Loading...
05/02/1989 - Minutes PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY'; UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met as the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, May 2, 1989, at 5:00 p.m. in Suite 304, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk c Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Willie Stoler Councilmember Fonnesbeck was absent from the meeting. Council Chair Stoler presided ,at the meeting. Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Wilson would be made honorary Director, said it had been sug- citizens of Matsumoto. Mr. Hall gested that in the interest of asked for RSVPs as soon as possi- time instead of reviewing every ble. item on the agenda, she would answer questions on specific Ms. Gust-Jenson said that the agenda items. This would be done Salt Lake Council had been asked on a trial basis and adjustments to host the Association of Munici- would be made depending on the pal Governments meeting on May Council' s preference. 17th at 6:00 p.m. She said there would be a conflict with the Ms. Gust-Jenson said that Sister City dinner but that the Gordon Ottley, President of Council should have representa- AFSCME, would be addressing the tives at both events. She asked Council during the citizens' if the Council had any objections comments period. She indicated it to hosting the meeting and spend- had been made clear to Mr. Ottley ing between $100 and $150 for that the Council could not inter- light refreshments. No objections fere in negotiations. She said were voiced. Council Member Godfrey had re- quested that the Council schedule Lee King reviewed the sched- an Executive Session for Thursday, ule of upcoming Olympic Bid Com- May 4, at 5:30 P.M. to discuss mittee meetings and said that he the ongoing contract negotiations. would get copies of his notes to the Council Members as soon as Ms. Gust-Jenson said that the possible. documentation for item D-1, a street light interlocal agreement, Ms. Gust-Jenson reviewed had an incorrect address but that items concerning the new building. the official copy of the agenda, She passed out parking stickers to the motion and agreement were the Council saying that they correct so it could be considered should go on the rear of the car as scheduled. on the driver' s side to allow the parking enforcement employees to James Hall, Council Staff see them. Assistant, said that the Council had been invited to a dinner with She also said that keys were the Sister City delegation from now available for the new offices Matsumoto, Japan, on May 17, 1989, and the old keys needed to be at 7:00 p.m. At the dinner Mayor turned in. She said some of the DePaulis and former Mayor Ted locks were not working properly 89-105 PROCEIINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIO UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 and that the locksmith should have those problems solved within a week. Ms. Gust-Jenson said the chairs in the Council Chambers for the Council Members are too high and that problems would be solved by the chair builder himself. She also mentioned that footstools were being ordered and the enunci- ator panel was under construction and would be in place within the next 4 weeks. She said vertical files had been ordered for the Council Members cubicles and that they would be delivered within a month. Mayor DePaulis told the Council that the Murray City Council and Mayor had presented Salt Lake with a resolution con- gratulating the City on the re- opening of the City and County Building. 89-106 PROCINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI , UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in regular session on Tuesday, May 2, 1989, at 6:00 p.m. in Room 315, City Council Chambers, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Willie Stoler Sydney Fonnesbeck Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Roger Cutler, City Attorney, Kathryn Marshall, City Recorder, and Lynda Domino, Chief Deputy City Recorder, were present. Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting and Councilmember Hardman conducted the meeting. OPENING CEREMONIES COMMENTS #1. The invocation was given #1. Gordon Ottley, president by Police Chaplain Robert Buhler. of AFSCME 1004 Local Utah, ex- plained why contract negotiations #2. The Council led the broke down. First he said the Pledge of Allegiance. merit freeze last year inadver- tently impacted probationary em- #3. Councilmember Kirk ployees. He said they are hired moved and Councilmember Godfrey below the "A" step and after 6 seconded to approve the minutes of months and 1 year are supposed to the Salt Lake City Council for the get pay increases to bring them up regular meetings held Tuesday, to the "A" step. He said because April 18, 1989, Thursday, April of the freeze they did not receive 20, 1989, and Thursday, April 27, the pay increases. He said the 1989, which motion carried, all union had asked for clarification members voted aye. from a judge but they had not yet (M 89-1) received an answer. #4. Mayor Palmer DePaulis His second issue was re- presented a proclamation designat- garding fair pay for the snow ing the week of April 30 through fighters. He said they were on May 7, 1989, as DAYS OF REMEM- call at the will of Salt Lake BRANCE OF THE VICTIMS OF THE City during winter months and HOLOCAUST. wanted to discuss fair compen- sation but the City was not Councilmember Kirk moved and willing to discuss this issue. Councilmember Bittner seconded to approve the proclamation, which Lastly he said the 100 level motion carried, all members voted pay class topped out after two aye. years so just reinstating merits (G 89-13) wouldn' t mean much to this group of people. He summarized by saying that negotiations broke down because the union had issues 89-107 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 they wanted to discuss and the Department of Transportation to City was not willing to discuss purchase and install new street them. lights along Redwood Road between North Temple and 1000 North. #2. Victor Willey, 1028 So. (C 89-211) 9th E. Apt. B, raised an issue about his illegal incarceration in #2. RE: Setting a date for a 1985 for a shoplifting charge. public hearing to be held Tuesday, He asked for comment from the June 6, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. , to Council. Councilmember Godfrey obtain public comment concerning said the last time Mr. Willey technical amendments to Salt Lake discussed this issue with the City' s floodplain ordinance. Council the City Attorney had (0 89-12) indicated that this problem rested with Smith' s and not Salt Lake #3. RE: Adopting Resolution City. 58 of 1989 authorizing the exe- cution of an Interlocal Coopera- Roger Cutler, city attorney, tion Agreement between Salt Lake said that as he described last City Corporation and the State of time Smith' s had made a citizen' s Utah Energy Office for a computer arrest and Salt Lake City police interconnect cable connecting officers only acted as transport traffic signals on Foothill Drive for Mr. Willey. He said Mr. between Guardsman Way and 2100 Willey' s remedy was to file suit South to Salt Lake City' s signal against the appropriate parties computer. but there was no liability against (C 89-174) Salt Lake City. Mr. Willey asked the Mayor for his input and the #4. RE: Adopting Resolution Mayor said he had nothing else to 59 of 1989 supporting National add. Water Week and all it entails and encouraging Salt Lake City citi- #3. Faye Nichols, 120 zens to participate in the events McArthur, People' s Freeway Commun- of National Water Week. ity Council, expressed apprecia- (R 89-1) tion for the program and cere- monies celebrating the City County Building. She also thanked NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS Councilmember Fonnesbeck for keep- ing the project going. #1. RE: The Mayor ' s recom- mended budget for Fiscal Year 1989-90. CONSENT AGENDA ACTION: No action required. Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded DISCUSSION: Mayor DePaulis to approve the consent agenda, presented his budget message. He which motion carried, all members said ours was a strong, vital voted aye. community and local government continued to help keep it that way #1. RE: Adopting Resolution by providing the services citizens 57 of 1989 authorizing the exe- had come to expect and rely upon. cution of an interlocal coopera- He said preserving our quality of tion agreement between Salt Lake life for the future, as well as City Corporation and the Utah for the present, was in large part 89-108 PROCAINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 determined by the services the improve the road leading in and city provided. out of the airport, and to expand the baggage claim area. He said He said fiscal restraints he was not recommending signifi- during the last few years forced cant budget changes in other de- the city to cut back on services partments. and programs but this year he said the city saw a slight increase in The Mayor expressed his revenues. He said money gained continued support of funding from sales tax was up, revenue capital improvements and said it from franchise tax was down, and was the city' s way of investing in property tax had shown no signifi- the future health of our physical cant growth. He said because the surroundings. He also recommended city was "holding steady" he did a $100, 000 increase in funding for not recommend a general tax in- the care and maintenance of the crease. urban forest since trees made the desert environment not only more The Mayor then highlighted inhabitable but also beautiful. the proposed 1989-90 budget. He said that given a small increase In reference to the concrete in local revenues and further replacement program, the Mayor "belt-tightening" among the de- said that too often our citizens partments, he proposed both a were unable to meet the financial cost-of-living raise and a merit responsibility resulting in the raise for employees. continuing deterioration of side- walks. He said he proposed that He said he was not recom- the Salt Lake City Public Works mending significant cuts in police Department repair or replace dam- or fire and said his emphasis was aged sidewalks and only charge the on restoring public safety pro- citizens for materials. grams and staffing levels. He also said he proposed eliminating The Mayor also said this the annual trash pick-up program year' s budget included $47, 000 for thus reducing the general fund the removal of weeds in public subsidy to the garbage fund. areas since they were unsightly and posed a major fire hazard. The Mayor said he recommended an increase in water fees given Lastly the Mayor recommended the growth of the community. He the following departmental reorga- said the additional funds would be nization. He proposed the forma- used for capital improvements such tion of a policy and budget divi- as replacing worn out water lines sion to be housed in the finance and building new water lines. He department. He said by consoli- said the increase in water fees dating budget and policy, the city would be partially offset by a would have a division where ex- decrease in sewer rates. perts from these major areas worked together all year to pro- He said there would be an duce budget recommendations that increase in the airport budget to would result in further consolida- help meet the increasing demands tion and savings. being placed on the airport due to its accelerated use. He said In conclusion the Mayor said funds would be used to build a new that while the revenue picture had covered parking structure, to not significantly improved, he be- 89-109 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITlr, UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 lieved the community was under- day, May 16, 1989, at 6:30 p-m. , going exciting changes that would to consider adopting an ordinance eventually be reflected in the amending Section 2. 52.010 of the economy. Salt Lake City Code, as last (B 89-3) amended by Bill No. 44 of 1988 relating to compensation of Salt #2. RE: A resolution adopt- Lake City Corporation officers and ing tentative budgets, including employees, including statutory the tentative budget for the officers. library fund, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1989, and ending ACTION: Councilmember God- June 30, 1990. frey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to set the date and ACTION: Councilmember God- refer this to the Committee of the frey moved and Councilmember Whole, which motion carried, all Horrocks seconded to adopt Reso- members voted aye. lution 60 of 1989, and refer the (0 89-20) tentative budgets to the Committee of the Whole, which motion car- #6. RE: Setting a date for Tied, all members voted aye. a public hearing to be held Tues- (B 89-3 and 4) day, May 16, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. , to consider adopting an ordinance #3. RE: Setting a date for a amending Section 2. 52. 116 of the public hearing to be held Tuesday, Salt Lake City Code relating to May 16, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. , to compensation and benefits for Salt obtain public comment concerning Lake City Corporation 500 Series tentative budgets, including the Employees. library fund budget, for Fiscal Year 1989-90. ACTION: Councilmember God- frey moved and Councilmember Kirk ACTION: Councilmember God- seconded to set the date and frey moved and Councilmember Kirk refer this to Committee of the seconded to set the date, which Whole, which motion carried, all motion carried, all members voted members voted aye. aye. (0 89-22) (B 89-3 and 4) #7. RE: Setting a date for #4. RE: An ordinance deter- a public hearing to be held Tues- mining the rate of tax levy and day, May 16, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. , levying taxes upon all real and to consider adopting an ordinance personal property within Salt Lake amending Section 2. 52. 115 of the City, Utah, made taxable by law Salt Lake City Code relating to for the Fiscal Year commencing compensation and benefits for Salt July 1, 1989, and ending June 30, Lake City Corporation 400 Series 1990. Employees. ACTION: Without objection ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey Councilmember Hardman referred moved and Councilmember Kirk this to the Committee of the seconded to set the date and refer Whole. this to the Committee of the (0 89-23) Whole, which motion carried, all members voted aye. #5. RE: Setting a date for (0 89-21) a public hearing to be held Tues- 89-110 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 #8. RE: Setting a date for #11. RE: Setting a date for a public hearing to be held Tues- a public hearing to be held Tues- day, May 16, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. to day, May 16, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. to consider adopting an ordinance obtain public comment concerning amending Section 2.52.118 of the an ordinance enacting Section Salt Lake City Code relating to 15.16.070 of the Salt Lake City compensation and benefits for Salt Code providing for admission fees Lake City Corporation 200 Series to Tracy Aviary. Employees. ACTION: Councilmember God- ACTION:- Councilmember Godfrey frey moved and Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to set the date and refer seconded to set the date and refer this to the Committee of the this to the Committee of the Whole, which motion carried, all Whole, which motion carried, all members voted aye except members voted aye. Councilmember Stoler who was (0 89-19) absent for the vote. (0 89-17) #9. RE: Setting a date for a public hearing to be held Tues- #12. RE: An ordinance day, May 16, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. to amending Title 9 of the Salt Lake consider adopting an ordinance City Code relating to Health and amending Section 2.52.117 of the Safety by adding Chapter 9.48 Salt Lake City Code relating to dealing with cost recovery for compensation and benefits for Salt negligently caused fire emergen- Lake City Corporation 100 Series cies. Employees. ACTION: Without objection ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey Councilmember Hardman referred moved and Councilmember Kirk this to the Committee of the seconded to set the date and refer Whole. this to the Committee of the (0 89-14) Whole, which motion carried, all members voted aye. #13. RE: An ordinance (0 89-18) amending Title 11, Chapter 16, Section 020 of the Salt Lake City #10. RE: Setting a date for Code, 1988, relating to sexual a public hearing for Tuesday, May intercourse and sex acts for hire. 16, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. to obtain public comment concerning an ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey ordinance amending Sections 17.- moved and Councilmember Kirk 16.670 and 17.72.030 of the Salt seconded to suspend the rules and Lake City Code relating to water on first reading adopt Ordinance and sewer rates. 23 of 1989, which motion carried, all members voted aye except ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey Councilmember Stoler who was moved and Councilmember Kirk absent for the vote. seconded to set the date and re- (0 89-13) fer this to the Committee of the Whole, which motion carried, all #14. RE: An ordinance members voted aye. amending Title 8 of the Salt Lake (0 89-16) City Code and adding thereto Chapter 8.12 relating to estrays. 89-111 PROCEOINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI , UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey #3. RE: An ordinance con- moved and Councilmember Kirk firming the assessment rolls and seconded to suspend the rules and levying an assessment against on first reading adopt Ordinance certain properties in the Special 24 of 1989, which motion carried, Improvement District No. 40-R-13 all members voted aye except (non-contiguous concrete replace- Councilmember Stoler who was ment), for paying the costs of absent for the vote. constructing street improvements (0 89-15) and certain miscellaneous work; reaffirming the establishment of a UNFINISHED BUSINESS Special Improvement Guaranty Fund; establishing the effective date of #1. RE: An ordinance con- this ordinance; and related mat- firming the assessment rolls and ters. levying an assessment against certain properties in the Special ACTION: Councilmember Kirk Improvement District No. 38-757 moved and Councilmember Godfrey ( 900 West, 900 South to 2100 seconded to adopt Ordinance 27 of South) , for paying the costs of 1989, which motion carried, all constructing street improvements members voted aye. and certain miscellaneous work; (Q 87-3) reaffirming the establishment of a Special Improvement Guaranty Fund; establishing the effective date of PUBLIC HEARINGS this ordinance; and related mat- ters. #1. RE: A public hearing at 6:20 p.m. to obtain comment con- ACTION: Councilmember Kirk cerning Petition 400-708 submitted moved and Councilmember Godfrey by David DeSantis requesting that seconded to adopt Ordinance 25 of the city amend Section 21. -78-130 1989, which motion carried, all to allow for-profit organizations members voted aye. to operate private recreation (Q 87-2) facilities in residential dis- tricts. #2. RE: An ordinance confirm- ing the assessment rolls and levy- ACTION: Councilmember ing an assessment against certain Horrocks moved and Councilmember properties in the Special Im- Godfrey seconded to close the provement District No. 40-R-16 public hearing, which motion (Avenues ) , for paying the costs of carried, all members voted aye. constructing street improvements and certain miscellaneous work; Councilmember Horrocks moved reaffirming the establishment of a and Councilmember Fonnesbeck Special Improvement Guaranty Fund; seconded to table this ordinance establishing the effective date of to May 16, 1989, in order to this ordinance; and related mat- address the issue of alcohol and ters the appeal process, which motion carried, all members voted aye. ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Godfrey DISCUSSION: Brent Wilde, seconded to adopt Ordinance 26 of planning and zoning, said this 1989, which motion carried, all petition requested that Salt Lake members voted aye. City amend Section 21.78. 130 to (Q 88-2) allow for-profit organizations to 89-112 PROCEOPINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 operate private recreation facili- the area in question in conformity ties in a residential district. with the city master plan for that He said the proposed project was area. He indicated that some of for a golf center on the Mount the criteria included whether the Olivet Cemetery, to include a golf proposed facility adversely im- training complex and pro shop. pacted the surrounding residential neighborhood in such ways as He said the proposed ordi- lights, noise, odor, time or nance defined recreational uses as method of operation or other "a structure or developed open similar objectionable operating space designed and equipped for characteristics. the conduct of sports, leisure time activities and other custom- Councilmember Horrocks asked ary and usual recreational activi- if this ordinance addressed the ties, including paths and play- issue of alcoholic beverages in grounds, tennis courts, swimming conjunction with the recreational pools, golf courses and golf facilities. Mr. Wilde said the training facilities, nature exhib- issue of alcohol was not addressed its and similar uses. " He said in this ordinance. Roger Cutler, the ordinance also stated that city attorney, said this was a recreations uses would "not in- zoning ordinance having to do with clude commercial spa or aerobic permitted uses and alcohol was a clubs, all terrain or recreational police matter. Councilmember vehicle parks, amusement parks, Horrocks expressed concern about waterslides, skateboard parks or the alcohol issue because he said similar uses. He also said this a developer wanted to create a was the first of two steps for commercial park and sell alcoholic the Sunnyside complex. beverages but the neighborhood was adamantly opposed. He sug- He said they didn't envision gested that they address the issue that this ordinance would open the of alcohol in this ordinance. "flood gates" for these types of requests and said the ordinance Councilmember Bittner ex- defined restrictions which would pressed concern because she keep these types of uses compati- thought that residential areas ble with the residential use. He should only be use for residential indicated that this would probably purposes and for-profit facilities open the door to privatization and should not be allowed. She was create a mechanism to allow concerned about negative uses that concessionaires to operate in might be allowed in an area and parks. said she felt the ordinance gave too much authority to the Board of Councilmember Fonnesbeck said Adjustment and not enough to the this ordinance would allow for- neighborhood. She was concerned profit facilities but wasn't that negative uses would develop changing the type of use allowed. in the lower income areas. Mr. Wilde said that when consider- ing a petition for a conditional Dave DeSantis, 2210 Sunny- use the Planning Commission would brook Way, petitioner, said he had have to determine from the crite- already received a conditional ria specified in the ordinance use permit for the development whether the proposed conditional but the current ordinance preclud- use substantially supported the ed development of the proposed desirable development pattern for project by a for-profit organiza- 89-113 PROCAINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 tion. He said he met twice with that the control would be with the the Yalecrest Community Council Planning Commission and not the which was not opposed to the City Council. He expressed his ordinance change. opinion that he didn't think the City should adopt ordinances to Rulon Horrocks, 1434 accommodate an individual when it Sunnyside Avenue, expressed his would affect the entire city. concern with increased traffic in what he thought was already a Councilmember Godfrey pointed high-traffic area and he was also out that the ordinance outlined concerned that people __using the mandatory criteria that had_ _to__ be facility would bring their own met before the Planning Commission alcohol to drink on the premises. could grant a proposed conditional use. He said this included a Bernice Cook, 1746 So. West review and approval of the traffic Temple, was concerned about busi- impact by the Salt Lake City nesses encroaching into residen- Transportation Engineer and also a tial areas and thought these types determination whether the proposed of uses should be built in areas facility would adversely impact zoned for business. the neighborhood because of lights, noise, odor, time or Victor Willey, 1028 So. 800 method of operation or other East, asked if alcohol could be similar objectionable operating consumed at these facilities. Mr. characteristics. Cutler said since this was in a residential area the facility Councilmember Fonnesbeck said couldn' t get a permit but the city if the Council just rezoned the would have to address the issue if area then the city would lose people brought their own alcohol. control over the conditions of the Mr. Willey voiced his support if development. She indicated that liquor would not be allowed. with a conditional use all the criteria as outlined in the pro- Councilmember Fonnesbeck posed ordinance would have to be said she thought the uses as met. outlined in the ordinance, paths and playgrounds, tennis courts, Councilmember Kirk said all etc. , were not detrimental to a the streets in the area surround- neighborhood and belonged in ing the proposed project would be neighborhoods. impacted and the community council didn't see the situation as a Councilmember Bittner said problem. Mr. Young said he was she had a park in her area that not opposed to the proposed site was used for sports by little of this project but was opposed to leagues and she said this was very having the entire city affected by disruptive to the neighborhood. this ordinance change. Rollins Young, 2135 So. 1900 Dee Grose, 1540 Sunnyside, E. , said he was concerned that said he was concerned with traffic this ordinance was being tailored and whether or not this commercial for a specific project and was venture would open Sunnyside Park also concerned that it would open to for-profit uses. He also a "flood gate" for activities in expressed concern that there would neighborhoods that were not bene- be less public input on future ficial. He also expressed concern proposals if the process bypassed 89-114 PROCAPINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITE, UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 the City Council. was completely considered in order to make sure it was controlled. Councilmember Godfrey indi- cated that businesses couldn't Councilmember Kirk asked if proliferate unless the Council the Sunnyside Recreation Center changed the zoning to a commercial could still be constructed if this use. He said the zoning would ordinance didn't pass. Mr. Wilde protect an area and he also reit- said as a nonprofit facility, erated that the ordinance would Sunnyside could be built in the only allow certain uses which met area as long as the facility met established criteria. the criteria of the existing ordinance. Councilmember Bittner reiter- ated her concern for low-income Councilmember Kirk said she neighborhoods. She said high- wasn't sure if the Sunnyside income neighborhoods were more project was non profit. Mayor aware and participated more, but DePaulis said he assumed it was low-income neighborhoods had a but he would check to make sure. hard time mobilizing the kind of protest needed to oppose adverse Mr. Wilde said they could uses. She was concerned that address the issue of liquor in the negative uses would go into low- ordinance. Councilmember Fonnes- income areas with no objection beck said she felt strongly about and would cause problems. prohibiting the use of alcohol and said she also had concerns Mr. Grose suggested that the about opening the flood gates and City Council retain more control. putting neighborhoods in the hands of the Board of Adjustment. But Hermoine Jex, 272 Wall, she said people asked for more indicated that a woman from the recreational areas and the city Mt. Olivet Board of Trustees had couldn't afford to build and said that any use other than a maintain as many recreational cemetery would go against the areas as the public wanted. She original intended use for the said she thought the criteria property. She indicated that this listed in the ordinance were good might cause them problems. and the allowed uses would benefit areas. She said the concern Councilmember Kirk asked the seemed to be with the admini- petitioner if the Mt. Olivet Board stration of the ordinance. Mr. of Trustees agreed with the Cutler said the Council could project and Mr. DeSantis said they elect to act as the appeal body. did. Councilmember Horrocks sug- Stan Penfold, 715 2nd Avenue, gested that the Council table the expressed his concern that the ordinance to May 16 in order to Board of Adjustment would act as address the issue of alcoholic just a "rubber stamp" for re- beverages and change the appeal quests. process. (P 89-93) Councilmember Horrocks said he recognized the need for recre- #2. RE: A public hearing at ation in neighborhoods but also 6:30 p.m. to obtain public comment said he didn' t want the ordinance concerning 15th Year Community passed until the subject of liquor Development Block Grant funding. 89-115 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 He then outlined other poli- ACTION: Councilmember God- cies formulated by the CDAC com- frey moved and Councilmember Hor- mittee: 1 ) all slippage would rocks seconded to close the public roll over to the next year but hearing, which motion carried, all CDAC would consider requests for members voted aye. slippage and could recommend granting funds on an emergency Councilmember Godfrey moved basis; 2) funding of contingency and Councilmember Kirk seconded to requests would be limited to refer this to the Committee of the construction cost overruns or Whole, which motion carried, all emergencies and_ would be reviewed members voted aye. and granted on a case by case basis; 3 ) CDBG funds for street DISCUSSION: Stephanie Loker, improvements and parks should only capital planning and programming, be used for neighborhood level said that on April 18, 1989, services since it should be the Mayor DePaulis gave the Council responsibility of the city' s gen- his funding recommendations for eral fund to construct community 15th Year CDBG projects. She said parks and special collector or the city would have $4, 147, 000 collector streets; 4) planning available as of July 1, 1989, and division proposals that were not this hearing was to receive neighborhood oriented should be public comments about projects to funded from the general fund; and be funded. She said the Council 5 ) CDBG funds should not be used would then make a preliminary to fund projects that benefit the recommendation and public comment city as a whole but should be used was invited until May 15. She to benefit lower income people. said on May 16 the Council would make their final recommendations He then outlined the differ- and she would submit the applica- ences between CDAC' s recommenda- tion to HUD the first week of tions and the Mayor' s recommenda- June. tions and asked the Council to seriously consider CDAC' s recom- Kim Anderson, chair of the mendations when reviewing and Community Development Advisory voting on the CDBG proposals. Committee, said they spent many hours reviewing the projects and Hermoine Jex, Salt Lake Area they, along with the Mayor, recom- Community Councils, said they mended the following: RDA, As- recommended projects dealing with sist, N.H.S. Revolving Loan, housing and approved of projects Security Lock, BHS Operation Paint dealing with planning improve- Brush, BHS Cleaning and Securing, ments. BHS Boarded at Risk program, Neighborhood Attorney, and CDC. Vicki Panella, Salt Lake Acting Co. , supported funding for He said this year CDAC' s exterior improvements and air priorities were to focus CDBG conditioning improvements to the funds on maintaining, improving Marmalade Hill Center. She said and/or creating vital neighbor- the Center positively affected the hoods; preserving existing low and neighborhood. moderate income housing stock; and Janet Nelson, Alliance House, providing amenities to improve thanked the Council for last marketability of neighborhoods. year' s funding and supported funding for phase two of their 89-116 PROCEIPINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 building renovation. She said supported funding for a park site renovation would help bring the in the Glendale area. She said building up to standard and said Raging Waters had used most of they provided programs for mental- Glendale Park and the neighbor- ly ill adults. hood was lacking in parks. She Richard Gomez supported said she had located a site and funding for the living traditions had persuaded the Board of Educa- festival. He said this festival tion to give it up. was very important to community development and teachers all over Jim Jenson, director of the the valley supported the festival. Salt Lake Boys_ and Girls Clubs, supported funding for their orga- On behalf of Steven Gold- nization to work with high-risk smith, Ms. Loker said he supported kids. He said there had been an artspace and she would get the increase in gang activities and Council information from Mr. they had been successful in deal- Goldsmith. ing with the high-risk kids. He said their programs were present- Marty Shannon, Family Support ly full and they had increased all Center, said their agency helped activities to run 7 days a week. with prevention and treatment of child abuse and neglect. She sup- Richard Winters, Executive ported funding to help rehab- Director of the Community Services ilitate their facility so they Council, said he appreciated the could better serve their clients. funding recommendation for their program and said they focused on Rob White, Utah Heritage low-income housing maintenance Foundation, supported funding for projects that assisted mostly the Marmalade Hill Center. He elderly widows. He said their said the city owned the building staff consisted of a full-time and needed to help maintain it and maintenance employee and they used also said that they had not re- painters, plumbers, and carpenters ceived any city funds for five as needed. Councilmember Hor- years. rocks asked about a similar county program and Mr. Winters said that George Swallow, 840 Nibley his program didn't duplicate those Circle, supported funding for a services provided by the county. proposed neighborhood park. He He also said that last summer they mentioned that there was a vacant did 100-150 houses and kept their lot by his home that was now staff totally busy. infested with mice, rats, weeds, and stray cats, and could more Cathy Hoskins, Board of productively be used as a neigh- Trustees of the Community Action borhood park. He said the only Program, said their programs, close open area was the Nibley Housing Outreach Rental and the Park school grounds. Westside Emergency Food Pantry, offered basic services to low Tony Reiter, Neighborhood income people. She supported Self Help group, supported funding funding for these programs. to finish neighborhood projects in the area of 5th South, 700 South, Pauline Valdez, Westside Food and 800 East. Pantry manager, thanked the Mayor for his recommended funding and Glenda Gaudig, 1510 Navajo, said they had already served 2, 406 89-117 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 households with a total of 8,020 down on pollution. He said the members. She said they were R/UDAT study encouraged the city serving more senior people and to develop a complete bike lane the number of homeless people they system. served was growing. Deborah Eaton, 878 Navajo, supported funding for the Neigh- Ruth Robbins, 819 Hudson, borhood Housing Services program supported funding for a study of and asked the Council not to the Nibley Park proposal. She cripple their funding. said the neighbors, especially those with children, supported- Nancy Saxton, 164 South--900 this study. East, supported funding for the Pennsylvania/Iowa Block Redesign. Sharon Abegglen, Director of She said this was a nice inner the Housing Outreach Rental Pro- block neighborhood area at about gram, supported funding for HORP 950 East 2nd-3rd South. She said and said that as many as 2300 that areas such as these were families would be homeless without invaluable to maintaining the the program. She said it was personality of the city. She said because of the staff' s abilities the people in the area had reno- that people could get into hous- vated their homes and there was a ing. She thanked the Council for lot of owner interest in this past support and asked for contin- area. She said it was very impor- ued support. tant to continue supporting neigh- borhoods where people put money Kent Miller, vice president into their homes. of the Bonneville Bike Touring Club, supported funding for the Roger Borgenicht, 218 East urban amenities programs which 500 South, supported funding for a would include bike paths. Community Development Corporation (housing program) . He said CDCs Jeffrey Levenson, League of around the country had solved American Wheelmen, also supported problems that private and public funding for the urban amenities sectors couldn't solve. He said programs. CDCs had the resources to get funding from corporations and Roland Pearson, member of the foundations, and funding that was Mayor' s Bicycle Advisory Commit- only available to nonprofit commu- tee, supported the urban amenities nity-based organizations. program and showed a drawing of proposed bike lanes. He said Tom Korn, First Step House, three of the lanes directly im- requested support for funding of pacted target areas. He said they their program. He said they were wanted to extend a lane to the a private nonprofit drug and Jordan River Parkway and they also alcohol recovery residential needed north/south access through facility that served low or no the downtown area and east/west income people. He said all ongo- access from the Northwest Multi- ing funding was used to meet day purpose Center, which accessed the to day expenses and their building northwest neighborhood. He said badly needed renovation which bicycling was a low-impact form of could only be accomplished by transportation and with adequate special grants. He said their space on the roads perhaps more repairs thus far had a positive people would use bicycles and cut visible effect on the community. 89-118 PROCEIINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 Bernice Cook, member of CDAC, said they did the best job they The meeting adj urned at 9:25 could do when they made their p.m. recommendations and she said the Mayor did his best. She said she knew the Council would also do , . their best and that everyone CO I AIR should be pleased with funds received since money was so limit- ed. Perry Underwood, 965 West 1st C T REc DER South, thanked the Council for funding improvements in the Euclid and Jeremy Street areas. She supported funding for improvements in the Leonard Street and First South areas and supported funding for curbs, gutters, sidewalks and drains throughout the west side. Opal Clark, Work Activity Center, said they served about 140 low-income handicapped adults per day. She supported funding for their program to help pay $150,000 still owing on their building so money they raised could then be used for program services. She mentioned that many other programs had been modeled after theirs. Stephen Hemingway, 1336 South 2nd East, asked the Council to review his application for the South Central Community Center. He said there was nothing in the neighborhood for youth and he wanted a facility for kids so they would have a place to go after school and have fun. Bonnie Huff, SLACC Housing Chair, supported the Assist pro- posal for a CDC. She said they could provide a great deal of services not currently available. There were eleven people who supported funding for the Alliance House but did not wish to speak. (T 89-7) 89-119 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA \\Cj CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER CITY & COUNTY BUILDING, 315 451 SOUTH STATE STREET Tuesday, May 2, 1989 6:00 p.m. A. BRIEFING SESSION: 5:15 - 5:55 p.m. or immediately following the meeting of the Redevelopment Agency Board of Directors, City & County Building 325, 451 South State Street. 1. Report of the Executive Director. B. OPENING CEREMONIES: 1. Invocation. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Approval of the Minutes. C. COMMENTS: 1. Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. - (rpr• cUY. U ,A rY-rti� 'lire- `U� � r� 2. Citizen Comments to the Council. Lug be. 1 hcc svo <<� �►vw� cal D. CONSENT: 1-or' , 1. Interlocal Cooperation Agreement - UDOT Street Lights_ L w uu Consider adopting a resolution authorizing the execution of an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the Utah Department of Transportation to purchase and install new street lights along Redwood Road between North Temple and 1000 North. u per- I b r ioi bort5 t/)'j (C 89-211) 1-1 e Cc+� lb do STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. (oat.erne ��' 1`5 G i- d�one�n - �� lip o� 2. Floodplain Ordinance. \E CSt i- (cthQV I► ) 4,1- a sti Set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, June 6, 1989, at 6: 30 g p.m. , to obtain public comment concerning technical amendments to Salt Lake City's Floodplain Ordinance. _ cv K - Ctt (0 89-12) r fl u pa t5A►It � "Ort ka STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set date. -H , Ir13Ur nce 3. Interlocal Cooperation Agreement - Utah Energy Office. P• Consider adopting a resolution authorizing the execution of an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the State of Utah Energy Office for a computer interconnect cable connecting traffic signals on Foothill Drive between Guardsman Way and 7100 South to Salt Labe City's signal computer. rj6/L- STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. el�/� L(tyi5 a)g� tad D. CONSENT Cor. 3. 4. National Water Week. Consider adopting a resolution of support for National Water Week and all it entails, encouraging Salt Lake City citizens to participate in the events of National Water Week. ' 1 I �`� (N f n,zinq be „if- arin , STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. a E. NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS: V/1. Fiscal Year 1989-90 Budget Message. Mayor Palmer A. DePaulis will present the Recommended Budget for Fiscal Year 1989-90. (B 89-3) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: No Action Required. J2. Tentative Fiscal Year 1989/90 Budgets. — `- 5je[) -pV4.uriq t bodge Consider adopting a resolution adopting t�entati e ts,including the tentative budget for the Library Fund, for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 1989 and ending June 30, 1990. (B 89-3) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt; refer tentative budgets to Committee of the Whole. Ely dt S! 3. Budget Hearing Date. Set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, May 16, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. , to obtain public comment concerning tentative budgets, including the Library Fund budget, for Fiscal Year 1989/90. (B 89-3) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set date. 4. Tax Levy Rates. Consider adopting an ordinance determining the rate of tax levy and levying taxes upon all real and personal property within Salt Lake City, Utah made taxable by law for the Fiscal Year commencing July 1, 1989 and ending June 30, 1990. (0 89-23) :- 5 5--q ore F RECOfM'IENDATION: Refer to Committee of the Whole. pions ( f9 empk eeo. ` (X5.. I t- Compensation Plan. tut tradV �l Ce "l,v� 06 Set a date for a public hearing to be held esday, May 16. 1989, at 6:30_ � ,L p.m. , to consider adoptin an ordinance amendin Section 2.52.010 of the quo agenda Wr Salt Lake City Code, as last amended by Bill No. 44 of 1988 re ating to -A(A � . haf compensation of Salt Lake City Corporation officers and employees, including _1 r uw statutory officers. w'in� Se (0 89-20)Pc he �b STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set date; and refer to Committee of the cILUV W Vi U Whole. .00 it 1;(5 1\12 G6` ''L b E. NEW COUNCIL -JSINESS Cont'd. 6. Compensation Plan - 500 Series Employees. Set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, May 16, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. , to consider adopting an ordinance amending Section 2. 52. 116 of the Salt Lake City Code relating to compensation and benefits for Salt Lake City Corporation 500 Series Employees. (0 89-22) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set date; and refer to Committee of the Whole. 7. Compensation Plan - 400 Series Employees. Set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, May 16, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. , to consider adopting an ordinance amending Section 2. 52. 115 of the Salt Lake City Code relating to compensation and benefits for Salt Lake City Corporation 400 Series Employees. (0 89-21) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set date; and refer to Committee of the Whole. 8. Compensation Plan - 200 Series Employees. Set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, May 16, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. , to consider adopting an ordinance amending Section 2. 52. 118 of the Salt Lake City Code relating to compensation and benefits for Salt Lake City Corporation 200 Series Employees. (0 89-19) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set date; and refer to Committee of the Whole. • 9. Compensation Plan - 100 Series Employees. Set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, May 16, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. , to consider adopting an ordinance amending Section 2.52. 117 of the Salt Lake City Code relating to compensation and benefits for Salt Lake City Corporation 100 Series Employees. (0 89-18) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set date; and refer to Committee of the Whole. 10. Water and Sewer Rates. Set a date for a public hearing for Tuesday, May 16, 1989 at 6:30 p.m. to obtain public comment concerning an ordinance amending Sections 17. 16.670 and 17.72.030 of the Salt Lake City Code relating to Water and Sewer rates. (0 89-16) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set date; and refer to Committee of the Whole. �Y1 ajlot5tmod ib t -Pi.) L 3 D (V l E. NEW COUNCIL JSINESS Cont'd. 11. Tracy Aviary. Set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, May 16, 1989 at 6: 30 p.m. to obtain public comment concerning an ordinance enacting Section • 15. 16.070 of the Salt Lake City Code providing for admission fees to Tracy Aviary. (0 89-17) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set date; and refer to Committee of the Whole. o u)rnj d La 12. Fire Emergency Cost Ordinance. `u" C-Giren��'�~' / CA 101 a ou , mom c. Consider adopting an ordinance amending Title9 of the Salt Lake City Code relating to Health and Safety by adding Chapter 9.48 dealing with cost recovery for negligently caused fire emergencies. (0 89-14) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Refer to CommitQtt�eee, ofth Whole. 13. Sex Acts for Hire. 11UULOCk O V(A JI 4 l''t"x°- Consider adopting an ordinance amending Title 11, Chapter 16, Section 020 of the Salt Lake City Code, 1988, relating to sexual intercourse and sex acts for hire. ( In�b6J (0 89-13) 1 f��G�n �" U tO STAFF RECOM`'IENDATION: Suspend Rules; Adopt on First Reading. 14. Estray Ordinance. Consider adopting an ordinance amending Title 8 of the Salt Lake City Code and adding thereto Chapter 8. 12 relating�� to estrays. tk o (0 89-15) 0. /12G k)ao 0146,24- STAFF RECOMMENDATION: us ules;`Adopt on Fi st(hRe�ldi g F. UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS: 1. Special Improvement District No. 38-757 - Assessment RiNt Consider adopting an ordinance confirming the assessment rolls and levying V ni3O j' ( an assessment against certain properties in the Special Improvement District ' u^'`�`` No. 38-757 (900 West, 900 South to 2100 South), for paying the costs of �(AJA) constructing street improvements and certain miscellaneous work; reaffirming U the establishment of a Special Improvement Guaranty Fund; establishing the ° effective date of this ordinance; and related matters. g (Q 87-2) U}- (ad C)- GL' STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. F. UNFINISHED JNCIL BUSINESS Cont"d. 2. Special Improvement District No. 40-R-16 - Assessment Ordinance. Consider adopting an ordinance confirming the assessment rolls and levying an assessment against certain properties in the Special Improvement District No. 40-R-16 (Avenues), for paying the costs of constructing street improvements and certain miscellaneous work; reaffirming the establishment of a Special Improvement Guaranty Fund; establishing the effective date of this ordinance; and related matters. (Q 88-2) STAFF RECOMPENDATION: Adopt. 3. Special Improvement District No. 40-R-13 - Assessment Ordinance. Consider adopting an ordinance confirming the assessment rolls and levying an assessment against certain properties in the Special Improvement District No. 40-R-13 (Non-Contiguous Concrete Replacement), for paying the costs of constructing street improvements and certain miscellaneous work; reaffirming the establishment of a Special Improvement Guaranty Fund; establishing the effective date of this ordinance; and related matters. (Q 87-3) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. G. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Petition No. 400-708 - David DeSantis. 6:20 p.m. 10 e6/ 01uirna4rr�, Obtain public comment concerning Petition No. 400-708 submitted by David-- DeSantis requesting that the City amend Section 21.78. 130 to allow for- profit organizations to operate private recreation facilities in residential districts. s�, (P 89-93) aGili t1%1 � n ��flj74 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Close Hearing and Adopt. �r �� iJ M /11i9/,1(/(2. ommunity Development Block Grant Funds. ,^/1W 6: 30 p.m. Obtain public comment concerning 15th Year Community Development Block Grant funding. (T 89-7) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Close Hearing; Refer to Committee of the OPw _„ l 9Whole. H. ADJOURNMENT. ** FINAL ACTION MAY BE TAM AND/OR ORDINANCES ADOPTED CONCERNING ANY ITEM ON THIS ACC DATED: April 28, 1989 BY: A4444ga- C RE 0 R STATE OF UTAH ) COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) ss. On the 28th day of April, 1989, 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 City Hall, 324 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah: 1. At 5:00 p.m. in the City Recorder's Office, 5th Floor; and 2. At 5:00 p.m. in the Newsroom, Room 336. r%/1// C 41FRECOI R Subscribed and sworn to before me this 28th day of Apri 1989. 'No ary Public residi n _he State of Utah My Commission Expires: APPROVAL: ( • S•D�— EXECUT DIRE R PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met as the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, April 11, 1989, at 5:00 p.m. in Suite 300, City Hall, 324 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Willie Stoler Sydney Fonnesbeck Council Chairperson Stoler presided at the meeting. The Council interviewed Ms . asked that the Council RSVP as Bonnie Sucec prior to consider- soon as possible if they would be ation of her proposed appointment interested in attending. to the Art Design Board. Coun- cilmember Stoler asked Ms. Sucec Mr. Lee King, Council Staff to tell the Council why she was Auditor, reviewed the upcoming interested in the Art Design schedule of Olympic Bid Committee Board. Ms. Sucec said she was a meetings. He said there was a full time working artist with a meeting with the Olympic Athletes Master' s Degree in Art from the Advisory Council at Snowbird Ski University of Utah and she said Resort. Councilmember Kirk asked she felt strongly about getting if the Council needed to have quality art for Salt Lake City. someone there. Mr. King said that Nancy Boskoff, Chair of the Salt because some of the athletes were Lake Arts Council, said Ms. Sucec voting members of the United had worked with the Children' s Art States Olympic Executive Committee Yard at the Salt Lake Arts Festi- it would be a good political move val and she was up for a position to have a representative there. on the Design Council reserved for full-time artists. Councilmember Ms. Gust-Jenson then reviewed Stoler thanked her for taking the the agenda. She said Item D-4 time to serve on the board. ( Petition 400-708 ) was to allow a private company to build a golf Ms. Cindy Gust-Jenson, driving range on property next to Council Executive Director, asked the Mount Olivett cemetery. She the Council if they would be said the ordinance change would interested in meeting with the allow companies to establish traffic impact fee consultant. private recreation facilities in The Council requested that the residential areas. briefing be set for May 11, 1989 . Ms. Bittner said she was Mr. James Hall, Council Staff concerned because a skateboard Assistant, said the Council had park was approved for a residen- been invited to help kickoff a new tial area by the Planning Commis- program for providing food for the sion without the neighborhood homeless shelter. He said Little knowing. Christine Richman, Caesars Pizza was providing the Administrative Assistant, said the first dinner on June 19th, and ordinance specifically excluded the Council was invited in hopes skateboard parks. Councilmember of raising the city' s awareness of Godfrey said he agreed with Ms . the homeless problem. Mr. Hall Bittner because if the Council 89-86 PROCEEDINGS uF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 1989 approved the change to allow the expected them to be admitted project by Mount Olivett, all the although there were other factors other similar projects would have that could influence the Sandy to be approved. Ms. Bittner asked situation. He said Sandy had that it be scheduled for a Commit- agreed to pay for the expansion of tee of the Whole discussion. the Parley' s plant but Salt Lake would still have to pay for the Ms . Gust-Jenson asked Mr. seismic upgrade and the filter bed LeRoy Hooton, Director of Public changes. Utilities, to give the background on item D-5, Metropolitan Water Ms. Gust-Jenson asked Louis District interlocal agreement. Miller, Director of Airports, to Mr. Hooton said the Parley' s explain the two airport bond Canyon Water Treatment Facility items. Mr. Miller said the items needed improvements to its seismic were on the agenda again because stability, replacement of its of some technical changes but this filtering medium and needed to be would be the last time. He asked expanded to handle the water from if the Council had any further Mountain Dell Dam. Mr. Hooton questions about the bonds. The introduced Mr. Wendall Evensen, Council asked no additional ques- Water Supply Superintendent, and tions. turned the time over to him for further explanation. Mr. Evensen said the Parley' s Treatment Plant building was strong enough to handle the gravi- • ty loads, but that due to is construction, strong lateral movement could cause the building to collapse. He said the cost to strengthen the building would be approximately $2.3 million. He said that $194, 000 of that would be for engineering costs . Mr. Evensen also said when problems with the filtering medium were found in the City Creek Canyon plant they inspected the Parley' s plant and found the same problem. He said the filter beds needed to be changed. Mr. Evensen said all three projects (expan- sion, seismic improvements, and filter changes ) would be scheduled to be finished in time for the completion of the Mountain Dell Dam. He said that Sandy City had applied to join the Metropolitan Water District and that they 89-87 PROCEEDINGS Ur' THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT Li.aKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in regular session on Tuesday, April 11, 1989, at 6:00 p.m. in Suite 300, City Hall, 324 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Willie Stoler Sydney Fonnesbeck Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Roger Cutler, city attorney, Lynda Domino, chief deputy city recorder, and S. R. Kivett, deputy recorder, were present. Council Chairperson Stoler presided at the meeting and Councilmember Fonnesbeck conducted the meeting. OPENING CEREMONIES ciated the work and effort from all of the neighborhood people and #1. There was no invocation. volunteers and said this was a good experience for everyone. He #2. The Council led the said Mr. Schwab was very pleased. Pledge of Allegiance. Councilmember Horrocks said #3. Councilmember Godfrey they had such a good response that moved and Councilmember Kirk it only took about three hours to seconded to approve the minutes of plant all the trees. the Salt Lake City Council for the regular meeting held Tuesday, April 4, 1989, which motion car- CONSENT AGENDA ried, all members voted aye. (M 89-1) Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Hardman sec- onded to approve the consent COMMENTS agenda, which motion carried, all members voted aye. Faye Nichols, 120 McArthur Avenue, chair for the People' s #1. RE: Approving the ap- Freeway Community Council, ex- pointment of Bonnie Sucec to the pressed appreciation from the Salt Lake Art Design Board. neighbors of Coatsville Avenue for (I 89-9) a "tree-planting" project which was completed last Saturday. She #2. RE: Approving the re- said the neighbors along with the appointment of Jan Graham to the help of Councilmember Horrocks, Central Business Improvement Stan Penfold, and Steve Schwab, District Board. urban forester, helped the neigh- ( I 89-11) bors get trees on their street. She said they appreciated the #3. RE: Adopting Resolution self-help mini grant program. 50 of 1989 authorizing the exe- cution of an Interlocal Coopera- Mayor DePaulis said he appre- tion Agreement between Salt Lake 89-88 PROCEEDINGS of THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT .SAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 1989 City Corporation and Murray City ACTION: Councilmember Hard- Corporation allowing Murray City man moved and Councilmember Kirk Corporation to use the airport seconded to suspend the rules and firing range for its police and on first reading adopt Resolution other certified officers. 52 of 1989, which motion carried, (C 89-152) all members voted aye. #4. RE: Setting a date for a DISCUSSION: Councilmember public hearing to be held Tuesday, Bittner said that approval of the May 2, 1989, at 6:20 p.m. to resolution did not in any way obtain public comment concerning indicate an intent on the Coun- Petition No. 400-708 submitted by cil ' s part to circumvent the re- David DeSantis requesting that the quirement of a referendum vote. City amend Section 21.78 . 130 to (R 89-1) allow for-profit organizations to operate private recreation facili- #3. RE: An ordinance making ties in residential districts. certain technical changes to the (P 89-93) sexually oriented business ordi- nance of Chapter 61 of Title 5 of #5. RE: Adopting Resolution the Salt Lake City Code. 51 of 1989 authorizing the exe- cution of an Interlocal Coopera- ACTION: Councilmember Fonnes- tion Agreement between Salt Lake beck referred this to the consent City Corporation and the Metro- agenda without objection. politan Water District of Salt (0 89-9) Lake City whereby Metropolitan Water District will advance money required for engineering to up- UNFINISHED BUSINESS grade Parleys Water Treatment Plant to conform to seismic re- #1. RE: Adopting Resolution quirements and enable it to handle No. 45 of 1989 providing for the the water from Little Dell Dam. issuance of Airport revenue bonds. (C 89-153) ACTION: Councilmember God- frey moved and Councilmember NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS Hardman seconded to adopt Resolu- tion 45 of 1989, which motion #1. RE: The appointment of carried, all members voted aye. Janet I . Embry, Bruce Wycoff, (Q 88-4) Michael W. Crippen, Ariel L. Jepson, and Richard F. Bojanowski #2. RE: Adopting supplemental as volunteer Hearing Examiners. Resolution No. 46 of 1989 auth- orizing the issuance and sale of ACTION: Councilmember $30, 520,000 Airport Revenue Bonds, Fonnesbeck referred this to the Series 1989, of Salt Lake City, consent agenda without objection. Salt Lake County, Utah; and relat- ( I 89-12) ed matters. #2. RE: A resolution of ACTION: Councilmember support for submission of Salt Godfrey moved and Councilmember Lake City' s bid to the United Kirk seconded to adopt Resolu- States Olympic Committee for the tion 46 of 1989, which motion 1994 Winter Olympic Games. carried, all members voted aye. (Q 88-4) 89-89 PROCEEDINGS fir' THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT -AKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 1989 The meeting adjourned at 6: 10 p.m. COUNCIL CHAIR CITY RECORDER 89-90 r.- PROCEEDINGS G. THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT . KE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met as the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, April 18, 1989, at 5:00 p.m. in Suite 300, City Hall, 324 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Willie Stoler Sydney Fonnesbeck Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting. Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Mr. Stoler said the Water Board Director, informed the Council was the only Board that the Coun- that they needed to convene on cil had complete control over in Thursday to take final action on selecting the members. Council- the sale of the IHC revenue bonds. member Bittner said she agreed with Ms. Fonnesbeck that the Board Ms. Gust-Jenson distributed and needed new people. Councilmember reviewed a schedule of events for Godfrey said the Council should the reopening ceremonies for the check and see if the Water Board restored City and County building. had anyone in training for a Board She mentioned that RSVPs were position,' and if they didn't to needed as soon as possible in have the Council choose the next order to get tickets for certain person. < events. Ms. Gust-Jenson said she had Ms. Gust-Jenson then reviewed written a letter to the Water the agenda. She said Mike Martin Board expressing the Council 's would be addressing the Council concern about the Board membership during citizen' s comments to talk and said she would speak with them about public intoxication in the again. Mr. Stoler asked the downtown area. Council if they wanted to inter- view Mr. Wilson, the reply was Concerning item E-3, reappoint- negative. ment of Charles Wilson to the Metropolitan Water District, Ms. Gust-Jenson asked if the Councilmember Stoler said they Council had any questions about forgot to ask if any of the other agenda items. Ms. Fonnes- Councilmembers wanted to interview beck asked Bill Wright, Planning Mr. Wilson prior to consideration and Zoning, if the rezoning peti- of his reappointment. Council- tions were as cut and dried as member Fonnesbeck said she was they appeared. Mr. Wright said worried that the Council had not the Redwood Road petition ( Item G- put anyone new on the Board for 1 ) was very straight forward but many years. She said the last there might be some questions time a vacancy came up, the Coun- about the Stringham Avenue peti- cil had to appoint the person the tion ( Item G-2) . The Council de- Water Board had in their training cided to hold their question for program. She said the Water Board the Council meeting. membership had the least turnover of all the City Boards. 89-91 PROCEEDINGS G_ THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT . RE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in regular session on Tuesday, April 18, 1989, at 6:00 p.m. in Suite 300, City Hall, 324 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Willie Stoler Sydney Fonnesbeck Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Steven Allred, Deputy City Attorney, Kathryn Marshall, City Recorder, and Lynda Domino, Chief Deputy City Recorder, were present. Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting and Councilmember Fonnesbeck conducted the meeting. OPENING CEREMONIES Mr. Holbrook thanked the Council and Commissioner Stewart #1. The invocation was given for their support. He thanked the by Father Joachim Hadzedhais, Mayor for putting his office at Greek Orthodox Church. the disposal of a community prob- lem which needed to be solved and #2. The Council led - the said the project brought many Pledge of Allegiance. people with differing backgrounds and beliefs together. He said he #3. Councilmember Godfrey hoped the project would get con- moved and Councilmember Hardman tinued support. seconded to approve the minutes of the Salt Lake City Council for the #4b. The City Council and regular meeting held Tuesday, Mayor adopted a joint resolution April 11, 1989, which motion car- proclaiming April 28, 1989, as ried, all members voted aye. Arbor Day in Salt Lake City. (M 89-1) Councilmember Stoler read the resolution. #4a. Councilmember Roselyn Kirk presented the "Audrey Nelson Councilmember Godfrey moved Community Development Achievement and Councilmember Hardman seconded Award" to the City Council, Mayor to adopt Resolution 55 of 1989, Palmer DePaulis, Salt Lake County which motion carried, all members Commissioner Mike Stewart, and voted aye except Councilmember representatives of the Shelter the Horrocks who was absent for the Homeless Committee - Steve Hol- vote. brook, Keith McMullin and Patrick (R 89-1) Poulin. She said the plaque was given to Salt Lake City and the Shelter the Homeless Committee. COMMENTS She accepted this award in Wash- ington and said it was a very #1. Mike Martin, business prestigious award which only three owner in downtown Salt Lake City, cities received. said there was a problem on Main Street between 300 and 400 South 89-92 PROCEEDINGS C, . THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT __SE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1989 because of drunks roaming around. program which appeared to have a He said that last year there were great deal of promise in the south 500 arrests in this area. He said end of downtown. He said they this presented a burden to Salt instituted the juvenile interdic- Lake City, the police force and tion team which was extremely the cost of doing business. He effective since they made 1, 000 said he personally paid for police arrests in a three-month period assistance from 3 :00 p.m. to 11:00 _ and cut the assault rate downtown p.m. to walk people to their cars by 50%. He said the theft rate in the Boston garage. also dropped comparably. He said Cheryl Luke, city prosecutor, the police department had a prior- confirmed Mr. 'Martin' s comments ity and emphasis in this area and and the downtown merchants' prob- they would continue to work with lem. She said the city had ac- Mr. Martin and the other business- knowledged their needs and was es. working hard to meet them. She said this had been and continued Councilmember Fonnesbeck to be a problem but they had been asked Mr. Martin what else the meeting monthly with downtown city could do. Mr. Martin said he merchants to address the problem had wanted to make the Council and identify solutions. She said aware of the situation so the city the police department had in- would continue to work on the creased the mobility of their problem. He said the police had downtown officers who were now been proactive and the prosecu- using bikes and they were working tor' s office was doing a good job. with the county to increase the = He said part of the problem was size of the detox facility. She that once people were convicted also said the jail was now accept- there was no room in the jail so ing the city' s public inebriants he was going to talk to the county when they were a danger to them- about the detox center. He said selves or others. the current problem affected the occupancy rate in buildings and Councilmember Hardman asked affected the retail merchants. He if the clubs in the area were said he personally did not believe contributing to the problem. Ms. that 3.2 bars belonged in the Luke said there were two licensed downtown area. bar establishments that at various points in time were handling their Several owners of businesses clientele irresponsibly. She said in this area confirmed the severi- they sent letters indicating that ty of the problem. They said many the bars could lose their licenses times drunks would come into their if they continued to practice stores, would pass out in the business in this way and now they doorways, would taunt and harass seemed to be abiding by the law people entering and leaving the better. She said they had seen business, or might cause damage to improvements since they first the premises. They said this was addressed the issue about three or not good for the image of downtown four months ago. Salt Lake. Jim Jensen, police depart- Mr. Jensen said any support ment, said they had actively the Council could give by way of pushed for panhandling ordinances encouraging the county to support and reiterated that the department the city's efforts would be help- had recently adopted the bike ful. 89-93 PROCEEDINGS C._ THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT _ CE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1989 Councilmember Bittner asked 25 West. if the Council could get a report (P 88-260) from the police chief or consider ordinance changes to get these #3. RE: Approving the ap- types of bars off main street. pointments of Janet I . Embry, She thought that if they didn't do Bruce Wycoff, Michael W. Crippen, something positive then they Ariel L. Jepson, and Richard F. wouldn' t solve the problem. Bojanowski as volunteer hearing examiners. John Schuman, chair of the (I 89-12) Planning Commission, said they needed to possibly change the #4. RE: Adopting Ordinance ordinance in order to omit 3.2 14 of 1989 making certain techni- bars from the "C-4" zone and cal changes to the sexually ori- permit only private clubs. ented business ordinance of Chap- Councilmember Stoler said they ter 61 of Title 5 of the Salt Lake couldn't zone these businesses out City Code. of existence and Councilmember (0 89-9) Fonnesbeck suggested that planning and zoning needed to work on this issue and report back to the NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS Council. #1. RE: The Mayor ' s recommen- dations for 15th Year Community CONSENT AGENDA Development Block Grant funding. Council to set a date for a public Councilmember Godfrey moved hearing to be held Tuesday, May 2, and Councilmember Kirk seconded to 1989, at 6:30 p.m. to obtain approve the consent agenda, which public comment concerning CDBG motion carried, all members voted funding. aye. ACTION: Councilmember #1. RE: Adopting Resolution Hardman moved and Councilmember • 53 of 1989 authorizing the execu- Horrocks seconded to accept the tion of a grant agreement between Mayor's recommendations, set - the - Salt Lake City Corporation and the date for the public hearing, and U.S. Department of Housing and refer this to the Committee of the Urban Development for a $62, 000 Whole, which motion carried, all Emergency Shelter Grant to aug- members voted aye. ment the activities of the Salt Lake Emergency Shelter and Re- DISCUSSION: Mayor DePaulis source Center and the Housing said the city received 98 CDBG Outreach Rental Program of the proposals totalling over $9 mil- Salt Lake Community Action Program lion. He said the city' s alloca- (C 89-156) tion would be $3, 947,000 and capital planning had identified an #2. RE: Setting a date for a additional $200,000 from cost public hearing to be held Tuesday, savings in previous years ' July 11, 1989, at 6:20 p.m. , to projects so the total allocation obtain public comment concerning for 15th year would be $4, 147, 000. Petition No. 400-596 submitted by The Mayor said the Community Banj Investment requesting Salt Development Advisory Committee Lake City to close the alley (CDAC) had reviewed all the pro- located at approximately 750 South posals and interviewed the appli- 89-94 PROCEEDINGS G_ THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT _ .KE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1989 cants and he said he included this administration and $139, 250 (3% ) information with his recommenda- was for contingency. In summary tions. he said he was recommending a strong emphasis in housing and He said he was impressed with asked the Council to join him in CDAC and said they had very good addressing long-term housing philosophical viewpoints especial- needs. ly in regards to their support for (T 89-7) housing. He said they had wanted to move away from allocating money #2. RE: An ordinance amend- in large blocks for streets and ing Chapter 16. 60, Salt Lake City public infrastructure and keep the Code, relating to ground transpor- funds in the neighborhoods. He tation at the Airport. said generally CDAC had good recommendations and he followed ACTION: Councilmember some of their thinking but there Godfrey moved and Councilmember were also many projects that Kirk seconded to suspend the rules needed to be finished. and on first reading adopt Ordi- nance 15 of 1989, which motion He said city staff also carried, all members voted aye. evaluated all the proposals, (0 89-10) ranked them by category and considered whether the proposals #3. RE: Reappointing Charles were for on-going projects, what W. Wilson to his second full six the program benefits were, the year term on the Metropolitan type of citizen input that was Water District Board. involved, the economic incentives, the cost benefits, and the consis- ACTION: Councilmember Stoler tency of projects with city-wide moved and Councilmember Bittner policies. He said he applauded the seconded to suspend the rules and city staff for their work. on first reading approve the reappointment, which motion car- He said there were 12 housing ried, all members voted aye. proposals totalling $1, 615,000 (I 89-14) (39% of the total funds ) . He said housing ought to be the major #4. RE: An ordinance amending emphasis and neighborhoods were Title 12, Chapter 80 Section concerned about the quality of 070(F) of the Salt Lake City Code, housing as part of the fabric of relating to Riding Rules and the continued existence of safe, Regulations -- Unlawful Acts; and secure, and healthy neighborhoods. an ordinance amending Title 12, He also said there were 11 street, Chapter 12, Section 070 of the sidewalk, and storm drain projects Salt Lake City Code, relating to totalling $1, 172, 000 ( 28% ) ; 5 park skateboards and other toy vehicles projects totalling $278,000 (7%) ; by adding a subsection C. 2 public building projects total- ling $72, 000 ( 2% ) ; 10 public ACTION: Councilmember Kirk service projects totalling moved and Councilmember Hardman $351, 000 ( 8%) ; 5 urban amenities seconded to suspend the rules and programs totalling $38, 100 ( 1%) ; 1 on first reading adopt Ordinance planning project for $65, 000 (2%) ; 16 of 1989 relating to riding and $2, 150 for the Percent for the rules and regulations, and adopt Arts program. He also said the Ordinance 17 of 1989 relating to remaining $414, 500 ( 10%) was for skateboards and other toy vehi- 89-95 PROCEEDINGS Or THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1989 Iles, which motion carried, all commercial zoning and also identi- members voted aye. fied urban design criteria which (0 89-11) included a documented need and community support for the develop- ment. She said the need existed PUBLIC HEARINGS since there were only three res- taurants (Arctic Circle, Pizza #1. RE: A public hearing at Hut, and Dominos Pizza) in the 6:20 p.m. to obtain public comment general area to serve about 25, 000 concerning Petition No. 400-705 people. She said the residents submitted by Scott McNeil of had expressed the need for servic- McNeil Engineering requesting Salt es as proposed and said the Lake City to rezone property community council voted to support located on the southeast corner the proposal on a conceptual basis of 700 North and Redwood Road from with approval based on development "R-2A" to "B-3" classification. of the entire site as presented in their meetings. ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember She said the project would be Kirk seconded to close the public located on streets which could hearing, which motion carried, all accommodate increased traffic members voted aye. since 700 North was designated as a minor arterial street and Red- Councilmember Bittner moved wood Road was a state highway. and Councilmember Godfrey seconded She said the transportation de- to adopt Ordinance 18 of 1989, partment would approve all curb which motion carried, all members cuts and UDOT would approve curb voted aye. cuts on Redwood Road. She said the developer would have to pro- DISCUSSION: Janice Jardine, vide adequate parking and open planning and zoning, outlined the space, and there should be no area on a map and said a church exception to the required land- abutted the property on the south, scape set backs, buffers, and the Jordan River Parkway was to parking. She mentioned that their the east, 700 North was to the site plan provided the required north and Redwood Road was to the parking but staff had not yet west. She said there had been received a landscaping plan. requests in the past to rezone one or two lots on this corner but She said signage had to be these requests had been denied, limited to pedestrian scale and however, this proposal included the project had to be new con- several properties and dealt with struction only and not conversion development on the entire site. of residential structures to commercial uses. She said the She said the proposed use was operation couldn' t negatively a strip commercial development impact the residential area and with a full service restaurant, said the hours of operation had one or two fast-food restaurants, been discussed with the community a convenience/gas store, and ten council but had not been estab- small retail commercial spaces in lished. She said residential one building running along the properties which would be impacted back line. She said the North- were homes to the north across 700 west Community Master Plan identi- North and the church to the south. fied this area for expansion of 89-96 PROCEEDINGS O, THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT , .EKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1989 She said the Planning Com- site plan and said he was excited mission recommended approval of about the potential of this the request with the following project. He said they met with stipulations : that the final the community council three times site plan including landscaping, and was satisfied that he could lighting, signage, and traffic perform under the guidelines circulation meet the criteria outlined in ordinance. He ex- identified in the Northwest Commu- pressed his gratitude to the nity Master Plan and the standards planning staff and the community of the Salt Lake City zoning council. He said he felt this ordinance with final site plan project would be doing the commu- approval from the planning direc- pity a service. tor. She said the rezoning would become effective upon approval of Councilmember Kirk asked a building permit within one year about the gas station. Mr. from the date of approval of the Christensen said the gas station City Council. would be under a canopy and said they had been sensitive to the Councilmember Bittner asked community needs. about the pedestrian scale for signage. Mr. Jardine said the Councilmember Fonnesbeck signs would be scaled down in asked how many homes were now on size since this • development was the property and Mr. Christensen based on the idea of being commu- said there was a duplex and a pity oriented rather than trying single-family home. He said they to attract traffic travelling would give the residents adequate through the area-. She indicated time to relocate. that basically signs would be flat on buildings or would be Bill Eccleston, 1829 Spring- kiosk type signs which would have field, chair of the North Redwood to conform to signage requirements Community Council, said they for B-3 zones. She said she met supported development of the with the developer and explained entire parcel with the stipula- that when he developed the site he tions that had been outlined. would have to comply with the sign Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked if ordinance existing at that time. they were satisfied with the traffic flow and he replied yes Councilmember Bittner asked and said the widening of Redwood when the zoning would take effect Road would facilitate the traffic. and Ms. Jardine said after they Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked had obtained a building permit about the loss of housing and Mr. the zoning would take effect on Eccleston said the people living the entire site. She explained there accepted the developer' s that he had one year to obtain a offer. building permit which could be a permit for one structure, but at Kim Anderson, 768 North that time he would be required to Redwood Road, said he was con- construct the building and put in cerned about lighting past 11 :00 the full landscaped area and curb, p.m. which would affect the neigh- gutter and sidewalk on , 700 North boring condominiums. He also and Redwood Road. expressed concern that this devel- opment would force a commercial Elliott Christensen, McNeil zone on the north side of 700 Engineering, showed the Council a North and said he opposed any 89-97 -mays PROCEEDINGS THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT —.ICE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1989 future commercial zoning on that side of the street. ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Councilmember Fonnesbeck Hardman seconded to close the asked if the neighborhood could public hearing, which motion look at the building plans before carried, all members voted aye. the permit was granted and Ms. Jardine replied that they could Councilmember Stoler moved but she thought the city had dealt and Councilmember Hardman seconded with the issue that concerned the to adopt Ordinance 19 of 1989 community by requiring the land- rezoning the area from C-1 to R- scaping and curb, gutter and 3A, which motion carried, all sidewalk. Councilmember Fonnes- members voted aye. beck also said she thought Mr. Anderson had a legitimate concern DISCUSSION: John Schuman, about the lighting issue. chair of the Planning Commission, Councilmember Fonnesbeck said she briefly outlined the history of would be satisfied if the develop- the zoning for this area. He said er said he would do a courtesy in October of 1985 the Sugar House call back to the neighborhood. Master Plan was adopted and the Planning Commission had recommend Councilmember Bittner said ed that this property be zoned she thought there was a need to from C-3 to R-5, which did not - look at the zoning on the east occur. In 1986 the City Council side of Redwood Road from about changed the zoning from C-3 to C-1 300 North to 700 North and thought and in 1988 a member of the Coun- it was important to have a compre- cil submitted a petition to rezone - hensive idea as to what the city the property from C-1 to R-3A. He wanted to have happen to this said as the Planning Commission property. She said she thought reviewed this recent petition it . that as the Redwood Road widening was evident that with the railroad was completed there would be tracks going through the property, pressure to make the area commer- rather than a zoning change the cial. She said in the past they master plan needed to be revisited - had talked about the possibility in order to consider another of a transitional overlay zone and solution. He asked the Council to she thought the community controls consider this suggestion. built in to that zoning would be effective for this area. She Bill Wright, planning and suggested that if the neighborhood zoning department, outlined the was amenable than perhaps planning area on a map and said the proper- could look at the transitional ty was located between 5th and 6th overlay for that strip of Redwood East and between Wilmington and Road. Stringham Avenues in the Sugar (P 89-92) House Neighborhood. He said the property was currently zoned C-1 #2. RE: A public hearing at and was occupied by commercial 6:30 p.m. to obtain public comment structures and businesses with concerning Petition No. 400-662 railroad tracks which bisected the submitted as a legislative action northern portion of the property. to rezone property located between He said the Planning Commission 500 and 600 East and Wilmington reviewed this rezoning petition on and Stringham Avenues from "C-1" three occasions and ultimately to "R-3A" classification. denied it with a four to three 89-98 PROCEEDINGS Oi THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT L._.E CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1989 vote. He said the minority posi- residential land uses. He said tion of the Planning Commission they would lose the potential for felt the important issue was that medium residential uses if someone if the master plan was to imple- removed an industrial use and ment housing in this area in the replaced it with a new C-1 commer- long term then the city couldn't cial development. "market" the property as commer- cial . He said currently the Councilmember Hardman asked businesses in the area were non- if this was still a target area conforming subsequent to the and Mr. Joyce said yes . zoning change from C-3 to C-1. He Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked how said they would retain the noncon- realistic it was to build residen- forming status no matter what tial units in this area. Mr. action the Council took at the Wright said the Planning Commis- meeting. sion also raised this point but the staff responded that if the Everett Joyce, planning and area wasn't in a residential zone zoning department, said this area now then the city effectively was in the middle of the Sugar wasn't marketing it as residen- House target area plan which was tial. He said the street systems adopted in 1974. He said the serving the area were residential- surrounding neighborhood, from ly designed and not designed for 2100 South to 1-80 and from 500 to heavy commercial traffic, which 700 East, was basically a low- impacted the quality of the neigh- density residential neighborhood borhood. He said this remnant of and said there were 360 housing C-i existed only because of the units - and a population of 900 in rail line. this area. He said the railroad tracks came from the west, went Councilmember Hardman asked through Fairmont Park and serviced how many housing units were on the Granite Furniture; from 700 East property in question. Mr. Wright to Fairmont Park the tracks cut said there were no housing units through residential areas. in the commercial area but said the area on each side of the He said the target area plan property was zoned R-2. Mr. Joyce allowed for the infusion of feder- said the north properties were al money into the area, and single-family homes and duplexes through block grants the city made and there were triplexes, four- money available to preserve the plexes and single-family homes to homes and had also done sidewalk the south. and street repairs. He said the target area plan and the 1986 Mr. Wright referred to envi- master plan both identified this ronmental concerns regarding the area for preservation and elimina- Wasatch Plaza site and said there tion of high commercial industri- were extensive studies done by the al-type uses. He said to mitigate EPA and the State of Utah Health the existing problems the railroad Division in 1985 which determined tracks needed to be removed and that there were some contaminates the zoning needed to be changed. on the site but they were in the process of remedying the "hot He said the planning staff' s spots" . He said they planned to viewpoint was that a C-1 zone remove the contaminated soil and was not appropriate since the city replace it. wouldn't be able to market future 89-99 (:. PROCEEDINGS Oi THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT L E CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1989 Dianna Smoot, chair of the to be replaced in 4 homes and an Sugar House Community Council, apartment across the street. He said they didn' t want this problem mentioned that employees had been in the future, they wanted hous- burning material in an open barrel ing. She envisioned beautifying and at one point the fire got out this area by taking out the tracks of control and they had to call and putting in a bicycle path. the fire department. He said She also said they didn't want to there was also an old underground put anyone out of business but gas tank to the southeast of the wanted to preserve the area for building under the driveway. the future by down zoning it. She said the community council Councilmember Stoler told Mr. accepted this 100%. Daniel he would call the Board of Health again and also said he Alma Edwards, 554 Wilmington, would check to find out if the gas said that his property was within tank had been filled with water. 10 feet of the area in question. He said he was representing many Councilmember Stoler said it citizens and they had fought for 5 was important to rezone because of years to get something done to the possibility of a new business make this area more enjoyable. He that might come in and he reiter- said he opposed the commercial ated that there were many nice, zoning and said because of the well kept homes in the .area. He current businesses, there were indicated that they had tried to chemical problems and noise prob- keep the businesses in Sugar House lems. He asked the Council to grouped together and he was con- give consideration to the resi- cerned that if they didn't rezone dents since they currently suf- the area then they'd eventually fered experiences of discomfort. lose the residential potential plus the homes now in the area Councilmember Fonnesbeck said would become run down. In regard that if the Council changed the to the railroad tracks he indicat- zoning the use wouldn' t change ed that the tracks may not be over night and Mr. Edwards said removed but said the area could be he understood that but it would be landscaped. a step in the right direction. Councilmember -Fonnesbeck Willy Eysser, 530 Wilmington, asked what would happen in regard and Harold Luker, 550 Wilmington, to the toxic waste and trash also opposed the current zone and burning. Mr. Wright said there wanted the area down zoned. had been enforcement by the health department, the building and Charles Daniel, 541 String- housing department had- sent out ham, said he lived next to Henry' s enforcement officers, and a few Industrial Laundry. He expressed cases had gone before the Board of his concern about the toxic chemi- Adjustment. cals used in this business which were stacked outside on the load- Councilmember Stoler said he ing dock. He said he had contact- had a letter from the state which ed the health department about the indicated that they had given the chemicals but had not heard back Wasatch Plaza area a clean bill of from them. He also said the heavy health and they would clean out vibration from washers and dryers the hot spots. ruined the water system so it had (P 88-346) 89-100 • PROCEEDINGS Or THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT L..<E CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1989 #3. RE: A public hearing of franchises and the terms and at 6 :40 p.m. to obtain public conditions thereof, which motion comment concerning and consider carried, all members voted aye. adopting an ordinance amending Title 5 of the Salt Lake City Code DISCUSSION: Rodger Neve, relating to Cable Communications director of administrative servic- by adding a new chapter 5 .21 es, said this issue was discussed providing for the customer service at length over the last several standards of cable franchises; an months and had finally been ordinance amending Title 5 of the brought to a successful conclu- Salt Lake City Code relating to sion. He said this had been a cable communications by adding team effort on the part of the Chapter 5 .20A granting a 15 year, city, and the Council and Mayor non-exclusive franchise to TCI had been very supportive as the Cablevision of Utah, Inc. ; and an city negotiated with the cable TV ordinance amending chapter 5 . 20 of company. He said previously they the Salt Lake City Code relating had a 35-year franchise which was to cable communication; providing passed in 1966 and it was a poor for the granting, renewal and franchise for the city. He said enforcement of franchises and the the cable TV company allowed the terms and conditions thereof. city to redo the existing fran- chise and now the city had the • ACTION: Councilmember most modern and well researched Godfrey moved and Councilmember franchise. He said they had good Horrocks seconded to close the cooperation from TCI, the cable TV = public hearing, which motion company, and he said the city was carried, all members voted aye. at a point to operate better. Councilmember Godfrey moved Councilmember Stoler asked and Councilmember Kirk seconded to about the schedule of rates and adopt Ordinance 20 of 1989 amend- how they were changed. Mr. Neve ing Title 5 by adding a new Chap- said the city didn' t have control ter 5 . 21 providing for the custom- over rates and Bruce Baird, er service standards of cable attorney's office, said that under franchises, which motion carried, the 1986 federal cable TV act, the all members voted aye. only cities which could regulate rates were those where the cable Councilmember Godfrey moved communications company was in a and Councilmember Kirk seconded to monopoly position. He said Salt adopt Ordinance 21 of 1989 amend- Lake City could not regulate rates ing Title 5 by adding Chapter or channel position and said the 5 . 20A granting a 15-year, non- proposed ordinances allowed as • exclusive franchise to TCI Cable- much regulation as possible under vision of Utah, which motion federal statute. carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Stoler asked Councilmember Godfrey moved if the cost to the consumer would and Councilmember Kirk seconded to increase to cover the $70, 000 adopt Ordinance 22 of 1989 amend- franchise fee. A representative ing Chapter 5.20 relating to cable from TCI said the fee was part of communication, providing for the the cost of doing business which granting, renewal and enforcement would be included in the billing. Mr. Baird said Salt Lake City would get a pro rata share of 89-101 PROCEEDINGS G_ THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT _ SCE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1989 every dollar that the cable compa- No one opposed this issue. ny received. He also said this (0 89-8) would be a 15-year franchise with termination and extension provi- sions. He pointed out that they The meeting adjourned at did three separate ordinances so 8:20 p.m. changes could be made more effi- ciently. Councilmember Bittner said COUNCIL CHAIR that supposedly 85% of the calls would be answered within three minutes and asked if there was any way to monitor this. Mr. Baird said they had requirements that CITY RECORDER the company keep logs and monitor- - -- - ing equipment. He said that according to Rodger Neve, the volume of complaints had gone down dramatically since the company voluntarily adopted the standards eight or nine months ago. Councilmember Bittner asked if cable service was available all over the city. Mr. Baird said it • wasn't 100% available yet and Councilmember Kirk asked if they • could find out where cable had not yet been installed. Mr. Baird said that the company was required to give the city a plan of expan- sion and update it so the city would know when cable was moving into new areas. He also said . there was a provision that if there were enough interested subscribers in an area then the company would be obligated to install cable. A TCI representative said they were basically 99% complete with just one or two small pockets still waiting. He said they were concentrating on getting service to those areas. Councilmember Kirk asked if there was any way to know where those pockets were and the TCI representative said he could get her a map. He also thanked the city staff, adminis- trative services and attorney' s office, for their work. 89-102 PROCEEDINGS L THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT .KE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, APRIL 20, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in regular session on Thursday, April 20, 1989, at 5:00 p.m. in Suite 300, City Hall, 324 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Willie Stoler Sydney Fonnesbeck Mayor Palmer DePaulis and Roger Cutler, City Attorney, were absent. Kathryn Marshall, City Recorder, was present. Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting. NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS facilities of IHC Hospitals, Inc. located within the boundaries of #1. RE: Setting a public Salt Lake City Corporation and hearing for Tuesday, May 9, 1989, certain other cities and counties. at 6:00 p.m. to obtain comment concerning the proposed issuance ACTION: Councilmember Bittner of not more than $9, 000,000 in ' moved and Councilmember Kirk Industrial Development Revenue seconded to adopt Resolution 54 of Bonds for Compeq International 1989, which motion carried, all Co. , Ltd. members voted aye. (Q 89-1) ACTION: Councilmember God- frey moved and Councilmember Hard- man seconded to set the date, The meeting adjourned at 5 :05 which motion carried, all members p.m. voted aye except Councilmember Horrocks who was absent for the vote. (Q 89-3) COUNCIL CHAIR UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS #1. RE: A resolution CITY RECORDER authorizing the issuance and confirming the sale of $36,400,000 of Hospital Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1989-A ( IHC Hospitals, Inc. ) to be issued by Salt Lake City Corporation for the purpose of refunding certain revenue bonds previously issued by Salt Lake City Corporation to finance certain health care 89-103 PROCEEDINGS C THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT . SCE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in regular session on Thursday, April 27, 1989 , at 8:00 p.m. in Suite 300, City Hall, 324 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Willie Stoler Sydney Fonnesbeck Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Roger Cutler, City Attorney, and Kathryn Marshall, City Recorder, were absent. Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting. NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS The meeting adjourned at 8 :05 #1. RE: Reconsider adopting p.m. Petition 400-662 submitted as a legislative action to rezone property located between 500 and 600 East and Wilmington and Stringham Avenues from "C-1" to "R-3A" classification. COUNCIL CHAIR ACTION: Councilmember Fonnes- beck moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to reconsider adopting Ordinance 19 of 1989, CITY RECORDER which motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Bittner seconded to reopen the public hearing and set a hearing date for Tuesday, May 16, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. , which motion carried, all members voted aye. (P 88-346) #2. RE: A joint resolution expressing appreciation to Phil Erickson for his work relating to the City/County Building restora- tion. ACTION: Councilmember Fonnes- beck moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to adopt Resolution 56 of 1989, which motion carried, all members voted aye. (R 89-1 ) 89-104 Council Staff 0:0/44/ 276TH BOARD MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY Room 325, City & County Building 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Tuesday, May 2, 1989 5:00 p.m. SPEC I A L MEETING AGE N D A 1. ROLL CALL . 2. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. 3. UNFINISHED BUSINESS . A. Resolution No. 276.1 Authorizing the Acquisition of Real Property by Negotiation or by Condemnation (Parcel No. 12) , and Resolution No. 276.2 Authorizing the Acquisition of Real Property by Negotiation or by Condemnation (Parcel No, 4) . B. Resolution No . 2.76..3 Amending Resolution No. 272.2 Aur .horizing the Acquisition of Real Property by Negotiation or, by Condemnation. 4. ADJOURNMENT. RESOLUTION NO. DATE: MAY , 1989 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY BY NEGOTIATION OR BY CONDEMNATION (PARCEL NO. 12 ) WHEREAS , the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City , hereinafter referred to as "Redevelopment Agency" , is a duly authorized public agency authorized to undertake and carry out redevelopment projects within Salt Lake City, hereinafter referred to as the "City" , and under the provisions of the Utah Neighborhood Development Act, as amended; and WHEREAS , the Redevelopment Agency and the governing body of the City have adopted a redevelopment plan en- titled "C.B . D. Neighborhood Development Plan, " encompassing a portion of the City; and WHEREAS , the legislative body of the City has determined that the project area is a blighted area as defined by statute and that it is desirable and in the public interest to undertake and carry out the acquisition of the real property within the project area ; and WHEREAS , the Redevelopment Agency has obtained the services of independent and qualified appraisers to appraise real property within the project area, and after reviewing the appraisals , the Agency has determined that the fee title interest in said property ownd by Harver Company, Inc , , less the value of the leasehold interest, has a fair market value of $1 , 561 , 050 . 00 less the payment of any outstanding liens or encumbrances . The Agency has also determined that the leasehold interest held by S .M. Horman & Sons in the property has a fair market value of $438 , 950 . 00 , less the payment of any outstanding liens or encumbrances; and WHEREAS , the Redevelopment Agency desires to submit an offer to the owners or purchasers of record to purchase , by negotiation, the fee title and leasehold interest to that certain described real property or interest in real property which the Redevelopment Agency seeks to acquire at the fair market price of $ 1 , 561 , 050 . 00 for the fee title interest and $438 ,950 , 00 for the leasehold interest , or in the event that said written offer is rejected by the owners or pur_ ctaers of record, the Agency shall acquire the property . mi_nent domain pursuant to law ; and WHEREAS , the parcel of real property which is sought by the Redevelopment Agency is described as follows , to-wit: PARCEL 12A: Commencing at a point 29 1/2 feet North of the Southeast corner of Lot 7 , Block 57 , Plat "A" , Salt Lake City Survey; and running thence West 10 rods; thence North 34 1/2 feet; thence East 10 rods ; thence South 34 1/2 feet to the place of Beginning . Together with a right of way over a 12 foot alley known as Victoria Alley adjoining said premises on the North and running West from State Street. PARCEL 12B : Commencing 64 feet North and 165 feet West of the Southeast corner of Lot 7 , Block 57 , Plat. "A" , Salt Lake City Survey; and running thence West 165 feet; thence South 34 . 5 feet; thence East 165 feet; thence North 34 . 5 feet to the place of Beginning . Together with a right of way over the following described property, to-wit: Commencing at a point 64 feet North of the Southeast corner of said Lot 7 , and running thence West 330 feet ; thence North 12 feet; thence East 330 feet; thence South 12 feet to the place of Beginning . Excepting therefrom that interest conveyed to Utah Power and Light Company by Warranty Deed recorded March 2 , 1965 , as Entry No. 2054231 , in Book 2297 , at Page 583 , of Salt Lake County Records , more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of the Grantor ' s land which point is 65 feet North, more or less, from the Southwest corner of Lot 7 , Block 57 , Plat "A" , Salt Lake City Survey; thence South 89 °.51 ' 43 " East 15 feet; • thence South 0°08 ' 17 " W,' fl feet ; thence North 89 °51 ' 43" West 1 ' hence North 0 °08 ' 17" East 30 feet to the point of Beginning. PARCEL 12C : Commencing at a point 16 inches East of the Southwest corner of Lot 1 , Block 57 , Plat "A" , Salt Lake City Survey ; and running thence East 97 feet 8 inches; thence North 272. 25 feet; thence East 66 feet; thence North 87 . 25 feet; thence West 165 feet to the West line of Lot 7 of the aforesaid Block 57, thence South along the West lines of Lots 7 and 8 194 . 50 feet ; thence East 16 inches; thence South 165 feet to the point of Beginning . NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency that the Redevelop- ment Agency is authorized to purchase by negotiation from the owners or purchasers of fee title and leasehold interests in said parcel of real property herein above-described, at the purchase price of $1 , 561 , 050 . 00 for the fee title interest and $438 ,950 . 00 for the leasehold interest, free and clear of all outstanding liens or encumbrances . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in the event that the owners or purchasers of record reject the Agency ' s offer to purchase after a reasonable period of time set forth in the offer , the Redevelopment Agency, through its Legal Counsel is authorized to undertake condemnation action to acquire , in the name of the Redevelopment Agency, fee title to the above-described real property or interest in real property in accordance with the statutes relating to eminent domain, and , if necessary, to make application in the Court having jurisdiction for an Order of Immediate Occupancy permitting the Redevelopment Agency to take immediate possession of the identified parcel of real property or interest therein for redevelopment purposes . OWNERS OF RECORD Fee Title Interest Owner Harver Company , Inc . c/o Tracy Collins Bank & Trust P. 0. Box 90 • Salt Lake C i LT 84111 Leasehold Interest Owner S .M . Horman S .M . Horman & Sons 1760 South State Street Salt Lake City, UT 84115 DATED this day of May, 1989 . Palmer DePaulis Chief Administrative Officer Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City Michael R. Chitwood Executive Director Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City - 4 - �'J.< COIh\ RESOLUTION NO. DATE : MAY , 1989 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY BY NEGOTIATION OR BY CONDEMNATION (PARCEL NO. 4 ) WHEREAS , the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City , hereinafter referred to as "Redevelopment Agency" , is a duly authorized public agency authorized to undertake and carry out redevelopment projects within Salt Lake City, hereinafter referred to as the "City" , and under the provisions of the Utah Neighborhood Development Act, as amended ; and WHEREAS , the Redevelopment Agency and the governing body of the City have adopted a redevelopment plan en- titled "C.B . D. Neighborhood Development Plan , " encompassing a portion of the City; and WHEREAS, the legislative body of the City has determined that the project area is a blighted area as defined by statute and that it is desirable and in the public interest to undertake and carry out the acquisition of the real property within the project area ; and WHEREAS , the Redevelopment Agency has obtained the services of independent and qualified appraisers to appraise real property within the project area, and after reviewing the appraisals , the Agency has determined that the fee title interest in said property has a fair market value of $2, 800 , 000 . 00 , less the payment of any outstanding liens or encumbrances; and WHEREAS , the Redevelopment Agency desires to submit an offer to the owner or purchaser of record to purchase, by negotiation, the fee title to that certain described real property or interest in real property which the Re- development Agency seeks to acquire at the fair market price of $2 , 800 , 000. 00, or in the event that said written offer is rejected by the owner or purchaser of record , the Agency shall acquire the property by eminent domain pursuant to law; and WHEREAS , the parcel of real property which is sought by the Redevelopment Agency is described as follows , to-wit : PARCEL 4A: Beginning 32 feet South of the Northwest corner of Lot 3 , Block 57 , Plat "A" , Salt Lake City Survey ; and running thence North 58 1/2 feet; thence East 270 feet; thence North 26 1/2 feet; thence East 60 feet; thence South 117 feet; thence West 165 feet; thence North 32 feet; thence West 165 feet to the point of Beginning . Together with and subject to a right of way over: Beginning 27 feet South of the Northwest corner of said Lot 3 , and running thence East 165 feet ; thence South 10 feet; thence West 165 feet; thence North 10 feet to the point of Beginning. Together with a right of way, the centerline of which is described as follows: Commencing 26 . 5 feet North and 180 . 5 feet East of the Southwest corner of Lot 4 , Block 57 , Plat "A" , Salt Lake City Survey ; and running thence North 24 . 0 feet; thence East 149 . 5 feet, more or less to an existing alley way. The right of way shall be five (5 ) feet in width along the North-South course of the above described center line and shall be five ( 5) feet in width along the East-West course of the above described center line , the Westerly 47 feet of right of way to be on the roof of a one story building . PARC I L 4B : Beginning at the Southwest corner Of Lot 3 , B1ck 57 , Plat "A" , Salt Lake City Survey; and running thence North 49 feet 11 inches ; thence East 330 feet; thence South 49 feet 11 inches ; thence West 330 feet to the place of Beginning. Together with a right of way over, upon and across a strip of land described as follows: - 2 - Beginning at a point 49 feet 11 inches North of the Southwest corner of the above said Lot 3 , Block 57 , Plat "A" , Salt Lake City Survey ; and running thence North 9 feet 10 inches ; thence East 239 feet 4 . 8 inches ; thence South 9 feet 10 inches ; thence West 239 feet 4 . 8 inches to the point of Beginning . PARCEL 4C : Beginning at a point 54 feet 10 inches North and 239 feet 4 . 8 inches East of the Southwest corner of Lot 3 , Block 57 , Plat "A" , Salt Lake City Survey; and running thence North 46 feet 2 inches; thence East 90 feet 7 . 2 inches; thence South 51 feet 1 inch; thence West 90 feet 7 .2 inches ; thence North 4 feet 11 inches to the point of Beginning . PARCEL 4D: Commencing at a point 16 inches East of the Southwest corner of Lot 1 , Block 57 , Plat "A" , Salt Lake City Survey; and running thence North 165 feet; thence West 82 . 53 feet; thence South 165 feet ; thence East 82 . 53 feet to the place of Beginning . PARCEL 4E : Beginning at a point 26 . 5 feet North 0 °07 ' 28" East and 250 . 0 feet East of the Southwest corner of Lot 4 , Block 57 , Plat "A" , Salt Lake City Survey; and running thence North 0 °07 ' 28 " East 26 . 5 feet; thence East 20 . 0 feet; thence South 0°07 ' 28" West 26 . 5 feet ; thence West 20 . 0 feet to the point of Beginning. Together with a right of way the center line of which is described as follows : Commencing 26 . 5 feet North and 180 . 5 feet East of the Southwest corner of Lot 4 , Block 57 , Plat "A" , Salt Lake City Survey ; and running thence North 24 . 0 feet; thence East 149 . 5 feet , more or less to an existing alley way. The right of way shall be five ( 5 ) feet in width along the North-South - 3 - course of the above described center line and shall be five ( 5 ) feet in width along the East-West course of the above described center line , the Westerly 47 feet of right of way to be on the roof of a one story building. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency that the Redevelop- ment Agency is authorized to purchase by negotiation from the owner or purchaser of fee title in said parcel of real property herein above-described , at the purchase price of $2 , 800 , 000. 00 , free and clear of all outstanding liens or encumbrances . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in the event that the owner or purchaser of record reject the Agency ' s offer to purchase after a reasonable period of time set forth in the offer , the Redevelopment Agency, through its Legal Counsel is authorized to undertake condemnation action to acquire , in the name of the Redevelopment Agency, fee title to the above-described real property or interest in real property in accordance with the statutes relating to eminent domain, and, if necessary, to make application in the Court having jurisdiction for an Order of Immediate Occupancy permitting the Redevelopment Agency to take immediate possession of the identified parcel of real property or interest therein for redevelopment purposes . OWNER OF RECORD S .M. Horman & Sons Company 1760 South State Street Salt Lake City, UT 84115 DATED this day of May, 1989 . Palmer_ DePaulis Chief Administrative Officer Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City Michael R. Chitwood Executive Director Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City - 4 • SALT.LAKE CITY CORPORATION TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING • 333 SOUTH 200 EAST, SUITE 201 PUBLIC OR AS DIRECTOR OR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841,171' TIMOTHY P. HARPST, P.E. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR !y CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER .(801). 35-6630 March 9, 1989 Mayor Palmer DePaulis 5th Floor — City Hall RE : Street Light Installations along Redwood Road from North Temple Street to 1000 ki.e-s-tj Mo-ch Dear Mayor DePaulis : I recommend approval of the attached agreement between the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) and Salt Lake City Corporation to install new street lighting facilities along Redwood Road from North Temple to 1000_North . The City will gain approval from UDOT to pu hrc ase materials and install the street light units or will cause others to do so , using monies from the Transportation Division ' s capital street lighting account . UDOT will reimburse the City for actual costs incurred up to a maximum of $25 , 000 . 00 within 60 days of receipt of bill incurred . The reimbursement shall be placed back into the Transportation Division ' s capital street lighting account . Upon completion the City will own said lights and all appurtenances associated with said light units and will arrange for electrical power and renew said street light units and appurtenances at no cost to UDOT . Sincerely , '544.141 R Joseph R . Anderson Public Works Director WSM/ lh 0 cc : Timothy P . Harpst /7%0 t CONTRACT R0UTatidkG-'1F R 18 1989 F1AR l 1989 ncr;�: REQUESTING DEPARTMENT: SLC PUBLIC WORKS-TRANSPORTATION Div. gii,A.NGppSISION DEPARTMENTAL CONTACT: W. Steve Meyer - Deputy Transportaion Engineer SUBJECT: Agreement for installation of street lights along Redwood Road from North Temple to 1000 West SIGNATURE: ).1k21.,ciallt 3 / 1 / $9 YES I NO Number of Executed Documents Required: 16 Insurance Required Expected Contract Completion Date: Insurance Attached e -9 c/ 7 �{ Funds Avai;eble _France Department FINANCE COMMENTS: ©i eum&ered� ey Account Number: 83_evg33.-27t 25,Ja.gZ ATTORNEY COMMENTS: APP?_OVEf A5 TO FORM Salt Lek city Attorney's Mee .. Delta ,__4///g/gt7 _ /0 - RECORDER COMMENTS: returned to on (contact or dept. ) (date) SALTLAKE CAW CORPORATION' TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 333 SOUTH 200 EAST, SUITE 201 JOSEPH R. ANDERSON TIMOTHY P. HARPST, P. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SALT LAKE_CITY, UTAH 8414,1 E. -.. CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER : (801)_535-6630 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL DATE : March 9 , 1980 RE : Agreement between the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) and Salt Lake City Corporation to install new street lights along Redwood Road between North Temple and 1000 North , RECOMMENDATION : The City Council approve the agreement AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS : The cost to purchase and install the street lights will be paid out of the Transportation Division ' s capital street lighting account which will be reimbursed up to a maximum of $25 , 000 . 00 by UDOT after completion of the project . The cost of electrical power will be paid out of the Transportation Division ' s street lighting electrical power account . DISCUSSION : The approval of this agreement will result in UDOT reimbursing Salt Lake City Corporation for the installation and materials . Upon completion UDOT will reimburse Salt Lake City Corp . within 60 days of receipt of incurred bills with the money to be placed back into the Transportation Division ' s capital street lighting account . Salt Lake City Corporation will own said lights and all appurtenances associated with said light units and will arrange for electrical power and renew said street light units and appurtenances at no cost to UDOT . SUBMITTED BY : Joseph R. Anderson -- Public Works Director C TPH/ lh 1'. SALT`LAKE CITY' CORPORATION TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 333 SOUTH 200 EAST, SUITE 201 JOSEPHUBLICR. AS DIRECTON OR ` SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 8411,1 TIMOTHY P. HARPST, P.E. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR - -- CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER (801)-535-6630 ' March 9 , 1989 Roger Cutler City Attorney 5th Floor - City Hall THRU : Joseph R . Anderson - Public Works Director RE : SLC/UDOT Cooperative Agreement for Installation of Street Lights along Redwood Road from North Temple to 1000 West, Dear Roger : Please review the attached agreement and Resolution . This agreement allows Salt Lake City to install new street lighting along Redwood Road from North Temple to 1000 North and be reimbursed by the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) . Salt Lake City Corp . will use monies from the Transportation Division ' s capital street lighting budget to complete the work . When the work is completed UDOT will reimburse Salt Lake City within 60 days of receipt of itemized bills , up to a maximum of $25 , 000 . 00 which will then be placed back into the Transportation Division capital street lighting budget account . Following your review we will route the agreement to Joseph Anderson , Public Works Director , and then to the Mayor and City Council for approval . Sincerely , �f iw✓ . Timothy P . Harpst , P . E . City Transportation Engineer / lh cc : W . Steve Meyer File RESOLUTION NO . OF 1989 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 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 : An agreement between the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT ) and Salt Lake City Corporation wherein the Utah Department of Transportation and Salt Lake City desire to install new street lighting facilities under Authority No . 9853 , along Redwood Road ( SR-68) from North Temple to 1000 Nnrth Street in Salt Lake City . The City will gain approval from UDOT to purchase materials and install the street light units or will cause others to do so . UDOT will reimburse the City for actual costs incurred up to a maximum of $25 , 000 . 00 . Upon completion the City will own said lights and all appurtenances associated with said light units and will arrange for electrical power , and renew said street light units and appurtenances at no cost to UDOT . 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 , 1989 . SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL BY: CHAIRPERSON ATTEST : APPROVED AS TO FORM Saif Lake fy _Attorney's Office CITY RECORDER Date . -1!' ' y.t" ua� State of Utah Transportation on Sa Samuel J.Taylor Samuel J.Taylor Chairman Wayne S.Winters UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Vice Chairman Norman H.Bangerter Governor R.Lavaun Cox 4501 South 2700 West Eugene H Findlay.C.P.A. Todd G.Weston Salt Lake City,Utah 841 19-5998 Execuuse Director James G.Larkin er.P.E. 8011-965-4000 Gene Sturzenegger. Elva H.Anderson Assistant Dirrctar &r retary February 7, 1989 Salt Lake City Corporation Transportation Engineering 333 South 2nd East Salt Lake City, UT 84111 ATTENTION: TIM HARPST SUBJECT: Street Lighting; Salt Lake County Redwood Road (SR-68) from North Temple to 10th North Street. Salt Lake City Corporation Authority No. 9853 Gentlemen: Attached are four copies of our proposed agreement between the Utah Department of Transportation and Salt Lake City Corporation on the above noted project. Please review this agreement. If you find it satisfactory for the purposes intended, please have the proper officials execute three copies and return them to this office for our further handling. A copy of the fully executed agreement will be furnished when available. Yours truly, oel S. Hall, P. E. Engineering Coordinator JSH/ESumsion/vs Attachments an equal opportunity employer • Street Lighti Salt Lake County Redwood Road ( R-68) from North Temple to 10th North Street. Salt Lake City Corporation Authority No. 9853 W-0526 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 198 , by and between the UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Party of the First Part, hereinafter referred to as the "UDOT" and SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Utah, Party of the Second Part, hereinafter referred to as the "City", WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to install new street lighting facilities under Authority No. 9853, along Redwood Road (SR-68) from North Temple to 10th North Street in Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared plans, specifications, and estimates of cost to cover the work herein; and WHEREAS, the City will gain UDOT' s approval of said plans and will then proceed to purchase materials and install the street light units or will cause others to do so. Said approved plans by this reference are made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the UDOT will reimburse the City for their actual costs incurred up to a maximum of $25,000.00; and WHEREAS, the UDOT has determined by formal finding that payment for said work on public right-of-way is not in violation of the laws of the State or any legal contract with the City; and WHEREAS, any relocation work not performed under the highway contractor's signing, flagging and safety measures will be accomplished in accordance with the provisions of the "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices" by certified City personnel. THIS AGREEMENT is made to set out the terms and conditions whereunder said work shall be performed. NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. The City, with its regular engineering and construction forces at its standard schedule of wages and working hours and in accordance with the terms of its agreement with such employees, or through qualified contractors with whom it has continuing contracts, shall perform the necessary field and office engineering, furnish all materials and perform - 1 - Street Light' ; Salt Lake County Redwood Road k6R-68) from North Temple to 10th North Street. Salt Lake City Corporation Authority No. 9853 W-0526 the construction work covered herein. In the performance of said work the City will adhere to the procedures and specifications contained in UDOT's "REGULATIONS FOR THE ACCOMMODATION OF UTILITIES ON FEDERAL-AID AND NON-FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY RIGHTS-OF-WAY," a copy of which has been furnished to the City and any supplements or amendments thereto. The City shall not perform any construction until authorized in writing by the UDOT. 2. The City will notify UDOT's Safety Design Engineer, telephone no. 965-4264 prior to performing any work covered herein. 3. An estimate of cost in the amount of $23,954.02 was furnished to the UDOT by the City under the date of November 17, 1987. The details of said estimate follow: ITEM QTY DESCRIPTION UNIT COST TOTAL COST A 20 COST FOR NEW $530 . 00 $10600 . 00 POLE AND FIXTURE B 14 COST FOR FIXTURE $350 . 00 $4900 . 00 ON EXISTING POLE C SUBTOTAL $15500 . 00 D 1 VEHICLE 12% OF C $1860 . 00 E SUBTOTAL $17360 . 00 F 1 ENGINEERING 12% OF E $2083 . 20 G SUBTOTAL $19443 . 20 H 1 OVERHEAD 12% OF G $2333 . 18 I SUBTOTAL $21776 . 38 J 1 10% MARGIN 10% OF I $2177. 64 K GRANDTOTAL $23954. 02 - TOTAL ESTIMATED COST TO UDOT IS $23,954.02. NOTE: The above is an estimation of costs only. The UDOT will reimburse the City for actual costs incurred up to a maximum amount of $25,000.00. The City will be responsible for any cost in excess of said $25,000.00 amount. - 2 - Street Light ,; Salt Lake County Redwood Road (SR-68) from North Temple to 10th North Street. Salt Lake City Corporation Authority No. 9853 W-0526 4. The UDOT will reimburse the City within sixty (60) days after receipt of itemized bills in six (6) copies bearing the project number together with supporting sheets therefor, covering the costs incurred by the City for performing the work required under the terms of this agreement. Said itemized bills covering said work shall be submitted by the City within one hundred twenty (120) days following completion of the work to: UDOT Safety Division, UDOT/DPS Complex, 4501 South 2700 West, Salt Lake City, Utah 84119, Attention: Engineer for Traffic and Safety. All bills shall be reviewed by UDOT's Safety Design Engineer for verification of the work performed. Any work performed without proper notification to UDOT's Safety Design Engineer's office shall be cited to the City and deducted from the reimbursement. 5. Upon completion of construction, the City will own the luminaire light units, wiring to the light units and all appurtenances associated with said light units and will arrange for electrical hookup and will thereafter maintain, provide electrical power, and renew said street light units and appurtenances at no cost to the UDOT. 6 . It is understood that access for maintenance and servicing of the City's property located on right-of-way of said project will be permitted only by permit issued by the UDOT to the City, and that the City will obtain said permit and abide by conditions thereof for policing and other controls in conformance with UDOT' s "REGULATIONS FOR THE ACCOMMODATION OF UTILITIES ON FEDERAL-AID AND NON-FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY RIGHTS-OF-WAY," a copy of which has been furnished to the City and any supplements or amendments thereto. - 3 - Street Lighting Salt Lake County Redwood Road (Sn--68) from North Temple to 10th North Street. Salt Lake City Corporation Authority No. 9853 W-0526 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be executed by its duly authorized officers as of the day and year first above written. ATTEST: SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, A Municipal Corporation in the State of Utah. By Title Title (IMPRESS SEAL) ********************************** **************************************** ATTEST: UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION By Secretary Director RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: FUNDS AVAILABLE: Engineer for Preconstruction Budget Officer Date APPROVED: Engineering Coordinator APPROVED AS TO FORM: • R. PAUL VAN DAM, ATTORNEY GENERAL Director of Finance By Sall APPROVED AS TO FORM Lake C Assistant Attorney General �� Attorney's OM.. Fig �, Enr rr'Erard - 4 - ��� DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CRAIG E. PETERSON 324 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 201 DIRECTOR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 535-7777 To: Salt Lake City Council April 6, 1989 RE: Technical amendments to the City's Floodplain Ordinance Recommendation: That the City Council hold a public hearing on June 6, 1989 at 6:30 p.m. to discuss technical amendments to Salt Lake City's Floodplain Ordinance. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Background and Discussion: An assessment was made of Salt Take City's floodplain hazard ordinance by the Natural and Technological Hazards Division and they recommended some minor changes to our ordinance. The changes will assure Salt Lake City's participation in the National Flood Insurance Program. The Planning Commission has reviewed and approved the proposed changes. The appropriate City Department have also reviewed and approved the proposed changes. Legislative Documents: The City Attorney's Office had prepared and approved the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. Submitted by: �' CRAIG E. PETERSON Director lf/ SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. 1989 (Technical amendments to the City' s floodplain ordinance required by FEMA. ) AN ORDINANCE MAKING CERTAIN TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 68 OF TITLE 18 DEALING WITH FLOODPLAIN HAZARD PROTECTION PURSUANT TO REQUIREMENTS OF THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM OF THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY. WHEREAS, the City needs to make certain technical amendments to its floodplain hazard protection ordinance to comply with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program; THEREFORE, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, hereby adopts the following amendments to Chapter 68 of Title 18. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Section 18. 68.020 is amended by adding a new Subsection 30 as follows: 18. 68.020(30) "Lowest Floor" means the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area ( including basement ) . An unfinished or flood restraint enclosure, usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage, in an area other than a basement area, is not considered a building' s lowest floor, provided that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the applicable non-elevation design requirements of this ordinance. SECTION 2. That Section 18. 68. 100(b) is amended to read as follows: 18. 68 . 100( b) All new construction and substantial improvements of residential structures within the floodplain hazard area shall have the lowest floor ( including basement) , elevated to or above the base flood elevation. SECTION 3 . This ordinance shall take effect on the date of its first publication. 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 -2- ALLEN C. JOHNSON wSALT RIP° h� � MEMBERS: PLANNING DIRECTOR NANCY K. PACE, CHAIRMAN BRENT B. WILDE DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ROBHRT LEWIS ZONING ADMINISTRATOR Board of Adjustment on Zoning DOROIHY PLESHE PETER VAN ALSTYNE GEORGINA DUFOUR 324 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 200 I. J. WAGNER SECRETARY SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 ALTERNATES: 535-7757 FAUN O. HANSEN W. KENT MONEY March 14, 1989 Craig E. Peterson, Director Department of Development Services 324 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Floodplain Ordinance Amendment. Dear Craig: Attached is the background information relating to a proposed amendment to the City ' s Floodplain Hazard Regulations, chapter 18. 68. This amendment is in response to a letter received from the Federal Emergency Management Agency ( LEMA ) , To summarize : - FEMA initially contacted the city on November 15th, 1988 requesting the changes be made ( see Attachment A ) . - The City ' s current Floodplain Hazard Protection Ordinance, Chapter 18. 68, was sent to Mr . Doug Gore, with FEMA Denver office, for review during the second week of January. - An assessment was made of Salt Lake City ' s Floodplain Hazard Protection Ordinance by Jerome M. Olson and Doug Gore from the Natural and Technological Hazards Division which stated that minor changes were needed to he made in the City ' s Ordinance. Please refer to the January 20, 1989 response letter ( Attachment B ) . A policy statement on the term "Lowest Floor" was also sent by FEMA ( Attachment C ) . - Several departments were contacted for comments on the proposed amendment including Building and Housing Services, Permits and Zoning, Planning Department, Heritage Foundation, City-County Health Department, Assist Inc. , Neighborhood Housing Services, Redevelopment. Agency, Housing Authority. - A staff report was prepared February 21, 1989. ( Attachment D ) - The Planning Commission met on March 9, 1989 and made a motion to approve the proposed amendment ( Attachment E - minutes ). The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council hold a public hearing for this ordinance amendment. The Planning Commission and staff anticipate no adverse impacts of the ordinance amendment and the changes will assure the City s continued participation in the National Flood Insurance Program. The date has been extended from May 1st to June 19, 1989 for final adoption of these changes into the City " s ordinance. The two proposed changes are outlined in the February 21 staff report recommendation. Respectfully Submitted, r Allen C. Johnson, AICP Planning Director attachment A cY M4 ^ r, 0� Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VIII (:>V• " ' 1�� Denver Federal Center, Building 710 0 Box 25267 Denver, CO 80225-0267 November 15, 1988 The Honorable Palmer DePaulis Mayor, City of Salt Lake City 324 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Dear Mayor DePaulis : On October 1 , 1986 , the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) implemented several revisions to its regulations. Prior to that date , a letter was sent to you as your community ' s 'Executive Official indicating what changes were needed and the deadline for adoption. Our records indicate that your community has not yet adopted these revisions, and we are offering our assistance to ensure your community' s regulatory compliance with the NFIP. Your community is required, as a condition of continued eligibility in the NFIP, to adopt or show evidence of adoption of floodplain management regulations that meet the standards of Section 60 . 3 (d) of the enclosed NFIP regulations (44 CFR 59 , etc . ) . These standards are the minimum requirements and do not supersede any State or local requirements of a more stringent nature . Standards specified in Section 60 . 3 (d) of the NFIP regulations must be enacted in a legally enforceable document. Some of the standards should already have been enacted by your community in order to establish initial eligibility in the NFIP. Your community can meet any additional requirements by taking one of the following actions: 1 . Amend your existing local floodplain management ordinance to incorporate any new regulations adopted to meet the additional requirements of Section 60 . 3 (d) . 2 . Adopt all of the standards of Section 60 . 3 (d) into one new, comprehensive set of regulations (model ordinance enclosed) ; or, 3 . Show evidence that regulations have previously been adopted that meet or exceed the minimum requirements of Section 60 . 3 (d) . 2 Communities that fail to enact the necessary floodplain management regulations will be suspended from participation in the NFIP and subject to the prohibitions contained in Section 202 (a) of the 1973 Act, as amended. To expedite your community' s adoption of a compliant ordinance , you may adopt the enclosed model ordinance which contains all of the minimum requirements of the NFIP. If, however, your community elects to amend its current ordinance rather than adopt a new one, an ordinance assistance packet is being provided Mr. Alan Johnson. This packet will include a copy of our model ordinance, current NFIP regulations, an itemization of all October 1 , 1986 regulatory revisions , and a paper describing the two regulatory options for manufactured (formerly referred to as mobile) homes located in an existing manufactured home park or subdivision. We request that a draft copy of your community ' s ordinance be sent to our office prior to adoption so we may review it and determine whether or not it meets NFIP requirements: To ensure your community' s continued participation in the NFIP, a compliant floodplain management ordinance must be adopted by May 1 , 1989 . If we can be of assistance in the preparation of your community ' s floodplain management ordinance, please contact Mr. Doug Gore at (303) 235-4830 . Sincerely, Jer mo e M. Olson, Chie Natural and Technological Hazards Division cc : Mr . Alan Johnson, Ping. Dir. , w/enclosures Mrs. Lorayne Frank, CEM .,„cs me", attachment B w* IFederal Emergency Management Agency Region VIII \r;>,iy o° Denver Federal Center, Building 710 Box 25267 Denver, CO 80225-0267 January 20 , 1989 Mr. Allen McCandless Environmental Planner Salt Lake City Corporation 324 South State Street Fifth Floor, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Dear Mr. McCandless: Thank you for your letter of January 1 , 1989 to Mr. Doug Gore of this office requesting our review of Salt Lake City' s floodplain management ordinance. While we find the ordinance addresses the latest requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) , relating to manufactured homes etc. ; an amendment is necessary for correcting past discrepancies. Once the amendment is received, Salt Lake City ' s participation will be continued. The issue in question relates to City standards for residential , floodplain construction. Section 18 . 68 . 100 B of the City' s ordinance states , "All new construction and substantial improvements of residential structures within the floodplain hazard area shall have the lowest floor (including basement) , if habitable , elevated to or above the base flood elevation. " C The phrase , "if habitable , " is inconsistent with part 60 . 3 D of the enclosed NFIP regulations and should be deleted 7 In addition, since the term "lowest floor" can be misunderstood, we are ,-, providing our policy statement on this issue and recommend the following definition be incorporated into the definition section (18 . 68 . 020) of the City ' s ordinance "Lowest floor" means the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement) . An unfinished or flood resistant enclosure, usable solely for parking of vehicles , building access or storage , in an area other than a basement area, is not considered a building' s lowest floor, provided that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the applicable non-elevation design requirements of this ordinance. 2 We appreciate your interest in the NFIP. Please contact Mr. Doug Gore of this office at (303) 235-4830 if we can be of assistance. Sincerely, Jerom M. Olson, Chief Natural and Technological Hazards Division Enclosures cc: Mrs. Lorayne Frank, CEM attachment C ��9 - Federal Emergency Management Agency :c� �� 1 7a �` `l'�1C` 1 Region VIII Denver Federal Center P.O. Box 25267 '?y 0 . 0 1 Denver, CO 80225-0267 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM POLICY STATEMENT: Use of the term "Lowest Floor " Clarification of the "lowest floor" issue can best be provided by distinguishing between lowest floor determinations for flood plain management purposes, and those necessary for flood insurance rating purposes. The distinction is important more from the standpoint that the concept of lowest floor serves two related, but functionally different components of the National Flood Insurance Program ( NFIP ) and not because significant definitional differences exist between the two. For flood plain management purposes, the term "lowest floor" is used to define the lowest level of a building which must be located at or above the 100-year flood elevation ( also called the base flood level) . Communities which participate in the NFIP must require that new construction comply with this standard in accordance with the requirements of 44 CFR 60 . 3 . NFIP flood plain management policy requires that all floor levels of a building , except those exclusively used for parking of vehicles ( i . e . garage) , limited storage, or building access ( i . e . stairs , elevator shafts, etc. ) must be elevated to or above the base flood elevation. Thus, for example, any floor level equipped for such uses as a kitchen; dining, living, family or recreation room; bedroom, bathroom; office, professional studio or commercial occupancy, may not be permitted below the base flood elevation. Basements ( i . e. those enclosures with floor levels completely below ground level ) are never permitted below the base flood elevation, unless an exception has been granted to the community by FEMA ( ref . 44 CFR 60 . 6 (b) ) . The allowance of certain reasonable uses below the base flood elevation, such as parking of vehicles, is permitted because the amount of damage caused by flooding to these areas can easily be kept to a minimum by following design and construction requirements contained in the NFIP regulations. The conditions outlined below must be met whenever such enclosed space ( i. e. used for parking of vehicles, storage, or building access) is located below the base flood elevation. Failure to meet these requirements can increase the structure 's damage potential and result in application of higher insurance premiums. These requirements include: • 1. No machinery or equipment which service a building such as furnaces, air conditioners, heat pumps , hot water heaters, washers, dryers, elevator lift equipment, electrical junction and circuit breaker boxes, and food freezers, are permitted below the base flood elevation; and 2 . All interior wall, floor and ceiling materials located below the base flood elevation must be unfinished and resistant to flood damage; and 3 . The walls of any enclosed area below the base flood elevation must be constructed in a manner to prevent flotation, collapse, and lateral movement of the structure . Note from item ( 1) above that machinery and equipment are not necessarily prohibited from an entire enclosed area, but only from that portion which is located below the base flood elevation. Machinery and equipment can often be raised above the base flood elevation on pedestals or platforms within these enclosed areas . Item ( 2 ) is meant to exclude use of materials and finishings which are normally associated with living areas constructed above the base flood elevation. However , materials and finishings which are necessary to meet applicable fire resistant codes are permitted. Item ( 3 ) is intended to address structural integrity considerations , since these walled areas are subject to external loading from a wide range of flood inundation levels. These standards apply to all flood plain construction and are required under 44 CFR 60 . 3 (a) ( 3 ) ( l) . These particular requirements are intended to be "performance" oriented, as opposed to standards which provide detailed written specifications for design and materials . Performance oriented standards tend to allow greater flexibility in choice of design and materials, and in many instances, allow lower construction costs. In order to meet the requirements of 44 CFR 60 . 3 ( a) ( 3 ) ( i) , the walls of an enclosed area below flood elevation, such as a garage, must be designed and constructed to prevent buildup of flood loads which could result in foundation failure or damage. For most residential construction, this becomes a necessary design consideration where expected flood depths above grade exceed one foot . In these cases, the enclosure should be designed to minimize the buildup of flood loads by allowing water to automatically enter into, flow through ( in higher velocity) , and drain from the enclosed area. The manner in which this is accomplished can vary depending on the type of flood conditions possible at the building site . For example, under low velocity conditions this may be accomplished simply by a series of small vents, louvers, or valves which permit the level of floodwaters inside the enclosed area to match rising and falling flood levels on the outside of the building. - 2 - For fully enclosed areas , balance of internal and external water pressure is controlled by size and placement of the openings. NFIP flood plain management regulations 44 CFR 60 . 3 ( c) ( 5 ) require, for all new construction and substantial improvements, that fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flooding shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwaters. Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect or meet or exceed the following minimum criteria: A minimum of two openings having a total net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding shall be provided. The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade. Openings may be _equipped with screens, louvers, valves, or other coverings or devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of floodwaters . From an insurance rating standpoint , a determination of a structure ' s " lowest floor " level provides a mechanism for defining a structure ' s exposure to risk , and thus permits application of appropriate actuarial rates. With the exception of only one rating category, as further explained below, the floor level described as a structure ' s "lowest floor" for rating purposes would be consistent with that required for flood plain management purposes under 44 CFR 60 . 3 . For insurance rating purposes, placement of an enclosure, such as a garage, below the base flood elevation would not result in the garage floor becoming the structure ' s " lowest floor " level, as long as certain design considerations are met . These considerations are explained both in the Flood Insurance Agent ' s workbook and FEMA ' s elevation certification form as follows: The floor of an unfinished enclosed area at ground level or above, which is a crawl space, or space within the foundation walls, useable as areas for building maintenance, access, parking vehicles , or storing of articles and maintenance equipment ( not machinery or equipment attached to the building ) used in connection with the premises is not considered the building ' s lowest floor ( emphasis added) if the walls of the unfinished enclosed areas are constructed with openings ( such as with parallel sheer walls, open lattice walls, discontinuous foundation walls, or combinations thereof ) to facilitate the unimpeded movement of flood waters , or the walls are breakaway walls . The unimpeded movement of flood water is imperative to equalize the hydrostatic pressure inside and outside of the walls of the building and/or garage. - 3 - The primary consideration from the above language is that sufficient effort in the design of the structure has been made -to - - equalize the hydrostatic pressure inside and outside the walls of the building during conditions of flooding. The insurance manual suggests use of parallel shear walls, open lattice walls, or discontinuous foundation walls as preferred examples for preventing excessive flood loads on the enclosed portion of the structure. However, any other design such as those previously described above as meeting the flood plain management requirements of 44 CFR 60 . 3 ( a) (3 ) ( i) would also be acceptable. One circumstance exists where a structure ' s lowest floor level used for rating is not consistent with that provided for under the flood plain management regulations. In V-Zone special flood hazard areas, the flood plain management requirements permit breakaway wall enclosures below the base flood elevation without regard to the size of the enclosed area. For insurance rating purposes, however , the floor of such an enclosed area will become the structure 's lowest floor level if the size of the enclosed area exceeds 300 square feet . The "300 square foot" limit was established because of the risk of excessive loading on the structure ' s foundation system as the size of the enclosure increases. This provision establishes an upper size limit where, from an insurance standpoint, additional design information is needed in order to set proper risk premium rates. Where information on the building 's design has been provided ( such as through an optional Individual Risk Rating form) , which shows that the structure adequately meets the performance standards for V-Zone construction, then lower rates can be provided. - 4 - Attachment D SALT LAKE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT OVERVIEW On October 6, 1986, the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP ) made several changes to its regulations which have not been yet incorporated into the Ordinances of Salt Lake City. Salt Lake City is required as a condition of continued eligibility in the NFIP, to meet the minimum standards of the NFIP regulations, and is required to adopt these changes into the City' s ordinance by May 1, 1989. Please refer to November 15, 1988 letter ( attachment A) from Federal Emergency Management Agency ( FEMA). BACKGROUND To date, the following has transpired: - FEMA has initially contacted the city on November 15th, 1988 requesting the changes be made ( see attachment A). - The City ' s current Floodplain Hazard Protection Ordinance, Chapter 16. 68, was sent to Mr. Doug Gore who is with FEMA for review during the second week of January. - An assessment was made of Salt Lake City' s Floodplain Hazard Protection Ordinance by Jerome M. Olson and Doug Gore from the Natural and Technological Hazards Division which stated that minor changes were needed to be made in the City's Ordinance. Please refer to the January 20, 1989 response letter ( attachment B ) . - Several departments were contacted for comments on the proposed amendment including Building and Housing Services, Permits and Zoning, Planning Department, Heritage Foundation, City-County Health Department, Assist Inc. , Neighborhood Housing Services, Redevelopment Agency, Housing Authority. Comments from these sources will be included for review if submitted. ANALYSIS Two Proposed Changes. In the January 20, 1989 response letter from FEMA ( attachment B ), two changes are needed in the City' s ordinance. The first change is to delete the phrase "if habitable" in section 18. 68. 100 B, as follows: All new construction and substantial improvements of residential structures within the floodplain hazard area shall have the lowest floor ( including basement), it habitable, elevated to or above the base flood elevation. The second change is to include the definition of Lowest Floor into the City's Ordinance as follows: "Lowest Floor" means the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area ( including basement). An unfinished or flood resistant enclosure, usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage, in an area other than a basement area, is not considered a building's lowest floor, provided that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the applicable non-elevation design requirements of this ordinance. FEMA Policy Statement. Along with the January 20th response letter from FEMA, a policy statement relating to the term "Lowest Floor" was included ( attachment C ) . Please refer to this statement which provides clarification to the term Lowest Floor. Agency Responses. To date, Assist and RDA has contacted the Planning Department by phone and has indicated that perhaps some minor repairs and improvements in flood areas could not be accomplished. The definition applies to "new construction" and "substantial improvements" rather than to minor repairs. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Staff respectfully recommends that two amendments be made to the Floodplain Hazard Protection Ordinance ( Chapter 18. 68 ) as follows: 1. The words, "If Habitable" be deleted from the paragraph in section 18. 68. 100 B, and 2. The definition of "Lowest Floor" as stated above, be inserted into the definition section ( 18. 68. 020 ) of the City's ordinance. Allen G. McCandless Environmental Planner February 21, 1989 Attachment E PC MINUTES March 9 , 1989 • Page 15 • • Mr . Howe moved to approve staff ' s recommendations to amend Section 21 . 78 . 230 (A) of the Zoning Ordinance to allow for profit and nonprofit private recreation facilities as conditional uses • in residential zones. Mr. Nicolatus seconded the motion; all voted "Aye. " The motion passes . PLANNING ISSUES ir Proposed Amendment to the City ' s Floodplain Ordinance. Mr . Allen McCandless presented the staff report and stated that on October 6, • 1986 the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) made several changes to its regulations which have not been vet incorporated into the Ordinances of Salt Lake City. Salt Lake City is required as a condition of continued eligibility in the NFIP , to meet the minimum standards of the NFIP regulations , and is required to adopt these changes into the City' s ordinance by May 1, 1989 . Mr . McCandless stated that to date, the following have • transpired : 1 . FEMA initially contacted the city on November 15th, 1988 requesting the changes be made . 2 . The City ' s current Floodplain Hazard Protection Ordinance , Chanter 16 . 68 , was sent to Mr . Doug Gore who is with FEMA. for review during the second week of January. 3 . An a==, ==meat was made of Salt Lake City ' s Flcodolc_n Hazard Protection Ordinance by Jerome M. Olson and Doug Gore- from the Natural and Technological Hazards Division which stated that minor chances nae^e^ to be made in the City ' s Ordinance . 4 . Several departments were contacted for comments on the orocosec amendment including Buildinc and Housing Services , Permits and Zoning , the Planning Division, the Utah Heritace Foundation, City-County Health Department , Assist , Inc . , Neighborhood Housing Services , Redevelopment Agency , and the Housing Authority. Mr . McCandless stated that two chances are needed in the City 's ordinance. The first change is to delete the phrase " if habitable" in section 18 . 668 . 100 B, as follows : / All new construction and substantial improvements of residential structures within the floodolain hazard area shall have the lowest floor (including basement) , if- h elevated to or above the base flood elevation. PC MINUTES March 9 , 1989 Page 16 • The second change is to include the definition of Lowest Floor into the City ' s Ordinance as follows : "Lowest Floor" means the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement) . An unfinished or flood resistant • enclosure, usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage, in an area other than a basement area , is not considered a building ' s lowest floor, provided that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the applicable non-elevation design requirements of this ordinance. Mr . McCandless stated that the Planning Staff recommends the two amendments be made to the Floodplain Hazard Protection Ordinance (Chapter 18 . 68 ) as follows : • 1 . The words , "If Habitable" be deleted from the paragraph in section 18 . 68 . 100 B, and 2 . The definition of "Lowest Floor" as stated above, be inserted into the definition section ( 18 . 68 . 020) of the City ' s ordinance . • Ms . Cromer moved to approve staff ' s recommendation to amend the flocdpla_n ordinance as listed in the two conditions . Ms . Liddle-Gamonal seconded the motion; all voted "Aye . " The motion passes . .Briefing on the proposed 1989-90 CDBC Project by Stephanie Lcker . Ms . Rosemary Davis and Ms . Stephanie Loker from Capital Planning and Programming were present for this discussion. Ms . Luker handed out a chart of the Funding Recommendations for CDSG 15th Year ( 1989-90) to the Planning Commissioners . She explained that they had received approximately 96 proposals totalling almost S10 million . She added that housing had emerced as a priority this year , that HUD had allocated approximately S1 2 , 000 more this year since they had deleted UDAG on a national scale. Ms . Davis added that the 312 program ( 3% rehab loans to homeowners) had also been deleted . Ms . Loker proceeded to explain the chart in detail to the Planning Commission. A discussion cn the funding requests and allocations followed . A copy c f the chart is filed with the minutes . Ms . Lcker recuested a re=_ocnse from the Planning Commission on the funding requests and allocations at the March CONTRAC D IR1 F 0 Nr, APR - 3 1989 mARE 3 REQUESTING DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS/TRANSPORTATION -- FINANCE DIVISION HI iC RWSION DEPARTMENTAL CONTACT: Timothy '. Harpst - or Kurt Larson 4'0„ Agreement between SLC Corporation and the Utah Energy Office to computer interconnect , SUBJECT: traffic signals on Foothill Boulevard between 2100 South and Guardsman Way SIGNATURE: i/ js. YES I NO Number of Executed Documents Required: 16 Insurance Required Expected Contract Completion Date: Insurance Attached Funds Available Finance Department Date FINANCE COMMENTS• Encumbered f 6 g3— g9 0/o .2 7a �;? � Account Number: --y_�-rT v•3 _ _ °9 -ATTORNEY COMMENTS: RECEIVED CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE RECORDER COMMENTS: returned to on (contact or dept. ) (date) RESOLUTION NO . OF 1989 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND STATE OF UTAH ENERGY OFFICE 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 : An agreement between the State of Utah Energy Office and the Salt Lake City Transportation Division for a computer interconnect cable connecting traffic signals on Foothill Drive between Guardsman Way and 2100 South to Salt Lake City ' s signal computer . 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 , 1989 . SALT LAKE LAKE CITY COUNCIL BY : CHAIRPERSON ATTEST : CITY RECORDER ' - .7 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS JOSEPH R. ANDERSON 324 SOUTH STATE STREET PALMER DEPAULIS PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 MAYOR 535-7775 March 28, 1989 Mayor Palmer DePaulis 5th Floor - City Hall RE : Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the State of Utah Energy Office to interconnect by computer the traffic signals along Foothill Boulevard between Guardsman Way and 2100 South . Dear Mayor DePaulis : I recommend approval of the attached agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the State of Utah Energy Office to interconnect the traffic signals along Foothill Boulevard between Guardsman Way and 2100 South thru Grant Funds and the City ' s labor costs . The project will be completed this summer and will provide for better commuter access to our downtown area through complete computer control of the city ' s eastern access route traffic signals . Sincerely , J sep R. Anderson Public Works Director KGL/ lh cc : Timothy P . Harpstf' t. 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 : March 28 , 1989 RE : Agreement between the State Energy Office and Salt Lake City Corporation to connect Foothill Drive traffic signals to Salt Lake City ' s signal computer . RECOMMENDATIONS : The City Council approve the agreement . AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS : The city ' s match of the grant funds will be the cost of labor which will be paid out of the Transportation Division ' s normal signal maintenance account . DISCUSSION : The approval of this agreement will result in receiving grant money from the State of Utah Energy Office which will fund parts and materials needed for this project . F SALT' I C1ITY"CORPORATION a.r......1 W TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, ''333 SOUTH 200 EAST,SUITE 201 JOSEPH R. R OR PUBLIC WORKS SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 8411.1` TIMOTHY P. HARPST, P E DIRECTOR _ - - CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER (801) 535-6630 March 28 , 1989 Roger Cutler City Attorney 5th Floor - City Hall THRU : Joseph R . Anderson - Public Works Director A RE : Agreement for Traffic Signal Interconnect on Foothill Drive between Guardsman Way and 2100 South Dear Roger : Please review the attached agreement and resolution between Salt Lake City Corporation and the Utah State Energy Office . The agreement allows Salt Lake City to interconnect 8 traffic signals along Foothill Boulevard between Guardsman Way and 2100 South to our traffic signal computer with Grant Funds and the City ' s labor costs . Following your review we will route the agreement to Joseph R . Anderson , Public Works Director , and then to Mayor and City Council for approval . Sincerely , Timothy P . Harpst , P . E . City Transportation Engineer / lh cc : Kurt Larson File CONTRCT STATE OF UTAH CONTRACT # 1 . CONTRACTING PARTIES: This agreement is between the State of Utah , Utah Energy Office (a division of the Department of Natural Resources) , referred to as STATE, and Salt Lake City Corp./Traffic Engineering Legal Status of Contractor (Contractor) Sole Proprietor 333 South 200 East Non—Profit Corporation (Address) For—Profit Corporation Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Partnership (City) (State) (Zip) X Governmental Agency referred to as CONTRACTOR. Federal Tax ID# 2. GENERAL PURPOSE OF CONTRACT: The general purpose of this agreement is : To interconnect traffic signals along Foothill Drive to the S.L.C. computer control system. 3. PROCUREMENT: This contract is entered into as the result of the procurement process on Strippr Well Restitution Solicitation , FY— May, 1988 4. CONTRACT PERIOD: This contract is effective March 1 , 1989 and will terminate on August 31 , 1989, unless otherwise extended or terminated in accordance with the terms and conditions of this contract. 5. CONTRACT COSTS: CONTRACTOR will be paid a maximum of $ 28,705.00 for costs authorized by this contract. 6. ATTACHMENTS INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS CONTRACT: �'na,ice Attachment A — Standard Terms and Conditions Dere Attachment B — Scope of Work & Reports Due Encumbered `�8n-5.6 Attachment C — Budget 6) % ��- - • 7. DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED INTO THIS CONTRACT BY REFERENCE BUT NOT ATTACHED HERETO: N/A a. All other governmental laws , regulations , or actions applicable to services provided herein . b. 8. COMPLETE ON COST REIMBURSEMENT CONTRACTS ONLY: N/A a. AUDIT INFORMATION: Provide the name , address and telephone number of the STATE staff person responsible for the contract audit and review function: 1 . What audits and reviews are required of this contract? Financial ? Yes No Program Compliance? Yes No How often? If applicable under OMB How often? If applicable under OMB By whom? By whom? b. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS: Are any declared by CONTRACTOR? Yes No See RELATED PARTIES — Attachment A Paragraph 10. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties sign and cause this contract to be executed. CONTRACTOR: SALT LAKE CITY CORP. STATE 47 2 Signature Date �Fisc Officer, Li ah Energy Office , Date Name or Title of Signer Director, Utah nergy Office , Date (Type or Print) Director, Division of Purchasing, Date 7� B"A1 -. 4, Director, Division of Finance, Date ATTACHMENT A R>tN'D RD Ric ah'1 cO1 D ON 4t rHOR'TY Provisions of this apetran set p.rsuant to the authority sr forth is regime I3-M UCA 1963 as amended. Uteri fame Prom rs hewn t Regulations,and reseed statutes which permit the STATE to pu rt h ase ce ttai a specified ass rotor.. aced ether approved purchases for the STATE. ! rON RACT JURISDIC'TIQN The Rrowiona of this contract shall be premed by the laws of the State of Utah 3 pFCORTIS_ATII N1STRATIOX. The CONTRACTOR shall maintain,or mperviae the aasintenance dell records neeeaaary to property account for the payments made to the CONTRACTOR for the mete authorised by this 000trect These remrda shall be mu:med by the CONTRACTOR for at lose four years after the contract terminates.or until all sudiu initiated within the four year,have been completed,whichever is later. 4- AUDIT OF RFCORT)�• The CONTRACTOR agrees to allow STATE and Federal auditors.and STATE Agency Staff,access to all the rsmrda relating to this mntract,for audit and inapation,and monitoring of services.Such access will be during n ormal busioem hours, or by appointment. 5. t;QNTLICT OF INTFREST: CONTRACTOR represents that none of it's officers or employees are officers or employees of the STATE of Utah. (Section 67-16.8,UCA 1963,as amended.) 6. 10\-7RACTOR AN LN7FPFNDFNT CCO"\TFALMIE The CONTRACTOR 'hall be an independent eontrsctor, and as such,shall have no authorisation,express or implied.to bind the State of Utah or the above State Agency to any agreements, settlements.liability,or u n derstan ding whatsoever,aid agrees not to perform any arts as agent for the State of Utah,except as herein expressly set forth.Compensation provided for herein shall be the total compensation payable hereunder by the State of Utah or the above designated State Agency.Persona employed by the STATE and acting under direction of the STATE shall not be deemed to be employes or agents of this CONTRACTOR. 7. j)FWNITY CiA'! SF The CONTRACTOR agrees to idemnify,save harmless,and release the State of Utah and the State sffwers,agents, and employees from and against any and all lost,damairea,injury,liability,suite and procoodin e arising out of the performance of this contract by the CONTRACTOR,its draws, spots,eolosrt,aers,or employees. !. EO''AL OPPOR11TNIT'Y CLATTSF• The CONTRACTOR agrees to abide by provisions sfTltk VI and VD of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 USC 2000e1 which prohibits diecriminatiae api.aat any employee sr applicant for employment or any applicant or recipient of services, on the boas of race, religion, color, or national origin; and further agrees to abide by Executive Order No.11246,as amended,which prohibits discrimination on the basis eau;45 CFR 90 which prohibits dia• eriminatioe on the basis of age;and Section 504 of the Rehabilitating Act of 1973,which prohibite discrirnination on the basis of handicap. ! SFPAR 4RTi,JTY MAT'CT.' 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 eafores+bility of any ether provision of this contract unless said provisions are mutually dependent. 10. pFiATFD PARTTFc• (Applied to Cost Reimbursement Contracts ONLY.)The CONTRACTOR shall not mane payments for goods, services, facilities, aalary.'wagea,professional foes,lasses, 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 daallowed on audit,and may result in an overpayment assssament. 'Related Partite'for the purpose of this contract,shall moan organitatioo.a'peraona related to the CONTRACTOR by any of the following. Blood hi erri age One or more partners in common with the CONTRACTOR One or more directors or officers in common with the CONTRACTOR More than 1O common ownership, direct or indirect,with the CONTRACTOR Lie elated P rtsta" sn w om ayme L re beirg ; $FIATIONSYIp ?IMPOSE OF PAYh FNT 11 RF`,TGOTIATIONS OF MODIF1C'ATlC N . This contract may be amended, modified,or supplemented only by written amendment to the eontrsrt,esrcuted by the parties hereto,and attached to the original signed copy of this contract far ' s furma n • b� the C NTRACTOR no rice f r■llt. u�he rr d lot• his n'ra t rill not br oaid by ri ATE 12. TERMTNIT:EN This contract may be terminated,with or without cause.in advance of the specified aspiration date,by either party,upon D0 days prior written notice being given to the other party On termination of this contract all amounts and payments will be pror*.med according to financial arrangement art forth herein fur eervioes rendered to date of termination. ATTACHMENT B Scope of Work and Reports Due The Contractor agrees to perform the following work tasks: Interconnect the traffic signals along Foothill Drive to Salt Lake City' s present computer control system. The Utah Energy Office will provide $28,705 for hardware and materials for the Foothill Interconnect and the city will provide the labor costs of $15,350 to complete this project. In completing the above work tasks , the following reports will be due at the specified times : One interim report due by May 31 , 1989 listing expenditure of project funds and summary of project completion schedule. One final report due by August 31 , 1989 listing total expenditures of project funds and certification that the project was completed as proposed. 6415/1-2 -3- ATTACHMENT C BUDGET Foothill Interconnect Parts QTY . DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COSTS 1 . 25 R-66B4-25 punch-down blocks 4 . 91 /ea . 122 . 75 2 . 20 A2-RB ( 3-M) splice kits 28 .00/ea . 560 . 00 3 . 25 18" x 5/8" Thimble eye bolts 2 . 67/ea . 66 . 75 4 . 25 5/8" Thible eye nuts . 15/ea . 3 . 75 5 . 112 18" x 5/8" Thru bolts 1 . 75/ea . 195 . 00 6 . 112 ' J ' clamp assy . 2 . 55/ea . 285 . 60 7 . 20 Metal Pole adapters (we make ) 8 . 15 1 1 / 2" Weatherheads alum. clamp-on 13 . 00/ea . 195 . 00 9 . 50 Preforms AWDE-4110 ( 6_m yellow) 2 . 75/ea . 137 . 50 10 . 6 1 1 /2" x 10" Nipples 1 . 79/ea . 10 . 74 11 . 20 1 1 / 2" x close Nipples . 65/ea . 13 . 00 12 . 6 1 1 /2" Plastic Bushings . 72 /ea . 4 . 32 13 . 20 1 1 / 2" L . B . condulets 10 . 75/ea . 2 : 5 . 00 14 . 25 1 1 / 2" Chase ( drive ) nuts . 55 /ea . 13 . 75 15 . 6 1 1 /2" Rigid elbows 7 . 65/ea . 45 . 90 16 . 32 1 1 / 2" Rigid conduit ( in 10 ' lengths ) 112 . 10/C 358 . 72 17 . 35 1 1 /2" PVC conduit ( in 10 ' lenths ) 25 . 72/C 90 . 12 18 . 350 5/8" Square pole washers . 19/ea . 66 . 50 19 . 350 5/8" Square nuts . 15/ea . 52 . 50 20 . 7 ULG Butt connectors ( boxes of 100 ) 10 . 75/bx 75 . 25 21 . 5 VM tape ( 2" width ) 4 . 70/RL 23 . 50 22 . 6 1 1 /2" PVC/RIGID Adapters 4 .80/ea . 28 . 80 23 . 12 Angle ' J ' clamp assembly PA 288 2 . 58/ea . 30 . 96 24 . 2500 Cable REA-SPEC Underground type 259 . 00/M 647 . 00 PE-22 , 12 pair 19 AWC , MCL 2500 ' on wooden disposable reel with 2 1 /2" arbor holes . 25 . 20 , 000 Cable REA-SPEC , Figure-8 , type PE-38 439 . 00/M 8 , 780 . 00 12 pair 19 AWG , MCL 5000 ' on wooden disposable reel with 2 1 /2" arbor holes 26 . 2 Bandit Steel , 3 /4" Stainless 43 . 15/C 86 . 30 27 . 1 Buckles , Bandit Steel , 3/4" ( 100/bx) 32 . 00/C 32 . 00 28 . 9 Winko-matic Mark II-MP Communication 1 , 800. 00/ea . 16 , 200 . 00 interface and control units with Salt Lake City modifications 29 . 15 Winko-matic CICU Input harnesses 30 . 15 Winko-matic CICU Output harnesses 31 . 60 Arrestors , gas discharge 75V 1 . 45/ea . 87 . 00 32 . 8 Pull boxes with lids 12 . 19/ea . 73 . 14 33 . 5 Electrical tape ( Scotch #88) 1 . 75/RL 8 . 75 34 . 500 Cable ties . 03/ea . 15 . 00 35 . 100 Shield connectors . 75/ea . 75 . 00 36 . ] 2 5/8" x 8 foot ground rods 6 . 00/ea . 72 . 00 37 . 39 5/8" x Ground rod clamps 1 . 00/ea . 12 . 00 36 . 100 Split bolt connectors 15 . 75/C 15 . 75 39 . 5 Electrical friction tape . 98/RL 4 . 90 Salt Lake City In-kind Labor $28 , 705 . 25 15 , 350. 00 TOTAL $44 , 055 . 25 -4- Y L LEROY W. HOOTON, JR. DIRECTOR WENDELL E. EVENSEN, P.E. �� \ I 1 ^\AQ ;�1 mtT ��� �y�jr SUPERINTENDENT _� ��.a.i�. DI WATER SUPPLY&WATERWORKS E TIM DOXEY SUPERINTENDENT DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER RECLAMATION WATER SUPPLY & WATERWORKS. PALMER DEPAULIS JAMES M. LEWIS, CPA. WATER RECLAMATION MAYOR CHIEF FINANCE& ACCOUNTING OFFICER 1530 SOUTH WEST TEMPLE GEORGE JORGENSEN, PE. SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 CHIEF ENGINEER TO: Salt Lake City Council RE: Resolution Supporting National Water Week Recommendation: Approval of the resolution supporting "National Water Week" is recommended. Availability of Funds: n/a Discussion: Salt Lake City through its public officials both in the past and present have made decisions that today provide Salt Lake City and its water customers a plentiful supply of pure drinking water which meets the required standards of the Safe Drinking Water Act passed by Congress in 1974. Throughout Salt Lake City' s history the citizens have supported their elected officials in developing water resources, constructing water treatment plants and developing a water distribution system that provides an uninterruptible supply of water to the customer' s tap. In 1934 Salt Lake City initiated the Deer Creek Project and formed the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City to sponsor this project that has allowed Salt Lake County to grow and prosper during the past 40 years. Future water supplies through the Central Utah Project and Little Dell Project will allow the city to continue to grow in the Northwest Quadrant and provide a firm water supply to protect against drought. During "National Water Week" the citizens of Salt Lake City and its water customers are encouraged to recognize the benefits of a plentiful safe drinking water supply. Sincerely, 14(1?-6 LEROY W HOOTON, JR. DIRECTO LHW:mf SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. OF 1989 NATIONAL WATER WEEK WHEREAS, the week of May 1 through May 7, 1989 has been designated as National Water Week; and WHEREAS, said week was designated to call attention to the excellent service and safe, reliable water supply provided daily by the Nation' s 58, 900 community operated water systems; and WHEREAS, the adoption by the Federal Government of the Safe Drinking Water Act in 1974, and its amendments in 1986, have placed safe drinking water in the forefront of public attention; and WHEREAS, the 1986 amendments will require changes in water supply monitoring and treatment and it is essential that the public be well informed of what is happening with their water supply; and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation has developed water resources and a distribution system to supply high quality, low cost water to an equivalent population of 400, 000 living in the middle of a desert; and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation, through its Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City, has planned for the future by developing additional water supplies through the Little Dell Dam and the Central Utah Water Project; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1 . That Salt Lake City hereby expresses its support for National Water Week and all that it entails; and 2. That Salt Lake City encourages its citizens to participate in and become aware of all of the benefits which their water system bestows and that the citizens participate in the events of National Water Week. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989 . SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER RLM:pp -2- i \ . ( 11_• \ ; ROGER F. CUTLER Sc�A�T�� A` Q 1�Q iUX 51V� A tIoIAr ASSISTANT ATTORNEYS CITY ATTORNEY :rr-- �S.�s.JlJ .l� �►.+��►��1 RAY L. MONTGOMERY STEVEN W. ALLRED LAW DEPARTMENT GREG R. HAWKINS DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY 324 SOUTH STATE STREET, FIFTH FLOOR LARRY V. SPENDLOVE BRUCE R. BAIRD CHERYL D. LUKE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 FRANK M. NAKAMURA CITY PROSECUTOR (801) 535-7788 ASSISTANT PROSECUTORS FAX (801) 535-7640 DONALD L. GEORGE CECELIA M. ESPENOZA RICHARD G. HAMP GLEN A. COOK April 27, 1989 TO: Linda Hamilton Director Department of Finance FROM: Frank M. Nakamura 44;1 . , Assistant City torney RE: Budget related Resolutions and Ordinances Attached are the following: 1 . 16 copies of a Resolution adopting the tentative budget. 2 . 16 copies of a proposed Salt Lake City Ordinance determining the rate of tax levy assuming that the tax levy does not exceed the certified tax rate. 3. 16 copies of a proposed Salt Lake City Ordinance assuming that the tax levy exceeds the certified tax rate. The original documents have been given to the City Recorder. I am also enclosing 16 copies of the following: 1 . A proposed Ordinance amending a City Code section relating to the Compensation Plan for 500 series employees ( in legislative form) . 2. An Ordinance amending a section of the Code relating to the Compensation Plan for 400 series employees ( in legislative form) . Linda Hamilton April 27, 1989 Page -2- 3. An Ordinance enacting the Compensation Plan for 100 series employees. 4. An Ordinance enacting the Compensation Plan for 200 series employees. 5. An Ordinance amending the Code section relating to the Compensation Plan for executive and 300 series employees in legislative form. As you know, the City is still bargaining with the Unions. Consequently, no Compensation Plans are finalized at this time. The "300" series Compensation Plan should be completed within the next two weeks. Thank you. FMN:cc RESOLUTION NO. OF 1989 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING TENTATIVE BUDGETS, INCLUDING THE TENTATIVE BUDGET FOR THE LIBRARY FUND, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1989 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 1990 WHEREAS, the Budget Officer of Salt Lake City Corporation has filed Tentative Budgets, including the Tentative Budget for the Library Fund, and a Budget Message pursuant to Title 10, Chapter 6, Section 111, UTAH CODE ANNOTATED, 1953, as amended; and WHEREAS, State law requires the Council to meet and adopt Tentative Budgets and cause the same to be filed as a public record at least ten days prior to adopting the Final Budgets and at said meeting establish a time and place for a public hearing thereon, with published notice given at least seven days prior to the adoption of the Final Budgets; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, as follows: 1 . The Tentative Budgets, including the Tentative Budget for the Library Fund, heretofore filed by the City' s Budget Officer are hereby adopted as the City' s Tentative Budgets and are ordered to be filed and maintained as a public record, available for public inspection in the office of the City Recorder ( located at 324 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah and on and after May 13, 1989, in the City & County Building, 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah) until adoption of the final budgets . 2. A public hearing on said Tentative Budgets shall be held Tuesday, May 16, 1989 at 6:20 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, City & County Building, 451 South State Street, Room 315, Salt Lake City, Utah. 3 . The City Recorder is directed to cause a Notice of said Public Hearing to be duly published, consistent with the requirements of Section 10-6-1131, Utah Code Annotated, 1953, as amended. The City Recorder is further directed to appropriately agenda and schedule said hearing to comply with the requirements of the Utah Open Meetings Act. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989 . SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney's Office CITY RECORDER Date 4'�7 119 FMN:cc -2- E---3, • ; DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE 324 SOUTH STATE STREET, 5TH FLOOR LINDA H N SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 PALMER DEPAULIS DIRECTOR OF F FINANCE (801) 535-7676 MAYOR _ April 26, 1989 Ms. Cindy Gust-Jenson Executive Director Salt Lake City Council • Salt Lake City Hall Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Dear Cindy: I respectfully request that you set dates for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, May 16, 1989 at 6: 20 P.M. : ( 1 ) to obtain public comment concerning tentative budgets for Fiscal Year 1988-89 ; and ( 2 ) to consider amending the Compensation Plan (Section 2 . 52 .010 of the City Code) for city officers and employees, including statutory officers. Thank you. ' • �y. - —0.��4-mac= 1-1.___ L_Linda Hamilton Director of Finance LH/hd cc: Mayor Palmer A. Depaulis Mike Zuhl Emilie Charles iiigrp.Tiw?1-5 -,.,, kv<ziz 1.7.f ) ; 1 1 APR 2 7 1989 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Determining the rate of tax levy and levying taxes upon all real and personal property within Salt Lake City, Utah made taxable by law for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1989 and ending June 30, 1990. AN ORDINANCE DETERMINING THE RATE OF TAX LEVY AND LEVYING TAXES UPON ALL REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY WITHIN SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH MADE TAXABLE BY LAW FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1, 1989 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 1990. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . Chapter 2, Title 59 Utah Code Annotated ( 1953 as amended) , states that before June 22nd of each year the governing body of each City, shall, by ordinance or resolution, set the real and personal property tax levy for various municipal purposes. Chapter 2, Title 59, Utah Code Annotated ( 1953 as amended) provides for certain notice and hearing requirements if the proposed tax rate exceeds the certified tax rate. It is the intent of Salt Lake City Corporation to comply with the mandate of the Utah Legislature, but reserve in itself the power to amend the tax rates set herein to guarantee, after final appraisal figures have been determined, that it does not exceed the amount required for its governmental operations and taxing authority granted by the Legislature. SECTION 2. For purposes of defraying the necessary and proper expenses of the City to maintain the government thereof and; for operating and maintaining its libraries and reading rooms, the City Council hereby levies upon all real and personal property within Salt Lake City, Utah made taxable by law in the year 1989 , for the fiscal year of Salt Lake City ending June 30, 1990, a tax of percent on each dollar of taxable evaluation of said property, apportioned as follows: ( a) percent shall be credited as revenue in the general fund; (b) percent shall be credited as revenue in the special library fund. Said tax levy shall be subject to Mayor approval and City Council reconsideration pursuant to Section 1214, Chapter 3, Title 10, Utah Code Annotated ( 1953 as amended) . SECTION 3 . The proposed tax levy does not exceed the certified tax rate and, therefore, the City is not required to publish notice or hold a public hearing pursuant to Chapter 2, Title 59, Utah Code Annotated ( 1953 as amended) . SECTION 4. The tax levy hereinabove determined and levied shall be certified by the City Recorder to the Auditor of Salt Lake County, State of Utah before the 22nd day of June 1989 pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 2, Title 59, Utah Code Annotated ( 1953 as amended) . -2- SECTION 5 . The City hereby expressly reserves the power and right to amend any property tax levy made herein as it may deem just, proper and appropriate under the law. SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall take effect on July 1, 1989 . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989 . SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By Chairperson ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attome 's Office Date ruin —eri By Transmitted to the Mayor on the day of , 1989 . Mayor ' s action: DATED this day of , 1989 . PALMER DePAULIS Mayor -3- ATTEST: CITY RECORDER FMN:cc -4- I t :! A IF T : - SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE [7-43No. of 198[$]9 (Salt Lake City Corporation = - Employee Compensation Plan) •tie/ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2.52.010 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE, AS LAST AMENDED BY BILL NO. [34] 44 OF 1988 RELATING TO COMPENSATION OF SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Al-,� Utah: .A,a'r SECTION 1. That Section 2.52.010 of the Salt Lake City ram. •4''' Code, as last amended by Bill No. [34] 44 of 1988, be, and , . r-, . is hereby amended as follows: • "' Sec. 2.52.010. Compensation Program Adopted. • '_ '.. A. The Compensation Administration Program for Salt `� : Lake City Corporation [(the "City" )] Employees, dated July ' ` 1, 198[$]9, is hereby adopted as the official compensation - .c,_;` plan for said employees (hereinafter referred to as the ' , "Plan" ) . Three copies of said Plan or any amendment thereto r shall be maintained in the City Recorder's office for public inspection. The provisions of said Plan shall be effective ' t. under the terms thereof commencing July 1, 198[$] 9, except ' as they may be amended by the City Council or upon approval of Memoranda of Understanding between the City and `'4- recognized Employee Bargaining units. Eta L . t 4° B. The Plan herein adopted and any amendment or modification thereto shall not apply to officers or employees whose employment terminated prior to publication of the ordinance codified in this chapter or to the adoption of any amendment or modification to the Plan. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect on July 1, 198[$]9 . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 198[8r]9 . CHAIRPERSON A..- ' ATTEST: ‘ . N. CITY RECORDER 4 Transmitted to the Mayor on 1 Mayor's Action: Approved Vetoed V' Atim MAYOR ATTEST: i • - CITY RECORDER FMN:cc -2- w. SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 198[$]9 (Employee Compensation Plan for 500 Series Employees) . 1r7AN ORDINANCE [ENACTING] AMENDING SECTION 2.52.116 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE RELATING TO COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOR SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 500 SERIES • '• EMPLOYEES. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, ?'°'; Utah: SECTION 1. That Section 2.52. 116 of the Salt Lake City Code, be, and is hereby [enacted] amended as follows: '` Sec. 2.52.116 Compensation Plan Adopted - 500 Series Employees. The compensation plan for Salt Lake City Corporation 500 series employees dated July 1, 198[$]9 is hereby adopted as the official compensation plan for said employees. Three copies of said plan, or any amendment thereto, shall be maintained in the City Recorder's Office • • for public inspection. The provisions of said plan shall be effective under the terms thereof, commencing July 1, 198[$]9 and ending June 30, 19[8.4]90, except as they may be amended by the City Council or upon approval of a Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the recognized employee bargaining unit. :FL The plan herein adopted, and any amendment or F:•`� � modification thereto, shall not apply to employees whose employment terminated prior to the effective date of this ordinance, or to the adoption of any amendment or modification to the plan. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect on July 1, 198[8]9. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 198[8]9. .1.k CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: .47 l' CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor's Action: v- ) DATED this day of , 198[8]9 . , pv. MAYOR Ta ATTEST: 'y. Ski ` CITY RECORDER FMN:cc A I -2- Ilk r1 :>!Y a tai SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 198[$]9 (Employee Compensation Plan for 400 Series Employees) AN ORDINANCE [ENACTING] AMENDING SECTION 2.52. 115 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE RELATING TO COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOR SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 400 SERIES EMPLOYEES. i"' Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: • SECTION 1. That Section 2.52.115 of the Salt Lake City . • Code, be, and is hereby [cnacted] amended as follows: 4,1 ;M1lt",. Sec. 2.52.115 Compensation Plan Adopted - 400 Series Employees. The compensation plan for Salt Lake City = Corporation 400 series employees dated July 1, 198[$] 9 is td-. hereby adopted as the official compensation plan for said employees. Three copies of said plan, or any amendment "4l `, : thereto, shall be maintained in the City Recorder' s Office ^rb- for public inspection. The provisions of said plan shall be f' , "'_ effective under the terms thereof, commencing July 1, 198[$] 9 and ending June 30, 19[8-9190, except as they may be is n ar:: amended by the City Council or upon approval of a Memorandum ,--:.., of Understanding between the City and the recognized bsr, employee bargaining unit. The plan herein adopted, and any amendment or - '" modification thereto, shall not apply to employees whose 1 ordinance, or to the adoption of any amendment or modification to the plan. SECTION 2 . This Ordinance shall take effect on July 1, 198 [$] 9 . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 198 [$] 9. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s Action: DATED this day of , 198[$]9 . MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER FMN:cc -2- SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 ( Employee Compensation Plan for 200 Series Employees) AN ORDINANCE ENACTING SECTION 2.52. 118 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE RELATING TO COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOR SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 200 SERIES EMPLOYEES. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Section 2. 52.118 of the Salt Lake City Code, be, and is hereby enacted as follows: Sec. 2. 52. 118 Compensation Plan Adopted - 200 Series Employees. The compensation plan for Salt Lake City Corporation 200 series employees dated July 1, 1989 is hereby adopted as the official compensation plan for said employees. Three copies of said plan, or any amendment thereto, shall be maintained in the City Recorder' s Office for public inspection. The provisions of said plan shall be effective under the terms thereof, commencing July 1, 1989 and ending June 30, 1990, except as they may be amended by the City Council or upon approval of a Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the recognized employee bargaining unit. The plan herein adopted, and any amendment or modification thereto, shall not apply to employees whose employment terminated prior to the effective date of this ordinance, or to the adoption of any amendment or modification to the plan. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect on July 1, 1989 . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989 . CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: AP? O` ED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attcmey's Office CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor's Action: DATED this day of , 1989 . MAYOR ATTEST: • CITY RECORDER FMN:cc • -2- 5 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Employee Compensation Plan for 100 Series Employees ) AN ORDINANCE ENACTING SECTION 2. 52. 117 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE RELATING TO COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOR SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 100 SERIES EMPLOYEES. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Section 2.52. 117 of the Salt Lake City Code, be, and is hereby enacted as follows: Sec. 2. 52. 117 Compensation Plan Adopted - 100 Series Employees. The compensation plan for Salt Lake City Corporation 100 series employees dated July 1, 1989 is hereby adopted as the official compensation plan for said employees. Three copies of said plan, or any amendment thereto, shall be maintained in the City Recorder' s Office for public inspection. The provisions of said plan shall be effective under the terms thereof, commencing July 1, 1989 and ending June 30, 1990, except as they may be amended by the City Council or upon approval of a Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the recognized employee bargaining unit. The plan herein adopted, and any amendment or modification thereto, shall not apply to employees whose employment terminated prior to the effective date of this ordinance, or to the adoption of any amendment or modification to the plan. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect on July 1, 1989 . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: LID. TO FORM Sait Lake City Attorney's Office Date —'7 . 27` y sy jaAJ' 411fl 4, CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s Action: DATED this day of , 1989. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER FMN:cc -2- /O• LEROY W. HOOTON,JR. DIRECTOR WENDELL E. &WATER N, P.E. _i Q� p (9 `� uy�T� r SUPERIN TENOENT , A 1 ,.��(.}��;I`Irryri ��'�rl 1 WATER SUPPLY&WATERWORKS E. TIM DOXEY SUPERINTENDENT DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER RECLAMATION WATER SUPPLY & WATERWORKS PALMER DEPAULIS JAMES M. LEWIS, CPA. WATER RECLAMATION :.• MAYOR CHIEF FINANCE& ACCOUNTING OFFICER .SOUTH,-WEST.TEMPLE GEORGE JORGENSEN, RE. SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 CHIEF ENGINEER April 27, 1989 TO: Salt ' Lake City Council RE: AMENDMENT TO SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE SECTIONS 17. 16. 670, 17. 16.680, AND 17.72.030, IN REGARDS TO PROPOSED WATER RATE INCREASE AND SEWER RATE DECREASE Recommendation: That the City Council approve the above rate increase and decrease. Availability of Funds: N/A • Discussion: It is proposed that the Salt Lake City Public Utilities water rates be increased to finance the major capital improvements required by the Water Utility Fund. The proposed rate increase would fund a waterline replacement program which is urgently needed. We propose a $1.00 per month surcharge be placed on the minimum bill or $12.00 per year for a residential 3/4-inch by 1-inch meter and a proportional amount by meter size. It is also proposed that the usage rate be increased by $.04 per hundred cubic feet from $.38 to $.42 for City residents and by $1.06 per hundred cubic feet for our county customers. It is also proposed that the Salt Lake City Public Utilities sewer rates be decreased due to a revision of our financial projections for the 1989-90 budget request. It is anticipated that the sewer rates could be reduced and still finance the capital improvements required for the next 10 years. The sewer rate reduction would be from $.85 to $. 80, which would reduce the average residential users ` bill by $.40 per month or $4. 80 per year. The net effect of these proposed changes would increase the average residential water and sewer user by $. 60 per month or $7.20 per year. LEROY HOOTON, JR. Director SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Water and sewer rates) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 17. 16.670, 17. 16. 680 AND 17 .72.030 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE, RELATING TO WATER AND SEWER RATES. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Table 17.16.670 of Section 17. 16. 670 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to minimum charges, be, and the same hereby is amended as follows: Table 17.16.670 Inside of Inside of Outside of Outside of City City City City Connection Monthly Bimonthly Monthly Bimonthly 3/4" & 1" $6.70 $13.40 $9.20 $18.40 1 1/2" 19.30 38.60 26.25 52. 50 2" 29.10 58.20 39.10 • 78. 20 3" 58.50 117.00 79.50 159.00 4" 90.20 180.40 131.20 262.40 t. 6" 192.55 385.10 263.50 527.00 8" 287.30 574.60 393.30 . 786.60 „ , •10" - , 409.20 . 818.40 560.20 1, 120.40 SECTION 2. • That Section 17.16.680 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to meter rates, be, and the same hereby is amended as follows: 17.16.680 Meter rates. The rates for water supplied through meters to all places, after the minimum charges for the first one thousand cubic feet of water specified in Section 17. 16. 670, or its successor, will be as follows: A. Inside the corporate limits of the city, forty two cents per one hundred cubic feet of water served through each service connection; B. Outside the corporate limits of the city, sixty two cents per one hundred cubic feet of water served through each service connection. SECTION 3. That subsections 3 and 5 of Section 17.72.030, of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to Schedule 3 - rates and fees, be, and the same hereby is amended as follows: 3. Sewer Charge. Each sewer service account shall be charged $3. 15 per month minimum charge or $.80 per 100 cubic feet of the average monthly water meter readings of those using solely city water during the consecutive months of November, December, January, February and March each year, hereafter "winter readings, " whichever is higher. Said 'Winter readings shall be the basis for sewer billings for the period July 1st through June 30th following such winter readings. Any user who had more than one water meter, one or more of which measures water eventually discharged into the sewer, and one or more other meters measuring water not entering the sewer, will be charged $.80 per 100 cubic feet for all water used which may enter the sewer, but will not be assessed a sewer charge on water meter( s ) which measure water no part of which flows into the sewer system. -2- For those not using city water or using some city water, the city may require a city-approved meter, at the sewer user' s expense, on the well(s) or other source(s) of water supply, for measurement by city during said months to determine the sewer user's water use during said months, the average of which shall become the basis for sewer billings for said period. For each single dwelling unit not using city water and desiring not to install a water meter as required above, the director of the department of public utilities may waive the meter requirement, in which event the user will be charged for sewer service as provided in Subparagraph ( 5 )(a) hereof. * * * 5. New Sewer Connections or Change in Occupancy. Any new sewer service or existing sewer having changed occupants (applies only to one to three dwelling units) or those which do not have sufficient or accurate data to establish said monthly winter reading, sewer rate shall be assessed monthly charges as follows until such data is available: (a) For each single dwelling unit, $6.40 per month. (b) For each duplex, $6.40 per month, per dwelling unit. (c) For each triplex, $6.40 per month, per dwelling unit. -3- (d) For each multiple dwelling, a minimum monthly charge of $6.40 per dwelling unit or $.50 per 100 cubic feet of total water consumption, whichever is highest. (e) For all other users, a minimum charge of $6.40 per month or $. 50 per 100 cubic feet of total water consumption, whichever is highest. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect on its first publication. 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 RLM:cc r. ! •t• 6Y 7' 7- -4- SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Adding Section 15.16.070 providing fees for Tracy Aviary) AN ORDINANCE ENACTING SECTION 15. 16.070 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE PROVIDING FOR ADMISSION FEES TO TRACY AVIARY. WHEREAS, the City Council believes it appropriate to charge admission fees at certain times and for certain programs at Tracy Aviary. NOW, THEREFORE, Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Section 15.16.070 be, and the same hereby is, enacted to read as follows: 15.16.070 Tracy Aviary Fees. Admission and program fees for the Tracy Aviary shall be charged as follows: A. Between April 1 and October 31 of each year, admission fees shall be required except for Monday, and between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and noon on Saturday, when admission shall be free. In the event that Monday or Saturday during the admission fee period shall be a legally designated state, federal or city holiday, the regular admission fees shall be charged. B. The individual admission fee schedule shall be as follows: Age Price Under 6 Years of Age Free 6 to 12 years $ .50 13 to 64 years $1.00 65 years and over $ . 50 Admission fees shall be waived for individuals or families paying yearly membership fees to the Friends of Tracy Aviary, Inc. C. Tour fees. Educational, religious or other organized clubs or groups visiting the Aviary during the periods specified above shall pay the following fees: 1. Unguided tours not accompanied by an Aviary staff member, when reservations are made at least forty-eight hours before the tour, shall pay $.25 per person under eighteen years old and $.50 per person over eighteen years old. 2. Guided educational tours shall pay $15.00 for the first thirty persons and an additional $ .25 for each additional person under the age of eighteen and $. 50 for each additional person over the age of eighteen. D. Outreach programs. Aviary staff may conduct programs including demonstrations, lectures, field trips or other similar activities as requested at schools, clubs, religious organiza- tions or other similar organizations and shall charge a fee for such programs to be determined by the Director of Parks based on the nature, complexity and expense of each such program. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989. -2- CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: r.4 -1t1 apPG 3 CITY RECORDER S �C 'j-,1;s'ca Transmitted to the Mayor on ey Mayor' s Action: Approved Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER BRB:pp -3- ROGER F. CUTLER I���1 \/�lj',I�Ir�,Y I ©)e Y ASSISTANT ATTORNEYS CITY ATTORNEY ��� v ��� ���® � RAY L. MONTGOMERY STEVEN W. ALLRED LAW DEPARTMENT GREG R. HAWKINS DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY 324 SOUTH STATE STREET, FIFTH FLOOR LARRY V. SPENDLOVE BRUCE R. BAIRD CHERYL D. LUKE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 FRANK M. NAKAMURA CITY PROSECUTOR (801) 535-7788 ASSISTANT PROSECUTORS FAX (801) 535-7640 DONALD L. GEORGE CECELIA M. ESPENOZA RICHARD G. HAMP GLEN A. COOK April 14, 1989 Cindy Gust-Jensen Salt Lake City Council 324 South State, Third Floor Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Proposed Fire Emergency Cost Ordinance Dear Cindy: At the suggestion of Council Member Horrocks we have drafted an ordinance allowing the City to recover costs incurred in fighting negligently started fires or other similar emergencies. The ordinance has been reviewed by the Fire Department and their communication to me is attached. Deputy Chief Florence and I both agree that, as a matter of policy, the Department does not intend to seek recompense for all fires which they fight. After the ordinance is adopted the Fire Department will, certainly, implement a policy for determining on a reasonable basis which fires they intend to charge for. I believe that Deputy Chief Florence has outlined his proposal by his letter and we would concur. If you have any questions please call. Sincerely, BRUCE R. BAIRD Assistant City Attorney BRB:cc cc: Frank Florence Emilie Charles 1011. Ar SY SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Negligently Caused Fire Emergency Cost Recovery Ordinance) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 9 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE RELATING TO HEALTH AND SAFETY BY ADDING CHAPTER 9 . 48 DEALING WITH COST RECOVERY FOR NEGLIGENTLY CAUSE FIRE EMERGENCIES. WHEREAS, Section 10-8-55, Utah Code Annotated, allows the City to establish its Fire Department and make other necessary rules and regulations and to fix penalties; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that recovering costs from negligently caused fire emergencies would be in the best interest of the City; NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Chapter 9 .48 is hereby enacted to read as follows: 9.48.010 Purpose. This chapter shall provide procedures for recovering costs incurred by the City for City assistance in negligently caused fire emergencies. 9.48.020 Definitions. As used in this chapter: A. "Negligently caused fire emergency: means a fire proximately caused by the negligence of an owner or occupier of property and/or structures which presents a direct and immediate threat to public safety and requires immediate action to mitigate the threat. B. "Expenses" means the actual labor costs of government and volunteer personnel including worker' s compensation benefits, fringe benefits, administrative overhead, costs of equipment, costs of equipment operation, costs of materials, costs of disposal and the cost of any contract labor and materials. 9.48.030 Recovery authorization and procedure. The City is hereby empowered to recover from any person, corporation, partnership or other individual or entity whose negligent actions cause fire emergency expenses incurred by City agencies directly associated with a response to a fire emergency pursuant to the following procedure: A. The City shall determine responsibility for the emergency and notify the responsible party by mail of the City' s determination of responsibility and the costs to be recovered. B. The notice shall specify that the determined responsible party may appeal the City' s decision before a hearing officer designated by the Mayor and establish a date by which the notice of appeal shall be filed. The appeal date shall be no less than fifteen ( 15 ) days from the date of the notice. C. In the event the determined responsible party appeals the determination, the hearing officer shall hold a public -2- hearing to consider any issues raised by the appeal, at which hearing the appealing party and the City shall be entitled to present evidence in support of their respective positions. D. The hearing officer shall, after the hearing, make a recommendation to the Mayor who shall issue a decision assessing responsibility and costs. 9 .48.040 No admission of liability. The payment of expenses determined owing under this chapter does not constitute an admission of liability or negligence in any legal action for damages. 9.48.050 Action to recover costs. In the event parties determined to be responsible for the repayment of negligently caused fire emergency costs fail to make payment to the City within thirty (30) days after a determination of any appeal by the Mayor, or thirty (30) days from the deadline for appeal in the event no appeal is filed, the City may initiate legal action to recover from the determined responsible parties the costs determined to be owing, including the City' s reasonable attorney' s fees. SECTION 2 . EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1988. CHAIRPERSON -3- ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s action: Approved Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. of 1989. Published: . BRB:rc -4- ,ITT ROGER F. CUTLER SAL? ASSISTANT ATTORNEYS ` � �R • I CITY ATTORNEY RAY L. MONTGCMERY STEVEN W. ALLRED LAW DEPARTMENT GREG R. HAWKINSLARRY V. SPENDLOVE DEPUTY CITY ATTO RN EY 324 SOUTH STATE STREET. FIFTH FLOOR BRUCE R. BAIRD CHERYL D. LUKE SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111 FRANK M. NAKAMURA CITY PROSECUTOR (801) 535-7788 ASSISTANT PROSECUTORS FAX (801) 535-7640 DONALD L. GECRGE CECELIA M. ESFENOZA RICHARD G. HAMP GLEN A. COOK April 12, 1989 Mayor Palmer A. DePaulis 324 South State Street, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Amendment of Section 11. 16 .020, Salt Lake City Code Dear Mayor: We are attaching a proposed ordinance change requested by the Prosecutor' s Office. The reason for the request is contained in the Prosecutor' s request for ordinance revision to the City Attorney and attached hereto. Very truly yours, a7- GREG R. HAWKINS Assistant City Attorney GRH:rc Attachments REC ` Zy�YS Ct C' ATiC:t REQUEST FOR ORDINANCE REVISION FROM: SALT LAKE CITY PROSECUTOR TO: SALT LAKE CITY ATTORNEY REQUEST SUMM.ARY: Amendment of 11-16-020A4 to remove the requirement that procuring for the purposes of prostitution occur in a public place. REASON FOR REQUEST: In a recent case, one of the acts occurred in the jail . Our ordinance did not cover that act. Further, it doesn't apply to acts in a hotel room or private residence. PROPOSED DRAFT ATTACHED YES NO DATED THIS � T�� DAY OF /7,-'�i2 , 19 / Induce, entice or procure, or attempt to induce, entice or procure another person to commit a sex act or an act of sexual intercourse for hire. t$ j'''',.' ,,,4, 7 '''' uT SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1988 (Sexual intercourse and sex acts for hire) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 11, CHAPTER 16, SECTION 020 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE, 1988, RELATING TO SEXUAL INTERCOURSE AND SEX ACTS FOR HIRE, AS FOLLOWS: Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That Title 11, Chapter 16, Chapter 020 of the Salt Lake City Code, 1988, be, and the same hereby is amended to read as follows: Sec. 11.16.020 Sexual intercourse 'and sex acts for hire. • A. * * * 1 . * * * 2. * * * 3. * * * 4. Induce, entice or procure, or attempt to induce, entice or procure another person[ , in or near any placc , ] to commit a sex act for hire or an act of sexual intercourse for hire; SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect upon the date of its first publication. 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 (SEAL) Bill No. of 1989 . Published: GRH:rc -2- ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT EARL "LOU" LYNES Division of Animal Control PALMER A. DEPAULIS ANIMAL CONTROL DIRECTOR 890 NORTH 300 WEST MAYOR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84103 (801) 538-2194 MEMO: TO: W.M. "WILLIE" Stoler Chairperson City Council DATE: APRIL 18 , 1989 1 . Subject: Estray Ordinance Number 8 . 12 2 . Recommendation: Adopt 3 . Funding: None 4 . Background: The estray ordinance was inadvertently deleted during recodification. Due to the large numbers of livestock in the city, our officers are responding to many estray calls. At present they have no ordinance to enforce proper fencing and prevention. 5 . Legislative Document: Included 6 . Contact Person: Frank Crowe 596-5070 7. Submitted By: Lou Lynes, Director 596-5070 LL/nl r^ • SALT EAKIP OITY1 CORPORA'ION1 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT EARL "LOU" LYNES Division of Animal Control PALMER DEPAULIS ANIMAL CONTROL DIRECTOR 890 NORTH 300 WEST MAYOR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84103 (801) 538-2194 MEMO TO : SHERYL GILL;LAN FROM: LOU LYNES DATE: MARCH 10, 1989 RE ESTRAY ORDINANCE Enclosed please find a draft of the Estray Ordinance we would like to submit. Chapter 8 . 12. 010 through 8 . 12 . 240 are our original Estray Ordinance that was in advertently left out during the recodification process. 8 . 12 . 250 Is a new section that requires a fence to be installed to contain any livestock kept within city limits. This is needed because of the owners of livestock who turn sheep and sometimes cattle loose in areas with no fence, or fencing in such poor repair that it will not contain the animals. There have been traffic accidents with serious injury to individuals , and a fatality caused by loose animals. On a recent court case involving property damage, the owner of the livestock denied liability because of the lack of the fencing ordinance. The court concurred . Loose livestock also have on numerous occasions been loose on the run ways at the airport . These problems result in major cost to the city in time spent by officers of Animal Control , the Police Department and Airport Operations. Also cost in property damage and loss of life are substantial . 8 . 04 . 390 Is being amended to read animals instead of dogs to reflect the growing number of animals not covered under existing ordinance. An example might be someone with rabbits who turns them loose to eat the neighbors garden. This ordinance would require the owner to keep their animal contained and makes the person responsible for the animal, liable for any damages caused by that animal. LL/nl gjo0 iJ,;; .';i ‘ '[;:? rr,-f SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Estrays) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 8 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE AND ADDING THERETO CHAPTER 8 . 12 RELATING TO ESTRAYS. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That Title 8 of the Salt Lake City Code be, and the same hereby is, AMENDED, by adding a new Chapter 8. 12 to read as follows: CHAPTER 8 . 12 ESTRAYS 8.12.010 Impounding and Disposal of Estrays, Generally. It is hereby made the duty of the City animal control manager to take into his/her possession and impound all estrays running at large, and to dispose of the same as hereinafter provided. Whenever the word "estray" appears in this chapter, it is defined to mean any valuable animal, except dogs or cats, not wild, found wandering from its owner. 8.12.020 Notice of Sale of Estrays. Within three days after an estray shall come into the possession of the animal control manager, the manager shall advertise the same in a newspaper published in the county, having general circulation in the county, by publishing a notice in at least one issue of said paper, at least five days before the sale, and by posting notices for a period of ten days in three public places in the City, one of which places shall be at or near the post office. The manager shall immediately deliver a copy of such notice to the county clerk, or mail the same to him/her by registered letter. The notice so filed with the clerk shall be available during reasonable hours for inspection by the public free of charge. The notice herein provided for shall contain a description of the animals, including all makes and brands, when taken, the day, hour, and place of sale, and may be substantially in the following form. NOTICE State of Utah, County of Salt Lake, In Salt Lake City, I have in my possession the following described estray animals, which, if not claimed and taken away, will be sold at public auction to the highest cash bidder at the city animal Shelter in Salt Lake City on , the day of , 19 , at the hour of (description of animals) Said estrays were taken up by me in said city on the day of , 19 Manager, Salt Lake City Animal Control 8.12.030 Return to Owner On Payment of Costs-Sale. If at any time before the sale of any estrays, such animals shall be claimed and proved to be the property of any person, the animal control manager shall deliver them to the owner upon receiving from the owner the cost of impounding, keeping and advertising the same. If the animals are not so claimed and taken away, the manager shall, at the time and placed mentioned in the notice, proceed to sell the same, one at a time, to the highest cash bidder, and shall execute and deliver a bill of sale transferring said animals to the purchaser or purchasers -2- thereof, which bill of sale shall be substantially in the following form: I hereby certify that in pursuance of the law regulating the disposal of estrays and trespassing animals, I have this day sold to for the sum of $ , he/she being the highest bidder, head of described as follows, to wit: (description of animals) Witness my hand this day of 19 Manager, Salt Lake City Animal Control The manager shall immediately file a copy of such bill of sale with the county clerk or forward the same to him/her by registered mail. The copy so filed with the clerk shall be preserved for a period of two years and shall be open to inspection during all reasonable hours without charge. Such bill of sale shall transfer and vest in such purchaser the full title to the animals thus sold. 8.12.040 Record of Estrays. The animal control manager shall keep an accurate record of all estrays received by him/her, their age, color, sex, marks, and brands, the time and place of taking and the expense of keeping and selling the same, all animals claimed and taken away, all animals sold and to whom sold and the amount paid, all moneys paid to owners after sale, all moneys paid into the city treasury, and all other matters necessary to a compliance with the provisions of this chapter. The Mayor shall provide the manager with a suitable book, in which shall be entered the records required by law to be kept by -3- the manager. Such records shall be open to the inspection of the public at all reasonable hours, and shall be deposited by the manager with his/her successor in office. 8.12.050 Trespassing Animals - Damaging - Impounding. If any cattle, horses, asses, mules, sheep, goats or swine shall trespass or do damage upon the premises of any person, the party aggrieved, whether such be the owner or occupant of such premises, may recover damages by an action at law against the owner of the trespassing animals, or by distraining and impounding said animals in the manner provided herein. 8.12.060 Appraisement of Damages. The owner or occupant of any property may distrain any or all of said animals trespassing or doing damage thereon. He/she shall, within twenty-four hours thereafter, deliver said animals to the city animal control manager, together with a certificate of the appraisement of the damage done by such animals. Such appraisement must be made by a qualified disinterested person of adult age. It must state the amount of the damage, the time when committed, the name of the person damaged, the name of the owner of the animals, if known, and if not known, it must state that fact, together with a description of the animals, including all visible marks and brands. If the animals appear to be owned by different parties, a separate appraisement and a separate certificate thereof shall be made of the damage done by the lot or group of animals which appear to belong to each of the different owners. In such cases, the owners shall be notified separately, and each lot or group of animals shall be advertised -4- advertised and sold separately in the same manner as though the damage had been done by different animals at different times. 8.12.070 Owner to Be Notified. The person distraining the animals must, if the owner of the same be known to such person and if the owner resides within ten miles of the place of the trespass, immediately deliver to such owner, or leave at his/her place of residence if he/she cannot be found, a copy of such certificate of appraisement; but if the owner does not live within ten miles of the place of trespass, the party distraining the animals may, at his/her option, deliver a copy of such certificate to the owner in person, or deposit the same in the nearest post office in a registered letter addressed to said owner. He/she shall be entitled to charge fifteen cents a mile one way for the first ten miles necessarily traveled in delivering such certificate, and ten cents for each additional mile, to be taxed as costs against the animals. 8.12.080 Failure to Notify Waives Damages. If the party distraining any animals shall fail to deliver them or the certificate of appraisement to the city animal control manager within twenty-four hours, or shall fail to deliver to the owners of the animals, if known, a copy of the certificate of appraisement within forth-eight hours after he/she receives the same, or to deposit the same in the post office at herein provided, said party shall not be entitled to recover damages under the provisions of this ordinance. -5- 8.12.090 Where Owner Unknown - Duty of Animal Control Manager. Whenever any animals are delivered to the animal control manager, and the certificate of appraisement is filed with him/her as herein provided and such certificate states that the owner is unknown, the animal control manager shall immediately examine all brand books or brand sheets in his/her possession, and if the owner be ascertained thereby, or if the owner be already known to the animal control manager, the manager shall, if the owner lives within ten miles, immediately deliver a copy of such certificate of appraisement to such owner or leave the same at the owner' s residence if he/she cannot be found; if the owner lives more than ten miles away, the animal control manager may, at his/her option, deliver such copy personally to the owner, or deposit the same in the nearest post office in a registered letter addressed to such owner. The manager shall, however, serve a copy in one of the ways provided herein; provided, that whenever personal service of a copy of any paper is required by this chapter, service by agent shall be deemed sufficient. 8.12.100 Notice of Sale of Distrained Animals. As soon as such animals are delivered to the animal control manager, the manager shall immediately proceed to advertise the same as hereinafter provided, except when the owner is known and has been notified, in which case he/she shall hold said animals fort-eight hours before advertising the same. The manager shall advertise in a newspaper published in the county, having general circulation in the county, by publishing a notice in at least -6- one issue of said paper, and by posting notices in three of the most public places in the city, one of which shall be at or near the post office, and shall deliver a copy of the same to the county clerk, or send the same by officer or by registered mail. The clerk shall preserve such notice and post a copy thereof. The notice herein provided for shall state the time when the damage was done and the amount thereof, the name of the party damaged, a description of the animals, including all visible marks and brands, and the day, hour, and place at which such animals will be sold, which shall be not less than ten or more than twenty days from the time of posting such notice; said notices may be substantially in the following form: SALE OF ANIMALS FOR DAMAGES State of Utah, County of Salt Lake, In the City of Salt Lake. I have in my possession the following described animals, which, if not claimed and taken away, will be sold at public auction to the highest cash bidder at the city animal shelter in Salt Lake City, on the day of , 19 Animal Control Director 8.12. 110 Owner May Pay and Take Animals - Disputed Appraisal. The owner of any trespassing animals taken up under the provisions of this chapter may, at any time before the sale thereof, claim and take such animals away upon paying the amount of damages set forth in the certificate of appraisement and the accrued costs, and if such animals are included in a lot or group of animals belonging to other parties, against which the damages and costs are assessed as a whole, he/she shall pay -7- his/her proportion of the total amount of damages and costs assessed against such animals, according to the number of animals he/she owns when compared with the number of the entire lot or group. If said owner deems the appraisal too high, he/she may choose another appraiser having the qualifications herein provided, who with the first shall make a new appraisal, and if they cannot agree, they shall choose a third and the three shall proceed to make another appraisal, and the decision of the majority shall be final. 8.12. 120 Sale - Bill of Sale. If such animals are not claimed and taken away by the owner, the animal control manager shall, at the time and place set forth in the notice of sale, proceed to sell such animals, one at a time, to the highest cash bidder. If the owner of any lot of animals to be sold is known, the animal control manager shall sell only enough of said animals to pay the damages and costs, and the remainder may be turned over to the owner at any time thereafter; but if the owner be not known, the animal control manager shall proceed to sell all of said animals so advertised for sale. The manager shall execute and deliver a bill of sale therefor, and file a copy with the county clerk as hereinbefore provided. Said copies shall be preserved for a period of two years and shall be open for inspection at all reasonable hours, free of charge. 8.12.130 Record of Trespassing Animals. The animal control manager shall keep an accurate record of all trespassing animals received by him/her, which shall contain all the items required by this title, together with the names of the injured -8- party and the owner of the animals, the amount of the damages claimed, and all other matters necessary to a complete account of the transaction. Such record shall be open for inspection at all reasonable hours without charge. 8.12.140 Unlawful Sales. The owner of any animals unlawfully impounded or sold may maintain an action to recover the same and damages for the detention thereof. 8.12.150 Retaking Animals Unlawfully. It shall be unlawful for anyone to take an animal out of the possession of anyone lawfully holding the same under the provisions of this chapter, either by stealth, force, fraud, or to intercept or hinder any person lawfully taking up or attempting to take up such animals. 8.12.160 Animal Shelter. The animal control manager shall furnish suitable premises to be used as the city animal shelter, and it shall be the duty of the city animal control manager to take charge of the premises, which shall be designated as the city animal shelter and keep said premises in a clean and orderly condition. It shall be said manager' s duty to receive and care for all animals committed to his/her charge; to examine records, marks and brands; and to exercise diligence in locating the owners of such animals and to notify them if found. 8.12.170 Bill of Damage. The animal control manager shall receive and file all bills of damage duly presented, and enter the amounts in his/her books, which shall be open to the inspection of the public. The manager shall not deliver any animal to the owner until all costs and damages are paid. -9- 8.12.180 Proceeds of Sale. The net proceeds of the sale of all animals, as herein provided, shall be paid into the city treasury, subject to the order of the owners of said animals, if applied for within six months from date of sale. If not applied for within that time, the city treasurer shall transfer the amount into the general fund. 8.12.190 Advertising Bills. All bills for advertising shall be certified to by the animal control manager, and if correct, shall be ordered paid by the city. 8.12.200 Animals at Large. No cattle, horses, mules, sheep, goats or swine shall be allowed to run at large, or be herded, picketed, or staked out upon any street, sidewalk or any other public place within the limits of the city, and all such animals so found may be taken up and driven to the animal shelter; provided that nothing herein contained shall be so construed as to prevent any person from driving milk cows, work cattle, horses, mules or other animals from outside the city limits to any enclosure within the city limits, or from any enclosure in the city to place outside the city or from any enclosure to another within the limits of the city. 8.12.210 Detention of Animals. It shall be unlawful for any person other than the city animal control manager to take up an animal of another, under the provisions of this chapter, and retain it more than eighteen hours. 8.12.220 Malicious Impounding. It shall be unlawful for any person maliciously to secrete or impound an animal of another pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. -10- 8.12.230 Fees. The animal control manager shall collect and retain the following fees for his/her services: For impounding and posting up notices, the sum of thirty- five dollars per head for all animals impounded; for feeding of animals, six dollars per animal per day; for conducting sale, six dollars per animal sold; and the actual cost of any advertising required by ordinance to be made by the animal control manager in the course of his/her duties as such animal control manager. 8.12.240 Monthly Statement. It shall be the duty of the city animal control manager to make monthly, a statement of the business transacted by him/her in connection with the city animal shelter, showing in detail all animals received, sold, advertised or handled by such manager, together with a detailed statement of all monies expended and received. 8.12.250 Responsibility For Fencing. The owner, occupant or lessor of any property used to confine, keep or pasture any cattle, horses, asses, mules, sheep, goats, swine or other types of livestock or large animals shall install and maintain in good repair a fence around the perimeter of said property sufficient to insure that no such animal contained therein shall be able to escape such property to run at large. All gates installed shall be locked and shall be of such a type that no animal contained within shall be able to escape and run at large by any means. -11- SECTION 2. That Section 8.04. 390, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to dogs running at large be, and the smae hereby is, AMENDED to read as follows: 8.04.390 [Dogs] Animals running at large. It is unlawful for the owner or person having charge, care, custody or control of any [dog] animal to allow such [dog] animal at any time to run at large. The owner or person charged with responsibility for an [deg] animal found running at large shall be strictly liable for a violation of this section, regardless of the precautions taken to prevent the escape of the [deg] animal and regardless of whether or not such owner or person knows that the [dog] animal is running at large. Any person violating any provision of this section shall be deemed guilty of an infraction and may not be imprisoned, but shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed two hundred ninety-nine dollars. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall take effect upon its first publication. 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. -12- MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER ( SEAL) Bill No. OF 1989 . Published: LVS:pp -13- �= Ire-)• I 5.ALt'!A�4„31G7T j�,�R O, R iION • DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CRAIG E. PETERSON 114 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING DIRECTOR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111, 535-7777 TO: Salt Lake City Council April 3, 1989 Re: Petition No. 400-708-89 submitted by David DeSantis Reconii ndation:. That the City Council hold a-public hearing on May 2, •1989 at 6:20 p.m. to discuss Petition No. 400-708-89 submitted by David • DeSanLis. The petitioner has requested that Salt Lake City Corporation amend section 21.78.130 to allow for-profit organizations to operate private recreation facilities in a residential district. Availability of Funds: Not applicable • • Discussion and Background: The Planning Commission has reviewed and • • approved this petition with the following conditions: MANDATORY CRITERIA: 1. The area to be used for recreational purposes is of sufficient size to accommodate all proposed facilities together with off street parking sufficient to accommodate the needs of the patrons of the proposed facility • and still maintain a landscaped 30"' front yard, 10' side yard and 25' rear yard. 2. That all drainage and water retention plans have been reviewed and • approved by the Salt Lake City Engineer. • 3. That all traffic impact mitigation has been reviewed and approved by the Salt Lake City Transportation Engineer. APPROVAL CRI'1ERIA: 1 . Whether the proposed recreation area is of such size and shape and so located as to not cause any undue infringement on the privacy of the abutting areas and is in keeping with the design of the neighborhood. 2. Whether the proposed facility is in keeping with the adopted master plan for the area. 3. Whether the proposed facility adversely impacts the surrounding residential neighborhood by way of such factors as lights, noise, odor, . time or method of operation or other similar objectionable operating characteristic. PROHIBITIONS: 1. No accessory uses- such as retail and food services be authorized to operate exclusively or as a part of any Private Recreation Facility unless such use has been independently approved by the City. All such accessory uses must be solely for the use and convenience of the patrons of the proposed establishment. The Planning Commission shall have the authority to place whatever additional conditions or restrictions it may doom necessary to protect the character of the residential district, and to insure the proper development _- and maintain of such residential area including the plans for the disposition or reuse of the property if the recreation area is not maintained in the manner agreed upon or is abandoned by the developer. • The Planning Commission also discussed and approved changing the approval authority for granting conditional uses for recreational facilities in residential zones from the Board of Adjustment to the Planning Commission. Legislative Documents: The City. Attorney's Office has prepared and approved the proposed:ordinance. Submitted by: / CRAIG E. PEI'ERSON Director lf/ • • C SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Amending Section 21.78. 130 Dealing with Recreational Facilities in Residential Districts Pursuant to Petition No. 400-708-89 ) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 21 .78.130, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, DEALING WITH RECREATIONAL FACILITIES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. 400-708-89 . WHEREAS, the City Council has held hearings before its own body and before the Planning and Zoning Commission and believes it appropriate to amend the provisions of Section 21. 78. 130, Salt Lake City Code, dealing with recreational uses in residential districts as conditional uses; :NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, hereby adopts the following amendment to Section 21 . 78.130 of the Salt Lake City Code. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That Section 21 .78. 130 , Salt Lake City Code, attached hereto as Exhibit A is hereby repealed. SECTION 2. That Section 21 . 78 . 130 is hereby reenacted to read as follows : 21 .7.8.130 Recreational facilities in residential districts. A. Recreational facilities as conditional use. Where not otherwise authorized by this title, and when in its opinion the best interest of the community will be served thereby, the Planning and Zoning Commission may permit, as a conditional use, the use of the land in a residential district f • for recreational purposes, subject to the following conditions and procedures: B. Definition. "Recreational uses" , for the purpose of this section, shall be defined to mean a structure or developed open space designed and equipped for the conduct of sports, leisure time activities and other customary and usual recreational activities, including paths and playgrounds, tennis courts, swimming pools, golf courses and golf training facilities, nature exhibits and similar uses. "Recreational uses" shall not include commercial spa or aerobic clubs, all terrain or recreational vehicle parks, amusement parks, waterslides, skateboard parks or similar uses. C. Application. f • Applications for conditional uses under this section shall be filed with the Planning and Zoning Commission. Such applica- tions shall include detailed information concerning the criteria specified in subsection E. below. The application shall also require the payment of a one hundred dollar ($100.00 ) processing fee which includes the cost of mailing any and all required notices. D. Notice and hearing. • The Planning and Zoning Commission shall hold an informal hearing on applications for conditional uses under this section. Notice of the hearing shall be given to residents and property owners within six hundred feet of the proposed conditional use. -2- E. Approval criteria. In considering the petition for conditional use the Planning and Zoning Commission shall determine from the criteria below whether the proposed conditional use substantially supports the desirable development pattern for the area in question in conformity with the city master plan for that area. The factors and criteria to be considered include: 1 . Whether the proposed recreation area is of such -size and shape and so located as to not cause any undue infringement on the privacy of the abutting areas and is in keeping -with the design of the neighborhood. 2. Whether the proposed facility is in keeping with the adopted master plan for the area. 3. Whether the proposed facility adversely impacts the surrounding residential neighborhood by way of such factors as lights, noise, odor, time or method of operation or other similar objectionable operating characteristic. F. Design requirements. Before the Planning and Zoning. Commission may grant the proposed conditional use it must find that the following mandatory criteria have been met: 1 . That the area to be used for recreational purposes is of sufficient size to accommodate all proposed facilities, together with all required off street parking sufficient to accommodate the needs of the patrons of the proposed facilities while still maintaining required landscaped thirty foot front yards, ten foot side yards and twenty five foot rear yards. -3- ,s1 2. That all drainage and water retention plans have been reviewed and approved by the Salt Lake City Engineer. 3. That all traffic impact mitigation has been reviewed and approved by the Salt Lake City Transportation Engineer. G. Additional design elements. Subject. to the provisions of this section, if the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the conditional use is appropriate for the site, the Commission may, in addition, require any or all of the design criteria specified below which . are determined to be reasonably necessary to minimize any negative esthetic, economic or planning impacts associated with : the conditional use: 1 . An opaque masking structure or fence of a material in keeping with the character of the neighborhood to screen the proposed use from neighboring uses. 2. Such other conditions reasonably necessary to ensure compatibility of uses within the district in conformance with adopted master plans and policies and the protection of property values. H. Prohibited accessory uses. Accessory uses on the property such as retail sales and food services shall not be permitted except as such uses have been specifically approved by the Planning and Zoning Commis- sion. Any such accessory use shall be solely for the benefit and convenience of the patrons of the proposed establishment. -4- I . Security. Prior to the issuance of a permit to construct the conditional use, adequate financial security shall be posted in a form acceptable to the city to ensure completion of the proposed and required landscape improvements. SECTION .3 . EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. 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 -5- • ALLEN C. JOHNSON MEMBERS: PLANNING DIRECTOR RALPH BECKER 1 1 '^'i p ONE CINDY CROMER SANDRA MARLER SALE° f A 1 �� �' gr r i R�'� !`� ON SECRETARY .,��.,.. ao„p v>..r ..� V�/�.,,���,�=� CINDY A. ELLISON EX•OFFICIO MEMBERS; DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES LAVONE LIDDLE-GAMONALRICHARD J. HOWA MAYOR 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 March 23, 1989 KATHY WACKER Craig Peterson Director of Development Services Building - Dear Craig, Attached herewith is Petition 400-708 by David Desantis. The petitioner is requesting .that Salt Lake City amend section 21. 78. 130 of the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance regulating the location and operation of private recreation facilities in residential zones. Presently, the Board of Adjustment may authorize as a Conditional Use the operation of a private recreation facility in a residential zone. In order to qualify for this provision in the zoning ordinance, the ownership of the facility must fall into one of two categories. Either the facility must be owned by the residents of the subdivision in which it is located or be owned and operated by a nonprofit corporation. The petitioner has requested that the city modify this portion of the zoning ordinance to allow for-profit organizations to operate private recreation facilities in a residential district. The Planning Commission reviewed this request on March 9, 1989 and recommends approval of Petition 400-708 by deleting paragraphs "a" and e through h of section 21 . 78. 130. The Planning Commission also discussed and approved changing the approval authority for granting conditional uses for .recreational facilities in residential zones from the Board of Adjustment to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission recommends that section 21. 78. 130 of the Revised Ordinances of Salt Lake City be amended to include the following conditions: Mandatory Criteria: 1 . The area to be used for recreational purposes is of sufficient size to accommodate all proposed facilities together with off street parking sufficient to accommodate the needs of the patrons of the proposed facility and still Craig Peterson March 23, 1989 Page -2- maintain a landscaped 30 ' front yard, 10 . side yard and 25 • rear yard. 2. That all drainage and water retention plans must be reviewed and approved by the Salt Lake City Engineer. That all required landscaped setbacks must be installed and their maintenance guaranteed by the installation of a sprinkling system. Of ova Co-ndi Tra Criteria: 4. The proposed recreation area must be of such size and shape and -so located so as not to cause any undue infringement on the privacy of the abutting areas and be in keeping with the design of the neighborhood in which the recreation area is to be situated. • 5. That the proposed facility is in keeping with the adopted master plan for the area. 6. The petitioner has demonstrated that all adverse traffic impacts can be mitigated to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission. ( Th'is must be verified by the Salt Lake City Transportation Engineer ). 7. The proposed facility does not adversely impact the surrounding residential neighborhood by way of: lights, noise, odor, time or method of operation or any other objectionable operating characteristic. \fir) 8. That where the city may deem appropriate, the petitioner C6ru must erect and maintain a 6 " fence. ( Type and material must be approved by the Planning Commission) . • Prohibitions: 9. No accessory uses such as retail and food services be authorized to operate exclusively or as a part of any Private Recreation Facility unless such use has been independently approved by the City. All such accessory uses must be solely for the use and convenience of the patrons of the proposed establishment. The Planning Commission shall have the authority to place whatever additional conditions or restrictions it may deem necessary to protect the character of the residential district, and to insure the proper development and maintenance of such a residential area including the plans for the disposition or reuse Craig Peterson March 23, 1989 Page -3- of the property if the recreation area is not maintained in the manner agreed upon or is abandoned by the developers. The Planning Commission would recommend that the City Council consider setting a date for a public hearing to receive input regarding this proposed ordinance change. Respectfully,• Allen C. Johnson AICP Planning Director • • • • • ACJ: CAS Attachments • f APPLICATION FOR ZONING AMENDEMENT To be filed in duplicate with the department of Development Services 324 South State Street Suite #201 Filing Fee $100.00 Advertising Fee* $100.00 (*if a public hearing is held) Application is hereby made to the Mayor and City Council of Salt Lake City Utah, to: Amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance. By amending Section 21.78.130(A) (Use reverse side for requested text change) Amend the Use District (Zoning) Map. Of Salt Lake City by reclassifying the following property located at: N/A from a classification to a classification (Use reverse side for legal description) • ATTACH TO APP'L.ICATION 1. The reasons why the present zoning- is not proper for the area. 2. Changes which have taken place in the area which justify a change in zoning. 3. Description of the proposed use to be made of the property. 4. Other items which justify a change in the existing zoning. 5. Indication of support for rezoning from all affected property owners. • 6. Any other information or exhibits which would aid the planning Commission in arriving at a proper recommendation. 7. Sidwell Parcel Identification Number. THE ABOVE INFORMATION, IN DETAIL, MUST ACCOMPANY THIS APPLICATION IN ORDER FOR 'Ltii: PETITION TO BE PAY BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. Signature of the applicant Address 2210 Sunnvbrook Way Salt Lake City, Utah Telephone Number 277-3027 Zip Code 84124 FILL OUT REVERSE SIDE • Attach all exhibits and supporting data to application. Petition No. Date Receipt No. n ,�, Amount $ /-)(), () * The office of planning and zoning has indicated that a credit is available for the amount already paid by the applicant in connection with its prior conditional icc arn1 ina inn !'•tea - MT. OLIVET CEMETERY ASSOCIATION 1342 EAST 5TH SOUTH SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84102 January 20 , 1989 Mr . Alan Johnson Salt Lake City Planning and Zoning 324 South State Street Salt Lake City , Utah Dear Mr . Johnson, As you know I have petitioned the Planning Commission and the City Council to ammend the section of the zoning ordinance dealing with allowing a for profit entity operating a private recreation facility in a residential zone. Because of the importance and benefit of nurturing newly seeded grass in the Spring, I am requesting that the petition be put in front of the Planning Commission on the next available slot ( Feb_ 9 ) so that if a favorable recommendation by the Planning Commission is granted a decision from the City Council will be expedited . Also, I would like to inform you that a Mr . Kennley Brunsdale will act as my agent in this. case. • Sinc rly, • //,„ David DeSantis ATTACHMENT TO APPLICATION FOR ZONING AMENDMENT 1 . Reason why the present zoning is not proper for the area. Applicant has already been granted a conditional use permit for the development of the proposed Golf Center on the Mount Olivet Cemetery land in Salt Lake City; how- ever , the permit is subject to the restrictions in zoning ordinance 21 . 78 . 130 (A) which precludes development of the center by a for-profit organization. The nature of the pro- posed project and benefit it would provide to the community, will be difficult to realize if the status of the developer is unattractive to capital resources . The applicant has been unable thus far to secure caitalization as a non-profit organization . 2 . Changes which have taken place in the area which justify a change in zoning . The office of planning and zoning as previously concluded that :the proposed Golf Center compliments the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will serve recreational and esthetic interests of the community. 3 . Description of the proposed use to be made of the property. (See the attached Development Plan. ) . 4 . Other items which justify a change in the existing • zoning. The subject lands constitute the expansion area for the Mount Olivet Cemetery. The lands are not antici- pated to be needed for at least 25 years . Currently, the property is a vacant lot which is costly to maintain within fire safety codes and often unattractive . The Golf Center plan provides for the development of vegetation, shrubbery, trees and other esthetics which will serve intended purposes of the Golf Center, as well as long term objectives of the Mount Olivet Cemetery. 5 . Indication of support for rezoning from all effected property owners . The applicant has undertaken to communicate with residents in the surrounding neighborhood and is aware of no objection to the proposed Golf Center development . The Mount Olivet Cemetery Trustees support and are enthusiastic about the Golf Center. 6 . Any other information or exhibits which would aid the planning .commission in arriving at a proper recommendation. (The attached includes conceptual drawings of the proposed Golf Center) . -2- . . � cam, SALT LAKE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Petition 400-708 By David DeSantis l r OVERVIEW The petitioner is requesting that the city modify the text of the zoning ordinance by deleting portions of section 21. 78. 130. This section states that any private recreation facility operating in a residential zone must be owned by the residents of the subdivision in which it is located or operate as a nonprofit corporation. The petitioner is requesting that the city modify the text of the zoning ordinance to allow "for profit" corporations to 'operate private recreation facilities in a residential zones as a conditional use. The petitioner has received conditional use approval from the Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment to operate a golf training facility as a nonprofit corporation at approximately 1519 East Sunnyside Avenue which is directly West of the National Guard Armory. BACKGROUND The present wording for this section of the zoning ordinance first appeared as a text amendment on September 1,-• 1959. Reasons for it 's adoption stem from concerns that were expressed regarding the commercialization of parks and open spaces by the sale of concessions and other goods to patrons of recreational facilities. ANALYSIS The question of whether of not the operator of a private recreation facility is a nonprofit corporation -would be difficult to research and enforce. The State of Utah Department of Business Regulation has indicated that there are several types of nonprofit corporations that may be licensed. There does not seem to be any correlation between the city's desires to regulate the operations of private recreation facilities and the requirement of licensing as a nonprofit corporation. The zoning ordinance is not specific as to what type of nonprofit corporation must be licensed to operate a private recreation facility in a residential zone. The staff feels that- the more important question to be answered is whether or not the land use is appropriate for the adjoining neighborhood and the city as a whole. It is this portion of the zoning ordinance that required the city to zone- Raging Waters Commercial C-3A to allow the recreational use that is operated by a private Company. The Planning Commission and the Board of Adjustment authorized the approval of a Conditional Use for a Private Recreation Facility in the form of a "Golf Training" facility in this residential zone. Both the Planning Commission and the Board of Adjustment have determined that this type of land use would be appropriate for this neighborhood as an interim use until Mount Olivet Cemetery needs the land. The activities that would cause the most concern on the site are the operation of the concessions A n that would be incidental to the functions of a golf training facility. These functions are currently being practiced in city parks and golf courses with apparent success. The petitioner has submitted operating guidelines to the staff as part of the request to change the text of 'the ordinance. This business plan is attached to the staff report. Cemetery officials indicate that the petitioner must still successfully negotiate an agreement with the Federal Government to ascertain whether a golf facility is a suitable interim use of a future cemetery. Only after this is completed do cemetery officials offer their support of the petitioners proposal. • RECOMMENDATION ' The Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of Petition 400-708 by deleting paragraphs "a" and e through h of section 21. 78. 130 and adding the additional conditions listed below: , In order to receive approval for a Private Recreation Facility - in a residential - zone the petitioner must demonstrate that: 1. That the proposed facility is .in keeping with the adopted master plan for the area. , 2. The petitioner has demonstrated that all adverse traffic impacts can be mitigated to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission. ( This must be verified by the Salt Lake City Transportation Engineer ) . 3. The proposed facility does not adversely impact the surrounding residential neighborhood by way ot : lights, noise, odor, time or method of operation or any other objectionable operating characteristic. 4. That all drainage and water retention plans must be reviewed and approved by the Salt Lake City Engineer. 5. That where the city may deem appropriate, the petitioner must erect and maintain a 6 " fence. ( Type and material must be approved by the Planning Commission ) . 6. That all required landscaped setbacks must be installed and their maintenance guaranteed by the installation of a sprinkling system. 7. That all accessory uses such as retail and food services be independently approved by the City. All such accessory uses must be solely for the use and convenience of the patrons of the proposed establishment. Cristian A. Schulz City Planner II March 1, 1989 I