03/25/1989 - Minutes AA SI —Z.
MINUTES: Committee of the Whole
Thursday, March 25, 1989
6: 00 -- 7: 30 p.m.
City Council Conference Room
Suite 300, City Hall
32.4 South State Street.
In Attendance: Florence Bittner, Wayne Horrocks, Alan Hardman, Willie
Stoler, Cindy Gust.-Jenson, Christine Richman, Lee King, Cam Caldwell, Emilie
Charles, Paulette Mounteer, Joseph Anderson, Tim Harpst., Duane Fuller, Max
Peterson, Sgt. Mac Connole, Press
] . The City Council interviewed Paulette Mounteer prior to consideration
of her proposed appointment to the Urban Forestry Board. Ms. Mounteer
indicated that she lives in the Rose Park area of the City and is very
interested in maintaining a good urban forest. She stated that her interests
lie out of doors, so she is very interested in serving the City in this
capacity. Council Member Bittner asked if Ms. Mounteer has the time to serve
on the board. Ms. Mounteer indicated that she works part-time, leaving her
plenty of time to serve on the board.
2. Joseph Anderson, Director of Public Works, presented his goals and
policy issues to the City Council. He indicated that although there are a
number of issues facing his department., he and his Division Heads had selected
three that they felt were the most. important.
The fi.rst issue, the possible use of traffic impact, fees for funding
new roads, was presented by Tim Harpst., City Transportation Engineer. Mr.
Harpst indicated that. the City is currently participating in a study with the
Cities of West Jordan, West Valley City, Murray and Salt: Lake County to assess
the possible use of traffic impact fees in Salt. Lake City. He indicated that
the Council"s participation in discussions with the independent consultant
would be appreciated and that he wi11 contact. the Council Office when the
consultant is in town.
Council Member Stoler asked that Mr. Harpst provide the Council with
how much developers have to pay in fees and licenses now so that when the
consultant prepares the report, the Council will have information on which to
base a comparison. Mr. Harpst stated that the base fee information will be
part of the study report.
Council Member Horrocks indicated that his main concern with impact
fees is that he does not want to discourage development. Council Member
Hardman stated that if the traffic impact. fees are implemented he would not
support a similar implimentat.ion of other fees. He indicated that although
traffic impact fees may be acceptable and justifiable, continuing
implementation of impact fees for other services would have to be studied in
depth.
Duane Fuller, Streets and Sanitation Superintendent., reviewed his
proposed changes to the 50/50 sidewalk replacement program. He stated that
some people who had had their sidewalks replaced through the 50/50 program had
indicated that they could get their sidewalk replaced more cheaply on their
own. Duane indicated that the reason for this is problems with the way the
contract has to be issued and costs built in by the contractor. He stated
that accordi ng to his calculations he could do the work in house and save the
recipients 30% on their bill by only charging them for materials. As a side
benefit to the new program, he will be able to better utilize existing heavy
equipment which isn't used all the time now.
Council Member Horrocks stated that the proposed changes to the program
look good because they are a more effective use of existing City resources.
Mr. Fuller then briefed the Council Members on the status of the
Neighborhood Trash Pickup. He observed that during last year's budget one of
the Legislative Intents was that the Department investigate alternatives to
the current neighborhood trash pickup program. He indicated that after
reviewing his options utilizing the new mechanized system he determined that
the current, system is still the most cost effective and useful for City
residents.
Council. Member Hardman asked if the Department had investigated
alternatives to the current schedule for the pickup. He indicated that based
on the rotation of the pickup a number of residents have complained that the
system doesn't always meet there needs. He suggested that perhaps the
Department could pickup the large items on an on-call basis. Mr. Anderson
stated that because the machinery necessary for the trash pickup is not
efficient at travelling long distances it is not cost effective to have the
front-loaders travelling all over town. He stated that it is most cost
effective to keep the pickup in small geographical areas.
The City Council indicated that they support the staff recommendations
concerning endorsing the Departments actions on the traffic impact fees and
the neighborhood trash pickup, and stated that they support. the Departments
proposal for the 50/50 concrete replacement. program.
3. Lee King, City Council Budget Analyst/Auditor, reviewed the status of
the Council's position paper concerning the Brighton Ski Bowl expansion. He
indicated that after reading the Council 's proposed letter the Public
Utilities Advisory Committee indicated that because the Brighton expansion
includes the installation of a sewer line to the top of the canyon, PUAC is
hesitant to recommend the delay of approval for the project. Mr. King
indicated that. PUAC felt that since the development is consistent with the
Watershed Plan they would like the City to support its approval.
Council Member Bittner indicated that her concern is that. the County
will approve the development but never get around to approving the Master. Plan
itself. Mr. King stated that the letter he has now prepared for Chairman
Stoler 's signature urges the County Commissioners to adopt the plan, but
leaves the issue of the Brighton development out of it. The Council Members
indicated that they support the letter urging the Commissioners to adopt the
plan.
Council Member Horrocks asked if the recently approved study of an
interconnect would affect the placement of the new lifts at Brighton. Emilie
Charles, Executive Assistant to the Mayor, stated that the Mayor and LeRoy
Hooton, Director of Public Utilities, are currently serving on the committee
overseeing the interconnect. study. She stated that the study is being
conducted under the auspices of the Mocuntainland Regional Council but. that
Salt Lake City had been invited to participate. Council Member. Horrocks
stated that. he thinks that in addition to Administrative participation, the
City Council. should be represented as well. Ms. Charles stated that she will
explore that. possibility.
0 i' ." /"/.",
W. P. "1Iz
ST- L.,•
ATTEST:
OP ifil --rtidJite"C
CT' Y •ECO' 'F'
•
• Council Staff Report
Executive Summary
Public Works Policy Meeting
March 23, 1989
Prepared by Cam Caldwell
* In an effort to improve the efficiency of the . Concrete
Replacement Program, the Public Works Department has proposed
that' this program be modified. The department proposes to
implement this program by hiring five staff to conduct the
program in-house. With the same budget the department projects
that it will be able to reduce the cost to the public by 30%,
while doing 30% more projects. In addition, the staff which
are hired will enable the department to complete additional
projects during the non-construction season. I generally
support this program with one minor modification. Three
options are identified for the Council.
•
* The department reviews three options for modifying the
Neighborhood Cleanup Program. The first is to completely
automate the program and purchase 1,500 new 440 gallon
containers to be systematically placed throughout the
community. The second option is to increase refuse collection
to twice a week. Option Three is to continue the present
program: The department supports continue the present program
due to its lower cost. I concur with this recommendation.
* A traffic impact fee is currently being researched by a
consultant hired by the City and several other government
units. The consultant report will be completed in September,
1989.
•
-1-
Council Staff Report
Public Works Policy- Meeting
March 23, 1989
The Public Works Department has prepared three issues for discussion on March
23rd. They are 1) a proposed in-house concrete replacement program, 2) a
presentation of options for the neighborhood cleanup program, and 3) a
proposal to establish a traffic impact. fee.
In-house Concrete Replacement Program
Overview
This past year the City received criticism from taxpayers who were upset that
the cost of the City's concrete replacement program was higher than they would
have to pay if they went through a private contractor. I worked closely with
the Public Works staff this past summer and reviewed in detail the reasons for
differences in cost. I concluded at that time that the City's cost were
sometimes higher due to the higher specifications that it requires for its
concrete and sidewalk replacement programs. During that analysis the Public
Works Street Superintendent proposed the initiation of an in-house concrete
replacement program. After several months of review by the Mayor's Office and
the City Attorney, this program got preliminary approval.
The Public Works Department proposes that the City change the 50/50 Sidewalk
Replacement program and charge the property owners only the actual cost of
materials used. The Department proposes that the benefits wduld mean 1) a 30%
lower price tb the property owner, and 2) an increase in the amount of work
done by 30%. In addition, the City would be able to do additional bridge
maintenance and increase its snow fighting capacity during the non-
construction season. This would occur because the program would be
administered by hiring five new staff to do the concrete replacement.
In its recommendations the department also proposes allowing residents to use
several creative options (e.g. , credit card payment or monthly billing) to pay
for their share of the concrete replacement. It also suggests that a low
income abatement program be considered.
Staff Analysis
In analyzing this program, I concluded that the only negatives were 1)
possible opposition from contractors who would have obtained the work, and 2)
it would represent a net increase in service levels. Philosophically, I
thought that it was in the public interest to do work ourselves if the City
can do it at less cost than the private sector. The second issue was more
difficult to resolve.
It appears to be in the City Council's interest to encourage departments to
propose cost savings that improve productivity. However, if the departments
do not get to use a portion of those cost savings which they achieve, they may
feel that there is little benefit to them to propose productivity increases.
At the same time, during a cutback economy where reductions in force are
anticipated it is difficult to justify hiring five new staff and expanding
programs. •
-2-
Option 1
On that basis, my recommeoda t_i ey t th,- Council would be to
encourage the department to initiate this in-house concrete
and sidewalk program, but with certain limits. I concur
with passing on' the 30% cost savings of this program to the
taxpayers. I recommend, however, that the program be
approved with the understanding that the additional time
resulting from the newly hired staff be used to perform
existing department duties. Ultimately the department
administration will need to exercise their best judgment in
the allocation of staff, based upon their professional
assessment of the department and the City's needs. However,
Council' may wish to communicate that the department do what
it reasonably can to limit the net growth in the City's
total service level to the public.
Option 2
As an alternative, Council may wish to support the
department request to do as much sidewalk replacement as
possible. If Council wishes to give sidewalk and concrete .
replacement higher priority, it may want to consider
increasing the cost of the residents'. share so that the cost
savings is less than the 30% savings proposed by the
department.
Option 3
Finally, Council may wish to fully enddrse the proposal of
the department, as developed and presented by the Street
Superintendent.
I have recommended the first proposal because its net impact on the budget
would be a slight net dollar savings, compared with the current fiscal year.
The other two options would result in a budget impact which keeps funding at
the FY 1988-89 funding level. Option Three would enable the department to
increase the amount of sidewalk replacement by an estimated 30%. Option 2
would increase the sidewalk replacement program by more than that.
Neighborhood Clear up Program
Overview --_-.The Neighborhood Cleanup Program provides special refuse collection service to
residential neighborhoods nine months of the year. The program has been
highly visible and is considered to be very popular to City residents. The six
full time and ten seasonal employees who carry out this program also assist in
alley cleaning, weed cutting, asphalt repairs, emergency support, and snow
removal. The annual cost of this program is budgeted at $590,000. The
department proposes three options: 1) completely automate neighborhood
cleanup, 2) increase weekly refuse collection to twice a week, and 3) continue
unchanged with the present program.
Staff Analysis
Automating neighborhood cleanup would require the acquisition of fifteen
hundred 440 gallon containers and the establishment of an increased refuse
collection charge. According to the department, that additional charge would
-3-
bring the garbage fee to $6 per month. Three new automated vehicles to pick
up this garbage would cost the City $330,000, and the cost of the new
- containers and new equipment to haul them arouti Lh •'_ty would be un
additional $675,000. Residents would have to place refuse in these containers
and heavy items and white goods (e.g. , old refrigerators or appliances) would
need to be disposed of by special pickup. This alternative has many
disadvantages which make it seem less attractive than the existing system.
The increasing of weekly refuse collection to twice a week would have several
impacts, according to the department. Additional costs would result to pick
up the refuse twice as often. Programs such as the Weed and Alley Program and
the support to emergency problems would decrease. The cost of vehicle
replacement and to pick up the garbage would rise. A special white goods
program would be needed to pick up old refrigerators and other large items.
In a time of cutback, it would be difficult to justify increasing the refuse
collection to twice a week.
Despite the cost of ,.the current program and some of the inconvenience caused
by the debris at the sides of the road during cleanup periods, I support the
department recommendation to continue the present neighborhood cleanup
program.
•
Historically, Council staff have always put the Neighborhood Cleanup Program
on the list of possible service level cuts for Council to consider. Each year
the Council has concluded that this program is an important service to the
residents of Salt Lake City. As an alternative to my recommendation, Council
may wish to direct the department ' to come back to the Council during the
budget review process to identify the impact of downsizing this program.
Traffic Impact Fee
Overview
The establishment of a traffic impact fee was one of thirty funding sources
identified by administrative staff as an alternative for funding
infrastructure improvements in the Northwest Quadrant. The fee is similar to
other impact fees currently established for water and recreation facilities.
The department staff report identifies a list of six negative aspects to
establishing a traffic impact fee. The most difficult of those problems are
the legal and administrative difficulties associated with trying to administer
this fee. In addition, the establishment of this fee may actually be a
deterrent to development.
Salt Lake City has joined with several other cities, Salt Lake County, and
UDOT to hire a consultant to study the feasibility and methodology of a
county-wide traffic impact fee. This study began in November, 1988, and will
not be completed to September, 1989. The legal and administrative issues of
concern to the City will be reviewed in this study.
I recommend that the City Council meet with the consultant to familiarize
itself with this potential funding source. As an alternative, the Council may
wish to request a written report at the conclusion of this study.
-4-
Staff Recommendation
1) Indicate Council's preference for implementing the In-
house Concrete Replacement Program.
2) Maintain the Neighborhood Cleanup Program as it is
currently administered.
3) Monitor the consultant study currently underway which is
researching the traffic impact fee concept.
•
•
-5-
PROPOSED. IN-HOUSE CONCRETE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM
Introduction and Description
. Salt Lake City has traditionally contracted out the work under the current
50/50 Concrete Replacement Program. The city shares the expense of repairs
with the property owner. This program has proved to be unsuccessful for the
following reasons:
1. The jobs are-very small and spread throughout the city. Costs of
mobilization to the contractor of such minute areas was high.
•
2. No set 'quantities could be guaranteed to the contractor.
3. The contract bid prices were very high because the contractor had no
base on which to place a reasonable bid.
4. This high cost of replacement under the contract caused most people
to refuse to participate.
5. The city received several complaints from people who noted they could
hire a contractor for less money.
6. Only 10-15% of property owners were willing to participate due to
excessive costs.
Option
Rather than the city requiring property owners to pay 550% through a contract
we propose the property owner pay only the actual cost of materials used. The .
city would pay all labor costs and city crews would do the work.
This would not require changes in the existing funding mechanism as the funds
would come from the $100,000 set aside in the CIP budget for 50/50 contract
work and from $34,000 presently allocated for raising manholes.
From the $134,000 five additional people would be hired with approximately
$9,000 leftover to cover the operating budget. The materials would be covered
by the property owner share. There will be no additional expense for
equipment as existing equipment will be provided by Fleet Maintenance and
Street Division assets.
This proposal does not require additional funding from the general fund. It
will require the authorization to use existing funding in a different manner
to increase productivity and reduce costs by 30%.
Advantage and Disadvantages of Option
Advantages:
1. A reduced price to the property owner averaging 30%
2. Increase the amount of work completed by 30%
a
I
3. Improve response time
4. Improve quality control
5. Accomplish up to 100% of manhole raising needs (this program was cut
75% in the 1988-89 budget)
6. Accomplish up to 20% of the Bridge Maintenance Program.
7. Accomplish city responsibility work in conjunction with the property
owner participation work.
8. Increase productivity by maximizing resources.
9. Reduce litigation for personal injury due to deteriorated sidewalks.
10. Increase snowfighting capability by five people
11. Better coordination between concrete work and road maintenance.
The main reason the Street Division can accomplish so much work with such a
small crew is that the required work compliments itself. In the winter the
crew lowers manholes, works on bridge maintenance and plows snow. In the
Spring, Summer and Fall they work on repairing defective concrete adjacent to
private property, city maintenance and some bridge work as time permits. The
crew is fully committed and can be supported by the other crews when needed to
insure high production rates and response time.
The -proposal allows for a more creative financing scheme, whereby the city can •
adopt a variety of options such as accepting Mastercharge, Visa, paying up
front or having a payment plan as part of their water bill.
Disadvantages;
1. The Associated General Contractors may register a complaint due to -
the loss of potential work but we note the contractors haven't liked the
uncertain nature of the work.
2: This program could be so popular that additional crews may be
required in order to keep up with the requests from property owners. (This
may not be a disadvantage)
3. There is not enough money in the Street Division budget to purchase
needed bridge maintenance supplies and equipment to effectively implement the
program.
Cost Savings
Comparisons between the current 50/50 Program and the proposed Materials Only
Program indicated an average of 30% savings with the new program.
Recommendations
1. That the administration approve the proposal and allow the Street
Division to implement this program effective July 1, 1989.
2. That Finance and the Treasurers Office work with the Public works
Department in developing a financial scheme to provide the public with
several payment options to include Visa, Mastercharge and a payment plan using
the water and sewer bill.
3. That the Administration work with Public Works in developing a low
income abatement program.
Introduction & Description
The Salt Lake City Neighborhood Cleanup Program provides refuse collection
service to 46,000 residences nine months each year. The program budget is
$590,000 and is accomplished with six full time and ten seasonal employees.
Equipment consists of three small bucket loaders and twelve leaf trucks. This
program has proved to be highly successful and appreciated among city
residents. Employees assigned to this program participate in and support the
alley cleaning, weed cutting, snow removal, apshalt repairs, flood control and
other emergencies. Since the new automated refuse collection has been
implemented to collect refuse, some alternatives for the neighborhood trash
collection have been considered.
Option 11 - Completely Automate Neighborhood Cleanup
Advantages:
a. Neighborhoods would be much cleaner and sanitary without piles of
trash along the curb. 440 gallon containers systematically placed curb side
throughout the city would replace the present unsightly piles of debris on our
city streets.
b. Problems from. private contractors dumping debris in front of the
cleanup effort would be eliminated.
c. A special program with 440 gallon containers could be available for
city residents on a yearly basis. An additional cost would be required for
this service.
Disadvantages: -
a. Overall costs to city residents for refuse collection would be
increased. -
1. 1500 - 440 gallon containers @ 250.00 each for a total of
$375,000.00.
2. 3 - new automated refuse collection vehicles for a total of
$330,000.00. New equipment such as transports would be needed
to haul containers around at an estimated cost of $300,000.00.
3. There would be no savings in personnel or other costs.
b. residents may •not like the idea of placing everything they want to
dispose of in this 440 gallon container. Items heavy or not would have to be
lifted up into these containers. The present Neighborhood Cleanup Program
accepts everything that is placed curbside in front of a resident's home (i.e.
concrete, building materials, appliances and yard debris, etc.) Some items
presently accepted would not be allowed in the 440 gallon container and cleanup
is limited to 440 gallons per home.
c. A special white goods program may need to be implemented to dispose
of items such as concrete, tree stumps, appliances, etc.
d. Reduced service for city residents in a number of other programs
such as:
1. Reduced number of snow plows (approximately 20%) .
2. Total elimination of the Weed and Alley Program.
3. Reduction of equipment and personnel to support the the
Leaf Program.
4. Seasonal personnel would have to be hired for support in
the Sanitation area.
Option #2 Increase Weekly Refuse Collection to Twice a Week
Advantages:
a. Residential refuse collection would be increase to twice a week
with 90 gallon containers.
b. Neighborhoods would be much cleaner and sanitary during cleanup
periods. -
c. Dumping problems from private contractors would be eliminated.
d. A special 440 gallon container program could be made available
for special pickups on a charge basis.
Disadvantages:
a. Residents would be limited to 90 gallons of disposal per week.
b. A special white goods program would need to be implemented for
items that could not be placed in 90 gallon containers.
c. Additional 90 gallon containers would be needed for residents
to dispose of all their debris.
d. Reduced service for city residents would result with
implementation of this program.
1. Reduction in the number of-snow plow units.
2. Total elimination of the Weed and Alley Programs.
3. Reduction of personnel and equipment to support the Leaf
Program.
e. The present capability of the Neighborhood Cleanup Program to
support the Sanitation Division with additional personnel and in all
• -emergency situations (flood control, asphalt patching, snow removal, etc.)
will be eliminated. .
f. Additional vehicle replacement funding would be required since
the trucks would be used more than normal.
Option #3 Continue with the Present Neighborhood Cleanup Program.
Advantages:
a. People can place curb side unlimited quanitites and all types
of debris (appliances, trees, limbs, furniture, dirt, concrete, etc.)
b. Price for refuse collection will remain the same.
c. The Weed, Alley, Snow and Leaf Removal Programs would remain
the same.
d. A special 440 gallon pickup on a yearly basis could be
implemented with little cost.
e. Presently the Neighborhood Cleanup program is very popular with
city residents. To change this present program to one of the alternatives
would mean increased costs and problems to city residents.
f. All emergency services to Salt Lake City are assisted from this
program (flood control, snow removal, asphalt repairs, weed cutting, alley
cleaning etc. )
•
Disadvantages:
• a. During. the.Neighborhood Cleanup .season streets are unsightly
b. Some damage to the curbs and parking strips take place each
year.
•
Recommendations
At the present time the Public Works Department's recommendation is to continue
with the current Neighborhood Cleanup Program. The Sanitaiton Division will
continue with the planning and strategy for considerations of some other
alternatives in mechanzied automated collection for the Neighborhood Cleanup
Program.
•
To further improve the present program and without increasing garbage fees to
residents, a new special 440 gallon container service could be implemented.
This would allow a resident on a yearly basis to call and request a 440 gallon
container. This container could be filled with extra yard debris, etc. After
the container has been filled it would be dumped by the regular sanitation
worker assigned to that area. After the container is returned to the
Sanitation Division the resident would be charged for this extra service.
•
Comments •
Sacramento, California citizens have twice voted not to mechanize their cleanup
program; they use the same program as Salt Lake City. (see attached article)
News 3reaks'.
Voters OK sending ; reject bottle bills
•
Across the nation. voters went As the local newspaper. the proved a 513 million bond Manufacturers will have to
to the ballot box Nov. 8 and Tribune, said in endorsing issue fur environmental place warnings on proper dis-
swept into power a candidate two over two others, "The cleanup and other purposes. posal on product labeling and
who emphasized the environ- plethora of arguments for and Tax extended: More guy- in advertisements. Paints and
ment in his campaign, George against the four potential land- ernment spending for the en- motor oil are affected; pesti-
Herbert Walker Bush. fill sites . . . is enough to vironment was OK with cides, bleaches, and disin-
What does this mean for give the most conscientious voters in Suffolk County, N.Y. fectants are not.
waste professionals? At a bare voter an Excedrin headache." (one of two counties on Lone Chemical industry spokes-
minimum, Bush. who criti- The voters chose to avoid Island). persons were nut happy. They
cized opponent Michael Du- ,' the headache entirely. All four Voters approved the foresee confusion about dis-
kakis for delays in cleaning measures were defeated! The 10-year extension of a sales posal and a lack of options for
Boston Harbor, will probably closest margin was 149,274 to tax of 0.25%. Monies will go Californians. because the
get Boston Harbor cleaned up 114,095 (56% against) . . . to cleanups, capping of land- state's household hazard:.
by November. 1992. and in the meantime, the fills. etc. The margin of vie- waste colic oroorams are
Beyond the national glee- Acme Landfill, the sole dis- tory; 315,321 to 64,490. sp
tions. there were at least a posal site serving Contra Finally, in Sacramento,
dozen state and local ballot Costa residents, gets closer to Other issues Calif,, city voters—for the
issues of interest that came capacity. second time in 11 years—said
under voter scrutiny. Nebraska nukes: Voters in In California, Proposition 05 they wanted to keep the cur-
Nebraska voted to pull out of called for manufacturer w-rn- rent method of yard waste
Bottle bills a five-state agreement that ings about proper dispus °f pickup.
would make the state the host household products. It p• sed Sacramento city crews pick
By a vote of 276.325 to for low-level radioactive with a 54%7c majority, up yard wastes from the street
75,422, voters in Montana re- wastes for the next 30 years. 4.461.303 to 3,726.911. with a bucket loader, scraping
jccted a proposition that The state has two nuclear- Note that Proposition 05 the streets. Citizens throw all
would have placed deposits on powered electricity generating also addressed four unre ated brush and clippings into the
beverage containers in the plants. States remaining in the issues, including rights tif street. A ballot measure to
state. That's a 79% margin. pact are Arkansas, Kansas, patients in nursing home4 and change this failed in 1977,
Another bottle bill proposal Louisiana. and Oklahoma. requirements that compa 'es this year the vote was 40,353
was on the ballot in Mercer selling products in Calif° is for a shift to containerization =
County, N.J., which houses disclose any connections s ith of yard wastes . . . 74,212
the state capital of Trenton. Bond & tax issues South Africa. against.—J.A.S.
New Jersey has an aggressive By a vote of 2.500.000 to
mandatory recycling law, .
which could be one reason the 77�,000 on the largest issue. } ove
bottle bill was defeated by voters in Michigan approved a M a n u f a a`u re I f s o Y e
Mercer County voters by 5660 million bond issue that
79,674 to 31,243 (7270). will see up to 5425 million Chem-Nuclear Systems: This ing and combustion infor-
spent on cleanup of 1,800 arm of Waste Management, mation products outside the
No to landfills contaminated sites in the Inc„ has become exclusive United States.
state, U.S. sales agent for an on-site Detroit Diesel has signed an
In Contra Costa County, As much as 5150 million of storage container made by agreement making it the mar-
. Calif., five county officials the funds raised by the bond Duratek Corp. The container keting and service agent in
• have been unable to pick issue will go for solid waste is used to hold radioactive North America fur a range of
among four proposed sites for projects, including recycling, wastes temporarily. engines produced by Perkins
a new sanitary landfill. This refuse-to-energy, and land- Cleaver-Brooks:Two 1988 Engine Group.
impasse has been caused by fills. awards for energy innovation 4 Mack Trucks has opened a .
one of the supervisors' in- As seen in Michigan, voters in Wisconsin were won by new 40.000-square-foot parts,
ability to vote on each land- were in a mood to approve companies burning wood sales, and service branch fa-
fill; his business interests are government spending. Stan- chips and methane gas using cility in Boston.The $3 mil-
allied to various landfill pro- dard & Poor's says voters ap- Cleaver-Brooks incineration lion facility replaces one built
ponents. proved 515.2 billion of state equipment, the company says. in 1924.
One result has been a series and local bond issues on Nov. Datatest, Inc„ has ap- . Mosley Machinery recently
of 2-to-2 votes in the county 8—the largest amount ever pointed Worldwide Marketing added Metpro Machinery Ltd.
chambers on proposed sites, OK'd by American voters on a Services (Richboro, Pa.) as its as its distributor for balers,
Another result was the placing single day! export management company. shears, and other equipment
on the ballot in November of Voters in Maine were part Worldwide will sell the corn- in Europe and South Africa.
Measures D, E, F, and G. of the trend, too. They ap- I pany's air pollution monitor-
I 12 WASTE AGE;DECEMBER 1988
POLICY ISSUE PRESENTATION TO CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MARCH 23, 1989
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE
Introduction and Description
Last year, the Development Technical Team briefed the City Council on financing
alternatives for the infrastructure needs of the Northwest Quadrant. Traffic impact
fees was one of thirty potential funding sources identified for infrastruture
construction needs.
A traffic impact fee is similar in concept to impact fees already being collected
for water facilities expansion. A fee would be collected from new development at the
time of building permit issuance to pay for that development's impact upon the city's
major streets identified for construction or improvement. The fee amount charged each
development is based on (a) the traffic generated by the development that would use our
major streets and (b) the cost to construct the needed improvements.
Policy Options
Adopt a traffic impact fee ordinance or continue current practice of negotiating
street improvements for new development.
Advantages/Disadvantages and Costs/Savings of Impact Fees versus Negotiation
Positive Aspects :
1) Provides a way for development to fairly pay its share of the new impact on the
overall arterial and collector street network which has in the past been met by
the public-at-large.
2) Provides a separate dedicated account for major street infrastructure
construction.
3) Reduces impact to other general capital improvement funding sources.
4) Allows means whereby the City can fund off-site improvements.
5) Gives developers a consistent picture of what is required of them.
Negative Aspects:
1) Can be difficult to set up and administer, particularly when done county wide.
2) Open to legal challenge.
3) Difficult to schedule projects, due to uncertainty of incoming revenues.
Development must occur before the facilities can be constructed.
4) Funds must be spent within a given time frame or returned, usually 7 years.
5) Impact fees can only finance part or all of new traffic impacts exceeding the
capacity of existing streets. Other funding sources are required to finance
pre-existing capacity deficiencies.
6) The development community may resist establishment of traffic impact fees.
Evaluation Process
Salt Lake City has joined West Valley City, West -Jordan City, Sandy City, Salt Lake
County, and UDOT, in a consultant study of the feasibility and methodology development of
a county wide traffic impact fee. The consultant-, James Duncan & Associates of Austin,
Texas is the leading national expert in traffic impact fee development. This firm is
working in association with a local economist and transportation engineering firm. The
study began in November, 1988, and is scheduled to be completed in September, 1989. The
consultant reports td •a committee of public works officials, planners, and attorneys from
each of the participating political jurisdictions, plus two local developers. The study
includes a legal analysis of the ordinance necessary to create an impact fee, a review of
our existing major roadway plan, development of computer hardware/software to calculate
impact fees, a review of impact to the C.I.P. and recommendations on the administration
and implementation of an impact fee program.
Council Action
There will be as many as three opportunities for the City Council to meet with the
consultant to review the study progress and answer questions between April and September.
If the conclusion of the study appears favorable, the City administration may request the
City Council to adopt a traffic impact fee ordinance in conjunction with the other
political jurisdictions participating in the study.
Recommendations
At this point in the study, it appears a traffic impact fee can be a viable partial
• funding source for needed major street construction in the Northwest Quadrant and other
areas of the City. -
It is recommended the City Council meet with the consultant as opportunities arise
during the remainder of the study to familiarize the council with this potential funding
source.
•
•
•
af^ L J
OFFICE�.OF:THE,CITY;:COUNCIL
=SUITE'300, CITY'HALL'••.
t '324 SOUTH STATE STREET. i'
SAL-•TLAKE"CITY;^UTAH;e4fi March 20, 1989
• MEMORANDUM
TO: Council Members
FROM: Lee King
RE: Brighton Ski Area Lift and Base Area Renovation Plan
During Committee of the Whole on March 9, 1989, LeRoy Hooton briefed you
on the status of the Salt Lake County Canyon Master Plan and proposed
expansion of Brighton Ski Resort. Mr. Hootoh. stated that the City's position
on the proposed development at Brighton Ski .Resort has always been that the
City will support the development if it is consistent with the City's Master
Plan, the County's Master Plan, and if the resort agrees to the installation
of a sewer line all the way to the top of the canyon. He further stated that
installation of the proposed sewer line for.the Brighton project would be a
• major contribution to the City's efforts to protect the watershed.
As a result of the this discussion, Council agreed that a letter to the
County Commission urging them to ensure the County Canyon Master Plan is in
place prior to considering final action on the expansion would be appropriate.
A letter to that affect was prepared, see attached.
Subsequent to this, the Public Utilities Advisory Committee notified the
Council by letter, attached, that it was their position that under the current
regulatory process the County's adoption of. its Master Plan is not necessary
to allow the Brighton renovation project to be approved. They feel that the
environmental concerns will be addressed and mitigated by the various •
governmental agencies involved. Because Salt Lake City exerted so much
pressure on Brighton to connect to the proposed sewer system as a condition to
approve their renovation plan, the Public Utilities Advisory Committee is
recommending that the Council urge the County to adopt its Canyon Master Plan
in a timely manner rather than advocating adoption of the plan prior to taking
final action on Brighton's request.
This issue has been placed on the Committee of the Whole agenda for
Thursday, March 23, for further discussion. I have included a second letter
that addresses the concerns of the Public Utilities Advisory Committee.
cc: Cindy Gust-Jenson
Emilie Charles
•
:1 •
1,
721.E 'ss ,- :�E3+. .
ilit
ti'•--+--- •• .''-_ r_e.i.• T n-4 a (a ..L...I. -.. .
OFFICE=OF;THE 7:C!T.Y3]COUNCIL
"5.::12.41iI2SUITE6OO.CITY HALL'%':..i
;I:•, 24`SOUTH STATE STREET*T!'•i4 March 15, 1989
—SALTLLAKE'GTTY:=t1TAH-841 1•
...`�.'.s:-",!5t 0 5:760x
'"` _ .
Commissioner Mike Stewart, Chairman TQv V.0 .A.4.41�c •
Salt Lake County.Commissioni� �-. L
2001 South State Street cri
Salt Lake City, UT 84115 .,Qe a,-tga. - 7„,
Dear Mike: - j
The Salt Lake City Council recently learned of the Boyne-Brighton
Renovation Plan for the upper reaches of Big Cottonwood Canyon.
It is our understanding that their proposal is consistent with the
Wasatch-Cache Forest Service Plan, the latest-County master plan draft, and it
is located entirely within the Forest Service permit boundary. However, it
. has also been our understanding that further development of the canyon would
be delayed until after publication of the Salt. Lake County Canyon Master Plan.
Our purpose here is to urge that Salt Lake County adopt its Canyon
Master Plan prior to taking action on the Boyne-Brighton request.
We have always been sensitive to development in the canyons if it .
impacts the City's watershed. Preliminary information provided to the Council
indicates that.basic requirements of the environmental assessment process have
been met. Our Public Utilities Department will however, be providing you
specific concerns about water issues under separate cover.
Thanking you in advance for your attention in this matter.
_ Sincerely, -
W.M. "Willie" Stoler
Chairman
Salt Lake City Council
cc: Salt Lake City Public Utilities
Salt Lake Association of Community Councils -
Commissioner Bart Barker •
Commissioner Tom Shimizu -
•
PUBLIC UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
1530 SOUTH WEST TEMPLE
SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84115
•
March 16, 1989
Salt Lake City Council
324 South State Street
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
RE: The Brighton Ski Area Lift and Base Area Renovation Plan
Pursuant to the City Council ' s request that the issue of the
Brighton Ski Area Lift and Base Area Renovation Plan be brought
before the Public Utilities Advisory -Committee, it was fully
discussed at the Committee' s regularly scheduled March 16, 1989,
meeting. In attendance at that meeting was John Hopgland, Acting
Forest Service Superintendent and Kent Miner of the City/County
_Health Department. In the course of the conversation the
following points were made:
1. That the County Commission has already acted on the Solitude
renovation which is similar to the improvements proposed by
Brighton.
2. The evaluation of the Brighton renovation has been ongoing
and is consistent with the Forest Service' s Master Plan and
the proposed County Master Plan.. Both plans contemplate
modification of the ski facilities within the existing
permit boundary.
3. The United States Forest Service has completed the draft
environmental report on the improvements and plans to make a
decision in mid-April. The report spells out .the envi-
ronmental issues and mitigation measures necessary for
approval, including protection of the watershed and water
quality.
4. Salt Lake City and the City/County Health Department have
exerted great pressure on Brighton to connect to the
proposed sewer system as a condition to approval of their
renovation plan. Sewering the entire canyon is a recom-
mendation of the Salt Lake City Watershed Master Plan,
adopted April 19, 1988.
CITY COUNCIL
PAGE 2
MARCH 16, 1989
5. The regulatory process with which the Brighton proposal is
going through is consistent with the process that would be
required under the County Master Plan. Therefore, regard-
less of the fact that the County Master Plan has not been
formally adopted, the proposed renovation plan will have to
meet the same stringent environmental conditions to protect
the City' s watershed and stream water quality as if the
Master Plan were approved.
In conclusion, the Public Utilities Advisory Committee recommends
to the City Council that under the current regulatory process the
County's adoption of its Master Plan is not necessary to allow
the Brighton renovation project to be approved. They feel that
the environmental ,concerns will be addressed and mitigated by the _
various governmental agencies involved. .However, the County
should be urged to adopt the County Master Plan in a timely
manner to avoid this kind of problem in the future.
If the Council wants additional information regarding this
matter, please feel free to contact the Committee and Department
of Public Utilities.
Sincerely,
•
W. ruin Tu denham
Chairman
WMT:LWH:mf
•
:.:.' "\d ( ' .etliP , Il i •
.j. 7—s:i•:_ i��'J> � ljL' ,..
OFE10E f OE THE-zcrix-;:cob NciL
6.P.t4ftz.SUlTE.300,:CITY HALL ':iii
4.i.„a24.SOUTH STATE STREET.+;� March 15, 1989
1_.'SALtt ?.-KE"CITY:: U-3'AH„84Y-rt
-,s_+ se?535!•7600'`="r`-... . .
Commissioner Mike Stewart, Chairman T.Q,w V. �� .t�n, t� zee,
Salt Lake County.Commission t64.4.,,ZLIC-To vo`. LC, ...tea
2001 South State Street
Salt Lake City, UT 84115
CCwu 1 c111,o a� ,.0-6-0ys. a-4 (
Dear Mike:
The Salt Lake City Council recently learned of the Boyne-Brighton
Renovation Plan for the upper reaches of Big Cottonwood Canyon.
It is our understanding that their proposal is consistent with the
Wasatch-Cache Forest Service Plan, the latest-County master plan draft, and it
is located entirely within the Forest Service permit boundary. However, it
has also been our understanding that further development of the canyon would
. be delayed until after publication of the Salt Lake County Canyon Master Plan.
We have always been sensitive to development in the canyons if it
' impacts the City's watershed. . We understand that the proposed renovation plan •
will have to meet the same stringent environmental conditions to protect the •
City's watershed and stream water quality as if the Master. Plan were approved.
Our purpose here is to urge that Salt Lake County adopt its Canyon
Master Plan as soon as possible to avoid any confusion in the future.
Thanking you in advance for your attention inthis matter.
Sincerely, •
W.M. "Willie" Stoler
• . Chairman
Salt Lake City Council '
cc: Salt Lake City Public Utilities
Salt Lake Association of Community Councils
Commissioner Bart Barker
Commissioner Tom Shimizu -
•
•
•
_ _ . .,-_.. _->. ,..rs•-. ... .< :./?�.:;n:,,N.:.f::..s`;t'Pr=-�. -;v:ir,.�