• Boundary line disputes will now need to be resolved ahead of zone change or annexation requests

• Monsen crowned Miss Nephi 2022

• JHS has two winners and four runners-up at Sterling Scholar competition

• City council discusses combined use area during work session

• Obits

• Classifieds

• Back

• Home

By Myrna Trauntvein
TN Correspondent

Boundary lines have proved to be a huge problem in Nephi and over the years have caused many problems for property owners and for the city staff.

As Nephi has received various zone change requests and/or annexation petitions, a common problem has been the misalignment of parcel boundaries.

“This has been a headache for staff,” said Lisa Brough, city recorder/finance director. “The proposed policy states that before any zone change is considered or before an annexation petition is certified, all boundary disputes will need to be resolved. While it may take a developer some time to resolve these boundary problems, it will allow for a faster application process and will remove obstacles for a final approval.

These misalignments may come in the form of an overlap, underlap or a disputed property line, she said. These boundary problems lead to delays in a development application later if they are not resolved sooner.

“To resolve this problem before a development application is proposed, the staff has submitted a policy for council consideration,” said Brough. “The planning commission reviewed the policy at their last meeting and has recommended approval.”

“Before the planning commission or city council will consider a zone change request or before an annexation petition will be certified, all boundary line disputes, including but not limited to underlaps and overlaps, shall legally be resolved by all affected property owners. Proof of resolution of boundary line disputes must be provided by the zone change requester or annexation petitioner(s) to the planning commission and city council,” reads the new policy.

Skip Worwood, council member, made the motion to adopt the policy as written and Larry Ostler, council member, made the second. All voted in favor.

Travis Ludlow, developer, said that there were some serious property shifts in the area and they worsened as the properties moved westward.

“In some places, we have a several-foot shift,” he said. “It isn’t easy to resolve.”

That error came as a result of a property survey that was done back when NRP was built. At that time, a surveyor made some wrong assumptions, he said.

The result is that the fence lines are not always on the recorded boundary lines.

Ludlow said that he did not favor having to have the property disputes resolved before zone change requests or annexation petitions were submitted because he thought it was easier to work through both processes at the same time and that doing so would not cause such long delays in projects.

“It shouldn’t be delayed more than two months on this issue,” said Kasey Wright, city attorney.

He said the issue wasn’t unique and occurred all over.

Boundary lines could be solved by an agreement or quit title. A quit title action is a way to remove someone’s interest from a property. This is a formal lawsuit. It costs more money and takes longer than a quit claim deed.

“The two processes can’t be done simultaneously,” said Wright.

The dispute should be solved because it can affect the outcome.

JD Parady, council member, said he thought the issue should be resolved at the time of the purchase through a title search.

“The risk is on the developer,” said Ludlow.

A serious overlap might mean that a subdivision would lose a couple of homes that had been included in the planning stage.

Jeremy Lynn, developer, said that there would need to be a way for the developer to know that it was expected that boundary disputes must be settled before any plans are presented to the planning commission or to the council.

“The developer would need to know what was expected in advance,” he said.

“We fight fights we can win,” said Ludlow. “We would prefer that we be able to get the work done simultaneously. But if we have to do the boundaries in advance, we will.”

The lion’s share of his concern, said Justin Seely, mayor, was with the city staff. When the boundaries could not be recorded for a project, it was the staff that had to be the bearer of bad news. It was the staff that took the brunt of the problem.

“We as a city, have to, first of all, present developers with the information they need but, secondly, we also need to protect the staff,” he said. “That said, I have no vote.”

Worwood said he favored having property disputes settled before developers met with the planning commission and the council.

“I think it needs to be solved on the front end,” he said.

Ostler said he thought it needed to be taken care of before the plan was presented to the planning commission or to the council. If problems were taken care of up front, then there would be less need for changes later after zoning or annexation was approved.

“How can we make sure that you are all aware, as developers, of expectations?” asked Seely.

Ludlow suggested that the city put the requirement on the check list that developers must complete. That way there would be no surprises.

Lynn said getting a project to the point where it could be built was a long process. If it was known that the boundary disputes needed to be solved in advance, it would help.

“We would know that we had to take care of it at the front end,” he said.

However, the process of planning and receiving approval would be lengthened by that requirement.

Seely asked what could be done to make the process more efficient. If there were ways to do that, the city would be open to hearing suggestions.

Jeremie Callaway, council member, said he also thought that the disputes should be resolved at the beginning of the process.

The most common reason for an overlap or underlap is that there are two different points of beginning. The two adjacent property parcels each had a survey that began at a different controlling corner. The first property could be described from the west one-quarter corner of a section and the second parcel could be described from the south west quarter of the same section.

The author of the descriptions assumed that the distance from the south west corner to the west corner was one-half mile when in reality, the distance is almost never a half-mile, and was a quarter mile. That would create an overlap gap caused by the difference.