LINK: Weber County Planning Commission
OGDEN -- As a public hearing with the potential to resolve the incorporation issue and development of Powder Mountain approaches, opinions are divided about the proposal between the Weber County Commission and resort developers.
Although many residents are hopeful that the memorandum of understanding could take the town incorporation out of the running, others feel that does not outweigh concerns about traffic, pollution and resource allocation.
The commission will deal with the memorandum at its meeting at 6 p.m. Tuesday in the Weber Center, 2380 Washington Blvd.
With one development unit every 3 acres, the general plan for Ogden Valley is an attempt at accessibility while retaining a rural atmosphere.
Valley residents worry that increased traffic and the development of 2,800 units at the resort will turn their home into a polluted suburb.
"It goes far beyond the community this time," said Eden resident Sharon Holmstrom. "This time, they have the homeowners in a vise from which they cannot escape.
"If a development agreement is not reached, then homeowners are stuck with the incorporation and expense and horror of that. But if they go along with that agreement, then they undermine the general plan for the rest of the valley."
Eden resident Kirk Langford is concerned that allowing higher than normal density at the resort in order to reach a resolution will open the door for future developers to demand density variances.
Langford and Holmstrom, along with many other landowners, lost two-thirds of their development rights in the down-zoning of the valley in 1998.
Now they are worried the move the landowners hoped would preserve the valley will be pointless if the resort is allowed to have more than its allotted development rights for the amount of land.
"I'm for Powder Mountain being developed," Langford said. "I think they should get every single entitlement that they had on the land when they bought it. ...
"But I've watched people go to build one house up here, and if they're a quarter acre short, too bad, they can't build. So why should they (the resort) be able to get 1,600 more (units)?"
It's about fairness, said Eden resident Steve Clarke.
"The thing I focus on right now is the fairness issue that people who own a considerable amount of property surrendered property rights and went from 1-acre zoning to 3-acre zoning," he said.
"I feel like it's unfair for the county to give density to a resort that other people gave up willingly years ago. It's important for the county commission to acknowledge the contribution of these landowners."
But some residents believe the memorandum, with recent changes, might be the best plan they can get to end the problems in the valley, said Darla Van Zeben, an Eden resident within the incorporation boundaries and one of the residents involved in the lawsuit against the county.
The revised memorandum, now available on the county website www1.co.weber.ut.us/, limits the resort to one golf course, creates a 1.5 percent fee for improvements and removes the developers' ability to withdraw from the agreement after action is taken on a neighboring development with common ownership.
Van Zeben said those were the issues creating the most worry among homeowners.
Most potential town residents don't think it's a perfect solution, she said, but it's one they can live with.
"There are parts of this deal that are tough to accept, but we're all in a tough situation and this new MOU might just be the best deal the Ogden Valley is going to get," Van Zeben said.
She said they are worried that if the incorporation is ultimately approved, it would allow unbridled development across more than 20,000 acres, rather than controlled development over 4,200 acres.
Because the incorporation petition was possible through a short-lived law, Van Zeben said she doesn't think other developers would be able to demand higher density.
Powder Mountain's bargaining power was a result of a very specific set of circumstances that won't be repeated, she said.
But Kim Wheatley, a former member of the Ogden Valley Planning Commission, said the memorandum simply doesn't do enough to address the concerns over fairness and consistency.
"We're (the county) trying to raise as much as $150 million to $200 million to stop the valley from being destroyed, and now they're turning around and giving what we took to these guys," he said.
"Why buy back the land if you just turn around and give it away? It breaks the trust that everybody had in zoning."
Wheatley said the resort's proposed numbers will saturate valley infrastructure and are unfair to the businesses and residents who played by the rules.
In a letter to the Weber County Commission, the Ogden Sierra Club also expressed concern about valley road safety.
It asked commissioners to require a road safety study and implementation of additional safety measures before any building begins, instead of after the first phase of development as the memorandum currently reads.
The letter also asked the commission to require a buffer zone between private lots and the Middle Fork Wildlife Management Area to avoid unauthorized entry, vehicle use and poaching.
This topic is being discussed at The Weber County Forum.
Comments