The Provo Planning Commission voted 6–1 on Sept. 10 to continue a conditional‑use request from Claudia Esteba for a dance‑hall/event space proposed in Suite 110 of the Wells Fargo building at 86 North University Avenue.

The request would allow an event venue in a downtown core zone; planning staff advised the commission that the building owner had pledged 135 parking spaces for the tenant, and that under city parking rules the proposed occupancy limit would be 540 people. Aaron Ardmore, planning staff, told commissioners that “they have allocated, 135 spaces specifically for this tenant,” and warned that conditional‑use permits run with the land and can be revoked only if code violations occur.

Why it matters: neighbors and several commissioners said the packet and the applicant’s presentation left open key questions about how the venue would meet the city’s noise limits, how vibration would be measured and mitigated in the seven‑story mixed‑use building, and how the business would control occupancy, parking and building security. Multiple residents who live in condominiums above the proposed suite testified that prior tenants in the same space produced intrusive noise and vibration that travelled through the building’s steel structure.

Commissioners and residents pressed the applicant and staff for objective evidence that the venue could meet noise standards at neighboring residences. Commissioner Daniel Gonzales called for on‑site decibel testing at property lines with doors open and closed; several commissioners suggested that a pre‑opening sound study be required before any certificate of occupancy is issued so the commission or staff would not have to rely on police complaints to determine compliance.

Residents described prior experience when a restaurant and occasional dance events occupied the same space. Vanessa DeHart, who said she lives in the Wells Fargo building, told the commission: “The information in this packet is misleading.” Brad Moss, who said he is HOA president and property manager for the building, said the building and its parking structure have multiple owners and questioned the assertion that 135 spaces could be exclusively reserved for the venue.

Commissioners also discussed how the city’s noise code measures decibels “across the real property boundary” and that commercial adjacencies inside a mixed‑use downtown zone are measured differently than a residential zone. Planning staff noted that the city already has code provisions that can require security staff for establishments serving alcohol or for events above certain size thresholds; those enforcement tools would apply if the venue began operations.

Action and next steps: Commissioner Harvey DeSoto moved to continue the item and asked that the owner come back with a plan including: decibel measurements at property lines (doors open and closed); a described method to regulate occupancy and count attendees; a parking and enforcement plan showing how allotted spaces will be protected; a security plan for events (noting the city code already allows the police to require security when warranted); a food‑and‑beverage plan including whether alcohol will be served; and any planned acoustical mitigation. The motion passed 6–1. The continuation leaves the conditional‑use application open; the commission will reconsider the item when the owner returns with the requested testing and plans.

Context and limits: The commission and staff emphasized that conditional‑use approval would “run with the land,” meaning any future owner could use the space for the approved purpose unless the permit is revoked for code violations. Commissioners said denial requires specific findings that a proposed use would unreasonably interfere with lawful uses nearby; several commissioners said the current record lacks the objective evidence needed to make such findings. The applicant signaled willingness to consider shifting the planned use toward a corporate event/meeting center and to perform sound testing, but the owner was not present at the hearing.