Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

1970s rock band.

Is your son still playing lacrosse or has he graduated?

So he will, he had ACL surgery last April, so he's recovering. But he should be good to go. Is he a senior this year?

I'll be at all his games.

I'm sorry. No.

All right. Do you have a son then? No. I love Alta LaCrosse.

Yeah, we went to, I mean, we went to him, but all the games was what he was, you know, what I had to purchase, and then one thing, and I'm like, oh, I just, that was just, yeah, it was, it was great. I was so sad. So, second game.

Yeah, second game.

I don't know. I'm trying to remember if I went to break. I wouldn't be surprised if I did, but my sports memory isn't as good.

The ball game was on the ground.

I was there sort of pressurized.

They ran by us and we all thought they were trying to be first in line. Then they start yelling, fight, fight, fight.

All the police and the administration from the school knew exactly what was going on. And we're just like, what about all the kids? But Jackson was in the stands. You didn't see or hear anything? I was like, did you not see them all go out of their stands?

They were coming from behind the stands. Oh, they were. They walked in concessions to the stands and they masked.

So what I heard is it was two girls.

Oh, really?

And so they ran into the restroom in the house. And a dad ran in a clear mouth before the police got there.

Wow. Well, then another one started in the stands, but right in the center from the ground level to the bottom level of the stands.

Those are the same people?

It might have been. There was just a small group of human neighbors. They come up there and start yelling at me. Me and them, Dad, just kind of let other guys just go.

We'll be available, we'll be assumed. Okay, yeah. But yeah, they were in my class, but I was so frivolous, I didn't even have a story. I see they, a couple days before the game, they took out all of the student section teachers. Oh. And they left just, you know,

No benches. Oh, it's the steps. And they were damaging them when they came out of the building. But they looked down. It's concrete. It's not concrete. It's still the wall. Or is it? Yeah, I think it's just down. Well, hey, it's no benches. In just the student center. Oh, just in the student center. Not the very end of the student center. But yeah, it was not breaking bleachers.

It's not breaking bleachers.

but it's something that's essentially important. Now that we've got our titles figured out, it's possible.

They had a chalk night, so all the students were in those white Home Depot overalls. It was hilarious to see. All these students walking around. One of them bombed her. Like, could you imagine with that many people? People were speaking like, why can't we have coveralls? We've never had this many people fight a coverall. All right.

What's his name?

Oh, yeah, no, my son does not. We stayed at home. Yeah, and he played football, his freshman year. He got hurt in that second game.

A couple of kids got hurt.

So that was earlier, but Mason got hurt. He was sitting out last night, and Mason got hurt first. And he was not playing the second game. And then Jackson got hurt, which was two teams that weren't playing in the second game. And I think that the kid who ended up playing the rest of the season got hurt. I'm sorry. I'm sorry.

I'm sorry. I'm sorry.

Okay, bye.

But yeah, Mason's injury, that was weird. Like, I think that when he went in, they said they really just didn't see that in the doctor. He had a puncture, a laceration, that's what it was. From getting hit. So it was like an impact injury to him.

But an internal injury.

An internal injury.

But didn't break the skin.

Yeah, just getting hit. And the only reason that he knew is that he had symptoms that something was wrong. So they took him in and did a scan to see it. I think he knew it was because he had pain. and it was bad enough that they thought somebody should see somebody. I can't remember, but yeah. That was crazy, but it takes a certain amount of time for that laceration to heal, and they don't allow you to do anything until that amount of time passes and they confirm it. Yeah. So, I mean, I guess you could still like wash but anything that you potentially have for which they don't like to do it.

So we normally have to do our open public meetings training every year. And so Mike was going to flip that up. So while we continue having our dinner.

Recording in progress.

All right, so to complete this, we'll go through these brief slides and presentation and answer the questions and make sure you're all certified for the year as required by state law.

Has anybody else already done open and public training? Is there a chance we've already done it all? Have you done it this year?

We have to do it every year.

Yeah, but I mean, if everybody's already done it,

You look true. I don't think we've all.

So what is the Open and Public Meetings Act? It's the state law that ensures government actions and deliberations are openly conducted. Before we continue, keep in mind that this video is an overview and exceptions may exist based on your entity type. We focus on local government, not state requirements. When in doubt, read the law and consult with your legal counsel. So what's considered an open and public meeting? It's when a public body quorum, also known as a simple majority, meets to discuss or act upon government business. It includes the meetings sometimes referred to as workshops or executive sessions. Regular meetings, public hearings, electronic meetings, and emergency meetings are all open and public meetings. Open and public meetings don't include chance or social meetings. A public hearing is a type of open and public meeting where citizens have a reasonable opportunity to speak. Public hearings happen when a government adopts a budget, imposes or increases taxes or fees or transfers money from an enterprise fund. These meetings have extra notice and posting requirements and won't be addressed in this video. An electronic meeting is a type of open and public meeting that's convened electronically, such as via phone or the internet. Remember, the governing body must adopt a resolution, rule, or ordinance allowing and governing electronic meetings. APMA adds additional requirements, too. An emergency meeting may be held to discuss an urgent matter due to unforeseen circumstances. In order to hold the meeting, the best notice that's feasible is provided of the time, location, and topics to be considered. An attempt is made to contact all governing body members, and a governing body majority approves the meeting. An open and public meeting may be closed to discuss any of the following. A person's character, competence, or health, collective bargaining, litigation, certain real property transactions, including any form of a water right or water shares with specific restrictions, security personnel, devices, or systems deployment, investigations of criminal misconduct, and private or protected information for the Utah Procurement Code, including trade secrets. A closed meeting may be held only if a quorum is present and the meeting was properly noticed. two-thirds of the governing body present at the meeting need to vote yes to close a meeting. Quick math lesson. Two divided by three equals 66.7%. Let's say your governing body has five members present at the meeting. If three out of five members vote yes, that equals 60%, which is not equal or greater than 66.7%, which means you're one member short and would need four out of five members to vote yes. During a closed meeting, a governing body can't interview someone applying to fill an elected position, discuss filling a midterm vacancy or temporary absence, Discuss the character, competence, or health of a person whose name was submitted for consideration to fill of midterm vacancy or temporary absence. Approve any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, contract, or appointment. Or take a vote, unless it's a vote on a motion to end the closed portion of the meeting and return to an open meeting. When a governing body closes a meeting, the following must be publicly announced and entered into the minutes of the open meeting at which the closed meeting was approved. The reason or reasons for holding the closed meeting, the location where the closed meeting will be held, and the vote of each member of the governing body either for or against the motion to close the meeting. If a closed meeting is discussing a person's character, competence, or health, or security personnel, devices, or systems deployment, or several other exceptions, mostly related to state bodies or project entities, no recording or minutes are required. However, the presiding member needs to sign a sworn written statement stating such. If the closed meeting is held for any other reason, a recording must be made, which includes date, time, and place of the meeting, names of members present and absent, and names of all others, except where disclosure would infringe on the confidentiality necessary to fulfill the original purpose of closing the meeting. Regular open and public meetings require 24 hours notice. The public notice includes the meeting agenda, date, time, and place. Public meeting agendas need to include reasonably specified topics to be considered, with each topic listed under a separate agenda item on the meeting agenda. The governing body may not consider a topic in an open meeting that wasn't on the agenda.

Hmm. Hmm. Hmm.

Hmm. Hmm. Notice is posted on the public body's website, in a public location such as the location where the meeting will be held, and on Utah's public notice website in accordance with Utah Code 63G-30-102. Typically, posting on the public notice website is done by the records officer, recorder, or clerk. However, it's the governing body's responsibility to ensure notice is provided. State Archives has prepared a training manual and quick guide for owners and posters, as well as training videos that can be accessed at their website, archives.utah.gov. Written minutes and a recording are kept of all open meetings, with few exceptions. Written minutes include the date, time, and place of the meeting, the names of members present and absent, the substance of all matters, names of citizens providing comments, the substance of the comments provided, any information a body member requests be entered into the minutes or recording, and a record by individual member of each vote taken. A body with elected members must record each vote in list format by category for each action taken by a member, including yes votes, no votes, and absent members next to each member's name. A recording must be a complete and unedited record of all open portions of the meeting from beginning to end and be labeled with the meeting date, time, and place. All or any part of an open meeting may be independently recorded by any person in attendance if the recording does not interfere with the conduct of the meeting. Pending minutes means written minutes of an open meeting in draft form subject to change before being approved by the public body that held the open meeting. Pending minutes must contain a clear indication, such as a draft or pending watermark, that the governing body hasn't yet approved the minutes and that the minutes are subject to change until the public body approves them. Approved minutes means written minutes of an open meeting approved by the public body that held the open meeting. Entities must establish and implement procedures for the public body's approval of written minutes. Public meeting pending minutes, approved minutes, and recordings are public records under GRAMMA. Any individual who publicly presents information relating to an item on the public body's meeting agenda must provide a copy of the information for inclusion in the public record. Make pending minutes available to the public within 30 days. Within three business days after approving written minutes of an open meeting, make approved minutes and any public materials available at the Utah Public Notice website, the entity's primary office, and the entity's website. Within three business days after holding an open meeting, make an audio recording of the open meeting available to the public for listening.

All right, so let's see how we do. True or false, a governing body may not take a vote during a closed meeting unless it's a vote to end the closed portion of the meeting and return to an open meeting.

True or false?

True.

Final answer? That is true. No other votes, but does the Board of Adjustment ever have need to go into a closed meeting? So it doesn't really apply to you guys. Which of the following is an example of when a public hearing is required? Use only one. That is the best answer. Adopting a budget, opposing a tax, increasing a fee, or all of the above.

All of the above. All of the above.

All right. That is correct, although those things require public hearing, not just a meeting. Within three business days after approving written minutes of an open meeting, make approved minutes and any public materials available at the Utah Public Notes website, the entity's primary office, and the entity's website.

True or false?

Four or five here. Regular and open public meetings require 24-hour notice. The public notice includes the meeting agenda, date, time, and place. And the notice is posted at the Utah Public Notice website, the public body's website, and in a public location such as the location in which the meeting will be held. True or false?

True.

That is correct. And five, a public meeting, pending minutes, and approved minutes, and reporting are not public records under grant law.

Government records, access, and . That's false. False.

That is correct. Those are all part of the public record. and we pass with 100%, good job everyone.

Okay. They did teach you how to do math. They did not quiz you on how to do math, thankfully, for all of us involved.

So you are a body of how many?

Seven.

Five. We have five regular members. Then we have up to two alternates.

So in order to constitute a quorum or to pass anything, how many do you need? Three. Yeah, at least three. So if there's three of us, is Tyler coming? It just has to be unanimous. Now, Tyler Shelley, our engineer, will be available. So we have four voting members tonight. Okay.

My understanding though, there's only three of us. It has to be unanimous.

If you're only three, yes. It has to be unanimous. Two out of three is 67%.

No, because your quorum, if not just who's present, it's what your body makeup is. Because you have a body makeup of five members, and in order to have a passing vote, you need at least three. So no matter how many attend, you have to have at least three to have a meeting, to constitute a forum, and then all three of those would have to vote one way or the other on an item in order for any motion to carry, because the minimum voting forum is three members.

But you're not 67% of the entire body.

not just those present. So alternate members can fill in for those regular members that they're not there so that you have at least five or up to five people voting. But in no case can you have less than three voting towards a particular IO.

Am I still an alternate member? Well, that is all the training that we have tonight.

Is there anything else, Darian, that you wanted to provide for our board members tonight?

No, I don't have anything.

I have a question for Steve Maran. Is he OK?

Well, I don't know if he's home. He's attending remotely.

Oh.

Oh, hello.

Hello, Steve. Wondering where you were.

OK. Well, Mr. Chair, if there's no other items that you want to discuss during this, I would suggest bringing the meeting to a recess and reconvene at 6.30.

Do you make the motion to second it? Second. All in favor? I don't need a motion to get a fair giving.

Not necessarily. Do you want to be chairman? No. You don't?

No.

That's the other thing we need to decide. Thank you.

Since it was noticed with this agenda, we just want to do quality for the chair.

I'm just asking.

I don't want to be chair or vice chair.

You don't?

During the next year? I'm going to be gone for six months next year.

We might not have a meeting in six months. We may not, but we need to move it up on the agenda. But I can do it tonight. The last time we had a vote was in December of last year. So do we have to vote on that tonight? You can't say when we've got other regular members here? That's my one question of chair and vice chair. But Jim can't do it, and I'm the only one that's here.

Oh, that's right.

I mean, do you have a picture? I don't want to read it. I'll still stand. Let's look at your bylaws. Okay. All right. I hate to sign it to one of these other guys. I can chair tonight. It's just being in a position all the time. I started this year, and I was going world cruise, but I ended up with 19. I had them all.

No shots in my eye. So we went from L.A. to Miami, through Panama Canal, and then came home, flew to the Buenos Aires and went around Cape Horn to Lima, came home, then flew to Tahiti and took the boat to Singapore. So next year, I'm going to pick it back up to Singapore, and then travel the rest of the world to New York.

Cool. So, yeah. That's super cool. That was my goal when I retired. You and your wife? Yeah. You know that? Mm-hmm. Which crew's life?

Oceana.

Oceana.

Oceana. It's a boat. 200 passengers. They had a crew. Very small. So it's not huge. No, it's very small, yeah. All inclusive. No tipping. No photos. Enjoy. Good for you. Yeah. So hopefully I can go the whole time this time and not have to come home.

Yeah, okay. Yeah. Yeah.

We would go with you as the vice chair, Phyllis, and as the chair for today. And for the agenda, just take the vote at the end of the meeting for the following. And if there is an issue, then.

OK. You can nominate, and I put you on the vote. any member that's a regular member share or might share, whether they're in attendance or not.

We need to wait until the other guy here, I think they have their own member. No, that sounds fun.

Let's just put them together.

No.

They both have it. But it's only regular members who are eligible for that, correct? Yes. Scott Bray, that's why I've been where I've been for 11 years. Brian would be the fastest. Brian will make meetings the fastest. I'm going to go live. I have a phone call from a product planning person.

They do merchants. a couple of our planning commissioners talk so fast. Like, they read the motion and it's just, I can't even talk that fast. And I'm like, no, they should do all the motions.

Some planning commissions, I mean, they write the motion and the findings for you. So it's like, you read it off and it's done, and then you can just record it.

I do have one question. Are we voting on three variances tonight? There's three separate variances in the chart. There's the variance of the 10 feet up front. There's another variance and another variance.

Consider it all as one.

You can't. Yeah. If you are in support of those. Yeah, in support of all of them, then you can just do it all. But if there is a problem with, let's say, one out of the three, They need to deal with that separately.

Or we could use more paper and vote each separately so the minutes run longer.

And the recording could be longer that way too. There's all those benefits to it. I fly to Mexico in the morning. I need all of that. So I'm prepared to make a motion.

right now that we don't need to hear from anybody not yet it's just let's wait until we get into the regular portion speaking and you guys can feel a great about that

Were you going to Mexico?

Danny, would you like to close the meeting and then we can pause the reporting and read around at 6.30?

Make a motion to close the meeting. Meeting adjourned.

To recess until 6.30.

We already did that motion.

We did.

You did and then we passed. Okay. We have to get up and leave before we have to do a third time.

Recording stopped. Okay.

There we go. Now you... Shut up. Oh, an Acer. Acer.

It's 6.30, so we'll begin. We welcome you to tonight's Board of Adjustment meeting. I am the current vice chair of the Board of Adjustment. My name is Jim Edwards. I am joined by my fellow board members, and we'll begin with on the left to introduce themselves.

Josh Chandler.

Matt Hale.

Burke Staker.

Thank you, gentlemen. We're also joined by city staff members and I'll start over here and ask them to introduce themselves and go to the right.

Mike Wilcox city's planning director.

Terian Alcorn senior civil attorney.

And then in the audience we have Travis Ackerman who's our assistant city engineer. Yeah right. More or less. And then we have Melissa Anderson who's our zoning administrator?

Thank you everybody As you may know the Board of Adjustment is a quasi judicial body a quasi judicial body Means that we are like a court, but we aren't judges The Board of Adjustment is empowered under state law and sat in city ordinance to hear variances and appeals of alleged errors from the Planning Commission and or city administration and tonight we'll be hearing a variance and We are not employees of Sandy City, but rather citizens who live in Sandy and have been appointed by this board by the mayor with advice and consent of the city council. We meet at the call of the chairman, normally on the second Thursday of the month at 6.30 p.m. here in the city council chambers. Our meetings are normally preceded by a field trip and often by training by our staff and legal counsel, which the public may attend, and we did take a field trip today to the site location to the lot and took a look at it. So we've seen eyes on target. That's my military speaking. The training regular portion of the meetings can be virtually attended through Zoom webinar as well. Although we may be sympathetic to the desire or need of the applicant or appealant, we are bound to follow the law. We don't legislate or make the laws here that is done by the state legislature and the city council. We may not agree with the law, but we as a board must follow the laws as written. This means that all requirements and ordinance must be met before the board can approve a matter brought before us tonight. And in terms of variance, there are five things in the law that we must meet in order to approve a variance. If those five are met, then we can approve. If not, we're not allowed to approve. And the appealant carries the burden of proof for showing that he or she meets the requirements of those five issues in the law. So we'd like to begin with the Pledge of Allegiance. And I've asked our board member, Matt, if he would do that and join us, please, in the pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you, Matt and everybody. We've had our staff introduction, so the way the agenda will go tonight, we will have a presentation by the petitioner, Then a staff presentation. Then since this is a public hearing, we will open it up to public comment. If you want to make a comment, please come up to the microphone. We would ask that you introduce yourself with your name, address, social security number, and bank account information. So scratch the last two. And then we'll have a response by the petitioner or the applicant. And then we have questions by our board. We can ask questions if we have concerns. The board will then take the matter under discussion. And there will be motions and decisions by the board. So that's how I'll proceed tonight. And we'll begin with a presentation by the petitioner, Mr. Rapley.

Well, we'll actually have staff introduce it.

Just a quick introduction. Staff will just introduce briefly, hand it over to the applicant for their proposal, and then we will follow after that with our staff analysis and recommendation. So this lot is at 10156 South Majestic Canyon Road. The zone is R110. It's also in the sensitivaria overlay zone. This variance is a request to construct a single-family dwelling on a property that has steep slopes. And to do so, there's a couple of other variances to accommodate that proposal. So just briefly, I'll go over that, and then I'll hand it over to the applicant. So to construct a new home on a continuous hillside slope, of 30% or more grade that there is no area that is a 5,000 square foot area that's less than 30. percent slope and so as such there's two sections of the code in the sensitive area overlay zone that we're requesting a variance for or the applicant is requesting and also a variance from the front setback now the front setback would be adjusting from normally a 20-foot front yard setback to a 5-foot setback to the property line, which would actually be 10-foot setback to the back of the sidewalk. And that would be at its closest point. And lastly, for off-street parking, the driveway, there's a portion of that that's in the right-of-way, but it is behind the sidewalk. And so that is the other variance. And for clarification, On the plans, it showed a request for a variance on the side yard for an 8-foot setback, but in the R110 zone, it's an 8-foot minimum setback, and when you combine both sides, it's 20 foot, so 8 and 12. So actually, the side yard, there's no need for a variance for that side yard. So that's the introduction in terms of the application. I'll hand it over to the applicant, and then we'll return later with more information.

Thank you.

Let's see if the slide deck will pop up. Is this it?

We're going to pull it up for you.

OK, perfect. Thank you. If you can't get it pulled up, I'm happy to talk without it. I just have a few things to say. Mike, it's not a huge deal. I can just chat without it. I mainly just wanted to, first of all, just thank the Sandy City team, Mike and Melissa and their team, for helping us get to the point where we're at today. As we know, you walked the site today. It's a challenging lot. It's a steep lot. with the help of Sandy City and Along with my engineering team from CMT engineering focus engineering as well as my engineering team from element design group. I want to thank all of them just for their time and effort that they've put into being able to design a house on this particular lot that limits as much disturbance of the natural landscape as possible While also doing so with being able to build a home safely on this particular lot. It is a safe, it is a steep lot. But with the two years of back and forth between the engineers and the architects and Sandy City, I think we've designed something that meets the safety requirements as well as the limited disturbance on this particular property. So thank you to everybody that's been involved. Thank you Board of Adjustments for coming and giving us the time and attention. that you're giving it and taking time away from your families and personal lives to be here. The presentation was just going to show a couple of renderings of what the house would look like. Matter of fact, there it is. Looks like he just got it up. So there's like a front view, a topical view, and then a back view of the proposed house for this particular piece of property. And while I know that When you're there looking at it, it looks like it's impossible to build a structure on there. We've got engineering teams and architectural teams that have done geotech reports and all the engineering required for this particular lot to be able to build something safely and securely on the piece of property. And yeah, I look forward to seeing the results of tonight's meeting. Thank you so much. MS.

Thank you, Mr. Rapley. We'll now move to hear from staff on this matter.

So we're going to pull up the staff's presentation again. Okay, great. So yeah, these images are just from the street looking south and then from the other side looking north. And so this property, there was evidence submitted by the applicant from Salt Lake County that the property was platted. in when it was under the jurisdiction of Salt Lake County in 1978. In 1995, there was a lot line adjustment. And then in 2012, it was annexed into the city. As such, staff is recognizing this as a legal lot that has some right to a single family home because it's zoned R110 for single family homes. And so that's one of the premises of the application. And staff has also looked at the evidence and determined that impacting the slope is unavoidable because the lot does not meet the minimum usable area of at least 5,000 square foot with at least 50 feet dimension for a single family home. We also looking at the slope analysis that shows that there's steep slopes on the property that it's unavoidable and so a variance would be required. There was also a geotechnical engineering study that was submitted and that states that there's anywhere from 2.5 to 13 feet of undocumented fill and that the development would require significant earthwork to remove the existing undocumented fill soils. Also existing situation here is that there's a number of major utilities that are running through the lot coming through the street and then down the north side of the lot going westward. So we have the Bell Canyon overflow as well as the Bell Canyon pressurized irrigation line with an above ground blow off valve. There's the Cottonwood Improvement District sewer line that's running through the north side, as well as the Sandy City storm drainage pipe. The Sandy City water is in the street. It's available to pour, to hook into. And so, but because of these utilities, The development is best sited on the south side of the lot, avoiding those areas. This is the layout of the proposed home. The variance is to construct the home on the lot where you have steep slopes, otherwise would not be able to build on those without the variance. Reducing the setback from 20 feet to 5 feet to the property line. You can see on the site plan there where the closest point at the garage would be 5 feet to the property line but approximately 10 feet to behind the sidewalk. And the reason being that there's that extra right of way there is because there was no park strip that was developed when the street was originally developed. It's not anticipated that the street is going to be redone with a park strip. And so pulling the development closer to the street is preferable to reduce the impacts to the steep slopes. And then the parking, instead of having the parking driveway in front of the garage to reduce the depth and impact to the slope, is having that parking driveway on the side of the garage and that a portion of that driveway would be in the right-of-way as opposed to completely off-street onto the private property. staff does see these these adjustments to the setback as favorable in terms of reducing the impacts and also locating the development to avoid the utilities on the north side to the extent possible so staff has fair amount of information in the staff report, also findings. In summary of those findings, staff had found that the property is determined to be a legal lot created in Salt Lake County before it was annexed into the city in 2012, which is important. Without that, I don't think the rest of the variance really could be considered. The property is a steeply sloped lot with existing utility infrastructure. And the variance request is not a result of actions that were self-imposed or economic in nature, which is not allowed by state law. But they are for the purpose of avoiding the utility infrastructure, minimizing disturbance to the hillside and the natural vegetation. In the staff report, staff had found that all the criteria required by statute has been met, but with conditions that are listed in the staff report. And so staff recommends that the Board of Adjustment approve the variance based on the findings and analysis in the staff report, but also the conditions, which are very important. Those are listed in the staff report. So the conditions, I'm not going to go through all of them now. I do have them in the slide deck if we do want to refer back to them on the overhead. But they're listed in the staff report. So anyway, that concludes staff presentation. We do have from Public Works, Travis Ackerman, our engineer, who can answer questions about the infrastructure and grading plans and the like. So if you have any questions for us, we'd be happy to answer them.

Yeah. I've got a couple of questions. The slope of the lot as it is, 30% is the maximum allowable for a buildable lot? Normally.

Normally you wouldn't be allowed to build on anything that has a slope of 30% or greater.

And what is the slope of this lot?

There's some portions that are 30% slope, some 50% or more. One of the slides we had was the slope analysis. There's an image of that.

Yeah, I saw that. It said 1,000%, and I didn't know what that meant.

It means it's very steep.

Yeah.

So you have 0% to 30%.

Come on. Then the microphone can hear.

Travis Ackerman, engineer with Salt Lake Air Sandy Public Works. So if you're looking at this, the green would be considered the buildable area, 0% to 30%. Then the orange is from 30 to 50. That's obviously outside the buildable area. Then you have some that's even steeper than 50%. It's not necessarily 1,000%, but that's just the maximum for whoever prepared this graph.

Are there precedents before this of other homes that have been built on such slopes?

Well, we have had variances to build on a lot that we had determined had some legal right to build a single-family home in a residential zone. And typically that was platted in the county and extended to the city. However, in terms of this slope, I don't recall that we've done one before, but during my tenure we definitely haven't had one as steep as this.

We did do one on Wasatch. We did do one on Wasatch at about a hundred and four south was on the east side. I can't remember if you were at that but it was building on 30 percent slopes and it got approved. It was the same thing where it was an old county lot from the 70s.

That one was an uphill slope rather than a downhill. But yes it was still it was a very the majority of that lot was 40 to 50 percent slope or greater.

So we have done these before.

Okay. And the reason for the rule at 30 is because safety, I would imagine?

That's one of the fundamental things, preventing erosion and preventing you know impacts the natural vegetation that impacting those kind of slopes and the vegetation potential for erosion and destabilizing the hillside so has there been any neighborhood concerns that this is extremely dangerous I have not received a written comment to provide for the board from for the public. I haven't received any comment to give you.

I assume there was a public hearing on this. I don't recall hearing anything about, seeing anything about the public hearing in the record. This is a public meeting. Excuse me, there was a neighborhood hearing. Was there a neighborhood hearing?

There was no neighborhood hearing, but there is the, at this meeting you can open the meeting to the public for their comments, either online or in person comments. It's just prior to this I haven't received any emails to provide the board.

Can you show me the slide again that has the layout of the home with the garage and the driveway to the side and am I reading this correctly that those two 10 foot easements, those two parked cars are directly over those easements?

Yes. You'd have to have an easement 20 foot on center of the pipe. And so as a consequence of that and being able to utilize that as a driveway, that there is comments from our public works department Travis Ackerman as well as our public utility group in terms of conditions that would be required to allow for that driveway parking within the easement area and over the pipe

Yeah, so parking in the easement is not a problem. Generally, you're not allowed to build any structures within the easement. This will require a small retaining wall to make that driveway parkable. And we've taken that into consideration. Part of the requirement to upsize that pipe and to use the concrete pipe is so that it can support the weight of that retaining wall.

And if something should ever happen because you're on top of an easement and the utilities needs to access that, Is it the responsibility of the homeowner then to go back and replace it when they're done? They have the easement right to be there, so they can come in and tear out the driveway. Then whose responsibility is it to put it back?

If the driveway gets torn out? Well, let's hope that never happens to them.

Travis, this is Tyler Scheller, other utility engineer with Public Works. But yes, it would be the utility department would go in and if the driveway had to be removed for the storm drain, we would remove it, do what needs to be done with the pipe, and then it would be the responsibility of the homeowner to put it back.

Okay, that was my understanding as well. I just wanted to make sure.

And I don't know if she fully addressed your question about why a 30% slope. So that's a conservative estimate for what is a stable slope. The steeper you get, the less stable they inherently are. You start to get landslides and movement. So 30% slope is conservative. You won't have any problems with stability. As you get steeper, you do start to have those problems. So included in this is a geotech report where they've done a global stability analysis to show that even though it is a steeper slope, it still would be stable with the weight of the house on the slope.

So is that then reliable for a – I mean, if the home should ever, heaven forbid, fall down the hillside, those who put their stamp of approval, those engineers, are they the ones that would be liable for – Correct.

And they have followed standard engineering practice. There's a factor of safety involved. So it's not like we're designing up to the failure point, right? But as with anything, it's a natural soil. There's variance. There's no guarantee that anything would never happen.

Are you trying to say we're not Draper?

We are trying to avoid that, yes. Okay, those are my questions, thank you.

The red line is the lot line on this picture?

Yes, it is, on this particular image, yes, that's the property line.

Where's the sidewalk in relation to the bumper of the cars?

Well, the cars are not in the sidewalk. The sidewalk goes to the gray, the edge of the gray.

Okay, I see it there.

The double line you see at the bottom is the curb and gutter. Okay, got it. Thank you. They're basically parking in the park strip a little bit, where the park strip would have been.

Okay, thank you. Other questions at this time of staff?

I do have questions, but I'd like to open to public comment to see, I want to know what they're doing here and what they think so that we can be factoring that in and ask.

Probably here because there wasn't a good movie tonight.

Probably. So do we need a motion for public?

Yeah. This item, as this item has been noticed in our practice, we'll now invite those from the public in attendance to provide any public related petition, appeal, or request. So if you're here in the audience, please come up, state your name and address. And then after we do those in the audience, we'll move to those on Zoom.

Hi, I'm Sharon Orlando. We live directly across the street from this lot at 10165, majestic canyon road. Obviously we would be directly impacted by any development of this property. I did want to address the comments about no public comment up until this point. That's because none of the neighbors knew anything about this. We were not invited to comment prior to this meeting, so that's why. There is extreme concern amongst all of us about the safety of this development. That lot has been vacant for a reason. It's not buildable. The street is our only means of access to most of the homes on that street, and we are concerned that it will undermine the integrity of the road. So we do have a lot of concerns. I'm hoping some of my neighbors are on the line and can also comment as well. But we do have a lot of concern and hope you will take that in consideration. 50% slope, that's not a good idea to build on anything like that. And that's all I had to share for today. Thank you. Thanks.

Together or separate comment? That's all the comment I see in the room so now we'll move to those if there's comments online on Zoom Mike if you could introduce him please.

If you are joining us via Zoom webinar and would like to speak on this particular item please use the raise your hand feature now and we'll address you one at a time. I see one hand raised. Barbara Luton you may unmute yourself. You can go ahead Mrs. Luton. We can't hear you.

Do we have to unmute the public or can they control that?

I control it but she's been unmuted. So you can go ahead and speak. Make sure your microphone is on. All right. If you're having issues with a mic because we're not able to hear you, you can type your comment into the Q&A feature and we can use that as an alternative. Let's see. I'm not seeing any other hands currently raised. Let's try Ms. Luton. Looks like they rejoined under a different line. Ms. Luton?

Can you hear me now?

We can now. Go ahead.

Thank you so very much. Appreciate it. How are you guys doing today?

Can you state your name and address for the record, please?

I'm Barbara Luton at 10174.

Directly next door.

Yeah, right next door. Exactly. A couple questions I have, and I'm sorry, I'm not the one to be talking about this, because my husband should be, but he's moose hunting. So my first question is, if he, whoever purchased the land, did they, should they know that the lot was not able to be built that way? Can you hear me?

After you're done with your comment we can provide answers to any comments or questions that you have But we want to make sure we get your comments

So that's my first one. And the second one is like we built a garage a year ago and we had a very trying time with Sandy City because of the slope. And we paid a lot of money to go out of the way that we were trying to do. So I'm hoping that whoever is building this property is in coordination with that. My second thing, there was a storm drain like you talked about that has to be overhauled. And with that storm drain, which was just overhauled, does it have to be overhauled again? And the last thing is the wildlife corridor. Is anything being considered about that? Those are my questions. Please. Thank you.

Did someone hear that final comment? I couldn't make it out.

It was regarding the wildlife corridor.

Wildlife corridor. Thank you, Barbara. Thank you.

Okay, I'm not seeing any other hands raised.

I noticed there were some comments in the chat, Mike.

Yeah so typically we don't take public comment through the Q&A chat unless there's a technical issue. So if Mr. Rio, Rhino, if you wanted to use the raise your hand feature and then I can allow you to speak. Looked like you had wanted to provide comment on this. Daniel Rio. Mr. Rhino, you may unmute yourself.

Yeah, Daniel Reno, 10104 South Majestic Canyon Road. So just two houses down. It's a neighboring lot. All I wanted to say was that we have a child. And if that house slides downhill, it's in our yard. So you better be sure it's not going to slide before you approve it. Thanks.

Okay, I'm seeing no other hands.

Okay, hearing no other comments in the room or online, we'll now close the public hearing portion of the meeting. And now we'll turn back to the applicant to provide a response, if they desire, to some of the comments from the public.

Can you hear me?

There we go. There's been comments about concerns with the house sliding down the mountain. Obviously, that's my number one concern. I've got three kids. The last thing I want to have happen is to move into a house where a house is going to slide down the mountain. There's a lot of precedence behind houses being built on homes this steep, and this is why I've taken two years to work with engineering teams and sandy city and different engineering groups to make sure that what is being proposed to be built is absolutely secure for this location and the professionals are putting their license on it and stamping and approving it saying that it is safe to be built on here if they said no I have no interest in building my house on an unsafe lot. So I'll start with that. And then there was a comment about costs. I think the next door neighbor built a garage and they had to go through a big process with Sandy City to get approval to build that. And there was a lot of costs associated with that. There have been lots of costs to me personally associated with getting to this point where we're at right now. buying the lot, engineering fees, architectural fees. So up to this point, yes. So to answer her question, there's been a lot of costs involved to make sure that what we're proposing to be built is safe, it's limiting the disturbance, and we've got engineering and architectural stamps of approvals on that.

Can't remember what other questions I believe the neighbors across the street asked the question about the road Stability if there's a lot of land movement happening on your property the engineers address that when they're looking at the Stability of a home, the road also will be safe and not moving.

So you'll notice in the conditions that we put in here that they have to temporarily shore the road during construction. So this won't be like your traditional open pit with a slope. They'll have to put in sheet piling or something else that would by itself support the road. even if the house were to slide or move or anything else.

You said temporarily. So after the home's built, those temporary blockades?

Yes, they could be taken out. There are options for shoring. Some of them stay in place because they're easier to leave than to take back out, and some of them can be easily taken back out. So there's no requirement that they stay there permanently, only while there's an open pit. And once the foundation and the house is supported, then there's no more risk of the road sloughing down. So the need is temporary.

Are you describing those steel beams they put down and then drill them into the hill like I see on construction sites? Help me visualize how they're going to hold the road in place.

So what you're talking about are pilings. The steel beams are usually not the kind that we're going to use here. These are more, they're sheet pilings, so they're wide and flat. They do have some three-dimensional aspect to them, but it's not like an I-beam. But they do interlock, and you get a series of steel beams that go down into the ground.

As the assistant engineer for the city, are you comfortable with the conditions that we're being asked to approve that this would be safe for the downhill neighbor and that it will safely support the street during excavation, the concerns of the neighbor across the street?

Yes. So I put those conditions together. As far as stability, so there's a little – I guess, misnomer that the house will just slide down the hill. That's not exactly how line slides work. The material just rotates. So it's not like this, if it were to fail, the house wouldn't travel very far. It's not going to end up down on Dimpledale Road or anything. But it has been designed so that even in an earthquake, there's a factor of safety that the house would not, the slope would not fail under the house. So the engineering has been solid. I have no concerns about the engineering. Thanks.

One of them I didn't see in the conditions is the impact upon neighbors during construction. You're going to have to have a pumper truck in there for a while and a concrete truck coming into them. And that's not that wide a road. Is there any conditions to keep the road open for the other neighbors to be moving in and out of their home?

So not as a condition to approval of this? So when they do construction, the contractor to be in the road does have to file for a permit to be in the public right away, and it gets addressed at that time. They submit the profit traffic control and detour routes and everything. So it's not a condition of approval, but it will be addressed in the future. Okay.

But that's... their impact on the road won't be any different than any of the neighbors' impacts when they build their homes. All of them have concrete trucks there. It's just this house hasn't done it yet.

I don't know if there were any other comments that you wanted the applicant to address.

There was other questions regarding the storm drain system and the improvements that were being part of this proposal and Maybe Travis you can speak to what's being required and I can show on the plan Yeah, so there was the comment that the system needs to be upgraded in it and it does we are upgrading well, we are putting the requirement that the system be upsized as part of this and

And they are going to complete an engineering study just to make sure that it is sized right before it's approved.

So it does need to be corrected and you're making him correct it as part of his bill job. Correct.

On this plan you see there's this green line here there's a storm drain line that's 30 30 inch and then it changes to a corrugated metal pipe that's only 15 inches. That's what he's being required to upgrade is that make this into a 30 inch concrete pipe rather than a corrugated metal pipe.

And this is Tyler Shelley. Just to add to that as well, that will need to be a 30-inch pipe. It will go to another box where it will combine with the 18-inch irrigation overflow and this new 30-inch. And then there will be a 36-inch concrete pipe going out. And one thing to just add is, I believe just to the south of there where there is an existing storm, they drain the outlets to the south side of the home that was mentioned. That is to handle the larger flows because that is at a low point in the road. So that's more of the larger, bigger storm events where that would overflow.

Maybe I can just speak to the board and share with you. I'm in that business and installing 30 inch pipe is very expensive. It's hard. It's a lot. They're asking the applicant to do a lot here.

Mr. Abbott, there are a lot of conditions in this. Yeah, I understand. Are you prepared to step up in every condition and pay the cost the city is expecting of you?

Yes, I am.

I have another question. One of the conditions, are you familiar with all nine conditions that were in the staff's report?

I've gone through them, yeah.

You were okay with all of them? Yeah. Okay, one of them specifically, number six, is that the footprint not be larger than 1885 square feet. Can you go to the site plan, Mike? And on the site plan, if you add up the walkout porch, the living space, and the garage, you're at – I just had it on my calculator.

1815?

You're at 1815. That doesn't include the area on the front porch. And so I'm wondering if our condition here is going to be too strict and it doesn't allow that to be built.

What was the total allowable in the condition?

The condition reads 1885. What I'm adding up in these three is 1815, and it looks like it's missing a 5 foot by 40 foot porch. 5 foot by 30 foot porch. Another 150 feet, so I think it's 100 feet short.

Yeah, go ahead. There was a slight discrepancy on the different plans, the architectural set versus the civil set. And I believe we went with the higher portion. I can re-look at the numbers.

I think my architect is on line, and he put a lot of these things together. I don't know if John's available to address that.

I just think this is one of the biggest conditions because you're also agreeing in the future nothing will ever expand beyond that. Right.

I see it. Yes, that is correct.

Yeah.

yeah we that's been a big part of the last year and a half is coming to the exact size of the footprint that we've came to an agreement on with the city and um originally john i don't know if john's online yeah do you guys do you guys hear me yes we do awesome hey nice nice to be with all of you tonight um yeah i would go off we kept going back and forth because i know that there's in your code and um

is I think that some portions weren't counted and some portions were. And so I would go off of what's on the architectural because we went through staff on how to calculate that. So I think ours is a little bit greater than the civil drawings. So I'd probably follow ours.

I don't know which one is the architectural versus the civil.

And what do you have? What is your square footage on there? I'm adding it up here. You've called out the walkout porch on the rear porch. the living space and the garage, but the front porch square footage is not rolled out.

And I need to go, I need to dig in our drawings, but I'm pretty sure, if I remember correctly, I think your code explicitly doesn't have us count the garage.

No, well, that's the definition, but what we're, in the condition of approval, it includes the garage.

Okay.

Give me.

So I had 1,815. Is that what you had, Burke?

Yeah, that's what I added up. But the staff report says, well, I measured 1,815, and the staff report says 1,885. Exactly. Yeah, so I don't know. That doesn't.

Give me three minutes, and I'm going to hurry and calculate it in the native drawing. Yeah.

What's the square footage on the porch? The front porch? Yeah. Yeah.

What?

While he's calculating that, I've got another question for you. I won't ask that. Do you desire to build a two-story home there, or do you just want to build a Rambler?

I'm perfectly happy with just the Rambler.

Okay, so Scott hasn't said you, because I think we have the right, we do, to limit your envelope here, but not necessarily your living space to go vertical. Well, I think there was a...

There was a... height requirement that we had to stay within. Cause originally we, I did want a second story.

Right.

Um, but after going back and forth with the city, there was a height requirement. And so we weren't able to meet that.

Is it measured between the average of the front and the back of the lot?

It's the average finished grade to the peak of the roof measured on the front and the sides.

So steep down the back.

Yeah, exactly. Okay.

So we ended up going with the Rambler style and that's perfectly fine.

And part of the conditions regarding the The front yard setback variance that they're requesting to keep that house from going further to the west and further down the hill, part of that exchange of reducing that setback we thought it would also be appropriate to keep it as a Rambler single level from the home so you didn't have that two story sitting very close to the street to disrupt the neighborhood continuity across there. So that was another consideration that we had.

That's a staff consideration. I feel like this is a platted lot from 1978. I heard somebody say it's unbuildable. I think a platted lot you're entitled to build on. And I don't know what the rest of the board feels. That's where I'm coming from. And I think you're entitled to build what you want on it. But if it's going beyond the 35 feet or whatever for the advertising, the two-story doesn't work, then the two-story doesn't work.

On the south side of the lot, where the home encroaches within the 10-foot setback, it's actually eight. I know you mentioned that earlier. That is no less than eight, right?

Yeah. I don't remember what the exact encroachment is, but I was told that we're within the bounds, that variance isn't needed on that side.

Yeah. On the side, the side setbacks in the R110 are a minimum of 8 feet, and the total of both side setbacks is a minimum of 20 feet. So that could be 8 and 12. So that's why I just want to confirm that that's not worse than 8. Right. Yes, it's a minimum of eight.

And we're within that.

Yes, we don't need a variance.

The other picture showed, the topical picture showed the home to the south has a parking area right up against that boundary, the red boundary line. I would assume part of the conditions is making sure their lot doesn't, get eroded or cave in. Because getting that close, you're going to have your excavators and all sorts of stuff digging out. If it's eight feet where the house is going to be, you're going to be dug out a couple, three feet more than that.

They're going to have to retain all that.

Yeah.

I don't know if that's something you want to discuss.

All of that will have to be retained and taken into consideration. Somebody far more technical than me can answer that question, but for sure. Okay.

Three children.

Yeah.

Ages?

My oldest is 12, almost 13, and then his boy, and then I've got two girls, 10 and almost 8. No, just turned 8.

Where's your yard?

Where's my yard?

Where's your yard? Where are they going to play?

We don't have one. We'd love a backyard, but I understand the specific condition. Our yard is the ski resorts. That's where our yard is going to be. We're conceding to not have a yard in our house in exchange for being right next to the mountains.

It's not part of the decision. I'm just curious. Yeah.

Yeah. I mean, obviously, we took that into consideration.

You're not going to have a backyard.

Yeah.

I'm not sure you want them out in the street.

Yeah.

Just invest in some sidewalk chalk or something. Yeah, exactly. Are you a developer, or do you plan on building this and living in it yourself?

I'm not a developer, no. So I bought this two and a half years ago with the plan to build it, move in, live in it. We're two and a half years into it. We're in Bountiful. My kids have gotten older. They're pretty ingrained in Bountiful right now. So right now it's up in the air.

Mr. Chair, I'm ready to make a motion once we get this approved. I got the square footage.

I'm waiting to hear from Dave online. Dave, are you back with the answer? John. Oh, John, the architect? Yeah, yeah, you hear me? Would you please give your full name and your firm, please, for the record?

Yeah, it's John Galbraith with Element Design Collective. I'm the licensed architect on it.

What's the square footage in the front porch?

So, well... Okay, my total square footage, excluding the walkout porch, is just over 1,800. It's like 1,803. And then with the walkout porch on the back, that approximately 132, I'm at 1,932 feet. That's the entire footprint, including the garage and everything. And you're stating... What's the front porch? The front porch, let me tell you what that exact square footage is.

But that was part of the 1932 total?

Yes. The 1932 is including the walkout porch in the back. The front porch is 140 square feet. 140?

And the engineered plan that was submitted that's what we based the condition of approval was based on the square footage that was shown on their engineered site plan and we were showing 1885 on that.

So would that need to get changed to 1932?

That depends on the board's decision regarding the case, whether you want to allow a little bit bigger of a footprint than what was shown on the engineered site plan.

And maybe I'm wrong. I was maybe under the impression that the front of the house, like in front of the home where the landscape and the porch is, we were okay to do some things there, because that's not going to affect any of the natural landscape on the property, whereas it's behind the house was the concern. And so I was kind of thinking the front porch was, I don't want to say a non-issue, but wasn't a factor in that, but I could be wrong.

yet the condition reads it is the porch that dark green friend we need to know the square footage for the board we're looking at this site essentially we just need to know what the total is what i'm looking at make sense The staff before had an 1885. Well, I think that's larger than 1885. I think it's actually 1955 if that porch is another 140 feet. So I think that's reasonable, and I would make the condition at 6. I would propose the condition number 6 but modify the square footage to 1955. Do you want to make a motion for that? Well, I will when I make my motion.

For what it's worth, I would favor that adjustment rather than trying to confine them to the number that we have in the condition as it's drafted here. I think that adjustment's reasonable and not a huge swing in the size of the space there. Okay. Thank you.

You mentioned you wanted to do other things up there. Increasing the porch? Are we giving you enough for the porch?

Um... Yeah, I mean, it's a good-sized porch. The only thing that I would maybe request at some point, to your point with having kids, is if there's any space in the back to be able to do anything behind the home.

I think you've got 10 feet up to a max of 55 is what the... The condition is.

So 55 feet as measured from the front property line. And the reason why we are proposing that the way we are it's to limit this footprint sliding further west and to limit the total square footage of what what it is that you're getting allotted and that is in the case that you aren't able to build this particular home or sell it to somebody else. This variance runs with the land. And so we're trying to adapt conditions that we deem where on the lot it's buildable and how much disturbance beyond the footprint of the home could be done in order to construct the home. The purpose of getting a variance is not to provide every amenity that you possibly could have on a given lot but to allow the primary use of the lot which is to have a home. not necessarily a yard or pool or the pickleball court or those types of things. But it's to have primary use of the home which is which is the structure of the facility of the home.

And we're using the basis of when this application was submitted at the time the minimum lot or minimum dwelling size in the R-110 was 1,300 square feet as defined by the code in terms of living area. It did not include a basement and it does not include a garage. So if you take 1,300 plus the garage at that would be about 1,700 square feet in terms of the footprint, not counting the basement. So I just wanted to put that as the baseline of what we're using as the reference point and what we have done in the past, too, if you compare that to the condition of approval of how much

Does the code require 1300 square feet of livable space above grade.

No it's.

Yes.

Well then this plan doesn't have that.

It does.

You're counting garages livable space. No. I'm looking at it and it says one thousand one hundred and sixty six.

It looks like they've included the walk out porch.

So the total square footage of the structure is both the above and below grade. The minimum that's required in the code is the footprint. So it's thirteen hundred minimum footprint. of the of the home plus 400 square feet for the garage so a total of 1700 is the absolute minimum that the board would need to approve. It's within your discretion also to allow for an allowance above that if you feel that that's suitable.

Yeah, I mean, of course, if you're open to allowing beyond that, I'm happy. That'd be great. But we tried to keep this as tight as possible to limit the amount of disturbance to the property. But if we could go a little bigger, that would be great as well.

I think the 1955 reflects what they're actually doing.

I'm not open to going above that. You'll just have to go to the security door to play.

Yeah, and that's great.

We just want to make sure that you don't have to come back, that we've got the ports there and it's included so there's no question coming out of this meeting what's allowed.

Yeah, perfect. And that's exactly what we're here to ask for.

By the way, one other quick question on the condition number four where it talks about the – The proposed driveway over the storm drainpipe must be able to handle the weight of a Vactor truck. What is a Vactor truck and what is pump?

I can help with that, Travis.

Go ahead, Tyler.

Again, Tyler Shelley, Public Utilities. So a vector truck is a truck where they'll basically go in and vacuum out any sediment or debris in a manhole or box, in this case. So we need to be able to drive on that driveway. And it essentially needs to be thick enough to handle it.

And reach that box that you can see Yeah Okay, and that's gonna easily support the weight of two vehicles like it shows there because they're gonna be less than the factor truck itself Any other questions for me Any other questions from any members of the board to anybody in the audience or any members I

Burke, you say you have a motion?

Yeah, just discussion. I mean, just discuss amongst us I'm okay with everything. Does anybody have any concerns that they want to address? My motion is going to be to support this with the findings that the staff's outlined.

Findings and the conditions. Findings and the conditions. Yeah, I think as long as the conditions are there. We've heard some concerns. I think they're valid concerns. But I think they're also concerns that have been taken into consideration. And that's the point of these conditions that are in place here to protect the neighbors, protect the neighborhood.

You know look out for the safety but also all of the other considerations for the people that are living in the area So as far as I'm concerned, I think that those I agree and And I share those same concerns that the neighbors have expressed because we've seen the property and we've seen the slope and it looks very dangerous and but if but I'm not the professional engineer and And if those who are are assuming full liability and responsibility for anything that happens in the street or the neighbor's property or, you know, the utilities, because they're the ones that are the professionals saying we've evaluated this and it is safe to build this home on this property with these conditions, then if something should happen, they assume that responsibility, then I'm okay with it.

I'm okay also. Go ahead, Mike.

I just wanted to, before you made a motion, there was one other comment that was made that we did not talk about. There was a question regarding a wildlife corridor or anything that's been considered as part of that. So typically when we talk about wildlife corridors, that's part of the sensitive area review that typically is addressed during subdivision review and not necessarily on a lot by lot basis. And so there was no wildlife corridor that was prescribed when the subdivision occurred on this particular lot. However with within that easement area that is shown here on the plan. I believe that easement would also restrict certain types of fencing or any fencing because it would inhibit and and prohibit the flow of that drainage channel and impact utilities ability to make to maintain that area. Tyler or Travis could speak to that but I believe that easement would effectively provide somewhat of a corridor through there that would prohibit some of the fencing.

I mean, easements in general don't prohibit fencing, but you're saying this one would.

It might. I don't know for sure, and that's where our city engineer could speak to that.

You know, and they have to deal with the channel. Fences go over.

So the easement doesn't prohibit a fence. It does prohibit structures. This will daylight out the back, so they do have to accommodate water flowing through the back of the property. So if they put a fence, they would have to be specially designed.

And any fence in the 30 percent corridor is required to be a black brown or green vinyl coated chain link fence so that they're limited to the type of fence so it couldn't be a solid barrier fence or things of that nature. It couldn't be a white vinyl fence.

I have one comment and that is it's going to be a single story house. Does that block the view of the neighbors across the street.

They don't have an easement for a view.

I thought that's what you're going to talk about and block your view.

We can't be having conversation that's not picked up in the mics and we have to close the public comment. Just a reminder to the board.

Before we move on, is your motion going to include Expanding condition six to the proper footage 1900.

Okay, 1955, okay Okay, then I'll take a motion mr. Chair I'd like to make a motion that we approve the requested variances outlined in the staff report for the property located at one zero one five six five six South Majestic Canyon Road that our findings are The findings found in the staff report numbered one through nine and the conditions found in the staff report numbered one through nine with a modification to condition number six to provide a footprint no larger than 1,955 square feet. Do I hear a second? I second it.

Alicia if you'd lead us through the voting please. Burke Staker aye. Matt Hale aye. Josh Chandler yes. Jim Edwards yes. This motion carries.

Staff just had a quick question on the motion.

OK go ahead. That the total square footage includes the garage and the front porch and the rear porch as presented in the site plan. Correct.

I think we're done with that. I do. Are there any other? I think that we'll hold off on elections for chair and vice chair.

I think she said we had to do it. So let's just do it.

We do need to proceed. So, yeah.

I have a motion on that. Okay. I'd like to make a motion that we elect Brian Jones as chair for next year and Tyler Brown as vice chair. I hear a second. I'll second.

Okay. Sorry, who was the vice chair? Tyler Brown. Have you talked to him? No, he'll do it.

That's a gift for not being here.

Burke-Staker? Yes.

Matt Hale? Yes. Josh Chandler?

Yes.

Jim Edwards? Yes. This motion carries.

With that being the conclusion of our business, I'll take a motion to conclude the Board of Adjustment meeting.

Motion to adjourn.

Motion to adjourn. Second. Okay. All in favor?

Unanimous.

Aye. Okay. Thank you.

Have fun. How long?

A week. Oh, screw work. Nice to meet you.

I hate my job. Oh, enjoy. Enjoy your time.