Planning staff recommends more review for proposed church at former Wells Fargo on Bridal Boulevard

Cottonwood Heights planning staff on May 7 recommended the Planning Commission continue consideration of a conditional use permit application (CV 25004) to allow the Beneficent Spiritus Center, UDV, to operate a church from the existing Wells Fargo building on Bridal Boulevard.

The recommendation follows late changes to the applicant’s parking plan and outstanding questions about whether on‑ and off‑site stalls will be available to meet demand. Staff said the congregation is about 47 members and normally meets twice a month — the first and third Saturday evenings — with services starting about 8 p.m. and ending just after midnight. The applicant’s narrative also allows “1 to 2 additional gatherings per month,” the staff presentation said.

Staff explained why the change in the parking plan prompted a request for more time. The original submittal showed about 14 painted stalls on site plus use of spaces at the Brighton Point Shopping Center across the street for overflow, bringing a total to about 20–21 stalls. A late amendment, received after business hours, said the applicant could not secure the Brighton Point spaces and instead proposes to use four stalls beneath the site’s drive‑through canopy and on‑street parking along Bangor Boulevard. Staff told the commission those on‑street spaces cannot be counted toward a site’s minimum parking requirement because public right‑of‑way spaces cannot be reserved for a single use.

“Conditional uses are entitled to approval. They shall be approved,” a planning staff member said during the presentation while explaining the conditional‑use standard and the need to focus on reasonable mitigation for detriments such as parking and traffic. Staff said typical new development parking standards would require about 24 stalls for a new church of the stated size (using the city’s usual half‑stall‑per‑attendee conservative metric), but because no structural expansion is proposed the permit is being reviewed under the conditional‑use detriment standard rather than a full redevelopment review.

Staff identified two primary concerns to analyze: (1) potential nuisances from noise, light and late‑hour activity if services start near 8 p.m., and (2) parking and traffic impacts during the occasional full‑congregation gatherings. The applicant proposes two mitigations in the narrative: orienting vehicles to back into a northern row to avoid headlights shining into the neighborhood, and restricting/preventing pre/post‑service outdoor congregating. Staff said the city’s outdoor lighting and nuisance ordinances would also apply.

Because the applicant indicated it could not secure the cross‑lot parking arrangement it had initially claimed, staff recommended continuing the item one meeting so staff can analyze the revised plan and propose conditions, including whether a written shared‑use agreement with an off‑site property owner would be necessary. Staff said a shared‑use or shared‑parking agreement — if offered — typically would be submitted in writing and reviewed by the city attorney.

Staff also noted the Utah Religious Land Use Act (as echoed in state law) constrains how municipalities may impose conditions on religious uses and requires the city to avoid imposing a substantial burden on the exercise of religion unless there is a compelling interest and the condition is the least restrictive means of addressing it. For that reason, staff said they intended any conditions to address measurable physical impacts (parking, traffic, lighting, noise) rather than hours or methods of worship.

The staff presentation also noted the applicant is expected to be a tenant, with property owner consent on file, and that the site is roughly a half‑acre and not located within the city’s Gateway Overlay District, so the project does not trigger gateway design review. Staff said no neighborhood comments had been received as of the meeting, but that notices had been mailed and posted.

No final land‑use action on the church application was recorded in the work session transcript; staff’s recommendation was to continue the item to the next meeting to allow the parking and mitigation analysis to be completed.

Ending

Staff will return with an updated analysis and proposed conditions after reviewing the late amendment and any shared‑use documentation the applicant can provide. The commission asked staff to request the current fire‑code occupancy for the space and to ask the applicant whether it had discussed overflow parking with adjacent religious or commercial property owners.