HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/12/2023 - Meeting Materials REGULAR MEETING OF THE
BUSINESS ADVISORY BOARD
July 12, 2023
451 S State Street, Room 126
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
8.30 a.m. — 10:00 a.m.
Business Advisory Board meetings are held in a hybrid meeting format. Board Members and staff may participate through an online
format, and members of the public may join in person at the City&County Building: 451 South State Street, Room 126, Salt Lake City,
UT 84111.
Agenda
Business Advisory Board Members
District 1: Alfonso Brito, Santo Taco District 5: Abudujannah Soud, Kafe Mamai
District 2: Siliveinusi Niu, Concord Electric District 6: Karen Gunn, Gunn Consulting Cooperative
District 3: Jeff Carleton, Chair, Mountain West Cider Sue Rice, Celtic Bank
Andy Robertson, Vice Chair, IONIQ Sciences
District 7: Scott Lyttle, Tea Zaanti
Jocelyn Kearl, Third Sun Productions
District 4: Pook Carlson, Patrick 402 Partners
Darin Piccoli,The State Room Ex-Officio: Kristina Olivas, Downtown Alliance
Ex-Officio: Michelle Saucedo, Suazo Business Center
1. Roll Call
2. Approval of the minutes
A. Review and Approval of May 10t", 2023, BAB Minutes
BAB members will review the May 10t", 2023 meeting minutes and consider for approval.
3. Briefings by the Staff
A. Report from the Department 10 minutes
Roberta Reichgelt will provide updates on recent loans approved from the EDLF program, the Construction Mitigation
Grant program, and will introduce new staff.
Peter Makowski will provide updates on Open Streets 2023.
4. Business
A. Council Member Mano Introduction 10 Minutes
Council Member Mano will introduce himself and take questions from the Board.
B. Main Street Pedestrian Mall Study 20 minutes
Peter Makowski and Dig Studio will present the Main Street Pedestrian Mall Study and collect feedback from the
Board.
C. Child Daycare Center Amendments 15 minutes
Cassie Younger and Aaron Barlow will provide updates on the Child Daycare Center and Home Daycares Zoning
Text Amendments. More information can be found here:https.//www.slc.gov/planninq/20231061121
openhouse-00225/
D. Special Event Permitting Subcommittee Update 10 minutes
Jeff Carleton, Board Chair, will provide an update to the Board on the work of the Special Event Permitting
Subcommittee and process recommendations letter to the Mayor. The Board will vote whether to approve the letter.
5. City Council Announcements 10 minutes
A. Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Budget Highlights
B. Other Upcoming Budget Actions
6. BAB Member Announcements
A. Community Outreach Hours 5 Minutes
Vice Chair Andy Robertson will provide discuss hosting community outreach hours.
7. Adjournment
People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance in order to attend this
Business Advisory Board. Accommodations may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids. This is an accessible
facility. For questions, requests, or additional information,please contact the Department of Economic Development at 801-535-7200.
MINUTES FOR THE
BUSINESS ADVISORY BOARD
Wednesday, May loth, 2023
8:30 a.m. -10:00 a.m.
1. Roll Call
The following members of the Business Advisory Board were present:
Jeff Carleton, Chair Andy Robertson, Vice-Chair
Scott Lyttle Darin Piccoli
Pook Carson Alfonso Brito
Abudujannah Soud Jocelyn Kearl
Siliveinusi Niu
The following members of the Business Advisory Board were absent:
Karen Gunn Sue Rice
Also Present:
Veronica Cavanagh, Department of Economic Development; Lorena Riffo Jenson,
Department of Economic Development; Roberta Reichgelt, Department of Economic
Development; Will Wright, Department of Economic Development; Cathie Rigby,
Department of Economic Development;, Andie Feldman: Department of Economic
Development; Peter Makowski, Department of Economic Development; Lindsey Day,
Department of Economic Development; Mayor Erin Mendenhall; Andrew Johnston, Director
of Homeless and Outreach; Heather Wall, LDS Hospital; Michelle Saucedo, Suazo Business
Center.
2. Business
A. Homelessness updates and business impact discussion
Mayor Erin Mendenhall started the discussion of homelessness as a significant and emotional
issue in the City. She explained the Mayor's Office have been dedicating a substantial amount of
time to address this issue since day one of the administration. The perception of Salt Lake City as
the sole creator and resolver of homelessness needs to change. She said that this perspective is
detrimental and does not emphasize that homelessness is a statewide crisis not just a Salt Lake
City crisis.
Mayor Mendenhall discussed the factors contributing to the crisis, such as the housing shortage,
economic impacts of the pandemic, and the fallout of the mental health system. She noted that
homelessness has been concentrated primarily in Salt Lake City and St. George. She highlighted
the State's commitment to affordable housing and the City's investments in affordable housing
projects. She emphasized the importance of collaborative efforts between the City, State, and
County in addressing homelessness.
Mayor Mendenhall introduced Andrew Johnston, Director of Homeless Policy and Outreach, as
a crucial member of the team responsible for leading homeless policy for the City. Mr. Johnston
provided his background as a social worker and his extensive experience in the homeless
services industry. He then provided a presentation regarding the City's homelessness.
Mr. Johnston mentioned that the City is actively searching for suitable land, ideally 10 to 20
acres, to address housing needs. The location should have some distance from heavy residential
and commercial areas.
Mr. Johnston discussed the need for better public dissemination of information and the challenge
of ensuring that the work done over the years reaches the public effectively. He mentioned the
involvement of the State Homelessness Council and emphasized the importance of involving the
business community and political circles in understanding the state strategic plan. Mayor
Mendenhall emphasized the need for collaboration and the collective effort required to address
homelessness effectively. She mentioned the partnerships established and the progress made with
the support of state and county funding. Mayor Mendenhall also acknowledged the challenges in
communicating the ongoing efforts to the public and expressed gratitude for Mr. Johnston's
leadership in this regard. She also told the BAB how much she appreciates them wanting to help
in getting the information out there.
B. Intermountain Healthcare at Sears Block
Heather Wall introduced herself as the Hospital Administrator at LDS Hospital and gave a
presentation on how Intermountain Health would like to move forward with the purchase of the
Sears block in downtown Salt Lake City. Here are some brief discussion points:
• Ms. Wall stated that the purchase of the Sears block downtown by Intermountain Health
has been in the works for over a year and they have proposed changing the zoning from
D2 to D 1 and are awaiting approval from the city.
• Intermountain Healthcare contracts with large employers to bring patients from across the
country for joint replacements and bariatric surgery so they need a location where it is
easily accessible for patients, close to public transit, and offers outdoor space for patients
and caregivers. She discussed the need for wraparound services and the benefits of
having hotel and restaurant connections nearby.
• The new downtown location would bring approximately 1,700 caregivers, but traffic flow
would remain like the current hospital location in Salt Lake City.
• Intermountain Health aims to build a long-term anchor and destination location for
healthcare downtown.
• Ms. Wall said the opening date of the new hospital depends on various factors, including
zoning approval and issuing the Request for Proposal (RFP). The aim is to open the
building as quickly as possible, ensuring patient accessibility and safety. However, no
specific date was mentioned.
3. Approval of the minutes
A. Review and Approval of March 8th, 2023, BAB Minutes
Mr. Piccoli made a motion to approve the minutes from March 8th, 2023, meeting. Mr. Soud
seconded the motion. Upon roll call, the motion passed unanimously.
4. City Council Announcements
No announcements.
5. Briefings by the Staff
Construction Mitigation Grant
Ms. Reichgelt updated the BAB regarding the Construction Mitigation Grant. Economic
Development have exhausted the $200,000 and have asked the Mayor for more funds. She
approved it and it will now go in front of Council for approval.
Living Traditions
Ms. Reichgelt let the BAB know that Living Traditions Festival will happen on May 19th to the
21 st. The festival will feature live performances, unique traditions, and diverse cultures.
Small Business Week
Ms. Reichgelt discussed Small Business Week which happened the week prior. They celebrated
local small businesses and visited various businesses such as Curry Fried Chicken, Sapa, Tacos
Don Rafa, Global Place, Pacific Seas, and Noor.
ARPA
Mr. Andersen gave three updates regarding ARPA:
1. Over 40 businesses were awarded the ARPA grants in Phase 1. Checks have started to be
distributed.
2. Currently working with the Community Recovery Committee to allocate $500,000 to
nonprofits.
3. The application process of the second phase of the individual small business grant closed
on April 18th and they have received over 100 applications.
6. BAB Member Announcements
Chairperson Carleton discussed a volunteer opportunity that Vice-chair Robertson organized for
the BAB at the Women's Resource Center through Volunteers of America in Salt Lake City. He
recently went there to volunteer and said it was a great experience.
Vice-chair Robertson discussed the Mayor's Community Outreach Office hours which is the
Mayor's team of community liaisons going out into different neighborhoods for discussions on
constituents needs, feedback for the Mayor, or help navigating the City. BAB members can find
out where they are hosting the office hours at https://www.slc. og v/mayor/home/community-
outreach.
7. Adiournment
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Jeff Carleton, Chairperson
This document and the recording constitute the official minutes of the Economic Development
Business Advisory Board meeting held on May 1 Oth, 2023.
Wi
ERIN MENDENHALL =� ^� , i; LORENA RIFFO JENSON
MAYOR DIRECTOR
1
DEPARTMENT of ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
BUSINESS ADVISORY BOARD (BAB) MEMO
DATE: July 7, 2023
PREPARED BY: Peter Makowski, Project Manager
RE: Main Street Pedestrian Mall Study
REQUESTED ACTION: Provide Comments
POLICY ITEM: None
BUDGET IMPACTS: None
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Business Development Division and Dig Studio are conducting a Main Street Pedestrian Mall
Study to examine the feasibility of a pedstrian mall on Main Street in downtown Salt Lake City,
from 400 South to South temple.The study will provide conceptual designs,infrastructure
analysis, and public engagement to help inform public officials and the community on design
options for the mall.
ANALYSIS & ISSUES:
None
PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL ACTION: None
ATTACHMENTS: Main Street Pedestrian Mall Study Presentation
,K
is 'us
Main ree
Pedestr*ian
i
Mail
_ A Conceptual Planning
AKF -
Project Kickoff
Q
N <
1947
• 10:00-10:05 Team introductions (WV)
• 10:05-10:15 Vision and goals (PM)
• 10:15-10:25 Project timeline and milestones (Dig /
PM)
• 10:25-10:40 Tools and methods for coordination,
recurring meeting scheduling (Dig)
• 10:40-10:55 Discussion: anticipated challenges, gaps
or opportunities (Dig)
• Next meeting - recurring meeting scheduling
Offig 06/28/2023 2
Ibrahim Ramazani Austin Taylor Amanda Roman Kristen Lavalett+ William Becker
SLC Office of Economic SLC RDA SLC Planning Jessica Thesing SLC Transportation
Development Downtown Alliance
Dig �o
Studio
Prime
Consultant �!► ,.!. .�
Peter Bill Vitek Megan Jones Andrew Cho
Makowski Principal-In- Shiotani Urban Designer
Project Manager Charge Project Manager
SLC Office of -
Economic =
Development _ I
0 Dig Leah Jaramillo Preston Stinger Yvette Freeman Dan Bourque
Public Transportation & Management& Civil Engineer
Main Street Project Kickoff Engagement Mobility I Fehr& Operations Talisman 06/28/2023 3
DEA Peers PUMA Engineering
•
0 Ad
Vision GoalF
, .w i0 l
�-- The primary objective of this study is to develop
i la w phased plans to redesign Main Street as a
pedestrian mall.This includes a high-level analysis of
existing conditions, identifying gaps and barriers,
providing recommendations for areas needing further
study, and calculating cost estimates for future project
! _ phases including planning, analysis, design, and
construction.While this study is high level in nature,
j -- - recommendations and estimates need to provide
r enough details to inform the City and stakeholders
+ + 4 of potential design options and any infrastructure,
policy,and other concerns that need to be
fh' = addressed.
.;� � Main Street, 1918 q
A _ Credit:Salt Lake Tribune
1
Main Street should be gay and colorful both day
and fight; it should have greenery and trees;
;.may it shd Id have all kinds of thkngs happening on
the sidewalks - kiosks, o,4tdoor cafes, street
vendors, displays, flowers', etc... all parking and
.. 1 unnecessary traffic should inated.
'fit
in Street must be foo-
o I e:
F f - 1964 Salt La '' cond. Century Plan,- ..�
tit' • � y
sr4 . k r •i .! 1
I • ^ = Y` _.
YF'
i
Project C-T A
� C
vision
v�,AKF i
N. 1 0612812023
�aai •
existing cross-section
A o Why
here? -------:L------------------- -------J----------L---------------L---------------J---------------I---------------J--------I--------LJ-------------------------------------
O
1 I. I�
mid-block cross-section
�.El,� i n
Why
here?_
O
1 I. I�
mid-block cross-section
P
Why
-------------------
here? 132'
O
1 I. I�
ASSETS&OPPORTUNITIES LEGEND
cnouxo aornusf xc ec¢ss
SOUTHT@AP,EsTPEEJ�.>✓ !f� !1 ❑ .ro..n,..F9ewii b�nss�y..0 O ..m ma.....r."�
The h lrtonc rtorefrgm e X 2nMrcan nva..no-n.Mei mor
office buildings e F 1H ry ew perform'q'
ce ter formarich AxwaecTUMt wMuncA s.ra[n eaap utcv cuxaccTk�xs
archrteRuralfrt ith rora1-Nw n ss q o
V Fendly budding scale .yumertnmowreiwuu q . 9
un
V iq uefor SALake CRY .w.W.nirg br wne..mwoao"We.y i.� .ei.c a 1d�omrtd«x m�xzrw.,nxy or
V
oo tRH }: Si Al
t nnections nrsnixPMermicrux
� t
eate'found' —
exper kd-Ed
and dmvid. rPAx s"`
bl«la lmoa O max,nm"
CHALLENGES&CONSTRAINTSAIN
\\� ~�'ti j .�. pedestrian scale O
XIm a d-being re a+ana fona ana v
beveage m City Creek Mzll leave V.-
Main Street rtorefmntsand ofe v v
spaces empty v
V
V
_ pO50UTH Attire retail along northern � t
�. block
Unique food,beverage and
nightlife along southern blodss
�ts�"_...•••a prwidesaframevrork for
unique blod iden[ieies
Cultural programming provides
mcancies or ahetrvise int dive V year+ound dynam
WhyO ca rrcreFonrsne m t do no Curren N V ism.
nbhe pub lic realm.
The legacy of historic ZCMI window .SOUTH
displays muld provide an �{
opporNnRy for[empon ry artor ( _ _
acvvatwn along unused rtorefrorrts
• wl
V
&CONSTRAINTS H-H TRARmri6«drawsvi4torsand v
OINIDAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND OBSERVATION5 BASED ON ONSITE reducepadsingdanand,butcreates
aphysiol divisi nthe rtretand
ANALYSIS(MARCH 2O23) demands pedertnan safety b,
piontced. A0o
06/28/2023 10
�� � �v�a s�e !A.rh aC•V, s
Y
y ;1 ,
Ail
5ALT LAKE'S CULTURAL CORE
SLC.COM S41i - )
Rr
Why
THE
BLOC I.
no
w _--
1
A9KA6bV/TSFEf/Al9- � � "��' �
Project Timeline
Conditions analysis Conceptual design Policy and design Ingress
recommendations ADA report
JUNE4ULY2023 JUNE-SEPTEMBER 2023 AUGUST-OCTOBER 2023 OCTOBER-NOVEMBER NOVEMBER 2023
a. Document Current a. Concept Designs for a. Recommend Short-, 2023 a. Cost Estimates for All
Conditions Short-,Medium-,and Long- Medium-,and Long-term a. Analyze Ingress and Design Options
b. Address O&M Needs term Implementation Improvements Egress Options
b. Overview Maps of b. Recommend Street,Curb, b. IdentifyBuilding,
c.e Project Area Address Public Utilities p Gutter,Sidewalk
R uirements Parking,Delivery Access
q Improvements
d. Ma Key Destinations in c. Illustrations,Renderings, c. Emergency Vehicle
p Y
the Study c. Recommendations for
Visualizations Access
Area Obstacles,Planters,Lighting
e. Review Existing Plans d. Video with Renderings d. Pedestrian Safety d. ADA Needs and
and Current Efforts for Project Promotion Infrastructure Requirements
f. Identify Gaps,Barriers, (addressed in Deliverables) Needs:Intersections/TRAX e. Pedestrian Safety
Opportunities e. Public Space,Green Infrastructure
g. Compile three Case Space,Common Area Recommendations
Studies-Similar Projects Improvements f. Summary of Key Findings
h. Conduct Field Tour f. Street Improvement Visual Report
Recommendations
i. Summarize Key Findings g. Green Space and Urban
(Virtual Report) Forestry Recommendations
h. Arts and Culture
Opportunities
I. Policy Recommendations
for Permitting
j. Best Practices for
Programming/Regulatory
Mechanisms
k. Safety and Enforcement
Main Street Project Kickoff Resources 06/28/2023 12
Work Plan and Schedule
i
Tools • Methods
Weekly meetings OneDrive Access
Schedule moving forward
- Biweekly (as needed)
Linked here
0 Dig
Main Street Project Kickoff 0612812023 14
Past planning efforts
- - 1962 — — — — — — — — — — — 1999 • - - - - - 2008 - - 2012 - - 2015 - - 2021 - ► 2023
Second CenturyPlan Downtown In Motion
Open Streets
• Original vision for Main Street City-wide TRAX, cycling
Pedestrian Mall and pedestrian guidance 2021-2023 activation
• 'Main Street should be gay and
colorful both day and night; it plan Salt Lake
should have greenery and trees;
it should have all kinds of things Additional resources
happening on the sidewalks- Defines citywide goals for
kiosks, outdoor cafes, street growth, transportation & • SLC Urban Forest Action
vendors, displays, flowers, etc... Plan
all parking and unnecessary mobility, air quality, parks
traffic should be eliminated. & recreation, • 2021-2023 Mayoral plans
Main Street must be for people.' beautification, (slcmayorplan.com)
preservation, arts & • Others?
0 Dig culture and equity that
can be implemented by
Main Street Project Kickoff the Main Street plan 06/28/2023 15
K" ov
Mwt
n
_� : ► -
TA
• • • • - //
010
Sri e
i6bbb;iiGiGifi
j � w
PO
• Deliveries and coordination items -
next 2 weeks:
stepsNext W1 • Team review of planning documents
and relevant guidance (please add to
OneDrive if not already in folder)All
consultants
July 10-11 Stakeholder worksessions • Prepare basemap, including utility
Field tour planning locates HIV / 1411�11Id'
Recurring meeting scheduling • Develop and open website and
survey )ig / DEA
Offline one-on-one follow up needs • Review SWOT analysis documents All
consultants
• Targeted discussions (Dig, DEA)
LDS Church
' ~" Utah Historic Society
W.
Ilk W.1771VAIZ.11
i s �. js Others?
Pp
I ��/'
Thank you.
Workshop .
M -,ain Street --w
ro ect brand
identity
84I 8�
Branding key goals
1 . Spark excitement for the future with big ideas
2. Be inclusive and communicate diverse and accessible spaces
3. Be flexible for public engagement and Open Streets integration
4. Be distinctive from other projects and spaces
5. Make it a destination
6. Others?
0 Dig
0
Main Street Project Kickoff 06/28/2023 20
kon Alternative branding approaches
1 . Process-oriented 2.Activation-oriented 3. District identity
• Focused on the current • Focused on future • Focused on future
planning effort activation identity and new
• Tied to past, present and • Tied to current street placemaking
future street identity identity • Tied to authenticity,
imagining future 'brand'
• Lifespan - project • Lifespan - could either be for the street
schedule only used for project schedule . Lifespan - should be a
only or extended into long-term identity - not
future activation efforts to be dismissed after
project end
0 Dig
Main Street Project Kickoff 06/28/2023 21
Approach 1 -
MpIN STREET
Process-oriented
s .............
Focused on the current planning effort
Tied to past,present and future street identity I
Lifespan-project schedule only WILL BE ..
5
�`�+" �•�,,r�°�"'" '�� NEXT t�
'J 1 F
Main Street was ....
Main Street is
Main Street will be ....
'The Future of Bozeman is...' 'Civic Center Next 100'1 Civic
Downtown Bozeman Center Park
Identity Workshop
//
Approach 2
-Activationmoriented
-- C�
Focused on future activation �\NER ON
Tied to current street identity Rim
Lifespan-could either be used for
project schedule only or extended
into future activation efforts } : ILI 3 ��
dd.f
Key themes/opportunities: I ( ! ! � I
Main Street is a place to go to(a l i°
destination),no longer just a place _ Imagine together on Main
to go through(a route or trail) Y— &1�lIt! ..._
Examples-large street corridors but Dine together on Main
the pedestrian mall is synonymous =with the street name-no clarification Dance together on Main
is needed
'Pearl Street', '161h Street', 'Bourke '"LOA Celebrate together on Main
Street', 'Nicollet; 'Granville Street' Play together on Main
'On Nicollet'l Nicollet Mall Y g
Identity Workshop 06/28/2023 23
Approach 3 -
GREAT SALT LANE
Districtidentity MAIN STREET• Focused on future identity and vo O 0
new placemaking O O O o
• Tied to authenticity, imagining a O new'brand'for the street 0 C3
• Lifespan -should be a long-term The Undek I O O O
identity-not to be dismissed after o 0
project end The Underline I Miami ❑ O
0 000
HIGH reen Atlanta o0
9
o 00
LINE G�P BeltUnE ❑ o
0 0
The High Line I NYC The Green Loop I SLC The BeltLine I Atlanta
History, past perception, future vision
*` Need to acknowledge
�f Vacancy (real and perceived)
LDS Church / City Creek-oriented retail
Historically cherished architecture
History of holiday displays
NOW �` — Need to foster
�' 11_ -
Imagination and big-picture thinking
r r r X' Correlation between Open Streets 2023 and
future Main Street design
_� ,� i :` '�. ..,ir�y�� vie_'•
!
Community engagement
PACIFIC A
SCIENCI BE PROUD. Communicate a Main Street full
CENTEP
AL
of color, garden spaces, and
18-hour activation
'Main Street should be gay
dift and colorful both day and
night,• it should have greenery
and trees,
it should have all kinds of
things happening on the
1 ! sidewalks-kiosks, outdoor
cafes,street vendors, displays, im
flowers, etc... all parking and
unnecessary traffic should be
eliminated. ■�[hI
Main Street must be for
people.'
REFERENCE -
EHOLDER SLIDES
• D- •
History
• Renewed interest
What is a
pedestrian
mall?
,��,PKF i
Presentation title N• '
■Series 1 ■Series 2 ■Series 3
6
6V
4
3
2
e
Why0
49
now .? Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4
Presentation title Ad Dig 20XX 29
Wi
ERIN MENDENHALL =� ^� , i; LORENA RIFFO JENSON
MAYOR DIRECTOR
1
DEPARTMENT of ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
BUSINESS ADVISORY BOARD (BAB) MEMO
DATE: July 7, 2023
PREPARED BY: Peter Makowski, Project Manager
RE: Child Daycare Center and Home Daycares Zoning Text Amendments
REQUESTED ACTION: Provide Comments
POLICY ITEM: Zoning Text Amnedment
BUDGET IMPACTS: None
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Planning Division is proposing amendments to the zoning code regarding daycare centers and
home daycares (as home occupations).As one of Mayor Mendenhall's priorities for 2023,the
intended goal of these amendments is to remove barriers to childcare providers within the City's
zoning regulations and better align our city regulations with State Code. Input on the proposed
changes from your Board is greatly appreciated and will provide the project team with insights
and perspectives that they may not be aware of.
ANALYSIS & ISSUES:
• Expand eligibility for child care subsidies,to the extent practicable,with Child Care&
Development Block Grant funds.
• Encourage significant developments to incorporate the building of child care facilities by
providing incentives such as: state corporate income tax credits for child care facilities
built in Opportunity Zones,local property tax abatement for developments that
incorporate child care facilities and zoning density bonuses that incorporate child care
facilities.
• Include child care access in long range planning, such as housing developments,land use
planning, as well as plans that include increasing access to employment.
• Local governments partner with employers to rehabilitate and retrofit vacant buildings to
operate as licensed child care programs.
PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL ACTION: None
ATTACHMENTS: Daycare Amendment Packet
MEMORANDUM
=� PLANNING DIVISION
DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS
To: All Salt Lake City Departments and Divisions
From: Cassie Younger,Senior Planner
Aaron Barlow,Principal Planner
Date: June 13,2023
Re: Zoning Text Amendments regarding Child Centers and Home Daycare Facilities
This memo is intended to provide information and solicit feedback regarding proposed text amendments related to
child daycare centers and home daycares within Salt Lake City.As one of Mayor Mendenhall's priorities for 2023,the
intended goal of these amendments is to remove barriers to childcare providers within the City's zoning regulations.
Input on the proposed changes from your department or division is greatly appreciated and will provide the project
team with insights and perspectives that they may not be aware of. Please have any comments or feedback to us
by June 27,2023.
ATTACHMENTS: -
ATTACHMENT A: Table of Current and Proposed Changes
ATTACHMENT B: Map of Existing and Proposed Zoning Maps for Child Daycare Centers
ATTACHMENT C: Proposed Code Redlines
ATTACHMENT D: Utah Department of Workforce Services: " Child Care Access in Utah"
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
06
Background Information
A national daycare shortage is affecting Utah's parents and children in a merging crisis of capacity and affordability.In
2020,the Utah Department of Workforce Services identified the most severe shortage of child care centers was in Salt
Lake County.As of 2020,Salt Lake County needed 99 new Child Care Centers and 454 licensed family daycares to keep
up with demand.As demand continues to grow,we can only expect that these numbers have increased in the three
years since this report.
Along with low wages and staffing difficulties,land use regulations can be a burden to new daycares trying to get land
use permits in a new city. While zoning cannot alone solve this complex problem,the Mayor has requested that the
planning department do everything possible to reduce zoning barriers to this desperately needed service in our city.
The Utah Department of Workforce Services recommended the following policy considerations to address the daycare
crisis in our state,emphasizing a need forbusinesses,philanthropy,and non-profits to join governmental organizations
to solve this problem:
• Expand eligibility for child care subsidies, to the extent practicable,with Child Care&Development
Block Grant funds.
• Encourage significant developments to incorporate the building of child care facilities by providing
incentives such as: state corporate income tax credits for child care facilities built in Opportunity Zones,
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 406 WWW.SLCGOV.COM
PO BOX 145480 SALT LAKE CITY,UT 84114-5480 TEL 801-5357757 FAX 801-535-6174
local property tax abatement for developments that incorporate child care facilities and zoning density
bonuses that incorporate child care facilities.
• Include child care access in long range planning, such as housing developments, land use planning, as
well as plans that include increasing access to employment.
• Local governments partner with employers to rehabilitate and retrofit vacant buildings to operate as
licensed child care programs.
Child Care Capacity vs.Remaining Need
Counties with Highest Gap Based on Variable Distance Methodology
Salt Lake 23,259
Utah 7,072
Davis 5,672
Weber 4,718
Washington 2,255
Cache 2,361 Facility Capacity
Allocated Need
Box Elder 722
Source.-U.S.Census,dCS 5-Yeew Dt mates,2013-1018�Utah
Tooele 1,023 Depaarmmt of 1*rkf—Sr-ices,Offet ojChild Care.
Uintah W359
Wasatch M 315
Iron 765
Sanpete 274
11�_.�
This analysis demonstrates that the gap in urban counties increases
to 70 percent,and in rural counties is unchanged at 65 percent.
The matter of available and affordable childcare is important for equity in the workplace for women and people of
color.With the growing cost of living and housing,many families need dual incomes to afford daily expenses.Without
affordable childcare,we are not only leaving many adults out of the workforce that would likely work otherwise,we are
leaving many families vulnerable to food and housing insecurity.Without childcare options,women are statistically
more likely to take on the domestic duties in a family, including childrearing.According to the Utah Department of
Labor's statistics, the rate of women in the workforce with children under 6 is only 50%, while 74% of women with
children ages 6-17(of school age)are in the workforce.If Salt Lake City intends to support women in the workforce,it
needs to provide opportunities for more childcare options where it can.
Existing Barriers and Conflicts with State Code
Currently,there are several barriers in the City's zoning regulations that can make finding a location for a new daycare
in the city difficult.For example,Conditional Use approval is required for daycare centers in the following residential
zones: R-1/12,00o,R-1/7,000,R-1/5,000,SR-3,R-2,RMF-3o,and RMF-35-
The Conditional Use standards for childcare centers as outlined in 21A.36.130 of the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance
are prohibitive for any new daycare center that would try to build within those residential zones. Planning staff has
found that many of these standards are not only prohibitive and costly,but unnecessary, especially with such a high
demand of these uses in the city.
Some of these prohibitive standards include:
• A minimum lot size of 20,00o square feet
• A requirement to be located on and oriented toward an arterial street
• A prohibition of new daycare centers within 60o feet of another daycare facility that requires a conditional use
on the same street frontage.
Staff has found these standards, and many others listed in the Conditional Use Standards for Child care centers, are
burdensome and prevent new daycares in areas where they are most needed—in residential areas,near families and
children.
Additionally, the regulations within the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance and State Code on this issue are often
conflicting. Our goal is not only to reduce barriers in this context,but greater align our code with State requirements
in order to reduce confusion in the process.
Proposed Code Amendments
A full version of the proposed redlines are included in Attachment C.Summary of the largest changes include:
Home daycares(as a Home Occupation)
• Eliminating the definition for "Nonregistered Home Daycares". "Nonregistered Home Daycares" are not
regulated by City or State code.This definition creates confusion with other definitions of childcare facilities.
• Increasing the number of children allowed at home daycares from eight(8)to sixteen(16),to align with State
code.
• Moving standards for Home Daycares into Home Occupation chapter, 21A.36.030 .
Child Care Centers
• Change the Land Use from Conditional Use to Permitted in the following zones: R-1/5,000, R-1/7,000, R-
1/12,000,SR-1,SR-3,R-2,RMF-3o,RMF-35,and RMF-45
• Adding as Permitted Use to the following zones: FR-1/43,560,F-2/21,78o and FR-3/12,000.
• Eliminating existing Conditional Use Standards for childcare centers outlined in 21A.36.130
Next Steps
Staff is in the beginning stages of the Early Engagement period. Community Councils will be notified, and Planning
will host a virtual Online Open House on the Planning website. After receiving comments from departments and
divisions within the city,as well as from the public,we will modify our proposed amendments,and prepare a report to
send these proposed code changes to the Planning Commission for a recommendation to the City Council.
Attachment A
00
CHILD DAYCARE CENTER
CURRENT PROPOSED REASON
"Persons,associations, "Persons,associations, Align with Utah State Code.
corporations,institutions corporations,institutions
or agencies providing on or agencies providing on
a regular basis care and a regular basis care and
supervision(regardless of supervision(regardless of
educational emphasis)to educational emphasis)to
children under fourteen(14) children under the age of
years of age,in lieu of care thirteen(13),or under the age
and supervision ordinarily of eighteen(18)if the person
provided by parents in their has a disability,in lieu of care
DEFINITIONS: own homes,with or without and supervision ordinarily
Daycare
charge,are engaged in provided by parents in their
providing child"daycare"for own homes.Such providers
purposes of this title.Such and their facilities shall be
providers and their facilities classified as defined herein
shall be classified as defined and shall be subject to the
herein and shall be subject applicable provisions of
to the applicable provisions title 5,title 9,chapters 9.08
of title 5,title 9,chapters 9.08 through 9.20,9.28 through
through 9.20,9.28 through 9.40,and title 14,this title,
9.40,and title 14,chapter and applicable State law or
14.36 of this Code,this title, their successors."
and applicable State law."
"An establishment providing "An establishment providing Align with Utah State Code.
care and maintenance to care to any number of
seven(7)or more children children at any one time of
at any one time of any age any age separated from their
DEFINITION: separated from their parents parents or guardians."Child
Daycare Center,Child or guardians." Daycare Center"does not
include:(i)residential child
care;or(ii)care provided in
a facility or program exempt
under Utah State Code."
Conditional Use in most Add or change to Permitted in Reduce land use permits,
single family and multifamily all residential zones. time,and cost for businesses
LAND USE TABLE residential zones. starting daycares.
Not permitted in Foothill
residential zones.
Conditional Use standards All Conditional Use standards Reduce unnecessary
for Child Daycare centers for daycare centers removed. restrictions and barriers to
STANDARDS outlined in 21A.36.130. building new daycare centers.
........................................................................................................................................
CHILD DAYCARE CENTER//ZONING TEXTAMENDMENT
HOME DAYCARES, AS HOME OCCUPATION
CURRENT PROPOSED REASON
"Registered home daycare or "An accessory use of a Eliminate unnecessary age
preschool daycare"means principal place of residence and group size restrictions
the use of a principal place to provide educational and/ and better align with Utah
of residence to provide or daycare opportunities State Code.
DEFINITION: educational or daycare for children."
opportunities for children Eliminate "Home Preschool"
Registered Home Daycare under age seven(7)in small
or Preschool groups.The group size at
any given time shall not
exceed eight(8),including the
provider's own children under
age seven(7)."
"Nonregistered home Eliminate definition and all This use is not regulated
DEFINITION: daycare"means a person references to"Nonregistered under zoning code.
who uses his/her principal home daycare".
Unregistered Home Daycare place of residence to provide
or Preschool daycare for no more than
two(2)children.
Permitted in all residential No change. N/A
districts and within a legal
LAND USE TABLE conforming dwellings in non
residential districts,except
M-1 &M-2.
Group size at any given time Group size shall not exceed This allows for more children
shall not exceed eight(8), sixteen(16)children, in home daycares,and
GROUP SIZE including the provider's own supervised by the number of follows the same group size
children under age seven(7). caregivers required according and age limitations as Utah
to Utah Administrative Code State Code.
430-90-10 or its successor.
Standards outlined in Standards outlined in When Special Exception
21A.36.130. 21A.36.030.H. petitions were removed from
the City's zoning regulations,
the method of approval
for home daycares was
STANDARDS essentially lost. Placing Home
Daycares within the Home
Occupation section of the
zoning ordinance will provide
the City with a mechanism
to review and permit new
Home Daycares.
........................................................................................................................................
HOME DAYCARES,AS HOME OCCUPATION//ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT 2
Attachment B
CHILD DAYCARE CENTER AMENDMENTS EXISTING CONDITIONS
60
OEM 110
■ ,
MINE klu MUMMER
WES MEN
LIA111111111IMMEut- ' ■
�•� INBtP 1 1;_;,\■■■[7L711lI7 'Jt�l�_. ■IN NNYSI
MIN I
IN A
Elk
IMEN L
a7wk.
Permitted Use Properties Eligible for Conditional Use Residential Properties ineligible for Conditional Use Not Permitted
CHILD DAYCARE CENTER AMENDMENTS PROPOSED CONDITIONS
1
•Il�� Il� iti� �"'
PANl�f■■� l■■; ,� i' iiiiaaii�• V'��..� III' �1 IIIIMIN a ■II■`.��.i r�i-
III 1RPi11■1111■11IM L'Elow " Iieu.ua.
lE] 111NN■11■■■.Iri�� ai.uiiiiiiii
■M� C■ IY■ ■
—.■ 2F IN/ ■■■I�e.---.--uu.u—ti�
CII.^■Ili..■■■C■■■.!■Y■.■Y1�.
YII'1■■11�.■■1 ■■■■■■rYY11YY1—
=�I� �_I:i11111u1m��. Ir 1-111���"''''■ YI■YiY■■:irilE7NIN1
II �■I1■■YCI!■�� Y!■■iY1N1
�l■�Y�SYIII: LNY■■Y■■■■■IINI■■■illY1111\ti
�I ■":'P�Y x7
111► ie■■IR■■■■11■11■■■11 ®�
Y\'An 11■I Ins iYY■=I1■NN�1■11■Y 11■■II
11! 1
�IeL 11 _■II■YY■YY■���II��,,,1111111Y711111
� ..� �\■■■111111lIIIfl1�NINIY■IIIIC■\ENT �.111F■ nYill exx ex►. �P�'���•��
Ell
ME
� 111 JEN O .NI�x =
...2 =�—
xxxx
F , -1—��='Clila�I�I�Jl�p!:��`IA'�v•"���I�I I
Ji
:'x�
��■ .. � 7�11_��===:1:ee ���I==Imo_.=■�— ....1�1
rll�e�� 1'I�ij�riill• `���
11�■ Illll�r..�•• �� _
If I�'� �;ii1111111111
Permitted Use Not Permitted
Attachment C
21A.60.020 LIST OF DEFINED TERMS
DAYCARE
DAYCARE CENTER, CHILD.
DAYCARE NONREGISTERED HOME.
DAYCARE, REGISTERED HOME DAYCARE OR PRESCHOOL
DAYCARE, HOME
PRESCHOOL, HOME
21A.62.040: DEFINITIONS OF TERMS:
DAYCARE: Persons, associations, corporations, institutions or agencies providing on a regular
basis care and supervision (regardless of educational emphasis) to children -,r,r,er fr„,rtoon (i 4)
years-owe, under the age of thirteen (13), or under the age of eighteen (18) if the person has
a disability,- in lieu of care and supervision ordinarily provided by parents in their own homes,
" . Such
providers and their facilities shall be classified as defined herein and shall be subject to the
applicable provisions of title 5, title 9, chapters 9.08 through 9.20, 9.28 through 9.40, and title
14, Gh` Ater 14.36 of this ( ode this title, and applicable State law or their successors.
DAYCARE CENTER, CHILD: An establishment providing care and maintonnnno to so„for
mere any number of children at any one time of any age separated from their parents or
guardians. "Child Daycare Center" does not include:(i) home daycare; or (ii) care provided in a
facility or program exempt under Utah State Code.
DAYr ARCe NONREGISTERED HOME: "Nenrpryistered h�ayGaro�Teansapp�enho
DAYCARE, REGISTERED HOME DAYCARE OR PRESCHOOL: "Registered Herne dayGare
Under age seven (7)
DAYCARE, HOME: An accessory use of a principal place of residence to provide educational
and/or daycare opportunities for children.
PRESCHOOL, HOME: See the definition of HOME DAYCARE.
DRAFT 5.17.2023
21n zG 1zn• CHILD DAYCARE:
pre�iirl + 21 n 33 "La„�USe T-ahl " .d '+hip I� I
prev Oder a c Se� �r u�r21z r� rrrcS , S�T "-ate v"v t h i aT
essi Apatien speGial a ptien a al shall pet her re.J
er registered heMe pFeSGheel as defined in Ghapter 21A.62 of this title, may be al!E)Wed as an
n21A n
• e e
family, of this title and within legal
GeRferMiRg single dijplex,
------- ef GhapteF 21A.594 A-f this title. Registe—re-d- hemea day Gares shall -he- P-A-Rside—re-d ap
felleWipn rtnni amen+�ti�n•
a Thep ether of. Phil Iron, �r,rl o .,Ir, oos• hr,+h + ,+aI fr,r+ho .J ar.J the 0 op+o.J
movimi im pi imher to he en the promises of aRy given tome;
b. The hei irs and days efepperaORaQ
evemptien therefrom is nlaimerl
a The a pliGap+ resides at +he home i whirh the hiisipess will he G RdIAs+ed;
0
b. At Re tome shall the appliGaRt previde home dayGare er home preSGhool serViGes for-a
rvrei Ap of shil.Jren e erdi the maximum .oifie.d far s sh faGili+�i•
G. The eutdeer play area fer the heme dayGare er heme preSGhec)l shall be IeGated OR the-
rear er side yards ef the heme for the PrOteGtIOR and safety of the Ghildren and fer the prateGtiGR
of the pe .d ghherhee •
and seGeRdary to the use of the dwelling for resideRtial purposes and shall ROt Ghange the
�h�r ter.,f thee hpme er the pe ghherhee.J•
pi Ahlis n e to the pe .d ghherhee •DRAFT 5.17.2023
seFV!Ge, Re
ether signs er displays
,
p No emnleyeec ether than persons lawfully living in the dwellinrv•
b Ae lay e;�a;�deq; Tep+ le-ea A the frert Y a�, Q
gistered
prev
eh
C. Child DayG re 0E+1«
1 (`er,.ditier,-AI I Ise C+-ar,ear.Js fl,r child DayGa e GeAter-s. A ..hill .JayGaFe GeRter m he
rervi firemen#c and nrOVisions of this S ihsentien
a.Site Req�eme„
I) PJti F I-et 2-.OzZe: TI.A.4P-Rt y +hG6lsa ,d (20,000) squaFe feet.
(2) LeGatiGR Requirements: The Ghild dayGaFe use shall be addressed OR and oriented
+e Ap er+eriAl street as shAWP AP the Git y's majer s+Fee+ r!aR
(3) Rear Yard PlaygreLind Equipment All outside playgrOURd equipmeRt shall be
les +e d er,ly OR the rear aFd
woth a selod feRGe at least sox feet (6') high. At least teR feet (10') five feet (5') from the feRGe te
the interier pertieR ef the property shall be IandSGaped OR SUGh a way that the area GaRRet be
used by the atFer,s
"flatene n
as defined on Ghapter 21A.46 of this title. The size of the sign shall be t Perm...n.pe.Hd
as aF+ of the s r,rli+ir,.,-,IiAse appFev-ak
A. Drehihi+fens.
.d2 yGare u r,.der this sestie,,
GeRditienal use allowed Linder this seGtiGR shall ROt permit aRy major extermor or iRtermar
+he re+.,rr, +e its sir•lpApp
DRAFT 5.17.2023
from aRY ZGRIR v nonrditien
-ndlor this
.
(9) h f 'Ldr lei l �n+ be for the day anal
e r�;;,,,�er� vre�, el-l"�yees, staff-�,teei"s� t$t
the expenteid maximi im number to he on the Premises at any given time•
(2) The hours aR d idayfeperatie ;
(3) The-prepeeed s+gRage; iAd_
(4) The n6imber, leGatiAn and dimensiens ef any ldreneff er Pinknkpareas fereither
Prn/ate transPor+atien p i 1hlis transportation
e. Standards: Standards fer approval shall inGlude, In additieR te standards ef Ghapte
z1.4r-15-4.--vf. this title, the felleWiRg:
()SpeG+fiG Standaralfer Ghil.d P2YGa1:e (`onrdi+iopal 1 I��
rear yards,
yard;
or to the rear of the required Ia Prdsnapld e sethank in the front yar •
Pi 1hlis street; anrd
(G) T�,age is appropriate for the area. (Or�Z2021: Ord. 46 17 2017)
21A.36.030: HOME OCCUPATIONS:
A. Purpose: The purpose of this section is to permit the establishment of home occupations
in all Residential Districts and within legal conforming single-family, duplex, and multi- family
dwellings within all Commercial and Nonresidential Districts and ensure that the home
occupations are compatible with the district in which they are located, having no negative
impacts upon the surrounding neighborhood. Home occupations are intended to promote local
and sustainable economic growth and development.
B. Permitted Home Occupations: All home occupations not specifically listed as prohibited
may be permitted subject to their compliance with the standards specified in subsection G of
this section.
C. Home Occupations Prohibited: The following businesses, regardless of their conformance
with the standards in subsection G of this section, are prohibited as home occupations:
1. Auto repairs;
DRAFT 5.17.2023
2. Kennels;
3. Welding shops or machine shops;
4. Large appliance/electronics or equipment repair or service (washers, dryers,
refrigerators and other appliances or equipment that are too large to be carried in 1 individual's
arms);
5. Truck hauling;
6. Deliveries;
7. Stables;
8. Bottling plant;
9. Commercial bakery;
10. Industrial assembly;
11. Laboratory, medical, dental, optical;
12. Laboratory, testing; and
13. Any occupation which is offensive or noxious by reason of the emission of odor,
smoke, gas, dust, vibration, magnetic or electrical interference, noise, or other similar impacts
extending beyond the property line of the lot where the occupation is located is prohibited.
D. Application: Applications for home occupations shall be filed with the Salt Lake City
business licensing department. The applications shall include the following information:
1. A complete description of the type of business proposed including the location of the
storage and operations area for the home occupation;
2. The expected hours of operation of the business;
3. The expected number of clients per hour and total expected number of clients visiting
the home per day.
4. For Home Daycares, applicant must also submit the number and ages of children and the
number of employees; both total for the day and the expected maximum number to be on the
premises at any given time; along with proof of appropriate licensing from the State of Utah,
where applicable, or basis upon which exemption therefrom is claimed.
E. License Required: It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation, or association to engage
in a "home occupation" as defined in chapter 21A.62 of this title without first obtaining a license
pursuant to the provisions of title 5, chapter 5.02 of this code. Prior to issuance of said license,
the standards GFiteFie set forth in this section must be satisfied and all applicable fees shall be
paid. All home occupations P8FMitG shall be valid for one year, and may be renewed annually.,
provided there have been no reported violations, subjeGt tO subseGtion 1 of this seGti
DRAFT 5.17.2023
F. Determination Of Completeness: Upon receipt of an application for a home occupation,
the zoning administrator shall make a determination of completeness pursuant to
section 21A.10.010 of this title.
G. General Standards: All home occupations shall comply with the following standards:
1. The home occupation must be clearly incidental and secondary to the primary use of the
dwelling for residential purposes;
2. The dwelling unit must be the principal place of residence for the person(s) conducting
the home occupation;
3. The area of the residence, used for home occupations shall remain in character with the
rest of the home except for such minor alterations necessary to conduct an approved home
occupation;
4. The home occupation shall not be conducted in, nor in any way use, carport, or any
portion of the yard. A home occupation may use a garage or other fully enclosed accessory
structure provided all other standards in this section are met. As per section 21A.36.200 of this
chapter, a home occupation license to distribute produce grown on the premises for off
premises sales may be conducted in the rear yard and include the use of accessory buildings
but may not occupy required parking areas; Outdoor play areas for home daycares are exempt
from this requirement.
5. The home occupation work conducted at the residence shall not involve more than one
employee from outside of the home, persons lawfully living in the residence may be employed;
6. Except for those vehicles identified by this chapter (urban farms), and the applicant's
personal transportation, there shall be no vehicles or equipment stored outdoors, which would
not normally be found at a residence. Service vehicles defined as an "automobile" in chapter
21A.62 of this title which double as a personal vehicle such as taxicabs, limousine, or other
vehicles used for mobile businesses and used for off site services may only be parked on site in
a legal parking area;
7. Delivery of merchandise, goods, or equipment, to the site of the home occupation, shall
be made by a vehicle typically employed in residential deliveries. No deliveries to the site of the
home occupation by semitractor/trailer truck shall be permitted. Loading and deliveries to the
site of the home occupation shall be limited to the hours of eight o'clock (8:00) A.M. and six
o'clock (6:00) P.M.;
8. No mechanical or electrical apparatus, equipment or tools shall be permitted in the home
occupation except those which are commonly associated with a residential use or as are
customary to home crafts, and which do not exceed two hundred twenty (220) volts;
9. Tools, items, equipment er f2f eGGWpatieRS which are offensive or noxious by reason of
the emission of odor, smoke, gas, dust, vibration, magnetic or electrical interference, noise, or
other similar impacts extending beyond the property line of the lot where the occupation is
located, are prohibited. Tools, items, and equipment used for the operation and maintenance of
an urban farm must comply with those storage requirements itemized by section 21A.36.200 of
this chapter;
DRAFT 5.17.2023
10. Stock in trade, inventory or other merchandise shall be allowed to be kept only in the
interior space of the dwelling;
11. No outdoor storage is permitted in conjunction with the occupation other than produce
for off premises sales, outlined in subsection G4 of this section;
12. Home occupations involving visitations from pedestrian or vehicular traffic shall only be
conducted between the hours of eight o'clock (8:00) A.M. and ten o'clock (10:00) P.M.; Home
daycare pickup and drop-off are exempt from this requirement.
13. Any home occupation requiring client(s) visitation shall not occur at a frequency of
greater than two (2) clients per hour, and no more than one client may be served at one time
and not more than one place of vehicular parking shall be occupied by a client at any time.
Client(s) shall include one or more person(s) with a unified interest in visiting the home
occupation at one specific time; Home daycare pickup and drop-off are exempt from this
requirement.
14. Only one nonilluminated nameplate, with a maximum sign face as specified in chapter
21A.46 of this title, stating the name of the business or occupant and mounted flat against the
building, shall be allowed. Except for the permitted nameplate, the home occupation shall not
make or require any internal alterations, other than those necessary for an approved home
occupation, nor any external alterations to the residence that creates the appearance of a
commercial operation, nor shall the home occupation provide any visible evidence from the
exterior that the building is being used for any other purpose than that of a residence; and
15. Direct retail sales are prohibited. Incidental or secondary sales ensuing from the
services provided in conjunction with the home occupation are permitted. Limited sales or
distribution of produce grown from an urban farm shall be permitted as specified by
section 21A.36.200 of this chapter.
16. For Home Davcares, group size shall not exceed 16 children in care, in accordance
with Utah Administrative Code 430-90-10 or its successor;
17. For Home Davcares, the outdoor play area for the home daycare shall be located in the
rear or side yards of the home for the protection and safety of the children and for the protection
of the neighborhood. Outdoor play areas and playground equipment are prohibited in the front
yard and corner side yard;
H. Decision By The Zoning Administrator: The zoning administrator shall issue a permit for
the home occupation if they find that I The standards IpFevisieRS of this ##e section are
met.
Rot adversely affent the desirability or stability of the neinhherheed;
e
Create an adverse parking imnant en adjanent streets er properties;
5. The herne GGGUpatien will not adversely affeGt the publiG health, safety er welfare; and
DRAFT 5.17.2023
I. Loss Of Home Occupation Use: The zoning administrator may terminate any home
occupation use upon making findings that support either or both of the following conclusions:
1. Any of the required licenses or permits necessary for the operation of the business have
been revoked or suspended; or
2. Any of the provisions of this section have been violated.
J. Termination Of Home Occupation:
1. The licensee shall be responsible for the operation of the licensed premises in
conformance with this code. Any business license issued by the city may be suspended or
revoked per the provisions of title 5, chapter 5.02 and this section.
K. Appeals:
1. Any termination of a home occupation may be appealed pursuant to the provisions of
title 5, chapter 5.02 of this code as if the termination were a business license revocation.
2. Any person adversely affected by the denial or issuance of a permit for a home
occupation may appeal that decision to the appeals hearing officer pursuant to chapter
21A.16 of this title.
L. Existing Home Occupation Licenses: Existing licenses for home occupations which were
legal under the prior zoning ordinance regulating home occupations but which are not permitted
under this title are subject to the provisions of chapter 21A.38 of this title.
M. Nontransferability: Permits for home occupations are personal to the applicant,
nontransferable and do not run with the land. (Ord.� 244-3-)
DRAFT 5.17.2023
21A.33.020: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS:
Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District
FR-1/ FR-2/ FR-3/ R-1/ R-1/ R-1/ SR-1 SR-2 SR-3 R-2 RMF- RMF- RMF- RMF- RB R- R-MU- R-MU RO
43,560 21,780 12,000 12,000 7,000 5,000 30 35 45 75 MU- 45
35
Daycare center, P P P C49 C4-9 C48 C49 C4-9 C4-9 C49 C49 C4-9 P P P P P P
child P P P P P P P P P
DayGare, P49 P-49 P-49 P-�19 P4-9 P4-9 P-�19 P4-9 P4-9 P-�19 P-�19 P49 P49 P49 P49 P-�19 P-�19 P49
R9RFeniGteFe l
home dayGare
fl. yGare, P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18
Registered home
rJayGare or home
preSGheel
Daycare, Home
18. Subject to section 21A.36.030.H of this title.
21A.33.030: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS
Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District
CN CB CS1 CC CSHBD1 CG SNB
Daycare center, child P P P P P P P
Daysaro R istered P49 P49 P-49 P-a9 P-49 P-a9 P-a4
home .do
yGare
vGaro Registered P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18 P18
hhemo rlayGar r heme
preSGhh eel
Daycare, Home
18. Subject to section 21A.36.030.H of this title.
DRAFT 5.17.2023
21A.33.035: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR TRANSIT STATION AREA DISTRICTS
Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District
TSA-UC TSA-UN TSA MUEC TSA-SP
Core Transition Core Transition Core Transition Core Transition
Daycare center, child P P P P P P P P
nonregistered home
dayGafre
DayEare Registered p6 p6 p6 p6 p6 p6 p6 p6
home dayGare or
home P oohool
Daycare, Home
6. Subject to section 21A.36.030.H of this title.
21A.33.040: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR MANUFACTURING DISTRICTS
Use Permitted And Conditional
Uses By District
M-1 M-2
Daycare center, child P
21A.33.050: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS
Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District
D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4
Daycare center, child P P P P
yGare nonregistered -1242 P42 P42 .p42
home dayGare
DayEare Registered p12 p12 p12 p12
home dayGare or home
feel DaVcare,
Home
12. Subject to section 21A.36.030.H of this title.
DRAFT 5.17.2023
21A.33.060: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES IN THE GATEWAY DISTRICT
Use G-MU
Daycare center, child P
DayGaro RORregistered h.,me.J yGaro P-6
�DayGaro Registered horne ayGare or herne
pfesGhoe .J
E Daycare, Home P6
6. Subject to section 21A.36.030.H of this title.
21A.33.070: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS
Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District
RP BP FP AG AG-2 AG-5 AG-20 OS NOS A PL PL-2 I UI MH El MU
Daycare center, child P P P P P P P P P P
DayEaro nonregistered P—a4 P-46 P—a6 P-46 P-46 P—a6 P—a6 pa-4 pay paw p46 p36 p46 p36 p46 p46 pa-&
heme dayGare
DayGaro Registered P16 P16 P16 P16 P16 P16 P16 P16 P16 P16 P16 P16 P16 P16 P16 P16 P16
home Ada yGar r heme
preSGheel
Daycare, Home
16. Allowed only within legal conforming single-family, duplex, and multi-family dwellings and subject to Section 21A.36.030.H of this title.
21A.33.080: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES IN FORM BASED DISTRICTS
Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District
FB-UN1 FB-UN2 FB-SC FB-SE
Daycare center, child P P P P
yEaro nenregistered P-4 P-4 P-4 p4
heme dayGare
DayEaro RegisteFed p1 P1 P1 P1
heme rdayGar r home
pFeSGheel
Daycare, Home
1. Subject to section 21A.36.030.H of this title.
DRAFT 5.17.2023
Attachment D
CHILD CARE
ACCESS IN UTAH
March 2020
8.
WORKFORCE
SERVICES
CHILD CARE
ExecutiveSummary............................................................................................................ 3
Introduction........................................................................................................................ 4
Capacity of Utah's Child Care System ................................................................................ 6
Closing the Child Care Gap ............................................................................................. 14
Affordability...................................................................................................................... 14
PolicyConsiderations....................................................................................................... 15
Conclusion........................................................................................................................ 16
Appendix 1. Variable Distance Gap Analysis by County.................................................. 17
Appendix 2. Heat Maps of Counties with the Greatest Need ......................................... 18
Appendix 3. Estimated Child Care Programs Needed By County................................... 19
Equal Opportunity Employer/Program•Auxiliary aids and services are available upon
request to individuals with disabilities by calling 801-526-9240.Individuals who are deaf,
hard of hearing,or have speech impairments may call Relay Utah by dialing 711.Spanish
Relay Utah: 1-888-346-3162.
2
91c; EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
IN UTAH,AS WITH THE NATION,an increasing number
of families have both parents in the workforce.This is due to several factors,
including the economic need to have two incomes in order to meet the basic
The state of Utah needs of their families.As a result,the majority of Utah children six years old
or younger are living in families in which there is a child care need.Utah's
defineschild care current early child care and education system is unable to meet this need
as care of a child with the existing capacity of regulated child care programs.Increasingly,the
challenges accessing child care is placing pressure on businesses to find reliable
by a responsible employees at a time when Utah is experiencing virtually full employment.In
fact,the limited access to child care nationwide is resulting in a$57 billion
person who is not annual economic loss for employers,employees and taxpayers.
the child's parent An analysis of child care data,as well as survey data,show Utah is
experiencing a significant gap between the need for child care and the capacity
orlegal guardian, of Utah's child care system to meet that need.Although government,business
leaders and economic development experts should work together to close this
fora portion of gap,the choices that families make selecting a child care program for their
the day that is less young children demonstrates that the entire gap does not need to be closed by
regulated child care programs.
than24 hours in a • Utah has a 65 percent gap between the need for child care for
children six years and younger and the capacity of regulated
qualified setting. programs to fill that need.
• There is significant variation across the state regarding the size of
the gap between child care need and child care capacity.
• Not all Utah families utilize regulated child care programs to meet
their child care needs and many families rely on unpaid child care,
or juggle work schedules with spouses to ensure one parent is at
home caring for their young children.
• Utah needs to expand its early child care and education system to
add approximately 274 licensed-center child care programs and
1,258 licensed-family child care programs to accommodate the
preferences of Utah families.
3
INTRODUCTION
UTAH'S ECONOMY IS CHANGING,contributing to significant changes for Utah families.This has led to an
increased need for child care options.Utah's labor force,like the nations,is increasingly consisting of women.In fact,the labor force
participation rate among Utah women with children under six years old is 59 percent.'When economic conditions were different for
families,oftentimes one parent,typically the mother,stayed home with young children while the other parent worked.Today,due to the
high costs associated with raising a family,more women are entering the workforce.Additionally,even in families able to provide for
their children on one income,women are increasingly choosing to work outside of the home.As a result of these economic and cultural
changes,47 percent of children under age six,living in two-parent households have both parents working.This increase of engagement
in the labor force among adults raising children is increasing the demand for child care but is not the only factor putting pressure on
Utah's early child care and education system.Utah's growing economy is leading to virtually full employment among the working age
population 2 As a result of these two factors,54 percent of Utah children under six years old are living in families with a child care need
and therefore require care from adults other than their parents.3
The labor force participation rate
among Utah women with children
under six years old is 59 percent
As the demand for child care by individuals other than parents increases in Utah,families are choosing a variety of early
child care and education options including using informal,unregulated child care settings such as family members and neighbors,
both paid and unpaid.4 In addition to these informal care arrangements,families may select regulated,licensed early child care and
education programs in either a large group,center-based setting or a smaller,home-based setting.These licensing options ensure that
specific health and safety regulations are met and verified through unannounced inspections,and address additional components of
quality that lead to kindergarten readiness among children in their care.
1 Utah Department of Workforce Services,2013-2017 Women in the Workforce,available at https:H.jobs.utah.gov/wi/data/library/
laborforce/womeninwf.html.
2 Utah's unemployment rate was 2.3 percent in December 2019.This equates to full employment.For
the most recent unemployment rate,visit https://www.google.com/url?q=https://jobs.utah.gov/wi/update/index.
html&sa=Dust=15 83168875014000&usg=AFQjCNHORwF1TJxg5j 3JcOf9_V WmZBiDsw
3 Utah Office of Child Care analysis of the U.S.Census,2018 1-Year estimates.
4 Throughout this brief,the terms"early child care and education programs"and"child care programs"are used interchangeably.These
terms refer to programs serving children between the ages of 0 and 12 years old and do not include public education programs.
4
In addition to family and economic changes increasing often passed onto parents who are increasingly unable to afford
the need for child care,the role and expectations of Utah's early high-quality child care.Even for care that is not necessarily high
child care and education programs are also resulting in significant quality,the cost of child care for an infant may be as high as
changes for child care programs.These changes emerge from $11,880 in urban counties or$9,096 in rural counties,annually.6
recent developments in the expanding field of brain science
demonstrating the rapid brain development that occurs during These increasing demands on early child care and
a child's first three years of life.Early child care and education education providers—more need for child care and higher
programs that support and nurture early development through quality care—is limiting access to child care statewide.
high-quality care and education promote children's development Throughout the state,these compounding pressures are an
and learning,effectively preparing children for kindergarten. increasing concern for Utah employers who face challenges
The high-quality early child care and education programs are filling positions,as well as maintaining a stable workforce.
particularly effective for children experiencing economic hardship, Nationally,$57 billion is lost each year in earnings,productivity
E and revenue due to the lack of affordable,reliable,high-quality
English learners and children with special developmental needs.
child care.
These positive outcomes have lasting implications for children,
and economists have found that for every dollar invested in high- This issue brief addresses access to early child care and
quality early child care and education programs there is at least an education in Utah.It analyzes Utah's current child care system
$8 return on that investment.5 and its capacity.It also provides an overview of the needs of the
This new research is contributing to an expanding system to address the issue of access.To the extent possible,the
role and expectations for child care beyond simply providing analysis incorporates preferences of families with regard to the
a healthy and safe place for children to be cared for while settings in which families prefer their young children to receive
parents are working.Increasingly,early child care and education care.The brief concludes with a set of policy considerations for
programs are part of the education continuum of children and Utah in addressing these challenges.
critical for preparing children for kindergarten.This role is a
shift from the time when child care began expanding late in
the last century as more women entered the workforce.At that These increasing demands on early
time,child care was primarily a critical work support for parents child care and education providers—
and the cognitive and social development needs of children
in care were secondary.Today,early child care and education more need for child care and higher
programs are expected to go beyond providing a healthy and safe quality care—is limiting access to child
environment for children by preparing children for kindergarten. care statewide.
This added expectation and role of early child care and education
providers adds requirements and costs on programs that are
5 Frances Campbell,Gabriella Conti,James J.Heckman,Seong Hyeok Moon,Rodrigo Pinto,Elizabeth Pungello,Yi Pan,Early
Childhood Investments Substantially Boost Adult Health,343 Science 1478-1485(March 2014).
6 Utah Department of Workforce Services,Office of Child Care,2017 Utah Child Care Market Rate Study,December 2017.Available at
https:H-jobs.utah.gov/occ/occmarket.pd
7 Belfield CR.The Economic Impacts oflnsuficient Child Care on Working Families.Washington D.C.;2018.Available at https:
strongnation.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/522/3c5cdb46-eda2-4723-9e8e-f20511cc9f0f pdf?1542205790&intine;%20filename=%22The%20
Economic%201mpacts%20of%20Insufficient%20Child%20Care%20on%20Working%20Families.pdf%22.
5
CAPACITY OF UTAH'S . _•- •._ of
Under
CHILD CARE SYSTEM • Need Need
- -
THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE current system in Grand jr465 74%°
meeting the needs of Utah families depends on the choices of those Wasatch 1,904 69/o
families with respect to the settings in which they prefer their young Summit 1,786 66%
child to receive care.In evaluating the sufficiency of the system,two Wayne 114 66%
analyses are necessary to determine the system's needs:(i)quantitative Kane 331 62%
analysis;and(ii)qualitative analysis.The quantitative analysis begins Weber 14,017 61%
by addressing the child care need statewide and applies the existing Piute 65 58%
capacity of the system to evaluate the degree to which the system is able Salt Lake 58,834 57%
to address that need. Garfield 184 54%
Quantitative Analysis of the Child Care Morgan 636 53%
Need in Utah Sevier 929 53%
The initial analysis most often undertaken in determining Carbon 803 52%
a state's child care need relies on first determining the number of Sanpete 1,209 52%
children,under age six,whose parents are working.In that analysis, Uintah 2,039 52%
there is an assumption that those families have a child care need. Box Elder 2,931 51%
Once that figure is established,there is an evaluation of whether the Juab 583 49%
system and its network of child care programs are able to address Tooele 3,044 49% A
the needs.
Iron 2,271 48%OU
Millard 570 48% JO
Currently, 54 percent of Utah children under Washington 6,735 48%�W
age six are living in families for which there is Davis 16,934 47% JO
a child care need— 157,345 children. Cache 5,962 46%'U
San Juan 627 45% —A
Currently,54 percent of Utah children under age six are Emery 410 44%'%
living in families for which there is a child care need.This rate Beaver 278 40% —A
equates to 157,345 children.'The child care need varies Duchesne 952 40%,"s
throughout the state,with the highest rate of need in Grand Utah 26,887 40%.A
County and the lowest in Daggett County. Rich 67 "�34%9
6 Daggett mjL0. 13 A=32%mA
Source.U.S.Census,ACS 5-Year Estimates,2013-2018.
8 U.S.Census,Age of Own Children Under 18 Years in Families and Subfamilies by Living
Arrangements by Employment Status of Parents,2018:ACS 5-Year Estimates.
6
Utah provides an extensive network of child care
programs to meet its child care need.Throughout the state,Utah's
child care system affords options to families that support their
choice and allow them to select the program that meets their
Licensed Child Care Programs Increases
needs.Families select child care programs based on multiple
factors such as cost,proximity to work or home,setting type and CY 2014-2019
level of quality.Given the options for families,it is often difficult to
evaluate the gap between the need for child care and the capacity of
the system to meet that need. Licensed Family Programs
The state of Utah defines child care as care of a child by on ' 654 657
a responsible person who is not the child's parent or legal guardian, / 584 599 615
for a portion of the day that is less than 24 hours in a qualified
setting.9 Although a program may meet the definition of child 494
care,the regulatory structure differs among types of child care
programs.There are programs that are regulated and hold either a
child care license or some other government certification,such as a
residential care certificate or statutorily licensed-exempt status.In Licensed Center Programs
Utah,these types of child care programs are regulated by the state 302 310
and subject to meeting specific health and safety requirements that 285 287 324
are verified during unannounced,annual inspections.In addition, 228
there are unregulated and informal child care settings families
select for their young children.In these unregulated and informal 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
settings,the arrangements fall outside the scope of the government.
Typically,these arrangements include settings in which fewer Source:Utah Department of Workforce Services,Office of Child Care.
than eight children are cared for,or the care may be provided by
a relative or a neighbor.The state does not regulate these smaller
child care settings.However,there are also instances in which
child care programs caring for more than eight children are simply
not operating legally and lack a business license or a child care
license.This report is only able to analyze the child care system for
programs that are formally regulated by thestate.10 Given the options for families, it is often
difficult to evaluate the gap between the
need for child care and the capacity of the
system to meet that need.
9 Utah Code§35A-3-102.
10 In addition to the regulated programs analyzed in this brief,there are approximately 30 Head Start locations and two early care and
education programs operated by the United States Department of Defense.
7
Although there are more regulated child care programs throughout Utah in 2020 than there were in 2014,a large gap
exists between child care capacity and child care need.Currently,Utah has 981 licensed child care programs throughout the state.In
some parts of the state,there are no licensed child care center providers.Across all categories of regulated child care,the number of
programs serving children statewide has increased between 2014 and 2019.
In addition to licensed programs,there are the previously mentioned categories of regulated child care programs that are
not required to have a license,including programs that are legally,licensed-exempt."Combined,the number of regulated programs
has increased by 131 providers since 2015.
Increase in Utah's Regulated Child Care Programs
CY 2015-2019
00aw— 1,030 1,018 1,076
945 947
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Source:Utah Department of Workforce Services,Office of Child Care.
In addition to the regulated care that is available to all residents of Utah,there is a classification of child care arrangements
regulated for families who are covered by child care subsidies administered by the Utah Department of Workforce Services.These
subsidies are provided by the state to low-income working parents through the federally funded Child Care and Development Block
Grant(CCDBG).12 These individuals have an additional option for child care that is regulated by the state known as Family,Friend
and Neighbor(FFN)child care.As required by CCDBG,these informal child care relationships still require an annual health and
safety inspection,as well as training in first aid and CPR.Although Utah families who are not receiving child care subsidies may rely
on a similar type of child care arrangement,only those for which CCDBG funding is used are identified as part of Utah's child care
system.
11 UT CODE§26-39-4.
12 Child care subsidies are also provided to families enrolled in Utah's Family Employment Program which is funded through the
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families federal block grant.These families are also allowed to use child care subsidies for FFN child care.
8
Child Care Centers, Licensed Families, and Residential Certificate
March 2020
P.
Salt Lake County
` r
T i•
• t Weber • . •�•• � �,�s ,
. +•
3 � County •� ,• • •
y : Utah County
Z.
J • •.
Legend ,• - =
• cnia tale xr5a.s �. 'sty � -.•"
St. George p ,
9
As noted,153,945 children under six years old need child care far exceeding the capacity of Utah's child care system.'Ihe capacity
of the system is based upon the licensing capacity of each child care program.In February 2020,the entire system had capacity to care for
55,463 children under six years old."As with the need for child care,the capacity of the system varies greatly throughout the state.
Child Care Capacity by County
Chicare ldren
care need
Beaver 40% 278 77
Box Elder 51% 2,931 590
Cache 46% 5,962 2,428
Carbon 52% 803 315
Daggett 32% 13 20
Davis 47% 16,934 5,321
Duchesne 40% 952 235
Emery 44% 410 156
Garfield 54% 184 36
Grand 74% 465 174
Iron 48% 2,271 781
Juab 49% 583 129
Kane 62% 331 20
Millard 48% 570 112
Morgan 53% 636 36 q
Piute 58% 65 20
Rich 34% 67 0
Salt Lake 57% 58,834 24,118 N
San Juan 45% 627 212
0
Sanpete 52% 1,209 275 N
Sevier 53% 929 352
Summit 66% 1,786 924 W
Tooele 49% 3,044 992
Uintah 52% 2,039 327 `�
Utah 40% 26,887 6,404
Wasatch 69% 1,904 315
Washington 48% 6,735 2,302 v
Wayne 66% 114 28
Weber 61% 14,017 4,988
cl
13 Bipartisan Policy Center analysis of Utah's early child care and education programs and capacity by program type.
10
'this quantitative analysis reveals that Utah's regulated child care system is only meeting 35 percent of the state's child
care need,leaving a gap of 65 percent between the need and the capacity.The gap is even greater when the need is analyzed by
evaluating the distance between child care programs and where children under six with a child care need reside.APPENDIX 1.
Variable Distance Gap Analysis by County.This variable distance gap analysis assumes that access to a child care provider should
be no more than 3.5 miles in urban counties and no more than 10 miles in rural communities.This analysis demonstrates that the
gap in urban counties increases to 70 percent,and in rural counties is unchanged at 65 percent.The county with the largest gap is
Salt Lake County.
Child Care Capacity vs. Remaining Need
Counties with Highest Gap Based on Variable Distance Methodology
Salt Lake 23,259 .
Utah 7,072
Davis 5,672
Weber 4,718
Washington 2,255
Cache aw 2,361 Facility Capacity
Allocated Need
Box Elder � 722
Source:U.S.Census,ACS 5-Year Estimates,2013-2018;Utah
Tooele 1,023 Department of Workforce Services, Office of Child Care.
Uintah 359
Wasatch 315
Iron 1 765
Sanpete 1274
HEII
This analysis demonstrates that the gap in urban counties increases
to 70 percent, and in rural counties is unchanged at 65 percent.
11
Utah's child care gap is considerable under either the simple quantitative gap analysis or the variable distance gap analysis.
In addition to the capacity needs,vacancies in existing programs are another consideration in evaluating access to child care for
Utah families.The evaluation of vacancy rates is an indication of demand and may show that in some areas,child care programs
have waiting lists.In many programs,there are greater numbers of vacancies for specific age groups,as is the case with infants where
the vacancy rate tends to be lower than for preschool-age children.As a result,finding a child care program that is able to care for
an infant is often challenging.The factors contributing to the low vacancy rate for infant care are the high demand for infant care
among families and the fact that not all child care programs provide child care to infants.14
Vacanc Rate Millard M1 29% ' 67%
Vacancy Rate Infants and Toddlers Morgan 0% ' 0%
Piute N/A ' N/A
Beaver 30% Rich N/A N/A
Box Elder 7% 6% Salt Lake 8% 7%
Cache 20% 21% San Juan 7% 40%
Carbon 24% 20% Sanpete 27% 11%
Davis 8% 9% Sevier 24% 16%
Daggett N/A N/A Summit 13% 5%
Duchesne 8% 6% Tooele 4% 4%
Emery 39% 30% Uintah 7% 8%
Garfield 0% 0% Utah 13% 12%
Grand 20% 9% Wasatch 12% 17%
Iron 9% 9% Washington 15% 9%
Juab 4% 0% Wayne 0% 0%
Kane M W N/A N/A Weber 7% 7%
Source:Care About Cbildcare.
When these quantitative factors are combined,it may seem that Utah has a child care crisis that is potentially damaging to Utah's
economy.The data indicate a greater need for child care than there is availability across the state,resulting in a need to increase the
number of child care programs statewide.Although accurate to an extent,the analysis must incorporate additional factors such
as family choice.It is clear from the data that not all families with a child care need select regulated child care and instead rely on
smaller,informal child care arrangements.As a result,the network of child care businesses only needs to expand to the extent that
families are using,or will use,child care in those settings.
14 Infant care is the most expensive age group to care for given the caregiver-to-child ratio of 1:4 and a group size limited to eight children.
12
Qualitative Analysis of the Child Care Need in Utah
In 2017,the Office of Child Care,in partnership with the University of Utah,conducted the Utah Parental Child Care
Survey to evaluate the extent to which parents of children under six years old needed child care.The survey revealed that among
those requiring child care and using paid child care,families are choosing a variety of child care settings.15 This is also the case with
the families who receive child care subsidies from the state.
Child Care Type , Private Pay Child Care Child Care Subsidy Population
Family, Friend or Neighbor Setting 11% 5%
Family Group Care Setting 38% 28%
Child Care Center Setting 47% 66%
The survey also revealed that there is a small percentage of families for whom there is a child care need being met through
unpaid child care arrangements.In those situations,families most often reported that they are relying on relatives and neighbors willing
to provide free child care or juggling work schedules between parents to ensure that one parent is always home with the child.16 The
survey did not evaluate whether the unpaid child care arrangements were the result of economic constraints or family choice.
When combining paid and unpaid child care relationships,among the 35 percent of families in the survey that are utilizing
child care outside of the home,the setting types are almost equally divided across the three traditional types of settings,with a
preference toward smaller child care settings.In small,less populated counties,that type of care is most likely to be available,whereas
in urban counties,child care centers are more widely available.The preference for child care setting types expressed by the Utah
survey respondents align with the national survey results.17
& Child Care Type Child Care Outside the Home
Family, Friend or Neighbor Setting 27%
Family Group Care Setting 28%
Child Care Center Setting 35%
Other Child Care Setting 10 %
15 In addition to the child care types listed in the data,the remaining 4 percent of respondents utilized other types of paid care such as
afterschool,older siblings and other.
16 In unpaid child care arrangements,25 percent of respondents reported relying on relatives or neighbors and 34 percent reported that
they are juggling work schedules with their spouse.
17 Belfield,Clive R.,The Economic Impacts oflnsu�icient Child Care on Working Families,Council for a Strong America(September 2018),
available at https://strongnation.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/522/3c5cdb46-eda2-4723-9e8e-f20511cc9f0f.pdf?1542205790&lnline;%20
filename=%22The%20Economic%20Impacts%20of%20Insufficient%20Child%20Care%20on%20Working%20Families.pdf%22.
13
CLOSING THE CHILD CARE GAP
THE RESULTS OF THE 2017 parent survey are instructive in evaluating the extent to which the 65 percent child
care gap in Utah needs to be closed through the establishment of regulated child care providers.In applying the parent choice
discussed above,there are 98,482 children under six years old with a child care need.Based on the survey responses,73 percent of
parents with a child care need are utilizing paid care and 27 percent are using unpaid care.As a result,approximately 71,892 children
will utilize paid care.It is clear from the preferred settings of families that the regulated child care system does not need to meet the
needs of all of these children.In fact,the parent preferences discussed above and applied to this gap demonstrate that regulated child
care needs to accommodate an estimated 45,292 children or 46 percent of the need.It is assumed that the remaining 47 percent of
the need is addressed through informal,unregulated and even unpaid child care arrangements.
In Utah's licensing system,a licensed family child care program may be licensed to serve a maximum capacity of either eight or
16 children,depending on the licensing type.Among child care programs serving more than 16 children,the program is required to be
licensed as a child care center.Utah's licensed-centers care for an average of 92 children in each child care program.Among the 45,292
estimated to utilize paid child care,approximately 20,130 will receive care in a licensed-family child care setting and 25,162 children
will receive care in a licensed-center child care setting.In meeting the needs of these children,it is estimated that Utah will need to
expand its early child care and education system to add approximately 274 licensed-center child care programs and 1,258 licensed-
family child care programs to accommodate the preferences of Utah families.APPENDIX 3.Estimated Child Care Programs Needed
by County.
AFFORDABILITY
Every three years,the Office of Child Care is required to conduct a survey of licensed child care programs to determine
the rates they charge families throughout the state.Between 2015 and 2017,the median rate child care programs charged families
increased approximately 13 percent for infants,the most expensive care,to$9,120 annually. For a single parent household,this
represents 15 percent to 19 percent of household income;and for a married couple household,between 8 percent and 10 percent of
household income,depending on the child care setting.
The issue of affordability is one often addressed through the use of CCDBG funds.This funding allows states to provide
subsidies to low-income,working families earning as much as 85 percent of the State Median Income(SMI)threshold and places
limits on families'out-of-pocket expenses.In Utah,child care subsidies are provided to families earning 60 percent or less of SMI,
which equates to$46,236 for a family of four.The subsidies continue for families up to 75 percent of SMI,which equates to$57,792
for a family of four.For these families,Utah requires that they contribute a copayment,which is capped at no more than 10 percent
of a family's income.For the 46 percent of working families receiving child care subsidies and living at or below the federal poverty
level,there are no copayments.18 As a result of the child care subsidy program,low-income working families pay a significantly
smaller portion of their income to child care than those earning slightly more than 60 percent of the state median income.
18 The rate of a family's copayment varies and depends on the amount of annual income and the number of children in child care.For
example,those with the lowest income will pay no more than 9 percent of income on the copayment.As income increases,the co-payment
increases to as much as 10 percent.
14
Family Eligible for Family Income Family Income
Subsidies Income $47,000 $77,060
$46,236
AT Child care NMF Child care • • Child care
$760 $760 $760
• • •
Child care Child care Child cart
1pi $568 $568 S568
Total cost of care $1,328 Total cost of care 61,328 Total cost of care 81,328
Subsidy$1,208 Subsidy$0 Subsidy$0
Cost=$346/mo.or$4,161/yr. Cost=$1,328/mo.or$15,936/yr. Cost=$1,328/mo.or$15,936/yr.
Cost=9%of income Cost=34%of income Cost=21%of income
For a family that is just over the income threshold for eligibility to receive child care subsidies,this family may be
expending as much as 38 percent of their income on child care.In these families,child care becomes a significant burden on
household budgets and may result in these families making the economic decision to have one parent stay home with their
young children rather than pay for child care outside of the home.
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS
AS WITH MOST CHALLENGES Utah faces,the issue of addressing child care access is not one that can be
solved by government alone.It requires the partnership of local and state governments,businesses,philanthropy and nonprofit
organizations.It is also an area ripe for innovation across all of these groups.The following provides possible policy considerations to
address the issues of child care affordability and child care capacity.
Affordability
• Employers include child care expenses in employee benefit packages.
• Expand eligibility for child care subsidies,to the extent practicable,with CCDBG funds.
15
• Utilize CCDF to offset the costs associated with increasing child care program quality,to ensure these costs are not
passed onto consumers.
Increasing Capacity
• Encourage significant developments to incorporate the building of child care facilities by providing incentives such as:
state corporate income tax credits for child care facilities built in Opportunity Zones,local property tax abatement for
developments that incorporate child care facilities and zoning density bonuses that incorporate child care facilities.
• Include child care access in long range planning,such as housing developments,land use planning,as well as plans that
include increasing access to employment.
• Incorporate child care access in economic development incentive packages and include the number of child care jobs
established in the post-performance job creation measures.
• Expand access to economic development incentives for the establishment of child care programs in high need
communities.
• Combine private and public funding to offer small business loans or grants to new child care programs opening in areas
of the state where there is high need.
• Businesses establish child care collaboratives to open and operate child care programs in partnership with high-quality
child care providers.
• Local governments partner with employers to rehabilitate and retrofit vacant buildings to operate as licensed child care
programs.
• Regional Child Care Resource&Referral agencies coordinate with the Office of Child Care to increase efforts to recruit
more child care providers in counties with high child care needs.
CONCLUSION
UTAH HAS AN EXISTING CHALLENGE regarding child care access that is impacting both the economics
of the state and the economics of families.Its current early child care and education system lacks the capacity to meet the child care
needs of families.Throughout Utah,the need is not uniform,with some counties having a greater need for child care than others.
Although there is a significant gap between the need for care and the capacity of the existing child care system,not all families with
a child care need are choosing regulated child care.However,this analysis establishes a need for Utah to increase the capacity of its
regulated child care system.
There are several opportunities for partnership among state government,business leaders,economic development agencies
and long-term planners to work together to address the need.Together,these interested parties will ensure that parents seeking
employment are engaged in the workforce,benefitting not simply the economics of their families but also the economics of Utah.
16
APPENDIX 1. Variable Distance Gap Analysis by County
Children under
County 6 with Parents in Facility Capacity Allocated Need aGapGap%
the Labor Force
Beaver 278 77 77 201 72.3%
Box Elder 2,931 590 722 2,209 75.4%
Cache 5,962 2,428 2,361 3,601 60.4%
Carbon 803 315 306 497 61.9%
Daggett 13 20 0 13 100.0%
Davis 16,934 5,321 5,672 11,262 66.5%
Duchesne 952 235 206 746 78.4%
Emery 410 156 125 285 69.5%
Garfield 184 36 36 148 80.4%
Grand 465 174 174 291 62.6%
Iron 2,271 781 765 1,506 66.3%
Juab 583 129 129 454 77.9%
Kane 331 20 20 311 94.0%
Millard 570 112 112 458 80.4%
Morgan 636 36 88 548 86.2%
Piute 65 20 20 45 69.2%
Rich 67 0 0 67 100.0%
Salt Lake 58,834 24,118 23,259 35,575 60.5%
San Juan 627 212 128 499 79.6%
Sanpete 1,209 275 274 935 77.3%
Sevier 929 352 354 575 61.9%
Summit 1,786 924 878 908 50.8%
Tooele 3,044 992 1,023 2,021 66.4%
Uintah 2,039 327 359 1,680 82.4%
Utah 26,887 6,404 7,072 19,815 73.7%
Wasatch 1,904 315 315 1,589 83.5%
Washington 6,735 2,302 2,255 4,480 66.5%
Wayne 114 28 20 94 82.5%
Weber 14,017 4,988 4,718 9,299 66.3%
17
APPENDIX 2. Heat Maps of Counties with the Greatest Need
1Ountiful
Salt Lake County
69
m It LakeCity
6
7
112
West Valley i m
Millcreek
Faylorsville
Murray
66 89
.-West.�ord an 15
Sandy
South Jordal I '
00751.5 4.5 6 Riverton
Mi
Concentration of U Draper
Gap
Oo
O1-25
026-50 80
CD 51-100 89 74
0101-zoo hi
.l'-413 73
73 5p`
US Ce AGS 2.13-2017, 1, ERE,GMmin.(c) and
plan o/cold care a Buser community
Weber County-Ogden Area , Utah County—Provo Area
G
i '
m
26
•
Layton ,w
c R7G1
Co— tion of
Gap 4wnoaneration orM� n
Oo GaP
Ot-25 O0
20-50
051-1m Os,-1W u
tot.mo M1o1-zoo
.1201-4,3 �201.411
08 GnwACa10133017; E.IM�101 i Fal. .IpWe�sueetlAac m ,
wnaa>aw,un m.ois wram,�way -
18
APPENDIX 3. Estimated Child Care Programs Needed By County
County Licensed centers Licensed family programs
Beaver <1 3
Box Elder 6 28
Cache 10 46
Carbon 1 6
Daggett <1 <1
Davis 31 144
Duchesne 2 10
Emery 1 4
Garfield <1 2
Grand 1 4
Iron 4 19
Juab 1 6
Kane 1 4
Millard 1 6
Morgan 2 7
Piute <1 <1
Rich <1 1
Salt Lake 99 454
San Juan 1 6
Sanpete 3 12
Sevier 2 7
Summit 3 12
Tooele 6 26
Uintah 5 21
Utah 55 253
Wasatch 4 20
Washington 12 57
Wayne <1 1
Weber 26 119
19
0
WORKFORCE
SERVICES
CHILD CARE
ERIN MENDENHALL BUSINESS ADvisoRY BOARD
Mayor
Mayor Erin Mendenhall,
I hope this note finds you well. I wanted to take this opportunity to provide the city with some feedback
following event permitting challenges related to the NBA Allstar weekend,here in Salt Lake City. The
Business Advisory Board,(BAB),became involved in discussions related to the All Star Bazaar as one of
our board members was impacted himself and very involved in the larger organization and their efforts to
produce this event.
The BAB decided to convene a subcommittee to review the event approval process and determine if we
could make recommendations or suggest changes to the process to avert future misunderstandings and assist
in improving the process. The subcommittee included 2 members of the BAB,Ryen Schlegel,a city
employee who manages the process,community members representing both Suazo and the Black Chamber
of Commerce,a member of the Economic Development team and a couple of event organizers with
significant experience utilizing the event approval process for very large,complicated events.
Let me start by saying that this group agreed that the current process and the city employees involved did
their very best to help make this event happen. This was not a city failure,but perhaps, an underestimation
of the complexity and time required to put on an event of this size which involves a multitude of city
agencies and departments,all with varying requirements and differing timelines for approval. One of the
large event organizers said that she starts the process 9 months before their event. In this particular case,
the event organizer started the process 25 days prior to the start date.
The BAB subcommittee makes the following recommendations:
We appreciate the city's helpful efforts to assist with events and do everything to make them happen,but
due to the complexity of large events,(over 500 attendees),we strongly suggest increasing the submission
application from the current 30 days prior to the event to 60 days. We also recommend that events be held
to a 5 day minimum prior to the event to have all of their department approvals in hand,or be notified that
the city will not approve their event. These bright lines will set expectations and remove some of the
uncertainty related to last minute permit approvals.
Develop a video/YouTube recording,walk through of the approval process so that applicants can gain an
understanding of time frames,requirements and departments they'll need to interact with to gain approval.
The city has used this approach in other areas and it's been found to be helpful.
Develop a visual dashboard so that as organizers work their way through the multiple approvals they are
presented with alerts that they're in good shape,or cautions that they're falling behind and need to
concentrate their resources and time to catch up. These visual cues might be as simple as red,yellow and
green bullets that call their attention to priorities.
Continue to monitor other city's processes and online application and status software to make sure that Salt
Lake City has access to the state of the art offerings.
Salt Lake City festivals and events drive significant revenue to both the city and to small businesses. In
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION www.SLGOV.com
C/O ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,Room 118 TEL.801-535-7200
P.O.Box 145590,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114
Page 1 of 2
addition to providing locals with entertainment,they attract out of town residents,provide the city with a
feeling of vibrancy and community and help make our city a more enjoyable and inclusive environment to
both work and play. The BAB will do everything we can to support a vibrant and successful events
calendar. Thanks for your consideration.
Jeff Carleton, Chairperson
Business Advisory Board, SLC
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION www.SLGOV.com
C/O ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 118 TEL.801-535-7200
P.O.Box 145590,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114