Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Hey.

Hey. Hey. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Hey, Heat.

Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Never.

Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Hey, Heat.

Heat. Heat. N. Hey, hey, hey. go ahead and get started. Um, thanks everyone for being here at the May 13th U Salt Lake City Planning Commission meeting. Uh, we will get started with a roll call. Vanessa,

Jeffrey Barrett here. Amy Barry here. Amy Burroughs here. Anna Sullivan here.

All right, that's a quorum. Um, we begin typically with a chair report. I'm the vice chair of this commission, but our chair, Commissioner Scott, is not here. Um, I do not have a chair report. Um, the director's report is next on the agenda. Uh the the only thing that I have is to thank Amy Barry for her two plus terms now of being on the uh planning commission tonight as her officially last meeting as a commissioner. And so we as is Norm, we have a little gift for Amy, but we really appreciate everything that Amy's brought to the commission. Um and uh you know, we've all we're all better off because of the role that Amy that you played on the commission, Amy. So, thank you.

That's very nice of you. I never thought this day would come, but here it is. Um, I appreciate all of the opportunities that you and staff have given. You have a great staff, Nick, and um all the things that I've learned over the years. So, um that's really nice of you to say. I hope that my time has you've seen me grow and learn and um be a better commissioner. So, but that's because um your staff has been so great all of those years. So, thank you for that. And you get to stay and keep doing all of the good work. So, um I'm sure I'll be watching from afar, but it'll be a long time before you see me again.

Yeah. And I'll echo that. I've only served with you for a year, but I'm daunted by the prospect of serving on a planning commission without you. So, um I hope to see you again soon. Um with that uh next we typically have uh the opportunity for an open forum among the commission. That is where we discuss uh if we so choose items that are not on the agenda uh but that are planning related or other things that are on our minds that are relevant to discuss. So do does anyone have anything?

Um I want to say thanks to um Commissioner Barry. She's a the commissioner like me came from the community council area which is a little bit different from the industry and you've been a really good mentor to me and I think you're uh you've been so knowledgeable and passionate and principled and you've been a good example for how we can be good um planning commissioners and community members. So I really I appreciate it. Thank you very much.

All right. Um any anyone else? Are we good? Okay. Um next I suppose we are moving on to the consent agenda. Uh tonight is a pretty brief agenda. It's been amended a couple of times. Um the consent agenda for tonight includes the following. Um approval of the minutes for April 22nd. Uh an extension request for the 2020 main town homes at approximately 2020 South Main Street. Um and an extension request for the Jordan River Town Home Project at approximately 1176 West and 21st South. Um any discussion or do we have a a motion?

I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda items. No public here. Oh, second. Great. Commissioner Barrett. Um, I'll abstain from the uh minutes item as I was not in in town for the last meeting. U but yes to the other two. Commissioner Barry. Uh yes to items one and two. No to item three.

Commissioner Burroughs. Um, I'll vote yes to all three items, but noting that um there are new rules now for extensions. And so um a one-year extension will be the maximum that you can get on projects in the future. And just want everybody to be aware that that's the rule that we're going to be living under going forward. Commissioner Sullivan. Yes.

Okay. All right. I believe each of those passes, correct? Yes.

Great. Um, and now we'll move to the regular agenda. Uh, the first and only item of which is the zoning map amendment for the 10th East Senior Center at approximately 237 South and 239 South on 10th East. Um, staff report, please. Thank you, vice chair, and good afternoon, commissioners. The proposed zoning map amendment was initiated by Mayor Erin Menenhal and is for the properties located at 237 South 1000 East and 239 South 1000 East. These properties are currently occupied by the 10th Senior Center and Victory Park along with the associated parking. Currently, this property, as you can see on the map, is splitzoned into three different zoning districts, which include public lands, special development pattern residential, which is SR3, and single and two family residential, which is R2. The proposal is to amend the zoning for both parcels to be entirely public lands. Um, just up front, staff is recommending the planning commission forward a positive recommendation to the city council. The proposal is to amend the zoning for both parcels to be entirely public lands. As mentioned previously, the property is occupied by the Teny Senior Center and Victory Park. The senior center has been located at this property since approximately 196 constructed and it is currently closed for renovations and is set to reopen in 2027. And this amendment is not tied to any specific development proposal. It is intended to eliminate the regulatory barriers that come with having split zone properties.

The public lands zone is intended for public uses. The R2 and SR3 zoning districts are meant for residential homes and have standards designed for residential homes. When a property is split zone like this, um barriers present themselves when changes are proposed to the property as different zoning districts have different standards or requirements. These changes can include um anything from adding signage, making changes to parking, or expanding the building. There are several um different considerations for zoning map amendments such as the consistency's plan goals and policies supporting the purposes of the zoning ordinance impact of the amendment on surrounding and adjacent properties. Consistency with applicable overlay districts and adequacy of public facility services and infrastructure to serve the property. The general plan policies generally support this reason as it supports the public use of the site and supports the long-term use of the site as well. Community plans split designate the property as both residential and institutional not reflecting the current use. But the general city plan policies support retaining and supporting community serving public uses like the senior center and victory park. Plans lake emphasizes the importance of maintaining public institutional uses to benefit the community and surrounding neighborhoods as well. Compared to the existing residential zoning districts, the proposed public lands designation has different development standards and permitted uses.

Side setback requirements are generally lower in residential districts than those in the public lands districts. Larger setbacks are required in public lands district to reduce the scale and the use impacts of development in the zone. Building height limits also differ between the residential districts and the public lands districts and the public lands district or the public lands designation would slightly expand the range of allowed permitted uses on a property. In addition to the existing community and government facilities uses such as botanical gardens, recreational uses and libraries are permitted in the public lands zoning districts as well. Some public comments were received. Generally, they were all in support of the zoning map amendment. Some residents noted concerns regarding the future of the parking area next to Norris Place. That is the area highlighted in red on the map and is located on the east side of the property. It is important to note that access and use of the parking area will not be altered with the proposed zone change from SR3 to public lands. Based on the findings in the staff report, staff recommends that the planning commission forward a positive recommendation to the city council. And I'm happy to answer any questions.

Do we have any questions? I do not. Okay, thank you. Um, I suppose we don't have an applicant. Uh, we just have your your report correct. Yes, that's correct. All right. Well, then I I guess we move into public hearing. Is that correct, everyone? Okay. Thank you. So, we'll now open the public hearing. I have one card um from Cindy Chromemer. Um, but if anyone else would like to speak, they can after Cindy speaks, they may go to the podium and and do likewise. Um, uh, Miss Chromemer, as you know, you have two minutes.

Whoops, there we go. Oh, now that's too much. Um, the Tin East Senior Center and Victory Park have been my immediate neighbors since 1992. The staff has done a thorough analysis of the split zoning. I would have just pronounced the split zoning as a tardy addition to the errors in the 1995 zoning rewrite and been done with it. But 31 years later, here we are and we need to fix this. Um you see the R2 zone um was a holding zone. So our parks were all zoned R2 um prior to the introduction of the public lands and the open space zones in 1995. So, I think that's could have been where the R2 came from. The history of the site for recreational use goes back to 1912. The public use of the state began with its purchase by Salt Lake City in 1927, which happens to be the same year as the zoning ordinance, the first zoning ordinance. Wallace Stegner lived nearby and played tennis here after Bradshaw described it as the center of tennis for the state. How could the city make such a mistake repeatedly when the history of recreational use here is so long? I think contributing factors included the use of the R2 for public lands, which I mentioned, the manual nature of mapping and decision-making in the early 1990s during the zoning rewrite, the lack of follow-through on the planning commission's motion to fix the problem in 2016 when it became evident, and possibly, I'm speculating here, but possibly the intention before the purchase of the land in 1912 for a private club to extend Norris and Maria through the block to 10th East. I'm urging you to recommend open space zoning for the park parcel consistent with its use since 1912. That is

divergent from the staff recommendation to zone all of the area um public lands, but we do need to clean this up. I think the mistakes are at least 31 years old. Appreciate it. Thank you. Um, do we have anyone else for public comment on this item? All right, with that we will close the public hearing and uh open it up for commission discussion.

I have a question for staff. Did you consider an open space zoning for this area? No, that was um I don't believe that was considered. It was just considered for public lands.

Okay. Also, I want to mention that in this report the the way that the in resoning I like the land use tables to be the way that they are where you can see each use for each different category. I mentioned that last time and this one is exactly the way that I like to see that um table. So, good job. It's a nice report. Thank you. I went there today and it's a little gem of a park really. Um on outgoing I'll make the motion if nobody has any other questions. Okay. Uh this would be for PLN PCM 2026-000091. Based on the information presented and the discussion, I move that the commission forward a positive recommendation uh for this application to the city council.

I'll second. Commissioner Barrett. Uh yes. Commissioner Barry, yes. Commissioner Burroughs, yes. Commissioner Sullivan, yes. Pass. Oh, all right. How does one close one of these meetings? Well, so so Mark, the motion passed. Oh, there there we go. So, the the motion passed uh four to nothing. And we have concluded the agenda. So, thanks everyone and uh we will close the meeting for tonight. We'll see you in a couple of weeks.