►
From YouTube: Planning Commission Meeting - August 22, 2018
Description
Planning Commission Meeting - August 22, 2018
A
See
this
evenings
Planning
Commission
meeting.
Thank
you
for
coming
out.
I
am
gonna
just
make
a
quick
announcement
at
the
top
here.
It
looks
like
some
of
you
have
already
filled
out
cards
and
brought
them
up.
If
you
wish
to
speak
on
a
topic,
that's
helpful
and
they're
just
outside
the
door,
so
you
can
fill
that
out
and
pass
it
up
on
either
side
of
the
table
here
and
and
we'll
be
sure
to
get
you
your
time
to
speak.
C
E
E
A
B
A
F
Second,
just
some
updates
on
some
activity,
that's
happening
with
the
City
Council
on
some
items
that
went
through
the
Planning
Commission
they've
held
a
number
of
public
hearings
on
things
last
night
they
approved
a
zoning
map,
amendment
that
was
on
900
East
and
in
between
South
temple
and
100.
South
I
can't
remember
the
details
of
that.
It
was
a
split
zone
property.
F
It
was
just
making
him
all
the
same,
I
think
and
then
the
other
items
they
had
public
hearings
on
the
state
law
code,
changes
related
to
appeals
of
Historic,
Landmarks
Commission
decisions
which
we
have
to
do
to
be
in
compliant.
They
haven't
adopted
that
yet,
but
there
were
no
real
comments
on
that.
The
text
amendment
to
fix
a
oversight
in
the
mixed-use
zoning
district
to
add
the
retail
services
back
in
that
were
somehow
erroneously
left
out
when
we
made
sweeping
light
when
we
redid
our
land
use
tables
five
or
six
years
ago.
F
So
that
is
expected
to
pass
too.
There
was
no
opposition
that
we've
heard
heard
to
that
and
then
clarifying
some
language
in
the
design
standards
about
making
sure
that
design
standards
apply
to
existing
structures
as
well,
so
that
once
something
is
approved,
they
can't
go
back
and
block
in
windows,
and
things
like
that,
so
those
are
pending
at
the
City
Council,
hopefully
in
the
next
at
their
next
meeting,
they'll
make
a
decision
on
those
they
also
will
be
taking
up
the
discussion
on
the
briefing
it
looks
like
on
ad
use
on
September
4th.
F
A
G
So
this
is
a
request
made
by
David
SEO,
the
developer
for
plan
development
and
preliminary
subdivision
approvals
to
construct
four
new
single-family
homes
on
four
new
Lots,
which
would
be
accessed
by
a
new
private
driveway
at
26
60s,
south
Highland
Drive
plan
development.
Approval
is
required
as
two
of
the
Lots
would
not
have
furniture
on
a
public
street.
G
But
beyond
this,
the
applicant
has
not
requested,
and
yet
other
type
of
relief
from
the
zoning
ordinance
I
did
want
to
point
out
quickly
that
this
petition
was
submitted
under
the
former
planned
development
ordinance
so
you'll
want
to.
We
did
consider
the
project
against
those
objectives
and
standards
and
not
the
current
ones
that
are
currently
in
place.
G
So,
as
you
can
see
here
on
this
aerial
on
the
subject
property
at
twenty
six,
sixty
South
Highland
Drive
consists
of
one
parcel
that
measures
just
under
half
an
acre
in
area,
and
it
currently
contains
one
single-family
home
that
is
oriented
towards
Highland
Drive.
The
parcel
currently
has
two
vehicle
access
points.
G
One
is
a
private
driveway
that
stems
off
of
Highland
Drive
in
another
private
driveway
at
the
back
of
the
lot.
That
comes
off
of
Katyn
Way
Katyn
Way
is
a
private
roadway
directly
to
the
south
of
the
site
that
was
constructed
to
serve
the
existing
plan.
You
didn't
development
to
the
south
and
west
of
the
subject.
Property
called
the
highlands
of
sugarhouse
I
did
also
want
to
point
out
that
if
you
can
see
on
that
zoning
map,
the
parcels
directly
to
the
south
are
zoned
cn
neighborhood
commercial.
G
G
It's
here,
too,
some
site
photos.
The
top
photo
is
the
existing
single-family
structure
on
site.
It
is
rate
this
home
was
rated
as
contributing
to
the
Highland
Park
national
historic
district,
but
it
is
not
located
in
a
local,
historic
district,
so
the
city
doesn't
have
any
authority
to
protect
it
from
demolition.
The
bottom
left
of
the
photo
is
the
strip
mall,
that's
directly
to
the
south,
and
the
bottom
right
photo
is
the
small
bungalow
that's
directly
to
the
north,
and
then
these
are
just
some
photos
of
development
directly
across
the
street.
G
So
this
is
a
site
plan
for
what's
being
proposed
again.
It's
a
plan
development
request,
because
the
two
rear
Lots
away
from
Highland
Drive,
don't
a
frontage
on
a
public
street.
The
proposed
Lots
range
in
area
from
about
5,000
square
feet
to
6,000
square
feet.
I
did
add
the
red
dashed
lines
to
kind
of
show
you,
where
they're
proposing
to
break
out
the
property
lines
for
each
lot.
G
It
does
include
the
construction
of
a
new
private
driveway
that
comes
off
of
Katyn
way
and
bisects
the
site
and
then
they'll
be
for
individual
driveways
that
lead
to
two-car
garages
that
are
proposed
for
each
home.
Guest
parking
could
be
accommodated
in
those
individual
driveways
or
you
are
allowed
to
park
on
the
street
on
Highland
Drive
in
that
area.
G
But
I
wanted
to
point
out
that
despite
this
orientation,
the
outermost
setback,
designation
for
the
the
property
as
a
whole
are
the
same
as
they
would
be
if
the
developer
we're
only
constructing
one
home
on
the
site.
So
the
yards
that
abut
Highland
Drive
by
definition,
are
front
yards
and
then
the
rest
of
the
Lots
are
configured
in
a
way
that
side
yards
are
side
yards
and
Groo
yards
are
where
you
would
expect
them
to
be.
G
So
when
it
comes
to
the
specific
designs
for
the
homes
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
construct
for
two-story
homes
with
attached
two-car
garages,
they
are
modern
in
design
with
minor
variations
between
each
of
them
all
the
structures
of
flat
roofs
and
they
each
have
a
large
pitched
roof
form
located
towards
what
I'm
calling
the
functional
front
of
the
home.
The
pitched
portions
are
limited
to
28
feet
in
height
and
the
flat
roof
portions
are
limited
to
20
feet
in
height.
G
G
That
would
be
most
visible
from
Highland
Drive
so
because
they
are,
the
homes
are
being
oriented
internally
toward
that
private
driveway,
the
functional
rear
of
the
homes
on
Lots
1
and
to
end
up
fronting
Highland
and
then
the
actual
front
elevations
of
the
homes
on
Lots,
3
and
4
can
be
seen
from
Highland,
but
they'd
be
set
back
behind
the
other.
Two,
so
the
top
two
elevations
here
would
be
closest
to
Highland
Drive.
The
bottom
elevations
would
be
set
back
behind.
G
And
the
orientation
of
the
homes
on
Lots,
one
and
two
that
have
furniture
on
Highland
Drive
is
highlighted
as
a
key
consideration
in
the
staff
report.
Staff
finds
that
the
proposal
supports
elements
of
the
sugarhouse
master
plan,
but
also
conflicts
with
some
policy
statements
that
relate
to
compatibility
with
the
surrounding
neighborhood
and
the
orientation
of
houses
so
that
they
face
the
street.
In
addition,
the
purpose
statement
of
a
planned
development
indicates
it
will
result
in
a
more
enhanced
product.
G
Someone
be
achievable
through
strict
application
of
land
use
regulations
while
enabling
the
development
to
be
compatible
with
adjacent
and
nearby
land
developments
so
to
better
comply
with
these
two
items.
I
strongly
encourage
the
applicant
to
orient
the
homes
with
furniture
on
Highland
Drive
toward
the
street
during
reviews
of
the
project,
and
you
can
see
on
this
slide.
The
revised
elevations
being
proposed
tonight
are
an
improvement
on
what
was
initially
proposed,
but
they
still
appear
to
be
the
rear
elevations
of
the
homes.
G
So
in
an
effort
to
address
this
stuff
is
recommending
conditions
of
approval
that
would
require
the
applicant
to
modify
the
street
funding
elevations
to
include
architectural
features,
typically
found
on
the
front
facade
of
a
single-family
home,
such
as
enhanced
entry
ways
with
usable
porch
features,
prominent
front
entry,
doors
window
patterns
and
configurations
that
are
more
appropriate
for
a
prominent
street
facing
facade
and
the
use
of
more
articulation
in
the
building
wall
or
additional
building
materials.
To
increase
visual
interests.
We
are
asking
for
final
design
details
to
be
delegated
to
staff.
On
that.
G
We
also
recommended
a
condition
that
the
eastern,
this
kind
of
just
affirms
that
the
eastern
yard
areas
of
lots
of
one-in-two
against
Highland
Drive,
will
be
considered
the
front
yards
of
the
Lots
in
for
the
purposes
of
designating
yards.
The
main
purpose
of
this
is
to
ensure
that
any
feature
fencing
would
comply
with
height
limitations
for
fences
in
front
yards,
so
it
be
limited
to
four
feet
in
height,
rather
than
being
able
to
have
a
six-foot
fence
on
Highland
Drive.
G
A
A
Can
you
speak
to
the
historic
preservation
component,
real
fast
related
to
the
plan,
development
and
I
know
that
one
of
the
criteria
is
preserving
any
historical,
architectural
and
environmental
features
of
the
property
and
on
the
staff
report
it
says
that
the
interpretation
of
that
is
that,
because
this
is
a
national,
historic
district
and
it's
not
a
local
historic
site,
building
or
district
that
staff
doesn't
see
it
as
a
contributing
home.
In
that
nature,
is
that
a
staff
interpretation
or
is
that
a
legal
interpretation
or
where
does
that?
Where
does
that
sit?
G
Think
that's
a
staff
interpretation
but
I
think
it's
mainly
because
we
don't
have
the
authority
to
prevent
demolition
of
a
structure.
That's
in
a
national,
historic
district.
Our
ordinances
give
us
the
authority
to
you
know
prevent
demolition
of
contributing
structures
in
a
local,
historic
district.
We
didn't
create
a
local
historic
district
in
that
area,
so
so.
A
A
A
F
E
F
To
demolish
a
structure
in
the
city,
you
that
you
have
two
options:
you
either
have
to
have
an
approved,
reuse
plan
or
you
have
to
basically
bond
for
future
landscaping
for
on
the
site,
and
so
in
a
situation
where
somebody
wants
to
demolish
a
home.
They
could
come
back
and
submit
a
pretty
generic
single-family
home
on
the
property
that
could
be
approved
through
the
building
permit
process,
and
that
would
satisfy
an
approved
reuse
plan
and
then
just
never
build
it.
E
They
build
three
Lots
on
this
property
when
not
just
a
fourth,
without
going
to
the
planned
development,
and
could
they
tear
the
house
down,
put
three
Lots
as
long
as
the
two
phrases
on
heiling,
the
third
one
faced
on
the
street.
The
fort
lot
for
just
couldn't
built
is
that
could
they
do
that
without
plan
event
and
process?
No.
G
I
I
just
did
not
rehash
the
the
development
again
but
to
go
through.
Maybe
a
couple
of
the
concerns.
The
the
reason
we've
designed
the
four
Lots
around
I
know
it
was
brought
up
of.
If
we
could
get
three
there's
not
enough
frontage
on
Highland
Drive
is
it
that
was
explained,
so
it
forces
either
one
access
off
Highland,
Drive
and
another
private
road
down
to
attempt
to
try
to
squeeze
three.
The
Lots
actually
become
a
little
bit
more
squeezed
in
that
the
the
setbacks
become
tighter.
I
If
we
do
a
north
or
south
private
road
in
in
this
situation,
we'd
end
up
with
a
more
north
private
road
coming
down
that
side
and
trying
to
squeeze
three
locks
in
and
that
the
project
does
not
become
financially
feasible.
So
the
the
approach
of
the
four
and
access
off
Katelyn
way
there
is
a
there
is
an
easement
in
place
that
does
allow
the
access
of
this
property
off
that
private
drive
of
that
private
development.
That's
currently
there
a
couple
of
things
to
discuss.
I
We
we
have
had
to
sugar
house
Planning,
Commission
or
Planning
Council
meetings
to
open
up
and
discuss
to
the
public
as
well.
We
have
talked
in
in
lengthy
depths
with
the
the
PD
development
Highlands
of
sugar
house
there
and
in
the
access
on
Katyn
way.
Currently
some
of
the
biggest
frustrations
they
have
is
traffic
cutting
through
their
PUD
to
avoid
the
traffic
light,
that's
on
Highland
Drive,
so
we've
proposed
and
tried
to
work
with
them
on
putting
a
gate
just
past
our
entrance
of
property,
electronic
gate
that
we
would
fund
and
pay
for
for
them.
I
That
would
hopefully
relieve
complete
issues
of
people
trying
to
cut
through
that
area
just
in
ways
of
trying
to
be
friendly
neighbors,
because
we
understand
the
change
is
hard
on
everybody.
That's
one
issue
that
shows
up
here
with
where
the
gate
was.
Second,
where
we're
at
slide
wise.
Here,
the
original
design
shows
where
the
current
access
is
or
easement
of
access
off,
Katyn
way.
I
Another
issue
that
was
brought
up
amongst
the
individuals
there
was
concern
of
how
close
our
access
was
getting
to
their
private
development.
Feeling,
like
our
headlights
in
our
cars,
were
getting
too
close
to
their
homes,
so
we
discussed
with
them
about
trying
to
move
that
access
a
little
further
east
and
I
think
for
multiple
reasons
that
serve
our
community
better
answers
their
community
better
of
giving
us
a
more
straight
shot
and
putting
less
traffic
further
down
their
road,
allowing
them
a
little
more
privacy.
On
that
development.
We.
I
H
These
are
a
little
bigger
than
the
ones
we're
proposing,
but
gives
you
kind
of
the
same
idea.
The
finishes
that
we
have
chosen
that
people
tend
to
like
and
then
I
skipped
ahead,
but
taking
in
some
of
the
complaints
or
suggestions
we
have
actually
went
over
this
started
to
make
it
look
more
like
the
front
of
a
house,
our
architect.
The
original
plans
were
definitely
the
back
of
a
supermarket
kind
of
looking
thing.
I
Kind
of
a
beginning
start
I
know
when
staff
originally
came
back
to
us.
We
had
the
top
original
designs
in
there.
We
came
this
back
as
the
first
red
line
set
of
drafts
of
some
ideas
and
suggestions.
We'd
get
to
get
there,
but
we
do
recognize
that
the
staff
is
asking
for
approval
on
their
level
two
to
continue
continue.
Making
changes
to
that
do.
I
Know
if
we've
discussed
back
and
forth
on
fencing
going
across
the
Highland
Drive
to
create
more
of
that
front
yard
backyard
feel
to
it.
If
we
did
we'd
probably
do
something
a
little
lower
four
feet
tall
and
open.
We
really
we've
kind
of
taken
to
the
approach
of
wanting
the
the
frontage
of
Highland
Drive
to
feel
like
the
front
of
those
homes.
Outside
of
that
we're
open
to
the
suggestion
of
fencing
around
two
more
give
more
privacy
to
the
Katyn
way
subdivision
as
well.
H
E
I
H
H
I
Yeah
there's
multiple
reasons
why
one
that
the
current
owner
of
it
has
let
it
go
immensely
on
the
inside
it's
it's
kind
of
looked
to
be
full
of
junk
and
waste.
It's
pretty
far
down
the
line
outside
of
that.
There
has
been
a
couple
of
experts
that
have
gone
through
and
been
concerned
with
types
of
materials
that
are
used
in
there
and
and
concerned
for
help
as
demoing
that,
apart
and
trying
to
reuse
structure.
I
So
it
it
really
turns
into
a
complete
interior
demo
on
having
to
restructure
to
to
make
it
usable
initially,
when
we,
when
we
looked
at
the
property,
we're
considering
it
as
for
commercial
use
and
we
having
it
into
a
commercial
use.
Zoning
that
kind
of
forced
us
to
end
up
with
a
large
sea
of
asphalt
around
for
parking,
which
we
felt
was
less
desirable
for
the
area
of
that
that
sugarhouse
feel
to
it.
I
A
Any
other
questions
before
we
go
to
the
public
hearing.
Okay,
thank
you
both
very
much.
Yes,
all
right!
We're
gonna
go
ahead
and
open
the
public
hearing
on
this
I
guess,
that's
a
flash
flood
warning
we're
all
getting.
Is
that
I'm
just
seeing
that
on
my
phone?
So
hopefully
we
can
survive
this
public
hearing.
A
J
J
J
J
J
And,
of
course,
they're
not
affordable.
That
was
sort
of
a
sarcastic
comment
on
my
part
because
the
neighborhood
weren't
supported,
but
that
is
one
of
the
goals
of
the
city,
so
I'm
just
pointing
that
out.
We
have
one
more
example
without
that
it's,
if
you
look
at
page
3
of
the
sugarhouse
master
plan
regarding
planned
developments,
this
proposal
doesn't
apply
with
anything
in
that
list.
J
The
orientation
of
the
buildings
has
the
rear
side
of
the
buildings
facing
Highland,
which
is
contrary
to
the
goals
of
the
master
plan.
I,
don't
see
any
reason
why
you
could
approve
anything
that
puts
the
rear
of
the
home
against
Highland
Drive
those
need
to
be
facing
the
street
and
and
a
real
front
door,
not
if
not
a
fake
porch
but
an
actual
usable
front
door.
J
The
master
plan
calls
for
preserving
natural
and
built
features
that
significantly
contribute
to
the
contributing
historic
structure,
and
the
removal
of
the
mature
Landscaping
is
contrary
to
the
standard,
so
I
think
they're,
better
solutions.
One
would
be
to
restore
the
house
and
add
to
traditional
homes
to
the
rear,
with
access
down
a
private
driveway.
Another
big
problem
is
the
Katyn
way
Highlands
of
sugar
house
development
that
was
built
some
I'm
guessing
about
20
years
ago.
J
I
hope
y'all
went
on
the
planning,
the
Planning
Commission
tour
today
to
see
how
narrow
that
Street
is
there's
a
photo
in
there.
That
is
very
clear
on
showing
you
that
the
driveways
are
short.
The
cars
all
hang
out
two
feet
into
the
street,
and
there
are
several
probably
three
right
turns
45
degree
angles.
You
can't
get
down
the
street,
so
I
think
if
the
gate
he's
talking
about
goes
in.
If
you
approve
this
project,
which
I
hope
you
don't,
the
gate
should
keep
out
anybody
who
doesn't
have
business
in
the
highlands.
J
J
A
You
Judy
all
right:
I'm
gonna
go
through
my
cards
that
I
have
first
and
if
you
haven't
turned
in
a
card,
you
still
have
an
opportunity
to
speak.
Just
we'll
do
that
right
after
the
card,
so
we'll
first
start
with
Patsy
McNamara
and
you
can
come
up
coming
up
to
the
microphone.
Unless
did
you
just
want
me
to
read
your
comment?
Okay,
I
will
just
read
it.
Then.
Oh
I'm,
sorry,
you
indicated
that
I
didn't
even
notice.
I'm.
Sorry.
A
The
project
is
within
the
Highland
Park
historic
district,
which
should
have
significant
influence
on
the
home
design.
The
proposed
are
totally
out
of
character
for
the
neighborhood.
We
need
to
preserve
sugarhouse.
Thank
you
and
John
McNamara
I
assume
you
want
to
come
up
and
speak
and
you'll
have
two
minutes
as
soon
as
you
get
up
here
and
just
give
us
your
name
into
the
microphone
and
for
the
record
and
then
we'll
start,
the
timer
Commission.
K
Frankly
of
you
know,
we
are
a
senior
mostly
senior
citizens
with
you
know
very
little
ability
to
get
out
of
the
way.
If,
if
we
have
a
lot
of
traffic
now,
I
have
I'm
referring
to
the
ordinance
that
requires
the
adherence
to
the
ordinance
for
a
plane
unit
development
and
it's
replete
with
notions
of
compatibility
is
the
area.
Is
it
compatible
with
the
neighborhood
and
that
kind
of
thing,
and
also
it
talks
about
the
impact
on
adjacent
properties?
And
we
we
would
urge
you
to
take
a
good
close
look.
K
You
likely
have
and
know
that
the
requirements
are
pretty
stringent
and
but
again,
I.
Think
our
major
concern
is
the
traffic
with
service
vehicles,
access
by
the
fire
department,
emergency
services
and
that
kind
of
things.
So
we
would
just
ask
that
consideration
be
giving
given
to
moving
that
egress
and
ingress
to
the
north
boundary
of
of
the
property.
Ok,.
A
H
H
H
Yeah
to
piggyback
on
what
John
said
regarding
the
traffic
concerns
the
developers
had
said
they
put
in
a
gate,
an
electric
gate
on
the
presentation.
I
noticed
it
was
west
of
the
axis
and
I'm
wondering
if
it
could
be
moved
more
east
of
the
axis.
So
it's
away
from
our
homes,
that's
just
a
question
there
and
then
I
know
the
original
easement.
H
A
L
M
Also
live
in
Highlands
of
sugarhouse
and
our
homes
were
built
in
the
early
90s
and
we've
invested
in
the
community.
We've
upgraded
our
property,
we
paid
our
HOA
dues
and
assessments,
we
paid
taxes
to
the
city,
school
district
library
fund
and
other
taxing
entities
for
25
years.
We
all
know
what's
happening
in
sugarhouse.
The
pace
of
development
is
a
blistering
pace,
we're
all
worried
about
congestion
from
traffic
parking
and
the
changing
face
of
the
community.
We
understand
progress
and
development.
M
We
know
that
change
is
constant,
but
your
own
ordinances
call
for
compatibility
and
I
would
cite
chapter
thirteen
point.
Seven,
eight
of
Planned
Unit
development
section
see
the
calculation
of
Planned
Unit
development
density
may
include
open
space.
That's
provided
as
an
amenity
of
the
Planned
Unit
development,
public
or
private
roadways
located
within
or
adjacent
to
a
plan.
Unit.
M
Development
shall
not
be
included
in
the
plan
unit
development
area
for
the
purpose
of
calculating
density,
so
I've,
yet
to
have
a
clear
answer:
why
they
can't
locate
these
homes
so
that
access
for
egress
and
ingress
will
be
on
the
north
boundary.
That's
where
the
existing
driveway
is
for
grace
Berry's
home.
M
The
current
Homer
owner
has
rarely,
if
ever
used,
that
easement
she's
always
relied
on
her
driveway
to
the
north
edge
of
the
property.
We've
documented
our
concerns
about
traffic
and
safety,
and
the
worry
that
our
tiny
little
development
will
become
a
through
way
thoroughfare
for
people
cutting
down
through
Highland,
along
Katyn,
Way
and
out
onto
Angelita
Court.
So
we
welcome
residential
construction
on
the
property
that
enhances
rather
than
two
tracks
from
our
community,
and
our
presence
as
a
well-maintained
PUD
will
surely
enhance
the
developers,
marketing
and
sales
efforts
with
prospective
buyers.
Thank
you
thank.
A
K
K
Well,
one
of
the
issues
that
came
up
was
the
traffic
and
I
still
don't
know
why
we
can't
access
this
property
if
it's
being
built
from
Highland
Drive,
the
street,
all
of
Highland
Drive
people
back
out
every
day
of
the
week
to
go
to
work
or
whatever
in
and
out
and
one
of
the
comments
was
we
can't
back
out?
Yes,
you
can
everybody,
does
it
there's
single
driveways
in
and
out?
K
And
secondly,
these
homes
don't
aren't
compatible
with
with
the
architecture
in
the
neighborhood,
like
I,
say:
I've
seen
sugar
house
being
built,
but
these
are
popular
homes,
I'll
agree,
but
they
just
aren't
compatible
with
the
with
the
old
sugar
house
area
and
the
homes.
The
brick
homes
among
the
lows
that
are
along
Highland
Drive
and
some
of
the
side
streets
like
I,
live
on.
I
know
the
contractor,
who
has
to
maximize
his
profits
on
this
property,
but
it
just
doesn't
fit.
There's
a
lot
of
issues
there.
I
think.
All
of
the
comments
were
great.
K
We
just
need
to
take
everything
under
consideration,
but
please
preserve
our
neighborhood,
we're
losing
it
fast
and-
and
you
know
that's
all-
we
have
now
we're
senior
citizens
and
see
what
you
can
do
for
us.
Okay,
work
it
out
with
the
contractor,
but
please
consider
the
neighborhood
and
those
long-term
residents.
Thank.
N
Name
is
Jerry
Schmidt
I
live
on
Elizabeth
Street
and
been
living
there
since
1983
grateful
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
you
folks
tonight
and
address
the
issue
and
very
grateful
to
our
veterans,
who
gave
so
much
to
maintain
our
democracy.
So
we
can
do
and
have
hearings
like
this
I
would
should
this
house
be
demolished.
I
will
miss
this
unique
home
in
our
neighborhood
I.
N
Do
appreciate
what
Judy
and
others
have
said
about
the
historic
nature
of
the
home
and,
frankly,
having
seen
what
other
people
have
done
inside
Salt,
Lake
City
with
regard
to
preservation
of
old
buildings.
I
wouldn't
be
surprised
if
it's
possible
for
this
one
as
well.
Looking
at
the
design
of
the
properties
and/or
the
homes
I
do
agree
that
they're
not
very
compatible
with
what's
in
the
area,
now
reminds
me
of
the
old
folks
on
little
boxes
by
Malvina,
Reynolds
and
I.
N
Don't
I
look
at
those
to
me
the
street
area
that
they're
talking
about
with
the
frontage
of
the
four
homes
there
would
be
the
most
aesthetically
pleasing
part
of
the
project
and
not
one
that
people
go
into
sugar
houses
on
Highland.
Drive
should
see
the
back
of
homes
rather
than
that
and
makes
me
wonder
why,
couldn't
you
turn
those
two
houses
on
Highland
Drive,
just
turn
them
around
and
have
back
backyard
access
to
the
driveway
and
just
do
the
driveway
differently.
I.
Also
wonder
about
the
earthquake
faults
in
the
area.
N
I
know
the
folks
at
the
Highlands.
The
sugar
house
had
to
design
around
the
earthquake
faults
in
that
property.
There's
also
a
lot
down
the
street
about
three
houses
down.
That's
quite
large
and
I
wonder
what
would
happen
if
they
came
to
you
at
the
same
type
of
development,
and
you
know,
would
you
be
able
to
turn
that
one
down
if
you
let
this
one
go
through
I,
just
think
that
the
design
I
agree
with
what
people
have
said
about
the
design.
N
I,
don't
think
it's
very
compatible
with
what's
in
sugarhouse
now
and
I,
just
you
know
at
least
have
one
home
facing
the
front.
So
this
is
what
people
see
as
they
go
to
sugar
house
in
Highland,
Drive
area
and
again
yeah
I.
You
know
it's!
It's
a
part
of
the
deal
as
to
maximization
of
profits
for
the
two
and
a
half
million
dollars.
N
Out
of
that
lot
is
it's
a
chunk
of
change,
but
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
and
I
also
want
to
say
that
I
consider
myself
an
ally,
a
grace
fairy
she's
done
a
lot
for
our
community
as
chair
of
the
sugarhouse
community
council
in
the
past
and
she's
helped
the
residents
of
Elizabeth
Street
out
with
issues
that
they
faced
as
well,
but
and
I
I
would
like
to
see
her
do
well,
but
at
the
same
time,
I
think
what's
been
presented
here.
Tonight
doesn't
help
our
community
as
well
as
it
should
thank.
A
L
I'm
grace
Perry
and
I'm
the
awful
one
that
owns
the
property
I
have
a
couple
of
comments
to
make
regarding
some
of
the
things
that
have
been
said
tonight,
one
we're
not
in
plat
a
we're,
not
part
of
the
historic
district.
The
Polly
Hart,
put
together
for
this
city
in
1997,
we're
in
plat,
be
to
my
house,
was
built
by
hands
and
Jensen.
Who
is
a
person
who,
with
Kimball
in
Richard
design,
Highland
Park,
but
he
did
not
include
this
house
and
the
reason
he
didn't
is
it
was
built
for
his
daughter.
L
The
house
has
had
a
very
sad
long,
excuse-me
history,
his
daughter's
husband
committed
suicide.
She
moved
back
to
the
mansion,
it
was
empty
for
years.
It
was
then
bought
by
man
named
áthis,
who
was
Greek.
He
was
the
first
Greek
to
live
east
of
seventh
east,
but
he
didn't
buy
it
in
his
name.
If
you
notice
on
the
historic
information
they
keep
saying,
it
was
rented
rented
rented,
because
no
one
who
was
not
part
of
the
Caucasian
race
could
live
in
a
house
east
of
seventh
east
at
that
time.
L
This
is
true
all
the
way
up.
In
that
area,
then,
the
next
thing
is
when
he
died,
it
was
empty
and
when
he,
when
it
was
empty,
was
bought
by
the
tailor's
it
was
and
used
as
an
old
folks
home
for
nearly
35
years.
All
of
the
rooms
were
divided
up
and
turned
into
bedrooms.
They
put
the
kitchen
in
the
basement
they
put
in.
There
was
one
bathroom
basement,
one
on
the
main
one
up
that
was
it
and
the
old
folks
sees
veterans.
L
She
used
to
go
up
and
down
to
the
basement
if
they
want
to
eat
any
food.
The
house
inside
has
and
totally
torn
apart
for
an
old
folks
home
after
that
it
was
home
for
abused
teenagers
for
a
long
time.
Then
it
was
empty
again
and
it
was
empty
for
three
years
when
we
bought
it.
We'd
lived
there
since
1990.
The
highlands
of
sugar
house
have
only
been
there
since
about
95,
and
they
wouldn't
even
have
the
14
condos
that
they
have.
L
If
we
had
not
given
them
access
and
ten
feet,
easement
on
the
south
side
of
the
property,
so
they
could
build
Kaitlyn
way
that
entire
area
was
once
the
AT&T
service
yards
for
years
and
years.
The
properties
to
our
south
are
commercial
and
if
anything,
these
properties
that
they
are
considering
building,
look
just
like
the
commercial
buildings
to
the
south.
So
since
it's
not
part
of
plan
a
which
is
a
little
teeny
bungalow
next
to
me,
it
is
perfect
for
that
area.
L
A
You
very
much
anybody
else:
okay,
seeing
none
we'll
go
ahead
and
close
the
public
hearing
and
probably
have
Ashley
come
back
up.
I
think
I
have
a
couple
questions
and
then
we'll
go
from
there,
so
just
to
clarify,
because
there
were
a
lot
of
questions
you.
If
the
applicants
want
to
come
up
to
you.
That's
that's
fine
yeah.
If
you
guys
want
to
come
up,
that's
fine.
I
And
that
was
one
thing:
I
wanted
to
point
is
technically
the
the
front
of
our
property
being
the
address
and
the
front
door.
Those
have
been
changed
to
show
the
front
of
the
property
for
for
all
means
necessary.
The
garage
accesses
off
the
back
of
the
property,
which
would
be
not
traditional,
I
guess
you
could
say,
and.
A
Then
Ashley
your
suggestion,
as
in
the
staff
report,
would
be
to
own
to
enhance
that
component
to
make
it
so
that
the
frontage
of
the
house
is
even
more
noticeable
as
the
front
of
the
house
and
that
and
that
sort
of
thing
right
and
that's
and
and
that
your
argument
is
that
they
will
have
to
come
back
to
you
for
final
approval
on
that
component
as
well.
Right.
G
A
A
Highland
run
it
yes,
absolutely
and
then
maybe
we
should
speak
a
little
bit
to
the
easement
on
the
private
drive,
because
I
know
there
was
a
lot
of
documents
in
the
staff
report
related
to
the
easement,
and
so
there
is
a
legal
right
for
the
property
owner
of
this
parcel
to
utilize.
That
private
drive
is
that
what
I'm
understanding
from
reading
that
those
documents
and.
G
I
can
I
mean
this
is
kind
of
it's
kind
of
more
of
a
civil
issue,
but
I
did
get
that
easement
document
looked
it
over
and
with
our
City
Attorney's
Office
just
briefly,
and
it
appears
that
yes,
there
is,
they
have
the
right
to
it.
That
use
'men
is
in
place
for
their
benefit,
but
it
is
definitely
up
to
them
to
assure
that
they
have
that
that
right,
right.
A
I
We
did
move
that
50
the
further
east
to
give
them
more
space
there,
and
then
we
did
put
the
gate
in
between
our
access
and
their
access
so
that
our
residents
would
not
be
using
any
of
their
Road
past
the
gate
to
access
into
the
any
of
their
subdivision
and
if
we
needed
to,
if
we
wanted
to
discuss,
moving
the
gate
closer
to,
maybe
our
driving
access
we'd
be
happy
to
do
so.
Okay,.
I
Yeah
I
mean
it's
it's
a
lot
of
the
discussion.
There
has
been
obviously
concern
of
the
narrowness
of
their
Road,
their
current
residents
not
having
room
inside.
There
are
two
car
garages
in
their
narrow
or
their
short
driveways
to
park.
So
they've
been
on
the
road.
We
don't
have
any
control
of
what
happens
there,
but
I
think
putting
in
a
gate
immediately
remedies
people
from
driving
through
there
and
that's
I
think
where
we
can
absolutely
help
out.
Okay,.
A
And
then
I
actually
have
a
question
about
the
transportation.
It
was
a
little
bit
vague
as
transportation
was
asking
about.
Our
kind
of
I
think
talked
about
parking
and
I
know.
There's
some
kind
of
a
concern
about
traffic.
Does
transportation?
Does
the
Transportation
Department
when
they're
looking
at
a
project
like
this?
Do
they
look
at
the
impact
on
a
private
drive,
or
are
they
only
looking
at
the
impact
on
the
public
road
I.
I
A
And
then
the
other
question
I
have
is
just
to
that
issue
of
and
I
know.
This
is.
This
is
kind
of
my
big
when
I
saved
it
for
last,
and
this
is
the
issue
of
compatibility
with
the
planned
development,
and
that
just
seems
like
such
that's
such
a
big
one,
both
from
the
community
and
also
from
interpretation
from
staff
and
our
interpretation.
A
What
exactly
that
means
and
it
and
know
that
that's
where
I
think
you
put
most
of
your
conditions
was
in
that
compatibility
issue
and
so
that
the
frontage
there.
But
where
does
that?
Where
does
that
stop
like?
How
do
we,
you
know
and
I,
think
one
of
the
community
members
brought
up
in
relation
to
its
impact
on
neighboring
properties
and
and
I?
Don't
know
it's
just
hard
to
measure
that
so
I
don't
know
if
I
don't
know.
If
you
have
any
further
comments
on
that
to
maybe
address
some
of
the
community's
concerns
related
to
compatibility.
G
A
F
F
I
Also
address
a
little
bit
of
cat
a
bit
compatibility.
It's
often
times
I
think
we
get
that
mixed
up
with
stylistic
compatibility
and
where
Nick
may
be
mentioned,
compatibility
may
fit
within
the
the
setbacks.
The
lot
size,
the
coverage.
Currently,
these
coverages
of
the
homes
are
only
about
17
to
27
percent
of
the
the
individual
Lots
themselves.
So
there's
a
lot
of
green
space,
open
yard
around
that
which
would
play
to
the
the
deep
front
yards
that
you
do
often
see
in
the
sugarhouse
areas,
the
the
style
that
is
a
separate
work
from
compatibility.
I
I
You
start
to
look
at
infill
Lots
through
Harvard
Yale
Princeton,
all
down
through
Western
sure
house,
moderns
becoming
that
new
infill
concept
to
speak
a
little
bit
to
that
I
am
the
vice
president
for
the
Salt
Lake
Home,
Builders
Association,
and
very
involved
in
the
Parade
of
Homes
I,
put
a
modern
home
in
every
year
and
I'm,
usually
one
of
the
top
visited
homes
over
the
past
five
years.
Due
to
that
stylistic
change.
I
That
is
a
style
that
people
want
and
I
recognize
that
it's
maybe
a
rough
change
to
people
that
don't
live
in
that
because
they
respect
and
they
they
like
their
current
communities
and
homes
they
live
in
and
I
can
respect
that
as
well.
But
I
feel
like
the
compatibility
versus
the
style,
are
have
to
be
treated
as
really
two
separate
words.
F
Piece,
the
piece
that
I
left
out
is
that
in
in
standard
C
compatibility
it
talks
about
what
the
Planning
Commission
can
consider
or
needs
to
consider
as
part
of
compatibility.
And
so
when
you
deliberate
on
that,
that's
that's
what
you
would
vote.
You
would
focus
on
and
some
of
them
deal
with
the
streets,
but
some
of
the
the
later
ones
do
deal
with
things
that
were
mentioned
about
size
scale.
Things
like
that.
E
I
When,
when
I
do
kind
of
our
modern
designs,
I'll
use
the
base
of
a
stucco
or
a
lighter
facade
material
around
it
to
give
it
that
light
airy
fill
most
of
our
modern
homes
are
designed
around
open,
filling
on
the
inside,
bringing
a
lot
of
natural
light
in
Windows
and
as
well.
We'll
use
a
lot
of
raw
woods
and
stained
woods
for
accents
around
because
of
the
ability
of
product
and
cat.
It's
kind
of
hard
to
show
that
concept.
I
know
our
planner
had
mentioned
a
lot
of
different
types
of
wood
accents.
I
I
We
have
had
to
I
believe
going
through
the
the
beauty
application
we
have
had
to
show
those
renderings
of
elevations
I'm,
not
sure
how
much
that
locks
us
in.
We
have
not
had
to
provide
any
direct
material
boards
and
so
to
speak
to
that.
No,
we
have
not,
but
I'm,
not
I
can't
speak
to
what
staff
may
say
on
their
level
of
what's
required,
based
off
the
elevations
we've
done.
Can.
E
You
sum
up
the
side
that
the
house
that
face
is
kind
of
Highland,
so
staff
kind
of
brought
up
some
of
the
issues
and
stuff
that
we've
talked
a
lot
about
at
the
Commission
here.
What
are
some
of
the
changes
you
won't
want?
You
talked
me
through
I
may
have
seen
the
I
can
see
the
renderings
the
drawings,
but
what
are
some
is
that
you
felt
like
you
made
between
when
the
staff
first
raised
the
issue
to
today
to
help
address
this
concern
about
street
frontage
along
Highland.
I
Was
bringing
and
a
sidewalk
access
to
to
allow
walkability
from
the
front
door
where
the
door
that's
been
provided
on
there
out
to
the
sidewalk
on
Highland
gives
it
more
of
the
easy
approach
walk
up
front
to
is
obviously
putting
on
an
address
block.
3
is
adding
some
dimension.
We
went
in
and
added
some
accent
areas
of
accent,
materials
and
dimension
to
create
some
depth
that
you
typically
see
on
the
front.
E
I
Would
be
come
on
catch
up
forward,
be
a
windows
we've
gone
in
and
change
the
windows
around
to
make
it
look
more
stylistic
with
the
front
of
the
house
out
of
the
awning
over
the
front
door
to
make
it
look
more
like
a
front
porch
again,
the
these
are
so
early
in
phase
it's
hard
to
kind
of
continue
into
landscaping,
but
I
think
landscaping
would
be
something
that
would
definitely
address
how
that
approach
is
taken
as
well.
Landscaping.
E
I
Through
sections,
do
you
know
obviously
stop
us
for
the
roof
of
how
we
go
to
the
top
and
that
flat
frontage
in
the
back
home
we
did
leave
the
the
shed
style
roof
that
had
typically
open
up
to
the
Morning
Sun
coming
through
afternoon.
Sun's
a
little
bit
hot
makes
it
much
much
less
efficient
about
the
big
windows
on
the
west
side
of
the
house.
Do.
I
I
would
say:
they're,
let's
maybe
say,
60%
if
I'm
putting
a
percentage
on
it
again.
A
blue
material
red
material
may
not
represent
a
a
redwood
type
of
look
or
a
a
darker
stained,
grayish
blueish
style
wood.
On
there
it's
hard
to
show
plantings
going
in
there.
We
did
do
a
more
current
drawing
that
moved
the
gutter
around
the
side.
So
you
don't
see
that
the
big
box
got
her
coming
down
the
front
of
the
house,
address
plaques
and
blocks
there
they're
hard
to
show.
I
I
Would
like
to
see
us
pull
that
that
patio
more
along
the
frontage
of
the
house,
fully
encompass
the
the
overhang
of
what
the
roofline
shows
there
to
give
it
a
front
patio.
You
know
again
going
back
to
the
sugarhouse
bungalow
a
lot
of
those
had
a
front
porch
that
people
would
sit
on.
This
may
or
may
not
be
the
case
being
on
busy
Highland
Drive,
but
that
gives
a
little
bit
more
of
a
front
appeal.
I
H
E
So
for
staff,
so,
first
for
Ashley,
why
are
you
always
given
the
hard
ones
I'm
so
realistic?
Talk
me
through
a
real
quick.
So
a
is
that
wanting
to
meet
one
of
the
filing
objectives
and
the
applicant
came
in
said
they
met
ad
and
F,
and
your
staff
report
lists
out
that
you
list
that
they
met
objective
D.
Did
you
first
question:
did
you
feel
like
they
met
objective,
a
yes
or
no
or
which
is
the
coordination
or
combination
of
coordination
of
architectural
styles,
building
forms,
building
materials
and
building
relationships?
E
E
E
A
M
F
M
I
I
That's
that's
often
the
term
it
might
be
loosely
brought
up,
but
us
coming
in
and
saying
we'd
like
to
put
in
a
gate
to
help
them
with
traffic,
trying
to
pull
the
the
the
homes
forward
to
stay
away
from
their
property
and
trying
to
put
in
a
garbage
collection
that
happens
on
our
property
as
well
as
opposed
to
those
bring
out
that
the
garbage
cans
to
keep
the
wide
open
of
their
Road.
There
I
feel,
like
those
have
all
been
very
considered
to
be
good
neighbor,
like
developers
as
we
come
in
to
make
change.
I
So
I
want
to
make
note
on
that
and
two.
We
were
unaware
that
the
the
current
owner
grace
pair
would
be
here
today
and
I
greatly
appreciate
her
taking
opportunity
to
give
us
a
little
history
of
what
that
is
and
explain
a
little
bit
more
of
the
current
property.
What
it
is
I
just
like
to
maybe
give
her
opportunity
if
it's
approval
on
a
staff
level
that
maybe
invite
her
to
change
the
name
to
whatever
she'd
choose
of
the
development
name
itself,
to
maybe
preserve
part
of
the
history
that
she's
seen
behind
that.
J
I
A
D
Don't
so
I'm
very
much
still
stuck
on
the
master
plan
of
the
peds?
That
specifically
calls
for
you
know
supporting
new
projects
that
incorporate
the
desirable
architectural
design
featured
in
common
in
the
neighborhood
and
I'm,
just
not
necessarily
convinced
that
we
can
add
anything
to
that
to
make
it
a
desirable
architectural
design.
D
That's
featured
in
the
neighborhood
and,
to
be
honest,
I
think
that
the
comments
given
by
the
current
property
owner
actually
made
me
feel
more
that
this
was
a
home
that
really
should
be
saved
because
it
has
such
a
rich
history
and
because
it's
a
contributing
structure,
it
qualifies
for
federal
and
state
tax
credits
for
renovation
through
shippo
State,
Historic,
Preservation
Office.
So
there's
opportunity
to
utilize
those
funds
to
do
some
renovation
for
that
building
and
I
just
I'm
pretty
much.
That's
really
where
I'm
at
and
I.
D
D
C
I
respond
to
that.
It's
if
I
understand
it
quickly
and
I.
Don't
always
I'm
gonna
say
that
upfront
that
easement
was
given
to
this
these
these
proper,
the
the
new
developments
ten
years
ago
by
the
current
by
this
property
owner.
So
if
they
hadn't
done
that
this
property
would
be
ten
feet
wider
and
then
they
could
put
it
on
the
north,
but
they
gave
up
that
property
to
give
that
driveway
to
this
other
group
and
so
they're
saying
now,
we
want
to
access
that
because
our
property
is
now
ten
feet
smaller
and.
A
C
A
A
My
gym
is
very
close
to
there
and
I
Drive
by
it.
All
the
time
and
I
have
actually
noticed
the
house
every
time
I
Drive
by
I,
think
it
is
a
great
asset
to
the
neighborhood
and
I
think
it's
a
tragedy
that
it's
you
know
and
I
I,
don't
know
it
sounds
like
we
don't
have
that
authority,
but
I
would
argue
that
it
being
on
the
national
registry.
Is
it
would
be
sufficient
in
saying
that
it
is
a.
E
With
compatibility
under
the
old
planned
development
ordinance
and
reviewing,
there's
not
the
way,
I
read
it
and
see
if
there's
not
a
lot
that
we
have
to
grab
on
to
as
a
foothold,
I
mean
a
lot
of
it
deals
with
access
to
public
streets
and
outs,
and
it's
a
deal
with
the
private
street,
which
is
a
really
weird
sort
of
position
and
there's
not
a
lot
of
control
that
that
we
have
from
a
standard
position
to
deal
with
that
compatibility.
Question
I
mean
the
question.
I
think
is
more.
E
That
I've
been
kind
of
relating
through
is,
like
you
know,
does
this
development
does
or
does
not?
This
development
qualify
for
a
plan
development,
and
so
you
know,
staff
doesn't
think
that
a
or
you
know,
F
qualifies
as
the
applicant
says.
I
probably
grew
his
staff
on
those
two
and
then
the
question
really
is
the
use
of
design.
Landscaping
are
two
features
to
create
a
pleasing
environment.
E
Really
really,
in
my
mind,
hinges
on
how
well
the
developer
can
deal
with
what
happens
along
Highland
and
I
agreed
that
staffs
kind
of
perspective,
and
what
they're
asking
for
is
is
the
right
things
to
ask
for,
although
I
also
feel
there's
a
lot
of
room,
I
mean
I,
guess
I.
Look
at
these,
and
this
to
me
looks
like
a
back
of
a
house
and
you
could
put
a
patio
that
would
fit
very
nicely
on
this.
E
E
We
want
to
delegate
this
back
to
staff
or
if
we
want
to
ask
for
to
come
back
here
with
these
Reard
renderings
and
Highland
done
in
a
way
that
is
meaningful
and
I,
don't
know
if
they
can
achieve
it
as
is
or
even
if
they
you
know,
I
mean
you
know,
I
think
it
would
be
a
lot
easier
for
them
if
they
were
accessing
these
kind
of
two
homes
off
of
Highland
Drive,
it's
the
front
of
that
actually
actual
front
of
the
houses.
It
would
be
a
lot
easier
to
keep
this
kind
of
inconsistent.
E
You
know
I
I,
wonder
if
the
developer
could
do
anything's
gonna
satisfy
my
need
to
make
these
seem
not
like
a
rear
of
a
house
along
Highland,
because
again
it's
another
development
that
looks
inward
and
how
many
of
those
are
we
dealing
with
in
the
city
or
developments,
look
Anna,
others
houses
and
into
it.
You
know,
and
that's
that's
what
this
development
does.
This
will
be
a
very
pleasing
private
street,
as
you
walk
up
it
through
a
little
gate,
but
from
Highland
the
rest
of
us
will
look
at
the
back
of
houses.
E
M
I
have
several
concerns
about
this
project,
the
first,
the
first
being
actually,
what
Matt
was
alluding
to,
which
is
that
I'm
not
sure
that
it
meets
the
planned
development
objectives
at
all.
So
whether
or
not
it's
compatible
or
whether
or
not
it's
you
know
it.
You
know
the
other
things
that
the
compatibility
question
is
really
not
a
not
as
important
as
the
question
of
whether
it
qualifies
for
Planned
Unit
development,
because
in
order
for
us
to
say
that
it
qualifies
for
that,
we
would
have
to
say.
M
M
My
natural,
my
my
interest
in
this,
of
course,
would
be
to
reuse
the
house
for
condominiums
and
divided
up
into
two
or
three
or
whatever,
and
then
have
you
know
additional
units
in
the
back,
which
of
course
would
require
a
plan
unit.
But
then
we'll
be
talking
about
a
much
better
project,
not
this
project,
it's
not
much
better.
So
from
my
perspective,
I
simply
can't
go
along
with
even
the
the
objectives
of
the
plan.
I,
don't
think
it
meets
the
objectives
of
the
planned
development.
B
J
M
M
E
G
A
M
A
preservation,
it
would
be
character
of
the
neighborhood,
it
would
be
preserving
architectural
or
character.
It
would
be
design
landscape,
blah
blah
blah.
So
I
think
that
there's
that
that
would
definitely
be
something
that
would
qualify
for
Planned
Unit
development,
but
I
don't
see
that
happening
with
this
particular
proposal.
If.
B
E
M
M
Would
be
willing
to
look
at
something?
Yes
of
course,
but
the
other
thing
I
think
is
that
in
concern
the
other
concern
that
I
have
or
the
question
I
have,
is
why
don't
we
do
it?
Why
isn't
there
a
driveway
I
mean
the
driveway
on
the
north.
That,
what's
been
said,
is
that
you
don't
want
to
back
out
you're
not
going
to
back
out
look
at
the
look
at
the
side
plan.
M
A
E
E
E
Do
you
think
the
staffs
I
do
think
Ashley's
outline
of
the
things
she's
looking
for
the
right
things
to
look
at
it's
just
a
question
whether
or
not
we
as
a
staff
feel
comfortable
or
not
and
I
feel
it's
so
much
so
much
work
needs
to
be
done
that
this
is
more
than
like
minor,
tweaks
and
dry.
You
know
sketching.
This
is
all
this
is
significant.
I
mean
you've,
got
the
utility
pole
rolling
running
up
the
side
of
the
building.
E
E
That
needs
to
be
done
for
me
to
even
give
this
a
shot
and
so
whether
or
not
we're
pushing
it
back
to
staff
I'm
tabling
it
letting
you
know
so
one
one
we
can
table
it
and
let
them
but
they've
all
come
back
with
that
fixed
or
if
people
don't
think
that
there's
in
the
developer
can
do
to
get
there,
then
we
vote
it
down
or
we
can
vote
it
forward.
Yeah.
J
J
Inherently,
don't
have
a
problem
with
making
for
lots
out
of
that.
Ideally,
you
keep
the
you
could
keep
that
historic
house,
but
that
may
or
may
not
be
feasible,
but
these
designs,
I,
don't
think,
are
compatible
with
the
neighborhood
I'm
I'm
kind
of
with
you
like
whether
there's
something
is
there
something
some
some
things
that
are
kind
of
an
easy
fix,
or
is
it
do
they
really
need
to
start
over
I.
A
Mean
I
think
that
oftentimes
compatibility
I
mean
it's
it's
our
decision,
but
it's
also
our
decision
based
on
the
feedback
we
get
from
the
community
and
that's
sort
of
that's
what
that's.
What
that
sort
of
notion
of
being
compatible
is
or
or
pleasing,
I
guess
is
the
one
I'm
going
for
and
the
communities
if
I
hear
tonight
saying
that
it's
not
and
so
I
think
that
that's
probably
where
they
would
go
to
make
it
more
pleasing
is
working
with
the
community
more
to
find
what
that
is
so.
B
E
The
Lots
large
enough,
it
remains
an
r1
5,000
zone,
they're
not
asking
for
setback.
Restrictions
are
not
changing
a
lot
sizes,
I,
actually
I
mean
fundamentally
I
have
no
problem
with
them.
Putting
four
houses
on
this
lot
like
it
seems,
there's.
No,
it
seems
fine
I
mean
that's,
they
have
a
look.
They
have
a
right
to
put
four
houses
in
the
lot
you
just.
B
Think
you're
right,
yeah
well
and
so
I
was
looking
over
what
Ashleigh
had
put
in
as
conditions
and
I
think
that's
a
this
is
a
great
way
to
put
it.
I
would
want
to
know
a
little
bit
about.
What's.
What's
a
more
appropriate
a
window
configuration
for
a
for
a
street
facing
facade,
I,
don't
know,
I,
don't
know,
what's
inappropriate
about
this
street
facing
facade.
Oh,
the
window
is
too
small
or
they're,
not
enough
of
them
and
then
also
use
of
more
articulation
in
the
building
wall.
B
B
D
D
All
the
time,
because
this
current
home
doesn't
have
it,
but
it
has
a
lot
of
architectural
features
that
are
contributing
to
the
historic
nature
of
this
neighborhood
as
a
whole
in
Highland
Park,
which
this
is
in
for
style,
but
so
I,
don't
know
that
you
know
that
I.
Think
that's
part
of
my
questions,
too,
is
what
is
if
conditions
are
met?
What
are
these
conditions?
How
are
they
really
going
to
look
because
it's
not
as
simple
as
just
let's
put
a
porch
on
it,
because
it's
not
always
it's
not
a
generic
solution
for
everything.
D
I
think
and
I
actually
have
been
thinking
now
when
Matt
and
Brenda
were
talking
like
now,
I'm
really
wondering
does
this
meet
the
plan
development
objectives
really
like?
Why
is
it?
Is
it
coming
to
us
as
a
plan
development,
the
way
it
should,
or
you
know
that
it's
not
meeting
all
of
the
the
conditions
to
really
even
be
considered
so
I
now
I,
don't
know
well.
B
E
Think
I
mean
staffs
in
this
position.
I
would
agree
with
staff
I
think
the
Commission
is
as
well
as
proposed.
This
plan
development
does
not
meet
any
of
the
conditions
that
would
qualify
for
a
plan
development.
They
need
to
do
something
along
Highland
to
make
it
a
pleasing
environment.
That's
what
staff
is
saying
and
I
agree
with
staff
and
I
am
I,
am
I
question
for
the
Commission
really
is
and
I
think
this
will
just
to
move
us
forward
is
either
one.
E
Do
you
think
they
can
get
there
or
two
do
we
need
to
know,
probably
probably
can't
get
there
and
we're
voting
it
down,
because
I
want
to
look
I
mean
when
you
look
at
the
houses.
The
front
of
the
house
is
is
clearly
facing
in
even
the
the
mountain
modern
examples
that
the
developer
provided
us
look
like
the
front
of
the
house
from
and
exactly
the
side
of
the
house
is
facing
the
private
street.
This
is
a
rear
of
a
house
you're
looking
at
a
rear
of
a
so
it's
pretty
pretty
clear.
P
F
Give
you
what
I
think
I'm
hearing
is
that
you
don't
have
enough
information
to
decide
if
they
actually
mean
an
objective,
and
in
that
case
then,
you
can
and
I
think
you
just
kind
of
explained
it
a
little
bit.
You
can
request
that
they
come
back
with
more
evidence
to
prove
that
to
prove
that
they
do
meet
those
objectives.
It
could
be
that
they
come
back
with
a
different
objective,
though
I
think
that's
something
you
have
to
consider,
but
I
mean
that's
kind
of
what
I'm
hearing
yeah.
D
D
B
M
M
M
A
C
A
J
M
E
E
Although
to
ensure
compatibility
with
the
wait
based
on
the
information
staff
report,
information
present
in
the
input
received
during
the
public
hearing
with
Planning
Commission
table
planned
development,
PLN
su
be
2017,
zero,
one,
zero,
twenty
seven
and
the
associated
plenary
sub
the
vet.
Our
subdivision
PL
and
Su
be
2017
zero.
One
zero
two
eight
with
the
following.
That
needs
to
be
addressed
by
the
applicant
to
ensure
compatibility
with
the
character
of
existing
development
with
a
vicinity
of
the
site,
the
eastern
elevations
of
the
homes
on
lot.
E
One
and
two
that
face
Highland,
you
know,
shall
be
altered
to
include
architectural
features,
typically
found
on
a
front
facade
of
a
single-family
home
such
as
a
through
D
listed
in
the
staff
report.
I'd
also
like
to
add
e.
That
includes
roof
detailing
that
would
be
more
consistent
with
a
front
of
a
home
and
I'd
like
to
maybe
also
add
that
the
developer
consider
a
primary
driveway
access
off
the
east
side
and
and
and
discuss
why
and
why.
That
would
not
be
possible.
E
J
B
D
D
A
M
A
There
you
have
it
I!
Guess,
we'll
see
you
back
here
in
a
while
thanks
and
thank
you
to
the
community
for
coming
out
really
appreciate
your
comments
and
feedback.
It
is
very
helpful
to
us
moving
on
to
the
next
one
number,
two
of
our
public
hearings.
This
is
the
modification
to
centro,
civico
senior
housing.
L
E
Q
Okay,
I
can
start
anything
go
for
it,
sorry,
okay,
so
this
is
the
centro
civico
senior
housing
project
changes
to
that
project
requested
by
the
applicant.
This
is
PLN
sub
20,
1700
370
and
PLN
PCM
2017,
zero,
zero,
five,
two
five.
This
is
a
proposed
60,000
square
foot,
approximately
six
story,
building
sixty
one
unit,
senior
housing
apartment
building,
but
seventy
five
foot
tall
building
it
was
approved
by
the
Planning
Commission
on
August
23rd
of
2017.
So
we
were
back
before
you
with
some
proposed
changes:
the
original
process.
Q
This
went
through
the
planned
development
process
being
a
new
use
and
the
GMU
zoning
district
did
require
the
planned
development
process
and
due
to
choice
of
materials,
including
corrugated
metal.
It
was
subject
to
the
conditional
building
and
site
design
review
process,
so
did
previously
receive
approval,
but
there
are
some
requested
modification
to
design
elements
of
the
building.
One
of
these
concerns
a
15
in
a
wall
in
excess
of
15
feet
at
the
street
level,
in
the
gateway
zoning
district
and
with
the
CBS
D.
Our
standards
here
limited
to
15
feet.
Q
They
have
about
a
25
foot
wall
at
the
ground
level.
There
was
a
requirement
from
the
Planning
Commission
to
include
public
artwork
on
the
front
elevation
of
the
building
again
now
that
wall
could
be
broken
up
with
that
artwork.
Also,
the
CBS
D
our
process
did
require
that
all
buildings
include
a
public
artwork
element.
The
applicant
has
proposed
looking
at
other
elements
in
lieu
of
artwork
on
the
front
elevation
wall,
and
they
did
propose
some
3d
architectural
elements
and
the
upper
floors
of
the
building.
Q
What's
not
shown
is
about
the
middle
of
that
wall
between
the
windows
you
see
at
the
ground
level,
on
the
left
side
of
the
building
and
what's
a
small
lobby
on
the
right
side
of
the
building,
the
southwest
corner.
That
would
be
the
blank
wall
that
we
were
looking
for,
some
artwork
to
break
up,
and
this
is
the
proposed
design
change.
That's
the
only
drawing
I
had
of
it.
Q
Staff
is
recommending
the
planting
commentation
Commission,
take
the
following
action
in
regard
to
changes
denied
a
modification
to
the
blank
wall
require
that
an
element
of
interest
be
included
in
addition
to
the
architectural
concrete,
also
deny
the
change
to
eliminate
the
public
art
make
the
art
required
on
that
street
level
too.
In.
F
Kent
mr.
chair
can
I
just
make
a
quick
comment
when,
when
David
mentioned
the
date
of
approval,
it
sprung
into
my
head
that
their
original
approval,
regardless
of
what
you
would
do
it
expire
it
would
expire
tomorrow.
So
you,
regardless
of
what
decision
you
make
you,
should
clarify
whether
or
not
you
want
to
extend
that
approval
date
just
so
that
we're
not
back
here
trying
to
figure
it
again
know
that.
Q
It
does
lack
glass,
the
the
standards
in
the
in
the
Gateway
district
really
talk
is
the
building
window
and
fenestration
really
are
aimed
at
more
the
ground
floor
level,
and
there
are
some
again
material
differences
changes
to
eliminate
it
being
a
totally
stark
wall.
Now
again,
there
may
be
some
value
added
in
having
those
3d
elements
to
break
that
up
further,
but
it
does
meet
the
first
floor.
Glass
require
window,
forty
percent.
J
J
R
R
R
There's
an
affordable
housing
project,
senior,
affordable
housing
project
and
Brandi
can
add
to
my
comments,
I
think
we're
okay,
with
with
the
recommendations,
one
of
the
one
of
the
things
that
we
would
would
like,
though,
is
that
and
it's
and
it's
part
of
the
gateway
urban
design
standards.
And
if
you
look
under
your
public
arts
requirements
paragraph
there,
it
does
say
public
art,
which
may
include
artists,
work
integrated
into
the
design
of
the
building
and
landscaping,
sculpture,
painting,
murals
glass,
mixed-media
or
work
by
artisans.
A
R
Yes,
it
would
be
on
the
ground
level,
though
so,
and
it
would
be
facing
west.
So
there's
didn't
survive
very
well,
so
this
one
would
probably
survive
a
little
better.
If
you
know
the
Japanese
Church
of
Christ,
they
have
some
landscaping
there.
Although
I
think
it's
grown
a
little
out
of
control,
but
that
would
be
a
another
example.
That's
right
on
what's
first
south
and
off
of
300
West.
R
A
J
R
We
will
have
some
public
art
work.
The
biggest
issue
was
really
more
the
the
shadowy
figures
up
up
top
in
terms
of
putting
them
on
the
building.
It
was
difficult
in
terms
of
cost.
It
was
very
expensive
and
in
terms
of
practicality,
some
people
were
working,
worried
that
the
birds
would
perch
up
there
and
poop
on
everybody
down
below.
E
You
is
the
African,
are
okay,
with
the
staffs
recommendations.
I
mean
seems
like
so
that
the
sounds
like
with
we
deny
the
blank
wall.
You
already
have
an
idea
of
what
to
do.
You're
gonna
put
the
Sun
thing
there
mm-hmm
the
public
art
requirements,
I
mean
your
biggest
concern
is
just
the
way
that
this
kind
of
proposal
got,
which
was
kind
of
backdoored
at
the
last
minute,
a
firm
ember
right.
E
It
was
kind
of
like
thought
of
during
the
meeting
and
didn't
really
wasn't
fully
vetted,
but
you
feel
like
the
public
art
you'll,
have
a
component
within
landscaping,
so
you'll,
probably
even
if
we
deny
that
as
long
as
we
release
the
kind
of
3d
element
that
that's
fine,
that
right
correct.
So
you
know
so
it's
not
you
know
you're,
you
guys
are
more
or
less
fine
with
the
motion
as
proposed
correct.
R
B
R
A
M
A
M
Q
R
M
A
Q
As
I
recall,
it
was,
it
was
just
dealing
with
the
general
starkness
of
the
blank
wall.
There
was
some
concern
over
that
and
I
believe
in
the
CBS,
dr
standards
or
in
the
urban
design
element
of
the
okay.
It's
the
Gateway
mixed
use,
urban
design
elements.
It
talks
about
windows
and
fenestration
buildings
with
completely
smooth
exterior
surfaces
shall
not
be
permitted.
All
new
construction
show
of
three-dimensional
details
on
the
exterior
to
include
cornices
window
sills
headers
similar
features.
How
very.
E
E
E
A
A
A
P
My
name
is
Adam
Wade
I
own
the
center
warehouse
and
the
Gir
corner
on
500
West,
and
excuse
me
yeah.
Second
hundred
two
hundred
South
five
hundred
West
I
bought
the
central
warehouse
and
the
two
parking
lots
and
the
Metro
bar,
because
it's
history,
it's
a
historical
area.
You
know
who
here
has
been
to
Seoul
New
York
right.
This
is
not
amazing
and
it's
sad
to
see
some
of
these
amazing
old
warehouses
that
we
have
in
Salt
Lake,
be
torn
down
and
I
was
very
fortunate
to
pick
up
that
piece.
P
I'd
love
to
to
take
everybody
here
inside
that
central
warehouse
and
and
I
also
on
the
Strube
building
that
was
going
to
be
knocked
down.
I
found
a
way
to
buy
that,
and
it
just
made
me
sick
to
think
that
some
of
these
older
buildings,
some
of
these
areas,
are
being
torn
down.
I'm
also
gonna
go
over
the
two
minutes
here,
but
I
have
a
few
things
to
say.
We.
P
We
have
an
amazing
opportunity
ahead
of
us
here
in
Salt
Lake
its
who
had
ever
thought
in
Utah.
It
would
be
you
know
our
Salt
Lake
would
be
the
silicon
slopes.
You
know
it's
awesome
and
I
know.
There's
northwestern
quadrant
good
bad
indifferent.
We
have
some
amazing
companies
that
have
come
in
effect,
the
Amazons.
Even
look
there.
P
That's
awesome,
look
what's
happened
in
Lehi
everything
goes
back
bourbon
everything
is
going
to
go
back
to
Salt
Lake,
downtown
Salt
Lake,
and
if
we
look
at
our,
we
look
at
our
transportation
and
you
look
at
with
the
new
airport.
You've
got
the
front-runner
right
there.
Kitty-Corner
I
feel
like
that.
Blocking
needs
to
be
designated
at
least
one
third
of
the
block
needs
to
be
designated,
as
as,
as,
for
instance,
I
got
I
got
hit
up
from
a
lady
in
Hong
Kong
littler
time.
Well,
I
did
get
me
devil
the
time
right.
A
P
There's
a
lot
of
groundwater
under
there
you
know
and
it
at
any
time
anyone
remembers
when
the
Delta
Center
was
dug.
You
know
it
was
just
a
lot
of
water
and
then
it
moves
over
to
the
Gateway
and
it
moves
over
and
and
if
there's
a
way
to
I'm
a
believer
if
there's
a
way
to
to
make
sure
that
that
isn't
contaminated
other
projects.
P
I'm
all
about
what's
best
for
everybody
but
I,
just
I
hate
to
see
some
of
these.
You
know
I,
think
that's
a
great
design.
Does
it
match
what
what
the
central
warehouse
and
and
and
you
know,
those
of
two
historical
buildings
and
that
they're
on
the
National
Historic
Registry,
but,
like
you
mentioned
it's
on
sixth,
that
instead
of
second
there,
so
okay.
A
P
P
A
A
E
A
E
You
know
I'd
like
to
deny
that
motion
on
the
public
art
requirements,
I'd
like
to
deny
that
motion
and
then
the
building
facade
three-dimensional
architecture
I'd
like
to
approve
the
requested
changes
and
permit
staff.
That's
the
public
art
one
from
its
staff
to
achieve
the
public
art
requirements
through
landscaping
along
well
on
the
frontage
of
the
law.
B
M
E
B
C
Is
I,
agree,
I,
think
it's
a
big
downgrade
from
the
art
they
were
proposing,
I'd
quite
liked
the
3d
I
thought
of
I've
thought
of
it
multiple
times
over
the
last
year.
Thinking
you
know
they
I
liked
the
idea
of
the
Sun
changing
it
over
the
day.
I
liked
now
I
didn't
think
about
Birds
perching
on
it
and
I
mean
I
hadn't
thought
through
some
of
those
stuff.
Some
of
those
things
so
I
understand
that's
a
concern
but
to
remove
the
art
and
replace
it
with.
Essentially,
nothing
I
do
not
like
that.
E
E
A
C
A
C
A
B
N
J
Of
the
opinion
that
you
know,
the
three-dimensional
objects
are
not
a
must
for
me,
but
when
Sarah
I
have
to
say
that
there
has
to
be
something
that
appeals
to
present
some
idea,
because
this
is
a
very,
very
nice
building.
It's
a
very
nice
structure
and
wanted
to
be
invited
into
the
community
and
and
the
centro
civico
americano
has
to
have
be
proud
of
a
very
nice
building.
So
I
have
to
sign
with
them
have
to
vote
no.
A
Yeah
I
think
so
lucky
you
lucky
me:
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
vote
no
on
this
motion,
just
because
I
think
that
we
should
probably
figure
this
out
a
little
bit
more.
It
seems
like
there's
a
good
divide
here
and
I
think
we
might
still
be
able
to
come
up
with
a
solution
motion
right
now,
so
we're
not
saying
no
to
it
quite
yet
it's
a
hold
on.
So
let's
try
again.
Someone
else
want
to
try
a
motion
that
I
think
for
me.
A
It's
just
a
little
bit
too
vague
and
we
spend
a
lot
of
time
coming
up
last
time
and
last
time,
with
our
discussion
coming
up
with
what
resulted
in
this
product
and
I
do
think
it
is
stepping
back
away
from
it
quite
a
bit
and
I.
You
know
we
talked
a
lot
about
how
this
is
such
an
opportunity.
It's
gonna,
be
such
a
center
for
the
community
and
I
would
hate
to
see
it
too
bland
because
it
is
such
an
opportunity
and
I.
Think
that's
where
our
conversation
conversation
was
last
time.
A
R
C
Think
that
my
recollection
of
this
building,
that's
one
of
the
things
we
liked
is
how
much
they
had
integrated
art
into
this
and
how
this
was
really
a
nod
to
the
seniors
that
are
going
to
be
in
this
building
and
to
the
neighbors
around
them,
and
so
to
remove
that
I'm
not
married
to
this
just
a
particular
art,
but
I
want
something
of
interest
on
this
building.
That
says
this
neighborhood
is
loved
the
people
who
live
in
this
building
or
loved.
This
is
an
important.
C
C
P
C
J
M
M
C
C
R
That's
that's
the
biggest
issue.
If
we,
if
we,
if
we
have
to
put
something
up
top
it's
expensive,
it's
hard
to
do
you
know,
frankly,
you
could
kill
this
project
not
to
be
you
know
overdramatic,
but
if
we
have
public
art,
we
put
it
on
the
front
level
which
is
what's
required.
Then
then
we're
fine
Sophie.
If,
if
you
support
the
recommendations
of
the
of
the
planning
staff
of
David,
then
you
know
I
think
we'll
get.
You
know
we'll
get
public
art.
C
A
E
M
Think
that
most
people
in
my
experience
spend
a
lot
more
time,
looking
at
the
first
and
second
floor
where
even
when
they're
driving
by
and
you
could
probably
put
almost
anything
on
the
upper
floors
of
a
building
and
people
probably
wouldn't
notice
it,
except
for
you
know
from
time
to
time
they
may
say:
hey,
look
those
bikes
up
there,
how
they
get
up
there.
But
it's
this.
This
facade
does
have
a
lot
of
articulation,
but
and
and
while
I
don't
like
the
idea
of
having
a
blank
facade
I,
don't
think
this
is
a
blank
facade.
M
E
I
mean
I,
remember
in
this
project
that
came
before
us,
I
kind
of
feel
like
we
may
be
certain,
was
a
very
blank
and
then,
when
they've
kinda
they
came
back
twice
or
three
times,
I
think
through
a
work
session
and
they've
added
different
elements
over
that
time,
because
I
actually
like
the
project
better
now
than
I,
did
for
ever
reason.
When
we
were
going
through
the
process.
E
Now
that
we've
taken
distance
I
mean
I,
agree
like
I,
don't
you
know,
but
the
first
time
I
was
almost
like
a
flat
wall
completely
than
they
added
the
different
elements
on
the
second
level
and
the
and
the
pipe
up
the
top.
Then,
through
the
middle
on
the
window,
I
mean
I,
just
feel
it's
different,
it's
not
as
bland
as
I.
Remember
it
being
and
so,
and
I
and
I
get
the
struggles
and
the
complications
that
they're
going
through
and
I.
E
Don't
think,
materially
that
we
are
I,
agree
that
most
people
aren't
going
to
notice
it,
especially
if
they're
doing
something
nice
and
that
big
open
space,
which
is
what
one
of
standards
is
between
the
glass
and
the
plant
floor.
So
I'll
try
one
more
time
unless
someone
else
wants
to
make
a
motion,
but
you
can
you.
B
Know
I'd
like
to
ask
the
applicant-
and
you
guys
mentioned
that
you
want
to
put
other
artwork
in
there-
tell
me
more
about
that.
What's
size
placement,
do
you
have
ideas
of
that
or
is
it
just?
You
know
when
I
say
when
I
hear
think
of
a
metal
piece
of
artwork,
like
you're,
describing
I
think
of
the
ones
over
on
second
east
they're
kind
of
small
and
on
in
the
park
strip
and
I,
don't
know
that
that
matches
this
building
but
I,
don't
know
what
you
guys
are
thinking.
J
My
idea,
okay,
so
we
came
up
with
a
name
for
the
building
which
is
called.
We
now
have
voted
on
it,
Casa
Milagro,
which
means
house
miracle
house.
If
this
project
gets
built,
it
will
be
America
anyway,
but
it
also
gives
hope
to
the
people
who
live
there,
to
the
name
and
because
of
the
culture
of
the
Mexican
people
and
the
Hispanic
people,
and
so
as
I
visualized,
the
name
I
tried
to
visualize
the
name.
What
does
it
represent?
I
mean
what
what
is
a
miracle
I
mean
it's
like.
J
B
J
Idea
originally
was
to
put
it
you
know
like
on
the
bill
on
the
top
of
the
building.
However,
as
we
discussed
it,
the
requirement
was
that
we
needed
to
have
the
artwork
on
the
street
level
of
the
buildings,
so
it
will
be
a
large
piece
that
will
that
will
be
on
the
street
level
of
the
building,
to
kind
of
to
give
it.
You
know
to
represent
our
culture
and.
E
B
D
Q
B
If
I
recall,
I
think
I
think
the
solution,
that's
in
front
of
us
was
kind
of
a
marrying
of
our
concern
about
what
the
public
artwork
would
look
like
and
our
concern
over
a
blank,
big
facade,
there
I
think
the
the
blank
facade
is
a
little
bit
of
a
subjective
terms.
I
think
that
we've
talked
about
how
there
is
some
some
distinction
there
and
there's
reason
for
it
to
be
minimized
on
the
windows.
I
feel
more
comfortable
after
hearing
about
this
artwork
about
about
approving
kind
of
this
blank
area.
B
As
long
as
there's
artwork
on
the
front
of
the
building,
again,
it's
kind
of
a
subjective
thing
of
what
kind
of
artwork
to
u1
on
that
building
and
if
they're
feeling
like
it's
gonna,
be
difficult
to
do
what
they
did
before
then
I'm
fine
with
them
changing
the
art.
I
do
remember.
I
was
talking
about
just
breaking
up
that
wall
a
little
bit
more
though
so
it
looks
different.
You
know.
Maybe
maybe
is
there
a
way
to
compromise
and
put
a
few
more
lines.
A
To
Matt's
point
and
I'm,
looking
back
at
the
old
report
here
and
I,
don't
know
what
was
what
at
one
point,
but
it
definitely
I
mean
the
great
the
dark
gray.
That's
that's
on
this
rendering
is
was
new
and
I
think
the
second
rendition
before
the
3d
people,
then
it
carried
with
the
3d
people,
and
it
seems
as
though
that
is
carried
through
to
the
final
rendition.
If
I'm,
seeing
that
correctly,
it's
got
so
it
so
from
the
front.
E
A
A
E
A
It's
got
the
the
darker
the
darker
line
on
the
top
on
the
side.
It's
got
the
more
varied
colors
on
that
Center,
the
large
Center
for
a
vertical
thing
and
what
it
even
looks
like
you're,
maybe
doing
darker
brick
on
the
second
floor
there
so
I,
don't
know,
I
mean
I,
might
try
this
again.
Alright,
go
ahead
and
try
it
Matt.
E
And
I'll
take
up.
There's
landscaping
does
not
qualify.
Let's
just
be
clear
about
that:
I
move
the
Planning
Commission
take
the
following
actions:
relations
proposed
changes,
centro
civico
senior
housing
project;
pls,
you
be
2017,
zero,
zero,
three,
seven,
zero
and
2017
zero
zero;
five,
two
five,
that
we
deny
changes
proposed
to
the
ground
level.
Blank
wall
that
we
deny
changes
proposed
to
the
public
art
requirements
and
that
we
approve
removing
the
3d
dimensional
architectural
elements
from
from
the
facade.
E
E
J
E
Mean
the
requirement,
because
we're
denying
they
stuff
to
incorporate
public
art
along
that
concrete
wall,
that
is
on
that
main
floor
between
the
glass
and
the
main
entry
doorway.
There
has
to
be
a
public
art
element
that
will
give
the
visual
appearance
and
make
it
a
pleasing
environment
for
people
who
are
walking
along
the
along
the
street.
A
C
A
K
A
K
L
A
A
O
Currently
there
are
basically
no
development
standards
whatsoever
other
than
height.
So
as
of
right
now,
if
you
wanted
to
build
a
60
foot
tall
metal
building
with
no
windows
surrounded
by
parking,
you
could
go
for
it.
I,
don't
know
why
you
would,
but,
but
you
could
do
it.
The
downtown
master
plan
calls
for
improved
design
standards
in
all
of
our
downtown
zones,
but
this
has
become
a
priority
and
the
real
catalyst
was
at
the
Sears
site.
Serious
closed.
It's
a
very
visible
site.
O
It
could
really
act
as
a
real
anchor
for
downtown,
but
without
the
right
standards
in
place,
it
could
certainly
be
detrimental
to
C
to
the
to
the
growth
in
that
neighborhood.
The
purpose
of
the
text
amendment
is
to
create
improved
gateways
in
the
downtown,
activate
Street,
frontages
and
pedestrian
spaces.
Minimize
impacts
to
low-density
residential
neighborhoods,
which
are
very
few,
but
we
do
one
we
do
try
to
recognize
them,
require
the
use
of
durable,
exterior
materials
and
preserve
existing
well-established
land
uses.
O
O
So,
just
to
begin
going
through
those
design
standards
I
wanted
to
discuss
those
at
effect.
Priming
the
ground
floor,
how
the
structure
I
know
as
you
well
know.
The
ground
floor
has
huge
impact
on
how
the
public
interacts
with
the
structure
and
in
its
ability
to
create
an
interesting
urban
street
where
people
feel
comfortable
where
they
want
to
spend
time
they
want
to
be
that
place.
The
standards
include
requiring
minimum
amount
of
ground-floor
glass
or
40%
entrances
at
all.
O
Street
frontages
requiring
active
ground
floor
uses
on
all
Street
Street
frontages
some
streets,
we've
identified
as
especially
busier
streets,
so
State,
Street,
Main,
Street,
8,
south
and
9
south
would
require
specific
ground
floor
uses
such
as
retail
restaurants
bars
something
they
would
actually
really
truly
activate
that
space
bring
people
into
those
areas.
We
know
that
retail
is
not
going
to
work
on
every
Street
in
the
d2
zone.
O
We
do
not
want
to
have
empty
storefronts
lining
streets,
so
those
other
streets
that
are
in
the
d2
zone
will
still
have
to
have
a
ground-floor
use,
but
something
like
office
or
residential
use
would
comply.
It
could
never
be
parking
so
I
think
that
was
the
biggest
issue
just
getting
rid
of
those
developments.
You
pull
up
and
it's
a
door
and
you
see
into
a
parking
garage,
mid
block
walkways,
would
required
anywhere
that
is
identified
an
adopted
master
plan.
The
downtown
master
plan
does
indicate
where
those
should
be
in
this
downtown
area.
O
Buildings
should
be
set
close
to
the
street,
with
obviously
no
parking
between
the
building
a
sidewalk,
however,
allowing
some
setback.
If
some
I
do
some
sort
of
active
use,
whether
it's
outdoor,
dining
or
art,
or
if
it's
just
a
hangout
spot
I
guess
staff
was
specifically
asked
during
the
public
engagement
period
and
I'll
go
kind
of
through
what
we
did
on
that
later,
but
about
the
allowance
of
projecting
or
blade
signs
which
these
signs
are
sung.
O
Perpendicular
to
the
street
they're
not
currently
permitted
in
this
zone
staff
leaves
of
these
pedestrian
oriented
signs
can
really
add
a
little
positive,
aesthetic
to
a
neighborhood
and
to
the
streetscape,
but
as
long
as
the
size
and
number
the
science
is
controlled.
So
when
we
look
at
the
structure
as
a
whole,
these
standards
kind
of
deal
with
scale
and
asking
and
those
impacts
it
would
have
on
the
street
as
well
as
those
that
they
would
have
on
surrounding
areas.
O
The
first
would
to
limit
the
length
of
the
building
to
200
feet,
require
articulation
the
facade
of
the
structure,
meaning
no
blank
walls
over
15
feet
requiring
a
minimum,
durable,
exterior
building
materials
such
as
brick,
stone,
rock
or
similar
materials,
and
for
the
very
first
time
in
Salt,
Lake
City,
a
minimum
amount
of
upper
floor
glass
of
25
percent.
It's
something
we
it's
been
on
a
list,
but
it's
never
been
implemented.
O
All
mechanical
equipment
service
areas,
loading
docks,
we
need
to
be
screened
and
then
there
also
be
specific
standards
for
parking
garages
standalone
parking
garages
just
to
minimize
their
impact
on
not
only
the
street
but
to
neighboring
properties.
So
it's
kind
of
a
quick
overview
of
the
changes
that
we
would
be.
Adding
one
kind
of
unique
portions
proposal
is
that
we've
included
standards
that
address
Auto
Sales
Lots
many
of
the
city's
largest
auto
sales.
Lots
are
located
in
the
d2
zone.
O
In
fact,
there's
over
30
acres
in
the
downtown
zone,
the
detune
zone
along
State,
Street
and
West
Temple,
it's
kind
of
a
unique
land
use.
It
comes
with
unique
design
requirements.
These
these
Lots
are
very
large.
They
were
developed
at
a
high
cost
and
they
are
very
on.
It
is
very
unlikely
that
they're
going
to
go
away
in
the
foreseeable
future
and
they
are
a
permitted
use
in
the
zone.
O
With
this
proposal,
we're
not
looking
to
adjust
the
land
use
tables,
so
we
wanted
to
find
standards
that
perhaps
was
a
compromise
to
allow
them
to
exist,
but
also
have
the
ability
to
implement
design
standards.
So,
first
of
all,
sales
and
display
buildings
would
and
would
need
to
comply
with
all
proposed
design
standards,
but
auxilary
buildings
such
as
car
washes
repair
shops.
Other
buildings
of
that
nature
would
not
have
to
comply
with
those
four
values
proposed
design
standards,
perimeter
landscaping
required
when
there
are
no
buildings
along
that
frontage.
F
Get
to
clarify
how
these
would
apply,
they
would
apply
to
new
buildings,
so
existing
buildings
that
don't
meet
them
aren't
required
to
be
brought
up,
but
new
buildings
and
I
think
additions.
If
they're
over
a
certain
percentage
of
the
earth
size
would
have
the
the
addition
part
has
to
comply,
but
and
that.
O
Would
be
with
all
made
mention
the
be
game
that
was
this
is
all
for
new
construction
or
for
additions.
So
this,
obviously
we
be
requiring
existing
buildings
to
come
into
compliance
with
these
standards.
We,
the
we've
attempted
we
conducted
a
fairly
significant
amount
of
public
engagement.
We
met
with
stakeholders,
business
owners,
business,
advisory
board,
the
mainstream
America
group,
the
ballpark
community
council.
Almost
recently,
we
had
an
open
house.
Last
week
there
was
generally
been
a
lot
of
support
for
this
project.
O
In
fact,
when
I
sent
this
first
Miller
out,
one
of
the
first
emails
I
got
was
from
an
architect.
He
said
I
can't
believe
it
took
this
long
for
this
to
happen,
so
they
knew
it
was
coming.
It
just
has
taken
some
time
to
get
there.
However,
at
the
open
house
there
were
comments
that
were
directed
specifically
at
Auto
Sales
Lots,
and
whether
or
not
they
should
have
different
design
standards,
whether
there
should
be
some
sort
of
exemptions
in
place
they
most
accounts.
O
All
the
comments
I
received
felt
that
auto
solet's
should
not
be
excluded
from
the
design
standards.
So
I
am
interested
in
your
thoughts
on
that
subject.
We
will,
as
staff
is
going
to
continue
to
analyze
that
particular
issue,
as
we
kind
of
finalize
our
draft
as
well
so
I'd
love
to
hear
any
feedback.
Any
questions,
any
comments
that
you
may
have.
A
A
That's
tough
because
I
I
kind
of
don't
want
to
be
lenient
either
because
I
would
like
I
would
like
the
appearance
of
the
auto
storage
to
be
gone
or
even,
if
they're,
still
there
and
I
remember
living
I
moved
to
Portland
for
a
brief
period
and
I
saw
this
like
car
dealership.
That
was
totally
inside
I.
Don't
know
if
it
was
like
a
super
fancy,
one
I,
don't
even
remember,
but
I
was
it's
just
like.
A
O
It's
one
reason
why
I
went
to
make
sure
that
those
main
buildings
were
pulled
to
the
street,
which
is
not
the
normal
development
pattern
for
a
car
lot.
So
that's
I
feel
like
we're.
Probably
gonna
get
some
pushback
just
asking
for
that
is
well
in
the
sense.
Normally
they
want
to
be
in
the
middle,
so
you
got
to
walk
through
all
their
cars
before
you
know
you
get
to
the
middle
bit.
We
definitely
still
want
to
look
at
that.
How.
A
O
Kangh,
ours
right,
you
know
adjacent
to
us
and
it's
kind
of
a
similar
option.
If
you
died
on
State
Street,
it
is
buildings
along
the
street.
But
behind
that
you
do
have
an
open
parking
lot.
It
is
permitted,
so
they
would
be
able
to
continue
to
do
that.
Even
if
the
buildings
are
pushed
forward
as
a
permitted
use,
I
mean
you
have
to
allow
the
storage
of
vehicles
so
yeah.
D
Have
kind
of
a
series
of
questions?
Yes,
John
perks
up,
okay,
any
more
so
we
talked
about
the
window
percentage
and
one
of
the
things
that
we
noticed
or
that
I
noticed
in
the
sugarhouse
business
district.
Is
that
just
blanketing
that
forty
percent,
sometimes
then
windows,
are
put
in
places
that
are
not
conducive
to
activating
pedestrians.
So
we
have
had
enough
buildings
that
put
the
windows
way
up
top
and
I
five
feet,
so
they
put
them
up
at
six
or
seven
feet
and
that
doesn't
activate
any
pedestrian
use.
D
And
one
of
the
things
in
talking
with
Nick
over
the
years
was
that
well
that's
what
the
ordinance
says
forty
percent
is.
This
may
be
an
opportunity
to
look
at
how
to
better
define,
not
necessarily
you
have
to
have
a
window
here
here
here,
but
that
the
objective
of
the
forty
percent
window
placement
is
to
activate
pedestrian
interest
and
you're
not
going
to
accomplish
that.
If
you
put
a
line
of
windows
up
in.
O
Thing
and
I,
as
I
was
walking
down
here
today.
I
thought
I
should
have
given
you
guys
something
give
you
a
little
more
context.
I
gave
you
the
table
with
the
standards
along
with
the
table
in
the
ordinance
it
kind
of
explains
what
it
means
when
we
say
ground-floor
glass,
so
example,
a
ground-floor
glass
means
that
you
have
to
have
forty
percent
between
three
and
eight
feet
above
the
ground,
and
so
it
would
require
that
glass
to
be
in
the
center.
So
I.
Q
O
Yes,
so
as
of
right
now,
you're
not
required
to
have
any
doors
on
the
street.
In
this
case,
some
zones
have
that
you
had
just
have
to
have
a
door
on
the
street,
and
there
are
some
zones
of
it
indicated
that
you
need
to
have
a
door
every
forty
feet,
for
example
in
the
TSA
I
know
in
those
businesses
we're
looking
between
thirty
and
forty
s,
so
it
wasn't
added
on.
There
is
something,
but
it
is
something
I'd
be
happy
to
to
look
at
if
you
wanted
to
have
a
specific
number,
how.
D
O
D
O
D
D
O
D
Were
employer
and
I
am
one
blade
science
I
told
when
I
read
that
I
totally
agreed
with
your
the
size
and
the
limitations
and
I
think
that
they're
great,
so
I
totally
proved
that
one
of
the
things
that
I
wanted
to
come
and
I
was
the
elimination
of
a
design
review
process.
If
you
met
so
much
affordable.
20%
of
for.
B
B
Q
E
H
D
E
M
K
B
O
A
O
O
Tough,
most
cities-
don't
Italy,
have
them
right
downtown.
You
know
they've
kind
of
the
value,
the
properties
gotten
to
the
point
where
they've
been
pushed
out
more
to
the
periphery
right
and
those.
You
know
when
you
get
really
really
high-end
and
you're
in
New,
York
or
somewhere
that
all
of
a
sudden,
you
have
a
parking
garage
instead
of
a
big
parking
lot.
So
but
but
the
Forsett
is
a
little
bit
tougher.
It
doesn't
mean
that
we
can't
look
into
a
little
bit
deeper
and
see
what
we
can
do.
Okay,.
A
F
So
that's
what
we're
here
to
about
I
kind
of
wanted
to
go
back
a
little
bit
and
describe
a
little
bit
and
give
you
some
basic
information,
not
just
about
what
an
inland
port
is,
but
also
what
the
build
said
so
that
you
are
aware
of
it,
because
I
think
a
lot
of
people
don't
fully
understand
what
what
was
in
the
in
the
bill.
So
first
off
just
start
with
the
inland
port,
and
these
are
general
kinds
of
definitions
but
they're.
F
Basically,
intermodal
facilities
that
move
things
around
they
move
goods
in
and
out
freights
from
different
modes,
all
different
modes,
whether
it's
train,
truck
or
plane,
they're
commonly
referred
to.
They
have
lots
of
different
names.
They're
listed
there
dry
port
global
trade,
port
logistics,
Park
intermodal
facility.
F
They
tend
to
have
large
cranes,
warehousing
and
distribution,
centers
kind
of
surround
them,
there's
other
light
manufacturing
facilities
because
they
can
benefit
from
assembly
assembly
of
goods
that
are
produced
elsewhere,
there's
also
movement
of
Bowl
goods.
Through
these
types
of
facilities
and
that
gets
to
some
of
the
temporary
storage
items.
There
are
some
benefits
and
there
are
some
drawbacks.
F
Obviously-
and
this
is
the
focus
of
what
we're
really
looking
at
at
this
point-
is-
are
the
drawbacks
and
the
impacts,
those
include
not
just
environmental,
but
also
to
city
services
and
infrastructure,
and
things
like
that
and
so
just
to
list
those
obviously
air
quality,
water
quality,
habitat
habitat
degradation
prickly
in
this
location
and
in
our
northwest
quadrant
area
of
our
city.
These
are
examples
of
another
examples
of
other
parks.
This
is
a
logistics
park
outside
of
Kansas,
City
I.
Believe
it's
about
30
or
40
miles
outside
of
Kansas
City.
F
You
can
have
a
basic
site
plan
and
the
aerial
that
shows
what
goes
on
there.
There
is
some
bulk
storage
outdoor
bulk
storage
that
does
occur
in
this
facility.
You
can
kind
of
see
that
in
that
gray
area
or
in
the
aerial,
there's
kind
of
some
Brown
unfinished
product
or
areas
on
the
on
the
ground,
similar
one
in
Illinois,
where
you
can
see
that
this
one
has
I,
don't
even
want
to
begin
to
imagine
how
many
miles
of
rail
line
and
stuff
was
in
this
facility,
but
it's
clearly
very
large.
F
One
of
the
interesting
things
about
most
of
these
ports
is
that
they
generally
have
occupied
land.
That
was
already
government
typically
had
a
government
use
on
them
prior.
So
this
particular
one
was
associated
with
the
u.s.
army
base,
one
in
San,
Antonio's,
Air,
Force,
Base,
etc,
and
so
this
is
where
we
are
a
little
bit
more
unique,
I
think
the
Kansas
City
one
is
mostly
private
property,
but
Salt
Lake
City's
area
is
almost
exclusively
privately
owned
land.
F
So
this
this
bill
that
was
passed
in
the
special
session
in
July
it
was
HB
2,
0,
0
1.
We
have
the
code
citations
in
here,
which
you
can
look
at
online
now
and
it's
a
little
bit
easier
to
follow
than
the
than
the
actual
bill
version
of
it.
But
basically
it
so
it
told
the
city
not
just
city,
it's
not
like,
but
also
West
Valley
City
in
Salt
Lake
County,
that
we
have
to
update
our
zoning
ordinance
to
allow
inland
port
uses
by
December
31st
of
28th
tene.
F
If
we
don't,
then
we
are
basically
essentially
waiving
our
right
to
regulate
in
lumpur
uses.
We
have
to
treat
them
as
permitted,
so
they
get
into
some
of
the
problems
with
that
in
our
ordinance,
mainly,
the
definition
of
what
an
inland
port
use
is
his
is
very
broadly
defined
and
I
think
it
could
reasonably
be
interpreted
to
mean
just
about
any
use.
F
We
also
cannot
prohibit
temporary
natural
resource
storage
or
the
storage
of
natural
resources
in
in
our
inland
port
and
I.
Think
we
can
read
between
the
lines
about
what
that
is
aimed
at,
but
some
interesting
things
also
came
about
in
in
the
bill,
in
that
there
were
some
added
objectives
for
the
inland
port
authority,
which
include
environmental
regulations,
and
so
that's
really.
F
What
we
are
looking
at
right
now
is
the
city
is
what
environmental
regulations
and
standards
can
we
utilize
in
our
zoning
ordinance
to
address
some
of
the
impacts,
let's
kind
of
start
by
showing
what
the
inland
Port
Authority
jurisdictional
lands?
Actually
are
this
changed
during
this
special
session?
So
those
of
you
who
are
familiar
with
our
northwest
quadrant
plan
and
up
in
the
upper
left-hand
corner
of
this
map,
you
see
you
can
see
the
dotted
black
line,
that
is
the
city
boundary.
F
Are
those
areas
that,
at
the
northwest,
quadrant
master
plan
in
our
previous
zoning
activities
identified
has
essentially
not
a
developable
areas?
Those
areas
that
we're
preserving
because
of
their
unique
nature,
the
wetlands,
the
wildlife
habitat
and
the
agricultural
uses,
and
things
like
that
that
are
existing
in
that
area?
And
so
this,
the
the
change
in
the
bill
took
those
out
of
the
jurisdictional
and
they
used
to
extend
all
the
way
the
city
boundary
so
that
you
know
that
that's
one
of
one
of
the
better
parts.
F
Well,
maybe
one
of
the
only
better
parts
of
the
bill,
but
the
other
section
it
modified
some
of
the
area
on
the
southern
part.
You
can
kind
of
see
right
in
the
middle
of
the
where
the
interstates
and
bangerter
highway
meet.
There's
that
big
kind
of
orange
yellow
area
just
to
the
towards
the
bottom
of
the
screen
on
there.
F
That
area
used
to
also
be
in
the
inland
port
jurisdictional
lands,
and
so
that
was
taken
out
as
well
a
bunch
of
things
that
the
bill
did
relating
to
what's
called
the
tax
differential
and
things
like
that
and
what
the
city
can
collect
and
how
we
provide
services.
Those
are
really
outside
of
what
we
are
discussing
as
serve
as
a
planning
staff
that
doesn't
mean
that
they're
not
any
less
important
to
the
city.
F
It's
just
it's
something
that
we
in
the
Planning
Division
can't
really
address,
or
do
anything
about,
and
we're
probably
the
wrong
group
to
do
something
about.
So
other
people
in
the
city
are
taking
our
leading
a
charge
on
that,
so
there's
basically
15
different
policies
and
objectives
in
the
inland
port
bill
and
when
we,
the
reason
why
these
are
important
is
because,
when
we
look
at
the
inland
port
use
and
definitions
and
our
whatever
zoning
standards
we
come
up
with,
they
have
to
basically
relate
to
these
policies
and
objectives.
F
So
I
pulled
out
some
of
and
kind
of
simplified
some
of
the
items
that
that
relate
directly
to
zoning,
and
these
are
what
we're
looking
at.
So
the
first
one
up
there
respect
maintained
since
the
sensitivity
of
the
unique
natural
environment
in
the
proximity
are
to
the
area,
improve
air
quality,
minimize
resource
use,
respect
existing
land
use
and
other
agreements.
F
So,
like
I
said,
our
task
is
really
to
develop
some
zoning
regulations
to
respond
to
the
bill.
We
need
to
allow
inland
port
uses,
and
this
is
where
we
kind
of
get
thrown
for
a
loop.
A
little
bit
is
that
the
jurisdictional
lands
include
lands
that
are
within
eight
different
zoning
districts,
not
all
of
them
allow
like
manufacturing,
warehouse
distribution.
So
that's
what
we're
tasked
with
that's.
F
D
F
Gonna,
we're
gonna
get
I'm
gonna
get
to
that
in
a
little
bit
here.
So
so
so
this
map
shows
basically
I
think
the
important
thing
about
this.
This
is
intended
to
show
the
eight
different
zoning
districts.
The
part
that's
not
on
here
is
there's
also
six
different
overlays
that
apply
to
this
area.
So
it's
a
it's
actually
a
very
complicated
zoning
problem
that
we've
been
tasked
to
do,
and
we
basically
have
a
month
less
than
a
month
to
do
it.
In
fact,
we
really
have
about
a
week.
F
We
have
ten
days
to
get
it
done
so
on
our
end,
not
on
the
Planning
Commission's
in,
but
on
our
end,
and
so
the
intent
of
this
is
to
show
where
those
are.
It
may
be
that
long
term
that
some
of
these
areas
get
rezone
to
m1,
given
the
reality,
but
the
way
that
map
amendments
are
working
in
Salt,
Lake,
City
and
negotiating
with
property
owners
and
everything
else.
We
don't
feel
like.
F
We
have
the
time
to
do
that
and
meet
the
December
31st
deadline
right
now,
so
we're
gonna
get
to
our
approach
in
in
a
minute,
but
I
wanted
to
go
over
a
few
of
the
other
changes
appeals.
So
there
were
some
some
significant
changes
to
the
appeal
section
of
this.
However,
it
didn't
change
the
fact
that
the
inland
port
appeal
panel
has
the
authority
to
basically
decide
which
city
standards
apply
and
which
ones
don't,
and
they
can
overrule
our
land
use
decisions
based
on
three
different
things
which
are
coming
up
in
a
different
slide.
F
So
the
big
change
is
that
it
has
to
go
through
our
city
approval
process.
First,
I,
don't
know
that
that
really
does
much
from
an
outcome
perspective,
because
all
it
does
is
mean
means
that
if
the
Planning
Commission
makes
a
decision
on
something
it
goes
to
the
appeals
hearing
officer
and
they
can
decide
just
like
they
do
now.
They
review
the
record
and
and
make
sure
that
the
Planning
Commission
made
essentially
a
legal,
legally
defensible.
This
is
staff
decision,
they're,
actually
de
novo,
because
there's
no
public
hearing
when
we
make
staff
level
decisions.
F
These
are
oftentimes
even
applying
a
zoning
ordinance
to
a
building
permit.
This
is
where
we
get
these.
We
do
get
these
types
of
things
appealed
more
than
likely
the
thing
that's
going
to
be
appealed.
The
staff
level
decision
that
would
more
than
likely
be
appealed
would
be
something
along
the
lines
of
whether
or
not
a
use
is
actually
an
inland
port
use
or
not.
So
those
would
go
to
the
hearing
officer
first
and
then
they'd
go
to
the
inland
port
authority
who
gets
to
actually
make
the
decision.
F
F
They
need
to
submit
to
the
appeals
panel
information
and
in
documentation
about
how
they
meet
or
exceed
applicable,
state
or
federal
regulations.
So
that
includes
air
quality,
water
quality,
etc.
They
need
to
list
any
potential
environmental
impact
and
what
mitigation
measures,
including
what
technology
allows
them
or
what
technology
is
being
used
to
help
mitigate
those
impacts.
They
need
to
provide
a
list
of
all,
and
this
is
different
than
what
we're
used
to
as
a
conditional
use
all
potential
impacts
on
abutting
properties.
F
The
conditional
use
standard
in
our
ordinance
is
that
it
has
to
be
an
adverse
impact,
and
it's
about
reducing
it.
There's
not
really
any
indication
in
this
bill
about
what
standard
that
appeals
panel
would
would
be
required
or
would
use
to
determine
what
to
do
with
an
impact
if
it's
identified
potential
impacts
to
migratory
bird
production
areas,
and
then
this
is
one
of
the
troubling
parts
of
it.
Municipal
regulations
that
the
applicant
will
be
unable
to
comply
with
and
if
there
are,
are
alternative
methods
to
achieve
the
intent
of
those
municipal
regulations.
F
So
that
statement
basically
means
if
you
can't
comply
with
a
standard
that
the
city
is
adopted.
Tell
us
why
and
we'll
make
a
decision
on
whether
or
not
we
think
it
there's
other
alternatives
or
whether
you
even
have
to
so
it
does
require
public
hearing
and
notice
of
the
public
hearing
before
no
public
hearing
was
required.
That
panel
could
just
make
a
decision
whenever
they
want
they
could
appoint
someone
to
make
the
decisions.
F
In
fact,
the
old
bill
didn't
even
require
notice
to
the
city
about
whether
or
not
they
were
going
to
be
hearing
an
appeal
or
they've
received
an
appeal
or
anything
like
that.
The
panel
can
they
can
affirm
a
decision,
but
they
can
also
overturn
the
decision,
and
some
of
these
are
pretty
typical,
but
if
it's
contrary
to
the
policies
and
objectives
of
the
inland
port.
F
So
that's
a
good
back
to
those
15
types
of
the
list
of
15
things
you,
the
city,
imposes
conditions
that
unreasonably
impair
or
essentially
prohibit
an
inland
port
use
or
if
it's
arbitrary,
capricious
or
illegal,
which
is
our
basically
our
standard
at
the
city
level.
So
our
approach-
and
we
think
that
this
is
really
the
only
way
that
we
could
accomplish
this
task
is-
is
to
create
a
use
overlay.
So
what
that
means
is
that
it
would
take
whatever
those
uses
are.
F
More
than
likely
is
going
to
be
the
m1
land
use
table
as
listed
whether
permitted
or
conditional,
and
apply
them
to
the
inland
port
area.
We
feel
like
we
don't
need
to
we're
gonna
reference,
the
bill
that
the
map
that's
actually
adopted
by
the
state
legislature.
So
we
don't
it's
not
a
map
amendment
for
us
we're
referring
to
that.
To
that
requirement.
F
What
we're
trying
to
figure
out
is
what
do
we
do
in
say,
for
example,
the
CG
Zone,
where
those
uses
aren't
allowed?
If
it's
not
allowed
in
the
underlying
zone,
should
it
be
permitted
or
conditional
what
the
process
is.
Those
are
the
types
of
things
that
we
are
still
trying
to
figure
out
and
that
gives
the
approval
process
what
additional
standards
of
review
are
required?
F
If
any,
do
our
existing
standards
for
conditional
use
already
cover
this
stuff
or
not,
and
then
what
semental
requirements
do
we
need
is
a
city
to
be
able
to
make
a
determination
as
to
whether
in
impact,
what
the
impacts
are
and
whether
or
not
and
how
they
might
be
mitigated
timeline?
This
is
probably
completely
on
unreadable.
F
So
a
couple
other
things
that
we
are
looking
at
just
so
everybody
is
aware
the
land
use
in
Development
Management
Act,
which
essentially
is
that
is
the
state
law
that
lets
us
do
zoning.
It
includes
objectives
for
land
use
regulations
and
there's
a
couple
of
things
in
there
that
we
think
that
we
can
use
to
to
help
the
city
achieve
our
goals
that
we
outlined
in
the
northwest,
quadrant
master
plan
for
this
area
and
accommodate
an
inland
port.
F
Clearly
the
ones
you're
familiar
with
land
use
and
buildings,
but
the
state
law
actually
allows
us
to
use
zoning
to
deal
with
energy
efficiency,
light
and
air
access,
air
quality
transportation.
The
air
quality
one
is
something
I
don't
know
if
local
jurisdictions
have
done
much
with.
So
it's
gonna
be
a
little
interesting
because
we
have
to
balance
that
out
with
some
of
the
other
regulatory
agencies
at
the
state
and
federal
level,
because
obviously
they're
going
to
preempt
anything
that
we
do
by
their
own
laws,
but
just
go
over
some
of
the
key
issues.
F
Obviously
not
all
zoning
districts,
like
I,
said,
allow
the
inland
port
uses.
We
have
the
existing
development
agreements,
which
are
essentially
vested
in
the
vested
to
the
ordinance
that
was
in
place
at
the
time
and
recommend
identified
in
that
development
agreement.
Not
all
inland
port
uses
are
going
to
create
impacts,
that's
something
that
I
think
is
a
reality,
but
we
want
to
make
sure
that
those
that
are
gonna
create
an
impact
that
we
treat
them
and
we
have
a
review
process
to
help
mitigate
those
impacts.
The
best
we
possibly
can
the
pitcher
kind
of
shows.
F
What's
already
permitted
and
built,
this
is
actually
in
Salt,
Lake,
City
and
I'm,
inland
port
jurisdictional
land,
a
development-
that's
relatively
new,
but
it's
a
permit.
It
was
a
permitted
use
the
questions
that
we're
kind
of
asking
ourselves
as
we
go
through
this.
How
do
we
do?
How
do
we
address
the
uses
that
are
not
otherwise
permitted
in
underlying
zones?
What
if
I
use
comes
in
that
doesn't
want
to
be
an
inland
port
use?
How
do
we
deal
with
that,
but
they're
in
the
land?
F
So,
for
example,
someone
building
a
warehouse
of
whatever
that
was
gonna
build
it
anyway?
Are
they
really
an
inland
port
use
if
they're
already
going
to
be
there?
What
do
we
need
to?
What
do
we
need
in
order
to
determine
what
the
impacts
are,
what
kind
of
studies
research
etc,
which
is
going
to
kind
of
raise
the
bar
for
some
of
these
uses,
I?
Think
in
the
city?
Do
we
need
expanded,
conditional
use
standards?
This
is
actually
another.
F
This
is
a
conditional
use.
That's
in
Salt,
Lake,
City
that
you
can,
if
you
it's
a
metal
recycling
and
you
can
kind
of
see
over
time.
What's
happened
with
it,
when
you
look
at
the
left-hand
side
of
the
picture,
that's
when
it
was
originally
built,
probably
30
or
40
years
ago,
there
really
weren't
any
kind
of
standards
in
place
or
anything
like
that
and
as
you
move
over
towards
the
right,
you
start
seeing
solid
surfaces
for
the
storage
and
movement
of
the
vehicles
on
the
site
to
help
reduce
the
dust,
water
pollution,
etc.
F
There's
actually
an
indoor
sorting
building
so
that
net,
so
that
that
also
helps
reduce
the
air
quality
impacts
for
those
types
of
facilities,
and
so
you
start
to
see
that
over
time,
there's
not
just
zoning
requirements,
but
also
there's,
probably
some
other
clean
air
requirements
clean
water
requirement.
You
can
actually
see
that
that
kind
of
holding
pond
that's
in
the
middle
there,
where
they
have
to
where
they
can
kind
of
store.
F
Some
of
the
liquids
that
come
out
of
this
facility
does
a
lot
of
recycling
of
junk
vehicles
and
things
like
that,
and
so
clearly
there's
all
kinds
of
liquids
and
things
like
that
that
are
in
those
old
vehicles
that
basically
get
sorted
and
taken
care
of
and
disposed
of
properly.
Instead
of
just
dumped
on
the
ground
and
let
absorb
into
our
into
our
water
supplies
in
our
groundwater,
why
didn't
we
take
the
other
approaches
like
I
said?
The
biggest
thing
is
time.
F
We
don't
think
that
we
could
have
accomplished
this
by
taking
other
approaches,
whether
it's
writing
a
new
zoning
district,
remapping
and
other
things.
We
just
think
that
there
were
too
many
potential
traps
in
that
in
that
process.
To
do
it.
We
also
have
to
think
about
staff
resource,
because
not
only
do
we
have
to
get
this
done,
but
we
have
to
get
the
other
I
think
we're
at
290
active
applications
that
we
are
working
on
right
now,
and
so
we
have
to
keep
those
moving
along.
F
A
lot
of
people
don't
realize
that
those
some
of
those
applications
have
processing
requirements,
not
just
in
our
ordinance
but
in
state
law
too.
So
we
can't.
We
can't
really
let
those
things
slide.
Some
of
them
will
be
impacted.
Some
of
them
are
being
delayed
a
little
bit
and
that's
just
the
reality
of
what
we
are
all
city
initiated.
F
Projects
are
impacted
by
this
and
currently
delayed
we're
taking
a
very
unusual
step
of
over
the
next
two
weeks,
sequestering
our
staff
to
work
on
this,
because
it's
the
only
way
we
can
get
it
done,
a
pretty
big
impact
to
what
we're
doing
otherwise.
As
a
Planning
Division
as
well
like
I,
said
earlier
longer
term,
we
may
look
at
rezoning
all
of
the
lands
to
m1
to
help
reduce
some
of
the
so.
C
F
Because,
basically,
under
under
state
code,
we
have
certain
noticing
requirements,
those
property
owners,
they
have
the
ability
to
protest
and
things
like
that,
and
it
just
adds
so
much
but,
like
I,
said
potential
traps,
it
doesn't
mean
they're
going
to
happen,
but
they
can
and
when
we're
kind
of
mandated
something
like
this,
we
kind
of
need
it.
We
feel
we
need
to
respond
in
the
most
time-sensitive
way
that
we
possibly
can.
M
F
M1
zone
does
most
of
this
area.
The
the
the
airport
overlay
actually
prohibits
housing,
regardless
of
the
zone,
so
we,
for
example,
we'd
see
G
zone
does
allow
housing,
but
because
the
airport
it
approximately
the
airport
in
that
location
it
wouldn't
so
that
the
one
thing
I
didn't
mention
is
that
we
like
I,
said
this
would
only
be
focused
on
the
use.
So
all
of
the
underlying
bulk
requirements
of
those
other
zones
would
still
come
into
play.
So,
for
example,
in
the
C
G
zone,
the
height
requirement
is
still
there.
Those
setbacks
are
still
there.
F
We're
not
adding
additional
things.
We're
not
trying
to
address
that
at
this
time,
because
it's
just
too
much
I
wanted
to
give
you
guys
a
little
bit
heads
up
about
what
we're
hearing
already
I
mean
a
lot
of
these
things.
We've
already
known,
going
in
clearly
the
the
biggest
impact
and
concern
that
the
city
has
and
I
think.
A
lot
of,
in
fact,
I
would
say
just
about
everyone
in
the
community
has
is
air
quality
and
how
that
relates
to
land
use.
Some
of
the
things
that
we've
identified.
F
F
F
Obviously,
it
arrives
in
coal
train
in
the
train
cars
when
and
usually
uncovered,
but
that
that's
just
wanted
to
use
that
as
an
example,
so
things
like
requiring
paved
working
yards
and
things
like
that
windscreens,
a
lot
of
materials
bulk
materials
can
have
water
suppressants.
There
are
chemical
suppressants,
but
that
has
a
catch-22
with
water
quality
and
also
potentially
air
quality.
F
If,
if,
during
the
application
of
those
that
those
chemicals
are
spreading
off
the
site,
like
I,
said
controlling
loading
and
unloading
operations,
whether
it's
in
enclosed
buildings
or
on
solid
services,
obviously
certain
vending
equipment
and
enclosed
types
of
storage
so
believe
it
or
not.
They're.
Actually,
our
full-on
storage
sheds
for
coal
that
you
wouldn't
believe
the
massive
size
of
those,
but
also
that's
what
grain
silos
are
for,
and
things
like
that
to
help
reduce
those
kinds
of
impacts
from
dust
water
quality
is
the
other
major
concern
that
we're
hearing.
F
This
is
another
example
of
storm
water
mitigation
plans
that
we
might
require
to
contain
the
storm
water
and
any
material
foreign
material
that
it
may
take
into
there,
particularly
when
you
have
yards
with
lots
of
vehicles
moving
around
and
things
like
that.
That's
a
big
thing.
We
already
require
that
as
the
water
supplier
and
the
the
manager
of
storm
water
in
Salt,
Lake
City,
our
public
utility
utilities,
Department,
is
required
to
comply
with
Clean
Water
Act,
and
so
they
already
are
requiring
some
of
these
things.
F
And
if
that's
the
case,
if
we're
already
requiring
something
as
a
city,
we
don't
feel
it's
necessary
to
put
it
into
our
zoning
ordinance
as
well.
But
the
wanted
to
give
some
examples
of
what
we
might
be
required
to
be
submitted
so
that
we
can
get
that
report
to
public
utility.
So
they
can
tell
us
if
it
if
it
complies
with
the
Clean,
Water
Act
or
not
other
issues,
and
these
this
doesn't
necessarily
mean
to
diminish
these.
We
just
haven't
gotten
just
researching
these
types
of
things
at
the
moment,
but
obviously
transportation
impacts
are
huge.
F
The
noise
impacts
are
also
important,
particularly
the
closer
you
get
to
sensitive
lands
and
sensitive
uses
and
energy
use
and
efficiency.
So
that
gets
back
to
the
state
code
about
how
you
know
are
we
going
to
be
willing,
as
a
city,
to
start
looking
at
energy
consumption
and
alternative
modes
on
some
of
these
buildings
that
may
and
uses
that
might
use
above
whatever
the
norm
is
if
we
can
figure
that
out?
F
But
those
are
the
types
of
things
that
we're
looking
at
like
I
said
we
are
still
very
early.
In
fact,
we
only
have
a
list
of
things
that
we
want
to
consider
in
our
ordinance
right
now
and
next
week
we
hit
it
hard
and
heavy
and
start
writing
a
ordinance
which
is
going
to
be
a
pretty
interesting
thing
because
normally
writing
a
draft
ordinance
like
this
would
probably
take
us
four
to
six
months
and
we
have
ten
days
to
do
it.
So
there's
gonna
be
some
grumpy
planners
in
the
city
over
the
next
few
weeks.
F
F
There's
there's
some
other
things
on
there.
We
do
anticipate
that
the
public
hearings
will
be
pretty
lengthy,
so
we're
trying
to
keep
those
meetings
focused
on
as
much
time
as
necessary
on
these,
so
that
we
can
so
that
one,
the
Planning
Commission
can
can
hear
what
people
are
saying.
We
will
also
provide
a
full
report
on
everything
that
every
comment
that
we're
getting.
So
what
what
we
plan
on
doing
is
summarized
or
kind
of
categorizing
those
comments.
F
A
Nick
I
have
to
run
right
at
this
moment
and
I
apologize,
you're
good,
but
thank
you
so
much
for
this
and
thank
you
so
much
for
the
staff
time
and
resource,
particularly
at
the
air
quality
and
water
quality,
because
I
share
that
concern
with
the
community.
It's
it's
just
it's
an
incredible
concern
going
into
this.
So
I
appreciate
all
the
time
and
energy
you're
spending
on
that
and
look
forward
to
how
we're
going
to
finagle
that
to
our
advantage
as
best
we
possibly
can.
Thank.
F
F
As
a
city,
we
fully
recognize
that
there
will
likely
be
some
response
from
Port
Authority
board
or
the
state
legislature,
but
we're
comfortable,
saying
you
know
what
we're
gonna
fight
for
this
and
we're
gonna.
Let
the
we're
gonna,
let
those
agencies
be
the
people
to
tell
our
city
that
they,
whether
or
not
they
care
or
not
about
the
environment.
I,
have.
M
One
more
question,
which
is
that
manufacturing
areas
and
storage
areas
was
in
the
city
limits
of
Salt
Lake
are
rather
limited
in
considering.
This
is
our
major
big
area
that
we
allow
this
kind
of
thing
to
happen,
and
do
we
see
that
the
inland
port
is
actually
going
to
limit
our
ability
to
have
economic
development
of
other
facilities
that
might
where
the
port
might
itself
might
not
be
of
any
interest
at
all?
To
someone
the.
M
F
Yeah
I
think
that
that's
I
think
that
gets
to
one
of
those
questions
of
that
we
have.
Is
you
know
what?
How
do
we
treat
something
that
doesn't
want
to
be
an
inland
port
use
that
still
wants
to
be
in
this
area?
And
you
know
how
do
we
figure
out?
How
do
we
apply
some
level
of
fairness
to
that,
but
also,
maybe
not,
if
they're
not
going
to
be
an
inland
port
use
and
not
subject
to
those
types
of
things
you
know,
how
are
we
going
to
proceed?
Is
a
city
in
that
regard.
F
B
I,
certainly
don't
think
it's
that
big
of
a
deal
to
have
trains
coming
through
the
city
like
they
are,
but
I
do
think
that
there
should
be
more
more,
what's
the
word,
a
term
or
building
or
more
construction
or
more
transportation
that
allows
for
free
movement
of
vehicles
and
pedestrians,
as
well
as
trains,
especially
if
we're
gonna
get
more
trains.
Absolutely.
F
And
I
know
that
our
transportation
division
is
looking
into
all
of
those
things
and
working
not
just
with
you
know,
because
that
is
a
global
issue
and
we
have
it
whether
we
have
an
inland
port
or
not.
We
have
that
issue
right
and
so
I
think
we're
trying
to
work
on
what
kinds
of
funds
are
available
to
help
address
that,
whether
it's
overpasses
and
underpasses,
and
things
like
that,
so
that
so
that
we're
not
seeing
that.
But.