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: Administrative
Decision Appeals
PLNPCM2020-00352
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 receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to
appeals of administrative decisions. Administrative decisions are made by the Planning Commission,
Historic Landmark Commission, or the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the zoning
ordinance.
The amendments clarify what matters can be decided by the City's Appeals Hearing Officer, who can appeal
decisions, and when an appeal can stay a decision, modify City Code to align with State law, related case
law, and make other clarifications to the “appeals chapter of the zoning ordinance, including:
Clarify that the City Appeals Hearing Officer can only make decisions regarding the interpretation
and application of provisions of Salt Lake City Code, not provisions regarding the interpretation
and application of provisions of the Utah State Code, the Utah Constitution, Utah common law or
federal law.
Modify the list of allowed appellants to the land use applicant, City board or officer, or “an
adversely affected party” to comply with new State Code.
Eliminate automatic stays of decisions. An appellant would have to specifically request and justify a
“stay” (a hold on further proceedings on a matter) when appealing an administrative decision.
The Planning Commission forwarded a unanimous positive recommendation to the City Council.
Page | 2
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Key Changes
A short summary of the key changes is provided below. See pages 2-5 of the Planning Commission staff
report for full details.
1. Appeals Hearing Officer Authority Over City and State Code Appeals
Clarify that the City Appeals Hearing Officer can only make decisions regarding the
interpretation and application of provisions of Salt Lake City Code, not provisions regarding the
interpretation and application of provisions of the Utah State Code, the Utah Constitution,
Utah common law or federal law.
2. State Code Updates Narrowing Appellants
The proposed changes to the City’s appeals chapter would revise the list of allowed appellants to
comply with the current State Code allowance. The list of allowed appellants includes:
o The land use applicant
o City board or officer
o An adversely affected party
3. Stays of Decisions for Appeals
Eliminate automatic stays of decisions. An appellant would have to specifically request and justify
a stay.
o Currently City Code specifies that a land use decision is automatically stayed upon
submission of an appeal.
o The proposal would no longer automatically stay a decision and instead require that an
appellant formally request a stay.
o The appellant would also need to justify the stay by showing how it would be necessary
“to prevent substantial harm” to the appellant.
o The Appeals Hearing Officer would then decide on whether to impose a stay.
4. Miscellaneous Changes
Clarifications to code references and removal of potentially conflicting language.
o Removal of potentially conflicting code regarding record keeping. City record keeping
timeframes are imposed by other City Code and State law and the code change reduces the
language to simply refer to those in order to avoid conflicts.
o Reference the current types of City applications and processes the Appeals Hearing Officer
has authority over.
o Clarify that there is an application and fee for appeals is included in the “Procedure” section.
o Delete reference to the “Historic Preservation Appeal Authority” shown in the draft. Those
are intended to reflect a recently adopted ordinance that deleted that entity, which has just
not yet been incorporated or “codified” into the official city zoning text.
o All the references to that entity were already deleted by another ordinance (5 of
2020). The strike-throughs shown in the legislative version of the ordinance
related to the “Historic Preservation Appeal Authority” are now redundant.
When the code was being drafted, those changes just weren’t yet codified.
Policy Questions:
Are there any stakeholders the Administration reached out to, notifying them about the proposed
changes? Would it be helpful if the billboard or cell tower companies were contacted directly to
inform them of these changes?
Are there any other groups who have commonly appealed administrative decisions that could be
contacted to work through and/or address potential unintended consequences?
Admin. Appeals Text Amendment
Appeals Chapter 21A.16
•Regulates appeals of administrative decisions
Decisions by:
•Planning Commission
•Historic Landmarks Commission
•Other Administrative decisions
•Zoning Administrator/Planning Director/Staff
•Appeals heard by an appointed Appeals
Hearing Officer
•Technical changes to Appeals chapter
•Comply with recent state code and case law
Admin. Appeals Text Amendment
•Clarify authority of Appeals Hearing Officer
•Authority over City code appeals only, not state code
•Align allowed appellant definition with State Code
•(2) "Adversely affected party" means a person other than a land use applicant
who:
(a) owns real property adjoining the property that is the subject of a land use
application or land use decision; or
(b) will suffer a damage different in kind than, or an injury distinct from, that of
the general community as a result of the land use decision.
•Stays of decisions with appeals
•Appeals will not automatically stay decisions
•Appeals Hearing Officer would decide on stay requests from
appellants
•Appellant must demonstrate potential substantial harm
•Other wording , clarification changes for consistency