►
From YouTube: Planning Commission Meeting - 04/12/2023
Description
Salt Lake City Planning Commission Meeting - 04/12/2023
Due to technical difficulties, this new version has been uploaded.
You can find the original version at:
Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTZCzSKxnTw
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DC2XR3Gkxo
A
A
C
C
So
we've
had
that
going
for
seven
years
yeah,
but
it
sounds
like
we're.
Finally,
at
the
finish
line,
so
the
the
council
is
going
to
have
a
public
hearing
on
that
they
haven't
scheduled
it
yet
and
then
make
a
decision.
Basically,
what
it
does
is
that
it
clarifies
those
different
engagement
activities
that
happen
within
those
45
days
and
the
noticing
like,
for
example,
right
now.
Our
code
doesn't
require
us
to
do
early
notice
to
neighbors
only
to
recognize
organizations,
and
so
that's
a
big
gap
in
our
in
our
process.
C
So
we'll
be
looking
at
some
changes
for
that
over
over
the
next.
Probably
four
to
six
weeks
and
then
the
plan
the
city
council
did
adopt
the
new
Adu
proposal
at
their
meeting
was
it
last
week
yeah,
it
was
last
week
they
essentially
kept
almost
everything
that
the
Planning
Commission
recommended
in
doing
that,
but
they
they
pulled
out.
C
There
was
a
clause
that
allowed
on
some
properties
very
large
properties
for
adus
to
go
up
to
1200
square
feet.
They
pulled
that
out,
so
that
wasn't
included,
but
the
rest
of
it
pretty
much
stayed
as
is
so.
That
goes
into
effect
as
soon
as
it's
published,
which
will
probably
happen,
and
then
sometime
over
the
next
week
and
a
half
and
then
away
we
go.
We
actually
have
already
had
a
number
of
inquiries
for
people
who
want
to
know
when
it's
going.
C
In
surprisingly,
those
are
all
outside
of
single-family
properties,
so
we
might
have
found
a
spot
in
the
city
where
there's
a
big
unmet
demand
for
that
kind
of
housing.
So
that's
going
on
they
also,
but
they
adopted
a
couple
of
map
amendments
as
well,
but
those
were
private
proposals
in
the
next
couple
of
meetings
like
the
next
Planning
Commission
meeting.
C
Most
of
the
items
on
the
agenda
I
think
all,
but
one
are
legislative
in
nature,
so
zoning
changes,
including
several
City,
initiated
changes
so
just
wanted
to
let
you
know
that
over
the
next
three
meetings,
so
through
the
rest
of
April
and
into
May,
we
have
a
total
of
something
like
16
different
zoning
changes
that
will
be
coming
before
the
Planning
Commission.
So
it's
going
to
be
an
interesting
couple
of
meetings,
so
I
think
that
is
all
the
announcements
that
I
have.
Unless
there's
any
questions
for
me.
A
D
Yeah
I
guess
I'm
I
think
I
I
many
people
have
been
frustrated
by
this
issue
of
street
level,
retail
and
I'm
wondering
if
we
can't
you
know
we
did
these
affordable
housing
incentives
where
we
basically
relax
some
of
our
other
restrictions
to
incentivize
something.
That's
you
know
of
importance
to
plan
Salt,
Lake
and
I.
Think,
like
our
walkability
I,
think
we
have
a
sort
of
problem
where
we're
in
a
bad
equilibrium.
D
We
should
probably
talk
to
the
people
who
build
this
or
might
build
this
to
talk
about
what
they
would
find
useful,
but
whether
it's
oh
it
could
just
be
staff
review.
So
something
wouldn't
have
to
come
before
the
commission
or
it's
a
change
in
the
height
restriction
or
or
a
dropping
of
the
height
restriction.
D
I,
don't
know
whether
anybody
else
is
interested
in
looking
into
this,
but
it's
a
constant
source
of
frustration
to
me
when
we
see
project
after
project
that
doesn't
put
in
a
street
level
retail
in
core
neighborhoods
that
we've
and
I
understand
why
they're
doing
this
is
not
on
the
developers.
I
understand
exactly
why
they're
not
putting
it
in
and
it's
not
profitable,
but
it
is
frustrating
to
me.
C
F
C
C
When
you
get
to
the
opportunity,
when
you
vote
on
items
on
the
consent
agenda,
you
can
abstain
from
a
voting
on
a
particular
item
and
vote
on
the
rest
if
they
stay
on
the
consent
agenda.
But
that
will
happen
after
after
the
public
hearings
on
those
items
yeah.
This
is
going
to
take
a
little
getting.
A
H
A
A
I
Yay
I
won't
take
that
long,
so
I'm,
Christina,
Robb
and
I
serve
as
the
chair
of
the
East
Liberty
Park
Community
organization,
the
elk
Co
we're
here
today
for
a
couple
of
reasons.
First,
we
didn't
realize
that
this
was
going
to
be
on
the
consensus
agenda,
just
simply
because
we
were
under
the
impression
that
they'd
pulled
this
away.
You
know
from
the
conditional
use
process.
I
We
did
get
a
lot
of
feedback
on
this
particular
property,
and
this
is
1005
East,
Princeton
I
believe
regarding
the
owner.
Occupancy
issues
and
I
want
to
give
a
shout
out
to
Cassie
who
attended
our
meeting
while
I
was
concussed
from
my
car
accident
and
showed
incredible
planning
leadership
to
help
us
through
the
process
and
to
understand
from
some
very
upset,
elpco
neighbors.
What
how
that
owner
occupancy
process
would
work
when
investors
come
in
and
buy
a
property
raise
the
property
build
a
larger
main
building
as
well
as
an
agu.
I
So
this
participant-
or
this
request
requested,
wasn't
able
to
meet
come
to
our
meeting,
so
we
weren't
actually
able
to
answer
questions
from
this
applicant,
which
you
know
that
kind
of
makes
it
a
little
hard
for
folks
to
come
to
the
meeting
to
to
do
that.
But
again,
Cassie
Cassie
was
really
good
with
this.
I
So
we
have,
you
know,
understanding
the
rules
and
understanding
that
this
meets
the
zoning
requirements
and
that
the
you
know
the
permit
will
be
issued
and
followed
through
by
Building
Services
and
enforcement,
everybody
who
will
make
sure
it's
the
best
property
potential
for
both
the
applicants
and
the
neighbors
again.
We
thank
you.
I
do
want
to
stress,
though,
that
we
are
seeing
a
lot
of
building
enforcement
issues
in
elpco
and
short-term
rentals.
So
you
know
we
realize
this
isn't
your
issue,
but
we
want
to
thank
you
for
hearing
the
public
out.
I
I
have
something
different
to
say
about
the
other
one.
Do
you
want
me
to
do
it
now?
Yes,
please,
okay,
so
the
the
gentleman
over
here
the
applicant
for
the
800
East
Adu
project
had
also
fallen
off
our
radar,
because
this
came
before
us
way
back
in
August
September
of
2022.
So
again
we
were
surprised
to
see
it
on
this
agenda
as
a
conditional
use.
I
And
you
know
we
support
what
the
ordinance
says
and
we
support
the
planning
and
continuing
not
only
that
good
work,
but
but
moving
forward
with
the
building
inspectors
in
the
Civil
enforcement
that
they
will
help
us
ensure
that
legal
uses
are
are
happening
in
these
adus
in
elpco.
Again,
we
probably
wouldn't
be
stressing
this
important
part
if
we
hadn't
seen
so
much
illegal
use
pop-up
recently
as
a
result
of
the
AWA
debate,
you
know
obviously
politically
charged
things
are
gonna
enable
people
so
Planning
Commission
again,
thank
you
for
hearing
us.
J
A
K
C
K
C
K
B
H
A
A
A
K
H
A
F
A
M
The
modifications
before
you
tonight
involve
the
removal
of
the
parking
garage
with
automated
stalls
and
replacement
of
that
with
a
15
stall
surface
parking
lot
and
above
that
there
were
two
residential
units:
a
gym
and
a
roof
deck
that
will
also
be
removed.
There
are
very
minor
changes
to
street-facing
facades
and
there's
also
a
new
request
for
reduction
in
the
landscape,
buffer
and
Weaver
of
the
Interior
parking
lot.
Madam.
C
M
So
the
modification
request
before
you
this
evening
is
for
the
removal
of
the
parking
garage
with
automated
Styles
and
replacement
of
it
with
a
15
stall
surface
parking
lot
and
then
above
that,
parking
garage.
The
removal
of
two
second
floor
residential
units,
a
gym
and
a
roof
deck.
And
then
there
are
some
very
minor
changes
to
the
street
facing
facades
and
there's
an
additional
request
for
reduction
in
the
landscape
buffer
along
the
north
side
of
the
property.
And
then
the
waiver
of
the
Interior
parking
lot
Landscaping
requirement.
M
And
so
you
can
see
here
the
approved
elevation
on
the
left.
And
then
the
request
removes
that
parking
garage
and
replaces
it
with
a
surface
parking
lot
and
then
zooming
in
along
that
North
property
line.
You
can
see
where
they
have
the
new
request
for
the
reduction
in
the
landscape
buffer
and
then
below.
M
That
is
where
the
parking
lot
would
be
is
located
and
again
the
very
minor
changes
to
the
front
which
are
generally
regarding
windows
on
the
500,
East
Elevation
and
somewhat
similar
changes
on
the
27th
South
elevation
and
then
looking
at
the
North
elevation.
You
can
see
the
removal
of
the
garage,
and
so
you
would
then
see
the
surface
parking
lot
and
then
the
rear
of
the
units
that
are
facing
27th
South
and
then
on
the
East
Elevation.
M
You
can
see
the
removal
of
the
garage
and
the
two
residential
units
and
then
in
that
location
you
would
see
the
rear
of
the
units
that
are
facing
fifth
East
and
the
same
standards
of
review
apply.
The
property
is
located
in
the
CN
zoning
district.
There
are
design
standards
for
that
zoning
District
in
21837
and
then
it's
a
plan,
development
and
design
review
projects,
so
those
standards
apply.
M
A
A
E
B
G
B
A
F
P
M
O
O
O
O
Excuse
me:
the
northwest
corner
of
the
property
and
three
two-sided
gas
pumps,
which
would
be
positioned
at
the
South
End
of
the
property
I'm,
trying
to
point
that
out,
I'm,
not
sure
if
you
can
see
them
proposed
underground.
Fuel
storage
tanks
would
be
along
the
east
property
line.
Those
are
these
to
the
right,
I'm
hoping
you
can
see.
The
cursor.
O
The
recommendation,
based
on
the
findings
listed
in
the
staff
report.
It
is
Step
planning
staff's
opinion
overall,
that
the
project
does
not
meet
the
applicable
standards
or
the
intent
of
the
Sugarhouse
master
plan.
Nor
can
it
successfully
mitigate
adverse
impacts
to
the
adjoining
property
or
water
source,
Sugarhouse,
Park
and
Parleys
Creek.
Therefore,
the
planning
staff
recommends
the
Planning
Commission
denied.
This
conditional
use
application
request.
O
Just
to
start
this
is
the
standard
for
a
conditional
use.
A
conditional
use
shall
be
approved
if
reasonable
conditions
are
proposed
or
can
be
imposed
to
mitigate
the
reasonable,
anticipated
detrimental
effects
of
the
proposed
use
in
accordance
with
applicable
standards
set
forth
in
ordinance,
21A
54080.
O
O
O
In
addition,
there
are
15
detrimental
effects
determinations.
These
are
noted
on
page
69
of
the
staff
reports.
Four
of
these
determinations
are
identified
as
detrimental
impacts
from
The
Proposal.
That
cannot
be
mitigated
that
is
shown
in
red.
You
don't
need
to
see
the
the
rest
of
the
text,
but
just
showing
you,
six
of
the
determinations
have
been
deemed
to
show
that
significant
detrimental
impacts
may
be
lessened
by
imposing
conditions,
but
cannot
fully
or
adequately
mitigate
all
potential,
contaminating
effects.
O
The
state
of
Utah
property
rights
Ombudsman
answers
the
question.
What
are
judgmental
impacts
by
stating
the
detrimental
impacts
identified
for
conditional
use
should
be
related
to
negative
impacts
on
legitimate
government
interests
or
on
the
public
welfare
Salt
Lake
City
municipality
and
Salt
Lake
County
governments
co-owned
Sugarhouse
Park,
which
is
the
second
largest
government
collaboratively
owned
and
maintained
public
park
in
the
Salt
Lake
Valley.
It
is
a
hugely
popular
park,
with
residents
of
Salt,
Lake
City
and
to
others,
County
and
Statewide.
O
The
secondary
recharge
area
provides
the
primary
means
of
replenishing
groundwater
as
a
secondary
drinking
water
source,
which
can
be
up
to
10
percent
of
the
city's
water
supply
under
the
groundwater.
Source
protection
overlay,
District,
ground
underground
petroleum
storage
tanks
are
listed
as
restricted
uses
in
the
secondary
recharge
area
and
therefore
present
a
potential
contamination
source.
O
O
This
chart
shows
those
three
sources
with
possible
detrimental
impacts
and
the
consequences
the
First
Source
would
be
the
underground
fuel
storage
tanks
usts
the
possible
detriment
in
Impact
would
be
a
fuel
leak
underground.
The
consequence
would
be
contamination,
contamination
to
SugarHouse,
Park,
soil
and
or
Parleys.
Excuse
me,
parley's,
Creek
Water,
the
Second
Source
would
be
contaminated
surface
runoff.
This
is
of
gas,
oil
or
other
chemicals
from
the
subject
site.
O
O
O
An
underground
fuel
storage
leak
or
contaminated
surface
water
runoff
would
cause
considerable
harmful
and
damaging
effects
on
the
soil,
water
and
air
quality
in
and
around
Sugarhouse
Park
information
in
the
staff
report
from
the
Department
of
Environmental
Quality
on
page
10
shows
that
one
in
four
inspected,
usts,
again
underground
storage
tanks
and
2022
had
fuel
leaks.
Research
shows
that
one
gallon
can
render
1
million
gallons
of
water
undrinkable.
O
The
subject
property
sits
at
an
elevation
above
Sugarhouse
Park,
where
the
two
properties
a
butt.
Therefore,
any
leak
from
the
proposed
underground
fuel
storage
tanks
proposed
to
be
located
at
the
East
property
line
or
any
contaminated
surface
runoff
of
fuel
or
other
chemicals
would
most
likely
contaminate
soil
inside
in
Sugarhouse
Park,
since
it
is
downhill
from
the
septic
property.
O
Research
shows
that
the
degree
to
which
leaking
tanks
impact
soil,
groundwater
and
air
quality
depends
on
groundwater,
velocity
and
flow
Direction.
Soil
permeability,
absorption
of
chemicals
to
solids,
dispersion,
water
table
depth,
chemical
contents
of
leak,
size
of
the
leak
and
many
other
factors.
O
O
This
photo
shows
the
pathway
of
the
storm
drain
system
and
how
any
unfiltered
contaminants
from
surface
runoff
would
enter
that
system
and
then
travel
Downstream
from
Hidden
Hollow
natural
area
and
possibly
Beyond
hoping
you
can
see
the
yellow.
This
is
kind
of
the
the
storm
drain
system.
Kind
of
winds
around
the
seagull
Lily
goes
underground,
comes
through
Hidden
Hollow
and
then
goes
out
towards
11th
East.
O
The
fuel
delivery
trucks
would
follow.
A
route
designed
dedicated
excuse
me
would
follow
a
route
design
dedicated
by
come
and
go
company
which
shows
the
fuel
trucks
would
enter
the
subject
property
at
the
1300
East
in
Ingress.
The
trucks
would
then
unload
fuel
on
site
and
then
exit
the
septic
property
on
2100
South
leaving
to
the
east.
O
This
aerial
at
the
bottom
left
shows
2100
South
marked
in
two
dotted
lines.
The
brown
dotted
line
shows
a
25
mile
per
hour.
Speed
restriction
on
a
collector
Street
section,
and
the
green
indicates
a
20
mile
per
hour.
Speed
restriction
on
a
collector
Street
section,
the
blue
lines,
which
may
be
a
little
bit
hard
to
see.
O
The
Sugar
House
master
plan
calls
for
the
subject's
property
to
be
low
intensity.
It
also
states
that
there's
a
renewed
recognition
of
the
value
of
having
neighborhood
businesses
that
residents
can
walk
to
instead
of
having
to
drive
to.
In
addition,
neighborhood
businesses
are
frequently
local,
frequently
locally
owned.
So
more
of
the
profits
stay
in
the
area.
O
O
A
O
A
O
Q
Q
If
the
commission
is
inclined
to
deny
the
application
on
the
basis
of
the
voluminous
and
Technical
material
that
the
applicant
received
for
the
first
time
two
weeks
ago,
we
would
ask
that
you
continue
this
hearing
so
that
we
may
have
an
opportunity
to
respond
and
give
you
information
to
make
a
truly
informed
decision.
A
lot
of
this
information
is
information
that
we
received
for
the
first
time.
Q
This
slide
is
a
is
a
timeline,
so
we
this
this
whole
process
started
in
January
of
last
year
and
it
seemed
to
be
a
collaborative
back
and
forth
process.
Our
our
application
was
Final
in
November
and
we
never
received
the
technical
hydrogeologist
report
that
the
city
had
since
April
of
last
year.
We
never
received
that
we
received
that
for
the
first
time.
Two
weeks
ago,
you
heard
the
staff
representative
today
talk
about
all
the
factors
that
need
to
be
considered.
Water
flow
aspects
of
geology,
hydrology
she
went
on
and
on.
Q
We
haven't
had
a
chance
to
weigh
in
on
that.
We
expected
to
get
a
staff
report
that
suggested
conditions
but
didn't
recommend
denial,
and
it
came
at
us
like
a
bolt
out
of
the
blue,
so
it's
only
fair
that
we
have
an
opportunity
to
fully
inform
you
folks,
so
you
can
make
the
proper
appropriate
decision.
Q
Q
It
shows
the
site
being
closer
to
the
primary
recharge
area
than
it
actually
is.
We've
got
here
a
correction.
This
is
what
we've
done:
we've
corrected
the
site
location,
it's
closer
to
the
discharge
area
and,
as
you
can
see,
from
the
the
sketch
on
the
on
the
right,
this
is
from
the
Utah
DEQ
interactive
map.
It's
the
same
map
that
the
staff
report
cites
and
relies
on,
and
what
we've
added
here
is
an
estimated
secondary,
recharge,
Zone,
primary
recharge
Zone
in
the
discharge
gel
Zone.
Q
All
these
blue
dots
represent
petroleum,
underground
storage
tank
sites,
all
of
them,
and
you
can
see
that,
as
you
get
closer
to
the
discharge
area
like
where
our
site
is,
as
shown
in
purple,
they're
more
clustered
they're
prevalent
in
this
area,
we
need
more
time
to
adequately
respond
now,
if
the
turning
to
the
conditional
use
approval
standards,
this
slide
lists
the
standards
that
present
no
obstacle
to
approval
right.
There's
12
standards
that
the
application
satisfies
satisfies,
there's,
no
detrimental
impact
or
the
impact
can
be
mitigated
and
that's
based
on
the
staff
report.
Q
Q
The
staff
position,
basically
is
there's
no
way
that
there
should
be
a
gas
station
at
this
location.
There's
no
way
the
city
is
already
determined
that
there
can
be
a
gas
station
at
this.
This
very
location,
this
location
is
Zone
CB
and
the
city
has
determined
that
a
gas
station
is
conditionally
allowed
in
the
CB
Zone
and
the
gas
station
is
defined
in
the
code,
and
this
is
section
21A
62040
as
a
principal
building,
site
and
structure
for
the
sale
and
dispensing
of
motor
fuels
or
other
petroleum
products.
Q
Q
It's
Allah
I'm,
quoting
from
the
Utah
Municipal
land
use
and
development
management
act
right
now,
Utah
code,
which
trumps
city
code
quote.
If
a
land
use
regulation
does
not
plainly
restrict
a
land
use
application,
the
land
use,
Authority,
shall
interpret
and
imply
and
apply
the
land
use
regulation
to
favor
the
land
use
application.
So
if
your
code
doesn't
plainly
restrict
this
use,
then
you
have
to
apply
city
code
to
favor
it,
and
does
the
city
code
allow
this?
Yes,
it
allows
it
in
the
table
of
uses
for
the
CB
Zone
21A
33030.
Q
Q
Here's
some
more
state
law-
and
this
is
similar
to
the
first
bullet
point
here,
similar
to
what's
in
the
city
code,
I
want
to
focus
on.
What's
in
the
second
bullet
point
here,
this
is
straight
from
M
ludma,
again,
city
of
a
Utah
law
quote
the
requirement
described
in
subsection
2a1
to
reasonably
mitigate
anticipated
detrimental
effects
of
the
proposed
conditional
use
does
not
require
elimination
of
the
detrimental
effects
right.
You
have
to
approve
this
conditional
use
application
if
reasonable
conditions
are
proposed
to
mitigate
reasonably
anticipated
detrimental
effects.
Mitigation
doesn't
mean
eliminate.
Q
They
can't
ask
you
to
deny
this
application,
because
we
can't
guarantee
a
perfect
site.
Utah
law.
This
section
here
in
the
in
the
bottom
bullet
says
you
cannot
do
that.
You
cannot
require
the
applicant
to
eliminate
detrimental
effects.
Mitigate
means,
lessen,
that's
the
standard,
dictionary
definition
lesson
the
severity
or
the
harm.
Q
Does
does
the
applicant
propose
conditions
that
would
lessen
the
severity
of
the
harm?
Absolutely
here's
a
a
slide
that
talks
about
the
the
surface
water
treatment
plan-
okay,
especially
compared
to
the
existing
use,
which
is
the
Sizzler
restaurant
right.
That's
on
on
the
left
on
the
right
is
the
proposal
and
I
won't
go
through
all
of
this.
This
is
in
the
the
response
to
the
staff
report
that
we
submitted
yesterday.
Hopefully,
you
have
that
I'm
just
going
to
focus
on
this
Flex
storm
Inlet
filters
all
right.
Q
Here's
a
slide
that
goes
into
further
detail
about
the
surface.
Runoff
subgrade
impacts
you
most
of
the
usts
25
percent
are
compliant
the
ones
that
aren't
most
of
it
is
due
to
unknown
causes.
We
can
disregard
that
unknown
causes
do
not
have
the
support
of
substantial
evidence.
You
can't
deny
this
based
on
unknown
causes.
Q
Seven
of
the
leaks
in
the
staff
report
identified
her
from
corrosion
fiberglass
tanks,
don't
corrode
the
rest.
Only
two
of
the
leaks
identified
in
the
staff
report
were
from
sub-grade
tank
damage
or
pipes
problems,
but
we
don't
know
anything
about.
You
know
the
age
of
those
tanks.
All
we
know
is
that
this
is
the
state
of
the
art,
and
this
is
what
the
applicant
will
will
apply.
Q
Q
We
have
a.
We
have
a
traffic
study,
there's
no
traffic
study
that
challenges
our
traffic
study.
Our
traffic
study
says
that
the
proposed
use
will
actually
reduce
traffic
from
what
it
currently
is.
With
the
restaurant.
It
will
be
reduced.
Why?
How
can
that
be?
Because,
what's
there
right
now
is
the
Sizzler
that
could
be
restarted
and
that's
a
destination
people
will
drive
there,
people
don't
drive
to
a
gas
station,
they
they
go
somewhere
and
they
they
get
go
to
it
and
fill
up
with
gas
on
the
way.
Q
So
it's
not
going
to
add
any
more
trips
and
a
convenience
store
is
expressly
permitted
in
the
code.
There's
not
going
to
be
any
more
traffic
than
what
would
be
expressly
permitted.
The
convenience
store
use
in
the
Battle
of
experts,
the
city
forfeit
it
because
it
doesn't
have
an
expert.
Our
expert
engineering
study
is
unrefuted.
A
A
I
have
cards
if
you
want
to
speak,
fill
out
a
card
and
get
it
to
us
up
here.
That's
the
most
efficient
way
to
do
that.
The
first
card
I
have
is
for
Judy
short
and
the
member
and
because
she's,
a
representative
of
the
community
council,
she'll,
have
five
minutes.
The
rest
of
the
individual
members
for
the
public
will
have
two
minutes
each
take
it
away,
Judy
and
remember
in
a
state
your
name
for
the
record.
A
R
R
R
Under
the
groundwater,
water
source
protection
overlay,
District,
underground
storage
tanks
are
restricted
uses
having
a
gas
station
within
this
overlay,
District
jeopardizes
the
purpose
of
the
overlay
District
to
protect
the
recharge
area,
underground
storage
tanks
leak
regularly
in
Utah.
This
can't
be
mitigated
surface
runoff
can't
be
mitigated
think
about
all
the
snow
we
had
in
the
last
month.
R
R
R
People
exercise
in
that
Park
all
day
long
every
day,
numerous
reasons
why
the
proposal
would
be
detrimental
to
the
air
the
people
breathe,
making
it
no
longer
a
wonderful
place
to
exercise.
That
alone
should
be
enough
to
deny
the
request.
They
quote
200
people
passing
by
in
a
one
minute
segment
of
time.
R
R
A
S
As
noted
in
the
report
for
my
hydrogeologist,
essentially
Vapors
from
gasoline
sink,
they
are
heavier
than
air
and,
as
was
shown
before
in
the
staff
report,
we
have
the
Sego
Lily
installation,
which
is
directly
downhill
from
where
this
proposed
development
is
in
our
hydrogeologists
report.
She
stated
quote.
S
S
The
current
proposal
has
the
sort
of
convenience
stores
right
on
the
road
and
then
the
undergrad
storage
tanks
and
the
areas
where
people
will
be
filling
up
their
cars
are
located
directly
next
to
that
installation.
So
there
is
no
barrier.
The
any
runoff
would
go
right
through
that
installation
that
we
installed
and
the
air
quality
would
also
sink
into
that
little
Bowl
as
into
the
draw
from
The
Hidden
Hollow
park.
S
T
I'm
Lynne
Schwartz,
the
conditional
use
should
be
denied.
This
is
an
inappropriate
use
for
the
site,
because
its
detrimental
effects
cannot
be
mitigated.
Salt,
Lake
City
has
a
stated
policy
that
it
should
be
coming.
Car
a
less
car,
Cedric
City,
therefore
core-centric
conditional
uses
should
be
denied.
Monitoring
for
leaks
does
not
prevent
leaks.
Monitoring
systems
only
notify
you
if
a
leak
has
occurred.
It
does
not
mitigate
a
leak.
T
We
live
in
an
earthquake
zone
and
we
have
them
not
infrequently
three
popped,
rivets
or
an
even
slightly
popped
seam
in
a
storage
tank,
and
you
have
a
leak
into
an
extremely
sensitive
Aqua
system.
Leak
mitigation
is
very
expensive,
disruptive
and
sometimes
unsuccessful,
go
to
any
gas
station
and
see
cars
leaking
all
kinds
of
fluids
all
the
time
there
is
no
containment
system
that
can
handle
one
of
our
torrential
downpours.
Just
ask
the
Sprague
Library.
This
will
be
located
at
an
intersection
that
is
consistently
rated
as
a
fail
by
Salt
Lake
City.
T
Considering
the
increase
in
traffic
that
will
come
when
all
the
new
apartments
come
online.
This
will
only
get
worse.
The
addition
of
even
more
cars
coming
and
going
with
this
use
will
make
an
already
worsening
situation
even
worse,
while
delivery
times
may
try
to
be
limited
by
the
owner.
We
all
know
circumstances
due
to
weather,
especially
in
the
winter.
Often
make
schedules
go
wrong
again.
This
you
should
be
denied.
It
is
not
the
highest
best
use
for
this
property,
and
the
detrimental
effects
cannot
be
mitigated.
A
U
U
It's
written
about
in
British
newspapers
in
the
New
York
Times
and
the
fact
is,
is
the
safety
of
the
water
affects
the
park,
all
the
parks
along
Parleys
Creek
and
ultimately,
the
Great
Salt
Lake.
With
regard
to
the
comments,
the
learning
gentleman
made
representing
come
and
go
I
I
do
want
to
say
times
change
the
fact
that
there
are
lots
of
legacy.
U
Usts
shouldn't,
be
a
justification
to
support
more
given
climate
change,
and
you
know,
given
the
number
of
comments
over
1100
comments
submitted
to
the
Sugarhouse
Community
Council
over
500
to
the
city.
It's
not
wanted
if
I
were
a
business,
I
would
want
to
locate
where
people
wanted
me
to
locate
in
that
location.
A
buddy
in
the
park
is
not
that
location.
W
My
name's
Thea
Brannan
first
I,
want
to
thank
you
all
for
serving
on
the
Planning
Commission.
It
is
a
very
tough
job
and
I
wouldn't
want
it.
I've
been
lucky
to
live
in
Sugarhouse
for
25
years,
and
I
want
to
speak
in
opposition
to
this
proposal,
along
with
almost
the
entire
population.
As
far
as
I
can
tell
of
Sugarhouse
community
I'm
not
going
to
focus,
would.
W
W
There
can
be
no
barrier
buffer
or
separation
from
all
the
people,
the
skaters,
the
bicyclists,
the
Walkers,
the
birds,
the
bird
lovers
who
use
this
park
every
day
and
then,
with
regard
to
detrimental
effects,
determination,
B3,
the
proposed
use,
is
not
well
suited
to
the
character
of
the
site.
The
businesses
in
the
surrounding
area
do
not
adjoin
and
Loom
over
one
of
our
City's,
most
iconic
Parks,
which
was
preserved
by
the
foresight
of
city
and
county
leaders
some
66
years
ago.
W
W
X
We
all
strongly
support
what
the
the
planning
committee
is
proposing
and
that's
not
to
allow
the
the
gas
the
gas
station
at
the
old
Sizzler
site.
Nobody
wants
another
gas
station,
we're
we're
Sugar
House
is
hanging
by
a
thread
onto
its
charm.
The
view
from
The
Sizzler
towards
the
mountains
is
one
of
the
very
few
unobstructed
views
from
the
city
still
left.
As
all
the
high-rises
continue
to
be
built
all
around
the
valley.
It's
as
we
become
increasingly
densely
populated
that
view
from
the
park,
is
very
precious
and
must
be
preserved.
X
X
Y
Y
So
I
was
in
the
meeting
when
come
and
go
came
to
present
to
the
to
the
community
and
they
were
asked
by
the
Chamber
of
Commerce.
After
talking
to
their
members,
what
value
they
would
add
to
the
neighborhood.
The
response
was
to
be
a
concession
stand
for
the
park,
so
I
checked
to
see
if
there
might
be
Park
concession
stands
with
gas
pumps.
Y
Also
Googled
gas
leaks
at
Kum
and
goes
and
I
found
several
things
like
the
tanker
trucks
put
start
to
fill
up
the
tanks
walk
away,
go
in
the
store
to
get
their
snacks
or
whatever,
and
it
overflows
tanker
trucks
running
into
the
gas
pumps,
causing
spills
other
cars
running
into
the
the
pumps
causing
spills.
So
no
fiberglass
tanks
going
to
keep
that
from
happening,
and
since
it's
right
there
by
the
Sega
Lily
that
whole
area
could
easily
be
contaminated.
Y
Z
Hence
my
genes,
I
would
have
known
how
to
dress
I
moved
to
the
Sugarhouse
area
in
1996,
where
I
rented
an
apartment
for
375
dollars,
and
it
was
then
I.
It
is
then,
when
I
truly
realized
the
depth
and
charm
of
the
quaintness
of
this
town,
the
sweet
little
Library.
The
sculpture
beats
that
sprinkled
about
the
monument
in
the
center
of
town,
the
prison
that
was
on
the
grounds
of
Sugarhouse
parch.
Z
I,
walk
and
bike
to
SugarHouse
Park
I
walk
along
the
stream
in
the
park
and
in
doing
these
activities
it
supports
me,
and
my
well-being
is
peaceful,
Serene
and
calm
to
build
a
gas
station
in
this
type
of
progress.
We
don't
need.
We
don't
necessarily
need
in
that
area.
I
don't
feel
like
it
supports
me
as
an
individual.
Z
It
dilutes
the
beauty
of
this
quaint
and
Charming
area,
especially
located
so
closely
next
to
the
park
where
families
and
children
and
all
activities
take
place
and
not
to
mention
the
water
that
we
drink
and
not
to
mention
the
water
that
we
drink.
That's
very
important
to
me
and
the
creatures
I
certainly
do
hope.
You
can
see
that
it
is
not
just
a
gas
station
but
to
me,
but
it
truly
breaks
my
heart
in
taking
away
the
peaceful
and
Serene
Gem
of
Salt
Lake
City
in
Sugarhouse
Park.
Z
L
L
The
second
thing
is
that
I'm
astounded,
I,
haven't
heard
anyone
talk
about
Highland
High.
We
have
drop-offs,
we
have
pickups,
we
have
special
events,
we
have
students
who
walk
along
the
north
side
of
the
park
and
then
who
additionally
catch
the
bus
directly
in
front
of
the
Sizzler.
If
I
understand
the
route
of
the
tanker
trucks
correctly,
we
are
endangering
the
lives
of
our
children,
of
our
youth.
We
must
deny
this
proposal.
Thank
you
so
much.
Thank
you.
A
A
It
would
have
been
in
the
Dropbox,
okay,
all
right,
seeing
no
one
else
who
wishes
to
speak
on
this
at
this
time.
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
and
bring
it
back
to
the
commission
Diana.
Where
did
Diana
go
there
you
are,
can
can
you
like
address
things
from
that
microphone?
Yes,
so
Commissioners!
You
have
questions,
concerns.
A
K
X
AA
AA
K
Z
K
Thing
I
want
to
speak
up.
Is
that
the
the
fact
that
when
you
look
at
the
zoning
this
this
site
has
a
CB
zoning
across
the
street?
Isn't
CB
zoning?
It's
a
different
thing,
but
kind
of
like
over
where
the
the
CVS
is
is,
is
a
similar
zoning,
the
same
zoning
CB
and
that
has
a
whole
list
of
uses,
some
that
are
permitted.
You
can
just
do
them,
some
that
are
conditional,
because
you
must
show
that
that
use
at
that
site.
K
Those
two
things
together
are
are
appropriate
that
they,
they
don't
conflict,
that
there
aren't
problems
with
the
use.
The
reason
why
it's
a
conditional
use
is
because
you
understand
that
there
may
be
problems
with
this
type
of
use
on
some
properties,
even
I
mean
including
conditional
or
community
business
properties,
so
I
think
the
fact
that
it's
a
conditional
use
means
that
the
city
hasn't
said.
This
is
fine.
This
gas
station
can
go
right
here
in
this
spot.
It
says,
consider
this
spot
and
consider
this
use.
K
There
are
lots
of
places
where
gas
stations
are
permitted,
they're,
probably
a
lot
of
places
where
there
are
gas
stations
in
community
business.
Zoned
areas
but
I
I
think
that
the
particular
ones
of
this
lot
in
this
use
are
problematic
and
I.
I
agree
with
the
findings
of
the
staff
report
and
I
I
also,
don't
think
I
think
that
if
we
met
the
re,
the
requirement
for
when
we're
we're
supposed
to
share
information
about
what
we,
the
research,
that
our
professional
planners
have
done
on
this
site
has
been
met.
V
O
O
You
so
it
did
go
under
a
different
design,
review,
design
standards
when
it
came
to
the
Planning
Commission
at
that
time,
but
it
was
in
2006,
so
the
regulations
were
different.
This
is
a
CB.
They
have
some
design
standards
which
they
meet
in
regard
to
the
actual
building
and
so
and
because
this
abuts
the
park
we've
got
the
detrimental
impacts.
The
other
one
is
550
feet
from
the
park
and
doesn't
have
the
same
kind
of
environmental
impacts
that
this
one
does
so
they're
very
different.
V
D
O
They
did
not
receive
it
last
year,
so
I
want
to
kind
of
give
you
a
reason
for
that,
so
the
Sugarhouse
Park
Authority
did
submit
their
letter
and
that
study
during
the
time.
The
comments
were
brought
in
during
that
45
day
review
period
in
the
next
eight
months
come
and
go
the
applicant
Galloway.
We
had
gone
through
many
revisions,
many
meetings
regarding
changes
made
to
the
site,
and
so
those
were
put
on
hold.
O
Typically,
we
give
any
kind
of
information
with
our
staff
report
at
the
very
end,
and
typically
it's
three
days
before
this
meeting
we
held
that
information
and
it
was
addressed
to
you.
I
had
gone
back
to
the
Sugarhouse
Park
Authority
a
few
times
to
ask
them.
If
they
wanted
to
make
revisions
to
it,
they
did
not
want
to
make
revisions
to
it,
and
so
it
was
submitted
with
the
staff
report
to
the
applicant,
which
is
very
typical.
Q
Absolutely
not
we
got
it
for
the
first
time
a
couple
of
weeks
ago
it
in
my
experience
in
my
firm's
experience,
it's
unprecedented
for
a
planning
department
to
have
there
is
a.
There
was
a
back
and
forth
between
the
staff
and
the
applicant,
but
this
wasn't
part
of
it.
For
some
reason,
I
don't
know
it's
inexplicable
to
me,
it's
unprecedented
in
my
experience
and
it's
not
just
the
hydrogeologist
report
right.
Q
It's
also
all
the
factors
that
staff
representative
mentioned
today
in
terms
of
the
geology
geological
aspects,
hydrology
flow
rates,
the
constituency
of
the
soils
compaction
all
of
those
factors
that
she
said
that
she
listed
a
half
a
dozen
of
and
said,
there's
even
more,
you
need
to
make
an
informed
decision.
What
what
has
been
placed,
Before
You
by
staff,
is
inherently
speculative.
Q
N
Q
It
would
have
been
changed
because
we
would
have
supplied
more
information
to
make
you
fully
informed
about
about
the
situation
that
can
the
geological
context
right,
but
I'm
sure
you
know,
based
on
everything
we've
seen
you
know,
there's
there's
just
not
we're
not
at
a
flood
plain
we're
not
close
to
a
water
course.
It
typically
and
you've-
probably
done
this
before
you
have
Landscaping
buffers
to
mitigate
any
impacts
associated
with
noise.
There's
a
humongous
landscape
buffer
here
so
I
hope
that
answers
your
question.
Q
Q
It
prohibits
it
from
being
a
recharge
area
and-
and
the
report
says
that
in
1988
the
Sugarhouse
Park
Municipal
well
was.
It
was
ceased
to
be
used
because
of
the
finding
of
that
that
plume,
that
groundwater
pce
plume,
that
prohibits
it
from
being
a
drinking
water
source
right.
So
these
are
things
that
were
sprung
on
us
a
couple
of
weeks
ago.
I,
don't
know
if
you
were
aware
of
the
plume
there,
but
it's
there
and-
and
it
probably
warrants
further
study
to
see
if
there
really
is
any
drinking
water
problem.
P
P
A
c
reads:
if
the
reasonably
anticipated
detrimental
effects
of
a
proposed
conditional
use
cannot
be
substantially
mitigated
by
the
proposal
or
the
imposition
of
reasonable
conditions
to
achieve
compliance
with
applicable
standards.
The
land
use
Authority
may
deny
the
conditional
use
given
that
direction.
I
want
to
talk
about
the
environmental
effects,
because
I
do
know
this
area
very
well
and
I
know
the
history
of
this
area
very
well.
P
So
one
of
the
points
that
the
applicant
brings
up
was
that
the
statistic
given
that
we
have
one
in
four
less,
which
is
leaking
underground
storage
tanks,
that
the
cause
of
those
is
unknown.
I,
think
that
is
the
point
of
the
staff's
report
that
is
part
of
a
detrimental
impact
to
the
neighboring
properties
that
how
do
you
mitigate
unknown
leaks
right?
It's
not.
We
can
hold
them
to
that
standard,
because
the
impact
to
our
water
source
in
parley's
Creek
is
is
very
real.
P
I
also
want
to
say
that,
according
to
Public
Utilities
comments
in
the
staff
report,
this
property
is
within
a
located
in
a
flood
plain
and
would
require
the
special
permit
that
is
found
with
FEMA.
It's
called
a
firm
permit,
so
I
think
we
can
also
use
their
expert
comments
that
we
do
have
a
floodplain
situation
for
this
particular
property.
P
One
thing
that
makes
this
area
of
vastly
different
than
across
the
street
where
Chevron
went
in.
Yes,
the
zone
is
different,
but
this
is
going
to
go
to
the
history.
So
when
the
state
demolished
the
prison
buildings
in
the
admin
building,
they
were
kind
enough
to
leave
the
foundations
and
the
concrete
floors.
P
Those
concrete
floors
and
rebar
were
thrown
into
13th
East.
That
is
a
dam
that
is
registered
with
the
state
and
it
is
built
upon
rubble-
and
we
know
this
because
when
Salt
Lake
County
began
construction
of
the
draw
the
tunnel
under
13
these
that
connects
Sugarhouse
Park
to
Hidden
Hollow,
they
had
to
stop
and
completely
re-engineer
the
whole
thing,
because
that's
all
they
found
were
concrete
blocks
and
rebar.
When
the
Sego
Lily
was
installed
and
approved
for
installation
because
it
does
about
the
dam,
it
also
had
to
be
approved
as
a
floodplain
retention
upon
it.
P
Couldn't
just
it's
not
just
an
art
installation,
it's
multi-faceted.
That
is
the
same
thing.
They
found
in
construction
of
the
Sega
Lily,
where
a
lot
of
concrete
blocks
a
lot
of
trash,
a
lot
of
rebar.
So
this
is
vastly
different
than
across
the
street
in
terms
of
what
is
holding
up
13th
East
on
this
side,
because
the
park
Authority
back
in
57
just
didn't
haul
the
rubble
away,
they
threw
it
on
13th
East
was
not
as
high
as
it
is.
P
The
park
was
not,
you
know,
Rolling
Hills,
it
was
all
flat,
so
all
of
this
has
been
man-made
constructed,
but
the
proximity
of
this
gas
station
this
proposed
gas
station
to
the
Sego
Lily,
which
has
more
function
than
just
its
looks,
is,
is
a
really
important
impact.
That
I
think
this
makes
this
site
also
vastly
different
parley's
Creek
is
an
integral
part
to
our
water
flow
through
this
part
of
the
city.
It
then
connects
as
commissioner
Tuttle
and
I
were
talking
about
earlier.
P
P
The
pond
was
just
a
nice
feature
that
they
constructed
back
in
the
late
50s
and
early
60s,
but
what
the
the
flow
of
that
water
is
a
very
important
part
of
our
water
system
for
the
city,
our
water
system,
for
the
state
and
I
think
those
are
considerations
of
why
this
specific
site-
and
it
is
very
unique
to
this
specific
site
that
we
should
be
considering
and
looking
at
the
detrimental
impacts
and
the
ability
or
inability
to
mitigate
them,
but
based
on
the
applicant
I,
will
also
make.
Finally,
my
point
about
traffic
I.
P
Think
that
having
lived
in
this
area
for
a
long
time,
you
know,
Sizzler
being
a
destination
was
a
destination
for
maybe
10
people
at
a
time
it
did
not
generate
a
lot
of
traffic.
It
did
not
generate
a
lot
of
in
and
out
that
is
part
of
the
problem.
When
this
intersection
fails
to
meet
load
at
various
times
of
the
day,
it's
an
F,
the
E
is
generous.
It
fails
to
meet
load
multiple
times
during
the
day.
There's
nothing
we
can
do
about
it.
P
The
the
the
problem
with
the
the
traffic-
yes,
the
the
semis
of
21st-
can
be.
You
know
some
of
it
an
issue
but
I
think
the
bigger
traffic
impact
that
I
don't
see
this
mitigating
I
see
this
exacerbating
is
how
traffic
going
North
is
flowing
through
this
area.
We
have
to
split
off
in
Four,
Points
immediately
and
then
now,
but
now
I've
got
people
going
in
and
in
and
I
can't
move
to
turn
right.
P
A
destination
Point
might
actually
be
a
little
bit
better,
because
people
would
go
there
and
stop
and
they
wouldn't
then
continue
to
flow
in
and
out
of
this
area.
That
is
really
hard
pressed
to
handle
it,
and
if
we
read
the
comments,
also
in
the
department
reviews,
one
of
the
the
points
that
traffic
made
or
streets
made
was
that
the
city
wants
to
look
at
is
planning
to
look
at
on
21st
South,
eliminating
that
third
lane
that
exists
up
until
you
turn
into
the
park
on
15th,
East
or
well.
P
It
goes
up
to
17th
that
that
would
then
become
a
bike
lane,
and
so
now
we've
got
an
even
bigger
conflict
without
out
out
going
out
on
21st
South.
So
I
think
we
have
a
lot
of
competing
interests
that
the
city
has
identified
for
that
road.
That
section
on
13th,
East
and
also
going
up
21st
South
that
this
particular
type
of
constant
in
and
out
would
be
a
problem.
It
is
a
problem
at
Chevron,
so
I
think
we
can
reasonably
understand
what
the
traffic
flow
will
be
for
this
opposite
corner.
P
It
is
a
big
issue
in
trying
to
get
onto
13th
East
coming
east
on
21st
South,
so
I
don't
know
that
that,
for
me,
the
traffic
part
is
really
really
focused
on
how
that
traffic
flows
on
that
intersection
and
how
it
already
fails
and
I,
don't
know
how
we
can
get
lower
than
an
F
but
I'm
sure
there's
a
way
if
there's
a
way
we'll
find
out
how
to
do
it.
But
that's
a
that
is
a
a
big
issue
on
that
particular
intersection
and
I.
D
Just
to
follow
up
on
commissioner
Barry's
points
the
motion.
This
is
a
question
for
staff.
Specifically,
you
had
several
findings
that
it
did
not.
You
know
they
were
not
able
to
mitigate,
one
of
which
was
traffic,
one
of
which
was
General
consistency
with
the
master
plan.
But
in
the
motion
that
you've
recommended,
we
propose
is
specifically
the
detrimental
impacts
to
the
environment
near
the
site
and
I'm
just
wondering
if
staff
could
clarify
why
they're
recommending
that
motion
as
opposed
to
us,
you
know
identifying
each
of
the
I
think
there
was
eight
points
that
could.
O
D
D
O
O
D
Okay,
I
just
my
thoughts
for
the
rest
of
the
commission.
I
would
rather
us
be
a
little
more
specific
because
my
concern
is
X
post
there
may
be
legal
battles,
surrounded
about
the
the
specific
environmental
impacts
and
I
think
if
we
sort
of
delineate
all
of
the
factors
specifically
environment
is
just
sort
of
a
vague
word
in
my
reading,
but
maybe
that's
just
my
thought
for
the
rest
of
the
commission.
K
I
I'm,
not
in
favor
of
that
I
mean
you
can
argue
with
me
if
you
want
to
but
I.
It
concerns
me
a
lot
when
they
say
well,
there's
a
year
old
environmental
report
that
we
didn't
say
that
says
that
this
site
is
exposes
this
huge
park
to
a
lot
of
environmental
risks
and
their
answer
to
that
is
well.
If
we
had
more
time
we'd
get
different,
we
get
something.
That
said
opposite
of
that,
not
that
we
would
change
our
mind.
We
would
do
above
ground
tanks
or
I,
don't
even
know.
K
Of
like,
if
that
information
is
not
moving
to
them,
and
it
just
gives
them
more
opportunity
to
get
alternative
environmental
report
that
says
the
opposite
thing,
then
I,
don't
I,
don't
see
the
point.
I,
don't
think
that
we've
broken
any
rules
I,
don't
think
that
they
there's
any
legal
ground
to
put
a
table
on
it.
V
I'm,
actually
in
favor
of
tabling
it
I
I
think
we
give
them
a
chance
to
respond.
I
think
we
definitely
want
to
remain
consistent.
There's
been
other
items
that
have
been
brought
before
us,
where
we
said
that
as
long
as
they
could
provide
a
reasonable
way
to
prevent
the
negative
outcome
of
a
development
that
was
good
enough.
I
know
that
we've
approved
things
in
the
past
that
we're
like
guys.
V
This
is
going
to
be
a
problem
for
the
neighborhood
and
we
said
hey,
they
can
install
security
cameras
or
something
I'm
not
going
to
go
into
specifics,
and
that
should
address
the
problem
and
I
would
like
to
hear
what
they
come
back
with.
As
can
you
address
any
of
these
concerns
any
all
of
them.
Some
of
them
I
think
that
would
be
cool
to
hear.
E
D
I
guess
I'm
in
in
favor
of
tabling
for
a
slightly
different
reason.
I
I
doubt
that
you
know
I
would
that
there
would
be
evidence
presented.
That
would
really
change
my
mind
that
all
of
these
conditions
could
be
mitigated,
but
I
feel
like
it's
a
sort
of
matter
of
due
process
and
fairness
and
there's
not
like
five
other
applicants
waiting
on
this
site,
desperately
the
like
to
develop
it.
It's
been
vacant
for
a
long
time
like
two
three
more
months.
I,
don't
know
how
long
the
applicant
needs
to
reply.
D
It
just
I,
don't
see
the
downside
of
waiting,
I
guess
you
know,
and
if
we
are
that
unsure
of
our
opinion
of
this,
if,
like
one
more
report,
would
change
our
opinion,
then
I
feel
like
we.
Should
we
shouldn't
be
that
unsure
making
a
decision
right?
If
we're
you
know
marshalling
more
information.
It
can't
I
can't
see
this
if
there
was
like
some
pressing
like
there's
five
other
developments
that
are
waiting
on
this,
then
I
would
see
the
urgency.
K
K
So
it's
been
a
long
time.
This
is
not
the
first
time
that
they've
heard
we
think
their
environmental
problems.
Here.
These
comments
have
been
in
the
news
for
a
year
like
we
heard
about
come
and
go,
is
people
are
worried
about
runoff
and
stuff,
like
that?
So
I
mean
if
they
had
a
great
way
to
address
it,
I
feel
like
they
should
have
the
thing
that
they
didn't
get
until
two
weeks
ago,
which
is
11
days
more
than
usual.
K
K
That
says
this
will
be
fine,
then
that
would
change
my
mind
I'm,
not
on
the
fence
enough
about
that,
because
we
already
have
a
lot
of
information
that
it's
dangerous
and
it's
specifically
dangerous
to
this
lot
and
this
use
like
if
they
were
asking
for
conditional
use
for
something
else,
a
crematorium
or
something
we
might
say
not
appropriate
for
the
neighborhood.
But
it's
not
this
dangerous
at
this
site.
There
are
other
conditional
uses
that
could
work
in
this
site,
but
this
this
one
particularly
is
bad
for
this
corner.
V
K
You
ready
go
for
it,
based
on
the
findings
listed
in
the
staff
report.
The
information
presented
and
input
received
during
the
public
hearing
I
move
that
the
Planning
Commission
denied
the
conditional
use
request,
because
the
potential
for
detrimental
impacts
near
the
site
cannot
be
substantially
mitigated
and
I
would
like
to
list
those
which
will
take
just
a
second.