SALT LAKE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
City & County Building
451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah
Wednesday, March 28, 2018
A roll is being kept of all who attended the Planning Commission Meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5:31:05 PM. Audio recordings of the Planning Commission meetings are retained for a period of time.
Present for the Planning Commission meeting were: Chairperson Weston Clark, Vice Chairperson Ivis Garcia; Commissioners Maurine Bachman, Amy Barry, Emily Drown, Matt Lyon, Andres Paredes, Sara Urquhart and Clark Ruttinger. Commissioner Brenda Scheer and Carolynn Hoskins, were excused.
Planning Staff members present at the meeting were Nick Norris, Planning Director; Wayne Mills, Planning Manager; Amy Thompson, Principal Planner; Greg Mikolash, Building Services Manager; Michelle Poland, Administrative Secretary and Paul Nielson, Senior City Attorney.
Field Trip
A field trip was held prior to the work session. Planning Commissioners present were: Maurine Bachman and Matt Lyon. Staff members in attendance were Nick Norris, Wayne Mills and Amy Thompson.
•275 W. High and 242 W. Paramount Avenue - Staff gave an overview of the proposal. The Commissioners asked where was the gap that allowed people to walk to the properties on the south and if there was street lighting at the site. Staff indicated where the gap was location and stated the lighting would be addressed through a neighborhood improvement program the city was working on.
•563/567 E. 600 South - Staff gave an overview of the proposal and explained why it was a Planned Development. The Commissioners asked how the duplex was allowed to have a zero lot line and what about the subdivision and access rights. Staff stated the building is at the property line but there was parking and a walkway in front of the building and a lot line adjustment with a cross access easement.
APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 14, 2018, MEETING MINUTES. 5:31:18 PM
MOTION 5:31:22 PM
Commissioner Bachman moved to approve the March 14, 2018, meeting minutes as corrected. Commissioner Drown seconded the motion. Commissioners Bachman, Drown, Barry Lyon, Urquhart and Ruttinger voted “aye”. Commissioner Paredes and Garcia abstained from voting as they were not present at the subject meeting. The motion passed unanimously.
REPORT OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR 5:32:13 PM
Chairperson Clark stated he had nothing to report.
Chairperson Garcia stated she had nothing to report.
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR 5:32:19 PM
Mr. Nick Norris Planning Director, reviewed the Inland Port and how it would affect the Planning Commission’s decisions regarding land use in the area.
The Commission and Staff discussed the appeal process in the bill and the Commission’s purview over the Northwest Quadrant.
Mr. Norris reviewed the other land use bills passed by the legislature this year and how they affected planning in the city. He reviewed the ordinances the City Council had approved in the last month.
Conditional Use for a Homeless Resource Center at approximately 275 W. High and 242 W. Paramount Avenue - Shelter the Homeless is requesting Conditional Use approval for a new homeless resource center to be located at the above listed addresses on a 3 acre combined property in the CG (General Commercial) zoning district. The proposed resource center will serve both men and women with 100 beds dedicated for each. It will be approximately 63,371 square feet in size and will include areas for sleeping and personal hygiene, client intake, community and day uses spaces, client services, administration, food services, support and donations. The property is located within Council District 5, represented by Erin Mendenhall. (Staff contact: David J. Gellner at (801)535-6107 or david.gellner@slcgov.com) Case number: PLNPCM2017-01064 (Administrative matter)
Mr. Wayne Mills, Planning Manager, reviewed the petition as outlined in the Staff Report (located in the case file). He stated Staff recommended that the Planning Commission approve the petition as presented.
Mr. Preston Cochrane Shelter the Homeless, introduced himself.
Ms. Jill Jones, architect, reviewed the list of pros and cons of moving the entrance to the building. She reviewed the entrances to the building and how each was critical to the design and operation of the facility.
The Commission, Staff and Applicant discussed the following:
•If a review on the impact of moving the entrance to High Avenue was conducted.
•The long term plan for development of the surrounding properties.
•If the Applicant felt security was more effective with the proposed layout than turning the building.
•How people arrived at the facility.
•If people with cars used the facility.
•The percentage of people that drive to these facilities.
•The client parking and how the facility would be accessed by someone driving a car.
•The traffic pattern for the site.
•The infrastructure that would be added to Paramount Avenue as part of the project.
Mr. David Litvack, Mayor’s Office, reviewed the program the city was initiating that would help determine the infrastructure needed in neighborhoods around the city. He stated the applicant submitted a security and maintenance plan for the site.
PUBLIC HEARING 5:59:17 PM
Chairperson Clark opened the Public Hearing.
The following individuals spoke to the petition: Ms. Michelle Goldberg, Ms. Sonya Brown, Mr. Jeff Neilson, Mr. Brennan Howard, Mr. Jim Russell and Mr. Nate McDonald
The following comments were made:
•Thanked the Commission for the Work Session and challenges that were addressed.
•Nothing had changed from the previous proposal.
•There was no true obstacle to placing the entrance on High Avenue.
•The entrance to the building could be on Paramount with the main entrance to the property from High Avenue.
•The curb and gutter were being put in place to help push the proposal through.
•The proposal was egregious.
•There was not a valid reason to not have the majority of the traffic come down High Street.
•Feel the neighbors should be treated fairly and the standards in the ordinance do not protect businesses in the area.
•Thankful something is trying to be done regarding the homeless in the area.
•Leases on buildings in the area were being held up because of the center.
•The State of Utah did not want to renew their lease for the Department of Work Force Services in the area which was contrary to what the State and City was asking of small business in the area.
•There were two bus stops within thirty steps of the facility one of which was for school kids.
•Moving the entrance would negatively impact the neighboring apartment complex and create a safety issue for the residences.
•210 families live in the apartment complex and changing the entrance would make it difficult to access the apartments because of the traffic to the shelter.
•The foot traffic from the homeless would create an issue for the apartments.
•DWS was going to remain in the current location and the issue was with the cost of the lease not the shelter.
The Commission and Mr. Howard discussed the following
•The access to the apartments from High Avenue.
•If there was a better location for the bus stop.
Chairperson Clark closed the Public Hearing.
Lieutenant Hatch and Officer Dave King introduced themselves.
The Commission and Police Department discussed the following:
•If the Police Department thought the layout of the building was safer facing Paramount Avenue or High Avenue.
•The clear sight lines created with the layout facing Paramount and the lack of the same sight lines if the facility faced High Avenue.
•If Paramount Avenue presented more security issues such as trespassing etc. than High Avenue.
•The best location for the entrance to the facility.
•How to promote safety on Paramount beyond the entrance to the facility and in the neighborhood.
•Reviewed the security on site but not extend into the neighborhood.
•The current interaction between businesses and homeless individuals at the current shelters.
•The aspects of Paramount and High Avenue that attracted or detracted from possible dangerous situations.
•Allowing additional time for the Police Department to further investigate how the facility would impact both streets.
•Reviewing the safety of the neighborhood could be done as part of the neighborhood improvement plan.
•The Homeless program was new and different than what currently exists. With the new model, the Police Department was hoping it would change the nature of the homeless uses in the area.
•If additional considerations should be stated and included in the small neighborhood plan.
•The impacts being considered by the Commission had to be directly tied to the facility and development and could not be created from something offsite.
The Commission, Applicant and Staff discussed the following:
•The standards of approval and how each standard applied to the petition.
•If it was appropriate to ask for an additional safety review prior to approval.
•The conditions that could be put on the proposal.
•Needed to ensure everyone’s safety was considered not just the residences of the facility.
•The programing for the facility and how residences would utilize the facility.
•The length of time one would stay at the facility.
•If there would ever be a large influx of people using Paramount Avenue to access the facility.
•The process to move individuals to other facilities if the facility filled to capacity.
•People would be coming and going which would attach the other activities that come with homeless shelters and impact the neighborhood.
•If there were a way to mitigate the issues at the entrance.
•If the applicant ever considered orientating the site to High Avenue.
•Why the entrance was not ideal on High Avenue
•The ways to reduce the impacts to the neighborhood.
•The fence and if the perimeter/height could be increased.
•The neighborhood improvement plan and what the City will be looking at as part of that plan.
•The funding allotted for homeless services and neighborhood action committee.
•The language that should for the motion.
MOTION 6:53:48 PM
Commissioner Ruttinger stated, regarding PLNPCM2017-01064 Conditional Use for a new Homeless Resource Center at 275 W High and 242 W Paramount Avenue, based on the findings and information listed in the Staff Report and the testimony and plans presented, he moved that the Planning Commission approve the requested Conditional Use application for a new Homeless Resource Center at the stated address subject to the conditions listed in the Staff Report with the following modification that clients should enter the facility from High Avenue regardless of how the building is oriented. Based on the detrimental effects table 21a.54.080b number 11. Where it talks about the use being appropriately screen, buffered or separated from adjoin dissimilar uses to mitigate potential use conflicts.
The Commission discussed the following:
•If the school bus stop could be moved.
•If the petition should be tabled for further review by the police department.
•The width of the public right of way on High and Paramount Avenue.
Commissioner Urquhart seconded the motion.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION7:00:41 PM
Commissioner Lyon moved to table the petition to the April 11, 2018 meeting. To allow the Police Department to do a review of whether or not they feel the public safety would be better served with the entrance on Paramount or High.
The Commissioners discussed and stated the following:
•The findings in the packet spoke to the plan as it existed and it would be speculative for the Police to speak to something that didn’t exist.
•That area would change as development occurred.
Commissioner Barry seconded the motion.
The Commissioners and Police discussed the following
•If additional information was needed for the safety review.
•Would like the safety review to include if features of the proposal could be changed, such as perimeter wall height that would benefit the overall safety of the area.
•The standards of review and if the request to table was allowed.
SUBSITIUTE MOTION 7:10:44 PM
Commissioner Lyon moved to table the petition to the April 11, 2018 meeting with the direction that the Police Department review the potential for detrimental public safety impacts on Paramount or High Avenue, if those impacts are better addressed if the main entrance were either on Paramount or High. Commissioner Barry seconded the motion. Commissioners Garcia, Bachman, Barry, Drown, Lyon, Paredes and Urquhart voted “aye”. Commissioners Ruttinger voted “nay” The motion passed 7-1.
Conditional Use for a Homeless Resource Center at approximately 131 E. 700 South - Shelter the Homeless is requesting Conditional Use approval for a new homeless resource center to be located at the above listed address on a 1.29 acre property in the D-2 – Downtown Support zoning district. The proposed women’s resource center will be approximately 61,229 square feet in size and will include areas for sleeping and personal hygiene, client intake, community and day uses spaces, client services, administration, food services, support and donations. The property is located within Council District 4, represented by Derek Kitchen. (Staff contact: David J. Gellner at (801)535-6107 or david.gellner@slcgov.com) Case number: PLNPCM2017-01063 (Administrative matter)
Mr. Wayne Mills, Planning Manager, reviewed the petition as outlined in the Staff Report (located in the case file). He stated Staff recommended that the Planning Commission approve the petition as presented.
Mr. Preston Cochrane, Shelter the Homeless, stated there YWCA was a similar resource center in the city and a good neighborhood and business relationship was currently in place.
The Commission and Applicant discussed the following:
•A comparison and example of programs similar to what was being proposed would help the Commission understand the impacts of the centers on the surrounding neighborhoods.
PUBLIC HEARING 7:19:27 PM
Chairperson Clark opened the Public Hearing; seeing no one wished to speak; Chairperson Clark closed the Public Hearing.
The Commission, Applicant and Staff discussed the following:
•The recommendation to have a Staff person monitor the neighborhood for loitering and other infractions and if that proposal was considered.
•The unique aspects around the site that would be considered in the neighborhood action strategy.
MOTION 7:24:59 PM
Commissioner Drown stated, based on the findings and information listed in the Staff Report and the testimony and plans presented, she moved that the Planning Commission approve the requested conditional use application PLNPCM2017-01063 for a new Homeless Resource Center at 131 East 700 South subject to the conditions listed in the Staff Report. Commissioner Bachman seconded the motion. Commissioners Garcia, Bachman, Barry, Drown, Lyon, Paredes, Urquhart and Ruttinger voted “aye”. The motion passed unanimously.
6 X 6 Mixed Use Project and Planned Development at approximately 563/567 E. 600 South - Kristen Clifford, representing the property owner Ernesto Gutierrez, is requesting Planned Development approval to develop a new mixed use building with ground-floor commercial, one ground floor residential unit, and two upper stories containing 3 residential units at the above listed address. There is a historically contributing duplex on the development site that will be retained as part of the proposal. The applicant is requesting zoning modifications through the Planned Development process to create a lot without street frontage and a 5 foot reduction to the front yard setback for the property with the existing duplex, and 4 foot 9 inch reduction of the rear yard setback for the new mixed use building. The subject properties are located in the R-MU-35 (Residential Mixed Use District) and the H (Historic Preservation Overlay) zoning district within Council District 4, represented by Derek Kitchen. (Staff contact: Amy Thompson (801)535-7281 or amy.thompson@slcgov.com.) Case number: PLNSUB2017- 00297 (Administrative matter)
Ms. Amy Thompson, Principal Planner, reviewed the petition as outlined in the Staff Report (located in the case file). She stated Staff recommended that the Planning Commission approve the petition as presented.
The Commission and Staff discussed the following:
•Why the historic building was being placed behind the new buildings and being preserved.
•If the historic duplex would be remodeled as part of the proposal or separately.
•The angled parking in the front of the home.
•The height of the structure.
Ms. Kristen Clifford, architect, reviewed the history and design of the proposal.
Ms. Krista Dimmic and Mr. Thomas Bath reviewed the design, how it fit and improved the neighborhood.
Ms. Clifford reviewed the parking, traffic flow, access and easement for the property,
The Commission, Staff and Applicant discussed the following:
•The renderings and streetscape where appreciated.
•The dimensions of the two lots.
•The parallel parking on the street and if it will be available to the public.
PUBLIC HEARING 7:48:54 PM
Chairperson Clark opened the Public Hearing.
The following individuals spoke to the petition: Ms. Cindy Cromer
The following comments were made:
•The developer chose to wait for the appropriate zoning, which was refreshing.
•The process was long for both the applicant and neighbors but it would be worth it.
•The parking was appropriate for the area.
•The development pattern fit the area and was not uncommon.
The Commission and Ms. Cromer discussed the following:
•If there were concerns with the conditions in the Staff Report.
•There were no concerns with the proposal as a whole.
•Would like to see the project finished soon.
Chairperson Clark closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION 7:52:47 PM
Commissioner Ruttinger stated, regarding PLNSUB2017-00297 the 6 X 6 Mixed Use Project and Planned Development at approximately 563/567 E. 600 South based on the information in the Staff Report, the information presented, and the input received during the public hearing, he moved that the Planning Commission approve the petition with the conditions listed in the Staff Report. Commissioner Lyon seconded the motion. Commissioners Garcia, Bachman, Barry, Drown, Lyon, Paredes, Urquhart and Ruttinger voted “aye”. The motion passed unanimously.
Demolition and Dangerous Housing Text Amendments – A request by the Salt Lake City Council Chair to amend the City Code modifying Chapters 18.48 – Dangerous Buildings; 18.64 – Demolitions; and related provisions of Section 2.21.030 – Housing Advisory and Appeals Board Powers and Authority. The purpose of the amendments are to provide a just, equitable and practicable method for the demolition of buildings; require the repair, vacation or temporary boarding of buildings, and provide a means to remedy dangerous buildings. (Staff Contacts: Orion Goff at (801)535-6681 - Orion.Goff@slcgov.com or Greg Mikolash at (801)535-6042 - Gregory.Mikolash@slcgov.com) Case number: PLNPCM2017-00132 (Legislative matter)
Mr. Orion Goff, Building Official, and Mr. Greg Mikolash, Building Services Manager, reviewed the petition as outlined in the Staff Report (located in the case file). They stated Staff recommended that the Planning Commission forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council regarding the petition.
The Commission and Staff discussed the following:
•The changes to the ordinance.
•If the new language addressed adaptive reuse plans.
•The impact the new ordinance would have on dilapidated buildings.
•If parking lots would be acceptable reuse plans and what zones allowed parking lots.
•If vacant lots would be allowed if it was a benefit to the area.
•If time limits for reconstruction were outlined in the new ordinance.
•Properties that would benefit from the new language in the ordinance.
•Time limits for boarded buildings.
•Would like to add language back into the code that stated coverings on a boarded building had to be painted in the same color of the building and/or its trim.
•If language could be added that would allow the City to push property owners to maintain boarded buildings and return them back to useable buildings.
PUBLIC HEARING 8:13:20 PM
Chairperson Clark opened the Public Hearing.
The following individuals spoke to the petition: Ms. Cindy Cromer
The following comments were made:
•The threshold for the boarding and housing mitigation ordinances needed to be addressed prior to the subject ordinance being changed otherwise buildings would be brought down without housing mitigation done.
•There are vacant buildings that can’t be boarded as the threshold for boarding a building that was repeatedly broken into was impossible to meet.
•The reported 160 boarded buildings was the tip of the iceberg regarding the number of vacant buildings in the city.
•There needed to be an ombudsman to help people through the process of rebuilding after a fire
•The definition for a dangerous building, the word “any” was too low of a threshold as it allowed for only one standard to be met to be approved for demolition.
•The Community Council Chair should not be included in the Committee to review emergency demolitions as they have nothing to do with the City’s organization.
•The time frames for completion of work were not feasible because it would take longer than ten days to secure a contractor.
The Commission and MS. Cromer discussed the following
•If the building that was not boarded was a historic building.
•If the historic status affect the boarding of the home.
•The process for boarding a building and who monitors if a building is secure.
•The unsecured nature of a building was the determining factor for boarding.
Chairperson Clark closed the Public Hearing.
The Commission and Staff discussed the following
•How people affected by fires are assisted with the process.
•If there was recourse that allowed the City to take over the maintenance of the building if a property owner did not maintain it or if the building became a nuisance.
•If language could be added to the ordinance that gave the City leverage, enforcement strength or added consequences when buildings are not maintained for a long period of time.
•The Commissions purview over the petition.
•The language for the motion.
MOTION 8:29:43 PM
Commissioner Urquhart stated, based on the findings and analysis in the Staff Report and testimony provided, she moved that the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation for PLNPCM2018-00132 to the City Council to adopt the proposed ordinance text amendments related to Chapter 18, Dangerous Buildings and Demolitions, and Section 2.21.030, Housing Authority and Appeals Board Powers and Duties. Commissioner Ruttinger seconded the motion.
The Commission discussed the following:
•How the City Council would view the recommendation if the discussed considerations where not included.
Commissioners Garcia, Bachman, Barry, Drown, Lyon, Paredes, Urquhart and Ruttinger voted “aye”. Commissioner Lyon abstained from voting. The motion passed unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 8:32:19 PM