The rumor mill is swirling and fingers pointing concerning our neighbor, Highland City's recent change to their transportation element of their General Plan to designate 9600 N. (which borders AF's northern boundary) a major collector road. Both AF and Highland neighbors have been in a dizzy thinking 9600 N. will be expanded on both sides on both borders in response to the change. Well, here are the myths and facts:
Myth: American Fork has sold out to Highland, receiving water shares for our agreement to consent.
Fact: No such thing has occurred. Highland has the authority to amend its transportation element as they choose. In this case, Mayor Franson an engineer has merely corrected the appropriate label of what the road really is.
Myth: This corridor and its widening is a "done deal" with UDOT and MAG (Mountainland Association of Governments). The Mayors in Utah County have so designated.
Fact: 9600 N. as a major east west corridor is only one of many proposals authorized by the county's mayors as an option to a major east west corridor in the overall planning.
Myth: Construction on the widening of 9600 N. is set to begin now if not sooner.
Fact: Even if 9600 N. is selected by UDOT as a major collector, it will be 15 - 20 years before it begins. There are Army Corp and wetland issues regarding Mitchell Hollow. There are funding issues. There is the issue of Fox Hollow Golf Course. AF owns the majority of the golf course property to the north. There are restrictive covenants relative to the golf course property remaining as open space and/or recreational property. In additon this road involves regional transportation planning. Also buying the property from homeowners will be difficult given rising land values and budget restraints from funding agencies.
Myth: There is nothing we can do as Highland and AF citizens to let our voices be heard.
Fact: The power of the people in lobbying, petitioning and appearing at meetings brings much to bear. In this instance such mobilization can be directed to UDOT, MAG and Highland City.
Myth: The American Fork City Council supports Highland's decision and the Regional transportation decision makers in widening 9600 N.
Fact: I do not support 9600 N. being a major east west corridor road. I know my colleagues are concerned about this issue as well. It seems to me that 9850 was planned and designed for that (it is much wider). Highland should be concerned about directing traffic toward its commercial center. We have or will make that known to the decision makers. Such action will have a detrimental effect on our citizens, homeowners and neighborhoods in the area. That said, we, (AF) do not have the right to dictate to Highland how to plan their city and have no authority to contest the changing of their transportation element of their general plan. (The entire road is in the jurisdiction of Highland City). Also, the fact that you call a duck a goose does not make it a goose, it is still a duck.
Hi Shirl,
The author of http://9600north.org/ may well lose her home if the 9600 North Proposal is approved by Highland City Council.
Please respond to her rebuttal of this (your) blog so that we can get both sides of the issue and make an informed decision as the the real facts and myths.
I believe her points deserve a response, as do other citizens in this surrounding neighborhood.
Note from Shirl: I have made a comment to the above referenced blog addressing the concerns listed. Also the proposed amendment to Highland's General Plan is in draft form, has not been voted on by Highland City Council. "If the 9600 N. proposal voted on by Highland City Council is voted on." is not controlling. Highland City Council is not the Decision Maker nor the Funding Agency.
The comment in the blog is reproduced here . . .
"The Mayors can take no action until ratified by the council, this has not been done. Further MAG is only a recommending quasi-agency and has no decision making authority. It therefore is "not a done deal" because for one thing there is no funding in place nor proposed. In any event public input has not been had. The meeting with Lehi, PG and AF was actually held on Wed 15th and another meeting is scheduled for tomorrow 8/22 at 6pm. The issue at this meeting to discuss a land lease agreement between the 3 cities with regard to land owned by AF and used by the golf course. The three issues discussed were protecting our wells, each city providing 1/3 of the water and contributions and lease amounts due AF for the use of golf course land owned by AF. All of this is dealing with the upgrades to the golf course which we have bonded for including a new irrigation system and clubhouse. The meeting was properly noticed last week and again for tomorrow. Minutes should be available for both. I was at the meeting on the 15th. A "proposed" road through the golf course was not discussed.
Posted by: Doug Brockbank | August 22, 2007 at 06:06 PM
I am very happy to know that Mr. LeBaron and other members of the American Fork City Council are concerned about maintaining the open space of Fox Hollow Golf Course. The Open Space that flows from Highland Glen Park, through Fox Hollow and down through Art Dye is one of the greatest treasures that we have to pass along to our children and future residents of this community. As the farmland around us is swallowed up by development, it will become more important in the next 100 to 200 years. I am grateful for City Leaders and citizens who are willing to sacrafice in order to maintain this beautiful area.
Posted by: Ann Boyle | August 22, 2007 at 09:21 AM
I am pleased that the City Council is concerned about this issue and how it will affect the American Fork Home owners. Will members of the council be attending the Wednesday night meeting at Legacy Elementary on the issue?
From Shirl: I know I will be there.
Posted by: Greg | August 21, 2007 at 08:01 PM