Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Cottonwood Heights planners review 10-unit live-work ‘Brighton Lofts’ proposal at 3425 E. Bingle Blvd.

2172457 · January 23, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Planning staff recommended approval with conditions for a 10-unit live-work townhouse subdivision at 3425 E. Bingle Boulevard. Commissioners raised concerns about parking, trash collection, ADA access and the lack of a local definition for "live-work."

Cottonwood Heights Planning Commission staff presented a proposed 10-unit live-work townhouse subdivision at 3425 East Bingle Boulevard during the commission’s Jan. 22, 2025 work session, recommending approval with conditions.

Sam, planning staff, told commissioners the project carries two application numbers — a conditional use permit (CUP 24019) and a preliminary subdivision (SUP 24098) — because live-work is a conditional use in the neighborhood commercial zone and any division into separately owned units requires subdivision approval when there are 10 or more units. The applicant is Nathan Anderson.

The project site is 0.48 acres at the corner of Bingle Boulevard and Oak Shadow Circle, immediately across from the Smith’s shopping center. The proposal shows two buildings with five attached units on each side of a central drive aisle, private 2-car garages for each unit, and four surface parking stalls at the north end of the site. The package in the staff packet described the ground-floor spaces as tenant office (the “work” component) and the upper floors as residential townhomes (the “live” component).

Staff said the proposal complies with the city’s dimensional standards for the neighborhood commercial zone: front and west setbacks of 25 feet, an east setback of 10 feet, and a north/rear setback of roughly 28 feet. Maximum building height in the zone is 35 feet; the applicant proposes a 30-foot maximum and staff measured height from existing grade. Sam said grading and any fill would be counted in that measurement and that more detail on grading should be provided during technical review.

Why it matters: planners noted the city’s code…

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to keep reading

Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.

  • Unlimited articles
  • AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
  • Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
  • Follow topics and more locations
  • 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
30-day money-back on paid plans