►
From YouTube: Salt Lake City Planning Commission Meeting - 05/24/2023
Description
Salt Lake City Planning Commission Meeting - 05/24/2023
https://www.slc.gov
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
C
B
D
D
Initially
be
put
on
the
consent
agenda
or
the
regular
agenda
like
if,
if
all
of
the
plan,
review
or
building
reviews
are
going
to
be
on
the
consent
agenda
in
the
future
or
types
of
things
are
going
to
be
on
the
consent
agenda.
Or
what
like
that
so
so
I
can
kind
of
know
how
that's
happening,
and
then
the
other
thing
I
want
to
say
is
when
I
there's
a
lot
of
reading
this
week
and
every
time
I
read
these
reports.
D
I'm
I
always
think
how
professional
how
lucky
we
are
to
have
such
a
professional
planning
department,
because
these
reports
are
I,
think
they're
hard
to
write
and
they
there's
so
much
information
in
them
and
I
really
appreciate
how
well
our
meetings
are
put
together
and
how
well
these
reports
are
put
together.
So
thanks.
E
So
I
was
going
to
ask
the
same
question
about
the
consent
agenda.
So
I
missed
a
meeting,
so
maybe
there
was
some
other
information
because
there's
three
items
or
four
items
three
items
here,
not
that
you
know.
So
what,
if
I
wanted
to
take
one
of
them
off
the
consent
agenda
is
that
possible?
Is
that
how
that
works?
These
days.
F
We
do
have
procedures
in
our
plant
policies
for
how
to
take
something
from
the
consent
agenda
to
the
regular
agenda.
I
think
I
asked
Council
last
time
how
we
do
the
opposite,
how
we
take
something
from
regular
agenda
to
put
on
consent,
agenda
and
I,
don't
know
whether
Council
has
an
answer
at
this
point.
E
G
The
extent
of
public
comment
that
has
been
received,
the
complexity
of
the
project,
all
kind
of
render
those
things
more
pertinent
to
the
regular
agenda
consent
agenda
is
supposed
to
be
items
that
are
require
limited
to
no
discussion
like
extensions
or
staff,
considers
to
be
routine
or
something
that
meets
the
standards.
That
again,
commission
is
always
able
to
move
those
items
onto
regular
for
more
discussion
but
staff
at
the
time
it's
preparing
the
agenda
does
not
believe
those
items
are
likely
to
Garner
much
discussion.
E
Okay,
so,
for
example,
there's
a
on
number
two
there's
a
plan
development
with
you
know
without
a
street
Frontage
and
two
and
a
half
additional
building
hide
and
awnings
and
balconies
out
into
the
street.
Normally.
This
is
something
we
would
review.
I'm
I
was
very
surprised
to
see
something
like
this
on
the
consent
agenda,
not
that
I
have
a
big
problem
with
it,
but
if
I
wanted
to
move
it
into
the
discussion
agenda
into
the
regular
agenda
is
the
applicant
even
here
for
that.
G
So
the
applicants
are
are
informed
of
whenever
their
item
is
going
to
be
considered
at
a
commission
meeting.
They
always
have
I
mean
they're
not
required
to
be
here,
so
it's
a
bit
up
to
their
discretion
about
whether
they
show
up
or
not,
and
if
you
see
and
I
I
think
well.
One
issue
is
that
the
consent
agenda
framework
is
a
bit
new
in
terms
of
how
it's
being
used
so
I.
Think
staff
is
open
to
feedback
about
categories
of
things
that
maybe
the
commission
isn't
comfortable.
G
H
A
I
A
Okay,
we
have
a
motion
from
commissioner
Burroughs
or
excuse
me
wrong.
One
commissioner
Barry
and
a
second
from
commissioner
Lee
we'll
go
ahead
and
call
for
a
vote.
Commissioner
Paredes,
although
yes,
let's
see
commissioner
de
Oliveira,
is
absent.
Commissioner
Shear.
Yes,
commissioner
Burroughs.
Yes,
commissioner
Gantt.
Yes,
commissioner
Barry,
yes,
commissioner
Tuttle,
yes
and
commissioner
Gail
is
also
absent
and
the
vice
chair
will
vote
Yes
and
I'll
vote
Yes
as
well.
Sorry
about
that.
Yes,
commissioner,
Lee
votes.
Yes,
so
that's.
K
I
So
I
have
some
procedural
clarifications
that
I'm
asking
I
don't
know
the
answer
to
I
believe
that
the
way
the
policy
and
procedures
were
written,
that
this
is
when
you
would
open
up
any
of
these
items
for
public
comment,
do
they
need
to
be
opened
up
in
order,
as
they're
listed
on
the
consent
agenda
or
just
in
one
big
group,
and
anybody
on
those
items
can
speak
out
of
turn.
Probably.
H
H
The
Commissioners
can
certainly
discuss
it
before
the
public
comment
period
is
open.
However,
you
wouldn't
pull
it
until
you
make.
The
motion
at
which
point
that
item
would
then
get
moved
to
the
regular
agenda.
Should
it
be
voted
out
of
the
consent
agenda,
but
then
it
would
also
be
considered.
The
public
hearing
for
that
item
had
already
been
opened
and
closed.
E
A
I
L
C
A
We're
well
we're
going
to
go
ahead
and
close
the
public
hearing
and
if
we
decide
to
move
it
from
the
consent
agenda
to
the
regular
agenda,
then
we
can
have
you
present
on
that
yeah.
So
seeing
no
more
comments
and
no
emails,
let's
go
ahead
and
close
the
public
or
comment
and
bring
it
back
to
the
commission
to
discuss
the
consent
agenda.
H
H
I
M
I
A
O
P
Q
J
A
A
I
R
M
R
R
Thanks
for
perfect
mission,
again,
all
right,
so
here's
the
context
along
Redwood
Road,
the
subject
properties
highlighted
in
blue.
It's
three
acres.
The
project
like
I
stated
earlier
is
a
town
home
style,
multi-family
development.
It
is
not
going
to
be
subdivided
into
a
condo
unit
at
this
point,
so
we'll
all
be
under
one
ownership
and
rent
it
out.
The
zone
is
CC
commercial
Corridor.
R
It's
in
the
west
side
master
plan,
the
exceptions
that
they're
requesting
is
buildings
without
Street
Frontage,
because
there
are
a
number
of
buildings
further
into
the
property
that
will
not
have
Frontage
along
Redwood
Road.
They
are
also
requesting
two
and
a
half
feet
of
additional
height
to
accommodate
three
stories.
R
The
deepest
one,
I
believe,
is
about
three
feet:
here's
a
site
plan
you
can
see
on
the
right
side
of
the
screen
that
is
Redwood
Road,
and
so
there
are
technically
three
buildings
include
the
building
up
at
the
top
that
fronts
onto
Redwood
Road
and
that's
where
those
projections
are
located
into
the
front
setback.
The
easement
that
was
brought
up
in
the
public
comment
period
is
identified
on
the
plans
and
it's
included
in
the
staff
report.
R
You
can
see
it
it's
kind
of
hard
to
see
on
this
one.
We
have
a
better
rendering
in
the
staff
report,
but
this
dotted
line
right
here
is
that
easement
and
the
easement
isn't
a
non-exclusive
act.
Excuse
me:
it's
a
non-exclusive
access
easement,
so
the
property
owner
to
the
north,
which
is
528
Redwood,
has
access
to
his
Warehouse
building
through
this
property
in
that
area.
R
S
S
And
then,
if
you
go
right
above
it
yep
those
there's
two
sort
of
awnings
that
encroach
by
a
couple
feet
into
the
setback
and
then
yeah
just
there's
the
dotted
line.
That
shows
where
the
easement
is
Our
intention
is
to
honor
the
easement.
That's
why
we
have.
We
haven't
put
anything
any
any
buildings
or
structures
there
within
the
easement
to
make
sure
that
our
neighbor
can
access
his
property.
R
E
D
A
I
Q
P
P
A
M
G
At
that
time
the
commission
can
decide
whether
or
not
to
continue
this
matter
to
a
different
date,
open
the
public
hearing
and
essentially
deny
their
request.
Close
the
public
hearing
decide
anyway
or,
as
I
believe,
you'll
hear
from
staff,
also
the
option
to
open
the
public
hearing
and
then
continue
the
public
hearing
to
a
later
date
to
decide
the
matter
at
a
different
date.
C
U
U
U
So
conditional
use
approval
is
required
because
the
center
is
expanding
by
more
than
a
thousand
square
feet.
If
the
conditional
use
is
approved,
they
will
renovate
the
existing
space
and
add
an
addition
to
5579
square
feet.
If
it's
denied
they
could
expand
up
to
a
thousand
square
feet
and
renovate
the
existing
space.
U
This
is
a
rendering
of
the
proposed
edition
of
the
weekend.
Center
and
I
wanted
to
go
over
some
of
the
key
considerations
that
you
can
find
in
the
staff
report,
the
first
one
being
the
land
use
classification
of
the
property,
the
Wigan
Center
originally
applied
for
the
conditional
use
approval
as
a
homeless,
Resource
Center,
we
process
the
application
as
they
have
had
applied.
U
So
we
received
a
lot
of
public
feedback
on
this
proposal
from
residents
of
downtown
and
the
Gateway
area
most
have
expressed
the
same
concerns
which
are
with
the
current
conditions
of
the
area.
These
issues
that
were
expressed
were
littering
camping,
drug
use,
safety
and
a
lack
of
public
restrooms
in
the
area.
U
So
it's
important
to
note
that
the
discussion
about
the
expansion
and
conditional
use
should
focus
on
the
immediate
impact
of
the
Wigan
Center.
They
can't
control
the
activities
that
could
that
occur
on
the
surrounding
properties.
To
address
these
concerns
that
were
expressed
by
The
Neighborhood,
the
Wigan
center
created
a
security
and
operations
plan
similar
to
what
would
be
required
when
a
new
homeless
Resource
Center
opens.
This
is
provided
in
the
staff
report
and
I'll
go
over
a
little
bit
here.
So.
U
No,
it
states
that
no
drugs
or
alcohol
are
permitted
on
the
premises
they
commit
to
engaging
people
who
are
loitering
in
the
public
right-of-way
and
inviting
them
into
the
Courtyard
area
and
or
to
receive
services
or
disperse.
This
will
be
done
by
the
weekend.
Center
of
security
personnel,
so
they
also
emphasize,
are
committed
to
working
with
police.
On
the
issue
of
loitering
in
the
area
of
the
Wigan
Center,
the
plan
also
outlines
the
security
operations
of
personnel
and
staff
at
the
Wigan
Center.
U
So
even
though
the
Wigan
Center
is
a
social
service
Mission
and
not
a
homeless
resource
center
staff
is
requesting
that
the
security
and
operations
plans
be
a
condition
of
approval,
just
because
the
two
land
uses
are
very
similar
in
their
impact.
So
the
condition
of
approval
states
that
the
Wigan
Center
will
record
the
security
and
operations
plan
with
the
city
recorder
and
then
conduct
its
operations
according
to
the
site
plan.
U
So,
along
with
the
security
and
operations
plan
similar
to
homeless,
Resource
Center,
they
provided
a
document
describing
how
their
site
to
mitigate
crime
in
the
area
or
on
the
property.
The
applicant
has
proposed
Windows
all
along
the
second
floor
of
the
remodel
and
the
proposed
Edition
to
allow
employees
to
see
into
the
Courtyard
area
they
proposed
to
move
the
entrance
of
the
day
room,
which
is
where
clients
go
to
escape
elements.
U
U
A
X
So
after
a
productive
meeting
with
some
community
members
this
morning,
we
feel
like
CCS,
being
a
good
neighbor
and
a
good
partner
want
to
listen
to
some
of
their
concerns
and
really
try
to
work
together
in
making
that
area
much
safer
for
the
community
and
for
those
involved,
but
then
also
supporting
those
that
we
serve.
So
with
that
recommend
with
those
that
conversation.
F
I
guess
are
the
I
appreciate
you
being
a
good
Community
citizen?
We
we
really
appreciate
that
and
I'm
sure
their
neighbors
do
as
well.
I
guess
I'm
wondering
whether
that
is
directly
related
to
the
land
use
request
and
with
the
land
use
request
change,
because
I
I
appreciate
you
know
wanting
to
take
into
account
the
community's
concerns,
but
it's
very
costly
in
terms
of
delays
in
development
for
the
rest
of
the
city.
F
When
we
postpone
things-
and
we
have
to
be
honest
with
you-
I
suspect
there
would
be
opposition
from
community
members
under
any
circumstance.
We
always
get
no
offense,
but
we
always
we're
used
to
hearing
opposition,
that's
sort
of
what
we
do.
We
hear
sit
here
and
we
listen
to
it
and
so
anyway,
I'm
just
do
you
think
it's
directly
related
to
the
land
use
request
what
you
would
be
changing
in
your
plan.
X
U
F
I
X
I
D
D
I
I
Septed
review
design
safety
design,
the
the
police
do
like
they
call
I,
can't
remember
what
it
stands
for,
but
it's
basically
designed
protocols
that
the
police
specifically
look
at
to
make
it
safer
and
I
believe
they
will
do
a
subtitle
review.
If
you
requested
okay
and
then
it's
something
we
don't
have
to
require,
but
it
could
actually
help
you
in
your
safety
and
operations
plan
and
then
maybe
even
modify
some
tweaks
in
it
in
the
actual
design
to
try
and
accommodate
what
you
know.
The
police
department
has
reviewed
under
that.
F
Okay,
thank
you.
That
seems
like
a
great
kind
of
formal
way
of
incorporating
concerns
that
you
know
we
I
like
the
idea.
A
lot
of
we
could
make
that
a
condition
we're
not
at
the
point
yet
of
making
a
motion,
but
we
could
is
go
through
because
this
is
not
just
somebody
talking.
These
people
are
trained.
There
are
some
of
our
police
officers
are
specifically
trained
in
this
area
they
take
and
they
would
be
a
great
resource,
and
that
might
what
I
worry
about.
F
Is
that
there's
some
complaints
from
people
that
just
don't
want
this
anywhere
in
their
neighborhood
and
we're
never
going
to
satisfy
them
and-
and
we
need
I'm
super
sympathetic
to
a
lot
of
the
public
comments.
We
got
that
we
need
public
bathrooms
and
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
you
know
we
we
would
all
agree
and
it's
completely
out
of
the
control
of
either
the
weigen
center
or
the
Planning
Commission,
to
get
some
of
the
things
on
the
list
anyway.
I'll
stop
I.
D
I
wonder
if
the
how
this
safety
and
operations
plan
is
treated
is
it
can
they
make
changes
to
it?
Do
changes
to
it
have
to
be
approved
by
Planning
by
staff,
by
code
enforcement
by
somebody,
or
is
it
just?
They
have
to
have
the
document
and
they
have
to
follow
it
and
they
can
change
it
whenever
they
want
to
do.
You
know.
G
So
the
condition
is
that
the
safety
and
operations
plan
be
recorded,
and
so
that
would
be
a
litmus
test
to
apply
to
Future
enforcement
actions.
If
there
was
some
review
of
their
operations
relative
to
that
safety
and
operations
plan,
and
if
there
were
discrepancies
there
could
be
enforcement
on
those
discrepancies.
F
M
Acquired
for
this
type
of
conditional
use
in
that
zone,
but
yes,
we're
recommending
it
as
a
condition
of
approved
I
just
wanted
to
add
one
clarifying
point
about
the
septed
review
that
sorry
I
just
wanted
to
add
one
clarifying
point
about
the
septed
review
that
commissioner
Barry
recommended
when
we
route
to
the
police
department.
That
is
the
type
of
review
that
they're
doing
so
when
the
police
department
commented
on
the
lighting.
I
Just
to
follow
up,
when
did
they
start
that,
because
when
they,
when
we
did
the
homeless
resource
center
on
Third
West,
they
reviewed
it,
but
it
wasn't
a
subhead
review
and
they
said
well.
We
were
only
asked
to
provide
our
feedback
on
what
we
think
might
be
better
here.
They
never
actually
did
a
thorough
or
a
formal
subside
review.
So
it
was
my
understanding
that
that
was
not
their
Baseline.
That
may
have
changed
yeah.
I
I
D
I
feel
like,
if
we're
going
to
consider,
if
we're
going
to
consider
requiring
the
safety
and
operations
plan
for
this
property.
For
this
you
know
the
expansion
of
the
building
that
the
since
it's
their
first
one
and
they
kind
of
get
one
chance
to
do
it
that
maybe
they
try
harder
on
it.
Otherwise,
I
don't
know
if
in
that,
and
maybe
that
way,
if
we,
if
we
table
it
for
that
reason,
then
the
comments
will
be
then
the
discussion
can
be
kind
of
that's
what
the
discussion
can
be
about
the
safety
and
operations
plan.
D
Also,
it
looks
like
they
followed
all
of
their
noticing.
This
I
mean
this
project
has
been
on
the
online
comment.
You
know
planning
online
planning
open
meeting
for
since
February,
so
it's
it's.
It's
not
like
I
mean
deadlines,
change
things,
but
yesterday
wasn't
the
first
day
that
this
project
has
been
out
there
for
consideration.
I.
Y
D
I
But
I
personally
think
that
it
is
okay
to
postpone
this
so
that
they
can
vet
out
a
better
plan
that
they're
happy
with
that
already
then
they've
already
heard
some
concerns.
We
would
have
that
they
would
want
to
also
think
about,
in
addition
to
the
community
input
and
but
that
we
accept
public
comment
period
tonight
for.
Q
This
I'm
also
amenable
to
that
same
train
of
thought.
I
think
they
have
an
idea
of
what
we're
thinking
of
what
is
in
our
minds
and
I
think
presenting
it
kind
of
going
over
it
again
and
readdressing.
Some
points
that
you
found
maybe
could
be
readdressed
in
a
better
way.
I
could
present
a
better
project,
so
yeah
I'm,
also
in
the
same.
Postponing
idea.
I
A
I
M
A
A
AA
Thank
you,
I'm
Brian,
Hill
I'm,
the
chair
of
the
downtown
community
council
and,
like
Randy
shared,
we
had
a
collaborative
meeting
today
that
I
felt
you
know
we
with
some
additional
discussions.
I
feel
that
we
can
make
some
Headway
that's
going
to
be
best
for
those
that
are
in
need
of
the
services
that
Saint
Vincent
and
the
Wigan
Center
provide
as
well
as
be
best
for
the
community.
AA
Prior
to
that
meeting,
our
plan
was
to
oppose
the
issuance
of
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
number
of
reasons.
One
of
the
reasons
was
based
off
of
the
current
permits
that
have
been
issued.
The
terms
of
those
permits
aren't
being
enforced,
and
so
there
was
questions
in
regards
to
that
on.
Why
would
the
Planning
Commission
issue
another
permit
when
the
terms
of
the
current
conditional
uses
aren't
being
enforced?
AA
The
other
things
that
were
discussed
were
we
had
come
basically
identified.
Six
different
talking
points
that
we
felt
would
be
beneficial
to
the
community
as
well
as
four
of
those
six
talking
points.
We
felt
would
be
more
beneficial
to
those
needing
the
homeless
services.
So
I
think
those
are
some
things
that
we
want
to
further
have
thoughtful
discussions
on,
so
that
it's
a
win-win
for
the
community
and
for
and
for
you
know
the
the
Wigan
Center
expansion.
AA
Prior
to
that
meeting
today
we
actually
had
a
huge,
a
a
significant
of
number
of
people
that
were
coming
on
behalf
of
I,
guess
we'll
call
it
the
gateway
community
to
basically
share
their
opposition
on
the
expansion.
Unless
certain
steps
were
made
and
based
off
of
the
discussion,
you
know
we
shared
with
them
that
that
that
probably
wasn't
needed
tonight.
So
I
appreciate
you
guys,
keeping
the
comment
section,
open,
I,
appreciate
you
being
willing
to
allow
the
Wigan
Center
and
the
community
to
work
on
a
better
plan
that
will
benefit
both
parties.
C
AB
Thank
you,
chair
of
East,
Liberty,
Park,
Community
organization,
but
I'm
here
tonight
to
talk
to
you
about
some
other
hats.
I
wear
in
the
community
and
one
I
have
been
in
charge
of
the
Salt
Lake
Gallery
stroll
for
about
20
years
and
I
just
wanted
to.
Let
you
know
that
small
businesses
do
see
an
impact
in
that
area
and
many
of
the
ones
that
we
have
worked
with
over,
that
time
have
moved
out
of
that
area.
AB
The
first
question
is:
is
we
were
wondering
why,
if
they
had
the
capacity
to
do
these
Safety
and
Security
initiatives
at
the
time
of
a
conditional
use
request?
Why
they're
not
actually
doing
that
all
the
way
along
to
serve
the
homeless
population
better
and
to
help
cut
down
on
crime
and
safety
issues
in
that
area?
AB
I
I
was
really
happy
in
another
capacity
that
I
work
in
to
you
know.
I
would
like
to
support
this.
We
would
like
to
see
this
kind
of
thing
supported,
but
there
was
some
question
with
the
Overflow
use
of
it
as
a
shelter
or
a
winter
shelter
why
it
couldn't
just
go
through
the
rigorous
process
that
is
now
in
line
with
new
ordinance.
Thank
you.
A
Next
up,
we
have
I
believe
this
is
just
a
written
comment
card
from
Alessandra
diplano.
If
you
want
to
speak,
go
ahead
and
jump
up,
but
otherwise
I'll
just
read
the
the
comment
they
said.
I
am
very
concerned
about
our
neighborhood.
The
expansion
will
only
exacerbate
the
negative
effects
that
we
are
already
experiencing.
Like
vandalism,
car
break-ins
inside
the
car,
the
garage
theft
urination.
A
AC
AC
AC
AC
Doesn't
matter
if
we
call
in
they
say:
oh
yeah,
we
know
the
guy
okay
he's
going
to
get
hit,
there's
been
a
fire
lit
and
my
daughter
and
grandkids
live
in
that
building.
So
you
know
I,
don't
know
what
the
solution
would
be,
but
we're
we
don't
feel
safe
to
walk
past
seconds,
Health
quite
honestly
to
even
get
anywhere
else.
AC
AD
My
name
is
Mike
stransky
I'm
here
on
two
counts:
one
I'm
on
the
board
of
Catholic
community
services,
but
I'm,
also
a
property
owner
at
375,
West,
200
South
and
before
I
retired
I
was
working
at
that
very
same
address.
So
I'm
here
to
support
conditional
use
approval,
Catholic,
Community
Service
has
been
providing
services
to
our
homeless
clients
in
the
neighborhood
since
the
1980s
after
the
original
Saint
Vincent's
soup,
kitchen
burned
down
on
a
different
site,
the
private
donor
bought
the
land
and
constructed
the
current
Saint
Vincent's
dining
hall.
AD
AD
Through
all
of
these
improvements,
it
was
ccs's
mission
to
serve
their
clients
and
adapt,
as
the
needs
involved
evolved
the
weekend.
Center
accommodated
The
increased
need
for
counseling
space
service
to
Veterans,
Legal
Services,
a
Night,
Court
showers,
laundry
phones,
personal
addresses
and
safety.
AD
AD
O
O
I'm
a
city
resident
after
20
years
as
a
judge
in
Salt
Lake
City,
the
Justice
Court
I
retired
last
July
40
years
ago
my
wife
and
I
bought
a
home
that
was
two
and
a
half
blocks
from
Liberty
Park.
Now
we're
two
and
a
half
blocks
from
Palmer
court
and
also
from
the
Geraldine
Kings
Women's,
Resource
and
Senator.
We
like
our
place,
but
we
have
done
over
time
the
victim
of
both
personal
crimes
and
property
crimes
and
I.
Don't
do
this
to
seek
Symphony
I.
O
Do
this
so
that
those
who
are
opposed
to
this
application
can
understand
that
I
have
personal
experience
with
some
of
the
current
concerns
that
they
have
expressed
tonight
and
during
my
time,
working
at
the
Wigan
Center
in
the
homeless
Court.
Also,
we
never
had
security
concerns,
but
I
could
see
the
problem
up
close
and
personal
when
I
left
High
School
50
years
ago,
1970
there
were
about
822
000
people,
Weaver
Davis,
Salt,
Lake
and
Utah
counties.
Now
it's
2.4
million
nearly
three
times
more
and
I.
O
Think
it's
fair
to
assume
and
infer
that
the
need
for
mental
health,
Counseling
Services
increased
at
the
same
rate,
it's
difficult
as
a
judge
to
find
out
what
happens
to
people
that
you
see.
If
you
don't
have
supervised
profession,
there
is
no
tracking,
but
I
want
to
tell
you
about
a
couple
of
cases
in
which
we
came
to
know
about
the
outcome
for
folks
who
we
saw
on
our
very
very
regular
basis.
O
Long
after
they
had
disappeared
from
our
jurisdiction,
we
received
calls
from
social
workers
in
the
group
homes
that
they
lived
in
off
Wasatch
Front
areas.
They
were
housed
there
after
receiving
Mental
Health
Services
we're
safe
and
we're
no
longer
a
problem
for
the
criminal
justice
service
or
the
criminal
justice
system
or
the
community.
Based
on
my
training
and
experience,
I
think
it's
likely
that
with
convenient
on-site
mental
health
counseling,
we
may
see
a
leveling
off
of
the
growth
of
people
needing
services
at
Wigan
Center,
if
not
a
decrease
over
time.
C
AE
AE
It's
been
interesting,
interesting
over
time
to
watch
systems
and
different
things
evolve,
and
one
thing
that
I
know
for
certain
from
not
only
research
but
also
from
life.
Experience
is
the
need
for
access
to
resources.
One
thing
that
I
noticed
in
my
research
was
the
security
security
and
coming
from
the
purview
of
a
cop.
AE
At
the
time,
I
definitely
saw
security
concerns,
so
I'm
grateful
to
see
Anna
Grace
for
that
I'm
also
hopeful
to
see
an
expansion
with
mental
health
support
as
a
social
worker
at
the
currently
also
overseas
and
works
with
clients
that
are
currently
without
a
home.
I
feel
that
the
more
access
to
resources
they
can
have
the
better
equipped
they
will
be
to
be
not
only
have
the
opportunity
to
be
housed
but
to
learn
how
to
live
and
to
learn
how
to
live.
AE
In
a
community
that
often
rejects
so
instead,
sometimes
I
think
we
have
this
US
versus
them.
Mentality,
Us,
Versus,
Them
exists,
but
at
the
same
time
the
other,
whoever
the
other
are
or
those
without
homes
always
are
going
to
choose
to
congregate
somewhere
else.
It's
it's
a
matter
of
time
and
in
space,
I'm
hopeful
that
there
can
be
a
common
agreement
amongst
the
community
and
amongst
and
amongst
the
people
that
have
needs
to
have
resources,
met.
I
appreciate
the
time.
Thank
you
for
your
service
and
I'm
hopeful.
There
can
be
an
understanding
for
Access.
AE
AF
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
Planning
Commission,
my
name
is
Bruce
Baird
I'm
Council
for
vestar
I
would
be
asking
you
for
five
minutes.
Speaking
on
behalf
of
the
entire
group
of
business
owners
of
the
neighborhood
but
I'm
trusting
that
we're
going
to
continue
this
matter,
I'd
like
to
take
just
a
few
seconds
to
explain
why
we
had
the
good
discussions
today
with
the
CCS.
First
of
all,
we
hadn't
seen
the
staff
report
until
literally
24
hours
ago.
We
disagree
substantially
with
many
of
the
factual
and
legal
conclusions,
but
as
a
good
faith.
AF
Effort
in
dealing
with
the
CCS
I
do
not
intend
to
bring
them
up
today.
I
have
a
detailed
presentation,
but
I'd
rather
not
do
it,
because
we'd
rather
be
in
a
spirit
of
cooperation
than
a
spirit
of
Cooperative
than
confrontation,
I'm,
trusting
I'm,
putting
my
clients
faith
in
you
doing
that,
specifically,
we
do
believe
that
a
security
plan
would
legally
be
required.
AF
We
didn't
see
the
security
plan
until
literally
yesterday
and
we
didn't
find
out
about
the
fact
that
there
was
a
security
plan
until
until
literally
yesterday,
none
of
the
stakeholders
were
given
any
opportunity
to
to
comment
on
that
plan.
We
believe
there
are
weaknesses
in
that
plan
and
the
plan
can
be
strengthened
in
a
mutually
beneficial
way,
but
again
in
a
spirit
of
cooperation
and
good
faith.
I
do
not
intend
to
go
into
those
today.
We
think
that
Ms
Burroughs
comments
about
needing
to
have
that
planner
correct
this
body
would
adopt
that
plan.
AF
An
amendment
to
that
plan
would
have
to
come
back
through
this
body.
We
think
Ms
Barry's
comments
are
very
good
about
needing
to
have
these
comments.
I
understand
this
again's
concerns
we
are
not
here
to
be
against.
I
think
that
the
CCS
will
tell
you
that
we
expressed
some
very
legitimate
concerns.
We
understand
their
positions
better,
they
understand
our
positions
better
and
we
are
willing
to
work
together
to
try
within
the
next
short
period
of
time,
to
come
back
to
you
with
what
we
hope
to
be
a
mutually
agreeable
set
of
conditions.
AF
AF
I
D
I
You
yeah
so
whatever
the
motion
is
I
do
want
to
just
for
the
community,
especially
those
that
will
be
participating
with
Catholic
community
services,
to
give
you
an
understanding
when
this
comes.
If
this
comes
back
to
us,
so
what
we
will
be
legally
allowed
to
consider
the
the
the
guts
of
this
security
plan
is
not
our
purview,
we
don't
oversee
it.
I
We're
not
going
to
be
going
through
it
with
a
fine-tooth
comb
to
make
sure
it
meets
anything,
because
it's
not
what
we
do
we'll
make
sure
that
they
have
one
we'll
want
to
hear
how
it
you
know
addressed
your
concerns
as
well
as
it
could.
But
if
this
staff
report
that
is
online,
it
was
online
last
week
is
available
to
the
public
on
page
23
are
the
conditional
use
standards
and
by
law
by
state
law.
Those
are
the
things
we
have
to
consider
if
we
were
to
look
at
denying
a
conditional
use.
I
State
law
requires
that
we
approve
a
conditional
use
unless
it
does
not
meet
one
of
those
standards.
So
if
you
are
going
to
continue
your
participation,
I
just
want
to
reset
your
expectations
of
what
the
purview
of
the
Planning
Commission
is
by
law.
So
page
23
is
where
you
will
find
those
conditions
and
staff
has
done
a
very
thorough
analysis
of
their
position
and
and
The
Narrative
of
why
they
comply,
and
you
are
free
to
disagree
with
that.
But
those
are
the
things
that
we
legally
will
be.
Looking
at,
I
will
be
looking
at.
I
Did
you
you
know
what
kind
of
conversations
did
you
have
with
the
public?
Did
you
look
at
the
things
that
we
brought
up
for
the
for
the
safety
and
securities
plan,
but
I'm
not
equipped,
nor
is
it
or
a
purview
as
a
Planning
Commission
to
dissect
every
part
of
that
so
I
just
wanted
to
make
that
comment.
D
Here's
my
idea,
I'm
going
to
stay
at
like
a
motion
but
feel
free
to
feel
free
to
change
it.
Okay,
you
ready,
based
on
the
information
presented
and
discussion,
I,
move
that
the
commission
approved
this
application
based
on
staff's
recommendation
with
the
following
modifications.
The
applicant
will
submit
a
security
and
operations
plan
for
approval
by
the
Planning
Commission
prior
to
recording
such
with
a
city
recorder
and
that
the
suggestions
made
by
the
Salt
Lake
City
Police
Department
septed
review
should
be
incorporated
into
the
plans.
F
D
That
was
my
first
idea,
but
then
I
thought
I
mean
staff
is
very
professional
and
they
do
a
good
job.
But
in
order
to
keep
the
conversation
like
open
that
it
comes
back
to
us,
we're
not
the
experts
on
it
but
like
they
have
to
come
up
with
a
safety
and
operations
plan
that
they're
comfortable
with
the
neighbors
being
comfortable
with,
but
I
I
love
the
idea
of
a
time
limit.
D
G
G
D
E
D
F
F
Yeah
the
substitute
of
motion,
so
let
me
explain
first
before
I
make
the
substitute
motion
there's
nothing
in
these
public
hearings
that
has
substantively
brought
new
information
to
me
in
terms
of
what
the
bearing
in
this
commission
I
read
through
the
vast
majority
of
the
public
comments
that
we
were
submitted
in
writing
and
they
were
like
I.
Don't
want
this
in
my
neighborhood.
The
city
should
put
this
elsewhere
and
they
were
just
like
nonsense
in
terms
of
the
land
use.
K
C
G
F
I
E
A
D
Q
A
J
A
C
A
J
A
A
P
T
T
T
Since
this
item
was
noticed
and
posted,
you
have
all
of
those
comments
up
to
about
5
30
this
afternoon
when
this
meeting
started.
Those
are
in
your
Dropbox
I
received
a
phone
call
from
the
applicant's
architect
this
morning
early
to
discuss
options
for
moving
forward,
including
the
option
of
tabling
this
item,
which
I
thought
they
could
do.
T
I
subsequently
received
written
requests
for
postponement
from
the
applicant
of
postponement
tabling
from
the
applicant
in
writing.
Later
this
morning,
I
proceeded
to
call
and
email
those
residents
that
had
contacted
me
to
indicate
that
the
project
has
been
postponed.
So
all
the
emails
that
I
had
received
all
the
phone
calls
I
called
those
folks
back,
I
emailed
back.
This
project
has
been
postponed.
T
I
was
then
informed
by
planning
management
staff
that
it
was
too
late
to
postpone.
Hence
the
director's
report
that
we
talked
about
are
our
bylaws
for
this
type
of
action,
and
it
was
decided
that
we
needed
to
go
ahead
with
this
hearing
tonight,
I
again
reached
out
to
all
those
via
email
and
telephone
to
tell
them
that
the
that
this
project
was
back
on
the
table.
T
T
T
This
application
was
submitted
in
2020
prior
to
the
city's
elimination
of
the
special
exception
process,
and
this
has
been
an
ongoing
work
and
Prescott
Muir
Architects
on
the
behalf
of
the
property
owners
is
requesting
special
exception
approval
to
construct
a
new
single-family
home
that
exceeds
the
maximum
permitted
Building
height
in
the
fr2
foothill
residential
district.
The
subject
property
is
located
in
1800,
South,
Devonshire
Drive
and
is
undeveloped.
At
this
time,
the
fr2
district
permits
a
building
height
of
28
feet,
measured
from
established
grade.
T
Devonshire
subdivision
was
plotted
in
1991
we're
talking
about
Lot
Number
Eight.
Here.
This
lot
is
almost
two
acres
in
size.
The
building
envelope
is
about
9
000
square
feet.
Here
are
some
visuals.
These
are
some
photographs
of
the
property.
The
property
is
very
steep.
This
is
looking
basically
towards
downtown
in
the
West.
T
T
Issues
to
overcome
in
the
development
of
this
lot.
This
is
another
view
you
have
this
as
well.
Looking
towards
the
Southwest,
you
see
the
subject
property
on
the
right.
There
you
have
the
East
bench:
preservation,
Trail
and
water
line,
Eastmont
easement,
and
then
you
have
the
closest
house
adjacent
to
the
subject
parcel
there
on
the
left
hand,
side
of
the
screen
another
view
of
the
the
a
lot.
T
T
There
were
three
of
those
and
at
this
point,
based
on
the
information,
the
staff
report
is
planning
staff's
opinion
that
the
request
is
special
exception
for
the
additional
Building
height
substantially
complies
with
the
standards
of
approval.
As
noted
in
your
staff
report
and
recommends
the
Planning
Commission
approve
the
requested
special
exception,
as
proposed.
A
AH
Good
evening,
I'm
Prescott
Muir,
the
architect
working
with
the
property
owners
and
applicants
Laura
and
Matt
before
is
so
thank
you,
Mr,
chair
and
planning
Commissioners
for
accommodating
this
hearing.
It's
been
a
long
process
as
Lex
alluded
to
I,
think
we
first
contacted
Lex
in
the
city,
public
utilities
and
some
of
the
other
departments
to
really
find
out
what
were
the
not
only
entitlement
restrictions,
but
the
physical
restrictions
on
this
site.
AH
I
think
we
we
originally
kind
of
looked
at
the
possibility
of
re-platting
this
lot,
because
the
plot
configuration
really
doesn't
respect
the
logistics
of
of
this
site,
but
found
out
that,
because
of
the
slope,
ordinance
has
been
changed
since
this
was
planted
in
91
by
replanting.
It
we
default
to
that
slope
ordinance
which
precludes
any
development
on
the
site.
So
that
was
one
challenge:
we've
got
to
work
with
the
configuration
of
of
the
plat.
Now
this,
unlike
the
other
Lots
along
the
west
side
of
Devonshire,
it
doesn't
have
hardly
any
Frontage.
AH
The
frontage
is
only
enough
for
what
could
be
considered
a
flag
lot
or
just
a
direct
access
road
coming
down
into
it.
So
you
can,
you
can
imagine
at
a
at
a
site,
that's
30,
30
plus
degree
slope.
We
come
down
at
a
12
slope,
and
this
and
the
site
is
dropping
away
faster
than
we
can
get
down
into
the
property,
and
so
without
that
considerable
Frontage,
you,
like
the
other
property
owners,
have
had
the
benefit
of.
AH
But
that's
the
challenge:
if
we
go
down
deep
directly
underneath
that
auto
court
at
some
point
we're
going
to
undermine
the
water
line,
so
we've
avoided
half
into
pothole
that
water
line
to
find
out
exactly
the
depth
and
determine
where
exactly
the
back
wall
of
the
house
could
be
located.
So,
as
you
can
imagine,
there's
considerable
logistical
challenges.
AH
AH
We
understand
that
there
is
considerable
public
concern
and
that's
why
we've
basically
made
the
request
is
that
we
feel
like
we
want
to
exhaust
any
possibility
and
I
I
must
thank
Lex
and
working
with
us
for
five
years
on
this
thing
and
and
continuing
to
put
the
effort
into
a
staff
report,
but
we're
we're
willing
to
with
the
approval
of
the
Planning
Commission
in
approving
a
tabling
of
this
motion
to
roll
up
our
sleeves
some
more
and
see.
If
there's
a
better
configuration.
W
AH
And
Laura
made
considerable
effort
to
respond
to
some
of
the
the
emails
that
they
received
to.
Let
them
know
our
our
desire
was
to
table
list,
but
obviously
that's
your
decision
and
so
people
are.
We
can't
tell
them
not
to
come
so
Matt
in
the
world.
Do
you
have
anything
to
add,
and
you
know
after
the
public
hearing
we'd
be
glad
to
come
up
and
answer
any
other
questions
that
you
may
have.
W
Matt
forsgren,
no
I,
think
Prescott
described
it
very
well.
It's
a
very
complicated
lot
where
the
water
line
is
where
the
Public
Works
wants
a
33-foot,
vehicular
easement
there's
been
a
retaining
wall.
Put
in
that's
on
the
easement,
that's
eight
to
nine
feet.
Tall
Public
Works
can't
drive
a
truck
on
the
top
with
a
nine
foot
wall
and
then
down
on
the
track.
W
The
property
boundaries
meet
together
and
the
easement
runs
across
it.
So
our
neighbor
to
the
east
owns
a
portion
of
the
hrock
trail
and
we
own
a
portion
of
the
eight
truck,
but
with
that
Public
Access
vehicle
33
foot,
wide
vehicular,
easement
Public
Works
needs
to
measure
from
the
bottom
of
that
nine
foot
retaining
wall
West
33
feet
that
cuts
into
our
buildable
pad.
It
cuts
greatly
into
our
property,
where
we
have
a
two
acre
lot:
we're
restricted
a
9
000
square
foot,
building
pad
which
is
also
being
reduced
due
to
that
Public
Works
easement.
W
If
there's
a
need
to
replace
or
repair
that
water
land
Public
Works
needs
to
have
access
to
that
of
course.
So
we
don't
want
to
be
anywhere
near
that
water
line.
We
want
to
be
far
enough
away
for
it
from
it,
but
pushing
us
down
the
hill
further.
It
gets
deeper
and
steeper
again
before
we
purchase
this
lot.
We
had
two
DRT
meetings
with
the
city
to
see
what
we
could
build.
We
want
to
know
why
it
hadn't
been
built
on
since
1991.
W
Well,
when
it
was
subdivided
in
1991
the
Devonshire
subdivision,
they
pushed
all
the
Green
Space
to
the
end
that
was
required
by
the
subdivision.
That's
why
the
lot
is
two
acres
and
we
just
have
a
9
000
square
foot
pad.
So
again,
just
let's
press
God
I
read
a
very
complicated
with
the
water
line,
the
easement
the
retaining
wall.
That's
there
access.
W
This
is
a
two-story
home
that
we're
trying
to
build
about
6,
000
square
foot
of
livable
space,
utilizing
some
of
the
underground
space
for
storage
and
garage
coming
up
with
the
design
that
we
have.
As
you
go
down
steeper,
we
need
to
come
out
of
the
ground
more
and
that's
where
the
height
variance
comes
into
into
play.
Working
with
the
city
planner
that
we've
been
assigned
has
been
great.
He
made
some
great
suggestions
in
tabling
this.
Let's
look
at
some
other
options.
Get
public
works
again
involved
to
see
if
they
have
any
ideas.
W
AI
Name
is
Lara
forsgren
and
I
just
want
to
acknowledge
that
I
understand
this
immediate
rush
to
concern
with
the
neighbors.
If
I
got
that
notification
in
the
mail
that
your
neighbor
wants
to
build,
a
building
that
exceeds
22
feet,
I
would
be
opposed
to
it
as
well.
I
mean
it's,
it
sounds
enormous,
just
want
to
say
we
have
no
desire
and
never
have
had
any
desire
to
build
an
enormous
home.
It's
just
it's
not
our
style.
We
like
understated
where
the
home
just
doesn't
scream.
Look
at
me.
AI
We
really
don't
like
those
homes
and
it's
one
reason
why
we
hired
Prescott
Muir
I
mean
the
he
has
a
I
mean
he's
designed
award-winning
buildings
that
just
beautify
our
city,
the
rose,
Wagner
theater,
the
Virginia,
Tanner,
dance,
building
and
I'm
gonna
miss
a
lot
more,
but
I
mean
we
hired.
We
hired
somebody
who's
who's
interested
in
adding
to
the
beauty
of
our
city,
not
creating
some
monstrous
home
on
the
side
of
a
hill,
that's
going
to
ruin
the
a-truck
trail
and
all
the
people
who
utilize
it.
We
utilize
the
hrock
trail.
AI
We
live
on
the
street,
as
Matt
said,
we
did
an
abundance
of
due
diligence
before
purchasing
the
slot.
It
I
just
want
to
briefly
share
what
a
struggle
this
has
been
for
us
during
an
enormously
stressful
time
in
our
lives
we
loved
our
existing
home.
That's
on
Devonshire,
it's
just
about
four
blocks
down,
but
we
went
through
a
multitude
of
really
horrific
tragedies
with
all
within
a
short
period
of
time,
including
a
Murder
By
arson
of
the
beloved
family
member,
in
which
I
was
named,
the
state's
victim.
AI
It
was
just
too
much
especially
for
our
young
children,
and
so
we
just
needed
a
fresh
start.
We
wanted
out
of
the
home.
We
just
want
to
be
in
the
neighborhood.
We
want
our
girls
to
go
in
the
same
school,
keep
their
friends.
So
when
this
lot
came
available,
we
we
I
mean
we
jumped
at
it,
but
we
did
no.
It
was
difficult.
So
that's
why
we
did
all
the
due
diligence
before
we
purchased
it
and
we
it's.
AI
It's
just
been
an
unexpected
struggle
and
we
just
are
looking
for
some
peace
and
just
a
light
at
the
end
of
the
tunnel.
We
we
want
the
I
think
the
drawings
show
this,
but
just
to
be
clear.
This
22
feet
exception
that
the
home
would
is
almost
even
with
the
H
Rock
Trail.
It's
not
like
it's
going
to
block
any
views,
it's
even
with
the
H
Rock
Trail.
So
it's
not
blocking
any
views.
AH
May
just
add
up:
I
might
Mr
chairman.
We
just
found
out
this
week,
the
extent
of
which
previous
height
exceptions
have
been
made
on
Devonshire
and
realize
that
we've
considerably
overshot
what
president
they
may
represent.
So
our
intent
is
to
come
back
within
those
parameters,
ideally
not
to
require
an
exception,
but
we'd
want
to
reserve
the
right
to
come
back
and
request
an
exception.
So
I'm
not.
AH
We
may
in
fact
not
even
come
back
to
the
Planning
Commission,
but
and
Alexis
also
told
us
that
not
only
would
is
he
willing
to
work
with
us
going
forward,
but
there
might
be
the
opportunity
for
us
to
come
before
a
working
session
of
the
Planning
Commission
and
just
get
your
feedback
on
what
you
think
is
reasonable
or
not.
So
anyway,
we
just
want
to
maintain
our
options
going
forward,
but
our
intent
is
to
try
to
make
this
work.
C
A
AD
A
AG
I'm
Stephen
Bradley
I'm
the
picture
of
the
house
that
you
saw
to
the
left
of
the
photo.
That's
my
house.
My
lot
was
in
a
mirror
image
smaller,
but
a
mirror
image
of
Fortune's
lot.
I
have
the
same
access.
I
have
a
limited
access
to
my
lot
because
it's
back
from
the
cul-de-sac,
I
have
the
same:
easements
I
have
a
utility
easement
I
have
a
pedestrian
easement
I
have
the
water
line?
I
have
utility
access
easement
we
had
to
stay
off
of
all
of
those
as
well
as
you
can
see
by
that
crude
picture.
AG
Our
architect
stair-stepped
our
house
up
the
hillside
staying
under
the
height
requirements.
All
the
way
up,
however,
when
we
finished
I
needed
an
elevator
because
of
handicap
access
and
I
have
three
floors
because
of
the
stair
stepping
so
I
the
best
place
to
put
it
was
in
the
front
corner
and
that
made
one
corner
of
my
upstairs
six
inches
higher
than
28
feet.
AG
So
we
came
to
the
city
and
asked
for
a
variance
and
we
were
told
that
we
needed
to
get
the
signatures
of
everybody
within
450
feet:
Property
Owners,
within
450
feet
of
our
property,
so
I
spent
the
next
three
weeks
going
around
door
to
door
getting
all
of
those
signatures
showing
the
plans
because
I
back
up
on
screen
space
because
I
signed
up
on
greenspace.
There
was
no
visual
impairment
to
anyone
behind
me.
AG
So
I
got
all
of
those.
Nobody
had
a
problem
with.
It
came
before
the
Planning
Commission,
not
a
hearing,
not
a
public
hearing,
but
before
the
Planning
Commission
and
before
we
could
even
finish
our
presentation.
We
were
shut
down
and
said.
We
don't
make
height
restrictions
in
the
foothold
Zone,
even
if
it's
six
inches,
because
if
we
give
you
six
inches
somebody's
going
to
want
10
feet
and
then
they're
going
to
want
15
feet
and
we
won't
have
a
reason
not
to
give
it
to
them.
AG
AJ
Name
is
Jordan
Kendall,
I
own
the
property
immediately
to
the
north
of
the
subject
property.
You
saw
my
house
in
those
photographs
and
my
family
and
I
object
as
to
the
plans
as
drawn.
We
sympathize
with
the
family
trying
to
build
the
home,
but
I
took
photos
last
night
looking
out
of
our
South
windows.
AJ
If
you
were
to
allow
the
property
as
built,
we
could
see
to
the
South
Point
of
the
mountains.
You
can't
anymore.
This
photograph
is
taken
from
the
top
of
our
house.
If
you
were
to
allow
the
house
as
drawn
complete
obstruction
of
our
Southward
views,
I
selected
those
a
couple
photographs
because
they're
on
the
south
side
of
our
house,
they're
also
from
our
home
offices
and
in
today's
day
and
age,
people
work
from
home
a
lot
allowing
this
a
special
exception
would
completely
obliterate
our
South
views.
AJ
I
also
took
those
two
views,
so
you
can
see
what
it
is
from
the
main
level
of
our
house
also
from
the
highest
livable
space
in
our
property.
Either
way
the
views
as
they
are
submitting
their
plans
would
be
completely
obliterated.
It's
also
important
to
keep
in
mind
how
much
is
being
requested
here.
It
is
22
feet
that
is
a
79
increase
over
the
20
foot.
Eight
feet
allowed.
What
they've
done
is
moved
that
over
Westward
because
of
the
slope,
and
we
now
have
what
would
be
a
50
foot
tall
building
in
my
backyard.
AJ
That's
right
in
the
area
of
the
South
part
of
our
yard
is
where
my
kids
play
our
pool
our
barbecue,
our
main
usable
grass
area
all
right
there
right
now,
they've
got
a
beautiful
mountainscape
to
look
at
as
proposed.
They
would
have
a
50-foot
tall
building,
25
feet,
of
which,
if
I
can
read
the
plans
correctly
would
be
a
concrete
wall
and
then
two
more
stories
of
Home
above
it
with
our
neighbors
peering
in
to
what
would
be
a
fishbowl
of
our
backyard
so
as
proposed,
we
would
object.
That's.
A
AK
AK
Live
just
behind
the
applicant
and
we
also
took
eight
years
to
get
our
home
build.
We
asked
for
an
eight
inch
variance
and
we
were
told
by
the
city.
You
can
jump
through
all
the
Hoops.
You
want
it's
not
going
to
happen.
We
ended
up
using
three
different
Architects
and
eight
years
to
finally
get
the
home
built.
This
is
one
of
the
most
beautiful
trailheads
in
the
city.
I
would
love
it.
AK
AK
My
lot
itself
was
six
thousand
feet
on
two
acres,
so
it's
considerably
smaller
than
than
the
applicants
building
envelope,
but
I
think
the
most
frustrating
thing
is
in
December
of
2021
the
Planning
Commission
decided
to
do
away
with
all
exemptions
period,
end
of
story,
the
biggest
exemption
that
was
ever
given
was
11
feet
and
permission
was
given
by
the
neighbor
directly
across
the
street.
This
is
not
the
case.
We
are
all
very
adamant
against
getting
not
just
11
foot
but
they're,
asking
for
a
22
foot
variance
and
it's
not
a
two-story
building.
AK
It
is
a
five-story
building,
it
looks
like
a
commercial
structure
and
the
roof
is
totally
flat.
So
no
matter
where
you're
standing
you're
looking
at
what
it
looks
like
an
industrial
building-
and
it's
just
looks
horrible
and
you
know
I
I
didn't
hire
a
steam
architect
like
Prescott,
but
I
would
say,
given
that
you've
had
three
to
five
years
to
do
this
and
here's
where
we
are
it's
very
disappointing,
but.
AL
Name
is
Peter
Cartwright,
my
wife,
Sandra
hastad
and
I
live
at
1761
South
Mohawk
Circle.
We
live
within
300
feet
of
the
property
in
question,
as
I
stated
in
the
email,
I
sent
I
think
that
we
have
three
objections
to
this
number
one.
We
feel
it's
going
to
set
a
very
dangerous
precedent
and
there's
still
a
lot
of
property
that
can
be
developed,
south
and
east
of
the
hrock,
and
if
this
becomes
something
that
is
accepted,
I
suspect
people
on
those
lots
are
going
to
request
the
same
kind
of
thing.
AL
Second
of
all,
as
people
have
already
mentioned,
the
focus
of
the
of
the
plan
and
the
justification
was
largely
from
the
road
upward
and
what's
being
missed
in
these
discussions.
Is
this
big
front
west
facing
structure
that
somebody
said
is
like
50
feet?
I
think
it's
actually
48
feet
and
half
of
that
is
a
concrete
wall.
There
were
no
Arc.
AL
There
were
no
Landscaping
plans
given,
so
we
don't
know
what
they're
going
to
do
with
that,
but
that's
not
going
to
look
very
good
and
it's
going
to
affect
more
than
just
the
300
yard
people
it's
going
to
affect
all
the
people
down.
Who
are
going
to
look
up
at
this
large
west
facing
wall.
The
third
thing
and
I
think
it
was
that
I
objected
to
it's,
but
it's
been
much
better
articulated
than
I
will
is.
AL
All
of
us
have
come
to
you
guys
with
variants
and
almost
universally
we
get
denied
I
asked
for
a
one
foot
setback
for
a
four
foot,
deck
and
I
was
denied,
and
so,
from
my
point
of
view,
there's
an
issue
of
fairness
here
and
an
issue
that
you
know
that
all
people
are
treated
the
same
and
I.
Think
if
the.
If
the
commission
accepts
this
you're
opening
the
door
for
being
viewed
as
taking
influence
from
the
outside
and
I
hope
that
that
wouldn't
happen.
That's
all
I
have
to
say
thank
you.
Thank.
C
AM
Will
this
work?
Yeah,
okay,
I'm,
Jennifer,
Kinder
and
I
have
to
say
that
I've
long
admired
and
respected
Prescott
Muir's
work
as
an
architect.
Also,
the
foresgrins
have
an
amazing
opportunity
to
build
a
beautiful
home
on
a
premier
lot
overlooking
the
Salt
Lake
Valley
I
would
agree
that
this
is
a
very
difficult
lot
to
design
for,
as
are
most
Lots
in
this
community.
AM
AM
The
issues
that
are
currently
of
greatest
significance
regarding
the
current
proposed
designer
fairness
and
impact
on
property
values
community
means
that
people
adhere
to
some
agreed
upon
rules
and
cooperate
to
protect
each
other's
Rights
and
Freedoms.
Our
government,
including
the
Planning
Commission,
is
put
in
place
to
prevent
people
from
infringing
on
the
rights
of
others.
AM
AM
AN
I'm
Von
Kinder
I'm
married
to
this
illustrious
architect
that
just
spoke,
so
this
lot's
really
steep
right.
We're
talking
about
that
lot
reaches
where
the
property
line
is,
and
then
it
really
gets
steep.
Our
lot
is
60
feet
higher
in
the
back
than
it
is
in
the
front.
We
went
through
all
the
Planning
Commission
stuff.
We
got
everybody
to
agree
and
we're
told
the
same
thing.
Everybody
else
did
like
no.
We
had
a
space
the
size
of
this
table
here,
12
inches.
We
we
spent
nearly
a
year
just
going
through
that
process.
AN
This
that
door
there's
eight
feet.
This
room
might
be
20
feet
and
you're
telling
me
you're
gonna,
go
20
more
and
then
another
10
on
top
of
that
and
you're
going
to
put
that
in
my
backyard,
so
I'd
be
a
little
excited
about
that.
I
think
they
understand
that
I.
Don't
think
that
the
commission
or
the
staff
has
considered
these
homes
that
border
the
west
side
of
this
lot
everything
I
read
about
is
nobody
can
see
this
house
from
Devonshire,
but
if
you're
at
my
lot,
you're
going
well,
it's
it's
substantial.
AO
AO
Project
is
going
to
be
built,
I
just
want
to
make
it
short
but
clear
that
I
don't
want
to
die
killed
by
the
concrete
or
any
of
the
rocks
in
the
landscape.
I
don't
want
to
see
anything
like
a
home.
What
we
see
what
we
saw
last
month
happened
in
Draper
those
developers
and
Architects
and
Builders.
They
have
so
much
experience,
building
beautiful
homes
in
Draper,
and
yet
we
see
that
happen.
It
happens
and
I
don't
want
to
be
killed
by
any
of
the
concrete
or
the
rocks
in
my
backyard,
and
that's
it.
Thank
you.
AO
C
AP
Proposing
willing
to
redesign
the
plan
because
I
hate
I
dislike
the
fact
that
you
would
be
coming
into
the
neighborhood
when
every
single
one
of
the
neighbors
around
you
is
against
your
home
I.
Don't
I!
Don't
want
that
for
you,
so
I'm
hoping
we
can
all
come
to
a
resolution
that
works
for
everybody
and
go
forward
with
something
that
fits
in
the
neighborhood
that
doesn't
impact
other
people
that
already
live
there.
That's
it
thanks.
C
AC
C
Q
Mr
chair,
it
seems
to
me
that
the
applicant
is
willing
to
work
through
his
project
again
through
their
project
again
and
revise
so
I.
Don't
know
that
there's
much
for
us
to
do
except
you
know
he
wants
to
ask
him
to
have
us
stable
this
project.
The
neighbors
have
voiced
their
opinion.
So
in
my
view
that
seems
to
be
the
mythological
choice.
T
If
it's
denied,
then
they
would
lose
the
opportunity
to
request
any
sort
of
special
exception
and,
and
we
as
planning
staff,
would
try
to
give
them
the
benefit
of
the
doubt
and
hope
that
you
would
not
outright
deny
this
project
that
you
would
table
it.
Let
them
come
back
with
the
redesign
and,
let's
let
the
public
see
that
comment
on
it
and
then
make
a
decision.
Moving
forward.
Can.
T
D
D
If
they
had
a
whole
different
rule,
I
mean
I.
Think
it's
I
think
it's
pretty
easy
to
table
it
and
say
we
hope
you
can
figure
out
this
house
without
having
to
come
back.
That's
a
pretty
easy
thing
to
do.
I
think
we
might
take
a
I,
don't
know
if
we
can
take
a
temperature
poll
and
say
does,
does
anyone
feel
like
they
would?
V
C
I
Q
P
A
I
A
W
AL
AR
AC
AQ
AM
D
F
K
K
K
K
V
V
So
here
is
the
current
single-family
home.
That's
on
the
property.
There
are
other
multi-family
buildings
directly
adjacent
to
this
property
directly
to
the
West.
Is
this
multi-family
building
here
there's
a
duplex
on
the
East
and
along
900s
out?
There
are
many
other
duplexes
triplexes
of
the
sort
in
this
rmf-35
Zone
directly
across
the
street
is
the
fire
station.
V
V
They
are
really
only
allowed
to
do
a
single
family
detached
home
on
their
lot,
despite
being
in
a
multi-family
Zone,
but
with
the
recent
changes
to
RMF
30,
these
standards
were
changed
in
the
RMF
30
Zone
to
allow
more
flexibility,
especially
in
regards
to
the
minimum
lot
width
and
minimum
lot
size
for
these
housing
types.
So
they
are
eligible
for
a
variety
of
different
housing
types
under
the
rmf-30
Zone,
despite
being
by
definition
a
down
Zone.
V
So
the
rmf-30
zone
changes
occurred.
They
were
voted
on
last
October
and
then
went
into
effect.
This
April
and
the
intent
of
these
changes
was
exactly
to
allow
greater
flexibility
for
multi-family
configurations,
and
so
that
meant
changing
the
lot
with
standards.
The
lot
size
areas
all
to
create
more
flexibility.
V
So
they
Not
only
would
have
greater
flexibility
in
housing
types,
but
also
additional
design
standards.
On
top
of
that,
so
the
master
plans
that
are
subject
to
this
property
are
the
Central
Community
master
plan
and
the
East
Central
Community
small
area
master
plan,
and
both
of
these
Master
plans
do
designate
this
area
as
a
medium
density,
residential
area
calling
between
15
and
20.
Sorry
I
think
that's
supposed
to
be
30
15
30
units
per
acre
and
the
master
plans
do
Express
concern
at
a
loss
of
residential
dwelling
units,
but
not
the
other
way
around.
V
This
application
did
go
through
the
housing
loss
mitigation
process
and,
although
the
applicant
has
no
current
plans
to
redevelop
their
property
at
this
time,
they
have
agreed
to
enter
into
a
development
agreement
that
ensures
that
housing
would
be
replaced
if
their
current
home
were
to
be
demolished
when
this
property.
When
and
if
this
property
redevelops.
A
A
AB
AB
We
are
we,
you
know,
I
I
thought
there
was
gonna
a
little
bit
of
a
change
here
in
that
we
felt
like
when
we
were
at
the
meeting
that
the
applicants
were
planning
on
moving
as
soon
as
possible,
and
we
we
were
under
the
impression
that
they
wanted
to
get
a
higher
price
for
their
house
and
that's
why
they
were
zoning.
That's
what
you
know
was
expressed
to
this
meeting
so
I
apologize
for
our
comments
because
it
potentially
doesn't
fit
now,
but
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
let
her
speak
first.
AR
Hi
I'm
Dr,
Alicia,
Cunningham,
Bryant
I'm,
also
on
the
alpco
board
and
I'm
working
on
our
land
use
committee
and
that
we've
newly
formed.
So
thank
you
from
hearing
from
elfco
this
evening
on
this
rezoning
issue.
As
it
stands,
the
elpco
board
has
heard
from
some
of
our
Christian
constituents
and
Christina
Rob
will
speak
more
to
these
in
a
few
moments.
However,
the
board
has
not
yet
been
able
to
discuss
this
feedback
from
Neighbors
and
community
members
and
as
such,
cannot
approve
or
disapprove
of
the
proposal.
AR
This
evening
the
board
will
be
meeting
tomorrow
with
zoning
issues
on
our
agenda
in
order
to
become
more
familiar
with
broader
Elco
zoning
maps
and
potential
ramifications
that
may
occur
from
this
proposal
and
potential
future
proposals
of
the
same
nature.
While
the
board
absolutely
supports
increasing
housing
opportunities,
the
board
remains
concerned
about
making
sure
those
housing
options
are
affordable
and
do
not
exacerbate
displacement
of
elpco
residents
due
to
being
priced
out
of
rentals
and
or
home
ownership.
AB
Okay,
so
when
we
did
walk
around
and
we
talked
to
people,
we
didn't
actually
get
direct
concerns
about
the
the
change
because
they
there
is
no
change
on
the
table.
That's
what
most
people
were
concerned
about
changing
a
Zone
and
not
really
then
going
for
the
conditional
use
when
the
project
was
being
proposed.
Other
issues
were
having
nothing
to
do
with.
This
is
It's
a
high
impact,
the
parking
issues,
especially
right
across
from
the
fire
department
and
with
the
new
Lanes
in
on
the
nine
Line
Trail
or
on
900
South.
AB
The
area
is
very,
very
tight,
so
additional
homes
in
that
area
would
potentially
increase
difficulties
for
the
fire
department.
Again,
I
want
to
be
really
clear
that
these
are
more
suggestions,
because
most
people
don't
understand
why
a
down
Zone
would
actually
increase
density
and
we
didn't
feel
like
we
really
had
that
ability
to
go
around
and
speak
to
them.
So
we're
going
to
leave
this
as
it
is
tonight
and
just
leave
it
up
to
you
to
do
your
best
work
and
thank
you
for
very
much
for
hearing
us
out.
C
D
V
D
J
Feels
that
way,
but
it's
not
I,
think
it's
because
the
the
purpose
of
the
Zone
zoning
this
area
rmf-35,
was
to
create
more
dense
housing.
This
lot
can't
support
that,
so
it
was
zoned
to
something
that
doesn't
support
the
zone
that
it's
been
rezoned
to.
So
this
is
the
only
way
to
be
able
to
get
the
density
that
was
originally
intended.
So,
even
though
it
seems
like
a
spot,
Zone
and
kind
of
is
it
it's
meets
the
intent
of
what
the
zoning
is
and
that's
how
we
get
there
I
think.
Q
V
E
V
AS
The
house
is
a
tear
down
it's
it's
falling
apart,
it
would
be
like
it
would
be
like
Tom
Pitts,
Tom
Hanks
in
The
Money
Pit,
for
it
would
I
mean
we
spent
20
some
odd
years
in
that
house,
and
we've
watched
it
just
dilapidate
and
there's
beautiful
places
going
up
in
my
neighborhood
across
the
street
from
me
down
the
street
around
the
corner
in
any
direction
and
I
would
like
to
see
something
like
that
happen.
Eventually,
I
have
no
plans.
I
I,
don't
have
my
house
up
for
sale.
AS
P
E
P
A
AS
AS
I
can
I
say
one
thing
for
just
one.
Second,
before
I
leave
I
know,
you're
pressed
for
time.
I
had
no
idea
this
evening
that
Saint
Vincent
De
Paul
was
going
to
be
here.
I
worked
for
Saint
Vincent
de
Paul
and
I
just
have
to
say
that
on
Ninth
and
9th,
where
I'm,
living
and
and
I
had
no
idea,
they
were
going
through
the.
A
A
A
AT
Should
I
make
Adobe
Acrobat
the
the
main
program
I
did
it
now
full
screen
should
be
easier
for
everyone.
Okay,
thank
you.
Everyone
for
your
patience.
My
purpose
here
today
is
to
give
you
an
overview
of
this
request
to
for
you
and
the
public
and
to
address
concerns
that
may
have
come
up
during
staff's
analysis
and
during
from
public
comments.
So
this
is
a
request
for
a
rezone
and
a
master
plan
Amendment
for
the
properties
around
1435
South
State.
AT
The
request
is
to
rezone
the
property
from
CC
commercial
Corridor
and
my
maps
are
flipped.
I
would
like
to
apologize
for
my
flipped
Maps
I
thought
I
updated
that
so
the
map
for
the
zoning
map,
image
on
the
left
on
the
map
for
the
master
plan
limits
on
the
right
to
rezone
from
r15000
and
CC
commercial
Corridor
to
fbun2,
form-based,
Urban,
neighborhood
district
and
also
an
Associated
master
plan
Amendment
from
medium
mixed
use
and
low
density
residential
to
High
mixed
use.
AT
So
the
project
site
consists
of
multiple
properties
that
the
applicant
intends
to
consolidate.
If
the
request
is
approved
and
building
code
does
require
consolidation
prior
to
development
of
the
lot,
the
property
is
occupied
by
several
commercial
buildings
along
State
Street,
as
well
as
a
single-family
house,
a
commercial
building
on
Edison
Street
and
an
outdoor
storage
parking
area
in
the
on
the
rear
on
facing
Edson
Street,
the
property
in
question.
Here,
here's
some
site
photos.
AT
This
is
located
within
the
Liberty
Wells
National
Historic
District,
and
you
mentioned
in
the
report
that
it's
not
under
the
city's
purview.
It
is
merely
an
honorary
system
that
provides
incentives
for
development,
but
the
applicant
intends
to
demolish
what
is
on
the
site,
but
the
four-year
entertainment.
This
was
an
OP
Skaggs
building
on
the
corner
here,
just
some
more
photos
of
the
property.
AT
And
on
1420,
this
is
the
commercial
building
on
Edison
Street,
and
this
is
the
the
parking
area
and
there's
Edison
Street.
The
neighborhood
is
generally
a
single
family
and
character
outside
of
the
the
subject
property.
The
transition
from
State
Street
commercial
to
the
residential
single
family
district
is
quite
Stark,
as
can
be
seen
from
the
subject
site
where
the
single
family
house
is
nearly
right
up
against
the
commercial
building
to
the
north
of
the
property
is
the
Utah
Department
of
Child
and
Family
Services?
Building
that
also
houses,
other
departments
and
other
organizations.
AT
So
I
want
to
get
into
what
exactly
would
change
under
this
request.
So
specifically
within
the
CC
district,
there
are
several
high-intensity
and
car
Centric
uses
that
are
not
permitted
within
the
CC
district
and
I've
listed
them
in
the
staff
report,
including
gas
stations
and
car
washes
auto
repair.
A
couple
of
things
that
are
permitted
even
without
a
conditional
use
for
height
45
feet
is
the
maximum
height
in
the
CC
District
went
through
design
review.
It
is
30
feet
without
design
review.
AT
AT
There
is
a
step
back
requirement
in
the
fbnu
fbun2
district,
which
is
a
one-to-one
step
back
above
the
30
foot
height
and
that
actually
may
change
it's
under
the
review
of
city
council
at
the
moment
for
the
downtown
building
Heights
amendment
that
you
reviewed,
it's
been
a
while
now,
but
in
the
past
and
fbun2,
is
included
in
that
that
amendment.
That
would
slightly
change
the
step
back.
The
way
they
put
it
in
the
city
council.
It
would
change
from
a
pyramid
to
a
wedding
cake.
AT
So,
instead
of
a
one-to-one
step
back,
it
would
be
simply
at
30
feet.
The
additional
height
needs
to
be
set
back,
30
feet
from
that
setback
line
and
then
the
landscape
buffer
would
not
change,
but
that
would
they
would
be
required
to
include
shade
trees,
Hedges
and
fences
along
single-family
Residential
Properties.
AT
This
proposal
mostly
complies
with
master
plan
and
policies
and
goals
in
the
Central
Community
master
plan.
There
is
some
Focus
to
keep
new
density
only
in
downtown
neighborhoods,
but
more
contemporary
policies
and
plans
have
really
focused
on
bringing
medium
density
and
high
density
to
other
parts
of
the
community
plant.
Salt,
Lake
and
growing
SLC.
C
AU
Thank
you
so
much.
My
name
is
Matthew
rootell
and
I'm
with
colemana
group.
We're
part
of
the
ownership
team
on
this
project,
we're
a
local
Salt
Lake
based
real
estate
development
firm
that
has
done
a
number
of
mixed
use
and
multi-family
projects
here
in
Salt
Lake.
We
also
are
excited
to
be
here
again.
We
are
here
a
couple
weeks
ago
on
a
similar
type
of
project
on
State,
Street
and
I'm.
AU
We
see
it
as
a
huge
asset
for
our
community
and
we
believe
that
1435
State
Street
will
Breathe
new
life
into
this
section
of
State
Street
that
will
provide
additional
housing
units
and
at
an
attainable
rate,
that
will
be
really
a
community
amenity
that
the
local
neighborhood
could
go,
engage
with
the
retail
that
will
be
there
and
the
restaurant
all
while
delivering
a
beautiful,
thoughtful
building.
So
with
that,
we'll
turn
the
time
over
to
our
design
team
Simon.
AV
Yeah
thanks
for
the
intro
Matt,
my
name
is
Simon
rusinski
I'm,
a
project
manager
with
designs
of
Tomorrow
architecture,
which
is
the
firm
that's
doing
this
project
we're
actually
located
on
State
Street.
So
we
have
a
pretty
vested
interest
in
the
neighborhood
and
in
a
lot
of
the
master
plans
that
have
come
out
recently
and
we're
pretty
heavy
because
of
kind
of
building
up
that
existing
Corridor
kind
of,
as
Aaron
mentioned,
with
some
of
the
master
plans
that
are
more
recent.
AV
So
look
here
just
briefly,
this
is
an
overview
map
you
can
see.
The
highlighted
in
red
here
is
the
subject
property.
We
are
just
a
little
bit
south
of
13th
South
a
little
bit
southeast
of
the
the
ballpark
and
as
Aaron
mentioned,
we
are
basically
one
lot
down
from
the
Coachman's
site,
which
was
recently
approved
with
the
same
up.
AV
Zone
take
a
look
here
at
the
transit
and
neighborhood
map,
so
State
Street
is
actually
an
existing
high
frequency
bus
route
through
UTA
buses
come
every
15
minutes
and
then
the
red,
green
and
blue
tracks
lines
are
all
converged
at
the
Ballpark
track
station,
which
is
only
about
a
half
mile
walk
away.
So
in
the
grand
scheme
of
things
this
is
actually
a
pretty
transit-rich
neighborhood,
looking
again
at
the
vicinity
and
current
zoning
map.
So
the
current
Zone,
as
Aaron
mentioned,
is
commercial
Corridor
and
then
there's
a
little
bit
of
r15000.
AV
In
that
lower
right
hand,
corner
limitations
of
the
current
Zone
include
lower
height
and
density
limits
than
are
preferred
in
a
lot
of
the
recently
approved
Master
plans.
The
more
contemporary
plans
that
Aaron
was
mentioning
mentioning
that
limited
height
leads
to
a
low
sense
of
enclosure
ratio
which
is
the
building
height
to
street,
with
I'm
sure.
As
we
all
know,
State
Street's,
a
very
wide
Street,
doesn't
feel
very
Urban
or
very
walkable
with
those
lower
density
buildings
that
are
in
the
current
zones.
AV
AV
So
here's
a
brief
site
plan
might
be
a
little
bit
hard
to
see,
but
you
can
see
some
of
those
some
of
those
setback
and
setback
requirements
put
in
place
here
when
the
the
property
borders,
the
existing
single-family
lots
that
are
down
here
to
the
southeast
and
then
a
ground
floor
plan
showing
we're
proposing
three
separate
retail
spaces
along
State
Street.
We
kind
of
minimize
the
lobby
and
we
kept
a
lot
of
our
amenities
internal
to
the
building.
AV
This
is
a
view
looking
from
the
southwest
corner,
so
State
streets,
running
in
front
of
the
property,
Cleveland
Avenue
is
just
kind
of
to
the
to
the
right
lower
right
of
this
image.
Here
you
can
see
those
three
separate
retail
spaces
with
the
lobby
in
the
middle
A,
View
From,
the
northwest
corner
again,
those
retail
spaces
along
State
Street
and
then
A
View
From,
the
southeast
Corner,
starting
to
demonstrate
how
those
setbacks,
step
backs
and
Landscape
standards
will
be
implemented
again.
AV
A
N
My
name
is
Natasha
Curtis
I
live
just
around
the
corner
from
where
this
is
proposed.
Speaking
to
a
lot
of
the
neighbors,
we
are
very
excited
about
State
Street
being
renovated,
but
what
we
don't
want
is
the
very
tall
buildings.
There's
nothing
like
that.
Really
in
the
area
it's
going
to
stand
out.
It
blocks
our
views,
but
we
like
the
idea
of
it
being
renovated.
N
A
AU
X
Q
AT
So
I
I
briefly
mentioned
it,
but
The
Coachman
property.
I
know
there
has
been
some
back
and
forth
with
staff
between
that
applicant,
but
that
was
approved
with
a
similar
district
and
they
had
a
plan
in
place
to
put
in
a
a
similarly
scaled
development
on
that
corner,
which
would
be
north
of
the
DCFS
building.
AT
This
would
basically
mirror
that
that
and
then
there's
also
this
is
a
little
further
south,
but
the
maven
estate
project
that
colemania
group
came
forward
last
meeting
on
that
was
for
an
rmu
District
that
is
still
needs
to
go
to
the
city.
Council
is
still
under
review.
There
are
a
few
others
in
the
ballpark
area.
I
believe
you
also
reviewed
one
for
a
plan
development
west
of
the
ballpark.
AK
AT
Q
F
C
A
A
P
P
F
A
P
A
A
Z
M
Z
Someone
Jamie
I
should
have
looked
at
that:
okay,
yeah.
Let
me
just
start.
The
sentence
over
the
applicant
is
requesting
to
change
the
zoning
and
amend
the
Central
Community
master
plan.
Future
land
use
map
for
the
property
located
at
116
East
Edith
Avenue.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
amend
the
zoning
from
r15000,
which
is
a
single
family,
residential
district
to
the
CC
Corridor
commercial,
which
is
a
commercial
District.
Z
The
subject
property
has
a
history
of
being
used
as
a
commercial
use,
despite
being
created
for
a
single-family
home.
According
to
the
original
plot,
which
was
created
in
1919.,
the
Sanborn
Maps
up
to
1950
indicate
a
home,
a
single
family
home
existing
on
the
property.
However,
no
records
of
the
house
can
be
found
after
1979
indicating
that
the
single-family
home
was
removed
prior
to
then,
the
site
has
a
current
existing
use
as
additional
surface
parking
for
the
commercial
business
located
directly
west,
which
fronts
along
State
Street.
As
you
can
see,
hey.
Z
All
right,
the
subject:
property
is
located:
adjacent
to
State,
Street,
directly
north
of
the
corner
of
state
and
1300.
South.
Here
is
an
aerial
image,
taking
looking
East
here's
an
image
as
the
site
of
the
site
as
it
exists
today,
standing
from
Edith
Ave,
looking
South
and
then
here
is
a
site
looking
North
from
the
alleyway,
and
then
this
is
the
site
on
the
ground
level.
As
seen
from
State
Street.
Z
The
following
key
considerations
were
identified
through
the
analysis
of
the
project.
I
will
touch
briefly
on
a
few
of
the
main
topics.
First,
master
plan
compliance
the
applicant
identified
and
proposed
the
community
commercial
Zone
in
order
to
match
the
existing
commercial
site
in
use
in
the
staff
report,
staff
discusses
the
city
goals
and
policies
identified
in
the
applicable
Master
plans
on
page
five
through
seven,
as
well
as
an
attachment
e,
as
outlined
in
the
staff
report,
identified
policy
statements
from
the
Central
Community
master
plan
and
plan
Salt
Lake
indicate
the
proposals.
Z
Compliance
with
both
plans,
the
adopted
plan
policies
and
goals
do
generally
align
with
the
proposed
amendments.
The
neighborhood
has
established
both
r15000
and
CC.
Zoning
in
the
area
surrounding
the
site,
while
the
change
could
allow
for,
let
me
go
for
it
here.
Well,
the
change
could
allow
for
larger
future
commercial
development
than
what
is
currently
existing.
Z
In
brief
comparison,
the
chart
included
on
this
slide
in
illustrates
the
regulatory
differences
between
the
two
current
and
proposed
zones.
The
zoning
Amendment
standards,
especially
the
purpose
statement,
which
are
analyzed
in
attachment
g
d.
Sorry
of
the
staff
report
generally
do
support
the
requested
amendment.
In
addition
to
these
standards,
several
additional
uses
are
permitted
in
the
CC
Zone
than
what
are
permitted
in
the
r15000
zone.
A
list
of
those
uses
can
be
found
on
pages,
14
and
15
of
the
staff
report.
Z
It
should
be
noted
that
if
the
property
were
redeveloped
or
the
use
were
expanded,
the
current
use,
a
landscape
offer
would
need
to
be
placed
in
between
the
expansion
and
any
adjacent
single-family
homes.
In
addition
to
the
two
considerations,
I
also
wanted
to
mention
housing
loss
mitigation.
According
to
section
18.97.020
of
Salt
Lake
City
code
quote
any
petition
for
a
zoning
change
that
would
permit
a
non-residential
use
of
land
that
includes
within
its
boundaries.
Z
Residential
dwelling
units
may
not
be
approved
until
a
housing
mitigation
plan
is
approved
by
the
city,
unquote,
because
the
site
does
not
include
a
residential
dwelling
unit
within
its
boundaries.
A
housing
mitigation
plan
is
not
required
by
the
city
in
regards
to
the
public
process
and
comments.
There
have
been
no
letters
or
public
comments
received
regarding
the
project
up
to
this
point
and
then
recommendations
after
reviewing
the
proposal
and
in
summary,
staff
recommends
that
the
Planning
Commission
forward
a
positive
recommendation
to
the
zoning
and
for
the
zoning
and
planned
Amendment
to
the
city
council.
AW
Ian
Kaplan
I
won't
take
10
minutes
of
your
time
tonight,
but
thank
you
guys
for
your
endless,
thankless
job
that
you
guys
do
for
our
city,
so
my
name
is
Ian.
Kaplan
I
run
a
company
called
ad
virtue,
it's
an
advocacy,
design
and
development
company
I'm
here
representing
the
owner
as
a
consultant.
He
found
me
through
a
variety
of
channels
that
I
operate
in
and
he
has
no
future
development
plans.
A
A
I've
lived
next
door
to
Bob's
for
four
years,
I've
called
9-1-1,
probably
five
to
six
times
about
people
hanging
in
the
lot
late
at
night,
I
was
told
two
weeks
ago
by
a
worker
at
Bob's
that
the
bush
along
the
fence
needed
to
be
trimmed.
It
was
killed
alongside
the
fence
for
a
good,
20
or
good
30
feet.
It
provided
privacy
between
the
house
and
Bob's
I
understand
and
need
to
maintain,
but
to
kill.
It
was
not
needed
living
next
door.
A
Y
My
name
is
Drew
Hansen
I
live
next
door
to
the
lot
I
was
I
bought
the
house
when
the
house
that
you're
referencing
was
in
place,
which
also
blocks
sound
from
State
Street
and
prevented
vagrancy
with
the
addition
of
the
commercial
zoning
it
changes
from
residential
to
commercial
completely.
Therefore,
the
changes
that
have
occurred
over
the
years,
you've
Incorporated
more
traffic.
When
I
bought
the
house,
there
was
a
school
behind
me
now.
I
have
a
strip
mall.
When
I
bought
the
house,
it
was
Glenn's
keys
and
a
house.
Y
Now
it's
a
magazine,
U-Haul
rentals
area,
sound
and
the
noise
has
increased.
Vagrancy
is
encouraged
by
access
between
both
the
strip
mall
and
the
building
that
exists.
There
is
no
thought
to
the
residential
area
only
to
commercial.
This
is
a
residential
area
and
it
needs
to
be
considered
kept.
That
way.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
A
AQ
AQ
So
while
I
don't
know
if
my
my
sound
is
not
nearly
as
increased
as
Drew's,
but
if
it
does
continue
to
increase
that,
not
only
do
I
maybe
not
approve
of
this,
but
our
street
needs
to
become
a
one-way,
because
we
also
have
the
hotel
that
is
across
the
street.
That
is
also
causing
issues
for
our
neighborhood
and
I.
Think
there
needs
to
be
a
priority
of
the
residents
that
are
there,
not
necessarily
the
businesses
that
are
occupying
that
end
of
our
neighborhood
on
State
Street.
AQ
So,
while
I
I
don't
want
anything
bad
to
happen
for
Bob's
like
they
haven't
necessarily
brought
a
lot,
but
it
has
increased
transient
traffic.
The
U-Hauls
have
become
a
very
big
issue
and
the
traffic
situation
that
is
coming
into
that
residential
area
has
become
a
major
concern
for
not
only
myself
or
the
other
families
that
have
children
that
we
want
that
to
be
a
safe
neighborhood,
and
we
want
the
Redevelopment
of
State
Street
to
reflect
our
values,
not
necessarily
making
more
money
for
the
city.
A
AX
I
work,
get
off
work
at
1am
to
3
A.M,
so
I
see
a
lot
of
people
coming
and
going
walking
down
the
streets
and
arguing
and
fighting
and
all
that
sort
of
thing
we
have
right
now,
one
one
way.
Basically,
the
cards
are
parked
on
the
north
side
of
the
street,
so
there's
not
a
whole
lot
of
room
to
be
going
back
and
forth
and
all
that
sort
of
thing,
and
so
when
we
see
the
U-Hauls
and
the
vans
that
are
parked
on
the
end
of
the
street.
AX
So
when
you
try
to
turn
out
onto
State
Street,
you
have
very
like
no
room
to
look
you're
like
trying
to
look
over
here
and
there's
just
no,
it's
not
safe.
So
that's
just
all
I
have
to
say
it's
just
a
parking
situation
and
a
driving
situation
in
traffic,
and
this
is
not
not
been
good
the
past
month
or
so
that
has
been
up.
So
it's
just
I've
just
noticed
traffic
being
being
increased
and
more
difficult
when
I
back
up
and
I
don't
have
a
great
big
vehicle.
So
just
maybe
something
to
look
at.
AY
Name
is
Rick,
Joseph
I
live
next
to
Drew,
and
the
neighborhood
has
gone
down
in
quality
and
safety.
As
this
business
has
expanded,
it
was
originally
a
magazine
shop,
mostly
pornography.
They
get
Maybe
One
customer
per
day,
so
how
they're
staying
in
business
is
suspect.
They
recently
decided
to
change
this
property
to
a
U-Haul,
drop-off
location,
I'm,
not
aware
of
any
process
that
went
through
the
public
to
approve
that,
and
it
makes
me
very
concerned
with
what's
going
to
happen
as
this
commercial
property
expands.
AY
C
I
So
I
just
have
a
little
bit
of
discussion
as
I
think
through
this,
so
the
existing
conditions
are
out
of
our
purview,
and
so
the
real
question
is:
does
changing
this
to
a
cc
zone?
Is
it
appropriate
for
the
area
and
as
I
understand
it
Grant?
So
when
we
were
looking
at
the
zone
that
big
swath
directly
south
like
that
is
currently
CC,
yeah.
I
Sorry
I
just
can't
picture
it
from
okay,
so
I,
oh
ICC,
okay,
so
I
mean
the
question
before
us
is
honestly.
If,
let's
just
say,
if
this
is
rezone
CC
by
the
city
council
and
they
do
development,
it
feels
like
if
a
new
development
under
the
CC
Zone
may
actually
be
a
better
an
improvement
for
the
conditions
that
are
existing
today.
Even
so,
we
can't
change.
What's
going
on
right
now.
It's
that's
out
of
our
purview.
I
E
I
think
it
probably
would
be
an
improvement
I
think
that
what
we're
looking
at
here
is
sort
of
similar
to
the
last
one
we
looked
at,
where
an
increasing
need
for
depth
off
the
street
to
develop
to
redevelop.
On
the
other
hand,
not
that
I
know
the
motivations
of
the
owner
or
anything
like
that,
but
I'm
unclear
whether
parking
for
U-Hauls
and
that
sort
of
thing
is
actually
allowed
on
a
residential
Zone,
and
so
it
may
be
that
that
is
exactly
why
this
is
going
through
us
and
so
I.
Don't
know
the
motivation.
I
I
F
Z
Z
M
Z
AW
So
this
this
owner
approached
me
about
eight
months
ago
for
this
rezone
and
at
the
time
there
were
no
U-Haul
Vehicles
present
on
site
and
I
also
had
no
mention
that
he
was
going
to
start
a
U-Haul
business
either.
So
this
actually
comes
as
a
surprise
to
me
as
well,
but
I
think
that
it
does
tie
into
the
general
discussion
of
you
know.
AW
J
J
That's
part
of
my
issue
with
CC
Zone
at
all
on
State
Street,
but
there
are
commercial
uses
that
are
appropriate
for
sites
like
this
that
are
beneficial
to
the
neighborhood.
But
you
have
to
weigh
that
and
make
sure
that
they
go
through
the
right
permitting
process
to
get
the
right
use
set
up
on
the
site.
So
but.
F
Street
this
is
now
in
the
United
Streets
of
State,
Street
and
I.
Don't
know
I,
guess
to
me:
it's
I,
don't
know
whether
the
neighbors
have
tried
calling
compliance
because
I
think
this
you
have.
Thank
you.
Yeah
I,
I
think
this
is
a
compliance
issue
and
I
think
if,
if
we
change
it
to
CC,
he
can
do
whatever
he's
doing,
because
then
I
think
we
just
make
a
permitted
use
and
I
don't
like
to
see
that
what
I
don't
I
don't
like
to
see
it
expand.
F
I
I,
don't
know
that
if
it
covers
U-Haul,
but
it
might
that's
what
I'm,
given
the
fact
that
staff
and
and
the
applicant
representative
had
no
idea
that
that
was
being
used.
I
can't
understand
why
that
was
not
included
in
the
comparison
table,
but
I'm
wondering
if
you've
had
a
chance
to
look
up
the
code.
If
that's
permitted
or
conditional.
Q
F
F
A
I
V
A
E
F
A
We
have
a
motion
from
commissioner
Shear
in
a
second
from
commissioner
gent.
Any
any
comments
to
the
motion
we'll
go
ahead
and
vote.
Commissioner
Lee.
Yes,
commissioner
share
yes,
commissioner
Ghent.
Yes,
commissioner
Tuttle.
Yes,
commissioner
Barry.
Yes,
commissioner
Burroughs,
yes,
commissioner
Paredes,
how
about
yes
and
the
vice
chair
will
also
vote
Yes,
so
the
motion
to
recommend
denial
also
passes
unanimously,
so
that
now
moves
to
the
city
council.
A
K
M
By
nine
so
again,
this
is
a
text
Amendment
related
to
the
historic
preservation
overlay
district
from
here
on
out
I'll
just
be
calling
it
The,
H
overlay,
District
that
that
District
applies
to
properties
within
a
local
historic
district.
Salt
Lake
City
currently
has
13
local
historic
districts,
as
shown
us
on
that
map
on
the
right
properties
within
a
thematic
designation.
We
currently
do
not
have
any
of
those
and
landmark
sites.
The
city
has
approximately
150
Landmark
sites.
M
The
section
also
outlines
process
and
standards
for
historic,
designation
and
amendments.
That's
expanding
or
reducing
boundaries
or
revocation
of
the
designation
of
a
landmark
site
staff
is
recommending
that
the
Planning
Commission
forward
a
positive
recommendation
to
city
council
The
Landmark
commission
is
the
land
use
Authority
that
administers
the
provisions
of
the
age,
historic
preservation,
overlay
district,
and
they
reviewed
this
proposal
at
their
May
4th
meeting
and
recommended
that
the
city
council
recommended
to
afford
a
positive
recommendation
to
the
city
council
and
that
recommendation
was
unanimous.
M
Just
a
quick
background.
The
city's
first
preservation
ordinance
was
adopted
in
1976..
Again,
the
hlc
is
one
of
four
land
use
authorities.
They
have
jurisdiction
over
properties.
In
the
overlay,
the
overlay
requires
approval
for
exterior
alterations,
new
construction,
Demolition
and
relocation,
and
again
also
outlines
standards
and
process
for
designation
and
amendments
before
I
jump
right
into
the
text.
Amendment
details
I
want
to
note
that
on
page
two
of
the
staff
report,
I've
included
some
common
preservation
terms.
That
may
be
helpful
for
some
Commissioners
to
reference
as
I
talk
about
the
proposed
changes.
M
A
large
portion
of
this
text
amendment
is
reorganization.
We
are
clarifying
and
reorganizing
chapter
21
a34,
that's
the
overlay
District.
It
moves
the
definitions
from
that
section
into
the
actual
definitions,
chapter
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
It
moves
the
designation
process,
which
is
essentially
an
amendment
process.
It's
adding
an
overlay
to
properties,
boundary
adjustments,
revocation
of
the
designation
of
a
landmark
site
to
a
new
chapter
which
is
21A
51.
M
It
exempts
certain
work
from
obtaining
a
certificate
of
appropriateness.
These
are
things
like
maintenance,
small
plaques
or
mailboxes
utility
meters
charging
stations,
solar
panels
not
visible
from
the
public
right-of-way.
It
also
authorizes
review
of
all
solar
panels
at
a
staff
level.
Currently,
the
hlc
is
required
to
review
solar
panels
that
are
on
the
front
facade
of
a
building.
M
It
adds
in
the
ability
to
deny
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
at
a
staff
level.
This
is
when
standards
are
not
met
as
a
streamlining
measure
for
the
hlc's
time,
it
adds
jurisdiction
and
Authority
language
for
the
hlc
to
reflect
duties
that
aren't
currently
listed.
These
are
things
that
the
landmark
commission
actually
already
does,
such
as
they
review,
National
register
nominations
and
they
make
recommendations
to
the
board
of
State
history,
and
they
also
make
recommendations
to
City
Council
on
the
development
of
incentive
programs
to
encourage
the
preservation
of
cities,
historic
resources.
M
It
also
adds
in
requirements
for
a
notice
of
mailing
for
demolition
of
a
non-contributing
building.
This
notice
is
currently
required
by
ordinance,
but
we've
outlined
things
that
must
be
included
to
provide
relevant
information
to
the
public,
such
as
a
map
survey
information
year
of
construction
photographs,
a
date
when
it
and
a
date
when
a
decision
will
be
issued
by
the
planning
director.
M
The
new
processes
that
we
are
looking
to
add
to
the
zoning
ordinance
are
to
consider
updates
to
Historic
resource
surveys
and
to
create
a
new
process
for
historic
status,
changes,
historic
status,
meaning
whether
or
not
the
building
is
contributing
or
non-contributing,
and
that
is
for
individual
properties.
In
certain
circumstances,
I'll
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
those
new
processes
in
these
upcoming
slides.
M
So
all
of
the
city's
local
historic
districts
have
Associated
historic
resource
surveys
as
a
best
practice
and
consistent
with
policies
outlined
in
the
community
master
plan.
Surveys
should
be
updated
every
five
to
ten
years.
This
text
Amendment
essentially
puts
this
process
into
our
zoning
ordinance.
They
provide
an
under
the
surveys,
provide
an
understanding
of
what
properties
should
be
protected
and
how
to
incorporate
preservation
goals
into
Community
planning
efforts.
Some
Commissioners
may
be
familiar
with
historic
survey,
but
for
the
benefit
of
those
that
may
not
be,
surveys
generally
consist
of
a
written
report.
M
Summarizing
the
history
what's
shown
here
on
the
screen
is
various
clippets
from
the
Central
City
Historic
survey.
So
you
can
see
the
table
of
contents
there.
It
has
a
map
outlining
the
boundaries
of
the
district
as
well
as
identification
of
contributing
and
non-contributing
buildings,
and
then
it
will
have
subsequent
survey
sheets
and
data
sheets
with
information
about
construction
date
style
of
the
building
Etc.
The
report
will
also
identify
periods
of
significance
within
the
historic
district.
M
Alterations
to
a
structure
could
be
made
that
reverses
a
pass
modification,
as
seen
in
these
examples
on
this
particular
slide.
So
a
structure
could
now
qualify
as
a
contributing
building.
Survey
updates,
also
capture
structure
listed
in
an
older
survey
that
may
have
been
adopted
may
have
been
demolished
and
when
we
think
of
historic
status,
changes
I
think
a
lot
of
times
we're
thinking
of
buildings
going
from
contributing
to
non-contributing,
and
that's
not
always
the
case
again.
M
As
seen
as
in
these
photos
in
the
proposed
text,
Amendment
updates
to
Historic
resource
surveys
would
be
a
city
council
level
decision
and
would
have
a
public
process
leading
up
to
it.
We
would
have
public
hearings
with
the
Lamar
commission
and
the
Planning
Commission,
then.
Ultimately,
it
would
be
a
city
council
decision.
M
The
historic
survey
update
wouldn't
change
the
boundaries
of
the
local
historic
district
and,
for
example,
if
the
city
council
chose
not
to
approve
a
historic
survey,
update,
it
wouldn't
change
the
existing
properties
within
the
previously
adopted
survey
and
then
finally,
historic
status.
Determinations.
These
are
for
individual
properties
in
certain
circumstances,
and
this
is
done
through
an
administrative
interpretations.
M
Historic
status
determinations
are
to
decide
whether
or
not
a
property
is
contributing
or
non-contributing.
This
is
important
because
the
standards
in
the
overlay
are
different
depending
on
whether
or
not
the
property
is
contributing
or
non-contributing.
There
are
some
circumstances
that
arise
when
a
Time,
timely
determination
is
needed
regarding
a
property's
historic
status.
The
proposed
ordinance
allows
this
into
like
for
two
situations
that
could
be
unrated,
Properties
or
properties
that
may
warrant
reconsideration.
M
M
Considerations
for
historic
status
determinations
could
be
an
updated
historic
resource
survey.
So
when
we
survey
a
whole
District,
it's
what's
called
a
reconnaissance
level
survey
and
with
somebody
requesting
a
determination
on
their
property.
One
of
the
things
they
could
provide
is
a
an
ILS
survey,
which
means
an
intensive
level
survey,
and
so
it's
a
much
deeper
dive
into
the
history
of
the
property
than
what
would
be
done
just
with
a
reconnaissance
level
survey
for
a
whole
District.
M
In
terms
of
the
public
process,
we
provided
notice
to
all
Salt
Lake
City
recognized
organizations.
We
had
a
virtual
open
house
I
attended
both
the
Sugarhouse
community
council
meeting
in
the
Central
City
community
council
meeting
I
also
spoke
over
the
phone
to
a
board
member
of
the
East
Liberty
Park
Community
Council.
To
answer
some
questions
they
had
about
this
ordinance's
applicability
to
National
register
properties.
Just
for
clarification,
this
does
not
apply
to
National
register
properties.
Those
are
not
regulated
by
Salt
Lake
City.
M
Only
locally
regulated
properties
are
impacted
by
this
ordinance
and
again
that's
properties
in
a
local,
District
or
local
Landmark
sites.
We
have
received
three
public
comments.
Two
of
those
are
in
the
staff
report
and
one
was
forwarded
to
the
or
two
were
forwarded
to
the
commission's
Dropbox,
both
from
the
same
person.
One
was
just
today
again.
Staff
is
recommending
the
commission
forward
a
positive
recommendation
to
City
Council
on
this
matter
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
might
have.
C
I
M
In
terms
of
survey
updates,
we
have
a
number
of
surveys
that
haven't
been
updated
in
a
long
time.
The
city
council
actually
allocated
seventy
five
thousand
dollars
to
the
planning
division
for
survey
updates.
So
we
are
working
on
putting
together
an
RFP
to
do
those
surveys
that
is
consistent
with
the
community
preservation
plan.
J
M
M
Always
say
that
I
don't
anticipate
that
we
will
be
able
to
do
them
every
five
years,
I
think
by
the
time
we
are
planning
on
starting
with
Central
City,
but
by
the
time
we
look
at
you
know,
some
of
our
other
districts
may
not
have
changed
much
like
yalecrest.
For
example,
some
of
the
smaller
districts
in
that
area
may
not
have
changed
since
the
time
those
have
been
designated
as
those
are
the
most
recently
designated
ones,
but.
I
I
guess
one
bit
of
advice:
when
you're,
whoever
does
the
RFP
have
them
set
you
up,
so
that
they
identify
those
potential
Pro
Parcels
that
who
would
be
coming
up
for
a
review,
so
you
don't
have
to
do
the
whole
thing
again.
You
can
already
have
an
idea
of
like
these
are
the
ones
that
should
be
priority
reviewed.
I
I
mean
you
already
know
what
age
of
the
buildings
are
when
you
do
the
initial
review,
so
it's
almost
like
a
precursor
of
like
these
are
the
ones
that
potentially
age-wise
I
mean
there's
still
going
to
be
other
factors
that
you
can
factor
in,
but
at
least
that
could
be
part
of
the
proposal
for
the
scope
of
work
that
they
do.
Yeah.
I
A
AB
Dear
Rob
and
I
currently
serve
as
the
East
Liberty
Park
Community
organization,
chair
and
I
just
wanted
to
thank
Amy
for
spelling
this
out
very
well
to
our
board
member
David
Jones.
He
was
very
appreciative,
and
we
also
wanted
to
thank
you
for
the
the
plan
it
it's
great.
The
one
concern
that
David
had
that
he
asked
me
to
pass
along
is
potentially
the
noticing
issue.
AB
If
many
of
these
things
slide
to
the
planning
department-
and
he
wanted
to
be
really
clear
that
this
wasn't
a
knock
on
the
planning
department,
because
it's
a
really
great
thing-
great
staff
report.
However,
over
time
it
felt
like
maybe
those
that
could
become
more
lackadaisical
and
the
neighbors
wouldn't
necessarily
understand
changes
that
were
being
made
or
they
wouldn't
know
about
it
ahead
of
time.
C
AZ
AZ
I
am
arguing
that
interested
parties
should
reasonably
be
able
to
find
out
about
reversing
the
previous
public
process.
This
proposal
does
not
offer
that
it
is
silent
regarding
notification,
so
I'm
going
to
walk
you
through
what
I
would
have
to
do
under
this
proposal
to
challenge
the
decision
made
by
the
zoning
administrator
regarding
contributory
status.
AZ
I
have
no
idea
how
to
find
that
decision.
The
proposed
ordinance
specifies
that
the
property
owner
and
the
members
of
the
landmarks
commission
would
be
informed.
The
decision
is
on
file
in
City.
Records
I
would
have
10
days
from
the
decision
to
file
an
appeal
which
of
course
assumes
that
I
could
find
out
about
the
decision
before
the
10
days
expired.
I
would
have
to
establish,
standing
and
pay
a
fee
to
appeal,
a
decision
which
could
affect
my
investments
in
Central
City
and
the
Avenues
historic
district
significantly.
AZ
My
appeal
would
have
to
be
based
on
very
narrow
requirements.
The
distinction
between
contributory
and
non-contributory
buildings
in
local
historic
districts
is
the
essence
of
the
city's
regulation
of
land
use.
To
illustrate
just
how
significant
this
Authority
is.
An
owner
has
the
right
to
demolish
a
non-contributory
structure,
but
it's.
A
D
M
I'm
not
sure,
if
I
exactly
understand
the
community
council
concern,
so
I
might
have
to
just
clarify,
but
there
was
a
mention
of
Gilmer
Park,
which
is
a
National
Historic
District.
So
specifically
within
East
Liberty
Park
Community
Council
area,
there
aren't
any
local
historic
districts.
There
are
some
individually
listed
Landmark
sites
within
that
area,
but
there's
not
really
anything
changing
with
those
particular
buildings.
There
are
they're
currently
listed
as
Landmark
sites,
there's
nothing
changing
with
the
designation
process.
M
If
somebody
wanted
to
like
read
like
designate
a
new
Landmark
site,
nothing's
changing
with
the
revocation
process,
if
somebody
wanted
to
revoke
that
Landmark
site
status,
so
in
terms
of
just
noticing
to
the
the
public
right
now
for
those
particular
properties
that
are
Landmark
sites,
there
may
be
noticing
required,
depending
on
what
a
type
of
application
was,
but
there's
not
noticing
required
for
National
register
properties.
Okay,
I,
don't
know
if
that
gets
at
the
question
or
comment
that
was
made.
I
might
not
be
completely
understanding
it
so
I,
don't
know
if
the
commission.
M
In
terms
of
noticing,
nothing
is
changing.
We
are
the
only
thing.
I
guess,
that's
sort
of
changing
is
we're
requiring
additional
materials
be
provided
on
the
demolition
of
a
non-contributing
building
that
particular
notice.
That's
not
a
new
notice,
we're
just
requiring
specific
things
like
a
map.
Notice
of
you
know
when
a
decision
will
be
made.
The
information
that's
contained
within
that
notice,
but
it's
currently
required
and
will
still
be
required
with
this
new
proposed
text
Amendment
if
it
were
to
be
adopted
so.
M
There's
not
currently
a
process
outlined
in
our
code,
necessarily
in
terms
of
considerations,
but
the
zoning
administrator
is
already
authorized
by
our
zoning
ordinance
to
make
determinations
of
the
zoning
ordinance,
and
so
we
have
issued
determinations
on
those
properties.
What
this
does
is
essentially
puts
the
considerations
that
we've
already
been
considering
as
part
of
that
determination
into
the
code.
So,
typically,
that's
if
we
indicate
who
can
request
a
determination
right
now,
that's
only
the
property
owner
is
authorized
to
submit
an
administrative
interpretation
with
this
particular
type
of
interpretation.
M
We've
also
added
in
that
the
planning
director
could
submit
a
request
for
an
interpretation
and
that's
because
we're
the
ones
dealing
a
lot
of
times
with
those
surveys.
When
applicants
submit
an
application,
we
reference
our
surveys
to
find
out
what
standards
apply
to
them
so,
whether
or
not
the
building's
non-contributing
or
contributing
or
if
there's
a
discrepancy
with
the
survey.
M
That's
when
we
would
initiate
a
determination
so
on
a
couple
of
the
examples
that
were
included
in
the
staff
report,
one
of
which
I
think
is
on
the
corner
of
third
South
and
7th
East.
That
particular
one
was
actually
initiated
by
staff
staff
saw
that
it
was
a
non-contributing
status
and
and
questioned
it,
but
upon
further
research
we
just
confirmed
what
the
consultant
had
already
said,
that
it
was
a
non-contributing
building.
M
M
That
and
we
we
actually
have
been
doing
you
know-
we've
had
updates
to
our
survey
since
these
districts
have
been
initially
adopted,
but
they
haven't
gone
through
this
particular
process.
So
this
they
have
gone
through
a
public
process
with
the
landmark
commission,
but
they
haven't
been
formally
adopted
by
City
Council
in
the
past,
and
we
are
looking
to
add
in
a
provision
that
any
previously
adopted
or
any
previously
conducted
survey.
Update,
would
be
adopted
with
this
text
Amendment
and
then
any
subsequent
going
forward
would
need
to
follow
this
new
process.
So.
E
M
I
was
gonna
say
that
that's
not
a
great
example,
because
all
those
buildings
unfortunately,
are
gone
now.
No,
but
yes,
I
see
what
you're
saying
in
that
case,
there
are
these
considerations
and
so
I
guess.
In
the
particular
example
you
brought
up
of
Bishop
place.
I
think
it
would
be
difficult
for
a
property
owner
to
come
through
and
say
that
they
are
meeting
these
standards
so
just
because
somebody
submits
even
an
ILS
survey,
an
intensive
level
survey
that
doesn't
mean
that
we
would
have
to
agree
with
everything
that
was
in
it.
M
For
example,
the
Big
Daddy's
Pizza
on
700
East.
They
were
listed
as
a
contributing
building
and
they
hired
a
consultant
who
did
an
intensive
level
survey.
There
were
things
within
the
Intensive
level
survey
that
staff
did
not
agree
with,
but
there
were
certain
things
that
were
uncovered
with
that
survey,
because
it's
more
of
a
deep
dive
into
the
history
of
the
property
and
ultimately
it
was
discovered
that
that
proper
property
actually
had
widened
the
whole
front
of
it
and
been
expanded,
and
we
ended
up
changing
the
status
of
that
building
to
non-contributing.
A
A
Tuttle,
yes,
and
the
vice
chair
of
OCS
that
passes
unanimously
and
goes
on
to
the
city,
council
and
I
believe
we're
done.
I
just
wanted
to
say
thanks
to
everyone
for
being
patient
with
everyone
we
had
and
especially
being
patient
with
me.
We
had
a
very
interesting
meeting,
also
want
to
thank
Aubrey
for
cracking
the
whip.
Every
time
we
needed
to
yeah
but
yeah
with
that,
we'll
adjourn.