November 2022 Agreement Cancelled by City Council – Citizens Frustrated by Cemetery Eastern Bypass Road

Documentation is below.  Is this how you want the City Government to treat you?  

The City Council suddenly cancelled a three-month agreement with Valley Hills property owners on the new Eastern Bypass Road route through the Cemetery on February 21, 2023.   

This is causing tremendous frustration for adjoining property owners and required a road redesign costing the City an additional $26,000.   

The November Bypass Road Agreement:  

This proposed Eastern Bypass Road starts at Center Street & 1400 East, goes north around to Mill Road, then west through the Cemetery and to US Highway 40.    

Last October the Valley Hills property owners asked the City to move the proposed Eastern Cemetery Bypass Road away from their back fence lines on the north side of Cemetery.  These Neighbors did not want roads on both the front and back sides of their homes—especially a higher traffic Eastern Bypass Road.  

Both on November 9^th and 15^th, 2022; the City Council did agree to build this Cemetery Bypass Road with a 73’ – 200’ buffer away from the north cemetery fence line to the south.  The road would be built on an angle with the closest point at about 73’ south of the north side property owners (at 550 East), and then swing further south and east to a 200’ buffer distance straight to Mill Road.  The Valley Hills Neighbors felt much better about the lower impact to their homes with the 200’ buffer.    

A New Roundabout At the Mill Road Intersection:  

The Mill Road Neighbors didn’t participate in the November agreement because (1) they weren’t notified by the City of any impacts to their property and (2) for the last several years the new Mill Road /Cemetery intersection was planned to be a two-way stop.  Mill Road would likely have stop signs on the north and south sides of this new intersection.  This was shown in the November 2022 agreement design.  There wasn’t supposed to be any property impacts to the Mill Road Neighbors.  

[A two-way stop can turn into a signalized intersection when needed in the future likely without affecting surrounding property.]

Yet in December 2022 the City Council asked a Mill Road annexation to dedicate extra property to a proposed roundabout on the NE side of the proposed Mill Road/Cemetery intersection.  No other Neighbors around that proposed Mill Road intersection were contacted by the City about changing the two-way stop plan or needing land for a new Mill Road roundabout to that point.    

Those Mill Road Neighbors then heard about the new roundabout replacing the two-way stop after this and contacted the City Council.  One Neighbor received a city email saying the city was ‘considering’ a Mill Road roundabout on Nov 28^th.  Another Neighbor asked for and obtained a city road roundabout sketch right before Christmas.  

This sketch excluded a City planned trail which did not show the full impact to the property. When the walking trail was added to later sketches, it would take much more property which includes mature trees, landscaping, a rock wall, and fencing.  

The other Neighbor will lose access to their driveway and likely have their front yard mostly paved over reaching to their garage, with no berm between these Neighbors and the road.   

Upon requests from these neighbors, the city finally sent finalized roundabout plans in February. 

During this time, I didn’t know that the Mill Road roundabout design would affect so much of the Mill Road property owners’ land.    

Cancellation of November Agreement on February 21^st:  

Then on February 21, 2023, this City Council agenda item was listed: “Consider Approval of Segment B Eastern Bypass Preferred Alignment.”  

The City Engineer explained that were “misunderstanding(s) between Staff and Council direction for the proposed eastern bypass alignment through the cemetery.”     This is where the Council finally saw how much property the Mill Road roundabout will take as well as a new road design sketch moving the Bypass Road much closer to the north side neighbors. What a surprise this was. See:

 https://heber-ut.granicus.com/DocumentViewer.php?file=heber-ut_7fe38bbb536431c6817ae6ade5831bbc.pdf&view=1; pg. 8 

The City Council then voted to cancel the November agreement using the unfair arguments below. 

Also the City did not officially notify the surrounding Neighbors about this agenda item or tell them about any changes being proposed to the November agreement.  

The Neighbors that saw it and attended were quite shocked, especially the Mill Road Neighbors were shocked seeing for the first time the road design for a new roundabout that affected so much of their property.    

Watch the Neighbors’ reactions at the February 21, 2023 Council meeting when the November 2022 agreement was cancelled:  https://heber-ut.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=1167 .  Start at the time mark of 4:07.   

City Council Arguments to Cancel the November Agreement:  

• Rachel Kahler claimed that Cemetery Plots should not be put onto the north side 200’ buffer area.  

Fact Check:  This is a policy choice that’s never been voted on by the Council.  The City Council has actually discussed several different cemetery options for the north side of this proposed road including plots.  The 200’ buffer gives more room to the City for plots.

• Mike Johnston claimed the 200’ buffer really ‘harmed’ the City’s placement of a new cemetery building.  

Fact Check: this is false because the Council actually voted on March 23rd to move the building location anyway, so the original November agreement would not affect it at all.  Yet at the February 7^th meeting, the Council said the 200’ buffer would affect the building’s location without any maps showing that.

• Mike Johnston also said a future City Council could put high-density housing onto the north side of the cemetery road with the 200’ buffer.  

Fact Check: this really shocked & silenced the Neighbors.  No neighbor wants high-density housing on the north side of the Cemetery.  Do you?

What Mr. Johnston suggested is also against the Cemetery Master Plan that he voted for.  To avoid this, the City could right now put a conservation easement on the cemetery property. Will the City Council keep cemetery uses on the north side of this new road or not?

• Rachel Kahler claimed there wouldn’t be parking available for north side cemetery plots.  

Fact Check:  the City can put parking on the north side of this proposed Road if needed with 100′ or 200′ buffer.  There is more room to do it with the 200’ buffer.  

• Scott Phillips claimed the City would lose millions in cemetery plot revenue if the 200’ buffer road was built.  

Fact Check:  No financial study was ever shown by him in the February and March city meetings to prove this. I requested twice to see a study or data showing a comparison in cemetery plot revenue between the two plans but was told by the City Manager that such information is not available.  I’ve not seen any information that shows financial losses to the City to keep the November 2022 agreement with the adjoining Neighbors.  

These are unfounded and unsubstantiated claims, yet the Council used them to cancel the November agreement decreasing the north side buffer from 200′ to a 100’ buffer with an additional $26,000 budget cost to change the road design; as well as adding the new Mill Road roundabout dramatically affecting those property owners.

Neighbors Petition the City Council on March 7^th and 23^rd for the November Agreement:  

These Neighbors came back on March 7^th and March 23^rd to the City Council to ask again for the November 22^nd agreement to be honored, but to no avail.    

At the March 23^rd Council Meeting, the City Engineer said that the two-way stop on Mill Road would serve traffic just as well as the proposed new roundabout.  [UPDATE on April 12, 2023: The City Engineer said that a signalized intersection (no property taken) or roundabout (private property taken) would be needed on Mill Road because of projected traffic flows.]

Yet, the majority of the City Council voted to keep the roundabout design, even after moving the location of the new Cemetery Building so a 200’ buffer wouldn’t affect the building at all.   Council Member Yvonne Barney was the only one who tried to ‘reconsider’ the 100′ buffer back to 200′.

Here’s the March 23, 2023 Council meeting where you can hear the Neighbors’ petition a third time for the November 2022 agreement and no Mill Road roundabout:  https://heber-ut.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=1178   Start at the 4:41 time mark.  

The Mill Road Neighbors are intensely impacted because that second roundabout will take away part of their front yards and tremendously affect their property values with no buffer from the road.  They are very concerned about their property values, how close the road will be to them with the roundabout and other impacts.

The Valley Hills Neighbors are also concerned about their property values, the increased air and noise pollution, etc., with the new road design.  They are also impacted from staging construction equipment and materials for the Heber Central Project over the last year at the cemetery.    

Sadly, these citizens tell me they’ve lost their trust in the City.  The November 2022 agreement is now meaningless after the hard work these Neighbors did to meet and work with the City last Fall several times.  Plus these Neighbors showed up in February without being notified by the City and then petitioned the Council in more meetings.  

The Council’s actions are a huge loss to their credibility with their unproven claims above.   

Final Questions:  

• Why wasn’t the November agreement honored?
• This agreement was a collaborative effort between the city and the affected Neighbors to protect the interests of both parties and the facts have not changed since that agreement was reached.

• Since there are no proven financial losses to the City, the cemetery, traffic mobility with a two or four way stop, and the road was already designed per the November agreement, why can’t the City work collaboratively with the Neighbors?  

• Why would City Council members not respect private property rights and values when there is no harm to the City, the cemetery or traffic?    

• Why would a City Council member even suggest the high density housing idea which silenced the concerns of these Neighbors?

• Do you want the City Council treating you and your property like this?  

-Property owners should have confidence that agreements made by the City Council will be kept.

-The City needs to notify citizens about upcoming meetings that affect their property like this.

-The City needs to earn your trust every day.