Ogden Council Approves Rezoning for 853 Seventh Street, Clearing Way for Small‑lot Homes

The Ogden City Council on Sept. 16 adopted Ordinance 2025‑29 to rezone property at 853 Seventh Street to permit a small‑lot, owner‑occupied housing development under a time‑limited development agreement.

The measure passed after public hearings and lengthy council discussion over access, habitat loss, and legal questions about a private easement that provides driveway access. Vice Chair Hyer moved to adopt the ordinance; the motion passed on a roll‑call vote with Council Member Ritchie and Chair White voting no.

The petition before the council, as presented by Planning Commission staffer Joe Simpson, seeks to change the site from single‑family R16 zoning to R2S (two‑family/small lot) with a conditional overlay and a development agreement that would limit some uses and include a deed restriction requiring owner occupancy for 10 years. Simpson said the site comprises several parcels adjacent to canal easements, has limited public street frontage, and would be developed with private drives and a homeowners association to maintain common open space and private drives.

Developer Pat Burns, who said his purchase is contingent on resolving site hurdles, described the proposal as an effort to produce smaller single‑family homes for first‑time buyers. Burns confirmed an existing contract covers half the property and said a price of “2.3” was under negotiation for that portion; he declined to disclose terms for the remaining acreage. Burns said one canal on the site would be piped and another left open and that the project would require numerous technical studies before building permits could be issued.

Residents and nearby property owners urged the council to delay action or explore park acquisition. Suzanne Hogan, who lives below the hill, said the site is “a wonderful park” and pleaded for preservation; other speakers described deer, turkeys and mature trees on the parcel. David Yates, who identified himself as the owner of a home at 817 Monroe, told the council he has spent thousands on legal review disputing whether a purported easement over his property grants development access and asked the city to consider state ombudsman review. Joe Simpson and other staff told the council the easement is private and that title and legal review would be required during the subdivision and plat process.

Council members stressed different priorities. Supporters said the change aligns with the neighborhood plan and could yield starter homes for local families, noting the proposed development agreement includes a time limit that would revert zoning if the developer fails to obtain required approvals. Opponents warned of tree loss, traffic safety risks on the steep Seventh Street hill, and uncertainty over the easement and geotechnical feasibility. Several council members emphasized that any construction would require traffic, geotechnical and other studies before significant ground disturbance.

Under staff guidance, if the zoning remains in place the developer would later submit preliminary group‑dwelling and subdivision plats, undergo site plan and building permit reviews, and pass additional public hearings. Simpson noted the typical development agreement timeline provides an 18‑month period to secure permits after initial applications are submitted; if milestones are not met the zoning can revert to its prior classification.

The council’s vote to adopt Ordinance 2025‑29 sets the rezoning and development‑agreement process in motion; however, multiple council members publicly asked the developer and affected homeowners to resolve legal easement issues and minimize site disturbance until feasibility studies confirm the project can proceed. The council did not adopt any immediate conditions beyond the standard development agreement and the normal site‑plan and platting review process.

What happens next: the developer must complete required studies (traffic, geotechnical, utility and canal approvals), submit preliminary group‑dwelling and subdivision documents to staff and the planning commission, and secure any necessary title clarifications or agreements on easements. If the developer fails to meet the development agreement timeline, the zoning will revert to the prior classification.

Comments from the council and members of the public indicated continuing friction between housing needs and preservation priorities in the neighborhood; the formal action moves the property a step closer to development but leaves many technical and legal questions to be resolved before construction can start.