Holladay Digest

March 17th, 2025

Admin Hearing Officer Meeting

View PDF

Topics

Lot Coverage Variance Request
for Holiday Peaks Lot 2 (1691 E Delaware Lane, Holiday, Utah 84117)
- Property size: 0.24 acres (10,451 sq. ft.), zoned R110 (single-family residential)
- Applicable code: City Code Section 13.14.080 (lot coverage regulations)
- Current maximum allowed structural coverage: 31%
- Requested structural coverage: 35% (a 4% variance)
- Current total impervious coverage maximum: 36% (with up to 10% bonus for non-structural impervious surfaces)
City's Tiered Lot Coverage System
how lot size categories determine structural and impervious coverage maximums across different zones
Applicant's "Coverage Inversion" Argument
applicant's claim that the ordinance is inequitable because smaller lots receive higher structural coverage percentages (35%) than larger lots (31%)
City Staff's Rebuttal
staff argued the ordinance is intentionally equitable (not equal), moderating massing and scale relative to lot size; smaller lots receive higher percentages to offset constrained space, while larger lots yield greater absolute structural area
Potential Self-Imposed Hardship
staff flagged that the subdivision (Holiday Peaks) was recently created (rezoned from LDS Church property), and the variance request may stem from buyer preference for a larger home rather than a genuine property-specific hardship
Precedent within Holiday Peaks Subdivision
Lot 5 encountered similar coverage issues; Lots 108 and 109 (same lot size) are currently being permitted within the allowed 31% structural coverage
State Law Variance Criteria
five criteria applicants must meet for a variance; city staff noted the applicant did not clearly address the hardship criterion

Decisions

None recorded.

Votes

None recorded.

Actions

Applicant (Peter Gambrellis / Jake Aruni)
Required to provide sufficient evidence substantiating the existence of a legitimate hardship that would occur if the variance is not granted, including a systematic response to all five state law variance criteria.
City Staff (Justice)
Completed pre-hearing analysis; deferred the hardship determination to the applicant to address during the hearing.

Notes

Hearing Notice
Nakamura clarified at the outset that this is an Administrative Appeals Hearing; attendees seeking Justice Court were directed next door.
Recording
The hearing was noted as being recorded; parties were asked to speak into the microphone for the record.
Holiday Peaks Subdivision Background
The subdivision is relatively new, created after the property was rezoned from ownership by the LDS Church. City staff stated the rezoning intent was not to create a neighborhood distinctively different from surrounding Westmore and Delaware neighborhoods.
Lot 5 Parallel
Another lot within Holiday Peaks (Lot 5) encountered similar structural coverage issues during zoning analysis, suggesting this may be a subdivision-wide concern rather than an isolated case.
Transcript Incomplete
The meeting minutes/transcript ends abruptly mid-sentence during the city staff presentation. No applicant rebuttal, public comment, deliberation, or final ruling is captured in the provided record.

Summarized May 8, 2026

HOLLADAY DIGEST