HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransmittal - 3/25/2024ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
rash tto (Mar 25, 2024 16:32 MDT)
Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff
DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
TO: Salt Lake City Council
Victoria Petro, Chair
Date Received: 03/25/2024
Date sent to Council: 03/25/2024
DATE: 3/21/2024
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
,i 1-r-T1_
SUBJECT: Zoning text amendment related to enforcement on work done with a Certificate of
Appropriateness
STAFF CONTACT: Mayara Lima, Planning Manager -Zoning Administrator,
Mayara.limakslc ov�com, 801-535-6141
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the changes to the zoning ordinance as
recommended by the Planning Commission.
BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This city -initiated petition is intended to address unlawful
construction and demolition activities in the City's local historic districts. The purpose of this
amendment is to protect historic resources, which includes designated local historic districts and
local landmark sites. The amendment adds enforcement tools to prevent and counter potential
code violations. It establishes a clear process to remedy alterations or any demolitions that occur
without approval. The proposed changes will affect Chapter 21A.34.020 (H Historic Preservation
Overlay District) and related provisions of Title 21A-Zoning.
Issue: A Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) is required prior to performing any exterior work
on a property located within the historic overlay. The COA is the main tool the city has to
ensure the work is appropriate, meets standards/design guidelines and ultimately will not damage
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.623o FAX 801-535.6005
the historic integrity of a historic resource. When work is done without such review, it puts
historic resources at risk of losing their status or worse.
The city's zoning and building code enforcement is equipped to address work without permits
but currently lacks the necessary tools or fines to account for the illegal demolition or permanent
damage of historic resources. Unlike typical code violations that can be reversed through
replacement, repair or maintenance, once all or part of a historic building is removed, its value is
lost permanently. No replica can recreate the original materials, craftsmanship, and cultural value
that provide authenticity and historical context to the individual resource. Because of the higher
risk, enforcement of violations in the historic overlay requires a more tailored approach.
Proposal: Based on research of current enforcement limitations and tools used in other cities, the
proposal includes the following changes to the Zoning Ordinance:
1. Create an enforcement subsection within the historic overlay (21A.34.020):
The subsection would reference the enforcement chapter in the Zoning Code (21A.20) and
lists additional consequences for work conducted in violation of the historic overlay
provisions.
2. Prohibit redevelopment of a property when a principal building is demolished without
approval unless the proposal is for reconstruction:
A contributing principal building or landmark site demolished without a COA would require
reconstruction. A certificate of noncompliance would be issued and recorded against the
property following the violation to prevent redevelopment for 25 years unless the applicant
proposes to reconstruct the demolished structure.
3. Establish a reconstruction process:
The reconstruction would have to follow specific standards to ensure the new building is true
to the size, proportions, and features of the original structure. The applicant would be
required to sign a legally binding restrictive covenant to acknowledge the reconstruction,
prohibit future demolition and major alterations for 25 years and ensure that the terms are
carried with the land. This process would be consolidated with the recently adopted standards
for reconstruction of carriage houses in landmark sites.
4. Prohibit a property owner from requesting a change of status based on a violation:
The city would require that any work done without a COA be undone if retroactive approval
is not possible. In the case of an irreversible alteration, a request to administratively change
the historic status from contributing to noncontributing based on work done without a COA
would be rejected. That is, regardless of the alterations, the structure will still be reviewed as
a contributing. This restriction would limit the property owner from further harmful
alterations or a full demolition. A change of status would still be possible through a district
survey update, subject to Council approval.
5. Clarify that self-imposed conditions are not eligible for Economic Hardship:
Language added to the Economic Hardship process would disqualify requests for demolition
of a contributing building based on a hardship that is related to owner's financial ability to
rehabilitate a property, lack of due diligence, or self-imposed conditions, such as demolition
by neglect, intentional destabilization of the structure or enforcement of a violation.
6. Coordinate with other city code sections that relate to reconstruction and enforcement:
Other sections would be amended to allow nonconforming use and noncomplying structures
to be restored in case of reconstruction (21A.38) and to create a reconstruction definition
(21 A.62.040).
PUBLIC PROCESS:
Public Input:
• October 3, 2023: All Salt Lake City recognized organizations were sent the required 45-
day notice for the proposed text amendment.
• October 10, 2023: An online open house webpage was posted to provide additional
information on the petition.
• October 23, 2023: The planning division sent out public outreach to stakeholders.
Commission Briefing:
Staff presented preliminary draft proposal to Historic Landmark and Planning Commissions to
introduce the request, gather feedback, identify key issues, and answer questions.
• November 2, 2023: Historic Landmark Commission
• November 8, 2023: Planning Commission
Their concerns were discussed in the meetings and several topics/questions were outlined and
addressed in detail in Key Consideration #4 of the PC Staff Report.
Public Hearings:
• January 4. 2024: Historic Landmark Commission
Following the public hearing, the Historic Landmark Commission voted unanimously to
forward a positive recommendation to City Council with the following modifications:
o That the 25-year period prohibiting redevelopment and the demolition of the
reconstructed structure be increased to 50 years.
o That staff explore a fee, similar to the boarded building fee, for a property that is
left vacant and not reconstructed.
The agenda, minutes, and staff report are bookmarked below for reference.
• January 10, 2024: Planning Commission
Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted to forward a positive
recommendation to City Council to adopt the ordinance as proposed. The Planning
Commission did not agree with the modifications recommended by the Historic
Landmark Commission. The agenda, minutes, and staff report are bookmarked below for
reference.
Historic Landmark Commission (HLC) and Planning Commission (PC) Records
a) HLC Agenda of January 4, 2024 (Click to Access)
b) HLC Minutes of January 4, 2024 (Click to Access)
c) HLC Staff Report of January 4, 2024 (Click to Access)
d) PC Agenda of January 10, 2024 (Click to Access)
e) PC Minutes of January 10, 2024 (Click to Access)
f) PC Staff Report of January 10, 2024 (Click to Access)
EXHIBITS:
1) Ordinance
2) Project Chronology
3) Notice of City Council Public Hearing
4) Public Comment Received after the Planning Commission Staff Report was Published
1. ORDINANCE
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. of 2024
(An ordinance amending various sections of Title 2 1 A of the Salt Lake City Code
pertaining to penalties for work done without a certificate of appropriateness.)
An ordinance amending various sections of Title 2 1 A of the Salt Lake City Code pursuant
to Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00336 pertaining to the creation of penalties for work done
without a certificate of appropriateness.
WHEREAS, on January 4, 2024, the Salt Lake City Historic Landmark Commission
("Landmark Commission") held a public hearing to consider a petition submitted by Mayor Erin
Mendenhall to amend various sections of Title 2 1 A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to the
creation of penalties for work done without a certificate of appropriateness pursuant to Petition
No. PLNPCM2023-00336; and
WHEREAS, at its January 4, 2024 meeting, the Landmark Commission voted in favor of
transmitting a positive recommendation with modifications to the Salt Lake City Planning
Commission ("Planning Commission") and the Salt Lake City Council ("City Council") on said
petition; and
WHEREAS, on January 10, 2024 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said
petition; and
WHEREAS, at its January 10, 2024 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of
transmitting a positive recommendation to the City Council on said petition; and
WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the City Council has determined that
adopting this ordinance is in the city's best interests.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
1
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
27
28 SECTION 1. Amending the text of Section 21A.34.020. That the list of subsections in
29 Section 21A.34.020 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: H Historic
30 Preservation Overlay District) shall be, and hereby is amended as follows, with no other
31 revisions to Section 21A.34.020:
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
21 A.34.020: H HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT:
A. Purpose Statement
B. Applicability
C. Local Historic Designation, Amendments or Revocation
D. Historic Status Determination
E. Certificate of Appropriateness Required
F. Procedures for Issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness
G. Standards for Alteration of a Landmark Site, Contributing Structure or New Construction
of an Accessory Structure
H. Standards for New Construction or Alteration of a Noncontributing Structure
I. Standards for Relocation
J. Standards for Demolition of a Landmark Site
K. Standards for Demolition of a Contributing Principal Building
L. Economic Hardship Determination
M. Reconstruction of a r.,....iage House on ., Landmark c:�o
N. Enforcement
SECTION 2. Amending the text of Subsection 21A.34.020.E.1. That Subsection
21A.34.020.E of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: H Historic Preservation
Overlay District: Certificate of Appropriateness Required) shall be, and hereby is amended to
53 read as follows:
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
1. A certificate of appropriateness shall be required for all of the following:
a. Any exterior alteration to the property or any structure on the property unless
specifically exempted under Subsection 21A.34.020.E.2;
b. New Econstruction;
c. Relocation of a structure or object on the same site or to another site;
d. Demolition; and
e. Reconstruction
14
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
62 SECTION 3. Amending the text of Subsection 21A.34.020.F.2. That Subsection
63 21A.34.020.F.2 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: H Historic Preservation
64 Overlay District: Procedure for Issuance of Certificate of Appropriateness) shall be, and hereby
65 is amended to read as follows:
66 2. Historic Landmark Commission Authority: The following shall only be decided by
67 the historic landmark commission:
68 a. Substantial alteration or addition to a landmark site or contributing site, building,
69 and/or structure;
70 b. New construction of a principal building in the H Historic Preservation Overlay
71 District;
72 c. Relocation of a landmark site or contributing principal building;
73 d. Demolition of a landmark site or contributing principal building;
74 e. Economic hardship determination;
75 f. Reconstruction of e house on a '.,,,am ar4site; and
76 g. Applications referred by the planning director.
77
78 SECTION 4. Enacting the text of Subsection 21A.34.020.F.3.c. That anew Subsection
79 21 A.34.020.F.3.c of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: H Historic Preservation
80 Overlay District: Procedure for Issuance of Certificate of Appropriateness: Submission of
81 Application) is hereby enacted as follows:
82 c. Reconstruction Application Requirements: In addition to the general application
83 requirements listed above, applications for reconstruction shall include drawings
84 and photographs of the original structure that justify the dimensions and details of
85 the proposed structure. The applicant shall provide documentation that indicates
86 the original structure's approximate:
87 O) Location on the site and the estimated setbacks.
88 Building footprint, including shape and size.
89 Roof shape, slope and details.
90 (41 Building height, including wall height and roof height.
91 Openings, including location, arrangement, size and details of any window or
92 door openings. For reconstruction of carriage house, include carriage entries.
93 Exterior building materials.
94
95 SECTION 5. Amending the text of Subsection 21A.34.020.F.6. That Subsection
96 21A.34.020.F.6 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: H Historic Preservation
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
97 Overlay District: Procedure for Issuance of Certificate of Appropriateness) shall be, and hereby
98 is amended to read as follows:
99 6. Administrative Decisions: The planning director or designee shall approve,
100 conditionally approve, or deny the application for a certificate of appropriateness based
101 upon written findings of fact. The decision of the planning director or designee shall
102 become effective upon issuance of the certificate of appropriateness or of the findings
103 and order in the case of an administrative denial.
104
105 SECTION 6. Amending the text of Subsection 21A.34.020.L.3.c. That Subsection
106 21A.34.020.L.3.c of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: H Historic Preservation
107 Overlay District: Economic Hardship Determination: Procedure for Determination of Economic
108 Hardship) shall be, and hereby is amended to read as follows:
109 c. Finding of Economic Hardship: If after reviewing all of the evidence presented by
110 the applicant and the advice/testimony of the planning director's appointed
III qualified expert, and if the historic landmark commission finds that the applicant
112 has presented sufficient information supporting a determination of economic
113 hardship, then the historic landmark commission shall approve the demolition. In
114 order to show that all beneficial or economically viable use cannot be obtained, the
115 historic landmark commission must find that all of the following are met:
116 (1) The contributing principal building or landmark site cannot be economically
117 used or rented at a reasonable rate of return in its present condition or if
118 rehabilitated;
119 (2) The contributing principal building or landmark site cannot be put to any
120 reasonable beneficial use in its present condition, or if rehabilitated; and
121 (3) Bona fide efforts during the previous year to sell or lease the contributing
122 principal building or landmark site at a reasonable price have been
123 unsuccessful -.Land
124 (4) The hardship is not a mere reduction in economic value of the property, is not
125 caused by the owner's financial ability to rehabilitate a property, is not caused
126 by the owner's lack of due diligence to rehabilitate a property, or by any other
127 self-imposed condition, such as demolition by neglect, intentional
128 destabilization of the structure or a violation outlined in 21A.34.020.N.3.
129
130 SECTION 7. Amending the text of Subsection 21A.34.020.M. That Subsection
131 21A.34.020.M of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: H Historic Preservation
132 Overlay District) shall be, and hereby is amended to read as follows:
0
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
133 M. Reconstruction
134 1. Applicability: The ro ns,..,,etio,, f a hist r-ie eafriage house : allowed if the
136 a. Reconstruction after demolition without a certificate of appropriateness: If a
137 landmark site or contributing structure is demolished without a certificate of
138 appropriateness, an application for reconstruction will be considered in
139 accordance with the provisions of this Subsection.
140
141 b. Reconstruction of a carriage house on a landmark site: An application for the
142 reconstruction of a historic carriage house is allowed subject to the provision of
143 this Subsection and if the following criteria are satisfied:
144 a-.Ll) The carriage house is located on a landmark site.
145 For the purpose of this section, any site that has been further subdivided since
146 the construction of the last principal building on the site shall be considered
147 part of the landmark site.
148
149 b fQ Documentation has been provided that indicates a carriage house associated
150 with the historic period of the landmark site existed on the site.
151 Documentation may include any property related record, prior survey,
152 photographs, site plans, or similar records. It is the responsibility of the
153 applicant to provide the necessary documentation and justification for the
154 proposed dimensions and details of the carriage house that is proposed to be
155 reconstructed. Documentation shall provide sufficient detail to estimate the
156 approximate details of the carriage house,
157
158 (1) The approximate leeation of the ealT-iage house on the site and estimate
159 somas
160 ;
161 ,
and details of the r-eef of the stfuetur-e proposed-
162 to be ro ns,...,eted;
163 , based on the seale of existing
164 buildings or- stmetffes tha are also visible in hister-ie deettmentatie or- the.
165 dimensionsofthe hister-io building materials, f available. The appr-exim�te
166 height shall inelude wall height and r-eef height; a
167 (5) T�oeation, affangement, size, and details of any window Ek ding
168 .
169
170 2.
171 shall be eensider-ed an applieation for- new eenstmetion and inelude all the applieati
172
173 ' Subseetier �.b above -.-Modifications authorized: The following modifications are
174 authorized for reconstruction in accordance with this Subsection:
175 a. Density: The qualifying_ provisions for density found in the minimum lot area and
176 lot width tables of the zoning district do not apply to the proposed reconstruction,
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
177 and in the RMF-30 zoning district, the minimum lot size per dwelling unit does
178 not apply.
179 b. Multiple buildings on a single parcel: If the reconstruction results in multiple
180 buildings on a single parcel, the buildings are allowed without each building
181 having street frontage.
182
183 3. Compliance with additional codes: An application for reconstruction shall comely
184 with all applicable codes, regulations and engineering standards that have been
185 adopted by the State of Utah or the city.
186
187 4. Approval Standards: In considering an application for a certificate of appropriateness
188 involving reconstruction, the historic landmark commission shall grant the certificate
189 if it finds the project complies with all of the following standards An appheation to
190
191
192
193 a. Reconstruction sly only be used to depicts only vanished or non -surviving
194 portion of a property when a,.,., ,,marry and pb�,sieal e .:denee : available .
195
;_
196
b. Reeenstme ien will and includes measures to preserve any remaining historic
197
materials, features, and spatial relationships;,
198
Eb. The Rreconstructionwill be Lased on the is an accurate duplication of historic
199
features and elements substantiated by documentary or physical evidence. When
200
evidence is not available, rather- than on conjectural designs may be allowed if
201
supported by research of similar structures of the same era as the original
202
structure. or- the availability of different features from thee- hiss r-ie r pe-Flies. A
203
204
propefty in materials, design, eeler-, and te*tufe;
205
dc. Proposed-dDesigns that were never executed historically will not be
206
allowed.^ stmeted s:der-ed
207
d. The proposed structure replicates the size, shape, location, orientation, material and
208
design of the original structure.
209
e. The proposed structure replicates character defining features and details of the
210
orig_ inal structure.
211
leeation
, and eft
212
the property based o the hiss r-ie d,.,., ment.atio provided by the pl:oant
213
Hister-ie doeumentation shall be used to appr-eximate the leeation and dimensions
214
of the st.,,,.ttwe.
215
fi The the house the the
eaiT-iage shall mateh appr-eximate r-eef shape of original
216
house;
217
inetuding fof
, rveenstrdeted entryways eai=Fiagesj
218
shall approximately Mat i. hist r-ie entF w ays eemma4y found o
219
houses ftemthe same era as- the original eafr-iage house; n
220
ligh
,' ,
221
,
n%
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
222 ,
224
225 4. Complying With Additional Codes: An applieation appr-e Ved under- this seefien shall
226 eemply with all appheable eedes,
227 been adopted by the State of or- the eity.
228
229 5. Additional requirements for reconstruction of a carriage house on a landmark site:
230 a. Subdivision Prohibited: Further subdivision of the property after approval of a
231 reconstruction under this section is prohibited and portions of Section 21A.38.060
232 authorizing subdivisions of lots with more than two principal buildings shall not
233 be applicable.
234 b. Updated Intensive Level Survey: If reconstruction is approved, the applicant shall
235 provide the city an updated intensive level survey to document the changes to the
236 landmark site.
237 c. 6-.Allowed Uses After Reconstruction: The following uses shall be allowed in a
238 reconstructed carriage house approved under this section:
239 aLll)-. A single-family dwelling, regardless of lot area, lot width or street
240 frontage;
241 b(2)- Any accessory use authorized in the underlying zoning district or
242 overlay district; or
243 e(3). Accessory dwelling units subject to the applicable regulations for
244 accessory dwelling units.
245
246 6. Restrictive covenant for reconstruction after demolition: In the case of a reconstruction after
247 demolition without a certificate of appropriateness, the property owner shall enter into a
248 legally binding restrictive covenant, the form of which shall be approved by the city
249 attorney. The restrictive covenant shall be recorded on the property with the Salt Lake
250 County Recorder prior to issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for the reconstruction
251 required pursuant to 21A.34.020.N.3. The restrictive covenant shall, without limitation:
252 a. Acknowledge the required reconstruction;
253 b. Prohibit demolition and major alterations to the reconstructed structure for 25
254 years from the date of the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, transferrable to
255 any future property owner;
256 c. Identify the nature of the approval and any conditions thereof,
257 d. Require compliance with all applicable regulations; and
258 e. Identify the city's remedies for any violation of the covenant.
259
260 7. Historic status for reconstruction after demolition: Following reconstruction, the
261 zoning administrator shall issue a historic status determination in accordance with
262 section 21A.34.020.D, indicating the historic status of the reconstructed structure as
263 noncontributing. Any future historic resource survey or status determination shall
264 evaluate the reconstructed structure on its own merits. M di fie ,tions "*,,,rued! In
265 , the histor-ie
266 landmark e . . iay modify the following standards "on finding that the
267 proposal ,lies with the ., rl;,.able standards:
7
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
.�KfW i n _
273
274 8. Updated Intensive Level Sufvey Required: if approved, the appheant shall pro
275 �sza��szes:��s iiss.�R:s�si o��� ���� �.issii��i �.iuz.aee��� azzu�� cszesymsi szuTzai
Wei
277 SECTION 8. Enacting the text of Subsection 21A.34.020.N. That anew Subsection
278 21A.34.020.N of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: H Historic Preservation
279 Overlay District) is hereby enacted as follows:
280
281 N. Enforcement: Anv nronerty on which work is done without a certificate of appropriateness
282 when such is required under 21A.34.020, shall be subject to the enforcement process
283 established in Section 21A.20. As applicable, the city shall have the following additional
284 remedies as set forth below:
285
286 1. Any work done in violation of this chapter, and which does not comply with or
287 cannot be made to comply with the standards of this chapter shall be undone. The
288 structure or site shall be restored to its condition prior to such unlawful alteration to
289 the greatest extent possible without further damage.
290 2. A request for historic status determination as outlined in 21A.34.020.D to change
291 the status from contributing to noncontributing based on work done without a
292 certificate of appropriateness shall be rejected.
293 3. In the case of demolition of a contributing principal structure or local landmark site
294 without a certificate of appropriateness, a certificate of noncompliance will be
295 issued and recorded against the property prohibiting redevelopment for 25 years
296 unless the proposed redevelopment is for reconstruction as permitted by
297 21A.34.020.M.
298
299 SECTION 9. Amending the text of Subsection 21A.38.040.H.5. That Subsection
300 21A.38.040.H.5 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Nonconforming Uses and Noncomplying
301 Structures: Nonconforming Uses: Modifications to Nonconforming Uses) shall be, and hereby is
302 amended to read as follows:
303 5. Deterioration Oor Destruction Oof Structure Wwith Aa Nonconforming Use:
304 Restoration of a deteriorated, damaged or destroyed structure and continuance of a
305 nonconforming use shall be subject to the following:
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
306 a. If a building or structure that contains a nonconforming use is allowed to
307 deteriorate to a condition that the structure is rendered uninhabitable as
308 determined by the building official and is not repaired or restored within one year
309 after written notice to the property owner that the structure is uninhabitable, the
310 nonconforming use will cease to be legal.
311 b. If a building or structure that contains a nonconforming use is voluntarily razed,
312 or is required by law to be razed, the nonconforming use shall not be resumed.
313 c. If a property owner has voluntarily demolished seventy five percent (75%) or
314 more of the perimeter wall length and area dimensions of the exterior walls and/or
315 total floor area of a structure, the structure shall not be restored.
316 d. A nonconforming use may be restored when reconstruction is approved according
317 to the provisions of 21A.34.020.M. La.
318 d—.e. If a building or structure that contains a nonconforming use is involuntarily
319 destroyed in whole or in part due to fire or other calamity and the structure or use
320 has not been abandoned, the nonconforming use may be resumed and the building
321 or structure may be restored to the condition prior to the destruction, provided
322 such work is reasonably pursued in a time frame determined by the building
323 official after such calamity.
324
325 SECTION 10. Amending the text of Subsection 21A.38.050.G. That Subsection
326 21A.38.040.G of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Nonconforming Uses and Noncomplying
327 Structures: Noncomplying Structures) shall be, and hereby is amended to read as follows:
328 G. Deterioration, Damage Oor Destruction Oof Noncomplying Structure: Restoration of a
329 deteriorated, damaged or destroyed noncomplying structure shall be subject to the
330 following:
331 1. If a noncomplying structure is allowed to deteriorate to a condition that the structure
332 is rendered uninhabitable as determined by the building official and is not repaired or
333 restored within one year after written notice to the property owner that the structure is
334 uninhabitable, the noncomplying structure status will be lost and requires either
335 complete demolition or compliance with the standards of the zoning district in which
336 the structure is located.
337 2. If a property owner or authorized representative voluntarily demolishes a
338 noncomplying structure or the noncomplying structure is required by law to be razed,
339 the structure shall not be restored unless it is restored to comply with the regulations
340 of the zone in which it is located. Demolition of a noncomplying structure includes
341 any act or process that destroys or removes seventy five percent (75%) or more of the
342 perimeter wall length and area dimensions of exterior walls and/or total floor area of a
343 structure.
344 3. A noncomplying structure may be restored when reconstruction is approved
345 accordingto o the provisions of 21A.34.020.M.La.
346 3 4_. If a noncomplying structure is involuntarily destroyed in whole or in part due to fire
347 or other calamity and the structure or use has not been abandoned, the structure may
348 be restored to its original condition with respect to building footprint, setback, height
6
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
349 and other noncomplying dimensional standards of the zoning district in which the
350 structure is located, provided such work is started within one year, unless a longer
351 time frame is approved by the building official, after such calamity.
352
353
354 SECTION 11. Amending the text of Section 21A.62.040. That Section 21A.62.040 of the
355 Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Definitions: Definitions of Terms) shall be and hereby is amended
356 to add the following definitions, which shall be inserted in alphabetical order and shall read as
357 follows:
358 RECONSTRUCTION (AS IT APPLIES TO PROPERTIES WITHIN THE H HISTORIC
359 PRESERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT): The act or process of depicting, by means of new
360 construction, the form, features, and detailing of a non -surviving site, landscape, building,
361 structure. or obiect for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and
362 in its historic location.
363
364 SECTION 12. Adopting a "Reconstruction" fee in the Consolidated Fee Schedule. That
365 the section of the Salt Lake City consolidated fee schedule titled, "Zoning Fees: Historic
366 Landmarks Commission Review (Application)" shall be, and hereby is amended to add a new
367 "Reconstruction" fee, which shall read as follows:
Service I Fee I Additional Information I Section
Reconstruction $2,982 See also fee for required public notices (21A.10.010 E) 21A.34.020
368
369
370 SECTION 13. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
371 first publication.
372
373
374 2024.
375
376
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of
10
CHAIRPERSON
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on
Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed.
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. of 2024.
Published:
Ordinance for Work Without a COAv2
MAYOR
11
2. CHRONOLOGY
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Petition: PLNPCM2023-00336
May 1, 2023 Mayor signed the petition initiation to address unlawful construction
and demolition activities in the H Historic Preservation Zoning District
Overlay.
May 5, 2023 Petition assigned to Katia Pace, Principal Planner, for processing and
research.
October 3, 2023 Notice emailed to recognized organizations citywide.
October 10, 2023 Proposed code changes posted to the Planning Division's webpage as
an online open house.
November 1, 2023 Petition re -assigned to Mayara Lima, Planning Manager -Zoning
Administrator.
November 2, 2023 Briefing with the Historic Landmark Commission.
November 8, 2023 Briefing with the Planning Commission.
December 22, 2023 HLC public hearing notice posted on City and State websites and
Planning Division listserv.
December 29, 2023 HLC Staff Report posted online and sent to the Historic Landmark
Commission.
December 29, 2023
PC public hearing notices were posted on City and State websites and
at city library.
January 4, 2024
PC Staff Report posted online and sent to the Planning Commission.
January 4, 2024
HLC held the public hearing and forwarded a positive recommendation
with modifications to City Council.
January 10, 2024
PC held the public hearing and forwarded a positive recommendation
to City Council.
January 11, 2024
Ordinance corrections forwarded to the Attorney's Office.
March 19, 2024
Ordinance returned from the Attorney's Office.
March 19, 2024
Transmitted to CAN administration.
3. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2023-00336 — Enforcement on work without a
Certificate of Appropriateness — Mayor Erin Mendenhall has initiated a petition for a zoning text amendment
to address unlawful construction and demolition activities in the H Historic Preservation Zoning District
Overlay. The purpose of the petition is to protect historic resources, which includes designated local historic
districts and local landmark sites. The text changes are aimed at adding enforcement tools to prevent and
counter potential code violations and at establishing a clear process to remedy alterations or demolition that
occur without approval. The proposed changes will affect Chapter 21A.34.020 and related provisions of
Title 21A-Zoning.
As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments
regarding the petition. During the hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue
will be given an opportunity to speak. The Council may consider adopting the ordinance the same night of
the public hearing.
DATE:
PLACE: Electronic and in -person options.
451 South State Street, Roon 326, Salt Lake City, Utah
** This meeting will be held via electronic means, while also providing an in -person opportunity to
attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located at 451 South State
Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. For more information, including Zoom connection
information, please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings. Comments may also be provided by
calling the 24-hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an email to
council.comments(&slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the
Council and added to the public record.
If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Cassie
Younger at 801-535-6211 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, or via e-
mail at mayara.limakslc ov.com. The application details can be accessed at
htips:Hcitizenportal.slcgov.com/, by selecting the "planning" tab and entering the petition number
PLNPCM2023-00336.
The City & County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for
reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and
services. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact
the City Council Office at council.comments(kslcgov.com, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711.
4. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Lima, Mayara
From: cindy cromer-
Sent:
Friday, January 5, 2024 6:53 AM
To:
Lima, Mayara
Cc:
Clark Aubrey
Subject
(EXTERNAL) Fw: comment to Landmarks on 1/4/24; dropbox for the PC on 1/10
Follow Up Flag: Flag for follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments
Mayara-My remarks at HLC last night are below, very close to the way I delivered them. (I may have fumed
briefly about the silos.)
Please submit the comments to the Dropbox for the Planning Commission's hearing next week. My comments
in person on 1/10 will focus on the obstacles that I face as a landlord in historic districts and the tools that I
need: TDRs and density bonuses. I will ask the Planning Commission to initiate a petition for TDRs. Soren
Simonsen has identified 5 communities in Utah which already have TDRs. (I also need a reduction in property
taxes for providing housing far below market rate.)
Onward with my thanks for an elegant piece of writing, cindy c
To the Landmarks Commission
1/4/24
text amendment re COAs
From cindy cromer
I am not opposed to this proposal as part of a much larger set of changes regarding the maintenance of the
City's historic districts. The short version is that this proposal is not enough, not nearly enough.
In the Central City Historic District, the obstacles to the effectiveness of this proposal include
-inaccuracies in the survey
-zoning, especially along the TRAX corridor, which is inconsistent with preservation
-the vast majority of residents are renters, unfamiliar with the regulations
-properties are changing ownership quickly, making the City's notification to owners less effective
-the buildings have a history of poor maintenance promoting partial and total demolition
Additionally. Citywide
-by complaint only doesn't work
-staff issue permits inappropriately
-different departments involved in enforcement operate in silos
-there is inadequate emphasis on the streetscape in the ordinance
What we need in addition to this proposal are
-data on the outcomes of enforcement, including cases before this Commission
-increased benefits for owners of contributory structures through density bonuses not linked to requirements
for affordable housing
-implementation of transfer of development rights
-focus on compatible mass and scale for new construction after examining the relationship between base
zoning and overlay zoning
-addressing so-called acts of God such as fires in vacant buildings God does not burn historic buildings.
Lima, Mayara
From: Mike Young
Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2024 EIA9 AM
To: Lima, Mayara
Subject Re: (EXTERNAL) Fwd: [Normandies] LHDs
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Yes, please forward it to the commission.
You can call it ignorance, but prior to my issue, I had received one postcard in 7 years of homeownership. The HLC/city
need to do more to notify homeowners in historic districts of their obligations to the HLC. I've said if several times now,
formal notice at the time of a home changing ownership would go along way to prevent similar issues. The postcards
that the city is now sending out once a year is inadequate.
Mike Young
On Jan 8, 2024, at 2:50 PM, Lima, Mayara <Mayara.Lima@slcgov.com> wrote:
Hi Mike,
You are certainly not the only one. The tent amendment referenced below is related to
enforcement of demolition without a COA and includes other violations. The standards apply
regardless of a violation occurring due to ignorance or not. If you are interested in reviewing the
proposal, see the staff report here: httus: //www.slc. ov Manning/public-meetings/planning-
commission-agendas-minutes/.
Would you like me to forward your email for Planning Commission's review as part of the test
amendment record?
Thank you,
MAYARA LIMA I (She/Her/Hers)
Zouiug Admvristrator & Planning Manager
PLANNING DIVISION I SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
<image001.png> Mobile: (8op 8o&zoz8
Email: MaNmra.Lima(dsIcaov.co
W'MV.SLGGOOPI NING WOMSLCGOV
From: Mike Young
Sent: Friday, January 5, 20244:40 PM
To: Lima, Mayara <Mayara.Lima@slcgov.mm>
Subject: (E)TERNAL) Fwd: [Normandies] LHDs
ICaution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments.
Mayas,
Asa side note to the ongoing appeal, a neighbor sent me this. Clearly I'm not the only one that has had
these types of violations. The city has neglected to adequately inform residents of the requirements to
check with the HLC regarding alterations. In the meeting with the committee, I suggested the HLC
provide formal notice to new home owners when they close on a home regarding the HLC and its
presence, mission and authority. That suggestion seemed to fall on deaf ears. In the past two years, the
city/HLC has sent out two small post cards that can easily be thrown away without a second thought. I
want to again stress that the HLC needs to provide formal notice, once a home in the historic districts
changes ownership. The once a year post card in completely inadequate. I'm sure the formal notice
approach will be easy to implement, cost very little, and go much further to prevent these types of
problems than the post card could ever do.
Best,
Mike Young
Begin forwarded message:
From: Katharine Biele
Blew S
Subject: [Normandies
Date: January 5, 2024 at 12:33:58 PM MST
To: 'Harmony Young' via Normandies
Reply -To:
I haven't read this amendment, but I hope it addresses your frustration
with the murky process:
2. Zoning Text Amendment for Enforcement on work done without a COA -
Mayor Erin Mendenhall has initiated a petition for a Zoning Text Amendment to
address unlawful construction and demolition activities in the H Historic
Preservation Overlay District. The purpose of the petition is to protect historic
resources, which includes designated local historic districts and local landmark
sites. The text changes are aimed at adding enforcement tools to prevent and
counter potential code violations. It also aims to establish a clear process to
remedy alterations or demolition that occur without a COA (Certificate of
Appropriateness). The proposed changes will affect Chapter 21A.34.020 and
related provisions of Title 21A-Zoning. (Staff Contact: Mayara Lima at 801-535-
6141 or mavara.lima(rDslccov.com) Case Number: PLNPCM2023-00336
Katharine eiele
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Normandies" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
To view this discussion on the web visit