July 17, 1997

SALT LAKE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION

451 South State Street, Room 126

Present from the Planning Commission were Chairperson Kimball Young, Judi Short, Diana Kirk, Aria Funk, Max Smith, Fred Fife, Gilbert lker, Andrea Barrows, Jim McRea and Craig Mariger. Carlton Christensen was excused.

Present from the Planning Staff were Planning Director William T. Wright, Brent Wilde, Ray McCandless, Everett Joyce, Robert Glessner, Craig Hinckley and Doug Dansie.

A roll is being kept of all who attended the Planning Commission meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5:15p.m. by Mr. Young. 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.

Mr. Young welcomed Craig Mariger as a new member of the Planning Commission.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Ms. Kirk moved to approve the minutes of Thursday, June 19, 1997. Mr. Smith seconded the motion. Ms. Kirk, Ms. Funk, Mr. McRea, Mr. Fife, Ms. Short, Ms. Barrows, Mr. Smith, Mr. lker and Mr. Mariger voted "Aye". Mr. Christensen was not present. Mr. Young, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.

PETITIONS

PUBLIC HEARING- Petition No. 410-240 by Sprint Spectrum requesting a conditional use for a telecommunications tower at 2186 West 2670 North in an Agricultural "AG" Zoning district.

Mr. Ray McCandless 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.

Ms. Funk stated that she feels that there should be trees surrounding the entire tower instead of the recommended condition that states that trees be installed along the north, east and south property lines.

Mr. Dave Killpack, representing Sprint Spectrum, was present for this portion of the meeting and stated that he was in agreement with the staff recommendations. Mr. Killpack presented a pan1phlet to the Planning Commission members and gave a brief overview of the type of tower being used. (A copy of the pamphlet is filed with the minutes.) He stated that the tower will be co-locatable. Therefore, if someone were to co-locate slimline towers, the trees could eventually interfere with their signals.

Mr. Young 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 Petition No. 410-240:

Mr. McRea moved, based upon the findings of fact, to approve Petition No. 410-240 by Sprint Spectrum to install a telecommunications tower in an "AG" zoning district subject to the following conditions:

1. Painting the entire tower and antennae a flat medium gray color.

2. Providing a professional engineer's stamp on the construction drawings.

3. Meeting all requirements of the various City departments.

4. Obtaining Airport approval.

5. Providing verification the site is not in a wetland.

6. Installing Russian Olive trees along the north, east and south property lines and adding Poplar trees near the pole as discussed in the ·findings of the staff report.

Final landscaping plan delegated to the Planning Director.

7. Hard surfacing 108 feet of the driveway where it connects to 2670 North.

8. No new utility poles be installed and all new utility lines be placed underground.

9. Allowing one additional set of antennae to be placed beneath Sprint's antennae in the future, provided the antennae are mounted flush against the pole.

10. Finalization of the bond for removal of abandoned facilities.

11. The lease area cannot become a separate parcel of land under different ownership in the future.

Ms. Kirk seconded the motion.

Mr. Mariger asked what requires a company to allow other companies to colocate on their tower. Messrs. Wright, McRea and Wilde gave a brief overview of the

Telecommunications Tower Ordinance and the role of the Planning Commission members.

Ms. Kirk, Ms. Funk, Mr. McRea, Mr. Fife, Ms. Short, Ms. Barrows, Mr. Smith, Mr. lker and Mr. Mariger voted "Aye". Mr. Christensen was not present. Mr. Young, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.

PUBLIC HEARING - Petition No. 410-270 by AT&T Wireless requesting a conditional use for a telecommunications tower at 608 West 700 South in a Commercial "CG" zoning district.

Mr. Young noted that Petition No. 410-270 has been postponed until a future Planning Commission meeting.

PUBLIC HEARING - Petition No. 410-264 by Swaner Design requesting conditional use approval for the construction of a new principal building for a non-residential use that includes the demolition of a residential structure located at 1788 South 11 00 East in a Residential "RB" zoning district.

Mr. Everett Joyce 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.

Mr. Soren Simonsen, representing Swaner Design, was present for this portion of the meeting and stated that he was in agreement with the staff recommendations. Mr. Simonsen stated that the petitioner has met with the Sugar House Community Council and has received their support. The petitioner has also accommodated the community council's concerns and requests.

Mr. Young opened the hearing to the public and asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission.

Ms. Alice Edvalson, Secretary of the Sugar House Community Council and a resident near the proposed demolition, stated that she petitioned the neighbors prior to this petition being presented at the community council meeting. The consensus of the neighbors was very positive.

Ms. Edvalson then stated that it will be nice to see an improvement at this location.

Upon receiving no further requests to address the Planning Commission, Mr. Young closed the hearing to the public and opened it for Planning Commission discussion.

Ms. Funk stated that she feels that the first condition listed in the recommendation which says "That the applicant obtain a variance from the Board of Adjustment to reduce the front yard setback along Wilson Avenue", should be deleted because it implies an approval, when in fact, it is just a procedural request.

Mr. Wright stated that the condition can be deleted. He just wants to make sure that the Planning Commission members are aware that the petitioner will seek a Board of Adjustment variance.

Motion on Petition No. 410-264:

Ms. Funk moved, based upon the findings of fact, to approve Petition No. 410-264 by Swaner Design to demolish a residential structure within the "RB" District to allow for a mixed use development subject to the following condition:

1. That the landscape plans and final site plans be submitted to the Planning Director for approval after Board of Adjustment consideration.

Ms. Short seconded the motion. Ms. Kirk, Ms. Funk, Mr. McRea, Mr. Fife, Ms. Short, Ms. Barrows, Mr. Smith, Mr. lker and Mr. Mariger voted "Aye". Mr. Christensen was not present. Mr. Young, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.

PUBLIC HEARING- Petition No. 400-97-7 by the Salt Lake City Planning Commission requesting an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance in Chapters 21A.24. 21A.36. 21A.40. 21A.44 and 21A.62 pertaining to accessory lots and accessory uses on accessory lots.

Mr. Robert Glessner 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 (text changes to the ordinance are noted in the staff report and are in bold.)

Mr. Wilde provided some background information as to why the changes are being recommended. Mr. Wilde then answered questions of the Planning Commission members in reference to the proposed changes.

Motion on Petition No. 400-97-7:

Mr. lker moved to forward to the City Council a recommendation for approval of Petition No. 400-97-7 based on the findings outlined in the staff report and subject to Chapter 21A.36, Table 21A.36.020B be changed to read as follows:

"Swimming pools (water line), tennis courts, game courts, and similar uses shall not be located less than 1 0' from a property line." Mr. lker further moved that the language pertaining to reverse corner lots be eliminated. Mr. Smith seconded the motion. Ms. Kirk, Ms. Funk, Mr. McRea, Mr. Fife, Ms. Short, Ms. Barrows, Mr. Smith, Mr. lker and Mr. Mariger voted "Aye". Mr. Christensen was not present. Mr. Young, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.

PUBLIC HEARING - Petition No. 400-94-29 by Salt Lake City Corporation requesting to close Richards Street between Paxton Avenue and 1300 South and an amendment to the North Columbia Subdivision. including the vacation of an alley within the same block. to facilitate the development of the parking lot for Franklin Quest Field.

Mr. Robert Glessner 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.

Mr. Wright gave some background information in reference to the Franklin Quest Stadium. At the time of the approval for the Franklin Quest Stadium, the intent was to approve the parking lot to the north of the field. Mr. Wright then stated that the parking lot is a pay lot owned by the City and the funding that did not generate for a number of years is now available. The goal now is to make the parking lot more presentable and more suitable to the neighborhood by providing better circulation, better parking arrangements and adding landscaping. Mr. Wright continued by stating that the proposed design will increase the available parking spaces. The option of a parking structure would not be economical because the cost to generate the revenue for a parking structure would put the price of parking out of range.

Mr. Young opened the hearing to the public and asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission.

Mr. Ron Howard, a property owner approximately one block north of the proposed

closure of Richards Street. Mr. Howard stated that he is opposed to the street closure because it will harm his business by taking away "drive by" customers. He also stated that before every game barricades are put on either end of Richards Street to stop cars from entering without paying; then removed after every game.

Mr. Werner Uhlig, a property owner approximately one block north of the proposed closure of Richards Street. Mr. Uhlig stated that he is opposed to the street closure because he also feels that it will harm his business. He would also like to see curb and gutter installed along Richards Street.

Mr. Mark Aitken, a representative for the Soup Kitchen located on the portion of Richards Street that is being proposed to be closed. He stated that he is concerned that he will lose his five parking stalls that abut Richards Street. He would also like to see curb and gutter installed.

Mr. Joseph Groberg, legal representative to BFR L.L.C. (owner of lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5- Pratt Property Car Wash - which are affected by the proposed closure of Richards Street), stated that his client is opposed to the street closure because it will harm his business by not having Richards Street access. Mr. Groberg then asked what the driving source is to have Richards Street closed.

Mr. Wright stated that the closure of Richards Street will improve the pedestrian circulation within the parking lot and bus loading/unloading.

Mr. Claron Pratt, representative of the Pratt Property Car Wash, stated that he feels that the Planning Commission should deny the closure of Richards Street.

Mr. Steve Harken, a property owner approximately one block north of the proposed closure of Richards Street, stated that semi trucks would have a difficult time making deliveries if the street closure is approved.

Upon receiving no further requests to address the Planning Commission, Mr. Young closed the hearing to the public and opened it for Planning Commission discussion.

Mr. lker stated that in the absence of a representative from Salt Lake City's Public Service, the applicants, it is difficult to get both sides of the story. He feels that Public Services has not made a case to close Richards Street. Mr. lker than stated that it is short sided to spend money to close the street when it can be closed by using barricades, as mentioned earlier, for each game.

Motion on Petition No. 400-94-29:

Ms. Short moved to forward a recommendation of denial to the City Council for the portion of Petition No. 400-94-29 that requests the closure of Richard Street right of way. Ms. Kirk seconded the motion. Ms. Kirk, Ms. Funk, Mr. McRea, Mr. Fife, Ms. Short and Mr. lker voted "Aye". Ms. Barrows, Mr. Smith and Mr. Mariger voted "Nay". Mr. Christensen was not present. Mr. Young, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.

Mr. Smith moved to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for the portion of Petition No. 400-94-29 that requests the vacation of the alley way that runs through the parking lot. Ms. Barrows seconded the motion. Ms. Kirk, Ms. Funk, Mr. McRea, Mr. Fife, Ms. Short, Ms. Barrows, Mr. Smith, Mr. lker and Mr. Mariger voted "Aye". Mr. Christensen was not present. Mr. Young, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.

Mr. lker stated that in the event that Salt Lake City's Public Services decides to return to the Planning Commission to discuss the closure of Richards Street, a representative from their office should be in attendance at the meeting so that all of the facts can be available and presented. In addition, the community council and the neighbors in the surrounding area should be given an opportunity to discuss the issues with the petitioner and then be prepared to give their input at the Planning Commission meeting.

A discussion of Planning Commission Bylaws took place during the Planning Commission's dinner break.

PUBLIC HEARING - Petition No. 410-249 by Neighborhood House requesting conditional use approval for off-site parking by expanding the existing parking lot over a lot line onto an adjacent lot owned by Neighborhood House located at 1050 West 500 South in an Institutional "I" zoning district.

Mr. Craig Hinckley 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.

Mr. Kimball Shaw, architect for the project, and Vicki Mori, representing Neighborhood House, were present for this portion of the meeting and stated that they were in agreement with the staff recommendations.

Motion for Petition No. 410-249:

Mr. lker moved, based upon the findings of fact, to approve Petition No. 410-249 by Neighborhood House and allow their request for off-street parking subject to the following conditions:

1. Compliance with the Landscape Plan and Grading and Drainage Plan reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission at its meeting of July 17, 1997.

2. Compliance with the City's Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance.

3. Compliance with other applicable ordinances and development standards.

Mr. Fife seconded the motion. Ms. Kirk, Ms. Funk, Mr. McRea, Mr. Fife, Ms. Short, Ms. Barrows, Mr. Smith, Mr. lker and Mr. Mariger voted "Aye". Mr. Christensen was not present. Mr. Young, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.

PUBLIC HEARING- Petition No. 410-269 by Kahler Realty requesting a conditional use for an addition to the Hilton Hotel which exceeds the mid-block building height limit and maximum setback located at 150 West 500 South in a Downtown "D-1" zoning district.

Ms. Kirk and Mr. Mariger declared a conflict of interest for this proposal, recused themselves from the Planning Commission and left the room.

Mr. Doug Dansie noted that the staff report that he had written was based upon a Downtown "D-2" zoning which is incorrect for this property. Mr. Dansie, Mr. Wright, the Planning Commission members and the representatives for the petitioner discussed possible options on how to deal with the situation. It was decided that Mr. Dansie would review the Zoning Ordinance with the representatives for this petition and then report back to the Planning Commission with an oral report tonight.

Upon Mr. Dansie and the petitioners returning to the Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Dansie stated that the conditional use criteria and process is a standard process for all zones so it applies in each zone equally. Mr. Dansie then presented the oral staff report outlining the major issues of the case, the findings of fact and the staff recommendation.

Mr. Mike Gehling and Mr. Mike Wilkus, architects and petitioners for the project, were present for this portion of the meeting and stated that they were in agreement with the staff recommendations.

Motion on Petition No. 410-269:

Mr. Smith moved, based upon the findings of fact, to approve Petition No. 41 0-269 for a hotel expansion including the a 13' setback and the 40°/o translucent glass at street level with the following condition:

1. The 400 South sidewalk be improved as an integrated sidewalk with trees and tree grates or the existing park strip be planted and maintained.

Ms. Funk seconded the motion. Ms. Funk, Mr. McRea, Mr. Fife, Ms. Short, Ms. Barrows, Mr. Smith and Mr. lker voted "Aye". Ms. Kirk and Mr. Mariger were recused. Mr. Christensen was not present. Mr. Young, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.

PLANNING ISSUES

PUBLIC HEARING- Revisions to the Salt Lake City Billboard Ordinance to bring it into compliance with State Law.

Mr. Wright 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. He noted that there has been a minor change in the language which was attached to the original staff report.

Previous language:

Existing billboards may not be relocated, except as mandated by the requirements of Utah State law.

New language:

Except as otherwise authorized herein, existing billboards may not be relocated except as mandated by the requirements of Utah State law.

Ms. Kirk asked what the purpose would be for amending the ordinance. Mr. Wright

stated that Salt Lake City does not want to set a precedent by ignoring the Utah State law; and the City does not want any confusion on which billboards will need a permit from the City and which billboards do not need a permit from the City.

Mr. Young opened the hearing to the public and asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission.

Mr. Greg Simonsen, from Reagan Outdoor Advertising, stated that he had some concerns with the amendment to the ordinance but they had been addressed with the "new language" (as noted above).

Upon receiving no further requests to address the Planning Commission, Mr. Young closed the hearing to the public and opened it for Planning Commission discussion.

Motion on Revisions to the Salt Lake City Billboard Ordinance:

Ms. Kirk moved, based upon the findings of fact, to approve the proposed amendment to clarify that the relocation of billboards are limited to those mandated by State law and permitted by Salt Lake City Ordinance, which reads:

Except as otherwise authorized herein, existing billboards may not be relocated except as mandated by the requirements of Utah State law.

Ms. Funk seconded the motion. Ms. Kirk, Ms. Funk, Mr. McRea, Mr. Fife, Ms. Short, Ms. Barrows, Mr. Smith, Mr. lker and Mr. Mariger voted "Aye". Mr. Christensen was not present. Mr. Young, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.

Discussion of a compatibility review overlay zone and other conservation zoning approaches that may be considered for selected residential neighborhoods.

Mr. Young noted that this item was mistakenly noted on the agenda as a public hearing and it should not have been. However, anyone who is present for this item will be given the opportunity to address the issue.

Mr. Brent Wilde led the discussion by stating that neighborhood council representatives in the East Central Community, and other neighborhoods, have expressed concerns regarding the scale and compatibility of infill developments in their neighborhoods, particularly in the segments of the neighborhoods that are not encompassed by historic district overlay. In response to these concerns, Planning Commissioner Funk asked that this item be put on the agenda for discussion to review the "Compatibility Review Overlay Zone" that was recommended in the East Central Neighborhood Master Plan that was adopted in 1984. Mr. Wilde then stated that conservation zoning may include a design review process, it could also be designed to be incorporated into the ordinance. Staff is not looking for a recommendation tonight, but we would like some direction from the Planning Commission if this is something that should be pursued further.

Ms. Funk presented a few slides to help illustrate the issues and concerns of what is occurring that is inappropriate to the area and incompatible to the other buildings in the area. The concerns are not just mass and scale, it is also building materials. There is a definite need for some kind of design review.

Mr. Young opened the discussion to the public and asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission.

Ms. Cindy Cromer, a resident in the East Central Community, stated that her main concern with incompatibility in the community is the scale and mass of garages that are being constructed in front of houses. Ms. Cromer also stated that she feels that this is an urgent matter.

Ms. Bonnie Mangold, a representative from the Capitol Hill Community Council, stated that buildings have been constructed that have not been compatible with the surrounding area and she feels that this interrupts and disturbs any real sense of the community. She expressed that the issue of a "Compatibility Review Overlay Zone" needs to be reviewed.

Upon receiving no further requests to address the Planning Commission, Mr. Young closed the discussion to the public and opened it for Planning Commission discussion.

Motion on Discussion of a "Corr1patibility Review Overlay Zone":

Ms. Funk moved to form a subcommittee which would include one Planning Staff member, two Planning Commission members and two members from the community. The subcommittee could address the possibility of doing conservation districts and address such issues as mass, scale, materials, limited design compatibility and other items that may be identified by the subcommittee. Mr. lker seconded the motion. Ms. Funk, Mr. McRea, Mr. Fife, Ms. Short, Ms. Barrows, Mr. Smith, Mr. lker and Mr. Mariger voted "Aye". Ms. Kirk voted "Nay". Mr. Christensen was not present. Mr. Young, as Chair, did not vote. The motion passed.

Ms. Funk and Ms. Short volunteered to serve on the subcommittee.

OTHER BUSINESS

Mr. Wright informed the Planning Commission members that the planning team for the Gateway Master Plan will be in Salt Lake City for a work session and public meetings the week of August 12, 1997. The Planning Commission has been invited to attend a Redevelopment Agency Board of Directors meeting on Thursday, August 14th at 6:30 p.m. in Room 126 to brief the City Council.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m.