►
From YouTube: Planning Commission Meeting - December 15, 2021
Description
Salt Lake City Planning Commission Meeting - December 15, 2021 **Full Version**
https://www.slc.gov/planning/
https://www.slc.gov/planning/planning-commission-agendas-minutes/
A
Yeah,
I'm
not
quite
sure
how
to
move
her,
I'm
getting
some
assistance
from
john.
B
Okay,
perfect
welcome
to
the
plant
salt
lake
city
planning,
commission
meeting
for
december
15
2021.
We
do
have
a
quorum
and
all
of
our
commissioners
present
that
indicated
they
would
be
so
we'll
go
ahead
and
start
this
meeting.
B
Last
week
I
read
the
attention
notice,
so
I
don't
need
to
do
that
again.
We
will
dive
right
into
the
report
of
the
chair.
I
don't
have
anything
other
than
I
want
to
say.
Thank
you
to
everyone
who
made
this
extra
meeting
a
priority
on
your
schedule.
B
A
First,
being
the
bueno
avenue,
re-zone
was
approved
by
city
council
last
night
with
a
legislative
intent
associated
with
that
approval,
and
then
I
would
like
to
introduce
david
schupik.
He
is
the
admin
admin
in
training
he'll
be
taking
over
the
meeting
in
the
next
hour
from
aubry,
and
we
do
have
a
recruitment
campaign
for
planning.
Commissioners
for
the
d1
and
d2
districts
and
michaela
is
working
with
the
mayor's
office
on
recruiting
planning
commissioners
and
anyone
listening
that
is
interested
in
applying.
B
Okay,
we
will
move
on.
We
do
not
have
minutes
for
last
week's
meeting,
it's
pretty
quick
turnaround,
so
we
will
pick
up
those
approval
on
those
when
we
reconvene
in
january.
So
with
that
said,
we
can
just
begin
the
public
hearings.
B
E
I
just
sit
as
close
to
the
computer
as
I
can
so
to
answer
your
question.
Yes,
this
is
my
my
first
meeting
so
hello.
B
Welcome
to
presenting
duties
at
the
planning
commission
go
ahead
and
start
your
presentation.
E
Okay,
so
this
request
is
for
a
new
detached
edu
to
be
located
in
the
rear
yard
of
the
property
at
362
east
sherman
avenue.
The
subject.
Property
is
zoned,
r15000,
single-family
residential
and
is
also
in
the
liberty
wells.
National
historic
district
staff
is
recommending
that
the
commission
approve
their
request.
E
E
E
E
E
However,
the
adu
ordinance
also
permits
the
parking
requirement
for
the
adu
to
be
waived
if
there
is
legally
located
street
parking
available
along
the
street
frontage
of
the
property
or
if
the
subject
property
is
located
within
one
quarter.
Mile
of
a
transit
stop
as
noted
by
the
transportation
division
in
their
review.
This
property
has
both
of
those
characteristics.
E
E
E
E
F
Chair
I'd
just
like
to
note
that
actually
we
did
receive
a
letter
commenting
and
it
is
in
our
packet.
So.
B
B
Okay,
then,
by
all
means
go
ahead.
Please
state
your
name,
so
it's
pronounced
correctly
for
the
record
and
go
ahead.
G
Hi
everybody-
this
is
george
greigar
and
really
just
want
to
say
thanks
for
taking
the
time
to
review
and
hopefully
approve
our
plans,
it's
been
a
exciting
and
thorough
process.
So
I
appreciate
the
stipulations
that
you
all
put
forth
or
the
city
puts
forth
being
resident
neighborhood.
I
think
it's
important
that
we
take
those
things
into
consideration
to
make
sure
that
we
keep
the
character
and
neighborhoodlyness
intact.
G
I
have
been
in
this
neighborhood
now
for
about
seven
years
and
part
of
this
plan
is
you
know,
planting
deeper
roots
in
the
neighborhood
and
hoping
to
stay
for
a
long
time.
I
do
have
the
intent
of
renting
that
out,
and
I
think,
knowing
our
city
population
and
some
of
the
housing
shortages
that
we
have.
I
hope
that
can
help
alleviate
that
long
term.
G
I
also
have
aging
parents,
and
I
do
I
would
love
to
be
able
to
be
in
this
house
long
enough,
where
I
could
support
my
family
if
they
get
to
the
point
where
something
like
this
could
be
helpful
for
them
as
they
transition
in
their
older
age,
but
that's
probably
a
ways
away
as
well.
So
really
just
want
to
say
thanks,
I'm
looking
forward
to
the
rest
of
the
process.
B
Okay,
george
hang
tight,
we're
going
to
open
the
public
hearing
and
if
we
have
anything
else,
we'll
come
back
to
you
after
that.
But
right
now
we
will
open
the
public
hearing
kelsey.
Are
there
any
hands
raised?
If
you
are
a
member
of
the
public
and
wish
to
speak
on
this,
you
need
to
click
the
hand
in
the
lower
right
hand,
corner
that
lets
us
know.
You
wish
to
speak.
B
John,
are
there
any
additional
emails
sent
to
the
email
address?
We.
B
Okay
with
that,
I
will
close
the
public
comment
period
for
this
and
bring
it
back
to
the
commission,
seeing
that
we
had
no
questions
before
if
you
have
something
now
go
ahead.
Otherwise,
I'd
entertain
a
motion.
G
B
I
B
G
G
B
J
J
Here
is
a
photo
of
the
property
in
question,
as
you
can
see,
there's
a
fence
there
in
the
front
yard
some
other
views
to
help
get
some
context.
This
is
the
to
the
left
is
looking
to
the
south.
You
see
the
fence
there
to
the
right
is
looking
to
the
north
along
900
east
and
same
thing
here,
but
looking
to
the
east
along
600
south
and
the
picture
on
the
right
is
looking
to
the
west.
J
This
issue
arose
because
the
applicant
submitted
a
fence
permit
to
repair
the
that
wood
fence,
that
is
in
disrepair
and
found
that
the
fence
actually
sits
in
the
public
right
of
way
and
was
given
a
violation
letter
by
the
civil
civil
enforcement
and
they
were
provided
a
few
options
in
order
to
rectify
the
issue
they
decided
to
pursue
this
street
vacation
request.
Street
vacation
requests
are
decided
by
the
city
council,
they're,
not
beholden
to
any
single
standard,
but
they
did
adopt
a
policy
in
1999
and
those
standards
are
in
the
staff
report.
B
All
right,
thank
you,
aaron,
commissioner,
do
you
have
any
questions
for
aaron
at
this
time?
J
So
if
there
are
other
property
owners
with
the
same
issue,
recommendation
is
to
reach
out
to
real
estate
services
to
see
what
their
options
are.
B
K
Correct,
can
you
hear
me
okay,.
K
No,
but
if
you
could
just
maybe
aaron
if
you
could
just
keep
that
on
the
okay,
that's
that
same
photo
there
yeah.
So
thank
you
very
much
justin
matkin
on
behalf
of
michael
and
amy
kennedy,
who
are
the
property
owners,
I'm
an
attorney
at
the
law,
firm
of
programming
loveless
and
have
been
asked
to
just
say
a
few
words
this
evening.
So
thank
you
very
much
for
hearing
this.
This
is
kind
of
an
unusual.
K
I
don't
know
if
that's
unusual,
but
the
the
kennedys
believed
until
fairly
recently
that
they
actually
owned
the
property
on
their
side
of
the
fence
of
when
they
obviously
tried
to
fix
the
wood
fence
that
was
falling
down,
received
notice
that
the
right-of-way
is
actually
inside
of
inside
of
their
fence
by
five
or
six
feet
and
received
a
notice
of
violation
and,
as
aaron
said,
a
few
options
to
remedy
the
situation.
K
The
the
right-of-way
here
on
six
south
is
about
132
feet
wide
and
on
nine
south
about
135
feet
wide.
So
it's
a
very
large
right
of
way
that
that
is
occupied
by
very
ample
park,
strips
some
beautiful
historic
trees
that
you'll
see
there.
K
K
You
can
see
that
the
boundaries
actually
shifted
over
on
all
of
these
residences
about
six
feet.
So
at
some
point
in
the
in
the
long
ago
past
there
was
probably
some
type
of
surveying
error
by
the
original
subdivision
that
created
this
problem
and
it's
just
being
discovered
now.
In
any
event,
the
the
solution
here
is
for
the
kennedys
to
purchase
this.
K
These
small
strips,
which
I
said,
are
about
five
five
feet
wide
on
the
other
side
of
the
on
the
property
side
of
the
sidewalk,
and
so
the
city
will
be
receiving
a
fair
value
for
that
land
purchase
will
need
to
go
through
an
appraisal
process
and
and
determine
that
the
value,
but
the
city
will
be
receiving
a
check
for
the
value
of
that
property
from
the
kennedys,
assuming
that
this
goes
through
with
a
positive
recommendation
and
also
approved
by
the
city
council,
which
is
a
again
a
partial
street
vacation.
K
The
the
issue
with
with
respect
to
the
other
owners
kind
of
up
and
down
the
street,
it
only
becomes
an
issue
really
when
there's
a
fence
that
that
encumbers
part
of
the
right-of-way
in
this
situation,
because
we're
on
the
corner,
there
is
a
fence,
but
if
you
go
down
farther
on
either
side,
it's
kind
of
a
case-by-case
basis,
but
many
of
those
yards
are
just
front
yards
without
fences,
and
so
there's
not
a
there's,
not
a
clear
property
line
or
what
was
believed
to
be
a
property
line
distinction
between
those.
K
And
so
even
though
it
may
be
an
issue
that
continues
down
the
street.
It's
a
particular
concern
on
this
property
because
it's
a
corner
property
and
because
there's
existing
fences
that
have
been
there
for
a
long
time
that
that
create
this
conflict
so
happy
to
address
any
questions
you
have.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
B
All
right,
thank
you
and
commissioners.
Any
questions
for
the
applicant.
L
How
long,
I
guess
I'm
confused
about
how
this
problem
arises,
and
I
I'm
sympathetic
to
the
public
comment
we
received
about.
You
know
the
other
property
owners
affected
if
the
city,
how
long,
I
guess,
justin?
How
long
is
the
statute
of
adverse
possession
in
the
state
of
utah
like
how
if
the
city
was
not
maintaining
this
property,
you
know
is
because
it
was
public.
Does
that
make
adverse
possession
not
a
feasible
option
for
the
landowners
correct.
J
That's
that's
correct,
I
mean
justin's
an
attorney.
I
am
staff
and
yeah
average
procession
does
not
apply
to
city
property,
public
property
in
the
at
least.
In
this
specific
case,
adverse
possession
does
not
apply.
K
I
For
some
reason,
my
camera
won't
turn
on.
That
is
correct.
G
I
G
That
is
a
principle
that
is
true
in
in
all
states
is
my
understanding.
Thank
you.
K
B
B
I
B
M
N
B
Yes,
andreas.
B
G
I
B
Amy,
yes,
okay,
that
motion
passes
unanimously.
Congratulations,
kennedy's,
you're!
Now,
moving
on
to
the
city
council,
we
will
go
on
to
our
next
agenda
item,
which
is
the
barola
plan
development
at
approximately
442
south
post
street.
That
is
case
number
pln
pcm
2020-00464.
A
Let
me
see
there,
you
go.
D
D
Unmuted,
okay,
I
will
start
again.
Thank
you,
commissioner.
So
salt
lake
city
has
received
a
request
for
a
planned
development
for
from
the
property
owners,
jesus
and
amalia
bareille.
The
plan
development
is
to
allow
for
modifications
to
the
zoni
district
for
the
creation
of
a
subdivision.
D
The
site
is
presently
being
used
as
a
single
family
residential
house
in
the
r1
5000
zoning
district,
the
site
is
considered
a
legal
non-complying
lot
as
the
site
exceeds
the
maximum
lot
size
in
the
r1
5000
district.
The
modifications
requested
include
a
reduction
of
lot
size
reduction
in
lot,
width,
a
reduction
in
side
yard
setbacks
and
a
great
greater
percentage
of
building
coverage
than
what's
presently
allowed.
D
So
during
stats
review,
we
have
found
that
the
berella
plan
development
meets
the
plan,
development
standards
of
review
and
the
r15000
zoning
district
standards
of
review.
This
includes
the
minimum
plan
development
size,
the
plan
development
master
plan,
compatibility
objective,
as
well
as
the
front
yard
setback,
they're,
very
hard
setback,
the
maximum
lot
size
and
maximum
building
height
standards.
D
The
four
requested
modifications
through
the
planned
development
process
are
reducing
the
lot
size.
The
lot
width
and
side
yard
setbacks,
as
well
as
increasing
the
allowed
building
coverage
in
the
r1
5000
district.
The
minimum
lot
size
is,
is
5
000
square
feet.
The
project
includes
a
lot
size
of
approximately
5
700
square
feet
and
4
800
square
feet
with
a
combined
subdivision
square
footage
of
10
500
square
feet.
D
The
request
would
also
reduce
the
minimum
want
width
of
50
feet.
The
proposed
is
approximately
34
feet
and
40
feet
of
frontage,
because
this
lot
is
part
of
an
older
subdivision,
narrower
lots
and
smaller
lots
are
common
in
the
neighborhood,
as
you
can
see
on
the
slide
on
your
screen
and
it's
a
result
of
the
neighborhood
being
fully
developed
before
this
area
was
zoned.
R1
5000
around
1995.
D
D
D
The
property
to
the
south
has
an
approximately
two
foot
side
yard
setback.
The
final
modification
requested
is
building
coverage.
The
requested
building
coverage
is
50
of
the
lot,
which
includes
the
house
and
attached
garage.
While
in
this
neighborhood
an
increase
in
building
coverage
isn't
necessarily
common.
There
are
a
number
of
other
lots
with
a
greater
percentage
of
coverage
than
what's
permitted
in
the
district,
because
there's
an
accessible
alley
to
the
rear
of
the
site.
D
A
greater
permitting
a
greater
percent
of
building
coverage
on
the
site
staff
feels
would
be
appropriate,
so
planning
staff
is
recommending.
The
planning
commission
approve
the
plan.
Development
requests
its
staff
has
found
the
proposed
development
meets
the
intent
of
the
underlying
zoning
district,
the
applicable
master
plans
and
the
planned
development
standards.
D
B
Okay,
thank
you
dad
any
questions
for
staff
at
this
time.
C
I
have
a
question,
madam
chair.
This
is
amy
burroughs.
I
wonder.
If
could
we
approve
some
of
the
exceptions
like
lot
size
and
not
some
of
the
others?
Like
setback?
Could
we
approve
all
the
requests,
except
for
setback.
B
O
Would
you
know,
have
a
presentation
we
just
have
a
statement
and
also
would
like
to
ask
nan
if
she
can
post
the
picture
of
the
aerial
picture
of
the
law
surrounding
okay.
B
Would
just
state
your
name,
so
it's
pronounced
correctly
for
the
record
and
then
go
ahead
well.
O
Thank
you
for
letting
us
present
tonight.
I
would
like
to
thank
danette
larson
for
sure
and
for
everyone
else
that
was
involved
in
all
the
work
that
led
to
to
us
being
here
tonight.
I
don't
want
to
keep
you
long
so
I'll,
just
dive
right
in
we
purchased
this
existing
house
back
in
2018
and
when
we
were
looking
to
purchase
what
caught
our
eyes
as
we
were
driving
was
like.
Why
is
there
an
empty
lot
next
to
the
house?
O
If
you
can
see
just
driving
through
the
neighborhood
or
the
actual
street,
you
can
see
that
all
of
the
houses
are
super
close
together
and
it
looks
very,
very
obvious.
Is
there
something
missing
there?
Our
plan
is
to
feel
something
that
completes
the
street
matches
the
look
of
the
neighborhood
and
makes
you
know
that
makes
it
look
more
cohesive,
one
of
the
planning
city
initiatives.
It
says
to
promote
infill
and
redevelopment
of
under
utilized
land.
I
think
this
would
be
fulfilled
as
well
as
accommodating
and
promoting
an
increase
in
the
city's
population.
O
We
have
been
in
contact
with
our
south
neighbor
tania
andrews,
who
owns
the
south
property,
which
is
the
property
that
would
have
the
most
impact.
I
guess
because
of
the
close
easements,
the
the
the
setbacks
on
the
side.
She
has
no
objections.
O
If
you
have
a
chance
to
have
to
glance
at
that
which
is
on
the
screen
right
now,
you
can
see
how
the
lot
it's
clearly
it
looks
very
obvious,
like
double
the
size
of
the
other
ones
that
are,
there
are
right
next
to
it,
and
it's
not
included
on
the
on
the
planning
report,
but
most
of
the
houses
on
the
neighborhood
have
one
or
two
feet
of
easement
next
to
the
the
next
property.
O
I
don't
know
yeah,
I
don't
know
if,
but
we
do,
we
did
submit
some
pictures
that
show
that
yeah
most
of
the
most
of
the
setbacks,
the
side
setbacks
on
that
street
are
less,
are
three
two
feet.
Some
of
them
are
1.5
feet
and,
just
to
finish,
we
have
noticed
an
increased
rehabilitation
in
the
houses
in
our
street
and
even
in
the
neighborhood
streets.
So
we
would
like
to
contribute
to
it.
We
appreciate
your
time
and
your
considerations
on
this
project.
Thank
you
so
much
and
we
are
open
for
any
questions.
B
Okay,
thank
you.
I
believe
the
site
photos
for
commissioners
is
in
our
dropbox.
On
page
nine
and
ten,
I
don't
know
if
you
submitted
those
or
those
were
the
ones
that
nan
took,
but
they
give
a.
D
B
It
happens,
hi
all
right,
any
questions
for
the
applicant
at
this
time.
F
F
B
A
A
B
Thank
you
with
that.
I
will
close
the
public
comment
period
and
bring
it
back
to
the
commissioners
for
a
discussion,
and
if
you
have
any
further
questions
or
a
motion.
F
I
have
a
question:
I'm
sorry,
go
ahead,
go
go
ahead.
I
have
a
question
for
staff
and
actually
for
it's
it
so
in
a
conditional
use.
Excuse
me
in
a
planned
development.
It's
it's
highest.
It's
held
a
higher
standard
right
than
just
any
any
other
project.
That's
sort
of
any
like
house,
that's
built
in
the
neighborhood.
Isn't
that
correct.
D
So
in
my
staff
report
I
went
through
each
of
the
criteria
for
upon
development
and
I
believe
my
rationale
of
why
I
thought
that
it
met
the
criteria
for
a
plan.
Development.
D
It
was
talked
about
in
the
staff
report,
there's
no
other
criteria
that
the
applicant
would
need
to
meet
in
order
to
develop
the
site.
Besides,
the
typical
standards
of
an
r1
set,
an
r1
5000
zoning
district.
F
Why
is
that?
Why
don't
they
have
to
come,
actually
propose
a
project
and
because
part
of
the
standards
are,
you
know
whether
the
building
orientation,
the
building
materials,
are
compatible
with
the
neighborhood,
whether
it
maintains
a
visual
character
in
the
neighborhood,
whether
the
scale,
mass
and
intensity
are,
you
know
appropriate
for
the
neighborhood,
so
it's
not
just
whatever.
You
could
already
build
an
r1
that
or
r1
5000.
Is
that
not
true
or
not
so
the
measure.
D
That
I,
that
I
used
in
determining
compatibility
or
like
some
of
the
criteria
of
the
plan
development
approval,
is
that
the
setbacks
are
compatible
to
the
larger
neighborhood.
Not
necessarily,
I
didn't
see
that
as
the
design
of
the
building,
but
the
the
design
of
the
site
setbacks.
But
I
could
be
incorrect.
If
you
know
the
commission
would
prefer
to
see
a
building
design
and
that's
a
route
that
we
could
take.
F
I
I
you
know,
I
just
it
just
struck
me
in
the
language
that
you
were
looking
at.
You
know,
through
the
standards
that
you're
basically
using
the
zoning.
As
you
know,
the
minimal
kind
of
zoning
as
a
standard,
rather
than
reviewing
this
at
a
higher
standard,
that's
appropriate
for
a
for
a
planned
development,
and
I
wondered
why.
F
A
This
point,
commissioner,
we
have
used
the
plan
development
process
to
create
these
lots
for
these
large
deep
parcels
that
may
not
meet
the
lot
width
requirement
for
a
standard
subdivision
in
a
single
family
residential
area,
which
is
why
they're
subject
to
the
plan
development
process
to
create
that
additional
lot.
F
Yeah
the
standards
ask
us
to
look
at
the
landscaping,
the
parking
areas,
the
lighting,
the
facade,
the
set.
You
know
it,
the
materials
you
know.
In
other
words,
these
are
the
things
which
the
standards
wants
us
to
look
at
and
we're
not
doing.
That
is
that,
because
we
don't
have
any,
we
don't
even
have
that
information.
A
Yeah
so
we
would
use
the
applicable
standards
for
the
proposal
in
front
of
us,
and
so
since
we
don't
have
you
know,
elevations
to
analyze
for
materials,
we're
not
going
to
analyze
materials,
we'll
analyze
the
lot
in
bulk
in
reference
to
the
larger
neighborhood.
D
Commissioner
shear,
if
I
could
give
the
way
that
I
looked
at
this
to
qualify
for
a
plan
development,
you
need
to
meet
one
of
the.
D
I
think
it's
five
objectives
of
a
planned
development
and
they
met
the
master
plan,
compatibility
objective
and
then
all
of
the
other
criteria
in
the
plan
development
staff
reviewed
against
the
preliminary
plat
draft
that
we
received
and
in
some
cases
like
landscaping,
we
didn't
ask
for
detailed
information
on
landscaping
because
it
they
could
meet
the
criteria
for
landscaping
if
they
met
the
criteria
for
an
r1,
5000
zoning
district
landscaping
requirements
and
they
do
meet
the
front
yard,
front
yard
setback
standards,
they're,
not
asking
for
modification
to
the
front
yard
setback
standards.
D
B
B
G
I
just
had
one
quick
question:
has
there
ever
been
a
a
house
on
this
property
previously
anyone's
knowledge
or.
D
When
I
looked
at
the
history
of
the
site,
I
think
the
subdivision
was
in
1888
and
the
only
building
permit
that
I
was
able
to
find
is
on
the
single
family
house
on
the
site.
I
can't
remember
off
the
top
of
my
head
what
date
that
was,
but
I
couldn't
find
a
second
home
being
built
on
the
site.
B
Any
other
questions
or
discussion
or
emotion,.
L
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion:
please
go
ahead,
andrew
based
on
the
information
in
the
staff
report.
I
move
that
the
planning
commission
approve
the
planned
development
petition,
pln
pcm
2020-00464.
B
Okay,
we'll
go
ahead
and
vote
on
that
john
yeah
andreas.
C
Yes,
and
can
I
say
something
real
quick
sure
I
want
to
say
that
making
narrower
lots
and
smaller
setbacks
is.
I
don't
think
I
like
that
very
much,
but
the
fact
that
it
matches
what's
already
there
and
meets
the
character
of
the
rest
of
the
street.
That
was
that
moved
me
to
say
yes,
so,
yes.
B
C
I
F
I'm
going
to
vote
no
because
I
believe
that
we
don't
have
enough
information
to
evaluate
whether
this
project
meets
the
standards
of
the
of
plan
development,
including
we
do
not
have
any
architectural
drawings
so
that
the
advocate
could
actually
build.
Something
was
quite
incompatible
with
the
neighborhood
based
on
the
footprint
that's
available
there
and
the
height
that
is
allowed.
B
Okay,
thank
you
all
right
with
that.
The
motion
passes
six
to
one
okay,
that
is
congratulations
roland.
You
can
move
ahead
with
that
plan
development.
Our
next
agenda
item
is
the
coachman
mixed-use
plan
development
at
approximately
1301
south
state
street,
that
is
case
number
pln,
pcm
2021-00898
and
the
planner
is
katya.
P
Hello,
let
me.
B
P
P
The
requirement
is
no
more
than
200
feet
and
the
applicant
is
proposing
a
building
that
is
550
approximately
551
feet
of
front
facade
and
also
additional
front
yard
setback
on
the
corner
facing
1300
south,
where
the
the
zoning
requirement
is
zero
front,
front
setback
and
the
proposal
is
23
feet.
P
This
is
a
drawing
of
the
proposed
project.
The
development
would
be
a
mixed
use,
a
six
story,
building
with
an
underground
parking,
restaurant
in
commercial
on
the
ground
level,
structured
parking
and
storage
on
the
second
level
and
then
three
floors,
above
with
residential
condominiums.
P
About
112
units,
the
residential
component
would
be
consistent,
consists
of
studios,
one
bedroom,
two
bedroom,
they
would
be
owner
occupied
according
to
the
the
african
would
like
it
to
be
owner
occupied
and
also
the
the
intent
is
to
make
this
an
affordable
housing
project.
P
These
are
renderings
of
the
proposed
project
and
you
can
see
how
the
the
proposed
the
residential
component
sort
of
setbacks
further
behind
on
the
front,
the
ground
level
and
the
ground
level
would
be
split
and
broken
into
three
sections.
With
these
parking
access
sort
of
breaking
the
building
down
existing
conditions.
P
Right
now,
there
is
a
restaurant
and
some
commercial
property
that
would
be
demolished
and
also
should
note
that
there's
the
parley's
creek
that
runs
through
the
site
and
in
underpass
with
a
concrete
cover.
P
P
So
the
main
ask
for
the
plan
development
is
to
modify
the
requirement
that
the
on
the
fb
um2,
where
it
it
requires
that
the
front
facade
be
no
more
than
200
feet,
and
that
is
the
purpose
for
that
is
to
have
distinct
spaces
that
it's
more
of
a
human
scale
and
comfortable
to
the
pedestrian.
P
P
Staff
finds
that
it
might,
it
might
be,
there's
an
option
here
for
the
planning
commission
to
request
a
little
bit
more
work
on
breaking
down
this
building.
Although
this
approach
is,
is
something
that
planning
finds
that
it
could
work.
P
If
it
could,
you
know
the
the
this
big
long
building
could
be
broken
down
through
design
and
material,
and
the
modulation
there
is
also
what
we
are
suggesting
is,
maybe
if,
if
the
planning
commission
finds
it
appropriate
to
further
distinct,
you
know
these
three
sections
and
having
the
ground
floor
sections
be
more.
P
Compatible
with
the
the
the
modulation
and
the
change
in
design
and
material
and
color
from
the
three
top
floors
so
make
the
you
know
these
three
sections,
more
distinct.
P
The
other
modification
the
applicant
is
asking
is
the
additional
front
yard
setback
in
the
corner
yard
facing
300
south
it
it.
P
It
would
be
what
what
the
required
from
your
setback
is
zero
and
you
can
go
beyond
zero
for
fifty
percent
of
the
of
this
facade,
but
there
the
the
this
application
is
asking
for
more
than
50
percent
and
they're,
asking
for
23
feet
of
a
setback
which
the
reason
for
is
because
of
utility
lines
that
exist
on
the
on
this
property,
and
so
that
no
construction
is
done.
Underneath
the
these
utility
lines
staff
finds.
P
That
said,
this
request
is
appropriate,
since
the
the
sidewalk
on
13th
south
is
only
about
five
feet
wide.
So
by
extending
the
setback
you
would
extend
their
the
project
would
also
extend
the
pedestrian
walkway
on
13th
south
and
allow
for
trees
along
the
the
street.
P
Another
thing
to
point
out
is,
as
I
said
before,
this
project
is
the
the
parley's
canal.
It
runs
through
this
property
and
where
one
of
the
the
the
parking
accesses
access
is,
is
where
the
canal
would
go
through
and
would
have
a
16
foot
clearance
vertically
and
then
15
feet
clearance,
both
ways
horizontally
and
so.
P
The
salt
lake
city
county
flood
control
has
already
given
the
applicant
preliminary
approval
for
for
for
for
to
build
this,
and
there
will
be
more
review
from
the
salt
lake
county
flood
control
when
it's
time
for
for
the
building
permit.
P
So
our
recommendation
from
the
planning
staff
is
that
it
meets
the
intent
of
the
zoning
district
and
the
plant
development
standards
and
plus
the
applicable
mastery
plans.
This
is
a
building
that
would
be.
P
Sort
of
the
catalyst
for
other
projects
on
state
street,
and
so
we
recommend
approval
with
conditions,
and
the
first
condition
was
that
the
applicant
comply
with
other
department
comments
and
conditions
and
that
the
lighting
be
delegated
to
staff
as
a
condition
of
approval.
P
P
The
plan
goes
to
building
permit
and
the
county
flood
might
have
some
additional
requirements
and,
in
addition
to
that,
staff
finds
that
if
the
planning
commission
finds
that
this
project
needs
to
have
additional
conditions
to
make
the
length
of
the
building
more
appropriate
that
it
that
it
can
add
to
those
conditions
with
that,
I
just
would
like
to
mention
that
there
are
or
two
comments.
P
One
from
george
chapman
with
that
was
was
included
on
your
dropbox
and
also
another
comment
from
the
central
knight
community
council,
and
maybe
you
haven't
heard
that
comment
yet
so
we
might
need
to
read
that.
But
those
were
the
only
two
comments
that
staff
has
received
for
this
project,
and
with
that
I
you're
welcome
to
ask
me
any
questions.
L
L
My
second
question
is
what
the
unit
mix
is
planned
to
be
between
studio,
one
bedrooms
and
two
bedrooms,
and
then
my
third
question
is
I
I
read.
I
understand
the
concern
about
the
very
long
facade
and
I'm
wondering
about
how
much
it
would
increase
the
cost
per
square
foot
to
make
some
of
the
modifications
that
the
ninth
and
ninth
community
council
is
suggesting.
P
So
your
first
question.
B
I
think
that
might
be
more
appropriate
for
the
applicant
to
address.
P
You
know,
as
far
as
the
the
affordable
housing
this
the
you
know,
I've
asked
the
applicant
about
it
and
there
is
no
process
that
he
is
has
entered
into.
For
example,
getting
you
know
any
incentives
for
for
having
that
as
affordable
housing?
It's
at
this
point.
It's
just
his
intention.
So
there's
no.
You
know
anything
to
show
that
that
it
will
be
a
an
affordable
housing.
P
B
After
after
the
applicant's
presentation
andra,
I
think
that
question
should
definitely
be
posed
to
them.
Okay,
any
other
thing
for
staff.
C
Okay,
okay,
I
have
a
question.
This
is
amy
burroughs
the
map
that
shows
the
23
foot
setback
from
the
sidewalk
instead
of
zero
feet.
It
shows
a
drawing
of
the
restaurant,
which
I
assume
is
the
existing
coachman's
restaurant
is
that
currently
20
the
edge
of
that
building
is
23
feet
away
from
the
sidewalk
on
13th
south.
C
P
I
don't
believe
so,
but
that's
a
good
question
for
the
architect-
and
I
believe
he's
here-
he's
the
applicant
and
would.
C
C
P
C
P
So
this
is
just
a
driveway,
and-
and
I
apologize
this
this-
this
drawing
here-
shows
parking
that
yeah,
but
the
parking
is
going
to
be.
Actually
there
will
be
a
parking
landscape
between
so
there
won't
be
10
parking.
There's
going
to
be
about
two
to
three
parallel
parking.
P
B
Let's,
let's
hold
off
on
these
architectural
drawings
and
tell
the
applicant
okay:
let's
have
him.
B
F
P
So
we
calculate
on
the
fpu
and
because
there
is
a
zero
parking
requirement
on
the
fbun
too,
and
so
how
we
calculate
the
maximum
is
by
looking
at
the
required
parking
for
the
restaurant
for
the
individual
users,
the
restaurant,
the
residential
component,
the
retail
component,
and
so
that
is
the
maximum.
B
B
R
Are
you
going
to
do
that
ryan,
or
am
I
going
to
do
that?
I'm
not
sure.
Q
So
I
actually
don't
have
any
anything
more
than
what
conscious
proposed
necessarily.
We
can
certainly
answer
the
questions,
but
mike
as
the
is
the
property
owner
wanted
to
kind
of
lead
us
in,
and
then
I
can
answer
any
questions
with
regard
to
the
technical
aspect.
B
We're
going
to
have
a
lot
of
questions
ryan,
so
we're
definitely
going
to
need
some
of
your
some
of
these
specs
up
for
sure.
But
I.
Q
B
Hoping
you
might
have
a
little
bit
better
on
the
drawings
for
us,
but
we'll
do
what
we
have
okay,
mr
nichols.
If
you
want
to
start
off
as
the
applicant,
you
will
have
10
minutes,
and
the
time
is
yours.
R
Okay,
thank
you.
I
appreciate
everything
that
everybody's
doing
just
so.
You
all
know
that,
taking
the
time
to
look
at
this
project,
we've
been
I've
been
working
on
it.
For
four
years
my
father
owned
coachman's
started
coachman
60
years
ago.
We
purchased
the
property
to
the
south
of
us.
Obviously,
landscape
and,
and
things
have
changed
there.
Those
buildings
were
in
dire
need
of
of
some
rehabilitation,
but
I
just
didn't
feel
that
that
was
the
proper
use
for
that
area.
R
I
mean
it
was
really
designed
wrong
because
it
was
designed
in
the
70s
and
it
was
just
not
working
so
we
made
this.
I
made
the
decision
both
of
us,
my
father
and
I
to
do
this,
and
we've
been
working
on
it.
For
a
very
very
long
time.
We've
tried
to
overcome
all
obstacles
in
the
way
the
creek
has
won.
We've
addressed
it
with
the
county.
The
county
has
given
us
a
green
light.
R
They
want
16
feet
above
15
feet
on
each
side
of
the
culvert
so
that
they
can
do
any
work
if
need
be.
They're
also
going
to
address
that
when
we
unearth
things-
and
they
want
to
look
at
it
at
that
time
and
as
well
as
that,
we've
done
a
lot
of
design
work
on
this,
and
you
know
we
really
want
it
to
look
good
and
that's
why
you're
seeing
the
picture
you're
seeing
there
is
we
we
want
it
to
look
really
good
and
I
do
believe
it's
going
to
be
a
catalyst.
R
The
other
thing
for
future
development
there.
The
other
thing
when
somebody
was
asking
about
affordable
housing-
I
mean
I,
I
call
it
affordable
ownership.
These
are
condos,
there's
gonna,
be
approximately
60
two-bedroom,
forty
percent,
I'm
sorry.
Fifty
percent,
two
bedroom,
forty
percent
one
bedroom
and
the
rest
are
gonna,
be
four
three
bedroom
on
the
corners
of
the
top
units,
the
the
fifth
level
and
the
rest
we're
going
to
take
up
with
the
the
studios,
okay.
R
But
the
idea
is-
and
I
pitched
this
to
the
city
council
before
and
to
the
community
council
who
all
liked
the
idea
I
mean
I
just
always
felt
that
people
are
putting
money
in
for
rents
and
they're
absorbent
right
now,
and
I
just
felt
I
would
love
to
see
a
young
family
or
a
young
person
professional
that
can
afford
something
and
have
an
asset
rather
than
just
a
rent
when
they
walk
away.
They
have
nothing.
R
R
So
that's
how
I
we
we
developed
this
now
with
the
openings
on
the
front
of
the
building.
I
believe
if
that
building
was
built
right
now,
and
somebody
was
to
stand
in
front
of
it
or
drive
by
it,
it
would
not
look
like
one
long
building
you're
going
to
have
a
50-foot
opening
for
that
double
wide
where
the
creek
is
and
then
you're
going
to
have
another.
R
I
can't
remember
the
exact
dimensions
but
they're
approximately
25
feet
on
the
further
north
entrance
and
that
breaks
up
those
where
it
does
not
look
like
it's
just
one:
solid
wall
of
building,
okay
and
then
on
the
lady
that
asked
about
the
the
setback
on
on
the
13th
south
and
the
corner
there
so
coachman's.
R
Currently
we
used
to
have
a
lot
of
property
there,
but
the
city
bought
it
from
us
and
they
extended
13th
south
when
the
floods
came
through,
I
mean
I
know
I
was
there
and
I
know
what
happened
and
they
had
to
deal
with
us.
So
they
purchased
a
lot
of
property.
We
hit
an
extra
approximately
18
feet
before
they
widened
13th
south
and
put
all
those
culverts
down
13th
south.
So
what
now
happens
is
they
have
put?
R
Let's
say
I
think
it
was
approximately
30
feet.
They
took
15
feet
from
us.
So
now
what
has
transpired
is?
We
only
have
about
10
feet
worth
of
grass
back
there
with
a
pony
wall
retaining
wall,
and
then
you
have
the
sidewalk.
It
is
literally
right.
Next
to
the
street
curb
gutter
that
sidewalk
I
went
down
there
to
try
to
remove
snow
because
the
plows
pushed
it
onto
that
sidewalk.
R
Today,
just
came
back
about
an
hour
and
a
half
ago,
that's
at
least
three
feet
thick
and
nobody
can
walk
down
that
and
I'm
gonna
have
to
get
a
backhoe
just
to
get
it
off
of
there.
So
in
my
own,
humble
opinion
being
set
back,
there
is
gonna
be
much
better.
Besides
the
fact
that
we've
got
power
lines
that
we've
already
talked
to
rocky
mountain
power
about
that
we
have
to
be
set
back,
a
certain
point
for
the
ark
around
it
and
everything
else.
So
the
setback
there
was
addressed
early
on
the
culvert.
R
We've
tried
to
address
early
on
and
try
to
get
as
many
answers
as
possible.
We've
got
these
two
openings
to
try
to
address
that
and
then
let
me
just
tell
a
little
bit
about
the
building.
On
top
of
the
second
level,
there
is
going
to
be
outdoor
amenities
with
hot
tubs
barbecues,
so
you're
going
to
be
above
street
level,
so
people
aren't
people
aren't
looking
into
you
and
you've
got
some
privacy
and
it's
going
to
be
huge.
You
can
see
it
right
in
the
middle
of
the
building
right
there.
R
That's
all
going
to
be
outdoor
amenities
inside
our
indoor
amenities,
gyms
gold
table
and
a
little
meeting
rooms,
and
things
like
this
that
way,
the
people
that
are
outside
are
not
looking
into
your
condo,
so
the
condos
on
that
level
extend
out
from
there
on
to
the
south
and
to
the
north.
Now,
on
the
second
and
third
level,
you
get
full
usage
of
all
of
the
space
for
condos,
but
we
haven't
just
applied.
R
How
can
I
say
all
building
all
livable
space,
all
everything
we're
looking
at
trying
to
make
amenities
and
and
make
it
really
really
functional
for
the
city
for
the
people,
and
I
want
affordable
ownership
for
a
reason
that
areas
everyone
that
lives
in
the
city
well
knows:
there's
been
a
problem
with
I
I
don't
want
to
say
what
I've
had
to
do,
but
it's
been
a
big
problem.
There's
been
people
that
break
into
cars
break
into
businesses.
R
I've
had
both
of
my
businesses
within
the
last
two
weeks
broke
in
three
times
but
anyway,
and
it's
just
a
mess
eyes
on
the
street
are
gonna
change
everything
if
we
have
affordable
ownership
and
you
own
it
you're.
Looking
into
that,
if
you're
just
there
for
six
months
and
gone,
it
changes
everything
and
then
you've
got
retail
on
the
bottom,
which
is
the
same
thing.
Everybody
has
to
protect
their
business,
otherwise
they're
not
going
to
have
one.
R
B
Thank
you,
ryan.
Did
you
want
to
address
some
of
the
design
questions.
Q
Yeah,
if
I
first,
if
I
can
share
countries
that
mean
you
have
to
release
your
share,
I
can
certainly
kind
of
show
a
couple
exhibits
with
regard
to
the
existing
coachmen.
B
I've
paused
your
time
for
this,
but
you'll
have
about
three
minutes
after
that,
and
then
we'll
have
questions
so
there
you
go.
Q
Okay,
so
let
me
show
you
the
kind
of
the
the
difference
between
what
mike
just
kind
of
mentioned,
with
regard
to
the
proximity
to
the
curb
with
the
existing
coachman's
restaurant
building,
and
then
the
proposed
as
it
as
it
shifts
back
a
little
bit
so
to
open
up
that
little
plaza
right.
There,
I
think,
would
be
a
huge
benefit
just
for
a
lot
of
reasons,
some
of
which
might
just
enumerated,
and
then
one
of
the
things
I
wanted
to
make
sure
we
clarify
as
well
in
is
katja's
presentation.
Q
She
mentions
it's
a
six
story.
Building,
technically
it
is.
One
of
those
stories
is
below
grade.
So,
as
mike
mentioned
as
we
as
we
look
at
this
from
a
pedestrian
standpoint,
the
street
side
is
going
to
be
broken
up
into
these
three
three
sections.
If
you
will
that'll
all
be,
have
different
uses
within
them
and
it
won't.
I
hope
the
idea
obviously,
is
that
it
won't
feel
quite
so
imposing
at
that
street
level.
Q
I
wanted
to
show
also
another
remember
one
of
the
questions
with
regard
to
the
parking
that
katy
mentioned.
The
image
that
she
showed
in
her
presentation
was
a
little
bit
was.
It
was
quite
out
of
date,
so
this
is
the
existing
curb
cut
off
of
1300
south,
and
this
will
remain
right
now.
There's
angled!
Excuse
me,
there's
a
para
front.
End
parking
coming
right
up
against
this
building,
actually
crossing
this
property
line
we
had
to.
We
had
to
cut
that
back
to
maintain
a
seven
foot
landscape
strip
right
across
here.
Q
So
that's
the
parallel
parking
that
she
mentioned
across
here.
So
this
is
all
uncovered
park
and
once
you
jump
into
here
and
kind
of
cross
into
this
plane,
that's
when
you
come
inside
the
building.
There
are
ramps,
there's
structured
parking
and
so
forth,
and
so
so
that's
kind
of
how
the
the
initial
drive
would
would
would
work
with
that
existing
curb
cut
there.
Q
Let's
see,
we
went
over
a
whole
lot
in
those
last
few
comments.
Was
there
what
the?
What
other
questions
were
there
that
I
could
answer.
B
Okay
with
that,
we
will
bring
it
to
the
commissioners
for
questions
who
would
like
to
start.
L
Can
I
start
amy?
Thank
you
very
much.
I
I
want
to
first
say
that
I'm
really
excited
that
you
guys
are
going
to
do
condos.
We
have
a
lack
of
condos.
I
think
in
this
city.
For
some
reason,
developers
seem
to
be
oddly
hesitant
about
condos
in
salt
lake,
and
I'm
excited
that
there's
a
good
set
of
two
bedroom
units.
I'm
excited
there's
going
to
be
some
three
bedrooms.
I
I
am
slightly
sympathetic
to
some
of
the
comments
in
the
central
ninths
public
comment
about
the
facade
and
I
you
know.
L
Q
So,
by
way
of
cost
that's
a
little
bit
above
my
own
pay
grade.
I
don't
get
into
estimating
a
whole
lot
of
a
threat
in
that
regard,
and
I
did
not
see
the
comment,
but
what
we
have
done
as
scotch
you
mentioned,
we've
got
at
street
level.
We've
got
these
three
separate.
You
know
in
in
concept
anyway,
three
separate
buildings
we've
tried
to
align
relatively
closely
with
shifts
in
material
with
color
and
with
regard
to
the
proximity
to
the
street
of
the
condos
up
against
state
street.
Q
So
in
her
presentation
she
had
a
kind
of
building
two
kind
of
broken
up
over
here.
So
looking
at
this,
this
is
north
is
to
the
left
on
this.
So
we
sort
of
saw
that
break
to
coincide
with
the
south
side
of
this
parking
drive
right
here
we
broke
up
the
building
here.
Changed
material,
changed
the
massing
and
then
did
the
same
thing
now
again.
So
even
this
even
this
portion
here,
that's
this
yellow
portion
of
the
building.
Q
It's
already
set
back
from
the
face
of
this
building
at
the
street
level
and
then,
as
you
move
further
south
again
you're
now
at.
Let's
call
it
building
two
at
the
street
level.
This
portion
of
the
residential
above
sets
back
even
further,
and
that's
the
large
courtyard
that
mike
was
mentioning
where
you'll
have
a
lot
of
common
common
amenities
for
the
tenants
and
that's
that'll,
be
a
really
really
nice
kind
of
urban
feel
to
that
place,
and
as
we
continue
to
move
south,
then
we
jump
into
building
three
the
level
the
the
base.
Q
If
you
will
of
level
three
excuse
me
of
building
three
and
then
again,
this
now
comes
back
towards
the
street
a
little
bit
back
towards
us
towards
state
street,
with
a
little
bit
of
a
kind
of
a
movement
back
again,
to
give
a
little
bit
more
separation
between
call
the
upper
levels
of
building
one
two
and
three.
F
Yeah,
I
I
have
a
couple
of
questions
so
in
your
unit
mix
you
have
112
units
by
my
count.
You
have
23
two
bedrooms,
58
one
bedrooms
and
31
studios.
F
So
you
actually
don't
have
three
bedrooms
on
the
plans
at
all,
and-
and
I
is
that
am
I
wrong
here
and
also
you
have
studios-
which
you
didn't
mention
I
mean
it
was
not
mentioned.
So
I'm
I'm
sort
of
wanting
to
recalculate
the
parking
requirements
because
it
looks
to
me,
like
you,
have
a
lot
more
parking
than
you
actually
are
allowed
to
have.
F
I
don't
I
don't
see
a
chart
where
that's
been,
but
that's
been.
You
know
calculated.
Q
You
know
that
balance
between
the
right
number
of
units,
the
right
size
of
units,
the
right
bedroom
count
and
so
forth,
so
that
we
are
kind
of
working
through
so
katya.
I
wonder
if
I
could
punt
back
to
you
a
little
bit
if
you
could
explain,
because
we
were,
quite
frankly
a
little
confused
with
regard
to
the
parking
requirement
for
this
fbun2
zone.
There
is
a
minimum
requirement
which
was
zero
and
then
the
maximum
requirement
referred
back
to
the
minimum
requirement
with
regard
to
parking.
Q
So
what
we
did
end
up
doing
we
have
on-
or
I
have
rather
on
my
cover
sheet,
a
breakdown
of
all
those
stalls
as
they're
as
we've
provided
them
as
the
different
uses
are
going
to
be
required.
So
this
is
how
we've
broken
it
up
for
a
studio.
Q
We
have
a
half
stall
per
unit
for
a
single
one
bedroom,
a
single
single
stall
and
then
for
a
two
bedroom
two
stalls,
and
then
we
have
the
commercial
spaces
with
that
are
according
to
the
chart
in
the
in
the
zoning
ordinance
for
this,
for
this
zone.
F
But
those
are
kind
of
the
maximum
park,
those
are
the
maximum
parking
requirements
and,
if
you're
really
trying
to
do
something,
that's
affordable,
that's
a
place
where
you
can
really
save
a
lot
of
money,
because
all
of
your
parking
is
structured.
As
far
as
I
can
see.
Is
that
correct.
F
So
I
mean
it
is
a
lot
of
parking
in
a
place.
That's
fairly
urban.
That's
supposed
to
be.
You
know
an
urban
zone
where
people
would
not
necessarily
have
two
parking
spaces.
It's
certainly
not
just
for
a
two-bedroom
unit,
so
I
think
you're
way
over-parked
on
this
one,
and
that
may
be
a
way
for
you
to
really
save
a
lot
of
money,
and
even
maybe
I
don't
I
don't
know,
maybe
the
underground
parking
doesn't
even
need
to
be
built.
F
So
it
seems
like
this
is
a
little
bit
not
worked
out
both
from
the
standpoint
of
the
of
the
of
the
facade
which
I
can
see.
You
know
the
separation
happening
on
the
ground
floor.
F
I
think
that's
you
know,
that's
that's
happening
on
the
ground
floor,
I'd
like
to
see
it
reflect
and,
and
it
somewhat
carried
up,
I
think
it's
carried
up
through
the
architectural
facade,
distinguishing
materials
on
the
second
floor
and
and
that's
okay,
but
I
think
some
of
the
comments
that
the
neighborhood
council
had
really
need
to
be
taken
to
heart,
and
I
don't
know
what
the
I
can't
tell
from
your
from
your
drawings.
F
What
the
height
of
the
ground
floor
is
so,
do
you
have
they're
sort
of.
F
Q
Q
Have
that
16
foot
clearance
at
the
at
the
drive
and
great
retail
space
on
that
street
side.
F
Q
So
if
I
recall
and
like
I
said
it
I'd
be
curious
to
hear
back
from
katya
again,
because
just
the
way
that
the
zoning
ordinance
with
this
fbu
n2
is
written,
there
is
no
maximum
parking,
it
refers
simply
back
to
the
minimum
parking
table
required
and
the
minimum
was
zero.
Q
So
what
we
ended
up
doing,
I
believe
we
went
to
a
a
similar
or
an
adjacent
zone
that
did
have
a
maximum
parking
and
used
those
standards
as
our
as
our
guideline,
because
the
fbun2
just.
F
A
Yeah,
I
can
jump
in
real,
quick,
so,
okay,
you
are
correct
that
there's
no
minimum
required
in
the
fbun2
specifically
in
that
table
for
zone
specific
fbn2
does
not
require
any
parking.
A
P
But
we
used
for
the
maximum
is
that
the
requirement
for
each
lend
use
so
for
each
land
use
there's
in
the
parking
chapter
there
is,
you
know
for
for
residential
there's
a
required
parking
for
retail
for
restaurants,
so
we
used
that
number
and
calculated
the
maximum
yeah
right.
C
So
the
the
minimum
for
that
land
use
turns
into
the
maximum
if,
when
you're
in
this
walkable
zoning,
is
that
not
right.
F
That
that
doesn't
sound
right
to
me,
I
mean,
what's
the
point
of
having
a
zero
requirement,
if
you
don't
have
zero
requirement,
if
you
actually
have
to
build,
you
know
all
of
this
parking.
H
F
H
H
Yeah,
I
would
say
it's
as
close
to
the
maximum
as
you
can
get,
and,
and
certainly
they
have
to
follow
those
regulations.
I
mean
we're
not
going
to
let
them
build
more
parking
and
you're
right
that
we
want
to
encourage
less
parking.
I
completely
agree
with
you
on
everything
you
said.
Thankfully,
this
will
be
a
lot
more
clear
when
the
council
adopts
our
updated
parking
regulations
from
what
we
currently
have
and
that
you,
I
believe,
reviewed.
I
don't
know
a
year
and
a
half
ago,
two
years
ago.
Yes,.
F
H
So,
and-
and
so
it
is
confusing-
and
I
get
that,
but
yes,
we
have
determined
that
basically
the
minimum
parking
becomes
the
maximum,
and
so
if,
if
not
we're,
basically
saying
you
can't
put
any
parking
at
all,
if
we
said
the
maximum
is
the
minimum
which
is
zero,
we
would
always
think
you
can't
put
even
one
parking
stall
in
and
I
don't
think
that
is
necessarily
reasonable
either,
and
so
this
is
what
we
took
when
we
interpreted
this
section
of
the
code,
so
hopefully
we're
on
the
it
will
get
better
and
easier.
C
I
wonder
that
that
existing
office
building
that's
going
to
be
demolished.
How
how
long
is
it.
Q
Those
are
yeah,
these
are
interior,
stairways.
It's
it's
one!
Contiguous
building.
These
are
really
just
circulation,
pedestrian
circulation.
But
that's
I
mean,
and
it's
got
the
same
kind
of
thing.
You
drive
underneath
the
building.
So
really
we
I
mean
we're
a
little
bit
longer
than
what's
there
existing,
but
honestly
by
the
time,
really
the
only
thing
we're
adding
really
if
it's
different
from
what
there
is
kind
of
this.
This
open
spot
right
here.
This
open
asphalt
here.
C
Well,
certainly,
if
you're
walking
on
that
street,
it's
different
to
have
a
big
parking
lot
and
then
a
shorter
building,
that's
long
than
a
tall
building,
that's
right
at
the
sidewalk.
That
is
long
right.
So
it's
I
mean
I
think
it's
a
big
difference,
but
that
is
already
a
pretty
long
building
right.
There.
F
So
I
have
a.
I
also
have
a
question
about
your
setback,
your
23
foot
setback
on
the
corner,
so
it's
a
narrow
side.
It's
a
narrow,
sidewalk
they're
true.
But
how
did
you
come
up
with
23
feet?
I
mean
if
you
increase
the
sidewalk
to
say
15
feet
even.
Q
Yeah
so
the
there
there's
good
size
distribution
lines
with
rocky
mountain
power
already
on
the
site.
They
actually,
if
I
remember
right,
if
they
don't
already
hang
over
the
existing
roof
of
the
coachman's
restaurant
they're,
very,
very
close
to
it.
So
as
we
start
looking
at
that
with
new
construction,
we're
actually
there's
two
big
concerns.
One
is
undermining
the
foundations
for
those
power
lines,
but
then
there
are
also
because
there
are
distribution
and
transmission
lines.
Q
There
there's
also
rocky
mountain
power
requirements
as
to
how
close
you
can
be
with
a
built
structure
to
those
power
lines.
So
if
you
can
consider
a
five-story
building
that
has
to
neat
that
the
exterior
windows
need
to
be
cleaned,
somebody's
got
to
get
out
on
the
roof,
come
down
over
the
edge
and
clean
those
windows
from
the
roof.
They
can
only
be
within
a
certain
distance
or
they
can
only
come
with.
Q
F
N
Thank
you.
I
just
had
a
simple
question.
I
guess,
has
you
not
approved
where
your
curb
cuts
are
and.
Q
Your
references
yeah
with
regard
to
the
curb
cut-
that's
a
great
question-
I
don't
know
actually
mike,
maybe
I'll.
Let
you
I'll
punt
to
you
on
that.
I'm
not
sure
if
we've,
if
we've
finalized
our
u-dot
conversations
or
not.
R
R
However,
with
the
culvert
there
and
everything
involved,
I
felt
I
thought
it
would
be
so
much
better
just
to
bring
traffic
in
one
way
and
out
and
widen
it
there.
So
the
only
thing
we
would
be
requesting
of
udot
and
we
haven't
gotten
to
that
just
because
we
need
to
know
what
we
need
to
do.
You
know
with
this
step
right
now
before
we
can
move
forward.
So
basically,
all
we're
doing
is
widening
it
and
making
it
directional.
R
When
you're
coming
from
the
south
to
the
north
you'd
come
in
right
away
and
then
obviously
you
can
see
the
arrows
where,
when
you're
leaving
the
property,
you
would
directional
as
well,
so
it,
I
think,
really
cleans
things
up
and
you've
got
much
better
vision
of
the
street.
When
you
do
that,
you
know
of
your
of
your
oncoming
traffic
and
pedestrians
and
everything
I
mean
it's
just
a
huge
difference.
When
you
do
things
like
that
anyway,
and
then
I
I
would
okay
that
that's
fine
I'll
let
go.
I
I
I
have
one
quick
question:
just
what
are
the
the
projected
sidewalk
widths
along
state
street.
Q
I
believe
the
sidewalks
are,
in
effect
at
least
along
state
street
are
are
in
effect
about
what
they
are
right
now
we're
coming
again,
because
we
have
a
zero
lot
line,
we're
basically
yeah
zero
lot
line,
we're
coming
up
to
the
back
of
sidewalk
with
a
fair
portion
of
or
yeah.
I
guess
maybe
portions
are
building
we've
reset
some
of
the
entrances
for
the
commercial
space,
but
it's
five
six
feet
give
or
take.
Q
Q
B
So
I
want
to
just
say
that
I'm
really
concerned
about
the
length
of
this
building.
When
I
look
back
on
our
discussions
of
other
projects
that
exceeded
the
link.
This
is
the
longest
building
I've.
I
have
a
memory
of
us
ever
discussing.
B
We've
approved
some
a
similar
type
design
where
you
had
an
entrance,
a
vehicle
entrance
that
broke
it
up,
but
that
building
was
like
250
280
feet
long.
This
is
double
that
and
I
I'd
like
to
hear
what
other
ideas
have
you
had
to
actually
break
these
up
into,
maybe
even
two
different
buildings.
So
this
is
not
550
plus
feet.
Q
Yeah,
that's
a
fair
question.
The
tough
part
is
when
you
get
into
the
buildings
like
this.
You
know
egress,
so
you
have
different
building
systems,
mechanical
systems
and
plumbing
systems,
and
it
really
becomes
a
question
of
egress.
How
do
you
get
people
out
of
the
building
without
having
you
know,
20
different
stairwells,
and
that's
that
was
kind
of
really?
What
drove
a
lot
of
this?
Q
You
know,
and
we've
talked
about
different
methods
or
techniques
of
design
that
could
help
reinforce
the
fact
that
that
we're
trying
to
you
know
reinforce
the
the
the
notion
that
these
are
three
separate
buildings,
and
you
know
for
now:
we've
kept
it
relatively
simple,
with
changes
in
materials
and
colors
and
recesses
and
so
forth.
Q
We
felt
it
was
a
pretty
effective
method
of
breaking
these
buildings
up
and
again,
the
the
big
concern,
at
least
all
that
we've
that
we've
talked
about
with
the
planning
staff,
has
been
the
pedestrian
experience,
and
so
with
from
that
perspective,
having
broken
this
up
into
quote
unquote,
three
buildings
really
is
achieving
in
our
minds
is
achieving
that
that
breakup.
R
R
I
mean
40
50
with
some
studios
to
take
up
the
rest
of
the
the
the
space
that
I
had
commented
on,
and
we
are
working
on
that
just
to
address
that
question.
R
That
was
never
really
answered
earlier,
but
the
whole
idea
here
is
to
create
a
a
project
that
people
can
come
in
and
buy
literally
one
bedroom,
two
bedroom,
three
bedroom
and
a
few
studios,
there's
not
going
to
be
many
approximately
six
to
eight
is
all
I'm
looking
at
and
still
make
it
affordable,
which
means
I'm
going
to
give
them
a
product
between
275
up
to
450.,
okay,
and
that's
what
I'm
trying
to
achieve
this.
I
can
achieve
it.
R
If
I
do
change
it,
it's
going
to
be,
it
would
be
drastically
different
and-
and
I
think
this
is
aesthetically
beautiful
and
would
be
a
wonderful
place
for
people
to
to.
I
mean
you're,
just
so
close
to
the
city
and
you're
so
close
to
salt
lake
community
college.
The
university
western
westminster
college
everywhere
tracks
is
just
down
the
road
I
mean
it
makes
it
the
ballpark
liberty
park.
R
I
mean
this
would
be
a
wonderful
starter
home,
and
that
was
my
whole
objective
in
in
trying
to
create
this
project
that
will
give
people
an
opportunity
to
do
it.
I
mean
if
anybody
ate
at
coachman's.
Our
mantra
was
to
give
you
the
best
for
the
least
price
possible
and
literally
that's
what
I'm
trying
to
achieve
with
this
whole
thing.
So
I'm
not
trying
to
trying
to
assert
any
anything.
What
we're
trying
to
make
it
work
under
those
parameters.
B
Can
I
yeah,
let
me
just
wrap
up
and
then
and
then
we're
gonna
go
to
the
public
comment
period
because
we'll
cycle
back
to
us
and
after
that,
I
will
just
say
that
I
appreciate
your
objectives,
but
my
view
on
these
type
of
things
has
always
been
as
a
city
there's.
We
are
one
shot
at
this
parcel
in
our
given
lifetimes,
and
so
you
know
paying
attention
to
the
type
of
product
that
we
end
up.
Building
is
important
to
me
and
I'm
not
convinced
550.
B
Some
feet
of
a
continuous
building
is
what
we
want
to
see
there,
but
that
you
know
we'll
continue
to
discuss
that
afterward.
So,
commissioners,
I'm
going
to
just
conclude
this
part,
but
if
you
have
other
questions
hold
them
for
when
we
come
back
after
the
public
comment
period,
and
we
can
ask
more
questions
and
have
more
of
a
wrap-up
discussion.
B
So
if
you
are
here
for
the
public
comments,
just
another
brief
reminder
of
how
to
participate
in
the
lower
right
hand,
corner
of
your
screen
as
a
hand,
it
looks
like
that
you'll
need
to
select
that
to
raise
it.
Let
us
know
that
you
wish
to
speak
when
you're
done
speaking.
If
you
would
click
that
hand
again
it
unraises
it
and
it
allows
us
to
process
or
to
you
know,
manage
who's
speaking
better.
B
You
will
have
two
minutes
to
speak
and
given
how
many
people
want
to
speak,
I
will
be
pretty
strict
on
that
and
then
please
also
state
your
name
for
the
record
at
the
beginning.
This
is
a
public
comment
period.
It's
not
a
back
and
forth
q.
A
however,
the
two
minutes
are
yours.
If
you
wish
to
ask
questions,
I
will
be
writing
them
down
after
the
public
comment
period.
B
You
are
up
in
terms
of
I'm
going
to
open
the
public
comment
period.
Okay
and.
H
A
I
So
I
was
just
gonna
say
on
these
on
the
this
building,
because
the
top
portion
is
kind
of
set
back
almost
looks
like
it's
a
different
building.
You
know
from
the
street
level
the
condos
aren't
you
know
it's
not
a
it's,
not
a
continuous
facade.
That
goes
all
the
way
up.
Five
stories,
it's
it's
as
if
there's
a
you
know,
retail
whatever
and
then
in
the
background,
there's
there's
condos,
so
I
mean
it's
it.
It's
kind
of
broken
up
that
way
as
well
seems,
like
you
know,
from
a
aesthetic
perspective.
B
Okay,
he
already
went
away
so
that
was
robert
smith
for
the
record
and
then
yeah.
I
can
see
a
check
mark
for
dr
anderson
if
you
could
check
with
them
and
see
if
they
want
to
comment.
A
G
G
My
name
is
taylor,
anderson
and
I
guess
I
wanted
to
reiterate.
I
know
it's
a
udot
issue,
the
sidewalks
on
the
I
guess
the
west
side
here
when
I'm
measuring
from
from
google
and
I'm
maybe
one
of
the
few
people
that
willingly
walks
this
stretch
I
live
near
here
and
the
idea
of
walking
between
a
building
that
that's
built
a
very
long
building.
G
That's
built
up
to
the
lot
line
and
then
it's
only
seven
feet
between
including
sidewalk
and
median
and
that's
approximately,
but
about
seven
to
eight
feet
total
between
a
turning
lane
on
state
street
us-89,
it
just
seems
unpleasant.
G
I
I
know
that
that's
their
right,
that's
the
the
fbu
n2
has
been
approved
already,
and
this
is
what's
being
allowed,
but
I
wonder
if
we're
doing
the
same
on
the
north
end
of
the
building,
if
it's
a
consideration,
the
developer
could
make
to
to
widen
that
a
little
bit
or
to
improve
the
pedestrian
experience
on
the
on
the
west
side
of
the
building.
So
it's
more,
I
guess
a
question
or
a
thought
or
a
piece
of
feedback.
However,
you
want
to
take
it
thanks.
B
H
B
H
Okay,
yeah,
I'm
happy
to
do
that.
Let
me
pull
it
up
for
you
all
right.
It
says
the
community
council
is
generally
supportive
of
a
new
high
quality
building
that
will
bring
new
housing
and
businesses
to
our
neighborhood.
However,
we
have
reservations
about
a
building.
That's
linked
with
an
uninterrupted
facade
built
right
up
to
either
the
setback
or
property
line.
An
important
urban
design
principle
is
the
building's
funding.
Sidewalk
should
offer
variety
and
interest
for
pedestrians.
H
This
building
is
missing
the
opportunity
to
offer
some
planted
open
space
to
allow
pedestrians
a
chance
to
step
off
the
sidewalk
at
reasonable
intervals,
solid
city's
orally
long
block
faces.
This
is
even
more
crucial
as
nice,
as
this
building
appears
for
the
pedestrian
walking
along
it.
The
experience
is
likely
to
be
relentless.
There
may
be
things
an
activity
to
look
through
to
look
out
to
the
window,
but
there
also
may
not
be.
There
is
no
way
to
guarantee
the
storefronts
will
be
actively
used
from
an
urban
design
and
walkability
perspective.
H
The
best
thing
to
do
on
a
building
of
the
scale
is
to
break
the
building
facade
up
into
separate
masses
or
vary
the
setback
to
the
front
facade.
One
way
to
do
this
is
by
introducing
one
or
two
courtyards
at
the
sidewalk
that
allow
the
public
to
interact
with
the
space
and
offer
an
amenity
they're,
also
useful
amenities
for
the
ground-level
commercial
spaces.
H
This
open
space
can
be
used
by
the
public,
even
though
it
is
on
private
property
and
allows
the
opportunity
to
introduce
trees
and
vegetation
blink
facade
design
also
impacts
away
cars
moving
on
the
street
when,
when
buildings
are
designed
with
an
uninterrupted
facade
like
this,
it
raises
the
perceived
design,
speed
of
a
road
and
makes
the
street
more
comfortable
to
drive
at
higher
speeds
change.
Changes
in
height
form,
increased
pedestrian
activity,
increased
tree,
canopy
all
work
together
to
lower
traffic
speed
and
make
streets
more
sticky,
which
is
a
good
thing
for
neighborhoods.
H
Another
design
concern
is
the
ceiling
height
of
the
first
floor,
commercial
space.
We
have
a
vested
interest
in
seeing
these
commercial
spaces
be
active
and
successful
and,
through
experience
have
found
that
spaces
with
low
ceilings
don't
do
well
and
have
trouble
attracting
and
retaining
good
businesses
when
building
get
taller
and
larger
the
stakes
go
up
to
offset
the
possible
impacts
of
the
building
on
the
streetscape.
We
need
to
insist
that
the
building
contributes
more
to
the
public
realm.
H
We
need
to
begin
and
begin
insisting
that,
when
a
developer
is
seeking
relief
from
requirements
that
they
offer
something
in
return,
a
quote
gift
to
the
street,
you
could
ask
that
this
happened.
We
would
ask
this
applicant
go
back
to
the
drawing
board
to
find
some
ways
to
be
a
better
neighbor
and
set
a
better
urban
design
pattern
for
future
projects
going
forward.
B
No
other
emails,
I
see
no
other
hands
raised
so
with
that
I
will
close
the
public
common
hearing
and
bring
it
back
to
the
commission.
First
up,
I
allow
the
applicant
to
address
taylor.
Anderson's
thought,
slash
question
of
increasing
the
pedestrian
pleasantness
experience
on
the
west
side.
Given
the
sidewalk
width,
you
want.
G
Q
Yeah
so
the
way
the
fbun
2
zone
is
written.
Now
I
don't
remember
exactly
the
requirements,
but
there's
a
portion
of
the
building
is
required
to
have
a
zero
lot
line.
Q
The
portion
of
the
building
have
to
be
up
against
that.
Back
of
curb
and
again
I
don't
remember
exactly
what
the
parameters
were
as
to
how
much
of
the
building
had
to
be.
That
close,
but
you
know
we've
recessed
portions
of
this
building
for
those
building
entrances
for
the
commercial
for
the
housing
lobby
area,
we've
actually
recessed
some
of
those
we
actually
had
some
of
them
even
deeper
than
what
we
show
right
now
and
as
part
of
the
staff
review.
B
Okay,
thank
you
all
right,
commissioners.
This
is
our
time
to
do
a
discussion,
any
further
questions
for
staff
or
applicant
and
talk
about
the
project
and
then
do
an
action.
L
It's
sandra
here
I,
I
am
wondering
a
question
from
mike
and
ryan
what
research
was
done?
I
I'm
still
concerned
about
the
volume
of
studio
units
and
that
we
are
building
in
this
city
and
particularly
like
what
does
the
acs
show
in
terms
of
the
growth
of
single-person
households
in
salt
lake
city
relative
to
the
number
of
permits
that
are
being
approved
for
studio,
because
the
only
people
that
are
going
to
occupy
a
studio
are
one-person
households.
R
All
right,
because
I
was
going
to
say
I-
I
did
a
lot
of
analysis
through
different
real
estate
and
and
a
whole
bunch
of
different
people.
I
don't
have
in
front
of
me
right
this
very
minute,
but
I
can
tell
you
that
that's
why
my
count
of
studios
is
literally
gonna,
be
somewhere
around
eight
and
literally
I
don't
want
more
than
that.
R
My
thought
behind
that
is
that
there
may
be
people
from
out
of
state
that
would
be
attending
school
that
may
or
may
not
have
or
want
to
to
own
a
studio
and-
and
I
literally
am
not
going
to
let
that
number
exceed
eight
and
ryan
knows
that
I've
been
pushing
him
so
that
we
can
get
together.
But
we've
been
trying
to
put
the
material
together
for
this
here
anyway,
that
we
want
to
redo
that
count.
That
count
is
not
accurate.
R
That's
from
a
previous
architect
that
I
had,
and
we
we've
just
been
basically
working
with
so
many
other
obstacles
that
we
haven't
got
to
that
count.
Yet
because
we
don't
even
know
if
we
can
do
this
project
yet.
But
my
ideal
is
somewhere
around
40
single
bedroom,
50
two-bedroom
anywhere
from
four
to
five
three-bedroom
and
the
remainder
to
be
sucked
up
by
the
studios
just
to
take
up
the
space
so
that
you
know
we
can
utilize
the
space.
R
Well,
we've
seen
we
did
you
know
and
also
to
let
you
all
know:
condos
are
really
tough
to
do
analysis
on,
because
there's
not
a
lot
of
them
around.
It's
all
just
rentals,
so
it
it.
We
had
to
go
a
little
bit
outside
of
our
our.
R
You
know
certain
circle
to
find
some
of
this
information,
and
then
some
of
it
didn't
apply
because
it
was
too
expensive
and
it
doesn't
apply
to
what
I'm
going
to
do.
You
know
when
you
get
to
gateway
when
you
get
to
all
those
things
that
that
doesn't
apply.
Those
numbers
are
not
the
same
as
that
would
apply
to
this
project.
R
So
we
we
did
a
lot
and-
and
my
study
is
that
this
is
what's
needed.
I,
I
obviously
am
banking
on
it.
You
know
otherwise
I
wouldn't
be
pushing
forward
for
this
project,
and
then
you
know
the
gentleman
that
from
the
council
that
addressed
that
you
know
first
level
he
wants
good
retail
places.
There.
We've
got
16
foot.
You
know
that
first
level
for
retail,
that's
going
to
attract
some
fantastic
people.
I
want
to
put
like
a
little
grocery
store.
R
I
want
to
find
you
know
like
a
harmons
type
and
holiday
right
there
on
that
corner.
I
think
that
would
be
fantastic
and
then
I'm
looking
at
doing
things
that
will
you
know
one
will
help
the
other
where
you've
got
maybe
an
insurance
company,
maybe
a
really
neat
salon.
R
Maybe
what
do
you
call
it
just
a
lot
of
little
things
that
will
the
tenants
will
help
the
retail
and
the
retail
will
love
to
have
those
tenants,
above
them,
as
customers
and
with
16-foot
ceilings,
and
what
we
plan
on
doing
there
we're
going
to
track
some
good
ones
like
a
verizon
would
go
well
there
things
like
this.
You
know
what
I
mean.
B
Commissioners,
any
further
discussions.
C
Well,
I
want
I
want
to
recognize
what
brenda
was
saying
about
the
other
plan
development
that
we
looked
at,
like
the
amount
of
information
we
have
on
this
one
is
significantly
different
than
the
other
plan
development
we
looked
at,
so
maybe
I
don't
know,
maybe
there's
a
different
way
to
split
lots,
or
something
like
that
does
this.
Is
this
building
big
enough
that
it's
going
to
have
to
go
through
design
review
that
was
20
000
square
feet
that
you
have
to.
B
C
C
Is
I
thought,
design
reviews
required
for
20
000
square
feet
right?
It
depends
on
the
zone.
H
Yeah
commissioner
burroughs
walcott
is
looking
for
that
different
zones
have
different
thresholds
which
would
trigger
a
design
review.
So,
for
example,
in
the
sugar
house
business
district,
it
is
20
000
square
feet.
If
you're
in
a
community
business
or
cd
zone,
it's
actually
7
500
square
feet.
The
ipa
in
uitu
does
not
ever
require
you
going
through
a
design
review.
If
you
meet
all
of
the
zoning
regulations,
we're
here.
B
Let
me
get
this
one
in
really
quick,
so
I
think
this
is
more
for
kelsey
as
acting
director.
So
whenever
a
project
gets
say
approved
by
the
planning
commission,
and
then
you
know
it's
up
to
the
director
to
decide.
If
modifications
are
major
enough
to
bring
back
to
us,
I'm
concerned
about
also
not
having
udot
approval
that
could
significantly
modify
the
the
entrances
and
exits
because
u-dot
is
u-dot
and
they're
going
to
do
whatever
they
want
to
do
that.
Where
is
the
threshold?
B
Because
if
this
gets
approved
at
550
some
feet
long,
there
could
be
some
serious
modifications.
What
would
trigger
that
to
come
back?
Do
you
think
as
a
major
modification
given
what
could
happen.
A
The
minor
modifications
are
fairly
minimal
and
they
keep
to
like
technical
issues
with
fire
or
engineering
concerns,
as
well
as
like
location
of
accessory
structures,
landscape,
buffers,
final
grade
and
then
location
of
open
space.
G
A
That
wouldn't
really
be
a
minor
modification,
especially
if
it
impacted
like
parking,
vehicular
access
and
circulation
on
the
interior
of
the
site,
because
the
building
is
so
long.
That
would
impact
the
full
facade.
F
So
I
think,
actually
this
this.
From
my
perspective,
this
project
is
not
ready
for
prime
time
number
one.
We
have
a
munich
mix
that
would
suggest
that
the
building
is
gonna,
be
a
lot
bigger
than
it.
Actually,
if
you
have
more
three
bedrooms
and
more
two
bedrooms-
and
you
know
substituting
for
a
lot
more
one
bit.
F
Okay,
I'm
saying
that
the
applicant
is
talking
about
changing
the
unit
mix,
significantly
that
from
what
they
have
actually
in
the
drawings,
and
when
you
look
at
the
units
in
the
drawings
there
isn't
room
on
that
building
floor,
plate
to
make
a
lot
more
three-bedroom
units
and
a
lot
more
two-bedroom
units
and
a
lot
fewer
studio
units.
So
there
will
have
to
be
some
significant
changes
to
this
building
in
order
to
meet
those
unit
mixes
that
the
applicant
is
talking
about.
F
I
think
the
issue
of
the
curb
cuts
and
the
state
will
have
a
tremendous
effect.
I
I
can't
imagine
them
allowing
two
curb
cuts
like
that
next
to
each
other
and
when
they
do
that
and-
and
that
may
not
even
be
desirable-
I
do
think
that
it
is
too
long,
and
there
is,
you
know
you
not
only
is
the
building
too
long,
but
it's
also
got
one
elevator.
F
As
far
as
I
can
see,
two
elevators
two
elevators
okay,
if
if
it
has
two
elevators
already,
then
it's
not
that
hard
for
you
to
for
you
to
add
another
staircase
and
have
essentially
two
buildings
where
you
have
one
long
one.
So
I
think
I
think
this
building
really
needs
a
little
bit
of
a
rework
from
the
design
perspective.
F
Katya
talked
in
the
beginning
about
trying
to
break
up
the
facade
itself
more,
and
I
think
that
at
the
very
least
you
could
create
more
of
a
courtyard
effect
so
that
maybe
not
it's.
Maybe
it's
still
all
one
building,
but
at
least
it
looks
a
little
bit
more
like
two
buildings
or
three
buildings
from
the
st
from
the
street
level,
which
means
you
would
have
to
break
that.
That
second
level
facade.
Excuse
me
that
second,
the
second.
R
If
I
can
just
ask
one
question,
I
the
only
changes
we
were
going
to
make
were
internally
on
that
top
footprint
of
the
three
floors,
and
that
was
the
mix
and
also
I
there
was
120.
I
think,
units
on
that
original,
drawing
I'm
dropping
it
down
to
100
to
105
units.
N
N
I
think
to
make
clear
what
their
what
their
housing
mix
is
going
to
be.
I
think
they
should
have
their
udot
approval
for
that,
because
that
could
be
a
big
change.
Will.
B
You
go
ahead
and
make
a
motion
and
then
just
kind
of
add
those
as
as
points
so
that
staff
is,
and
the
applicant
is
clear
about
what
we're
wanting
them
to
address.
G
N
We
will
we
aren't
approving
or
disapproving
it
would
be
a
motion
to
table
it.
B
N
N
I'll
make
a
motion
to
table
this
item
to
allow
the
applicant
time
to
address
and
update
the
unit
mix.
I
think
they
and
have
their
udot
approval,
give
them
time
to
look
at
additional
changes
in
the
facade
that
make
it
more
pedestrian
friendly.
G
If
I
can
yes,
so
I
think
to
help
clarify
some
of
the
things
that
I
think
we're
thinking
and
people
can
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
I'm
I'm
personally,
okay
with
the
overall
length
of
the
building,
but
it's
breaking
it
into
a
feeling
of
three
different
buildings,
and
I
think,
if
you
treat
each
one
of
those
retail
spaces
with
slightly
different
architecture,
different
material,
pallets
and
then
above
that,
follow
that
up
the
building
instead
of
having
the
little
tiny
buildings
on
the
top
break,
that
into
three
sections
that
feel
like
three
different
buildings.
G
B
C
Yes,
can
I
make
a,
can
I
make
a
friendly
suggestion
too
yeah.
C
Go
ahead,
I
think
maybe
they
should
investigate
splitting
it
actually
into
two
different
buildings,
so
they're,
because
this
is
so
far
out
of
the
range
of
what's
allowed
by
right-
that
maybe
they
should
investigate
more
splitting
it
into
they're
closer.
B
I
think
that
is
again
not
necessarily
necessary
to
do
a
friendly
amendment
for
that,
but
I
think
those
are
helpful
things
for
staff
to
hear
if
this
motion
passes
that
they
can
further
discuss
with
the
applicant.
So
I
think
the
medicine
still
covers
that
as
well.
F
B
With
that
too,
okay,
I
agree
with
that
as
well.
All
right,
we
have
a
motion
from
maureen
and
a
second
from
john
we're
going
to
go
ahead
and
take
a
vote
on
this
one
and
see
where
we
land
mike.
I
G
G
I
will
vote
yes
and
just
to
comment.
I
think
it's
a
very
nice
project
as
well,
but
the
things
that
were
addressed
by
brenda
and
yourself
as
well
with
them
sure.
I
think
those
were
very
valid
points.
So,
yes,.
L
I'll
vote
no,
and
I
want
to
explain
briefly
of
my
thinking
I
am
concerned
about
forcing
this
to
go
back
to
the
architect
without
some
sign
that
we
will
accept
the
building
length
and
the
setback,
because
it
adds
to
the
soft
construction
costs
by
kind
of
forcing
the
applicant
to
go
back
and
forth.
That's
my
reason
for
voting
now.
B
Okay,
that
motion
to
table
and
send
it
back
to
the
applicant
to
send
back
to
the
staff
passes
from
six
to
one,
and
I
think
the
the
points
brought
up
were
pretty
clear
for
staff
of
what
the
commission
would
like
to
better
address
in
the
next
time.
We
see
this
all
right
with
that.
It's
been
two
hours.
Let's
take
a
five
minute
break
and
reconvene
at
7
36.
B
I
M
M
This
would
be
located
on
a
2.2
7
acre
parcel.
That's
currently
vacant
at
750,
north
redwood,
the
zoning
is
cb
or
community
business
design
review
is
required
due
to
the
buildings
exceeding
the
total
total
building
size
limits
of
the
cb
zone,
which
allows
for
a
7
500
square
foot
footprint
or
15
000
square
feet.
Overall.
M
Since
this
is
in
the
cv,
zoning
district-
these
are
essentially
town
home
units
attached
attached.
Single
family
type
units
are
not
allowed
in
cb,
however,
this
will
be
planted
as
a
condominium
development
with
ownership
of
the
individual
units,
whereas
the
property
will
be
held
in
common,
so
that
is
allowed
as
a
multi-family
development
in
the
cb
zoning
district.
M
So
again
it
will
be
planted
as
a
condominium.
Development
and
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
both
applications
with
conditions
it
through
the
site.
Layout
again,
I
noted
it's
a
2.27
acre
site.
G
M
Site
context:
the
property
is
zone
cb
and
it
abuts
property
to
the
south
that
is
zone
cb
all
along
700
north.
A
number
of
those
properties
were
rezoned
from
r1
5000
to
cb.
In
the
last
I
would
say
three
years
there
were
a
couple
different
applications
for
a
variety
of
properties
in
this
area
to
be
rezoned
to
cb.
M
This
particular
lot
again
is
vacant.
It
did
have
commercial
uses
at
one
time.
It's
been
vacant
for
quite
a
number
of
years
and
looking
through
city
files,
it's
kind
of
been
a
little
bit
of
a
code
enforcement
problem,
child
with
dumping
and
camping
and
all
sorts
of
other
things
going
on
so
high
weeds
things
like
that.
M
But,
to
be
honest,
the
property
immediately
to
the
north
is
a
condominium
development
about
three
stories.
Tall
and
most
of
the
developments
on
ivy
circle
and
irving
street
are
all
small
scale
residential
uses,
typically
four
plexes.
So
the
zoning
pattern
doesn't
match
the
zoning.
So
the
the
sorry,
the
development
pattern
doesn't
match
the
underlying
zoning,
so
it
is
in
an
area
of
largely
multi-family
uses
again
a
little
bit
of
a
aerial
view.
M
Looking
to
the
west
of
the
subject,
property
on
the
south
boundary
is
a
gas
station
property
and
then
again,
these
are
the
properties
on
irving
and
ivy
that
have
largely
been
developed
for
small
scale.
Residential
multi-family
uses
standards
of
the
review.
We
looked
at
the
base.
Zoning
standards
for
the
cb
business,
zoning
district,
the
design
standards
in
chapter
21-837,
as
well
as
the
standards
for
planned
developments
and
standards
for
design
review.
M
We'll
note
that
a
couple
things
the
parking
for
the
property
is
one
space
per
unit.
That's
the
requirement
in
the
cb
district
and
one
space
that
will
be
provided
per
unit
within
the
enclosed
garage
at
each
unit
and
they're,
also
providing
a
extra
14
surface
parking
spaces
for
guests
and
other
parking.
M
As
far
as
buffering
goes
and
I'll
go
back
to
the
site
plan
for
a
moment,
the
requirement,
since
it's
an
interior
interior
lot,
they
do
not
have
an
interior
side
yard
requirement
on
either
the
north
or
south
property
lines.
However,
they
are
and
they
are
providing
a
seven
foot
interior
side
yard
which
is
beyond
what's
required
and
landscaping
both
of
those
and
then
the
rear
yard,
which
would
be
on
the
east
side
of
the
development.
M
M
So
such
staff
is
recommending
that
or
finds
that
the
proposal
meets
the
applicable
design,
review
and
plan
development
standards
and
recommends
the
planning
commission
approved
both
requests
subject
to
the
following
conditions:
the
final
approval
of
any
site,
signage
lighting,
landscaping,
tree
street
trees
will
be
verified
during
the
building
permit
review
and
a
condominium
plot
must
be
finalized
and
recorded
for
this
development.
M
B
Okay,
thanks
david
commissioners,
any
questions
for
staff
at
this
time.
B
So
I'm
looking
at
the
I'm
looking
at
the
layout
on
page
three
of
the
staff
report
that
shows
that
t
that
you
talked
about
I'm
just
trying
to
get
a
sense
of
like
what's
the
distance
between
the
units
is
it
so
when
you
have
the
parking,
is
there
any
sort
of
a
little
driveway
or
is
the
garage
right
up
to
the
to
the
road?
You
know
the
access
drive.
B
M
Let
me
see
if
I
can
see
it
on
an
enlarged
plan.
I
do
understand
your
concern
that.
B
B
24
feet:
okay,
thank
you.
Any
other
questions
for
staff.
Okay,
let's
go
to
the
applicant
jared
hall.
Has
he
been
moved
into
the
yeah
there?
He
is
all
right,
mr
hall,
are
you
there
yeah.
B
Okay,
do
you
do
you
need
screen
sharing
privileges.
J
G
B
All
right
with
that,
I
will
open
the
public
hearing
and
I
don't
see
any
hands
raised,
but.
A
B
And
all
right
with
that,
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
and
bring
it
back
to
the
commission.
If
you
have
questions,
discussion
or
emotion,.
M
I
would
know
one
thing:
it
was
sent
to
the
community
councils
for
the
area,
and
this
is
I've
had
a
number
of
rezones
in
this
area.
It
actually
falls
within
600
feet
of
four
different
community
council
areas
and
we
didn't
get
any
comments
from
either
rose
park,
jordan,
meadows,
west
point
or
fairport
park
on
this.
L
I'll
make
a
motion:
okay,
go
ahead,
andrew
based
on
the
findings
and
analysis
in
the
staff
report,
testimony
and
discussion
at
the
public
hearing.
I
move
that
the
planning
commission
vote
to
approve
the
proposed
design
review
and
plan
development
applications
for
the
rivers
edge
at
redwood
townhomes,
located
at
750
north
redwood
road
files,
plntcm
2021-00606.
L
With
the
conditions
of
approval
listed
in
the
staff
report,
specifically
final
approval
of
the
details
for
site
signage
lighting,
landscaping
and
street
trees
will
be
delegated
to
staff
for
verification
during
the
building
permit
review
and
two
a
condom.
Minimum
condominium
plat
must
be
finalized
and
recorded
for
this
development.
B
Okay,
I
have
a
motion
by
andra
and
a
second
from
mike.
Let's
go
ahead
and
take
a
vote.
Let's
start
with
maureen,
yes,
okay,
john.
G
B
B
There
you
are
brenda,
yes,
yeah.
Your
vote.
L
B
S
B
S
Thank
you,
okay,
so
yeah.
This
is
a
request
to
rezone,
just
a
single
parcel
at
that
is
currently
zoned,
r1
7000,
and
it
includes
the
seldom
used
or
seldom
seen
transitional
overlay
but
they're
requesting
that
that
would
make
remain
in
place.
So
you
can
see
the
property
here
outlined
in
yellow
with
the
transitional
overlay
with
the
black
dash
lines.
S
It's
just
under
0.8
acres,
there's,
currently
a
single
family
home
on
it
and
a
large
workshop
to
the
rear
property
and
there's
no
specific
proposal
for
the
redevelopment
property
at
this
point.
But
the
intent
is
that
it
would
be
redeveloped
for
future
either
multi-family
or
mixed-use
development
and
staff
is
recommending
the
planning
commission
for
a
positive
recommendation
to
the
city
council.
S
So
taking
a
look
at
the
vicinity
just
to
kind
of
give
a
little
better
feel,
so
this
is
a
subject:
property
here
of
700
west,
with
the
large
napa
auto
across
the
street.
You
can
see.
There's
to
the
north
is
kind
of
the
single
family.
Neighborhood
that's
fairly
well
established
and
then
to
the
south
is
largely
light.
Industrial,
a
lot
of
outdoor
storage
and
whatnot,
and
then
there
is
some
pl
land
to
the
rear
of
the
property.
S
So
this
is,
in
the
top
left
hand.
Corner
is
the
subject
property
with
the
single
family,
home
and
the
storage
sheds
to
the
rear
and
then
circling
around
looking
kind
of
northwest.
This
is
one
of
the
single-family
homes
to
the
northwest,
the
napa
auto
across
the
street,
and
then
this
is
taken
from
the
other
street
looking
at
the
side
of
the
property,
but
one
of
the
light
industrial
with
the
parking
lot
there.
That's
quite
well
kept
so
in
in
looking
at
this
there's.
S
A
number
of
considerations
to
examine
first
is,
of
course,
the
master
plan
for
the
area.
It
falls
into
the
west
side,
master
plan
and
really
there's
quite
a
few
statements
that
have
been
included
in
your
staff
report,
specifically
about
the
future
vision
for
the
700
west
corridor
to
gradually
diversify
and
add
more
options
for
commercial
and
multi-family
residential,
and
although
some
of
that
can
be
accomplished
with
the
transitional
overlay,
it
doesn't
meet
the
full
intent
as
as
written
in
that
master
plan.
S
So
this
rezone
would
help
realize
the
vision
in
the
master
plan
further
and
then
looking
through
plan
salt
lake.
There
are
numerous
initiatives
that
this
would
help
implement
in
the
areas
of
neighborhoods
growth,
housing,
transportation
and
mobility,
air
quality
and
economy.
S
The
neighborhood
is
convenient
to
mass
transit,
of
course,
there's
employment
opportunities
and
there's
quite
a
few
neighborhood
amenities.
So
it
is
supported
very
well
by
the
master
plans
of
the
city.
S
S
S
And
you
know
the
cb
zone
doesn't
allow
for
like
a
light
manufacturing
in
the
outdoor
storage
and
that
can
that
can
have
impact
on
the
single
family
residential.
So
we
do
staff
does
feel
it's
an
appropriate
buffer
that
transitional
overlay.
I
kind
of
did
an
outline
in
your
staff
report,
but
just
because
it's
seldom
used
it
does
have
provisions
that
the
biggest
thing
is.
S
Is
it
lists
some
additional
uses
and
allows
them
to
be
approved
under
a
modified
conditional
use,
prop
process
that
kind
of
incorporates
a
few
more
standards
and
and
checks
for
nuisances
a
little
bit
more,
but
the
the
biggest
problem
is
it.
You
know
it
does
still
allow
for
that
light
manufacturing.
It
does
not
allow
housing
so
in
and
of
itself
it's
maybe
not
the
best
transition
to
the
single-family
residential.
S
I
just
wanted
to
make
you
aware
that
that
is
in
the
works,
and
that
would
be
an
acceptable
term
under
the
ordinance
so
yeah
just
I
won't
read
these,
but
of
course
we
have
our
standards
for
zoning
map
amendments
and
this
seems
to
fall
within
all
of
those
and
accomplish
each
of
those
goals.
S
And
so
again,
staff
is
recommending
that
the
planning
commission
forward
a
recommendation
of
approval
to
the
city
council,
with
the
condition
that
the
property
owner
enters
into
an
agreement
to
construct
at
least
one
replacement
dwelling
unit,
in
accordance
with
the
options
for
housing
mitigation
loss.
B
S
S
B
S
B
Yeah
and
you
brought
that
up
like
they
might
not
be
the
best
transition
to
the
single
to
the
residential
on
the
on
the
one
side
right,
but
they're
all
conditional
uses
but
conditional
uses.
Are
we
don't
rare?
We
don't
get
to
really
say
no
to
them
to
modify
whatever
type
of
impact.
They
would
make
right.
S
B
Okay,
why
are
we
going
to
leave
this
transitional
overlays?
I'm
considering
I've
never
seen
this
before.
It's
really
there's
not
many
properties
that
follow
this.
Why
do
we
want
to
leave
it,
especially
if
it
allows
some
some
uses
that
probably
aren't
what
we
want
to
see
as
a
good
transition
buffer
to
those
residential
unit
buildings
next
door.
S
And
the
applicants
can
speak
to
that
a
little
bit
as
well,
but
it
seems
to
in
my
conversations
with
them
that
it
does
open
up
a
few
more
options,
and
if
the
market
is
not
there
and
not
looking
favorable
for
multi-family
or
for
something
like
that,
it
does
give
a
few
more
options
and
again
they
they
are
good.
The
additional
standards
are
good
they're,
just
not
as
good
as
would
be
under
the
cb
zone.
B
All
right,
let
me
open
up
this
door
is
the
applicant
here.
It
is
marco
and
melinda
geronimo.
O
Yes,
can
you
guys
hear
us.
B
There
we
are
yes,
yes,
do
you
have
a
presentation
that
you
need
to
share
the
screen
with,
or
were
you
just
going
to
give
us.
B
O
Sure
my
name
is
marco
geronimo,
and
this
is
my
wife
melinda
hello,
so
we
are
the
ones
that
are
trying
to
get
permission
for
this
rezoning.
I
think
what
eric
already
presented.
It's
meant
to
get
yeah,
so
we
do
appreciate
your
time
all
we
all
we
can
say
is
that
we've
been
in
this
neighborhood
for
quite
a
while,
so
we're
very
invested
as
well
to
see
it
progressing
and
improving.
B
Okay,
thank
you,
commissioners.
Any
questions
for
her
animals.
B
So
I
have
kind
of
a
follow-up
question
to
what
I
was
just
talking
to
eric
about
and
eric
you
might
have
to
pipe
in
on
this.
So
if
you
chose
to
use
the
the
uses
that
are
allowed
in
the
transitional
overlay
but
are
not
allowed
in
the
cv
zone,
none
of
those
have
a
housing
component,
and
yet
you
will
be
having
to
at
least
replace
one
dwelling
unit
eric.
S
For
example,
they
can
even
do
a
monetary
amount
for
the
cost
of
that
unit,
or
it
could
be
put
another
place.
I
do
know
those
two.
I
don't
have
the
specifics
right
in
front
of
me,
though,.
B
O
So
yes
you're,
we
are
talking
about
replacing
the
unit
as
we
develop
this
area
correct,
so
our
intent
is
basically
to
build
dwelling
apartments
mix
business
over
there,
but
mainly
just
apartments
so
that
should
mitigate
losing
that
unit
over
there.
B
Yeah,
so
I
guess
I'm
just
curious
why
you
want
to
keep
this
transitional
overlay
and
what
you're
not
requesting
to
just
like
eradicate
that
and
rezone
it
completely
to
cv.
C
When,
when
we
had
talked
about
that
with
eric,
there
were
some
differences
in
setbacks
and
stuff
that
some
smaller
details
that
we
thought
and
since
the
tr,
the
the
zoning
amendment
didn't
require
us
to
let
go
of
the
transitional
overlay
that
there
didn't
seem
to
be
a
reason
to
do
so,
for
the
plans
that
we
had
and
just
allowed
for
for
those
additional
options
with
some
setbox.
If
we
needed
to
utilize
those.
B
I
don't
want
to
say
totally
concerned,
but
I'm
a
little
concerned
about
those
those
uses
that
are
allowed
in
the
transitional
overlay,
not
really
being
something
we
would
want
to
see
happen
here
that
it
would
be
cleaner
if
we
did
away
with
that
and
you
have
the
options
to
do
whatever
you
wanted,
but
I'm
going
to
think
that
through
as
we
go
forward
anyway,
I
just
was
curious
as
like
why
your
reasoning
is
why
you
wanted
to
keep
it.
So
that's
helpful
commissioners,
any
other
questions
for
the
applicant
at
this
time.
B
Okay,
I'm
gonna,
have
you
guys,
stick
around
we'll,
do
the
public
comment
portion
and
then
come
back
to
the
commission
and
if
we
have
any
further
questions,
we'll
we'll
ask
you
perfect?
Thank
you.
L
C
Okay,
can
I
this
is
amy?
Can
I
can
I
make
an
amendment
that
we
remove
the
transitional
overlay.
B
You
can
make
that
suggestion.
I
have
a
motion
from
mike
and
a
second
from
andra
amy's,
making
a
suggestion
for
a
friendly
amendment,
I'm
taking
it
to
mike
and
that's
his
choice.
H
In
commissioners,
I
I
do
know
that
some
of
these
uses
are
kind
of
light
industrial
uses.
But
I
think,
if
you
look
at
the
context
of
southwest,
I
think
that,
although
they
may
not
be
appropriate
in
most
areas
that
you
may
want
to
just
kind
of
take
a
look
and
kind
of
make
a
decision
as
to
whether
or
not
you
think
they're
appropriate.
B
Okay,
so
that
friendly
amendment
was
rejected,
amy
you
would
have
well
depending
on
how
this
goes.
Then
you
could
make
an
alternate
motion.
Well,
let's
go
ahead
and
take
a
vote
maureen.
Yes,
john.
G
I
B
B
T
I'm
presenting
it's
chrissy
gilmore.
B
T
Right
chrissy,
so
you
should
be
able
to
see
my
screen
yep
you're
good.
So
this
is
a
request
initiated
by
the
mayor
to
amend
the
zoning
map
to
remove
the
property
at
2300,
2333
west
north
temple
from
the
airport
flight
path
protection
influence
zone,
a
the
property
is
currently
occupied
by
a
commercial
building,
which
is
the
airport
in
the
result,
would
allow
the
airport
in
to
accommodate
days
greater
than
30
days
as
transitional
housing.
T
So
as
far
as
key
considerations,
if,
if
removed
from
the
influence
zone,
the
property
would
still
be
subject
to
all
the
zoning
regulations
of
the
base
zone,
which
is
the
tsa
mixed
employment
center
core
zone.
The
primary
impact
is
that
the
use
is
currently
prohibited
under
the
overlay
zone
would
now
be
allowed
if
they
are
permitted
or
conditional
uses
in
the
tsa
zone.
These
include
multi-family
residential
and
some
institutional
leases
that
are
prohibited
in
the
overlay
zone.
T
I
folded
those
the
main
impacts
on
the
screen,
so
it's
these
residential
uses,
single
family
detached,
is
not
permitted
in
the
tsa
zone
and
then
institutional
uses
such
as
schools,
hospitals,
churches
and
rest
homes
would
be
allowed
with
this
amendment.
T
So
as
far
as
standards
of
review,
when
announced,
when
analysising
the
project,
we
consider
the
standards
review,
those
are
consistency
with
city
plans
and
policies,
supporting
purpose
of
the
zoning
ordinance,
extended
impact
on
adjacent
properties,
consistency
with
any
overlay
districts
and
adequacy
of
public
facilities
and
services
staff
believes
that
the
proposal
meets
those
standards.
The
full
analysis
of
analysis
is
an
attachment
e
of
your
staff
report,
and
then
these
are
photos
of
the
site,
so
this
top
left
photo
is
the
existing
airport
in
that
is
currently
being
remodeled
to
accommodate
this
transitional
housing.
T
If
approved,
then
the
top
right
is
the
property
to
the
west,
which
is
a
car
rental
shop
and
then
below
is
the
top.
The
bottom
left
is
the
headqua
headquarters
office
building
and
then
across
the
street
is
airport,
which
you
can
see
so
the
recommendations.
So
as
far
as
public
engagement
staff
receives
two
comments
from
the
same
individual
concerned
about
the
proposal,
the
proposal
is
technically
in
two
community
council
boundaries.
T
A
development
agreement
shall
be
recorded
on
the
property
that
requires
any
new
development
or
substantial
remodel
of
existing
development
to
be
constructed
with
air
circulation
systems
of
at
least
30
dbs
of
sound
attenuation
and
sleeping
areas,
and
at
least
25
dbs
of
sound
attenuation
elsewhere
to
help
mitigate
that
impact
of
longer
term
residential
stays
and
with
that.
That
concludes
my
presentation.
I'm
available
for
any
questions.
T
F
Yeah
chrissy,
so
so
what
what
this
does
is
allow?
What
you're
actually
doing
is
allowing
a
longer
term
residential
use
which
would
normally
not
be
allowed
at
all,
but
you
still
are
requiring
the
sound
attenuation.
B
Okay,
since
this
originated
from
the
mayor's
office
there
is
no
applicant
was.
I
saw
somebody
well,
no,
never
mind
all
right
so
with
that.
If
there's
any
further
discussion,
have
it
now,
otherwise,
I'm
open
for
a
motion.
B
Oh,
thank
you
yeah.
I
did.
I
forgot
that
we
will
open
the
public
comment
period
and
I
don't
see
any
hand
raise
of
who
is.
B
B
Brenda,
yes,
okay,
that
motion
passes
unanimously
and
with
that
concludes
our
business
tonight.
I
want
to
thank
everybody
again
for
participating
in
this
extra
meaning
and
know
that
I
we
will
see
you
on
january
12th
and
with
that
happy
holidays
and
happy
new
year.
This
meeting
is
adjourned.