►
From YouTube: Planning Division Appeals Hearing for August 12, 2021
Description
Salt Lake City Planning Division Appeals Hearing for August 12, 2021
B
C
B
C
D
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
E
E
E
The
planning
commission
did
not
do
so
properly
either
because
there
was
not
substantial
evidence
to
support
it
or
the
application.
It
was
illegal
to
approve
it.
So
let
me
say
that
I
have
read
the
material
and
I
think
I
pretty
well
understand
what
is
being
argued
on
all
by
all
involved,
and
so
there
may
not
be
a
need
to
repeat
things,
but
I
would
appreciate
the
comments
that
you
may
have
to
start
us
out,
mr
donohue
and
then
we'll
go
from
there.
C
And
that
is
many
appropriate
times,
such
as
one
when
the
only
community
member
that
spoke
was
speaking
and
two
of
the
commission
members
appeared
to
be
absent,
one
walked
away
from
her
chair
and
the
other
turned
her
screen
off
and
for
all
I
know
she
was
not
there
not
available.
Specifically
when
the
community
member
was
speaking.
C
C
Next,
instead
of
asking
the
applicant
what
the
re,
what
their
reasoning
was
in
certain
decisions
for
the
applicant
they
answered
for
the
applicant-
and
I
believe
the
question
was
looking
to
see
why
it
wasn't
made
into
a
flag
lot.
And
the
commission
answered
for
the
applicant
that
they're
they're
wanting
to
keep
that
free
from
any
flag
lot.
So
they
could
resell
the
property
at
1850.
C
C
C
I'm
familiar
with
meetings
and
and
proceedings
and
being
on
having
been
on
several
committees
and
spending
a
good
deal
of
time
in
administration.
You
have
to
retain
the
structure
of
the
meeting.
Otherwise
it's
a
free-for-all
and
anything
can
happen.
Structure
was
not
maintained
in
this
meeting
and
it
does
not
have
any
legitimate
basis
for
making
a
decision.
C
That's
that's.
The
first
portion
is
the
legitimacy,
and
I
I
find
it
hard
to
believe
that
we're,
even
here
today
with
the
city
having
the
knowledge
that
they
do,
of
how
that
proceeding,
went
that
they
pursued
this.
To
this
point,
it's
wasting
people's
time,
particularly
my
time
I
have
over
80
hours
in
this
of
a
position.
That's
80
hours
of
physician
time
that
I.
A
C
My
patients
have
been
robbed
of
by
this
application.
This
application,
who,
from
the
plan
from
the
beginning,
indicates
two
garages
on
the
plan,
one
at
1844,
one
at
1852,
which
do
not
function
as
garages.
They
have
not
had
cars
in
them.
One
of
them
doesn't
even
have
a
garage
door
garage
doors,
it's
got
garage
doors
on
it,
but
they
were
covered
over
and
I
see
many
people
come
and
go.
They
act
much
more
as
dwellings.
C
C
Next
is
a
very
important
issue,
which
perhaps
the
most
important.
If
people
are
really
interested
in
getting
to
the
truth
of
this
and
being
done
with
it,
they
will
watch
the
sugar
house,
video,
where
the,
where
that
is
where
the
harvath
explained
their
little
plan
to
develop
numerous
lots
in
this
90
year
old,
long-standing
farming
community,
which
was
protected
by
a
decision
made
in
1997
by
the
salt
lake
city
council.
C
C
C
E
F
You
you
mentioned
at
the
outset,
mr
call
that
you've
been
doing
this
for
a
while.
You
are
a
land
use
expert,
and
I
am
fully
aware
of
that,
because
you've
been
the
city's
appeal
hearing
officer
for
a
while.
You
were
the
property
rights,
ombudsman
and
you've
been
involved
in
numerous
land
use
disputes.
So
it
would
be
offensive
for
me
to
try
to
tell
you
at
this
point
what
your
role
is
and
what
the
standards
are.
F
That
there's
no
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
to
show
that
the
decision
was
arbitrary
and
capricious,
and
none
of
that
has
been
provided,
and
I'm
only
saying
this
to
you,
mr
call,
because
I
need
this
on
the
record
you're
fully
aware
of
of
what
the
propellant's
obligation
is
here
and
that
it
has
not
been
met.
I
do
want
to
address
a
couple
of
things
really
briefly.
F
Mr
donohue
mentioned
that
he
has
witnessed
a
lot
of
these
meetings.
I
don't
doubt
that
he's
talking
about
a
sugar
house,
community
council
meeting,
which
is
not
part
of
this
proceeding
sugar
house
community
council
is
not
a
governmental
entity.
It
is
a
private
entity
that
salt
lake
city
recognizes
as
a
community
organization
that
provides
us
with
feedback,
but
it
is
not
a
governmental
entity.
There
is
no
decision
making
that
occurs
there,
and
if
there
is
a
video
of
that
it
wouldn't
be
part
of
the
record.
F
F
One
of
the
commissioners
did
get
up
and
leave
her
desk
momentarily.
I
also
noticed
that
she
had
what
appeared
to
be
an
airpod
in
her
ear
so
that
she
could
continue
to
hear
the
comments
being
made
by
the
magic
of
bluetooth,
and
I
will
tell
you
there
have
been
many
planning
commission
meetings
where
my
camera
has
been
off
to
allow
me
some
conveniences
that
might
not
otherwise
be
available
in
a
meeting.
F
F
I
have
no
reason
to
believe
that
the
commissioner,
whose
camera
was
supposedly
off,
was
not
attending
the
meeting
and
not
listening,
and
then
I
do
want
to.
I
want
to
address
the
the
comment
that
the
commission
chair,
brenda
shear,
made
about
that
the
comments
she
made
to
the
legal
counsel
for
the
applicant
about
being
out
of
order.
F
The
first
part
of
that
statement
was
in
response
to
miss
hales,
trying
to
make
comment,
while
the
commission
had
closed
the
public
hearing
and
was
in
its
deliberative
state.
At
that
point,
the
other
comment
was
about.
The
second
part
of
that
comment
was
about
the
outcome
and
I
don't
think
there's
anything
nefarious
there.
You
know.
F
F
F
F
D
Yes,
thank
you,
this
victoria
hales
on
behalf
of
the
harvest.
We
would
submit
for
your
decision
based
on
the
strengths
of
the
written
materials.
I
have
addressed
the
bias
issues
in
my
rent
and
submissions,
and
the
city
of
salt
lake
also
has
addressed
them.
I
did
re-look
at
the
video
one
planning
commissioner
stands
up
for
12
seconds
and
is
off
screen,
but
no
indication
that
she
wasn't
listening
the
whole
time
as
all
of
us
who
attend
many
of
these
meetings.
D
Many
of
us
go
off
screen
while
we
powder
our
nose
or
have
a
drink
during
a
two-hour
and
40-minute
planning
commission
meeting,
so
I
just
would
submit
based
on
the
strengths
of
the
written
materials,
and
I
understand
that
mr
donahue
doesn't
like
the
decision,
but
disagreeing
with
the
decision
does
not
mean
that
it
is
subject
to
an
appeal.
So
we
would
request
that
you
uphold
the
decision
of
the
planning
commission.
There
is
substantial
evidence
and
mr
donahue
has
not
met
his
burden
of
proof.
Thank
you.
C
C
C
Well,
in
the
first
place,
let
me
let
me
go
back
a
little
bit
more.
Chris
earl
was
quick
to.
Let
me
know
that
if
in
the
commission
hearing,
if
the
information
that
was
presented
was
not
factually
based,
it
would
be
considered
public
clamor
and
that's
very
denigrating
and
demeaning
to
the
public
to
call
it
public
clamor.
These
are
people's
feelings
and
thoughts
about
their
homes,
their
dwellings,
where
their
lives
are
where
their
lives
occur,
and
it
appears
to
me
really.
C
The
planning
division
does
not
take
that
seriously
and
consider
that
and
in
fact
they
they
have
a
disdain
for
it,
calling
it
public
clamor
public
clamors
is
what
chris
reminded
me
that
they
that
they
call
that
I
thought
that
was.
I
thought
that
was
pretty
telling
myself
and-
and
you
know
I
I
know
I
don't
want
to
live
in
a
city
where
people
don't
have
the
thoughts
and
feelings
about
their
homes.
C
C
That
just
doesn't
happen
that
doesn't
have
people
don't
make
those
comments
like
that
and
and
that
all
by
itself
just
negates
this
whole
thing
outside
of
the
fact,
and
you
you'll
note
that
it
has
never
been
disputed,
that
the
two
that
the
two
buildings
on
the
two
lots
which
are
listed
as
garages-
I
live
right
next
door.
I
see
everything
goes
on
over.
C
There
has
people
coming
in
and
going
out
of
them
all
the
time
they
already
have
two
dwellings,
in
my
opinion,
on
each
lot,
and
they
just
want
to
keep
developing
just
like
they
wanted
to
change
the
the
zoning
without
considering
what
the
residents
want.
And
yes,
the
city
attorney's
wrong.
Our
opinion
does
matter.
We
are
the
ones
who
pay
the
money
who
pay,
which,
which
supports
the
checks
that
the
city
employees
get
every
two
weeks.
C
The
fact
that
you
know
david
david,
harbaugh,
cancelled
or
forgot
on
three
occasions
of
a
side
visit
by
an
enforcement
officer
to
see
if
that
garage
was
indeed
a
dwelling
and
so
their
thumb
in
their
nose
at
the
city
in
the
city
sitting
there
supporting
them.
I
I
don't
get
that
I
don't
get
any
of
that.
C
C
So
I
just
want
to
say
if
again,
if
the
integrity
and
standards
of
the
meeting
and
the
procedures
of
the
meeting
are
not
not
appealed
and
they're
even
taken
to
the
point
of
ridiculous
to
the
ridiculous
point
where
the
chairman
is
predicting
the
outcome
of
vote,
that's
insane.
Thank
you
very
much.
I
appreciate
it.
C
And
please
watch
that.
Please
watch
that
video
of
the
sugar
house
council
it's
listed
on
my
on
my
appeal
and
you'll,
see
you
can
see
the
harvest
with
their
plan.
You'll
know
their
real
motivation
and
why,
in
my
opinion,
the
city
planner
should
have
reported
that
back
to
the
city
when
he
knew
that
there
was
a
plan
to
develop
numerous
of
these
lots
in
this
long
standing
as
his
90-year-old
farming
community.