Disclaimer:
The following Working Draft Document is being provided as part of Salt Lake County’s
efforts to provide openness in the process of reviewing and revising of the Foothills and
Canyons Overlay Zone ordinance. The notes, discussions, comments, suggestions and
recommendations made in this document should not be seen as, or be interpreted as,
having any effect or change whatsoever in the current ordinance as it is currently written;
neither should they be seen as representative of the positions, comments, or feelings of all
or a majority of Blue Ribbon Commission members, individually or collectively. This
working Draft Document is subject to change, and will change significantly over the
course of the project. In an effort to provide the most up to date information, only the
most recent version of the working document will be posted at this location. The
document is provided for information purposes only.
1/25/2013
Section
19.72.010
A.
B.
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Purposes of provisions.
Section
19.54.010
The general purpose of the foothills and
canyons overlay zone is to promote the
health, safety, and public welfare of the
residents of the county, and while being
cognizant of private property rights, to
preserve the natural character of the
foothills and canyons by establishing
standards for foothill and canyon
development proposed in the
unincorporated areas of the county.
Camiros Text
PURPOSE
BRC Discussion
The general purpose of the Foothills and
Canyons Overlay Zone is to promote the
health, safety and welfare of County
residents while being cognizant of private
property rights, and to preserve the natural
character of the foothills and canyons by
establishing standards for development in
the unincorporated areas of the County.
These standards for development are
intended to accomplish the following
purposes:
This should embody what the 1989
Wasatch Canyons Master Plan had
envisioned.
Preserve the visual and aesthetic qualities
of the foothills and canyons, including
prominent ridgelines, which are vital to
the attractiveness and economic viability
of the County.
Would like to see more scientific
application.
BRC Recommendation
This is the link between broad conceptual
values and the technical nature of what
follows.
Appears that portions of the original text
(B) have been included in the Camiros
text but not all portions, but the intent has
been met.
The standards for development contained
herein are intended specifically to
accomplish the following purposes:
1. Preserve the visual and aesthetic qualities
of the foothills and canyons, including
prominent ridgelines, which are vital to
the attractiveness and economic viability
of the county;
A.
What do these mean? What is a prominent
ridgeline? Should these be defined?
Perspective becomes an issue.
How will designations such as these affect
the rights of property owners? Should
subjectivity be at a staff level or that of a
planning commission?
Comparison to historic district principles
of contributing and non-contributing
buildings.
What is economic viability? Is this
commercial enterprise only or does this
include watershed protection and the
economics of health and safety
2. Encourage development designed to
reduce risks associated with natural
B.
Encourage development designed to
reduce risks associated with natural
Some issue with the term “inhabitant” that
may imply only those who live in the
1|Page
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
hazards and to provide maximum safety
for inhabitants;
Section
Camiros Text
hazards and to provide maximum safety
for inhabitants.
BRC Discussion
canyon. We should include visitors to the
canyons as well.
BRC Recommendation
Visitors and Residents (potential language
change)
Maximum safety – reducing risks to an
acceptable level. Do we get to a point
where the nominal returns do not justify
the cost involved
This safety aspect also pertains to the trees
on the lot and tree replacement efforts.
3. Provide adequate and safe vehicular and
pedestrian circulation;
C.
Provide adequate and safe vehicular and
pedestrian circulation.
4. Encourage development that fits the
natural slope of the land in order to
minimize the scarring and erosion effects
of cutting, filling, and grading related to
construction on hillsides, ridgelines, and
steep slopes;
D.
Encourage development that fits the
natural slope of the land in order to
minimize the scarring and erosion effects
of cutting, filling and grading related to
construction on hillsides, ridgelines and
steep slopes.
To reduce risks associated with natural
hazards – language change
recommendation
Should this include Bicycles? Is this
added in definition of a vehicle?
Make sure that the text in this paragraph
matches the sections that follow.
Natural slope vs. steep slopes – what if the
natural slope exceeds 30%. Is more clarity
needed here?
There is a design aspect here of fitting a
building to the land. (Aesthetic)
Does this provision rather pertain more to
the minimizing of erosion and scaring of
hillsides.
Should this be two separate statements?
5. Prohibit activities and uses that would
result in degradation of fragile soils,
steep slopes, and water quality;
E.
Prohibit activities and uses that would
result in degradation of fragile soils, steep
slopes and water quality.
Should aesthetic elements be a separate
form based element?
There are no “fragile” soils on the west
side. This seems to imply alpine or
crypto-bionic soils.
This does not reflect the balance we are
2|Page
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
trying to achieve. Prohibit is a strong
word. Perhaps control, restrict, regulate.
Mitigate?
BRC Recommendation
Wasatch canyons tomorrow study would
want to see more tangible enforcement
actions.
6. Provide for preservation of
environmentally sensitive areas and open
space by encouraging clustering or other
design techniques to preserve the natural
terrain, minimize disturbance to existing
trees and vegetation, preserve wildlife
habitat, and protect aquifer recharge
areas;
F.
Provide for preservation of
environmentally sensitive areas and
natural open space by encouraging
clustering or other design techniques to
preserve the natural terrain, minimize
disturbance to existing trees and
vegetation, preserve wildlife habitat, and
protect aquifer recharge areas.
What do we mean by “degrading”?
Not sure why clustering is part of this
statement. Clustering is a very specific
tool added elsewhere in the ordinance.
Provide for preservation of
environmentally sensitive areas and
natural open space by encouraging
clustering or other design techniques to
preserve the natural terrain, minimize
disturbance to existing trees and
vegetation, preserve wildlife habitat, and
protect aquifer recharge areas.
Wildlife migration issues – corridors. Is
this covered in the term habitat?
Connectivity to areas, fences
“Provide for” may be a loophole – should
this rather be to preserve the existing
areas?
Encourage?
Why aquifer recharge areas rather than
watershed? SLC uses more surface water
than ground (aquifer).
We need a “fashion update” to the
language
7. Reduce flooding by protecting streams,
drainage channels, absorption areas, and
floodplains from substantial alteration of
their natural functions.
G.
Reduce flooding by protecting streams,
drainage channels, absorption areas and
floodplains from substantial alteration of
their natural functions.
This all centers around reducing the
flooding hazards and the county flood
control responsibilities.
3|Page
1/25/2013
Line by Line Analysis
Section
Original Text
Section
19.72.020
Overlay zone—Scope and application—
General provisions.
19.54.020
A.
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
Is this an in the canyon hazard vs. and in
the valley hazard?
Should this statement be more general or
maintain existing specificity?
BRC Recommendation
APPLICABILITY
Scope/Application.
1. Geographic Area of Application. Maps
delineating the boundaries of the foothills
and canyons overlay zone are attached as
Appendix A to this chapter and are on
file with the Salt Lake County planning
and development services division. Such
maps, as amended, are a part of this title
as if fully described and detailed herein.
A.
2. Development Activities Covered. The
standards and regulations contained in
this chapter shall apply to all
development that occurs within the
mapped foothills and canyons overlay
zone, as the term "development" is
defined at Section 19.04.165, including
grading, clearing and other land
disturbance activities.
B.
3. Applicability to Development on Lots of
Record. The standards and regulations
contained in this chapter shall apply to all
development that occurs within the
mapped foothills and canyons overlay
zone on legally subdivided lots that were
recorded prior to the enactment of the
Geographic Area of Application
Maps delineating the boundaries of the
Foothills and Canyons Overlay Zone are
on file with the Salt Lake County
Planning and Development Services
Division. Such maps, as amended, are a
part of this Ordinance as if fully described
and detailed herein.
Development Activities Covered
The standards and regulations of the
Foothills and Canyons Overlay Zone
apply to all development that occurs
within the mapped Foothills and Canyons
Overlay Zone. Development includes
grading, clearing, subdivision and all
other land disturbance activities, as
defined in this Ordinance.
Do we need to reference other zones in
play?
Can we get design elements worked into
the published ordinance with hyperlinks to
the referenced material
Subdivision seems to be in the wrong
place.
The development “definition” appears to
be a partial list. We need to be more
inclusive.
Development includes grading, clearing,
subdivision and all other land disturbance
activities, as defined in this Ordinance.
We may want to come back and define
what the term development means with
regards to FCOZ ordinance.
Some concur that this section should be
deleted.
Lots of record elements need to be
restored to the ordinance.
Need to eliminate multiple and duplicative
4|Page
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
ordinance codified in this chapter,
including subsequent additions or
expansions of buildings or structures
constructed prior to the enactment of said
ordinance, except when a waiver or
exemption expressly allowed by this
chapter has been granted.
4. Jurisdictional Exemptions. The
provisions of this chapter do not apply to
properties owned by the state of Utah or
the government of the United States,
except as specifically authorized by
intergovernmental agreement,
memorandum of understanding, or other
form of cooperative agreement
authorized by law. Although
jurisdictionally exempt, these entities are
nonetheless strongly encouraged to
voluntarily incorporate the principles and
practices embodied by this chapter.
B.
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
language.
BRC Recommendation
Should this be in administrative? – Both
FCOZ
If we spell out a definition of lot of record
shouldn’t we also clearly point out what
regulations apply?
C.
Jurisdictional Exemptions
These provisions do not apply to
properties owned by the State of Utah or
the government of the United States,
except as specifically authorized by
intergovernmental agreement,
memorandum of understanding, or other
form of cooperative agreement authorized
by law. Although jurisdictionally exempt,
these entities are nonetheless strongly
encouraged to voluntarily incorporate
these principles and practices.
General Provisions.
1. Construction and Rules of
Interpretation—Delegation of Authority.
Whenever a provision appears requiring
the head of a department or another
officer or employee of the county to
perform an act or duty, that provision
shall be construed as authorizing the
department head or officer to delegate the
responsibility to subordinates, unless the
terms of the provision specify otherwise.
2. Recognition of Salt Lake City
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction. Salt Lake
County recognizes that Salt Lake City
has extraterritorial jurisdiction for
protection of its watershed located in the
canyons east of Salt Lake City from City
Verify that this is elsewhere.
(consolidated)
D.
Recognition of Salt Lake City
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
Link this to SLC maps? Or add “maps as
amended” to the language.
Salt Lake County recognizes that Salt
Lake City has extraterritorial jurisdiction
for protection of its watershed located in
Language seems to cut off.
Need procedural/administrative
5|Page
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Creek Canyon south to Little
Cottonwood Canyon. All development in
the county that is also located within Salt
Lake City's watershed areas shall be
reviewed by Salt Lake City for
compliance with the city's applicable
watershed protection standards prior to
county approval or final permitting. Maps
delineating the boundaries of Salt Lake
City's watershed areas are attached as
Appendix B to this chapter and are on file
with the Salt Lake County planning and
development services division. Such
maps, as amended, are a part of this title
as if fully described and detailed herein.
Section
Camiros Text
the canyons east of Salt Lake City from
City Creek Canyon south to Little
Cottonwood Canyon. All development in
the County that is also located within Salt
Lake City's watershed areas must receive
approval from Salt Lake City for
compliance with the City's applicable
watershed protection standards.
3. Inconsistent Provisions. When the
provisions of this chapter are inconsistent
with provisions found in other chapters of
this title, or with provisions found in any
other county ordinance or regulation, the
most restrictive provision shall apply.
19.72.030
A.
Development standards.
BRC Discussion
clarifications regarding approval of SLC
prior to final approval of the County.
BRC Recommendation
Potential change in process? Technical
review prior to planning commission
review?
(check admin section)
This language in this section is goofy.
19.54.030
DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
PROCEDURES
Lot and Density Requirements.
1. General Rule. Except as specifically
modified by this chapter, all development
in the foothills and canyons overlay zone
shall comply with the standards for
minimum lot size, minimum lot width,
and maximum density required in the
underlying zone.
A. All development proposed in the Foothills
and Canyons Overlay Zone is subject to
the site development plan approval
procedures set forth in Subsection
19.16.100 (Site Development Plan
Application for FCOZ). No development
or construction activity, including
tree/vegetation removal and grading or
subdivision of land, may occur in the
Foothills and Canyons Overlay Zone until
a site development plan has been
approved.
B. Only those waivers and modifications to
6|Page
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
the standards of the Foothills and Canyons
Overlay Zone listed in Subsection
19.16.100 (F) (Permitted Modifications of
Standards) are allowed and must be
approved according to the procedures of
therein.
19.54.040
UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Unless specifically modified by the
standards of the Foothills and Canyons
Overlay Zone, all development must
comply with the standards of the
underlying zoning district. Previously
platted lots which have been consolidated
into one taxable parcel shall not be redivided into lots smaller than the
minimum area required in the underlying
zone.
2. Exception to the General Rule—Lots of
Record That Do Not Meet the Underlying
Zone's Minimum Lot Requirements. If a
lot of record subject to this chapter:
(WHERE DID THIS ALL GO?)
Was approved prior to the effective date
of the ordinance codified in this chapter;
a.
and
Does not meet the minimum lot size or
b. lot width requirements set forth in the
underlying zone district; and
Is not subject to the substandard lot
consolidation provisions set forth in
subsection (A)(3) of this section; then the
minimum lot size or lot width
c. requirements shall be waived and
development may proceed on said lot of
record subject to compliance with all
other applicable development standards
set forth in this chapter and in the
underlying zone.
7|Page
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
3. Consolidation of Substandard Lots.
Circumstances Under Which
Consolidation is Required. Two or more
lots or parcels located in the foothills and
a. canyons overlay zone shall be considered
to be a single, undivided lot or parcel for
the purposes of this chapter if all the
following factors apply:
The lots or parcels are in single and
i. common ownership; and
The lots or parcels are contiguous; and
ii.
The lots or parcels were legally
established and recorded in the office of
the county recorder prior to August 15,
1997; and
iii.
All or part of the lots or parcels do not
meet the minimum lot area or lot width
requirements set forth in the underlying
zone; and
iv.
None of the contiguous lots or parcels
have been improved with individual and
separate connections to municipal water
or sewer systems; and
v.
None of the contiguous lots or parcels
have been improved with structures.
vi.
b. Consolidation Acreage Requirements.
In Underlying Zones Where a Minimum
Lot Size of Less Than One Acre is
Required. In areas where the underlying
zone requires a minimum lot size of less
than one acre, lots or parcels shall be
i. consolidated, where sufficient land area
8|Page
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
is available, in increments of one-half
acre.
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
In Underlying Zones Where a Minimum
Lot Size of One Acre or More is
Required. In areas where the underlying
zone requires a minimum lot size of one
acre or more, lots or parcels shall be
consolidated, where sufficient land area
is available, in increments of at least one
acre.
ii.
c.
Remnant Land Areas.
In Underlying Zones Where a Minimum
Lot Size of Less Than One Acre is
Required. If, in the process of
consolidating lots in accordance with the
preceding requirements any remnant
portion of land less than one-half acre in
size remains, such remnant shall be
either:
i.
Proportionally added to the total number
of one-half acre lots created in the
(A) consolidation process; or
Added to the last one-half acre lot or
parcel created.
(B)
In Underlying Zones Where a Minimum
Lot Size of One Acre or More is
Required. If, in the process of
consolidating lots in accordance with the
preceding requirements any remnant
portion of land less than a full acre in size
remains, such remnant shall be either:
ii.
Proportionally added to the total number
of one acre lots created in the
consolidation process; or
(A)
(B) Added to the last full acre lot or parcel
9|Page
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
created in the consolidation process;
Section
Camiros Text
19.54.050
CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Prohibited Use or Sales. No portion of
such lots or parcels subject to this
consolidation provision shall be used or
sold in a manner that renders compliance
with applicable lot width and lot area
requirements less feasible.
(C)
4. Clustering. Clustering of development
(See Figures 1 and 2) is generally
recommended and may be required by
the planning commission to achieve the
objectives of this chapter. Whether
proposed by an applicant or required by
the planning commission, clustering of
development may only be used to reduce
otherwise applicable minimum lot size
requirements upon satisfaction of the
following findings:
A.
General Requirements
Cluster development is recommended and
may be required by the Planning
Commission to achieve the objectives of
the Foothills and Canyons Overlay Zone.
Whether proposed by an applicant or
required by the Planning Commission,
cluster development may only be used to
reduce the applicable minimum lot size
requirements upon satisfaction of the
following findings:
Should clustering of lands that are clearly
undevelopable be considered?
Current ordinance only allows a bonus
density on developable acreage.
The current intent is to pull the density
down and concentrate it where there are
utilities and services.
What lands qualify/ should qualify for this
type of provision?
Should we have a transfer of development
rights from outside of a service district to
inside the district?
The clustering proposal meets all other
applicable requirements set forth in this
a. chapter or in other applicable ordinances
or regulations;
1. The clustering proposal meets all other
applicable requirements set forth in the
Foothills and Canyons Overlay Zone or in
other applicable ordinances or regulations.
The clustering proposal, compared with a
more traditional site development plan,
better attains the policies and objectives
b.
of this chapter, such as providing more
open space, preserving existing trees and
vegetation coverage, and preserving
2. The clustering proposal, compared with a
more traditional site development plan,
better attains the policies and objectives of
the Foothills and Canyons Overlay Zone,
such as providing more natural open
space, preserving existing trees and
Do we need to codify what open space is
defined as? How is this protected?
Careful that we are not confusing people
with nuances in the language.
10 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
sensitive environmental areas such as
stream corridors, slide areas, wetlands
and steep slopes;
Section
Camiros Text
vegetation coverage, and preserving
sensitive environmental areas such as
stream corridors, slide areas, wetlands and
steep slopes.
BRC Discussion
Natural open space definition appears to
allow for trails and roads, no parking or
structures.
BRC Recommendation
Should we step aside from the open space
word and define this area as something
else entirely.
Public open space or private open space?
Including but not limited to language
needs to be added to this “list” (without
limitation)
Can we refer back to a common list from
the general purposes section?
The clustering proposal will have no
significant adverse impact on adjacent
properties or development, or, if such
impacts would result, the applicant has
agreed to implement appropriate
mitigation measures such as landscaping,
screening, illumination standards, and
other design features as recommended by
the development services director to
buffer and protect adjacent properties
from the proposed clustered
development; and
c.
3. The clustering proposal will have no
significant adverse impact on adjacent
properties or development, or, if such
impacts would result, the applicant has
agreed to implement appropriate
mitigation measures such as landscape,
screening, illumination standards, and
other design features as recommended by
the Director to buffer and protect adjacent
properties from the proposed clustered
development.
What about unintended impacts to service
districts?
Are there other criteria that we should
bring into determinations as to what you
can cluster and what you can not.
Access?
Should this be identified at a preapplication meeting?
This section seems fairly subjective.
What is significant?
The recommendations should be under the
direction of the planning commission not
the Director. Input from the affected
neighbors should be acknowledged here.
(note that this is an issue anywhere it
appears in the ordinance)
Would like to see this as more of a
positive statement, that clustering will
enhance rather than automatically be a
negative.
11 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
The architecture, height, building
materials, building colors, and other
design features of the development blend
with the surrounding natural landscape
and are compatible with adjacent
properties or development.
Section
Camiros Text
4. The architecture, height, building
materials, building colors, and other
design features of the development blend
with the surrounding natural landscape
and are compatible with adjacent
properties or development.
BRC Discussion
Isn’t this already covered elsewhere in the
ordinance?
BRC Recommendation
Does this mean we force a new building
to match an architectural style from an
adjacent property?
Everything is a natural color, should this
be earth tones? Or indigenous colors and
materials that mimic the surrounding
terrain and natural landscape.
d.
Cloaking?
See Entrada at Snow Canyon for possible
examples.
(Figure 1-2)
(See 19.54.050 D – Below)
Figure 1.Clustering of Development
away from Ridgeline: Recommended.
Figure 2. Scattered Development—
Intrusive upon Ridgeline: Not
Recommended.
12 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
5. Density Bonus for Clustering.
A density bonus of up to twenty-five
percent over the base density permitted in
the underlying zone district may be
available for cluster developments that
a. satisfy the above standards taking into
account the bonus density.
For purposes of calculating this twentyfive percent cluster density bonus, the
base density permitted in the underlying
zone district shall be calculated based on
"net developable acreage," which is
b. defined as land with all of the following:
Section
B.
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Density Bonus for Cluster Development
1. A cluster density bonus of up to twentyfive percent (25%) over the base density
permitted in the underlying zone may be
available for cluster developments that
satisfy the above standards while taking
into account the bonus density.
2. The allowable density bonus for a cluster
development is equal to twenty-five
percent (25%) of the “net developable
acreage”, and must be rounded to the
nearest whole number, but in no case less
than one (1). “Net developable acreage” is
defined as land with all of the following:
Average slope less than thirty percent;
a. An average slope less than thirty percent
(30%).
Soils of a suitable depth and type based
on soil exploration and percolation tests
in accordance with the regulations of the
Utah Department of Environmental
Quality in order to ensure against adverse
impacts on surface and groundwater
quality;
b. Soils of a suitable depth and type based on
soil exploration and percolation tests in
accordance with the regulations of the
Utah Department of Environmental
Quality in order to ensure against adverse
impacts on surface and groundwater
quality.
Does this get back to the intent of pulling
development off of other natural/sensitive
lands?
If this does not sufficiently encourage this
should we look at other incentives?
Does a Transfer of Development Rights
proposal fit this intent better? Can we find
an appropriate receiving zone?
Should we take this out and incentivize in
other ways?
Can we look at other ski areas and how
they have worked with this.
Would taking this out cause a greater
uproar than leaving it in? Especially if it is
not helping or hurting anything at the
moment?
could we offer an expedited process?
How is this average slope defined? Over
what area is it calculated?
(This is more relevant on larger lots.)
Could this be based on the LOD area?
i.
ii.
Should this reference a section of Utah
Code?
Can this be Hyperlinked to an outside
website? (Utah Code)
How might this apply or be altered for a
Mountain Resort Zone?
13 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
What if the home is built upon a solid
piece of granite? What if no “soil” is
necessary? Is the land developable or not?
Seems that this requirement applies more
to septic systems.
Does d. below address the situation
without the need for b.?
If this is kept in we need more
information. How does this apply, what
are the DEQ regulations? We need to be
more specific.
What is “suitable” this is subjective
language? Can we reference a definition
or determination that is elsewhere?
Perhaps this should say, “ soils in
compliance with requirements of
DEQ…etc.”)
(Ask Greg)(required upon request of the
local government?)
Is this an undue burden, or is a request for
a density bonus come with extra efforts on
the part of the developer?
Minimum distance from any stream
corridor, as that term is defined in
Section 19.72.070, of one hundred feet;
and
c. Minimum distance from any stream
corridor, as defined in this Chapter, of one
hundred (100) feet.
(Link to the definition of a stream
corridor)
Should there be a reference or link to the
provisions/waivers for “lots of record”.
iii.
Free from any identified natural hazards
such as flood, avalanche, landslide, high
water table and similar features. (See
Chapter 19.74, "Floodplain Hazard
iv. Regulations" and Chapter 19.75, "Natural
d. Free from any identified natural hazards
such as flood, avalanche, landslide, high
water table and similar features. (See
Subsection 19.46.040 (Floodplain Hazard
Regulations) and Subsection 19.54.120
How much “risk” is acceptable?
Fire risk is not listed.
Should the word “any” be removed?
14 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Hazard Areas.")
Section
Camiros Text
(Natural Hazards).
BRC Discussion
Free from unacceptable or unreasonable
natural hazards? There are areas where
mitigation is allowed should these be
included or excluded when calculating
bonus density? (confusing)
BRC Recommendation
Should the density bonus even be in the
ordinance?
Should we look more at TDR’s as
suggested in the Canyons Tomorrow
report?
Should there be a “penalty” when a
majority of the acres in a cluster
development are otherwise not
developable?
C.
Cluster Development Design
1. Forty percent (40%) of the area of the
development site must be preserved as
active or passive natural open space.
These natural open space areas must
conform with any adopted County open
space and/or trail plans, provide
contiguity with adjacent natural open
space and/or conservation areas, protect
unique natural, historic, or cultural site
features and resources, and avoid
fragmentation of conservation areas
within the site
2. The maximum number of lots allowed in a
single cluster is twenty (20) lots. Each
cluster must be separated from other
residential clusters by a minimum of onehundred (100) feet.
“Existing or future” county plans.
What does active vs. passive mean?
We would like a different term used for
“natural open space” (natural open area?)
Where/ how was the limit set at 20 and
100 feet distance.
How is the 100 foot distance measured.
Sq ft. / acreage concerns. 20 big homes?
Size matters!
3. The layout of a cluster development must
protect significant natural resources on or
adjacent to the site. Natural resources
include riparian areas, wetlands,
This is a good provision that speaks
towards the purpose of the clustering
provisions.
15 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
ecological resources, steep slopes and
ridgelines, and wildlife habitat and
corridors must be preserved. The overall
site design must take advantage of the
site’s natural topography to hide multiple
residential clusters from each other’s
view.
4. A cluster development must preserve the
open sky backdrop above any ridgelines
and significant views of the rural, open
character of the area, as viewed from
adjacent streets.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
New definition “open sky backdrop”.
From adjacent streets is problematic.
This should be from main/major streets
and not all streets (private vs. public)
streets.
Unsure if this is an enforceable regulation.
The street used for these purposes should
be below the structure (in elevation).
D.
5. The extension of roads and utilities for
development must be minimized and
reduce the County’s cost of providing
services. Access points to the cluster
development from the public right-of-way
should be limited.
Illustration of Cluster Development
Refer to previous ridgeline discussion
Accommodations for parking and access
to trails should also be considered. This is
important for both public and private trail
systems.
Figure 19.54.1: Cluster Development
illustrates recommended cluster
development.
FIGURE 19.54.1: CLUSTER
DEVELOPMENT
16 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
6. Planned Unit Developments.
Should look at removing this from the
underlying zones as well. Covered by
clustering section.
Minimum Lot Area and Lot Width. Lot
areas and lot widths for planned unit
developments in the foothills and
canyons overlay zone district shall not be
subject to the minimum lot area and lot
a.
width limits set forth in this section.
Instead, minimum lot areas and lot
widths shall be determined on a case-bycase basis by the planning commission
pursuant to Chapter 19.78 of this title.
This may apply to a resort village.
Maximum Density. Density of dwelling
units per acre in a planned unit
development shall be the same as that
allowed in the underlying zone district in
which the planned unit development is
b.
located.
B.
Slope Protection Standards.
19.54.060
SLOPE PROTECTION
17 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
A.
1. Prohibition of Development on Steep
Slopes. With the exception of permitted
minor ski resort improvements and as
otherwise expressly allowed in this
chapter, no development, including
clearing, excavation, and grading shall be
allowed on slopes greater than thirty
percent.
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Slope Protection Standards
1. Unless otherwise allowed in this Section,
no development, including clearing,
excavation and grading is allowed on
slopes greater than thirty percent (30%).
Should a link be provided to lot of record
provisions? Should we have a lot of
record section with all applicable sections
in one place?
We need to know if resort zones will be
pulled out or not to make
recommendations on language of these
sections.
FCOZ LTE
2. Structure Clearance from Steep Slopes.
Structure clearance from ascending or
descending slopes greater than thirty
percent shall conform to the requirements
set forth in applicable building code
provisions.
3. Prohibition of Development on
Designated Ridge Lines.
With the exception of permitted minor
ski resort improvements, which may
cross but not follow designated ridge
lines, and with the further exception of
a. instances where a waiver has been
granted pursuant to this chapter, no
development shall intrude into any ridge
line protection area that has been
identified and designated as part of an
adopted county or township plan (e.g.,
2. Structures must be set back from
ascending or descending slopes greater
than thirty percent (30%) in accordance
with the requirements of the building
code.
B.
***ALL FUTURE COMMENTS WILL
REFLECT THE DECISION THAT A
MOUNTAIN RESORT ZONE IS
DESIRED***
Should this defer to building code, IBC?
Or should we stick to this number?
Development on Ridgelines
1. No development may break the horizon
line, defined as the point where the ridge
visibly meets the sky as viewed from
public rights of way or trails.
Looking down or looking up?
Major roads? What would the threshold
be? Trails. What would be a better
definition?
What is a view shed. Aesthetic values?
Should the mapping provision be included
or not? (see provision 2 below)
18 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
the Emigration Canyon plan) or has been
identified and designated by the county
during the development review and
approval process set forth in Section
19.72.050 of this chapter.
For the purposes of this chapter,
designated ridgeline protection areas
shall consist of prominent ridge lines that
are highly visible from public rights-ofway or trails, and shall include the crest
of any designated hill or slope, plus the
land located within one-hundred feet
horizontally (map distance) on either side
of the crest. (See Figures 3 and 4 below)
b.
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
Further discussion regarding the
subjective elements of determining the
“vertical” elements of the protection zone
and what “is” a ridgeline. What
perspective (vantage point) is this viewed
at/from (public roads, trails, rights of
way)?
BRC Recommendation
2. No development may intrude into any
ridgeline protection area. Development
must be located a minimum of onehundred (100) feet horizontally (map
distance) from either side of the crest of a
ridgeline protection area. A ridgeline
protection area is defined as either of the
following:
a.
A ridgeline designated as such in an
adopted County or Township plan.
Continue to recognize existing maps and
plans
A ridgeline identified and designated as
such by the County during the
development review and approval process
b.
as a prominent ridgeline.
3. Figure 19.54.2: Ridgeline Development
illustrates recommended ridgeline
development.
FIGURE 19.54.2: RIDGELINE DEVEL
19 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
4. Steep Slopes—Open Space. One hundred
percent of areas with slope greater than
thirty percent shall remain in natural
private or public open space, except as
expressly allowed in this chapter.
C.
Grading Standards.
1. Grading Prohibited Without Prior
Approvals/Permits. No grading,
excavation, or tree/vegetation removal
shall be permitted, whether to provide for
a building site, for on-site utilities or
services, or for any roads or driveways,
prior to issuance of a building permit in
accordance with a grading and excavation
plan and report for the site approved by
the development services engineer.
Section
D.
(Should be C)
19.54.070
A.
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
Natural Open Space within Steep
Slopes
Should this refer to the ordinance, chapter,
or section. ? Look at this.
Unless expressly allowed in this Section,
one hundred percent (100%) of areas with
slope greater than thirty percent (30%)
must remain in natural private or public
open space.
Again, the open space confusion. Use a
more distinct term.
BRC Recommendation
GRADING STANDARDS
Prior to issuance of a building permit in
accordance with a grading and excavation
plan and report for the site approved by
the Development Services Engineer, no
grading, excavation or tree/vegetation
removal is permitted, whether to provide
for a building site, for on-site utilities or
services, or for any roads or driveways.
Basically the same thing only a bit
cleaner.
Should this say development services
engineer? Development Services? Who
should this refer to?
This isn’t exactly a complete/direct
sentence.
“No work is allowed until a building
permit is issued.”
20 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
B.
Camiros Text
A maximum of thirty-five percent (35%)
of the total area of the lot, but not to
exceed the maximum limits of disturbance
allowed per 19.54.040, may be graded for
a building pad, including building pads for
any accessory structures.
BRC Discussion
(reference to limits of disturbance section)
BRC Recommendation
How is this enforced? After the fact?
Bigger teeth? Increased financial and
criminal penalties?
Other law being violated (i.e. clean water)
Does the county have enough
resources/will power?
Inconsistent enforcement of provisions,
after the fact changes (after county
review/inspections are complete)
Equal protection questions. Consistency in
zoning ordinance violations (same
violation in the valley should be treated
the same)
Where did the 35% number come from (is
this a best practice?) could engineering a
work around be possible? What
unintended consequences might occur?
2. Cutting to Create Benches. Cutting and
grading to create benches or pads for
additional or larger building sites shall be
avoided to the maximum extent feasible.
(See Figures 5 and 6)
(Figures 3-6)
C.
FIGURE
19.54.3:
Figure 19.54.3: Cutting and Grading
illustrates recommended development that
minimizes cuts.
CUTTING AND GRADING
How do we manage recommendations?
(enforce)
21 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Figure 3. Development Away from
Ridgelines: Recommended.
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Figure 4. Intrusive Ridgeline
Development: Generally Prohibited.
Figure 5. Minimized Cuts: Encouraged.
Figure 6. Excessive Cutting:
Discouraged.
3. Limits on Changing Natural Grade. The
original, natural grade of a lot shall not
be raised or lowered more than four feet
at any point for construction of any
D.
The original, natural grade of a lot must
not be raised or lowered more than four
(4) feet at any point for construction of
any structure or improvement, except:
22 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
structure or improvement, except:
Section
The site's original grade may be raised or
lowered six feet if a retaining wall is used
to reduce the steepness of man-made
a. slopes, provided that the retaining wall
complies with the requirements set forth
in this section.
The site's original grade may be raised or
lowered more than six feet with terracing,
b. as specified in subsection (C)(8)(b) of
this section.
4. Grading for Accessory Building Pads
Discouraged. Separate building pads for
accessory buildings and structures other
than garages, such as tennis courts,
swimming pools, outbuildings, and
similar facilities, shall be discouraged
except where the natural slope is twenty
percent or less.
E.
5. Limits on Graded or Filled Man-Made
Slopes.
F.
a.
Slopes of twenty-five percent or less are
greatly encouraged wherever possible.
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
1. The site's original grade may be raised or
lowered eight (8) feet if a retaining wall is
used to reduce the steepness of man-made
slopes, provided that the retaining wall
complies with the requirements of section
I below.
Refer to Greg’s presentation (Millcreek)
2. The site's original grade may be raised or
lowered more than six (6) feet with
terracing, as specified in section I below.
Should section I below be added next to
this section? Should the diagram be
moved up as well?
Separate building pads for accessory
buildings and structures other than
garages or barns, such as tennis courts,
swimming pools, outbuildings, and
similar facilities, are prohibited except
where the natural slope is twenty percent
(20%) or less.
BRC Recommendation
These guiding principles should be moved
toward the front of this section.
This ties back to amount of land
developed or disturbed on a lot. The
guiding objective is to move towards a
more natural/non-urbanized area.
Started here on 1/25/2013
The following limits apply to graded or
filled man-made slopes:
1. Slopes of twenty-five percent (25%) or
less are greatly encouraged wherever
possible.
Graded or filled man-made slopes shall
b. not exceed a slope of fifty percent.
2. Graded or filled man-made slopes must
not exceed a slope of fifty percent (50%).
Cut man-made surfaces or slopes shall
c. not exceed a slope of fifty percent unless
it is substantiated, on the basis of a site
3. Cut man-made surfaces or slopes must not
exceed a slope of fifty percent (50%)
unless it is substantiated, on the basis of a
23 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
investigation and submittal of a soils
engineering or geotechnical report
prepared and certified by a qualified
professional, that a cut at a steeper slope
will be stable and will not create a hazard
to public or private property.
Section
Camiros Text
site investigation and submittal of a soils
engineering or geotechnical report
prepared and certified by a qualified
professional, that a cut at a steeper slope
will be stable and will not create a hazard
to public or private property.
4. All cut, filled, and graded slopes must be
re-contoured to the natural, varied contour
of the surrounding terrain.
All cut, filled, and graded slopes shall be
recontoured to the natural, varied contour
d.
of the surrounding terrain.
6. Revegetation Required. Any slope
exposed or created in new development
shall be landscaped or revegetated
pursuant to the standards and provisions
of subsection H of this section, "Tree and
Vegetation Protection."
G.
Any slope exposed or created in new
development must be landscaped or revegetated pursuant to the standards and
provisions of this Section.
7. Excavation. Excavation for footings and
foundations shall be minimized to the
maximum extent feasible in order to
lessen site disturbance and ensure
compatibility with hillside and sloped
terrain. Intended excavation must be
supported by detailed engineering plans
submitted as part of the application for
site development plan approval.
H.
Excavation for footings and foundations
must be minimized in order to lessen site
disturbance and ensure compatibility with
hillside and sloped terrain. Intended
excavation must be supported by detailed
engineering plans submitted as part of the
application for site development plan
approval.
8. Retaining Walls. Use of retaining walls is
encouraged to reduce the steepness of
man-made slopes and to provide planting
pockets conducive to re-vegetation. (See
Figure 7)
I.
Use of retaining walls is encouraged to
reduce the steepness of man-made slopes
and to provide planting pockets conducive
to re-vegetation.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
This should stay.
Look at how this can be shortened and
preserve the value of lessened
disturbance.
Does the second sentence refer to all
excavation or only that associated with
footings, foundations and load bearing
applications? This is unclear.
Do not want to see this too broad, but
would like to see the building code
respected.
Using the word “encouraged” is stronger
than desired. Would like to see more
natural slopes encouraged. Retaining
walls should reflect more of a
safety/necessity aspect.
These walls need to blend in better with
the natural surroundings.
They should reflect the “feel” of the land
– is the surrounding land rolling hills or
cliffs? Needs more details.
24 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Original Text
Retaining walls may be permitted to
support steep slopes but shall not exceed
six feet in height from the finished grade,
except as used in conjunction with the
a. development of minor ski resort
improvements, or where terraced as
specified in subsection (C)(8)(b) of this
section.
Except as used in conjunction with the
development of minor ski resort
improvements, terracing shall be limited
to two tiers. The width of the terrace
between any two four-foot vertical
retaining walls shall be at least three feet.
Retaining walls higher than four feet
shall be separated from any other
retaining wall by a minimum of five
horizontal feet. Terraces created between
retaining walls shall be permanently
landscaped or revegetated pursuant to
b. subsection H of this section, "Tree and
Vegetation Protection."
Line by Line Analysis
Section
Camiros Text
1. If a single retaining wall is used, one (1)
vertical retaining wall up to eight (8) feet
in height is permitted to reduce excavation
and embankment.
BRC Discussion
2. Terracing is limited to two (2) walls with
a maximum vertical height of six (6) feet
each. The width of a terrace must be a
minimum of a one to one (1:1) ratio with
the height of the wall. Terraces are
measured from the back of the lower wall
to the face of the upper wall. Terraces
created between retaining walls must be
permanently landscaped or re-vegetated as
required by this Section.
Should section change to chapter?
BRC Recommendation
Upper wall or lower wall for ratio?
3.
Figure 19.54.4: Terracing and Retaining
Walls illustrates recommended terracing.
FIGURE 19.54.4: TERRACING &
RETAINING WALLS
25 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Retaining walls shall be faced with stone
or earth-colored materials similar to the
surrounding natural landscape. (See
Chapter 19.73, "Foothills and Canyons
Site Development and Design
Standards.")
Section
Camiros Text
3. Retaining walls must be faced with stone
(should be 4.) or earth-colored materials similar to the
surrounding natural landscape, as required
by the design standards of Foothills and
Canyons Overlay Zone. The use of plain
concrete retaining walls is prohibited.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Board formed decorative concrete could
be o.k. ? Some fake stone might not be
acceptable at the same time.
Prohibition is very strong language.
Purely aesthetic concern related to
visibility of retaining walls.
c.
Perhaps the best thing is to remove the
last sentence. The use of plain concrete
retaining walls is prohibited.
Need to be more supportive of how these
retaining walls blend into the
surroundings.
All retaining walls shall comply with the
Uniform Building Code, except that
when any provision of this section
d.
conflicts with any provision set forth in
the U.B.C., the more restrictive provision
shall apply.
4. All retaining walls must comply with the
(Should be 5.) International Building Code, except that
when any provision of this section
conflicts with any provision set forth in
the IBC, the more restrictive provision
applies.
26 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
(Figure 7)
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
(see figure 19.54.4 above)
BRC Discussion
Filling or dredging of water courses,
wetlands, gullies, stream beds, or
stormwater runoff channels is prohibited.
Bridge construction is allowed pursuant to
the standards set forth of this Section.
A prohibition does not match up with the
Army corps requirements/applicable law,
however this section should remain very
strong.
BRC Recommendation
Figure 7. Horizontal Separation Between
Retaining Walls 4 ft. high or less require
3 ft. horizontal separation walls higher
than 4 ft. but less than 6 ft. require 5 ft.
separation
9. Filling or Dredging of Waterways
Prohibited. Filling or dredging of water
courses, wetlands, gullies, stream beds,
or storm water runoff channels is
prohibited, except that bridge
construction is allowed pursuant to the
standards set forth in subsection (J)(7) of
this section.
10. Detention/Stormwater Facilities. Where
detention basins and other storm and
erosion control facilities may be required,
any negative visual and aesthetic impacts
on the natural landscape and topography
shall be minimized to the maximum
extent feasible. (See Figures 8 and 9)
J.
We also need to acknowledge that many
watercourses have been moved over time
and may need to be moved back to their
original place.
K.
Where detention basins and other storm
and erosion control facilities are required,
any negative visual and aesthetic impacts
on the natural landscape and topography
must be minimized. See Figure 19.54.5:
Recommended Detention Basin Treatment
which illustrates recommended treatment.
Note that applicable law that may have
certain allowances for reclamation,
extenuating circumstances, etc. (by
permit only)
Support use of more permeable surfaces
for driveways and paved surfaces
(residential). Larger uses will need to
address pollution control and may need
impermeable surfaces.
27 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
1. Detention basins must be free form,
following the natural landforms. If such
forms do not exist, the basin must be
shaped to emulate a naturally formed
depression.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
2. Redistributing soils from basin
construction to create natural landforms
around the perimeter of the basin is
encouraged. The side slopes are limited to
a maximum slope of 3:1. These forms
must be located to filter views or redirect
and soften the views of the basin. Total
screening of basins, is not required. Side
slopes must be varied to imitate natural
condition.
3. Naturalized planting themes are required
for basins. Trees and shrubs should be
grouped in informal patterns to emulate
the natural environment and cannot reduce
the volume of the basin.
4. The ground surface of the basin and
surrounding disturbed areas must be
covered with native grass mixture or other
appropriate groundcover. It is the intent to
provide for a sustainable natural planting
throughout the basin that does not require
regular mowing or fertilization.
5. Appropriate erosion control measures are
required on all slopes
(Figures 8-9)
FIGURE 19.54.5:
RECOMMENDED DETENTION
BASIN TREATMENT
Figure 8. Site Sensitive Treatment of
28 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Detention Basin
Section
Camiros Text
19.54.080
SITE ACCESS
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Figure 9. Undesirable Treatment around
Detention Basin
D.
Streets/Roads and General Site Access.
(See subsection E of this section
regarding driveway standards)
1. Access to a building or development site
shall be by road, street, or private access
road only.
A.
Access to a building or development site
must be by road, street, alley, private
access road or driveway.
2. Streets, roads, private access roads, and
other vehicular routes shall comply with
the Salt Lake County highway and fire
department ordinances.
B.
Streets, roads, alleys, private access roads
or driveways for motor vehicle access
must comply with the Salt Lake County
Highway and Fire Department ordinances.
3. With the exception of those provided in
conjunction with permitted minor ski
resort improvements, streets, roads,
private access roads, and other vehicular
routes shall not be allowed to cross
slopes between thirty and fifty percent
unless specifically authorized by the
planning commission, upon the favorable
recommendation of the development
services director and public works
engineer, after finding that all of the
following conditions and constraints are
applicable:
C.
Streets, roads, alleys, private access roads
or driveways for motor vehicle access are
not allowed to cross slopes between thirty
percent (30%) and fifty percent (50%)
unless specifically authorized by the
Planning Commission, upon the favorable
recommendation of the Director and
Public Works Engineer, after finding that
all of the following conditions and
constraints are met:
a. No alternate location for access is
Note that a separate resort area zone is
anticipated /recommended.
1. No alternate location for access is feasible
29 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
feasible or available;
Section
Camiros Text
or available.
No individual segment or increment of
the street, road, private access road, or
other vehicular route that will cross
b.
slopes between thirty percent and fifty
percent exceeds one hundred feet in
length;
2. No individual segment or increment of the
street, road, alley, private access road or
driveway for motor vehicle access that
will cross slopes between thirty percent
(30%) and fifty percent (50%) exceeds
one-hundred (100) feet in length.
The cumulative length of individual
segments or increments that will cross
slopes between thirty percent and fifty
c. percent does not exceed ten percent of the
total length of the street, road, private
access road, or other vehicular route; and
3. The cumulative length of individual
segments or increments that will cross
slopes between thirty percent (30%) and
fifty percent (50%) does not exceed ten
percent (10%) of the total length of the
street, road, alley, private access road or
driveway for motor vehicle access.
No significant adverse visual,
environmental, or safety impacts will
result from the crossing, either by virtue
of the design and construction of the
d. street, road, private access road, or other
vehicular route as originally proposed or
as a result of incorporation of remedial
improvements provided by the developer
to mitigate such impacts.
4. No significant adverse environmental or
safety impacts will result from the
crossing, either by design or construction
as originally proposed or as a result of
incorporation of remedial improvements
provided by the developer to mitigate
such impacts.
4. Under no circumstances other than for
permitted minor ski resort improvements
shall any street, road, private access road,
or other vehicular route cross slopes
greater than fifty percent.
D.
Under no circumstances shall any street,
road, alley, private access road, access
corridor or driveway for motor vehicle,
maintenance or other access cross slopes
greater than fifty percent (50%).
5. Streets, roads, private access roads, and
other vehicular routes shall to the
maximum extent feasible follow natural
contour lines. (See Figures 10 and 11)
E.
Streets, roads, alleys, private access roads
or driveways for motor vehicle access
must follow natural contour lines to the
maximum extent feasible. If the natural
contour pattern does not facilitate a gain
in elevation or access to the development
site, a private access road or driveway
may be designed with a slope not to
exceed the requirements set forth in Title
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Roads change elevation.
Keep the main elements that are here.
Feasibility needs to be better defined.
30 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
14 of the County Code. Figure 19.54.6:
Recommended Access Route
Configuration illustrates the access route
following natural contours.
(Figures 10-11)
FIGURE 19.54.6:
RECOMMENDED ACCESS
ROUTE CONFIGURATION
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Need to address the disturbance limits and
how this will affect matching driveways
with natural contours.
Not thrilled with this picture.
Figure 10. Access Route
Figure 11. Access Route Improperly
Following Natural Contours Cutting
Cross Slope
6. Grading for streets, roads, private access
roads, and other vehicular routes shall be
limited to the cartway portion of the
right-of-way, plus up to an additional ten
feet on either side of the cartway as
needed, except that when developing
access on slopes in excess of twenty-five
percent, only the cartway right-of-way
shall be graded plus the minimum area
required for any necessary curb, gutter, or
sidewalk improvements. The remainder
of the access right-of-way shall be left
undisturbed to the maximum extent
feasible.
F.
Grading for streets, roads, alleys, private
access roads or driveways for motor
vehicle access is limited to the cartway
portion of the right-of-way, plus up to an
additional ten (10) feet on either side of
the cartway as needed. However, when
developing access on slopes in excess of
twenty-five percent (25%), only the
cartway may be graded plus the minimum
area required for any additional
improvements, such as curb, gutter or
sidewalk. The remainder of the access
right-of-way must be left undisturbed. For
the purposes of this section, a cartway is
defined as the paved portion of a street,
31 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
E.
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
7. Roads, other vehicular routes, or trails
may be required to provide access or
maintain existing access to adjacent lands
for vehicles, pedestrians, emergency
services, and essential service and
maintenance equipment.
Driveways. Driveways shall be provided
to ensure safe, convenient, and adequate
access to individual buildings. Driveway
access to a development shall be
consistent with the Salt Lake County
community general plans and highway
plans, as amended. In addition, provision
of driveway access is subject to the
following requirements:
Section
Camiros Text
road, private access road or driveway that
is used for vehicle travel, excluding any
paved or unpaved shoulder.
G.
Streets or roads may be required to
provide access or maintain existing access
to adjacent lands for vehicles, pedestrians,
emergency services, and essential service
and maintenance equipment.
H.
Private access roads and driveways must
be provided to ensure safe, convenient and
adequate access to individual buildings.
Driveway access to a development must
be consistent with the Salt Lake County
community general plans and highway
plans, as amended. In addition, provision
of private access road and driveway
access is subject to the following
requirements:
1. All driveways shall comply with the Salt
Lake County highway and fire
department ordinances.
1. All private access roads and driveways
must comply with the Salt Lake County
Highway and Fire Department ordinances.
2. Driveways longer than one-hundred, fifty
feet in length shall meet the following
requirements:
2. Private access roads and driveways
greater than one-hundred fifty (150) feet
in length must meet the following
requirements:
Provision of a turn-around that meets the
county's road/street and fire department
a.
standards; and
Provision of a turnaround that meets the
County's road/street and fire department
a. standards.
Provision of an adequate number of
spaced turn-outs along the length of the
driveway, as determined by the public
b.
works engineer in consultation with the
Salt Lake County fire department.
Provision of an adequate number of
spaced turn-outs along the length of the
private access road or driveway, as
b. determined by the Public Works Engineer
in consultation with the Salt Lake County
Fire Department.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
32 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
3. With the exception of those provided in
conjunction with permitted minor ski
resort improvements, driveways longer
than fifty feet in length shall not be
allowed to cross slopes between thirty
and fifty percent unless specifically
authorized by the planning commission,
upon the favorable recommendation of
the development services director and
public works engineer, after finding that
all of the following conditions and
constraints are applicable:
a.
Section
Camiros Text
A Code Modification Approval in writing
that specifies any additional requirements
from the Unified Fire Authority must be
c.
provided by the applicant if variation from
these standards is being sought.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
(Removed) (Ski Resort alternatives)
No alternate location for access is
feasible or available;
No individual segment or increment of
the driveway that will cross slopes
b. between thirty percent and fifty percent
exceeds one hundred feet in length;
The cumulative length of individual
segments or increments of the driveway
that will cross slopes between thirty
c.
percent and fifty percent does not exceed
ten percent of the driveway's total length;
and
No significant adverse visual,
environmental, or safety impacts will
result from the driveway crossing, either
d. as originally proposed or as a result of
incorporation of remedial improvements
provided by the developer to mitigate
such impacts.
4. Under no circumstances other than for
33 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
permitted minor ski resort improvements
shall any driveway cross slopes greater
than fifty percent.
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
5. Driveways shall to the maximum extent
feasible follow natural contour lines.
(Fig. 10 and 11)
6. Driveways may be shared by no more
than two residential units, or by two or
more principal nonresidential uses
provided such nonresidential uses
together do not exceed a total of twentyfive thousand square feet of gross floor
area. Shared driveways are greatly
encouraged.
3. Driveways may be shared by adjacent
residential dwelling or non-residential
uses. Shared driveways are encouraged.
7. Driveways to a building site shall have
direct access to a public street or to a
private right-of-way approved by the
planning commission. Finished driveway
grades shall comply with the following:
4. Private access roads and driveways to a
building site must have direct access to a
public street or to a private right-of-way
approved by the Planning Commission.
5. Finished grades must comply with the
following:
Driveways shall have a maximum grade
of twelve percent, or as determined by
the public works engineer on a case-bycase basis based on health and safety
concerns and the need for adequate
a. access for county service providers. In no
case, however, shall the public works
engineer approve a maximum grade
greater than fifteen percent. Driveways
shall have a maximum grade of fifteen
percent.
Private access roads and driveways are
limited to a maximum grade of twelve
percent (12%), or as determined by the
Public Works Engineer on a case-by-case
basis based on health and safety concerns
and the need for adequate access for
a.
County service providers. In no case,
however, may the Public Works Engineer
approve a maximum grade greater than
fifteen percent (15%).
Driveway grades within twenty feet of
the roadway shall not exceed ten percent.
See Highway Ordinance.
Private access road and driveway grades
b. within twenty (20) feet of the roadway are
limited to ten percent (10%) slope.
b.
34 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
F.
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
Trail Access.
19.54.090
TRAILS
1. Dedication Required. For the purpose of
providing trails necessary for public
access to public lands or trails shown on
the county general plans, the Salt Lake
County regional trail plan, the Salt Lake
County trail access plan, or applicable
community general plans, all
development in the foothills and canyons
overlay zone shall be required to offer a
dedication of an amount of land that is
roughly proportional to the demand for
open space, recreational facilities, trails,
or public access to public lands or trails
generated by the proposed development.
The county shall have the sole option
whether to accept a reasonable money fee
in lieu of land dedication.
A.
For the purpose of providing trails
necessary for public access to public lands
or trails shown on the County general
plans, the Salt Lake County Regional
Trail Plan, the Salt Lake County Trail
Access Plan, or applicable community
general plans, all development in the
Foothills and Canyons Overlay Zone is
required to offer a dedication of an
amount of land that is roughly
proportional to the demand for natural
open space, recreational facilities, trails,
or public access to public lands or trails
generated by the proposed development.
The County has the sole option whether to
accept a reasonable money fee-in-lieu of
land dedication.
2. Verification Required. All land offered
for dedication for trails or public access
to trails shall be verified on the ground by
the development services division before
approval of the site plan. Land offered for
dedication for trails shall be located so
that:
B.
All land offered for dedication for trails or
public access to trails must be verified on
the ground by the Director before
approval of the site plan. The County has
the sole option of rejecting the applicant's
offered land dedication and instead
selecting more suitable land, based on the
below factors, applicable plans,
opportunities to link to existing or planned
trails and public lands, and/or suitability
of the terrain for trail use. Land offered
for dedication for trails must be located so
that:
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
35 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
a.
b.
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Proposed trail construction and
maintenance is feasible; and
Section
Side slopes do not exceed seventy
percent; and
Camiros Text
1. Proposed trail construction and
maintenance is feasible.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
2. Side slopes do not exceed seventy percent
(70%).
Rock cliffs and other insurmountable
physical obstructions are avoided.
The county shall have the sole option of
rejecting the applicant's offered land
dedication and instead select more
c.
suitable land, based on the above factors,
applicable plans, opportunities to link to
existing or planned trails and public
lands, and/or suitability of the terrain for
trail use.
3. Rock cliffs and other insurmountable
physical obstructions are avoided.
3. Nature of Interest Dedicated. At the
county's sole option, dedications for trails
or public access may be of a fee or lessthan-fee interest to either the county,
another unit of government, or nonprofit
land conservation organization approved
by the county.
C.
At the County's sole option, dedications
for trails or public access may be of a fee
or less-than-fee interest to either the
County, another unit of government, or
non-profit land conservation organization
approved by the County.
4. Bonus Density Allowed for Certain
Dedications. The planning commission
may allow up to twenty-five percent of
the maximum allowable density
attributable to areas of the site with
greater than thirty percent slope to be
transferred to the developable areas of the
site if the applicant shows that the offered
dedication is beyond what would be
roughly proportional to the demand for
such trails or trail access generated by the
proposed development. The planning
commission may reduce the applicable
minimum lot area requirement within the
site's developable area if necessary to
D.
The Planning Commission may allow up
to twenty-five percent (25%) of the
maximum allowable density attributable
to areas of the site with greater than thirty
percent (30%) slope to be transferred to
the developable areas of the site if the
applicant shows that the offered
dedication is beyond what would be
roughly proportional to the demand for
such trails or trail access generated by the
proposed development. The Planning
Commission may reduce the applicable
minimum lot area requirement within the
site's developable area if necessary to
accommodate the transferred density.
36 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
accommodate the transferred density.
5. Liability Releases. Liability releases
related to dedicated lands shall be
prepared for a landowner in accord with
the State Landowner Liability Act of
1987, as amended.
G.
Fences.
Section
E.
19.54.100
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Liability releases related to dedicated
lands must be prepared for a landowner in
accord with the State Landowner Liability
Act of 1987, as amended.
FENCES
1. No fence shall be constructed or installed
unless shown on the approved site
development plan.
A.
No fence may be constructed or installed
unless shown on an approved site
development plan.
2. No fence in excess of forty-two inches in
height shall be constructed or installed
outside the designated limits of
disturbance on a site, except as required
by the county (such as fenced corrals for
horses or other animals). (See also
Section 14.12.040 of this code, "Clear
view of intersecting streets.")
B.
No fence in excess of forty-two (42)
inches in height may be constructed or
installed outside the designated limits of
disturbance on a site, unless required by
the County, such as fenced corrals for
horses or other animals. Fences are
subject to Section 19.46.050(A)(4)
(Intersecting Streets and Clear Visibility).
3. Fences in the front yards and along
roadways shall not exceed forty-two
inches in height.
C.
Fences in front yards and along roadways
must not exceed forty-two (42) inches in
height.
4. Fences in identified wildlife corridors
shall be strongly discouraged, but in no
case shall exceed forty-two inches in
height.
D.
Fences in identified wildlife corridors are
strongly discouraged, but in no case may
exceed forty-two (42) inches in height.
37 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
5. Fences shall conform to the standards set
forth in Chapter 19.73, "Foothills and
Canyons Development Standards."
H.
Section
E.
Tree and Vegetation Protection.
1. Purposes. Protection of existing tree and
vegetation cover is intended to:
Camiros Text
Fences must conform to the design
standards of this section.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
19.54.110
TREE AND
VEGETATION PROTECTION
A.
Purpose
Protection of existing tree and vegetation
cover is intended to:
a.
Preserve the visual and aesthetic qualities
of the County's foothills and canyons;
1. Preserve the visual and aesthetic qualities
of the County's foothills and canyons.
Encourage site design techniques that
b. preserve the natural environment and
enhance the developed environment;
c.
2. Encourage site design techniques that
preserve the natural environment and
enhance the developed environment.
3. Control erosion, slippage and sediment
run-off into streams and waterways.
Control erosion, slippage, and sediment
run-off into streams and waterways;
d. Increase slope stability;
4. Increase slope stability.
5. Protect wildlife habitat and migration
corridors.
Protect wildlife habitat and migration
e.
corridors; and
Conserve energy, in proximity to
f. structures, by reducing building heating
and cooling costs.
2. Application and Exemptions. The
provisions of this section shall apply to
6. Conserve energy, in proximity to
structures, by reducing building heating
and cooling costs.
B.
Applicability
38 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Original Text
all development on real property that is
located in the foothills and canyons
overlay zone, except that the following
developments and activities shall be
exempt from this section:
The removal of dead or naturally fallen
trees or vegetation, or such that the
a.
county finds to be a threat to the public
health, safety, or welfare;
Line by Line Analysis
Section
Camiros Text
These provisions apply to all development
in the Foothills and Canyons Overlay
Zone, with the following exceptions:
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
1. The removal of dead or naturally fallen
trees or vegetation, or trees or vegetation
that the County finds to be a threat to the
public health, safety and welfare.
The selective and limited removal of
trees or vegetation necessary to obtain
b. clear visibility. at driveways,
intersections, or for the purpose of
performing authorized field survey work;
2. The selective and limited removal of trees
or vegetation necessary to obtain clear
visibility at driveways, intersections or for
the purpose of performing authorized field
survey work.
The removal of trees or vegetation on
land zoned or lawfully used for
agricultural and forestry activities,
including tree farms and approved
forestry management practices. In the
event a site is substantially cleared of
c.
trees pursuant to such legitimate
activities, however, no development or
site plan applications for other types of
development shall be accepted by the
county for thirty-six months from the
date the clearing is completed;
3. The removal of trees or vegetation on land
zoned or lawfully used for agricultural
and forestry activities, including tree
farms and approved forestry management
practices. In the event a site is
substantially cleared of trees pursuant to
such legitimate activities, no development
or site plan applications for other types of
development will be accepted by the
County for thirty-six (36) months from the
date the clearing is completed
The selective and limited removal of
d. trees and vegetation in conjunction with
permitted minor ski resort improvements.
3. Tree/Vegetation Removal.
Outside the Limits of Disturbance, No
trees or vegetation shall be removed
a. outside the approved limits of
disturbance except as specifically
exempted in this section or chapter.
C.
Tree/Vegetation Removal
1. Outside the Limits of Disturbance
No trees or vegetation may be removed
outside the approved limits of disturbance
unless specifically exempted by this
Section.
39 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Within the Limits of Disturbance.
Significant trees (as defined in Section
19.72.070) removed from within the
b.
limits of disturbance shall be replaced as
set forth in subsection (H)(4) of this
section.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
2. Within the Limits of Disturbance
Significant trees removed from within the
limits of disturbance must be replaced as
set forth in this Section.
Wildfire Hazards and Tree/Vegetation
Removal. In areas determined by County
Fire Prevention officials as being highly
susceptible to fire hazards, vegetation up
to thirty feet from the perimeter of a
structure shall be selectively pruned and
thinned for fire protection purposes.
3. Wildfire Hazards and Tree/Vegetation
Removal
Defensible space is defined as the
required space between a structure and
wildland area that, under normal
conditions, creates a sufficient buffer to
slow or halt the spread of wildfire to a
structure. Appropriate defensible space
surrounding a structure must be
established in accordance with fire code,
Wildland Urban Interface Code and other
applicable standards. A copy of the
approved fire protection plan shall be
submitted to Planning and Development
Services.
c.
Tree/Vegetation Removal for Views
Prohibited. No trees or vegetation shall
be removed for the purpose of providing
d.
open views to or from structures on a
site.
4. Replacement of Significant Trees. Except
in conjunction with permitted minor ski
resort improvements, when a significant
tree or trees, as defined in Section
19.72.070 of this chapter, are removed
from either inside or outside the
established limits of disturbance, the
applicant or developer shall replace such
tree(s) on the lot, either inside or outside
Camiros Text
4. Tree/Vegetation Removal for Views
Prohibited
No trees or vegetation may be removed
solely for the purpose of providing open
views to or from structures on a site.
D.
Replacement of Significant Trees
40 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
the established limits of disturbance,
according to the following schedule and
requirements:
A significant deciduous tree that is
a. removed shall be replaced by three trees
with a minimum size of two and one-half
inch caliper.
A significant coniferous tree that is
b. removed shall be replaced by two trees
with a minimum height of eight feet.
Section
Camiros Text
1. When a significant tree is removed from
either inside or outside the established
limits of disturbance, the applicant or
developer must replace such tree(s) on the
lot, either inside or outside the established
limits of disturbance, according to the
following schedule and requirements:
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
A significant tree that is removed must be
replaced by two (2) trees with a minimum
size of two and one-half (2) inch caliper
for deciduous trees and a minimum height
of six (6) feet for coniferous trees in
locations on the lot that are appropriate,
a. feasible and practical and if it complies
with fire requirements and standards.
Acceptable replacement trees shall be
determined by a person or firm qualified
c.
by training or experience to have expert
knowledge of the subject.
Replacement trees shall be maintained
through an establishment period of at
least three years, except that singlefamily dwellings shall have an applicable
d. establishment period of only one year.
The applicant shall post a bond
guaranteeing the survival and health of
all replacement trees during the
establishment period.
Replacement trees must be maintained
through an establishment period of at least
two (2) years. The applicant must post a
bond guaranteeing the survival and health
of all replacement trees during the
b. establishment period.
41 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
5. Revegetation and Land Reclamation
Plan.
Section
E.
Camiros Text
2. If the remainder of the lot outside the
permitted limits of disturbance is heavily
wooded, defined as areas of trees whose
canopies cover eighty percent (80%) of
the area, and cannot accommodate the
planting of replacement trees, replacement
trees may be reduced or waived, subject to
review and approval by the Zoning
Administrator.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Revegetation and Land Reclamation
Plan
On a parcel of land that has been or will
be altered from its natural condition by
man-made activities, a revegetation and
land reclamation plan prepared and
certified by a qualified professional may
a. be required for review and approval by
the development services director.
1. On a parcel of land that has been or will
be altered from its natural condition by
man-made activities, a revegetation and
land reclamation plan prepared and
certified by a qualified professional may
be required for review and approval by the
Director. The plan must indicate a
timeframe for revegetation that is
acceptable to the County and that takes
into account optimal seasonal growing
conditions.
The revegetation and land reclamation
plan shall depict the type, size, and
location of any vegetation and trees being
planted and illustrate how the site will be
b.
recontoured in such a fashion and with
sufficient topsoil to ensure that
revegetation is feasible.
2. The revegetation and land reclamation
plan must depict the type, size and
location of any vegetation and trees being
planted and illustrate how the site will be
recontoured in such a fashion and with
sufficient topsoil to ensure that
revegetation is feasible.
Any slope exposed or created in new
development shall be landscaped or
c. revegetated with native or adapted trees
and other native or adapted plant
material. New vegetation shall be
equivalent to or exceed the amount and
3. Any slope exposed or created in new
development must be landscaped or
revegetated with native or adapted trees
and other native or adapted plant material.
New vegetation must be equivalent to or
exceed the amount and erosion-control
42 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
erosion-control characteristics of the
original vegetation cover in order to
mitigate adverse environmental and
visual effects.
Section
Camiros Text
characteristics of the original vegetation
cover in order to mitigate adverse
environmental and visual effects.
On man-made slopes of twenty-five
percent or greater, plant materials with
deep rooting characteristics shall be
selected that will minimize erosion and
d. reduce surface runoff. The planting basin
should be kept level with a raised berm
around the base of the plant to help retain
moisture.
4. On man-made slopes of twenty-five
percent (25%) or greater, plant materials
with deep rooting characteristics must be
selected to minimize erosion and reduce
surface runoff. The planting basin should
be kept level with a raised berm around
the base of the plant to help retain
moisture.
To the maximum extent feasible, topsoil
that is removed during construction shall
e. be conserved for later use on areas
requiring revegetation or landscaping,
such as cut-and-fill slopes.
5. Topsoil that is removed during
construction must be conserved for later
use on areas requiring revegetation or
landscaping, such as cut-and-fill slopes.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
The plan shall also indicate a time frame
for revegetation that is acceptable to the
f.
county and that takes into account
optimal seasonal growing conditions.
6. Tree/Vegetation Protection During
Construction and Grading Activities.
F.
Tree/Vegetation Protection During
Construction and Grading Activities
Limits of disturbance as established in
accordance with the provisions of Section
19.72.040 shall be shown on the final
plans for development and shall be
clearly delineated on site with fencing or
a.
other materials or methods approved by
the development services director prior to
the commencement of excavation,
grading, or construction activities on the
site.
1. Limits of disturbance, as established in
accordance with this Section, must be
shown on the final plans for development
and clearly delineated on site with fencing
or other materials or methods approved by
the Director prior to the commencement
of excavation, grading or construction
activities on the site.
b. Within the limits of disturbance, fencing,
2. Within the limits of disturbance, fencing,
43 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
at a minimum, should be placed around
each significant tree and around stands of
twelve or more smaller trees a distance
equal to the size of the individual or
outermost tree's drip zone. (see Section
19.72.070, Significant Trees)
Section
Camiros Text
at a minimum, must be placed around
each significant tree, which will not be
removed, and around stands of twelve
(12) or more smaller trees a distance equal
to the size of the individual or outermost
tree's drip zone. No construction,
grading, equipment or material storage, or
any other activity is allowed within the
drip zone, and the fencing must remain in
place until all land alteration, construction
and development activities are completed.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
For purposes of this subsection, the drip
zone is calculated by measuring the
diameter of the tree at breast height.
Every inch of tree trunk diameter, for
example, equates to one foot of drip zone.
i.
No construction, grading, equipment or
material storage, or any other activity
shall be allowed within this area, and the
fencing shall remain in place until all
land alteration, construction, and
development activities are completed.
ii.
If it is necessary to fill over the root zone,
compacted soils shall be avoided by
c. sandwiching fabric, rocks and more
fabric under the area to be filled.
3. If it is necessary to fill over the root zone,
compacted soils must be avoided by
sandwiching fabric, rocks and more fabric
under the area to be filled.
Fill placed directly on the roots shall not
d. exceed a maximum of six inches in
depth.
If fill creates a tree well or depression
around a tree or shrubs, such area shall be
drained so that the vegetation is not
e.
drowned by the pooling of rainfall or
irrigation.
4. If fill creates a tree well or depression
around a tree or shrubs, such area must be
drained so that the vegetation is not
drowned by the pooling of rainfall or
irrigation.
44 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
If a tree's roots must be cut, the branches
shall be trimmed by an amount equal to
the percent of roots that were lost. Roots
shall be pruned cleanly prior to digging
and not ripped off by heavy equipment.
Cutting more than thirty percent of the
f.
roots endangers the health of the tree, and
over forty percent affects the tree's
stability.
Section
Utility trenches near trees should be
avoided. If a line must be near a tree,
g.
tunneling, auguring, or other mitigation
measures shall be used.
I.
J.
Camiros Text
5. If a significant tree that will not be
removed has roots that are cut, the
branches must be trimmed by an amount
equal to the percent of roots that were lost.
Cutting more than thirty percent (30%) is
prohibited. Roots must be pruned cleanly
prior to digging and not ripped off by
heavy equipment. If the tree whose roots
have been cut dies within a two (2) year
period, the replacement provision in
section D above applies.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
6. Utility trenches near trees should be
avoided. If a line must be near a tree,
tunneling, auguring, or other mitigation
measures shall be used.
Natural Hazards. All development in the
foothills and canyons overlay zone shall
comply with the requirements and
standards set forth in Chapter 19.75,
"Natural Hazard Areas." A natural
hazards report required by Chapter 19.75
may be combined with any of the plans
and reports required by the provisions of
this chapter, including geotechnical,
slope, and grading reports. The county
geologist shall review all natural hazards
reports and submit his recommendations
in writing to the development services
director or planning commission prior to
final action on the site plan for
development.
19.54.120
Stream Corridor and Wetlands
Protection.
19.54.130
NATURAL HAZARDS
A natural hazards report is required and
may be combined with any of the plans
and reports required by the provisions of
this section, including geotechnical, slope,
soils, and grading reports. The County
will review all natural hazards reports and
implementation of the recommendations
in the report or resulting from review of
the report by the County may be required
to be incorporated into the project plans
and/or final conditions for approval prior
to final action on the site plan. The
County may charge an additional fee for
the cost incurred from reviewing the
reports which may include the use of third
party personnel to complete the review.
The applicant will be responsible for the
third party fees as applicable.
STREAM CORRIDOR AND
WETLANDS PROTECTION
45 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
1. Purposes. The following requirements
and standards are intended to promote,
preserve, and enhance the important
hydrologic, biological, ecological,
aesthetic, recreational, and educational
functions that stream corridors,
associated riparian areas, and wetlands
provide.
A.
2. Boundary Delineation. Unless previously
delineated by Salt Lake County,
boundaries for stream corridors and
wetland areas shall be delineated
according to the following provisions:
B.
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Purpose
The following requirements and standards
are intended to promote, preserve, and
enhance the important hydrologic,
biological, ecological, aesthetic,
recreational, and educational functions
that stream corridors, associated riparian
areas, and wetlands provide.
Applicability
Unless previously delineated by Salt Lake
County, boundaries for stream corridors
and wetland areas are delineated
according to the following provisions:
Stream corridor and wetland area
delineation shall be performed by a
qualified professional that has
demonstrated experience necessary to
a.
conduct site analysis. Delineations shall
be subject to the approval of the
development services director.
1. Stream corridor and wetland area
delineation must be performed by a
qualified engineer or other qualified
professional with the demonstrated
experience and expertise to conduct the
site analysis required for this type of
work. Delineations are subject to the
approval of the Director.
Stream corridors shall be delineated at
the ordinary high-water mark as defined
in Section 19.72.070. Stream corridors
shall not include ephemeral streams or
b.
ditches that are commonly known to be
irrigation ditches and that do not
contribute to the preservation and
enhancement of fisheries or wildlife.
2. Stream corridors must be delineated at the
ordinary high-water mark. Stream
corridors do not include ditches that are
commonly known to be irrigation ditches
and that do not contribute to the
preservation and enhancement of fisheries
or wildlife.
Boundary delineation of wetlands shall
be established using the Federal Manual
for Identifying and Delineating
c.
Jurisdictional Wetlands, dated January
10, 1989, and jointly published by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the
3. Boundary delineation of wetlands are
established using the Federal Manual for
Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional
Wetlands, dated January 10, 1989, and
jointly published by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S.
46 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the
U.S. Soil Conservation Service.
Subsequent revisions of the federal
manual shall not be incorporated into this
delineation methodology. Although the
federal manual may change in the future,
the county will use this referenced
manual as a basis for wetland
determination.
Section
3. Prohibited Activities. No person shall
engage in any activity that will disturb,
remove, fill, dredge, clear, destroy, or
alter any area, including vegetation,
within stream corridors, wetlands, and
their setbacks as set forth below, except
as may be expressly allowed in this
chapter.
C.
4. Minimum Setbacks. Except where the
city of Salt Lake, pursuant to its
recognized extraterritorial jurisdiction,
has defined a greater setback from
watershed resources (including stream
corridors and wetland areas), the
following minimum setbacks shall be
required:
D.
Stream Corridors. All buildings,
accessory structures, leach fields, and
parking lots shall be set back at least one
hundred feet horizontally, (plan view)
a.
from the ordinary high-water mark of
stream corridors. (See Figure 12)
Camiros Text
Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S.
Soil Conservation Service. Subsequent
revisions of the federal manual are not
incorporated into this delineation
methodology. Although the federal
manual may change in the future, the
County will use this referenced manual as
a basis for wetland determination.
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Prohibited Activities
No person may engage in any activity that
will disturb, remove, fill, dredge, clear,
destroy or alter any area, including
vegetation, within stream corridors,
wetlands and their setbacks as set forth
below, unless specifically allowed in this
Section.
Setbacks
1. Buildings
Setbacks from property lines are
established by the underlying zone. If no
setbacks are stated, buildings closer than
ten (10) feet to the property line must
demonstrate that they do not place
additional burden on neighboring
properties by addressing the following
factors: snow load, drainage, access, fire
protection, and building code.
2. Perennial Stream Corridors
All buildings, accessory structures, leach
fields, and parking lots must be set back at
least one-hundred (100) feet horizontally,
(plan view) from the ordinary high-water
mark of perennial stream corridors. (See
Figure 19.54.7: Setback from Stream
Corridor)
47 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
(Figure 12)
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
FIGURE
19.54.7:
Camiros Text
SETBACK FROM STREAM
CORRIDOR
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Figure 12. Setback from Stream
Corridor
Wetlands. All buildings, accessory
structures, leach fields, and parking areas
or lots shall be set back at least fifty feet
b.
horizontally (map distance), from the
delineated edge of a wetland.
Open Space/Landscaping Credit for
Setback Areas. All setback areas shall be
credited toward any relevant private open
c.
space or landscaping requirements, but
shall not be credited toward trail access
dedication requirements.
3. Wetlands
All buildings, accessory structures, leach
fields, and parking areas or lots must be
set back at least fifty (50) feet horizontally
(map distance), from the delineated edge
of a wetland.
(see #5 below)
48 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Original Text
5. Ephemeral Streams—Prohibited
Activities. Development shall not be
permitted within the channel of an
ephemeral stream, as defined by its
ordinary high water mark, except that the
planning commission upon the
recommendation of the development
services director may grant waivers or
modifications from this prohibition upon
a finding that the development will have
no adverse environmental impacts, or that
such impacts will be substantially
mitigated. The preceding
notwithstanding, development within Salt
Lake City's watershed areas, as
delineated on maps incorporated by
reference in Section 19.72.020(B)(2) of
this chapter and on file with the Salt Lake
County planning and development
services division, shall in no instance be
permitted closer than fifty feet of the
channel of an ephemeral stream, as
defined by its ordinary high water mark.
Line by Line Analysis
Section
Camiros Text
4. Ephemeral Streams
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
All buildings, accessory structures, leach
fields, and parking areas or lots must be
set back at least fifty (50) feet of the
channel of an ephemeral stream, as
defined by its ordinary high water mark.
For properties not located within the Salt
Lake City Public Utilities Watershed, the
Zoning Administrator may grant
modifications to this prohibition for
permitted uses or the Planning
Commission, upon the recommendation of
the Zoning Administrator, may grant
modifications to this prohibition for
conditional uses upon a finding that the
development will have no adverse
environmental impacts or that such
impacts will be substantially mitigated.
5. Natural Open Space/Landscape Credit
for Setback Areas
All setback areas are credited toward any
relevant private natural open space or
landscape requirements, but are not
credited toward trail access dedication
requirements.
6. Preservation of Vegetation. All existing
vegetation within the stream corridor or
wetland setback area shall be preserved,
and where necessary to provide adequate
screening or to repair damaged riparian
areas, supplemented with additional
native or adapted planting and
landscaping.
F.
Preservation of Vegetation
All existing vegetation within the stream
corridor or wetland setback area shall be
preserved, and where necessary to provide
adequate screening or to repair damaged
riparian areas, supplemented with
additional native or adapted planting and
landscaping.
49 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
7. Bridges. The construction of bridges over
a stream corridor and within the stream
setback area is permitted provided such
bridges are planned and constructed so as
to minimize impacts on the stream
corridor. (See Section 17.08.090,
"Replacement and new bridge and culvert
design criteria," and Section 19.73.080C,
"Bridges for Stream Crossings."
K.
Section
G.
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Bridges
The construction of bridges over a stream
corridor and within the stream setback
area is permitted provided such bridges
are planned and constructed to minimize
impacts on the stream corridor.
Wildlife Habitat Protection.
1. Intent and Purpose. Salt Lake County
finds that its foothills and canyon areas
provide important wildlife habitat for a
wide variety of animal and bird species.
As a result of past development activities,
many habitat areas have been
significantly impaired, altered,
fragmented, and in some cases destroyed.
In combination with the tree/vegetation
and stream corridor/wetlands protection
standards set forth above, the following
requirements have been developed to
promote and preserve valuable wildlife
habitats and to protect them from adverse
effects and potentially irreversible
impacts.
2. Applicability. The requirements of this
subsection shall apply to development on
real property in the foothills and canyons
overlay zone that contains wildlife
habitats designated as "critical
summer/winter [value] use," as shown on
the Salt Lake County wildlife habitat
maps, as amended, on file with the Salt
Lake County planning and development
services division.
50 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
3. Development Limitations in Areas of
Critical Habitat. All development subject
to this subsection shall, to the maximum
extent feasible, incorporate the following
principles in establishing the limits of
disturbance and siting buildings,
structures, roads, trails, and other similar
facilities:
Maintain buffers between areas
dominated by human activities and core
areas of wildlife habitat, with more
a. intense human activities, such as
automobile and pedestrian traffic,
relegated to more distant zones away
from the core habitat areas.
b.
Facilitate wildlife movement across areas
dominated by human activities by:
Maintaining connections between open
space parcels on adjacent and near-by
parcels;
i.
Locating roads and recreational trails
away from natural travel corridors used
by wildlife such as riparian areas;
ii.
Minimizing fencing types that inhibit the
movement of wildlife species; and
iii.
Minimizing the visual contrast between
human-dominated areas, including
individual lots, and less disturbed terrain
in surrounding areas (for example, by
retaining or planting native vegetation
and trees around a house or accessory
structure).
iv.
c. Mimic features of the local natural
landscape in developed areas by:
51 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Retaining pre-development, high-quality
habitat to the maximum extent feasible,
including large patches of natural,
vegetated areas that have not yet been
fragmented by roads or residential
development;
i.
Minimizing levels of disturbance to trees,
the understory, and other structural
landscape features during construction;
ii.
Designing house lots in a fashion
consistent with local natural habitats, for
example, by preserving and landscaping
with natural, native vegetation; and
iii.
Enhancing the habitat value of degraded
pre-development landscapes with
selective plantings.
iv.
4. Referral Requirements and Planning
Commission Action.
Site development plan applications
subject to this subsection shall be referred
to the Utah Division of Wildlife
Resources for review, comment, and
recommendations. The Utah Division of
Wildlife Resources' comments and
a.
recommendations shall be incorporated
into the staff report or in some other way
transmitted in writing to the development
services director (for permitted uses) or
to the planning commission (for
conditional uses and subdivisions) prior
to final action on submitted proposals.
52 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
The development services director and
planning commission shall give special
consideration to wildlife habitats that are
determined by the Utah Division of
b. Wildlife Resources in their review to be
of unique or critical value, and may
require project modifications or special
conditions recommended to mitigate
impacts on critical wildlife habitat.
The planning commission may deny a
development proposal if it finds that the
proposed development will have
c.
significant adverse impacts on critical
wildlife habitat that cannot be adequately
mitigated.
Permitted Uses. If the development
services director finds that a proposal for
a permitted use may have significant
adverse impacts on critical wildlife
habitat that cannot be adequately
mitigated, the site development plan shall
be referred to the planning commission
for final action.
i.
Definition. For purposes of this
subsection, "significant adverse impact
on critical wildlife habitat" means
elimination, reduction, and/or
fragmentation of wildlife habitat to the
point that viability of an individual
species is threatened in the county and
the diversity of wildlife species occurring
in the county is reduced.
ii.
L.
Site Development and Design Standards.
In addition to the development standards
set forth in this section, all residential and
commercial development within the
53 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
M.
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
foothills and canyons overlay zone shall
comply with the development design
standards set forth in Chapter 19.73,
"Foothills and Canyons Site
Development and Design Standards." To
the extent that standards in Chapter 19.73
conflict with the requirements set forth in
this chapter, the more restrictive
provision shall apply.
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Traffic.
1. Impact Study Required. Unless waived, a
traffic and parking impact study shall be
required as part of the site development
plan application for the following
developments in the foothills and
canyons overlay zone:
All residential development that creates a
projected increase in traffic volumes
equal to or greater than ten percent of
a.
current road/street capacity as determined
by the Salt Lake public works engineer.
All nonresidential development that
creates a projected increase in traffic
b. volumes equal to or greater than fifty
trip-ends per peak hour.
All development that affects a roadway
identified by the public works engineer as
c. having an unacceptable level of service
(LOS).
2. Impact Study—Contents. A traffic and
parking impact study shall address, at a
minimum, the items specified in the
"Submittal Requirements for
54 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Development Proposals in the Foothills
and Canyons Overlay Zone," which
document is incorporated by reference.
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
3. Standard of Review and Required
Improvements. All development subject
to this subsection shall demonstrate that
the peak hour levels of service on
adjacent roadways and at impacted
intersections after development shall
comply with current Salt Lake County
transportation and impact mitigation
policies and recommendations.
Transportation system improvements
necessary to proportionately mitigate
development-generated traffic impacts
shall be installed or fully funded by the
development or the owner of the property
on which it is situated prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy or
initiation of such use.
4. Access Management Plan Required. All
development required by this subsection
to submit an impact study shall also
provide an overall access management
plan to ensure free-flowing access to the
site and avoid congestion and unsafe
conditions on adjacent public roads and
streets. The access management plan
shall be combined with the required
traffic and parking impact study
19.72.040
A.
Establishment of limits of disturbance.
Establishment of Limits of Disturbance.
For every development subject to this
chapter, the development services
director shall establish "limits of
disturbance" that indicate the specific
area(s) of a site in which construction and
development activity must be contained.
55 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
For single-family residential
development, limits of disturbance shall
include that area required for the
principal structure, an accessory
structure(s), utilities, services, drainage
facilities, and a septic tank. Areas
required for driveways and leach fields
are not included. (See Figures 13-15)
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Figure 13. Existing Site
Figure 14. Excessive Establishment of Limits of
Disturbance
Figure 15. Appropriate Establishment of Limits of
Disturbance
56 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
B.
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
Criteria for Establishing Limits of
Disturbance. In establishing limits of
disturbance, the following criteria and
standards shall be considered and
applied:
1. Minimize visual impacts from the
development, including but not limited to
screening from adjacent and downhill
properties, ridgeline area protection, and
protection of scenic views;
2. Erosion prevention and control, including
but not limited to protection of steep
slopes and natural drainage channels.
(See Section 19.72.030B, "Slope
Protection Standards" and Section
19.72.030L, "Site and Building Design
Standards.");
3. Fire prevention and safety, including but
not limited to location of trees and
vegetation near structures. (See Section
19.72.030(H)(3), "Wildfire Hazards and
Tree/Vegetation Removal.");
4. Preservation of significant trees or
vegetation. (See Section 19.72.030H,
"Tree and Vegetation Protection.");
5. Conservation of water including but not
limited to preservation of existing native
vegetation, reduction in amounts of
irrigated areas, and similar
considerations;
6. Wildlife habitat protection, including but
not limited to preservation of critical
wildlife habitat and identified migration
corridors and routes. (See Section
57 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
19.72.030K, "Wildlife Habitat
Protection.");
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
7. Stream corridor and wetland protection
and buffering. (See Section 19.72.030J,
"Stream Corridor and Wetlands
Protection.");
8. Preservation of the maximum amount of
the site's natural topography, tree cover,
and vegetation.
C.
Zero Lot Lines Allowed. Where
appropriate to preserve or to protect steep
slopes or other natural features, a
structure may be located on a lot in such
a manner that one or both of the side
facades of a structure rest directly on a lot
line. This provision shall not be
interpreted to exempt a structure from
any applicable building and fire code
provisions or requirements.
D.
Limits of Disturbance May Be
Noncontiguous. Limits of disturbance
necessary to accommodate proposed
development may be noncontiguous in
order to best meet the criteria and
standards set forth in this section. (See
Figures 13-15)
E.
Clustering. Clustering of building pads
and parking areas within a building site is
strongly encouraged and may be required
to minimize the size of the limits of
disturbance and to maintain the
maximum amount of open space in the
development. (See Figures 14 and 15)
F.
Maximum Limits of Disturbance.
58 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
1. Single-Family Residential Uses: For lots
or parcels less than one acre in size, the
limits of disturbance for an individual
single-family use and any accessory
structure shall not exceed ten thousand
square feet, unless:
Significant existing site vegetation is
a. retained, or
Remedial revegetation and land
reclamation improvements which
substantially advance the purposes of this
chapter have been proposed and will be
implemented on the site in accordance
with a revegetation and land reclamation
plan reviewed and approved by the
development services director.
In such cases, the limits of disturbance
for lots or parcels less than one acre in
size may be increased up to but not to
exceed fifteen thousand square feet.
b.
For lots or parcels one acre in size or
greater, the limits of disturbance for an
individual single-family use and any
accessory structure shall not exceed
twelve thousand square feet unless the
aforementioned conditions (retention of
significant existing site vegetation or
submittal and implementation of an
approved revegetation and land
reclamation plan) are provided, in which
case the limits of disturbance may be
increased up to but not to exceed eighteen
thousand square feet.
59 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Original Text
2. All Other Land Uses. The maximum
limits of disturbance, including parking
areas and accessory buildings and
structures, shall be determined on a caseby-case basis. Areas for leach fields
constructed in connection with an on-site
sewer system shall not be included in the
determination of limits of disturbance,
but must be revegetated with native
vegetation in accordance with state
regulations for individual wastewater
systems.
Line by Line Analysis
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
60 | P a g e
1/25/2013
Section
Line by Line Analysis
Original Text
Section
Camiros Text
BRC Discussion
BRC Recommendation
61 | P a g e