Provo City Planning Commission
Report of Action
February 8, 2017
ITEM 3*
Provo City Community Development Department requests an amendment to Section 14.10.080 regarding
yard requirements in the One-Family Residential Zone, specifically eliminating the combined front/rear
yard requirement of 50 feet, and reducing the rear yard setback to a minimum of 15 feet, with an average
depth of 20 feet. City-Wide Impact. 16-0009OA, Brian Maxfield, 801-852-6429. This item was
continued from the July 27, 2016 Planning Commission Hearing.
The following action was taken by the Planning Commission on the above described item at its regular meeting of
February 8, 2017:
RECOMMEND APPROVAL
On a vote of 4:0, the Planning Commission recommended the Municipal Council approve the above noted application.
Motion By: Ross Flom
Second By: Brian Smith
Votes in Favor of Motion: Ross Flom, Brian Smith, Ed Jones, Jamin Rowan
Jamin Rowan was present as Chair.
•
The motion includes the facts of the case, analysis, conclusions and recommendations outlined in the Staff Report,
with any changes noted; Planning Commission determination is consistent with the Staff analysis and
determination.
STAFF PRESENTATION
The Staff Report to the Planning Commission provides details of the facts of the case and the Staff's analysis,
conclusions, and recommendations. Key points addressed in the Staff's presentation to the Planning Commission
included the following:
 The proposed amendment can be broken into two components. The first is the actual setbacks being proposed
and the second is the establishment of more defined measuring points for the front setback.
 In extensive examination of the entire City, staff has not found the amendment would create any nonconforming
situations. However, staff did find a number of existing nonconforming situations which would become
conforming through passage of the amendment. Additionally, staff believes the portion of the amendment
regarding the front yard measuring points will greatly benefit the Pioneer Neighborhoods where the current
ordinance actually requires a greater setback behind the sidewalk than required in most of the remainder of the
City.
 The proposed amendment was adopted in concept by the Planning Commission last Summer, however, because
staff was working on a total redrafting of the R1 zone, the amendment was not presented for a final
determination and recommendation. Since there have been ongoing delays in the redrafting of the R1 Zone, staff
would like to move this particular amendment forward to address several pending situations which would be
benefitted by the proposed amendment.
CITY DEPARTMENTAL ISSUES
• None
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING DATE
• City-wide application; all Neighborhood Chairs received notification.
NEIGHBORHOOD AND PUBLIC COMMENT
• No neighbors or other interested parties addressed the Planning Commission. Comments at previous Planning
Commission meetings from several Neighborhood Chairs have been favorable, with no dissention expressed or
otherwise received by staff.
CONCERNS RAISED BY PUBLIC
Any comments received prior to completion of the Staff Report are addressed in the Staff Report to the Planning
Commission. Key issues raised in written comments received subsequent to the Staff Report or public comment during
the public hearing included the following:
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION
The Planning Commission moved on the item without further discussion.
Planning Commission Chair
Director of Community Development
See Key Land Use Policies of the Provo City General Plan, applicable Titles of the Provo City Code, and the Staff Report to the
Planning Commission for further detailed information. The Staff Report is a part of the record of the decision of this item.
Where findings of the Planning Commission differ from findings of Staff, those will be noted in this Report of Action.
Legislative items are noted with an asterisk (*) and require legislative action by the Municipal Council following a public hearing;
the Planning Commission provides an advisory recommendation to the Municipal Council following a public hearing.
Planning Commission
Staff Report
Ordinance Amendment
Hearing Date: February 8, 2017
ITEM 3*
Provo City Community Development Department requests an amendment to Section
14.10.080 regarding yard requirements in the One-Family Residential Zone,
specifically eliminating the combined front/rear yard requirement of 50 feet, and
reducing the rear yard setback to a minimum of 15 feet, with an average depth of 20
feet. City-Wide Impact. 16-0009OA, Brian Maxfield, 801-852-6429. This item was
continued from the July 27, 2016 Planning Commission Hearing.
Applicant: Community Development Department
Staff Coordinator: Brian Maxfield
Current Legal Use:
Those listed under the R1 Zone.
Property Owner: N/A
Relevant History:
None
Parcel ID#: N/A
Current General Plan Designation: N/A
Proposed General Plan Designation: N/A
Neighborhood Issues:
None reported to staff
Current Zone: N/A
Acreage: N/A
Number of Properties: N/A
Summary of Key Issues:
1. Need for Amendments
2. Anticipated effect on future and existing
development.
*Council Action Required: Yes
Related Application(s): 16-0008OA; 16-0010OA; 16- Staff Recommendation:
Recommend Approval of the proposed
0011OA
ordinance amendment to Section 14.10.080
of the City Code as shown on the attached
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Exhibit “A”, eliminating the combined
1. Continue to a future date to obtain additional
front/rear yard requirement of 50 feet, and
information or to further consider information
reducing the rear yard setback to a minimum
presented. The next available meeting date is
of 15 feet, with an average depth of 20 feet.
February 22, 2017, at 5:30 p.m.
2. Recommend Denial of the proposed ordinance
amendment. This would be a change from the Staff
recommendation; the Planning Commission should
state new findings.
This action would be consistent with the
recommendation of the Staff Report. Any
additional changes should be stated with the
motion
Planning Commission Staff Report
February 8, 2017
Item 3
Page 2
OVERVIEW
This item was presented and discussed at the May 25, 2016, the June 22, 2016, the
July 13, 2016 and the July 27, 2016 Planning Commission meetings.
Key points discussed by the Planning Commission at the May 25, 2016 meeting
included:
 The general concept of the proposed changes is sound and, if done right, would
allow for a greater variety of dwelling types, especially some of the proposed
cluster development.
 The actual change between the existing and proposed setbacks and buildings
on properties, especially regarding between windows on adjoining properties.
 Access needs of emergency responders.
 Importance of front yard aesthetics vs. that of the other yard areas.
Key points discussed by the Planning Commission at the June 22, 2016 meeting
included:
 The point of measurement for front yard setbacks. The discussion included the
differences in property line and sidewalk locations between the Pioneer
neighborhoods where the sidewalk is within the street right-of-way, and newer
areas where the sidewalk is included within the property.
 The need for staff to amend the draft proposal to reflect the current discussion
and make sure minimum garage setbacks are addressed.
Key points discussed and adopted in concept by the Planning Commission at the
July 13, 2016 meeting included:
 Establishing common measuring points for setbacks.
At the July 27, 2016 meeting, the Planning Commission voted to agree in concept
with the revised wording regarding front and rear yard setbacks, and voted to
continue the item indefinitely to allow staff time to propose a complete revision to
Section 14.10 and to other related Sections of the ordinance as necessary. Due to a
continued delay in staff preparing a complete revision for several additional months,
ongoing situations now lead to staff request the front and rear yard revisions be
separated from the larger request, and forwarded to the Municipal Council for action.
Any adopted changes would then be incorporated in a more complete revision.
FINDINGS OF FACT

Currently, the required minimum setback for front and rear yards is 20 feet, but a
total of 50 feet is required for the two setbacks combined.
Planning Commission Staff Report
February 8, 2017
Item 3
Page 3
STAFF ANALYSIS
1.
Provo City Code Section 14.02.020(2) sets forth the following guidelines for
consideration of ordinance text amendments:
Before recommending an amendment to this Title, the Planning Commission
shall determine whether such amendment is in the interest of the public, and is
consistent with the goals and policies of the Provo City General Plan. The
following guidelines shall be used to determine consistency with the General
Plan:
(a) Public purpose for the amendment in question.
The proposed amendment addresses limitations on the development and
redevelopment of corner lots, through eliminating unnecessary development
restrictions.
(b) Confirmation that the public purpose is best served by the amendment in
question.
General Plan – Objective 13.4.3 Promote strategies in selected areas to allow
more citizens to qualify for a home purchase, to ensure affordable housing,
and to increase owner occupancy rates in Provo, including but not limited to:
…. Flexible development standards for rehabilitation of one-family
homes ….
(c) Compatibility of the proposed amendment with General Plan policies, goals,
and objectives.
See “(b)” above.
(d) Consistency of the proposed amendment with the General Plan =s Atiming and
sequencing@ provisions on changes of use, insofar as they are articulated.
The amendment would cause no conflict.
(e) Potential of the proposed amendment to hinder or obstruct attainment of the
General Plan=s articulated policies.
The amendment would not hinder nor obstruct attainment of the General
Plan’s articulated policies.
(f) Adverse impacts on adjacent land owners.
One of the goals of the amendment is to reduce or eliminate current adverse
impacts from an adjoining property.
(g) Verification of correctness in the original zoning or General Plan for the area
in question.
Does not apply to an ordinance amendment.
(h) In cases where a conflict arises between the General Plan Map and General
Plan Policies, precedence shall be given to the Plan Policies.
Does not apply to an ordinance amendment.
CONCLUSIONS
Staff believes the proposed amendment to eliminate the need for a combined minimum
setback would better address the reasonable development and redevelopment of
residential lots, without any significant impact to adjacent properties.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend Approval of the proposed ordinance amendment to Section 14.10.080 of
the City Code as shown on the attached Exhibit “A”, eliminating the combined front/rear
yard requirement of 50 feet, and reducing the rear yard setback to a minimum of 15
feet, with an average depth of 20 feet.
EXHIBIT “A”
14.10.080. Yard Requirements.
The following minimum yard requirements shall apply in the R1 zone: (Note: Except where otherwise noted, All
setbacks are measured from the property line.)
(1) Front /Rear Yard. Each lot or parcel in the R1 zone shall have a minimum combined front and rear yard of
at least fifty (50) feet. The minimum depth of a front or rear yard shall be twenty (20) feet. Exception:
Notwithstanding a lesser setback for the main building, garages and carports, whether attached or not, shall be
setback at least twenty-six (26) feet from the property line when necessary to ensure a twenty (20)
foot driveway depth, measured from the back of side walk.
(a) Front Yard: 14 feet behind the sidewalk or property line, or 23 feet from the back of curb, whichever is
greater. However, and except where approved through other provisions of this ordinance, all garages and
carports shall have a minimum setback of 20 feet behind a sidewalk, or where no sidewalk exists, 26 feet
behind the back of curb.
(b) Rear Yard: An average of 20 feet, with a minimum of 15 feet.