Planning Commission Public Hearing

WEST VALLEY CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 12, 2021 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 Clover Meaders, David McEwen, Cindy Wood, Mathew Lovato, Brent Fuller, Harold Woodruff and Martell Winters ABSENT Darrick Porter WEST VALLEY CITY PLANNING DIVISION STAFF Steve Pastorik, Jody Knapp, Steve Lehman, and Kirsten Hunt WEST VALLEY CITY LEGAL DEPARTMENT Brandon Hill AUDIENCE There were 8 people in the audience. CA-2-2021 ARCO/Murray – Tovala Commissary 5041 West 2400 South M zone, 22.27 acres The applicant, ARCO/Murray representing Tovala, is requesting a conditional use amendment for a Commissary at 5041 West 24500 South in Building 1 of the Lake Park Commerce Center. The zoning for this property is M, Manufacturing and the General Plan designation is Light Manufacturing. The surrounding zones are M, Manufacturing to the north, east and west and the zone across the Riter canal to the south is A2, Large Lot Residential. The surrounding uses include an Amazon delivery van parking lot to the west, Lake Park Commerce Center to the east, H&E Equipment to the north and vacant land to the south across the Riter Canal. This request is for approval of a Commissary for Tovala. They are a meal service prep and delivery company. The use will be located in the south end of building 1. The overall square footage of the building is 437,531 sqft and Tovala will occupy about 116,723 sqft of that building. There will be about 12,182 sqft of office/employee areas, 61,727 sqft of Warehouse which includes dry storage, coolers, freezers, prep/fill and pack out areas for deliveries. Then approximately. 9,510 sqft of kitchen area. The kitchen area will be used to lightly prepare and precook the food. The individual meals are then assembled in the facility and shipped to their clients, and the clients completely cook the meals in their kitchens at home. There will be no outside storage and no changes to the exterior of the site. The trucks used for this use are the standard warehouse delivery type trucks and not mobile food trucks or trailers like you would typically see in a Commissary. The existing landscaping and masonry screen wall on site will remain. Staff Alternatives Approval subject to any issues raised at the public hearing as well as the following conditions: 1. The site shall remain as constructed per the approved plans for Lake Park Commerce Center. 2. There shall be no outside storage. 3. Must meet the requirements of all affected departments and agencies. Continuance, to allow for the resolutions of any issues raised at the public hearing. Discussion: Jody Knapp presented the application. Cal Zoelner, representing Tovala, explained they have two facilities located in Chicago, and this will be the third facility serving the west coast. Ryan Heard, the applicant, was in attendance. He did not have anything to add to Jody’s presentation. Motion: Commissioner Lovato motioned to approve CA-2-2021 subject to the three staff alternatives. Commissioner McEwen 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 Unanimously – CA-2-2021 – Approved. CA-3-2021 Kilgore – Altaview Concrete 7057 West 2100 South M Zone (10 Acres) Kilgore Properties LLC and Altaview Concrete are requesting a conditional use amendment for the construction of a temporary concrete batch plant at 7057 West 2100 South. This property is zoned M, Manufacturing and the West Valley City General Plan designates this area as Heavy Manufacturing. The surrounding zones are M and this parcel borders Salt Lake City to the north and the zoning there is OS, Open Space. The site is currently occupied by Kilgore Contracting. They propose to set up a temporary batch plant for approximately 6 months (June-November 2021). The batch plant will be approximately 11’ x 60’ and 30’ tall and will be located in the existing yard area on the south end of the site. The yard is also being expanded to the east to provide additional parking and storage area for Kilgore Contracting. All vehicular parking areas must be paved with a hard surface and all storage yard areas may be gravel/crushed asphalt. Updated site and grading plans must be reviewed for this expansion. The lighting for this area is also being expanded which requires plans and a building permit to be submitted. Access to this parcel will be along an existing road to the north of the site. The curb cut and street improvements that were originally required when Kilgore occupied this site are currently being reviewed along with the expansion. Staff will work with Kilgore to ensure the proper permits are in place for all the work being conducted including the temporary batch plant. Upon completion of the temporary batch plant project all of the equipment, facilities and any stockpiled material for this use will be removed and the site will be restored to its original condition. Staff Alternatives:  Approval, for a temporary concrete batch plant subject to the resolution of any issues raised at the public hearing and the following conditions: 1. All equipment, facilities and stockpiled material for the temporary batch plant shall be removed and the site shall be restored to its original condition by December 1, 2021. 2. The expansion on the east side of the side must be reviewed and approved. All  vehicular parking areas must be paved with a hard surface and all yard areas may be gravel/crushed asphalt. 3. Access along 2100 South shall be improved per the standards in Title 7 including curb cut width and landscaping. 4. Must comply with all other requirements set forth from applicable department and agencies.  Continuance, to allow for the resolution of any issues raised at the public hearing. Discussion: Jody Knapp presented the application. Stewart Lamb, the applicant, was in attendance. He did not have anything to add to Jody’s presentation. Motion: Commissioner Woodruff motioned to approve CA-3-2021 subject to the four staff alternatives. Commissioner Fuller 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 Unanimously – CA-3-2021 – Approved. C-9-2021 Salt Lake County - Pioneer Crossing Park 1280 W. Cultural Center Dr. C-2 zone, 24 acres The applicant, Salt Lake County Parks and Recreation, is requesting conditional use approval for the master plan of Pioneer Crossing Park at 1280 W. Cultural Center Drive. The zoning for this property is C2, General Commercial and the General Plan designation is Mixed Use. This property is also located within the Jordan River Overlay Zone which requires that any new development be reviewed as a conditional use. The surrounding zones are C2, General Commercial to the west and south and B/RP, Business Research Park, to the north. The surrounding uses include vacant land to the west, the Cultural Celebration Center to the north and west, and a Granger Hunter Improvement District facility to the north. There are commercial uses to the east across the Jordan River in South Salt Lake which are zoned a mix of Business Park, Flex and Open Space. This request is for approval of a 24 acre park master plan. The first phase of the park will be constructed this summer. This area will be approximately 10 acres along the south end of the site. This will include parking, asphalt trails, some streambank restoration, a fishing pier and play features. There will be an 80’ x 24’ block building constructed for park maintenance storage, an office and public restrooms. The West Valley City Police Department will also have space on the west end of the building for ATV storage to assist in patrols of the area. The sidewalk will be expanded along the more improved areas of the site and connect the two proposed parking areas. Then the internal trail system will provide the access to the south. There is a large grade difference between the site and Cultural Center Dr and sidewalk is existing on the west side of the road as well. The streetscape standards for 3500 South will be completed per 7-10 along the south boundary of the site. The north end of the site will be constructed starting sometime next summer and will provide connections to the existing trail system, additional parking areas as well as a disc golf course. Staff Alternatives Approval subject to any issues raised at the public hearing as well as the following conditions: 1. The site shall be constructed per the approved plans and must meet the requirements of all affected departments and agencies. Continuance, to allow for the resolutions of any issues raised at the public hearing. Discussion: Jody Knapp presented the application. Commissioner Winters pointed out the disc golf course wraps around a large piece of property that is not part of the park. He asked Jody what is happening to that property. Dustin Wiberg with Salt Lake County Parks and Recreation explained the disc golf course is proposed adjacent to Granger Hunter Improvement District property. He stated that they are in communication and will need to work out and finalize an agreement if that property is to be incorporated into the park in the future. Mr. Wiberg said the parking lot is also on Rocky Mountain Power property although, West Valley City has a recreational easement along that corridor. He has been working with Nancy Day, West Valley City’s Parks and Recreation Director, to finalize an agreement for the parking lot. Mr. Wiberg is excited about the prospect of this park. He explained they have been focusing on accessibility to the river. There will be a boat launch and wetland preservation on the subject location. Motion: Commissioner Winters motioned to approve C-9-2021 subject to the staff alternative. Commissioner Fuller 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-9-2021 – Approved. ZT-2-2021 West Valley City A zone text change to add regulations for internal accessory dwelling units This application was continued by the Planning Commission on April 14, 2021. City staff is proposing an ordinance amendment to add regulations for internal accessory dwelling units. HB 82 was passed by the Utah Legislature in the 2021 General Session of the Utah Legislature and later signed by the governor. A copy of this bill is included with this report. Among other changes, the bill “requires municipalities and counties to classify certain accessory dwelling units as a permitted land use” and “prohibits municipalities and counties from establishing restrictions or requirements for certain accessory dwelling units with limited exceptions”. In summary, cities must now allow internal accessory dwelling units within single family dwellings and the State now limits the extent of local regulation of internal accessory dwelling units. Below is the list of items cities can regulate under HB 82: a) prohibit the installation of a separate utility meter for an internal accessory dwelling unit; b) require that an internal accessory dwelling unit be designed in a manner that does not change the appearance of the primary dwelling as a single-family dwelling; c) require a primary dwelling: i. to include one additional on-site parking space for an internal accessory dwelling unit, regardless of whether the primary dwelling is existing or new construction; and ii. to replace any parking spaces contained within a garage or carport if an internal accessory dwelling unit is created within the garage or carport;  d) prohibit the creation of an internal accessory dwelling unit within a mobile home as defined in Section 57-16-3; e) require the owner of a primary dwelling to obtain a permit or license for renting an internal accessory dwelling unit; f) prohibit the creation of an internal accessory dwelling unit within a zoning district covering an area that is equivalent to: i. 25% or less of the total area in the municipality that is zoned primarily for residential use; or ii. 67% or less of the total area in the municipality that is zoned primarily for residential use, if the main campus of a state or private university with a student population of 10,000 or more is located within the municipality; g) prohibit the creation of an internal accessory dwelling unit if the primary dwelling is served by a failing septic tank; h) prohibit the creation of an internal accessory dwelling unit if the lot containing the primary dwelling is 6,000 square feet or less in size; i) prohibit the rental or offering the rental of an internal accessory dwelling unit for a period of less than 30 consecutive days; j) prohibit the rental of an internal accessory dwelling unit if the internal accessory dwelling unit is located in a dwelling that is not occupied as the owner's primary residence; k) hold a lien against a property that contains an internal accessory dwelling unit in accordance with Subsection (5); and l) record a notice for an internal accessory dwelling unit in accordance with Subsection (6). Items a-f and h-j are all addressed in the proposed ordinance. Item g refers to septic tanks and does not apply to West Valley. Items k and l can be done without an ordinance amendment. Item f was addressed by prohibiting internal accessory dwelling units east of 4000 West. The stated goal of HB 82 from the bill’s sponsor, Ray Ward, was to increase the availability of affordable housing. The east side of the City has more affordable housing than the west side and single family homes on the east side of the City are generally older and smaller than those on the west side. For these reasons, staff is suggesting that internal accessory dwelling units not be allowed east of 4000 West. As of February of this year, the total area in the City that was zoned primarily for residential use was just under 10,000 acres. The area of single family home parcels east of 4000 West that are larger than 6,000 square feet (since lots 6,000 square feet or less in area are already excluded) is nearly 1,900 acres. Hence, the proposed prohibition of internal accessory dwelling units east of 4000 West is below the 25% maximum of the area zoned primarily for residential use. During the study meeting the City’s Chief Building Official, Jerry Thompson, provided information on how building code requirements for internal accessory dwelling units were amended as part of HB 82. His presentation is included with this report. Staff Alternatives: 1. Approval. The ordinance should be approved as proposed by staff.  2. Continuance. Discussion: Steve Pastorik presented the application. Commissioner Winters said he has had enough time to review this proposal and feels the regulations for internal accessory dwelling units proposed by staff are reasonable. Motion: Commissioner Winters motioned to approve ZT-2-2021. Commissioner Fuller 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 Unanimously – ZT-2-2021 – Approved. Z-3-2021 Russell Platt 3995 South Redwood Road Zone change from C-2 to RM 1.12 acres Russell Platt has submitted a zone change application for two parcels totaling 1.12 acres located at 3995 S Redwood Rd. The property is currently zoned C-2 (General Commercial) with a General Plan designation of Mixed Use (General Commercial and High Density Residential along this section of Redwood Rd.). The proposed zone is RM (Multiple Unit Dwelling Residential). Surrounding zones include C-2 to the north and south and RM to the east and west. Surrounding land uses include commercial to the north and south and apartments to the east and west. According to Google Earth imagery, the property included three buildings that were demolished sometime between 2007 and 2009. The property is currently vacant. The applicant is proposing a 15-unit, 3-story, townhome development. The proposed density of the project is 13.4 units/acre. Each unit would have a two-car garage and a driveway large enough to park two vehicles in. The proposed unit size is 1,444 sq. ft. and all units would include rooftop decks. The attached concept plan and application materials 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 a townhome 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 a townhome development? According to the City’s zoning ordinance, zone changes to the RM zone can only be considered by the City if the following four conditions are met: 1. For properties without existing Structures which are proposed to be developed, the property must be a minimum of one acre and the Density must not exceed 12 units per acre. For properties with existing Structures proposed to be redeveloped, the property must be a minimum of 20,000 square feet and the Density must not exceed 20 units per acre. For properties that are west of Redwood Road and within one-half mile of the West Valley Central light rail station, the Decker Lake light rail station or the Redwood Junction light rail station, the Density may exceed 20 units per acre; 2. The property shall meet any one of the following four requirements: (i) have access and Frontage on a Street with a planned Right-of-way width of at least 80 feet (for properties under two acres) or 100 feet (for properties two acres or larger) as indicated on the Major Street Plan; (ii) be adjacent to existing multifamily residential development on two sides; or (iii) be located west of Redwood Road and within one-half mile of the West Valley Central light rail station, the Decker Lake light rail station, or the Redwood Junction light rail station; or (iv) if the property is vacant, was vacant as of January 19, 2021, will be an exempt housing development under 24 CFR 100.304 or successor regulation with a density no greater than seven units per acre, and have access and Frontage on a Street with a planned Right-of-way width of at least 80 feet; 3. A Development Agreement must be proposed with the zone change application that addresses Dwelling Unit sizes, exterior materials, architecture, Landscaping, and project Amenities; and 4. A traffic impact study prepared by a registered traffic engineer is required for projects with 100 or more Dwelling Units. On the first condition, the applicant contends that there are still foundations in the ground from the buildings that were demolished that should be considered as structures since structures are defined in City Code as “anything constructed or erected on or below the ground”. Assuming the Planning Commission agrees with this assessment, the application meets the first condition in that the property is over 20,000 square feet and the density is below 20 units/acre. If the Planning Commission does not agree with this assessment, the property would still meet the first condition; however, the number of units would need to be reduced to 13 so that the density did not exceed to 12 units/acre. For the second condition, the subject property has access and frontage on Redwood Road, which has a planned right-of-way width of 115’. The property is also adjacent to existing multi-family residential development on two sides. On the third condition, the applicant’s development agreement standards are addressed later in this report. The fourth condition does not apply because the project is under 100 units. While the property is eligible for RM zoning, the City may still deny requests for RM zoning. The points below may help the Commission answer the first question.  The property has a relatively narrow frontage (91’) for a commercial property and is 556’ deep at its deepest point.  Redwood Road is currently a 7-lane arterial street that is serviced by UTA bus route 217.  Average annual daily traffic (AADT) on this segment of Redwood Road has held steady at 35,000 from 2017 to 2019. A 7-lane arterial can handle a traffic volume of 40,000 at a level of service (LOS) C and 46,000 at a LOS D. According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers, townhomes generate 5.81 trips per day.  There are commercial services like a Smith’s, CVS, and restaurants within walking distance of the site. 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. Dwelling Unit Sizes The proposed units include 3 bedrooms with a minimum unit size is 1,444 sq. ft. For dwelling units that are attached to the side of each other, City Code requires 1,400 sq. ft. for a 3-bedroom unit. Other recently approved townhome projects have included units that are significantly larger. Introducing a 2nd and 3rd floor cantilever over the 1st floor on the north elevation would increase the unit area. 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 proposed materials are stucco, fiber cement siding and tile. Without a development agreement exception, a minimum of 20% brick or stone will be needed. Architecture Based on a preliminary review of the proposed building architecture by staff and the Planning Commission, the following revisions are recommended:  To comply with Subsection 4 of Section 7-11-404, introduce some design variety between buildings.  To comply with Section 7-11-407 on the north elevation of the buildings, offset the middle unit by 2’.  Cantilever the 2nd and 3rd floors over the 1st floor on the north elevation of the buildings by 1’ or more.  On the north elevation, either change the color by unit or add relief to the where color changes occur.  Increase the contrast in color changes.  Make the roof of the stairway leading to the roof deck flat instead of angled or sloped. Landscaping/Recreation Space The recently adopted ordinance addressing landscaping and recreation space requires a total of 50% landscaping and recreation space for a planned unit development (PUD). The concept submitted by the applicant shows 50.7% of the site as landscaping and recreation space. Project Amenities For a project of this size, the ordinance requires one amenity. The proposed project includes one amenity from the ordinance, an outdoor fire pit, and one amenity not listed in the ordinance, a dog run. Other Considerations Along the east side of the property and roughly the east half of the north side there is an existing chain link fence with slats. Staff recommends a vinyl fence to replace or be placed next to the existing chain link with slats and a masonry wall along the north side adjacent to the neighboring parking lot to the north. Staff Alternatives: 3. Approval. This zone change application should be approved subject to a development agreement that incorporates the standards proposed by the applicant with the following additions recommended by staff: a. The architectural revisions addressed in this staff report shall be incorporated into the project. b. At least 20% of the building exteriors shall be tile. c. Fencing shall include a 6’ tall, vinyl fence along the east property line and along the north property line where a chain link fence exists. A 6’ tall, masonry wall shall be installed along the north property line adjacent to the parking lot on the  adjoining lot to the north. d. Upon completion of all of the on-site improvements, the developer shall provide a letter to the City from an independent engineering firm which certifies that all of the on-site improvements are completed as shown on the plans approved by the City. For the purposes of this provision, on-site improvements shall include landscaping, irrigation, private streets, sidewalks, parking, lighting, entrance features, fencing, and any other outdoor recreational amenity. 4. Approval. This zone change application should be approved subject to a development agreement that incorporates the standards in staff alternative #1 above with the following additions/revisions: a. The number of units shall not exceed 13 (12 units/acre). b. At least 20% of the exterior shall be brick or stone. 5. Continuance. This application should be continued for reasons determined during the public hearing. 6. Denial. This application should be denied. C-2 zoning is more appropriate at this location. Discussion: Steve Pastorik presented the application. Russell Platt explained there is a foundation and slab that needs to be removed on the subject location. He believes the ordinance states, if you need to remove an existing structure, you are allowed to build more units. Mr. Platt feels the subject location is a great opportunity for a higher density development. Commissioner Winters feels that it is hard to decide what would fit best on this parcel where it is so long and deep. Commissioner Woodruff feels that Mr. Platt has done a great job trying to make a project work on a difficult piece of property. He struggles with changing the zone. Commissioner Woodruff does not think this location will entice tenants or that there will be enough units to support an HOA. He doesn’t see this working as a residential property. Commissioner Fuller agree with Commissioner Woodruff and feels a commercial use would be a better fit for this location. He does not think tenants would want to look out their windows to see gas pumps. Commissioner McEwen said as a Planning Commission, we need to balance the zoning within the City. He feels this side of West Valley City has many town homes, apartment buildings and condominiums. Chair Meaders re-opened public comment.  Mr. Platt explained that this site has been vacant for a long time. He has reached out to Smiths about selling their property to us or we could sell our property to them and that isn’t an option. Mr. Platt said there has not been any interest from commercial developers. He feels residents will enjoy the convenience of a grocery store and restaurant across the street along with a 360-degree view of the valley from their roof-top. Motion: Commissioner Woodruff motioned to deny Z-3-2021, the C-2 zoning is more appropriate at this location. Commissioner Fuller seconded the motion. Vote: Commissioner Fuller Yes Commissioner Lovato No Chair Meaders Yes Commissioner Woodruff Yes Commissioner McEwen Yes Commissioner Wood Yes Commissioner Winters No Majority – Z-3-2021 – Denied. GPZ-8-2021 Randy Moore 7147 W Parkway Blvd. General plan change from community use to medium density residential and zone change from A to RM 6.72 acres This application was continued by the Planning Commission during the April 28th public hearing at the request of the applicant. Randy Moore has submitted a General Plan/zone change application for a 6.72-acre parcel located at 7147 W Parkway Blvd. The property is currently zoned A (Agriculture, minimum lot size ½ acre) with a General Plan designation of Community Use. The proposed zone is RM (Multiple Unit Dwelling Residential) and the proposed General Plan designation is Medium Density Residential (7 to 12 units/acre). Surrounding zones include A to the east and south and A-1 (Agriculture, minimum lot size 1 acre) to the north and to the west in Magna. The property is mostly surrounded by single family homes with some vacant ground to the north. The subject property is vacant. The applicant is proposing a 43-unit, single level, senior condo development. The proposed density of the project is 6.4 units/acre. Each unit would have a two-car garage and a driveway large enough to park four vehicles in since the driveways are over 40’ deep. The proposed minimum unit size is 1,520 sq. ft. The attached concept plan and application materials from the applicant provide details on and support for the proposed project. For comparison, the table below describes four existing senior condo developments and one recently approved project within the City: Year # of Project Name Address Built Acreage Units Density Zoning Valley Vu Villas 3561 S 4800 W 2000-2002 11.8 80 6.8 R-1-8 Hunter Villas 3260 S Hunter Villa Ln 2002-2003 16.3 90 5.5 R-1-10 Reunion Woods 3639 S 5600 W 2009-2013 4.1 24 5.9 R-1-8 Bingham Point 3151 S 7200 W 2015-2019 12.9 81 6.3 R-1-8 Parkway Senior Living 6187 W Parkway Blvd. N/A 13.8 84 6.1 RM In reviewing this application, staff suggests that there are two primary questions to answer: 3. Is this the right location for a senior living development? 4. 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 a senior living development? According to the City’s zoning ordinance, zone changes to the RM zone can only be considered by the City if the following four conditions are met: 5. For properties without existing Structures which are proposed to be developed, the property must be a minimum of one acre and the Density must not exceed 12 units per acre. For properties with existing Structures proposed to be redeveloped, the property must be a minimum of 20,000 square feet and the Density must not exceed 20 units per acre. For properties that are west of Redwood Road and within one-half mile of the West Valley Central light rail station, the Decker Lake light rail station or the Redwood Junction light rail station, the Density may exceed 20 units per acre; 6. The property shall meet any one of the following four requirements: (i) have access and Frontage on a Street with a planned Right-of-way width of at least 80 feet (for properties under two acres) or 100 feet (for properties two acres or larger) as indicated on the Major Street Plan; (ii) be adjacent to existing multifamily residential development on two sides; or (iii) be located west of Redwood Road and within one-half mile of the West Valley Central light rail station, the Decker Lake light rail station, or the Redwood Junction light rail station; or (iv) if the property is vacant, was vacant as of January 19, 2021, will be an  exempt housing development under 24 CFR 100.304 or successor regulation with a density no greater than seven units per acre, and have access and Frontage on a Street with a planned Right-of-way width of at least 80 feet; 7. A Development Agreement must be proposed with the zone change application that addresses Dwelling Unit sizes, exterior materials, architecture, Landscaping, and project Amenities; and 8. A traffic impact study prepared by a registered traffic engineer is required for projects with 100 or more Dwelling Units. This application meets the first condition in that the property is over 1 acre and has a proposed density below 12 units/acre. For the second condition, the subject property is vacant, is proposed as a senior condo development under 7 units/acre, and has access and frontage on Parkway Blvd., which has a planned right-of-way width of 80’. On the third condition, the applicant’s development agreement standards are addressed later in this report. The fourth condition does not apply because the project is under 100 units. While the property is eligible for RM zoning, the City may still deny requests for RM zoning. An argument could be made for the RE (Residential Estate) zone given the surrounding single family homes. The neighboring lots to the south and east in the Sugarplum Subdivision, which was developed as a planned unit development (PUD), average just over 12,000 square feet in area. Does the quality of the project further City goals? City Code requires requests for the RM zone to be accompanied by a development agreement proposal that addresses dwelling unit sizes, exterior materials, architecture, landscaping and project amenities. Each of these items is addressed below. Dwelling Unit Sizes During the study meeting a question was raised about the number of bedrooms and whether the smallest unit would be a two-bedroom unit. The applicant clarified that number of bedrooms would vary between 1 and 3 plus an additional room that could function as either an office or another bedroom. The applicant further clarified that he could increase the minimum unit size to 1,520 square feet. 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 fiber cement siding and brick or stone where the brick or stone would be at least 20% of the exterior. This means that fiber cement siding would comprise more than 60% of the exterior. The applicant is asking for an exception here as the fiber cement siding will have a mix of horizontal, vertical, and shingle patterns in lieu of a third material. Architecture Based on a preliminary review of the proposed building architecture by staff, the proposed units appear to meet the architectural requirements in the City’s multi-unit residential design standards. The percentage of windows on the front may be under the required amount. If this application is approved, a more thorough review will be conducted by staff on the elevations submitted for a building permit. Other projects recently reviewed by the Planning Commission included an offset between garages to add more building relief. Staff recommends that offsets between the garages be included. Landscaping The recently adopted ordinance addressing landscaping and recreation space requires a total of 50% landscaping and recreation space for a planned unit development (PUD). While the latest concept submitted by the applicant does not include a landscaping and recreation space area calculation, a previous concept plan showed over 50%. No exception is being requested. Project Amenities For a project of this size, the ordinance requires one amenity. The proposed project includes two amenities from the ordinance: a sport court and pavilion. Interior finishes and amenities include two-tone paint and solid surface countertops in kitchens and bathrooms. In the proposed development agreement standards, the developer is also proposing a concrete address plate for each unit, streetlights, a combination of vinyl and concrete fencing installed on the perimeter, and 11 visitor parking spaces. Other Considerations An 8’ trail exists to the south along 7200 W. Staff recommends that this trail be extended north to Parkway Blvd. by widening the existing 5’ sidewalk along 7200 W to 8’. Staff also recommends a 5’ landscaped spaced between the sidewalk and proposed precast walls along both Parkway Blvd. and 7200 W. Staff Alternatives: 7. Approval. This General Plan/zone change application should be approved subject to a development agreement that incorporates the standards proposed by the applicant with  the following additions recommended by staff: a. The existing 5’ wide sidewalk along 7200 W shall be widened to 8’ wide. b. A 5’ landscaped space shall be included between the sidewalk and the proposed precast walls along both Parkway Blvd. and 7200 W. The composition of the landscaping shall be determined during the subdivision review process. c. The color and style of the precast concrete walls along Parkway Blvd. and 7200 W shall be determined by the City during the subdivision review process. d. Garages shall be offset from each other. e. The minimum unit size shall be 1,520 square feet excluding the garage. f. With the exception of the amount of fiber cement siding requested by the applicant, the project shall meet the standards in Part 4 of Chapter 7-11 of the Zoning Ordinance. g. Upon completion of all of the on-site improvements, the developer shall provide a letter to the City from an independent engineering firm which certifies that all of the on-site improvements are completed as shown on the plans approved by the City. For the purposes of this provision, on-site improvements shall include landscaping, irrigation, private streets, sidewalks, parking, lighting, entrance features, fencing, sports court, and any other outdoor recreational amenity. 8. Continuance. This application should be continued for reasons determined during the public hearing. 9. Denial. This application should be denied. RE zoning is more appropriate at this location. Discussion: Steve Pastorik presented this application. Randy Moore, the applicant, addressed the Planning Commission. Mr. Moore feels this is a unique property being situated on two eighty-foot rights-of-way. He explained the subject property would be a good buffer between the neighboring single-family homes and the busy main street. Mr. Moore said this development is targeted to seniors who are selling their homes; however, they want to remain in the City as a homeowner instead of renting. Mr. Moore spoke with residents of adjacent properties and the primary concern was the increase in traffic. He feels this senior community will not have much through traffic where some residents will not own a car, and this age group does not travel as often. Where this agenda item had been noticed, Chair Meaders opened public comment. Robert Goodick, a neighbor to the subject property, feels this proposal has a density that is too high for this location. He does appreciate the concept plan without an exit onto Antelope Rd. Mr. Goodick said there are already too many high-density multi-family developments in the area, and he would like to preserve this land for single-family homes. He stated witnessing an accident at the intersection of Parkway Blvd and 7200 West at least once a month, so this development will only cause more congestion and traffic accidents. Mr. Goodick  feels the development located one mile away from the subject property, containing one hundred and seventy units, is enough for this location. Leah Wright, a neighbor to the subject property, agrees with Mr. Goodick. She resides in a single-family home on an acre lot and would like to see larger lot single-family developments. Randy Moore asked the Commission to keep in mind that there is a high demand for this type of senior development. He said that he had looked a couple of weeks ago, and the four senior communities that have been developed did not have a single available unit. Mr. Moore feels that if a developer wants to put in a single- family development on the subject location, they will connect off of Antelope Road. He also feels a single-family product would be complex in balancing the needs of the residents located on different parcels. Mr. Goodick disagrees with Mr. Moore’s comments, and he said those comments came from a developer. Mr. Goodick will trust that the Planning Commission will follow through with its goals on responsibly developing West Valley City. Commissioner Winters stated that he lives down the street from a similar development, and it is a lovely, quiet development. He said there is not much traffic in and out. Commissioner Winters can see the need for this type of development. However, he could also see single-family homes built on this location, so he is a bit torn. Commissioner Lovato is concerned about increasing the traffic on 7200 West. He also feels more senior developments are needed where there are approximately 150,000 residents and only 400 units. Commissioner Lovato thinks that he would like to recommend approval to the City Council. Commissioner Wood said she leans towards single-family homes for this location. She feels there is still a great need for single-family developments within the City. Commissioner Winters asked Commissioner Wood if she was referring to single- family detached homes. Commissioner Wood said that is correct, and she feels people will search for bigger homes on a more considerable lot. Motion: Commissioner Winters motioned to approve GPZ-8-2021 subject to the seven staff alternatives. Commissioner Fuller seconded the motion. Vote: Commissioner Fuller Yes Commissioner Lovato Yes Chair Meaders Yes Commissioner Woodruff Yes Commissioner McEwen No  Commissioner Wood No Commissioner Winters Yes Majority – GPZ-8-2021 – Approved. GPZ-9-2021 Russell Platt General Plan change from General Commercial to High Density Residential and a zone change from C-2 to RM 1.81 acres Russell Platt has submitted a General Plan/zone change application for two parcels totaling 1.81 acres located at 2351 South Redwood Road. The property is currently zoned C-2 (General Commercial) with a General Plan designation of General Commercial. The proposed zone is RM (Multiple Unit Dwelling Residential) and the proposed General Plan designation is High Density Residential (12 to 20 units/acre). Surrounding zones include RM to the east and south, A (Agriculture, minimum lot size ½ acre) to the north, and M (Manufacturing) to the west. Surrounding land uses include townhomes to the east and south, a single family home to the north, and commercial uses to the west. According to Google Earth imagery, there were homes on the properties that were demolished sometime between 2015 and 2016. The property is currently vacant. The applicant is proposing a 24-unit, 2 to 3-story townhome development. The proposed density of the project is 13.3 units/acre. Each unit would have a two-car garage and 18 of the units would have a driveway large enough to park two vehicles in. The proposed unit sizes range from 1,763 to 2,117 sq. ft. and all units would include rooftop decks. The attached concept plan and application materials 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: 5. Is this the right location for a townhome development? 6. 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 a townhome development? According to the City’s zoning ordinance, zone changes to the RM zone can only be considered by the City if the following four conditions are met: 9. For properties without existing Structures which are proposed to be developed, the property must be a minimum of one acre and the Density must not exceed 12 units per acre. For properties with existing Structures proposed to be redeveloped, the property  must be a minimum of 20,000 square feet and the Density must not exceed 20 units per acre. For properties that are west of Redwood Road and within one-half mile of the West Valley Central light rail station, the Decker Lake light rail station or the Redwood Junction light rail station, the Density may exceed 20 units per acre; 10. The property shall meet any one of the following four requirements: (i) have access and Frontage on a Street with a planned Right-of-way width of at least 80 feet (for properties under two acres) or 100 feet (for properties two acres or larger) as indicated on the Major Street Plan; (ii) be adjacent to existing multifamily residential development on two sides; or (iii) be located west of Redwood Road and within one-half mile of the West Valley Central light rail station, the Decker Lake light rail station, or the Redwood Junction light rail station; or (iv) if the property is vacant, was vacant as of January 19, 2021, will be an exempt housing development under 24 CFR 100.304 or successor regulation with a density no greater than seven units per acre, and have access and Frontage on a Street with a planned Right-of-way width of at least 80 feet; 11. A Development Agreement must be proposed with the zone change application that addresses Dwelling Unit sizes, exterior materials, architecture, Landscaping, and project Amenities; and 12. A traffic impact study prepared by a registered traffic engineer is required for projects with 100 or more Dwelling Units. On the first condition, the applicant contends that there are still foundations in the ground from the buildings that were demolished that should be considered as structures since structures are defined in City Code as “anything constructed or erected on or below the ground”. Assuming the Planning Commission agrees with this assessment, the application meets the first condition in that the property is over 20,000 square feet and the density is below 20 units/acre. If the Planning Commission does not agree with this assessment, the property would still meet the first condition; however, the number of units would need to be reduced to 21 so that the density did not exceed to 12 units/acre. For the second condition, the subject property has access and frontage on Redwood Road, which has a planned right-of-way width of 115’. The property is also adjacent to existing multi-family residential development on two sides. On the third condition, the applicant’s development agreement standards are addressed later in this report. The fourth condition does not apply because the project is under 100 units. The points below may help the Commission answer the first question.  The subject property was rezoned from A to C-2 in 2010 in anticipation of a commercial development that never materialized.  Redwood Road is currently a 7-lane arterial street that is serviced by UTA bus route 217.  Average annual daily traffic (AADT) on this segment of Redwood Road was 26,000 in 2019. A 7-lane arterial can handle a traffic volume of 40,000 at a level of service (LOS) C and 46,000 at a LOS D. According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers, townhomes generate 5.81 trips per day.  There are commercial services like groceries, a convenience store, and restaurants within walking distance of the site. Does the quality of the project further City goals? If the Commission believes that townhomes are appropriate here, the quality of the proposal should then be considered. Dwelling Unit Sizes The proposed unit sizes for the three unit types are 1,763, 1,841, and 2,117 square feet. Each unit will have three bedrooms plus an additional room that could function as an office, bedroom, or other living space. The ordinance requires a minimum area of 1,400 square feet for a three- bedroom townhome and 1,700 square feet for a four-bedroom townhome. Exterior Materials The ordinance states the following concerning exterior materials: “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 proposed materials are stucco, fiber cement siding and stone. The two buildings adjacent to Redwood Rd. include stone; however, it does not appear to be 20% of the exterior. The buildings to the east do not include stone. Without a development agreement exception, a minimum of 20% brick or stone will be needed. Architecture Based on a preliminary review of the proposed building architecture by staff, the following revisions are recommended:  For the buildings where the garage doors are on the front, add windows to the garage doors.  For the buildings that include 2 and 3 stories, changes of material should be accompanied by a relief change. Landscaping/Recreation Space Townhome developments require at least 50% of the site as landscaping and recreation space. According to the applicant, 50% of the site would be landscaped and the rooftop decks increase the landscaping and recreation space to 66%. Project Amenities For a project of this size, the ordinance requires one amenity. The proposed project includes one amenity from the ordinance, a playground, and two amenities not listed in the ordinance - a dog run and picnic areas. Other Considerations For the RM zone, the Zoning Ordinance states: “For properties adjacent to residential uses with buildings with two stories or less, the maximum building height at the minimum side and rear yard setback shall be 25 feet. For each foot of height over 25 feet, buildings shall be set back an additional foot from the minimum setback, with a maximum total building height of 75 feet.” Since the property to the south is landscaped for the first 140’ or so and since the home to the north will very likely be redeveloped, staff recommends the following minimum setbacks:  North Buildings o For the building facing Redwood Road, the minimum side setback shall be 10’. o For all other buildings along the north side of the property, the minimum rear yard setback shall be 15’.  South Buildings o For the building facing Redwood Road, the minimum side setback shall be 10’. o For all other buildings along the north side of the property, the minimum rear yard setback shall be 25’. Staff Alternatives: 1. Approval. This General Plan/zone change application should be approved subject to a development agreement that incorporates the standards proposed by the applicant with the following additions recommended by staff: a. The architectural revisions and setbacks addressed in this staff report shall be incorporated into the project. b. At least 20% of the building exteriors shall be brick or stone. c. Fencing shall include a 6’ tall, vinyl fence along the north property line and along the south property line where no solid fence exists. d. Upon completion of all of the on-site improvements, the developer shall provide a letter to the City from an independent engineering firm which certifies that all of the on-site improvements are completed as shown on the plans approved by the City. For the purposes of this provision, on-site improvements shall include landscaping, irrigation, private streets, sidewalks, parking, lighting, entrance features, fencing, and any other outdoor recreational amenity. 2. Approval. The zoning should be changed to RM and the General Plan should be changed to Medium Density Residential (7 to 12 units/acre) subject to a development agreement that incorporates the standards in staff alternative #1 above with the following revision – the number of units shall not exceed 21 (12 units/acre). 3. Continuance. 4. Denial. This property should remain commercial. Discussion: Steve Pastorik presented the application. Russell Platt, the applicant, said that he hopes the Planning Commission feels this development is a good fit for the subject location.  Commissioner Winters asked Steve if the density of the proposed development is comparable to the adjacent multi-family developments. Steve believes the Red Oaks development is ten to eleven units/acre. Commissioner Winters said the density looks comparable. Commissioner Lovato said he did not like the materials used on the latest multi- family development. However, he likes that the staff report states improved materials need to be used for this proposal. Chair Meaders asked the Commission if they feel the subject location is a good fit for townhomes? Commissioner Woodruff feels the townhome development is a good fit with the adjacent multi-family developments, and he can support this zone change. Motion: Commissioner Woodruff motioned to approve GPZ-9-2021 staff alternative 1 and the four additions recommended by staff. Commissioner Winters 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 – GPZ-9-2021 – Approved. PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS Approval of Minutes from April 7, 2021 Study Meeting Approval of Minutes from April 14, 2021 Regular Meeting Motion: Commissioner Wood approved both sets of minutes. Commissioner Fuller 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 – March 3, 2021 and March 10, 2021 Meeting Minutes – Approved. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kirsten Hunt, Administrative Assistant