►
From YouTube: Planning Commission - June 10, 2020
Description
Salt Lake City Planning Commission - June 10, 2020
B
Let's
do
that
and
I
have
started
recording.
So
if
you
have
anything
embarrassing
us
anything
to
say
or
do
don't
do
it?
Oh
thanks
for
everybody,
who's
joining
our
planning
commission
meeting
tonight.
There
are
several
ways
to
participate
in
the
meeting
one
you
can
go
to
the
web
browser
and
yours
a
link
there
on
the
screen,
or
it's
probably
easier
to
visit
our
website,
which
is
also
there
and
you
can
click
on
the
June,
June
10
2020
agenda
and
there's
a
link
to
get
into
the
WebEx,
which
is
what
we're
broadcasting
through.
B
If
you
are
not
being
any
issues,
there
is
a
link
for
view
instructions
for
joining
a
virtual
meeting,
we'll
help
you
join
step
by
step.
You
could
be
watching
through
youtube
or
on
channel
17,
and
if
you
you
have
comments
and
you'd
like
to
share
them
with
us,
you
can
always
send
us
an
email
at
planting
comments
at
SLC,
govt
comm,
and
we
will
have
employees
monitoring
those
emails
throughout
the
meeting
so
feel
free
to
send
those
to
us
and
we'll
make
sure
that
the
Commission
gets
those.
A
A
B
A
D
A
D
That
survey
will
basically
include
a
bunch
of
different
options
on
how
we
could
get
affordable
housing,
and
we
want
to.
We
want
to
gauge
public
interest
and
input
on
what
those
options
are.
So
we
can
put
together
a
proposal
and
we'll
be
doing
some
outreach
events
over
the
next
month,
starting
probably
actually
in
in
July,
just
timing
wise
and
things
like
that,
so
that
that's
a
big
important
project
for
us.
So
we're
looking
forward
to
launching
that
and
seeing
the
results.
A
Great
great
snick
any
questions
for
Nick
on
that
right.
Okay,
well,
now,
move
on
to
the
next
item
on
the
agenda
unfinished
business:
this
was
an
item
we
table
that.
A
recent
hearing
item
number
one
conditional
use
ad
you
at
approximately
ten
twenty
South
Lincoln,
Street
and
Linda-
is
the
staff
presenter
for
this.
E
B
F
F
2020,
the
Planning
Commission
held
a
public
hearing
and
reviewed
this
conditional
use
request
and
at
that
meeting
the
Planning
Commission
closed
public
hearing,
and
there
was
considerable
discussion
about
the
existent
existing
basement
use
of
the
single-family
dwelling.
A
motion
was
made
to
table
the
petition
with
the
Planning
Commission
directing
staff
to
conduct
research
and
report
back
on
the
use.
Determination
of
the
principal
building,
specifically
at
the
basement
level,
is
a
separate
dwelling
unit.
F
The
applicant
has
submitted
photographs
of
the
interior
space
from
the
exterior
entry
to
the
basement
level.
As
shown
here,
the
photographs
show
that
the
basement
level
has
a
space
shared
space
between
the
sleeping
area
living
area
with
the
kitchen
had
consisting
of
a
small
refrigerator
and
a
microwave
plus
a
full
bathroom.
F
The
basement
level
does
have
free
flow
access
to
the
main
floor.
The
interior
door
between
the
main
level
and
basement
does
hat,
does
not
have
a
locking
hardware.
Therefore,
there
is
no
restriction
of
free
flow
between
the
spaces.
Just
want
to
go
over
these
images
real
quickly
image.
One
is
a
view
of
the
rear,
exterior
entrance
to
the
main
floor
with
stairs
on
the
Left
leading
to
the
basement
level.
Image
is
a
view
of
the
stairs
down
to
the
basement
level
and,
as
you
can
see,
it's
just
a
curtain
and
then
image.
F
Three
and
four
is
that
interior
door
between
that
basement
level
and
the
main
floor,
and
you
can
see
the
same
doorknob
without
a
locking
hardware
and
lastly,
image.
Five
is
a
view
of
the
upstairs
from
the
basement
level.
As
you
can
see,
the
interior
door
is
on
your
list
and
that
exterior
door
is
on
your
right.
F
So
in
reviewing
the
submitted
photographs
from
the
applicant
and
current
use
with
the
listed
definitions,
the
basement
would
not
be
considered
an
additional
dwelling
unit.
The
applicant
has
showed
that
there's
free
flow
there,
where
it's
no
lock
doors
between
the
main
level
and
the
basement
level
and
that
the
occupants
can
perform
to
the
zoning
definition
of
family.
Therefore,
the
principle
building
on
the
property
is
considered
a
single-family
dwelling
and
is
in
compliance
with
the
zoning
ordinance
that
limits
the
number
of
ad
use
on
a
property
to
one.
F
The
conditional
use
request
remains
the
same
as
what
was
presented
at
the
May
13th
meeting.
I
do
want
to
go
over
a
couple
of
comments
received
since
the
last
hearing
to
bring
to
your
attention.
Most
of
the
comments
received
by
the
public
are
short-term
rentals
concerned
about
the
short-term
rentals
on
a
property
and,
in
addition,
East
Liberty,
Park,
commune
or
Ganesh
nation
has
provided
a
letter
yesterday
on
its
project,
which
is
uploaded
on
Dropbox.
Two
questions
were
brought
up.
F
One
was
in
regards
to
the
difficulty
of
determining
whether
there's
a
locking
hardware
interior
door
based
on
the
images
on
the
in
the
staff
memorandum
and
the
applicant,
has
provided
closer
to
photographs
of
the
doorknob,
as
shown
in
this
presentation,
and
it's
also
uploaded
to
Dropbox
for
your
review.
The
second
question
was
in
regards
to
the
short-term
rental
happening
on
the
property
is
a
primary
concern
for
the
community
council
and
quote,
we
believe
adding
an
Adu
with
an
active.
A
beer
Airbnb
listing
could
create
an
effective
triplex
in
an
area
zoned
for
single-family
homes.
F
I
do
note
that
a
civil
enforcement
case
was
open
a
couple
of
weeks
after
the
May
13
Planning
Commission
hearing
regarding
the
short-term
rental,
it
is
still
being
investigated,
but
the
alleged
short-term
rental
is
a
civil
enforcement
issue.
In
addition,
a
condition
has
been
added
to
note
that
short-term
rentals
are
not
permitted
in
the
single-family
dwelling
or
accessory
dwelling
unit,
and
non-compliance
with
the
conditions
prescribed
upon
approval
of
a
conditional
use
may
be
grounds
for
this
suspension
or
revocation
of
the
conditional
use.
F
D
D
A
A
I'm,
just
madam
chair
I'll
make
a
make
a
make
a
motion
and
based
on
the
findings
listed
in
the
staff
report,
information
presented
and
the
input
received
during
the
public
hearing
last
compounding
mission.
I
move
that
the
Planning
Commission
approved
the
conditional
use
request:
PLN
PCM
2019
zero,
one,
zero,
seven
nine,
as
proposed
subject
complying
with
conditions
listed
in
the
memorandum
very
motion
by
Brenda.
Second.
A
C
A
A
A
D
Madam
chair,
real
quick
before
we
continue.
This
is
Nick
Norris
I
just
wanted
to
I
forgot
to
announce
this
earlier,
but
it's
I'm
just
trying
to
make
sure
that
everybody
knows
that
we'll
do
everything
we
can
to
make
sure
that
the
commissioners
video
feeds
are
live.
There's
some
technical
issues
that
sometimes
prevent
that
from
happening,
and
so
I
just
want
everybody
to
recognize
that
that
we
and
that
we're
making
sure
that
we
are
monitoring
to
make
sure
we
maintain
a
a
quorum
throughout
the
meeting.
Whether
somebody's
video
is
on.
Thank
you.
F
Yes,
Irene
still
can
see
my
see
screen
correct,
yes,
perfect,
so
this
petition
is
for
a
conditional
use
for
a
detached
ad
you
to
be
placed
in
the
rear
yard
of
an
existing
single-family
dwelling
on
a
corner
lot
located
at
approximately
11
80
South
800
East.
Subject:
parcel
is
zoned
r1
5000,
single-family
residential
located
on
800
East,
between
Liberty,
Avenue
and
1300,
south
and
staff
is
recommending
approval
with
conditions
the
proposed
detached
ad.
You
would
be
above
a
new
two-car
garage
located
in
the
rear
yard
adjacent
to
the
alley.
F
The
gross
floor
area
of
a
do
would
be
approximately
six
hundred
and
thirty
three
square
feet.
With
this
building
footprint.
Also
the
same
633
square
feet.
The
ad
you
would
be
on
the
second
level
of
the
two-story
structure
containing
one
bedroom,
one
bath
with
a
flat
roof
measure,
approximately
19
feet,
2
inches
in
height.
The
exterior
building
materials
would
consists
of
brick
veneer,
horizontal
lap,
sightings
and
butch
rims.
The
proposed
ad,
you
would
have
a
balcony
area,
that's
approximately
52
square
feet
with
exterior
stairs
along
the
South
elevation.
F
The
Adu
entrance
would
face
a
south
interior
lot
line
and
there
are
several
windows
on
all
elevations.
The
proposed
windle's
are
similar
in
size
and
profile
as
the
windows
found
on
the
principal
structure.
The
pedestrian
access
goes
through.
The
proposed
concrete
driveway
to
the
alley,
which
leads
out
to
Liberty
Avenue.
A
parking
for
the
existing
house
would
be
accommodated
by
the
two
off
street
parking
spaces
in
the
new
detached
garage
below
the
ATU,
which
would
be
accessed
from
the
alley,
and
they
proposed
parking
for
the
ad.
F
You
would
be
in
the
rear
yard
between
the
Adu
and
a
south
lot
line
with
access,
also
from
the
alley,
some
key
considerations.
First,
being
the
parking
location,
as
noted,
the
parking
would
be
provided
from
in
the
rear
yard,
and
the
ordinance
only
requires
one
parking
space
for
an
Adu
second
housing
goals.
Their
proposed
Adu
is
consistent
with
the
goals
and
policies
outlined
within
the
scrolling
SLC
housing
plan.
Housing
goals
are
addressed
under
standard
three,
with
an
attachment
G
of
a
staff
report.
F
F
Here
are
some
site
visit
photos
image.
One
is
a
view
that
rear
yard
at
the
intersection
of
Liberty
Avenue
and
the
alley
where
they
proposed
ad
you
would
be
located
and
as
to
as
a
view
of
Liberty
Avenue
looking
towards
800
East
with
the
subject
property
on
the
right
and
image.
Three
is
a
video
of
the
rear
yard.
Where
the
proposed
ad,
you
would
be
located
an
image
for
the
view
of
the
alley.
With
the
subject.
Property
on
the
left
staff
has
not
have
any
comments
on
this
project.
A
A
F
A
A
B
There's
not,
we
actually
only
have
one
attendee
who's.
We
have
two
attendees
who
are
not
with
the
applicants
and
so
I
don't
see
anybody
from
the
Community
Council.
Just
as
a
reminder,
if
you
want
to
speak,
there's
that
little
hand
that
you
can
raise.
It
looks
like
currently,
we
have
one
hand
from
Zachary,
Dussault,
okay,.
G
Hey
guys,
Zack
reduce
all
speaking
favor
the
application
just
for
the
same
reason,
I
always
speak
in
favor,
maybe
use
increasing
housing
options
in
the
city,
a
nice
way
of
adding
density
without
and
of
being
overbearing
on
single-family,
neighborhoods
and
I
know.
This
is
kind
of
not
really
related
to
this
application
specific,
but
with
the
previous
application.
G
I
just
want
to
caution
the
Commission
and
what
I
appear
to
as
an
outside
observer
see,
is
moving
up
the
goal
posts
unable
to
use
I
believe
this
is
the
first
application
that
previous
occasion
was
the
first
one
where
staff
actually
did
go
out
and
photograph
doorknobs
and
I.
Don't
really
think
that's
the
best.
G
The
best
use
of
the
Planning
Commission
it's
time
and
I
do
believe
that
that's
an
enforcement
issue
that
should
be
what
Housing
and
zoning
enforcement
and
shouldn't
be
a
condition
of
approval
for
ad
use
or
the
allegations
of
short
term
rentals
them
being
the
reason
for
denial,
and
that's
it.
Thank
you.
Alright,.
A
Now
we
have
no
other
emails
or
other
named
individuals
expressing
an
interest
to
speak,
I'll
go
ahead
and
close
the
public
meri
meeting
public
hearing
and
bring
the
discussion
back
to
the
Commission.
Any
additional
comments.
Questions
concerns
discussion.
Items
from
the
Commissioner
is
someone
interested
in
making
a
motion.
D
Chair
I
just
wanted
to
acknowledge
that
we
we
did
receive,
and
maybe
Linda
did
this
and
I
missed
it,
but
we
did
receive
a
letter
from
the
community
council
by
email.
I,
don't
know
if
that's
in
your
Dropbox,
but
if
it
was
received
today,
but
it
does
indicate
I'm
support.
If
you
do
not
have
it
we're
happy
to
read
it.
The
record
I.
A
A
E
This
is
just
east
of
the
ninth
and
ninth
intersection
and
they're,
requesting
to
rezone
the
east,
half
of
the
property
from
our
be
or
residential
business
to
see
be
community
business
and
the
reason
for
this
the
applicant
is
exploring
expansion
options
of
their
building
because
of
the
growing
business
and
they
prefer
to
be
able
to
develop
under
one
consistent
zone
across
the
property.
So
with
the
rezone
staff
compares
the
zones,
their
compatibility
with
the
master
plan
and
potential
impacts
on
adjacent
properties
and
just
a
front.
B
You'll
commander
up:
do
you
get
one
second
yeah,
so
I
just
wanted
to?
Let
you
know
your
applicant
Ryan,
Littlefield
I'm
able
to
make
him
a
panelist,
so
I
was
wondering
if
he
wanted
to
maybe
exit
and
then
try
reentering,
the
other
applicant
Stuart
gray,
I
was
I
was
able
to
make
presenters,
so
I
just
wanted
to
get
that
out.
So
if
it
takes
them
some
time
to
re-enter
so
thanks.
Okay,
great
sorry,.
E
Okay,
so
as
part
of
the
analysis,
we
compared
the
development
potential
of
the
current
and
proposed
zones
they're
generally
similar
in
scale,
but
they
differ
primarily
in
design
controls.
So
you
can
see
on
these
aerials
on
the
slide.
On
the
left
hand,
side
you
have
a
current
developer
area
with
c
CB,
slash
Arby's
flip
zone
property.
E
So
you
can
see
that
the
property
is
limited
on
the
east
side,
with
the
RB
setbacks
of
10
feet
on
the
front
and
corner
on
the
6
feet
on
the
side,
and
they
can
only
cover
50%
of
the
lot
in
the
area
with
buildings,
whereas
if
they
rezone
the
whole
property
to
CB
on
you,
you
eliminate
those
setbacks
and
that
love
coverage
invitation.
So
you
have
a
much
greater
area
that
you
could
fill
with.
Building
on
that
East
Side.
E
So
this
slide
has
a
comparison
of
the
design
controls
in
each
zone.
They
do
have
the
same
height
limits,
but
there
are
differences
as
far
as
design
standards,
so
the
RB
zone
there
few
applicable
design
standards
to
this
building,
there's
no
glass
minimums
or
blank
wall
maximums
for
any
public
street
facing
facades
and
there's
no
other
facade
controls
in
that
zone,
whereas
with
the
CP
you
have
more
applicable
design
standards.
E
You
have
a
fifty
forty
percent
class
minimum,
which
is
typical
generally
for
our
pedestrian
oriented
zones
and
a
15-foot
maximum
for
any
blank
wall
segments
to
help
create
some
variation
in
the
facade
with
the
RB.
You
have
no
group
design
controls
for
additions
to
the
existing
flat
roof
building,
whereas
with
the
CB,
if
you're
doing
a
large
addition
or
new
build
you're
kicked
into
a
design
review
and
the
CV
zone
has
special
considerations
for
route
compatibility
with
properties
nearby
overall,
the
RB
zone.
It
really
has
no
design
controls
your
non
residential
style
buildings.
E
It
does
a
pretty
good
job
of
controlling,
limiting
character
and
feature
changes
to
existing
residential
style
buildings,
but
otherwise
for
an
existing
commercial
style
building.
It
really
doesn't
have
a
lot
of
design
standards,
whereas
with
the
CB
zone
for
any
large
buildings
and
new
buildings,
you'd
have
to
go
through
a
design
review
process
for
scale,
massing
setbacks
and
design,
and
the
special
design
guidelines
for
the
CV
zone.
E
So,
as
part
of
the
reason
request,
we
also
look
at
whether
the
zoning
would
be
compatible
with
the
master
plan
on
designation
for
the
property.
In
this
case,
the
property
has
a
low
density,
residential
/
excuse,
designation,
5
to
10
growing,
it's
an
acre.
It
supports
low
traffic
generating
commercial
uses.
Small
neighborhood
retail
service
uses
a
mix
of
residential,
above
with
small
businesses,
ground
level
and
otherwise
small
commercial
uses
to
maintain
a
residential
character.
E
So
in
this
case
the
RB
and
CV
zoning
both
do
exceed
the
density
limitations.
They
don't
have
a
density
limit
for
multi-family
development.
They
both
allow
for
similar
low
intensity
uses,
while
the
CB
allows
a
few
more
intense,
more
intense
abuses
in
the
RB,
including
restaurants,
with
Drive
thrus
and
both
zones
do
allow
for
mixed-use.
However,
with
the
RB
zoned
residential
character,
considerations
aren't
required
for
additions,
but
there
are
lot
coverage
limitations
to
help
reduce
that
scale,
whereas
the
CV
zone
again
requires
scale,
roof
style
coverage,
compatibility,
larger
additions
and
new
buildings.
E
E
So
the
other
consideration
is
compatibility
with
adjacent
properties.
In
this
case
the
West,
the
West
properties,
are
already
zone
CP,
which
would
match
the
CP
proposed.
Zoning
properties
to
the
south
across
900
South
are
buffered
by
Street
and
as
well
as
properties
to
the
east,
which
are
zoned.
Rb
also
have
that
Street
buffer.
There
is
a
single-family
property
to
the
north
of
the
site,
it's
intuition
in
an
institutional
zone,
so
there's
not
a
default
buffer
from
the
rezone
property
toward
this
property.
E
Generally,
those
buffers
only
apply
if
you
have
a
residentially,
zoned
protected
property
next
to
a
commercial
property.
So
it's
a
little
unique
that
this
single-family
house
is
in
an
institutional
stone.
However,
there
are
some
things
that
provided
buffering,
regardless
of
that
there's
a
seven
foot
parking
lot
landscape
buffer.
That
would
apply
regardless
of
this
RB
or
CV
zone,
and
that
would
be
expected
to
remain
with
any
additions
to
this
building.
They
are
right
on
the
edge
of
parking
compliance.
E
If
they
did
any
additions,
it
would
require
more
parking
than
what
they
have
so
staff
doesn't
expect
that
buffer
to
go
away
or
the
parking
to
go
away
on
that
more
side.
Additionally,
if
you
are
doing
a
larger
addition,
it
does
kick
you
into
design
with
you
again.
Those
scale
compatibility
step
back
considerations
all
can
be
reviewed
by
the
Planning
Commission
for
any
large
additions
on
that
side
of
the
property.
E
So
with
that,
we
are
recommending
that
you
send
a
positive
recommendation
of
City
Council,
as
it
generally
complies
with
the
master
plan.
Guidance
and
overall,
has
better
regulations
for
compatibility
in
building
design.
One
thing
to
note
is
that
we
did
receive
some
community
input
one
letter
and
support
from
resident
and
property
owner
nearby,
as
well
as
a
letter
and
support
from
the
Community
Council
for
the
area.
Otherwise,
we
didn't
receive
any
concerns,
and
that
is
the
end
of
my
presentation.
B
Adrienne
I'm
able
to
unmute
Ryan
Littlefield
I'm,
not
able
to
make
him
a
panelist,
so
I'm
gonna
unmute
him,
and
we
can
talk
to
him.
Okay,
Ryan,
can
you
hear
us
I
can
hear
you
can
hear
me?
Can
I
apologize
I,
don't
know
why?
But
through
WebEx
I
you're,
just
not
able
to
be
made
of
panelists
I
can't
make
Stuart
great
panelists
if
he
has
a
presentation
that
you
want
to
show
on
the
screen.
Yes,.
B
C
I'm
not
gonna
spend
a
lot
of
time
going
through
the
presentation,
because
Daniel
has
really
covered
many
of
the
aspects
that
we've
spent
a
lot
of
time.
Thinking
about
going
over
so
I
don't
want
to
necessarily
spend
a
lot
of
time
rehashing.
What
I
would
like
to
show
as
we've
looked
at
these
images-
and
you
see
them
here
and
as
we
make
this
request,
we
recognize
that
the
Planning
Commission
has
to
have
a
long
view
that
you
are
seeing
what
happens
to
this
property
in
the
future
beyond
the
owner.
That's
there.
C
They
moved
into
this
current
building
in
2012
2013
and
they
really
have
gone
to
great
lengths
to
make
sure
they
fit
in
to
this
neighborhood
as
far
as
aesthetically
and
as
a
business
and
being
a
vital
part
of
the
feel
that
is
in
that
community
again
this
next
slide.
Much
of
this
was
taken
from
information.
It
was
provided
from
the
staff,
so
we'll
go
ahead
and
skip
that.
C
This
next
part
is
really
the
key
element
to
our
discussion
as
we
sat
down
with
them.
By
the
way
my
name
is
Stewart,
Grass,
States
and
I
am
an
owner
in
a
small
local
firm
here
in
Salt,
Lake,
City
and
architectural
firm
and
I
also
admit
to
spending
far
too
much
time
and
money
at
contender,
because
I
am
a
I
love,
bicycles
and
I
like
how
they
approach
business.
C
So
we
had
an
opportunity
to
kind
of
talk
through
what
are
some
of
the
options
that
they
might
consider,
and
this
graphic
represents
conceptual
layouts
for
the
editions
under
the
CVR
guidelines.
Now
you
will
note
that
in
the
staff
recommendation,
they've
oriented
the
front
of
property,
2/10
east,
our
orientation
at
least
the
way
we
envisioned
it
would
be
to
orient
to
ninth
south.
C
That's
the
natural
front
to
the
building
in
terms
of
how
we
want
to
address
the
community
and
the
property
itself
and
as
such,
and
as
he
mentioned,
we
end
up
with
some
natural
buffers
with
regards
to
the
parking,
and
that
is
a
key
driver
in
any
conversation
and
any
concepts
that
we've
looked
at.
Is
this
idea.
We've
got
to
maintain
the
parking
and
good
traffic
flow
through
the
property,
and
certainly
over
the
last
few
months,
that's
been
highlighted
as
they've
seen.
C
So
these
Dwight
areas
that
you
see
our
critical
parking
areas
and
traffic
flow.
We
considered
options
for
expansion,
there
they're
just
not
great
options,
and
so
that
parking
becomes
a
natural
buffer,
which
is
why
we're
recommending
that
the
10-foot
setback
occurs
at
the
back
of
property
or
to
the
north
of
property.
Pardon
me,
which
would
again
increase
that
buffer
from
the
though
it's
institutionally
zoned,
it's
a
residential
neighbors
to
the
north,
and
certainly
we
are
considering
that,
as
we
look
at
different
designs,
I'll
jump
to
the
next
slide.
These
are
just
some
initial
concepts.
C
We
looked
at
the
neighborhood
itself,
we've
taken
numerous
photos
and
done
some
studies
of
the
traffic
in
the
area
kind
of
looking
at
what
what
are
our
best
options-
and
these
are
some
initial
massing
concepts
which
way
could
we
grow?
What's
the
best
way
to
do
it
with
the
intent
to
have
the
least
impact
as
well
on
the
property?
C
These
next
images
are
just
a
few
images
that
represent
some
more
in-depth
studies
on
how
do
we
meet
the
glazing
requirements
of
CB?
These
are
certainly
initial
concepts
and
if
this
is
granted
we'll
explore
some
of
this
stuff
further
and
make
sure
that
we're
fully
compliant
with
the
CB,
but
I
think
this
illustrates
that
we're
not
going
to
see
a
significant
change
in
appearance.
C
We
believe
that
gives
the
Planning
Commission
more
opportunity
to
to
make
sure
proper
growth
happens
and
that
again,
our
focus
is
to
put
the
primary
focus
of
the
property
to
the
ninth
south
street
front.
And
that
concludes
our
presentation.
As
far
as
that's
concerned,
we
we
believe
the
staff
recommendation
addressed
all
the
other
issues
and
again,
if
this
is
awarded,
we,
we
will
start
next
process,
which
is
getting
plans
that
we
would
present
to
the
city
for
the
addition.
A
B
G
I
can
how's
it
Secord
you,
salt
speaking,
favor,
the
application
just
gonna
make
it
short.
The
only
thing
that
I
would
disagree
with
with
the
presentations
that,
with
the
Burton
ordinance
update,
hopefully
happening
sometime
this
year.
The
interim
parking
spaces
for
the
building
would
be
reduced
slightly.
It's
going
from
I
believe
right
now,
it's
I
was
just
looking
at
the
ordinances.
The
current
is
2
spaces,
4,000
square
feet
of
retail
space
and
either
under
our
B
or
C
D.
So
it
doesn't
really
affect
this
rezone.
G
It's
gonna
be
reduced
to
a
1.5
or
a
thousand
square
feet.
I
think
that's
a
I
think
that's
a
positive,
but
just
to
keep
in
mind,
but
regardless
our
deal
CD
with
being
the
same
1.5,
so
the
parking
was
going
to
be
reduced
by
the
ordinance
updated,
not
by
this
rezone
other
than
that,
I'm
in
favor
the
application-
and
I
think
the
applicant
did
a
good
job
at
presenting
the
positives.
Thanks.
B
A
D
A
A
A
G
A
A
A
She
did,
she
said:
I
am
a
yes
here.
Yes,
sir,
hey
great
motion
passes
will
make
a
positive
recommendation
to
the
City
Council.
There
will
be
a
separate
public
hearing
before
the
City
Council
before
the
matter
is
either
approved
or
denied,
unless
John
or
Nick
or
Molly
has
anything
else.
We
need
to
run
through
tonight.
I,
don't.
B
D
D
A
Thank
you
for
that.
We
did.
We
did
manage
to
get
it
down
to
six
items
from
nine
and
we're
so
very
grateful
and
thankful
for
that.
I
think
the
last
time
we
had
five
items.
It
was
almost
a
five-hour
meeting,
so
I
don't
hold
much
hope,
I,
guess
yeah,
six,
let's
be
optimistic!
Okay,
all
right!
So
then,
oh,
if
you
are
going
away
on
vacation
for
any
of
the
July
or
August
meetings,
I
know
know
me,
maybe
is
going
anywhere,
but
we
do
have.