Live stream not working in Chrome or Edge? Click Here
No Bookmarks Exist.
OK. All right. 00:00:15
It is 6:02 PM on March 19th, 2024, the Holiday City Planning Commission. 00:00:17
Is missing 2 members. We have regrets from Commissioner Gong and Commissioner Prince. We do have city staff, John Terling, Carrie 00:00:25
Marsh and legal counsel. 00:00:30
Brad Christopherson with us and we have a total of seven items on the agenda this evening. We will be changing up the order of 00:00:36
that to start with items number four and five, which are the action items. 00:00:44
For extensions of final plat approval. 00:00:53
And then we will proceed with items 1-2 and three which there is a public hearing for, which is the accessory building footprint 00:00:56
size, a rezone from room to PO and then the text amendment for building height. 00:01:03
And then after, we will approve minutes and move into the discussion around the pending historic preservation ordinance. Before we 00:01:11
get into that, tonight there is an opening statement that we read before all our meetings and I have asked Commissioner Cunningham 00:01:17
if he'll go ahead and do that for us now. 00:01:23
The City of Holiday Planning Commission is a volunteer citizen board whose function is to review land use plans and other special 00:01:30
studies, make recommendations to the City Council on proposed zoning, map and ordinance changes. 00:01:36
And approved conditional uses in subdivisions. 00:01:43
The Planning Commission does not initiate land use applications, rather acts on applications as they are submitted. Commissioners 00:01:46
do not meet with applicants except in publicly noticed meetings. 00:01:52
Commissioners attempt to visit each property on the agenda where the location, the nature of the neighborhood, existing structures 00:01:58
and uses related to the proposed change are noted. 00:02:03
Decisions are based on observations, recommendations from the professional planning staff, the city's general plan, zoning 00:02:09
ordinances and other reports, by all verbal and written comments, and by evidence submitted, all of which are part of the public 00:02:14
record. 00:02:19
Thank you very much, Commissioner Cunningham. And with that we will start with item number four this evening, which is the Walker 00:02:25
Meadows Circle subdivision. 00:02:30
Extension of final plat approval. And Carrie, if you want to give us just a quick overview on that one, please? 00:02:36
Come all the way to the front for a 2 minute thing. All right, so this application is for or is our request to extend the 00:02:48
recording time period On a residential subdivision, it's Walker Meadows Circle subdivision on 5203 S Highland Dr. That's a 2 lot 00:02:57
subdivision. The subdivision currently is waiting for just corrections and comments from city staff before it's recorded. I. 00:03:06
So they should be able to meet their extension. 00:03:16
Within the next year, it's very reasonable. I'll have the applicant come up if you have any questions for them. OK. Thank you. 00:03:22
Do we have Darren Mansell or a representative here tonight? 00:03:28
Does not appear we have the applicant, but do any commissioners have any questions they would have had posed for the applicant? 00:03:34
I don't believe the applicant has to be here for approval, do they? 00:03:41
OK. Then in that case, Commissioners, any discussion about this extension? 00:03:46
All right. 00:03:53
Double check who? I even asked. 00:03:55
Leave the discussion. I can't remember on this one. Ginger, was this the one I asked you about? Or probably Carrie, who's not 00:03:57
here? Yeah, probably. I think it was Carrie on this one. But I'll go ahead and make a motion. Excellent. Thank you. 00:04:03
Commissioner Wilczynski motions to approve the extended to extend the recording date for the final plat for Walker Meadow Circle, 00:04:10
a residential Planned Unit development subdivision in the R110 zone located at 52. 00:04:17
03 S Highland Drive to one year from the prior approval date of November 15, 2024, finding that no significant changes have been 00:04:25
made to the Plat. 00:04:31
And reasonable circumstances for the extension have been presented. 00:04:37
Sorry, can we amend that so that the? 00:04:42
Date is November 15th of 2023. 00:04:46
So let's make that amendment that we are going to go ahead and extend it. 00:04:50
From the prior approval date of November 15th, 2023. 00:04:57
2022. 00:05:02
And we're going to extend it to November 15th of 2024, yes. 00:05:04
All right, we have an amended. 00:05:10
Motion. Do we have a second? 00:05:14
All right. We have it seconded. We'll call for a vote. Commissioner Barrett aye. Commissioner Font aye. Commissioner Cunningham 00:05:16
aye. Commissioner Wilczynski and chair Roach votes aye. 00:05:22
Got that done. All right. Thank you. And before we get into the next one, if you can correct us on any dates. 00:05:29
So we can make sure that motion is correct. 00:05:35
Yep, prior approval date on this one is going to be February 22nd of 20/23/2023. So whoever is making the motion ginger, I think 00:05:38
you might be on this one as well, so. 00:05:43
OK, got it. Thank you and. 00:05:49
If I'm not going to ask you to come back up, if you want to sit right there, if you can just give us the brief overview. Great. 00:05:53
Sounds good. This is a residential subdivision. 00:05:57
Request to extend the final Plat recording date for the Base 45 subdivision. 00:06:02
Located at 2180 E 4500 S in the Room zone. 00:06:09
This is an approved subdivision for 32 townhomes on 2.29 acres. 00:06:15
All the standards have been met and approved. Nothing has been changed in. 00:06:21
With what they're requesting and that can be that's one of the conditions noted is that no significant changes has been made to 00:06:27
the plan. 00:06:31
So with that I can have the applicant come up and if you have any questions on this one. 00:06:36
OK. And do we have the applicant, Luke Martino, here with us this evening or a representative? 00:06:41
All right. Looks like they had other plans where they were planning on being later in the docket. That's OK. 00:06:48
Commissioners, any discussion or thoughts on this one before a motion is made? 00:06:55
All right, and since Commissioner Prince is not here, I'll go ahead and make on her behalf. 00:07:00
Chair Roach would like to make a motion for approval to extend the recording date for the Final Plat for Base 45, a residential 00:07:06
Planned Unit development subdivision in the RM Zone located at 2180 E 4500 S, to one year from the prior approval date of February 00:07:13
22nd, 2023. Finding that no significant changes have been made to the Plat, reasonable circumstances for the extension have been 00:07:19
presented. 00:07:26
This Commissioner Barrett, all seconded. All right, we have motion and it's seconded. Commissioner Wilczynski, Commissioner 00:07:34
Cunningham, Commissioner Font, aye, Commissioner Baron aye. And chair Roach votes aye so. 00:07:40
Those two are taken care of. Moving right along. Thank you very much. 00:07:47
All right, and now for the fun stuff. We will get into the items requiring public hearing. The 1st is the conditional use permit 00:07:53
for the accessory building footprint size, and we will ask city staff to go ahead and come up and give us the. 00:08:00
Narrative on this. 00:08:08
OK, this is an application by applicant Colin McDonald located at 3931 S 2175 E in an R110 zone. 00:08:16
The applicant is requesting an accessory building that exceeds the permitted footprint size of 900 square feet. Total footprint 00:08:28
size of 1577 square feet. 00:08:34
That's an additional 677 square feet over the permitted accessory building footprint size. 00:08:41
The accessory building is compliant with setbacks and lot coverage standards. They're at their maximum allowed for lot coverage 00:08:48
with structures. 00:08:52
Their narrative explains a desire for. 00:08:58
Using the accessory structure as a mother-in-law apartment. 00:09:03
Sports court. 00:09:09
Garage. There's a few listed items in their narrative. 00:09:11
Our current Adu code doesn't allow ADUS on properties that are half an acre or smaller. 00:09:16
Our amended proposed code is under review currently by the OR will be heard by the City Council on Thursday. 00:09:25
If the applicant were to. 00:09:36
Use their accessory structure for an Adu. They would have to meet the requirements in order to rent it as an Edu. They can build 00:09:40
their accessory structure and use it for private use with. 00:09:47
Occupancy for family members. 00:09:55
And that would be allowed under code so. 00:09:59
Overall, what the Commission could would need to look at is. 00:10:03
Impacts on neighboring properties, considering those specific uses that the applicant has outlined, and possibly having conditions 00:10:10
that are related to the impacts of if that structure were used as dwelling space. If there's any additional conditions that the 00:10:16
Commission would like to see implemented. 00:10:23
I will have the applicant come up and they can discuss their application with you a little bit more and you can ask some 00:10:31
questions. Alright. Thank you very much. 00:10:34
Do we have Colin MacDonald or a representative here this evening? 00:10:40
Hi. Hi. So my intention is to primarily use this as a structure for my kids. We just moved here about seven months ago from 00:10:46
Arizona and winter is cold. 00:10:51
And so I'm sorry to cut you off. Just to clarify, are you calling McDonald's? Yes, that's me. OK. Just want to make sure we know 00:10:57
who you are and not someone else coming up and speaking on your behalf. Sorry, no problem. 00:11:02
And so I intend to build this structure primarily for the use of my five kids and their friends. 00:11:09
So they have things to do in the winter and also the summer. It will be used as recreational sports. 00:11:15
Inside the building I intend to do it exactly maximum. 00:11:21
That newly remodeled home that we just finished and siding in stone so it will match identical to the house. 00:11:26
As far as the height, the same 17 feet, so there's trees surrounding this that are. 00:11:32
3040 feet plus, so it's not going to be sticking out in any way. 00:11:39
It wouldn't even be visible from the front of my street. 00:11:45
It is for private use only. It will never be used for business. It will never be rented. It will never have any intentions of that 00:11:48
of any sort. 00:11:52
I will have gravel along the. 00:11:56
North side of the property to back some trailers in that I own. 00:11:59
But it's not going to be like a driveway for parking vehicles and stuff like that. 00:12:05
And so this doesn't have. This doesn't. What you're proposing isn't going to have a gravel, or any type of. 00:12:10
Path leading from the front of the property to gravel. Yes, just about 10 feet on the Northside. 00:12:16
Gravel. Back to it just so we don't sink trailers and mud and things like that, OK? 00:12:22
Commissioners, any questions for the applicant? 00:12:29
At this time, just Commissioner Font, this is not a. 00:12:33
A dwelling unit then this is not a someplace where you're going to rent out or no initially. 00:12:38
I would. I put that mother-in-law's casita in there, Yes. 00:12:47
But right now, it's not gonna be permitted for that. I don't intend to make an apartment out of it right now at all. That was just 00:12:51
in there for down the road. In case we need to take in my mother or my mother-in-law. We could convert a section of it to a little 00:12:56
apartment for one of them. 00:13:01
But it would never be rented out or an Adu or have it separate meter or anything like that. 00:13:07
Thank you. So to clarify on that, if the Planning Commission was to restrict use as that you would have no objections with it as 00:13:13
you've submitted at this time. No, no objection, OK. 00:13:19
All right, unless there's any other questions, we'll go ahead and have you sit down and might invite you back up. But first, we're 00:13:25
going to open this up for public comment. If there are people here that want to speak on this item today, we ask you to identify 00:13:30
yourself when you come to the podium, state your name, your address, and do try and keep your comments brief and not restate 00:13:35
anything if there's other. 00:13:40
People that have already made comment on this and with that we will open up the public comment for anyone to come up now. 00:13:47
Once, twice, all right. 00:13:55
Looks like we have. 00:13:57
My name is Brett Hardcastle. My property is directly West across the street. 00:14:02
From McDonald's and Kitty Corner to the North, what was your address please? 00:14:08
What was the house number? 00:14:14
3920 S 3920 Thank you. 00:14:16
Great. And I don't see any problems with this at all, matter of fact. 00:14:20
The whole remodel that he's been doing there. 00:14:25
Is very welcome as far as me as a property owner, I've been there 20 plus years actually. Before holiday was the city, so. 00:14:28
He's got my my approval. Thank you. Thank you very much for your comment. 00:14:36
All right. Any other public comment today? 00:14:43
Hello, thank you for your time. 00:14:52
My name is Jerry Williams, 3954 Alberly Way. 00:14:53
I've met the McDonald's here recently. 00:14:59
6-7 months ago, all I want to do is just say to. 00:15:02
You that they are nothing but. 00:15:07
An asset to our neighborhood. 00:15:10
Rarely has someone come in, an entire family come in and had such a positive. 00:15:13
Impact on our neighborhood? 00:15:20
They have and they are great neighbors. 00:15:22
We are pleased to have him in our neighborhood. Thank you. 00:15:25
OK. Thank you. 00:15:28
My name is Gary Jones. I live at 3939 S 2175 E I'm directly South of the McDonald's home. 00:15:38
And I've been there 40 some odd years at going to reiterate what they just said. That has been a plus. 00:15:46
To our neighborhood and what they're doing is a great improvement. 00:15:54
And I don't see any reason of. 00:15:58
Structure of looking at the mountains and stuff. The way it's acted, like you said, there's. 00:16:01
3540 foot trees all around his whole property because mine is surrounded by him too so. 00:16:06
I'm for whatever he would like to do. 00:16:12
OK. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. 00:16:14
All right. Any other public up? One more. All right. 00:16:19
My name is Jeff Lund. 00:16:25
And I'm at 3916 S Fairmores. 00:16:27
And I am. 00:16:31
On the east side of this property I back. 00:16:33
Just about 10 feet on the east side. 00:16:36
Backyard neighbors. 00:16:39
And I do have a couple of questions on this. One for the. 00:16:40
For the group here on the application, I saw 2000 square feet. 00:16:44
And then I heard 1500 square feet. I'm not sure exactly the number we're looking at on this. 00:16:50
Do you want me to address? Yeah, we'll go ahead and defer to city staff on that. If they want to just clarify the number, Sure. So 00:16:56
the applicant originally applied for a 2000 square foot footprint, reviewing his application and how big his current house is. 00:17:04
A 2000 square foot structure would not be compliant with code. Code states that structures can only cover 28% of the size of 00:17:14
property. So calculating what his current structure. 00:17:20
Covers that then created the 1577 leftover of how much allowance he has of that 28%. 00:17:28
OK. And then the other question is if this were, if this were attached to the House, would we have to have a hearing on that or is 00:17:36
it because it's detached, we have the hearing on it? 00:17:40
It's because it's detached. OK. 00:17:46
And then the other one in walking the neighborhood. 00:17:49
The other structures in this neighborhood are about 500 to 600 square feet. 00:17:52
There one car or two car Det. 00:17:57
Detached buildings and so this is very different than the other ones. 00:18:01
Not opposed to it in regards to that, we're hearing that it's not going to be an Adu or that would require additional. 00:18:06
Additional. 00:18:14
Approval I guess or something like that, but it is very different than the others in the neighborhood. 00:18:15
But that's thank you for clarifying that point. 00:18:22
OK. Thank you. 00:18:25
All right. 00:18:28
Excuse me? 00:18:40
My name is Roger Dean. 00:18:41
I live at 3956. 00:18:44
South Fairmont Drive. 00:18:46
And by property. 00:18:49
Doesn't quite touch this, but. 00:18:51
Very close. 00:18:55
And I was just. 00:18:57
Wondering there's an irrigation ditch. 00:18:58
On the east side. 00:19:02
Of this property. 00:19:04
And I just want to make sure that. 00:19:05
This construction will not. 00:19:08
Interfere with that irrigation ditch. 00:19:12
And so. 00:19:16
That we would always have. 00:19:18
Access to. 00:19:21
Service the irrigation ditch. 00:19:24
Cleaning that up then. 00:19:27
To prevent flooding. 00:19:29
In the neighborhood. 00:19:32
OK. Thank you. We can definitely find that out. Thank you. 00:19:35
I can respond to that too. 00:19:40
When we're reviewing building permits, we review locations to that do have irrigation laterals that are on the property and. 00:19:43
Applicants for permits are required to have a waterway protection agreement that's signed by the irrigation management company or 00:19:54
the the ditch manager. 00:20:00
And does that also address the? 00:20:07
Commenters concern about access for. 00:20:10
Keeping it working, yes. So all of our all of the irrigation canals ditches have utility easements on them for maintenance. 00:20:14
Thank you very much for clarifying that. Can I ask a question? It looks like on the map there is a small strip just north of this 00:20:24
property. Is that considered the irrigation property? 00:20:29
Well, I realize that. I'm just saying north of this looks like the irrigation is that. 00:20:38
I'd have to look at the at the canal map, but I believe so that could be just a outright ownership by the. 00:20:43
No property. I don't have someone raising their hand. Is that your property? 00:20:51
No, but I understand. 00:20:55
See that little strip where arrow just went right down there? 00:21:01
Irrigation. 00:21:08
So a safe assumption that it would be something related to the easement on that looking at the map, is that? Yeah, OK. OK. Thank 00:21:15
you. 00:21:18
All right. Any other public comment on this Tonight We have one more come on up. 00:21:23
All right. 00:21:30
State your name and address first, please. 00:21:35
My name is Ashley Smith. 00:21:37
And I own the property, 3926 S Farrah Mores Drive. 00:21:40
Thank you and. 00:21:48
Are you? What? What questions can we? I'm not sure if you'll be able to answer them or if Colin can answer them. 00:21:49
We'll invite you to address the Commission and then we'll give Colin a chance to come up and address any unanswered questions. 00:21:57
Yeah, I was just curious. 00:22:01
If the structure was going to be built running east West or north-south. 00:22:05
Not sure do we have city? 00:22:13
We have that. So those kind of decisions are done when we get the building plans for the building permit right so. 00:22:17
I don't know if we have the answer to that and I don't know if. 00:22:25
Right, but the site plan is. 00:22:31
Could not be built. The discipline that you have can't be built because it's a 2000 square foot one. 00:22:33
So we're just looking at the footprint size. The conditional use permit is just looking at how big the the footprint of the 00:22:38
building is. 00:22:43
Details of of that building are largely non regulated. 00:22:49
The Planning Commission can institute various conditions like landscaping on outside edges or other details to mitigate potential 00:22:55
impacts from that footprint. Size I. 00:23:02
That's what they're looking at is just the overall footprint size. 00:23:11
And for clarification, the site plan is flipped from. 00:23:17
What we've been looking at in the aerials, so just so people aren't thinking, they're putting the garage in the front yard. 00:23:20
OK. Any other comment? No. OK, thank you very much. 00:23:31
All right. And did we have any other? 00:23:36
Comments at this time for this. 00:23:38
All right. And with that, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. And if we want to go ahead and invite Colin to come back up 00:23:41
and just address any questions that may have come up from comments from neighbors. 00:23:46
Remind me the questions. Again, I think it sounded like pretty much we've addressed most of them, but if you just want to touch 00:23:56
base on any comments that you heard tonight, you don't have to say anything you can say I feel good about things and we can just 00:24:00
move forward. The irrigation ditch, I should have put it in the my descriptions, but I do have every intention of putting that in 00:24:05
a pipe. 00:24:09
So Gary, the neighbor to the north of me, already did his. It's already in a pipe. And so I own an excavator. I have the equipment 00:24:14
and. 00:24:18
Going to pull a permit with the water company when we when we're ready to this summer. 00:24:23
And and put that. 00:24:27
Irrigation ditch in a pipe, so therefore it's not going to. 00:24:29
Affect the irrigation at all like it will still run. It will still operate as it should. 00:24:33
So I think that's. 00:24:40
Settles that one. 00:24:41
And then the building on there is 40 by 50. 00:24:42
It'll most likely be 40 by 30, maybe 40 by 35, something like that, but it will be definitely in that back corner. 00:24:46
Up against the northeast corner of the law, so. 00:24:55
And that's where the big trees all surrounded pretty much on both sides. 00:24:59
Excellent and. 00:25:05
Just as a as a arborist, I'll just make one recommendation is that if you do have a lot of root zone that flows into where you're 00:25:07
looking to build as much mitigation as you can to the roots so that those trees continue to be big trees around your structure in 00:25:13
the future. But sounds like you've you've got a landscape plan and working through those things. So that's great. 00:25:19
Commissioners, any other questions for the applicant at this time? 00:25:26
Commissioner Barrett, I'm just looking at the site planner, the aerial. Are there other buildings in the back? 00:25:29
Are they being removed or there's a couple of little old sheds that are already have fallen down so they'll be gone. Thank you. 00:25:36
Any other questions? 00:25:45
All right. We'll go ahead and have you sit down. Thank you very much. And with that, I've asked Commissioner Barron if he would 00:25:47
just kind of help lead and facilitate the discussion on this one for us. Well, we were kind of going through that when we 00:25:51
originally started the discussion, I think. 00:25:55
Staff has answered my questions. There is some mention in the conditional use permit for access and compatibility to the. 00:26:01
Neighborhood and character of the neighborhood. 00:26:09
We realize there isn't anything specifically written that can be identified in that. 00:26:14
I don't know. 00:26:20
Analysis or how you'd make that? 00:26:22
A reality in this but. 00:26:26
So I thought. 00:26:29
Everything looks good in this, I just I'm curious if. 00:26:31
If we approve or if the Council approves the new text. 00:26:35
Does this meet that it looks like? 00:26:40
The five foot on the north side or South side, excuse me? 00:26:43
On the site plan would probably be a problem. 00:26:46
Yeah, and that's. 00:26:50
So they'll be moving the they could move that further if they wanted to increase the site set back but as is, it's compliant with 00:26:52
with the setbacks. 00:26:56
If there, you could make a condition that if they're. 00:27:03
If they have living space on that side of the building that they add some additional screening. 00:27:07
So the site plan that's been submitted is not. 00:27:12
We if we approve this. 00:27:16
That's set in concrete or I mean or can there be flexibility in? 00:27:18
So the only thing you're approving tonight is the size of the building, not the location of it or anything like that. So he would 00:27:24
have to come back with a building permit if there is living space. 00:27:29
Assuming council at the City Council approves the Adu text amendments that you guys reviewed a couple weeks ago? 00:27:35
In order to you'd have to comply with that to make it to have living space within it and call it an Adu and rent it out. 00:27:42
So that may change the location of it if he wants to comply with that, but that would all be dealt with. 00:27:49
When the building permit application comes in. 00:27:54
OK. Thank you. 00:27:56
And as he presented tonight, there's no intention of making it a Casita at this time. 00:27:59
So, OK, appreciate the clarification on that. 00:28:03
All right, Commissioners, any. 00:28:07
Other questions? 00:28:09
Comments. 00:28:12
Well, at this point then, if there's no other discussion, I think we might be at a point where we're ready to make a motion. 00:28:15
Commissioner Baron, are you prepared on that? This is Commissioner. Real quick. Can you close the public hearing? I thought I did. 00:28:20
I apologize if I did not say I closed the meeting. It's closed. I wasn't sure. Either I missed it or Brad missed me. One or the 00:28:24
other. I apologize, but it's definitely closed now. 00:28:29
Just one question. I'm sorry, I know it's only been 30 minutes, but I've already forgotten everything. So was this the one you 00:28:36
wanted to put on hold or? 00:28:40
We discussed that briefly, but if it's not, if the owner doesn't intend for it to be an Adu, then it doesn't. 00:28:45
Online with that with what our new codes being proposed is. 00:28:54
Again, thank you for I'm the slow one at the end of this. So this is Commissioner Barrett. I move that the Holiday Planning 00:28:59
Commission approved the application for a detached accessory garage sized at 15177 square feet. 00:29:07
Located at 3931 S, 2175 E. 00:29:15
Based upon the findings that the desired structures footprint does not exceed the total allowed structure coverage on the parcel 00:29:20
and is within the setbacks required for an accessory building. 00:29:25
Number Two staff has not received any objections or concerns written or verbally expressed to date requesting or respecting the 00:29:31
Conditional Use Permit request. 00:29:37
Contingent upon the applicants compliance with the following conditions. 00:29:45
The property excuse me this, the project is subject to height, set back and lot coverage. 00:29:49
Regulations for their property size #2 The owner applicant shall obtain a building permit for the proposed detached garage 00:29:55
addition addition. 00:29:59
#3 The owner applicant shall not. 00:30:04
Establish or use the structure as a commercial entity. 00:30:07
The number four the. 00:30:11
Owner applicant is. 00:30:14
Will be compliant with impervious lot coverage standards when adding a driveway to the access. 00:30:16
To access the detached structure #5, the owner applicant is to replace all trees removed by the placement of the accessory 00:30:23
building and any other hard impervious services added. 00:30:29
And I don't know if there was anything else that the Commission may have. 00:30:35
So all right, we have a. 00:30:39
Motion that has been made. Do we have a second? 00:30:43
Commissioner Font, I'll second. 00:30:48
All right. And with that we will call for a vote. Commissioner Vilchinsky, aye. Commissioner Cunningham aye. Commissioner Flaunt 00:30:50
aye. Commissioner Barron, aye. And chair Roach votes aye. 00:30:55
So you and the. 00:31:01
McDonald Fan Club can enjoy what's about to transplant, thank you very much. 00:31:06
And with that, we will give just a brief pause. If there's anyone that did not want to hang out and listen to the Planning 00:31:13
Commission all evening and did not want to sit through that, you're welcome to exit real quick now so we can move on to the next 00:31:17
agenda item. Thank you. 00:31:21
All right. 00:31:33
And then moving on, our next item that we have on here is the zone map amendment. This is the rezone from RM to PO. 00:31:35
And with that, we will ask city staff if they would be kind enough to give us. 00:31:44
A narrative on this? 00:31:48
Thank you, Chairman Roche, this property is. 00:31:56
Requesting A rezone from the RM Zone to the PO Zone that's located at 6375 S Highland Drive. 00:32:02
The property size is roughly .57 acres. It's comprised of one larger parcel than two kind of small little triangles. So they all 00:32:12
make up one piece that would be consolidated into one parcel totaling .57 acres. 00:32:20
The room zone is a rollover from Salt Lake County, which had mixed uses in it it previously allowed. 00:32:30
Both office use and residential use. 00:32:41
In 2018, the City created a new zone, the PO Zone for professional offices, which expanded the uses slightly to include medical 00:32:44
and dental uses and removed residential uses as a permitted use from from the PL. zone. And priority was given to property owners 00:32:54
who were zoned as PO and using their building as office space to rezone 2 PO from the RM Zone. 00:33:03
So that's what this applicant is requesting, considering their use as an office to move to the PO zone. 00:33:14
And then with the intent to redevelop the upstairs level of the. 00:33:22
Of the property and into a residential space, and that residential space will then come back to the Planning Commission for a 00:33:29
conditional use permit. 00:33:34
Within the general plan, this is in the Highland Dr. Master plan that was detailed in the staff report. 00:33:40
Segment C is identified as a commercial area. 00:33:49
There are two kind of outstanding properties left between the higher intense Ord zone where the hotel is at and the C2 zone where 00:33:55
kind of that stroke mall area is A. 00:34:01
The general plan's intent is to have that whole area be commercial. So this property and the other property that's zoned RM next 00:34:08
to it eventually should be C2 zone to be in line with the general plan. 00:34:16
With this application requesting PO zone. 00:34:26
The Commission has a couple of options on their recommendation. 00:34:31
But taking into account the the general plan staff recommendation with. 00:34:38
Or the general plan's recommendation for commercial C2 is the zone that fits best for that. 00:34:43
But the the PO zone is also in line with the process to rezone from RM to PO. 00:34:50
And do you want me, do you have any questions for me? I do appreciate you asking because you saw the look on my face. I definitely 00:34:58
have one question I want to ask, which is from your perspective. 00:35:05
Is there anything? 00:35:12
In the PO zone or C2 zone. 00:35:14
That would make a difference for what the applicant is asking for right now. Is there any difference between PO or C2 as far as 00:35:18
what it would impact for what the intent has been presented to you? What what you may run into as the property redevelops is that 00:35:25
you may have the property owner have an interested party in leasing space that doesn't fit within the uses for the PO zone and 00:35:32
would then possibly seek to rezone to the C2. 00:35:39
Zone in the future to kind of encapsulate that expanded use that is allowed in the C2 zone. 00:35:48
As is, the property owner hasn't expressed any intent to expand the uses beyond offices, but that is a potential for the future. 00:35:56
That might bring an application back to rezone this property for C2. 00:36:06
So just to clarify. 00:36:11
If it were to go to PO it's it's limiting versus then if it was an application to go to C2 and the master or the general plan that 00:36:14
we have. 00:36:19
Already suggest that C2 is the the direction it should be going. Is that a fair statement? Yes. OK. Just wanna make sure I 00:36:24
understand those details. Yeah, in that particular. So I appreciate. Hey, are we ready for the applicant and anything else for 00:36:31
anything else for staff before we get to the applicant up. Just to clarify so if we approve PO. 00:36:38
We are ostensibly tying the hands of the applicant. 00:36:45
For now. 00:36:50
Right. They could come back and ask for a rezone to C2. They could withdraw their application and immediately do a new application 00:36:52
for C2. Or you could forward a recommendation for the PO zone and City Council could then I. 00:36:59
Make the decision. I mean they are making the decision on the rezone. So your recommendation is either to. 00:37:08
Have a positive recommendation? Negative. We've done a neutral recommendation before. We could do that again, I guess. 00:37:16
That those are kind of your options as the Commission, and then the applicant will then have options themselves. OK, one other 00:37:24
question, just. 00:37:28
Do I understand? Do we understand correctly that City Council is would look more favorably upon this if it were an application for 00:37:33
AC2? 00:37:38
Rezoned in that it fits with the general plan. Yes. OK, thank you. 00:37:43
Hey, thank you very much. And with that I will have the applicant come up. Do we have? 00:37:49
Aaron, I'm going to mess up your last name. Huffa Hua Haga. Wow. I was way off. Thank you for clarifying that. 00:37:55
Go ahead. Hi, I'm Erin Haga. I'm the applicant for the rezone. But since that application, I've sold the building and the new 00:38:02
owner is right here and so I think it would be best if he's going to take over that. So probably best if if he speaks on it. OK. 00:38:09
And if you will give us your your, your name and your address. For the record please. Sure my name is Mike Alt and my mailing 00:38:16
address is 3340 S 300 W Suite #7. 00:38:24
I'm sorry, Chris. Christopher Alt. 00:38:32
Counsel for Mr. Altman, actually the new owner of the property is 6375 Highland LLC. 00:38:37
Which would now be the interested party. 00:38:43
And so you're representing representing 6375 Highland LLC? 00:38:46
And its member, Michael. 00:38:51
OK. All right. Thank you very much. 00:38:53
And so if you would. 00:38:56
I'm sure the Commission would love to hear just from you if you want to expound a little bit on what you're looking for in the PO 00:38:59
zone and maybe if you want to just touch on why you felt that direction versus the C2, sure, so. 00:39:06
What this is is. 00:39:15
My parents have for some time wanted to move into the commercial space live on the top floor. 00:39:19
This is something that's going to work for them. We have plans here for a site plan and building plans for the remodeled top floor 00:39:26
that will be split into two apartments. 00:39:31
One would be theirs, another would be available for rental that, whoever needed to rent that and whatever the market was at that 00:39:36
time. The reason that we selected PO as opposed to C2 is our understanding is that the community would much prefer this to be PO 00:39:42
as opposed to C2. 00:39:48
For our purposes, PO and C2 are identical. We don't intend on changing anything in the office structure. In the office use, the 00:39:53
only thing we're planning on changing would be the top floor use. We would not be asking for the rezone except that in the changes 00:40:01
that were made to the RM Zone, as we understand it, it cannot be their apartment unless it is their business in the first floor. 00:40:08
Their intent is to rent out the first floor. There are already several suites on the 1st floor and the basement that are rented 00:40:16
out to other people. And that's all this is, is for them to build their retirement home. 00:40:22
For themselves on the top and for them to live there for the next 10 or 15 or. 00:40:27
How long they last. 00:40:34
OK. Do you have any questions for us? 00:40:36
Commissioners other questions. 00:40:39
All right. Appreciate the narrative. We'll go ahead and have you sit down and then at this point, we'll go ahead and open up the 00:40:41
public hearing again. Just as a reminder, if you'll state your name and address, if you want to make comment on this. 00:40:47
Rezone request we have in front of us tonight. We'll go ahead and open that. Is there anyone that would like to make comment on 00:40:55
that now? 00:40:57
Come on up, Sir. 00:41:01
Tom Lloyd. 00:41:08
Let's see, 6284 Renhaven Lane. I'm sorry, I didn't catch your last name. Lloyd. Lloyd. Is that your first or last name? TomTom 00:41:10
Lloyd. OK, Thank you, Tom. Sorry about that. And what was your address? 00:41:16
What was your address? 00:41:22
6284 Renhaven Lane. 00:41:24
Thank you Rd. actually. 00:41:27
My I'm for what they're proposing, but this C2 stuff you've been talking about. 00:41:31
I'm adamantly opposed to it. My daughter lives behind the property. 00:41:37
And two. 00:41:42
As you probably already know. 00:41:44
Is allows a lot of things, including bars and all kinds of gobbledygook. 00:41:46
And this particular location. 00:41:52
Because of the. 00:41:55
Approval of the hotel to the South. 00:41:57
Has a weird intersection, as you know it gets. 00:42:01
You don't need this to be any more than what's being proposed. 00:42:05
And So what I'm asking. 00:42:10
In this is that it changed the stupid master plan to exempt that. 00:42:12
Those two parcels right there, they're too skinny. There's not enough depth. We don't want a restaurant on that site with that. 00:42:17
Road all mess up there, the intersection. 00:42:26
Had your job here when I first created a. 00:42:30
Holiday so I know what you're sitting. 00:42:34
With but and I know they pay you the big bucks. 00:42:37
But it's really relevant at this specific little site. I see why they master plan to see too, but they didn't look at what's how 00:42:42
skinny the depth is and how much. 00:42:47
Residential is right there. 00:42:53
So I'm against the C2. 00:42:56
I'm hoping there's a way to get it off the master plan. 00:42:59
And and and treated accordingly because of the traffic would be horrendous. 00:43:02
OK. Appreciate it. Thank you very much for what they're doing though. 00:43:09
Noted. Thank you very much. 00:43:13
Do we have any other comments this evening? 00:43:17
On this one. 00:43:20
No, Once. Twice. All right. And with that, we will close the public hearing. 00:43:23
And I have asked Commissioner Cunningham if he would go ahead and lead us. No, that's way, way off. Sorry, that's a night. What 00:43:28
can I say? I've asked Commissioner Font over here if she would lead our discussion on this. So with that, Commissioner Font. 00:43:36
So I'd like to start with a question because I'm not quite clear. 00:43:45
Is it possible to? 00:43:51
To designate properties. 00:43:55
Along that corridor, some as PO and some as C2. 00:43:58
Or is the zone the zone and it's all C2 or all PO? 00:44:04
The Council can do whatever it wants on that. 00:44:12
But there's a master plan that. 00:44:16
So that's a good question. So when the general plan calls for that to be C2 when it gets changed? 00:44:18
That was the general plan. General plans can be amended. General plans can be thrown out and started over. 00:44:25
Oftentimes, circumstances may dictate and they may be economic, they may be just pragmatic. 00:44:32
May say, well, yeah, we said C28 years ago when we passed the General Plan. 00:44:40
But PO makes more sense. So we're going to change it and then we'll amend. 00:44:45
Next time we amend the General Plan, we'll amend that to make sure it says PO. 00:44:49
I mean, the Council can do that too. 00:44:54
I also, the reason I'm asking is because when we had this discussion relative to the property on Murray Holiday Rd. we had a lot 00:44:56
of pushback from area residents. 00:45:01
And I can't speak for the other commissioners, but that certainly entered into my thinking. 00:45:07
And I just. I just wonder when these master plans are drawn up. 00:45:14
Is the are the adjacent properties and adjacent? 00:45:20
Homeowners considered. 00:45:24
I think the answer to that is they're considered on a kind of 30,000 foot level, but but any homeowner when when the city amends a 00:45:29
general plan. 00:45:33
Any homeowner? 00:45:39
No matter who they are can come in. 00:45:40
Speak to public comment. 00:45:42
There's nothing to prevent that. And oftentimes in part of the process, a general plan is the city will usually hold open houses. 00:45:44
We're amending the general plan. Here's what we thought. Here's what we've got. Here's a draft of the general plan. So it's not 00:45:49
once, it's not twice, It's like a dozen times. 00:45:54
That homeowners. Now I will say that most homeowners. 00:45:59
Aren't aware of a city doing this process, and so they most homeowners don't look at the city agenda unless they're on it. 00:46:02
Right. Or they get a notice that says, hey, but we don't mail out a notice to everybody that says, hey, we're going to update our 00:46:10
general plan. But the city puts it on its website, the city puts it on Facebook or whatever social media outlets they use. So 00:46:15
there's plenty of opportunity if residents want to be involved in that process. 00:46:20
But again, most residents aren't. 00:46:27
OK, involved, but not because the city doesn't want them involved. I understand. They just choose not to be. OK Well, and if it 00:46:30
might help Commissioner Font, I think John Tierling might have had a comment there. And since John Terling is kind of what I would 00:46:35
call the reigning planning member, I just wonder if you wanted to offer some insight as to I think your legal counsel has given 00:46:40
you. 00:46:45
Their appropriate answer? 00:46:51
You know, every municipality has a legislative body that wants their public involved and general plans are. 00:46:53
These crazy esoteric theoretical ideas that reach out 40 years in advance and. 00:46:59
It doesn't ring well with all residents all the time, and so it's a process that's not interesting. 00:47:05
Unless you get a notice for a change that's happening next door. 00:47:11
And then the idea of this, Well, we're using the General Plan. Wait a minute, I wasn't part of the General Plan process. 00:47:15
I moved into Sandy three years ago. I wasn't part of that process and I've got. 00:47:20
I have proposals near me. 00:47:26
That I don't necessarily agree with. So yeah, I mean. 00:47:28
That's essentially what it is for now, however. 00:47:31
We are that general plan is expiring this year, so next year. 00:47:35
The city will go through the whole process all over again. 00:47:41
OK, So what we have in front of us is. 00:47:45
Proposal to rezone this particular piece of property so. 00:47:49
To appeal. 00:47:55
To appeal commissioners. 00:47:57
Comments I personally in reading over things before tonight appreciated. 00:48:00
That there was some comment made on their public meeting. 00:48:07
That they wrote some notes about concern of a bar. 00:48:11
Other businesses of that type going in and so that's why they were looking. 00:48:15
At the PO rather than going to the C2. 00:48:19
Which I really appreciate that that the owners looked at what the residents. 00:48:25
We're concerned about what worked for the residents. 00:48:31
What they were hearing from. 00:48:35
The general. 00:48:37
And that that's what they stated today is that they're fine either way, that they could work with either one that they're trying 00:48:38
to work with. 00:48:42
The people that are around them. 00:48:48
And I appreciate that. I understand that it's not within the general plan, but if we can make a recommendation to go ahead and 00:48:50
approve this? 00:48:54
And maybe amend that general plan for. 00:48:59
I personally would be comfortable with that rather than giving a negative. 00:49:03
Recommendation. 00:49:10
My only concern I don't want. 00:49:14
I think I would be in favor of what you're doing because it keeps everyone happy. The applicant and the neighbors are all happy. I 00:49:17
I don't want it to appear that we made a decision about the general plan because that's not our decision to make. I agree with 00:49:22
that as well, if you know. 00:49:28
Be careful not to say that we're agreeing or disagreeing with the General Plan. 00:49:34
And the general plan will be back on the table at some point. 00:49:40
You have a position on whether it ought to include these properties. 00:49:43
That's a great place to have public input. 00:49:47
I just don't want to quote that the Planning Commission decided it shouldn't be part of the general plan. 00:49:52
And that because that's not what I think any of us are saying at all. No, I am, I must say I am reluctant to go against the 00:49:58
general plan. The purpose of a general plan is to have a general plan. 00:50:03
And that, and they're winners and losers in general plans. 00:50:09
And there. 00:50:13
But I would support today making an appeal. 00:50:15
I don't think going for or against the general plan is necessarily within our purview though I think all we can. 00:50:19
All we can comment on or vote on is what's in front of us tonight and then in Council will when we make our findings, we'll have 00:50:27
to say in spite of the fact that it's inconsistent with the general plan, we're in favor of it and. 00:50:34
Sometimes that is taken to mean that we have somehow decided against the general plan. 00:50:41
I think we're all trying not to do that. 00:50:47
That's up to whoever wordsmiths. 00:50:50
Commissioner Bar. 00:50:55
Yeah, I think I appreciate what's been said already and I agree with that. I think this is such a unique. 00:50:57
Type of proposal, there's no impact. 00:51:03
You won't even know that the zoning has been changed. 00:51:06
So I think the intent of. 00:51:09
The general plan is that it stays within kind of what the expectation of land use. 00:51:12
Planning and so this works with that and to me I support the request and. 00:51:19
So she's looking at me. All right, so. 00:51:26
When I look at well, I have just a quick question for staff and I apologize for not asking this earlier. Do we know? 00:51:31
It all because I understand it's a different city across the street, but would that all be considered a commercial zone over there 00:51:39
in Murray? 00:51:42
Or is there a patchwork of zoning that exists across the street as well? Do we know that by chance? I believe so. I think in the 00:51:47
Highland Dr. Master plan, it talks about that specific segment and the roadway width and what is across from it. Yeah, so this 00:51:53
segment is not expected to change its configuration. 00:51:59
It's I think 107 feet Rd. width. 00:52:08
So it's a pretty wide segment of the road and. 00:52:14
But yeah, Murray's zoning there so far is commercial. They have. 00:52:19
I think a Health Center that's across the street. 00:52:26
Some commercial locations here directly across the street. 00:52:31
Yeah, 7:11. So it is Highland Dr. overall is, is commercial on on both sides and that's what our general plan also took into 00:52:36
account. 00:52:40
I just I ask because I know there's that what appears to be office structure as we all get on the luge we call an on ramp. 00:52:47
Getting to 2:15 there that just right after the light. 00:52:54
And so I was just curious if that was maybe zoned differently than commercial, if this was like a compliment, if that was like 00:52:59
Office and this was Office, wouldn't that be a cute little pair, You know what I mean? Yeah, it's it's likely that that it's still 00:53:04
commercial but being used as office space. So commercial you'll typically have a little bit higher. 00:53:10
Height for their building, so that's. 00:53:16
Even if it's not a commercial or retail use, it still could be in a commercial zone. 00:53:19
Well, I for me personally, I just. I have. 00:53:26
John, did you have a comment just looking at the zoning map and yeah, everything from the freeway all the way to 62 affecting. 00:53:30
Including the office building on Van Winkle. 00:53:36
They call it commercial neighborhood. 00:53:40
C2 or C They're probably their C type of zone. 00:53:43
Not sure what neighborhood stands for. I'm familiar with that because I live in Murray, but the CN zone is. 00:53:47
It has to be low impact and it's supposed to be a transition. 00:53:54
From like a busy St. 00:53:57
To residential behind it. So it can't be huge and imposing. It can't. It's got height restrictions and it's got. 00:53:59
Lot coverage restrictions as well, so it's supposed to be. 00:54:05
Ease the transition from into commercial from a busy highway and be a buffer between. 00:54:09
The highway and residential. 00:54:15
It sounds like you're semi an expert on that. Could I ask you just in your opinion does this does the C2 zone and holiday 00:54:17
complement that pretty close or would you say PO would be more in line with matching the CN just out of curiosity. So I think C2 00:54:22
is pretty close to it because of the height restrictions that? 00:54:27
Currently there, I think the height restrictions might be a little higher in Murray than what our current C2 zone has. 00:54:33
I appreciate that clarification. 00:54:40
And just my final comment on it is like, you know, and this kind of touches like I totally understand what the the applicants 00:54:44
trying to do. I like what the applicants trying to do to be quite honest. 00:54:49
But when I look at it from the master plan and the reason we have our general plan, excuse me, that we have and why we have those 00:54:55
is it's not about what we're looking at today or 10 years from now, but what we're looking at for our grandkids 50 years from now. 00:55:01
And I suspect that if we approve this as a PO within 10 to 15 years, depending, I actually hope you know, Mr. All makes it another 00:55:09
30-40 years. That would be a blessing but however long. But at some point I do foresee looking in the crystal ball that this might 00:55:16
be back in front of the Planning Commission again as AC2. And I just wonder if we're just delaying the inevitable and just 00:55:23
creating extra work. But that being said. 00:55:29
That's just my only thoughts when I look at this. But with that, unless there's other discussion, I'm happy for anyone to 00:55:37
entertain a motion. Well, if we make a motion to approve it as APO. 00:55:43
And we have to base it upon the following findings, and one would be the proposed amendment. 00:55:50
Is not consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan. 00:55:59
You would leave that finding out, Speaking of wordsmithing. 00:56:06
I think you'd have to make that. You might have to wing it a little bit in wordsmith. 00:56:10
If you're comfortable doing that. 00:56:14
So leave a off. 00:56:17
Because it is harmonious with the overall character of the existing development in the vicinity, so we could leave that in. 00:56:20
It does not adversely affect abutting properties. 00:56:29
And the rest of it I mean. 00:56:36
BC and D certainly work so. 00:56:38
Commissioners. 00:56:42
I think if you're ready to make a motion, OK, this is Commissioner Font I. 00:56:45
Move to forward a recommendation to City Council to approve an application. Now is the application being made by Mr. Alt at this 00:56:50
point? 00:56:54
We need to scale the originals the application before an application to amend the holiday zoning map for .5 acres of land located 00:57:00
at 6375 S Highland Drive from RM to PO based upon the following findings. 00:57:09
A. The proposed amendment is harmonious with the overall character of existing development in the vicinity. 00:57:18
The exact the proposed amendment may adversely. 00:57:25
Will not or may not adversely affect budding properties. 00:57:30
And facilities and services intended to serve. 00:57:35
The subject property are adequate. 00:57:40
Including roadways, Parks and Recreation facilities, police and Fire Protection. 00:57:43
Schools, storm water, drainage systems, environmental hazard mitigation measures, water supply and wastewater, and refuse 00:57:48
collection. 00:57:54
We have a motion. Council. Is there concern? No. OK, we have a motion. Do we have a second? 00:58:01
Commissioner Wilczynski, I second that motion. All righty, and with that we will call for a vote. Commissioner Cunningham. 00:58:09
Aye, Commissioner Barron, Aye Commissioner Flaunt. Aye Mr. Wilkinski and Chair Roach is going to chicken out and abstain from this 00:58:16
one and with a four to five or four out of five then it does. 00:58:22
Move forward with the favorable recommendation. 00:58:30
Thank you very much. 00:58:36
All right. And then we will. 00:58:39
Now roll into our text amendment for a loud building height in the C2 zone. 00:58:43
And if city staff. 00:58:50
Mr. Terling would like to present on that. That would be way. 00:58:54
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Application before the Planning Commission tonight. It's a legislative recommendation. 00:58:58
On a proposal to amend building heights in the C2 zone, ironically we've been talking about this already. 00:59:04
Staff is prepared to staff report for you That provides some background. 00:59:10
Specifically on. 00:59:15
Your commercial zones. 00:59:16
And height in those zones. 00:59:18
Since the incorporation of holiday in 1999, the C1 and C2 zones have. 00:59:22
Largely been kept in place as far as standards are concerned. 00:59:28
As I mentioned in the work meeting, councils over past several years have included multiple infill type zones. 00:59:32
And not excluding the Holiday Village or the RMU zone, which is the Cottonwood Mall or the Village downtown here. 00:59:41
And height has always been this four letter word, so to speak. 00:59:47
In any zone for many municipality. 00:59:51
So specifically in the staff report, we've hopefully been able to give the Planning Commission some background. 00:59:56
At least on what heights are across the board in all the commercial zones for the city. 01:00:03
What the General Plan says. 01:00:08
We are proposing that you use Chapter 4, the General Plan. 01:00:10
And as it addresses economic sustainability and resilience. 01:00:16
There's some elements in there that staff believes that the Planning Commission can use. 01:00:21
While considering this application. 01:00:26
While you deliberate and request some. 01:00:30
Questions be made from the applicant itself. 01:00:34
As the request is a text amendment for maybe one site in particular. 01:00:37
It will affect all C2 zones across India throughout the entire city. 01:00:42
In now situations, we're required to mail notice to all property owners that are being affected by that. 01:00:48
Change so I'll see two property owners did receive a notice. 01:00:53
However, we have received a request from some neighborhoods that abut C2 zones. 01:00:59
That get to extend maybe the comment period because they're just now finding out about the situation so. 01:01:05
Staff believes that it might be fair and prudent to maybe continue to open the public hearing. Continue it to your next meeting. 01:01:11
In the case that we can get some extra comment in. 01:01:18
I did receive some comment from other C2 owners that were in favor. 01:01:22
But since it's still open, I'll forward those on to you later in the week as we get more comments in. 01:01:27
Staff is recommending approval for this amendment in particular. 01:01:35
For height, mainly for the purpose of. 01:01:39
The fact that one. 01:01:42
If you look at some other municipalities that are abutting the city, I didn't bring them into the staff report for analysis. 01:01:44
Because more or less other municipalities of what they do with their land uses are relevant from what your what the city does 01:01:51
here. 01:01:54
However, I think. 01:01:59
Our C2 zones, it's pretty prudent to say they're short, literally short term than other C2 zones, even directly across the street 01:02:02
from Highland Drive. 01:02:06
By a good 10 feet but. 01:02:11
Irrelevant. You know you can use that as you may. 01:02:14
What is relevant is what other what other commercial zones in the city are are being considered by. 01:02:17
City Council's and pass what applicable height and. 01:02:24
Is appropriate for the city. 01:02:27
So in using some elements of chapter 4 and some points of. 01:02:30
Quote UN quote Resiliency for economic stability. 01:02:35
Some provisions are granted to flexibility of the ordinances to allow for our economic centers to thrive. 01:02:39
That's one of the main reasons and I think in the narrative for the applicant you might get that notion. 01:02:47
As well. 01:02:52
But I'll be happy to take any other. 01:02:53
Questions from the Planning Commission, if you'd like. Question. Yes. Good. 01:02:56
So looking at this proposal to 40 feet. 01:02:59
Neighboring communities, aren't they higher than that or I mean is this kind of? 01:03:03
Increasing it, but not necessarily increasing it to where we might be. 01:03:09
In the same ballpark like 45 to 50 feet, correct? Even if you do increase the height and just as I was looking at Murray's across 01:03:14
the street. 01:03:18
And in Mill Creek, we'd be still 5 feet below their heights. 01:03:22
So we're not competitive if you want to put it that way. 01:03:27
Yeah, that's why I'm wondering why we don't just let's go bite the apple. 01:03:32
Make it work for the future, as we've been discussing the last. 01:03:38
Item that maybe we need to make this a little taller. 01:03:43
Obviously there are some people who won't agree with me on that, but. 01:03:46
Maybe some of us like our view of Mount Olympus. I don't think you're going to see any difference from 40 or 35 to 40 feet. 01:03:50
You look at buildings and you'll. 01:03:57
One will be taller, but that will be the only difference. 01:04:00
If it were just by itself, you wouldn't know if it was 40 or 35 feet. 01:04:03
To me, does that take away any compet? 01:04:08
This to other cities. Have you talked to clients and applicants whether the need for this? Yeah, I think I understand your 01:04:12
question. I mean anecdotally. 01:04:17
From my point of view over the past 15 years of being here. 01:04:25
We have not seen 1C1 or C2 commercial convert in any way in a remodel. 01:04:29
And primarily it's when we ask you know, hey you know we'd really like to work with you to see what we can, how we can figure out 01:04:35
to have property redevelop. We look at parking ratios, can we look at. 01:04:41
You know, maximum coverage issues. You know what are the other issues? Land uses, Maybe additional land uses that your land use 01:04:48
table we're not considering that you can be allowed for and it always comes back to height. 01:04:53
So I mean, my recommendation be why don't we consider maybe modifying this and maybe there could be. 01:05:01
Contextual application with this where there. 01:05:08
In certain areas, maybe a taller building would be appropriate and. 01:05:12
Well, along these busy corridors you have to realize that what is there, 60,000 cars going on Highland Dr. every day? 01:05:19
You know, I mean. 01:05:26
So we're getting to where there are areas of high impact. 01:05:29
That this would be a very appropriate addition. 01:05:34
Sure. I think I appreciate where Commissioner Barrett's coming from on this, but tonight we're just looking at a text amendment to 01:05:38
40. We're not discussing anything other than that, right? That's the application in front of you. Well, if we're continuing it, 01:05:43
I'm just curious if we maybe should look at. 01:05:48
Making additional. 01:05:54
A recommendation from the. 01:05:56
Can be a recommendation on the application itself. 01:06:00
And then you can add to that direction from the council on what they should do in the future, yeah. 01:06:03
Sorry, you need me to cut you off. Just make sure. 01:06:12
Commissioners, any other questions for city staff? 01:06:15
Before we invite the applicant up. 01:06:18
Thanks. Thank you very much. 01:06:21
And with that do we have? 01:06:24
Is it Brett Laughlin or Chris Layton or both that are going to come up? 01:06:26
Yeah, he just wants to be on the other side again. 01:06:32
Welcome back. 01:06:39
I'm Brett Laughlin, and I guess you guys know Chris Layton. 01:06:43
I have a question to begin with. 01:06:46
We had. 01:06:49
Done. A text amendment to move the height to 40 feet on the recommendation of. 01:06:51
Your group and I think we went with the 40 feet because that's what was going to be proposed as a permanent change. 01:06:56
Or is there a possibility that the permanent change, if the City made it on the recommendation of the Planning Commission and so 01:07:07
forth, that it could be increased to 45 feet? 01:07:12
So I think you're based upon a conversation you had with the mayor. 01:07:18
On what to do with commercial properties in general. 01:07:23
I think from his point of view, they were looking for a general plan amendment first before they start looking at heights across 01:07:26
the entire city itself. 01:07:30
So in the meantime? 01:07:36
Looking at an amendment for now, I think was something that you would prefer to have immediately rather than looking at. 01:07:38
Maximum the height you know what's the. 01:07:45
Absolute maximum height we could possibly consider for all commercial zones. 01:07:48
OK. Because we're finance, I mean we're just looking through this financially to get it to pencil out, right? And so we've been 01:07:52
slow at the design and. 01:07:56
The phase of getting approval and stuff, because it doesn't, it doesn't pencil out and. 01:08:02
Were kind of unique because I was doing this because I'm a resident of holiday and I wanted a fun. 01:08:08
You know the restaurant and place there, but I can't pencil it out and I just want to break even, right? 01:08:13
So to do a quality of construction and design. 01:08:19
I can't. I either have to do really cheap stucco and an ugly building of 35 feet or a beautiful building of 40 feet, right? 01:08:25
Because the it's amazing the economics of your designing and selling a town home or even a restaurant. You want to be competitive 01:08:31
with all the other. 01:08:37
Cities out there. 01:08:44
If I've got low 9 foot 10 foot ceilings, I can only get so much per square foot if I can get 11 or 12 foot ceilings. 01:08:46
The price 1 1/2 times more. 01:08:54
So we're just trying to figure out how to pencil it out, but. 01:08:58
I think me as a neighbor driving by and being part of it, and I hope the neighbors surrounding it would. 01:09:02
Agree to that. It would be so much nicer looking at an architectural piece that is. 01:09:07
Iconic, you know, It's not a stucco, somebody that just slapped something together to hurry, make a buck with a lot of doors. This 01:09:13
is going to be something that people are thinking. I'm a little crazy over designing them and. 01:09:19
In building something that will be an icon in the neighborhood, but to do that we need to have the. We need to have that. 01:09:26
I would love to have 45, but we don't have the time to hold the property until the city actually probably passes something like 01:09:36
that. 01:09:39
But short term, the 40 feet makes it possible that we can pencil out and make this project possible. 01:09:44
And I just want to clarify on that and I appreciate you bringing this up. So for I'm not sure how many planning commissioners were 01:09:50
here when we first saw your project. This is for the brewery located at the old Roots Garden Center, right, that you're 01:09:57
specifically speaking to, but when we consider. 01:10:04
The text amendment is an overall looking at the entire zone. It's not just applicable to what you want to do because it very much 01:10:12
does open the door for that, as you put it, ugly stucco mini door building to be built exactly across the street in the same zone. 01:10:19
So I think that's, you know, part of the consideration is, you know, is this the right move? Because it does in fact. 01:10:27
Give that green light to those scenarios, understanding of course you want to do what's better, and we applaud that, of course. 01:10:35
But that's I think you know part of the concern. So I appreciate just bringing that up, but. 01:10:44
Commissioners, questions for the applicant on this one at this time. 01:10:49
One of my concerns is, you know, I realize. 01:10:54
The plan you have and that, but this effects a whole bunch of other areas in the city. 01:10:58
All of which are different. 01:11:05
Yours is pretty easy to deal with because of where it's located. 01:11:07
Doesn't have a lot of residential backing on it and those kinds of things and that some of these do. 01:11:11
And noticing problem we've talked about that. You heard some discussion about that. 01:11:18
I'm a little reluctant to say do it in all of the zone. 01:11:24
Knowing that everyone of these is a very different they're in every part of the city, and that there's a commonality of Highland 01:11:30
Drive and most of it and that. 01:11:35
I guess for staff, is there any way that we can give the five feet for this project without changing? 01:11:40
All of the commercial too. 01:11:48
Well, I think what the abscond would have to. 01:11:53
Do. No, there isn't a way, OK? 01:11:56
So what I was going to mention is that the applicant can enter into a development agreement with the City Council. 01:12:00
And the development agreement can. 01:12:06
Sort of massage what's allowed. 01:12:09
And usually in terms of reduction. 01:12:12
Not expansion. 01:12:14
Yeah, they can't go. They wouldn't be able to go extending beyond normal standards in a development agreement that doesn't. That 01:12:18
wouldn't work. 01:12:21
Is it because of the zone that they're in like? 01:12:24
Because if you look at like. 01:12:29
Right next door to where he is. 01:12:31
Yeah, and I mean there's definitely different height requirements there. Is there a way to incorporate his project into? 01:12:35
To rezone it as the HHMP, right. 01:12:43
Technically, yes. 01:12:48
With with restrictions that 40 would be the Max. Now I think what would happen is so if we played that out. 01:12:57
Because it's fun. 01:13:04
Site development Master plan has a boundary. The Cottonwood Hill Cottonwood Mall has a boundary in itself. 01:13:06
What we need to do is expand the boundary to include the property. 01:13:12
And in doing so, the land use zones, the districts, land use districts would have to be amended as well. 01:13:16
And what to establish the uses for this property? 01:13:22
So my assumption would be if we were to get to that point. 01:13:26
Deciding on what types of uses are allowed here and then what types of heights. 01:13:31
Will probably either be ending up similar to where. 01:13:35
Abutting properties are now. 01:13:40
Because at the Far East side of. 01:13:42
Memory as it wraps around by the. 01:13:46
Cemetery. 01:13:49
Are detached single family homes and they can't go any higher than 40 feet anyway. 01:13:51
The idea is to have that mass transition down into the neighborhood. 01:13:55
So I'm assuming that we would follow similar thought. 01:14:00
Is that mass would as you go down to Highland Drive into the neighborhoods it might we might end up at the same spot. 01:14:04
And one if I don't. If you don't mind, I just have one like because I'm not an architect and he'll make fun of me all day because 01:14:11
he knows this, but like. 01:14:15
Is is Is it something where like hypothetically if you were to lower the first floor or five feet, that would allow you to do your 01:14:20
three stories and still meet the existing code? Or would that cause problems? 01:14:25
Can I? Can I respond to that? Oh, please, yes. 01:14:32
A couple of points if I may. 01:14:35
There are aside from this hyped. 01:14:40
Issue and I can address that, I think, in that comment. 01:14:44
There are also lots of regulations and setbacks in neighboring zones and how far you have to be away from them with your 40 foot 01:14:48
structure. So there's a lot of other ways that we can protect neighbors. 01:14:54
As far as the hike goes. 01:15:02
Aside from sinking into the diluvial streams below the ground. 01:15:04
Umm, not really. 01:15:10
However, to Brian's point about height, actually the reason why we settled on this wasn't. 01:15:11
Just specific to this. 01:15:20
But specific to other C2 projects that have three stories allowed. 01:15:23
But wanting to have commercial on the lower floor, residential on the next two or commercial and office and residential but 01:15:30
mixed-use projects which are. 01:15:34
Extremely viable needed. 01:15:39
And the problem is. 01:15:42
Quality of the spaces get diminished because we're trying to stuff them into 35 feet and even though it's only 5 feet more. 01:15:44
It's a huge difference. 01:15:53
It allows us to be 14 to 16 feet floor to floor for the commercial zone. 01:15:55
And allows us to be 11 to 12 feet with parapets and things that protect it and make it look nice from from afar. So it's it's 01:16:01
time. 01:16:06
That this city. 01:16:12
In my opinion. 01:16:15
Looks at this on a general basis because it affects the design of many projects, not just breaths. 01:16:16
Brett came up with the idea that if we were able to. 01:16:23
Commercial and a brewery and and a restaurant space and then dwelling units above. 01:16:27
1:00 We'd created vast need for dwelling units in the city. 01:16:33
And we could get that all to work and fit, and we're just one example of the good it would do to the C2 zone. 01:16:37
So I think it is broader and I think. 01:16:45
Yeah, it could be 45, but it wouldn't have to be. 01:16:49
To make our project work. 01:16:53
Appreciate that. And before I'm just going to say we do need to open the public hearing and allow for comment too. But if you had 01:16:56
another question on that, you had mentioned there the possibility of being able to conceal. 01:17:01
That's stuff on the roof. 01:17:08
With that extra feet. 01:17:10
Are you comfortable enough that that would be the trade off for the five feet? 01:17:14
That you'd have to conceal all that stuff? Or is that pushing it too much? Well, there's still appurtenances and things on roofs 01:17:19
that are typically allowed above the. 01:17:24
Versus height limitation. So I mean there are. 01:17:30
Certain elements of a building that might like a penthouse on an elevator, for example. 01:17:34
That we've seen and dealt with, but having the. 01:17:41
Perimeter kind of the roof line, the parapet line. 01:17:45
Which does screen. 01:17:49
40 feet we there's a tremendous amount of qualitative space we can create. 01:17:52
Question. 01:17:57
So. 01:17:59
Does the 40 feet go to the top of the parapet or to the can the parapet encroach into the additional? Yeah. So when when you get 01:18:01
into that element, you look at our supplementary regulations, which you don't really get into that much. 01:18:08
C1C2 Ordinance Ord The HV the RM Zone. 01:18:16
Penthouse roof structures, housing for elevators, stairways, tanks, ventilation, blah blah blah parapet walls, architectural 01:18:21
features. 01:18:24
Maybe be erected a maximum of eight feet above the heights prescribed in the title. OK, thank you. 01:18:29
So 8 feet on top of the 40 feet right, Right. 01:18:35
If changed as opposed to 8 feet on the existing 35, yeah, so all of your. 01:18:39
Stuff gone that goes on the roof can be a maximum height of eight feet above that. 01:18:44
Can I ask a question? 01:18:50
Anne Garcia was in here a few weeks ago. 01:18:53
This might might be off the wall. 01:18:57
But what you're talking about is building a. 01:19:00
High quality structure. 01:19:04
High quality housing, high ceilings and so forth. And Anne Garcia was in here making. 01:19:06
An impassioned case for the need for holiday to have more moderate income housing. 01:19:14
So I just wonder if it would be possible to rethink this whole thing. 01:19:22
And rethink it in terms of. 01:19:29
Do we really need? 01:19:32
Bigger, better, higher quality. 01:19:34
When what we really need if we want to balance things out is we need moderate income housing in holiday. 01:19:37
And can we achieve that objective? 01:19:45
Without further urbanization of our town, you can. I think you want them both, right? You know, but. 01:19:51
Specifically to our property, what the height allows us to do is put three or four studio apartments over the. 01:19:59
Over the bar restaurant Ruby itself. So it is. 01:20:08
Commercial and residential's and those would be considerably less expensive. They would be least rental, rental type of apartments 01:20:13
and. 01:20:19
But they really wouldn't be moderate income housing, right? 01:20:25
Nothing in holiday is. 01:20:30
Holiday they would be. 01:20:33
Across the street. 01:20:36
They're they're rented. They're more moderate than most housing in all, and moderate income housing. 01:20:38
If you look at the median income for a holiday. 01:20:45
You're going to have a different type of. 01:20:48
Federal government, State government does on a county basis, right? 01:20:52
If it was moderate and having a holiday, that's a different. 01:21:01
Brand and a magnitude of different than it was. 01:21:05
Yeah, but her point is well taken. 01:21:10
And I've said this before as well, that. 01:21:14
You know, we keep talking about moderate income housing and then we have $1,000,000 products. 01:21:16
And that's not modern income, even for holiday. 01:21:21
That's purely a function of land costs. 01:21:26
Like sometimes you just can't. 01:21:28
Sure. And that's our piece. But I think generally like if this is going to apply to all C2, I think we want it as a city because 01:21:30
then it allows people to do commercial where they can get the money from their land. 01:21:37
And then they can build residential and moderate and. 01:21:43
Maybe even lower income housing above it, but without the without the commercial you can't support. 01:21:48
The cost of the land and property tax and everything else here, But do we? It would help it. 01:21:54
I didn't mean to interrupt. I just wonder if we have to raise all the level of all the buildings in C2. 01:22:00
In order to achieve that. 01:22:09
Because we're looking at making a sweeping change. 01:22:12
For your building, yeah, I'm not. I'm not a developer per SE, but I. 01:22:16
Had discussions with others because I was like, I can't get this thing to pencil out right. It just doesn't make sense and. 01:22:22
And a lot of the other developers in the area were stating that the height will help them because they can do what they can, do a 01:22:27
commercial below, make the money off the land and then do less expensive. 01:22:33
Above, otherwise you have to. 01:22:40
What I've got outland like I'm. 01:22:44
You know, I'm a little stuck with it, but the cost of all the commercial land in holidays going up crazy, so you can't support it 01:22:47
with some sort of. 01:22:51
Umm, commercial or use? 01:22:56
We'll probably lose any further, you know, we'll lose development, we'll lose being competitive with. 01:23:01
Having housing period compared to the other cities that we don't really. 01:23:07
Is Mikey. 01:23:13
If I could add a comment on how. 01:23:16
Moderate income and housing is often created when you're adding new units. New units are always going to be more expensive. 01:23:20
Typically they're new. They have new construction. What? 01:23:25
Does happen is that people looking to move up into newer, nicer units than. 01:23:32
Alleviate or make available some of the older units that then are more affordable to more people. So it's it's a natural 01:23:39
progression of being able to move into a unit. Our last application with they wanted to live in a apartment above a commercial 01:23:46
space. I think there are a lot of people who are looking for that kind of. 01:23:53
A situation. 01:24:02
Adding the height to allow that in all of our commercial zones. 01:24:03
It would apply to that other applicant as well. If they wanted to redevelop, they could then do two stories. 01:24:08
Make their land purchase pencil out with being able to still have a residential use over commercial and then also redevelopment of 01:24:15
any of our commercial areas to bring more units in and create some of those walkable communities that people are looking for. 01:24:23
With that, I would like to just interject real quick, we do need to have a public hearing and we're getting very much into the 01:24:32
discussion side. So we'll invite the applicant to sit down and give an opportunity for any members of the public that want to 01:24:39
address this. However, as staff and legal noted that we will continue this. 01:24:46
Because of noticing requirements, but at this time we'll go ahead and open the public hearing and any members of the public that 01:24:55
would like to make comment on this are welcome to come up and do so at this time. 01:25:00
Doesn't look like we just have, OK, no, no takers on that at this time. So with that, unless there's further discussion on here. 01:25:08
You know, as mentioned, we're going to have to make a motion to continue, but is there any other discussion points that we need to 01:25:19
cover at this time? Just two things. 01:25:23
I'm glad we're talking about this in terms of my income housing. I didn't think it would go that way. Otherwise I would have 01:25:28
brought other elements in from the general plan that you can consider. 01:25:32
I think from Anne Francis Garcia's point of view, it wasn't necessarily of. 01:25:38
We need to do. 01:25:43
Or we need to? 01:25:45
Coerce or force property owners to do more with less. 01:25:47
It was. We need to try to figure out where we can, where our hindrances are, where our hurdles are on creating more. 01:25:51
Different types of housing. 01:25:59
And I don't think we've really even conceptualized that our C2 and C1 zones could be those areas. 01:26:02
But where we have an economic situation here where, as was brought up, we have property values and land is just in the situation 01:26:08
where it is as expensive as it is. 01:26:14
It's difficult to make those extra units. 01:26:20
Can appear out of thin air without some extra flexibility, so. 01:26:23
I'm glad we're having the discussion if you want, if you have any specific elements you'd like the staff to come back with. 01:26:27
If we'd like to have Anne come back and chime in on this, I'd be happy to have her come. 01:26:34
There's two things I think I would like to put into a motion and that beyond resolving that the noticing issue and one is and I 01:26:40
think you're absolutely right about the argument and that, but I would like to see somebody, maybe Chris or developer. 01:26:49
Give us some documents and show us how that works and that. 01:26:59
And that because that that way we can create a finding. 01:27:04
That, you know, this makes sense to us. I think we understand it intellectually, but now we've got to move it to another body and 01:27:08
that and I I think some paperwork that. 01:27:12
Shows you how that gap. 01:27:17
Allows the commercial to take more space and I think that would help us create a record. 01:27:21
And that. 01:27:26
There's one other thing I think would be useful, and you alluded to it, but just for the record. 01:27:30
What are the equivalent zones for our surrounding community? 01:27:36
I think that's always something a council is interested in. 01:27:41
That were the Johnny come lately to this. 01:27:44
And that and so you know what is, what is Mill Creek, Cottonwood Heights and Murray in particular doing Sandy, maybe because there 01:27:47
are surrounding things and they're part of this corridor on Highland Drive. 01:27:53
And they add, and if we're the shortest one, you know, maybe we're putting our businesses at a disadvantage. 01:28:00
So those are the things I'd like to fold into a motion for. What do we want when we come back? 01:28:06
Fair enough. Would you like to have, I mean, I just and by way of comparison, we still have a lot of RM zone out there, right that 01:28:13
runs along Highland and in the room zone they're currently allowed 40. 01:28:19
Is that right? If they're at that lot size, yeah. 01:28:25
Acre and above. Yep. 01:28:29
So I mean, you know the people that got folded into the C2 versus the. 01:28:30
Are the ones that are currently, I guess you could say, the loser. 01:28:35
Umm, depending on how you want to look at that along the corridor, but I think there's some great discussion points. 01:28:41
And look forward to having more of those. Unless there's any other discussion points that need to be brought up this evening, 01:28:47
however, I'm more than happy to take a motion to continue. 01:28:51
I'll be happy to make a motion. 01:28:57
This is Commissioner Cunningham and I motion to continue to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting, the 01:29:00
application by Brent Laughlin, represented by Chris Layton, to amend Title 13, Chapter 13.62, point 110, of the City of Holiday 01:29:07
Land Use Code to increase the maximum allowable height from 35 to 40 feet. 01:29:14
Specific items to discuss further are requested. 01:29:21
One resolution of the noticing issue. 01:29:26
Two additional. 01:29:31
Explanation and examples of. 01:29:33
Which we say that the business argument for going from 35 to 40 feet. 01:29:39
And three, comparison to the surrounding localities for similar zones. 01:29:45
We have a motion. Do we have a second? 01:29:54
This Commissioner Baird, I'll second that. All right. And so with the motions to continue, Commissioner Vilchinsky, Aye. 01:29:58
Cunningham, aye. 01:30:02
Baron Aye and Chair Rochelle. So we will continue that one till our next meeting. 01:30:08
And thank you very much for those of you that presented on that tonight and then we will move into the approval of minutes from 01:30:13
January 9th. 01:30:17
And I've had a chance to review those minutes. There was only one particular thing that stood out to me personally on that was 01:30:23
right at the very top, where it said that I read the opening statement to the public. And since I believe I've never done that 01:30:30
because I intentionally delegate that to everyone, I believe that might be an error because I think we might have omitted the 01:30:36
statement of memory served. January 9th had zero attendees. Was that right or am I wrong in thinking that? 01:30:43
Because wasn't that the one where we did the work meeting and then we had like the text amendment and nobody showed up for it? 01:30:51
I think you're right. Or am I thinking of a different meeting because January was too far away from me at this point? 01:30:57
We can certainly. 01:31:06
Verify that recording. 01:31:08
So, but that was the that was the only thing that stood out to me as a possible update on there. But I don't know that it makes a 01:31:11
huge difference if. 01:31:15
There was number members of the public. It could just be the chair, Roach opened it. So I don't know that it really changes the 01:31:19
outcome of the meeting. I don't think that there was any. What was the topic? Was it the home occupation? One or. Yeah, I think it 01:31:23
was the home occupation. 01:31:27
We didn't have any comments on home occupations. 01:31:34
Yeah, I don't think we had any attendees and. 01:31:37
I think it was just city staff and. 01:31:40
Commissioners, that whole thing needs to be struck out. 01:31:42
I know right how time flies, but were there any other? 01:31:48
Things that commissioners caught from that that we're in attendance of that meeting. 01:31:54
OK. But again, just because I delegate, that's the only reason it stood out to me. So outside of that, I don't know if it makes a 01:31:59
huge impact on the approval of the minutes or not. So I don't know we necessarily have to go back and strike it. 01:32:06
Whichever is easier for city staff, I don't care. 01:32:15
If we just double check that and then. 01:32:19
What Brad just said, so with that. 01:32:26
All in favor of approval of the Minutes? Say aye. 01:32:30
Thank you very much. And then with that is this historic preservation of ordinance which we will get through speedily, I'm sure as 01:32:34
we just start the discussion. I'm excited for this. 01:32:39
I really don't have any much else to add. Do you want to have any questions on how the historic preservation is handled in the 01:32:46
holiday? 01:32:50
So I notice there is the committee seems to be back up and running. Yes, seem to have disappeared and now it's up and running. 01:32:54
And then so they obviously are driving. 01:33:02
Getting a new ordinance and yes and no, I mean that's something that at least staff has been concerned with for quite some time. 01:33:06
The timing had to be right. 01:33:13
And specifically. 01:33:16
Council Member Gibbons, who is no longer on the Commission now. 01:33:19
Really sort of champion to that effort to make sure that this gets back into the public realm and and fixed essentially for lack 01:33:24
of better term. 01:33:28
Now that Council member Emily Gray has taken. 01:33:32
His place. 01:33:36
She's trying to usher it along and brought to my attention that May is. 01:33:38
It's either state or it's National Historic Preservation Month. 01:33:45
So in that light, we like. 01:33:50
To get this in front of the City Council in May so they can have a nice working document that they can work off of and approve it 01:33:52
during that month. 01:33:56
That's the timeline impetus essentially. We have some issues with the code that needs to be repaired. 01:34:01
And I think those are fairly simple to do. This is not going to be an extravagant update to ordinance or a rewrite. 01:34:08
But mainly procedural. 01:34:16
And so I'm just curious a little bit further. 01:34:20
A homeowner. 01:34:24
You know as far as and maybe it's in the details and I apologize if I overlooked it, but what qualifies as historic is that like I 01:34:26
think this house built in 1980 is really cool because it's got that 1980s Art Deco style or like is there a certain timeline that? 01:34:33
Dictates what's historic, Yeah. And I think it's only it's open to whatever the state will approve. 01:34:41
And accept whether it be architecture or an individual. 01:34:47
Or use. 01:34:51
I use the example a lot is because it's such a great example on Spring Lane, about 14 ish E There's a beautiful gingerbread 01:34:53
Victorian home there. 01:34:58
Its historic property, but not for the architecture. 01:35:04
It's for the dairy that was there. 01:35:07
And if, for example, they wanted to come to the Planning Commission for, well, First off. 01:35:09
They go through the state process right to get the historic designation. 01:35:16
And then they can bring that to us or the City Council. 01:35:19
To add it to the list. 01:35:23
And the reason why it goes to the City Council, not the Planning Commission, is because there's those extra uses. 01:35:26
And those are allowed additional land uses that would be provided that property owner. 01:35:32
Then to then come to the Planning Commission for a conditional use permit. 01:35:37
For example, a small ice cream shop because it was a dairy. 01:35:40
They want to have some artisan or ice cream. Something like that could be a significant benefit. 01:35:45
To help maintain and sustain that historic use. 01:35:51
And create something community identity at the same time. 01:35:55
So yes, you have the process of. 01:35:59
Declaring the historic architecture individual or Hughes with the state and then once we get that approval. 01:36:03
And then they can bring it to the City Council to add to the list that's in the code. 01:36:10
So it is a state. 01:36:15
Process. 01:36:17
That we're just kind of dovetailing on the back end of them right Right now. I don't think the City Council is interested in in 01:36:18
designating historic properties without that additional. 01:36:23
Anchor Historic preservation anchor. 01:36:28
Whether it be federal or state. 01:36:31
So that. 01:36:33
Just guessing probably limits the scope. I mean, not knowing what the state's requirements are, but I'm guessing that would not 01:36:34
necessarily. There are quite it's documentation, that's the hardest part. 01:36:39
If you have an architecture architectural feature like Arc Deco. 01:36:46
And you have a scroll work or a window that's very unique to that type of style. 01:36:51
And it's documented that that was there when it was originally built. 01:36:57
From my point of view, I think that's been acceptable in the past. 01:37:01
We've looked at the front of this building. 01:37:05
Specifically for Art Deco. 01:37:07
And the scroll work and the lentils above the building are very similar to the Carnegie Hall construction that you would Carnegie 01:37:10
Foundation construction you'd see in libraries. 01:37:15
In random areas across the state. 01:37:21
If you go up into Logan. 01:37:24
On your way out of Logan, you see their little library. It's it's a spitting image of this building. It's ironic. 01:37:27
But similar to those types of things would be acceptable for historic preservation. 01:37:34
For architecture. 01:37:39
Yeah, I was just wondering if the. 01:37:43
I don't know the name of it your architectural review board if they may be also included in the review of some of the designs of 01:37:46
these historic buildings. I don't know if they could give that perspective, but I don't feel like I have enough background to be 01:37:51
able to. 01:37:56
Qualifying opinion on an historical sure. And I think that's that's, you know that's a good point. 01:38:02
For example, if a historic property, that's. 01:38:08
Reason it's being hit designated Historic sports architecture. 01:38:12
And they need to come for conditional use for a remodel or an addition. 01:38:16
It's we probably is a good idea to have the recommending body be the Design review Board before it gets to you for an approval of 01:38:21
a conditional use permit. I think that's totally acceptable. Thanks. 01:38:26
I was just going to say what it maybe makes sense in some way to involve the historical Commission that we have for the city and 01:38:33
that when designating those, just since you know. 01:38:38
They're the volunteer authority of it for us. Yeah, they're they're volunteer authority. They I think what the council wants them 01:38:44
to do is help the property owner get them through the process. 01:38:49
That's kind of how they want their charge to be handled. 01:38:55
Not necessarily as a recommending body to the Planning Commission, but at least to help meet to the public or the property owner. 01:38:58
That was my next suggestion is maybe we do have a historic committee. 01:39:06
You know they insert in. It does have to be a recommendation, but. 01:39:11
Some information for us to kind of make a decision, yeah, more fully, especially if it has to do with the demolition. 01:39:15
They'll be charged with that 10 to 14 day stay. 01:39:23
To document the property. 01:39:26
I mean and just, you know, outside the box thinking, you know, call it anecdotally, but McDonald's decides that their buildings 01:39:29
been there a long time and they want to call it historic and they want to use that as an excuse to sell. 01:39:35
You know, asbestos filled Slurpees or something, whatever. You know what I mean. Just something that doesn't make sense because 01:39:42
it's what they did back in the day. 01:39:45
It would be nice to have that, you know, historical Commission chime in too and say yeah, we don't necessarily buy into this and 01:39:50
don't think it really matches history or something to that effect. 01:39:55
Yeah, I mean once, hopefully by the time it gets through the state process that will all be weeded out and once the when the 01:40:01
property owner comes to City Council to ask them to be added. 01:40:05
You know that would be between the property owner and the City Council. I don't think that has an intended that historic 01:40:11
preservation be part of that process, but. 01:40:15
On the other side, but once it is added, anything else that's done to the property? Yeah, the design review board is Storm 01:40:19
Preservation Committee. 01:40:22
Yes. All right. Just wondering what our role would be because it sounds like everybody's checked the boxes, so by the time it gets 01:40:25
to us, it's like, OK, is it going to tick off the neighbors? OK, good luck, you know? 01:40:30
Yeah, and especially when you have a remodel to a historic property that is based upon an individual or a family. 01:40:37
It's difficult. So you need to have that input. 01:40:44
Yeah, OK. 01:40:48
Commissioners, any other discussion points on this? 01:40:50
Everybody's excited and tired and ready to call tonight. 01:40:54
I'm sorry. 01:40:58
Items 4:00 and 5:00, will you just let him know that we did. I apologize. You've been hanging out all night for that. We we 01:41:00
actually did those at the very beginning. 01:41:04
So the good news is we gave the positive recommendation to continue those. 01:41:12
So sorry that you've been hanging out all night for that. 01:41:17
Well, what's that? 01:41:22
Unless anybody else has anything else that needs to be covered, I think we have spent the evening well and would make a motion to 01:41:31
adjourn. All those in favour. Aye. Aye, Alright. Thank you very much. 01:41:36
Here it is, Dennis. 01:41:42
Planning Commissioner granted conditional use permit. 01:41:47
To make changes to landscape. 01:41:50
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.
OK. All right. 00:00:15
It is 6:02 PM on March 19th, 2024, the Holiday City Planning Commission. 00:00:17
Is missing 2 members. We have regrets from Commissioner Gong and Commissioner Prince. We do have city staff, John Terling, Carrie 00:00:25
Marsh and legal counsel. 00:00:30
Brad Christopherson with us and we have a total of seven items on the agenda this evening. We will be changing up the order of 00:00:36
that to start with items number four and five, which are the action items. 00:00:44
For extensions of final plat approval. 00:00:53
And then we will proceed with items 1-2 and three which there is a public hearing for, which is the accessory building footprint 00:00:56
size, a rezone from room to PO and then the text amendment for building height. 00:01:03
And then after, we will approve minutes and move into the discussion around the pending historic preservation ordinance. Before we 00:01:11
get into that, tonight there is an opening statement that we read before all our meetings and I have asked Commissioner Cunningham 00:01:17
if he'll go ahead and do that for us now. 00:01:23
The City of Holiday Planning Commission is a volunteer citizen board whose function is to review land use plans and other special 00:01:30
studies, make recommendations to the City Council on proposed zoning, map and ordinance changes. 00:01:36
And approved conditional uses in subdivisions. 00:01:43
The Planning Commission does not initiate land use applications, rather acts on applications as they are submitted. Commissioners 00:01:46
do not meet with applicants except in publicly noticed meetings. 00:01:52
Commissioners attempt to visit each property on the agenda where the location, the nature of the neighborhood, existing structures 00:01:58
and uses related to the proposed change are noted. 00:02:03
Decisions are based on observations, recommendations from the professional planning staff, the city's general plan, zoning 00:02:09
ordinances and other reports, by all verbal and written comments, and by evidence submitted, all of which are part of the public 00:02:14
record. 00:02:19
Thank you very much, Commissioner Cunningham. And with that we will start with item number four this evening, which is the Walker 00:02:25
Meadows Circle subdivision. 00:02:30
Extension of final plat approval. And Carrie, if you want to give us just a quick overview on that one, please? 00:02:36
Come all the way to the front for a 2 minute thing. All right, so this application is for or is our request to extend the 00:02:48
recording time period On a residential subdivision, it's Walker Meadows Circle subdivision on 5203 S Highland Dr. That's a 2 lot 00:02:57
subdivision. The subdivision currently is waiting for just corrections and comments from city staff before it's recorded. I. 00:03:06
So they should be able to meet their extension. 00:03:16
Within the next year, it's very reasonable. I'll have the applicant come up if you have any questions for them. OK. Thank you. 00:03:22
Do we have Darren Mansell or a representative here tonight? 00:03:28
Does not appear we have the applicant, but do any commissioners have any questions they would have had posed for the applicant? 00:03:34
I don't believe the applicant has to be here for approval, do they? 00:03:41
OK. Then in that case, Commissioners, any discussion about this extension? 00:03:46
All right. 00:03:53
Double check who? I even asked. 00:03:55
Leave the discussion. I can't remember on this one. Ginger, was this the one I asked you about? Or probably Carrie, who's not 00:03:57
here? Yeah, probably. I think it was Carrie on this one. But I'll go ahead and make a motion. Excellent. Thank you. 00:04:03
Commissioner Wilczynski motions to approve the extended to extend the recording date for the final plat for Walker Meadow Circle, 00:04:10
a residential Planned Unit development subdivision in the R110 zone located at 52. 00:04:17
03 S Highland Drive to one year from the prior approval date of November 15, 2024, finding that no significant changes have been 00:04:25
made to the Plat. 00:04:31
And reasonable circumstances for the extension have been presented. 00:04:37
Sorry, can we amend that so that the? 00:04:42
Date is November 15th of 2023. 00:04:46
So let's make that amendment that we are going to go ahead and extend it. 00:04:50
From the prior approval date of November 15th, 2023. 00:04:57
2022. 00:05:02
And we're going to extend it to November 15th of 2024, yes. 00:05:04
All right, we have an amended. 00:05:10
Motion. Do we have a second? 00:05:14
All right. We have it seconded. We'll call for a vote. Commissioner Barrett aye. Commissioner Font aye. Commissioner Cunningham 00:05:16
aye. Commissioner Wilczynski and chair Roach votes aye. 00:05:22
Got that done. All right. Thank you. And before we get into the next one, if you can correct us on any dates. 00:05:29
So we can make sure that motion is correct. 00:05:35
Yep, prior approval date on this one is going to be February 22nd of 20/23/2023. So whoever is making the motion ginger, I think 00:05:38
you might be on this one as well, so. 00:05:43
OK, got it. Thank you and. 00:05:49
If I'm not going to ask you to come back up, if you want to sit right there, if you can just give us the brief overview. Great. 00:05:53
Sounds good. This is a residential subdivision. 00:05:57
Request to extend the final Plat recording date for the Base 45 subdivision. 00:06:02
Located at 2180 E 4500 S in the Room zone. 00:06:09
This is an approved subdivision for 32 townhomes on 2.29 acres. 00:06:15
All the standards have been met and approved. Nothing has been changed in. 00:06:21
With what they're requesting and that can be that's one of the conditions noted is that no significant changes has been made to 00:06:27
the plan. 00:06:31
So with that I can have the applicant come up and if you have any questions on this one. 00:06:36
OK. And do we have the applicant, Luke Martino, here with us this evening or a representative? 00:06:41
All right. Looks like they had other plans where they were planning on being later in the docket. That's OK. 00:06:48
Commissioners, any discussion or thoughts on this one before a motion is made? 00:06:55
All right, and since Commissioner Prince is not here, I'll go ahead and make on her behalf. 00:07:00
Chair Roach would like to make a motion for approval to extend the recording date for the Final Plat for Base 45, a residential 00:07:06
Planned Unit development subdivision in the RM Zone located at 2180 E 4500 S, to one year from the prior approval date of February 00:07:13
22nd, 2023. Finding that no significant changes have been made to the Plat, reasonable circumstances for the extension have been 00:07:19
presented. 00:07:26
This Commissioner Barrett, all seconded. All right, we have motion and it's seconded. Commissioner Wilczynski, Commissioner 00:07:34
Cunningham, Commissioner Font, aye, Commissioner Baron aye. And chair Roach votes aye so. 00:07:40
Those two are taken care of. Moving right along. Thank you very much. 00:07:47
All right, and now for the fun stuff. We will get into the items requiring public hearing. The 1st is the conditional use permit 00:07:53
for the accessory building footprint size, and we will ask city staff to go ahead and come up and give us the. 00:08:00
Narrative on this. 00:08:08
OK, this is an application by applicant Colin McDonald located at 3931 S 2175 E in an R110 zone. 00:08:16
The applicant is requesting an accessory building that exceeds the permitted footprint size of 900 square feet. Total footprint 00:08:28
size of 1577 square feet. 00:08:34
That's an additional 677 square feet over the permitted accessory building footprint size. 00:08:41
The accessory building is compliant with setbacks and lot coverage standards. They're at their maximum allowed for lot coverage 00:08:48
with structures. 00:08:52
Their narrative explains a desire for. 00:08:58
Using the accessory structure as a mother-in-law apartment. 00:09:03
Sports court. 00:09:09
Garage. There's a few listed items in their narrative. 00:09:11
Our current Adu code doesn't allow ADUS on properties that are half an acre or smaller. 00:09:16
Our amended proposed code is under review currently by the OR will be heard by the City Council on Thursday. 00:09:25
If the applicant were to. 00:09:36
Use their accessory structure for an Adu. They would have to meet the requirements in order to rent it as an Edu. They can build 00:09:40
their accessory structure and use it for private use with. 00:09:47
Occupancy for family members. 00:09:55
And that would be allowed under code so. 00:09:59
Overall, what the Commission could would need to look at is. 00:10:03
Impacts on neighboring properties, considering those specific uses that the applicant has outlined, and possibly having conditions 00:10:10
that are related to the impacts of if that structure were used as dwelling space. If there's any additional conditions that the 00:10:16
Commission would like to see implemented. 00:10:23
I will have the applicant come up and they can discuss their application with you a little bit more and you can ask some 00:10:31
questions. Alright. Thank you very much. 00:10:34
Do we have Colin MacDonald or a representative here this evening? 00:10:40
Hi. Hi. So my intention is to primarily use this as a structure for my kids. We just moved here about seven months ago from 00:10:46
Arizona and winter is cold. 00:10:51
And so I'm sorry to cut you off. Just to clarify, are you calling McDonald's? Yes, that's me. OK. Just want to make sure we know 00:10:57
who you are and not someone else coming up and speaking on your behalf. Sorry, no problem. 00:11:02
And so I intend to build this structure primarily for the use of my five kids and their friends. 00:11:09
So they have things to do in the winter and also the summer. It will be used as recreational sports. 00:11:15
Inside the building I intend to do it exactly maximum. 00:11:21
That newly remodeled home that we just finished and siding in stone so it will match identical to the house. 00:11:26
As far as the height, the same 17 feet, so there's trees surrounding this that are. 00:11:32
3040 feet plus, so it's not going to be sticking out in any way. 00:11:39
It wouldn't even be visible from the front of my street. 00:11:45
It is for private use only. It will never be used for business. It will never be rented. It will never have any intentions of that 00:11:48
of any sort. 00:11:52
I will have gravel along the. 00:11:56
North side of the property to back some trailers in that I own. 00:11:59
But it's not going to be like a driveway for parking vehicles and stuff like that. 00:12:05
And so this doesn't have. This doesn't. What you're proposing isn't going to have a gravel, or any type of. 00:12:10
Path leading from the front of the property to gravel. Yes, just about 10 feet on the Northside. 00:12:16
Gravel. Back to it just so we don't sink trailers and mud and things like that, OK? 00:12:22
Commissioners, any questions for the applicant? 00:12:29
At this time, just Commissioner Font, this is not a. 00:12:33
A dwelling unit then this is not a someplace where you're going to rent out or no initially. 00:12:38
I would. I put that mother-in-law's casita in there, Yes. 00:12:47
But right now, it's not gonna be permitted for that. I don't intend to make an apartment out of it right now at all. That was just 00:12:51
in there for down the road. In case we need to take in my mother or my mother-in-law. We could convert a section of it to a little 00:12:56
apartment for one of them. 00:13:01
But it would never be rented out or an Adu or have it separate meter or anything like that. 00:13:07
Thank you. So to clarify on that, if the Planning Commission was to restrict use as that you would have no objections with it as 00:13:13
you've submitted at this time. No, no objection, OK. 00:13:19
All right, unless there's any other questions, we'll go ahead and have you sit down and might invite you back up. But first, we're 00:13:25
going to open this up for public comment. If there are people here that want to speak on this item today, we ask you to identify 00:13:30
yourself when you come to the podium, state your name, your address, and do try and keep your comments brief and not restate 00:13:35
anything if there's other. 00:13:40
People that have already made comment on this and with that we will open up the public comment for anyone to come up now. 00:13:47
Once, twice, all right. 00:13:55
Looks like we have. 00:13:57
My name is Brett Hardcastle. My property is directly West across the street. 00:14:02
From McDonald's and Kitty Corner to the North, what was your address please? 00:14:08
What was the house number? 00:14:14
3920 S 3920 Thank you. 00:14:16
Great. And I don't see any problems with this at all, matter of fact. 00:14:20
The whole remodel that he's been doing there. 00:14:25
Is very welcome as far as me as a property owner, I've been there 20 plus years actually. Before holiday was the city, so. 00:14:28
He's got my my approval. Thank you. Thank you very much for your comment. 00:14:36
All right. Any other public comment today? 00:14:43
Hello, thank you for your time. 00:14:52
My name is Jerry Williams, 3954 Alberly Way. 00:14:53
I've met the McDonald's here recently. 00:14:59
6-7 months ago, all I want to do is just say to. 00:15:02
You that they are nothing but. 00:15:07
An asset to our neighborhood. 00:15:10
Rarely has someone come in, an entire family come in and had such a positive. 00:15:13
Impact on our neighborhood? 00:15:20
They have and they are great neighbors. 00:15:22
We are pleased to have him in our neighborhood. Thank you. 00:15:25
OK. Thank you. 00:15:28
My name is Gary Jones. I live at 3939 S 2175 E I'm directly South of the McDonald's home. 00:15:38
And I've been there 40 some odd years at going to reiterate what they just said. That has been a plus. 00:15:46
To our neighborhood and what they're doing is a great improvement. 00:15:54
And I don't see any reason of. 00:15:58
Structure of looking at the mountains and stuff. The way it's acted, like you said, there's. 00:16:01
3540 foot trees all around his whole property because mine is surrounded by him too so. 00:16:06
I'm for whatever he would like to do. 00:16:12
OK. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. 00:16:14
All right. Any other public up? One more. All right. 00:16:19
My name is Jeff Lund. 00:16:25
And I'm at 3916 S Fairmores. 00:16:27
And I am. 00:16:31
On the east side of this property I back. 00:16:33
Just about 10 feet on the east side. 00:16:36
Backyard neighbors. 00:16:39
And I do have a couple of questions on this. One for the. 00:16:40
For the group here on the application, I saw 2000 square feet. 00:16:44
And then I heard 1500 square feet. I'm not sure exactly the number we're looking at on this. 00:16:50
Do you want me to address? Yeah, we'll go ahead and defer to city staff on that. If they want to just clarify the number, Sure. So 00:16:56
the applicant originally applied for a 2000 square foot footprint, reviewing his application and how big his current house is. 00:17:04
A 2000 square foot structure would not be compliant with code. Code states that structures can only cover 28% of the size of 00:17:14
property. So calculating what his current structure. 00:17:20
Covers that then created the 1577 leftover of how much allowance he has of that 28%. 00:17:28
OK. And then the other question is if this were, if this were attached to the House, would we have to have a hearing on that or is 00:17:36
it because it's detached, we have the hearing on it? 00:17:40
It's because it's detached. OK. 00:17:46
And then the other one in walking the neighborhood. 00:17:49
The other structures in this neighborhood are about 500 to 600 square feet. 00:17:52
There one car or two car Det. 00:17:57
Detached buildings and so this is very different than the other ones. 00:18:01
Not opposed to it in regards to that, we're hearing that it's not going to be an Adu or that would require additional. 00:18:06
Additional. 00:18:14
Approval I guess or something like that, but it is very different than the others in the neighborhood. 00:18:15
But that's thank you for clarifying that point. 00:18:22
OK. Thank you. 00:18:25
All right. 00:18:28
Excuse me? 00:18:40
My name is Roger Dean. 00:18:41
I live at 3956. 00:18:44
South Fairmont Drive. 00:18:46
And by property. 00:18:49
Doesn't quite touch this, but. 00:18:51
Very close. 00:18:55
And I was just. 00:18:57
Wondering there's an irrigation ditch. 00:18:58
On the east side. 00:19:02
Of this property. 00:19:04
And I just want to make sure that. 00:19:05
This construction will not. 00:19:08
Interfere with that irrigation ditch. 00:19:12
And so. 00:19:16
That we would always have. 00:19:18
Access to. 00:19:21
Service the irrigation ditch. 00:19:24
Cleaning that up then. 00:19:27
To prevent flooding. 00:19:29
In the neighborhood. 00:19:32
OK. Thank you. We can definitely find that out. Thank you. 00:19:35
I can respond to that too. 00:19:40
When we're reviewing building permits, we review locations to that do have irrigation laterals that are on the property and. 00:19:43
Applicants for permits are required to have a waterway protection agreement that's signed by the irrigation management company or 00:19:54
the the ditch manager. 00:20:00
And does that also address the? 00:20:07
Commenters concern about access for. 00:20:10
Keeping it working, yes. So all of our all of the irrigation canals ditches have utility easements on them for maintenance. 00:20:14
Thank you very much for clarifying that. Can I ask a question? It looks like on the map there is a small strip just north of this 00:20:24
property. Is that considered the irrigation property? 00:20:29
Well, I realize that. I'm just saying north of this looks like the irrigation is that. 00:20:38
I'd have to look at the at the canal map, but I believe so that could be just a outright ownership by the. 00:20:43
No property. I don't have someone raising their hand. Is that your property? 00:20:51
No, but I understand. 00:20:55
See that little strip where arrow just went right down there? 00:21:01
Irrigation. 00:21:08
So a safe assumption that it would be something related to the easement on that looking at the map, is that? Yeah, OK. OK. Thank 00:21:15
you. 00:21:18
All right. Any other public comment on this Tonight We have one more come on up. 00:21:23
All right. 00:21:30
State your name and address first, please. 00:21:35
My name is Ashley Smith. 00:21:37
And I own the property, 3926 S Farrah Mores Drive. 00:21:40
Thank you and. 00:21:48
Are you? What? What questions can we? I'm not sure if you'll be able to answer them or if Colin can answer them. 00:21:49
We'll invite you to address the Commission and then we'll give Colin a chance to come up and address any unanswered questions. 00:21:57
Yeah, I was just curious. 00:22:01
If the structure was going to be built running east West or north-south. 00:22:05
Not sure do we have city? 00:22:13
We have that. So those kind of decisions are done when we get the building plans for the building permit right so. 00:22:17
I don't know if we have the answer to that and I don't know if. 00:22:25
Right, but the site plan is. 00:22:31
Could not be built. The discipline that you have can't be built because it's a 2000 square foot one. 00:22:33
So we're just looking at the footprint size. The conditional use permit is just looking at how big the the footprint of the 00:22:38
building is. 00:22:43
Details of of that building are largely non regulated. 00:22:49
The Planning Commission can institute various conditions like landscaping on outside edges or other details to mitigate potential 00:22:55
impacts from that footprint. Size I. 00:23:02
That's what they're looking at is just the overall footprint size. 00:23:11
And for clarification, the site plan is flipped from. 00:23:17
What we've been looking at in the aerials, so just so people aren't thinking, they're putting the garage in the front yard. 00:23:20
OK. Any other comment? No. OK, thank you very much. 00:23:31
All right. And did we have any other? 00:23:36
Comments at this time for this. 00:23:38
All right. And with that, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. And if we want to go ahead and invite Colin to come back up 00:23:41
and just address any questions that may have come up from comments from neighbors. 00:23:46
Remind me the questions. Again, I think it sounded like pretty much we've addressed most of them, but if you just want to touch 00:23:56
base on any comments that you heard tonight, you don't have to say anything you can say I feel good about things and we can just 00:24:00
move forward. The irrigation ditch, I should have put it in the my descriptions, but I do have every intention of putting that in 00:24:05
a pipe. 00:24:09
So Gary, the neighbor to the north of me, already did his. It's already in a pipe. And so I own an excavator. I have the equipment 00:24:14
and. 00:24:18
Going to pull a permit with the water company when we when we're ready to this summer. 00:24:23
And and put that. 00:24:27
Irrigation ditch in a pipe, so therefore it's not going to. 00:24:29
Affect the irrigation at all like it will still run. It will still operate as it should. 00:24:33
So I think that's. 00:24:40
Settles that one. 00:24:41
And then the building on there is 40 by 50. 00:24:42
It'll most likely be 40 by 30, maybe 40 by 35, something like that, but it will be definitely in that back corner. 00:24:46
Up against the northeast corner of the law, so. 00:24:55
And that's where the big trees all surrounded pretty much on both sides. 00:24:59
Excellent and. 00:25:05
Just as a as a arborist, I'll just make one recommendation is that if you do have a lot of root zone that flows into where you're 00:25:07
looking to build as much mitigation as you can to the roots so that those trees continue to be big trees around your structure in 00:25:13
the future. But sounds like you've you've got a landscape plan and working through those things. So that's great. 00:25:19
Commissioners, any other questions for the applicant at this time? 00:25:26
Commissioner Barrett, I'm just looking at the site planner, the aerial. Are there other buildings in the back? 00:25:29
Are they being removed or there's a couple of little old sheds that are already have fallen down so they'll be gone. Thank you. 00:25:36
Any other questions? 00:25:45
All right. We'll go ahead and have you sit down. Thank you very much. And with that, I've asked Commissioner Barron if he would 00:25:47
just kind of help lead and facilitate the discussion on this one for us. Well, we were kind of going through that when we 00:25:51
originally started the discussion, I think. 00:25:55
Staff has answered my questions. There is some mention in the conditional use permit for access and compatibility to the. 00:26:01
Neighborhood and character of the neighborhood. 00:26:09
We realize there isn't anything specifically written that can be identified in that. 00:26:14
I don't know. 00:26:20
Analysis or how you'd make that? 00:26:22
A reality in this but. 00:26:26
So I thought. 00:26:29
Everything looks good in this, I just I'm curious if. 00:26:31
If we approve or if the Council approves the new text. 00:26:35
Does this meet that it looks like? 00:26:40
The five foot on the north side or South side, excuse me? 00:26:43
On the site plan would probably be a problem. 00:26:46
Yeah, and that's. 00:26:50
So they'll be moving the they could move that further if they wanted to increase the site set back but as is, it's compliant with 00:26:52
with the setbacks. 00:26:56
If there, you could make a condition that if they're. 00:27:03
If they have living space on that side of the building that they add some additional screening. 00:27:07
So the site plan that's been submitted is not. 00:27:12
We if we approve this. 00:27:16
That's set in concrete or I mean or can there be flexibility in? 00:27:18
So the only thing you're approving tonight is the size of the building, not the location of it or anything like that. So he would 00:27:24
have to come back with a building permit if there is living space. 00:27:29
Assuming council at the City Council approves the Adu text amendments that you guys reviewed a couple weeks ago? 00:27:35
In order to you'd have to comply with that to make it to have living space within it and call it an Adu and rent it out. 00:27:42
So that may change the location of it if he wants to comply with that, but that would all be dealt with. 00:27:49
When the building permit application comes in. 00:27:54
OK. Thank you. 00:27:56
And as he presented tonight, there's no intention of making it a Casita at this time. 00:27:59
So, OK, appreciate the clarification on that. 00:28:03
All right, Commissioners, any. 00:28:07
Other questions? 00:28:09
Comments. 00:28:12
Well, at this point then, if there's no other discussion, I think we might be at a point where we're ready to make a motion. 00:28:15
Commissioner Baron, are you prepared on that? This is Commissioner. Real quick. Can you close the public hearing? I thought I did. 00:28:20
I apologize if I did not say I closed the meeting. It's closed. I wasn't sure. Either I missed it or Brad missed me. One or the 00:28:24
other. I apologize, but it's definitely closed now. 00:28:29
Just one question. I'm sorry, I know it's only been 30 minutes, but I've already forgotten everything. So was this the one you 00:28:36
wanted to put on hold or? 00:28:40
We discussed that briefly, but if it's not, if the owner doesn't intend for it to be an Adu, then it doesn't. 00:28:45
Online with that with what our new codes being proposed is. 00:28:54
Again, thank you for I'm the slow one at the end of this. So this is Commissioner Barrett. I move that the Holiday Planning 00:28:59
Commission approved the application for a detached accessory garage sized at 15177 square feet. 00:29:07
Located at 3931 S, 2175 E. 00:29:15
Based upon the findings that the desired structures footprint does not exceed the total allowed structure coverage on the parcel 00:29:20
and is within the setbacks required for an accessory building. 00:29:25
Number Two staff has not received any objections or concerns written or verbally expressed to date requesting or respecting the 00:29:31
Conditional Use Permit request. 00:29:37
Contingent upon the applicants compliance with the following conditions. 00:29:45
The property excuse me this, the project is subject to height, set back and lot coverage. 00:29:49
Regulations for their property size #2 The owner applicant shall obtain a building permit for the proposed detached garage 00:29:55
addition addition. 00:29:59
#3 The owner applicant shall not. 00:30:04
Establish or use the structure as a commercial entity. 00:30:07
The number four the. 00:30:11
Owner applicant is. 00:30:14
Will be compliant with impervious lot coverage standards when adding a driveway to the access. 00:30:16
To access the detached structure #5, the owner applicant is to replace all trees removed by the placement of the accessory 00:30:23
building and any other hard impervious services added. 00:30:29
And I don't know if there was anything else that the Commission may have. 00:30:35
So all right, we have a. 00:30:39
Motion that has been made. Do we have a second? 00:30:43
Commissioner Font, I'll second. 00:30:48
All right. And with that we will call for a vote. Commissioner Vilchinsky, aye. Commissioner Cunningham aye. Commissioner Flaunt 00:30:50
aye. Commissioner Barron, aye. And chair Roach votes aye. 00:30:55
So you and the. 00:31:01
McDonald Fan Club can enjoy what's about to transplant, thank you very much. 00:31:06
And with that, we will give just a brief pause. If there's anyone that did not want to hang out and listen to the Planning 00:31:13
Commission all evening and did not want to sit through that, you're welcome to exit real quick now so we can move on to the next 00:31:17
agenda item. Thank you. 00:31:21
All right. 00:31:33
And then moving on, our next item that we have on here is the zone map amendment. This is the rezone from RM to PO. 00:31:35
And with that, we will ask city staff if they would be kind enough to give us. 00:31:44
A narrative on this? 00:31:48
Thank you, Chairman Roche, this property is. 00:31:56
Requesting A rezone from the RM Zone to the PO Zone that's located at 6375 S Highland Drive. 00:32:02