Nibley council approves Apple Creek amendment to expand protected open space, transfer trail right-of-way to city

The Nibley City Council voted to approve a first amendment to the Apple Creek Subdivision development agreement, accepting new conservation boundaries and transferring a trail right-of-way to the city while declining a separate $37,000 payment that had been discussed during negotiations.

The amendment shifts the delineation of conservation land within the Apple Creek Phase 1 parcel and adds what the developer and city staff described as an identifiable, contiguous conservation area and a city-owned trail corridor. Proponents said the change would create a clearer, enforceable conservation boundary and increase the city’s permanently protected open space.

City planner Levi Robert explained the amendment’s purpose and the material that the developer added to the council packet. The developer’s representatives showed a map that, they said, more clearly separates buildable lots from conserved land and identifies a uniform trail corridor that would be transferred to the city.

Developer representatives said the change increases the conservation area by roughly two-thirds of an acre. "This is a clear delineation of where that conservation is, and it's in addition to what there was previously dedicated as a conservation," said Clay Shacker of Solutions Group, who presented the plan to the council.

Proponent Sean Dessen described the public-benefit trade-offs he is offering. Dessen said the amendment would transfer an identifiable trail right-of-way to the city and reduce the need for the city to negotiate access later. "Technically, all of this is potentially open and this is open," Dessen said. "If we do this, then this is buildable and it's guaranteed. . . . I'm giving up all of the control . . . and I'm trading it for certainty on what can be built here." He added that the city would benefit because it would not have to purchase access later.

Staff and the proponent also presented high-level financial estimates. The developer’s materials estimated the newly dedicated conservation land had a market value on the order of $67,000 and presented a net-benefit estimate to the city of about $207,000 (the proponent characterized that figure as an approximate metric and said it could vary widely). The developer also said a separate canal-company work and associated cost — described during the meeting as likely in the roughly $60,000 range based on prior bids — was a major expense driving his inability to fund an additional $37,000 payment the council had discussed.

Council discussion centered on three points: whether the newly delineated conservation area and the transfer of the trail easement produced a clear public benefit; how the change would affect lot counts and future development potential; and whether the council should require the developer to pay the previously discussed $37,000 fee toward city costs. Councilmember Norman Larson moved to approve the staff recommendation (the version without the additional $37,000), a substitute motion seconded by Councilmember K. Sweeten; the council voted in favor.

Levi Robert noted the amendment separates conservation areas from buildable lots and, staff said, improves protection for a wetland or stream buffer that lies on the parcel. The developer told the council the amendment also capped the maximum number of buildable lots in the phase so that the land dedicated to conservation would not later be subdivided into more lots.

The council vote approved the amendment as presented (the substitute motion without the $37,000 payment). The amendment was adopted by voice/roll-call and the mayor declared it enacted.

What was discussion vs. direction vs. decision - Discussion: Council and staff questioned the durability of the existing conservation easement, trail alignment and whether a formal transfer to the city would improve public access and long-term maintenance. The developer explained costs, the canal-company dependency and why he could not provide the $37,000 payment. Several council members asked how the conserved area would be maintained and whether the conservation parcel would be assigned to an HOA or attached to a lot. - Direction/assignment: Staff and the proponent agreed that final construction drawings and engineering comments must be resolved in the city’s standard plan-review process; the amendment was approved subject to the city’s normal plan-review requirements. - Formal action/decision: The council approved the first amendment to the Apple Creek Subdivision development agreement (relating to Ordinance 25-29) by majority vote on the substitute motion to accept staff recommendation, i.e., without the $37,000 payment from the developer.

Why it matters The amendment consolidates and clarifies the conservation boundaries inside Apple Creek Phase 1 and transfers a trail corridor to municipal ownership, which city staff and the developer said will simplify future trail construction and long-term protection of wetlands on the parcel. The developer also said the swap reduces the cost the city would face if it later tried to acquire access to the trail area, because the city would not need to negotiate or purchase rights from future private owners.

What to watch next The amendment includes dependencies: canal-company approvals and final engineering reviews are required before construction. Staff will continue plan review of final construction drawings and will require the developer to record any dedications or easement transfers in the city’s standard process. Neither the transfer of a trail right-of-way nor the conservation dedication changes other pending approvals for the larger subdivision beyond the confines of this amendment.

Attribution and sources Quotes and attributions in this story come from council members and participants at the Nibley City Council meeting where the Apple Creek first-amendment was discussed, and from the amendment documents the developer provided to the city in the council packet.