PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 1985
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 1985, AT 5:15 P.M. IN ROOM 211 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: GRANT MABEY THOMAS M. GODFREY SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK EDWARD W. PARKER EARL F. HARDWICK.
Councilmember Whitehead was absent from the meeting.
A vacancy exists in Council District #6 due to the death of Councilmember Davis on February 26, 1985.
Council Chairperson Sydney Fonnesbeck presided at the meeting.
BRIEFING SESSION
#1. Carole Stokes, council executive director, briefed the council on the evening’s agenda including a briefing by LeRoy Hooton, public utilities director, concerning three ordinances to be considered regarding sewer charges and shut-off procedures.
#2. The SLACC Social Services Committee briefed the Council on the progress they have made concerning an ordinance revision. This ordinance will serve to redistribute group homes on a City-wide basis. They presented the Council with a map indicating the current location of various group homes in the City. A discussion was held concerning the impact of various types of group homes on neighborhoods.
The briefing session adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET IN REGULAR SESSION ON TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 1985, AT 6:00 P.M. IN ROOM 301 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: RONALD J. WHITEHEAD EARL F. HARDWICK GRANT MABEY THOMAS M. GODFREY SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK EDWARD W. PARKER.
A vacancy exists in Council District #6 due to the death of Councilmember Davis on February 26, 1985.
Mayor Ted L. Wilson, Albert Haines, chief administrative officer, Roger Cutler, city attorney, Kathryn Marshall, city recorder, and Lynda Domino, chief deputy recorder, were present.
Council Chairperson Sydney Fonnesbeck presided at the meeting and Councilmember Hardwick conducted the meeting.
Invocation was given by Police Chaplain Donald Goodheart.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Approval of Minutes
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to approve the minutes of the Salt Lake City Council for the regular meetings held Tuesday, February 19, 1985, and Tuesday, February 26, 1985, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmembers Whitehead and Fonnesbeck who were absent when the vote was taken.
(M 85-1)
PETITIONS
Petition 400-109 of 1983 by Chen’s International Corporation.
RE: An ordinance providing a six-month extension for Ordinance 20 of 1984, which closed a portion of Sumner Avenue located at approximately 200 North between Cornell and Garside Streets.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to adopt Ordinance 9 of 1985, extending the effective date of Ordinance 20 of 1984 relating to the closure of a portion of Sumner Avenue (200 North) and a parallel 15-foot wide alley (175 North) from 1500 West (Garside Street, formerly known as Division”) to 1540 West (Cornell Street, formerly known as “Custer” and “Rock”) in Salt Lake City, Utah, by amending Section 3 of said bill, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmembers Whitehead and Fonnesbeck who were absent when the vote was taken.
(P 84-10)
Petition 400-144 of 1983 by Joanne Milner, et al.
RE: An amendment to the ordinance which was adopted on February 5, 1985, closing a 15’ alley at approximately 920 South from 800 to 900 West Streets. This item was pulled from the agenda.
(P 84-19)
Petition 400-207 of 1984 by Wayne Petty.
RE: The rezoning of the north side of North Bonneville Street from 937 to 997 East.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to adopt Ordinance 10 of 1985, amending Section 51-12-2 of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, relating to zoning and fixing boundaries of use districts by rezoning property frontage on the north side of North Bonneville Drive (765 North) for 434 feet from approximately 937 to 997 East from Foothill Preservation “P-l” to Residential “R-l” classification subject to the Foothill Development “F-l” Overlay Zone, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmembers Whitehead and Fonnesbeck who were absent when the vote was taken.
(P 84-227)
Petition 400-225 of 1984 by S. N. Sharna.
RE: The vacation of an alley located north of 2700 South between Elizabeth Street and Highland Drive in Salt Lake City.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to schedule a public hearing for Tuesday, April 9, 1985, at 7:00 p.m. to discuss this petition, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmembers Whitehead and Fonnesbeck who were absent when the vote was taken.
(P 85-19)
Petition 400-281 of 1985 by the Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, Filtrol Corp., and Union Pacific Land Resources Corp.
RE: The annexation of property located between 2650 West and 7400 West and between North Temple and 2100 South.
Randy Taylor, planning and zoning, outlined the area on a map and said that the annexation is for 5,733.77 acres of property or 8.9 square miles. He indicated that of the 90 property owners 54 signed the petition, which constitutes 60% and he said that the assessed property value of the signatories is $1,019,617 or 69% of the total assessed value. He explained that state law requires signatures from over 50% of the owners of record and the signatories must represent at least 1/3 of the assessed value.
Mr. Taylor said this is part of the overall northwest quadrant area and is within the City’s master annexation area. Mr. Taylor said that the Planning Commission feels this annexation request is logical and desirable because it will correct a boundary problem. He said that this annexation will allow logical development through City controlled public service extensions.
Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to adopt Resolution 22 of 1985 accepting Petition No. 400-281 of 1985 for the purpose of considering said annexation by way of reviewing the existing Master Policy Declaration regarding Study Area 1 and the proposed amendment specifically relating to the Northwest Quadrant Annexation Phase 2; and schedule a public hearing on April 9, 1985, at 6:45 p.m. to discuss the annexation petition, the proposed zoning, and the adoption of Amendment 1-D to the Master Policy Declaration, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Whitehead who was absent when the vote was taken.
(P 85-20 and R 85-3)
DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
CITY COUNCIL
#1. RE: An ordinance amending Chapter 2 of Title 51 of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, as amended, by adding Sections 51-2-13.1 and 51-2-15.6 relating to definitions; and an ordinance amending Chapter l2A of Title 51 of the Revised Ordinances by amending Sections 5l-12A-l and 5l-12A-2 and adding Sections 51-l2A-3 and 5l-l2A-4, relating to the foothill development overlay zone.
This item was pulled from the agenda.
(O 84-32)
#2. RE: An ordinance amending Title 46 of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, relating to the Traffic Code by adding Article 25 relating to establishing a residential permit parking program to be administered by the Public Works Director. Larry Livingston, council office, briefly outlined changes which were made to the ordinance since the public hearing in December. The changes are as follows: 1. The way the permit will be displayed has not been specified. 2. The portion of the ordinance regarding the issuance of permits to nonresidents was clarified to mean employees within a district. The permit would be issued on a priority basis.
3. The ordinance has been clarified regarding how the votes are counted in reference to establishing a district. Also owners are allowed to cast a vote for each tax parcel. 4. The criteria for establishing the district has been changed to 70% over a 4-hour period. Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked if there was a budget impact statement regarding this ordinance and Mr. Livingston said no. Councilmember Fonnesbeck indicated that a budget impact statement should be submitted to the Council.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck moved and Councilmember Whitehead seconded to refer this ordinance to the consent agenda for April 2, 1985, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(O 84-30)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
#1. RE: An application to the United States Geological Survey for an earthquake hazard assessment of essential city facilities.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to authorize the Mayor to submit an application to the United States Geological Survey in response to RFP 1586 for $72,000 for an earthquake hazard assessment of essential city facilities, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmembers Whitehead and Fonnesbeck who were absent when the vote was taken.
(T 85-5)
#2. RE: Recommendations for the allocation of $4.3 million of Community Development Block Grant funds. Mayor Wilson outlined changes which he made from the staff recommendations. A copy of the complete list of CDBG program funding recommendations for 11th Year is on file in the Office of the City Recorder. Mayor Wilson’s changes are as follows: 1. Land Write Down Project - no funding. 2. Housing Conservation for Elderly - $10,000. 3. Reservoir Park - $70,000. 4. Tree Planting Project - no funding. 5. Utahn’s Against Hunger - $10,000. 6. Rescue Mission - $15,000. 7. Salvation Army - $20,000. 8. Westside Emergency Food Pantry - $21,000. 9. Crime Prevention - $156,425.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to refer the CDBG funding recommendation list to the Committee of the Whole, which motion carried, all members voting aye. Councilmember Whitehead expressed concern that the Mayor had not recommended funding for the Northwest/Central City Medical Facilities. He said that this facility is well used by low-income people. Mayor Wilson indicated that he would not object if the Council funds this program. Stephanie Loker, capital planning and programming, said that the allocation is $4,568,000 which is $80,000 less than last year. She requested that the Council make their preliminary recommendation on April 2 and have the final recommendation on April 16.
(T 85-4)
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
#1. RE: A resolution amending the Fiscal Year 1984-1985 budget.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to adopt Resolution 23 of 1985 amending budgets of Salt Lake City, Utah, for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 1984, and ending June 30, 1985, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmembers Whitehead and Fonnesbeck who were absent when the vote was taken.
(B 84-5)
#2. RE: An interlocal agreement with the State Judicial Council for data processing services by the city.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to adopt Resolution 21 of 1985 authorizing the execution of an interlocal cooperation agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and State Judicial Council for data processing services by the city, including hardware, software, communications, and data processing personnel for the benefit of the state, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmembers Whitehead and Fonnesbeck who were absent when the vote was taken.
(C 85-61)
MAYOR’S OFFICE
#1. RE: Mayor Wilson presented his State of the City address. A complete copy of his message is on file in the Office of the City Recorder.
Mayor Wilson said that during the past year the City has continued to improve in several important ways: The water and sewer systems have improved, crime has been reduced substantially, housing stock has increased, the airport has modernized, computerized traffic signals have been employed, downtown and Sugar House have been developed, and the City has remained solvent. He also mentioned two negative situations which occurred: The STT situation and management problems at the sewage treatment plant. He said that the STT matter caused the administration to review its internal management practices and he said that responsible steps have been taken to solve management problems, investigate possible criminal elements, and proceed to recover any lost revenue.
In reference to the sewage treatment plant he said that stern disciplinary action was taken and new management was assigned. He reported that the plant is operating better today than ever before. Mayor Wilson said that he has directed the Chief Administrative Officer that the coming year is the year of management for the City. Each and every department will be carefully reviewed for all management practices, especially in the areas where finances are involved or critical compliance is important. Where soft spots are found, careful internal auditing will be done and corrective procedures established. The Mayor said that this is one of the more important goals of his administration this year. He added that generally the City is very well managed.
Mayor Wilson said that one of the important goals in 1985-86 is to continue with the commitment to save the City and County Building. He said that the City has established a good workable compromise with the county on the building but now must make some important decisions concerning the method of construction and the financing of the building. He supported the county in its efforts to pass the bonding referendum to complete the county complex at 2100 South and expressed his opinion that the voters should support the initiative since it would save the people tax money.
Mayor Wilson expressed excitement about the potential of the economic development program and said that it is the future salvation of the City’s tax base. He asked the Council to be generous with this program at budget time. He also expressed support for the City employees and said that they are the essential and critical element of productivity. He said they need to feel that the City management and leadership is behind them.
Mayor Wilson said that in Salt Lake City unemployment has declined from 7.8% to 6.8% during the past year, approximately 7,400 new jobs have been created, gross taxable sales have increased 10.9% and construction activity is up 68.9%. He added, however, that the poor and the homeless have encountered increasing problems. He said that it should be an important goal of the government this year to be an advocate for these unfortunate poor in the City and respond with reasonable contributions on occasions when a crisis is present.
Mayor Wilson said that the City is challenged by a serious housing crisis. In spite of efforts to stimulate moderate and low-cost housing, there has been almost no low-income and low moderate-income housing built in the City in recent years. He said that he is working with the leadership of Councilmember Hardwick to adopt a low-income housing policy aimed at meeting the needs of the displaced, preserving existing housing and stimulating new construction. The Mayor mentioned that he was recommending a temporary moratorium on housing demolitions in order to have time to adopt the policy before losing more critical low-income housing.
Mayor Wilson mentioned that the City is prepared for another flood year and that the legislature passed a flood bill that will do necessary diking in the northwest area in a timely manner. He said that the northwest citizens can feel assured that the state, county, and City will deal with the flood threat in a responsible manner. In closing Mayor Wilson said that the goals to solve management problems, housing problems, flooding problems, and make the City’s work force even more productive and satisfied are large tasks. He also anticipated new budget crises with service demands on the increase and the threat of the federal cut backs in revenue sharing, CDBG, and UDAG grants. But Mayor Wilson expressed his optimism about Salt Lake City’s future.
(G 85-3)
POLICE DEPARTMENT
#1. RE: An ordinance amending Chapter 10 of Title 20 of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, relating to financial and lending institutions and pawnbrokers.
Carole Stokes, council executive director, said that the pawnbrokers do not want the bond amount to be increased but because it costs more to replace the merchandise that would be pawned, the $5,000 bond requirement is legitimate. She indicated that $1,000 is the current amount. Roger Cutler, city attorney, added that the pawnbrokers are also concerned with the additional record keeping. He said that the police department feels strongly that without the records there would be no way to trace the merchandise.
Councilmember Whitehead recalled that at the last Council meeting when this ordinance was discussed, a suggestion was made that the pawnbrokers and police department meet to discuss the ordinance and resolve problems. He asked if these two groups met. Ms. Stokes said she would find out if a meeting took place.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to refer this ordinance to the consent agenda for March 12, 1985, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(O 85-2)
PUBLIC UTILITIES
#1. RE: An ordinance amending Section 37-6-2, Schedule 3 Rates and Fees, of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, relating to sewer service charges (sewer fees). Without objection, this ordinance was referred to the consent agenda for March 12, 1985.
(O 85-7)
#2. RE: An ordinance amending Section 49-6-54 of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, relating to required turn-off for nonpayment of water and/or sewer charges. Without objection, this ordinance was referred to the consent agenda for March 12, 1985.
(O 85-8)
#3. RE: An ordinance amending Section 37-6-2, Schedule 3 Rates and Fees, of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, relating to sewer service charges (sewer charge adjustment). Without objection, this ordinance was referred to the consent agenda for March 12, 1985.
(O 85-9)
PUBLIC WORKS
#1. RE: An interlocal agreement with the Utah Department of Transportation for construction of a bridge over 700 South for 4000 West.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to adopt Resolution 20 of 1985 authorizing the execution of an interlocal cooperation agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the Utah Department of Transportation for construction of a bridge over 700 South for 4000 West Street, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmembers Whitehead and Fonnesbeck who were absent when the vote was taken.
(C 85-60)
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
#1. RE: An application with the United States Department of Commerce for the establishment of a Sub-zone to the Intermountain Foreign Trade Zone #30.
John Hiskey, Mayor’s office, explained that this allows Hercules to establish a foreign trade zone on site as an extension of the existing foreign trade zone. He said that it would provide significant economic benefit to the company. Mr. Hiskey said it also provides a revenue source to the City since there is a fee for this service. He said the fee will go to the Redevelopment Agency.
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to suspend the rules and on first reading adopt Resolution 24 of 1985 authorizing the filing of an application with the United States Department of Commerce for the establishment of a Sub-zone to the Intermountain Foreign Trade Zone #30 as authorized by the Foreign Trade Zones Act of 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-8lu), as amended by Public Law 566, 81st Congress, approved June 17, 1950, and Public Law 971, 85th Congress, approved August 28, 1958, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(R 85-4)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Urban Environment Board
RE: An ordinance amending Title 25 of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, by adding Chapter 29 to be entitled “Salt Lake City Urban Environment Board”.
A public hearing was held at 6:30 p.m. to discuss this ordinance. Carole Stokes, council executive director, said that this ordinance would create a citizens advisory board. She explained that at a previous meeting the Council discussed the appearance of the City and asked the Council staff to develop a policy to address a number of concerns. The first concern was that the Council wanted Salt Lake City to be a beautiful place with green space (trees and landscaping). Second, they wanted citizen involvement; third, they wanted to expand the existing shade tree trimming and maintenance program; and fourth, they wanted to make sure City resources were adequately utilized.
Ms. Stokes said that the ordinance is a result of these concerns and it is a good way to address the problems which have occurred. She said that it is a standard ordinance creating an advisory board and the board should be helpful to City staff by adding new expertise and vision. Ms. Stokes recommended that this ordinance be referred to the Committee of the Whole so the Council can discuss the policy with the administration since it requires a lot of coordination with City departments. Councilmember Godfrey mentioned that an urban forester is referenced in the ordinance and he asked if this is how the position is created for a forester.
Ms. Stokes said that action will have to be taken in the budget process to formally create the position and if the Council budgets for the position then it exists. Mayor Wilson addressed two issues of concern. He said that the ordinance does not ask for any expertise and he suggested that some board members should have expertise in trees. He also said that the issue of the quorum is not dealt with adequately. Mayor Wilson referred to the position of urban forester and said that this position will need a staff in order to properly perform the job. He suggested that an urban forester not be hired immediately but the committee should be established first and charged with the duty of doing a needs assessment regarding the urban forest.
The following citizens supported the proposed ordinance: Mac Gibb, 1011 Hollywood Avenue. Gary Merrill, past president of the Utah Association of Shade Tree Commissions. Lloyd Seigendorf, 728 South 10th East. Lynn Larsen, president of the Utah Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects. Richard Hildreth, director of the state arboretum, University of Utah. Jane Stromquist, 33 C Street. Ken Bowers, past president of the Utah Association of Nurserymen and Landscape Contractors. Jesse Frazier. Terry Hanney, 1367 West Indiana. Gregory Perry, resident in the Avenues. Virginia Lee, 1458 Princeton Avenue.
Comments were made about the importance of trees and the function they provide such as purifying the air, reducing run off, flooding, and soil erosion, aiding with heating and cooling, beautifying, and screening. Many of these citizens mentioned that the urban forest needs to be managed properly and the ordinance is a significant step. Comments were made that if the urban forest is cared for properly it will increase in value. All were concerned with the urban environment and preserving and improving the quality of life. Support was expressed for hiring an urban forester.
Mr. Gibb and Mr. Frazier suggested that in regards to this ordinance, the total issue, which includes people, needs to be taken into consideration. Mr. Seigendorf and Ms. Lee volunteered to serve on the board. Ms. Stromquist suggested that more flexibility be given to property owners regarding landscaping of parking strips. Mr. Perry specifically supported citizen involvement. A comment was made that if Salt Lake City establishes a board then perhaps other cities will do likewise. No opposition to this ordinance was expressed.
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Fonnesbeck who was absent when the vote was taken.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Whitehead seconded to refer the proposed ordinance to the Committee of the Whole for March 14, 1985, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Fonnesbeck who was absent when the vote was taken.
(O 85-3)
Petition 400-273 of 1985 by Tate/Brubaker.
RE: The closure of Volney Court, a public street running 330 feet north from 700 South at 200 West.
A public hearing was held at 7:15 p.m. to discuss this petition. Randy Taylor, planning and zoning, outlined the area on a map and said that the petitioner is in the process of purchasing Fire Station #12 and adjoining properties in order to facilitate their development. Mr. Taylor said that Tri Arc has signed the petition and they are the only other adjoining property owner other than the City. He said that Volney Court serves no useful public purpose and the Planning Commission recommends that this court be closed. Warren Tate, petitioner, said that they plan to develop the area for retail use and will proceed as soon as possible. No one from the audience opposed this request.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmeniber Mabey seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Fonnesbeck who was absent when the vote was taken.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to adopt Ordinance 11 of 1985, closing a portion of a public street (Volney Court), said Street being 16.5 feet wide and running 330 feet north from 700 South at 200 West in Salt Lake City, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Fonnesbeck who was absent when the vote was taken.
(P 85-18)
Moratorium on Demolition Permits.
RE: An ordinance declaring a temporary moratorium on the issuance of demolition permits for residential structures located within the Salt Lake City limits.
A public hearing was held at 7:30 p.m. to obtain public comment. Mayor Wilson referred to a transmittal letter which he submitted to the Council regarding this issue and outlining the reasons for the moratorium (this letter is on file in the Office of the City Recorder). He said that the moratorium would be for only four months in order to stop the demolition process on all housing until the housing policy is established and he said that there is an appeal process in the ordinance. Mayor Wilson said that the tragedy of closing an apartment is too great to make the moratorium unreasonable.
Councilmember Whitehead asked if there is a waiting period before a building can be demolished once the demolition is authorized. Roger Cutler, city attorney, said that tenants have to be given 60 days written notice (those who refuse to leave are entitled to 60 days notice) but if the building has been vacated prior to application this does not apply. He added that state statute only requires 15 days notice before the end of the term. He said that the delay factor is from the time the application is submitted until the permit is issued; once the permit is issued they can proceed.
Councilmember Whitehead referred to the appeal process contained in the ordinance and asked under what conditions an exception would be granted. He was concerned that this moratorium would be imposed at a bad time since construction season is approaching. Mayor Wilson referred to Section 11 of the ordinance which outlines the appeal procedure and states what powers are given to the Housing Advisory and Appeals Board. The ordinance states that the Board can hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in the refusal of the City to issue a permit for demolition, they can authorize issuance of permits for the demolition of residential structures which have been declared by the City to be hazards, and they can authorize issuance of permits for the demolition of residential structures provided that such will not be contrary to the public interest and literal enforcement of the provisions of the temporary moratorium will result in unnecessary hardship. Mr. Cutler said that this ordinance would not apply to those who have already applied and are in the demolition process. He reiterated that this would not apply to those buildings which are unsafe or in a case where there would be unreasonable hardship. Councilmember Whitehead said that the purpose of the moratorium is to preserve low-income housing but he was concerned about a potential problem: owners would sell their property. He explained that if it is not feasible for a person to rent their property, they can sell the property and then the rents would increase.
Councilmember Hardwick explained that one reason for the moratorium is so plans can be established and the housing issue can be addressed with both the investment sector and the people who are impacted. He said that he feels an emergency exists. He said he was addressing the issue of housing in the downtown area in general and not just low-income housing. Councilmember Mabey pointed out that currently interest rates are low and he indicated that there would be advantages to building new housing units. He mentioned that even though the rent may be more for new housing, the heating costs would be less. He pointed out that if older housing is upgraded and improved then rents would increase.
Councilmember Mabey suggested that a revolving fund be established in order to help people and provide low-cost housing. Mayor Wilson reiterated that the moratorium would only be for four months in order to allow the housing policy to be established and he also reiterated that there is an appeal procedure in the ordinance. He encouraged the Council to approve the moratorium so that this issue can be debated without worrying about housing being demolished. Councilmember Fonnesbeck was concerned that the City may be contributing to the problem because of requirements such as parking lots. She suggested that the City needs to review policies that may be acting as deteriorating elements: zoning, exceptions to the zoning, and parking requirements.
Councilmember Parker suggested that the moratorium would possibly increase the costs of constructing new buildings since construction would be postponed. The following citizens supported the moratorium: Bud Limb, 2029 Logan Avenue. Bernice Cook, People’s Freeway Community Council. Nola Heppler, Lafayette Apartments. Gladys Banks, Lafayette Apartments.
These citizens expressed concern about the general housing situation in downtown Salt Lake City. Ms. Cook said that the demolition of good housing needs to stop. Ms. Lydia Heibel, 561 East 1st South, wanted developers to be required to give people three months notice when they have to move. She also agreed with Councilmember Fonnesbeck that zoning may cause problems. Linda Tracy objected to the moratorium. She said that downtown Salt Lake City is in a process of change and she said it is inevitable with rising property values that people are going to seek the highest and best use for their property. It was her opinion that government control of interest rates caused the current problems and government should not be involved in the market. She felt that adjustments should be allowed to occur gradually rather than government forestalling the inevitable difficulties, which in her opinion would create greater problems in the future. Ms. Tracy did not think that substandard buildings should be preserved. It was her opinion that the debate regarding a housing policy could continue in an orderly way without a moratorium.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Whitehead suggested that the City move ahead with the housing policy without imposing a moratorium. He was concerned that developers may panic. Councilmember Hardwick said he felt that at this point, developing the program without the moratorium may cause developers to panic as well. Councilmember Fonnesbeck said that by publicly announcing that the City intends to take steps to protect buildings (by developing a policy) may cause a rash of demolitions.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to pursue the housing policy as proposed in the ordinance without imposing a moratorium, which motion failed because of a tie vote. Councilmembers Parker, Mabey, and Whitehead voted aye; Councilmembers Godfrey, Fonnesbeck, and Hardwick voted nay.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck moved and Councilmember Hardwick seconded to pursue the housing policy and reconsider the moratorium on April 2, 1985, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmembers Whitehead and Mabey who abstained from voting.
Mayor Wilson said that he did not want people to think that this moratorium was a fight between the principles of free enterprise and over regulation. He reiterated that the moratorium will allow deliberation on the policy in an atmosphere of reason. Craig Peterson, director of development services, said that the moratorium was going to be used as a means to study policy and it is not the housing policy itself. He was concerned that postponing a vote on the moratorium will defeat the purpose of the policy. He said that the Council can set the moratorium at any time but the major purpose at this meeting is the actual policy which is to provide relief for those displaced by demolition, preserve and improve existing housing, and to stimulate new residential construction.
Mr. Peterson said that to make the moratorium an issue will be a mistake and he suggested that the Council not specify that the moratorium will be reconsidered on April 2. He was concerned that during the next month people will focus more on the moratorium than on the actual policy.
Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Hardwick seconded to reconsider the motion to discuss the moratorium on April 2, 1985, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Fonnesbeck who voted nay.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to rescind the motion to consider the moratorium on April 2, 1985, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Fonnesbeck who voted nay.
Councilmember Whitehead moved to pursue the housing policy as outlined in the moratorium ordinance. Councilmember Fonnesbeck moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to amend this motion to include the four-month moratorium, which motion failed due to a tie vote. Councilmembers Fonnesbeck, Hardwick, and Godfrey voting aye; Councilmembers Whitehead, Mabey, and Parker voting nay.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to pursue the housing policy as outlined in Section 10 of the proposed moratorium ordinance, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Fonnesbeck who voted nay.
(O 85-6)
The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.