Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report - N/APLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS Staff Report To: Salt Lake City Planning Commission From: Nick Norris, Planning Director, nick.norris@slc.gov or 801-535-6173 Date: February 12, 2025 Re: Petition Initiation regarding standards for alley vacations and fence height in the Manufacturing zoning districts. Petition Initiation REQUEST: At the January 27, 2025 Planning Commission meeting the commission asked to place two petition initiation requests on the next available agenda. The requests include: 1. Modifying the standards associated with petitions to close or vacate public alley ways; and 2. Modifying fence height regulations in the manufacturing zoning districts. Motions: “I move that the commission initiate text amendments that would modify the policy considerations found in city code 14.52 and any other provision in chapter 14.52 necessary for adequate review of petitions to close or vacate a public alley. I also move that the commission initiate a separate petition to amend the fence height regulations in the manufacturing zones.” Alternative motions: if no motion is made, then the petitions will not be initiated by the commission. Background Closing or Vacating Public Alleys: The process for disposing of public alleys is found in City Code 14.52. This section requires the planning commission to make a recommendation to the city council regarding petitions to close or vacate an alley. Within this chapter is a section of policy considerations that are intended to be used by the commission and council when considering disposing of city owned alleys. The policy considerations are: A. Lack Of Use: The City's legal interest in the property appears of record or is reflected on an applicable plat; however, it is evident from an on site inspection that the alley does not physically exist or has been materially blocked in a way that renders it unusable as a public right-of-way; B. Public Safety: The existence of the alley is substantially contributing to crime, unlawful activity, unsafe conditions, public health problems, or blight in the surrounding area; C. Urban Design: The continuation of the alley does not serve as a positive urban design element; or D. Community Purpose: The petitioners are proposing to restrict the general public from use of the alley in favor of a community use, such as a neighborhood play area or garden. This section requires an applicant to demonstrate that at least one of the policy considerations is satisfied. These factors were last updated by ordinance 24 of 2002. The commission asked that, at the least, consideration “A. Lack of Use” be modified to address situations where the alley has been illegally blocked from being considered a lack of use. In addition, the commission asked that the future development potential be a factor as well. More research and info will be provided as part of the Planning Divisions research and development of proposed modifications if the petition is initiated. The motion on page one of this document is broadly written to provide the opportunity for the entirety of Chapter 14.52 to be considered for modifications. This provides the division and other city departments to review and identify recommended changes to other sections of 14.52 through this process. Fence Height in the Manufacturing Zoning Districts: In 2024 the commission considered a private text amendment related to fence height for a specific area of the city that is zoned M-1 Light Manufacturing. As part of the discussion, the Planning Division attempted to work with the applicant to broaden the proposal. Due to a pressing timeline the applicant had associated with the proposal, the applicant did not agree to expand the petition. During the commission discussion on that item, the commission asked to consider a separate text amendment addressing fence height in the manufacturing zones to more broadly address fence height in manufacturing zones. At the January 27th meeting, planning staff asked if the commission was interested in initiating this petition because the City Council had recently initiated a similar text amendment for fence heights and the division identified some efficiencies in addressing both issues at the same time. This initiation would consider modifying the fence and hedge height for fences set at front setback line and along side property lines. It may also include increasing the fence height in other yards to reflect the nature of the land uses in the manufacturing zones. This initiation is also fairly broad to allow flexibility with the text amendment to ensure that the amendment can be comprehensive in terms of regulating fence height in the manufacturing zones. APPROVAL PROCESS AND COMMISSION AUTHORITY To initiate a text amendment, the commission must publish the intent to initiate the amendments on an agenda and provide 24 hours’ notice of the item. This has been done. During a public meeting, the commission may discuss the initiation (discussion is not required) and a commission may make a motion to initiate the petition. Any motion would be adopted if a majority of the commission present votes in favor of the motion. A public hearing is not required by the commission prior to voting on the initiation.