The URL can be used to link to this page

02/06/1990 - Minutes PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met as the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, February 6, 1990, at 5:00 p.m. in Room 325, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Ronald Whitehead Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Don Hale Nancy Pace Council Chair Hardman presided at the meeting. Council Chair Hardman opened bers had expressed interest about the meeting by requesting that the having vegetarian dishes available report of the Executive Director at the retreat. She asked that be delayed until after the Council those interested contact her. completed the board appointment interview. Ms. Gust-Jenson said Wayne Owens had requested a meeting with Mr. Curly Jones was inter- the Council regarding the wilder- viewed prior to his consideration ness bill. She said if several for appointment to the Community members were interested she would Development Advisory Committee. schedule the meeting. The alter- He said he had been employed at native would be for Council Mem- the University of Utah for eigh- bers to discuss this with Mr. teen years and had observed the Owens in Washington, D.C. , during different developments, especially the March conference. in the central city area. He expressed his interest in serving. She said this Thursday was He said he had been attending the Redevelopment Agency meeting meetings since September of 1989 and the fine arts discussion was and was aware of the time commit- scheduled for the Committee of the ment. He said he was asked to Whole meeting immediately follow- serve on the committee and favored ing. She said one of the fine the opportunity. arts representatives would have a scheduling conflict unless this Linda Peterson, scheduled for item could be completed prior to an interview prior to her consid- 7:20 that evening. eration for appointment to the Golf Board, was not present. This prompted a discussion regarding the duration of the Cindy Gust-Jenson, Council Redevelopment Agency' s meetings. Executive Director, distributed Councilmember Hardman suggested copies of the updated events the possibility of holding RDA calendar. She said the Mayor- meetings twice a month until their Council retreat was scheduled for agendas lightened. Councilmember Saturday, February 10, at the Godfrey suggested that breaks be Doubletree Hotel from 9:00 a.m. to taken from RDA business to conduct 5:00 p.m. She said packets for pressing Committee of the Whole the retreat would be distributed business, which had been done in on Thursday. the past. Or to postpone Commit- tee of the Whole agenda items when She also said Council Mem- necessary and appropriate. The 90-28 PROCEETUINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY', UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990 Council decided to discuss sched- Regarding Items D-4, D-5, D-6 uling options at future RDA meet- and D-7, she said this was the end ings and to take a break on Thurs- of the process regarding the Sandy day in order to accommodate the City annexation into the Metropol- fine arts schedule. itan Water District and LeRoy Hooton, public utilities director, Ms. Gust-Jenson reviewed the was present to answer questions. evening' s agenda noting that Item Mr. Hooton said the agreements B-4 was a presentation of a cer- would be signed on Wednesday, tificate to a citizen. The Coun- February 7, by all the Mayors of cil decided that Councilmember the affected jurisdictions. Hardman as the Chair would read Councilmember Kirk inquired and the certificate during the meet- Mr. Hooton confirmed that five ing. members would be appointed to the Board of Directors by Salt Lake Councilmember Kirk offered City and two members would be information about the Steiner appointed by Sandy City. The Aquatics tour scheduled for Council 's appointment authority Councilmembers. She said the tour was not impacted by the revisions. was worthwhile and was intended to give information. She indicated Councilmember Pace suggested that the tour revealed much more a field trip prior to the North- than could be seen from the road. west Community Master Plan Update Due to conflicts of the various appearing on the agenda. All members in making a 3:30 tour members agreed that a tour should time, it was suggested that the take place and could be scheduled Steiner organization be contacted in conjunction with a Committee of about a later time in the day. the Whole meeting. Ms. Gust- Jenson asked the Council to give Councilmember Hale said Tom her suggestions for dates. Welch had indicated a willingness to give an update on the Olympics. Regarding Item F-1, pertain- Emilie Charles of the Mayor' s ing to the Street Lighting Special Office said the Mayor' s staff had Improvement District, Dick Fox, been working to set a time with bond counsel, explained that a the various individuals and would change in the state statute al- arrange possible times with the lowed revenues from improvement Council Office Director. This districts to be adjusted. He said update would probably be given this improvement district would during a Committee of the Whole utilize the adjustment concept meeting and February 22 was being which allowed for a change in considered. installments to prevent surplus or deficit funds. Regarding Item B-5, Ms. Gust- Jenson said the Urban Design Award Councilmember Kirk asked if was annually presented during a those affected by this assessment Council meeting. This year the could anticipate an increase or a Council was being presented with decrease and how they would be an award for their action on the notified. Mr. Fox said the Yale- North Temple Interchange. The crest area could anticipate an Council decided that Councilmember increase in costs, since operating Hardman as Chair would accept the costs had increased. award. 90-29 PROCE•INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990 Councilmember Whitehead said a problem existed when neighbors compared their assessment fees, and he wondered if there was any way to make the fees more uniform. It was pointed out that certain areas were still paying off the capital expense for the light posts and once these were paid off, the rate would decrease to be comparable to other rates. Steve Meyer, transportation department, indicated that Scott Vaterlass from his office would be sending letters and meeting with the various Community Councils to explain the change. Councilmember Hardman asked for suggestions about special issues that Council Members wanted to discuss with the congressional delegation. Councilmember Whitehead indicated a priority should be placed on the war on drugs. Councilmember Hardman asked Council Members to give any other suggestions to the Council Office Director. Councilmember Godfrey said the League of Cities generally established the agenda for the meetings. The briefing session ad- journed. 90-30 PROCEIPINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in Regular Session on Tuesday, February 6, 1990, at 6:00 p.m. in Room 315, City Council Chambers, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Ronald Whitehead Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Don Hale Nancy Pace Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Roger Cutler, City Attorney, Kathryn Marshall, City Recorder, and Lynda Domino, Chief Deputy City Recorder, were present. Council Chair Hardman presided at and conducted the meeting. OPENING CEREMONIES Judge Memorial High School. #1. The invocation was given He explained the Leaf Bag by Police Chaplain Thomas Kaiser. Program by saying that about 500, 000 pumpkin-colored bags were #2. The Council led the distributed around Halloween to Pledge of Allegiance. Salt Lake City residents through the fire stations. He said during #3. Councilmember Godfrey the flood years the volunteer moved and Councilmember Kirk spirit rose in Salt Lake City seconded to approve the minutes of because city crews could not pick the Salt Lake City Council for the up leaves. He said had the leaves regular meetings held Tuesday, gotten into the drainage system, January 16, 1990, and Tuesday, they would have caused trouble January 23, 1990, which motion during the winter. Citizens came carried, all members voted aye. to the rescue and filled bags with (M 90-1) leaves and the city took them to the landfill. He said now with #4. The Mayor and Council the new recycling program, the presented certificates of appre- city was considering how to mulch ciation to the Salt Lake Area the leaves and discard the bags so Jaycees and to Thomas Peters for they didn' t become a problem. their volunteer efforts with the Leaf Bag Program. He said this program had lowered the city' s costs in terms Mayor DePaulis said the Leaf of drainage clean up and the Bag Program had become popular and Jaycees had been an integral part the number of leaf bags distribut- of the program. He said Mr. Peters ed had consistently increased. He had distributed bags to homebound said the Jaycees had been in- and elderly residents and had also volved in this program since its organized all the volunteers at inception so he wanted to present Fire Station #4. a certificate of appreciation to them. He also said he wanted to Councilmember Hardman read present a certificate to Thomas the certificates and he and the Peters, a citizen volunteer from Mayor presented them. 90-31 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY", UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990 #5. The Mayor presented the agenda except for Item #2, which Urban Design awards for 1989. He motion carried, all members voted said these awards had been given aye. every year since 1985 and were sponsored by the Urban Design #1. RE: Adopting Resolution Coalition and cosponsored by the 8 of 1990 authorizing the execu- Deseret News. He presented tion of an interlocal cooperation awards to the following: agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the University of The Historic Landmarks Com- Utah for the City Prosecutor to mittee of the Planning and Zoning prosecute misdemeanor citations Commission - recognized for ongo- issued by the University of Utah ing decisions addressing the police. historic fabric of the city. (C 90-47) The Regional Urban Design #2. RE: Setting a date to Assistant Team Steering Commit- hold a public hearing on March 13, tee - for interest in careful 1990, at 6:40 p.m. to consider an growth and development of the down ordinance adopting the Northwest town. Community Master Plan Update. Mr. H. David Burton, Presid- ACTION: Councilmember White- ing Bishopric of the Church of head moved and Councilmember God- Jesus Christ of Latter-Day frey seconded to set the hearing Saints - for commitment and in- date for April 3, 1990, at 6:20 volvement in long-range planning p.m. , which motion carried, all in the down town area and for members voted aye. working with such community groups (T 90-5) as the Urban Design Committee and the R/UDAT Steering Committee. #3. RE: Adopting Resolution 9 of 1990 authorizing the execu- The Salt Lake City Council - tion of an interlocal cooperation for their decision not to permit a agreement between Salt Lake City new freeway interchange at North Corporation and the State of Utah Temple. to provide grant funds under the provisions of the "E.M.S. Per- The Utah State Division of Capita Grants Program. " Facilities Construction and Man- (C 90-48) agement - for their decision to build the employment security #4. RE: Adopting Resolution building on Block 53. 10 of 1990 authorizing the execu- tion of an interlocal cooperation "Howard and Martha" - a wood agreement between Salt Lake City cutout, voice-activated, story- Corporation, Metropolitan Water telling display placed at various District of Salt Lake City and downtown locations to inform and Sandy City Corporation for the educate people about making wise treatment of Little Cottonwood choices for the down town area. Creek water. (C 90-49) CONSENT AGENDA #5. RE: Adopting Resolu- Councilmember Godfrey moved tion 11 of 1990 authorizing the and Councilmember Whitehead sec- execution of an interlocal cooper- onded to approve the consent ation agreement between Salt Lake 90-32 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990 City Corporation and Sandy City 1990, which motion carried, all Corporation regarding the Metro- members voted aye. politan Water District of Salt (Q 89-9) Lake City, Resolution No. 1633, and the composition of the Water #2. RE: A resolution de- District's Board of Directors. Glaring the intention of the City (C 90-50) Council of Salt Lake City to create Lighting District No. 1; #6. RE: Adopting Resolution to operate, maintain, patrol, and 12 of 1990 authorizing the execu- power lighting improvements; to tion of an escrow agreement for defray a portion of the original the annexation of Sandy City into capital cost of lighting improve- the Metropolitan Water District of ments, and the operation and Salt Lake City. maintenance expenses of said (C 90-51) improvement district by special assessments to be levied against #7. RE: Adopting Resolution the properties benefited by such 13 of 1990 approving the "Water lighting and improvements; to Supply and Distribution Plan for provide notice of intention to Salt Lake County 1991-2000. " authorize such lighting and im- (C 90-52) provements and to fix a time and place for protest against such #8. RE: Approving the lighting and improvements or the appointment of Guy Kroesche to the creation of said district on Salt Lake Art Design Board. Tuesday, March 13, 1990, 6:00 (I 90-4) p.m. ; and related matters. #9. RE: Approving the ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey appointment of William Bohling to moved and Councilmember Whitehead the Housing Advisory and Appeals seconded to adopt Resolution 15 Board. of 1990, which motion carried, all (I 90-6) members voted aye. (Q 90-2) #10. RE: Approving the appointment of Stephen Beard to #3. RE: A motion supporting the Recreation Advisory Board. the release of funds appropriated (I 90-7) in Fiscal Year 1989-90 for the Salt Lake Association of Community UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS Councils' staffing. #1. RE: A resolution to ACTION: Councilmember Hor- create the Salt Lake City, Utah, rocks moved and Councilmember Pace Curb and Gutter Extension Special seconded to support the release of Improvement District #38-758, as funds, which motion carried, all described in the Notice of Inten- members voted aye. tion, concerning the district and (T 90-2) authorizing the city officials to proceed to make improvements as #4. RE: A motion supporting set forth in the Notice of Inten- the release of funds appropriated tion to create the district. in Fiscal Year 1989-90 for the creation of a Salt Lake City ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey Community Development Corporation. moved and Councilmember Pace seconded to adopt Resolution 14 of 90-33 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990 ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey for a planned unit development in moved and Councilmember Horrocks the future. He said this would be seconded to support the release of beneficial to the area since there funds, which motion carried, all were some relatively large lots members voted aye. and this would allow for increased (T 90-3) development. PUBLIC HEARINGS He said this petition re- quest would not affect any commer- #1. RE: A public hearing at cial or industrial zones in the 6:30 p.m. to receive comments and area. He then pointed out that in consider adopting an ordinance the "R-2" zone there were 256 rezoning the property between the single-family units and 33 duplex- Jordan River and 700 West and 900 es; in the "R-4" zone there were South Street to California Avenue about 100 single-family units, 2 from "R-4" and "R-2" to "R-1" and duplexes and one 4-plex. He said "R-lA" classifications. the Planning Commission recommend- ed the zoning changes. ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Hale Councilmember Godfrey asked seconded to close the public what the master plan recommended. hearing, which motion carried, all Mr. Wirth said it recommended a members voted aye. low to medium density residential area. Councilmember Godfrey asked Councilmember Whitehead moved if the master plan recommended a and Councilmember Pace seconded to specific zone. Mr. Wirth said it adopt Ordinance 6 of 1990, which did not. motion carried, all members voted aye except Councilmember Godfrey Councilmember Godfrey said who voted nay. the Planning Commission minutes reflected some concern that the DISCUSSION: Terry Wirth, zoning change would not follow the planning and zoning staff, out- master plan. Bill Wright, deputy lined the area on a map. He planning director, said the bulk pointed out that the area current- of the area between 800 West and ly zoned "R-4" was east of 800 the Jordan River was master West and the area currently zoned planned in 1972 for low density "R-2" was west of 800 West. He residential use, although the said the Planning Commission master plan did not designate recommended rezoning the "R-2" whether that meant "R-1" or "R-2" . area to "R-1" and rezoning the In regards to the area currently "R-4" area to "R-1" and "R-lA" . zoned "R-4" , Mr. Wright said in 1972 it was in a land use category He said this change would be of low to medium density residen- consistent with the current master tial use. He said this area plan and the dominant present land remained zoned "R-4" which sent a use which was single-family dwell- message to the private sector ing units. He said the rezoning about multiple-family development. would reflect the single-family residential character of the He explained that during the area and would aid in maintaining master plan update process, the and supporting the population. He "R-4" zone was targeted as an area said the purpose for rezoning the of potential conflict. He said "R-4" area to "R-lA" was to allow the "R-4" zone would send the 90-34 PROCEEPINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE Cr, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990 signal that this area could be industrial zones in the petition developed as 4-plexes when cur- area had been adjacent for 40 rently the overwhelming land use years. He said the preservation was low density. He said he of the neighborhood was strong. believed the zoning change would be consistent with the current Councilmember Horrocks said land use. He expressed concern he had lived in this area since that the "R-4" zone would encour- 1949 and was one block from the age people to buy single family "M-2" zone. He said there were homes and tear them down to build many long-term residents who had 4-plexes. remodeled and maintained their homes, and this was a stable area. Councilmember Godfrey re- He said the west part of Salt Lake ferred to an industrial area valley was unique because indus- adjacent to the residential zone trial zones abutted residential and asked if it was contradictory zones. He said rezoning this area to have a low-density residential would protect the residential zone next to an industrial zone flavor. without a buffer in between. Mr. Wright explained that the Councilmember Whitehead asked "buffer" theory was being ques- if the homes currently in the "R- tioned in the planning profession 2" area conformed to the zoning. and they were not adhering to it Mr. Wright said the bulk of the as a strong planning theory. homes were single-family dwellings so they conformed to the "R-2" He said the issue concerned zoning. design rather than adjacency and said if the adjacent industrial Mr. Whitehead asked how zone was lowered from "M-2" to "M- rezoning the area to "R-1" would 1A" , there were design and use affect the home owners' ability to standards that could allow the remodel. Mr. Wright said the industrial and residential uses to front yard, side yard and rear be compatible. He said he didn't yard standards were the same in think there was a need to buffer the "R-2" and "R-1" zones. He the residential and industrial said the difference was in the zones with high-density housing area requirement; in the "R-2" since that was no more compatible zone a single-family house could than an established neighborhood be located on a 5, 000 square-foot of single-family housing. lot and in an "R-1" zone it would need 7, 000 square feet. He said Councilmember Godfrey asked the bulk of lots in the petition where in the city adjacent resi- area were greater than 6, 000 dential and industrial zones square feet. He said there would occurred. Mr. Wright said this probably be situations where occurred frequently along the west requests for building permits side neighborhoods which abutted would have to go before the Board the freeway and industrial corri- of Adjustment, but the proposed dors. He also pointed out that zoning change was not the same as the new development pattern on the changing the zone from high-densi- west side was to maintain the ty, such as "R-6", to "R-1" . He single-family housing rather than said in that case the standards tear it down to construct higher would change drastically. density housing. He also pointed out that the residential and 90-35 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990 In reference to the "R-4" Councilmember Whitehead said area, he said the "R-1" zoning the "R-2" area was already devel- change would conform to the cur- oped and he asked why it needed to rent use. In this case owners be downzoned. Councilmember would not have the option to add Horrocks said the West Side Commu- another unit to their property, nity Council wanted to protect the but he said the bulk of those predominantly single-family areas. properties could not accommodate another unit. He said in order to Councilmember Whitehead actually develop multiple units in expressed his concern that the "R- this area, developers would have 1" zone would restrict people from to buy two homes, tear them down, improving their property. Mr. and join the lots. He said this Wright said owners would have the would be contrary to the character ability to expand within the of the neighborhood. confines of rear, side and front yard requirements. He pointed out Councilmember Horrocks said that this was an issue of confor- there were two areas in his dis- mity with the existing land use trict that were developed as and the goals of the neighborhood. duplexes. He said one of the areas had become a slum and the He said rarely did people other area was overcrowded and legally convert single-family there were traffic problems. He dwellings to duplexes without a also said the duplexes had become building addition. In this case a haven for crime. He said he existing structures would have to wanted to protect the residential be demolished in order to rebuild areas. a duplex. He said the goal of the neighborhood was single-family Councilmember Whitehead units and they wanted people to suggested that a better mixture of reinvest in a single-family home single and multiple family housing versus speculating about duplexes. would eliminate the problems of concentrated multiple-family Mel Ingersoll, 766 West 1300 units. South, said his property was located in the "R-4" zone and he Mr. Wright reminded the asked about the advantages of an Council that in the petition area "R-1A" zone versus an "R-1" zone. there were 349 single-family Mr. Wright said the "R-lA" zone houses and 35 duplexes. had the same square footage re- quirements as an "R-1" zone, Councilmember Whitehead asked except the "R-lA" would allow for about raw land in the area. Mr. a planned unit development with- Wright said it was located in the out building a dedicated public area proposed to be zoned "R-lA" street. He said this meant that a and the bulk of it was owned by smaller street could be construct- the Ingersoll family. He said the ed with sidewalk on only one side. planning department recommended He pointed out a potential disad- the "R-lA" zoning in order to vantage which was that the city preserve development options. He would not own the street so would said "R-lA" would allow planned not be responsible to plow the unit developments but the develop- snow, collect the garbage or er would not be required to build maintain the road. He said the a dedicated public street. homeowners would be responsible for those services. 90-36 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990 Mr. Ingersoll asked if the the Council changed the zoning he "R-1" zone allowed for planned would not be able to convert his unit developments. Mr. Wright property. said it did not so the planning staff recommended the "R-lA" zone Councilmember Whitehead said in order to allow for development the neighborhood wanted the area options. to remain single-family homes. At this point to allow people to Mr. Ingersoll said he was construct 4-plexes would be con- part owner of a large parcel of tradictory. vacant property within the peti- tion area. He acknowledged that Mr. Ingersoll asked the the residents would have more of Council to delay the effective an advantage if they abutted an date of the rezoning in order to "R-1" zone rather than a zone allow him time to proceed with his which would allow for 4-plexes, plans for a 4-plex. Similar to since 4-plexes were considered a what they had done in another "bad" neighbor. He said higher- recent rezoning issue. density housing was usually a better development since more Councilmember Godfrey reaf- money was invested and the units firmed with Mr. Ingersoll that he were managed. He said he had wanted to convert his property to mixed emotions about whether he a 4-plex but did not have the preferred the "R-1" zone or an "R- appropriate permit. Mr. Godfrey 5" or "R-6" zone, which would said if the Council rezoned the emphasize a better development. area to "R-lA" then Mr. Ingersoll would not be able to proceed with He said he would support the his 4-plex. He also indicated petition with one exception. He that the Council shouldn't rezone said he was currently expanding the area if they were going to his existing home in order to have delay the rezoning in order to 9,000 square feet. He indicated allow Mr. Ingersoll time to com- that at some future point he plete his 4-plex. Councilmember wanted this property to be used as Whitehead said the purpose of the a 4-plex, which would not be rezoning was to avoid further allowed if the "R-4" zoning was construction of 4-plexes in this changed. He pointed out that when area. he received the permit to expand his home, it did not indicate that Mr. Cutler reiterated that he was changing the home into a 4- Mr. Ingersoll had applied for and plex. He reiterated his support received a building permit for a of the petition if he could be single-family dwelling and did not allowed to continue with his apply as a 4-plex. He said Mr. plans. Ingersoll would not have a non- conforming use right if this area Roger Cutler, city attorney, was downzoned. said he understood that Mr. Inger- soll had a building permit for a Mr. Ingersoll said he was single-family home and wanted to underway with his development and be grandfathered under the "R-4" thought he should be able to zoning in order to convert the proceed. In regards to the re- home into a 4-plex at a future mainder of the rezoning petition, date. He said Mr. Ingersoll did Mr. Ingersoll said he did not not have a vested interest and if object. 90-37 PROCEE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990 Mr. Cutler reiterated to Mr. tion to compensate people for Ingersoll that he should not base their property rights. his decision on a different zoning circumstance and should not rely Councilmember Godfrey asked on a concession from the Council. Mr. Stangle if he owned property He said if Mr. Ingersoll wanted to in this area. Mr. Stangle said he contest the proposed zoning change owned property in the adjacent "M- then he should do so and not have 2" area and his main concern would the expectation that the Council be with that proposed zoning would delay action based on a change. previous rezoning issue with different circumstances. June S. Cox, owner of the duplex at 1335 and 1337 South on W.W. Hales, owner of the 900 West, asked how the zoning property at 804 West 1300 South, change would affect his property. indicated his desire to keep the Councilmember Godfrey said his area as single-family homes. He property would remain a duplex. expressed his concern that large Mr. Cox said he wanted to keep the homes in the area would convert to neighborhood looking nice and duplexes or 4-plexes. He said if didn't object to the rezoning as the City Council rezoned the area, long as it didn't affect his then it would remain as single- duplex. family homes and would not be open for speculation. He supported the Mr. Ingersoll, on behalf of zoning change. the Ingersoll family property interests, said there was no other F.C. Stangle, construction parcel of vacant property in the company owner and real estate designated area of any appreciable developer, opposed the change. He size that was zoned "R-4" . He said the current zoning in the referred to the Cannon Farm Subdi- area had existed for 20 to 30 vision, between 1000 West and the years and the people living there Jordan River near 1700 South, and had been comfortable with it. He said it had been an unsuccessful said he thought there was a attempt to develop a single-family presumption that people wanted the subdivision. He said any new "R-1" zone and he said some people single-family homes in the peti- may not be aware of the repercus- tion area would be built next to sions of the zoning change. older homes and an industrial district. He referred to the He said the bulk of the land Hartland Apartments on the north was already developed and only side of 1700 South near Redwood about 5% was not developed, the Road and said this project was majority of which was owned by the completed and was 91% occupied. Ingersolls. He said he thought they had a right to their invest- He referred to the Planning ment. He suggested that the Commission hearing and said the Council research further what reason given for rezoning this damage would occur for the proper- area was to control gangs and ty owners because of the rezoning. prostitution. He said he thought He pointed out that the zoning these situations could be better change would create more than 30 controlled in a multiple-unit nonconforming uses. He said he development with a manager. thought along with the right to rezone property went the obliga- 90-38 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990 He suggested that the city Councilmember Kirk asked should not limit housing potential Councilmember Horrocks how the when it was suffering from a neighborhood felt about the zoning decrease in population, which change. Councilmember Horrocks affected the tax base and receipt said the neighborhood held a of federal funding. He said the public meeting and there were 3 proposed rezoning reduced the or 4 opposed, 2 were undecided and property owners' options to devel- the majority supported the change. oping single-family residences and (P 89-235) the sales potential was next to nothing. He said his property #2. RE: A public hearing at was purchased for its zoning and 6:40 p.m. to receive comments and this change would hurt his proper- consider adopting an ordinance ty value. making technical amendments to zoning ordinances to correct Councilmember Godfrey said he inaccuracies and omissions, and to would vote against adopting the improve the readability of the ordinance because he thought there zoning ordinances prior to re- was confusion as to what the printing. zoning would and would not do. He also said he was not comfortable ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey without a buffer or transition moved and Councilmember Whitehead zone between the "R-1" and "M-1" seconded to close the public zones. hearing, which motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Whitehead said the area had been stable for a Councilmember Godfrey moved long time but he thought as the and Councilmember Kirk seconded to area got older, the bigger homes adopt Ordinance 7 of 1990, which would convert to duplexes or 4- motion carried, all members voted plexes if it wasn't rezoned. He aye. said the downzoning would send a signal that this area would remain DISCUSSION: Bill Wright, single-family dwellings. He said deputy planning director, outlined the area was already developed and the eight changes: the rezoning would not change its character. He expressed concern 1. Updating the filing fee that if the current zoning re- for the Board of Adjustment. mained, people would speculate about developing multiple-family 2. Repealing a temporary units. moratorium on fraternity and sorority houses at the University Councilmember Pace asked of Utah. Councilmember Godfrey to clarify his reason for voting against the 3. Correcting an omission of rezoning. Councilmember Godfrey the area requirements for residen- said he was not suggesting that tial development in the Residen- the area remain zoned "R-4" but he tial "R-6" zoning district. said he thought an "R-2" zone would be more accurate for this 4. Clarifying the issue of area. He said he didn't think lots facing on public streets. there would be a large number of people converting homes into 5. Clarifying that driveways duplexes. must be hard surfaced. 90-39 PROCE•INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY•, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990 6. Clarifying parking re- quirements for residential devel- opments. 7. Clarifying parking re- quirements for apartments in the commercial and industrial zoning districts. 8. Setting the fee schedule for sign permits by the Uniform Building Code. Councilmember Pace asked what the date was of the most recently published complete zoning ordi- nance. Mr. Wright said the ordi- nance was updated quarterly and it took about one quarter to revise it. The most up-to-date version was still the June 1989 issue since they had not yet received the October 1989 version. No one from the audience addressed this issue. (0 90-3) The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. COUNCI CHAIR C T` R • D R 90-40 LAW OFFICES BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS a INGERSOLL 20.�. FLOOR I 1 30 SOUTH 17rH STREET (INCLUDING THE PUBLIC FINANCE PRACTICE OF THE FORMER FIRM OF PHILADELPHIA,PA 19103 FOX,EDWARDS,GARDINER &BROWN) ONE WESTLAKES AMERICAN PLAZA II SUITE 400 1235 WESTLAKES DRIVE BERWYN, PA 19312 57 WEST 200 SOUTH SUITE 2300 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84101 / 1225 17rm STREET 1fV1 �J DENVER.CO 80202 801 359-1800 ,� ��' SUITE STREET, EAST 7ELECOPIER:801 521-5364 55S ITT3TK STREET, T W. WASHINGTON,D.C.20004 RICHARD S. FOX L1� f\ •) r , r)kkY ?0\.. \I V February 5 , 1990 Ms. Cindy Gust-Jensen City and County Building 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Re: Salt Lake City, Utah Lighting District No. 1 Dear Cindy: Enclosed are seven copies of the legal descriptions of the captioned Special Improvement District for insertion following page 23 in the copies of the Notice of Intention scheduled for action February 6, 1990 . If you have any questions, please let us know. S. . cerely, Rich d Fox /kj Enclosures t'wi ? Sz as j g t� ) t lf r 1990 , 1 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS EXTENSION NO. 10-13H: AREA: Lots 20 to 24 inclusive and the west 17 .2 feet of Lot 25 , Block 1 ; Lots 1 to 29 inclusive, Block 2 ; Lots 1 and 4 to 27 inclusive, Block 3 ; Lots 1 to 29 inclusive, Block 4. Beginning at the southeast corner of Lot 29, Block 4, thence west 168.89 feet. Beginning at the southeast corner of Lot 1, Block 5, thence east 108. 1 feet. Lots 1 to 24 inclusive, Block 5 . EXTENSION NO. 10-16H: • AREA: Lots 1 to 22 inclusive, Block 1 ; Lots 1 to 5 inclusive and Lots 9 and 10, Block 2 ; Lots 1 to 10 inclusive and Lots 18 and 19 , Block 3 ; Lots 1 to 13 inclusive, Block 4; Lot 1 and Lots 4 to 31 inclusive, Block 5 ; Upper Yale Park, a Subdivision of part of Block 2a, Five Acre Plat "C" , Big Field Survey; Lots 1 to 39 inclusive, Block 13 ; Lots 18 to 24 inclusive, Block 14; Lots 27 to 32 inclusive, Block 19 ; and all of Block 22 , Douglas Park, a Subdivision of part of Blocks 28 and 29, Five Acre Plat "C" , Big Field Survey, and part of Section 9 , T. 1 S. , R. 1 E. , Salt Lake Base and Meridian, and parts of Blocks 28 and 29, Five Acre Plat "C" , Big Field Survey. EXTENSION NO. 10-17H: AREA: Lots 1 to 58 inclusive, Block 6, Upper Yale Addition; Lots 1 to 30 inclusive, Block 7, Upper Yale Second Addition; Lots 1 to 58 inclusive, Block 8, Yalecrest Park; all within Block 28 Five Acre Plat "C" , Big Field Survey. EXTENSION NO. 10-27F: AREA: The west 72 . 5 feet of Lot 6, all of Lots 7 to 36 inclusive, and beginning at the northeast corner of Lot 36 ; thence east 165 feet, Block 1 ; all of Lots 1 to 12 1 inclusive, Block 2 ; all of Lots 1 to 19 inclusive, beginning at the southwest corner of Lot 1; thence south 165 feet, beginning at the southwest corner of Lot 19 ; thence south 371 feet, Block 3 ; Lots 1 to 13 inclusive, beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 6; thence north 82 . 5 feet, Block 4; Lots 1 to 18 inclusive, Block 5; Lots 1 to 42 inclusive, Block 6; Lots 1 to 8 inclusive, beginning at the southeast corner of Lot 8; thence south 125 feet, the vacated 15 foot alley, and the west 125 feet of Lot 14, Block 7 ; Lots 1 to 12 inclusive, Block 8; Lots 1 to 37 inclusive, and the 20 feet vacated walkway, Block 9 ; Lots 1 to 17 inclusive, beginning at the northeast corner of Lot 12, thence east 72 feet, Block 11 ; Lots 1 to 13 inclusive, Block 12 ; Lots 1 to 14 inclusive, Block 13 ; Lots 1 to 36 inclusive, 17eginning at the southeast corner of Lot 36; thence south 370 feet, Block 14; all. being located in Rose Park Plat "C" , Sections 26 and 35, T. 1 N. , R. 1 W. , Salt Lake Base and Meridian. EXTENSION NO. 10-29F: AREA: Lots 1 to 9 inclusive, Block 1 ; Lot 1, the east 66 feet of Lot 2 , the west 62 .2 feet of Lot 5, and all of Lots 6 to 27 inclusive, Block 2 ; Lots 1 to 34 inclusive, Block 3 ; Lots 1 to 43 inclusive, Block 4; Lots 1 to 46 inclusive, Block 5 ; Lots 1 to 24 inclusive, Block 6; and Lots 1 to 8 inclusive, Block 7, Rose Park Plat "B" , a subdivision of Blocks 12 , 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 of Oakley, a subdivision of part of Section 26, 27, 34, and 35, T. 1 N. , R. 1 W. , Salt Lake Base and Meridian, and a subdivision known as part of Blocks 12 and 13 , Oakley; Lots 20 to 24 inclusive, Lots 37 to 39 inclusive, and Lots 45 and 46, Block 12 ; Lots 39 and 40, Block 13 , a subdivision known as part of Blocks 12 and 13, Oakley; Lots 7 to 10 inclusive, Block 14; Lots 36 and 37, Block 16; Lots 30 to 35 inclusive, Block 17; Lots 1 to 4 inclusive and vacated 16.25 foot alley, and Lots 51 and 54 inclusive, Block 18; and Lots 1 to 4 inclusive and Lots 51 to 54 inclusive, and vacated 16.25 foot alley, Block 19, Oakley, a Subdivision of part of Sections 26, 27, 34, and 35, T. 1 N. , R. 1 W. , Salt Lake Base and Meridian; Lots 1 to 12 inclusive, Block 1, and vacated 16.5 feet of alley, Waverly, a subdivision of part of Sections 34 and 5 , T. 1 N. , R. 1 W. , Salt Lake Base and Meridian; Lots 1 to 11 inclusive, Block 1, Riverside, a subdivision of part of Sections 26, 27, 34, and 35 T. 1 N. , R. 1 W. , Salt Lake Base and Meridian; Lots 1 to 13 inclusive, Block 26, Oakley Subdivision of Blocks 26, 27 and 28; Lots 1 and 15 to 26 inclusive, Block 1 and 2 vacated 66 foot street at 700 North, and Lots 1 and 15 to 26 inclusive, Block 4; Lots 1 and 15 to 26 inclusive, Block 5, Cone and Roberts Addition, a subdivision of part of Sections 26 and 27, T. 1 N. , R. 1 W. , Salt Lake Base and Meridian, and part of the southwest one-quarter of Section 26, T. 1 N. , R. 1 W. , Salt Lake Base and Meridian. EXTENSION NO. 10-30F: AREA: Lots 1 to 24 inclusive, Upper Yale 3rd Addition, a Subdivision of Lot 17, Block 28, Five Acre Plat "C" , Big Field Survey; Lots 1 to 10 inclusive, Block 1 and Lots 1 to 10 inclusive, Block 2, Yale Heights, a Subdivision of part of Lots 4, 5 and 6, Block 27, Five Acre Plat "C" , Big Field Survey; Lots 1 and 18 to 20 inclusive, Block 2 ; Lots 2 to 4 inclusive, Block 5; Lot 1, Block 6; Fairway, a Subdivision of part of Lots 5, 6, 7, 15, 16, 17, and 18, Block 27, Five Acre Plat "C" , Big Field Survey. EXTENSION NO. 10-43E: AREA: Lots 1 to 12 inclusive and 1/2 vacated alley, Block 24, Oakley Subdivision; Lots 1 to 24 inclusive, and vacated alley, Block 23 , Oakley Subdivision; Lots 1 to 24 inclusive, and vacated alley, Block 22 , Oakley Subdivision; Lots 1 to 24 inclusive, and vacated alley, Block 21, Oakley Subdivision; Lots 1 to 24 inclusive, and vacated alley, Block 20, and the vacated west 22 feet of Oakley Street, Block 19, Oakley Subdivision; Lots 28 to 54 inclusive and 1/2 vacated alley of Block 18, and the vacated east 22 feet of Oakley Street, Oakley Subdivision; Lots 1 to 14 inclusive, and vacated alley of Block 28, Oakley Subdivision; Lots 1 to 26 inclusive, and vacated alley of Block 27, Oakley Subdivision; Lots 14 to 26 inclusive and 1/2 vacated alley of Block 26, Oakley Subdivision; Lots 1 and 13 to 22 inclusive, and' 1/2 vacated alley, Block 3 , Byers and Tolles Addition; Lots 1 to 22 inclusive, vacated alley, and north 1/2 vacated 800 North Street, Block 2 , Byers and Tolles Addition; Lots 1 to 22 inclusive, vacated alley, and north 1/2 vacated 800 North Street, Block 1, Byers and Tolles Addition; Lots 1 to 24 inclusive, vacated alley and vacated 800 North Street, Block 2, Kabis and Myers Subdivision; Lots 1 to 24 inclusive, vacated alley and vacated 800 North Street, Block 1 , Kabis and Myers Subdivision; Lots 14 to 24 inclusive and 1/2 vacated alley and vacated Clinton Avenue, Block 1, Waverly 3 Subdivision; Lots 1 to 11, and 14 to 24 inclusive, vacated alley and vacated Clinton Avenue, Block 2 , Waverly Subdivision; Lots 1 to 11 inclusive, vacated Clinton Avenue of Block 3 , Waverly Subdivision; Lots 12 to 22 inclusive and 1/2 vacated alley of Block 1, Riverside Subdivision; Lots 1 to 22 inclusive and vacated alley, Block 2 , Riverside Subdivision. Beginning at the southeast corner of Lot 1, Block 28, Oakley Subdivision; running thence south 297 feet, Sections 34 and 27, T. 1 N. , R. 1 W. , Salt Lake Base and Meridian; Lots 1 to 14 inclusive and vacated alley and vacated 700 North Street, Block 1, Cone and Roberts Addition; Lots 1 to 26 inclusive, vacated alley and vacated 700 North Street, Block 2, Cone and Roberts Addition; Lots 1 to 26 inclusive, vacated alley of Block 3 , Cone and Roberts Addition; Lots 2 to 15 inclusive, vacated alley of Block 4, Cone and Roberts Addition; Lots 1 to 14 inclusive, and vacated alley of Block 5 , Cone and Roberts Addition; Lots 1 to 26 inclusive and vacated alley of Block 6, Cone and Roberts Addition; Lots 9 to 42 inclusive and vacated alley of Block 31, Oakley Park Subdivision; Lots 9 to 38 inclusive and vacated alley of Block 32, Oakley Park Subdivision; Lots 1 to 17 inclusive and 1/2 vacated alley of Block 34, Oakley Park Subdivision; Lots 1 to 34 inclusive, vacated alley of Block 35, Oakley Park Subdivision; Lots 1 to 34 inclusive, vacated alley and vacated portion of 700 North Street, Block 36, Oakley Park Subdivision; Lots 1 to 17 inclusive and 1/2 vacated alley of Block 38, Oakley Park Subdivision; Lots 1 to 34 inclusive, vacated alley and 1/2 vacated 800 North Street, Block 39 , Oakley Park Subdivision; Lots 1 to 34 inclusive, vacated alley and 1/2 vacated 800 North Street, Block 40, Oakley Park Subdivision. EXTENSION NO. 10-44E: AREA: Lots 1 to 17 inclusive, Rose Park Subdivision, Plat "G-1" ; Lots 1 to 31 inclusive, Rose Subdivision, Plat "Y" ; Lots 1 to 33 inclusive, Rose Park Subdivision, Plat "Z" ; Lots 1 to 19 inclusive, Rose Park Subdivision, Plat "X" ; Lots 1 to 32 inclusive, Rose Park Subdivision, Plat "W" ; Lots 1 to 29 inclusive, Rose Park Subdivision, Plat "V" ; Lots 1 to 46 inclusive, Rose Park Subdivision Plat "F" ; Lots 1 to 46 inclusive, Rose Park Subdivision, Plat "E" ; Lots 1 to 43 inclusive, Rose Park Subdivision Plat "G" ; Lots 1 to 23 inclusive, Rose Park Subdivision Plat "B-1" ; Lots 1 to 24 inclusive Rose Park Subdivision, Plat "C-1" ; Lots 1 to 27 inclusive Rose Park Subdivision, Plat "A-1" ; Lots 1 to 26 inclusive, Rose Park Subdivision, Plat "D-1" ; Lots 1 to 25 inclusive, Rose 4 698.0 feet; thence north 89°59'34" west 270.0 feet to the southeast corner of Lot 8, said Subdivision; thence north 0°08'33" west 698 . 0 feet to a point of beginning, said property being part of the southwest 1/4 of the northwest 1/4 Section 26, T. 1 N. , R. 1 W, Salt Lake Base and Meridian. EXTENSION NO. 10-49D: AREA: Lots 1 and 2 , Block 69; Lots 1 to 4 inclusive, Block 70; Lots 5 and 6, Block 57 ; and Lots 5 to 8 inclusive, Block 58. All are in Plat "A" , Salt Lake City Survey. EXTENSION NO . 10-50D: AREA: Lots 5 and 6, Block 59 ; Lots 1 and 6 to 8 inclusive, Block 67 ; Lots 2 to 5 inclusive, Block 69 ; Lots 4 and 5, Block 76; Lots 1 and 8, Block 78; Lots 1 to 8 inclusive, Block 78 ; Lots 1 to 4 inclusive, Block 86; all in Plat "A" , Salt Lake City Survey. EXTENSION NO. 10-62A: AREA: Lots 3 , 4, 8, and the east 153 . 1 feet of Lot 7, Block 59 ; Salt Lake City Survey Plat A, Part of W 1/2 S .E. 1/4 N.E. 1/4 Section 1, T. 1 S. , R. 1 W. EXTENSION NO. 10-63A: AREA: The west 170 . 156 feet of Lot 7, the east 79 . 44 and 2 . 32 feet of Lot 4 on Pierpont Avenue and along the easement to the west of Lot 7 to a point 129 . 73 feet to the north of Pierpont Avenue, Block 59 ; Salt Lake City Survey, Plat "A" , Part of W. 1/2 S.E. 1/4 N.E. 1/4 Section 1, T. 1 S . , R. 1 W. EXTENSION NO. 10-64A: \ AREA: Lots 6 to 8 inclusive, Block 59 ; Lots 2 and 7, Block 50; Lots 4 and 5, Block 58; Lots 3 to 5 inclusive, Block 51 ; Salt Lake City Survey, Plat "A" , Part of E. 1/2 N. E. 1/4 6 0 airnphomq Luncheon - Li K Oriel-0. 0) c a b Re£& a- s — h a A`, t do i�I\Qe� 'y / �ai 621.4-d 1Ao` ,/aq hati SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA bre* p /f Pe1?n6 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER . d /,� �pp /fro £ ROOM 315 l w CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING -7,'O. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET Tuesday, February 6, 1990 6:00 p.m. A. BRIEFING SESSION: 5:00 - 5:55 p.m. , Room 325 City and County Building, 451 South State. 1 . Report of the Executive Director. 2. The Council will interview Curley Jones prior to consideration of his appointment to the Community Development Advisory Board. 3. The Council will interview Linda Peterson prior to consideration of her appointment to the Golf Advisory Board. B. OPENING CEREMONIES: 1. Invocation. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Approval of the Minutes. JAL) The Mayor and Council will present a certificate of appreciation to the Salt Lake Area Jaycees and to Thomas Peters for their volunteer efforts with the Leaf Bag Program. (4) The Mayor will present the Urban Design awards for 1 89. ç wilt l( k . Couin c it Will lei ac iird r l0• Tontn. C. COMMENTS: Who toil( ac epi 1 — k1gin to uvisla.l 1. Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. 2. Citizen Comments to the Council. D. CONSENT: 1 . Interlocal Cooperation Agreement Re: Prosecutions for University Police Consider adopting a resolution authorizing the execution of an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the University of Utah for the City Prosecutor to prosecute misdemeanor citations issued by the University of Utah's police. (C 90-47) Staff recommendation: Adopt. 45140: 14 out- abast Enem $ ' WA ›Cc ftf oil 7. Resolution Re: Water Distribution Plan Consider adopting a resolution approving the "Water Supply and Distribution -�/ Plan for Salt Lake County 1991-2000". ViftrV (C 90-52) Staff recommendation: Adopt. 8. Board Appointment - Art Design Board Consider approving the appointment of Guy Kroesche to the Salt Lake Art Design Board. (I 90-4) Staff recommendation: Approve. 9. Board Appointment - Housing Appeals and Advisory Board Consider approving the appointment of William Bohling to the Housing Advisory and Appeals Board. (I 90-6) Staff recommendation: Approve. 10. Board Appointment - Recreation Advisory Board Consider approving the appointment of Stephen Beard to the Recreation Advisory Board. (I 90-7) Staff recommendation: Approve. E. NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS: F. UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS: 411) Resolution: Special Improvement District - Curb and Gutter Consider adopting a resolution to create the Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension Special Improvement District #38-758, as described in the Notice of Intention, concerning the district and authorizing the City officials to proceed to make improvements as set forth in the Notice of Intention to create the district. (Q89-9) Staff recommendation: Adopt. 701%,. ( )Ur' d ', 1 Resolution: Special Improvement District for Street Lighting Consider adopting_a resolution declaring the intention of the City Council of Salt Lake City to create Lighting District No. 1 ; to operate, maintain, patrol and power lighting improvements ; to defray a portion of the original capital cost of lighting improvements, and the operation and maintenance 15‘1):-/16 expenses of said improvement district by special assessments to be levied °- against the properties benefited by such lighting and improvements ; to `� provide notice of intention to authorize such lighting and improvements and to fix a time and place for protest against such lighting and improvements .A 1 or the creation of said district (Tuesday, March 13, 6:00 p.m. ) and related (\W` 1�, ,n(� matters. Staff recommendation: Adopt. ��' I, i ilik0114/ 3. Release of Funds Re: SLACC Staffing Consider adopting a motion supporting the release of funds appropriated in Fiscal Year 1989-90 for the Salt Lake(11 Community Councils' staffing. (T 90-2) Staff recommendation: Adopt. 4. Release of Funds Re: Community Development Corporation Consider adopting a motion supporting the release of funds appropriated in Fiscal Year 1989-90 for the creation of a Salt Lake City Community Development Corporation. (T 90-3) Staff recommendation: Adopt. G. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 6:30 1 . Legislative Action - Councilmember Wayne Horrocks Receive public comment and consider adopting an ordinance rezoning the property between the Jordan River and 700 West and 900 South Street to California Avenue from "R-4" and "R-2" to "R-1" and "R-1A" classifications. (P 89-235) Staff recommendation: Close hearing and adopt. 6:40 2. Technical Amendments to Zoning Ordinances Receive public comment and consider adopting an ordinance making technical amendments to zoning ordinances to correct inaccuracies, omissions and improve the readability of the zoning ordinances prior to reprinting. (0 90-3) Staff recommendation: Close hearing and adopt. H. ADJOURNMENT. ** FINAL ACTION MAY BE TAKEN AND/OR ORDINANCES ADOPTED CONCERNING ANY ITEM ON THIS AGENDA DATED: BY: �...::::1? '4114W2W2Ww- / CIT' ,''aiRDER K✓ , STATE OF UTAH ) COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) ss. On the 2nd day of February, 1990 I personally delivered a copy of the foregoing notice to the Mayor and City Council and posted copies of the same in conspicuous view, at the following times and locations within the City and County Building, 451 South State Street , Salt Lake City, Utah: 1. At 5:00 p.m. in the City Recorder's Office, Room 415; and 2. At 5:00 p.m. in the Newsroom, Room 343. Afar ITY ORDER Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2nd da o Februar , 1990. G' , _. ... ( "%_%/....., Nb6 is res' n he S ate of Utah My Commission Expires: O. ,; BARiBAFtAPt c y ,' t L isCl 84102f t' `�'� August 1,1993 1 APPROVAL: f. _ state of Utah .i 4C EX CUT E DIREC OR PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, 1990 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met as the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, January 16, 1990, at 5:00 p.m. in Room 325, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Ronald Whitehead Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Don Hale Nancy Pace Council Chair Hardman presided at the meeting. Cindy Gust-Jenson, Council indicated that the Council would Executive Director, indicated the have to hold the hearing, Item G- dates for the Mayor-Council re- 1, before they could pass the treat and for the Council-Staff resolution. retreat. She asked the Council to submit any requests for agenda She said that Item G-2 re- items to her and further request- quired a motion as indicated in ed agenda items for the Thursday the staff recommendation. Mayor-Council meeting. Councilmember Horrocks Regarding the evening' s briefed the Council on the fatal agenda, she indicated that Items automobile-pedestrian accident D-2 and D-3 were related to the that occurred this morning in his large water issue with Sandy City. district. He said it occurred on She said LeRoy Hooton, director of California Avenue by Mountain View public utilities, was present for Elementary school and the victim any questions they might have. was a 16-year-old girl struck by a car while crossing the street to She said Items F-1 and F-2 catch her bus. regarding SLACC staffing and Community Development Corporation He advised the Council that funding were on Thursday' s Commit- this area had been cause for tee of the Whole agenda for dis- concern by the residents and a cussion. She asked Councilmembers study had previously been prompted to pull the paperwork from their to determine the need for addi- packets regarding these issues and tional signs, etc. He said the save it for that meeting. study by the transportation de- partment had indicated that addi- Regarding F-3, JTM Foothill tional signs were not warranted, Village Project, she said this however, this incident had caused item was a simple refunding and him to have further concern. He was on the agenda for only a said the Mayor supported addi- technical change in the type of tional evaluation of this area in bonds to be issued. order to mitigate these types of accidents. He said factors such Regarding F-4, resolution for as the I-215 off-ramp and changes airport bonds, she said that in UTA bus routes were not present Airport Authority Director Louis at the time of the previous study. Miller and financial and bond counsel would make a presentation Councilmember Horrocks fur- regarding these bonds. She also ther indicated that he had been 90-17 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, 1990 contacted by the school principal and other citizens who would be present at tonight' s meeting to voice their concerns. Airport Authority Director Louis Miller and financial advisor Cheryl Cook briefed the Council on the Airport Revenue Bonds appear- ing on the agenda. Mr. Miller showed renderings of the proposed layout. He indicated the comple- tion date was set for November 1991. Mr. Miller said the bonds would be used to expand Terminal #2 and the baggage claim area, expand the aircraft control tower to allow for separate control of aircraft movement on the ground, expand the fuel system and mainte- nance hangars, construct a cargo building and enlarge the cargo ramp. He indicated road modifica- tions would be required in con- junction with these additions, the new golf course area, and the sky bridges. Cheryl Cook explained that repayment on these bonds would be through the airport revenues. She said this was a unique bond ar- rangement since it involved not only the airport authority but the carriers as well. She indicated the parameters for the bonds were an actual of $20 million over a 30-year period of time. Dick Fox, bond counsel, confirmed the order in which the Council should take action. He said the public hearing should be held prior to the Council approv- ing the resolution to authorize the issuance of the bonds. He said the final resolution would probably appear on an agenda in February. The briefing session was ad- journed. 90-18 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, 1990 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in Regular Session on Tuesday, January 16, 1990, at 6:00 p.m. in Room 315, City Council Chambers, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Ronald Whitehead Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Don Hale Nancy Pace Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Roger Cutler, City Attorney, Kathryn Marshall, City Recorder, and Lynda Domino, Chief Deputy City Recorder, were present. Council Chair Hardman presided at and conducted the meeting. OPENING CEREMONIES had successfully screened and placed over 50 senior companion #1. The invocation was given pets and several local veterinari- by Reverend France Davis, Calvary ans had provided free medical Baptist Church. services. #2. The Council led the The Mayor said that Mr. Pledge of Allegiance. Robertson routinely checked news- paper want ads to identify lost #3. Councilmember Godfrey pets and he had reunited several moved and Councilmember Kirk owners with their pets. Mr. seconded to approve the minutes of Robertson had also delivered pet the Salt Lake City Council for the food donated by local merchants to regular meeting held Tuesday, nearly 200 low-income pet owners. January 9, 1990, which motion The Mayor said he appreciated Mr. carried, all members voted aye. Robertson' s service time, sense of (M 90-1 ) humor, dedication and creativity. #4. The Mayor and Council Council Chair Hardman read presented a certificate of appre- the certificate and presented it ciation to Bill Robertson of the to Mr. Robertson. Green Thumb Program. #5. Mayor Palmer DePaulis The Mayor said that Mr. presented his 1990 State of the Robertson had served 20 hours each City address. He said at the week for the past year as a volun- beginning of the 1980s the future teer intern with the Salt Lake looked bright - oil was getting City Animal Control Division. He $33.00 per barrel and the building said Mr. Robertson spearheaded a industry was booming. The most new project called the senior pet visible symbol of good times was companion program which placed the construction of the Triad stray animals with senior citizens Center. By April of 1986 oil and handicapped individuals. prices declined to $11.00 a barrel Physical and psychological boosts and construction activity slowed were the proven results of this and then stopped. Salt Lake City adoption program. Mr. Robertson was left with a 22.8% vacancy rate 90-19 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, 1990 in office space. Both Kennecott 3 ) Streamline government and and Geneva closed in 1985 and 1986 make it more efficient, which was which left more than 6, 000 people accomplished by consolidating city jobless. departments, developing a more effective, long-term budget plan- Mayor DePaulis said as he ning effort, and establishing the entered his second year of office one-stop counter. in 1986, the Reagan Administra- tion' s "New Federalism" plan had 4) Revitalize neighborhoods, curtailed assistance to local which resulted in neighborhood governments and federal revenue self-help grants, training pro- sharing was eliminated. This cost grams for neighborhood council Salt Lake City more than $4. 5 members, and a citizen' s guide to million dollars annually. He said city hall. for three years, from 1986 through 1989, the annual budget message 5) Leadership was an issue was sobering, services and person- which resulted in bringing togeth- nel positions were cut, and city er leaders from all sectors of the employees went without cost of community to discuss and help living raises. The city experi- resolve problems. enced heavy flooding in 1983 and 1984 and in 1988 the L.A. Times 6) Revitalization of the described the city in a negative downtown area led to the five-day light. R/UDAT program where nationally known city planners and architects He said although this was not immersed themselves in the prob- a time of robust activity, it was lems and potential of the downtown a time for careful planning. On area. The result was a 62-page December 5, 1986, the Mayor said study which the city continued to he launched the community-based use in addressing downtown chal- strategic planning program called lenges. "Salt Lake City Tomorrow. " In January they met with citizens The Mayor said it was time to from all sectors of the community look again at the future. He said and at the end of the nine-month this year he was calling for the period, they had a clearly defined renewal of the "Salt Lake City six-point plan. The critical Tomorrow" program in order to look issues delineated from that pro- at past and current issues, and to cess and some of the results were address new issues and ways for the following: resolving them. The new, diffi- cult, and complex issues included 1 ) Solidify county-wide protecting the environment and economic development efforts, quality of the air, increasing which resulted in the formation car pooling, making the bus system of the Utah Economic Development more convenient, promoting bicy- Corporation. cling, and looking at staggering work hours. He said ultimately 2 ) Promote "human develop- they must implement a light rail ment" , which promoted volunteerism system. He reaffirmed his commit- and helped those in need as signi- ment to recycling programs and to fied by the completion of the educating the public as to how to homeless shelter. waste less and preserve more. 90-20 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, 1990 The Mayor said other issues the future required clear thinking included protecting the community and a well laid out plan of ac- from escalating gang- and drug- tion. He said renewing the "Salt related crime, and reexamining Lake City Tomorrow" program would public safety needs . He said they provide the necessary road map. needed drug prevention courses in (G 90-4) schools and work places, and effective drug rehabilitation pro- COMMENTS grams. He said housing was anoth- er important issue and the city #1. Patricia Standing, 1635 needed safe, habitable housing South 1300 West, PTA president of for neighborhoods and needed to Mountain View school ( 1250 West solve the ongoing landlord-tenant California Avenue) , said an East controversy. He said the Salt High student was killed by a car Lake City Housing policy would today in their neighborhood. She provide guidelines in this area. said the parents in her neighbor- hood had been concerned since the The Mayor said Salt Lake City I-215 California Avenue exit was needed an identity which he main- opened because there had been dra- tained was achieved through arts, matic changes in the traffic education and athletics. He said patterns through the neighborhood. the city would continue to support the arts community and its pro- She referred to a letter grams. In regards to education he which she had sent to the city said Salt Lake City could continue transportation engineer outlining to act as a liaison between the the neighborhood' s concerns. She school system and the private summarized their main concerns sector and could continue to work which were the following: Heavy toward drug-free schools. He said traffic moving east on California the police department had begun Avenue from I-215 prior to 8:00 the "D.A.R.E. " program to talk a.m. ; traffic approaching the with students about the dangers of school from the west with no drug use and the city was also signals or warning devices indi- among the organizers of the in- cating the school zone; an eleva- school scouting program. He said tion in the street approximately he wanted to foster greater lines one block west of the school which of communication between the obscures the view of the school University of Utah and the city. and causes traffic to travel down hill at an increased speed. In the area of athletics, the Mayor said that as the United She said students continued States' representative in the to cross California Avenue west of international winter olympic the school at Stewart and Montgom- bidding process, Salt Lake City ery Streets rather than with the had been given the opportunity to traffic guard at Navajo, since represent this community and the they would have to walk two blocks state as well as act as a role out of their way. She said the model for the nation and the neighborhood had requested a world. He said Salt Lake City was traffic survey, which was complet- stepping out into the world in the ed, but now because of this morn- decade of the 90s as well as ing' s accident they were request- inviting the world in. ing that this issue be studied again. In regards to the acci- In conclusion the mayor said dent, she said she understood that 90-21 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, 1990 the student was in the cross walk tion, which was completed, and had when she was hit. requested that the safety zone be extended the full width of school She said the neighborhood was property so children could cross full of children and California safely at both the east and west Avenue was a busy street. She ends of the school. She said they said they would appreciate any also requested a stop light at one further help on this matter and critical place. At the conclu- requested action as soon as possi- sion of the study she said they ble. were told that their situation did not warrant a stop light but #2. Max Packineau, 130 South they would have an extension of 800 East, said his children at- the safety zone by July 14, 1989. tended Glendale Intermediate and She said as of today no action Parkview Elementary schools. He had been taken and the city shops said that prior to the California had not received an order for Avenue exit opening, the city signs. traffic engineer had informed the neighborhood that they would see She said the school was a increased traffic volume and gathering place for children, speed. Mr. Packineau said this whether or not it was open, and was when the neighborhood took the there were children on the play- initiative through the school ground on Saturdays and during the community councils to take action. summer. She said the flashing lights only operated certain He said they contacted times during the school day. She Councilmember Horrocks who helped said the accident this morning them get in touch with the traffic occurred during a period when the engineer and traffic enforcement. flashing lights were not opera- And eventhough traffic enforcement tive. had been issuing tickets, people were still speeding through this She said that officially from area. He said the neighborhood the traffic engineer' s point of had originally wanted a traffic view, their situation did not meet light in order to prevent someone all eleven warrants for a light from getting killed by a car, but she said they did meet at which occurred today. He asked least one and maybe more. She the Council to give this situation appealed to the City Council and deep consideration. asked for their support in re- questing a signal light. She said #3. Nancy Larson, principal she didn' t think the traffic of Mountainview Elementary school, engineer' s recommendations would said that several months ago the be adequate. school community councils initiat- ed a major effort to increase the She also asked for the Coun- safety measures on California cil ' s help in expediting the Avenue. She said the school recommendations made by the traf- community councils had been coop- fic engineer, one of which was erative in following the correct increased lighting on the street. channels for pursuing their con- She said she thought adequate cerns. lighting might have prevented the accident this morning and said she She said they requested a was certain that a stop light full study of this traffic situa- would have prevented it. She also 90-22 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, 1990 asked that the neighborhood coun- cross walk. She said the lighting oils be better informed about in the area was extremely poor and projects such as California Ave- asked the Council to take immedi- nue. She said she thought there ate action. needed to be community input on these types of decisions and she #9. Glenda Gaudig, 1510 said provisions should have been Navajo, said that last August she in place before the traffic in- talked to Tim Harpst, traffic creased. engineer, about the opening of the off ramp. She said she expressed #4. Delores Talanoa, 1140 her concerns and said he recom- South Montgomery, referred to the mended that the West Salt Lake on-ramp in this area going south Community Council write a letter on I-15 which was presently to him, which they did. She said closed. She asked if anyone had they received no response and said anticipated how the traffic flow the principal of Glendale Interme- would be affected once this ramp diate School wrote a letter and was reopened. also received no response. #5. Brenda Hoskins, chair of She said in the years she had the Mountainview School Community attended the community council Council, implored the Mayor to meetings no one had explained that assist the neighborhood and said California Avenue would become a Councilmember Horrocks had good major thoroughfare. She asked the ideas regarding this issue. Council to do whatever was neces- sary so that no one else in the #6. Craig Standing, 1635 community would get killed on this South 1300 West, said that several street. weeks ago a young boy was killed on 700 West and 1300 South, which Councilmember Horrocks said was essentially California Avenue. this afternoon he talked with the Mayor and Joe Anderson, the direc- #7. Cindy Mueller, 852 West tor of public works. He said the 700 South, said she had children Mayor assured him that he would who attended school at Glendale give his fullest cooperation in and Mountainview schools. She getting a light and completing a said she didn' t think one traffic study of this situation. He said light could be so expensive that the police department had been children had to lose their lives. supportive in trying to get the big trucks off the street and slow #8. Gloria Udy, 1318 Mont- down traffic. He reiterated that gomery, said there was an incline numerous tickets had been written on California Avenue and people but to no avail. He also said entering the street could not see Emery Street was another concern traffic approaching from the west. that they wanted to address. She said the transportation de- partment had told the neighborhood He said the City Council and that there was nothing they could Mayor were giving their full do about this situation. She was support and would find the way to also concerned that children had solve this problem. He said they to walk two blocks past the school would do everything within their in order to cross at the cross power to make sure there wouldn't walk and said the teenagers in the be future accidents. neighborhoods did not use the 90-23 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, 1990 Mayor DePaulis thanked every- of 1990 authorizing the execution one who attended the meeting and of an interlocal cooperation said he was organizing a team agreement between the Salt Lake immediately to look at a compre- County Water Conservancy District hensive plan to deal with all the and the Metropolitan Water Dis- safety issues on this street. trict of Salt Lake City for the He said this would have high sale of surplus water and exchange priority and they would move of capacities. quickly. He said they would (C 90-9 ) coordinate this effort step by step with the neighborhoods and #3. RE: Adopting Resolution 7 community councils. He assured of 1990 authorizing the execution the citizens that the city did not of an interlocal cooperation want another accident to happen agreement between Salt Lake City and they wanted to make this Corporation and Sandy City Corpo- street as safe as possible. ration regarding Little Cottonwood and Richards Ditch Wells and the Councilmember Whitehead said sale of surplus water. this same situation existed on 700 (C 90-8) North off I-215. He said between Redwood Road and I-215 there was NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS an elementary school and he asked that the city also study this #1. RE: The appointment of area. Dennis M. Sargent to the position of Salt Lake City Fire Chief. Councilmember Kirk said the Foothill area needed to be studied ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey and suggested that the Mayor moved and Councilmember Kirk involve UDOT in his efforts. seconded to approve the appoint- ment, which motion carried, all Mayor DePaulis said he wanted members voted aye. to prevent problems and asked the (I 90-10) Councilmembers to give him a list of particular locations they UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS wanted the city to study. #1. RE: The release of CONSENT AGENDA $50, 000 allocated for Salt Lake Association of Community Council's Councilmember Whitehead staffing (SLACC) . moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to approve the consent ACTION: Without objection agenda, which motion carried, all Councilmember Hardman referred members voted aye. this to the Committee of the Whole. #1. RE: Adopting Ordinance 4 (T 90-2) of 1990 amending Chapter 12. 56, Salt Lake City Code, by amending #2. RE: The release of 15th Sections 12. 56. 120 and 12.56.130 Year Community Development Block and by enacting a new Section Grant funds to the Community 12. 56. 135 relating to handicapped Development Corporation. parking. (0 90-4 ) ACTION: Without objection Councilmember Hardman referred #2. RE: Adopting Resolution 6 90-24 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, 1990 this to the Committee of the Petition No. 400-756 by Ricks and Whole. Brown Architects. (T 90-3) ACTION: Councilmember Kirk #3. RE: A resolution autho- moved and Councilmember Horrocks rizing the issuance of Salt Lake seconded to adopt Ordinance 5 of City, Utah, Industrial Development 1990, which motion carried, all Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series members voted aye. 1990 (JTM Foothill Village (P 89-379 ) Project) in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $7, 410, 000; PUBLIC HEARING authorizing the execution and delivery of a financing agreement, #1. RE: A public hearing at an indenture, a tax agreement, a 6:00 p.m. to receive comment bond purchase agreement, an offi- concerning the adoption of a cial statement and such bonds and resolution authorizing the issu- closing documents in connection ance and confirming the sale of therewith. not more than $35, 000, 000 aggre- gate principal amount of Airport ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey Revenue Bonds, Series 1990, of moved and Councilmember Hale Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, seconded to adopt Resolution 5 of Utah, fixing the maximum aggregate 1990, which motion carried, all principal amount of the bonds, the members voted aye. maximum number of years over which (Q 84-18) the bonds may mature, the maximum interest rate which the bonds may #4. RE: A resolution autho- bear and the maximum discount from rizing the issuance and confirming par at which the bonds may be the sale of not more than $35, - sold; authorizing publication of a 000,000 aggregate principal notice of bonds to be issued; and amount of Airport Revenue Bonds, related matters. Series 1990, of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, fixing the ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey maximum aggregate principal amount moved and Councilmember Kirk of the bonds, the maximum number seconded to close the public of years over which the bonds may hearing, which motion carried, all mature, the maximum interest rate members voted aye. which the bonds may bear and the maximum discount from par at which DISCUSSION: Louis Miller, the bonds may be sold; authorizing director of airports, said the publication of a notice of bonds cost of the total construction to be issued; and related matters. program would be about $25, 900, - 000. He said $6.2 million would ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey come from federal grants, $705,000 moved and Councilmember Kirk from airport revenues, and $19, - seconded to adopt Resolution 4 of 000,000 from the bond proceeds. 1990, which motion carried, all members voted aye. He said the construction (Q 89-8) projects consisted of the follow- ing: Expanding Terminal Unit II, #5. RE: An ordinance clos- expanding a fuel farm for the ing a portion and vacating a airlines hydrant jet fuel system, portion of an alley adjacent to constructing moving sidewalks in 2185 South 900 East pursuant to the pedestrian bridges connecting 90-25 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, 1990 the parking structure and the engineering department, said the terminal building, constructing a written protest period ended at maintenance hangar for Sky West 5 : 00 p.m. today. He said they Airlines, constructing a cargo received one written protest on building for Emery Air Freight, the project which amounted to expanding the cargo aircraft ramp approximately 1% of the assessable parking area, remodeling and frontage. expanding the ground transporta- tion area, making various improve- Councilmember Horrocks asked ments to the taxiway on the air how many property owners were in field, installing landscaping and favor of this project. erosion control for the cross bar and terminal entry road system, Mr. Naser said there was constructing a terminal road approximately 7, 500 lineal feet of realignment system, and installing assessable footage and 80 feet baggage tunnels from the new protested. So the majority of the parking structure into the termi- property owners were in favor of nal buildings. the project. B.T. Price, Salt Lake City No one from the audience resident, said he thought the addressed this issue. airport had already expanded too (Q 89-9 ) much. (Q 89-8) The meeting adjourned at 7:25 #2. RE: A public hearing at p.m. 6: 20 p.m. to receive public com- ment concerning the city' s inten- tion to construct improvements for 400 to 500 South connector includ- Council Chair ing curb and gutters, sidewalks, asphalt pavement, driveways and miscellaneous work; to create Special Improvement District #38- City Recorder 758 to defray the cost and expens- es of a portion of said improve- ment district by special assess- ments levied against the property benefited by such improvements. ACTION: Councilmember White- head moved and Councilmember Horrocks seconded to closed the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to refer this to the City Engineer for tabulation and recommendation, which motion carried, all members voted aye. DISCUSSION: John Naser, 90-26 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JANUARY 23, 1990 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in Regular Session on Tuesday, January 23, 1990, at 9:05 p.m. at Glendale Intermediate School, 1430 West Andrew Avenue ( 1504 South) . The following Council Members were present: Wayne Horrocks Alan Hardman Don Hale Nancy Pace Roselyn Kirk Councilmembers Whitehead and Godfrey were absent. Mayor Palmer DePaulis was present. Roger Cutler, City Attorney, Kathryn Marshall, City Recorder, and Lynda Domino, Chief Deputy City Recorder, were absent. Council Chair Hardman presided at and conducted the meeting. NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS #1. RE: An ordinance adopt- ing the Block 42B Master Plan as part of the East Central Neighbor- hood Plan. ACTION: Councilmember Hor- rocks moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to set a date to hold a public hearing on February 20, 1990, at 6:20 p.m. , which motion carried, all members present voted aye. (T 90-4) The meeting adjourned at 9: 10 p.m. Council Chair City Recorder 90-27 12!--- 74 Community Development Advisory Committee ORDINANCE CITATION: 2.41.010 MEMBERSHIP: 15 members TERM: 3 years, staggered terms. QUALIFICATIONS: One member from each council district; representatives of low and moderate income, ethnic minorities, handicapped, elderly and female-headed households. ADVICE AND CONSENT: yes OATH OF OFFICE: yes PURPOSE: This committee provides citizens an opportunity to participate in the city's planning of its community development program. The committee recommends to the Mayor the projects that should be completed with Community Development Block Grant Funds. NAME COUNCIL INITIAL TERM DISTRICT APPOINTMENT EXPIRATION DATE 1. Kim Anderson 1 10/87(7/88) 2nd Term 768 No. Redwood Rd. #18 10/88 7/00/91 Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 Phone: (H) 539-1972 (W) 546-6637 2. Rosemarie Rendon 1 10/87(7/89) 2nd Term 356 North 600 West 9/89 7/00/92 Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 Phone: (H) 355-3955 3. Bernice Cook 2 10/87 1st Term 1746 South West Temple 7/00/90 Salt Lake City, Utah 84115 Phone: (H) 485-9304 4. Hermoine Jex 3 10/87(7/88) 2nd Term 272 Wall Street 10/88 7/00/91 - • Salt Lake City, Utah 84103 • Phone: (H) 364-5326 5. Ranae Pierce 3 10/87(7/89) 2nd Term 191 Canyon Road 9/89 7/00/92 Salt Lake City, Utah 84103 Phone: (H) 364-4075 (W) 363-5733 6. Peter Netka RESIGNED 3 10/87 1st Tern 471 M Street 7/00/90 Salt Lake City, Utah 84103 Phone: (H) 359-0179 7. Russell Allred 4 10/87(7/88) 2nd Term 1169 South 300 East 10/88 7/00/91 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Phone: (H) 467-6851 r " a3 �:�=� 41 Community Development advisory Committee a Page Two C. 8. Rosemary Grim 5 10/87(7/88) 2nd Term 773 East 1300 South 10/88 7/00/91 Salt Lake City, Utah 84105 Phone: (H) 484-7590 (W) 487-7771 9. Barbara Bennent VACANCY 5 10/87 1st Term 1164 Herbert Ave. 7/00/89 Salt Lake City, Utah 84105 Phone: (H) 583-4227 (W) 321-3300 10. Paul Osborn 6 2248 Wilson Avenue Salt Lake City, Utah 84108 Phone: (H) 581-1215 (W) 261-4077 11 . Diana Smoot 7 10/87(7/88) 2nd Term 2592 Elizabeth Street #5 10/88 7/00/91 Salt Lake City, Utah 84106 - Phone: (H) 486-0634 I 12. Rawlins Young 7 10/87(7/89) 2nd Term 2135 South 19th East 9/89 7/00/92 Salt Lake City, Utah 84106 Phone: (H) 467-5164 0 13. Marion Willey 2 12/88(7/89) 1st Term 237 Montrose Avenue 9/89 7/00/92 Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 • Phone: (W)535-1000 X7337 (H)359-8462 14. Nancy Saxton 4 4/88 1st Term 164 South 900 East 7/00/90 Salt Lake City, Utah 84102 • 15. Glenda D'Nell Armour 1 10/03/89 1st Term - 937 North Colorado Street 07/00/92 P.O. Box 16842 Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 Phone: (H) 363-7804 (W) 355-3037 '_fir ` ,. I . ,,.--A--,-.--. .-. _..r ... _ .. FT. ;-.-.:c, .:z ..... ... 1 r.-. ..i. . r r... ,T, .�;:-. ' -..t ,1;1 .•. .... - i . _ ...' , _ _.. . Community Development Advisory Committee Page Three Meeting Schedule: Meeting Schedule Set by Committee (Usually twice a month for 3 hours on Tuesday or Thursday) Human Resources Training Room Room 442, City and County Building Staff Support: Stephanie Loker 535-7902 09/11/89rbc h73 GOLF ADVISORY BOARD ORDINANCE CITATION: 2.38.010 MEMBERSHIP: 7 voting members; 5 ex-officio non-voting members: The Mayor, City Council, Parks Superintendent, City Engineer and the City Attorney. TERM: 4 years QUALIFICATIONS: 21 years old, a resident of the State of Utah and not engaged in any commercial golf venture. ADVICE AND CONSENT: yes OATH OF OFFICE: yes PURPOSE: The Board serves the golfing public in a variety of ways. It provides input from the public concerning day-to-day operations and maintenance. It reviews all capital improvements and the budget. All fee structures are also presented to the Board for its recommendation prior to recommending them to the Mayor and City Council for adoption. Through the Board, the public golfer has access to the management of City golf courses. NAME COUNCIL INITIAL TERM DISTRICT APPOINTMEITT EXPIRATION DATE 1. Mayor Palmer DePaulis Ex-Officio 500 City Hall 324 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Phone: 535-7704 2. Councilmember Willie Stoler Ex-Officio 300 City Hall 324 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Phone: 535-7600 3. John Gust Ex-0fficio 1965 West 500 South Salt Lake City, Utah Phone: 972-7805 4. Roger Cutler Ex-0fficio Citt Attorney 324 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Phone: 535-7788 5. Max Peterson Ex-0fficio City Engineer Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Phone: 535-6231 6. Virginia Ferguson 2 11/80( 1/82) 3rd Term 1671 West 300 South 8/82(1/86) 1/90 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 7/86 Phone: 363-8287 STEPHANIE PETERSON UN Li)kit GIATIMI Die ' ,<1J i11 PALMER DEPAULIS DIRECTOR MAYOR COMMUNITY AFFAIRS 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 335 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7915 MEMORANDUM TO: Emilie Charles, Executive Assistant to the Mayo �, FROM: Stephanie Peterson, Community Affairs Directo DATE: 12/21/89 RE: Mayor/City Council Recognition of Volunteer Projects There are two special volunteer projects which merit recognition by the Mayor and City Council. If possible, I would like to schedule the recognitions for early in January. However, I realize there are many transitions ahead with the new year and the Council's changing structure. Special projects and volunteers to be acknowledged include: 1. Salt Lake City Leaf Bag Program (Public Works/Fire Department) Outstanding Organization - Salt Lake Area JAYCEES The JAYCEES coordinated the volunteer scheduling for all second shifts. Outstanding Volunteer. - Thomas Peters, Judge Memorial student Tom coordinated volunteers for Fire Station #4 (Avenues) and developed a leaf bag distribution project which assisted elderly and homebound (see attached article) . Final figures on the Leaf Bag Program's volunteer services will also be presented. 2. Senior Pet Companion Program "Santa Dog" (Animal Control) Outstanding Intern - Bill Robertson, Green Thumb Program Bill is the program administrator for this program which places animals with elderly and handicapped individuals (see attached article) . Please let me know if you feel comfortable proceeding with these recognitions. Thank you for your consideration. 4fes c ! iJr 3 Y n•+t Y`f �pt.,:it .� 3'Y s" Z. n $' :1 .i x i .s.`"s y n Fla `^y., .,' /i` �- { rJ .41 R . �, 1 6k. 2r L ' " .s.' yr` 3.4 - x. - "`: ? 'Y :�.s . en, 1p:-5°� 3gt3�f � yyy�..�� S •k:`r, " •H 1� •:3�" w �y� �+F 4 .5.� 4 mti h` a x l�la f r .. • ir':. = Fa- • - `d.,Y S e a �`b r19fi ,• � ::♦ ".. z 1�3�� .�• A v -••. � •• • ..,..404),.. i ,� �� z�k A S . . • • ♦ 'db,hKn'a -.k ♦ .'• .k •, +F.' '. .� :a•. +ke q +' 8�'♦'ia:-.�- YY1. .r �`- 2.t;fc1. +'. Y ... w Y.. S" .rye 3 8 L j7 j j �. y 4•+ye/ , Y .:., a y yy�, " '.' yL ^yt'�,e. ti '�` . • " 4�?S % -,-1„ ksnw 41�yY . � y.gam. " � .+ '� � f�.F' , '� +� :�• , - r .t w 1t ,.. a a& . �_ 3 �t;-. , ` # ks�kQ f 'f PHOTOGRAPHY/TOM S Tom Peters of Judge Memorial High School gets leaf bags from fireman Darrell Henderson to be distributed free. S.L. residents can collect fall . _ leaves ire free bags By Karen Boren Swedin Judge Memorial sophomore Tom handing out bags or taking them to other ways,since they're not un Deseret News staff writer Peters knew that last year many rest. senior citi�en grog so many drain „ Leaf dents of his neighborhood didn't re- The Y��prog am began after a placed in garbage containers K There are ceive leaf bags• So he called volun- near-tragedy that occurred five taken on each collection day.If 500,000 of them in leer coordinator Tamara Wharton to y ago when Mayor Palmer De- dents have too many to fit in the •,,..• bright, day-glow see if he could help at the new fire pawy �the public works de- �o� said they would t S..;,;r'. orange waiting to station No. 4 at 800 East and 11th partment A child playing in a pile of send o al and n ' be distributed to Avenue- leaves was struck by a car-DePaulis Pick up on Saturdays. Salt Lake fire sta- Peters preparing a pamphlet to decided that not only were the leaves Salt Lake City volunteer coon • HELPING YOU bons and senior' be distributed to residents in the clogging drains before the firstsnow- for Tamara Wharton loves to sr citizen centers. area telling��about the program fall theq were a hazard to rhildren's orange bags sitting on curbs The plastic bags in a festive pumpkin Elderly citizens who are house- safety, fall."Sometimes you see them` color will be available from Oct 14 bound can call Peters,who will ar- Dustin • lamp post through Oct.28 to contain fall leaves Bills,supervisor in the De-. a like a jack o before they collect in drainage range to take bags to their homes partment of Public Works, Street k marker"And people to systems. "I just wanted to help out,"said Maintenance and Safety Division, take a black and make a Salt Lake City has sponsored the Peters as he organized friends to told the Deseret News that while the on them:, -' program for five years and,with the help hand out the bags on the first number of loads collected by Barba Gary Casaril the new�resid Salt Lake Jaycees helping with dis shift of the 1.7 p.m weekday and g��double during the leaf pickup, the Salt Lake Jaycees, is organ tribution, will again make the leaf 8:30 a m. to 4:30 pm Saturday time, the program saves about' Jaycee volunteers to take a bags available to Salt Lake Cityreal- schedule. So between football prac- • shift at fire stations and s he dents free of charge. lice and AP classes, Peters will be "Drainage crews can be utilized in zen to hand out the "The Jaycees are community o. ed,"said •Casaril."In addition tc U. Mothers' Club plans a membership tea Wednesday in S. pow a Head Start program. L for Santa;and Ronald JIcD House,we wanted to help distr The.University of Utah Mothers' Club will hold its sen,Mrs A F bags-As th errell Coombs Mrs.Gladys DaIebout and the bags the city" membership tea on Wednesday,Oct 11,at 1 pm at the Mrs Eldon T. McEntire.The refreshments will be fur- Last y:': 105 volunteers w� home of Mrs.Jack H.Ayre,2239 Berkeley St.,Salt Lake ed by board members,lad music will be provided by . to, . City:; Francelle Larsen:. . • . ' re the leafthe 500,000 Greetingests will be Mrs. Rose Thuet and Mrs- - prepares g • Founded in 1931,the U.Mothers'Club promotes the'p full of ll• tiautuy a glory, c Meda Allen.In the receiving line will be Mrs.Carol Egan, welfare-of the school and its students and is in close Leers will again play a major rt Mrs.Bill Polteno,Mrs.Karen Hyde,Mrs.Grace C.Ward, contact with the university faculty. Mrs-Adrian Christensen and Mrs.Marilyn Child. Poar- ing at the tea table will be six past presidents Mrs.Fred Women in the area are invited to join the club under . . - A.Peterson,Mrs-Orvil B.Smith,Mrs Rhonda N.Han- the direction of this Year's president,Mrs.Egan ; • ,:: t: ��cgaii.e. ife style �, - n� �, <;:.,._.., . anta o I ro grain " .: . - K .,,- ,. � r. i.„,,,,y...„,„. ,..,:.. .•„:„............t.„....:...,,.. .......0.... Li � perfect .ach�_ �� ,,t j ' '° t .,. F41:.: .= .; Y 414 • R NancyHobbs r' ;t 1 >•f-�'16.,• YThe Santa Dug/Senior Citizens 'Tribune Lifest}le Writer Companion Amnia'program collects j •` ; •t Bill Rol.eris on is a blend of bounty supplies names and backgrounds • -,-' ii,inter and adoption counselor, Mr. Robertson iitalilies those with t , .corking to match sonic of Lis nt,utgi- the best :+v.;il:tl,le dog, cat, bird or c t,li ,•.,t client:.with those who appreciate fish. i ,, -'+F{ Ian:ii•Ludtllestiote good looks. - -s N� duhawrth L, .vts is one of the pro- ,., lIis rev;ayd i::n't high slakes; as a grain's ihttltt:,I eustmuers. Handi- .y • Z`,+ �r.�i .•;vc,nnua,t l;t cyn 'I'huuth wori.er, , i ", "5` _ capped and , „rliatl) blind because a• i , 4. :'N I,..iraing nevi skills since his expel-- of mult.,,l, sclerosis, Ms. Lewis .? 4. "* , j is t.:.: y, a consultant for oil engineer- called:Inn•t nit animal shelter sever- Y c in: exploration became obsolete, '".a' f x-:` ; ' log a!mouth ,t,u. She explained to Mr. r 1 ages are the minimum. Instead, he Robertson that she wanted a dog to M ^w tttrises on making others happy. help alert her to things she may not '`,,,t , y. �r''�'I 's-� 'rile means is finding suitable pets see or hear.She also wanted the com f.,`�1 " - `'� .4. w.f., for:enrurs and handicapped individ- panionslip that a loyal friend could '-, `"'}*, Y . 'v- ,` f;, E k t:its \vita ,vant love and companion- provide. ip;�r • 1 •'‘ `i:.}"�'~"`r '�'`• ,,< ship. lie also studies the daily classy .,�r t Two month.; late°r, •Mr. Robertson p i``,. c '+; •,. s , . ;led:ifs to match owners of lost pets matched Ms Lewis with Arthur,a 6 , _� ` a -''= t, - 4' tN '�"-i•-• ','r- i-i v.itti animals at Sall Lake City's Ani- - ,� k, ;.� `., `� iG, , 6;., r year-old Maltese given up by his pre „ r - fry s y-,jj it :.l Control shelter,where he puts in viotts owner,. After a month togeth u r?1 ,? k #+ t 1 u weekly work hours. rf r r ..a-, .a "•� r ' , el-, both are doing well, Ms. Lewis a >„ ww: rt flits time of year,emphasis is put said. `-. r' ,411,,..,. ' F' +Ve,-,, , a. the Santa Dog Program, the 2- Having worked as a pediatric t` ` t' ' ' ,,-al-old brainchild of Lou Lynes,di- Lewis was aware of re , :•-1 ' 1, - 4 .� ,'�`., }. +k Ia nurse, 61s. :rI r of Salt L.ikc's Animal Control ,; f w s. , • 'ovision, and Frank Crowe,humane ports toutingthe benefits of pet they r f 1 ,� �� Er , ruucalinn and public relations offi- apy for children and senior citizens 3 t< ,„„ ,,. { t '(. ,,-.,",' '- Now she is living proof. Her blood • ' t - , r ;;,,-, t xr• .. ' '1'tn! program is year-round, but Pressure is down,she's off one meth ; ` >,, , ,,;; r - ' > ; ,,. cation she was taking prior to Ar Y, 'x for the other 11 months is called the trk�f t thur's arrival, and she feels much t. y�'� w nett ' < <-, t, *- ::aninr Citizens Companion Animal safer with the dug in her home,Ms r s ''*+">�� 1 a _ ,r4,, , r- • 1 rogram. :, - Thi concept is that pets, pet food Lewis said z r ny1 ` ai veterinary care will be provided During that same time,Arthur has - ,e --" �,, a �, learned several tricks:shaking paws, s za seniors or special-needs people, g P l lwi4v thug al or below poverty level, so bowing and dancing when she sings t i ae� ran reap the benefits of animal The dot;s previous owners also are unilianioushiti despite economic relieved to know their former pet is �. •;".;:::::;, , lions tl;oils. enjoying toying,attentive care. ,, t,„;a r t > ,,\vita ;; -., •( Toe piogrunt takes advantage of Although '�t. - - • food is available to se- •�..+•- .�_.-� .__x':-- ,:everal etc:ments, acting as a clear- nior citizens on limited incomes, —Tribune Sinn?noto by PP nomltt.t ial'house bringing factions together- whether or not they adopt their pet Johannah Lewis, handicapped and partially blind, is happy Thousands of dollars worth of pet through the Santa Dog Program,Ms. ,with new pet, Arthur, adopted through Santa Dog Program. f,nid anti supplies are donated annu- Lewis said she will assume that re- ally to Salt Lake City's Animal Con- sponsibility; she doesn't want to . trot Division, either because of abuse the program by taking the •.Mr.Crowe cited studies that claim pation is not limited to Sall Lake City faulty packaging or approaching ex- food front someone less able to af- a senior citizen who's able to keep a residents. The only criteria are ft- piration dates for retail sales (net- ford it. Ilcr concern prior to the pet lives longer and happier. Obvi- nancial need and ability to keep and tiler affects the product quality). adoption,however,was the potential ously,the pet benefits. care for the pet_ ' Local veterinarians have also ex- cost of veterinary care. She was as- But besides caring for the animal, Mr. Robertson, who lives under pressed interest in donating services, sured by Mr. Robertson that those Mr, Crowe said, the senior citizens • the same conditions as many of those I hut don't have an organized means of services would be donated, when also can take pride knowing they're he serves, using a pay telephone to determining what segment of the necessary. make calls after office hours and rid- community is most in need. "Veterinary costs may be only$20 contributing to society by adopting ing the bus to deliver dog food, has At the same time, there are hun- a year.But$20 can buy you soap and abandoned animals. his own Christmas wish: deeds of lost or unwanted animals toilet paper, when you're down to "An animal that is put to sleep is a "It would be nice if Santa Claus eallected by state shelters. that,"Ms. Lewis said. cost to the city financially and envo- tionall This way, the animal still wouldt that'song rsa gevastNothingfallIe- Firtaliy, there is the senior-citizen A major reason that pet therapy Y- But our biggesipmblem—de- .-aitinmintty,,many living on fixed in- works is that it gives those often de- has value to the community without livering food and services to the .notes that don't allow for luxuries, pendent fur so much,the opportuni- cost." • people." including an extra mouth— of any ty to have something that depends on Because there is no cost to taxpay- :tint—to feed. them. ers to operate the program, partici- SALT R 5 CI C'O{U NrC=SL February 2, 1990 MEMORANDUM TO: Cindy Gust-Jenson FROM: Nancy Boskof4 RE: Urban Design Awards Presentation, February 6, 1990 As you requested, here is an outline of the presentation of the 1989 Urban Design Awards at the February 6 Council meeting. There are six awards to be presented: Salt Lake City Council '\ Historic Landmarks Committee, Planning & Zoning Commission Regional/Urban Design Assistance Team (R/UDAT) Church of Jesus Christ. of Latter-day Saints Utah State Division of Facilities, Construction & Management "Howard and Martha" The Mayor will present each award to a representative of each group with a few brief remarks. Each representative will have the opportunity to respond briefly as well. Howard and Martha are "on vacation" so the Mayor will read a letter he has received from them. The presentation should not last longer than 10 minutes. The Urban Design Coalition has been sponsoring these annual Urban Design Awards since 1985; they are- co-sponsored by the Deseret News with support from the City Arts Council. ART BARN FINCH LANE GALLERY 54 FINCH LANE SALT LAKE CITY UTAH ( 8 4 1 0 2 801 . 596 . 5000 Vcr\ ROGER F. CUTLER yy,,��'11�'��1-- T AY ASSISTANT ATTORNEYS CITY ATTORNEY SALT_i Q CAI �Yr�Pt;eY 1 RAY L. MR.ONTGOM S ERY STEVEN W. ALLRED LARRY V. SPENDLOVE DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY LAW DEPARTMENT BRUCE R. BAIRD CHERYL D. LUKE CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING FRANK M. NAKAMURA CITY PROSECUTOR 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, SUITE 505 ASSISTANT PROSECUTORS CECELIA M. ESPENOZA SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 RICHARD G. HAMP TELEPHONE (801) 535-7788 GLEN A. COOK FAX (801) 535-7640 January 17, 1990 iLkk Councilmembers Salt Lake City Council City & County Building, Room 304 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Prosecution Service for the University of Utah Dear Councilmembers: The University of Utah has requested and, subject to your approval, the City Attorney has authorized the City Prosecutor and her staff of attorneys to prosecute U of U misdemeanor citations issued on the campus by U of U police. I prepared the attached Interlocal Agreement which has been signed by the University. The University requested that the Agreement be effective from January 1, 1990. While the Agreement is for one year, if either party decides it does not want to continue the contract after the first sixty ( 60) days, it may terminate upon thirty (30 ) days prior written notice. This office recommends that the City enter into the Agreement and that the Mayor be authorized to sign it on behalf of the City. Councilmembers Salt Lake City Council January 17, 1990 Page -2- If approved, please send an executed copy of the Agreement to Assistant Attorney General William T. Evans, 236 State Capitol Boulevard, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114. ry t my o rs, RAY . M0NTG0ME Ass tant City ttorne RLM:rc cc: Roger Cutler Cheryl Luke RESOLUTION NO. OF 1989 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH WHEREAS, Title 11, Chapter 13, U.C.A. , 1953, as amended, allows public entities to enter into cooperative agreements to provide joint undertakings and services; and WHEREAS, the attached agreement has been prepared to accomplish said purposes; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1 . It does hereby approve the attached agreement generally described as follows: For the City Prosecutor to prosecute misdemeanor citations issued by the University of Utah' s police for a total of $49.00 for each hour spent by a City Prosecutor on a University of Utah case. 2. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, is hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation and to act in accordance with its terms. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1990. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: 1 CITY RECORDER • RLM:rc INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN UNIVERSITY OF UTAH AND SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION FOR PROSECUTION OF MISDEMEANORS OCCURRING ON THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH CAMPUS THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the day of January 1990, by and between SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, a municipal corporation of the State of Utah (hereinafter "City" ) and the UNIVERSITY OF UTAH, a division of the State of Utah (hereinafter "University" ) . WHEREAS, University is desirous of having City prosecute misdemeanors for which citations are issued by University' s police department on the campus; and WHEREAS, City, through its City Prosecutor' s office is willing to provide such service . NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the parties agree as follows : 1 . The City shall designate Assistant City Attorneys assigned to the City Prosecutor' s office to be Special Assistant Attorneys General for the limited purpose of prosecuting University' s misdemeanor citations issued by University' s police department pursuant to the same policies and procedures utilized by City in the prosecution of similar City misdemeanors . 2 . For this service University agrees to pay City at the rate of $35 per hour for each such designated Assistant City Attorney, together with the sum of $14 . 00 secretarial, copying and other related services, a total of $49 . 00 per hour, assessed on an hourly basis for each such Assistant City Attorney' s time devoted to the prosecution of said University misdemeanors . 3 . The City Prosecutor' s office shall keep reasonable records as to the time expended in performing such services , and for which University will be billed on a monthly basis . Payment for said services shall be made by the University within 30 days of the issuance of said billing . 4 . The term of this Agreement shall extend for a period of one year from the date hereof, however, after the first sixty days either party may terminate this Agreement upon 30 days prior written notice to the other party. It is contemplated by the parties that the initial term of this Agreement is a trial period which may lead to a more extended agreement. 5 . Neither this Agreement nor any of the benefits or obligations hereunder may be assigned by either party without the prior written consent of the other party. 6 . This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties , and it cannot be altered except through a written instrument which is signed by both parties . IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have signed this -2- Agreement to be effective as of the day and year first above written. SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION By MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER STATE OF UTAH UNIVERSITY OF UTAH fictie -G ATTEST: • -3- A DZ CRAIG E. PETERSON "r�s�� ' 14 I WITAIR�l�t�c If IN DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7777 To: Salt Lake City Council January 19, 1990 Re: Northwest Community Master Plan Update Recommendation: That the City Council hold a public hearing on March 13, 1990 at 6:40 p.m. to discuss adopting the Northwest Community Master Plan. Availability of Funds: Not applicable. Discussion and Background: The Master Plan Update expands and updates the 1980 Northwest Community Master Plan but does not replace it. Both documents will serve as a guide to further development of this area. r The updated plan adds four elements not included the 1980 plan - assisted housing, energy conservation, capital improvements and commercial redevelopment. The plan also outlines the land use conflicts created by the evolution of development and rezoning refinements in the Community by recommending solutions to eliminate or alleviate any adverse impacts. The Planning Commission has reviewed and recommend approval of the Plan. The Plan had also been reviewed by the Northwest, North Redwood and Rose Park Community Councils. Legislative Action: The City Attorney's Office has prepared the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. S mitted by: IP ';1 ICHAEL B. Z Acting Direct Community and Economic Development lf/ I SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1990 (Adopting Northwest Community Master Plan Update) AN ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO SECTION 10-9-21, UTAH CODE ANNOTATED, 1953 ADOPTING THE NORTHWEST COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN UPDATE. WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, has held public hearings before its own body and before the Planning Commission and received input from the Northwest, North Redwood and Rose Park Community Councils and others and believes it appropriate to update the 1980 Northwest Community Master Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That the Northwest Community Master Plan Update recommended for adoption by the Salt Lake City Planning Commission on June 22, 1989 is hereby adopted pursuant to Section 10-9-21, Utah Code Annotated, 1953 as amended. The City Recorder is hereby directed to retain a certified copy of the Avenues Community Master Plan Update which is hereby incorporated by reference. SECTION 2 . This Ordinance shall take effect upon its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1990 . CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s Action: Approved Vetoed MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER BRB:cc -2- SAL�i � ! 60 V �l( v® ® D�� 1�1. � PALMER DEPAULIS ALLEN C. JOHNSON, AICPA\ ,� �: �A �, PLANNING DIRECTOR MAYOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET ROOM 406, CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7757 November 29, 1989 Mike Zuhl Acting Director of Community and Economic Development Room 218, City and County Bldg. Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Re: Northwest Master Plan Update Dear Mike: Attached please find copies of the Northwest Master Plan Update and Executive Summary. The Northwest, North Redwood and Rose Park Community Councils have been very involved in the preparation of this document and support this draft. The Planning Commission has extensively reviewed this document and at their regular meeting on June 22, 1989 voted to recommend approval to the City Council. Since that time the planning staff has made final revisions and prepared graphics. The Update is now ready for review and public hearing by the City Council. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council schedule a formal public hearing on the Northwest Community Master Plan Update to receive public comment and adopt the plan guiding future development opportunities for the community. If you have any questions concerning the Northwest Master Plan Update, please contact either myself or Janice Jardine. Sincere , Allen . Jo on, AICP Planni Di for attachments Northwest Community Plan Update EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PURPOSE OF PLAN The Northwest Community Master Plan Update expands and updates the 1980 Northwest Community Master Plan; it does not replace it . Both documents will represent the city' s comprehensive program to guide future development of the Northwest Community. GOAL OF EXISTING PLAN Most existing land use patterns are not expected to change. Established policies and programs are designed to eliminate land use conflicts in developed areas and direct new growth in areas of anticipated development . The goal of the Northwest Plan is to improve the living and working environment in the community. LAND USE CONFLICTS Certain land use "conflicts" resulting from the evolution of development and zoning refinements exist in the community. This section of the plan addresses these land use conflicts and recommends solutions to eliminate or alleviate any adverse impacts . STATE FAIRGROUNDS AND OFFICE COMPLEX The city with the amendment of the Northwest Master Plan has committed to the development of the State Administration Campus Plan concept . Development of the office complex is the recommended alternative to alleviate existing undesirable conditions of vacant and underutilized properties. To ensure appropriate development of this area the following policies and recommended actions should be used as a development guideline. o Encourage the campus style office development. o Office development should maintain a public aspect. o Support commercial services should be concentrated along the frontage of North Temple Street. o Office development should follow the site design criteria recommendations stated in the Administration Campus Master Plan Study for the State of Utah, 1985 . The following mechanisms are recommended to implement the above development policies . o Rezone underutilized and vacant areas in the interior parcels to a "R-7" zoning classification only when and if the State presents plans for development and petitions for rezoning . o Existing residential areas that are fully developed must remain in a residential zoning classification. Rezoning should only occur when and if the State is ready to relocate these uses and develop this portion of the office campus plan. Rezoning petitions must be accompanied with a relocation plan. o Fairgrounds expansion areas should not require rezoning for development . o The "C-l" commercial strip as it exists along North Temple Street should remain. o Criteria for approval of conditional uses in this area should include the following guidelines . - Maintain campus element with large amounts of landscaped open space . The percent of landscaped areas established by the development plan should apply to all office development in this area . - Building height limit should follow the three story height as established by the existing Agricultural and Health Building . - Private development must be responsive to the State Administration Campus Development Plan. - Off-street parking should be centralized with major access from secondary streets . Parking areas should be screened from buildings and streets with berms and landscaping. Large parking lots should be divided with intermittent landscaped areas . Parking structures should be limited to a maximum of two levels above ground. RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS LAND USE CONFLICT The update identifies two areas of residential and business land use conflicts . These areas are located on the west side of 12th West and on 5th North west of 12th West between Oakley and Colorado. In area A residential properties zoned Commercial "B-3" should be rezoned to a low density residential zone. In area B properties zoned "B-3" that contain residential uses should be rezoned to an appropriate residential classification. CONFLICTS IN AREA NORTH OF ROSE PARK GOLF COURSE The updated Northwest Plan supports industrial, recreational/open space and limited residential as appropriate land uses . Factors contributing to this decision are the proximity of the sewage treatment plant, oil refineries , I-15 and environmental concerns , such as , flooding and soils suitability for development . More study is needed to guide future development in this area . Creation of a detailed land use and circulation plan is recommended to update the existing land use policy plan. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS PUD DESIGN GUIDELINES The 1980 Northwest Community Master Plan recommended R-2A zoning to provide design flexibility in the development of planned unit developments. To accomplish this performance standards should be applied to PUDs . It is recommended that certain design guidelines as policy of this master plan be used in the approval process of PUDs in the R-2A zone. The development of more intensified "landscaped buffers" and better site design with regard to surrounding single-family uses is necessary. The minimum twelve foot "sideyard setback" is inappropriate for the low density character of the community unless the use of heavily landscaped buffers are applied. Within the community areas zoned R-2A a "height restriction" for multi-family structures should be limited to two stories when adjacent to single family uses, unless the building is situated in the interior of the development. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT SITES Five sites for potential neighborhood commercial revitalization or redevelopment are listed. Area Activity 500 N.- 1300 W. No expansion, improve buffers, and long range convert to low density residential use. Rezoning and redevelopment should be supported . 600 N.- 1200 W. Provide buffers and landscaping along rear property lines , plant street trees in the parking strip, screen garbage receptacles , and support renovation and redevelopment. 1000 N. - 1400 W. Extend landscaping in setback areas to include signs and utility poles , remove illegal signage and support facade and design theme renovation. 1000 N. - 900 W. Allow expansion to accommodate revitalization, provide appropriate landscaping, improve parking and in-out traffic movement. Clean up scattered signs , improve signage, extend landscaped area in setbacks to include signage and utility poles , and general clean up of properties . 700 N.- Redwood Provide adequate landscaped buffers along rear property line, provide additional landscaping in the required setbacks , support facade renovation and a signage program. Improve parking lot and support intensification of uses on this site. NORTH TEMPLE - COMMERCIAL STRIP The dual function of North Temple as a gateway and commercial strip creates conflicts in the urban design elements of this corridor . These two distinct functions need to be united into a single urban design characteristic that serves both the city and the adjacent communities . The Northwest Community Master Plan Update stipulates certain objectives designed to guide the development of the this area . The update recommends a specific plan be prepared to establish definitive design and development criteria and standards. The plan should identify issues including sign control , building setbacks , building heights, lot coverage, landscape standards , parking and land uses and establish policies , standards and regulations which provide controls or incentives for the systematic implementation of the plan. Because of the unique characteristics of the North Temple strip input from citizens , property owners and businesses is necessary and development of a specific plan will allow an opportunity to involve those most affected . NORTH AIRPORT RESIDENTIAL/AG AREA The property to the northeast of the airport has conflict with the airport and encroaching industrial/ commercial uses . The property owners and residents of this area have expressed a strong desire to maintain the agricultural/residential integrity of this area . Issues concerning this area are agricultural preservation, industrial development, urban limit line, wetlands preservation, airport related noise, transportation circulation improvements, provision of water and sewer services , and the level of the Great Salt Lake. A detailed land use plan is called for in the update. TRANSPORTATION The majority of streets are local streets basically in a grid pattern providing access to individual properties . Collector and minor arterial streets provide for circulation within the community. Traffic travels through the community with minimal impact on the local street circulation system. CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS o Completion of 1-215 1 o West Davis (Great Salt Lake) Highway o Connection of 2100 North to 2300 North between I-215 and Redwood Road Construction of these streets will provide improved circulation and new access to undeveloped areas in the community . The two state roadway improvement projects, relocation of North Temple connection with I-80 and widening of Redwood Road from North Temple to 1000 North, will improve the circulation system and have a positive impact on the community. However , Redwood Road north of 1000 North still requires improvement to service the new housing developments . A decision as to the status of the deadend frontage road along I-15 north of 1000 North should be included in the detailed land use plan called for this area in the update. Expansion of the bikeway system will be necessary to link with the proposed routes of surrounding communities. The City ' s major street plan has designated the anticipated major arterial , minor arterial and collector roadways for future development . The major street plan map does not identify future local streets since they will be established at the time of land subdivision. ENERGY CONSERVATION Strategies for energy conservation involve both conservation within individual buildings through structure and site design and the effect of land use patterns on energy efficiency. New energy saving techniques should be encouraged for use in existing and new structures and site developments . Land use patterns through the use of locating employment opportunities and commercial facilities next to higher density residential areas should be examined . Locating facilities that attract non-work journeys at important transportation nodes and concentrating high density residential uses adjacent to growth centers are policies which would encourage land uses that reduce non-work trips . The following energy saving development policies would benefit residents of the Northwest Community. o Use landscaping to shade buildings, parking lots, streets and other paved areas . o Use windbreaks (trees , hedges , fences and berms) to protect buildings from winter winds . o Provide convenience shopping and service facilities in residential neighborhoods at appropriate locations . o Develop facilities to encourage bicycling and walking. o Provide amenities to encourage use of mass transit. - o Increase densities near activity centers. o Use clustering even at low residential densities . o Encourage infill development. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS The capital improvements element of this update depicts the capital needs necessary to achieve the goals and objectives set for the Northwest Community. Proposed capital improvement projects include parks, storm drainage, public buildings, water and sewer facilities , and streets. Because the Northwest Community is mostly developed, many of these facilities are in place, but need to be upgraded due to age or condition. Capital improvement planning and programming is an ongoing process . Projects and schedules identified in the plan update are subject to modification. NCRTHWEST CCIEMNITY PLAN UPDATE e May 1989 Draft The printing of this plan was made possible by a grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to Salt Lake City under the provisions of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. DRAFT - Page 1 MAYOR Palmer A. DePaulis CITY COUNCIL Florence Bittner Sydney Reed Fonnesbeck Tom Godfrey Allan G. Hardman a L. Wayne Horrocks Roselyn Kirk Willie Stoler NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY COUNCILS Northwest Community Council Rose Park Community Council North Redwood Community Council • CONSULTANT Smith and Clarkson Design, Graphics Illustration Services PLANNING COMMISSION Ralph Becker Dan Bethel Cindy Cromer Thomas A. Ellison LaVone Liddle-Gamonal Richard J. Howa Ralph P. Neilson George Nicolatus John M. Schumann Peter VanAlstyne PARTICIPATING PLANNING STAFF Allen C. Johnson, AICP, Planning Director Everett L. Joyce, AICP, Project Director, Planner II Randolph P. Taylor, Editor, Planner III DRAFT - Page 2 NI:MIDWEST CCMMUNTTY PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT INTRODUCTION Purpose Study Area Existing Plan Goal LAND USE Acreage 1 Conflicts Planned Unit Developments Unincorporated Land Airport Noise Impacts HOUSING Structural Additions Jackson Target Area Assisted Housing TRANSPORTATION Circulation Improvements Official Street Plan PARKS Neighborhood Parks Golf Courses Jordan River Parkway Wetlands Park CC IERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial Services Commercial Strip URBAN DESIGN ENERGY CONSERVATION Structure and Site Design Land Use Patterns City-Wide Energy Conservation CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Proposed Capital Improvement Projects • IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES DRAFT - Page 3 INTRODUCTION Purpose of Plan The Northwest Community Master Plan Update expands and updates the 1980 Northwest Comriiunity Master Plan; it does not replace it. Both documents will represent the city's comprehensive program to guide future development of the Northwest Conununity. The plan update serves as a tool or refined mechanism to assist implementation of the 1980 Community Master Plan. The plan update reviews current policies and identifies necessary changes or actions to further implement the plan. Amendments of the 1980 plan occur basically through the elimination of existing land use conflicts. The update plan adds four elements not in the 1980 plan. The new elements are: assisted housing, energy conservation, capital improvements, and commercial redevelopment. Area of Study The boundary betwccn the Northwest and Capitol Hill communities has changed since the 1980 Master Plan (sec area map) . It was formerly along the Jordan River, but is now Interstate 15. Territory previously in the Capitol Hill Community is now in the Northwest Community. The area includes 1030.6 acres of mostly undeveloped land north of the Rose Park Golf course located in traffic zones 1131 and 1140 of Census Tract 1. Reasons for the boundary change are geographic isolation from Capitol Hill and the fact that development would mainly impact the Northwest Community. Annexation of large areas to the west of Salt Lake City has also affected the boundary of the Northwest Community. Since 1980, the city has annexed 10,000 acres of vacant land west of the airport. Because of the size of this area and its unique environmental conditions it will become an independent planning community. A separate plan for this area is being prepared. Goal of the Existing Plan Most existing land use patterns are not expected to change. Established policies and programs are designed to eliminate land use conflicts in developed areas and direct new growth in areas of anticipated development. The goal of the Northwest Plan is to improve the living and working environment in the conutunity. DRAFT - Page 4 • �. /( , AR EA OF STUDY I / /./ /,/ V UNINCORPORATED LAND 139.01 . r---7 r1- � ,-- -- -- -- c, ��,.2 4 u ,rlF ' ,� � i: I I 3.3�i 3.04 -• c. 139.01 1 F i 5 I r_______ /00 MORTM iYY 7 Jf 8 • ...., .. i' .. 10. 12 Th .,........_ 14 :. . ...: g 8 11 13 1-L _ 2� # 22.21 19 •w,l 7•,,•,• I5� Ij •0 1 24...c,n. 23 20 18 16L. . IL ot ._., d. . 2B` 24 30 a 35 36�/•• 41w s \1 — ' 31 oe•o.,. 34 37 40 i t _ �� 32 ��'"•"•," 33 38 39 43 4 L_______ / -- -- -- ----.'•--....--- , 5—_.`-- --- ..,-..�.__"_'r49 ....•..,0 46 �%1 di � 45 p 44 r S 'r ti1 �_jf1 • 11� 14 47 me WNW 48 SALT LAKE CITY /07 I°= 1980 `"' CENSUS TRACT BOUNDARIES I18 `-� ■•••••• "REVISED" ---c. .cnr. __..— L ` I .. __ LAND USE The updated land use map identifies designated future land use for all areas of the Northwest Community Plan Update. Minor changes have occurred • from the original 1980 land use plan. These adjustments to the map reflect existing development patterns, land uses, and conditions. Other changes in the land use plan are the result of providing the selected solutions to land use conflicts discussed later in this plan. Acreage The Northwest Community update study area consists of two predominant land uses, residential neighborhoods and the Salt Lake City International Airport with its related commercial uses. The airport is 6,014 acres in size and amounts to over 50 percent of the study area. Excluding the airport, the balance of the community land use (5,775 acres) is 25 percent vacant land, 18 percent residential land, and 15 percent commercial/industrial land. The following table depicts land use by category and acreage for the Northwest Community. Table 1 Northwest Community Land Use by Acreage Percent Percent Total Land Use Acreage Total Excluding Airport* Residential 1,015.0 8.6 17.6 Commercial 286.7 2.4 5.0 Industrial 568.7 4.8 10.0 Agricultural 561.5 4.8 9.7 Institutional 392.3 3.3 6.8 Parks/Recreation 289.2 2.5 5.0 Utilities 44.9 0.4 0.8 Strccts 1,188.1 10.1 20.6 Transportation 6,014.0 51.0 n/a Vacant 1,418.3 12.0 24.6 TOTAL 11,788.7 100.0 100.0 *The fourth column provides the percent of land use by category excluding the 6,014 acres in the transportation category related to the International Airport. Land Use Conflicts Certain land use "conflicts" resulting from the evolution of development and zoning refinements exist in the community. This section of the plan • addresses these land use conflicts and recommends solutions to eliminate or alleviate any adverse impacts. DRAFT - Page 5 1. State Fairgrounds and Office Complex. State Fairgrounds expansion and the development of a State administration office complex between the Jordan River and Redwood Road, north of North Temple Street conflict with the land use policies of the 1980 master plan. The 1980 master plan called for residential and commercial land uses in this area. In response to a rezoning petition by the State, the City Council amended the master plan in September 1984 to allow for the development of the first phase of the proposed State off ice complex. The city with the amendment of the Northwest Master Plan has committed to the development of the State administration campus plan concept. Development of the office complex is the recommended alternative to alleviate existing undesirable conditions of vacant and underutilized properties. To ensure appropriate development of this area the following policies and recommended actions should be used as a development guideline. o Encourage the campus style office development. o The majority of office development should maintain a public aspect. o Support commercial services should be concentrated along the frontage of North Temple Street. o Office development should follow the site design criteria recommendations stated in the Administration Campus Master Plan Study for the State of Utah, 1985. The following mechanisms are recommended to implement the above development policies. o Development plans by the State should be reviewed and meet Salt Lake City zoning and building code requirements as per the intergovernmental agreements between Salt Lake City and the State of Utah in 1984. o Rezone underutilized and vacant areas in the interior parcels to a "R-7" zoning classification only when and if the State presents plans for development and petitions for rezoning. o Furthermore, conditions for approval of conditional uses in this area should meet the following development guidelines: - Maintain campus element with large amounts of landscaped open space. The percent of landscaped areas established by the development plan should apply to all office development in this area. - Building height limit should follow the height established by the existing Agricultural and Health Buildings. - Any private development must be responsive in their design plans to requirements outlined in the State Administration Campus Development Plan. DRAFT - Page 6 1 trillIVVIsitpliumgmtniwoillurfl-- . ., . - .'? 11 nl ihtl.tf6t1l1Ac5;i1:1Ia4ff,.. g-I4. \, ____:...gc ,Yi,,:o'',..-.k._,,.;•,,.'.I.i,j* N. L • 11111IIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIHMIIII , \ N 1111111111111114, LI _ . . rg ldAI ( J'': ' 1 . - illifflfll —/i i 1 F h i IF:7' fjJ jil)'‘ I . . ,• 1-,_, ,I ). ,$11111111111111111114, I- %-7:' [jii ' •. -1 !IXMIAtT111 l•' - 1 .. . 7 . !) • ! „'••••, ' , ..1.-.• l -7---1•-•\ —III. k) iv', . ..-,7- • • .___;'cr,-1 --7-r ''' '.!!::;,.--) c->;-? 1_,,, c,_..) ,:z • 6,, CQ(?) (gi _/ • ..,-',.....,' 1---,.,,p-- , ''1." - - 1--, . . • 15 ),,......i.____, „,:.7,K.-7.1 _71::,!•...0-.;-,- '..,..x.i.: -4.1ff,...._____A ..., . • . . 143-[.-----1 I* •• , . -tc1;. . • ' 0 , ..,. . • . , ..'*.4'4\-/': ;:f; ' -4 rr) • W ''' . ' ' .: F-73? -.,:,(4\:.'''.;4",,,K'-Z,\\3'"-`<%5,.\, . ' sA!-. .. 1'-'1 1/1;1.V ,....i.•..>..' k"C.,,,•''. < ',I V • • <Z ‘',1 - L)'''. ''''5'.5:N 1....;.^.)0.4,. : •, :1:1- \ //:// l''. . . , . 0 0.' ' (...,' 25-7 .• f 1'i''1 4'.11}1. ,''6'.''''-'‘ • .-k;,-1 cn• Qo I" ->'') "*// 4'•''':.' . ' %;!•• C.'..Netr N r,‘.,- ),/,.' !•,,,,,.• 9 .•••••.,:• . .',- •4-•.: „ 7, ,,,../ 0.-_,I{q •i•-• fyi Cs.);•-.•-•-•%'•...,,,_?: 'z'•Cc: :-.'s',..:••••, •— LLI ..41 ,..4;.t.: -t••-,?..1‘ ; ,./ ,'..2s• ....s,--,;k--c-i I// 44i- -,t,51,..,':%.•,„:.,;. , ,..c...,,..-:.,./.4.7- .,.,)r/i„,,,)%, . ..,,.. . , 74,' i 1 i-2;'. :;'•' '.,:•:..'..-.: (r.1" i lz:0 1 .72 v ( ,,, ?-.- •,...,... ..•:),.....:;,f,-... .7, ; .., i .. . //c.:4? i2• .k,i;;',.1-16:...., 'b ,L 1-,/r -J` • ,tif::- >,:.', - tr 0 . . • • -r„ ' ..- ',.//. '44 i' ;,t, Ls.,...1.:%1-.1-44 ri 111"„P i w ',Y< `-s4 % • '.... ...• /,,,,,,c„ ci, ..!11 ,,.1 s\,6 i 4 : „ t.1 .!•, IS'. ,;•.',' s'.1.,\,4 ' I'' • ''' g,>—. . / 91•.•'i,‘.' "1 ' LL •• . . . , • ti .. o ^ / • -;o /' l. 'f!.//..t.e'.. /.9 ,,;- !.,.,et;1.15' VI: •Al ii2""'".._2•< ''..; .4.:Y.r.,' -5'i,d• ' -:.) . ' .' f j.,,tqr -,;-.:, • ,'.)g I:1 • >': ,41,i'''•rl'l N Pto ''',." ',4,1 ' Ft 1 . . . 4),) G:•••• .,1!r.../C .q,• 1.,,, • ",),04.:,,,.., ,i, R 1:: is ,,ot • *r3 • .:.',/' `. --- . '-'i, t4k4'N.'.'''',4,.' 7.1f ,:di4J • . .; ‘r4,3 d?v', 4/- ' 'ell ‘:,, -,,,,A, •?1,;,..- . .s.,,, - i - • vj,.., /../ A 2.7,,,ft),<<,.. ...1.,,,••. ,•• ',' ..0 r 1,--:-•:'.13_3 s'i"-call.6:11, 7-7-7.p ,i pp. • "--'n GA /''•:' •'..-fr)D u• , ;.• '.,04 4::,,;., i'''• ' .,--,: -i• Itft.-itirp:rt.:, tt .# -F..1 1-i- . al `.--,,,,,F,.,• ;;6 4.1, . R,., ',.46-,, c <<,••,,41;:_;'/j-,n1 •'''.:•-. :•: El CA. 04‘-f z C' Li ,.$by ,:' ti.-,'„?) *i :. .Z.,'" '-'?'-•.'-''. 9 'c'!••',.$Mi T-C-PilP I- . . • -, ; c•F- ' "7 , ')..'i..; ,...c1,1% 4V*,6(7' ,'' f`C'[.e‘; 71::ivi (t) -1= • • , ,7 ,:, -,.::' ' •••., ,>..,:s ...,, ,i, •fi •• v. r.. , • •,•••i..k -• „IP1 . ••:•"!,•' e'e < • .. • • . 1= i 17‘ /.'g A If" .'1,' . '...A.7'. _kr", th.:;,, .4 I '4,1;6 i ;,..,.: ,I.• • _1= • ,0 p 4-,,A, 1 iiii,, ::-. .1-1,. ,C= ,,,,,7,i, ,, 7.:,.i .:„ .).,;. ,,,6„,.. ,.., gr5:, ..:..,:. .;;;,,,•;-: 7.:,.. 1..1' 2 u) . C ii.'S V.4/s.i .`:'...4 cis.'7' it7. .,t4, 1. .;;z- I I ;Iv, •f:T. v .. 1 ., ,. "..,--v,,, ,,cs „,...i'--N, dr'64' .4S.!. ;3,.. '-', t- 11 -..-,••• -' M . p ,,,,,,, •,,e_',/„•- ,',..,':.?, •-7.,e1; , ;,,, 'Ir.,..4....S • • I Cl. . , • i 1 ..,./7' r '..,:;/is. '1Y -(T'i I 't'<4• '''C' '' "'"/ ir • / '': 6 P'.// ' -,<i'l)rl' <. 12.''.: ‘..Lh -'4 ••• 4 1 '11' 1"/ I 2 • ., • 'g, ,.// (3,.. -...N. ot 0 0 c,:b,2,0 ck c;e.a.thj :',...!V.r.,..... ;;;;;_,___;,_ _ __:. <' . / ,'' -:.;,;:',15.l'',,;;•4‘'4e:;‘ .....,. Af,' gif•''*;!$.6 }5:5?..:111-01ili:"gm .111,.Ai,11_14j,/-*-c,,4-•45 9.1,f,..---' C.) ' . . • •/ uP_i 'R,' `-'1,'"- 1,,,,,P ,:ii 4, t ow' cifiFx,t.ciiiip,"'IiIIII!1,411TIIIIIIiIIIT•11111111111, , '• !,!?:11: !-II, il . Z - . • • '...;:', lii7+',!N f• ". ,,4i,,Aiii11111V11111111a,;111111411111111111 bp 11„.... ..• 1 .1----p 0 • ,'r, ' ' J./ ',• .,,,r•',' ,,,z,7 ,' Ai . -' ' .< ',A ek'17--,,a-, 4:.‘,..stimi4IIItii4,6,;!iiiiiiiiI#IiItliniq I iliq Iri, , , [ I— . ,,f, :.p '. ••• ._,,,milo p/ ,-1- . ..1*,qi•_0.1zrpugt•iiz ;i,,el.:7.,,,zy.:r= •;;.1___.71t7.':•!'i,ii -.":1"'"'ql_ft-*-/I-..,-.`s--''--;:•I'-. < ' o r..', -'CHIHLI cii' ``:;•'-' \-s-- - , IF,,,,.) 41 g4 41,.a.i-r-,,T=--eii•-,!.1.,-:i.._,..x3 4:-.-A53,1.I.,,vy,ts.,‘ Cr 1 ,." ,'s' s. IiIiiPlo „' ri )1.111. It „•,,,,, „4:4,,--,.-c, ..-',12. ‘ rC • '• Le. awl. cn • 1 ,-- ' ' 'I :,c1.17.111up,iiiiiilu li.'''..5,,,;,,'"Pg,,"-:',•,th."; ..- -. )'' .0,--------7----3 . . . e i* ,7E*-- 4., , 1 4 tZl.,-.3•,;!,, .-c,,,,,•100)0. . 1- 1111111ifin ,;, .„.. Z • '/ .4-LI. 1-110P.iii. , , ,.•, e:;..,-; t.e u.1.1 in s: :( .,...._, • • ,... .,;,..,. , :1,: ..,i,i,;14' gr--- , .,c•4i, ir317,;-.1,, -ieN ' 1 .4411, _ ll 1 2 . , g .,'-', ' ,..,,,.; ,1di'i.•,,i.. ,,'.; '''r qi (q v,'''('''.„.`!I'es•-•,, ..,/,'- ill'-:-..,. ;:z.,,Isi,5J'..'ik t.'"!,:-44).;;.1'.. ' • . . • , ••• . ,,1 ;,:,-.•J,- ,,' 1..c.,'-t•••rai 10,...i.s py .. to‘1,J. ,-' '.-i.I .''''7 • -, • , -',••(4- 1-1 CI • • -- , ,• •f. •?••• ----. ':'!,,•• --c,—..,,... .."--••=;:, ,...qi •..-4-d-:,,,,i:,....i:-..i.,i,-;%7 F.,t.r..'1,,,,,Tirte`z,liAl,r.,77tr. . .. • ''' :',1•"•'`'•,'e''-'IL.i.. 1 1.7,- , '',.!:0. tfzi,i•I'...'&,:,--7-7:".„•—r:t.,717:...,i,1-4 • v.:, , ..0v. . V, . "4L1 ' v'l' .'?ril .r''t' l ..If ,Cf.';'"'''t. ....."':t.e.-It t..NJ,... ..L.: .10i qk..-,•• ,z••3 ..,,,,.1„....,•- t;.,•,..-„„4.,,,.:-• ., .,, ; , ,, A,. y_.; \1.1. ],,1 / ,i11'. . .Lg V -.:...-:,,F1 ,,,j,,t:L..,6,:. ;›,. ,,..:,:,-.... ,,gs,;,....yl.,,„,,v,• 1,tis 2 1,,,,,....1-,,,... - , :;.... p,t)i .t.u.;? , ?el r.c%L,Lz.,,,.7,..,,,-:-.:. . ',,,.,,,,,.., .),:;,,,s.e., ,,,u..,,,....,„ce.";' •,.,:,-;:-'..,1,,!.!..-ic ' ft„„,t,„-- ' .: '. • 'I,: . ''':-%\+./.,Y .7*-- cI-"r,1_-...--- • .i4i rc...* ‘,-...-,..,-, .c..- ','' .3. .. •-•'••••' it- i J '';•-•.• ''"A 1.--`f, ''., -'''', 7-",,,,I.. *' '''' II P - '•'F'' 4. 1-"-`14s: ' Q'\\';'" tr-"-''''•!...,•1,A,.1.fi.:...D..!,..11' 1, 1.4 C.'''.4.;''4.71: 1,:i,,....e......14;424,,i',_., . ..L ..• ... —r1 A tt 1.-A e, ,•:. . icf...;,i,— / J....;i ..c9,\,.\ ., --fr. i- , • 0 ,,. le .;‘er_l '•;.`,...'Cm'•,.1q..;tri'-.1 1.., t.''.3_et m ri_• . L, ..';',71.i• Z2 l'i,iiiiI! , 4),. ,.. "i Ct'6Vj ii 1E, 9'1E4 0.., 43::-,1.61?!,-,.., .:14 4..,',: ,=.,' 6; fi '• TL'1• '' tE •t•f... rA L,!:.;•:.,I:1,9",•'!:?,,:; ;el, .1).11 i)71 ' €4 SI'6%1 t. '''„,,;csW AX, f;iz a.:,..:, .,..1;;!;,:,;;4,''Otrlit , : • . • ell, .. ..1„> ., -, ' gri.. 1214:J•tt. h At.\,-;,,,' ,s\•,,,,' Tt.; . -)::-,••.0.1:0-::• ,;..;!.. ,, 11." '-. .t.mt.ht-'7:..,,4 ( t% ;.. 1 ri...r•i',i.:,twiL;;,c.::,'"6„..., y r: ' ;il n),-411, .'.r. /if,- 9*-::--1-71: ','':'-'-'r;:ii- -.,'r.71,- El •• • .1,c,(-, s, , ..i. et,:, -----....,..,=r....--tv. . 4. = ::= 1-, .&:. . ,;(. ..,, , • ,;:.,:;, -..,.;r :,., . „7,„FLET,,, g_fm-f-"-,.. _ ‘p•et.A., 0, is 2 1/4• /,.....:,- <1 .0. I • 4, , ,. " - - - It- •,• 41 , c'#''' Ail! ir4 ''''''''' t ,,.. fiii '"'"-'' •--.-:::::-:A '* ,,,-;7...'7 ..: V, ra.,;,--,.z • . • el .. , ., 4,, ‘,';1 _,L.,„,.....:..--,-:<.' ,•c.!;.... - ,!.: .e.-:::;1:.c.'. t_,,.„, Fe. •1•4 eNtf/Q140,i ON 0•,•••:1 '•1'`C•ilorn'irnritni'rn,vinilinitniinin = • . ' v r'r • ..;,, v,..i,..:_itr. - .•••Ip.,10:•,( , c .3:...tq;, Y,V.I-.Z.4 1.17.7 :,;;.,::I:'Mr. ..1 .4•C .. 4 • • 1. ,'!•)!'• • • --"-- -._.--± i' • !ip..•iii):1,r; , V!,• 1 , ,, c.. :repr.t. :',,I\il l'ii I!).".:.1:4 `;‘ii 1 loininfoilip.dmiiiiiiiiiiNst cr- r-..., • ,.!.4 •,.i ,,. •ty, i ,i I, ,.;0!1;.,.::, o I,i. t 9)., ill/4' I -1..'i• CI)„,.... 144:',Ig•All'A?i,1,,,,,,,,,14,,,,,,,,,,,,tive.,u,g„,,iir4; 1,,, ,,i,4,rill •-i;• w•-•t= -W.-Att.t2---....,---'—4 14""Ill•1•,--•41:Dm-‘11 t..t:_L-_...1,'Z A 71..,Tt.:111,-”rs..'; ,..-4_,1-1-3j„--(1;,.,!2'••;.X.,3P,11ir,i$L..---. -„x•„-,...,-„rt 1. 17c-.1t--r,_,_.._;qpilkirj?J!?.-:.. •--w "Lrz,-..r.:_r.a.:::,,,.,. pmx 1,..ximp.,% . . . • - Off-street parking should be centralized and provide the major access from secondary streets. Parking areas should be screened from buildings and streets with berms and landscaping. Large parking lots should be divided with intermittent landscaped areas. Any parking structure should be limited to a maximum of two levels above ground. o Existing residential areas that are fully developed must remain in an a residential zoning classification. Rezoning should only occur when and if the State is ready to relocate these uses and develop this portion of the office campus plan. Rezoning petitions must be accompanied with a relocation plan. o Fairgrounds expansion areas should not require rezoning for development. o The "C-1" commercial strip as it exists along North Temple Street should remain. Development of the State office complex will require the relocation of two mobile home parks. These parks could be relocated in the residentially zoned land north of the Rose Park Golf Course along Redwood Road and adjacent to Interstate 15. A minimum of 10 acres is required for a mobile home park development. A detailed land use plan for this area should be required to provide additional information as to the feasibility of such a relocation. 2. Residential and Business Land Use Conflict. The present land use in Areas A and B on the land use conflict map is residential. Both areas are zoned B-3 for business use. To preserve needed housing stock, both now and in the future, these residential properties should be rezoned to an appropriate residential zoning classification. Neighborhood businesses are discussed in the neighborhood commercial section of this plan. In Area A, located on the north side of 500 North between Oakley and Colorado Streets, residential properties zoned commercial B-3 consist of seven single family dwellings and two four-plexes. These residential properties should be rezoned to Residential R-1 or a low density residential classification. The existing businesses in this area are situated on local residential streets. Neighborhood commercial uses are not appropriate future land uses. The long range land use should be residential. The existing commercial land should be rezoned to a low density residential classification to support conversion of land uses. Area B, located between 600 North, 700 North, 1200 West and Oakley Streets, consists of both low and high density residential uses, including a condominium project. Those business uses on the 600 North collector street are appropriately located, however, they should not be allowed to intrude into the residential areas through expansion along side streets. To prevent this, • those areas in the B-3 zone that contain residential uses should be rezoned to an appropriate residential classification. DRAFT - Page 7 1��/' — I :�w.OR �� • /s- 0 41,..‘„,, .....::::„-• . , . . •r .I O • c is u ° Ttl o LAKE CITY 1 c SEWER TREATMENT V l ' PLANT C' •ice.•.•♦ N•.........♦ '�!i�i ! iii �>, 4 410,....... , ITS Teoo NORTH ��. :►.♦ .�, ..... r 4,.A.. '.4i44wvA AA 44\ ii:;f;;3;;:•� ; ; ;� LAND USE CONFLICT AREAS i•iiii .iii CA..,. (� ROSE PARK GOLF COURSE \\ Residential use in NEW VOII DRIVE i7o5 NORTH ROSEWOOD B-3 Zone - CSUNSET� PARK I �\ -� --DUPONT a J-,�,�___� State Office Fairgrounds W W n < W a :_ complex 'Inc1. Norm7...;,0t,-\\ nr I ►.;:;: Industrial/Residential = L DoobwlN`IT Irw �no' II 1��<��I th, ►..�W < d..: Landuse < ¢ O O1T00 NORTHO Z:LTL a HO U H = < T�°� UI 11I I O ; a 1UUL<J_ in < 1 MP a —[ u-oa J 1—•- 900 NOW.. ;J J--llll��E STE'a=IHO JjC IINDI3a�\� 71__ a l�1 -_.- TALISMAN n 1l"''��\ r'1 .. lu1 < I' I I _ • (� O W 900 NORTH I I•�3 1/ 0�� C KO HORfH ~- =O ` H `PROSPEIRITY_. § fUII - J/IaU__ ...1 100 NORTH ��I ^^�= II RIVERSIDE �W - pil IOOHORTN Q c PARK f;t �❑ i•_ , / ^O 0 .J A-0W r- Er_-.-.15c _. - 600 NORTH -^:7 -0 r,..0 SOO NORTH L -'-- - -1 J-- -H. r 500 NORTH �= = �n cn y0O NORTN � �t� __.8C !8i1T ri] v� r N^ORTH \ �SIMONOf c[..N..ofT. M NDI �ii C i `I ro.r..«t O u n, � �.J�II _. H 75-1 ��ET: � 700 NORTH JI\V �H 8 ll :.:?:.: a. 4iROE1Pl a 7 _ DI 1, li, . �- 200 NORTH PI O 11 ., ,, ........... .... __. . 7 ' N ,RTH T' [MPLE . 1 t \ G R . ° i' - - ---''''''.(..cASTA ///// T • • 1 1 ) 3. Conflicts in Area north of Rose Park Golf Course. This area lies north of the Rose Park Golf Course between the Jordan River and Interstate 15. Future land use identified in the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan depicts a potential for residential and industrial land uses. The updated Northwest Plan supports industrial, recreational/open space and limited residential as appropriate land uses. Factors contributing to this decision are the proximity of the sewage treatment plant and oil refineries and environmental concerns, such as, flooding and soils suitability for development. The sewage treatment plant, the existing oil storage tanks, and the nearby frocway make residential land use in this area difficult, but with wise use of large open spaces to buffer potential nuisances housing may be 1 , feasible. The rising level of the Great Salt Lake is another factor affecting land uses in this area. In view of present diking efforts to lower the water • table and to hold off potential rising lake level the types of land uses in this area should be commercial and industrial uses. A higher water table will impact design of structures. An increased water table level will eliminate construction of basements. For residential dwellings construction without basements could impact the market for low-medium density housing in this area. More study is needed to guide future development in this area. Creation of a detailed strategic plan is recommended. Planned Unit Developments In the Northwest Community those areas zoned R-2A allow Planned Unit Developments (PUD) through a conditional use process. Conditional uses require Board of Adjustment approval along with a recommendation from the Planning Commission. A minimum of 2.5 acres is required before considering a conditional use for planned unit developments. Community Council members have voiced concern about too many apartments being allowed in the community. It is felt that the Northwest Community's single family residential character is intruded upon by :excessive apartment complexes. In response to these concerns certain areas were rezoned from residential "R-2A" to residential "R-1". Those areas remaining in the "R-2A" zoning classification should develop under design guidelines that minimize the impact that higher density development has upon the surrounding single family character of the Northwest Community. PUD design guidelines. The 1980 Northwest ConQuunity Master Plan recommended R-2A zoning to provide design flexibility in the development of planned unit developments (PUD) . However, not all of the apartment developments constructed have been sensitive to the low density residential character of the community. It appears that the R-2A zone has been used as a maximum density mechanism rather than for design flexibility. As a result higher density uses abutting single family uses have created a negative impact. It should be noted that this impact is a design issue rather than a result of density. The development of more intensified landscaped buffers and better site design with regard to the surrounding single-family uses is necessary. To accomplish this performance standards should be applied to PUDs. It is DRAFT - Page 8 recommended that as policy of this master plan design guidelines be considered in the approval process of PUDs in the R-2A zone. In multiple dwelling developments those buildings adjacent to single family uses should to be limited to two stories in height, thus preventing undesirable impacts upon the adjoining owners. Furthermore, the minimum twelve foot side yard setback is inappropriate for the low density character of the conununity unless the use of heavily landscaped buffers are applied. Landscaped buffers should meet performance standards that allow smaller side yards as landscaping density increases. PUD buildings proposed within the areas zoned R-2A should be restricted to a two story limit when adjacent to single family uses, unless the building is situated in the interior of the development. Unincorporated Land and Area North of the Airport Unincorporated land addressed in the plan update lies north of present city limits and west of the Jordan River. This area lies within the proposed annexation areas identified by the city's 1979 Master Annexation Policy Declaration. The majority of the area consists of agricultural and vacant land use. One aspect of the agricultural land uses is the presence of single family homes on one acre lots or larger. Properties within the county are zoned Agricultural A-2. Incorporated land north of the airport consists of mostly vacant land with some agricultural and residential land uses. Road Improvements. Future road improvements will help this area develop. The planned Great Lake (West Davis) Highway and the connection of 2100 North to 2300 North along with completion of Interstate 215 will provide readily available access to major transportation corridors. These circulation improvements along with proximity to the airport will increase the demand for industrial development within the area. Public Utilities. Presently, no sewer or water facilities exist in most of the this area. No facilities are being designed to service the area. Depending upon the rate and type of development, the city's present waste water treatment facility may not be adequate to serve the area. The location of the future west side sewage treatment plant could affect sewer facilities planning for the area. Future development between the present city limits and the existing sewer facility could impact the distribution system for the area. Environmental Issues. The northwest portion of the conuuunity contains wetlands associated with the Jordan River and the Great Salt Lake. Significant wetlands should be protected from development and be maintained as open space. A major flood control dike proposed north of the airport should be built with the dual purpose to function for flood control and also as the base for the Great Lake (West Davis) Highway. This combination road/dike system would provide a definitive boundary for urban development expanding toward the Great Salt Lake and adjacent wetlands. Environmental constraints in the area such as the high water table, wetlands preservation, soil conditions, and airport noise will have a major influence on future land use. Because of these constraints the preferable DRAFT - Page 9 land use would be agricultural and limited light industrial parks. Development uses in the area will most likely require substantial fill work to protect properties from high water table levels. Wetlands designation is presently established by range of soil classification types. This places most of the properties in the area within a wetlands designation. Prior to any development in wetlands a 404 Wetlands permit must be obtained from the U.S. Corps of Engineers. This requirement also applies to excavation and fill work related to site development. Airport Noise Impacts Land within the vicinity of the International Airport is affected by the general operation of the airport. The major impact on surrounding land uses is noise. To protect the city and surrounding land owners, the city adopted an airport land use policy plan in 1982. Recommendations in the policy plan, officially titled Land Use Policy Plan-Salt Lake International Airport resulted in the adoption of noise impact overlay zones as part of the city zoning ordinance. These throe overlay zones known as Noise Impact "A", "B", and "C" are described below: Noise Impact Zone "A". Zone "A" permits only industrial and comercial uses. Buildings must have sound proofing as required in the building codes. Noise Impact Zone "B". Zone "B" permits industrial and agricultural uses. Residential uses are allowed in conjunction with agricultural zoning, however, sound proofing construction measures are required. (Zone "B" affects much of the unincorporated area north of the airport discussed above. ) Noise Impact Zone "C". Zone "C" does allow housing, but certain sound proofing measures are required such as air conditioning systems and "thermal pane" windows. Avigation Easement. The airport land use policy plan also requires that developers and land owners in the airport noise influence areas sign and dedicate an avigation agreement as a condition of new development. The purpose of the avigation easement is to preserve the utility of the airport. It grants to the airport or the general public the free and unobstructed use and passage of all types of aircraft in the airspace over the land covered by the easement. It is not unlimited in its allowances, however, noise cannot exceed certain levels. (Refer to avigation easement language in the city ordinance for specifics. ) Land use policy set forth as part of this master plan is discussed below. However, there is a need to develop a detailed land use plan for this area. Issues concerning this area are agricultural preservation, industrial development, urban limit line, wetlands preservation, airport related noise, transportation circulation improvements, provision of water and sewer services, and the level of the Great Salt Lake. DRAFT - Page 10 / . 4 - Farmington Say t . _. _ �f . i wat•riow 1 l a/; 1 S 0 �. `•�• r < • a . • rbi ` w I �1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 l l lI I II II1 1'1' III t 1 1 1+ + ♦ + + +Ua agimYr�LI1I1 I1,1I 1I1t1l1 1 1 IIIIiIII III + + + + + + I+ + + + + + . + + + + I}IIIIIIIIIIIIII 11 111111 ill1II1II 1II + + + + + a / ► + + + + + + + + + + 11,1,1,111,1 II1I 1, IlIlIiIlIl! 1 IIII III + + + + a � + + ff + + + + + + IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIII III I II 11 I I I II I + + + �1 + + + + + + + + + + I I I I III I II III I + + + + + 1+ + + + + + f + + + 1111111111111111111 III I11 111 1 1111111111I1 + + + + + 4 I+ ♦ + ♦ + + + + ♦ + 1111100111 lIlIlIl III l AIIII II ill IIIIIIIIIIII. + + ♦ + + I 14. ! ! III 1 tl 1111 + + + + f + + + + �1 I i l l lI l lI lI lI l i1 l l 1 1 I I III1I ,+ ♦ + + f1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I II I I tI iI lI lI + + + + 1 ` • f + + + + + + + + + l 1I1 1 Idly III+ + + + + + + f + �1111111111111 I1I1I1I 111 I1I1�1 gi I1IIIII1I1IIII1 + ♦ f +// 1 + + + (r + + ♦ + 1!1!1I1I1I1I 1I1I1I I I1I1I1I1I11 'F I111I1I1I1I + + + +/ 1 + f ♦ + + + a1i l lllllllll llllliI` I I I I I I i l + + + 111111 III I I 1 1 1ttI F# II +1+ + + + + + + + + a111 111 1IIIII III11 11 I 1 1 ' + i 1+ + + + + + + + + 41 !IIIlllliltil 111111! III IIIIIIIIIIIII 11111I I I + + + t 4 + + + + + + + + A II,lIti111I111I! II1II1III IIII 11IIiIl11IIIIIiIII II IIIIlt 11 + + + Private Ouek Club* Area � 1i11 11 11111 1111111 1 1I� II + + +/ + ♦ + + + + + + � IIIIIIIIIIiIl lIlIlIl l!liIlIlIlIl 11l1l I; I1 1lIl f + +/ + ♦ ♦ + + + + + j S 1 -j , roOOooOooOOOO000 ._♦ + ♦ + + + + + + OOOOOOOOOOOOOCO 11I/I j I4 + + + + + + + + + + + 000000000000 jC' 0;:;�J 1t ,"II, t Iti + + + + + + + ++ + + + COOO00000000000O( O re( + OO R�)Ol)1D0000.. 00000E , n 1 + + a + N !h i l l Corporate Boundary 00000 1 + + +' + s III rp�gcp� 1 I + f + + + +� ,F j 1 I I I1 00000Cy III I 4,' -hI , .• . . .I I I 00000G I • • • 4. 4. , 00000t>j I III OOOOOC 1 1 I + + f + 1 44 ; 000OO(' II ,: : : . + +I+ + + III 0C *+wage+ + I . . '.7• IIIIII 1I . . . T 1tfMhl�nt + f% : i 1,� I + + + + + + 1 L1 4•Ft+ + + +; : ��s �I11�, �i • l.+ + + + + + 1 51466.. III, i + + ♦ + + 7.4111tey • • • • . . . . �I i i i Salt lake City 11 1 . f + + + +1 . yak . . f''+ill! O International !I I . . �/i . + + + ♦ tr + +1 . . . . . . ' . . 1 ` 11111 \•o Airport II ,i• + + + a f + +1 1 III •� 11 . . ^S . 1 ,,• + + + + e,; + 1 Ord 1It1 11 • . . .: . r + + + + � + I I 11 . . •1 • , . . . .y . + f + +'v + 0 II l G^ I If dll Q . J+ f + + , yl1 iiI \ 1 `, !III 111 . : • •� . 1 + + + + + + + + 1 I `11111 L I\Lis 1. , + + + + + f + f 1 I 1I + + + + + f + +! I f iD -,IIfUU�I it + +..* + + + + +1 emph . . . IIIIIIC ` ,'\JLI II . ' . + + +:+ + + + 1 I�L � _� + + + +-+ + + + AIRPORT NOISE IMPACT ZONES o°'' : VERY HIGH NOISE IMPACT [i;:C HIGH NOISE IMPACT ::C:: MODERATE NOISE IMPACT . H:: HEIGHT RESTRICTION Agricultural land uses once dominant within Salt Lake City now exist in a few limited areas. However limited, there are areas within Salt Lake that should be set aside for the preservation of agricultural land uses. A distinct element of agricultural uses within the Salt Lake area is the development of single family residences on larger parcels of land, usually one acre or larger. The character of future development and the appropriate zoning classification for these areas should be responsive to the preservation of the limited agricultural areas within Salt Lake City. Certain areas within the Northwest Community need to be zoned for agricultural uses with the future land use designated agricultural. The agricultural zoning classification for these areas should not be considered a holding zone for future commercial or industrial land uses. A portion of the area identified in the Northwest Community for agricultural preservation has a land use conflict with the activity of the Salt Lake International Airport. Presently to protect airport operations due to present noise levels areas within Noise Zone "A" have restrictions concerning further residential development. However, one area in particular should allow additional residential development to further the preservation of adjacent and existing agricultural/residential development. The property owners and residents of this area have expressed a strong desire to maintain the agricultural/residential integrity of this area. Industrial and commercial development must be kept from creating a detrimental impact to the preservation of residential uses of the area. With the expansion of the airport toward the west, due to the proposed runway, noise level impacts in the agricultural areas along 2450 West Street should decrease due to less activity on the far eastern runway. The future allowance of agricultural land uses that contain residential uses should be allowed. Avigation easements will be necessary and may need to be strengthened to protect the future operation of the Salt Lake City International Airport. 1980 Master Plan Recommendation The city should continuously monitor development in this area. Developers should be required to design well-planned projects that will be compatible neighbors to the airport and other surrounding land uses. Industrial parks and carefully designed residential developments are potential compatible uses. All uses must be designed to tolerate airport disturbances. Continued agricultural use should also be accommodated. This is one of the few areas of the city where agriculture has prevailed as the dominant land use. These recommendations also apply to areas north and east of the airport that may be annexed in the future. Agricultural zoning should be considered for all areas annexed west of I-215 unless well planned developments compatible with the airport and other neighboring uses are being proposed. DRAFT - Page 11 Land use polices with respect to agricultural/residential land use preservation recommends that the area 1000 feet west of 2240 West Street and north of 2300 North that lies within the Airport A Noise Overlay Zone Should allow as a special exception agricultural/residential land uses. A land use policy for the preservation of this particular agricultural/residential area should be implemented. A policy should be adopted that will resolve the conflict between residential uses and the airport "A" noise zone restrictions. The airport noise overlay zone is part of the city's zoning ordinance. Therefore, the overlay zone is subject to appeal and the granting of variances through the Salt Lake City Board of A Adjustment. The recommended solution is to amend the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance relating to transitional zoning. The ordinance should allow a special exception for agricultural/residential land uses within certain areas of the Airport Restriction Zone "A". This Special Exception should be for specific uses which must meet the requirements of the Agricultural A-1 Zone and the requirements recommended below: 1. Residential development may occur only as single lot subdivision. 2. Development must moot all of the requirements of the airport's avigation easement. 3. Development must meet sound attenuation requirements established by the airport and the Uniform Building Code. 4. Structures must meet the height restrictions established by the Salt Lake International Airport. 5. Development must clearly meet the intent for the preservation of existing agricultural/residential areas and be adjacent to such land uses. HOUSING Housing is one of the most important elements in a community. It provides shelter, privacy, environmental amenities, and investment opportunity. Construction of new housing should be emphasized, but preservation of the existing housing stock is also of paramount importance. The Northwest Community is mostly developed and a majority of the housing stock consists of single family dwellings. Structural Additions A large percentage of the homes in the Northwest Community are small post World War II vintage dwellings. To accommodate growing families many residents have added-on to enlarge their homes. As the homes in the area turn over to younger couples who will be raising families, those wishing to remain within the community but needing to enlarge their homes will most likely look DRAFT - Page 12 at the precedent set by previous expansion projects, namely conversion of carports and garages to living quarters. Such conversions can eliminate required off-street parking. When such conversions take place, the city should ensure that they moot appropriate zoning and building codes. Such conversions can be workable if adequate side yard areas exist which allow for relocation of driveways to appropriately located off-street parking areas. When this situation occurs garage conversions to living quarters will not negatively impact surrounding residential uses through illegal front yard parking or forcing necessary parking to use the public street. The city should undertake an education program to inform the public of appropriate and legal ways to add-on or expand their homes. Pamphlets, for instance, could be used to outline the necessary permits and procedures for structural additions. Such action should be coordinated along with any increased code enforcement efforts. Jackson Target Area In 1980 the city identified the Jackson Neighborhood as a Community Development Target Area and structural rehabilitation area. This action concentrated the use of Community Development Block Grant funds in the area. Boundaries of the target area are: North Temple to 600 North and I-15 to 1000 West. Concentrating community development grants in specific neighborhoods provides enough funding to make a positive impact. Accomplishments through this program were new housing projects; new streets, sidewalks and utility line replacement; and low cost loans and grants for housing rehabilitation. Rehabilitation loans were used to bring homes up to building code standards. The intent of this program is to provide a signal to the private sector that the city is not going to allow further deterioration of the area to continue. Instead the city policy provides public investment to improve the infrastructure and thereby encourage and support private reinvestment. A number of projects have been undertaken in the Jackson area including a new housing project at 600 North and Interstate 15. (The Grant Street Project) . Also, the Jackson Neighborhood Park was expanded and improved. Many of the neighborhood's 585 residential structures needed repair. During the period since 1980, the city has assisted in rehabilitating 104 homes through loans and grants. The concentration of target area funds is to improve the public infrastructure of the neighborhood. During the time period that a target area is open housing rehabilitation activities are heavily supported. However, after the closure of a target area housing rehab funding still continues but at a less concentrated effort. Alternative residential redevelopment areas. The 1980 Northwest Master Plan identified four residential redevelopment areas in the Jackson neighborhood: Grant Street, 700 West, Hoyt Place and Chicago Street. Grant DRAFT - Page 13 Street and 700 West sites required land assembly and redevelopment. Hoyt Place and Chicago Streets needed new streets as a means to encourage private development of the vacant interior parcels. The Grant Street site is to be developed as a planned unit development housing project. Chicago Street has been rebuilt. Hoyt Place and 700 West actions have not been implemented. Hoyt Place could be improved through a block redesign project. Potential land assembly to open the interior parcel to 800 West Street should be assessed as part of a block redesign plan. A Hoyt Place block redesign project should be added to the city capital improvement plan. The Jackson target area was closed at the end of the llth CDBG funding year (June 30, 1986) . Continuation of the sidewalk replacement program was extend into the 12th CD funding year to complete target area sidewalk repair needs. The target area infrastructure needs have been completed. The Jackson Target Area is part of census tract 6. The western portion of this census tract should be closely reviewed with regard to public infrastructure needs. A "needs" analysis should be prepared to determine if the area should be designated a community development target area. Assisted Housing Assisted housing is defined as publicly-subsidized housing. Assisted housing needs for the city are identified in the Housing Element of the city master plan. The Housing Element discusses the need for each community in the city to provide its share of assisted housing opportunities. The Northwest Community's estimated reasonable share of future assisted housing units is 120; fifty elderly units and seventy family units. These housing units would meet needs projected for 1990. However, allocations are not static especially when availability of sites is an important decision factor. The 1980 Northwest Master Plan states that public housing sites should not be located in neighborhoods that are predominantly single-family in character. Also assisted housing projects should require to have approved and compatibly designed buildings. TRANSPORTATION One element important to the success of most land uses is accessibility provided by an adequate transportation system. The Northwest Community is served by a system of local, collector, minor arterial, and major arterial streets. The majority of the streets are local streets basically in a grid pattern functioning as access to individual properties. Collector and minor arterial streets provide circulation within the community. Portions of the community's boundary consists of Interstate highways. Traffic travels through the community on the Interstates with minimal traffic congestion impact upon the local street circulation system. DRAFT - Page 14 Circulation Improvements Completion of Interstate 215 and the West Davis (Great Salt Lake) Highway will provide new access and impetus for development in the northern portion of the community. The connection of 2100 North to 2300 North Streets between I- 215 and Redwood Road will also improve circulation. Presently a dead-end frontage road exists along Interstate 15 north of 1000 North street. A decision as to the development status of this street should be part of the detailed land use plan called for this area in the update. The development pattern that is finalized for the area north of Rosewood park will have an impact upon the design criteria for this frontage road. The development pattern of the area may result in the necessity to directly connect the frontage road to arterial roadways rather than filter through local streets or closure of the street. • Two state roadway improvement projects will have a positive impact on the community's circulation pattern. Relocating North Temple to connect with I-80 and widening Redwood Road from North Temple to 1000 N. Strcct, as proposed will aid circulation in the community. The right-of-way for widening Redwood Road has already been acquired. The street is to be widened from 36 feet to 82 feet with construction projected for 1989. However, Redwood Road north of 1000 North Street still requires improvement to service new housing development in this area. The 1980 Master Plan proposed a bikeway system. Expansion of the proposed system for the northwest will be necessary to link with proposed bike routes of surrounding communities. Official Street Plan The city's major street plan map has designated the anticipated roadways necessary for future development within and adjacent to the city. Through the official street plan the city alerts subdividers when dedication of land for public streets will be necessary. It classifies streets according to the following categories: major arterial, minor arterial, and collector. It should be noted that private land owners will participate with the city in constructing streets in the categories listed above. The street plan map does not identify future local streets since they will be located at the time of land subdivision. DRAFT - Page 15 PARKS The city recognizes the importance of recreation in the lives of its residents. As population increases in the Northwest Community new recreational facilities will be needed along with improvements to existing facilities. In the 1977 Salt Lake City Parks and Recreation Plan, the city identified specific recreational facilities needed in the community. Efforts to meet recreation needs outlined in the 1977 Plan and the 1980 Northwest Community Plan should continue to be carried out by the city and coitununity residents. The city's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) identifies the following projects to help moot recreation needs: 1) renovation of Riverside and Northwest community parks, 2) a new park west of Redwood Road and 3) improvement to Rosewood Park. Neighborhood Parks Analysis of neighborhood parks with regard to established standards results in the needs priority depicted in Table 2. The neighborhood park deficiency rating provides a rank order for determining placement within the city's capital improvement program. Table 2 Neighborhood Park Deficiency Rating Vacant Percent Census Land Population Below Existing Total Rank Tract Acres(3)* Density(2) Poverty(3) Park(2) Points Order 3.04 406.8 (1)** 22.5 (4) 12.4 (3) No (4) 28 1 1004 1.6 (4) 18.0 (3) 3.5 (1) Yes(3) 27 2 1005 4.8 (3) 20.7 (3) 9.7 (2) Yes(0) 21 4 1006 29.6 (2) 20.0 (3) 12.3 (3) Yes(2) 25 3 *Weight of Criteria **Rating Value The Westpointe development plan includes vacant land between Redwood Road - Interstate 215 and 900 - 1700 North Streets. The Westpointe development company has dedicated property to the city for two neighborhood park sites. The city should develop these two parks when adjacent subdivision development takes place. DRAFT - Page 16 Golf Cour-es. The golf course standard applied in the 1977 Parks master plan is one 18 hole golf course per 25,000 residents. The projected population in 2005 for the Northwest Community is 31,000. Community standards will be maintained by the Rose Park golf course and the State's Jordan River Parkway golf course. However, there is a shortage of golf courses to moot the projected city- wide need. To overcome this deficiency a golf course is proposed at a site just south of the International Airport. Another potential golf course site is north of the existing Rose Park course and adjacent to Interstate 15. When renovation of the Rose Park Golf Course is considered active recreational needs and location of such facilities will require analysis due to the population growth associated with the development of Westpointe. One alternative to consider is the relocation of the Rosewood Park active recreational facilities to Redwood Road on the present golf course and relocating portions of the existing golf course along Redwood Road to the area north of Rosewood Park. The site north of the Rose Park Golf Course would provide some benefits in addition to recreation. Natural springs dot the area and create drainage problems. A golf course could control the springs and use them for water hazards on the course. Additionally, placement of dense evergreen vegetation next to the freeway would help alleviate fog problems that occur in the area. Jordan River Parkway The State of Utah created the Jordan River Parkway Authority in 1973 as an alternative to channelization for flood control on the Jordan River. For years the Parkway Authority has coordinated development and acquisition of property along the river. In the early 1940's, the city first endorsed the idea that the river environment should be preserved in a park like setting providing a major natural open space and recreational amenity in the Northwest Community. A great deal of work has been done along the river in the Northwest Community. The parkway system uses natural channels as much as possible and existing stoop banks are cut back and gently sloped to create a safer, wider channel. This recontouring of the river banks creates a modified flood plain that meets the dual purposes of flood control and recreation. For the system to be successful, development can not be allowed to encroach upon the river. As part of the Jordan River Parkway System, the State developed a 10 acre park on Cornell Street between the Department of Agriculture and Health buildings in 1985. The park includes a tot lot, picnic shelters, volleyball, softball, and basketball facilities. This park also has pedestrian access through the Jordan River Parkway to the Northwest Multipurpose Center. DRAFT - Page 17 Wetlands Park The Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities has chosen to establish a year-round wetlands park on a 30 acre site north of the Department's 56 million gallon per day wastewater treatment facility. Wetlands will be enhanced by using one to five million gallons per day of secondary treated wastewater to provide a water fowl habitat. The project will also create an educational and scientific demonstration facility. The wetlands enhancement proposal has been discussed with representatives from the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Division; the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; the Utah Department of Health Bureau of Water Pollution control; and the Salt Lake City-County Department of Health. All these agencies support the proposed project. The project will: - Provide needed wetlands area for bird migration and habitation. Since the Great Salt Lake's recent rise wetlands have been lost consequently, there is a critical need for wetlands for migrating birds and local water fowl. - Provide needed urban wetlands for public enjoyment and education close to the Wasatch Front with easy access from Interstate 15. The department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division indicates that there is a demand for public facilities for wetlands educational programs. - Provide a new use for treated wastewater. Although the wetlands would use a small portion of treated wastewater it would create a scientific pilot area to study other uses of treated wastewater. - Provide a research area for wetlands treatment of stormwater. As a result of the 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act, the Environmental Protection Agency is developing regulations requiring the treatment of storm water discharges. - Provide recreation. The State Parks Division has indicated that they are interested in expanding the Jordan River Parkway to a wetlands area west of the city's proposed wetlands park. It may be possible to connect the proposed park with the Jordan River Parkway plan in order to provide greater public use. - Improve the appearance of the city's wastewater treatment plant. The 30 acre site already is classified as wetlands by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. RcIAL/INEL=AL DEVELOPMENT Within the last decade, national attention has focused on commercial revitalization as a means to reverse neighborhood decline. Cycles of neighborhood decline occur in commercial as well as residential areas. Commercial services in the Northwest Community are discussed in this section of the plan. DRAFT - Page 18 Neighborhood Commercial Neighborhood commercial areas in the Northwest Community consist of one concentrated business center located at 700 North and Redwood Road and four- corner sites located elsewhere in the coiniiiunity. Street corner development is scattered throughout the community. These convenience commercial centers provide easily accessible service to community residents. Services, such as, small retail shops, restaurants, and barber shops make up this category. However, the increasing drawing power of regional shopping centers and easy access to transportation facilities are inducing people to shop outside their neighborhood. Historically these areas have served economic and social functions in support of overall neighborhood activities. The Northwest Community must combat the decline of neighborhood commercial areas to ensure necessary services. Revitalization Issues. Certain issues need to be addressed in a neighborhood commercial revitalization process. Selection of target areas, establishment of general support for public/private partnerships, encouragement for neighborhood participation, initiation of planning and design, coordination of financing and leveraging, and creation of an ongoing management framework are a few. The city can help a great deal by initiating a neighborhood commercial redevelopment strategy. To be successful, such a strategy must involve both the city and private community interests. Proper and updated site design standards and urban design guidelines are a must in order to ensure commercial activities are of an appropriate character that do not disrupt surrounding residential uses. Urban design guidelines for commercial areas are discussed in the urban design section of this plan. Revitalization efforts of neighborhood business areas must address the following elements: - street and streetscape improvements; - building and facade renovation; - signage and landscaped buffers; - provisions for expansion of existing commercially zoned areas where appropriate. Streetscape elements most in need of improvement are sidewalks, curb cuts, parking strips, landscaped setbacks and general maintenance. Parking strips must be maintained with landscaping. Street tree planting is necessary to soften the harsh environment presented by parking lots associated with commercial uses. Excessive curb cuts add confusion to people using the facilities. Minimizing curb cuts and providing an internal circulation system within the parking lots of adjacent buildings would improve the urban design features of these neighborhood commercial centers. DRAFT - Page 19 Often all a building needs is a face lift. Merchants could sponsor an effort to dress up building facades through revolving loan funds and other means. Other ideas should be explored. We must face the fact, however, that not all neighborhood businesses are going to be successful no matter what measures are taken. Sometimes alternative uses such as housing or office space must be evaluated as replacement land uses. Redevelopment Sites. Five sites for potential neighborhood commercial revitalization or redevelopment are listed on the following table. Table 3 Neighborhood Commercial Revitalization Areas Area Activity 500 N.- 1300 W. No expansion, improve buffers, and long range convert to low density residential use. Rezoning and redevelopment should be supported. 600 N.- 1200 W. Provide buffers and landscaping along rear property lines, plant street trees in the parking strip, screen garbage receptacles, and support renovation and redevelopment. 1000 N. - 1400 W. Extend landscaping in setback areas to include signs and utility poles, remove illegal signage and support facade and design theme renovation. 1000 N. - 900 W. Allow expansion to accommodate revitalization, provide appropriate landscaping, improve parking and ingress/egress traffic movement. Clean up scattered signs, improve signage, extend landscaped area in setbacks to include signage and utility poles, and general clean up of properties. 700 N.- Redwood Provide adequate landscaped buffers along rear property line, provide additional landscaping in the required setbacks, and support facade renovation and a signage program. Improve parking lot and support intensification of commercial uses on this site. DRAFT - Page 20 Neighborhood Commercial Expansion. The city must carefully assess the impacts before allowing new commercial uses or expansion of existing commercial uses within residential areas. Enough land is already commercially zoned to provide adequate services to the community in the future. However, certain areas of the community lack neighborhood commercial services. For these areas additional commercial zoning may be required. An analysis of existing neighborhood commercial uses and their respective service areas shows that certain residentially zoned areas within the community do not fall in any neighborhood commercial trade area. These areas are the Westpointe development and the residentially zoned areas north of the Rose Park golf course. The long range need for additional commercial zoning should be focused in this area. Fully developed areas presently have enough commercial uses and commercial buildings available to provide adequate neighborhood commercial services. Certain areas now zoned for commercial uses consist of residential land uses. In order to discourage small scale strip commercial development these areas should to be rezoned to an appropriate residential zoning classification (soe land use conflict section) . To mcct commercial land use demand of projected population and employment levels for the year 2005, an additional 25-30 acres of unused land would need to be developed for neighborhood commercial uses. Enough vacant appropriately zoned acreage exists within the community to meet projected demand. However, a concern for future commercial needs is whether this commercial land is appropriately located to service future development patterns and demand. Also, some future demand requirements may be met through the increased development of certain existing commercial areas, in particular, the commercial complex at 700 North and Redwood Road. Other issues in residential to commercial rezoning requests are the presence of neighborhood demand and support for proposed commercial uses. Also, whether the commercial expansion is merely taking advantage of purchasing lower cost residential property and rezoning to commercial use. The question must be asked, "Is there other appropriately zoned property for development or redevelopment of commercial activity?" These concerns should be part of the decision making process in considering future residential to commercial rezoning requests in the Northwest Community. As stated future additional neighborhood commercial uses are anticipated in the community either through expansion or new development. The following parameters are established to assist the decision making process in the provision of commercial services to future residents. These parameters are should be used as a guideline in considering future requests for zoning changes for commercial uses within the community. The following criteria are for evaluating commercial rezoning requests. - There must be a need for the proposed business project and documented community and neighborhood support. Property owners must address the issue of business need in the whole city perspective and why the proposed site is the best location with regard to the best interest of the conutunity and the city. DRAFT - Page 21 - Property must be located on a street that can accommodate the additional traffic. Minimum location criteria would be on a collector street. - The site must be large enough for adequate open space and parking without overcrowding the lot. - Business projects must be of a density, design and scale that would not negatively impact neighboring residential properties. - No exceptions should be granted to required landscaped setbacks or landscaped buffers between commercial uses and abutting residential uses. Reduction in parking requirements should not be granted. - Signage should be limited to a pedestrian scale. - Commercial expansion should be new construction only not conversion of residential structures to commercial uses. - Hours of operation and facilities for deliveries should not impact surrounding residents. - Rezoning, when appropriate, should be conditional. Conditional rezoning would require that new commercial property develop closer to more restrictive surrounding districts. This transitional action allows some expansion while deterring potential strip development. (However, conditional rezoning is not allowed under State statutes. The city should make a concerted effort to amend State codes to allow for conditional rezoning. ) Community Commercial Services In the Northwest Community there is an older industrial area with potential for redevelopment situated between Interstate 215 and Redwood Road south of North Temple Street. The transportation access is excellent. It is anticipated that the future land use in this area will contain some industrial uses and changes toward more commercial oriented land uses. The area of Redwood Road and North Temple Street should also receive future development pressures for office construction related to the implementation of the States' office campus complex. Development of a community level shopping center is another possible land use for this area. Such a center would serve both the Northwest Community and the Westside Community. The desired future land use would see the trucking terminals relocate to the newer industrial areas of the city, along with the elimination of the railroad tracks that cross Redwood Road at South Temple Street. Replacement land use should be similar to commercial uses that have recently developed in this area, particularly uses that support the numerous motel developments. DRAFT - Page 22 Within this area the private sector should assemble the land and redevelop the properties, but the city could provide such economic development incentives as industrial revenue bonds. Possible use of land assembly through the City Redevelopment Agency should be considered in redeveloping this area. The development of the State office complex and the proximity to the Northwest and Westside Communities requires that the area redevelop with land uses that are compatible with to the surrounding residential uses. North T ivle - Commercial Strip North Temple Street between Interstate 15 and the International Airport is a commercial strip that borders the southern edge of the Northwest Community. North Temple Street is a gateway into Salt Lake City. The dual function of North Temple as a gateway and commercial strip creates certain conflicts with the urban design elements of this corridor. These two distinct functions need to be unified into a single urban design characteristic that serves both the city and the adjacent communities. In this section of the master plan general development guidelines are identified that will guide North Temple's future development, which is a blend of these distinct functions. Because North Temple functions as an arterial street, a commercial strip, and "gateway" into the Central Business District, this corridor must not be allowed to deteriorate. Certain factors will impact the future development of North Temple Street. Most of the commercial uses along North Temple are tourist related, however, with the completion of Interstate 80 the demand for tourist related commercial uses will likely drop. Expansion of the State fairgrounds and development of the State office complex at Redwood Road and North Temple will bring about additional development pressures along North Temple Street for related supportive commercial uses. Strip commercial development should not be allowed to expand into the residential areas to the north. Intrusion of commercial uses along side streets would severely effect residential areas and should not be allowed. (Expansion does not refer to increasing the depth of C-1 zoning to accommodate development along North Temple. ) Enforcement of the Commercial "C-1" zoning regulations is required to protect surrounding residential areas along North Temple Street. Strict code enforcement to control signs, land uses and setbacks is needed. Particularly, code enforcement needs to be maintained, with respect to auto rental agency uses converting to illegal used car lots. Presently the North Temple commercial strip is zoned Commercial "C-1". The basic elements determining the urban design character of this zone is a required 15 foot landscaped front yard setback and a height limitation of 2 stories. However, when a "C-1" abuts a zone with a less restrictive height allowance, the "C-1" can take on the height characteristics of the less restrictive zone. In other words, buildings constructed in this situation could far exceed the 2 stories normally allowed. This is disruptive to the low level character of the North Temple commercial frontage. New development DRAFT - Page 23 along the North Temple strip should be required to step back building heights in excess of two stories. Buildings on the north side of North Temple should develop within a solar envelope that will protect residential properties from shadow impacts and provide a smooth transition of scale. Since North Temple is a gateway to the city certain design elements and characteristics need to be provided and maintained that reflect the streets status as a gateway. Urban design guidelines are discussed in the urban design section of this plan. The Northwest Community Master Plan Update identifies certain objectives designed to guide the development of this area. It recommends that a specific plan be prepared to establish definitive design and development criteria and standards. A specific plan is a plan applicable to small geographical areas with unique characteristics. The specific plan should contain the policies, standards and regulations which provide controls or incentives for the systematic implementation of the plan. The specific plan should address an array of issues, including sign control, building setbacks, building heights, lot coverage, landscape standards, parking and land uses. Identified in the plan would be the applicable zoning cedes for the North Temple commercial strip. The planning process of developing a specific plan will allow an opportunity to obtain input from citizens, property owners and businesses. Input from these groups is necessary because of the unique characteristics of the North Temple strip. URBAN DESIGN Urban design control provides a means for fostering environmental quality in a changing urban environment. The urban design element presents recommendations in the form of policies to preserve the urban form and character of the Northwest Community. Many urban design guidelines which are applied city-wide are not addressed in this plan, but will be addressed in the city-wide Urban Design Element. Therefore, the Northwest Community Master Plan and the Urban Design Element must be consulted throughout the design review process of any proposed development. Urban design guidelines for residential areas. The following urban design actions are essential in the Northwest Community: - maintain lawn and trees in the parking strips, - create an active campaign to plant trees on both public and private property, - discourage vehicle parking and storage in front and side yards, which is illegal, DRAFT - Page 24 - keep vacant lots free of litter and weeds, - install culverts or fence open ditches and canals that abut residential lots, and - form special improvement districts among private property owners to bury utility lines underground. Urban design guidelines for commercial areas. Implementation of urban design principles within neighborhood commercial areas and along the North Temple Street commercial strip will guide development towards the desired compatibility standards of the Master Plan. These guidelines are only general standards. The pattern and design of strectscapes should convey a significant message complementing the type and intensity of land development. Through the design a strcctscape should unify a district and portray an identity. The strip commercial strectscape acknowledges a less-intense use oriented more for automobiles than pedestrians. Commercial design issues in the Northwest Community are signage, parking lots, landscaped buffers, and the streetscape. These guidelines are only general standards. The following actions should be applied in all commercial areas in the Northwest Community: - remove excessive curb cuts and curb cuts that do not meet traffic engineering safety design standards. - implement signage guidelines: o signs should be pedestrian oriented in neighborhood commercial areas, o off-premise signs are inappropriate and should be removed, o signs should be flat on buildings and any free standing signs for commercial centers should use a kiosk concept. - provide landscaped buffers between commercial and residential uses. Use of lightproof fencing of compatible materials and colors are encouraged. - parking lots should have delineated appropriate parking layout and traffic flow pattern, ground landscaping and trees should be used to reduce the impact of large areas of asphalt. - Street trees should be placed in the parking strip to continue the boulevard aspect of the surrounding residential strectscapes. DRAFT - Page 25 - Building height limitations should step-back starting with two stories and going higher in locations when a higher base zone height is allowed. ENERGY CCNSERVATICN Strategies for energy conservation involve both conservation within individual structures and the effect of land use patterns on energy efficiency. Structure and Site Design Individuals control energy conservation through design of structures and sites. Development and building codes also come into play. Many energy saving techniques have been published in recent years identifying ways to improve energy efficiency, but they have not been widely applied to existing structures. The perceived cost/benefit of retrofitting for energy conservation limits its application. The city should investigate strategies supporting increased use of energy conservation techniques on a citywide basis. Land Use Patterns Land use patterns have a significant impact on energy consumption. The density and arrangement of land development affect travel time and the amount of energy travel consumes. A strategy to reduce energy consumption involves containment of growth through high density. Development to implement this strategy employment opportunities and commercial facilities should be located close to higher density residential areas. Concentrated urban areas consume less energy, but such concentration imposes other environmental and personal costs. Pollution increases with higher density and there can be a reduction in housing amenities. Land use controls can not easily arrange residential and employment locations to minimize work journeys because workers commute throughout the metropolitan area. However, land use controls may more easily influence non- work journeys, such as, trips for shopping, school, recreational, and social purposes. The following policies would encourage land use linkages that reduce non-work journeys: - Locate facilities attracting non-work journeys at important transportation nodes. - Concentrate high density residential uses adjacent to growth centers. DRAFT - Page 26 City-wide Energy Conservation Energy conservation should be addressed comprehensively as a city-wide issue. Increasing energy costs in the future will provide strong pressure for improved local ordinances and energy saving adjustments to development patterns. Energy saving development policies that would benefit residents of the Northwest Community are listed below. These policies need to be closely analyzed with respect to their effect on the city as a whole. e - Use landscaping to shade buildings, parking lots, streets and other paved areas. - Use windbreaks (trees, hedges, fendes and berms) to protect buildings from winter winds. - Provide convenience shopping and service facilities in residential neighborhoods at appropriate locations. - Develop facilities to encourage bicycling and walking. - Provide amenities to encourage use of mass transit. - Increase densities near activity centers. - Use clustering even at low residential densities. - Encourage infill development. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT A Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is a comprehensive multi-year schedule of projects and funding sources for public facility improvements within the city. The CIP is where the relationship between capital needs, community goals and available resources are brought into balance. The Capital Improvements element of this plan depicts the capital needs necessary to achieve the goals and objectives set for the Northwest Community. Future capital improvement programming related to the community should be directed by the goals and priorities of this plan. Proposed capital improvement projects include parks, storm drainage, public buildings, water and sewer facilities, and streets. Because the Northwest Community is mostly developed many of these facilities are in place but need to be upgraded due to age or condition. Capital improvement planning and programming is an ongoing process. City needs and priorities are constantly being reevaluated. Projects and schedules identified in this plan are therefore subject to modification. DRAFT - Page 27 Proposed Capital Improvement Projects In addition to listing project needs, a priority level and cost estimate, if available, is provided in the capital improvements list. Cost estimates reflect present values and are not adjusted for inflation. • DRAFT - Page 28 Streets Project Project Schedule Cost Estimate Major Streets 700 N. Redwood Rd - 2200 W. 700,000 2200 W. from 700 N.-2100 N. 3,700,000 1700 N. from 2200 W.-Redwood Rd 1,000,000 2300 N. Redwood Rd-I 215 1,000,000 1 2100 N. 3800 W.-West Davis Highway 1,850,000 Local SID Street Needs Walnut Drive from 1300-1400 W. (street dedication) - Cornell St. from 500-600 N. - Colorado St.-Ouray Ave. - 1500 W. south of 600 N. - Gertie Ave. - Hoyt Place Block Redesign (planning) 5,000 Storm Drains Project Project Schedule Cost Estimate CWA#4 Drainage Ditch 1,200,000 Redwood detention basin Ditch covering 700 N. Misc. pipe improvements Rose Park Drainage 830,000 Parks Project Project Schedule Cost Estimate Rosewood Park 5-10 years 200,000 Riverside Park (parking) 5-10 years 150,000 Riverside Park (irrigation) 5-10 years 150,000 Westpointe Park #1 5-10 years 275,000 Westpointe Park #2 - Northwest Mini-park 1100N-1000W - Public Buildings Project Project Schedule Cost Estimate Fire Station #12 (land & design) 147,280 (construction) 731,940 DRAFT - Page 29 Location of Fire Hydrant Needs 640 North 1400 West 640 North Colorado Street 640 American Beauty Dr. 1141 Lafayette Dr. 1244 Clark Ave. 830 Picture Dr. 1040 West 600 North 900 West - west side of street 940 Cornell St. from N. Temple to 800 North 1105 West 1000 North Note: Individual fire hydrants are not classified as a capital improvement item due to low cost level. Installation of needed fire hydrants should occur when the city Water Department adds to or upgrades the water system in the Northwest Community. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES The successful implementation of the Master Plan Update depends on the follow-through efforts by neighborhood groups, city officials, city staff, and private developers. Through a combined effort the Northwest Community Master Plan's goals can be realized. The implementation strategy summary chart outlines actions necessary to carry out the goals and objectives of the Master Plan. The chart identifies initiators of certain proposed actions. DRAFT - Page 30 Table 4 Implementation Strategies Summary 0 - Potential initiator (or requires coordination) # - Requires coordination Conauunity Proposed Action Private Council City State • AState Office Complex # # 0 Rezone residential uses in B-3 areas to appropriate zone 0 0 Develop detailed land use plan north of golf course # # 0 Develop detailed land use plan north of International Airport # # 0 Develop bike paths # 0 Acquire & develop park in census tract 4 # # 0 Develop neighborhood commercial revitalization strategy # # 0 Develop community level commercial services 0 # # Develop specific plan for North Temple commercial strip # # 0 Develop Hoyt Place block # # 0 redesign Install fire hydrants 0 Develop parks in Westpointe # # 0 Develop wetlands park # 0 0 DRAFT - Page 31 vidry, A 0. D 3 1 A r kr FIRE DEPARTMENT PETER O. PEDERSON 315 EAST 200 SOUTH CHIEF OF FIRE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CRTY. UTAH 84111 799-4101 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: August 4, 1989 RE: Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and State of Utah, Department of Health, Division of Health Services. Recommendation: That the City Council agrees to this cooperation agreement between the State of Utah Department of Health, Division of Health Services, will provide grant funds under provisions of E.M.S. Per-Capita Grants Program, according to the Emergency Medical Services Grants Program to Salt Lake City Fire Department in the sum not to exceed $61, 856.00 for the purpose to fund E.M.S. training testing, and certification programs for a one-time purpose of E.M.S. equipment used for patient care, transportation or communication purposes. Availability of Funds: None required. Submitted by: 41010 Chief of Fire Department POP/aa Encls. - 16 Copies RESOLUTION NO. OF 1990 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND STATE OF UTAH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, DIVISION OF HEALTH SERVICES WHEREAS, Title 11 Chapter 13 of the Utah Code Annotated 1953 as amended allows public entities to enter into cooperative agreements to provide joint undertakings and services; and WHEREAS, the attached agreement has been prepared to accomplish said purposes; THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1 . That it does hereby approve the attached agreement generally described as follows: To provide grant funds under provisions of "E.M.S . Per-Capita Grants Program" , according to the Emergency Medical Services Grants Program to Salt Lake City Fire Department in the sum not to exceed $61, 856 . 00 for the purpose to fund E.M.S . training, testing, and certification programs for the onetime purchase of E .M.S . equipment used for patient care, transportation or communication purposes . 2 . Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah is hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation and to act in accordance with its terms . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City this day of , 1990 . SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER FMN:cc UTAH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 288 North 1460 West Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 State Contract Number CONTRACT Procurement Information See page 2 1. SOURCE OF FUNDS: CFDA#: 2. COMPENSATION TYPE: 3. LEGAL STATUS OF CONTRACTOR: Federal Fixed Price [ ] Sole Proprietor X State EMS Grants, Competitive/Per Capita X Cost Reimbursement [ ] Non-Profit Corporation Contractor's Share _ Fee for Service [] For-Profit Corporation Low Org# 2871 Activity# A747 &A748 _ Other [] Partnership [X] Governmental Agency 4. STATE AGENCY INFORMATION: 5. NAME OF CONTRACTOR: EMS Grants Program Division: Community Health Services Bureau: Emergency Medical Services NAME OF CONTRACTOR: Salt Lake City Contact Person: Richard L Warburton ADDRESS: 315 East 200 South Phone Number: (801) 538-6435 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 6. CONTRACTING PARTIES: This contract is between the State of Utah Department of Health, herein referred to as DEPARTMENT, and Salt Lake City herein referred to as CONTRACTOR. 7. CONTRACT PERIOD: The term of this contract shall begin on August 1, 1989 -and terminate on June 30, 1990, unless otherwise modified, extended, or terminated in accordance with the terms and conditions of this contract 8. CONTRACT AMOUNT: Contractor will be paid a maximum amount of$61,856.00 J. GENERAL PURPOSE OF CONTRACT: The purpose of this contract is to improve the quality of emergency medical services in Utah by allocating funds to prehospital emergency medical service provider agencies for specified and discretionary use in accordance with 26-8-2.5, Utah Code Annotated and Department expenditure guidelines. 10. REFERENCE TO ATTACHMENTS: Attachments included as part of this contract. Attachment A - General Provisions 11. DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED INTO THIS CONTRACT BY REFERENCE BUT NOT ATTACHED HERETO: a. AU other governmental laws, regulations, or actions applicable to Services provided herein. b. CONTRACTOR's FY 1990 grant application is made part of this contract by reference. IN WETNESS WHEREOF,the parties have agreed to the provisions of this contract and cause this contract to be executed. CONTRACTOR: SALT LAKE CRY UTAH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Signature of authorized individual Signature of authorized individual By: By: Typed Name: Typed Name: Sheldon Elman Title: Date: Title: Deputy Director Date: Federal tax ID# 88308 Page 1 UTAH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SIGNATURE PAGE-STATE APPROVAL ,N ORG #: 2871 ACTIVITY : A748 $60,158.00 A747 $ 1,698.00 CONTRACT NAME: EMS COMPETITIVE AND PER CAPITA GRANTS PROGRAM CONTRACTOR: SALT LAKE CITY APPROVED AS TO AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: Date Division Management Service Coordinator Date Department of Health Financial Manager Date State Division of Finance APPROVAL BY DIVISION DIRECTOR: Date Brett Lazar, M.D., M.P.H., Director _.vision of Community Health Services PROCUREMENT: This contract is entered into as a result of: (please indicate) X 1.a contractual agreement between the State and a governmental entity exempt from procurement as provided by State purchasing rules. 2.a Sole Source contractor justified by attached memorandum approved by the Division of Purchasing. 3.the procurement process on requisition # FY COMPLETE ON COST REIMBURSEMENT CONTRACT ONLY a. AUDIT INFORMATION: Provide the name, address and telephone number of the STATE staff person responsible for the contract administration an monitoring function: (See information on p.1 #4 State Agency Information). 1. What audits and reviews are required of this contract? Financial? Yes_ No X Program Compliance Yes_ No X How often? How often? By whom? By whom? b. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS: Are any declared by CONTRACTOR? Yes_ No X See RELATED PARTIES-General Provisions, paragraph 18 List Related Parties to whom payments are being made: Name Relationship Purpose of payment 88308 Page 2 LOW ORG #: 2871 ACTIVITY: A748 $ 60,158.00 A747 $ 1,698.00 FUNDING: EMS COMPETITIVE AND PER CAPITA GRANTS PROGRAM SPECIAL PROVISIONS A. STATE Agrees to: 1. Provide funds to the CONTRACTOR in the amount not exceeding $61,856.00, in accordance with provisions on the budget page. 2. Reimburse CONTRACTOR for initial training of personnel in STATE certifiable training programs following completion of training and certification by the STATE. 3. Process payments upon receipt of claims for reimbursement from CONTRACTOR for expenditures not to exceed the total of the amount shown in A.1. above. 4. Vest title to any and all equipment acquired through the expenditure of funds pursuant to this contract with the CONTRACTOR (26-8-2.5 Utah Code Annotated). This supersedes General Provision 8-a. B. CONTRACTOR Agrees to: 1. Regarding competitive grant awards noted on the budget page, arrange for the purchase and installation of items and/or the completion of tasks specified on the budget page in accordance with the CONTRACTOR's FY 1990 grant application. 2. Regarding per capita grant awards noted on the budget page, limit the expenditure of funds under this contract to the following purposes: EMS training, testing and certification programs and for the purchase of EMS equipment used for patient care, transportation, or communication purposes. Funds shall not be used for routine operational expenses or to fund new local government emergency medical services, if the new service will be competing with existing licensed emergency medical services. 3. Regarding competitive grant awards noted on the budget page, complete special projects in accordance with objectives and methodologies described in the CONTRACTOR's FY 1990 grant application and funding limitations as provided for on the budget page. The CONTRACTOR shall also provide a final written report to the STATE within sixty days of contract termination. 4. Provide for the 24 hour operation and maintenance of all communication equipment purchased under this contract. 5. Where this contract provides for the purchase of computer equipment or computer software, use the computer primarily to record and manage emergency medical services (EMS) data, gathered to comply with the requirements of the EMS Bureau data system. The data system includes the prehospital incident report system, the emergency department log system and the trauma registry. Such information shall be recorded in the electronic format specified by the EMS Bureau and transmitted to the Bureau in a timely manner. After the EMS data requirements are met, the computer may be used for other EMS administrative tasks or agency functions. Page 3 LOW ORG #: 2871 ACTIVITY: A748 $ 60,158.00 A747 $ 1,698.00 FUNDING: EMS COMPETITIVE AND PER CAPITA GRANTS PROGRAM 6. Submit claims for reimbursement with copies of invoices which are consistent with items described on the budget page. Where per capita funds are used, reimbursement is contingent upon the items purchased being consistent with Item B-2, Special Provisions. The final claim shall be submitted to the STATE no later than July 15, 1990. Reimbursement will not be made for claims received after this date. However, all reimbursable items must have been received or completed prior to the termination date of the contract. All copies must be legible. 7. Expend money acquired through the disposition of equipment purchased under this contract only for equipment used in the provision of emergency medical services. Page 4 LOW ORG #: 2871 ACTIVITY: A748 $ 60,158.00 A747 $ 1,698.00 FUNDING: EMS COMPETITIVE AND PER CAPITA GRANTS PROGRAM BUDGET PAGE SALT LAKE CITY Division of Community Health Services August 1, 1989 to June 30, 1990 QUAN- UNIT TOTAL LOCAL STATE TITY DESCRIPTION COST COST SHARE SHARE COMPETITIVE GRANT FUNDS 1 Mega Max $ 3,396 $ 3,396 $ 1,698 $ 1,698 PER CAPITA GRANT FUNDS 60,158 0 60,158 Total $63,554 $ 1,698 $61,856 NOTE: Regarding competitive grant funds, item costs shown for continuing medical education (CME) and equipment are estimates only. The STATE share is 50% of actual costs, with the following exceptions as applicable: 1) ambulances or rescue vehicles, for which the STATE share will be $15,000 per unit and; 2) initial training for STATE certifiable personnel which does not require local matching funds. Actual costs per item in excess of estimates shown shall be assumed by the CONTRACTOR. Where actual costs are below the estimated item costs shown, the STATE share shall be reduced accordingly. Regarding per capita grant funds, these funds are for discretionary use by the CONTRACTOR and may be used only for the purposes noted under Special Conditions B-2. No matching funds are required. If desired, per capita grant funds may be used as matching funds for competitive grant awards noted above, where such awards are in compliance with Special Condition B-2. Page 5 UTAH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR CONTRACTS WITH OTHER UTAH GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES 1. As used throughout these General rrovisions, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth herein: a. "Contractor" means the person, or government agency, as designated in the heading, who is performing the services or delivering the items described in this contract. b. "State" means the State of Utah. c. "Department" means the Utah Department of Health. d. "Director" means the Executive Director of the Utah Department of Health or duly authorized representative. e. "Subcontract" means any Contract between the Contractor herein and a third party for the provision of items or services which the original Contractor has himself/itself contracted with the Department to perform, except purchase orders for standard commercial equipment, products, or services. f. "Recipient" means individual persons who are eligible for services provided by the Department or by an authorized Contractor of the Department. g. "Local health department" means a city-county or district health department. h. "City-County health department" means a local department established under 26-24-5 Utah Code Ann. 1953, as amended, which serves a county and municipalities located within those counties. i. "District health department" means a local health department existing under 26-24-6 Utah Code Ann. 1953, as amended, which serves two or more contiguous counties and municipalities located within those counties. j. "Public Officer" means any elected or appointed officer of the State or any of its political subdivisions who occupy policy-making posts but excluding legislators, legislative employees, and special employees. k. "Special employee" means: (1) Any member of any commission, board, division, council, committee, or authority of the State serving on a part-time basis, either with or without compensation; or (2) Any person who is appointed or employed by the State, a political subdivision, or an agency to perform special or temporary duties, either with or without compensation, for an aggregate of less than 800 hours during any period of 365 days. 1 . "Public employee" means any persons who are not public officers who are employed on a full, part-time, or contract basis by the State of any of its political subdivisions but excluding legislators, legislative employees, and special employees. m. "Equipment" means capital equipment which costs $500 or more and has a useful life of one year or more. -1- 89006 n. "State Law" includes, but is not limited to, statutes, rules and regulations of the State. o. "Federal Law" includes, but is not limited to, statutes, rules and regulations of the Federal Government. p. The definitions set forth in 63-56-5 of the "Utah Procurement Code," Utah Code Ann. 1953, as amended, are incorporated herein by reference. q. "General Provisions" means those provisions of this contract which are set forth under the heading "General Provisions." r. "Special Provisions" means those provisions of this contract which are in addition to the General Provisions. 2. CONFLICT BETWEEN PROVISIONS If the General Provisions and Special Provisions conflict, the Special Provisions shall govern. In the event that the contractor's terms, conditions, specifications, or scope of work conflict with those of the Department, the Department's terms, conditions, specifications, and scope of work shall prevail for purposes of contract interpretation. 3. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS a. This contract agreement shall become effective on the date specified in the contract, provided that it is signed by the Director. b. This contract shall be construed in accordance with Utah law and any legal action there upon shall be initiated in an appropriate court of the State of Utah. c. The Contractor shall obtain and maintain all licenses, permits, and authority necessary to do business and render services under this Contract, and shall comply with all laws regarding unemployment insurance disability insurance, and workmen's compensation. d. The parties agree that the Contractor shall be deemed independent from the Department in the performance of this Contract, and shall comply with all laws regarding unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and workmen's compensation. As such, the Contractor shall have no authorization, express or implied to bind the Department to any agreement, settlement, liability, or understanding whatsoever, and agrees not to perform any acts as agent for the Department except as expressly set forth herein. e. Exclusive of salary which is paid under this contract, no public officer or public employee shall, through the use of his official position, secure or gain a pecuniary benefit arising out of the execution or implementation of this Contract, in violation of the Public Officers' and Employees' Ethics Act Section 67-16-1 et. seq., Utah Code Ann. (1953). f. CONTRACTOR represents that none of it's officers or employees are officers or employees of the STATE of Utah. (Section 67-16-8, UCA 1953, as amended.) g. The declaration by any court or other binding legal source that any provision of this contract is illegal and void shall not affect the legality and enforceability of any other provision of this contract unless said provisions are mutually dependent. -2- 89006 4. OTHER CONTRACTS The Department may perform additional work related to this Contract or award other contracts for such work. The Contractor shall cooperate fully with other contractors and/or public officers and public employees in the scheduling of and coordination of its own work with any additional work. The Contractor shall afford other contractors reasonable opportunity for the execution of their work and shall not commit or permit any act which will interfere with the performance of work as scheduled by any other contractor or by public officers and public employees. This section shall be included in all subcontracts and will be included in the contracts of all contractors with wham this Contractor will be required to cooperate. The Department shall equitably enforce this section as to all contractors, to prevent the imposition of unreasonable burdens on any contractor. a. Unless otherwise agreed by the terms of this Contract, the Contractor shall not subcontract with any other party for the furnishing of the work or services contracted for herein without the prior written approval of the Department. When authority to subcontract is granted, the Contractor agrees to use written subcontracts drawn in conformity with Federal and State laws which are appropriate to the activity covered by the subcontract, which shall include all of the general provisions set forth herein, and which shall apply with equal force to the subcontract, as if the Subcontractor were the Contractor referred to herein. The Contractor is responsible for contract performance whether or not subcontractors are used. The Contractor shall submit a copy of each subcontract to the Department for approval at least 20 days prior to its effective date. b. No rights or obligations of the Contractor under this Contract shall be assigned without the prior written consent of the Department. 5. OWNERSHIP OF INFORMATION Exclusive of confidential medical records, title to all reports, information, data, computer data elements, and software prepared by the Contractor in performance of this Contract shall vest in the State, unless otherwise provided in this Contract. Subject to applicable State and Federal laws, regulations, and contract requirements, the State shall have full and complete rights to reproduce, duplicate, disclose, and otherwise use all such information. Use of medical records by state personnel is governed by Section 26-25-1 through 26-25-5 Utah Code Ann. (1953) and will be strictly observed. 6. CONFIDENTIALITY OF RECORDS The Contractor shall establish, maintain and practice procedures and controls that are in compliance with Federal and State laws, and that are acceptable to the Department for the purpose of assuring that no information contained in the Contractor's records or obtained from the Department or others in carrying out its functions under this Contract, shall be used or disclosed by it, its agents, officers, or employees except as is essential to the performance of duties under this Contract. Persons requesting such information should be referred to the Department to assess compliance with Title 26, Chapter 25 Utah Code Ann. (1953). The Contractor also agrees that any information pertaining to recipients shall not be divulged, other than to officers or employees of Contractor as is required for the performance of duties under the Contract, except upon the prior written consent of the Department. 7. RECORD KEEPING, AUDITS, AND INSPECTIONS a. All Contractors agree that the Contractor and any Subcontractors shall maintain financial and operation records in sufficient detail to document all transactions related to the disbursement of contact funds. The Contractor and any Subcontractors shall maintain and make available for audit and inspection all records relating to Contract services, requirements, and expenditures until all audits initiated by State and Federal auditors are completed, or for a period of five years from the date of termination of this Contract, whichever is shorter, and for such period as is required by any other paragraph of this Contract, including the following. -3- R9006 (1) Records which relate to disputes, litigation, or the settlements of claims arising out of the performance of this Contract, or to cost and expenses of this Contract as to which exception has been taken by the Director, shall be retained by the Contractor until disposition has been made of such disputes, litigation, claims or exceptions. (2) Local health departments agree to comply with Federal regulations and Utah Code Ann. 1953, as amended, by obtaining independent financial and compliance audits annually. Audits are to be performed in accordance with the United States Office of Management and Budget Circular A-128. Copies of audits shall be retained by local health departments and available on request by the State. B. SUBMISSION OF REPORTS-FOR PAYMENT a. Contractor agrees that payments made by the Department to the Contractor are conditioned upon receipt of applicable, accurate, and complete reports to be submitted by the Contractor. The Department shall pay for completed services within 60 days after receipt of the Contractor's invoice. b. Reimbursement of expenditure contracts: Contractor agrees to submit to the Department monthly expenditure reports within twenty (20) days following the end of the month in which the expenditures were made. Claims shall be made on State claim forms and shall total actual expenditures less fees collected, if any. c. Fee-for-service contracts: Contractor agrees to submit to the State monthly billings within twenty (20) days following the end of the month in which the services were provided. Billings shall be sufficiently detailed to indicate the number of services provided and the cost of each service. RECOUPMENT OF CONTRACT PAYMENTS Unacceptable Expenditures: The Contractor agrees to reimburse the Department for all contract funds expended which are determined by the Department, based upon an audit, to not have been expended by the Contractor in accordance with the terms of this Contract. Such a contract shall be considered executory until such repayment is made. The Department may also elect to withhold reimbursement amounts from any further payments due Contractor under this Contract, any other current contract between the State and the Contractor, or any future payments due Contractor dealing with a similar activity from Department under a subsequent agreement. 10. WARRANTY Contractor warrants that: a. All services shall be performed in conformity with the requirements of this Contract by qualified personnel in accordance with generally recognized standards. b. All nonservice items furnished pursuant to this Contract shall be free from defects and shall conform to Contract requirements. Any items determined by the Department to be in nonconformity with this warranty shall be repaired or replaced at the Department's option and at the Contractor's expense, for up to one year following the completion or termination of this Contract. 11. MODIFICATIONS AND WAIVERS a. This instrument contains the entire Agreement between the parties, and no statements, promises, or inducements made by either party or agent of either party which are not contained in the written agreement are valid or binding. -4- 84006 • b. The terms, scope of work, or amount in this Agreement may not be enlarged, modified, or reduced except by wirtten amendment signed by the parties. No chanage, alteration, or erasure of any printed portion of this Agreement such as correction of typo errors is valid or binding unless agreed to and initialed by both parties. 12. INDEMNIFICATION Both parties are governmental entities under the "Utah Governmental Immunity Act," Title 63 Chapter 30 Utah Code Ann. 1953 as amended. Consistent with the terms of this Act, it is mutually agreed that neither party is responsible nor liable to the other party for wrongful or negligent acts which it commits or which is committed by its agents, officials or employees. Neither party waives any defenses otherwise available under the Governmental Immunity Act. 13. DEFAULT AND TERMINATION a. Both parties shall have the right to terminate this Contract in whole or in part with cause which includes but is not limited to, failure to perform any requirements of this Contract or failure to make satisfactory progress toward performance. In such case, the party terminating the contract shall transmit 15 day notice of intent to terminate citing the cause for termination to the other party by certified mail, return receipt requested. If the default is not cured within the 15 day notice period to the satisfaction of the terminating party, this Contract shall then terminate 45 days from receipt of the notice or at a later date specified in the notice. b. Financial obligations of the state, payable after the current fiscal year, are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted, or otherwise available. The Department agrees that it will use its best efforts to obtain such funds. In the event funds are not appropriated or otherwise are unavailable to continue the payments under this Contract, the Department may terminate this Contract by giving thirty (30) days' written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, effective upon receipt of such later date as specified in the notice. c. If required by a reduction in Federal funding, or otherwise required by Federal or State Law, the amounts authorized in this Contract shall be reduced or the Contract terminated with thirty (30) days' written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested to the Contractor. d. If the Contractor defaults in any manner in the performance of any obligation under this Contract, or if audit exceptions are identified, the Department may, at its option and in addition to other available remedies, either adjust the amount of payment or withhold payment until satisfactory resolution of the default or exception. The Contractor, shall have the the right to written notice of the Department's action in adjusting the amount of payment or withholding payment. Under no circumstances shall the Department authorize payment to the Contractor that exceeds an amount specified in the Contract without an approved amendment to the Contract. The Department may, at its option, withhold final payment under the Contract until receipt of all final reports and deliverables. e. In the event of termination as provided in this section, the Contractor shall stop all work as specified in the notice of termination and immediately notify all subcontractors in writing to do the same. f. The Contractor shall continue the performance of this Contract to the extent not terminated under the provisions of this section. h. In the event the Director terminates this Contract in whole or part as provided in this section, the Department may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may deem appropriate, services similar to those terminated. -5- 89006 i. Should the Director procure other services as provided in subparagraph h, the Contractor shall not be liable for any excess costs for failure to perform this Contract unless failure to perform results fran Contractor's fault or negligence. If the failure to perform is caused by the default of a subcontractor, the Contractor shall be liable if the services to be furnished by the subcontractor were obtainable fran other sources in sufficient time to permit the Contractor to meet the required schedule. j. If the Contract is terminated as provided herein, the Director, in addition to any other rights provided in this section, may require the Contractor to transfer title to and deliver to the Department, in the manner and to the extent directed by the Director, such partially completed reports or other documentation as the Contractor has specifically produced or specifically acquired for the performance of any part of this Contract as has been terminated. Payments for completed reports and other documentation delivered to and accepted by the Director shall be in an amount agreed upon by the Contractor and the Director. k. The rights and remedies of the Department enumerated in this section shall be in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by or under this Contract and/or available at law or equity. 14. DISPUTES a. Any disputes pertaining to this Contract shall be governed by the rules of the Department, or appropriate Division thereof, in accordance with Utah State law and any applicable Federal law. 15. FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS The Contractor shall comply with: a. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 USC 2000e) which prohibits discrimination against any employee or applicant for employment or any applicant or recipient of services under Federally assisted programs, on the basis or race, religion, color, or national origin. b. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, amended, which prohibits discrimination in the employment or advancement in employment of qualified persons because of physical or mental handicap. c. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1975, which mandate that all persons, regardless of race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin or political affiliation, shall have equal access to employment opportunities. d. Executive Order No. 11246 which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. e. Mandatory standards and policies relating to energy efficiency which are contained in the State Energy Conservation Plan issued in compliance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act . (P.L. 94-163). (This provision applies only to contracts funded in any part by federal dollars.) f. Section 306 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 1857(h)), Section 508 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1368), Executive Order 11138, and EPA regulations (40 CFR Part 15). (This provision applies only to contracts in excess of $100,000 which are funded in any part by federal dollars.) 16. NOTICES Whenever notice is required pursuant to the terms of this Contract, such notice shall be in writing, shall be delivered by certified mail, return receipt requested, and shall be directed to the person at the address specified for such purpose, or to such other persons and/or addressees as either party may designate to the other party by written notice. 89006 THIRD PARTY COLLECTIONS ,ntractor agrees to bill and collect funds from recipients and third parties where there is a third party ability for payment for services, i.e., Title XIX (Medicaid), private insurance, etc. RELATED PARTIES (Applies to Cost Reimbursement Contracts ONLY.) The CONTRACTOR shall not make payments for goods, services, facilities, salary/wages, professional fees, leases, etc., to related parties for contract expenses without the prior written consent of the STATE. Disbursements by the CONTRACTOR to related parties made without such prior approval may be disallowed on audit, and may result in an overpayment assessment. "Related Parties" for the purpose of this contract, shall mean organizations/persons related to the CONTRACTOR by any of the following: Marriage; Blood; One or more partners in common with the CONTRACTOR; One or more directors or officers in common with the CONTRACTOR; More than 10% common ownership, direct or indirect, with the CONTRACTOR. END OF GENERAL PROVISIONS -7- \aff 0:6g Ot") ' \OPP U\lAgael �n U� LEROY W. HOOTON, JR. NJ L V DIRECTOR WENDELL E. EVENSEN, P.E. S! 1 010 (i �Y►�I SUPERINTENDENT �t r [ �� .,.�t WATER SUPPLY 6 WATERWORKS E. TIM DOXEY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SUPERINTENDENT Water Supply & Waterworks WATER RECLAMATION PALMER DEPAULIS Water Reclamation MAYOR JAMES M. LEWIS, C.P.A. CHIEF FINANCE 6 1530 SOUTH WEST TEMPLE ACCOUNTING OFFICER SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 GEORGE JORGENSEN, P.E. CHIEF ENGINEER January 19, 1990 TO: City Council RE: Interlocal Agreement Between Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City and Sandy City Corporation for the Treatment of Little Cottonwood Creek Water. Recommendation: The City Council approve the agreement and forward it to the Mayor for execution on behalf of the City. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Discussion: As part of the annexation of Sandy City into the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City (District ) Sandy City cancelled its agreement with the Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District (SLCWCD ) for the treatment of its water rights in Little Cottonwood Creek by the District ' s Little Cottonwood Water Treatment Plant. This interlocal agreement allows the District to treat Sandy City' s water rights in Little Cottonwood Creek on a space available basis to the extent that treatment capacity is available in excess of the preferential rights of Salt Lake City. Also, Sandy is expected to annex early into the District during the calendar year 1990 and the District will start receiving ad valorem taxes during calendar year 1991, which was not contemplated in Resolution No. 1633; therfore, Sandy City will have to also pay 1991 taxes to the SLCWCD as required under their withdrawal agreement. This interlocal agreement provides that -1 City Council January 19, 1990 Page 2 the District will allow Sandy City a credit for its water treated in the Little Cottonwood Water Treatment Plant of $87 per acre- foot until such credit accumulates to the amount equal to the ad valorem taxes received by the District in 1991 . Sincerely, , GJ, , LeRoy wJ Hootonc, Director RESOLUTION NO. OF 1990 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION (SLC) , METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SALT LAKE CITY (MWD) AND SANDY CITY CORPORATION (SANDY) WHEREAS, Title 11, Chapter 13, Utah Code Ann. , 1953, as amended, allows public entities to enter into cooperative agreements to provide joint undertakings and services; and WHEREAS, the attached agreement has been prepared to accomplish said purposes; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1. It does hereby approve the form and substance of the attached agreement, which is one of several agreements necessary for Sandy City Corporation' s annexation into MWD. This one is entitled "Interlocal Agreement between Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City Corporation and Sandy City Corporation for the treatment of Little Cottonwood Creek Water. " This agreement involves when and with what priority Sandy' s Little Cottonwood Creek will be treated at MWD' s Little Cottonwood Water Treatment Plant. 2. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, is hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation and to act in accordance with its terms, subject to any minor changes which do not materially affect the rights and obligations of the City thereunder. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1990. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER MAYOR ATTEST: RLM: rc -2- INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SALT LAKE CITY AND SANDY CITY CORPORATION FOR THE TREATMENT OF LITTLE COTTONWOOD CREEK WATER This Interlocal Agreement is entered into in Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of February, 1990, by and between the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City, a metropolitan water district organized and existing under the laws of the State of Utah (hereinafter "MWD" ) and Sandy City Corporation, a municipal corporation of the State of Utah (hereinafter "Sandy" ) , with Salt Lake City Corporation as an approving party. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Sandy, by its Resolution No. 88-40C, dated May 17 , 1988, determined it to be in the best interest of Sandy and its inhabitants to annex into and become a part of MWD, and pursuant thereto, Sandy filed its application with the Board of Directors of MWD for consent to annex Sandy into MWD; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of MWD, by its Resolution No. 1633, dated January 9 , 1989, made and entered its Order granting Sandy' s application and fixing the terms and conditions upon which Sandy may be annexed to and become a part of MWD and transmitted to the governing body of Sandy a copy of its Order granting Sandy' s application and containing the terms and conditions thereof; and WHEREAS, annexation of Sandy into MWD initially was contemplated to occur on or before January 2 , 1992 , such that the taxable property located within Sandy and annexed into MWD would be subject to the ad valorem tax of MWD beginning in fiscal year 1992; and WHEREAS, MWD, Sandy and SLC deem it feasible and advisable to annex Sandy into MWD on or before September 1, 1990, and in that event the taxable property located within Sandy and annexed into MWD will be subject to the ad valorem tax of MWD one year earlier, i.e. during the fiscal year 1991, and accordingly, Sandy should be entitled to a credit which Sandy could apply toward the cost to Sandy for the treatment of Sandy' s Little Cottonwood Creek water in MWD' s Little Cottonwood Water Treatment Plant ( "LCWTP" ) ; and WHEREAS, Sandy entered into a Lease Agreement with Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District ( "SLCWCD" ) on May 8, 1983, which entitled SLCWCD to lease the waters accruing to Sandy' s water rights in Little Cottonwood Creek, as described in said Lease Agreement; and WHEREAS, Sandy has given notice of termination to SLCWCD of said Lease Agreement, to become effective May 8, 1990; and WHEREAS, after May 8, 1990, Sandy's Little Cottonwood Creek water will be available for treatment by MWD in the LCWTP. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits accruing to the parties hereto, the parties agree as follows: 2 1 . To the extent treatment capacity is available in the LCWTP in excess of the preferential right of SLC as provided in Utah Code Ann. S 73-8-18(2) and MWD Resolution No. 1633, dated January 9, 1989, MWD shall treat Sandy' s Little Cottonwood Creek water in the LCWTP and make such treated water available to Sandy at the LCWTP. 2. Sandy shall be entitled to a credit of $87 . 00 per acre- foot for the cost of treatment and delivery of its Little Cottonwood Creek water by MWD until such credit accumulates to an amount equal to the ad valorem taxes received by MWD for the 1991 fiscal year from the taxable property located within Sandy upon its annexation into MWD on or before September 1 , 1990 . 3 . This Interlocal Agreement shall terminate at such time as the total accumulated cost to Sandy for water treated and delivered pursuant to this Interlocal Agreement equals the credit to Sandy for the ad valorem taxes received by MWD for the 1991 fiscal year from the taxable property located within Sandy and annexed into MWD, and thereafter, the cost to Sandy for water treated and delivered by MWD at the LCWTP shall be equal to the then current rate fixed by MWD' s Board of Directors for treated water made available to MWD' s member cities. 4 . This Interlocal Agreement embodies the entire agreement between the parties hereto, and it cannot be altered except by written instrument signed by both parties hereto. 3 5 . This Interlocal 'Agreement shall become effective on the date that Sandy is annexed to MWD, provided, however, in the event Sandy is not annexed to MWD on or before September 1, 1990, this Interlocal Agreement shall be void. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Interlocal Agreement the date and year first above written. ATTEST: METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SALT LAKE CITY By Secretary Chairman ATTEST: SANDY CITY CORPORATION By City Recorder Mayor APPROVED BY: ATTEST: SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION By City Recorder Mayor 4 STAFF RECOMENDATION APPROVAL OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT RELATING TO BOARD COMPOSITION OF THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT February 1, 1990 STAFF RECOMMENDATION BY: Ed Snow ACTIO N REQUESTED OF COl INCIL: To approve Interl.ocal Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and Sandy City Corporation regarding Metropolitan Water. District of Sa7.t. Lake City Resolution No. 1633 and Composition of its Board of Directors. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: As part of the Sandy City annexation into the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City (District), the District Board on January 9, 1989, passed Resolution No. 1633 fixing the terms and conditions upon which Sandy City could annex into the District. This interlocal agreement provides that Salt Lake City and Sandy City accept terms and conditions of the District's Resolution No. 1633 which is attached. Upon the annexation of Sandy City into the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City will have five Board members and Sandy City two. The board members will not be required to vote as a unit for their respective cities. The agreement also sets the respective terms of office for the incumbent directors, including the Ex-Officio Director and the new directors from Sandy City. The Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City is the one board to which the Council holds full and direct appointment power, under State statute. This interlocal agreement does not alter that appointment power. At this time, Salt. Lake City's Mayor holds an ex-officio slot on the board. This position would be phased out at the end of the current term ( 1992). As the terms of the ex-officio member and other board positions expire, the five directors will be appointed or reappointed by the Council in accordance with Utah law. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Interl.ocal Agreement. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move that we adopt the resolution authorizing the execution of an interlocal cooperation agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and Sandy City Corporation. r T. y LEROY W. HOOTON, JR. DIRECTOR c WENDELL E. EVENSEN, P.E_SUPERINTENDENT 1 Il te ;�� P f WATER SUPPLY 8 WATERWORKS E. TIM DOXEY DEPARTMENT,OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SUPERINTENDENT ,; PPI Water$U r ;&Waterworks_,♦ PALMER DEPAULIS WATER RECLAMATION �:.�Water Reclamation�` �- -? MAYOR JAMES M. LEWIS, C.P.A. "-s �...0 CHIEF FINANCE a :-153d-SOUTH WESTTEMPLE ACCOUNTING OFFICER SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 GEORGE JORGENSEN, P.E. CHIEF ENGINEER January 19, 1990 TO: City Council RE: Interlocal Agreement Between Salt Lake City Corporation and Sandy City Corporation Regarding Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City Resolution No. 1633 and Composition of -its Board of Directors. Recommendation: Approve the Interlocal Agreement and forwarded it to the Mayor for execution in behalf of the City. Availability of Funds: Not applicable. Discussion: As part of the Sandy City annexation into the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City (District) the District Board on January 9, 1989, passed Resolution No. 1633 fixing the terms and conditions upon which Sandy City may annex into the District. This interlocal agreement provides that Salt Lake City and Sandy City hereby accept the above terms and conditions of the District ' s Resolution No. 1633 and further sets the number of directors who will comprise the Board of Directors of the District. Salt Lake City upon the annexation of Sandy City into the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City shall have five ( 5 ) Board members and Sandy City shall have two ( 2 ) Board members, who shall not be required to vote as a unit for their respective cities and without regard to the tax value of property taxable for District purposes. City Council January 19, 1990 Page 2 This agreement further sets the respective terms of office for the incumbant directors, including the EN-Officio Director and the new directors from Sandy City. Sincerely, iLL L. � LeRoy Hooton, r. Director LWH:mfs RESOLUTION NO. OF 1990 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION ( SLC) AND SANDY CITY CORPORATION ( SANDY) WHEREAS, Title 11, Chapter 13, Utah Code Ann. , 1953, as amended, allows public entities to enter into cooperative agreements to provide joint undertakings and services; and WHEREAS, the attached agreement has been prepared to accomplish said purposes; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1 . It does hereby approve the form and substance of the attached agreement, which is one of several agreements necessary for Sandy City Corporation' s annexation into MWD. This one is entitled "Interlocal Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and Sandy City Corporation Regarding Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City Resolution 1633 and Composition of Its Board of Directors. " This agreement gives SLC' s approval of MWD Resolution 1633 which sets the terms and conditions for Sandy ' s annexation into MWD, and fixes the number of directors of MWD at seven ( 7 ) , with SLC having the right to appoint five ( 5 ) of said directors and Sandy two ( 2 ) . 2. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, is hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation and to act in accordance with its terms, subject to any minor changes which do not materially affect the rights and obligations of the City thereunder. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1990. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER MAYOR ATTEST : RLM: rc -2- INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND SANDY CITY CORPORATION REGARDING METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SALT LAKE CITY RESOLUTION NO. 1633 AND COMPOSITION OF ITS BOARD OF DIRECTORS THIS AGREEMENT is entered into in Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of February, 1990, by and between SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, a municipal corporation of the State of Utah (hereinafter "SLC" ) and SANDY CITY CORPORATION, a municipal corporation of the State of Utah, (hereinafter "Sandy" ) with METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SALT LAKE CITY (hereinafter "MWD" ) as an approving party. W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, Sandy, by its Resolution No. 88-40C, dated May 17 , 1988, determined it to be in the best interest of Sandy and its inhabitants to annex into and become a part of MWD and pursuant thereto, Sandy filed its application with the Board of Directors of MWD for consent to annex Sandy into MWD; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of MWD, by its Resolution No. 1633, dated January 9 , 1989, made and entered its Order granting Sandy' s application and fixing the terms and conditions upon which Sandy may be annexed into and become a part of MWD, and transmitted to the governing body of Sandy a copy of its Order granting Sandy' s application and containing the terms and conditions thereof; and WHEREAS, SLC and Sandy desire to accept and approve the terms and conditions of MWD Resolution No. 1633, and particularly, apportioning and fixing the terms of the members of the Board of Directors of MWD between the two cities comprising MWD upon Sandy' s annexation into MWD. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits which will accrue to the parties hereto, the parties agree as follows: 1 . SLC and Sandy hereby accept and approve the terms and conditions of MWD Resolution No. 1633, dated January 9, 1989 , to become effective only upon Sandy's annexation into MWD. 2 . SLC and Sandy agree that upon Sandy' s annexation into MWD the number of directors of MWD shall be fixed at seven, of which five directors shall be appointed by the legislative body of Salt Lake City and two directors shall be appointed by the legislative body of Sandy for as long as SLC and Sandy are the only two cities comprising MWD, and the number of directors of MWD shall not be changed except upon written authorization signed by SLC and Sandy with the written approval of MWD. 3 . SLC and Sandy agree that upon annexation of Sandy into MWD, the incumbent directors of MWD, including the ex officio director, shall be designated as appointed by the legislative body of SLC and shall continue in office for the remainder of their respective unexpired terms, except that the office of ex 2 officio director shall terminate upon such annexation by operation of law and the incumbent ex officio director shall continue to serve as a director designated and appointed by the legislative body of SLC for a remaining term expiring on May 15, 1992 . Thereupon, and upon the expiration of the respective terms of office of the incumbent directors, those five offices of director shall be designated for appointment or reappointment by SLC in accordance with Utah Code Ann. S 73-8-20. Upon annexation of Sandy into MWD, the legislative body of Sandy shall appoint two directors to the board of MWD for initial terms expiring on May 15, 1991 and May 15, 1994, respectively, and upon the expiration of such initial terms, those two offices of director shall be designated for appointment or reappointment by Sandy in accordance with Utah Code Ann. S 73-8-20. Each director shall be entitled to one vote on all questions, orders, resolutions and ordinances coming before the board of MWD without regard to the taxable value of property taxable for MWD purposes in SLC or Sandy and shall not be required to vote as a unit representing their respective City. 4. This Interlocal Agreement represents the entire agreement between SLC and Sandy, as approved by MWD, regarding the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior agreements, representations , conversations and understandings of the parties, whether written or oral, concerning the subject matter hereof, 3 except as it may be controlled by the provisions of MWD Resolution No. 1633, dated January 9, 1989 . This Interlocal Agreement may be amended only by written instrument executed by SLC and Sandy and approved by MWD. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement to be effective as of the day and year first above written. ATTEST: SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION By CITY RECORDER MAYOR ATTEST: SANDY CITY CORPORATION By CITY RECORDER MAYOR APPROVED BY: ATTEST: METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SALT LAKE CITY By SECRETARY CHAIRMAN 4 LEROY W. HOOTON, JR. DIRECTOR WENDELL E. EVENSEN, P.E. I ) CI Wit�`4�p��aACAVI SUPERINTENDENT NJl1 1 1 hJ 1 WATER SUPPLY 8 WATERWORKS E. TIM DOXEY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SUPERINTENDENT Water Supply & Waterworks PALMER DEPAULIS WATER RECLAMATION Water Reclamation MAYOR JAMES M. LEWIS, C.P.A. CHIEF FINANCE& 1530 SOUTH WEST TEMPLE ACCOUNTING OFFICER SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 GEORGE JORGENSEN, P.E. CHIEF ENGINEER January 25, 1990 TO: City Council RE: Escrow Agreement For Annexation of Sandy Into the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City Recommendation: Approve the Escrow Agreement and forward it to the Mayor for execution in behalf of the City. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Discussion: As a result of Sandy City' s petition to annex into the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City (District) the District' s Board of Directors past Resolution No. 1633 on January 9, 1989 . This escrow agreement is to satisfy the terms and conditions of Resolution No. 1633 in which certain Interlocal Agreements must be entered into, and in connection therewith, the District, Salt Lake City and Sandy have deemed it necessary and advisable to enter into an Escrow Agreement to provide for the tendering, receipt, recording, and/or delivery of the documents or property as specified in the respective Interlocals. Sincerely, LeRoy W Hooton, Director LWH:mfs RESOLUTION NO. OF 1990 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR ANNEXATION OF SANDY CITY INTO THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SALT LAKE CITY WHEREAS, Title 11, Chapter 13, Utah Code Ann. , 1953, as amended, allows public entities to enter into cooperative agreements to provide joint undertakings and services; and WHEREAS, the attached agreement has been prepared to accomplish said purposes; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1 . It does hereby approve the form and substance of the attached agreement which is one of several agreements necessary for Sandy City' s annexation into the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City. This one is entitled "Escrow Agreement for Annexation of Sandy City in to Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City. " This agreement involves the instructions to Zions National Bank for holding and distributing documents relating to and necessary for Sandy City Corporation' s annexation into the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City. 2. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, is hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation and to act in accordance with its terms, subject to any minor changes which do not materially affect the rights and obligations of the City thereunder. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989 . SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER MAYOR ATTEST: RLM:rc -2- DRAFT: 1/22/90 ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR ANNEXATION OF SANDY CITY INTO THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SALT LAKE CITY This Escrow Agreement (hereinafter the "Agreement" ) is entered into as of the day of February, 1990 , by and among the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City, a metropolitan water district organized and existing under the laws of the State of Utah (hereinafter "MWD" ) , Salt Lake City Corporation, a munic- ipal corporation of the State of Utah (hereinafter "SLC" ) , Sandy City Corporation, a municipal corporation of the State of Utah (hereinafter "Sandy" ) , and Zions First National Bank, Salt Lake City, Utah (hereinafter the "Depository" ) . MWD, SLC, Sandy are sometimes hereinafter collectively called the "Parties . " GENERAL CONDITIONS This Agreement is executed by the Parties as a part of the annexation proceedings of Sandy into MWD. The delivery of documents , papers, money or property hereinafter described shall occur pursuant to and subject to the terms and conditions of pro- ceedings governing the annexation of Sandy into MWD , one condi- tion being the issuance of the formal Order of Withdrawal of Exclusion. of Sandy from the Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District (hereinafter the "Order" ) , said Order to be issued by the Third District Court of Salt Lake County, Utah (hereinafter the "Court" ) and secondly one condition being the filing of the Certificate of Proceedings by MWD pursuant to Res . 1633 . If , for whatever reason, the Order is not issued by the Court formalizing and confirming the exclusion of Sandy from the Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District on or before September 1 , 1990 , all Depository Property, as hereinafter described, shall be returned by the Depository to the person or entity that originally deliv- ered said Property to the Depository within 15 days thereafter , at which time this Agreement shall be automatically terminated. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, and for other good and valuable consideration, the Parties hereby deliver the Depository Prop- erty, as hereinafter described, to the Depository to be held and disposed of by said Depository in accordance with the duties , instructions , and upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth to which the undersigned hereby agree as follows : 1 . Appointment of Depository as Escrow Agent; Deposi- tory not a Party. MWD, SLC and Sandy hereby appoint the Deposi- tory ii. as escrow agent under this Agreement , and the Depository hereby accepts such appointment. The Depository is not and shall not consent to be or become a party to or bound by any agreement which may be evidenced by or arise out of the following instruc- tions , other than this Agreement . 2 . Liability Limitations . The Depository acts here- under as a Depository escrow agent only, and is not responsible or liable in any manner whatever for the sufficiency, correct- ness , genuineness or validity of any instrument deposited with it hereunder , including , in particular , any disbursement authoriza- tions, the form or execution of any instruments deposited with -2- it , or the identity, authority, or rights of any person executing or depositing the same. The Depository shall not incur any lia- bility in acting upon any notice, request , waiver , consent , receipt or other paper or document believed by the Depository to be genuine and signed by the proper party or parties . 3 . Notices; Defaults. The Depository shall not be required ( i ) to take or be bound by any notice of default by any person, or ( ii ) to take any action with respect to such default involving any expense or liability, unless written notice of such default by the undersigned or any of them is given an officer of the Corporate Trust Department of the Depository. 4 . Legal Advice. The Depository may consult with legal counsel in the event of any dispute or question as to the construction of the instructions contained herein or the Depository' s duties thereunder, and the Depository shall not be held liable for acting in accordance with any legal advice so received. 5 . First Lien. The Depository shall have a first lien upon the Depository Property and papers held by it hereunder for its compensation and for any costs , liability, expense or counsel fees it may incur. 6 . Disagreements, Claims Demands . In the event of any disagreement between the undersigned or any of them, and/or the person or entity named in the instructions contained herein , -3- and/or any other person, resulting in adverse or conflicting claims or demands being made in connection with or for any papers , money or property involved herein or affected hereby, the Depository may, at its option, refuse to comply with any such claim or demand so long as such disagreement shall continue, and in so doing the Depository ( i ) may refrain from making any deliv- ery or other disposition of any money, papers or property involved herein or affected hereby, and ( ii ) shall not be or become liable to the undersigned or any of them or to any person or entity for its failure or refusal to comply with such con- flicting or adverse claims or demands. The Depository shall be entitled to continue so to refrain and refuse so to act until : ( a) The rights of the adverse claimants are finally adjudicated in a court assuming and having jurisdiction of the parties and the money , papers and property involved herein or affected hereby; and/or (b) All differences are settled by agreement and the Depository is notified thereof in writing signed by all of the affected parties . 7 . Depository' s Fees . The fees for the services of the Depository hereunder are set forth in the Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit "A" . In addition, the Depository shall be entitled to reimbursement for all out-of-pocket expenses reason- ably incurred hereunder ( including , without limitation , fees of counsel ) . All such fees shall be computed on a fiscal or -4- calendar year period adjusted for any fractional part thereof (but not less than one quarter) , except that a fee for any period shall not be less than the minimum fee indicated on Exhibit "A" . It is agreed that additional compensation shall be paid to the Depository for any additional or extraordinary service it may be requested to render hereunder, and the Depository shall be reim- bursed for any out-of-pocket expenses ( including , without limita- tion, fees of counsel) reasonably incurred in connection with any such additional or extraordinary services. All fees charged by the Depository shall be paid 100% by Sandy. In the event the fees charged and due the Depository remain unpaid for a period of one year, the Depository shall have the right , and is hereby authorized, in its sole and absolute discretion, and without liability to any person to discontinue the escrow, terminate all duties hereunder , close all accounting or other records , and to destroy all documents , records and files or to retain such items in a dormant account status subject to the escheat laws of the State of Utah. 8 . Conditions Precedent to Escrow. The Depository shall not accept deposit of or receipt of any of the documents referred to in paragraph 9 of this Agreement until the following events have occurred and notice of said events have been deliv- ered to the Depository: (a) Delivery to Depository of conformed executed copies of the following Interlocal Agreements : -5- i . Interlocal Agreement Between Salt Lake City Corporation and Sandy City Corporation Regarding Little Cottonwood and Richards Ditch Wells and Sale of Surplus Water (hereinafter called " Interlocal I " ) . ii . Interlocal Agreement Between Metro- politan Water District of Salt Lake City and Sandy City Corpora- tion for the Sale of the Little Cottonwood Well and the Richards Ditch Well and Water Right for 2 , 000 Acre Feet of Water Annually (hereinafter called " Interlocal II " ) . iii . Interlocal Agreement Between the Metro- politan Water District of Salt Lake City and Salt Lake City Corporation for the Construction of Two Segments of Pipeline Within the Northwest Quadrant (hereinafter called " Interlocal III" ) . iv. Interlocal Agreement Between the Metro- politan Water District of Salt Lake City and Salt Lake City Corporation for Exchange of the Little Cottonwood Well and the Richards Ditch Well and the Water Rights Therein for Water Rights of Equal Use Value (hereinafter called " Interlocal IV" ) . v. Interlocal Agreement Among the Metro- politan Water District of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City Corpora- tion and Sandy City Corporation for Expansion of the Parley' s Water Treatment Plant (hereinafter called " Interlocal V" ) . -6- vi . Interlocal Agreement between Metro- politan Water District of Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District for Sale of Surplus Water and Exchange of Capacities (hereinafter called " Interlocal VII " ) . vii . Sandy and Salt Lake City Interlocal Cooperation and Boundary Agreement (hereinafter called "Interlocal VII " ) . viii . Interlocal Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and Sandy City Corporation Regarding Metropoli- tan Water District of Salt Lake City Resolution No. 1633 and Composition of its Board of Directors (hereinafter called " Interlocal VIII " ) . ix. Interlocal Agreement between Metropoli- tan Water District of Salt Lake City and Sandy City Corporation for the Treatment of Little Cottonwood Creek water (hereinafter called " Interlocal IX" ) . (b) Written notice by MWD of certification to the Board of MWD by Sandy of the results of an election held by Sandy on August 29 , 1989 , in accordance with Section 73-8-49( 2 ) , Utah Code Ann. ( c) Written notice by MWD that the Certificate of Proceedings by the Secretary of MWD has been filed with the Lieutenant Governor of the State of Utah in accordance with Section 73-8-49( 2 ) , Utah Code Ann. -7- 9 . Depository Property. The following items (herein called the "Depository Property" ) are subject to this Agreement : (a) Property Item No. 1 : A Warranty Deed executed by SLC in favor of MWD for 2 , 000 acre feet of water as specified in paragraph 1 of Interlocal IV. (b) Property Item No. 2 : A Quit Claim Deed executed by SLC in favor of MWD for certain lands as referenced in para- graph 2 (a) of Interlocal IV. ( c) Property Item No. 3 : A Quit Claim Deed executed by SLC in favor of MWD for land as described in paragraph 2 (b) of Interlocal IV. (d) Property Item No . 4 : A Grant of Right-of-Way executed by SLC in favor of MWD as described in paragraph 2 (c) of Interlocal IV. (e) Property Item No . 5 : A Grant of an Undivided Interest in a certain Right-of-Way executed by SLC in favor of MWD as described in paragraph 2 (d) of Interlocal IV. ( f ) Property Item No . 6 : A Bill of Sale executed by SLC in favor of MWD for certain facilities as described in paragraph 3 (a) of Interlocal IV. (g) Property Item No. 7 : A Bill of Sale executed by SLC in favor of MWD for certain facilities as described in paragraph 3 (b) of Interlocal IV. -8- (h) Property Item No. 8 : An Assignment of a Segrega- tion Application from SLC in favor of MWD for 2 , 000 acre feet as described in paragraph 4 of Interlocal IV. ( i ) Property Item No. 9 : A Warranty Deed executed by MWD in favor of SLC for 2 , 000 acre feet of water from the Little Dell Lake Reservoir as described in paragraph 5 of Interlocal IV. ( j ) Property Item No. 10 : An Assignment of a Segrega- tion Application from MWD in favor of SLC for 2 , 000 acre feet of water from Little Dell Lake Reservoir as described in paragraph 6 of Interlocal IV. (k) Property Item No . 11 : A Warranty Deed executed by MWD in favor of Sandy for 2 , 000 acre feet of water from certain wells as described in paragraph 1 of Interlocal II . ( 1) Property Item No . 12 : A Quit Claim Deed executed by MWD in favor of Sandy for certain lands described in paragraph 2 (a) of Interlocal II . (m) Property Item No. 13 : A Quit Claim Deed executed by MWD in favor of Sandy for certain lands as described in paragraph 2 (b) of Interlocal II . (n) Property Item No. 14 : A Grant of Right-of-Way executed by MWD in favor of Sandy as described in paragraph 2 (c ) of Interlocal II . -9- (o) Property Item No. 15 : A Grant of Undivided Interest in a Right-of-Way executed by MWD in favor of Sandy as described in paragraph 2 (d) of Interlocal II . (p) Property Item No. 16 : A Bill of Sale executed by MWD in favor of Sandy for a certain well as described in para- graph 3 (a) of Interlocal II . (q) Property Item No. 17 : A Bill of Sale from MWD to Sandy for a certain well described in paragraph 3 (b) of Interlocal II . ( r) Property Item No. 18 : An Assignment of a Segre- gation Application, which was filed originally by SLC and assigned to MWD, executed by MWD in favor of Sandy for 2 , 000 acre feet of water from certain wells as described in paragraph 4 of Interlocal II . 10 . Duties of Depository. Upon receipt of the Deposi- tory Property , the Depository shall inventory said Property, make such records of said Property as the Depository considers pru- dent , and deposit the Property in the Depository' s vault for safekeeping until directed to dispose of the Depository Property pursuant to the instructions herein , or until certain events occur whereupon the Depository shall carry out the acts described in the following paragraph ( including the subparagraphs thereunder ) . -10- (o) Property Item No. 15 : A Grant of Undivided Interest in a Right-of-Way executed by MWD in favor of Sandy as described in paragraph 2(d) of Interlocal II . (p) Property Item No. 16 : A Bill of Sale executed by MWD in favor of Sandy for a certain well as described in para- graph 3 (a) of Interlocal II . (q) Property Item No. 17 : A Bill of Sale from MWD to Sandy for a certain well described in paragraph 3 (b) of Interlocal II . ( r) Property Item No. 18 : An Assignment of a Segre- gation Application, which was filed originally by SLC and assigned to MWD, executed by MWD in favor of Sandy for 2 , 000 acre feet of water from certain wells as described in paragraph 4 of Interlocal II . 10 . Duties of Depository. Upon receipt of the Deposi- tory Property , the Depository shall inventory said Property, make such records of said Property as the Depository considers pru- dent , and deposit the Property in the Depository' s vault for safekeeping until directed to dispose of the Depository Property pursuant to the instructions herein, or until certain events occur whereupon the Depository shall carry out the acts described in the following paragraph ( including the subparagraphs thereunder ) . -10- 11 . Actions of Depository. The Depository shall not perform any action referred to in the following subparagraphs until MWD has delivered a certificate to the Depository certify- ing that ( i ) the 3 month period specified in section 73-8-49 Utah Code Ann, has expired and as of the date of the certificate no action has been brought contesting the validity of the proceed- ings for the annexation of Sandy into MWD, and ( ii ) Sandy has deposited certain funds, as described in paragraph 4 (a) of Interlocal V, in a restricted account in the name of MWD, and ( i i i ) Sandy has paid to MWD the sum of $250 , 000 as described in paragraph 9 of Interlocal II . Upon certificate of said notice, the Depository shall take the following actions in the following chronological order without further instructions : (a) Record in the Office of the Salt Lake County Recorder the Warranty Deed from SLC to MWD hereinabove referred to as Property Item No. 1 . (b) Record in the Office of the Salt Lake County Recorder the Quit Claim Deed from SLC to MWD hereinabove referred to as Property Item No. 2 . (c) Record in the Office of the Salt Lake County Recorder the Quit Claim Deed from SLC to MWD hereinabove referred to as Property Item No. 3 . -11- (d) Record in the Office of the Salt Lake County Recorder the Grant of Right-of-Way from SLC to MWD hereinabove referred to as Property Item No. 4 . ( e) Record in the Office of the Salt Lake County Recorder the Grant of Interest in a Right-of-Way from SLC to MWD hereinabove referred to as Prop- erty Item No. 5 . ( f ) Deliver to MWD the Bill of Sale from SLC hereinabove referred to as Property Item No. 6 . (g ) Deliver to MWD the Bill of Sale from SLC hereinabove referred to as Property Item No. 7 . ( h) Deliver to MWD the Assignment of Segregation Application from SLC hereinabove referred to as Property Item No . 8 , and record a duplicate original thereof with the State Engineer of Utah. ( i ) Record in the Office of the Salt Lake County Recorder the Warranty Deed from MWD to SLC for 2 , 000 acre feet of water hereinabove referred to as Property Item No. 9 and file a stamped copy with the State Engineer of Utah. ( j ) Deliver to SLC the Assignment of Segregation Application from MWD hereinabove referred to as -12- Property Item No. 10 , and record a duplicate original thereof with the State Engineer of Utah. ( k) Record in the Office of the Salt Lake County Recorder the Warranty Deed from MWD to Sandy for 2 , 000 acre feet of water hereinabove referred to as Property Item No. 11 and file a stamped copy with the State Engineer of Utah. ( 1) Record in the Office of the Salt Lake County Recorder the Quit Claim Deed from MWD to Sandy hereinabove referred to as Property Item No. 12 . (m) Record in the Office of the Salt Lake County S Recorder the Quit Claim Deed from MWD to Sandy hereinabove referred to as Property Item No. 13 . (n) Record in the Office of the Salt Lake County Recorder the Grant of Right-of-Way from MWD to Sandy hereinabove referred to as Property Item No. 14 . (o) Record in the Office of the Salt Lake County Recorder the Grant of Interest in a Right-of-Way from MWD to Sandy hereinabove referred to as Property Item No . 15 . (p) Deliver to Sandy the Bill of Sale from MWD hereinabove referred to as Property Item No . 16 . -13- (q) Deliver to Sandy the Bill of Sale from MWD hereinabove referred to as Property Item No. 17 . ( r ) Deliver to Sandy the Assignment of Segregation Application for 2 , 000 acre feet from MWD hereinabove referred to as Property Item No. 18 , and record of a duplicate original thereof with the State Engineer of Utah. 12 . Binding Effect . This Escrow Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties and Depository and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns . 13 . Governing Law. This Escrow Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Utah . 14 . Modification. No alteration or modification of this Escrow Agreement shall be effected unless in writing and executed by the Parties and Depository. 15 . Survival of Provisions . The terms, covenants , conditions and agreements of the Parties and Depository contained herein shall survive the execution and delivery of this Escrow Agreement . 16 . Paragraph Headings . Subject headings of the paragraphs and subparagraphs hereof are included for purposes of -14- convenience only, and shall not affect the construction or interpretation of any of the provisions hereof . 17 . Null or Void Provisions . If any provision or part of this Agreement shall be deemed by a court of competent juris- diction or other appropriate authority to be null, void or unenforceable , such shall not affect the validity and enforce- ability of the remainder on this Agreement , which shall continue in full force and effect . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties and Depository have executed this Agreement intending to be fully bound hereby. ATTEST: METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SALT LAKE CITY SECRETARY CHAIRMAN ATTEST: SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION CITY RECORDER MAYOR ATTEST: SANDY CITY CORPORATION CITY RECORDER MAYOR ATTEST: ZIONS FIRST NATIONAL BANK 200 : 010290A -15- LEROY W. HOOTON, JR. DIRECTOR T� WENDELL E. EENDENT , P.E. yI�T 10142 Tt/�\Tt t��`r +�.�i—\,�_' �( 1 SUPERINTENDENT II''111111 111C114 �11 WATER SUPPLY 8 WATERWORKS E. TIM DOXEY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SUPERINTENDENT Water Supply & Waterworks PALMER DEPAULIS WATER RECLAMATION Water Reclamation MAYOR JAMES M. LEWIS, C.P.A. CHIEF FINANCE a 1530 SOUTH WEST TEMPLE ACCOUNTING°FACER SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 GEORGE JORGENSEN, P.E. CHIEF ENGINEER January 19, 1990 TO: Salt Lake City Council RE: Conjunctive Water Management Plan entitled "Water Supply and Distribution Plan for Salt Lake County 1991-2000" Recommendation: Adopt a resolution adopting the plan. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Discussion: As a result of Sandy City's petition to annex into the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City (District ) and its withdrawal from the Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District (SLCWCD ) , the water managers from the above entities and Salt Lake City negotiated a 10-year plan to insure the efficient delivery of water within Salt Lake County utilizing existing water supplies, treatment and aqueduct capacities. The plan provides that Sandy City will annex into the District and be excluded from the SLCWCD. Besides utilizing capacities, the entities pledge to cooperate by joint master planning, install common communication and telemetry systems and negotiate boundary agreements to avoid duplication of services. Under the plan and the District ' s Resolution No. 1633, Salt Lake City will receive $2. 5 million for the construction of water supply mains in the Northwest Quadrant, receive approximately $8 million for the expansion of the Parley' s Water Treatment Plant Salt Lake City Council January 19, 1990 Page 2 and exchange 10 mgd of capacity from the Salt Lake Aqueduct to Jordan Valley Water Treatment Plant and Aqueduct for additional water deliveries to the City' s Northwest Quadrant. Salt Lake City preserved its preferential rights in the District' s water supplies and facilities. Sincerely, LeRo(3194 Hooton, r. Director LWH:mfs RESOLUTION NO. OF 1990 APPROVING THE WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION PLAN FOR SALT LAKE COUNTY 1991-2000 WHEREAS, Title 11, Chapter 13, Utah Code Ann. , 1953, as amended, allows public entities to make joint plans to provide joint undertakings and services; and WHEREAS, the attached plan has been prepared to accomplish said purposes; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1 . It does hereby approve the form and substance of the attached Water Supply and Distribution Plan for Salt Lake County 1991-2000 which is also part of the approvals and agreements necessary for Sandy City Corporation' s (Sandy) annexation into the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City (MWD) . This plan was prepared to work in conjunction with MWD' s Resolution No. 1633 and controls water and treatment availability for Sandy and Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District ( SLCWCD) and to buffer the effect of Sandy' s leaving SLCWCD for ten ( 10) years. 2. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, is hereby authorized to act on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation with regard thereto. h CityCouncil al Lakei Passed by the ofSalt City, Utah, this day of , 1990. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER MAYOR ATTEST: RLM:rc -2- WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION PLAN FOR SALT LAKE COUNTY 1991 - 2000 The "Plan" consists of Resolution No. 1633 with noted additions: A. Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District will proceed with Sandy City' s petition for exclusion from the Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District and Sandy City will proceed with annexation into the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City. Upon annexation Resolution No. 1633 will go into effect. Sandy City would gain 25 mgd of capacity in Metro' s Little Cottonwood Water Treatment Plant and quantities of Metro' s water supply as specified in the resolution. This achieves two objectives toward the conjunctive management goals. 1 ) Sandy City can treat its Little Cottonwood Creek Water; and 2) Most of the east side high zone areas can be served by Metro's Little Cottonwood Water Treatment Plant without costly pumping. B. Sixty-two million gallons per day of new capacity will be made available for less than $10 million from the en- largement of Parley' s Water Treatment Plant and pipeline construction in Salt Lake City' s Northwest Quadrant. This new capacity will make capacity available in Metro ' s Little Cottonwood Water Treatment Plant for Sandy' s 25 mgd and allows for the potential for surplus capacity to the Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District. C. Metro will exchange with the Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District 10 mgd capacity in the Salt Lake Aqueduct for 10 mgd capacity in the Jordan Valley Water Treatment Plant and Aqueduct. This will allow the Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District capacity in the Salt Lake Aqueduct to supply the Southeast Regional Water Treatment Plant reducing idle capacity and serving its customers in the high east zone without pumping (see Fig. 2) . D. Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District' s 10, 000 acre-feet under its two contracts with Metro will be delivered through the year 2000, subject to Salt Lake City' s and Sandy City' s preferential rights under Resolution No. 1633 beginning in 1992 ( See Fig. 3 ) . Sandy City will exercise its remaining preferential rights to water in surplus of Salt Lake City' s needs and Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District ' s 10, 000 acre-foot contracts. Metro will renegotiate the two contracts with the Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District which will permit the transfer of raw water to the Jordan Aqueduct/Jordan Valley Water Treatment Plant and Southeast Regional Water Treatment Plant. -7- 4 1 PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND CAPACITY* • 375-- i . , - r 350 . _ . _ _ uo • _ 305 ♦ 7- Air ♦��, •---'+1.�� 300 .r.+•••.. _A �.ow. s_ 252 A�.e.,,"% ••:��♦ .t+��to47.4.!' a=re_=�''`.: SLC'S SUPPLY 275 cere *m►trttN. '_;�h..:# 4 „...* •;•V• -'� =a'll•',� _ CAPACITY/USER 'AAA"'10.* .4 ••�;.;........ . NOW2'IA DEMAND (MGD) 250 - . - . . 227 232 225 .pr 200 �Avgr. 2U8 xue- . _ _ . . . . , .- . 175 - . ' - . ,_ , 150 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 .20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 ' 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 I. YEAR 1 . ' SLC'S, Sandy'!. and SLCWCD'S Projected Supply and Demand Capacities Sandy's demand for High or Low Growth Rates on top of SLC'a demand) (SLCIICD'a 10 MGD in the SLA on top of SLC'a and Sandy's demand). CAPACITY TOTAL SLA/LCRTP LEGEND YEAR DESCRIPTION IN CRE SE SYSTEM A ACITY 1988 Vella and springs 5 119 A SLC+Sandy+SLCWICD high Growth Mg Jordan Yalley 1ITP 50 113 Rats • • 1992 Parley's NTP 12 113 SLC+Sandy High Growth Rate 1995 Nlllereet Trp • 9/8 119 2000 SLA/LCATP Syvtama 20 133 2005 SLA/1.CATP Stems 17 150 a SLC+Sandy Low Growth Rate E. Salt Lake City and Metro will enter into an exchange agreement for 2000 acre-feet of water in the City' s Richard' s Ditch and Little Cottonwood Wells for 2000 acre-feet of Metro's Little Dell water. Sandy City will purchase the two wells from Metro and gain 2, 000 acre- feet of additional water supply. F. All entities involved will enter into boundary agreements to avoid duplication of services and maximize efficiencies. G. All entities involved will jointly prepare a Salt Lake County Master Plan for water resources and delivery systems. H. All entities involved pledge to practice "Conjunctive Management" to fully utilize all water supplies and system capacities, including water from the Big Cottonwood Water Treatment Plant and Conduit. The entities will install common communication and telemetry systems to implement the "Conjunctive Management" of supplies and facilities. VI . Conclusion: The proposed 10-year plan will provide for the efficient delivery of water supplies through the year 2000. This time will allow the various entities to prepare for the next Century. With the annexation of Sandy City into Metro and implementation of Resolution No. 1633, capacity will be made available that otherwise would not be available. This capacity will benefit everyone in Salt Lake County and enhance the chances that adequate water deliveries will be made within the various service areas. Salt Lake City is sacrificing 25 mgd of capacity in the Little Cottonwood Water Treatment Plant and Salt Lake Aqueduct that must be made up in the future. For this reason, it needs the tax base and commitment by Sandy City through annexation into Metro to replace this capacity in the future. The question was asked why was Sandy City considered for annexation into Metro. The answers are 1 ) because they are a City and can legally join Metro, 2 ) they have their own water supply in Little Cottonwood Creek, 3 ) Sandy City' s location is south of Salt Lake City' s service area and below Metro' s Little Cottonwood Water Treatment Plant and Aqueduct and 4) after evaluating their request for annexation, it was determined that it would work to the benefit of Salt Lake City, Metro and Sandy City. When the 10-year plan is implemented it helps the Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District from a "Conjunctive Management" perspective. If Sandy City remains in the Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District and Salt Lake City and Metro pursue courses of action that are in the best interest of the City ' s inhabitants, the Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District will not have east side capacity to serve Sandy City. The Salt Lake -8- .; I. • • r; • PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND VOLUMES* ' 180000 - . al rrr.. y 170000 — . . . - .,--•. `< s, ,..,., 160000 - . _ �..�,..�`♦ 444104, , 4.4t0 P4,a, SLC's SUPPLY 140 00 0 ♦PS♦'��"�♦�i♦�♦��5��♦�+_��++�� ♦!��5�� .��►♦+��4��:4_0.-6,-.:-4 V t., e*J.i VOLUME/DEMAND ♦ �+�� .�+� �►1��+. ••i►+••+��•��♦•�.•~♦..46 4,5-„.- VOLUME AC—FT 130000 +�♦♦♦• %+. �i♦i♦^V10..A0►�i"�♦ ♦ �' _! -; a' -o • EA 110000 . .4 90000 - ip- „' 74 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19. 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 YEAR ti 0 •SLC's, Sandy's (Resolution No. 1633) and SLCIICD's Projected Supply and Demand Volumes (Sandy's High Growth Rate and Low Stream Flow on top of SLC's Growth Rates — boto 3 lines) 0 m SLCIICD's 10,000 AC-FT on top of SLC's and Sandy's Growth Rates starting in 1989 - top 3 lines) VOLUME AVE. VOLUME LOW !'( STREAM FLOW STREAM FLOW LEGEND YEAR DESCRIPTION (AC-FT) (AC-FT) 1907 Eziotinl System: Q RATgSandy+SLC1rCD HIGH GROWTH Deer Creek 61,700 01.700 A SLC+Sandy+SLCRCD Medium Streams 85,000 80.000 Growth Rate Groundwater 18,000 18,000 +Sandy+SLC1fCD Lew Growth 4 1903 Little Dell 8.000 8.00 Rata 0 2005 Central Utah 4,000 4,000 + SLC+Sandy High Growth Rate 2006 Central Utah 4,000 4,000 O 1 2007 central Utah _ 4,000 4,000 SLC+Sandy Medium Growth Rate 2008 Central Utah 4 000 4,000 A - - ._� IliSLC+Sandy Low Growth RaL - 2000 Central Utah 4,000 4,000 4A , County Water Conservancy District will have to spend millions of dollars to construct facilities from the west side ( Jordan Aqueduct) to the east side of the valley to provide water by expensive pumping to serve Sandy City. Under the plan presented, water deliveries are projected to be made without shortages within the entire valley through the year 2000. LWH/co -9- �JV SALT LAKE ART DESIGN BOARD ORDINANCE CITATION: 2.30.010 MEMBERSHIP: 5 members (1) Architect (2-3) Art Administrator or Artist. (4-5) Citizens interested in visual art (5) Representative from the Salt Lake Arts Council (6) Ex-officio--Executive Director, Salt Lake Arts Council. TERM: 3 years QUALIFICATIONS: No more than two members shall be professional artists or arts administrators and one member must represent the Arts Council. ADVICE AND CONSENT: Yes • OATH OF OFFICE: No PURPOSE: The board assesses artistic needs of future individual City construction projects and recommends the nature, acquisition and placement of works to be used in such projects where the City has declared its policy to allocate 1% of the budget of a new building for works of art. NAME COUNCIL INITIAL TERM DISTRICT APPOINTMENT EXPIRATION DATE • 1. Kip K. Harris, Architect 3 8/86(3/8/89) 2nd Term 574 9th Avenue 9/05/89 3/8/92 Salt Lake City, Utah 84103 Phone: (H) 363-6367 2. Charles Loving 4 (12/86)1/87 2nd Term 40 South 900 East #5E (3/8/89) 3/08/92 Salt Lake City, Utah 84102 9/05/89 • 3. Bonnie Sucec 3 4/89 U/T Term 189 1st Ave. t82 3/8/90 Salt Lake City, Utah 84103 . . . Phone: 322-4637 4. Tom Kass 3 1/87(3/88) 1st Term 735 10th Avenue 5/88 3/8/91 Salt Lake City, Utah 84103 Phone: (H) . 5. Brook Bowman VACANCY 2 1/87 1st Term P.O. Box 16253 3/8/89 Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 Phone: 6. Nancy Bosskoff Ex-Officio Salt Lake Arts Council 54 Finch Lane Salt Lake City, Utah 84103 Phone: 596-5000 HOUSING ADVISORY AND APPEALS BOARD ORDINANCE CITATION: 18.48.040 MEMBERSHIP: 10 TERN: 3 years, Staggered QUALIFICATION: None required ADVICE AND CONSENT: No . OATH OF OFFICE: Not required • . PURPOSE: The purpose of the Board is to improve housing and neighborhood conditions within the city through recommendations to Mayor and the City Council, and to hear and rule on matters assigned to the Board. The advisory function includes recommending code changes, making recommendations on proposed new city ordinances, and reviewing of housing-related issues. The hearings function includes hearing appeals of property owners, sitting as panel of examiners on cases recommended for demolition, making recommendations to the Mayor regarding proposed demolition, hearing appeals to the landscape provisions of the demolition ordinance, and hearing requests for waivers from Redevelopment guidelines governing housing rehabilitation cases. NAME COUNCIL INITIAL TERM DISTRICT APPOINTMENT EXPIRATION DATE 1. Edward Lunt 5 4/81 3rd Term Western Management Co. 10/14/89 866 McClelland Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84102 . Phone: (W) 328-1866 (H) 272-7796 2. Maj-Greth Holmberg 1 11/87 Unexpired Term 1814 West 600 North 10/14/89 Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 Phone: (H)355-8004 (W)481-5043 3. Karen Wickstrom 7 1/89 U/T Term 955 East Logan Ave. 10/14/90 • Salt Lake City, Utah 84105 Phone: (H) 486-9158 (W) 355-1791 4. Ron Rowley 3 2/88 1st Term 216 North 200 West 10/15/90 • Salt Lake City, Utah 84103 Phone: (W) 531-6879 (H)364-7182 5. Roger Borgenict 3 5/88 1st Term . 20 South 1200 East 10/15/90 Salt Lake City, Utah 84102 Phone: (H) 359-4009 6. Lois Brown 4 8/86( 10/88) 2nd Term 310 South 3rd East 10/88 10/14/91 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Phone: (W) 237-8007 (H) 359-1061 • A ,Housing Advisory and Appeals Board . Page Two 7. Elizabeth Haslaa Resigned 4 1st Term • 648 South 1200 East • 10/14/90 Salt Lake City, Utah 84121 Phone: (W) 521-3200 (H) 582-4384 8. Afton Kyriopoulos 7 7/1/86 1st Term 2498 Green Street 10/31/88 Salt Lake City, Utah 84106 Phone: (H) 485-3626 9. Kathy Shaeffer 6 5/88 U/T 1487 South 1600 East 10/14/89 Salt Lake City, Utah 84105 Phone: (H)486-1570 (W)539-1590 10. Jody Williams 4 1/83 2nd Term 374 South 1200 East 10/14/89 Salt Lake City, Utah 84102 Phone: (W) 535-2851 (H) 583-1735 Meeting Schedule: Second Wednesday, Hearings Fourth Wednesday, Policy Meetings, 3:00 p.m. Community and Economic Development Board Room • Room 126 City and County Building Staff Support: Harvey Boyd 535-7751 9/08/89rbc SALT LAKE CITY RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD ORDINANCE CITATION: 2.37.010 MEMBERSHIP: 7 voting members and 4 ex-officio TERM: 4 years, staggered terms. QUALIFICATIONS: 21 years old, a resident of the State of Utah and not involved in commercial recreational venture. ADVICE AND CONSENT: yes OATH OF OFFICE: yes PURPOSE: The Board shall estblish criteria and guidelines for assesing the City's recreational and program needs, with the exception of those areas roperly adressed by the Golf Advisory Board, and to recommend recreational priorities, as well as to monitor any joint recreational agrements between the City and other entities. NAME COUNCIL INITIAL TERM • DISTRICT APPOINT?ENP EXPIRATION DATE 1. John Gust, Director Ex-0fficio City Parks Department 1965 West 500 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84104 Phone: 972-7800 2. Roger Cutler Ex-Officio City Attorney ....; 324 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Phone: 535-7788 3. Max Peterson Ex-0fficio City Engineer Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Phone: 535-6231 • 4. Garth Campbell Ex-0fficio 1111 Sonata Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 Phone: (H) 359-3390 (W) 533-0547 5. Gary Hicks 1 2/88 1st Term 1560 West 500 North 1/00/91 Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 • 6. Blake Rosenvall VACANCY 2 2/88 1st Term 811 Lucy Ave. 1/00/89 Salt Lake City, Utah E 0 • '9 Page 2 Recreakotion Advisory Board 7. Betsy Hunt 3 2/88 1st Term 1291 3rd Avenue 1/00/91 Salt Lake City, Utah 84103 4. Alan %atoa RESIGNED 4 2/88 1st Term 156 Edith Avenue 1/00/90 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 5. Tom Billings 5 2/88 1st Term 1436 Harvard Avenue 1/00/92 Salt Lake City, Utah 84105 6. Sylvia Bennion 6 2/88 1st Term 1837 Harvard Avenue 1/00/92 Salt Lake City, Utah 84108 7. Bill Prince 7 2/88 1st Term 2624 Dearborn Avenue 1/00/90 Salt Lake City, Utah 84106 .ems Meeting Schedule: Third Thursday at 4:00 p.m. _ 1965 West 500 South Staff Support: Scott Gardner 972-7805 09/13/89rbc • • • • ` n /�� € PALMERADEPAULIS : �L 'r A\ .3 of eat GO 11 O' IjYOR .1® 1 MAX G. PETERSON, P.E. i MY ENGINEER DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS City Engineering Division 444 SOUTH STATE STREET SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7871 TO: Salt Lake City Council Date: February 6 , 1990 REFERENCE: Resolution to Create the 400 to 500 South Connector Curb and Gutter Extension Special Improvement District No. 38-758 . RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution to ' create the District as described in the "Notice of Intention" . AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS : Fiscal year 1989/90 and 1990/91 and Class "C" Road Funds and property owner assessments through the Special Improvement District. DISCUSSION: The 400 to 500 South Connector Curb and Gutter Extension Project involves the construction of 500 South Street from Redwood Road to the Surplus Canal . The project will include curb and gutter , driveway approaches, storm drainage, traffic signals , utility relocations and concrete pavement with five traffic lanes ( two each direction with a left turn center lane) . It is planned to bid the work during February of 1990 , and begin construction in April , with completion this fall . The construction will be in phases and administered as to cause the minimum amount of disruption and inconvenience to the businesses and pedestrians. Attached is an information sheet and a summary of protests for the District . CONTACT PERSON: John Naser , Project Manager , 535-6240 SUBMITTED BY: Joseph R. Anderson, Public Works Director Yt, JRA:JNN: cp Attachment cc: Vault INFORMATION SHEET AND SUMMARY OF PROTESTS 400 TO 500 SOUTH CONNECTOR CURB AND GUTTER EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 38-758 DISCUSSION The 400 to 500 South Connector Curb & Gutter Extension Project involves the construction of 500 South from Redwood- Road to the Surplus Canal and the connection of 400 South to 500 South at Orange Street . The project will include curb and gutter , some sidewalk, driveway approaches, storm drainage, traffic signals, utility relocations and five traffic lanes (two each direction with a left turn center lane) . If is planned to bid the work during February 1990 , and begin construction in April 1990 . The work will be done during next summer and completed by late fall. The construction will be in phases and administered as to cause the minimum amount of disruption and inconvenience to the businesses and property owners . Assessments to the property owners would include the curb and gutter , driveway approaches, a small amount of sidewalk and ten ( 10) feet of the pavement. All other improvements will be paid for using and the Class "C" Roadway Funds . RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the City Council create the Special Improvement District as detailed in the "Notice of Intention" . ESTIMATED COST OF IMPROVEMENTS The total cost of improvements in said proposed Special Improvement District as estimated by the City Engineer is $1, 852 , 800 . 00 of which it is anticipated the Municipality will pay $1 , 545 , 700 . 00 . Approximately $307 , 100 . 00 shall be paid by a special tax to be levied against the property abutting upon the streets to be improved or upon property which may be affected or specifically benefited by such improvements . The actual commitment of the municipality to pay its portion of the costs of improvements is subject to the availability of funds and compliance with budget approval. The estimated costs include an allowance for contingencies and an allowance of approximately fifteen percent ( 15%) for administrative costs , engineering , legal and other costs in connection with the issuance of bonds. The property owners ' portion of the total estimated cost of the improvements may be financed during the construction period by the use of interim warrants . The interest on said warrants will be assessed to the • property owners. The estimated cost to be assessed against the properties within Curb and Gutter Extension No. 38-758 shall be as follows : SUMMARY OF PROTESTS A written protest to the creation of the Improvement District was received from the following property: Lois J. Kakunes 502 South Redwood Road Assessable Frontage 89 .00 feet With this the protest rate for the District is 1. 2% of the total 7, 488 feet of frontage. BD1485(PF) Salt Lake City, Utah February 6, 1990 A regular meeting of the City Council of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, was held on Tuesday, February 6, 1990, at the hour of 6: 00 p.m. at the offices of the City Council at 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah at which meeting there were present and answering to roll call the following members who constituted a quorum: Alan Hardman Chair Nancy Pace Vice Chair Roselyn N. Kirk Councilmember L. Wayne Horrocks Councilmember Thomas M. Godfrey Councilmember Ronald Whitehead Councilmember Don C. Hale Councilmember Also present: Palmer A. DePaulis Mayor Roger Cutler City Attorney Kathryn Marshall City Recorder Absent: None Thereupon the following proceedings, among others, were duly had and taken: Pursuant to published notice concerning the creation of Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension Special Improvement District No. 38-758 (the "District" ) , a public hearing was held on January 16, 1990 at which there were no oral protests. A written protest concerning the proposed District and the improvements to be constructed was received from Lois J. Kakunes, 502 South Redwood Road. The City Engineer has determined that the percentage of written protests for the District as described originally in the Notice of Intention was approximately 1 .2% of the total to be assessed. It is the recommendation of the City Engineer that the District be created. Having considered the protests and the recommendation of the City Engineer, Councilmember introduced a resolution to create the District and moved its adoption. Councilmember seconded the motion to adopt the Resolution. The Resolution was thereupon put to a vote and unanimously adopted on the following recorded vote: YEA: NAY: The resolution reads as follows: BD1485(PE) 2 RESOLUTION NO. OF 1990 A RESOLUTION TO CREATE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH CURB AND GUTTER EXTENSION SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, NO. 38-758, AS DESCRIBED IN THE NOTICE OF INTENTION CONCERNING THE DISTRICT AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY OFFICIALS TO PROCEED TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS AS SET FORTH IN THE NOTICE OF INTENTION TO CREATE THE DISTRICT. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah: Section 1 . It will be in the best interest of Salt Lake City (the "City" ) to construct the improvements identified and described in the Notice of Intention for the Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension Special Improvement District, No. 38-758 (the "District" ) . Section 2 . The City Council has heretofore considered the written protest on file with the City Recorder. A hearing was held to give each and every person who wished to be heard an opportunity to protest against the creation of the District or the construction of any of the improvements therein. Section 3 . Improvements proposed and described in the Notice of Intention are hereby authorized and the District is hereby created to construct these improvements. Section 4. The area included within the District is described in the Notice of Intention. The legal desci1iption or tax identification numbers of the included properties are more fully set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. BD1485(PF) 3 Section 5 . As required by law, the City Engineer is hereby authorized and directed to file a copy of the Notice of Intention and this Resolution creating the District as finally approved, together with a list of properties proposed to be assessed, described by tax identification number or legal description in the Salt Lake County Recorder' s office within five days from the date hereof. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 6th day of February, 1990. Chair ATTEST: City Recorder ( S E A L ) BD1485(PF) 4 After conduct of other business not pertinent to the above, on motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting was adjourned. Chair ATTEST: City Recorder ( S E A L ) BD1485(PF) 5 PRESENTATION TO THE MAYOR The foregoing resolution was presented to the Mayor for his approval or disapproval on the 6th day of February, 1990. Chair MAYOR' S APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this 6th day of February, 1990. Mayor BD1485(PF) 6 STATE OF UTAH ) . ss COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) I , Kathryn Marshall , the duly appointed, qualified and acting City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, do hereby certify as follows: That the foregoing pages constitute a full, true and correct copy of the record of the proceedings of the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, at its regular meeting held on February 6, 1990, insofar as said proceedings relate to the creation of Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension Special Improvement District, No. 38-758 as the same appears of record in my office. I personally attended said meeting and the proceedings were in fact held as specified in said minutes. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the corporate seal of said City as of this 6th day of February, 1990. City Recorder ( S E A L ) BD1485(PF) 7 STATE OF UTAH ) : ss. CERTIFICATE OF FILING COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) I , Kathryn Marshall , the duly qualified and acting City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, do hereby certify that on the day of February, 1990, pursuant to Section 10-16-7, Utah Code Annotated 1953 , as amended, a copy of the Notice of Intention dated December 5, 1989 and the Resolution dated February 6, 1990 creating Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension Special Improvement District, No. 38-758 (the "District" ) as finally approved, together with a list of properties proposed to be assessed described by tax identification number or legal description, was filed in the Salt Lake County Recorder' s Office within five (5) days of the date of Creation of the District. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said Municipality this _ day of February, 1990. City Recorder (S E A L) BD1485(PF) 8 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH OPEN MEETING LAW I , Kathryn Marshall , the undersigned City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "City" ) , do hereby certify, according to the records of the City in my official possession, and upon my own knowledge and belief, that in accordance with the requirements of Section 52-4-6(2 ) , Utah Code Annotated 1953 , as amended, I gave not less than twenty-four (24) hours public notice of the agenda, date, time and place of the February 6, 1990 public meeting held by the City as follows: (a) By causing a Notice, in the form attached hereto as Schedule "A" , to be posted at the City' s principal offices at the City and County Building, Salt Lake City, Utah on February , 1990, at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the convening of the meeting, said Notice having continuously remained so posted and available for public inspection until the completion of the meeting; and (b) By causing a copy of such Notice, in the form attached hereto as Schedule "A" , to be delivered to the Deseret News on February _, 1990, at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the convening of the meeting. BD1485(PF) 9 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my official signature this 6th day of February, 1990. City Recorder ( S E A L ) BD1485(PF) 10 SCHEDULE "A" NOTICE OF MEETING BD1485(PF) 11 EXHIBIT "A" TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS AND LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF PROPERTIES TO BE ASSESSED [A complete list consisting of pages of Tax I .D. numbers and property descriptions is available for inspection at the Salt Lake City Recorder' s and the City Engineer' s office. ] BD1485(PF) 12 SALTBAKE____ CFR 0.�ORPOR"whenATI9N1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS JOSEPH R. ANDERSON 324 SOUTH STATE STREET PALMER DEPAULIS PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 MAYOR 535-7775 ' TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: December 5, 1989 REFERENCE: Notice of Intention for 400 to 500 South Connector Curb and Gutter Extension No. 38-758 RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the Notice of Intention for the district and authorize the City to proceed with the advertising of the Notice of Intention in accordance with the attached schedule. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: Fiscal year 1988/89 and 1990/91 and Class "C" Road Funds and property owner assessments through the Special Improvement District. DISCUSSION: The 400 to 500 South Connector Curb and Gutter Extension Project involves the construction of 500 South Street from Redwood Road to the Surplus Canal. The project will include curb and gutter , driveway approaches, storm drainage, traffic signals, utility relocations, with five traffic lanes (two each direction with a left turn center lane) . It is planned to bid the work during the spring of. 1990, and begin construction in April 1990 . The majority of the work will be done during the summer of 1990 and should be completed by late fall . The construction will be in phases and administered as to cause the minimum amount of disruption and inconvenience to the businesses and pedestrians. Attached is an information sheet, letter to the abutting property owners, the Notice of Intention, and a schedule of events for hearings and meetings on this project. CONTACT PERSON: John Naser, Project Manager 535-6240 SUBMITTED BY: Joseph R. Anderson, Public Works Director JRA:JNN:cp Attachment • • INFORMATION SHEET ,tom° 400 TO 500 SOUTH CONNECTOR CURB AND GUTTER EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 38-758 • DISCUSSION The 400 to 500 South Connector Curb & Gutter Extension Project involves the construction of 500 South from Redwood Road to the Surplus Canal and the connection of 400 South to 500 South at Orange Street. The project will include curb and gutter , some sidewalk, driveway approaches, storm drainage, traffic signals, utility relocations and five traffic lanes (two each direction with a left turn center lane) . If is planned to bid the work during February 1990, and begin construction in April 1990. The work will be done during next summer and completed by late fall. The construction will be in phases and administered as to cause the minimum amount of disruption and inconvenience to the businesses and property owners. Assessments to the property owners would include the curb and gutter , driveway approaches, a small amount of sidewalk and ten (10) feet of the pavement. All other improvements will be paid 67: .- for using and the Class "C" Roadway Funds. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the City Council adopt the Special Improvement District Notice of Intention and authorize the City to proceed with the advertising of the Notice of Intention. ESTIMATED COST OF IMPROVEMENTS The total cost of improvements in said proposed Special Improvement District as estimated by the City Engineer is $1,852,800.00 of which it is anticipated the Municipality will pay $1,545, 700.00. Approximately $307, 100. 00 shall be paid by a special tax to be levied against the property abutting upon the streets to be improved or upon property which may be affected or specifically benefited by such improvements. The actual commitment of the municipality to pay its portion of the costs of improvements is subject to the availability of funds and compliance with budget approval. The estimated costs include an allowance for contingencies and an allowance of approximately fifteen percent (15%) for administrative costs, engineering, legal and other costs in connection with the issuance of bonds. The property owners ' portion of the total estimated cost of the •improvements may be financed during the construction period by the use of interim warrants. The interest on said warrants will be assessed to the • property owners . The estimated cost to be assessed against the properties within Curb and Gutter Extension No. 38-758 shall be as follows : IMPROVEMENTS AND ESTIMATED COSTS Rate Improvements Front Feet Estimated Estimated No. of Abutting Cost Per Cost Property Foot 1 . Sidewalk, Curb & Gutter and 10 ' of 8" Thick Industrial Class Pavement 494 . 07 $48 . 11 $ 23 , 769 . 71 2 . Curb & Gutter & 10 ' of 10" Thick Industrial Class Pavement 5 , 270 . 76 $42 . 00 $ 221 , 371 . 92 3 . Curb & Gutter & 10 ' of 8" Thick Industrial Class Pavement 585 . 44 $37. 71 $ 22, 076 . 94 4 . 10 ' of 8" Thick Industrial Class Pavement 1, 138 . 31 $25 . 84 $ 29 , 413 . 93 Total Assessable Frontage 7, 488 . 58 $ 296, 632. 54 Estimated Cost for Driveway Approach $ 10 , 500. 00 Total Estimate Abutters Portion of Improvements $ 307, 132. 50 FUNDING SOURCE 1 . Abutting Property Owners Portion for Improvements A. Estimated Cost for Improvements $ 307, 100 . 00 B. Interest on Interim Finance $ 30 , 000 . 00 2 . Estimated City Portion Funding for Improvements $1, 545 , 700 . 00 BD561 (PF) . ' Salt Lake City, Utah • December 5, 1989 • A regular meeting of the City Council of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah was held on Tuesday the 5th day of December, 1989, at the hour of 6:00 p.m. , at the offices of the City Council at 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah at which meeting there were present and answering roll call the following members who constituted a quorum: W. M. "Willie" Stoler Chair Alan Hardman Vice Chair L. Wayne Horrocks Councilmember i5_ Florence B. Bittner Councilmember Thomas M. Godfrey Councilmember Sydney Reed Fonnesbeck Councilmember Roselyn N. Kirk Councilmember Also present: Palmer A. DePaulis Mayor Roger F. Cutler City Attorney Kathryn Marshall City Recorder Absent: Thereupon the following proceedings, among others, were duly had and taken: • Councilmember introduced the following resolution in writing, which was read by title and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. of 1989 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, SALT LAKE COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH, TO CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS ON 500 SOUTH FROM REDWOOD ROAD WEST TO PIONEER ROAD AND THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF 400 TO 500 SOUTH CONNECTOR FROM REDWOOD ROAD TO ORANGE STREET, INCLUDING CURB AND GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, ASPHALT PAVEMENT AND DRIVEWAYS AND ALL OTHER MISCELLANEOUS WORK NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE IMPROVEMENTS; TO CREATE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH CURB AND GUTTER EXTENSION SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 38-758; TO DEFRAY THE COST AND EXPENSES OF A PORTION OF SAID IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT BY SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS TO BE LEVIED AGAINST THE PROPERTY BENEFITED BY SUCH IMPROVEMENTS; TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF INTENTION TO AUTHORIZE SUCH IMPROVEMENTS AND TO FIX A TIME AND PLACE FOR PROTESTS AGAINST SUCH IMPROVEMENTS OR THE CREATION OF SAID DISTRICT; TO AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION -BIDS AND RELATED MATTERS. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah: Section 1 . The City Council of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "City" ) hereby determines that it will be in the best interest of the City to make improvements that will include construction of designated widths of roadway pavement, concrete curb and gutter and pavement where it does. not now exist and related driveway improvements and other improvements and modifications (collectively the "Improvements" ) , and to complete the whole according to the design plans, profiles and specifications on file in the Office of the City Engineer of Salt Lake City, Utah. In order BD561 (PF) 2 • 7 to finance the costs of the Improvements, the City proposes to create and establish a special improvement district which is more particularly described in the Notice of Intention, to construct the proposed Improvements. Section 2 . The proposed district shall be known as Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension Special Improvement District No. 38-758" (the "District" ) . Section 3 . The cost and expenses of a portion of the proposed Improvements shall be paid by a special tax to be levied against the property fronting or abutting upon or situated within the District to be improved or which may be affected or specially benefited by any of such Improvements, such tax to be paid in not more than ten (10) equal annual installments with interest on the unpaid balance until due and paid. Section 4. Written protests against the proposed Improvements or against the creation of the District must be presented and filed in the Office of the City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Utah on or before the 16th day of January, 1990, at the hour of 5:00 p.m. Thereafter at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, the 16th day of January, 1990 at the City Council Chambers at 451 South State Street in Salt Lake City, Utah, any such protests shall be heard and considered by the City Council. The City Recorder is hereby directed to give notice of intention to make the proposed Improvements and of the time �sY BD561 (PF) 3 • within which protests against the proposed Improvements or the creation of the District may be filed and the date when such protests will be heard and considered by publishing a notice of intention to create the District in the Deseret News, a newspaper of general circulation in the City, said notice to be published four times, once during each week for four consecutive weeks, the last publication to be not less than five (5) nor more than twenty (20) days prior to the time fixed in the notice as the last day for the filing of protests. In addition, the City Recorder shall mail a copy of such notice by United States Mail, postage prepaid, to each owner of land to be assessed within the proposed District at the last known address of such owner, using for such purpose the names and addresses of said owners appearing on the last completed real property assessment rolls of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, and, in addition, a copy of such notice shall be mailed, postage prepaid, addressed to "Owner" at the street number of each piece of improved property to be affected by the assessment, said notices to be so mailed not later than ten (10) days after the first publication of the Notice of Intention. If a street number has not been so assigned, then the post office box, rural route number, or any other mailing address of the improved property shall be used for the mailing of the Notice. Said Notice shall be in substantially the following form: ED561 (PF) 4 090 NOTICE OF INTENTION _.. fl } PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on the 5th day of December, 1989, the Mayor and City Council of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "City" ) , adopted a resolution declaring its intention to create a special improvement district to be known as Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension Special Improvement District No. 38-758 (the "District" ) . It is the intention of the City Council to make improvements within the District and to levy special taxes as provided in Chapter 16, Title 10, Utah Code Annotated 1953 , as amended, on the real estate lying within the District for the benefit of which such taxes are to be expended in the making of such improvements. DESCRIPTION OF DISTRICT The District will be created within the following described area and boundaries and named in the section entitled "Street Improvements" as follows: AREA: The area involved in the Special Improvement District includes property abutting 500 South as detailed on Salt Lake City Atlas Survey Map Plats No. 50 and 51 and as further described on Salt Lake County Property .Sidwell Map' s Numbers 15-3-31, 15-3-32 , 15-4-41 and 15-4-42. BOUNDARIES: Boundaries of the Special Improvement District being the North and South sides of 500 South from Redwood Road West to Pioneer Road and the north and south sides of 400 to 500 South Connector from Redwood Road to Orange Street. BD561 (PF) 5 (Th STREET IMPROVEMENTS Along the above described sections abutting property owners will be assessed for improvements built at the herein below estimated rates per front foot of abutting property; for designated widths of roadway measured 10 feet out from the street edge of the gutter, for concrete curb and gutter and pavement where it does not now exist, and for the abutter' s portion of certain miscellaneous driveway costs of the project as follows: 400 South Redwood Road to Orange Street, North Side • From the west right-of-way of Redwood Road thence southwesterly 1,228. 71 feet to east side of Orange Street row line: Rate 2 400 South Redwood Road to Orange Street, South Side From the west row line of Redwood Road thence southwesterly 1, 134. 40 feet to the east side of Orange Street row line: Rate 2 . 400 South/500 South Connector, Orange Street, to 2300 West Street, North Side From the west row line of Orange Street thence west 3 , 712 .94 feet to the east side of 2300 West row line: Rate 2 . 400 South/500 South Connector Orange Street to 500 South, South Side From the west row line of Orange Street thence southwesterly 295.22 feet to the point of intersection to the north row line of 500 South: Rate 2 . Orange Street, 400 South Connector to 500 South, East Side From the south row line of 400 South connector thence southeasterly 225 . 44 feet to the north side row line of 500 South: Rate 3 . BD561 (PF) 6 MP Orange Street, 400 South Connector to 500 South, West Side From the south row line of 400 South connector thence southeasterly 187 .96 feet to the north side row line of 500 South: Rate 3 . 500 South, Redwood Road to Orange Street, North Side From the west row line of Redwood Road thence west 798 feet: Rate 4. Beginning at a point 798 feet west from the west row line of Redwood Road thence west 153 .05 feet to the, east row line of Orange Street: Rate 1. From the west row line or Orange Street thence west 349.42 feet to the point it intersects the south row line of 400 South connector: Rate 3. 500 South, Redwood Road to 2300 West Street, South Side From the west right-of-way line of Redwood thence west 455. 69 feet: Rate 1. Beginning at a point 798 feet west from the west row line of Redwood Road thence west 340.31 feet: Rate 4. Beginning at a point 796 feet west from the west right- of-way line of Redwood Road thence west 252 .017 feet: Rate 1. Beginning at a point 1, 048.017 feet west from the west right-of-way line of Redwood Road thence west 360 feet: Rate 3 . Beginning at. a point 1, 1408.017 feet west from the west right-of-way line of Redwood Road thence west 1, 729.30 feet to the east right-of-way line of Delong Street: Rate 2 . From the west right-of-way line of Delong Street thence west 1, 122 .41 feet to the east right-of-way line of Surplus Canal. Rate 2 . All other necessary things shall be done to complete the whole project according to preliminary plans and profiles on file in the office of the Salt Lake City Engineer. BD561 (PF) 7 All nonconforming improvements such as lawns, sprinkling systems, rock gardens, driveways, curbs and gutters, culverts, walks, fences, etc. which have been built or installed by abutting property owners within the area to be improved and public way, must be removed by the property owners at their expense prior to the commencement of the project. If these improvements are not removed by the property owners, they will be removed by the contractor and disposed of by him as directed by the City Engineer. ESTIMATED COST OF IMPROVEMENTS The total cost of improvements in said proposed Special Improvement District as estimated by the City Engineer is $1, 852 , 800. 00 of which it is anticipated the Municipality will pay $1, 545, 700. 00. Approximately $307, 100.00 shall be paid by a special tax to be levied against the property abutting upon the streets to be improved or upon property which may be affected or specifically benefited by such improvements. The actual commitment of the municipality to pay its portion of the costs of improvements is subject to the availability of funds and compliance with budget approval . The estimated costs include construction and engineering expenses, an allowance for contingencies and allowance of approximately fifteen percent ( 15%) for administrative costs, legal and other costs in connection with the issuance_ of bonds . The assessments, when made for the District, may BD561 (PF) 8 0 include an amount sufficient to allow for the sale of bonds of the District at a discount and/or the funding of all or a portion of a debt service reserve. The property owners' portion of the total estimated cost of the improvements may be financed during the construction period by the use of interim warrants. The interest on said warrants will be assessed to the property owners. The estimated cost to be assessed against the properties within Curb and Gutter Extension No. 38-758 shall be as follows: BD561 (PF) 9 IMPROVEMENTS AND ESTIMATED COSTS Rate Improvements Front Feet Estimated Estimated No. of Abutting Cost Per Cost Property Foot 1. Sidewalk, Curb & Gutter and 10' of 8" Thick Industrial Class Pavement 494.07 $48.11 $ 23,769.71 2. Curb & Gutter & 10' of 10" Thick Industrial Class Pavement 5,270.76 $42.00 $ 221,371.92 3. Curb & Gutter & 10' of 8 " Thick Industrial Class Pavement 585.44 $37.71 $ 22,076.94 4. 10' of 8" Thick Industrial Class Pavement 1 ,138.31 $25.84 $ 29,413.93 Total Assessable Frontage and Cost 7,488.58 $ 296,632.54 Estimated Cost for Driveway Approach $ 10,500.00 Total Estimate Abutters Portion of Improvements $ 307 ,132.50 FUNDING SOURCE 1. Abutting Property Owners Portion for Improvements A. Estimated Cost for Improvements $ 307,100.00 B. Estimated Interest on Interim Finance $ 30,000.00 2. Estimated City Portion Funding for Improvements $1,852,800.00 The estimated cost of the City' s portion consists of the cost of unclassified excavation, the cost of the paving of all BD561 (PF) 10 intersections and remainder of street pavement not paid by the abutting property owners, traffic signals, storm drains, sewer systems, resetting manholes and clean out box covers and frames, utility relocations, the cost of replacing any existing curb and gutter or 'sidewalk necessitated by the new improvements, and all miscellaneous costs of the project. Parking area, i . e. , those areas between the back of new curb and the property line, not occupied by walks or driveways will be brought to finished grade using the existing soil unless the property owner desires a 4-inch trough be left for placement of topsoil at his expense and labor. All of the frontage on the street within the district, upon which the improvements are to be made, will be assessed in accordance with the improvements constructed. Credits for corner lot exemptions or partial exemptions will be made as provided by State Statutes and City Ordinances. The abutter' s estimated cost per front foot does not include the cost of driveways which will vary according to width, length and amount of area to be covered. These costs are estimated to be approximately $3 . 50 per square foot for driveways. The cost of driveways will be assessed against the properties benefited in addition to the assessment for curb and gutter and paving. • BD561 (PF) 11 ASSESSMENTS AND LEVY OF TAXES It is the intention of the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah to levy assessments as provided by the laws of the State of Utah on all parcels and lots of real property within the District. The purpose of the assessments and levy is to pay those costs of the subject improvements which the City will not assume and pay. The method of assessment shall be by lineal front foot as set forth herein. The assessment may be paid by property owners in ten (10) equal annual installments with interest on the unpaid balance at a rate or rates fixed by the City Council, or the whole or any part of the assessment may be paid without interest with fifteen (15) days after the ordinance levying the assessment becomes effective. In order to fund the first semiannual interest installment payment and to coordinate the debt service schedule for the bonds of this District with debt service requirements for bonds outstanding from other districts within the City, the first payment of an assessment installment may be scheduled to fall due on a date less than one year from the date of adoption of the assessment' ordinance. Thereafter assessment installments will fall due on the anniversary date of the first installment payment. The assessments shall be levied according to the benefits to be derived by each property within the District. Other payment provisions and enforcement remedies shall be in BD561 (PF) 12 #5 41P accordance with Chapter 16 of Title 10 of Utah Code Annotated 1953 , as amended. A map of the proposed District and copies of the preliminary design plans of the proposed improvements and other related information are on file in the office of the City Engineer who will make such information available to all interested persons. TIME FOR FILING PROTESTS Any person who is the owner of record of property to be assessed in the District described in this Notice of Intention shall have the right to file a written protest against the creation of 400 to 500 South Curb and Gutter Extension No. 38- 758 or to make any other objections relating thereto. Protests shall describe or otherwise identify the property record by the person or persons making the protest. Protests shall be filed with the City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Utah on or before 5 :00 p.m. on the 16th day of January, 1990. Thereafter at 6: 00 p.m. on the 16th of January, 1990, the City Council will meet in public meeting at the City Council Chambers to consider all protests so filed and hear all objections related to the proposed Curb and Gutter Extension No. 38-758. The protest rate shall be determined by totaling the front footage of abutting property owners filing written protest and dividing it by the total assessable front footage BD561 (PF) 13 • of all abutting property owners within the proposed District. The result will be a protest rate stated as a percentage for improvements to be assessed by the front foot. After the written protest rate has been determined, the City Council may, at its discretion, delete areas from the District. At the time of creation of the District, the written protests of property owners in any area not included in the District will not be used in determining the protest rate for the property owners remaining within the District. The City Council will rescind its intention to create the District if, after the deletions from the District, the total protest rate by front foot within the modified District boundaries is fifty percent (50%) or more. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH /s/ Kathryn Marshall City Recorder BD561 (PF) 14 flO Section 5. The City Engineer is hereby authorized to prepare a notice which calls for bids for the construction of improvements contemplated to be made in the Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension Special Improvement District No. 38-758, and the City Recorder is hereby authorized to publish the Notice to Contractors calling for bids at least one time in the Deseret News, a newspaper of general circulation in Salt Lake City, at least fifteen (15) days before the date specified in the notice for the receipt of bids. Councilmember seconded the motion to adopt the foregoing resolution. The motion and resolution were unanimously adopted on the following recorded vote: Those voting AYE: W. M. "Willie" Stoler Alan Hardman L. Wayne Horrocks Florence B. Bittner Thomas M. Godfrey Sydney Reed Fonnesbeck Roselyn N. Kirk Those voting NAY: BD561 (PF) 15 After the conduct of other business not pertinent to the above, the meeting was, on motion duly made and seconded, adjourned. Chair ATTEST: City Recorder ( S E A L ) BD561 (PF) 16 010 PRESENTATION TO THE MAYOR. The foregoing resolution was presented to the Mayor for his approval or disapproval on the day of December, 1989. Chair MAYOR'S APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day of December, 1989. • Mayor BD561 (PF) 17 STATE OF UTAH ) ss . COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) I , Kathryn Marshall, the duly chosen, qualified and acting City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, do hereby certify as follows: 1. That the foregoing typewritten pages constitute a full , true and correct copy of the record of proceedings of the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held in said Municipality on December 5, 1989 at the hour of 6: 00 p.m. , insofar as said proceedings relate to the consideration and adoption of a resolution declaring the intention of the City Council to create Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension Special Improvement District No. 38-758 and make certain improvements therein described as the same appears of record in my office; that I personally attended said meeting, and that the proceedings were in fact held as in said minutes specified. 2 . That due, legal and timely notice of said meeting was served upon all members as required by law and the rules and ordinances of said Municipality. 3 . That the above resolution was deposited in my office on December _, 1989, has been recorded by me, and is a part of the permanent records of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah. BD561 (PF) 18 a rt. . . ._ . ,.... IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my official signature and affixed the seal of said Municipality this day of December, 1989 . City Recorder f) I ( SEAL ) iz - r i 4 --) 7.4''• -••-. , BD561 (PF) 19 STATE OF UTAH ) AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING : ss . NOTICE OF INTENTION COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) I , Kathryn Marshall , the duly chosen, qualified and acting City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, do hereby certify that the attached Notice of Intention was approved and adopted in the proceedings of the City Council held on Tuesday, the 5th day of December, 1989 . I further certify that on the day of , 1989 (a date not later than ten ( 10) days after the first publication of the Notice of Intention) I mailed a true copy of the Notice of Intention to create Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension Special Improvement District No. 38-758 by United States Mail, postage prepaid to each owner of land to be assessed within the proposed Special Improvement District at the last known address of such owner, using for such purpose the names and addresses appearing on the last completed real property assessment rolls of Salt Lake County, and in addition I mailed on the same date a copy of said Notice of Intention addressed to "Owner" addressed to the street number, post office box, rural route number, or other mailing address of each piece of improved property to be affected by the assessment. I further certify that a certified copy of said Notice of Intention together with profiles of the improvements and BD561 (PF) 20 t 09P (0.11 a map of the proposed District, was on file in my Office for - inspection by any interested parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the corporate seal of said Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah this day of , 1989. City Recorder ( S E A L ) BD561 (PF) 21 (Affidavit of proof of -publication of the Notice of Intention to create Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension Special Improvement District No. 38-758. ) • BD561 (PF) 22 15 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH OPEN MEETING LAW. I , the' undersigned City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County (the "City Recorder" ) , do hereby certify, according to the records of the City Council in my official possession, and upon my own knowledge and belief, that in accordance with the requirements of Section 52-4-6(2 ) , Utah Code Annotated 1953 , as amended, I gave not less than twenty-four (24) hours public notice of the agenda, date, time and place of the December 5, 1989 public meeting held by the City Council as follows: (a) By causing a Notice in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A" , to be posted at the offices of the Salt Lake City Council on December , 1989, at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the convening of the meeting, said Notice having continuously remained so posted and available for public inspection ' until the completion of the meeting; and (b) By causing a copy of such Notice, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A" , to be delivered to the Deseret News on December , 1989, at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the convening of the meeting. BD561 (PF) 23 • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, -have- -hereunto subscribed my official signature this day of December, 1989 . City Recorder ( S E A L ) BD561 (PF) 24 CO - TRACT ROUTING FORM REQUESTING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION DATE PUBLIC WORKS/TRANSPORTATION DIVISION 01-23-90 DEPARTMENTAL CONTACT PHONE Timothy P. Harpst, Transportation Engineer 535-6630 NAME OF CONTRACTING PARTY REF # SUBJECT Street Lighting District #1 - Notice of Intention Council Approval to be Published in Local Newspaper Yes No X Number of Copies 17 Insurance Required Expected Completion February 6, 1990 Insurance Attached X RECORDER FINANCE Contract No. Vendor No. l'26(4� Account No. / Funds Avai able Funds N Needed ATTORNEY 3 / /1 APPROVED AS TO FORM iY ( I Date By • • COPY DISTRIBUTION Date To ALT JOSEPH R. ANOERSON +oar �Sa_ .r •I�ti�.k��. TIMOTHY P. HARPST, P.E. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 333 SOUTH 200 EAST, SUITE 201 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE (801) 535-6630 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: February 6 , 1990 SUBJECT: Approval to proceed with renewal of Street Lighting Assessment District #1 (SID #1) , and publication of Notice of Intention. Set date for public hearing. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council give approval to proceed with the renewal process for Street Lighting Special Assessment District #1, and approve publication of Notice of Intention at the February 6 , 1990 , City Council meeting. Set date to hold a hearing on March 13 , 1990 , p.m. to receive public comment and consider protests to the renewal of SID #l . AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: The District #1 cost estimate incorporates projected lighting costs to July 15 , 1993 . Abutting property owners will be responsible for 75% of the total cost and Salt Lake City provides the remaining 25% as per City Policy. DISCUSSION: Four new extensions have been added to this district to make a total of 14 extensions . The new extensions are as listed: 10-62A Pierpont Avenue 10-64A West Temple 10-63A Pierpont Midblock Easement 10-65A Post office Place The old extensions are as listed 10-13H Harvard/Princeton Avenues 10-30F Yale Avenue 10-16H Yalecrest 10-43E Central W. Rose Park 10-17H Herbert/Yale Avenues 10-44E Rose Park North West 10-27F Rose Park South East 10-49D 200 South 10-29F Rose Park Central 10-50D Salt Palace The projected lightiny rates provide for operation maintenance , replacement and applicable portions of the capital purchase cost. SUBMITTED BY: Joseph R. Anderson, Public Works Director BD1290 (PF) Salt Lake City, Utah February 6, 1990 A regular meeting of the City Council of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah was held on Tuesday the 6th day of February, 1990, at the hour of 6 : 00 p.m. , at the offices of the City Council at 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah at which meeting there were present and answering roll call the following members who constituted a quorum: Alan Hardman Chair Nancy Pace Vice Chair L. Wayne Horrocks Councilmember Ronald Whitehead Councilmember Thomas M. Godfrey Councilmember Don C. Hale Councilmember Roselyn N. Kirk Councilmember Also present: Palmer A. DePaulis Mayor Roger F. Cutler City Attorney Kathryn Marshall City Recorder Absent: None Thereupon the following proceedings , among others, were duly had and taken: The following resolution was introduced in writing, was read by title and Councilmember moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. of 1990 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, SALT LAKE COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH, TO CREATE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 1 ; TO OPERATE, MAINTAIN, PATROL AND POWER LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS; TO DEFRAY A PORTION OF THE ORIGINAL CAPITAL COST OF LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AND THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES OF SAID IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT BY SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS TO BE LEVIED AGAINST THE PROPERTIES BENEFITED BY SUCH LIGHTING AND IMPROVEMENTS; TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF INTENTION TO AUTHORIZE SUCH LIGHTING AND IMPROVEMENTS AND TO FIX A TIME AND PLACE FOR PROTESTS AGAINST SUCH LIGHTING AND IMPROVEMENTS OR THE CREATION OF SAID DISTRICT, AND RELATED MATTERS. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah: Section 1 . The City Council of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "City" ) hereby determines that it will be in the best interest of the City to operate, maintain, patrol and power street lighting (the "Lighting" ) , in locations described hereafter and more specifically identified on maps and plans on file in the Office of the City Engineer of Salt Lake City, Utah. In order to finance the costs of the Lighting, the City proposes to create and establish a special improvement district, which is more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and in the Notice of Intention. BD1290 (PF) -2- y Section 2 . The proposed district shall be known as Salt Lake City, Utah Special Lighting District No . 1 (the "District" ) . Section 3 . A portion of the capital cost of the lighting fixtures and improvements (the "Improvements" ) and the expenses of the Lighting shall be paid by a special tax to be levied against the property situated within the District which is improved or which may be affected or specially benefited by the Lighting and Improvements, such tax to be paid in three (3 ) annual installments with interest on any unpaid balance until paid. Section 4. Proceeds from assessments , or any installments thereof, are declared to be improvement revenues ( "Improvement Revenues" ) which are pledged hereby to the payment of the Lighting and the Improvements . Any annual assessment installment may be modified and adjusted by Improvement Revenues collected in connection with the Lighting and the Improvements. Adjustments to assessment installments may be calculated annually, based in part upon the actual expenses for operation and maintenance for the previous year. Any past credit or debit balance resulting from the carryforward of past charges or assessments for street lighting also may be taken into account in the calculation of the assessment or an assessment installment. BD1290 (PF) -3- Section 5 . Written protests against the proposed Lighting and Improvements or against the creation of the District must be presented and filed in the Office of the City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Utah on or before the 12th day of March, 1990, at the hour of 5 : 00 p.m. Thereafter at 6: 00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on Tuesday, the 13th day of March, 1990 at the City Council Chambers at 451 South State Street in Salt Lake City, Utah, any such protests shall be heard and considered by the City Council . The City Recorder is hereby directed to give notice of intention (the "Notice of Intention" or "Notice" ) to provide the Lighting and defray the costs thereof and a portion of the costs of the Improvements. The Notice of Intention shall also specify the time within which protests against the proposed Lighting and Improvements or the creation of the District may be filed and the date when such protests will be heard and considered. Notice shall be given by publishing a Notice of Intention to create the District in the Deseret News, a newspaper of general circulation in the City, said Notice to be published four times, once during each week for four consecutive weeks, the last publication to be not less than five (5) nor more than twenty (20 ) days prior to the time fixed in the Notice as the last day for the filing of protests. In addition, the City Recorder shall mail a copy of the Notice by United States Mail , postage prepaid, to each BD1290 (PF) -4- owner of land to be assessed within the proposed District at the last known address of such owner, using for such purpose the names and addresses of said owners appearing on the last completed real property assessment rolls of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, and, in addition, a copy of the Notice shall be mailed, postage prepaid, addressed to "Owner" at the street number of each piece of improved property to be affected by the assessment, said Notices to be so mailed not later than ten ( 10) days after the first publication of the Notice of Intention. If a street number has not been so assigned, then the post office box, rural route number, or any other mailing address of the improved property shall be used for the mailing of the Notice. Said Notice of Intention shall be in substantially the following form: BD1290 (PF) -5- NOTICE OF INTENTION PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on the 6th day of February, 1990, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, adopted a resolution declaring its intention to create a special improvement district to be known as Salt Lake City, Utah Lighting District No. 1 (the "District" ) . It is the intention of the City Council to operate, maintain, patrol and power lighting improvements within the District and to levy special taxes as provided in Chapter 16, Title 10, Utah Code Annotated 1953 , as amended, on the real estate lying within the District for the benefit of which such taxes are to be expended in the maintenance of such improvements. DESCRIPTION OF DISTRICT AND ESTIMATED COSTS AND ASSESSMENTS The District will be located within areas and boundaries described by metes and bounds in the resolution of February 6, 1990. The resolution, maps and other information about the District are available for examination in the offices of the Salt Lake City Division of Transportation, 333 South 200 East, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 . The streets and areas to be included within the District and the estimated costs to be assessed (the "Estimated Costs" ) are as follows : BD1290 (PF) -6- EXTENSION NO. 10-13H: STREETS: Laird Avenue : 1300 East Street to a point 350. 0 feet east. Princeton Avenue: Laird Avenue to 1500 East Street. Harvard Avenue : 1300 East Street to 1500 East Street. 1400 East Street: Harvard Avenue to Princeton Avenue. BOUNDARIES: North - Yale Avenue West - 1300 East Street South - 1300 South Street East - 1500 East Street ESTIMATED COSTS: Front feet of abutting property 6, 955 . 11 Total estimated cost per front foot $8. 16 City' s estimated cost per front foot $2 . 04 Abutter' s estimated cost per front foot $6. 12 Estimated cost of City' s portion $14, 189 . 05 Estimated cost of Abutter' s portion $42 , 567 . 15 TOTAL estimated cost $56, 756.20 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15, 1990 to July 15, 1993 EXTENSION NO. 10-16H: STREETS: Yale Avenue: Both sides, between 1500 East and 1700 East Streets. Yalecrest Avenue: Both sides, between Yale Avenue and 1700 East Street. Military Drive : Both sides between Yale Avenue and 900 South Street. BOUNDARIES: North - 900 South Street East - Military Drive South - Yale Avenue West - 1500 East Street BD1290 (PF) -7- ESTIMATED COSTS: Front feet of abutting property 7, 640. 79 Total estimated cost per front foot $10. 09 City' s estimated cost per front foot $2 . 52 Abutter' s estimated cost per front foot $7 . 57 Estimated cost of City' s portion $19,281 . 92 Estimated cost of Abutter' s portion $57, 845 . 76 TOTAL estimated cost $77, 127 . 68 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15, 1990 to July 15, 1993 EXTENSION NO. 10-17H: STREETS: Yale Avenue: Both sides, between 1700 East and 1800 East Streets . Yalecrest Avenue: Both sides, between 1700 East and 1800 East Streets. Herbert Avenue: Both sides, between 1700 East and 1800 East Streets BOUNDARIES : North - Michigan Avenue East - 1800 East Street South - Harvard Avenue West - 1700 East Street ESTIMATED COSTS : Front feet of abutting property 4, 354. 50 Total estimated cost per front foot $9 . 83 City' s estimated cost per front foot $2 . 46 Abutter' s estimated cost per front foot $7 . 37 Estimated cost of City' s portion $10, 699 . 63 Estimated cost of Abutter' s portion $32 ,098. 88 TOTAL estimated cost $42 , 798. 51 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15, 1990 to July 15, 1993 EXTENSION NO. 10-27F: STREETS : 1200 West Street: East side, between a point 137 feet south of Lafayette Drive and Picture Drive. 800 North Street: South side, between 900 West Street and Picture Drive . Los Angeles Street: Both sides, between 700 North Street and Prosperity Avenue . American Beauty Drive : Both sides, between 600 North and 800 North Street. BD1290 (PF) -8- Grenoble Street: Both sides, between Briarcliff Avenue and 700 North Street. Rambler Drive: Both sides, between 1100 West Street and American Beauty Drive. 1100 West Street: Both sides, between 600 North Street and Rambler Drive . Lamarne Street: Both sides, between Briarcliff Avenue and Lafayette Drive. Ideal Street: East side, between 600 North Street and Briarcliff Avenue . Lafayette Drive : Both sides between 1200 West Street and 800 North Street. Picture Drive: South, southeast and east sides between 1200 West Street and 800 North Street. Autumn Avenue: Both sides, between American Beauty Drive and Briarcliff Avenue. Briarcliff Avenue: Both sides, between American Beauty Drive and Autumn Avenue; also both sides between Ideal Street and Grenoble Street. 700 North Street: North side, between Rambler Drive and 900 West Street; south side, between 900 West and 1100 West Street. Prosperity Avenue: Both sides, between Lafayette Drive and Los Angeles Street. BOUNDARIES: North - 800 North Street East - 900 West Street South - 600 North Street West - 1200 West Street ESTIMATED COSTS: Front feet of abutting property 18, 060. 67 Total estimated cost per front foot $1 . 76 City' s estimated cost per front foot $0. 44 Abutter' s estimated cost per front foot $1 . 32 Estimated cost of City' s portion $7, 961 . 81 Estimated cost of Abutter' s portion $23, 885 . 42 TOTAL estimated cost $31 , 847 . 23 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15, 1990 to July 15 , 1993 EXTENSION NO. 10-29F: STREETS: 1200 West Street: West side, from a point 169 . 85 feet south of Lafayette Drive, north to 900 North Street . Oakley Street: Both sides, between 600 North Street and 900 North Street . BD1290 (FF) -9- 1300 West Street: Both sides, between 600 North Street and 900 North Street. 900 North Street: Both sides between 1200 West and 1300 West Streets. Talisman Drive: Both sides, between 1200 West and 1300 West Streets. Lafayette Drive : Both sides between 1200 West and 1300 West Streets. BOUNDARIES: North - 900 North Street East - 1200 West Street South - 600 North Street West - 1300 West Street ESTIMATED COSTS: Front feet of abutting property 14, 577 . 83 Total estimated cost per front foot $1 .92 City' s estimated cost per front foot $0. 48 Abutter' s estimated cost per front foot $1 . 44 Estimated cost of City' s portion $6,981 . 87 Estimated cost of Abutter' s portion $20, 945 . 61 TOTAL estimated cost $27, 927 . 48 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15, 1990 to July 15, 1993 EXTENSION NO. 10-30F: STREETS: Yale Avenue: Both sides, 1800 East to 2000 East Streets. 2000 East Street: Both sides, Yale Avenue to Herbert Avenue. BOUNDARIES: North - Herbert Avenue East - 2000 East Street South - Yale Avenue West - 1700 East Street ESTIMATED COSTS: Front feet of abutting property 3 , 404. 16 Total estimated cost per front foot $7. 65 City' s estimated cost per front foot $1 . 91 Abutter' s estimated cost per front foot $5 . 74 Estimated cost of City' s portion $6,510. 27 Estimated cost of Abutter' s portion $19, 530. 82 TOTAL estimated cost $26, 041 . 09 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15, 1990 to July 15, 1993 BD1290 (PF) -10- EXTENSION NO. 10-43E: STREETS: 900 North Street: Both sides from 1500 West to a point 130. 5 feet west of 1500 West Street. Talisman Drive: Both sides from a point 130. 5 feet west of 1500 West Street to 1300 West Street. 800 North Street: North side from a point 130. 5 feet west of 1500 West Street to Catherine Street. 800 North Street: South side from the edge of the old Jordan River bank to Catherine Street. Leadville Street: Both sides from 1300 West Street to the banks of the old Jordan River. Oakley Street: Both sides from 900 North Street to 1000 North Street. 1300 West Street: East side from 900 North Street to 1000 North Street. 1300 West Street: West side streets from the south side of the vacated 800 North Street to 1000 North Street. Colorado Street: Both sides from 600 North Street to 1000 North Streets. 1400 West Street: Both sides from 600 North Street to 1000 North Street. Catherine Street: Both sides from Leadville Street to 1000 North Street. 1500 West Street: Both sides from 800 North Street to 1000 North Street. BOUNDARIES: North - 1000 North Street East - Old Jordan River South - 600 North Street West - Oakley Street ESTIMATED COSTS: Front feet of abutting property 23 , 142 . 46 Total estimated cost per front foot $1. 60 City' s estimated cost per front foot $0. 40 Abutter' s estimated cost per front foot $1 . 20 Estimated cost of City' s portion $9,268. 73 Estimated cost of Abutter portion $27,806. 18 TOTAL estimated cost $37,074. 91 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15, 1990 to July 15, 1993 BD1290 (PF) -11- EXTENSION NO. 10-44E: STREETS: Sunset Drive : Both sides from the Jordan River to Dupont Avenue (between Oakley and Valentine Street) . Dupont Avenue: Both sides from Carousel Street to a point 108. 92 feet east of Valentine Street. 1300 North Street: Both sides from Colorado Street to 1300 West Street. 1200 North Street: Both sides from Colorado Street to a point 107 feet east of Valentine Street. Goodwin Street: Both sides from a point 100 feet west of 1500 West Street to Colorado Street. 1000 North Street: Both sides from Catherine Street to Valentine Street. 1000 North Street: North side from a point 100 feet west of 1500 West Street to a point 116. 45 feet east of Valentine Street. Carousel Street: Both sides from a point 140 feet south to Dupont Avenue north to Dupont Avenue . Garnette Street: Both sides from point 685 feet south from Dupont Avenue north to Dupont Avenue. 1500 West Street: Both sides from 1000 North Street to a point 120 feet north of Sunset Drive . Catherine Street: Both sides from 1000 North Street to Dupont Avenue. 1400 West Street: Both sides from 1000 North Street to Goodwin Avenue. Colorado Street: Both sides from 1000 North Street to a point 120 feet north of Sunset Drive . 1300 West Street: Both sides from 1000 North to Dupont Avenue . Sonata Street: Both sides from Oakley Street (150 feet north of 1100 North Street) to Dupont Avenue. Oakley Street: Both sides from 1000 North Street to Dupont Avenue . Valentine Street: Both sides from 1000 North Street to 1100 North Street, and from 1200 North Street to Dupont Avenue . BOUNDARIES: North - Sunset Drive East - 1700 West Street South - 1000 North Street West - Carousel Street BD1290 (PF) -12- ESTIMATED COSTS : Front feet of abutting property 42 ,225 . 48 Total estimated cost per front foot $1 . 71 City' s estimated cost per front foot $0 . 43 Abutter' s estimated cost per front foot $1 . 28 Estimated cost of City' s portion $18, 089 . 62 Estimated cost of Abutter ' s portion $54, 268. 85 TOTAL estimated cost $72 , 358. 47 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15, 1990 to July 15, 1993 EXTENSION NO. 10-49D: • STREETS: 200 South Street: West Temple Street to State Street BOUNDARIES: North - 100 South Street East - State Street South - 300 South Street West - West Temple Street ESTIMATED COSTS: Front feet of abutting property 2 , 051 . 15 Total estimated cost per front foot $15 . 52 City' s estimated cost per front foot $3 . 88 Abutter' s estimated cost per front foot $11 . 64 Estimated cost of City' s portion $7 , 959. 44 Estimated cost of Abutter portion $23 , 878. 32 TOTAL estimated cost $31 , 837 . 76 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15, 1990 to July 15, 1993 EXTENSION NO. 10-50D: STREETS: South Temple Street: North side, between West Temple Street and 200 West Street. West Temple Street: East side, between South Temple Street and 200 South Street. Second West Street: South side between West Temple Street and 200 West Street. 200 West Street: West side, between South Temple Street and 200 South Street . BOUNDARIES: North - North Temple Street East - Main Street South - 300 South Street West - 200 West Street BD1290 (FF) -13- ESTIMATED COSTS: Front feet of abutting property 2 , 695. 00 Total estimated cost per front foot $33 . 18 City' s estimated cost per front foot $8. 29 Abutter' s estimated cost per front foot $24. 89 Estimated cost of City' s portion $22 , 355. 72 Estimated cost of Abutter portion $67, 067 . 16 TOTAL estimated cost $89 , 422 . 88 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15, 1990 to July 15, 1993 EXTENSION NO. 10-62A: STREETS: Pierpont Avenue: South side from West Temple Street to 200 West Street; north side from West Temple Street to 200 West except for the west 170. 156 feet of Lot 7, and the east 79 . 44, and 2 . 32 feet of Lot 4 that runs along Pierpont Avenue. BOUNDARIES: North - 200 South Street East - West Temple Street South - 300 South Street West - 200 West Street ESTIMATED COSTS: Front feet of abutting property 1, 152 . 32 Total estimated cost per front foot $9 . 52 City' s estimated cost per front foot $2 . 38 Abutter' s estimated cost per front foot $7 . 14 Estimated cost of City' s portion $2 , 743 . 92 Estimated cost of Abutter' s portion $8, 231. 77 TOTAL estimated cost $10, 975 . 69 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15, 1990 to July 15, 1993 EXTENSION NO. 10-63A: STREETS: Pierpont Avenue: Part of Lot 7 and along the easement to the west of Lot 7 . BOUNDARIES: North - 200 South Street East - West Temple Street South - 300 South Street West - 200 West Street BD1290 (PF) -14- ESTIMATED COSTS : Front feet of abutting property 382 . 31 Total estimated cost per front foot $15 . 78 City' s estimated cost per front foot $3 . 94 Abutter ' s estimated cost per front foot $11 . 84 Estimated cost of City' s portion $1, 508. 52 Estimated cost of Abutter' s portion $4, 525 . 58 TOTAL estimated cost $6, 034. 10 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15 , 1990 to July 15, 1993 EXTENSION NO. 10-64A: STREETS: West Temple Street: Both sides from 200 South to 400 South Streets . BOUNDARIES: North - 200 South Street East - Main Street South - 400 South Street West - 200 West Street ESTIMATED COSTS: Front feet of abutting property 2 , 133 . 00 Total estimated cost per front foot $18. 59 City' s estimated cost per front foot $4. 65 Abutter' s estimated cost per front foot $13 . 94 Estimated cost of City' s portion $9, 912 .21 Estimated cost of Abutter' s portion $29 , 736. 65 TOTAL estimated cost $39 , 648. 86 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15, 1990 to July 15, 1993 EXTENSION NO. 10-65A: STREETS : The north side of Post Office Place from West Temple Street to Main Street, except the west 155 feet of Lot 7 . BOUNDARIES: North - 200 South Street East - Main Street South - 400 South Street West - 200 West Street BD1290 (PF) -15- ESTIMATED COSTS: Front feet of abutting property 345 . 00 Total estimated cost per front foot $16 . 08 City' s estimated cost per front foot $4. 02 Abutter' s estimated cost per front foot $12 . 06 Estimated cost of City' s portion $1 , 386. 56 Estimated cost of Abutter' s portion $4, 159 . 68 TOTAL estimated cost $5 , 546. 24 SERVICE PERIOD - July 15, 1990 to July 15, 1993 TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS FOR DISTRICT $555, 397 . 10 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF CITY'S PORTION $138, 849 . 27 TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS TO BE ASSESSED $416,547 . 83 INTENDED IMPROVEMENTS The improvements shall consist of operating, maintaining, patrolling, and providing power to street lights located within Salt Lake City Lighting District No. 1 as described above . Also included in the Estimated Costs for some of the Extensions is a portion of the capital cost of the lighting fixtures and improvements. BASIS FOR ASSESSMENT It is proposed to levy assessments on property in the District to pay all or a portion of the Estimated Costs according to the benefits derived by such property by levying an assessment on all property in the District according to front footage . Estimated Costs include, among other things, power costs, patroling, a reserve for replacement of lighting fixtures and improvements, any other operation and maintenance expenses, a portion of the capital costs of the lighting fixtures and improvements, any debit or credit balances BD1290 (PF) -16- carried forward from previous charges and expenses for lighting and administrative costs . The total estimated cost of all services is $555, 397 . 10 as determined by the City Transportation Engineer, of which the City" s portion is estimated to be $138, 849 . 27 and the remainder is to be paid as estimated above by an assessment to be levied upon property fronting or abutting upon or adjacent to the system to be serviced, or which may be affected by or specifically benefitted by any of such services. If the actual cost of the improvements exceeds the estimated cost, the governing body shall nevertheless have the right to levy assessments in excess of the estimated cost. Assessments shall be payable in three (3 ) yearly installments (the "Assessment Installment" or "Installments" ) , with interest on any delinquent Assessment Installment at the rate of eighteen percent ( 18%) per annum until paid. The whole or any part of the assessment may be paid without interest within 15 days (the "Cash Payment Period" ) after the ordinance levying the assessment becomes effective, but the first Assessment Installment shall be due and payable during the Cash Payment Period. Future Assessment Installments may be adjusted to reflect changes in operation and maintenance costs and any balances or deficits resulting from the previous year' s operations . Property owners paying the total assessment, or any portion of any future Assessment BD1290 (PF) -17- Installment prior to reduction of any future Assessment Installment, will not receive a rebate. If, because of energy rate increases, or for any other reason, adjustments of Assessment Installments result in an increase in the total assessment, notice of such proposed increase will be given and a public hearing will be held prior to levying of the increase in the total assessment. This requirement shall not apply where an increase in an Assessment Installment does not result in an increase in the assessment. TIME FOR FILING PROTESTS All protests or objections to such services or the creation of the District or to the carrying out of such intention MUST BE IN WRITING, signed by the owners of the property affected or benefitted by such services, describing or otherwise identifying said property and its front footage. WRITTEN NOTICE OF PROTESTS MUST BE FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER, ROOM 311 , CITY & COUNTY BUILDING, ON OR BEFORE 5: 00 o'clock p.m. on March 12 , 1990, thereafter at 6: 00 p.m. , on March 13 , 1990 the City Council will meet at the City Council Chambers in the City & County Building to hear and consider any such protests and objections to the creation of the special improvement district or any other objections thereto. The method for determining the number of protests sufficient to defeat the District shall be according to front footage. BD12.90 (PF) -18- BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH /s/ Kathryn Marshall City Recorder BD1290 (PF) -19- Councilmember seconded the motion to adopt the foregoing resolution. The motion and resolution were unanimously adopted on the following recorded vote : Those voting AYE : Those voting NAY: BD1290 (PF) -20- 1 After the conduct of other business not pertinent to the above , the meeting was, on motion duly made and seconded, adjourned. Chair ATTEST: City Recorder ( S E A L ) BD1290 (PF) -21- PRESENTATION TO THE MAYOR The foregoing resolution was presented to the Mayor for his approval or disapproval on the 6th day of February, 1990 . Chair MAYOR' S APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this 6th day of February, 1990. Mayor BD1290 (PF) -22- EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS [ attach multi-page metes and bounds descriptions to original copy of resolution] BD1290 (PF) -23- STATE OF UTAH ) . ss. COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) I , Kathryn Marshall , the duly chosen, qualified and acting City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, do hereby certify as follows: 1. That the foregoing typewritten pages constitute a full, true and correct copy of the record of proceedings of the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held in said Municipality on February 6, 1990 at the hour of 6:00 p.m. , insofar as said proceedings relate to the consideration and adoption of a resolution declaring the intention of the City Council to create Salt Lake City, Utah Lighting District No. 1 and make certain improvements therein described as the same appears of record in my office; that I personally attended said meeting, and that the proceedings were in fact held as in said minutes specified. 2 . That due, legal and timely notice of said meeting was served upon all members as required by law and the rules and ordinances of said Municipality. 3 . That the above resolution was deposited in my office on February 6, 1990, has been recorded by me, and is a part of the permanent records of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah. BD1290 (PF) -24- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my official signature and affixed the seal of said Municipality this 6th day of February, 1990. City Recorder ( S E A L ) • BD1290 (PF) -25- STATE OF UTAH ) AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING : ss. NOTICE OF INTENTION COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) I , Kathryn Marshall, the duly chosen, qualified and acting City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, do hereby certify that the attached Notice of Intention was approved and adopted in the proceedings of the City Council held on Tuesday, the 6th day of February, 1990. I further certify that on the day of , 1990 (a date not later than ten (10) days after the first publication of the Notice of Intention) I mailed a true copy of the Notice of Intention to create Salt Lake City, Utah Lighting District No . 1 by United States Mail, postage prepaid to each owner of land to be assessed within the proposed Special Improvement District at the last known address of such owner, using for such purpose the names and addresses appearing on the last completed real property assessment rolls of Salt Lake County, and in addition I mailed on the same date a copy of said Notice of Intention addressed to "Owner" addressed to the street number, post office box, rural route number, or other mailing address of each piece of improved property to be affected by the assessment. I further certify that a certified copy of said Notice of Intention, together with profiles of the improvements and BD1290 (PF) -26- a map of the proposed District, was on file in my office for inspection by any interested parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the corporate seal of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah this day of , 1990. City Recorder ( S E A L ) BD1290 (PF) -27- (Affidavit of proof of publication of the Notice of Intention to create Salt Lake City, Utah Lighting District No. 1 . ) BD1290 (PF) -28- CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH OPEN MEETING LAW I , the undersigned City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County (the "City Recorder" ) , do hereby certify, according to the records of the City Council in my official possession, and upon my own knowledge and belief, that in accordance with the requirements of Section 52-4-6(2 ) , Utah Code Annotated 1953 , as amended, I gave not less than twenty-four (24) hours public notice of the agenda, date, time and place of the February 6, 1990 public meeting held by the City Council as follows: ( a) By causing a Notice in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "I" , to be posted at the offices of the Salt Lake City Council on February 1990, at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the convening of the meeting, said Notice having continuously remained so posted and available for public inspection until the completion of the meeting; and (b) By causing a copy of such Notice, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "I" , to be delivered to the Deseret News on February , 1990, at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the convening of the meeting. BD1290 (PF) -29- » IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my official signature this 6th day of February, 1990. City Recorder ( S E A L ) BD1290 (PF) -30- EXHIBIT "I" to Certificate of Compliance Notice of City Council Meeting BD1290 (PF) -31- . rd STAFF RECOMMENDATION OFFICIAL RELEASE OF CDC AND SLACC STAFFING FUNDS January 30, 1990 STAFF RECOMMENDATION BY: Ed Snow ACTION REQUESTED BY COUNCIL: To officially support release of monies already appropriated in the 1989-90 budget, but not yet allocated to SLACC and the newly-formed Salt Lake City Community Development Corporation. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City Council on May 6, 1989, moved to appropriate $50,000 for SLACC staffing, but not to release the money until the issues regarding the SLACC __ budget and the recognition and notification ordinances were resolved. On January 18, 1990, SLACC President Stan Penfoid told the Council in a Committee of the Whole briefing that he now believes the SLACC staffing budget and the ordinances have progressed to a point at which it is now possible to begin the hiring process for a full-time SLACC Coordinator. The SLACC staffing budget provides for one full-time coordinator in the $25,000-28,000 salary range and a part-time hourly employee at $10,000. Other benefits and office expenses would boost the total budget to $46,560 a year. In the City"s 1989-90 budget, $80,000 in the 15th year CDBG budget was appropriated for the creation of a Salt Lake City Community Development Corporation. The Council acted to make the release of the funds for the CDC contingent on SLACC appointing a task force of 5-10 persons to review options and make recommendations. The task force has been formed and has met and has submitted its recommendations to the Council at the January 18 Committee of the Whole meeting. STAFF ANALYSIS: SLACC has followed the Councils instructions regarding both the SLACC staffing and CDC funding issues. The Council has reviewed the actions SLACC has taken. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Recommend to the Administration that the $50,000 appropriated for SLACC staffing be released and that the .•80,000 appropriated for the creation of a Community Development Corporation be released. SUGGESTED MOT I ONS: move that we support the City Administration's release of the $50,000 in the ft itFY 1989-90 budget that has been appropriated for staffing of the Salt Lake 1/nAssociation of Community Councils. ,�4,1move that we support the City Administration's release of the $80,000 in the II FY 1989-90 budget that has been appropriated for the creation of a Salt. Lake City Community Development Corporation. :_-`E r"L ate;(J grG..R � ..: . %°11 O 1 OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, SUITE 304 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 535-7600 January 16, 1990 MEMORANDUM TO: COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: ED SNOW RE: ON JANUARY 18, THE SLACC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE WILL MEET WITH THE COUNCIL TO DISCUSS SLACC STAFFING, CREATION OF A SALT LAKE CITY BASED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND DRAFT NOTIFICATION AND RECOGNITION ORDINANCES **SLACC STAFFING The City Council on May 6, 1989, moved to appropriate $50,000 for SLACC staffing but not to allocate the money until the issues regarding the SLACC budget and the recognition and notification ordinances were resolved. SLACC President Stan Penfold believes the SLACC staffing budget and the ordinances have progressed to a point at which it is now possible to begin the hiring process for a full-time SLACC Coordinator. The SLACC staffing budget provides for one full-time coordinator in the $25,000-28,000 salary range and a part-time hourly employee at $10,000. Other benefits and office expenses would boost the total budget to $46,560 a year. The SLACC staff would be housed in the Capital Planning office temporarily, and Capital Planning would donate a telephone, office supplies and some clerical services. SLACC has also drafted a job announcement for the position of Salt Lake Association of Community Councils Coordinator. The draft , along with other SLACC-related materials, was placed in your packet last Friday. PAGE TWO No formal legislative action is necessary to release the $50,000. However, it would be appropriate for the Council to express its opinion, at this time, to use the $50,000 for the hiring of a Coordinator and part-time staffer and for the funding of office activities. **CREATION OF SALT LAKE BASED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION The Council set aside $80,000 in the 15th year CDBG budget for the creation of a CDC, contingent on SLACC appointing a task force of 5-10 persons to review the options and make recommendations. In addition, $71,649 was also recently awarded to the CDC from past year's CDBG slippage through the November 1989, budget opening. The task force was instructed to address the following issues: 1. Review the range of community housing needs that can be accommodated within the context of the CDC. 2. Investigate and report to the Mayor and Council within three months as to the need for a CDC and the housing problems it may be expected to address. 3. Report whether SLACC should incubate the CDC or whether another sponsor should incubate the CDC. SLACC organized a task force as instructed, and began meeting on August 7, 1989, to address the above three issues. The task force has now completed its study and have made the following recommendations: --Housing needs CDC can address As its first priority, the task force established a model block program to address housing needs. Model block residents would be organized through the local Community Council to conduct activities such as initiating zoning changes and making minor repairs. The model block program was also thought to be the most appropriate way to deal with general community problems of boarded-up housing, in-fill housing and neighborhood deterioration. Specific geographic areas are to be selected within Community Council districts for concentrating CDC resources. The CDC will operate City-wide but will use the model block approach. --Need for CDC and problems it would address Commercial encroachment is a problem and has resulted in lack of neighborhood cohesiveness and spirit. CDC would need to promote civic identity, community spirit and stability in the residential population. PAGE THREE The CDC would address the most pressing neighborhood development needs in order or priority. The CDC would also serve in an advisory capacity to community councils when dealing with problems such as zoning. This may include providing the community councils with the technical assistance needed to coordinate block activities. --Incubation In order to reduce operation costs and to encourage the potential for private sector funding, the task force recommends that for fiscal year 1989- 90, the CDC share office space with ASSIST, Inc. This recommendation is contingent on the approval of SLACC and ASSIST boards. The task force believes the structure of the board of trustees will assure that control over the operations of the CDC will remain with SLACC and the eight community council districts. --Organization The task force proposes that the CDC be organized as a non-profit corporation with one trustee selected by, and for, each of the eight community councils and two by and for SLACC. After the CDC is formed, the ten board of trustee members would select up to five individuals with special skills to serve on the initial board. The board of trustees would be responsible for fund-raising, selection of projects, legal function of the CDC, policy making, hiring of staff (CDC Coordinator) and coordination of projects with neighborhood councils and SLACC. Each one of the eight community council representatives will chair a neighborhood CDC committee in their own community council area. These committees will examine and recommend projects for their area, work to build neighborhood participation, monitor on-going projects in the neighborhood and coordinate funding. It should be noted that the Administration recommends that a City staff member be added to the CDC board. As with the SLACC staffing matter, the Council now has the opportunity to express its opinion on the CDC proposal. **RECOGNITION ORDINANCE The purpose of the recognition ordinance, (a draft of which was enclosed in your packet on Friday) is to establish a means to recognize neighborhood- based community organizations for the purpose of providing citizen input and information to various city planning and administrative services. The ordinance prescribes the necessary legal status of neighborhood organizations and outlines the method of registering with the City. 1 ( PAGE FOUR I The crux of the ordinance is Section 2.60.020 (page three of your draft ordinance) which lists the organizations which will be officially recognized. In this section, SLACC is recognized as the City-wide organization in which community councils, neighborhood councils and neighborhood associations participate by sending representation in accordance with SLACC by laws. The section also recognizes neighborhood and community organizations representing the neighborhoods and communities on the list and map attached as Exhibit A. This particular list and map have not yet been completed, but will be made available at the Thursday Committee of the Whole meeting. It is the intent of SLACC and the Mayor's special recognition committee that a the a SLACC-centered process be recognized. All neighborhood organizations which participate in the community councils which comprise SLACC, including the SLACC organization, will be officially recognized by this ordinance. The ordinance also outlines procedures by which other neighborhood-based organizations or new organizations could eventually be recognized. "NOTIFICATION ORDINANCE The notification ordinance has not experienced the same degree of controversy that the recognition ordinance has. The notification ordinance outlines the type of information which will be transmitted to the various organizations. Organizations recognized in the recognition ordinance will be notified of certain City actions concerning these organizations. Any other entity, organization or person may register on annual basis with the Department of Community and Economic Development to receive the notices specified in the ordinance The Planning and Zoning division shall submit to each recognized or registered organization copies of the Planning Commission public meeting agendas. Under the ordinance, Planning and Zoning is required to submit to recognized organizations applications for changes to zoning ordinances or conditional use applications under certain circumstances The Board of Adjustment's agendas shall be sent to the recognized organizations and other City administrative departments shall take reasonable steps to notify affected recognized organizations of any significant activities pertaining specifically to the recognized organizations' geographic area. The ordinance also outlines the way recognized and registered organizations should make recommendations concerning matters of which they are given notice. Both the notification and recognition ordinances are expected to come before the Council for official action in the coming weeks. 1 RECEIVE JAN 0 8 1990 MAYOR s QFFICF ROSEMARY DAVIS SALT pc,` a,1%oI i ', V/V` 1' rV! D`� C1�O� 41 _��`- DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Capital Planning and Programming CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 418 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7902 January 4 , 1990 /44Y TO: Alan G. Hardman -7111 FROM: Rosemary Davi 'i SUBJECT: SLACC Staffing RECOMMENDATION: City Council release the $50 ,000 that was allocated for SLACC funding at the May 6, 1989 , City Council Meeting. FUNDING: $50 ,000 from CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funding . BACKGROUND DISCUSSION: The City Council on May 6, 1989 , moved to allocate $50, 000 for SLACC staffing but not appropriate the money until the issues regarding the ordinance and budget are resolved. The Mayor met five times with the Community Council Chairs and the SLACC Executive Board to develop an outline of requisites for the ordinance. It was agreed that there would be two ordinances; a Recognition ordinance and an Early Notification ordinance. The City Attorney' s office has been working on the drafts based on the outline developed at those meetings. The Recognition and Notification ordinances are now in final draft and will be reviewed by the Community Council Chairs and the SLACC Executive Board. The drafts are expected to come before the City Council in February. The SLACC budget which had not been submitted May 6, 1989 , has been prepared and is attached. As indicated in the budget, a Director and an hourly person will be hired and will be responsible to the SLACC Board through the Chair for the implementation of policies and programs as assigned by SLACC. This position compliments but does not duplicate the services available through the Community Affairs Office. The responsibilities will include administrative, planning and programming, and community relationships. A complete job description is attached for your review. In addition, the SLACC staff will be housed in the Capital Planning office temporarily and Capital Planning will donate a telephone, office supplies, and some clerical services. With the budget completed and the Recognition and Notification ordinances in final draft (attached) , SLACC would like to begin receiving funding in order to hire the coordina-tor. LEGISLATIVE ACTION: No formal legislative action is necessary. The $50,000 has been appropriated in the FY 89/90 CDBG Budget, however, we would like the opportunity to discuss this prior to the release of the funds. CONTACT PERSON: Rosemary Davis, 535-7123 and Stephanie Peterson, 535-7915 {a cc: Emilie Charles la Stephanie Peterson Becky Sanchez Stan Penfold Attachments ROSEMARY DAVIS Mir i' 1 1�a 1 vM, + CI" W�u�ull® j mmin- DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Capital Planning and Programming CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 418 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7902 January 2, 1990 TO: Alan G. Hardman ,/ FROM: Rosemary Davis Lt_ �G , SUBJECT: Recommendation for Funding the Community Development Corporation (CDC) From 15th Year CDBG Funds RECOMMENDATION: That 15th year CDBG funds be released to the CDC in accordance with the recommendations made by the task force (report attached) . In addition to the recommendation in the report, an additional Board Member appointed by the City should be added to the Board. This member should be a City employee . from the Capital Planning Division. DISCUSSION: Concept: The Community Development Corporation (CDC) concept is based on the premise (and proven experience) that often the most creative and effective mechanisms for community change arise out of latent human resources within neighborhoods . Developing this potential by involving government as a catalyst to promote and assist CDCs began in the 1950's and 1960 's . Some cities have scores of them. Even Denver, our nearest urban neighbor has twenty-two. Salt Lake City has one: Neighborhood Housing Service. CDCs are usually non-profit organizations (although they can be subsidiaries of for-profit organizations such as a lending institution) which generally have full-time paid professional staff and a Board of Directors to set policy and define objectives. They are supported by volunteers who work within the neighborhood or community to cultivate essential political, financial , technical and manpower reserves. While they may not be financially independent of government funding initially, they strive to be, or at least not be wholly dependent on government, contributions from private trusts and foundations. Their missions are diverse and wide-ranging but always they are looking for solutions to problems that concern the people who support them. Most often, housing and neighborhood conditions are their principal targets, but small business interests and economic development may also be on their agenda. The CDC Role: CDCs are in large part partnership-forming and coordinating entities. They function to effectively direct available resources toward problem solution. Unlike government agencies, they are owned, operated, and managed by the special interests who promote them. They are task-specific oriented and exist only to meet their objectives. While they may use government funding, and often form alliances with governmental bodies to accomplish their goals, they also hate access to private capital. City agencies such as housing authorities and redevelopment agencies do not, and can not function as CDCs (even though they may be an important partner in finding the solution to a particular problem) because they are usually too broadly focused, their leadership is from "top down" rather than "bottom up" , and they do not have access to non-profit funding or the capacity to coordinate volunteer manpower resources. The Salt Lake City CDC as Recommended by the Task Force: In recent years, as the federal government has sought to withdraw direct intervention in community affairs (especially commitments for funding) , the feds have become more interested in the CDC concept. There is every indication that CDCs and other NON- Profit organizations will be asked to assume increasing roles and be offered greater financial incentives to do so in the foreseeable future. In their meeting of May 16, 1989, the City Council adopted a motion as part of their consideration of the 15h year CDBG budget to fund a Community Development Corporation pending the findings of a CDC task force as to the need for the structure of a CDC. The specific charge of the task force was: 1. Review the range of community housing needs that can be accommodated within the context of the CDC, 2. Investigate and report to the Mayor and Council within three months as to the need for a CDC and the housing problems it may be expected to address, 3 . Report whether SLACC should incubate the CDC or whether they recommend another sponsor . The study by the task force is now complete and a copy of their written report which addresses the following considerations is attached: . The CDC will be organized as a non-profit corporation with one trustee selected by, and for, each of the community councils, The CDC will he organized as a non-profit corporation with one trustee selected by, and for , each of the community councils, two by and for SLACC, and up to five at large appointed by the rest of the board based on their technical qualifications . The Director will be a salaried position to be hired by the Board of Directors. . The CDC will operate City-wide but will use a model block approach. . A model block program was selected as the most appropriate and effective way to deal with general community problems of boarded-up housing, in-fill housing and neighborhood deterioration. Specific geographic areas are to be selected within Community Council districts for concentrating CDC resources . . The CDC will initially operate from the ASSIST office. This will allow the new organization to share space, equipment and personnel until it is sufficiently staffed to be independent. In addition to their feasibility/organizational study, the task force has prepared a budget for first year operations and met with SLACC and CDAC and received votes of support for their proposed program. The process now requires that the task force meet with the Mayor and City Council and report on their minutes, that the Council must pass a motion to release funds to the program similar to the action recently taken for the Stiener Aquatics projects . When this step has been completed, the Board of Directors can be appointed and they will initiate the formal procedures and incorporation, adopting bylaws, and hiring a Director to begin operations. FUNDING: $80 , 000 was set aside in the 15th year CDBG budget. In addition, $71 , 649 was also awarded to the CDC from past year ' s CDBG slippage through the November, 1989 , budget opening. This brings the total to $151, 649 . ACTION REQUIRED: This item should be scheduled for an early January Council Agenda and a motion made to accept the task force' s report, release the funds to the CDC in accordance with regular City procedures, and an additional Board member (from the Capital Planning Staff) be appointed by the City. LEGISLATION DOCUMENT: As above CONTACT PERSON: Rosemary Davis, 535-7123 cc: Emilie Charles Roger Borgenicht Stan Penfold REP BY THE SLACC TASK FORCE • • THE FEASIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A -N. SALT LAKE CITY BASED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION History In October 1988 Roger Borgenicht, of Assist, Inc. submitted an application to Salt Lake City for Community Development Block Grant funds. The purpose of the grant application was to create a Community Development Corporation (CDC). This CDC would purchase and rehabilitate vacant and boarded up homes in Salt Lake City, then offer them for sale to moderate and low income home buyers. Funds were allocated by the City Council on May 16, 1989 for a CDC contingent on the Salt Lake Association of Community Councils (SLACC) appointing a task force of 5-10 individuals for the purpose of conducting a study. The committee was charged by the City Council with responsibility for: 1. Review of the range of community housing needs that can be accommodated within the context of the.CDC, 2. Investigate and report to the Mayor and Council within three months as to the need for a CDC and the housing problems it may be expected to address, 3. Report whether SLACC should incubate the CDC or whether they recommend another sponsor. The Task Force Starting on August 7, 1989 a group of citizens met as a committee chartered by SLACC to discuss the need for and feasibility of forming a community based development corporation. Since that time the committee has been meeting on a weekly basis. The first meeting was an introductory meeting: group members became acquainted and introductory materials describing the goals and organization of Community Development Corporations were distributed. The task force " i_-...:e•-<�ZY. • - : . .. .. z • initiated a search for a Anon, neighborhood-based purr or a Community Development Corporation. The Range of Community Housing Needs The task force reviewed a wide range of housing related needs that a community development corporation could address, These included a model block program, rehabilitation of boarded up houses, in-fill housing, at risk housing, low interest rehabilitation loans, single room occupancy units, and urban apartments. After discussing these options the task force members established a model block program as a first priority. Based on the belief that a coordinated approach is essential for neighborhood preservation and improvement. The model block program represents a means of improving the aesthetic and social value of living in a neighborhood. The model block residents would be organized through the local Community Council to conduct model block actives such as initiating zoning changes, minor repairs, landscaping, painting and similar low cost home improvements. Many elements of the model block program could be financed by residents and existing city programs. The task force therefore concluded that the needs best met by a community development corporation would be those that could be organized as model block projects, and that rehabilitating boarded up homes or providing in-fill housing could be a critical part of certain model block projects. Boarded up houses were seen as a problem, especially if they occur in an otherwise stable neighborhood. These unoccupied boarded up homes sap neighborhood spirit, reduce residential investment, and breed social problems. The task force recommends only undertaking the rehabilitation of a boarded up house if the residents in the surrounding neighborhood are willing to participate in a model block program. In-fill housing was discussed in the context of a need within a model block. Abandoned lots are not a welcome part of any neighborhood. A relatively inexpensive method for handling in-fill housing would be to relocate a home donated by a developer onto a vacant lot. Funding for the CDC was not sufficient to deal with low interest rehabilitation loans, single room occupancy units, and urban apartments. • Need For A Community Development Corporation The task force members noted that the day time population within the boundaries of Salt Lake City is in excess of 300,000 people. This exceeds the 0 157,000 who reside in the city. The corresponding demand for new commercial property has been satisfied at the cost of housing. Commercial encroachment into otherwise viable neighborhoods is seen as a significant problem. As a result many neighborhoods lack the cohesiveness and spirit of community that existed even ten years ago. The task force determined that any project must seek to involve the entire neighborhood, and improve the sense of community. The purpose of the CDC is undertaking development projects that promote civic identity, community spirit, and stability in the residential population. Due to the limited funds available it was agreed that the Community Development Corporation would need to: 1. Deal with only the most pressing neighborhood development needs in order of priority, 2. Serve in an advisory capacity to community councils when dealing =� with other problems (such as zoning). This may include providing the community with the technical assistance needed to coordinate their model block activities. Incubation The task force members believe that the funding allocated for the formation of a community development corporation is extremely limited. The task force members considered ways to leverage these resources to the fullest extent possible. It is clear that project funds can be increased by reducing the amount spent on administration. At the same time, it seems desirable to have a professional staff with the knowledge and personal energy required to develop additional sources of funding. These two apparently conflicting objectives can be resolved if the CDC shares facilities with another organization. In addition to reducing the cost of operating the CDC in its first year the task force feels this type of relationship will increase the potential for private sector funding. The director of the new community development corporation will benefit from sharing the experience and contacts already developed anu nurtured . through the operation of an existing organization. Therefore the task force recommends for the 1989-90 fiscal year the CDC share offices with ASSIST, Inc. This recommendation is contingent on the approval of SLACC and ASSIST boards. The task force believes that the structure of the board of trustees will assure that control over the operations of the CDC will remain with SLACC and r#e eight community council districts. The CDC's board will rely on the community councils to identify suitable projects within the neighborhoods. It is the perogative of the CDC's board of trustees to select projects from the community council model block programs. Area of Operation The committee discussed the.value of having a target area. While this seems desirable, it was noted that viable boarded up"residential property exists in all areas of the city. The committee believes that accepting a model property/ neighborhood as a pilot project will provide the necessary focus. It is anticipated that each community council district will be working on planning, implementing and completing a project. The CDC will therefore be able to operate in all areas within Salt Lake City, contingent on the availability of appropriate funding. Since the initial funding is from Community Development Block Grant funds the pilot project will occur in an area that is eligible for those funds. Organization • The need for broad based community support was deemed essential, The • committee agreed that the CDC should be a non-profit corporation. After reviewing the history and purpose of the CDC it was decided that the initial board of trustees should consist of ten people. One individual would be selected by each of the eight community council districts. Two individuals would be selected by SLACC. After the CDC is formed up to five technical / at large trustees could be named by the initial board. These individuals would have special skills or access to resources of value to the CDC. For example, these trustees may include persons from City government, the financial services community, real estate sales, and the construction industry. 1 The board or trustees i ' i be responsible for fund raising ::action of lf projects, legal function the CDC, policy making, hiring of4aff, (CDC Director) and coordination of projects with neighborhood councils and SLACC. Each one of the eight community council representatives will chair a neighborhood CDC committee in their own community council area. These committees will examine and recommend projects for their area, work to build neighborhood participation, monitor on-going projects in the neighborhood and coordinate funding. The term of office would be two years for trustees. Funding The Salt Lake City Council has approved $80,000 for a CDC during fiscal year 1989-90. A tentative budget for the expenditure of that amount is attached. f.try,-�• • • • �y. ..�7�. _ .• •^7r,(�:rr.:':i�;.,...,_. :.4:-.r�,r .. ;�ya,,�-..,� : s,�,r:-.M-x?firer.,. -._ .... �""'_ '�>:'�^-"Sc-r•', _, ;"'i�:T..��,',�„'�-ryi ro•S' =.r;°lC;...:,«.roc;:�P,•�_ :. .. ..... - - ... .- - ' - ^^r ' �Cnmnounj ty UwvP}oomvnt t-ornoroUoo FT FOP, N'ov 1. l9O9 - Ju:o30. 199O (Omoy) ---- i ------ --'-- --- ---r ^ (|o[uboLod 4S5|�T0fhco) ' / ! Annual � OMonth Dudoet| ^ F Nve\,prnont 0i'octVr (25/}00 - 30.000) { 30000 i 20100 T8^ � Fnoae. @^ 25110 7500 502 T�Lai �Lm�� 7500 � 25|25' _-_'__-_--_-___-_'___.-__�______'__'-'_____--_-_-�__--- -__-'_--__---- 0P P�T|N� C0STS � | 0fficeSuuulios/E . 1000 - --'----' -- — -------- ohv»p/CnmputorLinkTime | | 1800 ! 120 ---- L)aodity hsuroo[o (not inc} DGO) 2000' ( 1340 . � � 250J' � �_ . ."' �� ---- ----------------7---------- - ----- -'--- 600' ! -----' - ------ Admintn4SS|ST (5� 5b�70pvr) | 232�� | -- --'-------'- ---�--- -- i EuuioPur{hnses / � 2500 ! 25,00 �`- i Total Operating | 1372�, � 100171 [---------- T- |Totml Stmyy8~ Operating | 51220. COSTS !Hf)ld,'.nq Costs (Prop !nsur, Taxes, Fp,,s, Interest) 10000 FI-OL ! These [ond� wou}d ho usrd to helpl*vornqo project costs) � . ASSIST -- ----- ----- /Director Time (2O�) | ' 6600. . 4422 �0fh[o AdminTime (10") ! � 1740' -- � 1166 A«:i/UUiiUo5 | ` | 5400! | 7)6161 ! 100Oi ' �� -_-- -- _-_--_------ r- PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 16, 1989 Geneva Rock UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS Base S676, 562. 05 #1. RE: An appropriation Alternate A S437, 198. 02 resolution adopting a final state- Alternate B $283, 443 . 12 ment regardinc 15th Year Community Alternate C $6, 710.00 -bevelonment Block Grant Fundinc t1 9-90) and approving an Inter- Workman Construction local Cooperation Agreement be- tween Salt Lake City Corporation Base S801, 961 . 50 and the United States Department Alternate A S428, 049 .00 of Housing and Urban Development Alternate B S338, 252. 00 concerning the same. Alternate C S7, 200. 00 NOTE: Councilmember Hardman M.C. Green & Sons relinquished the chair to Council Chair Stoler for this item of Base S674, 879. 99 business so Mr. Hardman could Alternate A S445, 725 .00 participate in the debate. Alternate B S341 , 406 .00 Alternate C $4, 790.00 ACTION: Councilmember Hard- man moved and Councilmember Hor- Western Quality Concrete rocks seconded to reduce funding for the Communi evelopment ': Base S623, 075 . 50 Corporation by( -$50, 00 reducing Alternate A S469, 675.00 it to $100, 000, and increase Alternate B S371, 090.00 funding fcr the Redevelopment Alternate C S5, 550 Agency housing rehab program by S50, 000, increasing it to $700, - Mr. Lyon said that using 000; and any slippage from 15th pavement alternate B, which was Year projects which becomes avail- lower in bid price from all four able during the year be applied contractors, Geneva Rock was the toward the CDC project which is apparent low bidder. He said this currently funded, pending the bid was slichtly below the engi- findings of the task force, which neer' s estimate . motion carried, all members voted (Q 87-1 ) aye except Councilmember Kirk who voted nay. #3. RE: A joint resolution of support for a favorable vote on Councilmember Hardman moved the General Obligation Bond issue and Councilmember Horrocks second- for a new jail facility before ed to reduce funding for the Salt Lake voters on May 23, 1989 . Community Development Corporation by S50, 000, reducing it to $50, - ACTION: Councilmembdt Stcler 000, and _.al_1Qca_te__$5000 f OW moved and Councilmember Godfrey SLACC staffing. but ._not appropriate_ seconded to suspend the rules and the money_ until _the ssues regarS3- on first reading adopt Resolution ing the ordinance anci bpad7et are 67 of 1989, which motion carried, resolved; and that the remaining_ all members voted aye. S50,000___in the CDC line item be (R 89-1 ) for start up costs for a Community Development _C orporti_on __without_ a designated sponsor_ at this time; and that a _task _force consisting of 5-10 individuals with expertis B- and interest -in-=housingproblems, PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 16, 1989 finance, neighborhoods, and other Hardman first made a motion to related issues be selected by reduce funding for the Community SLACC, and__charged to review the ' Development Corporation by $50, - range of community housing needs-,-/ 000. that may be accommodated within j th context of the CDC, and have , Councilmember Godfrey asked their immediate task be to make an! where the $50, 000 would go and Mr. inve_s.t.igation -_and . report to the Hardman said it would go to the Mayor and Council within three. Redevelopment Agency (RDA) housing months as to the need for a CDC\ rehab program. and the housing problems it may be ,expected to -_address; the task Mayor DePaulis asked about force would also report to CDAC the rationale of reducing the CDC. whether SLACC should incubate the Councilmember Hardman said the CDC or whether they recommend funding last year on the RDA was another sponsor_and_ the__ Community \ $700, 000 and they requested $1, - _.Development _.Advisory Committee \ 000, 000 this year. He said CDAC would then make a recommendation recommended $700, 000 and the Mayor -to the Mayor and Council, which recommended $650, 000. He said -- motion carried, ala_.members voted with the loss of the RDA' s 3-12 aye except Councilmembers Fonnes- money and the addition of the beck, Godfrey, and Kirk who voted urban homestead program, he felt nay. it was better at this time to bolster existing programs given Councilmember Horrocks moved the limited amount of housing and Councilmember Kirk seconded to resource money. reduce the funding for the down town plan strategies by $30, 000, Mayor DePaulis said that in reducing it to $35, 000, and move terms of the comprehensive housing the money to the CDC, which motion policy he was trying to provide carried, all members voted aye. for the opportunity to extend resources and attempt to do new Councilmember Horrocks moved programs to aid housing. He said and Councilmember Bittner seconded he thought if the Council reduced that the security lock program be the CDC by $50, 000, then this put out to bid and that a recom- would limit the capacity to move mendation be made to the City into this area which was consis- Council by the Community Develop- tent with all other housing poli- ment Advisory Committee and by the cies and priorities. He said it Mayor for the placement of that seemed reasonable to take money program; and to appropriate the from RDA to use for another oppor- money recommended by the Mayor tunity and expand the program. He ( $30, 000 ) , which motion carried, said he was worried that reducing all members voted aye. funding would damage the possibil- ity to do a CDC effectively. Councilmember Hardman moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to Councilmember Hardman said he adopt the rest of the package as supported the CDC concept and proposed by the Mayor ' s Office, thought there was a role for it to which motion carried, all members play. He said in the absence of voted aye except Councilmember a housing policy he was concerned Godfrey who voted nay. that they may duplicate efforts and was concerned with having DISCUSSION: Councilmember several program vying for money. 89-132 SALT r a,. %STY I P®° Is-i CRAIG E. PETERSON ....ate DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7777 To: Salt Lake City Council December 27, 1989 RE: Petition No. 400-752-89 - Legislative Intent submitted by Council Member Wayne Horrocks Recommendation: That the City Council hold a public hearing on February 6, 1998 at 6:30 p.m. to discuss Petition No. 400-752-89 - Legislative Intent submitted by Council Member Wayne Horrocks. The request is to rezone property located between the Jordan River to 700 West Street and 900 South Street from "R-4", "R-2" to "R-1" and "R-1A" classification. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Discussion and Background: The Planning Commission has reviewed this petition and recommends approval. The rezoning is consistent with the Master plan for the area. The area is predominant single family dwelling -- and the rezoning would provide the City with the best opportunity to expand the population in this area without adverse impact to the existing community. The attached map outlines what areas will be "R-1" and "R-1A" ..- classification. Legislative Action: The City Attorney's Office has prepared the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. Vittedby: CHAEL B. Z A ting Director Community and Economic Development • lf/ J (Y t R* 3 f a tut..., 9� ? > ^m ` 7 — '[� ET 0 O 0 � � �F.�' . .f r1 . ~ 0 O �c O C 0 YL[NDALE r = Z' 1 �� O O O y FRANKLIN L iii E OR1.t ' e •N;\ /j/ O • JORDAN O O 'f, t ' /'` _ �' ``` w G, _ ` P.'• JUNIOR O O BHP GLASS C • i.,ti W t 3 T 3T 13 `• .:: ., O • • -0.•.°••b p O U - • It y to 'f�� "I I 7C D L �. O•• - PEST 3 T..'0 .ii • 0 ' . ■ 1[D D00 aE] Od ,00 lo to.) '25 y,/ 1 0L 900 WEST! WiD[ ST �� n A �� '+ A 9, �, • ,• A_ ,� � fob • Ill D A = �'1T}(F)10 . =.I�..UM = • JER[w T fr \!.4, _ o S ' �JI 8 0 0 e� WEST S T '� f � ��e` jul1 N141 ► i• 3• o �o � r•.o. o• ° uul oN • �. b L ' L 11\%471411 I I\ ,-, i › IL. lihti.. .0 .•... . • ,,,,• -0,>. _ i- 2,, , „it \N , 110 100 v! 9 T 9 T I• 3 T ti 411/4 \‘' \al L N‘ilikket k' _in 111111‘11Nilligilli:1 ib• •• co /, C _. .nn w t S T 3T TD SE WIDENED ► 1 I I I I I 4 Li IL\ 1 1 i 0 I I 0 I I IIII;7 %/ ,4 I i ii - z.-�.� -- _ I REONE TO R-1 ;Aii,_______,z:_______.___._.____________. ____________ .\ , . -\111S b.billik"Ur. • alala -,No u ,,,,, . ...IL .8, -I I I I I I 1,,,4.2,,\\\ \.1.,::,1 11 I lb'.di-47-4 III it il III . REZONE TO R-1A NiNi ‘\ i\ NACIN: li 1.! is .,, : i -, ,4„ : .1AL A I . , • NI G • IF E / Se 1 .14 Ni% o .-�-1 .: r Petition No. 400-752 \ t 1 r [y �y MAP C. SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 ( Rezoning property located between the Jordan River and 700 West Street and 900 South to California Avenue pursuant to Petition No. 400-752-89 ) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 21 . 14 .020 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE RELATING TO ZONING AND FIXING OF BOUNDARIES OF USE DISTRICTS. WHEREAS, in response to the rezoning petition initiated by City Council Member Wayne Horrocks, No. 400-752-89, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, has held public hearings before its own body and before the Planning Commission, and has taken into consideration citizen testimony, filing and demographic details of the area and the Master Plan as part of its ? deliberation. Pursuant to these deliberations, the Council has concluded that the proposed change of zoning for the property located between the Jordan River and 700 West Street and 900 South and California Avenue is appropriate for the development of the community in that area; THEREFORE, The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, hereby adopts the following amendments to the Use District provisions of Title 21 . Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That the Use District Map, as adopted by Section 21 . 14.020 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries of Use Districts, be, and the same hereby is AMENDED to read as follows: 21. 14.020. Boundaries of Districts - Use District Map Adopted. The following-described parcel of real property in Salt Lake City, Utah, presently zoned Residential "R-4" and "R-2" is hereby rezoned "R-1 " as noted below, and the Use District Map is amended accordingly: Residential "R-2" to "R-1" Beginning from a point at the southeast corner of 900 South Street and 800 West Street; thence 861 .3 feet +/- south along the east right-of-way line of 800 West (1 Street to the south property line of Lot 14, Block 8, (2"�� Five Acre Plat "B" ; thence east 92 feet along said `�� property line; thence south 2017 . 7 feet +/- from the south line of Lot 14, Block 8, Five Acre Plat "B" , following a line 125 feet east of the east right-of- way line of 800 West Street to the north right-of-way line of 1300 South Street, also being California Ave. ; thence west along the north line of 1300 South and California Ave. to the center line of the Jordan River; thence northerly along the center line of the Jordan River to the South right-of-way line of 900 South Street; thence east along the south right-of-way ? line of 900 South Street to the point of beginning; Excluding "B-3" zoned property within the area. Residential "R-4" to "R-1" Beginning from a point 125 feet east of the southwest corner of Lot 16, Block 8, Five Acre Plat B, Salt Lake City Survey; thence east 634 feet east along the south lot line of Lot 16, Block 8, Five Acre "B" , to the west right-of-way line of 700 West Street; thence south along the west right-of-way line of 700 West GU r2_ /�1 931 . 7 feet to the southeast corner of Lot 21 , Block 8, 1 � Big Field Survey, Five Acre Plat "B" ; thence west ddd along the south property line extension of Lot 21, Block 8, Big Field Survey, Five Acre Plat "B" , to a point being 125 feet east of the right-of-way line of 800 West Street; thence north to the point of beginning. Residential "R-4" to "R-lA" From the intersection of the south right-of-way line of Paxton Ave. and the east right-of-way line of 800 West Street, 150 feet south to the south property line -2- of Lot 3, Block 8, Big Field Survey, Five Acre Plat "B" , and 125 feet east along said south property line to the point of beginning; thence east along the extension of Lot 3, Block 8, Big Field Survey, Five Acre Plat "B" , to the intersection with the west right-of-way line of 700 West Street; thence south along the west right-of-way line of 700 West 862. 1 feet to the north line of Dotson Sub. of Block 5, Big Field Survey, Five Acre Plat "B" , Salt Lake City Survey; thence west 733 . 74 feet along said sub. line to the east line of 800 West Street; thence along the ` 1 east line of 800 West Street to the north line of 1300 South Street; thence east 99 . 74 feet; thence north 509 t feet to the point of beginning. SECTION 2 . EFFECTIVE DATE AND CONDITIONS. This ordinance shall become effective when recorded. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989 . CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s Action: Approved Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER BRB: rc -3- c c r ALLEN C. JOHNSON MEMBERS: PLANNING DIRECTOR RALPH BECKER SANDRA MARLER SAT'I § 9 A yp��,///®®®��I � e iy 1��yTT� CINDY CROMER SECRETARY SJ�I, S�,,,.L� ab_} ��y �1 g -'j�® �e , �a' �1`, THOMAS A. ELLISON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES LAVONE LIDDLE-GAMONAL EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS_ RICHARD J. HOWA AYOR OF SALT LAKE CITY Planning and Zoning Commission RALPH P. NEILSON CITY ENGINEER 324 SOUTH STATE STREET. ROOM 200 GEORGE NICOLATUS CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111 JOHN M. SCHUMANN CITY BUILDING OFFICIAL 535-7757 F. KEITH STEPAN PETER VANALSTYNE KATHY WACKER November 21, 1989 Mike Zuhl , Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor Acting Director , Community and Economic Development BUILDING Dear Mr. Zuhl : Please find attached Petition 400-752 by Council Member Wayne Horrocks requesting Salt Lake City rezone property located between the Jordan River to 700 West Street and 900 South to California Avenue from an existing Residential "R-4" and "R-2" to a Residential "R-1" zoning district . At their regular meeting on November 2, 1989 the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held an Informal Hearing , reviewed the petition , and received public comment from property owners and residents in the area. After deliberation , the Planning Commission determined the following findings of fact : * the rezone is consistent with the master plan for the area ; * the dominant present land use in the area is single unit residential housing ; * the occupancy level and number of persons per unit for one unit dwellings will further population growth in the area. The Planning Commission recommends the City Council hold a formal hearing on these rezonings . Attached are the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting and the staff reports . The legal description of the areas recommended for rezoning are attached. Respe fully , Alle C. J hnson AICP Pla ning irector ACJ :TW attachments Salt Lake City Planning Commission Staff Report Petition No . 400-752 Westside Rezone - Jordan Park Neighborhood Petition No . 400- 752 submitted by Council Member Wayne Horrocks , requesting that property located between the Jordan River and 700 West and 900 South to California Street be rezoned from R-4 and R- 2 to R-1 classification . The planning commission staff recommend that the area be rezoned to R-1 and R-1A classification . This would provide an opportunity to accommodate new single family unit development within the current land ownership pattern of the area and provide the best opportunity for the City to expand the population in this area without adverse impacts to the existing community or its social structure . Only detached single units should be permitted in the R-lA rezones created in this area through Planed Unit Development review under Sec . 21 . 78 . 160 . ANALYSIS The predominant character of this area is single family housing . The only value for R-2 classification would be to allow present single family housing to be converted to accommodate basement apartments . However , the high flood potentials and very high water table make such conversions impractical in this area . There is little demand in the Salt Lake market for duplex units outside the basement apartment or conversion . Existing Conditions Single family housing in this area has over 2 . 5 persons per unit while multifamily housing in the Salt Lake area averages 1 . 4 persons per unit . New single family housing in the same area typically has 4 to 5 occupants per unit , they are often young families whose head of household or spouse was raised in or near the neighborhood . New single family housing in the area would provide greater opportunities for population growth in the area than would new duplex units . Duplex units can expect vacancy rates in excess of 20o and average persons per occupied unit of 2 . 1 persons . There are 348 single-unit dwellings and 30 two-unit ( 60 units ) dwellings in the rezone area . Single unit dwellings equal 850 of units in the area . Alternatives R-2 vs . R-1 Zone A higher average population density and more stable residential area would be provided by the rezone of the R-2 area to R- 1 to reflect the current character of the area . The data displayed in Table 1 . and Graph 1 . indicate the population density for single family housing verses a new duplex or two-unit development . There are 30 two-unit developments ( 60 units ) which would be nonconforming uses if the rezone is adopted ( see Table 2 ) . Existing Conditions R-4 Zone The average Four-unit occupancy for the Salt Lake area is 1 . 4 persons per unit with vacancy rates for apartments of 15% . There are 100 single family residential structures on lots in the R-4 zone , of these 68% are to small to be developed as a four -unit under the area requirements of the R-4 zone . Alternatives R-4 vs . R-1 or R-1A Development on the small lots would require aggregation of two or more lots currently used for single family dwellings . Over 20% of the lots are nonconforming even in use for one single family unit . Most redevelopment of existing single family homes would require the removal of two homes to build one four -unit apartment . Only one undeveloped lot ( 2 . 27 acres ) is present in the R-4 zone area . Subdivision of this lot would be required before it could be economically developed for four-unit apartments . If subdivided at maximum density it would accommodate only 10 four -unit dwellings ( 40 units ) providing a population of 47 , without subdivision only 4 units can be placed on this property under the R-4 zoning . Because of lot sizes and existing housing structures on all other lots , the R-4 zone of this area has no real value in this predominately single family housing area . The rezone of this area from R-4 to R- 1A would provide greater stability for the existing single family homes in the area , encourage maintenance of single family homes , and preclude any change in neighborhood character that could cause a decrease in the quality of life or of property values . The 2 . 27 acre lot and the rear yards of 3 adjoining one acre single family units could be developed best under R- 1A zoning as a Planned Unit Development providing a potential for 32 new single family units , housing 128 people . PLANNING GOALS The City needs to stop population decline and to encourage population growth . Because of the existing pattern of development in this area , the current population intensities and limited developable or redevelopable area , a rezone to R-1 and R- 1A would be , in the best interests of the City to encourage population growth and stabilize the residential property in this area . Some R-lA is desirable for flexibility of new construction in flood plain and high water table areas . RECOMMENDATION Rezone R-4 to R-lA is recommended for block 15- 12 -478 between 1300 So to Paxton and 700 West to 800 West excluding Paxton frontage ( Map C . ) ; and 15- 12- 480 , 1300 So . to 1350 So . The remainder of the area covered in the rezone petition as outlined on Map C . should be rezoned to R-1 as requested in the rezone petition . The rezone is consistent with the master pia for this area , supports the present land use in the area , and will further population growth in Salt Lake City . Tues . 10-24 -1989 1 PC MINUTES November 2, 1989 Page 8 Ms. Liddle-Camonal closed the hearing to the public and opened it up for Planning Commission discussion. Mr. Nicolatus asked if this parking lot would be open for evening public use. Mr. Money stated that it would be policed by Zions Securities and would not be open for public use in the evening. Mr. Becker moved to recommend approval of Petition No. 410-025 subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Mr. Schumann seconded the motion; all voted "Aye." The motion passes. INPDRMAL HEARING - Petition No. 400-752, a Legislative Intent by Councilmember Wayne Horrocks requesting Salt Lake City to rezone property located between the Jordan River to 700 West Street and 900 South to California Avenue from an existing Residential "R-4" to a Residential "R-1" zoning district. IN ORMAL HEARING - Petition No. 400-751, a Legislative Intent by Councilmember Wayne Horrocks requesting Salt Lake City to rezone property located between 800 West to Interstate-15 and 700 South to 1300 South Streets from an existing Industrial "M-2" to an Industrial "M-]A" zoning district. Councilmember Wayne Horrocks was present for this portion of the Planning Corrauission meeting. Mr. Terry Wirth presented the staff reports and stated that Petition No. 400-751 submitted by Councilmember Wayne Horrocks, requests that property located between 700 West and I-15 and 700 South and 1300 South Streets be rezoned from Industrial "M-2" to Industrial "M-lA". Mr. Wirth stated that the Planning Staff recommends approval of Petition No. 400-751. Additionally, the staff recoiuiuends the rezone of property between 800 West and 700 West from the 700 South north right-of-way line to 143.55 feet north from the center line of Fremont Avenue and that the north boundary of Jordan Park Subdivision be included in the petition for rezoning from "M-2" to "M-IA". Mr. Wirth stated that this area is adjacent to a predominantly single family area known as the Jordan Park Neighborhood, a good lower-to-middle income family area, with strong neighborhood identity. The rezone of "M-2" to "M-1A" is intended to, implement the written recommendations of the Salt Lake City Model Neighborhood Plan, Westside Community Master Plan of 1974 providing for compatibility between the residential and industrial uses in the area. Since 1974 the strength and vitality of the adjoining residential neighborhood in maintaining its family oriented character has promoted a master plan update which is now in progress and will recommend the emphasis of compatibility with single family homes and family oriented environments in this neighborhood. There is residential use on facing properties to the "M-2" zones. The existing "M-2" zoning site standards are not protecting this residential area by providing an orderly transition through intensity of land use. Single family homes face directly into industrial uses, such as aluminum recycling, PC MINUTES November 2, 1989 Page 9 metal fabricating, bottling plants and auto parts wholesalers where there is no required set back and landscaping in front of these industrial uses. The "M-1A" zone requires a 15 foot landscaped front yard set back, prohibits major above ground petroleum or petroleum by-product storage; and currently prohibits storage, sorting or salvage of auto bodies, other metal, glass, bottles, rags, cans, rubber or paper or other junk articles. These are the currently permitted uses that would be made nonconforming by the zoning change from "M-2" to "M-lA". Future new industrial uses or changes in use would be required to meet the 15 foot landscape set back requirements. The adjoining residential areas are stable residential neighborhoods consisting primarily of long term city residents and are predominantly single family homes built after 1940. The Jordan River Park represents major public investments in the residential character of the general area and contains the International Peace Gardens. The presence of industrial uses such as a major petroleum storage facility, which is permitted in the "M-2" zone, would be detrimental to the value of these public improvements and to the health and safety of the 2500 residents who live in the adjacent neighborhood. The present Westside Community Master Plan, prepared in 1974 outlined the area involved in this rezone as industrial but specified that "Those uses that are noxious by reason of noise, vibration, smoke, odor, fumes, etc. , will not be permitted." The specific purpose of the "M-2" zone is to permit above ground storage of petroleum products or by-products in excess of two (2) seven thousand (7000) gallon tanks, which is specifically prohibited in the "M-1" zone because of the potential for emission of odor and gas. Storage of large volumes of petroleum products above ground in such close proximity to a residential area of 2500 people would pose a threat to safety from fire or explosion which could result in emission of smoke, noise and other destructive or harmful effects to the residents of the area and to their property. The wording of the master plan was intended to prevent "M-3" and "M-2" uses in the 1-15 Industrial corridor of the Westside Planning area. The Welfare Square and Bishops Store House located at 751 West 700 South contains underground storage capacity for petroleum products, this underground storage is permitted in "M-1A" zones. The "M-lA" district prohibits storage or sorting or salvaging of auto bodies, other metal, glass, bottles, rags, cans, rubber or paper or junk articles. This restriction could affect future expansion of: 1. Deseret Industries, Welfare Square 751 West 700 South 2. Reynolds Aluminum recycling, 1101 So. 700 West 3. Standard Metal Co. : Junk 1178 So. 500 West 4. A.M. Castle Co. : Metal Warehouse 939 So. 700 West 5. Purcell Truck Tire Center 550 West 1300 So. 6. Combined Supply & Plastic 980 So. 700 West 7. Aaron Rents Furniture 520 West 1300 South 8. Rollins Truck Leasing 1260 So. 500 West 9. 7-Up Bottling Co & Recycle Cntr 959 So. 800 West. These operations will be classified as nonconforming uses in the "M-lA" zone or given legal status by changing the wording of the "M-1A" ordinance Sec. 21.68.010 as follows: PC MINUTES November 2, 1989 Page 10 "except no building or premises may be used for auto wrecking or burning, . NOR MAY ANY o- for the storage or sorting or salvaging of JUNK ARTICLES, INCLUDING auto bodies, or other metal, glass, bottles, rags, cans, rubber_, or paper or other JUNK ARTICLES, BE PERMITTED OUTSIDE OF A FULLY ENCLOSED STRUCTURE articles commonly ) own as junk. " Most of the buildings or structures currently built for industrial use in the present "M-2" zone would be classified as nonconforming buildings or structures because of the 15 foot front yard setback and landscaping requirements of the "M-lA" Front Yard Regulations (Sec. 21.68.020) . Aerial photo coverage of this area should be acquired on the date of adoption of this rezone for determination of Nonconforming Building Status in the area. Mr. Wirth stated that the Planning Staff recommends the rezone from "M-2" to "M-lA" as outlined on Map (A) of the staff report which is filed with the minutes. The requested rezoning for the industrial area west of 1-15 will support the master plan for this area. The proposal will rezone all "M-2" property in the corridor between I-15 and the Jordan River to "M-lA" industrial use and provide for front yard setbacks and landscaping in these industrial areas. The staff also recoiunends amendment of Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance Sec. 21.68.010 to read: ". . .except no building or premises may be used for auto wrecking or burning;. NOR MAY ANY or for the storage or sorting or salvaging of JUNK ARTICLES, INCLUDING auto bodies, or other metal, glass, bottles, rags, cans, rubber_, or paper or other JUNK ARTICLES, BE PERMITTED OUTSIDE OF A FULLY ENCLOSED STRUCTURE articles common ." Petition No. 400-752: Mr. Wirth stated that Petition No. 400-752 was submitted by Councilmember Wayne Horrocks, requesting that property located between the Jordan River and 700 West and 900 South to California Street be rezoned from "R-4" and "R-2" to "R-l" classification. The Planning Staff recommends that the area be rezoned to "R-1" and "R-1A" classifications. This would provide an opportunity to accommodate new single family unit development within the current land ownership pattern of the area and provide the best opportunity for the City to expand the population in this area without adverse impacts to the existing coruitunity or its social structure. Only detached single units should be permitted in the "R-LA" rezones created in this area through Planed Unit development review under Sec. 21.78.160. The predominant character of this area is single family housing. The only value for "R-2" classification would be to allow present single family housing to be converted to accommodate basement apartments. However, the high flood potentials and very high water table make such conversions impractical in this area. There is little demand in the Salt Lake market for duplex units outside the basement apartment or conversion. PC MINUTES November 2, 1989 Page 11 A higher average population density and a more stable residential area would be provided by the rezone of the "R-2" area to "R-1" to reflect the current character of the area. The rezone of this area from "R-4" to "R-lA" would provide greater stability for the existing single family homes in the area, encourage maintenance of single family homes, and preclude any change in neighborhood character that could cause a decrease in the quality of life or of property values. The City needs to stop population decline and to encourage population growth. Because of the existing pattern of development in this area, the current population intensities and limited developable or redevelopable area, a rezone to "R-1" and "R-lA" would be in the best interests of the City. Some "R-1A" is desirable for flexibility of new construction in flood plain and high water table areas. Rezoning "R-4" to "R-lA" is recommended for block 15-12-478 between 1300 South to Paxton and 700 West to 800 West excluding Paxton frontage and 15-12-480, 1300 South to 1350 South. The remainder of the area covered in the rezone petition should he rezoned to "R-l" as requested in the rezone petition. The rezone is consistent with the master plan for this area, supports the present land use in the area, and will further population growth in Salt Lake City. Councilmember Horrocks stated that he and Mr. Bill Wright had spent a considerable amount of time on this matter trying to ascertain the best way to solidify these neighborhoods. Councilmember Horrocks stated that the Ingersoll family owns a large parcel of land in this area and the City is interested in changing the area's zoning, yet at the same time, protecting the development abilities of the Ingersoll family. Councilmember Horrocks also stated that they had been surprised to discover that petroleum storage was allowed under the current zoning regulations and they were desirous of rezoning to protect the surrounding residential uses from petroleum storage uses. Councilmember Horrocks said he and Mr_ . Wright had visited the business owners along 700 West informing them of what the City wanted to accomplish in the proposed rezonings. He stated that they had not received any negative comments from these businesses. Councilmember Horrocks stated that drastic measures need to be taken in this district to maintain the residential quality and reduce the crime, prostitution and drugs. Ms. Diddle-Camonal opened the hearing to the public and asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission. Mr. John Atzet, 733 West Cenessce Avenue, stated that they bring reusable items into their facilities to repair and remarket them. Mr. Atzet stated that he would not be able to contain all of the items they are preparing to remarket within an enclosed structure. Mr. Atzet asked the Planning Commission if his business would be considered a "junk yard." Mr. Johnson PC MINUTES November 2, 1989 Page 12 stated that Mr. Atzet's operation would fall under the definition of a " junk yard" but added that assuming these changes are enacted, the businesses in this area that did not meet the ordinance would receive a nonconforming status. Mr. Johnson further explained that Mr. Atzet would be allowed to continue operating as he currently operates, but if he chose to expand in the future, he would be required to bring his operation into conformity by enclosing it. Mr. Art Bruner, representing Standardized Metal, stated that he had been at his present location for over 40 years and he did not want this zoning change to take place. Mr. Bruner asked if he would be allowed to expand and purchase the properties adjacent to his property. Mr. Johnson explained that he would not be allowed to do that, if this proposal is approved, without enclosing his operation. Mr. Bruner stated that due to the type of materials he deals with, that would be impossible. Mr. Bruner stated that a zoning change of this nature would hurt his ability to develop his business further and he was opposed to it. Mr. Jim Bruner, also representing Standardized Metal, stated that he feels they are being discriminated against since they have the only scrap or "junk" yard in the area. He added that this location had been chosen 42 years ago • before the freeway was put in and before the residential area reached its current boundaries. Now, he stated they are being discriminated against to protect the "residential quality" of the area that they had located in first. Mr. Bruner added that they would not be able to enclose their operation due to the size of the cranes they use to move the large pieces of scrap metal around. Mr. Kent Thurgood, representing Deseret Industries, stated that they are in the business of "recycling people" and they would hate to have anything happen to jeopardize that. Mr. Curzon Hailes, 1100 California Avenue, stated that he owns property in the area in question. He added that he had promised his current tenants that they could build a duplex on his land if they desired and he is, therefore, opposed to a zoning change that would preclude this development. Mel Ingersoll, 766 West 1300 South, stated that he is neither in favor of nor opposed to the zoning change as. long as it does not render this area "undesirable" for future development. Mr. W. W. Hailes, 804 West 1300 South, stated that he would like to see the zoning in this area Residential "R-1". Mr. John Atzet stated that when he set up his operation in this area two years ago, he was required to put in landscaped set backs, meet code on the building and to put up decorative fences. He stated that what they are requiring for the "M-1A" has already been done. Mr. Johnson stated that the reason those requirements were imposed is due to the residential use on the same block face. Ms. Liddle-Camonal closed the hearing to the public and opened it for Planning Commission discussion. PC MINUI`ES November 2, 1989 Page 13 Mr. Nicolatus stated that he was concerned about the property owners who had purchased property in this area with the intent to develop it as it was zoned when purchased. If the zoning is changed, those people then lose the value of their property. Mr. Nicolatus asked if the City would be discriminating against these property owners. Mr. Bill Wright stated that this is primarily a developed area, the lot sizes are bluall, the homes are built on the lots with no side yards and there is very little opportunity to convert these units from single family units to duplexes. Mr. Wright stated that people in the community do not want developers buying two and three single family lots in order to build duplexes and fourplexes. This issue is the driving force behind this petition. Mr. Becker asked what the master plan for this area called for. Mr. Wirth stated that the master plan calls for industrial use with an indication that "M-1" or "M-IA" are the industrial zones referred to. Mr. Wright stated that the actions taken at this meeting would amend the 1972 master plan for the area that is zoned Residential "R-4" . Petition No. 400-752: Mr. Schumann moved to recommend to the City Council , approval of Petition No. 400-752 to rezone from Residential "R-4" to Residential "R-lA" the area between 1300 South to Paxton Avenue and 700 West to 800 West, excluding Paxton Avenue and 800 West frontage; to rezone from "R-4" to "R-1A" the area from 1300 South to 1330 South between 700 West and 800 West; and to rezone property located between the Jordan River to 800 West Street and 900 South to California Avenue from "R-2" to "R-1", with the understanding that this more clearly defines the direction of the master plan for this area. Mr. Howa seconded the motion. Ms. Cromer asked what the effect would be on the adjoining residents' back yards. Mr. Johnson stated that the property owners in the "M-lA" zone would need to access their property off of 700 West and provide ten feet of landscaped buffer on the south and west property lines. Mr. Howa said his concern under the current zoning is that someone could go into the area, remove two or three homes and construct one large structure. He added that the sizes of these lots are not conducive to this type of development. Mr. Ellison stated that he does not believe that "R-IA" represents an investment opportunity, and therefore, this action does not really promote housing. Mr. Ellison said his concern is that a higher density would be more appropriate as a transition, consistent with the residential neighborhood, and is being foreclosed without the kind of master plan study that would normally be done to back up a decision of this nature. Mr. Howa called a question on the motion; Mr. Howa, Mr. Schumann, Ms. Cromer and Ms. Palacios voted "Aye"; Mr. Neilson, Mr. Nicolatus, Mr. Ellison and Mr. Becker voted "Nay." Ms. Liddle-Gamonal, as chair, voted "Aye." The motion passes. PC MINUTES November 2, 1989 Page 14 Petition No. 400-751: Addressing Petition No. 400-751, Ms. Cromer stated that she has concerns about the property owners who have been in this area before the housing was constructed and placing them in a nonconforming status. Mr. Schumann asked if the Planning Staff had examined all aspects of the master plan on this issue and whether or not the master plan needed to be revisited for this area. Mr. Schumann said he was also concerned that this area is a "gateway" area. Mr. Wirth stated that they could rezone the major portion of the requested area for rezoning (highlighted in blue on the staff report map, a copy of which is filed with the minutes) and leave the minor portion (highlighted in purple on the staff report map which is filed with the minutes) as "M-l". This would allow the present uses to remain "M-1" and continue their present operations. Mr. Wright stated that under the "M-1" classification, they would only be required to have a fence around their operation, rather than having it enclosed. Mr. Becker inquired what the "gateway" plan calls for. Mr. Johnson stated that in the Urban Design Element, Interstate-15 is considered a "gateway" into Salt Lake City and that features such as billboards and junk yards should be eliminated. Mr. Ellison moved to adopt the proposed change to the Zoning Ordinance Section 21.68.010, as set forth in the staff report, a copy of which is filed with the minutes. Mr. Schumann seconded the motion; all voted "Aye" with the exception of Mr. Neilson who abstained from the vote. The motion passes. Mr. Ellison moved to recommend to the City Council, the approval of Petition No. 400-751 for rezoning from "M-2" to "M-lA" the area from 800 West to the railroad tracks located at 640 West and 700 South to 1300 South; the rezoning on the area from the railroad tracks to 1-15 and 930 South to 1300 South to be held until the Planning Commission has the opportunity to consider other similarly situated properties in the area and reexamine the master planning issues. Mr. Schumann seconded the motion; all voted "Aye" with the exception of Mr. Neilson who abstained from the vote. The motion passes. PLANNING ISSUE Discuss "Block 57 - Implementation Strategy and Urban Master Plan" and requests of the Redevelopment Agency for conditional use approval for the public plaza and demolition permits for existing structures. Mr. Johnson stated that FFKR was under contract with the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) to prepare the master plan for Block 57. That master plan is now at the conceptual approval stage. Eventually, the RDA will have to approve this plan in their client capacity. Mr. Johnson explained that before this plan can become an effective part of the City's master plan, it must be approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council. This is the first phase of getting this plan approved. Mr. Johnson further stated that this is also an P 8 - LEGISLATIVE ACTION ACTION PROPOSED BY: Council Member L. Wayne Horrocks PROPOSED ACTION: Rezone area located between the Jordan River and 700 West and. 900 South to California Avenue from "R-4" and "R-2" to "R-1" classification. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This rezoning is a necessary step in the implementation of the Westside Community Master Plan goals and to update the plan for new development. REFERRED TO: Department of Development Services for scheduling on the Planning Commission agenda. CRAIG E. PETERSON S_A DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7777 it: Salt Lake City Council December 28, 1989 Re: Technical Amendments to Eight Zoning Ordinances Recommendations: That the City Council hold a public hearing on February 6, 1990 at 6:40 p.m. to discuss technical amendments to the zoning ordinances to correct inaccuracies, omissions and improve the readability of the Zoning Ordinance prior to reprinting. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Discussion and Background: The following is a review of the corrections that are being recommended: 1. 21.06.050 Updating the filing fee for the Board of Adjustment 2. 21.26.010(E) Repealing a temporary moratorium on fraternity/sorority ✓ houses which has expired; new ordinance is in place. 3. 21.38.020 Correcting an omission of the area requirements for residential development in the Residential "R-6" zoning district. 4. 21.80.030 Clarifying the reading of the requirements for lots facing public street. 5. 21.84.010 ' Clarifying that driveways must be hard surfaced. 6. 21.84.020 Clarifying the parking requirements for residential development. 7. 21.84.030(A) Clarifying parking requirements for apartments in the Commercial and Industrial zoning districts. 8. 21.92.280 Setting the fee schedule for sign permits by the Uniform Building Code. The Planning Conutiission has reviewed and approved the above mentioned technical amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. Legislative Action: The City Attorney's Office has prepared and approved the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. Submitted by: MICHAEL B. Z I Acting Dir or ConQuunity a o mic Development S' ri\ 1,J Orgiff 0913.119,Lilikki ALLEN C. JOHNSON, AICP PLANNING AND ZONING :,RECTOR COMMISSION MEMBERS wlu_IAM T. WRIGHT, AICP COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RALPH BECKER DEPUTY DIRECTOR PLANNING DIVISION DAN BETHEL ._.,'E'9JISOR LONG RANGE PLANNING Planning and Zoning Commission CINDY CROMER AND URBAN DESIGN THOMAS A. ELLISON SANDRA MARLER 451 SOUTH STATE STREET LAVONE LIDDLE-GAMONAL . SECRETARY ROOM 406, CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING RICHARD J HOWARALPH P. NEILSON SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 GEORGE NICOLATUS TELEPHONE 535-7757 JOHN M. SCHUMANN December 22, 1989 Mr. Mike Zuhl, Acting Director Community and Economic Development Salt Lake City Corporation Dear Mike: Attached please find a staff initiated petition to make certain technical amendments to the zoning ordinance to correct inaccuracies, omissions and improve the readability of the ordinance prior to reprinting. On December 7, 1989 the Planning Commission held an informal hearing to discuss these changes and receive public comment. At the conclusion of their discussion, the Planning Colruuission recommended that the City Council schedule a formal public hearing for the proposed ordinance changes and adopt the new ordinance. Bruce Baird has drafted the ordinance in accordance with the Planning Commission recommendation. The attached staff report outlines the changes and their affect on the existing ordinance. I reconurlend that the City Council schedule a public hearing and adopt the Planning Commission's recommended changes. If you have any questions, please contact me. Respectfully su mitted, William. T. Wri t AICP Deputy Planning Director cc: file Salt Lake City Planning Commission Staff RFrt Ordinance making certain technical amendments to the Zoning Ordinance OVERVIEW The City Planning Staff is recommending technical changes to the zoning ordinance to correct inaccuracies, omissions and improve the readability of the ordinance prior to printing. These corrections do not materially change the ordinance. The Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council for these changes. ANALYSIS Attached is the proposed ordinance with the changes highlighted. The additions are underlined and the deletions struck out. A review of the corrections are as follows. 21.06.050 Updating the filing fee for the Board of Adjustment. 21.26.010(E) Repealing a temporary moratorium on fraternity/sorority houses which has expired; new ordinance is in place. 21.38.020 Correcting an omission of the area requirement for residential development in the Residential "R-6" zoning district. 21.80.030 Clarifying the reading of the requirements for lots facing a public street. 21.84.010 Clarifying that driveways must be hard surfaced. 21.84.020 Clarifying the parking requirements for residential development. 21.84.030(A) Clarifying parking requirements for apartments in the Commercial and Industrial zoning districts. 21.92.280 Setting the fee schedule for sign permits by the Uniform Building Code. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Staff recommends approval of correcting these technical errors presently contained in the zoning ordinance. The Planning Commission should make their recommendation to the City Council. October 27, 1989 William T. Wright Deputy Planning Director .c, i5 ' Et 4 ,ra conditional use approval criteria. He added that the business down the street could be an allowed use and the canopy overhang restrictions would not apply to them. PET1TIGNs INFORMAL HEARING - Planning Staff initiative to make certain technical amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to correct inaccuracies omissions and improve the readability of the ordinance. Mr. Bill Wright presented the staff report and stated that the Planning Staff is recommending technical changes to the Zoning Ordinance to correct inaccuracies, omissions and improve the readability of the ordinance prior to printing. These corrections do not materially change the ordinance. The Planning Staff recommends the Planning Colllluission forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council for these changes. A copy of the proposed changes are filed with the minutes. The additions are underlined and the deletions struck out. A review of the corrections is as follows: 21.06.050 Updating the filing fee for the Board of Adjustment. 21.26.010(E) Repealing a temporary moratorium on fraternity/sorority houses which has expired; new ordinance is in place. 21.38.020 Correcting an omission of the area requirement for residential development in the Residential "R-6" zoning district. 21.80.030 Clarifying the reading of the requirements for lots facing a public street. 21.84.010 Clarifying that driveways must be hard surfaced. 21.84.020 Clarifying the parking requirements for residential development. 21.84.030(A) Clarifying parking requirements for apartments in the Commercial and Industrial zoning districts. 21.92.280 Setting the fcc schedule for sign permits by the Uniform Building Code. Mr. Wright said the Planning Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of correcting these technical errors presently contained in the Zoning Ordinance to the City Council. Mr. Wright added that Mr. Bruce Baird, the Assistant City Attorney had recommended this matter be handled as an informal hearing. He stated that since this matter affects every location in the City, the Planning Staff had not mailed notices to the entire City. He added, however, that this matter would be advertised as required by law when the City Council holds the public hearing on this matter. Ms. Cromer asked if the changes dealing with parking requirements for apartment complexes were sensitive to whether or not the apartments had one or two or more bedrooms. Ms. Cromer said she felt one stall was adequate for a one bedroom apartment but might not be adequate for a two or more bedroom • apartment. Mr. Wright responded in the negative but added that the number of stalls required was based upon an averaging of the total number of apartments in various complexes. He added that this might be an issue worth considering when the entire Zoning Ordinance is rewritten. Mr. Nicolatus moved to recommend approval to the City Council of the technical amendments to the Zoning Ordinance as suggested in the staff report. Ms. Cromer seconded the motion; all voted "Aye." The motion passes. DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Making certain technical amendments to Title 21 ) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF TITLE 21 TO CORRECT TECHNICAL ERRORS. WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, has reviewed Title 21 and has determined that numerous technical errors should be corrected; NOW, THEREFORE, Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Section 21.06 .050 be amended to read as follows: 21.06.050 Appeals to the board. Appeals to the board of adjustment may be taken by any person aggrieved or any officer, department, board or bureau of the municipality affected by any decision of the administrative officer. Such appeal shall be taken within a reasonable time, as provided by the rules of the board, by filing with the officer from whom the appeal is taken and with the board of adjustment a notice of appeal specifying the grounds thereof and paying to the city treasurer a fee [of twenty dollars] as provided in Section 21 .01 .020 with each notice of appeal where the relief sought is a variance from the terms of this title. The officer from whom the appeal is taken shall thenceforth transmit to the board of adjustment all the papers constituting the record upon which the action appealed from was taken. SECTION 2 . That Section 21 .26.010.E. be repealed as the moratorium has expired: 21.26.010 * * * A. * * * B. * * * C. * * * D. * * * , occupying which in any way converts the use e-f a facility for use occupied only by the faculty or students of any cellege er university" shall be accepted by the planning or building departments or any other department of the city, nor shall any plans or applications for applicable department, nor shall any permits be issued- by the building inspector or other appli able department or personnel . permits and appro als, imposed to preserve the status quo, shall extend for six months or until such sooner time as the city council shall amend the moratorium by taking final action on Petition No. 400 -515 87. ] -2- SECTION 3 . That Section 21 .38.020 be amended by adding the following language which was accidentally omitted during the recodification: 21.38.020 Area regulations. The minimum lot area shall be not less than four thousand (4, 000) square feet for a one-family dwelling with an additional five hundred ( 500) square feet required for each family added. Area requirements for boarding houses, lodging houses and convalescent and nursing homes in the R-6 district shall be four thousand (4, 000) square feet for the main structure plus five hundred square feet for every three boarders, lodgers, roomers, patients or other persons the building is designed or licensed to accommodate. SECTION 4. That Section 21 . 80.030 be amended to read as follows: 21.80.030 Lot Facing a public street required for all uses--Exceptions. Except for [group dwellings, ] all planned unit developments including residential, commercial or industrial [planned unit developments, ] as specifically authorized by this title, except for accessory [buildings] structures, all buildings shall be located and maintained on a lot as defined in this title, and shall maintain a front yard facing and have unrestricted access to a public street. SECTION 5 . Section 21 . 84.010.A. shall be amended to read as follows: -3- A. There shall be provided at the time of the erection of any main building or structure, minimum hard-surfaced off-street parking space with adequate [provisions for] hard-surfaced ingress and egress by standard-sized automobiles as hereinafter provided. SECTION 6. That 21.84.020 be amended to read as follows: 21.84.020 Number of spaces [Oneto four family dwellings.] Dwellings. • A. In all [residential zones] zoning districts there shall be provided in a private garage, or on a hard-surfaced area properly located for a future garage, space for the parking of two automobiles for each single-family dwelling, three automobiles for a two-family dwelling, five automobiles for a three-family dwelling and six automobiles for a four-family dwelling. The parking space must be on the same lot as the main building. In addition to the above, visitor parking meeting all front, rear and side yard requirements and design standards shall be required on a ratio of one-half stall per unit. B. For more than four dwelling units such other amounts of visitor parking shall be provided as may otherwise be specified. SECTION 7, That Section 21. 84.030.A. be amended as follows: A. For apartments, one and one-half parking spaces for each unit in such apartment unless the apartment is located in an R-7, C-2, C-3, C-3A or C-4, M-1, M-1A and M-2 district, in which case parking shall be required on a ratio of one parking stall to each apartment. -4- SECTION 8. That Section 21.92.280 be amended to read as follows: 21.92.280 Fee schedule. [ alculated by using the valuation as determined by the building inspector and the following: [[�� pp�� 1GN—PE'RMIT ZE Total Valuation of Sign Sign Permit Fce $1 .00 to 500.00 $5.00 $501 .00 to 2,000.00 .00 feT first 500.00, plus 1 .00 for each additional 100.00 or fraction thereof . , each additional 1, 000.00 $25, 001 .00 to 50,000.00 $112.00 p-l-us 3.00 for each additional 50, 001 .00 and up Fee as established by the building permit fce schedule. ] Fees for sign permits shall be those specified by the Uniform Building Code as adopted by Salt Lake City. This Ordinance shall take effect on its first publication. Passed by -the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989. CHAIRPERSON -5-