Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Hillside Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission denies variance to build inside 30% slope at 2857 N. Iroquois Drive

5078588 · June 26, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Provo Planning Commission denied a requested variance to allow a new home to encroach on land with slopes greater than 30% at 2857 North Iroquois Drive, citing existing options that avoid the steep slope and public-safety and hillside-stability concerns raised by staff and neighbors.

The Provo Planning Commission on June 25 denied a variance request that would have allowed a new single-family home to encroach on slopes greater than 30% at 2857 North Iroquois Drive in the Rock Canyon neighborhood.

Staff told commissioners the subdivision that created the new lot already included plans showing how a house could be sited without entering the 30% slope area and recommended denial. Jessica Dinecki, a city planner presenting the item, said the application did not meet the code’s variance criteria because the applicant had demonstrated a buildable option that avoided the steep slope.

That recommendation framed the meeting’s central question: whether the property had an ‘‘unreasonable hardship’’ or special circumstances that would justify violating Provo City Code 15.05.160 (hillside development standards). The commission’s discussion repeatedly returned to the hillside code’s hazard and safety intent.

The applicants, who identified themselves as Spencer and Louise, asked the commission for a 15-foot lateral variance (in addition to an existing 10-foot setback) so the proposed new home would sit 25 feet from the neighboring house rather than 10 feet. Spencer said the extra distance would improve vehicle turning and exit safety near a nearby blind hill and reduce fire risk. He told the commission, “we're requesting, what feels like a small variance, but ... we think would be more safely on the property,” and said his packet included geotechnical and structural letters in support.

Neighbors urged denial. Ronald Willie, who said he lives on Rolling Nose Drive, told the commission that construction and earthmoving would worsen erosion and that the proposed driveway location would make sightlines over the hill worse. He said the neighbors supported terracing the slope, not building into it. Colleen Thorstenson, who lives on Apache Lane, added, “That's how steep this hill is,” describing a near-accident while mowing the slope. Several neighbors cited past collisions, mailbox damage, and unstable, sandy soils on the slope.

Commissioners questioned whether the requested change actually improved safety. One commissioner cited a geology course and the purpose of the 30% slope rule, saying, “mother nature always wins” and that the ordinance protects future homeowners from hazard. Another commissioner noted that the subdivision-approved plan already provided a compliant layout and that the existence of a buildable alternative weighs against a variance.

After deliberation, the commission moved to deny the variance request, citing the variance standards on page 3, number 2 (subparts 1, 2, and 3). The motion to deny passed unanimously; the roll call recorded all commissioners present voting to deny. The denial leaves the previously approved subdivision layout — which avoids the 30% slope — as the remaining build option for the lot.

The record shows the commission weighed competing safety claims: the applicants’ desire to alter a driveway/building orientation to improve sightlines and turning, versus staff, engineers, and multiple neighbors who warned that disturbing the slope would raise erosion and fire risks. The denial is final for this review; any future attempt to change the proposed house placement would require a new application that addresses the variance criteria.

Votes at a glance: The planning commission unanimously voted to deny the variance request for 2857 North Iroquois Drive, citing failure to meet required variance subparts 1–3.