Tuesday, April 1, 2014

City Council Meeting Mar 18, 2014

Highland LogoBelow is the agenda with my comments in italics. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions (mannrw@gmail.com).


  • Randy Paul – Economic Development
    Randy presented his views on what he sees as the most likely and best paths of growth for the city. In very short terms he does not see Highland seeing a lot growth in terms of businesses and he doesn’t think we should plan for that to be a significant source of revenue for the city. He does think that maintaining standards and services which make the city attractive to residents is one of the most important things the council can do. Subsequent to the meeting Randy sent an email to the council summarizing his points.
  • Kent Loosle – IASIS Healthcare, Mountain Point Medical Center
    IASIS is building a new hospital and medical office complex on the west side of I15 near the Thanksgiving Point Exit. Kent wanted to review the services that will be provided and share the desire of the IASIS to serve N. County residents.


  • MOTION: Approval of Meeting Minutes for City Council Work Session – February 11, 2014.
    Approved with clarifying comments from the police chief. His goal is to get to a ratio of 0.88 officers per 1,000 residents. At present the ration is 0.76 per 1,000 residents. The minutes were unclear and it could have been construed that he was trying to get to a 1 per 1,000 resident ratio.
  • MOTION: Approval of Meeting Minutes for City Council Regular Session – March 4, 2014.
    Approved with minor changes
  • MOTION: Approval of Meeting Minutes for City Council Work Session – March 4, 2014
    Approved with minor changes
  • MOTION: Ratifying the Mayors appointment to Open Space Committee – Roger Mickelsen
  • MOTION: Ratifying the Mayors Re-Appointments to the Tree Commission – Ed Barfuss and Jim MacDuff


The 4 items below all deal with disposal of small pieces of “open space” property in various community to allow residents to purchase them with objective from a city perspective that residents will be able to better maintain them.

  • PUBLIC HEARING/MOTION: Disposal of Surplus Property – Canterbury Circle Subdivision
    Council approved disposing of all of the open space property surrounding this development and allowing it to be sold to residents whose land adjoins the property. An easement was approved where an existing, but unused, waterline was buried to accommodate possible future development.
  • PUBLIC HEARING/MOTION: Disposal of Surplus Property – Apple Blossom Lane Subdivision
  • PUBLIC HEARING/RESOLUTION: Disposal of Surplus Property – Chamberry Fields Subdivision
    There are two long sections of “open space” property bordering this development; an east-west section along the north side of the development and a north-south section on the east side. The council approved disposing of the east-west section but deferred on the north-south section. The N-S section is 735 ft. in length and contains a public culinary water service line. A pressurized irrigation line is also planned to be installed parallel to the culinary line. The concern is that should the land be sold to residents it would create potential issues/sources of conflict between the city and residents in terms of maintenance of the existing line and future construction of the PI line.
  • PUBLIC HEARING/RESOLUTION: Disposal of Surplus Property – Beacon Hills Subdivision, Plat I
    The Lund’s received a variance to build an accessory structure on their property to create a “stand-alone accessory apartment” for a disabled adult son. Permission for a separate building was granted by the appeal authority and now that the son has passed away (much earlier than expected) they want to ensure that they can rent it out so that they can cover the mortgage costs for the small building. The difficulty was that the variance granted by the appeal authority was illegal. The council decided to allow the accessory apartment under the doctrine of “equitable estoppel”, one of the three options available to us as per the city attorney. To exercise this option the city must have committed an act or omission upon which the developer (in this case the Lund's) could rely on in good faith in making substantial changes in position or in incurring extensive expenses.


  • I asked the council whether they were friendly to the idea of amending the use policy for the multi-purpose room to allow meeting to go beyond the library closing hours if a council member, staff member or the mayor is present at the meeting. The council was in agreement.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts regarding this post.