Document Ogden_doc_f1ac3c479c

OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 2549 WASHINGTON BOULEVARD OGDEN, UTAH AGENDA August 2, 2017 There will be a meeting of the Ogden City Planning Commission held August 2, 2017, at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers on the 3rd Floor of the Ogden City Municipal Building, 2549 Washington Boulevard. Commission members are invited to attend a work session field trip which will leave the Municipal Building Parking Lot at 4:00 p.m. The following items will be discussed during the work session as well as in the regular meeting. However, formal consideration, open discussion and decision making process will be limited to the regular meeting. Approximate Start Time* Agenda Item Recommendation to: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – led by Jenny Sandau 5:00 p.m. 1. Approval of the Minutes, of the regular meeting held July 5, 2017 5:05 p.m. 2. Common Consent: a. Consideration to Amend CIP Plan, 2018-2022 to allow the purchase and demolition of the Courtyard Inn Motel at 455 25th Street. (Attachment A) b. CBD Site Plan/Conditional Use Permit to allow additional cell equipment on Ben Lomond Hotel, 2510 Washington Boulevard. (Attachment B) c. Request for Encroachment Permit, to allow landscape retaining wall at 2172 Tyler Avenue. (Attachment C) City Council* Mayor – 8/10/17 Mayor – 8/10/17 5:10 p.m. 3. Request to Expand Nonconforming Use, to allow rear yard accessory parking at single-family home at approximately 3131 Stephens Avenue. (Attachment D) Final Action 5:35 p.m. 4, Request to Expand Nonconforming Use, to allow warehouse addition for Catholic Community Services, approximately 2504 F Avenue. (Attachment E) Final Action Reports: Landmarks Commission – Lillie Holman Ogden Trails Network – Ross Patterson Review of Meeting Mayor’s Administrative Review Meeting Thursday August 10, 2017 - 11:00 a.m. 3rd Floor, Municipal Building *The City Council meets the first, third and fourth Tuesdays of each month. Please contact the City Council Office at 629-8153 for agenda information *Start times are approximate – item may be discussed before or after identified start time In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons needing auxiliary communicative aids and services for this meeting should contact the Management Services Department at 629-8701 (TTY/TDD: 711 or [PHONE REDACTED]) or by email: [EMAIL REDACTED] at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting. CERTIFICATE OF POSTING The undersigned, duly appointed City Recorder, does hereby certify that the above notice and/or agenda was posted in accordance with Utah State Code Annotated 52-4-202(3) on this 28th day of July, 2017 in the following places: 2nd floor foyer of the Ogden City Municipal Building; the Utah State Public Notice website, the Ogden City website, and provided to the Standard-Examiner. Tracy Hansen, Ogden City Recorder ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 1 of 7 Unofficial draft of the proceedings of the regular meeting of the Ogden City Planning Commission held July 5, 2017. This draft does not constitute official minutes of the Planning Commission, and will not, until approved by the Commission. Official minutes may vary significantly from these draft proceedings. Meeting was conducted by Chair Herman and began at 5:03 p.m. Members Present: Robert Herman, Chair Rick Southwick, Vice-Chair Cathy Blaisdell Lillie Holman Jenny Sandau Bryan Schade Members Excused: Dave Graf Janith Wright Members Absent: Ross Patterson Staff Present: Greg Montgomery, Planning Manager Clint Spencer, Assistant Manager John Mayer, Planner Joseph Simpson, Planner Jannette Borklund, Planning Technician Mark Stratford, City Attorney Others Present: James Carpentier Kevin Koons Bruce Butler Sherry Brown Tucker Lahr Dan Dailey Dan Spark Ken Burton Suzy Dailey Julie Spark Peter 1. Election of Chair/Vice-Chair for FY 2017-2018 2. Approval of the Minutes, of the regular meeting held June 7, 2017 and work session held June 21, 2017. 3. Public Hearing, Petition 2017-3 to Amend Zoning Ordinance, to revise standards for front yard parking for single-family properties. (Attachment A) 4. Encroachment Permit, Union Grill Restaurant, 315 E 24th Street. (Attachment B) 5. Conditional Use Permit Amendment, to allow satellite antenna and compound at 526 W 17th Street. (Attachment C) 6. Conditional Use Permit, to allow kid’s carnival at 120 North Washington. (Attachment D) 7. Public Hearing, Proposed Sign Ordinance Amendment, to define monument signs and to create monument signs as required free-standing sign types on Harrison Boulevard between 12th Street and 4800 South. (Attachment E) Reports: Landmarks Commission – Lillie Holman Ogden Trails Network – Ross Patterson Review of Meeting 1. Election of Chair/Vice-Chair for FY 2017-2018 A motion was made by Commissioner Blaisdell to elect Robert Herman as Chair for a second year. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Schade and passed unanimously. A motion was made by Commissioner Schade to elect Lillie Holman as Vice-Chair. A motion was ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 2 of 7 made by Commissioner Blaisdell to elect Rick Southwick as Vice-Chair to serve the second year. Votes were taken for both nominations, with 2 votes for Lillie Holman and 4 votes for Rick Southwick. 2. Approval of the Minutes, of the regular meeting held June 7, 2017 and work session held June 21, 2017. A motion was made by Commissioner Schade to approve the minutes of both meetings as prepared. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Holman and passed unanimously. 3. Public Hearing, Petition 2017-3 to Amend Zoning Ordinance, to revise standards for front yard parking for single-family properties. (Attachment A) Mr. Kevin Koons, 1446 Capitol, stated his wife has been in this home for over 13 years, during which time it has had a narrow driveway and a garage which is too small for a vehicle. The garage has since been converted to living space as a family room, and the driveway widened. They had been told by the contractor that he had obtained permits, but none were issued. He stated in working with City Staff, he was informed parking is not allowed in the front setback if there is reasonable access to the rear yard. Although there is an abutter’s alley in the rear of this property, it is not improved, and it would be a financial burden for a single property owner to pave and/or maintain the alley of 660’ in length. This petition is to amend the Ordinance to allow front yard parking when an alley exists if it is not paved and/or maintained. He stated there is no ability to access the rear yard from the front due to an existing tree. He stated the Commission had expressed concern about the amount of pavement in the front yard, and indicated the language proposed by Staff limits the width to 20’ or 50% of the lot, whichever is smaller. He stated his neighbors support the property upgrade, and he felt providing off-street parking makes the property more valuable. Mr. Simpson stated this item was tabled at the June meeting, and then a work session was held to discuss both existing and proposed parking standards. He stated the proposed ordinance had applied only to existing noncomplying single family homes where parking does not exist. These homes may not conform to the City’s regulations in terms of height, parking, lot area or setbacks, and the existing language allows front yard parking only if there is no reasonable access to the rear yard, with pavement limited to 50% of the lot width or 20’, whichever is smaller. Commission had expressed concern that due to the width of some lots, 50% of the lot area can allow too much pavement in the front yard, which is not desirable. He stated while the Ordinance refers to “reasonable access” it is not defined, and the proposed amendment would add a definition, as well as to define garage dimensions, stating some older homes have small structures which originally housed a buggy, but does not accommodate a modern vehicle. While these would count as a garage, the ability for them to be used as such is not realistic. He also cited the reality of people using garage space for storage, leaving the driveway in front of the garage as the only legal parking available. He stated the Commission had expressed concern about the ability of newer homes to have too much pavement in the front yard in order to accommodate both vehicles and recreational vehicles. It was felt parking should be in scale with the home rather than the lot. The proposed ordinance now would allow front yard parking limited in size from a minimum of 9’ in width to 50% of the width of the home rather than the lot with a maximum width of 92’, whichever is less, which would be applicable to all residential properties rather than only noncomplying properties. The amendment also would define reasonable access. He also answered questions from the Commission, indicating the definition of reasonable access would indicate it is not a hardship for a property owner to pave up to 100’ in length, but would be a hardship if a longer access is needed. ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 3 of 7 Mr. Simpson indicated he had contacted both Salt Lake City and researched in the national planning documents, stating there is little recent information available for front yard parking. Salt Lake does allow front yard parking, but is limited to 9’ in width. Mr. Stratford noted that while the amendment would address part of the petitioner’s request, the width limitation would require removal of some concrete in order to be less than 50% of the width of the home. He stated it would be advisable for the Commission to first act on the petition, to determine whether an alley would constitute reasonable access, and then to address other concerns relating to front yard parking in a separate motion, so there is an action specific to the petition which was submitted. As there were no public comments, a motion was made by Commissioner Schade to close the public hearing. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Sandau and passed unanimously. MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Blaisdell to recommend approval of the petition to amend the Ordinance to revise standards for noncomplying properties specific to this property at 1453 Capitol based on the findings the rear abutters alley is not reasonable access and there is a need for off-street parking, allowing the parking as constructed to be legal. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Holman and passed unanimously, with Commissioners Blaisdell, Holman, Sandau, Schade, Southwick and Herman voting aye. MOTION: A motion was then made by Commissioner Blaisdell to recommend approval of the ordinance language as proposed by Staff, which would address limiting front yard parking in both noncomplying and legal lots, define reasonable access and garage dimensions, to also include the graphics showing the ability for front yard parking in the event reasonable access is not available to the rear yard. Action is based on the findings the proposed amendment is consistent with the intent and purpose of the regulations of the Zoning Ordinance, provides better language clarity in meeting the intent of the Ordinance with Staff’s recommended language, and is consistent with the General Plan. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Southwick and passed unanimously, with Commissioners Blaisdell, Holman, Sandau, Schade, Southwick and Herman voting aye. 4. Encroachment Permit, Union Grill Restaurant, 315 E 24th Street. (Attachment Mr. Peter stated he desires to increase the visibility of the restaurant on 24th Street and is proposing to add an outdoor dining area consisting of five tables. Mr. Montgomery stated in reviewing an encroachment permit, the Commission first is to consider whether there is good cause for the encroachment, and then determine whether pedestrian access is restricted. He stated due to the location of the church across 24th Street, the business entry is at the rear of the building. He stated part of the recent branding effort of the City directs toward more activity and vitality, and sidewalk dining is an important part of that effort. He stated the enclosed area would leave10’ between the rail and the back of curb, which is adequate for pedestrian use. While the building code requires an emergency access onto 24th Street, the State regulations for uses which sell alcoholic beverages does not allow it as a primary access, while requiring an enclosed area for sidewalk use. He stated there are currently no height restrictions for the enclosed area, and the proposed rail at 46” is acceptable. Staff recommendation is for approval, subject to meeting building and fire code requirements in terms of building egress by creating an egress only gate. He also indicated the enclosure has been approved by the State DABC. MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Southwick to recommend approval of the ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 4 of 7 encroachment permit as requested based on the findings it does meet the standards of location and design of the Code for the location of sidewalk dining, there is good cause for the encroachment, and the encroachment does not interfere with the use of the public right-of-way for pedestrian traffic. Approval is subject to creating an egress only gate that will meet building and fire code requirements and complies with the encroachment standards. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Schade and passed unanimously, with Commissioners Blaisdell, Holman, Sandau, Schade, Southwick and Herman voting aye. 5. Conditional Use Permit Amendment, to allow satellite antenna and compound at 526 W 17th Street. (Attachment C) Mr. Tucker Lahr stated this request is for the construction of a ground based satellite communication facility. The proposed compound would be adjacent to an existing cell tower compound and would be 24x33’ and would be surrounded by chain link with three strands of barbed wire. He felt the area is conducive to the use as it is zoned M-2. The facility will improve internet services. Mr. Mayer stated in considering a conditional use permit, the Commission is to determine that any impact created can be mitigated. He stated the proposed compound is not visible from 17th Street and appears to be compatible with existing development in the area. The use is consistent with the M-2 regulations. Staff recommendation is for approval of both the satellite compound consisting of a satellite dish and equipment cabinet and the surrounding fence as proposed, subject to building permits being obtained for the proposed work. MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Holman to recommend approval based on the findings the design of the satellite dish, compound and associated equipment is compatible with surrounding development, and with the Zoning Ordinance. Approval is subject to the applicant obtaining building permits. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Sandau and passed unanimously, with Commissioners Blaisdell, Holman, Sandau, Schade, Southwick and Herman voting aye. 6. Conditional Use Permit, to allow kid’s carnival at 120 North Washington. (Attachment D) Ms. Sherry Brown stated she desires to operate a 10-day kid’s carnival in an existing vacant parking lot. The venue would contain both games and rides, and operate typically during evening hours. Mr. Spencer indicated there is an empty grocery store, with a few businesses on the perimeter of the site, with residential uses to the east. He reviewed the proposed ride layout, stating the nearest ride is 120’ from the nearest residential property line. He stated a carnival is a conditional use and the determination of the Commission is whether there are impacts created by the proposed use, and whether or not those impacts can be mitigated. He also reviewed the proposed location for RV storage, restrooms and dumpsters. He stated any lighting should be directed away from residential areas, and suggested hours of operation be limited to 10pm as the noise ordinance becomes effective at that time. He felt as the use is temporary there would be little impact created. Staff recommendation is for approval of the carnival to operate from June 7-15, with hours of 5pm until 10pm on weeknights, and 2pm until 10pm on Saturdays and Sundays. MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Blaisdell to approve the conditional use permit based on the findings the use is in compliance with both the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan, is compatible with surrounding uses and neighborhoods, and is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of those properties within the ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 5 of 7 general vicinity. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Completion of all staff comments and requirements 2. Locating all dumpsters and portable restrooms away from existing businesses and residentially zoned property, in the northwest portion of the existing parking lot; 3. Any and all lights included with the carnival to be directed away from residentially zoned properties; 4. Hours of operation be limited to 5-10pm M-F and 2-10pm on Saturday and Sunday in accordance with the City’s noise ordinance; and 5. Ride operator housing be located to the north of the existing building as shown in the revised site plan. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Southwick and passed unanimously, with Commissioners Blaisdell, Holman, Sandau, Schade, Southwick and Herman voting aye. 7. Public Hearing, Proposed Sign Ordinance Amendment, to define monument signs and to create monument signs as required free-standing sign types on Harrison Boulevard between 12th Street and 4800 South. (Attachment E) Mr. Mayer indicated while the Commission had previously made a recommendation to the City Council regarding monument signs on Harrison Boulevard, the Council had asked for its reconsideration, including notification of property owners and tenants along the corridor. Since that time, a public meeting was held in which owners, residents and sign companies were invited, having also been invited to this meeting. He stated the proposed ordinance would be effective only to free- standing pole signs, and would be applicable to any new signs or when a sign structure is re-done by the business owner. He reviewed both existing and proposed sign standards, identifying locations where free-standing signs would be allowed. Her stated the intent is to preserve the appearance of the Harrison Boulevard Corridor, to protect the view of the mountains and to showcase Weber State University. It is felt the result will enhance the view-shed of the community and eliminate sign clutter. He indicated the current code does not define monument signs, which is now proposed, and requires these for new signs along the Harrison Corridor between 12th Street and the south City limits. The size allowance for signs would not be affected. Commissioner Schade asked about the effect on existing signs, stating the previous recommendation required monument signs if sign copy were to be changed, while this recommendation would apply only if the sign structure were to be removed by the owner. HE stated the existing status quo could go on for a lifetime, and the Ordinance would have little effect. Commissioner Blaisdell noted the previous ordinance had addressed a time frame for signs which are damaged, requiring either their repair within a year or they would need to come into compliance with this regulation. Mr. Mayer responded damaged signs would be required to come into compliance only if the sign structure itself were proposed to be replaced. Mr. Strafford clarified the different heights of signs, stating monument signs would be limited to 8’ in height unless representing a building with more than 300’ of street frontage in which case a 12’ sign would be allowed, typically for shopping centers. He further reviewed the square footage sign requirements for each of these types of signs, as well as their locations. Mr. James Carpentier, representing the sign industry, expressed his desire that pole signs be allowed to continue on Harrison, but suggested the height be limited. He stated other sign options are available as technology changes, and felt restricting them to monument signs does not support the business community of the area. He felt the regulation would be unfair to new businesses, in that they could ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 6 of 7 not compete with existing signs. He stated trees are a major feature along the Harrison Boulevard corridor, and they typically grow to 30’, stating taller signs would blend with the tree line. He expressed concern with the variation between 8’ signs and 12’ signs, suggesting the height for all signs be 12’ indicating 8’ signs might be obscured by either landscaping or snow. As there were no additional comments, a motion was made by Commissioner Blaisdell to close the public hearing. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Holmen and passed unanimously. Commissioner Southwick expressed concern with existing signs, and suggested a time period be established that they might be phased out, or the standards of the previously reviewed ordinance might be applicable to require monument signs when sign copy might change rather than when the sign structure changes. Mr. Stratford asked about a pedestal for monument signs, and asked if the height is measured of the sign area, or whether it includes the pedestal. Mr. Mayer responded the height is measured from the sidewalk and the pedestal is included in the overall height measurement. He clarified a second monument sign is allowed on a site only if it is a corner lot and has two frontages. Commissioner Southwick felt action should be taken to enhance the views of the City, and suggested a time fam be identified whereby existing pole signs would be amortized and eliminated. He acknowledged while signage is important to business owners, the view-shed of the City should be protected. He felt the proposed language is a step in the right direction but is not enough to improve the appearance of this important corridor. Mr. Stratford discussed the laws regarding amortization in Utah, stating a time needs to be allowed for the particular business to recover the cost of the investment. While amortization is more typically used for a particular type of business rather than signage, there may be a way to determine a recovery on investment for signs. Commissioner Schade suggested the ordinance require a monument sign when any existing sign is replaced or business changes, stating this might effect change, where the existing language could retain existing signs forever. Commissioner Southwick felt a time frame should be established at which time all signs must be changed to become monument signs. Commissioner Blaisdell asked if the Ordinance should extend further to the north, noting there are some existing pole signs. MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Blaisdell to recommend approval of the proposed language based on the findings creating the new language as proposed will be consistent with the General Plan to improve the streetscape, views, general appearance and provide clear standards for businesses and the community regarding free-standing signs along the Harrison Corridor. Approval is for the proposed amendments to define monument sign, to remove language as proposed and to create special signage regarding signage along the Harrison Boulevard Corridor between 12th Street and Ogden’s southern boundary, and to add language in Appendix A as well as revising language in the PI regulations. Additional language is to be added which would limit the time frame of existing pole signs to 10 years, at which time they would be required to be in compliance and become monument signs. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Schade and passed unanimously, with Commissioners Blaisdell, Holman, Sandau, Schade, Southwick and Herman voting aye. Reports: Landmarks Commission – Lillie Holman Commissioner Holman reported the Landmarks Commission had approved a sign and paint for a new business which will occupy the ground floor where Olive and Dahlia was previously ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 7 of 7 located. The business is called Art Box and will be a venue where artists can work and show their material. Classes also may be held to coincide with the existing business on the upper floor of the building. Ogden Trails Network – Ross Patterson Commissioner Patterson was not in attendance – no report Review of Meeting Mr. Stratford stated he had recommended two motions be made as the recommendation of Staff did not directly address the petition, and the petitioner has the right for the petition to be addressed, whether approved or denied. Mr. Montgomery informed the Commission of the Council action relating to student housing on Harrison Boulevard. They had increased the number of students to four per unit, but made it specific to the property at 3850 Harrison. They also requested the City work with WSU in creating a student housing master plan. Commission asked if there is information regarding the ownership of signs along Harrison, whether they are actually owned by the business or by the sign company. Mr. Montgomery stated he did not have a way to track the ownership of signs. Mr. Montgomery reminded the Commission their July work session will be on the 11th, and will be a joint meeting with the City Council to discuss a new street master plan. It is anticipated to begin at 4:50pm, but Commissioners are encouraged to start arriving as close to 4:30 as possible. There being no additional business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 7:22 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jannette Borklund, Planning Technician Approved: (date) Robert Herman, Chair ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 1 of 15 Agenda Name: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR ADDITIONAL CELL EQUIPMENT AND ANTENNA REPLACEMENT ON THE BEN LOMOND HOTEL AT 2510 WASHINGTON BLVD. Petitioner/ Developer: AT&T Jared White 1894 W 1690 S Woodscross, Utah 84087 Petitioner/ Developer’s requested action: Approval to replace six of the existing 96”x 12” cell antennas with six 72”x 28.5” cell antennas and add six small remote radio head (RRH) antennas and a surge suppressor (DC2) on the roof of the Ben Lomond Hotel. Cellular towers and antennas are conditional uses throughout the city, and are subject to the criteria outlined in 15-7-4, which are the basis for issuing conditional use permits. As a conditional use permit has already been obtained for the equipment on this site, this action is an amending the existing conditional use permit. The applicable criteria the Commission must review would relate to the visual implications of the proposed cell antennas to the surrounding uses. As part of the criteria for issuing conditional use permits, the use will also need to comply with the regulations and conditions of the land use ordinances. Commission action is the final action needed for use approval. The applicant will still need to complete the necessary building and site reviews and obtain any necessary permits. 1. The design of the cell antennas on the building and site will / will not be compatible with surrounding properties with staff recommendation to paint the antennas and equipment to match the building. 2. The cell antennas will / will not be in compliance with the regulations and conditions in the land use ordinances. Staff recommends approval of the proposed cell antennas and equipment, subject to painting all of the antennas and equipment on the north and south penthouse walls to match the brick, as was required in the previous conditional use permit amendment approvals, which must be completed by November 1, 2017. Report by Joseph Simpson Planning Commission’s determination for action Planning Staff’s Recommended Action What Planning Commission reviews ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 2 of 15 Vicinity Map Project fact sheet ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 3 of 15 The applicant is proposing to replace six 96”x 12” (8 sq. ft.) cell antennas with six 72”x 28.5” (14.25 sq. ft.) cell antennas and add six small remote radio heads (RRH) and a surge suppressor (DC2) on the Ben Lomond Hotel (see attached plans). Four of the new replacement panel antennas are to be located on the roof of the penthouse on an existing mounting rack system. The small RRH antennas & DC2 are to be located on the roof mounting rack as well. The antennas and equipment are proposed to be a light gray color, matching the existing antennas and equipment on the roof. There is also to be some minor cable and mechanical equipment that will be installed on the roof to support the new antennas, but will not be visible on the outside of building. Two of the new replacement panel antennas are to be located on the north wall of the penthouse wall (see attached antenna and elevation plans). The applicant has indicated that this location has more traffic than any other site in Ogden City. These upgrades to the site are to increase the use capacity for cell users. Cellular towers and antennas are conditional uses throughout the city, and are subject to the criteria outlined in 15-7-4, which are the basis for issuing conditional use permits. As a conditional use permit has already been obtained for the AT&T equipment on this site, this action is an amendment to the already established conditional use permit. The applicable criteria the Commission must review would relate to the visual implications of the proposed cell antennas to the surrounding uses. As part of the criteria for issuing conditional use permits, the use will also need to comply with the regulations and conditions of the land use ordinances. Commission action is the final action needed for use approval. The applicant will still need to complete the necessary building and site reviews and obtain any necessary permits. 1. Design Compatibility: The proposed site and building design and placement at the particular location is compatible with: a. The character of the site in relationship with the surrounding uses which includes buildings and site uses integrating with the topography of the site, retaining trees of value, using natural features as site amenities, developing landscaping along the public areas of the property to create an improved streetscape, reducing expanses of large areas of asphalt or concrete, and screening objectionable views that may exist on the site from all surrounding property owners: Description of request What Planning Commission reviews Factors for consideration of action ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 4 of 15 The antennas, RRHs, and DC2 surge suppressor will be located on existing mounting equipment, which was installed with a larger size to accommodate additions such as these. The proposal to replace the 8’ tall cellular antennas on the roof of the hotel with 6’ tall antennas should not create any additional objectionable views. As noted on the attached antenna plan, the replacement antennas will be at the same elevation height as the existing antennas, so there will be no increase to the height of the overall use on the building. In January of 2016, the Planning Commission granted AT&T approval to install 8’ tall antennas on the north and south walls of the penthouse. The antennas on these walls were centered over three spaces where windows have been filled-in (see attached elevation plans, first page). To help the antennas and equipment blend with the building, it was required that all of the antennas on the north and south walls of the penthouse be painted to match the existing brick. This requirement was emphasized again in the December 2016 amendment approval and still needs to be completed. Staff is recommending that it be completed within three months as a condition of approval with this proposed amendment (see attached elevation photo). 2. Compliance with Regulations: The proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the land use ordinances: Though there is no set height standard for cellular antennas or towers, it is ideal to locate them on existing structures. The Ben Lomond Hotel has functioned well for the location of antennas without having to install new cell towers in the area. These towers are generally less compatible, especially in a downtown environment. This proposal to add new antennas on the building is in compliance with land use regulations and has been reviewed by all relevant department staff, who recommend approval. 1. Project Fact Sheet 2. Elevation Plan 3. Antenna Layout Plan 4. Antenna Plan 5. County Plat 6. Department Staff Comments (2 pages) 7. South Elevation Photo 8. Notice (3 pages) Attachments ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 5 of 15 Property Address: 2510 Washington Blvd. Community Plan: CBD Zone: CBDI Existing Use: Mixed Use January 1996 – Approval for an antenna array on top of the Ben Lomond Hotel for PCS Wireless. December 1998 – Approval was given to relocate an antenna on the roof of the Ben Lomond Hotel for Pagenet Wireless. October 2000 – approval was given for installation of additional antennas on the roof of the Ben Lomond Hotel for Liberty Wirestar. November 2009 – Action tabled for CUP application for installation of cellular antenna panels, dish antennas, and related equipment cabinet pending submittal of additional information. March 2010 – Approval of antennas, dish antennas, and related equipment cabinet on the roof of the Ben Lomond Hotel for Clearwire Cellular. April 2015 – Approval to allow the replacement of cell antennas and equipment that were removed on the roof of the Ben Lomond Hotel for Utah Broadband. January 2016 – Approval to install three additional cell antennas on the Ben Lomond Hotel. December 2016 – Approval to install three additional cell antennas and equipment on the roof of the Ben Lomond Hotel for AT&T. February 2017- Approval to install three additional antennas and replace three more for T-Mobile. May 2017 – Approval to install a new roof top skid mount and three new cell antennas on the roof of the Ben Lomond Hotel for T-Mobile. Project Fact Sheet Previous Actions ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 6 of 15 2. Elevation Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 7 of 15 3. Antenna Layout Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 8 of 15 4. Antenna Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 9 of 15 5. County Plat ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 10 of 15 6. Department Staff Comments (2 pages) ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 11 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 12 of 15 7. South Elevation Photo ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 13 of 15 8. Notice (3 pages) ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 14 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- B Page 15 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- C Page 1 of 6 Agenda Name: ENCROACHMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW LANDSCAPE RETAINING WALL IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AT 2172 TYLER AVE. Petitioner/ Developer: Annie Crawford 2172 Tyler Ave Ogden, UT 84401 Petitioner/ Developer’s requested action: Approval for a 4’ tall block retaining wall placed 19’ 6” into the public right-of-way and running 20’, for the purposed of landscape retention at 2172 Tyler Ave. The ordinance requires that the Planning Commission review encroachments in the public right-of-way to ensure that there is good cause for the encroachment and that it will not interfere with the use of the public right-of-way. The Planning Commission will be making a recommendation of action for the proposed encroachment. The Mayor will review the Planning Commission’s recommendation and determine the final action for the proposed encroachment. 1. The applicant has / has not obtained written support from abutting property owners for the encroachment. 2. The applicant has / has not demonstrated good cause for the encroachment. 3. The encroachment will / will not interfere with the use of the public way by vehicular or pedestrian travel, or with utilities legally installed in or over the public way. Staff recommends approval of the proposed 4’ x 20’ block retaining wall. Report by Eric Daems Planning Commission’s Determination for Action Planning Staff’s Recommended Action What Planning Commission Reviews ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- C Page 2 of 6 2172 Tyler- Retaining Wall Encroachment Vicinity Map ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- C Page 3 of 6 This proposal is to allow for a landscape retaining wall to encroach 19’ 6” into the public right-of-way on the east side of the road at 2172 Tyler Ave. The wall is constructed of concrete block and will be 20’ in length. It replaces a similar retaining wall that was in the same location, but was 31’ long. That wall did not have an encroachment permit. Description of request Site Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- C Page 4 of 6 There are four key factors for consideration with this proposal: 1. The permittee is the owner of the abutting property, provided that a permit may be issued to the lessee of such property if the encroachment does not involve any excavation, or affixing of structures to improvements, within the public right of way and the owner concurs in writing with the issuance of such permit; This application was made by the abutting property owner. 2. The applicant demonstrates good cause for such encroachment; The right-of-way for Tyler Ave along this block is platted as 80’ wide. The homeowners’ property lines start 19’ 6” east of the curb. This presents a challenge as the properties have a considerable grade change from rear to front. In order to maximize useable yard space, most have installed landscape retaining walls near the curb. Although many of the properties have retaining walls, none have encroachment permits. A landscape retaining wall has existed at this site for many years without an encroachment permit. Recently, the homeowner undertook to revise and rebuild the retaining wall, and for this purpose is now seeking an encroachment permit. The new retaining wall is located just behind the curb (same location as the old), but will extend 20’ where it was previously 31’ long. It will then head east behind the Factors for consideration of action Existing Portion of Proposed Retaining Wall ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- C Page 5 of 6 property line. The modification will leave an area approximately 11’ x 20’ which will be maintained at street level. That area will then be landscaped. This approval will give official status to the size-reduced retaining wall. 3. The encroachment will not interfere with the use of the public way by vehicular or pedestrian travel, or with utilities legally installed in or over the public way; The east side of Tyler Ave does not include a developed or sidewalk. Due to the substantial grade change, it is unlikely that one would be installed in the future. The proposed retaining wall will be located behind the curb and will not interfere with any vehicular or pedestrian travel. There are also no utilities in the area where the wall will be located. 4. The application is reviewed by and recommendations received from the City Engineer and the Planning Commission. The City Engineering Department has reviewed this application and does not have any objections to the proposed encroachment. 1. Project Fact Sheet 2. Site Plan 3. Parcel Map 4. Public Notices Factors for consideration of action Attachments ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- C Page 6 of 6 Property Address: 2172 Tyler Zone: R-1-6 District Plan: Taylor Property Size: 8,800 square feet Existing Use: Single-family home  None Project Fact Sheet Past Actions ---PAGE BREAK--- Proposed 4' Retaining Wall New area to be landscaped at street level Property Line 19' 6" behind curb ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 13-120-0002 HILKINA HERBERT LIVING TRUST 5528 S 225 E OGDEN UT 84401 13-120-0001 BRAY CORY 1304 E 22ND ST OGDEN UT 84401 13-120-0003 HALACY JR MICHAEL 2168 TYLER AVE OGDEN UT 84401 13-120-0002 Occupant 2172 TYLER AVE OGDEN UT 84401 13-120-0001 Occupant 1304 22ND ST OGDEN UT 84401 13-120-0003 Occupant 2168 TYLER AVE OGDEN UT 84401 ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Division August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- D Page 1 of 12 Agenda Name: PROPOSED EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING USE TO HAVE A CONCRETE PARKING PAD IN THE REAR YARD OF AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY HOME AT 3131 STEPHENS AVENUE Petitioner/ Developer: Ray Gomez 3131 Stephens Avenue Ogden, Utah 84401 Petitioner/ Developer’s requested action: Approval of the expansion of a nonconforming use to have a concrete parking pad in the rear yard of the single-family home at 3131 Stephens Avenue. Per ordinance15-6-3.B, the Planning Commission is required to review any expansions of a nonconforming use. The Commission will need to make certain determinations in order to prevent negative impacts to surrounding uses, or creating additional nonconformities. It will also need to be determined that site development standards would be met as much as possible, and there would not be an expansion beyond the original property. The Planning Commission decision regarding an expansion of nonconforming use is a final action. The Planning Commission will need to make the following determinations to allow an expansion of a nonconforming use: 1. The expansion of the use would/would not adversely impact the surrounding properties; 2. The proposed expansion is/is not compatible with the surroundings; 3. The site of the proposed expansion conforms/does not conform to all site development requirements as much as physically possible given existing site limitations; 4. The proposed expansion shall/shall not create new nonconformities or conditions of noncompliance; and 5. The expansion of a nonconforming use would/would not extend beyond the original lot or tract of land. Report by Joseph Simpson Planning Commission’s determination for action What Planning Commission reviews ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Division August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- D Page 2 of 12 Staff recommends approval of the expansion of the nonconforming use to have a concrete parking pad in the rear yard of the single-family home at 3131 Stephens Avenue. Vicinity Map Planning Staff’s Recommended Action ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Division August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- D Page 3 of 12 The applicant currently lives in the single-family home on this property. He had obtained approval from the Planning Commission in May 2015 to construct a 20’x 30’ metal garage in the backyard of the property. This garage has helped provide legal parking on the property, as previously there was only a single-car parking space accessed from Stephens Avenue. The approved metal garage is accessed via an abutter’s alley at the back of the property with an 11’ wide concrete driveway. The applicant is proposing to add concrete around the rear garage to provide parking for personal trailers and recreation vehicles. As shown on the attached site plans, the proposed concrete addition is to add approximately 6’ (width) of concrete on the south side of the existing driveway, and approximately 18’ (width) of concrete on the north side of the existing driveway. The concrete on the north side of the existing driveway is to provide access to a 12’ wide parking pad on the north side of the existing metal garage. 1. The expansion of the use would not adversely impact the surrounding properties. The proposed expansion will allow the applicant to store his personal trailers and recreational vehicle on his property. He has been currently doing this on the lawn in the backyard, which has created mud and rut issues that adversely impact the property and surrounding properties. The added pavement to store the vehicles will eliminate these impacts. 2. The proposed expansion is compatible with the surroundings. The creation of parking and accessory parking pads on single-family home properties is not unusual. As this home is located in a manufacturing zone, it is a nonconforming use and has to obtain Commission approval for any additions to the site. The home is surrounding by other nonconforming single-family homes, and the additional paved parking will be compatible and not impact the surrounding homes, especially as the paved parking is to be located in the rear yard. 3. The site of the proposed expansion conforms to all site development requirements as much as physically possible given existing site limitations. The proposed paved parking will not encroach in any of the required setbacks. Additionally, as shown on the attached site plans, the additional pavement will not exceed the maximum impervious surface coverage on the site as it is regulated in the M-2 zone. Description of request Past History Factors for consideration of action ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Division August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- D Page 4 of 12 4. The proposed expansion shall not create new nonconformities or conditions of noncompliance. There will be no new nonconformities or conditions of noncompliance created by the development of the paved parking. The addition of pavement will actually make the site conforming, as citations have been issued for parking on the lawn in the rear yard. 5. The expansion of a nonconforming use would not extend beyond the original lot or tract of land. The proposed paved parking will not extend to another property and will remain on the single-family home property. 1. Project Fact Sheet 2. Application 3. County Plat 4. Site Plans (2 pages) 5. Public Notice (3 pages) Attachments ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Division August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- D Page 5 of 12 Property Address: 3131 Stephens Avenue Zone: M-2 Community Plan: Jefferson Property Size: 7,262.5 square feet Existing Use: Single-Family Home May 2015 – Expansion of a Nonconforming Use was granted to allow the construction of a 20’x 30’ metal garage in the back yard of the property. 1. Project Fact Sheet Past History ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Division August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- D Page 6 of 12 2. Application ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Division August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- D Page 7 of 12 3. County Plat ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Division August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- D Page 8 of 12 4. Site Plans (2 pages) ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Division August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- D Page 9 of 12 ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Division August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- D Page 10 of 12 5. Public Notice (3 pages) ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Division August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- D Page 11 of 12 ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Division August 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- D Page 12 of 12 ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- E Page 1 of 11 Agenda Name: EXPANSION OF NONCONFORMING USE FOR A WAREHOUSE FOR CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICES AT 2504 F AVE. Petitioner/ Developer: Mark Hilles 543 25th Street Ogden, UT 84401 Petitioner/ Developer’s requested action: Approval of the request for an expansion of a nonconforming use for the construction of a warehouse addition for Catholic Community Services in the O-1 zone. The Planning Commission reviews all requests to expand a nonconforming use in the city. The Commission makes a decision by evaluation whether or not the request meets the following requirements of the city zoning ordinance (15-6-3.B.1.b): The expansion of the use would not adversely impact the surrounding properties; The proposed expansion is compatible with the surroundings; The site of the proposed expansion conforms to all site development requirements as much as physically possible given existing site limitations; The proposed expansion shall not create new nonconformities or conditions of noncompliance; and No expansion of a nonconforming use shall be allowed which would extend beyond the original lot or tract of land. The Commission provides the final action for expansion of nonconforming uses. The Planning Commission shall determine if the proposed carnival: 1. Does/ does not adversely impact the surrounding properties 2. Is/ is not compatible with the surrounding uses and neighborhoods with the proposed changes. 3. Does/ does not conform to all site development requirements 4. Does/ does not create new nonconformities or conditions of non-conformance. 5. Does/ does not all a nonconforming use to expand beyond the existing property. Staff recommends approval subject to the following: 1. Completion of all staff comments and requirements. 2. Work with staff for approval of the exterior finishing materials, but not include metal. 3. Installing a screening fence between the single family homes and proposed building and drive. Planning Staff’s Recommended Action Report by: Clinton Spencer, AICP Planning Commission’s findings for action What the Planning Commission Reviews ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- E Page 2 of 11 Vicinity Map ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- E Page 1 of 11 The applicant is proposing to construct a new warehouse addition for Catholic Community Services. As the services at CCS continue to expand they are in need of more space to accommodate their growth and to continue expanding their programs within the community. The proposed warehouse is located to the south of the existing building and will allow CCS to increase the donation programs and services they currently run. It contains 12,000 square feet, and is thirty-one (31) feet tall at the top of the roof. The building exterior is proposed to be a combination of brick, stucco, masonry wainscoting, transom window openings, and metal paneling with an EIFS type finish. Specifically, the façade of the building facing west will include brick that matches the existing brick, stucco around the building entrance, masonry wainscoting, EIFS metal panels, and metal window awnings over the entrances. The exterior walls are proposed to have a combination of the other finishing materials listed above. The color scheme is proposed to be earth toned shades of brown, which match and are similar to the existing brick on the existing building. Screening fences are also included which attach the building to block views of the mechanical equipment. A metal roof is also proposed. Ten (10) new parking stalls are also included on the site which are adjacent to the existing parking on the east of the building. 1. The expansion is compatible and does not adversely affect surrounding properties: As stated, the proposed building addition is located to the south of the existing building. There are two single family homes to the south of the CCS, and the addition is proposed to be directly behind them to the east with a twenty (20) foot setback from the property line. The Observatory Park trail is located to the south and east of the addition. In order to be compatible with the surrounding area, the building will utilize brick that is found on the existing building, and other materials that are found in residential buildings such as stucco, and masonry. No metal, other than possible trim elements and the roof, is proposed as a finishing material. A metal paneling with a stucco appearance will be utilized as well. The west façade which faces the residential properties will receive the most attention in terms of variation and interest in the finishing products. The south and east side will largely consist of the stucco appearing metal paneling. Access for the proposed addition is from F Avenue, and only smaller box trucks will be utilizing the drive for shipping and transporting goods. In order to protect the residential homes from adverse affects of the proposed drive and to provide the residents with privacy, a screening fence is recommended by staff along the property lines directly adjacent to the drive and warehouse addition. (See attached) Landscaping will be installed on both sides of the proposed drive which includes grass and three new trees which improves the beautification of the area. Description of request Factors for consideration of action ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- E Page 2 of 11 2. The site complies with development requirements, and does not create any conditions of nonconformance: The proposed addition meets the development standards of the O-1 zone for height (35’ maximum) and setback (20’ minimum side yard setback) regulations, and will not create any nonconforming condition. 3. The expansion does not extend past existing property lines: The property where CCS currently operates has been combined into one parcel as it existed at the time the it was being used as a school dating back to 1985. Allowing the proposed addition does not extend the use beyond existing property lines and is in compliance with this requirement. Staff Review Comments The application is subject to review by city staff from the planning, fire, building, and engineering departments. The comments for this proposal have not been completed and will need to be completed and satisfied as a condition of approval. 1. Fact sheet 2. County parcel map 3. Proposed site/landscaping plan 4. Elevations 5. Public 1. Fact sheet: Street Address: 120 Washington Blvd Zone: O-1 Existing Use: Private use for CCS Area: 3.82 Acres Previous applications/ approvals: Feb 2014 – Expansion of NCU for driveway expansion June 2004 – Approval for school remodel Sept 2002 – Non-conforming use approved for CCS June 1977 – Hopskins School closed 2. County parcel map Attachments ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- E Page 3 of 11 3. Proposed Site/ Landscaping Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- E Page 4 of 11 4. Elevations ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- E Page 5 of 11 ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- E Page 6 of 11 ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- E Page 7 of 11 5. Public Notice PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC NOTICE YOU ARE INVITED TO ATTEND AND SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS REGARDING A REQUEST THAT HAS BEEN MADE BY MARK HILLES TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING USE TO ALLOW A WAREHOUSE ADDITION AT CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICES AT APPROXIMATELY 2504 F AVENUE. THE MEETING WILL BE HELD ON AUGUST 2, 2017 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2549 WASHINGTON BLVD If you have comments or questions before the meeting, please contact the planner, Clint Spencer at [PHONE REDACTED] or [EMAIL REDACTED] A copy of the Staff Report will be available at ogdencity.com on 7/29/17 or at our office 7/31/17 Start times are approximate This item is scheduled to be heard at 5:35pm. ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- E Page 8 of 11 14-044-0035 GARCIA ROGELIO G & WF NORMA GARCIA 4640 W 2400 S TAYLOR UT 84401 14-044-0035 Occupant 2631 F AVE OGDEN UT 84401 14-044-0023 HC & BETTY P MASSEY PO BOX 10153 OGDEN UT 84409 14-044-0023 Occupant 2609 F AVE OGDEN UT 84401 14-044-0011 BARRUS JERALD & BARBARA BARRUS 3975 BITTERCREEK RD AFTON WY 83110 14-044-0011 Occupant 762 W ELLIS ST OGDEN UT 84401 14-045-0007 COUNTY OF WEBER (LAND FILL) 2380 WASHINGTON BLVD STE 350 OGDEN UT 84401 14-022-0004 MAES LLOYD & WF TONI JO MAES 2529 F AVE OGDEN UT 84401 14-044-0006 MARTINEZ ARTURO & WF BERNICE MARTINEZ 767 W 26TH ST OGDEN UT 84401 14-022-0001 Occupant 2505 F AVE OGDEN UT 84401 14-022-0002 Occupant 2515 F AVE OGDEN UT 84401 14-026-0023 GOSPEL TABERNACLE PENTECOSTAL CHURCH 3100 S 1475 W OGDEN UT 84401 14-026-0023 Occupant 2484 E AVE OGDEN UT 84401 14-044-0004 GARCIA PEDRO & WF PAULINA GARCIA 3484 GRAMERCY AVE OGDEN UT 84403 14-029-0019 MORRIS LARRY 663 W 25TH ST OGDEN UT 84401 14-044-0004 Occupant 777 W 26TH ST OGDEN UT 84401 14-022-0025 IGLESIA UNIVERSAL DEL NOMBRE DE JESUCRISTO INC 805 2ND ST OGDEN UT 84404 14-029-0018 Occupant 721 W 25TH ST OGDEN UT 84401 14-022-0019 THOMAS PAUL J & WF SHAUNA D THOMAS 2521 F AVE OGDEN UT 84401 14-029-0002 Occupant 677 W 25TH ST OGDEN UT 84401 14-045-0001 ARRINGTON FAMILY TRUST 1921 E SUMMER WILLOW PL SANDY UT 84093 14-022-0017 CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICES OF UTAH 2570 W 1700 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104 14-022-0005 KWIATKOWSKI PETER 2183 S 760 W WOODSCROSS UT 84087 14-022-0001 JOHNSON AARON D 8 S ANGEL ST KAYSVILLE UT 84037 ---PAGE BREAK--- OGDEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2017 AGENDA ITEM- E Page 9 of 11 14-029-0015 STENE EDWIN A & SALLY L STENE TRUSTEES 729 W 25TH ST OGDEN UT 84401 14-029-0014 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF OGDEN 1100 GRANT AVE OGDEN UT 84404 14-022-0021 IGLESIA UNIVERSAL DEL NOMBRE DE JESUCRISTO INC 805 2ND ST OGDEN UT 84404 14-029-0013 GALLOWAY APARTMENTS 2650 WASHINGTON BLVD #103 OGDEN UT 84401 14-022-0016 PARADIGM PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC 6051 S WEBER DR RIVERDALE UT 84405 14-029-0009 STENE EDWIN A & SALLY L STENE TRUSTEES 729 W 25TH ST OGDEN UT 84401 14-029-0013 Occupant 2525 D AVE OGDEN UT 84401 14-021-0021 STEED ADAM B 2470 S F AVE OGDEN UT 84401 14-022-0009 ACTS 2 38 APOSTOLIC CHURCH 753 W LAKE ST OGDEN UT 84401 14-022-0005 Occupant 2549 F AVE OGDEN UT 84401 14-021-0020 STEED ADAM B 2470 S F AVE OGDEN UT 84401 14-029-0002 VIGIL DIANA B & RAUL F RODRIGUEZ 677 W 25TH ST OGDEN UT 84401 14-022-0015 SOLIS ROBERTO GALINDO & WF MARTHA GALINDO LIRA 2556 F AVE OGDEN UT 84401 14-022-0017 Occupant 2504 F AVE OGDEN UT 84401 14-022-0016 Occupant 2548 F AVE OGDEN UT 84401