The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/10/2026 - Work Session - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA WORK SESSION February 10, 2026 Tuesday 4:00 PM Council meetings are held in a hybrid meeting format. Hybrid meetings allow people to join online or in person at the City & County Building. Learn more at www.slc.gov/council/agendas. Council Work Room 451 South State Street Room 326 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 SLCCouncil.com 4:00 PM Work Session Or immediately following the 2:00 PM Community Reinvestment Agency Meeting No Formal Meeting Please note: A general public comment period will not be held this day. This is the Council's monthly scheduled briefing meeting. CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS: Alejandro Puy, Chair District 2 Erika Carlsen, Vice Chair District 5 Victoria Petro District 1 Chris Wharton District 3 Eva Lopez Chavez District 4 Dan Dugan District 6 Sarah Young District 7 The Work Session is a discussion among Council Members and select presenters. The public is welcome to listen. Items scheduled on the Work Session may be moved and / or discussed during a different portion of the Meeting based on circumstance or availability of speakers. The Website addresses listed on the agenda may not be available after the Council votes on the item. Not all agenda items will have a webpage for additional information read associated agenda paperwork. Generated: 11:51:41 Welcome and public meeting rules Note: Dates not identified in the project timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined. Item start times and durations are approximate and are subject to change. Work Session Items 1.Informational: Economic Development Revolving Loan Fund Review ~ 4:00 p.m. 30 min. The Council will receive a year-end briefing from the Department of Economic Development on the Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF) program. The briefing will cover program successes and challenges, loan repayment processes when businesses close, the determination of interest rates, and the impact of these factors on the fund's sustainability. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, February 10, 2026 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a 2.Ordinance: Temporary Street Closure for Temple Square 2027 Reopening ~ 4:30 p.m. 30 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would temporarily close all or portions of City streets adjacent to the Salt Lake City Temple. The proposal would mitigate unsafe conditions, and facilitate public safety and crowd management during the Temple Reopening Celebration. The temporary street closures would occur between March 2027 and October 2027. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, February 10, 2026 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, February 3, 2026 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, March 10, 2026 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 24, 2026 3.Ordinance: Fence and Hedge Height Text Amendment ~ 5:00 p.m. 25 min. The Council will receive a briefing about proposals that would amend multiple sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code. The first proposal would increase the fence height of front yard fences (between the front lot line and the primary façade of the principal structure) from the required four feet to a maximum of six feet in all M-1 (Light Manufacturing) and M-1A (Northpoint Light Industrial) zoning districts City-wide. A second proposal would clarify the height and location of fences, walls, and hedges, in accordance with the defined clear view standards. Currently, fences, walls, and hedges are all regulated the same in the ordinance. Planning staff has recommended removing the word “hedges” to be replaced with the word “landscaping” in the fencing ordinance and the ground mounted utility boxes ordinance. They have also recommended increasing the rear and side yard fence height to a maximum of seven feet. Other sections of Title 21A may also be amended as part of this petition. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, February 10, 2026 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, February 17, 2026 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, March 10, 2026 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 24, 2026 Standing Items 4.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair - - Report of the Chair and Vice Chair 5.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director - - Report of the Executive Director, including a review of Council information items and announcements. The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to City Council business, including but not limited to scheduling items. 6.Tentative Closed Meeting - - The Council will consider a motion to enter into Closed Meeting. A closed meeting described under Utah Code Annotated (UCA) Section §52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including, but not limited to discussing: a. discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual. b. strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining. c. strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation. d. strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration, or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms. e. strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration, or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms. (ii) the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale, and (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale. f. discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems. g. investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code § 78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act. CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, February 5, 2026, the undersigned, duly appointed City Recorder, does hereby certify that the above notice and agenda was (1) posted on the Utah Public Notice Website created under Utah Code Section 63F-1-701, and (2) a copy of the foregoing provided to The Salt Lake Tribune and/or the Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any others who have indicated interest. KEITH REYNOLDS SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER Final action may be taken in relation to any topic listed on the agenda, including but not limited to adoption, rejection, amendment, addition of conditions and variations of options discussed. The City & County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slc.gov, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF MEMO CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Austin Kimmel DATE:February 10, 2026 RE: INFORMATIONAL: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND (EDLF) UPDATE ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE Goal of the briefing: To learn more about the EDLF program, including its successes, challenges, and the Department’s approach to balancing business support with the fiscal responsibility in maintaining the revolving loan fund. POLICY QUESTIONS Item Schedule: Page | 2 4. The Council could ask the department about the typical recovery rate through collections and collateral for businesses that close and default on loans. Council Members could also ask how common these situations are among loan recipients. BACKGROUND A.Program History. The program was created in 1991 as the Revolving Loan Fund and renamed the Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF) in 2014. In 2019, the Department of Economic Development began managing the program. The Department of Economic Development maintains the EDLF corpus to support the program's goals. Each loan application is pre-screened, and an underwriting analysis and economic impact statement are completed before it is recommended for Loan Committee review. Information on successful applications is transmitted to the Council to consider for final approval. B.EDLF Committee Membership. The Department of Economic Development lists nine members of the EDLF Committee as follows: City Employees Community Volunteers Finance Director, Community and Neighborhoods Department Salt Lake City Business Advisory Board (BAB) member Representative of the Mayor’s Office Banker Salt Lake City employee at large Community lender Representative of the Division of Housing Stability Business mentor Director, Department of Economic Development C.Interest Rate Reductions. The EDLF program incentivizes City interests by offering a one percentage point interest rate discount for each qualifying factor a business meets. The bases for potential reductions are as follows: a.Location within a priority area: RDA Project Area; Opportunity Zone; West of I-15; or Neighborhood Business Improvement Program (NBIP, previously known as Façade Improvement) target area. b.Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Individuals (SEDI)-Owned Businesses: 51% of the business is owned by at least one SEDI individual. c.Low Income Business Owner: Income does not exceed 80% of Salt Lake County average median income (AMI) as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). d.Sustainability: Either, i. Membership in SLC Green’s E2 Business Program; or ii. Loan proceeds will be used for the purchase of electric vehicles, electric vehicle charging stations and infrastructure, renewable energy including but not limited to wind and solar, heat pumps, high efficiency equipment, and/or energy efficiency. SALT LAKE CITY TRANSMITTAL To: Salt Lake City Council Chair Submission Date: 01/20/2026 Date Sent to Council: 01/22/2026 From: Department * Economic Development Employee Name: Gibbs, Colin E-mail Colin.Gibbs@slc.gov Department Director Signature Director Signed Date 01/20/2026 Chief Administrator Officer's Signature Chief Administrator Officer's Signed Date 01/22/2026 Subject: City Council Transmittal - Economic Development Loan Fund Update - 1/20/26 Additional Staff Contact: Lorena Riﬀo-Jenson, lorena.riﬀojenson@slc.gov Presenters/Staff Table Colin Gibbs, colin.gibbs@slc.gov;Peter Makowski, peter.makowski@slc.gov;Lorena Riﬀo-Jenson, lorena.riﬀojenson@slc.gov;Jacob Maxwell, Lorena Riﬀo-Jenson, Director of Economic Development, Department of Economic Development, lorena.riﬀojenson@slc.gov; Document Type Information Item Budget Impact? Yes No Recommendation: Update Background/Discussion This transmittal responds to the City Council’s request for a comprehensive update on the Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF). The EDLF was established as a strategic tool to stimulate local economic growth by providing accessible ﬁnancing options to businesses that may not qualify for conventional lending. The program’s overarching objectives include fostering entrepreneurship, supporting business expansion, generating employment opportunities, and strengthening the city’s economic resilience.The update includes a brief historical overview of the fund, accompanied by key program metrics such as the number of loans issued, aggregate loan amounts, and repayment performance. Additionally, the report outlines the application process. To ensure ﬁscal integrity and sustainability, the discussion also addresses the mechanisms employed to manage delinquent accounts and defaults, including collection strategies and risk mitigation practices. These measures safeguard the fund’s viability and ensure continued availability of resources for future applicants. Public Hearing Is there a City or State statutory requirement to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No The City Council reserves the option to hold and notice for a public hearing pursuant to their practices for public engagement. Does the City have a general practice to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No Provide your perspective on the value of recommending a public hearing The Economic Development Loan Fund is made up of taxpayer dollars and therefore requires transparency and a ﬁduciary responsibility back to the taxpayer on use of funds. Public Process This page has intentionally been left blank DEPARTMENT of ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MAYOR DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL __________________________________________________________________ DATE: 01/20/2026 FROM: Colin Gibbs, Director of Business Development, Department of Economic Development. _________________________________________________________ Jacob Maxwell, Deputy Director of Economic Development, Department of Economic Development, jacob.maxwell@slc.gov SUBJECT: Economic Development Loan Fund 2026 Update. STAFF CONTACTS: Colin Gibbs, Director of Business Development, Department of Economic Development, colin.gibbs@slc.gov Lorena Riffo-Jenson, Director of Economic Development, Department of Economic Development, lorena.riffojenson@slc.gov Jacob Maxwell, Deputy Director of Economic Development, Department of Economic Development jacob.maxwell@slc.gov DOCUMENT TYPE: PowerPoint Briefing RECOMMENDATION: Update BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This transmittal responds to the City Council’s request for a comprehensive update on the Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF). The EDLF was established as a strategic tool to stimulate local economic growth by providing accessible financing options to businesses that may not qualify for conventional lending. The program’s overarching objectives include fostering entrepreneurship, supporting business expansion, generating employment opportunities, and strengthening the city’s economic resilience. DEPARTMENT of ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MAYOR DIRECTOR The update includes a brief historical overview of the fund, accompanied by key program metrics such as the number of loans issued, aggregate loan amounts, and repayment performance. Additionally, the report outlines the application process. To ensure fiscal integrity and sustainability, the discussion also addresses the mechanisms employed to manage delinquent accounts and defaults, including collection strategies and risk mitigation practices. These measures safeguard the fund’s viability and ensure continued availability of resources for future applicants. Attachments: EDLF Council Update 1/20/2026 Economic Development Loan Fund A Salt Lake City Business Financing Tool Economic Development Loan Fund History •Created in 1991 as the Revolving Loan Fund. •Renamed Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF) in 2014. •The EDLF is a revolving loan fund, created to promote economic growth and to facilitate business ownership in Salt Lake City. •The Department of Economic Development (D.E.D.) began managing the loan fund in 2019. •Presently, there are 27 Active loans. EDLF Recipients •The Leonardo •Beacon Audio •Impact Hub •Torq Motorsports •Mid City Salon •The Chocolate Conspiracy •Cleanwell •Andolsek •Hruska’s Sugarhouse, LLC. •S.L. Kraut Fraus •Water Witch Bar •Rocky Ventures DBA The Front Climbing Gym •Roha Brewing Project •Maison de Poutine •Bakker •Meditrina •Gaillac •Happy Valley Chocolate •Hello! Bulk •Fice •Taco Bout Burritos •Tailor Cooperative •The Dispensary •Torrent Cycle •Alibi •Kaddas •Elefant •Nohm •Wave Women •Nomad East •Han's Kombucha •Buddies, Inc •The Current Exchange (Power and Steel) •Mindful Living Wellness Center •The Pearl Palace •Club Verse •Forty Three Bakery •Kahve Cafe •Kalo Clinical Research •Chip Cookies •Trackland •Salt Lake Sandwich Co •Leavity •Ocean City Seafood Market •Eats Bakery •Shades •Parea •Goathead •Botanika •City Cakes SLC •Policy Kings •HK Brewing •Frontier Fruit •Exotic Fast Food LLC •Himalayan Kitchen •Cold Plunge Coffee •Hruska's •Ski Trucks EDLF Program Statistics 2011-2026 •65 Loans Disbursed •Total = $9,533,040 •44 loans paid off 2020-2026 •30 Loans Disbursed •Total = $5,267,500 EDLF Program Statistics Continued Disbursements •FY 2024 •7/2023 – 6/2024 =$390,000 •FY 2025 •7/2024 – 6/2025 = $2,262,430 •FY 2026 YTD •7/2025 – 12/2025 = $491,723 •3-year Total YTD = $3,144,153 Receivals •FY 2024 •Principal = $535,179.32 / Interest = $194,297.90 •Interest Allocation = $393,510.04 •TOTAL = $1,122,987.26 •FY 2025 •Principal = $500,721.96 / Interest = $162,987.38 •Interest Allocation = $353,512.03 •TOTAL = $1,017,221.37 •FY 2026 YTD •Principal = $573,853.00 / Interest = $126,335.22 •Interest Allocation = $55,647.50 •TOTAL = $755,835.72 •3-year Total YTD = $2,896,044.35 EDLF Quarterly Application •Quarterly Opening: •First come, first serve. •Allows for efficient tracking and management of funds. •Allows Business Development to identify and aid those that require additional assistance. •Loan Amounts: •Start up (3 years or less )-$100,000 max. •Existing (3+ years ) -$350,000 max. EDLF Interest Rate 1.8 Interest Rate •The minimum interest rate is the Prime rate. •6.75% Effective 12/11/2025. •The maximum interest rate shall not exceed the Prime rate + 8%. •Interest rate reductions if borrowers meet City-wide or Economic Development objectives: •Business location in priority area of the City. •Involved in a City Program (E2, RDA project, etc.). •Business that is primarily owned by disabled persons, women, minorities, low-to moderate income earners (80% or less of area median income and/or veterans. •The Loan Committee may adjust the rate up to 1.5 percentage points. •Average EDLF interest rate is Prime +4%. Delinquency and Default •The goals in the event of payment delay, delinquency, or default are to: •Maintain the solvency of the business while maintaining our fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayer. •Borrower to make full payment restoration without business liquidation, or to settle on a reasonable payment plan. •Maintain contact with the delinquent borrower until resolved. Collections and Collateral 4.3.1 Collections •15 Day grace period to make the loan payment after the due date. •Establish repayment plan with Borrower within 30 days of first late payment. •Loans shall be deemed delinquent after 180 days of nonpayment or noncompliance. •If unsuccessful in establishing a payment plan and ongoing collections are unlikely. •The DED, Loan Committee and City Attorney shall determine the appropriate action, including: •Small claims, or court judgment filing; •Repossession of the collateral; •Refer to outside collections, wage assessment, or other suit; •Write-off uncollectable portion of the debt. Delinquency and Default Tools •D.E.D. can grant temporary forbearance or modification of payment and/or waive late fees up to one (1) year. •Loan Committee may elect to forbear or lower payments or waive fees temporarily or permanently for more than one (1) year, and/or write-off loans. •Business Technical Assistance Program (BTAP). •If a Borrower is non-responsive and/or continues to be delinquent, the City will proceed with its remedies as outlined in the Loan Agreement. Business Technical Assistance Program (BTAP) Critical Skills Course developed with 3rd Party Business Centers. Required on a case-by-case basis for applicants and borrowers. •Course Material to include: •Marketing •Market Research, Generating Sales, Marketing Plan. •Business Strategy •Business Plan Writing , Strategy, Pricing and Margin Building. •Basics of Accounting •Balance Sheets, P&L, Cash Flow, Pro Forma; Understanding Debt; Financing and relation to Profitability, Taxes. •Operations •Business Registration and Licensing, Contract Negotiation, Compliance. Borrower Reporting •Borrowers required to submit ongoing reports on financial status, job creation and other impacts of the loan. •Builds relationship and regular communication with borrower. •Allows Business Development to identify when a borrower may be struggling. •Intervene with the BTAP program before default occurs. Thank You! Colin Gibbs Director of Business Development Department of Economic Development| Salt Lake City Corporation colin.gibbs@slc.gov This page has intentionally been left blank CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Nick Tarbet Policy Analyst DATE:February 10, 2026 RE: Temporary Street Closures around Temple Square View the Administration’s proposal: Ordinance: Temporary Street Closure for Temple Square 2027 Reopening ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will be briefed on an ordinance that would temporarily close all or portions of City streets adjacent to Temple Square in downtown Salt Lake City for a period of six months in 2027. The proposed temporary closure is intended to facilitate public safety and crowd management during the reopening celebration of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Salt Lake City Temple. The temporary street closures would occur between March 2027 and October 2027. The closure is being considered a year in advance of the temporary closure to give the applicant enough time to address the planning and coordination of the event to ensure public safety. According to Utah code, in order to temporarily close a road a city must make a finding that the closure is necessary to mitigate unsafe conditions, and a public hearing must be held after being notice for at least four weeks. On February 3, the Council set the public hearing date for March 10, 2026. The Administrative Transmittal notes the proposed closures are necessary to ensure the safety and well-being of residents, visitors, and event participants. Based on anticipated attendance, the closure will facilitate orderly crowed management, mitigate traffic congestion and allow for the placement of safety infrastructure such as barricades, emergency access, signage and accessibility accommodations. (Transmittal Letter, Page 2) Goal of the briefing: To brief the Council on the proposed temporary street closures and provide feedback on public engagement strategies. City code includes provisions related to street closures, work in the right-of way and use of City-owned property. To fulfill the city requirements the Church will be required to obtain all applicable permit fees, parking meter fees and lease fees that equate to approximately $2.3 million, based on the consolidate fee schedule. Schedule: Page | 2 POLICY QUESTIONS Acknowledging the public engagement plan is in its preliminary stages, the Council may wish to provide feedback to the administration regarding potential strategies to enhance outreach both prior to and during the temporary street closure. Items to consider may include: 1. Which stakeholders (businesses, residents, visitors, etc.) have been identified to collaborate with to develop an effective public engagement plan? 2. Closures may impact traditional routes for students going to school; how will the school district be involved in the planning process? 3. How does the Administration anticipate businesses will be impacted; how could they be assisted during the temporary closures. 4. How will the city coordinate signage for detours during the project? a. How will both vehicle and pedestrian traffic be considered? 5. How will UTA bus routes be impacted? a. How will the city coordinate public outreach on these detours? 6. Will there be a project website people can go to for updates on the project? SALT LAKE CITY TRANSMITTAL To: Salt Lake City Council Chair Submission Date: 01/29/2026 Date Sent to Council: 01/29/2026 From: Department * Community and Neighborhood Employee Name: Hunt, Logan E-mail Logan.Hunt@slc.gov Department Director Signature Director Signed Date 01/29/2026 Chief Administrator Officer's Signature Chief Administrator Officer's Signed Date 01/29/2026 Subject: Street closures to facilitate public safety and crowd management during the Temple Reopening Celebration Additional Staff Contact: Tammy Hunsaker Presenters/Staff Table Document Type Ordinance Budget Impact? Yes No Recommendation: To adopt an ordinance to temporarily close certain streets as a necessary measure to mitigate unsafe conditions for the Temple Reopening Celebration. Background/Discussion See ﬁrst attachment for Background/Discussion Public Hearing Is there a City or State statutory requirement to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No The City Council reserves the option to hold and notice for a public hearing pursuant to their practices for public engagement. Does the City have a general practice to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No Public Process This page has intentionally been left blank ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Tammy Hunsaker Director SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ________________________ Date Received: _________________ Jill Love, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: 1/29/2026 __________________________ SUBJECT: Street closures to facilitate public safety and crowd management during the Temple Reopening Celebration ADDITIONAL STAFF CONTACT: Tammy Hunsaker, tammy.hunsaker@slc.gov DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: To adopt an ordinance to temporarily close certain streets as a necessary measure to mitigate unsafe conditions for the Temple Reopening Celebration. BUDGET IMPACT: N/A BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (“Church”) has invited people from around the world to take part in an open house celebration for the Salt Lake Temple, which will occur from April 2027 to October 2027 (the “Temple Celebration”). This event will draw millions of visitors to the City with mass gatherings taking place on the blocks surrounding Temple Square. As such, the Church has requested that the City close certain street segments beginning in March 2027 through the duration of the Temple Celebration with the exact dates to be determined once additional details are finalized. The street closures will only occur between March 2027 and October 2027– refer to Exhibit A for a map and description of the proposed street closures. State and City Requirements for Street Closures Utah Code 72-5-105 dictates the process of when and how the City may temporarily close a street. Generally, state law requires that a street, once established, shall continue to be a street unless a certain action is taken by the City. Section 3(c)(iii) allows cities to temporarily close all or a portion of class C roads if the City makes a finding that temporary closure is necessary to mitigate an unsafe condition. To temporarily close the road, the City will need to hold a public hearing, provide notice to the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT), and the City Council will then need to pass an ordinance – refer to Exhibit B for the draft ordinance. In addition to State regulations, City Code includes various provisions relating to street closures, work in the right-of-way, and use of City-owned property. To fulfill the requirements of City Code, the Church will be required to obtain various permits and execute a lease with the City. Applicable permit fees, parking meter fees, and lease fees will equate to approximately $2.3 million and will be based on the fiscal year 2027 consolidated fee schedule. Justification for Street Closures The proposed closures are limited in scope and duration as much as possible and are necessary to ensure the safety and well-being of residents, visitors, and event participants. Based on anticipated attendance, event activities, and traffic volume, the street closures will support orderly crowd management, mitigate traffic congestion, and allow for the proper placement of safety infrastructure such as barricades, emergency access, signage, and accessibility accommodations. Emergency personnel will have controlled access, enabling more effective response in the event of a medical, fire, or security incident. The Administration, including the Police Department, Fire Department, and Community and Neighborhoods, is working with the Church on a closure plan that balances public safety needs with traffic circulation and access for nearby residents and businesses. In addition, the Administration and Church are working with other stakeholders including UDOT, Utah Transit Authority, businesses, and property owners. Advance public notification, detour signage, and traffic control measures will be implemented to support mobility and access throughout the area. Approving these temporary street closures is a proactive and necessary measure to uphold public safety, support emergency preparedness, and ensure the successful and responsible execution of the event while balancing community needs. PUBLIC PROCESS: According to Utah Code 72-5-105, before authorizing a temporary closure, the City shall: a. hold a hearing on the proposed temporary closure; b. provide notice of the hearing by mailing a notice to UDOT; and c. provide notice to the owners of the properties abutting the street for at least four weeks before the day of the hearing. In addition to Utah Code, Section 14.32 of City Code provides that notice shall be delivered to the adjacent properties on the same side of the street as the proposed work, or closure in this instance. EXHIBITS: A. Map and description of the proposed street closures B. Ordinance Exhibit A: Proposed Street Closures Requested Closure Description (City Code (City Code 2.58) (City Code (City Code (City Code SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. ________ of 2026 (Temporarily Closing All or Portions of City Streets Adjacent to the Salt Lake City Temple to Mitigate Unsafe Conditions) An ordinance temporarily closing all of North Temple Street between West Temple Street and Main Street, a portion of North Temple Street between 200 West Street and West Temple Street, all of West Temple Street between North Temple Street and South Temple Street, a portion of West Temple Street between 200 North Street and North Temple Street, and a portion of South Temple Street between West Temple Street and Main Street to mitigate unsafe conditions, pursuant Utah Code Section 72-5-105. WHEREAS, from March 1, 2027-October 31, 2027, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter- day Saints is planning the Temple Reopening Celebration for the extensively renovated Salt Lake City Temple in downtown Salt Lake City and anticipates an unusually large number of visitors to the area during this time; and WHEREAS, Utah Code Section 72-5-105(3) allows a municipality to temporarily close a class C road under certain conditions including if the municipality makes a finding that the temporary closure of all or part of a class C road is necessary to mitigate unsafe conditions; WHEREAS, the City has found that during the Salt Lake City Temple Reopening Celebration from March 1, 2027-October 31, 2027 the temporarily closure of all or portions of certain roads around the Salt Lake City Temple, as more fully depicted on Exhibit A, is necessary to mitigate the unsafe conditions of having an unusually high volume of pedestrian traffic to help prevent pedestrian-vehicle conflict, help with orderly crowd management, mitigate traffic congestion, and allow for the proper placement of safety infrastructure such as barricades, emergency access, signage, and accessibility accommodations; and 2 WHEREAS, during the temporary closure, the City and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will execute a lease agreement for the Church’s exclusive use of a portion of the temporarily closed roads to help mitigate the unsafe conditions; and WHEREAS, during the temporary closure, the City will erect traffic control barricades on portions of the temporarily closed roads to help with traffic control and circulation; and WHEREAS, a temporary closure is allowed after following the procedures specified under Utah Code Section 72-5-105(4)-(5), which requires the City to hold a public hearing on the temporary closure and provide notice to the Utah Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Temporary Closure of City-Owned Right-of-Way. That, in accordance with Utah Code Section 72-5-105(3), all of North Temple Street between West Temple Street and Main Street, a portion of North Temple Street between 200 West Street and West Temple Street, all of West Temple Street between North Temple Street and South Temple Street, a portion of West Temple Street between 200 North Street and North Temple Street, and a portion of South Temple Street between West Temple Street and Main Street, which is more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto, shall be temporarily closed as a public right-of-way during the closure period identified in Section 2. SECTION 2. Temporary Closure Period; Reopening. The planned temporary closure described herein shall be closed as a public right-of-way from March 1, 2027-October 31, 2027, which timeframe may be more particularly defined in the lease. Upon the conclusion of the temporary closure period or termination of the lease between the City and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, whichever occurs first, the mayor shall direct that the portions of 3 closed roads described in Exhibit A hereto shall be reopened and all obstructions to vehicular traffic be removed. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its passage. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _______ day of ______________, 2026. ______________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2026. Published: ______________. APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:__________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Allison Parks, Deputy City Attorney January 28, 2026 4 EXHIBIT A Map of the portion of the temporary closures This page has intentionally been left blank CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM:Brian Fullmer Policy Analyst DATE:February 10, 2026 RE: Fence, Wall and Hedge Height Text Amendment PLNPCM2025-00045, and Fence Height in M-1 and M-1A Zoning Districts Text Amendment PLNPCM2025-00138 The Council will be briefed about two text amendments related to fence, wall and hedge heights. Multiple petitions are not typically briefed at the same time but since these are closely related, they are being processed together. The first text amendment related to fence, wall and hedge heights in residential districts was initiated by the City Council in January 2025. The proposal would increase the maximum hedge height on side yard property lines in front of the primary structure’s primary façade to six feet if it does not obstruct clear view standards. The proposal would also increase the maximum fence, wall or hedge height behind the principal structure’s primary façade from six feet to seven feet. (Staff note: Planning staff recommend moving hedges to the landscaping chapter of City code and not limiting the height. This is discussed further in the additional information section below.) The second proposed text amendment was initiated by the Planning Commission and would extend the increased fence height to six feet of front yard fences allowed in the M-1 zoning district within the International Center to all properties in the M-1 and M-1A zoning districts citywide. The Planning Commission reviewed both proposals at its August 13, 2025 meeting and held public hearings at which no one spoke. The Commission voted 5-3 to forward a positive recommendation to the Council on the fence, wall and hedge height amendment with the exception that rear yard fences remain at a maximum of six feet. Item Schedule: Page | 2 The Commission voted 5-3 to forward a positive recommendation for the M-1/M-1A fence proposal with a condition that properties in these zoning districts that abut or are across the street from any zone that allows residential uses have front yard fences that do not exceed four feet. Commissioners who voted in opposition to the motions did not share why they were opposed. Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed text amendments and determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposals. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to discuss whether it is still supportive of increasing the maximum height for rear yard fences and walls to seven feet. 2. The Council may wish to discuss whether it is supportive of moving hedges to the landscaping section of City code and eliminate the height limit. 3. The Council may wish to discuss whether it is supportive of extending the six-foot maximum fence height to all properties in the M-1/M-1A zoning districts except for those that abut or are across the street from zoning districts that allow residential uses. In those instances, front yard fences would be limited to four feet. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION For clarity the two text amendments will be discussed separately below. Fence, Wall and Hedge Height When conducting research for the proposal, Planning staff compared maximum allowed fence and hedge heights within the following Utah municipalities: Provo, Ogden, and South Salt Lake. Planning also considered maximum heights in Portland Oregon, Denver Colorado, and Clark County Nevada (Las Vegas area). Allowed front yard hedge heights in the researched municipalities ranged from three to six feet. Some do not define the term “hedge” in code but include hedges as landscaping regulated in their landscaping ordinances. It is Planning’s opinion that hedges, which are not defined in City code, fit better in the Landscaping and Buffers section of code rather than in the fencing ordinance. Defining hedges as vegetation in this section would not limit their height but require them to “be maintained in a live condition to present a reasonably healthy appearance.” The code also does not allow vegetation to block the sight distance triangle, so they won’t obstruct the view of oncoming pedestrians or vehicles. The six municipalities listed above allow maximum rear yard fence heights between six and eight feet. Planning recommends allowing fences and walls in rear yards up to seven feet high. They found benefits for privacy, security, property aesthetics, and additional height could help prevent large game animals from entering private properties. It is worth noting that fences taller than seven feet require engineering drawings which could be a burden for property owners. Key Considerations Planning staff identified three key considerations related to the fence and hedge height proposal, found on pages 6-8 of the Planning Commission staff report for that item, and briefly summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the Planning Commission staff report. Page | 3 Consideration 1 – Compatibility with Master Plan Policies and Initiatives Fences are not required in most zones, so they aren’t discussed in Plan Salt Lake and many neighborhood plans, though they are they are mentioned in some more recent master plans. The Salt Lake City Urban Design Element includes a discussion of land use buffers, including fencing, to separate adverse effects from dissimilar uses. It notes that fencing can deter criminal activity and provide security. Plan Salt Lake and other City master plans discuss protecting the natural environment. Planning staff stated “By considering hedges as “landscaping” and allowing them to grow in any location and at any height, this will help maintain the importance of sustaining vegetation for a healthier natural environment.” Consideration 2 – Key Changes Moving hedges to the landscaping section of City code will allow property owners to determine what height they would like, and they will be responsible for maintenance. Regarding the proposed maximum fence height of seven feet, Planning staff noted additional height will likely be used in new fences or those being fully replaced. Consideration 3 – Additional Text Changes – General Code Cleanup and Update While working on the Council request to review fence and hedge heights Planning staff identified additional proposed changes to the sections of City code related to fences, walls and hedges, and to ground mounted utility boxes listed below. Remove “hedges” from the ordinance. “Hedges” would be considered landscaping and regulated under 21A.48 “Landscaping and Buffers” ordinance. Residential and Non-residential districts have been combined to make the regulation of fences and walls more consistent when possible. Remove or modify most of the provisions listed under the “Double Frontage Lot” section, since most of them are listed in other parts of the zoning ordinance. Remove the word “hedges” from 21A.40.160 to be consistent within the zoning ordinance and replace with “landscaping.” M-1 and M-1A Maximum Fence Height Text Amendment Some Council Members will recall adopting a text amendment in October 2024 requested by Delta Airlines that increased the maximum front yard fence height for properties in the M-1 (Light Manufacturing) zoning district within the International Center. The current proposal would expand that allowed fence height in front of buildings to all properties in the M-1 and M-1A (Northpoint Light Industrial) zoning districts throughout the city, with an exception for these properties that abut or are across the street from zoning districts allowing residential uses. Front yard fences for those M-1 and M-1A properties would be limited to four feet. The rationale for increasing the maximum front yard fence height is to provide additional security for visitors and vehicles to these properties which frequently have parking in front of the buildings. Because facilities in the manufacturing districts don’t often have consistent traffic flows there are not “eyes on the property” that are found in commercial and residential districts. Taller fences could also help screen larger vehicles that frequently are on site at manufacturing and distribution facilities. As noted above, the Planning Commission recommended limiting front yard fence height in the M-1/M-1A zoning districts to four feet on properties that abut or are across the street from zoning districts that allow Page | 4 residential use. The Commission felt this would help maintain a residential neighborhood aesthetic in these areas. Notwithstanding Subsection 21A.40.120.E.1.b.(1), in the M-1, M-1A, M-2 and EI zoning districts, fences, walls, or hedges may be up to six (6) feet in height if located between the front lot line and the front building line of the facade of the principal structure that contains the primary entrance, unless the subject property is abutting or across a public street from a zoning district that allows residential use, then the maximum height for a front yard fence is four (4) feet. Key Considerations Consideration 1 – Compatibility with Master Plan Policies and Initiatives Plan Salt Lake and many neighborhood plans, though they are mentioned in some recent master plans. The Salt Lake City Urban Design Element includes a discussion of land use buffers, including fencing, to separate adverse effects from dissimilar uses. It notes that fencing can deter criminal activity and provide security. Consideration 2 – Zoning Districts That Allow Six-foot Fencing in the Front Yard Setback- Use Analysis ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS Factor Finding (fences/walls/hedges) Finding (M-1/M-1A fences) Whether a proposed text amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the city as stated through its various adopted planning documents. City purposes and goals do not specify fence and hedge heights. Proposal is intended to achieve safety and security. City purposes and goals do not specify fence and hedge heights. Proposal is intended to achieve safety and security. Whether a proposed text amendment furthers the specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Complies Complies Page | 5 Whether a proposed text amendment is consistent with the purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards. Not applicable Not applicable The extent to which a proposed text amendment implements best current, professional practices of urban planning and design. Complies Complies CITY DEPARTMENT REVIEW During City department and division review of the proposed text amendment, no responding departments and divisions expressed opposition though Public Utilities noted the need to maintain water meter access for their employees. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY • February 13, 2025 – Both petitions accepted by Planning Division. • February 25, 2025 – o Petitions assigned to Diana Martinez, Senior Planner. o Early notifications sent to community council chairs citywide. 45-day comment period begins. • May 8, 2025 – Extended 45-day recognized community organization comment period ends. • July 23, 2025 – Planning Commission public hearing notice posted at the Sugar House and Main Libraries. • August 13, 2025 – Planning Commission meeting and public hearing. The Commission votes 5-3 to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council. • August 28, 2025 – Ordinance requested from the Attorney’s Office. • December 10, 2025 – Ordinance received from the Attorney’s Office. • January 13, 2026 – Transmittal received in City Council Office. Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning City Council Briefing //February 10, 2026 PLNPCM2025-00138 ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT FOR FRONT YARD FENCES IN THE M-1 & NEWLY CREATED M-1A ZONING DISTRICTS CITYWIDE Salt Lake City //Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning REQUEST: •In October of 2024, the City Council adopted an ordinance for a fence height increase –which was requested from a private petition (not a city petition). This approval increased fences in the front setback from 4’ to a max. of 6’, in the M-1 (light manufacturing) zoning district within the Salt Lake International Center (west of the SLC International Airport). The boundaries of the SL Int’l Center were also defined within that approval. •In January of 2025, the Planning Commission initiated this text amendment, (discussed at the Jan. 27, 2025 meeting) to allow the same fence height (up to a max. of 6’) in the front yards of all M-1 & the newly created M-1A zoning districts citywide. •In August of 2025, the Planning Commission voted to send a favorable recommendation (5 to 3) to the City Council for this petition to permit all city-wide M-1 & M-1A zoned properties to have a max 6-foot fence in the front setback, - with an additional recommendation that states if an M-1/M-1A zoned property is abutting or across the street from a zone that allows residential uses, then that property is restricted to a max 4-foot fence in the front setback. Salt Lake City //Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning Salt Lake City //Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning Salt Lake City //Planning Division (4)Notwithstanding Subsection 21A.40.120.E.1.b.(1), in the M-1 zoned properties in the Salt Lake International Center,M-2 and EI zoning districts, fences, walls, or hedges may be up to six (6) feet in height if located between the front property line and the front yard setback line. CURRENT TEXT: Salt Lake City //Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning Salt Lake City //Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning PROPOSED TEXT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: (4) e.Notwithstanding Subsection 21A.40.120.E.1.b.(1), in the M-1 zoned properties in the Salt Lake International Center, M-1A, M-2, and EI zoning districts, fences, or walls, or hedges may be up to six (6) feet in height if located between the front property lot line and the front yard setback line. front building line of the facade of the principal structure that contains the primary entrance, unless the subject property is abutting or across a public street from a zoning district that allows residential use, then the maximum height for a front yard fence is four (4) feet. Salt Lake City //Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning END Salt Lake City //Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning 4261 ftSLGW W 200 S N a v a j o S t 80 N a v a j o S t N a v a j o S t N a v a j o S t 500 S W 700 S W 700 S C h e y e n n e S t W 6 0 0 S Hayes Ave Arapahoe Ave Ameri can Ave S P u eb l o S t W 800 S W 900 S A d am G alv e z St W Paci fic Ave Indiana Ave 68 68 68 Sherwood Park Glendale Dr Na v a j o S t N a v a j o S t SRed woo d Dr W 1300 S S S t e wartSt Montg o m er y St U t a h S t C h e y enn e S t Glen r o s e D r ornia Ave S R e d w o o d R d 68 Un ion P ac ific W 2 00 S W 200 S S 1 0 0 0 W J er e m y S t S 9 0 0 W 80 4242 ft W 40 0 S S 70 0 W S 1 0 0 0 W S 1 2 0 0 W W 700 S S 1 3 0 0 W W 600 S W P ac i fi c Ave W 900 S W 500 S Arapahoe A ve Mead Av e A dam Ga l vez S t Po s t S t P oplar Grove B l vd Genesee Ave G o s h e n S t I o l a Av e S P o s t S t S 9 0 0 W W 800 S Indiana Ave 80 80 15 W 1300 S S 1 1 0 0 W S 8 0 0 W S 7 0 0 W Fremont Ave S 1 3 0 0 W S 13 00 W C l a y t o n S t S 1 0 0 0 W C o n c o rd S t C o n c o r d S t I ll i no i s Ave S 1 2 0 0 W E m e r y S t W 1 3 0 0 Ca li f o rn i a A v e Seventeenth South Park Jordan Park And Peace Gardens Glendale Mini Park Riley Elementary School Re d w o o d R d Residentially Zoned Properties Adjacent to or Across the Street from Previous M-1 Zones ¯ Salt Lake City Planning Division 1/28/2026 0 1,000 2,000500Feet Special Development Pattern ResidentialSR-3 Moderate Density Multi-Family ResidentialRMF-35 Single-Family ResidentialR-1/7,000 Single-Family ResidentialR-1/5,000 Mixed Use 8MU-8 Mixed Use 6MU-6 Mixed Use 5MU-5 Mixed Use 3MU-3 Light ManufacturingM-1 Zoning Districts W 0 0 9 W 0 0 3 1700 S E 0 0 3 500 S 2100 S W 0 0 4 500 N 22 0 0 W 1500 S Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning City Council// February 10, 2026 PLNPCM2025-00045 ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING THE HEIGHT AND LOCATION OF FENCES AND HEDGES Salt Lake City //Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning REQUEST: Last year, the City Council requested that Planning Staff research and draft an ordinance text amendment to update the Salt Lake City Code regarding the following within 21A.40.120: •Increase maximum fence height behind the house to 7 ft •Increase hedge heights along side property line of front yards to 6 ft, except in clear view areas. Salt Lake City //Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning CURRENT TEXT: •Fences, walls, and hedges can be 4 ft. in front yards and 6 ft. in side and rear yards in most zoning districts and most situations •Taller fences are permitted in EI and M-2 zones, low-density residential zones that back up onto non-residential zones, public utility facilities, and recreational facilities, among others. These regulations are not changing. •Hedges are treated the same as fences and walls Salt Lake City //Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning PROPOSED TEXT CHANGES: Staff recommended increasing the rear fence height be increased to 7 ft. The Planning Commission recommended fence heights behind front façade be maintained at 6 ft. Combining the residential and non-residential zoning fencing standards in the code. Currently these two sections are largely the same. All mention of hedges will be removed from the fence/wall ordinance, removing the height limit for hedges. Hedges will now be managed as landscaping and regulated under the landscaping ordinance 21A.48. Sight distance triangle regulations will still apply. Salt Lake City //Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning LANDSCAPING: •The proposal removes hedges from the fence code and regulates them under landscaping. This will remove the height limit for hedges in front yards except for sight distance triangles and park strips. •The landscaping ordinance also has provisions to keep landscaping from interfering with pedestrian movement, keeping them maintained and healthy, and free of debris. •Hedges provide needed greenery and live vegetation, and do not create as much of a walled-in effect as solid fences and walls. Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning •This graphic shows where fence heights would still be restricted to 4 ft, and where it is proposed to be increased to either 6 ft with the Planning Commission recommendation, or 7 ft if council chooses to move that direction. Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning •Regulations regarding double frontage lots (21A.40.120.E.2) will be cleaned up as most sections were redundant with other sections of code. •Double frontage lots are lots that have frontages on two opposite streets •Mention of hedges in other parts of code will be removed. - 21A.40.160.b & c: Mention of “hedges” as an appropriate screening material for utility boxes replaced with “landscaping”. ADDITIONAL TEXT CHANGES: Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning Planning Commission recommended approval of the removal of hedges from the fence code but did not recommend approving the rear fence height increase to 7’ RECOMMENDATION Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning 21A.48.040: RESPONSIBILITY AND MAINTENANCE: A.All landscaping shall: 2.Not create a hedge or visual barrier between the sidewalk and street; 3.Not create obstructions within a sight distance triangle, as defined and illustrated in Chapter 21A.62 of this title; 4.Be maintained in live condition to present a reasonably healthy appearance; and 5.Be kept free of refuse, debris, and noxious weeds. Merriam-Webster definition of hedge: Hedge: a fence or boundary formed by a dense row of shrubs or low trees Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning SALT LAKE CITY TRANSMITTAL To: Salt Lake City Council Chair Submission Date: 01/07/2026 Date Sent to Council: 01/13/2026 From: Department * Community and Neighborhood Employee Name: Martinez, Diana E-mail diana.martinez@slc.gov Department Director Signature Director Signed Date 01/12/2026 Chief Administrator Officer's Signature Chief Administrator Officer's Signed Date 01/13/2026 Subject: Fence Text Amendments Additional Staff Contact: Jason Berntson, jason.berntson@slc.gov Presenters/Staff Table Jason Berntson, jason.berntson@slc.govJohn Anderson, john.anderson@slc.gov Document Type Ordinance Budget Impact? Yes No Recommendation: Favorable recommendation with modiﬁcations to staﬀ's recommendation Background/Discussion See ﬁrst attachment for Background/Discussion Public Hearing Is there a City or State statutory requirement to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No The City Council reserves the option to hold and notice for a public hearing pursuant to their practices for public engagement. Does the City have a general practice to hold a public hearing for this item?* Yes No Provide your perspective on the value of recommending a public hearing State law requires a public hearing. Public Process Complied with State Law and Zoning requirements. Notiﬁed all Recognized Community Organization and held online Open House. This page has intentionally been left blank ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Tammy Hunsaker Director SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: PLNPCM2025-00138 Two zoning text amendments petitions were considered. The first one, PLNPCM2025-00138 is a petition initiated by the Planning Commission, to amend the zoning ordinance to increase the fence height of front yard fences (between the front lot line and the primary façade of the primary façade of the principal structure) from the required four feet to a maximum of six feet in all M-1 (Light Manufacturing) and M-1A (Northpoint Light Industrial) zoning districts city-wide. Currently, front yard fencing between the front property line and the primary façade of the principal structure on a property in the M-1 (Light Manufacturing) Zoning District cannot exceed four feet. The amendment of the ordinance would allow a six-foot fence in the front yard setback to help secure the patrons, buildings, and parking areas. PLNPCM2025-00045 The second zoning text amendment considered, PLNPCM2025-00045, a petition initiated by the City Council, proposes amendments to sections of Title 21A.40.120 “Regulation of Fences, Walls and Hedges”. The City Council has requested that the planning staff research and draft an ordinance text amendment to update the Salt Lake City Code regarding the height and location of fences, walls, and hedges, in accordance with the defined clear view standards. Currently, fences, walls, and hedges are all regulated the same in the ordinance. Planning staff recommended removing hedges from the fencing ordinance, for hedges to be regulated as landscaping under the Landscaping and Buffers Ordinance 21A.48. The word “hedges” would be taken out of the fencing ordinances as well as out of the Ground Mounted Utility Boxes Ordinance 21A.40.160, to be replaced with the word “landscaping”. Planning staff also recommended increasing the rear and side yard fence height to a maximum of seven (7) feet. PUBLIC PROCESS: • Early Notification—On February 25, 2025, all city-wide Community Council Chairs were sent the 45-day required notice for recognized community organizations. Only two community councils, the Greater Avenues Community Council & Sugar House Community Council, reached out to the planning staff to inquire about the applications. An online open house was posted on the Planning Division’s website from March 3rd, 2025, to an extended period ending May 8th, 2025. • Planning Commission Meeting – o PLNPCM2025-00138- The Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the request on August 13, 2025, and voted 5 to 3 to send a favorable recommendation to the City Council with a modification to planning staff’s recommendation stating that M-1 and M-1A zoned properties that are abutting or across a public street from zoning districts that permit residential use, the fence height cannot exceed four (4) feet. o PLNPCM2025-00045- The Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the request on August 13, 2025, and voted 5 to 3 to send a favorable recommendation to the City Council with a modification to the planning staff’s recommendation to keep the rear and side yard fence height at a maximum of six (6) feet in height. Planning Commission (PC) Records a) Planning Commission Agenda- August 13, 2025 b) Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - August 13, 2025 c) Staff Report for PLNPCM2025-00138 -Planning Commission August 13, 2025 d) Staff Report PLNPCM2025-00045 - Planning Commission August 13, 2025 EXHIBITS: 1. Project Chronology 2. Notice of City Council Hearing 3. Original Petitions 4. Mailing List 5. Ordinance 6. Transmittal Memo EXHIBITS: 1.PROJECT CHRONOLOGY 2.NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING 3.ORIGINAL PETITION 4.ORDINANCE 5.MAILING LIST 1.PROJECT CHRONOLOGY PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Petition: February 13, 2025 February 25, 2025 February 25, 2025 May 8, 2025 July 23, 2025 August 13, 2025 PLNPCM2025-00138- Zoning Text Amendment – Petition to amend the zoning ordinance to increase the fence height of front yard fences (between the front lot line and the primary façade of the primary façade of the principal structure) from the required four feet to a maximum of six feet in all M-1 (Light Manufacturing) and M-1A (Northpoint Light Industrial) zoning districts city- wide. The Planning Commission initiated this petition for the Zoning Text Amendment, it was accepted by Salt Lake City Planning Division on this date. Petition PLNPCM2025-00138 was assigned to Diana Martinez, Senior Planner, for staff analysis and processing. Early notification was sent to all Community Council Chairs city- wide, providing information about the proposal and how to give public input on the project. Beginning of 45-day input and comment period. End of extended 45-day Recognized Community Organization notice period. Public hearing notice sign with project information and notice of the Planning Commission public hearing posted at two public libraries: Sugar House Public Library and the Salt Lake City Main Library. The Planning Commission holds a public hearing and votes 5 to 3 to send a favorable recommendation to approve the proposed text amendment. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Petition: PLNPCM2025-00045- Zoning Text Amendment – Proposes amendments to sections of Title 21A.40.120 “Regulation of Fences, Walls and Hedges”. The City Council has requested that the planning staff research and draft an ordinance text amendment to update the Salt Lake City Code regarding the height and location of fences, walls, and hedges, in accordance with the defined clear view standards. February 13, 2025 February 25, 2025 February 25, 2025 May 8, 2025 July 23, 2025 August 13, 2025 The City Council initiated this petition for the Zoning Text Amendment, it was accepted by Salt Lake City Planning Division on this date. Petition PLNPCM2025-00138 was assigned to Diana Martinez, Senior Planner, for staff analysis and processing. Early notification was sent to all Community Council Chairs city-wide, providing information about the proposal and how to give public input on the project. Beginning of 45-day input and comment period. End of extended 45-day Recognized Community Organization notice period. Public hearing notice sign with project information and notice of the Planning Commission public hearing posted at two public libraries: Sugar House Public Library and the Salt Lake City Main Library. The Planning Commission holds a public hearing and votes 5 to 3 to send a favorable recommendation to approve the proposed text amendment. 2.NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2025-00138 to amend the zoning ordinance to increase the fence height of front yard fences (between the front lot line and the primary façade of the primary façade of the principal structure) from the required four feet to a maximum of six feet in all M-1 (Light Manufacturing) and M-1A (Northpoint Light Industrial) zoning districts city-wide. As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments regarding the petition. During these hearings, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The Council may consider adopting the ordinance on the same night of the public hearing. The hearing will be held: DATE: TIME: PLACE: 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah ** This meeting will be held in-person, to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located at 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. For more information, please visit www.slc.gov/council. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24- Hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the Council and added to the public record. If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Diana Martinez at 801-535-7215 or via e-mail at diana.martinez@slc.gov or Jason Berntson at 801-535-6247 or via e-mail at jason.berntson@slc.gov. The application details can be accessed at https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/, by selecting the “planning” tab and entering the petition number PLNPCM2025-00138. The City and County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance in order to participate in this hearing. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com , 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2025-00045 amendments to sections of Title 21A.40.120 “Regulation of Fences, Walls and Hedges”. The City Council has requested that the planning staff research and draft an ordinance text amendment to update the Salt Lake City Code regarding the height and location of fences, walls, and hedges, in accordance with the defined clear view standards. As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments regarding the petition. During these hearings, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The Council may consider adopting the ordinance on the same night of the public hearing. The hearing will be held: DATE: TIME: PLACE: 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah ** This meeting will be held in-person, to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located at 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. For more information, please visit www.slc.gov/council. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24- Hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the Council and added to the public record. If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Diana Martinez at 801-535-7215 or via e-mail at diana.martinez@slc.gov or Jason Berntson at 801-535-6247 or via e-mail at jason.berntson@slc.gov. The application details can be accessed at https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/, by selecting the “planning” tab and entering the petition number PLNPCM2025-00045. The City and County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance in order to participate in this hearing. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com , 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. 3. ORIGINAL PETITION PLNPCM2025-00138 PLNPCM2025-00045 4. ORDINANCE 1 Project Title: Fence and Hedge Height Amendments Petition Nos.: PLNPCM2025-00045 & PLNPCM2025-00138 Version: Planning Commission Recommended Date Prepared: 8/25/25 Planning Commission Action: Recommended 8/13/25 The proposed ordinance makes the following amendments (for summary purposes only):  Amends code references associated with sections of 21A.40.120 and 21A.40.160.  Deletes the word “hedges” throughout 21A.40.120.  Deletes “hedges” from 21A.40.160 and replaces it with the word “landscaping”.  Combines regulations for residential and non-residential zoning districts under: “Height Restrictions and Gates” 21A.40.120.E.1.a-g.  Amends 21A.40.120.E.1.a.(1) changes the word “property” to “lot” to be consistent with the zoning ordinance. Also adds a note allowing M-1 properties outside of the Salt Lake International Center to have a six (6) foot fence in the front yard, if not abutting or across the street from a zone that allows residential uses.  Amends 21A.40.120.E.1.a.(3) adds wording for if there is no minimum front yard setback, fence placement and height are called out.  Amends 21A.40.120.E.1.a.(4) to change the wording from “front property line” to “lot line” and change “front yard setback line” to “front building line of the facade of the principal structure that contains the primary entrance” to be consistent with the ordinance.  Removes 21A.40.120.E.1.a.(5), because the section overlaps with other wording in the ordinance.  Amends 21A.40.120.E.2 to modify or remove the provisions of the “Double Frontage Lot” section.  Amends 21A.40.120 E.4.i., 5.a.& 5.b., and E.6 to remove “hedges”.  Amending sections 21A.40.120.E.1.b.(6) adding “M-1A”.  Amends section 21A.40.160.C.1.b. & c. to take out “hedge” and replace with “landscaping”.  Amends Illustration in 21A.40.120.E.1. “NON-RESIDENTIAL FENCE HEIGHT” Underlined text is new; text with a strikethrough is proposed to be deleted. All other text is existing with no proposed change. 1. Amends the title to Section 21A.40.120 with no other changes to the section, as follows: 1 21A.40.120: REGULATION OF FENCES, AND WALLS AND HEDGES: 2 2. Amends Subsection 21A.40.120.A as follows: 3 4 A. Purpose: Fences, and walls and hedges serve properties by providing privacy and security, defining 5 private space and enhancing the design of individual sites. Fences also affect the public by 6 APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date: ___________________________ By: ____________________________ Katherine D. Pasker, Senior City Attorney December 10, 2025 2 impacting the visual image of the streetscape and the overall character of neighborhoods. The 7 purpose of these regulations is to achieve a balance between the private concerns for privacy and 8 site design and the public concerns for enhancement of the community appearance, and to ensure 9 the provision of adequate light, air and public safety. 10 11 3. Amends Subsection 21A.40.120.B as follows: 12 13 B. Location: All fences, and walls or hedges shall be erected entirely within the property lines of the 14 property they are intended to serve. 15 4. Amends Subsection 21A.40.120.E.1 as follows: 16 1. Fences, and walls, and hedges shall comply with the following regulations based on the following 17 zoning districts: 18 a. Residential Zoning Districts: 19 (1) a. Except as permitted in subsection 21A.24.010.P and 21A.40.120.E.4 of this code a fence, 20 or wall, or hedge located between the front property lot line and front building line of the 21 facade of the principal structure that contains the primary entrance shall not exceed four (4) 22 feet in height. 23 (2) b. A fence, or wall, or hedge located at or behind the primary facade of the principal 24 structure shall not exceed six (6) feet in height. 25 (3) c. On developed properties where there is no existing principal structure, the height of a 26 fence, or wall, or hedge shall not exceed four (4) feet in a front yard area or six (6) feet in 27 the rear or side yard areas. If there is no minimum front yard setback in the underlying 28 zoning district, a fence or wall taller than four feet may not be placed closer than ten (10) 29 feet from the front lot line. 30 31 (4) d. All refuse disposal and recycling dumpsters shall be screened on all sides by a solid wood 32 fence, masonry wall, or an equivalent opaque material to a height of not less than 6 feet but 33 not more than 8 feet. 34 3 b. Nonresidential Zoning Districts: 35 (1) A fence, wall, or hedge located between the front property line and front building line of the 36 facade of the principal structure that contains the primary entrance shall not exceed four (4) 37 feet in height. 38 (2) A fence, wall or hedge located at or behind the primary facade of the principal structure 39 shall not exceed six (6) feet in height. 40 4 41 42 43 (3) On developed properties where there is no existing principal structure, the height of a fence, 44 wall, or hedge shall not exceed four (4) feet in a front yard area or six (6) feet in the rear or side yard 45 areas. 46 (4) e. Notwithstanding Subsection 21A.40.120.E.1.b.(1), in the M-1 zoned properties in the Salt 47 Lake International Center, M-1A, M-2, and EI zoning districts, fences, or walls, or hedges 48 may be up to six (6) feet in height if located between the front property lot line and the front 49 yard setback line. front building line of the facade of the principal structure that contains the 50 primary entrance, unless the subject property is abutting or across a public street from a 51 zoning district that allows residential use, then the maximum height for a front yard fence is 52 four (4) feet. 53 (5) If there is no minimum front yard setback in the underlying zoning district, a fence, or wall, 54 or hedge of a maximum six (6) feet in height may be placed no closer than ten (10) feet from 55 the property line. 56 (6) f. Outdoor storage, when permitted in the zoning district, shall be located behind the 57 primary facade of the principal structure and shall be screened with a solid wall or fence 58 and shall comply with the requirements in Section 5.60.120. Outdoor storage in the M-1, 59 M-1A, and M-2 districts are also subject to the provisions of 21A.28.010.B.3. 60 (7) g. All refuse disposal and recycling dumpsters, except those located in the M-2, LO and EI 61 districts shall be screened on all sides by a solid wood fence, masonry wall or an equivalent 62 opaque material to a height of not less than 6 feet but not more than 8 feet. 63 64 5. Amends Subsection 21A.40.120.E.2 as follows (there are no changes to the “Fence in a 65 Double Frontage Lot” illustration): 66 5 2. Double Frontage Lot: A fence, wall, or hedge located on a property where both the front and rear 67 yards have frontage on a street may be a maximum of six (6) feet in height in a front yard provided the 68 fence, wall, or hedge: On properties with more than one front lot line, a fence or wall may be a maximum 69 of six (6) feet when located: 70 a. behind the primary facade of the principal structure; or 71 b. in the front yard that is directly opposite the front yard where the primary entrance to the 72 principal building is located. 73 a. Is located in a provided yard that is directly opposite the front yard where the primary entrance to 74 the principal building is located; 75 b. Is in a location that is consistent with other six (6) seven (7) foot tall fence locations on the 76 block; 77 c. Complies with Sight Distance Triangle requirements of this Title; and 78 d. Complies will all other fence, wall, and hedge requirements of this Title. 79 e. Not exceed six (6) feet in height in a front yard. 80 6. Amends Subsection 21A.40.120.E.4.a as follows: 81 a. When Abutting Nonresidential Zoning Districts. Fences, or walls, or hedges in the FR, SR, and R-l 82 zoning districts shall not exceed six (6) feet in height in the side or rear yard except where they abut a 83 Commercial, Downtown, Manufacturing, or Special Purpose Zoning District. The maximum height shall 84 be eight (8) feet. This exception does not apply to fences, or walls, or hedges in the corner side yard or 85 front yard and only applies where the lot abuts the nonresidential district. 86 7. Amends Subsection 21A.40.120.E.4.i as follows: 87 i. Conditional Uses. A fence, or wall, or hedge may exceed the allowable height requirements of this 88 Chapter where additional fence height is imposed as a reasonable condition to mitigate the anticipated 89 detrimental effects of a conditional use. Where such additional height is imposed as a reasonable 90 condition, such height shall not exceed the minimum height necessary to mitigate the anticipated 91 detrimental effects of the conditional use. 92 8. Amends Subsection 21A.40.120.E.5. as follows: 93 5. Vision Clearance and Safety. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code, a fence, or wall, or 94 hedge shall comply with the sight distance triangle requirements of this section. 95 a. Corner Lots; Sight Distance Triangle: No solid fence, or wall or hedge shall be erected to a 96 height in excess of three (3) feet if the fence, or wall or hedge is located within the sight distance triangle 97 extending thirty (30) feet either side of the intersection of the respective street curb lines, or edge lines of 98 roadway where curbing is not provided as noted in Section 21A.62.050, illustration I of this title. 99 b. Intersection of Street and Driveway; Intersection of Alley or Driveway and Sidewalk; Sight 100 Distance Triangle: Solid fences, or walls and hedges shall not exceed thirty (30) inches in height within 101 the sight distance triangle as defined in Section 21A.62.050, illustration I of this title. 102 6 c. Sight Distance Triangle and See Through Fences: Within the area defined as a sight distance 103 triangle, see through fences that are at least fifty percent (50%) open shall be allowed to a height of four 104 (4) feet. 105 d. Alternative Design Solutions. To provide adequate line of sight for driveways and alleys, the 106 zoning administrator, in consulting with the development review team, may require alternative design 107 solutions, including, but not restricted to, requiring increased fence setback and/or lower fence height, to 108 mitigate safety concerns created by the location of buildings, grade change or other preexisting 109 conditions. 110 111 9. Amends Subsection 21A.40.120.E.6 as follows (there are no changes to the “Fence on Top of 112 Retaining Wall” illustration): 113 6. Height Measurement. The height of a fence, or wall, or hedge shall be measured from the finished 114 grade of the site as defined in section 21A.62.040 of this title. In instances of an abrupt grade change at 115 the property line, the height for fences that are located on top of a retaining wall shall be measured from 116 the top of the retaining wall. 117 10. Amends Subsection 21A.40.160.C.1.b as follows: 118 b. Front and Corner Side Yards: The ground mounted utility box shall be located within five feet (5') 119 of the building façade when located in required or provided front or corner side yard and at least one foot 120 from a front or corner side yard property line. Utility boxes in a front or corner side yard shall be screened 121 by a wall, fence, or hedge landscaping of at least equal height not to exceed the maximum height for a 122 wall or fence allowed in the applicable yard. 123 11. Amends Subsection 21A.40.160.C.1.c as follows: 124 c. Ground mounted utility box(es) may be placed in a required landscaped yard if screened by a wall, 125 fence or hedge landscaping of at least equal height not to exceed the maximum height for a wall or fence 126 allowed in the applicable yard. 127 128 12. Effective Date. This ordinance, if passed, shall be effective on the date of its first publication. 129 130 [end] 131 5. MAILING LIST This was a city-wide notice posted at three libraries and sent to all Recognized Community Councils. This page has intentionally been left blank