Planning Commission Public Hearing

WEST VALLEY CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 26, 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, Martell Winters, Cindy Wood, Mathew Lovato, Brent Fuller and Harold Woodruff ABSENT David McEwen and Darrick Porter WEST VALLEY CITY PLANNING DIVISION STAFF Steve Pastorik, Brock Anderson, and Kirsten Hunt WEST VALLEY CITY LEGAL DEPARTMENT Brandon Hill AUDIENCE There were 2 people in the audience. GPZ-10-2021 Adam Maher 3540 West 4700 South General Plan change from Non-Retail Commercial to High Density Residential and a zone change from C-2 to RM 1.08 acres Adam Maher has submitted a General Plan/zone change application for a 1.08-acre parcel located at 3540 West 4700 South. The property is currently zoned RB (Residential Business) with a General Plan designation of Non-Retail 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 RB to the west, R-1-8 (Single Unit Dwelling Residential, minimum lot size 8,000 square feet) to the north and east, and LC (Limited Commercial) and R-1-6 to the south in Taylorsville. Surrounding land uses include single family homes to the north and east, Cyprus Credit Union to the west, and an office building and single family homes to the south in Taylorsville. The subject property includes a home that, according to the County Assessor, was built in 1898. The applicant’s original proposal was for a 14-unit, 2-story townhome development with a density of 13 units/acre, hence the request for High Density Residential. After receiving feedback from staff, the applicant has reduced the proposed number of units to 12, yielding a density of 11.1 units/acre. Each unit would have a two-car garage with a driveway large enough to park two vehicles in. The proposed unit sizes range from 1,822 to 2,127 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 property includes structures that would be demolished and is over 20,000 square feet in area. The proposed density is under 20 units/acre. For the second condition, the subject property has access and frontage on 4700 South, which has a planned right-of-way width of 106’. 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 R-1-8 to RB in 2004. The RB zone allows assisted living facilities, day cares, financial institutions, nursing homes, professional offices, medical/dental offices, and veterinary hospitals. The RB zone also allows single unit dwellings on 8,000 square foot lots.  4700 South is a 5-lane arterial street that is serviced by UTA bus route 47.  Average annual daily traffic (AADT) on this segment of 4700 South was 18,000 in 2019. A 5-lane arterial can handle a traffic volume of 26,500 at a level of service (LOS) C and 30,500 at a LOS D. According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers, townhomes generate 5.81 trips per day.  There are commercial services like a convenience store, credit union, and strip commercial center 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 four unit types are 1,822, 1,893, 1,922, and 2,127 square feet. All units will have three bedrooms. The ordinance requires a minimum area of 1,400 square feet for a three-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 brick. It appears that the stucco may exceed 60% of the exterior. Architecture Staff performed a preliminary review of the proposed building architecture. To comply with the City’s design standards, the rear elevation would need to be modified to include at least one relief treatment such as a building offset and at least one building design treatment such as a change of material. Landscaping/Recreation Space Townhome developments require at least 50% of the site as landscaping and recreation space. The concept plan shows 46% of the site as landscaped and an additional 5% in rooftop decks. As pointed out in study meeting, staff believes an alternative layout with less roads would yield more landscaped space. 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 an outdoor fire pit. Other Considerations The Planning Commission expressed concerns about the long-term viability of a homeowner’s association with only 12 units. The City’s PUD ordinance does allow projects as small as one acre. At the request of the Commission, staff will be researching this issue for a future discussion. Staff Alternatives: 1. Approval. A General Plan change to Medium Density Residential and a zone change to RM 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 maximum number of units shall be 12. b. The existing masonry wall along part of the north side of the property shall be extended to the east boundary of the property. c. A 6’ tall, vinyl fence shall be installed along the east property line. d. All standards in the City’s Multi-Unit Residential Design Standards shall be met. e. 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. Continuance. 3. Denial. This property should remain RB as it could be developed as single family residential or one of the non-residential uses allowed in the RB zone. Discussion: Steve Pastorik presented the application. Adam Maher, the applicant, said he likes the concept plan recommended by staff. He asked if there could be further discussion about the roof-top garden. Mr. Maher feels the roof-top green space is unnecessary and will increase cost without adding any value to the building.  Commissioner Winters is concerned that an HOA would not be effective enough to maintain a twelve-unit project. Mr. Maher said that he understands the burden an HOA can impose. He said the City’s code states that projects less than twenty units are required to have fifty percent landscaping, which causes more cost and HOA maintenance. Mr. Maher explained the roof-top garden would increase the landscaping percentage. However, it would not add any aesthetic value to the project. Commissioner Lovato feels the City would like to see future developments become more sustainable, and projects of this size are not. Mr. Maher said he understands the concern with maintaining a duplex with one owner. He said this project would have twelve different owners and an HOA, keeping the building well maintained. Commissioner Winters asked Steve if he feels a roof-top garden is an effective way to meet the landscaping requirement. Steve said we have some more modern projects with roof-top decks, and they have turned out to be a valuable amenity. He stated the intent of the roof-top patios for this project is to be used as recreation space. Steve pointed out this would not be a green roof but could contain some potted plants. Commissioner Winters, Fuller, and Woodruff do not feel the roof-top deck would be a good addition, and they would like to consider a landscape reduction. Commissioner Woodruff likes the concept plan that Commissioner Fuller explained in the study meeting, with two six-unit buildings on the north and south of the subject property. He realizes that the back of the building will be facing the street and feels the applicant can work with staff to make it aesthetically pleasing. Motion: Commissioner Winters moved to approve GPZ-10-2021 subject to the five standards in the development agreement and an addition of a landscape reduction to 46%. Commissioner Lovato seconded the motion. Vote: Commissioner Fuller Yes Commissioner Winters Yes Commissioner Lovato Yes Commissioner Woodruff Yes Commissioner Wood No Chairperson Meaders Yes Majority – GPZ-10-2021 - Approved C-10-2021 West Valley Retail 4936 W 3500 S C-2 Zone (2.47 acres) The applicant, Ezequiel Martinez Flores, is requesting conditional use approval for a new shopping center, which will be located on a vacant parcel at 4936 W 3500 S. The property is zoned C-2, General Commercial, and the West Valley City General Plan designates this area as General Commercial. Zoning to the north, east, and west is C-2, while parcels to the south are zoned R-1-8. The surrounding uses include a credit union to the west, charter school to the north, and a vacant commercial building, as well as the former Shopko building, parking lot, and restaurant pad sites to the east. The applicant is proposing to construct an 11,695 sq. ft. multi-tenant retail building. Access to the site will be from an existing private road on the west side of the property that is currently utilized by the adjacent credit union and charter school. A sidewalk is not required running north to south on the west side of the site next to the road since it is not a public street, but a pedestrian connection needs to be included from the site to the adjacent credit union parcel. 46 parking stalls are required on the property and 56 stalls are proposed. The tenant space on the northern end of the building will include a drive-up window. At the time of the study meeting the applicant was still revising the plans for that area of the site. The drive-thru shall comply with all applicable requirements in Title 7. 3500 South is one of the City’s high image arterial streets, so the first 20’ of landscaping adjacent to that road must meet the standards in 7-10-103. Fifteen percent landscaping is required throughout the site, and approximately 34% is proposed. There are some existing parking lot landscape islands that are on the east end of the parcel that need to be cleaned up and maintained. The building shall meet all the Commercial Design Standards outlined in 7-11-300P. Exterior materials will be EIFS, brick, metal siding, and wood siding. Some Planning Commission members expressed concern during the study meeting about the east building elevation, which will be visible from 3500 South. That elevation is considered a secondary building façade and needs to meet all the building relief, design and roof requirements outlined in the code. All signage on the property shall comply with the regulations in Title 11. Staff Alternatives: Approval, subject to the resolution of any concerns raised at the public hearing as well as the following: 1. The site shall be constructed per the approved plan. 2. The drive-thru shall comply with all Title 7 regulations. 3. There shall be 15% landscaping on the site, and the frontage along 3500 South shall meet the Standards for Landscaping Along High-Image Arterial Streets found in 7-10-103. All landscaped areas shall include 50% live plant material.  4. The existing parking lot landscape islands on the east side of the property shall be cleaned up and maintained. 5. The building elevations shall meet all the Commercial Design Standards outlined in 7-11-300P. 6. Signage shall comply with the West Valley City Code. 7. Shall meet the requirements of all affected departments and agencies. 8. Subject to review upon valid complaint. Continuance, to allow for the resolutions of any issues raised at the public hearing. Discussion: Brock Anderson presented the application. He requested the Planning Commission add a sentence to the third staff alternative stating a three-foot berm shall be added to the landscaped area adjacent to the western side parking. Commissioner Winters asked if the berm needs to be a hill or if it could be shrubs or a masonry wall. Brock explained since it is a private street and not a public street, they would have the option of a three-foot masonry wall with the landscaping sloping up to the wall. Commissioner Winters asked if both the wall and berm are needed. Brock said both are typically done; however, if the Commission feels just the wall is sufficient, that could be added to the staff alternatives. Commissioner Woodruff said when driving west, the east elevation of the building would be the first thing you would see. He felt having a solid wall will open up a canvas for graffiti. Commissioner Woodruff said there needs to be more relief added to the east elevation. He also suggested that something like spandrel glass be used to break up the plain façade. Brock said the requirement is for one relief treatment and two design treatments, and they are currently meeting one design treatment with the 20% materials change. They still need to add a relief treatment such as awnings, as well as an additional design treatment. Commissioner Woodruff said he is unsure why the east elevation is considered a secondary façade where it is the most prominent portion of the building. Brock explained that it fits the definition of a secondary façade because it does not have a customer entrance and is not fronting a road. Brock mentioned an option for the Commission is to add additional requirements for the secondary facade. Commissioner Wood agreed with Commissioner Woodruff and was also concerned about graffiti. She was also bothered by the possible traffic issues with the drive-thru option. She also agreed that spandrel glass should be added to the east elevation. Cory Middleton, the applicant, addressed the Commission. He explained that he wanted to offer a drive-thru since businesses have been relying on them during the pandemic. He explained that wrapping the drive-thru around the  building would help to prevent traffic issues. Mr. Middleton said he would be open to looking at some options for the secondary façade. Commissioner Wood asked Mr. Middleton what type of business would be operating the drive thru. Mr. Middleton was not sure what the company will be at this time. He just wanted to have that option available in the building. Commissioner Winters asked Brock if there are any limitations to the type of business that can offer a drive thru. Brock said there is not a limitation. Any use allowed in the C-2 zone can have that option. Commissioner Lovato liked Commissioner Wood's suggestion of the spandrel glass. Motion: Commissioner Lovato moved to approve C-10-2021 subject to the eight staff alternatives, with the addition of a three-foot berm be added to the landscaped area adjacent to the western side parking to the third staff alternative and the addition of spandrel glass to the southeast portion of the east elevation. Commissioner Woodruff seconded the motion. Vote: Commissioner Fuller Yes Commissioner Winters Yes Commissioner Lovato Yes Commissioner Woodruff Yes Commissioner Wood No Chairperson Meaders Yes Majority – C-10-2021 - Approved There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:51 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kirsten Hunt, Administrative Assistant