PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
TUESDAY, MARCH 1, 1983
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON TUESDAY, MARCH 1, 1983, AT 5:00 P.M. IN ROOM 211 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
ON ROLL CALL THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: GRANT MABEY ALICE SHEARER SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK IONE M. DAVIS PALMER DEPAULIS EDWARD W. PARKER.
Council Chairman Grant Mabey presided at and conducted this meeting.
POLICY SESSION
Leigh von der Esch briefed the Council on items on the Council agenda and on scheduling of upcoming meetings. Councilmember Parker briefed the Council on the status of work at the Fairmont Park Senior Citizens Center and on the Sugarhouse Beautification Special Improvement District. Julie Pinter and Wayne Horrocks presented suggestions for placement of “Neighborhood Crime Watch” signs throughout the City. Funding is to be provided out of CDBG slippage. Ms. Pinter stated that the decision on where to place the signs was based on (1) amount of traffic on street and (2) neighborhood’s organization and commitment to Crime Watch program.
Councilmember Shearer asked how many signs would be ordered. Julie stated that 85 were recommended, and probably 100 would be ordered. Councilmember Davis asked what design would be used on the signs. Ms. Pinter stated that the design had not been determined, but that they were requesting bids on two-color signs. Wayne Horrocks stated that the “Boris the Burglar” design was becoming the standard crime watch sign and was recognized throughout the country as the crime watch symbol. Councilmember Davis expressed some concern that the neighborhood council in District #6 had presented a design some years ago but had not been contacted about use of the design. She also expressed a concern that this neighborhood council was willing to buy more signs than were called for in the plan.
Wayne Horrocks stated that a decision on individual councils purchasing their own signs would have to be made by the Council. Councilmember Mabey asked about the installation of the signs. Norm Barnett said the signs would be installed by City crews on existing poles, when possible, but on new poles when necessary. A discussion of the cost per sign followed. The figures provided by the Transportation Division did not give an accurate cost breakdown. Norm Barnett said he would provide more accurate figures. Council Members stated that they would review the placement of the signs and the costs of the program before authorizing purchase and installation of the signs. Lou Miller briefed the Council on the status of the proposed airport parking structure. He stated that the airport authority had deferred design of the structure for at least one year.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck expressed concern that the placement of the parking structure would make the use of solar power in the airport impossible. Other locations and designs were briefly discussed. Lou Miller stated that in the present economic climate he could not recommend that the structure be built. He stated that the amount of land available allowed a sufficient amount of parking at a reasonable rate, and that the use of shuttle service made the current parking system more convenient to patrons. He also stated that the current interest rates would make parking rates in a structure prohibitive. Although the structure is included in the airport master plan, he recommends that its design be deferred until the economic climate improves.
Mr. Miller stated that the “D” concourse is in the planning stages. Mr. Miller stated that he would be requesting Council approval to bond for the building and connector within the next several weeks. Al Hameg informed the Council that the refinancing of water and sewer bonds could take place as soon as Friday, March 4, or Monday, March 7, 1983.
The policy session adjourned at 5:45 p.m.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET IN REGULAR SESSION ON TUESDAY, MARCH 1, 1983, AT 6:00 P.M. IN ROOM 301 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
ON ROLL CALL THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: GRANT MABEY ALICE SHEARER SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK IONE M. DAVIS PALMER DEPAULIS EDWARD W. PARKER.
Mayor Ted Wilson, and Roger Cutler, City Attorney, were present at the meeting.
Council Chairman Grant Mabey presided at this meeting. Councilmember Alice Shearer conducted this meeting.
Invocation was given by Councilmember Mabey.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Approval of Minutes:
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Fonnesbeck seconded to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Salt Lake City Council held Tuesday, February 15, 1983, as corrected, which motion carried, all members present voting aye.
(M 83-1)
Special Presentation:
Linda Edeiken presented to the Council the results of the “Central-Southern Architectural/Historical Survey”. A map of the area, graphically showing locations of buildings with architectural/historical significance, was used in the presentation. The area covered was from South Temple to I-80 and from Main Street to 1300 East. The survey has been funded by CDBG funds and was originally requested by SLC Area Community Councils. This is one of the most important elements of the preservation program in the City as this survey forms the data base to do any kind of planning on a comprehensive level. A/P Associates was the consultant in the preparation of the Survey.
Gary Jones of that organization continued the presentation by giving a summary of the survey and outlining the criteria used for the selection of the sites. This criteria was used in the survey of 2560 sites of which 413 were selected. The selection criteria was broken down into four categories, 1) Significant (eligible to be placed on the National Register) which had three sub-categories, S-1 most exceptional; S-2 highly important; S-3 lessor significance; 2) Contributory (not eligible for the register but had architectural significance); 3) Non-Contributory (structure had been radically altered); and 4) Intrusions (structure was incompatible with its surroundings). Roger Roper of A/P Associates gave a slide presentation showing some of the buildings selected and presented in the survey. A copy of this survey is on file in the office of the City Recorder.
(L 83-1)
PETITIONS
Petition 400-14 submitted by Richard and Margarett Carlson.
RE: Rezoning of Property at 243 Glendale Street.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council hold a public hearing on April 12, 1983 at 6:15 p.m. to discuss Petition 400-14 submitted by Richard and Margarett Carlson. The petitioner is requesting that property located at 243 Glendale Street be rezoned from a Residential “R-6” to a Commercial “C-1” classification.
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: The petitioner is required to pay a $50 advertising fee to the City Recorder.
DISCUSSION: The petition has been reviewed by the planning commission and they have recommended that the petition be denied for the following reasons: 1. To rezone this lot would be “spot” zoning which is illegal. 2. There is no justification in enlarging the zoned area to include this property as this would create instability in the neighborhood and there is no evidence to indicate a need or desire for an enlarged commercial district. 3. To rezone the area would be contrary to the master plan for the area which calls for maintaining and stabilizing its residential nature. The petitioner has requested this public hearing to appeal the planning commission decision.
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded that this item be placed on agenda for public hearing April 12, 1983, at 6:15 p.m., which motion carried all members present voting aye.
(P 83-168)
Petition 331 of 1982 submitted by Richard D. Young.
RE: Vacation of alley running between Herbert Avenue and Michigan Avenue parallel to 1100 East Street.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council hold a public hearing on April 12, 1983 at 6:30 p.m.
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: The petitioner has been notified that he is required to pay a $35 advertising fee to the City Recorder’s Office.
DISCUSSION: This petition has been reviewed by the planning commission, engineering, transportation, public utilities, fire and the city attorney’s office. They have recommended that the alley be vacated subject to maintaining any utility easements that may exist in the alley. Two of the abutting property owners have not signed the petition and the petitioner has been unsuccessful in obtaining their signatures. Therefore, the petitioner has requested this public hearing.
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded that this item be placed on agenda and scheduled for public hearing on April 12, 1983 at 6:30 p.m., which motion carried, all members present voting aye.
(P 83-169)
Petition 330 of 1982, submitted by Mr. and Mrs. Abbott and Mr. and Mrs. Gudmundson.
RE: Vacation of 15 foot alley approximately 139 feet in length between 726 and 752 Goshen Street.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council hold a non-advertised public hearing on March 8, 1983 at 6:15 p.m.
DISCUSSION: This Petition has been reviewed by the planning commission, finance, public utilities, fire, public works and the city attorney’s office. Each of the departments have recommended that the alley be vacated subject to retaining all existing easements and right of ways. The alley was dedicated as a part of the Seventh South Subdivision, only the Abbott property is located within this subdivision. The property owned by the Gudmundsons is part of a separate subdivision. Therefore, upon vacation of the alley, ownership of the entire alley will revert to the Abbotts rather than the usual instance of each abutting owner receiving a one-half interest. All the abutting property owners have signed the petition, therefore, an advertised public hearing is not required. The city attorney’s office has prepared the necessary vacating ordinance and is attached for your action.
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded that this item be placed on agenda and scheduled for a non-advertised public hearing on March 8, 1983 at 6:15 p.m., which motion carried, all members present voting aye.
(P 83-170)
Petition 151 of 1982 Submitted by Robert Peterson.
RE: Annexation of property in vicinity of 3165 South 1300 East Street.
RECOMMENDATION: That City Council reschedule a public hearing on Petition 151 of 1982 for March 15, 1983 at 6:15 p.m.
DISCUSSION: This petition has been reviewed by the planning commission, city engineering, transportation, public utilities and the city attorney’s office. They have recommended that the petition be approved subject to the following conditions as requested by the city engineer: 1. The petitioner would be responsible to prepare and submit a plat abiding by the platting requirements of the City engineer; 2. That the petitioner, as part of an annexation agreement, would be obligated to install, curb and gutter and sidewalk and street improvements along the frontage of his property, including Richmond Street and Woodlawn Avenue (3175 South). The planning commission has recommended that the zoning of this property be Commercial “C-1” classification.
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to reschedule this item for public hearing on March 15, 1983 at 6:15 p.m., which motion carried all members present voting aye.
(P 83-60)
DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
CITY ATTORNEY
#1. RE: Handicap Parking Ordinance: Subsection (1) of Section 160-A of Traffic Code.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council consider amending Section 160-A of the Traffic Code relating to parking for the handicapped.
DISCUSSION: The City previously recommended an amendment of the handicap parking ordinance to accommodate the needs of our handicapped citizens and assist in our enforcement efforts against those who illegally park in areas designated for handicapped persons. After adopting the Ordinance, concern was expressed that being limited to the time designated on the meter was inadequate. The City’s concern was that short term meters, i.e. 12 minute areas in front of the Post Office, or other limited areas not be used for long period of time by anyone, including handicapped persons.
Discussion of this issue with the interested parties has brought about an agreement on the proposed ordinance amendment. This ordinance change, in substance, permits handicapped persons to park for two hours at all meters or other parking areas designated for parking for a time in excess of 30 minutes. It is felt this is a reasonable compromise and meets the needs of our handicapped citizens and those basic concerns of the City. Councilmember Shearer referred this item to the public improvements committee without objection.
(O 82-58)
CITY COUNCIL
#1 RE: Dog Licensing Fees. Section 100-1-8, Revised Ordinances.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council consider and approve an amendment to Section 100-1-8 of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah, 1965, to allow for abatement of dog licensing fees. Councilmember Shearer referred the item to the budget/finance and administration committee without objection.
(O 83-8)
CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
#1. RE: No-Fault Insurance. Section 46-114-4, Traffic Code.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council consider an amendment to Section 46-114-4, of the Salt Lake City Traffic Code.
DISCUSSION: The recommendation that the present ordinance be amended prohibiting any person to operate a motor vehicle anywhere within the corporate limits of Salt Lake City, knowing that the owner does not have security in effect as required by the Utah No-Fault Insurance Act. This proposed bill does not guarantee payment if vehicles are involved in accidents. It only makes it a criminal violation to fail to carry proper insurance. Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked the Council how the City would enforce this ordinance if placed in effect. Councilmember Shearer stated enforcement would not be any different than enforcement of the ordinance requiring vehicle operators to have a license.
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to adopt Ordinance 11 of 1983, Amending Section 46-114-4 of Salt Lake City Traffic Code, relating to no-fault insurance required to operate a motor vehicle anywhere in Salt Lake City corporate limits, which motion carried, all members present voting aye.
(O 83-6)
OFFICE OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT PLANNING
#1. RE: Budget Amendment #1 - Reallocation of CIP Funds by Project.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council review and adopt proposed Resolution #15 of 1983, for Fiscal Year 1982-1983 Capital Improvement Projects.
DISCUSSION: The City Council’s review and subsequent adoption of Budget Amendment #1 to the FY 1982-1983 Budget (Resolution #4 of 1983) on January 18, 1983, included several adjustments to the amount of funds for CIP projects. Upon the adoption of the budget amendment the City Council requested that they be provided with a revised schedule of projects in the Capital Budget for FY 1982-1983. The schedule is found on pages 1-3 through 1-10 in the “5 Year Capital Improvement Program, 1982-83 through 1986-87.” Attachment A is a revised schedule with a complete listing of all projects and the new budget amount for each project in FY 1982-83. Attachment B is a list of all water and sewer utility projects detailing the actual adjustments made to each project.
Councilmember Shearer said that when the original budget was approved that no specific list of projects was provided. That list has now been provided and therefore the reason for this proposed resolution. Councilmember Davis asked if the priority list as submitted was a firm list or if priorities could be switched and moved around; is the Council approving the priority listing of the items at the same time of approval of the resolution. Leigh von der Esch stated that the lists referred to are not the priority list but a list of the capital improvements as they effect the departments. To obtain the priority list the Council would have to refer back to the budget document itself.
Councilmember Shearer moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded that Resolution 15 of 1983 pertaining to Fiscal Year 1982-1983 Capital Improvement Projects he approved and adopted, which motion passed all members present voting aye.
(B 82-6)
CITIZEN COMMENTS
#1. Sherry Repscher, 1590 Richards Street, acting in a professional capacity as executive director for the Governor’s Committee on Employment of the Handicapped, expressed appreciation to the Council for clarifying the handicapped parking confusion. She suggested changes or clarification to the handicapped ordinance in regards to community awareness of the new changes. Ms. Repscher offered her committee to be a vehicle for that awareness if the council desired. Councilmember Shearer said that was one purpose of sending the ordinance to committee, and that they were invited to the committee hearing to present their views.
The meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m.