Skip to main content
Sandy City, UT Logo
File #: BOA08232024-006819    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Planning Item Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 9/5/2024 In control: Board of Adjustment
On agenda: 9/12/2024 Final action:
Title: Appeal to Review Alleged Error of the Planning Commission for the Willow Creek Country Club Conditional Use Permit 8505 S Willow Creek Drive [Community #18, Willow Creek]
Attachments: 1. Staff Report for Appeal of Willow Creek CC, 2. Exhibit A - Appeal Packet, 3. Exhibit B - Staff Report Code Amendment, 4. Exhibit C - Ordinance 24-15, 5. Exhibit D - Willow Creek CC Response to Appeal
Related files: CA07032024-0006794 (CC), CA07032024-0006794 (CC WS), CA07032024-0006794 (PC), CUP05272024-006775, SPR05172024-006771
Agenda Item Title:

Title

Appeal to Review Alleged Error of the Planning Commission for the Willow Creek Country Club Conditional Use Permit

8505 S Willow Creek Drive

[Community #18, Willow Creek]

Body

Presenter:

Melissa Anderson, Zoning Administrator

Body

Description/Background:

The appellants Steven Harries, Erin Harries, Brad Fogg, Mindy Fogg, Vivian Vonk, and Leonard Furus are represented by Amy C. Walker of Miller Harrison, LLC (“Appellants”). On the Appellants’ behalf, Amy Walker has filed a request with the Sandy City Board of Adjustment to review an alleged error of the Planning Commission’s decision regarding the Willow Creek Country Club's Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary Site Plan Review for the reconstruction and relocation of the existing maintenance area facilities for the property located at approximately 8505 Willow Creek Drive.

See the attached staff report and all exhibits for full details.

Recommended Action and/or Suggested Motion:

Recommendation

The applicant has not met their burden of proving that the Planning Commission decision was so unreasonable as to be arbitrary and capricious. As stated in the ordinance cited, the appellant bears the burden of proving that the land use authority erred. It is not enough to show that one could reasonably reach a different conclusion on the facts if there is a reasonable basis for the decision reached by the Planning Commission.

Based upon the foregoing the Board of Adjustment should conclude that the Planning Commission did not err in making their determination to approve with conditions the Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary Site Plan Review, and adopt the following findings:

Findings:

1. The record of this decision is sufficient and not deficient as demonstrated in the referenced staff reports and associated exhibits and other information in the record; therefore, this matter can be reviewed on the record, and not de novo.

2. The appellants have not...

Click here for full text