There's a blockbuster Marshall Thompson story in this morning's Standard-Examiner, revealing the latest development in the ongoing Powder Mountain rezone saga. Frustrated with the regulatory delays and hurdles that have been imposed by the Weber County rezoning process, Powder Mountain owner/developer Mark Arnold has suddenly decided to bypass the county regulatory process altogether, and to incorporate Powder Mountain as its own self-regulating municipality. We provide below the lead paragraphs of today's Std-Ex article:
In taking this action, Mr. Arnold is attempting to avail himself of the provisions of HB466, a bill which was intended by the legislature to streamline the process of incorporation for small municipalities. HB466, (signed into law by the Governor in March of 2007) allows a town to incorporate if there are at least 100 residents and certain ownership and land value requirements are met. Unfortunately, the bill also takes the final authority for incorporation away from county government and gives it to Lt. Governor Gary Herbert. If 50 percent of the residents and landowners support the petition, the county can't stand in the way of incorporation. Subsequent events have revealed, we believe, that cutting county governments out of the approval loop was a big legislative mistake.OGDEN — Powder Mountain ski resort may soon become Powder Mountain Town — developers filed paperwork Friday with the Weber County clerk to incorporate as a municipality.
The action could allow resort developers to move ahead with plans to expand into a massive four-season resort in the Ogden Valley without going through the county planning commission.
Last month, after months of workshops and public hearings, the Ogden Valley Planning Commission voted in favor of the resort’s rezoning proposal, but attached almost 20 conditions that limited the density of the development and required secondary access roads.Powder Mountain owner Mark Arnold told the Standard-Examiner that some of the requirements were unreasonable and would have destroyed his vision of the project.
“I just want to see our vision through, and the way things are going, this is what came to the surface to enable us to do that,” he said.
We've tangentially discussed the unintended ill effects of this bill on Weber County Forum before, in the context of a proposed ski resort development now pending in Wasatch County, wherein Arizona real estate developer Dean Sellers is attempting to develop his own 8,366-acre 4-season resort, and to bypass Wasatch County regulatory authority through application of the HB466 municipal incorporation process. For a robust summary of the Sellers case, we link a pertinent Voice of Deseret blog article here, together with a short series of subsequent VOD articles, nicely detailing some of the more recent developments in this loosely analogous Wasatch County case.
As it stands, HB466, originally intended to cut the red tape for the process of incorporating small Utah townships, has instead become an unintended mechanism allowing slick developers to thumb their noses at county zoning regulations. Such seems certainly the situation with respect to the now pending Powder Mountain municipal incorporation application, judging from the comments of Mr. Arnold in today's Std-Ex article. The defects of HB466 have also caught the attention of at least a few legislators, and the Utah Association of Counties has made it a high priority to steer this legislation back to the legislative floor for remedial modification, in order to cut Utah counties back into the municipal approval process.
Whether any "curative" 2008 legislation will affect Powder Mountain's now-pending town incorporation application is any one's guess. It's possible however that any new legislative requirements could be deemed by the courts to be ex post facto, and that Mr. Arnold's application might be necessarily "grandfathered", and processed under the rules then-existing at the time of his original petition.
And what say our gentle readers about all this?
Update 1/20/08 11:56 a.m. MT: We were delighted to discover that the Voice of Deseret blog, which we cited and linked above, has this morning published yet another excellent article, again dealing with the topic of developer abuse of the provisions of Utah HB466. This morning's article discusses the Powder Mountain story, provides a top-notch fact summary and analysis, and then segues into a discussion of the important underlying topic of rural gentrification. We believe this article is a must-read for those who are closely following the Powder Mountain development story. Read the latest VOD article here.
29 comments:
I like it very much, This is exactly what these planning commissions deserve when they make things so difficult because of there personal agendas (f******g Sierra Club types) This article gave me a smile for the rest of the day.
Hey Persistent, your statement seems to be predicated on your own ignorance. The Ogden Valley planning commission is not related to the Sierra Club, none of its commissiners are Sierra Club folks. The commission acted out of concern from an overwhelming majority of valley residents. Their conditions were not far fetched, or unatainable. Developers just prefer cart blanche acceptance of their intentions, with no concideration for the negative impacts on others.
What baffles me is the fact that the western Weber County residents don't realise the negative impact this will have on them.
I disagree that were the legislature to outlaw this that it would still go forward as ex post facto or grandfathered.
It is a regulatory matter, not a punitive matter, which is where the ex post facto applies.
Government changes regulations all the time. Even were the town of Powder Mountain fully incorporated at the time of a change in law, the legislature could wipe the town out legally if it chose to do so, just as it could disincorporate Ogden at any time it chose to do so.
This must be addressed this legislative session. Please change the tone to reflect that residents must ask their legislators to stop this practice and to state as a matter of law that Aspen, Bryce, and Powder Mountain misapplied the law and are not valid Utah cities.
I, for one, will applaud Mr. Bob Geiger's efforts to get this development under way. I say, "Don't let the bastards get you down, Bobby!" Apropos of nothing: There is a little concept called the categorial imperative; it's a fancy way of saying don't dish it out if you can't take it. I would call all Davis County residents to its attention, please.
*categorical
Hey Bill C. your statement is your opinion, obviously based on your ignorance. The conditions set forth by the planning commission were indeed far fetched and certainly UNATTAINABLE, the secondary access road was UNATTAINABLE you idiot. Speak truth, or not at all. More baffling to me is all the positive aspects of this project that you (Bill C.) are not able to see with your glasses all fogged up from your apparent case of NIMBYitis!
Looks like little Bobby G is back at it again. I think he needs to be sedated and locked up for a few years with Bubba, then he may learn the real meaning of life.
Persistent,
Please elaborate upon "all the positive aspects" of the Powder Mountain development.
I'm feeling so f*****g giddy now I believe I'll hop in my hummer, race to Ogden at top speed, and f*rt in a few hotel elevarors!
The above post was not mine you f******s. First off why don't you explain all of what (Bill C.) calls the "negative impacts that will be felt by western Weber county residents."
Persistent, the secondary road is a must. The current one falls far outside the allowable road building guidelines,too steep a grade, too sharp of turns, it is a safety nightmare, and unreliable doe to numerous closures. Emergency vehicles at times cannot even attempt to climb it.
So, in the event of a large fire you believe the residents of Weber County should always pony up so helicopters can be used in the place of fire trucks?
As Birdlips requested, please explain the virtues of this, so one can make a determination in the absence of ignorance.
P.S. I could be unmovably biased, I have at least studied their proposal. Have you?
I must have been posting while yo posed your question persistent. Other negative impacts for western Weber County include, financial burden, in a very large way. To accomidate what these developers have in mind, almost all roads leading there will require substantial investment. This would also include eventually taking on the burden of redoing the existing road up to the resort. Plus the financial burden of supplying all other county services to such a remote, unaccessible location.
Water issues are plentiful. How much water can be sacrificed? Detrimental effects on the ground water which eventually wind up as Ogden City drinking water comes to mind.
The water quality of Pineview has steadily diminished over the last couple of decades, this due to what developement has all ready happened in the valley, it's not inconcievable that this new round of development at Powder Mountain would turn Pine View into a big green slough.
Why do you think Cache County views this as a non starter?
Developer/Owner Mr. Arnold displays the unnerving arrogance of real estate developers throughout the west.
Q: Should he be able to reasonably develop his property according to his money-grubbing visions?
A: Yes
Q: Should he be unfettered in his vision, unto the point where he creates a substantial nuisance to his neighboring property owners?
A: Obviously... NO! Make as much money as you can, Mr. Arnold... but DO NOT step on your neighbors' toes.
This latest act of grandstanding on the part of Mr. Arnold illustrates what a poor neighbor he would be to the adjacent communities who would ultimately bear the burden of his frontier-style excesses.
Mr. Arnold: Go home! Ogden Valley residents know a lot about frontier values too, especially when it comes down to justice.
Hey Rudi, chime in. You and I have had some good conversations on this topic, share with you posters some of your insights. You've got about 38 minutes until you can watch the Utes destroy the evil blue clad southerners.
Have you noticed that all Utah "suede shoe" hustlers invariably refer to their "vision?"
This bullshit phrase gets special traction in Utah.
Ever wonder why?
Utah - Home of the Gullible Sheeple
I for one will admit that as far as anything close to HIGH ADVENTURE OUTDOOR RECREATION here in Weber Countyis concerned, driving to and from Powder Mountain on a snowy day is hard to top.
It's interesting that those in support of the development take basically a "to blazes with the neighbors and their opinions" position.
These fools should note that tyranny cuts both ways. Some day it will cut them down too.
These money grubbing a-holes will be turning to their neighbors to pay much of the cost. The neighbors will have to build roads, infrastructure etc. Development usually costs more than it produces.
All who feel so inclined should write their representatives to repeal this law. It is fully legally valid for the repeal to bar all incorporations began or completed during the past year. Don't buy the ex post facto or granfathered argument. Those apply in criminal issues, not in land use or regulatory issues. It will not have to be litigated. The courts have already decided this many, many times.
The critical issue is that the legislature act to stop all of this during the current session. Write your congressperson and senator!
My guess is that the real world financial condition that is in great flux, and apparently going down the tubes, will solve this Powder Mountain greed fest as well as the one in Heber and near Cedar City - at least until the next economic bubble inflates again.
Meanwhile it is just another sad example of the havoc that continually flows forth from the annual convention of fools, AKA the Utah Legislature.
There are 1100 new bills being introduced this year alone! A very large number of the legislators are basic everyday people without much understanding of the economic and political world outside of their own legislative district. They self admittedly cannot digest and understand the vast majority of these bills. Yet the State Law requires them to vote on every bill regardless of their knowledge of it. So what that ends up doing is saddling the people with a huge shit load of new laws passed by a bunch of bumpkins that didn't have a clue about what the law did or didn't do, but mostly voted for or against it at the direction of their leadership - who apparently don't understand these new laws themselves.
This law in question at Powder Mountain is a perfect example of this folly.
I rail loudly and longly against this Mr. Arnold; I condemn his greed, malfeasance and corruption. But I do admire his advocate and agent of subterfuge, Persistent. Persistent is interesting and will add a lot to the Eden community once his penchant for avarice has abated. I live in Davis County. I have no credibility because of this hypocritical position. I cheer for Brigham Young University.
There has been no response, so far, to the requests for “"all the positive aspects" of the Powder Mountain Development....shocker!....Therefore, I located a couple of links related to appropriate development in and around ski resorts. Please check out the first link and visualize a more responsible type of development than the “business as usual” model. It would be very informative to attend the lecture at the second link, IMHO.
Here is a link to an article titled, “Next-Generation 'Sustainable Development Community' Emerges In The Heart of Utah's Prime Ski Country.” The article contains some nice guidelines for community development, some of which could be appropriate for the Powder Mountain development.
The article opens with, ”One of the nation's first new neighborhood construction projects to participate in the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED-ND (Neighborhood Development) pilot program is emerging in the heart of Utah's ski country, just outside of Park City.
Newpark, a thirty-eight acre 'green' community, is being planned and constructed with the latest sustainability concepts in mind.
The community's development firm, Newpark Corporation Inc., retained Denver-based sustainability consultants, DOMANI, to facilitate the LEED-ND planning, design, and oversight process.
Attractive, environmental-friendly living and commercial space at Newpark will feature green planning and architectural concepts to minimize land consumption, energy and water usage, and traffic generation. Innovative green building concepts designed and built into the community will be exhibited in an appealing nature education center that will be LEED-platinum certified.”.....
Here is a notice about an upcoming lecture for the University of Utah Green Bag Series: “Sustainable Development and Management of Ski Resorts,” on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 12:15 PM. The Powder Mountain development team would be wise to send someone to take notes and ask questions.
The speaker is Gian P. Zini, who is apparently from Italy: “Gian will discuss the sustainable development of mountain areas and ski resorts and the impact of the recreation industry on mountain ecosystems, culture and economics, focusing on the situation in North America, specifically Utah and the Wasatch Mountain Region.
Gian P. Zini retired from the legal profession in 2004 after twenty years of active practice. He was admitted in Italy and licensed as a foreign legal consultant in New York. Gian now works as an economist, international consultant and academic, drawing upon his worldwide and multidisciplinary professional and research track record in a broad spectrum of industries.”
Birdlips, thanks for the link, but somewhere some how should there not be some sort of means for Counties to evaluate need? I mean a saturation measurement. To me it's very wastefull and makes no sense to continue granting more developement when there is all ready more than adequate area all ready developed. Take for instance Roy or No. Davis county. They're currently developing every inch of property left, while almost half of their original developement is for sale or falls into a persistent state of undesirability.
The Ogden Valley is just plain over developed all ready, uncontrolled and unneeded developement hurts all of us. Including new fangled GREEN upscale developement. I will conceed if it's going to be, the latter is prefered.
Bill:
A large portion of the Ogden Valley has been developed poorly. What I’m trying to say is that all growth and development, anywhere, should be planned and accomplished responsibly. Sustainable and/or “green” guidelines should always be implemented, everywhere.
A simple definition of “sustainable,” from the Green Building Primer website:
'... meeting the needs of people today without destroying the resources that will be needed ... by persons in the future; based on long range planning and the recognition of the finite nature of natural resources...'
PS.... Did you know that there are golf courses that follow sustainable design? Check out this article about the Roaring Forks Club golf course in Basalt, Colorado.
Here’s the story of the design process and some of the issues involved with the community. Please read this and see how some of the same issues are relevant along the Wasatch Front.
Here’s a link to the company that designed the course.
Birdlips, golf courses have quite a task ahead of them. Many of the older courses could be improved from an enviromental perspective.
Older courses locally tend to be nothing more than acres of grass, wide open grass from tee thru the green. This requires a hell of a lot of water and fertilizer, more native rough needs to be put in, in place of all that excess grass. This leads to a more target style course which the better players have no qualms with. But the the majority of players tend to not be as good as they would like to think they are, in fact that applies to all golfers, the game always wins. But my point is, we need to change the players mindset along with the courses. This gradually happening nationwide, but is slower locally.
How this whole thing plays out will give us a good idea of what how the state views the development proposals that are cropping up for the northern part of the state. We'll see if it is the state that had held Ogden down, or if it is its own people.
If the state helps this effort along, then we'll know that we in for a fight to stop Chris Petersen and the other developers who are proposing growth and development plans for Ogden and other northern cities.
After all, Smart Growth, isn't really about growth, but rather about keeping this place the private playground of its natives. Never mind the negative consequences for tax base, historical building preservation, and job base. What's most important is that the trails I hike are are MINE, MINE, MINE!
The famous squirrel patrol leader, peterson's plan and proposal had nothing to do with growth, it was a get rich quick land grab, and scheme of the worst order. Same can be said for powder mt. new thing.
These so called developements should have to pay for all their impact and demonstrate their ability to do so, along with viability and sustainability. They should not require the current taxpayer from subsidizing or picking up all these related costs that come as a by product of their project.
What is the HB466 requirement regarding the feasibility study that a County must do? Could this bring the 17% grade road issue back into regulatory authority?
Looks like Weber County still has approval authority through the feasibility study. Hopefully this can block unfair greedy manipulation. After all, the things Weber County wanted were reasonable, and based on infrastructure, public safety, health, and welfare.
Post a Comment