Board of Adjustment Hearing

WEST VALLEY CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES June 4, 2025 The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Necia Christensen in the City Council Chambers at West Valley City Hall 3600 Constitution Boulevard, West Valley City, UT 84119, and using Zoom at: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85875112721 WEST VALLEY CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS Necia Christensen, Sandy Naegle, Scott Spendlove, and Josh Pettersson ABSENT Angela McConkey WEST VALLEY CITY PLANNING DIVISION STAFF Steve Lehman and Julie Davis WEST VALLEY CITY LEGAL DEPARTMENT Brandon Hill PRESENTATION: B-1-2025 Salt Lake Brewing Company - Variance 3555 South Constitution Boulevard C-2 Zone REQUEST: Peter Corroon, representing Salt Lake Brewing Company, is requesting a variance from Section 11-5-109 of the West Valley Municipal Code. This title requires that the area limitation for wall signs on the face of a building or structure in the C-2 zone be 10 percent of the first story building face for the front face of the building and 5 percent of the first story building face on all other faces of the building. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the east and north sides of their building to have a 1.1% and 3.2% increase respectively over what the ordinance allows. BACKGROUND: � The subject property is known as lot 3 of the Valley Fair Subdivision. The building in question was constructed in 2009 and was originally occupied by TGI Fridays. TGI Fridays operated at this location until they closed their doors a few years back. The building has been vacant until January 2025 when Squatters Corner Pub opened. Page 1 of 4 � Squatters complied with all City ordinances related to sign permits. The proposed signage was similar to other locations in Salt Lake City and Park City. However, West Valley City’s sign code limits the area for signage to the first story of a building face which has resulted in a smaller sign area than what Squatters believes is necessary to be successful at this location. � One of the unique aspects of this building in comparison to the other outlying buildings along Constitution Boulevard (except Olive Garden and Wells Fargo) is that this building is a stand-alone, meaning it is not attached to other businesses in a multi-tenant building. The south elevation is approximately 10 feet from the building next door and does limit the exposure of any signage that would be placed on that side of the building. � To determine the feasibility of utilizing all of the allowed signage for this building, but allocating it in different locations, the applicant met with staff to discuss alternatives. The applicant discussed a potential text amendment to change the City’s sign code to better match what other communities allow for signage especially in a downtown setting, as well as a variance option. Due to the timing of the first alternative, the applicant decided to pursue a variance request with the Board. � Based on calculations from the applicant, Squatters is allowed to have 300 square feet of signage for this building. The applicant is proposing that 288.55 feet be allowed for signage. Since the front of the building faces inward towards the Valley Fair Mall, the east side would be allowed to have 10% signage. All other sides of the building would be allowed to have 5%. � The applicant is requesting a variance increase of 1.1% for the east side elevation and 3.2% for the north side elevation. These percentages and allowed square footage are captured in the following table: North West East South Total Code 5% 5% 10% 5% 6.25 Percentage allowed Allowed Sign 62.25 square 58.5 square 117.00 62.25 square 300 square Area feet feet square feet feet feet Proposed Sign 102.25 56.75 129.55 0 288.55 Area Proposed 8.2% 4.9% 11.1% 0% 6.05 Percentage Increase � One of the restricting factors in the way the City addresses signage to these elevations, is that it calculates the percentage of the first story of a building. City ordinance defines the first story of a building as follows: “First story building face” means the result of the first story building height of one building face up to 15 feet multiplied by the length of the same Page 2 of 4  building face. For single story buildings, that number generally works fine. However, for buildings that are a little taller, it does restrict the signage to the first 15 feet of height. � The applicant believes that only allowing the first story face to count towards the allowable signage is too restrictive – especially where you have a building that is a little taller. According to the applicant, the proposed increase as outlined in the variance request will better allow a display of signage that is more readable from a distance. � Staff discussed the variance criteria with the applicant. They have provided a letter to the Board and as part of their letter, do address the 5 variance criteria. In addition, various illustrations have been provided that will show before and after renderings of what the requested variances will look like. Staff will more thoroughly address this in the meeting. ORDINANCE SUMMARY: Section 11-5-109 of the West Valley Municipal Code requires that the area limitation for wall signs on the face of a building or structure in the C-2 zone be 10 percent of the first story building face for the front face of the building and 5 percent of the first story building face on all other faces of the building. Section 11-1-104(7) of the West Valley Municipal Code defines “First story building face” means the result of the first story building height of one building face up to 15 feet multiplied by the length of the same building face. The West Valley City Land Use Development and Management Act Section 7-12-107 outlines the standards or conditions for approving a variance. The Board of Adjustment may grant a variance only if: 1. Literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would cause an unreasonable hardship for the applicant that is not necessary to carry out the general purpose of the zoning ordinance. 2. There are special circumstances attached to the property that do not generally apply to other properties in the same zoning district. 3. Granting the variance is essential to the enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same zoning district. 4. The variance will not substantially affect the general plan and will not be contrary to the public interest. 5. The spirit of the zoning ordinance is observed and substantial justice done. According to Williams, American Land Planning Law (Volume 5, ACriteria for the Validity of Variances@, pages 131 and 133 et. seq.) there is a presumption against granting a variance and it can only be granted if each of the standards are met. Page 3 of 4 In Wells v. Board of Adjustment of Salt Lake City, the Utah Court of Appeals held that a Boards’ decision to grant a variance would be illegal if the required statutory findings were not made. Discussion: Steve Lehman presented the application. Scott Spendlove asked when the most recent update was on the sign ordinance. Brandon Hill replied that it was last updated in 2017 and is about due to be amended. Necia Christensen asked if this sign modification is similar to the Granger Medical variance a while back. Steve replied that it is very similar. Josh Pettersson asked what other cities allow for their sign ordinances. Steve replied that West Valley City is one of the few cities that has less signage allowance compared to other cities The applicant, Peter Carroon, 201 S. Main, SLC, addressed the Board. He said Salt Lake Brewing Company is happy to be operating in West Valley and enjoys the location, however, the revenues are below what they were hoping for and felt the lack of signage may play a role in the loss of revenues. Peter feels the signage is difficult to see and therefore the literal enforcement imposes an economic hardship and undue hardship. He believes new signage would allow SLBC to enjoy similar property rights possessed by others in the C-2 zoning district. Many retail buildings in the C-2 zoning district have street facing entrances unlike us, and they have adequate space between their properties and adjacent properties, so that all building faces can be used and seen from public roadways. The General Plan also seeks to prevent leakage where a city is lacking retail opportunity, so residents spend their money inside the city. Mr. Carroon discussed the outline he provided to the Board and went through the 5 variance criteria. After discussing the criteria, the Board members all spoke in favor of this variance. Motion: Sandy Naegle motioned to grant the Variance for B-1-2025. Scott Spendlove seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Scott Spendlove Yes Josh Pettersson Yes Necia Christensen Yes Sandy Naegle Yes Unanimous – B-1-2025 – Granted Josh Petterson motioned to adjourn. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:35 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Julie Davis Julie Davis, Administrative Assistant Page 4 of 4