Are They Serious? Are We?

City Council Work Session: 8/8/06

By Dian Woodhouse

I have attended almost four hours of various City Council functions this evening. I am better off than those actually serving on it, however, since they attended at least five. I will therefore start with the Peterson proposal, which occurred in a Council Work session after the regular meeting, because that, in my opinion, is a new, important, and momentous occurrence. Other momentous occurrences will come later.

The purpose of this Work Session was to impart information about the proposed project to the Council. Bill Cook began by welcoming us all, more chairs were brought to the work session room, and we were informed that there would be no public comment. He then introduced Chris Peterson and his attorney, Tom Ellison from Stowe Reeves Law Firm.

Chris Peterson began by stating that, as he had begun this project and talked to people he respected, two strategies became clear. The one was to take the traditional path of development, involving creating a proposal and presenting it. The second was the view that members of the public would appreciate the opportunity to be included while the project was still a concept. He chose the second.

During his talks with members of the community, he was "encouraged about how much people care about their community," and also by the good ideas that were generated as to how to make the project better. Some of what people wanted was: continued urban access to the mountains, more stops for the gondola, parking lots around these stops, and an assurance that the housing development would indeed lead to the building of the resort. In a meeting with the Ogden Trails Network, for instance, he was asked if he could put a trailhead at a higher elevation. The concerns regarding WSU were---"Help us with our parking problem." Also a land shortage for expansion--could land be worked into the deal for the property Peterson wants, and also that WSU could benefit by having a "campus life." Also, a "link" from the land WSU owns by the Dee Events Center to main campus would be favorable for them.

But Peterson was not there tonight to talk about how these things could be accomplished. Instead, he and Tom Ellison were there to talk about how to put something together that works best for everybody. He introduced Mr. Ellison, who would discuss the process, and ended by stating that "Tarzan never let go of the last vine until he had hold of the next vine," and the forthcoming process discussion would be along those lines.

Tom Ellison spoke for some time, but basically, what they want is not only a development agreement, but a development agreement that will itself constitute the regulatory process for the project. Yes, we have regulations and ordinances in place to regulate projects. Problem is, they won't work for a project of this nature. Therefore, the development agreement will outline the process for the project, regulate it, and describe it. This was done at Brian Head, for instance.

Ogden City, we were told, "needs to have new ordinance structures." Projects like this one "require a different process for approvals."

One very important thing that would have to happen is that our zoning is evidently defective for a project of this nature. A special zone, with special definitions and conditions, would have to be created for it. This development agreement for this special zone would then become a "comprehensive regulatory tool" for the "ten to twenty year potential development life of this project."

Tom Ellison outlined five steps for crafting this development agreement. They are: 1.) Identify specific approvals that are going to be required, and needed policy decisions. Look at any general plan amendments and ordinances that need to be amended to "create a regulatory structure," although the project will be regulated in the end by a development agreement: 2.) Explore different changes to your ordinance structures, hearings, and evaluations: 3.) Application step. Draft the agreement, subject to a review and approval process. Would include general plan amendments, the new special zone, and modification of general plan annexation policies: 4.) Final documentation step. Appropriate resolutions, development agreements, ordinances, and approval of the project made as a package, 5.) Financial commitments, approvals, and land sale required from the city council, example: bonding for the gondola. They have to be sure we will hold up our end of this.

All of these things are under the purview of the City Council and Administration. It was emphasized that the entire project had to be approved as a package, and could not be approved in parts. It will all have to be done together. The ability to meet current requirements of small parcel zoning regulations is not possible. No ordinances exist that would accommodate this project. A special zone will have to be created, and that zone applied to this land. "We are already well into this process," we were told, "because of the work you have already asked your staff to do." The first steps are not a commitment to the project, they are "a commitment to the city of Ogden."

Someone asked if the planning commission would be involved, and the answer was that this is a legislative process. (I assume that meant no, as it is the Council that is the legislative body.)

Amy Wicks asked exactly who this development would be with. The answer was, probably an LLC, or something of that nature. They don't have an entity formed yet to do this, evidently. Councilwoman Wicks also asked if this special zone would eliminate the "sensitive overlay area" that was already in place, and the answer was that it would be an entirely new zone, and perhaps sensitive areas would be included in it.

Dorrene Jeske mentioned that we were being asked to change our laws, and WSU had been told that by law it could not build on the land Peterson wants to buy since it is right on top of the Wasatch fault and would be unsafe and that was a concern. The answer was that Ellison was unaware of any building that was planned for that particular area.

There you have it. Most of it.

(Editorial comments: Told you it was momentous. Basically, we are being told that we need to change our existing ordinances to accommodate this project. We are being told that we need to create a special zone for it, and show that we are financially committed to it, have gondola bonding in place, etc., before they will proceed.

Certain council members cheerfully mentioned the need to hammer out this development agreement--others asked questions of Peterson and Ellison as if requesting permission, for instance, to negotiate portions of the agreement they might find troublesome. Such permission was graciously granted. This I find an as great if not greater concern than the request itself. Because, to my way of thinking, we don't ask them if we can do things. They ask us if they can do things. And we then look at our existing laws and ordinances, weigh the factors, and answer yes or no. That, to me, is the process. It would, I believe, be very possible to waive certain existing requirements if, after examining the requirement, a determination was made that it was possible, but we must remember that our ordinances and processes exist for reasons, ostensibly good, well thought out ones, and to simply jettison them and tailor what we do to this project is not, I think, especially wise.

But they want us to show them that we're serious, by doing the things outlined above. Are we? Are they???)

(Close browser to return to main page)