SALT LAKE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes
451 South State Street, Room 126
Present from the Planning Commission were Chairperson Judi Short, Kay (berger) Arnold, Andrea Barrows, Robert "Bip" Daniels, Arla Funk, Jeff Jonas, Vice-Chairperson Max Smith, Stephen Snelgrove and Mike Steed. Diana Kirk and Craig Mariger were excused.
Present from the Planning Staff were Planning Director William T. Wright, Deputy Planning Director Brent Wilde, Ray McCandless, Margaret Pahl, Cheri Coffey and Doug Dansie.
A roll is being kept of all that attended the Planning Commission meeting. Ms. Short called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. 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
The minutes of Thursday, January 20, 2000 were not ready for Planning Commission approval.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PUBLIC HEARING – Case No. 410-413 by TCI Cablevision of Utah requesting a conditional use to install a ground mounted electrical equipment cabinet that includes a back-up generator located at approximately 859 E. Logan Avenue in a Single Family Residential "R-1/5,000" zoning district;
AND, Case No. 410-417 by TCI Cablevision of Utah requesting a conditional use to install a ground mounted electrical equipment cabinet that includes a back-up generator located at approximately 415 N. "F" Street in a Special Development Pattern Residential "SR-1" zoning district;
AND, Case No. 410-422 by TCI Cablevision of Utah requesting a conditional use to install a ground mounted electrical equipment cabinet that includes a back-up generator located at approximately 537 S. Denver Street in a Moderate/High Density Residential "RMF-45" zoning district;
AND, Case No. 410-423 by TCI Cablevision of Utah requesting a conditional use to install a ground mounted electrical equipment cabinet that includes a back-up generator located at approximately 1000 S. Denver Street in a Single Family Residential "R¬1/5,000" zoning district.
Mr. Ray McCandless presented the staff report outlining the major issues of each case, the findings of fact and the staff recommendations, a copy of which is filed with the minutes. Mr. McCandless stated that the East Central Community Council Chair, Mr. Mark Bunce, was contacted regarding Case No. 410-413 (859 East Logan Avenue). Mr. Bunce's preference would be to move the cabinet to the Albertson's store across the street, if possible, so as to not have the cabinet located in a residential area. The applicant has been exploring this option and has not received an answer from Albertson's at this time. Mr. McCandless then stated that if the Albertson's site is not possible, the proposed location is acceptable as it is located near a parking area at the rear of a deep lot.
The Planning Commissioners then asked questions of Mr. McCandless relating to the cases.
Mr. Jonas stated that he has noticed a lot of the cabinets being placed in alleys. He then asked if the Planning Commission should be concerned about future access to the cabinets. Mr. Wright responded by stating that Staff should make sure that the cabinets are being placed in alleys that are currently being used for access so that there is not a future conflict with a possible alley closure.
Ms. Barrows asked about moving the cabinet from the residential site to the Albertson's site. She then wondered that if the cabinet were to be moved to the Albertson's site if the case would need to be re-advertised. Mr. Wright responded in the affirmative.
Mr. Smith spoke concerning Mr. Jonas' statement about the cabinets being placed in alleys. He then stated that his recollection is that Staff is encouraging the petitioner to place the cabinets in alleys. Mr. Wright responded by stating that Staff is encouraging the petitioner to find locations that are on private property, in back corners and not out in the public right-of-way. Mr. Smith's personal preference would be to place the cabinets in the public right-of-way to reduce possible hazards when remodeling or constructing.
Mr. Daniels spoke in favor of moving the cabinet (Case No. 410-413) to the Albertson's site because he feels that it will be a better fit in their parking lot than in a residential neighborhood.
Mr. Frank Martinez, representing the petitioner, was present for this portion of the meeting to answer questions and concerns. Mr. Martinez then spoke concerning the Albertson's location. He stated that if Albertson's corporate office gives their approval the cabinet will be placed in the southwest corner of the store next to an existing UP&L transformer.
Mr. Jonas asked Mr. Martinez where he would prefer to locate the cabinet. Mr. Martinez stated that he would prefer to locate the cabinet at the proposed site because the accessibility is better for maintaining the cabinet.
Mr. Jonas then stated that he feels that the proposed site would be less of an impact than the Albertson's site because it seems to be out of the way. Ms. Funk agreed with Mr. Jonas.
Ms. Short opened the hearing to the public and asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission. Upon receiving no response, she closed the hearing to the public and opened it for Planning Commission discussion.
Motion for Case Nos. 410-413, 410-417, 410-422 and 410-423:
Ms. Funk moved, based on the findings of fact, to approve Case Nos. 410-413, 410¬417, 410-422 and 410-423 subject to the following conditions as listed in the staff report:
1 No propane tanks be used.
2 All City departmental requirements be met including obtaining the applicable building permits from the City's Building Services and Licensing Division, public way permits from the City's Engineering Division or revocable permits from the Property Management Division and resolving any franchise agreement issues with the City Attorney's Office.
3 The cabinets, including the cement pad, be removed within 90 days if they no longer are needed or used and any lease with property owner terminated.
4 A surety bond or cash bond be posted assuring removal of the equipment and pad.
5 All utilities and cables be placed underground.
6 If TCI or its related entities install cabinets underground, or partially underground, in other community, TCI will retrofit this equipment within one year of availability of this technology, provided, TCI shall not be required to retrofit any equipment before the expiration of five years of the date of its approval. When new technology becomes available, the Planning Commission will no longer accept and/or approve above ground cabinets.
7. All lease agreements with property owners shall contain a 'hold harmless' language to sufficiently protect the property owner from liability.
Ms. Funk further recommended the following site-specific conditions:
Case Nos. 410-417, 410-422, 410-423:
1. A lease agreement will need to be signed with the property owner(s) as this site is on private property.
Mr. Steed seconded the motion. Ms. Arnold, Ms. Barrows, Ms. Funk, Mr. Jonas, Mr. Smith, Mr. Snelgrove and Mr. Steed voted "Aye". Mr. Daniels abstained. Ms. Kirk and Mr. Mariger were not present. Ms. Short, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.
PUBLIC HEARING – Case No. 410-376 by Alan Bradshaw requesting a conditional use approval for a .95 acre flag lot amendment to the Beverly Hills Subdivision located at 2534 Wilshire Circle in a Single Family Residential "R-1/7,000" zoning district.
Ms. Margaret Pahl presented the staff report outlining the major issues of the case, the findings of fact and the staff recommendation, a copy of which is filed with the minutes.
The Planning Commissioners then asked questions of Ms. Pahl relating to the case.
Mr. Alan Bradshaw, the petitioner, was present for this portion of the meeting and stated that he was in agreement with the staff recommendation.
Ms. Arnold asked why Mr. Bradshaw is requesting conditional use approval if he does not plan to develop the property.
Mr. Bradshaw responded by stating that he knew prior to buying the property that there was an issue with respect to whether this lot would potentially be buildable. Therefore, he decided to purchase the property knowing that by paying market value he would not be able to afford purchasing the property without it being buildable. His proposal was to buy the property, go through the approval process and at some point he would then develop the property.
Ms. Short opened the hearing to the public and asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission.
Ms. Monica Strong, an abutting property owner, wondered if another abutting property owner in the rear would be using the driveway to the flag lot property to access his backyard to store vehicles. It was noted that access could be granted by Mr. Bradshaw. However, Ms. Funk noted that the zoning prohibits the storage of cars in a residential area.
Upon receiving no further requests to address the Planning Commission, Ms. Short closed the hearing to the public and opened it for Planning Commission discussion.
Ms. Barrows stated that she is concerned about how the flag lot ordinance is being interpreted because the ordinance refers to a flag lot as "a lot behind an existing lot". She sees this request as "a lot behind existing lots", therefore, she wonders if the interpretation is being stretched. She then stated that flag lot requests are usually considered as in-fill housing and she feels that this request is slightly different because the property was going to be a buffer, perhaps, to the freeway. Ms. Barrows then stated that she is also concerned that once a house is built the walls may bounce sound to homes that have not had sounds.
Mr. Wilde responded by stating that typically a flag lot is a lot behind an existing lot. The fact that this configuration happens to be a skewed configuration behind more than one lot is not an ordinance issue unless the neighbors expressed a concern.
Motion for Case No. 410-376:
Mr. Smith moved, based on the findings of fact, to approve Case No. 410-376 for a proposed flag lot subdivision and preliminary approval of the plat amendment subject to the following conditions:
1 All departmental subdivision requirements are met.
2 Final approval be delegated to the Planning Director including the resolution and/or verification of the 4 foot buffer issue.
Mr. Jonas seconded the motion. Ms. Arnold, Mr. Daniels, Ms. Funk, Mr. Jonas, Mr. Smith, Mr. Snelgrove and Mr. Steed voted "Aye". Ms. Barrows voted "Nay". Ms. Kirk and Mr. Mariger were not present. Ms. Short, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.
Mr. Smith then spoke concerning an earlier issue that Ms. Strong brought up regarding others using the driveway for access. He stated that Mr. Bradshaw noted that he would not allow others to obtain an easement for the driveway. However, in the future, there may be a different property owner and Mr. Smith feels that he would not like to see an increased intensification of traffic across the driveway and/or any easements to gain access to the backs of the other properties. Therefore, Mr. Smith amended the motion to include his concern.
Amended Motion for Case No. 410-376:
Mr. Smith moved, based on the findings of fact, to approve Case No. 410-376 for a proposed flag lot subdivision and preliminary approval of the plat amendment subject to the following conditions:
1 All departmental subdivision requirements are met.
2 Final approval be delegated to the Planning Director including the resolution and/or verification of the 4 foot buffer issue.
3 That there be no increased intensification of traffic across the driveway and/or any easements to gain access to the backs of other properties.
Mr. Jonas seconded the motion. Mr. Daniels, Ms. Funk, Mr. Jonas, Mr. Smith, Mr. Snelgrove and Mr. Steed voted "Aye". Ms. Arnold and Ms. Barrows voted "Nay". Ms. Kirk and Mr. Mariger were not present. Ms. Short, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.
BRIEFING – Petition No. 400-00-2 – The Planning Commission will be briefed on the draft future land use map and proposed zoning changes for the Northpoint Small Area Master Plan. The Northpoint area is located between 1900 North and the north City limits (approximately 3500 North) and between I-215 and 3400 West.
Ms. Cheri Coffey and Mr. Doug Wheelwright were present for this portion of the meeting.
Ms. Coffey presented the major issues of the Northpoint Small Area Master Plan and zoning changes. She then presented some information relating to staff's current recommendations for the Northpoint Small Area Plan, a copy of which is filed with the minutes. Ms. Coffey stated that the main goal of the plan is to protect the Airport from incompatible land uses while preserving and enhancing the current agricultural lifestyle in the Northpoint area, north of 2600 North. To preserve and enhance the agricultural lifestyles, staff is recommending new residential structures on the west side of 2200 West which would require shifting the existing Airport Influence Zone A/B boundary. The Airport Influence Zones are part of an overlay zone which provides protection for the Airport from incompatible land uses. The Airport Influence Zones are mainly based on noise contours.
By using three different maps, Ms. Coffey then briefed the Planning Commission on three different scenarios for the future land use map (copies of the maps are also filed with the minutes). The scenarios are identified as follows: recommendation because it will create land use conflicts between the agricultural and future business park uses. In addition, it does not address the desire to maintain the current rural road for local traffic.
The Planning Commissioners then asked questions of Ms. Coffey and Mr. Wheelwright relating to the Northpoint Small Area Plan and possible land use map scenarios.
Mr. Steve Domino, Planning and Environmental Programs Director for the Salt Lake City Airport, was present for this portion of the meeting. He thanked Mr. Wright and his staff for doing an excellent job in coordinating with the Airport. He appreciates the opportunity to participate in the future land use changes relating to the Northpoint Small Area Plan. Mr. Domino then expressed some areas of concern. He stated that one of the most significant changes that the Airport would like is an increase in the lot size for the Agricultural zone because a 10,000 square foot lot size is not typical of an agricultural area. Mr. Domino then stated that the Airport does not support recommendations that expand or change the zones between the Airport Influence Zone A/B boundary that would allow more residential uses near the Airport.
The Planning Commissioners then asked questions of Mr. Domino relating to his comments and the Airport's recommended scenario.
Ms. Arnold asked Ms. Coffey how many new homes are being considered on the west side of 2200 West. Ms. Coffey responded by stating that there could be a total of 23 homes. Mr. Wright then stated that the difference between Staff's scenario and the Airport's scenario is 17 homes.
Ms. Coffey noted that the Planning Commission public hearing for the Northpoint Small Area Plan is scheduled for February 17, 2000.
PUBLIC HEARING – Petition No. 400-99-65 by Salt Lake City Planning Commission requesting that Section 21A.46.160.15 of the Salt Lake City Sign Ordinance, regarding billboards in special gateways, be clarified, consistent with traditional interpretation, that any new billboard shall not exceed the size of the board, or consolidated boards, which they are replacing. The remainder of the Billboard Ordinance, Section 21A.46.160, shall also be reviewed to eliminate any potential for misinterpretation. Special gateways streets include North Temple, State Street and 400 South.
Mr. Doug Dansie presented the staff report outlining the major issues of the case, the findings of fact and the staff recommendation, a copy of which is filed with the minutes.
The Planning Commissioners then asked questions of Mr. Dansie relating to the petition and the proposed changes to Section 21A.46.160.15 of the Salt Lake City Sign Ordinance.
Mr. Snelgrove commented on Paragraph 1, the Purpose Statement, by stating that he realizes that what is intended is the City wants no greater than the current amount of billboards. However, he feels that the City's hope is that the current amount of billboards will be diminished over time. Therefore, Mr. Snelgrove recommended the following change to Paragraph 1:
1. Purpose Statement: This Chapter is intended to limit the maximum number of billboards in Salt Lake City to the maximum of no greater than the current number.
Ms. Short then asked what the total number of billboards is in Salt Lake City.
Mr. Dansie stated that the total number of billboards in 1993 was approximately 220. Mr. Wright stated that staff is not confident that the count in 1993 included every billboard.
Mr. Snelgrove then recommended one more text change to the ordinance in Paragraph 2, third sentence. The change is as follows:
"Billboard Credit" means an entry into a billboard owner's billboard bank
account that shows the number and square footage of a demolished
nonconforming billboards.
Ms. Short opened the hearing to the public and asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission.
Mr. Kirk Brimley, representing the Utah Highway Advertising Association and Young Electric Sign Company, spoke for the billboard industry. He stated that some of the negative remarks made toward the billboard industry are not supportive of what the industry has done for the community. Many of the companies have donated thousands of dollars to various charitable organizations and they do a service for the business community as well. Mr. Brimley then asked the Planning Commission to also consider the good side of billboards and what they do for the community. He does realize that there are areas that the industry needs improvement. Sometimes the law prevents the improvements. Mr. Brimley then noted that the industry had understood the current interpretation of the ordinance and had been operating under that interpretation. He stated the industry was supportive of the current interpretation. The industry looks forward to continuing to work with the City.
Upon receiving no further requests to address the Planning Commission, Ms. Short closed the hearing to the public and opened it for Planning Commission discussion.
Motion for Petition No. 400-99-65:
Mr. Steed moved, based on the findings of fact, to forward Petition No. 400-99-65 with a positive recommendation to the City Council recommending the Sign Ordinance be amended to clarify the banking process for billboards on special gateways including the two clarifications made earlier in the meeting. Mr. Steed further moved to recommend that the construction and demolition form used at the counter be separated to eliminate any future confusion. Mr. Daniels seconded the motion. Ms. Arnold, Ms. Barrows, Mr. Daniels, Ms. Funk, Mr. Jonas, Mr. Smith, Mr. Snelgrove and Mr. Steed voted "Aye". Ms. Kirk and Mr. Mariger were not present. Ms. Short, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.
OTHER BUSINESS
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m.