HolladayDigest

• Public Hearing notice deficiency

  for the "Amare Vita" application (one day short of the required 10-day notice period), requiring the hearing to be continued rather than closed

• "Oly Vista" Subdivision Amendment

  (Action Item): Proposed boundary expansion at 4877 South Holladay Boulevard, adding a 15-ft × 140.84-ft strip of land on the east side of the existing subdivision within the R-1-10 Zone

• "Amare Vita" Residential Subdivision – Conceptual Plan

  Proposal by J.U.B. Engineering to subdivide 11.42 acres into 9 lots across R-1-43 and R-1-87 zones at 6114, 6178, 6190 South Holladay Boulevard and 2715 East 6200 South

  • Split-zone PUD structure (7.18 acres in R-1-43; 4.29 acres in R-1-87)
  • Big Cottonwood Creek setback requirements (100-ft for undeveloped parcels; 50-ft for developed parcels)
  • Variance request for reduced minimum lot widths on the east side of the creek
  • Proposed private road with singular entrance on Murray Holladay side and secondary entrance on 6200 South
  • Creek corridor preservation, tree canopy preservation, and open space considerations
  • Front yard setback flexibility for garages along private road
  • Fence/wall along Holladay Boulevard (incorporated into design, not required)
  • CC&R limitations on property sales within the PUD

• "Amare Vita" – PUD Conditional Use Permit

  (Discussion Item 1A): Review of request to subdivide 11.42 acres as a Planned Unit Development under Holladay Ordinance §13.08.040

• "Amare Vita" – Preliminary Plan/Plat

  (Discussion Item 1B): Preliminary-level review of development details under R-1-43 and R-1-83 zone compliance standards per Holladay Ordinance §13.10A

• Meeting Minutes review

  May 6, 2025 (no amendments); July 15, 2025 (typo identified on Page 12 — "Ms. March" should read "Ms. Marsh")

• Public Hearing for "Amare Vita" Residential Subdivision Continued

  Due to the public notice being one day short of the required 10-day period, the Public Hearing was opened and immediately continued. The Planning Commission retained the ability to discuss the item but could not close the hearing.

(Note: The minutes as provided are truncated before any additional formal decisions on the "Oly Vista" amendment or "Amare Vita" Discussion Items are recorded.)

Vote 1 — Continue Public Hearing: "Amare Vita" Residential Subdivision

• Motion

  Commissioner Fonte moved to CONTINUE the Public Hearing for the "Amare Vita" Residential Subdivision

• Second

  Commissioner Gong

• Individual Votes

  • Commissioner Cunningham — Aye
  • Commissioner Fonte — Aye
  • Commissioner Gong — Aye
  • Commissioner Berndt — Aye
  • Chair Roach — Aye

• Outcome

  Motion passed unanimously (5–0)

(Note: No additional votes are recorded in the provided portion of the minutes.)

• Continue Public Hearing for "Amare Vita" to a future meeting with proper notice

  Planning Commission / StaffNotesRequired due to 10-day notice deficiency

• Correct typo in July 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes ("Ms. March" → "Ms. Marsh")

  City Staff (Carrie Marsh)NotesNoted on Page 12 of those minutes

• Applicant to pursue variance for reduced minimum lot widths on east side of creek

  J.U.B. Engineering / ApplicantNotesVariance to be heard by Administrative Appeals Officer; Subdivision approval may be conditioned on variance being granted

• Clarify setback and private road questions with applicant during Regular Meeting discussion

  Planning Commission / Carrie MarshNotesCommissioner Berndt raised questions about setbacks and private road; Ms. Marsh indicated applicant could answer during Regular Meeting

• Further discussion of "Amare Vita" PUD (Item 1A) and Preliminary Plat (Item 1B)

  Planning Commission / City StaffNotesContinued as Discussion Items pending Conceptual Subdivision process

• Agenda reordering

  Chair Roach directed the Commission to consider the "Oly Vista" Subdivision Amendment (Item 2) ahead of other agenda items so the applicant would not have to wait; Items 2 and 3 were also to be discussed before Items 1A and 1B during the Work Session

• LUDMA clarification

  City Attorney Christopherson noted that the State Legislature eliminated public hearing requirements for subdivision modifications under the Land Use, Development, and Management Act (LUDMA) for cities, but Planning Commission approval remains required for subdivision plat amendments

• Creek setback clarification

  Undeveloped parcels require a 100-foot setback from Big Cottonwood Creek; already-developed parcels have a 50-foot setback requirement

• PUD open space/amenity note

  Unlike Holladay Village, there is no requirement for public amenities on private lands in this PUD context; City benefit may include open space or tree preservation

• "Oly Vista" context

  The 15-ft × 140.84-ft strip being added has a slope and existing drainage issues; the addition does not change what is currently permitted on the site; two dwellings are already allowable in the R-1-10 Zone without the extra land

• Opening Statement

  read by Commissioner Cunningham at the start of the Regular Meeting

• Minutes are truncated

  the provided document ends mid-sentence during the presentation of Discussion Item 1A/1B; additional votes, decisions, and action items from the remainder of the meeting are not captured in the text provided