Agenda - Planning Commission - 08/05/1997

Home

Page 4 - July 10, 1997 Z.B. qft:, Variance - Residents challenge restaurant's attempts to contain garbage flow Wells v. Board of Adjustment of Salt Lake City Corporation, 936 P.2d 1102 (Utah) 1997 ITJ Partnership and Gastronomy Inc., converted a former Salt Lake City firestation into a restaurant. The restaurant stood next to the border of a historic residential neighborhood. Initially, the restaurant kept its garbage dumpsters inside the building, then moved them to an enclosed rear porch, and later, to the backyard. As business increased, the restaurant generated more and more garbage during the course of a day. In an effort to alleviate the problem, the restaurant tried to move the garbage into neighboring dumpsters but was unsuccessful. As a result, the restaurant was forced to keep two dumpsters in the backyard, and had to empty them at least once a day. Salt Lake City's zoning ordinance required businesses in historic zones to maintain 10-foot landscaped rear yards, free of any obstructions. In addition, commercial property owners had to maintain landscaped buffers of at least 10 feet when their lots abutted res'idential property. In 1994, the restaurant attempted to comply with another ordinance - requiring that dumpsters be enclosed - by requesting a variance to build an enclosure for the two dumpsters. When granting a variance, a Utah board had to make statutory findings that an owner would suffer unreasonable hardship if the ordinance were enforced literally; that special circumstances applied to the property, as opposed to other properties in the district; that the variance was essential for the owner to enjoy a substantial property right; that the variance would not substantially affect the general plan or harm the public interest; and that the spirit of the ordinance would be honored. The city's board of adjustment held a hearing. -It heard testimony that the restaurant needed two dumpsters to handle the volume of garbage and that the dumpsters had been there for more than 10 years. Several residents opposed the variance and testified at the hearing. They claimed the restaurant's hardship stemmed from its own success, not from any problems with the lot; that the restaurant failed to make adequate provisions for the dumpsters during the remodeling phase; and that other restaurants faced similar challenges but managed to comply with the ordinance. The board granted the variance and said the neighborhood should be more concerned with eliminating the garbage problem than with pursuing the buffer Issue. The residents appealed to court, arguing the board's decision was arbitrary, capricious, and illegal because the board failed to make the required statutory findings required by Utah law. The court granted the board judgment without a trial, and the residents appealed again.