►
From YouTube: Planning Commission Meeting - 08/10/2022
Description
Salt Lake City Planning Commission Meeting - 08/10/2022
https://www.slc.gov
A
C
Meeting
of
the
salt
lake
city
planning,
commission,
if
everybody
come
in
and
take
their
seats
and
settle
down
here
and
we'll
get
started
just
a
couple
of
housekeeping
items.
If
you
want
to
speak
on
a
an
item,
please
fill
out
a
card
and
pass
it
to
whoever's
at
the
end
and
they'll
get
them
up
to
me
and,
let's
just
behave
ourselves.
No
cheering
booing.
D
E
D
C
D
You
I
wanted
to
start.
We
have
a
couple
things
to
discuss
under
the
director's
report.
First,
I
want
to
address
for
the
commission
and
an
incident
that
happened
at
our
last
historic
landmarks,
commission
involving
one
of
our
staff
members
and
an
applicant
that
put
a
staff
member
in
a
position
of
being
unsafe,
and
as
a
result
of
that,
we
are
changing
some
protocols
with
how
this
meeting
and
how
these
meetings
will
be
run.
D
D
If
there's
a
disturbance
on
the
hall,
we
will
pause
the
meeting
until
that
disturbance
is
addressed.
So
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
everybody
is
aware
that
the
safety
of
everybody
in
this
room
is
job
one
for
all
of
us
and
that
if
we
end
up
having
to
make
changes
to
continue
to
make
sure
that
everybody
can
be
safe,
we
will
do
so.
D
So
that's
going
to
the
police
department's
working
on
what
that
looks
like
and
how
to
staff
that.
So
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
covered
that,
because
it
is
absolutely
an
important
element
of
what
we
do
and
we
can't
have
good
decision
making
if
people
don't
feel
safe
in
a
meeting
room.
Part
of
that
will
also
be
having
more
strict
adherence
to
general
basic
decorum
in
the
meeting.
D
D
So
at
a
prior
planning
commission
meeting,
the
planning
commission
asked
for
some
information
on
what
it
might
look
like
and
require
to
initiate
a
text
amendment
to
prohibit
or
modify
how
drive-through,
restaurants
or
windows,
I
should
say
in
the
sugarhouse
business
district
are
approved,
and
so
we
put
together
a
summary.
That's
in
your
packet
about
what
that
might
look
like
are
providing
a
map
of
the
sugar
house,
business
district's,
the
sugar
house,
business
district,
one
which
is
the
more
intense
of
the
two
in
in
the
darker
purple.
D
And
then
we
did
a
windshield
survey
of
where
drive-through
windows
are
drive-through
windows
and
sugarhouse
come
in
primarily
three
forms:
restaurants,
financial
institutions
and
retail
establishments,
mostly
pharmacies,
and
so,
as
you
can
see
there,
there
is
a
number
of
them,
mostly
concentrated
on
the
main
streets.
In
fact,
I
think
all
of
them
are
whether
that's
1300,
east,
2100,
south
or
1100
east
island
drive.
D
So
with
that,
in
that
information
that
we
included
in
your
packet,
if
the
commission
is
so
inclined
to
initiate
that
process,
you
can
do
so
by
a
motion
and
a
majority
vote,
and
that's
all
I
have.
But
I'm
happy
to
entertain
any
questions
for
you
right
now.
I
left
this
part
out
and
it's
pretty
important,
but
right
now,
drive-throughs
are
a
permitted
use
in
this
zone
in
both
of
these
zones.
D
You
may
recall
or
may
not
know
this,
but
you
know,
maybe
seven
or
eight
years
ago
the
city
adopted
a
regulation
that
required
drive-throughs
that
if
their
drive-through
window
was
open,
that
they
also
had
to
provide
service
to
customers
who
arrived
by
any
other
means
through
that
window,
whether
they
walk
up
or
ride
a
scooter
or
bike
or
whatever,
and
then
the
following
legislative
session.
The
legislature
passed
a
bill
prohibiting
cities
from
doing
that.
D
So
I
think
that
there
could
be
some
unintended
fallout
from
that,
but
it
could
be
extended
if
the,
if
the
commission
chooses
to
do
that,
do
that.
If,
if
that
it
were
the
case,
it
will
require
more
staff
time
to
have
those
discussions.
We'd
have
to
reach
out
to
a
broader
list
of
stakeholders
and
go
from
there.
D
Yeah,
so
so
it's
a
fairly
that
would
be
a
fairly
simple
text.
Amendment
right
now,
all
it
would
take
all
it
really
would
take
would
be
or
the
simplest
approach
would
be,
simply
changing
that
p
for
permitted
in
the
land,
use
tables
to
a
c,
and
then
we'd
fall
back
on
whatever
conditional
use
standards.
There
are.
D
I
think
that
if
that
were
the
approach,
I
think
it
would
warrant
a
consideration
of
the
drive-through
specific
regulations
as
well
to
make
sure
that
things
like
the
number
the
stacking
area
is
large
enough
to
accommodate
the
impact
on
site
instead
of
on
the
streets,
which
we
all
know
is
happening
at
several
drive-throughs
in
the
city
and
clearly
the
number
of
stacking
stalls
for
high
frequently
visited
restaurants
is
not
enough,
but
for
other
drive-throughs
pharmacies.
It
probably.
H
Is
yes,
I
visited
there
today
and
there
was
only
one
restaurant
that
seemed
to
have
this
major
issue
and
it
was
a
major
issue,
but
I
am
concerned
about
making
rules
for
basically
one
violation
and
and
hoping
that
as
sugar
house
builds
out,
this,
this
kind
of
use
is
not
going
to
be
economical
anymore,
because
it's
basically
a
single
story
thing.
So
I
would
not
be
in
favor
of
spending
staff
time
significant
staff
time
if
it's
just
changing
a
pay
to
a
c.
D
D
D
I
think
that
that's
something
that
I
I
don't
think
that
the
commission
needs
to
decide
that,
if
that,
if
the
route
you
choose
is
to
initiate
a
change,
I
think
you
can
ask
for
options
on
whether
it
should
be
changed
to
a
condition
used
or
prohibited
outright,
and
then
we
can.
We
can
look
at
at
the
pros
and
cons
of
each
and
then
get
you
know
bring
that
back
after
we
start
that
process
for,
for
some
preferred.
D
Right
that
that's
that's,
the
ask
that
the
commission
made
at
a
prior
meeting
is
to
is
discuss
whether
or
not
a
petition
should
be
initiated,
which
means
just
start.
The
process
doesn't
mean
what
the
outcome's
going
to
be.
It's
not
going
to
dictate
what
the
recommendation
is.
It
just
starts
the
process.
D
H
So
I
would
be
interested
in
having
an
initiative,
but
I
think
I
might
put
it
on
the
bottom
of
the
list.
In
terms
of
of
the
planning
stat,
I
mean
we
don't
prioritize
the
planning
staff's
work,
but
it
seems
to
me
like
that
the
biggest
issue
with
really
looking
at
this
is
not
that
it
wouldn't
be
a
useful
thing
to
do,
but
that
the
planning
staff
is
already
pretty
pretty
tapped
out.
D
G
C
I
Ready
go
okay,
good
evening,
commissioners.
This
presentation
is
intended
to
inform
you
of
the
process
that
city
staff
have
undertaken
to
this
date
to
put
together
an
amended
accessory
dwelling
unit.
Ordinance
summarize
the
proposed
language
and
get
feedback
from
the
commission
before
putting
together
a
final
draft
for
the
commission's
consideration
at
a
future
public
hearing,
the
current
adu
ordinance
was
passed
in
2018..
I
The
city
estimates
that,
through
the
end
of
2021,
a
total
of
30
adus
have
been
constructed
under
the
current
ordinance,
with
an
additional
28
adus,
either
under
construction
or
in
building
permit
review.
As
of
december
31st
2021
salt
lake
city
faces
a
dire
need
for
additional
housing
units,
and
the
city
would
like
to
see
more
adus
built.
I
I
I
The
amended
ordinance
is
intended
to
align
with
this
change
to
state
law
on
may
18th.
Early
notification
of
the
proposal
was
sent
to
the
community
council
chairs
starting
a
45-day
public
comment
period
that
ended
on
july
5th
staff
presented
to
the
sugar
house
community
council
and
had
discussions
with
representatives
from
other
councils.
I
I
I
The
proposed
amendment
would
completely
strike
the
current
adu
ordinance
and
replace
it
with
a
new
one.
There
would
also
be
small
changes
to
some
other
sections
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
The
changes
are
summarized
in
the
column
on
the
left
on
the
right
are
some
questions
that
staff
would
like
the
commission
to
consider.
F
I
J
J
I
I
I
Slides
beginning
with
maximum
size,
the
city
currently
has
two
different
requirements
depending
on.
If
the
adu
is
internal
or
detached,
the
adu
is
internal.
The
maximum
size
is
limited
to
50
of
the
gross
square
footage
of
the
principal
structure,
however,
bill
82
preempts
the
city
from
being
able
to
impose
a
size
limitation
on
internal
adus
to
align
with
the
new
state
law.
There
is
no
maximum
size
in
the
proposed
draft
for
detached
adus.
The
city
currently
allows
for
a
maximum
size
of
50
of
the
footprint
of
the
principal
structure
up
to
650
square
feet.
I
H
H
D
Maybe
I
can
jump
in
and
help
most
of
the
districts
where
we
would
add.
This
only
allow
multi-family
residential,
and
so
it
doesn't
specifically
allow
a
single
unit
and
that's
one
of
the
barriers
that
we've
identified
in
our
code.
This
would
allow
any
use
provided
it's
in
the
zoning
district
that
allows
other
residential
uses
to
to
have
a
small
apartment,
a
detached
edu
in
their
backyard
or
other
portion
of
their
buildable
area
or.
K
I
I
I
The
city
is
proposing
to
keep
the
same
maximum
height
of
17
feet,
but
remove
the
limitation
that
the
adu
has
to
be
the
same
height
as
the
principal
building
or
less.
We
are
also
proposing
that
a
height
of
up
to
24
feet
be
allowed
if
there
is
a
commensurate
increase
in
setback
from
side
and
rear
property
lines.
I
I
I
J
I
I
G
I
Adu,
if
there's
a
fence
between
the
adu
and
the
alley,
a
gate
would
be
required
and
the
path
would
need
to
lead
from
the
gate
to
the
adu
entrance,
and
there
would
be
an
exception
to
the
requirements
for
paper.
Alleys
or
those
that
legally
exist
on
subdivision
plats,
but
have
not
been
physically
improved
or
are
inaccessible.
I
Currently,
the
adu
ordinance
has
minimal
requirements
related
to
decks,
patios
and
other
outdoor
space.
It
limits
balconies
to
80
square
feet
in
size
says
that
a
balcony
or
deck
must
be
located
at
least
10
feet
from
a
side
of
rear
property
line
and
prohibits
rooftop
decks
under
the
proposed
amendment.
I
I
I
I
Adding
these
definitions
to
the
zoning
ordinance
will
help
clarify
how
to
apply
the
adu
outdoor
space
regulations
and
other
regulations
related
to
outdoor
space
in
the
zoning
ordinance
under
the
proposed
changes.
The
parking
requirements
for
an
adu
would
remain
mostly
the
same
as
they
are
in
the
current
ordinance
right
now.
The
city
requires
one
off-street
parking
stall
for
an
adu
and
that
requirement
can
be
waived
if
there
is
legally
located
on
street
parking
available
along
the
street
frontage
of
the
subject,
property
or
the
subject.
Property
is
located
within
one
quarter,
mile
of
a
transit
stop.
I
I
Two.
The
property
already
contains
at
least
one
accessible
stall
above
the
minimum
parking
requirement
for
the
principal
use
or
three,
the
property
is
within
one
half.
Mile
of
a
designated
bicycle
lane
or
path,
the
amended
language
would
also
clarify
that,
in
order
to
qualify
for
the
exception
based
on
the
availability
of
on-street
parking,
there
must
be
an
uninterrupted
curb
length
of
at
least
20
feet
along
the
street
frontage
of
the
subject.
Property.
I
The
current
adu
ordinance
has
specific
entrance
requirements
for
internal
and
detached
adus.
An
entrance
to
an
internal
adu
is
only
allowed
on
the
side
or
rear
facades
of
the
building.
Unless
the
ada
is
utilizing
the
existing
entrance
to
the
home.
There
are
also
setback
requirements
for
some
entrance
locations
and
for
stairs
that
lead
to
an
adu
entrance.
I
I
Under
the
proposed
amendment,
the
entrance
requirements
would
be
eliminated
and
entrance
locations
would
be
regulated
by
building
code
window
requirements
for
detached
adus
and
the
current
ordinance
strictly
limit
the
size
of
windows
to
what
is
required
for
egress
under
building
code
and
when
located
within
10
feet
of
the
side
or
rear
property
line.
Windows
are
required
to
be
glazed
unless
they're,
skylights
or
clear
story
windows.
I
The
proposed
amendment
would
create
flexibility
for
the
window
requirements.
The
regulations
are
only
applicable
to
second
story
windows,
which
would
be
prohibited
unless
at
least
one
of
the
following
conditions
is
met.
One
the
window
is
a
clear
story
window
where
the
bottom
is
at
least
six
feet
above
the
finished
floor
of
the
second
story.
I
I
L
I
I
City
is
also
proposing
to
amend
the
existing
definition
of
accessory
dwelling
unit
to
remove
language
referring
to
a
single
family
dwelling,
reflecting
the
fact
that
one
could
be
built
on
a
property
containing
a
use
other
than
a
single
family
dwelling
that
summarizes
the
proposed
changes
for
your
reference.
The
complete
proposed
language
was
included
in
the
briefing
memo
that.
K
J
I
The
proposed
language
currently
retains
the
owner
occupancy
requirement,
with
an
exception
added
for
duplex,
multifamily
and
non-residential
properties,
because
those
are
not
typically
occupied
by
their
owners.
However,
staff
would
like
to
consider
whether
to
do
away
with
this
requirement
and
would
like
to
get
the
commission's
feedback.
I
F
I
remember
talking
about
a
project
where
there
was
you
know,
there's
like
a
massing
maximum
like
your
adu
can
be
this
big,
so
they
just
said
well,
half
of
it's
going
to
be
used
for
storage
for
the
primary
residence,
and
that
seemed
to
be
the
opposite
of
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish.
I
feel
like.
Is
there
any
kind
of
does
this
address?
That.
I
I
G
A
F
I
also
would
like
to
introduce
the
idea
that
we
do
like
the
owner-occupied
requirement.
That's
like
it
seems
like
it
makes
a
big
deal
in
all
of
our
like
every
discussion
we
have
about
about
adus
with
the
neighborhood
community,
council
and
stuff.
So
I
I
probably
would
like
to
see
that
is
there
anything
that
we
can
do
you
said
that
including
the
definition
of
a
short-term
rental
may
help
with
enforcement,
because
I
think
enforcement
is
everybody's,
like
that's
the
thorn
in
everyone's
side.
I
D
D
D
And
and
because
right
now
no
adu
has
been
approved,
that's
in
a
zone
that
would
allow
a
hotel
or
a
motel
okay,
and
so
they
they
can't
convert
that.
They
can't
use
that
that
interpretation
of
our
code
to
do
that,
and
so
there
are
no
right
now
there
are
no
legally
existing
short-term
rentals
in
an
adu
in
the
city.
There's
plenty
in
homes
that
have
been
operating,
but
but
they
technically
are
all
operating
illegally.
H
H
There
makes
the
short-term
rental
issue
even
worse,
because
then
you
have,
you
know
a
single-family
home
with
maybe
two
apartments
inside
the
home
and
one
adu
and
a
lot
of
people
coming
and
going
and
we've
had
that
situation
where
that
has
been
reported,
even
though
nobody
seems
to
do
anything
about
it.
I
have
a
lot
of
questions
about
the
window
issues.
Okay,
I'm
not
I'm
a
little
bit
confused
so
right
now
we
have,
we
can't
have.
H
D
H
H
D
No,
so
what
we're
saying
is
that,
when
they're
adjacent
to,
if
they're,
if,
if
they're
within
a
certain
on
a
the
adu
wall,
that's
within
a
certain
distance
to
a
property
line,
then
you
can.
Your
windows
are
going
to
be
limited,
but
on
those
building,
walls
that
are
facing
into
the
main
yard
or
that
are
further
away
from
the
property
line
because
they
chose
to
have
a
bigger
setback
or
whatever
then
those
window
regulate.
D
D
H
That,
in
terms
of
the
way
it's
presented,
and
maybe
even
the
way
it's
written-
I
don't
know-
I
think
if
you
have
a
curb
length
of
20
feet,
you're
going
to
have
a
very
tight
weight.
You
need
to
have
probably
22
feet
in
front
instead
of
20
for
for
for
a
parallel
parking
space,
not
that
that's
going
to
make
much
difference,
but.
D
D
Is
probably
one
of
the
things
that
we've
struggled
with
the
most
and
trying
to
figure
out?
This
was
a
request
from
the
council
to
tr
find
try
to
find
a
way
that
adus
could
activate
the
alleys
and
and
to,
I
believe
they
said,
require
it,
and
so
we've
been
looking
at
that,
and
one
of
the
things
that
we're
running
into
is
that
you
know
we're
in
a
somewhat
unfortunate
situation
with
our
alleys,
because
a
lot
of
them
are
very
isolated
and
they
don't
have
that
same
sense
of
security.
H
So
if
you,
if
you
have
one
operable
window
on
the
out,
why
does
it
have
to
be
operable
number
one
and
number
two?
If
you
have
this
out
window
and
then
you've
got
a
fence
like
you
know
three
feet
away
from
it
that
doesn't
help
anybody
with
anything,
except
that
somebody
could
hide
behind
that
fence
and
you
know
hop
in
your
operable
window.
H
Instead
of
being
you
know
a
non-operable
or
we
don't,
we
don't
talk
about
operable
or
not
operable
I
mean
because
once
it's
operable,
then
you
can
open
it
and
go
in
somebody
could
break
in.
So
I
just
you
know
this
this
just
doesn't
this
whole
thing
doesn't
make
any
sense.
I
mean
I
understand,
what's
what's
happening
or
what's
trying
to
be
happen,
but
I
would
say
that
it
is
not
working
right
now.
I
mean
maybe
some
other
way
to
make
it
work,
but.
H
H
H
H
I
I
think
the
part
of
the
logic
for
requiring
the
window
be
able
to
open
is
that
it
kind
of
increases
the
suggestion
that
there
might
be
somebody
there
who
can
see
what
you're
doing,
if
you're
in
the
alley.
If
you
can
hear
someone
in
their
adu,
then
or
even
just
seeing
the
window
and
knowing
that
it
can
open-
and
I
think
that
was
the
logic
behind
it
and
we
do
have
a
similar.
I
J
G
G
D
D
C
L
The
request
before
the
commission
today
is
for
approval
of
a
conditional
use
permit
for
an
accessory
dwelling
unit
that
will
be
established
in
a
new
detached
accessory
structure
in
the
rare
yard
of
property
at
2156
south
oneida
street.
Based
on
the
review
of
the
request
and
the
submitted
plans,
staff
recommends
approval
of
the
conditional
use
permit.
L
L
L
L
The
adu
entrance
will
face
the
rear
of
the
home
and
will
not
be
visible
from
the
street.
With
the
proposed
accessory
structure.
The
total
footprint
of
all
structures
on
the
property
will
be
approximately
2
850
square
feet,
which
is
about
28
percent
of
the
total
lot.
The
maximum
allowable
lot
coverage
in
the
r112000
single-family
residential
zone
is
35
percent,
so
the
proposed
lot
coverage
is
within
an
allowable
amount.
L
The
parking
for
the
adu
will
be
provided
on
street
along
oneida
street.
In
the
front
of
the
home,
legal
on-street
parking
is
permitted
along
oneida
street.
There
is
also
a
uta
bus,
stop
on
2100
east
near
the
corn,
near
the
intersection
of
2100,
east
and
2100
south.
That
is
within
a
quarter
mile
of
the
subject:
property
properties
that
are
within
a
quarter
mile
of
a
transit,
stop
are
excused
from
providing
on-street
parking
or
sorry
off.
L
L
The
floor
plan
shows
a
style,
studio
style
layout
with
a
combined
sleeping
living
and
kitchen
kitchen
area.
The
primary
entrance
will
face
east
towards
the
rear
of
the
existing
home
and
there
will
also
be
a
secondary
entrance
facing
north
towards
the
existing
accessory
structure
and
driveway.
Neither
entrance
will
be
visible
from
the
street
or
from
the
front
of
the
property.
L
L
L
L
Based
on
staff
review,
the
proposed
adu
appears
to
meet
all
city
code
requirements
and
the
intent
of
the
adu
ordinance
and
no
impacts
are
anticipated,
detrimental
or
otherwise.
With
approval
of
the
conditional
use
staff
recommends,
the
planning
commission
approve
the
conditional
use
permit
for
the
proposed
adu
as
permitted
with
no
recommended
conditions.
F
M
Thank
you,
yeah.
I'm
tracy
stocking,
I'm
actually
the
architect,
not
the
owner,
the
owner's
here,
but
asked
me
to
speak
on
her
behalf.
I
I
don't
need
10
minutes
good.
It's
we've
worked
closely
with
riley
she's
been
great,
very
helpful.
We
think
we've
understood
the
regulations
and
thanks
for
the
great
introduction
a
few
minutes
ago,
I
guess
that's
encouraging
to
me
because
obviously
there's
some
motivation
at
the
state
level
in
the
city
level
to
encourage
adus
and
reduce
restrictions
for
the
long
term.
M
O
C
Okay
looks
like
you:
can
you
can
stay
there
if
you
want
we'll
open
the
public
hearing,
so
is
there?
I
do
have
judy
short
on
here.
So
anyone
who
wants
to
speak
on
this,
if
you're,
not
a
member
of
the
community
council
you'll,
have
two
minutes
and
be
sure
to
state
your
name
at
the
beginning
of
your
comments
for
the
record
judy.
O
O
O
C
H
L
F
E
E
A
K
So
taking
a
look
at
the
vicinity
here,
it's
in
the
ballpark
neighborhood
kitty
corner
to
the
jefferson
park
there
you
can
see
here
the
area
in
yellow,
there's,
currently
a
single
story:
employee
training
facility
there,
but
it's
adjacent
to
a
vacant
lot
and
has
an
alley
to
the
rear
and
then
there's
some
newer
development
on
the
west
and
the
north.
A
multi-family
development
there
as
well-
and
you
can
see
it's
in
the
cc
zone.
K
K
K
It's
proposing
45
parking
stalls
which
meets
the
minimum
of
half
stall
per
unit
for
studio
units
in
that
zone
and
when
located
within
proximity
to
mass
transit
and
then
the
facade
of
the
building
is
comprised
of
brick
glass.
These
architectural
metal
panels
on
the
upper
two
floors
and
then
a
precast
concrete
as
well.
K
So,
looking
at
this,
we
first
look
when
we
consider
design
review,
we
consider
a
number
of
things,
but
first
how
it
implements
the
objectives
of
any
master
plans
and
so
within
planned
salt
lake.
There's
a
number
of
initiatives
and
they're
outlined
more
particularly
in
your
staff
report,
but
it
does
support
initiatives
in
neighborhoods,
growth,
housing,
transportation,
mobility,
air
quality,
in
a
beautiful
city
and
within
the
central
community
master
plan.
K
It
does
talk
about
adding
higher
density
residential
near
mass
transit,
and
this
is
within
two
blocks
of
the
ballpark
track
station
and
then
also
improving
the
urban
design
characteristics
of
the
neighborhood
and
where
this
is
required
to
have
design
review.
Of
course,
it
has
more
robust
design
standards
than
would
be
otherwise
required
by
the
base
zone
alone,
and
then
we
look
at
the
compatibility
of
the
additional
height
and
things
they've
done
with
the
building.
N
N
N
I
haven't
been
back
into
lake
for
a
few
years,
so
it's
been.
I
worked
for
another
company
for
a
few
years
and
went
away
so
this
is
my
first
time
back,
so
you
have
a
few
familiar
faces,
but
for
us
I
think,
on
this
project.
Eric
did
a
great
job
of
of
touching
on
kind
of
our
design
focus.
We
did
meet
with
the
community
council
and
one
of
the
big
concerns,
particularly
in
this
immediate
area.
Around
the
track.
N
Stop
has
been
safety,
and
so
one
of
our
big
focuses
in
the
design
is
those
porches
that
he
mentioned
where
we
have
units
right
on
the
ground
floor
and
they
have
kind
of
a
public
private,
porch
patio
that
interacts
with
the
street,
but
still
sets
it
back
away
from
the
street
for
the
safety
of
the
tenants.
So
it
was
really
one
of
our
biggest
design
focuses
was
how
how
we
could
get
more
eyes
up
toward
the
pedestrian
right-of-way
and
on
the
street,
and
we
found
some
inspiration
in
the
building
across
the
street
to
the
west.
N
There's
some
row
houses
that
I
think
did
a
really
good
job.
They
have
kind
of
a
similar
rhythm
as
our
our
project
and
have
those
kind
of
front
courtyards,
so
that
was
kind
of
our
main
focus
on
this
one.
We
love
being
by
the
track.
Stop
we
have
another
project
under
construction
right
now
in
the
neighborhood
and
overall
we
got
pretty
good
feedback
from
the
community
council
when
we
went
with
them.
They
liked
our
design
and
the
the
textures
and
kind
of
that.
N
N
So
there's
there's
units
that
face
that
face
the
alleyway
side
that
face
the
back
and
there's
units
that
so
there's
a
central
hallway
inside
it'll,
be
obviously
security.
They'll
be
key
coded
to
get
into
the
building.
So
there's
a
central
corridor
that
accesses
units
on
on
both
sides,
but
then
those
ground
floor
arenas
just
have
a
separate
public
entrance
where
they
can
access
from
the
outside.
Just
the
ground
floor.
N
Correct
yep
and
the
other
thing
to
mention
kind
of
where
the
courtyard
is
maybe
I'll.
Click
on
this
kind
of
front
area
there's
on
each
floor,
there's
a
community
amenity,
so
there's
kind
of
a
loungy
area
for
each
floor
where
it
has
that
glass
that
interacts
with
the
street
so
each
floor
because
they're
smaller
units,
we
gave
them
a
place
where
they
can
kind
of
congregate
or,
if
you're
entertaining
and
have
friends
over.
That
would
be
where
you
do
it
and
it's
facing
towards
the
street.
For
that
same
reason,.
F
N
Entrance
correct
yeah,
so
we'll
probably
I
like
how
we
didn't
show
it
here.
One
of
the
things
we've
been
talking
about
is
maybe
putting
up
across
the
street.
They
have
the
same
kind
of
feel
with
these
little
courtyards
little
porches,
but
they
have
like
a
like
a
modern,
picket
fence
kind
of
with
its
own
little
gate.
To
get
to
that
porch
and
we'll
probably
do
something
similar
in
our
landscape.
N
H
H
H
H
N
I
should
I
should
write
that
up,
so
we
won't
have
very
low
income,
but
our
goal
with
this
project
we've
done
our
other
project
in
the
neighborhood,
is
a
tax
credit
project.
So
we
hit
all
incomes
this
one
we're
trying
to
hit
an
affordable
rate
under
80
ami,
just
as
naturally
occurring
so
there's,
no
subsidy
or
anything
just
the
size
of
the
units
enables
us
to
rent
them
for
a
little
bit
less
than
what
a
market
rate
studio
would
go
for,
and
so
that's
that's.
F
K
K
N
C
F
C
E
C
C
F
D
P
P
It
is
a
lot
of
a
subdivision,
so
this
is
a
an
amendment
to
the
original
subdivision
in
order
to
do
this
subdivision
because
it
generally
meets
all
standards,
except
for
the
lot
with
they
are
asking
for
a
modification
for
a
modification
of
both
lots,
lots
one
and
lot
two,
and
that
is
from
the
requirement
of
50
feet
wide
to
40.
Excuse
me
42.93
feet
on
lot.
One
and
forty
seven
point.
P
Six
three
feet
unlock
two
there's
an
additional
modification
that
came
up
a
little
bit
later
in
the
process
that
I
was
working
with
the
applicant,
and
that
is
the
placement
of
the
driveway
I'm
going
to
skip
ahead
just
a
little
well.
No,
I
won't
skip
ahead
I'll
come
back
to
it,
but
the
placement
of
the
driveway
that
they
have
now
sits
to
the
south
of
the
existing
house,
because
they're
subdividing
the
property
and
that
new
property
line
will
go
right
between
the
existing
house
and
the
vacant
lot.
P
P
Which
requires
six
feet,
the
driveway
be
six
feet
from
the
abutting
property
line.
They
don't
have
that
so
between
the
existing
house
and
the
budding
property
line
to
the
north.
They
only
have
13
feet
so
they're,
basically
asking
you
for
typically
it's
a
12
foot,
driveway
plus
the
six
feet
so
they're
asking
for
a
modification
from
18
feet
down
to
the
13
feet,
so
they
basically
won't
have
much
of
a
buffer
between
the
driveway
and
the
property
line.
It'll
be
about
a
foot
really
in
talking
with
the
transportation
engineer.
P
P
P
Based
on
the
information
the
findings
listed
in
the
staff
report,
it
is
staff's
opinion
that
the
request
generally
meets
the
applicable
standards
of
approval
and
therefore
recommends
the
planning
commission
approve
the
request
with
the
following
condition:
we
changed
the
condition.
Initially
we
had
the
one
condition
that
is
in
your
staff
report,
of
the
removal
of
the
shipping
container
from
the
property
prior
to
obtaining
a
building
permit
for
any
new
structures.
P
P
P
P
P
I
have
noted
because
they're
asking
for
lot
width
modification.
I
have
noted
in
the
extreme
immediate
vicinity
that
there
are
quite
a
few
lots
that
are
not
50
feet
and
some
of
them
are
as
low
as
25
and
a
half.
So
this
isn't
unusual
in
this
area.
It
will
be
compatible
with
the
area
at
excuse
me.
I
lost
the
numbers
but
they're
asking
just
barely
47
and
a
little
bit
47,
plus
and
42
plus,
so
it's
it's
gonna
be
very
compatible
with
the
area.
P
G
P
P
P
F
P
D
So
that's
a
current
standard
that
all
new
development
would
have
to
comply
with,
and
so
anytime.
There's
a
proposal
like
this,
where
there
is
a
new
development
that
new
development
is
expected
and
anticipated
to
comply
with
a
standard
if
there's
a
reason
why
it
can't
or
there's
a
benefit
to
not
doing
that.
The
code
provides
a
process.
The
plan
development
process
to
address
that
as
part
of
the
broader
goals
of
the
plan
development
and
so
the
the
code
gives
the
planning
commission
the
authority
to
modify
almost
any
zoning
regulation
through
plan
development.
F
D
F
D
So
how
that
standard
works
is
that,
basically,
at
the
front
property
line,
the
street
facing
property
line,
the
driver
has
to
start
six
feet
away
from
the
from
the
property
line.
That's
mainly
not
to
so
it
doesn't
impact
adjacent
property
rights
and
then
it
can
angle
towards
the
property
line,
as
it
goes
back
into
the
property.
So
there's
like
a
triangle
yeah
of
space-
and
maybe
I'm
not
quite
understanding.
P
K
G
G
H
G
C
C
A
C
H
A
H
H
The
preliminary
submission
okay
got
it.
I
will
make
a
motion
the
first
one
of
three
based
on
the
information
in
the
staff
report,
the
information
presented
and
the
input
received
during
the
public
hearing.
I
move
that
the
commission
approved
the
bolanos
preliminary
subdivision
plat
pln
sub
2022-00248,
with
the
condition
listed
in
by
the
staff
member
in
the
presentation.
E
H
A
H
E
G
G
H
E
H
I
P
P
Staff
feels
comfortable
that
the
garage
that
is
on
site
is
okay,
so
I
am
scratching
the
condition
of
the
for
the
recommended
recommended
recommendation
of
approval.
Sorry,
so,
based
on
the
information
and
findings
listed
in
the
staff
report,
it
is
staff's
opinion
that
the
request
generally
meets
the
applicable
standards
of
approval
and
therefore
recommends
the
planning
and
commission
planning.
Commission
approve
the
two
requests
without
condition.
P
This
is
the
preliminary
subdivision
plat.
Like
I
mentioned,
this
is
where's
my
cursor.
This
is
the
garage
it
does
meet.
The
accessory
structure
setbacks,
so
we're
not
gonna
require
them
to
to
take
it
down
before
permits
are
issued.
I
think
the
applicant
is
going
to
take
the
the
grudge
down.
It's
quite
old
and
dilapidated,
and-
and
so
I
think,
that's
their
prerogative
to
do
that,
but
at
this
point
we're
not
going
to
require
that
lot.
2
is
the
vacant
lot.
It
has
been
vacant
for
as
long
as
I
could
find
the
subdivision.
P
P
I
went
through
quickly
and
did
a
look
at
all
the
so
the
white
stripe
in
the
middle
is
lincoln
street.
The
application,
the
subject
property
is
marked
in
yellow,
there's
no
differential.
You
know
between
the
the
character
I
use
the
the
check
mark
and
the
the
cross,
but
the
the
x
means
that
the
lot
has
a
width
between
25
feet
and
35
feet
wide
wide
excuse
me
and
the
check
the
green
check
means
that
it
has
a
lot
width
of
40
to
47..
P
H
C
J
C
O
O
O
C
O
O
So
I
did
calculations
and
figured
if
the
existing
house
stays
at
50
feet
and
the
addition
is
going
to
be
41
feet.
You
could
easily
put
a
house
as
wide
as
mine,
which
is
22
23
feet
and
a
driveway
in
that
41
feet
and
have
the
required
setbacks.
So
it's
room
it's
room
enough
for
a
nice
house
because,
as
diana
pointed
out
most
of
the
lots
there
aren't
lots
on
that
block
my
block
that
are
only
25
feet
wide
and
there
are
livable
dwellings
there.
O
C
G
Hi
my
name's
marie
mitbo,
I
live
directly
south
of
this
property
and
I'm
in
deep
dis.
I
don't
want
it.
I
bought
my
property
and
when
I
bought
it,
I
found
out
that
the
property
next
door
was
not
subdividable,
and
that
was
largely
why
I
brought
my
property
because
of
the
open
space.
I
also
oppose
I've
been
listening
to
your
adu
things
and
the
knee-jerk
reaction
to
build
build
build.
G
I
think
this
is
wrong
and
reckless,
given
all
kinds
of
things
like
climate
change
and
and
that
the
city
council
is
trying
to
increase
the
population
of
salt
lake
when
we
don't
have
the
water,
okay,
those
are
just
some
of
the
bigger
things
for
just
little
me
trying
to
fight
this.
This
is
going
right
next
to
my
bedroom
window.
G
G
I
will
end
up
with
a
someone's
kitchen
window,
probably
eight
feet
from
my
bedroom
window,
which
it
lets
the
light
in
and-
and
that's
really
really
important
to
me
and
the
and
this
thing
with
the
oh
there's
a
20.
The
lot
25
feet
wide.
That's
not
a
reasonable
lot
and
that's
the
that's
an
argument
of
the
bandwagon.
Oh
everybody
else
is
doing
it.
So
it's
okay
for
us
to
do
it
build
an
adu
in
the
back,
not
right
on
top
of
my
house.
G
B
I'm
michael
wertheimer,
I
vehemently
oppose
this
project.
I
read
through
it.
Basically,
I
think
that
25
feet
is
absolutely
ridiculous.
Does
anybody
here
have
a
25-foot
lot
that
they
live
in?
It's
not
livable.
It's
comical.
Furthermore,
within
her
the
discussion
for
this
there's,
this
promise
of
affordable
housing.
I
was
the
tenant.
B
She
stopped
cutting
the
lawn
in
january
and
it
looked
like
terribly.
She
threw
me
out
without
any
reason
and
upped
the
rent
by
25
by
1850
to
2
300,
I'm
a
single
dad
with
two
kids
this
this
is
she.
What
we
are
being
led
to
believe
is
done
in
good
faith
and
to
help
community
is
not.
This
is
a
cash
grab.
She
doesn't
even
live
there.
She
has
no
care
of
the
property,
she
doesn't
take
care
of
it.
Allegedly
they
were
supposed
to
take
care
of
it.
B
G
Good
evening
yeah,
my
name
is
steven
shake
I'm
one
of
the
neighbors.
I
actually
own
multiple
houses
on
the
street.
I
guess
I
just
had
some
general
questions
and
judy.
I'm
not
sure
if
I
got
your
last
name
correct
sure,
yeah,
just
in
your
professional
opinion,
is
the
lot
big
enough
for
a
multi-family
unit.
G
I
guess
that's
my
first
general
question
to
the
committee
or
the
staff
or
the
applicant
is:
if
they've
had
it
reviewed
for
size
for
multi-family,
I
think
that's
a
big
concern
in
the
neighborhood
is
we.
We
have
some
houses
that
are
currently
on
small
lots
that
are
held
as
rental
and
just
the
ownership
of
them
are
not
great.
So
I
think
that's
the
primary
concern.
G
I'm
coming
in
maybe
a
little
bit
more
neutral
that
I
can
see
a
beautiful
home
going
there.
That
would
appreciate
all
of
our
values
in
the
neighborhood
on
a
fiscal
basis
which
I'm
all
for,
but
I
think
a
little
bit
of
clarity
from
the
applicant
on
the
purpose,
I
think,
would
be
great.
We've
read
through
a
lot
of
the
materials
and
it
just
seems
pretty
ambiguous
in
nature.
J
My
name
is
jennifer
olson,
and
you
may
have
some
comments
in
your
file
from
me.
My
major
concern
is
about
whether
or
not
a
multi-family
unit
might
be
erected
on
this
lot.
Diana
has
assured
me
that
that's
not
allowed
under
the
current
zoning
and
is
not
a
high
likelihood
in
the
future
that
that
might
happen,
but,
as
I
expressed
after
40
years
of
living
at
my
address,
1501
south
lincoln,
I'm
directly
across
from
the
proposed
lot
too.
J
That
border
my
property
lines,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
go
on
record
that
I
would
be
vehemently
opposed
to
any
multi-family
unit
that
might
be
erected
on
either
of
these
lots
and
again
I
am
somewhat
bothered
also
by
the
ambiguity
of
ms
briggs
application
in
terms
of
what
her
intentions
really
are.
What
she's
going
to
do
with
this
lot,
and
one
other
thing
I
want
to
mention,
is:
I
would
corroborate
a
couple
of
the
other
people's
statements
that
the
lot
has
not
been
kept
up.
C
C
P
On
our
website
it
does
say
something
to
the
effect
of
subdivision
condominium
plat
and
I
think
that
has
thrown
a
couple
of
the
neighbors
I
had
talked
to
them
initially
when
this
application
came
in,
they
were
concerned
about
the
condominium
part
of
that
and
I
think
that
got
them
on
the
lines
of
the
multi-family,
and
that
is
not
the
case.
Unfortunately,
that's
not
right.
This
is
a
subdivision
plat,
but
the
zoning
is
our
one.
500
excuse
me,
five
thousand,
it
is
single
family.
P
P
C
F
Can
I
just
say
something:
okay,
so
this
property,
this
this
splitting
is
not
making
a
25
foot
wide
lot.
They're
just
saying:
that's
the
smallest
lot
on
the
block.
These
are
41
feet
and
50,
not
49
feet,
so
they're
still
pretty
big.
They
won't
be
the
smallest
on
the
block.
The
other
thing
is
that
I
don't
know
who
said
this
is
not
subdividable,
but
sometimes
people
say
stuff
or
the
realtor.
Maybe
next
door
said
this
property
is
not
subdividable,
but
everything
can
change.
F
So
it's
been
nice
to
have
a
big,
huge
property
next
door
for
for
decades,
but
it's
it's
not
true
to
say
that
it
was
never
subdividable,
because
all
of
these
there
are
exceptions
and
applications
and
standards
and
all
that
kind
of
stuff
to
make
a
decision
that
we
make
a
decision
on.
Does
it
meet
the
standards
to
be
subdivided
and
that's
what
we're
considering
and
the
the
owner's
intent
on
what
to
do
with
the
property
is
not
one
of
the
standards
that
we
consider.
F
I
don't
think,
like
we've
been
asking,
I
realize
we've
been
asking
in
all
of
these
things
like
what
are
you
going
to
do?
Which
house
are
you
going
to
live
in?
What
are
you
going
to
build
next
door,
but
it
doesn't
matter,
that's
not
part
of
the
application.
The
application
says
these
are
the
standards
for
dividing
this
lot.
F
This
er
does
it
match
the
does
it
match
all
the
rules
that
we
have
or
reasons
why
we
might
think
that
that's
a
good
idea
and
those
are
the
things
that
we
consider
when
we
vote
for
or
against
it
and
in
in
my
reading
it
meets
it,
meets
the
considerations.
Of
course
we
can.
We
also
can
decide
if
it
meets
those
conditions
or
not
if
we
agree
with
the
staff's
finding
or
not.
H
F
But
if
you
have
a
problem
with
it,
there
really
is
like
code
enforcement,
where
you
can
make
a
complaint
to
and
they
can
do
enforcement
actions
and
all
that
kind
of
stuff
and-
and
I
would
love
if
all
of
the
neighbors
knew
you
got
to
get
a
hold
of
judy
short's
pamphlet
when
it
gets
through
its
process,
because
I
would
love
for
everyone
to
know
how
to
do
that.
So,
if
there's
a,
if
there's
a
problem,
you
can
do
what
you
there
is
actually
something
you
can
do
that.
Can
that
can
address
it.
A
P
E
F
F
E
A
C
A
F
Can
I
can
I
say
something
I
should
have
said
in
those
first
10
minutes
when
we
were
supposed
to
say
something:
can
you
give
me?
Can
it
have
a
minute?
Okay,
okay,
I
want
to
say
I'm
really
sorry
about
that.
Your
employee
encountering
an
ugly
situation.
I
hate
that
and
it
doesn't
have
to
be
like
that,
and
I
think
we
should
do
those
rules,
regardless
of
whether
it
feels
like
it's
warm
and
cozy
in
here
or
not.
F
You
know
not
make
a
qualitative
decision
on
doing
that,
because
I
think
everyone
should
feel
safe
doing
their
jobs
and
these
guys
do
a
great
job.
The
other
thing
I
want
to
say
is
one
time
we
talked
about
changing
the
language
and
the
motions
so
because
sometimes
the
input
in
the
public
hearing
is
not
leading
us
in
the
direction
that
we
ultimately
end
up
in.
So
I
remember
we
talked
about
that
and
maybe
it's
still
going
to
happen.
P
No
not
at
this
point
I
mean
you're
fine,
because
I'll
probably
try
to
take
it
I'll,
try
to
get
it
assigned
to
me
again
and
that
one
doesn't
need
to
come
back
to
them.
So
it'll
be
administrative.
So
I
can
ask
you
for
any
information
I
need
or
any
other
city
reviewers
that
they
need.
I
can
just
let
you
know
so,
but
that's
a
good
start.