OCR Text |
Show Page 12 The Ogden Valley News Volume XXX Issue IX December 15, 2023 Letters to the Editor The Success of the Valley’s Future Hinges on the Character & Integrity of Its Elected Officials I am writing to express my concern about the state of our county governance and the critical role that representation plays in its effectiveness. As we navigate the complex landscape of dramatic changes to Ogden Valley, it becomes increasingly evident that the success of the future of this Valley hinges on the character and integrity of our elected officials. The individuals who occupy positions of power must be driven by a sense of duty to the public rather than personal gain. At its core, a government is a reflection of its people. The representatives we elect serve as the bridge between the diverse tapestry of our society and the legislative halls where decisions are made. A government is only as good as the moral compass of its representatives. Ethical governance requires transparency, accountability, and a commitment to the welfare of the people. And then we have last night’s Weber County Commission meeting (held Dec. 5) where an amended street regulating plan was voted upon, as well as the creation of another commercial village node adjacent to New Town Eden. Mind you, this is a matter that the Ogden Valley Planning Commission has voted down twice within a six-month period, in a 5-2 vote in May 2023 and a 5-2 vote in Nov. 2023. Public representation should ensure that the needs and concerns of all segments of society are considered. It was very clear the Commissioners did not want to hear from the public. The public was given a total of 30 minutes to comment on their positions: 3 minutes Having spent, collectively, hundreds of hours of input into the development of multiple parts of Weber County’s ordinances, including the Ogden Valley general plan, we believe the Eden Crossing Development should not have been approved as it was presented before the Weber County Commissioners on December 5. We would like to point to five reasons why: 1. As has often been stated, one of the core goals of the general plan was to cluster highdensity development and leave open space whenever possible. Eden Crossing does not do this. Rather than achieving this goal, the current Eden Crossing plan injects high-density commercial parcels and high-density housing into AV-3 areas that are currently open spaces, agricultural, and low-density residential areas. 2. Eden Crossing will be a “free-standing” commercial development inserted into, and surrounded by, agricultural and residential properties that are not designated as commercial centers in the OV general plan. The public input into the general plan included the idea that the commercial areas would be clustered and contiguous. There was much sentiment against having multiple, separated commercial enterprises with, for example, a restaurant on one corner, a gas station on another, a market on another with open lands or residential areas found in between. 3. The developers of Eden Crossing are competing unfairly with existing commercial property owners and businesses currently located near Eden’s 4-way stop, and the developers will immediately realize great profits when the county changes the zoning. The Eden Crossing developers purchased property that is zoned AV-3. The commercial zones surrounding the 4-way stop have been in place for decades. For years, many businesses, rights of current residents of Ogden Valley are being trampled. The residents pay the price for development while The Applicant runs to the LETTERS-OPPORTUNITY cont. from page 2 bank with his bag of cash from the exploitation of the land and his neighbors. At the current oper’s future projects. As a result, it seems that hyper-rate of development in the Valley, if resi- there is none for future public use. The property dents were simply compensated for every time owner has a right to install a private system but they had to wait behind a construction stop sign, that should not then drive wholesale planning there would be no profits left for the developer! decisions in response. It appears that the upsizing The recent Eden Crossing proposal support- of pipe that has been touted as serving the public ed by our county commissioners, Gage Froerer, good is actually intended for future projects directJames Harvey, and Sharon Bolos, if developed, ly controlled by the developer. To now say that will have sacrificed the long-term enjoyment zoning should change due to the location of the of the Valley by the entire Valley in favor of the sewer line is the proverbial tail wagging the dog. short-term profits of a single applicant. This is Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs) unconscionable! The applicant’s Eden Crossing Despite the many ways in which the Eden sacrifices AV3 (agricultural valley) land, which Crossing application deviates from the General could be developed into a neighborhood similar Plan, the County seems to be looking to TDRs to the single-family neighborhood to its east— as the silver bullet that will save the valley a neighborhood full of long-term residents from itself. The data and images provided at the with children, dogs, gardens, and chickens—to, open house held at the Ogden Valley Library in instead, sacrifice this open ag land for the ben- Huntsville on September 23 opened the comefit of tourists who will fill the proposed hotels munity’s eyes to the growth that is allowable and condos, and the commercial ground that per current zoning. This was a good start to rewill only be enjoyed for short-term ski trips and engage the public in the discussion of how they’d drunken bachelorette parties. like to see the valley take shape. It could have The members of the Ogden Valley planning been a great launching point for public feedback commission, who truly represent us (and we regarding planning for future growth, yet no pubappreciate their countless unpaid hours)—the lic comment was allowed. I appreciated the effort Ogden Valley community—have voted down to shed light on the challenges we face moving the proposed Eden Crossing development in a forward, and I also appreciate the time they 5 to 2 vote… twice! And have recommended took to answer questions as folks milled about each time that the county commissioners do amongst the graphic displays. I would venture likewise. Also, Valley residents voted against to guess that they overheard a bit of shock and the proposed Eden Crossing development with concern as people digested this information. As a 3,000-signature ballot, asking county commis- a planning strategy, one might have come away sioners to maintain the Valley’s longstanding from this feeling that perhaps it’s time to revisit culture of ag lands, neighborhoods, and families the General Plan and possibly revise it to address in the Valley by rejecting the proposed develop- recent development pressures and the concerns ment and its accompanying new road proposal. of residents. However, I came away feeling as In a just world, the short-term property rights of though the intent was to scare people into acceptthe applicant would not trump the long-term prop- ing high-density development such as the Eden erty rights of residents who call the Valley home, Crossing “urban center” as the only solution. many of them doing so for multiple generations. It is not the only solution. I wonder now, after The vote of our county commissioners— digesting the information provided, if people Gage Froerer, James Harvey, and Sharon would rather have three-acre lots where families Bolos—on December 5 that took away the can raise their children, than urban centers built rights of the people in favor of a single devel- primarily for transient visitors? We won’t know oper’s high-density land-use proposal that goes until a community wide discussion and evaluaagainst the general plan, was a travesty. tion of the pros/cons takes place. As a community, may we continually grow At the library open house, the planner mentogether and become more and more unified…. tioned that even if all the remaining unbuilt “Stay Valley Strong!” development rights were transferred to the village nodes, those rights would be used up before the Cord, Lisa, and Josh Pack, nodes were built to full capacity. If that is the Eden case, why would we entertain transferring rights to the outskirts of these nodes, as Eden Crossing proposes? Wouldn’t we want the existing villages built to their capacity first to avoid dead zones where the General Plan calls for active centers? When inquiring about allowable uses along Valley Junction Drive in Feb. 2021, Weber County planning staff responded that Valley Junction Drive will act as a Main Street for this area, and that they’d expect to see street-front buildings with a building design that can define this area as New Town Eden. This concept was articulated in the Street Regulating Plan adopted in 2022. Eden Crossing’s developer has stated that their project would create New Town Eden’s Main Street. He says this as he’s been trying to convince everyone that Valley Junction is ruined due to current development there… that it’s too late for that to function as Main Street. This is false. There are vacant properties yet to be developed and redevelopment of existing properties is possible in the future. This won’t happen overnight, but the newly approved changes to the street regulating plan diminishes the walkable aspect of that area, per person, with a limit of ten people speaking for and ten against the proposal. Think about this… on such a large-scale decision, only a mere hour was allotted for public comment. Concerns were presented, Utah code 17-27a-401 was presented… and the Commission did not comment or ask a single question about complying with the law or the fears put forth by the public. If you had multiple citizens question the legitimacy and the validity of a decision that will change the face of this valley forever, don’t you think you would attempt to address it or to present the facts that dispute it? Or even feign that you would consider the interests of the facts presented? The meeting appeared staged and scripted as the Commissioners comments did not reference nor align with the topics presented by the public. Their remarks were off topic, disjointed and lacked a cohesive line of reasoning. I have never witnessed anything like it in my life. When citizens see themselves mirrored in their elected officials, it instills a sense of confidence that their interests will, at the very least, be considered. It is through them that the voice of the people finds resonance in the corridors of power. We have a long road ahead of us, in this fight for the Valley to have a voice in its own future. I urge all Valley residents to go watch the first 39 minutes of the Weber County Working Session held on August 7th, 2023, and watch as the county’s own legal counsel advises against the will of the commissioners. It is mind blowing. Kelli Booth, Eden The County’s Vote in Support of Eden Crossing Tramples the Rights of Existing Property Owners We love the Valley! With all our hearts we love the Valley. Even more, we love the people who reside here. Our family roots run very, very deep, as do many others. This is one reason why there is so much feeling, emotion, and passion tied to the current decisions Weber County Commissioners Gage Froerer, James Harvey, and Sharon Bolos are directing in our Valley. Lisa’s third great-grandfather, Henry Holmes, brought the first plow into Liberty over the North Ogden Divide, and the family has been here ever since. From the days of homesteading to our current time, we have been blessed a thousand times over and over again! The Valley has always been known for its good neighbors and community members, from the eldest to the youngest, who would drop what they are doing and give anything needed to help one another. You could find yourself playing in a church basketball game one night being pulled off of an opponent by the referee and the very next week helping that same person shovel their roof off or he was helping you get the hay in before it got rained on! That’s how we rolled, Valley Strong! WE LOVE THE VALLEY! Much has been said about the amazing amenities that Ogden Valley has to offer—its unparalleled beauty and recreational opportunities—a place for the world to come and play. But as important as all these things are, we believe, as the Pack family, that Ogden Valley’s greatest amenity is the fulltime residents of our community—the fine men, women and families who reside here! Has there ever been a greater place to raise a family, where kids learn how to work hard, how to play hard, and learn how to love with all their hearts? Over the past few months, the argument that The Applicant’s property rights to develop a new commercial center, called Eden Crossing, must be upheld has consistently been wailed and whined. We ask, what about the rights of the surrounding property owners? Do they not have the right of quiet enjoyment of their invested property? Do they not have the right to come and go from their home as they wish? Are the surrounding property owners and Valley residents being justly compensated by developers every time their power goes out because of the nearby construction, for their water being turned off, their trees removed, their driveways torn up, their time wasted behind a man holding a stop sign during the months of construction work to put in a new sewer line, their neighborhood culture destroyed, or compensated for every time they are awakened early in the morning by the sound of a track-hoe’s incessant beeping? No, they are not compensated! The property Eden Crossing Should Not Have Been Approved for Several Reasons landowners, and developers have paid commercial rates to buy or rent commercial properties in these existing commercial areas, and they have also paid the higher commercial property taxes. Now, the Eden Crossing developers will unfairly profit from the marked increase in the value of each acre when their residential and agricultural (AV-3) land is turned into commercial property. 4. Many residents living near the proposed Eden Crossing purchased property as residential properties. These residents have expectations of relative zoning stability in their communities. They have invested in their properties, built homes, and have raised (and are raising) families in these homes located in areas that support single-family housing. “Form Based Zoning” may have advantages for developers and planners, but in the case of Eden Crossing, this is a type of spot zoning in an agricultural area that denigrates the value of neighboring residential properties and thus takes away the private property rights from Ogden Valley residents who are currently living near the newly proposed Eden Crossing who had the expectation, according to the general plan, that their neighboring properties would remain zoned for agricultural and single-family residents. 5. The Ogden Valley Planning Commission (OVPC) has twice recommended that the Weber County Commissioner deny the petitioner’s proposed Eden Crossing development. Members of the OVPC are appointed and approved by the Weber County Commissioners. We believe the Weber County Commissioners should support and trust the decisions of their own appointed OVPC members; thus, they should not have voted to approve the Eden Crossing development as recommended. Lee Schussman, Eden Greg Booth, Huntsville Brian Smith, Liberty Kim Wheatley, Eden which is needed to enable a thriving main street as was previously planned. This is directly taking development potential from existing zoned commercial areas—and those who have invested in these properties—and diverting it to a new area to benefit one single developer and his interests. Apparently, the bulk, if not all, of the TDRs for this project would be from the developer’s own Osprey Ranch. This does not meet the stated goals and principles outlined in the General Plan. It is allowable for TDRs to be transferred to receiving areas that call for higher density, but examples such as this, where a zoning change is required, is not a guaranteed right. Elected officials have the power and ability to require conditions of approval and to set specific rules for where these TDRs may come from. So, rather than taking them from unbuildable acreage within hillside development areas that are out of the public eye, they could be strategic and require that they come from high visibility, productive ag land, or river corridors and wetlands on the valley floor. These transfers of rights could then be used to better achieve the goals of the General Plan. If TDRs will be used up before commercial areas are built out, will the rush to develop rural areas become a modern-day gold rush, leading us to a future of boom and bust? The Eden Crossing proposal feels like a mad dash to create a false sense of inevitability while, in actuality, it may very well leave some landowners high and dry with few options on the land they have been tending to for generations. Some of these property owners have conveyed that they’ve been limited on developing their property to its highest and best use due to a lack of infrastructure. Now that it appears to be on the horizon, give them a chance. The alternative to the Eden Crossing proposal would be to allow TDRs to be fully developed within currently zoned village boundaries that respond to changing market demands rather than artificially creating urban centers. This would lead to the enduring and sustainable development patterns found in truly vibrant villages and main streets. The county shouldn’t have bypassed the smart growth potential of this valley for the sake of a seemingly quick fix. The bottom line? When a non-compliant application is denied, it motivates an applicant to seek alternatives that alleviate negative consequences, address concerns, and modify their plans to meet adopted policies. Difficult conversations are part and parcel, yet often lead to better outcomes. Democracy can be a messy process but it’s the system of governance that we are fortunate to have. Denying the Eden Crossing application would have provided the applicant an opportunity to address the many concerns of both the community and the OV Planning Commission, then return with a more viable solution that met the goals, principals, and implementation policies of the General Plan. The decision on December 5 was a wasted opportunity. With the commission’s approval, they stated several minimum conditions they wish to require of the applicant, with more to come through the development agreement. The applicant then stated that they value community input in their projects and will commit to engage and collaborate with the community to find a winwin. Time will tell whether these assurances were sincere. Angela Dean, Liberty 801-791-7875 |