Board of Adjustment Meeting

WEST VALLEY CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES June 6, 2018 The meeting was called to order at 6:05 p.m. by Necia Christensen at 3600 Constitution Boulevard, West Valley City, Utah. WEST VALLEY CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS Necia Christensen, Josh Pettersson, Scott Spendlove, and William Whetstone ABSENT Sandy Naegle WEST VALLEY CITY PLANNING DIVISION STAFF Steve Lehman and Brenda Turnblom WEST VALLEY CITY LEGAL DEPARTMENT Eric Bunderson AUDIENCE There were five people in the audience. Board of Adjustment June 6, 2018 Page 2 B-3-2018 Jesus Montano - Variance 1674 West Claybourne Avenue R-1-6 Zone REQUEST: Julio Garcia, in behalf of Jesus Montano, is requesting one variance from the West Valley City Code. The variance is from Section 7-11-208 which requires that when the garage is attached to the home and the garage door is facing the street, the width of the front of the house excluding the garage shall be 15 feet. The applicant is seeking a variance of 5 feet for the front of the house to be 10 feet in width. BACKGROUND: WEST VALLEY CITY GENERAL PLAN recommends low density residential land uses.  The subject property is known as Parcel Number 15-27-201-028. This property is known as lots 11 & 12 Block 9 Chesterfield Subdivision. The property is zoned R-1-6 and is presently vacant. There used to be a home on the property, but the property owner obtained a demolition permit in November of 2016 and the home was removed sometime thereafter. The R-1-6 zone requires a minimum frontage of 65 feet and a minimum area requirement of 6,000 square feet. The subject property is only 50 feet in width and is a little under 5,700 square feet in area.  The applicant approached staff about building a new single unit dwelling at this location. However, when staff explained the building requirements, a concern was expressed regarding the width of the dwelling.  To assist the Board in understanding the building requirements pertinent to this application, staff would like to provide some background with regards to the variance requested: 1. In the process of reviewing many building permits, staff noticed that the predominant feature of the dwelling, as seen from the street, was of the garage. To enhance the architectural look of the home, an ordinance was adopted that requires the width of the home itself to be at least 18-feet in width for rambler-style plans and 15-feet in width for multi-level plans. This would balance the garage and home architecturally making for a more attractive home.  Staff would like to point out that the lot is narrow by today’s standards. In addition to the lot being narrow, the City also requires a two-car garage to be a minimum of 20 feet in width. If you subtract out the required setbacks of 16 feet in the R-1-6 zone and the 20- foot garage, that only leaves 14 feet for the dwelling. Although the applicant could build a detached garage, the most desirable home plans have an attached garage for convenience and safety and staff supports this type of home more so than a detached garage. Board of Adjustment June 6, 2018 Page 3  The applicant believes that what they are proposing to build is a vast upgrade to the homes that surround this property. The square footage is substantially larger than most of the homes in this area. Staff did some research and learned that homes near the subject property range in size from 440 to 2000 square feet. Most homes are less than 1400 square feet.  Should the Board of Adjustment approve the variance, and/or if the applicant decides to pursue building a new home even if the variance request is denied, the applicant will work with staff regarding a new single unit dwelling building permit.  ORDINANCE SUMMARY: Section 7-11-208 which requires that when the garage is attached to the home and the garage is facing the street, the width of the front of the house excluding the garage shall be 18 feet for ramblers and 15’ for multi-levels. The applicant is seeking a variance of 5 feet for the front of the house to be 10 feet in width. 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, Criteria 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. In Wells v. Board of Adjustment of Salt Lake City, the Utah Court of Appeals held that a Board’s decision to grant a variance would be illegal if the required statutory findings were not made. Board of Adjustment June 6, 2018 Page 4 Applicant: Julio Garcia 1674 West Claybourne Avenue Discussion: William Whetstone asked if a two-car garage is the minimum requirement in the R-1-6 zone. Steve Lehman answered that the minimum standard for the City is now a three-car garage. Properties existing prior to the date the new ordinance was adopted will be grandfathered and a two-car garage will be allowed. Scott Spendlove mentioned that the R-1-6 zone is a bit unusual. Steve Lehman confirmed that the R-1-8 zone is predominant within the City. This area of Chesterfield has lots more closely affiliated with 6,000 square feet, so the R-1-6 zone was established here. He continued that the pioneer standard for many of the lots in Chesterfield was 25’ wide and 127’ deep. These homestead-sized lots were wide enough for a small home, with room in the back for a horse, a cow, or a garden. Over the years, these properties have been assembled. Most of these assembled lots are 75’ in width. A few are 50’ wide. Necia Christensen asked if the rear part of this property was reduced with the installation of the Trax line. Steve Lehman answered that the Trax line diminished the size of the lot on the north side. Julio Garcia said the City requires that the garage be 20’ wide with at least 15’ of home to balance the garage. Because this lot is narrow, it is impossible to meet the house size and setback requirements. Julio Garcia answered the five criteria for receiving a variance: 1. The purpose for the City’s zoning ordinance is to promote the health, safety and welfare of the citizens. The approval of the variance we are requesting will not negatively impact the purpose noted above. The unreasonable hardship is the narrowness of the property, being only 50 feet wide. The lot width makes it difficult to fit a larger home with a two- car garage. The City has a minimum lot size requirement of 15,000 square feet for new development and a minimum home size of 2,000 to 3,000 square feet, depending on the style. Our lot is about 9,300 square feet smaller, but we are being asked to build almost to the same standard as the larger lots require. 2. This property is 50 feet in width. Many of the other properties in the area have larger frontages. For properties that do have the same frontage width, the homes are typically much smaller, most below 1,400 square feet. We are proposing to build a 2,100 sq. ft. home. The home directly to the west of this property is 440 sq. ft. We don’t believe that larger homes were ever intended to fit on these small lots. We are also required to have a two-car garage, and many of the homes in this area do not even have a garage. 3. The substantial property right is that we be allowed to build a new home with an attached two car garage, which vastly exceeds most anything in this part of the Chesterfield area. The size of the new house will in some instances double or triple the size of some of the Board of Adjustment June 6, 2018 Page 5 older homes in the area. 4. This area of the City lacks much, if any new housing. We believe building a new home here will comply 100% with what the City wants to see in new housing and architecture. A new house will not be contrary to the general public, but will only improve other property values in the area. 5. The spirit of the zoning ordinance is observed because a new home meeting all other standards of the zoning ordinance will be built. The City is constantly trying to improve its neighborhoods. Chesterfield is an older area that suffers from a lack of maintenance on many properties. This home will help to improve the area and, if approved, we believe substantial justice will be done. Josh Pettersson asked what year the owner purchased the property. Julio Garcia answered about three years ago. Scott Spendlove asked why the structure on the property was demolished. Julio Garcia answered the house was purchased with the intent to repair it. After further inspection, the home was found not salvageable. Having no further comments, Necia Christensen closed the public portion of the meeting. Motion: Scott Spendlove moved to approve B-3-2018 based on the criteria presented. William Whetstone seconded the motion. Josh Pettersson said the requirement to build a certain size of home on such a small lot is not feasible. The narrow lot size is a special circumstance. William Whetstone previously thought that a detached garage would be the answer here. However, a detached garage would necessitate a long driveway that would take up most of the property, which he feels would be an unnecessary hardship. Scott Spendlove said the Trax line on the north side of this narrow lot is also a special circumstance. Trying to incorporate the City’s new home requirements creates a burden. Compared with the structure that was demolished on the property, a new home will be a vast improvement. A roll call vote was taken: Necia Christensen Yes Josh Pettersson Yes Scott Spendlove Yes William Whetstone Yes Motion Carries – B-3-2018 Approved – Unanimous Board of Adjustment June 6, 2018 Page 6 B-4-2018 Numbers – Variance Request 3534 South 6000 West C-1 Zone REQUEST: Mike Numbers, representing the property owner, is requesting a variance from Section 7-6-302 of the West Valley City Code. This section requires that the minimum lot size in the C-1 zone be 20,000 square feet. The property owner is seeking a variance of 5,781 square feet to divide off the back portion of his property. The divided property would then be combined with the Kids of Camelot day care to provide additional parking. BACKGROUND: WEST VALLEY CITY GENERAL PLAN recommends neighborhood commercial uses.  Mr. Numbers, the owner of the Kids of Camelot day care, approached staff about the possibility of dividing out a portion of the subject property for additional day care parking. Mr. Numbers would purchase this property from Mr. Civish who does not need this area for his current business practice.  Staff explained that the C-1 zone requires a minimum lot area of 20,000 square feet. If he were to purchase a portion of the subject property, it would fall below the required minimum size. Mr. Numbers explained that the property owner does not have any plans of expansion and does not currently use or anticipate needing this area for his medical practice. Mr. Numbers further explained that the property sits well off 6000 West and would likely not develop with a new land use as visibility is almost non-existent.  Staff explained the variance process and criteria that the Board needs to consider. Mr. Numbers believes that with the odd configuration of the property, the variance option seemed like a reasonable request.  The subject property is known as parcel 14-35-126-087. This property is not in a formal subdivision but has been in this configuration prior to West Valley City’s incorporation. The front portion of this parcel adjacent to 6000 West and where the doctor’s office is located was zoned C-1. The rear portion of this property was zoned RM, but was subsequently changed to C-1 after the City’s incorporation.  The property is approximately .74 acres in size. According to the surveyed drawing provided by the applicant, if the variance was granted, the front portion of the property would contain 14,219 square feet. This puts the property 5,781 square feet shy of the required 20,000 square feet. The back portion of the property would be combined with Mr. Numbers property to the north and east, so additional variances would not be needed. Board of Adjustment June 6, 2018 Page 7  Access to the rear portion of the property would be gained from existing cross access easements. According to the surveyed drawing, there are several easements in and round these properties. Should the variance be granted, the applicant will need to submit a subdivision application wherein these matters would be addressed.  The site presently contains 1 building which is used as a medical office. The rear portion of this site has not been developed and is currently void of any formal improvements.  Should the Board of Adjustment approve the variance, the applicant will be required to submit a minor subdivision to create legal lots. In addition, the applicant would be required to submit a permitted use application to ensure that the parking lot is landscaped, has the appropriate barrier wall etc.  ORDINANCE SUMMARY: Section 7-6-302 of the West Valley City Code requires that the minimum lot/parcel size in the C-1 zone be 20,000 square feet. The West Valley City Land Use Development and Management Act Section 7-18-107 outlines the standards or conditions for approving a variance. The Board of Adjustment may grant a variance only if: 2. 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. 6. There are special circumstances attached to the property that do not generally apply to other properties in the same zoning district. 7. Granting the variance is essential to the enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same zoning district. 8. The variance will not substantially affect the general plan and will not be contrary to the public interest. 9. The spirit of the zoning ordinance is observed and substantial justice done. According to Williams, American Land Planning Law (Volume 5, Criteria 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. 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. Board of Adjustment June 6, 2018 Page 8 Applicant: Michael Numbers 3534 South 6000 West Discussion: Josh Pettersson asked about the sliver of property in the center of this area. Michael Numbers said the finger of property is to allow for a dumpster and two parking spots for the doctor’s office. Josh Pettersson reported that the doctor’s office, construction office, and day care have shared parking. The doctor’s office has excess land that is not being used. The daycare needs more parking and more room to make the dropping off and picking up of children separate and therefore safer for children Michael Numbers read the answers to the five criteria: 1. The purpose of the City’s zoning ordinances is to promote the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens. Literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would cause an unreasonable hardship for the applicant because visibility to the undeveloped piece of property is almost non-existent, creating an atmosphere for illegal activity. Approval of this variance will enhance the purpose above by alleviating parking congestion. Kids of Camelot drops off and picks up children from 15 different elementary schools in the area. Approval of this variance will allow children to enter and exit the vans in a safer area. 2. The circumstance that does not generally apply to other properties is that the current property owner and his medical practice do not require additional land or parking. Other properties sharing parking need more land and parking. 3. Other properties in the same zoning district possess the substantial property right of being able to dispose of the property as a whole or in part. This variance is essential to the enjoyment of property disposition which, due to current zoning ordinance, is not available. 4. Granting this variance supports the General Plan and the permitted use requirements will ensure that the parking lot is landscaped, has appropriate barrier walls, and lighting. 5. The spirit of the zoning ordinance is observed because it improves the way these local businesses serve the surrounding neighborhood. Substantial justice is done by maximizing the public safety, health, and welfare of the citizens as they are better served by the businesses that are positively affected by the approval of this variance. Josh Pettersson asked Michael Numbers to show how this variance will change where the children are currently dropped off and picked up from the day care. Michael Numbers explained that currently children must pass through the busiest part of the parking lot to get to the passenger vans. This variance will allow the vans to be moved and stored in the rear of the property. Kids will still be dropped off in front of the building, but when Board of Adjustment June 6, 2018 Page 9 loaded to take to school or brought back after school, they can enter and exit the vans near a playground that is gated and fenced. William Whetstone asked if he has heard from the neighboring Hess Construction regarding this proposal. Michael Numbers said he heard from both Arden Hess and Hyrum Bertoch asking about this variance, and they are amenable. Steve Lehman said that he received a call from Hyrum Bertoch, whose concerns were that his zoning not be changed and that the irrigation line that services his property not be obstructed. Josh Pettersson asked if there is adequate parking for this property. Steve Lehman said a division would not be allowed to occur without necessary parking for all landowners. Michael Numbers said these businesses have been serving the community for decades, and he hopes for decades more. This variance will help to serve the needs of the community. Don Simons, 245 South Orange Street, Salt Lake City, is a contractor that has done a lot of work for these property owners. He is in support of this variance because he has seen the traffic congestion and the need for additional parking. He mentioned that during the winter time, it gets dark in the parking lot. There are no streetlights on this corner of property. Don Simons has installed some LED lights in the parking lot, but he feels more needs to be done with lighting. There is the potential for illegal activity in the vacant field. Necia Christensen closed the public portion of the meeting. Motion: Josh Pettersson moved to approve B-4-2018. Scott Spendlove seconded the motion. Scott Spendlove said there are special circumstances on both properties that reduce the viability of the rear lot. This will be a good consolidation of one business that is static with another business that is expanding. Josh Pettersson lives in this area and sees the congestion. This variance will create an oddly-shaped lot, but the safety of the children is paramount. Necia Christensen noted that the businesses have worked together to solve problems. These good neighbor relationships are commendable. A roll call vote was taken: Necia Christensen Yes Josh Pettersson Yes Scott Spendlove Yes William Whetstone Yes Board of Adjustment June 6, 2018 Page 10 Motion Carries – B-4-2018 Approved – Unanimous OTHER: Nominate new Chair and Vice Chair for term beginning July 1, 2018 Motion: Scott Spendlove moved to nominate Necia Christensen to continue serving as Board of Adjustment Chair. William Whetstone seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken: Necia Christensen Abstained Josh Pettersson Yes Scott Spendlove Yes William Whetstone Yes Motion Carries – Necia Christensen elected as Chair - Majority Motion: William Whetstone moved to nominate Scott Spendlove as Vice Chair. Josh Pettersson seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken: Necia Christensen Yes Josh Pettersson Yes Scott Spendlove Abstained William Whetstone Yes Motion Carries – Scott Spendlove elected as Vice Chair – Majority Approval of Minutes from March 7, 2018 – Approved Approval of Minutes from May 2, 2018 - Continued Necia Christensen asked that the minutes reflect that we are glad to have William Whetstone back safely after his military service in Qatar. She also thanked City staff for their work. Board of Adjustment June 6, 2018 Page 11 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m. Brenda Turnblom, Administrative Assistant