PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
REGULAR/BRIEFING SESSION
TUESDAY, MARCH 10 1987
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON TUESDAY, MARCH 10, 1987, AT 5:00 P.M. IN SUITE 300 CITY HALL, 324 SOUTH STATE.
THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: FLORENCE BITTNER THOMAS M. GODFREY GRANT MABEY ROSELYN N. KIRK SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK WILLIE STOLER EARL F. HARDWICK.
Council Chairperson Kirk presided at the meeting.
BRIEFING SESSION
Linda Hamilton, Executive Director, briefed the Council on the evening’s agenda. Larry Livingston, Council Staff, answered questions the Council had concerning Petition No. 400-367, submitted by Terry Becker et al. The petitioner requested that the City place the “F-l” Overlay Zone over the entire Arlington Hills Neighborhood lying north and east of the intersection of 11th Avenue and Virginia Street up to the present “P-l” Foothill Preservation Zone. Mr. Livingston recommended that the Council adopt an ordinance which placed Arlington Hills within the Foothill Development Overlay Zone. He also suggested that the Council adopt an ordinance amending the Foothill Overlay Zone to increase side and rear yard requirements and add a 50% maximum site coverage requirement. Mr. Livingston added that he felt the Council should adopt a resolution establishing a policy for vesting of rights pertaining to changes pending in the Site Development Ordinance. After considerable discussion, the Council decided that it would be in the best interest of the City to not adopt the resolution until the Avenues Master Plan update was completed.
The meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET IN REGULAR SESSION ON TUESDAY, MARCH 10, 1987, AT 6:00 P.M. IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, SUITE 300, CITY HALL, 324 SOUTH STATE.
THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: FLORENCE BITTNER THOMAS M. GODFREY GRANT MABEY ROSELYN N. KIRK SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK WILLIE STOLER EARL F. HARDWICK.
Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Steven Allred, assistant city attorney, Kathryn Marshall, city recorder, and Lynda Domino, chief deputy recorder.
Council Chairperson Kirk presided at and Councilmember Fonnesbeck conducted the meeting.
The invocation was given by Police Chaplain Allen Roden.
The Council led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Approval of Minutes.
Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to approve the minutes of the Salt Lake City Council for the regular meeting held Tuesday, February 17, 1987, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(M 87-1)
Special Recognition
Mayor Palmer Depaulis and the City Council presented the February Tourism Ambassador award to Shirley Gutke, a tour guide for Western Leisure. Mayor DePaulis said Ms. Gutke had worked for Western Leisure as a tour guide for the past five years and had acquainted thousands of visitors with Salt Lake City. He said the president of Western Leisure said Shirley had a genuine love of people which made her an invaluable asset in dealing with Western Leisure’s public. Mayor DePaulis thanked Ms. Gutke for the great job she had done for Western Leisure and for Salt Lake City. Ms. Gutke thanked the Mayor and Council and said she appreciated the award. She said it was a delight to sell Salt Lake City.
(G 87-7)
PETITIONS
Petition 400-367 by Terry Becker, et al.
RE: The request that Salt Lake City place the “F-1” Overlay Zone over the Arlington Hills neighborhood and change the “F-1” Overlay Zone requirements and the Site Development Ordinance to require larger lot sizes and buildable areas.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to adopt Ordinance 14 of 1987 placing the “F-1” Overlay Zone over the entire Arlington Hills neighborhood lying north and east of the intersection of 11th Avenue and Virginia Street up to the present “P-l” Foothill Preservation Zone, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Hardwick moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to adopt Ordinance 15 of 1987 adding Section 51-12A-5 to the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, as amended, relating to side yards and buildable spaces in the “F-1” Overlay Zone, amending the Foothill Development Overlay Zone to increase side and rear yard requirements and adding a 50% maximum site coverage requirement, which motion carried, Councilmembers Fonnesbeck, Hardwick, Godfrey, and Kirk voting aye and Councilmembers Bittner, Mabey, and Stoler voting nay.
Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to return that portion of the petition amending the Site Development Ordinance to the Planning Commission, asking them to work with Bruce Baird of the City Attorney’s Office to refine their recommendation concerning lot area/slope requirements, and requesting that the matter be returned to the City Council as rapidly as possible, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
DISCUSSION: Councilmembers Bittner, Stoler, and Mabey expressed concern about the proposed ordinance which would change the requirements for side yards and buildable space. Councilmember Bittner explained that she was concerned with the role of government in what appeared to be an aesthetic issue. She said she thought that when government was in a position to legislate issues other than health, safety or the environment, then they were restrictive and onerous.
Councilmember Stoler said he had researched the issue and the proposed ordinance would eliminate approximately 200 homes in the $300,000 range. He said this would result in a loss to the community of about $200,000,000 and would affect businesses such as plumbers, electricians, carpenters, roofers, carpet layers, and people who sell furnishings, landscaping, and insurance. He said this would also eliminate people who could afford these homes and he felt this mixture of people was needed. He said Salt Lake was encouraging economic development and as companies came to Salt Lake some of these people would be in the $75,000 salary range.
In regards to the issue of quality of life, Councilmember Stoler said the people in this area had expensive homes, nice cars, could afford to pay for yard care, could afford to buy club memberships, and send their children to college. He suggested that this was a very good quality of life and indicated he was stunned that people were complaining. He opposed the proposed ordinance because of the affect it would have on the economy and he felt the various trades should be helped.
Councilmember Mabey concurred with both Councilmembers Bittner and Stoler and added that additional residents to this area would support downtown Salt Lake. He said the City needed the tax base and more children would keep the schools open. He said the lots in this area were wider and people could build larger homes. He thought the Council needed to study this issue more in terms of economic loss. Councilmember Kirk said she received phone calls from her constituents in favor of preserving the foothills. She said she was on the Salt Lake City Tomorrow committee and said the quality of life was crucial to attract people to Salt Lake.
She indicated that preservation of the foothills and the environment was protecting the quality of life that attracted people to the area. Councilmember Godfrey said all zoning tried to protect areas and establish criteria. He thought it was a duty of City government to deal with these types of issues and he did not think it was restrictive. He indicated that an economic loss would be a long time coming since people wouldn’t build in that area all at once. He felt the residents of that area had a valid argument. Councilmember Hardwick agreed with the preservation of the foothills.
(P 87-4)
Petition 400-500 by Bernice Cully/Byron Couch.
RE: An appeal of Historic Landmark Case No. 624 denying the request to retain a fence located at 322 North 300 West which extends approximately 8.7 feet on city property.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to set a public hearing for Tuesday, April 7, 1987, at 6:35 p.m., which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(P 87-48)
DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
#1. RE: An interlocal cooperation agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the Utah Transit Authority for the placement of public transit signs, posts, benches and shelters and how the facilities will be utilized, maintained, and repaired or replaced.
ACTION: Without objection this was pulled from the agenda.
(C 87-76)
#2. RE: Three investigative subpoenas to Union Pacific Railroad, Denver Rio Grande Railroad, and Salt Lake, Garfield and Western Railroad Companies.
ACTION: Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Bitter seconded to suspend the rules and authorize the issuance of the subpoenas on first reading. No vote was taken.
Councilmember Hardwick moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to replace the first motion, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Hardwick moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to suspend the rules and on first reading authorize the issuance of three subpoenas, in the manner set forth in the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, and directed to: Union Pacific Railroad, Denver & Rio Grande Railroad, and Salt Lake Garfield & Western Railroad; and further that such subpoenas not be served if the information requested therein is delivered to the Office of the City Attorney within such time as that office shall designate, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
DISCUSSION: Steven Allred, assistant city attorney, said the attorney’s office had an indication from the railroads that they would probably deliver the information on an informal basis. So based on that he said he wanted to have the subpoenas authorized but not issued pending their informal delivery. He said this would short circuit problems and expedite the resolution of the information.
(G 87-11)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
#1. RE: The designation of the Danish Evangelical Lutheran Church/Tabor Lutheran-Central Baptist Church located at 387-389 First Avenue on the City Historical Register.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to set a public hearing for Tuesday, March 17, 1987, at 6:50 p.m., which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(L 87-1)
#2. RE: The designation of the Charles James Mullet home at 680 Wall Street on the City Historical Register.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to set a public hearing for Tuesday, April 7, 1987, at 6:45 p.m., which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(L 87-2)
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
#1. RE: A resolution amending the general fund budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1986, and ending June 30, 1987.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to amend the resolution by deleting “general fund” and having it read “amending the budget”, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to set a public hearing to be held Tuesday, March 17, 1987, at 6:40 p.m., which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(B 86-11)
MAYOR’S OFFICE
#1. RE: The reappointments of William Kibbie and Joe Rosenblatt to the Airport Authority Board.
ACTION: Without objection these reappointments were referred to the consent agenda.
(I 87-10)
#2. RE: The reappointment of John E. Pace to the Central Business Improvement District.
ACTION: Without objection this reappointment was referred to the consent agenda.
(I 87-11)
#3. RE: The appointment of Alicia L. Suazo to the Salt Lake City Library Board.
ACTION: Without objection this appointment was referred to the consent agenda.
(I 87-12)
#4. RE: The appointment of J. Gordon Sorenson to the Sugarhouse Park Authority.
ACTION: Without objection this appointment was referred to the consent agenda.
(I 87-6)
#5. RE: The reappointments of Gainor L. Bennett and Clayton M. White to the Tracy Aviary Board.
ACTION: Without objection these reappointments were referred to the consent agenda.
(I 87-13)
#6. RE: The appointments of Allen S. Dodworth, Carleen Jimenez, George Maxwell, Olivette T. Orme, Roger Borgenicht, and Stan Roberts to the Salt Lake City Arts Council; and the reappointments of Gerald McDonough, Peter Emerson, Stephen A. Goldsmith and Roger Reynolds to the Salt Lake City Arts Council.
ACTION: Without objection these appointments and reappointments were referred to the consent agenda.
(I 87-14)
#7. RE: The appointment of Lori J. K. Lof to the Urban Forestry Board.
ACTION: Without objection this appointment was referred to the consent agenda.
(I 87-15)
PUBLIC UTILITIES
#1. RE: An interlocal agreement with the Utah State University foundation for a study of the irrigation water the City takes from Utah Lake and the Jordan River.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to adopt Resolution 17 of 1987 authorizing the execution of an interlocal cooperation agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the Utah State University Foundation for a study of the irrigation water the City takes from Utah Lake and the Jordan River to determine the content and environmental effect, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(C 87-75)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Special Improvement District 38-819.
RE: A public hearing at 6:00 p.m. to obtain protests concerning the creation of Special Improvement District No. 38-819 non-contiguous streets, for the reconstruction of various streets; installation of new pavements, curb and gutter, sidewalks, driveway approaches, street trees, sod and topsoil; installation of major storm drains and a pump station and all other miscellaneous work necessary to complete the improvements.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye. Without objection this was referred to engineering for tabulation and a recommendation.
DISCUSSION: John Naser, city engineering, said the preliminary protest rate for the entire district, which was comprised of about 12,540 feet of frontage, was 21%. He said 1400 South from 900 West to 1000 West had a protest rate of 65%; 1045 West from 1700 to 2100 South was 36%; Colmar Avenue from 900 West to 1045 West was 3%; Margaret Avenue from 900 West to 1045 West was 4%; and he said no protests were received from Jewell Avenue. Kenneth Ingersoll, owner of property on Jewell Avenue, said he thought written protests could be submitted at this meeting and didn’t realize the deadline was 5:00 p.m. on Monday. He submitted several written protests from property owners on Jewell Avenue.
Lloyd McDermott, owner of property at 900 West 1400 South, protested on the basis of the cost. He said the cost of the improvements would exceed the value of his property. He said his estimated cost for the improvements was about $17,400, which did not include all the improvements such as landscaping and driveways, and his property was valued at $12,500. He thought the project would be a burden on people In the area and they would not be able to recapture the costs of the improvements if they sold their property.
Mrs. Lowell Quist, owner of property on 1400 South, indicated that she owned a piece of rental property In this area and did not have the money to pay for the improvements in front of this property.
Robert Layton, on behalf of Don Layton who owned property at 1045 West 1700 South, opposed. He also opposed the location of the pumping station. Orrin Green, 1000 West Jewell Avenue, said most of the people on Jewell Avenue protested although the protests were submitted at this meeting instead of on Monday. He said they had a large sewer assessment in 1986 and objected to now being assessed for curb, gutter, and sidewalk. He said the existing buildings did not provide parking for employees or customers on the property and he expressed concern about eliminating additional space in front of the buildings for these improvements since he felt it would constrain parking. He said the proposed driveway access would not conform to large vehicles to load and unload equipment and supplies. He also said the cost placed a burden on the owners of large front footage and said he was disturbed that this project was not done in conjunction with the sewer project. He said the area needed a storm drain and suggested that a different type of curb could be installed for a lot less expense.
(Q 87-1)
Special Improvement District 38-757.
RE: A public hearing at 6:00 p.m. to obtain protests concerning the creation of Special Improvement District 38-757, 900 West curb and gutter extension, for the construction of a five-lane roadway, the installation of curb and gutter, sidewalks, storm drainage, driveway approaches, street trees, sod and topsoil and all other miscellaneous work necessary to complete the improvements.
ACTION: Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye. Without objection this was referred to engineering for tabulation and a recommendation.
DISCUSSION: John Naser, engineering, said the preliminary protest rate on 900 West was 1% and the district had 9,636 feet of frontage. No one from the audience spoke on this matter.
(Q 87-2)
Petition 400-484 by Ray Campos.
RE: A public hearing at 6:30 p.m. regarding the request that Salt Lake City rezone the northwest corner of 900 West and 800 South by increasing the “B-3” zone west an additional 50 feet.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Hardwick seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Hardwick seconded to delay a decision until March 17 so the Council could take a field trip to the area, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
DISCUSSION: Vernon Jorgensen, planning director, outlined the area on a map and said the corner of 800 South and 900 West was presently zoned “B-3” and was occupied by a drive-in. He said there was a 50-foot 1t to the west which was vacant and explained that the petitioner’s proposal was to remove the existing drive-in and replace it with a new convenience store. He said in order to do this they wanted to include the entire property which would involve an extension of the “B-3” zone 50 feet. He said the Planning Commission recommended that the 50-foot enlargement be made. Councilmember Fonnesbeck expressed her concern that the “B-3” zoning areas were scattered all over the city specifically in neighborhoods. She was concerned about the precedent being set by continuing to enlarge these “B-3” zones. Mr. Jorgensen said much of the “B-3” zoning was done before requirements for parking and landscaping set backs were imposed so many of the “B-3” corners were too small to build a modern facility and meet both the landscaping and parking requirements. He said this was one reason they were having problems with these corners.
He said there was a new development across the street from the property in question and indicated that the Planning Commission felt the 50-foot 1t would not be developed into a home because of its relationship to the development. Councilmember Stoler said he thought “B-3” zones had outlived their usefulness and hoped problems would be solved with “B-3” zones that were in the middle of residential zones.
Ray Campos, petitioner, said nothing could be done with the property currently because of the side yard and parking requirements but with the additional footage they could build a convenience store. He said the current building was too small and run down and it would not be economically feasible to upgrade it. He said he wanted to sell the property because of health reasons and had approached 7-Eleven about buying it.
Gary Nelson, Southland Corporation, said about a year ago they entered into a contract with Mr. Campos and Mr. Wilding regarding the property in question. He said they met with the neighbors on both sides, Mr. Rudy and Mr. Terkelson, and had an agreement about fencing and landscaping. He said their building would substantially improve the corner and said they planned to have gas pumps. Council- member Godfrey said he had a 7-Eleven in his neighborhood that was closed and had concerns with the gas-station concept. He asked if the 7-Eleven in his area closed because it was across the street from a major food market and asked if the proposed store could possibly close since it would be across the street from a major food store.
Mr. Nelson said the problem with the 7-Eleven on 900 South in Mr. Godfrey’s area was that there wasn’t ample parking for the convenience store and people were only buying gas. He said the food store was not the reason the 7-Eleven closed. He indicated the proposed location would allow the traffic to flow better if they utilized the additional 50 feet of property.
Jerry Terkelson, living north of the project, said after Mr. Wilding’s home was torn down he would be the neighbor directly north. He indicated that he was not concerned about the property to the west but was concerned about what would happen to the north. He was not opposed to Mr. Campos or Mr. Wilding selling their property but was concerned with having the convenience store built. He said the drive-in closed around 8:00 p.m. or 9:00 p.m. but a 7-Eleven would be open 24 hours a day and expressed concern about the noise late at night. He indicated that he had talked with Mr. Nelson about various problems such as fencing but they had nothing in writing. Councilmember Mabey asked if all the 7-Elevens were open 24 hours. Mr. Nelson said they had three or four stores that were not and Mr. Jorgensen said this had been done in special exceptions but once the area was zoned the City couldn’t impose those restrictions. He said the property north was already zoned “B-3” but said the store would have to maintain 10 feet of landscaping and a masonry wall on the property line.
Mr. Nelson said the fence would be precast cement and could be the same color as the building. He said the building would be almost 32 feet off the property line and said he felt the fence and landscaping would be a buffer. He said they would also plant trees if necessary and said the exterior lighting would be directed on their property only. He said he mentioned to Mr. Terkelson that their property went three feet into his driveway and he said they wanted to moved their fence in three or four feet in order to give Mr. Terkelson the driveway.
Councilmemer Mabey asked Mr. Terkelson if this would be acceptable and Mr. Terkelson indicated it would. Mark Wilding said he lived on the corner next door to Terkelson’s and he wanted to have the property in question rezoned so the entire parcel could be sold to Southland. He said his elderly mother needed a more suitable place to live and they wanted to be able to sell their property. Dick Peterson, 757 Post, said he had no objection to rezoning the property in question.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked if the neighborhood council had been involved in this request. Mr. Jorgensen said they had and Mr. Nelson said he had a letter from the neighborhood council indicating their support. Councilmember Mabey said this vacant property was a weed patch most of the year and the proposed project would upgrade this corner and would be an improvement to the neighborhood.
(P 87-31)
Petition 400-445 by Jim Sifantonakis.
RE: A public hearing at 6:45 p.m. to obtain public comment regarding the request that Salt Lake City rezone the property on the northwest corner of 300 South and 700 East from a Residential “R-6” to a Business “B-3” classification for the purpose of constructing a fast food restaurant.
ACTION: Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Hardwick moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the petition to rezone the property, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
DISCUSSION: Vernon Jorgensen, planning director, outlined the area on a map and said the Planning Commission recommended that the request be denied. He explained that when 7th East was turned into a major artery, people feared it would become commercial like State Street so at that time the decision was made, and was incorporated into all the plans, that 7th East was not to become a commercial Street. He said over the years many requests for rezoning had been denied except one. He said the problem was that people felt the corners along 7th East were ideal for development of commercial uses and said new commercial developments along 7th East involved already existing zoning.
He said in this case the request was spot zoning, which is illegal, and it would leave one property zoned residential between Markea Avenue and the proposed use. He explained that the neighborhood plan called for no additional commercial uses and designated this area for high-density residential use. He said this was one of the few “R-6” areas left and was suitable for high- density housing like the housing across the Street. He said the corner of the property in question was vacant but there were homes on the remainder of the property. He said from a land use stand point a need for more commercial zoning had not been shown and he felt strongly that the area should not be rezoned.
Justin Barney, representing Mr. Sifantonakis, said that not all the members of the Planning Commission were present when they voted on this Issue and two voted in favor of the proposal. He explained that five lots were involved and housing on the property had deteriorated due to age. He said four of the eight units were vacant and the landlords had a hard time getting tenants because of the noise, the traffic, and the commercial nature of the area. He referred to a letter from David Luscher, Housing Development Corporation, which stated that they were not interested in purchasing this property because it was not satisfactory to their needs.
He said three lots had been vacant for many years so were not providing residential needs and many interested buyers wanted the property for a commercial use rather than a residential use. He did not anticipate that this property would be used in the future for housing. He said he didn’t think this was spot zoning because of the proximity to other commercial zones.
Glen Milner, 653 East 300 South, supported the request since the property in question was run down. In his opinion the area was almost continuous commercial development along 7th East and the proposed restaurant would employ at least 30 or more people and would clean up the area. Paris Jensen, real estate appraiser and attorney, supported the rezoning since the proposed development would improve the neighborhood. In his opinion, if the area remained zoned residential it would stay vacant since he felt it was not feasible to build apartments on the site. Mark Norris, chairperson of the Central City Neighborhood Council, said they opposed the rezoning and said If the city was going to hold the line on housing they needed to start now. He also said Robert McQuarry, chairperson of the East Central Neighborhood Council, opposed the request.
Wendell Jensen, property owner to the west, expressed his opinion that the vacant property would stay vacant unless the zoning was changed. Sue Neider, representing residents on Markea Avenue, opposed the request and complained about absentee landlords letting their property deteriorate. In her opinion there was not enough residential property in Salt Lake. She said the McDonalds, already in the area, caused real problems for their neighborhood and she said the residents did not want this request to be approved. She said there were other alternate sites in the area already zoned for this type of use and she urged the Council to deny the request.
Robert Rodman, past chairman of the Central City Community Council, supported the project and said the questions and concerns of the community council members had been discussed in many meetings. He said on May 7, 1976, the matter was voted on and they recommended the zone change. Morris Page, property owner, said he did not let his property deteriorate. He had maintained his property but the area looked bad because of the vacant lots. He said he was having a hard time renting his property and in his opinion it would be to the City’s advantage to have the area clean and receive taxes.
Lois Brown, 310 South 300 East, said she was a member of the Salt Lake Citizens Congress and on the Housing Advisory and Appeals Board. She expressed her concern about residences being torn down and businesses going out of business. She said residents and businesses needed to work together since they both depended upon each other. She said housing in the downtown area needed to be preserved and not destroyed and she felt approval of this request would jeopardize existing housing.
Gary Vance, previous landlord in this area, said he had maintained his property but the problem was the renters were low income and it was difficult to continue fixing up property if people could not afford to pay the rent that would justify the improvements. He supported the proposal and said it would provide jobs. John Langley, Bettilyon Realty, expressed his opinion that it would be many years before high-density residential was constructed and said higher rents would have to be charged just for the developer to break even.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck pointed out that if the property remained “R-6” it may be along time before housing was built but if the area was rezoned to commercial there would never be housing. Jim Sifantonakis, petitioner, indicated that at the inception of this project he talked with the neighbors several times and provided them with information they requested such as traffic reports. He said when he talked with the neighbors they didn’t oppose and he explained that he tried to work with the residents to resolve problems they were having with other restaurants in the area. He showed pictures of the proposed project and said there would be 50 parking stalls and a drive through window. He said it would not create traffic problems. Council- member Fonnesbeck asked him why he chose this corner when there were other locations in the area already commercially zoned. He said his type of business needed traffic and he wanted the corner because of the traffic.
Micahel Ortega, Salt Lake Citizens Congress and Central City Community Council, asked the Council to consider the impact this rezoning would have on the housing west of the project on 300 South. He was concerned that if this property was rezoned the rest of the housing on 300 South would eventually become commercial. He said there was a lot of housing in this area and urged the Council not to rezone the property. Victor Martinez, area resident, expressed his opinion that it was a matter of time before the zoning would become commercial. He said the empty lot caused problems such as weeds and said most of the area was commercial. He said the proposed project would improve the area, produce revenue for the city, and provide employment.
Mrs. Ray, property owner, said she was neutral about this issue but reaffirmed that high rents for housing could not be charged in this area and said there were already many businesses in the area. Mildred Collett, part owner of the property in question, said she worked hard to maintain her property but she couldn’t raise the rents enough to keep up. She said she had been doing the work herself but couldn’t continue to do so and couldn’t afford to hire someone to maintain the property. She thought the corner would remain an eyesore unless it was sold and improved. She supported the rezoning so a nice development could be built.
Bruce Heidenrick, realtor, said he had been working on this project for two and one half years. He said he talked with neighbors in the area and had petitions from people supporting the project. He said people told him there had been no change to this property for 15 years and they thought the project would improve the area. Mr. Jorgensen said zoning was a tool to effectuate a plan which should be on a long-range basis. He indicated that the Planning Commission was concerned because one precedent set another and 7th East could become a strip commercial street.
He said the property in question had the potential for residential development and referred to property on First South which was now being developed into housing for the elderly. He said the Planning Commission was concerned about the long-range plan for the community and said strip zoning was the worst thing that could happen to a neighborhood. He said unless the line was held at some point there were potential problems. Jane Sears, 417 East 300 South, asked the Council to decide on a favorable solution instead of leaving the current negative situation. Councilmember Mabey indicated his concern with developing housing on busy streets because of noise. Mr. Jorgensen explained that many housing developments were on busy streets in the city and proper design could handle problems. He indicated that good stable residential neighborhoods had to be established to build the city for the future. Councilmember Hardwick said this area was designated as residential in the master plan and he supported that. Councilmember Bittner suggested that the Council take a field trip and look at the area and the condition of the housing. Councilmember Fonnesbeck said she felt strongly that rezoning this area would be spot zoning since it was not surrounded or attached to similar zoning.
She said the entire neighborhood needed to be taken into consideration and rezoning this area would be opposing the master plan. She thought rezoning this area would be a mistake and suggested that rather than making piecemeal zoning changes, the master plan for the area should be reconsidered. She said there was a tremendous amount of commercial space available and said if the Council denied this request then they could ask planning to look at the master plan. Councilmember Kirk concurred and recommended that the Planning Commission look at this area and report back to the Council in 6 months.
(P 86-343)
Petition 400-433 y Ivory and Company.
RE: A public hearing at 7:00 p.m. to obtain public commnet concerning the request that Salt Lake city to rezone property at approximately 817 North Redwood Road from an “R-2A” to a Business “B-3” classification.
ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Bittner moved and Councilmember Hardwick seconded to adopt Ordinance 16 of 1987 rezoning the property at approximately 817 North Redwood Road from Residential “R-2A” to Business “B-3” according to the recommendation of the Planning Commission; approval shall incorporate the five conditions included in Development Services’ transmittal letter to the City Council addressing access through the post office parking, landscaped setbacks, finish materials of the building, extra landscaping, and the effective date of the zoning change; the City Recorder is instructed not to record the ordinance until the Mayor certifies to the City Recorder that a building permit has been issued In accordance with the conditions of the transmittal letter, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
DISCUSSION: Vernon Jorgensen, planning director, outlined the area on a map and indicated that on the corner of 700 North and Redwood Road there was a shopping center. He said north of that was a post office and the request was to enlarge the shopping center by going north 218 feet. He said there was a demand for a larger shopping center to serve the northwest community and said the Planning Commission and community council supported the request. He indicated that the Planning Commission recommended that the zoning not take affect until the developer submitted a building permit and met certain design and landscaping requirements. He also said they wanted a continuing effort made to work with the post office regarding traffic access through their parking lot. He said there would be a 20-foot easement to the north since there would eventually be a street put in leading to the property to the west.
Vernon Cooley, Ivory and Company, said they had several single-family residential developments in the northwest area and one reason for requesting more commercial development was because of the expanding residential development. He said they had traffic studies done and the reports said the traffic could be appropriately handled. He said the area which would be impacted by traffic would be Redwood Road. He said there was some difficulty in interfacing the existing commercial development and the proposed project because of the post office but they were trying to use the post office parking for access.
He said what they proposed was a mixture of traffic between the proposed site and the post office. He showed the Council a site plan and outlined the project and their proposed single-family subdivision. He said the types of businesses which had expressed interest in locating in the project included a shoe repair store, medical offices, a family restaurant, and a clothier. He said these shops would be in addition to the existing shopping center and not competitive.
Kim Anderson, 768 North Redwood Road, expressed concern about Increased traffic on Redwood Road and said the intersection at 700 North was very congested. He said there were currently two medical clinics in the area and thought another one would be competitive. He said stores currently in the area were vacant and he was concerned that new space would be competitive with existing space. He said there would be more benefit from building housing in the area and asked if this proposed development was In keeping with the master plan.
Echo Pettit, 1800 West 857 North opposed the request and expressed concern that more of the area would be rezoned to commercial. Mr. Jorgensen said the original master plan called for five or six acres further north on Redwood Road to be developed into shopping but rather than having a separate small center, the area would be better having just one center. He said the master plan stated that additional needs of the area could be met by expanding existing developments and cited the project in question as one area which could be expanded.
He said the developers were keeping very close to the master plan for the area. He said the major problem with the development was vehicular traffic between the two centers. He said their main recommendation was that a continuing effort be made to tie the two stores together by using the post office parking lot. Mr. Cooley reaffirmed that they would continue to work with the post office to have access between both shopping centers. Ralph Short, area resident, expressed concern about the traffic congestion and said there was plenty of vacant space in the existing shopping center. Earl Salsgood, small business owner, did not object to the shopping center but said traffic was a problem. Jean Christensen, 1800 West 900 North, said there were vacancies in the existing shopping center and suggested this space be used rather than build new space.
Mrs. Fred Anderson, 879 North 1800 West, expressed concern that a field in front of their property would be rezoned commercial and that was why she opposed the rezoning. She also said the proposed located was always full of water. Fred Anderson expressed his concern with the depth of the shopping center. Mr. Jorgensen said the rear property line would be the same as the back of the post office parking lot. Mrs. Pulley, 853 North 1800 West, expressed concern about traffic problems in front of the post office. She did not desire industrial or commercial zoning but wanted residential zoning. She said if Redwood Road was widened it would help the traffic problems.
Councilmember Bittner said traffic was a major concern but said when she talked with UDOT they assured her they would begin construction this fall to alleviate problems on Redwood Road. She suggested that the City Engineer work with Ivory and Co., the post office, and the owners of the Safeway regarding access since this was currently a very bad situation and there needed to be cooperation. She reiterated that the developers followed closely with the master plan and did not think the proposal was in excess to the amount of commercial space planned for the area.
She indicated that the amount of commercial space in the area was going to be limited so the residents did not need to become overly concerned. She explained that most of the vacant shops were too small and businesses needed more space. She said additional medical facilities were needed in the area and the master plan affirmed this; she also said there was no clothing store in this area. She thought the development could be an asset and said the only real objection she heard was regarding traffic. Councilmember Fonnesbeck suggested that the city write a letter to the post office superiors regarding the traffic problems and possible solutions.
(P 87-14)
COMMENTS
#1. Mike Black was scheduled to ask the Council to discuss the possibility of creating legislation pertaining to open-air markets. When called upon to speak Mr. Black was not present.
The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.