The City Council met in Work Session on Tuesday, July 31, 2012, at 2:00 p.m. in Room 326, Committee Room, City County Building, 451 South State Street.
In Attendance: Council Members Carlton Christensen, Stan Penfold, Kyle LaMalfa, Luke Garrott, Jill Remington Love, Charlie Luke and Søren Simonsen.
Also In Attendance: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; Mayor Ralph Becker; Jennifer Bruno, Council Deputy Director; Edwin Rutan, City Attorney; Lynn Pace, Deputy City Attorney; Joel Paterson, Planning Manager; Nick Tarbet, Council Policy Analyst/Constituent Liaison; Janice Jardine, Council Land Use Policy Analyst; John Anderson, Principal Planner, Wilford Sommerkorn, Planning Director; Nole Walkingshaw, Planning Program Supervisor; Cheri Coffey, Assistant Planning Director; Nick Norris, Planning Manager; Maryann Pickering, Principal Planner; Greg Hughes, Capitol Center Properties; Gary Nordhoff, Capitol Center Properties; and Scott Crandall, Deputy City Recorder.
Councilmember Simonsen presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 2:11 p.m.
AGENDA ITEMS
#1. 2:11:15 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE CENTRAL COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN AND REZONE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1015-1035 SOUTH 200 WEST AND 1068 JEFFERSON STREET IN ORDER TO DEVELOP A MIXED-USE PROJECT ON THE PROPERTIES PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. PLNPCM2011-00658 AND PETITION NO. PLNPCM2011-00659.
•THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP WOULD BE CHANGED FROM LOW MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL/MIXED USE.
•THE PROPERTIES WOULD BE REZONED FROM MODERATE DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RMF-35) TO RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE (R-MU). RELATED PROVISIONS OF TITLE 21A - ZONING, MAY ALSO BE AMENDED AS PART OF THIS PETITION. (PETITIONER CAPITOL CENTER PROPERTIES) (ITEM H3) View Attachments
Nick Norris, John Anderson, Nick Tarbet, Greg Hughes and Gary Nordhoff briefed the Council with handouts. Council Members comments/concerns included neighborhood outreach efforts, address residents concerns regarding height allowances, utilize other mixed-use zones, density/setback requirements, reasons/justifications for negative Planning Commission recommendation, support density around public transportation hubs, proximity to transit, integrate historic church, remove height restrictions in areas outside of downtown, utilize development agreements, concentrate height in downtown, shift areas where density belongs, transform entire area, preserve single-family structures, review master plan criteria, how would proposal interact with neighborhood, review process going forward, remove conditional use allowance for 125-foot height, attain density with lower heights, ground floor parking issues, deed restriction, how designs interface with surrounding neighborhoods, favorable bike corridor, design features not consistent with zoning intent, high ground water and quality of life issues.
Councilmember Simonsen said a public hearing was scheduled for August 14, 2012. He invited the petitioners to attend and provide additional comments.
#2. 2:47:46 PM HOLD A DISCUSSION TO REVIEW PHILOSOPHY STATEMENTS. THE COUNCIL MET IN JANUARY TO DISCUSS PRIORITY FOCUS AREAS AND REQUESTED THAT STAFF PROVIDE DRAFT PHILOSOPHY STATEMENTS FOR REVIEW AND REFINEMENT BY THE PUBLIC. THE SEVEN PRIORITY AREAS ARE: ECONOMIC HEALTH OF THE CITY, ARTS AND CULTURE, NEIGHBORHOOD QUALITY OF LIFE, TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE, SUSTAINABILITY AND EDUCATION. (ITEMS D2, D3 AND H2). View Attachments View Attachments View Attachments
Nick Tarbet briefed the Council with a Powerpoint presentation/handouts. Council Members comments/concerns included concept of moving people not cars, pedestrian first approach, encourage people to use public transit, vehicles necessary for some people, reliable/convenient public transit needed, include statement that zoning supports mass transit, change order of Items 4 and 5, re-word Item 4 incorporating pedestrian/bicycle safety/efficiency as high priorities and balanced with other transportation modes, include statement about sustainable land use patterns with added population, formed based zoning initiative, avoid exclusionary language, pursue action steps, remove capitalization in Item 8, avoid land use decisions which exclude elderly and people with disabilities, define meaning of non-motorized transportation and review order of statements.
Councilmember Simonsen said after adoption, policy statements would be forwarded to the Planning Division for implementation. He said Mr. Sommerkorn wanted to update the Council with plans on how to move forward. Councilmember Garrott requested additional Council discussion to address action steps associated with each philosophy statement. Councilmember Simonsen said actions items would be a focus of the next Council retreat.
Councilmember Penfold requested a copy of the original policy statement. Councilmember Simonsen asked Councilmember Garrott to work on an alternate statement regarding “non-motorized transportation” and come back to the Council with a suggestion.
Councilmember Simonsen said he would schedule the item for formal consideration on August 14, 2012 and asked Council Members to let him know if they wanted to have items listed in a different order and any other recommendations/changes.
Councilmember Simonsen said discussion on “Sustainability” and “Parks and Open Space” would be scheduled for a later discussion. He asked if Council Members wanted to put the current “Parks and Open Space” proposal on Open City Hall for public comment and schedule August 14, 2012 for a public hearing. A majority of the Council was opposed. Councilmember Simonsen said the item would be pulled from the Consent Agenda.
Council Members Garrott and LaMalfa said they wanted to include additional items in the proposal and Councilmember Christensen asked for an explanation during the “Sustainability” discussion regarding the reference “getting into an energy business”.
#3. 3:23:31 PM RECEIVE A FOLLOW-UP BRIEFING REGARDING A SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT AND RELATED ZONING REGULATIONS. THE PROPOSAL WOULD CHANGE SOME EXISTING COMMERCIAL ZONING REGULATIONS AND ESTABLISH REGULATIONS FOR A NEW SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT. BUSINESSES THAT SERVE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ARE NOT PART OF THIS PROPOSAL. RELATED PROVISIONS OF TITLE 21A - ZONING, MAY ALSO BE AMENDED AS PART OF THIS PETITION. PETITIONER - MAYOR RALPH BECKER, PETITION NO. PLNPCM2009-00615. (ITEM D4) View Attachments
Nole Walkingshaw and Wilford Sommerkorn briefed the Council with handouts. Council Members comments/concerns included housing mitigation options, quality standards for replacement housing, point of diminishing return, discourage redevelopment speculation, contributions to neighborhood character, demolition disincentives, public review process and tools to interpret ordinance language.
Mr. Walkingshaw said the proposed action would establish the zoning district. He said the Administration would go through a map amendment process and review each property once the district was in place. He said interested parties would be given an opportunity to protest or provide additional input.
Councilmember Garrott wanted to include language in the ordinance that better defined material contributions including design, orientation to abutting properties, setbacks and similar construction features/materials. Mr. Sommerkorn suggested supplementing the ordinance with some sort of guidelines. Discussion was held on adding the following language to the ordinance: the City would not permit demolition without demonstrating that the replacement use contained the residential unit for new non-residential construction, the structure on the property was isolated from other structures and did not relate to other structures within the residential business neighborhood, and the design and condition of the structure was such that it did not make a material contribution to the character of the neighborhood.
Councilmember Simonsen said the proposal was scheduled for consideration/action during the formal meeting but there appeared to be enough substantive changes that additional time was needed to refine the ordinance.
#4. 3:48:27 PM HOLD A DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION STEPS THAT WILL ENABLE SALT LAKE CITY RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES TO SUCCESSFULLY ENGAGE IN PRESERVATION EFFORTS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THEIR UNIQUE SITUATIONS.
a. 3:59:20 PM PRESERVATION PLAN. View Attachments
RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING THE PROPOSED SALT LAKE CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. PLNPCM2009-00171. THE PLAN WOULD BE THE KEY STRATEGIC DOCUMENT TO GUIDE PRESERVATION ACTIVITY AND INFORM DECISIONS RELATING TO BUDGET PRIORITIES, DEVELOPMENT OF INCENTIVES, MASTER PLANS, ZONING TEXT AND MAP AMENDMENTS AND SITE-SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT. (PETITIONER SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL)
Wilford Sommerkorn, Cheri Coffey, Joel Paterson and Janice Jardine briefed the Council with handouts. Ms. Coffey said the handouts contained a list of new issues incorporated in the plan such as eliminating redundancies, simplification, changing the focus to identify various methods used by the City to accomplish preservation, policies which incorporated historic preservation as well as community character preservation, and more tools to support both historic and conservation preservation.
Ms. Coffey said other new issues included requiring all City departments to look at implications that projects might have on historic resources, allowing the Planning Director enough time to comment on projects and ensuring the plan gave more policy direction. She said the State Preservation Office said they did not want the City to mix Local Historic Preservation Plans with National Register Plans so statements were included to ensure they were not mixed.
Ms. Coffey said language was removed that could obligate the Council to funding requirements. She said no changes were made to the vision statements and the plan’s educational component was placed in an appendix. She said Planning needed to find various ways to help the public understand preservation issues. She said there were things in the fine-tuning ordinance which would help streamline the City’s process and provide some incentives.
Council Members comments/concerns included the City’s ability to perform annual survey updates which were costly and time consuming, ability to have some type of historic assessment district which would help pay for itself, additional burden on property owners would make it more difficult to create historic districts, utilization of historic preservation programs/tax credits, educational components, utilize downzoning as a preservation tool and clean up conflicting preservation/zoning policies.
Councilmember Christensen asked if any models were available for some type of historic assessment district which would help cover costs. Ms. Coffey said she would get information for the Council. Councilmember Love said the plan required additional updates/surveys and suggested including language to explore efficient ways to accomplish that.
Councilmember Penfold said he wanted to explore opportunities to create assessment districts (potentially self-imposed) that would be independent of historic designations and explore funding opportunities to provide incentives, restoration, maintenance, street lighting, curb and gutter, park benches, signs, etc. Councilmember Christensen said a CDA could be created that might provide an opportunity to give property tax rebates to home owners over a certain time period.
Councilmember Love said the new community engagement position could be utilized to help the Council develop an educational piece to inform the community about available incentives and how the overall process worked.
Councilmember Simonsen asked if Council Members wanted the Administration to fine tune the plan and then have it scheduled for adoption. A majority of the Council wanted to discuss/adopt Items a-d together.
b. 4:34:51 PM HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGNATION PROCESS AND CRITERIA. View Attachments
RECEIVE A BRIEFING RELATING TO ZONING REGULATION CHANGES THAT MODIFY THE PROCESS AND ADOPTION CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING NEW LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT AND HISTORIC LANDMARK SITES PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. PLNPCM2011-00723. THE PROPOSAL WOULD:
•CLARIFY THE TYPES OF DESIGNATIONS THAT CAN BE APPROVED.
o LANDMARK SITES
o GEOGRAPHIC-BASED HISTORIC DISTRICT
o THEMATIC BASED HISTORIC DISTRICTS
•CLARIFY WHO CAN INITIATE A PETITION TO DESIGNATE A NEW LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT:
o THE MAYOR
o A MAJORITY OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.
o A PROPERTY OWNER WITH SUPPORT FROM A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE PROPOSED DISTRICT.
•DEFINE THE STAFF REVIEW PROCESS.
•OUTLINE HOW TO ASSIST GAUGING THE LEVEL OF PROPERTY OWNER SUPPORT FOR THE CREATION OF A NEW LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
RELATED PROVISIONS OF TITLE 21A, ZONING, MAY ALSO BE AMENDED AS PART OF THIS PETITION. (PETITIONER MAYOR RALPH BECKER)
Wilford Sommerkorn, Maryann Pickering, Joel Paterson, Lynn Pace, Neil Lindberg and Janice Jardine briefed the Council with a PowerPoint presentation/handouts. Council Members comments/concerns included how many signatures or what percentage was needed to initiate a petition, Council retains full decision making authority, legislative authority could not be delegated to private citizen groups, public outreach process/education, better define assessment and decision making processes, could public process be used for other things such as crosswalks/parks/etc., understanding advisory versus binding votes, disincentives versus incentives, and loss of personal property rights.
Mr. Pace said Page 4 of the Council staff report contained a list of “Matters at Issue” that he felt the Council needed to carefully review because this proposal was charting new territory. He said there were numerous ways to craft legislation but it was important to avoid eroding the Council’s land use authority. He said part of what he felt the Council was being asked to do was to craft a model/policy that was workable for Salt Lake City and potentially other cities if it were to be adopted by the State Legislature.
Councilmember Simonsen said the proposal would be scheduled for discussion at a future Work Session.
c. 5:30:32 PM 5:37:58 PM CHARACTER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS.
RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING CREATION OF AN A CHARACTER CONSERVATION ZONING DISTRICT AND RELATED ZONING REGULATIONS PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. PLNPCM2011-00473. THE PURPOSE OF A CHARACTER CONSERVATION ZONING DISTRICT IS TO: View Attachments
•PROTECT DESIRABLE AND UNIQUE PHYSICAL FEATURES AND DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS
•PROMOTE ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION
•ENHANCE THE LIVABILITY OF THE CITY
•REDUCE CONFLICT CAUSED BY INCOMPATIBLE
•AND PROMOTE COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT
•PROVIDE A PLANNING TOOL FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
•STABILIZE PROPERTY VALUES
•RETAIN AFFORDABLE HOUSING
RELATED PROVISIONS OF TITLE 21A, ZONING, MAY ALSO BE AMENDED AS PART OF THIS PETITION. (PETITIONER - MAYOR RALPH BECKER)
Wilford Sommerkorn, Maryann Pickering, Joel Paterson, Lynn Pace and Janice Jardine briefed the Council with a PowerPoint Presentation/handouts. Council Members comments/concerns included preserving neighborhood characteristics, consistency with percentages, and review process parameters.
Councilmember Simonsen said a follow-up discussion would be scheduled in September, 2012 and encouraged Council Members to meet with staff to address any concerns/questions. He said small group discussions could be scheduled if Council Members were interested.
d. HISTORIC PRESERVATION FINE TUNING. View Attachments
RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING CHANGES TO THE CITY’S ZONING REGULATIONS. TO PROVIDE CLARITY AND EFFICIENCY FOR THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY ZONING REGULATIONS PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. PLNPCM2011-00470. THIS PROPOSAL INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:
•IMPROVE CLARITY WITHOUT CHANGING THE INTENT OF SPECIFIC ZONING REGULATIONS.
•STREAMLINE THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR APPLICANTS.
•ALLOW THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION TO MODIFY BULK AND LOT REGULATIONS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
•ADDRESS ONGOING PROBLEMS WITH ADMINISTRATION OF EXISTING REGULATIONS.
•CLARIFY THE LENGTH OF TIME A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IS VALID.
•CLARIFY WORDING THAT MAY BE OPEN TO INTERPRETATION.
RELATED PROVISIONS OF TITLE 21A, ZONING, MAY ALSO BE AMENDED AS PART OF THIS PETITION. (PETITIONER - MAYOR RALPH BECKER)
No discussion was held on Item d.
#5. 5:53:51 PM INTERVIEW CINDI MANSELL PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HER APPOINTMENT AS THE SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER (ITEM H4)
Councilmember Simonsen said Ms. Mansell’s name was on the Consent Agenda for formal consideration.
#6. 6:02:31 PM INTERVIEW HEATHER THUET PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HER APPOINTMENT TO THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION. (ITEM H5)
Councilmember Simonsen said Ms. Thuet’s name was on the Consent Agenda for formal consideration.
#7. 6:05:33 PM INTERVIEW HAL JOHNSON PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HIS APPOINTMENT TO THE TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD. (ITEM H6)
Councilmember Simonsen said Mr. Johnson’s name was on the Consent Agenda for formal consideration.
#8. 6:25:50 PM INTERVIEW JOCELYN ROMANO PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HER APPOINTMENT TO THE HOUSING TRUST FUND ADVISORY BOARD. (Item H7)
Councilmember Simonsen said Ms. Romano’s name was on the Consent Agenda for formal consideration.
#9. 6:29:38 PM INTERVIEW DENISE THORNHILL PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HER APPOINTMENT TO THE LIBRARY BOARD OF DIRECTORS. (Item H8)
Councilmember Simonsen said Ms. Thornhill’s name was on the Consent Agenda for formal consideration.
#10. 5:30:43 PM 6:09:39 PM 7:51:29 PM REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING A REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. View Attachments
Note: Part of the discussion was held in the Council Chambers.
See file M 12-5 for announcements.
#11. 7:55:53 PM REPORT OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR, INCLUDING AN UPDATE ON COUNCIL INTEREST ITEMS AND A REPORT OF MEETINGS WITH THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR OF VARIOUS CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
Note: This item was discussed in the Council Chambers.
Councilmember Simonsen said he had a discussion with Karen Keieger, Arts Council Director and Arts Council Chair, regarding the Twilight Concert Series. They said attendance had increased, there were positive comments about fees, there was better success managing crowds, and there were positive impacts on surrounding businesses. They said the Arts Council was committed to developing a program where all art programming in the City would be paid for through the Concert Series and Living Traditions. Councilmember Simonsen said the Director was available to provide a personal update if Council Members were interested.
Councilmember Simonsen said due to time constraints, some agenda items in August would be listed as “written briefings” only and asked Council Members to let staff know if there were concerns or a need for additional information.
#12. (TENTATIVE) CONSIDER A MOTION TO ENTER INTO CLOSED SESSION, IN KEEPING WITH UTAH CODE § 52-4-204, FOR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES:
a) DISCUSSION OF THE CHARACTER, PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE, OR PHYSICAL OR MENTAL HEALTH OF AN INDIVIDUAL, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205(1)(a),
b) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205 (1)(b),
c) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, OR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY (INCLUDING ANY FORM OF WATER RIGHT OR WATER SHARES) WHEN PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE TRANSACTION WOULD DISCLOSE THE APPRAISAL OR ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION OR PREVENT THE CITY FROM COMPLETING THE TRANSACTION ON THE BEST POSSIBLE TERMS, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205(1)(d),
d) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR REASONABLY IMMINENT LITIGATION, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205(1)(c),
e) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY (INCLUDING ANY FORM OF WATER RIGHT OR WATER SHARES) IF (1) PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE TRANSACTION WOULD DISCLOSE THE APPRAISAL OR ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION OR PREVENT THE CITY FROM COMPLETING THE TRANSACTION ON THE BEST POSSIBLE TERMS, (2) THE CITY PREVIOUSLY GAVE NOTICE THAT THE PROPERTY WOULD BE OFFERED FOR SALE, AND (3) THE TERMS OF THE SALE ARE PUBLICLY DISCLOSED BEFORE THE CITY APPROVES THE SALE,
f) FOR ATTORNEY-CLIENT MATTERS THAT ARE PRIVILEGED, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 78B-1-137,
g) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS DEPLOYMENT OF SECURITY PERSONNEL, DEVICES OR SYSTEMS PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205(1)(f).AND
h) A SESSION TO INVESTIGATE PROCEEDINGS REGARDING ALLEGATIONS OF CRIMINAL MISCONDUCT, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205(1)(g).
Item not held.
The meeting adjourned at 8:03 p.m.
This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the City Council Work Session meeting held July 31, 2012.
sc