Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Subdivision topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Weber County staff recommend, chair approves Reece Subdivision boundary amendment

3410750 · May 20, 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

At a Weber County administrative review meeting, staff recommended approval of a subdivision boundary adjustment in the Forest Valley 3 zone subject to a recorded easement termination; the meeting chair approved the amendment and the prior meeting minutes and then adjourned.

At a Weber County administrative review meeting, Steve Burton, who said he was filling in for Rick Grover, approved an amendment to the Reece Subdivision in the Forest Valley 3 (FV‑3) zone and approved the May 17, 2023, meeting minutes as written.

Tammy, a staff member, told the review body the applicant sought a boundary adjustment between Lots 1 and 2 to create buildable area and to vacate a private access easement. Staff told the review body the County Surveyor's Office indicated a termination of the private access easement must be signed by all affected parties and recorded with the final plat. Because there are existing homes on the parcels, staff did not request water or sewer feasibility; staff also said the lots still meet the minimum area and width for FV‑3. Staff recommended approval subject to a recorded document, signed by all adjacent lot owners, vacating the private access easement.

No members of the public spoke in the meeting. Burton stated he would approve the subdivision amendment as presented in the staff report and then adjourned the meeting.

Next steps noted in the record are administrative: a termination of the private access easement must be signed by all affected parties and recorded with the final plat before the amendment is finalized. Staff also noted the parcels' size means the owners could potentially subdivide in the future; staff said a future subdivision could prompt additional county requirements if deemed necessary at that time.