City Council

Minutes of Work Session of Redevelopment Agency of Ogden City, Utah, February 16, 2016 Page Minutes of the Work Session of the Ogden City Redevelopment Agency held on Tuesday, February 16, 2016 at 7:47 p.m., in the Board Work Room on the third floor of the Municipal Building, 2549 Washington Boulevard, Ogden City, Weber County, Utah. Present: Chair Marcia L. White Vice Chair Bart E. Blair Board members Neil K. Garner Richard A. Hyer (via telephone) Luis Lopez Ben Nadolski Doug Stephens Board Deputy Administrator Janene Eller-Smith Board Policy Analyst Glenn Symes Communications Manager Amy Sue Mabey Also present: Chief Administrative Officer Mark Johnson Planning Manager Greg Montgomery Chief Deputy Recorder Lee Ann Peterson The purpose of the Work Session was to discuss the Ogden River Bend Phase I amendments and Board business. Ogden River Bend Phase I Amendments Board Policy Analyst Symes explained the proposed amendment to the Mixed Use Zone Master Development Agreement, or MUMDA, is specific to the townhomes proposed in Phase 1 of the development. The MUMDA is a requirement of the Mixed Use (MU) Zone and acts as a master development agreement for phased projects within the Ogden River Redevelopment Project Area. The proposal would amend the architectural style and materials of the townhomes proposed for the north end of the development area. The previously approved architectural design was a Victorian style. The amendment would allow the Transitional Modern design instead. Elements defining these styles were included in the Ogden Bend Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Guidelines document approved in 2011. Planning Manager Montgomery explained PEG Development is proceeding with the final phase of the River Bend project which consists of six townhomes. The initial proposal for the project included a two-story row of Victorian homes, but as the project got underway, the design concept changed and PEG later proposed three-story units. He reviewed elevations for the townhomes, highlighting the decks on the first and second story units as well as a change to the architectural style and stated the developer is requesting a change to the development agreement to allow the six townhome units to be constructed in this manner. He indicated the townhomes will be high-end and the most expensive units in the development at nearly $300,000; the developer is trying to incorporate design features into the units that will justify that price. Mr. Symes inquired as to the number of architectural styles the developer was allowed to choose from for the townhomes. Mr. Montgomery answered three: Victorian, arts and crafts, or transitional/modern. Mr. Symes stated that three different architecture styles must be included in each block throughout the development and that requirement will be met with the proposed amendment. Mr. Montgomery confirmed that is correct. Chair White asked if the amendment will change the height of the units and impact the views from other units in the development. Mr. Montgomery revisited the elevations of the proposed units and adjacent units and indicated he feels the view corridors from other units are preserved. Board member Nadolski referenced the Planning Commission recommendations and asked if there is any language included in the proposed resolution that will bind the developer to the recommendations made by the Planning Commission. Mr. Montgomery noted the elevations will be an exhibit to the development agreement and that is the document that will bind the developer to the recommendations made by the Planning Commission. Board member Lopez asked if all units will have a purchase price of $300,000. Mr. Montgomery stated that is the approximate purchase price for each of the six townhomes subject to this requested amendment; there are other for-sale units on the property, but there are also apartment units available for lease. Chair White asked Mr. Montgomery if he is concerned about changing the architecture style of the six townhomes. Mr. Montgomery answered no and indicated one goal for the project was to provide a variety of architecture styles so that it does not appear as if one developer completed a mass construction project. The MUMDA calls for three different design styles on the block on which the townhomes will be located and the purpose of that is to give the appearance that units were constructed over time throughout different architectural periods. He stated he feels this amendment is in line with that goal. Board member Stephens asked for information about the landscaping that will be provided at the townhomes. Mr. Montgomery noted the front porch area of each townhome will be landscaped using drought tolerant plants and drip irrigation systems; the landscaped area for each unit will be approximately 80 feet. The units will only be setback 10 to 12 feet from the sidewalk. Board member Stephens asked if the residents will hear traffic on the street since the units will be located so close to the street. Mr. Montgomery pointed out that Park Boulevard is a dead-end street and traffic levels should not be too high. Vice Chair Blair stated he is a fan of the Victorian architecture style, but he likes the amendment that is being proposed. Board member Stephens agreed and added that he likes the idea of providing a variation in architecture style to avoid the ‘cookie- cutter’ look on the block. Mr. Symes reported an action item regarding the requested amendment will be included in the Redevelopment Agency agenda for the meeting scheduled for February 23, 2016. Board Business Chair White reminded the members to submit their Capital Improvement Project (CIP) ranking sheets to Board staff. The meeting adjourned at 8:01 p.m. ________________________________________ LEE ANN PETERSON, MMC CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER ________________________________________ MARCIA L. WHITE, CHAIR APPROVED: June 7, 2016