PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
TUESDAY, APRIL 20, 1982
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON TUESDAY, APRIL 20, 1982, AT 50O P.M. IN ROOM 211 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
ON ROLL CALL THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: RONALD J. WHITEHEAD ALICE SHEARER GRANT MABEY IONE M. DAVIS SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK EDWARD W. PARKER PALMER DEPAULIS.
Council Chairperson Sydney R. Fonnesbeck presided and conducted this meeting.
POLICY SESSION
Leigh von der Esch briefed the Council on items appearing on their agenda. Office of Budget and Management Planning staff presented findings of the audit of the Parks Department. John Gust briefed the Council on reorganization proposals for the Parks Department.
The Council adjourned at 5:55 p.m. to begin the Council meeting in room 301.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET IN REGULAR SESSION ON TUESDAY, APRIL 20, 1982, AT 6:00 P.M. IN ROOM 301 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
ON ROLL CALL THE FOLLOWING COUNCILMEMBERS WERE PRESENT: RONALD J. WHITEHEAD ALICE SHEARER GRANT MABEY IONE M. DAVIS SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK EDWARD W. PARKER PALMER DEPAULIS.
Mayor Ted L. Wilson and Roger Cutler, City Attorney, were present at this meeting.
Council Chairperson Sydney R. Fonnesbeck presided at and conducted this meeting.
Invocation was given by Police Chaplain Don Goodheart.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Approval of Minutes:
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Salt Lake City Council for its meeting held Tuesday, April 13, 1982, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
M 82-2
PETITIONS
250 of 1981 submitted by Raija K. Maddock
RE: Requesting the vacation of a 12-foot alley running approximately 132 feet east from Beverly Street and 125 feet north of Stratford Avenue. The petitioner has not been able to obtain the signatures of the abutting property owners and has requested a public hearing.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council hold a public hearing on June 8, 1982 at 6:00 p.m. to discuss Petition No. 250 of 1981.
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: The petitioner has paid the required $35 advertising fee.
DISCUSSION: This petition has been reviewed by Transportation, Fire Department, Public Utilities, Fixed Assets, Engineering, Planning Commission and the City Attorney’s Office. They have recommended that the petition be granted subject to retaining any existing rights of way or easements.
Councilmember DePaulis moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to schedule a public hearing for June 15, 1982 at 6:00 p.m. to discuss Petition 250 of 1981, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
R 82-82
Petition 626 of 1982 submitted by Emanuel Floor, Salt Lake International Center.
RE: Requesting the closure of Deseret and Learned Avenues. In a previous Council meeting, April 13, 1982, a public hearing was held to discuss this petition. At that meeting, conceptual approval was given for the closure. This item was brought back before the Council on April 20 to consider and adopt the ordinance.
The Council indicated that they had not had an opportunity to read the ordinance. Councilmember Davis asked if this request involved any time constraints. Howard Marsh, attorney representing Triad Utah, addressed the Council and stated that there was a severe time problem. Mr. Marsh reiterated what action had taken place in the meeting of April 13 stating that at that meeting the proposal had been for closure of Deseret and Learned Avenues and the subsequent conveyance of the property to Triad Utah so they could move ahead with the development of the Deveraux block and the Triad Center. This was conceptually approved but there were some questions raised by the Council and also raised by the staff.
The staff’s concern was that there were no “strings” on the development to make sure it went ahead as it had been represented to the Council. The agreement with the staff was to amend the ordinance and provide for a conceptual master plan to be attached to the conveyance documents; the developer would agree to have the building permits reviewed by the Planning Department to make sure they conform with the master plan. If there was nonconformance, then the Planning Department would object and no building permit would be issued. Mr. Marsh stated that since April 13 he has worked with Judy Lever on this ordinance; he is satisfied with the language and he stated the Ms. Lever is also satisfied. Mr. Marsh stated that the petitioner has a deadline with HUD regarding UDAG funding for Deveraux and they wanted to have the situation resolved by May 1. The Council recessed at this time so they could read the ordinance. When the Council reconvened, Councilmember Fonnesbeck stated that approval of permits was being left as a function of Planning and Zoning so there is no reason to have disputes come before the Council; basically, issuing of permits is an administrative rather than a legislative function. She further stated that she was glad an administrative hearing is required.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Whitehead seconded to adopt Ordinance 29 of 1982, effectuating the closure of Learned and Deseret Avenues between 300 and 400 West Streets, which motion carried, all members voting aye, except Councilmember DePaulis who was absent when the vote was taken.
P 82-28
54 of 1982 submitted by Wallace Wright, Trolley Square Associates.
RE: The petitioner is requesting to have Trolley Square removed from the City Register of Historic Places.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council hold a public hearing on May 11, 1982 to discuss Petition No. 54.
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: The Petitioner has been notified of the $50 advertising fee and will be forwarding the fee to the City Recorder’s Office. A fee is charged on this petition because this is a requested change to the zoning ordinance.
DISCUSSION: This petition has been reviewed by the Planning Commission and by the Historical Landmark Committee. They both recommend that the petition be denied. A copy of the recommendation is attached to the petition. The petitioner has requested this hearing to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission.
Councilmember DePaulis moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to schedule a public hearing for May 11, 1982, at 6:45 p.m. to discuss Petition 54 of 1982, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
P 82-83
DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
CITY ATTORNEY
RE: Introduction of proposed traffic code ordinance amendment: Section 196 pertaining to U-turns.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council consider amendments to Section 196 of the Salt Lake City Traffic Code.
DISCUSSION: The City’s current ordinance regulating U-turns is in conflict with the provisions of state law. The state law provides that U-turns are generally permitted unless prohibited by sign or traffic control device, Section 4l-6-l7(a)(9),(c). The City’s ordinance provides for just the opposite. The amendment eliminates the inconsistency between the two legislative enactments.
Councilmember DePaulis moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to adopt Ordinance 30 of 1982, amending Section 196 of the traffic code of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, relating to limitations on U-turns, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
O 82-21
RE: Enactment of a resolution authorizing the sale of Industrial Revenue Bonds in the amount of $9,500,000 for Holy Cross Hospital for the purchase of computerized equipment and body scanner and for refund of 1978 bonds.
Councilmember DePaulis moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to adopt Resolution 41 of 1982 authorizing the sale and delivery of Salt Lake City, Utah, Hospital Revenue Refunding and Improvement Bonds, Series 1982, Holy Cross Hospital Project, in an aggregate principal amount of $9,500,000, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Q 82-14
PARKS DEPARTMENT
RE: Proposed ordinance of fees and charges at the Wild Wave Swimming Pool.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council consider the following fees and charges to be put into ordinance form.
DISCUSSION: It is proposed that the admissions and fees charged by Wild Wave be increased from $2.50 for adults (12 and over) to $3 and children from $1.75 to $2. The family season pass be increased from $75 a year to $125 a year, and a new single pass be sold at $65 a year. It is also proposed that the $2 deposit required to rent a raft be dropped and a one-time deposit of $2.50 be charged with $1 being returned when the raft is brought back.
1. Wild Wave has not raised its admission fee since it was built in 1979. It is now necessary to do so to meet ever increasing operational, maintenance and service expenses. 2. Raising admissions and fees will aid Wild Wave in meeting financial obligations to the City. 3. It is felt that the new charges are still very low compared with the cost of recreation offered by other facilities, not only locally but nationwide. Wild Wave admissions are among the lowest of any wave pool in the country. 4. Last year the pool sold 136 family passes, resulting in $10,200 revenue. Those passes were used 9,235 times throughout the summer, resulting in an average cost per admission of only $.90; far below what is necessary to make Wild Wave self-supporting. Therefore, an increase in season pass price is necessary to make the season pass program profitable. Last year (1981) there was an increased demand for single passes from young adults and single persons who worked and lived close to the pool. For this reason it is proposed that a single season pass be offered. 5. It has been found that there is a loss of potential revenue by charging an hourly rental for the use of a raft. Unnecessary labor also results in keeping track of the amount of hours each raft is used. By charging a flat $2.50 fee for each raft rented and returning $1 of that fee when the raft is returned, will result in increased raft rental revenues and greater efficiency.
6. With the proposed admission increases mentioned above, the Wave Pool as shown below will generate approximately $77,000 each year to meet the financial obligations to the City.
TYPE OF INCREASE BUDGET PERIOD -January 1st -June 30, 1982 BUDGET PERIOD
1982/83
Increase Adult to $3.00 $ 8,250 $22,996
Increase Child to $2.00 4,000 9,408
Increase Season Pass from $75.00 to $125.00 6,000 6,000
Institute a new Single Season Pass for $65.00 6,500 6,500
Change the Raft Rental System to a one-time charge 2,000 5,381
TOTAL $26,750 $50,285
Councilmember Davis asked Albert Haines if he was aware of this proposed increase at the time the Council discussed the budget on Thursday, April 15. Mr. Haines stated that he was but the general fund was only presented to the Council in that meeting; enterprise funds were not presented. The only item presented regarding the Wild Wave Pool was the recommendation that the Council forgive the $450,000 obligation.
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to refer this proposed ordinance to the Public Safety and Community Activities Committee, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
O 82-23
POLICE DEPARTMENT
RE: Introduction of proposed Traffic Code ordinance amendment: Sections 186 and 191 regarding left-turn lanes.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council consider amendments to Section 186 and 191 of the Salt Lake City Traffic Code.
DISCUSSION: The recommendation is that a new ordinance be drafted prohibiting vehicles from “driving in between the newly designated traffic separators”. Councilmember DePaulis stated that this item had been tabled in a previous Council meeting, April 6. Since that time, the ordinance has been rewritten and the problem of inconsistencies and contradictions with definitions solved.
Councilmember DePaulis moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to adopt Ordinance 31 of 1982, amending Sections 186 and 191 of the Traffic Code of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, relating to left-turn lanes, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
O 82-19
PUBLIC WORKS
RE: Curb & Gutter Extension No. 38-601-2, 200 West Street from 5th to 9th South and Curb & Gutter Extension No. 38-555-1, 8th South Street from Main to 300 West Street.
RECOMMENDATION: Adoption by City Council of ordinances levying assessments set out in the assessment rolls for the above two curb and gutter special improvement districts.
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: Property owner assessment funds.
DISCUSSION: The Board of Equalization and Review for the above two curb and gutter extensions convened for public hearings on January 12, 13, and 14, 1982. Members of the Board of Equalization and Review as determined by City Council were Richard A. Johnston, Deputy City Engineer, Greg R. Hawkins, Deputy City Attorney, and Kathryn Marshall, City Recorder. At the conclusion of the hearings on January 14, 1982, the Board entered its recommendations and decision. It was the recommendation and decision of the Board of Equalization and Review that the assessment rolls should be adopted and confirmed without modification and that the City Council should adopt an ordinance levying assessments set out in the assessment rolls.
The 60-day appeal time has elapsed and no appeal has been submitted to the City Council. Richard Johnston, Deputy City Engineer, addressed the Council. He stated that these projects were constructed in 1981 and the Board of Equalization was held January 12, 13, and 14, 1982. Mr. Johnston named the members of the Board and stated that it was their recommendation that both districts be approved and that the ordinances levying the assessments as set out in the assessment rolls also be approved and adopted.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to adopt two ordinances: Ordinance 27 of 1982 confirming the assessment rolls and levying a tax providing for the assessment of property in Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension No. 38-601-2 and Ordinance 28 of 1982 confirming the assessment rolls and levying a tax providing for the assessment of property in Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension No. 38-555-1 which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Q 82-18
RE: Adoption of a resolution creating Curb and Gutter Special Improvement District No. 38-700.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution creating a district covering the following streets: 500 North Street from 1400 West to Redwood Road; Parley’s Way from 2300 East to Maywood Drive; and Foothill Drive from Sunnyside Avenue to 2100 East. It is further recommended that the City Engineering Division be authorized to proceed to have the Notice to Contractors advertised.
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: Fiscal Year 1981/82 Capital Improvement Funds and property owner assessments (special improvement district).
DISCUSSION: Curb and Gutter District No. 38-700 will provide for the construction of curb and gutter, sidewalk, roadway and drainage facilities for the above mentioned streets. During the protest period two streets, 700 West from 1300 South to 2100 South and 12th Avenue from “K” Street to “L” Street were protested out. They received 76% and 63% written protests against the district. It is the intent of the City Engineering Division to bid this project in May and start construction in the first part of June. Completion of construction should be in November, 1982.
The total estimated cost of the City’s portion being recommended for construction is $617,936. The abutters’ portion is $272,067 and the estimated total cost is $890,003. Richard Johnston, Deputy City Engineer, addressed the Council. He stated that a public hearing was held before the Council about a month ago and the protests have been tabulated. It is recommended that the two projects with protest rates in excess of 50%, 700 West and 12th Avenue sidewalk, be eliminated from the district. A district should be created for the remainder of the projects, 500 North, Foothill Drive and Parley’s Way; the overall protest rate on these projects was 25%.
It is also recommended that the City Engineer’s Office be authorized to proceed with advertisement of the Notice to Contractors. The Notice of Intention regarding this project has been sent. Mr. Johnston stated that meetings have been held with the Board of Education and the property owners to try and salvage the 12th Avenue sidewalk project; however, they were unable to eliminate or change any of the protests. Councilmember Fonnesbeck stated that this project was by request from the PTA because the children have no sidewalks to use when they go back and forth to school. The major land owner is an absentee land owner whose property is a field full of weeds and where garbage is dumped; but because of this one person the project has been eliminated.
Councilmember Whitehead asked what was involved with the 500 North Street project as far as the city’s payment portion. Mr. Johnston replied that there is a corner involved in that area and so there would be an exemption; also a portion in the vicinity of the bridge, which will be constructed as part of the bridge replacement project. A considerable amount of this project is being paid by the city’s portion because there is storm drainage required, this is all paid for by the city.
Councilmember Davis asked if the curb and gutter projects on Foothill Drive and Parleys Way would be affected because the state owns these streets. Mr. Johnston stated that these roads were designated state roads but the responsibility has been turned over to the city; the responsibility for Foothill Drive was given to the city in 1952. The state retains the fee title but they have designated the jurisdiction and responsibility to the city. Councilmember Davis asked if there would be any problems when the city starts construction; she also asked if there needed to be coordination with the state on the construction projects. She stated that she did not want the project stopped. Mr. Johnston stated that they are working with the state on this matter to guarantee that there is no problem; before the projects are actually started this assurance will be obtained.
Councilmember Whitehead asked about the November 4 completion date; he stated that asphalt cannot be laid that late in the season and wondered if there would be problems with asphalt not being laid and then having the area a mess all winter. Mr. Johnston stated that the asphalt must be completed by October 15; there is wording in the contract to this effect and there are penalties if this date is not met. Also new requirements have been instigated regarding time frames once excavation is begun; the contractor is also required to keep the area watered down. Mr. Johnston stated the issue of time frames is also addressed on extra work orders.
Councilmember Parker stated that there will be two projects on Foothill Drive and Parleys way, one is curb and gutter 38-700 and the other is the trench for the conduit. Mr. Johnston stated that the Parleys conduit watermain will be constructed both on Parleys Way and on Foothill Drive; the study which was done concluded that the best alternate was to use both streets. The Public Utilities Department has been directed to compile the final drawings of the watermain so that it can be added to the construction contract.
Councilmember Shearer stated that she was troubled by the state ownership of these roads; the city does not have anything in writing guaranteeing that the state will allow the city to do the construction. The city is also investing money in properties which are not owned by the city. Ms. Shearer asked what kind of precedent had been sent for curb and guttering state highways. Mr. Johnston stated that there were many streets which had been state highways and now are under the jurisdiction of the city; examples include Parleys Way, Foothill Drive, South Temple, 300 West, and 2100 South. On 300 West, curb and gutter was constructed from 900 South to 2100 South during the late 1960’s and early 1970’s. Ms. Shearer asked if the state deeded the street to the city or if they just turned over the maintenance to the city. Mr. Johnston stated that the fee title was not given to the city; as a matter of state policy this is not done. By action of their transportation commission jurisdiction will be designated to the local agency. Councilmember Mabey thought that even though the city has jurisdiction over some state-owned roads, there should be something in writing regarding additional improvements.
Roger Cutler stated that there is a difference between owning title and having a state highway. A state highway is designated under the statutes of state as being a state highway and therefore they have financial responsibility to maintain the road. The state may own the title to various roads but they no longer classify the road as a state highway and it is removed from the code; one example is that the city entered into an agreement to accept responsibility for the maintenance of 2300 East and the state agreed to maintain the roads around the Capitol. By the agreement, the city retained a certain amount of control over how the city streets would be handled. The problem with Foothill Drive is that in 1952 the state sent the city a letter stating that this was no longer a state road and the city was responsible for its maintenance.
This road has been maintained as a city road for 30 years and even though the state owns the underlying fee, it is still a public thoroughfare which the city has the right to maintain. Mr. Cutler also felt that there needs to be a clear agreement so that there would not be any problems with delays; he stated that the district should be approved and an agreement drafted clarifying that the city has responsibility for this road and it can be improved.
Councilmember Shearer moved to table this item until the agreement has been signed; there was no second to this motion. Mr. Johnston stated that bids will be opened on May 18 but the contract will not be awarded at that time; this project is being bid without the park but the closure of the road is being included. The question about the closure of Foothill Drive is one question that will be asked of the state. Councilmember Davis stated that Elaine Kay, State Department of Transportation, has been to several meetings regarding her portion of the Foothill area and he has indicated that there is no problem.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to adopt Resolution 42 of 1982 creating Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension No. 38-700 and authorizing construction of improvements as set forth in the Notice of Intention but require that state approval be given by May 20, which motion carried, all members voting aye, except Councilmember Shearer who voted nay.
Q 82-12
The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m.