Live stream not working in Chrome or Edge? Click Here
No Bookmarks Exist.
Sugar. | 00:00:00 | |
Oh, sure. Happy dinner, all right. | 00:00:01 | |
Good evening. Welcome to the holiday City Planning Commission work meeting. It is 536. I believe we have everyone in attendance | 00:00:05 | |
except for Commissioners. Vilchinsky and Commissioner Gong are not with us at this time. Everyone else is here, city staff and | 00:00:13 | |
council. We have one public hearing item today for a zone amendment and then some minutes to approve. | 00:00:21 | |
Carrier, John, which one of us, which one of you will be walking us through this one exciting agenda item we have tonight? | 00:00:30 | |
That's me and I just discovered this microphone doesn't move so. | 00:00:37 | |
Which is very sad. The other one does. So the sole item on the agenda for a public hearing is a rezone from RM to PO. This is kind | 00:00:43 | |
of our standard rezones that we'll see for RM STPO. | 00:00:50 | |
The property owner has some additional uses that they'd like to utilize in the PO zone. Since those uses are not allowed in the | 00:00:59 | |
room zone, one of their tenants is provides massage services which is falls under personal service which is allowable in the PO | 00:01:08 | |
zone and not allowable in the room zone. So the RM zone originally only had office use. | 00:01:18 | |
So in order to have that tenant in the building, they need to. | 00:01:29 | |
Rezone so that they are compliant with the uses. | 00:01:32 | |
Any questions? It's pretty straightforward. | 00:01:38 | |
So did you have a question, Commissioner? | 00:01:46 | |
Yeah. | 00:01:53 | |
Yeah, it can be fun. It's good to be aware of what kind of crowd you get right. And they would like to have a business license, so | 00:01:55 | |
and we would also like them to have a business license. | 00:02:00 | |
So nothing is being done to this property. There's no changes happening. It's literally just a use allowance and it's basically | 00:02:08 | |
just pretty. | 00:02:12 | |
Taking something that's existing, non conforming and bringing it up like several others of these we have seen in the last couple | 00:02:17 | |
years, right? Yep, just expanding uses to beyond just an office use. So and then in the future the property owner could lease to | 00:02:25 | |
there's like dental laboratories, medical laboratories. | 00:02:32 | |
Professional services like salons. | 00:02:41 | |
There's more uses that are permitted in the PO zone than were originally in the RM zone. | 00:02:45 | |
So that was kind of the intention of the PO zone being created was to have more uses than the RM zone originally had, so that then | 00:02:52 | |
those property owners would have kind of that extra incentive to rezone. | 00:02:58 | |
But there's still residential component to PO, isn't there? Yeah, in the PO zone you can still do a conditional use permit for a | 00:03:06 | |
mixed-use development. So it just has to be accessory to the office uses. | 00:03:13 | |
So really, they're giving up nothing and just gaining and becoming compliant, which was the city's intent in the 1st place, yeah. | 00:03:21 | |
Complicated one, I know. Questions. | 00:03:31 | |
All right, and then we have the approval of minutes and in anticipation for our actual meeting. Did anyone have anything? First | 00:03:35 | |
off, I'm curious, did anyone go back and watch May's meeting just for grins and giggles? | 00:03:42 | |
OK, I didn't either like I just. | 00:03:49 | |
Keep up to date. I did not go back and watch it. I read through it. I didn't see anything that looked inaccurate or that needed to | 00:03:56 | |
be changed. Did anyone else see anything in May that caused concern? | 00:04:01 | |
OK. And then how about October 1st? Anything stand out to anybody on those meeting minutes if they had a chance to look over them? | 00:04:07 | |
All right. Well then that just makes that one a whole lot quicker to get through. | 00:04:16 | |
So really that means we got 20 minutes and we have council here and he loves to educate us. So I'm going to put you on the spot. | 00:04:22 | |
Is there anything that would be beneficial in the next 15 minutes for us to explore as a Commission? | 00:04:28 | |
Ethics. | 00:04:35 | |
I think it's a good idea always and I this is not related to holiday, so let me make that clear, nor to this Planning Commission, | 00:04:38 | |
but this has come up recently. I. | 00:04:44 | |
Conditional use permits. | 00:04:52 | |
Umm. | 00:04:57 | |
I want you to check the definition of conditional. | 00:04:57 | |
Forevermore when it comes to a conditional use permit. | 00:05:01 | |
They are permitted uses that allow you to put conditions on that are reasonably related, and they have to be related to the. | 00:05:05 | |
Perceived problem that they create right and you have to have and it's under a substantial evidence standard that you have to have | 00:05:16 | |
an objective standard. So for example, if you have an ordinance that says. | 00:05:22 | |
A hotel should not be next to, adjacent to. | 00:05:30 | |
Residential. | 00:05:35 | |
But then you have 1000 feet. | 00:05:38 | |
Between where the hotel will be and where the 1st house is. | 00:05:40 | |
Technically it's still adjacent. | 00:05:46 | |
Right, because the property lines a **** but that particular. | 00:05:49 | |
Standard is. | 00:05:54 | |
Doesn't doesn't hold water to substantial, it's not as sufficient and substantial evidence. So what are the things that some of | 00:05:57 | |
the conditions that you could put on when you have something like that, you could have a distance in your ordinance that says you | 00:06:02 | |
should not have. | 00:06:07 | |
A 24 hour use kind of business next to residential within. | 00:06:14 | |
300 feet. | 00:06:20 | |
Really easy to measure 300 feet. | 00:06:22 | |
And maybe it says 300 feet from the property line, or maybe it says 300 feet from the entrance. But either way, you have something | 00:06:24 | |
that you can objectively determine, right? If you just say it shouldn't be adjacent. | 00:06:30 | |
OK. Well and and then you in your zoning map you have, oh I don't know, not a single commercial zone that isn't next to | 00:06:37 | |
residential. | 00:06:43 | |
So you have to apply it to the context. So when your ordinance says no hotel next to or no hotel or no 24 hour operations next to | 00:06:51 | |
a residential. | 00:06:57 | |
Unit. You can't just have AG or a residential zone without a house on it. | 00:07:05 | |
That doesn't work either. | 00:07:11 | |
There's no impact, right? But then you have to have a. But if you do have that and you want to say, you know, it should say should | 00:07:13 | |
maybe not shell should be able to mitigate. What are the kind of things and conditions that you could put on it? Well, you could | 00:07:19 | |
put a higher fence right around it. So you're screening and you could put landscaping barriers, landscape screening that could | 00:07:25 | |
help mitigate. What are you trying to mitigate? You're trying to mitigate privacy concerns. | 00:07:31 | |
Umm, we had a situation where. | 00:07:38 | |
The hotel building itself was three stories, the proposed hotel was three stories, and the nearest residential home was 1000 feet. | 00:07:43 | |
From it, but it was adjacent from the property line, right? So, but then we had a drone footage of the top of the. | 00:07:53 | |
Top of the top window of where it could possibly look. | 00:08:03 | |
And you couldn't see anything with the camera. And this was like a, this was a very high-powered digital camera on this drone and | 00:08:08 | |
it was you couldn't make out. | 00:08:13 | |
Anything from that distance that was. | 00:08:19 | |
I mean, I guess if you're, but again, those are kind of standards that you're not protecting against, right? You can talk about | 00:08:23 | |
lighting, lighting concerns. OK, lighting concerns. OK, well, let's get down facing lighting that has shrouds and that can | 00:08:28 | |
eliminate that. And so anyway, when you're dealing with conditional use and you're talking about what kind of conditions you can | 00:08:33 | |
put on it, you have to articulate #1 what it is you're trying to. | 00:08:39 | |
What impact you're trying to mitigate #2 You have to have an objective standard. If your ordinance requires, has any requirements | 00:08:46 | |
in it, they have to be objective. And then if you do put a condition, it has to be reasonably related to to that particular issue, | 00:08:52 | |
right? So you can't require a. | 00:08:58 | |
So we had one particular condition that was proposed. | 00:09:07 | |
And it was well, we can't do it because we don't have our own Police Department. | 00:09:12 | |
You can't. You can't put a 24 hour business in because you don't have a Police Department. So does that mean you can't have a gas | 00:09:22 | |
station? | 00:09:25 | |
Well, you still have police services from the County Sheriff. | 00:09:29 | |
And there by statute required to respond to any calls for service. So just because it's not a municipal PD and you have a County | 00:09:33 | |
Sheriff, how does that that's not reasonably related to any issue? | 00:09:39 | |
So you have to be able to articulate that standard and when you're creating a record especially, I mean if it's if you're trying | 00:09:48 | |
to put in a. | 00:09:52 | |
I'm trying to think of a. | 00:09:59 | |
You've got a nature preserve right here and you put in a gas station right next to it. | 00:10:02 | |
And you have articulated zones that say, OK, yeah, commercial. But within the so many feet of the nature preserve, you can't put a | 00:10:08 | |
petroleum based, you know, business that you know, has. I mean there's not a gas station in this state that hasn't had a gas leak. | 00:10:15 | |
Right from their tanks, they just very rare. | 00:10:22 | |
But those kind of things, I mean you can, those are conditions that you can articulate its objective standard like OK, this is not | 00:10:28 | |
a good spot for this. | 00:10:31 | |
But then you also have plenty other places within the city. | 00:10:34 | |
And the general plan where you could put them. | 00:10:37 | |
Is that how Salt Lake City got rid of the proposed gas station where the old Sizzler was at? | 00:10:41 | |
13th East and 21st South because they wanted to put a big YEAH. | 00:10:47 | |
I'd have to look at that specific one. I'm aware of it. I saw the headlines, but I didn't pay attention to exactly how sometimes. | 00:10:53 | |
Well, I know it was right, right next to Sugarhouse Park and the neighbors and everything pulled out every possible concern that | 00:11:02 | |
well and sometimes. | 00:11:07 | |
Sometimes it is possible to just wear down the developer. | 00:11:13 | |
I mean, I think that was the right decision to not vote in there. | 00:11:20 | |
As I understood it, most of the record was a. | 00:11:24 | |
Citizen traffic engineers. | 00:11:26 | |
I. | 00:11:31 | |
Relied on him in the findings. | 00:11:38 | |
So does does everybody and, and John could probably weigh in on this too. Does everybody understand what a traffic study is? | 00:11:44 | |
As far as they study the impacts of turning out safety to collision, all those kind of projected volume. So that's part of it. A | 00:11:52 | |
lot of it has to do with trip generation, right? And so will this road support this additional traffic? That's the main question | 00:11:57 | |
it's answering. | 00:12:02 | |
Will the road support? | 00:12:09 | |
Wide enough is the road. | 00:12:11 | |
Yeah. So like you don't put a Walmart on residential street, right, That's what it is. Is it wide enough to handle the so you look | 00:12:13 | |
at the trip generation from this type of use. So if it's. | 00:12:18 | |
Like I mean if it's a 10 unit townhome complex. | 00:12:26 | |
You're going to get what is it average? Is it 4 trips a day for a residential in a townhome? I think it's something close to that. | 00:12:30 | |
I think it's still 6 1/2 is for single family, 6 1/2. Oh, wow. So it may. Yeah, So it may be, Yeah. So 6 1/2 trips a day. And will | 00:12:37 | |
the road handle it? It doesn't sit there and say. | 00:12:43 | |
It doesn't sit there and say is it going to be more congested during peak traffic hours. I mean that's a given. | 00:12:49 | |
Right. So it doesn't look at that. It says will the road support an additional in its current width and depth? Will IT support, | 00:12:56 | |
you know, if it's six and a half 10, so 60 additional trips a day for that 10 unit? | 00:13:03 | |
And if it's a regular residential street that it's on, or even a collector, chances of it failing under a traffic study are almost | 00:13:11 | |
0. | 00:13:14 | |
I mean you have to have so many other. | 00:13:18 | |
Uses around it in our ordinance or in your ordinance, there's a threshold of. | 00:13:20 | |
Most cities have. | 00:13:25 | |
If you're getting impacted at least 10% of what the maximum threshold is or drops it before below a certain level of service ABCD. | 00:13:26 | |
Then you can start looking at additional conditions on. | 00:13:36 | |
Well, you really look at exactions at that point, right? How do you remedy the traffic that you're bringing is going to cost this | 00:13:40 | |
much to maintain the service level? And so then you look for contributions from the developer to help mitigate those. So what's | 00:13:47 | |
the minimum grade level of service the holiday gives? Is it a C if it gets a C or D engineer would like you would like to maintain | 00:13:54 | |
at least a level C service of all your streets. What is the level C service mean that means? | 00:14:01 | |
Sorry. Sorry. Yeah. | 00:14:09 | |
Yeah. So depending on what traffic engineer is going to be answering that question, it depends on how a number of things you're | 00:14:11 | |
waiting at a light, how long it makes to make a left and right hand turn, what's the backing up queuing of of cars that are at | 00:14:18 | |
light when waiting? How many car trips a day are based upon the width of the road? | 00:14:24 | |
So for example, a residential St. should be around 2500. | 00:14:32 | |
Our trips a day Murray Holiday road to Hialeah Holiday Blvd. and Highland Dr. upwards around 28,000. | 00:14:36 | |
18 to 28,000 depending on when you look at that data and the IT will give a kick out of rating of what that road should be. | 00:14:45 | |
A would be your absolutely no impact. You've got free movement of traffic, no congestion, no congestion at all at any times of the | 00:14:54 | |
day. | 00:14:57 | |
And D or below is basically a failure type situation where. | 00:15:02 | |
It's completely clogged and there's no free movement or safe movement of traffic. | 00:15:06 | |
So it's not the road condition, like there's nothing to do with Rd. No, nothing to do with that. Just what's happening on top of | 00:15:11 | |
the road, on top of the road. | 00:15:15 | |
And if you're interested in seeing models, WFRC has land use traffic models where they're pulling in population data and housing | 00:15:21 | |
data and what the lab uses are around a certain area. Rd. widths, all of that and then using models to project what the the road | 00:15:27 | |
classification would be. | 00:15:34 | |
What with taking Paul's example? | 00:15:41 | |
Any consideration what is generally required to become a traffic engineer mean, do you just like cars? So no, it's it's an | 00:15:45 | |
engineer. Yeah. And everybody thinks they're a traffic engineer. | 00:15:52 | |
I drive on the roads, I know exactly what's going on. | 00:16:01 | |
Yeah. So we contract with a certified doctor Perron, Joe Perrin. I don't know if you've met him before. | 00:16:05 | |
Anybody. He has consulted on some of our projects and he's very well known in the Valley. | 00:16:11 | |
One of the very few actual traffic engineers, except for those that are hired by engineering companies to run traffic. | 00:16:16 | |
Yeah, most education, most full service engineering firms will have a traffic engineer on staff that. | 00:16:24 | |
Is certified to do those and prepare those reports. | 00:16:30 | |
As we look at. | 00:16:33 | |
We've got retail, we've got. | 00:16:36 | |
There are a lot of traffic issues. | 00:16:41 | |
But we look at it piece meal. | 00:16:46 | |
So who looks at? | 00:16:49 | |
Who looks at that project? | 00:16:51 | |
Well, that was a mall before a long time ago and so. | 00:16:55 | |
They've already looked at that's been, yeah, I mean, you've got pretty heavy carrying capacity on the roads around it. If you look | 00:17:01 | |
at the SDMP, there are. | 00:17:05 | |
20% of the STMP is the parking study, the transportation engineering study. So as long as you're not going over the square footage | 00:17:10 | |
of retail and the number of units, the number of parking stalls, you should be somewhere around that. So when we look at each one | 00:17:17 | |
of these individually, we're just at the tipping the iceberg, tipping the iceberg on this type of development. So once we start | 00:17:24 | |
adding up all of the parking stalls that are in there, we use, we'll start looking at quantifying how close they are becoming to. | 00:17:32 | |
Meeting that traffic generation standard. | 00:17:40 | |
So right now it's not anywhere near Yeah. | 00:17:43 | |
Still require. | 00:17:52 | |
Yes. Keeping into park, Yes. | 00:17:59 | |
Yeah, So what I mentioned if you go back at the. | 00:18:04 | |
The traffic data for, say, 2005. | 00:18:07 | |
Highland Dr. was at peak ADT. Average daily traffic was like 29,000 car trips a day. | 00:18:12 | |
And then you can see where it dropped off or the mall was demolished and know where it is now. It's hovering around 13,000. | 00:18:19 | |
We're not even up to where we used to be when that whole parking lot was full of cars during Christmas season, right? | 00:18:26 | |
It won't ever get back to that, I don't think. As far as I recall, no. Another thing that even at full build out it doesn't get to | 00:18:36 | |
that level. | 00:18:40 | |
It will generate less traffic than it used to no matter what. Well, the mixed-use also changed the traffic patterns. | 00:18:45 | |
You know, so yeah, they're not all coming during the open business, Yeah. | 00:18:52 | |
Exactly. If I could, I just want to circle back to where you started with the conditional use permit side of things and you talked | 00:18:59 | |
about some of the language and you know. | 00:19:05 | |
Crafting that the Planning Commission. | 00:19:11 | |
Near as I can tell from what I've been on, it would never be the ones. | 00:19:15 | |
Orchestrating or putting that together right, we would rely on city staff and the applicant to come up with the most sensible. | 00:19:20 | |
Conditional use request and we might suggest a modification here or there, but like rarely or is there going to be a situation | 00:19:27 | |
where it's like, oh, well, here, let's just do this set of things, right? So the Planning Commission can propose, certainly | 00:19:34 | |
propose and add conditions, right? I mean, that's within your authority. They just, you just need to be careful when you do. | 00:19:42 | |
And I would hope that we would. | 00:19:51 | |
You know, if there's some concerns. | 00:19:53 | |
I'd rather deal with those before the meeting than during the meeting. If there's some conditions, I mean we'll usually we'll | 00:19:55 | |
identify staff is really good about identifying what the what the issues that come with this particular use on this property is | 00:20:01 | |
and here's some suggested conditions that can. | 00:20:06 | |
They're defensible. The hard part is when you get conditions that are not defensible. | 00:20:12 | |
Right. And they make it. | 00:20:17 | |
It's always better to have those discussions. | 00:20:23 | |
Not during the meeting Than it is to have them after the meeting and say you can't really have that. | 00:20:26 | |
Because I can't. | 00:20:31 | |
Defended so. | 00:20:32 | |
So Ludmet, though, says you have to approve it if there isn't a condition in place to mitigate. | 00:20:34 | |
So. | 00:20:39 | |
How often is the Planning Commission creating a condition? | 00:20:42 | |
Because that seems counterintuitive to the approval process that if there isn't a condition. | 00:20:46 | |
So I I I'm trying to argue but I'm just trying to say it seems confusing to me that. | 00:20:52 | |
The way Ludma had originally prescribed conditional uses, if there aren't conditions, you have to approve it. Or you have to | 00:21:00 | |
approve it anyway. If they meet the conditions, if they meet you, reasonably so. | 00:21:05 | |
Yeah, I'm nervous about creating conditions. Yeah. There's only been one instance where the Planning Commission in Holiday has | 00:21:11 | |
denied a conditional use site plan based upon the fact that they couldn't meet the conditions, the conditions that were were | 00:21:17 | |
required based upon a very. | 00:21:22 | |
Central core operation of what that use was supposed to be and. | 00:21:29 | |
Because of proximity of homes and such. | 00:21:33 | |
The applicant just simply couldn't do it because it was so critical to what they needed for their use. And so it wasn't. It was | 00:21:36 | |
denied. | 00:21:39 | |
And I can go into what that was. | 00:21:44 | |
So we denied the original ordinance creating those things to answer that before the Planning Commission even discusses Yes, and | 00:21:48 | |
staff, holiday staff does a really good job. | 00:21:54 | |
Giving you reasonable conditions that are defensible. | 00:22:02 | |
And that are related to the issue that you're trying to mitigate, the impact that you're trying to mitigate? | 00:22:05 | |
Look at that. City staff does all the work for us. Isn't it the best job, guys? You guys have the statutory kind of ability to | 00:22:11 | |
rely on. | 00:22:16 | |
I mean, I'm not saying you can't question staff reports, but you have the statutory authority that as a planning commissioner you | 00:22:24 | |
have the right to rely on the reports that staff provide you. So your your job isn't to well. I know nobody's going to sue you for | 00:22:29 | |
negligence for. | 00:22:35 | |
You know a decision that you made because you relied on the report from staff, right? You have the right to rely on staff and | 00:22:41 | |
that. | 00:22:44 | |
On the reports you get from staff and the experts testimony and the expert information that you get from staff. | 00:22:49 | |
That's one of the good things about it, why planning commissioners don't usually get sued personally. | 00:22:55 | |
That's not very rich. | 00:23:01 | |
I'm remembering back. | 00:23:05 | |
Within the last year or two where we had the lady who was selling wanted to sell flowers out of her garden. And so there were | 00:23:07 | |
conditions that we came up with in terms that, you know, she could only sell them between these hours and only so many people | 00:23:12 | |
could come to. | 00:23:18 | |
Time. And is that the type of conditions that you're talking about? Yeah. And the reasons that they are they are that way is | 00:23:24 | |
because the use is a kind of a retail kind of use in the middle of a residential area. | 00:23:30 | |
So makes sense. | 00:23:38 | |
That's good, good discussion. And it took us right to the top of the hour. Look at that, Brad on the spot. Get that man a raise. | 00:23:40 | |
All right, well, with that, we'll close. And once there's anything else, we'll close the work meeting and John will cue us when | 00:23:47 | |
we're ready to start the actual meeting. And I assume we have the applicant here in attendance. | 00:23:54 | |
No, OK. | 00:24:02 | |
OK. | 00:24:06 | |
Just making sure I was gonna. I'm gonna omit the opening statement. If we don't have any members of the public here, we can do | 00:24:07 | |
that, right? OK. Done. So John will let us know when we're ready to rock'n'roll. | 00:24:12 | |
With that, good evening and welcome to the City of Holiday Planning Commission meeting November 19th, 2024. We have our City | 00:24:18 | |
staff, council and Commissioners in attendance, minus Commissioner Gong and Commissioner. | 00:24:25 | |
On the agenda tonight, we have a public hearing for a zone map amendment and then we have an action item of approval of minutes. | 00:24:34 | |
And with no members of the public here, we will omit the opening statement and move right into our first agenda item and ask city | 00:24:40 | |
staff if they will give us a brief overview of that. | 00:24:47 | |
OK. | 00:25:01 | |
All right, so first and only item on our agenda, public hearing for the rezone of 2091 E Murray Holiday Road from its existing RM | 00:25:03 | |
zone, which is residential multifamily to a professional office zone, which is PO. The building currently and has historically | 00:25:12 | |
served as a office building with office uses permitted under the former. | 00:25:20 | |
RM Zone The PO Zone was created in 2018. | 00:25:30 | |
And some of those uses for office space were expanded to include laboratory services. | 00:25:35 | |
Medical dental personal services salon so more I. | 00:25:43 | |
Professional services then existed in the room zone previously that rezones were then expected to occur as property owners wish to | 00:25:50 | |
utilize some of those expanded uses, so this property owner. | 00:25:57 | |
Has a tenant that they would like to bring into compliance with the PO zone. So having one of those uses that is in the PO zone | 00:26:06 | |
and not allowed in the room zone so that they can have. | 00:26:12 | |
A legal conforming status for that use. | 00:26:19 | |
Pretty, pretty basic with the property was identified in 2018. A study was done. There's a map in the packet that shows all the | 00:26:24 | |
properties that existed as office space within room zones. They were the purple squares in that that map that was in your packet. | 00:26:34 | |
And so all of those were identified and expected to rezone to the to the new PO zone when that was created. | 00:26:44 | |
So that is what this application is in dealing with and I'll have the applicant come up with. | 00:26:55 | |
Or if you have any questions for me, Do we have any questions for city staff? I'm not even sure if we have questions for the | 00:27:03 | |
applicant, but if the applicant would like to come forward and add anything that would be. | 00:27:09 | |
Perfectly welcome. | 00:27:15 | |
Bob Nesslin and I really don't have anything to add she. | 00:27:20 | |
Very thorough. | 00:27:24 | |
Great. Any questions for the applicant? All right. Well, thank you very much. Appreciate that. And with that, we will open the | 00:27:26 | |
public hearing. Since there is nobody here, I assume we don't have any live streamers that are like, oh wait, I have comments | 00:27:33 | |
right in that I don't have a way to bring them in. We have no way. So if you're watching online, sorry, you should have showed up | 00:27:39 | |
in person. With that, we'll close the public hearing and we will now move into our Planning Commission discussion. | 00:27:46 | |
Commissioner Baron, Yeah, I just got one question. | 00:27:54 | |
Is there any difference between the RM and the PO site development standards? | 00:27:57 | |
Or the building heights and everything exactly the same. There is a difference in the standards. So when that PO zone was created, | 00:28:04 | |
the building height increased to 40 feet and then some of the setbacks were changed. So it's a 10 foot front yard set back. | 00:28:11 | |
And a 30 foot rear set back when they're adjacent to a residential zone. So it increased a set back distance next to residential | 00:28:19 | |
properties and or residential zones and reduced a set back in the front. So they kind of balanced out. Instead of putting a multi | 00:28:26 | |
family development right in the middle of a property, it moved it closer to the street. All of the differences are listed in the | 00:28:33 | |
packet. | 00:28:39 | |
From that where there's. | 00:28:47 | |
It just reviews what those changes were. Height increased from 35 feet in the room zone to 40 feet in the PIO zone. OK. And the | 00:28:49 | |
parking doesn't change, right? Yeah. Parking is just our standard off St. standards. | 00:28:57 | |
So looking at the current property, it would be existing non conforming to the PO zone just with the current set back then right? | 00:29:05 | |
Yes. So the structure itself is fine, it would just be a non conforming. So those standards would apply to new development if the | 00:29:11 | |
property owner wish to. | 00:29:17 | |
Remove or add on to the building. They would just have to meet new setbacks for the PO zone. | 00:29:24 | |
Gotcha. OK. | 00:29:29 | |
All right. Thank you very much for that clarification. Any other? | 00:29:31 | |
Questions from the Commission, Anyone ready to make a motion on this if we feel like we're covered all the bases? | 00:29:35 | |
This is Commissioner Prince, I will make a motion to forward a recommendation to the City Council to approve an application by Bob | 00:29:45 | |
Neslin to amend the holiday zoning map for .56 acres of land located at 2091 E Murray Holiday Road from RM to PO based upon the | 00:29:52 | |
findings listed in our packet. | 00:29:59 | |
We have a motion. Do we have a second? | 00:30:09 | |
This Commissioner Baron, I second that. All right, we have it seconded. We'll call for a vote. We'll start down here. Commissioner | 00:30:11 | |
Cunningham aye, Commissioner Flaunt aye. Commissioner Prince aye, Commissioner Baron Aye. And Commissioner Chair Roach votes aye. | 00:30:17 | |
So that favourable recommendation moves forward unanimously. And thank you very much for showing up for that. And with that, we'll | 00:30:23 | |
move to our next item on the agenda, which is the approval of the minutes we had. | 00:30:28 | |
Yes, Yep. | 00:30:39 | |
Two days. It will be at City Council on Thursday. | 00:30:40 | |
Thank you. No worries. So with that, we already discussed the minutes in the work meeting and had a chance to look over that | 00:30:43 | |
already. And unless there's any opposition, we'll just call for an all in favor to approve those minutes. | 00:30:51 | |
Both sets say aye aye passes. You need to abstain on the second one. I wasn't here. That's OK. You can approve the minutes. | 00:31:00 | |
And with that, that takes us to the end of our agenda and we will move to adjourn. I won't. We'll just call for a vote. All in | 00:31:11 | |
favour to wanna adjourn. Aye, aye. And we're done. That's it. Woo Hoo. I will note that the clock over there. | 00:31:18 |
* you need to log in to manage your favorites
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
Sugar. | 00:00:00 | |
Oh, sure. Happy dinner, all right. | 00:00:01 | |
Good evening. Welcome to the holiday City Planning Commission work meeting. It is 536. I believe we have everyone in attendance | 00:00:05 | |
except for Commissioners. Vilchinsky and Commissioner Gong are not with us at this time. Everyone else is here, city staff and | 00:00:13 | |
council. We have one public hearing item today for a zone amendment and then some minutes to approve. | 00:00:21 | |
Carrier, John, which one of us, which one of you will be walking us through this one exciting agenda item we have tonight? | 00:00:30 | |
That's me and I just discovered this microphone doesn't move so. | 00:00:37 | |
Which is very sad. The other one does. So the sole item on the agenda for a public hearing is a rezone from RM to PO. This is kind | 00:00:43 | |
of our standard rezones that we'll see for RM STPO. | 00:00:50 | |
The property owner has some additional uses that they'd like to utilize in the PO zone. Since those uses are not allowed in the | 00:00:59 | |
room zone, one of their tenants is provides massage services which is falls under personal service which is allowable in the PO | 00:01:08 | |
zone and not allowable in the room zone. So the RM zone originally only had office use. | 00:01:18 | |
So in order to have that tenant in the building, they need to. | 00:01:29 | |
Rezone so that they are compliant with the uses. | 00:01:32 | |
Any questions? It's pretty straightforward. | 00:01:38 | |
So did you have a question, Commissioner? | 00:01:46 | |
Yeah. | 00:01:53 | |
Yeah, it can be fun. It's good to be aware of what kind of crowd you get right. And they would like to have a business license, so | 00:01:55 | |
and we would also like them to have a business license. | 00:02:00 | |
So nothing is being done to this property. There's no changes happening. It's literally just a use allowance and it's basically | 00:02:08 | |
just pretty. | 00:02:12 | |
Taking something that's existing, non conforming and bringing it up like several others of these we have seen in the last couple | 00:02:17 | |
years, right? Yep, just expanding uses to beyond just an office use. So and then in the future the property owner could lease to | 00:02:25 | |
there's like dental laboratories, medical laboratories. | 00:02:32 | |
Professional services like salons. | 00:02:41 | |
There's more uses that are permitted in the PO zone than were originally in the RM zone. | 00:02:45 | |
So that was kind of the intention of the PO zone being created was to have more uses than the RM zone originally had, so that then | 00:02:52 | |
those property owners would have kind of that extra incentive to rezone. | 00:02:58 | |
But there's still residential component to PO, isn't there? Yeah, in the PO zone you can still do a conditional use permit for a | 00:03:06 | |
mixed-use development. So it just has to be accessory to the office uses. | 00:03:13 | |
So really, they're giving up nothing and just gaining and becoming compliant, which was the city's intent in the 1st place, yeah. | 00:03:21 | |
Complicated one, I know. Questions. | 00:03:31 | |
All right, and then we have the approval of minutes and in anticipation for our actual meeting. Did anyone have anything? First | 00:03:35 | |
off, I'm curious, did anyone go back and watch May's meeting just for grins and giggles? | 00:03:42 | |
OK, I didn't either like I just. | 00:03:49 | |
Keep up to date. I did not go back and watch it. I read through it. I didn't see anything that looked inaccurate or that needed to | 00:03:56 | |
be changed. Did anyone else see anything in May that caused concern? | 00:04:01 | |
OK. And then how about October 1st? Anything stand out to anybody on those meeting minutes if they had a chance to look over them? | 00:04:07 | |
All right. Well then that just makes that one a whole lot quicker to get through. | 00:04:16 | |
So really that means we got 20 minutes and we have council here and he loves to educate us. So I'm going to put you on the spot. | 00:04:22 | |
Is there anything that would be beneficial in the next 15 minutes for us to explore as a Commission? | 00:04:28 | |
Ethics. | 00:04:35 | |
I think it's a good idea always and I this is not related to holiday, so let me make that clear, nor to this Planning Commission, | 00:04:38 | |
but this has come up recently. I. | 00:04:44 | |
Conditional use permits. | 00:04:52 | |
Umm. | 00:04:57 | |
I want you to check the definition of conditional. | 00:04:57 | |
Forevermore when it comes to a conditional use permit. | 00:05:01 | |
They are permitted uses that allow you to put conditions on that are reasonably related, and they have to be related to the. | 00:05:05 | |
Perceived problem that they create right and you have to have and it's under a substantial evidence standard that you have to have | 00:05:16 | |
an objective standard. So for example, if you have an ordinance that says. | 00:05:22 | |
A hotel should not be next to, adjacent to. | 00:05:30 | |
Residential. | 00:05:35 | |
But then you have 1000 feet. | 00:05:38 | |
Between where the hotel will be and where the 1st house is. | 00:05:40 | |
Technically it's still adjacent. | 00:05:46 | |
Right, because the property lines a **** but that particular. | 00:05:49 | |
Standard is. | 00:05:54 | |
Doesn't doesn't hold water to substantial, it's not as sufficient and substantial evidence. So what are the things that some of | 00:05:57 | |
the conditions that you could put on when you have something like that, you could have a distance in your ordinance that says you | 00:06:02 | |
should not have. | 00:06:07 | |
A 24 hour use kind of business next to residential within. | 00:06:14 | |
300 feet. | 00:06:20 | |
Really easy to measure 300 feet. | 00:06:22 | |
And maybe it says 300 feet from the property line, or maybe it says 300 feet from the entrance. But either way, you have something | 00:06:24 | |
that you can objectively determine, right? If you just say it shouldn't be adjacent. | 00:06:30 | |
OK. Well and and then you in your zoning map you have, oh I don't know, not a single commercial zone that isn't next to | 00:06:37 | |
residential. | 00:06:43 | |
So you have to apply it to the context. So when your ordinance says no hotel next to or no hotel or no 24 hour operations next to | 00:06:51 | |
a residential. | 00:06:57 | |
Unit. You can't just have AG or a residential zone without a house on it. | 00:07:05 | |
That doesn't work either. | 00:07:11 | |
There's no impact, right? But then you have to have a. But if you do have that and you want to say, you know, it should say should | 00:07:13 | |
maybe not shell should be able to mitigate. What are the kind of things and conditions that you could put on it? Well, you could | 00:07:19 | |
put a higher fence right around it. So you're screening and you could put landscaping barriers, landscape screening that could | 00:07:25 | |
help mitigate. What are you trying to mitigate? You're trying to mitigate privacy concerns. | 00:07:31 | |
Umm, we had a situation where. | 00:07:38 | |
The hotel building itself was three stories, the proposed hotel was three stories, and the nearest residential home was 1000 feet. | 00:07:43 | |
From it, but it was adjacent from the property line, right? So, but then we had a drone footage of the top of the. | 00:07:53 | |
Top of the top window of where it could possibly look. | 00:08:03 | |
And you couldn't see anything with the camera. And this was like a, this was a very high-powered digital camera on this drone and | 00:08:08 | |
it was you couldn't make out. | 00:08:13 | |
Anything from that distance that was. | 00:08:19 | |
I mean, I guess if you're, but again, those are kind of standards that you're not protecting against, right? You can talk about | 00:08:23 | |
lighting, lighting concerns. OK, lighting concerns. OK, well, let's get down facing lighting that has shrouds and that can | 00:08:28 | |
eliminate that. And so anyway, when you're dealing with conditional use and you're talking about what kind of conditions you can | 00:08:33 | |
put on it, you have to articulate #1 what it is you're trying to. | 00:08:39 | |
What impact you're trying to mitigate #2 You have to have an objective standard. If your ordinance requires, has any requirements | 00:08:46 | |
in it, they have to be objective. And then if you do put a condition, it has to be reasonably related to to that particular issue, | 00:08:52 | |
right? So you can't require a. | 00:08:58 | |
So we had one particular condition that was proposed. | 00:09:07 | |
And it was well, we can't do it because we don't have our own Police Department. | 00:09:12 | |
You can't. You can't put a 24 hour business in because you don't have a Police Department. So does that mean you can't have a gas | 00:09:22 | |
station? | 00:09:25 | |
Well, you still have police services from the County Sheriff. | 00:09:29 | |
And there by statute required to respond to any calls for service. So just because it's not a municipal PD and you have a County | 00:09:33 | |
Sheriff, how does that that's not reasonably related to any issue? | 00:09:39 | |
So you have to be able to articulate that standard and when you're creating a record especially, I mean if it's if you're trying | 00:09:48 | |
to put in a. | 00:09:52 | |
I'm trying to think of a. | 00:09:59 | |
You've got a nature preserve right here and you put in a gas station right next to it. | 00:10:02 | |
And you have articulated zones that say, OK, yeah, commercial. But within the so many feet of the nature preserve, you can't put a | 00:10:08 | |
petroleum based, you know, business that you know, has. I mean there's not a gas station in this state that hasn't had a gas leak. | 00:10:15 | |
Right from their tanks, they just very rare. | 00:10:22 | |
But those kind of things, I mean you can, those are conditions that you can articulate its objective standard like OK, this is not | 00:10:28 | |
a good spot for this. | 00:10:31 | |
But then you also have plenty other places within the city. | 00:10:34 | |
And the general plan where you could put them. | 00:10:37 | |
Is that how Salt Lake City got rid of the proposed gas station where the old Sizzler was at? | 00:10:41 | |
13th East and 21st South because they wanted to put a big YEAH. | 00:10:47 | |
I'd have to look at that specific one. I'm aware of it. I saw the headlines, but I didn't pay attention to exactly how sometimes. | 00:10:53 | |
Well, I know it was right, right next to Sugarhouse Park and the neighbors and everything pulled out every possible concern that | 00:11:02 | |
well and sometimes. | 00:11:07 | |
Sometimes it is possible to just wear down the developer. | 00:11:13 | |
I mean, I think that was the right decision to not vote in there. | 00:11:20 | |
As I understood it, most of the record was a. | 00:11:24 | |
Citizen traffic engineers. | 00:11:26 | |
I. | 00:11:31 | |
Relied on him in the findings. | 00:11:38 | |
So does does everybody and, and John could probably weigh in on this too. Does everybody understand what a traffic study is? | 00:11:44 | |
As far as they study the impacts of turning out safety to collision, all those kind of projected volume. So that's part of it. A | 00:11:52 | |
lot of it has to do with trip generation, right? And so will this road support this additional traffic? That's the main question | 00:11:57 | |
it's answering. | 00:12:02 | |
Will the road support? | 00:12:09 | |
Wide enough is the road. | 00:12:11 | |
Yeah. So like you don't put a Walmart on residential street, right, That's what it is. Is it wide enough to handle the so you look | 00:12:13 | |
at the trip generation from this type of use. So if it's. | 00:12:18 | |
Like I mean if it's a 10 unit townhome complex. | 00:12:26 | |
You're going to get what is it average? Is it 4 trips a day for a residential in a townhome? I think it's something close to that. | 00:12:30 | |
I think it's still 6 1/2 is for single family, 6 1/2. Oh, wow. So it may. Yeah, So it may be, Yeah. So 6 1/2 trips a day. And will | 00:12:37 | |
the road handle it? It doesn't sit there and say. | 00:12:43 | |
It doesn't sit there and say is it going to be more congested during peak traffic hours. I mean that's a given. | 00:12:49 | |
Right. So it doesn't look at that. It says will the road support an additional in its current width and depth? Will IT support, | 00:12:56 | |
you know, if it's six and a half 10, so 60 additional trips a day for that 10 unit? | 00:13:03 | |
And if it's a regular residential street that it's on, or even a collector, chances of it failing under a traffic study are almost | 00:13:11 | |
0. | 00:13:14 | |
I mean you have to have so many other. | 00:13:18 | |
Uses around it in our ordinance or in your ordinance, there's a threshold of. | 00:13:20 | |
Most cities have. | 00:13:25 | |
If you're getting impacted at least 10% of what the maximum threshold is or drops it before below a certain level of service ABCD. | 00:13:26 | |
Then you can start looking at additional conditions on. | 00:13:36 | |
Well, you really look at exactions at that point, right? How do you remedy the traffic that you're bringing is going to cost this | 00:13:40 | |
much to maintain the service level? And so then you look for contributions from the developer to help mitigate those. So what's | 00:13:47 | |
the minimum grade level of service the holiday gives? Is it a C if it gets a C or D engineer would like you would like to maintain | 00:13:54 | |
at least a level C service of all your streets. What is the level C service mean that means? | 00:14:01 | |
Sorry. Sorry. Yeah. | 00:14:09 | |
Yeah. So depending on what traffic engineer is going to be answering that question, it depends on how a number of things you're | 00:14:11 | |
waiting at a light, how long it makes to make a left and right hand turn, what's the backing up queuing of of cars that are at | 00:14:18 | |
light when waiting? How many car trips a day are based upon the width of the road? | 00:14:24 | |
So for example, a residential St. should be around 2500. | 00:14:32 | |
Our trips a day Murray Holiday road to Hialeah Holiday Blvd. and Highland Dr. upwards around 28,000. | 00:14:36 | |
18 to 28,000 depending on when you look at that data and the IT will give a kick out of rating of what that road should be. | 00:14:45 | |
A would be your absolutely no impact. You've got free movement of traffic, no congestion, no congestion at all at any times of the | 00:14:54 | |
day. | 00:14:57 | |
And D or below is basically a failure type situation where. | 00:15:02 | |
It's completely clogged and there's no free movement or safe movement of traffic. | 00:15:06 | |
So it's not the road condition, like there's nothing to do with Rd. No, nothing to do with that. Just what's happening on top of | 00:15:11 | |
the road, on top of the road. | 00:15:15 | |
And if you're interested in seeing models, WFRC has land use traffic models where they're pulling in population data and housing | 00:15:21 | |
data and what the lab uses are around a certain area. Rd. widths, all of that and then using models to project what the the road | 00:15:27 | |
classification would be. | 00:15:34 | |
What with taking Paul's example? | 00:15:41 | |
Any consideration what is generally required to become a traffic engineer mean, do you just like cars? So no, it's it's an | 00:15:45 | |
engineer. Yeah. And everybody thinks they're a traffic engineer. | 00:15:52 | |
I drive on the roads, I know exactly what's going on. | 00:16:01 | |
Yeah. So we contract with a certified doctor Perron, Joe Perrin. I don't know if you've met him before. | 00:16:05 | |
Anybody. He has consulted on some of our projects and he's very well known in the Valley. | 00:16:11 | |
One of the very few actual traffic engineers, except for those that are hired by engineering companies to run traffic. | 00:16:16 | |
Yeah, most education, most full service engineering firms will have a traffic engineer on staff that. | 00:16:24 | |
Is certified to do those and prepare those reports. | 00:16:30 | |
As we look at. | 00:16:33 | |
We've got retail, we've got. | 00:16:36 | |
There are a lot of traffic issues. | 00:16:41 | |
But we look at it piece meal. | 00:16:46 | |
So who looks at? | 00:16:49 | |
Who looks at that project? | 00:16:51 | |
Well, that was a mall before a long time ago and so. | 00:16:55 | |
They've already looked at that's been, yeah, I mean, you've got pretty heavy carrying capacity on the roads around it. If you look | 00:17:01 | |
at the SDMP, there are. | 00:17:05 | |
20% of the STMP is the parking study, the transportation engineering study. So as long as you're not going over the square footage | 00:17:10 | |
of retail and the number of units, the number of parking stalls, you should be somewhere around that. So when we look at each one | 00:17:17 | |
of these individually, we're just at the tipping the iceberg, tipping the iceberg on this type of development. So once we start | 00:17:24 | |
adding up all of the parking stalls that are in there, we use, we'll start looking at quantifying how close they are becoming to. | 00:17:32 | |
Meeting that traffic generation standard. | 00:17:40 | |
So right now it's not anywhere near Yeah. | 00:17:43 | |
Still require. | 00:17:52 | |
Yes. Keeping into park, Yes. | 00:17:59 | |
Yeah, So what I mentioned if you go back at the. | 00:18:04 | |
The traffic data for, say, 2005. | 00:18:07 | |
Highland Dr. was at peak ADT. Average daily traffic was like 29,000 car trips a day. | 00:18:12 | |
And then you can see where it dropped off or the mall was demolished and know where it is now. It's hovering around 13,000. | 00:18:19 | |
We're not even up to where we used to be when that whole parking lot was full of cars during Christmas season, right? | 00:18:26 | |
It won't ever get back to that, I don't think. As far as I recall, no. Another thing that even at full build out it doesn't get to | 00:18:36 | |
that level. | 00:18:40 | |
It will generate less traffic than it used to no matter what. Well, the mixed-use also changed the traffic patterns. | 00:18:45 | |
You know, so yeah, they're not all coming during the open business, Yeah. | 00:18:52 | |
Exactly. If I could, I just want to circle back to where you started with the conditional use permit side of things and you talked | 00:18:59 | |
about some of the language and you know. | 00:19:05 | |
Crafting that the Planning Commission. | 00:19:11 | |
Near as I can tell from what I've been on, it would never be the ones. | 00:19:15 | |
Orchestrating or putting that together right, we would rely on city staff and the applicant to come up with the most sensible. | 00:19:20 | |
Conditional use request and we might suggest a modification here or there, but like rarely or is there going to be a situation | 00:19:27 | |
where it's like, oh, well, here, let's just do this set of things, right? So the Planning Commission can propose, certainly | 00:19:34 | |
propose and add conditions, right? I mean, that's within your authority. They just, you just need to be careful when you do. | 00:19:42 | |
And I would hope that we would. | 00:19:51 | |
You know, if there's some concerns. | 00:19:53 | |
I'd rather deal with those before the meeting than during the meeting. If there's some conditions, I mean we'll usually we'll | 00:19:55 | |
identify staff is really good about identifying what the what the issues that come with this particular use on this property is | 00:20:01 | |
and here's some suggested conditions that can. | 00:20:06 | |
They're defensible. The hard part is when you get conditions that are not defensible. | 00:20:12 | |
Right. And they make it. | 00:20:17 | |
It's always better to have those discussions. | 00:20:23 | |
Not during the meeting Than it is to have them after the meeting and say you can't really have that. | 00:20:26 | |
Because I can't. | 00:20:31 | |
Defended so. | 00:20:32 | |
So Ludmet, though, says you have to approve it if there isn't a condition in place to mitigate. | 00:20:34 | |
So. | 00:20:39 | |
How often is the Planning Commission creating a condition? | 00:20:42 | |
Because that seems counterintuitive to the approval process that if there isn't a condition. | 00:20:46 | |
So I I I'm trying to argue but I'm just trying to say it seems confusing to me that. | 00:20:52 | |
The way Ludma had originally prescribed conditional uses, if there aren't conditions, you have to approve it. Or you have to | 00:21:00 | |
approve it anyway. If they meet the conditions, if they meet you, reasonably so. | 00:21:05 | |
Yeah, I'm nervous about creating conditions. Yeah. There's only been one instance where the Planning Commission in Holiday has | 00:21:11 | |
denied a conditional use site plan based upon the fact that they couldn't meet the conditions, the conditions that were were | 00:21:17 | |
required based upon a very. | 00:21:22 | |
Central core operation of what that use was supposed to be and. | 00:21:29 | |
Because of proximity of homes and such. | 00:21:33 | |
The applicant just simply couldn't do it because it was so critical to what they needed for their use. And so it wasn't. It was | 00:21:36 | |
denied. | 00:21:39 | |
And I can go into what that was. | 00:21:44 | |
So we denied the original ordinance creating those things to answer that before the Planning Commission even discusses Yes, and | 00:21:48 | |
staff, holiday staff does a really good job. | 00:21:54 | |
Giving you reasonable conditions that are defensible. | 00:22:02 | |
And that are related to the issue that you're trying to mitigate, the impact that you're trying to mitigate? | 00:22:05 | |
Look at that. City staff does all the work for us. Isn't it the best job, guys? You guys have the statutory kind of ability to | 00:22:11 | |
rely on. | 00:22:16 | |
I mean, I'm not saying you can't question staff reports, but you have the statutory authority that as a planning commissioner you | 00:22:24 | |
have the right to rely on the reports that staff provide you. So your your job isn't to well. I know nobody's going to sue you for | 00:22:29 | |
negligence for. | 00:22:35 | |
You know a decision that you made because you relied on the report from staff, right? You have the right to rely on staff and | 00:22:41 | |
that. | 00:22:44 | |
On the reports you get from staff and the experts testimony and the expert information that you get from staff. | 00:22:49 | |
That's one of the good things about it, why planning commissioners don't usually get sued personally. | 00:22:55 | |
That's not very rich. | 00:23:01 | |
I'm remembering back. | 00:23:05 | |
Within the last year or two where we had the lady who was selling wanted to sell flowers out of her garden. And so there were | 00:23:07 | |
conditions that we came up with in terms that, you know, she could only sell them between these hours and only so many people | 00:23:12 | |
could come to. | 00:23:18 | |
Time. And is that the type of conditions that you're talking about? Yeah. And the reasons that they are they are that way is | 00:23:24 | |
because the use is a kind of a retail kind of use in the middle of a residential area. | 00:23:30 | |
So makes sense. | 00:23:38 | |
That's good, good discussion. And it took us right to the top of the hour. Look at that, Brad on the spot. Get that man a raise. | 00:23:40 | |
All right, well, with that, we'll close. And once there's anything else, we'll close the work meeting and John will cue us when | 00:23:47 | |
we're ready to start the actual meeting. And I assume we have the applicant here in attendance. | 00:23:54 | |
No, OK. | 00:24:02 | |
OK. | 00:24:06 | |
Just making sure I was gonna. I'm gonna omit the opening statement. If we don't have any members of the public here, we can do | 00:24:07 | |
that, right? OK. Done. So John will let us know when we're ready to rock'n'roll. | 00:24:12 | |
With that, good evening and welcome to the City of Holiday Planning Commission meeting November 19th, 2024. We have our City | 00:24:18 | |
staff, council and Commissioners in attendance, minus Commissioner Gong and Commissioner. | 00:24:25 | |
On the agenda tonight, we have a public hearing for a zone map amendment and then we have an action item of approval of minutes. | 00:24:34 | |
And with no members of the public here, we will omit the opening statement and move right into our first agenda item and ask city | 00:24:40 | |
staff if they will give us a brief overview of that. | 00:24:47 | |
OK. | 00:25:01 | |
All right, so first and only item on our agenda, public hearing for the rezone of 2091 E Murray Holiday Road from its existing RM | 00:25:03 | |
zone, which is residential multifamily to a professional office zone, which is PO. The building currently and has historically | 00:25:12 | |
served as a office building with office uses permitted under the former. | 00:25:20 | |
RM Zone The PO Zone was created in 2018. | 00:25:30 | |
And some of those uses for office space were expanded to include laboratory services. | 00:25:35 | |
Medical dental personal services salon so more I. | 00:25:43 | |
Professional services then existed in the room zone previously that rezones were then expected to occur as property owners wish to | 00:25:50 | |
utilize some of those expanded uses, so this property owner. | 00:25:57 | |
Has a tenant that they would like to bring into compliance with the PO zone. So having one of those uses that is in the PO zone | 00:26:06 | |
and not allowed in the room zone so that they can have. | 00:26:12 | |
A legal conforming status for that use. | 00:26:19 | |
Pretty, pretty basic with the property was identified in 2018. A study was done. There's a map in the packet that shows all the | 00:26:24 | |
properties that existed as office space within room zones. They were the purple squares in that that map that was in your packet. | 00:26:34 | |
And so all of those were identified and expected to rezone to the to the new PO zone when that was created. | 00:26:44 | |
So that is what this application is in dealing with and I'll have the applicant come up with. | 00:26:55 | |
Or if you have any questions for me, Do we have any questions for city staff? I'm not even sure if we have questions for the | 00:27:03 | |
applicant, but if the applicant would like to come forward and add anything that would be. | 00:27:09 | |
Perfectly welcome. | 00:27:15 | |
Bob Nesslin and I really don't have anything to add she. | 00:27:20 | |
Very thorough. | 00:27:24 | |
Great. Any questions for the applicant? All right. Well, thank you very much. Appreciate that. And with that, we will open the | 00:27:26 | |
public hearing. Since there is nobody here, I assume we don't have any live streamers that are like, oh wait, I have comments | 00:27:33 | |
right in that I don't have a way to bring them in. We have no way. So if you're watching online, sorry, you should have showed up | 00:27:39 | |
in person. With that, we'll close the public hearing and we will now move into our Planning Commission discussion. | 00:27:46 | |
Commissioner Baron, Yeah, I just got one question. | 00:27:54 | |
Is there any difference between the RM and the PO site development standards? | 00:27:57 | |
Or the building heights and everything exactly the same. There is a difference in the standards. So when that PO zone was created, | 00:28:04 | |
the building height increased to 40 feet and then some of the setbacks were changed. So it's a 10 foot front yard set back. | 00:28:11 | |
And a 30 foot rear set back when they're adjacent to a residential zone. So it increased a set back distance next to residential | 00:28:19 | |
properties and or residential zones and reduced a set back in the front. So they kind of balanced out. Instead of putting a multi | 00:28:26 | |
family development right in the middle of a property, it moved it closer to the street. All of the differences are listed in the | 00:28:33 | |
packet. | 00:28:39 | |
From that where there's. | 00:28:47 | |
It just reviews what those changes were. Height increased from 35 feet in the room zone to 40 feet in the PIO zone. OK. And the | 00:28:49 | |
parking doesn't change, right? Yeah. Parking is just our standard off St. standards. | 00:28:57 | |
So looking at the current property, it would be existing non conforming to the PO zone just with the current set back then right? | 00:29:05 | |
Yes. So the structure itself is fine, it would just be a non conforming. So those standards would apply to new development if the | 00:29:11 | |
property owner wish to. | 00:29:17 | |
Remove or add on to the building. They would just have to meet new setbacks for the PO zone. | 00:29:24 | |
Gotcha. OK. | 00:29:29 | |
All right. Thank you very much for that clarification. Any other? | 00:29:31 | |
Questions from the Commission, Anyone ready to make a motion on this if we feel like we're covered all the bases? | 00:29:35 | |
This is Commissioner Prince, I will make a motion to forward a recommendation to the City Council to approve an application by Bob | 00:29:45 | |
Neslin to amend the holiday zoning map for .56 acres of land located at 2091 E Murray Holiday Road from RM to PO based upon the | 00:29:52 | |
findings listed in our packet. | 00:29:59 | |
We have a motion. Do we have a second? | 00:30:09 | |
This Commissioner Baron, I second that. All right, we have it seconded. We'll call for a vote. We'll start down here. Commissioner | 00:30:11 | |
Cunningham aye, Commissioner Flaunt aye. Commissioner Prince aye, Commissioner Baron Aye. And Commissioner Chair Roach votes aye. | 00:30:17 | |
So that favourable recommendation moves forward unanimously. And thank you very much for showing up for that. And with that, we'll | 00:30:23 | |
move to our next item on the agenda, which is the approval of the minutes we had. | 00:30:28 | |
Yes, Yep. | 00:30:39 | |
Two days. It will be at City Council on Thursday. | 00:30:40 | |
Thank you. No worries. So with that, we already discussed the minutes in the work meeting and had a chance to look over that | 00:30:43 | |
already. And unless there's any opposition, we'll just call for an all in favor to approve those minutes. | 00:30:51 | |
Both sets say aye aye passes. You need to abstain on the second one. I wasn't here. That's OK. You can approve the minutes. | 00:31:00 | |
And with that, that takes us to the end of our agenda and we will move to adjourn. I won't. We'll just call for a vote. All in | 00:31:11 | |
favour to wanna adjourn. Aye, aye. And we're done. That's it. Woo Hoo. I will note that the clock over there. | 00:31:18 |