PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
REGULAR/BRIEFING SESSION
TUESDAY, JULY 12, 1988
The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met as the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, July 12, 1988, at 5:00 p.m. in Suite 300, City Hall, 324 South State.
The following Council Members were present: Wayne Horrocks Thomas Godfrey Sydney Fonnesbeck Roselyn Kirk Alan Hardman Willie Stoler. Councilmember Bittner was absent.
Council Chairperson Godfrey presided at the meeting.
BRIEFING SESSION
#1. The City Council interviewed Barbara Stubblefield prior to her appointment to the Tracy Aviary Board. Ms. Stubblefield indicated that she had become interested in birds recently and had been taking some classes from the National Audubon Society. She said she u1d be representing the average citizen and user of the Aviary.
#2. Councilmember Fonnesbeck reviewed the status of the Fire Station No. 4 site selection. She said the site originally identified by the City had been reviewed and approved by the committee. There was only one residence which was adjacent to the proposed fire station, and the owner of the home had agreed to the location with some landscaped buffer and a fence.
#3. Linda Hamilton, Executive Director, reviewed the evening’s agenda with the City Council. She indicated that to of the bargaining units had agreed to a labor contract, and the Memorandums of Understanding with those units were on the agenda for adoption. Ms. Hamilton said that there was an executive summary of the agreement included in the packet material.
#4. Steven Allred, Assistant City Attorney, briefed the City Council on the status of contracts pertaining to the Public Safety Building. He indicated that it was the recommendation of the City Attorney’s office that at the Council’s next meeting they adopt a resolution stipulating that all excess bond funds be allocated to reimbursing the City for up-front, out-of-pocket expenses prior to allocation for extras in the building. He said that the contract currently before the City Council was one which used City General fund monies to pay for the installation of computer cables in the building.
The meeting adjourned at 5:55 p.m.
The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in regular session on Tuesday, July 12, 1988, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 324 South State Street.
The following Council Members were present: Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Sydney Fonnesbeck Roselyn Kirk Alan Hardman Willie Stoler Councilmember Bittner was absent.
Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Roger Cutler, city attorney, Lynda Domino, chief deputy city recorder, and S. R. Kivett, deputy city recorder, were present. Kathryn Marshall, city recorder, was absent.
Councilmember Godfrey presided at the meeting and Councilmember Fonnesbeck conducted the meeting.
Donna Gray, Summum, 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 meeting held Tuesday, July 5, 1988, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
(M 88-1)
PETITIONS
Petition 400-518 by Robert Miller.
RE: A request that Salt Lake City rezone property located at approximately 1320 South between 700 and 800 West as a Mixed Use Transitional Overlay District.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Horrocks seconded to set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, August 9, 1988, at 6:20 p.m., which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
(P 87-366)
Petition 400-591 by Helen Butler.
RE: A request that Salt Lake City annex .84 acres of unincorporated territory located between 1100 East and Richmond Street along the north side of 3300 South.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Horrocks seconded to suspend the rules and on first reading adopt Resolution 87 of 1988 accepting Annexation Petition 400-591 for purposes of City Council consideration and to set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, September 6, 1988, at 6:20 p.m. to obtain public comment concerning the annexation with a zoning classification of Commercial “C-3A” and adopt proposed Amendment No. 5-E as an official supplement to the City’s Master Annexation Policy Declaration, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
(P 88-195)
Petition 400-59 5 by Richard Russell and Richard Donald Olwine.
RE: A request that Salt Lake City annex .66 acres of unincorporated territory between 1100 East and Richmond Street along the north side of 3300 South.
ACTION: Councilmember Stoler moved and Councilmember Horrocks seconded to suspend the rules and on first reading adopt Resolution 88 of 1988 accepting Annexation Petition 400-595 for purposes of City Council consideration and to set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, September 6, 1988, at 6:30 p.m. to obtain public comment concerning the annexation of said property with a zoning classification of Commercial “C-3A” and adopt proposed Amendment No. 5-E as an official supplement to the City’s Master Annexation Policy Declaration, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
(P 88-194)
DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
AIRPORT
#1. RE: Airport Development Revenue Bonds, inducement resolution.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Horrocks seconded to adopt Resolution 84 of 1988, a resolution of intention authorizing the issuance of approximately $30 million in bonds by Salt Lake City to finance certain airport and related facilities to be located at the Salt Lake International Airport, which motion carried, all members present voted aye. NOTE: The Council adopted Resolution 84 of 1988 after they held the TEFRA hearing (see Public Hearings).
(Q 88-4)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
#1. RE: A proposed ordinance to amend the existing Commercial “C-3A” zoning district text to include a conditional use for the outdoor sales and leasing of new and used automobiles and light trucks.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Horrocks seconded to set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, August 2, 1988, at 6:45 p.m., which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
(O 88-23)
#2. RE: The execution of a grant agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development providing the 1988-89 (14th Year) Community Development Block Grant entitlement amount to Salt Lake City Corporation.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Horrocks seconded to adopt Resolution 89 of 1988 authorizing the execution of the agreement, upon approval of the final form of the agreement by the City Attorney’s Office, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
(C 88-374)
FINANCE
#1. RE: The execution of an agreement between the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City and Pay-Tel Corporation to furnish and install and date wiring system.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to adjourn as the City Council and convene as the Municipal Building Authority, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to adopt Resolution 90 of 1988 authorizing the execution of the agreement, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to adjourn as the Municipal Building Authority and reconvene as the City Council, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
(C 88-362)
MAYOR’S OFFICE
#1. RE: The appointment of Barbara Stubblefield to the Tracy Aviary Board.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Horrocks seconded to approve the appointment, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
(I 88-4)
#2 RE: The appointments of Robert S. Adams and John Richard “Rick” Graham to the Urban Forestry Board.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Horrocks seconded to approve the appointments, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
(I 88-15)
#3. RE: The appointment of Jim Jensen to the Golf Advisory Board.
ACTION: Without objection Councilmember Fonnesbeck referred this appointment to the Committee of the Whole.
(I 88-10)
#4. RE: The reappointments of Roger Jones, Cynthia Char Ong, and J. Boyer Jarvis to the Salt Lake City Library Board.
ACTION: Without objection Councilmember Fonnesbeck referred these reappointments to the consent agenda.
(I 88-17)
#5. RE: The appointments of Anthony L. Rampton, Marcia Poulsen Price, and John T. Dunlop to the Salt Palace/Fine Arts Board.
ACTION: Without objection Councilmember Fonnesbeck referred these appointments to the Committee of the Whole.
(I 88-18)
#6. RE: The reappointment of James W. Webb to the Mosquito Abatement District.
ACTION: Without objection Councilmember Fonnesbeck referred this reappointment to the consent agenda.
(I 88-12)
#7. RE: Memorandums of Understanding between Salt Lake City Corporation and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1004, representing “100” and “200” Series employees.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to adopt Resolution 82 of 1988 approving the Memorandum of Understanding for “200” Series employees, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Hardman seconded to adopt Resolution 83 of 1988 approving the Memorandum of Understanding for “100” Series employees, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
DISCUSSION: Councilmember Stoler expressed concern about increasing fringe benefits in lieu of pay raises. He said the sick leave had been increased from 12 to 15 days which would affect the “buy out” policy in the future and he was concerned that this would eventually hurt the city. He said he was not concerned about an increase in pay differential but was concerned about increases in fringe benefits.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck said that salaries for the 200 Series employees had been behind the private sector and she asked if their pay structure was closer to where it should be. Karen Hashimoto, human resource management, said they had conducted a general audit of 200 Series employees last November and a salary increase was implemented April 1. She said the average increase was about 6% and the salaries were closer to the private sector.
(C 88-372 and C 88-373)
PUBLIC UTILITIES
#1. RE: A proposed Salt Lake City ordinance amending Sections 17.08.100 and 11.48.060 and repealing Section 17.08.110 dealing with firearms and hunting restrictions in City Creek Canyon and discharge of firearms in City Creek Canyon.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Horrocks seconded to set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, August 9, 1988, at 6:30 p.m., which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
(O 88-24)
PUBLIC WORKS
#1. RE: Board of Equalization and Review for I-215/California Avenue Interchange, Special Improvement District No. 38-763.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to adopt Resolution 85 of 1988 appointing a Board of Equalization and Review for I-215/California Avenue Interchange, Special Improvement District No. 38-763; setting the dates for the Board of Equalization to hear and consider objections and corrections to the proposed assessments; authorizing the City Recorder to publish and mail a notice of meetings; and related matters, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
(Q 84-6)
#2. RE: Board of Equalization and Review for non-contiguous street improvements, Special Improvement District 38-813.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to adopt Resolution 86 of 1988 appointing a Board of Equalization and Review for non-contiguous street improvements, Special Improvement District 38-813; setting the dates for the Board of Equalization to hear and consider objections and corrections to any proposed assessments; authorizing the City Recorder to publish and mail a notice of meetings; and related matters, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
(Q 87-4)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Airport Development Revenue Bonds.
RE: A public hearing at 6:00 p.m. concerning the proposed issuance by Salt Lake City of $30 million of its Airport Revenue Bonds to finance the costs of certain airport facilities at the Salt Lake City International Airport.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Hardman seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
DISCUSSION: Louis Miller, director of airports, displayed a drawing showing the five-year development program for the airport. He said the revenue bonds would be used to finance the parking structure and said in the 88-89 budget the Council approved three projects relating to this development program: $700, 000 for design fees, $135,000 for employee parking lot expansion, and $700,000 to expand the long-term parking. He said they wanted the inducement resolution so the costs incurred this year would be eligible for revenue bond financing.
He said they intended to sell the bonds within the next 12 months to finance the entire structure and he said the entire parking program project would cost about $31.3 million -- $7.7 million would be financed from airport revenues and they would need $3.6 million to fund interest during construction, $3.4 million for an addition to debt service reserve, $482,000 for issuance costs and $1.2 million for interest earned during construction for net bond proceeds necessary of $30 million.
Mr. Miller said the project would increase short-term parking from 900 to 1700 spaces and would meet forecasted needs for 7 years. He said the parking structure was 4 levels and the rental cars would move in to the lower level eliminating the need for people to shuttle to get rental cars. Councilmember Stoler asked what the term of the bonds would he. Mr. Miller said probably 20 to 25 years although that had not been determined at this time. He said Council action at this time would only approve the inducement resolution and not the bonds. No one from the audience spoke.
(O 88-4)
Petition 400-350 by Harold Wilkinson.
RE: A public hearing at 6:20 p.m. to obtain comments concerning the request that Salt Lake City close a portion of Elgin Avenue located west of 1100 East and close a dead-end stub of 1100 East Street south of Elgin Avenue.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Hardman seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked the planning staff to meet with the petitioner and adjoining land owners to work out solutions to the various problems and asked that this issue come back before the Council on September 6, 1988.
DISCUSSION: Doug Wheelwright, planning and zoning, outlined the area on a map and indicated that the Council had annexed the streets in question last spring. He said Elgin Avenue was poorly designed and created a dangerous “s” curve and said they wanted to realign the street and provide a safer intersection. He showed the new road design and said it would only affect one house which used a private driveway off of the end of 1100 East. He said instead of that right of way beginning at the end of 1100 East, there would be a new easement which would extend the private driveway. He said the city did not have clear-title dedication to 1100 East; the city’s claim was prescriptive. He said the street changes were included as conditions to closure and if the Council approved this the petitioner would reconstruct Elgin Avenue and a portion of 1100 East. He said this was $24,000 in street improvements and the petitioner had invested $6,000 in engineering drawings so the city proposed that the compensation be the street improvements and design work. He said the changes would allow property in the area to be used as a building lot.
Harold Wilkinson, petitioner, said he would get one more building lot but his main purpose was to correct the streets and make the area better. He said he thought the changes would increase property values since they would make the situation more desirable. Ralph Trane, 1041 Elgin Avenue, speaking on behalf of the residents on Elgin Avenue, said they agreed with the continuation of Elgin Avenue to 1100 East. He asked if the curbs, gutters and sidewalks would continue along 1100 East.
Mr. Wheelwright said they would be completed on 1100 East to the realigned Elgin Avenue on the west side and would be completed on the south side of Elgin Avenue to the completion of the curve. Mr. Trane pointed out a parcel of property and said they were concerned about access to the rear of the property. Mr. Wheelwright said that parcel had frontage on Elgin Avenue and said the rear portion of the parcel could undergo subdivision. He said with the street changes the parcel would not have direct street frontage and would have to use the private right of way or develop from the north.
Mr. Trane said they objected to cutting off access to the rear of this property. Mr. Wheelwright said if they didn’t close the south portion of 1100 East then there would need to be a turn-around area which would be very costly and not practical for two properties because of the additional expense and continued maintenance. Mr. Trane asked about the drainage situation on 1100 East. Mr. Wheelwright said the drainage would go from the curb and gutter into the storm drain and the situation would be improved. Mr. Wheelwright referred to a spring in the area and said it would follow the same course it had always followed; the improvements would only contain the run-off water from the streets.
Mr. Trane asked when this change would be effective if approved. Mr. Wheelwright said construction of the improvements would probably start this year. Mr. Trane also said Mr. Wilkinson’s property needed to be cleaned up because it posed a fire hazard and he suggested that there be a stop sign at the private drive. Ann Maddocks, 3025 South 1100 East, said she was afraid that if her private drive was extended then it would be like an alley rather than a street. Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked how many feet would be added to Mrs. Maddocks’ drive. Mr. Wheelwright said about 112 feet and he said she traversed that portion now but it was partially an asphalted street, so the change would just make it privately owned. Councilmember Fonnesbeck said the lots now were not useable and this change would make them into standard lots so they could be cleaned up and used. Mrs. Gogo, 1076 Elgin, expressed her concern about the weedy lots, which caused weeds in her yard, and the rat problem. She agreed with the change in the road configuration but did not think that 1100 East should be closed completely.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked about leaving a stub of 1100 East open for better access to Mrs. Maddocks’ property and the rear of the other parcel which was discussed. Mr. Wheelwright said this would add considerable improvement costs. She asked about leaving the stub available for potential development. Mr. Wheelwright reiterated that the city only had a claim to it but the city could keep the easement until the area was annexed. Pete Orullian, on behalf of his mother who owned property at 1128 Elgin Avenue, said he wanted the city to leave 1100 East as it was.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck said it seemed that there were some problems which needed closer discussion. She thought the petitioner should meet with the property owners and the planning department in order to work out a solution. She said the city would like to have the street straightened so the lots could be cleaned up and used. Kelvin Anderson, on behalf of Mrs. Kazarian who owned property at 1112 Elgin Avenue, referred to the property which would remain unusable because of several utility easements and suggested the possibility of using this parcel for the road and using the parcel proposed for the road as developable property. He said there was not a good access from Elgin Avenue to the back of Mrs. Kazarian’s property because of the spring and her driveway. He agreed with the proposed improvements but did not want Mrs. Kazarian to be land locked in any way.
(P 88-146)
Petition 400-597 by Yeates/Priest Development.
RE: A public hearing at 6:30 p.m. to obtain comments concerning the request that Salt Lake City rezone the property located at 1300 South State Street (Lincoln School property) from “C-3”, “R-7”, and “R-2” to limited Commercial “C-1”.
ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Hardman seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members present voted aye except Councilmember Fonnesbeck who was absent for the vote.
Councilmember Hardman moved and Councilmember Stoler seconded to adopt Ordinance 50 of 1988 rezoning property located at the Lincoln School site, 1300 South State Street, from “C-3”, “R-7”, and “R-2” to Commercial “C-1” subject to certain conditions, and in addition ask the developer to work with the planning staff and residents on Edith Avenue regarding the fence type and height, which motion carried, all members present voted aye.
DISCUSSION: Cris Schulz, planning and zoning, outlined the area and existing zoning on a map. He said the area from State Street to the back of the school was zoned “C-3”, the area from the back of the school to the east 150 feet was zoned “R-7”, and the remainder of the property was zoned “R-2”. He said the petitioner wanted to change the zoning to “C-1” in order to accommodate the development of a neighborhood shopping center.
He said the Planning Commission reviewed the request and recommended that it be approved with conditions: 1. No vehicular access provided on 200 East; 2. The design of the site include a 20 foot set back along 200 East in order to maintain the general set back of those homes fronting on 200 East; 3. Lighting should be of low height and intensity and directional to prevent reflection into neighboring residences; 4. Any proposed development meet the minimum design standards for landscaping and parking requirements for new development;
5. Should the City Council recommend approval of the requested zoning change, it would become effective upon the issuance of a building permit that meets the conditions; 6. The Planning Commission review and approve the final site plan of the project before a building permit is issued and the zoning changed. He showed the final site plan which would include a gas station/mini mart, specialty car care center (for which they would need a conditional use permit), and retail facilities such as a restaurant, clothing store, and office space.
He said employee parking and possibly garbage collection would be in the northeast corner of the area. He said they had worked with the residents, especially those on Edith Avenue, and said the residents had many concerns such as garbage collection and delivery trucks. He said the city ordinance did not allow garbage collection or deliveries before 7:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck said she was concerned that only minimum landscaping was required. Mr. Schulz explained that the frontage on 200 East would have a 20-foot landscape set back and three-foot berm. He said there would be a six-foot, light-proof fence on the north side and said the residents talked about having a higher fence but he was concerned about a fence higher that six feet since the residents would get less sun in their yards.
He said there was a 10-foot landscape buffer with trees on the south side of the fence plus he said there would be no commercial activity at the rear of the building. He said on 1300 South and State Street the set back would be 15 feet. He said the C-1” zone would minimize the building height and would require landscaping not required by the “C-3” zone. Councilmember Stoler said these types of shopping centers were popular because they paid for themselves, although he wanted to know how the residents felt. Councilmember Godfrey asked about access into the shopping center from State Street and 1300 South. Mr. Schulz said the transportation department reviewed the curb cuts and had no problems with access from 1300 South but there were some questions about curb cuts at the north end on State Street.
Councilmember Godfrey was concerned about the curb cuts at the west end on 1300 South because of traffic congestion. Mr. Schulz said that transportation recommended that the developers put in a right-hand turn lane and a bus cut out. Delyn Yeates, petitioner, said the shopping center would be called the Lincoln Factory Outlet and said most of the tenants would be retail outlets for a factory, similar to the VF Factory Outlet. He said they had an astounding response from retailers interested in locating nearer downtown but not in the middle of downtown.
He said they had letters of intent from various stores and they were presently in lease negotiations with many people. He said Valley Bank was interested in financing the project. He said at the onset of the project they met with the residents to get support and he said the residents gave input and suggestions. He showed an artists rendering of the shopping center. Scott Priest, petitioner, said the planning staff suggested putting trees in the parking lot and Councilmember Fonnesbeck supported this idea and said they could use the urban forester for help.
His concern about putting trees in the parking was expense and visibility for the businesses but indicated they would be willing to work with the city staff on a reasonable solution. Mr. Priest described what the structure would look like and Councilmember Godfrey asked if the separate buildings would look the same. Mr. Priest said the businesses in the separate buildings would have their own colors because they would be national companies but they would try to encourage these two users to conform. He said one user would be Conoco which would be a small operation with no car wash.
Betty Berquist, 240 Edith Avenue, supported the project but was concerned with the security along 200 East and in the parking lot. She said most of the neighbors supported the project. Councilmember Hardman suggested that if the Conoco was open all night then this would help the security situation. Mayor DePaulis asked if the parking lot would be secured. Mr. Yeates said he did not know how they could secure the entire parking lot since it was reciprocal parking and Councilmember Fonneseck suggested having gates to secure the rear of the building.
Mayor DePaulis suggested that the developers consult with the police department to find out what they could do. Ernest Hoff, 227 Browning Avenue, supported the project. His concern was that the berm would not stop foot traffic and he indicated his preference to having an 8-foot fence. He also supported having trees along the asphalt. William Gibson, 174 Edith Avenue, supported having an 8- to 12-foot fence and thought 200 East needed more of a barrier than the 3-foot berm. Mr. Schulz said the Planning Commission discussed a barrier along 200 East and recommended the berm versus a barrier because they thought a wall or another type of barrier would be detrimental to the area. Mayor DePaulis said the berm at the Smith’s store on 900 South and 900 East worked well and they hadn’t had any problems in that area.
Councilmember Godfrey asked for more clarification about the type of fence that would be constructed. Mr. Schulz said typically they required a 6-foot masonry fence but he said because of the mature trees along this area the foundation would not last. He said they recommended a painted wood fence supported by steel poles. Councilmember Stoler pointed out that the residents seemed to be concerned that a 6-foot fence would not provide adequate security.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck suggested that they consider an 8-foot fence; Mr. Schulz indicated that this would require a variance. Mr. Yeates said they were willing to work with the neighborhood regarding the fence. Alan Waite, 167 Kensington, supported the project and said he had not heard any general opposition. He encouraged the project 100%. Steven Hemingway, chairman of the South Central Community Council, said this project had excellent potential to help the neighborhood become strong and vital and said this was the only economical and feasible project for the area.
He said they worked with the developers and most of the neighborhood recommendations had been met. He said the fence was an issue, however, but everything else seemed fine. He also said he thought this project would help the property values and he was interested in improving the neighborhood.
(P 88-149)
The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.