Snyderville Planning Commission declines ADU approval for Park East 3, asks owner to return with details

The Snyderville Basin Planning Commission on a December meeting declined to approve a conditional use permit to place an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) in Unit 47 of the Park East 3 commercial complex, citing parking uncertainty and the building’s three separate kitchens and entrances.

Planner Laura Kuhnmeier told the commission the application would locate the ADU on the first floor because building‑code and egress requirements prevented the originally proposed third‑floor placement. Staff recommended approval with conditions limiting the ADU to the outlined square footage and prohibiting residential conversions elsewhere in the unit. “There are three kitchens in the building,” Kuhnmeier said, raising staff’s primary concern that the floor plan could be interpreted as multiple residential units.

Applicant architect John Davis said the owner intends to occupy the unit and that the site would function as a part‑time satellite office for an out‑of‑area business. “The owner plans to occupy the entire unit,” Davis said, adding he expected only one employee/tenant on site most of the time.

Commissioners pressed several practical questions: how the single‑occupant narrative squares with three separate kitchens and entrances; whether the recorded parking management plan and HOA enforcement are sufficient to prevent spillover street parking; and whether the ADU conditions allow more than one resident. Commissioner Cook noted a conflict between the applicant’s narrative and the plan language, saying the conditions could be read as permitting multiple residents even if the applicant says there will be one.

An online speaker identifying himself as the Park East HOA president said shared parking is already strained and described seeing about 50 cars on the street near the complex. “All the parking in Park East 2 and Park East 3 now have become shared parking,” the HOA president said, urging caution.

A motion to approve the ADU, moved by Commissioner Holly and seconded by Commissioner Nagel, failed on a roll call where several commissioners voted no. Rather than deny the application outright, the commission voted to continue the item to a date uncertain so the owner can appear (in person or by Zoom) and provide more detail on operations and parking management.

Next steps: staff will attempt to contact the owner to get additional operational information and the application will return to the commission after the applicant provides clarifying documentation and testimony.