PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1984
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1984, AT 5:30 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 EARL F. HARDWICK.
Council Chairperson Ronald Whitehead presided at the meeting.
BRIEFING SESSION
#1. Ms. Leigh von der Esch, council executive director, briefed the Council on the evening’s agenda. Councilmember Fonnesbeck informed the Council of the possible problems to be faced during the Bonneville Boulevard public hearing. Mr. Larry Livingston presented the Council with some information on Bonneville Boulevard and Canyon Road.
#2. Phil Erickson and representatives from the Ehrenkrantz group briefed the Council on the City and County Building restoration with a slide and Information presentation concerning current work on the exterior of the building. They indicated that they had divided the stones of the building into three categories: 1) rough textured field stones of which the majority appear to be in good shape and have therefore been set aside, 2) stones with a smooth surface and 3) carved pieces. In the last two categories the condition of the stones range from fair to poor and this is where the majority of the restoration work will be done. They indicated that the replacement of windows with thermal-pane style glass and metal replacement on the seams of the roof is anticipated.
Mr. Erickson warned the Council that during the next few weeks the Ehrenkrantz Group will be performing a series of shear tests on the exterior of the building to evaluate the state of the stones and the extent of breakdown which has occurred over the last few years. He indicated that this would constitute a “mess” and would be performed only in the evenings on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday because it would prove to be noisy.
The briefing session adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET IN REGULAR SESSION ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 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 and Roger Cutler, city attorney, were present at the meeting.
Council Chairperson Ronald Whitehead presided at the meeting and Councilmember Grant Mabey conducted the meeting.
Invocation was given by Police Chaplain Allen Roden.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Approval of Minutes
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Whitehead seconded to approve the minutes of the Salt Lake City Council for the regular meetings held Tuesday, November 6, 1984, and Thursday, November 8, 1984, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmembers Fonnesbeck, Hardwick, and Davis who were absent when the vote was taken.
(M 84-1)
PETITIONS
Petition 400-235 of 1984 by PF West/Louis W. Friedheim.
RE: The rezoning of property located at 600 South and Redwood Road from “R-2” to “R-5” to permit a planned unit development apartment complex which will contain approximately 378 dwelling units. Also discuss Petition 400-247 of 1984 submitted by James McKinley requesting denial of Petition 400-235.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to schedule a public hearing for Tuesday, December 4, 1984, at 7:15 p.m. to discuss the two petitions, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(P 84-279 and P 84-280)
DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
#1. RE: The proposed East Central Neighborhood Plan.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to schedule a public hearing for Tuesday, December 11, 1984, at 6:30 p.m. to discuss the proposed East Central Neighborhood Plan, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(T 84-27)
#2. RE: The Westside Neighborhood Land Use Plan.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Hardwick seconded to approve the Westside Neighborhood Land Use Plan, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(T 84-9)
#3. RE: An ordinance amending Section 51-7-215.1 relating to sign awnings.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to schedule a public hearing for December 11, 1984, at 7:00 p.m. to discuss this ordinance amendment, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(O 84-33)
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
#1. RE: The reappointment of Gordon Oettli to the Housing Authority Board of Directors.
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Shearer seconded to refer this reappointment to the consent agenda for December 4, 1984, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(I 84-20)
PUBLIC WORKS
#1.RE: The Board of Equalization and Review meetings for Concrete Replacement Special Improvement District No. 40-R-5, Sugar House Beautification Special Improvement District No. 38-708, 1300 South 200 East to 400 West Street Improvement District No. 38-681 on January 8, 9, and 10, 1985.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to schedule the Board of Equalization and Review meetings for projects 40-R-5, 38-708, and 38-681 on January 8, 9, and 10, 1985, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(Q 83-4, Q 83-3, Q 82-34)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Parkview Plaza Associates Industrial Revenue Bond.
RE: A resolution authorizing and approving the issuance and sale of $7,000,000 Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for Parkview Plaza Associates Project.
A public hearing was held at 6:30 p.m. to discuss this issue. Darrell Larsen, Chapman and Cutler bond counsel, explained that this resolution would ratify previous actions taken on the UDAG loan agreement and the mortgage agreement. Jim McGuire, Clark Financial, explained that the money would be used just for Phase I of the project which is a 100,000 square-foot office building. Gene Davis, Sugar House Community Council, mentioned that they had not seen a drawing of the building and did not know its location or if the building would be approved by planning and zoning. They also did not know if the space had been leased. He questioned if it is proper to take money until the project is approved by planning and zoning and questioned whether or not the proposal will fit into the Sugar House master plan. Mr. McGuire said that last Thursday the master plan of the project, including Phase I, had been presented to the Council. He explained that the IRB documents require appropriate governmental approvals before beginning construction and prior to drawing down funds.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck indicated that the Council, as the Redevelopment Agency, will have continued involvement in the process of this project and the project will not continue until Phase I has been completed to Council specifications. She mentioned that the community council will be part of the planning process.
Councilmember Shearer moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Whitehead who was absent when the vote was taken.
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Fonnesbeck seconded to adopt Resolution 116 of 1984, subject to the City Attorney’s approval, authorizing and approving the issuance and sale of $7,000,000 aggregate principal amount of floating/fixed-rate Industrial Development Revenue Bonds, 1984 Series, (Parkview Plaza Associates Project), of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, for the purpose of providing financing for a portion of the cost of acquiring, constructing, improving, and equipping a certain business and professional office building facility and related parking facility, and paying costs and expenses incidental thereto and to the issuance of said bonds; authorizing the execution and delivery of a trust indenture to secure said bonds, loan agreement to provide for the loan of proceeds and repayment of said bonds, and a bond purchase agreement among the city, Parkview Plaza Associates, Shearson Lehman/American Express Inc. and Boettcher & Company, Inc., an indexing agent agreement and an official statement in connection with the sale of said bonds, and other documents required in connection therewith; ratifying a UDAG loan and reimbursement agreement and a UDAG mortgage with respect to the foregoing project; and authorizing the taking of all other actions necessary to the consummation of the transactions contemplated by this resolution, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmember Whitehead who was absent when the vote was taken.
(Q 82-9)
Petition 400-215 of 1984 by Associated Food Stores.
RE: The closure of a portion of Associated Avenue (1900 South) as it runs between Industrial Road (1900 West) and Empire Road (1800 West).
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 said that Associated Food owns both sides of the street in question. He mentioned that the public utilities department was concerned about retaining a right of way for a 10-inch watermain, the engineering and traffic engineering departments did not object to the closure provided that certain conditions are satisfied, and the fire department had concerns about access. Mr. Barney said that the Planning Commission had not held a public hearing but recommended closure of the Street provided that the petitioner pays the fair market value for the property and meets various other conditions such as street improvements.
Gill Warner, president of Associated Food, said that the road is primarily used by employees, customers and suppliers of Associated Food. He indicated that he requested this street closure in order to make all of the Associated Food property one contiguous piece for purposes of development. He felt that the requested closure would take traffic off of Associated Avenue and Redwood Road which is a dangerous intersection. Mr. Warner said that there would be a gate for fire department use but employees could enter and exit on the west of the property. Mr. Warner also indicated that this Street closure would allow more room for trucks. He indicated that there is an economic need to close the road in order for the company to stay in Salt Lake City.
Craig Glende, representing the Post Office, objected to the proposed closure of the street. He read a letter from Howard Buck, MSC Manager/Postmaster (this letter is on file in the Office of the City Recorder). The letter states that objections to the closure are based on the nature of the post office location and the physical limitations of their plant, as well as the costs involved in rerouting already existing transportation. The letter also mentions that the safety of employees and customers would be jeopardized by the closure since the intersection of Redwood Road and Associated Avenue is not semaphore controlled and the intersection at Empire Road and 2100 South is not semaphore controlled.
Dale Reese, representing Standard Plumbing Supply Co., opposed the petition and submitted a letter from Standard Plumbing Supply explaining their position (this letter is on file in the Office of the City Recorder). The letter states that closing the road would restrict the access to several companies as well as employees and incoming and outgoing shipments. The letter also mentions the importance of keeping the street open for fire vehicles and it says that closing the lower part of 1900 South would render Standard’s west yard unusable. The letter also mentions a traffic problem on 1900 South and Redwood Road since there is no semaphore. Mr. Reese submitted petitions to stop the closure of Associated Avenue, signed by people who use the road (these petitions are on file in the Office of the City Recorder).
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Whitehead seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Davis expressed concern that the Planning Commission had not held a public hearing but recommended closure of the street. She suggested that this petition be referred back to planning and zoning for review because of the opposition which had been expressed. Councilmember Shearer felt that a decision should not be prolonged by sending the petition back to planning and the Council should make a decision based upon the information received at the public hearing. Councilmember Whitehead agreed. Councilmember Parker felt that further thought was needed about this request.
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to refer the petition back to the Planning Commission, which motion failed, all members voting nay except Councilmembers Davis and Parker who voted aye.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Fonnesbeck seconded to refer this matter to the Committee of the Whole for a field trip and refer the request to the agenda for December 4, 1984, for action, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(P 84-260)
James R. Savage Industrial Revenue Bond.
RE: The issuance by Salt Lake City of Industrial Revenue Bonds in the amount of $5,000,000 for James R. Savage, Inc., a Utah Corporation.
A public hearing was held at 7:00 p.m. to discuss this issue. Boyd Ferguson, Chapman and Cutler bond counsel, explained that there had been a change in the number of acres involved in the project and there was also a more specific address. Because of these changes, it was felt that another public hearing should be held. 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 Shearer moved and Councilmember Fonnesbeck seconded to adopt Resolution 115 of 1984, subject to the City Attorney’s approval, approving the issuance by Salt Lake City of Industrial Revenue Bonds in the amount of $5,000,000 to finance the cost of acquiring approximately 5.5 acres at the Salt Lake International Center and the construction of a facility to manufacture and service high technology electronic circuit boards for James R. Savage, Inc., a Utah Corporation, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(Q 83-21)
Petition 400-188 of 1984 by Patrick Shea.
RE: Alternative actions concerning (1) road closures, (2) restriction to one-way traffic, and (3) continuance of two-way traffic, for separate segments of Bonneville Boulevard and Canyon Road in the vicinity of City Creek Canyon and Memory Grove. The roads under consideration are the west leg of Bonneville Boulevard, the east leg of Bonneville Boulevard, and Canyon Road.
A public hearing was held at 7:15 p.m. to discuss this petition. Brent Wilde, planning and zoning, outlined the area in question on a map and said that the petition requests the closure of Bonneville Boulevard on the west side from 500 North, around into City Creek Canyon, to 11th Avenue. He explained that a master plan for this area is being developed and it has been suggested that no permanent decision be made until the master plan is finished. He said that Bonneville Boulevard and Canyon Road have been closed since the floods of 1983 and as an interim solution the Planning Commission recommended that the streets remain closed until the master plan is complete.
He explained that their rationale included the fact that the streets are currently closed, the slide on the west side of Bonneville Boulevard would make only one-way traffic possible and traffic hazard would increase if sliding continues, and road signs, striping, and possibly guardrails would he necessary to open the street. He said that the Planning Commission believes the best solution is to leave the streets closed while the city determines a feasible solution to the slide and while the City Creek master plan is being completed.
Mr. Wilde also said that there is concern about the City Creek Canyon road as ‘it cuts through Memory Grove. It is very narrow and difficult to accommodate two-way traffic plus pedestrian traffic. Closure of this road will also give the planning department the opportunity to consider solutions for this area as well. Patrick Shea, petitioner, explained that when he petitioned for closure of Bonneville Boulevard he would have included the entire canyon but at that time he did not understand the distinction between Canyon Road and Bonneville Drive. He said he requested to have the area closed because the proximity of the canyon to the city would provide a unique opportunity to have a natural setting close to a city. He mentioned that there are eight other canyons in the valley open to vehicles.
Mr. Shea said that school children could tour the canyon area and better understand nature. It was Mr. Shea’s opinion that if the area is re-opened to vehicular traffic, it would not be preserved. He suggested that the area be closed until the master plan is complete and he also suggested that Canyon Road be permanently closed. Mr. Shea said that the signatures of people supporting the closure of this area were gathered in the surrounding area. Councilmember Mabey suggested that for those interested in using the area for jogging perhaps a separate trail could be constructed. Mr. Shea said that the canyon walls are unstable and the cost would be prohibitive. Mayor Wilson said that a study was conducted two years ago to extend the street lane and the cost was estimated at about $45,000. The following citizens opposed the closure of the roads: Debbie Clark, 755 17th Avenue, Dorothy Stevens, 738 Hilltop Road, James Scott, 950 Canyon Road, Michael Reed, 686 Hilltop Road, Kerry Adams, 490 J Street, L. S. Morr, 385 7th Avenue, Curtis Bradbury, 4653 Boxelder Street, Doug Winters, 522 C Street, Lame Olson, 741 Northview Circle, Dorothy Olson, 741 Northview Circle, 785 Northview Drive, 585 H Street, Mike Edwards, 1459 East Maple Hills, Marvin Johnson, 71 E. Girard Avenue, Jack Dolcourt, 1459 East Maple Hills-Bountiful, Marvin Johnson, 71 E. Girard Avenue, James Malcolm, 184 N. Sandrun Road, Douglas Graham, 514 10th Avenue, Beth Page, 538 14th Avenue, Grace Henley, 229 B Street, Jack Watkins, 123 Edgecombe Drive, Susan Little, 409 7th Avenue, 686 Hilltop Road, Patricia Reed, 1133 W. 600 N., Arvin Winterton, Jon Hubble, 124 S. 700 E., Bountiful, Allan Lendall, 158 University Village, Mike Bingham, 51 S. 650 E., Bountiful, Craig Merrill, 1082 Eastbrook, Midvale, F. Willis Taylor, 1020 N. 1400 W., Rebecca Reed, 150 3rd Avenue, J. Allan Crockett, 536 13th Avenue, Stephen Reed, 686 Hilltop Road, Eldon McEntire, 536 11th Avenue.
These citizens did not want the roads closed so that just one group, such as joggers, could enjoy the area. Comments were also made about the necessity of the roads staying open for access to the area hospitals. It was pointed out that in bad weather this is the best route to use because of the favorable grade. Some of these citizens were concerned that it would be easier for people to sell drugs if there wasn’t traffic through the area. Also many of the citizens felt that traffic on the other area streets had increased since the closure of the roads after flooding in 1983. The point was made that the only way many people can enjoy the canyon is by driving through it and the question was raised about where people would park so they can walk through the area if the roads are closed. Suggestions were made that if these roads are closed then an alternative arterial route could be constructed. Concern was also expressed about the cost to maintain the area as a jogging trail. A point was made that both drivers and joggers should be given fair consideration. It was suggested that the streets remain open until the master plan has been completed. Petitions opposing the closure of the roads were submitted and are on file in the Office of the City Recorder.
The following citizens supported the closure of the roads: Anthony Sweet, P.O. Box 2008, Nick Norton, 251 Quince Street, David Bennett, 187 J Street, William Lund, 651 Egli Court, Scott Williams, 244 Canyon Road, Robert McLaughlin, 286 1/2 C Street, Hermoine Jex, 272 Wall Street, Bruce Plenk, 125 L Street, Inola Johnson, 115 North Main, Arthur Swindle, 1296 3rd Avenue, Thomas Noel, 607 E. Ramona Avenue, Daniel Torkelson, 832 So. 800 E.
These citizens supported the petition and considered closure of the roads a unique opportunity to maintain a natural area so close to a city. Comments were made that since the roads were closed in 1983 much of the animal life has revived. The citizens felt that this area could be used as a respite from the busy city. Comments were made that the area would not be only for joggers but would be for everyone’s enjoyment and that the area would not be closed to people but just to vehicles. A point was made that the road in City Creek Canyon would have to be maintained since the water department needs access into the canyon so the area would not be maintained only for joggers. Comments were made that currently picnic reservations are required for the upper portion of the canyon and those people with reservations would still be able to drive up the canyon.
Many of these citizens felt that the roads in question were not vital for the access to hospitals and suggestions were made that emergency vehicles could still be allowed to use the area if necessary. Many of these citizens mentioned that they had not noticed an increase in traffic on other area streets because they felt the traffic had dispersed over many streets. It was suggested that the area stay closed until the master plan is complete. Petitions supporting the closure of the roads were submitted and are on file in the Office of the City Recorder.
A written motion which was passed in the November meeting of the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Council, was submitted. This motion requests the continued closure of Bonneville Drive and supports the concept of a City Creek Park including the closure of Canyon Road to vehicles except by special permit. Don Bressler, Chen and Associates, addressed the issue of the hillside which is sliding and encroaching on the west side of Bonneville Boulevard. He explained that this is a slow-moving slide but cutting back the slide would encourage it to move. However, he said that there are ways to stabilize the slide such as installing drains.
Councilmember Shearer moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Whitehead pointed out that after scanning the additional petitions which were submitted, more people living in the Avenues area wanted the roads opened rather than closed. He questioned why people in areas outside of Salt Lake would support a petition to close the area. He felt that the road can accommodate both traffic and jogging. He also felt that the Council needed to make a decision and then review the situation again after the master plan is complete. Councilmember Davis felt that there is a traffic problem at the intersections of State Street and South Temple and State Street and North Temple.
She mentioned that a 25-story building is being constructed on the south-west corner of South Temple and she felt that traffic would increase because of this. It was her opinion that closing roads was not the answer to this problem. She suggested that Bonneville Boulevard be open to two-way traffic. Councilmember Parker mentioned that Hansen Hollow is available for jogging and enjoying nature. Councilmember Whitehead mentioned that the Jordan River Parkway is also available. Councilmember Hardwick felt that people need to look ahead and there should be a place available where children can go from the city and enjoy nature. Councilmember Fonnesbeck reiterated that there are other canyons where people can drive but she also felt that a decision needed to be made which was best for the area. She suggested that a compromise would be to open Bonneville Boulevard but close Canyon Road to vehicles. She mentioned that she had received little opposition to closing Canyon Road between Memory Grove and the canyon. She also felt that the traffic flow on Bonneville Boulevard, one way or two way, should be mandated by safety factors.
Councilmember Mabey felt that there is a solution to the slide problem depending on the amount of money which the city wants to spend. He felt that there are people who need to use the road for driving and he suggested that a jogging trail should be considered with the master plan. He also felt that there are alternatives which can be considered. Mayor Wilson felt that it would be a tremendous addition to the city to have a refuge away from automobiles. He reiterated that people with reservations would still be allowed to drive up the canyon and this should accommodate those who aren’t as mobile without a vehicle. He indicated that other alternate routes can expeditiously accommodate traffic to the upper destinations in the city, event though the routes may be a little further south.
Mayor Wilson recommended the closure of both Canyon Road and Bonneville Boulevard except to essential emergency personnel if necessary. He pointed out for the Council’s information that there would be money involved in opening Bonneville Boulevard to two-way traffic. Roger Cutler, city attorney, mentioned that the Council only has the legal authority to close or open the road and the Traffic Engineer has to decide the safest situation for traffic (one lane or two). Councilmember Shearer did not view this decision as final because this will be brought back before the Council as the master plan for the City Creek area is developed.
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Shearer seconded to recommend that Bonneville Drive be opened to two-way traffic until a master plan for the City Creek area, as well as State Street and South Temple and State Street and North Temple, can be developed, reviewed and approved by the City Council to determine the future use of this area; and recommend that Canyon Road above Memory Grove area to Bonneville Drive be permanently closed and that City Creek Canyon remain closed until the master plan has been reviewed by the City Council, which motion carried, all members voting aye except Councilmembers Whitehead, Fonnesbeck and Hardwick who voted nay.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck expressed concern that the motion linked the City Creek master plan with a plan for State Street.
(P 84-261)
CITIZEN COMMENTS
#1. L. Moseley, 1487 Walnut Drive, addressed the Council and Mayor concerning zoning ordinances regulating child care establishments in R-2 districts. Mr. Moseley said that he submitted an application to have up to eleven children in a day-care center, to be operated in his home, but the license was denied. He requested that a zoning change or an exception be given to allow this number of children. Dean Barney, planning and zoning, explained that the ordinance allows six children in a registered home day-care center located in residential zones, including the owner’s children under six years of age. He mentioned that a conditional use has to be granted by the Board of Adjustment and six is the maximum number allowed. The Board granted the Moseley request for six children.
Councilmember Parker mentioned that the zoning for an area is the law and the ordinance would have to be changed to accommodate the request. Councilmember Fonnesbeck explained that the law could be changed or a petition could be filed requesting that a zoning change be made in the area. She mentioned that a zoning change is a lengthy process and Mayor Wilson pointed out that the request may not be approved. Councilmember Whitehead mentioned that the law was recently changed to be more restrictive. Councilmember Shearer suggested that Mr. Moseley conduct the child-care center in an area appropriately zoned.
#2. Marilyn Green, 1137 West Sterling Drive, requested that Sterling Drive between 1200 West and Lafyette Drive be re-opened as a two-way street. She said that the traffic on San Fernando Drive, south of Sterling Drive, has increased and the Street is difficult to cross because there is no cross-walk at the eastern end of the street. Traffic also has to detour around the block in order to get to homes in the area. She mentioned that most of the time Sterling Drive is empty except for two or three hours a day during school months. She said that in the November meeting of the Northwest Community Council, a vote was taken to have Sterling Drive returned to a two-way street.
Councilmember Whitehead said that he received a petition from the PTA to change Sterling Drive to a one-way street. He said that when cars are parked on both sides of the street it is difficult to get through and it is a dangerous situation when children are being let off for school. Mr. Whitehead said that the traffic division evaluated the area and agreed it was a dangerous situation so they were willing to experiment for three months to find out if having a one-way street would help alleviate the problem.
He said that the one-way street was an inconvenience to a few people but it was worth trying for the protection of the school children. Councilmember Whitehead also mentioned that letters had been sent to the residents informing them of this change and the issue had been discussed during community council meetings. He mentioned that this change has alleviated the problem but suggested that if the residents have a better solution they should meet with school representatives.
The meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m.