SALT LAKE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
451 South State Street, Room 1 26
Present from the Planning Commission were Acting Chairperson Max Smith, Andrea Barrows, Carlton Christensen, Fred Fife, Aria Funk, and Judi Short.
Present from the Planning Staff were Planning Director William T. Wright, Brent Wilde, Doug Wheelwright, Joel Paterson, Margaret Pahl, and Robert Glessner.
A roll is being kept of all who attended the Planning Commission meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5:00p.m. by Mr. Smith. Minutes are presented in agenda order, not necessarily as cases were heard by the Planning Commission. Tapes of the meeting will be retained in the Planning Office for a period of one year, after which, they will be erased.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Christensen moved to approve the minutes of Thursday, February 6, 1997, with the adjustments that Mr. Smith made. Ms. Short seconded the motion. Ms. Barrows, Mr. Christensen, Mr. Fife, Ms. Funk, and Ms. Short, voted "Aye." Mr. lker, Ms. Kirk, Mr. McRea, and Mr. Young were not present. Mr. Smith, as Acting Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.
PETITIONS
PUBLIC HEARING- Argenta Avenues. LC. requesting approval of the Governor's Row Condominium conversion application for an 18-unit apartment building located at 73 No. ''F" Street. in a Residential IIRMF-35" Zoning District.
Ms. Margaret Pahl presented the staff report outlining the major issues of the case and the staff recommendation, a copy of which was filed with the minutes.
Mr. Mark Elardo, the petitioner, was present for this portion of the Planning
Commission meeting and stated that he was in agreement with the staff recommendation.
Mr. Smith opened the hearing to the public and asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission. Upon receiving no response, he closed the hearing to the public and opened it for Planning Commission discussion.
Motion on the Governor's Row Condominiums
Ms. Short moved to approve the Governor's Row Condominium conversion, as indicated, with the recommendation that they include the improvements, as specified by the Building Department. It was seconded by Mr. Christensen. Ms. Barrows, Mr. Christensen, Mr. Fife, Ms. Funk, and Ms. Short, voted 11Aye." Mr. lker, Ms. Kirk, Mr. McRea, and Mr. Young were not present. Mr. Smith, as Acting Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.
PUBLIC HEARING- Pioneer Valley. LLC. requesting approval of the Marmalade Square Condominium conversion application for a 1 00-unit apartment building formerly the Pioneer Valley Apartments} located at 650 North 300 West in a Residential 11BME-35" Zoning District.
Ms. Margaret Pahl presented the staff report outlining the major issues of the case and the staff recommendation, a copy of which was filed with the minutes. Mr. Keith Mead, representing the petitioner, was present for this portion of the Planning Commission meeting and stated that he was in agreement with the staff recommendation. He indicated that the petitioner, Mr. Manka, was willing to make the changes on the sidewalk and the storm water which had been recommended.
Mr. Mead explained why there were only 11 of the 100 units rented. He said that when the petitioner purchased the property, there were serious problems with the heating and air-conditioning systems and that the petitioner had spent a
considerable amount of money to renovate those systems. Mr. Mead continued by
saying that the petitioner would not make an effort to rent the units until after the conversion process was completed.
Mr. Smith opened the hearing to the public and asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission.
Ms. Pahl noted that she received a telephone call from the Chair of the Capitol Hill Community Council, Mr. Eric Jergensen, who indicated the Council's concerns regarding past history of this apartment complex and the negative impact that it has had on the surrounding neighborhood. Ms. Pahl said that Mr. Jergensen was encouraged that there was reinvestment in the project.
Mr. Bobby Hendrix, asked if there was going to be low-income housing funds available for those in need, and if those funds would be acquired in the renovation of the apartment building. Mr. Mead said that he did not know if the petitioner had taken the appropriate steps to qualify this issue with the Utah Housing program, then he added that the petitioner had set up the procurement documents for 1/FreddieMac" (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation) approval so he anticipated having funds for those loans available. Mr. Hendrix further inquired if there would be an organized condominium association established.
Mr. Mead affirmed that but said that he did not know the details or the terms of the monthly assessment, which would have to be addressed. Mr. Mead explained that the FreddieMac" program would be financed through a private company, which would sell the loans into a "FreddieMac" pool Mr. Mead said that FreddieMac" was a national guidance system so mortgages could be sold on a national market. He continued by saying that an intended owner could go through any agency as long as it was approved through the "FreddieMac" program. Mr. Mead further discussed some of what he called JJsafe-guards" that could be included in the declaration of the homeowners association. There was some
discussion regarding these issues.
Mr. Fife questioned the source for the financing of the conversion project and asked if the present owner would carry the financing. Mr. Mead said that idea was not anticipated. He said that the source would be conventional, which meant that there would not be a governmental agency involved.
Mr. Nephi Kemmethmueller, stated that he was affirming the condominium conversion of the Pioneer Valley Apartments. He said that the area had been down-graded due to the condition of the apartment complex. Mr. Kemmethmuelle said that he thought private ownership would be ideal. He said he supported the condominium -project.
Ms. Short said that the Planning Commission members had expressed some concern about whether or not these units would be owner-occupied and asked if anything had been written into by-laws that would make that requirement. Mr. Mead said that there was nothing in the by-laws and questioned whether or not it was legal to make that prerequisite. Mr. Mead said that a declaration could be set up that the units be owner-occupied, however there was no limitation to the number of units an individual could purchase. He said the financing that was anticipated called for 70°/& owner-occupancy/' which would have to be reported periodically to "FreddieMac". Mr. Wilde inquired if the by-laws should reflect the 70% financing requirement. Mr. Mead stated that he did not how that could be mandated through the by-laws. He said that a better control over the environment would be through an active association because it would comprise of people who lived in the complex. In response to a question by Ms. Barrows, Mr. Mead said that the petitioner, Mr. Manka and the Pioneer Valley, LLC, anticipated selling all of the units but would maintain ownership during the interim period. Ms. Barrows continued to discuss the issues surrounding the owner-occupancy arrangement.
Mr. Hendrix asked if there was an inclusion in the by-laws that the association fees collected from the unit owners would go into an association fund and not be added to the profits of the petitioner and Pioneer Valley, LLC. Mr. Mead said that the declaration required that there would be a formula used for the assessment to homeowners and the petitioner would pay into a capital account of the homeowners association the same amount as any other owner. He continued by saying that the petitioner would also have to provide an annual report that would be available for anyone to examine.
Mr. Kemmethmueller asked what preventative measures the petitioner was going to use to stop odors from drifting into other apartments. Mr. Mead indicated that those issues had been addressed with the Building Services Division. Mr. Kemmethmueller stated that he thought this would be an improvement to the neighborhood as long as the guidelines and safeguards were adhered to.
Ms. Funk expressed her concerns about t~e impact of the apartment complex because of very little open space and the fact the investors could acquire several units and lease them to other tenants. She recommended that the homeowners association address this issue because she thought there could be a lot of problems if the units were not owner-occupied. Ms. Funk asked for a deferment for any action by this Commission until a legal opinion could be sought to find out if this issue could be incorporated into the home owners association's by-laws.
Ms. Funk asked how the problems created by a bad tenant would be handled.
Mr. Mead explained that the apartment complex would be managed by the home owners association and a professional management company who would have the legal right to invoke house rules on the owner.
Ms. Pahl suggested that the by-laws incorporate a provision where the home owners association would have first right of refusal if units were to become available for purchase, as has been done in other condominium complexes.
Mr.Mead said that he did not think the home owners association's capital would be able to provide that suggestion. There was much discussion regarding the details of the uFreddieMac" program, suggested restrictions in the by-laws of the home owners association, as well as other related matters. Mr. Mead said that he would convey the Commission's concerns to the petitioner, Mr. Manka, and Pioneer Valley, LLC. Upon receiving no further requests to address the Planning Commission,
Mr. Smith closed the hearing to the public and opened it for Planning Commission discussion.
Mr. Smith expressed the concerns of the Commission by saying that this complex had some differences that other condominium conversion projects did not have which the Planning Commission had reviewed, due to the physical nature of being a dense and compact facility, plus the lack of open space. Also he said that the price level being where it would be may encourage a large number of investors purchasing blocks of units with the intent of leasing or renting them to tenants so those units would not be owner-occupied.
Motion on the Marmalade Sguare Condominiums
Mr. Christensen moved to recommend approval of the condominium conversion for the Pioneer Valley, LLC, which is known as the Marmalade Square Condominiums, based upon the conditions as afore mentioned, with the initial sales coming within the 70% ratio through ~~FreddieMac", and an inclusion in the by-laws that there would be a two-unit ownership limit, based upon a review by the City Attorney and the approval of the petitioner. It was seconded by Ms. Funk. Ms. Barrows, Mr. Christensen, Mr. Fife, Ms. Funk, and Ms. Short, voted ''Aye." Mr. lker, Ms. Kirk, Mr. McRea, and Mr. Young were not present. Mr. Smith, as Acting Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.
PLANNING ISSUES
Update on the Central City Community Master Plan
Mr. Wilde introduced Mr. Robert Glessner, as a new staff member. He gave a brief history of the changes of personnel in the Planning Division, and pointed out that Mr. Glessner would become the Central City Community's planner.
Mr. Wilde presented an update to the Central City Community Master Plan by outlining some of the issues and describing the boundaries of the area. Mr. Wilde stated that the staff realized the first draft of the master plan was too general and some of the neighborhood level issues were not addressed. He said that a Central City Master Plan Advisory Committee was recreated. A proposed schedule of future Advisory Committee meetings was circulated to each member, a copy of which was filed with the minutes. Mr. Wilde extended an invitation to any of the Commission members to be part of the Advisory Committee. Ms. Short and Ms. Funk indicated they were both interested. When asked, Mr. Wilde said that he hoped to have the master plan completed and into the adoption process by the Fall of 1997.
Discussion on the Steiner/Centennial Segment of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail Alignment including: Report of the Subcommittee: review the staff's video of the proposed trail alignment: review the staff's suggested changes to the alignment: and a consideration of future approval format.
Mr. Smith announced that this portion of the meeting would not be open for public comment, but that the public was welcome to stay for the presentation.
Mr. Wheelwright and Mr. Joel Paterson, from the Planning staff, were in attendance. Mr. Wheelwright presented some background on this issue. Mr. Wheelwright stated that two years ago the Steiner Foundation made a sizable cash donation to the City for furthering a trail above the upper Avenues and Capitol Hill. He said that the City matched that money with a State Trails grant and basically doubled the money. Mr. Wheelwright said that one of the design criteria was that the trail was flat enough to allow bicycles, generally less than a 1 0% grade. Mr. Wheelwright noted that the trail was intended to go from the mouth of Emigration Canyon, past Ensign Peak, to the Davis/Salt Lake County line. He reported that the project was stopped after citizens complained that the trail was too close to their residential properties and that there had not been any public process, prior to the beginning contrast. Mr. Wheelwright said that the Planning Commission was the only body that would review the project to render a decision on the approval of a specific alignment.
Mr. Paterson then presented the proposed alignment segment by segment as presented in the staff report, a copy of which was filed with the minutes, and outlined the segment on the various map exhibits.
Mr. Paterson pointed-out on the aerial map the necessary acquisition parcel which the City would need to purchase and some of the problems surrounding that issue. The video was shown in coordination with an aerial map of the proposed trail alignment, narrated by Mr. Wheelwright.
At the conclusion of the video, Mr. Wright said that the issues surrounding the gravel pit, north of the City, would be resolved in a master plan. He spoke of the intention of the City of North Salt Lake to continue to improve its side of the boundary line. Mr. Wright also talked about the existing trail on the Davis County side of the Davis/Salt Lake County line, but indicated they had not made any proposals to improve the old roadway.
Mr. Wheelwright said that in the next proposed City budget, there would be a creation of an open-space coordinator position and that Management Services was looking at ways to finance the on-going maintenance and operational costs. He said that those issues would be addressed as part of the budget process. A public hearing, scheduled for the March 20, 1997, was proposed. The discussion continued regarding the fine points of the project and the various presentation approaches at any future meetings.
Mr. Paterson said that the staff believed that it was important to regain momentum by completing additional sections of the trail. He said that the staff would like the Planning Commission to consider the options, included in the staff report, and provide direction for the pending alignment approval of the Steiner-Centennial Segment of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail. It was the general consensus of the Planning Commission that the alignment decision would be made for the entire route at one time.
Mr. Smith announced that since this portion of the meeting was not opened for
public commentary, he invited anyone interested to contact staff to address his or her comments. The Commission praised the staff on the incredible job they had done on the video and the presentation of the accompanying information.
OTHER BUSINESS
Mr. Wright said that he thought it would be beneficial to the Commission members if they heard an update on the Sugar House Business Development project. Since
Ms. Short was on the Advisory Committee, she was asked if she would make that presentation. Ms. Short updated the members with the some current information and noted that the project was scheduled on the March 6, 1997 Planning Commission meeting agenda.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.