[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6342417,"mediaKeyId","2255125-a9c1f4f97e1eaf9894292d80a73a59ac","parentId",2255125,"title","Draper partners with Ivory Foundation to reserve seven deed‑restricted homes for city and school employees","audioSeconds",559,"startMs",10037165,"endMs",10597000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2255125-a9c1f4f97e1eaf9894292d80a73a59ac&start=10037&end=10597","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2255125-a9c1f4f97e1eaf9894292d80a73a59ac/thumbnail_10037165.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6342417/Utah/Draper-partners-with-Ivory-Foundation-to-reserve-seven-deedrestricted-homes-for-city-and-school-employees","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6342417-9adf4a7f120e622ef277d016871cf842/orig.mp4?Expires=1771130140&Signature=Qx13eBOMM6nnvW~M6jt5LtI2gCM8Oolm7q43OpIIAQj50PqFA0T2zQNJSIFwgFq69bOZJTSEhSq4rVRghZsV9BXo2kW5BcDU1PhSLGCvoo5AOrLooYvRM5c2y26cYA8QnTsog9RToqsDacUlz8eodYhWLNI2-AQJEsf5~WckBhUxKjkDM~BeHKT3-oQHtZXjxuO0Mgu5OCdRZAza4pJUCkyf5tb0iPuNSzuGjsm9IpWtSSUrfwoK6fWJmhVtbdmH~ZXbBT9t48TBd~tySKRrypP3Q4nmsEwe~TLMKg0yb12oDFXjSL8S4uGKsIkUKHjnhvgSmhKT-R-r3ZrVeiyx8w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Draper City Utah","date","2025-01-07T00:00:00Z","article","The Draper City Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA) approved a resolution to contract with the Clark and Christine Ivory Foundation to reserve seven for‑sale, deed‑restricted homes in the Big Willow neighborhood for Draper City and Canyon School District employees.

Under the approved agreement the CRA will contribute $100,000 per reserved unit in CRA funds. The Ivory Foundation agreed to sell seven units at below-market prices with no developer profit for the designated workforce units. The units are deed-restricted for 50 years with an annual appreciation cap of 4 percent; the city will have a first right to purchase if an owner seeks to sell, and priority reoffering will be to qualified critical-workforce employees. Eligibility targets the 80–120 percent area median income (AMI) band for combined household income; staff said final occupant screening and procedural details will be managed in partnership with a housing-preservation intermediary.

Staff said Phase 7 units will be available as soon as early April; Phase 10 units are expected later in the year. Example prices presented by staff placed three-bedroom townhomes at roughly $430,000–$475,000 with the CRA contribution factored in; the CRA’s housing budget is sufficient for the transaction and the city has a larger CRA fund balance that staff said must be used for affordable housing or be at risk of legislative constraints.

Council and CRA board members commended the Ivory Foundation and CRA staff; the CRA resolution (CRA-25-01) passed unanimously. Staff said they will distribute program details to city and school district employees and coordinate with the foundation and a preservation intermediary on eligibility screening and closing procedures.

Ending: CRA staff will implement outreach to eligible employees, finalize deed-restriction language and complete agreements; the city indicated interest in pursuing additional similar opportunities.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Draper City Council January 7, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Draper Community Reinvestment Agency agreed to contribute funds so seven for‑sale homes in Big Willow will be deed-restricted for critical workforce employees; units will be deed-restricted for 50 years with a 4% annual appreciation cap.","taxTitle","Draper City Council, Draper , Salt Lake County, Utah","taxId",21432,"location","Utah","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6342421,"Council approves Mercer Mountain (Hidden Canyon Estates) development-agreement amendment with narrower road section and slope easements",1625,8363659,9989371,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2255125-a9c1f4f97e1eaf9894292d80a73a59ac&start=8363&end=9989","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2255125-a9c1f4f97e1eaf9894292d80a73a59ac/thumbnail_8363659.jpg","/articles/6342421/Utah/Council-approves-Mercer-Mountain-Hidden-Canyon-Estates-development-agreement-amendment-with-narrower-road-section-and-slope-easements","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6342421-be81204980adb84370ba2a29c4b1ed8d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771130140&Signature=QpbpYov8jPnH4WlS0Wcrqc0Nk6Rl9beekXVEpw68uR7h2HVYAQsp3vPJMCuR9R4FjgzyPnOoPBtaNh5YMl2nEMGpfmoHwnZhwuNlg0x~adT8rRKd1oEciOsVy5sRAn1a4Grk993rbojpoTkFpkYnIl3w8UmVoyAo542Kshx4UjzN5hEN9DMblXamxGzuk0s5mDAo5yZQEyJmT6G~A4tbMkheHJoKeuhQnZGPn2LKt-7-RLB6N5PgeQkDbY2oyexbE8DpObXCdwU9gSjflk0iGR2SQpbRNspZYRW8pG9cNn8NEvRTFLV5yCTtSQEMBuLJOL5Za17AVHYC6Bkrye0myQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Draper City Council approved Ordinance 16-31, a proposed amendment to the Mercer Mountain (Hidden Canyon Estates) development agreement, by unanimous vote (4–0). The amendment reduces the required roadway width from the city’s 56-foot standard to 50 feet for the subdivision’s primary access, adjusts where grading and cut/fill would occur, authorizes slope easements on adjacent city property, and sets maintenance responsibilities for private utilities and stormwater infrastructure.

City planner Jennifer summarized the main changes: a narrower street cross-section that removes the sidewalk on one side in favor of a 4-foot snow-storage/landscape strip (staff noted an alternative of eliminating the park strip to allow sidewalks on both sides), slope easements totaling about 3.2 acres on city-owned hillside needed to construct the roadway, and a detention pond that will be sized and controlled to restrict post-development discharge to historic flow rates. The amendment also allows temporary construction fencing strategies and establishes that private utilities will require written water-quality and maintenance agreements because the city will not operate the private distribution system.

Applicant Pratt (surname not provided on the record) described the design adjustments as a way to reduce the amount of cut-and-fill into the adjacent hillside while still providing a private gated neighborhood with trail access and landscaped snow-storage areas. Residents and nearby property owners asked questions about trail connectivity, sidewalk placement, and hillside stability; staff responded that the narrower cross-section reduces grading impacts and that further engineering review will finalize exact grading and drainage plans.

Councilmember Green moved to approve Ordinance 16-31; Councilmember Lowery seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Council members asked staff to ensure safe pedestrian crossings and to coordinate with engineering for final sidewalk and slope-easement details.

Ending: The ordinance was adopted 4–0; staff will finalize engineering-level grading plans, confirm slope-easement language and return any outstanding exhibits as needed before building permits are issued.","Draper City approved Ordinance 16-31 to amend the Mercer Mountain (Hidden Canyon Estates) development agreement, allowing a 50-foot private street cross-section (instead of the 56-foot standard), slope easements on city property and related stormwater and utilities provisions.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6342425,"Draper council denies Suncrest rezoning request for reception venue after extensive public comment",6086,2246683,8333005,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2255125-a9c1f4f97e1eaf9894292d80a73a59ac&start=2246&end=8333","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2255125-a9c1f4f97e1eaf9894292d80a73a59ac/thumbnail_2246683.jpg","/articles/6342425/Utah/Draper-council-denies-Suncrest-rezoning-request-for-reception-venue-after-extensive-public-comment","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6342425-d191d8bf13d5d239a0502c76d4226fbc/orig.mp4?Expires=1771130140&Signature=le4-HXHuNfct4SPpQy8hCtHLr-VMUFJPAGvI3Fh75cHsPMgSgBGn~~WlPDhX76RgZ-7AGiwblzi76MUojuOzk8kWBx-y4q8jcrA5YPMlEkqynUZ7XifbSKo9U88k8VK2xk2SDI-yEDLQcKXx2AFWKko9jIZ91Yb6RMtQQo5aFmue3F4yV-E0zR~v~dR-6hYp-Sj1uZI5uxeqATMxR0kQLoBLEHqzPYu2KHz4x~Rrqvibc5zzEFwwvjwrAhROo~uI9pCUSG9Z0jmnhGbqSaHOKXsKtj32riZCjkoZeAf9OGFB1-7zO7SWY7lZAhtNM014gJT-U7Wq12qfkEacrfLwFg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Draper City Council voted 4–0 to deny Ordinance 16-30, a proposal to rezone three parcels in Suncrest (including the K2/clubhouse building) from legacy C-2 zoning to the city’s current General Commercial (CG) zone. The council heard more than two dozen public comments both supporting and opposing the change before taking action.

Jennifer (city planner) reviewed the zoning history: the Suncrest area is governed by a 1999 code tied to development agreements, and its C-2 designation is a carryover from the older code that staff cannot amend directly. The applicant, property owner Adam Koch, asked for CG zoning because the older C-2 rules do not permit a reception center; Koch said his building was constructed in 1997–1999 with a large gathering space and a full kitchen and that he intends to run a small wedding/banquet venue there.

Public comment was strongly divided. Supporters said the venue would be smaller than other facilities in the area, the applicant already shares parking with the HOA, and rezoning would legitimize an existing use and help keep a locally owned business operating. Opponents raised repeated concerns about insufficient parking, overflow parking onto neighborhood streets, noise and fireworks, wildfire risk in the wildland-urban interface, insurance and liability impacts, precedent-setting spot zoning, enforcement problems and conflicts of interest because the applicant is active in community bodies. Several speakers — including legal counsel representing a group of residents — urged the council to consider alternatives such as development agreements or additional study rather than a rezone.

Planning Commission had recommended approval (4–1) at its December 12 meeting. Council members expressed concern that rezoning the two parcels to CG would create an out-of-scale commercial zoning pocket surrounded by single-family residential neighborhoods, and that the applicant had not demonstrated that infrastructure and parking were adequate to support the commercial intensification. One council member also cited a pattern of prior enforcement complaints at the site and the public safety implications of fireworks in a high fire-risk area.

Councilmember Green moved to deny Ordinance 16-30; the motion was seconded by Councilmember Lowery and passed unanimously (4–0). Councilmembers stated the presumption in favor of the existing zoning had not been overcome, cited adverse impacts to adjacent properties and pointed to unresolved parking and neighborhood compatibility issues.

Ending: The ordinance was denied; the applicant and neighbors were encouraged to pursue alternative mechanisms (for example, a more narrowly tailored development agreement or parking improvements) if they wished to address the underlying business use. No rezoning or conditional-use permit was granted.","After a nearly three-hour public hearing with dozens of residents for and against, the Draper City Council voted unanimously to deny Ordinance 16-30, which would have rezoned three Suncrest parcels to allow a reception venue and other CG uses.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6342429,"Draper staff recommend clearing canal easement and building Phoebe Brown Trail; council directs staff to proceed with full-easement option",1283,98885,1381955,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2255125-a9c1f4f97e1eaf9894292d80a73a59ac&start=98&end=1381","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2255125-a9c1f4f97e1eaf9894292d80a73a59ac/thumbnail_98885.jpg","/articles/6342429/Utah/Draper-staff-recommend-clearing-canal-easement-and-building-Phoebe-Brown-Trail-council-directs-staff-to-proceed-with-full-easement-option","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6342429-fe8f4e100557a3cf683f9563dfa49107/orig.mp4?Expires=1771130140&Signature=BFLtzz3ZtSMl0K3qUthhoI-uYFF6fgEmhC4cHcD1mOcPweBqqmFUd8xVyJf4tLyCn6gVWJL~oOblUcRQ96qFY7tqX1xgPj5I8~TNI7-WepoP3HnePx~KhHYWgCWgedtbttIe3u3EFGAD0bULcTx2o1-L8zt7F75vpw1Nn723qnj02Dwy6w0KQwTjNzVey~2-VvfeYtO2DtbLALx4EDnyJ8rQDlTIipoz4mIIweMbw3WgaNoJ4gD5FpEReUlp3VFEj1UDstz1TMuJf2x7KjwP42IMUEvAw5aqyHy0DPfAp6WStX1kYSlRzTep0UIag2YvDcZVRFrq0jOhxA~ZwLuuSg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Draper City staff brought two design alternatives and construction estimates for a 12–13-property segment of the Phoebe Brown Trail and the council directed staff to proceed with the option that uses the full trail easement and clears private encroachments.

The trail segment sits between existing park connections and a canal; staff said completing it would close a key paved loop that links neighborhood hubs and regional trails. Brad Jensen, project manager for Parks and Recreation, presented two alternatives: Option A would use most of the existing 15-foot trail easement, keep the paved trail about 3 feet from the canal bank (avoiding a fence) and require removal of some private fences and minor yard encroachments; Option B would shift the trail toward the canal bank so several encroachments could remain but would require installing a fence along the bank and cost substantially more.

\"Total construction cost estimate is about 550,000,\" Jensen said when describing the lower-cost alternative; staff later summarized total estimates near $600,000 for the full-easement option and $775,000 for the fence/shift alternative. Council members and staff noted the city currently has $350,000 budgeted in the CIP for the project. That leaves a shortfall: under the staff estimate the city would need roughly $250,000–$425,000 more depending on which option is chosen.

Council discussion focused on two linked issues: whether the canal-owner (the canal company) will permit a security/forklift gate along the canal and how to treat private encroachments into the city easement. Staff said the canal company favors installation of a fence or gated access because it permits maintenance access; the company’s recorded easement language also contains a plaque restricting certain uses, which staff said the canal company could manage. Multiple council members said allowing some residents to keep encroachments would risk unfairness, encourage further violations, and impose higher city costs. One council member framed the decision bluntly: either do the project fully and enforce easement limits, or do not build the trail.

On balance the council directed staff to proceed with Option A — the design that uses the full easement and requires removal or relocation of private encroachments — and asked staff to return with refined cost and funding options. Staff flagged a potential for litigation from property owners regardless of the chosen approach and said any fence requirement would be coordinated with the canal company.

The council asked staff to return with: a refined construction estimate, a proposed funding source (staff noted Park Impact Fees were available), a list of affected properties and required removals, and a timeline for next steps. No formal ordinance or appropriation was adopted at the meeting; the action was recorded as council direction to staff.

Ending: Staff will return to a future meeting with updated cost estimates and a funding recommendation; council members emphasized the need to treat similarly situated property owners equally if the project proceeds.
","City staff presented two designs and cost estimates for a short missing section of the Phoebe Brown Trail. After hearing options and resident concerns about fences and private encroachments, the council directed staff to proceed with an option that uses the full easement and requires removal of encroachments.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Draper partners with Ivory Foundation to reserve seven deed‑restricted homes for city and school employees

Council approves Mercer Mountain (Hidden Canyon Estates) development-agreement amendment with narrower road section and slope easements

Draper council denies Suncrest rezoning request for reception venue after extensive public comment

Draper staff recommend clearing canal easement and building Phoebe Brown Trail; council directs staff to proceed with full-easement option