Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

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

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N.

Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. N. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. to the Salt Lake City Planning Commission for April 22nd, 2026. Um, we'll start off with a roll call.

Amy Barry here. Amy Burroughs here. Laya Rosenfield here. Anna Sullivan here. That's four. Okay, that's a quorum. So, we'll keep going. Next is a report of the chair and the vice chair. And neither of them are here this evening and I don't have anything to say in theirstead. Next is a report of the director.

Um, we don't have a lot. Excuse me. But one thing that's clear, we are trying to recruit new um candidates for planning commission HLC. As you know, um Commissioner Villa has left as he moved out of state and Commissioner Barry has one more meeting, I think, with us. So, um Michaela has been interviewing people. So, we've had candidates, but we're always looking for more. So, if there's anybody who's watching on YouTube or if any of you happen to know anybody who would be a great candidate, please tell them to go on our website and apply. and we need them for both HLC and um planning commission. Um the only other thing we wanted to bring up um Nick can kind of talk to us about what kind of trainings we can provide you. So if you have things in your mind that you would like to learn more about with it, whether it's the process, whether it's urban design, whether it's just zoning in general, if you just want to keep that in your mind and then let us know, we'd be happy to do that. Obviously, our agendas haven't been as full, so we do have time to do that. So just keep it in your brain and let us know. Thank you. Thank you. Um, now we're going to go to the open forum where the commissioners can discuss things that they want to. If anyone has any training ideas um to share, this is a good time to do that. I was thinking um the commission a long time ago used to go on field trips to go see the projects that were on the agenda. And I wonder if you guys have some direction on when we're doing our individual site visits, if you have some direction on how we can do those, what the rules are, like what we should be looking for, that kind of stuff. And then also, what's the best way for us to read or interact with staff reports if we have a question? Can we is it okay to write to the planner immediately? Um, that kind of stuff. So, helping us use the things that you produce for us better would would be good for me. Does anyone else have something to say?

Well, I would say years ago I brought up the idea and it never happened, but it would be nice if you put together maybe twice a year. Um, a list of projects that actually got completed so that then we could go look at them. Um, we did that once when we were still doing field trips and I learned a lot with that and but I just it's hard to track what actually gets done. Um, for but but seeing how it ended up was was a really a big help to like understand what worked and what didn't type of a thing. So like twice a year or maybe even just once a year depending on um how the building schedules that would be a really um informative thing for commissioners.

Okay. And we don't obviously we're not doing filters before every meeting, but we do have a much nicer van that we can get from the fleet. So the seat belts function. So that's Yes, you do. Cuz I'm leaving. You're a nicer van. Of course you do.

There's also it it would be interesting or I think useful to us too. I was trying to keep track of it when I was chair about the decisions we make, how they are followed through. And there usually is an update like these things pass, but like I'm thinking about specifically like alley vacations if we if we recommend for it to happen like what happens in the end kind of thing. Um and we hear about kind of the biggest things but maybe more types of things would be good to hear about. Anybody else have anything? Okay, now we're going to go to the um consent agenda. There's one item on the consent agenda that doesn't have a public hearing and it's approval of the minutes for April 8th. If someone wants to make a motion.

I'll make a motion to approve the minutes for April 8th. Second. Great. We have a motion by Commissioner Barry and a second by Commissioner Sullivan. Um, any action on the motion? Okay, we'll vote. Amy Barry, yes. Amy Burroughs, I'll abstain because I wasn't at that meeting. Laya Rosenfield. Yes. If somebody is abstain, if we have one person abstaining, does that mean we no longer have a quorum? No. I think it's a majority of the people who are here. Is that right?

That's my recollection. I read them. I could vote for them if I wasn't here, but I read them. While we wait, do we want to have Commissioner Sullivan vote? Oh, yes. Okay. We have three votes in favor of approving the consent agenda.

It's okay. Okay. Is your microphone on? Sorry. Um what I am seeing in the policies and procedures is uh all members present shall be counted including members who may abstain from a particular vote in determining quorum. It is not speaking to if you have somebody who abstains. So, I think worst case scenario, let's proceed and if we need to, we will revote at the next meeting.

Great. Thank you. Um, now on our regular agenda, our first item is an alley vacation at approximately 2553 South Chadwick Street. If the planner will introduce yourself and tell us about this application.

Good evening. I'm Diana. Um, first let's start with the property location. This is um in the area of the southeast part of the city. So this is just south of I80 and east of 1300 East. This request is an alley vacation request. The applicant's property is shown outlined in yellow. Um this request has two alley portions that are involved in this application. The first, and I hope this is not confusing for you, but the first portion that I'm going to talk about runs east west, which is shown with the red line. Um, this runs along the applicant and their neighbor to the east, 2554 South Dearborn Street. It runs along their south property lines. The east west LA portion has served as the driveway for both of those properties for at least six years. And the portion is approximately 12 ft wide by 262 ft long. A total of six properties above the east west portion. The applicants the neighbor to the east 2554 and then those four properties along Stratford app. The second portion which runs north south which is shown by the green line runs along the applicant and their neighbor to the east their property line their east prepping lines um east and west I guess it is um the portion has been used as part of their rear yards um and their neighbors since again 1958. this property or this portion is approximately 12 feet by 51 feet long

and only the applicant and that Dearborn uh property above that. So this is the LA view looking east from Chadwick Street. The applicant's house is to the left of the photo. And this is the alley view looking west from Dearborn Street. And the house on the right is 2554 South Dearborn. So this property, if you can see, it's very small. It's in the blue. Um the applicants property. Uh this LA Vacation is within the Highland Park subdivision. Many of those I'm not sure if I'm even going to be able to show you um but the Highland Park subdivision was platted with many subdivision or excuse me alleyways between each block of properties. A lot of those have been vacated. A lot of those have just been assumed to have been taken over by the neighbors. Again, I hope this doesn't confuse you. This is the same picture just the plat map on the left and an aerial map on the right. Um the north south LA vac uh section is accessible only to five properties that enter from park parkway avenue which is at the top of this block between Chadwick and Dearbornne. The X shown is a fence that blocks the rest of that alleyway. And that alleyway is considered a paper alleyway. It every yard meets beyond that X all the way down to the black line at the bottom. The east west LA section serves as the driveways like I mentioned and there is

no con connection between those two properties. 250, excuse me, 2552 and 254 Dearborn. There are multiple accessory buildings that encroach into this alleyway. So, this is the view from that top uh street, Parkway Avenue, looking south. Only, like I said, only five properties access from Parkway into that alleyway. These are two historic are aerials of the alleyway. Uh the left one is 1958. You can clearly see that there's quite a few accessory buildings at that time that encroached on that alley portion. And then the one on the right is from 1999. And likewise, most of those buildings have either increased in size or have not been changed. This is a little bit of a clearer view and I marked it out showing all the structures that do at some point encroach into that alleyway. I think everyone here, maybe not Anna, um the standards for alley vacations, it has to meet one of these four for consideration in order to be vacated. The one that we're using tonight is lack of use. And again, that lack of use is because there are many accessory structures along that east west alley section that have encroached on the south um on this since approximately 1958. And uh just to as a reminder, it comes to you for consideration and a recommendation to the city council and then the application goes to the city

council for a decision. If the alley vacation is approved, the city would convey the vacated portion of the alley to the abuing property owners within the Highland Park Plata A subdivision. And the recommendation is that staff is recommending that you forward a positive recommendation to the city council. The applicant is here if you have questions. Thank you. Let's hear from the applicant now. You'll have up to 10 minutes to uh tell us. She doesn't have a presentation. Okay. Um, so if you just have questions or Sure, you can we can ask.

Does anyone have any clarifying questions right now? I wonder if you have uh to staff if you've if you have a letter or a position. You do from the city from the community. Yeah, there is one in the staff report. Thank you. Any other questions right now? Okay, I'm going to open the public hearing if anyone wants to speak on this. I have one request to speak from Ralph Dnub if you want to make a comment. I'm just here in No.

Can we get you to step over to the microphone? Microphone or that's fine. State your name and then tell us real quick. or you can have you can have two minutes to I'll take 30 seconds. My name is Ralph Dnup. We occupy the property immediately south of them. Uh we abut the alleyway and have no objection at all. It's an improvement to the neighborhood. Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak on this application? Okay, I'll close the public hearing. Um, and now the commissioners can discuss, ask questions if we need to.

Um, I do have one question. The one comment I think from engineering was about Rocky Mountain Power not being able to access something along the alleyway. Um, can you talk about that or like what would be done to mitigate that? I guess allow them access. Right. Typically in the past we I may need to defer to legal on this one, but in the past we have had an easement established so that the power lines could be serviced or repaired or changed out. Um I'm going to go to Courtney to see if that's something that we still do at this point.

So most of these um when the area was platted, that's where the reservation of the utility easements may be. So, if you weren't finding something in a title report, that would be why. Um, but I would assume given the age of this development that that's exactly where the easements lie.

Thank you. Any other questions or discussion? I mean, I'm a little uncomfortable creating a discontinuity in what is, at least on paper, a continuous alleyway, right? This isn't like an alleyway that's already been partially vacated earlier on. It's a full alleyway on paper. And um I I'm not thrilled conveying that public interest um over to to private hands at this time. Well, there's a in this along the same token, there's a um one of the things that we're supposed to consider is if this request furthers the city's preference for disposing of an entire alleyway rather than a small segment of it. And I I know that in the past we've considered alleyways that are perpendicular as separate, like this is this is a separate one from this. Um, so vacating the one makes sense that crosses across the six properties, but the one that only has two properties adjoining seems like it's a part of an alley that is still being used. Um, I mean, there's a fence at the north end of it, but um, the part of that alleyway that's going north south is still being used. So that's kind of that's kind of what I think I'm more comfortable with the east west alleyway being vacated and not just the little piece of the north south one.

Can I interrupt on that? You can. Yeah. So like I mentioned earlier only the top five so on this diagram only the five the top five have access and as you can see there are multiple structures beyond that that encroach on that alleyway. So maybe this request should be to vacate all of the parts of it that aren't being used because at this point it seems like every neighbor could every backyard neighbor could make a request then you have one two three four right? You have the 12 more requests to vacate a 12oot alley or something.

Understandable. The applicant did consider that, but because it was going to be difficult to get those 12 people to agree at this time and they were trying to um go forward with their portion, that wasn't something that they could pursue. I understand you have to have permission from all it would be like 24 other homeowners. It's 75%, right? Correct. Yeah,

I would just mention you're right. It it is the council's preference to eliminate or vacate to the totality of an alleyway, but they certainly don't have to do that. So, um obviously you guys are going to make a recommendation to the council tonight and whether that's uh comes with a condition or you know a preference we can do that too. So, right, they that's true. Have have the new rules that we've discussed on alleyways gone through yet? give us a little update on that. Yes, they were approved by the city council last month, but the ordinance has not been published yet, which means they're not in effect yet. So, okay. It should be published, you know, any day or week now.

Okay. So, this is based on the old rule, which is appropriate because it was applied for then. Somebody want to make a motion or

Well, I'll just throw in some of my comments about alleys because everybody knows I' I am generally not in favor of alley vacations. Um, but the one difference I've noticed or that I feel is that if an alley exists on ground and then somebody has blocked it for whatever reason at some point in time with a fence or an accessory structure, um, but it the alley physically exists beyond that. I'm generally never in favor of those vacations. Um in in situations like this where there is zero alley um along this line, the fences are going right up into the middle of the so-called alley. Those are a little different for me when I evaluate them because let's just take if we take off of Parkway, the north end, um that fence that is blocking that. Beyond that, there's actually no existing alley. There's no physical alley. So, it's not so much a matter of the people have over the decades built um accessory their garages basically encroaching on that or their fences. It just it's not there. It doesn't exist. So, if we you know made the person on the north take the fence down the city, not not me personally, but the city did it then there would still be no alley beyond it. Whereas in other cases that have come before us, somebody has encroached on it or blocked it, but the alley still exists. And so requiring that encroachment like so those are the cases where I generally am not in favor of the vacation because if we simply remove the encroachment, we will then have a functioning alley. In this case, we actually have no alley.

What there's nothing there. It's there's the in order to construct an alley, we would have to everybody would have to move their their fence and and their garages and make way for that. So in in this case, I'm um supportive of a positive recommendation. Um but that's the reasoning behind how I evaluate when I am the the very few times going to say that I support an alley vacation is when it just physically doesn't exist. um like in this case, what's the zoning of the district or of the area? R17,000. Thank you. Mhm.

I mean, I guess I'm I'm also thinking about posterity, right? I don't think and and I mean this is the inherent difficulty of alleys is that it puts owners on shaky ground. Um, but I do think that like if this were to theoretically turn over, especially given the um, you know, efforts we're considering in terms of residential um, uses, protecting the ability to transition that back into an alley over time, I think does serve some community value. Um and and uh I think completely eliminating that possibility into the future is something that I I'm not thrilled with. But I your point is well taken that this is really a paper alley. There is there is nothing on it that currently is usable.

Anybody want to make a motion? May I ask a question? Yes. Um what what would the potential benefit of having an alley um created in a like a long a narrow street like this serve for the city? Yeah. I mean I think that ultimately it's it's about community integration, walkability, right? The streets on the side they are walkable it appears. Um but at the same time like creating that more complex urban fabric is generally um I think beneficial to the city's design goals.

There's alleys serve a huge purpose where they're used correctly. You can have backdoor access to an ADU or like a lot of things. But does anybody want to make a motion? I can't. So, I I would like to move that the commission recommends that the city council adopt this alley vacation. I'll second. Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Sullivan and a second by Commissioner Barry. Any action or activity on the motion? Okay, we'll vote. Amy Barry, yes. Amy Burroughs, no. Laya Rosenfeld,

no. Anna Sullivan, yes. Okay. When a when a motion doesn't get a majority vote, then it doesn't pass. Does anybody want to make a different motion?

Hold on. Oh, sorry. The public hearing is over right now. Does anybody want to make a different motion? I'll move that we recommend denial to the city council. Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Rosenfield. I don't think I can second. Is that right? Miss Lords is not here, but I don't think I can second. Right. When I'm chairing. Okay. I mean, I can withdraw the motion, but we're just stuck.

If if neither of you want to second, then we we can do another motion to table it. That's I I might be in favor of that because if the entire alley was vacated, I would be in I would be in favor in future of that. So tableabling is Madam Chair. So I'm curious. I think in our policies and procedures at one time it stated that in the event of a tie vote, the uh vote of the chair is the way that it goes. Did we change that? I don't think that's in the I don't think it's it used to be in that and I don't know if it made the recent update. Is Miss Lord's here almost.

No, she had to step out for a moment. So, apologize for that. Do you two want to weigh in? I'm going to I'm looking I mean I would just say that I I appreciate what everyone has said here. Um I can say in the time that I've been here, I've never heard of the city ever reclaiming an alleyway in this manner. Um, and I don't know that it would be reasonable to con to conceive that the city would pay all the money to rip out all these fences and garages and things. And not to say where they could or not, legalities, you know, those are put aside. But, um, I can just tell you I've never seen anything like that ever occur at Salt Lake City. So, just my thoughts.

I appreciate that. So we can Well, will you do you want to catch her up? We'll wait for our attorney to make a call. Stand down. so that she would agree with this. We do need to have a motion and just consider that this is just a recommendation to the city council. Right.

So, right. Does anyone want to make a motion? C can we recommend no recommendation? Okay. We can table, we can recommend passing or not. And it it is true that this is not the last decision. The city council can decide for whatever standards there are.

It I mean is it possible to to advance a recommendation to the council that the entire thing is vacated or would would that need to collect sufficient signatures? So, I mean, I think that you could add a condition that it would be preference for the planning commit or to obtain the additional signatures. I don't think we could require that as a condition. Okay. Just because we're trying to force hands on a bunch of property owners that aren't involved in this is what I would think.

So, I would make a stab then at a second motion for you all to consider. So for PLN PCM2026-000073, based on the information presented and discussion, I move that the commission recommends that the city council adopt this alley vacation with the stated preference that the city council look into an entire vacation of the alleyway between Chadwick and Dearbornne with the exception of the existingly operational. Sorry. There are f Well, no. Say that again. Uh the the there there are the the northernmost portion of that alley there is like an active segment.

No, that's that we would vacate. They would I I still would say that the way I stated it would stand in that the city council is looking into Got it. that vacation and then whether they decide that section is fine then that would be up to them. Okay. Yeah. We have a motion by Commissioner Barry. Any second? I'll second. Thank you, Commissioner Sullivan. All right. Any other action on that motion? Okay, we can vote. Amy Barry, yes. Amy Burroughs.

Um, yes. And with my voting yes on that, I want to say that I understand that gathering the signatures and accommodations for the entire alleyway I realize would be hard or at least the part that's not used, but that's the stated preference that our group is supposed to consider. So, I think making the effort to get the other another 18 people on board or something like that when they get the property, it's given to them when they agree to the alley vacation. So, it seems like it might not be impossible. Of course, I didn't try anything. So, but that's right. That's why I would vote for it now. Laya Rosenville,

no. Anna Sullivan, yes. Three to one. Okay. So that passes and it will go to the um city council. So good luck. Thank you. Okay. Our next item on the agenda is And c can we confirm that if if a motion um has an even vote, it doesn't pass. Is that the way we're handling? That is correct.

Thank you. Okay. Um, the next item is a reszone request at approximately 2620 North, 2200 West with other addresses as well. If you'll introduce yourself and this application. Thanks. Sorry, one moment. Let me get this presentation up. I'm Aaron Barlo, senior planner. And I'll let Alicia say her name into the record.

Okay. I am Alicia Celely, principal planner. Um, and we are here representing planning staff for this zoning map amendment. Um, the amendment is proposed from AG2 to M1A um at the properties listed here. Um, okay. So the site details the addresses this proposal um consists of three separate properties 2620 north 2200 west 2075 west 2670 north and 2025 west 2670 north um yes sorry that is confusing. Um these three parcels are in the North Point area um and they are currently zoned AG2 which is agricultural. Um, this petition is to reszone these three properties to M1A, which is the North Point Light Industrial Zoning District. Um, and again, the neighborhood planned is the North Point small area plan. Um, the purpose of this reszone um is to provide a way to develop future light industrial use on the properties. However, no development plans have been produced at this time. Um and staff is recommending approval or a positive recommendation to city council with conditions. Um here's a better look at the subject site and what is there currently. So again, three parcels. One is currently used as residential use. So the one on the west or the left side of this site map um has a house, a single family home that fronts 2200 west. Um and then the other two properties um that have access through 2670 north, they are undeveloped. They have been used as

irrigated pasture land um prior to this proposal. Um neighborhood context, uh this area is characterized by very low density residential and agricultural uses. Um however, as I'm sure you're aware, the immediate area and vicinity is seeing new industrial development um primarily across 2200 West on the west side. Um you can see a large warehouse in the background um of some of these photos that were taken from 2670 north um facing west. Uh so as far as what would change um if this zoning map amendment was adopted um the M1A district has similar height requirements as the AG2 district. Um setbacks have uh a unique provision in M1A in that the setbacks of the bay zone are similar to AG2. However, all buildings um must be set back at least 65 ft from any principal residential structure on an abuing property. Um the M1A has no minimum lot width or lot size requirements. Um and then it is subject to additional landscaping and tree planting requirements um that are not required right now in the AG2 zone. Um the other significant change would be the additional allowed uses. This is not a comprehensive list. This is just um highlighting some of the examples of uses that are not currently permitted in AG2 um and are permitted in M1A that um future development on this property could turn into. Um there is an exhaustive list in the staff report, but I've just put some highlights up here. This zone is primarily designed for light manufacturing, light industrial. Um,

okay. And then finally, the M1A district is subject to additional design standards that don't apply to AG2. So any future development on this site would be subject um to these design standards. They have there are provisions and requirements for the maximum building facade length, maximum length of a Blake wall. um building materials, roofs, uh minimum glass requirements, and then lighting, fencing, and storm water management requirements that are unique to this zoning district designation. Um as far as compliance with the city's adopted goals and plans, um Plan Salt Lake supports the growth of industrial areas with the city. Um, however, the goal of Plant Salt Lake is to do so in a way that balances protecting and restoring critical wildlife habitat um and sensitive lands and open space and also providing a balanced economy um that produces quality jobs um and planning staff's determination is this proposal is in line with that as well as the North Point small area plan. Um, just to be clear, this is not a general plan amendment, just a zoning map amendment because the amendment is in line with the intent and the goals of the North Point small area plan. Um, including mitigating noise impacts from industrial development, which we will talk about with the community benefit in a moment. um additional design standards and appropriate future land uses um that can coexist with the wildlife habitat and the natural environment. Okay. Um as mentioned, this is a zoning map amendment um that is in line with the North Point vision map. Um and the uh this area in which these three properties lie is designated in that

small area plan as transitional. The purpose of the transitional zone is to mitigate impacts of light industrial development on existing properties. So while the main um purpose and intent of this zone is to provide space for industrial and light light industrial and light m manufacturing uses. it is designed in a way that mitigates those impacts on existing development.

So, one area of concern that came up uh through public comment and through staff review was the considerations of wetlands on the site in the north north point small area plan. It actually points out areas that are generally understood to be wetlands, but it's hard to tell until a delineation study has been done. And that is usually done either when development happens or when there's a subdivision application that would be managed through public utilities. They're the ones that enforce these types of of issues. But with the plan, the map that we have now in the plan, it can only give us a general idea and we can't say exactly where they are. And once they're identified, there are codes in place to protect those uh wetland areas both uh through the riparian corridor overlay um as well as other protections in the M1A zoning district. Next slide. Uh so yeah, we did hear some comments uh from the public. Many of them were focused on the issues with 2670 north. That is a primary access point for many homes along there. And it's not an improved street. It's a private street and cannot really accommodate commercial type traffic or fire and types of things that you would need for major industrial development. Thus, the applicant responded and purchased the property, the long narrow one uh 2260 north. Uh that one uh provides the plan is to use that as an access point and to you know ensure privacy for the adjacent property owners. We can go to the next slide. Uh so you know in response to these comments, the applicant has proposed a community benefit that helps to mitigate and maintain the negative impacts to an extent even greater than what's required in the M1A district. So first off, there's tree plantings. A

significant amount of tree plantings along residential property lines where there are res residential uses. uh that includes uh two evergreen types of trees, Italian cypress and arro juniper. Um there's also a plan to remove invasive plant species which includes Russian olives, tamarisks, and other types of trees that aren't really beneficial to even to land like this agricultural land. And then they are planting it much closer together than what's required by the code. And yeah, there's also plans for fencing, privacy fencing along residential uses and then wildlife friendly fencing in other areas where there's not residential uses to ensure that you know there are wetlands here if they are here the wildlife using it uh have that visibility and the plan is to follow the best practices uh provided by the fish and wildlife. Uh there are some other measures as well. Um mainly keeping the impacts of any new building away from residential uses. For example, pointing all primary entrances to bay doors or any sort of access point away from those residential lots when it's within 100 100 ft of a residential property. There'll be no storage or yard spaces within 100 ft of a residential property. And then they will not use 2670 as a site access unless conditions change. So the recommendation includes two conditions. We are recommending a positive recommendation with these conditions. The first is install that privacy fence and additional trees as shown in the landscape plan. And then not allowing any sort of subject site access for this use for the M1A district on 2670 north unless the street is improved and the zoning district changes on the properties abuing there to M1A.

And that's the end of the presentation. The applicant is here to answer questions. They don't have a formal presentation, but if you'd like to talk to them or talk to us first, whatever works. Okay. Thank you. Does anyone have any clarifying questions on these? Yeah. Um, this is not the property that is planned for the homeless campus. Correct. That's the parcel south. Correct. This is not that property. But that that but it is one parcel south. Like this would be directly adjacent to that campus. Correct. Correct. Thank you. Um, I think I'll save my questions for uh any remaining questions for after public comment.

And one, if I can add one sort of peripheral benefit to having the street be an access point is it does buffer the space proposed to be the homeless camp. Um, it separates the residential uses and that proposed use. I I c could you go back to the parcel map, please? Yeah. What? There there's it looks like there's one parcel to the south between that you that probably. Yeah. Okay. So, it wouldn't directly buffer. There would still be one parcel next. Thank you.

Yeah. Commissioner Rosenfel, we were looking at the map and we agree with you that there is that parcel in between that proposed campus and this area, but obviously it's all a proposal right now. So, um my question is the community benefit um is in addition to the conditions. So the community benefit will be outlined in a development agreement type deal and then the conditions are the those two specific things. So the other wildlife fences, the trees, yeah, the will be in the there are specific plans that the applicants submitted that will be oh sort of that will outline what those community benefits are, the location of the fences, and the Yeah. things like that.

Okay. Um the wetland delineation will occur at the time that somebody applies for a building permit or a development or subdivision subdivision. And that that happens no matter what. We don't need a condition for that. No. Okay. Okay. Do we want to open public comment and then Yeah, let's do public comment. Unless the if if you want to make a comment, this is a good time to do that if you're the applicant. Sure. Come on up. You have you can say what you want to.

Uh my name is Dustin Cutler. Um it is my I don't even remember what LLC I technically have this under, but I am the developer on it. Um, we do build light industrial. We just don't have the We're doing a project out by the airport right now and don't have the capital to do this project. So, we are just pursuing this so we can sell it. Um, if you can go back to the parcel map there, there there's a few things on there. So, the homeless shelter is actually one parcel to the side. the the parcel directly south is owned by Hughes Construction, which is the guys that run the the Rock Quarry right here at North Point. And they actually own the house to the south. They purchased the house to the south at the first of January. So, they own I believe it's a 15 acre parcel and then the city property that's abuing that is the one proposed for the for the homeless shelter. And the Hughes contractors, we spoke to them a few times. Um, their plan initially before the homeless shelter came along was to build their new like storage yard and kind of main primary office there, but to be honest, they said we're going to kind of wait and see what happens with the homeless shelter before we commit to that. So, there is there is a separation and the property to the north is also owned by an investment company and I've been in talks with them as far as the road access um along with the other neighbors. I initially approached all the neighbors on 2670 to see if they wanted me to pay for the road to be upgraded to meet city standards. Um they were not interested. A couple of them were, a couple of them weren't, but of course you have to get nine people to all agree, which was a little bit difficult. Um there are the two neighbors. There is a business operating at the end of 2670. It's a landscape company that most of the neighbors uh don't really enjoy. Um, and then the two larger parcels which are up against the freeway, they're actively trying to develop that also, but they

lack access. Um, to the point that they've approached us to see if I'd be willing to put the road over to them and I it doesn't really work for me if I ran a 60ft road through the middle of it cuz then I don't really have any developable space. So, they are they are actively trained to do that. But uh within the area along the the h home I purchased both the property to the north and to the south are owned by investment companies at this point in time and um there are residents living in they're renting them out but they're pursuing some sort of future use that'll probably fall along these lines. Any questions?

I have a question for staff. the community benefit, the development agreement, the conditions, those all follow with the property regardless of who owns it. Okay. Correct. Okay. So, I was looking through the the comparison the the various permitted uses. Do you know if there are any um fossil fuel or fossil fuel adjacent industrial uses permitted under the M1A zoning code? I believe those are limited to the M2 district. Okay. because those would all be heavy industry. That that would be heavy. Yeah. Okay.

Yeah, commissioner. That's correct. And actually, when the M1A zone came through the planning commission, I'm not I don't recall if you were on the commission at that time, but the commission actually made a recommendation to take out any of those uses that would have like hazardous materials. So, those were all taken out. So, the M1 zone truly is a very light industrial zone, but it does include light manufacturing. Correct. What What is the definition of light manufacturing? Let's pull up the zoning code and see.

I can tell you the basis is really is any type of manufacturing that doesn't cause any sort of noxious fumes, sounds, um any sort of negative impacts to the surrounding area. It should be contained in the site. And also, I believe this zone also limits the size of buildings. So, like the buildings across the street, you're not going to be able to build a 1.4 or 5 million square foot building even if they had enough space, which they do not. It's limited to 100,000 square ft maximum. Realistically, this site will fit um having had an engineer look at it, it'll fit roughly a 30,000 ft building and a 40,000 ft building is by the time you factored in road and parking and turnaround is about the maximum. Gotcha.

There is what you don't see on here is there is a a Kern River gas line. There's a 36 in two 36-in gas lines that feed from Wyoming to California running right through the middle of the property. and it has a 50 foot wide easement. So, um there's limited building envelope there. Yeah. Okay. We're going to move to um public comment period. Does anyone want to make a comment on this application? Okay. I'm going to close the public comment period. So, now we're in executive session, which means the commissioners um can ask questions of staff if they need to. I have a question. Are

all the properties on the other side of 2200 West? Are they M1A like Nature's Bakery? Believe. So it looks like they're BP. Yeah, they're business park. Across 2200 West is BP Business Park. Okay. And that has a different land use table.

Correct. Okay. Um Okay. Let me say I don't when when we're considering a reszone and there's a land use tables to compare. I liked the way where we would look at one that would say um like bakery like not allowed bakery permitted so you could like see exactly across the uses that went I like kind of like that layout unless the land use tables have changed so much and that that's doesn't exist anymore. But I liked that way to compare the two. Um, yeah, and that is in the staff report. We didn't put it in the presentation because it would take up many slides. It was quite long.

Well, I mean, I I see it, but do you know what I'm It looks like you understand what I'm saying where you have like this use allowed not allowed for each individual use for both districts. And then what's the what is the result or the consequence of destroying a residence that's currently in use? Is there any kind of

So that property the the former property owners actually be submitted an application to reszone to M1A and then they were approached by the applicant and they willingly sold the property to the applicant. So in this case it's there's not any displacement happening because the applicants they gave gave the home to they gave the property to the applicant. Okay. if it's sold, but city council can require the replacement of a dwelling unit, but in this situation, because of if it goes to the M1A zone, dwellings are not allowed. They're not permitted. This is a just a different situation than we would normally see. They they could still require it in some way.

They could require Yeah, they could require paying into the housing fund, but it Okay, thank you. I would love to see that happen because it's a house that someone lives in. It's a It's a pretty little farmy neighborhood right now.

It It does look like data center is on this list. Um and I did go through the the code and it seems like we have some relatively reasonable restrictions in place for data centers, right? We have requirement for closed loop water system. Um we have a max that maximum that the mayor put in place or the the council put in place a couple a couple weeks ago. that emergency ordinance is 20,000 200,000 gallons correct um just to give us give me a sense of comparison how does that 200,000 gallons compare to the quantity of water required currently to use the property for agricultural purposes I I'm not a farmer so I'm not sure I'm sorry

there there is some more context to this as well the the sewer and water capacity in this area is, you know, whatever improvements they make on the property, they will need to pay into or provide additional infrastructure improvements to even reach that point. And we do have limits for new uses for for the water use. Um, I have to pull out my old uh irrigation handbook to figure out exactly how much uh water is being used per acre on there. But also one one thing to consider is those limitations from the council put on that's for culinary water use

and most of this water is coming from the ditch and the canal which are controlled by those canal companies and ditch companies. Obviously I don't think they would be utilizing ditch water in a data center but um just for a reference.

Right. Yeah. I just there's a lot of conflicting information about the way in which data center water use may or may not actually be comparable to other substantial water uses. So I wanted to see if we could clarify that as part of a broader conversation which is that I'm deeply concerned that this would allow data centers not necessarily because of the water use although I think water use is more of a problem here than it is say in Virginia um in NOVA that said uh in terms of power use right something like what 4% of 4.6 six 4.9% of the entire power use of the entire United States uh is currently dedicated to data centers. We have a pretty dirty energy mix here in here in Utah. Um and and I'm not sure I really love the feeling of of a vote on Earth Day to permit like massive power hungry data centers, power- hungry um you know, light industrial uses. Uh it looks like heavy machinery rental, right? These are these are no it's not heavy industry. It's not oil extraction or or you know plastic manufacturing or refineries but it is uh still a substantially heavy heavier use in terms of pollutants in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and given where we're at and given that it's Earth Day. Um although really you know every day is Earth Day. Uh I I think that that uh drives some serious concern from me um about about adding this level of manufacturing even with the environmental protections of the M1A district um to this area with a rapidly shrinking uh sort of green or at least agricultural base which to be fair agriculture is not an environmentally friendly activity. I think that that's something that a lot of people miss, but I mean currently the field is fall correct.

Thank you. Yes. It's alpha. It's alpha alpha current. Okay. Yeah. do some of the comments. Um the neighbors there were asking really specifically like could you get the kind of construction vehicles that when they back up they don't make the beeping noise, they make a white sound noise. Is is is there are there any kind of like who regulates construction? Like if construction's happening at 6:00 a.m. on that, who who's in charge of saying that's allowed or not? Uh that's up to county noise ordinances. Um so that would be the county that regulates on noise and times of noise pollution.

We also do have in the building title where we um you're only allowed to do construction on the actual building. I think it's from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. double check on that, but we do regulate that. They can ask for exceptions, but they would need to do that through building services. The county would regulate the building operation itself. So when other business comes in and moves in, they would be limited to what the county health standards are. Okay. And is that is it clear that the um noise wall would go up first before anything else would be built on that on that site? Is that clear or does that need to be clarified in some kind of

It's not clarified in the the current conditions, but if you want to make that a point of sense important point like I think the trees should be in place and the if they can survive the construction in the wall. I'll also add the we've done a couple projects in the year 215. Um there was some some housing want projects if you remember a while back over by the airport and the noise from 215 surpassed any sort of other sort of noise pollution from the area. Yeah. Just to keep that in consideration. Well, the wind whipping through the Russian olives was was like the sound that you could hear on that property today, which will go away, but new trees. Fair.

Anyway, any other questions or do you guys want to make a motion? We have our four best brains on this. I guess sorry I'm such a new commissioner. Um I guess this is a question for the other commissioners more than anyone else, but how common is it that a an applicant is applying for a reason like this before there is a determined development plan? Is that pretty frequent? Okay. I'd say it's about 5050.

It is. You can imagine if spending a considerable amount of money to design a project, site plans and um buildings and public utilities, it's a it's a pretty substantial cost to do um at a risk that you may not get the zoning change that you've requested. And when we're looking at a zoning change, it's more than just whatever development plan is in place. We're looking at the district as a whole. as commission commissioner Rosenfield pointed out, you know, there's all these other uses that we may not want and we need to look at it kind of holistically and not just with what the applicant has planned.

Yeah, I would um say that even even if you have a reason request that has a development um specific one that you uh are looking at, that developer then can sell it and the new um person say I don't want to do that. So sometimes it becomes more important to look at what is allowed and if that is what you base your decision on because I probably don't have enough digits to count how many times those projects were sold and and even though a new developer could come in and use what was approved, they often want something different. And so then any of that new zone in that land use table is allowed to them. So there have been many instances where my evaluation has really been centered on this could end up being what's there and we don't like that. So it it almost doesn't um the difference between not having a proposal and having a proposal is somewhat nil in potential ramifications. They could still end up in the same boat of being sold to somebody else.

Okay. Helpful. Thank you. I I can make a motion. Um based on the information presented in discussion, I move that the commission recommend that the city council deny this proposal for a zoning map amendment for the following reasons. It is not compliant with um page 27 of plan Salt Lake, the natural environment striving to protect and restore critical wildlife habitat, sensitive natural lands, and open space. Um and that furthermore, it is not compliant with um page 38, economy, a balanced economy that produces quality jobs and fosters an an innovative environment for commerce, entrepreneurial, local businesses, and industry to thrive given the limited impact um on employment that data centers who employ almost nobody have on our overall job mix.

Thank you. We have a motion by Commissioner Rosenfield and second. I don't see a second, so we'll look for another motion. Second. No, we got a second from Commissioner Barry. Any other action on that motion? Okay, we'll vote. Amy Barry, yes. Amy Burroughs, no. Laya Rosenfeld. Yes. Anna Sullivan, yes. Passes 3 to1.

That passes 3 to1. So, we'll send a recommendation to decline the um reszone to the Salt Lake City Council, although they have a different set of things that reasons why they decide what they do. So, thank you. Anything else? There's nothing else on the agenda. I think we're done for the evening. So, the next meeting is the second Wednesday in May. Thank you. Thanks y'all.