►
From YouTube: Planning Commission Meeting - June 23, 2021
Description
Salt Lake City Planning Commission Meeting - June 23, 2021
https://www.slc.gov/planning/
https://www.slc.gov/planning/planning-commission-agendas-minutes/
A
A
B
Yes,
of
course,
I
will
just
go
ahead
and
open
the
meeting
and
would
someone
from
the
plant
either
nick
or
someone
else
want
to
explain
how
to
join
the
meeting
and
how
to
participate.
A
Absolutely
I'd
be
happy
to
I'm
not
quite
sure
who
is
sharing
this
screen
right
now,
but
for
those
yeah
aubry
for
those
watching
on
television
or
inquiring,
paying
attention
and
acquiring
how
to
join
the
meeting.
The
screen
that
you
might
be
able
to
see
titled
planning
commission
gives
you
some
instructions
on
how
to
join
our
meetings.
A
If
you're
having
any
sort
of
difficulty,
please
send
an
email
to
planning
dot
comments
at
slc,
gov,
dot
com
and
there's
also
some
step-by-step
instructions.
You
can
see
that
link
that's
on
that
screen
and
you
can
also
go
to
our
our
planning
webpage,
which
is
slc,
gov.com
planning,
click
on
public
meetings
and
under
the
planning
commission
tab.
There's
instructions
there
to
join
as
well
audrey.
A
Would
you
mind
going
to
the
next
screen
if
you
are
an
attendee
wishing
to
make
public
comment
on
the
any
item
on
the
agenda
tonight,
you'll
see
on
the
screen,
that's
being
shown,
there's
an
orange
square
with
what
looks
like
a
tiny
little
hand
and
depending
on
what
size
screen
you're
looking
at
it's
noticeable,
or
sometimes
it's
hard
to
see.
A
And
we
are
monitoring
that
during
the
meeting.
And
so
we
will
be
aware-
and
we
will
try
to
troubleshoot
and
get
you
identified
a
notice
so
that
you
can
speak
and
unless
there's
any
other
questions.
B
B
A
second
thank
you.
I
have
a
motion
from
john
in
a
second
from
adrian
maureen,
epstein
amy,
yes,
adrian,
yes,
john.
C
B
D
B
C
A
E
Madam
chair,
it
looks
like
andreas
has
logged
in
now.
Okay,.
C
Yes,
thank
you
very
much,
I'm
in
finally.
B
Okay,
do
you
approve
the
minutes
from
last
time.
B
Thank
you.
Okay,
we
have.
We
have
four
votes
and
two
yay
and
two
abstentions,
and
so
the
motion
passes
okay,
yay
all
right.
So
moving
on
to
the
report
of
the
chair,
I
do
have
one
rather
sad
item
to
report
at
one
report
on
behalf
of
the
planning
commission,
we
are
very
very
saddened
to
learn
of
the
passing
of
chris
earle,
a
planner
here
in
salt
lake
city,
who
is
at
who
was
actively
presenting
before
us
only
two
weeks
ago.
A
Thank
you
for
those
kind
words
brenda.
I
think,
as
you
can
imagine,
the
the
planning
staff
is
has
had
a
rough
week,
and
so
it's
it's
very
meaningful
to
hear
the
condolences
for
our
good
friend
and
colleague,
and
it's
a
very
sad
way
to
start
a
meeting.
But
you
know
sometimes
we
we
have
to
move
on,
and
here
we
are
just
another
another
announcement.
That's
not
as
not
sad,
but
this
will.
This
is
also
commissioner.
A
Lyons
last
meeting
has
his
two
terms
are
up,
and
so
we've
been
working
with
the
mayor's
office
and
getting
some
appointments
done.
So
I
wanted
to
turn
the
time
over
to
matt,
to
see,
if
or
commissioner
lyon,
to
see
if
you
have
anything
to
to
convey.
D
F
D
How
they
applied
on
the
ground
and
how
we
navigate
those
challenges.
I
also
want
to
say
to
my
I
guess,
my
fellow
commissioners
that
I
really
enjoyed
get
to
know
many
of
you
most
of
you.
Actually,
I
didn't
know
before
this
experience.
D
Some
of
you
certainly
have
we've
rubbed
each
different
ways
over
the
time
period,
but
I
just
have
developed
such
an
amazing
amount
of
respect
for
how
all
of
you
come
at
each
of
these
issues
in
a
slightly
different
perspective
and
I've
enjoyed
working
with
you,
even
though
we
were
virtual
for
the
last
year,
and
I've
just
enjoyed
getting
to
know
you
and
hopefully
bump
into
you
and
see
you
guys
in
some
ways
in
the
future,
so
so
appreciate
the
time-
and
I
thought
I
would
say
this
planning
staff
has
been
excellent
and
such
a
pleasure
and
so
smart
and
where
you
approach
things
and
laying
things
out
and
and
willing
to
listen
to
our
feedback.
D
B
A
I
have
a
couple
of
other
things
to
update
the
commission
on.
If
that's,
okay,
yes,.
C
B
A
And
speaking
of
virtual
meetings,
it
looks
like
your
next
meeting
will
be
a
hybrid
meeting,
so
we
are
working
with
the
recorders
off
well.
The
recorder's
office
is
working
on
setting
up
some
protocols
for
us
to
follow,
but
the
city
council
is
tentatively
scheduled
to
their
july
13th
meeting
to
be
available
in
person
in
the
building
in
the
city
and
county
building
and
virtually,
and
so
we
plan
on
following
suit
the
day
after
with
planning,
commission
and
then
the
thursday
of
that
week,
with
landmarks
commissions.
A
So
we
will
keep
everybody
posted
because
to
how
that
may
or
may
how
that
will
work
out.
We're
still
going
to
be
practicing
some
putting
some
safety
protocols
in
place
for
social
distancing
and
things
like
that,
but
something
to
look
forward
to
seeing
people
in
person
again
and
we'll
go
from
there.
The
other
thing
that
I
wanted
to
update
the
planning
commission
on
is
that
the
city
council
approved
their
the
city
budget
for
2021,
2022
and
part
of
that
budget
included
new
planning
staff.
A
So
we
will
be
that
that
was
partial
year
funded,
so
it's
funded
starting
september
1st,
and
so
we
will
be
spending
the
next
month
or
so
trying
to
figure
out
what
that
means.
A
We
have
had
requests
for
some
changes
in
almost
every
part
of
the
city,
so
we
obviously
still
have
to
prioritize
what
goes
first
and
we're
going
to
be
analyzing.
Our
adopted
plans
and
policies,
the
mayor's
goals,
city
council
goals,
growth
issues
and
seeking
input
from
the
planning
commission
on
how
to
set
those
priorities
so
that
we
can
hit
the
ground
running
once
we
are
fully
staffed.
B
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
nick
all
right,
so
we
are
just
about
ready
to
go
on.
I
I
do
also
want
to
thank
matt
for
his
eight
years
of
work
on
the
planning
commission.
B
I
was
on
the
commission
when
matt
was
chair
and
he
would
he
did
a
wonderful
job
then
too,
and
and
it
is
a
grateful,
the
commission
is
very
grateful
to
him
for
his
service.
B
I
haven't
had
any
hammers
or
anything
because
the
whole
time
I've
been
chair,
we've
been
virtual,
so
we'll
see
how
that
how
that
goes,
all
right.
So
we're
going
to
start
the
set
of
public
hearings
tonight.
Our
first
one
is
bueno
avenue
apartments,
planned
development,
conditional
use,
zoning
map
and
master
plan
amendment
at
approximately
129,
south
seven
hundred
east,
and
so
let
me
forget
to
look
on
the
next
page.
B
Oh
katya,
okay
katya
will
be
presenting
this.
This
project.
G
G
G
G
This
is
the
proposed
project
it
as
you
can
see
the
these
are
renderings.
This
is
a
building
that
frontages
it
has
frontage
to
700
east.
This
is
a
leasing
office.
G
It's
it's
also
an
amenities
building
with
they'll
have
fitness
center
and
just
other
amenities
and
the
the
proposed
lane
use
is
a
rooming
house.
G
The
rooming
house
building
would
be
in
the
back
as
you
can
see
here,
and
this
is
the
rooming,
the
proposed
rooming
house
sitting
on
the
back
this
project,
like
I
said
it's
a
besides
being
a
plant
development,
it's
also
a
zoning
amendment
master
plan.
Amendment
conditional
use
the
plan.
G
The
planning
recommendation
is
that
the
commission
forward
a
favorable
recommendation
to
the
city
council
for
the
zoning
in
the
master
plan
amendments
and
that
it
approved
the
request
for
plan
development
and
conditioner
use
with
conditions
and
now
list
the
conditions.
At
the
end
of
my
presentation.
G
The
master
plan
amendment
is
crucial
because
that
is
you
know.
Without
the
master
plan
amendment
you
know,
none
of
the
other
processes
are
are
going
to
be
able
to
be
approved.
G
To
from,
as
you
can
see
here,
this
is
the
block
of
where
this
project
is
and
we're
requesting
it
from
median
density
to
a
medium
high
density,
so
that
they
can
also
ask
for
the
rezoning
going
back
here.
Staff
took
in
consideration
other
master
plans,
the
housing
plan,
plants,
hall,
lake
and
central
community
master
plan,
and
all
these
master
plans
mention
about
the
the
the
desire
to
promote
their
housing
goals,
and
we
believe
that
this
proposal
meets
those
considerations
from
the
master
plans.
E
G
The
master
plan
has
that
site
zone
sr3
and
it's
the
purpose
of
the
the
sr-3
is
so
it
will
protect
this
inner
block
development.
However,
as
you
can
see,
this
inner
block
is
in
a
very
disrepair.
G
With
unpaved
road,
poor
infrastructure
and
the
condition
of
the
homes
are
not
very
well
kept.
G
G
The
next
request
is
the
rezoning
of
the
the
parcels
that
are
sr3,
and
you
can
see
the
parcels
that
are
sr3
in
this
map.
G
They
are
seven
parcels
and
the
the
applicant
is
asking
that
these
seven
parcels
be
rezoned
to
rmf45
and,
as
you
can
see
in
this
block,
all
the
properties
surrounding
this
develop
this
this
area
are
its
zone,
rmf
45,
so
it
would
be.
G
The
next
request
is
for
plant
development
and,
as
you
can
see
here
are
the
the
setbacks
were
that
are
being
requested
to
be
modified
here.
The
rear
yard
sat
back
they're,
proposing
5.4
feet
where
the
required
setback
is
30
feet
here
in
the
this
side,
yard
they're
proposing
2
0.8
feet
where
the
required
is
eight
feet.
G
The
other
requirement,
at
the
other
request,
is
to
place
this
accessory
building
here
in
the
front
yard,
and
the
next
one
is
for
the
additional
height
they're
requesting
a
five
foot
additional
height,
and
the
reason
for
the
additional
height
is
so
that
they
can
have
a
pitch
roof.
G
The
next
request
for
the
planning,
the
plan
development
is
street
frontage.
The
existing
parcel
right
here
right
now
it
is
66
feet
wide.
The
required
street
footage
on
this
zoning,
the
rmf
45
zoning
district
is
80
feet.
G
The
request
for
the
condition
to
use
is
for
a
rooming
house,
it's
a
lineus
that
is
allowed
in
the
rmf-45
as
a
conditional
use
and
there
as
part
of
this
conditional
use.
We
have
some
conditions
and
also
I'll
I'll
talk
about
this
new
condition
in
a
moment.
G
This
is
the
surrounding
len
uses
on
this
block
and,
as
you
can
see,
a
lot
of
the
land
uses
are
multi-family
use,
which
is
which
would
be
a
similar
land
use.
As
a
rooming
house,
a
rooming
house
is
a
a
unit
where
there
are
bedrooms
that,
on
this
specific
project
would
have
their
own
bathroom
on
each
of
the
bedrooms,
but
they
would
share
a
living
room
and
a
kitchen.
G
G
There
is
plenty
of
room
between
these
buildings
and
the
site,
and
the
only
place
where
it
would
be
closer
than
you
know.
Less
than
60
feet
would
be
on
the
north
property,
which
right
now
there's
approximately
14
feet
between
the
property
line
and
the
as
principal
structure,
and
also
here
on
the
south,
where
they're
sharing
this
driveway.
G
As
far
as
parking
so
for
each
of
the
the
units,
well,
counting
all
the
all
of
the
bedrooms
in
this
project,
it
will
be
a
192
bedrooms
and
each
of
these
bedrooms
would
be
one
single
person
that
would
be
allowed
to
be
renting
the
uni,
the
the
bedrooms.
G
So
the
the
required
parking
for
the
rooming
house
is
one
stall
for
two
individuals
and
that's
97.
96
parking
requirement.
They're
they're
planning
on
using
25
reduction
from
the
transportation
demand
reduction,
so
they're
meeting
the
72
stalls.
G
But
there
is
we're
requiring
we're,
suggesting
we're
recommending
the
planning
commission
to
add
a
new
condition
that
there's
only
one
person
for
each
of
the
bedrooms
on
in
this
project.
G
So
we
are
recommending
the
conditional
use
have
the
the
following
conditions,
and
one,
of
course,
is
that
the
zoning
cancer
plan
amendments
are
approved
by
the
city
council,
that
the
10
parcels
be
consolidated,
that
they
retain
that
access
easement
to
the
property
on
the
south
and
that
the
applicant
submit
a
housing
mitigation
plan
for
that
for
the
housing
that
is
going
to
be
demolished
and
replaced.
G
The
additional
condition
is
to
guarantee
that
the
proposed
parking
project
is
possible
and
so
we're
adding
this
condition,
and
this
condition
is
not
listed
on
the
staff
report,
so
I
I
also
changed
and
added
this
condition
to
the
motion
sheet
that
you
have
so
when
that
is
that
each
bedroom
on
this
project
be
limited
to
a
single
occupancy
and
that
the
parking
is
provided
according
to
the
parking
ordinance.
G
H
Yes,
I
this
is
kevin
perry.
I
am
prepared
to
present.
H
Okay,
so
I'm
gonna
just
go
ahead
and
jump
right
into
it
and
thank
you
katya
for
presenting
our
project,
so
bueno
avenue
apartments.
You
know
this
is
an
interesting
concept
in
that
it's
new
to
salt
lake
city.
It's
not
necessarily
a
new
concept
in
the
united
states,
but
this
is
a
co-living
project
which
is
a
you
know,
I'm
going
to
get
into
more
into
that
later
in
the
presentation
of
what
that
means.
But
what
that
does
for
this
site
and
this
project
is.
H
It
allows
us
to
provide
attainably
priced
housing
or
housing
at
a
price
point
that
people
can
afford.
You
know:
we've
all
heard
it
a
thousand
times
that
the
housing
prices
in
salt
lake
city
are
extremely
high
and
are
pricing
out
working
class
members
of
the
community
and
our
approach
to
this
project
is
a
company
strategy
and
initiative
that
we've
put
in
place
for
social
impact.
Investing
where
we
are
looking
to
have
a
portion
of
our
investments
be
focused
on
having
a
positive
social
impact
on
a
community,
and
this
is
going
to
be
our
flagship.
H
You
know
our
first
major
project
that
focuses
on
providing
attainably
christ
housing
through
the
co-living
concept.
So
it's
going
to
look
and
feel
much
like
a
normal
apartment,
complex.
You
know
to
a
passerby
they're,
not
going
to
notice
a
difference
by
the
look
of
it
by
the
people
coming
and
going
it's
it's
it's
a
housing
project.
H
However,
the
way
that
it's
operated
is
different
in
that
we
will
be
renting
each
bedroom
versus
renting
an
entire
unit,
so
we
will
have
bedrooms
ranging
from
one
I'm
sorry.
We
will
have
units
ranging
from
one
bedroom
to
four
bedrooms
and
each
of
those
units
will
have
a
kitchen
and
a
living
room
amenity
that
is
shared
with
the
other
tenants.
So
in
a
four
bedroom
unit,
a
tenant
will
be
sharing
with
three
up
to
three
other
individuals
that
bathroom
I'm
sorry,
the
kitchen
and
living
room
space.
H
Each
bedroom
will
have
a
private
closet.
It
will
be
fully
furnished
and
we'll
have
a
private
bathroom,
a
full
private
bathroom
and,
as
I've
mentioned
before,
you
know
what
this
allows
us
to
do
is
without
seeking
any
government
subsidies.
We
can
rent
these
units
at
a
price
point
that
is
close
to
the
actually
below
the
60
ami
number
for
a
studio
apartment
in
salt
lake
city.
H
I'm
going
to
jump
into
the
site,
I'm
going
to
go
very
quickly
through
this
because
most
of
it
you've
seen
from
katya
and
we'll
just
hit
on
a
few
points
of
the
condition
of
the
site
and
the
location.
So
you
know
between
first
and
second
south
just
off
of
7th
east,
and
you
can
see
that
the
majority
of
the
site
is
interior
of
the
block
with
only
66
feet
of
street
frontage.
H
It's
in
a
prime
location,
though
it's
located
about
300
yards
outside
of
the
transit
oriented
requirement
of
a
quarter
mile,
we're
just
beyond
a
quarter
mile
from
the
transit
stop
well
within
walking
distance
to
tracks,
also
major
bus
lines
and
and
bike
lanes.
Great
amenities
in
this
neighborhood,
a
very
walkable
location.
H
I'm
gonna
keep
going
so
aerial
view
of
the
site.
Katya
mentioned
this,
that
the
site
is
currently
seven
single-family
homes
and
one
multi-family
structure.
Six
of
these
single-family
homes
are
zoned
sr-3.
H
There
is
really
no
infrastructure
to
support
the
neighborhood
within
the
interior
of
the
site.
There's
no
paving
the
utilities
are,
are
privately
installed
and
and
far
under
or
just
very
very
under-managed.
I
mean
they
just
don't
work
for
supporting
new
housing
here.
The
site
lacks
utility
infrastructure.
H
Currently
now
you've
already
seen
this,
you
know
the
site
is
surrounded
in
rmf
45.
Zoning
on
all
sides,
except
for
these
six
homes,
which
are
on
seven
parcels,
are
sr3
zoning
interior
of
the
block
and
that's
what
we're
seeking
the
master
plan
amendment
and
the
zoning
amendment
is
for
these
parcels
to
be
consistent
with
the
other
parcels
as
part
of
this
project
and
the
parcel
surrounding
it.
So
here's
just
another
map
so
currently
the
rmf
45
zoning,
it's
split.
Basically,
almost
exactly
50
50.,
so
half
of
the
site
is
rmf45.
H
You
know
just
under
39
units
and
on
the
sr3
portion
of
the
site,
the
other
half
the
master
plan
density
currently
allows
up
to
30
units
per
acre.
So
you
know
when
you,
you
run
that
calculation
of
the
total
acreage
times
those
units
per
acre
the
and
you
blend
it.
That
would
allow
for
40
units
per
acre
under
the
master
plan.
H
H
These
are
all
of
the
adjacent
properties,
the
total
number
of
units
and
the
unit
density
or
the
density
per
acre
on
these,
and
the
average
surrounding
our
site
is
43
units
per
acre,
so
we're
well
within
the
context
of
the
neighborhood
and
area
and
from
a
design
standpoint.
We
we
tried
hard
to
meet
the
to
design
this,
to
meet
the
context
of
the
neighborhood
and
to
fit
in
as
well
understanding
that
it's
a
mid-block
and
it's
four
stories.
H
It
does
match
the
height
of
the
buildings
around,
but
we
tried
to
keep
a
consistent
look
and
feel
so.
I
want
to
just
jump
in
and
again
I'm
going
to
quickly
go
through
this,
but
surrounding
neighborhoods
that
are
currently
sr3
zones.
H
Look
a
lot
different
than
bueno
avenue
and
there's
a
purpose
for
an
sr3
zone
and
that's
to
preserve
these
inner
block
neighborhoods
and
allow
them
to
thrive.
And
so
you
know
I
personally
went
and
walked
every
one
of
these
sr3
zones
and
and
took
a
look
at
them
and
there's
there's
some
stark
differences.
H
In
many
cases,
they've
had
they've
either
been
renovated,
but
in
many
cases
there's
brand
new
homes
that
have
replaced
these
these
existing
homes.
H
H
In
fact,
in
19,
I
believe,
1996,
the
east
community
master
plan
identified
these
specific
parcels
as
needing
redevelopment
so
about
30
years
ago.
These
were
in
disrepair.
I'm
going
to
go
through
each
of
these
properties
quickly
and
you'll
see
the
images
of
the
screen
on
the
screen
indicating
their
current
conditions.
H
The
condition
of
the
properties
themselves
are
very
bad,
but
also
the
infrastructure
is
in
in
major
disrepair
and
it
just-
and
this
is
from
the
owner.
You
know
these
homes
were
never
built
to
last
as
long
as
they
have.
They
were
built
around
the
turn
of
the
century
to
the
lowest
architectural
standards
of
that
time,
and
they
just
haven't
been
up
kept,
and
at
this
point
the
cost
of
renovating
and
reinvigorating
this
neighborhood
is
is
impossible.
H
It's
cost
prohibitive,
so
you'll
see
and
I'll
just
go
through
each
home
on
the
property
and
you'll
start
to
see
some
of
the
issues
you'll
see
a
common
theme
among
the
plumbing
and
the
electrical
issues
and
the
foundations
most
of
the
foundations
on
this
property.
In
fact,
all
of
the
foundations
on
this
property
are
sitting
on
stone
or
dirt,
they're
unreinforced
there's.
This
is
a
great
example
here
of
attempting
to
reinforce
the
foundation.
H
H
Again,
you
see
plumbing
that's
nearly
100
years
old
foundations
with
water
damage.
It's
because
it's
wood
sitting
on
dirt
which
would
never
fly.
You
know
it
just
doesn't
work
here.
Here's
an
attempt
to
reinforce
the
foundation
with
cinder
block
cinder
block
on
dirt,
trying
to
hold
the
home
in
place.
H
Again,
more
dirt
of
the
foundation
holding
this
home
up.
So
here's
a
jacking
attempt
to
try
and
jack
the
home
up
kevin.
H
You
so
I'll
keep
I'll
skip
forward
through
this
sorry,
the
powerpoint
is
slow
to
keep
up
with
me,
okay,
so
here's
the
site
currently
and
the
site
with
our
project
overlaid
on
it
so
and
then
the
setbacks.
You
know,
katya
went
over
these
already
we're
seeking
setbacks
that
are
similar
to
what's
in
place.
Currently,
the
building
on
the
front
of
the
property
is
going
to
go
in
the
same
footprint
and
the
rear
setback
is
currently
13.5
feet.
H
The
building
height,
you
know
we're
seeking
additional
five
feet
of
building
height.
You
know
we
have
two
options:
we've
we've
shown
it
both
ways
with
the
additional
five
feet:
you'll
see
that
we're
able
to
screen
the
rooftop
unit.
So
look
in
the
bottom
left
corner
of
the
page
and
you'll
see
how
that
screening
will
take
place.
So
we
think
it
just
meets
the
the
look
of
the
neighborhood
better
and
then
just
jumping
into
the
rooming
house,
designation
with
the
conditional
use.
This
is
this
is
the
key
you
know
for
co-living.
H
H
In
the
plain
salt
lake
document,
we
feel
that,
with
this
type
of
housing,
we're
meeting
these
planned
salt
lake
initiatives
building
affordable
in
salt
lake
city
is
a
development
guide,
and
you
know
it
specifically
states
that
the
city
should
support
innovative
construction
methods
that
provide
solutions
from
rising
development
costs
and
creative
housing
design
and
a
co-living
concept.
Does
that
so
co-living?
H
You
know
cbre
has
a
study
on
this.
It
basically
explains
this.
As
you
know,
multiple
tenants
sharing
the
key
amenities.
H
Ours
is
four
bedroom
units
where
you
know
you're,
sharing
the
the
living
living
room
and
kitchen
amenity
with
a
few
other
people
to
one
to
three
other
people,
but
we
can
provide
the
same
luxury
multi-family
amenities
that
you're
seeing
throughout
the
city.
And
truly
you
know
if
you
compare
this
to
a
studio
apartment,
the
most
comparable
unit,
that's
available.
H
We
are
about
half
the
cost
for
a
one
bedroom
apartment,
I'm
sorry
for
one
for
a
single
bedroom
rental
in
one
of
our
four
bedroom
units.
H
School
district
we've
talked
with
multiple
individuals
who
have
expressed
not
just
interest
but
downright
excitement
for
something
like
this
for
their
employees
who
fit
the
demographic
that
this
works
for,
and
we
understand
it
doesn't
work
for
every
renter,
but
for
individuals
who
are
single
and
and
this
works
for
it's
a
major
benefit
from
their
cost
of
living
and
I'll
just
wrap
it
up
with
this.
You
know,
as
a
company
initiative.
It's
this
is
our
social
impact
housing
initiative.
H
You
know
we
have
investments
throughout
salt
lake
city
that
are
that
are
class,
a
luxury
apartments
that
you
know
are
more
typical
for
what
you
see
going
up
right
now,
but
this
is
our
opportunity
to
provide
attainably
priced
housing
without
needing
government
incentives
and
opening
it
up
to
the
market
to
all
working
class
citizens
who
need
a
place
to
live
at
a
price
that
they
can
afford,
and
we
feel
that's
a
huge,
a
huge
deal.
H
You
know
where
the
alternatives
for
this
site
are
realistically,
you
know
when
it
gets
redeveloped
or
realistically
luxury
townhomes
that
are
going
to
sell
for
800
to
a
million
dollars,
800
grand
to
a
million
dollars
and
really
does
not
does
not
achieve
any
benefit
for
the
neighborhood
or
for
the
community
at
large.
B
E
I
have
one
yes,
mr
perry:
I'm
assuming
you'll
have
active
management
on
the
site,
just
as
you
would
any
normal
apartment
complex.
Yes,.
B
Complex,
so
I
have
a
question
you
keep
referring
to
a
price
point:
how
much
are
your
units
going
to
rent
for.
H
B
H
Yes,
so
our
our
single
bedroom
rental
in
our
four
bedroom
unit
starts
at
839
a
month
that
includes
furnishings
all
of
your
utilities.
All
of
your
ancillary
costs,
that's
what
it
is.
Currently
you
know.
H
According
to
the
current
market,
we
plan
to
keep
it
at
that
market
level
when
you
compare
that
to
a
studio
apartment,
you're,
looking
at
approximately
1600
a
month
for
a
studio
apartment,
and
I
think
it's
worth
noting
that
the
60
ami
number
for
salt
lake
city
as
put
forth
by
hud-
and
I
believe
this
is
a
2019
number-
would
be
at
874
dollars.
That's
the
60
of
ami
income
limit
that
would
be
for
a
studio
apartment
would
be
874,
so
we're
actually
starting
at
8.69.
H
I
apologize,
I
said
839,
but
when
you
consider
in
the
cost
of
furnishing
the
apartment,
the
utility
adjustments
that
are
also
done
with
the
ami
adjustment
that
puts
your
net
rents
at
788,
so
nearly
a
hundred
dollars
below
the
sixty
percent
of
ami
number.
D
So
I'm
mainly
just
looking
at
your
plan
development
and
the
setback
requirements
that
you're.
I
know
your
interior
block,
which
creates
some
differences
there,
but,
but
just
talk
me
through
why
you've
chosen
to
have
this
like
large
parking
lot
like
in
front
and
not
that's
kind
of
there
and
then
the
other
buildings
kind
of
push
to
the
sides.
As
far
as
I
can,
instead
of
using
parking
more
a
circular
way,
that
would
add
it
would
keep
your
zoning
setbacks
more
in
line
with
what
is
required
like
why?
Why
seek
the
plan
development.
H
So
the
plan
development
is
triggered,
I
mean
it
was
triggered
by
the
frontage,
the
street
frontage
of
66
feet.
We
had
no
choice
to
go
any
other
way.
We
tried
to
design
this
property
every
which
way,
based
on
what
you're
saying
we
attempted
that
parking
around
it.
The
critical
aspect
of
it
and
I'll
share
my
screen
again.
While
I
talk
here,
but
the
critical
aspect
of
the
site
is
the
fire
turn
around.
We
cannot
get
fire
turn
around
on
this
site
without
pushing
the
building
as
far
to
the
side
as
possible.
H
So
that's
the
key
a
fire
apparatus
has
to
get
in.
It
has
to
have
an
80
foot
wide
turn
around
space
and
a
t
shape
and
there's
just
no
way,
no
way
possible
to
get
that
fire
turn
around
without
pushing
the
building
as
far
to
the
sides
as
possible.
H
B
H
It's
private
that
that
is
currently
private,
all
of
bueno
avenue
is
actually
private,
right-of-way
and
also
the
grading
on
the
site
would
not
allow
for
us
to
get
up
and
out
once
you
put
a
building
on
this
site
across
it,
there's
actually
about
a
10
foot
drop
from
one
side
to
the
other.
H
B
Okay,
I'm
going
to
open
it
up
for
public
hearing
now
and
we
will
hear
from
the
public.
Are
there
any
representatives
from
the
community
council
here
to
speak.
A
I'm
not
exactly
sure
what,
if,
if
there
is
or
not
so
I
think
what
we're
going
to
do
is
just
go
down
the
list
of
people
who
have
their
hands
raised
so
just
a
reminder
to
raise
your
hand.
I
know
a
number
of
people
have
sent
us
emails,
saying
that
they'd
like
to
speak
so
we'll
just
go
down
the
list
and
if
there
is
somebody
representing
the
community
council
that
they
can
identify
themselves
at
that
point
in
time,
okay,.
A
Okay,
I'm
I'm
gonna
go
just
it's
it's
easier
to
keep
track
of
everybody
if
we
just
start
at
the
top
and
go
down
in
alphabetical
order.
So
when
we
get
to
that
person,
they
can
they
can.
Let
us
know
the
first
speaker
with
their
hand
raised
is
casey
mcdonough,
casey,
you're,
unmuted.
J
Oh
perfect,
thank
you.
So
I
live
on
south
temple
in
the
bonneville
tower.
I
grew
up
on
9th
and
9th
I've
lived
pretty
much
downtown
most
of
my
life
and
I've
worked
in
architecture
and
planning,
and
I've
dealt
with
projects
like
this
before
and
and
as
a
resident.
I
guess
I
would
start
by
saying
I.
I
don't
think
this.
I
love
the
project.
I
think
it
has
a
great
opportunity
to
provide
that
type
of
housing.
I
don't
think
this
is
the
right
place.
J
You
know
we
we
had
historic
districts,
zoning,
the
result
of
thousands
and
thousands
of
hours
of
public
input,
public
effort,
city
effort
in
the
past
to
to
create
kind
of
the
fabric
of
the
city
we
have
and
the
intent
of
moving
to
the
future.
I
when
I
saw
the
application-
and
I
saw
the
pictures
of
the
the
proposed
higher
density
zoning
versus
what
was
there.
J
I
would
comment
too
that
you
know
speaking
on
the
historic
preservation
side.
It's
actually
in
the
national
historic
district.
I
was
a
little
discouraged
to
not
see
that
addressed
more
in
the
staff
report
or
by
the
applicant,
even
if
they're,
in
poor
condition,
there's
there's
possibly
50
in
total
tax
credits
between
state
and
federal
tax
credits
to
restore
the
property's
rental
properties,
residential
rental
properties.
So
you
know
there's
a
reason
why
it's
a
historic
district,
national,
historic
district
there's
a
reason
why
it's
zoned
the
way.
J
It
is
it's
because
we
don't
want
that
big
of
a
building
there
right
as
a
city
we've
we
made
that
intent
and-
and
it
would
be
the
biggest
thing
as
far
as
I
can
tell
on
the
block
in
the
middle
looking
down
on
the
rest
of
the
block.
So
for
those
reasons
I
don't
like
it
and
I
think
it's
a
bad
idea
again.
I
like
the
idea
I
like
that
type
of
housing
idea.
I
just
don't
think
this
is
the
right
place.
It's
it's!
J
It's
just
not
the
right
place
and
on
top
of
that,
you've
surely
seen
the
comments
from
me
and
others
about
whoever
owned
them
before
who
let
them
fall
into
disrepair?
Who
you
know
hoarded
all
the
lots?
We
don't
know
what
their
intent
was.
It
could
have
just
been
the
circumstance
of
their
their
financial
puzzle,
but
I
I
think
it's
it's.
I
don't
know.
I
don't
like
the
idea
that,
because
of
the
circumstance,
we
should
change
the
zoning
that
we
should
give
them.
J
You
know
more
height
and
more
density,
regardless
of
how
great
this
project
is.
So
that's
why
we
have
you
guys
you
guys
are
gonna.
I
I
would
like
to
thank
the
check
and
balance
against
doing
too
much
against
the
intent.
The
master
plan,
the
current
zoning,
all
of
the
input
that
we've
had
up
until
this
point
and
so
I'll.
Let
you
have
it
thanks
for
listening.
A
Next
up
is
cindy
crower
cindy.
You
are
unmuted.
C
C
I
want
to
make
three
really
clear
points
by
proceeding
with
the
conditional
use
and
plan
development,
you
are
stamping
this
proposal
as
a
done
deal
when
you
do
not
have
final
decision
decision-making
capability.
The
city
council
has
the
authority
to
make
other
decisions,
and
it
is
clear
that
there
will
be
opposition
at
the
council's
hearing.
You
are
sending
a
message
to
the
public.
It's
a
done
deal
number
two.
The
purpose
of
a
plan
development
is
to
make
an
improved
project
over
what
strict
interpretation
of
the
ordinance
would
allow.
C
C
C
Additionally,
I
will
tell
you
that
all
parking
on
the
street
is
currently
in
use,
and
I
believe
that
the
additional
condition
my
interpretation
as
a
landlord
is
that
it's
a
violation
of
the
fair
housing
act
by
limiting
the
occupancy
to
one
person
per
bedroom.
The
staff
is
assuming
that
there
will
magically
be
mitigation
for
the
lost
housing.
I
do
not
believe
that
that
is
the
case.
It
has
certainly
not
been
the
case
previously.
C
The
new
ordinance
for
housing
loss
mitigation
and
displacement
is
in
its
early
stages
under
the
label
of
a
gentrification
study.
There
is
nothing
required
of
these
developers
in
terms
of
affordability.
They
can
pocket
the
money,
they
are
saving
on
the
reduction
of
the
numbers
of
kitchens.
You
are
approving
market
rate
housing.
This
is
a
repeat
really
of
the
lincoln
street
and
second
south
story
where
the
developers
dangle
the
possibility
of
some
affordable
units
in
front
of
you,
maybe,
but
there's
nothing
in
writing
again.
C
A
I
know
that
the
next
person
on
the
list
who
I
know
indicated
through
email
that
they
wanted
to
speak
but
doesn't
have
their
hand
raised,
is
jen
colby,
so
jen
I'm
going
to
unmute
you-
and
I
understand
that
you
have
some
another
individual
present
with
you
who
would
like
to
speak
following
you
and
you're
unmuted.
K
K
My
neighbor
monica
is
hilding
is
here
she
can't
get
webex
to
work
across
the
street,
so
she
will
be
making
separate
comments
following
me,
and
I
also
want
to
speak
up
for
the
tenants
who
are
may
or
may
not
have
made
it
onto
webex
that
I
talked
to
and
tried
to
talk
through
this
that
really
want
to
participate,
and
this
is
very
disadvantageous
to
tenants
and
lower
income
people
they
may
or
may
not
show
up
tonight,
and
I
just
want
to
speak.
K
K
Thank
you.
I
will
start
now,
so
the
east
central
community
council
does
not
support
these
four
applications.
We
believe
that
the
current
sr
zoning,
the
requests
are
clearly
inconsistent
with
the
guiding
central
community
master
plan
and
other
city
code.
The
purpose
of
the
current
sr
zone
3
zoning-
is
indeed
to
protect
the
interior
block
lots
in
scale
with
the
character
and
development
within
the
interior
portions
of
city
blocks.
K
These
blocks
were
established
to
provide
small
lots
and
modest
workforce
housing
amid
the
larger
homes
and
apartments
on
the
exterior
main
streets,
they're
a
unique
feature
of
the
national
historic
district
and
by
definition,
they're
smaller.
This
project
would
flip
the
script
by
destroying
the
entire
block
entirely
and
replacing
it
with
an
inappropriately
scaled
massive
building
that
would
tower
over
surrounding
properties.
This
is
in
conflict
with
numerous
specific
policies
in
the
master
plan
and
future
land
use
map.
According
to
the
zoning
ordinance
criteria,
these
applications
do
not
meet
standard.
K
Unfortunately,
the
specific
master
plan
guiding
policies
were
not
fully
analyzed
in
the
staff
report.
Further
disrepair
is
no
justification
for
rezoning,
so
like
stay
should
not
endorse
demolition
by
neglect,
and
I
would
argue
that
many
of
the
buildings
are
not
beyond
repair.
I
have
a
house
with
foundation
that
looks
a
bit
like
that.
Many
of
us,
if
you
would
sell
to
private
people,
would
figure
out
how
to
deal
with
it.
Some
may
be,
but
they
could
be
replaced
with
something
that
fits
the
zoning.
K
We
therefore
ask
that
the
planning
commission
forward
a
negative
recommendation
and
denial
of
the
master
plan
and
map
amendments
to
the
city
council.
We
also
believe
any
consideration
of
the
ceo
and
pud
applications
is
premature.
At
best
you
must
vote
on
them
tonight.
We
ask
you
also
deny
these
applications.
K
Alternatively,
if
you
could
postpone
a
vote,
then
separate
out
the
ceo
and
pud
wait
until
after
any
action
by
city
council
and
we're
particularly
also
concerned
that
the
housing
loss,
mitigation
and
displacement
ordinances
are
not
in
place
without
them,
harm
to
current
tenants
will
be
magnified.
K
We
also
object
to
the
new
one
person
per
room
condition,
which
was
not
noticed,
and
this
is
not
right
for
decision.
We
questioned
whether
a
spot
of
zoning
to
rms
45,
even
if
it
did
meet
standards,
would
allow
for
this
development.
We
believe
the
unit
count
should
be
by
bedroom,
since
they
will
be
rented
individually,
not
by
dorm
suite
grouping.
K
192
rooms
is
the
correct
unit
count.
This
exceeds
the
current
zoning
requested
zoning
and
it's
not
currently
correctly
evaluated
in
the
staff
report.
In
our
opinion,
in
recent
surveys,
the
majority
87
789
respondents
preferred
a
small
house
with
yard
versus
a
complex
with
shared
facilities,
as
proposed
current
rents
at
the
sites
of
the
existing
units,
which
are
much
larger,
are
700
per
month.
According
to
the
tenants-
and
I
would
argue,
you
have
to
look
at
rent
per
square
foot
when
you're
analyzing.
K
This
affordability,
with
the
stated
intent
of
this
proposal,
is
to
provide
affordable
housing,
which
is
a
noble
goal.
We're
concerned,
the
development
will
not
actually
meet
the
affordability
gap.
This
gap
is
most
acute
among
individuals,
families
and
multi-generational
households
in
the
essential
workforce,
seniors
and
people
with
disabilities.
Unlimited
fixed
incomes
and
the
currently
unhoused
affordability
is
a
formula
based
on
income.
Very
low
ses
is
a
key
driver.
That
is
not
being
addressed
here.
We're
also
concerned
that
this
rooming
facility
will
be
de
facto
become
de
facto
student
housing.
K
K
The
limited
formal
public
comment
received
does
not
reflect
the
important
precedent
or
wider
interest
in
the
applications.
We
recognize
that
city
officials
are
under
enormous
pressure
to
address
housing
needs,
but
the
narrative
of
a
crisis
must
not
lead
to
bypassing
or
conflicting
with
current
plans,
ordinances
and
codes.
We
note
that
the
comments
in
support
of
approval
do
not
address
the
standards
for
rezoning
or
map
amendments.
Instead,
they
are
general
comments,
agreeing
with
the
need
for
more
housing
and
innovative
projects.
We
concur
with
these
sentiments
with
a
large
caveat.
K
K
We
object
to
the
continual
pressure
to
tear
into
our
neighborhoods
by
speculative
real
estate
investors
who
ask
for
upzones
and
concessions.
We
do
not
agree
that
this
is
a
positive
social
impact
for
our
neighborhood.
We
strongly
support
maintaining
the
naturally
occurring,
affordable
housing
in
our
community.
We
support
new
development
by
encouraging
projects
on
the
countless
lots
within
the
city
already
zoned
for
such
development.
These
co-living
buildings
are
best
suited
for
the
transit
station
area
zones,
where
the
city
pretty
previously
come
committed
to
concentrating
density
in
exchange
for
height.
K
We
encourage
the
applicants
to
go
back
to
the
drawing
board
and
bring
a
creative
smart
growth
based
master
plan,
appropriate
infill
project.
We
would
welcome
properly
scaled
ideas
to
redevelop
the
rmf,
45
lots
and
replace
the
garages
and
empty
areas
with
townhomes
cottages,
tiny
houses
or
other
affordable
options,
and
thus
building
the
building
up
the
missing
side
of
the
block
and
preserving
the
existing
homes
as
possible.
K
And
I
will
turn
this
over
to
my
neighbor
monica.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
good
luck.
Matt
thanks!
So
much
for
all
your
service.
C
Okay,
so
I
tried
to
join
on
my.
C
My
name
is:
thank
you
I'll
go
ahead
and
just
give
my
feel.
I
urge
the
fine
commission
to
reject
the
zoe
map
amendment
on
bueno
avenue.
The
city's
master
plan
clearly
states
that
an
effort
should
be
made
to
protect
the
unique
inner
ports
of
our
workforce,
housing
that
are
part
of
east
central
communities
neighborhood
and
contribute
to
its
walkable
nature.
I
want
the
city
to
do
more
to
protect
the
little
affordable
housing
that
exists.
C
These
homes
are
part
of
the
national
historic
register.
The
city
needs
to
do
more
to
discourage
property
owners
from
allowing
these
historic
homes
to
deteriorate
as
a
city,
we
should
not
reward
property
owners
who
deliberately
neglect
maintenance
to
argue
for
zoning
changes
and
the
teardown
of
existing,
affordable
housing.
Where
are
the
inhabitants
of
these
homes
supposed
to
go?
One
of
the
main
issues
of
concern
in
the
master
plan
is
to
reduce
excessive
density
potential,
stabilize
the
neighborhood
and
conserve
its
residential
character.
C
The
proposal
of
a
four-story
rooming
house,
with
65
units
of
one
to
four
bedroom
units
does
not
fit
in
the
existing
neighborhood
72
parking
stalls
for
192
bedrooms
is
not
realistic.
How
many
of
those
bedrooms
will
be
occupied
by
couples?
Well,
I
just
learned
it's
only
for
singles,
but
I
don't
know
how
you
can
enforce
that
this
definitely
does
not
reduce
excessive
density.
I
agree
with
the
east
central
community
council's
recommendation
to
develop
the
portion
of
the
property
that
is
already
zoned
rmf
45,
without
tearing
down
existing
housing
stock.
C
B
Thank
you.
If
anyone
else
would
like
to
speak,
and
you
don't
have
your
you
need
to
do
to
hit
the
little
the
tiny
little
hand
in
the
right
hand
corner
of
your
of
your
screen.
If
you
can
see
it.
A
F
F
F
The
small
cottages
that
this
street
is
currently
already
has
and
could
be
redeveloped
with
additional.
Such
housing
is
some
of
the
very
little
remaining
naturally
affordable
family
housing
in
this
part
of
the
city,
great
to
think
of
fitting
192,
more
people
onto
a
block
somewhere
in
this
city,
but
it
really
isn't
housing
for
all
working-class
citizens.
It
really
is
aimed
it
seems
at
single
individuals
who
certainly
need
housing
too,
but
not
at
the
expense
of,
what's
already
very
sparse
family
housing
in
this
part
of
town.
F
I
would
like
to
reiterate
the
comment
others
have
made
that
disrepair
and
neglect
of
properties
no
fault
of
the
current
owners,
I'm
sure,
but
that's
not
a
justification
for
significant
rezoning
requests.
A
F
Thank
you
very
much.
I
would
also
urge
you
to
vote
no
for
the
reasons
that
have
been
presented.
Also.
I
would
just
like
to
add
that
there's
nothing
affordable
about
860
dollars
a
month
for
one
bedroom
and
not
even
a
kitchen
to
call
your
own,
and
it
makes
me
upset
that
developers
are
trying
to
get
concessions
and
stuff
from
the
city
by
pretending
to
care
about
affordable
housing.
F
If
they
did,
they
would
find
out
what
was
that
we
could
actually
afford
as
working-class
citizens
of
this
city
and
what
we
actually
wanted,
which
would
be
like.
I
don't
know
a
room
for
my
son
to
sleep
in
and
our
own
kitchen
and
bathroom,
and
that's
all
I'd
like
to
say
thank
you.
L
Thank
you
nick
planning,
commission.
This
is
jeff
taylor
and
I'm
representing
the
current
owners,
and
I
just
wanted
to
provide
some
feedback
based
on
some
of
the
other
comments,
I
think,
as
kevin
pointed
out,
bueno
avenue
is
very
different
from
the
other
small
in-field
neighborhoods
that
are
sr3
and
some
of
the
issues
and
the
burdens
with
this
site
are
it's
completely
private.
L
So
all
of
the
infrastructure,
this
related
curb
gutter
street
sidewalk,
which
there
is
none
of,
is
the
burden
of
the
owners
and
so
to
kind
of
make
this
workable.
That
is
a
huge
infrastructure
cost
that
will
have
to
be
calculated
into
whatever
development
occurs
here
or
even
trying
to
renovate
these
properties.
L
The
other
issue
is
is
that
all
of
these
homes
are
served
by
long
private
sewer,
laterals
that
are
are
starting
to
fail.
So
this
notion
that
we
can
just
come
in
and
fix
up
what's
existing
and
somehow
maintain
affordability,
it
is
simply
not
the
case.
L
These
issues
started
long
before
we
acquired
the
property,
as
kevin
mentioned,
we
acquired
them
a
couple
of
years
ago.
So
when
you
look
at
the
cost
of
the
public
utilities,
everything
else
that
would
need
to
occur
here,
there's
a
lot
of
these
homes
that
are
literally
sitting
on
earth.
I've
done
a
ton
of
renovation
in
the
east
central,
and
these
are
some
of
the
worst
homes
I've
ever
seen.
D
A
Nick
you
know
I'm
not
seeing
any
additional
hands,
we
did
get
an
email
saying
there
were
two
people
who
were
having
a
hard
time,
one
anticipated,
but
who
could
not
join
the
meeting
and
I've
asked
for
those
those
names
so
that
we
could
add
their
apparently
they're.
A
They
object
to
it
to
the
proposal,
but
I'll
just
read
this
and
if
those
names
come
up,
we'll
add
them.
But
the
quote
is
overall,
they
object
to
the
rezoning
and
are
afraid
of
becoming
homeless
if
they
lose
housing.
And
I
think
this
is
two.
The
message
says
two
tenants
who
wanted
to
speak
but
could
not
figure
out
how
to
get
online.
C
B
At
this
point,
thank
you,
okay,
thank
you.
Seeing
no
additional
desire
to
speak,
I
will
go
ahead
and
close
the
public
hearing
and
bring
it
back
to
the
planning
commission
for
discussion.
J
I'm
sure
sorry
we
received
two
emails
at
about
5
30..
We
can
read
into
the
record
as
well.
C
J
I
will
make
that
quick.
Thank
you
looks
like
the
first
one
is
from
glenna
wallace.
It
says
hello
regarding
the
first
side
on
the
agenda
tonight.
I'm
opposed
to
the
setback
reduction
does
not
seem
necessary,
no
reasonable
to
allow
the
setback
on
the
northwest
side
of
the
property
to
reduce
from
eight
feet
required
by
arm
of
45
to
2.8
feet
where
to
bust
the
existing
driveway
small
home.
J
The
owners
justify
this
request,
since
the
existing
structure
is
currently
this
close
to
the
property
line
when
you're
already
bulldozing
the
existing
structure,
why
can't
you
just
comply
with
the
code
and
adopt
the
newer
setback
requirement?
There
is
no
reasonable
requirement
that
an
amenities
and
leasing
office
could
not
be
just
five
feet
smaller
to
apply
the
setback.
Maintaining
a
setback
requirement.
Eight
feet
up
northwest
is
a
very
reasonable
point
for
the
planning
commission
to
recommend
and
the
second
one
is
from
aaron
rosenis.
J
My
name
is
aaron
rizness,
I'm
speaking
in
favor
of
the
rezone,
but
in
opposition
to
the
height
and
setback
variances,
almost
the
entire
block
is
already
rmf45.
So
I
see
no
issue
with
the
remaining
few
parcels
matching
the
rest
of
the
block.
However,
I
do
not
understand
why
the
applicants
should
be
allowed
additional
height
for
essentially
aesthetic
reasons.
I've
never
seen
a
house
spill
out
an
extra
five
feet
high
because
they
thought
it
just
looked
better
was
more
cohesive.
J
If
five
more
feet
is
acceptable
than
rmf
45
then
change
the
zoning
rule,
so
everyone
gets
five
more
five
feet
more
height
or
allow
for
anyone
in
any
zone
to
have
five
feet
more
for
aesthetic
reasons.
I
also
oppose
the
setback
reduction
for
similar
reasons.
A
modern
urban
block
with
a
new
development
should
be
expected
to
have
underground
parking
and
not
a
massive
surface
lot.
J
There
is
plenty
of
space
for
a
building
to
be
designed
to
fit
within
the
allowed
setbacks,
but
they
simply
ignore
the
rules
of
the
zone
when
designing
the
whole
complex,
a
2.8
foot
setback
would
be
entirely
unfair
for
the
existing
home
on
700
east
setback
conditions
are
not
required
to
make
the
best
use
of
the
land,
so
why
should
it
be
allowed?
Please
help
me
understand
the
reasoning
for
recommending
exceptions.
J
B
E
B
B
D
Can
I
don't
know
if
policy
or
staff
can
raise
that
question
about
the
the
fair
housing
act
and
whether
or
not
we
can
actually
limit
one
person
per
bedroom?
If
that
violates
that
for
housing.
B
C
That's
probably
something
we
should
take
the
time
to
look
into,
so
I
don't
know
if
it
was
the
planning
commission's
desire
to
act
on
the
applications
today
or
we
were
anticipating
a
continuance,
but
I
would
suggest
we
look
into
that.
Based
on
the
concern
raised
tonight.
G
D
D
Okay-
okay,
that's,
okay!
So
my
next,
my
next
question
was
for
staff.
There
was
a
reference
that
one
of
the
public
made
about
the
protection
of
interior
blocks
being
part
of
one
of
the
master
plans
and
being
kind
of
a
policy
of
deals.
Did
you
guys
review
that
or
reference
that
sort
of
section?
Do
you
know
what
section
the
public
was
addressing?
Maybe
respond
to
the
public's
comment
about
that
being
in
there
in
the
master
plans.
G
Prefer
to
maintaining
the
inner
block
pattern,
however,
there
were
other
policies
on
the
master
plan.
Also,
that
talked
about
the.
I
I
D
Yeah,
just
the
computing
okay,
so
this
is
okay,
and
then
I
mean
a
question
for
the
applicant.
D
If
you
could
help
me
understand
this,
so
your
you're
requesting
a
plan
development
and
in
that
plan,
development,
you're,
really
moving
these
setbacks
pretty
back
significantly
and
your
the
setbacks
sort
of
kind
of
help
accommodate
you
talk
about
the
need
for
a
fire
lane,
which
I'm
not
sure
the
plan
development,
though
the
policy
you're
after
is
you,
say,
there's
housing,
housing,
types
and
affordable
housing
types,
and
I'm
just
trying
to
attach
how
you
your
request
for
setbacks,
helps
you
achieve
the
housing
types
need
if
you're
selling
these
at
market
rate
instead
of
affordable
rates,
where
you're
restricted
to
your
price
point
like.
D
H
Yeah,
thank
you.
Thank
you
for
your
question
matt
and
I
would
like
an
opportunity
to
respond
to
some
of
the
public
comments
as
well
afterwards.
If
that
would
be
a
consideration,
but
I'll
respond
to
your
question.
So
this
is
attainable.
Housing,
attainably
priced.
This
is
not
an
affordable
housing
project
that
is
seeking
government
subsidies
that
is
seeking
government
funding.
This
is
a
hundred
percent
privately
funded,
there's
a
key
difference
between
seeking
millions
of
dollars
in
either
tax
credits
or
grants
and
paying
for
something
at
market
rate.
H
You
know
it's
no
secret,
that
the
cost
of
land
in
salt
lake
city
is
astronomical
and
to
build
attainably
priced
housing,
which
I
think
we
made
a
pretty
strong
case
that
we're
at
the
60
ami
number
to
rent
and
have
all
of
the
same
amenities
as
a
luxury
apartment
complex.
This
is
a
proven
model
across
numerous
cities
across
the
united
states.
In
fact,
this
would
be
a
model
that
would
be
allowed
in
salt
lake
city
under
a
multi-family
code
with
three
bedroom
units
you
can
still
rent
by
the
bedroom.
H
Salt
lake
city's
code
does
not
allow
more
than
three
unrelated
individuals
in
an
apartment
unit.
However,
you
know
with
that
being
said,
you
know
we're
trying
to
fit
check
two
boxes,
and-
and
I
heard
the
comment
that
you
know
this
is
a
guise
to
provide
attainable
housing.
It's
not
a
guys.
This
is
this-
is
a
true
social
impact,
housing
effort
to
pay
for
and
invest
with
private
funds
for
attainably
priced
housing
and
make
an
impact
on
the
community.
H
I
don't
think
it
should
be
lost
on
you
as
commissioners
that
there
are
currently
six
homes
and
a
cost
study
that
we've
recently
done
would
require
a
million
dollars
of
infrastructure
improvement
for
these
six
homes,
I'll.
Let
that
number
set
settle
in
for
a
minute.
A
million
dollars
in
private
infrastructure
improvement
for
these
homes,
on
top
of
any
renovation
costs,
would
be
required.
H
H
I
there's
six
homes
on
the
sr3
parcel
parcels
that
would
be
replaced
with
attainably
priced
housing,
but
this
meets.
You
know
coming
back
to
the
plan
salt
lake
document,
the
goal
set
forth
by
the
city,
the
city
doesn't
say
you
know,
let's
get
affordable
housing
and
throw
all
the
money
at
it.
It
says
we
need
to
propose
and
accept
new
ideas
where
we
don't
have
to
throw
money
at
it,
but
developers
come
up
with
creative
ideas
and
creative
strategies
to
provide
attainably
priced
housing
to
the
community
without
sucking
up
public
funding.
D
Respond
so
kevin
just
one
thing:
I'm
looking
at
this
project
with
so
one.
I
actually
appreciate
the
proposal.
I
actually
like
this
idea
of
the
school
living
and
see
how
it
kind
of
work
and
someone
who,
20
years
ago,
15
years
ago,
and
I
moved
back
to
utah-
I
had
a
shared
apartment
with
a
roommate
that
I
just
found
off
the
internet
and
it
was
750
a
month
for
a
bedroom
of
the
shared.
So
it
means
you
know
the
fact
that
it's,
I
understand
the
concept
and
appreciate
that.
D
But
when
I'm
trying
to
just
understand
and
get
my
mind
wrapped
around
is
the
way
that
these
four
proposals
kind
of
stack
on
top
each
other
and
they
kind
of
impact
each
other.
And
what
happens
I
mean
so.
The
conditional
use
the
issue
with
this
different
housing
type,
increasing
the
density
and
the
impacts
in
the
neighborhood,
and
so
we've
talked
about
mitigating
that
which
may
have
a
compound.
D
You
know
with
one
person
for
bedroom
that
may
have
a
fair
housing
act,
sort
of
issue
the
impact
of
permitting
a
larger
structure
on
the
plant
development,
because
you
know,
then
what
would
otherwise
be
allowed
by
right
right,
but
the
plant
development
presumably
allowed
more
housing,
but
it
was,
you
know
we're,
so
we
could
still
still
do
this
with
less
housing.
But
you
know
by
looking
at
that
plant
development.
You
know
the
the
rezone,
which
I
think
is
you
know,
certainly
fair
and
reasonable.
D
In
many
ways
we
have
to
look
into
this
issue
with
the
city's
other
policies
and
you
may
have
conflicting
policies
in
the
city,
but
that's
for
us
to
kind
of
work
through
and
consider
right.
It
seems
to
be
fair
but
you're,
but
the
way
all
these
proposals
stack
on
top
of
each
other
is,
I
think,
what
the
community
is
responding
to.
C
I
have
a
question
for
staff
and
also
a
comment.
After
have
we
had
in
salt
lake
a
similar
project,
you
know
that
that
has
this
type
of
a
setup,
the
rooming
house,
I
guess
and
requesting
these
types
of
similar
exemptions-
have
we
had
anything
like
that
before.
A
C
Gotcha,
so
it's
I
assume,
because
it
is
westminster's
project.
It
was
probably
for
students
kind
of
like
a
dorm.
I
guess
style
set
up.
I
guess.
C
Okay,
thank
you
so
yeah
you
know
I
I
I'm
not
really
sold.
I
mean.
I
definitely
appreciate
the
the
applicant's
proposal.
It
seems
you
know
that
he
truly
put
some
thought
into
bringing
something
to
the
table
that
can
help
with
with
costs
and
everything
going
on
right
now,
but
the
idea
of
a
large
storm,
essentially
amongst
residential
houses,
etc.
C
B
B
You
know
just
for
the
tenants,
so
we
can't
even
have
a
coffee
shop
in
there.
So
I'm,
I
think,
all
together
this
project
simply
just
doesn't
quite
it's
not
something
I
would
be
willing
to
to
go
with.
E
I
just
wanted
to
maybe
bring
it
back
to
the
questions
before
us.
You
know
when
we
look
at
a
rezone
for
me,
I
do
look
at
is
this
making?
Does
this
zone
make
sense
in
the
area
and
what
are
the
policies
matt
alluded
to
that
before?
We
are
conflicting
points
in
the
policies,
and
so
then
it
is
up
to
us
individually
to
kind
of
navigate
if
this
zone
is
appropriate
and
makes
sense.
E
I
also
want
to
point
out
that
the
question
of
the
conditional
use
is
simply
to
make
this
a
you
know,
single
roomy,
occupancy
and
based
on
the
the
standards
for
the
conditional
use.
I
personally
haven't
seen
any
argument
that
persuaded
me
that
that
is
a
detrimental
impact
to
the
neighborhood,
and
so
that's
really
our
litmus
test
for
conditional
use.
E
I
I
also
want
to
weigh
in
on
limiting
occupancy.
I
have
a
real
problem
with
that,
just
even
beyond
the
idea
that
it's
going
to
maybe
interfere
with
federal
law.
So
I
would
not
be
in
support
of
making
that
a
condition,
so
I
just
I
also
do
have
a
problem
with
the
setback
to
the
northwest
side
for
that
house.
E
I
think
we
should
keep
that
set
back
at
eight
feet,
but
the
other
setbacks
in
the
interior
don't
seem
to
be
that
big
of
an
issue
because
they're,
basically
a
budding
parking
lot
of
the
buildings
along
the
perimeter
of
that
whole
block,
and
so
those
feel,
okay,
those
feel
appropriate
to
me.
I
don't
seem
to
have
a
problem
with
those,
but
that's
kind
of
where
I
stand,
I'm
not
against
it.
E
I
I
really
get
frustrated
when
I
hear
people
say
this
is
a
good
project,
but
not
here,
it's
always
like
it
should
be
somewhere
else.
I'm
actually
really
excited
about
the
notion
of
this,
and
I
am
also
really
pleased
that
it
would
be
on
the
east
side
and
that
we
don't
always
push
all
of
these
type
of
projects
on
the
west
side
that
we
move
them
around
the
city.
So
you
know
with
a
little
bit
of
modification.
I
feel
pretty
good
about
this
project
as
a
whole.
D
I
mean
I'm
not
I'm
just
saying
this
just
to
to
push
my
responsibility
off.
I
mean
I.
I
would
like
just
to
the
answer
to
the
fair
housing
question,
so
I
would
motion
to
table
it.
I
think,
if
you,
if
we're
considering
that
as
a
conditional
use,
that's
concerning
use,
you
know
that
what
the
detrimental
impact
is
the
density
of
the
people
there,
and
this
was
the
solution-
that's
been
proposed.
A
Can
I
just
say
real,
quick,
just
a
reminder,
there's
four
different
applications
in
front
of
you
with
this,
and
so
it
might
be.
It
sounds
like
there's
there's
some
questions
about
the
condition
related
to
the
conditional
use,
but
if
it's.
A
It
might
be
advantageous
for
the
planning
commission
to
consider
those
each
application
and
separate
motions.
So
one
is:
is
it
appropriate
to
amend
the
master
plan
as
first,
if,
if
the
planning
commission
recommends
that
or
finds
that
that's
appropriate
makes
a
recommendation
of
the
city
council
to
support
that
then
move
on
to
the
zoning?
A
If
you
don't
support
updating
the
master
plan,
that's
kind
of
signaling
that
you
also
don't
support
the
zoning
change
which
basically,
at
that
point,
the
other
two
items
become
moved
essentially
because
they
couldn't
go
through
and
teleport
until
the
city
council
made
a
decision,
and
so
you
could
you
could
table
those
other
two
applications.
The
administrative
applications
intel
sometime
in
the
future
that
we,
until
we
have
a
decision
from
the
city
council.
D
I
mean
probably,
if
we're
separated,
yeah,
I'm
probably
supportive
of
the
master
plan,
the
zoning
amendment,
if
you
want
me
to
make
a
motion
of
that,
but.
D
B
Thank
you,
a
motion
from
matt
and
a
second
from
john
to
table
two
portions
of
this
application,
so
maureen.
E
B
Hey
john.
F
B
C
B
B
As
I've
already
stated,
I'm
not
in
favor
of
the
master
behind
amendment,
primarily
because
I'm
I
am
in
favor
of
retaining
the
character
of
those
inner
blocks.
I
think
that
50
or
100
years
from
now,
we
will
be
so
regretful
that
we
let
go
of
this
particular
one
that
this
particular
part
of
the
legacy
of
the
whole
east
capital
of
the
whole
community
of
this
whole
community.
B
E
So
I
think
it's
hard
because
there's
no
guarantee
that
these
buildings
will
they
could
just
be
demolished
and
then
much
larger
homes
be
placed
on
there
to
make
it
economically
feasible
for
the
property
owner.
So
what
are
we
really
preserving?
I'm
not
against
it,
but
I
don't
think
I
don't
think.
B
D
I
think
for
let
me
move
in
my
last
meeting
for
our
language
as
a
body.
We
need
to
start
thinking
of
affordable
as
what
hud
defines
affordable
and
not
what
a
developer
or
someone
else
feels
is
affordable.
I
mean
I,
while
I
do
feel
like
800
a
month
is
better
it's
not
it's
not
led
by
definition
of
any
sort
of
sense.
It's
led
by
what
people
think,
and
so
I
think
we
as
a
body
should
get
better
and
stronger
at
pushing
back
on
what
that
term
is.
B
D
In
my
deal,
I
guess
the
president's
request:
I'd
probably
support
the
master
plan,
zoning
amendments
for
the
need
for
more
housing,
we've
got
to
densify,
neighborhoods
and
upscale,
and
I
get
in
this
block.
Given
the
small
number
of
lots
that
are
still
remaining,
I
can
see
it
makes
sense.
I
can
see
the
need
to
protect
the
interior
blocks
and
that
it's
a
it's
a
unique
housing
pattern,
but
I
we
do
need
to
increase
density,
and
so
I
probably
support
the
density
increase
in
the
plant
that
that
that
policy
would
guide.
My
thinking.
B
D
I'll
do
it
all
right,
so
basically,
every
single
staff
report
and
the
information
presented
an
input
received
in
a
public
hearing
with
the
planning
commission
approved
the
request
for
the
master
plan,
amendment
pln
pcm,
2021
47,
and
the
zoning
map
amendment
pln
pcm
2021-48.
C
Sorry
can
I
just
interrupt.
We
already
took
action
with
respect
to
the
conditional
use
in
the
plan
development,
so
that
can
language
might
not
be
the
best
to
use.
B
Okay.
Thank
you
all
thanks.
Sorry,
okay,
so
we
have
a
motion
to
forward
an
approval
on
the
master
plan.
Excuse
me
the
master
plan
amendment
and
the
zoning
map
amendment
a.
B
E
B
C
B
C
B
C
B
Have
four
to
two:
I
believe
that
is
okay
as
a
quorum.
Yes,
we
would
have
to
be
treated
too
okay
emotion
passes.
B
Thank
you
all.
Thank
you
all
very
much
for
your
attention
and
thank
you
for
the
public
for
your
attention
on
this
issue.
B
So
we
will
move
on
to
our
next
item
on
the
agenda,
which
is
the
encircle
family
services
rezone
at
approximately
331
south
600
east
case
number.
Excuse
me
case
number
pln
pcm.
B
2021-00268
and
staff
is
caitlyn
tubbs.
I
I
They
are
currently
zoned
rmf35
and
they
have
requested
a
zoning
map
amendment
to
r
nau-35,
and
this
request
is
put
forward
in
order
to
facilitate
the
establishment
of
a
cafe
within
the
encircled
family
services
office,
building,
which
is
not
currently
allowed
under
the
existing
zone.
I
I
I've
gone
through
the
zoning
map,
amendments
of
people,
standards
in
the
stock
report
and
that
staff
has
found
that
the
request
does
meet
those
standards
of
approval,
and
it
is
recommending
that
the
funding
commission
forward
a
positive
recommendation
to
the
city,
council
and
staff
particularly
finds.
This
is
a
good
implementation
of
the
adopted
master
plans
in
the
area,
because
it
would
facilitate
an
additional
buffer
between
the
residential
uses
to
the
north
of
the
site,
as
well
as
the
heavyweight
commercial
and
hypothetical
areas
to
the
south
of
the
site.
I
C
B
C
Look
at
any.
Actually
I
have
one
question
for
her:
did
you
look
at
height
limits
in
the
two
different
zones?
I
realize
it's
an
interesting
building,
but
it
may
not
be
forever.
I
Correct
the
right
limitations
in
the
existing
zones
was
not
studied
in
the
staff
reports.
However,
as
you
pointed
out,
it
is
an
existing
building
and
the
building
is
in
fact
owned
by
the
office
that
occupies
it
and
they
do
not
have
any
plans
to
relocate
at
this
time.
I
C
B
A
Okay,
the
different
there's
two
there's
two
differences,
though
one
is
that
the
army,
the
35,
when,
when
it's
next
to
zones
that
allow
taller
buildings,
it
can
go
an
additional
story.
However,
this
is
also
in
a
local
historic
district.
So,
ultimately,
if
there
were
ever
changes
to
the
building,
whether
it's
in
addition,
whatever
it
would
have
to
the
height
of
approval,
would
be
subject
to
to
the
landmarks.
N
Yes,
good
evening,
madam
chair
and
commissioners,
thank
you
so
much
for
your
time
tonight.
We
really
appreciate
it.
My
name
is
wade
budge,
I'm
here
representing
in
circle.
I
have
with
me
also
representatives
from
encircle
and
caitlyn.
If
it's
okay,
I'd
like
to
share
an
updated
powerpoint
that
we
have
so
if
it's
all
right,
I
I
could
take
down
this.
N
If
you
could
take
down
this
one,
I
have
an
updated
one
if
that
could
be
enabled,
but
we
have
just
a
very
brief
presentation,
but
before
we
jump
into
it,
I
just
really
want
to
acknowledge
the
staff
who
have
been
very
good
in
in
helping
us
understand
this
zone,
and,
and
what
we
are
coming
forward
with
is
a
is
a
rezone
that
we
think
achieves
the
aim
that
we're
trying
to
achieve
without
disrupting
the
patterns
for
development
in
the
area.
N
And
I'll,
let
me
just
introduce
jacob
dunford
as
well,
who
will
be
presenting
with
me
so
as
as
was
indicated
in
the
staff
report.
Encircle
is
an
entity
that
provides
important
families,
important
services
to
our
lgbtq
community
and
has-
and
this
facility
in-
and
this
is
our.
This
is
our
statement
that
we
operate
under.
This
is
our
facility
right
here.
If
you
could
see
my
cursor
it's
this
facility,
that's
the
center
facility.
N
John
williams,
was
one
of
the
initial
supporters
of
of
encircle
and
its
founder
was
related
to
john
williams,
and
so
this
particular
site
in
salt
lake
city
has
some
particular
importance
for
the
organization,
and
we
really
want
this
to
be
our
flagship
organization,
and
so
we've
appreciated
the
relationship
we've
had
with
the
community
and
with
salt
lake
city
in
particular,
and
we
think
by
being
able
to
pursue
a
rezone
that
would
allow
us
to
have
a
cafe
on
the
interior,
we'll
be
able
to
better
integrate
with
the
community
and
get
our
message
out.
N
But
I
wanted
to
jacob
if
you
want
to
just
take
a
moment
to
just
explain
a
little
bit
more.
I
recognize
planning
commission
that
we're
not
seeking
a
site
plan
approval,
we're
seeking
a
recommendation
for
a
rezone,
but
I
think
just
spending
a
moment
or
two
about
in
circle
will
be
helpful
as
you
consider
our
request
so
jacob.
If
you
want
to
just
speak
for
a
moment.
F
Thank
you
wade.
I'm
really
grateful
to
be
here
and
we're
super
excited
about
this.
My
name
is
jacob
dunford,
I'm
the
chief
operating
officer
of
encircle,
I
oversee
the
day-to-day
operations
of
all
of
our
locations.
I'm
here
in
utah,
I'm
a
big
salt
lake
city
fan.
I
grew
up
in
san
diego
and
I
think
I
need
to
live
here
for
the
rest
of
my
life.
F
What
I
will
say
is
that
encircle
started
with
the
premise
of
building
a
safe
space
for
lgbtq,
youth
and
families.
We
average
about
60
guests
per
day
per
house,
and
our
salt
lake
city
house
is
one
of
our
favorite
locations
for
a
variety
of
reasons,
but
to
wade's
point
it.
F
It
brings
together
so
many
different
intersections
from
the
community
and
we're
able
to
serve
such
a
large
group
of
folks
out
of
this
home.
Some
of
the
things
that
we
do
in
there
I
mentioned
monday
through
friday,
from
3
pm
to
8
pm
are
our
drop-in
hours.
We've
got
daily
programming
available
weekly
support
groups.
We
call
them
friendship
circles,
the
core
of
what
we
do
is
subsidize
therapy.
Upstairs
we've
got
therapy
up
there,
we're
going
to
do
6,
000
sessions
of
therapy
here
in
utah
this
year
alone.
F
I
think
that
will
double
by
next
year,
but
essentially,
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
create
spaces
where
these
kids
can
come
feel
safe
and
you
know
eventually
grab
a
cup
of
joe
and
bring
the
community
members
in
as
well
and
basically
find
a
greater
community
out.
Just
really
briefly.
What
I
want
to
share
is
when
I
first
came
out
of
the
closet.
F
I
think
what
was
interesting
was
so
often
I
was
left
feeling
like
you
know,
maybe
I'm
not
going
to
have
community,
maybe
utah
isn't
going
to
show
up
for
me
and
what
we
see
at
in
circle
every
single
day
is
the
entire
community
showing
up
rallying
and
supporting
our
lgbtq
youth
and
their
families,
and
I've
seen
that
for
myself,
not
only
in
utah
but
specifically
in
salt
lake
city.
So
thank
you
for
the
time
and
I'm
really
honored
to
be
here.
N
Right
thanks
jacob.
I
appreciate
it
so
in
this
slide
in
this
next
set
of
slides.
What
we've
done
is
we've
gone
through
the
general
plan
to
identify
how
this
rezone
is
consistent
with
the
values
that
are
identified
in
the
general
plan,
and
we,
you
know
I
this
is
in
the
staff
report,
so
I
won't
read
every
one,
but
we've
paid
a
lot
of
attention
to
neighborhood.
N
We
like
the
preserved
home.
We
think
that
this
is
a
use.
That's
consistent
with
this
particular
home.
We
won't
be
doing
any
exterior
modifications
to
the
house
other
than
we'll
have
a
sign
that
will
be
visible
if
we
were
able
to
obtain
the
rezone,
it's
also,
it
promotes
arts
and
culture.
That's
an
important
aspect
of
the
programming
that
we
do
and
then
also,
of
course,
equity
and
advancing
the
economy
on
the
economy.
N
One
of
the
reasons
for
this
is
that,
as
we
operate,
the
cafe
it
will
provide
a
revenue
source
to
help
fund
other
activities
of
encircle,
but
also
provide
training
for
for
some
of
our
participants.
Who
may
want
some
job
training
about
working
in
a
cafe
and
then
that
we
went
ahead
and
looked
at
the
the
master
plan
and
we
have?
We
are
not
by
this
rezone
exceeding
the
density
units.
As
was
mentioned,
this
is
a
historic
overlay
as
well
the
central
city,
local,
historic
and
central
city,
national
historic
overlay
districts.
N
We
have
no
intention
to
to
ever
leaving
just
particu,
particularly
because
this
is
a
beloved
site,
but
we
were
mindful
of
that
of
this
component
of
your
master
plan
in
choosing
to
go
to
the
rmu
35,
and
then
this
is
the
site
and
the
map
would
look.
N
This
is
how
the
map
looks
today,
and
what
would
happen
is
this
purple
color
be
carried
over
to
this
site,
and
so
it's
not
a
pattern,
that's
out
of
harmony
with
this
neighborhood
and
we
think
the
fact
that
we're
adjoining
this
commercial
area,
which
is
where
you
have
t-mobile
tony
burger
pizza,
lamont
and
others-
that
this
is
a
is
acting
as
a
buffer,
as
was
stated
by
staff,
we've
gone
ahead
and
done
some
counter
drawings
of
how
the
property
would
look.
N
I
know
this
isn't
part
of
the
formal
approval,
but
I
always
like
to
give
a
planning
commission
just
an
idea
of
how
we
would
attempt
to
implement
this,
and
this
is
our
kind
of
our
working
concept
about
how
we
would
modify
the
existing
kitchen
to
include
some
features
and
then
to
include
a
serving
area
and
the
rest,
and
we
would
work
with
staff
if
we
were
to
get
the
rezone
on
making
sure
that
we
have
conforming
plans.
But
from
our
initial
concept
drawings.
N
This
would
be
some
of
our
boxing,
and
this
would
be
the
way
we
would
be
operating
as
we
would
be
operating
it
with
with
with
these
folks
at
jacob
who
you
mentioned,
and
then
shaylee,
who
is
also
our
operating
one
of
one
of
our
operating
employees
and
key
key
employees.
B
Thank
you,
wait.
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
for
mr
budge
as
we
or
can
we
go
on
to
the
public
hearing.
B
Okay,
so
do
we
have
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
close
the
public
hearing
and
bring
it
back
to
the
planning
commission
for
a
motion.
B
B
E
E
So
this
is
for
encircle
zoning
math
amendment
pl
and
tcm
2021-00268.
B
C
B
B
Crystal
wrong
button:
hello,
yes,
okay!
Thank
you!
Okay,
there
was
some
passes
seven
to
zero
and
thank
you
all
very
much.
We
will
be
forwarding
a
positive
recommendation
to
city
council
for
proving
this
sony
change
so
now
what
brings
up
our
last
item?
No
excuse
me,
our
last
item
on
the
public
hearing
agenda,
which
is
the
cowley
adu
at
approximately
738
east
1700
south
case
number,
pln
pcm
2021-00259
and
the
staff
is
linda.
A
G
O
You
can
see
my
screen,
so
this
is
the
conditional
use
approval
for
the
conversion
of
the
existing
loft
space
above
the
detached
two-car
garage
at
738,
east
1700,
south
here's
a
photo
of
that
existing
detached
structure
surrounding
properties
are
all
single
family
zones,
and
I
do
want
to
let
you
know
that
the
loss
space
was
added
on
in
2000.
O
A
little
bit
about
the
proposal,
it
would
be
approximately
544
feet
for
the
adu
square
footage
and
the
building
footprint
the
height
will
remain
the
same.
No
changes
to
the
exterior
are
being
proposed.
I
do
want
to
take
this
time
just
to
provide
some
clarification
regarding
the
side
and
radar
setback.
O
As
noted
in
attachment
d,
it
was
indicated
by
a
second
story
addition
for
this,
because
it's
existing
but
does
not
apply
so
the
existing
two
feet.
Two
foot
sit
back
to
the
north
to
the
west
and
forefoot
to
the
south,
meets
the
ordinance
and
then,
in
regards
to
the
building
entrance.
As
you
can
see
here,
the
it
goes
from
the
north
out
to
the
patio
onto
lake
street
parking
would
be
on
the
street
as
the
existing
for
the
home
would
be
in
the
two-car
garage.
O
O
B
B
B
Looks
like
you're
in
luck,
okay,
let's
go
ahead
and
open
up
the
public
hearing.
C
C
B
D
B
B
A
Thank
you
so
we're
going
to
the
planning
commission.
A
An
update
on
the
legislative
session
from
this
year,
and
so
we
have
angela
price
who's,
a
policy
and
project
director
with
our
department
of
community
neighborhoods,
who
kind
of
has
head
up
our
department's
approach
to
the
legislative
session
and
bills
and
everything
else.
A
So
I
don't
know
if
you
all
have
an
opportunity
to
meet
angela,
but
here
she
is
so
angie.
I
don't
know
if
you
wanted
me
to
run
this
presentation
or
and
just
move
screens
as
you
talk,
is
that
the
idea.
M
I
it
doesn't
look
like.
I
have
sharing
powers,
but
I'm
happy
to
if
you
want
to
give
me
that
I'd
be
happy
to
share
and
do
myself.
M
I
think
so
yeah
see
here
one
second.
B
M
Okay-
and
you
can
see
just
the
the
one
slide-
yep
okay,
perfect!
Well,
thank
you
guys
so
much
for
being
here
for
allowing
me
some
time
on
your
agenda
this
evening.
It's
been
really
interesting
to
listen
to
your
meeting
tonight
and
I'm
a
planner
heart
and
a
planner
by
trade,
a
grad
from
the
eu's
master
program,
and
so
I'll
be
honest.
I
actually
miss
planning
commission
meetings,
so
maybe
I
need
to
pop
into
these
a
little
bit
more
and
haggle
nick
and
everybody
so
again.
M
Thank
you
so
much
for
allowing
me
some
time
on
your
agenda
this
evening
to
talk
about
a
few
of
the
bills
that
we
tracked
within
community
neighborhoods
and
that
are
specific
to
land
use.
M
I
just
want
to
kind
of
start
off
by
saying
that
I
know
I
tell
nick
this
often,
but
nick
is
quite
a
superstar
as
far
as
legislative
stuff
goes,
and
so
I'm
always
incredibly
grateful
for
his
insight
and
his
experience
and
his
knowledge-
and
he
certainly
is
viewed
among
many
of
us
in
the
legislative
realm
is-
is
one
of
the
experts.
So
we're
really
fortunate
to
have
here
him
here
in
salt
lake
is,
is
the
planning
director.
M
So
thanks,
nick
for
always
responding
to
my
emails
and
texts
in
the
middle
of
the
night
on
legislative
issues.
M
M
He
used
to
work
for
the
city
and
he's
been
doing
legislative
work
for
about
40
years,
and
we
were
talking
about
this
legislative
session
and
we
both
agree
and
I'm
I'm
much
younger
than
wealth,
but
that
this
was
one
of
the
hardest
landy
sessions
really
kind
of
in
the
history
of
the
legislature.
M
There's
a
lot
of
there's
a
lot
of
attention
on
housing
and
land
use
and
transportation,
which
is
really
great
from
a
community
planning
perspective
and
so
we're
hearing
kind
of
similar
rumors
coming
down
the
pipes
of
the
2020s
2022
session,
and
so
I
just
like
to
encourage
all
of
you
as
planning
commissioners,
to
tell
your
story
of
how
of
how
land
use
legislation
impacts.
The
work
that
you
guys
do
as
planning
commissioners.
So
with
that,
I
will
launch
into
what
we
what
we
did
in
the
2021
session.
M
So
just
within
the
planning,
division
tracked
17
bills
and
that's
just
bills
that
were
specific
to
the
planning
division.
There
were
also
bills
that
touched
other
divisions
within
community
and
neighborhoods,
and
outside
of
can
that
had
an
impact
on
land
use
as
well.
M
So
quite
quite
the
year
there
was
a
lot
to
juggle,
I'm
just
going
to
touch
on
a
few
of
the
kind
of
major
bills
and
I'm
going
to
talk
about
the
legislation
and
then
nick
is
going
to
talk
about
the
local
implications
and
the
changes
that
you
guys
will
be
seeing
come
coming
before
you
in
the
form
of
text.
Amendments
so
with
that
nick,
do
you
have
anything
else
to
add
there.
M
Cool,
so
there
were
three
kind
of
major
bills
this
year,
and
some
of
these
you
maybe
have
seen
in
the
news.
Hb
82
is
the
single
family
housing
modifications.
This
is
the
internal
adu
bill.
M
Hb
409
was
a
bill
that
made
substantial
changes
to
subdivisions
and
road
widths
and
all
kinds
of
fun
stuff,
so
I'll
get
into
that
in
a
few
minutes
and
then
hb
98,
which
was
introduced
during
the
the
general
session
local
government
building
regulations
was
actually
vetoed
by
the
governor
and
I'll
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
that
when
we
get
into
that
bill
and
came
back
in
the
special
session
back
in
in
may
as
hb1003
in
past.
M
So
those
are
the
three
kind
of
hot
bills
that
that
we
were
working
on
a
lot
during
this
legislative
session,
and
I
would
be
remiss
if
I
didn't
thank
our
friends
at
the
league,
utah
league
of
cities
and
towns,
for
the
incredible
work
that
they
do
in
advocating
for
land
use
and
housing
and
maintaining
local
control
and
really
for
planning
commissions
and
city
councils
to
maintain
their
local
land
use
authority.
M
And
so
I
know,
and
rendeal
the
director
of
the
league
slept
for
the
entire
legislative
session,
fighting
billboards
and
negotiating
on
some
of
these
bills.
So
you
know
we
we'd
be
in
a
much
different
place
without
the
hard
work
that
they
do
up
at
the
legislature
and
our
lobbyists
that
we
have
here
in
the
city.
So
with
that
hb
82
was
a
single-family
housing
modifications
bill,
and
this
bill
specific
to
internal
adus.
M
This
does
not
impact
external
edu's,
tiny
homes,
guest
houses,
any
of
those
any
of
those
structures
that
aren't
inside
of
a
home
and
the
intent
of
this
legislation
really
was
to
provide
an
opportunity
to
have
an
impact
on
housing.
M
Housing
stock
and
representative
ward
was
his
concern
with
internal
edu's
is
that
they
were
really
expensive
for
the
average
homeowner
to
be
able
to
to
be
able
to
put
in
their
homes
because
of
fire
separation
and
different
building
code
requirements,
and
so
his
intent
with
with
this
bill
is
really
to
make
it
easier
to
and
more
affordable
for
an
individual
to
be
able
to
put
an
internal
edu
in
their
home
and
there's
certainly
quite
a
few
rumblings
that
this
bill
will
be
expanded
in
the
2022
session
to
look
at
external
adus
as
well.
M
So
what
this
bill
did
is
it
defined
an
internal
accessory
dwelling
unit
in
ludma
and
ludma,
as
you
guys
know,
is
the
the
land
use
management
act
that
governs
all
of
the
work
that
you
do
as
planning
commissioners,
it
strikes
unrelated
in
the
single
family
unit
definition,
and
this
was
something
that
nick
and
I
both
were
a
little
bit
concerned
about
removing
this
unrelated
term
from
the
single
family
unit.
M
Definition,
it's
going
to
be
really
interesting
to
see
how
this
has
an
impact
on
affordable
housing
over
the
next
few
years,
as
that
unrelated
term
could
could
potentially
have
a
negative
effect
where
individuals
aren't
able
to
have
as
many
people
in
a
home,
so
it'll
be
interesting
to
see
how
that
plays
out.
It
outlines
the
permitted
use
requirements
and
provides
for
some
design
regulation.
M
It
allows
recording
of
a
notice
of
present
condition
on
the
title
of
an
internal
adu
property,
which
then
allows
prohibition
for
short-term
rentals,
and
I
just
want
to
stop
here
for
a
quick
second
and
talk
about
this.
A
few
years
ago,
the
legislature
passed
a
bill
that
would
that
prohibits
cities
from
regulating
short-term
rentals
from
vrbo
or
craigslist
or
any
of
those
online
services,
and
so
a
lot
of
cities,
salt
lake
being
one
of
them
park.
M
City
moab,
those
kind
of
gateway
communities,
are
losing
a
substantial
amount
of
business
license
revenue
because
they're
not
able
to
regulate
those
short-term
rentals
within
their
city.
Additionally,
it's
having
a
huge
impact
on
the
housing
stock
within
those
communities,
as
we
as
we
all
know
here
in
salt
lake.
It's
if
you
want
to
invest
in
property
right,
if
you
can
afford
it
park.
City
is
a
great
place
to
invest
in
rental
properties.
M
You
have
sundance
and
skiing
in
and
it's
just
a
beautiful
mountain
mountain
town,
and
so
these
kinds
of
prohibitions
have
huge
substantial
impacts
on
those
cities
and
salt
lake
participated
in
some
of
these
negotiations
as
well,
and
what
what
came
out
of
this
is.
We
did
get
an
internal
adu
exception
to
that
portion
of
state
code,
which
allows
us
to
regulate
those
internal
adus
through
craigslist
or
vrbo
or
or
whatever
those
online
sources
are,
which
is
a
move
in
the
right
direction.
M
The
other
thing
that
this
did
is
it
opened
up
a
conversation
on
the
impact
that
that
legislation
is
having
on
city's
revenue,
and
so
this
is
one
of
the
items
that
is
slated
to
be
discussed
in
the
interim
over
the
next
few
months,
and
so
I
wouldn't
be
surprised
if
we
see
some
some
movement
on
this
in
the
2022
session.
M
This
bill
also
puts
specific
requirements
for
notices
of
violation
in
an
appeals
process,
and
so
it's
important
for
cities
to
be
able
to
use
these
these
provisions
within
this
bill
to
be
able
to
regulate
those
short-term
rentals
on
internal
edus,
as
I
mentioned,
there
were
some
building
code
changes
and
it
also
established
an
internal
edu
loan
program.
M
So
what
this
bill
did
is
it
made
internal
adus,
a
permitted
use
in
every
city
in
every
zone
throughout
the
state
or
I'm
sorry,
every
primarily
residential
zone
throughout
the
state,
and
it
also
prohibits
certain
things
like
minimum
size
of
the
internal
adu
law
area,
front
entry
requirements,
and
then
it
also
prohibits
hoas
from
not
allowing
internal
adus.
M
It
didn't
have
a
substantial
impact
on
salt
lake
city
because,
as
you
guys
know,
we
allow
accessory
dwelling
units
here
within
within
our
city,
but
it
certainly
had
a
substantial
impact
on
other
cities
and
one
of
the
biggest
concerns
that
the
league
through
polling,
kept
hearing
was
parking
and
a
city's
ability
to
be
able
to
regulate
parking,
and
so
that
was
one
of
the
things
that
was
was
negotiated
and
was
added
into
the
bill
later
on
in
subsequent
versions.
M
What
this
bill
does
is
it
does
allow
for
cities
to
pick
25
percent
of
their
residential
zones
that
they
don't
have
to
allow
internally
to
use
and
for
salt
lake
again.
This
is,
it
doesn't
have
an
impact
on
us,
but
for
other
cities.
You
know
I've
been
doing
trainings
on
on
this
legislation
several
times
over
the
past
few
months,
and
it
sounds
like
most
cities
are,
are
not
going
to
go
with
that
that
exemption,
just
because
it's
it's
going
to
be
too
challenging
to
figure
out
what
those
zones
would
be.
M
The
one
thing
that
it
does
allow
is,
if
you
want,
if
a
city
would
want
to
require
or
prohibit
internal
edu's
on
lots
under
6
000
square
feet,
it
also
has
a
whole
host
of
design
standards
that
you
can
and
can't
regulate,
and
we
can
talk
more
about
that.
If
you
guys
want
to
dig
into
that
a
little
bit
more
and
then
it
has
a
short-term
rental
prohibition
if
the
property
is
recorded
as
an
internal
adu,
and
it
allows
you
to
require
a
business
license.
M
What
so,
from
a
legislative
perspective
and
I'll
have
nick
chime
in
here
in
a
second
on
what
he'll
be
bringing
before
before
the
planning
commission
on
on
this
bill?
But
essentially,
if
you
were
going
to
may
5th,
was
when
the
bill
went
into
effect.
So
you
have
to
change
your
single
family
definition
within
your
code
and
then
october
1st.
If
you
were
a
city
that
was
going
to
opt
into
that
25
or
for
salt
lake,
it
would
be
a
67
exemption
because
we
have
a
university
of
utah
here.
M
You
need
to
have
that
done
by
october.
First,
there
are
some
administrative
review
things
with
this
bill,
specifically
looking
at
the
building
code,
changes
and
making
sure
that
your
that
our
building
department
is
is
aware
of.
You
know
that
there's
no
longer
separate
metering
allowed,
the
the
fire
separation
has
changed
window,
egress
has
changed
and
utility
metering
has
changed
with
this
bill.
M
So
there
were
quite
quite
a
few
changes
to
the
ibc
that
they
came
out
of
this
legislation,
so
that
I'll
turn
it
over
to
nick
to
talk
the
specifics
on
how
this
impacts
the
work
that
you
guys
are
doing
here
in
salt
lake.
A
Yeah,
so
so,
first
off
with
these
effective
dates,
they
go
into
effect.
Whether
we've
adopted
our
code
or
not
so
we'd
have
to
follow
them.
Even
if
we
haven't
updated
our
code
by
then,
and
so
whenever
we
have
an
adu,
that's
internal,
it's
just
going
to
be
a
permitted
use
starting
on
a
in
october,
but
what
we
plan
on
doing
is
updating
our
code,
obviously
to
make
make
those
permitted
clearly
in
our
code.
A
A
Some
of
those
there
are
some
regulations
we
have
that
we
will
no
longer
be
able
to
enforce
with
internal
adus.
Those
will
be
deleted
and
we
haven't
one
of
the
points
that
I
think
are
questions
we
wanted
to
have
asked.
The
planning
commission
is
whether
or
not
we're
ready
as
a
city
to
entertain
making
detached
adus
permitted
as
well.
A
We
don't
need
to
as
part
of
this
bill,
but
as
the
planning
commission
is
well
aware,
it
ate
up
a
lot
of
agenda
time.
They
are
controversial.
There
are
a
number
of
people
in
the
community
who
don't
like
them,
and
so
that's
that's
kind
of
where
we
are,
but
we
haven't
made
that
that
decision.
Yet
that
is
something
that
you
know.
A
The
planning
commission
does
have
the
authority
to
initiate
a
petition,
and
if
that's
something
that
the
planning
commission
wants
to
consider
doing
for
this,
then
we
can
put
it
on
a
future
agenda
for
an
action.
But
we
will
update
our
code
we'll
we
will
be
initiating
that
process,
probably
in
the
next
few
weeks.
A
We
will
not
get
it
completed
by
october
1st,
so
we're
going
to
have
to
operate
under
under
state
code
with
conflicts
in
our
current
city
code
before
then.
So,
if
there's
any
questions
or
follow-up,
I'm
happy
to
answer.
A
This
year
we
haven't
had
a
lot
of
applications,
but
we
have
had
a
number
of
people
inquire
about
internal,
and
so
at
this
point
just
given
our
processes
and
timings
and
how
many
things
we
have
in
the
queue
pending
planning
commission
we're
telling
people
that
it
really
doesn't
make
a
lot
of
sense
for
you
to
submit
a
conditional
use
application
right
now,
because
in
three
months,
you're
going
to
be
permitted
and
so
for
four
months,
and
so
that's
kind
of
where
we
are.
M
Okay,
thanks
nick
for
that.
Moving
on
to
hb98,
can
you
guys
see
that
okay.
O
M
No
big
gray
box,
okay,
there
we
go
good
perfect.
Thank
you
guys,
sorry
about
that.
Hb
98.
I
started
off
in
the
2021
session
and
this
bill,
along
with
billboards
and
adus,
took
up
a
a
decent
chunk
of
nick
myself
orion.
We
worked
on
these
bills
a
lot
during
the
legislative
session,
and
this
is
much
better
than
it
was
when
it
originally
started.
So
that's
good.
It's
good
that
we've.
We
made
some
progress
on
it,
but
it
will
have
some
pretty
substantial
impacts
on
our
historic
districts.
M
That
nick
can
talk
a
little
bit
about.
As
I
mentioned,
this
bill
was
initially
vetoed
by
governor
governor
cox
and
the
reason
that
it
was
vetoed
was
the
original
bill
had
a
provision
in
it
that
would
allow
for
that,
would
allow
for
a
developer.
M
If
the
city
didn't
meet
a
three-day
building,
inspection
requirement,
a
developer
could
hire
their
own
inspected
and
insured
inspector
to
go
and
inspect
a
development
and
issue
their
own
certificate
of
occupancy,
and
so
I
know
that
may
seem
a
little
awkward
but
having
an
independent
entity
outside
of
the
city.
M
Issuing
certificates
of
occupancy
for
homes
is
incredibly
scary,
so
we
we
definitely
put
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
energy
into
getting
that
removed
from
the
legislation
and
why
it
was
ultimately
removed
was
actually
because
of
fema
concerns,
rather
than
any
anything
else,
and
so
fema
was
was
basically
saying.
We
won't
insure
those
homes,
and
so
that's
why
that
provision
was
removed
from
the
bill
and
it
was
brought
back
during
the
special
session
and
came
back
as
hb1003
I'll
talk
a
little
bit
about
so
this
this
bill.
M
What
the
intent
here
was
is
to
expedite
building
plan
review
and
then
we're
kind
of
seeing
this
trend
within
the
legislature,
not
just
with
this
bill,
but
there's
conversations,
there's
been
conversations
the
past
few
years
and
they're
certainly
gaining
some
traction
of
from
the
development
community
on
how
they
can
streamline
their
development
process
with
municipalities
and
one
of
the
things
that
kind
of
keeps
rising
to
the
top
is
having
sort
of
standardized
design
requirements
and
prohibition
on
individual
municipalities
having
specific
design
requirements
for
for
their
communities,
and
so
this
bill
is
is
kind
of
starting
really
moving
in
that
direction.
M
A
little
bit
and
like
I
said,
I
think,
we'll
we'll
be
seeing
more
legislation
like
that,
coming
down
down
the
pipe
and
I'll,
let
nick
in
a
minute
talk
about
the
the
design
components
of
this
and
how
that
impacts.
M
The
city,
as
I
mentioned
it
really
was
the
intent-
was
to
expedite
plan
reviews
and
ensuring
that,
when
an
applicant
submits
a
building
permit
application
that
cities
aren't
just
continually
kicking
back
that
building,
permit
application,
saying
that
it's
an
incomplete
application,
so
part
of
this
is
creating
a
shop
clock
on
plan
reviews
and
again
this
is
separate
from
what
the
planning
division
would
review
as
a
land
use
application.
M
So
an
applicant
would
probably
most
likely
come
into
nick's
team
apply
for
a
land
use
application,
and
then
they
would
be
moving
into
the
building
permit
process
where
they
would
where
this
process
would
trigger.
So
it's
not.
This
doesn't
live
within
ludman.
It
doesn't
live
within
the
planning
divisions
review,
but
what
it
does
do
is
it
requires
the
planners,
because
essentially,
the
building
division
is
the
the
gatekeeper
right
and
so
all
of
the
entities
that
need
to
review
an
application
have
to
do
it
within
14
days
for
single
family
homes
and
duplexes.
M
The
other
thing
is
the
original
bill
had
town
homes
in
it
as
well,
and
hb1003
struck
the
town
home
language
so,
from
a
planning
perspective,
the
impact
that
this
has
on
our
planning
division
here
is:
they
now
have
to
make
sure
that
they're
getting
in
and
reviewing
those
building
permits
in
a
in
a
timely
fashion
and
meeting
that
14
day
shot
clock.
M
It
also.
It
also
added
some
requirements
on
redlining
and
resubmission
of
plans
which
again
made
us
very
nervous
as
a
city
that
we
can't
require
a
set
of.
We
can't
ask
for
red
lines.
Well,
we
can,
but
we
have
to
meet
that
14-day
deadline
and
essentially
developer,
could
trigger
that
14-day
deadline
and
say
well,
I'm
I'm
done
I'm
shutting
this
down,
I'm
going
I'm
going
vertical
and
at
that
point
the
city.
M
What
our
course
of
action
is
is
to
have
our
inspectors
out
in
the
field
going
through
and
redlining
and
ticketing
ticketing,
what
is
being
developed
that
doesn't
need
the
plans
or
meter
our
code
or
ivc,
and
so
we're
hopeful
that
we
have
a
a
great
plan
review
process
here
within
the
city
that
we
won't
have
developers
triggering
that
because
it
certainly
will
have
a
substantial
impact
on
their
project
and
on
the
financial
feasibility
of
their
project.
M
So
we're
hopeful
that
our
existing
process
that
we
have
here
within
within
the
city
will
continue
on,
as
it
always
has.
M
So,
as
I
stated
it,
it
defines
when
a
complete
application
is
submitted
and
again
this
is
for
a
building
permit.
So
I'm
not
going
to
go
too
much
into
this,
but
it's
not
the
same
as
what
a
complete
application
is
defined
within
ludma.
So
again,
two
separate
processes,
but
certainly
has
an
impact
on
on
planning
and
then
the
design
requirements
were
were
the
biggest
concern
for
the
planning
division.
M
Well,
I
shouldn't
say
the
biggest,
but
one
of
the
concerns
for
the
planning
division,
because
it
really
it
limits
the
city's
ability
to
implement
design
regulations
within
our
city,
specifically
in
certain
districts
and
nick
I'm
going
to.
Let
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
this
piece
right
now
and
the
historic
components
and
and
how
this
impacts
different
areas
within
the
city.
A
So
the
good
news
about
this
is
that
this
applies
only
to
single
and
two
family
dwellings,
and
so
we
don't
build
a
lot
of
new
single
or
two
family
or
we
don't
see
built
a
lot
of
new
single
or
two
family
dwellings,
but
it
does
impact
existing
buildings
too,
and
so
that's
that's
where
this
starts
to
become
a
little
bit
difficult
to
administer
the
building
design,
elements
that
are
prohibited,
they're,
pretty
broad,
it's
everything
from
color,
which
we
only
have
one
or
one
area
in
the
city
where
we
actually
regulate,
building
material,
color
and
that's
up
in
our
foothill
zones.
A
A
So
that's
that's
good
and
there's
a
couple
other
things
in
there
we
can't
regulate
non-structural,
architectural
elements
as
well,
and
so
where
this
becomes
really
problematic
for
us
is
in
a
number
of
places.
Fortunately,
the
bill.
The
code
does
have
some
exceptions
which
are
listed
on
the
screen.
The
first
one
is
the
historic
district,
so
any
historic
district
that
existed
prior
to
gen
local
district
that
existed
prior
to
january
1
isn't
impacted
by
this.
A
However,
any
future
historic
district
could
potentially
be
impacted
and
they
would
be
impacted
because
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
regulate
some
of
those
key
historic
elements
of
buildings.
The
roof
shape
materials,
architectural
elements,
windows,
door,
placement
garage
door,
locations,
things
like
that,
and
so
that's
where
it
becomes
problematic.
A
There
are
some
areas
where
we
could
stack.
We
could
stack
multiple
exceptions
on
top
of
each
other
to
be
able
to
do
that.
One
is
that
national
register
districts
don't
have
that
same
january
first
deadline,
and
so
we
can
actually
if
the
city
chose.
This
is
pretty
problematic,
and
I
know
our
state
historic
preservation
office
has
some
issues
with
this,
but
suddenly
using
federal
designations
to
determine
how
local
regulations
apply
could
be
problematic,
but
the
city
would
have
the
ability
to
do
that
now.
A
A
A
Dwellings
that
are
in
areas
that
are
could
be
designated
as
historic
and
it
impacts
our
ability
or
the
community's
ability
to
designate
neighborhoods,
particularly
on
the
west
side
that
have
already
been
surveyed,
some
of
which
that
are
on
the
national
register,
some
of
which
that
are
probably
worthy
of
being
on
the
national
or
a
local
register.
A
It
also
I
mentioned
earlier
mixed-use
districts
in
those
districts
that
are
product
that
are
not
primarily
residential,
don't
qualify
for
that
residential
exemption,
and
so
we
do
have
some
single-family
homes,
for
example,
in
the
ballpark
neighborhood
in
central
ninth,
some
other
areas
that
are
zoned,
something
else
that
allows
single
family,
but
we
can
no
longer
regulate
some
of
those
things
that
we
have
before
and
so,
particularly
in
those
mixed-use
walkable
areas
or
areas
where
we're
trying
to
create
walkability
residential
structures
can
cert
single
and
two-family.
A
Buildings
can
certainly
play
a
role
in
in
determining
walkability,
but
we're
not
we.
For
example,
if
somebody
wanted
to
put
a
garage,
have
their
front
facade
be
a
garage.
We
couldn't
stop
that
in
those
areas
and
so
that
that's
problematic
getting
back
to
the
foothill
zones,
and
I
have
a
couple
maps
that
when
angela's
done
sharing
her
screen,
we
can
circle
back.
So
you
can
kind
of
see
the
historic
development
patterns
by
decade
in
salt
lake.
A
A
lot
of
those
regulations
deal
with
building
color
reflectivity
windows,
things
like
that
building
materials,
so
that
they're,
not,
I
said,
reflectivity
but
they're,
more
natural
in
in
character.
We
can
no
longer
regulate
that
and
so
that
those
are
areas
that
don't
fit
any
of
these
exemptions
for
those
things,
and
so
we
will
be
doing
some
code
modifications
to
address
that
and
address
some
other
things.
A
Continue
to
address
some
of
the
things
that
the
building
design
elements
that
we
can't
regulate
right
now,
so
that,
like
I
said,
that's
not
a
huge
issue
in
salt
lake,
because
we
don't
do
a
lot
of
one
and
two
family
plan
developments
and
we
don't
build
a
lot
of
new
one
on
two
family
homes
and
most
of
our
modifications
to
existing
single
or
two
families
really
aren't
making
such
significant
changes
that
it
impacts
that
it
could.
A
Potentially
if
people
were
demolishing
and
replacing
homes
which
is
most
of
our
new
single-family
homes,
depending
on
where
they
are
in
the
city,
they
we
may
not
be
able
to
apply
some
of
those
regulations,
and
so
we
can
still
do
things
like
building
height
and
setbacks
and
all
of
that
stuff.
But
we
can't
we
can't
get
into
a
finer
detail
to
address
the
some
of
those
elements
that
we
continue,
that
we
currently
regulate.
A
The
other
thing
that
our
big
concern
really
is
on
those
edges
of
areas
where
there
may
be.
Some
question
is
whether
they've
been
developed
before
1950
or
after
1950.
That's
going
to
require
a
lot
more
administrative
research
to
figure
out
on
a
case-by-case
basis
where
somebody
fits
and
where
a
property
fits.
A
It's
really
those
areas
right
around
1950,
and
so
to
give
you
an
idea
just
before
we
can
before
angela's
share,
stop
sharing
it
on
her
screen.
That
includes
basically
areas
west
of
the
jordan
river.
A
A
A
And
so
it's
not
as
easy
as
just
removing
those
from
the
code,
and
so
because
it's,
for
example,
we
have
you
know
an
r1
5000
zone
that
may
be
in
night
built
in
1970,
but
we
also
have
a
bunch
of
them
that
were
built
pre
1950,
and
we
don't
want
to
jeopardize
those
areas
by
by
striking
out
some
of
these
regulations
from
the
code.
A
M
Thanks
nick
I'll
I'll
say
to
you
that
michaela
did
an
amazing
job
testifying
on
this
bill
in
committee
and
really
speaking
to
the
equity
issues,
specifically,
that
nick
was
just
alluding
to
on
the
west
side
and
and
some
of
those
districts
within
rose
park
that
haven't
been
able
to
go
through
the
the
actual
historic
designation
process
for
a
whole
host
of
reasons,
financial
time
and
whatnot.
And
so
we
certainly
were
concerned.
Both
you
know
within
within
the
planning,
division
and
can.
M
But
the
city,
council
and
the
mayor
were
also
concerned
about
the
inequities
again,
that
this
bill
has
on
our
our
residents
on
the
west
side
of
salt
lake
city
and
their
ability
to
to
be
able
to
have
their
neighborhoods
and
their
communities
preserved.
And
so
we
tried
we
worked
really
hard
to
to
get
that
historic
language
changed,
so
that
it
wouldn't
have
that
impact.
But
unfortunately
it
did-
and
I
think
nick
touches
on
a
really
good
point
that
we've
had
a
lot
of
conversations
in.
M
As
I
said,
I've
been
doing
this
training
with
the
league.
Sorry,
I
just
heard
a
loud
bang
of
a
kid
in
the
background.
So
hopefully
no
bones
are
broken
there,
but
what
what?
What
we're
worried
about
is
going
to
happen
is
the
cities
are
just
going
to
start
using
plan
unit
developments
or
development
agreements
to
just
build
all
housing
right
and,
and
especially
when
we
start
seeing
these
prohibitions
on
design
regulations.
M
Then
it's
just
going
through
those
development
agreements
and
in
my
previous
life
I
was
a
planning
director
in
taylorsville
and
development
agreements
are
certainly
have
their
place,
but
they're
a
lot
of
work
as
well
for
planning
division
and
that
kind
of
eats
up
your
time
of
processing
the
land
use
application
that
takes.
M
You
know
a
considerable
chunk
of
time,
rather
than
being
able
to
be
proactive
and
actually
doing
you
know
the
the
other
planning
work
within
our
communities
and
so
again
I
think
this
is
gonna,
be
really
interesting
to
see
how
this
plays
out,
and
this
bill
was,
the
intent
was
really
to
have
an
impact
on
affordable
housing,
and
so
one
of
the
the
really
great
things
that
that
we
have
is,
you
know:
we've
had
several
housing
bills
over
the
past
couple
of
sessions
where
we
can
start
kind
of
tracking
the
impact
that
these
bills
are
actually
having
on
on
affordable
housing
and
quantify
right
what
these
policies
are
doing
and
the
impact
that
they're
having,
and
so
I
think,
it'll
be
interesting
to
see
how
again
these
these
bills
actually
play
out
within
our
communities.
A
If
the
market's
still
producing
that
same
rate,
and
so
that's
the
benefit
of
data
because
there's,
I
think
everybody
would
be
shocked
if
there's
any
evidence
that
links
this
bill
to
decreased
housing
costs
for
consumers,
and
I
think
that's
just
the
reality.
It's
it.
It's
not
gonna.
It's
not
gonna
make
it's
not
gonna
move
that
needle
at
all.
M
The
his
crystal
ball-
I
I
believe,
is
on
point
on
that
one.
The
other
thing
that
I'll
just
quickly
add
on
this,
and
I
I've
only
been
with
the
city-
I
guess
a
year
and
a
half.
So
I'm
not
sure,
but
I
imagine
you
guys
had
the
planning
commission
had
a
role
back
in
the
day,
growing
slc,
the
modern
income
housing
plan
for
the
city,
and
I
know
the
staff
bring
bring
the
goals
and
objectives
before
and
in
the
housing
plan.
M
Before
you
guys,
often-
and
some
I
imagine,
there's
a
decent
amount
of
familiarity
there,
but
we,
I
guess,
was
it:
two
years
ago
there
was
a
bill
that
was
passed,
that
the
sb-34
that
required
cities
to
pick
to
update
their
moderate
income
housing
plan
and
pick
from
a
menu
of
23
different
items.
M
And
don't
quote
me
on
this,
but
I
want
to
say:
salt
lake
does
19
or
20
of
those
items,
but
what
this
bill
also
does
is
one
of
the
one
of
the
menu
items
was
removing
some
of
these
residential
design
standards
from
from
your
code
to
allow
again
for
that
expedited
development.
And
so,
if,
if
that's
a,
if
that's
a
menu
item
that
that
you
choose
as
a
city
and
you
either
for
salt
lake,
we
have
to
have
four
menu
items.
M
You
can
no
longer
have
that
as
one
of
your
four,
so
that
doesn't
have
an
impact
on
us,
but
again
speaking
to
that
bigger
context
of
of
what
we're
seeing
within
the
legislature
that
I
mentioned
earlier,
of
reducing
those
design
standards.
M
Let's
see
here
nick,
I
think
kind
of
alluded
to
some
of
the
the
ordinance
changes
that
that
you
guys
will
be
seeing
coming
before
you
here
in
the
next
few
months
and
again
this
was
effective,
may
28th
and
the
legislative
action
will
of
course
be
making
some
changes
to
our
zoning
ordinances
to
comply,
and
then
some
administrative
actions
to
just
ensure
that
our
building
department
is
is
following
these.
These
regulations
and
our
building
department
has
been
just
amazing.
M
Our
building
division
has
been
just
really
amazing
in
in
a
pivotal
player
in
the
negotiations
on
this
bill
as
well.
So
nick,
do
you
have
anything
else
to
not
on
this
one?
Okay,
I
am
not
going
to
get
two
in
the
weeds
on
this,
and
I
want
to.
I
know
it's
already
getting
late,
but
just
kind
of
flag,
a
few
things
that
were
in
hb409
specifically
because
I'm
speaking
to
the
planning
commission
and
you
guys
will
now
be
required
to
have
a
for
out
our
annual
training
requirement.
M
We
can
get
into
that
a
little
bit
more
in
a
second
and
they
can
talk
about
what
that
will
look
like
for
you
guys
it
added
some
provisions
on
development
agreements
to
ludma.
It
defines
substantial
evidence
for
land
use
decisions.
M
I
heard
you
guys
talking
this
evening
about
conditional
use
permits
and
those
standards
within
the
conditional
use
permits
being
objective
versus
subjective
right.
We
can't
just
say
well:
it
needs
to
fit
in
with
the
character
of
the
neighborhood.
We
have
to
say
be
specific
that
everybody
has
to
have
a
hot
pink
house
within
their
neighborhood.
M
M
So
nick
I'll,
let
you
chime
in
here
in
a
quick
second
on
planning
commission,
but
essentially
planning
commissioners
now
have
to
have
four
hours
of
landings
training,
and
this
was
negotiated.
I
believe
when
we
started
these
negotiations,
we
were
12
and
we
got
down
to
four
and
one
of
those
hours
can
be
just
see
you
guys
attending
12
pc
meetings
within
a
calendar
year
and
then
one
will
be
the
general
powers
and
duties
of
ludma.
M
So
many
of
you
maybe
have
attended
the
league's,
luau
trainings
and
then
there's
all
sorts
of
other
opportunities.
You
know
envision,
utah
or
wasatch
front
regional
council,
or
you
know
historic
preservation,
meetings
or
those
different
things
that
you
can
use
to
get
those
four
hours
and
nick
I'll.
Let
you
pop
in
here
real
quick
and
talk
about
the
oh.
You
guys
are
going
to
manage
this
with
the
planning
commission.
A
Well,
you
guys
are
already
after
this
you'll
be
two
hours
in
so
just
show
up
12
times
and
you've
got
your
third,
but
we
we
will,
as
our
agendas
allow
we'll
we'll
we'll
try
to
address
this
on
agenda's
time.
A
So
people
don't
need
to
do
it
outside
of
regular
commission
meetings,
but
we
also
offer
up
attendance
at
local
conferences,
whether
it's
the
utah
epa
conference
or
the
utah
land
use
institute
or
other
other
things
where,
where
these
things
can
be
acquired,
so
we'll
we'll
continue
to
do
that
and
make
it
as
easy
as
possible
for
the
commissioners
to
get
their
four
hours
of
training
in.
M
Thanks
nick
I'm
going
to
kind
of
breeze
through
this
fairly
quickly,
for
you
guys,
nick
just
chime
in
if
you
want
to
add
anything
specific
on
any
of
these
sections
on
how
this
impacts
your
code
or
any
of
your
hot
takes.
So
the
one
of
the
things
that
this
bill
does
is
it
defines
develop
development
agreements
and
basically,
it
states
that
a
municipality
has
to
go
through
a
legislative
process,
so
development
agreements
and
I'm
not
sure
how
many
of
these
go
through
salt
lake
city.
M
But
we
did
quite
a
few
in
taylorsville
and
essentially
it
creates
its
own
zone
right
within
within
the
land
use
code,
and
so
what
this
bill
is
doing
is
saying
that
you
have
to
go
through
a
legislative
process
and
a
public
hearing.
If
you're
doing
a
development
agreement,
any
nick,
you
have
anything
to
add
there.
A
Yeah
we
we
generally
don't
do
too
many
of
these.
Most
of
them
happen
with
zoning
changes
once
they
get
to
the
city,
council
and
the
city
council
wants
to
add
some
specifics
that
aren't
otherwise
addressed
in
the
code.
That's
typically
where
it
happens,
and-
and
I
I
don't
envision-
that
we
will
go
towards
having
more
development
agreements.
B
A
C
A
So
that
really
wouldn't
be
a
conflict
with
that.
So
that
would
be
a
good
question
as
whether
something
like
that
would
be
a
just
an
administrative
approval
development
agreement
and
have
to
go
to
the
council
or
not.
I
don't
know
the
answer
to
that.
M
I'm
not
an
attorney
so
I'll
lead
with
that
and
hannah
and
I'll
preface
my
statements
with
that,
but
I
would
say
if
it's,
if
it's
not
changing,
if
it's
not
you
going
through
a
legislative
action
as
defined
within
ludma,
so
changing
changing
things
within
the
code
right,
creating
a
new
zone,
creating
a
new
code
that
it
wouldn't
be
a
legislative
process.
So
for
the
inland
port,
where
it
was
really
walking
into
a
zone,
I
would
say
that
would
still
be
an
administrative
process
and
wouldn't
require
a
public
hearing.
A
Yeah
and
those
development
agreements
addressed
other
things,
besides
zoning,
so
that
wouldn't
necessarily
be
impacted
by
this
by
hp,
409
it
dealt
with
how
tax
increments
dealt
with
distributed
and
collected,
and
everything
else
so.
M
I
I
wish
I
would
have
pulled
up
to
share
with
you.
The
flow
chart
that
nick
put
together
for
his
staff
on
lot
line,
adjustments,
parcel
parcel
boundary
adjustments,
plans
and
voucher
line
agreements,
because
it
really
is
it's
it's.
It's
amazed
to
kind
of
figure
out.
M
You
know
what,
when
somebody's
coming
in
what
they
actually
need
to
do
and
what
their
process
is,
because
there's
a
lot
of
nuances
to
these
line,
adjustments
and
parcel
adjustments,
and
so
again,
just
kudos
to
nick
for
diving
into
these
bills
at
the
the
level
that
he
does
to
ensure
that
the
city's
in
compliance
and
his
staff
understands
when
somebody
comes
in
what
they
need
to
do
and
trying
to
get
them
through
the
process
as
quickly
as
possible.
M
So
again,
just
kind
of
creating
new
definitions
within
ludma.
On
these,
these
different,
these
different
subdivision
items
and
allowing
a
land
use
application
to
be
withheld
if
the
boundary
adjustment
does
not
comply
with
local
land
use
regulations,
it
prohibits
approval
of
a
subdivision
that
does
not
identify
and
preserve
culinary
water
and
sanitary
sewer,
easements,
and
then
this
last
piece
here,
the
recording
of
a
subdivision
plant.
This
is
incredibly
controversial
and
this
was
something
that
this
bill
rolled
out.
Nick
correct
me.
M
M
The
eminence
dilemma,
always
fast
forwards
of
the
league
of
cities
in
town,
were
gone
through
the
entire
you
know,
starting
typically
in
in
may
and
and
into
january
and
nick,
and
I
both
participated
in
the
land,
use
task
force
and
have
for
a
couple
of
years
and
this
year,
this
provision,
this
last
bullet
point,
was
added
into
the
bill
at
the
very
last
minute,
and
I
don't
think
anybody
really
fully
understood
the
unintended
consequences
until
we
started
diving
into
that,
and
it
was
the
very
last
week
of
the
session
and
we
were
trying
to
get
this
pulled.
M
But
there
were
a
lot
of
it
was
a
train
moving
down
the
track,
and
so
the
league
is
trying
to
pull
this
provision,
but
essentially
what
it
says
is
that
an
entity
that
goes
through
a
land
use
process
is
vested
in
a
building
permit.
M
So
if
you
go
through
an
entitlement
process
for
a
subdivision
today,
you're
vested
in
your
building
permit
requirements
and
your
requirements
for
the
next
10
years,
so
if
you
decide
in
20
31,
you
want
to
build
that
subdivision
you're
vested
in
the
process
today-
and
this
didn't
actually
mean
what
the
property
rights
coalition,
what
the
development
community
wanted
either,
and
so
I
think
we
were
hoping
to
get
this
pulled
in
the
special
session
we
didn't,
but
I
imagine
that
I
know
we're
working
diligently
on
getting
this.
M
This
language
amended
and
changed
in
the
future.
So
this
is
a.
This
is
a
really
big
deal
so
we'll
see
how
see
how
that
plays
out.
Excuse.
C
M
M
Two
slides
out:
okay,
great
yep-
this
I'm
not
even
going
to
go
into
but
again
has
roadway
changes
for
low
impact
development,
not
really
huge
impact
to
you
guys
and
then
again,
nick
we'll,
I'm
sure
be
bringing
forward
some
text
amendments
nick.
Do
you
want
to
add
any
thoughts
on
that
really
quickly.
A
M
And
I'm
not
gonna
go
through
any
of
these,
but
just
wanted
to
show
you
guys
these
short
of
sb
164.
These
are
all
of
the
bills,
the
past
that
we
were
tracking
within
the
planning
division
here
within
the
city.
There
certainly
are
many
other
land
use
bills,
but
these
were
the
big
ones
that
impacted
that
impacted
us
and
then
just
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
there's
a
lot
of
focus
on
land
use
and
housing
and
transportation.
M
These
are
some
of
the
the
issues
that
we
see
will
be
coming
down.
The
pike
billboards,
the
utah
lake
authority,
impact
fees,
short-term
rentals,
inclusionary
zoning
is
heating
up
pretty
substantially
in
public
improvement
districts.
M
So
with
that
again,
thank
you
guys
so
much
for
your
time
this
evening
happy
to
answer
any
other
questions
you
may
have,
and
if
not,
I
will
let
you
guys
get
on
with
your
evening.
B
Thank
you
so
much,
I'm
sorry
to
be
so
rude
to
kind
of,
but
we
are,
you
know,
kind
of
getting
shaggy
here.