Entity Staff Report - 7/29/2021COUNCIL STAFF
REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Nick Tarbet, Policy Analyst
DATE: July 20, 2021
RE: Text amendment: Eliminating the
Special Exception Process
PLNPCM2020-00606
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Briefing July 20, 2021
Set Date: July 20, 2021
Public Hearing: Aug, 17 2021
Potential Action: Aug, 24 2021
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will be briefed on a proposal to that would remove the special exception process from the
zoning ordinance. The purpose of this proposal is to amend the zoning ordinance related to special
exceptions to accomplish the following:
Simplify the zoning ordinance by updating regulations and eliminating special exceptions
Reallocate staff resources away from processing land use applications that favor individual
properties and toward updating overall zoning codes to align with adopted master plans
Increase predictability and reduce neighbor conflicts that are created by requests for exceptions to
the zoning regulations for single parcels
A special exception is a minor alteration of a dimensional requirement of the zoning ordinance or
addresses accessory uses and structures. Common examples of special exceptions include requests for
exceptions to the maximum height requirements for buildings and fences, additions to existing buildings
that do not comply with current setback requirements, grade changes over four feet in height, legalization
of dwelling units when there is no record of the unit be permitted, and modifications to building bulk
requirements in historic districts. Special exceptions are approved by staff of the Planning Division, the
Planning Commission, or Historic Landmark Commission depending on location/designation of the
property.
The Planning Commission forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council.
Page | 2
Policy Questions
1. The Council may wish to ask if this change will enable planning staff to process other
initiatives more quickly, and how this staff time would be coordinated with the positions added
in the FY 22 budget process.
2. Given the breadth of these changes and City-wide nature, the Council may wish to discuss with
planning staff how public feedback was sought and incorporated, and whether additional
public process is concluded.
Public Process
The proposed text amendment went through the required public process outlined in City Code
See pages 2-3 of the transmittal letter for details.
Early engagement period ran from August 13 to October 10, 2020
o The public information document was posted on the Planning Division website
o Notice sent to all recognized organizations, AIA Utah, and the Planning Divisions email list
Planning Commission held a work session on September 30, 2020
Historic Landmark Commission virtual public hearing on November 5, 2020
o HLC adopted a motion recommended that the City Council adopt the proposal
Planning Commission virtual public hearing on November 18, 2020
o PC unanimously adopted a motion recommending that the City Council adopt the proposal
During the public process, Planning staff reached out to the Utah chapter of the American Institute of
Architects (AIA) and Rocky Mountain Power (RMP), in addition to all recognized organizations. RMP
provided suggestions to the proposal.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Definition (21A.52.020): A "special exception" is an activity or use incidental to or in addition to the
principal use(s) permitted in a zoning district or an adjustment to a fixed dimension standard permitted as
exceptions to the requirements of this title of less potential impact than a conditional use but which
requires a careful review of such factors as location, design, configuration and/or impacts to determine the
desirability of authorizing its establishment on any given site.
Purpose Statement (21A.52.010): The planning commission or historic landmark commission may
delegate its authority as necessary to the planning director to make a determination regarding special
exceptions. The planning director may approve the special exceptions authorized by this title in accordance
with the procedures and standards set out in this chapter and other regulations applicable to the district in
which the subject property is located.
Budget /Staffing Impact
Pages 2-3 of the transmittal letter outlines the budgetary and staffing impact of the proposed amendments.
Below are some of the key info taken from that section.
If adopted, revenue from application fees would decrease approximately $43,000.00
o application fee of ($265) x average number of applications submitted annual (156)
Approximately 150 applications for special exceptions are received each calendar year.
The application fee is $265.00.
Page | 3
Eliminating this process would result in significant staff time savings. See calculation summary
in the following two sections:
Typical Special Exception Process
o The processing time for a typical special exception is about17 hours. The cost to process
the applications is determined primarily by the hours of staff needed.
the cost to the city is between approximately $460.00 and $575.00
depending on the classification of the planner processing the application.
The application fee covers between 48-57% of the cost.
Special Exception that Requires Planning Commission or Historic Landmark
Commission Review
o Average processing time for special exceptions that require approval by the Planning
Commission or Historic Landmark Commission is approximately 52 hours.
Staff hour cost is between $1,370.00 and $1,765.00 which is 5-6.6 times the
application fee.
The application fee only covers between 15% and 52% of the cost to process
which means that the rest of the cost is subsidized by the city.
Summary of Proposed Changes
Currently there are 42 special exceptions authorized in the zoning ordinance. The proposal addresses each
special exception and results in each of them being either deleted, permitted, or authorized through a
different process in the zoning ordinance. The list below uses a color code to easily identify the proposed
changes for each item.
Process to be Permitted (see items in the list below in blue)
Most special exceptions do not generate public input and either require no conditions of approval
or require consistent conditions of approval regardless of the property location. The special
exceptions that fall into this category will be allowed by right and some of them will have
specific qualifying provisions
Processes Proposed to be Eliminated (see items in the list below in red)
These exceptions are being eliminated because they make up the bulk of denied special exceptions
requests, there are other processes to address the exception already in the zoning ordinance, or due
to the high level of controversy that are generated by the exceptions.
Proposed Changes that Generated Public Input (see items in the list below in green)
The Planning Division identified some special exceptions that have generated public input during
the process, as potentially impactful and the Planning Commission asked for more detailed
information those items. See pages 23-25 Planning Commission Staff report for full discussion on
these items:
Historic Landmark Commission would retain authority to make modifications to
dimensional requirements through existing processes in 21A.34.020 Historic Preservation
Overlay District.
Ground mounted utility boxes will be required to be on private property when serving
individual developments.
Accessory building heights would be able to increase slightly up to a district specific
maximum with increased setbacks.
Page | 4
Outdoor dining would be permitted with qualifying provisions intended to reduce the
impact when next to residential zoning districts, including a setback from the shared
property line and time limitations for outdoor music.
Front yard parking would be allowed for residential uses only when no other yard is
accessible for parking and there is no option for an attached garage.
Inline additions would be allowed to follow existing building lines in front and rear yards.
In side yards, an inline addition would be allowed to extend an existing wall that doesn’t
met setbacks up to 25% of the length of the wall.
In commercial zoning districts, building height would be allowed to be increased by up to
10% if the lot is sloped, the increased height is not creating an additional habitable, upper
level to the building, and at least 50% of the building complies with the height requirement.
Zoning districts where vintage signs can be used as art are expanding to include the
following zoning districts: CSHBD-2, FB-UN2, FB-UN3, FB-SC, FB-SE, and TSA.
Vintage signs as art is already authorized in the D-1, D-2, D-3, D-4, G-MU, and CSHBD1
zoning districts.
The following is a simple summary of the proposed changes. The change for each item is identified as
either; deleted/no longer authorized, permitted with some qualifying provisions, or permitted/authorized
through a different process. (Attachment A of the November 18, 2020 staff report for the Planning
Commission)
1. Additional Accessory structure height: increased height (up to 75% of the principal structure)
allowed with increase in setbacks
2. Accessory structures on double frontage lots: standards added to match location of accessory
buildings of the block.
3. Additional height for fences: removed exception process, sets maximum heights.
4. Additional building height in commercial districts: deleted special exception; standards added to
allow 10% increase on sloping lots.
5. Additional height in foothill districts: deleted special exception
6. Additional height in R-1, R-2, SR districts: deleted special exception
7. Alternative to off street parking: deleted
8. Barbed wire fences: standards added, restricted to industrial and agricultural zones and for land
uses that require added security, such as public utility facilities.
9. Conditional home occupations: deleted. This was changed several years ago to permitted but was
not deleted from the special exception chapter.
10. Dividing exiting lots with existing detached dwellings: allowed through the subdivision process
with standards added.
11. Front yard parking: Standards added to allow front yard parking in very limited instances.
12. Grade changes over 4 feet: will become permitted with a step between retaining walls necessary to
retain the grade change.
13. Ground mounted AC units, pool equipment, etc. within 4 feet of side or rear property line:
standards updated to allow equipment in additional situations when there is no impact, or the
equipment is screened.
14. Hobby shop, art studio, exercise room in accessory buildings: deleted, will become permitted.
15. Inline additions: permitted to match the existing building setback in front and rear yards; allowed
in a limited manner in side yards.
16. Home day care: will become permitted or conditional based on Utah Code requirements for
number of kids.
17. Outdoor dining in required yard: will be permitted with specific standards for setbacks, noise, etc.
when next to residential zone.
18. Razor wire fencing: limited to industrial and agricultural zones and some uses that require a high
level of security.
Page | 5
19. Replacement of noncomplying building or portion of a noncomplying building: allowed by right
within the noncomplying chapter of the zoning ordinance.
20. Underground encroachments: permitted in the encroachment table with standards.
21. Window mounted AC units: deleted special exception, will be permitted.
22. Vehicle and equipment storage in CG, M1, M2, EI: permitted with specific standards for water
quality and to reduce mud, dirt, gravel being carried onto public streets.
23. Ground mounted utility boxes: prohibited in the public right of way unless the box serves a broader
area than just a private development and with specific standards; location requirements on private
property added. Size limitations deleted.
24. Unit legalizations: will be addressed as a determination of nonconforming use in chapter 21A.38.
Standards related to continuing use maintained. Other standards that require update to parking
standards deleted.
25. Vintage signs: Changed to permitted with existing standards in the ordinance, expanded where a
vintage sign could be used as public art.
26. Additional height for lights at sports fields: changed to permitted with screening of light trespass,
increased setback from residential uses.
27. Recreation equipment height in OS zone: capped at 60 feet in height with no exceptions.
28. Public utility buildings in OS zone: will be allowed to exceed building height for critical public
utility infrastructure. Does not include office buildings.
29. Fence and wall height over 6 feet for homeless resource centers: Planning Commission will be given
the authority to approve taller fences for buffering purposes.
30. Enlargement of structure with noncomplying use: allowed by right provided the addition complies
with zoning requirements.
31. Horizontal inline additions: permitted to match existing portions of buildings that do not meet
setback when the addition is in the front or rear yards, with limited application in side yards.
32. Alteration to an existing SFD [single family dwelling] when the use is not allowed: alterations will
be permitted.
33. Amateur HAM radio antennae over 75 feet in height: special exception deleted.
34. Electrical equipment for cell towers: will need to be in a side or rear yard with specific setback and
screening requirements.
35. Electrical security fences: permitted with updated qualifying provisions.
36. Covered ADA ramps: deleted, will be addressed through a reasonable accommodation authorized
under federal laws.
37. Ground mounted utility boxes over a certain size in the right of way: will be deleted and required to
be located on private property when serving individual developments.
38. Front yard parking for SFD when side or rear yard not accessible: deleted and will be allowed in
very limited instances.
39. Parking exceeding the maximum: deleted. Will be addressed through proposed changes to parking
ordinance.
40. Alternative parking requirements: deleted. Will be addressed through proposed changes to parking
ordinance.
41. Commercial signs in historic districts: delete special exception requirement; will be authorized
through existing processes in the Historic Preservation Overlay.
42. HLC bulk modifications: delete special exception requirement: will be authorized through existing
processes in the Historic Preservation Overlay.
Removing Special Exceptions From the Zoning Code
Or
Making Zoning Easier
Or
Streamlining Zoning Processes
Or
Removing Inequities in the Allocation of Planning Resources
Or
Removing Barriers
CITY COUNCIL
Allowed variations from a zoning requirement
•Minor in nature (although code does not cap degree of variation)
•Most often dimensional
•Can be ancillary uses
•Sometimes legalizes past actions
WHAT IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION
Over-height fences
Additions to buildings that don’t meet setbacks
Mechanical equipment size
Grade changes
Historic districts
Additional garage height/size
MOST COMMON EXAMPLES
42 authorized special exceptions
HLC can modify any lot or bulk standard
Average 156 per year
2021: 120 through end of June
•Projected 240
HOW MANY DO WE PROCESS?
Fence height
•Part of companion proposal/separate transmittal
•7/14/2021: in council office
KEY ISSUES
Outdoor Dining
•Adjacency to residential uses
•Noise
Qualifying provisions
•Requires setback
•No music between 9 pm and 9 am
•Typo on pg. 16 of transmittal: should say outdoor dining is not
considered an expansion of the use for parking purposes.
•Some want an approval process for outdoor dining in smaller
zoning districts adjacent to residential(conditional use)
KEY ISSUES
HLC Authority
•Bulk/lot modifications
through H Overlay
•Eliminates the need for
multiple applications
•Supports preservation goals
KEY ISSUES
Grade Changes
•Requires a “step” between tiers
•Sets max height of each tier
KEY ISSUES
Extra building height
•Based on characteristics of block face
•HLC can still approve taller
KEY ISSUES
Inline Additions
•Allows by right up to a certain extent
•Public input: may be too restrictive
•Second story must meet setbacks
•Addressed in noncomplying chapter
KEY ISSUES
Accessory building height
•Increases allowed height
•up to 75% of principal building with a cap
•R-1 zones and multi-family/mixed use zones
•Flat roof: from 12 to 15 ft
•Pitched: from 17 to 21 ft
•*typo multi family zones: says max of 15 for pitched, should be 21. (pg. 14, section 25, C.1.b)
•SR-1 zones
•Flat roof: 9 to 11 ft
•Pitched: 14 to 15 ft
•Requires additional setback on a 1:1 basis if going up to 75% of principal height
KEY ISSUES
Use of Accessory Buildings
•Stand alone buildings, over garages
•Allows home office, hobby shop, fitness room
•No special approval
KEY ISSUES
Noncomplying Buildings
•Allowed to be rebuilt, expand meeting current standards
•Retains property rights
•Most pre -1950s buildings are noncomplying
•Unit legalizations are noncomplying issues, legalizing based on
facts.
KEY ISSUES
Front Yard parking
•Properties without access to off street parking
•Allowed in certain instances
•Historic approval required in historic districts
KEY ISSUES
Ground Mounted Utility Boxes
•Individual developments
•Not allowed in ROW
•Setback requirements (for access to
service provider)
•Screening required in front or corner side
yard
•Exception
•Adaptive reuse when there are not
private property alternatives
KEY ISSUES
Ground Mounted Utility Boxes
•When serving the neighborhood:
•Allowed in ROW with standards
•Spacing from trees
•Cannot impact other
infrastructure
•Cannot impede future planned
ROW needs (bike lanes, wider
sidewalks, etc.)
KEY ISSUES
Ground Mounted Utility Boxes
•Dimensional Standards:
•Removed from Zoning Code
•Title 14 regulates objects in the ROW (other that street trees)
•Subjects ROW permits to land use appeals process
•Limits flexibility when boxes are beneficial or required
•Approval establishes a property right in ROW
KEY ISSUES
Application fee: $265
Average staff hours: 52 hours
•Zoning review
•Review by other depts
•Noticing
•Findings
•Staff reports
Fee covers between 10-40% of staff cost
WHAT DOES IT COST?
Geographic inequities: 85% of applications are east of I-15
Staff resources forced towards expand property rights of individual
property rights, not on city goals.
WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS OF
SUBSIDIZING SPECIAL EXCEPTIO
Simplify the zoning code
Remove uncertainty
Neighbor vs Neighbor
OTHER REASONS FOR THE PROJ
Deletes the special exception process
Authorized special exceptions will be:
•Allowed by right
•Allowed by right with qualifying provisions
•No longer allowed
KEY POINTS