OCR Text |
Show The Ogden Valley News J anuary | Ogden Valley Master Plan Revrsrted By Jim Hasenyager Wit ', N the recent election of two new | Weber County Commissioners, it seems a good time to revisit the considerations and o= concerns that lead to the recent implementa'-'». resrdent durrng the survey phase of the Bear - West/Weber County study. In effect, what intuitively felt “about right” to Valley resi- dents was scientifically “about right” as well. Adopting the findings of that study the tion of the three acre minimum lot size for burldmg purposes now in place in Ogden Valley. It is reasonable to believe that some - Weber County Commlssroners then established the three acre minimum lot size requrrement To have maintained a one acre ot size requirement would, inevitably, have lead to the degradation of water quality in the valley and force the construction of a valley wide sewer system. Their decision was not an arbitrary one, but instead was based on sound scientific analysis. Nonetheless, some valley | residents and developers have claimed that thef- | decision was arbitrary, and infringed upon ) their “property rights” to sell and/or develop ~valley residents or developers, unhappy with the three acre minimum, and wanting to return to the previous smaller one acre minimum lot size requlirement will attempt to persuade the new commissioners to reverse the current requirement. In 1995 and 1996, Ogden Valley resi- dents, representatrves of county govemment,' and planners from Bear West analyzed the ~ impact of unmanaged growth in Ogden Valley under a baseline/status quo scenario which, in general, represented one acre lots on the val- - ley floor, five acre lots along the reservoir and foothills, and forty acre mountain lofs. At that time, there were approximately 1 300 existing dwellings in the valley; 415 approved ~ but undeveloped lots and room for 8,656 additional dwellrng units. Total projected dvvellmg units in this unmanaged scenario came to 10,371. At that time and now, existing roads mto ~and out of the valley could only accommodate traffic from about 4,500 dwellings. In order to accommodate traffic from the extra 5,871 dwellings, Ogden Canyon would have to be widened, a North Ogden tunnel built, and extensive mass transit systems developed in and out of the valley. A Valley wide waste' water system would have to be constructed and additional culmary water sources “obtained. If one assumes three people per “dwelling unit, the valley population simply ~explodes and would as the Bear West study overwhelming majorrty of valley re51dents dread and oppose. ' | The bottom line in every planmng decr— - sion is that someone’s “property rights” are infringed upon regardless of the decision made. There are always two sides to every decision. Those propenty owners who object to the three acre minimum quite correctly argue that their ability to develop and market l - cne acre lots has been restricted or infringed upon. The other side of that coin, however, is that if those same landowners or developers are permrtted to develop their property as they see fit, in one acre parcels that ultimately result in a “seaof roofs,” they are, with equal | validity, infringing upon the° rrghts of every- | ~one else who chooses to live in the valley, because it is a scemcally beautiful place with a slower pace, has abundant wildlife, open spaces and fresh air. In economic circles, stated, result 1in a “sea of roofs” instead of the; | these very characteristics are recognized as 'umque rural atmosphere which still exists." f N § 5 5 ;.possessmg economic value Attractive open * . That scenario was deemed to be unacceptable ‘areas are simply more valuable than a crowd by and overwhelmrng majonty of valley resr-.' ed, congested clutter of homes, and the dent who have moved to or remain living in ~ destruction of these quahtles affects everyone the valley, because they appreciate the value ~else’s pocketbook as surely as those of the of its rural lifestyle, the slower pace, the open. landowners’ or developers’ who object to the " spaces and the fresh air. There is wide recog- - increased lot size requirement. nition in Ogden Valley that qualrty of life How then to resolve these cornpetrng “property right” interests? The past Weber matters. | i, The Weber County Commlssmn recog— o - County Commission took.a reasonable and ~ nized that these were valid concerns and ‘justified approach by letting nature decide the CE ‘enacted a temporary building moratorium, but quesnon The Commission made a decmon wanted additional mformatron on oroundwater~ “on a minimum three acre lot size because that X qualrty before determining a proper minimum was the smallest size which preserved the ot size in the valley. That ground water qual- ~water quality of the valley. The added benefit ity study, completed in the spring of 1998, is that this was a fiscally and socially responproduced compelling evidence that in order to - sible decision as well. It is now becoming preserve the ground water qualrty of the valwell recognized thatin working with nature, . ley, which also acts as a major watershed for instead of agalnst it, not only is the job at hand often times better handled in the longl Ogden City, an “average septic system densi- seony ‘ofi 0 0RGONFOLISIRELREBOREE »‘nadn«ow««»ncn«o«ooo«wc»a»ey'tnfl - their land as they saw fit, which generally meant to fit in as many lots as possible, thereby creating the “sea of homes” which the decision ty of about three acre/system” is required. Interestingly, this closely paralleled the 2.5 acre lot size preference expressed by valley laamo IN THIS AD rom | _ S sroo DOLLARS OFF | . 'YOUR CLOSING COSTSH run, but\ it is also (Continued on page 6) aaases E S. lfilfifil’fififlfiwl% p ‘ 3 ® N E@}Rfig 41’@3!9‘? G#£60R30E009’63Q63§938Q#6 Wy e L2 $33 4% @W&e 335 Weieew . MEMEER UTAH BUREAU a IR S Dr. Steven B Hooper is pleased to announce the openmg of his prac- ice of General Dentistry. He will be open by appomtment Call now |l8for . R raaraaae* : vfigfi *f‘,%&z fi} @mete : S FREE first time dental exam 88 with this ad. This offer mcludes _decay dlSClOSlng x-rays Most 1nsuranee accepted ] ® . |