►
From YouTube: Planning Commission Meeting - 12/12/2018
Description
Planning Commission Meeting - 12/12/2018
B
A
C
C
A
D
Okay,
so
Lance
Howell
and
studio
pba
architects
representing
the
property
owner,
are
requesting
conditional
building
and
site
design
approval
for
additional
height
to
accommodate
the
construction
of
a
256
unit
apartment
building
at
approximately
336
East
200
south,
which
you
can
see
on
the
screen
here.
The
tallest
point
of
the
proposed
building
will
be
approximately
91
feet,
one
and
a
half
inches,
which
is
measured
to
the
top
of
the
rooftop
amenity
rooms.
Above
the
primary
roofline
of
the
proposed
building
buildings
in
the
arm
are
mu.
Residential
mixed
use.
D
Zoning
district,
where
this
project
is
located,
are
permitted
up
to
75
feet
tall
outright
and
up
to
125
feet
tall
with
conditional
building
and
site
design
approval.
As
you
can
see
from
this
aerial,
the
subject
property
runs
the
length
of
the
block
and
the
proposed
building
will
front
both
200
south
and
300
South
to
smaller
Lots
at
327,
East,
300,
South
and
327
south
dakota.
D
Here
are
images
of
those
two
street
frontages
that
I
mentioned
200,
south
and
300
south.
The
main
lot
is
vacant
and
the
structures
on
the
smaller
Lots
that
you
can
kind
of
see
in
these
photos
will
be
removed
for
context
Big
Lots.
The
retailer
is
located
to
the
low
to
the
left
on
the
200
south
image
and
then
to
the
right
is
the
violin
school.
D
Again,
the
tallest
point
of
the
proposed
building
will
be
in
its
center
and
that
will
measure
91
feet,
one
and
a
half
inches,
and
this
is
measured
from
average
finished
grade
in
the
center
of
the
site
to
the
top
of
the
amenity
spaces
on
the
top
of
the
roof.
As
you
can
see
kind
of
circled
in
pink
there
I
do
want
to
clarify
that
the
staff
report
indicates
the
highest
point
will
be
98
feet.
D
D
D
The
conditional
building
and
site
design
processes
is
intended
to
help
ensure
that
newly
developed
properties
and
redevelop
properties
are
designed
to
concurring
access,
circulation
and
orientation,
while
also
encouraging
or
acknowledging
the
need
for
transit
and
automobile
access.
So,
with
this
in
mind,
staffs
encouraged
the
applicant
to
try
and
recloaking
the
parking
garage
and
trees
and
exits
from
the
front
facades
to
the
side
of
the
building.
D
However,
because
a
lot
is
relatively
narrow
and
due
to
existing
easements
that
run
along
the
different
sides
of
the
building,
this,
the
applicants
indicated
that
relocating
those
entries
on
the
front
facades
really
wasn't
feasible.
Besides
the
one
exit,
that's
located
on
the
west
side
of
off
of
300
south,
so
here's
a
rendering
of
the
300
South
or
Broadway
ground
floor
level.
Since
their
initial
submit.
D
All
the
applicants
have
worked
to
increase
pedestrian
interaction
on
both
the
street
facing
ground
floors
by
incorporating
active
uses
on
these
floors
and
introducing
more
glass,
interesting
landscape
and
public
art
pieces.
So
you
can
see
kind
of
those
public
art
pieces
on
the
building
and
in
the
park
strips
and
then
they've
also
included,
introduced
a
mural
on
the
facade
off
of
200
south,
which
you
can
kind
of
see.
They're.
D
So
staff
feel
does
feel
that
the
ground
floor
off
of
200
South
in
particular,
could
be
better
distinguished
from
the
upper
levels
of
the
building
and
is
recommending
this
specific
condition
that
architectural
detail
and
shall
be
added
on
the
200
South
facade
to
termini
or
distinguish
the
base
of
the
building
from
the
upper
storeys
and
reduce
the
sense
of
apparent
height.
So
they
could
do
at
some
kind
of
coping
or
a
freeze
ban.
Something
of
that
nature
and
staff
can
work
with
the
applicants
to
to
accomplish
that.
E
D
Never
a
condition
it's
something
that
we
suggested
the
applicants
do,
but
it
wasn't
a
specific
condition,
because
we
do
feel
that
the
one
condition
with
kind
of
defining
that
200
South
ground
floor
meet,
helps
to
meet
that
one
standard.
But
it
was
a
suggestion
and
at
this
time
it's
not
it's
not
going
to
be
pushed
back.
B
D
I
believe
it's
always
been
one
one
parcel
as
it
as
it
is
now
and
it
was
owned
by
the
United
States
I
think
it
might
might
have
been
a
post-office
parcel,
but
the
applicants
might
be
able
to
speak
to
the
previous
ownership,
but
yeah.
It's
always
been
configured
that
way
from
what
I
understand
I
know.
B
D
Yeah,
there's
no
rules
about
the
actual
depth
of
the
lot.
The
building
we
want
building
faces
to
be
broken
up
in
terms
of
architectural
detailing,
so
the
length
of
those
faces
on
the
west
and
east
size
and
and
they
are
being
broken
up
so
yeah.
It
is
there
meeting
that
in
terms
of
design
standards,
but
the
lot
itself
there's
no
regulation
for
that,
since
it
is
an
existing
lot
and.
B
B
G
So,
are
you
talking
to
Sarah
for
a
little
bit
about
a
mid-block
crossing
between
3rd,
south
and
2nd
south?
He
seems
like
this
building.
You
know.
Maybe
we
get
it
future
somewhere
else.
It
seems
like
it
would
completely
block
off
the
opportunity
for
us
to
ever
go
from
thirties
to
fourth
east
with
us,
some
sort
of
mid-block
crossing
or
maybe
block.
What
is
there
any
plans
for
the
city
to
get
char
to
make?
You
know,
go,
make
a
connection
and
that
sort
of
way
too,
or
is
that
not
a
consideration
here.
D
Yeah
you're
I
think
you're
right.
It
does
kind
of
prevent
that
from
happening
east
to
west,
but
we
don't
have
that
marked
off
as
a
specific
area
where
we
have
math
timid
block
walkway,
we
were
working
with
them
to
try
to
get
a
walkway
from
north
to
south,
but
because
the
property
is
quite
narrow
and
due
to
the
access
easements
along
the
different
sides,
it
was
hard
for
them
to
accommodate
a
big
enough
space
for
that
walkway.
But
in
the
other
direction
yeah
it's
it's
just
not
something
that
the
city
has
mapped
out.
G
G
D
H
H
Hello,
my
name
is
robert
miller,
I'm
with
studio
pba.
We
are
at
1575
gilpin
street
near
the
architect,
gilpin
street
denver
colorado.
We
are
the
architect
for
the
project,
I,
think
just
to
address
some
of
the
things
or
the
questions
that
were
raised
during
your
questioning
of
Lauren
before
I
talked
specifically
about
the
architecture.
H
We
are
concerned
because
once
again
we
are
very
narrow
a
lot
so
to
do
it
right
to
do
it
well,
so
that
it
is
safe
and
hospitable
for
for
people
to
truly
utilize.
We
require
you
know
10
feet
of
our
site
at
a
minimum
and
probably
something
closer
to
15
feet
somewhere
in
that
range.
In
order
to
create
a
safe
environment.
H
That
would
be
a
burden
completely
on
our
site
until
potentially,
maybe
other
sites
were
able
to
join
in
on
that,
and
it
really
creates
a
a
dimensional
problem
with
us
with
our
garage
because
of
the
width
of
our
site.
It
would
make
it
so
that
we
would
have
very
inefficient
or
be
unable
to
park
certain
areas
of
our
site.
Additionally,
we
have
a
private
driveway
that
we're
sharing
partial
access
with
the
Oxford
apartments.
H
So
there
were
a
number
of
different
reasons
why
it
was
very
impractical
on
the
site
for
us
to
completely
share
that
burden
of
that
north-south
connection.
I
think
if
we
were
to
develop
into
the
future,
there
is
land
along
our
side
that
I
think
once
of
once
of
a
developed,
we
would
be
interested
in
having
it.
You
know
encouraging
it
and
improving
our
edge
so
that
it
could
accommodate
that
or
join
with
that,
if
that's
something
it
does
develop
within
this
block
on
in
the
north/south
condition,
so
please
be
trained.
Okay,
so
the
so.
H
This
is
the
perspective
looking
north
from
Broadway
or
300
South
and
then
once
again,
looking
north
from
300
South
at
the
building.
We
have
a
two
storey
concrete
podium
on
this
level.
We
decide
to
embrace
the
beauty
of
the
concrete,
we're
doing
board
form
concrete
at
the
base
here,
as
well
as
providing
a
great
enhancement
to
the
public
way
at
this
location.
So
we
are
praying
in
our
signage,
a
lot
of
planting
bicycle
racks
and
then
grading
it
all
together
into
one
hard,
scape
solution.
Here
we
also
have
our
leasing
Center
directly.
H
Here
we
also
have
a
kind
of
a
co-working
office
type
environment,
going
on
on
the
on
the
second
floor,
that
comes
down
with
a
stairway
into
the
first
floor,
so
we
think
that
this
will
be
activated
and
annualized
syrup
both
the
day
in
the
evening
hours.
It's
the
main
entry
lobby
into
our
building,
so
all
visitors
will
be
coming
in
this
way.
They
can
also
come
in
off
of
200
south
as
well,
and
the
interior
design,
the
interior
and
exterior
design
really
work.
H
Well,
together,
you
can
see
some
of
the
interior
design
through
this
rendering
we
really
bring
out
a
lot
of
that
materiality
into
the
hardscape
in
in
the
public
way,
planting
materials,
etc.
They
submit
as
part
of
this
package,
and
then
you
can
see
the
the
leasing
space
environment,
tear
the
the
Co
office
working
environment,
going
on
up
here
library,
looking
down
into
that
space,
a
two-story
fireplace
coming
up
through
the
space.
So
as
you
walk
by
this
building,
it's
it's
kind
of
just
be
a
beautiful
gorgeous.
H
Then,
as
we
get
to
the
two
hundred
South
Side,
we
once
again
here
we
have
a
one-story
podium,
because
we
have
a
10-foot
changing
grade
between
the
north
side
and
the
south
side
of
this
building.
So
here
you're,
seeing
that
one-story
expression
of
that
concrete,
we
bring
that
beautiful
material
once
again
out
to
the
up
to
the
street
board
form
concrete.
So
this
this
isn't
the
cold
hard
concrete
that
you're
used
to
seeing
like
an
office
building.
This
is
going
to
have
texture.
H
It's
going
to
have
warmth
because
of
the
of
the
board
form
nature
of
the
architecture.
I'll
pause
here
for
a
moment
and
just
talk
through
one
issue,
so
Warren
I
thought
I
thought
we
have
made
this
clear
in
our
plans,
but
our
garage
doors
are
recessed
back
twenty
to
twenty-five
feet
inside
the
building.
We
do
have
the
garage
entry
on
this
side.
The
by
Court
is
here:
it's
a
private
drive
with
a
cross
access
agreement.
H
So
we
need
an
agreement
with
them
that
we
wouldn't
take
our
residential
traffic
on
to
the
by
court.
It
was
part
of
a
negotiation
with
them
because
they
had
some
rights
further
within
the
site.
That
would
have
prevented
us
from
being
able
to
do
this
building.
So
through
this
negotiation,
we
agreed
to
take
our
residential
traffic
off
of
the
by
court
and
put
it
and
have
our
garage
entry
come
in
off
of
200
south.
This
is
one
of
the
many
complicated
deals
that
have
have
had
to
happen
in
order
to
make
this
project
happen.
H
H
So
that's
one
reason
why
we
have
both
entries
into
our
garage
here,
both
the
inin
and
the
out
here,
but
once
again
we
do
recess
those
doors
far
back,
so
they
are
25
feet
within
the
building,
they're,
not
right
on
the
street
edge,
and
we
bring
that
concrete
materiality
back
into
that
space
as
well.
So
we
have
a
continuity
of
design
here.
H
So
once
again
you
know
talking
about
engagement
here,
so
we
have
a
dog
wash
here
and
then
we
bring
some
bone
benches
out
here
and
a
little
dog
sculpture
here
so
once
again
we're
connecting
that
indoor
and
that
outdoor
space
together.
So
this
is
a
place
where
the
residents
will
be
able
to
wash
their
dogs
and
then
bring
them
outside
and
go
for
a
walk
or
go
for
a
walk
and
bring
them
back
inside
at
the
dog.
H
Wash
we've
got
bicycle
repair
shop
right
here
in
a
ski
waxing
shop
right
here
and
we
bring
our
bicycle
parking
here
as
well.
So
once
again,
we've
put
a
lot
of
uses
onto
the
street
and
we
put
we've
maxed
out
the
amount
of
transparency
that
we
can
do
here.
Everything
that's
concrete
here
has
to
be
there
structurally.
We
didn't
add
any
extraneous
concrete
at
this
location
and
we
think
that
that
concrete's
going
to
just
be
a
beautiful,
interesting,
engaging
material.
H
Then
we
have
saying
we
have
our
building
entry
at
this
location.
Here
we
engrave
planters
into
here
and
then
we're
proposing
once
again
a
Muller
mural
that
will
speak
to
the
violin
school.
Be
a
musical
themed
mural
so
once
again
we're
kind
of
integrating
this
into
the
neighborhood
and
working
with
the
neighborhood
to
make
sure
that
their
project
fits
in
with
the
context.
H
So
you
can
see
some
of
these
use
of
some
of
these
interior
spaces
that
we're
going
to
be
providing
inside
the
building.
The
dog
wash
the
graphics
are
going
to
be
on
the
wall
and
the
dog
wash
also
mail
will
be
in
the
back
of
that
Lobby
as
well.
So
once
again,
you're
going
to
see
people
coming
and
coming
and
going
in
and
out
of
this
Lobby
for
this
project
and
then,
as
lauren
had
mentioned,
we
are
less
than
75
feet,
as
you
can
see
from
either
streets
right
from
300
south
or
from
200
south.
H
Those
elevations
are
less
than
the
the
75
foot
building
height
the
only
place
we
are
over.
The
75
foot
building
height
is
in
the
middle
of
the
building
in
the
middle
of
that
block.
So
it's
200
feet
inside
the
block
from
either
of
those
two
streets
walking
by
on
the
street
you're,
never
going
to
see
that
height
and
the
reason
for
that
height
specifically
is
to
provide
a
rooftop
amenity.
So
there
will
be
a
club
room
up
there.
H
There
will
be
a
well
indoor/outdoor
room,
a
spa,
a
pool
and
then
a
pool
deck
up
there
and
one
of
the
main
guiding
guidances
in
the
code
for
allowing
additional
height
in
the
zone
is
to
create
an
engaged
rooftop
deck
environment.
So
if
the
code
is
specifically
written
to
to
allow
for
this
type
of
environment
to
exist
and
for
that
to
be
a
reason
to
to
allow
us
to
go,
exceed
the
75
foot,
building
height
limitation.
H
G
Talk
me
through
the
decision
to
make
this,
like
one
building
kind
of
you
know,
and
you
know,
Street
Front
Street
font
rather
than
two
separate
buildings,
or
you
know,
or
breaking
it
up
a
little
bit
like
how.
Why
does
it?
Why
is
it
ended
up
as
a
better
project,
because
it's
one
building
rather
than
different
buildings
and
structures?
That's.
H
A
great
question,
and
the
driver
of
it
is,
is
parking
so
because
we
have
the
grade
to
enter
into
a
lower
level
parking
garage
from
the
300
south
side
and
an
upper-level
parking
garage
side
from
the
200
south
side
that
allows
this
building
to
occur.
Without
that
the
width
of
the
site
is
winds,
support
having
an
internal
ramp.
H
H
G
E
H
We
will
be
doing
recycling
in
the
trash.
That
was
the
one
use
that
was
negotiated
with
the
violin
store.
They
were
okay
with
us,
bringing
our
loading
and
our
trash
off
of
the
by
Court.
So
that's
actually
buried
all
the
way
back
into
that
kind
of
middle
portion
of
the
building
it's
internal
to
the
building,
and
then
we
have
some
garage
doors
there
that
will
bring
the
and
people
to
come,
bring
the
garage
trash
out
when
the
trash
dumpsters
there,
so
it
won't
be
seen
or
have
any
impact
upon
200
or
300
South.
H
H
G
H
G
H
But
we
are
we're
actually
less
than
one
parking
space
per
unit
you
know,
so
that
is
from
a
economic
viability
standpoint.
The
first
thing
that
will
drive
people
away
and
not
have
them
renew
what
their
lease
is.
The
inability
to
park
so
from
a
from
an
economic
standpoint
going
that
low
to
less
than
half
the
amount
of
cars
as
there
are
units
in
the
building
would
not
functionally
work
for
the
for
the
for
the
management
company.
What's.
F
Am
I
hearing
there
is
no
there's,
no
low-income
or
no
affordable
housing
and
you're.
It's
all
market
rate
that
was
crack.
Yes,
this
is
one
of
the
biggest
developments
we're
seeing
in
this
area.
That's
a
huge
building
day.
That's
surprising!
Usually
most
of
them
do
have
some,
but
that's
something
to
think
about
I
guess,
but
thank.
H
C
H
E
C
My
name
is
Mathew
Burnett
I
own,
probably
the
smallest
lot
on
this
block.
I
don't
have
huge
concerns,
and
maybe
this
is
my
new
chef
for
them,
but
number
one
is
I.
Think
having
a
garage
entrance
going
onto
300,
South
and
I
know
they
kind
of
have
to
do
this,
but
I
don't
think
the
people
who
design
that
have
spent
much
time
on
300
South.
It's
a
single
lane
each
way
there's
bike
lanes
each
way,
there's
parking!
There's
already.
C
That's
going
to
be
that
dog
wash
is
not
going
to
be
attractive
site
for
you,
so
who's
ever
developing
this
site,
I
think
they
should
spend
some
time
in
the
neighborhood
and
see
not
only
the
homeless
for
low-income
people
and
the
small
business
that
live
there
too,
as
well
as
the
high-end
residents
in
the
area.
That's
all.
Thank
you.
Thank.
I
H
First
of
all,
I'm
300
South.
We
are
sharing
access
with
the
carwash
that
is
already
established,
use
there.
So
we
are-
and
that
was
part
of
many
ways
in
which
we
were
trying
to
thread
a
needle
here
was
trying
to
create
some
shared
access.
We
weren't
able
to
make
it
work
with
the
Oxford
apartments
for
a
number
of
different
reasons,
including
the
grade
there,
but
we
were
able
to
make
it
work
for
for
the
buildings
that
front
if
they're
injured
East.
H
So
we
have
tried
to
incorporate
that
because
our
garages
actually
don't
communicate
the
two
levels,
don't
communicate.
Only
half
of
the
apartment
traffic
is
going
on
to
300
South
and
only
half
of
is
going
on
to
200,
South,
so
I
think
that
that's
going
to
help
with
those
concerns
as
well.
But
then,
additionally,
this.
H
This
is
a
dense
residential
project
in
an
area
of
the
city
that
is
looking
to
develop
towards
dense
residential
development
is
not
terribly
far
from
City
Creek
and
the
traffic
that
exits
in
an
out
of
City,
Creek,
etc,
and
all
of
that
is
part
of
living
in
a
city
and
navigating
streets
within
a
city.
So
we
only
absolutely
respect
the
bicycle
lanes.
That's
part
of
the
attraction
for
this
project
at
this
location
is
the
bicycle
lanes
and,
and
we've
enhanced
that
and
we've
embraced
that.
H
So
we
will
do
everything
in
our
part
to
make
sure
it
as
a
safe
interaction
and
then,
if
I
made
on
the
issue
of
the
dog
wash
the
the
water
and
the
facilities
actually
wash,
the
dog
will
be
inside
the
building
behind
keyfob
access,
so
the
homeless
won't
have,
or
anyone
else
won't
have
access
to
water
at
that
location
and,
furthermore,
I
think
having
a
frontage
that
had
this
led
24
hours
a
day
with
people
coming
in
and
out
will
also
help
address.
Some
of
that
concern
an
issue
as
well
and
improve
that
Street.
G
D
D
G
G
D
Can
come
and
that's
something
that
should
probably
be
amended
in
our
code
and
it's
something
that's
commonly
not
waves
but
reduced
through
this
conditional
billion
site
design
process,
because
it's
it's
a
quite
a
high
standard
and
something
that
urban
developments
like
this-
that
don't
have
very
high
open
space
requirements
and
they
can
build
to
property
lines
and
things
of
that
nature,
and
they
can
cover
a
lot
of
the
lot.
They
tend
not
to
have
a
lot
of
that
public
space
on
the
lot.
D
G
B
My
question
is
to
my
statement,
I
said
earlier
and
I
on
the
in
the
same
standards
and
I've
lost
it
of
course,
however
er.
So
this
is
in
the
site,
design,
review,
standard,
KB
and
it
says
no
new
buildings
are
contiguous.
Group
of
buildings
shall
exceed
a
combined
building
length
of
300
feet
and
then,
which
my
question
earlier
was:
does
that
not
pertain
to
interior
running
buildings
because
what's
the
length
what's
the
front
yard?
What's
the
side
yard?
B
We've
talked
about
all
the
time
and
you
comment
on
there
that
the
interior
facade
of
this
building
is
longer
than
300
feet,
but
that
it
has
been
broken
up
architectural
II
to
create
lots
of
interest
along
these
long
walls.
So
is
that
then,
making
the
argument
that
it
does
need
to
be
broken
up
and
that
your
argument
is
that
the
zigzag
in
the
middle
of
the
building
is
sufficiently
addresses
that
issue
of
being
so
long,
yeah.
D
B
D
G
H
H
D
F
B
H
As
you
can
see
here
so
there's
a
length
here
that
is
probably
somewhere
in
the
range
of
80
feet
long
then
we
have
a
12-foot
step
back
in
the
building.
Then
we
have
an
area
here
that
is
probably
somewhere
in
the
vicinity
of
200
feet
long.
Then
we
have
another
80
foot
chunk
here
that
is
stepped
back
out
again.
H
This
is
used
only
as
an
example
of
the
ways
in
which
you
know
we
haven't
just
provided
a
plank
wall
along
these
facades
that
even
at
the
lengths
of
the
330
feet,
you
know
each
leg
is
330
feet,
but
then
there's
a
barbell
each
end
and
I
think
the
death
substantially
breaks
up
the
architecture.
It's
a
beautifully.
D
J
B
G
H
There's
two
responses,
I
think
to
this,
the
first
of
which
is
whether
in
the
diagram
of
the
city,
if
this
block
Wanda
MIT
block,
whether
that
meant
block
would
want
to
be
east-west
as
opposed
to
north-south
and
I.
Think
when
you
look
at
the
geography
of
the
other
lot
lines
or
the
other
parcels
on
this,
it
does
suggest
a
more
north-south
connection,
an
east-west
connection,
and
that's
true,
you
know
throughout
Salt
Lake
City
as
the
grid
swaps
back
and
forth.
H
H
The
second
of
all
this
this
project
has
amenities,
are
shared
with
all
the
residents,
so
breaking
the
building
in
the
middle
and
creating
it
so
that
I
have
to
leave
the
building
to
go
to
a
different
building.
To
get
to
my
amenity
would
be
a
concern
and
would
create
inefficiency
for
the
building
and
for
the
residents
that
live
there.
H
Furthermore,
you
know
to
talk
about
the
issue
of
safety,
bringing
that
that
you
know
if
the
goal
is
to
get
to
a
nice,
West
mid-block
connection
and
bringing
bringing
some
amount
of
that
pedestrian
traffic
into
the
middle
of
our
project
then
creates
a
a
perception
of
a
concern
of
safety
for
those
residents,
as
I
be
going
from
one
side
to
the
other,
to
go
to
the
pool
I
wouldn't
feel
safe
in
that
environment.
Potentially
that
weighs
heavily
on
a
great
number
of
the
renters
of
the
fact
that
this
is
one
building.
H
That's
all
connected
together
that
there's
security
to
get
into
the
building,
creates
that
safety
and
creates
environment
that
will
be
more
leasable,
I.
Think
holistically.
Looking
at
this
block,
this
is
a
great
block
of
the
city.
There's
a
lot
going
on
this
block.
That's
already
there
I
think
the
violence
school
is
amazing.
I
think
the
commercial
on
300
South
is
amazing.
I
think
the
Oxford
Apartments
is
is
a
neat
old
little
building
right,
I
mean,
but
it's
it's
got
character
and
I
think
our
building
is
going
to
enhance.
H
H
H
So
do
I
think
that
there
could
possibly
some
junction
be
a
great
mid-block
crossing
here.
I
think
it
could
potentially
develop
depending
upon
the
will
of
other
people
and
other
partners
that
that
we
have
no
control
over.
Do
I
think
that
it
should
be
east-west
I.
Don't
think
the
geography
of
the
of
the
block
really
supports
the
east-west
connection,
I
think
the
existing
buildings
that
are
probably
not
going
to
go
anywhere,
I'm
400
South
for
quite
some
power
for
injury.
H
Excuse
me,
300,
East,
are
probably
not
gonna
go
anywhere
for
quite
some
time,
so
I
think
if
it
develops
it,
wants
to
develop
on
the
north-south
corridor.
I
think
it
also
occur.
The
east
side
of
our
project
and
I
think
that
we
be
willing
partners
if
the
right
plan
came
into
place
to
make
that
Street
that
may
block
connection
viable,
safe
with
eyes
on
the
eyes
on
it
and
embrace
it.
G
And
I
would
agree
that
the
going
from
north-south
may
block
will
happen
because
there's
so
much
other
vacant
lot
in
parking
lots.
Everything
else
like
to
me.
That's
not
that's.
You
know
I'm
not
concerned
about
you
guys,
not
including
that
in
your
project,
because
there's
so
many
there's
so
many
other
opportunities
that
are
available
and.
H
You
know:
I
I,
know
that
playing
the
developer
card
isn't
a
popular
card
to
play
right,
but
these
things
are
not
easily
financed.
We've
spent
a
lot
of
money.
We've
dedicated
a
lot
of
money
to
the
improvement
of
the
of
the
public
way.
Here,
we've
put
the
money
onto
the
street,
the
enhancements
that
we
are
showing
in
this
package
are
far
and
above
what
the
standards
call
for.
H
We
have
done
that,
because
that
is
where
we
think
the
public
realm
will
see
the
most
benefit
to
that
money.
Placing
this
money,
and
this
enhancement
in
the
middle
of
the
block
is
not
going
to
be
something
that,
at
this
juncture,
in
the
foreseeable
future
in
the
next
two
or
three
years
are,
is
going
to
be
an
enhancement
to
the
public
good,
where
the
money
we
have
placed
directly
impacts,
enhances
the
design
and
enhances
the
street
frontage
on
two
very
prominent
streets
here
in
Salt
Lake
City.
H
So
we
feel
like
we
have
done
our
part
to
make
this
block
a
great
block
both
with
our
building
architecture,
but
then
also
in
what
we
are
proposing
to
do
in
the
public
right-of-way
here.
This
is
not
land,
we
own,
we
are
in
enhancing
the
public
pride
away,
we
are
providing
street
benches
here.
We
are
providing
plantings,
we
are
providing
bicycle.
H
C
D
Things
of
not
that
nature,
but
the
one
thing
that
kind
of
stuck
out
to
us
was
that
just
the
facade
off
of
200
South
just
was
kind
of
kind
of
not
as
well
defined
as
the
upper
floors,
and
if
there
could
be
some
kind
of
architectural
detailing
to
really
give
a
solid
base
to
this
tall
building
and
really
really
say
that
this
is
the
ground
floor.
This
is
the
pedestrian
entry,
that's
what
we
were
going
for
with
that
standard
and
we
feel
like
we
might
be
able
to
work
with
the
applicant
to
get
there.
I
So
if
I
had
to
comment
on
that
particular
request,
I
don't
think
it
has
to
do
the
sort
of
understated
'no
subfloors
does
not
have
to
do
with
detailing
it
has
to
do
with
height.
Those
things
are
only
eight
and
a
half
feet
tall
or
a
nine
feet
from
floor.
You
know:
that's
that's
not
even
a
parking
garage
height,
so
a
ground
floor
traditionally
in
a
building,
especially
in
a
residential
building,
would
be
up
to
twelve
feet,
florida
florida
floor
and
eight
feets
just
not
going
to
cut
it.
C
B
Lauren
I'm
glad
that
Matt
brought
up
the
open
space
component,
because
I
think
it's
important
that
we
clear
this
up
for
this
project
and
going
forward
because
I
know
it's
a
concern
of
mine
and
it's
a
concern
that
I
hear
generally
from
people
about.
You
know
that
we
are
adding
a
lot
of
people
and
a
lot
of
density
into
our
city
and
that's
going
to
continue
to
tax
our
open
spaces
and
our
parks
and
and
whatnot.
So
the
intent
of
the
public
space
do
we
know.
D
Spaces
yeah
for
everybody,
and
so
since
they
are
able
to
per
the
zoning
standards,
cover
a
lot
of
that
lot.
It's
difficult
to
accommodate
public
space
on
the
site,
so
in
lieu
of
that
they
work
to
add
these
different
features:
kind
of
in
front
of
the
building,
the
benches,
the
public
art,
the
kind
of
metal
art
pieces,
the
public
mural
they
added
to
kind
of
again
in
lieu
of
that
public
space
on
this.
I
F
It's
only
available
to
residents,
how
can
it
be
called
public
space
I
actually
thought
it
was
just
open
space,
but
it
looked
here
and
it
is
public
space
I'm
corrected.
So
I
think
this
is
kind
of
contingent
on
what
they've
decided
to
develop.
They
have
a
lot
that
goes
clear
across
a
block,
so
they're
not
required
to
have
a
backyard
and
they're
wanting
an
entire
building
rather
than
two
separate
buildings
which,
if
this
was
you
know,
any
of
the
other
Lots
on
this
block
are
broken
up.
F
I
D
G
D
H
I
D
I
A
A
I
H
It
can
can
I,
speak.
Okay,
sorry,
so
I
know
that,
historically
through
projects
that
we've
taken
before
through
Salt
Lake
saying
from
this
body,
you
have
counted
the
podium
level,
courtyards
they're
sitting
on
top
of
garage
oftentimes,
elevated
above
the
street
level,
to
count
towards
this
open
space,
which
were
some
of
those
projects
that
you
brought
through
just
like
sugar,
mount
apartments
being
a
prime
example
of
that,
so
our
open
space
was
counted
by
having
the
elevated,
in
this
case
about
3
D
feet
above
the
street
level,
both
along
McClellan
along
sugar
Mont.
H
H
H
Whether
it's
at
grade
or
whether
it's
70
feet
up
in
the
air,
it
functions
in
the
same
way
for
the
residents
of
the
building
in
this
case,
because
it's
70
feet
up
in
the
air.
It
also
accomplishes
the
goal
of
activating
the
rooftops,
which
is
part
of
the
standard,
as
well
as
making
just
a
great
amenity
for
the
building.
It
will
be
more
use
than
if
it
was
buried
into
the
middle
of
our
site
at
grade
with
you
know
five
stories
of
shadows
of
falling
upon
it.
I
I
think
what
tends
to
bother
me
a
lot
about
this
project
is
the
fact
that
it
is
very
large.
Very
long,
completely
covers
the
site,
with
almost
no
relief
whatsoever
from
the
site.
Boundaries
has
no
open
space
to
speak
of
and
I,
and
certainly
nothing
that
would
actually
grow
on
the
site
like
trees
or
something
like
that,
except
at
the
very
narrow
ends
of
the
property
and
I.
G
I
I
F
Think
you've
put
it
really
well.
I
agree.
I,
think
this
to
me
kind
of
comes
down
to
just
how
the
applicant
has
decided
to
design
and
and
use
a
huge,
huge
piece
of
property.
We
see
a
lot
of
other
projects
that
get
broken
up
a
lot
differently,
I'm,
not
here,
to
prescribe
what
what
how
they
designed
but
I,
do
think
the
scale
of
this
building
is
is
what
makes
all
these
things
seem
more
important
in
this
project.
B
C
B
B
You
know
we
love
going
to
Liberty,
Park
and
I've
definitely
seen
it
get
busier
and
busier
and
busier,
as
we
add
more
and
more
people
to
our
city,
and
we
need
to
be
very
cognizant
as
we
go
forward.
As
we
add
these
large
projects
that
we're
offering
open
space
and
public
space
for
people
I'm
less
concerned
about
the
the
I'm,
getting
my
words
mixed
up,
but
the
open
space
for
the
rooftop
I
think
you
know.
If
that's
intended
to
be
space
for
the
residents,
then
I,
you
know,
I,
don't
really
care
where
it
is.
B
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
design
elements
to
this
building
that
I,
like
I,
think
if
we
are
applying
that
300
foot
maximum
for
the
depth
of
this
building
I
think
it
I.
Don't
think
that
the
12-foot
jog
in
the
building
satisfies
that
standard
to
break
up
the
300
foot
facade
and
adds
to
that
huge,
visible
mass.
That
I
think
is
problematic.
So.
A
In
the
other
comments,
I
would
just
caution
us
from
requiring
public
space
in
the
nature
of
parks
to
be
imposed
on
private
development.
That's
a
concern
of
the
city,
I
think
it's
something
the
city
needs
to
look
at
and
its
park
master
plans
and
we
don't
put
that
burden
on
the
applicants
when
they
come
before
us.
Well,.
B
A
No
I'm
just
saying
I
would
just
caution
us
from
not
imposing
burdens
that
would
should
be
placed
on
the
city
itself
as
opposed
to
private
developers.
That's
my
only
comment
on
that
and
I
would
also
say
we.
This
lot
is
challenging.
I
mean
we
can't
change
the
fact
that
it's
one
lot
I
mean
if
it
were
two
Lots
I
think
it
would
be
a
lot
easier
to
do
a
kind
of
project
that
we
all
have
in
mind
where
it's
smaller
in
scale.
A
Perhaps
there's
more
setback,
there's
a
rear
yard
setback,
so
the
mass
is
not
what
it
is.
They've
got
one
lot
so
I
just
would
say
there
are
constraints
to
this
lot.
That
I
think
you
know
I
agree
they're
asking
us
to
waive
certain
requirements,
but
there
are
also
issues
that
we
should
take
into
consideration.
I.
G
Mean
it
could
be
two
lots
or
all
right
and
I
know.
What's
they
do
I
mean
the
developer
when
we
Sugarman
with
different
issues
with
it,
but
there
is
a
intentionally
because
there's
a
walkway
that
kind
of
curves
off
and
goes
from
the
where
the
streetcar
kind
of
goes
with
intended
for
people
to
walk
through,
that
is
Don
and
developed
by
the
private
developer
and
maintained
for
the
use
of
people
getting
through
that
big
sugarhouse
block
to
the
streetcar.
We.
A
G
A
Again,
there's
nothing
in
a
city
plan
that
says
this
is
area
has
been
identified
for
an
east-west
cross
block
walkway
and
we've
got
buildings
that
are
already
there
that
have.
There
are
no
plans
to
redevelop
them.
I
think
we
just
should
not
impose
burdens
on
private
developers
when
the
reality
is
it's
not
their
obligation.
What.
A
Agreed
and
in
here
they've
discussed,
doing
north/south
and
I
think
that
makes
sense
given
how
the
lot
lines
work
and
how
the
buildings
work
and
how
the
area
will
be
redeveloped.
All
I'm
saying
is
we
be
reasonable
when
we
think,
through
those
kinds
of
burdens
that
were
imposing
on
my
private
applicants,
I
kind.
I
Public
walkway
through
that
site,
especially
well
landscape,
one
could
provide
a
great
deal
of
sort
of
interesting
public
space
for
that
property
and
the
and
while
the
applicant
has
agreed
that
this
might
be
something
to
do
in
the
future.
The
reason
they're
not
doing
it
now
is
because
they've
made
the
building
so
large
that
it
squeezes
that
side,
potential
side,
I.
G
G
I
Might
be
helpful,
I
just
think
that
that's
a
that's
a
way
of
sort
of
solving
this
problem
without
a
total.
When
we're
talking
about
making
a
three
foot
for
foot
dimensional
change,
not
you
know
tearing
a
building
down
and
I,
don't
know
what
the
parking
architect
indicated.
That
was
the
parking
garage
dimensions
which
are
I,
know
very
turkey.
They
don't
have
a
lot
of
flexibility.
B
A
C
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity,
I
I'm,
I'm
kind
of
this
is
one
of
those
cases
where
I'm
kind
of
torn
I
do
like
the
architectural
design
of
this
building,
unlike
many
others
that
I've
seen
through
this
commission
I
definitely
applaud
the
work
that
he's
done.
Then
what
was
mentioned
before
by
by
Commissioner
Brenda
and
also
the
Commissioner
Matt,
they
do
make
sense
as
well.
C
A
G
Really,
like
the
design,
I
think
the
architecture.
This
project
is
great,
I,
think
it
fits
in
the
area.
I
think
you
can.
You
could
go
higher
to
help
solve
some
of
their
issues.
I
mean
at
least
within
the
zoning
standards.
It
permits
a
higher
higher
higher
building
and
so
I
think
and
I
think
that
would
fit
that
area
which
would
solve
some
other
questions
so
but
I'll
vote.
Yes,
thank.
A
J
Okay,
sorry,
sorry
about
that
I'm
Doug
I'm,
not
gonna,
read
the
staff
report
for
you,
but
I'll
start
at
sort
of
the
30,000
foot
level
and
get
down
to
the
detail
of
why
the
recommendation
is
what
it
is:
zoning
or
plantings,
not
a
hard
science.
If
you
take
a
math
class
and
they
say
two
plus
two
is
six:
you
probably
should
get
a
new
math
teacher
or
figure
out
if
they're
still
working
in
base
ten
or
whatever,
but
planning
is
a
social
science
and
there's
no
one
right
answer.
J
No
one
way
to
get
there
to
it
and
the
reason
I
mentioned,
that
is
the
TSA
zones
or
transit
station
areas
and
they
were
developed
in
response
to
light
rail
going
in
on
North
temple
and
for
South.
Both
of
those
streets
used
to
be
very
Auto
oriented
force
south
is
still
us.
Forty
kind
of
the
unfinished
quadrant
of
I
to
fifteen,
it
still
carries
lots
of
traffic.
North
temple
was
one
of
the
last.
J
Oh
thank
you,
I'm,
not
technology,
savvy
last
sections
of
I-80
to
finish,
and
it's
just
recently
when
light
rail
was
put
in
it,
you
dot
donated
the
street.
Well,
I
guess
donate
it's
not!
The
right
word
conveyed
the
street
to
the
city
and
it's
now
a
city
street,
but
it
still
carries
a
lot
of
traffic.
So
the
concept
of
facilitating
those
streets
from
a
transition
to
hype
from
highway
orientation
to
more
pedestrian
and
transient
oriented
is
still
a
very
good
concept.
J
For
example,
some
of
the
details
around
the
eight
d
station
are
different
than
what
they
are
around
the
third
or
the
second
II
station
on
four
South.
Likewise,
the
eighth
West
station
is
a
TSA
urban
neighborhood
subcategory,
where
the
station's
to
the
west
portion
of
North
temple,
specifically
the
Cornell
1950
into
2200
West
stations
are
in,
what's
called
the
mixed-use
economic
center
zone
further
from
those
subcategories,
we
acknowledge
that
there's
a
difference
between
being
right
at
the
station
and
being
a
couple
of
blocks
away
from
the
station
and
we
divide
it
into
core
versus
transition.
J
J
J
This
is
transit,
no
drive-through
windows,
no
cars,
but
you
kind
of
you
start
massaging
in
the
nuances
and
and
is
the
hard
core
response
really
the
appropriate
one
part
of
what
went
into
thinking
of
staff
coming
up
with
this
recommendation
is:
we've
modified
TSA
zonings,
as
we
figured
out
what
has
worked
and
what
hasn't
worked.
Some
of
the
first
buildings
that
went
up
on
force
South
were
nice,
but
they
had
blank
facades
and,
after
the
fact,
we've
modified
TSA
to
prevent
back
thing
and
part
of
one
thing
that
sort
of
changed.
J
My
thinking
on
how
we
should
respond
to
this
was
an
incident
on
development
on
force
south
at
about
four
theast,
where
drive-through
windows
for
restaurants
are
not
allowed.
So
when
you
have
a
rare
commodity,
it
becomes
more
valuable
and
there's
still
a
lot
of
cars
on
force
South,
so
Starbucks
bought
an
old
Taco
Bell
just
because
it
had
a
non-conforming
drive-thru
and
we're
having
an
apartment
building
built
around
it
when
maybe
it
might
have
been
better
if
we
let
them
integrate
it
into
a
more
urban
building.
J
If
is
our
high
hardline
having
unintended
consequences
by
making
non-conforming
uses
dig
in
so
that
was
one
of
my
thought
patterns
and
also
when
you
look
at
the
master
plan
for
the
North
Temple
corridor.
It
pretty
much
acknowledges
that
this
intersection
here
at
North,
temple
and
redwood
road
is
still
pretty
Auto
oriented
it's
a
freeway
off-ramp,
it's
a
major
north-south,
auto
corridor
and
you
look
at
many
of
the
land
uses
just
in
the
TSA
mu,
EC
transitional,
there's
still
drive-through.
Restaurants
truck
stops
that
kind
of
thing.
J
Now
it
is
transitioning
to
urban
and
we're
getting
some
really
nice
apartments
on
North
temple
and
there's
some
others
going
in
on
redwood,
road
and
I
guess
I
should
back
up
at
this
point,
I
should
have
started
out.
This
petition
was
initiated
by
Lorie
Hendricks,
representing
bike,
LLC
Gatos
investments,
because
they
own
a
property
at
the
corner
of
North
temple
and
redwood
road,
and
they
had
asked
that
we
amend
the
zoning
ordinance
to
allow
drive-through
windows
for
restaurants.
J
J
There
at
least
a
couple
of
transitional
areas
on
north
temple,
RIT
that
allow
drive-through
windows
for
financial
institutions,
so
I
asked
miss
Hendricks
if
they
could
look
at
their
site
and
see
if
they
could
actually
design
something
that
would
meet
sort
of
urban
design
standards
of
having
it
all
the
drive-through
and
the
rear
or
the
not
front
yard.
Portions
and
that's
what
you
haven't
in
the
staff
report
is
an
example
of
what
they
did
of
how
they
could
make
an
urban
development
with
a
drive-through.
J
The
idea
of
being
more
like
chick-fil-a
in
sugarhouse
that
from
24
South
reads
very
urban
as
opposed
to
a
more
traditional
drive-through.
So
the
staff
recommendation
after
that
long
tedious
story
was
that
we
allow
as
a
permitted
use
restaurants
with
drive-through
windows
in
the
mixed-use
economic
center.
Transitional
zoning,
which
is
only
mapped
in
the
area
that
I
showed
you
around
redwood
road
in
North
temple
and
then
a
small
amount
west
of
215,
but
also
we
suggested
putting
into
the
Land
Use
table
some
criteria.
J
That
specifically
says
you
know:
all
of
this
activity
has
to
take
place
in
the
side
or
rear
of
the
building,
that
you
can't
have
the
drive-through
in
the
front
yard,
and
that
kind
of
thing.
So
we
were
trying
to
come
up
to
with
a
reasonable
alternative
of
accommodating
development
and
still
facilitate
a
more
move
movement
towards
urbanism.
F
A
E
She's
one
of
the
owners
of
the
company
we
have
about
40
properties
across
the
Utah
and
a
couple,
few
properties
outside
of
Utah,
and
this
is
the
first
time
we've
asked
for
anything
like
this,
and
the
reason
we're
here
asking
is
because
we
feel,
like
we've,
exhausted
everything
everything
we've
tried.
We
were
really
excited
about
the
opportunity
to
have
this
property
back.
E
A
Very
interested-
and
we
felt
like
that-
would
be
a
welcoming
nice
addition
to
the
neighborhood,
but
we
weren't
able
to
do
that
and
they
left
the
table
because
we
can't
they
insisted
on
having
a
drive
through
with
it.
Also
we've
looked
at
the
banks,
mountain
America
was
very
interested,
but
they
couldn't
make.
Our
lot
is
very
small
and
they
couldn't
make
it
fit
on
that
lot.
So,
look
if
you
have
any
other.
C
C
The
purpose
of
that
TSA
zone
is
to
promote
pedestrians
and
transit
I,
think
it
drive-throughs
counterproductive.
It
produces
more
curb
cuts
and
cars
in
and
out
across
sidewalks
doesn't
make
it
walkable
or
safe
for
pedestrians.
I,
don't
think
it
promotes
sustainability,
which
is
one
of
our
city
goals,
because
cars
are
idling.
C
You
have
to
snake
around
the
building.
Yes,
it
goes
around
behind,
but
what
it
does
is
creates
about
six
cars
on
21st
south,
and
you
know
how
freely
that
traffic
doesn't
move.
So
we've
got
six
cars
in
the
right
lane,
7:30
to
8:30
in
the
morning,
11:32
one
o'clock
at
noon
and
again
about
5:30
it.
You
know
it
doesn't
work
and
the
reason
chick-fil-a
was
permitted
was
because
the
Carl's
jr.
across
the
street
already
had
a
drive-thru
and
that
was
grandfathered
from
a
hundred
years
before
so.
C
Once
you
put
this
in
place,
you
can't
ever
stop
it.
I
think
this
is
radical,
but
I.
Think
if
the
owner
changes,
the
drive-thru
permission
should
be
an
extinct
through
the
city.
Now
that's
my
personal
one.
The
Land
Use
Committee
didn't
talk
about
this,
but
this
is
supposed
to
be
a
mixed-use
employment.
Center
people
should
be
able
to
safely
walk
to
coffee
shop.
Coffee
shops,
not
dodge
cars,
so
I'd
really
like
to
see
in
the
future.
C
A
B
J
It
varies
from
use
to
use
to
use
because
some
coffee
shops,
drive-through
coffee,
can
get
by
with
a
2-car
stacking
chick-fil-a
to
their
credit
as
a
booming
business,
and
they
could
have
30
cars,
stacking
and
and
still
have
a
line
just
because
of
who
they
are,
and
so,
when
I
I
praised
them.
I
was
talking
about
their
presentation
from
the
sidewalk
from
the
street
how
it
appears
urban
so
back
to
your
question.
J
G
J
On
the
subcategories
of
the
TSA
were
trying
to
differentiates,
the
different
personalities
have
stops,
and
this
is
the
mixed-use
employment
center
by
and
large,
because
it's
it's
the
state
office
campus,
the
Cornell
light
rail
station
accesses
the
agriculture
and
where
you
get
your
birth
certificates
and
Natural
Resources.
The
next
station
is
taxes,
and
so
it
tends
to
be
more
of
an
office
campus
than
the
special-purpose
district,
which
is
around
the
fair
park,
which
is
different
than
the
eight
West
one,
which
is
more
of
a
neighborhood
residential
orient,
because.
G
J
I've
worked
here
a
long
time
and
one
thing
I've
never
developed
as
a
ability
to
see
that
far
into
the
future.
Anybody
can
ask
for
anything,
so
it's
entirely
possible
that
somebody
will
ask,
but
to
be
honest
with
you,
if
we
we
already
have
subcategories
for
the
existing
streets
that
have
light
rail
on
them.
G
To
me,
the
key
defining
feature
thing
in
this
area
is
that
access
to
two
different
freeways-
yes
right
I
mean
that
is
that's
unique
for
cars.
Right
people
are
driving
cars
if
you've
got
access
to
different
freeways
in
those
areas
which
make
it
seem
more
appropriate
that
you'd
have
a
drive-through
area
where
that
people
would
use
while
getting
a
lot
off
the
freeway,
but
like
a
long
for
South,
it
would
seem
less
because
you
you
know,
but
yeah
anyway.
That's
what's
me,
that's
what
seems
unique
about
this
area
and.
J
G
E
E
E
So
when
we
talk
about
this
philosophy
that
it's
a
car
driven,
Street
2100
South
is
definitely
car
driven
and
especially
during
rush
hour,
cars
are
backed
out
of
that
parking
lot
on
to
21st
south,
and
so
traffic
doesn't
move,
and
so
it
creates
a
problem
and
I,
don't
necessarily
I'm,
not
in
real
life.
Seeing
this
relationship
of
well,
we
have
a
car
driven
busy
street.
This
makes
sense.
E
We
should
put
a
drive-through
there
because
in
reality,
what's
happening
is
creating
problems
for
that
traffic
to
flow
and
then
thusly,
because
I
live
on
the
north
side
of
that
Street.
It
creates
a
lot
of
problems
to
try
to
cross
it
as
a
pedestrian,
and
so
it
creates,
creates
problems
to
try
to
cross
the
street.
E
Don't
I,
don't
know
if
we're
accomplishing
a
vision
when
we're
stuck
in
a
mentality
of
like
well
we're
all
still
in
our
cars
and
I.
Don't
know
if
we're
helping
traffic
flow
by
putting
drive
throughs
on
busy
streets,
because
that's
not
what
I
see
happening.
I,
don't
see
good
things
happening
from
that.
B
It
is
more
complicated
that
said,
I
also
have
kids
and
they
are
growing
up
in
this
dirty
air,
world
and
I
know
it's
a
small
part,
but
it's
a
part.
We
all
have
to
keep
the
I
think
the
philosophy
behind
this
wasn't
necessarily
you
know
is
this:
where
cars
are
not
cars?
It's
just
it's
a
more
of
a
general
philosophy
that
we
need
to
eliminate
as
many
places
where
people
are
idling
their
cars
as
possible,
and
so
I
think
this
is
on
that
taking
a
step
backwards.
I
Am
I
actually
agree
with
the
the
reasoning
here
and
and
I
do
think
that
a
coffee
shop
or
even
a
chick-fil-a
in
this
location,
designed
somewhat
like
the
one
that
we
have
here,
would
be
a
much
better
addition
to
the
street
life
of
that
street
than
just
about
anything
else
that
we
might
be
able
to
reasonably
put
there
at
this
time.
This
is
placed
as
a
transition
area
and
I
hope.
I
That
means
that,
in
the
future,
we'll
be
tightening
up
the
requirements
for
this
area
as
it
develops
more,
but
transition
means
that
we're
not
quite
there
yet
in
terms
of
taking
it
to
the
highest
level
of
pedestrian
and
ISM.
I
must
also
point
out
that
to
be
on
the
back
of
this
site
means
you're
actually
entering
it
from
redwood
road,
which
has
22,000
cars
per
hour
on
it.
I
E
So
I
feel
like
I,
don't
know
how
you
would
accomplish
this
in
a
text
amendment
because
the
you
know
the
promotion
of
the
pedestrian
activity
is
on
north
temple
and
if
the
drive-through
is
located
entrance
and
exit
is
located
off
of
North
temple,
then
I
don't
necessarily
have
a
problem
with
that.
I
guess.
E
Can
you
accomplish
that
in
a
text
amendment
where
you
identify
the
road
that
you're
trying
to
activate
and
in
the
TSA
and
that
drive-throughs
as
long
as
they're
not
entering
and
exiting
off
of
that
road
are
permitted
because
I
have
less
heartburn
or
indigestion
or
any
bad
feeling
of
them
doing
it
off
of
redwood
road?
Because
that's
not
the
road
we're
trying
to
activate
pedestrian,
wise
and.
J
E
J
J
E
E
E
I
E
J
This
particular
circumstance
at
North,
temple
and
redwood
road,
for
example.
North
temple
has
light
rail
down
the
center.
So
if
you
had
your
access
up,
North
temple,
it's
gonna
be
right
in
right
out.
You
can't
get
across
lanes
and
what
the
double
left
turn
lanes
on
redwood
road.
You
have
it's
au,
dot,
Road,
and
so
you
have
similar
type
of
access
issues
with
this
particular
site.
Yeah.
E
E
Then
Doug
didn't
I
guess
I
was
looking
at.
It
is
okay,
so
say
this
zone
pops
up
somewhere
in
the
city
in
the
future.
It's
just
a
youth,
that's
we've
amended
the
text,
and
so
it's
permitted
and
you're
saying
that
we
would
actually
I
just
thought.
It
would
then
wouldn't
never
come
before
any
decision-making
body
again.
Well,.
J
J
But
I
think
if
you're
looking
say,
we
wanted
a
zone
Foothill
Boulevard
at
13,
South
TSA
in
part
of
your
deliberation.
She
would
go.
Are
all
these
things
appropriate
for
that
location?
And
if
they're
not,
you
could
make
the
appropriate
changes
that
at
that
time,
because
you
have
to
make
a
conscious
decision
to
expand
this
zone
anywhere
else?
Is.
J
Thanks
for
asking
that,
because
originally
I
was
going
to
go
down
the
conditional
route
because
it
would
give
the
Planning
Commission
a
review
of
anything
that
came
in
but
and
my
thought
process
there
was
a
conditional
use,
is
really
a
permitted
use
by
state
law.
And
unless
there
are
things
that
can't
be
mitigated
and
the
argument
for
having
it
as
a
conditional
use
is
that
you
would
get
to
see
it
and.
G
J
E
E
In
this
particular
instance,
if
the
entrance
and
exit
is
off
of
redwood
road
I
am
much
more
inclined
to
say
like
that's
fine,
then
it
being
on
North
temple
itself.
That's
my
personal
take
on
this
as
I.
Try
to
balance
all
of
these
different
values
and
visions
and
potential
things
that
where
this
zone
could
pop
up
somewhere
in
the
few,
so
that's
my
I
think
that's
my
position.
I.
F
E
F
E
That
I'll,
be
there
forever
either
I'm
just
challenging
your
this.
This
mentality
of
well
it'll
always
be
there
or
this
will
never
change
or
we
have
drive-throughs
there,
but
that
doesn't
mean
they're
gonna,
be
there
forever.
If
there's
anything,
I've
learned
in
the
twenty
years,
I've
lived
in
sugarhouse
was
this
idea?
That's
something
that's
there
would
be
there
forever,
because
it,
the
changes,
have
been
immense.
Madam.
G
Sure
I
like
to
make
a
motion:
please
do
based
on
the
information
the
staff
report,
the
information
presented
in
the
input
received
in
the
public
hearing
or
the
Planning
Commission
for
positive
recreations.
It
accounts
regarding
PLN
PCM,
2018,
zero,
zero,
five,
seven
five
with
the
following
modifications
that
they
change
we
listed
as
conditional
instead
of
permitted
Oh.
Second.
I
B
F
A
F
A
G
J
Thanks:
okay,
another
text
amendment
same
kind
of
philosophical
turmoil.
On
my
part,
the
petition
is
to
allow
self
storage
units
in
the
d1
zone
and
I'll
get
the
the
the
the
flow
right.
This
time
the
petitioner
was
Bruce
Bingham
of
Hamilton
partners
who
owned
324,
South
State,
which
is
the
old,
our
Beck's
building.
That's
what
it'll
always
be
known
to
me,
but
it's
been
office
billing
for
20-something
years
now.
Hamilton
also
owns
several
other
high-rises
in
the
downtown.
The
genesis
of
their
request
is
it's.
A
former
department
store
very
deep
floor
plates.
J
The
back
offices
are
far
from
street
frontage
with
windows
and
stuff,
and
it
has
a
basement
the
basement
used
to
have
a
health
club
in
it.
The
health
club
has
since
moved
over
here
across
the
street,
and
so
it
sat
empty
for
a
while,
and
so
they
requested
that
we
amend
the
d1
ordinance
to
allow
self
storage
and
in
their
request
they
talked
about.
They
were
just
they're
just
concerned
about
the
basement.
Taking
up
that
space
and
allows
storage.
Now
you
can
already
do
on-site
storage.
J
So
if
you
had
a
office
been
the
building
and
stored
it
in
the
basement,
that's
on
site.
What
they're
asking
for
is
to
mark
it
as
sort
of
retail
storage,
it's
kind
of
difference
between
on-site
parking
and
a
commercial
parking
lot.
Where
are
you
renting
it
out?
The
first
knee-jerk
response
is.
This
is
downtown
it's
supposed
to
be
active
and
busy
and
high
density-
and
you
know,
storage
units.
Don't
really
add
to
that.
J
And
but
in
sort
of
bigger
terms
offices
they
grow,
they
need
storage
off-site
because
they
can't
hold
everything.
People
will
downsize
their
homes
when
they
move
to
a
high-rise,
condo,
downtown
and,
and
they
went
from
6000
square
feet
to
1500
square
feet
and
they
still
want
to
have
access
to
their
Christmas
ornaments.
So
they
so.
There
has
developed
a
market
for
storage
units
in
the
downtown
area.
J
There
is
a
really
large
exclusive
self
storage
complex
at
fifth
west
and
the
first
south
for
south
yeah
four,
so
that
one
is
in
the
GMU
zoning
district
and
it
really
doesn't
allow
self
storage.
But
it
was
a
warehouse
to
begin
with,
so
they
maintained
it's
non-conforming
status
and
went
from
a
warehouse
to
self
storage
and
their
market
has
been
people
that
live
in
the
apartments
and
condos
in
Gateway
and
West.
Downtown.
There's
also
been
in
the
last
ten
years.
J
A
big
self
storage
warehouse
at
fifth
west
and
six
south
which
again
covers
that
market
and
so
part
of
the
question
is:
is
it
better
to
have
big
storage
warehouses
around
downtown
or
maybe
integrate
smaller
things
into
other
buildings
downtown?
And
so
we
went
back
to
their
original
request
and
it
was
really
just
to
convert
basements
to
self
storage.
Their
request
was
that
80%
of
it
had
to
be
below
ground.
J
The
final
recommendation
from
staff
was,
the
storage
is
underground
and
the
things
you
can
have
above
ground
as
you're
leasing
and
sales
office
and
that
kind
of
stuff,
but
that's
how
I
my
recommendation
differed
from
their
requests,
but
ultimately
arrived
at.
That
decision
was
most
basements
in
the
downtown,
are
used
for
parking
or
storage
or
other
uses
anyhow
and
allowing
them
to
be
used
as
self
storage
units
was
not
going
to
impact
the
urban
design.
J
At
the
first
floor,
the
upper
levels
I
looked
at
some
other
cities
and
I
was
a
bit
surprised
that
Denver
allows
self
storage
in
their
downtown
and
they
have
some
design
criteria.
There.
Dyke
criteria
is
basically
the
units
can't
be
accessed
from
the
street,
and
most
of
these
self
storage
places
now
put
their
hallways
on
the
outside.
So
you
can
see
through
the
windows
and
see
people
in
the
building,
but
they
do
that
because
they
don't
want
the
storage
units
next
to
the
windows.
J
By
just
restricting
it
to
below
ground,
we
didn't
get
into
the
any
of
these
urban
design
issues
and
it
seemed
like
a
legitimate
use
for
otherwise
dead
spaces
and
whereas
Salt
Lake,
City's
blocks
or
660
feet,
we
get
lots
of
buildings
that
have
deep
floor
plates.
It's
not
like
Portland
we're
200
foot
blocks,
and
so
everything
is
sort
of
on
a
street
frontage.
So
you
get
places
like
the
back
of
324,
South
State,
that's
way,
far
away
from
the
street,
and
it's
not
accessing
so
again,
I'm
rambling.
E
J
Try
to
be
really
strongly
compatible
with
building
and
fire
codes,
but
the
zoning
code
kind
of
regulates
land
use,
and
so
when
they
went
in
to
take
out
a
building
permit
to
convert,
in
this
case,
an
old
health
club
to
storage
units.
The
fire
codes
going
to
step
in
and
say
you
have
to
have
this
kind
of
sprinklers
and
okay.
J
Would
kick
in
at
the
building
permit
level,
but
you
bring
up
a
good
management
issue.
You
don't
want
somebody
storing
their
LP
gas
tanks
in
the
basement
of
your
building,
but
that
really
becomes
you
know
somebody
an
attorney's
office
in
the
building
can
do
something
bad
now:
I'm,
not
bad-mouthing
attorneys
for
any
office,
but
that
becomes
a
management
of
your
storage
where
they're
going
to
have
to
be
strict
about
what
they
can
and
can't
have
in
there
how
they
manage
it.
I
assume.
J
Yes,
it's
below
grade,
but
we'll
allow
it
to
poke
out
to
like
three
feet.
So
you'll
see
different
apartments
around
town,
where
the
first
level
is
like
three
or
four
feet
above
the
ground,
and
they
they
raised
them
in
part
a
lot
of
times
when
there's
parking
below
so
they
can
have
venting
for
the
parking.
So
they
left
the
building
slightly
for
the
first
level.
So
it
we
count
the
first
level
once
it
starts
getting
above
three
and
a
half
four
feet.
A
Madam
chair,
just
a
point
of
information
basement
as
defined
in
the
zoning
code,
is
a
story
where,
in
each
exterior
wall
is
50%
or
more
below
grade
for
purposes
of
establishing
building
height
a
basement
shall
not
count
toward
the
maximum
number
of
storeys
allowed,
and
the
exposed
portion
of
the
basement
wall
shall
not
exceed
5
feet.
So.
C
E
C
As
many
of
the
streets
in
Salt
Lake
City,
we
have
a
mid
block
street
in
the
middle
of
this
large
block
exchange
place.
It
comes
off
of
400
South,
then
turns
east
and
hits
State
Street.
It's
only
a
half
block
one
way
and
a
quarter
of
a
block,
the
other,
our
parking
garage
for
324,
South,
State,
Street
fronts
on
Exchange
Place.
Next,
to
that
parking
garage
and
between
that
and
the
adjacent
building
is
a
long
ramp
that
leads
down
to
our
basement.
So
we
don't
have
to
access.
C
We
don't
have
to
park
any
trucks
on
streets
for
unloading
or
anything
like
that.
They
would
be
positioned
in
this
ramp
out
of
view
of
everything
really,
and
we
think
that
it
was
one
of
the
keys
that
seemed
to
make
this
work
better
than
a
lot
of
other
situations,
because
we
had
that
kind
of
an
access
facility
yeah.
That
does
seem
very
ideal.
A
C
C
Rather
than
make
this
for
all
just
new
construction.
We
didn't
want
it
to
face
the
street,
but
it
could
be
in
the
back
and
we
didn't
care
that
it
was
only
in
the
basement.
It
could
be.
You
know
a
long
exchange
place,
perhaps
in
the
back
on
the
third
floor
as
an
example,
so
we
think
storage
needs
to
be
everywhere.
We
were
concerned
about
the
SRO
zones.
C
A
E
J
And
in
fact,
a
lot,
for
example,
99
West
condos
there
on
South
temple
in
West
temple.
They
have
the
big
tower,
but
down
buried
in
the
parking
lot.
They
have
storage
for
individual
units,
the
difference
that's
on
site,
it's
it's
part
of
the
development,
so
this
petition
is
really
for
somebody
to
create
a
commercial
storage
complex
to
rent
to
the
general
public,
as
opposed
to
being
exclusive
to
those
residents.
Thanks.
F
So
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
I
think
this
is
a
great
idea.
It's
a
appropriate
use
of
a
bunch
of
basements
that
probably
don't
get
used
for
much
or
what
more.
This
is
an
alternate
use
for
those
basements
I.
Think
it's
a
great
idea:
I,
don't
think
it's
gonna
I,
don't
think
anybody's
gonna,
even
notice
the
change
in
our
living
environment
other
than
just
having
more
storage.
So
this
is
regarding
PLN
PCM
20
18000
645,
based
on
the
information
in
the
staff
report.
F
A
A
J
C
K
So
I'm
here
to
brief
you
on
the
changes
we're
working
on
for
the
sugarhouse
business
district
zoning
just
to
get
your
initial
feedback
on
what
we're
looking
at
on
some
of
the
potential
changes
that
were
considering
so
just
for
context.
The
sugarhouse
business
district
zone
is
generally
from
21st
south
to
IAT,
and
you
can
see
that
on
this
map
and
from
about
ninth
east
up
to
1,300
East,
but
it
is
split
into
two
sub
zones.
K
The
sugarhouse
business
district
one
zone
allows
development
up
to
a
hundred
and
five
feet
in
height
and
that's
the
properties
in
yellow
and
the
sugarhouse
business
district.
Two
zone
allows
for
development
up
to
sixty
feet
in
height,
so
it's
the
lower
of
the
two
zones
so
in
the
sugarhouse
business
district
zone.
K
There's
also
two
routes
for
development,
permitting,
if
you're
a
small
scale,
development
under
twenty
thousand
square
feet
in
size
and
under
thirty
feet
in
height
in
the
sugarhouse
business
district
to
zone
or
under
fifty
feet
in
height
in
the
sugarhouse
business
district
one
zone,
you
just
go
straight
to
permits
for
a
development
proposal.
You
do
have
to
comply
with
basic
basic
zoning
requirements
and
basic
design
standards
and
design
standards
could
deal
with
the
percentage
of
glass
on
a
ground
floor.
The
materials
on
the
front
facade
those
types
of
things,
but
generally
measure
measurable,
objective
standards.
K
So
after
you
meet
those
on
Planning
Commission
approval,
then
you
finally
can
go
to
building
permits.
So
the
issue
in
sugarhouse
is
that
small-scale
developments
don't
really
have
a
lot
of
design
standards
that
they
need
to
comply
with.
In
fact,
there's
only
really
three
or
four
design
standards
that
they
currently
need
to
comply
with
when
we
actually
have
a
selection
of
ten
or
twelve
that
could
be
applied
to
development
in
this
zone.
K
So
this
is
actually
an
extract
from
the
design
standards
chapter
that
we
have
a
few
years
ago.
We
consolidated
our
design
standards
from
various
different
zones
into
one
section
of
the
code
to
kind
of
standardize
the
language
and
make
it
easier
to
implement
I'll,
make
sure
they're
being
consistent
about
how
we're
applying
these
standards.
So
you
can
quickly
see
the
stars
and
underlines
indicate
new
standards
that
we're
proposing
to
be
applicable
in
the
sugarhouse
zone.
I
can
go
into
them
in
the
next
slide,
so
the
first
one
is
ground
floor.
K
Active
uses
we're
proposing
that
80%
of
ground
floors
be
occupied
by
a
ground
by
an
active
use.
Besides
parking
and
also
applying
a
25
foot
minimum
depth
for
those
grounds
base
uses
in
the
sugarhouse
zone,
you
do
have
to
actually
have
specific
uses.
You
could
be
residential
and
there's
a
few
commercial
ones
like
art,
galleries,
retail
restaurants,
but
there's
no
actual
dimensional
standards
for
how
much
of
the
facade
actually
has
to
occupy
and
no
dimensional
standard
for
the
depth
of
the
space.
K
So
we're
proposing
minimum
standards
for
that
we
are
considering
a
commercial
requirement
and
on
top
of
that,
for
developments
on
Highland,
Drive
and
21st
south,
mostly
because,
generally
those
have
been
sugar
houses,
commercial
corridors,
we
do
have
a
number
of
commercial
businesses
and
they
may
be
being
pushed
out
by
our
residential
development.
That's
happening
right
now
or
in
the
future.
So
that's
one
consideration
when
we're
looking
at
the
other
standard,
we're
looking
at
is
minimum
entrance.
Spacing
the
sugarhouse
business
district
guideline
handbook
actually
calls
for
entry
spacing
of
30
feet.
K
So
an
entry
every
30
feet.
We
do
kind
of
recognize.
That's
a
little
tight
in
our
other
zones.
We've
had
numbers
more
like
40
or
50,
so
the
30
may
be
a
little
too
tight
for
some
areas
in
sugarhouse.
So
we're
consider
open
to
looking
at
that
number.
Some
more
we're.
Also
looking
at
maximum
building
lengths,
300
feet
length
maximum
for
buildings
and
you'd
have
to
then
put
a
pedestrian
corridor
or
a
break
of
20
feet
and
five
feet.
Minimum
of
it
would
have
to
be
a
pedestrian
walkway.
K
K
A
lot
of
different
things,
so,
in
addition
to
the
design
standards,
we're
also
looking
at
a
few
zoning
modifications
as
well.
One
of
those
is
sidewalk
wits.
The
guidelines
actually
specifically
call
for
8-foot
sidewalk
wits
and
higher
intensity
areas
of
sugarhouse
and
six
feet
in
the
slightly
lower
intensity
areas
of
sugarhouse.
So
we're
proposing
a
standard.
Eight
foot
in
our
high-intensity
sugarhouse
sound
six
feet
in
the
lower
one,
also
proposing
a
standard
for
street
lighting.
K
K
Currently,
it's
not
clear
whether
you
can
actually
pave
your
park
strip,
but
in
some
areas
of
sugarhouse,
the
sugarhouse
circulation
and
amenities
plan
actually
calls
for
more
plaza
areas
rather
than
grass
or
grass
park
strips.
So
this
would
be
an
allowance
as
long
as
you
actually
met
the
circulation
guidance
in
the
plan
and
that
would
have
to
be
reviewed
by
the
Planning
Director
to
get
special
approval
so
would
paving.
G
K
Another
just
clarification
is
that
we
do
have
some
large
paragraphs
in
the
sugarhouse
code,
and
so,
while
we're
making
changes,
we
look
at
trying
to
make
those
regulations
more
clear
and
there's
a
confusing
thing
about
height
limits
and
we're
looking
at
changing
that
into
a
table.
So
it's
easier
to
read.
K
So,
on
top
of
those
standards,
there
are
some
four
different
existing
design
standards
that
apply
in
sugarhouse.
That's
the
forty
percent
minimum
glass
requirement
the
upper
floor
step
backs
that
we
see
for
buildings
in
sugarhouse
a
15
feet,
lighting
limits
regarding
the
direction
lights
can
be
pointed
and
also
maximum
built
blank
wall
links
of
15
feet.
So
we
only
have
a
few
design
standards
currently
for
small
developments
in
sugarhouse,
and
this
would
really
look
at
beefing
that
up
a
little
bit
just
to
mention.
K
We
have
worked
with
the
sugarhouse
community
councils,
Land
Use
Committee
a
few
times
and
discuss
this
proposal.
They
did
have
some
concerns
with
our
original
proposal
for
the
entryway
spacing
we
were
proposing
looking
at
more
of
a
50
feet,
they
were
concerned
that
was
too
wide.
So
right
now
we're
back
to
the
30
feet
currently
and
with
that
I'm
happy
to
take
any
questions
or
suggestions
or
discuss
I.
K
K
In
some
of
our
other
zones,
we've
set
that
at
200
feet
the
tsa
zone
has
been
200
feet
and
I
think
our
d2
proposals
200
feet.
The
300
feet
does
line
up
with
exactly
midway
through
some
of
our
larger
blocks,
which
was
like
600
feet
ish,
so
it
is
660.
So
the
mid
block
walkways
kind
of
would
flow
at
300
feet
generally.
I.
Think
that's
why
we
looked
at
300
and
additionally,
in
the
current
conditional
building
in
site
design.
That
is
a
number.
K
So
we
use
that
for
guidance,
but
we're
open
to
looking
at
its
smaller
numbers.
The
reason
for
that
with
limitation
and
sugarhouse
would
be
to
so
that
we
get
some
of
the
pedestrian
circulation.
So
we
get
breaks
in
the
buildings
and
some
pedestrian
walkways
and
you've
seen
that,
with
a
few
large
larger
developments
that
have
come
into
sugarhouse
they've
broken
up
the
building
when
it's
been
longer
than
300
feet
for
little
walkways,
yeah.
B
And
I
really
appreciate
that
you
have
the
kWe
component
in
there.
I
just
think
that
the
the
mass
of
a
300
foot
building
the
footprint
of
a
300
foot
building
is
very
large,
and
you
know
back
to
our
discussion
forever
ago
about.
You
know
that
there
are
architectural
ways
to
make
a
300
foot
building,
not
look
like
a
300
foot
building
and
make
it
look
like
two
completely
distinct
buildings,
and
if
that's,
if
that's
something
we
can
write
into
it,
I'm
absolutely
fine
with
that
I
just.
K
B
B
K
B
The
Dutch
building
was
it
a
Dutch
building
yeah,
it's
like.
Apparently
it's
a
famous
Dutch
building.
We
looked
at
it,
I,
don't
remember
it
was
called,
but
it
was,
but
it
was.
It
was
a
building.
I,
don't
know
how
long
it
was
really
long
and
it
was
one
building.
It
sits.
We
see
the
same
thing
at
City.
Creek
I
mean
they
did
it
in
City
Creek
that
a
lot
of
those
are
massive
buildings,
but
they.
G
B
I
B
A
B
B
B
A
B
K
If
a
building
did
cuff
so,
for
example,
if
we
set
it
to
200
feet
and
a
building
wanted
to
go
beyond
that,
they
could
still
go
through
our
condition:
a
building
in
site
design
process
to
get
a
modification
and
would
be
just
encouraging
them
to
put
a
walkway
through
if
at
200
feet,
if
they're
asking
for
a
modification,
but
they
could
through
that
process,
look
at
alternative
ways.
Lets
you
break
up
the
building.
The.
G
Walkway
is
one
solution,
though
right
I
mean
I.
Think
if
I
don't
think
it
needs
to
have
a
walkway
every
200
feet
right.
One
watt,
one
walkway
and
300
and
feet
is
fine,
but
just
something.
So
it's
not
you
don't
have
a
single
facade
that
is
equivalent
to
300
feet
because
I
mean
there's
sugar
mom.
When
you
go
walk
it
it
feels
long
and
that
sidewalk
is
the
narrow
like
I,
like
that's
one.
My
I
always
remember
that
project
it.
Just
it
feels
long.
G
It
feels
a
narrow,
so
I'm
with
Weston
like
there's,
always
shorten
it.
It
doesn't
mean
that
as
to
be
a
walkway
every
300
feet,
you
know,
maybe
maybe
they,
if
there's
a
way
they
can
get
something
if
they're
putting
a
walkway
in
so
there's
an
incentive
to
it.
Maybe
we
got
our
250th,
they
get
it.
You
know
to
put
a
walkway
in,
but
otherwise
you
know
it's
shorter
I
think
200
feet
seems
better.
In
my
opinion,.
I
E
K
E
Don't
know
how
you
balance
this
so
in
some
way,
what
I
hear
a
lot
of
Integris
and
in
various
other
places
are
these
smaller
businesses
and
communities
are
very
interested
in
trying
to
promote
local
and
they
need
smaller
spaces,
not
bigger
ones.
So
if
we
did
every
30
feet,
that
would
be
promoting
some
more
small
spaces
that
are
conducive
for
local
businesses
to
inhabit.
E
But
if
you
had
anyone
every
50
feet
so
I
don't
know,
there's
a
balance
in
there
somewhere,
because
I
remember
reading
that
rationale
that
you
mentioned
you
know.
Currently
we
don't.
We
have
a
very
little
vacancy
retail
in
sugarhouse,
so
I
don't
know
if
there's
a
balance
for
kind
of
allowing
the
promotion
of
some
smaller
spaces
that
are
conducive
to
those
retail,
those
local
ones
that
need
it,
but
also
trying
to
circumvent
the
possibility
of
locked
doors.
Sure.
E
E
E
A
E
K
E
K
E
Even
if
a
pattern,
even
especially
if
it's
gonna
be
part
of
your
8
foot,
sidewalk
yeah
still
have
some
visual
break
up,
and
then
this
last
one
I
literally
I,
don't
know
what
is
wrong
with
my
brain,
but
I've
read
this
so
many
times
and
I'm,
not
quite
sure,
I
get
it
and
it's
on
the
minimum
glass
requirements.
Okay,
so
I'm
sure
when
you
explain
it,
I'll
be
like
oh.
That
was
so
dumb
of
me
to
not
understand
this,
but
so
we
have
40%
ground
floor,
facade
between
3
and
8
foot
height
levels.
E
And
I
was
because
this
is
a
been
a
big
issue
for
Austen
sugarhouse,
but
if
the
40%
is
allowed
between
three
to
eight
feet,
they
could
technically
do
the
40%
at
like
7
to
8
feet
along
this
big
long
building
and
then,
which
is
what
Walgreens
did
ok,
so
that
40%
meant
nothing
in
terms
of
pedestrian
activation
in
terms
of
scene
in
anything
because
it's
a
brick
wall.
Unless
you're,
you
know
nine.
J
E
K
E
Like
the
standard,
oh,
they
go
well.
If
we
don't,
if
we
don't
communicate
that,
no
the
reason
we
want
this
is
so
that
people
can
see
and
people
can
deactivate.
It
then
they'll
do
that.
Okay,
that's
that's
it
thanks!
Daniel
I
think
this
was
great
I'm,
really
glad
you're
doing
this
and
I
appreciate
that
report.
I.
F
Think
so
you,
your
report,
says
that
this
is
focused
on
small
or
small
scale:
development
in
sugarhouse
and
300-foot
wall
and
a
20,000
square-foot
building
seems
in
a
50
or
30.
Foots
building
seems
huge
to
me
still
so
I
think
anything
you
can
do
to
you
know,
add
as
many
entrances
and
make
things
as
tight
as
possible.
I
mean
it
seems,
like
you
could
just
put
a
bunch
of
toys-r-us
buildings
in
in
this
area
and
and
that
would
meet
the
standards
that
you're
proposing.
F
J
B
K
Yeah
we
went
back
and
forth
on
this
one.
Originally
we
were
just
doing
the
design
standards.
Chapter
I
think.
Ultimately,
we
ended
up
with
25.
Feet
was
kind
of
a
compromise
where
maybe
you
wouldn't
necessarily
get
a
big
restaurant
space
with
back,
but
you
might
get
some
of
the
smaller
restaurant
spaces,
so
it
was
kind
of
a
balance
toward
requiring
super
cheap.
No.
B
K
K
B
I
B
It's
deep
enough
that
a
small
like
I,
guess
kind
of
to
the
point
of
the
local
shops
like
it's
big
enough,
that
a
local
shop
could
thrive
there
and
a
25-foot
deep
spot,
no
I
mean
okay,
well
survive
and
then
the
active
use.
Does
it
spell
out
exactly
what
like?
Can
it
be
the
bike
lockers
for
the
apartment
building?
Can
it
be
the
office
for
the
the
leasing
office?
Can
it
be
the
gym
for
the
for
the
building
or
can
it
does
it
have
to
be
public?
It.
B
B
E
B
B
B
J
E
K
And
it
went
through
a
public
process,
that's
the
other
thing
that
we're
not
eliminating
the
public
process.
The
design
review
process
and
Molly
actually
took
the
a
new
design
review
process
to
the
Planning
Commission
a
few
months
or
maybe
a
year
ago.
At
this
point
so
built
those
large
buildings
would
still
have
to
go.
There's
this
more
subjective
review
process
and
they
could
look
at
breaking
up
the
building
facade
for
those
long
lengths
of
buildings.
So.
K
K
K
Think
everybody
has
different
backgrounds
from
planning
school,
but
we
do
have
an
urban
designer
on
staff.
That
is
generally,
we
consult
with
for
any
design
review
project
to
get
their
input
and
we
do
have
managers
on
staff
that
actually
have
urban
design
backgrounds
as
well
to
get
their
input.
So
we,
when
we
get
a
project,
we
do
look
at
it
collaboratively
and
have
the
entire
staff
look
at
it
and
including
consulting
one-on-one
with
some
of
our
more
experienced
urban
design
professionals.
I
K
Smaller
developments
in
sugarhouse
might
not
necessarily
meet
the
master
plan.
Ultimately,
when
they're
built,
because
we'd
really
don't
have
any
standards
for
these
developments,
they
could
go
in
and
they
wouldn't
reflect
what
what
we
have
in
our
master
plan
and
what
we
want
to
see
in
sugarhouse
and
we
generally
haven't
gotten
a
lot
of
small
development.
But
we
do
want
to
get
a
little
ahead
of
it.
Making
sure
that
if
we
do
get
more
small
developments
and
our
house
that
we're
getting
what
we'd
like
to
see,
yeah.
E
C
K
B
Is
there
anything
that
can
be
done
through
this
process
that
could
help
preserve
those,
at
least
like
the
pattern
that
they've
developed?
You
know
that
we
talked
about
this
a
little
bit
when
we
did
the
when
we
talked
about
the
Dixon
Medical
that
there's
no
longer
the
Dixon
Medical,
which
was
just
south
of
the
view,
and
you
know
that
they've
got
that
sort
of
zig-zag
pattern
of
little
shops.
B
You
know
I,
don't
I,
I,
don't
even
know
if
there's
something
that
would
be
in
our
purview
at
all
and
I'm
just
taking
this
opportunity,
because
we're
talking
about
design
and
sugarhouse
to
say
that
there's
not
a
lot
of
elements
left
of
old
sugar
house
and
we
hear
all
the
time
from
the
community
that
they're
sad
that
it's
gone
and
development
is
going
to
happen
and
I
just
don't
know.
If
there's
anything
we
can
do
through
our
process
here
that
can
help
encourage
the
preservation.
B
K
So
there's
different
ways:
it
depends
what
you're
trying
to
preserve
I'm.
If
it's
just
simply
the
pattern,
we
could,
that
kind
of
goes
to
standards
like
the
entryway
spacing
when
it
comes
to
pattern.
Often
that's
something
we
look
at
with
historic
preservation,
kind
of
standards.
We
were
looking
at
the
solid
void
ratios
on
facades,
as
we
did
look
a
little
bit
or
have
at
preserving
facades.
B
E
That
thing
is
really
what
kills
that
is
all
of
that
Old
Town,
that
you've
described
is
zoned
business
district
one
and
it's
the
only
parts
that
our
business
district,
one
north
of
21st,
all
the
other
north
of
21st
is
business
district
and
there
were
political
reasons
for
that.
But
those
are
the
ones
that
would
be
subject
to
non
quaintness
as
it
were,
so
I
think
it
would
take.
Looking
at
the
rezoning.
Those
I
don't
know
that
there's
design
guidelines
if
those
got
redeveloped
that
would
really
help.
I
K
K
I,
don't
know
that
sugarhouse
is,
is
there
quite
yet
maybe
some
central
areas?
One
thing
that
did
come
up
when
we
talked
with
the
land
use
committee
is
that
there
may
be
areas
where
sidewalks
should
be
much
larger
in
sugarhouse,
and
we
do
have
a
study
going
on
with
the
Transportation
Department.
It's
actually
looking
at
our
street
configurations
and
we're
wide
sidewalks
would
be
more
appropriate,
but
we
don't
have
specific
guidance
right
now
to
say
we're
in
sugarhouse.
It
would
be
best
to
have
a
ten
feet,
so
we
wouldn't
kind
of
a
simple
path
and.
K
K
If
there
were,
this
would
essentially
be
a
district-wide
rule,
but
we
couldn't
force
development
force.
Existing
buildings
to
just
suddenly
upgrade
their
sidewalks
to
eight
feet
and
because
improvements
are
done
incrementally
with
every
building
permit,
we
get
we
get
what
what
we're
asking
for
at
the
time.
So
we
may
get
little
part
parts
where
there's
an
eight
foot
sidewalk
and
then
it
goes
back
down
to
the
five
foot
sidewalk,
but
until
there's
potentially
funds
to
do
expanded
sidewalks
throughout
sugarhouse.
That's.
I
K
I
K
I
That's
you
know,
but
what
I'm
saying
is
that,
instead
of
complying
with
that,
if
they
take
that
as
their
sort
of
okay
eight
feet,
you
know
when
really
you
you're,
saying
I
would
say
in
front
of
these
larger
buildings,
especially
once
they
take
up
a
significant
amount
of
the
space.
There
should
be
much
wider
sidewalks.
So
you
know
when
you
say
eight
feet,
you're
kind
of
setting
a
limit
versus
you
know
being
more
expansive
and.
K
E
K
K
J
I
J
D
Right
so
tonight
we're
going
to
be
going
over
potential
or
text
amendments
that
you'll
be
seeing
again
in
the
future
and
we're
calling
them
updates
to
our
RMF
30,
low
density,
multi-family
residential
zones
and
there's
quite
a
bit
of
information
to
go
over
so
I'll
try
to
kind
of
go
through
quickly,
but
please
feel
free
to
stop
me.
If
you
have
questions,
we
really
do
want
to
get
your
initial
feedback
before
taking
this
out
to
the
public
for
comment
and
then
eventually
refining
the
standards
and
bringing
them
back
to
you
for
a
public
hearing.
D
So
again,
stop
me
whenever
with
questions
or
comments.
So
as
you
all
are
aware,
facilitating
new
housing
in
our
city
is
a
top
priority
of
our
administration
per
the
current
five-year
housing
plan.
A
major
goal
is
to
reach
a
point
where
all
residents
in
Salt
Lake,
City,
current
and
prospective
regardless
of
race,
age,
economic
status
or
physical
ability
can
find
a
place
to
call
home.
So
this
goal
is
not
only
emphasizing
emphasizes
creating
more
housing
but
creating
different
types
of
housing
for
different
people
in
different
stages
of
their
lives.
D
So,
in
addition
to
doing
things
like
allowing
different
types
of
housing,
for
example
as
a
single
resident
occupancies,
which
you
all
recently
reviewed,
the
housing
plan
specifically
calls
for
the
removal
of
restrictive
zoning
barriers
to
creating
new
housing,
and
so
for
some
time
now.
Planning
staff
has
recognized
that
some
of
our
zoning
standards
within
our
city's
multi-family
residential
districts
in
particular,
or
we
refer
to
them
as
our
RMF
districts,
so
standards
in
those
districts
that
were
first
established
in
nineteen
five,
they
can
tend
to
be
quite
restrictive
and
even
hamper
creative
housing
solutions.
D
D
Introducing
allowing
new
new
housing
forms,
including
cottage
developments
inside
oriented
row,
houses
allowing
multiple
buildings
on
a
lot
allowing
slots
without
street
frontage
amending
some
lot
with
requirements
and
amending
some
lot
area
requirements
so
before
jumping
into
all
those
very
specific
changes.
I
do
want
to
just
generally
show
you
where
the
RMF
30
districts
are
located
in
the
city
which
can
they
can
be
found
or
their
centralized
kind
of
just
north
of
the
Liberty
Park
area
or
west
of
the
University,
and
then
there's
also
a
handful
in
our
sugar
house.
Just
neighborhood
in
particular.
D
I
also
want
to
explain
that,
with
these
updates,
the
city
is
looking
to
encourage
missing
middle
housing
in
particular.
Missing
middle
housing
is
not
a
new
type
of
housing,
but
it's
housing
that
exists
in
our
city
today,
like
duplexes,
triplexes
row,
houses
and
small-scale
apartment
buildings.
These
types
of
housing
forms
can
accommodate
more
housing
units,
while
remaining
compatible
with
lower
density
development.
D
D
So
here
are
just
a
few
examples
of
existing
missing
middle
type:
housing.
The
housing
in
our
city
that
really
tend
to
fit
in
with
existing
lower
density
neighborhoods,
but
also
provide
higher
unit
counts.
Just
for
your
reference,
the
central
city
master
plan
calls
for
20
units
per
acre,
which
equates
to
2178
square
feet
per
unit.
So
that's
what
our
future
land
use
plan
calls
for
for
these
types
of
low
density
zones.
So
here
you
can
see
at
8:25
South,
800
East.
D
This
is
a
cottage
type
developments
and
it
currently
exists
with
12
units
which
it
equates
to
about
1,000
452
square
feet
a
unit.
However,
if
we
were
to
apply
the
current
RMF
30
standards,
this
site
would
be
allowed
only
5
units.
The
second
example
at
620
South
Park
Street.
This
is
a
more
I'm
sorry.
D
Yes,
so
the
current
standard
for
lot
area
per
unit
is
3,000
square
feet
per
unit,
so
that
would
be
applied
here.
Thank
you.
The
second
example
is
a
traditional
row
house
at
620,
South
Park
Street.
This
quinces
dentally
has
similar
stats,
so
there's
12
units
on
this
lot.
It's
about
1490
square
feet
a
unit
and
again
it
would
only
allow
five
units
per
current
standards.
D
Here's
an
example
of
some
more
traditional
apartment
buildings
at
688,
East,
700
South.
There
are
16
units
in
these
buildings
in
both
of
these
buildings
combined
16
total
that
equates
to
527
square
feet
per
unit
and
per
current
standards.
This
couldn't
be
constructed
today
because
a
multi-family
building
requires
at
least
9,000
square
feet
for
the
first
three
units.
D
So
a
multi-family
building
couldn't
be
constructed
here
they
could
have
a
duplex
at
8,000
square
feet,
but
not
multifamily,
and
then
the
last
example
I
wanted
to
throw
in
something
more
current
at
1712
South,
900
East,
the
blue
koi
kind
of
row,
house
development,
and
there
are
20
units
on
this
site.
It
equates
to
1633
square
feet
per
unit
and
per
current
arm
of
30
standards.
D
All
right
so
now,
diving
into
each
of
the
changes.
The
first
update
is
to
introduce
design
standards
for
all
new
construction
in
our
ARMA
30
district.
These
standards
being
applied
are
actually
the
same
standards
that
exist
in
the
cities
form
based
in
foreign
based
zoning
districts
today,
which
require
design
features
like
front
entries,
front,
facade,
glass,
higher
quality
building
materials
on
the
front
facades
of
buildings.
Second
floor
balconies,
and
they
also
limit
the
length
of
blank
walls
on
buildings.
D
D
D
D
D
G
A
D
A
A
G
I
D
G
I
mean
I
would
I
would
also
could
try.
Thinking,
like
my
house,
like
I,
doubt
my
house,
it's
got
20%
and
I'm
a
big
street
facing
facade
person.
This.
You
guys
made
my
comments,
but
I
don't
know
if
the
20%
makes
sense
so
I
have
no
idea.
I'd
have
to
like
look
at
my
house.
Let's
see
if
it
gives
some
examples
and
just
taking
only
the
20%
makes
sense.
Okay,.
D
D
D
D
G
D
B
D
B
D
B
Mean
I
would
be
I
mean
it
was
one
of
the
first
things
that
happened
when
I
got
on
the
commission
as
I.
Had
somebody
approached
me
and
they
have
the
they
have
a
very
active
community
and
wanting
to,
but
they
can't
build
their
homes
any
of
these
homes
anywhere
because
no
nowhere
allows
them
or
nowhere.
We.
B
C
D
And
so
the
idea
with
these
cottage
developments
as
we
feel
that
these
could
accommodate
more
units
on
one
lot
and
be
compatible
with
our
existing
RMF
neighborhoods.
The
same
goes
for
the
side.
We're
calling
these
now
side,
oriented
row,
houses
or
just
row,
houses
that
are
flipped
to
be
oriented
towards
the
interior
of
the
lot
versus
the
public
street,
which
you
review
quite.
A
D
So
we
are
proposing
to
allow
these
with
additional
design
standards.
So,
of
course,
these
aren't
allowed
per
current
standards
without
a
plan,
development
approval
and
a
lot
of
times
with
these
planned
developments.
We
really
try
to
get
these
types
of
housing
forms
to
to
front
the
street
to
be
broken
up
things
of
that
nature.
So,
with
these
site
oriented
row
houses
in
particular,
we
are
proposing
additional
design
standards
in
addition
to
the
design
standards
that
will
be
applied
to
all
new
construction.
D
So,
of
course,
they'll
have
to
have
a
front
entry
oriented
to
the
street
a
little
bit
more
glass.
The
interior
facades
will
have
to
have
a
20%
glass
garage
doors
cannot
face
the
street
on
these
types
of
units.
The
side
units
will
need
to
be
delineated
in
some
fashion
which
we're
trying
to
work
through
right
now.
D
G
The
vigorous
you
have
with
many
of
these
is
it
one,
obviously
the
street
facing
facade
and
then
to
what
happens
on
the
back
side
of
the
house
that
neighbors
a
neighboring
property,
the
back.
You
know
the
side
yard
sure
the
shore
side
yard,
where
you
got
the
driveway
on
one
side,
and
so
then
you've
got
someone
else's
house
here
and
you
just
have
a
wall
and
so
I
think
trying
to
figure
out
how
we
mitigate
that
wall
is.
D
I
G
D
E
E
Okay,
that
makes
more
sense
and
I
agree
with
Matt
I.
Think
a
lot
of
our
consternation
with
these
slat
homes
is
what
we're
considering
the
back
wall,
because
the
developers
always
go
well.
You
know,
that's
the
that's
like
the
rear
of
the
house.
We
don't
really
care
about
that,
but
it's
really
not
because
it's
a
side,
yeah.
D
E
E
And
traditionally,
look
at
that
and
so
yeah
and
we've
seen
some
really
bad
examples
of
how
that
can
turn
out
and
I
think
we
need
some
very
specific,
or
at
least
we
need
some
guidelines
for
that,
because
that's
something
that
we've
struggled
with
as
well-
and
you
know,
I
I
have
I
have
some
angst
in
allowing
this
to
be
permitted.
Just
because
we've
seen
such
a
variety
of
these
things
come
forward
and
they're
all
they're
all
really
bad
and
and
nobody's
getting
it
yet
of
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish,
and
so
I'm
afraid
about.
E
The
design
guidelines
will
basically
allow
somebody.
The
other
thing
we're
concerned
about
is
that
front
facing
so
we're
concerned
that
I
don't
want
somebody
to
be
able
to
just
slap
a
door
in
a
little
walkway
and
call
that
a
front
entrance,
because
that's
to
me
the
intent
of
having
it
engaged
to
the
street
as
engagement
is
having
it
feel
like
it's
a
home
that
you're
you're
doing
it
so
I
would
so
I
have
anks
with
allowing
this
to
be
permitted
instead
of
going
through
a
review
by
the
Planning
Commission.
E
Simply
because
I
don't
know
if
the
answer
is
to
have
such
tight
guidelines
that
you're
getting
to
the
intent
of
what
we've
been
trying
to
accomplish.
I,
don't
know
if
that's
feasible,
I,
don't
know
if
that's
preferable,
I,
don't
know
if
that's
possible,
but
I'm
concerned
with
what
what
somebody
could
get
away
with
doing
a
bare
minimum
and
if
that
meets
the
intent
of
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish,
which
is
that
engagement,
because
there's
no
one
solution
slapping
a
porch
on
it
doesn't
work
there.
E
Everything
they
should
have
flexibility
to
to
design
that
due
to
what's
meeting
you
know
what
they
want
to
do,
but
we've
seen
too
many
yeah
I'll
put
a
door
there
right.
I
know
you
know
you
want
to
walk
away,
okay,
fine
and
that's
how
you
get
the
other
question
you
had
of
delineating
side
entrances.
One
of
the
things
that
I
have
felt
a
lot
is
that
side
entrance
with
the
parking
with
the
garage
has
felt
almost
like
a
warehouse
and
then
there's
a
door
in
the
warehouse.
E
There's
a
door
and
delineating
that
you
could
do
with
lighting
with
I
mean
I
would
call
it
a
porch
light,
but
I
realize
there's
an
import
so
just
a
light,
but
that's
delineating
hey.
This
is
an
a
separate
entrance,
a
little
portico
that
sticks
out,
not
a
huge
one.
That
also
helps
delineate
each
individual
unit
so
that
it
doesn't
feel
just
like
this
wall
of
garage
door,
door,
garage
door
right.
D
E
Ultimately
feels
just
kind
of
warehouse
right
and
so
I,
don't
I,
don't
know
if
you
feel
our
staff
feels
like
you
can
accomplish.
The
things
we've
been
struggling
with
since
I've
been
on
the
Planning
Commission.
With
these
lot
homes
in
design,
review,
I
think
it
it's
to
be
a
lot
tighter
or
a
lot
longer
than
this.
Some.
E
And
I
don't
so
that's
where
I'm
struggling
with
allowing
this
to
just
be
something
that's
permanent,
because
I
also
feel
like.
Sometimes
staff
gets
limited
and
like
okay.
Well,
they
met
it.
Okay,
you're
good
and
then
I
would
look
at
it.
Wait
that
did
not
accomplish
anything
and
so
I
feel
like.
Sometimes,
staff
is
constrained
with
those
limitations,
whereas
we
can
morph
flush
out,
I
sure.
D
That's
why
yeah
and
we're
trying
to
find
that
balance
as
well.
One
thing
I
will
say
is
another
update
to
this
is
we're
trying
to
allow
lots
without
street
direct
public
street
frontage
through
instead
of
a
planned
developments
and
through
some
sort
of
administrative,
administrative,
maybe
staff
level
review
like
a
special
exception
or
a
conditional
building
and
site
design.
So
these
types
of
housing
forms
the
side
oriented
row.
Houses
almost
always
have
lots
without
street
frontage.
D
E
D
D
I
D
D
D
I
D
F
I
D
For
example,
like
you
see
here,
you
would
have
to
go
through
a
planned
development
process
and
initially
this
standard
might
have
been
in
place
to
kind
of
limit,
poor
visibility
and
poor
access
to
properties
in
the
rear,
a
lot,
especially
for
kind
of
safety
purposes.
But
there
are
lots
in
the
city
that
have
adequate
access
and
have
adequate
visibility
to
do
some
sort
of
development
in
the
back.
This
is
just
a
lot.
I
happen
to
walk
by
and
I
saw.
D
E
Lauren
I
have
a
question
near
my
house,
probably
about
10
years
ago,
maybe
12
on
Garfield
Avenue
and
about
Manono
1150
east,
the
home,
that's
horn
down
and
they
built
a
duplex
with
you
know.
Garage
in
the
front
is
a
very
suburban
ish,
far
back
and
then
they
built
another
duplex
in
front
of
it.
Probably
a
year
and
a
half
later,
mm-hmm.
J
E
C
D
Would,
and
so
this
is
a
balance,
we're
trying
to
strike
here
we're
trying
to
increase
housing
units
in
our
city,
but
we
also
recognize
that
we
need
to
preserve
our
existing
housing
stock,
expecially,
affordable
housing,
stock
and
historic
housing
stock.
So,
with
that,
I'll
talk
about
this
a
little
later
on
what
we're
trying
to
propose
a
unit
bonus
where,
if
you
preserve
or
retain
the
existing
structure
on
the
lot,
you
could
potentially
get
a
unit
bonus
of
one
more
unit
than
your.
D
The
square
footage
of
your
lot
could
accommodate
if
you
retain
the
existing
structure
on
the
lot,
but
I
also
think
we
need
to
review
a
lot
area
and
kind
of
strike,
a
balance
between
what
what
we're
starting
to
allow
and
and
how
we
can
make
sure
that
that
existing
housing
stock
remains.
If
that
makes
sense,.
D
A
D
Right
now,
if
you
want
to
create
a
lot
with
that
Street
frontage,
it
needs
to
be
approved
per
a
plan
development
so
in
terms
of
just
process
and
cost
there's
that
can
be
hindering
I
suppose
but
and
I
think
there's
lots
that
are
able
to
accommodate
Lots
without
Street
frontage
that
have
adequate
access
and
adequate
visibility,
and
so,
instead
of
having
them
go
through
a
planned
development.
To
do
that,
which
again
is
a
lot
of
it
is
the
expense
of
it.
D
Her
with
all
of
the
updates,
so
there's
a
specific
section
on
page
two
of
the
updates,
so
some
of
the
standards
would
be
the
lots
without
direct
public
street
frontage
must
be
associated
with
a
construction
of
new
buildings.
The
creation
of
lots
that
do
not
have
adequate
access
to
public
streets
to
a
public
street
through
access,
easements
or
shared
drive
oi
shall
not
be
permitted.
D
So
a
staff
member
would
kind
of
analyze
that
we
would
route
these
to
other
City
departments
for
a
review
and
if
they
feel
like
it's
not
meeting
their
standards,
we
would
also
analyze
that
they
would
need
to
disclose,
submit
a
disclosure
of
private
infrastructure
cause
for
any
common
area,
so
just
to
maintain
common
area.
That
often
happens
with
these
planned
developments
where
there's
multiple
Lots,
but
then
there's
some
access
common
area.
We
would
review
that
and
then
they
would
be
required
to
have
design
standards
just
like
any
of
the
other
new
construction
projects.
A
D
I
Would
say
that
I
would
like
to
see
it
as
planned
development,
because
there's
still
so
many
different
configurations,
especially
when
you
change
the
lot
areas
as
where
is
your
counting
plane
doing
here,
the
big
could
be
totally
messed
up
and
not
that
the
staff
wouldn't
be
able
to
recognize
that
it's
totally
messed
up.
They
would
probably
but
I,
think
it's
it's
helpful
for
us
to
see
those
four
for
at
least
the
short
term
until
it
sort
of
settles
down
to
see
what
how
these
come
out.
Okay,
yeah.
E
C
G
E
We
don't
see
these.
What
do
we
be
doing
we'd
be
going
on
at
seven
I
mean
I.
Think
staff
is
totally
capable
of
that.
It's
just
at
this
point,
they're
just
still
really
bad,
and
but
there
some
are
really
bad
and
some
are
like,
so
so
bad
and
I
guess
until
we
start
seeing
a
little
bit
more
conformity
in
terms
of
what
people
are
doing,
I
just
I
hesitate
to
to
try
to
promote
that
staff
put
together
such
dense
guidelines.
D
E
I,
don't
even
know
that
it's
desirable
okay,
really
yeah
from
a
staff
point
of
view.
If
you
were
burdened
with
a
design
guideline
that
is
this
thick
and
you're,
trying
to
to
evaluate
I,
don't
know
that
that's
a
desirable
method
at
this
point,
and
so
I'm
I'm
leaning
more
towards
wanting
to
still
have
them,
be
a
plan
development
not
because
I,
don't
think
staff
is
capable
at
all
I.
Just
I
I
think
that
the
policy
and
procedure
of
the
design
guidelines
would
be
so
immense
right
now.
D
15
feet
is
the
stand,
is
the
Wyss
standard
in
our
existing
form,
based
districts
and
then
for
multifamily
units,
which
we
feel
is
is
really
out
of
line
with
the
LA
twist
that
we
see
in
the
city
that
would
go
from
80
feet
to
50
feet
and
again.
These
are
all
minimums
and
I
do
feel
that
there's
other
controls,
zoning
controls
on
Lots
in
terms
of
setbacks,
a
lot
coverage
things
of
knapp
that
nature.
D
That
would
encourage
more
spacing
and
the
same
type
of
thing
that
lot
with
does
so
that's
kind
of
the
idea
behind
that.
Just
as
an
example,
here
we
have
ten
thousand
three
hundred
square
foot
lot
vacant
lot
and
then
it
has
63
feet
of
width.
So
this
lot
could
actually
not
have
multifamily
on
it
without
going
through
plan
development
approval,
because
it
doesn't
have
that
80
feet
of
width.
D
So
that's
those
are
the
lot
with
changes
and
then,
along
the
same
lines,
we're
looking
at
reducing
lot
area.
So
I
think
the
biggest
change
would
be
for
what
we're
calling.
What
are
currently
single-family
attached
units
are
required
to
have
3000
square
feet
per
unit,
and
then
we
are
proposing
to
bring
that
down
to
15,000
square
feet
per
unit
which
aligns
with
the
requirement
in
our
foreign-based
districts
and
then
for
a
single-family.
D
D
And
then
we
would
keep
the
3,000
square
foot
requirement
for
multifamily
units.
We
would.
We
would
definitely
like
to
reduce
this
requirement
for
the
RMF,
thirty
five,
forty
five
and
seventy
five
districts,
but
right
now
we're
we're
keeping
that
3,000
square
foot
requirement,
and
so,
if
you
have
any
input
on
that
for
multifamily
forms,
you
give
an.
D
So
we
looked
at
those
forms
earlier
right
here.
This
lot
is
the
same
lap.
We
looked
at
with
ten
thousand
three
hundred
square
feet.
It
can
currently
rakamma
date
three
units
and
then,
if
you
just
look
to
the
unit's
right
beside
it,
those
lots
are
about
fifty
one
hundred
square
feet
and
they
exist
with
six
units,
so
so
double
what
that
vacant
lot
could
have.
D
I
D
D
D
D
G
D
G
D
D
I
D
Would
say:
half
and
half
so
of
the
RMF
30
land
use
types
about
half
of
the
Lots
have
single
family
homes
on
them.
Okay,
the
blocks
just
above
Liberty
Park,
those
are
very
single
family
oriented,
but
then
the
Central
City
area
is
definitely
more
of
a
mixed
bag
that
could
handle
higher
density.
Maybe.
G
G
I
G
I
I
G
G
G
I
Residential
district,
it
may
make
sense
to
once
you
get
to
have
to
have
a
sense
of
what
this
is
actually
intended
to
do,
so
that
you
do
discourage
the
apartment
house
kind
of
type
and
and
only
have
these
in
areas
where
there's
clearly
some
relationship
strong
relationship
to
single
family
housing.
So
you
might
even
change
some
of
the
zone.
Zoning
in
certain
areas
to
be
denser
or
less
dense,
the,
depending
on
its
location
relative
to
okay,
going.
D
Definitely
look
into
that
and
I
will
also
say
that
we
do
realize
what,
by
changing
the
area
and
reducing
it,
for
these
different
forms,
we're
putting
more
development
pressure
on
existing
Lots
with
single-family
homes
and
so
I
think.
That's
another
reason
why
we're
hesitant
to
drop
the
multi-family
requirement
down.
It's.
G
D
So
the
idea
behind
this
with
the
new
changes,
those
lots
with
single-family
homes.
There
are
a
hundred
and
forty
Lots
between
I
believe
six
thousand
square
feet
and
7999
square
feet
that
what
the
changes
can
now
add
one
additional
unit.
So,
instead
of
demolishing
the
existing
house,
our
hope
is
that
this
bonus
might
say.
Let
the
let
them
add
an
internal
unit
and
exit
internal
unit
and
then,
if
they're,
retaining
that
house
on
top
of
that,
they'll
get
a
bonus.
I
G
D
B
Wonder
if
that
would
have
worked,
I
don't
know
if
that
was
if
it
was
an
RMF
30
zone.
I'm
thinking
back
Sarah
would
know
which
I'm
talking
about
with
the
one
was
this
kind
of
the
old
building
but
they're
gonna
tear
down
and
put
like
five
units
in
the
back
yeah
I.
Wonder
if
that
this
sort
of
a
thing
would
a
lot
of
us
express
Kalla
wish
you
would
have
kept
that
front
unit
yeah!
B
B
D
J
B
Mean
and
I'm
wondering
I
guess
in
that
in
the
vein
of
that
other
building
and
wonder
if
there's
other
standards
that
could
be
relaxed
to
meet
that
same
goal
and
I,
don't
know
what
the
I
don't
know:
I,
don't
know
if
that's
opening
it
just
too
big
of
a
door,
but
it
seems
like
it
seems
like
it'd
be
really,
especially
with
the
affordable
housing
component
like
if
we're
really
looking
at.
This
is
a
great
way
to
preserve,
affordable
housing
stock
and
these
older
buildings.
B
D
E
Like
the
idea
of
an
incentive
to
keep
the
original
structure
because
I
feel
like
it
does
then
meet
these
additional
things
when
we
talk
about
affordability,
but
also
we
talk
about
a
character
of
the
neighborhood,
which
is
always
part
of
the
standards
as
well.
So
I
think
that
that's
a
great
approach,
okay,
yeah-
and
there
might
be
other
things
you
can
tack
on
to
that
too,
to
try
to
get
it
but
I
like
that
direction.
Okay,
I.
C
D
A
C
Reason
I
ask
is
because
they're
so
and
the
RMF
zone
there's
a
lot
of
areas
that
have
a
really
big
parking
strip,
maybe
like
ten
right
and
so
I.
Don't
know
if
some
of
the
UK's
can
look
at
later.
I
mean
nothing,
that's
probably
related
to
this
particular,
but
just
wanted
to
suggest
it
out
there
for
yeah
Park.