Live stream not working in Chrome or Edge? Click Here
No Bookmarks Exist.
Right of way for this section of Murray Holiday Rd. 00:00:00
Umm, so primarily the general plan needs to be amended for that part, that portion, and then also. 00:00:04
There's some there's some standards in 13 that he'd like to codify. 00:00:10
And that's the proposal that we're considering tonight, right? You're making a recommendation on? 00:00:15
Is it the appropriateness of having an amendment to Title 13 for standardizing widths for this section of Murray Holiday Rd. 00:00:22
And a general plan amendment on. 00:00:29
For seeing the width and perpetuity of this section of Murray Holiday Rd. 00:00:32
And just to be clear, this Murray Holiday Rd. As it passes where this particular utility pole is, does it not widen back up again? 00:00:37
From where it's narrowed out or does it get narrow and stay at that time you get the general plan says by the time you get past 00:00:46
Clearview or one of those streets, it goes down to a 50 foot wide. 00:00:51
Right away, that's just bringing that 50 foot wideway closer to the village. 00:00:56
I think we mentioned in the staff report that when we look at specific cross sections of roads, usually that's in a situation of a 00:01:02
small area master plan scenario. 00:01:07
So that's why we have those different cross sections for. 00:01:13
Holiday Village for in particular. 00:01:17
We use those to determine the widths of the standard dimensions of what the sidewalk and the gutter and those type of things 00:01:20
should be. 00:01:23
And the. 00:01:28
Village extends up to or. How far short of this does the village master plan so it stops just a lot 1 lot away? OK. 00:01:30
Is it appropriate? 00:01:45
In light of the fact that we're just embarking on. 00:01:51
That's a good point to bring up. Maybe request the applicant the timeliness of the request? 00:01:56
Good Commission. Can I ask a question? I just curious east of Holiday Blvd. does Murray holiday change to a collector or? 00:02:05
It maintains a collector status up until about this location, about Clearview, the next intersection east. OK, yeah, so all right, 00:02:17
I was trying to find out where that was, but interesting. Yeah, the roadway map that's in the general plan isn't the greatest. 00:02:24
Okay. Hopefully that's the type of thing we will be changing in our general plan update. 00:02:31
Thank you. 00:02:38
Paul, is there any other area? Umm. 00:02:40
Where the change the proposed change in the general plan? 00:02:45
Would create similar situations. 00:02:50
Because it's so focused on this section, no, but that would be the idea of a general plan to have it applied. 00:02:54
In various locations so that the staff could use it or the City Council could use that standard. 00:03:00
To address similar issues citywide. But because it's written in such a specific location, So what would what's the argument for 00:03:07
amending the general plan? If this is really to just deal with one location, that would be a good question to ask the applicant. 00:03:15
Can the city engineer just designate this right of way, this width? Because the general plan is basically looking at volumes and 00:03:25
impacts to residential areas, isn't it? 00:03:30
Yeah, it addresses the characteristic of the road and what it actually carries for the community. Because I appreciate your 00:03:36
question that I hate to start taking pieces that are fairly minor or small, not minor to people who live around there, but and 00:03:43
start to mess around with that. You change the dynamic of the surrounding area and then all of a sudden you've got a lot of 00:03:49
unintended consequences that. 00:03:56
Then you start to have to make changes that you didn't expect to. I think those are the conversations that will come about in this 00:04:03
meeting. Yeah. Thank you. 00:04:07
Any other questions on item 3? 00:04:13
All right, then we will have a brief pause and be back in 5 minutes for our meeting to start. 00:04:17
Carrie and I do have the list plan to pardon me. I have the landscape plan. Oh, OK, You do have the landscape plan. Dennis, do you 00:04:28
want to see the landscape plan? 00:04:33
Before sorry pauses paused, we're going to pause the pause to see the landscape plan. 00:04:38
OK, so they do have trees going in. 00:04:46
Or are those? 00:04:49
I I don't know if they designate on here what is existing. Yeah. So they have. 00:04:53
Columnar St. Spire Oaks. 00:05:00
It looks like, OK. I just wanted to see if they were actually going to be putting trees up against these units or again, if it was 00:05:03
like you like trees go to the river, so. 00:05:08
We had the discussion at that meeting though that the width of those areas where those smaller trees are shown. 00:05:15
Won't support those kind of. There'll be bushes. 00:05:23
Rather than treason. 00:05:26
I think that was on the Holiday Hills project. Yeah, they were really tight. Yeah, I think they they, I'm pretty sure we had a 00:05:28
measurement. I just don't remember what it was. It was 3 feet or 4 feet or. 00:05:34
I can't remember, was this PUD? Yeah, we. 00:05:43
We went past that point. We weren't happy with it, but nothing we can do given this acreage. 00:05:46
Or the square footage in the floodplain counts on the size of the lot. 00:05:53
Right. It's yeah. 00:05:59
Yeah. I'm just curious all of that, is this a PUD on this project or is it not? OK, So then they have a little more carb launch on 00:06:01
where they can do their landscape. OK. All right, All right, Appreciate it. Pauses unpaused. 00:06:07
5 minutes. Thank you. 00:06:13
City Planning Commission meeting tonight is January Tuesday, January 7th. My name is Carrie Ann Prince. I'm the vice chair of the 00:06:20
Planning Commission and will be conducting this meeting this evening. We'll go ahead and begin with an opening statement read by 00:06:26
Commissioner Vilczynski. 00:06:32
The City of Holiday Planning Commission is a volunteer citizen board whose function is to review land use plans and other special 00:06:43
studies, make recommendations to the City Council on proposed zoning map and ordinance changes, and approve conditional use and 00:06:51
subdivisions. The Planning Commission does not initiate land use applications, rather acts on applications as they are submitted. 00:06:59
Commissioners do not meet with applicants except at publicly noticed. 00:07:08
Meetings Commissioners attempt to visit each property on the agenda. 00:07:12
Where the location? 00:07:18
The nature of the neighborhood, existing structures, and use related to the proposed changes are noted. 00:07:20
Decisions are based on observations, recommendations from the professional planning staff, the City's general plan, zoning 00:07:27
ordinances and other reports, by all verbal and written comments, and by evidence submitted, all of which are a part of public 00:07:33
record. 00:07:39
Meeting procedures can be found on the back of the agenda. Thank you Commissioner Birchinsky, we are glad to have so many members 00:07:45
of the public here. We're welcoming you this evening and as always, our meetings are always open to the public. But we're we're 00:07:52
glad to have so many of you here. Tonight. We will begin. We have 3 items for a public hearing and then one action item. We will 00:07:58
start out with our first item. 00:08:05
Highwood subdivision preliminary plat, I believe. 00:08:12
This is Carrie Marsh, City staff will do a presentation for us to begin. 00:08:16
I'm going to Scroll down to the image here so that that can be referenced while I am presenting this. Sorry. 00:08:24
OK. 00:08:46
So this is a proposal for a subdivision at 1919 E Baywood Dr. and 5428 S Highland Drive. The property was formerly 2 properties 00:08:48
owned by two separate owners. The owner of the Baywood Dr. property with that access from Baywood Dr. 00:09:00
Purchase the Highland Dr. property years ago and then combined those I believe in 2013. 00:09:13
So the existing property owner now wants to uncombine those. 00:09:20
To create the two separate parcels that were there originally. 00:09:25
To facilitate that separation into two separate parcels, putting things back how they were, they've gone through a rezone process 00:09:30
so that the Baywood Dr. property maintains the R121 zoning with a half acre minimum lot size, and then the front portion of the 00:09:38
property on Highland Dr. was rezoned to R210. That was in line with the Highland Dr. master plan. 00:09:47
And there's not any proposals to redevelop either property. The Baywood Dr. property would be sold, so it would have a separate 00:09:57
owner. The access for that would only be on Baywood Dr. The access for the front property would only be on Highland Drive. So just 00:10:06
kind of cleaning up what was previously combined. So their subdivision plot is detailed on there. The zone follows the. 00:10:15
Parse the line between the two properties and they've got all of their. 00:10:26
Requirements there to legally record as two separate properties. I'll have the applicant come up and they can. 00:10:31
Bring up anything else that I may have missed and you can ask them any questions. 00:10:41
Can we have an applicant come up and? 00:10:52
If they are here. 00:10:55
And maybe she is not here. 00:10:58
OK. 00:11:00
All right. Well, seeing as how the applicant is not here, we will open this up for any comment by the public. Just as a reminder, 00:11:01
people who would like to comment may approach the podium. You need to give your name and address and please limit your comments to 00:11:08
less than 3 minutes. 00:11:15
And if someone before you has made a comment, please don't make that comment again, but please try and and keep your comments. 00:11:24
Pertinent to the project and and original. 00:11:34
Do we have anyone who would like to speak on this particular item? 00:11:38
We'll go ahead then and close the public hearing on this item and open the discussion for members of the Planning Commission. 00:11:47
Do we have anyone who would like to comment on this item to begin with? 00:11:55
Just for disclosure, this is I have a family connection, so I'll recuse myself from this item. OK. Thank you, Commissioner Gong. 00:11:59
Any comments from Commissioner Barrett or Commissioner Roach? 00:12:06
Commissioner Font. 00:12:12
Commissioner Vilczynski. 00:12:14
And Commissioner Cunningham. 00:12:16
All right. I will go ahead and comment that we have seen this, this makes sense and that at this point I don't see there being any 00:12:19
stumbling block or any problem as we go forward. Since there's no development proposed at this time, only entitlements for the 00:12:27
properties, only a preliminary plat approval is required by the Planning Commission. 00:12:36
Do we have anyone who's in a position that they would are willing to make a motion on this item? 00:12:46
This is Commissioner Roche. I'll be happy to make a motion. 00:12:52
To the preliminary application by Ashley Wooley for Highland Subdivision A2 Lot Subdivision. 00:12:56
Located at 1919 E Baywood Dr. and 5428 S Highland Drive in the R121 and R210 zones. Based upon the followings. 00:13:03
In the staff report to. 00:13:16
Approve or make a motion to approve. Excuse me, to City Council. OK. Do we have a second for that motion, this Commissioner 00:13:20
Barrett? I second that. Thank you. Commissioner Barrett. Let's go ahead and have a vote. Commissioner Cunningham. Aye. 00:13:26
Commissioner Volcanski. Aye. Commissioner Font aye. Commissioner Roche. Commissioner Gong. Oh, abstain. Thank you. And 00:13:33
Commissioner Barrett And chair boats. Aye. So unanimous with the one abstention. 00:13:40
All right. Thank you. Our second item is. 00:13:47
A preliminary plat review for holiday college cottages. 00:13:52
Miss Marsh, would you go ahead and. 00:14:00
Introduce this item to us. 00:14:02
Definitely, I will Scroll down to that one so that we've got that up on the screen. 00:14:04
All right. 00:14:32
This is an application for a subdivision. 00:14:35
In the room zone, the property is located at 4821 S, 1740 E. 00:14:41
This project has previously been had site plan approval for the addition of nine townhome units on the site. Access has all been 00:14:49
reviewed by the fire official and Public Works in engineering determining. 00:14:59
We've gone through a couple of iterations on how that access looks. So this is the final as was approved on their site plan 00:15:09
approval. The subdivision process takes each of those nine townhome units and creates a separate legal property for each unit. So 00:15:16
it's in line with the existing approval for the site plan review and is just creating a subdivision into legal property for each 00:15:22
of those units. 00:15:29
The property owner is here and can review. 00:15:37
Any additional items on that, but largely just a legal process to create those legal? 00:15:41
Parcels for the units. Thank you, Mr. Reynolds. 00:15:49
Good evening, 2500 E Haven Lane, Brad Reynolds. 00:16:01
We've since the last time we met, we've gone back and we've added four additional parking stalls. I know that was a concern. 00:16:07
And then we've gone through and we've obtained all the necessary permits or Salt Lake County flood control. 00:16:17
Army Corps of Engineers, State of Utah Engineering and. 00:16:25
We honestly feel, and that's why we're doing this as individual lots or townhomes, we just feel like there's a real need, 00:16:33
particularly in Holiday to try and have something that is sellable but perhaps a little more affordable. And we certainly feel 00:16:42
this will be a great product here in Holiday and we think we'll be highly sought after and in demand. 00:16:51
We are planning to finish them with granite or quartz countertops, 2 tone paint. We're trying to make them high quality but still 00:17:02
trying to maintain a little bit more of an affordable. 00:17:07
Element on them. 00:17:13
Any questions I could answer? 00:17:15
This is Commissioner Roach. I just curious, I know it's more towards the final, but in line with trying to make them more 00:17:20
affordable. If given thought to what the facade on the outside is going to look like as far as how that's going to be designed, 00:17:27
yeah, there's there's going to be a considerable amount of stone and there will be Hardy plank. There will be absolutely no stucco 00:17:35
and then we'll have an aluminum softened fascia. So we think with those elements there will be benefits for long. 00:17:42
Because you won't have. 00:17:50
Near the repairs and issues and they'll look nice 10-15 years down the road. 00:17:53
Thank you. 00:17:58
A question, you mentioned the additional parking. So it used to be that turn around was just straight and now it's sort of like AT 00:18:00
shape and that's where the additional four, that is where the additional parking is. There's four additional stalls, 2 on each 00:18:04
side of that little tee. 00:18:09
That's nice. 00:18:15
OK. 00:18:17
Mr. Reynolds, I'm just curious. This is for Commissioner Font. 00:18:19
When you say you have. 00:18:23
Done some things to make the units a little more affordable. Can you describe the kinds of things that you've done? Well, I we've 00:18:26
just tried to do value engineering where we go back through and on the trusses and different things like that. Try to make them. 00:18:35
A little more cost efficient, but yet still trying to maintain very high quality in the units. So not a whole lot, but they're a 00:18:44
little bit smaller, they have rooftop decks and. 00:18:51
We think they'll go very over very well. 00:18:59
Thank you. 00:19:03
So when I'm looking at this from the view we have right now, is the rooftop deck going to be on the front or the back of the unit? 00:19:06
It depends on the front units that are facing north. 00:19:11
It will be on the front of those and then those on the back will be facing the Creek. OK. 00:19:17
And then those on the side there should be facing a little bit towards the side so you have a little better view. 00:19:24
All right. What is the size of the units again? They're roughly on the three floors. You're about approximately in the area about 00:19:33
1600 square feet. 00:19:37
Thank you 16 to 17. 00:19:42
Any other questions for our applicant? 00:19:46
All right. Thank you. Thank you. 00:19:49
All right. We will go ahead and open the public hearing on this. Do we have any members of the public that would like to comment 00:19:53
on this item? 00:19:58
Well, with that resounding response, we will close the public hearing and continue the discussion for the commissioners. 00:20:06
Commissioner Prince, do you want to mention the comment that we received? Oh, yes. 00:20:12
We did have an e-mail comment that was that all of the commissioners have received. 00:20:20
Um, that. 00:20:27
There was comment about the roads and some stoplights but nothing that was. 00:20:32
Pertaining exactly to this item. 00:20:41
Is that? 00:20:45
Yeah, that works. Just let me know that we received the comment. But yes, we did receive, we did receive a comment and we're 00:20:46
always happy to have them. 00:20:50
And so so there's that. 00:20:55
Discussion from the Commissioners, anything from this end of the. 00:20:58
Just one question, yes, as far as staff parking in the floodway is that. 00:21:03
It seems unusual so. 00:21:10
Yeah. When you're looking at waterway protection, we do have specific standards and parking areas or roads are something that is 00:21:13
permitted with a permit, I believe. 00:21:19
And Jared can answer that question more directly. 00:21:25
So this is in a FEMA floodplain and I think that's what your your question is related to. Yeah. So I'm looking at the easement 00:21:29
line or the designation line and it looks like all four spaces. 00:21:35
Yes. So it would be allowed within the floodway and what we look at when issuing permits in the FEMA floodplain is the. 00:21:43
Habitable space. Floor elevation. 00:21:54
So we are concerned about life safety and not as much as like vehicle damage, OK. I would just like to caution staff to make sure 00:21:58
that we don't drain off the parking areas into the Creek, just we know what kind of mess that creates, so. 00:22:07
Anyway, thank you for that. 00:22:16
So no van life in the four spots then, is that what you're saying? 00:22:19
All right, any any other. 00:22:25
I like the balconies. I think that's great for a starter townhome. I think a rooftop deck sounds great so. 00:22:30
OK. All right. 00:22:36
Well, we've seen Mr. Reynolds before we've discussed this project and as we noted in the work meeting, there are some bushes and 00:22:38
and landscaping around the units and, and there will be those that are down towards the Creek. So I think there's a lot of 00:22:44
potential here and. 00:22:51
Do we have anyone that is willing to make motion on this item this evening? I'll give it a shot. OK. And that this is Commissioner 00:22:59
Cunningham and I would motion that we approve the preliminary plat application by Brad Reynolds for Holiday Cottages A9 unit 00:23:08
townhouse, townhouse subdivision located at 4821 S 1740 E in the room zone based on the following findings. 00:23:18
Development details required for preliminary plat have been submitted and reviewed by the TRC and found to be complete and 00:23:28
acceptable to the number of units. Is compliant with the RM Zone Regulations. 3 The subdivision is in line with the previously 00:23:36
approved site plan for the development. Complies with the General Plan. 5 Fire Access. 00:23:44
Is approved by UFA 6 On site stormwater retention is compliant with requirements 7. Vehicular access, emergency access and utility 00:23:53
easements are shown on the plat and subject to the following requirements that the CCN Rs for the maintenance of common areas. 00:24:01
Stormwater retention and access must be submitted prior to final approval. 00:24:09
And are to be recorded with the final plan. 00:24:17
And also within one year and in accordance with 13.10 A .070 E to complete administrative review and approval of the final plat by 00:24:20
the Community and Development Economic Development Director following a positive written recommendation from TRC. 00:24:30
Commissioner Roach, I'll second the motion. OK, It's a call for a vote, starting with Commissioner Barrett. 00:24:41
Aye, Commissioner Gong, Aye, Commissioner Roach, Aye, Commissioner Font, Aye Commissioner Lachenski, Aye, Commissioner Cunningham. 00:24:48
Aye. And Chair votes aye. So that motion will be forwarded to City Council. Thank you very much. 00:24:55
All right. We will move to the third item on our agenda this evening, which is an ordinance amendment for the General Plan Chapter 00:25:03
3, Transportation Map 3.1 and Title 13.02, Point 030 planning documents and invite. 00:25:14
Mr. Tierlink to come up and give us a presentation. 00:25:25
Thank you, Vice Chair Prince. Application brought for you this evening is a legislative request to amend. 00:25:32
Couple of sections of holiday ordinance and general the general plan. 00:25:40
The application is a required to be reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to sending a request of recommendation to City 00:25:45
Council. 00:25:49
Who will have the final decision application included in your packet is presented by Ron Hilton. There's a staff report in there 00:25:53
from various members of the Technical Review Committee. 00:26:00
On the application itself. 00:26:07
So specifically, we have a section of Murray Holiday Rd. that has been requested to review some dimensional standards. 00:26:10
For consideration. 00:26:18
In the application packet, you'll find what has been proposed. And I think from the Planning Commission's point of view, 00:26:20
requirement tonight is to moderate a discussion on the merits of both the general plan amendment and how it is involved in this 00:26:27
request, how Chapter 13 is involved in the dimensions and standards of that request. 00:26:34
And also. 00:26:41
Thirdly, which I've neglected to mention in the work session, you'll notice in the applicant's packet is an addendum request. 00:26:44
To amend secondary residential streets on the Roadway Master plan map from 50 to 40 feet. 00:26:52
In your packet you'll go through and find a signed addendum with a clip of the roadway map and then the bottom right. It'll have a 00:27:00
red line that strikes through 50 foot right of way 40 and then change proposed change to 40 feet. 00:27:07
Specifically in that section of code, as I mentioned previously, when we look at new roadway dedication widths for a new 00:27:17
subdivision, for example. 00:27:22
If it falls within a secondary residential roadways, normally we would dedicate 50 feet and everything has to be included in that 00:27:28
travel with lanes, gutter, park, strip, sidewalk. 00:27:33
The proposal now is to rather consider 50 feet, but 40 feet for a dedicated right of way with for all new streets within the city. 00:27:41
So all the new, the development requirements, the standards for roadway creation, travel lane widths, guttering, that type of 00:27:47
thing would have to fit within 40 rather than 50. 00:27:53
That would be the that the general. 00:28:00
Summary of that request so I can take any questions on the staff report. You have a couple of addendums in there from our 00:28:03
transportation plan or Justice 2 for who happens to be here this evening and our City Engineer, Jerry Bunch. 00:28:10
If I may, John, I have this. Commissioner Roche, I have a quick question since I failed to look at this during the work meeting. 00:28:18
By eliminating that 50 down to 40. 00:28:27
For what this would impact on future go forward, would that not end up reducing primarily out of the park strip in order to still 00:28:31
facilitate enough roadway and sidewalk access, gutter, et cetera? Yeah, all of the it's unclear as to where that would be stolen 00:28:36
from, but. 00:28:41
For the benefit of. 00:28:48
Pedestrian right away it would probably take me taken out of the park strip, which would then in turn actually hurt holidays 00:28:50
efforts in being a tree City USA where many trees are required to be planted in those park strips. Is that right? Yeah, St. trees 00:28:58
are a required tree that is required for every development and especially redevelopment. 00:29:05
As the types of tree lists that the tree committee is assembling gets smaller and smaller, I'm noticing every year because of the 00:29:14
hardiness of those species. 00:29:18
Park strip width is critical. 00:29:24
The other element would be to be taken from the width of the travel lane, so the traveling will get smaller. Therefore the park 00:29:27
park strip could remain the same width. 00:29:32
Something would have to give. 00:29:38
Some more traffic or less green space essentially. 00:29:40
Or combination of both? What is the what's the role of parking? 00:29:45
If this would would parking be prohibited if the the width is reduced going forward? That would have to be looked at. Parking on 00:29:49
streets is generally allowed type of situation unless there's a specific safety concern. Where parking is eliminated. On street 00:29:56
parking is eliminated. That's very few places in the city. 00:30:03
So it would be. 00:30:11
Recommendation from the staff that on street parking not be something that is eliminated, but that could be something to be looked 00:30:13
at, but that's a standard I don't have a detail on in this proposal. 00:30:19
Is this conceptual or do we have actual language for a text change? 00:30:26
I believe you have actual language for the text in the application. 00:30:31
For both, it's right above the colored diagrams. 00:30:36
So the text amendment would be in. 00:30:45
I guess you can say presented two ways, 1 is a text. 00:30:51
Similar to what we have here. That would be what's being proposed in chapter 13. 00:30:55
The other element for the general plan is a change to map 3.1, which is an image. 00:31:01
In the general plan and it's just a section of roadway that the applicant can highlight in his presentation for you. 00:31:07
I guess. 00:31:16
If I can ask our attorney, does this suffice to be a text amendment or? 00:31:17
Wouldn't need additional. 00:31:25
Legalese to accomplish. 00:31:28
Yeah, I have some questions about whether it's sufficient there. 00:31:30
And then a part of your question you may want to address to the city engineer because it relates to the standards and how the 00:31:35
drawings for this portion of the road go into the standards. And so I think he he can advise on that. But I do think having a 00:31:42
little more precise language on the text amendment would be a cleaner approach to do it. But I think there's enough of the 00:31:50
legislative issue for you to chew on today that, you know, even if you don't get to the text language, you can. 00:31:57
Ask questions of the applicant about why they think the. 00:32:05
The changes needed, you know, especially as you consider the history of how it came to this point. 00:32:08
OK. 00:32:15
All right. Any other questions for city staff? 00:32:20
All right. Thank you very much. We'll go ahead and invite the applicant to come forward and make his. 00:32:24
Presentation. 00:32:31
I'm Ron Hilton. 00:32:43
The manager of Holiday Cottages LLC. 00:32:46
And we are doing a subdivision in this location called Holton Park. 00:32:50
Umm, so that's kind of how we came to this point. 00:32:57
Umm. 00:33:03
We've got. 00:33:05
Mr. Hilton, can I have you state your address for the record? Sure. 2394 E Murray Holiday Rd. Thank you. 00:33:14
So anyway. 00:33:23
Just by way of background. 00:33:25
Fulton Park is. 00:33:28
Basically smack dab in the middle of what's called the medium density district and the general plan. So if you look at the drawing 00:33:30
there on the left, that's the boundary of Holiday Village. 00:33:35
And then you have some condos and townhomes. Holiday row. 00:33:41
The terraces, then you have some duplexes, the Hadley Pines, and then you come to Holton Park. 00:33:45
Which is a single family development, but of a higher density than the low density district. So as you move further to the east. 00:33:53
On the other side, so Clearview Street is on the right side of that diagram and that becomes your low density district, so. 00:34:05
We're kind of right in right in the middle of this medium density area. And so the kind of the concept of Halton Park was to be a 00:34:12
transitional buffer, buffer zone, I guess you could say. So it's single family that has the character of a single family 00:34:19
neighborhood, but it has somewhat higher density than than the than the further going further E into the neighborhood. So it's 00:34:27
kind of creates this transition. 00:34:34
Character and density. 00:34:42
And there's a similar transition going on with the the road. 00:34:44
So. 00:34:50
And we, we, we were under a bond. We've, we've paid for a bond to do right away improvements as part of our project. Holton Park 00:34:52
is divided into a North and South phase. 00:34:58
So we have the unique position of basically straddling Bernie Murray Holiday Road and we've required to make improvements. 00:35:05
On both sides of the road so. 00:35:14
Based on input from the neighborhood. So when we first started the project, there was a lot of input from the neighborhood about, 00:35:20
you know. 00:35:24
Keeping the density down and. 00:35:29
And. 00:35:31
In fact, there was a petition to. 00:35:33
Umm, basically. 00:35:38
Reduce the size of the medium density district, you know, to have them be more of it, be low density. And that was done. So it 00:35:41
seemed quite clear that the neighborhood sentiment was, you know, to have this transition to a lower density, lower intensity you 00:35:47
could say. 00:35:52
And so. 00:35:58
We in talking with the neighbors. 00:36:01
We became aware that they're also concerned about the traffic, the speed, the safety involved. And since we're basically on the 00:36:05
hook to make some right away improvements as part of our project and we're right there at Ground Zero, so to speak of this, of 00:36:13
this critical transitional area, we we agreed to propose some changes to the right of way. 00:36:21
The neighbors mounted a petition. This was. 00:36:30
18 months ago and really nothing has been done on it. So this application is actually an effort to give the community an 00:36:35
opportunity to get in front of of you in front in front of their elected representatives to be heard on on their concerns. So that 00:36:42
that's really one major motivation behind this but. 00:36:49
Basically, I'm going to turn most of my time over to. 00:36:58
My traffic engineer Brian Haran with Galloway and company and he's here tonight so I'd like to give most of the time to him. But 00:37:03
just wanted to say that the main focus here is is safety and, and this has been a concern in this neighborhood. A lot of cut 00:37:11
through traffic going from 45th South over to Murray Holiday Rd. on like Russell and Wander. 00:37:19
That's been a concern the City Council at one point. 00:37:28
Proposed making those one way streets to try and curb the problem and the residents while they appreciated the intent didn't like 00:37:33
that solution. So maybe what we're proposing could be that long sought solution because. 00:37:41
One thing that the city pointed out to me, they said I should have a look at the general plan map. 00:37:50
And this section of Mary Holiday Rd. is very unique. It's the only one where you have an arterial that becomes a collector that 00:37:56
becomes a secondary residential St. It actually narrows that's the only St. in Holiday that shows that on the general plan. So 00:38:03
it's a very unique situation and I'll let Brian speak to that a little more. 00:38:10
But. 00:38:18
Anyway. 00:38:20
Based on the neighborhood input, we've. 00:38:22
Essentially agreed to. 00:38:24
You know, take this issue up and make it part of our project so. 00:38:26
I'll turn the time over to to Brian. 00:38:30
Thank you. 00:38:34
Hello, Brian Horan. 00:38:40
Address that 511 S 200 E Salt Lake City. 00:38:43
I'm a licensed traffic engineer in this state and about a dozen others. I'm also a professional traffic operations engineer. I was 00:38:48
asked to do. 00:38:54
Opine on this proposal from a safety and traffic standpoint. 00:39:00
So I've only recently been involved with Ron and this project, so the history of how we got here, I don't have a lot of context 00:39:08
for. What I understand is that the neighbors and Ron are looking to. 00:39:14
Create an improvement here that's focused on safety. 00:39:22
Umm, I know that there's a plan amendment currently in process. So my hope today and moving forward is to be a resource for this 00:39:29
Commission, for the city, for council to ask any, you know, specific traffic questions or safety questions that are related to a 00:39:37
proposal such as this. I know you have a lot of information in the packet already. 00:39:46
And I'm sure there's been some discussions on this. 00:39:55
But if I may, you know kind of go through. 00:39:59
What I see from this proposal and then just, you know, give the opportunity for for you all to ask me any questions or further 00:40:03
opine on some of these things. 00:40:08
So as I understand it, the method or mechanism to. 00:40:16
Provide these safety improvements is an amendment to the general plan. As I understand it, they worked with city staff to figure 00:40:22
out what the best mechanism is to provide this specific improvement and there can probably be some conversation on if there is a 00:40:30
better mechanism, but I would say the directly from the general plan, the primary goals are. 00:40:38
To and this is directly from Chapter 3 to ensure the safety of all users. 00:40:47
Continue to build upon and maintain existing infrastructure. 00:40:52
Mitigate and absorb traffic impact of new development and reduce impediments to convenient use of main traffic corridors and 00:40:56
discourage cut through use of local residential streets. The reason I bring this up and this is typical of the city's general plan 00:41:04
and most general plans is it speaks to safety reducing cut through it doesn't speak to. 00:41:12
Increasing traffic volumes, increasing throughput. That's kind of a older idea. 00:41:21
For traffic engineers, as you're probably aware of a very car centric planning and design culture, most cities, this one included, 00:41:27
are moving towards safer, more pedestrian friendly, more bicycle friendly I. 00:41:35
And it's represented well in the general plan. 00:41:44
As I read. 00:41:48
The citizen comments and the proposal here. The idea is to narrow this section. It was mentioned several times in the packet as a 00:41:51
chicane. It's probably more accurately defined as a choker or Rd. diet, so probably terms you've heard before. But narrowing 00:41:59
streets has a proven effect on increasing safety. 00:42:08
And lowering speeds. 00:42:17
So from a vehicular perspective. 00:42:20
There's many references, you can pick any of them, they all say the same thing. Institute of Transportation Engineers ashtow I saw 00:42:23
a reference in the packet a bunch of times nachto happy to use that resource as well. 00:42:29
NACTO specifically says lean widths of 10 feet are appropriate in urban areas and have a positive impact on the streets safety 00:42:38
without impacting traffic operations. Lanes greater than 11 feet should not be used because they may cause unintended speeding and 00:42:44
assume valuable right of way at the expense of other modes. 00:42:50
Two way streets with low or medium volumes of traffic may benefit from the use of a dash, center line with a narrow lane with or 00:42:56
no center line at all, which is what this proposal is getting to. If you do a quick search of lane with versus speed, the very 00:43:03
first thing that comes up is the Nachto study saying that. 00:43:10
Narrower lanes are decreased speed. 00:43:19
I probably don't need to make the case for lower speeds are safer, but I will just to kind of drive the point home locations where 00:43:24
speeds have been. 00:43:30
Statewide, if a speed limit is increased by 5 miles an hour, you see 8%. 00:43:37
Increase in fatalities on interstates and a 4% increase in fatalities on all local roads. 00:43:44
To further this point, it's much worse for pedestrians. Don't need to get too deep into it, but you get about a 15% increase in 00:43:51
mortality every 5-5 miles an hour. 00:43:58
The speed is increased and this is at the 23 to 30 mile an hour speed limits, which is what we're talking about. 00:44:05
There was a. 00:44:13
UPD. I believe it's from the Police Department, the speed study that's provided in the application. 00:44:16
That shows. Oh Yep, it's right there, that one. 00:44:22
This shows the 85th percentile speed is 31 mph. So in traffic engineering we use the 85th percentile speed as our measure for 00:44:26
speeding. So if the 85th percentile is more than 5 miles an hour over the speed limit, we consider that an issue. We consider that 00:44:35
something to be mitigated. So you can see here it's 31 miles an hour. The speed limit for that area is 25. 00:44:43
Reasonably you would want to pursue some sort of traffic calming measure to reduce that to back, to be back within that five mile 00:44:53
or five mile an hour range. As I mentioned before, it's a that 5 miles an hour is a pretty big increase in pedestrian fatality and 00:45:02
accidents. And so each of these little increments does matter and it's the threshold that we use. 00:45:10
Additionally, wider. 00:45:20
Streets attract cut through, which again in your general plan is something to avoid. 00:45:22
If you're familiar with the context of sort of the area which should be, it's right down the street. 00:45:29
There are some opportunities for cut through like up Russell. I know there's a larger larger map. 00:45:34
But any opportunity in this area that you could use to? 00:45:43
Discourage vehicular traffic in this area, which would be a Rhode Island or lane narrowing would help to discourage some of that 00:45:48
cut through through the neighborhood. 00:45:54
A couple of other things that I wanted to mention related to which are related to bicycle and PEDs. 00:46:02
So this road here is a class 3. 00:46:09
Bike. 00:46:14
Umm facility for the city which class 3 is on street? 00:46:16
Bicycles should take up the travel lane. This helps to reduce speed so going back to reducing speeds in the area. 00:46:23
Umm, providing too much width in an area like this will encourage bicycles to use the shoulder. 00:46:32
And it kind of encourages vehicles and bikes to use the same area. 00:46:40
Reducing that puts the bicycle in the lane it requires, and you can, if you travel the bike, route through that area. There's 00:46:45
signage that says. 00:46:49
You know, bicycle, we got the bike route sign, but there's also signage to that says bike lanes will be using the full the full 00:46:54
lane. So to continue to encourage that through this area makes sense for the context that this proposal is not out of out of line 00:47:01
with what this bike route already represents in this area. 00:47:08
And finally, as you're probably aware, this roadway is a neighborhood pedestrian corridor. The intent of these corridors for the 00:47:17
for the general plan is to connect the neighbors to the sort of historic commercial. 00:47:24
Center keeping the sections narrow and then the crosswalk that's provided you know, location to be determined. These are all good 00:47:32
elements that help connect the neighborhood to the commercial center. Shorter roadway or smaller roadway with also reduce the 00:47:41
crossing time. It also creates more roadway friction which reduces speeds and in areas like this where there's a crosswalk. 00:47:51
Not that far from the proposed location. Eliminating on street parking also helps in an area specific to this. 00:48:01
So that pedestrians and traveling vehicles can see each other better. So eliminating on street parking in this area would also. 00:48:10
Be appropriate. 00:48:20
So those are the kind of vehicular bicycle PEDs things that I wanted to hit on related to just generally this proposal and knowing 00:48:23
that you are working on a plan update, keeping these things in mind for that plan update. And I will echo what Ron mentioned about 00:48:32
this being if you look at the full map 3.1, it's the only collector in the city that doesn't connect to arterials. 00:48:41
My. 00:48:51
And I've talked to some neighbors who bought their house in the 60s and, you know, went to the school there and their doctor was. 00:48:53
In that commercial center, my guess is that, yeah, this little snip was to accommodate the existing commercial back. You know, 00:49:02
that already exists, but it is the only collector in the city that doesn't connect to arterials and. 00:49:10
Really only forced would only. Yeah, that's the thank you. 00:49:21
So this happens all the time with with plan updates that you need to kind of dig in specifically to certain areas. This seems like 00:49:26
a area that would warrant some extra scrutiny. 00:49:32
So I'm also available. 00:49:40
For any traffic related questions. 00:49:43
Thank you. We have any commissioners that have a question? Yes, please. So if we put this on a diet. 00:49:45
And start to restrict the amount of traffic, how much volume of the traffic will move to the residential streets adjacent to it? 00:49:53
Have you done a calculation just to see how much that pushes? 00:50:02
The additional traffic because this is really, and I'm not trying to say it's a major Rd. but there people use this to get up into 00:50:06
this area. 00:50:10
Primarily and then get on to wander which is the basic north-south. 00:50:14
It's almost a collector, but it so. 00:50:21
I'm just curious as you've looked at the analysis of reducing the size of this. 00:50:25
What does it do to the impact of the neighbors neighboring streets? Because to me, I don't want to just try and solve one problem 00:50:31
and create another 1-2 streets down or something like that. So yeah, that's a great point. 00:50:38
Typically how these go, and I've done many of them, you do a data collection. 00:50:46
You make the improvement and then you test it again. And I don't think an extensive what we would call an origin destination study 00:50:54
has been done. OK. So we don't have we don't have the data. OK, that's fine. Did you design the what what we're seeing or did the 00:51:00
staff do that? 00:51:06
No, the road narrows and no. So the applicant put together the proposal. I was brought on just to sort of. 00:51:13
Opine on what impacts this might have and so I'm just here to to talk traffic engineering specifically. Generally the reason I ask 00:51:25
is you've probably done a lot of pinch points or transitions from major to minor. 00:51:32
You see, this is the most effective way to do this. 00:51:41
Because I appreciated the questions earlier about the park strip. 00:51:44
Landscaping, the pedestrian being right next to the street. 00:51:48
It won't quite be as obvious. I think everybody thinks that the traffic is going to immediately slow down until they're kind of 00:51:54
into the area. So I'm trying to figure out if there's a way to design this so. 00:52:00
It seems a little. 00:52:07
I don't know. 00:52:09
Seamless or helpful to everybody using the corridor. You know, I'm going with what you're saying. Pedestrians, bikers, cars. 00:52:10
If we take and reduce this down and traffic doesn't slow down, you've got a problem, you know, So I'm just curious, you've 00:52:18
probably had a lot of opportunities where you've seen how to maybe do this and is this the best way to do it or so? And I don't 00:52:24
want to put you on the spot. If you don't have an answer, don't, don't answer if you don't. 00:52:30
What I'm here to to help with and and help Commission and something to take forward is there's as you as you're alluding to, 00:52:39
there's a lot of ways that you can. 00:52:44
What I would call increased the friction out here. This is one way to do it and it seems to fit within the existing conditions 00:52:51
that are out there. So I would say this is from a cost and you know, available infrastructure. This is a good, you know, attempt 00:53:00
again from the speed data. It would be great if we could reduce it like 2 miles an hour. 00:53:09
And so incremental changes. 00:53:19
That are cost effective is usually the approach that you want to take. So can I ask you a question about the design that you've 00:53:23
got four cars shown here and I don't there's only two lanes, right? Brian, I'm going to just pause your, your, your question 00:53:30
simply because he didn't design it. So I think to ask him about it moves outside the purview. Thank you for your presentation. 00:53:36
We'll go ahead and have you sit back down. 00:53:42
The applicant. 00:53:49
Could come back up so that if any Commissioner members, Commission members have questions for the applicant, we can address it to 00:53:52
him. We appreciate your presentation about the traffic. Thank you. Commissioners, do we have any questions specifically? 00:53:59
First off, if I understand the history of this. 00:54:07
There was a previous or a series of previous requests to narrow the road and between staff and the city using its legislative 00:54:13
authority, they made a decision and now this is an attempt to change that decision, that kind of a short summary of what happened 00:54:20
in the past. 00:54:27
I mean the city. The city did something through staff and the City Council. 00:54:34
And an appeal to the mayor and now we're being asked to do a text amendment to. 00:54:41
So they essentially get a second bite at the apple. Is that well, the the problem was like I said. 00:54:49
I'm basically doing this. 00:54:56
You know, to try and get the. 00:54:59
Neighborhood the opportunity to be heard on this issue. 00:55:02
And to get the petition, you know, before their elected officials and be able to be decided upon a. 00:55:06
And So what staff recommended was that we file an appeal. 00:55:16
You know, that that wasn't really, I didn't feel it was necessary, but they said that was the avenue to do it. So we, we filed an 00:55:21
appeal, which got it in front of the mayor. But then the city attorney said, well. 00:55:29
And so and I invited. 00:55:37
One of the neighbors who had spearheaded the petition to come and I gave him a, you know, a big chunk of of the limited time that 00:55:40
I had in that appeal. 00:55:44
But then, you know, the city attorney says, well, this is inadmissible in this forum. 00:55:50
We can't decide on this and the merit says I have to send this back to staff. 00:55:55
So the peel was kind of a OK, you know, didn't do anything. 00:56:00
Back to the original premise, there was a request to do Rd. narrowing. The city took some actions to do Rd. narrowing based on 00:56:05
probably staff recommendations which were adopted during a legislative process by the council. Part of that legislative process is 00:56:10
budget. 00:56:16
Is do you have a cost for what this all costs? 00:56:23
If we were to do this thing. 00:56:27
I think I saw eight or nine polls that have to be replaced. Curbs, gutter and all that. Does anyone what is it? 00:56:29
Someone costed that out for us. 00:56:37
Well. 00:56:40
And the city would have to speak to that. I mean the cost. Well, that's us. So do you mean cost of our proposal or the cost of not 00:56:42
doing our proposal? 00:56:47
Well, I'm asking you, have you? 00:56:53
Figure it out, even a ballpark cost of doing the proposal. So one thing that came out of that, the one constructive I think thing 00:56:55
that came out of the appeal process was Mayor Dali said that. 00:57:02
He would be open to the idea of restriping the road to narrow the. 00:57:10
Narrow the right of way. 00:57:15
You know that he had seen that done on Spring Lane here where he lives, and it had been effective. 00:57:18
And so that was another motivation for filing this proposal where we would narrow, we would restripe the road to narrow the lanes. 00:57:24
I mean, the reason I'm asking that question is. 00:57:34
You know, that's competition for budget dollars. OK. And somehow this is the first time I've been on the Commission, that somehow 00:57:38
we're in the middle of an issue that's really a budget issue and that I. 00:57:45
I assume the developer would have to move the polling question. 00:57:52
And that well, if our this appears to shift the cost to the city, to the other residents of the city to solve a problem for a 00:57:56
development of a pole that needs to be moved. OK, so the. 00:58:03
The moving of the pole and the cost of the moving of the pole is not really the issue. 00:58:11
It it's, it's safety and that's what we're trying to achieve at the. 00:58:18
At that aforementioned appeal and I also did made the same offer in writing to staff because this is you know part of our, you 00:58:25
know, it falls right in the middle of our project. We have offered to pay the cost of doing a phase one and phase two of this 00:58:34
proposal. So the restriping of the road and the we did get a bid for that and it's $25,000. 00:58:44
But it's something that we're willing to add to the cost of our project at no cost to the city. 00:58:54
No, the phase three is continuing the sidewalk further up the South side of the road. 00:59:02
But aren't those all typically developer costs? 00:59:09
We will do the second. We are already on the hook to do the section of sidewalk that's right by our development. But phase three 00:59:13
would be. So phase two puts a crosswalk from the end of that sidewalk. 00:59:19
To the existing sidewalk, you know that goes all the way. Phase three, if you choose to adopt it, would extend the sidewalk on the 00:59:26
South side of the road the rest of the way as well. We're not volunteering to pay for that that's you know beyond the scope of our 00:59:32
project that isn't but the part that's right in front. But as far as the restriping, the repainting of the road, we're willing to 00:59:38
do the whole thing and it came to about 25,000 that. 00:59:44
That would be Phase 1 and 2. 00:59:50
And when you say the whole thing, you mean all the way up to that, all the way up to the church on the corner? 00:59:52
Murray Holiday Rd. 00:59:57
Yeah. 00:59:59
It's about. 01:00:00
2000 feet. 01:00:02
I just wonder if the merits of. 01:00:04
The safety issue, there are lots of other areas in the city that probably have similar needs and stuff like that. And that's 01:00:09
usually a budget process and the competition for budget dollars or prioritization over years and those kinds of things. And it 01:00:15
kind of feels like we're using a text amendment to prioritize this safety issue over all others. And in effect, if we support this 01:00:22
text amendment. 01:00:29
We're putting. 01:00:37
The city, if they adopted course, the City Council makes the final decision, but we would essentially be recommending a priority 01:00:37
for this project in the budget process. 01:00:42
And I recognize that, and that's why. 01:00:47
If you if you read the language of the amendment, it says that phase three would be subject to the normal budgetary process and 01:00:51
conditioned upon that. So phase 3 is a little bit more optional and would be whereas I'm willing to pay for Phase 1 and 2. So 01:00:58
yeah, but I thought, I thought about that and that's I. 01:01:04
That's why I made that offer. 01:01:11
Other commissioners that have questions for. 01:01:14
Mr. Hilton. 01:01:17
Chair Prince just before the the thought is lost. I don't want to take away from the applicants time, but I can fill Commissioner 01:01:19
Cunningham in on some of the legal details at the appropriate moment. 01:01:25
If you'd prefer that be now, let's just do it right now while it's on our train of thought. Do you mind standing Mr. Hilton for a 01:01:33
little bit longer? OK, thanks. So the the basic context of the. 01:01:38
The prior request of Mr. Hilton and how it was handled is separate from this request legally, but the background might be relevant 01:01:45
in some ways. You're being asked right now to make a legislative decision. So he he's applied for a land use change. The land use 01:01:52
change takes place in two locations. You have a text amendment to the code and then you have a general plan amendment that you're 01:01:59
being asked to consider. They fit together hand and glove a little bit. 01:02:06
You you need both to be able to effectuate what's being requested. 01:02:14
I don't want to speak to Mr. Hilton's intentions, I don't know that, but I know what the prior request was and the circumstances 01:02:19
of it. So when the development came forward and the bond was posted for the public improvements that are required with the 01:02:27
development, there was a question about Rd. widths and the city agreed to a reduction of the road width to 32 feet. 01:02:35
That's the paved Rd. width. And then there was the question. There was a question about a utility pole in its location. 01:02:44
I think the utility pole was initially understood by some of the parties involved to be located on a neighboring property that had 01:02:51
been redeveloped prior to the to this development. 01:02:57
But it was then learned that the utility pole was in fact on the Hilton property and was therefore the responsibility of this 01:03:04
development. 01:03:08
The utility pulls in a location where if you look at the roadway width, it interferes with not the travel lanes, but the 01:03:13
pedestrian, the shoulder, and then the pedestrian and park strip infrastructure that would be along that side. And so there was 01:03:20
discussion with the city about who would be responsible for relocating that utility pole and whether the road widths could be 01:03:26
changed in a way that would not require. 01:03:33
That pole to be moved, that was the Did you have a question? 01:03:41
Include drainage as well as the drainage impacted by the location of this power pole. I think storm water and things. I don't know 01:03:44
the answer to that. The city engineer may I, I don't offhand know that, sorry. The the appeal then that went to the mayor was 01:03:50
styled as quote, a variation. 01:03:57
It wasn't a variance per SE, but it was a request to adjust the city standards for Rd. widths at that location. And so the Mayor 01:04:04
considered statements from the City of Engineer, the city planner and myself and Mr. Hilton and his representative were present at 01:04:14
the hearing, and the decision of the mayor was to deny the request for the variation, which essentially required the. 01:04:24
32 foot width of the roadway, the relocation of that pole and then the pedestrian improvements that would occur essentially on a 01:04:34
straight line parallel with. 01:04:39
The road striping in Rd. Wits as I understand what's being put. 01:04:45
What's being proposed and applied for now, it's related in that it affects the same location and that it's asking for similar 01:04:52
things. But legally it's not part of the same process. And you have the flexibility of considering it as a legislative decision 01:05:00
where you can weigh policy preferences, policy choices, and is a different choice than than what? 01:05:08
Than the decision that was put to the mayor, but I hope that's a little bit of helpful context as. 01:05:16
How it relates and what the decisions are? 01:05:22
Thank you. All right. I did have, yeah, this Commissioner Roche, I did have just a couple questions for you, Mr. Hilton, and I 01:05:25
think it falls kind of within that purpose. I appreciate the clarification there. 01:05:31
So if this were your text amendment were approved, city general plan was changed and amended to accommodate. 01:05:38
With the power pole have to be moved. 01:05:46
No, I wouldn't. 01:05:50
You can see on the. 01:05:53
Drawing it shows several power poles in fact, just to give you a little bit of background. 01:05:55
When it came to my attention that the power pole might need to be moved, I just decided, well, I'm going to go down the street and 01:06:02
see if there's any other power poles that have this problem, right. There's about a dozen power poles along that side of the 01:06:09
street and, and eight of them would have to be moved if the original plan, you know, was, was used in the new road, not narrowed. 01:06:16
So anyway, I'm walking down the street and one of the neighbors says, what are you doing? 01:06:22
And so we had a conversation and. 01:06:30
That's kind of what sparked him to do the petition. 01:06:35
So he says, oh, no, we don't want to move all these poles. And yeah, you know, they should, they should narrow this road. You 01:06:40
know, he had just requested a electronic speed sign and that had gone right next to his property to try and, you know, so anyway, 01:06:45
and. 01:06:51
You know, he and the other neighbors did the petition. Like I said, this is about 18 months ago, and they submitted it, but it 01:06:58
basically went nowhere. And so I was working with staff. So how can we get this petition in front of the city? That's when the 01:07:03
appeal process was suggested. 01:07:09
But like I said, you know, it was deemed not the appropriate forum. And so, yeah, I guess you could say this is another bite at 01:07:16
the apple, but it's it's another attempt hopefully to get closure and to get. 01:07:22
Get this issue in front of the decision makers and get a decision. Absolutely. Let me be clear, I absolutely love and applaud 01:07:28
citizen efforts to improve safety in the community. That's no question. I love the altruistic nature of that. I was just curious 01:07:35
how it individually affected you as a developer in this poll project. And with that, I was just curious if you have a rough 01:07:41
guesstimate, and I don't know if you can. 01:07:47
Disclosed. But I was curious what it costs to have that poll moved on your property. Well, the poll. 01:07:53
Really. 01:08:00
That's not really the issue here, but just to answer your question, I. 01:08:03
The. 01:08:08
Rocky Mountain Power's first statement to us was that the poll could not be moved. 01:08:10
To be that, you'd have to bury the power for the entire block and that was very expensive. The city went back and talked to them, 01:08:16
apparently, and came back with an estimate of $16,000 to move the one pole. 01:08:23
The problem with that was because the city had already allowed the other development to take place without moving the pole. 01:08:32
You know, and it was clearly spelled out in their plans. There's this poll that's a problem, but we're not moving it. 01:08:40
A lot more got added, you know, they put new curb and gutter, they put risers with underground power and all kinds of stuff. So 01:08:46
moving, you know, ripping out and moving all that stuff. I'm sure it would be more than 16,000. But like I said, from a financial 01:08:52
standpoint, I'm I'm offering to pay 25,000 to do what the neighbors want instead of the city wasting a similar amount of money to 01:08:58
do something that nobody wants. I understand. I just, I was curious on the cost comparison there. It's not, it's not a money 01:09:04
issue. 01:09:10
I'm willing to spend the money on something that. 01:09:16
Actually, you know, does what? 01:09:19
You know, it would make sense. 01:09:22
OK. Thank you, commissioners with questions. 01:09:25
Are there not ways to slow the traffic down without such a dramatic change to city code to making legislative changes to changing 01:09:30
the roadway? Aren't there other things that can be done? 01:09:38
What's on that poster? That's our proposal, yes. Everything else. 01:09:48
And all the verbiage general plan code, you know that's. 01:09:54
That's up to you and up to the City Council as to what's the best way to do it. Yes, I mean, I think. 01:10:01
The city could just decide to do and not have to. 01:10:07
Do any of this but it's. 01:10:10
1st the appeal which didn't serve the purpose and now this is just a way to get the issue in front so a decision can be made. 01:10:13
There could be very well be a much better way to do it, but this was the only Ave. 01:10:19
Apparently that existed to bring the issue forward. So that's that's why we're pursuing this, but. 01:10:26
For example, the the general plan amendment, to me, I didn't see the need for it personally. You know, the original general plan 01:10:33
already showed the road being narrowed. And you know, and in the general plan, you know, I've learned from my own experience with 01:10:40
this project is just a guideline. It's not exact. And you know, so it already more or less said, yeah, this is the plan. 01:10:47
We just want the city to do what the general plan essentially already says. But staff said, well, we ought to amend it to make it 01:10:55
even more focused. So that's what we did. We at their request. So the text amendment was actually 1st and then they said we better 01:11:01
amend the general plan too. So we did. But. 01:11:07
Far as I'm concerned, if we can do it without any of this, I'd be great. 01:11:16
Thank you. Mr. Hilton. At this point, I think we'll go ahead and invite you to sit back down and we will open up the public 01:11:21
comment session for any members of the audience that would care to comment. When you come to the microphone, please state your 01:11:29
name and your address so that it is available for the record and. 01:11:36
Again, keep your comments to under 3 minutes and and please be careful not to repeat each other's talking points. 01:11:45
Please. 01:11:53
Oh I'm very uncomfortable speaking in public, but. 01:11:56
My name is Philip Cohn. I live at 2636 Murray Holiday Rd. I've lived there for 13 years. 01:11:59
I own a home on Murray Holiday. It would be directly affected by this this plan here. 01:12:06
So I look at this and I look at that traffic study median. 01:12:14
MPH was 2526. I was pleased with that. I don't understand the 85th percentile, percentile. Try and drop it two mph. I thought 01:12:20
we're doing pretty good. 01:12:26
I've lived there for 13 years. Right on the road, there's traffic. 01:12:32
Some increased traffic over 13 years, not terribly. 01:12:38
We have a pretty stable population above that is being fed by this road. This road is critical to feed that area. 01:12:42
Even the cross streets wander Russell. I don't see a real big problem there. 01:12:52
I think people mostly go slowly, they work around each other. Seems fine. 01:12:57
I don't see the problem that needs to be solved here. 01:13:02
So the narrowing of the road. I live in a town home across from Holiday Church of Christ. There, you know. 01:13:06
That means that our guests that come visit and park on the road there, all that parking would be eliminated by this as far as I 01:13:13
can tell. 01:13:17
So any kind of overflow, people visiting 20 homeowners there would not be able to park on the road. 01:13:22
Now we can't park in the road when it's snowing, but otherwise it's utilized pretty heavily. 01:13:30
When I hear the words traffic calming, I think that's an Orwellian term to a certain extent. 01:13:37
What they mean? They mean make it miserable to drive, make it miserable to get anywhere. 01:13:44
And push it to what? To bicycles and public transportation? How effective is that then? 01:13:51
People aren't going to give up their cars. 01:13:56
So you can put up barriers. I mean, look what's happened in Salt Lake City. 01:14:00
Take 90's from 4 lanes to two. 01:14:05
Take 11 days. Put all kinds of barriers up there. 01:14:08
What's happened to 13th East? 01:14:12
What's happened to 70's The big arteries? 01:14:14
13th E is backed up from 21st South Claire Pass, Westminster all the time. 01:14:17
So you play whack a mole is what's going on. We have a major artery here. It goes by my house. Parking would be eliminated. My 01:14:23
economics would be affected by that if I sold my home. 01:14:30
And these are three bedroom places. 01:14:37
Where's where's the guy going to park? Where's the extra cars going to go? 01:14:41
So. 01:14:45
It would affect me economically. 01:14:47
It irritates me. 01:14:51
I don't see what the problem is that needs to be solved here. I walk in the neighbor. I've been retired for eight years. I walk 01:14:53
the neighborhood all the time. 01:14:57
It's stable. I don't see any major problems. If there's a major problem in the neighborhood, it's people running stop signs all 01:15:01
the time at 20 mph That's it. 01:15:06
I don't see big arterial problems. Wonder Lane has more traffic. 01:15:11
During the day, it's mostly workmen. 01:15:16
But I don't see what the issue is. The population is stable. 01:15:20
These roots seem stable. 01:15:25
Let's address other issues. Thank you. 01:15:27
Thank you very much. 01:15:30
Do we have anyone else who would like to speak, please? 01:15:33
My name is Brian Jack and I live on 4644 S Chapel, about 2 1/2 blocks from where this is going on. 01:15:41
Been here for 34 years so I have seen some traffic. 01:15:52
Increases most of my opinion. 01:15:56
And I got a question to ask, you know, too. But in my opinion is most of this traffic is residential traffic. That road goes all 01:16:00
the way up to Wallace. 01:16:04
Goes both ways. 01:16:10
But the petition this gentleman is talking about, and I've seen it. 01:16:12
How many people signed that and where do they live? Does anybody have those numbers? You don't have to where they live, but how 01:16:17
many people sign that? Where is this petition? Because he's talked to me and I've told him I wasn't interested, that I thought it 01:16:22
was. I'm like that gentleman. 01:16:26
Not thought out and really only benefits one person that I can see. 01:16:31
And we all know who that person is. 01:16:37
Does anybody have the answer of how many people sign this petition for me? 01:16:40
They're on John. We got 8. 01:16:46
It I I'm I'm I'm not sure that that. 01:16:51
We can have questions from the person presenting to the audience council. Do you have any recommendations? Oh, oh, I, I appreciate 01:16:55
that. And I'm interested in getting you the answer. I just wanna make sure we run the meeting appropriately that that's a, that's 01:17:02
a fair question and you're asking a fair question. So I think the right way, the right procedure here is. 01:17:08
The petition was not put together by the city, it was put together by the applicant. So state your question as part of your 01:17:15
comment and then the city has an obligation to allow the applicant to come and respond to what you've said so he can then answer 01:17:22
that and indicate who signed it and how many. 01:17:28
And that, but the point you're trying to make, I think is understood. 01:17:36
And thanks for that. But what I'm asking and I'm not asking for names, I'm just because I'm just asking how many people because I 01:17:41
have talked to people. 01:17:45
And my consensus is nothing like what he's trying to say about everybody's on board with this. He's gone up and down the road with 01:17:49
his little measuring will and his survey. 01:17:54
Flags trying to tell people the city is going to come and put a sidewalk in here. Understood. And I would encourage you make that 01:18:00
comment and then when Mr. Hilton comes back to. 01:18:05
Readdress the Planning Commission. He can answer your question as to how many people signed the petition and where the signers of 01:18:12
the petition reside. 01:18:17
Great. Thank you. 01:18:22
Talking about how to slow people down. 01:18:25
To me. 01:18:29
And I live in this neighborhood. 01:18:31
A stop sign? How expensive is it? Would it be put a stop sign either Chapel. 01:18:33
Or Clearview. Or Russell. 01:18:38
They do it on Clearview. There's, I don't know where everybody lives, but Clearview isn't a very long street. And they have two of 01:18:41
them on Clearview. And like this previous gentleman, I see people go through them. They don't even slow down. So enforcement. 01:18:48
And a stop sign a lot cheaper than all these other things we're talking about. 01:18:55
You know I walk. 01:19:05
Daily. On these roads daily. 01:19:07
And I love an area where there's a sidewalk. 01:19:10
They're all talking about safety, the safety. 01:19:16
Of the person that's walking. 01:19:20
It's not to walk in the road, it's to remove them from the road. Well, we're going to tighten this road up. They think people are 01:19:22
going to slow down. 01:19:26
I don't know how many people drive on Wander. They don't slow down. They're not supposed to park, though they do. 01:19:30
I avoid that road because, quite frankly, I'm afraid. 01:19:37
The crosswalks. 01:19:43
They're a nice idea. 01:19:45
I would say if I'm standing there getting ready to cross, maybe. Depends on which crosswalk and what time of day is maybe 50% of 01:19:47
the people might stop. 01:19:50
Even the flashing crosswalk down at the bottom of Kentucky, they don't stop. 01:19:56
So maybe have somebody enforce it and then the work gets out. Hey, these people don't want to speeding in their neighborhood. 01:20:02
The speed limit is already supposed to be 25 S, dropping at 2 miles an hour or whatever this other gentleman said. I don't know. 01:20:10
But I live in the neighborhood. I don't live in Salt Lake City. 01:20:18
And I've seen what's happened. 01:20:22
And I've seen the development going in, you know. 01:20:24
Umm, the sidewalk as far as right now, it's just going to go in front of his property. Is that correct? Can anybody answer that or 01:20:30
is that not a fair question again? 01:20:34
You ask it and the applicant has the will have the opportunity to address it after after your comments are wrapped up. OK. 01:20:43
Bikes. 01:20:55
You can't tell now, but I rode a bike for 20 years so I know what it's like to ride a bike, not an E bike. 01:20:58
When you get a bike trying to go east on that. 01:21:04
You've done this to the road and he has nowhere to ride and he's going about 5 or 8 miles an hour. 01:21:06
You want to know frustration Flynn drivers? 01:21:12
Umm, and from this I really can't figure this out, but maybe again, this is something he's going to have to explain. So phase 01:21:16
three and Phase 2, are we making this arcing on both sides of the road? 01:21:22
I appreciate your comments. I'm going to invite you to just wrap them up here. We've we've exceeded your 3 minute comment time, 01:21:29
but we appreciate. I'm, I'm sorry, I had some, some some of my comments I can't get to because I was asking questions that anyway, 01:21:34
I think it's going to make it less safe. The school kids, they go that way to the junior high, they go that way to the grade 01:21:40
school. 01:21:45
I see him try to cross the sidewalk. Cars don't stop. Thank you Sir, we appreciate your comments. 01:21:51
Do we have another person that would like to comment? 01:21:58
Please. 01:22:02
Hank, I live at 2500 Murray Holiday Rd. I've lived there for 15 years. 01:22:08
I don't see a problem with the way everything is right now. Some of these things, these changes, I don't know why we need them. 01:22:17
And I'm going to what Brian was saying about a sidewalk on the South side. You look at all those power poles. Those power poles 01:22:24
are going to have to be moved and everybody's mailboxes are going to have to be removed. 01:22:31
I mean, it's going to widen everything and then nobody's going to be able to park on that side of the street because everything's 01:22:40
going to be narrowed down. So the people that actually live on Murray Holiday Rd. they wouldn't be able to park in front of their 01:22:45
homes like they do now on the street, like when they have company come over and guess. 01:22:51
And there's really I see the kids all the damn outside my yard all the time. 01:22:57
The kids always use the sidewalk on the other side of the street and I never seen any problem. I mean there's the only time you 01:23:04
see them crossing the street is where the cross walk is up by the LDS church there on Chapel. 01:23:11
And there's a striped crosswalk there. 01:23:19
As far as the speeding. 01:23:23
Last maybe 18 months ago, talk to the police a little bit and they put up one of those blinking 25 mile an hour speed limits signs 01:23:27
and that's actually right Russell Street, that's right in front of my house, which is about midpoint between Water Lane and 01:23:34
Holiday Blvd. And. 01:23:41
I've noticed quite a difference. You still get speeders you do but but it's reduced it a lot having that blinking sign. But as far 01:23:48
as. 01:23:53
Crosswalks. I mean, there's one on Clearview. 01:24:00
Going cross Murray Holiday and there's one. 01:24:03
Up on Chapel going also to the Northside so and they work and I don't see kids crossing the street. 01:24:08
Just the crossworks. Most of them are just going down the north side of the street. And the cyclists, yeah, they're cyclists. I 01:24:17
see them going both ways, but there's not a ton of cyclists. 01:24:23
And most people around here, they're just walking down to harmless or something. They're going down the north side of the street. 01:24:30
So I personally I don't see why there's a problem anyway. 01:24:37
If it's not broke, why fix it? 01:24:42
It's working for all these years and it's never been a problem and. 01:24:46
The traffic is most people go the speed limit now. 01:24:51
You do get some speeders, actually, the high school kids. 01:24:57
Anyway, that's my opinion. Thank you. We appreciate your comments this evening. Talking to neighbors today. This mostly effects 01:25:01
the people on Murray Holiday Rd. 01:25:05
They're the ones that really see it, you know, And everybody's opinion matters. The people I can't remember. 01:25:10
Spoke, you know, he, he sees the way it is too. We live right there we're seeing it right out our kitchen window and everything 01:25:19
we, we see what's going on and. 01:25:24
It seems like everything's fine. What's the problem? 01:25:30
Thank you for coming this evening. 01:25:34
I've been looking at the petitions and Mr. Volcker, did you sign this petition? 01:25:38
Yes. 01:25:44
So you did sign this petition? I'm looking at the. 01:25:46
18 months ago. OK, so not a current petition. 01:25:52
Well, I signed the one out front today. 01:25:57
Go out on desk out there. That's just to speak at the meeting. That's not a petition. I'm just I'm looking at the three petitions 01:25:59
in the packet and your name appears here with your address at 2500 Murray Rd. as a signature or in favor of the changes. And now 01:26:05
you're speaking in opposition to the changes. 01:26:12
Down below in Clearview, I know that some of that has to that has to be fixed from for Holiday Blvd. up to Clearview. 01:26:20
Umm. 01:26:30
Because they already have a sidewalk below the power pole, which I was talking about and. 01:26:32
It'll ask me. They were talking about what they call a pop out or the sidewalk just goes around the the telephone pole and the 01:26:38
sidewalk goes on up to Clearview. 01:26:43
OK. I was just curious. Thank you. Thank you very much. 01:26:49
Others for public comment. 01:26:54
Melissa Hilton, 2394 E Murray Holiday Rd. So I see the traffic issues and all of that, but I don't really want to address that. 01:27:09
What I want to address is the idea of park strips. We live in a drought problem, we have water issues, trees are important, grass 01:27:19
is important, flowers, plants. But in that park strip, most of the recommendations are. 01:27:29
Go away from a park strip and to boot for the sidewalk on the street, which is what we have on the Northside of Murray Holiday Rd. 01:27:39
Is that sidewalk right on the street? 01:27:44
And that's what I would see is a more beneficial type of sidewalk. So when I heard let's put trees in that park strip, I'd rather 01:27:51
see the trees behind the sidewalk so that we can shade but get more moisture than you would have in a park strip. And you don't 01:27:58
have the lifting of the sidewalks like you would if you're doing the park strip. And I've seen that because I've had houses with 01:28:05
park strips in the past. 01:28:13
And have had to take out trees because of the lifting of the part of the sidewalk. So that's where I see an issue part. I think 01:28:21
part of the reason you're getting this from the neighbors is we were told that the sidewalk would eventually go all the way up 01:28:27
Murray Holiday Road. And that's why many of the people on Murray Holiday Rd. 01:28:34
Were against. 01:28:41
Having sidewalks, they want to be able to park. They don't want sidewalks and park strips and. 01:28:43
Down. 01:28:51
West of Clearfield Clearview, we don't have parking on the street. 01:28:52
Except for the house right on the corner. 01:28:58
That because they've put back their property a bit, so just address that with the moisture and the. 01:29:02
We still will plant trees. 01:29:12
Thank you. 01:29:14
Other people for public comment. 01:29:16
All right. At this point we'll go ahead and close the public hearing and have a discussion with the commissioners. We reserve the 01:29:23
opportunity to ask questions of of the applicant as as necessary. Council, do you have any guidelines for us at this point? We 01:29:30
should be aware you should before you have your discussion, you will want to give the applicant an opportunity to respond to 01:29:37
what's been stated and This is why we have council and we're glad for that. 01:29:45
Reminder to invite our applicant back up to address any points that he would like to from the public comment. 01:29:52
So I. 01:30:06
I'm kind of wearing 2 hats here. 01:30:09
I'm a the developer that's developing Holton Park. 01:30:11
But I also live at Holton Park and I will continue to live there. So I'm also a resident. So I kind of, you know, have two 01:30:15
perspectives here, but. 01:30:21
Yeah, So Mr. Volcker, Hank, who just spoke, I, I. 01:30:29
You refer to the same occurrence that I did when I was going up the street measuring power poles. And he said what are you doing? 01:30:37
And so that was actually the genesis of the. 01:30:42
Petition. 01:30:49
And the main thrust of the petition was um. 01:30:51
If you look at the original plan, you see that that sidewalk would. 01:30:57
Would continue straight with the park strip. I have. I have a question, whose original plan if you could. So this is the plan that 01:31:01
the city staff told me was this was the plan for the future of Murray Holiday Road and that was reconfirmed on the record at the 01:31:08
appeal hearing as well. That was the original plan. 01:31:15
And so it would require the power poles to be moved. It would require. 01:31:24
You know. 01:31:31
Private property to be either through eminent domain, which I believe is how the sidewalk was done on the other side of the road, 01:31:32
eminent domain or what's called exaction. When you do a development like I'm doing, then they can require things I. 01:31:40
And so that was the concern, you know, of the property owners they didn't want, you know, like Hank didn't want their property 01:31:49
taken and, you know, where they parked their cars and have a sidewalk put there that. 01:31:56
To them seem to serve no purpose. So that's that petition that was based on that. 01:32:03
After the petition, there was some. 01:32:09
Further feedback, for example, Brian Jackman who spoke. 01:32:12
And others, not just him, I would say. 01:32:18
Probably a minority, but still a significant minority of neighbors. Felt like no, actually it would be good to have a sidewalk 01:32:23
there. We just don't want to. 01:32:27
To take away from our yards, right and and. 01:32:32
And you know, if it's done only when development happens, then you only you get pieces of sidewalk, you don't get the whole thing 01:32:37
all at once, right? 01:32:41
I had an experience where when we lived in California, we put in a sidewalk and it was just a piece, you know, because it was just 01:32:47
our property and one of our neighbors tripped on it and broke their jaw, you know, So it's a little bit of a, it is better to 01:32:53
just, if you're going to have a sidewalk to do it. So that's. 01:32:59
Where this proposal came is. 01:33:06
To address the safety issue with speeding by narrowing the travel lanes. 01:33:10
But then use that extra asphalt now. 01:33:15
That would be freed up by narrowing the travel lanes and put the sidewalk there. So you could put the entire sidewalk in it 01:33:19
wouldn't, you know, affect power poles. It wouldn't affect people's yards. They can still park on their own property, you know, so 01:33:25
it doesn't take away that. So that's how this evolved. 01:33:31
Do you have any other things you'd like to address or does that do you feel like you've been able to say what you needed to say? 01:33:42
Well, Brian? 01:33:48
This Brian. 01:33:51
I'll let him make. 01:33:55
Comments. 01:33:57
Now I. 01:34:01
This might be a question to relate to city staff, but Commissioner Cunningham. 01:34:04
As I was reviewing the proposal, it feels like and maybe the city can confirm the. 01:34:10
Current proposal I. 01:34:17
Maybe less expensive to the city because it requires less pulls that the city would have to move it. 01:34:20
So you may want to ask that question because I was reviewing this. This modification seems like it would be less cost to the city. 01:34:28
Tend to go out there all right. 01:34:38
What the plan is for? 01:34:40
Thank you. 01:34:42
Council, are we good to OK, We'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Again, we appreciate all of you that have come to 01:34:45
participate in the public process and to be involved and to offer your thoughts on the community in which you live in. And we're 01:34:51
we're happy to have you here and, and always welcome you to attend any and all of our meetings. We'll go ahead now and have a 01:34:57
discussion with the commissioners. 01:35:04
Just Chair, if I could. I just have a quick question I'd like to clarify with city staff if it'd be OK. 01:35:11
Poles and sidewalk relocation came up multiple times in the public comment and I just want to clarify and make sure I understand 01:35:18
the requirements correctly. Things that are as they are today continue to remain in that state until there is a permit for 01:35:26
development and changes to the site, then it's brought into the new plan conformance. Is that right? 01:35:34
Correct. You have a section of off site improvements within your code. They're enacted when new development occurs on on the 01:35:44
property. 01:35:48
So if a neighbor up the street with a telephone pole and no sidewalk does nothing, there's no requirement for them to add 01:35:52
sidewalks or remove telephone poles. Is that a fair statement? OK, I just wanted to clarify that there's a very rare situation 01:35:58
where the city will actually go out and get a grant. 01:36:03
For example, like right now you're seeing sidewalks installed on 27th and 27th on the east side. That's. 01:36:10
That's a city project. 01:36:17
That would be the outside of that scenario. Perfect. I appreciate that clarification. I just wanted to make sure I understood that 01:36:19
right. So I appreciate it. Thank you. 01:36:23
Thank you, Commissioner Roach. Let's just look to this end of the. 01:36:28
Dyess Commissioner Barring or Commissioner Gong, have you got any comments that you'd like to share at this point? So this this 01:36:33
affects all secondary residential roads, is that correct? 01:36:38
Ah. 01:36:44
It's not just this little section. It affects all of the secondary residential. 01:36:46
I'm surmising, yeah, the staff report said that it does have a greater impact than just this little section that would have been 01:36:55
the second-half of the applicants addendum request. It could be a question posed to the applicant, but it yeah, it would be 01:37:02
extended to second issues. But Commissioner Barrett, I read it the same way you do that it would have broad. 01:37:09
Applicability, the way it's written and proposed and I don't know how we measure that impact or. 01:37:17
The mitigation of some of that I get worried and I think what other the other commissioners were saying is kind of leading up to 01:37:23
some of these things that are not specific to this little section, but to the city overall. 01:37:29
So I think that's a big concern for me. Thank you. I had a similar thought, which is I, I, I appreciate the. 01:37:36
The research on on traffic calming and I've seen, you know, corroborating research and other things that I've read it, it does 01:37:45
seem like residents along the road may not be seen as as strong. You know, there's, there are mixed opinions, but for right here, 01:37:53
are there other places that that need the, the funding and is, is that a prioritization question? And then also, I don't, I also 01:38:00
don't understand the broader implications of if this lies to all secondary roads, what it, what does that mean? I I. 01:38:07
Don't feel like I have a clear understanding of that at all. 01:38:15
Thank you. 01:38:19
Oh, you know, I have thoughts and opinions, that's why we that's why we looked at you. But I'll keep them as as brief and concise 01:38:21
as I can. 01:38:25
I think for me, there's a couple high concerns that I have. And one is, I mean, when we look at just this specific area, I mean 01:38:32
the village is a high traffic zone and the development around the that zone is pretty intense. And as a resident and consumer 01:38:39
who's shop there, I know that I'm travelling on that road and going where the crap I missed the turn off and now I'm on Clearview 01:38:46
and now I'm going back down to try and get into a grocery store that has not enough parking as it is. 01:38:54
So I think if we just say, oh, we're going to eliminate some of this, we are, to someone else's point, playing the whack a mole 01:39:02
and just pushing it somewhere else and creating more congestion and problems and, you know, adding to traffic. And I wouldn't call 01:39:08
it calming as much as I would congestion. So that's just my perspective on that, but I'm no traffic engineer. 01:39:15
Then when we talked about the impact throughout the city on secondary streets where it sounds like it would be applicable to all, 01:39:23
I go back to my earlier question to city staff on that is OK, well if we have to. 01:39:29
That might be coming in the future. So for those reasons, I don't feel like this is a situation where the text amendment makes a 01:40:06
lot of sense for me. 01:40:11
Thank you. 01:40:16
Commissioner Cunningham, Yeah. Could you throw up the proposed text language section, A&B that appears above the diagram that 01:40:18
we've been looking at? 01:40:25
OK, that's the language that we're being asked to look at. 01:40:57
OK. And I've just been comparing that to the. 01:41:01
Surveys that I think there were 27 people that responded on three different sheets, including the gentleman that appeared here and 01:41:06
then spoke against what he signed in favour of these. These two don't even look alike. OK, the petitions. 01:41:14
Were very specific about a sign here, you know. 01:41:23
Speed limit, Rd. narrows, you know, electronic signs and stuff like that, and that's morphed into a text amendment. 01:41:29
With a deadline date for the city in April 11, 2025 to do Phase 1 and 2. So that's a budget issue in a current year that's already 01:41:37
been established in that. And then it specifies the the phase one with the center striping and the phase two continuation, none of 01:41:47
which appear in the original petitions. And then of course Phase 3 is. 01:41:56
Problematic is because it. 01:42:08
Doesn't really if I think it purports to bind the council to prioritize this project, I think that's what it does and that so I 01:42:09
have problems with this because one I think this is the whole wrong mechanism to fix those kinds of problems. I think you talked 01:42:16
to the professional staff about trafficking problems and see what the city is willing to do and then you take it political with 01:42:23
your City Council member and. 01:42:30
Fight the budget battle. 01:42:37
Get support from other council members, get it weighed in the competition for budget and that and get it evaluated and that 01:42:39
somehow we're going to bypass all that by using a text amendment. I think probably you can legally force us to put it on an agenda 01:42:46
by doing this. I think it's a terrible idea. I don't think it accomplished what the petitions were designed to do. Not sure. I 01:42:53
heard a lot of support for it. 01:43:00
And that I think there's lots of other problems with doing it by text amendment, this kind of process. 01:43:08
So yeah, I'm not going to be voting for it for that reason. 01:43:15
Thank you, Commissioner Cunningham. Commissioner Wilcinski. 01:43:19
I agree with everything that the commissioners have all previous said. I think my perspective from a former business owner that 01:43:23
owned a business on Murray Holiday Rd. a little further West. 01:43:30
Than this property, it is a feeder Rd. I drove that street coming to and from work all the time. It is important that people have 01:43:39
the ability to access their neighborhoods and communities. 01:43:46
And if it's not on this street that's already been used, it's going to be on another St. There has to be a way for people to get 01:43:55
to and from the village center and to and from schools. 01:44:00
And are we just going to be creating other traffic problems, other areas? 01:44:07
Like we've heard so many times, whack a mole. Are we saving or solving one problem by creating another one and just pushing it to 01:44:15
another St. to another neighborhood? And we have the general plan. 01:44:21
Being revised right now, they're welcoming lots of input from the community. They want to hear what people want, what people are 01:44:30
looking for. I would really encourage the citizens that are here that have a strong opinion on that. 01:44:37
To be involved in that process, let's look at it as we look at the general plan. 01:44:45
Instead of reviving what we have right now and making changes for this one street and potentially causing problems elsewhere. 01:44:51
Thank you, Commissioner Font. 01:45:00
So I really feel a bit. 01:45:03
Burden of responsibility in serving on this Commission and when we receive an agenda and there's an agenda item that states 01:45:06
there's a a legislative change proposed. 01:45:13
Red lights flash for me and I feel a greater burden of responsibility so. 01:45:22
With that said, I. 01:45:28
I take it very seriously, and in this particular case, I. 01:45:32
I studied it very carefully. I went to that site. I listened carefully. Tonight, I will not be voting in favor of this change. 01:45:40
I think it it, it would be irresponsible of us to do so because I think just to look at this one little piece of of the city. 01:45:52
And and not to take it in context of the entire city. 01:46:05
I just don't think it makes sense if if the issue is safety. We haven't really seen any evidence that there's a safety issue on 01:46:10
that little piece of Rd. I believe that there probably are other opportunities to calm the traffic if if the traffic needs to be 01:46:18
calm there without narrowing the road or doing things that are that drastic. So. 01:46:27
That's that part of it. The other part of my thought is just to dovetail with what Commissioner Vilchinsky said. We are working on 01:46:36
a a new general plan and I spent 45 minutes or an hour yesterday on the phone just. 01:46:46
Sharing some thoughts about things that I really like about this city. And I think that we now we as a Planning Commission need to 01:46:56
be considering our decisions in context of of the new general plan that the city is working on and and that includes all of our 01:47:03
decisions. 01:47:09
I. 01:47:18
I think that. 01:47:20
You know, everything has to be considered in context in terms of what we want to see moving forward. And that includes our tree 01:47:23
canopy as an example. And I don't think we can, we can look at, well, let's, let's just narrow the street and put in a sidewalk 01:47:29
and, and without considering, well, are there going to be trees along that street? I, I think everything has to be considered in 01:47:36
terms of what we want to see. 01:47:43
5 and 10 years down the road. 01:47:50
So this just feels to me like it's a very specific little tiny piece of. 01:47:52
Of a change that could have broad reaching implications, I would not recommend that we forward this to City Council. 01:48:02
Thank you. 01:48:12
I I appreciate the comments that have been shared by the other commissioners and I think we're ready at this point to see if 01:48:14
anyone is ready to make a motion this evening. 01:48:19
Do we have? 01:48:26
Brave, hearty soul. 01:48:28
This is Commissioner Roach. I'll go ahead and make a motion to forward a recommendation to the City Council to deny an application 01:48:32
by Ron Hilton to amend the Land Use Ordinance 1302030 and map 3.1 of Chapter 3 of the General Plan based upon the findings of how 01:48:40
can I legally say, copy and paste everything the commissioners just said in the last five or six minutes here? 01:48:49
But I'll, I'll, I'll make an attempt to summarize that. 01:48:59
It doesn't seem to fit with the intent to which the applications or applicants submitted it and. 01:49:02
And in light of the upcoming general plan, it feels like it would be better vetted and worked through in that process rather than 01:49:11
trying to amend it at this time. 01:49:17
Do we have a second? 01:49:24
We've got Commissioner Font and Commissioner Barrett both willing to make a second. We'll call for a vote. Commissioner Barrett? 01:49:28
Aye. 01:49:31
Commissioner Gong, Commissioner Roach Aye, Commissioner Font Aye, Commissioner Vilcinski, Commissioner Cunningham Aye and Vice 01:49:35
Chair also votes aye. We will forward a negative recommendation towards the City Council on item number 3. 01:49:42
We'll go ahead and move now to our 4th item, which is an action item review of minutes for. 01:49:51
October 29th. October 29th. Commissioners. Did anyone see anything that needed to be changed in the minutes? 01:49:59
I was not at that meeting so I won't vote. Thank you. 01:50:07
Anyone who was at the meeting see any changes that need to be made? 01:50:11
All right, then we'll just go ahead and vote on accepting the minutes by voice. All in favor. We need to do motion second, 01:50:15
otherwise we'll have to redo it at the end of the year. Well, all right, I was just going to, we learned a lesson last year. I was 01:50:23
going to shortcut us, but that is just not going to float. Do we have a motion to accept the motion that we approve the minutes of 01:50:30
October 29th, Chair Roach seconds, Thank you. And voice vote all in favor, Aye. 01:50:37
Any against? OK, All right, City staff, I think we're finished. Is this correct or were we supposed to review that calendar that 01:50:45
you sent us? 01:50:49
That's just for our personal enjoyment. 01:50:55
OK. All right. 01:51:00
Are you interested in an? 01:51:03
Outlook calendar invite that you can add into your calendars for these meetings. Oh, yes, please. That would be great. OK, OK. 01:51:05
Thank you. All right. Well, then we'll consider our meeting adjourned. Thank you. And we appreciate having all of you come and 01:51:11
participate in our process. 01:51:17
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
Loading...
Unable to preview the file.
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
Unable to preview the file.
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
Unable to preview the file.
Right of way for this section of Murray Holiday Rd. 00:00:00
Umm, so primarily the general plan needs to be amended for that part, that portion, and then also. 00:00:04
There's some there's some standards in 13 that he'd like to codify. 00:00:10
And that's the proposal that we're considering tonight, right? You're making a recommendation on? 00:00:15
Is it the appropriateness of having an amendment to Title 13 for standardizing widths for this section of Murray Holiday Rd. 00:00:22
And a general plan amendment on. 00:00:29
For seeing the width and perpetuity of this section of Murray Holiday Rd. 00:00:32
And just to be clear, this Murray Holiday Rd. As it passes where this particular utility pole is, does it not widen back up again? 00:00:37
From where it's narrowed out or does it get narrow and stay at that time you get the general plan says by the time you get past 00:00:46
Clearview or one of those streets, it goes down to a 50 foot wide. 00:00:51
Right away, that's just bringing that 50 foot wideway closer to the village. 00:00:56
I think we mentioned in the staff report that when we look at specific cross sections of roads, usually that's in a situation of a 00:01:02
small area master plan scenario. 00:01:07
So that's why we have those different cross sections for. 00:01:13
Holiday Village for in particular. 00:01:17
We use those to determine the widths of the standard dimensions of what the sidewalk and the gutter and those type of things 00:01:20
should be. 00:01:23
And the. 00:01:28
Village extends up to or. How far short of this does the village master plan so it stops just a lot 1 lot away? OK. 00:01:30
Is it appropriate? 00:01:45
In light of the fact that we're just embarking on. 00:01:51
That's a good point to bring up. Maybe request the applicant the timeliness of the request? 00:01:56
Good Commission. Can I ask a question? I just curious east of Holiday Blvd. does Murray holiday change to a collector or? 00:02:05
It maintains a collector status up until about this location, about Clearview, the next intersection east. OK, yeah, so all right, 00:02:17
I was trying to find out where that was, but interesting. Yeah, the roadway map that's in the general plan isn't the greatest. 00:02:24
Okay. Hopefully that's the type of thing we will be changing in our general plan update. 00:02:31
Thank you. 00:02:38
Paul, is there any other area? Umm. 00:02:40
Where the change the proposed change in the general plan? 00:02:45
Would create similar situations. 00:02:50
Because it's so focused on this section, no, but that would be the idea of a general plan to have it applied. 00:02:54
In various locations so that the staff could use it or the City Council could use that standard. 00:03:00
To address similar issues citywide. But because it's written in such a specific location, So what would what's the argument for 00:03:07
amending the general plan? If this is really to just deal with one location, that would be a good question to ask the applicant. 00:03:15
Can the city engineer just designate this right of way, this width? Because the general plan is basically looking at volumes and 00:03:25
impacts to residential areas, isn't it? 00:03:30
Yeah, it addresses the characteristic of the road and what it actually carries for the community. Because I appreciate your 00:03:36
question that I hate to start taking pieces that are fairly minor or small, not minor to people who live around there, but and 00:03:43
start to mess around with that. You change the dynamic of the surrounding area and then all of a sudden you've got a lot of 00:03:49
unintended consequences that. 00:03:56
Then you start to have to make changes that you didn't expect to. I think those are the conversations that will come about in this 00:04:03
meeting. Yeah. Thank you. 00:04:07
Any other questions on item 3? 00:04:13
All right, then we will have a brief pause and be back in 5 minutes for our meeting to start. 00:04:17
Carrie and I do have the list plan to pardon me. I have the landscape plan. Oh, OK, You do have the landscape plan. Dennis, do you 00:04:28
want to see the landscape plan? 00:04:33
Before sorry pauses paused, we're going to pause the pause to see the landscape plan. 00:04:38
OK, so they do have trees going in. 00:04:46
Or are those? 00:04:49
I I don't know if they designate on here what is existing. Yeah. So they have. 00:04:53
Columnar St. Spire Oaks. 00:05:00
It looks like, OK. I just wanted to see if they were actually going to be putting trees up against these units or again, if it was 00:05:03
like you like trees go to the river, so. 00:05:08
We had the discussion at that meeting though that the width of those areas where those smaller trees are shown. 00:05:15
Won't support those kind of. There'll be bushes. 00:05:23
Rather than treason. 00:05:26
I think that was on the Holiday Hills project. Yeah, they were really tight. Yeah, I think they they, I'm pretty sure we had a 00:05:28
measurement. I just don't remember what it was. It was 3 feet or 4 feet or. 00:05:34
I can't remember, was this PUD? Yeah, we. 00:05:43
We went past that point. We weren't happy with it, but nothing we can do given this acreage. 00:05:46
Or the square footage in the floodplain counts on the size of the lot. 00:05:53
Right. It's yeah. 00:05:59
Yeah. I'm just curious all of that, is this a PUD on this project or is it not? OK, So then they have a little more carb launch on 00:06:01
where they can do their landscape. OK. All right, All right, Appreciate it. Pauses unpaused. 00:06:07
5 minutes. Thank you. 00:06:13
City Planning Commission meeting tonight is January Tuesday, January 7th. My name is Carrie Ann Prince. I'm the vice chair of the 00:06:20
Planning Commission and will be conducting this meeting this evening. We'll go ahead and begin with an opening statement read by 00:06:26
Commissioner Vilczynski. 00:06:32
The City of Holiday Planning Commission is a volunteer citizen board whose function is to review land use plans and other special 00:06:43
studies, make recommendations to the City Council on proposed zoning map and ordinance changes, and approve conditional use and 00:06:51
subdivisions. The Planning Commission does not initiate land use applications, rather acts on applications as they are submitted. 00:06:59
Commissioners do not meet with applicants except at publicly noticed. 00:07:08
Meetings Commissioners attempt to visit each property on the agenda. 00:07:12
Where the location? 00:07:18
The nature of the neighborhood, existing structures, and use related to the proposed changes are noted. 00:07:20
Decisions are based on observations, recommendations from the professional planning staff, the City's general plan, zoning 00:07:27
ordinances and other reports, by all verbal and written comments, and by evidence submitted, all of which are a part of public 00:07:33
record. 00:07:39
Meeting procedures can be found on the back of the agenda. Thank you Commissioner Birchinsky, we are glad to have so many members 00:07:45
of the public here. We're welcoming you this evening and as always, our meetings are always open to the public. But we're we're 00:07:52
glad to have so many of you here. Tonight. We will begin. We have 3 items for a public hearing and then one action item. We will 00:07:58
start out with our first item. 00:08:05
Highwood subdivision preliminary plat, I believe. 00:08:12
This is Carrie Marsh, City staff will do a presentation for us to begin. 00:08:16
I'm going to Scroll down to the image here so that that can be referenced while I am presenting this. Sorry. 00:08:24
OK. 00:08:46
So this is a proposal for a subdivision at 1919 E Baywood Dr. and 5428 S Highland Drive. The property was formerly 2 properties 00:08:48
owned by two separate owners. The owner of the Baywood Dr. property with that access from Baywood Dr. 00:09:00
Purchase the Highland Dr. property years ago and then combined those I believe in 2013. 00:09:13
So the existing property owner now wants to uncombine those. 00:09:20
To create the two separate parcels that were there originally. 00:09:25
To facilitate that separation into two separate parcels, putting things back how they were, they've gone through a rezone process 00:09:30
so that the Baywood Dr. property maintains the R121 zoning with a half acre minimum lot size, and then the front portion of the 00:09:38
property on Highland Dr. was rezoned to R210. That was in line with the Highland Dr. master plan. 00:09:47
And there's not any proposals to redevelop either property. The Baywood Dr. property would be sold, so it would have a separate 00:09:57
owner. The access for that would only be on Baywood Dr. The access for the front property would only be on Highland Drive. So just 00:10:06
kind of cleaning up what was previously combined. So their subdivision plot is detailed on there. The zone follows the. 00:10:15
Parse the line between the two properties and they've got all of their. 00:10:26
Requirements there to legally record as two separate properties. I'll have the applicant come up and they can. 00:10:31
Bring up anything else that I may have missed and you can ask them any questions. 00:10:41
Can we have an applicant come up and? 00:10:52
If they are here. 00:10:55
And maybe she is not here. 00:10:58
OK. 00:11:00
All right. Well, seeing as how the applicant is not here, we will open this up for any comment by the public. Just as a reminder, 00:11:01
people who would like to comment may approach the podium. You need to give your name and address and please limit your comments to 00:11:08
less than 3 minutes. 00:11:15
And if someone before you has made a comment, please don't make that comment again, but please try and and keep your comments. 00:11:24
Pertinent to the project and and original. 00:11:34
Do we have anyone who would like to speak on this particular item? 00:11:38
We'll go ahead then and close the public hearing on this item and open the discussion for members of the Planning Commission. 00:11:47
Do we have anyone who would like to comment on this item to begin with? 00:11:55
Just for disclosure, this is I have a family connection, so I'll recuse myself from this item. OK. Thank you, Commissioner Gong. 00:11:59
Any comments from Commissioner Barrett or Commissioner Roach? 00:12:06
Commissioner Font. 00:12:12
Commissioner Vilczynski. 00:12:14
And Commissioner Cunningham. 00:12:16
All right. I will go ahead and comment that we have seen this, this makes sense and that at this point I don't see there being any 00:12:19
stumbling block or any problem as we go forward. Since there's no development proposed at this time, only entitlements for the 00:12:27
properties, only a preliminary plat approval is required by the Planning Commission. 00:12:36
Do we have anyone who's in a position that they would are willing to make a motion on this item? 00:12:46
This is Commissioner Roche. I'll be happy to make a motion. 00:12:52
To the preliminary application by Ashley Wooley for Highland Subdivision A2 Lot Subdivision. 00:12:56
Located at 1919 E Baywood Dr. and 5428 S Highland Drive in the R121 and R210 zones. Based upon the followings. 00:13:03
In the staff report to. 00:13:16
Approve or make a motion to approve. Excuse me, to City Council. OK. Do we have a second for that motion, this Commissioner 00:13:20
Barrett? I second that. Thank you. Commissioner Barrett. Let's go ahead and have a vote. Commissioner Cunningham. Aye. 00:13:26
Commissioner Volcanski. Aye. Commissioner Font aye. Commissioner Roche. Commissioner Gong. Oh, abstain. Thank you. And 00:13:33
Commissioner Barrett And chair boats. Aye. So unanimous with the one abstention. 00:13:40
All right. Thank you. Our second item is. 00:13:47
A preliminary plat review for holiday college cottages. 00:13:52
Miss Marsh, would you go ahead and. 00:14:00
Introduce this item to us. 00:14:02
Definitely, I will Scroll down to that one so that we've got that up on the screen. 00:14:04
All right. 00:14:32
This is an application for a subdivision. 00:14:35
In the room zone, the property is located at 4821 S, 1740 E. 00:14:41
This project has previously been had site plan approval for the addition of nine townhome units on the site. Access has all been 00:14:49
reviewed by the fire official and Public Works in engineering determining. 00:14:59
We've gone through a couple of iterations on how that access looks. So this is the final as was approved on their site plan 00:15:09
approval. The subdivision process takes each of those nine townhome units and creates a separate legal property for each unit. So 00:15:16
it's in line with the existing approval for the site plan review and is just creating a subdivision into legal property for each 00:15:22
of those units. 00:15:29
The property owner is here and can review. 00:15:37
Any additional items on that, but largely just a legal process to create those legal? 00:15:41
Parcels for the units. Thank you, Mr. Reynolds. 00:15:49
Good evening, 2500 E Haven Lane, Brad Reynolds. 00:16:01
We've since the last time we met, we've gone back and we've added four additional parking stalls. I know that was a concern. 00:16:07
And then we've gone through and we've obtained all the necessary permits or Salt Lake County flood control. 00:16:17
Army Corps of Engineers, State of Utah Engineering and. 00:16:25
We honestly feel, and that's why we're doing this as individual lots or townhomes, we just feel like there's a real need, 00:16:33
particularly in Holiday to try and have something that is sellable but perhaps a little more affordable. And we certainly feel 00:16:42
this will be a great product here in Holiday and we think we'll be highly sought after and in demand. 00:16:51
We are planning to finish them with granite or quartz countertops, 2 tone paint. We're trying to make them high quality but still 00:17:02
trying to maintain a little bit more of an affordable. 00:17:07
Element on them. 00:17:13
Any questions I could answer? 00:17:15
This is Commissioner Roach. I just curious, I know it's more towards the final, but in line with trying to make them more 00:17:20
affordable. If given thought to what the facade on the outside is going to look like as far as how that's going to be designed, 00:17:27
yeah, there's there's going to be a considerable amount of stone and there will be Hardy plank. There will be absolutely no stucco 00:17:35
and then we'll have an aluminum softened fascia. So we think with those elements there will be benefits for long. 00:17:42
Because you won't have. 00:17:50
Near the repairs and issues and they'll look nice 10-15 years down the road. 00:17:53
Thank you. 00:17:58
A question, you mentioned the additional parking. So it used to be that turn around was just straight and now it's sort of like AT 00:18:00
shape and that's where the additional four, that is where the additional parking is. There's four additional stalls, 2 on each 00:18:04
side of that little tee. 00:18:09
That's nice. 00:18:15
OK. 00:18:17
Mr. Reynolds, I'm just curious. This is for Commissioner Font. 00:18:19
When you say you have. 00:18:23
Done some things to make the units a little more affordable. Can you describe the kinds of things that you've done? Well, I we've 00:18:26
just tried to do value engineering where we go back through and on the trusses and different things like that. Try to make them. 00:18:35
A little more cost efficient, but yet still trying to maintain very high quality in the units. So not a whole lot, but they're a 00:18:44
little bit smaller, they have rooftop decks and. 00:18:51
We think they'll go very over very well. 00:18:59
Thank you. 00:19:03
So when I'm looking at this from the view we have right now, is the rooftop deck going to be on the front or the back of the unit? 00:19:06
It depends on the front units that are facing north. 00:19:11
It will be on the front of those and then those on the back will be facing the Creek. OK. 00:19:17
And then those on the side there should be facing a little bit towards the side so you have a little better view. 00:19:24
All right. What is the size of the units again? They're roughly on the three floors. You're about approximately in the area about 00:19:33
1600 square feet. 00:19:37
Thank you 16 to 17. 00:19:42
Any other questions for our applicant? 00:19:46
All right. Thank you. Thank you. 00:19:49
All right. We will go ahead and open the public hearing on this. Do we have any members of the public that would like to comment 00:19:53
on this item? 00:19:58
Well, with that resounding response, we will close the public hearing and continue the discussion for the commissioners. 00:20:06
Commissioner Prince, do you want to mention the comment that we received? Oh, yes. 00:20:12
We did have an e-mail comment that was that all of the commissioners have received. 00:20:20
Um, that. 00:20:27
There was comment about the roads and some stoplights but nothing that was. 00:20:32
Pertaining exactly to this item. 00:20:41
Is that? 00:20:45
Yeah, that works. Just let me know that we received the comment. But yes, we did receive, we did receive a comment and we're 00:20:46
always happy to have them. 00:20:50
And so so there's that. 00:20:55
Discussion from the Commissioners, anything from this end of the. 00:20:58
Just one question, yes, as far as staff parking in the floodway is that. 00:21:03
It seems unusual so. 00:21:10
Yeah. When you're looking at waterway protection, we do have specific standards and parking areas or roads are something that is 00:21:13
permitted with a permit, I believe. 00:21:19
And Jared can answer that question more directly. 00:21:25
So this is in a FEMA floodplain and I think that's what your your question is related to. Yeah. So I'm looking at the easement 00:21:29
line or the designation line and it looks like all four spaces. 00:21:35
Yes. So it would be allowed within the floodway and what we look at when issuing permits in the FEMA floodplain is the. 00:21:43
Habitable space. Floor elevation. 00:21:54
So we are concerned about life safety and not as much as like vehicle damage, OK. I would just like to caution staff to make sure 00:21:58
that we don't drain off the parking areas into the Creek, just we know what kind of mess that creates, so. 00:22:07
Anyway, thank you for that. 00:22:16
So no van life in the four spots then, is that what you're saying? 00:22:19
All right, any any other. 00:22:25
I like the balconies. I think that's great for a starter townhome. I think a rooftop deck sounds great so. 00:22:30
OK. All right. 00:22:36
Well, we've seen Mr. Reynolds before we've discussed this project and as we noted in the work meeting, there are some bushes and 00:22:38
and landscaping around the units and, and there will be those that are down towards the Creek. So I think there's a lot of 00:22:44
potential here and. 00:22:51
Do we have anyone that is willing to make motion on this item this evening? I'll give it a shot. OK. And that this is Commissioner 00:22:59
Cunningham and I would motion that we approve the preliminary plat application by Brad Reynolds for Holiday Cottages A9 unit 00:23:08
townhouse, townhouse subdivision located at 4821 S 1740 E in the room zone based on the following findings. 00:23:18
Development details required for preliminary plat have been submitted and reviewed by the TRC and found to be complete and 00:23:28
acceptable to the number of units. Is compliant with the RM Zone Regulations. 3 The subdivision is in line with the previously 00:23:36
approved site plan for the development. Complies with the General Plan. 5 Fire Access. 00:23:44
Is approved by UFA 6 On site stormwater retention is compliant with requirements 7. Vehicular access, emergency access and utility 00:23:53
easements are shown on the plat and subject to the following requirements that the CCN Rs for the maintenance of common areas. 00:24:01
Stormwater retention and access must be submitted prior to final approval. 00:24:09
And are to be recorded with the final plan. 00:24:17
And also within one year and in accordance with 13.10 A .070 E to complete administrative review and approval of the final plat by 00:24:20
the Community and Development Economic Development Director following a positive written recommendation from TRC. 00:24:30
Commissioner Roach, I'll second the motion. OK, It's a call for a vote, starting with Commissioner Barrett. 00:24:41
Aye, Commissioner Gong, Aye, Commissioner Roach, Aye, Commissioner Font, Aye Commissioner Lachenski, Aye, Commissioner Cunningham. 00:24:48
Aye. And Chair votes aye. So that motion will be forwarded to City Council. Thank you very much. 00:24:55
All right. We will move to the third item on our agenda this evening, which is an ordinance amendment for the General Plan Chapter 00:25:03
3, Transportation Map 3.1 and Title 13.02, Point 030 planning documents and invite. 00:25:14
Mr. Tierlink to come up and give us a presentation. 00:25:25
Thank you, Vice Chair Prince. Application brought for you this evening is a legislative request to amend. 00:25:32
Couple of sections of holiday ordinance and general the general plan. 00:25:40
The application is a required to be reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to sending a request of recommendation to City 00:25:45
Council. 00:25:49
Who will have the final decision application included in your packet is presented by Ron Hilton. There's a staff report in there 00:25:53
from various members of the Technical Review Committee. 00:26:00
On the application itself. 00:26:07
So specifically, we have a section of Murray Holiday Rd. that has been requested to review some dimensional standards. 00:26:10
For consideration. 00:26:18
In the application packet, you'll find what has been proposed. And I think from the Planning Commission's point of view, 00:26:20
requirement tonight is to moderate a discussion on the merits of both the general plan amendment and how it is involved in this 00:26:27
request, how Chapter 13 is involved in the dimensions and standards of that request. 00:26:34
And also. 00:26:41
Thirdly, which I've neglected to mention in the work session, you'll notice in the applicant's packet is an addendum request. 00:26:44
To amend secondary residential streets on the Roadway Master plan map from 50 to 40 feet. 00:26:52
In your packet you'll go through and find a signed addendum with a clip of the roadway map and then the bottom right. It'll have a 00:27:00
red line that strikes through 50 foot right of way 40 and then change proposed change to 40 feet. 00:27:07
Specifically in that section of code, as I mentioned previously, when we look at new roadway dedication widths for a new 00:27:17
subdivision, for example. 00:27:22
If it falls within a secondary residential roadways, normally we would dedicate 50 feet and everything has to be included in that 00:27:28
travel with lanes, gutter, park, strip, sidewalk. 00:27:33
The proposal now is to rather consider 50 feet, but 40 feet for a dedicated right of way with for all new streets within the city. 00:27:41
So all the new, the development requirements, the standards for roadway creation, travel lane widths, guttering, that type of 00:27:47
thing would have to fit within 40 rather than 50. 00:27:53
That would be the that the general. 00:28:00
Summary of that request so I can take any questions on the staff report. You have a couple of addendums in there from our 00:28:03
transportation plan or Justice 2 for who happens to be here this evening and our City Engineer, Jerry Bunch. 00:28:10
If I may, John, I have this. Commissioner Roche, I have a quick question since I failed to look at this during the work meeting. 00:28:18
By eliminating that 50 down to 40. 00:28:27
For what this would impact on future go forward, would that not end up reducing primarily out of the park strip in order to still 00:28:31
facilitate enough roadway and sidewalk access, gutter, et cetera? Yeah, all of the it's unclear as to where that would be stolen 00:28:36
from, but. 00:28:41
For the benefit of. 00:28:48
Pedestrian right away it would probably take me taken out of the park strip, which would then in turn actually hurt holidays 00:28:50
efforts in being a tree City USA where many trees are required to be planted in those park strips. Is that right? Yeah, St. trees 00:28:58
are a required tree that is required for every development and especially redevelopment. 00:29:05
As the types of tree lists that the tree committee is assembling gets smaller and smaller, I'm noticing every year because of the 00:29:14
hardiness of those species. 00:29:18
Park strip width is critical. 00:29:24
The other element would be to be taken from the width of the travel lane, so the traveling will get smaller. Therefore the park 00:29:27
park strip could remain the same width. 00:29:32
Something would have to give. 00:29:38
Some more traffic or less green space essentially. 00:29:40
Or combination of both? What is the what's the role of parking? 00:29:45
If this would would parking be prohibited if the the width is reduced going forward? That would have to be looked at. Parking on 00:29:49
streets is generally allowed type of situation unless there's a specific safety concern. Where parking is eliminated. On street 00:29:56
parking is eliminated. That's very few places in the city. 00:30:03
So it would be. 00:30:11
Recommendation from the staff that on street parking not be something that is eliminated, but that could be something to be looked 00:30:13
at, but that's a standard I don't have a detail on in this proposal. 00:30:19
Is this conceptual or do we have actual language for a text change? 00:30:26
I believe you have actual language for the text in the application. 00:30:31
For both, it's right above the colored diagrams. 00:30:36
So the text amendment would be in. 00:30:45
I guess you can say presented two ways, 1 is a text. 00:30:51
Similar to what we have here. That would be what's being proposed in chapter 13. 00:30:55
The other element for the general plan is a change to map 3.1, which is an image. 00:31:01
In the general plan and it's just a section of roadway that the applicant can highlight in his presentation for you. 00:31:07
I guess. 00:31:16
If I can ask our attorney, does this suffice to be a text amendment or? 00:31:17
Wouldn't need additional. 00:31:25
Legalese to accomplish. 00:31:28
Yeah, I have some questions about whether it's sufficient there. 00:31:30
And then a part of your question you may want to address to the city engineer because it relates to the standards and how the 00:31:35
drawings for this portion of the road go into the standards. And so I think he he can advise on that. But I do think having a 00:31:42
little more precise language on the text amendment would be a cleaner approach to do it. But I think there's enough of the 00:31:50
legislative issue for you to chew on today that, you know, even if you don't get to the text language, you can. 00:31:57
Ask questions of the applicant about why they think the. 00:32:05
The changes needed, you know, especially as you consider the history of how it came to this point. 00:32:08
OK. 00:32:15
All right. Any other questions for city staff? 00:32:20
All right. Thank you very much. We'll go ahead and invite the applicant to come forward and make his. 00:32:24
Presentation. 00:32:31
I'm Ron Hilton. 00:32:43
The manager of Holiday Cottages LLC. 00:32:46
And we are doing a subdivision in this location called Holton Park. 00:32:50
Umm, so that's kind of how we came to this point. 00:32:57
Umm. 00:33:03
We've got. 00:33:05
Mr. Hilton, can I have you state your address for the record? Sure. 2394 E Murray Holiday Rd. Thank you. 00:33:14
So anyway. 00:33:23
Just by way of background. 00:33:25
Fulton Park is. 00:33:28
Basically smack dab in the middle of what's called the medium density district and the general plan. So if you look at the drawing 00:33:30
there on the left, that's the boundary of Holiday Village. 00:33:35
And then you have some condos and townhomes. Holiday row. 00:33:41
The terraces, then you have some duplexes, the Hadley Pines, and then you come to Holton Park. 00:33:45
Which is a single family development, but of a higher density than the low density district. So as you move further to the east. 00:33:53
On the other side, so Clearview Street is on the right side of that diagram and that becomes your low density district, so. 00:34:05
We're kind of right in right in the middle of this medium density area. And so the kind of the concept of Halton Park was to be a 00:34:12
transitional buffer, buffer zone, I guess you could say. So it's single family that has the character of a single family 00:34:19
neighborhood, but it has somewhat higher density than than the than the further going further E into the neighborhood. So it's 00:34:27
kind of creates this transition. 00:34:34
Character and density. 00:34:42
And there's a similar transition going on with the the road. 00:34:44
So. 00:34:50
And we, we, we were under a bond. We've, we've paid for a bond to do right away improvements as part of our project. Holton Park 00:34:52
is divided into a North and South phase. 00:34:58
So we have the unique position of basically straddling Bernie Murray Holiday Road and we've required to make improvements. 00:35:05
On both sides of the road so. 00:35:14
Based on input from the neighborhood. So when we first started the project, there was a lot of input from the neighborhood about, 00:35:20
you know. 00:35:24
Keeping the density down and. 00:35:29
And. 00:35:31
In fact, there was a petition to. 00:35:33
Umm, basically. 00:35:38
Reduce the size of the medium density district, you know, to have them be more of it, be low density. And that was done. So it 00:35:41
seemed quite clear that the neighborhood sentiment was, you know, to have this transition to a lower density, lower intensity you 00:35:47
could say. 00:35:52
And so. 00:35:58
We in talking with the neighbors. 00:36:01
We became aware that they're also concerned about the traffic, the speed, the safety involved. And since we're basically on the 00:36:05
hook to make some right away improvements as part of our project and we're right there at Ground Zero, so to speak of this, of 00:36:13
this critical transitional area, we we agreed to propose some changes to the right of way. 00:36:21
The neighbors mounted a petition. This was. 00:36:30
18 months ago and really nothing has been done on it. So this application is actually an effort to give the community an 00:36:35
opportunity to get in front of of you in front in front of their elected representatives to be heard on on their concerns. So that 00:36:42
that's really one major motivation behind this but. 00:36:49
Basically, I'm going to turn most of my time over to. 00:36:58
My traffic engineer Brian Haran with Galloway and company and he's here tonight so I'd like to give most of the time to him. But 00:37:03
just wanted to say that the main focus here is is safety and, and this has been a concern in this neighborhood. A lot of cut 00:37:11
through traffic going from 45th South over to Murray Holiday Rd. on like Russell and Wander. 00:37:19
That's been a concern the City Council at one point. 00:37:28
Proposed making those one way streets to try and curb the problem and the residents while they appreciated the intent didn't like 00:37:33
that solution. So maybe what we're proposing could be that long sought solution because. 00:37:41
One thing that the city pointed out to me, they said I should have a look at the general plan map. 00:37:50
And this section of Mary Holiday Rd. is very unique. It's the only one where you have an arterial that becomes a collector that 00:37:56
becomes a secondary residential St. It actually narrows that's the only St. in Holiday that shows that on the general plan. So 00:38:03
it's a very unique situation and I'll let Brian speak to that a little more. 00:38:10
But. 00:38:18
Anyway. 00:38:20
Based on the neighborhood input, we've. 00:38:22
Essentially agreed to. 00:38:24
You know, take this issue up and make it part of our project so. 00:38:26
I'll turn the time over to to Brian. 00:38:30
Thank you. 00:38:34
Hello, Brian Horan. 00:38:40
Address that 511 S 200 E Salt Lake City. 00:38:43
I'm a licensed traffic engineer in this state and about a dozen others. I'm also a professional traffic operations engineer. I was 00:38:48
asked to do. 00:38:54
Opine on this proposal from a safety and traffic standpoint. 00:39:00
So I've only recently been involved with Ron and this project, so the history of how we got here, I don't have a lot of context 00:39:08
for. What I understand is that the neighbors and Ron are looking to. 00:39:14
Create an improvement here that's focused on safety. 00:39:22
Umm, I know that there's a plan amendment currently in process. So my hope today and moving forward is to be a resource for this 00:39:29
Commission, for the city, for council to ask any, you know, specific traffic questions or safety questions that are related to a 00:39:37
proposal such as this. I know you have a lot of information in the packet already. 00:39:46
And I'm sure there's been some discussions on this. 00:39:55
But if I may, you know kind of go through. 00:39:59
What I see from this proposal and then just, you know, give the opportunity for for you all to ask me any questions or further 00:40:03
opine on some of these things. 00:40:08
So as I understand it, the method or mechanism to. 00:40:16
Provide these safety improvements is an amendment to the general plan. As I understand it, they worked with city staff to figure 00:40:22
out what the best mechanism is to provide this specific improvement and there can probably be some conversation on if there is a 00:40:30
better mechanism, but I would say the directly from the general plan, the primary goals are. 00:40:38
To and this is directly from Chapter 3 to ensure the safety of all users. 00:40:47
Continue to build upon and maintain existing infrastructure. 00:40:52
Mitigate and absorb traffic impact of new development and reduce impediments to convenient use of main traffic corridors and 00:40:56
discourage cut through use of local residential streets. The reason I bring this up and this is typical of the city's general plan 00:41:04
and most general plans is it speaks to safety reducing cut through it doesn't speak to. 00:41:12
Increasing traffic volumes, increasing throughput. That's kind of a older idea. 00:41:21
For traffic engineers, as you're probably aware of a very car centric planning and design culture, most cities, this one included, 00:41:27
are moving towards safer, more pedestrian friendly, more bicycle friendly I. 00:41:35
And it's represented well in the general plan. 00:41:44
As I read. 00:41:48
The citizen comments and the proposal here. The idea is to narrow this section. It was mentioned several times in the packet as a 00:41:51
chicane. It's probably more accurately defined as a choker or Rd. diet, so probably terms you've heard before. But narrowing 00:41:59
streets has a proven effect on increasing safety. 00:42:08
And lowering speeds. 00:42:17
So from a vehicular perspective. 00:42:20
There's many references, you can pick any of them, they all say the same thing. Institute of Transportation Engineers ashtow I saw 00:42:23
a reference in the packet a bunch of times nachto happy to use that resource as well. 00:42:29
NACTO specifically says lean widths of 10 feet are appropriate in urban areas and have a positive impact on the streets safety 00:42:38
without impacting traffic operations. Lanes greater than 11 feet should not be used because they may cause unintended speeding and 00:42:44
assume valuable right of way at the expense of other modes. 00:42:50
Two way streets with low or medium volumes of traffic may benefit from the use of a dash, center line with a narrow lane with or 00:42:56
no center line at all, which is what this proposal is getting to. If you do a quick search of lane with versus speed, the very 00:43:03
first thing that comes up is the Nachto study saying that. 00:43:10
Narrower lanes are decreased speed. 00:43:19
I probably don't need to make the case for lower speeds are safer, but I will just to kind of drive the point home locations where 00:43:24
speeds have been. 00:43:30
Statewide, if a speed limit is increased by 5 miles an hour, you see 8%. 00:43:37
Increase in fatalities on interstates and a 4% increase in fatalities on all local roads. 00:43:44
To further this point, it's much worse for pedestrians. Don't need to get too deep into it, but you get about a 15% increase in 00:43:51
mortality every 5-5 miles an hour. 00:43:58
The speed is increased and this is at the 23 to 30 mile an hour speed limits, which is what we're talking about. 00:44:05
There was a. 00:44:13
UPD. I believe it's from the Police Department, the speed study that's provided in the application. 00:44:16
That shows. Oh Yep, it's right there, that one. 00:44:22
This shows the 85th percentile speed is 31 mph. So in traffic engineering we use the 85th percentile speed as our measure for 00:44:26
speeding. So if the 85th percentile is more than 5 miles an hour over the speed limit, we consider that an issue. We consider that 00:44:35
something to be mitigated. So you can see here it's 31 miles an hour. The speed limit for that area is 25. 00:44:43
Reasonably you would want to pursue some sort of traffic calming measure to reduce that to back, to be back within that five mile 00:44:53
or five mile an hour range. As I mentioned before, it's a that 5 miles an hour is a pretty big increase in pedestrian fatality and 00:45:02
accidents. And so each of these little increments does matter and it's the threshold that we use. 00:45:10
Additionally, wider. 00:45:20
Streets attract cut through, which again in your general plan is something to avoid. 00:45:22
If you're familiar with the context of sort of the area which should be, it's right down the street. 00:45:29
There are some opportunities for cut through like up Russell. I know there's a larger larger map. 00:45:34
But any opportunity in this area that you could use to? 00:45:43
Discourage vehicular traffic in this area, which would be a Rhode Island or lane narrowing would help to discourage some of that 00:45:48
cut through through the neighborhood. 00:45:54
A couple of other things that I wanted to mention related to which are related to bicycle and PEDs. 00:46:02
So this road here is a class 3. 00:46:09
Bike. 00:46:14
Umm facility for the city which class 3 is on street? 00:46:16
Bicycles should take up the travel lane. This helps to reduce speed so going back to reducing speeds in the area. 00:46:23
Umm, providing too much width in an area like this will encourage bicycles to use the shoulder. 00:46:32
And it kind of encourages vehicles and bikes to use the same area. 00:46:40
Reducing that puts the bicycle in the lane it requires, and you can, if you travel the bike, route through that area. There's 00:46:45