Remarks by Cyndi Sharkey
75 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 1 of 3
- Play at 42:57
“Thank you for this report. Yours is a really short presentation in consideration of all the information you've provided us in the report. I really just want to give... a giant pat on the back to public utilities. In both of the management studies that we have received so far, I'm very gratified to have gotten the sense that I've gotten from these two is that we are doing very, very, very well. And that is especially important to recognize public utilities for that because they're an enterprise fund. There is high expectation that they will balance their own budgets and make the revenues and…”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 56:39
“One more thing I just wanted to mention because I found it interesting. Thank you for including it, Jen and Amy. Is this information in the back that's almost like a little bit of an executive summary for us about the cost of running the utilities department in Sandy versus other cities? And once again, it's high level, doesn't have a lot of detail, but it gives us a level of satisfaction that we're also doing a lot for a little. We're operating very lean. We're operating very well. And thank God we're not Salt Lake City. Thank you.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 1:30:13
“Just a question. Obviously, this is just a straight-up rezone request, right? But there was a little bit of a mystery associated with this, and I kind of wanted to ask you about that, Jake, because it seems like you were the one that maybe looked into this a little bit, and that was that you do look at it and you wonder why all the other lots on this street of about the same size have the A designation, but these four don't. And so you wonder how did that condition come to exist, right? And so from what I saw and read, what you found in the record was that the Planning Commission at one time,…”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 1:31:03
“The Planning Commission made a recommendation to the City Council for R-128. consistent with all the other properties on the block right that may not have been listed as the rationale but it would have been consistent all we know since this was so long ago is that the city council chose the resolution that was passed shows r120 so we don't know you you made some kind of effort to figure out Did the City Council take the Planning Commission recommendation and decide against it? Or was there a mistake made by chance in the resolution that it just didn't include an A? Did you try to research as…”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 1:33:10
“Okay. That's different than I thought. I'm glad I asked the question.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 2:13:39
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 2:13:55
“You know what's confusing? You know what? Okay. So we all understand STRs and why and how that happened. We all understand ADUs and why and how that happened. Now we were told we were going to have to comply with detached ADUs. We get it, right? STR, ADU, DADU. You know what's the most confusing part? ELAs. So why did we decide? that we had to define limit control living areas that were not rented but just part of the intended use of the homeowner, why did we need to fold that in here? It seems like that is the complicating and confusing factor.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 2:16:09
“I still don't see calling that out anymore. If you're saying it's been there forever and it's part of our code and we're just trying to clarify. Because an ELA could or could not be an ADU depending on how it was designed, right? If it's completely freestanding, habitable, you could use it as an ADU or you could use it as an ELA It's both a matter of how it is configured and designed and who's going to occupy it. Are they paying rent or are they not paying rent?”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 2:17:46
“You know, that's a good clarification. That's part of it. We care about them more if they're detached than if they're attached, ELAs. OK.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:05:26
“So I guess with a broad brush here, because there's a lot of detail in here, right? I am going to side with Councilmember Stroud on what I see as the wisdom of taking the conservative approach in terms of implementation and learning lessons along the way. So I'd rather dial back to what the state has mandated. And again, like I said, learn those lessons. I doubt that floodgates of construction are going to open up overnight, but I think we do have a lot to learn. And I'd like to take... this education that we're about to embark on and make some good decisions for our community and maybe even…”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:07:45
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:08:17
“So that's the way I'd like our code to read.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:08:26
“But I don't want to do the reduction on proximity to a transit station.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:08:33
“Just a question for staff. When we first looked at this back in April, when you came to us with some concepts and just random bias, we were talking about the maximum building... coverage, was it coverage or size? Or size, yeah. Was it size or was it? It's coverage. Of 50 to 75. Now we didn't, I even watched the meeting all over again, 50 to 75%. We didn't really directly answer the question, but it's coming back to us now at 75.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:10:06
“So once again, it's the either-or equation that you have.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:10:46
“Okay I'm good with that then. Thank you for that. I think I had it a little bit twisted.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:11:08
“But you could have a secondary structure that is 75% of the primary dwelling building coverage and that is also 75% of the square footage of the primary dwelling. Could it wind up that way? So let's say you had a, your primary home is 4,000 square feet. Could you have a detached ADU that was 3,000 square feet under this rule?”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:12:16
“2,000 square feet is the footprint, not the total square footage.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:12:28
“And if you had a second story on top of that you could. And met all the setbacks. To 6,000 square feet. And the height.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:12:43
“And I want to stick with that. I think I saw something from the planning commission that on a large lot you could.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:12:52
“Yeah. I. I would want to keep it. It's either accessory and it's subservient or it's not, right? And so...”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:13:50
“Yeah. Well, it's good to understand that because that's not the maximum size of the structure. That's right. It's just the maximum size of the footprint of the structure, which could also have a basement and a second story.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:14:51
“And to that issue, the subject of decks and balconies, I don't know why we would restrict the DADU from something that the main, provided that the setbacks are met, right? Restrict the DADU from something that would be granted to the main building.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:15:19
“So the breezeway issue, disconnecting the ADU or extended living area by a breezeway. Does that make it attached instead of detached?”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:15:35
“So that could be a problem. That could be a problem.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026