The City Council met in Work Session on Tuesday, July 28, 2015, at 2:12 p.m. in Room 326, Committee Room, City County Building, 451 South State Street.
In Attendance: Council Members Luke Garrott, James Rogers, Erin Mendenhall, Charlie Luke, Kyle LaMalfa, Stan Penfold, and Lisa Adams.
Staff in Attendance: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; Jennifer Bruno, Executive Council Deputy Director; David Everitt, Mayor’s Chief of Staff; Margaret Plane, City Attorney; Lehua Weaver, Council Senior Policy Analyst; Robin Hutcheson, Transportation Director; Libby Stockstill, Council Constituent Liaison/Budget Analyst; Rick Graham, Public Services Director; Nick Tarbet, Council Senior Policy Analyst; Nick Norris, Planning Manager; John Anderson, Principal Planner; Scott Fisher, Assistant City Prosecutor; and Scott Crandall, Deputy City Recorder.
Guests in Attendance: Ryan Bjerke, Bond Counsel/Chapman and Cutler.
Councilmember Garrott presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 2:12 p.m.
AGENDA ITEMS
#1. 2:12:08 PM RECEIVE A WRITTEN BRIEFING ABOUT A RECENTLY COMPLETED ANALYSIS OF THE CITY’S TRANSIT SYSTEM – THE FIRST MAJOR MILESTONE IN DEVELOPING A TRANSIT MASTER PLAN (TMP). The analysis, which was compiled in a report titled the State of the System Fact Book, includes data on existing plans and policies, land use and growth, overall travel patterns, existing transit use, rider demographics and more. Next steps for the plan include identifying system gaps, creating goals and public outreach. The Council will continue to be briefed on the plan as it develops.
Jennifer Bruno, Lehua Weaver, and Robin Hutcheson briefed the Council with attachments. Suggestions made by Council Members included providing a predictable/efficient circulator bus system, determine where/how bus systems should run to best serve individual communities (local neighborhood routes), identify service gaps/determine travel destinations, analyze University student ridership percentage/what could be learned from data, costs/difficulty of University parking (utilize data for modeling City parking), impact of free transit passes, schedule consultant update in September, establish process (work with Utah Transit Authority (UTA) to prioritize changes before bus systems were updated/changed, transit providers need to utilize TMP before modifying service levels (identify players critical to process), explore potential to utilize distance based fares, municipal transit bond, land use considerations, and shape land use/transportation decisions together.
#2. 2:25:48 PM RECEIVE A FOLLOW-UP BRIEFING FROM THE ADMINISTRATION ABOUT TWO OPTIONS FOR A PARKS, TRAILS AND OPEN SPACE BOND PROPOSAL - A $150 MILLION BOND OPTION, OR A $125 MILLION BOND OPTIONS AND RECEIVE A WRITTEN BRIEFING ON THE SCHEDULE AND STAFFING FOR THE REGIONAL ATHLETIC COMPLEX. If approved by voters, the potential bond would result in a property tax increase for residents and property owners and would be used to pay for more outdoor recreational opportunities in the City – including converting some current open spaces into new uses, adding trail improvements and connections, and other opportunities. The Administration will present details of its two proposals, respond to questions from the Council, and receive Council requests for alternative project information that could potentially be included in the bond. The Council will vote on August 18 to determine if the bond will be placed on the November ballot. (Item C1)
Jennifer Bruno, Libby Stockstill, Lehua Weaver, Ryan Bjerke, Rick Graham, Robin Hutcheson, and David Everitt, briefed the Council with a PowerPoint Presentation and attachments. Ms. Weaver reviewed items from the Powerpoint. She said several of the Council’s current/past priorities were addressed in different ways with the proposed bond. She said the bond could be reconfigured depending on how Council wanted to proceed. She said issues like air quality, Westside Master Plan, urban trails, economic development, and overall economic health of the City could potentially be met in some way with the bond.
Council Member’s general discussion included Glendale projected to make a small profit in 2016, $44,000 needed to refinance golf carts next year, Glendale capital improvement needs ($1 million), debt service issues, overall financial liability to Golf Fund, potential to utilize impact fees, re-evaluate impact fee eligibility for final list of projects identified by Council, identify other funding sources including state/federal, bond amenities, Capital Improvement Program (CIP) issues, explore private funding/donations, matching grants(pursue grant funding), park impact fees, issue bond in phases, operation/maintenance issues, work with Bond Counsel to explore flexibility, and caution needed when requiring a funding match.
Councilmember Garrott asked Council Members to make a pitch for what they wanted to see in the proposal.
Councilmember Adams: focus on water trails connectivity and make other recreation activities like tennis, golf, swimming, etc. part of the County’s bond next year; have significant portion of the bond go toward deferred maintenance issues (take care of what the City already had before adding new projects), waterway improvements should include Sugar House pond/create meandering river rather than just a pond, work with Sugar House Park Authority to trade services (City would fix pond and Park Authority would find space for tennis courts), Sego Lily art piece proposed for Sugar House Draw, pond restoration at Fairmont, Forest Dale, and Nibley, and retain disc golf at Jordan River Par 3 property (co-exist with nature park at that location).
Discussion about the term “deferred maintenance” included potential for legal issues relating to bond requirements and replacing “deferred maintenance” with an appropriate term that was accurate/bond eligible. Councilmember Garrott asked Bond Counsel to address deferred maintenance, capital investment, appropriate terminology, and what type of issues would qualify for bond financing. Mr. Bjerke said the intent was to invest in capital projects intended to last a number of years (10+) and not something where maintenance had fallen behind such as painting, shingle repairs, etc. He said issues which needed routine maintenance should not be paid for from bond proceeds. Councilmember Garrott suggested replacing the term “deferred maintenance” with “capital improvements”.
Councilmember Adams said she wanted to have an additional public hearing after the Council developed a firm proposal so the public would have something concrete to comment on. Councilmember Garrott suggested keeping the public hearing open after the formal hearing.
Councilmember LaMalfa: support for $150 million bond, add art, finish Sego Lily, creating matching art piece for bridge located over South Temple tracks along the Jordan River (potential for funding match), develop connecting trail on 300 North including pedestrian bridge (east/west connection), use band shell funding for community fishing pond (State to provide maintenance) at Glendale (would compliment nature park).
Councilmember Penfold: support for connectivity concept throughout City, opportunity at Glendale for regional activities, enhance on/off-leash dog facilities, install dog bag dispensers at venues, utilize ballot language/education, opportunities for community partners in nature center restoration(potential funding match for construction/programming), whitewater activities on surplus canal (outdoor recreation partnership), revenue stream/taxable bonds, outdoor swimming facilities (divert funding from surplus canal water category), and explore combining indoor/outdoor pools. Councilmember Penfold requested additional information about how much “Percent-for-Art” was budgeted for proposed projects and if consideration was given to individual or independent Percent-for-Art through the entire system (add additional percent early in the design phase).
Councilmember Rogers: swim classes needed in association with water activities along Jordan River (safety issues), 300 North (Westside connection), invest in outdoor activities, include Westside outdoor pool managed by County, and support to place proposal on November ballot.
Councilmember Luke: use significant amount of $150 million proposal for existing CIP projects, ($65 million of parks projects needed), concerns about moving projects ahead of existing ones, secondary water investment, how to address $3.3 million ongoing maintenance costs associated with bond (potential to raise taxes), $8.8 million needed to convert 10-12 parks to secondary water (not included in proposal) (parks include Riverside Park, Cottonwood Park, Cottonwood Dog Park, Gatsby Trailhead Park, Pioneer Precinct Park, Jordan Park, Bend-in-the-River Park, 17th South Park, Glendale Park, and Fairmont Park).
Discussion was held on $3.3 million in ongoing maintenance costs associated with proposal. Councilmember Penfold requested information about how savings from converting facilities to secondary water could impact the $3.3 million.
Councilmember Mendenhall: interest in trimming proposal and addressing ongoing maintenance costs, connectivity, urban trails/parks attract businesses/affluent retirees, property values would increase along with municipal revenues, make legislative intent to direct new growth, and careful planning/commitment needed to avoid creating new infrastructure that could result in additional deferred maintenance costs.
Councilmember Garrott: create a proposal that might pass ($150 million would not pass), shrink/focus proposal on Council priorities (primarily trails), add Eastside amenities (perception that proposal was a Westside investment), and develop a $65 million proposal (not including Eastside amenities)
Further discussion was held on developing amenities that would attract businesses to Salt Lake and promote future economic development. Comments included $70 million of current unfunded projects, potential to increase property taxes to pay for ongoing maintenance, no tangible link to economic development, masterplan direction/up-zoning, return on investment from putting $66 million into Glendale, difficulty predicting new growth revenue, create Redevelopment Agency (RDA) and Community Development Area (CDA) areas to capture new growth, encourage businesses to invest in Salt Lake to increase tax base, impact/burden on taxpayers, utilize Special Assessment Areas (SAA), more public hearings needed, allow taxpayers to make choices, invest in outdoor recreational opportunities, outreach/survey efforts only reached 1% of population, and craft proposal citizens would support.
Discussion was held on how to proceed. Comments included creating Council Member “packages” or “clusters of concepts” to vote on such as trails/connectivity, bike recreation, outdoor pools, secondary water, nature restoration/nature parks, courts/playfields, dogs off-leash, art, bridges, un-funded capital needs (including ponds), gathering places, pocket parks, new ponds, neighborhood node development would not capture big growth, Northwest Quadrant future growth, and change name of bond proposal to “Uniting Salt Lake City Through Recreation”. Ms. Weaver said the Council could add Council priorities such as Urban Forestry, impact fees, CIP, air quality, and future cemetery planning including long-term uses/revenue options.
Councilmember Garrott said a public hearing could be held on August 4th. He asked Council Members to review their lists of proposed projects in the $125/$150 million proposals and add additional projects to list. He said after staff compiled information, the Council could flush those out and agree on a process to move forward to express ranking preferences (include/develop associated bond costs). He said that would get the Council closer to putting packages together for straw polls.
Ms. Weaver said she would prepare a spreadsheet so Council Members could identify their top four/five priorities then staff could determine from that where support was and rank them in order. Councilmember Garrott asked staff to have the ranking available for August 4, 2015 and to make that information available to the public (post on website). Ms. Gust-Jenson asked Council Members to let staff know if they had new projects (not yet mentioned) so work/project costs could be done.
Note: Council Members Garrott and LaMalfa were excused and Councilmember Rogers conducted remaining items.
#3. 4:57:53 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING ABOUT BUDGET AMENDMENT NO. 1 FOR FISCAL YEAR BUDGET 2015-16. Among the proposed amendments was a pilot program where the County District Attorney’s Office would manage the Salt Lake City Prosecutor’s Office. The pilot program would evaluate the effectiveness of increased collaboration between the District Attorney’s and Prosecutor’s office. Anticipated savings would be split between the City and County. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets, including proposed project additions and modifications. (Item H1)
Margaret Plane, Jennifer Bruno, and Scott Fisher briefed the Council with attachments. Comments included potential efficiencies, manage statutory changes, identify measurables, evaluation component, incentive provision for savings, and explore Citywide opportunities to create efficiencies. Ms. Bruno said a public hearing was scheduled for August 18, 2015.
Discussion was held on the following budget amendment items.
Item I-1: University of Utah Demography Contract - $20,000 – source: General Fund Balance. Councilmember Mendenhall was interested in increasing funding for the University of Utah Demography contract. Currently the FY 2016 budget has $30,000 allocated for this purpose. If the City were to add $20,000 to this purpose, the University of Utah would be able to (with some other funding) hire a full-time staff person to work on demographic work for Salt Lake City. While this idea has been raised previously, Council Staff has not yet had the opportunity to fully review this with the Administration for input. Council Members expressed interest in having this as an on ongoing appropriation.
Item I-2: Parliament on World Religion Conference. The Mayor’s Office has requested $12,500 to help fund a conference coming to Salt Lake City in October, for the Council for the Parliament of the World Religions. The Conference has an estimated 10,000 attendees. If the Council approved this request, it will be included in an upcoming budget amendment. The conference needs to know sooner than the upcoming budget amendment, whether the Council was interested in the City offering funding. A majority of the Council was in favor of including the item in the budget amendment.
#4. 5:12:28 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING ON A PROPOSAL THAT WOULD AMEND REGULATIONS FOR TWO RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE (RMU) ZONING DISTRICTS PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. PLNPCM2014-00127. The proposed changes would remove qualifying provisions for residential density, adjust required setbacks and lot standards, add design requirements and allow projecting signs in the R-MU-35 and R-MU-45 districts. Related provisions of Title 21A, Zoning, may also be amended as part of this petition. (Petitioner – Mayor Ralph Becker)(Item H3)
Nick Norris, Nick Tarbet, and John Anderson briefed the Council with attachments. Comments included compatibility issues, eliminate density requirements, set-back adjustments, step-back requirements from low-density residential, decrease maximum height allowance, additional design standards, provision included to modify design standards, allow projecting/blade signs, pedestrian oriented signage, allow market to create housing inventory to some degree, extra height allowed only if supported by East Downtown Master Plan, preserve view corridors of key historic buildings, zero setback requirement for single family attached(shared wall) homes.
Discussion was held on decreasing lot requirements (size & width) relating to micro-units (townhomes, condos). Mr. Anderson said lot size changes would have to be rear loaded to avoid having driveways every 22’. Councilmember Penfold asked Planning to provide Council staff with similar language for mixed-use zones. Mr. Norris said micro-housing was not a specific type of use defined in the code (only considered attached or detached housing). Councilmember Penfold asked if the current Planned Unit Development (PUD) process would accommodate micro-housing. Mr. Norris said possibly but density increases would not be allowed. Councilmember Penfold said that was an option the Council could explore. He expressed concerns about ground floor activity in some RMU-type zones and wanted the City/Planning to continue having conversations about that.
Discussion was held on the definition of durable ground floor materials such as brick, masonry, textured concrete, cut stone, etc. Councilmember Penfold said he wanted to ensure the definition was clearly defined so building officials could not deviate from approved materials.
Discussion was held on the 125’ maximum height requirement and the East Downtown Master Plan height map. Mr. Norris said zoning was written so extra height was only available if applications met specific location criteria contained in the East Downtown Master Plan. Council Members expressed interest in adding height map restrictions to other zones to provide additional clarity.
Councilmember Rogers asked if Council Members wanted Planning to pursue removing the maximum 125’ height (just downtown area). All Council Members present were opposed except Councilmember Adams who was in favor. Council Members LaMalfa and Garrott were excused.
Councilmember Penfold asked if Council Members wanted to add master plan height map restrictions to the zoning code. Straw Poll: Support for Councilmember Penfold’s suggestion. All Council Members present were in favor. Council Members Garrott and LaMalfa who were excused. Mr. Tarbet said a public hearing was scheduled for August 18, 2015.
#5. 6:24:35 PM INTERVIEW JAMES (JAMIE) BOWEN PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HIS APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.(ITEM H4)
Councilmember Rogers said Mr. Bowen’s name was on the Consent Agenda for formal consideration.
#6. 6:28:02 PM REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING A REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to City Council business.
•Scheduling Items
See File M 15-5 for announcements.
#7. REPORT OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.
No discussion was held.
#8. CONSIDER A MOTION TO ENTER INTO CLOSED SESSION, IN KEEPING WITH UTAH CODE FOR ANY ALLOWED PURPOSE.
The Work Session meeting adjourned at 6:33 p.m.
This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as other items may have been discussed; please refer to the audio or video for entire content.
This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the City Council Work Session meeting held July 28, 2015.
sc