►
From YouTube: Planning Commission Meeting - October 23, 2019
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
D
E
A
F
D
G
A
A
C
C
Their
proposed
single-family
residence
will
be
approximately
720
square
feet.
It
will
have
a
sheds,
shed
style
roof
and
an
approximate
height
of
13
feet,
4
inches
the
primary
material
for
the
exteriors
Cement
issues,
vertical
siding
to
be
painted.
In
addition
to
the
principal
structure,
there
will
be
a
approximately
288
square-foot
carport,
as
well
as
the
276
square-foot
concrete
pad
to
provide
its
required
off
street
parking.
C
The
project
is
located
within
the
sweet
town,
neighborhood
of
the
Capitol
Hill
master
planning
area
kind
of
in
the
northwest
area
of
Salt
Lake
City.
It
is
primarily
zoned
as
an
m2
heavy
manufacturing
district.
It
does
have
some
m1
bordering
it
to
the
north
and
east.
Historically,
the
sweet
town
area
was
home
to
several
hundred
residences.
C
C
This
map
kind
of
shows
just
a
portion
of
the
sweet
town
area.
If
you
look
up
in
the
top
right
corner,
the
area
in
red
is
the
subject
property
one
Street
south
of
that
is
the
sweet
town
park,
as
well
as
a
couple
of
residences
to
the
west
of
the
subject.
Property
you'll
also
see
a
couple
of
single-family
residences
as
well,
and
then
southwest
of
the
subject:
property
you'll,
see
in
within
the
two
streets.
There
there's
a
large
cluster
of
single-family
homes
that
still
exist
in
this
area.
C
C
C
C
So
the
m2
zoning
district
does
not
permit
new
single-family
residences
and
the
Capitol
Hill
master
plan,
future
land
used
for
most
industrial
and
commercial
uses.
However,
due
to
the
large-scale
nature
of
an
of
an
industrial
use,
the
smaller
existing
residential
lots
are
more
appropriate
in
size
for
residential
use,
rather
than
industrial,
hurt
or
heavy
manufacturing
use.
Because
of
this,
the
complete
vacation
of
residential
use
is
unlikely
to
happen.
A
E
When
we
for
the
staff,
when
we
rezone
a
set
of
property,
you're
gonna,
read
out
the
master
plan,
I
mean
even
with
these
small
Lots,
the
intent
seems
to
be
like
it
was
that
they
would
be
acquired
and
consolidated
and
built
out,
and
it
seems
like
putting
a
new
construction
goes
against
that
and
your
staff
plan
kind
of
notes
that
you
know-
and
it's
notes
it
in
the
standards
right.
So
it's
the
standard,
3
or
2,
sorry,
but
we
just
kind
of
are
disregarding
it,
because
you
think
that
that
won't
happen
is
that
correct.
C
C
E
E
B
What
I'm
wondering
Chris
on
this?
Do
we
have
landscape
requirements,
because
this
is
the
applicant
intends
to
keep
using
the
north
end
for
the
storage
and
there
are
shipping
containers
and
there's
do
we
have
landscape
requirements
if
we
allow
this
to
be
a
residential
use,
because
there's
nothing
here
right
now?
Yes,.
C
The
front
yard
will
be
landscaped.
The
applicant
does
plan
on
landscaping
the
rear
yard,
as
well
all
of
the
equipment.
One
of
the
requirements
for
the
zoning
review
when
it
goes
to
building
permits
is
to
remove
all
of
that
equipment.
It
does
have
to
be
a
residential
use.
It
can't
be
mixed
use
with
manufacturing
elements
in
it,
so
all
of
that
equipment
will
be
removed,
so
it
will
be
strictly
residential
use.
C
I
D
A
K
K
A
A
A
L
A
N
Good
evening,
commissioners,
how
are
you
doing?
This
is
regarding
a
text
amendment
for
increased
height
in
a
certain
portion
of
the
G
mu
zone,
and
it
is
crossed
three
blocks.
Portions
of
three
blocks,
they're
located
between
500
West
and
the
railroad
tracks,
which
are
approximately
625,
west
and
200,
south
and
400
south
and,
as
I
said,
the
requested
text.
Men
specifically
focused
on
building
height,
and
the
petition
is
specifies
that
the
maximum
building
height
on
corner
Lots
would
increase
from
the
corner
or
from
the
current
maximum
of
120
feet.
N
Up
to
190
feet
and
mid
block
areas
would
have
a
maximum
building
height
of
a
hundred
feet,
but
they
are
saying
that
additional
height
could
be
requested
through
a
design
review
process,
and
this
is
to
illustrate
the
exact
area
that
we're
talking
about.
The
red
lines
illustrate
that
it's
the
area
directly
between
the
intermodal
hub
for
UTA
and
the
Rio
Grande
station
down
on
five
hundred
west
and
within
the
larger
zoning
area.
You
can
see
where
it's
located.
It's
a
portion
of
the
GMU
zone.
N
N
This
is
an
illustration
of
the
urban
design
element
and
the
language
that's
listed
here
comes
directly
from
the
master
plan.
It
talks
about
the
overall.
You
know
design
that
has
been
programmed
in
for
Salt
Lake
City.
Basically,
what
it
boils
down
to
is
from
the
downtown
the
central
downtown
business
district
going
towards
the
west
and
towards
the
south
there
supposed
to
be
a
sloping
pyramid
shape
on
those
sides
that
just
gradually
slopes
down
with
the
highest
concentration,
the
highest
height
in
the
middle
of
the
downtown
area.
N
And
with
that
being
the
case
and
trying
to
break
up
these
blocks,
it
doesn't
seem
in
line
with
you
know,
increasing
the
height
up
to
a
maximum
of
190
feet
from
what
it
can
be
right
now
at
120.
Feet
and
I
should
also
mention
that
the
baseline
height
in
the
GMU
zone
is
75
feet
for
flat
roof
buildings.
If
the
building
has
a
peak
to
it,
if
there's
a
slope
to
the
roof,
then
they
can
go
up
to
95
feet.
N
N
It
doesn't
look
like
it
right
now
if
you
go
out
and
look
at
it
and
it's
just
a
typical,
very
wide
street,
but
it
has
been
narrowed
with
the
idea
that
when
development
happens
down
there,
that
buildings
will
be
placed
much
closer
to
the
street
and
it
will
be
a
focus
more
on
a
pedestrian
street
and
there
will
still
be
automobile
access
most
likely,
but
it's
trying
to
create
a
much
more
intimate
area
and
going
along
with
that
within
the
plan.
It
talks
about
having
an
approximate
ratio
of
buildings
on
each
side
of
the
street.
N
That
Leigh
says
goes
between
six
to
twelve
stories
with
the
street
being
85
feet.
It's
spoken
about
a
one-to-one
ratio
of
going
up
to
about
85
feet
in
height
for
buildings.
The
way
that
the
zoning
is
right
now
120
feet
is
the
maximum
that
can
get
there.
So
it's
it's
fairly
close
at
190
feet,
you'd
be
almost
doubling
that
ratio,
so
it'd
be
more
like
two
to
one
instead
of
one
to
one
and
then
another
another
element
where
the
city
has
tried
to
you'll
move
towards
meeting
the
goals
of
the
master
plan
is
in
2017.
N
This
area
was
rezone
specifically
to
GMU
the
current
zoning,
and
at
that
point,
if
the
objective
had
been
to
allow
for
higher
buildings,
then
they
could
have.
You
know
proposed
other
zone
zoning
to
take
place
there,
but
they
settled
on
the
GMU
zone
with
that
maximum
height
as
I've
mentioned
previously.
N
F
I
have
a
question:
can
you
has
the
property
owner
the
RDA
taken
a
position
on
this
petition?
Do
we
know
what
what
they,
what
they
think
about
it?
The.
N
Rda
made
a
statement,
they
provided
it
in
the
staff
report.
I,
don't
have
it
right
in
front
of
me,
but
it
is
in
the
comments
section
and
I
think
they
specifically
mentioned
that
they
didn't
think
that
there
should
be
the
minimum
height.
You
know
in
the
mid-block
areas
or
anything
like
that.
They
want
to
be
able
to
maintain
the
the
plan
that
they
have
with
some
smaller
buildings.
I.
It
was
my
understanding
they
got.
N
B
B
N
A
J
J
We
also
think
that
look
looking
at
it
through
a
different
lens
that
each
one
of
those
points
could
be
looked
at
as
as
being
supportive.
This
is
a
place
that
once
to
develop
from
an
urban
standpoint
into
a
walking
environment
that
appreciates
the
TOD
nature
of
the
land
and
appreciates
a
lot
of
the
history.
That's
gone
on,
but
also
looks
forward.
O
Sure,
thank
you
for
your
time
tonight
by
the
way
we're
excited
about
this
area.
We've
been
working
on
this
for
a
number
of
years
and
we
have
a
worked
out:
a
land
lease
with
the
the
family
of
the
Nikolas
food
company
family
that
had
three
and
a
quarter
acres
on
the
on
the
northwest
corner
of
this
block
immediately
across
the
street
from
the
front
runner
and
tracks
intermodal
hub
area.
So
it's
been
of
interest
to
us.
O
We've
done
more
Tod
developments
in
the
state
of
Utah
than
any
other
developer
from
South
Jordan
sandy
Lehi,
clear,
filter,
we're
starting
to
work
on
and
this
site
in
downtown
Salt
Lake
City
we're
big
believers
in
the
future
of
rail.
In
our
very
linear
geography,
we
have
stretched
across
the
Wasatch
Front
and
we
believe
that
we
can't
build
I
fifteen
big
enough
to
accommodate
all
the
cars
that
will
eventually
try
to
get
on
it
and
we
think
rail
is
going
to
become
more
and
more
important
in
the
future
and
certainly
the
black
eye.
O
We
take
in
Utah
many
times
as
our
air
quality
that
we
have
in
the
middle
of
the
winter.
That
is
really
at
bad
proportions
and
we
need
to
get
more
cars
off
the
road.
This
is
one
reason
that
we
really
are
focused
on
this
site.
You
know
we
love
festival,
Street.
We
love
the
plans
to
narrow
that
Street
and
make
it
walkable.
We
would
hope
that
many
people
would
arrive
on
rail
to
this
location,
wouldn't
need
to
bring
their
car
to
this
location
that
we
can
be
green.
O
O
They
work
in
those
buildings,
and
so
that
can
reduce
vehicle
trips,
because
it's
so
consistent
when
you
add
the
resident
she'll
mix
into
it,
which
we've
planned,
we
didn't
bring
our
entire
block
plan,
but
we've
spoken
to
the
RDA
about
it.
We've
got
a
great
mix
of
really
nice
residential
brownstones
that
are
in
in
there
that
are,
you,
know:
townhome
type
walk-ups
on
some
of
these
interior
streets
to
make
it
more
human
scale
and
we
have
pocket
park
in
the
middle.
O
It's
really
all
the
things
that
are
kind
of
designated
in
the
guiding
documents
and
so
we're.
You
know
a
little
surprised,
we're
disappointed
that
that
a
negative
recommendation
would
be
proposed,
but
we
would
hope
that
you
would
look
at
it,
maybe
with
a
little
bit
of
our
lens
of
what
we're
seeing
and
what
we're,
building
and
and
choose
to
be.
You
know
more
dense
in
this
area.
I.
O
Just
note,
in
closing
that
you
know
a
lot
of
the
new
projects
that
are
being
proposed
for
the
CBD
are
25
stories,
so
in
general
the
downtown
core
is
getting
taller
anyway,
so
you
still
are
going
to
maintain
that
kind
of
pyramidal
line
up
to
the
peak
in
the
CBD
as
time
goes
on,
it's
inevitable.
With
land
prices
going
up,
the
buildings
are
going
to
get
taller
in
the
CBD,
and
we
think
this
is
a
very
appropriate
height,
especially
for
a
Tod
location.
So
we
would
hope
for
a
positive
recommendation.
J
In
in
terms
of
additional
height,
we
still
feel
it's
important
to
recognize
downtown
and
the
375
foot
plus
high
flim
it
that
is
established
for
that.
We
think
that
having
this
district
have
a
a
height
which
honors
that
is
important,
we
have
looked
at
view
sheds.
We
don't
feel
that
they're
negatively
compromised,
especially
if
you
look
at
the
120
foot.
That's
now
allowed
for
building
height
within
the
GMU
zone.
J
We
think
that
the
urban
character
with
with
streets
and
the
ratio
of
height
and
that
sort
of
thing
is
important.
But
we
also
look
at
some
some
wonderful
cities
where
there
are
narrower
streets
like
Philadelphia,
where
you
have
three
and
four
hundred
foot
high
buildings,
but
they're
wonderful
streets,
and
it's
because
of
the
character
that's
created
at
the
ground
floor
and
what
happens
at
the
street
plane
and
and
that
sort
of
thing
we
think
the
narrowing
of
streets
is
a
great
idea.
I
know
no.
J
We've
had
meetings
over
the
years
and
recently
regarding
this,
this
very
petition
with
the
RDA
and-
and
we
feel
like
that,
having
something
act
as
a
catalyst
to
make
it
happen
is
very
important
to
us.
We
understand,
regardless
of
of
the
recommendation
of
the
Planning
Commission,
that
it
does
go
to
City
Council
and
we
respect
that.
O
You
you
know,
one
of
the
reasons
are
the
economics
you
know
come
into
play.
If
we
can
only
do
a
shorter
building,
we
cannot
pay
the
land
with
the
Nicholas
family.
You
know
for
the
next
99
years,
so
part
of
us
economics
for
sure,
but
part
of
it
is
really
the
big
driver
for
me
personally,
is
just
that.
We've
got
multiple
billions
of
dollars
that
have
been
spent
by
UTA
to
create
this
system
that
can
help
us
reduce
air
pollution,
move
people,
do
it
in
a
sustainable,
Green
Way.
Why
wouldn't
we
maximize
that?
O
Why
wouldn't
we
in
all
due
respect
to
getting
documents
from
2014
we're
almost
2020,
and
things
have
changed
a
lot
even
in
that
time
and
people
have
become
aware
of
Tod
s
and
what
they
can
and
should
be,
and
great
cities
are
making
really
amazing
use
of
it.
In
our
opinion,
with
the
the
linear
nature
of
our
geography
with
mountains
on
one
side
and
lake,
on
the
other
side,
we're
strung
out
on
this
little
strip
of
buildable
land,
we
can't
just
keep
sprawling
and
we're
just
compounding
our
problems.
M
Just
one
or
two
things
that
those
are
great
points,
the
other
thing
is
is
in
development
or
in
construction.
The
building
codes,
kind
of
set
up
to
sort
of
package,
people
in
mid
rise
and
high
rise,
and
that
mid
rise
code
is
the
most
efficient
code
to
build
inside
outside
of
a
downtown.
And
so
that's
what
you
see
in
suburban
markets,
a
lot
of
five
and
six
storey
office
buildings.
You
don't
see
much
above
five
and
six
storey,
because
you
hit
a
new
code
and
it's
it's
really
expensive
to
do.
M
At
a
hundred
and
twenty
feet,
you
could
get
to
an
eight
story
building,
but
if
you're
going
to
go
above
six
storeys
and
only
get
two
more
floors
on
top
of
it,
the
efficiencies
of
what
you
have
to
do
just
to
get
into
that
high-rise
code,
it
just
doesn't
make
any
sense.
So
if
you're
gonna
go
above
six,
usually
have
you
try
to
shoot
above
ten
you
get
to
ten
to
twelve
to
fourteen,
and
then
you
can
start
to
make
the
efficiencies
of
a
high-rise
code
makes
sense.
M
So
that's
kind
of
a
nuts
and
bolts
construction.
Then
the
other
thing
is,
is
you
know
we
know
our
market
really
well,
we've
done
a
lot
of
office
development
and
we
know
what
tenants
are
asking
for
and
what
they
want
in
Class
A
office
space,
and
it's
pretty
specific.
You
know
we've
done
a
lot
of
building
in
the
suburban
market
and
we
know
what
the
tech
tenants
want.
We've
we've
been
in
touch
with
Salt
Lake,
with
the
RTA
and
with
the
city
here
and
wanting
to
attract
tech
downtown.
M
We
can
combine
all
of
that
in
one.
We
can
create
the
perfect
package
that
will
sort
of
create
that
soho,
if
you
will
of
new
york
here,
a
little
edgier,
a
little
more
tech
focused
centered
on
on
on
Millennials,
coming
and
living
and
working,
and
we
need
to
get
high
enough
to
both
maximize
density,
but
also
get
high
enough
to
make
it
fill
iconic.
M
The
tenant
that
we
had
been
focused
on
for
the
better
part
of
six
months
for
this
particular
site
has
since
gone
a
different
direction,
because
the
timing
of
how
much
of
the
entitlement
time
that
we
need
to
do
here,
which
is
fine,
but
the
message
that
they
sent
was
really
clear.
Is
that
if
I'm
going
to
come
in
and
invest
on
the
west
side
of
Salt
Lake,
where
what
I
see
today
is
not
worth
investing
in
this
coming
from
the
CEO.
M
But
but
if
you
can
create
that
vision
and
build
something
iconic
that
when
someone
comes
across
four
South,
there's
something
there
besides
a
five
or
six
story:
suburban
office
building,
then
that's
a
place.
I
want
to
come
and
put
my
roots
down
and
I
want
to
come
and
invest
in
that
area
and
and
help
catalyze
it
so
that
that
speaks
to
the
market.
The
tenant
saying
I
want
something:
iconic,
not
something
that's
going
to
outdo
downtown,
but
something
that's
going
to
be
special
for
that
part
of
the
neighborhood.
Thank.
A
E
Grappling
with
is
when
we're
doing
a
zone
change
we're
looking
at
a
chant,
really
we're
not
really
considering
a
project
right,
we're
considering
whether
or
not
the
zone
change
and
the
request
is
appropriate
for
the
area
that
you're
making
and
then
for
us.
We
review
when
we
look
at
the
standards
they're
set
out
for
us,
because
we
we
did
not
set
the
master
plan.
This
body
didn't
and
we
have
comments
not
approved
it.
E
We're
looking
at
the
the
guiding
documents
of
what's
been
kind
of
directed
to
us
and
trying
to
figure
out
whether
or
not
the
proposal
matches
those
guiding
documents
or
not
like
it's
not
a
question
when
we
think
of
projects
good
or
not
appropriate,
or
not
it's,
whether
or
not
it
matches.
What's
the
direction
that
we've
been
given
as
a
body
and
the
staff
does
make
a
pretty
strong
argument,
you
know
going
through
those.
You
know,
sections
of
standards
towards
the
rear
of
the
report.
E
That
outlines
were
you
guys,
don't
comply
with
the
direction
that
we've
been
given,
which
doesn't
give
us
a
lot
of
wiggle
room.
But
but
you
made
a
comment
in
your
presentation
where
you
felt
that
there
were
other
ways
to
read
the
standards
and
what's
been
outlined
in
the
guiding
documents
that
maybe
would
be
more
appropriate.
That
would
make
an
argument
for
this
zone
change.
E
O
O
Tod
was
specifically
mentioned
I've
elaborated
on
that,
so
I
won't
elaborate
any
more
on
that
as
Brenda's
direction.
So
that's
why
I'm
number
two
would
be
the
this
six
to
twelve
story
height
that
was
in
the
upper
right
there
on
that
slide
on
the
screen,
complimentary
building
six
to
twelve
stories
tonight.
O
That's
all
we're
asking
for
we
we've
actually
on
this
full
block
design
had
six
story,
residential,
mid
block
with
the
12
story,
building
on
the
northwest
corner,
so
coroner's
framed
by
higher
buildings
lower
in
the
middle,
to
give
a
relief
to
the
height
of
that
and
I
think
those
are
two
things
that
are
specifically
in
the
guiding
documents
that
would
would
support.
You
know
our
plan
supports
those
things.
Thank.
A
J
So,
with
respect
to
additional
height,
we
fill
the
the
guiding
documents
are
telling
us
that
in
some
places,
any
ways
that
this
district
is
is
a
gateway
into
Salt
Lake
and
it's
essentially
the
beginning
of
downtown.
There
are
other
areas
in
that
that
reference,
the
RDA
property
and
and
the
district
in
general,
as
an
area
that
that
is,
that
is
a
catalyst.
We
feel
that
this
is
being
a
gateway
and
into
the
city
and
being
being
the
beginning
of
downtown.
J
That
actually
rising
up
and
saying
that
this
is
downtown
is
something
that
is
is
pretty
forcefully
forcefully
outlined
by
the
guiding
documents
with
respect
to
appreciating
the
ratios
of
heights
and
that
sort
of
things
was
another
issue
that
was
brought
up
in
the
report
and
I
know
you.
You
said
that
you
don't
want
us
to
rehash
things,
but
we
do
think
that
the
proper
scale
of
buildings
and
that
sort
of
thing
can
be
attended
to
and
that
the
intent
of
those
guidance
guiding
documents
can
be
maintained.
So
I.
O
O
So
we
have
three
and
a
quarter
acres
on
that
corner,
so
it
actually
go
yeah
right
there.
So
it's
the
prominent
piece
right
across
from
the
rail
stop
and
that's
probably
another
reasons.
You
know
people
arrive
on
the
train
and
more
and
more
people
will
do
that
in
the
future.
Do
we
want
to
have
a
nice
beautiful?
You
know,
building
that
says
you
are
in
downtown
and.
M
A
A
A
J
Well,
a
big
part
of
it
has
to
do
with
thinking
about
the
the
urban
character
here.
That's
trying
to
be
created
and
trying
to
be
recognized
and
and
and
a
big
part
of
that
is
establishing.
This
was
very
special
place
as
this
festival
street
and
creating
this
district
as
a
gateway
to
the
city
and
then
recognising
the
need
to
use
some
urban
cues
to
create
sort
of
iconic
form
there
and
to
have
enough,
let's
say
energy
in
terms
of
building
height
and
intensity
of
use.
A
F
It's
a
proximity
to
the
rail
station
and
to
the
gateway
I
think
that
whole
neighborhood
could
become
something
that
is
quite
unique
within
the
city
and
and
a
place
that
we
are
that
not
just
the
people
that
work
in
that
tech,
firm,
that's
gonna,
go
there,
we'll
use
and
I
want
to
do
whatever
would
support
that.
But
my
question
for
Chris
would
be:
are
there
things
in
the
zone
that
require,
for
instance,
active
public
uses
on
the
ground
floor
or
mixed
use
with
not
just
office
office,
and
residential
and
retail
and
restaurant?
Are
there
any?
N
That
is
one
thing
that
I've
referenced
in
a
certain
part
of
my
staff
report,
where
the
GMU
zone
allows
for
a
variety
of
different
uses,
but
it
doesn't
necessarily
establish
there
has
to
be
certain
percentages
of
those
uses
or
that
type
of
thing.
So
you
know
that
opens
up
the
floodgates
to
potentially
having
big
structures
that
are
only
one
use.
Maybe.
N
H
Yeah
there
is
a
president
for
that.
I
was
just
looking
through
the
GM.
You
I
mean
that's
something
that
we
would
have
to
probably
go
back
to
the
drawing
board
a
little
bit
look
at,
but
we
do
have
zones
to
say
if
you
go
a
certain
height
or
if
you
include
residential
and
you
can,
you
can
increase,
you
can
get
extra
things.
H
One
thing
that's
with
this
particular
proposal:
there's
really
any
absence
of
design
review
for
those
taller
buildings
on
the
corner
right
now
and
the
GM
you
if
you
were
to
go
over
75
feet
if
you're
a
flat
roof
building
or
over
990
feet.
If
you
have
a
pitched
on
your
on
your
building
up
to
125,
you
have
to
go
through
design
review.
The
applicants
proposal
for
those
corner
buildings
eliminates
the
design
review
process.
H
The
design
review
process
does
have
some
element,
a
lot
more
elements
in
that
process
and
those
standards
that
require
us
to
review
ground
floor
interaction
and
things
like
that.
The
GMU
district
does
have
some
design
standards
built
into
it.
That
requires
some
some
ground
floor,
at
least
activation
from
a
design
standpoint.
H
F
I
guess
just
to
summarize
Mike,
my
concern
is
not
that
the
increased
height
would
be
appropriate
or
inappropriate.
I,
don't
I,
don't
necessarily
think
it's
inappropriate,
but
I
am
concerned
that
there
would
be
a
12
story
office
building
with
the
secured
Lobby
that
I
as
just
a
regular
person,
could
not
enter,
and
then
there's
nothing
for
me
in
that
district
to
to
go
to
and
I
think
that
creates
a
really
dead
environment.
F
It
creates
something
you
know
akin
to
a
lot
of
our
suburban
office
areas
where
really,
if
you
don't
have
an
appointment
there,
you
don't
go
there
and
I.
What
that's?
What
I
do
not
want
to
see
with
this
neighborhood,
so
I
hope
that
there's
we
could
come
up
with
something
creative
where
if
we
do
allow
it
increased
height,
we
require
things
like
that.
F
N
D
H
M
N
Think
it
has
to
be
something
that
draws
people
there
and
not
just
the
lobby
and
I
think
there
should
be
some
sort
of
design
review.
That
would
happen
if
this
was
allowed,
because
I'm
all
for
density
I
want
taller
buildings.
I
want
to
reduce
the
commutes,
but
I
think
it
has
to
be
done
and
a
respectful
way
to
the
community
and
create
that
engagement,
yeah.
F
A
A
But
we
don't
want
a
I,
don't
think
we
want
a
city
where
you
know
it's
a
level
375
or
400
feet,
even
though
we
all
want
density,
I,
think
we
do
have
to
consider
that
there
are
parts
of
the
city
whose
character
now
and
in
the
past
and
evident
by
the
Rio
Grande
building
itself
is
more
of
a
smaller
scale
and
I
think
that
was
exactly
what
the
attention
of
that
particular
zoning
area,
and
certainly
the
RDAs
master
plan
around
the
festival.
Street
was
that
what's
that
intention.
C
Yeah
I
would
just
say
that
I'm
sympathetic
to
the
extra
height
to
I'm,
I'm
kind
of
wondering
timeline-wise
was
this:
was
the
zoning
around
this
done
before
after
the
conception
of
the
intermodal
hub?
Do
we
know
that
like
does
this?
Was
this
part
of
that
understanding
that
this
hub
would
be
there
and
yeah.
N
C
C
We
should
really
look
into
increasing
the
density
in
that
whole
area
drastically,
and
I
and
I
don't
know-
and
I
and
I'm
also
sympathetic
to
the
pyramidal-
you
know
look
of
the
city
and
all
that
stuff,
but
I
think
that
that
decision
was
changed
with
a
decision
to
put
the
intermodal
hub
there,
and
I
think
that
you
know
I
would
while
I'm
sympathetic
to
the
cause
tonight.
I
do
think
we
maybe
need
a
more
comprehensive
discussion
about
what
what
more
we
need
to
do
to
that
area
to
better
play
off
of
the
intermodal
hub
yeah.
N
You
know
as
a
planner
I
appreciate
these
issues
and
you
know
I
think
that
height
very
well
may
be
appropriate,
but
what
it
comes
down
to
is
the
standards
of
review
and
just
looking
at
the
guiding
documents
and
what
we
have
out
there.
It
seemed
like
it
was
very
difficult
to
be
able
to
get
to
that
place
where
they're
meeting
the
review
standards,
and
so
that's
you
know,
it's
kind
of
a
bigger
conversation
at
this
point
is
kind
of
what
it
comes
down
to
for
me
because
they
made
a
very
specific
petition.
N
The
other
thing
that
was
a
little
bit
difficult
to
even
gauge
at
all
is
they
did
not
submit
any
sort
of
plan.
So
it's
just
kind
of
conceptual
across
the
entire
area.
We're
not
seeing
buildings,
we're
not
seeing
what
they're
planning
on
doing
they're
so
based
on
that
and
based
on
the
guiding
documents
based
on
what
our
standards
of
review
are.
I
feel
like
that
we
reviewed
it
the
best
way
that
we
could
and
we
determined
what
we
could
within
the
standards
that
we
have
to
work
within.
I'm.
E
So
for
some
very
sympathetic
to
the
applicant
and
what
they're
trying
to
do
there,
I
probably
also
understand
some
of
the
challenges
that
come
with
tech
and
recruiting
some
of
the
companies.
Then
we
may
need
to
look
at
the
gateway
and
look
at
whether
how
we
zone
that
I,
don't
think
tonight
is
that
discussion
I.
Think
that's
a
much
broader
community
engagement
piece,
we've
got
I!
Think
it's
pretty
recent
for
us
in
the
last
five
years.
A
A
F
I
agree
that
I
don't
think
that,
as
written
I'm,
comfortable
forwarding
a
positive
recommendation,
a
question
I
wanted
to
ask
was
the
design
of
reprocess
currently
in
place
that
allows
up
to
120
feet
instead
of
75
or
90
feet?
Does
that
include
things
that
we've
been
discussing
tonight,
such
as
what
the
uses
are
not
not
uses?
It's
just
aesthetics
stuff
again.
Q
A
Motion
passes
seven
to
zero.
We
will
be
forwarding
a
negative
recommendation.
Remember
that
for
those
of
you
in
the
honestly,
the
the
Planning
Commission
does
not
make
the
zoning
changes
that
we
make
a
recommendation
to
City
Council.
Our
next
item
on
the
agenda
sounds
like
a
good
one.
Medicinal
cannabis
text,
amendment.
I
Further
state
law
dictates
and
municipalities
may
not
adopt
regulations
that
are
more
restrictive
than
the
state
regulations.
So,
in
order
to
address
this,
we
have
come
up
with
a
proposal
to
amend
our
ordinance
and
they're.
Basically,
three
key
points
there.
The
first
is
to
define
cannabis,
production,
establishment
and
medicinal
cannabis
pharmacy
and
those
have
been
proposed
or
included
in
your
packet
and
those
are
based
directly
on
the
state
definition.
I
This
is
really
kind
of
a
what
I'm
looking
for
a
housekeeping
type
item.
Basically,
we
are
trying
to
reflect
what
the
state
has
adopted
as
law
into
our
ordinance,
so
that
when
we
as
planners
citizens,
commissions,
are
approached
with
folks
who
want
to
participate
in
these
types
of
activities.
It's
clear
where
these
activities
can
be
conducted
in
our
city.
So
with
that,
we
recommend
that
the
Planning
Commission
for
deposit
recommendation
to
the
City
Council
regarding
the
amendments
concerning
the
medicinal
cannabis,
as
proposed,
the
City
Council,
has
final
decision-making
authority
in
the
proposed
text
amendments.
A
Any
questions
you
step
down
and
we
will
hold
public
hearing.
So
is
there
anyone
here
who
would
like
to
speak
concerning
this
particular
agenda
item
Wow,
this
isn't
as
much
fun
as
I
thought.
It
would
be
okay,
I'm
going
to
close
the
public
hearing.
Are
there
any
other
comments
or
questions
or
discussion
from
the
Planning
Commission
I
will
entertain
a
motion.
D
A
D
L
A
A
D
D
D
L
L
I
click
it
yeah
all
loaded
up
when
you
guys
are
up
there.
Okay,.
L
G
K
D
A
L
L
So
just
to
give
you
some
context
of
the
property
we're
looking
at,
you
can
see
it
in
the
wider
context
map
on
the
left
side
of
this
slide,
the
property
is
highlighted
in
yellow
it's
located
to
the
north
of
the
airport,
just
west
of
i2
15
at
the
very
north
edge
of
the
city
boundary
on
the
right.
You
see
a
closer
up
view
that
identifies
land
uses
around
the
property.
The
property
is
adjacent
on
the
west
to
Rudi
reclamation
and
Sportsman's
Club.
L
That
club
that
manages
a
number
of
acres
of
wetlands
on
the
east
side
of
the
property
you
have
agricultural
and
residential
uses
predominantly
and
then
3,200
West
itself
for
context
as
a
gravel
road
and
2200
West
is
a
two-lane
rural
or
local
Road
and
for
size.
The
property
is
about
400
acres
and
the
frontage
of
the
property
itself
along
2,200.
West
is
about
2/3
of
a
mile,
so
this
is
the
current
city
zoning
map
you
can
see.
L
The
property
is
currently
zoned,
Business
Park,
so
it
could
be
currently
developed
for
a
variety
of
commercial
and
light
industrial
uses,
the
surrounding
properties
to
the
north
west
and
the
east
are
predominantly
agricultural
under
city
code
there
is
owned
a
g2
and
a
g5
and
in
the
county
properties
that
also
surround
the
property
they're.
Also
under
the
County's
agricultural
designation
to
the
south
of
the
property,
you
have
additional
BP
zoned
land
and
then
in
the
county.
There's
a
small
sliver
of
m1
they're,
light
industrial
zone
under
County
regulations
to
the
southwest
of
the
site.
L
You
can
see
the
airport
property
the
zoning
Airport
just
is
on
the
corner
there.
So
for
historical
background,
the
property
has
been
zoned
since
1976
for
commercial
uses
on
the
commercial
designation
was
c3
allowed
for
a
variety
of
commercial
and
light
industrial
uses
in
1995,
the
zoning
changed
to
the
Business
Park
zone,
which
generally
reflects
its
current
zoning.
In
2000,
the
city
did
a
North
Pointe
small
area
plan
or
master
plan
for
this
particular
area
included.
A
number
of
policies
generally
related
to
buffering
and
reducing
impacts
on
residents
that
live
in
that
area.
L
So,
following
that
plan
adoption,
the
City
Council
also
adopted
some
zoning
changes,
including
a
landscape
buffer
into
the
BP
zone.
That
would
apply
on
2,200
West
across
from
residences.
So
as
far
as
the
proposal
background
itself,
they
originally
requested
a
rezone
for
the
property
in
2018
of
October
to
the
m1
light
industrial
zone.
L
The
applicant
went
to
a
number
of
Community
Council
meetings.
We
had
an
open
house
held
by
the
city
and
then
in
July
of
2019,
the
applicant
revised
their
proposal
to
the
current
proposal
of
Business
Park,
one
overlay
and
the
overlay
proposal,
since
that
time
has
been
developed
into
the
current
ordinance
in
your
packet
and
that's
Impa
in
response
to
additional
public
and
city
input.
L
So
again,
the
current
zoning
of
the
property
is
Business
Park.
The
Business
Park
zone
again
allows
for
a
variety
of
commercial
and
light
industrial
uses.
It
allows
for
buildings
up
to
60
feet
in
height
and
includes
a
hundred
foot
building
setback
from
2,200
west,
and
that
was
part
of
the
North
Point
small
area
plan
that
buffer
includes
a
50-foot
landscaping
buffer,
a
five
foot,
berm
trees,
every
25
feet,
four
foot
tall
shrub
line
and
a
six
foot
tall
fence.
L
So
the
applicants
proposal
is
an
overlay
and
an
overlay
supplements
the
existing
underlying
zoning.
It
doesn't
replace
the
underlying
zoning.
It
can
modify
the
underlying
zoning
when
it
differs.
So
the
proposal
from
the
applicant
would
add
some
additional
commercial
and
light
industrial
uses
to
be
allowed
and
increases
the
height
limit
for
development
by
five
feet
to
65
feet.
It
increases
the
residential
landscape
buffer
along
2,200
West
by
10
feet
to
a
total
of
60
feet
of
width.
L
It
also
allows
for
the
allocation
of
that
open
space
requirement
to
be
allocated
anywhere
on
the
entire
development
site
rather
than
piecemeal
a
lot
by
lot.
It
additionally
prohibits
driveways
along
2,200
West,
though
public
streets
would
still
be
allowed
to
connect
to
2,200
West,
so
individual
businesses
couldn't
have
individual
driveways
on
to
2,200
West.
L
It
also
imposes
a
variety
of
environmental
regulations.
Most
of
these
are
from
the
northwest
quadrant
zoning
that
the
city
recently
adopted
in
the
past
few
years.
They're
predominantly
regarding
protections
for
birds
and
Wildlife,
includes
restrictions
on
lighting
restrictions
on
glass,
light-colored
roofing,
which
is
generally
they
do.
L
Energy
efficiency
they've
also
added
a
prohibition
for
development
within
50
feet
of
the
canal,
as
there
is
a
canal
that
runs
through
this
property
and
they've
also
proposed
that
any
wetland
mitigation,
that's
required
for
development
of
the
site,
be
located
on
the
west
side
of
the
property
adjacent
to
the
existing
wetlands
and
I'll
get
into
these
a
little
bit
more
in
the
next
few
slides.
So
as
far
as
what
staff
looks
at
generally
with
a
zoning
amendment,
we
generally
look
predominantly
at
the
master
plan
for
guidance
in
this
case.
L
There's
a
specific
master
plan
for
this
area,
titled,
the
North
Point
small
area
plan
and
again
this
was
developed.
January
response
to
resident
concerns
for
future
development
in
2000,
it
established
a
future
land-use
map
for
the
area
that
designated
this
property
and
properties
to
the
south
as
Future
Business
Park
development
properties.
It
also
establishes
a
future
land
use
expectation
of
agricultural
on
the
east
side
of
2,200
West.
L
So,
as
far
as
the
proposal
itself,
the
proposal
proposes
to
increase
the
allowed
uses
for
the
property.
These
uses
are
generally
similar
in
intensity
to
the
existing
BP
allowed
uses
it
does
make.
Some
of
the
conditional
use
is
permitted
generally
because
of
the
buffering
standards
already
in
this
zone.
Staff
isn't,
as
concerned
with
the
change
from
conditional
uses
to
being
permitted
uses.
Generally.
When
we
look
at
a
conditional
use,
often
times
the
requirements
are
just
additional
buffering
setbacks
berms
things
like
that.
L
Additionally,
the
increased
uses
fit
generally
within
the
Business
Park
designation
that
the
master
plan
calls
for
the
applicant
has
also
requested
the
increased
height.
The
five
feet
is
fairly
minimal.
It's
in
line
with
our
other
similar
commercial
zones,
so
stuff
didn't
have
significance.
Urns
with
that.
The
open
space
allowance
that
they're
requesting
would
allow
for
the
open
space
to
just
be
distributed
across
the
entire
development
site,
rather
than
lot
by
lot
and
generally
they
could.
L
L
It
also
includes
the
driveway
prohibition
from
2200
West
and
that
would
reduce
vehicle
conflict
points
and
cross
traffic
turns
across
2,200
west
into
the
site
if,
by
limiting
it
to
a
public
street,
public
streets
are
generally
more
expensive
to
build
than
just
a
simple
driveway
includes
utility
improvements
as
well,
so
staff
would
expect
fewer
connections
to
2200,
West
and
fewer
conflict
points
and
though
it
doesn't
fully
meet
the
master
plan
guidance
that
the
policy
that
says
no
vehicles
should
access
the
site
from
2200.
It
does
better
meet
the
master
plan
guidance.
L
The
proposal
also
adds
language
requiring
the
north
new
north-south
arterial
street.
It
would
required
for
any
development
whether
they're,
subdividing
the
property
or
just
going
through
a
building
permit
process
again
it
better
assure
that
that
Street
is
constructed
in
the
long
term
and
better
meets
the
master
plan
guidance
and
just
one
note
about
any
development.
Regardless
of
this
over,
what
overlay,
2200
West
with
any
development
activity
would
need
to
be
widened
and
improved
by
the
developer
as
the
property
is
divided.
L
Additionally,
the
Transportation
Department
has
noted
that
they
would
require
a
traffic
study
for
any
subdividing
of
this
property
into
individual
Lots,
and
through
that
traffic
study,
we
could
identify
the
need
for
additional
off-site
improvements,
such
as
additional
paving
down
the
street
from
the
property.
If
the
roadway
couldn't
handle
the
capacity.
L
So,
as
far
as
environmental
context
of
this
site,
it
is
directly
adjacent
to
wetlands.
On
the
west,
the
wetlands
are
actively
managed
by
the
rhudi
reclamation
and
and
hunting
club.
They
are
officially
designated
as
a
migratory
bird
production
area
they've
registered
themselves
with
the
county
under
that
designation,
which
states
that
they
do
actively
manage
the
property,
which
means
they
actively
manage
the
wetlands
on
that
property.
L
The
there
also
is
a
wildlife
concentration.
That's
been
identified
on
the
property
of
birds
that
wildlife
concentration
is
just
to
the
west
of
3200
West,
and
one
important
thing
to
note
is
that
this
property
is
closer
to
wetlands
than
nearly
any
other
property
in
the
city,
including
properties
in
the
northwest.
Quadrant.
L
So,
in
response
to
that
context,
the
developer
is
including
some
environmental
regulations
from
the
northwest
quadrant.
Those
include
the
lighting
restrictions
so
that
there's
not
light
trespass
into
other
properties
window
treatments
to
reduce
bird
impact,
bird
impacts
to
buildings,
requirements
for
roof
color
to
inch
to
a
lighter
color
for
energy
efficiency
reasons,
they've
also
included
a
allowance
to
replace
any
city
require
trees
with
shrubs.
L
That's
been
in
response
to
environmental
concerns
that
trees
can
provide
habitat
for
predatory
birds
that
would
negatively
impact
the
wetland,
wildlife
and
there's
also
a
requirement
for
fencing
to
prevent
trespass
into
wetland
areas.
Additionally,
they
are
including
the
setback
from
canals
on
the
site
on
the
50-foot
setback
that
they're
proposing
matches
expectations
elsewhere
in
the
city.
When
we
have
creeks
or
canals,
we
have
that
codified
and
other
zoning.
L
We
thinks
that
would
be
great,
but
we
don't
have
any
data
about
what
that
expectation
expected
mitigation
would
look
like
or
how
substantial
it
would
be,
because
of
that,
we
are
recommending
an
additional
vertical
noise
and
light
buffer
for
wetland
wildlife
protection
that
would
mirror
some
of
the
requirements
for
the
east
side
buffer.
It
would
include
a
five-foot,
berm
and
six
foot
tall
wall
I
mean
that
was
in
response
to
best
planning
practices
to
buffer
uses
and
better
meet
the
city's
general
environmental
policies
about
protecting
what
wildlife
so
overall
staff
please.
L
L
It
also
involves
clarifying
the
residential
buffering
location
language
to
ensure
that
the
buffer
there,
the
increased
buffer
they're
proposing
along
2,200
west,
actually
applies
where
it
should
apply.
It's
kind
of
a
technical
language
also
the
tree.
The
tree
allowance
that
they're
requesting
through
this
proposal
through
replace
any
city
required
tree
requirements
for
shrubs
and
trees,
shrubs
and
grasses
generally
supportive
of
that.
L
Additionally,
the
berm
and
wall
buffer
that
was
noted
in
the
last
slide
is
condition
and
adding
a
plat
tracker
requirement.
404
the
open
space
designation.
Just
so
that
staff
in
the
term
can
look
at
property
records,
look
at
Platt
records
and
identify
where
they've
actually
allocated
their
open
space
on
the
site.
B
I
think
I
need
you
to
go
back
and
help
me
understand
better
the
language.
So
what
you
said
in
your
staff,
the
part
about
their
arterial
street,
was
that
there
was
too
many
people
in
play
that
you
couldn't
expect
it.
But
what
you
said
tonight
was
a
little
different,
but
then
you
moved
on
quickly.
So
what
is
what
is
proposed?
That
would
work
towards
making
sure
this
arterial
Street
happens.
L
B
L
This
point:
yes,
if
the
property
is
below
it,
ever
developed,
we'd
have
to
work
through
how
that
gets
configured
and.
B
B
L
B
L
A
B
Point
that
is
gonna
happen
and
we
need
that
in
place.
Yeah.
The
other
question
I
have
is
regarding
the
open
space
requirement.
So
if
we're
talking
about
all
of
the
parts
that
they
control,
do
you
calculate
how
many
Lots
that
is
and
times
that
15
percent
by
that?
So
we
still
get
the
same
amount
of
open
space.
They
just
are
consolidating
it
somewhere,
but
we're
not
losing
technically
any
right.
A
L
A
K
H
A
But
I
mean
that
sort
of
open
space
I'm
just
for
now
just
more
discussion
than
this
particular
petrosal,
but
that
sort
of
open
space
if
a
consolidated
could
actually
I
mean
if
it's
not
consolidated,
it's
going
to
be
like
little
islands
in
the
parking
lot
you
know
and
pretty
useless.
So
if
we're
able
to
you
know,
insist
that
it's
consolidated
or
something
like
that
or
and
that
it
be
dedicated
if
we
want
it,
you
know
that
would
be
something
to
look
forward
to
in
future
planning
efforts.
Perhaps.
G
E
K
We'd
like
to
start
by
thanking
all
of
you
for
hearing
our
application
tonight
and
we'd
also
like
to
recognize
all
of
the
other
stakeholders
in
the
room
who
we've
worked
with
for
the
past
year-plus
and
thank
them
for
their
cooperation
to
get
us
to
where
we
are
tonight.
I
want
to
introduce
you
to
the
ivory
foundation
and
clarify
one
thing.
K
One
of
the
big
goals,
there's
three
big
goals
of
the
ivory
foundation:
those
are
education,
providing
affordable,
housing
and
supply
and
other
basic
needs
to
those
most
in
need,
so
that
they
can
advanced
economically
the
big
goal
for
education.
Currently,
the
Foundation
supports
hundreds
of
students
a
year
and
with
scholarships.
The
goal
is
to
support
thousands
of
students
per
year
with
scholarships,
so
the
we
have
please
go
ahead.
K
So
the
goal,
the
big
goal
for
Utah
education
is
fourfold
its
to
improve
access
to
higher
ed,
curb
the
cost
of
tuition,
elevate
completion
rates
and
build
a
more
skilled
workforce.
To
do
that,
you
obviously
need
revenue.
There's
several
ways
to
raise
revenue
for
education,
the
one
that
the
ivory
foundation
is
particularly
skilled
at
doing
is
real-estate
revenues
creating
ongoing
real
estate
revenues
from
real
estate
development.
K
That's
approximately
located
to
the
airport
and
a
key
location
left
in
Salt
Lake
City
for
this
kind
of
development,
as
we've
done
that
the
I
redevelopment
decided
an
m1,
probably
wasn't
in
the
best
interest
of
all
the
stakeholders
we
received
comments
from
and
that
this
BP
overlay
would
most
accomplish
the
integration
of
Research
Park
uses
from
the
University
current
location
to
this
new
location.
So
that's
really
the
purpose
behind
this
Business
Park
one
overlaid
application.
K
So
it
would
be
a
collaboration
between
the
ivory
foundation
and
the
key
institutions
of
higher
learning
in
the
state,
most
notably
probably
the
immersive
Utah
Utah
State
University
in
Salt
Lake,
Community
College.
The
vision
would
be
for
the
RC
of
Utah
and
Utah
State
to
collaborate
in
research
type
uses
and
to
have
uses
such
as
the
West
Point
Center
of
Salt
Lake,
Community
College.
That's
just
down
the
road
participate
in
events
and
programming
here
at
this
new
development.
K
So
what
is
the
University
Park?
As
mentioned?
It's
a
collaboration
between
stakeholders
and
partners
involved
with
the
institutions
of
higher
learning
to
create
a
park
that
is
modeled
upon
other
successful
parks
in
the
country.
A
prime
example
is
one
in
North,
Carolina
called
Research
Triangle
Park,
that's
a
collaboration
between
private
developers,
the
University
of
North,
Carolina
and
North,
Carolina,
State
and
Duke
universities
that
the
key
difference
here,
however,
is
that
this
part,
the
ivory
Foundation
and
the
Board
of
Regents
will
donate
all
operating
profits
to
scholarships
for
students
at
these
state's
universities
and
colleges.
K
So
to
be
clear,
I've
redevelopment,
the
I
every
family,
none
of
the
I
every
for
business
or
for-profit
businesses
will
benefit
financially
from
this
development.
All
of
the
revenues
generated
from
the
development
will
be
donated
in
perpetuity
to
fund
scholarships,
and
the
gift
to
the
Board
of
Regents
of
a
significant
portion
of
this
land
will
be
controlled
by
you.
K
She
and
the
institutions
of
higher
learning,
and
also
they
have
committed
that
all
the
profits
from
that's
the
all
the
profits
and
revenues
that
come
from
their
operation
of
their
acreage
will
be
donated
to
scholarships
in
perpetuity.
In
fact,
we
have
the
representatives
of
you.
She
here,
our
executive,
their
executive
director
is
here
tonight
in
support
of
this
application,
and
we've
appreciated
their
cooperation
in
being
here
and
supporting
us
tonight.
K
K
Why
is
this
a
great
project,
not
just
for
the
University
and
you
she
and
the
other
institutions
of
higher
learning?
It's
it's
a
great
project
for
Salt
Lake
City.
This
is
the
type
of
development
that
will
attract
users
that
may
go
elsewhere
or
would
and
they'll
stay
here
instead,
and
it
will
attract
new
users
such
and
such
as
aerospace,
technology
type
companies
and
those
those
types
of
high
quality.
Tenants
that
will
make
this
a
sort
of
a
flagship
development
for
Salt,
Lake
City,
and
it
will.
K
R
Daniel
did
a
great
job
of
explaining
and
we
appreciate
his
staff
report.
It
was
very,
very
comprehensive
if
there
are
any
questions.
I'd
love
to
hear
those,
but
let
me
just
touch
on
two
or
three
things:
the
the
comment
about
open
space
is
really
spot
on.
We
think
that
by
allowing
through
this
BP
met
overlay,
the
the
concentration
of
open
space
in
certain
areas
will
result
in
us
having
higher
quality
open
space.
R
We
also
think,
given
the
proximity
of
wetlands
in
the
duck
Club
and
bird
production
areas
that
are
nearby,
that
was
some
of
the
language
that
we
are
proposing
and
that
the
staff
has
provided
comments
on.
We
have
the
opportunity
to
prioritize
the
creation
of
on-site
mitigation
that,
together
with
open
space,
will
make
it
so
that
these
uses
are
harmonious
and
integrate
well
with
the
neighboring
uses.
R
We
just
want
to
also
notice
this,
and
that
is
the
staffs
recommendation
of
a
suggestion
of
a
positive
recommendation
as
is
well
founded,
and
the
reason
is
is
because
right
now
this
already
is
a
zone
BP
and
by
adding
these
additional
uses.
What
we
are
achieving
is
a
better
integration
with
Research
Park.
That
was
really
our.
We
had
our
eye
towards
the
research
park,
uses
that
exists
and
the
tenants
who
are
there
right
now
and
what
we
thought
is.
How
can
we
make
it
so
that
if
they
have
expansion
needs
they
stay
in
Salt
Lake?
R
How
is
it
that
we
can
make
it
so
that
they'll
want
to
come
and
expand
into
this
research,
Park,
West
or
whatever
name
it
ends
up
being
branded
with,
and
that
was
a
motivation.
At
the
same
time,
we
wanted
to
reflect
the
kind
of
environmental
values
that
have
been
developed,
and
for
that
reason
we
have
inserted
the
birdstrike
permit
glass
provisions
that
have
already
been
discussed,
as
well
as
the
other
environmental
incentives.
I
just
wanted
to
highlight
just
two
things
and
then
I'll
pause
for
questions.
R
The
the
thing
that
I
think
is
important
is
to
recognize
that
we
have
a
real
opportunity
here
to
make
sure
that
these
improvements
that
are
going
to
go
in
this
area
reflect
the
the
considerable
effort
done
by
the
prior
planning,
Commission's
and
decision
makers
in
coming
up
with
the
area
plan.
The
collector
Road
and
having
that
located
through
the
middle
of
the
project
is
one
prime
example
and
that's
why
we
added
language
to
clarify
that
that's
an
obligation
beyond
just
an
aspiration
in
the
area
plan.
R
The
other
thing
that
I
would
say
is
that
by
confirming
that
the
berming
needs
to
occur
along
the
residential
uses,
where
we're
making
we're
implementing
the
concept
that's
found
in
the
area
plan,
but
making
it
a
regulatory
requirement
in
this
VP
overlay
zone.
So
when
you
balance
all
the
things
that
are
being
proposed
against
what
we
could
do
anyway,
we
are
really
finding
a
good
balance
that
we
think
produces
a
high
number
of
community
benefits.
F
Just
a
matter
of
curiosity,
thank
you
for
presentation
by
the
way,
what
what's
the
approximate
percent
their?
How
big
is
this
in
relation
to
the
current
research
park
sites,
140
acres
and.
K
The
current
research
Park
is
350.
Acres
was
larger,
yes,
and
in
fact,
your
questions
well-founded
part
of
the
discussion
that
we
had
early
on
whether
city
of
Utah
was
they've
outgrown
it
in
many
ways
they're.
Some
of
the
tenants
they'd
like
to
keep
there
are
relocating
outside
of
research
Park
even
outside
of
Salt
Lake
City
in
some
cases.
K
M
R
R
And
that's
really
it
it's
really
the
addition
of
those
uses
and
in
coming
forward
with
a
request
for
those
additional
uses.
That's
where
we
put
a
lot
of
thought
into.
How
could
we
make
it
so
that
the
buffering
is
is
better?
How
can
we
make
it
so
that
we're
addressing
comments
we
received
both
from
the
electric
utility
and
from
the
duck
club
members
about
trying
to
pursue
on-site
mitigation
in
areas
that
would
be
strategic,
and
so
we
added
that
language
to
the
text.
R
R
Then
there
was
one
comment
once
where
someone
said
well,
isn't
this
looking
like
m1
and
it
isn't?
M1
has
a
whole
host
of
uses
that
are
not
in
in
this
particular
zone.
We're
not
trying
to
have
this
be
an
m1
use.
M1
has
I
mean
I
can
give
you
examples.
I
have
a
line
they
have
uses
such
as
check-cashing.
They
have
uses
such
as
a
correctional
facility.
They
have
uses
such
as
rail
facilities.
They
have
uses
such
as
grain,
elevators
and
impound
lots.
R
A
O
G
G
Owen
I
am
the
chair
of
the
West
Point
Community
Council,
a
West
Point
is
the
largest
Community
Council
in
Salt
Lake
City,
we
don't
do
boring
is
our
motto:
that's
because
we
have
the
inland
port,
the
new
state,
correctional
facilities,
the
recreational
Athletic
Center
and
the
Salt
Lake
West
Point
campus
in
our
area.
We
also
have
about
10,000
plus
residents
in
the
last
agricultural
land
in
Salt,
Lake
City.
G
We
have
spent
over
a
year
with
every
development
on
this
and
I
realize
you
guys
have
been
here
for
a
long
time.
You
did
a
tour,
you
did,
but
other
things
been
listening.
So
if
you're
not
I'm,
not
surprised
that
you're
not
halfway
as
excited
as
you
should
be,
we
are
not
just
excited.
We
are
ecstatic.
G
We
started
out
a
year
ago
with
a
little
contention
on
what
we
saw
when
the
em1
concept
was
presented,
and
we
were
looking
at
a
bunch
of
warehouses
which
wasn't
going
to
do
anything
for
adding
the
types
of
jobs
we
thought
the
Westside
deserved
do
take
into
account
a
lot
of
the
environmental
issues.
You
know
we
thought
we
could
do
better
at
that
time.
No
one!
Absolutely!
No
one
I
think
that
everybody
here
will
agree
ever
thought
is
that,
a
year
later,
we
would
come
up
with
a
proposal
like
this.
G
It
is
much
better
than
anything
we
would
have
thought
we
could
have
come
up
with
under
best-case
scenario.
It
is
proof
that
when
government
and
developers
and
the
community
work
together,
we
come
up
with
stuff.
We
didn't
even
think
we
could
come
up
with
that's
why
this
is
important
and
that's
why
we're
excited
and
that's
why
you
should
be
excited,
because
you
are
key
to
being
making
sure
that
the
vision
that
we
worked
so
hard
to
develop
happens.
G
It
wouldn't
have
happened
without
the
commitment
of
a
swan
or
family
who
wanted
to
make
sure
their
legacy
was
preserved
and
understood
this
land
and
what
it
meant
it
wouldn't
have
happened
if
it
hadn't
been
for
the
many
residents
and
community
council
members
who
tirelessly
as
volunteers,
worked
on
this,
they
were
committed,
they
didn't
take
the
time
they
made
the
time
and
they
worked
together
to
do
something
that
was
much
better
than
a
bunch
of
warehouses.
Innovative,
exciting
talks
to
education
talks
to
employment
and
does
what
people
are
always
concerned
by.
G
G
This
meeting
today
is
about
the
overlay
and
the
overlay
is
the
tool
to
help
make
this
happen.
If
you
don't
have
questions,
it's
because
you've
been
here
like
way
too
long,
because
there's
a
lot
of
questions
and
then-
but
that's
not
the
point,
get
this
point
here.
The
point
is:
what
do
you
as
the
Commission
need
to
do
to
help
move
this
vision
along?
G
We
basically
came
up
with
some
guidelines
on
addressing
the
overlay
and
we've
put
that
in
our
letter
here,
and
then
we
also
on
the
bass,
because
you
always
keep
it
to
one
page.
You
guys
right
so
on
the
back
are
our
recommended
modifications
to
the
proposal.
There's
lots
of
parts
to
this.
We
didn't
think
we
were
going
to
list
all
the
things
we
agree
with
because,
as
you
can
tell
from
Daniel
stuff,
there's
lots
there
and
we
agree
with
a
lot.
You
know
and
concur
with
that.
G
These
are
the
adjustments
that
we
thought
were
important
to
be
made
in
with
it.
We
hope
that
you
will
include
in
your
recommendation
to
the
City
Council
and
they
fall
into
three
areas.
One
is
our
first
goal
was
that
the
overlay
zoning
should
be
deliberate
and
focused
on
the
vision,
and
in
doing
so
you
want
to
avoid
generalities
and
inappropriate
types
of
zoning
that
can
that
seeks
to
undermine
its
credibility
and
can
be
used
to
distort
where
we're
going.
G
G
G
This
we
had
about
I
know
maybe
20
of
these
or
30
or
something
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
money,
so
we
didn't
okay.
We
had
printed
these
up
two
years
ago,
when
we
held
a
public
hearing
at
the
State
Fair
Park,
that
our
legislative
representatives
put
together
to
try
to
persuade
the
Utah
State
Legislature.
That
cooperation
with
the
local
people
is
a
good
idea.
G
A
S
S
Heidi
Hoeven,
thank
you
for
this
opportunity,
I'm
a
wetland,
ecologist
working
for
the
National
Audubon
Society,
where
I
help
manage
and
conduct
research
at
our
Gilmer
sanctuary,
nearly
4,000
acres
of
wetlands
and
uplands
on
Great
Salt,
Lake,
protected
for
shorebirds
and
water
birds.
These
are
contiguous
to
part
of
nearly
20
thousand
acres
of
managed
wetlands
west
of
the
ivory
development
property
that
are
designated
and
globally
important
Bird
Areas.
These
notes
are
supplementary
to
the
comments
that
I
submitted
and
it's
included
in
your
report.
S
So
I'm
gonna
get
right
down
to
business
and
say
that
first
I
would
like
to
commend
the
intentions
of
the
applicants
proposed
zoning
codes
for
bird
friendly
elements,
and
you
can
see
them
listed
there
in
the
third
paragraph,
including
wetland,
buffer,
50-foot
setbacks
and
so
forth.
I
would
also
like
to
commend
the
inclusion
of
requiring
a
buffer
and
berm
to
wetlands
by
the
staff
that
lie
to
the
west
of
the
project.
S
S
The
wetlands
and
Wildlife
functional
assessments
done
in
2006
and
the
recommendation
of
60
feet
as
near
as
I
can
tell,
was
based
on
the
wildlife
activity
protection
zones
largely
and
which
are
outlined
in
the
the
samp,
but
when
that
was
just
one
of
the
many
steps
to
reach
the
final
conservation
area
that
was
recommended
in
that
work
and
that
work
was
scientifically
founded.
Looking
to
the
scientific
literature
or
agency
reports
and
experts
that
are
local
here,
it
was
based
on
the
four
criteria
you
see
listed
on
the
front
page.
S
So
what
I'm
suggesting
is
that
the
buffer
needs
to
be
greater
than
60
feet,
not
as
great
as
these
distances,
but
just
to
realize
that
these
are
sensitive
species
and
the
disturbances
that
come
along
with
these
development.
This
development
potential,
which
I
think
is
a
great
idea,
should
be
taken
into
consideration.
There's
other
things
on
the
second
page.
If
you
would
look
at
them.
Thank.
A
P
Me,
thank
you.
My
name
is
Jack
Ray
I'm,
the
president
of
the
Utah
waterfowl
association
and
I'm,
also
here
with
the
Rudy
Reclamation,
which
is
a
duck
Club,
so
Rudy
reclamation
this
year
is
celebrating
its
one
hundred
and
tenth
anniversary.
At
a
time
when
wetlands
were
called
swamps
and
the
only
good
one
was
a
drained
one.
These
people
preserved
over
1,800
acres
of
habitat
anyone
who's
out
there
and
I
know.
A
number
of
you
have
been
a
number
of
people
here
have
been
out.
P
There
know
that
it's
a
natural
marvel
and
it's
something
that
has
been
preserved
in
the
face
of
pressures
for
development
for
drainage.
They
have
resisted
the
temptation
to
profit
from
their
property
and
from
their
water,
and
they
have
provided
consistently
over
in
ten
years,
habitat
for
wildlife,
their
roots
of
conservation
and
preservation
and
nurturing
the
habitat,
extend
deep
into
the
landscape
of
this
area,
and
they
hope
that
that
legacy
will
you
know,
branch
far
into
the
future,
so
there's
another
legacy
here.
P
We
appreciate
the
proposal
of
ivory
and
many
of
the
steps
and
measures
that
they've
taken,
but
there
are
two
issues
that
need
to
be
further
addressed
in
order
to
preserve
the
legacy
on
both
sides
of
the
property
boundary.
One
of
those
is
the
buffer,
and
dr.
Hoeven
has
referred
to
that.
60
feet
is
inadequate.
There
are
many
species
of
shorebirds
we've
attached
to
our
comments.
P
Many
of
the
dozens
of
species
of
birds
that
inhabit
the
areas
that
are
close
to
3200
west
those
species
are
often
sensitive
to
human
activity
and
having
a
60
foot
high
or
65
foot
high,
building,
just
60
feet
away
or
even
a
hundred
feet
away
from
those
areas
is
going
to
significantly
disrupt
the
wildlife
activity
and
the
ecological
value
of
that
habitat.
Second,
the
height
of
the
berm
is
inadequate.
A
berm
of
five
feet
high
is
ecologically
inconsequential.
P
It
won't
serve
the
purpose,
even
if
it
has
a
six-foot
wall
on
top,
it
needs
to
be
much
higher
in
order
to
provide
buffering
for
the
species.
Salt
Lake
City
has
recognized
the
value
and
the
utility
of
buffering
when
it
developed
its
northwest
quadrant
plan
and
incorporated
a
buffer
of
several
thousand
acres
in
the
northwest
quadrant
because
of
the
significance
of
these
buffers,
and
so
there
needs
to
be
a
bigger
buffer
here
and
a
higher
berm
significantly
on
both
sides
so
that
that
legacy
is
preserved.
Thank
you.
Thank.
B
P
So,
in
terms
of
the
berm,
we
suggest
that
the
berm
be
20
feet
high
with
the
six-foot
wall.
On
top
of
it,
it's
important
to
realize
that
these
many
of
these
species
are
very
sensitive
to
human
activity,
and
so,
if
you
have
a
lot
of
traffic,
if
you
have
the
kinds
of
commotion
lighting
that
occurs,
you
know
you
need
to
have
that
type
of
thing.
You
know
this
is
a
sensitive
area
and
it
it's
it's
sensitivity
needs
to
be
recognized
in
terms
of
the
you
know.
P
The
ordinances
and
restrictions
that
are
put
into
place
in
terms
of
the
buffer,
the
buffer,
should
be
something
between
300
and
500
feet.
I
know
that
sounds
significantly
larger,
but
recognize
that
the
buffer
in
the
northwest
quadrant
is
well
over
a
half
a
mile
in
size.
So
in
terms
and
these
you
know
here,
we
have
the
sensitive
areas
literally
right
across
the
street,
from
the
proposed
development,
as
opposed
to
the
northwest
quadrant,
where
the
proposed
development
is
much
further
away.
So
those
values
need
to
be
taken
into
consideration.
We're.
D
Citizen
of
the
city
working
with
the
West
Side
folks
for
a
couple
of
years,
around
development
I'm,
a
former
educator
with
2.9
degrees
and
I,
want
to
speak
to
the
education
component
that
these
folks
had
proposed.
I
became
a
businessman
after
I
left
education.
More
recently,
I've
been
studying,
West
Side
and
East
Side
schools
by
spending
one
hundred
and
days
about
a
hundred
and
fifty
days
in
classrooms,
figuring
out.
D
So,
while
that
isn't
a
necessary
component
of
planning
that
a
project
like
this
is
incredibly
necessary
for
the
folks
on
the
Westside
and
I
think
working
with
the
West
Point,
Community
Council
and
the
foundation
to
see
that
this
happens
would
be
something
I'd
be
committed
to
and
I
know,
Dorothy
and
her
group
is
also
thank.
You
thank.
D
D
I'm
sorry
Bonnie
Christensen,
thank
you.
They
had
not
allowed
animal
kennels
they're
allowing
veterinary
clinics
I
think
it
would
be
a
good
idea
and
I
reached
out.
I
tried
to
reach
out
to
the
mr.
budge
and
mr.
Bates,
but
no
one
replied
back
to
me:
I'm
thinking
that,
if
we're
going
to
allow
a
veterinary
clinic
in
this
business
part
that
we
should
also
allow
an
animal
clinic,
an
animal
kennel.
Thank
you.
Thank.
T
Can
do
that?
Brady,
Fredrik
cinema,
director
of
planning,
Salt,
Lake,
City,
Department
of
airports,
I
appreciate
the
thoughtfulness
of
the
ivory
design
and
I've
appreciated
working
with
them.
Over
the
last
year,
they've
been
more
than
gracious
to
to
talk
about
their
development.
The
only
thing
that
I
would
like
to
state
is
that
I
all
the
the
uses
that
they
are
proposing
typically
fit
and
are
compatible
with
the
airport
environment.
T
The
one
thing
that
we'd
like
to
see
and
and
I've
talked
to
ivory
about
it
and
they're
Ameen,
able
to
put
it
into
their
the
overlay
district
is
that
the
development
should
also
be
subject
that
the
development
is
subject
to
the
airport
flight
path,
overlay
district
and
to
FA
FAA
regulations
as
well.
So
we'd
like
to
see
that
in
the
order
inspire
in
that
it.
T
A
D
Thank
you.
My
name
is
Linda
Freitas
I'm,
the
executive
director
of
Friends
of
Great
Salt,
like
I,
sent
to
David
a
copy
of
my
comments
and
just
for
the
record
I'd
like
to
read
the
last
paragraph,
because
I
think
it
sums
it
up
quite
nicely.
I'd
like
to
thank
ivory
development
in
Salt,
Lake,
City,
Planning
Division,
for
providing
us
with
this
unique
opportunity
to
engage,
inspire
and
recognize
the
collective
responsibility.
D
We
all
have
the
responsibility
to
work
openly
and
effectively
in
shaping
our
future
and
the
responsibility
we
have
as
stewards
for
our
natural
systems
and
the
environment.
We
friends
of
Great,
Salt,
Lake
and
others
believe
this
process
has
the
potential
to
serve
as
a
model
for
helping
to
shape
the
future,
and
we
invite
Salt
Lake
City
Planning
Commission
to
champion
the
development
of
future
ordinances.
Then
we'll
achieve
far-reaching
examples
for
others
to
follow
as
we
look
to
the
future
of
this
place.
So
thank
you.
Thank
you.
B
K
B
L
L
It
may
be
unintentional
that
some
of
those
are
listed
without
a
P
next
to
them,
including
like
a
laboratory
use
so
I,
don't
know
that
that
was
specifically
intentionally
left
out
as
an
allowed
use.
Some
of
those
uses
allowed
in
the
BP
zone
are
fairly
general
like
research
and
development.
It's
it's
defined
fairly
broadly
and
if
a
use
like
laboratory
wasn't
specifically
listed,
we
could
just
say
you
fit
within
research
and
development.
L
L
F
Based
on
the
public
comment
that
we've
received
and
that
we've
read,
it
seems
like
some
of
the
sticking
points
or
some
of
the
recommendations
from
the
community
is
certain
uses
that
get
removed,
such
as
gas
stations,
commercial
parking,
bus
line,
yard
and
facilities.
It
does
the
applicant
want
those
things
to
stay
in
for
a
particular
reason
or
is
I
mean
the
friend
says
the
animation
of
the
project.
R
F
K
A
hotel
use
we
would
advocate
to
remain
example,
would
be
the
Marriott
at
University
Park
at
the
research
park.
Now
the
vision
would
include
that
kind
of
a
hospitality
facility
in
the
new
you
know
the
research
Park
West
or
University
Park
at
this
site.
The
commercial
parking
lot
was
envisioned
again
because
there's
such
uses
at
the
current
research
park
and
to
your
question
I,
don't
know
that
it
was
ever
contemplated
that
that
would
provide
parking
for
airport
users,
but
I
guess
potentially
could
and
then
what
was
the
other
one.
The.
M
O
D
K
K
Was
included
with
the
thought
that
there
could
be
a
buses
that,
with
operating
with
regard
to
programming
between
a
university,
a
Utah,
State
or
the
receipt
buses
could
come
on
and
if
they
can
reach
and
be
parked
there
and
repaired
they're
minimally
to
help
with
programming
from
those
universities.
That
was
the
intent
anyway.
I.
F
K
R
You
know
we've
been
hesitant
to
suggest
that
a
buffer
on
that
west
side
should
be
delineate
it
in
a
number
of
feet.
That
was
the
comment
that
was
made
by
the
Ruby
duct
Club.
The
reason
why
is
if
you
look
at
the
staff
report,
the
staff
report
does
a
very
good
job
of
showing
how
there
are
two
main
power
corridors
in
that
area
that
happen
to
be
located
near
the
entrance
to
the
Rudi
duck
Club.
R
It's
not
the
same
sort
of
value
you're
trying
to
protect,
and
so
what
we
did
is
we
put
language
in
there
saying
if
you're
going
to
be
doing
on-site
mitigation
located
next
to
the
wildlife
habitat,
that's
the
regulatory
requirement,
but
we
wanted
to
leave
flexible
the
number
of
feet
so
that
we
could
achieve
the
optimal
outcome
once
you
get
the
technical
folks
in
there
looking
at
the
site,
looking
at
what
it
requires
I'm.
Looking
what
kind
of
the
way
you
would
be
locating
that
that
wetland
mitigation
area
next
to
these
neighboring
uses
in.
K
Addition
to
that
I
would
say
and
I
I
don't
want
to
speak
for
Jack,
but
in
our
conversations
with
Jack
Ray
and
other
representatives
for
the
waterfowl
association
of
the
duck
clubs
and
also
in
talks
with
planning,
there's
been
some
discussion
about
the
possibility
of
a
banding,
a
portion
of
3200
West,
all
together,
which
would
probably
provide
a
greater
mitigation
impact
on
the
ecologically
sensitive
migratory
and
resident
bird
populations.
Then
the
buffer
and
the
berm.
So
we're
open
to
that
continuing
dialogue.
R
K
A
K
The
scope,
one
thing
I
probably
didn't
do
a
good
job
of
was
touching
on
the
scale
of
this
project.
It's
440
acres,
it's
bigger
than
the
current
research
park,
so
that
type
of
detailed
planning
and
master
plan
hasn't
occurred
other
than
the
the
part
of
the
vision
is
to
donate
the
best
of
the
acreage
to
the
Board
of
Regents
and
to
have
that
centralized
hub
and
programming
for
university
type.
Research
Park
uses
be
closest
to
the
neighbors.
That's
that's
a
general!
That's
a
general
vision
of
what
the
plan
would
look
like
so.
A
I'm
going
to
ask
Daniel
this
question,
which
is
the
research
park.
The
current
research
park
at
the
university
is
sweet,
generous
of
a
generous
of
a
particular
place
in
time.
Let's
put
it
that
way
about
25-30
years
ago
kind
of
time
in
terms
of
urban
planning
and
best
practices
and
so
forth.
All
of
the
buildings
sit
by
themselves,
they're,
all
surrounded
by
parking
by
useless
landscape,
I
mean
useless
landscape,
and,
and
is
that,
and
so
the
reason
I'm
asking
about
the
master
planning
issues
is
because
I
think
there's
a
huge
opportunity
here
to
incorporate.
A
More
sensitive
landscaping
more,
you
know
less
parking
more
attention
in
particular
to
transit,
because
I
don't
see,
I,
don't
know
how
many
people
will
work
here
or
come
here,
but
if
it's
like
the
research
park,
it's
going
to
be
thousands
of
people
and
that
for
them
all
to
come
through,
the
cars
I
think
is
not
very
sensitive.
So
it
seems
to
me
here
and
I'm
actually
a
little
bit
sensitive
about
this
point.
A
But
I
was
on
the
Commission
when
we
approved
some
of
the
issues
with
that
have
later
come
back
to
bite
us
on
the
northwest
quadrant,
so
I'm
I'm
paying
a
lot
more
attention.
Let's
put
it
that
way
to
some
of
the
potential
problems
that
could
arise
and
I'm
I
guess
I'm,
going
to
ask
staff
and
sort
of
what
are
the?
What
are
the
guidelines
for
this
district?
That
would
prevent
some
of
these
things
from
happening
from
the
sort
of
style
of
development.
L
Think
one
of
the
primary
issues
was
the
open
space
requirement
that
nib
itself
ends
up
taking
up
a
lot
of
a
lot
and
creating
that
traditional
business
park
environment.
So
the
allowance
to
modify
that
and
put
that
in
another
area
allows
them
to
have
more
of
a
dense
development
pattern
than
would
otherwise
be
allowed.
L
L
A
Pretty
familiar
with
where
we
stand
on
that
right
now,
but
three
per
thousand
is,
is
it
is
more
more
like
inline,
with
two
thousand
your
year,
two
thousand
rather
than
the
year
2020.
So
that's
something
that
I
mean
I'm,
just
I'm,
very
cautious
about
going
forward
that
and
I
know.
The
intention
is
wonderful
and
I
recognize
that
the
community
is
really
appreciating
this
tremendously,
but
I
am
and
but
the
pictures
are.
You
know
this
of
the
stuff
that
we're
that
we
are
able
to
see
right
now.
L
Not
gonna
add
a
little
bit
on
the
location
of
this
isn't
next
to
any
prime
transit
corridors.
So
it's
not
served
right
now,
so
there
would
be
the
expectation
that
you
would
need
parking
at
least
initially,
and
until
we
actually
had
transit
connections
to
the
site
that
were
significant,
bring
people
throughout
the
valley,
not
just
from
the
university
research
park
to
this
research,
Park
West
well,.
H
Can
speak
a
little
bit
to,
or
maybe
just
had,
some
comments
on
research
park
in
that
development
pattern,
art
our
research
parks,
zoning
isn't
necessarily
what
has
fully
encouraged
that
development
pattern.
A
research
park
has
very
strict
kind
of
covenants
for
everything.
That's
developed
up
there.
You
know
right
down
to
the
type
of
landscaping
that
has
to
be
installed,
they're,
very
much.
Rethinking
that
development
pattern
up
there
now
and
in
the
process
of
remaster
planning
that
whole
area.
H
A
Q
Madam
chair,
madam
chair,
would
you
mind
if
I
ask
the
applicant
a
question
along
this
line
of
thinking
with
research
parks
there?
There
are
specific
provisions
of
state
code
that,
with
respect
to
Research
Park
and
with
respect
to
property
owned
by
the
state
of
Utah,
that
would
remove
that
from
the
city's
jurisdiction.
As
far
as
regulating
land
use
would
the
applicant
be
willing.
You
mentioned
that
you
may
be
transferring
some
of
this
to
the
University
of
Utah.
R
Mean
I
think
the
answer
to
that
is
we
want
to
have
this
b1
project
yeah.
We
highlighted
the
fact
that
there
will
be
a
donation
component,
because
we
think
that's
important
to
show
that
we're
trying
to
have
the
university
be
the
spearhead
or
the
the
main
concept
over
which
all
the
rest
of
the
development
then
revolves
and.
R
Q
R
Q
R
So
I
think
I
think
this
is
a
real
good
opportunity
to
show
how
this
the
city,
in
pursuing
this
particular
project,
which
you
know
in
approving
and
overlay
for
this
type
of
use,
is
really
wanting
to
see
one
project
within
the
overlay.
That's
one
of
the
additions
we
added
to
the
regulatory
language
is
to
say
that,
once
the
city
makes
the
election
to
apply
this
particular
bp1
overlay
to
an
area
that
becomes
a
project
and
so
then
folding
in
something
more
to
achieve
what
Paul
talked
about.
I
think
that's
something
worth
exploring,
but.
D
R
R
One
of
the
questions
is
this:
so
when
you
get
into
the
point
of
then
master
planning,
where
you're
going
to
put
your
open
space,
you
have
to
make
sure
that
you
bring
forth
your
first
plot.
You
have
to
identify
an
additional
area
where
you're
going
to
be
dedicating
the
open
space,
and
what
you
want
to
do
is
by
saying
that
the
overlay
is
creating
the
boundaries
of
the
project.
R
You
now
know
how
many
acres
you
need
to
be
aiming
for
to
show
that
you're
meeting
the
15
percent
threshold
we
didn't
want
to
have
a
scenario,
not
that
there
have
been
scenarios
with
other
projects
and
other
developers
where
they
say
the
15
percent
will
be
achievable
to
maligne
the
last
phase
and
by
the
time
you
get
there,
it's
maybe
changed
ownership
hands,
and
so
one
of
the
things
we
built
in
with
the
help
of
the
staff
is
the
concept
we're
establishing
a
single
project
with
this
one
overlay.
So.
R
A
R
That's
what
I
was
going
to
say
is
that
the
comment
made
by
vice-chair
about
that
particular
about
master
planning
is
well
taken.
We're
looking
for
those
kind
of
comments,
because
once
we
get
a
rezone
approved,
then
it
we
can
go
into
the
foundation
and
say
it's
time
to
now
invest
in
the
master
plan
and
some
of
the
comments
we
heard
from
Planning
Commission
and
that
we
need
to
account
for
before
we
start
bringing
in
plats
is:
how
are
we
going
to
tie
all
these
pieces
together?
R
A
K
I'm
sorry,
good
attorney,
Nelson's
point
and
one
of
his
comments.
I
need
to
make
it
very
clear
that
this
donation
is
going
to
the
Board
of
Regents.
It's
not
going
to
the
receive
Utah
or
any
particular
institution
of
higher
learning.
That's
going
to
the
Board
of
Regents
and
then
you
she,
the
Utah
System
of
Higher
Education,
will
coordinate
development
by
the
various
institutions
of
the
portion.
Donated
can
I
ask.
Q
And
I
don't
know
that
this
this
issue
is
is
ripe
enough.
Yet
for
right
here,
I
just
wanted
to
ask
the
question:
I
think
it's
something
that
the
City
Council
may
be
more
concerned
about:
I'm,
not
sure
that
the
Board
of
Regents
can
hold
property
I'm,
just
I'm,
not
familiar
enough
with
with
that
part
of
them.
You.
A
A
K
C
I
think
that
I
I
mean
Darrin
kind
of
went
over
some
of
them,
but
between
the
two
documents
that
we
received.
There's
a
pretty
extensive
list
of
concerns
based
on
what
is
being
proposed
by
the
overlay
and
what
the
community,
the
community,
through
the
Community
Council,
as
well
as
the
Berner
organizations
have.
C
They
seem
like
things
that
are
manageable
and
I
don't
know
if
this
is
the
right
point
in
which
to
address
each
one
of
those
things,
but
there's
and
I
don't
see
anything
unreasonable
in
here,
but
it
speaks
to
just
what
what
you
need
and
like
maybe
we
need
to
like.
Have
you
go
through
this
list?
If
you
haven't
already
and
say
well,
no,
this
is
acceptable,
or
this
is
okay.
I
mean
we
got
this
today
or.
R
So
we
can
I
mean
I'm
happy
to
take
comment
from
the
group.
If
you,
if
the
group
would
does
I
mean
from
the
Planning
Commission
on
this
I
mean
we
didn't,
for
instance,
registered
home
daycare
and
home
occupation.
We
agree
that
doesn't
need
to
be
involved
because
there
will
be
no
residences.
We
just
didn't
bother
to
put
it
in
the
prohibited
column,
happy
to
do
that
place
of
worship,
institutional.
R
B
H
That's
that's
something
you
can
do
you
could
that
would
move
it
along
to
the
City
Council
and
allow
them
to
start
considering
the
issue,
and
you
can
put
that
condition
on
there
that
they
please
consider
the
community's
concerned
and
they
in
the
land
uses.
I
mean
it'd,
be
helpful
with
the
more
information
that
you
have
to
pass
along.
I
mean
if
you
have
some
concerns
specifically.
B
Getting
this
right
now,
this
additional
stuff
is
hard
for
us
as
a
as
a
commission
to
sift
through,
along
with
the
applicant
that
it's
I
just
feel
like
that.
That
might
be
a
better
approaches
to
we
recognize
these
are
important
and
we
want
the
applicant
to
take
this
time
in
between
us
and
the
City
Council's.
You
have
answers,
but
that
the
City
Council
gets
a
note
from
us
is
like
we
want
you
to
look
at
these
comments.
We've
received
from
the
community
sure
and
then
you're
ready
for
them.
That'd.
B
R
R
H
A
At
that
time,
to
hear
from
these
people
as
well,
I
just
I'm
a
little
uncomfortable
punting
it
up
to
City
Council
rather
than
tabling
it
because
I
feel
like
if
we
tabled
it,
we
could
get
a
response
from
staff
and
from
and
from
the
applicant
to
these
things
and
specifically,
and
they
could
probably
work
it
out
pretty
easily
with
their
knowledge
of
what's
going
on
here
and
so
I
know.
That's
that
nobody
likes
to
table
things.
R
E
For
for
me,
I
mean
I,
agree
with
Amy
and
a
lot
of
it
I.
Don't
these
questions
about
the
berm
Heights
and
the
there's
two
o'clock
there's
two
problem.
One
problem
is
that
we're
making
a
change
that
why
we've
got
the
applicants
intent
even
if
the
foundation
decides
not
to
move
forward,
they
sell
the
land
that
these
impacts
are
still
going
to
happen
on
these
properties
right
so
that
they
appreciate
the
applicants,
intent
knife
full
faith
believe
they're
going
to
follow
through,
but
if
they
don't,
what
we're
playing
here
is.
E
There
is
gonna
happen
and
I
don't
know.
If
I
could
ever
really
get
an
answer,
that
I
would
feel
qualified
to
make
an
assessment
on
on
the
berm
height
or
the
length
between
you
know
the
the
buffer
zone.
That
I
would
feel
like
I
mean
you
guys
could
make
one
argument
and
the
you
know
the
the
Queen
you
could
make
another
argument
and
I
don't
know
if
I
ever
really
could
distill
down,
which
one
would
be
meaningful
and
so
I
mean
I,
I'm,
ready
and
prepared
to
move
this
forward.
E
Exploring
the
questions
on
the
deed
restrictions
and
then
I,
I
I
think
there's
a
five
that
the
community
council
lists
that
they
should
be
considered
as
can
not
leaving
it
not
making
them
permitted,
but
as
conditional
uses,
which
is
the
bus
line,
yard
repair
facility,
that
vehicle
truck
repair,
the
financial
institutions,
the
package
leverage
facility
and
the
parking
commercial
I'm,
not
convinced
that
those
are
needed,
necessarily
in
a
in
a
vision
for
what's
being
presented.
I
think
there
are
impacts
that
could
happen.
E
Should
you
guys
not
move
forward
with
your
plan
that,
having
some
a
conditional
you,
you
know
having
the
ability
to
be
a
conditional
use
where
we
would
have
some
say
in
it,
because
they
still
could
be
moved
forward.
You
just
have
to
deal
with
a
little
bit
of
process
would
at
least
kind
of
protect
the
community's
concerns
and
what
I
think
is
a
legitimate
one
with
traffic
and
air
pollution
another
you
know,
other
questions
of
you
know
what
happens
in
that
area.
E
D
A
E
Things
being
conditional,
I've
made
a
motion,
I
mean
I
could
but
ma'am
would
be
fine
with
those
being
changed
to
be
conditional.
I,
don't
think
it
really
impacts
these
the
applicants
in
a
meaningful
way.
It
does
add
some
protection
of
the
community
and
should
the
applicant
not
go
forward,
it
does
add.
Some
protection,
you
know,
gives
us
more
strength
to
make
sure
something
good
goes
in
there.
I.
F
Agree
with
Amy,
though,
that
I
think
a
little
bit
of
additional
process.
Maybe
it's
between
staff,
the
applicant
and
the
community
to
determine
what
are
appropriate,
permitted
and
conditional
uses
and
I,
don't
know
that
we
can
determine
that
tonight.
I
think
I
think
we
could
take
the
five
that
the
Community
Council
recommend,
but
whether
or
not
those
are
appropriate,
I
don't
feel
qualified
to
determine
so
I
think
it'd
be
great
if
that
was
was
further
considered.
F
I
personally
I
think,
first
of
all,
I
think
the
project
is
fantastic,
I
really
hope
it
goes
through,
and
I
really
appreciate
you
for
bringing
this
and
I
think
the
public
comment
was
actually
some
of
the
most
informed
and
professional
public
comment.
I've
heard
on
any
issue.
So
thank
you
for
those
of
you
that
spoke
I
want
the
project
to
move
forward,
but
I
also
want
the
public
comment
to
be
recognized
and
I.
F
I
would
say
we
move
it
to
the
City
Council,
with
the
recommendation
that
staff
and
the
applicant
refine
the
proposal
and
the
City
Council
to
look
at
I.
Think
the
three
things
were:
berm
height,
buffer
width
and
and
the
list
of
permitted
and
conditional
uses
with
further
further
study
and
refinement
to
those.
F
On
the
information,
the
staff
report,
the
information
presented
and
the
input
received
during
the
public
hearing
I
move
that
the
Planning
Commission
recommend
that
the
City
Council
approve
the
proposed
amendments
P
the
proposed
amendments,
PLN
PCM,
2018,
zero,
zero,
eight,
six,
five
business
business
park.
I
overlay
zoning
map
amendment
and
PL
and
PCM
2019
zero,
zero,
six,
seven,
seven
Business
Park
park.
I
overlay
zoning
text
amendment
with
the
conditions
noted
in
the
staff
report.
L
N
H
F
K
I
B
So,
first
of
all,
I
just
want
to
commend
you
wait
that
you
got
Dorothy
to
be
enthusiastic
about
something,
that's
positive
and
that's
a
big
deal.
So
you
still
have
a
lot
of
work
ahead
of
you,
but
I
feel
confident
that
you
all
can
rise
up
to
that
and
and
meet
this
challenge
and
do
something
good.
So
I
vote.
Yes,
Darren.