PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
TUESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1985
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1985, AT 5:00 P.M. IN ROOM 211 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: RONALD J. WHITEHEAD ALICE SHEARER GRANT MABEY IONE M. DAVIS SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK EDWARD W. PARKER EARL F. HARDWICK.
Council Chairperson Sydney Fonnesbeck presided at the meeting.
BRIEFING SESSION
#1. Lance Bateman, Gary Mumford, and Dave Lamb of Arthur Young Co. presented the Council with a briefing on the recently released Salt Lake City Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and the Salt Lake City Corporation and Related Entities Financial Statements, Management Letters and Reports for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1984. They pointed out a number of the details and areas of concern in the reports including some deficits which will decrease as some funds are received to be applied to the fiscal year. Mr. Bateman indicated to the Council that new contractual procedures have been implemented to avoid other problems such as the one with STT.
#2. John Gust presented the feasibility studies and projected master plan for the Forest Dale Golf Course. The architect displayed a drawing of the design and engineering implementations hoping to solve the problems of flooding at the course which has limited play on the course during the last two flood seasons. It was also recognized that at this point in time no source of funding has been found for this project. The question of an increase in Senior Citizen Golf Passes was also presented and Mr. Gust indicated that the Mayor had tabled that issue until spring.
#3. Leigh von der Esch briefed the Council on the night’s agenda indicating that there are no problems with the Loveland Hill annexation and it is ready for approval. She also informed the Council that the Devereaux Partners are currently prepared to offer bonding for their new construction and that before the IRB decisions are made Walcen must demonstrate the same degree of readiness.
The briefing session adjourned at 5:55 p.m.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET IN REGULAR SESSION ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1985, AT 6:00 P.M. IN ROOM 301 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: RONALD J. WHITEHEAD ALICE SHEARER GRANT MABEY IONE M. DAVIS SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK EDWARD W. PARKER EARL F. HARDWICK.
Mayor Ted L. Wilson, Albert Haines, chief administrative officer, and Roger Cutler, city attorney, were present at the meeting. Lynda Domino, chief deputy recorder, was also present.
Kathryn Marshall, city recorder, was absent from the meeting.
Council Chairperson Sydney Fonnesbeck presided at and conducted the meeting.
Invocation was given by Police Chaplain Cliff Higbee.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Approval of Minutes.
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to approve the minutes of the Salt Lake City Council for the regular meeting held Tuesday, January 8, 1985, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Whitehead who was absent when the vote was taken.
(M 85-1)
PETITIONS
Petition 400-227 of 1984 by Loveland and Hill.
RE: Annexation of 1.553 acres at approximately 2100 South Lakeline Drive into Salt Lake City.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to adopt Resolution 7 of 1985 accepting annexation Petition No. 400-227 of 1984 for purposes of City Council review, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to adopt Resolution 8 of 1985 amending Salt Lake City’s policy declaration relating to annexation, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to adopt Ordinance 2 of 1985, extending the limits of Salt Lake City to include the “Hill-Loveland Annex”; zoning the same R-l, subject to the Foothill Development Overlay Zone, by amending the Use District Map as adopted by Section 51-12-2 of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(P 84-283, R 84-16)
Petition 400-237 of 1984 by The Boyer Company.
RE: The vacation of any remnant pieces of streets and alleys contained within their property at 1900 West and North Temple and the vacation of Winnifred and a portion of Gertie Avenue.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to schedule a public hearing to consider this petition, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Shearer moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to schedule the public hearing for Tuesday, February 5, 1985, at 7:15 p.m. if this can be an unadvertised public hearing; or schedule the public hearing for Tuesday, February 19, 1985, at 7:15 p.m. if the public hearing must be advertised, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(P 85-1)
DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
CITY COUNCIL
#1. RE: A proposed ordinance amending Chapter 2 of Title 51 by adding new sections 51-2-13.1 and 51-2-25.6 (definitions), amending Sections 5l-12A-l and 51-l2A-2, and adding new sections 5l-l2A-3 and 5l-12A-4, all relating to Foothill Development Overlay Zone.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to schedule a public hearing for Tuesday, February 19, 1985, at 6:45 p.m. to discuss this proposed ordinance, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(O 84-32)
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
#1. RE: Industrial Revenue Bond for Walcen Restoration Partners.
Richard Scott from Chapman and Cutler, bond counsel, explained that in order to proceed with the financing of this project there needs to be an indication from the City as to the amount of the state ceiling which can be allocated so the purpose of the Council action at this meeting would be to verify the City’s willingness to allocate a portion of the state ceiling to this financing. Mr. Scott indicated that the company wants to issue the bonds before April 1.
Councilmember Shearer moved and Councilmember Whitehead seconded to adopt Resolution 6 of 1985 authorizing and directing the submission to the Executive Director of the Department of Community and Economic Development of an application for allocation of allotment dollars pursuant to that certain Executive Order signed by the Governor of the State of Utah, for the purpose of issuing Industrial Development Revenue Bonds to finance the acquisition, rehabilitation and remodeling by Walcen Restoration Partners, in an amount not to exceed $9 million, of a business and professional office building, and related matters, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Mabey who abstained from voting.
(Q 84-17)
#2. RE: Industrial Revenue Bond for Devereaux Partners.
Richard Nordlund, president of Triad Center, explained that they are requesting $10 million to acquire floors 3, 4, and 5, which is approximately 85,000 square feet, in 3 Triad Center. He indicated that they are ready to proceed with the bond issue and could have this complete by or before March 1, 1985.
Councilmember Shearer moved and Councilmember Whitehead seconded to adopt Resolution 9 of 1985 authorizing and directing the submission to the Executive Director of the Department of Community and Economic Development of an application for allocation of allotment dollars pursuant to that certain executive order signed by the Governor of the State of Utah, for the purpose of issuing Industrial Development Revenue Bonds to Devereaux Partners for an amount not to exceed $10 million, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(Q 84-16)
MAYOR’S OFFICE
#1. RE: Reappointment of Lynn M. Thatcher and appointment of Ronald J. Whitehead to the Board of Trustees of the Salt Lake Mosquito Abatement District.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to approve the reappointment of Lynn Thatcher and the appointment of Ronald Whitehead, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(I 85-1)
#2. RE: Reappointment of Robert Doidge and appointment of Edward W. Parker to the Sugar House Park Authority.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to approve the reappointment of Robert Doidge and the appointment of Edward Parker, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(I 85-2)
#3. RE: Appointment of Edmund W. Allen to the Historical Landmark Committee to represent the Exchange Place Historic District.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to approve the appointment of Edmund Allen, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(I 84-15)
#4. RE: The appointment of Nancy Pace to the Board of Adjustment.
The Council requested additional biographical information about Ms. Pace. Without objection, Council Chairperson Fonnesbeck referred this matter to the consent agenda for February 5, 1985.
(I 85-3)
POLICE DEPARTMENT
#1. RE: An ordinance amending Chapter 10 of Title 20 of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, as amended, relating to financial and lending institutions, specifically pawn shops. Without objection, Council Chairperson Fonnesbeck referred this matter to the consent agenda for February 5, 1985.
(O 85-2)
PUBLIC UTILITIES
#1. RE: An agreement with South Salt Lake to receive standby water supply from Salt Lake City.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to adopt Resolution 10 of 1985 authorizing the execution of an interlocal cooperation agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and South Salt Lake for South Salt Lake to receive standby water supply from Salt Lake City, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(C 85-3)
PUBLIC WORKS
#1. RE: Special Improvement District No. 38-685, 1700 South generally between West Temple and 700 West.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to adopt Resolution 11 of 1985 declaring the intention of the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, to create Special Improvement District No. 38-685 for curb, gutter, pavement, and other improvements for the area on 1700 South generally between West Temple and 700 West, and authorizing notification of affected property owners, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(Q 85-1)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Petition 400-201 of 1984 and Petition 400-198 of 1984 by St. Joseph’s Villa/Richard Erick.
RE: Appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of Petition 400-201 requesting that property located on the west side of 500 East between 1942 and 1950 South and the south side of Ramona Avenue between 450 and 498 East be rezoned from “R-2” to “R-6, and Petition 400-198 requesting the closure of the east end of Ramona Avenue where it enters 500 East.
A public hearing was held at 6:30 p.m. to consider these petitions. Vernon Jorgensen, planning director, outlined the area on a map and said that the purpose for the request is to allow for construction of residential units in conjunction with St. Joseph’s Villa which requires the “R-6” classification. He explained that this would allow people to get the type of medical care they need without living in a medical institution. Mr. Jorgensen said that the Planning Commission denied the request on the basis that it is not in keeping with the general plan of the area, it would change the street system, it would be an enlargement of spot zoning, and because the area had recently been down zoned from “R-4” to “R-2”. Mr. Jorgensen said that the Planning Commission was not opposed to the concept of St. Joseph’s plan but they opposed the location. Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked why the project would require an “R-6” zone. Mr. Jorgensen explained that this is the only classification which would permit the multiple-family dwelling and associated medical uses. He mentioned that an “R-5” zone may be possible if the project is strictly residential.
Councilmember Whitehead felt the biggest concern about the rezoning is that eventually the entire street may be rezoned to “R-6”. He explained that some developers buy property, which they do not maintain, and then request a zoning change in order to construct a project which will improve the neighborhood. He also said all the uses which are allowed in the “R-6” zone need to be considered and he indicated that he is concerned about possible future development not the proposed project.
Richard Erick, petitioner, showed preliminary drawings of the project. He said that the master plan for St. Joseph Villa envisions a complete senior citizen center which would include a skilled nursing facility, an intermediate facility, a residential facility and senior citizen apartments. He said that all sections of the facility would be united by the emergency call system and other protective systems. Mr. Erick said that a major emphasis of this project is the ability for a senior citizen to use the level of care necessary for a particular period. He said that most of the residents in the neighborhood are in favor of the zoning change and Street closure.
Mr. Erick referred to the drawings and said that all traffic to and from St. Joseph Villa would be by way of 500 East and he also said that all land needed for the project is owned by St. Joseph Villa. He said that additional land may be acquired but would be used for a landscape buffer. Mr. Erick said the project would be limited to a three-story structure with underground parking. He also indicated that they would not oppose a restriction to the number of stories constructed. Dr. Victor Kassel expressed concern about deficiencies in services for the aged. It was Dr. Kassel’s opinion that the project proposed by St. Joseph Villa would be an opportunity to provide the care which is needed in this community for the elderly. He said that St. Joseph Villa would render care comprised of independent living, residential care, skilled and intermediate nursing care.
Councilmember Whitehead asked if there would be medical facilities in the new building. Dr. Kassel said that doctors would visit the residents but the facility would not be a nursing home. Larry Shaw, 433 Hollywood, mentioned that the neighborhood has concerns which need to be addressed, such as possible future expansion of the St. Joseph facility. He was sensitive to the neighborhood concerns but hoped the problems could be solved so that the project could be completed. He felt that this project has merit in terms of the community. Councilmember Fonnesbeck reiterated that the worth of the project is not being questioned but the question is whether the project can be completed without jeopardizing the neighborhood. She said that when “R-6” zoning is enlarged it becomes easier each time to enlarge the “R-6” zone. Roger Cutler, city attorney, said that if the property ceased to be used by St. Joseph Villa then any use allowed under the “R-6” zone could be developed.
Bobbi Maire, 446 Westminster Avenue, supported the project and said that St. Joseph Villa is one of the most beautiful buildings in the neighborhood. She mentioned that there are many other buildings in the area which are in disrepair. Frank Heiner, 445 Ramona Avenue, opposed the project and the closure of the street. He felt that if St. Joseph Villa wants to expand they should go outside the residential area. He said that he would no longer have the southeast view from is home if the project is constructed. Mr. Heiner also felt that his property value would be diminished by this project.
H. Mervin Wallace, retired real estate broker, said that Mr. Heiner asked him how the project would affect the value of his property. It was Mr. Wallace’s opinion that the project would depreciate the value of the homes on Ramona Avenue. Mr. Wallace felt that the project should not upset the established residential area. Miriam Hall, 470 Garfield Avenue, opposed the project. She was concerned about the parking situation, noise from the air conditioning units, and the traffic flow if the street is closed. She was also concerned that property values would depreciate. Ms. Hall expressed concern about the construction of large buildings in the future.
Ron Miller, health care consultant with St. Joseph Villa, indicated that every attempt had been made to answer the neighborhood’s questions and he said that the question of property values had been addressed by a qualified appraiser. Councilmember Fonnesbeck felt that the neighborhood was facing a critical period as far as the residences remaining single family or the area becoming high density. She asked how many of the homes in the area are owner occupied. Mr. Jorgensen said that 55% to 60% of the homes are owner occupied and the recent zoning change from “R-4 to “R-2 was made in an effort to stabilize the area. He said that the basic theory behind this change was to encourage young families to move into the neighborhood. Councilmember Fonnesbeck suggested that other zoning options should be explored before a decision is made about this situation.
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Whitehead seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Shearer said that St. Joseph Villa has a good reputation for taking care of patients but she said that she was uncomfortable with changing the zoning to “R-6”. She thought that the Council should find another alternative because “R-6” zoning could leave the neighborhood open to the potential of large construction even though this is not proposed by St. Joseph. She agreed that various options should be considered. Councilmember Fonnesbeck suggested that Mr. Jorgensen study the issue and present various options to the Council which would allow for the project but protect the neighborhood. Councilmember Mabey indicated that facilities like St. Joseph Villa are needed and he suggested that Mr. Jorgensen also consider the general issue of housing for the elderly in neighborhoods.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Hardwick seconded to defer this item to the planning and zoning department for a recommendation and reconsider the issue at the March 12, 1985, Council meeting, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(P 84-175, P 84-176)
West Downtown Master Plan
RE: The proposed West Downtown Master Plan.
A public hearing was held at 7:30 p.m. to consider this issue.
Dan Smith, planning and zoning, outlined on a map the area encompassed in the West Downtown Master Plan, which is the area between West Temple and 500 West, and North Temple and 400 South. He said that the plan is a comprehensive master plan and provides an analysis as well as resource data concerning existing land use patterns, general building conditions, public facilities, parking facilities, population analysis, and a general characterization. So besides being a policy document, the plan also provides resource information for the Planning Commission and developers.
Mr. Smith said that there is a strong emphasis in this plan for residential development to provide a resident population for downtown, it encourages housing development and Redevelopment Agency involvement in the housing development, and it emphasizes the mixed-use development concept for urban development. Mr. Smith said that this plan also contains urban design guidelines and general principles of design were provided to assist developers, architects, and the Planning Commission in understanding the environment of the west downtown area. He said that emphasizing the connection of new development with the existing development is intended to provide maximum compatibility of new development.
Mr. Smith said the plan points out that the west downtown area has a great deal of potential for new urban development as an expansion of downtown, that there is an underutilization of land, and that there are pockets of blight and some substandard facilities. He said generally the plan points out that there are locational advantages for the expansion of urban development in this area. Mr. Smith said that in terms of the general area for mixed use, there is no recommended zoning change; the zoning would remain C-3. Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked if this plan varies from the American Cities plan for this area. Mr. Smith said that the American Cities plan concentrated primarily on housing and was mainly a housing feasibility analysis whereas the West Downtown Master Plan is more comprehensive. He did not think that the West Downtown Plan reinforced all the housing contemplated by the American Cities plan but it does mention Redevelopment Agency involvement in urban housing and Block 49.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked if this plan contains a recommendation about funding for redevelopment areas. Mr. Smith said that there is not a specific recommendation for funding for rehabilitation although there is reference to the fact that certain older buildings might lend themselves to the adaptive re-use concept. He indicated that according to the plan there may be some rehabilitation in the area but new development should be encouraged more than rehabilitation. Councilmember Shearer asked about the compatibility review ordinance in relation to this plan. Mr. Smith said that the urban design guidelines in this plan are intended to be implemented with a compatibility review overlay zone. He indicated that the overlay zoning provision has been reviewed extensively by the City Council and it is ready for a hearing before the Planning Commission. B. T. Price felt that the development of an Amtrak station should have been included in this plan.
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Mabey asked if funding is available to extend this plan further west. Mr. Craig Peterson, director of development services, indicated that there is money in the proposed budget for next year to consider the area west of the west downtown area.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to refer this proposed plan to the attorney’s office to prepare a resolution for the implementation of the plan, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(T 84-32)
The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.