PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
TUESDAY, JUNE 5, 1984
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON TUESDAY, JUNE 5, 1984, AT 5:00 P.M. IN ROOM 211 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
ON ROLL CALL THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: RONALD U. WHITEHEAD ALICE SHEARER GRANT MABEY IONE M. DAVIS SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK EDWARD W. PARKER EARL F. HARDWICK.
Council Chairperson Ronald Whitehead presided at the meeting.
POLICY SESSION
#1. Richard Johnston and Fred Wright of the Salt Lake Arts Center presented a slide presentation on the commissioning of the USS Salt Lake City. The photography was made possible by a grant from Polaroid. #2. John Gust, parks director, introduced Grenville Roles, director of Tracy Aviary. Mr. Roles outlined his goals for Tracy Aviary, which is one of two city-owned avicultural collections in the United States. He has reduced the hours of operation at the Aviary to allow for a breeding program and intends to concentrate on the educational potential of the Aviary. Mr. Roles said that if the $50,000 capital improvements allocation is approved, the funds will be used for sidewalk repair and general cleanup. The Tracy Aviary Board has developed a five-year capital improvements plan that will be submitted to the Council.
The policy session adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET IN REGULAR SESSION ON TUESDAY, JUNE 5, 1984, AT 6:00 P.M. IN ROOM 301 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 EARL F. HARDWICK.
Mayor Ted L. Wilson, Albert Haines, chief administrative officer, and Walter Miller, deputy city attorney, were present at the meeting.
Council Chairperson Ronald Whitehead presided at and Councilmember Earl Hardwick conducted the meeting.
Invocation was given by Police Chaplain Robert Hyden.
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 meeting held Tuesday, May 22, 1984, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(M 84-1)
Special Presentation
Bruce Bennett briefed the Council on public hearings to be held in order to discuss the report of the Governor’s Commission on Criminal Justice. He said that the Commission was established in order to determine direction and overall policy for the criminal justice system and to consider solutions from the perspective of the entire system. The public hearings will be held to explain problems within the system and receive public input about priorities. Mr. Bennett said that the hearing for the Salt Lake City area is scheduled for June 21, 1984, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. This will be an opportunity for the citizens of Salt Lake to voice their opinions and have input on the recommendations which will be given to the Governor.
PETITIONS
Petition 400-187 of 1984 by Utah State Department of Administrative Services.
RE: The vacation of portions of Simondi Avenue, Cornell Street (formerly Custer Street), Garside Street (formerly Division Street), and a certain public alley adjacent thereto, located in the vicinity of 300 North and 1550 West.
Councilmember Shearer moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to schedule a non-advertised public hearing for Tuesday, June 12, 1984, at 6:30 p.m. to discuss Petition 400-187 of 1984, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Fonnesbeck who voted nay.
(P 84-35)
DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
CITY ATTORNEY
#1. RE: An ordinance amending Section 19-2-19(a) of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, relating to location limitation of certain licenses, changing the designation of the official city map numbering.
Without objection, Councilmember Hardwick referred this ordinance to the consent agenda for June 12, 1984.
(O 84-13)
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
#1. RE: An inducement resolution for an Industrial Revenue Bond in the amount of $2 million for Hayden, Inc. for a plant and distribution center in the Cambridge Industrial Park at approximately 11th South and Swaner Road for the manufacture of their oil cooling systems products.
Without objection, this item was pulled from the agenda at the request of the bond counsel.
(Q 84-11)
#2. RE: An ordinance amending Section 25-1-1 of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, as last amended by Bill No. 39 of 1983, relating to compensation of city officers and employees, including changes in some statutory officers’ salaries and classifications.
Without objection, a public hearing was scheduled for Tuesday June 12, 1984, at 6:45 p.m. to consider adoption of this ordinance.
(O 84-15)
#3. RE: Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes, Series 1984.
Cheryl Cook, city treasurer, indicated that on May 22 the Council adopted a resolution authorizing the issuance and awarding the sale of the tax anticipation notes. In connection with that, a resolution needs to be adopted regarding the Official Statement. Ms. Cook said that the Official Statement has been reviewed by the attorney’s office.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to adopt Resolution 61 of 1984 approving and authorizing the use and delivery of an Official Statement in connection with the offer, sale and delivery of the Salt Lake City, Utah, $24,000,000 Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes, Series 1984; and related matters, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Fonnesbeck who was absent when the vote was taken.
(Q 84-9)
#4. RE: Industrial Development Revenue Bonds in the amount of $5 million for Big “V” Associates for the construction of a 41 ,000 square foot office building at 455 East 500 South. The inducement resolution was previously approved under the name of Hermes Associates in the amount of $9.5 million for construction of an office building at 100 South 500 East.
Ms. Leigh von der Esch, council executive director, said that this project is appropriate for the zoning in the area, which is “R-7”. The project would be in accordance with the city’s master plan and Big “V” Associates has received approval for a conditional use for this project. Councilmember Hardwick mentioned that this is in his district and the surrounding development includes apartments and business complexes. Nick Vidalakis, Big “V” Associates, explained that in the future the property at 100 South 500 East will be developed but currently it has not been developed because of interest rates and a sufficient tenant has not been obtained. Mr. Vidalakis showed plans for and explained about the project to be located on 455 East 500 South. He said that they are ready to start construction and there are potential leases for 50% of the building.
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to adopt an inducement resolution, Resolution 60 of 1984, for Big “V” Associates for Industrial Development Revenue Bonds in the amount of $5 million; said inducement resolution is subject to the City Attorney’s approval, and bond applicant must meet city financial requirements and pay the processing fee, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(Q 84-10)
POLICE DEPARTMENT
#1. RE: An ordinance amending Sections 20-29-6(3) and 20-29-6(a) of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, as amended, relating to license and business regulation non-profit clubs and associations.
Without objection, Councilmember Hardwick referred this ordinance to unfinished council business on the July 10, 1984, agenda.
(O 84-14)
PUBLIC UTILITIES
#1. RE: A resolution authorizing the execution of an interlocal cooperation agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and Salt Lake County wherein the county agrees to restore and repair the city’s Green and Walker Ditch Diversion Structures in Big Cottonwood Creek.
Without objection, Councilmember Hardwick referred this resolution to the consent agenda for June 12, 1984.
(C 84-211)
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
#1. RE: A resolution authorizing payment of tax increment funds in connection with the C.B.D. Neighborhood Development Project Area. Councilmember Shearer indicated that this is the Council’s authorization for spending at the Triad project. It is subject to approval of funds in the Redevelopment Agency budget for next year and there is a hold harmless clause that if they do not conform as agreed then the Agency’s money will be returned.
Councilmember Shearer moved and Councilmember Fonnesheck seconded to adopt Resolution 62 of 1984 of the City Council of Salt Lake City authorizing payment of tax increment funds for the installation and construction of facilities, structures or other improvements which are publicly owned within the C.B.D. neighborhood development project area, subject to approval of said funds in the 1984-1985 Agency budget, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(R 84-4)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Fiscal Year 1983-84 Budget.
RE: Proposed amendments to the Fiscal Year 1983-84 budget.
A public hearing was held at 6:15 p.m. to discuss the amendments. No one from the audience addressed this issue.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Albert Haines, chief administrative officer, outlined two changes to the summary of proposed amendments. First, under Source of Funds for Finance and Administrative Services, $133,000 anticipated property tax revenue should be $133,000 contingency. Second, the fund amount for non-departmental should be $169,416 contingency instead of $36,416 contingency. Mr. Haines explained that there was no anticipated property tax revenue. Property tax revenue is reflected in the total revenue of the city’s general fund and does not represent a “new” source of revenue. Therefore it was recommended that the source of revenue be the contingency account.
Mr. Haines explained that these funds were for the rekeying effort in the parking meter collections ($44,000) and additional charges of the county for collecting and assessing taxes ($89,000). Councilmember Shearer expressed concern that the Council was being asked to approve expenditures after they had already been made. She said the auditors have advised that it is necessary for the full amount of any lease contract to be appropriated up front. In response to Ms. Shearer, Mr. Haines said that there was a $1.5 million appropriation for the telephone communications system, $3.1 million associated with the new mainframe computer, and $253,000 and $44,000 for fleet management. The fleet management appropriation pertains to an appropriation that had been identified in prior year but had not been expensed until 1983-84.
Mr. Haines indicated that the telephone system is cost justified since the new system would be on a lease purchase basis instead of renting which is presently the case. Regarding the mainframe computer, Mr. Haines said that the Council had approved the acquisition of a new mainframe computer but because of accounting and bookkeeping responsibilities this has to be accounted for in the year that it is acquired. Mr. Haines indicated that the city is not binding future years because there is an option under contracts for termination. Mr. Haines then reviewed funding for flood expenses. He said that the 1983-84 fund balance would be revised downward from approximately $2.3 million to approximately $1.9 million to reflect the $400,000 appropriation from fund balance. If the city is reimbursed, the funds will revert back to fund balance.
Councilmember Shearer moved and Councilmember Fonnesbeck seconded to refer the amendments to the 1983-84 budget to unfinished council business on the June 12, 1984, agenda, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(B 83-3)
Gladiola Street.
RE: The proposed amendment to the official street map to include the 3230 West/Gladiola Street extension.
A public hearing was held at 6:30 p.m. to discuss this proposal. Dean Barney, planning and zoning, outlined the area on a map and indicated that the adoption of official maps, in accordance with the zoning ordinance, gives the municipality the ability to withhold building permits in the mapped areas in order to protect the right of way as development occurs. Gerald Blair, engineering, said that the proposed alignment fulfills a gap between I-215 and the West Valley Highway and will allow better north/south access into that industrial area which is developing. This location has a direct tie to 2100 South and will also tie into California Avenue to provide east/west access. A full-width roadway will be provided to serve the entire area. No one from the audience addressed this issue.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to request that an ordinance be prepared to amend the official street map to include the 3230 West/Gladiola Street extension, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Fonnesbeck who was absent when the vote was taken.
(W 84-4)
Petition 400-183 of 1984 by Donald White, et al.
RE: Rezoning of property located at 984 Donner Way from its present Residential “R-5” classification to a Residential “R-l” classification.
A public hearing was held at 6:45 p.m. to discuss this petition. Dean Barney, planning and zoning, outlined the area on a map and briefly presented the zoning history of the area. In 1951 a quarter of a section, or a quarter of a square mile, was zoned “R-5” to permit multiple-family use. As the streets were constructed the parcel in question was separated from the rest of the block. Mr. Barney explained that the block which contains this parcel is zoned “R-l”. The property which lies directly across the street to the east and north and across the intersection is zoned “R-5”. The residents in this area want the parcel zoned “R-1” so that it will conform to the rest of the zoning to the south and to the west. However, the owner of the parcel wants the zoning to remain “R-5”. The majority of the Planning Commission thought that the zoning of the parcel should be oriented to the block in which it lies rather than oriented to property across the street. They recommended that the zoning be changed from “R-5” to “R-1”.
Mr. Barney explained that the size of this parcel is approximately 12,000 square feet and the “R-5” zoning would allow a maximum of 17 units, however there would be restrictions such as height, parking, yard area and open space so at this point the exact number of units allowed is unknown. The “R-l” zoning permits only a single-family dwelling and there must be 7,000 square feet in a lot so there would not be enough property to divide and build two single-family dwellings.
Ms. Leigh von der Esch, council executive director, presented a letter from the attorney representing Brian Shank, owner of the parcel in question. This letter is on file in the Office of the City Recorder. The letter states that it is Mr. Shank’s position that the petition to down zone one single piece of property constitutes spot zoning and is prohibited by both the Utah Code Annotated and the cases of the Utah Supreme Court construing the statutory authorization of the Council to zone on an area-wide basis. The letter mentions that Mr. Shank’s property is across the street from condominium developments on two of the other corners and states that his property is only saleable as a multiple unit development and has no value as a single residence lot because the other corners have been developed as condominiums.
Finally, the letter states that by reversing the zoning after all of the other pieces of adjacent property have been fully developed renders Mr. Shank’s property unsaleable and amounts to inverse condemnation. Jack Schoenhals, 2849 Millicent Drive, supported the rezoning and he said that rezoning the parcel would cause this lot to conform to the entire concept of the rest of the residential area. He said that when Lee Teerlink, the previous owner of the parcel, sold it to Mr. Shank, it was with the understanding that the property would be developed as a single-family residence.
Mr. Schoenhals said that the value of the surrounding residences is destroyed by having one “R-5” lot in the area and there is no reason to leave the parcel zoned “R-5”. He said that this entire area bears a large amount of “R-5” zoning and more density and traffic is not needed in the area. Mr. Schoenhals did not agree that there was inverse condemnation because it was his opinion that the property is as valuable zoned “R-l” as “R-5”. In conclusion he said that a buffer is needed between the neighborhood and the “R-5” development to the north. He requested that the Council rezone the lot to “R-l” to conform to Mr. Shank’s understanding at the time he purchased the property and to protect the neighborhood. Donald White, 2995 Chaucer Place, supported the rezoning and mentioned that Mr. Shank had indicated to him that he had always intended to build a house on the lot. Timothy Brosnahan, 1065 Donner Way, supported the rezoning and said that the lot in question is of compatible size to the other lots on which single-family homes are built. Richard Kanner, 939 Donner Way, supported the rezoning because of traffic problems in the area, especially in the winter.
Lee Teerlink, previous owner of the lot in question, supported the rezoning and said that Mr. Shank had approached him in order to purchase the property for the purpose of developing a single-family residence. He also said that in this neighborhood building lots are selling for a minimum of $135,000. He did not feel that Mr. Shank would be adversely affected if his property sold for $135,000 since he purchased the lot for $45,000. No one from the audience spoke in opposition to the rezoning.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to approve the rezoning of 984 Donner Way from “R-5” to “R-l” for the following reasons: The rezoning agrees with the master plan for the area, the rezoning does not deny Mr. Shank the legal use of his property and it is still valuable and useable, to leave the zoning “R-5” would be a detriment to the surrounding property, and there appears to be a verbal agreement that Mr. Shank would build a single-family dwelling on the lot; an ordinance should be prepared to effectuate the rezoning, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(P 84-36)
CITIZEN COMMENTS
#1. A group of young people from the Ensign Downs neighborhood addressed the Council about the condition of tennis courts in the area. Stephanie Lloyd and Allison Lloyd presented pictures of the tennis courts showing their deteriorated condition. They explained that other courts in the area, 11th Avenue and Wasatch Springs, have water fountains, landscaping, sidewalks and adequate fencing.
The Ensign Downs courts have no walkways, the courts are cracked, and there is not a water supply. Jennifer Walker and Debbie Larsen explained that the courts are used by the immediate area plus the Capitol Hills and Marmalade areas. They said that many people from the Ensign Downs area use the courts often. They felt that if the courts were repaired the active use of the courts would increase. They said that there is only one ill-fitting net available. The courts have been placed in a strategic neighborhood position and because of frequent use they felt that the courts should be extensively repaired and adequately maintained. Tricia Beesley and Rachael Rencher presented information from a survey taken among 50 families. Of all the families contacted only three said they would not use the courts if they were improved. They also found that many people would take lessons if they were offered by the recreation department. Jeff Rencher said that the courts need a new surface since there are cracks and holes in the courts, another net is needed, the fence needs to he repaired, paths and walkways are also needed. A bench and a water fountain would also improve the courts.
Ms. Rencher said that courts similar to those at Wasatch Springs would be nice. She also mentioned that the youths in the area have volunteered to help improve the Ensign Downs courts. Mayor Wilson indicated that this item could be considered with the capital improvements budget. He mentioned that he would work with the neighborhood to obtain a cost estimate for the improvements.
#2. Ruth Pacheco addressed the Council concerning the management of Tracy Aviary. She was concerned that the hours the Aviary is open to the public had been reduced. Because of this she said that people were now unable to visit the Aviary after work and more crowded conditions were created on the weekends. She did not agree that longer hours were stressful to the birds and would interfere with breeding as had been indicated by the director; she felt that crowded conditions were more stressful. She was also concerned because the mammals are no longer at the Aviary and many popular birds have been sold.
She felt that the new director was more concerned about the breeding aspect of the park than the public recreation and enjoyment aspect. It was also Ms. Pacheco’s opinion that the new director was unwilling to compromise. She referred to the ordinance which states that the Aviary Board makes recommendations to the Mayor before action is taken and she felt that this had not been done. She asked that immediate corrections be taken to lengthen visiting hours and that the sale of animals be checked. A copy of Ms. Pacheco’s address, in its entirety, is on file in the Office of the City Recorder.
Kerry Draitch, president of the Avicultural Association in Utah, disagreed with Ms. Pacheco’s comments. He agreed with the changes that the new director has implemented and felt that the director ought to be given a chance since many improvements have already been made at the Aviary. Mr. Draitch felt that the Aviary had been able to acquire many exotic birds, that it otherwise would not have obtained, because of the director. Maureen Hicks also agreed that the new director should be given a chance and agreed that many improvements have been made and there are plans for many more. Gisela Jensen agreed that there was a need for longer hours and she said some birds were no longer available for public display.
(G 84-17)
#3. Norma Amodt said that on Memorial Day the restrooms in Liberty Park were closed; she mentioned that they are also closed on some Saturdays and Sundays. She felt that restrooms should not be closed on holidays when many people visit the park. She also mentioned that the concessions and merry-go-round were closed on Memorial Day.
The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m.