BOUNTIFUL CITY Tuesday, May 2, 2017 6:30 p.m.  PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA  NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Bountiful City Planning Commission will hold a meeting in the Conference Room at City Hall, 790 South 100 East, Bountiful, Utah, at the time and on the date given above. The public is invited. Persons who are disabled as defined by the American with Disabilities Act may request an accommodation by contacting the Bountiful Planning Office at 298-6190. Notification at least 24 hours prior to the meeting would be  appreciated.  1. Welcome and Introductions.  2. Approval oft the minutes for April 18, 2017.  3. Consider preliminary and final site plan approval for a Verizon Telecommunication Tower at the South Davis Recreation Center located at 550 N 200 West, Jared White 4. PUBLIC HEARING Consider approval for a Variance to Section 14-5-105 A in order to allow for parking within the required front yard setback at 157 W 300 South, Robert 5. Planning Director's report, review of pending applications and miscellaneous business.  representing Verizon, applicant.  McArthur, applicant.  (Chad Wilkinson, AB  Planner City    Bountiful City Planning Commission Minutes April 18, 2017 6:30 P.M.  Present:  Vice Chair - Von Hill; Planning Commission Members -Dave Badham, Jesse Bell, and Tom Smith; City Council Representation - Richard Higginson; Asst City Attorney -. Jacob Fordham; City Planner - Chad Wilkinson; City Engineer - Paul Rowland; and Recording Secretary Chair- - Sean Monson; Planning Commission Member - Sharon Spratley; City Attorney - Clint  Darlene Baetz Drake  Excused:  1. Welcome and Introductions.  Vice Chair Hill opened the meeting at 6:30j pm and welcomed all those present.  2. Approval of the minutes for April 4, 2017.  Richard Higginson made a motion to approve the minutes for April 4, 2017 as written. Dave Badham seconded the motion. Voting passed 5-0 with Commission members Badham, Bell, Hill, Higginson 3. Consider preliminary PUD Plat and site plan approval for a five unit townhome style  and Smith voting aye.  multifamily development, located at 958 N 200 West, Robert Gibson, applicant. Robert Gibson was present. Chad Wilkinson presented the staff report.  The 0.73 acre property is located within the RM-13 zoning district. Because the parcel is less than an acre, densities are calculated at 7 units to the acre for the property. Based on the size oft the property the five units proposed meet the density requirements of the Code. Surrounding uses include single family residential to the north, west, and south and multifamily residential use to the east. The development parcel has an existing single family home located on the south west corner of the Access to the project will be via a single driveway on 1000 North. Each of the units has a two car garage, with some of the units having a third car garage. In addition to garage spaces, the units each have driveway space available for off street parking. Minimum parking standards require a total of2.5 spaces per unit for the development (based on 3 bedroom units). The proposed garage spaces and driveways will meet the requirement for parking. The proposed structures are a maximum of two stories and are less than the 35 foot maximum height for buildings in the RM-13 zone. The buildings The applicant proposes a mix of brick and siding materials. The proposed elevations appear to meet the 50 percent minimum requirement for brick as required by Code. The submitted landscape plan shows the minimum 40 percent landscaping required by Code. A final landscape and irrigation plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 16 of the Land Use Ordinance and prepared by a licensed landscape architect will be required prior to building permit issuance. One of the key factors on this particular development will be maintaining the minimum front yard along 200 West and 1000 North as landscape area. This area will not be allowed to be fenced in with 6 foot fences and will need to be  property which is proposed to be removed as aj part oft the development.  meet minimum setback requirements for the zone.  Bountiful City Planning Commission Minutes - April18, 2017  Page lof2    comprised of commonly maintained landscaped area.  Storm water will be handled via on-site storm pipes which will empty into two detention ponds on the north side oft the property which will in turn connect to the existing catch basin in 1000 North. Water and sewer plans have been reviewed by the City Engineer with minor redlines required in order to meet City standards. Sewer and water service to the project will be via existing lines in 1000 North Mr. Gibson is submitting this plan as the preliminary for a town home style condominium development which will require all oft the necessary bonds. A final PUD (condo) plat will be required for final approval. The term PUD is being used in the name only to overcome banking restrictions on the use of the term condominium. The proposed development is in an area that is zoned for multifamily use and with conditions meets the applicable standards of the Code. Current infrastructure is adequate to handle the additional units proposed. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request for preliminary review subject to the following conditions: a. Concrete curb and gutter or edge shall be shown along all asphalt surfaces  which will require resurfacing of the road after construction.  1. Complete any and all redline corrections including:  b. Provide a 20 foot wide public utility easement (PUE) centered over the proposed 8 inch sewer Provide a 7 foot wide PUE along the south and east property liens and a 10 foot wide PUE  line.  along the 200 W and 1000 North frontages.  d. Show the location and size oft the existing irrigation service lateral. 2. Prior to the item being forwarded to City Council for review, complete the following: a. Any modifications required by conditions oft the Planning Commission.  3. Prior to building permit, submit a final landscape plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 16 of  the Bountiful City Zoning Ordinance. 4. Replace all sidewalk along the 1000 North frontage.  5. Remove and replace any and all existing damaged curb and gutter along 1000 North. 6. Pay for slurry seal of1 1000 N. Street after asphalt is patched and repaired. Commission Members discussed current code for fencing and front doors facing the street. Richard Higginson made a motion that the Planning Commission pass a recommendation for approval to the City Council for the preliminary PUD Plat and site plan approval for a five unit townhome style multifamily development, located at 958N200 West with the six conditions outlined by staff. Tom Smith seconded the motion. Voting passed 4-0-1 with Commission members Badham, Bell,  Higginson, and Smith voting aye with Hill abstaining.  4. Planning Director's report, review of pending applications and miscellaneous business.  1. 2017APA Utah Spring Conference in Brigham City.  Vice Chair Hill ascertained there were no other items to discuss. The meeting was adjourned at 6:44  p.m.  Chad Wilkinson, Bountiful City Planner  Bountiful City Planning Commission Minutes - April 18, 2017  Page 2 of2    Commission Staff Report  Item #3  Subject: Author: Date:  Preliminary and Final Site Plan Review fora a Telecommunications Tower Located at the South  Davis Recreation Center Chad Wilkinson, City Planner May 2, 2017  Address: 650 North 200 West Description of Request:  BOUNTIFUL EST.1 1847  Mr. Jared White, representing Verizon Wireless, requests preliminary and final site plan approval for a new telecommunications tower located at the South Davis Recreation Center. The proposed tower is to bel located on the north side of the Recreation Center in an existingl landscape area. The subject property is located within a Single Family Residential (R-4) zone. Telecommunications towers are an allowed use in the R-4zoning district.  Background and Analysis  The Land Use Ordinance encourages location of telecommunications facilities on public properties and more specifically states that the policy oft the City is to make available to telecommunications companies such sites that the City owns which can reasonably serve the needs oft the companies, the citizens and the City. To that end, when located on a City owned property, a telecommunications tower is considered aj permitted use and does not The proposal includes the installation of an 80-foot high telecommunications monopole tower along with antennae. The application also includes the installation ofa fenced equipment area: approximately 20 feet by 36 feeti in area (720 square feet). A 10-foot wide access easement is proposed across the Recreation Center parking area to provide for routine maintenance of the facility. The applicant proposes to provide power to the facility from an existing pole located to the north west oft the tower. An additional easement is proposed across the north side oft the Rec. Center site in order to provide access to fiber optics and power. The precise location of these easements will be subject to review and The applicant has indicated that they are willing to install a 60-foot tall tower instead oft the 80 foot tower. However, the installation ofal lower tower will limit the ability for CO- location by other providers in the future. Co-location is encouraged by City Code in order to minimize the number oft towers in the City. The 80 foot height requested is consistent with other towers installed in the City including the tower: atl Mueller Park) Junior High. The proposed toweri is effectively screened from public view to the south by the Rec. Center building and is located several hundred feet from 200 West and Main Street. The closest of the existing residences is approximately 150 feet from the proposed tower and al large tree exists between the tower and the residence. The conditions below include a maximum width for pole and the antennae array in order to mitigate visual impacts.  require a public hearing.  approval by impacted City departments.  G:ENGISite Plans/Verizon Wireless Rec Center Tower 6501 N2 2001 West/PCF Preliminary and Final Site Plan Verizon Wireless Rec Center  Tower 5-2-17.docx    Department Review and by the Fire Marshall. Significant Impacts  This proposal has been reviewed byt thel Engineering, Power, and Planning Departments  The proposed tower will create visual impacts to adjoining properties. Impacts to traffic  and existing utilities are expected to be minimal.  Recommended Action  Staffrecommends: that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of preliminary and final site pan approval for the requested telecommunications tower 1. Thea applicant shall meet all requirements ofthe Bountiful Power Department. 2. Provide easement documents, including legal descriptions for review and approval 3. The communications tower shall not exceed 30 inches in diameter at the base and shall taper to no more than 20 inches in diameter at the top oft thej pole. 4. The maximum tower height allowed shall be 80.Antennas and appurtenances shall 6. Atn no point shall any part ofa an antenna array,i including the antenna pads, extend more than 80" inches from the exterior oft the communications tower pole. 7. The tower shall be constructed in such a way to allow for atl least three different services, meaning the original applicant equipment and two co-locations on the 8. The applicant shall consent to at least two future Co-locations on the tower. 9. The applicant shall obtain a building permit before commencing construction.  subject to the following conditions:  by the City.  note extend more than 6 feet above the tower. 5. The color of the tower is tol be determined by staff.  same tower.  10.Any and all fees shall be paid.  Attachments 1. 2.  Aerial photo Site and utility plans  G:ENG/Sitel Plans/Verizon' Wireless Rec Center' Tower 6501 N 2001 West/,PC Preliminary and Final Sitel Plan' Verizon' Wireless Rec Center  Tower 5-2-17.docx    Aerial Photo  Towerl Location  G:ENGISitel Plans/Verizon Wireless Rec Center Tower 650N N2 200 West/PCI Preliminary: and Final Site Plan' Verizon' Wireless Rec Center  Tower5-2-17.docx    6  Y  858  S    0010-2Z0-E0 1OIHISIG 100HOS SIAVO ONOUVONGB: OQNVOS :0INIT 1304Vd  ES MZA) (V ). I8SLIZ (W), 3.25,40.005 ONINV3S 13381S. LSIMO 00Z  HLON    &aoamaos-  VEYOR  oud  S-anener    HLON)  13381S IS3MO0Z    HLION  > ()  -  0-E  Geas ga        Davis Search this site COUNTY  Q  Recorder  Recorder( (..1./home) 1 Property Search Property Search Davis County Taxl Information- Please Read bes sufficient for use on anyl legal documents.  This website isr not and official record or tax statement. Thei information ont this page may not Dor not use this page unlessy you understand: and agreet toT Terms ofl Use (below). Your may printt this page, asl longa asy youi includet this notice, andt thel Terms ofl Use withy your print.  Tax Information SEPTEMBER 15, 2016.  THE: 2016V VALUES ONT THIS WEB PAGE ARE PRELIMINARY' VALUES, AS OFJ JULY22, 2016,A AS DISCLOSED ON THE: 20161 DAVIS COUNTY VALUATIONI NOTICE. THESEVALUES MAY BEA APPEALED BY THET TAXPAYERI BY  Property Information Year: Parcel Serial Number: Tax District:  2016 V 030250088 03 ACRES. 4005425WEST BOUNTIFUL, 84010 0.17  Legal Description: GAAFTIRSEISHER: NWCOROFSEC3 30-T2N-R1E, SLM; THS  66FEIMEII3SFFTANGFEIHWIBSFTTOPOB.CONT.0I73  SITUS Address: Building/Land" Values Acres: Residence Year Built: 0 Residence: Square 0 Feet: Taxl Information Estimated Delinquency! Payoff Amount (for specified Payoff Date): 2016Tax Statement CHASEBROOKI BOUNTIFUL LLC Recipient: 2016Total Market $94,972.00 Value: Recent Tax History  No delinquencies werej found for this serial number att this time.  154EASTMYRTLE/ AVE#303 MURRAY,UT84107    Item #4  Commission Staff Report  Item:  PUBLICI HEARING - Request for a variance in order toa allow parking within the required fronty tyard Chad Wilkinson, Planning Director  setback. May 2, 2017  Address: 157 W.300 South  BOUNTIFUL EST.1892  Author: Date:  Description of Request  The applicants, Robert McArthur and Alan Mortensen, have requested a variance to allow fora parking space within thei required front yard setback area ofaj property he developed at 157W300 South. The property is located in the RM-19 zoning district and is part oft the DuMc Planned Unit  Development. Authority  Section 14-2-111 authorizes the Planning Commission as the review body for variance  requests related to parking and setbacks. Background and Analysis:  The applicant has requested a variance to allow an existing driveway and parking area constructed at 157 W300 South to remain. The DuMc Planned Unit Development was originally approved in 2013 as a three unit multifamily development. The site plan approved by the City Council and Planning Commission did noti include the driveway and parking space and the site plan approved as part of thel building permit set didi noti include the driveway and parking space. Subsequent to the issuance oft the building permit for the site, the driveway was constructed and was discovered during a bond release inspection by City Engineering staff. The driveway approach for the parking space was constructed without permit and does not meet City standards for driveway approaches. The City initiated enforcement action in order to obtain compliance with the Code and the applicant has elected to request a variance rather than removing the noncompliant The parking space in question does not meet the standards for thel RM-19 zone. Section 14-5-105 (A) states that, "No dwellings, parking spaces, or other site elements, other than sidewalks, landscaping, and approved driveways may be allowed in the front setback" (Emphasis added).. Additionally, Section 14-5-117 states that, Driveway and parking areas in multifamily projects shall be designed so that vehicles do not back on aj public street." The staff report for the original Planning Commission review of the item noted that the units "are effectively attached single family dwellings, and SO the parking standard, driveway  driveway.    width, etc, applied are those for single family dwellings." Single family residential requirements include ai minimum 35: foot separation between driveways located on the same property and a restriction on parking of vehicles within ai required front yard except for on an approved, paved driveway. Whether the development is treated as a single family dwelling or a multi-family dwelling, the driveway does not meet the standards oft the Land Use ordinance. The applicant has suggested that the development be deemed a "townhome style" residential development in order to utilize an exemption int the multifamily zone standards. However, this isi inconsistent with the original approval and would still not address the parking of vehicles in the front yard which is prohibited in the multifamily zoning standards. The applicant has submitted a written narrative which is attached to this report. The submittal includes photographs of existing driveways and parking spaces throughout Bountiful. Some oft the driveway examples appear to be illegally constructed with several of the examples using metal plates or ramps instead ofal legally constructed driveway to access a parking area. Others appear to access the parking areas by mounting the curb. This ise expressly prohibited in the Code. The existence ofc other non-permitted and/or illegal  driveways is not: aj justification foral variance.  Variance Findings  Utah Code 10-9a-702 establishes the criteria for review ofa variance request. In order to () Literal enforcement ofthe ordinance would cause an unreasonable hardship for the applicant that is not necessary to carry out the general purpose ofthe land use  grant a variance each oft the following criteria must be met:  ordinances;  Staff Response: The additional parking space and driveway were not discussed at the Planning Commission or City Council meetings approving the development. In addition, the site plan approved with the building permit did noti include the extra parking space. The property has adequate off-street parking to meet code standards and therefore the elimination oft the parking space will not cause an unreasonable hardship. Instead, elimination will bring the site into compliance with the original approval.  (i) There are: special circumstances attached to the property that do not generally apply Staff Response: The applicant has listed several special circumstances including proximity to a power plant, a drug rehabilitation center and personal storage units as, justification for a variance. In order for a special circumstance to be considered in granting a variance, it must relate to the standards for which the applicant seeks ai relief. The applicant does not indicatel how an extra parking space addresses or provides relief from the proximity to the power plant, or storage units or the drugrehab facility. Thej parking space does not provide buffering to surrounding uses, and is not needed for emergency access to the property. Replacing thej parking space with landscaping would more effectively buffer the residential unit from the neighboring storage use.  to other properties in the. same zone;    (iii) Granting the variance ise essential to the enjoymento ofasubstantial property right Staff Response: Approval ofa a variance would actually grant a right thati is not possessed by other property in the same zone. The applicant has submitted photos of other driveways in the City that do not appear to meet the standards of the Code. Many oft these are non-permitted driveways that violate the ordinance. These non-permitted and/or illegal driveways are not a (iv) The variance will nots substantially affect the general plan and will not be contrary to Staff Response: Limitations on the number and location of driveways and parking areas within required front yards is in the public interest. The development was approved in conjunction with a site plan review by thel Planning Commission and City Council. Requiring compliance with (v) The spirit ofthe land use ordinance is observed and substantial, justice done Staff Response: Granting a variance would be contrary to the spirit oft the land use ordinance. The driveway spacing standards oft the Code are: meant to enhance public safety by limiting the number ofl locations vehicles may enter the public right-of-way. Restrictions onj parking within a front yard provide opportunities for additional landscape areas in front yards which enhances the  possessed by other property in the same. zone;  justification for a variance.  the public interest;  the approved site plan is also in the public interest.  beauty oft the community. Department Review  City Planner, City Engineer, City Attorney  Recommended Action  Staffrecommends denial ofthe requested variance to allow for a parking space in the required front yard ofa multifamily development in the RM-19: zone. Staff recommends removal oft the parking space and driveway leading to the parking space in order to comply with the approved site plan and the standards oft the Land Use Ordinance.  Attachments 1. Aerial Photo 2. Applicant's Narrative 3. Original approved Site Plan 4. Proposed Revised Site plan    Aerial Photo  CS  GoogleEarth    April11, 2017  VIAI Hand Deliveryto Bountiful City Planning Department Department of Planning and Economic Development  790 South 100 East Bountiful, UT 84010  Re: 157 West. 300 South, Bountiful, UT8 84010  To Whom It May Concern:  We hereby request a variance on our property located at 157 West 300 South in Bountiful. The ordinance does not allow for the cutting of a curb for a driveway when another driveway is less than 50 feet away. As you can: see from the attached photographs, the only entrance between the planned unit development andi the storage garages for emergency and/ ort fire would be goingt through this small  flagpole side yard.  We recently bought this home and up until the day of the purchase were unaware ofthere being an issue with the city regarding the curb cut and/or cement pad that is captured ini the attached photos. We have invested in purchasing this very nice home int the downtown area of Bountiful in hopes that we can help ini the urban revitalization of downtown Bountiful. We were disappointed that the city building is not going to be built to help revitalize the downtown as we want to remain here and assist in beautifying downtown. We are next to storage garages that are less than attractive and are obviously not compliant with maintenance on the sidewalks and are going ignored. However, we would like to keep the previous owner's cut and cement pad: so that we can have al buffer between the storage Pursuant to Utah Code 10-98-702, a variance is warranted because ofal literal enforcement of the ordinance would cause an unreasonable hardship upon us in that we would be giving upa beatification effort that has ample precedence in Bountiful city for. There are: special circumstances as this planned unit development is next to and across the street from the power plant, a drug rehabilitation facility, and next to a storage garage and strip mall. This is al less than desirable location, yet we were willing to invest in the city by moving here and hopefully encourage others to do the same. The special circumstances that attach to this property do not applyt to other properties that are int the same zoning areas int that they are not across the street from the power plant, drug rehabilitation center, or next to storage garages and as strip mall. Granting this variance is essential toi the enjoyment of our property in order tol have al buffer and also to have emergency: access to our backyard through this cut. This variance would not generally affect the general plan in any method or manner and the public interest in not hurt given the conditions that are allowedi to exist with the storage garages tot the west of our property. Int the spirit of the land use ordinance being observed ands substantial justices being done in allowing the cement pad and cut to remain, we have included address and images ofr more than nine Bountiful properties showing a precedence for the cement pad and curb cut. The design is to  garages and our property.  help alleviate road parking congestion. 14-18-109 (A)(3) and (C)(1)(b) and (C)(2).  Please note the enclosed attachments regarding response to Bountiful City Code 14-18-105 (F),    We appreciate your attention tot this matter and look forward to working with Bountiful City by  coming to an acceptable resolution.  Sincerely,  Alan' W. Mortensen  AWM/ncc    14-18-105  GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PARKING. AREAS  F.  No off-street parking shall be permitted ina any required residential front yard or street side yard other thani in approved, paved driveways. And no vehicle, trailer, ors similar device may be parked on al lawn, parks strip, or any other non-paved surface.  When approval of the paved area, which has ample precedence in Bountiful city, is granted, then the  paved pad will bei in code.  14-18-109  ACCESS REQUIREMENTS 3.  A. Any property, regardless ofi its use or zone designation, shall be subject to the following.  No off-street parking area shall be: approved or constructed" without a drive approach meeting city standards. Any drive-approach: shall be located at least five (5)feet from a side orr rear property line, with the exception of approved, shared  drive-approaches.  A variance is being requested from this code as the drive-approach is next to a storage unit facility that is less than attractive andi is obviously not compliant with maintenance on the sidewalks andi is goingi ignored. The paved padi is requested to keepi in place to have al buffer between the storage  units and the property address.  14-18-109  ACCESS REQUIREMENTS C.  Multiple-Family Residential Developments  2.  Number of Driveways Permitted. Notr more than two (2) drive-accesses (curb cuts) shall be allowed for each one hundred (100) feet ofs street frontage, except for town-home style residential units approved and constructed after December 31, 2006, that front ontoa a public street that is not designated on the Street Master Plan asa a collector or arterial street andt that does not exceed ana average daily  traffic volume of one thousand (1,000) vehicles  Although the Planning Commission approved the PUD on August 20, 2013, they listed the parking aspect of the units as signal family dwelling units. As the units are indeed approved PUD town-home style residents, the request is to keep the parking labeled as town-home style parking, as well, which "The proposed development is atypical ofi most multi-family developments in that all three units will have individual driveways connecting to the: street and no shared parking. They are effectively attached. single family dwellings, and: 50 the parking standard, driveway width, etc, applied are those fors single family dwellings. Each unit will have at least two covered parking stalls and two uncovered spaces in the driveways, which meets the minimum requirements of the ordinance. As a result of each unit having its own driveway within ai relatively. small amount of frontage, all of the: sidewalk and curb and gutter must be replaced as part of the construction process and before  willl keep the propertyi in code.  final occupancy of any of the residential units is granted."    Variance requested forp property located at 157 West 300 South, Bountiful, UT8 84010.    Address of other current Bountiful City properties with same design use:  174 W 100 N Bountiful, UT 84010    130 W Center St Bountiful, UT 84010  HEDARES    906 S7 750 E Bountiful, UT 84010    695 Mill St Bountiful, UT 84010  MIS St  MISE    633 Mill St Bountiful, UT 84010    139 W: 300 S Bountiful, UT 84010    834 E 1875 S Bountiful, UT 84010    1899 800 E Bountiful, UT 84010    1896 800 El Bountiful, UT 84010    890 Mill St Bountiful, UT 84010  Me SL    276 S 100 W Bountiful, UT 84010  276Scubo0Wet  2015   -I    a  BVILDING PERMIT STTE PLAN  Robert) McArthurs Sludis "-RGMInc.-m Suioowas FALSEPAN         JNIT  UNTE: ms  i tBr  s  KEYED_NOTES 0 NEW4 4 PVC 5S LAT 23 MN SLOPE NEW 1 WATER SERVICE AND METER NEW DRIVE APPROACHES ASF PER ary EXISTNG CURB AND GUTTER EXISTING 4 SIDENALK 0 NEW CONCRETE DRIVEWAY  SITE PLAN  SITE PLAN  ORTGINAL    300 SOUTH STREET CURBEGUTTER SIDEWALK 132  FSLEEVE  9-0" 1-0"  DE  PROPOSED SITE PLAN  85     Rolert.McArthur Sludios -RGMInc- IsS