Council denies petition to vacate Rose Creek Estates trail, orders mitigation

Herriman — The Herriman City Council voted 4–1 on July 8 to deny a petition from property owners to vacate the public trail behind Rose Creek Estates and directed staff to implement mitigation measures including bollards, prioritized maintenance and a review of fence ordinances.

Bryce, a city staff planner, summarized the trail's history and the city's outreach. Staff reported a July 2025 petition signed by 13 of 16 adjacent property owners and a subsequent survey that produced mixed results: roughly 60% of respondents in the broader neighborhood opposed closure, about 30% favored it, and adjacent-property responses were split (8 of 16 in favor). Staff recommended retaining the trail and implementing targeted mitigation rather than vacating the corridor, citing the absence of full adjacent-owner consensus and risk of setting a precedent for disposing of city property.

Residents who spoke at the public hearing urged closure, citing loitering, trash and privacy concerns. Adam Jacobson, one of the petition organizers, said the cost to complete a plat amendment for the west-side option would be modest and estimated the per-property share at about $225: "So I'm sure I've talked to all the residents... that's like two water bills in Herriman." Scott Lathrop described shopping carts and debris being thrown into yards and said, "It would be great if it were just gone." Craig Gastonno, another west-side resident, said he had observed juveniles loitering and supported closure.

Council members raised competing concerns. Several members — including Jared — acknowledged the trail's nuisance problems and said they had sympathy for homeowners. Others warned against creating inconsistent precedent for the sale or conveyance of city property and noted the logistical complications of obtaining signatures and adjusting property lines if the city vacated the trail.

After debate, Council member Teddy moved to deny the petition and direct staff to prioritize upkeep, build bollards (triangle-style gates used elsewhere in the city) to limit motorized access, and return with ordinance language addressing fence materials and enforcement. The motion, seconded by Matt, passed 4–1 with Jared dissenting.

The council instructed staff to bring proposed ordinance language and a timeline for the mitigation steps back to a future meeting. Staff estimated bollards could be fabricated in-house with about $1,000 in materials and installed within a few months; maintenance and recycled asphalt millings for trail shoulders were also recommended to reduce weed and nuisance issues.

Next steps include: prioritizing the trail on the parks crew maintenance list, fabricating and installing bollards, applying recycled asphalt millings to shoulders to slow weed growth and returning to planning commission and council if ordinance changes are proposed. The council did not approve any conveyance of city property or sales to adjacent owners at this meeting.