Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setbacks Lot Coverage Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Salt Lake City grants 30‑day continuance for variance request at 871 W. 400 North; applicant to provide targeted briefing
Summary
An appeals hearing officer granted a 30‑day continuance for the variance request at 871 West 400 North (PLN 202500198). Applicant Tim Fotu and his son described construction and permit history and asked the city to consider alternatives, including acquiring a 6‑foot strip; the city said a street‑vacation would require city council action.
Salt Lake City granted a 30‑day continuance on a variance request for 871 West 400 North to allow the applicant to submit focused written materials addressing the variance standards, Appeals Hearing Officer Matt Worthland said at a remote hearing.
Tim Fotu, the property owner and applicant, described the lot, construction sequence and neighborhood history and asked for help after the city identified several setback and lot-coverage issues. “I just need to ask to see what else I can do to save a home for my family,” Fotu told the hearing, describing the project as a family home for relatives from Hawaii.
The application (PLN 202500198) seeks reduced setbacks and an increase in lot coverage. Staff reported the zone requires a maximum 40% lot coverage; the project’s coverage was reported at about 49% in the staff report. Staff also identified an average side-yard setback of roughly 8 feet on comparable buildings and said the proposed west-side setback would be down to about 2 feet under the applicant’s configuration. The hearing officer summarized those staff findings and said the application must show that all variance criteria are met.
The applicant explained he had pulled permits and undergone inspections during construction and described work and costs he said he incurred while readying the lot: the removal of multiple trees, cleanup of debris on an unused corner lot, and plan revisions. He said neighbors had complained that the house was being used as a multiunit rental; the applicant and his son said the dwelling is a single-family home. The applicant told the hearing he has been working with city planner Alicia and with city staff member Casey on options to resolve a roughly 6‑foot strip between the sidewalk and the property line and that staff were exploring whether that strip could be sold or otherwise addressed.
City staff and the hearing officer cautioned that a street vacation or acquisition of public right-of-way is a separate process that generally requires city council action and can be lengthy. A city attorney also clarified that a street vacation would not be resolved in the appeals hearing.
Worthland asked the applicant to file additional written materials focused on how the application meets each statutory variance criterion. “I’ll give you 30 days to produce some additional written materials and additional briefing,” Worthland said. The hearing will be continued after the filing. Worthland also noted that, if the officer issues a final decision, the applicant retains any statutory appeal rights beyond this administrative hearing.
The continuance gives the applicant time to coordinate further with planner Alicia and to submit evidence and legal arguments addressing the specific variance standards cited in the staff report. The applicant said he will submit materials and continue working with city staff on the right‑of‑way question; city staff noted a street vacation would involve council and take additional time.
