Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Highland City council approves boundary adjustment with Draper after public hearing
Summary
After a public hearing on Feb. 3, Highland City Council voted unanimously to approve a negotiated boundary adjustment with Draper City transferring a small open-space strip while keeping the city's trail parcel inside Highland; staff noted two resident objections in the packet and answered neighborhood concerns at the hearing.
Highland City approved an ordinance on Feb. 3 to adjust municipal boundaries with Draper City, following a staff presentation and a public hearing in which one nearby neighbor raised concerns about notice and potential new access points.
Rob (staff) summarized the 2022 property-exchange history: Alpine Joint Ventures acquired a strip of open space in exchange for a trail parcel the city obtained to preserve trail access around private property that had blocked historic trail connections. The agreement contemplated facilitating a boundary adjustment so Alpine Joint Ventures’ larger parcel could be consolidated with adjacent property already inside Draper. Staff said the city prefers to retain the trail parcel inside Highland and recommended approving the adjustment.
Stephanie Diamond, who lives on Ponce De Leon near the affected land, told council she had not received notice and expressed worry that transferring the open-space strip to Draper could allow a road or increased parking that would change local neighborhood access patterns. Staff responded that the Metropolitan Water District owns a nearby strip and that a road connection is unlikely without additional property transfers; staff also offered follow-ups with the city attorney for residents.
Councilmember Campbell moved and Councilmember Bridal seconded adoption of the ordinance. The motion carried on a recorded vote of 5–0.
Ending: Staff said required filings and notices would follow and that property owners had the right under state law to submit protests in narrowly defined circumstances; two objections from Beacon Hills residents were included in the packet and council considered them during the hearing.
