Planning Commission Public Hearing

WEST VALLEY CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 27, 2020 The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Chair Meaders with an electronic meeting: Zoom at https://zoom.us/j/ 95328405803 WEST VALLEY CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS Brent Fuller, Clover Meaders, David McEwen, Martell Winters, Cindy Wood, Mathew Lovato, Darrick Porter and Harold Woodruff ABSENT Mathew Lovato and Darrick Porter WEST VALLEY CITY PLANNING DIVISION STAFF Steve Pastorik, Steve Lehman, Brock Anderson and Kirsten Hunt WEST VALLEY CITY LEGAL DEPARTMENT Brandon Hill AUDIENCE There were 6 people in the audience. ZT-3-2020 West Valley City A zone text change to amend the residential building design standards in the CC (City Center) zone On March 10, 2020 the City Council adopted Ordinance # 20-13 that included several revisions to the City’s multi-unit residential design standards found in Chapter 7-11 of the Zoning Ordinance. The City Center zone also includes design standards for residential buildings that are very similar to the multi-unit residential design standards. The purpose of this proposed zone text change is to align the standards for residential buildings in the City Center zone with the recently updated design standards for multiple unit dwelling residential in Chapter 7-11. Staff Alternatives: 1. Approval. The ordinance should be approved as proposed by staff. 2. Continuance. Discussion: This application did not have a discussion. Motion: Commissioner Lovato moved for approval of ZT-3-2020. Commissioner Winters seconded the motion. Vote: Commissioner Fuller Yes Commissioner Lovato Yes Chair Meaders Yes Commissioner Porter Yes Commissioner Woodruff Yes Commissioner McEwen Yes Commissioner Woodruff Yes Unanimous– ZT-3-2020– Approved GPZ-3-2020 Joe Salisbury 2892 S Decker Lake Dr. General plan change from commercial/light manufacturing to high density residential and zone change from A and M to RM 16.05 acres This application was continued during the Planning Commission meeting on May 13, 2020. Following the Planning Commission study session on May 20, the applicant requested that his application be continued until the June 24 Planning Commission meeting to allow time to modify his application to incorporate the Commission’s feedback. The staff report for the May 13 Planning Commission meeting is also included for reference. Staff Alternatives: 1. Continuance. This application should be continued to the June 24, 2020 Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant time to revise his application to incorporate feedback from the Commission.  2. Denial. This application should be denied to preserve the land for job creating uses and to focus apartment development in areas that accomplish more citywide objectives. Discussion: Steve Pastorik presented the application. Steve explained this application was continued from the May 13, 2020 public hearing. Steve then stated the applicant is requesting to continue this application to the June 24, 2020 public hearing. The applicant is looking to propose a different concept and development agreement. Motion: Commissioner Winters motioned to continue GPZ-3-2020 to the June 24, 2020 public hearing. Commissioner Lovato seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Commissioner Fuller No Chair Meaders Yes Commissioner McEwen Yes Commissioner Porter Yes Commissioner Winters Yes Commissioner Woodruff Yes Commissioner Lovato Yes Majority – GPZ-3-2020 – Continued GPZ-4-2020 Rockworth Companies, LLC 3036 and 3078 S Decker Lake Dr. General plan change from entertainment to very high density residential and zone change from M with the Decker Lake Station Overlay Zone to RM without the Decker Lake Station Overlay Zone 2.79 acres Adam Davis with Rockworth Companies, LLC has submitted a General Plan/zone change application for two parcels at 3036 and 3078 S Decker Lake Dr. totaling 2.79 acres. The property is currently zoned M (manufacturing) with the Decker Lake Station Overlay Zone. The proposed zone is RM (multiple unit dwelling residential) without the Decker Lake Station Overlay Zone. The current General Plan designation is entertainment and the proposed General Plan designation is very high density residential (over 20 units/acre). The current General Plan designation of entertainment is unique to this area. The Plan states the following regarding the entertainment designation: “This section of the City already contains several entertainment-focused venues including the Maverik Center and the Hale Center Theatre. This district will encourage more entertainment and other complementary uses such as hotels and restaurants within or nearby to build upon existing vitality. Broad goals in this area include the encouragement of a more pedestrian-friendly environment and increasing the rich variety of services and opportunities to attract more visitors to this vibrant and fun area.” Surrounding zones include M to the north and west, RM to the east and C-2 (general commercial) to the south. Surrounding land uses include Rocky Mountain Power transmission lines to the north, My Place Hotel and vacant property to the west, the West Pointe Apartments to the east and the Maverik Center to the south. The applicant is proposing a total of 219 apartments within a 7-story building. The proposed density of the project is 78.5 units/acre, which is similar to the two apartment developments at Fairbourne Station. The attached concept plan, application materials and development agreement proposal from the applicant provide details on and support for the proposed project. In reviewing this application, staff suggests that there are two primary questions to answer: 1. Is this the right location for an apartment development? 2. Assuming the location is appropriate, does the quality of the project further City goals? These two questions are explored below. Is this the right location for an apartment development? When considering this question, there are many aspects to consider including recent code changes, transportation infrastructure, neighboring land uses and balancing City objectives across the City. Each of these topics is addressed below. Recent Code Changes One consideration is the City Council recently amended the criteria to determine whether a property would be eligible to apply for the RM zone. Prior to this change, the subject property was not eligible to be rezoned to the RM zone. The recent code change made properties located on within ½ mile of the Decker Lake light rail station eligible to be rezoned to RM. The subject property is adjacent to the Decker Lake stations. While the property is eligible for RM zoning, the City may still deny requests for RM zoning. Transportation Infrastructure One of the recent code changes made requires a traffic impact study prepared by a registered traffic engineer for projects with 100 or more dwelling units that are requesting RM zoning. The required traffic impact study is included with this report. In summary, all study intersections are currently operating at an acceptable level of service (LOS) under existing conditions and are anticipated to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS in 2025 with the proposed project. During the Planning Commission study session, Commission Winters asked if the traffic impact study for this project included the proposed units in the application from DAI (GPZ-3-2020) to the north. Staff confirmed with the traffic engineer that the traffic impact study for this project does include the units from both projects as this project came in after the DAI proposal. Of all apartment developments within the City, this development would be the closest to a light rail station with the station directly adjacent on Decker Lake Dr. Neighboring Land Use In staff’s view, the proposed apartments are compatible with the neighboring hotels to the west as well as the light rail station and apartments to the east. The 75’ height of the building is comparable to the Maverik Center to the south that ranges from 75’ to 85’ in height. The height of the My Place Hotel is just over 51’ to the roof ridgeline. The power corridor property to the north is underutilized and would benefit from further improvements like parking and landscaping. Another land use consideration for the area is the number of existing or proposed apartments. The E Gate Apartments just north of Rocky Mountain Power’s property include 304 units and the West Pointe Apartments to the east include 104 units. The City also received a General Plan/zone change application (GPZ-3-2020) for the property at 2892 South Decker Lake Dr. on the northwest corner of 3100 S Decker Lake Dr. where 320 apartment units are proposed. If the two proposed apartment developments are constructed there will be 947 units within ¼ mile of each other. Balancing City Objectives Across the City When reviewing a General Plan/zone change for apartments in a specific area of the City, the Commission should consider not only site-specific issues but citywide goals as well. Given the regular inquiries staff receives regarding apartment development, it seems clear that apartments, if allowed, would be built just about anywhere in the City. However, doing so would preclude other important objectives from being accomplished and would put our housing stock out of balance. Therefore, deciding where to approve zoning for new apartment developments takes careful consideration of both area specific issues and citywide goals. Below are statements within the General Plan in quotations that highlight the need for a comprehensive view when considering a zone change for apartments along with some commentary from staff:  “In areas where retail development is aging (at least 30 years old) and underperforming and where transit is readily accessible, consider the addition of some multi-family residential as part of a redevelopment strategy to add more retail demand.” This objective was part of the reason for approving apartments on the old Kmart site on Redwood Road as well as the apartments at Valley Fair Mall.   “Maintain zoning in areas currently zoned for office or industrial development to allow opportunities for new commercial development.”  “West Valley City should work to maintain at least one job for each person in the labor force within the City.”  “When considering rezone requests for high density residential development, the proximity to transit, the size of the project and the proposed level of quality (i.e. exterior and interior finishes and amenities) should be primary factors for evaluation along with other site-specific considerations.” The proposed level of quality is addressed later in this report.  “Redevelop blighted multi-family residential with higher density residential.” Examples of this would be the redevelopment that occurred on Harvey Street and in Fairbourne Station. There are other areas in the City where this approach will be needed. In summary, when considering where to approve apartment developments, the City should balance considering area specific issues which have already been discussed, providing retail support within retail areas, preserving land for job creating uses, supporting transit and redeveloping blighted areas. While the site has no neighboring retail, it is closer to the restaurants to the south along Decker Lake Dr. and the commercial uses along 3500 South than the apartment proposal to the north (GPZ-3-2020). With less than 3 acres, the proposed use would consume much less land that could be used for job creating uses than the apartment proposal to the north. Being directly adjacent to the light rail station, it seems this use would support transit. Does the quality of the project further City goals? City Code requires requests for the RM zone to be accompanied with a development agreement proposal that addresses dwelling unit sizes, exterior materials, architecture, landscaping and project amenities. Each of these items is addressed below. As a reminder, the recent code changes mentioned earlier included several changes to the City’s design standards for multiple unit dwelling residential. Dwelling Unit Sizes The proposed project includes a mix of studio, one-bedroom and two-bedroom units. As described below, all of the proposed unit sizes meet or exceed the minimum required for units that are stacked on top of each other. Unit Type Number of Units Minimum Size from Proposed Size (Sq. Ft.) Ordinance (Sq. Ft.) Studio 58 400 527 One-bedroom 64 600 682, 715 and 751 Two-bedroom 97 850 850, 935 and 974 Exterior Materials For materials, the City’s multi-unit residential design standards state: “All multi-unit residential Building exteriors shall be brick, stucco, stone, tile, metal panels or fiber cement siding. With the exception of brick or stone which may be used on the entire Building exterior, no single material shall comprise more than 60 percent of a Building’s exterior. Where stucco, tile, metal panels or fiber cement siding are used, at least 20 percent of the Building’s exterior shall be brick or stone. Wood and vinyl may be used as trim, soffits and/or accent materials only.” The applicant is proposing a combination of metal panel, fiber cement siding, brick or stone and stucco, which are all permitted materials. Architecture Based on a preliminary review of the architecture by staff, the proposed apartment building appears to meet or exceed the City’s architectural standards. If this application is approved, the construction plans will be reviewed to verify compliance with City standards. Landscaping The ordinance requires a minimum of 15% usable open space with no more than 60% building coverage. The proposed useable open space is approximately 28% in the form of open landscaped areas at grade, recreation space above the structured parking and shared outdoor patios. The building coverage is approximately 55%. Project Amenities The proposed project exceeds the City’s requirements for amenities. For a project of this size, the ordinance requires five amenities. The proposed project includes 8 amenities listed in the ordinance: rooftop patios, outdoor grill, clubhouse, fitness center, a business center with Wi-Fi and computers for residents, pool, hot tub and bicycle storage. In addition, the project also includes a dog wash. Interior finishes and amenities proposed by the applicant include 9’ ceilings, walk-in closets in master bedrooms, 2-tone paint, stainless steel appliances, microwave ovens, garbage disposals, granite or solid surface countertops in kitchens and baths and high-speed internet. Other Issues  Parking: The Zoning Ordinance allows the Planning Commission to utilize the following parking ratios for developments with multi-unit dwellings with at least 40 units: 1.3 spaces per unit for studio units, 1.5 spaces per unit for 1-bedroom units, and 1.75 spaces per unit for two-bedroom units. Using these ratios, the minimum required parking is 332. The latest concept plan shows 323 stalls on-site with an additional 32 stalls on or accessed from the Rocky Mountain Power property to the north. Therefore, staff is recommending that the addition parking on the Rocky Mountain Power property be included in the development agreement. Also, the code was recently changed to state: “All parking shall be made available free of charge.” The proposed management  standards include this statement: “Every unit will be required to rent at least one interior garage parking stall as part of the recurring monthly rental charges.” This statement implies that a charge could be levied for additional parking spaces.  Exceptions: o One minor exception with the building is the height. Most of the building is 75’ tall, which is the maximum allowed in the RM zone. There are a few areas on the building where features are 76’ tall. Staff recommends that an exception be made for these features in the development agreement. Otherwise, the plans can be modified so that no portion of the building is taller than 75’. o The RM zone requires a minimum 25’ front setback and a 20’ street side yard setback. Given the design of the building, staff recommends a different approach to the streetscape as described in part in the next bullet point. o The existing improvements along Decker Lake Dr. include a 6’ sidewalk and the existing improvements along 3100 South include a 5’ park strip and a 4’ sidewalk. The Decker Lake Station Overlay Zone requires a 6’ park strip and 8’ sidewalk along Decker Lake Dr. While the applicant is requesting to remove the overlay zone, staff recommends that the park strip and sidewalk widths in the overlay zone be used for this project to tie in with development to the south. These standards are included in the recommended development agreement revisions from staff.  Recommended Development Agreement Revisions: In addition to addressing the parking and exceptions mentioned above, the recommended development agreement revisions from staff include a few other clarifying changes. Staff Alternatives: 3. Approval. This application should be approved subject to a development agreement that includes the proposal from the applicant and the recommended changes from staff. 4. Continuance. This application should be continued to allow the applicant time to further refine the proposal. 5. Denial. This application should be denied to preserve the land for job creating uses and to focus apartment development in areas that accomplish more citywide objectives. Discussion: Steve Pastorik presented the application. Commissioner McEwen asked Steve if Rocky Mountain Power will allow the applicant to park on their property. Steve explained there is currently an easement for access to Egate Apartments that will also apply to the subject property. Steve stated there will possibly be a need for an easement to allow the use of Rocky Mountain Power’s land for parking. Commissioner McEwen asked Steve if the concept plan includes parking on Rocky Mountain Power’s land. Steve explained the concept plan breaks down the parking on the subject property and the land owned by Rocky Mountain Power. Steve explained the applicant would need 10 stalls on Rocky Mountain Power’s land to meet the minimum parking requirement according to the ordinance. Adam Davis, representing the applicant, addressed the Planning Commission. Mr. Davis stated the applicant is willing to meet and exceed the RM ordinance. Adam then addressed the question of the subject property being built in the correct location. Mr. Davis stated there have been different market studies in support of this location. He pointed out the proximity of the TRAX station, the amenities offered, and the target market all point to this being a great location for this proposal. Mr. Davis also expressed his feeling of how adding the subject property will increase the population and therefore draw in business. Commissioner Winters asked Mr. Davis why they proposed to have apartment buildings on the ground floor as opposed to retail shops. Mr. Davis explained the apartments coincide with current market demands. Commissioner Porter asked Mr. Davis what the intentions for parking are. Mr. Davis explained all parking will be free of charge per the development agreement. Craig Larson, an adjacent business owner, expressed his concerns with the proposal as it pertains to parking. Mr. Larson explained how overflow parking from E-Gate Apartments is an issue for his business and he does not feel there are enough stalls in this proposal to meet the parking needs. He stated this will have a negative impact on his business. Steve explained that the City is working with E-Gate to add more onsite parking. Steve also explained the City Council added free parking to the ordinance to address issues with the parking at E-Gate. E-Gate Apartments were charging for parking on-site and that caused tenants to look for free parking elsewhere. Steve explained the parking on the subject property would be free for tenants. Mr. Davis stated the number of cars located on the subject property will be minimized by the ability to use the TRAX station. Mr. Larson and Mr. Davis continued their conversation addressing the parking issues that will impact the subject property, and the adjacent properties. Steve explained any comments made during the public hearing should be addressed to the Planning Commission and continued conversation between property owners should take place elsewhere. Mr. Larson asked the Planning Commission to table this proposal until there is agreement about the parking issues. Commissioner Winters asked Steve if a plat agreement will be needed to address parking. Steve explained if the applicant would like to modify the parking that would require a plat agreement. Commissioner McEwen asked Steve if the surface parking for the subject property is gated. Steve stated the surface parking is not gated in the proposed site plan. Chairperson Meaders asked Steve if the staff feels there will be adequate parking for the subject property. Steve explained with the use of Rocky Mountain Power’s land, staff feels they will meet the minimum parking requirement. Commissioner Winters asked if there is a way to move forward with this proposal allowing more time to address the parking. Steve stated his feeling would be to wait and see if there will be cooperation between the property owners so the applicant will not be stuck in limbo. Commissioner Winters pointed out two issues with parking. One is if the applicant will be able to use Rocky Mountain Power’s land and the second issue is between the property owners. Steve explained any revision to the easement pertaining to the access to the subject property, and the Egate Apartments might require several different parties’ involvement. Steve explained he would need to look further into the easement to see if the issue can be resolved between the property owners or if other parties would need to be involved. Commissioner Fuller asked if the Planning Commission approves a change to the zone today would the applicant need to come back to the Planning Commission for further plans? Steve explained the applicant would need to come back to the Commission for a conditional use agreement or a plat amendment. Commissioner Winters explained he did not see this parking issue addressed in the development agreement and asked Steve if the concern is to add the parking issue to the development agreement. Steve explained the Planning Commission could table this issue with the concern being the sharing of parking and flow of traffic. Steve stated with the current proposal the applicant would meet the minimum parking requirement. Chairperson Meaders stated she doesn’t feel the need to table this proposal where any further conversation will not affect the development agreement. Commissioner McEwen stated he isn’t sure how the applicant will meet the minimum parking requirement without the use of Rocky Mountain Power’s land. Steve stated the development agreement includes the provision that they provide the parking on Rocky Mountain Power’s land. If Rocky Mountain Power does not agree with the use of their land the applicant can modify the plan to have all parking onsite. Steve explained the staff feels using Rocky Mountain Power’s land is something that can be arranged. Motion: Commissioner Winters motioned to approve GPZ-4-2020 subject to the development agreement including the changes recommended by staff. Commissioner Woodruff seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Commissioner Fuller Yes Chair Meaders Yes Commissioner McEwen No Commissioner Porter Yes Commissioner Winters Yes Commissioner Woodruff Yes Commissioner Lovato Yes Majority – GPZ-4-2020 – Approved There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ______________________________ Kirsten Hunt Administrative Assistant