of our neighborhood and the long term harm it caused residents and all of Salt Lake is another idea. This plan is a critical step in undoing that profound harm and can be stronger. 

We sincerely thank the city and the CRA for their work on this plan and for incorporating many community-driven ideas. We know that the hundreds of residents who attended BAT-led community meetings have helped shape this plan, and that they are anxious for real progress. However, the community called for – and was led to believe – that this planning process would result in something ‘iconic’.  Apartments buildings and a playing field with stadium seating are not iconic. We believe this plan is a good start - but it can and must be far more creative, innovative and place-specific. As one of our Urban Development committee members put it “Let’s take the opportunity to build something capable of lifting the Ballpark up and carrying it far above the “People’s Freeway” past. The people of SLC and Ballpark know what is capable here, we can make authentic improvements and real changes that will last generations. Let’s get real, make hard decisions, face the truth and create something we can be proud of for a very long time.” 

We look forward to continued collaboration as the plan moves toward implementation. With clear timelines, thoughtful adjustments and a shared commitment to action, we believe this project can truly deliver on its promise—and help the Ballpark neighborhood thrive for generations to come.