Live stream not working in Chrome or Edge? Click Here
No Bookmarks Exist.
Transcript
Irrigation pipes that, yeah, east and West along there. And they've all been busted into at different points too. So like, I have 00:00:00
a hike that runs from my backyard into that canal and it's seven houses away, but I've got my hound up that's constantly wagging 00:00:06
his tail and sticking his nose down in that pipe because he's waiting for a rat or a squirrel or something. Or. 00:00:13
Well, it forced everybody into the time nobody was bringing It is time. All right. Good evening, everyone. It's a good thing to 00:00:21
have, OK? 00:00:25
We'll get started here. It is April 16, 2024. This is the City Planning Commission work session. We have one item that is a public 00:00:31
hearing item and then approval of minutes. So I'm sure we're going to need the whole half hour to talk specifically about this 00:00:38
zone map amendment and all the subtle nuances before we get to what I'm sure will be a well attended public hearing. So with that 00:00:45
we will ask Carrie to start us off. 00:00:52
OK, so. 00:01:01
I think the easiest thing on this one is looking at the context here, right? This property is a long deep I. 00:01:04
Fronts on 5600 S 2, family zoning on the east side, single family on the West side. Both of these properties on the West side are 00:01:13
duplexes, both are on the east side are duplexes. So it's totally surrounded by duplexes. It's just that these two on the West are 00:01:21
non conforming to the zone, so they are duplexes. 00:01:30
But non conforming. And I just if you'll back up to that map, I just want to clarify to make sure I'm looking at it right on the 00:01:39
east side of it, that is a duplex facing 56 and then another duplex that's part of the PUD subdivision facing inside, right. 00:01:45
Right. OK, yeah. Thank you. 00:01:51
Yeah. 00:01:58
And. 00:02:01
So the list of kind of all those neighboring properties is included in the staff report. 00:02:06
And then an analysis of the general plan, I think the biggest issue on this is that this whole area is identified as on the future 00:02:13
land use map as low density residential stable. 00:02:19
I was just going to bring up this existing Blandius. So sometimes we have land uses that are not necessarily consistent with what 00:02:28
zone or the future land use map is. So here you have that area. This is existing land uses where you can see the sorry super zoom 00:02:35
in here. 00:02:42
Too much? 00:02:50
There it is here. So this is the assisted living. That's multifamily obviously as they have high density there. This is 2 family. 00:02:55
These are duplexes. This is the property in question. And then those are both duplexes. 00:03:03
So the duplex on the West that's shown in like a shady yellow, but that's not an R2, right? 00:03:11
Right, those are both. 00:03:20
Our one zoned, but the they are both used as duplexes so they're both legal non conforming. I think that this one that's right on 00:03:24
the corner wasn't captured in that existing Gladys, but it is a. 00:03:30
Legal non conforming duplex. I can zoom back out and we can go to the future land use map and it's legal nonconforming because it 00:03:38
was there before this zoning stuff. Yeah, OK. 00:03:43
So we have quite a few properties in Holiday that were zoned as duplexes under Salt Lake County and then when they were 00:03:49
incorporated into Holiday, we just did larger kind of area wide zoning instead of property specific zoning. 00:03:57
So you'll usually run into pockets where there's two or three duplexes that are all together. I know offhand there's another set 00:04:04
of duplexes on 27th East as somewhat by Granados, not Granados Block Party. 00:04:13
So kind of across the street on the east side of 27th East. There's a few duplexes there. There's own single family, but they are 00:04:23
legal non conforming. So there's things like that all over in the city. Here is the. 00:04:31
Future land use. So this is kind of what the general plan refers to on this. Adjusted zones, so. 00:04:40
In that specific area that we are looking at before. 00:04:48
That whole corner is low density, residential stable. The exception is on the Highland Drive. 00:04:53
Where we refer back to the Highland Dr. Master plan for properties along Highland Drive. But this pocket where the. 00:05:01
Assisted living is identified as low density residential stable and then this corner where we're kind of looking at is low density 00:05:10
residential stable. 00:05:14
I may be a little slow is stable, meaning rickery or like horses or just the neighborhood stable. The neighborhood doesn't change 00:05:20
ever. Yes, and that's the what that is defined as here intended to support a mix of single family residential development that has 00:05:28
been established by historic development patterns. So then it has suggested zones in there, OK. 00:05:37
Thank you. Yeah, I like the language. At the end of that, on the LDRS rezone with the suggested zone list may be appropriate where 00:05:46
increased density will not destabilize the existing neighborhood. 00:05:53
So just to clarify on that, I didn't catch that the first time I looked at it, but the general plan does say the zone suggested in 00:06:01
there R18R10 or R110 and R115. And I think that's kind of the challenge with any sort of infill or a built out community. You've 00:06:09
got these outliers that are not like everything's not going to perfectly fit and that's where in the staff report there's I 00:06:16
discussed a bit about context of the area. 00:06:23
I'm also going to pull up the arterial the roadway before you switch to that if you would. I just wanted to see because the R2 is 00:06:33
listed as medium, RT, whatever MDRT. Can you show me just back up on the map where most of those MDRT zones exist? Or are there 00:06:39
any here? 00:06:44
So just here and here, the corridors basically is the. 00:06:52
OK. All right. Thank you. Can I ask a question about that also? Well, about the paragraphs you were showing before we move on, 00:06:59
there was language in it. I thought it just clarified this where it says new develop in. 00:07:06
Low density residential. 00:07:15
Protected, it said. 00:07:19
Use unclaimed density by subdivision instead of rezones, but this is stable. 00:07:23
Umm, so rezoning is more usual, more appropriate. Can you, can you just talk a little bit about what that means? Yeah, it doesn't 00:07:29
have that specific designation. And these, when I was talking to John Tierling about these, how these were set up in the general 00:07:39
plan, he said it was some of our future land use was really designed with the intent to identify these larger protected areas. 00:07:49
Within the estates and surrounding and then everything else kind of outside of that just was like, OK, these are stable areas. It 00:08:00
didn't really take into account a lot of corridors beyond Highland Drive and these obvious ones on 23rd, 45th and 39th. 00:08:10
As far as those corridors are concerned, is that the first property on the corridor that's included in that or? 00:08:22
Is there a depth of how much? 00:08:30
It's not, yeah. It doesn't designate specifically on those. 00:08:32
But the the line was just created with basic mapping of here's the road and here's this specific area we're going to draw around 00:08:43
the road. But it doesn't identify any specific roads or that it has to be fronting onto a major road or any other such thing. This 00:08:51
is a major Rd. So that's properties that are in kind of close proximity to that road would be considered. 00:08:58
Would be probably a safe assumption two or three lots in, you know is is kind of touching the road and then from there you're 00:09:08
really throwing up the question mark of does this fit with that? Yeah and the I am challenged with. 00:09:14
I think all of these main corridors are primarily U dot roads. 45th is. Highland Drive is. I don't think 23rd or 39th. Are you not 00:09:22
well, 39th maybe? 00:09:28
I remember another zone amendment we had before us that did not get a favorable recommendation about a year and a half ago that 00:09:35
was on the other side of Highland, right across from that area. 00:09:40
Yeah. On the East side where there's that home for sale with the fence around it and someone wanted to put like 4 units in on that 00:09:47
property or something like that. 00:09:51
Or on Highland Drive that was well it was where what is the road? Pheasant way. Not pheasant circle, but pheasant way connects to 00:09:58
Highland. I believe it faces pheasant way but it's right on the corner. 00:10:05
Of Highland, yeah. And those are, we were talking a little bit before the meeting about updates of the general plan. Some of those 00:10:13
things might be refined in the future as we work through general plan updates as what And that's things that we're thinking about 00:10:21
as staff as well. You know what our neighborhoods, what are areas that maybe we want to refine a little bit so that we don't have. 00:10:29
Do we want to keep 5600 S as a? That's a collector Rd. 00:10:38
As a stable with single family or that an area we want to look at, possibly some other. 00:10:44
Zones that would be appropriate, but. 00:10:51
I think. 00:10:55
Within the and. 00:10:58
It's kind of that just that Contextual called it. Yes, these are suggested zones. 00:11:01
You could suggest a rezone within those, or there's other points in the general plan that you can base a rezone recommendation off 00:11:06
of. So there's multiple kind of angles. Sometimes it doesn't. One application won't fit every checklist, but it may fit some of 00:11:14
the checklist, so as the Planning Commission you'll just. 00:11:21
That is what you get to decide. Call that logistical ambiguity when I walk by there. 00:11:29
It looks like there's a home on the front. 00:11:37
And I think somewhere I said two accessory buildings. 00:11:40
At the back. 00:11:43
But there's clearly a big house back there, another house. It was. I know, the former owner of the property. He did a he had a 00:11:46
music studio back. There he was. 00:11:52
A piano teacher for many many years and that was his studio where he would have people come and like one of those home occupation 00:12:00
type things that he worked out. It was basically a garage converted into studio, which is a rather large one. 00:12:07
But you know, I think he had like a baby grand in there, if I'm not mistaken, or big grand. So yeah. 00:12:14
And I mean, it looked it looked to me like it was occupied and being used as a house. 00:12:20
We don't have as a rental. Any indication of that, Yeah, but I but in any case, so I'm assuming what what is he trying to 00:12:25
accomplish that he couldn't accomplish? 00:12:30
With the zoning not changed. 00:12:37
Does he have a plan? I know he doesn't have to tell us about a plan, but right and I think on a larger scale picture, what R2 does 00:12:39
accomplish is provide. 00:12:45
Potential ownership opportunities in the future if the current landowner doesn't want to create ownership. 00:12:51
They don't have to, but just having that zoning in place then creates the. 00:12:59
Ability for that to be subdivided up where you get something like this. I mean any duplex could be subdivided into two separate 00:13:07
owners. 00:13:11
Umm, so intent could be just converting the accessory building into a unit. 00:13:15
Being able to rent out both the houses in the front and the rear unit. 00:13:22
Other potentials that you demolish both structures and. 00:13:28
And build something new up to 3 units. And Dennis, I didn't get a chance to look at the. 00:13:34
Total area, but we can pull that up too of what? So when? 00:13:41
When you're doing a. 00:13:47
Unit assessment of how many units would be allowed on a property. You have to take out the access Rd. 00:13:49
Or the access driveway, so that would be a minimum of 20 feet wide and then whatever the depth of the property is or how far back 00:13:55
that. 00:14:00
Roadway would go so roughly. 00:14:05
And I think you did kind of do just some brief math on it and figured that there could be enough room to make 3. 00:14:12
And that would possibly be like 2 that are attached. In this situation, if they wanted to leave the existing structure, they could 00:14:19
split the front house into a attached unit, have an Upstairs Downstairs that's rentable and convert the back building into a 00:14:25
rental unit. So it's. 00:14:32
Depending on the area of land as controls, how many units that they'd be able to put on that. 00:14:38
So this property is too small to be subdivided, right? Right. OK. 00:14:44
Yeah, because it's only .44, right? 00:14:49
And same thing, you'd have to take out the access, which then limits your land area even more for both. 00:14:53
And just to clarify, if it was an R18, they could subdivide, yes, and there would be enough area likely to take out a roadway. 00:15:01
Have they indicated what they want to do with the property after if it does get approved? I haven't had any conversation with the 00:15:12
applicant about their intent I. 00:15:17
I mean because a lot of the language suggests that the future development of the site. 00:15:23
We're supposed to kind of hope and pray that they're going to do something that's going to create a harmonious development, but. 00:15:30
They haven't even told you what's going to happen, so how do we use that as part of our? 00:15:37
Decision making. I think on that point, no, there isn't a way to. 00:15:42
Say yes, you'll create something that's harmonious, but. 00:15:51
Looking at. 00:15:56
The properties on either side of it where you have two here, 2 here. 00:15:59
In roughly the same size of area and they'd be limited to at Max 3 units if they have enough land area after taking out access. 00:16:04
It's pretty similar to what all the neighbouring properties are. 00:16:15
Even, less, less dense. 00:16:20
Right. It seems like we're giving him the right to have more than the surrounding people on his argument that he's surrounded with 00:16:27
lots with two homes on them. So with the size of property, if you look at this one, this has two on it. This has 2 units on it. So 00:16:34
same area of land has four units. 00:16:40
Same here, nearly the same area of land has four units. His area of land would be limited to 3 units, so he would be even with the 00:16:48
R210 zoning, he would not have the same density as. 00:16:55
And then having zero setbacks on top of it, right, if it were rezoned. 00:17:37
Right. And I think that's one we've talked to them before. This is where we encourage people talk to kind of that neighboring PUD 00:17:43
and see if you can be incorporated. And most people don't really want to have additional units, even though it would likely create 00:17:50
a more harmonious kind of look to their existing neighborhood. They don't want to have the additional units in there. 00:17:58
Yeah. So then you get kind of. 00:18:07
Weird. Maybe not matching, maybe it won't be weird there. I mean, there's not any guarantee the PUD has some some controls there, 00:18:10
but if you were in that PUD, it would likely be in your best interest to say yes, come join our PUD and then we have some controls 00:18:16
over what gets built there. 00:18:23
So can we approve the rezone with the condition that only two units will be built on it? That would not. You can't. You can't 00:18:30
limit legal land rights, so R2 zoning comes with two units per whatever area of land. 00:18:39
And we also couldn't put any future restrictions on an application for a PUD, right? You can't, you can't limit what is within the 00:18:51
zoning code specific to an application. So if the fear of what you don't want them to do is overshadowed by, you know, a 00:18:57
narrative, that doesn't sound like it's really been given of here's what my plan is and why I'm doing this. And forgive me for 00:19:04
being a little bit bold, but it really just seems to me like this is a dollar sign thing, right? Like this is a $650,000 lot that 00:19:10
if I subdivide it three ways. 00:19:16
I can turn around and sell for $900,000 because it's still marketable to a developer to go in and scrape that clean and do 00:19:23
whatever they want on it. So then the possibility exists if we approve the rezone that we could end up with. 00:19:30
Two homes and two Adus. 00:19:37
I don't know if they'd have enough room for 280 us on it, so our proposed language for Adu text with external Adus would be that 00:19:41
you can only do an external Adu if you have a detached structure. So if they were to build 3 detached structures, they could do 3 00:19:48
detached Adus possibly. 00:19:55
But they don't have enough land to reason. But they do have enough land. Like there's other factors that control that, Yeah. 00:20:04
Like they'd be lucky if they can. Like it would be a challenge to fit 3IN there, but it could legally be done with an R28 zone. 00:20:10
You're also going to have some limits with the lot size. So those puds, they have smaller setbacks, other things that were 00:20:18
incorporated into their PUD. So R210 zoning would have setbacks that are appropriate for that zone. So that's going to limit 00:20:26
building area as well. Even with an R2 zone, they might say, you know, there's not enough land that we want to do small lots. We 00:20:34
just want to do 2 units so that there's two bigger structures on there with bigger land size. 00:20:41
Can I ask a procedural question? Yes. So on the standards of approval or approval standards? 00:20:51
It's the second item down in the staff report. 00:20:58
You see that? 00:21:04
1307030 G 2. 00:21:05
Move standards of consideration for or against. 00:21:10
On the first page. 00:21:15
So I'm just wondering, do they have to meet all four of those? 00:21:17
In order for us to consider approval. 00:21:22
Umm, no. You can make your recommendation to the City Council and note. 00:21:25
Those things. So you could do a positive or negative recommendation, noting whatever factors that that you want to include in that 00:21:31
recommendation. So there's because. 00:21:37
Since City Council is the deciding body, they're looking at those standards. It helps them if you have those standards that you 00:21:44
were then including in your recommendation. 00:21:50
So those could be the findings I guess at some point, but. 00:21:56
So I'm curious why they list it like this and don't tell you how many you have to satisfy in order to. 00:22:00
So I guess never mind. 00:22:07
And following up on the general plan, the analysis, I think it's the next page. 00:22:10
Where it says land use, urban design and neighborhood preservation, Chapter 2 it starts to get into defining points of 00:22:17
development, development patterns and that type of thing. 00:22:23
Do we use this or do we have to have them satisfy all of these? 00:22:30
For us to vote, I'm trying to make it so it loses, it becomes a little more black and white, so if that's OK. 00:22:35
I'm not trying to say it's going to be easier to make the decision, but. 00:22:43
You know, we're already having some difficulty with the fact that this is surrounded by these type of units, and yet we don't 00:22:47
really. 00:22:51
It's still a struggle to make that happen, so of these defining. 00:22:56
Characteristics or different references, points of consideration, that type of thing. 00:23:01
Do we have, do we need to use all of those in our consideration? So yeah, their point. There are points from the General Plan. The 00:23:08
General Plan is a guiding document. You can use various points from it in your recommendation where it's not. 00:23:17
Coated items that are like these are the specific standards and it has to meet all of these or it has to meet at least X or Y. 00:23:28
Your recommendation can be based on kind of. 00:23:34
Any of these factors, so you could say positive, right. I think we came to a conclusion even on one application where we did a 00:23:41
neutral application based or neutral recommendation based on the vote. 00:23:46
Umm, but. 00:23:53
Whatever way your recommendation goes, just referencing what points. 00:23:56
Would be a positive influence. What would be negative because all of that information will go to the City Council. 00:24:03
That help or make any sense? Or did I just muddy up the water? 00:25:18
OK. Can I ask one more question? I know we'll switch. 00:25:24
I know that several of the letters were concerned about upkeep rats, sort of just the the upkeep of the lot and and a few section 00:25:29
of the staff report made it sound like. 00:25:36
You know, there's also the canal, so it's hard to it's hard to connect the dots one for one on. 00:25:44
On the rest, but do we does that figure into our decision at all? Is this, is that something that the Planning Commission needs to 00:25:51
consider even can? Yeah. The condition of the property is not something that is taken into consideration for rezones and you may 00:25:58
have a property that is in terrible shape that somebody comes in and purchases and needs to rezone to. I think we ran into 00:26:06
something similar with the Old Roots Garden. 00:26:13
Nursery area, like the building is abandoned the most applicable. 00:26:21
Zone is a higher zone than what it was zoned. So even though the property was in poor repair rundown, that didn't affect the 00:26:27
rezone proposal. 00:26:31
Thank you. 00:26:37
So we got a lot of solid discussion points that are going to be great as we iron out after we hear from the applicant in the 00:26:38
official meeting. And then the only other thing on there is approval of minutes. So hopefully we'll had a chance to check on that 00:26:44
and we'll call that one when it comes. But with that it is 6:00 PM, So we will go ahead and close the work meeting and. 00:26:51
I he's actually going to be excused for this meeting, so I'll call that out when we get started with the official. But does anyone 00:27:00
need a break before we roll right into the official meeting? I just don't want to run amok, you know? 00:27:05
Keeping us in check. 00:27:13
All right, perfect. So just let me know when you're ready, Carrie. 00:27:17
OK, let me double check all my recordings, see if we're still doing. 00:27:22
All right. Here we go then. So with that, good evening, everyone. Welcome to the Holiday City Planning Commission on April 16, 00:27:30
2024. 00:27:34
We have several. Well, we have a couple items on our agenda this evening. 00:27:39
Do want to call out that we do not have legal counsel here this evening. 00:27:44
So we will be on our best behavior and refer any of those contingent questions up to City Council with the recommendation we make 00:27:50
one way or another on any items. And we're also excusing Commissioner Prince, who will not be joining us. All other commissioners 00:27:58
are present and we have city staff Carrie Marsh with us. And with that we will start the meeting with the statement we give at the 00:28:05
beginning of all public meetings and for Planning Commission. And I've asked Commissioner Font if she will read that now for us. 00:28:13
The City of Holiday Planning Commission is a volunteer citizen board whose function is to review land use plans and other special 00:28:23
studies, make recommendations to the City Council on proposed zoning map and ordinance changes, and approve conditional uses and 00:28:30
subdivisions. The Planning Commission does not initiate land use applications, rather acts on applications as they are submitted. 00:28:38
Commissioners do not meet with applicants except at public, publicly noticed meetings. 00:28:46
Commissioners attempt to visit each property on the agenda where the location, the nature of the neighborhood, existing structures 00:28:54
and uses related to the proposed change are noted. 00:29:00
Decisions are based on observations, recommendations from the professional planning staff, the city's general plan, zoning 00:29:06
ordinance and other reports, by all verbal and written comments, and by evidence submitted, all of which are part of the public 00:29:12
record. 00:29:18
Thank you very much, Commissioner Font. 00:29:24
All right. And with that, we have a public hearing this evening for item number one, which is a zone amendment, excuse me, zone 00:29:27
map amendment rezone from R110 to R210 located at 1932 E 5600 S So I do see we have some members of the public here this evening. 00:29:35
We'll start with a staff report from Kerry Marsh and then we'll invite the applicant up and then we will open up the public 00:29:43
hearing for comment at that point. And with that, Carrie, whenever you're ready. 00:29:50
Thank you, Chairman Roch. 00:30:09
So this application is for property located at 1932 E 5600 S Current zone is R110. The requested zone map amendment is to R210 00:30:11
zone. 00:30:18
The property is narrow and deep. It fronts on 5600 S. 00:30:27
Surrounded by duplexes, both legal duplexes and legal non conforming to a single family zone. Duplexes on the West side across the 00:30:35
street is a multi family zone with an assisted living care facility on it. 00:30:42
The staff report outlines general plan. 00:30:53
With suggested zones as identified on the future land use map. 00:30:58
And then an analysis of other factors for rezones. 00:31:04
The property if rezoned to R210 potentially could allow up to 3 units based off of the total property size. If a access driveway 00:31:11
is then taken out of that total area, that could reduce the total amount of of units to to allowed on the property. 00:31:21
And I think that was all the high points on that. I'll have the applicant come up and just talk a little bit more about their 00:31:33
application and what they're envisioning. All right, Thank you very much. And with that, we will invite the applicant, Matthew or 00:31:40
Amanda Lewis, to come up. 00:31:46
Or representative. Thank you. I'm Matthew Lewis. So. 00:31:53
Appreciate you taking the time. Just to give you a little bit in considering the application. 00:31:59
This is a family home that my parents purchased in 1991 or 19. 00:32:06
Two, I think you have the kind of picture up before And so it's a fairly big piece of property and kind of what's unique about 00:32:11
it's got this second structure in the back. 00:32:16
Before my parents bought it, I think it was a actually like a a lock manufacturing facility and then my dad. 00:32:24
Was piano teacher. He converted to a piano studio and used it in that manner for 30 years or so. He passed away in 2019, didn't 00:32:33
use it for a few years. My sister went back and approached the city about whether we she could reopen the studio and use it in 00:32:41
that way and was told that she couldn't like that because he was. He had been grandfathered in, but because there have been a 00:32:48
period of unuse, it was no longer zoned for any kind of, like business activity. So we basically have this structure in the back. 00:32:56
That is in a lot of ways unusable because it's big enough. It's bigger than you would kind of use for a home. 00:33:04
Office, It's probably 1500 square feet or so with the different. 00:33:12
Additions that have been done but. 00:33:17
Can't really like, use that building. So anyway, that led us to and inquiring as to whether we could rezone the property. 00:33:19
Obviously everything around. 00:33:24
Our property, with the exception of the house just to the West. 00:33:30
Is either zoned R210 or being used in that manner where it has a duplex. 00:33:35
Or two units on there, so and it's not big enough that you could just subdivide it as is. 00:33:42
Because it's just under 20,000 square feet, so you couldn't do another R110 lot I. 00:33:49
So anyway, in conversations with C, just trying to figure out how to effectively use that space back there. 00:33:57
That was the option. We haven't really looked into what we would do with the property, to be honest. We were told that. 00:34:04
We asked. You know, we said we'd probably want to subdivide. 00:34:11
Could we do this in like 1 process where we came back with proposals as to what would be there, but we're informed that we need to 00:34:15
do it step by step, so this zoning rezoning application. 00:34:21
Is that first step as we? 00:34:28
Understand it so. 00:34:31
There, you know, I know there's been some comments about kind of the condition of the product. My parents did have an above ground 00:34:34
pool. We have removed that. Now we're in the process of re landscaping that property. 00:34:42
To take account of that, the property is an air canal. 00:34:50
And so we had addressed these issues with. 00:34:55
Code enforcement, they came out, they investigated both, the Radish said. It's very rare that any property is usually the source 00:34:58
of rats, and there's been. 00:35:03
Rats coming from these canals for years they didn't like notice any smell. They asked us to takedown some bushes and other things 00:35:08
that we did I. 00:35:12
So we try to, you know, address all those issues, but really the I guess. 00:35:19
Thing that's driving us is that we have that back building that's in a lot of ways just unusable because we can't. 00:35:24
It was used for 50 years probably as a business that's not being allowed now. So that's the that's what the basis of the request 00:35:32
is. We have no plans to change the front home. In fact, we've probably put $50,000 or so into that front home including a new roof 00:35:38
that was just completed last week, but trying to figure out. 00:35:45
What we could do with the back portion of the property. So that's the basis for our request. 00:35:52
Any questions? Or I do have a couple questions for you and then I'll ask my fellow Commissioners. 00:35:58
I was just told that I had two options. 00:36:41
Initially when I spoke with Mr. Cheerleading, he said your lots not big enough. 00:36:45
To so you can leave it as it is not big enough to divide into two R, one 10s and. 00:36:49
The other option presented was our 210 so. 00:36:55
Appreciate that. Just wanted to clarify that the other this is a kind of a question for you and also a question for city staff if 00:37:00
they know? 00:37:03
Understanding that the original conditional use permit would have expired when it wasn't renewed. 00:37:08
Would this to anything you know of, Carrie? Is there any reason why a conditional use permit to continue teaching piano or using 00:37:16
that accessory building in that similar nature not have been approved? 00:37:22
Yeah, I don't see any reason why. 00:37:29
A conditional use for home occupation wouldn't be approved. 00:37:33
With using that accessory building we. 00:37:38
Recently amended our Home occupation code to allow for the use of accessory buildings for home occupations. Previously that wasn't 00:37:42
allowed and so that's likely where that. 00:37:48
The use because it was discontinued wouldn't be allowed because it was in an accessory building but that was recently amended goes 00:37:55
into effect on the 21st of April. So that is an option with that new code amendment to use that for business use. I don't know if 00:38:03
it would still be applicable based off of the the family's use with your father not running it anymore but I just you brought up 00:38:10
that your your sister I if I recall yeah. 00:38:18
Applied for it. So I was just trying to figure out 'cause we've had a lot of discussion around conditional uses over the last 00:38:26
couple of years and I wasn't sure because I thought even, you know, before the amendments that might still qualify, I. 00:38:31
For what City Standard was. So I was just trying to figure out, unless she was trying to like, you know, open up like something 00:38:38
extreme back there I guess. But yeah, she was. There's a fair amount of traffic involved with a. 00:38:44
Studio like that. Could you have, you know, the way it was constructed, actually there's four or five different classrooms in 00:38:50
there. So you it's not just one student showing up at a time. It was group classes and then breakouts into individual classes. So 00:38:55
you had, you know, I don't know, 10 to 15 students in there at any one time basically from 3:00 PM when school let out till about 00:39:01
8:00 PM. 00:39:07
So anyway, she was told that I wasn't part of those conversations that. 00:39:14
The traffic would not be denied on the parking probably. OK, I'm just curious on that. I forgive my inquiry, I just I heard it 00:39:20
secondhand from her. So we did try to figure out, you know, we could provide that other commissioners do we have questions for the 00:39:26
applicant at this time that he hasn't covered for us. 00:39:32
Alright, we'll go ahead and invite you to sit down then. Thank you very much. 00:39:39
Right. And with that, we will go ahead and open our public hearing and invite members of the public to come up. When you do come 00:39:42
up, we would ask that you state your name and address for the record. And we would also ask that if you follow someone who's just 00:39:47
made statements that you don't make similar statements. 00:39:52
And if you have a representative for collectively as a group, you can also have that representative come up. But we would ask you 00:39:58
to try and be brief to the point and keep it roughly around 3 or 4 minutes for us. And with that, we'll go ahead and invite anyone 00:40:02
that wants to come up now. 00:40:07
What? Commissioner? My name is Arlene Hassan. 00:40:18
I live at 5617 S Doon Tree Hill Lane. 00:40:21
Thank you. 00:40:27
I am president of the HOA of the property. I took the. 00:40:29
Of the townhomes that are on the corner. 00:40:35
And we have no objection to. 00:40:39
Multiple use whatever our objection in this case. 00:40:43
Is that the property has been. 00:40:48
Neglected for so long. 00:40:51
So they did have an outdoor pool. They had a. 00:40:53
I'm sorry. I'm nervous. We won't bite. It's OK. So they had this. They had this above ground pool and it was stagnant for years. 00:40:57
The ducks were in it. There was. There was filth. There was. 00:41:04
There are one 2-3. There are 4 structures on the property actually. 00:41:11
There's one structure. 00:41:17
That's right next to the fence on the east side that was filled with chemicals. It was chlorine and fertilizer, which was. 00:41:19
Very annoying when they took down the pool last summer when they. 00:41:31
To compare the structure that it was sitting on. 00:41:37
The rats went crazy because they were nested under there, so several of our. 00:41:41
Residents have had an extreme problem with that. 00:41:49
Umm, we we've just. 00:41:56
We're upset because the property is dealt with rat infestation, chemical storage, a decline in the condition of the structures. 00:41:58
The property we feel is has been a health hazard to us. Several of us had to hire exterminators. One woman who directly backs up 00:42:04
to it has spent thousands of dollars trying to build something in her backyard. But they can't let their children, grandchildren, 00:42:11
in the yards. 00:42:18
Dogs or pets because there's a horrible rat infestation. 00:42:27
And Mrs. Hansen, if you don't mind, I apologize for interrupting you here. 00:42:32
Just so you know, the proposal before us tonight is around the rezone. OK. So if you and other members of the public would just 00:42:36
contain your comments around the concern around the Green Zone, I understand there's been a rat problem and that's been handled 00:42:41
through code enforcement. Our position is. 00:42:46
If if the if the holiday is going to allow the rezone, we would ask that you delay it until they bring the property up to code. 00:42:52
Because the property is a mess. 00:43:05
Appreciate it. That. And there was there was like, I'm sorry, there was like mattresses left out all winter. There's tools and 00:43:10
things all over the place. There's one structure on the east side that appears to be falling apart directly directly next to the. 00:43:18
Facility that he wants to use for. 00:43:27
The music studio, I would say. 00:43:31
And one thing I will say is just in regards to anything that would be a code enforcement matter that would be handled through the 00:43:34
code enforcement officer. 00:43:38
So as far as what we're considering here tonight, it's just is the property. 00:43:42
Reflected correctly with the requirements for a rezone and that's pretty much the basis for anything that we have approval for to 00:43:49
make a recommendation for approval or denial. So OK, so we're we're just concerned that with the reason that the that the owners 00:43:55
of the property maintain what would be. 00:44:02
Holiday. 00:44:10
Specifications. OK, that's great. Thank you. 00:44:12
Do we have? Yes, Sir. 00:44:19
Good evening. My name is Aiden Bradney. We live in the property on the West of. 00:44:26
Weather changes to the planning to be scheduled. I'm sorry, what was the address I missed it 1922? 00:44:32
Directly West. 00:44:40
1920 two 5600 OK right where the mouse is there, so if you are. 00:44:42
Open up that parcel, assessor. It's kind of a little clearer to see. 00:44:47
But there's a couple of main concerns. One is that we live in an area of outstanding natural beauty. If the canyons were 100 miles 00:44:53
away, there would be national parks without a shadow of a doubt. And the view from our deck is something that is phenomenal is one 00:45:00
of the reasons we moved into holiday was to have Mount Olympus on our doorstep. We moved prior to the. 00:45:08
That HOA housing R210, that doesn't impact us too much, but our fear is that if they rezone 1932 and then all of a sudden we're 00:45:17
going to be putting two floor structures in there, our view will completely disappear. 00:45:26
Beyond that and we did e-mail photographs from our deck as soon as this came up. 00:45:35
The other thing is, if you can see the width of the driveway leading to the back, that is directly on our RV pad. Now whether we 00:45:41
have an RV, there is not a problem. But that driveway on a great day is probably about 7 feet wide and they have one car in and 00:45:48
out. The people that live in the front house right now and they're a wonderful young couple with a couple of kids, no problems 00:45:55
with them whatsoever. As soon as there are going to be more apartments, houses. 00:46:01
Whatever goes in back there, there's going to definitely be a congestion issue. 00:46:09
Road parking is kind of out of the question already because of the amount of employees and people that visit the assisted living 00:46:15
across the road. 00:46:18
And then there is a, to the best of my knowledge, is still there. I'm kind of not around you in the daytime anymore, but that, 00:46:22
well, it was kind of like a daycare. 00:46:27
In that 278024 house there was a daycare there, so there's a lot of traffic on the road. 00:46:33
But as soon as they stop putting apartments in there and you've got to think that each apartments probably got two or three 00:46:41
vehicles in today's standards, then there's definitely going to be. 00:46:45
An issue with vehicles. 00:46:50
To speak to the condition of the front property, we've always loved it. It's kind of. 00:46:53
A pretty looking property. They just recently did the roof. No problems with that at all. The back would be wonderful if it was 00:46:59
made into a. 00:47:02
A real nice yard. We never we live right next door. We never had any problems with the swimming pool. We if the rats are coming 00:47:06
from the canal. 00:47:10
They never came across our backyard. We've never had any rat issues whatsoever. 00:47:16
But you'd occasionally hear a duck in the swimming pool. I thought that was kind of funny, but never an issue with with Joan, 00:47:20
anyone at all. But my fear is that this property at the back, if that starts getting construction in there and construction 00:47:27
equipment, there's going to be a major knock on effect to us who are directly next door. And then as soon as they put in the 00:47:34
permission and all of a sudden you can build 2 Storey houses in that location. 00:47:41
The quaintness of holiday all of a sudden I feel starts to tumble. What's to stop me from applying to make my house three stories 00:47:49
high and that would get shot down immediately. So it's this kind of ongoing. 00:47:56
Yeah, I think it's going to snowball personally and our beautiful view of those mountains is going to be massively impacted. 00:48:04
Thank you very much for your comments. I appreciate it. 00:48:13
Do we have any other members of the public that wish to make comment at this time? 00:48:20
My name is Kurt Larson. I live at 5646 Nations Way. 00:48:31
Just W one St. West of the property. 00:48:36
Our big concern is a little bit what Hayden was talking about is all the cars on the street with the living assisted living across 00:48:41
the street. We constantly have cars parked up and down the street, sometimes even on our street because they have gatherings and 00:48:48
whatnot over there and all we need to do is that, you know four or five more cars to that. I know building is only don't really 00:48:56
take that into consideration. 00:49:03
But somebody ought to. It's just it's crazy. I don't know how that assisted living got by with no, you know not nearly enough 00:49:11
parking. It's it's just there's always cars up and down there. We come around the corner and just about plow into them because 00:49:16
they they don't park where they should and. 00:49:22
It just seems like a real inconvenience for us. 00:49:28
Also another concern I had when they put in the HOA. 00:49:34
They had to bring the level of the foundations up six feet out of the ground, the existing ground, to make the sewer lines work. 00:49:38
I would think they might have the same problem if they built something in the back there and. 00:49:48
If they've got to bring that up six feet out of the ground, Taddy Oka lives right behind him. He's going to feel like he's in a 00:49:53
hole. 00:49:56
It's just so I wanted to. 00:50:01
Make sure that if that's the case, I, you know, I don't want another building 6 feet out of the ground right there. So that's 00:50:05
that's all the comments I have. 00:50:10
Thank you very much. Appreciate it. 00:50:16
All right. Did we have any other comments? 00:50:23
If you come back up, I'll allow. 00:50:30
You get 60 seconds on the clock. 00:50:33
But restate your name and address so we know which one it is. Adam Bradney, 1922 E 5600 S. 00:50:36
Kurt has brought something up there. 00:50:43
Clicked in. My mind is last year we had major plumbing issues that they had to dig up our entire backyard. 00:50:45
And the whole structure under there, with the plumbing crew, with the cameras and everything, it's already pretty maxed out, 00:50:52
according to the plumbing company that came out in the city that came out that had to say, yes, you know, the new plumbing lines 00:50:58
are great. They said that the infrastructure below ground is already starting to look a bit tired. 00:51:05
So I'm sure that the house at the front doesn't have a problem. But as soon as you start putting eight more toilets back there and 00:51:12
a few more bathtubs, goodness knows what's going to happen as well as what Coat was saying about raising the level of ground. 00:51:19
That is all. Thank you. All right. Thank you. 00:51:27
Nailed it. 60 seconds. Good job. Just kidding. All right, one more. Go ahead. 00:51:30
You gotta come up to the mic and give us. 00:51:36
We got to get it for our recorder, just so you know, I know who you are, but we got to get it recorded. Jim Preston 5670 Nations 00:51:42
way. So I'm. I'm not even on the map here but. 00:51:48
You know, I want to just kind of find out. So, Mr. Lewis, what do you want to do? 00:51:54
So my whole thing would be. 00:52:35
So how many, how many square feet, how many square? Jim, Jim, Jim, Jim, back-to-back back to the Planning Commission. Please, 00:52:38
we're not, we're not talking to the applicant right now. You're talking how many square feet are on the property. 00:52:44
The property is. So if you got our 2:10, you can put a duplex on 10,000 feet. 00:52:50
How many square feet do you have? 00:52:56
Right. 00:52:59
So it's 19,166 square feet or .44 acres. 00:53:00
OK, well, so. 00:53:06
You know, I'm all for improving the property. You know, on the one hand we're here and leave it like it is and and and make it 00:53:09
better. But then I don't know if Mr. Lewis wants to make it into a piano teaching facility again. If he gets approval to do it and 00:53:16
just and if he don't if he got that, he'd he'd he'd do that again. I I don't know. 00:53:23
As far as the the, the property goes if if it's allowed for. 00:53:32
R210 duplex per 10,000 feet. 00:53:40
Then I'd want to be, you know, listening to what, how many, how many, what? What is the height limitation. We've got Aiden here 00:53:45
that he's got a situation with the height, so. 00:53:51
That would be. 00:53:59
Part of my my question is how are we going to improve the property? How has the property going to be improved? And I guess that's 00:54:00
something that isn't going to be determined until it is made to an R210. I'd like to ask Mr. Lewis, is the existing home on 56 00:54:06
going to remain? 00:54:12
And we can give the applicant a chance to come up and address any comments made to the public after we close the hearing. So we 00:54:19
can definitely table that and see if Mr. Lewis wishes to respond. So thank you for your comments. 00:54:24
I think and did we and was there anyone else we haven't heard from that wanted to make comment before I close the public hearing. 00:54:32
OK. I think we got just about everybody today. So we'll go ahead and close the public hearing at this time then. And if Mr. Lewis 00:54:38
would like to come up and just make any address remarks to the comments that were made by the public, yes, happy to do that and 00:54:44
happy to have conversations. 00:54:49
So just trying to kind of tick these off. Well, I don't know if I should get into the **** issue that that you know, one thing you 00:54:57
have to remember is. 00:55:01
My parents had this property and built some of these structures long before the Highland Court. 00:55:06
Facility was built so that shed that they're talking about that's close to the property line that was there when Don Wilson had 00:55:12
his huge backyard that was all just grass back there to the east and then obviously that was all taken over and these tall twin 00:55:20
homes were built and they are tall and they do look down you know into we have a fence back there but they look into the yard you 00:55:28
know and they are tall now I would be that's why I said before I on on some of the other. 00:55:35
You know, like I said, code enforcement came out about the smell of the chemicals, those things. 00:55:43
They didn't see anything. They didn't hear any. You know, they smelled. There's nothing to that, that I know there's never been a 00:55:49
mattress out there. I rechecked with the tenants. That's never been the case. So, you know, some of these things I think are 00:55:56
overblown. And again, I'm kind of, I feel like some of the other things are just premature. 00:56:02
Because like I said, we asked should we just try to do a rezone application with a plan on what we might do with the property? 00:56:09
But we're told that we had to take these kind of seriatim steps, So what we're doing is just trying to figure out can we get it? 00:56:17
Rezoned R210. 00:56:20
We would have plans, we could investigate, you know, whether we could change that existing structure into something. 00:56:58
Or you know a different thing. But all of these issues about parking and sewer and all those things would be considered as part of 00:57:04
that. That's how I understood it would work. So I'm not maybe it's unsatisfying, but not I don't. I don't have it. We haven't put 00:57:10
in the time effort but to figure out exactly what we do. But that would be the plan. If we got the R210 is then we would 00:57:16
investigate different options. 00:57:22
Discuss those. 00:57:28
You obviously have to come back to the city to get approvals for any of those plans and I think we'd have to factor in all of 00:57:30
these, you know, issues about parking and access and other things, so. 00:57:36
That may not be the most satisfying answer to say we don't know, but we just understand this is the first step. It does. You know, 00:57:44
it's not out of line with any of the surrounding properties in our view, so we can address all these other concerns. 00:57:51
In the next step. 00:58:00
I appreciate to appreciate the additional comments and clarification there. Just real quick before you sit down, Commissioners, 00:58:02
any other questions for the applicant that haven't been addressed in either of his addresses? All right, we'll go ahead and have 00:58:08
you sit down. Thank you very much. All right. And with that, we will now turn to our discussion and I have asked Commissioner 00:58:14
Baron if he would just lead our discussion before any motions are made on this to capture everybody's input on this. 00:58:21
I did close the feed. If I didn't already say that, I apologize. The public hearing has been closed. 00:58:28
OK. And with that, Commissioner Baron. OK, well, based on all the questions were asked earlier, I'm not sure how we're going to 00:58:33
lead this discussion. So one of the things I had to ask is of staff for the R210, you're saying that there's three total single 00:58:39
family detached dwellings. 00:58:45
Allowed on the property, but that's if they had access. 00:58:52
Because it looks like the lots too narrow to have the 20 foot access point right? 00:58:56
Yeah. So if they were to take out access, I think the measurement if we've measured 20 feet on here, I that's one of the issues 00:59:03
that would be addressed once they apply for adding additional units onto the property is how wide is the access and fire looks at 00:59:11
that access requirements there are. 00:59:20
Umm, exceptions. Sometimes if there isn't an appropriate access, you could do fire sprinklers. That's all addressed through fire 00:59:30
code. So fire code is what regulates the the width of the access Rd. and any exceptions because there are sometimes properties 00:59:37
that are further back typically. 00:59:43
Properties that can't be or structures that can't be accessed with a fire truck have to have fire sprinklers in it. OK, well part 00:59:51
of my question is to try and answer the question that the audience is asking is what's potentially could happen here? Yeah. The 00:59:58
second question is, is the height allowed in the R110 and the R210 the same? They are the same. OK, so not to scare you, but they 01:00:05
can build the two-story structure now. 01:00:12
Yes. Any zoning change? Yeah. So current code is properties. Less than half an acre is 32 feet in height. That's to the top of the 01:00:19
Ridge. 01:00:25
The additional control on height is graduated height, so that pushes taller areas of a structure further away from our property 01:00:33
line. 01:00:38
That graduated A height applies to all structures, so primary structures and accessory structures. 01:00:43
OK. So if they wanted a second story on the extra structure in the back, it would be more in the middle. They could not do it up 01:00:50
against the lot line, right? 01:00:54
I'm sorry you take up all the time, but another question. If they were to do the three single family or the attached to whatever 01:01:01
the maximum development you thought they could put on the property, if they were to do AD use as part of either one, or they're 01:01:08
not subdividing the property or another Adu, does that also have to be fire sprinkled? 01:01:15
And that may be a question if you're talking, are you asking about an external Adu or I'm just trying to see just. 01:01:24
Again, helping the audience figure out exactly what we could see potentially being built on the property with an R210. 01:01:33
So the state requires that accessory dwelling units are allowed in any residential zone. We have recent code amendments that are 01:01:40
being heard by City Council currently that would limit external or sorry ADUS to detach structures only. So in a situation like 01:01:50
this in an R2 zone where an Adu would be permitted by the state code. 01:02:00
If they were to do an attached unit with two units in one single building. 01:02:10
Those units couldn't have 80 use because it is an attached structure. If they were to detach and do three separate detached units, 01:02:16
each of those could have an internal or an external Edu. External Adu varies based off of what the lot size is. 01:02:25
So that you may not see. It's highly unlikely you'd see an external Adu on those properties. All that dependent on what passes 01:02:36
with City Council, but. 01:02:41
So because you're looking at, OK, what is the potential units plus accessory units? Accessory units would likely be an internal 01:02:48
accessory unit and I would say that's pretty common. Most people are adding kind of a second kitchen or area that can be converted 01:02:55
to an accessory unit that they want to incorporate into a single family house. So if single family houses were built, each of 01:03:02
those single family houses could have an accessory dwelling unit. 01:03:09
With fire sprinklers. 01:03:16
Right access would all be determined if it If it needs to be fire sprinkled, that's what it would need to be. 01:03:18
OK. Just two more questions and I'll be quick. OK. There's a street to the South of this property. I know it's probably a private 01:03:26
road, but if they were to get access to that. 01:03:31
Does that change the dynamic of? 01:03:36
How they could develop the property, right. So you're you're referring to this private subdivision, Yeah. 01:03:39
Yeah, that would have to be an agreement or worked out with the with the planned unit development that's there. 01:03:48
I mean, I've seen other situations where the property owner has approached the planned unit development. In many cases they don't 01:03:59
want to incorporate that area and their subdivision would have to be amended to add property into it. So it would require the the 01:04:05
PUD to bring. 01:04:11
New units in, but then those units would have to conform to whatever standards are in the PUD. So there's there's benefits that 01:04:19
might be there that the that that community may want to consider if they want to have a similar development pattern. 01:04:26
That's something that then they are to you, and they could do that even without rezoning. If they wanted to bring an area into 01:04:35
their PUD, a rezone wouldn't need to be. 01:04:41
Done because they just capture an additional area of land. 01:04:48
As long as the front area then would retain the 10,000 square foot minimum so but we would have to get it that would require then 01:04:53
the PUD. 01:04:57
Approving that that amendment onto their subdivision, so. 01:05:02
And maybe this is a question for the applicant. I'm not sure if that's been discussed at all, but a lot of times beauties are not. 01:05:09
Super amenable into adding more units into their into their planned unit development, but you sometimes get outlier like 01:05:19
properties like this where maybe this property owner didn't want to sell a portion of their property to that developer's. 01:05:25
At that point in time and so that's where it kind of ended up. I just wondered if. 01:05:32
You know all the planets align and they agreed to do it if that changes the dynamic of. 01:05:38
How much access? Obviously it would reduce how much access, but yeah, it would, if it were incorporated into that PUD, it would 01:05:44
just meet the standards of the PUD. So their planned unit development would be amended. 01:05:51
Similar to these properties that are here, to the east of this property you just have setbacks that are designated on the plat. 01:05:58
Essentially it would be 3 properties, but it'd be just the duplex. I'm trying to factor out all the possibilities of what could 01:06:06
ultimately be built there to kind of give some of the audience some reassurance that if that does happen, that's all things that 01:06:13
would have to be worked out between the land owners in that private development if they wanted to do an access easement and have 01:06:20
the property access. I mean, there's there's different approaches there, but it does require all of the. 01:06:28
Or does require the approval? 01:06:36
And the legal process to be followed with that planned unit development, OK. 01:06:38
Finally, I'm just trying to figure out as we look through the general plan criteria. 01:06:44
And the approval criteria for rezoning and that type of thing, this appears to meet the intent or the kind of expectation of being 01:06:49
in the same character of the adjacent properties. So we take that into consideration. If this were ultimately developed, do you 01:06:56
see that the future development would be? 01:07:03
Consistent with that character we're trying to preserve. 01:07:12
I'm trying to figure out what would happen if right. You're going to have character that is very highly controlled within a 01:07:17
beauty, but this area is not within a beauty, so you're not going to have that same architectural kind of similarity. Total number 01:07:26
of units if we're reducing it to just what is what is on the land and using that as a indicator of character. 01:07:34
Yes, it would be in character with. 01:07:44
So is just the 2 units if the density is consistent with properties adjacent to one another. 01:07:49
Is that by nature? 01:07:55
Meeting the character of the area. 01:07:58
Yes, I any residential neighborhood does. What is the character of a of a neighborhood? It's really subjective, but overall 01:08:02
character could be summarized as just a. 01:08:08
Single family or two family dwelling unit. So character here is to family, yes, yes, because I mean I appreciate the way you just 01:08:18
said it because it is very difficult to say. 01:08:24
We're trying to figure out exactly how it's supposed to meet up to make kind of that. 01:08:32
Yeah. And I think is that in? 01:08:41
Is there a specific point on the general plan that references the character? I don't remember exactly where that's at. Oh, it's 01:08:44
the third one. Retain and protect the natural environmental character of the city and its neighborhoods? 01:08:50
So. 01:08:59
So as long as it's a neighborhood, it's a neighborhood character. 01:09:01
It's really ambiguous, though it is. Character is always subjective. 01:09:07
What do you want to loop into it? What do you not want to I anything is going to vary in the neighborhood. You're going to have 01:09:12
some houses that have been remodeled substantially that have very different looks or feels. You could have a neighborhood that has 01:09:18
a mix of two stories and single stories all intermingled in it. 01:09:25
In this area, and that's where it's just the simplest, most basic is is the neighborhood? Is it a neighborhood? Do you have what 01:09:33
is a neighborhood character? Neighborhood character is properties that are used for residential purposes. 01:09:40
OK. Well, I've kind of driven the Commission off the Cliff here. Follow up to your. 01:09:49
Where you were going I think if one of these prior non conforming duplexes. 01:09:54
Change property and the new property owner wanted to build. 01:10:03
A new duplex? Would he have to come in and rezone R210 if the property was destroyed by natural means? He can rebuild if. 01:10:06
If it is not, if they selectively demolished a duplex, they couldn't rebuild a duplex, and I think that applies to this property. 01:10:18
Let me roll down the east. 01:10:26
And then the one zone nations, right? Yeah, just prior just this one duplexes that are really single property home and I'm not. 01:10:33
When I looked at Google Maps, this had two addresses associated with it, but I'm not sure if that one is E legal non conforming 01:10:44
duplex. This one definitely is. 01:10:48
And then this duplex is already zoned as R2. 01:10:54
I can address some of the other comments if the Planning Commission has more questions about those. I think largely Commissioner 01:11:02
Baron has addressed a lot of those questions with access and. 01:11:09
What is addressed at a building permit level? That's where we're looking at all the utility connections. Utility connection 01:11:18
letters are required for building improvements. Converting an accessory structure into a living space? That's. 01:11:26
Building the Building official will be looking at the plans to make sure that they're meeting building code. Utility letters have 01:11:34
to be. 01:11:38
Provide a letter saying that utility service is available for the additional units. They have their metrics that they're looking 01:11:45
at in assessing that if there were substantial redevelopment like a subdivision and. 01:11:52
New lots created. A utility provider may require the applicant to upgrade the service line in order to account for those 01:12:01
additional units. So that's something that is addressed when they're applying for a building permit or that we'd see if they're 01:12:07
doing a subdivision. 01:12:12
But as is, if they were just to convert the existing accessory building, they would be required to have that reviewed by the 01:12:19
utility providers. 01:12:23
All of the upkeep issues, those are addressed just with code enforcement. Same standard for every property and holiday and 01:12:30
foundation wise I that's just. 01:12:37
Depending on the grade of the property, we don't regulate what size of foundation is, but building height is regulated and it is 01:12:45
the same in R1 and R2 zones. 01:12:50
Those are all next steps, none of which are applicable to tonight's current proposal or application before us, which tonight is 01:12:56
just specifically the Zone. And does the Zone meet all the criteria for a rezone? Is it applicable? Does it make sense? 01:13:04
And so with that other commissioners comments, one question. 01:13:14
Some of the folks in the audience talked about parking. 01:13:19
And. 01:13:23
Is it correct that? 01:13:25
This application, any anything that's built has to include on site parking. 01:13:27
Yes, so residential. 01:13:34
Development is to parking spaces required for each residential unit. 01:13:37
So they would have to meet those standards. If they're adding an additional unit, they have to have to. 01:13:44
Parking spaces for that additional unit. 01:13:49
On the comment of street parking, Street parking is a public good that's available to anyone. We don't regulate street parking 01:13:55
beyond limiting it to 24 hours at a time. 01:14:01
The home occupation daycare that existed that was referenced by one of the comments is no longer in Operation 2. 01:14:09
Commissioners, other questions, comments. 01:14:21
Everybody says, OK, we're all soaking it in at the moment. All right. Yes, go ahead. 01:14:26
The issue of. 01:14:33
A structure being in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. Is that something that the technical review committee gets 01:14:36
involved with or? 01:14:40
No, because we don't have character standards for neighborhoods. Neighborhoods are residential, so the character is is it a 01:14:47
residential use? 01:14:51
Because that is what neighborhoods are. Neighborhoods are residential use. That is the only character that we have to rely on for 01:14:57
neighborhoods. And you're going to have neighborhoods with older homes that get replaced with newer homes. Some people buy 01:15:04
multiple parcels and build giant homes. Is that out of character with the neighborhood? It's. 01:15:10
It's not. It's not a factor beyond is it a residential use. 01:15:18
Oh boy, yeah. Well at the end of the day for me, when I look at this, I'm just going to throw my comment out there. When I look at 01:15:26
this, I think I I for me it's just why is it? It sounds like based on what the applicant is trying to do with a potential 01:15:33
subdivide, it feels like an R18 would satisfy that and also satisfy the general plan of the city, which for this area has been 01:15:40
earmarked as low density residential stable. 01:15:48
Right. Like I feel like that. 01:15:55
Somehow is the path that should have been on and it got skewed and steered off into the R210 and I don't know if it's just 01:15:59
because, well the neighbors have it, let's do that. I don't, I'm not I can't speak to that. But the the three home thing and part 01:16:06
of it just has me a little bit concerned because I think that's you know, at what point does the domino effect happen And then the 01:16:12
neighbors duplex becomes a triplex and then the next neighbors becomes a triplex or you know R2 et cetera. 01:16:19
Highland Court, thank you. I think that'd be easy. But Highland Court, I think that one would fall under the exception rule 01:16:58
because it falls into that master plan. 01:17:03
That's very controlled to City staff's point, right. That's not going to go change. Nobody's going to sell that property and go in 01:17:39
and subdivide it. It's already part of a master plan as where this has no control mechanisms on it whatsoever. And you know, build 01:17:45
it bigger, better, faster, higher, whatever fits as long as it can fit in there. We've just given it the green light to do so. So 01:17:51
that's my only reservation on R2 versus an R18. And with that I will be quiet and see if any other commissioners have thoughts or 01:17:57
if we have a motion. 01:18:03
I appreciate the Commissioners direction. With that. I do, however, reading in the staff report. 01:18:09
It says under guidelines in the general Plan, rezone request should be considered only when increases in density will not 01:18:17
negatively impact the established development pander. 01:18:22
Patterns in the surrounding neighborhood which this would not, and even with the increased units I think it would still fit. New 01:18:28
development will be accommodated through utilizing unclaimed density. I'm not sure what that means anymore. Rezoning may be 01:18:35
appropriate when increased density will not destabilize the existing neighborhood. 01:18:42
Based on that criteria or those defining points, I think there's merit to this. I think that. 01:18:50
In my questions there are some limiting factors to how narrow the property is and the access to that which. 01:18:59
May be cost prohibitive to do a number of these things but. 01:19:07
To me, I'm seeing that this is kind of meeting the intent. 01:19:12
You know whether that. 01:19:18
I don't know. 01:19:21
That helps though for me. 01:19:25
Well, if anyone else has, unless there's no further comments, I've had the same thought about the R18 being a better zoning and I 01:19:28
I wonder. 01:19:34
I don't know how everyone feels, so I don't know what the vote is going to be, but if this is some food for thought for the 01:19:40
applicant. 01:19:44
And whether the applicant would have any concern if we tabled this for the next meeting. 01:19:48
To let him decide if. 01:19:55
These other things have been talked about, which zoning he really wants. I mean, he could get a vote today. He may get it, he may 01:19:57
not. He could certainly come back another time and try, you know, on our 1/8. 01:20:03
Or maybe we could be efficient and table this for two weeks and? 01:20:09
Maybe he changes it or doesn't change it takes a chance, I don't know. 01:20:14
Well, and I'll defer to city staff on that. What would be the correct protocol, something like that? 01:20:19
Yeah, that would be an option. 01:20:26
I think when looking at R18, if I were walking through R18, there's going to be significant challenges if the applicant is trying 01:20:30
to use that back. 01:20:35
Building. It's rezoning the whole property to R18. 01:20:42
You would then need to do a planned unit development or subdivided, but then the. 01:20:48
R18 still comes with significant challenges in being able to use that and I think that's possibly where that are too. O 10 01:20:55
recommendation comes in is that it is an easy way to say OK 2 units. 01:21:02
The that's there's two structures existing on the property, and it is. 01:21:11
A clearer process moving forward for the applicant and using the property or subdividing. 01:21:17
R2 subdividing is still going to have some challenges with it as well I. 01:21:27
We talked about the access when I pulled out. 01:21:32
Kind of a area that would go from the property line back to where that structure is. It's roughly 2200 square feet. So if you're 01:21:37
taking 2200 square feet out of their 1900, that's going to be pretty close on even an R18 subdivision if they're. 01:21:46
Yeah, because they're nineteen 19166, taking out 2200 square feet of roadway access. 01:21:56
16 and 16 by two is 8 right? Right. 01:22:07
So it's it's tough, but it's doable. Doable, yes. 01:22:10
Where R2 could avoid some of those those issues. But even with an R2, that existing structure is still legal non conforming 01:22:15
because of its placement on the setbacks, right? So either way, that's still going to present a hassle if he says hey, I wanna 01:22:20
make this a home now, right? 01:22:25
I think my concern just, I mean that's a really interesting thought and I. 01:22:33
I think. 01:22:39
And the list of considerations just on the very first page of the staff report. 01:22:42
Is it consistent with the general plan? I also think so. It seems to be. Is it consistent with the character of adjacent 01:22:47
properties? It seems to be. 01:22:51
Umm, this 4th one is their adequacy of the whatever it sounds like that's going to be a limiting factor and so to me, I'm not. 01:22:57
I mean, certainly it could be built up, absolutely. But it sounds like there's there going to be a lot of pieces to puzzle in 01:23:08
about that. 01:23:13
But but I think. 01:23:19
I'm in favor of the R210 over the considering an R18 or sending them back to consider. That is because it would match the things 01:23:22
that are next to it, and so even though it's a PUD and even though it's a sort of a special arrangement having having that whole 01:23:28
thing be a matching zone. 01:23:34
Makes I think more logistical sense to me than having one property that's sort of different, you know, so in. 01:23:42
20 years as as these buildings may or may not change. 40 years having something that's not maybe gonna have to be rezoned again in 01:23:51
some funny way that doesn't match the ones next to it, I'm not sure. I that's my thought about that. 01:23:58
Thank you, Commissioner Bill. 01:24:06
So it sounds like we have some interesting discussion points. We've covered and gone over this pretty well. But I think what's 01:24:10
before us tonight has been prepared well by staff and if someone wants to make a motion on it, we can see where that lands unless 01:24:16
anyone has an objection to a motion being made. 01:24:21
Or additional comments to consider. 01:24:28
With that, is anyone willing to make a motion? 01:24:31
This is Commissioner Barrett, a motion to forward recommendation to the City Council to approve an application by Matthew and 01:24:39
Amanda Lewis to amend the Holiday Zoning Map for .44 acres of land located on 1932 E 5600 S from R110 to R210, based on the 01:24:48
following findings that the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan. 01:24:58
The proposed amendment is harmonious with the overall character of the existing development in the vicinity. 01:25:08
The proposed amendment will not will. 01:25:14
To the extent of which the proposed amendment may adversely affect abutting properties. 01:25:18
And the adjacency of facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, such as roadways, parks, recreational 01:25:24
facilities, and so forth. 01:25:30
All right, we have a motion as anyone seconding that. 01:25:37
I second the motion. 01:25:43
Right, Commissioner going to 2nd and therefore we will call for a vote. I will start down here with Commissioner Barron Aye, 01:25:44
Commissioner Gong Aye, Commissioner Font aye, Commissioner Wilcinski, Commissioner Cunningham, nay. And Chair Roach votes nay. And 01:25:52
with that it will move forward with a four to two recommendation to City Council to approve my math is correct. 01:26:00
All right. Thank you very much. 01:26:09
And with that, we have just one more item on the agenda this evening, which is just approval of minutes from February 6th meeting 01:26:13
and from March 5th meeting. I was here for the February 6th and read through those minutes. I did not find any discrepancies or 01:26:20
adjustments that needed to be made. Did anyone else find anything from the February 6th that there was concern? I wasn't here, so 01:26:28
I won't vote on this. OK, so all in favor to approve the two 6 minutes? Aye. Aye. All righty, it's unanimous. And then? 01:26:36
On the three 5 minutes, I was not here, so I have no idea if those minutes are accurate or not. Any suggested amendments or 01:26:44
adjustments to those by anyone that was here? 01:26:49
No, they're they were fine to me. All right. And all in favor of approval of those minutes. Aye. Aye. All righty. And that takes 01:26:55
us to the top of the hour, 7:00 PM on the dot. Thank you for the discussion this evening. And do we have a motion to adjourn the 01:27:00
meeting? 01:27:04
So move. All right, Double motioned. All right. With that, all in favor, say aye. Aye. Done and done. Thank you very much, 01:27:11
everyone. 01:27:14
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. Make sure you have Adobe Reader installed
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Unable to preview the file. Make sure you have Adobe Reader installed
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Unable to preview the file. Make sure you have Adobe Reader installed
Transcript
Irrigation pipes that, yeah, east and West along there. And they've all been busted into at different points too. So like, I have 00:00:00
a hike that runs from my backyard into that canal and it's seven houses away, but I've got my hound up that's constantly wagging 00:00:06
his tail and sticking his nose down in that pipe because he's waiting for a rat or a squirrel or something. Or. 00:00:13
Well, it forced everybody into the time nobody was bringing It is time. All right. Good evening, everyone. It's a good thing to 00:00:21
have, OK? 00:00:25
We'll get started here. It is April 16, 2024. This is the City Planning Commission work session. We have one item that is a public 00:00:31
hearing item and then approval of minutes. So I'm sure we're going to need the whole half hour to talk specifically about this 00:00:38
zone map amendment and all the subtle nuances before we get to what I'm sure will be a well attended public hearing. So with that 00:00:45
we will ask Carrie to start us off. 00:00:52
OK, so. 00:01:01
I think the easiest thing on this one is looking at the context here, right? This property is a long deep I. 00:01:04
Fronts on 5600 S 2, family zoning on the east side, single family on the West side. Both of these properties on the West side are 00:01:13
duplexes, both are on the east side are duplexes. So it's totally surrounded by duplexes. It's just that these two on the West are 00:01:21
non conforming to the zone, so they are duplexes. 00:01:30
But non conforming. And I just if you'll back up to that map, I just want to clarify to make sure I'm looking at it right on the 00:01:39
east side of it, that is a duplex facing 56 and then another duplex that's part of the PUD subdivision facing inside, right. 00:01:45
Right. OK, yeah. Thank you. 00:01:51
Yeah. 00:01:58
And. 00:02:01
So the list of kind of all those neighboring properties is included in the staff report. 00:02:06
And then an analysis of the general plan, I think the biggest issue on this is that this whole area is identified as on the future 00:02:13
land use map as low density residential stable. 00:02:19
I was just going to bring up this existing Blandius. So sometimes we have land uses that are not necessarily consistent with what 00:02:28
zone or the future land use map is. So here you have that area. This is existing land uses where you can see the sorry super zoom 00:02:35
in here. 00:02:42
Too much? 00:02:50
There it is here. So this is the assisted living. That's multifamily obviously as they have high density there. This is 2 family. 00:02:55
These are duplexes. This is the property in question. And then those are both duplexes. 00:03:03
So the duplex on the West that's shown in like a shady yellow, but that's not an R2, right? 00:03:11
Right, those are both. 00:03:20
Our one zoned, but the they are both used as duplexes so they're both legal non conforming. I think that this one that's right on 00:03:24
the corner wasn't captured in that existing Gladys, but it is a. 00:03:30
Legal non conforming duplex. I can zoom back out and we can go to the future land use map and it's legal nonconforming because it 00:03:38
was there before this zoning stuff. Yeah, OK. 00:03:43
So we have quite a few properties in Holiday that were zoned as duplexes under Salt Lake County and then when they were 00:03:49
incorporated into Holiday, we just did larger kind of area wide zoning instead of property specific zoning. 00:03:57
So you'll usually run into pockets where there's two or three duplexes that are all together. I know offhand there's another set 00:04:04
of duplexes on 27th East as somewhat by Granados, not Granados Block Party. 00:04:13
So kind of across the street on the east side of 27th East. There's a few duplexes there. There's own single family, but they are 00:04:23
legal non conforming. So there's things like that all over in the city. Here is the. 00:04:31
Future land use. So this is kind of what the general plan refers to on this. Adjusted zones, so. 00:04:40
In that specific area that we are looking at before. 00:04:48
That whole corner is low density, residential stable. The exception is on the Highland Drive. 00:04:53
Where we refer back to the Highland Dr. Master plan for properties along Highland Drive. But this pocket where the. 00:05:01
Assisted living is identified as low density residential stable and then this corner where we're kind of looking at is low density 00:05:10
residential stable. 00:05:14
I may be a little slow is stable, meaning rickery or like horses or just the neighborhood stable. The neighborhood doesn't change 00:05:20
ever. Yes, and that's the what that is defined as here intended to support a mix of single family residential development that has 00:05:28
been established by historic development patterns. So then it has suggested zones in there, OK. 00:05:37
Thank you. Yeah, I like the language. At the end of that, on the LDRS rezone with the suggested zone list may be appropriate where 00:05:46
increased density will not destabilize the existing neighborhood. 00:05:53
So just to clarify on that, I didn't catch that the first time I looked at it, but the general plan does say the zone suggested in 00:06:01
there R18R10 or R110 and R115. And I think that's kind of the challenge with any sort of infill or a built out community. You've 00:06:09
got these outliers that are not like everything's not going to perfectly fit and that's where in the staff report there's I 00:06:16
discussed a bit about context of the area. 00:06:23
I'm also going to pull up the arterial the roadway before you switch to that if you would. I just wanted to see because the R2 is 00:06:33
listed as medium, RT, whatever MDRT. Can you show me just back up on the map where most of those MDRT zones exist? Or are there 00:06:39
any here? 00:06:44
So just here and here, the corridors basically is the. 00:06:52
OK. All right. Thank you. Can I ask a question about that also? Well, about the paragraphs you were showing before we move on, 00:06:59
there was language in it. I thought it just clarified this where it says new develop in. 00:07:06
Low density residential. 00:07:15
Protected, it said. 00:07:19
Use unclaimed density by subdivision instead of rezones, but this is stable. 00:07:23
Umm, so rezoning is more usual, more appropriate. Can you, can you just talk a little bit about what that means? Yeah, it doesn't 00:07:29
have that specific designation. And these, when I was talking to John Tierling about these, how these were set up in the general 00:07:39
plan, he said it was some of our future land use was really designed with the intent to identify these larger protected areas. 00:07:49
Within the estates and surrounding and then everything else kind of outside of that just was like, OK, these are stable areas. It 00:08:00
didn't really take into account a lot of corridors beyond Highland Drive and these obvious ones on 23rd, 45th and 39th. 00:08:10
As far as those corridors are concerned, is that the first property on the corridor that's included in that or? 00:08:22
Is there a depth of how much? 00:08:30
It's not, yeah. It doesn't designate specifically on those. 00:08:32
But the the line was just created with basic mapping of here's the road and here's this specific area we're going to draw around 00:08:43
the road. But it doesn't identify any specific roads or that it has to be fronting onto a major road or any other such thing. This 00:08:51
is a major Rd. So that's properties that are in kind of close proximity to that road would be considered. 00:08:58
Would be probably a safe assumption two or three lots in, you know is is kind of touching the road and then from there you're 00:09:08
really throwing up the question mark of does this fit with that? Yeah and the I am challenged with. 00:09:14
I think all of these main corridors are primarily U dot roads. 45th is. Highland Drive is. I don't think 23rd or 39th. Are you not 00:09:22
well, 39th maybe? 00:09:28
I remember another zone amendment we had before us that did not get a favorable recommendation about a year and a half ago that 00:09:35
was on the other side of Highland, right across from that area. 00:09:40
Yeah. On the East side where there's that home for sale with the fence around it and someone wanted to put like 4 units in on that 00:09:47
property or something like that. 00:09:51
Or on Highland Drive that was well it was where what is the road? Pheasant way. Not pheasant circle, but pheasant way connects to 00:09:58
Highland. I believe it faces pheasant way but it's right on the corner. 00:10:05
Of Highland, yeah. And those are, we were talking a little bit before the meeting about updates of the general plan. Some of those 00:10:13
things might be refined in the future as we work through general plan updates as what And that's things that we're thinking about 00:10:21
as staff as well. You know what our neighborhoods, what are areas that maybe we want to refine a little bit so that we don't have. 00:10:29
Do we want to keep 5600 S as a? That's a collector Rd. 00:10:38
As a stable with single family or that an area we want to look at, possibly some other. 00:10:44
Zones that would be appropriate, but. 00:10:51
I think. 00:10:55
Within the and. 00:10:58
It's kind of that just that Contextual called it. Yes, these are suggested zones. 00:11:01
You could suggest a rezone within those, or there's other points in the general plan that you can base a rezone recommendation off 00:11:06
of. So there's multiple kind of angles. Sometimes it doesn't. One application won't fit every checklist, but it may fit some of 00:11:14
the checklist, so as the Planning Commission you'll just. 00:11:21
That is what you get to decide. Call that logistical ambiguity when I walk by there. 00:11:29
It looks like there's a home on the front. 00:11:37
And I think somewhere I said two accessory buildings. 00:11:40
At the back. 00:11:43
But there's clearly a big house back there, another house. It was. I know, the former owner of the property. He did a he had a 00:11:46
music studio back. There he was. 00:11:52
A piano teacher for many many years and that was his studio where he would have people come and like one of those home occupation 00:12:00
type things that he worked out. It was basically a garage converted into studio, which is a rather large one. 00:12:07
But you know, I think he had like a baby grand in there, if I'm not mistaken, or big grand. So yeah. 00:12:14
And I mean, it looked it looked to me like it was occupied and being used as a house. 00:12:20
We don't have as a rental. Any indication of that, Yeah, but I but in any case, so I'm assuming what what is he trying to 00:12:25
accomplish that he couldn't accomplish? 00:12:30
With the zoning not changed. 00:12:37
Does he have a plan? I know he doesn't have to tell us about a plan, but right and I think on a larger scale picture, what R2 does 00:12:39
accomplish is provide. 00:12:45
Potential ownership opportunities in the future if the current landowner doesn't want to create ownership. 00:12:51
They don't have to, but just having that zoning in place then creates the. 00:12:59
Ability for that to be subdivided up where you get something like this. I mean any duplex could be subdivided into two separate 00:13:07
owners. 00:13:11
Umm, so intent could be just converting the accessory building into a unit. 00:13:15
Being able to rent out both the houses in the front and the rear unit. 00:13:22
Other potentials that you demolish both structures and. 00:13:28
And build something new up to 3 units. And Dennis, I didn't get a chance to look at the. 00:13:34
Total area, but we can pull that up too of what? So when? 00:13:41
When you're doing a. 00:13:47
Unit assessment of how many units would be allowed on a property. You have to take out the access Rd. 00:13:49
Or the access driveway, so that would be a minimum of 20 feet wide and then whatever the depth of the property is or how far back 00:13:55
that. 00:14:00
Roadway would go so roughly. 00:14:05
And I think you did kind of do just some brief math on it and figured that there could be enough room to make 3. 00:14:12
And that would possibly be like 2 that are attached. In this situation, if they wanted to leave the existing structure, they could 00:14:19
split the front house into a attached unit, have an Upstairs Downstairs that's rentable and convert the back building into a 00:14:25
rental unit. So it's. 00:14:32
Depending on the area of land as controls, how many units that they'd be able to put on that. 00:14:38
So this property is too small to be subdivided, right? Right. OK. 00:14:44
Yeah, because it's only .44, right? 00:14:49
And same thing, you'd have to take out the access, which then limits your land area even more for both. 00:14:53
And just to clarify, if it was an R18, they could subdivide, yes, and there would be enough area likely to take out a roadway. 00:15:01
Have they indicated what they want to do with the property after if it does get approved? I haven't had any conversation with the 00:15:12
applicant about their intent I. 00:15:17
I mean because a lot of the language suggests that the future development of the site. 00:15:23
We're supposed to kind of hope and pray that they're going to do something that's going to create a harmonious development, but. 00:15:30
They haven't even told you what's going to happen, so how do we use that as part of our? 00:15:37
Decision making. I think on that point, no, there isn't a way to. 00:15:42
Say yes, you'll create something that's harmonious, but. 00:15:51
Looking at. 00:15:56
The properties on either side of it where you have two here, 2 here. 00:15:59
In roughly the same size of area and they'd be limited to at Max 3 units if they have enough land area after taking out access. 00:16:04
It's pretty similar to what all the neighbouring properties are. 00:16:15
Even, less, less dense. 00:16:20
Right. It seems like we're giving him the right to have more than the surrounding people on his argument that he's surrounded with 00:16:27
lots with two homes on them. So with the size of property, if you look at this one, this has two on it. This has 2 units on it. So 00:16:34
same area of land has four units. 00:16:40
Same here, nearly the same area of land has four units. His area of land would be limited to 3 units, so he would be even with the 00:16:48
R210 zoning, he would not have the same density as. 00:16:55
And then having zero setbacks on top of it, right, if it were rezoned. 00:17:37
Right. And I think that's one we've talked to them before. This is where we encourage people talk to kind of that neighboring PUD 00:17:43
and see if you can be incorporated. And most people don't really want to have additional units, even though it would likely create 00:17:50
a more harmonious kind of look to their existing neighborhood. They don't want to have the additional units in there. 00:17:58
Yeah. So then you get kind of. 00:18:07
Weird. Maybe not matching, maybe it won't be weird there. I mean, there's not any guarantee the PUD has some some controls there, 00:18:10
but if you were in that PUD, it would likely be in your best interest to say yes, come join our PUD and then we have some controls 00:18:16
over what gets built there. 00:18:23
So can we approve the rezone with the condition that only two units will be built on it? That would not. You can't. You can't 00:18:30
limit legal land rights, so R2 zoning comes with two units per whatever area of land. 00:18:39
And we also couldn't put any future restrictions on an application for a PUD, right? You can't, you can't limit what is within the 00:18:51
zoning code specific to an application. So if the fear of what you don't want them to do is overshadowed by, you know, a 00:18:57
narrative, that doesn't sound like it's really been given of here's what my plan is and why I'm doing this. And forgive me for 00:19:04
being a little bit bold, but it really just seems to me like this is a dollar sign thing, right? Like this is a $650,000 lot that 00:19:10
if I subdivide it three ways. 00:19:16
I can turn around and sell for $900,000 because it's still marketable to a developer to go in and scrape that clean and do 00:19:23
whatever they want on it. So then the possibility exists if we approve the rezone that we could end up with. 00:19:30
Two homes and two Adus. 00:19:37
I don't know if they'd have enough room for 280 us on it, so our proposed language for Adu text with external Adus would be that 00:19:41
you can only do an external Adu if you have a detached structure. So if they were to build 3 detached structures, they could do 3 00:19:48
detached Adus possibly. 00:19:55
But they don't have enough land to reason. But they do have enough land. Like there's other factors that control that, Yeah. 00:20:04
Like they'd be lucky if they can. Like it would be a challenge to fit 3IN there, but it could legally be done with an R28 zone. 00:20:10
You're also going to have some limits with the lot size. So those puds, they have smaller setbacks, other things that were 00:20:18
incorporated into their PUD. So R210 zoning would have setbacks that are appropriate for that zone. So that's going to limit 00:20:26
building area as well. Even with an R2 zone, they might say, you know, there's not enough land that we want to do small lots. We 00:20:34
just want to do 2 units so that there's two bigger structures on there with bigger land size. 00:20:41
Can I ask a procedural question? Yes. So on the standards of approval or approval standards? 00:20:51
It's the second item down in the staff report. 00:20:58
You see that? 00:21:04
1307030 G 2. 00:21:05
Move standards of consideration for or against. 00:21:10
On the first page. 00:21:15
So I'm just wondering, do they have to meet all four of those? 00:21:17
In order for us to consider approval. 00:21:22
Umm, no. You can make your recommendation to the City Council and note. 00:21:25
Those things. So you could do a positive or negative recommendation, noting whatever factors that that you want to include in that 00:21:31
recommendation. So there's because. 00:21:37
Since City Council is the deciding body, they're looking at those standards. It helps them if you have those standards that you 00:21:44
were then including in your recommendation. 00:21:50
So those could be the findings I guess at some point, but. 00:21:56
So I'm curious why they list it like this and don't tell you how many you have to satisfy in order to. 00:22:00
So I guess never mind. 00:22:07
And following up on the general plan, the analysis, I think it's the next page. 00:22:10
Where it says land use, urban design and neighborhood preservation, Chapter 2 it starts to get into defining points of 00:22:17
development, development patterns and that type of thing. 00:22:23
Do we use this or do we have to have them satisfy all of these? 00:22:30
For us to vote, I'm trying to make it so it loses, it becomes a little more black and white, so if that's OK. 00:22:35
I'm not trying to say it's going to be easier to make the decision, but. 00:22:43
You know, we're already having some difficulty with the fact that this is surrounded by these type of units, and yet we don't 00:22:47
really. 00:22:51
It's still a struggle to make that happen, so of these defining. 00:22:56
Characteristics or different references, points of consideration, that type of thing. 00:23:01
Do we have, do we need to use all of those in our consideration? So yeah, their point. There are points from the General Plan. The 00:23:08
General Plan is a guiding document. You can use various points from it in your recommendation where it's not. 00:23:17
Coated items that are like these are the specific standards and it has to meet all of these or it has to meet at least X or Y. 00:23:28
Your recommendation can be based on kind of. 00:23:34
Any of these factors, so you could say positive, right. I think we came to a conclusion even on one application where we did a 00:23:41
neutral application based or neutral recommendation based on the vote. 00:23:46
Umm, but. 00:23:53
Whatever way your recommendation goes, just referencing what points. 00:23:56
Would be a positive influence. What would be negative because all of that information will go to the City Council. 00:24:03
That help or make any sense? Or did I just muddy up the water? 00:25:18
OK. Can I ask one more question? I know we'll switch. 00:25:24
I know that several of the letters were concerned about upkeep rats, sort of just the the upkeep of the lot and and a few section 00:25:29
of the staff report made it sound like. 00:25:36
You know, there's also the canal, so it's hard to it's hard to connect the dots one for one on. 00:25:44
On the rest, but do we does that figure into our decision at all? Is this, is that something that the Planning Commission needs to 00:25:51
consider even can? Yeah. The condition of the property is not something that is taken into consideration for rezones and you may 00:25:58
have a property that is in terrible shape that somebody comes in and purchases and needs to rezone to. I think we ran into 00:26:06
something similar with the Old Roots Garden. 00:26:13
Nursery area, like the building is abandoned the most applicable. 00:26:21
Zone is a higher zone than what it was zoned. So even though the property was in poor repair rundown, that didn't affect the 00:26:27
rezone proposal. 00:26:31
Thank you. 00:26:37
So we got a lot of solid discussion points that are going to be great as we iron out after we hear from the applicant in the 00:26:38
official meeting. And then the only other thing on there is approval of minutes. So hopefully we'll had a chance to check on that 00:26:44
and we'll call that one when it comes. But with that it is 6:00 PM, So we will go ahead and close the work meeting and. 00:26:51
I he's actually going to be excused for this meeting, so I'll call that out when we get started with the official. But does anyone 00:27:00
need a break before we roll right into the official meeting? I just don't want to run amok, you know? 00:27:05
Keeping us in check. 00:27:13
All right, perfect. So just let me know when you're ready, Carrie. 00:27:17
OK, let me double check all my recordings, see if we're still doing. 00:27:22
All right. Here we go then. So with that, good evening, everyone. Welcome to the Holiday City Planning Commission on April 16, 00:27:30
2024. 00:27:34
We have several. Well, we have a couple items on our agenda this evening. 00:27:39
Do want to call out that we do not have legal counsel here this evening. 00:27:44
So we will be on our best behavior and refer any of those contingent questions up to City Council with the recommendation we make 00:27:50
one way or another on any items. And we're also excusing Commissioner Prince, who will not be joining us. All other commissioners 00:27:58
are present and we have city staff Carrie Marsh with us. And with that we will start the meeting with the statement we give at the 00:28:05
beginning of all public meetings and for Planning Commission. And I've asked Commissioner Font if she will read that now for us. 00:28:13
The City of Holiday Planning Commission is a volunteer citizen board whose function is to review land use plans and other special 00:28:23
studies, make recommendations to the City Council on proposed zoning map and ordinance changes, and approve conditional uses and 00:28:30
subdivisions. The Planning Commission does not initiate land use applications, rather acts on applications as they are submitted. 00:28:38
Commissioners do not meet with applicants except at public, publicly noticed meetings. 00:28:46
Commissioners attempt to visit each property on the agenda where the location, the nature of the neighborhood, existing structures 00:28:54
and uses related to the proposed change are noted. 00:29:00
Decisions are based on observations, recommendations from the professional planning staff, the city's general plan, zoning 00:29:06
ordinance and other reports, by all verbal and written comments, and by evidence submitted, all of which are part of the public 00:29:12
record. 00:29:18
Thank you very much, Commissioner Font. 00:29:24
All right. And with that, we have a public hearing this evening for item number one, which is a zone amendment, excuse me, zone 00:29:27
map amendment rezone from R110 to R210 located at 1932 E 5600 S So I do see we have some members of the public here this evening. 00:29:35
We'll start with a staff report from Kerry Marsh and then we'll invite the applicant up and then we will open up the public 00:29:43
hearing for comment at that point. And with that, Carrie, whenever you're ready. 00:29:50
Thank you, Chairman Roch. 00:30:09
So this application is for property located at 1932 E 5600 S Current zone is R110. The requested zone map amendment is to R210 00:30:11
zone. 00:30:18
The property is narrow and deep. It fronts on 5600 S. 00:30:27
Surrounded by duplexes, both legal duplexes and legal non conforming to a single family zone. Duplexes on the West side across the 00:30:35
street is a multi family zone with an assisted living care facility on it. 00:30:42
The staff report outlines general plan. 00:30:53
With suggested zones as identified on the future land use map. 00:30:58
And then an analysis of other factors for rezones. 00:31:04
The property if rezoned to R210 potentially could allow up to 3 units based off of the total property size. If a access driveway 00:31:11
is then taken out of that total area, that could reduce the total amount of of units to to allowed on the property. 00:31:21
And I think that was all the high points on that. I'll have the applicant come up and just talk a little bit more about their 00:31:33
application and what they're envisioning. All right, Thank you very much. And with that, we will invite the applicant, Matthew or 00:31:40
Amanda Lewis, to come up. 00:31:46
Or representative. Thank you. I'm Matthew Lewis. So. 00:31:53
Appreciate you taking the time. Just to give you a little bit in considering the application. 00:31:59
This is a family home that my parents purchased in 1991 or 19. 00:32:06
Two, I think you have the kind of picture up before And so it's a fairly big piece of property and kind of what's unique about 00:32:11
it's got this second structure in the back. 00:32:16
Before my parents bought it, I think it was a actually like a a lock manufacturing facility and then my dad. 00:32:24
Was piano teacher. He converted to a piano studio and used it in that manner for 30 years or so. He passed away in 2019, didn't 00:32:33
use it for a few years. My sister went back and approached the city about whether we she could reopen the studio and use it in 00:32:41
that way and was told that she couldn't like that because he was. He had been grandfathered in, but because there have been a 00:32:48
period of unuse, it was no longer zoned for any kind of, like business activity. So we basically have this structure in the back. 00:32:56
That is in a lot of ways unusable because it's big enough. It's bigger than you would kind of use for a home. 00:33:04
Office, It's probably 1500 square feet or so with the different. 00:33:12
Additions that have been done but. 00:33:17
Can't really like, use that building. So anyway, that led us to and inquiring as to whether we could rezone the property. 00:33:19
Obviously everything around. 00:33:24
Our property, with the exception of the house just to the West. 00:33:30
Is either zoned R210 or being used in that manner where it has a duplex. 00:33:35
Or two units on there, so and it's not big enough that you could just subdivide it as is. 00:33:42
Because it's just under 20,000 square feet, so you couldn't do another R110 lot I. 00:33:49
So anyway, in conversations with C, just trying to figure out how to effectively use that space back there. 00:33:57
That was the option. We haven't really looked into what we would do with the property, to be honest. We were told that. 00:34:04
We asked. You know, we said we'd probably want to subdivide. 00:34:11
Could we do this in like 1 process where we came back with proposals as to what would be there, but we're informed that we need to 00:34:15
do it step by step, so this zoning rezoning application. 00:34:21
Is that first step as we? 00:34:28
Understand it so. 00:34:31
There, you know, I know there's been some comments about kind of the condition of the product. My parents did have an above ground 00:34:34
pool. We have removed that. Now we're in the process of re landscaping that property. 00:34:42
To take account of that, the property is an air canal. 00:34:50
And so we had addressed these issues with. 00:34:55
Code enforcement, they came out, they investigated both, the Radish said. It's very rare that any property is usually the source 00:34:58
of rats, and there's been. 00:35:03
Rats coming from these canals for years they didn't like notice any smell. They asked us to takedown some bushes and other things 00:35:08
that we did I. 00:35:12
So we try to, you know, address all those issues, but really the I guess. 00:35:19
Thing that's driving us is that we have that back building that's in a lot of ways just unusable because we can't. 00:35:24
It was used for 50 years probably as a business that's not being allowed now. So that's the that's what the basis of the request 00:35:32
is. We have no plans to change the front home. In fact, we've probably put $50,000 or so into that front home including a new roof 00:35:38
that was just completed last week, but trying to figure out. 00:35:45
What we could do with the back portion of the property. So that's the basis for our request. 00:35:52
Any questions? Or I do have a couple questions for you and then I'll ask my fellow Commissioners. 00:35:58
I was just told that I had two options. 00:36:41
Initially when I spoke with Mr. Cheerleading, he said your lots not big enough. 00:36:45
To so you can leave it as it is not big enough to divide into two R, one 10s and. 00:36:49
The other option presented was our 210 so. 00:36:55
Appreciate that. Just wanted to clarify that the other this is a kind of a question for you and also a question for city staff if 00:37:00
they know? 00:37:03
Understanding that the original conditional use permit would have expired when it wasn't renewed. 00:37:08
Would this to anything you know of, Carrie? Is there any reason why a conditional use permit to continue teaching piano or using 00:37:16
that accessory building in that similar nature not have been approved? 00:37:22
Yeah, I don't see any reason why. 00:37:29
A conditional use for home occupation wouldn't be approved. 00:37:33
With using that accessory building we. 00:37:38
Recently amended our Home occupation code to allow for the use of accessory buildings for home occupations. Previously that wasn't 00:37:42
allowed and so that's likely where that. 00:37:48
The use because it was discontinued wouldn't be allowed because it was in an accessory building but that was recently amended goes 00:37:55
into effect on the 21st of April. So that is an option with that new code amendment to use that for business use. I don't know if 00:38:03
it would still be applicable based off of the the family's use with your father not running it anymore but I just you brought up 00:38:10
that your your sister I if I recall yeah. 00:38:18
Applied for it. So I was just trying to figure out 'cause we've had a lot of discussion around conditional uses over the last 00:38:26
couple of years and I wasn't sure because I thought even, you know, before the amendments that might still qualify, I. 00:38:31
For what City Standard was. So I was just trying to figure out, unless she was trying to like, you know, open up like something 00:38:38
extreme back there I guess. But yeah, she was. There's a fair amount of traffic involved with a. 00:38:44
Studio like that. Could you have, you know, the way it was constructed, actually there's four or five different classrooms in 00:38:50
there. So you it's not just one student showing up at a time. It was group classes and then breakouts into individual classes. So 00:38:55
you had, you know, I don't know, 10 to 15 students in there at any one time basically from 3:00 PM when school let out till about 00:39:01
8:00 PM. 00:39:07
So anyway, she was told that I wasn't part of those conversations that. 00:39:14
The traffic would not be denied on the parking probably. OK, I'm just curious on that. I forgive my inquiry, I just I heard it 00:39:20
secondhand from her. So we did try to figure out, you know, we could provide that other commissioners do we have questions for the 00:39:26
applicant at this time that he hasn't covered for us. 00:39:32
Alright, we'll go ahead and invite you to sit down then. Thank you very much. 00:39:39
Right. And with that, we will go ahead and open our public hearing and invite members of the public to come up. When you do come 00:39:42
up, we would ask that you state your name and address for the record. And we would also ask that if you follow someone who's just 00:39:47
made statements that you don't make similar statements. 00:39:52
And if you have a representative for collectively as a group, you can also have that representative come up. But we would ask you 00:39:58
to try and be brief to the point and keep it roughly around 3 or 4 minutes for us. And with that, we'll go ahead and invite anyone 00:40:02
that wants to come up now. 00:40:07
What? Commissioner? My name is Arlene Hassan. 00:40:18
I live at 5617 S Doon Tree Hill Lane. 00:40:21
Thank you. 00:40:27
I am president of the HOA of the property. I took the. 00:40:29
Of the townhomes that are on the corner. 00:40:35
And we have no objection to. 00:40:39
Multiple use whatever our objection in this case. 00:40:43
Is that the property has been. 00:40:48
Neglected for so long. 00:40:51
So they did have an outdoor pool. They had a. 00:40:53
I'm sorry. I'm nervous. We won't bite. It's OK. So they had this. They had this above ground pool and it was stagnant for years. 00:40:57
The ducks were in it. There was. There was filth. There was. 00:41:04
There are one 2-3. There are 4 structures on the property actually. 00:41:11
There's one structure. 00:41:17
That's right next to the fence on the east side that was filled with chemicals. It was chlorine and fertilizer, which was. 00:41:19
Very annoying when they took down the pool last summer when they. 00:41:31
To compare the structure that it was sitting on. 00:41:37
The rats went crazy because they were nested under there, so several of our. 00:41:41
Residents have had an extreme problem with that. 00:41:49
Umm, we we've just. 00:41:56
We're upset because the property is dealt with rat infestation, chemical storage, a decline in the condition of the structures. 00:41:58
The property we feel is has been a health hazard to us. Several of us had to hire exterminators. One woman who directly backs up 00:42:04
to it has spent thousands of dollars trying to build something in her backyard. But they can't let their children, grandchildren, 00:42:11
in the yards. 00:42:18
Dogs or pets because there's a horrible rat infestation. 00:42:27
And Mrs. Hansen, if you don't mind, I apologize for interrupting you here. 00:42:32
Just so you know, the proposal before us tonight is around the rezone. OK. So if you and other members of the public would just 00:42:36
contain your comments around the concern around the Green Zone, I understand there's been a rat problem and that's been handled 00:42:41
through code enforcement. Our position is. 00:42:46
If if the if the holiday is going to allow the rezone, we would ask that you delay it until they bring the property up to code. 00:42:52
Because the property is a mess. 00:43:05
Appreciate it. That. And there was there was like, I'm sorry, there was like mattresses left out all winter. There's tools and 00:43:10
things all over the place. There's one structure on the east side that appears to be falling apart directly directly next to the. 00:43:18
Facility that he wants to use for. 00:43:27
The music studio, I would say. 00:43:31
And one thing I will say is just in regards to anything that would be a code enforcement matter that would be handled through the 00:43:34
code enforcement officer. 00:43:38
So as far as what we're considering here tonight, it's just is the property. 00:43:42
Reflected correctly with the requirements for a rezone and that's pretty much the basis for anything that we have approval for to 00:43:49
make a recommendation for approval or denial. So OK, so we're we're just concerned that with the reason that the that the owners 00:43:55
of the property maintain what would be. 00:44:02
Holiday. 00:44:10
Specifications. OK, that's great. Thank you. 00:44:12
Do we have? Yes, Sir. 00:44:19
Good evening. My name is Aiden Bradney. We live in the property on the West of. 00:44:26
Weather changes to the planning to be scheduled. I'm sorry, what was the address I missed it 1922? 00:44:32
Directly West. 00:44:40
1920 two 5600 OK right where the mouse is there, so if you are. 00:44:42
Open up that parcel, assessor. It's kind of a little clearer to see. 00:44:47
But there's a couple of main concerns. One is that we live in an area of outstanding natural beauty. If the canyons were 100 miles 00:44:53
away, there would be national parks without a shadow of a doubt. And the view from our deck is something that is phenomenal is one 00:45:00
of the reasons we moved into holiday was to have Mount Olympus on our doorstep. We moved prior to the. 00:45:08
That HOA housing R210, that doesn't impact us too much, but our fear is that if they rezone 1932 and then all of a sudden we're 00:45:17
going to be putting two floor structures in there, our view will completely disappear. 00:45:26
Beyond that and we did e-mail photographs from our deck as soon as this came up. 00:45:35
The other thing is, if you can see the width of the driveway leading to the back, that is directly on our RV pad. Now whether we 00:45:41
have an RV, there is not a problem. But that driveway on a great day is probably about 7 feet wide and they have one car in and 00:45:48
out. The people that live in the front house right now and they're a wonderful young couple with a couple of kids, no problems 00:45:55
with them whatsoever. As soon as there are going to be more apartments, houses. 00:46:01
Whatever goes in back there, there's going to definitely be a congestion issue. 00:46:09
Road parking is kind of out of the question already because of the amount of employees and people that visit the assisted living 00:46:15
across the road. 00:46:18
And then there is a, to the best of my knowledge, is still there. I'm kind of not around you in the daytime anymore, but that, 00:46:22
well, it was kind of like a daycare. 00:46:27
In that 278024 house there was a daycare there, so there's a lot of traffic on the road. 00:46:33
But as soon as they stop putting apartments in there and you've got to think that each apartments probably got two or three 00:46:41
vehicles in today's standards, then there's definitely going to be. 00:46:45
An issue with vehicles. 00:46:50
To speak to the condition of the front property, we've always loved it. It's kind of. 00:46:53
A pretty looking property. They just recently did the roof. No problems with that at all. The back would be wonderful if it was 00:46:59
made into a. 00:47:02
A real nice yard. We never we live right next door. We never had any problems with the swimming pool. We if the rats are coming 00:47:06
from the canal. 00:47:10
They never came across our backyard. We've never had any rat issues whatsoever. 00:47:16
But you'd occasionally hear a duck in the swimming pool. I thought that was kind of funny, but never an issue with with Joan, 00:47:20
anyone at all. But my fear is that this property at the back, if that starts getting construction in there and construction 00:47:27
equipment, there's going to be a major knock on effect to us who are directly next door. And then as soon as they put in the 00:47:34
permission and all of a sudden you can build 2 Storey houses in that location. 00:47:41
The quaintness of holiday all of a sudden I feel starts to tumble. What's to stop me from applying to make my house three stories 00:47:49
high and that would get shot down immediately. So it's this kind of ongoing. 00:47:56
Yeah, I think it's going to snowball personally and our beautiful view of those mountains is going to be massively impacted. 00:48:04
Thank you very much for your comments. I appreciate it. 00:48:13
Do we have any other members of the public that wish to make comment at this time? 00:48:20
My name is Kurt Larson. I live at 5646 Nations Way. 00:48:31
Just W one St. West of the property. 00:48:36
Our big concern is a little bit what Hayden was talking about is all the cars on the street with the living assisted living across 00:48:41
the street. We constantly have cars parked up and down the street, sometimes even on our street because they have gatherings and 00:48:48
whatnot over there and all we need to do is that, you know four or five more cars to that. I know building is only don't really 00:48:56
take that into consideration. 00:49:03
But somebody ought to. It's just it's crazy. I don't know how that assisted living got by with no, you know not nearly enough 00:49:11
parking. It's it's just there's always cars up and down there. We come around the corner and just about plow into them because 00:49:16
they they don't park where they should and. 00:49:22
It just seems like a real inconvenience for us. 00:49:28
Also another concern I had when they put in the HOA. 00:49:34
They had to bring the level of the foundations up six feet out of the ground, the existing ground, to make the sewer lines work. 00:49:38
I would think they might have the same problem if they built something in the back there and. 00:49:48
If they've got to bring that up six feet out of the ground, Taddy Oka lives right behind him. He's going to feel like he's in a 00:49:53
hole. 00:49:56
It's just so I wanted to. 00:50:01
Make sure that if that's the case, I, you know, I don't want another building 6 feet out of the ground right there. So that's 00:50:05
that's all the comments I have. 00:50:10
Thank you very much. Appreciate it. 00:50:16
All right. Did we have any other comments? 00:50:23
If you come back up, I'll allow. 00:50:30
You get 60 seconds on the clock. 00:50:33
But restate your name and address so we know which one it is. Adam Bradney, 1922 E 5600 S. 00:50:36
Kurt has brought something up there. 00:50:43
Clicked in. My mind is last year we had major plumbing issues that they had to dig up our entire backyard. 00:50:45
And the whole structure under there, with the plumbing crew, with the cameras and everything, it's already pretty maxed out, 00:50:52
according to the plumbing company that came out in the city that came out that had to say, yes, you know, the new plumbing lines 00:50:58
are great. They said that the infrastructure below ground is already starting to look a bit tired. 00:51:05
So I'm sure that the house at the front doesn't have a problem. But as soon as you start putting eight more toilets back there and 00:51:12
a few more bathtubs, goodness knows what's going to happen as well as what Coat was saying about raising the level of ground. 00:51:19
That is all. Thank you. All right. Thank you. 00:51:27
Nailed it. 60 seconds. Good job. Just kidding. All right, one more. Go ahead. 00:51:30
You gotta come up to the mic and give us. 00:51:36
We got to get it for our recorder, just so you know, I know who you are, but we got to get it recorded. Jim Preston 5670 Nations 00:51:42
way. So I'm. I'm not even on the map here but. 00:51:48
You know, I want to just kind of find out. So, Mr. Lewis, what do you want to do? 00:51:54
So my whole thing would be. 00:52:35
So how many, how many square feet, how many square? Jim, Jim, Jim, Jim, back-to-back back to the Planning Commission. Please, 00:52:38
we're not, we're not talking to the applicant right now. You're talking how many square feet are on the property. 00:52:44
The property is. So if you got our 2:10, you can put a duplex on 10,000 feet. 00:52:50
How many square feet do you have? 00:52:56
Right. 00:52:59
So it's 19,166 square feet or .44 acres. 00:53:00
OK, well, so. 00:53:06
You know, I'm all for improving the property. You know, on the one hand we're here and leave it like it is and and and make it 00:53:09
better. But then I don't know if Mr. Lewis wants to make it into a piano teaching facility again. If he gets approval to do it and 00:53:16
just and if he don't if he got that, he'd he'd he'd do that again. I I don't know. 00:53:23
As far as the the, the property goes if if it's allowed for. 00:53:32
R210 duplex per 10,000 feet. 00:53:40
Then I'd want to be, you know, listening to what, how many, how many, what? What is the height limitation. We've got Aiden here 00:53:45
that he's got a situation with the height, so. 00:53:51
That would be. 00:53:59
Part of my my question is how are we going to improve the property? How has the property going to be improved? And I guess that's 00:54:00
something that isn't going to be determined until it is made to an R210. I'd like to ask Mr. Lewis, is the existing home on 56 00:54:06
going to remain? 00:54:12
And we can give the applicant a chance to come up and address any comments made to the public after we close the hearing. So we 00:54:19
can definitely table that and see if Mr. Lewis wishes to respond. So thank you for your comments. 00:54:24
I think and did we and was there anyone else we haven't heard from that wanted to make comment before I close the public hearing. 00:54:32
OK. I think we got just about everybody today. So we'll go ahead and close the public hearing at this time then. And if Mr. Lewis 00:54:38
would like to come up and just make any address remarks to the comments that were made by the public, yes, happy to do that and 00:54:44
happy to have conversations. 00:54:49
So just trying to kind of tick these off. Well, I don't know if I should get into the **** issue that that you know, one thing you 00:54:57
have to remember is. 00:55:01
My parents had this property and built some of these structures long before the Highland Court. 00:55:06
Facility was built so that shed that they're talking about that's close to the property line that was there when Don Wilson had 00:55:12
his huge backyard that was all just grass back there to the east and then obviously that was all taken over and these tall twin 00:55:20
homes were built and they are tall and they do look down you know into we have a fence back there but they look into the yard you 00:55:28
know and they are tall now I would be that's why I said before I on on some of the other. 00:55:35
You know, like I said, code enforcement came out about the smell of the chemicals, those things. 00:55:43
They didn't see anything. They didn't hear any. You know, they smelled. There's nothing to that, that I know there's never been a 00:55:49
mattress out there. I rechecked with the tenants. That's never been the case. So, you know, some of these things I think are 00:55:56
overblown. And again, I'm kind of, I feel like some of the other things are just premature. 00:56:02
Because like I said, we asked should we just try to do a rezone application with a plan on what we might do with the property? 00:56:09
But we're told that we had to take these kind of seriatim steps, So what we're doing is just trying to figure out can we get it? 00:56:17
Rezoned R210. 00:56:20
We would have plans, we could investigate, you know, whether we could change that existing structure into something. 00:56:58
Or you know a different thing. But all of these issues about parking and sewer and all those things would be considered as part of 00:57:04
that. That's how I understood it would work. So I'm not maybe it's unsatisfying, but not I don't. I don't have it. We haven't put 00:57:10
in the time effort but to figure out exactly what we do. But that would be the plan. If we got the R210 is then we would 00:57:16
investigate different options. 00:57:22
Discuss those. 00:57:28
You obviously have to come back to the city to get approvals for any of those plans and I think we'd have to factor in all of 00:57:30
these, you know, issues about parking and access and other things, so. 00:57:36
That may not be the most satisfying answer to say we don't know, but we just understand this is the first step. It does. You know, 00:57:44
it's not out of line with any of the surrounding properties in our view, so we can address all these other concerns. 00:57:51
In the next step. 00:58:00
I appreciate to appreciate the additional comments and clarification there. Just real quick before you sit down, Commissioners, 00:58:02
any other questions for the applicant that haven't been addressed in either of his addresses? All right, we'll go ahead and have 00:58:08
you sit down. Thank you very much. All right. And with that, we will now turn to our discussion and I have asked Commissioner 00:58:14
Baron if he would just lead our discussion before any motions are made on this to capture everybody's input on this. 00:58:21
I did close the feed. If I didn't already say that, I apologize. The public hearing has been closed. 00:58:28
OK. And with that, Commissioner Baron. OK, well, based on all the questions were asked earlier, I'm not sure how we're going to 00:58:33
lead this discussion. So one of the things I had to ask is of staff for the R210, you're saying that there's three total single 00:58:39
family detached dwellings. 00:58:45
Allowed on the property, but that's if they had access. 00:58:52
Because it looks like the lots too narrow to have the 20 foot access point right? 00:58:56
Yeah. So if they were to take out access, I think the measurement if we've measured 20 feet on here, I that's one of the issues 00:59:03
that would be addressed once they apply for adding additional units onto the property is how wide is the access and fire looks at 00:59:11
that access requirements there are. 00:59:20
Umm, exceptions. Sometimes if there isn't an appropriate access, you could do fire sprinklers. That's all addressed through fire 00:59:30
code. So fire code is what regulates the the width of the access Rd. and any exceptions because there are sometimes properties 00:59:37
that are further back typically. 00:59:43
Properties that can't be or structures that can't be accessed with a fire truck have to have fire sprinklers in it. OK, well part 00:59:51
of my question is to try and answer the question that the audience is asking is what's potentially could happen here? Yeah. The 00:59:58
second question is, is the height allowed in the R110 and the R210 the same? They are the same. OK, so not to scare you, but they 01:00:05
can build the two-story structure now. 01:00:12
Yes. Any zoning change? Yeah. So current code is properties. Less than half an acre is 32 feet in height. That's to the top of the 01:00:19
Ridge. 01:00:25
The additional control on height is graduated height, so that pushes taller areas of a structure further away from our property 01:00:33
line. 01:00:38
That graduated A height applies to all structures, so primary structures and accessory structures. 01:00:43
OK. So if they wanted a second story on the extra structure in the back, it would be more in the middle. They could not do it up 01:00:50
against the lot line, right? 01:00:54
I'm sorry you take up all the time, but another question. If they were to do the three single family or the attached to whatever 01:01:01
the maximum development you thought they could put on the property, if they were to do AD use as part of either one, or they're 01:01:08
not subdividing the property or another Adu, does that also have to be fire sprinkled? 01:01:15
And that may be a question if you're talking, are you asking about an external Adu or I'm just trying to see just. 01:01:24
Again, helping the audience figure out exactly what we could see potentially being built on the property with an R210. 01:01:33
So the state requires that accessory dwelling units are allowed in any residential zone. We have recent code amendments that are 01:01:40
being heard by City Council currently that would limit external or sorry ADUS to detach structures only. So in a situation like 01:01:50
this in an R2 zone where an Adu would be permitted by the state code. 01:02:00
If they were to do an attached unit with two units in one single building. 01:02:10
Those units couldn't have 80 use because it is an attached structure. If they were to detach and do three separate detached units, 01:02:16
each of those could have an internal or an external Edu. External Adu varies based off of what the lot size is. 01:02:25
So that you may not see. It's highly unlikely you'd see an external Adu on those properties. All that dependent on what passes 01:02:36
with City Council, but. 01:02:41
So because you're looking at, OK, what is the potential units plus accessory units? Accessory units would likely be an internal 01:02:48
accessory unit and I would say that's pretty common. Most people are adding kind of a second kitchen or area that can be converted 01:02:55
to an accessory unit that they want to incorporate into a single family house. So if single family houses were built, each of 01:03:02
those single family houses could have an accessory dwelling unit. 01:03:09
With fire sprinklers. 01:03:16
Right access would all be determined if it If it needs to be fire sprinkled, that's what it would need to be. 01:03:18
OK. Just two more questions and I'll be quick. OK. There's a street to the South of this property. I know it's probably a private 01:03:26
road, but if they were to get access to that. 01:03:31
Does that change the dynamic of? 01:03:36
How they could develop the property, right. So you're you're referring to this private subdivision, Yeah. 01:03:39
Yeah, that would have to be an agreement or worked out with the with the planned unit development that's there. 01:03:48
I mean, I've seen other situations where the property owner has approached the planned unit development. In many cases they don't 01:03:59
want to incorporate that area and their subdivision would have to be amended to add property into it. So it would require the the 01:04:05
PUD to bring. 01:04:11
New units in, but then those units would have to conform to whatever standards are in the PUD. So there's there's benefits that 01:04:19
might be there that the that that community may want to consider if they want to have a similar development pattern. 01:04:26
That's something that then they are to you, and they could do that even without rezoning. If they wanted to bring an area into 01:04:35
their PUD, a rezone wouldn't need to be. 01:04:41
Done because they just capture an additional area of land. 01:04:48
As long as the front area then would retain the 10,000 square foot minimum so but we would have to get it that would require then 01:04:53
the PUD. 01:04:57
Approving that that amendment onto their subdivision, so. 01:05:02
And maybe this is a question for the applicant. I'm not sure if that's been discussed at all, but a lot of times beauties are not. 01:05:09
Super amenable into adding more units into their into their planned unit development, but you sometimes get outlier like 01:05:19
properties like this where maybe this property owner didn't want to sell a portion of their property to that developer's. 01:05:25
At that point in time and so that's where it kind of ended up. I just wondered if. 01:05:32
You know all the planets align and they agreed to do it if that changes the dynamic of. 01:05:38
How much access? Obviously it would reduce how much access, but yeah, it would, if it were incorporated into that PUD, it would 01:05:44
just meet the standards of the PUD. So their planned unit development would be amended. 01:05:51
Similar to these properties that are here, to the east of this property you just have setbacks that are designated on the plat. 01:05:58
Essentially it would be 3 properties, but it'd be just the duplex. I'm trying to factor out all the possibilities of what could 01:06:06
ultimately be built there to kind of give some of the audience some reassurance that if that does happen, that's all things that 01:06:13
would have to be worked out between the land owners in that private development if they wanted to do an access easement and have 01:06:20
the property access. I mean, there's there's different approaches there, but it does require all of the. 01:06:28
Or does require the approval? 01:06:36
And the legal process to be followed with that planned unit development, OK. 01:06:38
Finally, I'm just trying to figure out as we look through the general plan criteria. 01:06:44
And the approval criteria for rezoning and that type of thing, this appears to meet the intent or the kind of expectation of being 01:06:49
in the same character of the adjacent properties. So we take that into consideration. If this were ultimately developed, do you 01:06:56
see that the future development would be? 01:07:03
Consistent with that character we're trying to preserve. 01:07:12
I'm trying to figure out what would happen if right. You're going to have character that is very highly controlled within a 01:07:17
beauty, but this area is not within a beauty, so you're not going to have that same architectural kind of similarity. Total number 01:07:26
of units if we're reducing it to just what is what is on the land and using that as a indicator of character. 01:07:34
Yes, it would be in character with. 01:07:44
So is just the 2 units if the density is consistent with properties adjacent to one another. 01:07:49
Is that by nature? 01:07:55
Meeting the character of the area. 01:07:58
Yes, I any residential neighborhood does. What is the character of a of a neighborhood? It's really subjective, but overall 01:08:02
character could be summarized as just a. 01:08:08
Single family or two family dwelling unit. So character here is to family, yes, yes, because I mean I appreciate the way you just 01:08:18
said it because it is very difficult to say. 01:08:24
We're trying to figure out exactly how it's supposed to meet up to make kind of that. 01:08:32
Yeah. And I think is that in? 01:08:41
Is there a specific point on the general plan that references the character? I don't remember exactly where that's at. Oh, it's 01:08:44
the third one. Retain and protect the natural environmental character of the city and its neighborhoods? 01:08:50
So. 01:08:59
So as long as it's a neighborhood, it's a neighborhood character. 01:09:01
It's really ambiguous, though it is. Character is always subjective. 01:09:07
What do you want to loop into it? What do you not want to I anything is going to vary in the neighborhood. You're going to have 01:09:12
some houses that have been remodeled substantially that have very different looks or feels. You could have a neighborhood that has 01:09:18
a mix of two stories and single stories all intermingled in it. 01:09:25
In this area, and that's where it's just the simplest, most basic is is the neighborhood? Is it a neighborhood? Do you have what 01:09:33
is a neighborhood character? Neighborhood character is properties that are used for residential purposes. 01:09:40
OK. Well, I've kind of driven the Commission off the Cliff here. Follow up to your. 01:09:49
Where you were going I think if one of these prior non conforming duplexes. 01:09:54
Change property and the new property owner wanted to build. 01:10:03
A new duplex? Would he have to come in and rezone R210 if the property was destroyed by natural means? He can rebuild if. 01:10:06
If it is not, if they selectively demolished a duplex, they couldn't rebuild a duplex, and I think that applies to this property. 01:10:18
Let me roll down the east. 01:10:26
And then the one zone nations, right? Yeah, just prior just this one duplexes that are really single property home and I'm not. 01:10:33
When I looked at Google Maps, this had two addresses associated with it, but I'm not sure if that one is E legal non conforming 01:10:44
duplex. This one definitely is. 01:10:48
And then this duplex is already zoned as R2. 01:10:54
I can address some of the other comments if the Planning Commission has more questions about those. I think largely Commissioner 01:11:02
Baron has addressed a lot of those questions with access and. 01:11:09
What is addressed at a building permit level? That's where we're looking at all the utility connections. Utility connection 01:11:18
letters are required for building improvements. Converting an accessory structure into a living space? That's. 01:11:26
Building the Building official will be looking at the plans to make sure that they're meeting building code. Utility letters have 01:11:34
to be. 01:11:38
Provide a letter saying that utility service is available for the additional units. They have their metrics that they're looking 01:11:45
at in assessing that if there were substantial redevelopment like a subdivision and. 01:11:52
New lots created. A utility provider may require the applicant to upgrade the service line in order to account for those 01:12:01
additional units. So that's something that is addressed when they're applying for a building permit or that we'd see if they're 01:12:07
doing a subdivision. 01:12:12
But as is, if they were just to convert the existing accessory building, they would be required to have that reviewed by the 01:12:19
utility providers. 01:12:23
All of the upkeep issues, those are addressed just with code enforcement. Same standard for every property and holiday and 01:12:30
foundation wise I that's just. 01:12:37
Depending on the grade of the property, we don't regulate what size of foundation is, but building height is regulated and it is 01:12:45
the same in R1 and R2 zones. 01:12:50
Those are all next steps, none of which are applicable to tonight's current proposal or application before us, which tonight is 01:12:56
just specifically the Zone. And does the Zone meet all the criteria for a rezone? Is it applicable? Does it make sense? 01:13:04
And so with that other commissioners comments, one question. 01:13:14
Some of the folks in the audience talked about parking. 01:13:19
And. 01:13:23
Is it correct that? 01:13:25
This application, any anything that's built has to include on site parking. 01:13:27
Yes, so residential. 01:13:34
Development is to parking spaces required for each residential unit. 01:13:37
So they would have to meet those standards. If they're adding an additional unit, they have to have to. 01:13:44
Parking spaces for that additional unit. 01:13:49
On the comment of street parking, Street parking is a public good that's available to anyone. We don't regulate street parking 01:13:55
beyond limiting it to 24 hours at a time. 01:14:01
The home occupation daycare that existed that was referenced by one of the comments is no longer in Operation 2. 01:14:09
Commissioners, other questions, comments. 01:14:21
Everybody says, OK, we're all soaking it in at the moment. All right. Yes, go ahead. 01:14:26
The issue of. 01:14:33
A structure being in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. Is that something that the technical review committee gets 01:14:36
involved with or? 01:14:40
No, because we don't have character standards for neighborhoods. Neighborhoods are residential, so the character is is it a 01:14:47
residential use? 01:14:51
Because that is what neighborhoods are. Neighborhoods are residential use. That is the only character that we have to rely on for 01:14:57
neighborhoods. And you're going to have neighborhoods with older homes that get replaced with newer homes. Some people buy 01:15:04
multiple parcels and build giant homes. Is that out of character with the neighborhood? It's. 01:15:10
It's not. It's not a factor beyond is it a residential use. 01:15:18
Oh boy, yeah. Well at the end of the day for me, when I look at this, I'm just going to throw my comment out there. When I look at 01:15:26
this, I think I I for me it's just why is it? It sounds like based on what the applicant is trying to do with a potential 01:15:33
subdivide, it feels like an R18 would satisfy that and also satisfy the general plan of the city, which for this area has been 01:15:40
earmarked as low density residential stable. 01:15:48
Right. Like I feel like that. 01:15:55
Somehow is the path that should have been on and it got skewed and steered off into the R210 and I don't know if it's just 01:15:59
because, well the neighbors have it, let's do that. I don't, I'm not I can't speak to that. But the the three home thing and part 01:16:06
of it just has me a little bit concerned because I think that's you know, at what point does the domino effect happen And then the 01:16:12
neighbors duplex becomes a triplex and then the next neighbors becomes a triplex or you know R2 et cetera. 01:16:19
Highland Court, thank you. I think that'd be easy. But Highland Court, I think that one would fall under the exception rule 01:16:58
because it falls into that master plan. 01:17:03
That's very controlled to City staff's point, right. That's not going to go change. Nobody's going to sell that property and go in 01:17:39
and subdivide it. It's already part of a master plan as where this has no control mechanisms on it whatsoever. And you know, build 01:17:45
it bigger, better, faster, higher, whatever fits as long as it can fit in there. We've just given it the green light to do so. So 01:17:51
that's my only reservation on R2 versus an R18. And with that I will be quiet and see if any other commissioners have thoughts or 01:17:57
if we have a motion. 01:18:03
I appreciate the Commissioners direction. With that. I do, however, reading in the staff report. 01:18:09
It says under guidelines in the general Plan, rezone request should be considered only when increases in density will not 01:18:17
negatively impact the established development pander. 01:18:22
Patterns in the surrounding neighborhood which this would not, and even with the increased units I think it would still fit. New 01:18:28
development will be accommodated through utilizing unclaimed density. I'm not sure what that means anymore. Rezoning may be 01:18:35
appropriate when increased density will not destabilize the existing neighborhood. 01:18:42
Based on that criteria or those defining points, I think there's merit to this. I think that. 01:18:50
In my questions there are some limiting factors to how narrow the property is and the access to that which. 01:18:59
May be cost prohibitive to do a number of these things but. 01:19:07
To me, I'm seeing that this is kind of meeting the intent. 01:19:12
You know whether that. 01:19:18
I don't know. 01:19:21
That helps though for me. 01:19:25
Well, if anyone else has, unless there's no further comments, I've had the same thought about the R18 being a better zoning and I 01:19:28
I wonder. 01:19:34
I don't know how everyone feels, so I don't know what the vote is going to be, but if this is some food for thought for the 01:19:40
applicant. 01:19:44
And whether the applicant would have any concern if we tabled this for the next meeting. 01:19:48
To let him decide if. 01:19:55
These other things have been talked about, which zoning he really wants. I mean, he could get a vote today. He may get it, he may 01:19:57
not. He could certainly come back another time and try, you know, on our 1/8. 01:20:03
Or maybe we could be efficient and table this for two weeks and? 01:20:09
Maybe he changes it or doesn't change it takes a chance, I don't know. 01:20:14
Well, and I'll defer to city staff on that. What would be the correct protocol, something like that? 01:20:19
Yeah, that would be an option. 01:20:26
I think when looking at R18, if I were walking through R18, there's going to be significant challenges if the applicant is trying 01:20:30
to use that back. 01:20:35
Building. It's rezoning the whole property to R18. 01:20:42
You would then need to do a planned unit development or subdivided, but then the. 01:20:48
R18 still comes with significant challenges in being able to use that and I think that's possibly where that are too. O 10 01:20:55
recommendation comes in is that it is an easy way to say OK 2 units. 01:21:02
The that's there's two structures existing on the property, and it is. 01:21:11
A clearer process moving forward for the applicant and using the property or subdividing. 01:21:17
R2 subdividing is still going to have some challenges with it as well I. 01:21:27
We talked about the access when I pulled out. 01:21:32
Kind of a area that would go from the property line back to where that structure is. It's roughly 2200 square feet. So if you're 01:21:37
taking 2200 square feet out of their 1900, that's going to be pretty close on even an R18 subdivision if they're. 01:21:46
Yeah, because they're nineteen 19166, taking out 2200 square feet of roadway access. 01:21:56
16 and 16 by two is 8 right? Right. 01:22:07
So it's it's tough, but it's doable. Doable, yes. 01:22:10
Where R2 could avoid some of those those issues. But even with an R2, that existing structure is still legal non conforming 01:22:15
because of its placement on the setbacks, right? So either way, that's still going to present a hassle if he says hey, I wanna 01:22:20
make this a home now, right? 01:22:25
I think my concern just, I mean that's a really interesting thought and I. 01:22:33
I think. 01:22:39
And the list of considerations just on the very first page of the staff report. 01:22:42
Is it consistent with the general plan? I also think so. It seems to be. Is it consistent with the character of adjacent 01:22:47
properties? It seems to be. 01:22:51
Umm, this 4th one is their adequacy of the whatever it sounds like that's going to be a limiting factor and so to me, I'm not. 01:22:57
I mean, certainly it could be built up, absolutely. But it sounds like there's there going to be a lot of pieces to puzzle in 01:23:08
about that. 01:23:13
But but I think. 01:23:19
I'm in favor of the R210 over the considering an R18 or sending them back to consider. That is because it would match the things 01:23:22
that are next to it, and so even though it's a PUD and even though it's a sort of a special arrangement having having that whole 01:23:28
thing be a matching zone. 01:23:34
Makes I think more logistical sense to me than having one property that's sort of different, you know, so in. 01:23:42
20 years as as these buildings may or may not change. 40 years having something that's not maybe gonna have to be rezoned again in 01:23:51
some funny way that doesn't match the ones next to it, I'm not sure. I that's my thought about that. 01:23:58
Thank you, Commissioner Bill. 01:24:06
So it sounds like we have some interesting discussion points. We've covered and gone over this pretty well. But I think what's 01:24:10
before us tonight has been prepared well by staff and if someone wants to make a motion on it, we can see where that lands unless 01:24:16
anyone has an objection to a motion being made. 01:24:21
Or additional comments to consider. 01:24:28
With that, is anyone willing to make a motion? 01:24:31
This is Commissioner Barrett, a motion to forward recommendation to the City Council to approve an application by Matthew and 01:24:39
Amanda Lewis to amend the Holiday Zoning Map for .44 acres of land located on 1932 E 5600 S from R110 to R210, based on the 01:24:48
following findings that the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan. 01:24:58
The proposed amendment is harmonious with the overall character of the existing development in the vicinity. 01:25:08
The proposed amendment will not will. 01:25:14
To the extent of which the proposed amendment may adversely affect abutting properties. 01:25:18
And the adjacency of facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, such as roadways, parks, recreational 01:25:24
facilities, and so forth. 01:25:30
All right, we have a motion as anyone seconding that. 01:25:37
I second the motion. 01:25:43
Right, Commissioner going to 2nd and therefore we will call for a vote. I will start down here with Commissioner Barron Aye, 01:25:44
Commissioner Gong Aye, Commissioner Font aye, Commissioner Wilcinski, Commissioner Cunningham, nay. And Chair Roach votes nay. And 01:25:52
with that it will move forward with a four to two recommendation to City Council to approve my math is correct. 01:26:00
All right. Thank you very much. 01:26:09
And with that, we have just one more item on the agenda this evening, which is just approval of minutes from February 6th meeting 01:26:13
and from March 5th meeting. I was here for the February 6th and read through those minutes. I did not find any discrepancies or 01:26:20
adjustments that needed to be made. Did anyone else find anything from the February 6th that there was concern? I wasn't here, so 01:26:28
I won't vote on this. OK, so all in favor to approve the two 6 minutes? Aye. Aye. All righty, it's unanimous. And then? 01:26:36
On the three 5 minutes, I was not here, so I have no idea if those minutes are accurate or not. Any suggested amendments or 01:26:44
adjustments to those by anyone that was here? 01:26:49
No, they're they were fine to me. All right. And all in favor of approval of those minutes. Aye. Aye. All righty. And that takes 01:26:55
us to the top of the hour, 7:00 PM on the dot. Thank you for the discussion this evening. And do we have a motion to adjourn the 01:27:00
meeting? 01:27:04
So move. All right, Double motioned. All right. With that, all in favor, say aye. Aye. Done and done. Thank you very much, 01:27:11
everyone. 01:27:14
scroll up