Live stream not working in Chrome or Edge? Click Here
No Bookmarks Exist.
I still make an argument you could have a church that's designed specifically around alcohol and therefore it did fitness E2, but. 00:00:11
That being said, I don't know how the tithing part of it would go. All right, it is. 00:00:25
April 2nd, 2024 we got 533 on the clock in attendance. We have all commissioners except for Commissioner Gong and Wilchinski. 00:00:31
We have legal counsel Brad Christofferson and city staff John Tier link. 00:00:41
We have three items on the agenda today. One of them is the continued item of the text amendment on round building height. John, 00:00:47
do you want to give us a quick walk through on that one? Sure, a couple of items of the Planning Commission requested staff and 00:00:52
the applicant come back with. 00:00:57
Those two items and included in your packet, one in particular. 00:01:03
Sort of the zoning schematic of what's going around, what's going on around the city. 00:01:08
So Cottonwood Heights, Mill Creek and Murray have been shared with you. So you see what those commercial zones, where they are and 00:01:13
what the heights are. 00:01:17
And then the applicant has provided you a schematic of what? 00:01:23
Height looks like distributed through the space. 00:01:26
Could you scroll to that real quick? Because I'm not gonna lie, I think I looked at it once and. 00:01:30
My memory is not what it once was. 00:01:34
And the packet has not made it to this tablet for me yet. 00:01:37
Oh, it was when I left it. It was downloading. Let me see if I can try mine. 00:01:43
Dennis is cool with me. 00:01:58
You can just have one. I really use the. 00:02:03
So this almost looks split level on what's being proposed. 00:02:14
Yeah, this one has the three levels 12/2 and 1/2. 00:02:19
OK, but if approved? 00:02:27
As a zone change or zone amendment to all it does open up the door for. 00:02:32
How can I say this? 00:02:38
Lesser quality, three story units that would fit in that space. 00:02:40
Unless you recommend the City Council. 00:02:45
Direct staff to start maybe looking at architectural standards for C2. 00:02:49
I just all you are considering is just the fact that it's going to go from 35 to 40. I mean not to pick on our neighbors in Mill 00:02:55
Creek, but I look across the street and I see these, for lack of a better term, Russian style tenements which are like these 00:03:01
concrete squares over garages that are two stories tall. And I just have this vision of lots of that creeping in and holiday and 00:03:07
me not being a huge fan and feeling bad that. 00:03:13
I participated in saying let's make that happen, but. 00:03:20
Correct. Ask a question. Yeah, so. 00:03:24
I haven't been on the Commission for very long, but it seems to me that we have a lot of. 00:03:28
Discussions where we talk about well, what's happening in Mill Creek and what's happening happening in Cottonwood Heights and 00:03:36
what's happening in Murray. 00:03:41
And it seems to me that Holiday has its own character. 00:03:46
And that is a special character. 00:03:52
And when we on the Planning Commission starts ask what's happening in these other places? 00:03:56
We are. 00:04:03
Considering moving ourselves into a character that is more in keeping with what's happening in those other places. 00:04:08
And I just wonder about that. And I wonder. 00:04:15
If that makes sense? And is that the direction that we want to go in and when we look at for example, cases like this? 00:04:19
I don't know. Should we not be concerned? 00:04:31
Are we not? 00:04:35
Should we not be concerned that we're not preserving? 00:04:38
The very thing about holiday that makes it special. 00:04:43
Maybe the counter to that, but we have to balance this. The city's already made a decision in a general plan. 00:04:47
To grow. 00:04:55
And that's the elected officials. 00:04:58
Who you know have made the general plan and. 00:05:00
You know, it's for example, in this case we haven't done anything for 25 or 30 years. 00:05:05
I think it doesn't give us that we see. 00:05:12
What other people are doing? What? What does growth look like? 00:05:15
And then make it. 00:05:18
So we still look different. 00:05:19
Have the feel of the holiday. 00:05:22
But growth in place that you have to finally move on from where you were to the next thing? 00:05:26
I think you have to balance if it's a balancing act. And then and part of what I was thinking on this is similar to the question 00:05:32
you asked. 00:05:36
And that. 00:05:41
This probably makes sense for this specific. 00:05:43
Proposal at this specific location, but there are a bunch of other locations in this same zone, some of which I thought we'd hear 00:05:47
from when the public was noticed. 00:05:53
Where maybe the setbacks and the height. 00:05:59
Don't make sense. 00:06:03
One of those other areas, maybe there is a lot of residential budding or behind that, that five feet is a big deal to them. 00:06:06
And I I caught the impression last meeting that. 00:06:16
One of the reasons we had the weight was there's a noticing requirement and we've heard from anyone who's concerned about this. 00:06:20
No, not directly on this in particular. 00:06:24
Now the neighborhood that well. 00:06:30
We can definitely open up the discussion when we get to the item, but umm. 00:06:34
I'll leave that up to you, but the noticing was it happened to be the exact same neighborhood where we heard the result. 00:06:39
So they looked at the rezone pack and they're like, well, wait a minute, this is also affecting us. So then you send it back out 00:06:47
and they really didn't. 00:06:51
Much else. 00:06:55
OK. And some good thought points and discussion. When we get to the item and then? 00:06:58
I think the map on what is this like page four of the packet that has kind of like the little red dots that call out those zones. 00:07:04
I mean it's it's not a huge chunk of the city, right? 00:07:10
So I mean for me, it's not like, you know, all these places are going to get inundated. But at the same time, as I look at some of 00:07:17
those locations and I mean the other thought that immediately comes to my mind is it's like, OK, well, we're right on the buffer. 00:07:22
We have Mill Creek over on this side and then we're over here on the east side. We're already higher just because of the slope 00:07:27
that exists there anyway. So then we're talking about green lighting. 00:07:33
5 foot more on top of that it really gives us just like tunnel. 00:07:38
But again discussion points to go in, but Brian you had a comment, can I ask the question as the commercial architecture is 00:07:42
reviewed by the design review or how is that managed? As far short answer, it's not C1C2 zone, there are no architectural 00:07:49
controls, see to me a well designed building. 00:07:57
You're not going to really see the emphasis of height or anything, because the building is designed in such a way that the height 00:08:04
is a part of the building, and it doesn't. 00:08:09
I mean some of the buildings we've seen aren't very good, I mean similar what you're saying so. 00:08:14
I I think I agree with what you said initially is that maybe we need to have more of a design standard for these type of 00:08:21
buildings. 00:08:25
That being said, I also last time I was thinking more of. 00:08:30
The question I was trying to find out like haven't you checked with other cities or we have asked you to check is? 00:08:34
That commercial. 00:08:41
Development is. 00:08:42
And it's incorporating mixed-use. 00:08:45
And so that's changed in the dynamic of how buildings are. 00:08:48
Built and meetings like you're saying, I think the first level is 14 to 16 feet for the grand entrance and that type of thing. 00:08:53
So you know, I understand that. 00:09:00
This additional 5 feet may not make any difference, or it may be too much. I'm not here that. 00:09:04
Try and answer that I'm just trying to figure out. 00:09:09
You know, as you're looking through these examples of other places. 00:09:12
And I think you answered the question to some degree last time. Is that? 00:09:17
There really isn't the standard by which. 00:09:22
Each floor will be measured because it's so dynamic and. 00:09:25
I like the idea that we're competitive to a point where we can interest. 00:09:30
Commercial investments into the city. 00:09:35
That help our economic development. I'm not trying to redesign the character of the city by any means so. 00:09:38
I think I gave people the impression that height needs to be everywhere. I'm not trying to say that. 00:09:43
But so I I don't know how we can take that into account because we're considering this. 00:09:51
You know, I mean, Conor heights the maximum height of 35 feet Murray had. 00:09:58
It takes into consideration how the commercial, how close it is to residential. 00:10:04
And I think that's kind of a novel idea that you have to reduce the height based on the residential, you know? 00:10:10
But again. 00:10:16
I don't know what's going to be best for how you. 00:10:18
Welcome or how you get people to look at the city to. 00:10:21
Open a commercial business here or. 00:10:25
I certainly don't want to be hindrance to that, but I don't want it to be wide open where it just becomes a mess. Sure, I 00:10:28
appreciate that because, you know, that's my the other part of my job is economic development. 00:10:33
My responsibility is to try to have other businesses come to the city. 00:10:39
And if they're looking at our zoning ordinance and saying, that'd be great, but I can't build what I need. 00:10:44
Period. I'm out. So is there a way to maybe have some of that but not all of it? I mean, maybe you can't answer that in this 00:10:50
meeting, but. 00:10:54
To me, that's where I prefer the ordinance go. I don't want to have this ordinance before us again in a year because we didn't 00:10:59
address some of the things that maybe now companies and businesses are asking for, but. 00:11:05
I don't know how you do it, frankly, yeah. 00:11:12
In the scope of this. 00:11:15
Another good discussion plan. It's gonna be fun. 00:11:17
Now and just one last question before we move on from this item. On the map that we have up in front of us, is there not a 00:11:24
separate master plan for the holiday gateway where this little chunk in red in the bottom left corner exists? Isn't that all under 00:11:31
a different plan anyway now or that big BLOB is sort of an anomaly because there's another zone that's prepared for that already? 00:11:38
And it's well above 40 feet, right. So that that's not really something to consider with this because that's got its own little. 00:11:46
You know set of rules that it's planned by. So really it's just these other little red blocks on the map that this is impactful to 00:11:54
right. In fact you can see that there that one little tiny. 00:11:59
Spot where you've already resumed that's outside. This makes a little. 00:12:04
It's a five story condo, yeah. 00:12:09
What is that big blood? 00:12:13
Van Winkle intersection of Van Winkle and Howard Drive at 6200 S where XF Fitness and Wendy's and Taco Time. 00:12:16
True. Yeah. 00:12:26
Used to be Wendy. They wanted to hire building, so now they're out in here, so. 00:12:27
Down there, you want a location we're driving through. Isn't a shortcut around that intersection. 00:12:32
Where it's a race to see who can cut who off the fastest and do 50 miles through that little one lane, yet that's the spot. It's 00:12:42
great. 00:12:45
It's great. We love it. Someone referred to it as the luge ones. I've looked at it that way ever since. It's great. All right, 00:12:50
moving on to item 2, the preservation ordinance. 00:12:55
So we talked about this at the end of the last meeting. I asked a bunch of irrelevant questions because they were way off base 00:13:03
from what this is actually doing. But John, do you want to just give us a quick reminder and review of what? 00:13:08
Has a little tail, yes, I appreciate it. Item two is amendment to update the historic preservation ordinance. Holiday currently 00:13:15
has a preservation ordinance, however. 00:13:20
In 2017 Ish 2018 the Council of the time. 00:13:26
Reorganized a lot of the committees that were working for the city. 00:13:31
And in particular the Historical Committee and what their responsibilities? 00:13:35
Are, were. 00:13:41
And in doing so the process by which a property owner. 00:13:43
Can get their historic property on his holidays list. 00:13:48
Was amended and meant to be amended, never have been. The Council never came back to that. 00:13:52
So this update corrects that. 00:13:58
Application process. 00:14:01
The issue that the council had at the time was that any entity could. 00:14:03
Proposed that someones property be placed on holidays. Historic preservation list, historic designation list. 00:14:08
Leaving the property order completely out of the process and then like that situation, so this rectifies that. So it has to be the 00:14:16
property or their agent. 00:14:21
Gets to nominate their property for historic the on the Historic Sites list. 00:14:26
Answer the question. 00:14:32
So is there any incentive for an owner to have their property? 00:14:34
Designated as a historical property. 00:14:39
It seems like there's more encumbrances by. 00:14:42
That designation, right? 00:14:45
Not necessarily. Not from the way that this preservation ordinance is drafted in some cities. 00:14:48
Definitely the way that this is drafted in the way that I've heard direction from our council. 00:14:53
Is that one has got to be already either federal or state designated? 00:14:59
Or there's some procedures in there that that allows the City Council to decide if it's it's historical significance. 00:15:07
So that's the way to get it on the list. 00:15:14
Once it's on the list, if the property owner would like to apply for a conditional use permit for extra land uses that are outside 00:15:17
of the zone that it's in, they can do that. 00:15:21
It can be a small antique shop. It can be a number of things. 00:15:27
To sort of sustain the preservation effort of that property. 00:15:31
They also have to come to the Planning Commission if they want to modify a property. 00:15:37
That includes demolition. 00:15:42
The properties proposed to be demolished before it is demolished, there's a 30 day stay. 00:15:44
Where the city goes in and documents the property inside and out. 00:15:50
And then? 00:15:55
That all that information is made available to the public and the historical committee to, you know, do their educational pieces. 00:15:57
So that the incentive is really the city is providing more land uses to you than your neighbors have. 00:16:04
But it has to go back to the Planning Commission for that conditional use permit. 00:16:12
So being designated doesn't include the Planning Commission. 00:16:18
A designation only goes to the City Council because they're they are deciding that the extra land uses get placed. 00:16:22
Then they come back to you for the permit. 00:16:29
That really is what this ordinance update does. Thank you and if the property changes hands. 00:16:32
You know, title, deed, etc. Is there additional things or steps that have to go through once it has that designation? 00:16:38
To change hands? No. 00:16:46
But I thank you for bringing that up. That is the other amendment, is that how to how a property owner gets its right their rights 00:16:48
to remove their their property from the list? 00:16:53
It gives a process for that, so they buy historic property. 00:16:59
It's obvious it becomes unsustainable for them economically. 00:17:04
They can request to have the list delisted, so to speak. 00:17:08
The City Council can also remove a property from the list if it becomes dilapidated or to a point where it's really lost its all 00:17:14
of its historical significance. 00:17:19
They can decide to remove it from the list as well. 00:17:24
Other questions around the the other thing I was a little surprised within the ordinance was that. 00:17:30
The D listing can happen without any public notice. That is a policy question I'd like to put forth to the Planning Commission. So 00:17:35
there are two highlighted sections, I just think. 00:17:40
Why not publicly notice it? OK, that's the owner has to decide. But do that a public meeting so there's not a lot of criticism. 00:17:46
Or accusations that's behind the, you know, whatever happened and that. 00:17:55
Well, I think the way that's written that it will still happen in a public meeting. 00:18:01
The question is, do we notice the neighbors saying? 00:18:06
Mr. Smith wants to delist their property. 00:18:09
We're going to have a hearing. 00:18:11
Do the property, Do the neighbors have any comment that would be? 00:18:13
Applicable to the Council? 00:18:17
On the property owners request to delete the property. 00:18:19
I don't know that's. 00:18:22
All cities are different on that regard it's it's A1 sided spectrum of the other. So I'd like to planning commissions opinion on 00:18:24
that. It's a good good discussion point I'll make note of. 00:18:29
When we get to that in the meeting. 00:18:35
Any other elements before we move into item 3. 00:18:38
I wonder why it would just be neighbors. 00:18:40
It's typically townspeople who care about historic properties. 00:18:44
And why was it was silly noticed on the agenda, right? Anybody that was at the agenda? 00:18:50
So again, the question is. 00:19:00
Benefit is that notice and give you out a better way that doesn't cost. 00:19:02
Yeah. 00:19:09
Just real quick, this is an administrative question. Do we get like a different bulk rate tax on postage or free postage as a city 00:19:12
or anything or is it just no, I've I've reduced the size of our mailings. 00:19:19
So that we get a postcard rate, but that's the cheapest I can go, and postcards are still like 40-5 cents. 00:19:26
Now. 00:19:34
Gotcha. So times that by whatever we have 20,000 households or something and. 00:19:36
Gotcha. It's $10,000. 00:19:41
That makes sense. 00:19:45
All right. And item three as brought up for anyone who didn't hear this ahead of time, but this is one that's going to require a 00:19:49
little bit of extra and therefore it will be a continued item tonight. 00:19:55
Make any decisions on this, But that said, John, do you want to kind of walk us through what we're going to be discussing and 00:20:03
looking at in this item tonight? 00:20:07
Yeah. So the concern is that finding other land use zones that are available for. 00:20:11
What's called Quasi public uses? 00:20:18
Meaning specifically churches. 00:20:21
So we're looking, the idea is that we're looking for some land use zones and made available that churches can move into. 00:20:24
Potentially displace retail locations in commercial, public around or to any type of zoning in there. 00:20:31
There's some discussion in the staff report that kind of gives the Planning Commission some direction on where those zones could 00:20:39
be. 00:20:42
Especially how other cities look at that type of use, land use. 00:20:46
Should be made available in every type of zone based upon case law, but. 00:20:51
Open the public hearing. We can have a discussion on it, but definitely continue it so that we can. 00:20:57
Refine this a little bit. 00:21:02
The back story on this just to clarify as this came from the Korean Baptist Church that we had approved the. 00:21:08
It wasn't a zone change request, it was a use, right. It was a land use added to the C2 zones, yes. 00:21:17
Document. Yeah, So that was ultimately decided an A from City Council and they said no, go back and try again. Something else 00:21:25
officially made a decision, yet they're still deliberating on it, but they've requested staff to go back and let's look at some 00:21:30
other zones. 00:21:36
We can add church uses to not just see one person in C2 zones. There's some maps in your packet to try to show what. 00:21:41
Those areas look. 00:21:51
We can chat about it. 00:21:53
Any other questions around item three? I do. I have just one quick question. This kind of arbitrary, but I understand that the 00:21:57
anytime you request a liquor license, you have to look for locations with the church and school. 00:22:03
Does the opposite happen in this if a church wants to go into an area that's within that proximal boundary? 00:22:11
Do we have any concerns? 00:22:18
That through the city no OK or the like the board and yeah you know it does put it does put the the company other or the licensee 00:22:20
edit. 00:22:27
Considerable situation situation then if they maybe change hands or the liquor license changes hands and have to reapply, it will 00:22:36
cause a problem. 00:22:40
Well, I'm just saying if a church wanted to go into an area that. 00:22:44
Suddenly was in that boundary. 00:22:48
The licensee for the wouldn't have to change anything, would they? No, not until no. 00:22:52
But only if they have to reapply for a new license somehow for some reason that seems interesting. 00:22:58
And do they do we know, does the state law require renewal or reapplication of those licenses or once you have one, is that once 00:23:05
you have it and you're the same owner entity? 00:23:11
Pretty much continues the year after year. 00:23:17
Yeah. So in other words, if they lose it, that's on them. And then if it's a problem, they did something wrong. Yeah, through 00:23:21
enforcement or lapse of time not paying, you know that license fee that you could possibly lose it. Yes. But essentially they're 00:23:27
just legal non conforming because they were their first if this were to go through. Is that right? OK. 00:23:33
Big questions. Any other questions around #3 or any? 00:23:41
Circle backs before we take a quick break and start the official. 00:23:47
All right. Well then with that, we'll go ahead and close the work meeting and take a. 00:23:51
4 minute pause. 00:23:55
Before we start our official meeting at 6:00. 00:23:57
Yeah. 00:24:03
She absolutely no. 00:24:26
There's one. 00:25:33
Yeah, he's got a bunch of them right there. 00:25:35
How are you? 00:26:02
Good. 00:26:14
I think that right. 00:26:24
Green shirt as a reminder of the tree ordinance, right? 00:26:26
Yeah, yeah. I mean, look, what better color could you have for a tree committee? 00:26:34
Inhalations. Did he get the planning company? I don't know. Some people would say it would be black. 00:26:46
Really. Yes. Yeah. Just because we haven't kind of stuck with the general plan on the general plan. 00:27:14
Go ahead, all right. 00:27:25
All right. Good evening, everyone. Sorry, sorry. 00:27:32
Time to get our Adobe updated. All right. Good evening everyone. This is the Planning Commission on April 2nd, 2024 is 6:00 PM We 00:27:37
are going to get started. We have three items on our agenda this evening. There is a text amendment that has been continued around 00:27:44
the building height and C2 zone. Another text amendment around the historic preservation ordinance. 00:27:52
And then a text amendment on land use zones for quasi public and community uses. 00:28:00
And we will be getting into those shortly. But before we get started, we do have an opening statement. We read and begin with all 00:28:06
these meetings, and I have asked Commissioner Barrett if you would do so for us. The City of Holiday Planning Commission is a 00:28:12
volunteer citizen board whose function is to review land use plans and other special studies, make recommendations to the City 00:28:19
Council on proposed zoning, map and ordinance changes, and approve conditional uses and subdivisions. 00:28:26
The Planning Commission does not initiate land use application, rather acts on the applications as they are submitted. 00:28:33
Commissioners do not meet with the applicants except in publicly noticed meetings. 00:28:39
Commissioners attempt to visit each property on the agenda for the location. The nature of the neighborhood, existing structures 00:28:45
and uses related to the proposed change are noted. Decisions are based on observations, recommendations from the professional 00:28:52
planning staff, the City's general plan, zoning ordinance, and other reports by all verbal and written comments and by evidence 00:28:59
submitted, all of which are part of the public record. 00:29:05
Thank you very much. 00:29:13
And with that, we will start with our first item, which is the continued text amendment and we will ask that city staff go ahead 00:29:15
and give us a quick update on that. 00:29:20
Thank you, Chair. 00:29:26
Item one tonight the Planning Commission requests staff and the applicant to. 00:29:28
Come back into this meeting. 00:29:32
Some additional information regarding a request to amend heights in the C2 zone. 00:29:34
Staff has been able to prepare their side of the request. 00:29:40
Specifically. 00:29:44
Zoning and requirements for commercial heights in other cities that holiday. 00:29:46
And the applicant has also prepared prepared schematic drawing. 00:29:51
Of how that height? 00:29:55
Looks like through as it's dispersed through the stories. 00:29:56
Staff Report the original staff reports included in your packet. 00:30:01
Staff didn't believe the opinion had changed, had changed at all since putting together that additional information, so 00:30:05
recommendation still stays the same. 00:30:09
But the Planning Commission can either recommend the continuance again. 00:30:15
Recommend as as it's been proposed or make some alterations in the recommendation to City Council further for the deliberation. 00:30:20
Thank you very much. And as a reminder, because the public hearing is already open on this, we will invite comments of that for 00:30:28
that shortly. But since we do have the applicant here, John, if I could ask you to just scroll to the additional schematics that 00:30:34
were provided for the any interest of the public. And then if we can invite the applicant to come back forward and maybe just 00:30:40
speak on what they provided in addition to this. 00:30:46
For the benefit of both the public and the Commission. 00:30:54
So with that, do we have the applicant here this evening that wants to come up? 00:30:58
Honored and grateful. 00:31:06
Thanks for thanks for allowing us to present this to you. 00:31:08
First of all. 00:31:14
I'm Chris Layton. 00:31:16
I am a resident of Holiday City. 00:31:18
3200 E 3900 S. 00:31:20
I love to live here. 00:31:24
And I care about it. 00:31:26
This is about responsible growth. 00:31:31
This is about. 00:31:35
Evolving with. 00:31:37
Not only just real estate trends, but development trends, but construction and architecture. 00:31:40
I am a licensed architect. I've had my own firm for 34 years. 00:31:47
I've seen how. 00:31:53
Zoning needs to evolve with. 00:31:56
Needs, and I think, Commissioner Fonte, your comment was very valid. 00:32:00
This is holiday. It's not the other municipalities. 00:32:06
This isn't about. 00:32:11
Increase in the sense of. 00:32:14
What you can and can't do in AC2 zone as far as stories. 00:32:18
As far as uses, as far as density really. 00:32:23
It's about quality. 00:32:27
It's about qualitative increase to allow us to. 00:32:29
Build properly so that commercial spaces. 00:32:34
And intervene with residential uses which. 00:32:38
2010, five years ago, never was such a thing, but we're embracing growth. 00:32:43
We're trying to embrace it responsibly and caringly. 00:32:51
And qualitatively? 00:32:55
And I think this is an opportunity. The schematics that we showed are from a very specific project. This is not a specific 00:32:57
problem. 00:33:01
This is in any of these commercial zones where we want people to develop mixed-use, three story developments. 00:33:07
In order to give the quality of space that you need floor to floor. 00:33:17
And not shortchange anybody because of this artificial ceiling that we've imposed on them, that hasn't been readdressed for. 00:33:23
Decades that that's really what this is about. I don't think this is about taking advantage of development as a way to force. 00:33:31
Quality and there and all of us as residents who accept something. 00:33:41
That isn't. 00:33:48
It that isn't valid. 00:33:50
And so we're we're excited about this. And this isn't just our little project. This is. 00:33:52
As you saw, albeit a very small part of the city. 00:33:59
There are significant areas where the opportunity to introduce commercial and residential as a as a mixed-use and and kind of a 00:34:03
village is is an incredible opportunity for everybody. 00:34:11
And so we appreciate your consideration and your time. 00:34:19
Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Commissioners, any questions from the applicant? 00:34:24
OK. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. And with that, just as a reminder, if you are here to make public comment on it this 00:34:28
evening, we ask that you keep your comments to 3 minutes or less. And if you're making a comment after someone else, we ask that 00:34:34
you not restate the same points of their comment. And with that, we'll go ahead and invite any members of the public that want to 00:34:39
come up and speak on this particular matter now to do so. 00:34:45
Maybe this is not what they're all here. 00:34:54
Going once, twice. All right. So with that, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing on this. 00:34:59
And commissioners will have some discussion points on here. Mr. Barrett, I have a question upper staff. 00:35:05
I I've been to all of the commercial areas in the city, but I don't remember are any of them vacant? 00:35:13
Right now I can't think of any that are vacant, so this may not be a widespread usage of any additional. 00:35:24
OK, what about the subway there on across from? 00:35:32
No, currently vacant. We are reviewing a building permit that's thought. 00:35:37
OK. I'm just wondering what the impact that we were to see this citywide won't be? 00:35:41
Recently vacant is now occupied by the new pretzel place, which is not my favorite pretzel spot. 00:35:49
That's pretty economic development. Goodness gracious. 00:35:56
Thank you. 00:35:59
So other, so in the work meeting we had a couple discussion points around just height and concerns around building architecture. 00:36:05
And I'll just kind of start off the discussion by saying what the applicants property and specifically what they have in mind for 00:36:11
that I'm highly in favor of. I think it makes sense. I don't think it's going to mess up anything within that sphere that they're 00:36:17
in right there. 00:36:23
The extra 5 feet, I really don't see that having an impact when literally across the street there's units that are being built 00:36:29
that are, you know, 40 feet higher than that or whatever. So I I don't think that particular location is one that I'm at all 00:36:36
concerned about with this. But for me, the concern on some of these others I did voice like for example the subway. 00:36:44
You know, how how close can they get on the setbacks in that zone? How big of a structure can you put there? And if you live next 00:36:52
door to it, did you just lose your view of everything West of you and now you're going to live in the shadow of A? 00:36:58
You know giant concrete three story structure that. 00:37:04
You know approved or approved by City Council could be permissible there. So that's that's where a little bit of my reservation 00:37:09
comes in on that. So with that I'll I'll look to my fellow commissioners to extend that discussion and. 00:37:16
Weigh in their thoughts around that. Commissioner Cunningham, we started with you I believe last time on this. I'm going to come 00:37:23
back to you first. 00:37:26
Yeah, so I have two concerns. One is the set back issue and that. 00:37:30
This location I don't have any problem with. I just don't. 00:37:35
Short of looking at all the residential, all the others, I wonder if we can preserve the ability for that extra 5 feet to make 00:37:38
sure we're comfortable with the setbacks. 00:37:44
For any specific project, because that's the problem when you have all these different pieces of a zone scattered all over and 00:37:51
that and then I also think it is worthy of discussion about the architectural thing. I think I like the idea and show us what it 00:37:59
is you're going to do if all we get is a three story building and we can't figure out how the five feet helped. 00:38:07
Make it look better and that then why do it so I think and if there's a way to. 00:38:16
Get that five feet, nut. 00:38:24
You know, it could go up to 40 feet. 00:38:26
With staff approval of something that, you know, review of the setbacks and they have negative Planning Commission for approval. I 00:38:29
don't know. I think that. 00:38:34
Get rid of my concerns. I think we need to be moving forward and allowing it. I just don't want to allow them the next one that 00:38:39
comes in. 00:38:43
We would kick ourselves and said Yep, all we did was 5 feet and we got nothing. 00:38:47
I think it's a good. 00:38:53
Valid point. I appreciate that perspective. Commissioner Prince, I'll see you highlighting the mic ahead. So maybe, and I I was 00:38:54
not here 2 weeks ago, but what are the setbacks exactly for? 00:39:00
The C2 zone currently that that has the 35 feet height limit. If you give me a second I'll find those out for you. 00:39:06
I didn't. 00:39:15
Because they weren't requested to be altered, I didn't really look at them. 00:39:17
I mean, you don't just have those memorized after doing this, I don't feel we don't build very commercial business. 00:39:21
Remember what they were. 00:39:28
You probably remember. 00:39:29
Oh. 00:39:36
Give me, give me two minutes here. 00:39:39
It's on the corner of well, this is all C2 zone. 00:39:42
Has specific profit that that you're representing on what's that? 00:39:49
They can come up and chat, ask questions. 00:39:55
Well, they're just they're they're having, I'm ignoring them because they're having a conversation in the audience. That's OK 00:39:58
We're just waiting on you. No, no pressure, John. 00:40:02
The way he's looking that up, maybe I'll come over to Commissioner Baron. 00:40:09
Any additional thoughts or concerns that you want to share at this time? Well, my preference would not to hold it up, but I don't 00:40:13
know. I appreciate the other comments that have been made. 00:40:18
Staff, is there a way to introduce? 00:40:24
And architects review with any commercial. 00:40:27
I mean I don't want to add another level of. 00:40:31
Review that maybe the staff can't do at this point in time, but. 00:40:34
At this point, the request is just for a height amendment. 00:40:38
True, but I'm saying is and as part of that commercial would have to be. 00:40:42
Reviewed through the city's Architecture Review Board. 00:40:47
We can add the DRB board, the Design Review Board to Reviewing C2. 00:40:50
As well, because they already reviewed for the Holiday Village Zone and the Holly Crossroads. 00:40:57
Zone, but the idea of whether or not we're just going to pull those standards over and include them in the C2, we have to look at, 00:41:02
see if it works. 00:41:06
It should be fine and there's no reason why I couldn't. Well, that's why I'm kind of asking to see how much additional work this 00:41:10
would be. Or does this just add another delay to this that? 00:41:16
Maybe won't be satisfied through. 00:41:21
Some of the discussions we're having right now, so I don't I don't quite know how we're gonna solve the problem with the design. 00:41:24
Well, maybe to to simplify it because I'm I'm all about to keep it simple. 00:41:30
Principle. 00:41:36
Perhaps anything where they wish to exceed the already existing height of 35 if they wish to go up to the 40. 00:41:38
Umm then that would be applicable to the extra layer of Design Review Board, but if it came in at 35 or under then. 00:41:47
It's just business as usual, and it's not as arduous or additional task into city staff. 00:41:54
But I see the applicant has his hand up. Did you want to come up and ask a question on that? 00:42:02
OK, because I think you're on to something because this is. 00:42:10
That would be concerning. 00:42:15
Because I know what the setbacks are. 00:42:18
But I also know that we have a graduated. 00:42:20
Restriction on certain zones and overlays and so forth. 00:42:24
And what that does is it allows, like you said, if something is over 35 feet. And I'm not trying to complicate this or make it 00:42:30
convoluted, but. 00:42:36
There, there is something to be considered about that as long as that 40 foot. 00:42:43
Limit of the building falls inside of the graduated height limitation for that zone. 00:42:49
That might be something John might want to consider, and you might want to consider because that helps. 00:42:57
A40 foot building being placed 15 feet from the property line, which it's allowed to be. 00:43:03
Based on a limited height that comes up the property line and then angles in. 00:43:10
Set up 20 feet, which would allow a 35 foot building but not a 40 foot building that close. It would allow a 40 foot building 5 00:43:16
more feet in. 00:43:23
My just. 00:43:30
Just a thoughtful suggestion about how. 00:43:32
That could keep. 00:43:36
Your concerns about the 40 feet limited, but. 00:43:38
I might be overstepping my bounds, but I think that might be helpful. Well, it's good insight is. 00:43:42
Architect and. 00:43:51
Someone with interest in development in the city, so I appreciate the comment. Thank you very much. And then you also have to. 00:43:53
I can remind the Planning Commission all commercial redevelopment site plans come to the Planning Commission anyway. 00:43:59
So you have an opportunity to look at the site plan. 00:44:07
Then we if we needed to, we can add in through the City Council study on how to add in architectural controls. But yeah, that's 00:44:10
another step. But it's not. 00:44:15
We've seen how effective it is with the village. 00:44:21
So for setbacks that answer Commissioner Prince's request, front yards is at set 20 feet. 00:44:26
But it depends on what's around the commercial property. 00:44:32
And it's more restrictive if it's a budding residential, so side yards. If it's a budding residential, it's 15 feet. 00:44:36
Very. Our defensive budding residential, it's also 15. 00:44:43
Otherwise, if it's within like a like a strip mall situation, it's fully surrounded. 00:44:46
The Planning Commission gets to set the setbacks or they default to 0. 00:44:53
Thank you. 00:44:59
This Commissioner Prince, again I I like the idea of incorporating some sort of an architectural review. 00:45:02
Or. 00:45:09
Some You've got to show something to get the extra 5 feet. 00:45:12
You know, I'm not quite sure which is the more workable solution, but I like doing. 00:45:16
Something. 00:45:22
From Commissioner Farm, We haven't heard from you yet. What What are your thoughts on? 00:45:25
The idea of that too, I think you know you gotta. 00:45:29
You got to give to death. 00:45:33
So and I don't want to speak for so it sounds like we're as a Commission fairly comfortable with what's being proposed this 00:45:37
evening with the giant asterisk on there of an additional step of a design review board. 00:45:43
Or and or graduated height. Just one question staff. 00:45:50
Do you see a manageable way to do what we're kind of talking about? Yeah, I think a recommendation to approve the request to 00:45:54
change from 35 to 40 feet is recommended with. 00:46:01
Also recommendation to have staff study for it to include. 00:46:07
Architectural review in the C2. 00:46:11
Well, it should be just all for commercial zones really. I think you can make that, that's what I'm suggesting. But I understand 00:46:14
that's a separate thing. So will this slow down this particular applicant's project, which I think we're all supportive of, not 00:46:20
necessarily that project is well. 00:46:26
Essentially, is entitled. 00:46:32
And just able to review for building permit but no, it wouldn't affect this one. 00:46:35
I like that solution, Commissioners, anything. So does anyone feel comfortable and articulating a motion to approve with that 00:46:41
stipulation in a manner that will? 00:46:47
Make it to City Council and staff can facilitate. 00:46:53
I can give it a whirl, but I'm intrigued on how you're going to do that. 00:46:59
If you're listening ears on Brad, you're ready to. 00:47:05
Well, I'll ask him. 00:47:08
Legal to help us and I guess we should refer to council. Is there anything? 00:47:10
With such a recommendation that we should be careful of or would be problematic. 00:47:16
I don't think there is because I mean, it still has to go through City Council. I think maybe you could attempt something like. 00:47:21
And maybe correct me if I'm wrong. 00:47:28
A motion to. 00:47:35
Forward this project on or this text amendment on, with a couple of caveats. 00:47:40
And those caveats would be one that. 00:47:45
There be some flex, some additional process that an applicant would go through to get the extra 5 feet. It wouldn't be automatic. 00:47:48
And two that could potentially be. 00:47:55
Some architectural controls so that we get quality buildings, something along those lines. 00:47:58
Well, you feel that's too broad. 00:48:05
I mean, it's a sliding scale well. So we have in supplemental regulations maybe, maybe that maybe it's in a C2 zone, there's a 00:48:08
supplemental regulation added because we have existing regulations that allow for additional height for certain reasons. 00:48:16
I mean I think if I'm understanding correctly, I think the biggest concern, is the height the biggest concern or is the additional 00:48:26
stories a bigger concern? So if you have a 40 foot building? 00:48:31
I mean you want to do 8 foot ceilings? 00:48:37
You could probably get four stories in there. 00:48:40
I don't think we ought to get four stories. I'm just saying, right? So that's what I'm saying, so. 00:48:43
It's not so much the height necessarily. 00:48:48
It's the you don't want to be have. 00:48:51
As dense as possible dwelling units. There are studio apartments on every C2 zone. Is that my understanding that Is that a big 00:48:56
concern? 00:49:00
That's already built into the ordinance already, right? So you've got you can't receive three stories. 00:49:06
Anyway, OK, so that's not a proposal then. That's not even an issue. 00:49:12
So really it's just. 00:49:18
The way you phrased it, quality over you know, the quality to receive the additional five I think is really what we're looking for 00:49:21
on that. 00:49:25
Does anyone feel brave or do you want me to take the step? 00:49:30
All right, I'll stab away. All right? I don't even have it on my packet. Let me find it in here. 00:49:33
Thank you. 00:49:41
All right, this is Chair Roach. I motion to forward a recommendation to the City Council to approve an application by Brent 00:49:44
Laughlin, represented by Chris Layton, to amend Title 13, Chapter 13.62, point 110, the City of Holiday Land Use Code to increase 00:49:51
the maximum allowable height from 35 to 40 feet. 00:49:59
And with that, a caveat that anytime a building. 00:50:07
Looks to go beyond the standard 35 two up to 40 feet. It must also go through an additional layer of design review board or 00:50:13
something through city staff to ensure that the IT is architecturally. 00:50:20
Quality. 00:50:28
Qualitative. 00:50:30
Whichever word works. 00:50:32
To to receive that approval for the additional 5 feet. 00:50:35
That work? 00:50:39
I think we need to add the finding as well. So we have a finding in there because we have. We didn't put a finding. 00:50:41
You can just say and and to include the findings and to include finding the staff in the staff report. 00:50:47
This is Commissioner Prince. I'll second that motion. 00:50:55
Right. We have a motion that's been seconded. We'll call for a vote, Commissioner Cunningham. 00:50:58
Commissioner Barrett and Chair Roach votes aye and passes unanimously. 00:51:05
Thank you very much. 00:51:10
All right. With that, we are moving on to the next one, which maybe everyone's here For this one, we'll find out. It's exciting. 00:51:12
This is the historic preservation ordinance update. And with that, we'll ask city staff to go ahead and walk us through what is 00:51:17
included with this. 00:51:23
Yes, thank you, Chair Roach. Item 2 tonight is an amendment request from the City Council. 00:51:29
To update historic preservation ordinance for the city. 00:51:35
What this preservation ordinance update does is it reestablishes a process. 00:51:40
At which an applicant can. 00:51:45
Add to historic site. Register historic property, especially. 00:51:47
If even when they've been designated either by the state or federal entities. 00:51:53
Or if the property shows significant historic value. 00:51:59
Through a certain series of steps that the applicant can go through. 00:52:04
Property owners or their agents are now applicants to add their properties to a site. They're also the applicants to remove their 00:52:09
properties from site. 00:52:13
That's something that is pretty much standard through most historic preservation ordinances, how properties can be added to, but 00:52:18
what's the process if needed to have properties removed from that process was also not included in the original historic 00:52:24
preservation ordinance as well. 00:52:30
Noticing is now included as that part of that process. 00:52:37
Whenever a property is proposed by the City Council to be added to that list. 00:52:42
New noticing requirements are added to our ordinance. They're there to follow the exact same process as a result. 00:52:47
So specifically we notify within 500 feet that are not on the agenda and on the website for for noticing of that city meeting. 00:52:56
The Planning Commission's authority didn't really change too much in that the authority the Planning Commission has for historic 00:53:06
properties is to. 00:53:10
Approve conditional use conditional land use permits. 00:53:15
For the extra land uses that are allowed for that property, so. 00:53:19
The reason why the City Council designates historic properties is that there's additional land uses that are allowed there and 00:53:24
they could be retail. 00:53:28
Something that the neighbors in a residential neighborhood cannot do. 00:53:32
The purpose for that is to help sustain economically that use to keep those properties rolling in perpetuity. 00:53:36
So the Planning Commission is that approval body for conditional land uses, also for alterations to the site. 00:53:44
Architectural modifications, additions, landscaping changes, those are all approvable by the Planning Commission. 00:53:51
Which also includes major modifications. 00:53:59
And so, so modification in the ordinance is defined as. 00:54:03
Anything that drastically alters or changes the structure, including demolition. 00:54:07
So there's a 30 day stay that the applicant has to come the Planning Commission for. 00:54:12
So that the property can be. 00:54:18
Documented. 00:54:21
Before that alteration happens. 00:54:23
Very recent situation that we saw in the news that over Easter weekend in Salt Lake City we dealt with a historic property that. 00:54:26
They contractors decided to go ahead and demolish a portion of the 5th Ward downtown. 00:54:34
Without permits, that's something that happens. There is an enforcement process and so that enforcement process was built back 00:54:40
into this ordinance. 00:54:44
Which refers back to the normal missed Class B misdemeanor situation for a violation of this type, the title that you're going to 00:54:49
be amending or considering. 00:54:54
And I. 00:55:01
Those are the minutes in a nutshell. I can answer any questions if you'd like. John, wasn't there a. 00:55:03
Some of the reasoning behind the amendment was to help it coincide more with the state's process. True, there is a state state of 00:55:11
Utah's process for sites and districts. 00:55:15
It is intended to comply with that process as well. 00:55:22
Thank you. 00:55:26
Commissioners, any question for city staff on. 00:55:28
What was a pretty detailed review of? 00:55:31
What's in the text? Amendment. 00:55:35
Mr. Mayor, so as far as any type of remodel or redesign of a historic building. 00:55:37
Is anybody on staff? 00:55:44
I'm educated, not only I want some like. 00:55:46
Has the expertise to make sure that that does follow the historical architecture, or does it go to a state review? 00:55:50
To make that happen? No. 00:56:00
They'll be brought to so in the process. 00:56:03
Staff will have determination of what they're going to need or reasonably require the applicant to come to the Planning Commission 00:56:07
for that consideration. 00:56:11
So we'll be looking for specific architectural review from specialized designers that we're going to propose drawings that comply 00:56:16
with the original vernacular of that that site. 00:56:22
And then that could be the elements will be brought to the Planning Commission for their approvals and the considerations. 00:56:28
So we will be making a decision on architecture as well, yes, OK. Yes. 00:56:35
So you'll have to be the expert. Well, and we do live in this, this wonderful digital age where there's a camera in everyone's 00:56:41
pocket and a server on every, you know, corner, basically. 00:56:47
I assume through this process, would there be like if someone came through with an application, would there be like a digital or 00:56:55
photographic record that we could refer back to? Because I mean, I I see it's in the text, but I mean in pictures worth 1000 00:57:01
words, right? You literally look at a picture and say, yeah, that whatever you build on the House wasn't there before. What is 00:57:06
that? And that doesn't match with whatever. 00:57:12
Chair, Chair, Roach. The County Recorder's Office has a lot of photographic documentation that goes back quite a ways, so part of 00:57:19
that process would likely include. 00:57:24
Whatever public records are available related to this specific property. 00:57:30
Especially if they went have already gone through a State historic designation process, the documentation required with that is 00:57:34
pretty is extremely extensive. Would be expected that would be a would accompany the application. 00:57:40
So nobody at the city of holiday is going to shrug their shoulders and say that was right. 00:57:46
Well, that's the thing I don't want to have happen is, you know, because somebody doesn't have the expertise that something's 00:57:51
approved that suddenly makes the historic property or. 00:57:56
Building not historic anymore. 00:58:02
Anytime you add or change property, as long as vernacular looks similar to what was essentially there. 00:58:05
That's why there's this process. Thank you. 00:58:12
Question. Appreciate that, Commissioner, for the gentleman. 00:58:15
Said somebody has it owns a historic property and wants to turn. 00:58:18
That into a retail. 00:58:23
Situation. 00:58:26
Does that come before us by way of a conditional use permit, right? 00:58:28
OK. So we then have the opportunity to. 00:58:34
Approve that or deny it? Yeah, and it would follow the exact same process for all conditional uses. Staff would notify everyone 00:58:39
within 500 feet. The public hearing would be take place. 00:58:45
The applicant proposed the use. 00:58:51
What its parameters are and then if if either through the public process or from the Planning Commission's discussion, there are. 00:58:54
Detrimental effects of that use conditions can be placed upon it to sort of contain it and and its effect on the the neighbourhood 00:59:02
essentially, so there won't be any salons getting approved. 00:59:09
My name is Camille Pierce. 00:59:56
I live at 2052 E Arbor Lane in Holland. 00:59:59
It's across the street from the mall development on the South Side. 01:00:05
My home was originally built in 1938. 01:00:10
With a later careful addition made in 1957. 01:00:14
It belonged to the prominent Dinoti family. 01:00:19
Known for their long standing fine furniture store. 01:00:22
The homesteads on 1 1/2 acres of property along Big Cottonwood Creek. 01:00:26
With substantial mature vegetation and a variety of flower gardens. 01:00:33
We have infested money and love. 01:00:38
By replacing all the plumbing. 01:00:42
Burying utility lines, installing solar panels. 01:00:44
Seismic strengthening. 01:00:48
As well as maintaining the buildings in the yard. 01:00:50
It's all in really good condition. 01:00:54
We have already spent close to $7000. 01:00:57
Working with an architectural firm to try and create a means of protection. 01:01:01
And preservation for this historical property. 01:01:06
We have contacted the Utah Historical Society in the state's Historical Preservation Office. 01:01:09
We also talked with some of the people on a holiday historical committee. 01:01:15
We have consoled with a well known historical architect of professional person. 01:01:21
And he has been encouraging to us in terms of the historical value of our home. 01:01:27
And property. 01:01:32
We have lost every single home that has been sold. 01:01:36
Demolished. 01:01:41
With very little of the materials recycled before being taken to the dump. 01:01:43
Vegetation on these properties is typically sent to the chipper. 01:01:49
Only the empty land surface is valued. 01:01:54
We want a way to preserve our home. 01:01:58
Trees, plantings and property for the future. 01:02:02
It represents styles of a special time and holiday. 01:02:07
When living in need was a respite from the stresses of city living. 01:02:11
Thank you. 01:02:17
I'm Kim Duffy. I live at 2195 Walker Lane. 01:02:30
I'm glad that historic ordinances are being considered again. 01:02:35
What these proposed ordinances appear to do is essentially restore the ordinances of holidays we used to have. 01:02:43
But now it just bypasses the Historical Commission. 01:02:51
If a city has preservation ordinances and an historical Commission, the two should work together. 01:02:56
But I was told in January that as a commissioner, I'm not allowed to lobby the City Council on ordinances. That seems 01:03:02
counterproductive to me. 01:03:06
That said, I'm talking right now as a constituent, not as vice chair of a historical Commission. 01:03:11
A case in point for our working together. 01:03:19
13.86 point 020. 01:03:22
Historic Sites Register. There are 8 buildings listed. 01:03:25
I know each of these buildings. I'm in touch with the owners of these buildings once or twice a year. 01:03:29
One of the houses has been removed from its original site, so won't qualify under the new ordinances. 01:03:35
Another house has undergone major renovation to the principal facade in the last year, so it won't qualify either. 01:03:41
Another house is owned by a family. 01:03:48
WHO is resistant to participating in holiday preservation events and would probably be surprised and maybe angered. 01:03:51
At their inclusion on this list. 01:03:57
And another house was demolished 3 months ago, so that's 50% of the houses that were listed on this. 01:04:00
These proposed 8 houses. 01:04:06
I would like to see an ordinance that spells out the duties. 01:04:09
Of the Commission. 01:04:12
I'd like to get a CLG grant to give us funding to pay for additional listings to the Holiday Historic Sites Register. 01:04:14
Or providing support for document any properties that is that is demolished on a local registry list. 01:04:21
Or paying an historian to write the history of holiday, as most of our neighboring cities have done. 01:04:28
Worth finding an architectural survey of holiday because it's anybody's guess what significant buildings we have here. 01:04:35
Then on 13.07 point 050 procedure. 01:04:42
It talks about the roles of the community and economic development director or the City Council or the city and staff. 01:04:47
Nowhere does it say what the role of the historic Commission is in this process. 01:04:56
Why does it only involve the City Council and city staff when meter body? 01:05:01
They claim to have special knowledge of historic preservation for historic buildings in our city. That's to your point, Mr. Burn. 01:05:06
Removal of properties is letter I removing the properties from the city's historic site register. It's only the council's opinion 01:05:15
that is being considered again. Where is the Holiday Historical Commission in all of this? 01:05:22
Ideally, this these petitions passed through a historical Commission to provide advice. 01:05:29
Additionally, the ordinance does not incentivize adding properties to the holiday historic site designation. 01:05:35
How about a clause that states if a property is nominated to the National Register, it is automatically invited to be placed on 01:05:42
the holiday list? 01:05:45
And this could be done retroactively to capture any properties within holiday that are on the National Register but not on 01:05:50
holidays list. 01:05:53
Under 13.86 point 060 additional uses for historic sites. 01:05:58
The Planning Commission may improve approve any of the following uses for an historic site. 01:06:05
Antique shop, art shop, working house, etc. We were discussing once a minute ago. 01:06:11
If our house is on holidays, historic sites register when Hank and I die. 01:06:17
My neighbors will not welcome a boarding house opening up at our address. I don't even know what a boarding house is anymore or 01:06:22
how that plays out. 01:06:26
The other thing I'm not seeing is means for a developer who owns an historic structure like the Britain House. 01:06:31
To work with the city and the Historical Commission. 01:06:38
When they want to develop a mixed-use or higher density in order to save the building. 01:06:41
With regard to the Britain House, we sent proposed density changes and historic preservation zone ideas to the developer and to 01:06:47
our council person. 01:06:51
Hoping for a conversation. 01:06:56
The developer liked our ideas, but we could never get an answer from the council person, whether they liked it or hated it or 01:06:58
found it completely implausible. 01:07:02
So the idea died. 01:07:07
I know this city can't put its thumb on the scale of a particular developers project, but we do. 01:07:09
But do we have to operate in a vacuum? 01:07:14
I don't know how these things work. 01:07:17
Not very many citizens do, and that's part of the problem. 01:07:19
I feel like some attempt to work together that if some attempt to work together had occurred. 01:07:23
The FA Britain house might not have sat empty for a year experiencing demolition by neglect. We shouldn't be working at cross 01:07:29
purposes. 01:07:34
The things I do like about the new ordinances. I like the mention of dark sky compliant lighting. 01:07:39
And I really like the 30 day documentation. Period. 01:07:45
My question is who is going to do the documenting? 01:07:48
Does that historical Commission do it, or does the next door neighbor do it? 01:07:52
I personally trespassed to document three buildings in holiday before they were raised. 01:07:57
One as it was being raised. 01:08:02
I don't recommend it. 01:08:04
Thank you very much for your comments. I appreciate that and for the perspective that it will provide the. 01:08:10
Commission for discussion. 01:08:16
Do we have any other members of the public who wish to make comment at this time? 01:08:19
So the. 01:08:23
My name is Steve Glaser. 01:08:31
And I live at 2052 E Harbor Lane. 01:08:34
I haven't read the proposed revisions to the code, so. 01:08:37
But what I can tell you is that when I've looked at the ordinance in the past. 01:08:41
It does seem like a homeowner could very easily. 01:08:47
You see meaningful protection for their. 01:08:52
Going forward? 01:08:56
When I've seen comments by city officials. 01:08:58
When they talk about historic preservation ordinances, they've always been concerned, hey, they don't want to impose an historic 01:09:02
preservation on. 01:09:06
A place when the. 01:09:11
And take away current owners property rights. 01:09:13
At the very least, we ought to make it. 01:09:16
So that if a homeowner wants that protection on their property. 01:09:20
And they're just fine, with whatever financial consequences there are. It should be a pretty simple process. 01:09:25
Now there is a caveat with that. I mean if you're going to have that. 01:09:34
There is responsibility. We've been talking about the review required for future alterations. 01:09:39
There's an enforcement component which I think is a lot easier for citizens. 01:09:46
Building permits exist and things like that. 01:09:52
So maybe when I say a simple process, maybe that's. 01:09:56
Maybe I'm overstating what can be done. 01:10:01
But I'd like as long as we're considering revisions, let's make it so that a homeowner who wants historic preservation protection, 01:10:04
I should say historic protection. 01:10:09
And obtain that if their home is appropriate. 01:10:16
Thank you. Thank you very much. Appreciate that. 01:10:19
Do we have any other members of the public which may comment on this item at this time? 01:10:26
Once, twice, OK. And with that, we'll go ahead and close the public comment, appreciate. 01:10:32
The talking points that have been presented by. 01:10:38
Everyone. And with that, we'll turn to the Commission to to start the discussion on this. 01:10:41
Commissioner Barrett, you look like you have a thought. Can't wait to share. Yeah, you gotta hurry. 01:10:48
So, staff, can you tell me how does the plant, the historic Commission, work in this process? They do not. 01:10:55
Couldn't that be in a? To me that seems a little odd where they could add some expertise to. 01:11:04
I mean, they're doing all the work as far as historical properties in the city. Why wouldn't we tap them for? 01:11:12
Yeah. So the City Council made a very specific directive that the Historical Commission has their directive entitled to. 01:11:18
Title 2 gives them a list of responsibilities. 01:11:28
And those responsibilities didn't transfer her under the Staffs direction to this this update. 01:11:32
Explicitly, I'm wondering if that council may want to reconsider them just having a review part of it. That's how we have this 01:11:38
process. 01:11:43
All right. Thank you. 01:11:48
Would would it be possible? At least from we talk about listing and the listing of properties. 01:11:50
Maybe rather than give any actual responsibility to the Historical Commission, could we at least involve them and let them know 01:11:59
when that's happening? Because that would seem more than appropriate since they have charged over all the properties that are 01:12:04
listed as historical or not in the city. Would that be fair? 01:12:10
Yeah, I mean, especially one of the very primary responsibilities of all of our committees. 01:12:17
Arts. 01:12:23
Tree is to educate and to help property owners who want to list their properties get through that process. 01:12:25
So from the the ordinances point of view. 01:12:32
Historical committee should would be the. 01:12:35
Absolute reference point of reference that a resident could get education from to help them through that process. 01:12:38
By the time they get to the application, yeah, they might have the the property owner might have a federal designation or a state 01:12:46
designation. 01:12:50
They may not have to get to that point. The historical community definitely helped them get to that point. 01:12:54
For Mrs. Pierce's point of view, that process has been hard with the State because of an individual. 01:13:00
This the proposals in this ordinance allows property owner to bypass federal and state and still get it listed in historic site 01:13:06
register. 01:13:10
If they're significant an individual. 01:13:15
An activity architecture, something that wasn't necessarily a state level, that it is a local level designation. 01:13:18
So the Council conditionally. 01:13:26
A situation in Mrs. Pierce's sit. 01:13:28
Historical designation and for her situation. 01:13:32
Which has been hard in the past, right? So to get through the process to Mr. Glazier's point. 01:13:35
As effectively stream streamlined, you either have already gone through the federal historical process which is onerous. 01:13:42
Getting it added to the list is fairly simple. 01:13:49
If you can't have the federal or state designation and you can meet the some of the other criteria. 01:13:53
Then the Council can make that consideration. 01:14:00
Without the state of the federalist state designation. 01:14:03
Just for my own identification on this. 01:14:07
Is there any cost associated not at the state or county level but at the just or excuse me, national level, but at the city level? 01:14:10
Is there any cost associated with? 01:14:16
Applying for and obtaining that designation for the City of holiday, we haven't considered the cost for that. Is that something 01:14:23
you can definitely have the council consider? 01:14:28
And I'm not sure what they would be interested in. 01:14:34
The process itself is similar to a text amendment or reason. 01:14:38
That legislative process has a fixed fee and I think it's $500 actually. 01:14:43
But for reasons and text amendments, as you know, that's a considerable amount of work from the Planning Commission. 01:14:50
To review those types of processes but for justice and to appear before the City Council to make a determination. 01:14:55
I'm assuming it wouldn't be anywhere near that. 01:15:01
Yeah, I mean, I just, I think if they've already done the work to go through. 01:15:05
The process of getting at state or federally recognized as historical, I think it's kind of. 01:15:09
What's the insult to injury for the city to come back and slap them with more fees if there's any costs associated with going 01:15:15
through those two owners processes that you point out? 01:15:20
So I just I was curious if there would be any additional burden on? 01:15:27
Residents to have to do local level. 01:15:31
This is. 01:15:35
Commissioner Prince, I've got a question. So say that that this ordinance goes forward and we have. 01:15:37
Some local homeowners who go through the process and get their home listed. 01:15:45
In the city. 01:15:51
Under this this. 01:15:52
Text amendment Would that designation as a historic local historic property continue to? 01:15:55
Next owner. 01:16:04
Yes, OK. 01:16:06
Stays. It would stay with the problem. Especially if it had a conditional use permit to stay with it would stay with the property 01:16:09
is it recorded. 01:16:12
With the deed or something or just in the, I'm just wondering where it would be recorded that it stays with. Yeah, this this state 01:16:17
or local historic. I'm not sure if we have a process to record against the title, but it definitely be kept with the city. When 01:16:24
conditional use permits are approved, we don't record them. That's just something that's kept on file with the city and tagged 01:16:31
against the address. So we had to follow that process. Thank you. 01:16:38
And along the lines of, we kind of talked about this in our work meeting and touched on a discussion point as far as if a new 01:16:48
owner wishes to delist a property and say they want to undo all that work that someone's gone through because they want to. 01:16:55
Build a lack of better term, Very modern home where a historic 1 used to be. I watched myself be proud of me, I can tell. 01:17:03
Would there be any involvement in like notify we we talk about notifying like neighbors, but I think again circling back to if we 01:17:14
have historic properties that are historic commission's aware of. Obviously education is important, but I feel like they should 01:17:19
also be somehow included in the notification so that they can try and educate that property owner maybe before it gets to the 01:17:25
point of the Wrecking Ball. 01:17:30
Or already approved through several processes and fees paid out to start that process before someone from a historical Commission 01:17:37
reaches out and says, oh by the way, did you know that you're about to? You just got approved and paid a bunch of money to tear 01:17:42
down something. That's a gem and holiday we all appreciate. 01:17:47
So that's that's something I don't know if it's worded in there, but I think that would be a strong recommendation. 01:17:56
To have them involved in that process without overstepping their duties as City Council has directed, if that makes sense. 01:18:04
Commissioner Park. 01:18:13
I don't know how to say this. 01:18:16
Tactfully, so I'm just going to say it, OK? No swear words. 01:18:19
I I just wonder if it makes sense. 01:18:25
For us to continue this application. 01:18:31
Given that the. 01:18:36
Historical Commission has not been involved in this process at all. 01:18:38
It just seems to me to make sense to involve. 01:18:44
Then in some way shape or form. 01:18:48
Before it comes before. 01:18:53
Before our consideration. 01:18:55
Actually, enough. That was great. I'm proud. better than I am. 01:18:59
And I appreciate the point. I think that makes sense for me. I think right now the text amendment is tying up a loose end that 01:19:07
right now there's nothing. 01:19:11
Right, like that's that's kind of the problem is right now, property owner says, hey, I want this. I've gone through the work at 01:19:16
the state and federal level for it and it's like, good for you, cool. But nothing at the city level is happening. 01:19:22
Right. This at least gives the avenue for the city to recognize and take action on that. And like I said, I think we can word our 01:19:28
recommendation to involve the Historical Commission in some way, shape or form without overstepping. 01:19:35
What apparently City Council feels like might be, you know, staying in their lane. 01:19:43
But at the same time, I think it makes more sense to move forward with this than to say, yeah, we make a negative recommendation 01:19:48
on this because it doesn't include enough because I'm I'm a believer in starting somewhere, if that makes sense. So I would say is 01:19:54
a is there a rush? 01:19:59
And be what's the harm and continuing it. 01:20:04
For many more insight to city staff. 01:20:10
Council is directed staff to have this in front of them by May. May is the National Historic Preservation Month, so we'd like to 01:20:14
have something that's approvable. 01:20:18
Whether in whatever format, so they can work the details out and have that approved in by May. 01:20:24
That's the rush you gotta can I ask a question in terms of the historic committee? 01:20:31
It doesn't exist by ordinance or yes, OK, and so that ordinance. 01:20:38
You can quickly pull it up, see what their duties are. By my ordinance, I mean. 01:20:47
Our views and. 01:20:53
The City Council is the group of elected officials. No non elected committee gets to make city policy and that's I'm curious what? 01:20:57
The elected officials said is the role in the historic committee, which is their job to decide. 01:21:07
And that and. 01:21:14
Maybe that would help us as whether what role they. 01:21:16
Maybe suggestion changes to us and that I'm certainly sure the committee's going to speak to the council directly when the 01:21:20
ordinance is on the table. 01:21:25
And I'm just curious what the ordinance says. 01:21:30
You'll be referencing Title 22.08010. 01:21:36
Which talk about all of the commissions for the cities and their responsibilities. 01:21:41
The five responsibilities that have been designated to the historic Commission are highlighted. 01:21:46
So #3. 01:22:03
As I'm reading this. 01:22:05
Areas that now well preserve history of the areas that now comprise. 01:22:07
I mean this. This feels like it would fall under that umbrella too. 01:22:13
An extent understanding. 01:22:17
I am property rights. I am a property rights advocate. So I mean my first answer is anyone that says I really want this to last 01:22:20
forever, then my answer would be buy it and then you can have it last forever. 01:22:26
But I also think that, you know, there should be more involvement. 01:22:33
In these items of consideration, when it gets to the point of designation. 01:22:38
Listing or delisting these properties. 01:22:43
I think it feels like to me, based on that item number three, that there should be a tether to the historical Commission in some 01:22:46
way, shape or form. 01:22:50
True, these items are effectively intended to be educational based. 01:22:55
With no recommendation to either legislation or administration. 01:23:02
So at least the notification, so they can do that outreach. Educational piece of it I think is the important component. 01:23:12
To stay that, stay in that lane then. Because yeah, I agree. If they're not elected, then who are you to tell me I can't do things 01:23:19
on my property? 01:23:23
So I understand and appreciate that, but like I said, I also think that, you know, I don't think I'd be terribly offended if a 01:23:27
historical committee member came to my house and. 01:23:32
Said Hey, did you know this exists and This is why? And one specifically for documentation purposes. 01:23:36
For example. 01:23:43
Through the staff level, our building officials given by right to enter into a property. 01:23:44
I don't need to have to worry about obtaining the warrants or having citizens or thread across properties where they don't have 01:23:50
rights to do that. 01:23:54
If there's an application that's before the city that requires a certain process, my building official has right to enter a 01:23:58
property and staff can assist them in that documentation. That's essentially how it's written that way. 01:24:04
Keeps the city out of trespass and legal issue concerns. 01:24:10
Realizing that I. 01:24:17
This ordinance is not in front of us and different ordinances in front of us. 01:24:21
If we if we continue this. 01:24:27
With the historical committee have specific language changes not to this ordinance, but to the ordinance that we're looking at. 01:24:32
It would give us something to talk about. For example, one that that I mentioned is. 01:24:41
Why are we going to delist without a public notice? 01:24:45
I I can't imagine why any city would want to delist. 01:24:49
Like what happened Sunday? Why? Why would you not make that a public decision? So everyone knows why the house got torn down next 01:24:55
door? Because the ownership changed and the the owner wanted to delist it. But that happened in a public meeting with with some 01:25:02
kind of notice in there, so you could disagree with the decision that you at least understand. 01:25:09
What happened? 01:25:17
And then I don't know if anyone from the committee would like to respond, but I if there are specific language changes to. 01:25:18
Historic. 01:25:28
Or that's not a committee ordinance, but the one in front of us, you know, maybe that is worthwhile to to wait two weeks and see 01:25:32
and then so. 01:25:37
If the chair would allow any of those folks to respond, they're raising their hand. 01:25:43
It looks like we have one. Yeah, go ahead and. 01:25:48
Excuse me, One of the things that I was going to mention was a. 01:25:55
I read all the documents from from when the. 01:25:59
The demolition of the Brenton house was approved and they had the the neighborhood meeting as they're required to do. And I know 01:26:03
people. 01:26:07
Essentially, don't want to leave their homes and go to a meeting. 01:26:12
There were seven people that came to that meeting. 01:26:16
And they didn't have any idea what the building was. 01:26:19
I don't think the developer really knew what the building was so that neighbors were asking questions like, well, is there is 01:26:23
there going to be an elevator in the building? And the questions that they had have absolutely nothing to do with what was about 01:26:27
to happen to this building. 01:26:31
So seven people, I kind of feel like 7 people got to decide for the community what was going to happen to that building in some 01:26:37
sense. I mean, I realized, you know, permits and so on had to happen as well. 01:26:43
But the developer said to me. 01:26:50
We checked that box. That's what we were required to do and we checked that box. I think that box needs to be a little more 01:26:53
meaningful. And you said, John, that has to be all the neighbors within 500 feet. 01:26:59
That seems like a really narrow circle of people to be involved in something as monumental as that house was. 01:27:06
It seems like there should be a little bit more consideration. 01:27:15
Well, we had say you may not have been here. We had some discussion around this in the work meeting about the the costs associated 01:27:20
with notifying for example an entire city. 01:27:25
Or, you know, larger swath of citizenry. Umm. 01:27:32
You know, at what point does that become too cumbersome? And who bears the burden of that cost? Is it unfair to a new property 01:27:37
owner to say, well, if you want to do anything with this, you're going to have to pay 10,000 plus dollars to notify everybody in 01:27:43
the city who has no legal right to your property but enjoys it for the aesthetic of its historical value. 01:27:50
That that's, you know, I think a little bit too much to ask of an applicant in that scenario, although I do appreciate the 01:27:58
sentiment of yes, I agree I think. 01:28:03
It would be good to have some kind of outreach that goes beyond the scope of just the immediate 10 people that live right around 01:28:09
it, or however many. 01:28:12
Yeah, I think the way that it looks like what the Commission is going on, I think you definitely make a recommendation. 01:28:16
To consider. 01:28:24
A public notice for delisting. 01:28:26
You know, consider historic preservations involvement in. 01:28:29
You can enumerate the process procedure. 01:28:33
I think those are those primarily. 01:28:38
To choose. 01:28:40
And then at that point, if the Council wants the the amendment to be drafted in that way to include those, we can definitely have 01:28:43
them in. 01:28:46
At least they have all the tools and everything to consider. 01:28:51
Not just, you know, plain text. And staff sees it. 01:28:55
The text has been proposed as his staff has been directed to. 01:28:58
Propose. Well, that's why the process is set up in a way that includes public comments, although those all those recommendations 01:29:02
in the meeting minutes will go up to the Planning Commission or City Council to make the ultimate that ultimate decision. 01:29:08
I would encourage, you know any members of the audience concerned about this item as it moves to that next level to also attend 01:29:15
that City Council meeting and share thoughts directly with the decision makers there. Council, did you have something? Yeah, just 01:29:21
one other thing that I wanted to just make mention of, one of the things with historic preservation. 01:29:27
Is it runs? It can if a city just decided well, we deem this. 01:29:34
Area historic and therefore you have to have additional processes. 01:29:40
That can impact economic value of properties and that can also be considered. Potential takings claim that if you impact the value 01:29:43
of by by government action, you've impacted the value of the property, and it wasn't voluntary, right? That's why this is a 01:29:49
voluntary process. 01:29:54
Then city could be held liable for designating something of their own accord as historic and therefore protections that came with 01:30:01
it. So that's why these are voluntary processes and not. 01:30:06
Mandatory or, you know, dictatorial processes where we have now deemed this to be. 01:30:13
Historic and therefore. 01:30:18
Whatever economic damage that does to you, too bad, right? That's that's why this is historic and so that's why you have to have 01:30:20
that balance between property rights and. 01:30:25
You know the desires of the owner. That said. 01:30:30
If it's got that historic designation prior to you obtaining they know about it right, then it's something you're taking that on. 01:30:34
So the government action, that was homeowner action, right? 01:30:39
You chose to buy the historic building knowing that it had those conditions absolutely right. 01:30:45
Good clarification. So can I make a suggestion please? I'm wondering if we don't get the historical Commission input on this 01:30:51
proposed language so that they can add the things that maybe we're missing and kind of don't understand in this discussion. 01:30:58
Because frankly, I know I'm out of my element with this and I don't mean to put it on staff to try and bring this together so 01:31:07
everybody's happy. 01:31:11
But I think they do have more expertise than we do typically and I'm wondering if that wouldn't help in this continuance for 01:31:15
another few weeks to get their input. 01:31:20
See if that doesn't help us move this forward. It may upset State Council the way you're describing how they'd like this to go, 01:31:26
but. 01:31:31
I frankly think this is going to be beneficial for all of us if this works with these different groups who have influence in these 01:31:36
different specialties, so. 01:31:40
Does that make sense? 01:31:46
Well, I guess another way to and I I can appreciate because it sounds like we've kind of had this from a couple different sides 01:31:49
now with continuing so that there can be more feedback given. 01:31:53
Will it be something that will? 01:31:59
Delay it to the point where it's pushed out several months, because will there be too much onerous review involved with that, or 01:32:02
would two weeks be enough time to revisit, connect with that committee and then put it back before us? 01:32:09
I think using the term committee. 01:32:18
Being the one recommending code amendments is incorrect. 01:32:21
I think if you're going to continue with them for the public comment and input, that's more appropriate. 01:32:25
Now, that being said, I think we've heard from a majority, not majority, a few members from the historic committee. 01:32:31
You believe that Earth. They believe it needs more input to give to you to make those those changes. 01:32:37
We can definitely put it off to another meeting. 01:32:43
John, how many? How many council meetings are in? 01:32:48
Is it just one? 01:32:51
One more No, there's one more Planning Commission meeting this month. 01:32:53
Do we have two planning? Do we have two City Council meetings in May or just one? 01:32:57
You never know. 01:33:01
And the summer? I'm hoping there's two. There should be two. 01:33:03
OK, so look, we would need to move it. 01:33:07
To comply with the Council's request, we would need to have a recommendation made. 01:33:12
At the latest by next Planning Commission meeting. Well, right and I, you know, ideally. 01:33:17
The elements of what has been requested that the staff bring, the Planning Commission we believe has been provided. 01:33:23
If you want to provide a framework for the City Council to work through amendments, they can take as long as they have to to get 01:33:29
through it and actually make it actually a workable ordinance for them and and the public. 01:33:35
But if you don't believe it's at that point right now, you can continue until you're comfortable with making that right. Well, 01:33:43
there will be a public hearing. 01:33:47
At City Council for this right. This process will start completely over. Yes. So if if for example, because again just talking 01:33:50
about the baby stuff because this isn't the only thing that like you know this isn't like the one and done and OK we're never 01:33:56
gonna do anything historical ever again. We did our our job like I can't imagine that there wouldn't be opportunity in the future 01:34:02
to revisit if there was additional amendments wanted needed or petitioned. 01:34:08
By the the public or City Council. So what I'm suggesting is maybe we move forward with this with recommendations. 01:34:15
Of you know what should be considered And then also the members of the audience here tonight who are members of the Historical 01:34:23
Commission can also go to that City Council meeting and provide the additional feedback and say, look, this is what we think 01:34:29
should also be included with this and then City Council at that time to make the decision if they want to. 01:34:36
You know continue work with it more set up a subcommittee etcetera because that would be more in their wheelhouse than what's in 01:34:43
our wheelhouse here which is the text amendment because if we say OK let's just continue it is city. What I'm hearing from city 01:34:48
staff is it doesn't sound like they're saying well we're going to take a whole lot of public comment and we're going to revise and 01:34:54
read the draft and start over with this. It sounds like they're. 01:34:59
Correct me if I'm wrong. It sounds like you're saying we pretty much did what was petitioned and asked of us from City Council and 01:35:06
you know their the ultimate decision maker and any additional changes or tweaks need to come from them, not from us. Is that a 01:35:13
fair? Well, yes. However, if you believe that you know, you know that process should include entity commissions. 01:35:20
That aren't weren't considered in the original draft. You can make that recommendation to them. 01:35:28
While still forwarding this to them. 01:35:35
While still approving this and moving it along. 01:35:37
So that we didn't come up the works. 01:35:41
Right. Well, you're not not necessarily gumming up the works, you say? 01:35:43
The the central meat and bones that are actually that are. 01:35:47
However, the process by which you add in advice and consent from other commission's should be considered. I think that's part of 01:35:51
would be part of the collective. 01:35:55
Point of view of the Commission right now. 01:36:01
Sounds like to me. 01:36:03
Dennis. 01:36:09
Well, I'm going to just pause comments from the public. We close that hearing, so I might come back, but. 01:36:11
I think we should make a recommendation to Council and let them have these additional discussions because I appreciate Staffs 01:36:15
direction on this. 01:36:19
And I don't want to overly complicate this as far as what you're trying to achieve with this in the direction you're given. So I 01:36:24
think we could move this to the council. 01:36:28
I don't know how many of these little additional things we need to add other than just to prove it. 01:36:34
Well, I think you can add, I've made, I've been carrying a laundry list. 01:36:39
So a filing fee. 01:36:44
You want to direct council to review a filing fee. 01:36:46
Well, as opposed to just the standard $500, I'd like it to not be that you want to lower filing, right. So like determine, I don't 01:36:52
want it to sound reasonable filing fee like add the word reasonable to your laundry list I guess. 01:36:59
A favorable fee, not non minimal fee. 01:37:08
Involvement Historic Committee and Enroll. 01:37:16
I can read my own header, I thought my glasses. Or whether or not to record against title. 01:37:22
Process delisting to include a notice sent to the historic committee, or at least. 01:37:28
Involved their involvement in that. 01:37:35
Preferably a public notice. 01:37:38
Yeah, for a public. 01:37:41
Yeah, this just seems that if this building suddenly going to disappear in the neighborhood, that the reason ought to be well 01:37:43
known. You know they don't. They don't have to like it, but at least they know why it happened. 01:37:48
Otherwise. 01:37:55
The city's not being responsible. And maybe not just noticing the immediate neighbors, but maybe noticing on the website or 01:37:57
something like that. So that that happens anyway. Yeah, with just being on our. 01:38:05
Decision to be more generous about noticing you know the 500 is actually. 01:38:18
More than the state requirement, so I you know, I think if that was the. 01:38:24
That's 505 hundred feet. 01:38:28
300 per state 300 We actually go 200 feet more than the state. 01:38:33
That's all I had. 01:38:39
It's a good list, yeah. I mean, from what I and this is just for the member of the audience that have thrown their hands up and 01:38:42
still want to pop up for comment on this. 01:38:46
I heard from everybody that spoke mostly favorable but lack substance. 01:38:51
In a summary like. 01:38:57
This is a starting point, but we feel like there's needs to be more involved with it. And what I would say to that is if you have 01:38:59
additional thoughts and feels and concerns with that, take those to City Council at the next step because they're the ones that 01:39:05
can take action on that more so than what we can with our recommendation to them. 01:39:11
Unless anybody disagrees with me. 01:39:17
OK, so with that, I'm going to keep the public meeting closed. 01:39:20
I appreciate you, but I'm also going to. 01:39:24
You know, move you to the next stage of that for those additional concerns outside of what we've got. And I think with the 01:39:26
discussion we have now and John's list, I hope someone took notes because I can't remember it all if we can maybe get someone to. 01:39:34
If someone's got the motion for us or we can just say everything that John added to his list, maybe legally that'll work. 01:39:42
Can we say everything John said. 01:39:50
Or staff notes, you could make a motion you move to send it on to with a positive recommendation to City Council, with request to 01:39:52
consider the following five additions, A reduced filing fee. 01:39:58
A. Let's see the inclusion somehow to include the Historic Preservation Committee in this process. 01:40:06
To consider title recreation. 01:40:13
To consider a process, a public process for delisting that includes notice of the Search Preservation Committee. 01:40:16
And then a public hearing for the listing. 01:40:22
And you'll prompt whoever's giving the motion when we can't remember all of those. 01:40:25
You could somebody could just say so moved. 01:40:32
But again, we need to get the findings language in there again. So we have findings with staff finding. Yeah. So let me state 01:40:37
those friendly amendments and the amendment proposed are supported by the goals and policies of the General Plan by promoting and 01:40:44
facilitating historic preservation in all zones in the city and. 01:40:50
The City Council is the land use authority is the applicant and has requested amendments to reestablish the process standards and 01:40:57
procedures of historic site preservation designation. 01:41:03
Do we second that or second the amended motion? Yeah. Do we have a second on the amended motion? All right, We got a second look 01:41:10
at that, like somehow we have piece, meal this motion together and seconded it and we're going to roll forward. So that will 01:41:15
Commissioner Barrett. 01:41:20
Aye, Commissioner. Aye, Mr. Point. 01:41:26
Mr. Cunningham and chair Roach votes aye, so it's moving on to the next stage and. 01:41:29
Appreciate the public's comments and involvement with this and definitely want you to come back and talk to City Council and share 01:41:35
that feedback with them so that they can. 01:41:39
Hopefully get it worked out to where it's going to be best for the community, so thank you very much. 01:41:45
All right. And we have one item left and unless anybody's dying and needs a break, I think we can probably get through this one 01:41:52
pretty swiftly because it is one that's going to be continued. 01:41:57
So with that, John, can you go ahead and walk us through the next item, please? 01:42:02
Sure. Item number 3 tonight is a another text amendment to holiday ordinances in chapter title 13. 01:42:08
Specifically as Council direction for from Council direction to review additional land use zones. 01:42:16
In which quasi public or church uses may be added. 01:42:23
Currently, the P zone is the only zone that churches can be located within. 01:42:28
There's definitely cases that have required majority of zones, or at least thousands, to have churches allowed in pretty much any 01:42:36
zoning city. 01:42:40
That's the the study that needs to be reviewed by the Planning Commission to make recommendations. City Council staff has provided 01:42:45
some background to sort of kind of flesh out this the the key points of this application. 01:42:52
And in deciding which types of zones might be appropriate, um. 01:42:59
Other than having all residential zones or churches being allowed in pretty much any zone as a conditional use. 01:43:04
So right now the staff has provided some amendments to the land use table. 01:43:12
And a staff report to kind of give some background recommendation at this point is to open the public hearing. 01:43:17
Moderate discussion, if any, from the Commission and then continue it to the next meeting. 01:43:24
Commissioners, any questions? 01:43:29
All right. I think we'll go ahead and roll into it. Then we'll open up the public hearing for item number 3 for anyone that wishes 01:43:32
to make a comment on the land use zones for quasi public and community uses. 01:43:38
At this time, do we have anyone? 01:43:44
I am taking that as probably a no, but I think we'll leave the public. 01:43:48
Hearing open. 01:43:54
Just in case there's anything that comes up with revision in the. 01:43:57
Next meeting since there's more to consider on this. 01:44:01
So with that, do we have a motion to continue? 01:44:06
This is Commissioner Prince. I motion that we continue this text amendment discussion to our next meeting. 01:44:11
I'll second that. All right, then. Seconded. Commissioners all in favor? Aye. All right. One question. Is the next meeting going 01:44:17
to be enough time? 01:44:23
Or OK. 01:44:30
Anytime we continue, it automatically goes to the next meeting, right? 01:44:33
Unless you designate us a different one. 01:44:37
One point I just want to make real quick, Sorry to prevent the adjournment motion, but one of the reasons that I. 01:44:41
Staff and. 01:44:50
Counselor to ask mayor I guess Gina asked to continue this is so right now if. 01:44:52
If a church wanted to move into holiday. 01:44:58
They have to get a reason. 01:45:02
Unless they're moving into an existing church. 01:45:03
So why that's an issue is because. 01:45:06
There are federal and state protections. 01:45:11
That require accommodating religious uses because of constitutional protections that we have both in federal and state. And so 01:45:15
this is just kind of a in holiday when we redid all of the all of the land uses we went through and we said, OK, there's a church 01:45:20
here, let's put that in AP zone, church here, put that in the P zone, church here, put that in the P zone. There are no P zones 01:45:26
that aren't occupied. 01:45:32
Right. So you have to get a rezone and that creates a problem because it's a legislative thing in nature. And what we want the 01:45:38
Planning Commission to consider and is what zones should churches on public uses be allowed in, quasi public uses be allowed in. 01:45:47
Lots of most cities. 01:45:58
Residential zones. 01:46:00
Regardless of the density, allow for churches. 01:46:02
Right now we don't have that here in holiday and so we just want you to have a broad discussion. 01:46:05
On where does it make sense that this is a permitted use and not one that they have to get? A church or other religious 01:46:11
organization or other quasi public use has to get a reason in order to locate the holiday? 01:46:16
So what happened with that Korean church? 01:46:22
They withdrew their application. 01:46:25
It was so important that we decided that that meeting. 01:46:28
Well, and they they. 01:46:32
Withdrew. They withdrew it at City Council because City Council did not want to approve the text amendment. 01:46:35
Or at that time, right? 01:46:40
Yeah, hey, what? 01:46:43
So they what the goal is what the kind of. 01:46:47
I guess the next step is we're going to consider an amendment to the zoning code that allows that fixes. 01:46:50
The fact that you have to get a reason in order to locate a church. 01:46:57
Anywhere. 01:47:00
You find a vacant piece of property. 01:47:01
Or a vacant building. In order to locate a church there, it requires a rezone. 01:47:04
Almost universally, unless there's already a church there. 01:47:08
That's not the case in. 01:47:12
I hate to say all. 01:47:15
But the vast, vast majority of other cities, and there may be an argument that that's the violation of federal law. 01:47:16
That we are the violation of federal law. 01:47:25
But anyway that I mean that's a strict by not, so I'm the reason potentially could make the claim. 01:47:29
So anyway, yeah, So what you what you see in the land use table, you can see that. 01:47:35
Right here. 01:47:41
Under the C1, that's your. 01:47:42
Lowest intensity use that's more residential in nature. 01:47:47
Everything above that is excluded, everything below that is available. 01:47:52
As conditional. 01:47:56
So in your C ones, your neighborhood commercials. 01:47:58
Obviously public. 01:48:02
The professional office zone, which is usually an infill zone that goes in the next to neighbors and then definitely all the Rs. 01:48:03
So that's how we're in your economic development hand. 01:48:12
What you don't want is that all zones will allow it. 01:48:16
And the Korean Bank church that we reviewed? 01:48:22
Two meetings ago that was in a C2, wasn't it? So with this new proposal, that still wouldn't work. 01:48:26
So I mean with. 01:48:35
So, I mean, is there a reason why we wouldn't just say, well, if City Council doesn't feel unfavorable about that and it 01:48:37
potentially scratches on some legal limits? 01:48:41
Why wouldn't we just stick with the tried and true? Then you got a reason on AP zone and that's that's the way it works. 01:48:46
Yes, you can. We can get in some more of that discussion though. OK. I just that that's the only thing that like steps out of me 01:48:53
is like OK, well, I mean I understand we're trying to accommodate, but at the same time it's not going to even accommodate the 01:48:58
applicant that kind of prompted it, if that makes sense. 01:49:03
So why we write the rule book I guess? 01:49:09
What couldn't it? I mean, the counterargument would be for someone who reads the ordinance and just said, like, I want to have a 01:49:15
church here, but the city won't, there's no place I can print it. Well, from that they don't have to find a place, they just need 01:49:19
to assert that there's no place. 01:49:24
There's a lot of lawsuits out there where people say, well, if I went to this hotel that doesn't have ADA accommodations, I have 01:49:29
no intention of going there. The lady who's in the Supreme Court. 01:49:34
Who's never been to any of the hotel she sued never had any attention. 01:49:39
Chuck that one, but. 01:49:45
From an economic development standpoint. 01:49:47
You don't want any churches. 01:49:50
Right. No, no. 01:49:53
Well, that's a loaded one. 01:49:57
Retail uses. 01:50:07
You sort of designated those higher intensity zones for really heavy intense retail uses, right? 01:50:09
There are places for there are still commercial. 01:50:16
It's sort of our infill type commercial type zones that could be available. 01:50:19
CEO Your or your C1? Your PO? 01:50:25
Is the room in there? The RM is not right. 01:50:29
No multi family. 01:50:32
It's not supposed to be in there. 01:50:34
So it's just neighborhoods. 01:50:36
The Council of the when we went and pulled out all the office uses from the RM Zone and put them in PO, we're kind of following 01:50:40
that pattern. 01:50:43
We're putting all those types of quasi public community type uses in the PO zone where they intended to be. 01:50:48
Gotcha. 01:50:55
So even just again, going back to the. 01:50:57
Think church. I can't remember Korean Presbyterian Church. 01:51:00
They would still have to rezone that or apply to rezone that from C2 to either C1 or PO in order to fulfill that location at that 01:51:05
location, yeah, but the idea is to have a location that already has. 01:51:11
A church has a permitted use, but to open that up a little bit more and not restrict that process by making them go through the 01:51:17
zoning. 01:51:21
Space for churches. It's intended to create a space that doesn't require a rezone. 01:51:26
For religious years. 01:51:32
But that is standard. It sounds like pretty much everywhere to require the rezone. 01:51:34
Is that what you were saying earlier? It's the opposite of that and we're so worthy outlier and we're the problem. 01:51:40
Because we don't have that accessibility. 01:51:46
It shouldn't. 01:51:50
It shouldn't necessarily require a rezone to locate a church. 01:51:53
In a city, OK? 01:51:56
Gotcha. Now I'm on board now I was thinking the opposite and I'm like, well, if everybody else does that, why aren't we? But now 01:51:59
it makes more sense if we lifted a lot of the code from Salt Lake County when we incorporated this was not. 01:52:06
This is not no. This was redone when in 2015, the P zone was established. 01:52:14
Yeah, about them. 01:52:21
That's this was part of a completely read. 01:52:23
Almost a complete redo of the zoning code in holiday. So for 15 years churches could be anywhere. And then in 2015 we said no, no. 01:52:27
Am I am I following this correctly? OK all right, so we've only been anti church for. 01:52:38
Since we did the general Plan in 2016, basically. 01:52:43
When I said what I said but you guys. 01:52:49
Well, you you cheated up that you were going to say something awful. I thought what you said was fine. 01:52:53
Well, that's because I have to censor my. 01:52:59
Better than I do. Interesting. All right, so do. But we did continue this and we're now at a point. I think we are ready to wrap 01:53:02
up. But we have a I don't think we need a motion. This is Commissioner Print on motion. We adjourn. 01:53:10
Link
Start video at
Social
Embed
* you need to log in to manage your favorites
My Favorites List
You haven't added any favorites yet. Click the "Add Favorite" button on any media page, and they'll show up here.
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Unable to preview the file.
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Unable to preview the file.
I still make an argument you could have a church that's designed specifically around alcohol and therefore it did fitness E2, but. 00:00:11
That being said, I don't know how the tithing part of it would go. All right, it is. 00:00:25
April 2nd, 2024 we got 533 on the clock in attendance. We have all commissioners except for Commissioner Gong and Wilchinski. 00:00:31
We have legal counsel Brad Christofferson and city staff John Tier link. 00:00:41
We have three items on the agenda today. One of them is the continued item of the text amendment on round building height. John, 00:00:47
do you want to give us a quick walk through on that one? Sure, a couple of items of the Planning Commission requested staff and 00:00:52
the applicant come back with. 00:00:57
Those two items and included in your packet, one in particular. 00:01:03
Sort of the zoning schematic of what's going around, what's going on around the city. 00:01:08
So Cottonwood Heights, Mill Creek and Murray have been shared with you. So you see what those commercial zones, where they are and 00:01:13
what the heights are. 00:01:17
And then the applicant has provided you a schematic of what? 00:01:23
Height looks like distributed through the space. 00:01:26
Could you scroll to that real quick? Because I'm not gonna lie, I think I looked at it once and. 00:01:30
My memory is not what it once was. 00:01:34
And the packet has not made it to this tablet for me yet. 00:01:37
Oh, it was when I left it. It was downloading. Let me see if I can try mine. 00:01:43
Dennis is cool with me. 00:01:58
You can just have one. I really use the. 00:02:03
So this almost looks split level on what's being proposed. 00:02:14
Yeah, this one has the three levels 12/2 and 1/2. 00:02:19
OK, but if approved? 00:02:27
As a zone change or zone amendment to all it does open up the door for. 00:02:32
How can I say this? 00:02:38
Lesser quality, three story units that would fit in that space. 00:02:40
Unless you recommend the City Council. 00:02:45
Direct staff to start maybe looking at architectural standards for C2. 00:02:49
I just all you are considering is just the fact that it's going to go from 35 to 40. I mean not to pick on our neighbors in Mill 00:02:55
Creek, but I look across the street and I see these, for lack of a better term, Russian style tenements which are like these 00:03:01
concrete squares over garages that are two stories tall. And I just have this vision of lots of that creeping in and holiday and 00:03:07
me not being a huge fan and feeling bad that. 00:03:13
I participated in saying let's make that happen, but. 00:03:20
Correct. Ask a question. Yeah, so. 00:03:24
I haven't been on the Commission for very long, but it seems to me that we have a lot of. 00:03:28
Discussions where we talk about well, what's happening in Mill Creek and what's happening happening in Cottonwood Heights and 00:03:36
what's happening in Murray. 00:03:41
And it seems to me that Holiday has its own character. 00:03:46
And that is a special character. 00:03:52
And when we on the Planning Commission starts ask what's happening in these other places? 00:03:56
We are. 00:04:03
Considering moving ourselves into a character that is more in keeping with what's happening in those other places. 00:04:08
And I just wonder about that. And I wonder. 00:04:15
If that makes sense? And is that the direction that we want to go in and when we look at for example, cases like this? 00:04:19
I don't know. Should we not be concerned? 00:04:31
Are we not? 00:04:35
Should we not be concerned that we're not preserving? 00:04:38
The very thing about holiday that makes it special. 00:04:43
Maybe the counter to that, but we have to balance this. The city's already made a decision in a general plan. 00:04:47
To grow. 00:04:55
And that's the elected officials. 00:04:58
Who you know have made the general plan and. 00:05:00
You know, it's for example, in this case we haven't done anything for 25 or 30 years. 00:05:05
I think it doesn't give us that we see. 00:05:12
What other people are doing? What? What does growth look like? 00:05:15
And then make it. 00:05:18
So we still look different. 00:05:19
Have the feel of the holiday. 00:05:22
But growth in place that you have to finally move on from where you were to the next thing? 00:05:26
I think you have to balance if it's a balancing act. And then and part of what I was thinking on this is similar to the question 00:05:32
you asked. 00:05:36
And that. 00:05:41
This probably makes sense for this specific. 00:05:43
Proposal at this specific location, but there are a bunch of other locations in this same zone, some of which I thought we'd hear 00:05:47
from when the public was noticed. 00:05:53
Where maybe the setbacks and the height. 00:05:59
Don't make sense. 00:06:03
One of those other areas, maybe there is a lot of residential budding or behind that, that five feet is a big deal to them. 00:06:06
And I I caught the impression last meeting that. 00:06:16
One of the reasons we had the weight was there's a noticing requirement and we've heard from anyone who's concerned about this. 00:06:20
No, not directly on this in particular. 00:06:24
Now the neighborhood that well. 00:06:30
We can definitely open up the discussion when we get to the item, but umm. 00:06:34
I'll leave that up to you, but the noticing was it happened to be the exact same neighborhood where we heard the result. 00:06:39
So they looked at the rezone pack and they're like, well, wait a minute, this is also affecting us. So then you send it back out 00:06:47
and they really didn't. 00:06:51
Much else. 00:06:55
OK. And some good thought points and discussion. When we get to the item and then? 00:06:58
I think the map on what is this like page four of the packet that has kind of like the little red dots that call out those zones. 00:07:04
I mean it's it's not a huge chunk of the city, right? 00:07:10
So I mean for me, it's not like, you know, all these places are going to get inundated. But at the same time, as I look at some of 00:07:17
those locations and I mean the other thought that immediately comes to my mind is it's like, OK, well, we're right on the buffer. 00:07:22
We have Mill Creek over on this side and then we're over here on the east side. We're already higher just because of the slope 00:07:27
that exists there anyway. So then we're talking about green lighting. 00:07:33
5 foot more on top of that it really gives us just like tunnel. 00:07:38
But again discussion points to go in, but Brian you had a comment, can I ask the question as the commercial architecture is 00:07:42
reviewed by the design review or how is that managed? As far short answer, it's not C1C2 zone, there are no architectural 00:07:49
controls, see to me a well designed building. 00:07:57
You're not going to really see the emphasis of height or anything, because the building is designed in such a way that the height 00:08:04
is a part of the building, and it doesn't. 00:08:09
I mean some of the buildings we've seen aren't very good, I mean similar what you're saying so. 00:08:14
I I think I agree with what you said initially is that maybe we need to have more of a design standard for these type of 00:08:21
buildings. 00:08:25
That being said, I also last time I was thinking more of. 00:08:30
The question I was trying to find out like haven't you checked with other cities or we have asked you to check is? 00:08:34
That commercial. 00:08:41
Development is. 00:08:42
And it's incorporating mixed-use. 00:08:45
And so that's changed in the dynamic of how buildings are. 00:08:48
Built and meetings like you're saying, I think the first level is 14 to 16 feet for the grand entrance and that type of thing. 00:08:53
So you know, I understand that. 00:09:00
This additional 5 feet may not make any difference, or it may be too much. I'm not here that. 00:09:04
Try and answer that I'm just trying to figure out. 00:09:09
You know, as you're looking through these examples of other places. 00:09:12
And I think you answered the question to some degree last time. Is that? 00:09:17
There really isn't the standard by which. 00:09:22
Each floor will be measured because it's so dynamic and. 00:09:25
I like the idea that we're competitive to a point where we can interest. 00:09:30
Commercial investments into the city. 00:09:35
That help our economic development. I'm not trying to redesign the character of the city by any means so. 00:09:38
I think I gave people the impression that height needs to be everywhere. I'm not trying to say that. 00:09:43
But so I I don't know how we can take that into account because we're considering this. 00:09:51
You know, I mean, Conor heights the maximum height of 35 feet Murray had. 00:09:58
It takes into consideration how the commercial, how close it is to residential. 00:10:04
And I think that's kind of a novel idea that you have to reduce the height based on the residential, you know? 00:10:10
But again. 00:10:16
I don't know what's going to be best for how you. 00:10:18
Welcome or how you get people to look at the city to. 00:10:21
Open a commercial business here or. 00:10:25
I certainly don't want to be hindrance to that, but I don't want it to be wide open where it just becomes a mess. Sure, I 00:10:28
appreciate that because, you know, that's my the other part of my job is economic development. 00:10:33
My responsibility is to try to have other businesses come to the city. 00:10:39
And if they're looking at our zoning ordinance and saying, that'd be great, but I can't build what I need. 00:10:44
Period. I'm out. So is there a way to maybe have some of that but not all of it? I mean, maybe you can't answer that in this 00:10:50
meeting, but. 00:10:54
To me, that's where I prefer the ordinance go. I don't want to have this ordinance before us again in a year because we didn't 00:10:59
address some of the things that maybe now companies and businesses are asking for, but. 00:11:05
I don't know how you do it, frankly, yeah. 00:11:12
In the scope of this. 00:11:15
Another good discussion plan. It's gonna be fun. 00:11:17
Now and just one last question before we move on from this item. On the map that we have up in front of us, is there not a 00:11:24
separate master plan for the holiday gateway where this little chunk in red in the bottom left corner exists? Isn't that all under 00:11:31
a different plan anyway now or that big BLOB is sort of an anomaly because there's another zone that's prepared for that already? 00:11:38
And it's well above 40 feet, right. So that that's not really something to consider with this because that's got its own little. 00:11:46
You know set of rules that it's planned by. So really it's just these other little red blocks on the map that this is impactful to 00:11:54
right. In fact you can see that there that one little tiny. 00:11:59
Spot where you've already resumed that's outside. This makes a little. 00:12:04
It's a five story condo, yeah. 00:12:09
What is that big blood? 00:12:13
Van Winkle intersection of Van Winkle and Howard Drive at 6200 S where XF Fitness and Wendy's and Taco Time. 00:12:16
True. Yeah. 00:12:26
Used to be Wendy. They wanted to hire building, so now they're out in here, so. 00:12:27
Down there, you want a location we're driving through. Isn't a shortcut around that intersection. 00:12:32
Where it's a race to see who can cut who off the fastest and do 50 miles through that little one lane, yet that's the spot. It's 00:12:42
great. 00:12:45
It's great. We love it. Someone referred to it as the luge ones. I've looked at it that way ever since. It's great. All right, 00:12:50
moving on to item 2, the preservation ordinance. 00:12:55
So we talked about this at the end of the last meeting. I asked a bunch of irrelevant questions because they were way off base 00:13:03
from what this is actually doing. But John, do you want to just give us a quick reminder and review of what? 00:13:08
Has a little tail, yes, I appreciate it. Item two is amendment to update the historic preservation ordinance. Holiday currently 00:13:15
has a preservation ordinance, however. 00:13:20
In 2017 Ish 2018 the Council of the time. 00:13:26
Reorganized a lot of the committees that were working for the city. 00:13:31
And in particular the Historical Committee and what their responsibilities? 00:13:35
Are, were. 00:13:41
And in doing so the process by which a property owner. 00:13:43
Can get their historic property on his holidays list. 00:13:48
Was amended and meant to be amended, never have been. The Council never came back to that. 00:13:52
So this update corrects that. 00:13:58
Application process. 00:14:01
The issue that the council had at the time was that any entity could. 00:14:03
Proposed that someones property be placed on holidays. Historic preservation list, historic designation list. 00:14:08
Leaving the property order completely out of the process and then like that situation, so this rectifies that. So it has to be the 00:14:16
property or their agent. 00:14:21
Gets to nominate their property for historic the on the Historic Sites list. 00:14:26
Answer the question. 00:14:32
So is there any incentive for an owner to have their property? 00:14:34
Designated as a historical property. 00:14:39
It seems like there's more encumbrances by. 00:14:42
That designation, right? 00:14:45
Not necessarily. Not from the way that this preservation ordinance is drafted in some cities. 00:14:48
Definitely the way that this is drafted in the way that I've heard direction from our council. 00:14:53
Is that one has got to be already either federal or state designated? 00:14:59
Or there's some procedures in there that that allows the City Council to decide if it's it's historical significance. 00:15:07
So that's the way to get it on the list. 00:15:14
Once it's on the list, if the property owner would like to apply for a conditional use permit for extra land uses that are outside 00:15:17
of the zone that it's in, they can do that. 00:15:21
It can be a small antique shop. It can be a number of things. 00:15:27
To sort of sustain the preservation effort of that property. 00:15:31
They also have to come to the Planning Commission if they want to modify a property. 00:15:37
That includes demolition. 00:15:42
The properties proposed to be demolished before it is demolished, there's a 30 day stay. 00:15:44
Where the city goes in and documents the property inside and out. 00:15:50
And then? 00:15:55
That all that information is made available to the public and the historical committee to, you know, do their educational pieces. 00:15:57
So that the incentive is really the city is providing more land uses to you than your neighbors have. 00:16:04
But it has to go back to the Planning Commission for that conditional use permit. 00:16:12
So being designated doesn't include the Planning Commission. 00:16:18
A designation only goes to the City Council because they're they are deciding that the extra land uses get placed. 00:16:22
Then they come back to you for the permit. 00:16:29
That really is what this ordinance update does. Thank you and if the property changes hands. 00:16:32
You know, title, deed, etc. Is there additional things or steps that have to go through once it has that designation? 00:16:38
To change hands? No. 00:16:46
But I thank you for bringing that up. That is the other amendment, is that how to how a property owner gets its right their rights 00:16:48
to remove their their property from the list? 00:16:53
It gives a process for that, so they buy historic property. 00:16:59
It's obvious it becomes unsustainable for them economically. 00:17:04
They can request to have the list delisted, so to speak. 00:17:08
The City Council can also remove a property from the list if it becomes dilapidated or to a point where it's really lost its all 00:17:14
of its historical significance. 00:17:19
They can decide to remove it from the list as well. 00:17:24
Other questions around the the other thing I was a little surprised within the ordinance was that. 00:17:30
The D listing can happen without any public notice. That is a policy question I'd like to put forth to the Planning Commission. So 00:17:35
there are two highlighted sections, I just think. 00:17:40
Why not publicly notice it? OK, that's the owner has to decide. But do that a public meeting so there's not a lot of criticism. 00:17:46
Or accusations that's behind the, you know, whatever happened and that. 00:17:55
Well, I think the way that's written that it will still happen in a public meeting. 00:18:01
The question is, do we notice the neighbors saying? 00:18:06
Mr. Smith wants to delist their property. 00:18:09
We're going to have a hearing. 00:18:11
Do the property, Do the neighbors have any comment that would be? 00:18:13
Applicable to the Council? 00:18:17
On the property owners request to delete the property. 00:18:19
I don't know that's. 00:18:22
All cities are different on that regard it's it's A1 sided spectrum of the other. So I'd like to planning commissions opinion on 00:18:24
that. It's a good good discussion point I'll make note of. 00:18:29
When we get to that in the meeting. 00:18:35
Any other elements before we move into item 3. 00:18:38
I wonder why it would just be neighbors. 00:18:40
It's typically townspeople who care about historic properties. 00:18:44
And why was it was silly noticed on the agenda, right? Anybody that was at the agenda? 00:18:50
So again, the question is. 00:19:00
Benefit is that notice and give you out a better way that doesn't cost. 00:19:02
Yeah. 00:19:09
Just real quick, this is an administrative question. Do we get like a different bulk rate tax on postage or free postage as a city 00:19:12
or anything or is it just no, I've I've reduced the size of our mailings. 00:19:19
So that we get a postcard rate, but that's the cheapest I can go, and postcards are still like 40-5 cents. 00:19:26
Now. 00:19:34
Gotcha. So times that by whatever we have 20,000 households or something and. 00:19:36
Gotcha. It's $10,000. 00:19:41
That makes sense. 00:19:45
All right. And item three as brought up for anyone who didn't hear this ahead of time, but this is one that's going to require a 00:19:49
little bit of extra and therefore it will be a continued item tonight. 00:19:55
Make any decisions on this, But that said, John, do you want to kind of walk us through what we're going to be discussing and 00:20:03
looking at in this item tonight? 00:20:07
Yeah. So the concern is that finding other land use zones that are available for. 00:20:11
What's called Quasi public uses? 00:20:18
Meaning specifically churches. 00:20:21
So we're looking, the idea is that we're looking for some land use zones and made available that churches can move into. 00:20:24
Potentially displace retail locations in commercial, public around or to any type of zoning in there. 00:20:31
There's some discussion in the staff report that kind of gives the Planning Commission some direction on where those zones could 00:20:39
be. 00:20:42
Especially how other cities look at that type of use, land use. 00:20:46
Should be made available in every type of zone based upon case law, but. 00:20:51
Open the public hearing. We can have a discussion on it, but definitely continue it so that we can. 00:20:57
Refine this a little bit. 00:21:02
The back story on this just to clarify as this came from the Korean Baptist Church that we had approved the. 00:21:08
It wasn't a zone change request, it was a use, right. It was a land use added to the C2 zones, yes. 00:21:17
Document. Yeah, So that was ultimately decided an A from City Council and they said no, go back and try again. Something else 00:21:25
officially made a decision, yet they're still deliberating on it, but they've requested staff to go back and let's look at some 00:21:30
other zones. 00:21:36
We can add church uses to not just see one person in C2 zones. There's some maps in your packet to try to show what. 00:21:41
Those areas look. 00:21:51
We can chat about it. 00:21:53
Any other questions around item three? I do. I have just one quick question. This kind of arbitrary, but I understand that the 00:21:57
anytime you request a liquor license, you have to look for locations with the church and school. 00:22:03
Does the opposite happen in this if a church wants to go into an area that's within that proximal boundary? 00:22:11
Do we have any concerns? 00:22:18
That through the city no OK or the like the board and yeah you know it does put it does put the the company other or the licensee 00:22:20
edit. 00:22:27
Considerable situation situation then if they maybe change hands or the liquor license changes hands and have to reapply, it will 00:22:36
cause a problem. 00:22:40
Well, I'm just saying if a church wanted to go into an area that. 00:22:44
Suddenly was in that boundary. 00:22:48
The licensee for the wouldn't have to change anything, would they? No, not until no. 00:22:52
But only if they have to reapply for a new license somehow for some reason that seems interesting. 00:22:58
And do they do we know, does the state law require renewal or reapplication of those licenses or once you have one, is that once 00:23:05
you have it and you're the same owner entity? 00:23:11
Pretty much continues the year after year. 00:23:17
Yeah. So in other words, if they lose it, that's on them. And then if it's a problem, they did something wrong. Yeah, through 00:23:21
enforcement or lapse of time not paying, you know that license fee that you could possibly lose it. Yes. But essentially they're 00:23:27
just legal non conforming because they were their first if this were to go through. Is that right? OK. 00:23:33
Big questions. Any other questions around #3 or any? 00:23:41
Circle backs before we take a quick break and start the official. 00:23:47
All right. Well then with that, we'll go ahead and close the work meeting and take a. 00:23:51