Board of Adjustment Meeting

WEST VALLEY CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES September 2, 2015 This meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairperson Necia Christensen at 3600 Constitution Boulevard, West Valley City, Utah. WEST VALLEY CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS Russell Moore, Scott Spendlove, William Whetstone, and Necia Christensen Those Absent: Sandy Naegle WEST VALLEY CITY PLANNING DIVISION STAFF Steve Lehman and Nichole Camac WEST VALLEY CITY LEGAL DEPARTMENT Nicole Cottle, CED Director Eric Bunderson, City Attorney Brandon Hill, City Attorney AUDIENCE: Approximately two (2) persons were in the audience. Board of Adjustment Page 2 APPEALS B-5-2015 The following minutes are verbatim Necia Christensen I call the meeting of the West Valley City Board of Adjustment to order noting that four Board members are here and we’re the four who have taken the testimony and then all of the work on case B-5-2015. The purpose of this meeting tonight is to do our final deliberation and make a decision on the record as it relates to case B-5-2015, Richard Allen representing the Audie Leventhal Irrevocable Trust on the property located at 2940 West 3650 South in the City Center Zone. Because this meeting is formal and on the record, following our standard procedure, I would like to hear a motion related to this case. Russell Moore Madam Chairman I’ll make a motion. I move to affirm the Zoning Administrators denial of the accommodation and direct the council to… direct the council for the Board to prepare a written report in accordance with our determination this evening. Necia Christensen Do I hear a second? Scott Spendlove I’ll second. Necia Christensen Mr. Moore made the motion, Mr. Spendlove seconded it. Alright because we have this case before us and we have a motion to affirm the administrators decision lets have some discussion so we know exactly why we have chosen to even have this motion before us. William Whetsone Madam Chair I would like to just provide some comments on my decision. I don’t feel like I can overturn this decision without a couple of things. One would be... we were not provided concrete proof of a market study that indicated that it wouldn’t be economically feasible. There was no market study provided. The Department of Health, there was no evidence included that indicated that the Department of Health would not approve a 5 story building. Finally we were not provided with a cost analysis of the building that indicated that the cost would be increased by this type of building. Based on the lack of evidence of those three things, I cannot confirm the overturn of the decision. Board of Adjustment Page 3 Necia Christensen Will, we talked about this earlier, we heard arguments and accepted all the documents in our initial case hearing on August 5, 2015 and you are acknowledging that although those things were mentioned we never actually saw any documentary proof. Is that correct? William Whetstone That’s correct. Necia Christensen Anyone else? May I say something then? In 2014 this particular case was seen by the Planning Commission and approval was given for a different style building but approval was given. My understanding from both the documents we heard and from the City’s presenter, was that they had other options at that time when they wanted to change it and they still have options that the City is still willing to work with them. As a primary, in my mind, a primary indicator of the City’s willingness to do what it took in order to help this builder and the owner make it work the way they originally presented it, was that the City helped them with the destruction of the property there and helped them avoid ordinance enforcement penalties and fines by destroying the buildings that were there originally. To me that indicated the City’s willingness to work with them. Anything else? Scott Spendlove Well Madam Chairman in something you were addressing… there were some references to coercive nature of the City in regard to the applicant and going over the records there’s never been any documentation or any evidence of such coercive nature from the City. Russell Moore And as I deliberated and studied the information here, I could not find any undue influence or pressure from the City to force them to do something that was not in the zoning requirements. Also Madam Chairman, another thing that I was thinking about is that Mr. Leventhal knew and was willing to accept the zoning requirements in 2014 when they made application for their project and that project was approved. He was very much aware of the requirements at that time and accepted those. Necia Christensen As his plan showed. Mr. Spendlove you keep… Scott Spendlove Well Madam Chairman based upon the information that has been entered into the public record, I do not believe that the appellant has proven that the Zoning Administrator was in error in denying the reasonable accommodation request to the conditional use application that was originally approved by the West Valley City Planning Commission. A review of the December 10, 2014 West Valley City Planning Commission Minutes affirm that case C-70-2014 was a unanimous approval of the conditional use application as submitted by the Furst Construction Company. From this I do not Board of Adjustment Page 4 believe that the City acted illegally in enforcing height requirements in the City Center zone codes. I would like to affirm the City’s position that the appellant has failed to demonstrate that the requested accommodation to the Fair Housing Act is both necessary and reasonable to allow for equal access of the disabled to this housing project. In terms of necessity a reduction in the building height is not absolutely required in order to have the housing for the disabled. Additionally, project profitability is not a component of reasonability. Furthermore it is not the mandate of the Planning Commission to determine the economic viability but rather approve or deny a request based upon the adherence to the City codes. Russell Moore I would agree with that and to go along with that, going through this I asked the question of myself where is the Zoning Administrator’s error? Frankly I could not find where the Zoning Administrator had erred in following the necessary steps in denial. Necia Christensen So we’ve heard the arguments, we accepted all the testimony and documents on August 5th. We reviewed the testimony on record individually and then met on August 19th to deliberate. Based on what I’m hearing tonight, we have a motion before us. Are you ready to take a vote? Russell Moore Yes. Necia Christensen Okay. That being said, we would like to vote on appeal B-5-2015 by roll coll. Nichole Camac Mr. Moore? Russell Moore Can we clarify that a vote to the affirmative... Nichole Camac The vote is for denial of the appeal and to affirm the Zoning Administrators decision. Russell Moore Yes and affirmative vote denies the appeal. Nichole Camac Mr. Moore- Yes Mr. Spendlove- Yes Mr. Whetstone- Yes Board of Adjustment Page 5 Mr. Moore- Yes And Chairperson Christensen- Yes The motion for denial is approved. Necia Christensen So at this point we will direct our council to draft a document affirming our motion of denial and present that to the appellant, Mr. Richard Allen representing the Audie Leventhal Trust. Eric Bunderson Yes Ma’am. Necia Christensen Consider yourself so directed. OTHER The minutes from July 1, 2015 were approved. The minutes from August 5, 2015 were approved. The minutes from August 19, 2015 were approved. There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 6:11 p.m. Nichole Camac, Administrative Assistant