PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
REGULAR/BRIEFING SESSION
TUESDAY, AUGUST 2, 1988
The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met as the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, August 2, 1988, at 5:00 p.m. in Suite 300, City Hall, 324 South State Street.
The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Tom Godfrey Wayne Horrocks Roselyn Kirk Sydney Fonnesbeck Willie Stoler Alan Hardman.
Mayor Palmer DePaulis and Roger Cutler, were present.
Council Chairperson Godfrey presided at the meeting.
BRIEFING SESSION
The Council interviewed John Dunlop prior to consideration of his appointment to the Salt Palace/Fine Arts Advisory Board. Councilmember Stoler indicated he would not vote in favor of Mr. Dunlop’s or Mr. Rampton’s appointment to the Board because they and the third candidate Marcia Price, were all from Council District 3. He said that his opposition was based upon a concern that there be geographic balance on the city’s boards and commissions. He told Mr. Dunlop that his vote to deny the appointment was not a reflection of his opinion of Mr. Dunlop’s or Mr. Rampton’s qualifications, but simply a reflection of his belief that there were qualified people in all districts.
Mr. Dunlop said he had a Master’s Degree in economics from the University of Utah, and had lived his entire life in Salt Lake City. He said that he had extensive experience in financial matters, including the financing of the renovation of the Utah State Fairgounds. Councilmember Kirk asked Mr. Dunlop if he was aware that the intent of the agreement which created the board was that the public sector subsidy of the facilities should be short term only, and Mr. Dunlop said he was aware of that and although he would not say that he would be successful in accomplishing that goal, he could say that it was with a similar intent that the financing of the renovation of the Fairgrounds was designed.
The Council interviewed Anthony Rampton and he said he had attended school in the state and had received his Juris Doctor from the University of Utah in 1976. He said that in addition to his general qualifications, he had been involved in developing a solution to the Salt Palace/Fine Arts facilities funding problem from the beginning. Councilmember Kirk observed that he had been involved in the lobbying efforts at the legislature and therefore had a lot of contacts at the state level. Councilmember Bittner said she also had concerns about the geographic representation of board members.
Linda Hamilton, Executive Director, briefed the Council on the evening’s agenda. Mark Morrison, Assistant City Engineer, told the Council that the low bidder on Special Improvement District 38-830 might not be appropriately licensed to do the work required in the SID and therefore requested the Council’s permission to investigate the possibility of awarding the bid to the second low bidder. Roger Cutler, City Attorney, proposed language by which the award could be accomplished according to the needs of the City Engineer’s Office.
Fred Olsen, Ballard, Spahr, Andrews, and Ingersoll, briefed the Council on the proposed extension of the escrow period on the Landmark Hotel-Airport Holiday Inn Industrial Development Revenue Bond (IRB) issue. Mr. Olsen indicated that the Landmark Hotel people were requesting that the escrow period be extended by six months to allow them to close on the deal. Councilmember Godfrey said that he hesitated to rush the extension resolution through because two of the Councilmembers had never been through the IRB process and probably did not fully understand what was expected of them.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck said that as the current escrow period on the bonds would expire before the Council had time to schedule a briefing on the IRB process, it was probably best that the Council move ahead with the current resolution and use another new IRB as a learning process for Councilmembers Horrocks and Hardman. Brent Wilde, Planning and Zoning, briefed the Council on issues surrounding the public hearings on the Brasher Auto Auction rezoning petition and the proposed amendment to the “C-3A” zoning text.
The meeting adjourned at 6:00 PM
The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in regular session on Tuesday, August 2, 1988, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 324 South State Street.
The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Tom Godfrey Wayne Horrocks Roselyn Kirk Sydney Fonnesbeck Willie Stoler Alan Hardman.
Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Roger Cutler, city attorney, Kathryn Marshall, city recorder, and LaNita Brown, deputy city recorder, were present. Council Chairperson Godfrey presided at the meeting and Councilmember Hardman conducted the meeting.
Lavon Young, representing Eckankar, Great Salt Lake Satsang Society, gave the invocation.
The Council led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Approval of Minutes
Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to approve the minutes of the Salt Lake City Council for the regular meetings held Tuesday, July 12, 1988, and Thursday, July 21, 1988, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(M 88-1)
Special Recognition
Mayor Depaulis indicated that awards would be presented to Ernest Mariani and Pykes Manufacturing Company in recognition of their contribution to the city of 2,000 pieces of new clothing valued at $30,000, along with clothes racks and hangers for the “Women Helping Women - Work Clothing Drive”; and to Jean Pierce and the Salt Lake Community College/Skills Center for their aid in organizing the distribution of the clothing. He said that on Saturday, June 18, 1988, more than 300 low-income, single mothers arrived at the Salt Lake Skills Center to pick out three outfits each among the 4,000 pieces of clothing available.
They came from throughout the Salt Lake Valley as well as Orem, Ephraim, and St. George. He said the idea was conceived by a group of female employees who wanted to do something to help fellow women in need, and the clothing was donated by city employees during their “Women Helping Women - Work Clothing Drive” held the week of May 16, 1988. Councilmember Godfrey awarded the two certificates.
PETITIONS
Petition 400-609 Carl Larsen, Majestic Meats.
RE: Set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, September 6, 1988, at 6:40 p.m., to obtain comment concerning the request to close an alley located south of 1700 South at 115 West.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to set the date for the public hearing for Tuesday, September 6, 1988, at 6:40 p.m., which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(P 88-224)
Petition 400-621 Margrit Schneider-Atherton.
RE: Set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, September 6, 1988, at 6:50 p.m., to obtain comment concerning the request to close a portion of Paxton Avenue west of 400 West and east of the I-15 freeway.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to set the date for the public hearing for Tuesday, September 6, 1g88, at 6:50 p.m., which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(P 88-225)
Petition 400-610 Judge Memorial High School.
RE: A request to approve the honorary name of “Bulldog Avenue” for 1100 East between 600 and 700 South.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Fannesbeck seconded to suspend the rules and on a first reading adopt Resolution 93 of 1988, approving the honorary name, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(P 88-223)
DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
FINANCE
#1. RE: The execution of a third supplemental indenture for the $8,800,000 Salt Lake City, Utah Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (Landmark Hotel-Airport Holiday Inn Project) Series 1986, extending the escrow period for an additional three months.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to adopt Resolution 92 of 1988, authorizing execution of the third supplemental indenture and extending the escrow period for six months, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(Q 86-18)
#2. RE: A proposed ordinance granting to A T & T Communications the right and privilege to construct, erect, operate and maintain over and under Emigration Canyon Road, wires, cables, and underground conduits in connection with its telecommunication business.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Bittner seconded to suspend the rules and adopt on a first reading, Ordinance 52 of 1988, granting the franchise, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(O 88-25)
MAYOR’S OFFICE
#1. RE: The appointments of John Dunlop and Anthony Rampton to the Fine Arts Advisory Board.
ACTION: Councilmember Fonnesbeck moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to approve the appointments. Councilmember Stoler moved to make a substitute motion to refer the appointments to the Committee of the Whole, which was seconded by Councilmember Bittner. Councilmembers Bittner, Horrocks, Hardman, and Stoler voted aye, and Councilmembers Fonnesbeck, Godfrey, and Kirk voted nay.
DISCUSSION: Councilmember Kirk said the state and county board members had already been appointed and she felt that because the two persons were eminently qualified, they needed to make the appointments now and discuss the issue of representation at another time. Councilmember Godfrey said the hang-up on this issue was that all three persons they had discussed for membership on the board lived in District 3 and they had an overabundance of committee and board members from Districts 3 and 6. He said he felt the two persons were well qualified and that they should be appointed or the city would not have representation in decisions that would be made now. He said although the Council had a policy on geographical locations of board members, it had not been adhered to in the past because they were always looking for qualified people.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked what could be gained by putting off the decision and Councilmember Stoler said he hoped that the Mayor would understand that the majority of the Council would like representation from the entire community rather than just one district and he felt there were people qualified throughout the city. Mayor Depaulis said he had a problem understanding their concern because he did not consider geographical locations in making the selections but was looking for qualifications, and that he could not select 7 persons so each district could be represented, but only 2.
Councilmember Bittner said that if a list of all the boards and committees was compiled it would show that 70 or 80% of the members came from Districts 3 and 6, and although she and other Councilmembers had mentioned that before, they were not getting attention. She said she felt that geographical location was important in selecting members for boards and committees as policies were made on the boards that affected the city.
Mayor Depaulis said that 70 or 80% was not correct, that approximately 300 people were appointed to boards or committees and his office tried to appoint on a geographic balance, but on certain committees they hadn’t followed a strict boundary or geographic representation because certain skills were needed. He said the Fine Arts Advisory Board called for representation with business management as well as fine arts skills in order to deal with the issues, and those were the criteria he had used.
Councilmember Hardman read from the policy the Council had adopted regarding the appointment of individuals to boards and committees, which stated that geographic location should be considered and he said the Council was still struggling with those issues. He said the majority of appointments did come from 2 or 3 districts and maybe this was not the time to wrestle with the issue, but they needed to send it back to the Committee of the Whole whether they wanted to or not.
Councilmember Kirk said the irony of the issue would be to not have representation on the committee after all they had gone through to get the issue passed through the legislature. She asked the Council to approve the appointments now and discuss the issue later on another appointment. Mayor Depaulis reminded the Council that their policy was a Council policy whereas he had to appoint under an administrative purview but he would try to be as accommodating as possible.
(I 88-18)
#2. RE: The appointment of Joan Degiorgio to the Public Utilities Advisory Committee.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to approve the appointment, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(I 88-6)
#3. RE: The reappointments of Roger Jones, Cynthia Char Ong, and J. Boyer Jarvis to the Salt Lake City Library Board.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to approve the reappointments, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(I 88-17)
#4. RE: The reappointment of James W. Webb to the Mosquito Abatement District.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to approve the reappointment, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(I 88-12)
#5. RE: The reappointment of Allen Blodgett to the Airport Authority Board.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to approve the reappointment, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(I 88-8)
#6. RE: The- reappointment of Thomas Kass to the Art Design Board.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to approve the reappointment, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(I 88-16)
PUBLIC UTILITIES
#1. RE: The execution of an agreement between the city and the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) for the reimbursement by UDOT of city’s cost of moving its culinary water facilities in connection with federal aid highway road reconstruction of California Avenue from Redwood Road to Pioneer Road.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to adopt Resolution 96 of 1988, authorizing execution of the agreement, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(C 88-411)
#2. RE: The execution of an agreement between the city, Salt Lake County, the State of Utah, and the United States Forest Service (Wasatch Cache National Forest) for water quality monitoring activities in the Wasatch Canyons.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to adopt Resolution 97 of 1988, authorizing execution of the agreement, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(C 88-375)
PUBLIC WORKS
#1. RE: Accepting a bid for construction work, and subject to approval of the City Engineer, authorizing execution of a contract with the low bidder for construction of improvements of Special Improvement District No. 38-830, Pierpont Avenue, as set forth in the Notice of Intention; providing for alteration of the district by addition of Rate 14, and amendment of rates 5 and 7 of proposed improvements; further providing for issuance of interim warrants and for the addition of the interest thereon to assessable costs.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to adopt Resolution 91 of 1988, conditionally accepting a bid for construction work and authorizing execution of a contract with the low bidder, provided that they have the appropriate licenses for construction of improvements in SID 38-830, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(Q 88-3)
#2. RE: The execution of an agreement between the city and UDOT regarding street sweeping by the city to be paid by UDOT.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to adopt Resolution 94 of 1988, authorizing execution of the agreement, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(C 88-413)
#3. RE: The execution of an agreement between the city and UDOT for street lighting at several places on Redwood Road, with UDOT furnishing labor and materials and the city furnishing maintenance thereafter and paying for the power.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to adopt Resolution 95 of 1988, authorizing execution of the agreement, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
(C 88-412)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Petition 400-594, Brasher Auto Auction.
RE: A public hearing at 6:15 p.m. to obtain comment regarding the request to rezone the property located at approximately 700 South and 5600 West from “A-1” to “M-1A” classification, and consider adopting the ordinance relating thereto.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Stoler seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
Councilmember Bittner moved and Councilmember Horrocks seconded to adopt Ordinance 51 of 1988, rezoning the property, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
DISCUSSION: Doug Wheelwright, Planning and Zoning, briefed the Council on the rezoning request and said the original petition had requested to change approximately 30 acres from an Agricultural “A-1” zone to and Industrial “M1-A” zone. He said the Planning Commission had recommended that they not rezone the entire 30 acres without a provision for rezoning some of the previously zoned “M1-A” to “C-2” to provide a corridor or buffer strip along 700 South and 5600 West to protect and control land uses, signage, and site development aspects. He said they received an amended petition requesting that only 7 acres be rezoned.
Councilmember Horrocks said this property was in the Northwest Quadrant where they were hoping to develop a residential area on the west side of 5600 West, but because the Master Plan was not in place they needed to zone carefully to protect residences that would be built there in the future. Councilmember Bittner said they should request the Planning Commission to continue negotiations with Brasher Auto Auctions to ensure that they get the setbacks they were asking for in zoning the balance of the property. Sharon Snow, representing the Brashers, said they had built a new facility and needed more parking and they were committed to working closely with the Planning Committee and the Council.
(P 88-192)
North Temple Interchange, I-15.
RE: A public hearing at 6:20 p.m. to obtain comment concerning the possible construction of an I-15 interchange at North Temple prior to the formulation of the city’s recommendation to the Wasatch Front Regional Council’s I-15 Steering Committee.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
Councilmember Stoler moved and Councilmember Bittner seconded to refer the matter to the Committee of the Whole for future information regarding the Environmental Impact Study and for technical information, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
DISCUSSION: The following people spoke in opposition to the interchange: Russell Jacobsen, 851 Ouray Avenue; Senator Rex Black, 826 North 1300 West; Carlene Jiminez, 720 West 400 North; Roly; Pearson, 730 West 400 North; Willy Littig, 121 D Street; Rod Julander, 1467 Penrose Drive; Marilyn Sharine, 1565 South Park Street; Bernice Cook, 1746 South West Temple; Fae Nichols, 120 MacArthur Avenue; Qita Woolley, 867 3rd Avenue; Chuck Richardson, 815 4th Avenue; Farrell Wankier, 461 2nd Avenue; Gary Cunningham, 175 North 700 West; Francis Hoopes, 1006 3rd Avenue; Kim Anderson, 768 North Redwood Road; Keith Widdison, 521 Arctic Court; Steve Erickson, 1064 3rd Avenue; Neil O’Connor, 89 C Street; Roger Borgenicht, 20 South 1200 East; Erlinda Davis, 358 West 500 North; Larry Kilpatrick, 809 3rd Avenue; Jane Stromquist, 33 C Street; Stan Penf old, 715 2nd Avenue; Michael Salamon, 136 U Street; Randy Dixon, 726 Wall Street; Gerald Miller, 969 Bryan Avenue; Joyce Marder, 780 East Scott Avenue; Javier Romero, 621 West 400 North; Doug Burton, 1115 2nd Avenue; David Stillman, 711 2nd Avenue and Vincent Shepherd, 1261 2nd Avenue.
Mr. Jacobsen said when the freeway system was proposed some 30 years ago, it was intended to eliminate congestion from the city and put it on the freeway, and now they were trying to take it back of f the freeway and put it in the city. He said putting more interchanges on the freeway would not eliminate congestion but would add to it, and also, it would not be conducive to pedestrians and would be a safety hazard for the Jackson School children.
He said the Jackson, Guadalupe, and Euclid Neighborhoods were promised that when the present freeway was built it would be landscaped beautifully and maintained, but this promise had gone unfulfilled. He said the responsibility was to the city residents not the commuters. Senator Black said North Temple was already impacted with traffic and he felt the interchange would create more problems than it would cure. Mr. Littig said he had heard that the city wouldn’t have much say in whether the interchange went through, that if the Utah Department of Transportation wanted it, the city would have it thrust upon them, and he asked the Council to speak strongly against it.
Ms. Sharine said she had seen the abuse freeways had caused in cities like Chicago, Milwaukee, etc. and had moved to Salt Lake City because of it’s well laid out streets and other attractions and she said it would be foolish to allow the interchange. Ms. Cook said the freeway exits should be placed farther apart and they already had enough of them now, and she felt the interchange would further divide the residents. Ms. Nichols said her community had been disrupted by the present freeway since they no longer had a school, only one church, and homes had been destroyed, and she hated to see that happen to the Jackson area. She said it was a beautiful area and it would be too big a price to pay to allow the interchange when there might be another alternative. Mr. Richardson said they needed long-range planning in considering the interchange and he felt it was a quick-fix to a solution that was not part of the coordinated plan for the 1-15 corridor. Mr. Wankier said he was a 2nd Avenue resident and it was already crowded with traffic and would be worse if the interchange was allowed. He said they should be finding ways to alleviate traffic, not make it worse.
Ms. Hoopes said the interchange would ruin the historical avenues with the 40,000 additional cars that would be thrust on them. Mr. Anderson said he was opposed to the interchange because of the following reasons: 1) the report was incomplete, did not include all options, and was very narrow; 2) the destruction of neighborhoods where CDBG funds had been spent would be eminent; 3) the west North Temple businesses would not be helped; 4) the cost would be prohibitive to city taxpayers;
5) it would make downtown streets a parking lot during four hours of the day and inhibit tourist travel to downtown; 6) the residents of downtown neighborhoods supported businesses downtown and if these neighborhoods failed, downtown and the businesses would also fail; 7) the voter citizens of Salt Lake City did not want it; 8) the Neighborhood Transportation Alliance (NTA) and the Salt Lake Area Community Councils (SLACC) were opposed for good reasons; 9) the R/UDAT study made interesting proposals that should be studied and not passed over; 10) the LDS Church was opposed;
11) there was no environmental impact study yet; and 12) there was a definite need for a housing policy, and neighborhoods should not be destroyed before a policy was set. Mr. Widdison suggested using other alternatives such as synchronization of lights, a freeway express lane, and using the 600 North exit. Mr. Borgenicht expressed interest in the impact of the interchange on the downtown area and said the R/UDAT study had stressed the importance of pedestrians downtown, and he said the quadrupling of traffic by the interchange would be a detriment to the city.
Mr. Kilpatrick said he felt they should hold a third public hearing on the subject because the environmental impact statement had not been completed. Mr. Penfold said they had been asked to accept a plan that would seriously impact the residential and downtown neighborhoods, but they had not been given adequate information to assess the entire impact to the city’s livability, nor had they been given other alternatives.
He requested that copies of all documents, including maps, drawings, surveys, neighborhood impact studies, land acquisition requirements, project costs, mitigation measures, and traffic counts be made available to the NTA, the Council, and city residents. Mr. Dixon, a Capitol Hills resident, said they were already divided into sections by thruways and he felt the 600 North alternative would impact this further. Mr. Romero said the only people he had heard speak favorably of the interchange were business owners who planned on selling their property to accommodate the interchange. Mr. Burton asked why those in favor weren’t expressing their views at the meeting. Councilmember Fonnesbeck questioned whether they needed to wait for the Environmental Impact Study before making a decision because most of the people knew what the impact was going to be since they lived there, and she said the study had been in limbo for so long she felt someone was trying to wear them down.
Councilmember Godfrey said that until UDOT had the impact study they would not be able to approach the legislature for funding. Councilmember Bittner said there were a lot of questions she needed to have answered before she could make a decision. She said she received a lot of telephone calls from constituents who were in favor of the interchange but she felt they were too intimidated to come forth in the hearing and express their views. She said the cost for the 1-15 corridor study was nearing a billion dollars, and they had spent a lot of money for the traffic consultant’s study and she felt it was foolish to ignore it.
She said she wasn’t sure the neighborhoods would be as impacted as they thought they would and said she knew there were other alternatives and she would be talking to a lot of experts, analyzing the figures, and walking the area and looking at it before making a decision. Councilmember Godfrey said that he could very easily vote on the issue now but he felt they should wait for the impact study because they would have more information to help sway the Wasatch Regional Council.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck said one of the frustrations they were dealing with was that when the interchange plan was originally set up, the limitations that those studying it were given were far too narrow, and maybe they should be addressing the fact that the interchange might not happen and they should be looking at other alternatives in the meantime. She said if they delayed the decision for six months or a year it would mean they were delaying their ability to find better solutions. Councilmember Stoler said he had heard from Parsons/Brinkerhoff that the impact study was done, but other parameters were added to it and they had to start from scratch again, and he felt they should wait for the study.
Councilmember Kirk said she was not ready to vote on the subject now as she felt she needed more information. Councilmember Fonnesbeck suggested they schedule the item again for the second week in January, hoping they would have all the information they needed by then. Registration cards were received from people who did not wish to speak but wished to express their support or opposition to the proposed interchange. Of those received, 59 were opposed and 3 were in favor.
(G 88-6)
Commercial “C-3A” Amendment.
RE: A public hearing at 6:45 p.m. to obtain comment and to consider adopting an ordinance amending the existing Commercial “C-3A” zoning text, Chapter 62 of Title 21, to include a conditional use for outdoor sales and leasing of new and used automobiles and light trucks.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Stoler seconded to refer the item to the Planning Commission for further review and recommendations, which motion carried, all members voted aye.
DISCUSSION: Doug Wheelwright, Planning and Zoning, said the issue had arisen in 1987 when the planning staff and city adopted the West Temple Gateway Redevelopment Project Area Plan and a component of the plan included an auto mall concept and three blocks were designated to that land use. He said a portion of the property was zoned “C3-A”, which included a prohibition against any business that required open storage of any merchandise, vehicles, or equipment to be sold, rented, or stored, so the auto mall concept was in conflict with the zoning provision. He said the Planning Commission recommended that they amend the text of the “C3-A” zone to allow as a conditional use, the sale or leasing of new or used automobiles or light trucks.
He said this would allow a site by site review of each facility proposed and would allow increased signage, setback, and site development control. Mr. Wheelwright said there were eight areas throughout the city which would be affected. Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked if the Planning Commission had guidelines for when it would be appropriate to give the conditional use and when it would not, and asked on what basis they would make a decision. Councilmember Horrocks said he felt they should have parameters established before they approved the ordinance.
(O 88-23)
COMMENTS
Frank C. Davis, 3494 Plaza Way, addressed the Council and said he had compiled a number of newspaper clippings dating back to May 1971 regarding the traffic semaphore synchronization problem which he felt had gone on too long without something being done to better it. He said there had been millions spent on the present system, besides all of the studies that had been done, and it still didn’t work right.
He mentioned other cities, especially Denver, Colorado, where there was no synchronization problem and he wondered why Salt Lake City couldn’t do the same. Mayor Depaulis introduced Mr. Davis to Tim Harpst, Traffic Engineer, and encouraged Mr. Davis to visit the Transportation Division and see the city’s traffic computer and then discuss his questions and suggestions with Mr. Harpst.
The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.