Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Trails General Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Woodland Hills PTR committee reviews Chapter 6 trail map, urges ‘feasibility’ language and a separate trails plan
Summary
At its Sept. 30 PTR meeting, committee members reviewed the Chapter 6 trails map in the draft general plan, recommended labeling the proposed Woodland Hills–Summit Creek route as a feasibility study, and discussed maintenance, safety and regional connections.
WOODLAND HILLS, Utah — The Woodland Hills Parks, Trails and Recreation (PTR) committee on Sept. 30 reviewed Chapter 6 of the draft general plan and urged staff to clarify that the Woodland Hills–Summit Creek trail shown on the map is under study rather than a committed project.
Committee members and staff said a corridor analysis for a trail down Woodland Hills Drive and portions of Summit Creek Drive is underway and that Jeremy Surly, a consultant contracted by the city, has been working with the city’s public works director on the study. Committee members asked that the general plan map and text emphasize the study and feasibility stage rather than present a finalized corridor.
The discussion focused on three issues: safety and terrain, right-of-way and easement needs, and maintenance. Multiple members said the segments on Woodland Hills Drive and Summit Creek Drive include steep grades and narrow rights-of-way that could make a conventional, recreational trail unsafe or expensive. One committee member said Woodland Hills Drive “is way too dangerous” for a downhill bike route on the existing curve, and others agreed that the Summit Creek segment may not be appropriate for a leisurely paved trail because homes are close to the road and grades are steep.
Committee members recommended alternatives to placing a trail in already developed, steep street sections: pursue alignments that run more west–east through future development parcels, coordinate the 11200 South trail connection with neighboring jurisdictions (Elk Ridge and Salem) and reserve trail construction for locations designed to accommodate gradual grades. Members said portions of 11200 South are already in planning cross-sections and could include a trail when the roadway is widened to four lanes in coming years.
The group also debated maintenance and monitoring. The switchback trail on undeveloped hillsides has not been routinely maintained by the city despite appearing in prior general plans, committee members said. They recommended an annual maintenance day, use of volunteer crews with technical support where feasible, improved online trail condition updates (Trailforks/AllTrails) and low-cost trail counters if there is a clear data-driven purpose. A committee member noted $1,500 in available funds that could be used for counters but stressed the city should spend only if the data will support grant or maintenance requests.
On planning documents, members supported keeping trail-specific technical details available for staff and stakeholders but asked Daniel (staff) to pare back granular design language in the general plan. The committee asked Daniel to place the detailed guidance in a separate short “trails plan” document while marking the general-plan map items as feasibility studies so residents do not assume construction is imminent.
Next steps identified at the meeting: staff will revise Chapter 6 language to emphasize feasibility study status, prepare a separate short trails plan with technical details for internal use, and present the revised materials to the community development committee and then to the planning commission (mid‑October was mentioned). Committee members also encouraged continued outreach to Elk Ridge and Salem to coordinate regional connections.
Votes at the meeting were limited to routine procedural items: committee members approved minutes for Jan. 21 and April 15, 2025, and later moved to adjourn.
