Salt Lake City 2018 Planning Commission, 8 Aug 2018

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Planning Commission Meeting - August 08, 2018

Description

Salt Lake City Planning Commission Meeting - August 08, 2018
https://www.slc.gov
https://www.slc.gov/planning/
https://www.slc.gov/boards/planning-commission-agendas-minutes/

A

Everyone will go ahead and begin with this evenings. Planning Commission meeting we'll go ahead and start with the approval of the minutes from our last meeting, which has been a while July 11th 2018 do I have a motion to that effect.

B

Well, move: we approve the minutes from the last meeting. Thank.

A

You Maureen do I have a second second from Clark Matt, yes, Amy, yes, Andreas I will abstain. Mr. chair Maureen, yes,.

B

In Clark, yes,.

A

All right it passes going to the report of the chair and vice-chair I, don't have anything to report, except that it is my son's eighth birthday tomorrow. So happy birthday to my son, I, don't know if I can do that right. Anything the report morning, no.

B

A

Right and over to the director, the director seat,.

C

I'm, the only thing I have to add is that is it'll, be extremely important that we have a quorum for the next few meetings, specifically until the end of September. We have a very large time, critical project that the state has handed to us related to the inland port that you'll be briefed on at the next Planning Commission meeting. It's really time-sensitive the Planning Commission will need to make a decision, or at least a recommendation to the City Council and there a final meeting in September.

C

So we would ask that if you can't make it to a meeting to please let us know and do everything possible to to attend the next. We want you to come to every meeting, but it's really important to the next month. Okay,.

A

Great I will be here all right. Let's go to our first item. This is some unfinished business from our previous meeting and Kelsey is here to talk to us about the ninth West Towne, how tiny town Helms a planned development and preliminary subdivision plat.

D

Okay, I'm just a reminder of the proposal. A rod Enger the applicant representative is requesting approval from the city in order to construct for single-family attached units located at 624, south 900 west. The applicant is requesting plan development approval for the relaxation of zoning and subdivision standards. The relief includes lot dimension standards due to the proposal for zero lot line for each single-family attached unit.

D

They are also requesting three Lots without street frontage, and these requests are primarily due to the depth of the vacant lot. The subject property is located in the RMF 35, which is a moderate density multifamily zoning district.

D

Please note that townhome units are incorporated into special, affordable housing, which provides prices to homebuyers within a lower-income market as well as market rate.

D

The proposed plan development includes modifications to the lot dimension standards in the arm of 35 zoning district. The modifications are due to the proposed pulminary subdivision. The applicant is proposing the lot lines for the for single-family attached units at the building wall. This means that each lot will outline the building wall for each unit. This is unlike a condominium project, because the proposed Lots include the ground located beneath each unit. Well, each individual lot does not meet the requirements established in the arm of 35. The overall width and square footage meets the requirements.

D

The width is approximately 64 feet, 64 point 25 feet and approximately twelve thousand six hundred and thirty-two square feet.

D

Okay, so the Planning Commission tabled this item On June 13th and requested the following revisions. They requested the applicant delineate each unit with alternating materials along the northern elevation moves the front door to the center of the eastern elevation at a front, porch element and the window should reflect a residential design.

D

So the applicant modified the northern elevation to include a hardy board, siding on unit 1 and 3, as well as cultured stone on unit 2 and the gable feature on unit 3.

D

The apple can also move the front door to the center and recess the front entry on the eastern elevation.

D

The applicant did explore a front porch element, but without modifying each floor floor plan he went forward with a proposed on grade porch and then recessed that front entry as well. So there is more outdoor space, so in summary, staff is still recommending approval for the plan, development and preliminary subdivision, as proposed and subject to complying with all applicable regulations and the conditions listed in your motion sheet happy to answer any questions at this time: Thank You, Kelsey, yeah. Of course, I.

A

Don't have any questions to start off? Does anyone have any questions for.

E

Its a recess kind of area, rather than a rejecting.

D

E

Are some problems with the street and the project like you could going out require different changes? It.

D

Would have required a reduced front yard setback.

F

D

Would have added an additional modification.

G

A

Anything else, okay, thank you and then applica would like to come up and maybe just focus in on some of the changes that you made to address our concerns at our last meeting.

H

As we may recall, the last being, we thought there was some thinking that the North Face of the building you.

A

May want to make sure the microphones is close to your mouth, so you get good sound and how's.

H

That yeah, that's great. That's.

A

H

The North Face now we have gun and individualized each house so that it has a unique back wall as well as the front and side walls. So we have done that. Accordingly, you don't see the colors there, but there also would be different colors as we complete the television color scheme on the building.

H

So each house will have its own individual flavor on that back wall, although it won't be seen much, there's trees already there to kind of hide that, but but we do have the siting in the combination of stucco and then stone, and then the third unit, siding painted with a couple of gables can leave it out on the second level and then the back unit would be came to authority. That's a stucco finish on the back assad there on the north, so we feel that we've accomplished that and I quite like it.

H

Actually, I think it looks better and I agree- that's a good good change. We made the second item on the request list.

H

There was that we moved the front porch on the front unit from the corner, where it was originally over to the center of that house, so that that does look like and then represents the entire project as a front door for the house there, and we have accomplished that by moving it to the center because of the setback requirements the way they are without completely read starting all over again, we we couldn't really come out with a porch, so we went back into the building with a with a recessed, porch and added the.

H

It's not a deck area, it's actually. What did you call it? That was a good word. You used just some.

D

On grade porch, okay,.

H

D

H

You called yeah patio on the front there, that's and with a short fence about ten feet out from the house just going across, so it does gives us a little element of privacy, but it also opens it up to the neighborhood so that it's part of a home look. So we feel like with those adjustments. We have accomplished what we attempted to.

I

H

In our efforts here and the last item, of course, we just changed the window sizes a little front to make a little taller and I think they do look more like the old neighborhood there. That's surrounding it, so I feel like we've made the changes that would make this a very doable project now and I think it meets the requirements that you folks had asked us to include in that project. So with our efforts, we we would encourage you to approve it tonight, so we can actually get started all.

A

Right, thank you very much appreciate it and I appreciate that extra time you put into addressing those concerns and I do think it is vastly improved. My.

H

A

Do we have any questions or comments or motions on this.

J

Mr. chair I'd like to make a motion I'd also like to just express my appreciation to to the developer. I think he's done a great job in making those changes. Thank.

H

J

Accommodating of him, so this is regarding peel and sub 2018: zero, zero, zero, five, nine and peel and sub 2018 zero zero. Two two three based on the information in the staff report, information presented in the input received during the public hearing. Along with this follow-up presentation, I moved the Planning Commission approve these petitions with the conditions, as listed in the staff report, all.

A

Right, we have a motion by Clark. Do we have a second I.

B

Was like second.

A

By Maureen and we'll go ahead and vote Matt. Yes,.

E

A

B

A

Yay Maureen, yes,.

J

A

J

A

Right, thanks for your work with us, congratulations all right! Moving on to our first public hearing item number one: this is the Fairmont conditional building and site design review, Daniel, hello, hi.

K

Thank you. So this is a development proposal again at 1034 East Elm Avenue, it's located at the intersection of elm and McClellan Street in the sugarhouse area. The property is located in the sugarhouse business district two zone and, as Laura is adjacent to a large multifamily development across the street to the north there's. Also, an ongoing under construction apartment building to the east, to the west of the property is single-family residential zones and to the south is a Auto Detailing shop.

K

Also, the streetcar station is just a minute, walk down the block and you can see that in the map as well so just up front, we are recommending approval of this development, we'll go into a few details about it, so I'm just going to do a quick overview of the building and the site, but I'll leave the architectural details to the developer to go over. This is a rendering of the building, as viewed from McClelland and Elm Street L Avenue. It's a six story.

K

Building about six stories, 59 units and office space and the entire ground floor has uses, except for the parking structure entrances themselves. The corner has a large two-story tall Lobby and the entire ground floor is glass with the upper levels, mostly composed of brick, just for orientation as well. This is a view from above Elm Avenue. You can see. The placement of the building on the site is toward McClellan Street and they've set the building back from the lower scale residential properties on the west.

K

By about 45 feet 265 feet, the property line does jog a little bit and there is parking in the rear yard, but the majority the parking is underground and within the building itself.

K

So because this building is located in the sugarhouse business district to zone any building over 20,000 square feet or taller than 30 feet has to go through this conditional building and site design review process, and that's why the project is here before you today. This building itself is 60 feet, so the CBS dr standards generally deal with pedestrian orientation of the building and features of the building and also deals with overall visual interest of the facades of the building. You can request some modifications to the specific design standards for properties through this process.

K

Like setbacks and glass percentages, but the intent of the standards still must be met and the projects in the sugarhouse zone are also reviewed against the sugarhouse design guidelines, which are about 110 different guidelines dealing with landscaping, parking building and architectural details.

K

So the developer is requesting a small modification through this process, they're requesting a small 1.5. What about one and a half foot step back modification? So the building itself would meet the 15-foot step-back requirement at the upper levels, which is required for any building in sugarhouse has to have this upper level step back, but they are pushing the front of the building in word a little bit into the pretty by about one-and-a-half feet and that's to expand the sidewalk a little bit more to get an 8-foot sidewalk on the ground.

K

So technically, the upper level is separated from the lower facade by only 13 feet, but generally it's other buildings on that block or actually built up to the street, so they're all about 15 feet from the property line. So it's minimal modification staff still thinks it meets the intent of the standard which creates a consistent Street wall. On the upper levels, that's 15 feet from property line, so we were recommending approval of that modification.

K

Additionally, technically the balconies are within the step back area and they're, proposing some small balconies. It's a small encroachment, they're visually transparent. It does add some visual interest to the facade. It also allows for more activity visible to and from the street, with people on their balconies looking down at the street. So we're also recommending approval of that modification as well as they both still meet the intent of the standards, otherwise the building meets or exceeds all of the minimum design standards and Zoning standards.

K

There was also a question about sidewalk configuration that came up from the community council. The developer is proposing an 8 foot wide sidewalk with 3 foot wide park strip, they're accomplishing that 8 foot wide sidewalk by insetting they're, building a little bit so that they can add some additional pavement at the ground level.

K

The sugarhouse community council did prefer that today pave the park strip and put the trees intrigue rates, but the sugarhouse Business District guidelines specifically call for a maximum 8 foot wide sidewalks and there is some benefit to a landscape buffer from street activity for pedestrians. There's also a beneficial benefit. It's more comfortable walking environment. If you have some sort of buffer between cars and your walking experience, so we are recommending approval, as is as they propose with the 8 foot wide sidewalks, because it does meet the sugarhouse guidelines.

K

Just to note, though, the city is working on a redesign of that segment of McClelland I'm working with the property owners and any design will and core will accommodate the bikes separately from the sidewalk, so the bike, so the sidewalks are not intended to accommodate any bicycle traffic. That would be separate.

K

Overall, the building does meet the CBS D our standards on the pedestrian oriented at the ground level, with a high level of storefront glass entry feature treatments, including large entry features and some hardscaping treatments across the sidewalk that call attention to the entrances overall, there's also a high level of visual interest. There's a lot of brick detailing there's a lot of window details with some shadowing and there's a lot of modulation of the building front itself, which creates more visual interest and otherwise also complies with all the other applicable guidelines.

K

So, overall staff is recommending approval of the development with some final details to be delegated to staff, specifically landscaping, specific plants, hardscaping more specific brick, details, final signage for the building and ensuring that street lighting is installed in the park strips so with that I can take any questions. Okay,.

A

Thank you very much Daniel any questions. Right now before we have the applicant come up.

G

Okay, all right.

A

Thanks and we'll have the applicant come on up and we tried to limit our applicant presentations to ten minutes or less so that would be great since we've got a long agenda today, we'll.

L

Keep it brief for you, so excellent Daniel covered most of it, but we, my name, is Alex Lowe, the developer on the site, and we appreciate the opportunity to be here tonight. This is Peter Berger, with mve architecture, who's, the architect on the site.

L

It's just a couple things to highlight: we've been working on this design for a long time now worked very closely with the community council and also the city staff to make sure that we comply on the the various points that Daniel pointed out and with the community council to make sure that this is a project that we can all be proud of. We are from the area born and raised in Salt, Lake and close to the sugarhouse district, so this was near and dear to our hearts.

L

Just a couple things to highlight on the design side, one of the things that we wanted to really focus on is navigating the delicate balance between the old and the new, and so, as you see on the design with the the red, brick there and kind of the sugarhouse district, we think that's more a tribute to what sugarhouse is and has been, and then with the glass on the street and the activating street level and also the metal panels on the tower. There is kind of pointing a little bit to the future.

L

A couple other just modifications that we've made as we've worked with the Community Council and with the city staff, is one we're very concerned. If we can just let's go so we were, we were concerned about our neighbors to the west, and so one thing when we initially had our design. We.

G

L

An l-shape where a part of the building was going right up very close to our landscape buffer to the property line to the west, and, as we looked through, that we felt like that was infringing a little bit too closely on some of the residential neighbors to our west, and so we went back to the design table and we've pushed the building, far east as possible to give a buffer between us and the residents to the west.

L

And so, as Daniel mentioned, we have about 45 feet, 265 feet of a buffer to the residents to the west. The other thing that we did is, as Daniel mentioned, is we pushed our building one and a half feet back from the east side of the property line, and that was to accommodate the 8 foot sidewalk. That was very important to the community council, and so, whereas most buildings are building right to the property line, to maximize the space of their buildable square footage.

L

That was something that we wanted to do to accommodate the City Council. The last thing that I would just mention.

L

We love the walkable nature of this neighborhood, and so one thing that we've done is: we've incorporated a bike share program in the community, where residents can use bikes that they can share and just enter a code and take their bikes around the neighborhood, which we think is an important point part of sugar house and what makes this neighborhood special so and the last thing that I would just say is that the ground floor office that we're putting in is inactivated use our company.

L

It plans to actually office out of that space, and so we plan to be there. We're invested in the community and we're excited to see this project and the area be very successful. So anything nothing.

A

Further just happy to answer any questions that you guys may have great. Thank you. Both very much I have to say I, really like the design of this project and whoever did your rendering of the sort of night scene. I. Think that's! That's really good Peter gets all the credit. Thank.

L

A

In fact, I think it's gonna be one of the better-looking buildings in that area. So I appreciate that very much can you speak to the I know. You just mentioned the office space on the main floor and then you're using a lot of the space for the lobby and then I guess the bike share stuff as well. Is that so that will be the entirety of your main floor space? Is that correct, that's correct and did you look at doing any other sort of retail or anything that might engage the the public more? We.

L

Looked at that, it's it's difficult with house how narrow the space is to do much more than we've done. You know. Obviously, retail in this area is, we know it's desired and it's actually can be very valuable space. This is a little bit harder kind of at the end of McLellan, where we're a little concerned that retail would not be as successful there.

L

So we kind of went back and forth and what we could do to activate that ground floor, which is one of the reasons we decided to put our office space there, which is obviously a very good thing for the surrounding retailers in the neighborhood yeah.

A

Definitely: okay thanks anything else, Amy so.

F

Along those lines, is there an option to do retail if you decide to move your offices somewhere, are you building it with the ability to then put retail in there? If that becomes an option.

L

Again, we think it's a it's a narrow space for retail, but if down the road, McLellan continues to be activated and I mean we would be incentivized to then. If we could get high rents than that in that area, then we would be incentivized to try to put.

F

Anything part of the thing is we're looking for a smaller rental spaces for smaller shops and not food part of the reason, McClelland I think struggles is because it's 99% food, a mix of retail. It really helps keep those things activated. So I just wanted to inquire if you were designing it and constructing it in a way. If, in the future, your offices weren't located there that they would be amenable or able to be rented out as retail, whether they're I think you would find actually many tenants who want some narrower or smaller space yeah.

F

A

Are parking to the the code minimum for for that space for a commercial use so whether the loads end up- and you know using.

M

The space or not, it will be able to handle someone.

A

L know we're not subsidizing.

L

The parking or going with a less parking ratio, it's actually getting all parked to code. So yes, at the end of the day, if a different use comes along, it can be rented out. Okay,.

F

I have a follow-up on the sidewalk question related to a lot of the community comments that were in our report and photos and whatnot. So you know that side of McLelland on the old showroom for granite furniture, initially that parking strip was grass and now it's rock and rock is the worst thing.

F

If you want to have pedestrian movement, whether you have eight feet or not, because you can't walk on it safely, you can't have a stroller or a wheelchair or a walker, and so that's one thing that, and while the guidelines specified 8 feet, the community has been actively asking for 10 feet for good 8 to 10 years.

F

So the need for wider sidewalks is there and 8 feet is a great start, but what how I mean I'm inclined to want to have more hardscape that people can walk on there and then trees in the grades, because it allows for more movement right now. You literally can't have two people walking this way. You have to give a single-file, because you only have 2 people on the sidewalk at once and then, when you start out with grass. Okay, that's great people walk on it and then there's nothing to stop.

F

You then, from just putting rocks there that then it's basically unusable safely for anybody else, and so I'm personally inclined to see a wider sidewalk through that kind of a treatment, and then it's less maintenance and then there's less option to then turn it into something: that's literally unusable because you don't want to maintain grass which I get.

F

However, how do you feel about that? I.

L

Mean so especially when you introduce strollers and people trying to walk by each other and every all the points that you're bringing up, we think make a lot of sense and honestly we're very open to having additional sidewalk they're, not necessarily the landscaping strip, we're taking a little bit our cue from the city and in the council there. We did have a long meeting today with various departments in the city to talk about what we can do with McClelland and I. Think our message from the beginning has been we're happy to do either.

L

So we think both will look good and so do we think an 8-foot sidewalk works. Yes, we do do. We think it would work and look great if we had a larger sidewalk or a little bit more of a plaza space there. That works as well for us and so I think that there's some design considerations that are being as far as what's happening elsewhere, I'll McClelland, what's happening on the other side of the street.

L

But our message has been that we're happy to accommodate and we want to work together with the city and their staff to make sure that that Street becomes something very special which is what's in. What's the intent.

A

Okay, any other questions before we go to the public hearing. Okay, thank you both very much all right. Let's go ahead and open the public hearing on this matter and we will start with our Community Council for sugarhouse and that is Judy short, come on up and you've got your five minutes.

N

Thank you, I'm Judy short, the land use chair for the sugarhouse Community Council. We like this project, I, think they've they've made some good design decisions, I. Think we especially like the fact that the back side, the west side, has a nice buffer to the short houses that are along Elm Street. On that side, the the parcel to the north, it has as a real tall building right around those houses, and it's just wouldn't want it to be my backyard. It makes it unlivable. So I think this is a good solution.

N

Amy stole my thunder about the wide sidewalks, but I'm gonna reiterate it anyway, because she's right we've been talking 8 to 10, feet, sidewalks foot sidewalks for years now, because you can't accommodate an open door, a baby carriage, a bike, a four-year-old and walked down the street. You know that.

N

And the the planner talked about the coming of the McClelland trail. Actually it is the McCullen trail, it's just not very it doesn't have any signage and things right now and you've heard me talk about it. Also so I think a self-fulfilling prophecy is for every developer to say retail doesn't work and if nobody makes it work, you know what it'll never work and all these conversations we've had about the trail use the Pearl Street. As an example, I mean we could have it. That activated with probably not a whole lot of very expensive changes.

N

So look at the at the drawing that has that first floor, retail or whatever you call it first floor space. Most of it is the office space that will be six employees, then there's a secretary desk and then there's the bike share program and the leasing office. I guess is part of the first floor. None of that's real active, not a lot of people coming in and going out and sitting around and talking so I really would like to see them rethink, maybe put the Bike Share down in the garage and do something more fun.

N

In the in the front.

N

An extra signage we've talked a lot about place, making signage and I think they're on board with that, especially as we try to identify the trail and where things are in sugarhouse, we've suggested cutting off the northeast corner of the building.

N

Just enough to make that corner seem a little wider that wouldn't take a lot away from the building and maybe put those two benches that are up north by the dog park down by the door where people might be going in and out a place where they might actually be used and I want to make sure they know the benches they're providing or vandal-proof. There's a perfect picture of a nice flat, wonderful granite block to sit on. That's the perfect thing for the skateboarders to knock all the corners off and it'll. Take them five minutes.

N

So they need to find the right stuff and they can talk to my stepson who's, an expert at that he can tell them what to find. You need a you know, little balls on the seat periodically, so that it's not easy for them to escape quickly.

N

I think that's really all I have to say we like this a lot right.

A

Thank you so much Judy I, don't have any other cards on this, but if anyone would like to speak from the general public, now is your chance to do so.

A

Seeing none we'll go ahead and close the public hearing on this and go ahead and have Daniel and the applicant come back up and go to any other questions that we might have I'll start Daniel. Maybe you can go into a little more detail on the options here. Remind me, I should have looked better when we were there is it? Is it two lanes the row? How many lanes is the road? It's just one lane each way.

I

G

A

Is there a lot of room I think you were mentioning, there's an option for the city at some point to widen the sidewalk into the road and take some of the road space into more sidewalk. Yes,.

K

There's a lot of extra payment that could only be.

A

Taken so there is plenty of pavement to do that. It's not like we're working with the.

O

A

Already and and that and that specifically is being addressed or that's trying to address the McLellan trail issue. Yes,.

K

I was just trying to link that 21st south end of the mill Kalan trail to the park itself. Okay,.

A

Okay, great thanks any other questions.

F

When I was paying more attention to them, the Clairol design, it was basically going to be on the east side, so it aligned with McClellan straight across there. Wasn't the trail actually wasn't not going to be on the west side of the street. Has that Sigma I know it's still planning, but has that significantly changed that they would divide it? It's.

K

It's still an option: that's there, but they're exploring all sorts of different options at this point. It's it's kind of all over the place. Yeah.

F

P

We're trying to narrow.

K

Down options with the developers and I've been having meetings with the developers, mostly transportation, division themselves,.

F

K

There we're moving things around and seeing what will work best. So it's not locked in on the side for a bike. No.

F

But I'm gonna say that I think for movement and safety wise to cross 21st South having the trail going both sides of McClelland and then try to converge right there is, is a dangerous proposition. So I don't see a lot of opportunity for the trail to be established on that west side in front of their building. I mean definitely you'll have interaction and play with it wherever it goes, because one side is going to get this trail. The other side is going to get all that street parking right.

K

L

Would say it seems like one option: that's gaining momentum is kind of creating a shared, a shared space here with kind of pedestrians, bikes and vehicles, and making this a 10 to 15 mile per hour road, and so that bikes and pedestrians will come through bikers and pedestrians feel comfortable I'm using the road, but then also I'm factoring the cars so not necessarily a trail, that's on the east or west side, but just making it comfortable for everyone. That's coming to this space, so it seems like that's again we're not leading that charge.

L

It's just from our meeting today. That seemed like that's where transportation is kind of heading, but I don't know if that's I wouldn't.

K

Say there's anything locked in yet, but but it's an option that came to the front. The meeting well.

A

I, don't I, don't know that there's anything on this project that we can do to enhance that, but.

F

It sounds like there's happening, which is great, there's nothing. We.

A

F

A

Yeah anything else, though. Okay do we have a motion.

E

I missed track, make a motion. Okay, first won't appreciate the applicant and the you guys really done a great job of thinking about a bunch of different things being good neighbors, and you should bring more projects before us. So based on the information, the staff report, information presented, I input received a public hearing, move the Planning Commission to approve petitioned PLN PCM 2018, zero, zero, three two: three, the Farrell conditional building and site design review with conditions list of the staff report. Okay,.

A

We have a motion by Matt. Do we have a second well? Second, second, by Maureen, no.

F

I have comments: okay,.

A

F

Would really like us to have a discussion about the sidewalk I think that this is I, don't know that we want to put a condition on it, but I don't feel like allowing it to be grass or whatever is the appropriate thing here we have the opportunity to actually get some usable sidewalk space, which we really don't have a McClelland I.

E

Don't know what a lot of conversation happening, that a lot of information that we aren't really necessarily purview to, but the eventual, whether it's grass or not, is not really. It seems like there's flexibility in what happens going forward right, yeah.

F

I think there's flexibility, I, think that I'm concerned that we have the opportunity now to try to establish some sort of direction, because then what ends up happening is what we see on the other side, where it's just rocks and it's totally unusable and it's unsafe to walk on yada yada, and so, if, if you know part of the Planning Commission is looking at okay, how do we, you know, try to address some of these things that we've seen happen, that we want to not continue to see happen as we try to promote a pedestrian, oriented, pedestrian, friendly pedestrian and moving business district?

F

That and and the community has brought this up, that I think it just warranted a little bit more attention from the Planning Commission. His.

A

Is the park strip under our purview.

K

Yes and this point out the struggle that staff had was that we have to look at standards and guidelines and see if it calls for anything in particular, and in this case it just didn't call for anything greater than a feet. So we struggled to compel find any way to compel a developer to do the additional width.

A

C

Fast that you yeah actually have a park strip ordinance in our landscape section that does dictate a minimum amount of basically landscaping vegetation. So you have to have a minimum of 30 percent of live material within that I. Just kind of wanted a point unless there's an actual recorded.

C

Beautification district scenario, which we don't have along this street, so I had caution against a conditioning full hardscape, because there is ordinance requirements that they have to yeah.

F

But they meet that ordinance requirement just by the trees they may, which.

C

F

Exactly what happened on the other side of the street and.

C

They may meet that with the trees, I'm not sure, but I wanted to so.

F

C

F

A sense I think that ordinance, you just plant your trees and then you have hard scape and you still met the ordinance of live material. If.

C

That meets the 30% I, don't know I.

A

Mean it sounds like the you're not wedded to the idea of a grass or whatever you're kind of open to whatever the city ends up coming up transportation wise with this trail and how that's going to connect into the whole thing. I guess, I agree with you. Amy I, I, completely understand I think we need some wider sidewalks generally to promote pedestrian use, but I guess I'm comfortable, allowing the process of the city deciding what this trail is go look like and how it's going to look the.

F

Trail is not going to hit that the trail is not going to be part of the parking strip, though it's.

E

Question for staff I mean with all this stuff is happening with the trail and what's happening on that road is the. Could the park strips gonna evolve over time? It's to me doesn't seem like that's set and what that's going to be if you're going to a street, that's 15 miles an hour like Regent Street, or something like that. You're gonna make changes to the whole thing right. This doesn't.

K

Lock it in in perpetuity nothing.

E

It's locked in there's.

K

Nothing no prevents.

E

The development from adding adding hard scape correct I mean they could ready. You could still like hard scape. If you wanted so I guess, I mean.

L

This is a pretty fluid process, what's happening.

F

L

And so I think we would be wary of setting certain parameters when we don't know what's happening across the street I.

F

Mean I'm comfortable with that and I understand what you're saying I think in some ways, I just feel like that's part of the role of the Planning Commission is to try to address some of these issues and knowing that we could get something completely unusable, like you see across the street that that's what I want to avoid and I don't know the best mechanism to do that, but I think the community is also expressed that to it. Maybe it's not hardscape, but I.

F

Don't I, don't know how to go about trying to so look into the future of how to create some sort of a box where this can fit. Where you know, we don't want something that becomes unusable to or pedestrian the.

L

Only thing that I would add there is that I think all of our interests are aligned from that standpoint and obviously we're putting a lot of investment into this property. This is a property that we're not looking to build and then just sell like a typical developer. We plan to own this forever, and so we are interested in what we've communicated to the city, the Transportation Department. Is that we're willing to contribute to the enhancement of mcclellan. So what that ends up being we're not sure yet, frankly, I mean I just communicated.

L

What, with what seemed like, was getting traction earlier today, but I don't know what direction this will go, but we are willing to even you know, help with that. You know financially because again we think that benefits the neighborhood. We think it benefits our project, and so that is just something. I know that probably doesn't necessarily technically address those concerns, but we are. We are committed to that and we want to find something that works for the neighborhood and for the street.

L

F

Other owners said that to me.

A

I don't know if, if you have maybe a substitute motion that would be applicable to this particular project or maybe you're looking into opening up or asking staff in the future to look at changing I guess.

F

I would just ask staff to, as you you know, do the final approvals and whatnot that you very much consider how a pedestrian can still utilize that parking strip for movement.

F

Okay, so I don't want to see it with cobblestone rocks.

K

You you could put something into motion: oh there's, something that absolutely isn't going to work in that Park strip area. Further commission I, don't.

F

Know do I mean do we need to condition it or can we just like say this? Is you know, pay attention to that stuff, I, don't know.

A

Depends on how much do you want it? I'm.

E

Mr. Jarrett yep.

G

E

Like to call of ocean or go it's that called a previous question, okay,.

A

We'll go ahead and vote and see where this goes Matt. Yes,.

F

A

F

Q

Yes and I do want to think of the team as well forever it's a very nice project and you guys have done nice work. Maureen.

A

G

A

G

A

Right passes, congratulations. Thank you.

G

A

Work all right. Moving on to the second item of the public hearings conditionally used for the Samoan independence, seventh-day Adventist Church and welcoming David back glad to see you upright.

G

Thank You Weston.

G

Okay, so, as you noted, this is a conditional use at 1624 South 1000 West. This is for the Samoan independent seventh-day Adventist Church, in our ordinance, defined as a place of worship.

G

Sorry, overall site photo up on the screen for you. There is an existing church building at this site with parking on the north side of the building. Essentially, they are replacing the existing church. Building with a slightly larger building in a similar footprint will include a residential unit for visiting clergy, which previous administrative past administrative interpretations at the city have ruled that that isn't allowed use that it's not considered like a hotel kind of use that it's it's common at some churches and the parking has accounted for that they will need to do a lot.

G

Consolidation again, just very brief site plan, showing kind of the location of the existing building on the site and the new building is in a similar location, a little bit of a rendering of the building, and so looking at the zoning ordinance standards, it meets the standards for conditional uses again. Looking at all the different impacts, it's essentially replacing the same. You set a similar scale, so there's not any additional anticipated detrimental impacts and client complies with the criteria and the detrimental effects determination.

G

So staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approved this conditional use great.

A

Thanks any questions yeah.

F

I, just have an educational question for me, so they were there requiring a lot consolidation. Why hadn't, alep and consolidated before with the same use.

G

Probably over time it I don't know, I can't speak to when it was first built. Maybe that was missed at the time or their parking may have expanded over time. But, as we are reviewing, things are coming in for a new lease we do look at. We do put that as a condition on getting their building permit. So.

F

The lock consolidation would just be for now what is currently say like the building and then the park on that. Yes,.

G

They're on two separate parcels: okay,.

A

Okay, we'll go ahead and bring up the applicant in.

A

And then just give us your name and you got 10 minutes sure.

G

Or less it will be much less than that. Make no dobra with architectural Nexus I'm the project architect for the project and David's done.

E

A great job of explaining the project I just wanted to add that the owner is they've, worked really hard to fundraise, for this they're really excited to get here and we've been happy to help them get to create something that serves their congregation.

G

And the community and meets all the setbacks and high requirements of that zone and the neighbor projects.

E

Too, there's another church to the north and the multi-family housing project to the east, so there's and we've talked to both of them, so there's very little impact there.

G

I'm just happy to answer any questions. Ok,.

A

Thanks any questions all right, thank you very much. We'll go ahead and open the public hearing on this matter, starting of course with the any representative of the Community Council for the area.

G

Information was sent to the community council, they didn't ask staff to present. They indicated that they had no concerns with the project.

A

Great, thank you. Anybody from the general public wanting to speak on this matter come on up yeah. You need to come up to the microphone, though, so we can get you on the record.

A

And once you get there just give us your name and you'll have two minutes to give your remarks shouldn't.

H

Take that long, my name is Ernest hards I live directly across the street to the east of the church and I agree with that I think it looked much nicer than the old building. That's there there being good neighbors to.

G

H

G

Been there so I'm for it great thank.

F

You so more question, so they currently are in the current church. Now the.

H

Same congregation, doubt of the church to make way for the demolition of this one.

F

H

A very old and dilapidated building, it's been there for quite a number of years, so yeah. It would really be a nice asset to have something new there great.

A

Thank you very much.

H

A

Else, seeing none we'll go ahead and close the public hearing on this, and are there any questions or do we have a motion? Mr.

F

Chair I'll make a motion all.

A

Right thanks, Amy based.

F

On the findings and information listed in the staff report and the testimony plans presented I move that the Planning Commission approved the requested conditional use application, PLN PCM 2018, zero, zero, three seven for a new church building for the Samoan independent seventh-day, Adventist Church, subject to conditions one and two, as listed in the staff report, all.

A

Right, thank you. Amy. Do we have a second I'll.

E

A

I can by Matt we'll go ahead and vote starting with Clarke, yes, Maureen, yes, Andreas, yay, Amy, yes and Matt. Yes, great! Congratulations! Good! Luck! All right! Moving on to item number 3! This is the birdie.

A

All right, hi, Molly, hi.

R

Musical chairs tonight do hats, okay, so the birdie is a planned development located at the southwest corner of second south and second east, and they are in the plan development process for a building height that doesn't meet the minimum height for a corner property in the d1.

R

The this is the site at the corner of second south and second east.

R

Here's, a rendering of the project. The proposed building height, is approximately 76 feet. Four inches as proposed. The applicant has some changes that they're working on which may impact what the final height request will be. So I will let them talk to you about where they are in that process.

R

hmm In the meantime, I did want to talk a little bit about what the purpose is of the zoning in this area.

R

So the d1 zoning requires a 100 foot, minimum building height on corner properties, so at the intersections of all of our main streets building height is defined as the vertical distance, measured from the average elevation of each face. The building to the highest point of the wall of a flat roof building, and our zoning code allows modification of that through the plan development process.

R

R

This is kind of the the general building height. Seventy six feet, four inches one of the the purpose really of this zoning is so that the taller buildings on these intersection corners really help to kind of enclose and make a place out of these. What are very large intersections of very wide streets and taller buildings can help kind of create more of a place with that with tolerable features.

R

The applicant made some revisions at the end of June that provided a little bit more prominence to the corner, with some changes to the facade that we felt helped to contribute to that prominence of the corner without reaching that 100 foot building height.

R

The as I said, heightened corners emphasize the intersection as a node or a place on two other corners on the north west corner of the center section is the second and second building which is on the National Register and is only three stories. So we don't anticipate that this building will change and become a 100 foot tall building and then on. The southeast corner is the First Methodist Episcopal Church, which is also on the National Register.

R

One of the features of the building is a roof deck accessible by the residence, which is a amenity that meets the livability recommendations of the downtown plan.

R

The building also has some of the units proposed, have balconies approximately 27 square feet which and three feet in depth, so they're pretty small, pretty tight balconies, but they are outdoor space for residents as well, and this is also in line with master plan, livability recommendations.

R

There, as I said, there's a number of changes that the developer is working on, that the applicant is working on to address service, can service access, emergency access and in particular, building height and so I'm, going to skip ahead to the developers.

R

Presentation in one second, we received two comments from the public on this. One was at the open house suggesting that, with the two historic buildings on at this intersection that a lower height building would be acceptable and more in scale with those two historic buildings and a letter from the downtown Alliance supporting the project as it provides infill development needed housing units in commercial space in a very pedestrian oriented design, and they at this point, staff is not ready to recommend approval of this project.

R

We recommend that the Planning Commission table this project until some of these design details can get worked out. Some of these issues just came to light within the last week after this was already notified as a public hearing. So anyway, we're recommending cabling a decision on the proposed development at this time. Okay, any questions.

G

R

J

Have a quick question, maybe free for you and because it was noticed for a public hearing. Is it required that we hold the public hearing or are we just prevented from having a public hearing if we didn't notice it, because I feel like it's not in the interest of staff or the public to give feedback on something that we're tabling and they're going to come back with other information on, and then we end up having to hold a longer public hearing because they have to feedback tonight and the next time they come. We.

C

Do need to have a public hearing we advertised it right. There is some benefit the issue. If there is any issues that come up with just the issue of a under 100 foot tall building, it would be nice to actually get some feedback I think from the public if there is any, but we do have to hold the public hearings since we advertised it.

A

Okay: well, go ahead and have applicant come up and give us an update.

A

A

They put it in.

A

Well, Molly's, getting it up lunch, give us your names and yeah.

S

So I'm Jake Williams I'm the project manager on this project for CW urban, the developer and.

O

I'm John Gower than the registered architect on the project.

S

So we actually we've had some good discussions with Molly as well. A lot of these issues came up. Fire had some feedback like last Thursday, so we've been rushing to try and get some solutions for you beforehand. We feel like, ultimately, the design the overall design is not going to change the overall height. It might vary by a few feet. I think just from our meetings today, between fire and the stuff that we've been able to come up with the ultimate height of the building will be closer to 88 feet.

S

So it's actually pushing a little bit closer to to the hundred feet, but it's as tall as you can go in a wood structure which was kind of our limiting factor on this site and it still fit within the context initially that we, the initial feedback, that we got on the context from the community council. When we met with the community councils, they they supported and liked our design because they felt like in the existing historic context with the second and second building and the church that really the scale of this building fit.

S

And so we we've kind of pushed forward with that. As far as the design goes, the other thing that has changed so I wanted to just give a brief overview and I think. Ultimately, when Molly and I spoke about, maybe we just pull this and don't take everyone's time.

S

I think we looked at it as an opportunity to get some initial feedback and maybe use this more as a design exercise to get your opinion on some of our art design, so that as we go and resolve some of these issues with with the fire marshal, we can also incorporate any initial feedback that you guys have as a commission. So ultimately, this site, one of the the hardest things has been and really what's driven us to ask for the reduction in the 100 feet.

S

Is it's only a quarter acre site that is further limited by the fact that, as you, let's see sorry I'm clicking too far, look at the site plan we're basically filling up the full the full lot with building.

S

However, one of the things that came up last week was that the Gallants ins gun shop, which is next door to the west, has footings that encroach on our property that were not recorded anywhere that we just found last week, which makes our building then move three feet to the east or not move the building stays there, but our parking garage shrunk by three feet.

S

So it's caused some reworks in this ground-floor split space, but this has been the tricky part is to go up to a hundred feet and to get parking sufficient to service the market need for this area even to get to our 85 feet, where we're at currently we're having to do mechanical parking stalls, and basically it's a small elevator that stacks three stalls three parking spots in one space, and even at that, it's still hard to get the amount of parking. We need for the 85 feet in height that we're proposing.

S

So all the stalls is you look at this site plan that have this triangle here are actually stacked and have two or three high in those stacks and ultimately, what makes it hard is. This is a corner site and we feel like it's a really important corner to the city, so it's been. Our main focus is making sure that we still leave some commercial space, something that can be active, particularly along 2nd, south and occupying this corner.

S

So this is commercial space and then our really, our only big amenity to to our residents, is along 2nd East, which we have created, apparently keep you in the wrong button. Sorry, we've created kind of a co-working lounge area, so the lobby really expands and has fireplaces and has a full kitchen, and we want that to be an area where residents can go and plug in and work from from that space and really activate the street on the ground floor.

S

So keeping that space has been crucial to us and it's been really hard with the parking to make it fit, which is what has really limited our height on that hundred feet. But we feel like with Molly's help we were able to really address the corner and make that a prominent feature and then, with the scale of the neighboring properties. We still feel like it's a very fitting project for for the site and I'll. Maybe let John talk to some of the specific details that we're pushing on the exterior of the building so.

O

We really want this to be. You know, since the area has such nice historic buildings, you know we want to keep maintain a high caliber of quality with materials.

O

So all of the street base materials is a is a durable material like this here and that's either kind of fluted like this, as you can see in the picture on the right or it's a smooth panel that you see on the left a more of a monochromatic contemporary design, yet a very high-class quality and we're using aluminum, clad windows in lieu of vinyl, so that the building kind of maintains the high caliber of aesthetics and quality to match. What's the adjacent properties and.

S

Then also on the lighting Molly's been very helpful to help us really get a lighting plan that we feel like activates, the pedestrian walkway, all the signage that sits above that the doorways will be illuminated like that, and we may light there at the top. But that's really been the focus is how can we make this ground floor even though it's contemporary feel very active? It's got.

S

12 foot, floor-to-ceiling glass and we're we've been working with the downtown Alliance to hopefully find a local retailer, or maybe a little coffee shop to fill that corner space and hopefully compliment the active uses that are going on across the street, with beer bar and bar X, and talk idea, 27 and the different neighborhood amenities that are that are happening in the area and not.

O

Know Amy I like how you brought up that there's people looking for smaller retail spaces, that's kind of what we're gonna offer here is the retail space is 1,500 square feet, so be good for a small local coffee shop or you know a company, that's just starting out. That needs to be downtown, but you know can't afford this gigantic space to lease out, so we're kind of trying to work with local brokers to find a good local company to go in right there. So.

S

If you have somebody that you know is looking for a small retail us.

O

S

Take their name, but then, and then there are other amenity for for the residents, as my I said, has really been a focus as the rooftop is making them really we're working with a local landscape architect who has done some really neat stuff to make a really active, rooftop space and give fire pits and barbecues in a place where the residents can can spend some time outside and enjoying the the urban atmosphere.

S

Ultimately, those amenities are really kind of what we're hoping to push, as always, is really the community within a community that this building will offer its own little community. That can then go out and and serve the greater community, but we'd be glad to take questions and feedback so that we can bring it to the to the next meeting.

S

I think for us with my mom, has been really patient, as we found a lot of things out from the fire marshal just last week that have caused some changes, but I think ultimately we're to the point with them that we feel like the building design is not going to change. The heights may vary just a little bit and we're working with them just to work around how we bury the power lines and some of the stuff generally it it hasn't, come up at this stage in our design process.

S

It's been more in the building permit side of things, but since it came up, we've been working with with Molly and with with george ott, and the fire marshal to train come up with the right solutions, but ultimately the design that we'll build is going to be the same. Just some minor height and width changes. Okay,.

A

Any questions comments, andreas go.

Q

For it mr. chair mm-hm, so um right now, what is your final heights right now? Is it 81 feet, 82 or 88, so.

S

And this is just because we like this morning, we're talking to our structural designer, so I don't have a final height, I think just from our calculations. It's looking like in between 86 and 88 feet at the top of the parapet, as Molly had shown, it.

Q

Okay, yeah, which is close to closer to the 100 yeah.

S

It's a little bit closer than what we had proposed, originally we're trying to stay in a lower construction type and it just hasn't worked out with fire. So that's what pushed us back up? That's.

G

A

What is the minimum parking requirement that you need to me here.

S

It's a has a half style minimum and a half style maximum. So that's another part of the request would be world in between the no you barely hitting that we're at like point we're actually at point eight. So for us as far as financing in the market goes, we really should be at point 1 and there's award.

S

There's a workaround to get point 1 or not point 1 to get one style per unit approved it's hard to finance it with a bank underneath one stall per unit, but we're so we're kind of in the middle of that is there.

A

An opportunity to do more of the to do a taller, podium to add more I mean since you've got boundless height there. Can't you do more podium to do more park table the.

O

Problem with that right now we're already a tall podium. It's a it's we're sixteen feet from level 1 to level 2 floor to floor, so that we can stack those cars. The the International Building Code only allows the type 3 8 construction, we're doing that your roof plane has to be the max can be, is 85 feet. So if we were to increase that higher, like you're saying that would push the overall building and that construction type higher than what's allowed per code, you can do what.

A

S

And that's kind of for us just with the parking in the way. It is the jump in cost to go to steel or to go to concrete at this many units. We can't we just can't make that it's not financially feasible. To do that, we want to I really wanted to yeah, try it, but it's not quite there. You guys have financing.

E

For this project, yeah.

S

E

Couldn't secure financing do steel or concrete it.

S

Jumps, it almost doubles the cost per square foot to build that you.

O

Know with the narrow sight and the parking complications, it's you can't put more units in to justify that cost. So.

S

I'm, pushing the limit parking is kind of a limiting factor. Just cuz. We can't get more really a lot more units out of it. So that's been where we're stuck. It's only a quarter acre site. So it's it's tight. So.

A

I am I'm a fan of yours and I love the projects that you've brought in they're.

G

Worth the wait, what's.

A

Up, that's right worth the wait. Yeah, but I. Don't love this I, really don't I! It feels to me a little bland. It feels like some with all the vibrancy and the kind of quirkiness of that part of that Street right there with bar X and and the funky second and second of the art gallery across the street. It just and- and maybe that's maybe that's on purpose- to not take away from those, but it seems like it's not really meshing with the with the streetscape there as much as I think it could and I.

A

Don't know you know, I'm, not an architect, so I don't know. If there's some limitations that come into play with the podium and I am so I'm. You know we see so many podium stick projects that they all kind of look the same and I and there's probably some limitations to that that I'm, unaware of but I just I, don't feel like I know. You know, I was looking over the standards here again to see the compliance and a lot of them with the plan development.

A

Are you know how it how it fits into the neighborhood how it fits in the community and I? Don't know I, don't even feel like it does a lot of that stuff. Aside from the missed opportunity, the room you know and you're telling me these things and again, I'm no expert, so I have to take what you're telling me at face value.

A

But you know we, you can build up to three hundred and some-odd feet there and- and we have a huge housing crunch in our city and I'd hate, to see some density that could be used not be used, and so that to me is a little disappointing as well.

A

So I would be hesitant to go down the path of allowing reduced height. Even though I hear your I hear your constraints and and I understand that that's problematic but I, know I know it's done elsewhere. I know: we've we've seen other buildings on small footprints and going taller and Manhattan. Does it all the time? How do they do it? Now? It's physically.

S

Get $300 a square foot and ring.

E

Do you own the lot, no.

S

We're under contract currently contract.

E

For a lot, this.

S

Is kind of the the sticking point for us as far as closing on it and we did try to initially we approached gallons to try and expand the site. So we could fit more parking and he's just he's willing to sell, but he's not really willing to sell at this point. So.

A

Any other comments before we go to public hearing I.

Q

Have a comment it's funny, because usually we have to work with buildings that are too tall and wanting to be shorter, and this time it's the other way around, and you know trying to get it taller I. Just that was kind of ironic I.

S

Did also want to just address speaking to the to the design and in in defense of it I think some of these details that we looked at we looked at the beer bar. We didn't want a copy traditional. We wanted to kind of key off of it, so we use a darker palette, we're using some really cool metal shrouds that will go around all the windows and no awnings that we felt like complimented.

S

Some of the industrial, like rah feel that you get from the neighboring properties like we're, leaving the concrete raw because of what's going on next door. We didn't want to go, build another brick building that copied and looked just like that, and even the color palette of keeping it kind of monochromatic. We fought the same battle of like every when you put the same colors as everybody else on these buildings.

S

They look the same, and so what's something we could do design wise that maybe push the envelope a little bit, even though we're kind of limited on the size of the openings and all the different things that wood construction offers. I think that was one of the things we try to do is really push something that's a little more clean. It still got some of the raw feels that cue off of what's happening next door, so those textures that we're using in this material that's kind of a new material. We tried to avoid stucco.

S

It's got a really cool mitered corner that when the light shines down on it from up above is gonna, put really cool shadow lines that add some texture and dimension that maybe isn't isn't reading from one rendering and and maybe that's something we can work on for the next one is showing some of those design decisions that we made that, even though the box might look similar because that's a five story over one we're really trying to do make some design decisions that aren't the same striped bass, stucco with a dark another dark next door, just to try and kind of combat that so I appreciate the feedback.

S

But that is something we're trying to fight as well and I. Think if we felt really strongly that we did that as far as queueing off of what was going on next door without copying it yeah and.

O

And to kind of echo that to as others that have looked at this project are shocked, that it is a wood building and it's the the rendering you know far away, might look like every other podium, but our openings are maybe even twice as large as some of the openings. That you're seeing everywhere else is that our structure engineer has really been bending over backwards to make it work, because we we want a lot of glass. We want a lot of you know, views to the city and and like Jake says we we paid homage.

O

We wanted that pedestrian level to be kind of gritty. You know to match the adjacent, but then we wanted to be muted yet elegant for the levels above, because just that we don't want to take away from the great character there. So I don't want to put this big bright flashing element on the corner, because in in our opinion it would take away from that cool character, so muted, yet elegant is kind of what we were going for. Okay,.

E

Thanks, do you know how long that Lots been for sale? It's.

S

Been four so for a while I think they've gone through two or three different buyers that couldn't make the site work and backed out.

E

I'm out, we no idea why I know this, but I feel like it's plenty for self for a really long time. Yeah.

S

It's bits, the limiting factors are just the size of the site, and now that we know the footings are coming onto our site, it makes it even smaller, there's quite a bit of power lines that we're having to deal with and fiber optic lines and things that we're gonna have to bury and deal with that make it a really tough tough site.

S

But we I think because we're from here locally, like the murals everything about this little corner, we love and that's why some of the design was driven by that and I did want to speak to Molly talked about each unit has balconies. Those balconies are bigger, now they're four feet on the normal ones, and then even the studios have a Juliet balcony, so they have a sliding, a sliding door that can open up like a balcony even on the smaller studio units. So it's a Juliet balcony on those as well.

A

Okay, any other questions comments before I do public hearing? Okay, thanks guys, alright, let's open up the public hearing starting first with anybody representing Community Council all right. Anybody from the general public would like to speak on this okay, seeing none we'll go ahead and close the public hearing and come back to the Commission for I guess motion, since nothing is particularly changed.

E

I have some questions for staff. Okay, um a lot of times in a project like this comes before us and there's some issues, particularly that are code related right with fire and a lot of times. You guys just ask us to approve it and then just delegate it back to you, especially because in this case seems like we're approving a lower height, which is bizarre for this body. That means that it seems, like that's. The big hang-up with this whole project is the height gonna, actually being lower, not taller. Yes,.

R

And because the height is the question that is before the the Commission, and that is the question that is also triggering the fire departments.

E

Do you think it's gonna come back lower than the than the 80 feet? I mean they're saying it seems, like their height is limited because of its a wood structure. Right.

R

E

Was gonna come back lower than like 70 feet? Is that what you're.

R

Well, the I'm, not an expert on the fire code, but the the design that is in your staff report is a type 3b construction, which is the concrete podium with the wood stick frame above and the maximum height by fire code, not building code and fire code that can be used with that type of construction is 75 feet because it is limited by the height of the fire apparatus. So the ladder that extends up from the truck can only reach a building maximum height of 75 feet.

R

So with that limitation, the specific design that we talked about that I talked about in the staff report was identified as 76 feet. Four inches, which is one foot four inches above 75 feet, so the fire department would require them to drop the building down for that type of construction 275 feet, which would then lower the ceiling height for I. Think two of the floors.

S

Though the there's kind of two.

R

S

The fire marshal is concerned with the top of the roof deck. So wherever there's people which is at currently it's at 75 feet it in our current design that we had gone through with Molly and that was type three a and then the parapet which extends three and a half feet above. That is what then gives you the additional actual building height so moving forward where we're at now, because we had to shrink ceiling heights which ultimately, we didn't find out, and we don't really want to do we're gonna change.

S

We were changing the building type to a 3, 3 3, a which allows you then, to go up to 85 feet with the wood, but that is capping the wood structure.

S

So the hard thing on this site is we're required to go to a hundred feet. However, if you go over 30 feet, that's when fire has all of their issues that are kicked in over 30 feet, and so anything that we're dealing with now is considered. If we go to the three well, you can speak to 3a as a high-rise building versus what 3b was you're allowed to stay under 75 feet. Yeah.

O

So, essentially, anything over standing five feet is a high-rise building. So that means you have to have two points of access for a ladder truck. So we've proposed that we're gonna go to a 3a which you can go 85 feet and that's why we now are bearing the powerlines on 2nd east, so that then we can allow for louder tracked truck to get on both of the street facing facades.

O

In addition to that, since it's tight on the South facade and the West that are boxed in by buildings, we we proposed to the fire department to do a higher density of sprinklers fire sprinklers so that they feel comfortable that it's a safe building. So so yeah like Jake, said anything over 30 feet. You'd have this issue, regardless of its wood, steel or or concrete.

S

And that was kind of where we ended to is: is there an option to approve based on?

S

We clearly have to get all of those things approved to be able to build the building with fire, but there are some of those limiting factors which we've been working Mali's had to take too many of my calls in the last four days, because the fire marshal didn't get back to us till super late, so we've been trying to figure out the best workaround for it so I it wouldn't go under that seventy-five feet, but we're trying to actually push it over that now.

R

One of the things I noted in the analysis of the plan development standards, which is labeled, page 22, but I- think it may be further down in your actual PDF document.

R

Efore of those standards we talked I talked about the that compliance through the plan. Development review does not. This goes back to your original question does not guarantee compliance with the International fire code and yes, in some ways, those details get kind of hashed out as the applicant moves further through the building permit process and they're more design. Details are required through that drawing through those drawings, and things like that, however, because the specific requests before the Commission is about building height, and that seems to be a moving target right now.

R

We want to make sure that that is confirmed before we ask you to make a motion on this project.

E

You don't think having this body set a floor and then delegating all these decisions back to you that they comply, not gonna is you'd. Rather have it come back here? Yes,.

R

In part, because there are certain like there's some other other issues regarding.

R

Loading service, other aspects of the building, what hasn't really been I know the rooftop roof deck is a very key amenity for the applicant, but if that becomes a not you know an occupy above lore according to the fire department, it very well could get axed from the project, but it's also a key component of the project's compliance with the standards. So I want to make sure that those things are kind of locked in before I.

R

Don't want to force your hand on a project before it's ready.

A

Okay, any other questions or a motion. The staff recommendation is to table it. You have.

Q

A question mr. Sherr, besides the downtown Alliance letter, did you receive any other comments from any of the other like the church or the second and second or anything, anybody know.

R

The only other comment was a comment received at the open house which had more to do with the scale of the building. There.

Q

Were no negative comments like anybody, anybody against.

E

Know what it to me, it seems so well, I mean I, don't know enough about this whole property, but I think the property has been for sale for like years, and it's like in a prime corner of downtown I know a couple I think for some reason. I also think that it just hasn't worked. It's been difficult to sell and so I do understand their position.

E

I think also the reason that the problem, though, that at least but then meeting the minimum height standards are related to the fact they want to go would, instead of stealing concrete, which would be more typical for a downtown building and they're limiting Casteel and I and I think it's because it could be cost, but also it's I'm, we're pretty familiar with your buildings, because you mark it on moral on the city and not.

E

It seems like this kind of fits their style of architecture, so unless we think we could hold out for a steel or wood building- or you know, steel and concrete building, maybe I, think you're kind of with what you're gonna get just cuz been for sale forever in a prime development time. But all that said Molly wants us to table it and I buy her argument that there's some other things that might change I'd, be comfortable. Staff was comfortable setting a floor for the minimum height that it could be and then letting staff delegate out.

E

But if staff wants to reveal Unger I'm fine with that and the applicant seems okay with that as well, and even though the delay is there. So with all that said, I'll make a motion based on the information staff report, public testimony discussion by Planning Commission I move the Planning Commission table plan, develop PL and Su n 2018, zero, zero, five one nine. So the app can't produce the additional information regarding the service and loading and in compliance with the emergency vehicle standards. Okay,.

A

We have motion by Matt. Do we have a second.

B

I'll second, it but I'll tell you guys, I'm, not feeling the love on this one either I'm kind of like so maybe when you come back, if you have some more some of those details, you're trying to describe, if you can show those in the drawings help convey what some of those details are, that you're doing that are gonna, make it nicer and help it fit in with the neighborhood I'd like to see that you.

S

Have anything specific that stands out to you is something that you're.

B

Well, it's just to me looking at that whole ground floor is kind of like wow yeah.

S

B

You talked about there like the shadow from that that sighting would would give more detail. Well that doesn't that doesn't come across.

E

Is this triggering conditional like our site design review, or is it just no.

R

No, it was originally submitted as a conditional building and site design review, but we based on the ordinance we don't actually have the ability to modify the minimum height through that process, which is why it's going through a plan development, so it was initially I initially did a review on it, based on conditionally site design review and then through comments from our zoning reviewer. They flagged that it was not appropriate to use that process. So that's why we're going through plan development along those lines.

R

A couple years ago, one of the projects that came before the board was the 600 lofts at six South and State Street, which was a combined conditional building aside, it's interview and a plan development in the d1 on a corner property for a building height less than 100 feet again at kind of the edge of the central business district that is actually at the very edge of the central business district. In fact, that particular property I think was even split zoned and the.

R

The Planning Commission ultimately approved that project much larger site, so it also could have gone a lot higher and gotten a lot more density.

A

But Maureen and my defense, it is design and compatibility, is one of the planned development components and it does talk about its compatibility with the neighborhood and pedestrian interest and that sort of thing so I think those are the sort of the things that we've been mentioning.

E

A

Right so we have a motion. We have a second right, yep all right. So any other comments we'll go to a vote. Clark.

J

A

Maureen, yes, Andreas.

Q

Under a different circumstance,.

Q

Have a good project I'd like to see go through I. Do, however,.

Q

That could definitely be a.

Q

This time, although yes.

A

F

Yeah, so I want to reiterate something that activates that pedestrian level I think is what we're all Tamara looking for as far as your building height I personally am fine with that being less than 100, um since that's kind of a question too before us just to give you that feedback I think it's just the ground level.

F

For me, that is really like, because it's such a cool area I, want to I think you can not take away from the area and still be try to make that a little bit more engaging since you're gonna put some really awesome small retail in there. So I will vote yes, I'm.

A

At yes all right, so the it is tables we'll see you back soon. Thanks.

G

A

Right moving on to the next item, this is the Staybridge Suites Hotel.

R

But actually soon almost.

P

So the applicant is requesting approval from the city to develop an 8 acre lot, approximately at 310 north of Hollow Road in the inland like manufacturing zoning district. The parcel is an undeveloped lot, with no existing structures on the site.

P

And that's the site there.

P

This is a proposal. What they want to do was eventually put three hotels in a restaurant and.

C

I'm gonna I'm gonna interrupt you really quick. Can you pull the microphone a little closer, we're not hearing you and that there you go Thanks so.

P

The applicant is wanting to is proposing to put three hotels and a restaurant on the site. There's a couple of issues with the site, though one of them is that they don't have access off at 5600 West, it's an extra large site with it being 8 acres and so they're gonna have to create lots with double street frontage and then they're also going to have one lot that doesn't have access from the road. So those are two problems.

P

Another issue, too, is that with it with the development the way it is right now they want to have the perimeter landscaping requirements for the parking lots. We have some relief off of that and that's so that they can have better internal circulation in the development between the sites.

P

One of the reasons why they have to do the plan development is because they are subdividing the site. This development they could potentially do without subdividing it and without having the planned development. So what they're asking for is a relief with the per from the parameters of the landscape perimeter and then also with the subdivision ordinance requirements.

A

A

Questions yeah.

F

And could you explain more about what relief they're looking for in the landscaping? What are they wanting to take out.

P

The landscaping requirement between the lot lines along the parking lot, there's a seven foot buffer perimeter buffing requirement along the parking lot, so that would put SEP 14 feet of landscaping in between all the Lots. So each individual lot. Let me get you to the subdivision, so here's the lot lines here.

P

These are the different lights and the Staybridge Hotel is the first one that they're going to be developing here. So along each of these preps along each of these property lines. Here they would be required to have a seven foot per landscape perimeter, buffering where they have a parking lot and what they're asking for is relief from that. So that's zero, I think they're going to provide some. There is a. There is one in our staff report. There is.

P

Our here there is some buffering, if you see through here and then they also have a landscape design.

P

I'm, sorry excuse me if you look at attachment, B, there's a site landscape and building elevation design, and that's just for the first phase, because they're only going to be doing that right now and then each building, they're gonna do in phase this afterward. So I.

C

Can probably expand on that a little bit we we have this ordinance requirement that we're parking lots. That says when you have a parking lot, that's within a certain distance from a property line, and you have to have this perimeter this landscaping along that property line. It works well for single parcel limit, but when you have a property like this, where so in this case, if they weren't subdividing this development, if they were just building three or four different buildings, keeping it under one one lot, this whole perimeter of landscape thing wouldn't be an issue.

C

They'd still be have to do it on the outside perimeter of the excuse me of the whole site, but because they are putting doing a subdivision. This is still going to operate like it's one, entire site, but they're putting property lines in just for ownership purposes. It kicks in this perimeter parking lot landscaping, which then kind of disrupts the internal circulation of the site. So.

F

Follow up on that, then, by giving a relief, are you also giving a relief to the whole, the outside perimeter or landscaping, or just.

P

A parking lot, just the interior so that they can have easier access in between the.

F

Requirement for the ordinance for landscaping on the perimeter of each of these Lots on the outside is still valid. Yeah.

P

They would still have all of the like all of the yard requirements, the five percent parking lot, where a landscaping requirement, they're also proposing to put in additional landscaping like little garden areas and that type of stuff throughout the development as well. Okay, thank.

F

A

Are there questions? Okay, just the applicant have anything to add.

A

Okay, no, you don't need to. If you don't want it. Alright, we'll go ahead and open the public hearing. I, don't know! If do we have a community council that neck of the woods or anybody from the general public who would like to come up and speak, seeing none we'll go ahead and close the public hearing and bring it up to the Commission for any additional questions or a motion.

A

B

Make the motion Thank You, Maureen.

A

I knew you I knew you're working on it. Okay, go for.

B

It this doesn't have all this stuff in it.

B

No, but it doesn't have the numbers and stuff in so this motion sheet doesn't have like the pln numbers and stuff in it. I.

P

Can give you the PLN numbers? Okay,.

B

Based on the information in the staff report, public testimony and discussion by the Planning, Commission and I move the Planning Commission approve this plan. Development request.

B

The EO PL n SQ 2018, oh oh 64 and PLN su b, 2018 OH for.

B

Four to four.

B

Requests as proposed and with subject to the conditions contained in the staff report.

G

That's great hey. We.

A

Have a motion by Maureen: do you have a second I'll? Second, second, by Clark, I will start voting with Matt. Yes,.

G

A

Yes, andreas yay Maureen, yes,.

G

A

Clark, yes, all right thanks so much thanks, Hanna all right. Moving on to the next item. This is the Hopkins estate plan development and preliminary subdivision.

A

Hello Ashley.

T

T

Alright, are you ready, okay, yep, so this evening, I request made by Clayton Homes on behalf of the property owners for a planned development and preliminary subdivision approvals to develop five new lofts in a private driveway at 1950 and 1960 South. Seventeen hundred yeast, which is located in the r-1 7,000 single-family residential zoning district, planned development approval is required as four of the Lots I would not have furniture on a public street and the applicant is also requested. A reduction in the front and rear yard setback dimensions on lot, 1, which about 1700, east.

T

So the subject property consists of two parcels that have furniture on 1700 east. Each lot currently contains a single-family home and a paved driveway runs between the two homes and leads to a large backyard kind of fueled area. This open area contains two accessory structures and appears to be used right now for the storage of vehicles and some other large items. As you can see on the aerials, the parcel is deep within an area zoned, r1 7000, so the site is largely largely surrounded by single-family residential uses.

T

There is a plan development directly to the north of the property that was approved in 2000, and it is essentially a mirror image of what's being proposed this evening. A similar layout except the project of the North has four homes. This project would have five homes, but this property does have more land than that project had.

T

So here are some site photos on the top ones, just a google street view of the site, so those two homes with the drive running between them are part of the site and then the bottom photos show the the back two corners of the property. So actually, at the end of this pavement, more than half of the site is actually like grass grassy field area.

T

So there's it's still a bit larger than what you can even see in this photo it's hard to get a good picture of an acre at one time, so the top left. This is just a couple photos of surrounding single-family homes in the area. The top left is on 17th East on the same block faced directly to the south.

T

The top right photo is looking down that Kirstin place. Looking at the planned development, that's to the north and then on the bottom. That's just more single-family homes to the north, so there's a mix of kind of mid-century era homes and then there are a couple order homes, but it's all pretty simple architecture. One to one-and-a-half stories.

T

So this slide shows the site plan for the proposed development contains five new Lots that are oriented in an east to west direction and will be accessed by a new private driveway that stems off of 1700 east. The applicant is a home voter. He plans to sell each lot individually for the construction of single-family homes. So, for this reason the submitted plans reflect site and landscaping improvements and they do specify a building envelopes, but the design of the five structures would ultimately be up to the purchase purchasers of each lot.

T

I added the red lines on this site plan to try to highlight the lot lines, but each lot total a lot areas. They range from eighty four hundred square feet to ninety eight hundred square feet. That does include the area of the private drive, but it exceeds the 7,000 square foot minimum lot size for the zone. The grey boxes are present the proposed building envelopes. Each one is approximately three thousand square feet, which is basically the maximum possible footprint that each home could have and the single-family homes would face.

T

The private driveway and the applicant has indicated that the home on lot, one which front 1,700 east that would have primary facade features along 1,700 East and on the facade, abutting, the private driveway and a lot one is proposed to have direct access off of 17th East. You can see that it has its own driveway Lotte's. Two through five would be accessed by that private drive, and then they lots two and three and then lot lots four and five that each have a shared driveway running between them.

T

That shared driveway leads back to two car garages that will be located towards the rear of the homes and then those driveways actually extend past the voting envelopes and there's enough room for I'm sure it'll be used for turnaround area, but also each lot could have one guest parking space.

T

So again, to reiterate they are: they need plan development approval because Lots two through five would not have frontage on a public street. An applicant is requesting reduced front and rear guards setback dimensions for a lot one. So you can see the green area highlighted is on the east side. Is the front yard for a lot one and then per code? The opposite yard would be the rear yard. So sorry, the front yard they're asking for a 20-foot front yard, rather than the average of the block face, which is approximately 27 feet.

T

So it's a seven foot reduction in the front yard and that rear yard is actually six feet rather than 25. But this setback is obviously internal to the project and it functions more like an interior side yard, so staff finds it's an appropriate request.

T

And then the remainder of the building envelopes on Lots 2 through 5, they all meet the minimum required setbacks based on the configuration of the homes and I, did want to highlight, even though we don't have specific design details for the single-family homes. At this time they would be limited to the standard lot in bulk requirements of the r-1 7000 zoning district and includes a maximum building height of 28 feet for a pitched roof and or 20 feet for a flat roof. There's a maximum exterior wall height of 20 feet.

T

There are standards to ensure that an attached garage would be subordinate to the rest of the home, which these guards would be towards the back. So that wouldn't be so much of an issue. But everything at this point does meet the setback requirements, but they, you know all of the homes, would ultimately be subject to these other requirements.

T

It also have to be located within this building envelopes, which, like I, said, meet setbacks, with the exception of the front and rear yards for a lot 1, and because we don't have the design of those homes right now, staff is recommending a couple conditions of approval related to the structures designs, just to ensure compliance with the purpose, statements of for plan developments and for the r-1 7000 zoning district.

T

So the first two proposed recommended conditions of approval are actually required by code. I included them here, just kind of as an affirmation that you know there are extra standard. There are standards related to the design of these homes. We do want to ensure that the facade of the structure on lot 1, that about 1700 east.

T

We want to ensure that that does have front facade features, and it looks more, you know, looks and feels more like a front facade for the home, even if that's not how it's used and then the eastern facade of the structure on lot 1, the same. The same side would be subject to those it's for attached garages, because there would be a garage on 1700 East as currently proposed, and then the third condition of approval is one that we added.

T

Sorry, it's meant to ensure that the use of building materials that are compatible with nearby development in an effort to preserve the existing character of the neighborhood, so the majority of homes near the projects later cans are constructed of masonry, brick and stone, stucco and various types of siding. The applicant can't confirm at this time the architectural styles styles that the future buyers may choose to construct. They've indicated they're willing to commit to the use of brick stone, hardy board, siding and stucco for accent purposes.

T

Staff finds that these are all quality building materials that fall within the pallet seen in the neighborhood. So we are recommending that as a condition of approval and the applicant has indicated that they would they're open to that. I have.

B

A quick question: is there gonna, be a homeowner's association with a architectural committee or I'm.

T

Not sure about the architectural committee, but they will have an HOA and that's a requirement whatever before they can record a final plat. They have to get the HOA set up and mainly because the main purpose of that will be for managing the the private driveway, though.

B

It wouldn't wouldn't be for control of how the facades look. You.

T

Could ask the applicant okay.

B

T

So much for party.

E

B

It's like a cool stuff, it's made of cement and it looks like would.

T

B

Up to my house, I'll show you something we.

T

Do consider it a Cree, durable yeah leader.

R

Hardy board is a siding material made out of a fiber cement. Typically we're not paint Abul. It looks like a wood.

E

Like there's one of the houses you had in the building, it's like, yellow, aluminum, citing and that water would not fit under no.

T

That wouldn't will Hardy.

E

T

Is in its its own material, and it is something that we actually allow in the historic district, so aluminum.

E

Siding, though, is not allowed in the five homes under the proposal. Is that right? No.

T

If that condition was not incorporated in the motion, it wouldn't be allowed. So this is my last slide. I actually just wanted to touch on the development potential of the site if they did not get planned development approval. So in the zoning district, the minimum lot width is 50 feet and this lot is about 141 feet wide, so they could. The most they could do is subdivide or just do a lot line. Adjustment to create two Lots they'd be about three hundred and thirteen feet deep and each lot could have a single-family home.

T

So it's essentially what already exists on site. Another option would be to build an access road that meets public standards and could be dedicated, but the road would have to be about 40 to 50 feet based on just transportation design documents which would take about that access. Road plus the front yard setback would take away about half the site, so it would greatly reduce the incentive to develop this site, so I just wanted to.

T

Let you know that, but staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approved the plan development and the preliminary subdivision, as proposed, subject to compliance with the applicable regulations and the conditions listed in the provided motion sheet.

A

Thanks quick question: if fills it, it does feel a little unusual to me to not to let go of the design and compatibility components of the plan development. Is that giving it to an administrative leave be done so the plans when they finally come I assume house by house. They would then have to come to staff to get approval to ensure that they're complying with all of those things.

A

T

Most because this is a single-family residential zone, like I said like most, each house would have its own building permit and it would be reviewed against the zoning ordinance. The things like the maximum building height voting wall height it would. They would be aware that has to stay in that building envelope, as shown on, because those are being shown on their plat as well.

T

I would probably review it to make sure that they're complying with the building materials, if that was that condition was incorporated, but when it comes to specific design like the architectural style and things like that right now, it would not be suggests.

C

Actual staff would actually so Ashley would actually, whenever a building permit comes in under this plan development under our building permit system anytime, that there's a planning approval planning staff is included as a sign-off on that building permit, so Ashley would actually have to sign off in each one of those building permit plans yeah.

G

A

For you, so so you then would it would be up to you to ensure that all of these things I'm the one in particular I mean I, am concerned about the building materials. But then also you know, we've had a lot of discussion with a lot of I'm, forgetting the name of the turn, the ones that are all connected. The shotgun slot, shotgun slams and our big concern was that front facing one that it's facing the street and that sort of thing and I know that that's one of the conditions but I.

A

That's something that we've been a little bit nutty about lately yeah. So we want to make sure that it is super compatible with the neighborhood yeah.

T

A

So that so I back to my original statement, it does feel a little bit strange for us to let go of that control. Is that unusual, with a planned development to not have the actual development to plan? No.

C

I mean well it's unusual these days because of kind of where we're at as a city, I would say when I first started here. It wasn't that unusual to have plan developments come in that were strictly a kind of subdivision based because a particular lot didn't meet a zoning standard, but they weren't quite ready to do the design. That's why I think? If you look at our previous plan development standards, they were really all based on access, and you know things of that nature, and that's one of the reasons why we changed our plan.

C

Development ordinance is because we do have different types of development. Now this actually came in under the previous plan development standards. So we are reviewing it according to that, and so because of that they do have the ability to come in without building plans for the homes.

A

The new the new plan development requires that the plant put plans.

C

On it doesn't require it, but if you look at the standards, the new plan development standards, where they're all based or most of them, are really based on architectural compatibility scale. Mass it's gonna, be a bit more difficult for a developer to come in with no building plans to to meet those standards.

A

A

The other question I have is related to the separation between the existing private drive to the development to the north, with the vegetation between the two just be the existing trees that are already there or is there any additional required vegetation that the that this new development would add to that separation.

T

I'm, just assuming that vinyl fence would remain since it's part of the other development. The applicant for this project has indicated that they want a fence in the perimeter of the entire development, with the exception of the frontage on 17th east. So there would be likely an additional fence there and there is a landscape plan that I think had trees. I'm sorry I need to find it.

G

T

Yeah there are a line of additional trim.

A

Those are new, those are new trees, those aren't the ones that are existing there. Okay, oh.

E

G

E

Of course I was relate to that I mean was there I mean I, understand that Kirstin place is a private drive, and maybe this is a question for the applicant, but they ever was ever approached to add well allow these homes to access their homes through Kirstin place, rather than putting it two parallel streets, yeah.

T

There was I'll, let the applicant discuss that, but I know that that was they did try to take that approach.

A

Yeah- let's maybe get to that, because I think that is a interesting yeah. We talked about a little bit on the field trip.

E

Appreciate that all.

A

Right we'll go ahead and have the applicant come on up and just give us your name and then we'll give you ten minutes or less to present your plan. My.

I

Name is John Clayton and representing Clayton Homes. Do we want to start with the last one about Kirstin place and why it's.

A

Your time, that would be great initially.

I

When we came into our original DRT meeting, we had come in proposing to do a public road. What we were asking Christian place was: if we could go ahead, tie into their road, add additional property and make it a public street came to the DRT meeting. They they were in favor of it. They said, that's great.

I

If you can get this to happen, do it so we set up an appointment with the four homeowners of Christian place and sat down with him and started talking, and it wasn't five minutes into the conversation that it was blatantly obvious that they were not interested at all. So we started drilling down, trying to find out why they weren't interested when they formed that association and the master developer, who developed it actually put a poison pill in it for him that they had to pay him a hundred and forty five thousand dollars.

I

If anybody attached applied added to or did any to the property yeah, so there they're in there going well, we don't want to pay the hundred and forty five thousand dollars and I said well. Why don't you? Let me go negotiate and I'll see if I can do a better deal and that kind of went on for a few seconds and then a few people who stood up said we don't want anything to do with it. That's it we're done.

I

We don't want to talk to you anymore, so we tried valiantly to get this to work because we thought that would have been is so much better of a situation. So then we went back and regrouped and we realized excuse me that we had the distance and we have and that's the beauty of this piece of property is there's quite a bit more real estate there. That's why we're getting five Lots?

I

If you look at that, even with the road, we still have 7,000 square foot Lots with the road, that's not including the square footage of the road. So these are. These are sizable Lots. These are as big as any lot that you would approve any day on a r17 zoning, and so we thought well we'll go this direction. It's not our ideal situation.

I

We weren't exactly thrilled about not being able to tie it together, but this is where we're at with the situation and I think we've created quite a little subdivision here to kind of move further on the architectural end of this. These are gonna, be 902, probably 1.2 million dollar homes and I.

I

You know for me to come in with a cookie-cutter plan which I'm in I'm in the townhome development business, so I build buildings and we have buildings and architectural features and everything about it and we're quite used to bringing plans in and showing them to people. But these are expensive homes. I mean this isn't an expensive home area. This is going to be a very nice addition to Salt Lake City as far as quality of construction types of homes, and so we don't want to pigeonhole ourselves into one specific product or a type of product.

I

We think that you're gonna have five separate homes and you're gonna have five separate Architects, probably drawing these homes and we'll we'll put some commonality in it, with maybe some rough color keeping all of the five units as the same of color or potentially trim color for the soffit and facia or something of that nature.

I

But we would really want to be letting the homeowners the people that are gonna be shelling out this amount of money to have what they want, not necessarily what we want them to have, and so that's why I've resisted bringing a plan into you as far as building materials. These are expensive homes. We illumine siding, wouldn't never even enter our lexicon. I mean that's just like that's so 30 years ago. We'd, never even think about so to answer a couple. Questions about Hardie board hardy board is a manufacturer of cement.

I

Fiber siding, you're, very correct there. There are several manufacturers.

I

We are also thinking that cedar is becoming very, very popular right now, so there might be somebody that's going to come in and say we want cedar siding or we want brick or we want stone or I'm. Seeing a lot of these modern farm homes going up right now, there's a modern architecture and they're putting quite a bit of stucco on them, not a big fan of it myself. But you know if somebody comes in and says: I'm gonna give you a million dollars, but I want this modern home.

I

That's black trim, black windows with white soffit and facia. It's for black solving patients in white stucco! I! Don't want to be the guy that says not gosh. We can't do that for you. I want to be able to give them that right, they're, choosing it's their home. That's the right! I want to let them have. My preference would be to mix it up a little bit more I really like. If you looked at any of our projects, you would see a great mix of cement, fiber siding.

I

You would see stone work, you would see stucco and and multicolored. We like to mix a lot of color in with our product and just give it something that kind of stands out. So there's not going to be a home, that's gonna be painted one color I can tell you that right now that help you with some of these things that I've kind of heard your question yeah.

A

You have any other questions. What.

E

Is your role post this thing in this project, I mean? Are you we're subdividing it in the year going and selling it? Are you gonna help, though,.

I

Know I'm gonna well MIT will build all five homes, they're gonna be actually builder of it. Yes, I'm the developer in the Builder I you're.

E

Not just taking these Lots and Sony's building.

I

In a lot, no the reason I'm doing this project. This is not really in my wheelhouse, like I, said I'm a townhome developer. We build big townhome developments and and a good friend of mine who owns the the property. Mr. Hopkins him and I have been friends for probably thirty plus years and he's just asked me if I would come in and do something with this piece of property.

I

They're living in a very small house. They'd like a nicer, bigger excuse me nicer, bigger home, and so we have come together and said: okay, listen, I'll, I'll, develop this piece of property and I'll, give you a very nice home to live in he'll he'll be there and in the other, four homes will be sold to other individuals, but no I man, I'm gonna, manage this thing from start to finish that there will be nobody else involved in it. But me.

Q

Yes, I'm a couple of questions with your chair, so so do you already have those for potential home buyers right.

I

No, we have no don't have those we haven't even scratched the surface as far as looking for home buyers right now,.

Q

And my next question is: do you think there might be an issue with the shared driveway there, the main quote-unquote public driveway? Do you think there might be an issue there between the different independently owned homes.

I

No, what that's one of the things we'll set up in the CCN ours too, to help mitigate that issue, we're adding an additional parking at the end, so that'll be there. It's gonna be a shared driveway, so people are gonna have to understand that yeah. You can't just pull in and park your car right in front of your garage and just walk in the house and leave it sitting there, because you have a neighbor, that's gonna have to get in and out.

I

So if we handle that through signage or if we handle that with the CCR's and everybody signs to see seen ours and agrees to them that you know hey it, you have to be a neighbor, I mean you're in it you're in the neighborhood. You have to be the neighbor and we think we can address that with our CC and ours and I think that most people will understand. It. I mean the benefit of having that garage at the back and not having your garage door sitting out on the front.

I

We can put a nice porch. We can do a nice feature on the front of the home and really make it look like a a nice side, Sugar House, bungalow type home and then put that garage in the back. Where you can you don't have to look at a garage door from the front of us of the home I. Think people will appreciate that and I. Think though they'll get along I guess is the best word. I could use.

A

Okay, any other questions.

A

Okay, thank you very much. We will open up the public hearing first with any member of the Community Council and we've got Judy short.

A

Five minutes for you Judy as usual.

N

Good evening, I'm not sure I have a whole lot to add. The staff report, I think was very well-written and Ashley did a good summary and.

N

Mr. Clayton answered all your questions from my standpoint. I look at this as a huge lot. You know a lot of the blots that we see where they want to put four attached. Townhomes in might be 60 feet wide. You know in a hundred and seventy five feet deep. This one is 147 by 300, so these are five very nice-sized, Lots and I hate to see everything being priced out of the market.

N

We do need some lower priced homes for people who are buying their first home, but at the same time we need space for bigger homes too. We have families with children and they need places to live. I think these look like nice homes.

N

There may be some neighbors here to talk to this. One of our requirements was that the house along 17th, is be required to face the street and that's in the staff report and the garage entrance needs to meet the required width compared to the face of the house for that house.

N

I've really liked the idea of the garage being on the side street, but I suppose that could be up to the owner person who buys that house and then I added the project comply with the Larry Bailey stipulation of the CC and hours of Kirstin place and I think that site financial agreement and I did send you a copy. It's probably attached. If you want to read it, no, we like it.

G

A

You all right is there anyone else from the public who would like to speak on this? Do you do come on up.

A

And you will have two minutes as soon as you get up here and give us your name. Thank you.

H

My name is Keith Brown I live at 1886, south 1700 East, just a little bit north of the Hopkins estate. I actually used to hom teach the original owner of the property just next door to the north back before she died when they put that subdivision in it didn't cause any problems for the neighborhood I.

H

Don't see any reason why this would cause any problem for their neighborhood and I, don't know of any I, don't personally know of anybody in their neighborhood. That has voiced any concerns, so that's my two cents worth I've known them for twenty years or so, and the honors and I think it's a great idea. Great.

A

Thank you very much. Anyone else.

A

Okay, seeing nobody else we'll go ahead and close the public hearing bring it back after the commission for some questions, comments, discussion.

F

Yeah I just have some clarifying comments with staff. Okay,.

A

Ashley we need you.

F

So, to follow up with Chairman's concern over that front facing facade I, don't know if the condition that you've written into the report addresses kind of I think that the the direction that the Commission has been going for. Those type of things is to vent to make sure that we don't just get a door on the side windows that we get it that it actually looks and functions like the front of a house does.

F

Does your condition give you enough of that structure to to kind of guide so that that particular envelope home has not just like this afterthought. It will put a door over here in this corner and and comply.

T

Yes, so that condition is actually just a requirement of the code for in residential zones, but it does indicate that.

T

They're required to include an entrance door and such other features as windows, balconies, porches and other such architectural features in the front facade totally not less than 10% of the elevation area, so it would be 10% of that elevation area, which is a pretty it's a pretty large. It's you know, aside and technically, elevation.

F

Yeah so I think that there's this gap going on between what the ordinances and then what we see for some things. This is a store on the side and then we all talk about it and they come back with something like we just saw with the ninth West one. Their initial one was hey: we'll put a door on this corner, so the you know, because we're not reviewing this design at all and I and I don't want to talk about like how the whole thing will look or whatever.

F

This is more about how it functions in a relationship to the street. Is that that ordinance kind of just allows the door to be off to the side and then it doesn't look or feel or function like an actual home. That's inviting you know, because we've seen modern architecture that does that on that field, trip that that was very nice. And then you see some. You know more traditional architecture that puts it off to the door, and so it's it's more of that function. Yeah.

T

F

I'm really concerned about that. That particular condition really spells out enough for you, so that you know if they came before the Planning Commission I'm, pretty certain that those are the things that we would be. Zoning in on is like. How is this yeah.

T

F

Is this working with the neighborhood and its relationship to 17th east I? Don't I, don't know if that goes far enough or if it needs a little bit more clarification for you of what we've been talking about for every slot home. That's been coming to us for months, yeah.

H

A

Guessing that's something that you could add as a as a condition. If you would like to clean that up and tighten it up, I think that would probably be totally fine and.

B

I think the door they do have a driveway to that house on the plat that goes to 17th, and that would probably help drive that that that's the front of the house.

F

That's right way for a karate.

B

B

F

Think the driveway on the front of the house is very inconsistent with the neighborhood, but you know that we can leave up to it. I, don't I, don't think a driveway to a garage is an interaction with 1700 east consistent with that entire community area, those there's a handful of them where the garage dominates and then there's no interaction so whether they put their garage there or not. I think it isn't open. I'm not concerned about that. I.

F

Just don't want this to be a facade where it's not having a valuable, consistent theme and interaction with 17th, east, okay and I. Just don't I, don't know that the ordinance really captures an why you know the direction that the Planning Commission has been consistently going towards for the homes over the last three months that I've been here. Okay, well.

A

Take some time and come up with a well worded addition: I guess! Well, that's because I agree, I tend to I tend to agree that that's definitely in the spirit of what we've been wanting and so.

E

What's the bummer was kind of weird here is like if the street was merged with Kirsten and it was like a normal Street, then that house could be a side yard her side heart and in dude. That would front would be on the curstyn Street and it wouldn't be. One of these planned about actually have a little bit more like a cul-de-sac, type Street and it would fit and be normal, but there's nothing. We can do that. Would try to get Kirsten Street into this and then compel that of their property owner, not.

T

That I'm, aware of no I think that's more of a civil because, like.

E

The slot homes were they're, one big building, they're down there a couple times down the way like this. This one really is like you. Could you it's big enough? You could have a cul-de-sac type feel like it. You know, but it's just kind of weird, because we've got these two prepa driveways that are parallel to each other yeah.

A

I mean that's one of my that's one of my and I and I yeah I, don't know you can do there and that's- and that goes to my first question earlier on about this sort of the buffering between the two because I mean I. Think the the worst case of this already bad scenario is that you have something that essentially just looks like two giant asphalt, driveway in and so at the final.

E

A

Know with a nice final fence, down the middle so at minimum like to be able to add some vegetation to create a separation, so that there's like a big median between the two would be would be helpful in breaking that up, but I also hate to like put the burden on of that cleanup on this project. When really it sounds like the problem is the previous project I.

E

Think we always had to do everything with concerns. I mean is there? Does it do a condition of where that front facade? For that one building comes back through this body? Can we do that, or is that too cumbersome.

C

No, that I mean that is something you can do. You've actually done that on previous projects, where you've approved a plan, development or a conditional building in site design, which allowed some construction to get underway, but you've had a lot of them have been in sugarhouse where you've had people but developer come back and you weren't necessarily happy with the ground floor space how it interacted. So you said basically it's approved.

C

You can go ahead and start work, but before you're at least your site work, but before you before you can move forward, you need to come back with those ground floor designs I mean. That is something that you could do that I guess. The tricky part in that is that you know you would have a plan development approved for five Lots and then, if weren't extremely happy with what was going on with that one law did I. Guess it just kind of holds that one law hostage, but there's not much.

C

You could do with the rest of the development.

C

So it gets a little tricky. It's just something something to think about.

A

E

F

I'm happy to hold that first, one hostage with the fork: oh I, don't I mean I'm, not looking at it as holding the hostage. It is really I am very comfortable with putting a condition where that the 17th east-facing lot needs to come back before us, based on the guidelines and standards in the in the plan. Development for that how that is interacting yeah.

C

Lose if you will just make sure that you're looking at the plan development standards, I mean pick a standard that you can tie that condition to.

A

And I would and I don't know if I don't know. If you, the applicant, has any further thoughts about because I don't I, don't know, there's anything we can do so. Perhaps there's nothing.

A

We can do then it's just over, but that the in between the two drives that what are you doing to address that the in between drivers yeah come on up the space in between the two driveways to sort of I, guess best-case scenario with what we've got is break it up and I know you've got a you know: I've got the landscape plan here. What's that.

E

He has to then you have to have some sort of landscape buffer all along that. Yes, yeah.

A

I

A five-foot landscape buffer it'll be on either side of that vinyl fence. It's there. We did bring in a landscaping plan. My thinking on the side is is that we do need some trees, but we wouldn't plant like a tree next to a tree. We would off, you know, stagger them down the line, but we really we don't want to put grass or something there well.

I

We'd like to do is just to put some zero scape type landscaping, maybe some low growing bushes and things like that with a with a drip system, something that's going to be water, wise and not waste, a lot of water and then and in the front yards, we'll landscape, with some trees and and and things like that, flowerbeds and just to kind of dress it all up and tie altogether and make it look. Nice maybe put in some larger landscaping, rocks and things like that to.

A

Go with your landscape buffer of five feet and then the fence and then do I, don't know if you know Ashley do they have five feet as well? Yes, so there's a total of ten feet. Softscape between the two in.

I

Your my point at some point when they all everybody goes hey you know. Maybe let's just knock the fence down and we combine this. Then it would kind of look like a yeah.

S

I

One of the sugarhouse streets up here where you've got the name.

G

In the middle right and.

I

That's that's entirely possible I kind of see that I can tell you that all the people that live on Christian, Kirsten, I'm, sorry, they all know the Hopkins's that they're they're, all neighbors I mean they all talk, and so I can't see that this wouldn't be something that would not happen or could not happen. So that and I think that avast ly make both properties nicer. Yeah.

G

I

Of looking at your front door, so you know vinyl fence in your front yard, you you know open it up now.

A

For sure, when.

I

I can't make them do it, but.

A

Right, yeah, I'm, fine timing,.

I

Is they have to repair that fancy? It may just fix it? Yeah.

A

Well, I would think they would want more people that could help do pay for repairs and whatever on that drive and.

I

Anyway, if I could just addressing something on this 1700 East, you know we have proposed all of these homes facing to face North off of that Pro Street, and that's probably, why we're asking for this extra of variance on the that's, the right word: variance or just a condition.

F

I

This PUD, but but we're keenly aware that that has got to be addressed and it's got to be done correctly, and it's got to look right because nobody wants to pull up and see the side of their house driving down the street. They want to see something nice.

I

The garage is being put there because the other four Lots have common garages and alleyway parking, and so, as we looked at designs of homes, these homes will all have kind of an inset, Cove type patio they'll all have porches on the front. This one I had kind of envisioned a wraparound porch, so the front door may not necessarily be on the side on 1700 East. There can be another door and I'm thinking more of a patio type door so that we've got an inset patio type area that would be covered.

I

That would be part of that facade. We can actually put some Gable and things like that, and some some additional siding and stonework and things down that side and with that wraparound front, porch I think we can minimize the garage because nobody I know I, don't particularly like putting garages on the front of houses.

I

That's not really where I'm I mean I got four Lots that don't have a single thing with a garage on the front and so we'll work very diligently with some sort of a plan to make sure that this facade across the 1700 East is very pleasing to the neighborhood you're right Kristen place. If you look across the street, they have a flat facade the face of 1700 east their garage, and everything else is on Kirstin Drive. If you drive down that street every corner lot going up and down that Street has a flat slab sided.

I

We're definitely going to do something a lot better than that. We understand that we're willing to work with you. However, you would like us to work with if you'd like us to work with planning, if you'd like planning to bring us back in here, we'd be glad to do that. We can.

A

I

A

Awesome, thank you. Okay, do you have a motion Amy.

F

Not sure how to construct it bring up the motion she well I have.

F

Okay and I: don't never do these right, the first time so we'll take a stab at it. You'll.

D

Do when I'm merging.

F

Things together so based on the information in the staff report, the information presented and the input received during the public hearing I move that the Planning Commission approved the plan development petition, PLN SUV 2018, two: zero: zero, zero. Three three and associated preliminary subdivision PLN SUV 2018: two: zero: zero, zero. Three four with the following conditions: you.

A

Can just say the ones included in staff report ones.

F

Included in the staff report in.

A

F

Addition that the front faces do I have to like okay. So, in addition to those requirements in the staff report that the front-facing 1700 east lot come back before the Planning Commission, based on the standard of compatibility.

A

Hey good job, all right, we have a motion by Amy. Do we have a second second, second by Matt, we'll go ahead and there any other discussion on that? Okay, Clark! Yes, Maureen! Yes,.

B

A

Q

Initially very leery about the project, but you have convinced me. You have made a very good argument. Solo, yes, Amy.

A

F

A

Matt, yes, all right! Thank you. We'll see you back here sometime in the future,.

I

A

All right, moving on to our last item number six for our public hearing. This is the urban elf Andre FB, un-to zoning district building height amendment and you look more like Molly than Casey I am.

R

Playing musical chairs and musical hats tonight, Casey's out of the office this week and asked me to present this zoning text amendment. So please bear with me as I stumble my way through this a little bit. This is a request to modify the zoning text to allow additional height for a specific corner property in the FPU and to in the central ninth neighborhood five stories with a maximum of 65 feet tall rather than the four stories or 50 feet currently allowed.

R

The site is on the south east corner of Washington Street and ninth south, which is basically a half block west of the 200 West tracks. At the central ninth station.

R

Here you can see two jumpy here. You can see the site in greater context. This is ninth South here through the middle of the image. This is second West Third West, and this is Washington Street.

R

Sorry so in this particular neighborhood- and this is another- this shows where the zoning is in this particular neighborhood. We have kind of our standard, 660 foot square blocks, but the blocks are almost very regularly subdivided in half by this mid block street. So in this particular block, it's divided by Washington and then the block to the east is divided by Jefferson. So it's that original plat of Zion urban form. But it's it's been divided more for residential development, and this was done many many years ago.

R

So when the when this F bu n to the foreign-based zone was developed, it was originally designed for this neighborhood. It was part of a discussion with the creation of the RTA district. It was all kind of done all together and the there were two form-based zones that were created for this neighborhood one is the FPU n1, which is kind of our lower density.

R

More single-family, though, some like townhome type developments allowed in there and that's the pink that you see in the zoning that and then the FPU n2, which allows a 50-foot maximum height, four storeys and then on corner properties of the main streets. It allows additional height up to 65 feet, so those are the intersections of third west, 2nd west and west temple. Those corner properties so I know I was up here earlier talking about corner properties in the central business district.

R

Here it's a similar kind of condition where that additional height is allowed at those main intersections, though obviously not at the same kind of density as a central business district. So the application request before you is to allow that 65 foot max Hite knot on one of those main intersections, but on one of those smaller intersections of one of the smaller cross streets.

R

In this case Washington, the applicant had originally proposed that 65 foot height for a much larger area, not just this single property and it was- has now been scaled back to the Justice single property.

R

Here are a few examples of what's around it.

R

This is the site itself and it's a probably a little difficult easier for you to see it in the staff report. It's kind of a poor condition, twin home. That's on the site today.

R

What you see in the background in the top right photo is the kind of multicolored building that building was constructed prior to the forum based code adoption. So it is a taller building for the neighborhood.

R

Exactly I don't know it's in the vicinity of 60 to 65 feet, so it's probably approximately the site, the the height that we're talking about it is a if we go back or a page. It's a larger deeper lot, though, than the one that we're talking about.

R

There's three issues that Casey identified in the staff report. One.

E

On the tracks line, isn't it which.

R

One color building the multi. No, it's it's.

E

R

It's I think it's on Washington. It doesn't go over 2/3 west and it's it's somewhere in this vicinity here. Halfway down that block.

R

Anyway, the there's three issues that Casey identified in the staff report one was that additional building height is opposed by 90% of the attendees at the open house event, which was held when the applicant had a larger scale. Looking at more at multiple properties and bringing it up to 65 feet, issue 2 was non compliance with applicable master plan policies, so the master plan specifically supports the existing form based code and in this neighborhood, with those kind of pop-ups 265 feet at those main intersections, specifically on the north side of 9th south.

R

It does not have specific language that would support additional height or not support additional height on the south side of 9th south, from an urban design standpoint and really from a planning. Standpoint. Typically you'd want your zoning to be the same on both sides of the street. It helps with the symmetry of the street understanding the street as a place that kind of thing as that that form develops you kind of want it to be somewhat even on both sides of the street and then finally, issue. 3 is non-compliance with the zoning district purpose statement.

R

And the purpose of the FB UN form-based urban neighborhood district is to create an urban neighborhood that provides the following options for housing types, options in terms of shopping, dining, etc, transportation, options, access to employment, opportunities appropriately scaled buildings that respect the existing character of the neighborhood.

R

That, in particular, was the item that Casey highlighted for emphasis and in terms of the the character of the development. The lower rise 50 feet is what we think is more in scale with that smaller Street Washington Street.

R

So with that again, the the request is to allow to go to 65 feet tall rather than four stories and 50 feet at for this particular property and planning staff recommends the Commission for it a negative recommendation to the City Council on this text. Amendment: okay, any.

G

Questions thanks questions for.

A

E

We've just this, the forum based stuff is new I think to a lot of us on the cushion even a little bit longer, but.

E

The form basis all is a lot looser and then because you're looking at the foreman and the function and I'm trying to figure out how this I mean, would you characterize this? Is a spot zone or not I mean, or what do I mean I, always always struggle with these, like zoning changes that come forward with a specific applicant property in mind, I think.

R

We would characterize this as a spot zone because it is just a single parcel that.

R

E

It's not the whole corner, that's being well.

R

It is, it is the whole, it is the corner, it is the corner of that intersection, but it's not all of those properties. That was what the applicant had originally proposed was actually increasing.

E

R

Feet the whole of I all at the applicant answer that question but I think isn't. His initial application was allowing up to 65 feet for the whole of that nine South Corridor within the FPU.

E

Nth and I didn't write the staff report from some page to just reading. The code has age. Yes,.

R

E

It has I assume that's from the code and so we're looking at yes. So.

R

That's why it's there it's considered a zoning text amendment because it actually lists the specific locations where you can go up to 65 feet all.

E

Four properties are just the one I'm just not it's.

R

Just it's just the one at this point a.

C

Way that it's written, though I think it would be I would interpret that as being all the all for two.

G

C

Yeah and then on the Spock owning the zoning question.

C

Anything of a city and state law used to prove a bit spot zoning, but that prohibition has been lifted.

C

You can actually rezone one property, but I believe that the way that this is written I would interpret that as being all four corner properties which.

G

Would be consistent.

C

With the way that the rest of the zoning is worded.

E

And then my last person there's no other tool within that within the code that the applicant could seek plan development and variants are otherwise greater height. This is the only thing, the only tool that did he or she has. Yes, thanks.

A

Anything else before we bring the applicant up. Okay, let's do that. James come on up.

M

Hello, my name is James elf, Andre and I'm. The applicant I don't know where to begin I think I'm gonna start with just the reason behind this on a macro level and go to a micro level, then I'd be happy to talk about spot zoning and to me there's that's a typo and the zoning about I have explicit communication with the planner on that and I was a big issue, so I think that's a typo in the staff report and then so anyway. I'll go ahead and get started and then happy to take any questions.

M

M

We have the site under control, we're closing the end of this month on it, and our business plan is to create a beautifully designed mixed-use project. Our business ethos is locating near walkable amenities, where our residents can have a walkable urban lifestyle, be less car dependent. Obviously, central ninth is a neighborhood that screams to that. We love the form based code, so our business plan is to provide as much ground floor commercial as we can, which we want to do.

M

The whole street frontage is ground floor, commercial reserved for locally owned businesses, and you know, as I'd like to quote Weston actually when he said on the second and second piece that our city is facing a housing crunch right. We all know that and be ashamed to.

M

In our opinion, not have density, we're more density can be handled, gracefully so from a macro level, from a city from air quality from the Salt Lake City housing plan, what it came out with a big recommendation for that was providing housing and density and you're near transit stops, which we are we're literally steps away from transit, and you know our proposed height increase falls right in line with that plan, and it also falls in line with the new downtown master plan is quoted in here that I interpret differently I guess then the staff did and the form based zoning for the neighborhood.

M

We are not proposing anything that is out of character for the neighborhood. Five stories is already deemed as in character for the neighborhood, as you can tell they're already buildings that are built there that are farther away from tracks are that, then we are there also corners on major corridors that are farther away from tracks than we are that are zoned for five storeys.

M

We feel like we are on and again in the in the master plan and the wording of the language that which I'd be happy to get into, but it talks about ninth South as being a major corridor where they want train where they want density, and that's this just falls in line with all what the master plans and city plans are telling us for housing and how we want to grow as a city.

M

So an extra story of height will bring more residences to attract south will, allow more people greater opportunity to live a car-free life which has many benefits as I. We all can can realize now, I'm going to talk about talk about our height increase as it's relevant to the neighborhood like I mentioned before we love the form based code.

M

That's been adopting this neighborhood we've been working in this neighborhood for the last eight years, very invested in the neighborhood and how it grows, and we don't want to do anything out of character or anything that would be. You know deemed as inappropriate for the neighborhood and again in the staff report. It talks about nodes and where nodes should be, and it talks about the second south and ninth south or the second west and ninth South node, which is his track. Stop I mean essentially this whole neighborhood can be a node right.

M

It's it's it's it's so located in your tracks. Now, obviously you want to be sensitive to the interiors of the block, and you know especially where this thing of family homes are so I can get more to that of how we interpret the code and corridors and nodes, and things like that I feel like. We have really good arguments for that.

M

If we want to get more into that and kind of opposing what what the staff report is saying now I'm going to get down to kind of site specifics, so we all we control the chuckles lounge as well, which is an l-shape. So it creates a you in this parcel. It's not just this corner, it's the chuckles lounge, and so that Mouskouri we control, but it would be a bigger parcel that can that can that can handle. You know it's kind of hard to think of going.

M

Sixty five feet on this small of a parcel, but when you incorporate into this larger parcel, it makes more sense for what we want to do. So we got started with chuckles. We knew that they're closing down and they were selling. So we approached them and put it under contract through all of our due diligence.

M

We found that it's very contaminated from its down gradient from Henry's dry, cleaner, which is directly east, which prohibits us from removing any sort of dirt from that grant from that site, be very cost prohibitive, so it becomes I mean we're not playing the card of you know their economic. You know this has to be economically viable for this to happen, we're still gonna.

M

Do it we're still gonna go forward with it, but the fact of the matter is it can be a much better product with more ground floor commercial with that extra height, because it gives us more creativity and more options to provide enough on-site parking while having a ground floor, commercial funding, the street, so that's just the reality of the site as well, and what we're dealing with and so as we got into and found out that there is all this contamination.

M

I came to the planning the planning staff and talked about this idea about adding an extra height here on the chuckles piece because of the contamination and it's right on nine south and it steps from tracks, and it was met very positively. It was at the time Mike Malloy. He wasn't here anymore.

M

It's been, but I I have nothing but respect for our planning staff. I mean every time I've worked with them.

M

It's been fantastic, I admire how they're, leading us and forward-thinking and how we're dealing with these real issues were growing as a city, but this unique situation was because Mike because Mike Malloy left it was kind of lines were crossed and things got mixed up and it was confusing for me going through that process and also is this to me that they came back with a negative recommendation because all of my conversations, the Mike Malloy and with with priests and middle meetings were this would be.

M

You know, favorably accepted it's my tracks, it's not a main main corridor, etc. So long story, short I had a meeting with Mike, Malloy and chuckles is on an ally. It's not on a corner, so we were figuring out how to in court, incorporate the text of because it's not on a corner. How do we add that to a text amendment and he had the idea of why? Don't we just go for nights out?

M

You know it's a it's a big corridor, it's right at tracks, let's just say all of 9th south from 3rd west to west temple and if you know we'll see how the community reacts, and so we had an open house and there was some pushback from the from the residence on doing all of the 9th south. So we kind of scaled back and then he left and things just kind of got lost in translation.

M

We ended up getting this piece under control and started dealing with Casey and just just went forward now that it's a corner having the text be, you know the southwest corner of Washington and in 900 South. So so all of the you know, comments from that open house were for all was for all of 900. South I also never had the chance to go to the community council and speak there.

M

I myself have then reached out to to the community council, chair and I'm I'm gonna go there in August to present to them and get feedback from them. So again, you know having the planner leave mid application caused a lot of hurdles that were kind of unforeseen, and but so that's the kind of the evolution of where we are here. With this now I'd also like to address spot zoning I mean the definition of spot.

M

Zoning is zoning, a parcel that is inconsistent with the master plan, and even though this is you know, adding something on or changing a zoning. It's technically not spot zoning, because it in our opinion is falls exactly in line with the master plan, as I can read through the staff report and and argue the case for that. In our opinion. But you know I guess bottom line here is we're very excited about this neighborhood we're very excited about this project. We're planning we're putting forward it's a difficult site with the contamination.

M

We feel like it's very appropriate, we're not setting any precedences we're not asking for six seven eight stories where I can ask him for five stories that has already been generally accepted as a very appropriate height for the neighborhood and we're on a main corridor on 900 South. Just steps from tracks and we're you know, excited to bring more residents down to the neighborhood, but the businesses that around us, and also just you, know how he grows. A city, more responsible density around around tracks.

G

A

Thank you. Any questions.

E

Did you look at rezoning it to like fbu and one I'm just trying to think through different ways that this could be accomplished? No.

M

Cuz that downs owns us so.

E

That gives us like 25, because it's like 25, okay and.

M

We're not saying a precedence either. Fayette Avenue came in after the fact as well and said: we'd like to be involved in adding our corner to the text amendment and that was approved unanimously or I. Don't know if it's approved unanimously. He was approved as as a text amendment as well, so we feel like we're closer to tracts and Fayette. You know: 900 South is more prone, a very appropriate Street, as potentially Fayette is so so we kind of sought precedence as well and also we're on the south side of the street.

M

We're not impacting any single-family residences. Everything around us is commercial, the their single-family homes behind us. Those are under contract to be redeveloped as well, so everything's going to be four storeys, so you know we feel like we're, not really negatively impacting anyone to you know directly around us as well as far as for what they're zoned and what they can do. I.

E

Mean some fortunate timing, since you came in talked about second and second, and this nodes thing is a little bit least in my mind and I. Some of the stuff I probably agree with you. It may seems like you're consistent with the purpose and goals objectives. Many other ones, but I talk me through how you respond to the one about the the nodes on major streets and you, you know I.

I

R

That because I'm looking at the.

E

Zoning code, any zoning states that you know it describes larger buildings located on corner streets and we talked about the urban planning element being major kind of major corner corners and cueing. It and I can see. Certainly I know the area. Well, you know certainly Washington Street, being a residential neighborhood.

E

So just I'm curious if you could just respond to me and walk through or how you view that that that kind of nodes that where people can see this is a special corner and people come to you for specific reasons.

M

Sure I mean specific reasons: we're gonna have awesome, retail that steps to tracks.

E

Will come to yours, Oh.

M

Oh got it: okay,.

E

Clearly, night, South and main where that track station is yeah.

M

E

Corner that you will approach and there's lots of activity and stuff with.

G

E

On there and I can see all those not really there, but you know third west and west temple yeah.

M

E

Having that same.

M

Yeah yeah, so, to be honest, I feel like we can be a much better node than what's happening on 3rd West and West temple, just because you're on six-lane highways, where, if you talk about walkability and urban scale, actually like where we are a lot better for that urban quality.

M

As far as a note is concerned, you know it was interesting to I've come before this body before and one of the arguments for against what we were trying to propose on another project was clustering density, around transit stops and then having it scaled down from there, and so there they're. Just there are different arguments that you can cling to, or you know that you can. You can believe in I love nodes, but I also feel like.

M

We have a better option to be a node as the the scale of the street that were honest but being on right on 900 South I mean especially here to in the in the code. I interpret it as 900 South being a major corridor where extra height is should be allowed.

M

So you know, I mean I, think we can go back and forth on on nodes and where appropriate nodes are to be honest, I think you get a more vibrant node around a track stop than one that's farther away.

M

Just because it's on a corner which we are I mean it's really proximity to two tracks, and just that accessibility and the scale of nine south and what's already happening there and we're just perpetuating that and and one want to build off of that I mean I've hunted south is really the best commercial corridor and we want to keep that commercial corridor. You know coming down, 900 South, it's not a 200 west. That's all residential third west is, you know, still a very wide street.

M

A lot of you know: single-story commercial, the best node commercially, in my opinion, is just that note of 900 south and we're perpetuating that and we're gonna increase in that value. To that and.

E

Right across the street from use the vertical diner right.

M

E

M

E

They redeveloping as well.

M

Not that I'm, aware of I know and then kind of kitty-corner across the street to is the the new spy hop that's going in as well. So there's gonna be a lot of it. A lot of activity there I mean that's really. The biggest note is second west and nine South. You know that neighborhood with all the activity that's there, and so we feel like we're very well located to increase and add services and keep that a lively. You know Street like it already is.

G

I'm, good, okay, nice one question.

Q

Did you get a chance to present your plans to like the neighborhood meetings or any I.

M

Have not I usually do that all the time again lost in translation with Mike Malloy leaving I, don't know if it just slipped through the cracks, but I was never scheduled to go speak to the community council, but I reached out a couple weeks ago. Knowing that I was on this and I haven't, you know talked to them yet and they don't have a meeting in July, so I'm on the I'm on the agenda for August. Thank you but I've had initial discussions with the chair.

M

The community council, who was you know his just you know not official statement. Was we preferred more density, around transit stops, but nothing official yet but I'm anxious to get there and kind of get feedback and talk through with this.

A

So I'm really sympathetic for what you're doing, because I completely agree with the philosophy of putting as much density as we can near transit and I think I think maybe the process this has went through with change in staff and and now the change in request from something larger to something smaller. It seems it makes it really awkward for us because I think.

A

Ultimately you know, people still see it as I mean the feedback that we've gotten from the community is the only feedback, we've gotten and we'll open up the public hearing in a minute and see if anyone else wants to speak, but we have a lot more emails and that sort of thing- and it does seem very adamantly opposed. So it's really awkward I think for us to go around that sure.

M

What and sorry I can't speak to that so what's hard about, that is all that feedback was from our initial, just putting a flag out there and sing about doing all of 900 South right, so we weren't able to kind of say, Mike Malloy wasn't able to to be here to kind of lead us through that game plan originally than okay. Let's take it back now and let's just focus on this and then go back out and get feedback on that specifically so I. It does put you in an awkward position. Yeah.

A

Any other questions before we see if any public comments. Okay, let's do that and then we'll Craig finishes off all right, so we've got an open of the public hearing. Anyone from the Community Council or anyone from the public I mean come on up, come up to the microphone and just give us your name into the microphone and then you'll have two minutes to give us your remarks.

A

We need you on the record.

G

I own a little business right between chuckles and building he's going to build on it. So my building my businesses, hair salon and water store, so that's I'm right between and them right in the middle of them. So that's my concern. Let's say I just want to know what are they gonna do next, if they're gonna go on top of you? No! No, because I'm dry in the middle okay do.

A

You feel like the more height is okay or I. Think.

G

Four storeys you're all the area, it's four stories, no more higher than that. Like the colorful thing he talking about it's the way, almost and 300 ways, and maybe right in the middle, a Washingtonian third ways. So you don't see the the the the building industry is right in the middle, so that's the the most highest one I can see Andrew, maybe Ryan nearly by chuckles. They have buildings per maybe five stories, not six stories, but it's kinda six stories. It's kind of high for the area, I. Think, okay,.

A

Thank you very much.

H

A

Just give us your name into the microphone and then you'll have two minutes: yeah I'm Bruce Johnson that I own the corner, kitty corner.

G

From them at 262, 48, 868 and 864 Washington and nine South, so those four.

S

Little Lots I agree: I'm, probably one of the minority who, in the community agrees that the building height should be.

G

S

G

S

G

Whole corridor is.

S

Is does have a high velocity and of the.

G

Development under utilization of the track stop there, just I feel, could really benefit from the the increased density and and all that, so just wanted to put the positive on record for it. Okay,.

A

All right, thank you very much. Anyone else, seeing none we'll go ahead and close the public hearing and come back up to the Commission for direction where to go from here.

E

Hey Molly, a cup of you in the yeah Casey.

E

The one standards here, the extent to which a proposed text amendment implements best current professional design practices or breasts sorry best. Current professional practices of urban planning in design.

F

E

Does this meet I mean cuz I? Probably so I probably disagree, I mean I'm, just gonna babble, because I don't know what else to do, and it's not the first time Weston so I think looking at the standards here, I mean I. Think the proposed amendment is consistent with the purposes and goals and objectives of stated policy. I think the housing stock thing is pretty clear: transit, you know close approximately transit I think you know. The proposed text amendments furthers a specific purpose of the zoning ordinance.

E

It's listed there and we certainly you look at the purpose statements are people are in two places: options for housing, types, options for shopping, dining, fulfilling transportation, employment opportunities and clearly that would support I. Think I, probably think that probably fits those standards.

E

What he's talking about most text amendment is consider the person's provisions that there's no overlaid isn't matter, but so this one here, though, the extent to which the proposed text amendment implements best current professional practices of urban planning and design, and so talk me through a bit more like this whole concept of that you kind of presented here and you had a little like cartoonish image and your last thing that talked about major street corners having these taller buildings to signify that it was a major sort of place.

E

But we threw more like where's that come from how long has it been around? Is it current not current? Is the world changing or not changing that sort of view, and what? How does is that, like it's.

R

A fairly established urban planning urban design principle of taller height at intersections Barcelona has kind of probably one of the most recognizable examples of that in a very consistent urban form and how they, how that got implemented many many years ago, and so you know that's a fairly consistent thing.

R

You know we could also talk about the difference in like width of the right-of-way in comparison to the height of the building or height of the allowed building, and how you know not necessarily Salt Lake City, but how cities determine you know what is a reasonable height width ratio, and you know that would be one thing that you might want to consider in your decision. How does that you know?

R

One thing is that 9 South actually represents a shift in the in the grid, so the stree twists actually particularly on Washington, is narrower south of 9th than it is north of 9th and.

R

Well, you know 9th 3rd, 2nd and West temple are all kind of consistent with those other streets are narrower, so that you know, helps there's a relationship between the building height and the street, with, in terms of you know how you, how a pedestrian feels when they're walking on the street and that that human scale aspect- and that was you know, one of the big intents with the creation of this form based code- was about yes, providing the ability for additional density at a track.

R

Stop, but also to keep in a more human scale, form of development and not just kind of donut or you.

I

R

A great great density, but more of this more human scaled aspect. You know that that to say the difference between 50 feet and 65, you know it's 15 feet. It's. You know one story. Difference!

R

That's not two stories you know is that I think you you're gonna have to determine whether or not you feel that that's like a a major shift and in that height that building height and density and what that might mean for for Washington Street in particular, and then you know how does that compare to you know we already have the 65 foot max height for the intersection at second west or third west. So, yes, I answered your question, but I mean.

E

Assuming that I mean I know a lot about that corner, so you mean so second west and ninth South is probably that mean point, but none of those buildings are anywhere near 65. Feet by hop is three stolen. Three stories the new condos or apartments are going up worth. The wait, I think are I, think they're. Four four stories or three. You know where blue copper kind of is is one and you got rid.

R

It's one there's a billboard on the actual corner. Yes,.

E

Chuckles sad to see it go.

E

It's definitely had its time, but no I mean all those buildings are all low. I mean they're, not anywhere near, which is interesting. You seems, like the urban form there, the idea, because a lot of those are new, they haven't prompted a 65-foot buildings. Well,.

R

And in some cases, didn't prompt anything over one story and I think part of that was at the time that they were being developed. The argument for some of those properties was that the market wasn't there to support greater density at this location, even though we were talking about you know, half a block from a track station.

R

You know four and five years ago I mean.

E

New condos in the corner, brand-new and then you have to be built and then I, don't think blue coppers been there. But three or four years blue.

R

E

Architecture: five I think.

R

About five years, um I.

J

Mean I think it's reasonable. Those examples you know you're not gonna, see more development on that node, except for that one corner where the cleaner is right and that's probably gonna get a big building on it and I think the reality of this area is that area is going to be that it's going to get more dense and they're. We're gonna want more we're. Gonna want more amenities and more housing on that corner, I'm personally, in favor of giving them the height but I, don't know exactly how to I.

J

Haven't I haven't totally formulated my justification for that, based on some sort of conditions. Well,.

R

Remember, you're you're, making a recommendation: City Council's! You don't have to have all of the details that you would honor on a regular Planning Commission motion.

J

Sure we still need to tie it to a reason, though, right, if we're going against staff recommendation, no yeah.

C

I mean I, think you should you definitely. The City Council will be interested to hear your reasoning behind why that is.

J

Well, beyond what I just said, then don't I have to do I need to say, like some other like when we're approving something and I have to tie it to something in the report you.

C

Can tie it to you can tie it to those standards. So if you look on your staff report in.

J

C

J

The first table there that's a discussion section yeah.

C

It's under the discussion, those are the standards.

C

If you feel it is consistent with plans- and it is yeah the interesting thing with this is a legislative item and the way that the wording is is that the Planning, Commission and City Council should consider these things. When making the decision, it doesn't say they shall consider these things. So it's a little different than a conditional use from planned development. Where you know the City Council.

C

Could they needed can that they should consider these, but they don't have to base their decision on that, but I think the City Council is definitely going to want to hear from the Planning Commission what you know the feedback from you. What how you think it meets those standards.

A

So Molly, would you say that the general understanding of the community is that the requests coming forward? Is that the the request is to change everything on 9th South, because that was the original request? And that's where we have.

R

Met the original request day, I believe the in the Dropbox folder there's one email that was received more recently, yeah that iterated the same sentiments as back in December, even though the request has been scaled back to the single site, because.

A

For me, that's that's. My biggest concern is I'm, actually I'm, not necessarily opposed to the additional height and I think that perhaps that could work there, but I just think process wise I'm concerned that there's confusion in the community over what the request is and that there probably needs to be more time for the community to understand that it is scaled back and it would probably be beneficial to James and his project for the communities they have. That understanding before we move forward with allowing additional height because I know I do know.

A

Knowing a couple of people who live in this community I think it's a it's a been a pretty engaged community, because they've they've seen a lot of transformation in their neighborhood over the over the last few years and I know that this the process to establish this zoning here was long and a lot of community involvement and so I feel a little uncomfortable just subverting that today.

A

For this request, not saying that it's a bad request, just saying that we probably need to allow the process to maybe restart and with this transform, because that's a pretty substantial difference to see.

R

A

On nine south versus one parcel.

R

Yes and I believe that that was you know, a major factor, as you said in staffs recommendation, was responding to the public comment on this particular on this particular application, and you know I think it's up to you to decide whether or not you want to allow that public process to continue.

R

Through the Planning Commission process, or there will be more public process as it moves through the City Council right, yeah.

G

R

F

Something like.

R

It's devoid of process.

F

For this point and mr. chair just to expand on that, I mean when I read the comments regardless. If it was all of ninth South or not, the thing that really stuck out to me was most of them are saying. We were part of that process that created this forum based code. We were very engaged.

F

We want that to stay, which is that's. What really came forward to me was that they were like we've already decided what we want for our neighborhood and listen to that, and so I don't know I don't know if those comments would substantially change, but I'm hesitant as well, because these people were very engaged six years ago in creating what they wanted for their neighborhood and I'm. Also, one of the other things I wanted to expand on is one of the things you said.

F

Molly was about symmetry for both sides of the street and as I look at the aerial I. Don't know that I would feel comfortable with additional Heights all along ninth south on that North Side. So then, if we do it on the south side, we're just kidding is that little block?

F

That's blocked in by you know that that freeway on-ramp to 9,000 okay, for that whole thing to go up higher, but then we don't mirror that on the other side of the street and yeah, as far as like a best practice standard for urban design, I, don't know how that translates, then, because we clearly have more of a single-family residential going on on the north side right.

R

So you see in the map up on the screen where all the the pink properties are and they're basically across these mid block streets from each other across Washington and across Jefferson, and then the zoning on the north side and the south side of 9th south is all FPU, and so it's all purple. It's also that the idea is to have that symmetry and at those main intersections, is that there's a pop-up to emphasize that as a particular node or a place just like I explained in the previous example, I mean.

E

I would not be supportive of the higher height next to an FPU, and one so I mean that's something that if we were to move of recommendation forward, I think that is something that we should at least mention, because I think you know this is this property, maybe is unique because it it's the corner intersection and it's not next, but I think across the street I can see if I was. If I was one of those houses in Washington has become. It is a neighborhood street. It's not a it's, not a thoroughfare.

E

It's not a major corner right. It's not a it's.

J

Blocked in by the freeway to you, so it's not like it's not like you're gonna have tons of people going up and down that yeah.

E

But I don't think I would want a 65 feet on North. You know I. Think I can see why there was a decision made that north and I are at south on Washington. You wouldn't go up to 65 feet like to me. That makes sense. Why ooh as you haven't, you have people who are zoned in to 30 feet right, you know immediately behind it and 65 is quite a bit. You know I.

J

Feel, like the whole purpose of this, this zoning in this neighborhood is kind of being defeated by those who've chosen to develop. So far, though, because the zoning was put there to have higher buildings on the corner and you're not getting that, so we want to get I think we should get more density in that neighborhood and that's what the that's, what the zoning was intended to do and since it didn't happen, I think it I think this is. This is a valid argument.

J

I, just don't think that this is going to become less dense. It's going to end up becoming overcrowded without more options. There.

A

Kame I think today.

Q

I kind of share some sentiments of all the discussions that we've had here. I mean definitely agree that it's gonna become a very busy intersection later on. However, I also I also want to have the neighborhood feel that they've been part of the process, and since they haven't heard- and they haven't been explained to and talked about what the project consists of- which I think is a very worthy project.

Q

They might not have the right idea, or they perhaps have misheard things or or something that effect so I'm, more leaning towards following the recommendation that was proposed by my staff and, in my case named.

A

Favor motion Andreas.

J

A real quick question here, just looking at yeah I'm reading the wrong part of this, but just this table here.

J

Where it's got building height and placement cottage development, row house, family, multi-family, residence mix, you storefronts, sorry, there's no page numbers on these pages, so I don't know what each.

R

J

Believe it's probably page yeah. It actually lists Washington Street at 900. That's.

R

The text amendment additional.

J

Text that you would be ok, sorry I did not recommending recommended addition and.

R

The applicant mr. al fondo brought up a good point about there being a typo because, as Wayne pointed out, the bold underlined in that table suggests Washington Street at 9 South, not the southwest corner of Washington Street at 9 south, and it's very clear that the request is for the subject, property and not for all four corners of that intersection. So that would have to be in you know it's it's an edit that I can obviously be made between now and when it goes to the City Council, either either. However, you decide to.

A

Make a decision tonight: okay,.

Q

A

Do great I'm sure everything.

Q

Based on the information in the staff report, the information presented and the input received during the public hearing I move that the Planning Commission recommended the City Council deny the offer and rezoning map Dipel amendment petition, PLN PCM to zero one: seven dash zero, zero, five, nine, zero, okay.

A

We have a motion by andreas L.

B

A

Second, by Maureen any further discussion, we'll start voting with Matt.

A

I can I can change that voting if you'd like I.

E

Guess: I'm a no ocean; okay,.

G

F

Yeah I mean it: oh, yes, Andreas.

A

Yes, Maureen, yes,.

L

J

A

So with three yeses and two knows: we.

G

Have six commissioners.

S

That's gonna see if I get a whole night without turning my microphone on.

G

You have to have a majority vote to pass a motion, so this is a circumstance where the chair gets to vote and really the only effect that that.

S

Might have is, if you vote in favor of the motion, to put it over the.

G

The threshold of a majority of the Commission. Otherwise, if you vote no, it's essentially a tie and and we either revote or we forward a neutral or no recommendation to the council. Okay, maybe.

E

I kind of wonder if I've missed a comment with mine, the City Council but I would say, I mean I I'd be interested in least talking or exploring with community more. What would mean to allow it there with the but say that you could not go to 65 feet when neighboring an F, be you in one's own.

E

I, don't know if you can just list that in a staff report the City Council that one odd Commissioner mentioned. That is something to consider.

S

We always reference the one, odd committee, all.

A

Right well, this is fun, so you know I I, think, ultimately, for me, it's the it's. The process, I'm not really opposed to the idea of doing more density, I believe fully that we need to do more density around our our transit stations. I do know that this neighborhood has had a lot of changes and a lot of intervention from the RTA and and planning and and a lot of changes and they've been very involved and very active, and so for me it just.

A

It feels incredibly uncomfortable to to do something outside of that process and I feel like that. Is this, but I but I, don't think it's a bad idea to continue to pursue it and go back to the public, with a better understanding of exactly what is going on here, to help them better decide and we can get some better feedback what they would like to have in their neighborhood.

A

And ultimately, you know this will go to the City Council and they will be able to have a conversation with the community and they may see differently at that point and that's their prerogative, but for tonight I'm going to say yes and vote with the motion there. It is.

F

A

Right thanks everyone- and we are oh wait, so we are going to move the elections. Yeah.

C

We can move that.

A

C

Probably a little premature and putting the elections on there, we don't have to do it until September first means in September. So no.

E

If we can get rid of Weston.

C

So if you want to wait until you have more commissioners here to to make that vote, we can put that on for the.

A

Next meeting, all right, we're gonna, wait and push that to the next meeting. All right, we're joined.