Planning Commission Public Hearing

WEST VALLEY CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 23, 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 WEST VALLEY CITY PLANNING DIVISION STAFF Steve Pastorik, Jody Knapp and Kirsten Hunt WEST VALLEY CITY LEGAL DEPARTMENT Brandon Hill AUDIENCE There were 5 people in the audience. GPZ-7-2020 Holiday Oil 6443 West 3500 South General plan change from low density residential to neighborhood commercial and zone change from R-1-8 0.34 acre Holiday Oil has submitted a General Plan/zone change application for a 0.34 acre parcel located at 6443 West 3500 South. The property is currently zoned R-1-8 (single unit dwelling residential, minimum lot size 8,000 SF) with a General Plan designation of low density residential (3 to 4 units/acre). The proposed zone is C-1 (neighborhood commercial) and the proposed General Plan designation is neighborhood commercial. Surrounding zones include R-1-8 to the west and south, A (agriculture, minimum lot size ½ acre) to the north and C-1 to the east. Surrounding land uses include homes to the west and south, a church to the north and a convenience store to the east. The subject property includes a home that was built in 2002. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing home and neighboring convenience store and car wash to make way for a larger convenience store, car wash and fuel canopy. If this General Plan/zone change is approved, a conditional use permit will be required for the planned redevelopment. The City’s Major Street Plan shows the future right-of-way width for this portion of 3500 South as 106’. The existing right-of-way width is 80’. Section 7-2-111 states: “Wherever a Front Yard is required for a Lot facing on a Street for which a Subdivision plat has been recorded in the office of the Salt Lake County Recorder, the depth of such Front Yard shall be measured from the mapped Street line provided by the Subdivision plat. Where a Subdivision plat has not been recorded and no widening is anticipated in the Major Street Plan, measurements shall be made from the existing Right-of-way line. Where widening is anticipated in the Major Street Plan, measurements shall be made from the proposed Right-of-way line.” Staff recommends a development agreement be entered into on the subject parcel and on the adjoining parcel to the east to require a minimum landscaped setback of 33’ as measured from the existing right-of-way line along 3500 South. Staff also recommends that the agreement require 13’ of right-of-way dedication. Staff Alternatives: 1. Approval. This application should be approved subject to a development agreement requiring a 33’ landscaped setback and 13’ of right-of-way dedication as described in this report. 2. Continuance. This application should be continued for reasons determined during the public hearing. 3. Denial. This application should be denied as the parcel should remain residential. Discussion: Steve Pastorik presented the application. Steve stated receiving phone calls with concerns about, ground water, late hours of operation, noise, lights and traffic. Jim Jessop, applicant, addressed the Planning Commission. He has been playing with the concept plan and the 13 feet UDOT is asking for will not allow this plan to work. Mr. Jessop said if he was able to keep the 13 feet he could put in the new store and move the access to the store further away from the intersection at 3500 South. Commissioner Winters asked Mr. Jessop if his main concern with losing the 13 feet is having less parking. Mr. Jessop said parking is a concern as well as losing  the north islands of the gas canopy. Steve Pastorik asked Mr. Jessop if there was a possible compromise where he could add additional landscaping just not the entire 13 feet. Mr. Jessop said it might be possible to add additional landscaping on the west side of the approach, however, he would be losing parking spaces. Carma Lloyd, neighbor to the subject property, spoke against the proposal. She stated this expansion is not needed or desirable in the area. Mrs. Lloyd pointed out the traffic is already a safety concern for the neighborhood, and this would add to this issue. She explained currently having issues with gas trucks coming and going, bright lights, noise and littering. Mrs. Lloyd feels this proposal will have a negative impact on the neighborhood. Rudy Scherzinger’s property abuts Holiday Oil on the south side and sits higher. His concern is having the construction cause damage to his foundation. Betty Craftz, neighbor, agrees with Carma Lloyd and does not want to see an increase in traffic in this area. Commissioner Winters asked if the 13 feet UDOT is asking for needs to be addressed in this meeting. Steve explained if we do not require the 13 feet one of two things will need to happen. Either, the applicant would need to apply for a variance through the Board of Adjustments or we would need to add an exception to the development agreement stating the applicant could provide the dedication but not the extra landscaping. Chair Meaders is concerned with the buffer between the homes and the store. Steve explained that the code requirement calls for ten feet of landscaping and a six-foot wall. Commissioner Woodruff asked if we can modify the ordinance, we have in place with an exception in a development agreement. Steve said we can grant setback exceptions through a development agreement. Commissioner Fuller feels the Commission is being asked to vote on a zone change without resolution of the landscape requirement. Steve explained that if this proposal is approved the applicant will need to come back to the Commission for a conditional use. At that time there will be a more detailed discussion about the landscaping. Chair Meaders expressed she would like to continue this application. Commissioner Winters asked Steve if he knew what the long-term plans are for 3500 South. Steve said UDOT plans on widening 3500 South from three lanes to five lanes between 2040 and 2050. Commissioner Woodruff would like to add the additional 13 feet now as to comply with the ordinance. Motion: Commissioner Winters motioned to continue GPZ-7-2020 to the October 14, 2020 public hearing.  Commissioner Lovato seconded the motion. Vote: Commissioner Fuller No Commissioner Lovato Yes Chair Meaders Yes Commissioner Woodruff Yes Commissioner McEwen Yes Commissioner Wood No Commissioner Winters Yes Majority – GPZ-7-2020 – Approved C-12-2020 Kevin Merrithew 2542 W. Robin Rd. R-2-8 Zone (.24 acres) The applicant, Kevin Merrithew, is the property owner at 2542 W. Robin Road and is requesting conditional use approval for a two-unit dwelling. This property is zoned R-2-8 (two unit dwelling residential, minimum lot size 8,000 sqft) and the West Valley City General Plan designates this area as medium density residential. The surrounding zone is R-2-8 on all sides and the surrounding uses are two family dwellings. The home at 2542 W. Robin Road was originally constructed in 1966. Zoning records show that in 1965 this area of the City was un-zoned. In 1970, this property and the surrounding area was zoned R-2-8. The surrounding two family dwellings were then constructed in 1979. Mr. Merrithew purchased this property in 2017 and at that time there were two separate dwellings in the home. One is on the main floor and the other is in the basement. Mr. Merrithew has indicated there is no internal connection between the two units but the utilities are mostly shared between the two units. Some research was conducted after the original purchase to verify if the two units were constructed legally and when they were constructed. According to Mr. Merrithew the County Archive records indicated this was originally a single unit home. Mr. Merrithew reached out to the Archives again recently but was unable to get copies of any of those records at this time. Staff also reached out to Archives and was also unable to get any of the records and was told that record requests are not able to be conducted in a timely manner due to their limited Staff and operating hours at this time. The property assessment was updated in 2018 as part of the property sale and Staff verified that at that time the Mother-in-law designation was added to the assessment and prior to that it was a single unit home. Therefore, since this property is currently zoned R-2-8 and due to the lack of historical information for the property and records indicating this was legally constructed as a duplex, Mr. Merrithew is requesting this conditional use. Since this structure is existing the request is a change of use and does not trigger all of the design guidelines for new construction that are set forth in the West Valley City Code (7-11-200). But this change of use does trigger needing to comply with the Building Code regulations, parking requirements and general site maintenance. The Chief Building Official, Jerry Thompson, has indicated that a building permit will be required for this conversion. The home must have complete separation of the units. This would include separate utilities i.e., furnace, water, electrical, etc.. Each of these utilities are required to be contained and accessible from within the individual units. Additionally, there should be separate entrances for each unit, which are currently in place. Finally, there may be additional Fire-Separation requirements but that will be evaluated once a building permit is submitted and reviewed. For parking, 7-9-104 states that a two unit dwelling must have two parking spaces per unit located outside of the front yard setback (25’). The home currently has a two car garage with no additional space out of the front yard setback or possibility for access to the year yard for additional parking. The applicant has proposed possibly removing the attached garage to add uncovered parking spaces in the rear yard or possibly applying for a variance through the Board of Adjustment to request additional parking spaces in the front setback. During the study session of this item different parking requirements and alternatives were discussed at length. If this were new construction, a two unit dwelling would be required to have a 3 car garage and then one additional uncovered space out of the front setback (7-11-208). Section 7-11-209, outlines the guidelines for conversion of parking spaces for existing homes. It states that if a home was constructed prior to 1998 and they want to convert or remove an existing garage then that parking needs to be replaced by two parking spaces outside of the front setback but they do not need to be covered. It was also discussed that since the garage is existing it would be a reasonable condition of approval to require that a minimum of two of the spaces at this location remain covered. This could be the existing cover or new covered spaces relocated to the back of the property as either a garage or carport. Lastly, the site itself must be maintained. This includes the maintenance of all fencing and landscaping areas maintained in live condition and free of weeds. Currently it appears that the backyard has very large weeds and the fencing has not been maintained. Staff Alternatives: Approval, subject to the resolution of any concerns raised at the public hearing as well as the following: 1. The approved use for this application is for a two-unit dwelling.  2. A building permit must be obtained for the change of use to a two-unit dwelling. 3. There shall be a minimum of 4 parking spaces provided for this use: a. that are located on a hard surface out of the front yard setback per 7-9-104. b. Two of the spaces must be covered and two spaces may be located on hard surface out of the front yard setback. i. Covered is defined as an enclosed garage. ii. Covered is defined as a carport. 4. The site shall be maintained including but not limited to all fencing and landscaped areas. 5. Must meet the requirements of all affected departments and agencies. 6. Subject to review upon valid complaint. Continuance, to allow for the resolutions of any issues raised at the public hearing. Discussion: Jody Knapp presented this application. Kevin Merrithew, the applicant, addressed the Commission. Mr. Merrithew explained he was unaware that the property management had not been taking care of the subject property. He has been working on the front yard and will have property management take over after this process is finished. Mr. Merrithew would like to fit all the parking in the front yard and keep the garage as is. He said he would make the alterations needed for the utilities to comply with the ordinance. He also stated if the only option is to remove the garage, he will sell the property because the cost would be too high. Commissioner McEwen asked Mr. Merrithew if the garage is being used for parking. Mr. Merrithew said the last four tenants had used the garage for storage only. Juan, who has lived in the subject area for twenty-five years, then addressed the Commission. Juan stated that the current tenants residing at the subject property occupy four parking spots on the street and three parking spots in the front yard. Juan said there had been people parking in the middle of the cul-de-sac. His first concern is for snow removal or any emergency vehicle not having access to the neighborhood. His next problem has a child outside playing and not seeing them due to the number of cars on the street. Juan stated there is one child that is deaf, which increases the risk of being injured by a moving vehicle. Juan said he is not opposed to this proposal. He would just like safety addressed first. Motion: Commissioner Winters motioned to approve C-12-2020 subject to the 6 staff alternatives, with the third alternative option a only.  Commissioner Woodruff seconded the motion. Vote: Commissioner Fuller Yes Commissioner Lovato Yes Chair Meaders Yes Commissioner Woodruff Yes Commissioner McEwen Yes Commissioner Wood Yes Commissioner Winters Yes Unanimous – C-12-2020 – Approved PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS Approval of Minutes from August 5, 2020 Study Meeting Approval of Minutes from August 12, 2020 Regular Meeting Commissioner Lovato motioned for approval of the August 5, 2020 and August 12, 2020 meeting minutes. Commissioner McEwen seconded the motion. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:04 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kirsten Hunt Kirsten Hunt Administrative Assistant