SALT LAKE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
In Room 326 of the City & County Building
451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah
Present for the Planning Commission meeting were Chair Mary Woodhead and Vice Chair McHugh. Commissioners: Michael Gallegos, Angela Dean, Frank Algarin, Michael Fife, Prescott Muir, Tim Chambless, Matthew Wirthlin, Kathleen Hill, and Babs De Lay.
A field trip was held prior to the meeting. Planning Commissioners present were: Frank Algarin, Tim Chambless, Angela Dean, Michael Fife, Susie McHugh, Matthew Wirthlin, and Mary Woodhead. Staff member present was: Cheri Coffey and Ray Milliner.
A roll is being kept of all who attended the Planning Commission Meeting. Chair Woodhead called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m. Planning staff members present at the meeting were: Wilford Sommerkorn, Planning Director; Cheri Coffey, Programs Manager; Paul Neilson, City Attorney; Ray Milliner, Principal Planner; Everett Joyce, Senior Planner; and Tami Hansen, Senior Secretary.
Chair Woodhead called for a motion to change the order of agenda items 2 and 3.
Commissioner Chambless made the motion to change the order of the agenda. Commissioner Wirthlin seconded the motion. All in favor voted, “Aye”. The motion was approved.
Approval of Minutes from Wednesday August 26, 2009.
Commissioner Wirthlin made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Commissioner Gallegos seconded the motion. All in favor voted, “Aye”. The minutes were approved.
Report of the Chair and Vice Chair
Chair Woodhead stated that she did not have anything to report.
Report of the Director
Mr. Sommerkorn stated the City Council heard the Central City Community Center mapping error, the rezone for a parcel of property adjacent from the West High athletic field for a non-conforming motel that currently exists, and the rezone of the Reese Apartments. He stated that all three of these items were set for a public hearing on September 22, 2009.
Chair Woodhead volunteered to attend the meeting regarding the Reese Apartments.
Petition 410-06-29 & 490-07-09, Request for Time Extension: Capitol View Conditional Use/Planned Development and Subdivision – a second request by Jeremy Jones for a twelve month time extension for the approvals granted for the Capitol View project. The Planning Commission approved the project on October 10, 2007. Section 21A54.120 of the Zoning Ordinance limits the validity of approval for conditional use to 12 months, unless a longer time period is requested and granted by the Planning Commission. The subject property is located at approximately 690 North West Capitol Street in City Council District 3 represented by Eric Jergensen.
Commissioner Chambless inquired of Mr. Jones when he felt the project would be completed.
Mr. Jones stated they would be constructed and sold by the spring of 2012.
Commissioner De Lay made a motion regarding Petition 410-06-29 &490-07-09, that the Planning Commission grants the requested one year time extension.
Commissioner Gallegos seconded the motion.
Commissioners De Lay, Fife, Hill, Algarin, Chambless, Muir, Wirthlin, McHugh, and Gallegos voted, “Aye”. The motion passed unanimously.
Public Hearings
Petition PLNSUB2009-00619; Salvation Army Conditional Use—a request by the Salvation Army of Salt Lake City for a conditional use approval of an 89 bed, large Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Home located at the existing facility at approximately 252 South 500 East. This petition includes no plans to physically expand the building, only legalize the use. This property is located in City Council District Four, represented by Luke Garrott.
Chair Woodhead recognized Ray Milliner as staff representative.
Mr. Milliner stated that the Salvation Army had been in this building since approximately 1990, and a few months ago they submitted an interpretation request for the use. Staff determined that the Salvation Army had operated as a treatment home without a conditional use for quite some time. He stated that the master plan contained specific language regarding impacting institutional uses within this zone. He stated that staff found that this use complied with the criteria, and recommended approval of the application.
Chair Woodhead invited the applicant to the table.
Major Richard Green from the Salvation Army stated that they were running a spiritually based, 12 step drug rehabilitation facility for men only.
Public Hearing
Chair Woodhead opened the public hearing portion of this petition. There were no members of the public present to speak; Chair Woodhead closed the public hearing.
Motion
Commissioner Algarin made a motion regarding Petition PLNSUB2009-00619, based on staff recommendations; the Planning Commission approves the Conditional Use petition subject to the following conditions:
1. No physical expansion of the building is allowed as part of this application. Any expansion will require review and approval from the Planning Commission.
2. The number of beds allowed in the facility shall be limited to 89. Any increase in number shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Dean seconded the motion.
Commissioners De Lay, Fife, Hill, Algarin, Dean, Chambless, Muir, Wirthlin, McHugh, and Gallegos voted, “Aye”. The motion passed unanimously.
Petition PLNPCM2009-00168; Northwest Quadrant Master Plan—a request by the City Council to develop a community master plan for the Northwest Quadrant. The Northwest Quadrant includes the incorporated area of the City located approximately between Bangerter Highway and the west City limits (8800 West) from 2100 South to the north City limits (3700 North). The purpose of the Northwest Quadrant Master Plan is to apply the community’s shared values and goals via public policy. The master plan provides policy guidelines for Salt Lake City commissions, boards and administrative entities to use when directing, reviewing and implementing future development and programs related to land uses, zoning, urban design, transportation, and the environment. The community is located in City Council District One, represented by Carlton Christensen and in City Council District Two, represented by Van Turner.
Chair Woodhead recognized Everett Joyce as staff representative.
Mr. Joyce introduce consultants Bruce Meighen and Megan Moore with EDAW, Inc. from Ft. Collins, Colorado.
Mr. Joyce stated the center of the Northwest Quadrant is about eight (8) miles from downtown Salt Lake City and currently this area is split into agriculture, manufacturing, and open space zoning areas. He stated the agriculture zone was put there when this area was adopted into the City, to be used as future development space, and was basically a holding zone.
Mr. Joyce stated a vision document was written as an initial guidance, which the Planning Commission reviewed in 2007, and the premise of this master plan was that growth will occur and can be beneficial. Also that judicious
management of critical resources was necessary, and the unique and cultural qualities needed to be preserved throughout this area.
Mr. Joyce stated the plan was broken down into environmental attributes, ―green‖ designs and neighborhoods, economic development, multi-model transportation, parks, trails, recreation, cultural and landscape resources, and public services.
He stated that the process to establish this master plan included: 15 Master plan advisory committees and technical resource committee meetings, over 60 stakeholder interviews, two public workshops, a Chamber of Commerce presentation, property owner/ environmental community meetings, property owner charettes, site visits, City Council briefings, and Planning Commission updates.
Mr. Joyce stated this plan was based on a framework of three elements: environmental, transit, and centers. The transit and center elements would be brought in to help sustain a viable community. He noted that there was also a goal in place to protect the existing ecological systems.
Mr. Meighen stated the goal of this area was sustainability of the social, economic, and environmental. There were a lot of natural areas that have sensitive resources that should be protected. There was major emphasis on restoration, and restoring some of the habitat that was already there which would include Bailey’s Lake, and creating a ―green edge‖ to Salt Lake City. He stated social sustainability would include infill and contiguous development as well as redevelopment, which would include landfill clean up. An ideal neighborhood would involve amenities and would be close to schools, neighborhood services, and have access to transit. He stated that trails would also be included that would be on the border of the natural environment, and would include a new 20 mile loop system, that would not disrupt the current ecosystem.
Mr. Meighen stated that in terms of employment there were currently 30,000 jobs in the area, and the plan proposed another 60,000 jobs in the future. Enough housing would be created so people could live in the neighborhood they worked in.
Commissioner De Lay stated that the mixed-use zoning was only about one (1) percent of the total use.
Mr. Joyce stated it was about six (6) percent, because the majority of the zoning in that area was industrial and natural areas.
Commissioner De Lay stated that would be the greenest zoning for the area.
Mr. Joyce stated that it might be a small percentage of the area, but the percentage reflected the mixed use zoning would be compact, which was where the ―green‖ concept came from.
Commissioner Fife stated that there were 25,000 housing units planned. He inquired how many people this development would house.
Mr. Joyce stated this would house 2-3 people per household, so approximately 70,000 people.
Commissioner Fife stated that on Page 10, Guiding Principle EA-2 Conserve and Manage Open Space for a Healthy Natural Environment and Enhance Quality of Life, He inquired why the word discouraged was used
instead of prohibited in the section Natural Areas are areas for wildlife habitat, resource protection and flood protection. Increase development and related human activities in these areas are discouraged to preserve the habitat qualities.
Mr. Joyce stated there were agricultural uses in this area in the past, before the City had zoning.
Commissioner Fife stated that this plan would bring increased activity in the area.
Mr. Joyce stated that the State will not allow the City to prohibit these types of activities, so it cannot be included in the master plan that way.
Commissioner Fife stated that on Page 18, Policy GD-8.3 states Development sufficient housing in the Northwest Quadrant to allow community close to downtown Salt Lake City that utilizes transit and existing freeway capacity to travel to downtown Salt Lake City, rather than having such housing being developed in more distant locations outside of the Salt Lake Valley. He stated that he would think that this development would help to decrease the need of development in more distant locations.
Mr. Joyce stated that language should be interpreted as the City would encourage development in the Northwest Quadrant, rather than in other areas inside or outside of the Salt Lake Valley.
Commissioner Fife inquired if a walkable community was possible that only had five to eight homes per acre.
Mr. Joyce stated the five to eight homes per acre was one aspect of the plan, there were other areas that would have higher densities, up to 50 homes per acre.
Commissioner Fife stated that really the walkable communities would only be around the transit hubs and the other areas should be referred to as non-walkable.
Mr. Joyce stated neighborhood services in the less dense areas would still provide that walkable aspect to this community. He stated five to eight dwelling units per acre was higher than what the Sugar House area currently had, which was four dwelling units per acre.
Commissioner Dean stated there was ample land in the area and she suggested taking another close look at land restrictions beyond open space boundaries, and evaluating the unfinished levels. She stated the green building standards were encouraged, and this was a real opportunity to set the bar high with buildings, site and neighborhood development, etc. She stated she would encourage staff and the consultants to review those and have more discussion on how to obtain the highest ―green‖ building standards as possible.
Commissioner Chambless inquired about Salt Lake City’s future population.
Mr. Joyce stated that would increase because of infill, and the population would possibly be increased to 250,000-300,000. He stated there was a lot of growth potential even in the downtown area.
Commissioner Chambless inquired when the light rail line would be extended in the Northwest Quadrant.
Mr. Meighen stated this would be a high priority project, but the extension to the airport would need to be made first and then extended into the Northwest Quadrant
Commissioner Chambless stated 30-35 years from now it was projected that over 500,000 people would be living in the Northwest Quadrant.
Mr. Meighen noted that number was actually projected over 75 years, but Kennecott did have areas targeted for development in the next 20-25 years.
Commissioner Chambless stated that because parts of the Northwest Quadrant were wetlands and the lakes, could any of the structures be below ground.
Mr. Joyce stated that no structures could be below 4,217 feet underground, they have not research yet where the ground water level was; however he did not see this happening, maybe in commercial parking structures, but definitely not residential.
Commissioner Muir stated that the build-out of this area was probably going to be about 20-30 years and there had been discussion of a carbon neutral development, so why was there not a carbon-neutral standard imposed on this. He stated that on Page 23, under ED-3.2 it stated, design commercial buildings, public facilities, and multifamily residential developments with architectural character that complements the natural surroundings. Commissioner Muir inquired what the interpretation of that was.
Mr. Meighen stated what that guideline encouraged was that anything designed in the Northwest Quadrant, especially as it related to development in the conservation development zone, was done in a context sensitive way. He stated that this was a large extension of Salt Lake City which would include multiple neighborhoods and each should have its own unique character. He stated that character books and design guidelines should be part of the future development process.
Commissioner Muir stated that he hoped that did not mean creating ―theme park‖ type neighborhoods.
Commissioner Wirthlin stated that regarding the overall framework, map, and documents the neighborhood centers were prevalent including: neighborhood centers, village centers, urban centers, and town centers. He inquired if these terms were interchangeable.
Mr. Meighen stated that town and urban centers were interchangeable.
Mr. Joyce stated town centers, meant the community center, which included community and regional services, and high schools. Village centers meant small scale communities which would serve the neighborhood, and neighborhood centers would include schools and some public services. He stated basically the radius of the service was more concentrated around town centers regarding what type of service was provided, and to whom.
Commissioner Gallegos complimented the mix of density and types of housing that were included that would provide housing for all types of renters and homeowners.
Chair Woodhead inquired about the statement, no human interaction in the natural areas. She stated there had been hikers in some pristine areas in the surrounding mountains in the past without much damage, and inquired why the decision was made to have no trails in any of the rural areas of the Northwest Quadrant.
Mr. Meighen stated there were a lot of people involved in shaping this plan, including many environmental groups. He stated there were a number of species and nests in the area, including nesting ground birds that could not be protected as well with trails through the area. He noted people would also bring with them pets into the area, including dogs and cats that could be detrimental to the surrounding wildlife; however, the framework map allows for a number of places to walk the edge of that environmental and experience it, as well as an area where people would be able to observe birds and animals in that habitat.
Chair Woodhead inquired about the utility plan in the area, and how this would be situated. She inquired if there would be above ground power lines in this area.
Mr. Joyce stated Rocky Mountain Power would be involved once the plan was adopted, as far as where substations would be located. He stated that there would be overhead power lines in the area.
Chair Woodhead inquired if the City’s position on that should be included into the master plan, as far as how principles of power generation should interact with other principles of the plan.
Mr. Joyce noted that State law stated that cities could mandate if they wanted underground power lines, but the city would have to pay the difference in cost to do so.
Chair Woodhead stated she understood that, and she did not feel the language needed to reference that issue, but there should be some language included that spoke to the inevitable presence of power generation in the area, and emphasized this need to be done in accordance to the other goals of the plan.
Commissioner Hill stated she loved the plan; however, sustainable language and concepts were infused throughout this plan, but the basis of that was building a community on land that cannot sustain life. She stated that the salt flats in the Northwest Quadrant do not produce vegetation and long term if a community was placed on salt, where trees cannot grow because of the salt tables—how sustainable can this land be. She inquired if an environmental impact study was required.
Mr. Meighen stated right now there was no protection in this area; the land was used for a lot of purposes. He stated this plan would preserve all of the most sensitive natural resources, and a lot of those concerns would have to be looked at and taken care of by developers when they submitted a plan to the City. Yes, there was always more to be done, and the plan encouraged that, but the Commission should be aware of that in the future as developers came with their applications, some type of checks and balances should be put into place to make sure those applications met the plan’s sustainability requirements.
Chair Woodhead announced a small break at 6:50 p.m.
Chair Woodhead reconvened the meeting at 6:58 p.m.
Public Hearing
Chair Woodhead opened the public hearing portion of the meeting.
The following people spoke or submitted cards in support of the petition: Carl Duke, property manager for Suburban Land Reserve (193 Vinecrest Drive) stated they owned approximately 4,000 acres in the Northwest Quadrant. He stated this major undeveloped piece of property next to a major metropolitan area was exciting and should be planned carefully. He stated that the transit and transportation portions of the plan were discussed, but there were also two major interstates colliding, which created a great area where density could be created. He stated this was a great place to develop, to continue the community and a great deal of effort and time was focused on the sustainability of the area; there was also an economic and social component. He stated the landfills that Suburban Land Reserve owns would be cleaned up, which would be a very expensive project, so that would not start until this master plan was adopted. He stated that with some control over Bailey’s Lake, this could be a great amenity to this new community.
Commissioner De Lay stated that the City Creek project would be LEED certified, and she found it interesting that with this development the applicant was committing to that level, but did not want it in the master plan.
Mr. Duke stated that project was one of three pilot projects, which will be LEED-ND certified, he stated they were not pushing back on that, but economically can you do this development and force everything to be LEED certified. He stated that he did not know if anyone was able to answer that at this point.
Commissioner Chambless inquired why not be assertive throughout the development of this area from the beginning and commit to LEED standards now.
Mr. Duke stated that LEED should be encouraged, but who can say that the LEED program would be what governed environmental sustainability in the future. LEED certification was a private rating, so they felt the master plan was not the place for that requirement.
Maureen Davison (6905 Geysers Road, Geyserville, CA 95441) stated she represented Epperson Associates, which was a little over 20 acres of land, and family owned for over 75 years. She stated that the property north of I-80 was a huge opportunity for the City to create a one of a kind environment and legacy. She stated there were a few improvements that could still be made including: clarification of the Future Land Use Map, which should be strictly conceptual and not used as a zoning map. She stated that the 4,217 water table issue still needed to be clarified; this designation supposedly was in connection with properties associated with the Great Salt Lake, and she would like further clarification of what that actually means. Ms. Davison stated that the LEED designation should be encouraged, but not required because housing could become so expensive that the social diversity would be lost in the area. She stated that as far as conservation and wetland easements, who would pay for that and if it was not financially protected would it be forgotten.
Commissioner Dean inquired about the legacy Ms. Davison was talking about that her and her family would like to leave, and what their vision was regarding that.
Ms. Davison stated that it had always been a vision of mixed-use and trying to preserve as much of the natural landscape as possible, and to also find a great way for those two elements to coexist.
Chair Woodhead inquired about Ms. Davison’s concerns regarding using the Future Land Use Map as a zoning base.
Ms. Davison stated that the map allowed for all of the uses they had envisioned, but it was the specific locations of those uses that were on the map currently which they did not want set in stone.
Marty Banks (representing the estate of Edward Gilmore) stated that in relation to zoning, the existing agricultural uses that were a historical landmark for awhile would fall under a pre-existing use protection for a non-conforming use, and the plan could benefit from some elaboration of agricultural areas. He stated that the connecting lines between the natural areas and development zones needed to be clarified to ensure that future readers of the plan did not rely on a default presumption that the Future Land Use Map was the actual zoning.
John McDonald, asset manager for Riverbed Holdings, stated his company own approximately 362 acres in-between 7200 West and 5600 West south of I-80. He stated this was a thorough plan, and one of the best he had seen and a lot of the public was involved as well. This would create a great entrance into Salt Lake City and was a great opportunity to put a shining foot forward.
Nathan Darnall, ecologist (286 West 2060 North Sunset) stated this plan made great strides; however, sustainability was a more recent term that people defined differently. He stated there were some definitions at this meeting which provided a type of disconnect from the term including: carbon-neutral standard, landscaping ordinances, and renewable energy. He stated those ideas were fantastic and created sustainability, but whether or not they should be in the master plan was debatable. He stated that he hoped staff, the Commission, and the City Council would continue to push for sustainability and be visionary.
Heidi Hoven, Applied Watershed Sciences, stated there were some incredible natural resources in this area that deserved a better understanding. She stated she led a study to determine the most sensible buffer for Bailey’s Lake and a 300 setback buffer from the lake would be adequate. There was a national topography, which rose up from eight to eighteen feet which created a natural buffer in the area, but there needed to be good storm water drains, which would protect the wetlands from runoff pollutants.
Jennifer Gillmore-Larson stated that her family had ranched in this area for 100 years and they planned to continue ranching. It was important that those ranching rights not be jeopardized in any way. She stated that they are a migratory ranch which moves cattle in and out twice a year and were currently considering organic certification in the future for the cattle, so pesticides that were going to be used in the future to control the huge amount of deer flies and mosquitoes was a big concern. She stated that in regard to the LEED standards that was something that the community could afford not to do.
Commissioner Algarin stated that it appeared that Ms. Larson’s concerns were already addressed, he inquired if she felt her concerns were not addressed aggressively enough.
Ms. Larson stated that in the draft version of the plan, the ranch was mentioned as a historical use, but not as a current agricultural use, which would be ongoing.
Mr. Joyce stated the modifications made to the plan identified the agricultural uses and also called for the opportunity to look at open space zoning, with agricultural uses.
Ms. Larson stated they were willing to work together in the future to optimize the way they manage the ranch, which was best for the area and which would keep it sustainable.
Loyal Hulme, representing Property Reserve, stated they owned 700 acres in the Northwest Quadrant. He stated that the clarification he would like to make was that a lot of the concerns everyone had would be more fully captured in the zoning and implementation processes. He stated that a lot of this discussion was moving away from the master plan, and it was key to get this in place so that the parameters could be understood, and then the studies and other things could be executed.
The following person spoke or submitted a card in opposition to the petition: Ivan Weber (953 1st Avenue) stated that he was not convinced that the Northwest Quadrant had been looked at with the right parameters. He stated that he was involved with LEED certification, and this master plan created some early mistakes that developers would spend the rest of the developmental process overcoming. He stated that one of the biggest problems was scale awareness, and also a lack of awareness of what this would become in the future. He stated that future precipitation and lake levels could mean the difference between habitation in the area and not. He stated that global warming and the bird factor in the area had not been given the attention it should, and this plan should be tabled to review studies, which already exist, that could aid in education about this area.
Commissioner De Lay inquired what Mr. Weber meant by do not make early mistakes.
Mr. Weber stated LEED certification did not deal well with macro-scale ecological phenomena, which would include the constant shifting of the lake shore and migratory water fowl. He stated if a hard line was drawn along that lake, like Legacy Highway for example, then the lake could not shift. He stated that LEED could not overcome things of that nature, but the one thing that the City could overcome was bad location. He stated that infill was far preferable to centrifugal development.
Commissioner Chambless inquired if Mr. Weber was saying that the status quo was more preferable than development.
Mr. Weber stated yes.
Jeff Salt, Executive Director of Great Salt Lake Keeper (PO Box 522220) stated this was not the right place for this type of development. He stated if this development could bring in 120,000-150,000 people and he felt that there were not realistic projections of how big this development would get. He stated there were also no studies on the area water quality, the R208 plan, which was a federally required master plan for sewer and storm water. He stated that this community seemed non-sustainable.
Chair Woodhead stated it was her understanding that when it came to sewer lines, the developers would bear the cost of bringing that in.
Mr. Joyce stated that developers would bear that cost, and things like water quality and issues of that nature would be looked at more in-depth with that process. There would also be impact fees in addition to each developer paying the separate cost for installation and other things.
Mr. Salt stated they were required by the County to plan for sewage treatment plants 20 years in advance, beyond just the pipeline. There would need to be a facility to treat the sewage for such a dramatic increase of people.
Commissioner Chambless inquired if status quo would be better than then what was being planned.
Mr. Salt stated status quo would be better than the plan, with proposed projections of this master plan and infill on the west side of the project in the 300 West areas would be more productive.
Chair Woodhead stated that the legal definition of the status quo in this development allowed suburban development in this area, so actually status quo would probably be the least sustainable alternative.
Mr. Salt stated that what he meant was the agricultural status quo.
Commissioner Chambless noted that if there was a big earthquake, the most vulnerable part of the valley would be the Northwest Quadrant, and inquired if Mr. Salt would agree.
Mr. Salt stated that hardly any information was given to the public about the motion of the waterways when events like that happen. He stated that the Great Salt Lake shifts dramatically during earthquake events. He stated that a buffer to allow for an area of rebound for wildlife was also not being considered either.
Wayne Martinson (549 Cortez Street) stated he would prefer that this area was kept as natural and undeveloped as possible; however many of the land owners wanted to develop it. He stated that many conservation groups were still concerned that the buffers created were not big enough to protect the wildlife. He thanked the Planning Commission for the decision on not extending a trail above the new pipeline that would be going into that area, during their April 8, 2009 meeting.
Chair Woodhead closed the public hearing.
Chair Woodhead inquired about the statements made on global warming and the effects that it would have on some of the boundaries set within the Northwest Quadrant, she stated that she had the impression that some felt that those issues had not been discussed in the past three years, and inquired if Mr. Joyce or Mr. Meighen had additional information about that. She also inquired about the malleability of the boundaries as far as the Future Land Use Map.
Mr. Meighen stated that the map itself was really a vision, one possible depiction of a community with all of the different components. The reality was it was unrealistic to fully predict the future, but parameters could be set as to what everyone would like to see in the community as far as sustainability. He stated that because of the nature of the size of the community, a lot of in-depth studies would need to be done to make it work for everybody.
Mr. Joyce stated that the concepts of this plan were pretty much all there, but the details would need to be worked out after the implementation of the master plan. He stated that these maps would be updated as the details of the plan were discussed.
Mr. Meighen stated they met with the University of Utah, and as far as natural disasters and global warming; they were relying on the best available information, and expert opinion was used to create the largest buffer
possible. He stated that climate change was something that would have to be monitored in the future, and no one could really predict what the actual impact would be. He stated that understanding the nature of this and the scale was really a small piece of the puzzle of sustainability and it was important to get the basics right first before the code and other things were talked about. He stated that the big building blocks were in place, but again that is not to take away from the fact that climate change was happening and that would have to be monitored.
Chair Woodhead noted that the Planning Commission and City Council already had approved the visioning document, so there was already some action setting the parameters of what everyone is looking for.
Commissioner Gallegos inquired if Mr. Joyce and Mr. Meighen had access to the Utah State University study on lake levels.
Mr. Joyce stated no, they had worked with Genève Atwood with the University of Utah geological survey, as far as earthquake, wind, and lake levels.
Commissioner Muir inquired about the underlying zoning accommodating single-family residences, and how they would be built in an agricultural zone.
Mr. Joyce stated that the agricultural zone was a holding zone, but it allowed one unit per 10,000 square feet.
Commissioner Muir inquired if that would restrict the City from down-zoning to strictly an agricultural zone.
Mr. Joyce stated that the history of that area was annexed into the City in several large chunks in 1979-1980, with the anticipation that there would be some development in the area, and the agricultural zone recognized that potential to some extent.
Commissioner Dean stated there were a lot of references to maps, which were partially completed including: the low land map, which the Commission referred to quite heartily in the past, and now the Commission was being told that developers would do the study.
Mr. Joyce stated yes, developers would have to come before the Commission with those studies to show what they were proposing was consistent with the concepts of the plan, and also scientific background that showed how they approached the development would be feasible. He stated the master plan had to be more flexible for that more detailed response to happen.
Commissioner Dean stated that she felt that there had not been a broad holistic view of this plan, it sounded like this would be put together in a more piecemeal approach.
Mr. Joyce stated that was something that would be dealt with as the different zones came in, and how they related to the areas adjacent to it.
Mr. Meighen stated that the challenge and benefit that the Commission had was that this area had been studied a lot, and there was always more to be done; however, in addition to government data, there had been a lot of different studies which have generated a lot of information to get a fairly accurate study of the area.
Mr. Sommerkorn stated that was always the question, how much time do you spend and how much detail do you include when doing a master plan. He stated a good example was the wetlands delineation, do you spend time and money on doing the study, or on coming up with some general standards and creating the plan. He stated that when developers do the detailed work there would need to be some future adjustments to keep within the general philosophy of the plan.
Commissioner Hill stated that she was hesitant to adopt a general master plan because it did not always happen that what had been written in the plan would actually show up on the land after it was developed. She stated that Sugar House was a good example of this and she did not feel that enough language was included in the plan to hold future developers responsible for environmental impact studies. She stated that some small changes in the language could make that difference and be put in place.
Mr. Sommerkorn inquired if Commissioner Hill could give a better example of what she meant.
Commissioner Hill stated she felt that the basics of the land needed to be discussed. What would the land hold, what would the infrastructure be, there were a lot of pieces missing—critical shoreline, etc. She stated she understood developers were ready for the plan to be adopted, so they could move forward, but without adequate language to provide developers with, as far as what was expected of them, the plan was not ready.
Mr. Sommerkorn stated that it sounded like Commissioner Hill would like more information in regards to some of the implementation strategies, and have them ready to go at the same time as the adoption of the plan.
Chair Woodhead stated there were a few ways to do that, vote on the plan and then send comments and suggestions to staff regarding elements that Commissioners would like to see included in the plan, and then vote on those changes later. She stated that if that was the route the Commission took it should be taken care of at the next meeting. She stated it might be helpful for the new Commissioners to review the scientific information and maps and some of the other back data.
Commissioner De Lay stated there were not really a lot of negative comments; and the full Commission seemed to agree that sustainability practices and LEED certification should be encouraged. She inquired if this would be a designed utopia that would become an example for the whole state, and suggested that a month would be an adequate amount of time to gather Commissioners concerns and comments and get feedback on those.
Commissioner Wirthlin stated that a month seemed like a long time considering this master plan had not happened over night, it had been going on for a long time. He stated a master plan was a visioning document and he did not feel that this needed to be put off for a month, he would suggest voting tonight. He stated the City Council had the final authority on this document, so the Commission should articulate their concerns for the Council and then let them vote on it.
Commissioner De Lay stated that the Commission could make a motion to approve this plan as written with the caveat that Planning Commissioners provide staff with their comments in the next two weeks. She inquired if that was protocol.
Mr. Sommerkorn stated that the Commission might want to table this and then come prepared with a list of their comments to have further discussion at the next scheduled meeting.
Commissioner Wirthlin stated that the problem with that was the full Commission was not going to agree with all of the things that each Commissioner might want to change, so he would prefer to have a vote, knowing the City Council would review the minutes of this meeting and get an idea of what the Commission wanted.
Commissioner Fife stated that at first he had a lot of questions, but they had been substantially answered, he could see how the development plans would need to be looked at more in depth, but the master plan was ready to be voted on.
Commissioner Algarin stated he agreed with that, there were not that many issues and quite frankly they were not very controversial.
Motion
Commissioner Wirthlin made a motion regarding Petition PLNPCM2009-00168, based on the contents of the staff report, study and site visits by the Planning Commission, extensive public input, and discussions that the Planning Commission forwards a positive recommendation to the City Council to adopt the Northwest Quadrant Master Plan as written.
Commissioner Algarin seconded the motion.
Commissioners De Lay, Fife, Algarin, Wirthlin, McHugh, and Gallegos voted, “Aye”. Commissioners Hill, Dean, Chambless, Muir voted, “No”. The motion passed.
Commissioner Algarin stated that a lot of work had gone into this plan and it was a good plan. He stated that the Commission agreed that the agricultural area should be preserved the way it was. This master plan should be used as a guide and then as developers came before the Commission, it should be adhered to.
Commissioner Dean stated that she agreed this was a great plan, but it felt like it was just not complete yet. She stated there were still a few details that needed to be hashed out before it started to evolve in the future; this is an important document that should be taken seriously. She felt that some of the concerns may only be small issues, but they should still be taken care of before passing this onto the City Council.
Commissioner Hill agreed that some of the issues were small, but with large impacts, it is a great plan, but in a bad location, and some of the language was missing that would secure the execution and impact of the plan is what the Commission and the City wants.
Commissioner Muir stated that to some degree lip service was being given to the LEED-ND certification. He stated that agricultural land could not be taken out of production for housing, and further encroachment into those agricultural zones without seeming like a total contradiction.
Commissioner Chambless stated that this was land that had never been developed and had only been studied now for three years, there were a few things that needed to be looked at which would be able to be accomplished in a two to four week time.
Commissioner De Lay stated through Mr. Joyce and the City had gathered a lot of information and done an amazing job throughout this process, she felt that there could not be enough information gathered to completely
predict the future. The reality was when this area was developed, what will actually happen versus what was planned for.
Chair Woodhead thanked the property owners, stakeholders, and everyone who had been involved in this process and provided input and time to create this plan.
The meeting adjourned at 9:11 p.m.