►
From YouTube: Planning Commission Meeting - September 08, 2021
Description
Salt Lake City Planning Commission Meeting - September 08, 2021
https://www.slc.gov/planning/
https://www.slc.gov/planning/planning-commission-agendas-minutes/
A
A
A
A
I
brenda
shear
planning
commission
chair
hereby
determined
that,
with
the
ongoing
covert
19
pandemic
conditions
existing
in
salt
lake
city,
including,
but
not
limited
to
this
week's
spike
in
utah,
coveted
19
hospitalizations
and
the
presence
of
the
more
aggressive
and
contagious
delta
variant,
that
meeting
at
an
anchor
location
presents
a
substantial
risk
to
the
health
and
safety
of
those
who
would
be
present.
A
So
thank
you
all
for
joining
us
remotely
on
webex
and
the
commission.
Members
are
here
and
they
will,
for
the
most
part,
be
able
you
will
be
able
to
see
them
in
in
video.
So
the
first
item
on
our
agenda
is
the
approval
of
the
minutes
for
august
25th.
2021..
A
Commissioners,
do
I
have
a
motion.
B
Ma'am,
I
have
a
question
in
the
dropbox
there
in
draft
form.
Is
that
going
to
be
the
final
version.
A
There
you
have
it
they're
drafted
until
we
approve
them
all
right,
whatever
so,
okay,
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
call
the
roll,
so
we're
going
to
go
with
amy,
yes,
marlene.
A
E
A
Carolyn,
yes,
thank
you.
We
have
unanimous
approval,
so
I,
the
next
item
is
the
report
of
the
chair
and
the
vice
chair
and
I
do
not
have
anything
to
report.
Neither
do
I
thank
you,
ms
mata
vice
chair,
so
reporter
the
director.
Do
we
have
any
items
from
the
director
this
evening.
F
E
A
So
if
we
are
finished
with
our
reporting,
we'll
go
ahead
and
open
the
issues
for
the
public
hearing,
the
first
one
is
the
bueno
avenue
apartments,
zoning
map
and
master
plan
amendment
at
approximately
129,
south
700
east
and
our
oh
sorry,
let
me
give
you
the
numbers.
The
zoning
map
amendment
is
case.
Number
plnpcm,
2021-0048,.
D
D
So
on
tonight's
meeting
well,
I
will
be
presenting
the
master
plan
and
zoning
map
amendment
or
the
project
on
bueno
bueno
apartments,
approximately
at
129
south
700
east-
and
this
is
a
an
area
map
of
this
project.
As
you
can
see,
this
bigger
parcel
here
is
actually
has
the
address.
A
A
D
F
A
D
A
F
D
This
bigger
lot
here
is
addressed
from
700
east
129,
south
700
east,
and
then
there
are
nine
other
parcels
in
the
back
of
this
site
that
are
addressed
from
bueno
avenue
and
bueno
avenue
is
a
private
right-of-way
that
ends
at
the
the
parcel
here.
There's
no
continuation.
D
Some
reason
my
computer
is
taking
a
lot
of
time
too,
just
a
little
bit
about
this
project.
D
This
is
the
current
condition
existing
condition,
and
this
is
these
are
carpool
storage
units
that
are
associated
with
the
apartment
building
and
then
on
the
on
the
other
side.
Here
you
can
see,
there
are
seven
homes.
D
This
is
the
apartment
building
now
that
faces
700
east
with
the
carports
some
vacant
land
and
then
some
small
homes
that
are
proposed
to
be
demolished
with
this
project.
So
this
is
a
proposed
project.
D
It
would
consolidate
the
10
parcels
here
and
then
replace
it
with
a
single
story:
amenity
building,
fronting
700,
east
and
then
a
four-story
rooming
house
on
the
interior
of
the
site.
The
blooming
house
would
consist
of
65
units
and
each
of
these
units
would
share
a
cooking
in
a
living
room
facility
and
would
have
a
bathroom
for
each
of
the
bedrooms.
D
D
However,
that
vote
was
later
recalled
in
the
following
meeting,
because
we
have
an
ordinance
the
mitigation
of
residential
housing
laws
that
requires
that
the
planning
commission
considered
a
a
housing
mitigation
report
for
zoning
amendments
prior
to
making
a
recommendation
to
the
city
council.
For
that
reason,
and
that
vote
was
recalled.
D
So
tonight
in
front
of
you
we're
presenting
the
master
plan,
the
zoning
amendment
and
the
housing
mitigation
report.
D
So
the
reason
what
the
applicant
is
requesting
is
to
change
the
central
city
community
master
plan,
which
currently
designates
that
property
as
median
density,
residential
and
requests
to
change
to
a
medium
high
density,
residential.
D
When
we
analyzed,
when
this
project
staff
took
in
consideration,
other
master
plans,
the
housing
plant
plants,
all
lake
and
the
central
community
master
plan
and
took
in
consideration
that
this
request
would
promote
the
redevelopment
of
the
site
and
would
help
meet
city
growth
and
housing
goals
listed
on
the
master
plans
listed
above.
D
The
other
issue
that
is
being
reviewed
at
this
meeting
is
the
zoning
map
amendment.
As
you
can
see
on
this
map.
D
D
The
request
is
to
make
all
of
the
site
be
rmf
45.
In
another
words
result
these
seven
parcels
that
are
sr3
to
imf,
45.,.
D
This
graphic
shows
the
surrounding
land
uses
in
how
they
match
the
proposed
development
being
that
a
lot
of
these
land
uses
are
multi-family
residential.
D
D
D
D
And
and
because
the
rmf
45
would
allow
for
non-residential
land
uses,
the
zoning
amendment
is
subject
to
the
housing
loss
mitigation
process.
D
And
how
do
we,
you
know,
measure
what
what
what's
being
lost
and
by
the
way,
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
the
housing
loss
mitigation
ordinance
has
been
been
work.
You
know
the
city
has
been
working
on
it
for
a
very
long
time.
D
But
for
now
we
are
working
on
under
this
current
ordinance,
and
it
requires
that
the
director
of
the
department
of
community
in
neighborhoods
signs
the
the
report
reviews
it
and
and
approves
it,
and
this
housing
mitigation
report
that
we're
presenting
has
done
that
it
it's
signed
by
the
director
it
it
requires
the
planning
commission
evaluate
if
the.
If
the
housing
loss
mitigation
plan
is
adequate
and
the
way
the
ordinance
is
structured
to
do
that
is
by
giving
the
applicant
three
options.
D
One
is:
was
the
construction
of
replacement
housing.
Another
is
the
payment
of
fee
based
on
difference
between
the
existing
housing
market
and
value
and
the
cost
of
replacement,
and
the
third
option
is
a
payment
of
a
flat
mitigation
fee.
D
So,
according
to
the
plan
and
according
to
the
option
of
looking
at
a
fee.
D
It
was
the
calculation
resulted
that
the
the
cost
for
replacement
was
a
lot
higher,
so
it
was
a
negative
number
or
replacing
the
six
homes.
If
you
reduce
the
the
the
the
actual
cost
of
the
house
with
the
cost
to
replace
the
house,
there
was
a
negative
number,
so
no
mitigation
fee
is
required.
At
this
time,
staff
finds
that
the
housing
loss
mitigation
report
results
does
not
change
the
original
staff's
recommendation.
D
So
our
findings
for
the
master
plan
and
zoning
amendment
is
that
this
inner
block
is
in
disrepair
and
further
development
of
the
site.
Under
the
current
zoning,
a
master
plan
designation
could
result
in
the
removal
of
affordable
housing
stock
to
be
replaced
with
very
high
priced
housing,
and
with
that
I
that's
my
presentation
and
I'll
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
A
D
I
can
you
know
I,
I
don't
have
the
definition
at
the
you
know.
D
Yeah
yeah,
it's
my
staff
report,
but
I
you
know
I
apologize.
A
F
C
So
we
looked
into
how
a
unit
is
defined
in
a
rooming
house.
You
would
look
at
this
a
unit
is
this
is
not
like
a
multi-family
unit,
definition
in
a
rooming
house.
They
go
by
bedroom.
C
C
A
Okay,
so
what
I
don't
quite
understand
what
you're
saying
you're
saying
that
that
the
the
master
plan
has
very
specific
limits
of
20
to
or
excuse
me
30
to
50
for
medium
high
density,
housing.
C
A
A
Right
under,
but
that's
not
what
we
have
here,
we
have
a
rooming
house
use.
So
how
do
we?
So
I
guess
I'm
asking
both
you
and
the
planning
staff
if
they
want
to
weigh
in
on
this.
We
could
talk
about
this
later,
but
why
don't
you
go
ahead
and
make
your
presentation
while
they
start
to
look
up
that
issue.
G
A
C
All
right,
thank
you.
Well,
thank
you
for
taking
the
time
to
listen
to
this
project
and
and
hear
the
bueno
avenue
apartments
project
again.
So,
as
you
know,
and
you
heard
from
katya,
this
project
has
been
reviewed
already
and
in
the
previous
meeting
the
commission
did
vote
to
recommend
approval
of
the
master
plan
and
zoning
amendment.
C
At
any
rate,
you
know
just
reiterating
today,
you're
specifically
looking
at
the
master
plan
and
zoning
amendment
and
the
conditional
use
and
plan
development
is
not
under
consideration
in
this
meeting.
So
we're
only
looking
at
the
master
plan
and
zoning
amendment,
so
this
project
is
a
co-living
project.
C
Co-Living
is,
is
new
and
unique
in
salt
lake
there
are
not
other
co-living
projects,
so
this
project
consists
of
65
units.
Pods
of
one
to
four
bedrooms,
each
just
like
a
typical
multi-family
unit.
However,
we
are
renting
those
bedrooms
individually,
so
it's
class
a
luxury
apartments,
there's
no
compromise
to
finish
or
quality.
C
So
this
is
the
concept
of
sharing
your
living
unit
common
spaces
with
other
tenants.
Here's
an
example
of
our
biggest
unit,
the
four
bedroom
unit,
which
makes
up
the
majority
of
this
project.
So
in
a
four
bedroom
unit,
the
kitchen,
the
laundry
room,
the
living
room,
are
shared
between
four
individuals.
C
Each
of
those
individuals
are
renting
a
private
and
secured
bedroom
and
with
a
private
bathroom
and
this
project
targets
members
of
the
workforce,
who
are
currently
completely
priced
out
of
traditional
housing.
That's
going
up
in
salt
lake,
and
just
so
you
know,
according
to
cbre
the
average
class,
a
rent
rate
in
downtown
salt
lake
city
is
1558
dollars
a
month.
So
what
that
means
is
an
entry
level
teacher
making
37
000
a
year
is
paying
over
50
of
their
pre-tax
income
and
rent
at
our
project.
C
This
same
teacher
and
that's
that's
salt
lake
city,
school
district,
salary
that
same
teacher
in
this
project
would
pay
about
25
of
their
income
in
rent
now
hud
defines
rent
as
affordable
when
it
comprises
30
percent
of
family
income,
and
we
obviously
recognize
pro-living
isn't
for
everyone.
It's
it's
clearly
targeted
to
individual
renters,
it's
rather
than
couples
or
families.
C
As
katya
mentioned,
the
site
consists
currently
of
vacant
land,
there's
some
seven
single-family
structures,
a
six-unit
multi-family
structure
and
large
abandoned
storage
garages
on
the
site,
the
entire
site,
the
entire
block,
rather
essentially,
the
entire
block
surrounding
this
site
is
currently
zoned
rmf45,
and
these
seven
parcels
containing
six
homes
are
zoned
sr3
all
within
the
boundaries
of
our
project.
C
It's
important
to
note
that
the
sr3
parcels
are
consist
of
dirt
roads,
failing
utility
infrastructure
and
six
homes
which
are
built
to
the
lowest
architectural
standards
of
their
time.
These
homes
are
riddled
with
major
issues
right
now,
including
serious
structural
problems,
failed
utilities
and
foundations.
C
It's
also
important
to
note
that,
under
the
current
zoning
allowed,
the
density
on
this
site
would
be
when
you
blend
the
the
two
different
zoning
designations
would
still
allow
40
units
per
acre,
we're
seeking
approval
for
just
two
additional
units
and
and
a
uniform
zoning
and
land
use.
Designation
and
we've
also
really
tried
hard
to
design
this.
This
project,
with
a
strong
residential,
feel
we
really
have
tried
to
make
an
effort
to
have
it
fit
in
with
the
surrounding
buildings
and
the
surrounding
uses.
As
best
we
can.
C
C
C
Sorry,
I'm
trying
to
load
the
the
next
slide
here,
so
this
shows
some
of
the
existing
homes
on
the
site,
they're
in
major
major
disrepair.
These
homes
have
seen
some
attempts
to
be
updated
over
the
years,
but
the
utility
and
structural
issues
that
are
occurring
here
have
essentially
deemed
these
homes
fun,
functionally
obsolete.
C
So
and-
and
we
I
mean-
we
want
to
note
it-
that
really
on
no
uncertain
terms.
The
existing
homes
on
this
site
are
going
to
be
demolished
and
new
housing
will
be
built
one
way
or
another,
and
katya
also
mentioned
that
that
the
planning
staff
looked
at,
that
the
consideration
for
these
homes
to
be
renovated
would
be
the
right
of
the
private
property
owner
and
we've
looked
at
the
cost,
even
including
the
grants
out
there
that
are
potentially
available,
and
it's
it's
too
cost
prohibitive
to
rebuild
those
homes
like
they
are
now.
So.
C
C
C
Salt
lake
city
has
also
published
an
affordable
housing
guide,
which
calls
for
a
spectrum
of
attainable
housing
that
is
privately
driven.
It
calls
for
removing
barriers
which
limit
housing
density
and
prohibit
needed
housing
types
and
calls
to
support
the
development
of
new
or
under-utilized
housing
types.
C
C
They
specifically
list
as
one
of
these
innovations
co-housing
or
co-living
as
things
that
they
are
looking
for,
which
have
not
happened
in
salt
lake.
Up
to
this
point,
so
in
conclusion,
you
know
the
vote
to
recommend
approval
of
this
project.
The
second
vote
to
recommend
approval
of
this
rezone
would
be
a
vote
in
favor
of
attainably
priced
housing
and
a
vote
in
support
of
allowing
the
goals
in
plan
salt
lake
set
forth
by
city
council
in
the
mayor's
office
for
an
innovative
approach
to
addressing
the
affordable
housing
crisis.
C
In
salt
lake,
there
really
are
three
outcomes
for
this
property
that
need
to
be
carefully
considered.
There
are
other
outcomes
that
can
be
dreamt
up,
but
the
reality
is
one
of
these
three
things
is
what's
going
to
happen,
so
the
first
outcome
is
the
approval
of
the
proposed
object
or
proposed
project.
C
Obviously,
so
this
would
provide
dignified
and
attainably
priced
housing
for
192
individuals.
It
would
provide
housing
at
rental
rates
that
are
below
60
ami,
with
no
government
funding
required
option,
two,
which
we
considered
for
this
site
and
almost
certainly
would
be
the
approach
of
any
other
developer.
C
If
they
were
going
for
a
rezone
is
they
would
go
for
proposing
traditional
luxury
multi-family
housing,
which
we
see
all
over
the
place
going
up?
This
would
be
top
of
the
market
rates
for
67
units.
These
rental
rates
are
unattainable
for
most
members
of
the
workforce,
and
we
tried
hard
to
assess
this.
We
went
down
that
route
initially
and
we
tried
hard
to
assess
what
are
the
needs
of
the
city
and
does
co-living
address
those
housing
needs
and
we
believe
it
does.
C
Finally,
the
denial
of
the
project
would
ultimately
result
in
about
30
luxury
town
homes
being
built,
which
can
be
built
by
right
under
the
current
zoning.
They'll
sell
for
upwards
of
a
million
dollars,
so
the
opportunity
to
provide
innovative
housing
in
that
case
is
lost
and
pushes
for
more
high-priced
housing
that
fills
no
needs
of
the
community.
C
So
thank
you
for
listening
to
us.
We
urge
the
commission
to
move
forward
with
the
previous
recommendation
for
approval
and
let
this
continue
forward
to
be
heard
by
the
city
council,
just
as
it
was
a
few
months
ago
and
also
just
in
conclusion.
We'd
also
respectfully
request
an
opportunity
for
a
response
period
after
the
public
comment
comment
portion
of
this
hearing
and
yeah.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
I
appreciate
it.
A
A
You
said
that
under
the
current
zoning
30
units
of
housing
could
be
built.
Would
you
build
that.
C
That's
on
a
portion
of
the
site,
0.77
acres
of
the
site,
30
housings
units
could
be
built.
The
other
portions
of
the
site
up
to
50
housing
units
could
be
built
so
when
we
laid
out
the
site
based
on
the
current
zoning
and
the
exist
existing
zoning
of
the
rest
of
the
parcels.
This
subject:
property
could
support
up
to
40
units.
A
Okay
and
so
okay,
so
I
guess
what
I'm
asking
and
that's
as
of
right,
correct.
A
F
G
F
So
it's
important
to
note
that
you're
not
looking
at
the
project
right
now,
that'll
come
later
when
the
unconditional
use
and
the
plan
development
comes
through.
This
is
the
request.
You're
looking
at
is
the
rezone
from
the
sr3
to
rmf45,
so
you're
looking
to
see
if
rmf45
zoning
is
appropriate
at
this
location,
and
so
the
master
plan,
designation,
that's
being
requested,
would
basically
be
more
consistent
with
the
rmf
45
zoning.
F
A
Okay,
so
is
there
a
definition,
I
know
we're
not
looking
at
the
project,
but
in
for
future
reference.
Is
there
a
definition
of
a
unit
under
the
designation
of
the
of
the
rooming
house.
F
A
A
Okay,
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
open
the
public
hearing.
If
you
do
wish
to
speak
at
the
public
hearing,
please
use
the
tiny
little
hand
to
push
that
percept
as
a
button
to
raise
your
hand.
F
H
Okay,
thank
you.
Melinda
maine,
I'm
a
board
member
for
the
east
central
community
council
and,
as
previously
stated,
we
do
not
support
the
change
in
zoning.
H
We're
we've
got
so
many
boarding
houses
in
this
neighborhood
as
it
is.
I
I
understand
things
look
really
great,
but
anyway,
I'd
like
to
quote
the
master
plan,
the
kim
community
master
plan.
The
neighborhood
also
has
a
well
preserved
inner
courts,
unlike
those
farther
west,
these
small
streets
that
penetrate
the
10
acre
blocks,
such
as
dooley
court
and
strong's
court
and
windsor
street,
are
still
lined
with
small
cottages
dating
from
the
beginning
of
the
20th
century.
H
We
do
not
feel
like
that.
The
proposal
meets
the
criteria
for
changes
to
the
plan.
It's
also
our
opinion
that
this
proposal
and
its
current
configuration
will
not
address
the
need
of
more
moderately
priced
workforce.
Housing
up.
Zoning,
like
this
fuels
more
land,
banking
and
speculation
and
drives
have
already
inflated
housing
prices
in
the
area.
H
Part
of
the
feedback
of
this
proposal
that
we
conducted
a
neighborhood
survey
was
that
most
people
prefer
a
small
house
with
a
yard
and
a
yard
versus
a
complex
shared
with
facilities,
if
at
all
possible,
which
we
have
a
number
of
those
in
the
in
the
city
already
and
of
course,
we
were
told
in
the
beginning
what
the
housing
costs
or
the
room
rents
would
be
upwards
of
900
a
month,
plus
at
the
first
hearing,
the
developers
said
that
the
rents
well
anyway,
okay,
so.
H
We're
concerned
that
the
proposed
requirement
of
renting
rooms
only
to
single
people
to
skirt
the
parking
requirement
is
in
violation
of
the
fair
housing
act.
As
noted,
our
community
needs
more
family
and
multi-generational
housing
and
is
over
supplied
with
studios
and
one
bedroom
already
relative
to
larger
rentals.
H
More
likely,
this
complex
as
configured
with
shared
facilities
would
become
a
de
facto
student
housing.
The
ecc
supports
large
complexes
of
student
housing
be
located
on
the
university
of
utah
property,
where
students
are
best
served,
as
was
defined
in
the
student
housing
master
plan.
The
ecc
strongly
supports
maintaining
moderately
priced
and
naturally
occurring
housing
in
our
community.
We
also
support
development
by
encouraging
developers
to
utilize
the
countless
lots
within
the
ecc
and
district
4
already
zoned
for
such
development.
Rather
than
tearing
into
our
neighborhoods.
H
We
continue
to
discourage
the
displacement
of
existing
neighborhoods
who
depend
on
moderately
priced
homes.
They
are
currently
renting.
We
oppose
the
continued
destruction
of
the
fabric
of
our
neighborhoods
by
classifying
existing
older
workforce
housing
as
worthless
and
beyond
repair.
There
are
many
programs
and
tax
advantages
for
rehabilitation,
since
the
houses
are
in
the
national
historic
district
boundaries.
H
F
Okay,
so
we'll
move
on,
let's
go
to
cindy
cromer,
go
ahead,
cindy.
I
Hi,
I
want
to
express
my
thanks
to
chairman
shear
for
reopening
the
hearing
and
also
thank
you
for
separating
the
plan,
development
and
conditional
use
from
the
request
in
front
of
you
tonight.
The
bundling
of
all
four
requests
conveyed
that
the
project
was
a
done
deal
to
tenants,
property
owners
and
business
people
in
the
area
and
especially
on
the
block.
Your
vote
in
favor
of
the
rezoning
led
some
tenants
to
move
soon
after
your
vote,
never
doubt
that
what
you
do
and
say
makes
a
difference
in
people's
lives.
I
I
In
previous
messages,
I
have
emphasized
the
development
potential
on
this
block
and
the
constraints
imposed
by
the
existing
condominiums.
This
is
not
about
prevailing
zoning
on
the
block.
It's
about
the
prevailing
development
as
condominiums
and
shared
ownership.
The
staff
report
emphasizes
the
zoning,
but
the
reality
is
that
condominiums,
dating
from
the
70s
and
90s
determined
the
potential
for
a
large
portion
of
this
block.
The
perimeter
can
certainly
redevelop
as
rmf
45
and
I
think,
as
rmu
45,
but
the
interior
will
be
considerably
lower
based
on
the
divided
ownership
standard
number
one
for
zoning
amendment.
I
standards,
two
and
three
without
a
major
fire
or
earthquake,
or
the
proposed
zoning
change
in
front
of
you,
the
average
height
on
the
interior
of
this
block
would
continue
to
be
that
of
the
watts
condos.
The
staff
report
refers
again
to
zoning,
but
because
of
the
condominiums
the
existence,
zoning
is
irrelevant
to
the
impact
of
the
properties
which
are
not
going
to
redevelop.
I
I
suspect
that
you
believe
that
the
proposals
you
addressed
years
ago
have
now
been
adopted
by
the
city
council,
but
they
haven't
been.
There
is
a
log
jam
of
ordinances
in
the
city
council
office
which
are
relevant
to
this
proposal.
You
are
being
asked
to
support
loopholes
in
ordinances
such
as
housing,
loss
mitigation
and,
I
would
add,
the
definition
of
a
boarding
house
which
should
have
been
taken
care
of
long
ago.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
J
The
proposal
rezone,
I
think,
would
negatively
affect
the
standard
of
living
in
the
neighborhood
and,
like
our
city
as
a
whole,
and
people
should
not
be
forced
to
share
kitchens
and
living
spaces
when
the
rent
is
not
cheap
or
at
all,
and
I'd
like
the
solution
to
affordable
housing
is
not
deregulation,
and
no
part
of
this
proposal
includes
stipulations
to
make
these
rooms
affordable
only
that
they
can
be
cheaply
produced.
F
I
apologize
for
the
little
lag
here.
I'm
just
trying
to
get
things
straight.
The
next
we'll
go
with
alex
benton
go
ahead,
alex
all.
K
Right,
yeah
yeah,
my
name
is
alex,
I'm
with
the
group
called
wasatch
jones
united,
and
we
oppose
the
redistricting
or
rezoning
of
this
part
of
the
neighborhood.
I
live
just
a
couple
streets
down.
K
My
fear,
coming
from
this
being
rezoned,
is
that
it'll
drive
up
rent
prices
in
the
surrounding
neighborhood,
as
it
sets
the
standard
for
a
small
apartment
that
is
shared
to
be
priced
significantly
higher
than
what
I'm
currently
paying
and
what
other
people
in
the
area
are
also
paying,
and
even
though
they
may
claim
that
this
is
going
to
end
up
being
an
affordable
housing
unit.
K
I
think
it'll
definitely
lead
to
people
who
are
priced
below
this
price
point
to
get
pushed
out
of
this
neighborhood
and
have
to
find
housing
elsewhere,
and
that's
something
I
don't
want
to
see
so
yeah
and
I
think,
setting
a
standard
where
a
shared
space
and
200
square
feet
of
living
private
living
area
sets
a
bad
standard
for
what
decent
housing
is
inside
of
salt
lake
city.
I'd
like
to
see
people
being
able
to
have
an
apartment
where
they
don't
have
to.
K
You
know
share
a
kitchen
in
a
living
room
with
up
to
three
other
people
that
they
may
not
know.
I've
lived
in
a
similar
situation
to
that.
I
didn't
like
it
at
all.
It
was
one
of
the
worst
housing
situations
I've
been
in
and
we're
just
trusting
the
word
of
the
developer
that
this
is
going
to
be
some
sort
of
luxury
apartment
complex.
K
I
don't
think
they
have
any
real
guarantee
that
it's
going
to
be
fairly
priced,
to
allow
people
to
continue
living
in
the
neighborhood
and
to
set
a
good
standard
for
what
good
housing
can
look
like
in
the
city.
Thank
you.
F
Next,
we're
gonna
go
with
jim
whale.
Jim
wells
go
ahead.
F
L
The
current
owners
and
I'd
like
to
read
a
letter
by
a
former
tenant
they've
asked
me
to
read
that
I'd
like
two
minutes
to
do
that.
If
I
could
and
then
I'd
like
to
make
my
own
statement,
if
that's
okay.
L
A
L
Everybody's
had
a
chance
to
read
the
owner's
statement
of
the
current
condition
of
the
property.
If
you
have,
it
becomes
clear
that
the
expense
of
trying
to
fix
these
homes,
many
of
which
don't
even
have
foundations,
is
cost
prohibitive.
L
L
You
can
go,
get
a
two-bedroom
apartment
or
a
one-bedroom
apartment,
where
you're
not
sharing
anything,
and
you
can
pay
fifteen
hundred
and
two
thousand
dollars
and
twenty
five
hundred
dollars
for
those.
So
this
is
an
attempt
to
bring
down
housing
costs.
I
mean
the
reality.
Is
we
just
do
not
have
reasonable,
inexpensive
housing
in
salt
lake
anymore?
L
I've
heard
comments
that
this
is
going
to
be
for
students
or
blue
collar
workers
or
hourly
wage
earners.
That's
exactly
who
this
is
going
to
help
and
those
are
great
people.
This
development
will
provide
housing
for
all
of
the
people
that
are
at
that
price
point
that
are
looking
for
that
rent
level
and
so
as
many
units
as
we
can
add
to
that
price
level.
It
helps
everybody.
L
The
long
and
short
is
these
homes
are
going
away
and
we
have
a
choice
to
choose
attainable
housing
instead
of
luxury
town
homes,
and
so
I'm
hoping
that
we'll
make
that
choice,
because
we
don't
need
more
luxury
townhomes.
Thank
you.
F
Okay,
next
is
john
ribbons.
M
Cool
so
first
I
wanna,
my
name
is
john
ribbons,
I'm
with
wasatch
tenants,
united.
I
want
to
start
off
by
just
addressing
some
points
about
acting
like
you
can
go,
get
a
1500
studio
apartment.
I'm
I
mean
just
really
quick.
I
looked
up
on
zillow
half
a
block
west
of
there.
You
can
find
a
two-bedroom
for
875.
M
half
a
block
north
of
there.
You
can
find
a
two-bedroom
for
1200..
These
are
not
actually
more
affordable
than
what
already
exists
on
that
block.
These
are
about
par
for
the
course.
The
difference
being,
is
you
don't
get
a
private
kitchen
and
setting
the
standard
is
dangerous.
We
look
at
that.
You
know
we
have
similar
projects
like
this.
In,
like
the
ballpark
neighborhood,
where
I
live,
I
live
in
one
of
these
a
year
and
a
half
ago
they
would
probably
run
for
about.
I
mean
they
were
running
for
625
a
month.
M
Now
someone
just
moved
into
one
next
door,
they're
telling
me
they
before
any
of
the
other
fees.
It
is
now
900.
We
have
no
guarantees
from
the
developer
that
these
will
remain
affordable
and
there's
no
stipulations
stating
that
we're
not
going
to
make
affordability
by
decreasing
the
quality.
All
we're
going
to
make
is
the
same
kind
of
less
affordable,
increasing,
rent,
but
just
worse
quality
for
everybody,
so
yeah
there's
I
mean
I'm
sure
that
people
have
seen
you
can
objectively.
M
Look
at
this
there's
been
a
declining
size
of
apartment,
along
with
the
increasing
rent
in
this
city.
So
that's
just
a
fact.
If
you
go
off
the
multi-family
definition
that
the
developer
wants
to
use,
one
of
these
four
bedrooms
is
actually
3
200
a
pop
for
every
month.
That
is
not
cheaper
than
what
exists
in
the
area
for
a
four
bedroom.
M
Projects
like
these
are
intended
to
maximize
the
amount
of
rent
collected
from
working
people
per
square
foot
and
not
to
provide
affordable
housing
units
built
out
private
kitchens
or
bathrooms
like
this.
One
create
the
incentive
for
landlords
in
the
same
market
to
charge
a
premium
for
their
apartments
that
have
private
amenities.
Other
developers
of
similar
projects
have
already
stated
their
intention
to
charge
upwards
of
thirteen
hundred
thirteen
hundred
dollars
for
these
types
of
units.
Eventually,
the
planning
commission
is
a
public
body
intended
to
act
in
the
best
interest
of
the
public.
M
With
this
consideration,
you
cannot
good
conscious,
approve
this
proposal
or
give
it
a
positive
recommendation,
the
harm
this
could
do
to
the
neighborhood
and
the
city.
By
creating
this
new
standard,
yep.
F
E
F
We
will
come
back
to
keenan,
let's
see,
let's
try
madeline
madeleine
gerhardt.
J
J
This
is
being
cast
as
affordable
housing
but,
as
others
have
pointed
out,
this
is
likely
to
have
the
opposite
effect,
not
only
in
that
it
probably
won't
stay
affordable
over
time,
but
that
it
will
actually,
you
know,
by
by
casting
like
privacy
and
security
as
like
some
luxury
feature,
and
not
just
like
a
standard
of
living
that
everyone
deserves.
It's
that's.
You
know
it
sets
up
developers
to
charge
even
more
for
what
people
single
or
families
are
already
getting.
J
I
think
that
kevin
perry
you
specifically
mentioned
dignity
as
a
need
that
the
bueno
avenue
rooming
house
style
living
affords.
I
disagree
that
that's
not
dignity
having
to
share
your
space
with
someone
that
you
have
not
picked,
not
vetted
that
you
know
that's
only
up
to
the
management
like
that's,
not
dignity,
and
then
let
me
look
through
my
other
notes
here:
the
project
positions
itself
as
a
liberating
choice
for
lower
income.
J
Well,
actually,
I
mean
that's
the
thing
like
if
you're,
if
you're
targeting
just
single
adults,
then
it's
not
really
an
affordable
housing
solution.
Is
it
because
when,
when
we
raise
concerns
in
this
city
about
affordable
housing,
it's
not
just
for
single
people,
it's
for
everyone,
families
who
are
trying
to
live
on
working
class
wages
like
this
is
not
an
affordable
housing
solution.
It
just
isn't.
It
in
fact
allows
developers
to
make
more
profits
per
square
foot
while
forcing
horse
residents
to
sacrifice
their
needs.
J
I
urge
you
to
not
support
this
rezone
or
this
project
to
choose.
This
is
still
even
instead
of
luxury
townhomes.
It's
still
supporting
the
status
quo.
We
need
the
city
to
put
people's
needs
before
developer
profits.
Thank
you.
O
Hi,
can
you
hear
me
yes,
okay,
great
I'm
on
I'm
on
phone,
but
watching
on
the
computer,
so
I
want
to
make
sure
I
just
wanted
to
to
say
I'm
in
favor
of
this
project.
I
think
I
think
we're
losing
a
little
bit
of
the
focus
when
we're
commenting
on
whether
the
boarding
house
should
be
approved
or
not
when
we're
really
talking
about
the
rmf
45
zoning
change.
Here
I
heard
a
couple
comments
about.
O
You
know
the
the
relativity
of
dooley
court
and
windsor
street
and
all
these
areas
that
are
there
are
pleasant
streets
to
walk
down
because
of
the
single
family
connection
and
they're
all
surrounded
in
a
single
family
kind
of
block.
This
block
is
all
multi-family
for
the
most
part.
It's
already,
I
would
say
what
90
percent
rmf-45
we're
asking
to
just
make
that
zone
more
consistent
across
the
way,
and
the
reality
is.
Is
that
bueno
alley
right
now?
Is
it's
a
dark
alley?
It
has
no
city
support.
There's
no
lighting,
there's
no
curb
gutter.
It's
dirt!
O
It's
kind
of
a
dangerous
area
to
you
know
if
you
walk
down
that
street
at
night,
I
you
know,
I
I
don't
feel
super
safe
as
it
is,
so
I
do
believe
that
developers
will
be
redeveloping
this
this
lot,
regardless
as
it
stands,
and
I
think
if
we
have
the
opportunity
to
make
it
more
of
a
consistent
zoning,
so
that
you
know
there's
the
flexibility
there
to
develop
it
in
in
in
a
more
consistent
way.
I
think
that's
that's
a
real
benefit
for
for
developers
as
well
as
for
the
city
as
a
whole.
O
I'm
also
not
hearing
many
alternatives
when
people
suggest
not
to
propose
not
to
accept
this.
You
know
that
I'm
hearing
reasons
why
they
don't
like
the
idea
of
what
the
developer
is
proposing,
but
I'm
not
hearing
their
alternatives
that
could
reasonably
be
built
there.
A
developer
will
honestly
build
there.
So
what
would
have
been
nice
is
to
hear
from
the
people,
not
in
favor
of
like
well.
O
We
would
rather
see
you
know
townhouses,
because
I
mean
that's
the
alternative
of
what
we're
going
to
see
develop
there,
and
so
you
know,
hearing
some
other
alternatives
would
be
a
little
more
compelling
when
I
hear
someone
say
they're,
not
in
favor
of
the
zone
change.
I
think
I
think
that's
about
all
I
have
so.
I
appreciate
your
time.
F
Okay,
we're
gonna
go
to
keenan
wells
hello.
Can
you.
E
Hear
me:
can
you
hear
me
okay,
yeah
sorry
about
earlier?
My
mic
must
have
broken
so
first
I
will
propose
an
alternative,
actual,
affordable
housing.
This
is
possible.
We
can
do
this
in
the
city
we
are
currently
looking
at.
Something
that
is
attainable
is
not
affordable.
Class
a
luxury
is
the
opposite
of
affordable.
E
The
developer
has
himself
stated
that
this
is
closer
to
a
hotel
than
an
apartment,
and
yet
you're
proposing
people
stay
here
long
term,
okay,
also
nine
hundred
dollars
a
month.
Okay,
if,
if
you
compare
that
to
a
two
person
apartment,
that's
two
people
sharing
a
br
sharing
a
fridge
with
five
other
people,
which
straight
up
does
not
work
and
they're
paying
eighteen
hundred
dollars
a
month
versus
the
fifteen
hundred
dollars
a
month,
which
is
on
the
already
inflated
rate
for
a
two
bedroom.
E
So
this
is
more
expensive
than
a
two-bedroom
for
two
people.
It's
also
okay.
They
say
this
isn't:
student,
okay,
student
housing.
This
is
clearly
the
only
people
who
would
want
this
are
students,
but
this
isn't
a
university
dorm.
There
is
no
student
safety.
There
is
no
dorm
oversight.
There
is
no
ra.
E
This
is
essentially
a
unsafe
dorm
at
okay
at
class,
a
luxury
luxury
prices
rather
than
actual
affordable,
affordable
count,
affordable
housing,
so
yeah
we're
making
a
choice
about
the
future
here
and
I'd
like
it
to
be
affordable
housing.
This
is
something
that
the
owner
could
commit
to
doing,
but
have
consciously
decided
not
to
and
before
and
pursue
class
a
luxury
housing.
E
Even
if
only
a
third
of
the
units
have
cars,
you
have
way
too
little
parking
and
those
cars
will
spread
out
to
other
areas,
a
large
number
of
students
and,
if
you're
stowing
to
blue-collar
workers,
most
blue-collar
workers
have
cars,
and
if
these
people
aren't
family
sharing
these
then
you're,
okay,
you're
talking
about
possibly
hundreds
of
cars
in
a
space
that,
even
if
it
was
entirely
parking
lot,
could
not
fit
all
those
cars.
So,
mr
perry,
how
much
parking
are
you
actually
committed
to
providing
and
have
you
done
that
in
any
binding
way?
E
F
Thank
you.
Kanan
next
is
michael
valentine,
michael.
P
P
I
was
arrested
before
the
june
meeting
or
july
meeting
before
I
can
make
comments,
then
so
don't
plan
on
getting
arrested
at
this
moment,
but
I'm
here
in
support
of
wasatch
tenets,
and
I
urge
you
to
vote
against
the
zoning
change.
I
think
this
is
a
terrible
idea
for
several
reasons.
Specifically
I'd
like
to
talk
about
the
rmf
zoning.
I
think
the
the
zoning
is
decimating
salt
lake
city.
P
We
see
it
over
and
over
again
with
the
theater
and
our
new
restoration
society
that
we
started
to
fight
against
the
decimation
of
historic
properties.
This
high
density
zoning
is
is
just
destroying
all
sorts
of
character
and
important
things
to
the
city,
and
I
think
it
you
guys,
have
a
very
serious
role
in
the
planning
commission
of
how
you
use
this,
and
the
second
goes
against
the
master
plans.
P
Master
plans
are
there
for
a
reason:
they're
created
with
tens
of
thousands
of
hours
community
input
directly
from
citizens
they're
our
best
blueprint
for
what
the
city
want.
This
should
be
coming
directly
from
citizens.
So
any
changing
going
against
the
master
plan
is
very
serious
thing
and
I
don't
think
the
applicant
and
these
developers
have
adequately
shown
why
they
deserve
the
changing
of
the
master
plan.
Salt
lake
city
is
going
against
all
sorts
of
master
plans.
We
see
with
the
theater
again.
P
The
pantages
was
on
the
downtown
master
plan,
specifically
there
to
be
restored
into
a
cultural
and
activity
generator
that
the
city
went
against
and
you
guys
voted
against
as
well.
We
see
in
the
foothills
where
they're
going,
it's
master
plans
for
foot
trails,
and
I
think
this
is
a
very
serious
problem.
Master
plans
are
there
for
it
to
be
for
a
reason,
and
then,
lastly,
these
are
dormitories.
P
Let's
not
like
call
things
what
they
aren't.
I
know
this
developer
was
talking
about
a
random
person
with
32
thousand
dollars.
If
we
can
afford
this
for
twenty
five
percent,
but
that
we
don't,
they
didn't
seem
to
mention
that
they're
not
getting
a
hundred
percent
of
an
apartment,
they're
getting
a
shared
kitchen
space.
These
are
dorms
and
just
googling
quickly
on
campus,
what
dorms
cost
is
500
an
hour,
so
vote
against
this
do
do
do
what's
right
and
best
for
the
city,
these
these
properties.
Thank.
F
Okay,
next
we'll
have
jen
colby
speak,
go
ahead,
jen.
B
Hello,
jen
caldey.
I
also
ask
that
you
vote
to
deny
these
applications.
These
are
my
own
comments.
By
the
way,
I
respectfully
disagree
with
the
staff
report.
It
gave
the
developers
the
benefit
of
the
doubt
and
downplayed
the
numerous
conflicts
with
the
area
master
plan
and
surrounding
context,
citing
bigger
city
plans,
while
ignoring
the
master
plan
is
really
problematic
in
this
entire
process
and
the
developers
have
completely
ignored
the
master
plan.
B
It
does
not
fit
the
criteria
for
rezone
and
is
in
direct
conflict
with
the
future
land
use
map,
even
with
the
confusion
over
what
units
are
in
shared
housing,
it
concur
with
the
chair's
assessment
at
the
previous
hearing
that
the
sr-3
upzoning
would
be
a
mistake.
We
would
regret
the
master
plan
highlights
these
inner
courts
as
one
of
the
distinctive
pattern
language
features
of
this
area.
The
up
zoning
will
lay
the
groundwork
for
a
massive
inappropriately
scaled
luxury,
co-housing
that
displaces
low-income
and
disabled
residents,
who
can't
afford
luxury.
B
I'm
particularly
concerned
also
with
one
of
the
commissioners
previous
remarks.
They
stated
they
did
not
like
it
when
people
said
this
was
not
the
place
for
a
given
project.
Isn't
the
entire
function
of
the
planning
commission
to
understand,
uphold
and
properly
interpret
zoning
ordinances
and
maps
and
I'll
say,
area
plans?
What
goes
where
in
context
is
zoning
101
keeping
development
and
uses
in
the
correct
zones
is
crucial
to
preventing
rampant
real
estate
speculation
and
dysfunctional
neighborhoods
and
infrastructure.
B
Perhaps
you
never
get
follow-up
reports
on
the
outcomes
of
applications
that
are
denied
here
are
two:
the
hackston
apartments
at
900
east
redeveloped,
within
the
existing
zoning
and
saved
to
historic
houses
that
are
now
rentals
for
the
five
200
south
houses.
The
threats
of
tear
downs
were
indeed
a
bluff
and
the
owners
have
painted
fixed
up
and
re-rented
them.
There
are
other
options,
please
resist
being
swayed
by
claims
of
houses
and
disrepair
and
high
infrastructure
costs.
They
should
have
done
due
diligence
and
should
not
have
overpaid
for
this
land.
B
F
Okay,
next
is
jared:
zemp
go
ahead.
Jared
hi
there.
Q
Hey
I've
lived
in
the
university
area
for
over
the
last
15
years
and
about
a
block
from
the
university,
and
what
I've
seen
over
and
over
again
is
that,
regardless
of
zoning
and
regardless
of
enforcement,
we
start
to
see
single-family
homes
turn
into
multi-family
dwellings
regardless,
and
so
I
I
think
that
to
me
what
I've
seen
is
that
all
of
our
best
laid
plans
aside
the
market
kind
of
dictates
how
land
will
end
up
being
used
and
how
homes
will
end
up
being
used
that
it's
it's
not
even
up
to
mr
perry
to
decide
what
rent
is
going
to
be.
Q
If
the
market
wants
to
pay
900
for
a
shared
room,
they'll
pay
it,
and
if
they
don't,
then
mr
perry
will
have
to
lower
his
price
and-
and
I
think
that's
what
we've
seen
in
that
in
that
whole
area
is,
is
a
lot
of
hoping
that
zoning
will
fix
the
problem
when,
in
reality,
the
market
makes
the
decision
and
what
I,
what
I
like
about.
Q
What
mr
perry
is
proposing
is
that
it
increases
the
the
supply
of
available
homes
which
should
bring
down
the
price
overall,
because
I
don't,
I
don't
think
the
developers
set
the
price.
I
think
the
market
sets
the
price
by
the
amount
of
available
places
to
rent,
and
so
I
like
the
idea
of
of
housing
that
shares
space
and
and
has
a
lower
carbon
footprint,
because
I
also
think
it
it
overall
brings
down
the
cost
of
housing
in
the
city.
Q
I
don't
think
any
one
project
can
bring
down
the
cost
of
housing,
but
I
think
that
this
type
of
project
can
can
influence
the
the
supply
that's
available,
and
I
think
that
it
this
appears
to
be
done
in
a
in
a
responsible
way
in
a
community
that
allows
for
biking
and
walking
yeah,
and
if
the
market
doesn't
want
dormitory
style
housing,
then
by
all
means
they
won't
pay
for
it
and
it'll
be
repurposed
somewhere
else.
But
I've
I've
seen
this
sort
of
thing
work
in
other
cities.
Q
I
travel
a
lot
for
work
and,
and
I've
actually
stayed
in
in
homes
like
this
in
in
other
american
cities,
as
well
as
european
cities
and
and
it's
remarkably
effective.
Thank
you.
F
R
You
can
hear
me
yes,
because
it
says
mute
on
mine,
okay.
I
strongly
encourage
that
you
vote
or
give
a
negative
recommendation.
R
It
applies
zone,
amendment
code,
standards
to
favor,
a
developer
and
inappropriately
it
applies
other
city,
housing
plans
and
goals
to
benefit
the
developer
side.
So
what
we
have
is
that
developers
are
being
favored
by
the
planning
division
and
the
people
who
live
there.
I
am
one
of
them-
are
have
to
take
our
own
time
and
effort
to
try
and
fight
against
these
developments
that
are
happening
all
the
time.
It's
just
constant
that
we're
fighting
these.
R
It
fails
to
provo,
to
preserve,
naturally
affordable,
older
housing,
with
creative,
infill
and
rehabilitation,
not
just
tear
downs
and
again,
as
jen
pointed
out,
the
houses
on
200
south
have
been
rehabilitated
and
they
are
all
being
lived
in
again.
The
the
threats
that
these
developers
go.
Oh
nobody
can
live
there.
It's
totally.
You
know
that
it's
that's!
R
I
I'm
gonna
watch
my
language,
okay,
so
it's
totally
inappropriate
for
the
city
to
be
tearing
down
these
very
unique
inner
courts
that
are
lovely
places
for
people
to
live
and
it's
it's
destroying
people's
lives
and
the
developer
is
only
interested
in
money.
I
think
his
plan
stinks
and
I
just
hope
that
you
will
not
ignore
the
master
plan
and
you
will
ignore
that
that
spot
zoning
up
zoning
fuels
more
land,
banking
and
driving
up
of
prices,
and
that's
not
what
we
need
in
this
neighborhood.
R
N
Hi,
yes,
thank
you.
Can
you
all
hear
me
all
right?
Yes,
thank
you
good
evening.
My
name
is
sarah
j
bland.
I
live
in
district
one.
I
am
here
representing
cooperation,
slc
cooperation
slc
opposes
the
zoning
amendments
for
the
bueno
avenue
apartments
and
calls
for
the
planning
commission
to
move
to
recommend
denying
them
for
the
following
reasons.
N
Firstly,
co-living
in
a
space
that
is
owned
and
operated
by
someone
working
to
make
a
profit
off
land
in
the
real
estate
market
by
packing
in
as
many
residents
as
possible
on
said,
land
will
never
render
affordable
housing.
The
property
owner
can
still
raise
rent
in
accordance
with
the
quote
market,
and
we
all
know
that
they
will
continue
to
do
so.
N
Market-Based
rent,
its
number
one
goal
being
to
make
money
rather
than
to
sustainably
house
people
will
continue
to
increase
as
income
inequality
continues
to
increase,
and
young
and
low-income
folks
will
continue
to
be
pushed
out.
Secondly,
young
and
low-income
folks
are
already
sharing
living
space
with
each
other.
This
is
called
having
to
get
a
roommate
in
your
mid-30s
in
order
to
survive
in
the
city
in
which
your
job
and
community
are
located.
These
proposed
amendments
are
not
an
innovative
use
of
resources
to
tackle
what
is
a
systemic
issue.
N
That
would
be
a
step
up
from
this
quote:
co-living
now,
of
course,
in
the
prec
and
housing
co-op
models,
land
does
not
become
modified
but
held
in
trust
and
those
people
who
partner
with
each
other
co-own
and
co-govern
the
spaces
on
which
they
reside.
Those
people
have
a
say
about
costs
and,
what's
best
for
their
community,
those
people
are
engaged
democratically
with
one
another.
I
urge
you
to
change
your
paradigm
on
the
meaning
of
what
so-called
community
and
economic
development
is.
The
market
is
what
we
make
of
it.
It's
not
some
magical,
invisible,
all-powerful
force.
F
Okay,
next
is
tears
b.
L
Can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
okay,
please
start
my
time
as
of
now,
not
when
you
called
my
name.
Thank
you
setting
a
precedent
of
co-living
as
a
means
of
meeting
the
needs
of
poor
and
working-class
people
of
this
city
is
dangerous
and
dishonorable.
By
the
way
I
am
a
member
of
wasatch
center,
as
it
redefines
the
most
rudimentary
hud
standards
of
non-homelessness
as
luxury.
The
people
of
the
valley
do
not
merely
deserve
basic
housing
as
this
so-called
luxury
housing
offers,
but
rather
we
deserve
decent
housing.
L
L
Q
L
Par
with
what
these
units
cost,
moreover,
these
rent
prices
will
only
increase
per
the
trajectory
of
current
market
rates
of
rent
in
the
valley,
there's
no
stipulation
that
they
will
remain
affordable
and
will
set
a
precedent
for
basic
immunities
as
being
a
luxury
allowing
other
rents
to
increase
that
have
those
as
a
former
case
manager
at
the
road
home.
I
can
also
say
with
certainty
that
the
co-living
would
only
increase
the
amount
of
discrimination
against
those
that
are
seeking
to
restore
their
lives
from
the
situation
of
homelessness.
L
The
current
developers
seeking
to
invest
in
this
project
are
functionally
threatening
us
with
even
higher
rent
prices
via
luxury
townhomes
within
the
current
zoning,
if
we
do
not
key
to
their
desires
with
that
higher
precedent
for
co-living,
that
is
an
attack
on
our
rights
and
we
need
on
our
rights
and
needs
as
tenants.
If
you
believe
that
development
should
be
conducted
with
the
people's
interests
primarily
in
mind,
I
urge
you
to
a
vote
against
this
proposal.
F
A
Yes-
and
I
would
ask
if
those
of
you
who
have
already
spoken,
would
you
go
ahead
and
hit
that
little
hand
again,
so
that
would
just
make
sure
that
that
you
don't
need
to
you're
not
wanting
to
that
we've
gotten
everybody.
G
My
name
is
trapper
roderick,
I
li
I
am
a
local
business
owner
and
a
local
builder
as
well.
My
clients
have
expressed
desperate
need
for
a
project
like
bueno
avenue.
It's
nearly
impossible
to
be
a
professional
in
this
city,
whether
you
are
established
or
just
getting
started.
Rent
and
home
ownership
is
very
expensive.
G
G
One
comment:
I'm
going
to
read:
katie
ducos
d-u-c-o-s.
My
name
is
katie
dukos
and
I'm
living
or
I'm
moving
to
the
east
central
neighborhood.
I'm
urging
the
commission
to
vote
against
the
proposal
for
bueno
avenue
apartments.
This
proposed
development
causes
many
problems
and
will
negatively
impact
the
living
conditions
of
the
east,
central
neighborhood
and
the
whole
community.
G
This
rezone
would
allow
developers
to
create
micro
units
that
force
working
people
to
share
kitchens
because
there
will
be
no
kitchen
in
the
unit.
This
unit
itself,
these
units
increase
in
rent
dramatically
regularly,
which
is
a
concern
for
tenants
in
those
units
with
a
starting
price
of
eight
hundred
dollars,
but
it
is
also
a
major
concern
for
other
apartments
in
the
area.
If
kitchens
become
a
luxury
good,
most
tenants
in
the
area
will
be
priced
out
of
their
apartments
and
left
with
no
options.
G
As
a
concern
renter,
I'm
asking
the
commission
to
vote
no
on
this
proposal.
I
work
full
time
with
over
twice
the
minimum
wage
and
can
barely
afford
800
rent
the
starting
point
for
these
market
units.
We
can't
allow
deregulation
and
developers
to
price
out
so
many
of
the
renters
that
make
salt
lake
city
what
it
is
and
then
jeff
taylor
sent
his
friend's
comment.
His
friend
was
david
beam.
G
Let
me
just
open
this
pdf
okay,
I
david
beam,
lived
at
732,
east
bueno
for
30
years
jeff,
taylor
and
bruce
johnson
brought
the
bought
the
property
a
number
of
years
ago.
They
were
good
landlords
to
me.
They
did
not
raise
my
rent,
they
fixed
the
issues
and
repairs
that
came
up
and
they
dealt
with
a
number
of
sewer
repairs.
They
gave
me
lots
of
notice
that
a
development
was
planned
for
my
area
and
even
provided
me
with
a
deposit
when
I
found
a
new
apartment.
G
S
F
F
We
do
have
a
couple
of
more
hands
that
have
come
up.
The
first
here
is
angela.
Montenegro
go
ahead.
Angela.
S
S
Thank
you
to
everyone
who
are
raising
their
voices
against
this
proposal.
Now
I
am
urging
the
commission
to
vote
against
this
proposal
for
the
following
reasons:
many
which
have
been
stated
already
here
tonight.
The
proposal
zone
will
negatively
affect
the
standard
of
living
in
the
neighborhood
and
the
city
as
a
whole.
The
city
should
not
allow
developers
to
force
working
people
into
sharing
kitchens.
S
The
proposed
projects
does
not
include
private
kitchens
within
the
units.
Many
micro
apartments
have
seen
their
end
and
cost
increased
nearly
30
percent
over
the
last
year
along
the
last
year.
The
consequences
of
allowing
developers
to
build
tenements
as
a
solution
for
a
housing
service
far
outweighs
the
benefits.
S
S
T
Thank
you
very
much,
so
I've
been
listening.
All
the
comments-
and
you
know
where
I
was
gonna
start-
was
in
the
context
of
development.
The
developers
surely
purchase
the
properties
with
the
clear
understanding
of
how
they
were
zoned.
It's
it's
a
reflection
of
the
past
of
community
community
input
in
the
past
of
of
numerous
hours
of
city
input
of
the
residents
giving
their
input.
I
think
that's
clearly
reflected
in
the
community
council's
input
that
they
don't
want
to
see
this.
T
The
zoning
changed
and
upzoned,
and
so
you
know
and
and
they've
said
as
much
they've
said
that.
Well,
if
we
don't
do
this,
we
can
build
town
homes,
whether
they're,
expensive
or
not,
is
a
reflection
of
the
market.
As
we
all
know
the
market
changes
and,
as
was
pointed
out
by
another
commenter,
you
know
that
their
goals
could
change
with
an
approval
or
with
a
denial
of
this
application.
T
So
someone
comment
about
alternatives.
Obviously
that's
one
of
their
alternatives.
You
don't
observe
the
property
to
accommodate
this
project.
For
all
the
reasons
people
are
are
against
community
council,
in
particular
master
planning
in
particular,
or
even
just
because
it's
currently
zoned
the
way
it
is
for
a
reason
that
isn't
superfluous.
It's
been
that
way
for
a
very
specific
reason
and,
like
I
said
from
the
input
in
the
past
and
from
how
the
people
of
the
city
wanted
to
see
our
city
develop
and
progress.
T
This
particular
property
in
in
in
my
perspective,
is,
is
even
more
important.
It's
stuck
between
the
south
temple
and
avenues,
historic
zone,
the
university,
historic
district
and
the
central
city
historic
district
and
is
itself
inside
of
a
national
historic
district.
So
how
much
they
paid
for
the
property
is
probably
a
reflection
of
what
they're
trying
to
do
their
alternatives
are
to
do
a
high-end
townhome
project
under
the
current
zoning,
or
if
they
wanted
to
make
less
money,
they
could
restore
some
of
the
homes
and
and
fix
up
some
of
the
other
properties
with
new
housing.
T
So
I
mean
the
alternatives
are
are
numerous.
I
would
urge
you
not
to
not
to
approve
or
recommend
this,
because
I
think
that
the
loudest
voices
and
the
majority
of
the
votes
voices
against
this
are
the
community
and
the
community
doesn't
want
it.
Thank
you.
F
United
I've
lived
on
this
street
for
23
years.
My
entire
life.
C
F
Luxury
products,
I
don't
think
we
should
be
changing
this
neighborhood
in
a
way
that
only
would
be
used
by
students
or
in
a
form
of
a
halfway
house.
I
I
I
don't
understand
why
we're
focusing
on
destroying
people's
homes
in
order
to
build
new
housing
when,
as
many
salt
lake
city
residents
would
know,
the
entire
city
is
speckled
with
unused
land.
You
know
just
down
the
street
from
me
on.
Fourth
and
second
there's
a
big
lot:
that's
been
sitting
vacant
and
empty
and
unused
for
the
past
four
or
five
years.
Why
aren't
we
building
there?
F
Why
are
we
building
on
people's
homes?
There
are
empty
lots
all
over
the
place.
Salt
lake
city
is
full
of
seldom
used
parking
lots.
I'm
just
I'm.
I'm
frustrated
that
you
know
the
projects
that
we're
trying
to
build,
and
you
know
change
this
city,
I'm
not
against
densification,
I'm
very
much
against
this
project
where
we're
destroying
people's
homes
in
order
to
build
small
dorm
rooms.
I
I
don't
understand.
F
I
don't
understand
why
this
is
a
viable
option.
Why
we
would
why
we
would
push
this
through.
That's
that's
all
I
have.
Thank
you.
J
Hi,
can
you
hear
me
yes,
hi
yeah.
I
am
also
urging
the
commission
to
vote
against
this
proposal.
I
live
in
central
city
liberty,
wells
area,
just
a
few
blocks
away
as
a
low-income
service
worker
who
lives
in
the
neighborhood.
I
am
supposedly
the
target
market
for
this
development,
but
I
do
not
think
that
this
project
will
meet
the
needs
of
people
like
me.
Nor
do
I
think
that
it
is
significantly
less
expensive
than
our
current
options.
J
Traditionally
and
currently
working
class
people
can
share
rent
costs
and
space
as
roommates.
If
they're
looking
to
save
money,
this
development
removes
the
choice
of
who
a
person
lives
with
and
instead
throws
adult
strangers
together
into
dorm
style
living.
J
Some
of
the
prices
have
risen
as
much
as
30
in
the
past
year
without
rent
control.
Why
should
we
expect
that
these
single
bedrooms,
which
are
proposed
to
be
around
800,
won't
be
twelve
hundred
dollars
a
year
or
so
in
the
future?
J
It's
also
been
said
almost
in
a
threatening
way,
that
if
this
rooming
house
is
not
built,
luxury
town
homes
will
be
I'd,
just
like
to
say
that
every
time
we
build
a
new
development
in
this
city,
we
are
making
a
choice.
We
can
choose
what
is
built
in
this
spot.
We
can
choose
affordable
housing
that
could
look
like
small
single
family
homes
or
small
traditional
apartment
buildings
which
could
fit
within
current
zoning,
and
you
know
we
could
also
choose
to
regulate
rent
prices,
but
that's
a
different
story.
J
So
again,
please
vote
against
this
proposal.
Thank
you.
F
A
A
Do
the
commissioners
have
any
specific
questions
arising
out
of
the
testimony
for
the
developer?
Actually,
madame,
oh.
G
Yes,
that
the
developer
wanted
to
make
a
statement
in
response
to
the
public
hearing.
A
Yes,
I
know
he
did.
Thank
you.
So
do
the
commissioners
have
any
specific
questions
for
the
developer?
That
came
out
of
the
the
comments
in
the
public
hearing.
A
Okay,
mr
perry,
please
keep
your
remarks
to
the
contents
of
the
public
hearing.
C
C
There
was
a
lot
of
responses
that
were
against
it,
but
provided
no
no
reasonable
alternatives.
There
was
a
specific
question
regarding
parking
stalls.
We
will
have
72
parking
stalls.
This
meets
the
city
code
required
number
of
parking
stalls.
Also,
there
was
a
real
fixation
on
our
rent
numbers,
stating
900
to
1300
per
month
in
rent.
C
We
did
not
address
the
rent
number
in
our
in
our
statement.
I
will
address
that
now
and
state
that
co-living
is
a
concept
that
has
been
proven
across
several
markets.
It's
been
proven
to
be
pricing,
these
units
at
40
below
a
comparable
studio
apartment.
I
want
to
be
clear
on
what
this
is.
C
This
is
market
rate
apartments,
that,
by
design
and
by
function
of
what
they
are,
they
lead
to
obtainably
price
rents
that
leads
to
40
below
market
rate
rents.
End
of
story,
the
market
dictates
what
happens
not
just
in
terms
of
apartments,
but
everything
how
properties
are
developed,
how
businesses
are
run.
C
You
know
stating
that
you
know
we
just
raise
our
rents.
Well,
the
market
is
actually
what
dictates
how
things
go.
This
type
of
project
is
subject
to
those
same
market
conditions.
I
also
want
to
state
that
we
all
know
the
city
is
facing
a
major
housing
crisis.
I
think
everybody's
basically
stated
that
some
spoke
about
the
master
plan
documents
and
I
wanted
to
address
that
as
well.
C
So
we
believe
that
this
rezone,
the
rezone
of
this
property,
exceeds
the
expectations
set
forth
in
the
master
upon
document
clan
salt
lake,
while
providing
housing,
that's
an
innovative
and
attainably
priced
housing
through
a
market
and
private
development.
I
also
want
to
address
that
disrepair
and
neglect
is,
of
course,
not
a
justification
for
a
rezone.
C
C
They
placed
this
property,
these
specific
parcels,
where
only
one
point,
nine
percent
of
parcels
in
this
community
replaced
they
placed
it
in
the
worst
category
requiring
substantial
reconstruction.
This
was
forty
years
ago
nearly
in
nineteen.
Eighty
four
so
think
for
a
moment
how
much
growth
has
occurred
in
the
past
four
years,
I
have
personally
gone
and
walked
every
inner
block
street
zoned
sr-3
in
this
community.
Every
single
one
of
them
has
seen
significant
upgrades
with
new
homes,
renovations,
city,
funded
utility
upgrades,
streetways,
sidewalks,
curb
and
gutters
all
have
been
installed.
C
There
is
a
reason
why
this
sr-3
zoned
area
has
not
been
improved,
while
every
other
sr3
zoned
alley
is
improving
and
is
thriving,
they're
beautiful.
That's
a
real,
strong
indication
that
this
is
not
the
right
fit
for
an
sr3
zone.
It's
correct
to
state
that
the
sr3
zone
was
established
to
protect
inter-block
neighborhoods.
C
However,
a
strong
indicator
that
a
pro
property
is
inappropriately
zoned
would
be
when
the
city
hasn't
followed
through
on
their
call
for
investment
to
improve
it
over
a
40-year
period.
This
has
been
evidenced
by
the
lack
of
interest
in
investment
on
this
property,
both
by
both
previous
private
owners
and
by
the
city.
C
Finally,
you
know
there
was
some
questions
about
you
know.
It's
been
brought
up
that
this
may
be
good.
You
know
this
may
be
something
that
the
community
needs.
We've
heard
that
several
times,
including
in
the
last
meeting,
just
not
here.
So,
if
not
here,
where,
where
do
we
solve
the
housing
crisis?
C
Should
it
not
be
here
because
it's
on
the
east
side
instead
of
on
the
west
side?
Is
it
because
there's
more
prominent
individuals
on
the
east
side,
it
is
unreasonably
to
simultaneously
state
that
my
city
needs
housing
and
they
need
attainably
high
priced
housing,
but
I
don't
want
it
in
my
neighborhood,
especially
especially
when
the
alternative
is
clearly
the
construction
of
million
dollar
town
homes.
You
know
I
would
love
to
have
million
dollar
homes
built
around
my
property
as
well.
C
C
We
should
be
clear,
it
is
market
rate,
but
it
is
built
and
operated
in
a
professional
and
safe
way
that
keeps
rent
attainable
for
the
individual,
regardless
of
their
income
level
and
whether
they
qualify
for
this
type
of
housing,
and
I
mean
that
qualify
in
terms
of
rent,
restricted
housing,
where
many
can't
afford
rent
don't
qualify
for
rent
restricted,
but
still
can't
find
somewhere
to
live
well,
it
might
not
be
the
choice
of
housing
for
some
and
it
certainly
does
not
fit
all.
There
is
strong
demand
for
this
housing
at
this
price
point.
C
This
project
is
an
excellent
way
to
fulfill
that
duty.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
I
would
like
to
say
something
before
we
make
a
motion,
though,
because
normally
I
will
not
be
able
to
vote
on
this,
but
I
am
not
in
favor
of
this
project.
A
The
developer
has
talked
about
the
cost
of
infrastructure,
and
even
his
engineers
says
that
the
cost
of
infrastructure
is
the
same,
whether
you
build
this
large
project
or
you
build
or
you
renovate
the
existing
houses
and
I'm
assuming
it
would
be
pretty
much
the
same
and
to
to
be
shared
across
the
allowable
30
units
of
townhouses.
If
that's
where
that
were
going
to
happen,
I
think,
by
denying
this,
we
could
also
give
this
property
a
chance
to
see
some
other
kind
of
development.
That
is
more
in
keeping
with
the
master
plan
for
the
community.
A
I
would
be
very
sad
to
lose
the
opportunity
that
is
currently
afforded
by
these
smaller
streets
within
these
within
the
blocks,
so
go
ahead.
Amy.
If
anybody
else
wants
to
speak,
please
do.
B
I'll
make
a
motion
and
we
can
discuss
after
that.
Okay,
based
on
the
information
in
the
staff
report,
the
information
presented
and
the
input
received
during
the
public
hearing.
I
move
that
the
planning
commission
forward
a
favorable
recommendation
to
the
city
council
for
the
master
plan
pln
pcm
2021-00047
and
zoning
pln
pcm
2021-00048
amendments
with
the
following
conditions:
one
that
the
plan,
development
and
conditional
use
are
approved
by
the
planning
commission
and
two
that
the
ten
parcels
be
consolidated
into
one
person.
D
Mr
chairman,
this
is
kacha
peace.
May
I
speak
about
the
motion.
B
A
That
are
you,
are
you.
Are
you
against
the
form
of
the
motion,
katya.
D
Yeah-
and
I
was
advised
this
afternoon
by
our
city-
attorneys
that
it
you
know,
we
can't
make
a
condition
on
the
master
plan.
I
mean
the
plan
development
condition
used
before
the
the
property
is
zoned
appropriately
for
the
plant
development
and
condition
use
and
the
consolidation
of
the
lots.
D
B
A
I
This
is
hannah.
I
can
further
explain.
I
think
the
principle
behind
them
is
fine.
If
the
desire
is
to
consider
those,
I
think
it's
just
a
matter
of
the
form.
What
we
don't
want
is
them
to
be
conditions
precedent
to
the
zoning,
because
then
you
wouldn't
be
able
to
do
the
zoning
until
the
administrative
acts
that
can't
happen
until
the
zoning
happens
happen,
and
so
it
places
in
a
difficult
legal
position.
I
But
if
you
do
want
those
requirements,
we
could
appropriately
place
them
in
the
form
of
a
development
agreement
tied
to
the
zoning
which
would
ensure
that
those
things
take
place.
So
I
would
just
tweak
the
motion,
if
it's
your
desire
to
require
the
consolidation
of
the
lots
and
receive
approval
for
the
conditional
use
for
this
proposed
project
that
those
just
be
terms
incorporated
in
a
development
agreement
tied
to
the
rezone
as
opposed
to
a
condition
precedent.
So
that's
a
lot
of
nuance,
but.
A
So
hannah
I'm
a
little
confused
here,
so
the
condition
that
the
condition
that
the
planned
development
and
conditional
use
are
approved
by
the
planning
commission.
If
we
do
not
approve
those,
then
the
zoning
does
not
get
recommended.
I'm
or
the
zoning
change
is
not
recommended.
Well.
Is
that
what
you're
saying
we
don't
want
to
do.
A
I
understand
so
so
we
are
voting
here
on
a
straight
zone,
change
and
master
plan
change
not
on,
and
I
think
everybody
should
understand
that
we
are
not
voting
on
this
specific
project
with
its
specific
layout
design
parking
units
anything
else.
We
are
just
voting
straight
up.
Zoning
change
master
plan
amendment
exactly.
B
Is
that
okay?
So
we
separated
those
out
yes
on
the
last
time,
because
we
didn't
want
it
all
packaged
right,
I'm
fine
to
remove
those
as
conditions.
Okay,
I
would
just
appreciate,
when
there
is
legal
advice
for
the
stuff
like
that,
that
the
motion
sheets
in
the
dropbox
get
updated
prior
to
our
meetings,
so
motion
with
stan
minus
the
two
conditions,
because
I
understand
the
cause
in
that
game-
that
the
cat
and
mouse
game
that
go
along
with
them.
A
A
All
right,
then
they'll
go
ahead,
maureen,
no
amy,
yes,
carolyn!
No
john.
K
A
Thank
you
all
very
much
for
your
time
and
energy,
and
so
we
will
now
move
on
to
the
next
item
on
our
agenda.
I
I'm
sorry,
the
planning
commission
has
to
take
action
and
forward
a
recommendation
or
table
or
continue
the
matter.
If
so,
that
motion
failed.
You
should
call
for
another
motion.
N
B
A
A
K
Good
evening,
let's
make
this
as
quick
as
possible.
I
can
share
my
screen:
okay,
first
off
shout
out
to
our
graphic
designer
and
our
staff
and
his
team
for
putting
together
a
new
template
for
reports,
you'll
be
seeing
new
new
presentations
in
the
future.
K
F
C
K
Request
for
conditional
use
approval
at
2274,
south
green
street,
the
yellow
blob
there
is
the
proposed
location
of
this
accessory
drilling
unit
and
staff
is
recommending
approval
with
the
conditions
in
the
staff
report.
K
K
K
K
K
F
Do
you
michael,
would
you
like
to
share
a
screen.
O
You
know
my
the
owner
of
our
company
dave
brock,
I
think
is
going
to
take
over
for
me.
I
have
to
go
pick
up
a
child
who's
waiting
to
be
picked
up.
I'm
sorry!
No.
F
O
Yeah,
I
think
I
sent
a
pdf
to
arlo
this
mor
this
morning
and
that
that
has
pretty
much
a
great
overview
of
the
whole
project.
If,
if
you
have
access
to
that
aaron
here,
it
is.
O
Yeah,
it's
just
basically
the
adu
on
the
left
and
the
in
the
garage
on
the
right,
and
I
think
you
know
it's
a
very
large
yard,
so
our
numbers
are
our
ratios,
I
think,
are
good
and
I
don't
think,
there's
a
lot
more
to
say
about
it.
O
F
Yeah,
I
I
could
also
add
you
know,
obviously
a
quite
a
large
lot.
The
alley
is
actually
quite
large
as
well.
It's
a
20-foot
wide
alley.
We
we
tried
to
focus
it
on
the
alley.
R
F
Put
a
little
front
porch
on
the
adu,
with
a
gate
for
the
main
entrance
off
the
alley
and
they're
they're.
Excuse
me:
there
also
is
a
a
little
parking
space
kind
of
a
parallel
type
parking
space
between
the
alley
and
the
and
the
adu,
which
is
not
not
super
apparent
from
the
drawings.
But
we,
the
owner,
wanted
something
sort
of
more
traditional
in
form.
We
went
with
the
pitched
roofs
they
also
wanted
south
facing
roofs
for
future
solar
panels.
F
So
you
know
we
just
just
went
with
the
the
east-west
cables
and
you
yeah.
I
think
that
pretty
much
pretty
much
covers
it.
A
A
Everybody's
so
quiet
all
right,
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
open
up
the
public
hearing.
Do
we
have
any
people
who
wish
to
speak.
B
Because
mr
lawler
pretty
much
covered
the
points,
this
particular
block
is
very
cautious
about
adus
having
been
had
the
wool
pull
over
their
eyes
by
this
was
the
very
first
adu
that
we
approved
that
has
turned
into
this
adu
and
we've
been
working
with
enforcement
and
can't
seem
to
make
any
headway.
B
F
Next,
we
have
nick
baston
go
ahead.
Nick.
Q
Yeah,
if
you
can
hear
me
so
I'm
actually
the
owner
of
of
the
house,
my
last
name
is
actually
best
in
that
baguette.
So,
yes,
we're
from
ohio.
Originally
our
moms
live
out
in
ohio,
so
it'd
be
nice
to
have
some
space
when
they
come
out
and
visit.
They
both
retire
here
in
a
couple
of
years-
and
you
know
in
the
interim
if
we
do
it'd
be
a
long-term
rental
for
a
college
student
or
somebody
in
the
area.
J
F
Thanks
nick
would
you
have
keenan
wells
who
I
believe
spoke
at
the
last
item.
Keenan
all
right.
Do
you
want
to
speak
to
this
matter?
Also,
yes,
okay.
Go
ahead!
Please.
E
L
E
B
Yeah
hi
jen
colby
here
again
just
wanted
to
make
a
couple
of
comments
generally
about
adus.
I
wanted
to
point
out
that
district
4
is
the
only
district
that
has
zero
r1
or
single
family
zoning
in
the
entire
district.
So
all
of
ours
are
approval
by
wright
and
I
guess
I'm
concerned
that
that
standard
doesn't
hold
across
the
city
and
why
that
might
be
the
case.
So
actually
I
see
how
many
adus
show
up
on
your
agendas
and
frankly,
I
think
this
should
be
city-wide
at
this
point.
B
B
Two
companies
doing
airbnb
rentals
out
of
housing
that
have
been
pitched
for
locals,
so
the
airbnb
issue
is
serious,
but
is
a
totally
separate
thing
and
it's
just
pointing
out
that
we
have
plenty
of
housing,
it's
just
not
in
being
appropriately
rented
in
our
city.
As
far
as
adus,
I
have
aging
parents.
I
am
currently
really
struggling
because
my
mother
doesn't
actually
have
a
caregiver
unit,
and
I
think
this
is
so
crucial
for
aging
in
place
and
for
multi-generational
families.
We
have
this
especially
sort
of
white.
B
Western
culture
has
really
prioritized
so-called.
You
know
nuclear
families,
I
think,
to
our
community
detriment,
so
the
more
ability
for
people
to
have
older
relatives
or
students
or
other
family
members
or
people
who
need
housing,
join
them
on
their
property
in
the
appropriate
locations,
the
better.
So
that
was
just
my
comment
and
thank
you
for
your
time.
A
Thank
you
jen
wayne
in
regard
to
that
it
can
you
clarify
whether
or
not
we
actually
need
the
planning
commission
actually
needs
to
see
conditional
use
in
these
these
things
anymore.
After
the
last
legislative
session.
F
After
last
legislative
session,
basically
attached,
adus
or
adu
is
located
within
the
prince
structure
as
permitted
uses.
They
did
not
in
state
code,
address
detached
adus.
So
therefore
our
code
still
applies
to
those
okay.
I
think
what
was
mentioned
is
that
just
to
clarify,
eight
adus
in
multi-family
districts
are
just
permitted
uses.
It's
actually
only
in
the
single-family
districts,
where
adus
require
conditional
use
and
then
just
to
clarify.
Also
the
the
airbnb
situation
and
was
mentioned
before,
is
that.
Q
F
Just
by
code
are
not
allowed
in
these
we've,
just
because
we've
heard
you
know
a
lot
of
folks
having
issues
with
abv
air
bnbs
that
we've
we've
just
put
those
in
as
conditions
just
so
it's
really
highlighted
hey.
You
can't
do
this
as
an
airbnb,
but
they
are
not
allowed
as
airbnb.
So
if
a
community
member
feels
that
they
there
is
one
please
contact.
Zoning
enforcement.
A
A
B
A
Do
I
have
a
second
a
second
okay.
I
have
a
motion
from
maureen
and
a
second
from
carolyn.
So
let's
go
ahead
and
vote
maureen.
Yes,
amy.
T
A
Carolyn
agree:
john
yeah.
Okay.
The
motion
passes
four
to
zero.
Thank
you
all
very
much.
If
there
is
no
further
business,
the
planning
commission
will
then
be
adjourned.
Thank
you
all
very
much
for
your
attendance.