Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
09/12/1989 - Minutes
PROC INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI , UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met as the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, September 12, 1989, at 5:00 p.m. in Room 325, 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 Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting. The Council Members inter- included in the Opening Ceremonies viewed Mr. Theophile J. Syms for was a presentation of a resolution appointment to the Board of Ap- recognizing September 14th as peals and Examiners. Chairman D.A.R.E. Day in Salt Lake City. Stoler asked Mr. Syms to state his D.A.R.E. is an anti-drug program qualifications and desire to serve helping children and young adults. on this Board. Mr. Syms said he felt qualified for this appoint- Ms. Gust-Jenson said Council ment due to his familiarity with Member Fonnesbeck had requested the rules and regulations of that the public hearing concerning building homes and remodeling the appointment procedures to the structures. Historical Landmark Committee be scheduled for October 10, 1989, Council Member Kirk asked if rather than October 3rd. The he was aware of the responsibili- reason for her request was because ties of this appointment. Mr. the Avenues Community Council Syms said he was aware of the monthly meeting was scheduled for Board ' s service but was not, at October 4, 1989 . this time, aware of what his particular duties would be. Upon Council Member Godfrey' s Council Member Bittner expressed inquiry about the Consent Agenda, appreciation to Mr. Syms for his Ms. Gust-Jenson explained the willingness to serve, reason for scheduling and holding a public hearing the same night. The Council Members inter- She said this was a nonadvertised viewed Glenda Armour for appoint- public hearing and scheduling had ment to the Community Development been approved by the City Attor- Advisory Committee. Chairman ney' s office. She explained that Stoler asked Ms. Armour to state while the timing was appropriate her qualifications and desire to in the legal sense, it was outside serve on this Board. Ms. Armour of the Council ' s general practice. said she had never served on a She had informed Council Members City committee but was excited present at last week' s Committee about this appointment. Ms. of the Whole meeting of this Armour would be representing the request, and they had agreed to Jackson area. Council Member Kirk setting the date and holding the indicated her appreciation for Ms. public hearing on the same night Armour' s enthusiasm. to expedite the process. Cindy Gust-Jenson, Council Ms. Gust-Jenson reviewed the Executive Director, said that calendar of events as stated on the attached list. 89-260 OUNCIL MINUTES 410 EPTEMBER 12 , 1989 ATTACHMENT DATE EVENT LOCATION COST RSVP 9/13-15 League of Cities Conf. SLC TG 3 days FB 3 days RK Wed 9/15 Dedication/Open House Central Valley Water 800 W Central Valley Rd yes- FB & RK 9/21 - Gov's Breakfast. Salute Little America Hotel -**by 9/15 to UP & L no-RK yes-FB 9/23 Coalition for Utah's Airport Hilton $15 **by 9/18 Future/Child Care no-RK Action Forum 9/26 Lt.. Gov's Breakfast Marriott by 9/26 re: 1989 Utah Ski Ball yes-FB 9/27 Delta Airlines Grand 3823 W 1200 N **by 9/15 Opening yes-FB RK CIP Project. Tours ( Max Peterson ) 11/25 NLCT Nat.'1 Conference Janne has WS & AH Janne needs airline info 12/6 Clark Financial Xmas Party SL Country Club 11/20 89-260A PROCEOINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI , UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in Regular Session on Tuesday, September 12, 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 Emilie Charles, Executive_ Assistant to the Mayor, Roger Cutler, City Attorney, Lynda Domino, Chief Deputy City Recorder, and Doc Kivett, Deputy Recorder, were present. Mayor Palmer DePaulis was absent. Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting and Councilmember Bittner conducted the meeting. OPENING CEREMONIES would have additional skills to deal with the ever increasing drug #1. There was no invocation. problem. He said the program was in 10 schools this year and his #2. The Council led the goal was to be in all 27 Salt Lake Pledge of Allegiance. City schools next year. He said on September 14th representatives #3. Councilmember Godfrey of the local business community moved and Councilmember Kirk were going to make a significant seconded to approve the minutes of financial contribution to this the Salt Lake City Council for the program in order to ensure its regular meeting held Tuesday, success in its first year. September 5, 1989, which motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Stoler pre- (M 89-1 ) sented the resolution to Chief Chabries and pledged the Council #4. The City Council and support of this program. Mayor presented a resolution (R 89-1) officially recognizing September 14, 1989, as D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) Day in Salt CONSENT AGENDA Lake City. Councilmember Horrocks moved Councilmember Kirk read the and Councilmember Kirk seconded to resolution. Councilmember Kirk approve the consent agenda, which moved and Councilmember Godfrey motion carried, all members voted seconded to adopt Resolution 106 aye except Councilmember Hardman of 1989, which motion carried, all who abstained from voting. members voted aye. #1. RE: Setting a date for a Police Chief Chabries said he nonadvertised public hearing to be was excited about the new held Tuesday, September 12, 1989, D.A.R.E. program. He said he at 6:30 p.m. to obtain public thought the police department comment concerning, and consider could be more effective by working adopting, an ordinance regarding with 5th and 6th graders so they closing "old 700 North" between 89-261 PROCAPINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI , UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1989 John Glenn Road and Eddie #2. RE: Consider adopting Rickenbacker Road within the Salt an ordinance amending section Lake International Center pursuant 21.78. 130, Recreational Facilities to Petition No. 400-741-89. in Residential Areas, pursuant to Petition No. 400-708-89, DeSantis DISCUSSION: Councilmember petition. Hardman asked which company was involved with this request. Cindy ACTION: Councilmember Kirk Gust-Jenson, Council Executive moved and Councilmember Godfrey Director, said Compeq was the seconded to adopt Ordinance 59 of company. Mr. Hardman said the 1989, which motion carried, all -- - architectural firm which he worked members voted aye. for was involved with this company (0 89-36) so he said he would abstain from voting. PUBLIC HEARINGS Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked why the Council was setting #1. RE: A public hearing at the hearing and holding it the 6: 20 p.m. to obtain comment con- same night. Ms. Gust-Jenson said cerning, and consider adopting, an the firm needed to act quickly on ordinance amending Section 21.52.- their building and the Salt Lake 010, "B-3" business district, to City Attorney' s Office said this prohibit mechanical repairs and was legal action since the hearing specialty-type service centers for was nonadvertised. automobiles and light trucks. Allen Johnson, planning ACTION: Councilmember Kirk director, said all the concerned moved and Councilmember Godfrey parties had been involved through seconded to close the public the Planning Commission process hearing, which motion carried, all and were aware that the Council members voted aye. was holding this hearing. (P 89-308) Councilmember Hardman moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to adopt Ordinance 60 of 1989, which UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS motion carried, all members voted aye. #1. RE: Set a date to hold a public hearing on October 10, DISCUSSION: Allen Johnson, 1989, at 6:20 p.m. to obtain planning director, said this was a public comment concerning, and staff initiated request as a consider adopting, an ordinance result of a recent Board of Ad- regarding the appointment proce- justment case in which the City dures to the Historical Landmark Attorney' s Office rendered a Committee. legal opinion on the definition of a retail establishment. He ACTION: Councilmember Hard- said that after a legal interpre- man moved and Councilmember Hor- tation, certain automotive sales rocks seconded to set the date, and repair facilities were consid- which motion carried, all members ered qualified uses in a B-3 zone voted aye except Councilmember whereas before they had been Stoler who was absent for the conditional under a C-1 zone and vote. allowed under a C-3 zone. (0 89-7) 89-262 PROCARINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI , UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1989 Because of the Board of Councilmember Stoler said new Adjustment case and the attorney' s EPA standards were going to be legal opinion, Mr. Johnson recom- imposed and many neighborhood mended that the B-3 ordinance be service stations would close modified to further define the because it would be too expensive present intent of the B-3 zone, to repair their underground tanks. which was to exclude those uses He asked if the Planning Commis- that were automobile repair ori- sion had considered a possible use ented or oriented toward specialty of this land. Mr. Johnson said servicing such as muffler shops, they hadn' t submitted this issue brake shops and tire establish- to the PlanningCommission but he ments. He said it was never the had directed the long-range plan- city' s intent to allow these uses ning section in his office to in neighborhood B-3 zones since develop a new B-3 zone and this they were more of a community or was one issue they would address. regional use. He said it was He said even though a business may important to have the Council not be able to afford to replace a approve a definitional clarifica- tank, the EPA would require them tion in the ordinance. to pull it out of the ground. Councilmember Bittner asked Councilmember Stoler said if existing situations would the fire department indicated that remain a conditional use. Mr. as long as the tank was empty and Johnson said that presently in the filled with foam or sand, it could B-3 zone the city didn't have any stay in the ground. Mr. Johnson specialty service-type establish- said the EPA was concerned about ments. He said service stations the plume which would develop off would remain but his office wanted the tank and was also concerned to address the issue of public about fluid migrating into the garages or muffler/brake shops tank. He said if the tank was where they derived more that 50% filled with sand, the fumes would of their income from the sale of stay in the sand and would be a the item and 49% from the cost of danger. He said he thought the EPA installation. He said currently would require owners to pull the there were not any nonconforming tanks. He also said there were a uses. number of neighborhood uses they could retrofit into these older Councilmember Kirk asked buildings but they would have to about this type of business which consider each case on a site-by- had been approved in Foothill site basis. Village. Mr. Johnson said he understood that if Goodyear was Councilmember Horrocks asked successful in locating at 500 East what would happen if an owner and 400 South then they wouldn't couldn't afford to remove the locate in Foothill. He said the tanks and declared bankruptcy. Board of Adjustment approved the Mr. Johnson said the problem would Foothill location based on the rest with whoever had the title to recent legal opinion but the the property. Mr. Horrocks asked Goodyear marketing section didn' t about a case where the title to think the Foothill location would the land was free and clear. Mr. be advantageous since they Johnson thought in this case the couldn't advertise as extensively property would belong to the as they usually do. county. Roger Cutler, city attorney, said that banks may 89-263 PROCAPINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI" UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1989 refuse to foreclose on property caused problems with traffic con- and the county may be unable to gestion and she was concerned take property over through tax about the traffic because of the sales, which would create a situa- small children in the neighbor- tion of property belonging to no hood. one because of the environmental and liability problems. Stan Penfold, 715 2nd Avenue, chair of the Salt Lake Area of Mr. Johnson said that most of Community Councils, said the the existing service stations were executive committee of SLACC nonconforming because of the supported - this - change --and looked- - building design and not the use. forward to working with the plan- He said this current issue would ning department on rewriting the not create another class of non- B-3 zone. conforming uses and said the present uses became nonconforming Mr. Johnson said that about when the city made the B-3 zone four years the zoning ordinance more sensitive to the neighborhood permitted, as a conditional use in environment. the C-1 and B-3 zones, the conver- sion of a service station into a The following people spoke: "light" repair garage. He said that experiences with about six Rosalee Norwood, 353 East 900 sites convinced the Planning South, said she didn' t want to see Commission that this was not in any more service stations in the the community' s best interest and B-3 zone. She said the goal of so the ordinance was repealed the Central City Master Plan was about two and a half years ago. to make the area inviting so He said they had not been granting people would want to live there. conditional uses for light repair She said the city had added three shops in the B-3 zone although neighborhood parks in order to this was still allowed in the C-1 make the area more neighborly and zone. allowing repair shops would defeat the purpose. Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked why they were not more She referred to a shop locat- careful about enforcing the Blair ed on the corner of Blair Street Street site. Mr. Johnson said and 9th South which was a small the city' s philosophy had been to gas station when she first moved enforce the zoning ordinances if into the area. She said new there was a complaint. Council- owners took over the property in member Fonnesbeck asked if they 1981 and obtained a conditional could assume that Mrs. Norwood was use permit which allowed for making a complaint and Mr. repairs of cars and light trucks. Johnson said he would refer this She said one of the conditions was situation to the enforcement that no more than one automobile staff. He said the owners of this was permitted to remain on the site received permission from the premises outside of the building Board of Adjustment to add to but today she counted 21 cars. their building, which would facil- She said she also understood that itate their operations and they now this location had been granted would be required to remove some another variance to add 576 square hard surfacing and install grass. feet to their nonconforming build- (0 89-35) ing. She said this situation 89-264 PROCARINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIl, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1989 #2. RE: A public hearing at The meeting adjour ed at 6: 50 6:30 p.m. to obtain comment con- p.m. cerning, and consider adopting, an ordinance regarding closing "old GAG% 700 North" between John Glenn and d—t--, Eddie Rickenbacker Road within the COU Salt Lake International Center pursuant to Petition No. 400-741- 14A224."..4._ 89. ,0,4 �. ACTION: Councilmember__ God TY RE i- aE frey moved and Councilmember Hor- rocks seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members voted aye except Councilmember Hardman who abstained from voting. Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to adopt Ordinance 61 of 1989, which motion carried, all members voted aye except Councilmember Hardman who abstained from voting. DISCUSSION: Councilmember Hardman said that since his em- ployer was doing business with one of the companies involved in this issue he would abstain from the discussion. He then left the dais. Bruce Eggleston, planning and zoning, showed a map and outlined the "old 700 North" prescriptive use right of way which transversed Plat 16 in the International Center. He said the petitioner and land owner, Zions Bank, requested that this pre- scriptive use be closed and the staff recommended closure based on the fact that any need had been supplanted by improved highways to the south, east and west of this right of way. He also said the Planning Commission approved the proposal and recommended closure. No one from the audience spoke. (P 89-308) 89-265 NO Adendum— In-6U -4 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENUti 4. 7tU)t) y,tra 0. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER (� U j5 bO t V ROOM 315, lJ -t or CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING '(DOn 451 SOUTH STATE STREET ( D � Tuesday, September 12, 1989 L 6:00 p.m. A. BRIEFING SESSION: 5:00 - 5: 55 p.m. , Room 325 City and County Building, 451 ._....----------------- South State. ) nlAycr rS ea ct‘ Taal. 1. Report. of the Executive Director. 2. B. OPENING CEREMONIES: 1. Invocation. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Approval of the Minutes. 41 4. The City Council and Mayor will present a resolution officially recognizing September 14 as D.A.R. E. Day in Salt. Lake City. _ Chief zt Rp 4 T ,0_ C. COMMENTS: 1. Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. 2. Citizen Comments to the Council. D. CONSENT: 1. Petition No. 400-741-89 submitted by_ Zions First National Bank Set a date to hold a non-advertised public hearing on September 12, 1989 at 6: 30 p.m. to obtain public comment concerning and consider adopting an ordinance regarding closing "old 700 North" between John Glenn Road and Eddie Rickenbacker Road within the Salt Lake International Center pursuant to Petition No. 400-741I''-89. - e i Ui Computer- need j ckj- (P 89-308) cal, Lc)U(l(�( RRritr; I \ lb p(u(e Or\ NW-lr(1u - }�urpox 14."‘ 1 .lk er 4/ /41 - dka et. IY141nla±n;n Staff recomme a -ion, e��. `� E. NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS: F. UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS: 0 Gym�2 lb -7 1. Legislative Action - Council Member Alan Hardman ,u Set a date to hold a public hearing on October 3, 1989 at 6:20 p.m. to obtain public comment concerning and consider adopting an ordinance regarding the appointment procedures to the Historical Landmark Committee. (0 89-7) Staff recommendation: Set. date. 2. Recreational _Facilit.ies in Residential_Areas Consider adopting an ordinance amending Section 21. 78. 130 Recreational Facilities in Residential Areas pursuant t.o Petition No. 400-708-89, DeSantis petition. AEI (nr drr4hc.e. Made ? >C c� (0 89-36) b� Att��J `J Staff recommendation: Adopt. G. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Special Service Centers in B-i Business Districts _ 'yam U 6: 20 p.m. Obtain public comment concerning and consider adopting an ordinance amending Section 21. 52.010 "B-3" business district. The amendment is t.o prohibit mechanical repairs and speciality-type service centers for automobiles and light. trucks. (0 89-34) Staff recommendation: Close hearing and adopt. 2. Petition No. 400-741-89 submitted by Zions First National Bank - ._— '6:30 p.m. Obtain public comment concerning and consider adopting an ordinance regarding closing "old 700 North" between John Glenn and Eddie Rickenbacker Road within the Salt Lake International Center pursuant to Petition No. 400-741-89. (P 89-308) Staff recommendation: Close hearing and adopt. H. ADJOURNMENT. ** FINAL ACTION MAY BE TAKEN AND/OR ORDINANCES ADOPTED CONCERNING ANY ITEM ON THIS AGENDA DATED: BY: CHIEF DEPUTY C Y ECORDER STATE OF UTAH COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) ss. On the 8th day of September, 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 the City and County Building, 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah: 1. At 5:00 p.m. in the City Recorder's Office, Room 415; and 2. At 5:00 p.m. in the Newsroom, Room 343. CHIEF DEPOT/ C Y -CORDER Subscribed and sworn to before me this 8th day of September, 1989. 7-7 Notary Public residin in he State of Utah My Commission Expires: i dartinkli L.......... �.�,. APPROVAL: EXEC IVE DI ECTOR SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA AMENDED CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER ROOM 315 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING 451 SOUTH STATE STREET Tuesday, September 12, 1989 A. BRIEFING SESSION: 5:00 - 5:55 p.m. , Room 325 City and County Building, 451 South State 2. Interview Theophile J. Syms for appointment to Board of Appeals and Examiners 3. Interview Glenda Armour for appointment to the Community Development Advisory Committee DATED: / ;' / { CITY RECORDER STATE OF UTAH COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) ss. On the 11th day of September, 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 the City and County Building, 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah: 1. At 5:00 p. m. in the City Recorder's Office, Room 415; and 2. At 5:00 p. m. in the Newsroom, Room 343. A j CITY RECORDER Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11th day of September, 1989. Notary Public re"di • in the State of Utah r . • , Puafc 9 a ►►1 SHT My Commission Expires: I : tt. 1. 461Et.Sar t.Rm415 Z lalw C!A► utiynv6a��, `4,.,1/ August 1,1993 �j State at Utah APPROVAL: _C , AOL -- - - - - - EXECITIVE RECTOR 2 . Accessory uses for which licenses for the sale or consumption of alcohol are required shall not be permitted as part of any conditional use permitted pursuant to this section. 3 . Any use under this section involving alcohol which is, or becomes, non-conforming shall retain its non-conforming status the provisions of Sections 21 . 90 . 030 or 21 . 90 . 060 notwithstanding. 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 . J . Appeals. Any person aggrieved by the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission may appeal the decision to the City Council . Appeals must be filed within fifteen days from the date of the Planning and Zoning Commission' s final decision. The Council shall hold a public hearing on the appeal . Notice of the appeal and hearing shall be provided to all residents and property owners within six hundred feet of the proposed conditional use no later than seven days prior to the hearing. SECTION 3 . EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. -5- DATE EVENT LOCATION COST RSVP 9/13-15 League of Cities Conf. SLC TG 3 days FB 3 days RK Wed 9/15 Dedication/Open House Central Valley Water 800 W Central Valley Rd yes- FB & RK 9/21 Gov's Breakfast Salute Little America Hotel **by 9/15 to UP & L no-RK yes-FB 9/23 Coalition for Utah's Airport Hilton $15 **by 9/18 Future/Child Care no-RK Action Forum 9/26 Lt. Gov's Breakfast Marriott by 9/26 re: 1989 Utah Ski Ball yes-FB 9/27 Delta Airlines Grand 3823 W 1200 N **by 9/15 Opening yes-FB RK CIP Project Tours ( Max Peterson ) * * * * * * * * * 11/25 NLCT Nat'l Conference Janne has WS & AH Janne needs airline info 12/6 Clark Financial Xmas Party SL Country Club 11/20 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met as the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, September 5, 1989, at 5:00 p.m. in Suite 325, City County Building, 451 South State Street. 50 The following Councilmembers were present: Florence Bittner Wayne Horrocks Sydney Fonnesbeck Alan Hardman Tom Godfrey Roselyn Kirk Willie Stoler Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting. Cindy Gust-Jenson, Council bers should be present at the Executive Director, reviewed the committee meetings to express any Council ' s invitations and events, concerns they might have. It was including the Little Dell Dam agreed that the Council Members tour, the UTCL conference, the would make their concerns known to Central Valley water reclamation Lee King, who would communicate facility dedication ceremony, the them to the Council Chair prior to Clark Financial Corporation the Olympics meeting. Christmas party, and the Congress of Cities conference in Atlanta, The meeting was concluded in Georgia. She mentioned that a preparation for the convening of memo with information on the the regular City Council meeting. Atlanta trip would be distributed after the meeting. Ms. Gust-Jenson reviewed the agenda items for the evening' s Council session, noting that the budget opening paperwork would be distributed next week, that Item E-2 should be pulled from the agenda (name withdrawn) , and that someone would be present for questions regarding item E-23. Councilmember Hardman asked about the information the Council had recently received for the Winter Games Organizing Committee meeting. Councilmember Fonnesbeck inquired about the Olympics audit committee recommendations, ex- pressing concern that certain policies and procedures did not appear to have gone through the committee' s recommendation_ pro- cess. Councilmember Kirk suggest- ed that some of the Council Mem- 89-244 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in Regular Session on Tuesday, September 5, 1989, at 6:00 p.m. in Room 315, City Council Chambers, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Councilmembers were present: Florence Bittner Wayne Horrocks Sydney Fonnesbeck Alan Hardman Tom Godfrey Roselyn Kirk Willie Stoler Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Roger Cutler, City Attorney, Lynda Domino, Chief Deputy City Recorder, and LaNita Brown, Deputy Recorder, were present. Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting and Council Member Bittner conducted the meeting. OPENING CEREMONIES Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to #1. The invocation was given adopt Resolution 99 of 1989, by Police Chaplain Michael Denos. honoring the Wastewater Treatment Plant, which motion carried, all #2. The Council led the members voted aye. Pledge of Allegiance. LeRoy Hooton, Director of #3. Councilmember Godfrey Public Utilities, said the treat- moved and Councilmember Horrocks ment plant had been a real success seconded to approve the minutes of story because ten years ago the the Salt Lake City Council for the plant was often out of compliance, regular meeting held Tuesday, over loaded, and a poor neighbor. August 8, 1989, which motion He said they were now looking to carried, all members voted aye the future and did not plan to except Councilmember Fonnesbeck have any rate increases for anoth- who was absent at the time of the er ten years. He said the plant vote. was fully funded and functioning, (M 89-1) and in compliance under the clean water act. #4a. The City Council and Mayor presented a resolution Councilmember Fonnesbeck said honoring the Wastewater Treatment she wished Ron Whitehead was at Plant. Councilmember Horrocks the meeting to hear what was being read the resolution which honored said as he had spent so much time the plant for the significant in past years to get the changes improvements made during the past made. She said they owed him decade, for its dedicated employ- congratulations also. ees, for receiving the Environmen- tal Protection Agency's 1987 award Bill Farmer, plant manager, of excellence for Region 8, and said it was a team effort and he for its gold award received from publicly thanked all those who the Association of Metropolitan worked at the plant for the com- Sewer Agencies for a -perfect mitment they had made. record in complying with national (R 89-1) affluent limitation requirements. 89-245 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 #4b. The City Council and State Street after 10 p.m. " rule. Mayor presented a resolution He said that perhaps in an effort honoring Salt Lake City's Central to control one problem they had City Western Boys' Baseball Asso- created another. ciation (WBBA) Little League All Star Team. Councilmember Hardman Mayor DePaulis said the read the resolution honoring the Police Department had recommended coaches and team for displaying the policy to him and he had outstanding skills, hard work, and approved it on a trial basis to determination; and for great see if it would alleviate the strength of character in never Saturday night cruising problem on giving up and coming from behind State Street. He said the cruis- to win the Little World Series. ers would park and occupants would sit on the cars or trucks and Councilmember Godfrey moved sometimes throw objects such as and Councilmember Hardman seconded pop cans at passing cars. He said to adopt Resolution 100 of 1989, the Police Department was having a honoring the Central City Little tremendous problem controlling the League team, which motion carried, rowdiness from the vehicles, and all members voted aye. there had been a shooting recently where someone was killed. He said Dave Spatafore, the team's the business owners had complained coach, introduced the team members about the debris left behind by who were present to the Mayor and the cruisers which they had to Council and said he had enjoyed clean up. He said he would con- working with the boys and he sider the protests of Mr. Caputo applauded them for their courage and others and evaluate them along and determination. with input from the Traffic and (R 89-1) Police Departments. COMMENTS CONSENT AGENDA Lee Caputo, 147 South State, Councilmember Kirk moved and said he was opposed to the "no Councilmember Godfrey seconded to parking on State Street" rule approve the consent agenda, with that was currently in effect. He the exception of Item 2, which said this affected those business- motion carried, all members voted es, such as his bar business, that aye. were open later at night, and his business had dropped 25% as a #1. RE: Set a date to hold a result. He said it was bad enough public hearing on September 19, to receive parking tickets in the 1989, at 6:20 p.m. to obtain daytime but to receive them at public comment to discuss Budget night too was unfair and he felt Amendment No. 2. people didn't want to come down- (B 89-5) town if they couldn't park on the street. #2. RE: Set a date to hold a public hearing on October 3, 1989, Councilmember Hardman said at 6:20 p.m. to obtain public Mr. Caputo and another constituent comment to discuss the Legislative who owned businesses on— State Intent regarding the appointment Street had called him and com- procedures to the Historical plained about the "no parking on Landmark Committee. 89-246 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 ACTION: Without objection watermain extension at 3815 East this item was pulled. and Crestwood Drive (3870 South) . (C 89-489 ) DISCUSSION: Councilmember Fonnesbeck said she had a problem #7. RE: Adopting Resolution with the language of Item 2 as 105 of 1989, authorizing the there were ordinances in her execution of an interlocal agree- packet and she questioned whether ment with Salt Lake County for an the Council would discuss an easement for Watermain Extension ordinance or a legislative intent. 33-C-1276 at 2029 East Creek Road, Ms. Gust-Jensen, Council Executive Willow Creek Hollow Estates. Director, said the language on the (C 89-490) agenda was not correct and al- though the City Attorney had indicated they could amend it and NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS set the date, she felt it would be better to pull it from the agenda #1. RE: Consider approving and allow them to correct the lan- the appointment of Theophile J. guage. Syms to the Board of Appeals and (0 89-7) Examiners. #3. RE: Adopting Resolution ACTION: Without objection 101 of 1989, authorizing the this item was referred to Commit- execution of an interlocal agree- tee of the Whole. ment with Salt Lake County relat- ( I 89-13) ing to law enforcement services for the watershed areas outside #2. RE: Consider approving the city' s corporate limits. the appointment of Carol A. Maul (C 87-448) to the Community Development Advisory Committee. #4. RE: Adopting Resolution 102 of 1989, authorizing the ACTION: This item was pulled execution of an interlocal agree- from the agenda. ment with the Utah Department of (I 89-2) Transportation for sidewalk con- struction on Redwood Road, 1000 #3. RE: Consider approving North to 1300 North. the appointment of Glenda Armour (C 89-492) to the Community Development Advisory Committee. #5. RE: Adopting Resolution 103 of 1989, authorizing the ACTION: Without objection execution of an interlocal agree- this item was referred to Commit- ment with Salt Lake County for an tee of the Whole. easement to install Watermain ( I 89-2) Extension 33-C-1382 at approxi- mately 2450 West, north from 3200 #4. RE: Consider approving North. the appointment of Karel Doop (C 89-488) McDonough to the Tracy Aviary Board. #6. RE: Adopting Resolution 104 of 1989, authorizing the ACTION: Without objection execution of an interlocal— agree- this item was referred to Commit- ment with Salt Lake County for an tee of the Whole. easement to install an 8-inch (I 89-16) 89-247 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 #5. RE: Consider approving ACTION: Councilmember Stoler the appointment of Victoria Pala- moved and Councilmember Godfrey cios to the Planning and Zoning seconded to suspend the rules and Commission. approve the reappointment, which motion carried, all members voted ACTION: Without objection aye. this item was referred to Commit- (I 89-15) tee of the Whole. ( I 89-5) #11. RE: Consider approving the reappointment of Verda Mae #6. RE: Consider approving Christensen to the Salt Lake City the appointment of Curtis Decker Library Board. to the Mosquito Abatement Dis- trict. ACTION: Councilmember Stoler moved and Councilmember Godfrey ACTION: Without objection seconded to suspend the rules and this item was referred to Commit- approve the reappointment, which tee of the Whole. motion carried, all members voted (I 89-8) aye. (I 89-15) #7. RE: Consider approving the appointment of Christine #12. RE: Consider approving Chalkley to the Urban Forestry the reappointment of Cindy Gust- Board. Jenson to the Salt Lake City County Board of Health. ACTION: Without objection this item was referred to Commit- ACTION: Councilmember Stoler tee of the Whole. moved and Councilmember Godfrey (I 89-3) seconded to suspend the rules and approve the reappointment, which #8. RE: Consider approving motion carried, all members voted the appointment of Pamela R. Heal aye. to the Urban Forestry Board. (I 89-1) ACTION: Without objection #13. RE: Consider approving this item was referred to Commit- the reappointment of Rosemarie tee of the Whole. Rendon to the Community Develop- (I 89-3) ment Advisory Committee. #9. RE: Consider approving ACTION: Councilmember Stoler the appointment of Mike Martin to moved and Councilmember Godfrey the Central Business Improvement seconded to suspend the rules and District. approve the reappointment, which motion carried, all members voted ACTION: Without objection aye. this item was referred to Commit- (I 89-2) tee of the Whole. (I 89-11 ) #14. RE: Consider approving the reappointment of Ranae Pierce #10. RE: Consider approving to the Community Development the reappointment of Alicia Suazo Advisory Committee. to the Salt Lake City -Library Board. ACTION: Councilmember Stoler moved and Councilmember Godfrey 89-248 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT i,AKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 seconded to suspend the rules and motion carried, all members voted approve the reappointment, which aye. motion carried, all members voted ( I 89-5) aye. (I 89-2) #19. RE: Consider approving the reappointment of LaVone Lid- #15. RE: Consider approving dle-Gamonal to the Planning and the reappointment of Rawlins Young Zoning Commission. to the Community Development Advisory Committee. ACTION: Councilmember Stoler moved and Councilmember Godfrey ACTION: Councilmember Stoler seconded to suspend the rules and moved and Councilmember Godfrey approve the reappointment, which seconded to suspend the rules and motion carried, all members voted approve the reappointment, which aye. motion carried, all members voted (I 89-5) aye. (I 89-2) #20. RE: Consider approving the reappointment of Anthony L. #16. RE: Consider approving Rampton to the Salt Palace/Fine the reappointment of Marion Willey Arts Board. to the Community Development Advisory Committee. ACTION: Councilmember Stoler moved and Councilmember Godfrey ACTION: Councilmember Stoler seconded to suspend the rules and moved and Councilmember Godfrey approve the reappointment, which seconded to suspend the rules and motion carried, all members voted approve the reappointment, which aye. motion carried, all members voted (I 89-17) aye. (I 89-2) #21. RE: Consider approving the reappointment of Charles #17. RE: Consider approving Loving to the Salt Lake Art Design the reappointment of Kevin Board. Anderson to the Tracy Aviary Board. ACTION: Councilmember Stoler moved and Councilmember Godfrey ACTION: Councilmember Stoler seconded to suspend the rules and moved and Councilmember Godfrey approve the reappointment, which seconded to suspend the rules and motion carried, all members voted approve the reappointment, which aye. motion carried, all members voted (I 89-9 ) aye. (I 89-16) #22. RE: Consider approving the reappointment of Kip K. Harris #18. RE: Consider approving to the Salt Lake Art Design Board. the reappointment of Ralph Becker to the Planning and Zoning Commis- ACTION: Councilmember Stoler sion. moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to suspend the rules and ACTION: Councilmember Stoler approve the reappointment, which moved and Councilmember -Godfrey motion carried, all members voted seconded to suspend the rules and aye. approve the reappointment, which (I 89-9) 89-249 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 #23. RE: Consider adopting they were bypassing the policy and a motion that the Capital Improve- he questioned the wisdom of it as ment Program Contingency Project, it cost the city a lot to process 38-89099, be reduced by $4, 256; alley vacations. He also indicat- the Parks Facility Repair Project, ed there were 10 people abutting 83-89028, be reduced by $6,000; the alley which would only cost and the Old Fire Station #4 Asbes- $10 per person. tos Removal Project be increased by $10, 256. The Council discussed the decision they had made some two ACTION: Councilmember God- years ago allowing alley vacations frey moved and Councilmember Kirk to be done without a fee being seconded to suspend the rules and paid. They said it was done as an adopt the motion, which motion incentive to close alleys and was carried, all members voted aye. done at the request of Grant (B 89-6) Mabey, former councilmember. They wondered if they should extend the #24. RE: Consider adopting period for another year, or wheth- an ordinance amending Title 11, er they should change the policy the Salt Lake City Code, 1988, by to exclude low-income people from adding a new Chapter 12 relating paying the fee. to parties, gatherings or events. Roger Cutler, City Attorney, ACTION: Without objection said the issue was a question of this item was referred to Commit- legal protection as the city had tee of the Whole. an ordinance stating that there (0 89-37) was a filing fee of $100 for a petition to close an alley and #25. RE: Consider adopting those guidelines should be fol- an ordinance vacating an alley lowed. He suggested the Council located between Goshen Street and amend the ordinance to make excep- 1100 West, approximately 150 feet tions for low-income persons. south of 700 South. Mayor DePaulis asked Mr. ACTION: Councilmember Hor- Cutler if Mr. Mabey' s request for rocks moved and Councilmember a period of time in which to reach Godfrey seconded refer the item to the people had been legal, and Mr. Committee of the Whole, which Cutler said yes. motion carried, all members voted (P 89-307) aye. DISCUSSION: Councilmember UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS Godfrey questioned why the item was a legislative action instead #1. RE: Consider adopting of being processed through the an ordinance amending Section 21- regular petition procedure. He 14-020 of the Salt Lake City Code said there should be a $100 fee to relating the zoning and fixing of hold a hearing for an alley vaca- boundaries of use districts pursu- tion. Councilmember Horrocks said ant to Petition No. 400-713-89 he was trying to avoid the $100 submitted by First Charter Devel- fee as the property owners abut- opment Corporation requesting that ting the alley were low-income, the city rezone property located elderly and couldn't afford the below the Block U from "R-1" to fee. Councilmember Godfrey said "R-lA" . 89-250 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 ACTION: Councilmember Fon- #2. RE: Consider adopting nesbeck moved and Councilmember an Ordinance amending the Official Kirk seconded to adopt Ordinance City Map No. 19372 to add the 56 of 1989, which motion carried, Russell and Olwine Annexation to all members voted aye. District A and create certain major streets for the map. DISCUSSION: Councilmember Fonnesbeck said the rezoning was ACTION: Councilmember Kirk contingent upon certain conditions moved and Councilmember Godfrey being met and she wanted to know seconded to adopt Ordinance 57 of if those conditions had been met. 1989, which motion carried, all members voted aye. Alan McCandless, Planning and Zoning, said the conditions were: DISCUSSION: Brent Wilde, 1) that the approved Planned Unit Deputy Director Community and Development be recorded with the Economic Development, said the County Recorder; and 2) that the Scoreboard Lounge at 1239 East road connecting it from Virginia 3300 South had applied for a Street and llth Avenue through the business license and his staff proposed park was approved by the realized the annexation documents city. He said as far as he knew, did not include extending the the conditions had not been met. tavern location map to encompass Councilmember Fonnesbeck ques- the area. He said they also tioned why the ordinance was on failed to designate 3300 South and the agenda. Brickyard Road as major streets as they related to the tavern loca- Ms. Gust-Jensen, Council tion map. He said Mr. Baird, Executive Director, said the Assistant City Attorney, had ordinance would not become effec- informed his office that they tive until those two conditions could amend the annexation without had been met and it was approved going through a second hearing. by the Department of the Interior. (P 88-194) Mr. Cutler said his office under- stood the Council wanted the ordinance to be in a form that PUBLIC HEARINGS could be adopted but conditioned on those things happening before #1. RE: A public hearing at it was valid. 6:20 p.m. to obtain comment con- cerning proposed amendments to Councilmember Fonnesbeck said Section 21. 78. 130, Recreational there was also a request for First Facilities in Residential Areas. Charter Development to meet with the neighborhood council to dis- ACTION: Councilmember Kirk cuss how the plans were going to moved and Councilmember Godfrey interface with the possibility of seconded to close the public the llth Avenue extension. She hearing, which motion carried, all said a verbal agreement had been members voted aye. given at the hearing and she wanted some kind of verification Councilmember Godfrey moved that those conditions had been and Councilmember Stoler seconded met. to table the item until September (P 89-137) -- 12, 1989, to allow the attorney' s office to draft another ordinance to reflect the items discussed, 89-251 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 which motion carried, all members report that the wording of the voted aye. proposed ordinance would create a problem for the Country Club and DISCUSSION: Brent Wilde, asked if that item had been re- deputy director Community and solved. Mr. Wilde said the word- Economic Development, said the ing was " . . .permitted as any proposal was an amendment to an conditional use permitted pursuant existing ordinance which permitted to this section. . . " , and his private non-profit facilities in understanding was that the Country residential districts. The pro- Club was non-conforming now and posed ordinance would permit for- would continue to function on a profit private recreation facili- non-conforming basis. Coun- ties in residential areas subject cilmember Godfrey asked if that to conditional use approval. He meant they were grandfathered in, said this had been on the and Mr. Wilde answered yes, that Council ' s agenda in May and June they would be a pre-existing use. and two issues had not been re- He said the golf courses were not solved in the original ordinance approved subject to a conditional draft. He said they were: 1) the use process, they were permitted issue of alcohol sales and con- under contract from the city sumption; and 2 ) the appeal pro- administration, so they made a cess. He said the ordinance had distinction between the public been amended in regards to the facilities and the public conces- alcohol consumption and read as sions that were contracted. follows: "accessory uses for which licenses for the sale or Councilmember Stoler ques- consumption of alcohol are re- tioned how the rule would affect quired shall not be permitted as the situation if a club house part of any conditional use per- burned down at the Country Club mitted pursuant to this section" . and Mr. Wilde said they would lose He said the language received from their non-conforming status. Mr. the attorney' s office deviated Cutler said if it was damaged they slightly from what the Council had could not rebuild because they suggested but it seemed to be would be non-conforming, and they adequate. He said the second would have to go through the issue had been clarified and application process to comply with appeals would now go to the Coun- the non-conforming use status and cil. get a permit. He said the petitioner was Mr. Wilde said if a situation securing approval of a golf driv- such as that occurred, the Board ing range and training facility at of Adjustment (BA) was available the Mount Olivet Cemetery on to grant continuance of non-con- Sunnyside Avenue. He said the forming uses. Councilmember petitioner had been approved as a Godfrey asked if the BA had the non-profit use under the existing option to continue the non-con- ordinance but if the proposed forming use, and Mr. Wilde said ordinance was adopted the peti- the only ones he had seen were tioner would have to return to the those that had questions about the conditional use process once again "50% of fair market value" . He for compliance. said if the entire structure was -- lost the BA would not have the Councilmember Godfrey said discretion to grant a continuance. there was a reference in the staff 89-252 PROCEEDINGS Or' THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LuiKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 Mr. Cutler said they could at 145 North Redwood Road be change the ordinance to include a rezoned from "R-6" to a "C-1" sentence dealing with non-conform- classification. ing use rights and say that exist- ing golf courses would be a non- ACTION: Councilmember Stoler conforming use and would be viewed moved and Councilmember Kirk as a whole and any appurtenant seconded to close the public structures that were destroyed hearing, which motion carried, all would be viewed in the context of members voted aye. the total asset of the golf course operations and it would be un- Councilmember Kirk moved and likely that a building would Councilmember Horrocks seconded to exceed the value of the golf adopt Ordinance 58 of 1989, which course as a whole. motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Horrocks asked what recreational uses would do to DISCUSSION: Janice Jardine, the theme park as far as selling Planning and Zoning, briefed the beer etc. , and Mr. Wilde said Wild Council on the proposed rezoning Wave was in a Commercial "C-3A" saying that Ms. Ruiz wanted to district and would not be gov- build a family-style restaurant to erned by the proposed regulation. serve Mexican food. She said the He said the existing ordinance Northwest Community Master Plan included provisions for proximity called for the area to remain a to adjacent residential struc- buffer between the residential and tures, parks, etc. and Glendale commercial uses but it allowed for Golf Course was probably consid- the expansion of commercial zoning ered a park. He said the proposed to accommodate development propos- ordinance would not regulate the als. She said counsel for Ms. sale of alcohol in commercial Ruiz had appeared before the North zoning districts but the city had Redwood Community Council and an ordinance that would regulate received a favorable recommen- it. dation. She said the site plan complied with all existing city Councilmember Hardman asked design standards and met all the what the zoning was at Mt. Olivet requirements of the zoning ordi- Cemetery and Mr. Wilde said it was nance. She said the Planning zoned Residential "R-2" to assure Commission recommended that the control over future land use petition be approved with the change. He said the Country Club rezoning to become effective upon Golf Course was also zoned "R-2" . approval of a building permit within one year from the date of Hermoine Jex, SLACC, spoke in the approval by the Council. opposition to the proposed amend- ment and said it was a rezoning Jay Hansen, counsel for Ms. maneuver that went gainst the Ruiz, said they intended to build community council ' s goal to pre- a 3,000 square foot Spanish style serve neighborhoods. restaurant with appropriate land- (0 89-36) scaping. He said the Cafe Syl- vestre had three present locations #2. RE: A public hearing at within the city and Ms. Ruiz was 6:30 p.m. to obtain comment con- an industrious person and had an cerning Petition No. 400-740-89 excellent reputation. He said requesting that property located they felt the site was ideal for a 89-253 PROCEEDINGS of THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT i,AKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 restaurant and it would fit well situations in the Yalecrest area, in the area. so in order for the city to win in (P 89-247) court they had to enforce the other 43 situations in violation. #3. RE: A public hearing at Mr. Nelson said as a result this 6:40 p.m. to obtain comment on a spawned interest for the Council proposed ordinance outlining to adopt legislation that would conditions and an overlay zone to protect people who had purchased legalize certain garages, car property with existing non-con- ports and patio covers which were forming setbacks. He said his built without proper permits and staff report recommended denial of do not adhere to the present side that type of legislation and this yard and/or rear yard require- was upheld by the Planning Commis- ments. sion, but if the Council was so inclined to adopt it there were ACTION: Councilmember God- eight conditions they recommended frey moved and Councilmember Kirk that were tied to an overlay zone seconded to close the public proposal. hearing, which motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Godfrey said when they had discussed this item Councilmember Godfrey moved previously the Council had indi- and Councilmember Kirk seconded to cated they wanted to adopt condi- refer the matter to the City tions that the Board of Adjustment Attorney' s Office to draft an could use in making their deci- ordinance establishing criteria sion, and he felt that the present for legalizing existing garages, proposal wasn' t what the Council car ports, and patio covers which had asked for. were built without proper permits and do not adhere to the present Roger Cutler, City Attorney, side yard and/or rear yard re- said it would be confusing to quirements; and return the ordi- adopt an overlay zone and that nance to the City Council for they should possibly adopt an action on November 21, 1989, after ordinance setting forth standards it has been reviewed by the commu- where they could invade side nity councils, which motion car- yards. ried, all members voted aye. Ms. Gust-Jensen, Council DISCUSSION: Merrill Nelson, Executive Director, said that Alan Building and Housing, explained Johnson, planning director, said that a citizen had applied for a that this hearing date had been building permit to build a car set so the Council would go ahead port right on the property line and accept comment on what was and the permit was denied because written, then the planning staff it didn' t meet the setback re- would work to modify the proposal quirement. He said the citizen based on the Council ' s concerns subsequently built the car port and public comment. without a permit so the city brought suit against him. He said Councilmember Horrocks said the citizen appealed all the way he felt they needed to give neigh- to the Supreme Court and was borhoods a decision in the matter ordered to remove the car- port. as it would affect a lot of people He said the citizen had pointed if there were 43 other cases. out that there were 43 similar Councilmember Godfrey said there 89-254 PROCEEDINGS Vr' THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 were actually only two cases out tion on their home they had pur- of the 43 that this item would chased in 1964 and were denied a address and they were situations permit by the city because they in which people had bought a home had a non-conforming car port on with an existing non-conforming their property. She questioned use. whether they would have problems in trying to sell their property. Councilmember Kirk said those people who were made to conform Nancy Saxton, 164 South 900 were angry and except in a couple East, said she felt there should of cases they were not aware that be better enforcement of the they were illegal. Councilmember already existing laws. Bittner said if there were 43 cases in the Yalecrest area there Stan Penfold, 715 2nd Avenue, must be many in Glendale and Rose suggested that the Council defer Park. mzaking a decision so the neigh- borhoods could discuss it. Mr. Nelson said they should refer the ordinance to the Attor- Wyllis Dorman, 634 East 700 ney' s Office to adjust the legal South, said she felt the Council language. was missing the real issue which in her opinion was numerous viola- Mr. Wilde, planning office, tions of front, side and rear reiterated that they were not yards. proposing additional regulation but were in search of a solution Bill Thompson, 563 Columbus to a problem that already existed. Street, said he had his automobile towed away while parking on the Councilmember Bittner said street because he could not park the problem was created because in his yard. He said when he homes built in the 50 ' s and 60' s purchased his property the realtor were built to house either one car did not mention any restrictions. or no cars and now people had multiple cars and no place to park Jim Webster, 938 Military them. She said they were trying Drive, said he felt overlay zones to find a solution for an existing should be an incentive mechanism problem. to encourage people to do things they wouldn' t ordinarily do, and The following persons spoke he felt it was an inconsistent ap- regarding the issue: proach. Ralph Anderson, 1430 Cheyenne Mr. Nelson said the cases Street, said he hoped the Council they had enforced were the ones would not limit itself to what had where people had put a carport in been indicated. He questioned the side yard then attached a whether he might have a problem if garage or other structure in the he should decide to sell his home. rear yard. He said side yards He said he felt it was more un- provided a significant planning sightly to have vehicles parked in buffer between lots and that all the street than in a side yard. master plans reflected setbacks. Mrs. Ronald Rosher-- 2701 Councilmember Fonnesbeck said Wilshire Drive, said they had that with a good ordinance illegal wanted to build a $22, 0000 addi- existing structures could be 89-255 PROCEEDINGS (jr' THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT 1KE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 legitimized and she didn' t see a yards as a conditional use with reason for the overlay status as appropriate requirements such as it could be dangerous. She said landscaping, fencing and buffer- if they passed the regulations ing; both ordinances to be re- they would be allowing the neigh- turned to the City Council by bors to have a say and the majori- December 12, 1989, with review by ty of concerns would be handled. the neighborhood councils prior to She suggested they delay the that date, which motion carried, ordinance to allow the attorneys all members voted aye. to revise the conditions so it could go to the neighborhoods. DISCUSSION: Everett Joyce„ Planning and Zoning, said there Mr. Cutler said if the Coun- were numerous violations and upon cil had modifications he would contacting the County Assessors want clarification of them and he Office they had learned that there understood they would be dealing were 3, 800 RV' s and trailers with the uses outlined in G-3 of licensed in the city. He said the agenda. Councilmember Godfrey they felt that not all of them said it would not include the would be in a proper location or overlay zone. storage area. He said his staff had looked at requirements in Mr. Wilde said if the changes other cities and found they were were substantial they would have allowing RV' s in side yards with to go before the planning commis- certain conditions, and they sion and he felt they may want to recommended this also. He said abandon the architectural compati- it would relate to single family bility. He said they should work and duplex dwellings only and with the attorneys then present it would be limited to one motor or to the Council before the ordi- travel trailer per dwelling and nance went to the community coun- other RV' s, for a total of two. cils. He said if you could get an RV in (0 89-33) the side yard it was questionable why you couldn' t get it into the #4. RE: A public hearing at rear yard. He said if a vehicle 6: 50 p.m. to obtain comment on a is parked in the side yard it proposed overlay zone to allow should be on a hard surface pad certain recreational vehicles and access to the pad could have (RV' s) in the side yards of resi- both grass and hard surface. He dentially zoned properties. said they recommended that side yard parking not be used for ACTION: Councilmember God- automobile parking and that the frey moved and Councilmember side yard parking be screened by a Hardman seconded to close the six foot high fence. He said they public hearing, which motion also recommended the use of land- carried, all members voted aye. scaping in the front yard to screen the vehicle and that the Councilmember Horrocks moved vehicle be registered with the and Councilmember Stoler seconded resident of the property. He said to refer the issue to the City the Planning Commission had re- Attorney' s Office to prepare two viewed the staff report and felt alternative ordinances for Council it was a poor solution to an consideration: 1 ) an overlay zone unenforceable ordinance and recom- with conditions, and 2 ) an ordi- mended that the existing ordi- nance legitimizing the use of side nance be enforced rather than 89-256 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 create another one that would be Hermoine Jex, SLACC, said she just as hard to enforce. He said had spent hours viewing different they recommended that the Council neighborhoods with regards to maintain the existing ordinance front yards and side yards and and not adopt a new one. He said found some in compliance and some the overlay was an administrative not. She said the aesthetic concept. value was important for low-income as well as the wealthy. She said Councilmember Fonnesbeck said she felt they needed stricter maybe they should add a stipula- regulations. tion that if an RV was allowed in a side yard it could not be used Edith Montrone, 2010 Richards as a living area. Street, said her son had built a pad for his motor home in the back Councilmember Godfrey said if of his yard and the motor home an abutting property owner had a been broken into twice, whereas notarized statement that he didn't her motor home was outside her object to RV parking in the side bedroom window and she felt that yard and then moved, would the new lessened the chance of a break in. owner have to live with the RV. Mr. Joyce said they recommended Bill Thompson, 563 Columbus that a neighbor not have a say in Street, said he felt citizens allowing the RV. should be allowed to park their RV' s near their home where they Mr. Cutler said neighbors could keep an eye on them. could have input but veto power could not be delegated to a land Stan Penfold, 715 2nd Ave, owner. said he represented SLACC and hoped the Council would refer the Councilmember Fonnesbeck matter to the community councils questioned whether a sunset clause for comment. would take effect if a permit was given, and Mr. Joyce said the Kim Anderson, 768 North permit would go with the land. Redwood Road, was concerned about the fire hazard that parking two The following people spoke to RV' s close together could cause. the issue: He felt if people could afford an RV they could afford to store Renee Garritson, 2367 Blaine them. Circle, thanked the Council for their fairness and hoped a reason- Note: the Fire Department able solution could be found. had no comment to the safety issue. Jeanette Webb, 1147 North 13th West, was concerned for her Bonnie Dean, 1090 Taffeta neighborhood because of illegally Drive, said if RV' s were allowed parked RV' s. She said the present to be parked anywhere in the yard ordinance was too restrictive. it would take away from the quali- She said her neighborhood had ty of life. She hoped that if an banded together and did not have ordinance was passed it would be cars parked on the street during enforced. the daytime for the safety of children. Calvin Burningham, 1231 Catherine Street, said he had 89-257 PROCEEDINGS of THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT ',AKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 owned a trailer and parked it at the parking to the rear yard, his home for 20 years and he therefore, the ordinance would didn' t think he should be heckled preclude the property from consid- by the city for it. eration. Nancy Saxton, 164 South 900 Roger Evans, Building and East, said she was opposed to Housing said the ordinance would having RV' s parked at the side of not solve the problem for 90% of a home and neighbors shouldn't the pending cases they now had, have to put up with it. and that if you applied the crite- ria to the present cases they Wyllis Dorman, 634 East 700 could not comply. He said most of South, pointed out several places the cases had reasonable access to within the city where zoning their back yard but for those who violations were occurring and felt didn' t, their only solution would the Council needed to deal with be to tear up existing concrete to all problems in side yards, not force access to the rear yard. just RV' s. Mr. Wilde said the ordinance Mr. Cutler said the Council was an attempt to satisfy the needed to decide whether they residential integrity while re- wanted the overlay zone for dis- sponding to the legitimate hard- cussion purposes or an ordinance ships. He said the only other that would be applicable to all viable option was to just allow areas of the city. He said the parking in the side yard without overlays created all sorts of restrictions. administrative problems and prob- lems with neighborhoods, and maybe Mr. Cutler said with an they should use an overlay with overlay zone it would have to be some discretion. Councilmember initiated by a neighborhood and it Bittner said she felt if such would pit neighbor against neigh- decisions had to be made they bor and create land use issues should be made by the Council and that he felt were better resolved they should not put that responsi- on a city-wide basis. He said he bility on a neighborhood. felt the overlay would create more problems than it would solve and Mr. Wilde said that one other would not solve the non-compli- advantage to an overlay zone was ance problem. He said people that the geographic characteris- would not give up their back yard tics varied considerably and the space and would continue to park conditions they had established illegally in their side yards. He were to maintain residential said the Council wasn't addressing integrity. He said in some the underlying problem which was neighborhoods the condition re- whether or not they were going to quiring that an owner extend the compromise and allow people to use parking into the rear yard would side yards with landscaping and be difficult to live with. He buffering under certain circum- said in many communities the large stances. majority of property owners could extend the hard surface to the Councilmember Kirk said what rear yard and would be exempt from they were trying to do with the consideration, but if they went former ordinance was give people a with the overlay district there little bit of flexibility. She was nothing to prevent extending said she felt they were trying to 89-258 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 tell people there was a way out if they had unusual circumstances. She felt that most people would not be able to meet the criteria. Mr. Cutler asked if the Council would consider two alter- natives : 1 ) an overlay, and 2 ) a conditional use where they would COUNCIL CHAIR legalize side yards if there was buffering, landscaping, an ade- quate separation between houses, allowing some discretion to solve the issue on a case by case basis. Mr. Wilde said that if their CITY RECORDER intent was just to accommodate the few exceptions that had a legiti- mate hardship they would easily be able to administer it on a city- wide basis. Councilmember Hardman said he assumed they would send the two alternatives to the neighborhood councils and asked that the motion reflect that. Councilmember Bittner said they were trying to solve an unsolvable problem and it was not only a land use issue but a life- style issue also. She said they had spot enforcement in the Rose Park area in response to com- plaints from neighbors. She said if the Council passed the ordi- nance a few people would be able to park in their yards but the majority would be in noncompli- ance. She said it was a difficult problem and she was glad the neighborhood councils were going to discuss it as the Council had been struggling with it for years. Mr. Cutler said they needed to send the ordinances to Planning and Zoning also. (0 89-34) The meeting adjourned -at 9:45 p.m. 89-259 7C »-!C-. _—_,.�-.Yi:C"'•riZS?-..t.=.n=2t_ :r... ::Y. n17-_.'.C.: :�Z:r 7-vtr-'�. ..,2:_aa7-ti7__,C.."^_ -:.=-za:e?Z-- ---_=.-.�'-- -: 27:71,hr-tv� A 5 ,r,' - Y ' _ f� .,L i. y . -,. 1. . t i_ ?t :.7 }•ai } _ A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE - F CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR OF '•5 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH • WHEREAS, D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) is a semester-long program that teaches._ fifth and sixth grade children how to resist pressure to experiment with drugs F=f and alcohol; and = r- WHEREAS, D.A.R.E. targets children when they are most vulnerable to tremendous peer .4. E:) pressure to try drugs and alcohol and teaches the skills to make positive to decisions and resist pressure to engage in negative behaviors; and = WHEREAS, School children are frequently much more sophisticated about substance abuse than are classroom teachers, the D.A.R.E. program is taught by veteran police officers with direct experience in cases involving criminal activities and ruined lives caused by substance abuse; and "; WHEREAS, Each police officer who teaches the D.A.R.E. program completes an 80-hour training: ry course that includes instruction in teaching techniques, officers-school relation • ,,i ship, development of self-esteem, child development, and commun i ica on d�. 1 WHEREAS, Independent research shows that the D.A.R.E. program has exceeded its goal of helping students combat peer pressure to use drugs and alcohol by contributing to improved study habits and grades and decreased vandalism and gang activity and by generating greater respect for police officers; and • WHEREAS, The President of the United States has signed an official congressional resolution declaring September 14 National D.A.R.E. Day. • NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council and Mayor Palmer DePaulis officially recognize Thursday, September 14 as D.A.R.E. Day in Salt Lake City. DATED this 12th day of September, 1989. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor 1,1. M. "Willie" Stoler, Chair Florence B. Bittner L. Wayne Horrocks Sydn . Fbnnesbeck Alan G. Hardman Tom Godfrey Roselyn N. Kirk . >i :1: arin it. .:11nG _L. ._l:.i.�-:,14 L 11_ :_L.'E" LL_..:ii.,..2-x ..`it..1 _ ti-. T :" r `Y'fy.L,.:.--% :A-; \tJ I REFER TO PUBLIC HEARING SECTION NO. G-2 FOR REFERENCE DOCUMENTATION CF S' 'K TO saames a G1T1X aOsi PO J JION( CRAIG E. PETERSON DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7777 To: Salt Lake City Council August 22, 1989 Re: Amendment to Section 21.74.030 Landmark Committee Recommendation: That the City Council hold a public hearing on October 3, 1989 at 6:20 p.m. to discuss the Legislative Intent regarding the appointment procedures to the Historical Landmark Committee. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Discussion and Background: The Planning Commission has reviewed this Legislative Intent and recommends that the City Council adopted a "revised draft". The Planning Commission agreed that having a geographical balance of representation is important but felt that the method of limiting the "at large" memberships on the committcc to residents who do not own property nor reside within a historic district is too limiting. Their proposal emphasizes the need for a balanced membership both professionally and by location but would not exclude a candidate solely on property ownership or residency. Legislative Document: An ordinance has been prepared by the City Attorney's Office and is ready for your action. Submitted by: 7 �� CRAIG E.) PETERSON Director lf/ ROGER F. CUTLER �j ®t� CI T�Y�gO,Elpr �a- sLOi�y ASSISTANT ATTDENE,5 CITY ATTORNEY ' �c"� `�'`0' .r1'..b.i.d ®s��..i. RAY L. MONTGOMER`:' STEVEN W. ALLRED LAW DEPARTMENT GREG R. HAWK'NS LARRY V. SPENDLOVE DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING BRUCE R. BAIRD CHERYL D. LUK� 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, SUITE 505 FRANK M. NAKAMURA SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 64111 CITY PROSECUTOR (801) 535-7788 ASSISTANT PROSECUTO-<5 FAX (801) 535-7640 DONALD L. GEORGE CECELIA M. ESPEN_'=A July 20, 1989 RICHARD G. F ' GLEN A. COC- Craig Peterson, Director Community and Economic Development 218 City & County Building 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Amendment to Section 21. 74.030 Dear Craig: �U Q On July 19, 1989 your note to Roger Cutler transniil-ng, Allen Johnson' s letter of June 6, 1989 dealing with revisions--to the Historic Landmark Committee Membership Ordinance Section 21 .74.030 was assigned to me. I have redrafted the ordinance consistent with the recommendation for the ''revised draft" from the Planning Commission. As you know, the initial request for the draft ordinance came from the Council and the wording in the original draft was designed to effectuate the purposes of the requesting council member. The new draft effectuates the intent of the Planning Commission . Our office expresses no preference for either draft recognizing that the matter is one of policy consideration appropriately left in the hands of the legislative and advisory bodies. If you have any questions please free to call . Sincerely, /71 BRUCE R. BAIRD Assistant City Attorney BRB: rc Enclosures cc: Allen Johnson Alan Hardman, Council Member 14, 4 11 qi;144 (A AA g SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Amending Section 21 .74.030 creating additional residency limitations on the Historic Landmark Committee) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 21. 74.030 CREATING ADDITIONAL RESIDENCY LIMITATIONS ON THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMITTEE. WHEREAS, the City Council believes it is important to have geographical diversity of membership on the Historic Landmark Committee; NOW, THEREFORE, Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That Section 21 . 74.030(B) be amended to read as follows: 21.74.030 Historical landmark committee - Creation - Membership A. * * * B. [The co-mmitte^e--shall co r`sist of iruesst ie--ni-ne-or . ] Each voting member shall be a resident of the city interested in preservation and knowledgeable about the heritage of the city. Members[ , to] shall be appointed by the mayor with the consent of the city council[ , shall be-selectedfrom t-hc folly s end interested parties] as follows: [1 . One mew American-I-nstitute-e-freh cots] ( a) Historic Districts. From each area designated as an historic district not more than two members who either reside or own property within the district; [ e city] (b) At Large. Five members who are residents of the city with consideration of broad geographical representation; [3. One member from the Utah Heritage Foundation] (c) Designated Members. One member designated to represent the Utah Heritage Foundation; one architect licensed in the State of Utah; and, one member of the Planning Commission designated to represent the Planning Commission; [4—No more ch an twe—members—w-he are res-ident--s--e ar ow-n (d) Ex Officio. The directors of the Planning Division and the Building and Housing Division (or their designees ) shall both serve as members ex officio without vote[f]2_ [5. Five members may be citizens at large; ] [ mission; ] [7. The directors of the planning division and Building and Housing representatives-)- shall b t'` r-boas- ex of f icio member-s withouut vei-e—] 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 -2- ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s Action: Approved Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER BRB:pp -3- ECEIVE E C T , ATTORNEY'S Of5 C."E p : 6: ATE--------�...-- __ ._... ALLEN C. JOHNSON MEMBERS: PLANNING DIRECTOR RALPH BECKER � � 0 I "D�� � }T CINDY CROME4 SANDRA MARLER SWEATT, CITY G RPO {' JI THOMAS A. ELLISON SECRETARY -•�.. - za-:,r mow. `.y avA a. '-o'bs1+.t.l`s•,• ca..o',PvA LAVONE LIDDLE-GAMONAL EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS: DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RICHARD J. HOWA MAYOR OF SALT LAKE CITY Planning and Zoning Commission RALPH P. NEILSON CITY ENGINEER 324 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 200 GEORGE NICCLATUS CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111 JOHN M. SCHUMANN CITY BUILDING OFFICIAL 535-7757 F. KEITH STEPAN PETER VANALSTYN= KATHY WACKER June 6, 1989 Mr. Craig E. Peterson, Director Community & Economic Development Salt Lake City Corporation Salt Lake City, Utah Dear Craig, The Salt Lake City Planning & Zoning Comittission has reviewed the Legislative Initiative from the City Council regarding the appointment procedures to the Historical Landmark Corlullittee. The City Council submitted a new draft ordinance to the Planning Commission for review and requested their recommendation. The Planning Conunission discussed the proposed change on April 27, 1989 and held an informal hearing on May 25, 1989 to receive public comment. At the conclusion of the informal hearing, the Planning Comruission voted to recommend not to change the existing ordinance. Additionally, the Planning Corrunission voted (five in favor and three against) to recommend to the City Council a "revised draft" of the proposed ordinance change. A copy of their "revised" draft is attached. The Planning Corrunission agrees with the intent of the proposed City Council change, that of having a geographical balance of representation on the Historical Landmark Corrurrittee. However, the opinion of the Planning Commission is that the method of limiting the "at large" membership on the conurrittee to residents who do not own property nor reside within a historic district is too limiting. The Planning Corrunission recognizes the many hours of expertise donated to the city by the Historical Landmark Committee members to further the heritage of the City. The Planning Commission wishes not to penalize a qualified interested participant in Salt Lake City's preservation effort because of ownership of property or their residency. Craig F. Peterson June 6, 1989 Page 2 The Planning Conunission believes the Mayor and City Council may need to increase their efforts to find qualified enthusiastic volunteers for the "at large" positions from neighborhoods throughout the City thereby assuring the geographical balance of Coiuunittee membership. The Historical Landmark Corrunittee provides a very technical review of design issues to maintain and improve the quality of life in Salt Lake City. The Planning Commission proposal emphasizes the need for a balanced membership both professionally and locationally but would not exclude a candidate solely on property ownership or residency. The Planning Commission respectfully recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing and adopt the "revised draft ordinance". If you have any additional questions regarding the Planning Commission recommendation, please call me. Respectfully submitted, e4G, Allen C. Johnson AICP Planning Director ACJ:WIW attachment i ' MEMBERS: ALLEN C. JOHNSON RALPH BECKER PLANNING DIRECTOR I CINDY CROMER ,�\ SANDRA MARLER Safi, :' � GIrTY�� JI Y1 TI Nj THOMAS A. ELLISCN ..�.o� v.►�. •��'��` " �'� `a LAVONE LIDDLE-GAMONAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RICHARD J. HOWA EX•OFFICIO MEMBERS: Planning and Zoning Commission RALPH P. NEILSCN MAYOR OF SALT LAKE CITY GEORGE NICOLA-US CITY ENGINEER 324 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 200 JOHN M. SCHUMANN CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 F. KEITH STEPAN CITY BUILDING OFFICIAL 535-7757 PETER VANALST"NE KATHY WACKER MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Bil Schwab , Historical Landmark Committee DATE: April 20 , 1989 SUBJECT: Proposed Historical Landmark Committee Ordinance Change Please find attached minutes from the Historical Landmark Committee meeting of April 5 , 1989 with the Historical Landmark Committee review of the proposed ordinance change for appointments to the Committee. Also , enclosed are two letters from Alan Hardman and Roger Cutler . Copies of the proposed ordinance changes were included in your Planning Commission meeting packets for the April 13th meeting . At the April 19 , 1989 meeting , the Historical Landmark Committee moved to oppose the ordinance changes . Mr . Louis Ulrich, from the Historical Landmark Committee will attend the Planning Commission meeting on Thursday, April 27 , 1989 to discuss this issue with you before a recommendation is forwarded to the City Council . Thanks . BS : skm a;r • rILC Minutes , Apr] 5 , 1989 Page 13 and service organizations and City Boards and Commissions or Committees . Ten organizations have been invited to participate in the tree planting, one being the Historical Landmark Committee . The HLC members were enthusiastic about this project , and several members volunteered , as follows : Ms . Pamela Grubaugh-Littig, Anna Grace Sperry, Randall Dixon, Steve England and Louis Ulrich, as well as Stuart Loosli , a former HLC member . Any members not present during this -meeting will be contacted . A dedication plaque will also be installed along the planting treeway but the exact spot has not been selected 'yet Ms . Harrington is asking each participating organization to contribute $25 . 00 to help pay for the plaque. Mr . Bil Schwab said he will arrange for the $25 . 00 donation from the HLC. The second activity will be later during the day on April 29th when Salt Lake City will be designated "Tree City USA" , which is a national designation. The Mayor will receive a plaque and a flag to fly on the flagpole in front of the City and County Building . The ceremony will be at 3 : 00 p . m. , and the members of the HLC were invited to attend Review of Proposed Ordinance Chance for Aopointmenis to Historica 1 Landmark Committee . Ms . Cindy Gust-Jensen from the City Council Offices addressed the Committee . She stated that as a City Council staff person, she , of course, does not take any position and was only there to present some background explain the procedure followed in matters like this . She explained that several months ago the City Council members , in reviewing the composition of city boards , noticed that District 3 had several more representatives on city boards and committees than any other district. The Council members thought that members of the Historical Landmark Committee all had to be from the Avenues area but when Councilmember Alan Hardman read the city ordinance, he found it stated two members from the historic district and five at-large members. He interpretated "at-large" to mean people who live in areas other than historic districts . However , the City Attorney ' s Office was consulted , and one of the attorneys explained that the ordinance could , et first glance , be construed that way but due to the punctuation used , it does ' nt specify and cannot be construed to mean that the members of the committee have to live in areas other than the historic district . Councilmember Hardman is very interested in an ordinance being passed specifying that each historic district have a epresentative and that interested groups have representation but that there also be members on the Historical Landmark Committee from other areas of the city. Ms . Gust-Jensen said Mr . Hardman HLC Minutes , April .1 , 1989 • page 14 • =fV? had stressed that this was not a personal issue on his part but just that he felt a broader representation is needed . This issue was discussed in detail during the Council ' s retreat held in February 1989 . Councilmember Sydney Fonnesbeck brought up several issues which were discussed at that time . Councilmember Hardman asked the City Attorney' s Office to draft an ordinance with the additional representation he was interested in. The ordinance was drafted and was on the agenda for the City Council held the previous evening (April 4th) , at which time the Council voted to refer the revised ordinance to the Planning Commission for a recommendation . Ms . Gust-Jensen said the Council members had not realized this was a zoning ordinance and had thought they could act on it by voting it "up or down" ; however , it was brought to their attention that it was an ordinance change and should be referred to the Planning Commission and after that, placed cn the City Council agenda for a public hearing and vote . Ms . Gust-Jensen said Allen Johnson, Planning Director , had said the Planning Commission could possibly refer this matter to any number of places but that it could be back to the City Council in about twc months . Mr . Ulrich felt it would be inappropriate to create change without looking at the history of the direction of the ordinance in the beginning . Ms . Gust-Jensen said the Council had the ordinance and the materials relating to the Committee but that if this Committee had information along those lines they would like to provide to Alan Hardman or to the whole Council , it might be a good idea . Bil Schwab said that Ms . Linda Edeiken, a member of the Historical Landmark Committee, was unable to attend this meeting but she talked with him and cave him some information which he will provide to the city Council . Mr . Stuart Loosli , 955 East South Temple, a former member of the Historical Landmark Committee , was present . He thought the idea of the original ordinance was to give quite a bit of leeway to whoever made the appointments to select people who are interested and concerned with historic preservation regardless of where they live even if they all live in one area ; that the concern was to appoint people who are willing and able to participate in the activities of the Committee . JHe said there is nothing in the ordinance stating a person ' s residence would qualify her/him Eor membership on the Committee . Mr . Kimball stated there are the lower Avenues area , the Capitol Hill , the South Temple historic district, which has been without representation for two years because the City Council has not approved the names submitted because the appointing of new members to the Historical Landmark Committee has been "put on • HLC Minutes , April 1989 °' page 15 r . hold" since the matter of the change in the ordinance was first brought up. Mr . Kimball continued, stating there are presently eight members on the Committee who either own property in or reside in a historic district. He noted the words "own property in" are important language which would disqualify many people who may have an investment in the lower Avenues or in Capitol Hill and live elsewhere in the city. He said of the eight people, • three organizations are represented; i . e. , Utah Heritage Foundation, the AIA and Planning and Zoning. Those people cannot be from the historical districts or they count in those districts . He clarified there are eight people, three organizations being represented , and five members-at-large. Mr . Kimball noted there have been several vacancies periodically on the Historical Landmark Committee, and the difficulties in getting new appointees have at times made it difficult to have a quorum present at the meetings ; also, that the members of the Committee would appreciate having a few extra members so it would not be absolutely necessary to attend every meeting to get the necessary business done. He asked how, under the proposed ordinance change which would permit 15 or 16 members on the Comm,.ttee, how would the existing members be dealt with who have spent hundreds of "volunteer hours" because most of them are from the previously designated historic districts . It appears that the change will "wipe out" three people from Capitol Hill and three people from the Avenues presently on the Landmark Committee . Ms . Gust-Jensen said she had asked that question and been informed that generally when there is a change like the proposed change , the existing membership is not affected but that future appointments would be based on the new ordinance , if the ordinance were to pass . Mr . Loosli expressed concern over the possibility of having a committee composed of absentee landowners having little interest in the historical quality of the property, or the reverse--of having absentee landowners whose interests would be in seeing maximum development for profit--not historical preservation. During discussion it was brought out that should additional historic districts be designated in the city, there would , of course, be members on the Committee as representatives of those districts . Ms . Gust-Jensen said based on her conversations , it seemed the larger issue was the idea that all City committees should have representatives from all areas . Mr . Ulrich said he felt the lancuage of the proposed ordinance is discriminatory because it excludes participation. He noted there are members presently serving on the Historical Landmark Committee who do not reside in a historic district but are serving because they are very interested in preservation, and he Hr,C Minutes , April 5 , 1989 Page 16 felt it is because people have that interest and are willing to serve, rather than "numbers" that make this a viable committee. He feels strongly that qualifying because of "numbers" and not because of " interest or qualifications" is a very dangerous precedent in legislation. He has no objection to any of the City Council members trying to promote someone in their district because of " interest" ; however , he believes to direct by legislation is very dangerous . that is a matter of course and interest; however , he feels to direct by legislation is very dangerous . Mr . England ' s objection to the proposed change is that it is negative does not guarantee representation from all districts; it only guarantees that all members won ' t be from District 3 . He feels the valid way to address general representation would be to require one representative from each of the six districts and the additional members to be at-large members . Dr . Schricker commented as one of the newer members of the HLC, at the time inquiry was made as to his interest in serving on the Committee, no mention was made about where he lived but only concerning his interest in old homes and restoration, etc. During discussion, it was brought out that many of the existing members were appointed to the Historical Landmark Committe for different reasons will find themselves , because of the proposed change in the ordinance, in a position of not being eligible to serve on the Committee , and the membership of the Committee oppose the proposed legislation. Discussion again turned to the absentee landowner issue which was a major concern of the Committee members . Mr . Loosli suggested the Planning Commission clearly understand the concerns from the point of view of the members of the Historical Landmark Committee . He voiced concern over the inability of the Mayor ' s Office to make appointments to clear vacancies existing on the Historical Landmark Committee for long periods of time after names have been submitted . He sees that as having a weakening effect for the whole process . He resides on South Temple, and wonders why that district has not had a representative on the HLC for over one and one-half years . Further , he referred to the South Temple Master Plan now in process , noting there is not even a voting member from South Temple on the Committee . Mr . Kimball asked that the Minutes reflect his apprion , and the other Committee members agreed with him, to all members who have been on the HLC for more than one meeting and also to the members of the Architectural Subcommittee of the Historical Landmark Committee for their many hours spent in meetings . He noted these are not political appointments , and when things become "political" , he gets a "funny taste in his mouth" . He added that all efforts put forth by the HLC and the ASC have been • .n•w•.w-sue:t•' 7HLC Minutes , Ap ri,. J , 1989 Page 17 done independently of political interests and on a voluntary • basis as responsible citizens . He shares Mr . Loosli ' s concerns over the lack of appointments by the Mayor ' s Office to the Historical Landmark Committee . • Mr . Stransky commented that perhaps the Committee should make a motion that they have read the proposed ordinance, and they are anxious to receive the City Council ' s input soon and moving ahead with the matter quickly because the members of the Historical Landmark Committee are interested in filling the existing vacancies as soon as possible. He wondered if the City Council members should make recommendations for persons from their districts? Mr . Schwab said Allen Johnson (or did you mean Alan Hardman? ) has directed him to bring this matter up for discussion, saying there will probably be further discussion during the April 19th meeting and to prepare a letter to the City Council requesting anyone who is concerned to come and talk with the Historical Landmark Committee at that meeting or at some other time when the Committee could meet . Review Historical South Temole Master Plan With Recommendation to Planning Commission . Bil Schwab explained that he and Ms . Jan Striefel had gone over the South Temple Master Plan and made the changes recommended by the Historical Landmark Committee and others . Copies of the revised draft of the Master Plan were previously mailed to the HI,C members for their review. (A copy of the revised draft is on file with these original Minutes . ) Mr . Schwab said the Planning Commission will not be reviewing the draft of the Master Plan until April 27th , or possibly later , and he asked the Committee members , or others present , if they had further recommendations or suggested changes before the Master Plan is presented to the City Council . Mr . Stuart Loosli referred to page 9 concerning the "Existing and Proposed Land Use" and the legend shown for "Commercial" . He felt the document should be changed to say "Proposed Land Use" and not "Existing" , and it should show all that is now "Commercial" as "Residential" . It was decided there should be two maps--one showing what is "existing" and one showing what is "proposed" in order to avoid confusion. Mr . Ulrich commented concerning " Institutional" and "Commercial" that many times the structures are residential in character ; i . e . , the Cathedral of the Madeline and the adjacent properties , and the Holy Cross Hospital . He suggested using different graphics for those institutions . Mr . Neilson agreed, thinking that would reinforce the notion of getting away from commercial and into residential . Mr . Schwab said he would work out two legends . He said most Master Plans require the existing land use and the proposed land use to be shown. • • 'II 1 fri !'+ .I. I. I • SALT'EAKP C;I_'IYNORPOIITII; ALAN HARDMAN OFFICE .OF. .THE CITY-_COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBER. DISTRICT 44 - - - ese PARK STREET : 211-CITY AND COUNTY.BUILDING SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84102 .SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH,84111 ,. • 359-eee9 535-7600 December 29, 1988 RECEIVFr. Rocer Cutler JAN 03 19'69 City Attorney City Hall, 5th Floor MAYOR'S OFFICE Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Dear Roger: • I would like to request that your office review the composition of the Historic Landmarks Board to see if the current practice is in keeping with the ordinance. The ordinance states that members shall be selected froth the ". . . following groups of experts and interested parties as follows: 1. One member from the membership of the Utah Society, American Institute of Architects; 2. One member representing the historical societies of the city; 3. One member from the Utah Heritage Foundation; 4. No more than two members who are residents of or own property in each area designated as an historic district. 5. Five members I'eay be citizens at large. " Currently, the Administration is interpreting this to mean that two members should be designated as representatives of each of the historic districts, but they also are recommending for appointment individuals who live inside the historic districts as the "at large" members. In addition, several of the individuals who are representing professional organizations reside in one of the historic districts. I have two questions relating to this: 1. Is it appropriate, given the wording in the ordinance, for the "at large" members to be appointed from within the historic districts, as the current practice, or should the "at large" members be appointed from other areas of the City? 2. Is it appropriate, given the wording in the ordinance, for the members representing professional organizations to also live within the historic districts? It seems to me that the current membership of the Historical Landmarks Committee is not in compliance with the intent of the ordinance. However, I would appreciate hearing your response on both of these questions. I have enclosed for your information a listing of the current board members and their places of residence. If you have questions or need further information, please feel free to contact me, or you can call Cindy Gust-Jenson in the City Council Office. Thank you in advance for your review of this request. Sincerely, Alan Hardman Council Member District 4 cc: Linda Ham ton milie Charles • 14 '(.!�-�r;• iMy JAN 2 7 WO J SALT L 4V E rITY CfJ R,CI1 . .... ..,, r=- SALT- r`` Q IMY%ORPR IIORj ASSIsTANT NTGOMERSY CITY ATTORNEY _..S •-._. .: ., ..,'.=:::,:, :.._I.. .. • ' GREG R. HAWKINS CHERYL D. LUKE �. •I.1�;`• ��W- DEPARTMENT "'" === LARRY V. SPENDLC'.E CITY PROSECUTOR • •324 SOUTH STATE. FIFTH FLOOR STEVEN W. ALLRE D . SALT LAKE CITY,.UTAH 841 11,,• BRUCE R. BAIRD FRANK M. NAKAMUCA • FAX (801) 535-7640 ASSISTANT ►ROSCCUTOas DONALD L. GEORGE CECELIA M. ESFENCZA RICHARD G. HAMP January 4, 1988 GLEN A. COOK Alan Hardman Council Member 324 South State, Third Floor Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Historic Landmarks Board • Dear Alan: This letter is written in response to your request of December 29, 1988, which was assigned to me, for a legal opinion concerning certain questions you have about • appointments to the Historic Landmarks Board. Your two questions will be answered seriatim. QUESTION 1. Is it appropriate, given the wording in the ordinance, for the "at large" members to be appointed from within the historic districts, as the current practice, or should the "at large" members be appointed from other areas of the, City? RESPONSE. The wording in Section 21 . 74 . 030(B) ( 5 ) which you cite is written in the permissive "may" rather than any mandatory type of language. Accordingly, there is no requirement that the "at large" members be appointed from areas of the. City outside of the historic districts. As the ordinance is currently written the issue of "at large" appointments and their residents is a matter of the political process which the City council may consider in rendering its advice and consent to appointments. • QUESTION 2_ Is it appropriate, given the wording in the ordinance, for the members representing professional organizations to also live within the historic districts? 0\ V • • Alan Hardman January 4, 1988 Page -2- - _- • RESPONSE. In subsections ( 1 ) , ( 2) and (3 ) there is no limitation on the residents of the three official memberships. Again, checks on the number of representatives from each individual district is a matter of the political process. In your letter you highlighted the provisions of subsection ( 4 ) of the ordinance. In the form that the ordinance is written the various subsections of 21. 74 . 030( B) 'f establish different, independent, classes of membership on ? ; the Committee. Subsection ( 4 ) does not, therefore, serve as a limitation on the other subsections setting out membership classes on the committee. If you have any further questions please feel -free to call. Sincerely, • { \\ _ BRUCE R:'�BAIRD Assistant City Attorney BRB:cc • • • 7. , •(-:,• ?', it . f Sri SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 - ( Amending Section 21.74.030 creating additional residency limitations on the Historic Landmark Committee) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 21.74.030 CREATING ADDITIONAL RESIDENCY LIMITATIONS ON THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMITTEE. WHEREAS, the City Council believes it is important to have geographical diversity of membership on the Historic Landmark Committee; _ NOW, THEREFORE, Be it ordained by the Cit Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: . SECTION 1 . That Section 21.74.030(B) be amended to reed as follows: 21.74.030 Historical landmark. committee - Creation - .Membership A. t t t y , - y • 1 t-... . ., _ ] Each voting member shall be a resident of the city interested in preservation and knowledgeable about the heritage of the city. Members[;to] shall be appointed by the mayor with the consent of the city _ L t council[ , -- -. ,, i ] as follows: . . � -] ( a) Historic Districts. From each area desi nated as an historic district not more than two members who either reside or own property within the district; : • • • may] (b) At Large. Five members who shall not reside or own property in an historic district; [.,. • ] (c) Designated Members. One member designated to represent the Utah Heritage Foundation; one member designated to represent the Utah Society of the American Institute of Architects; and, one member of the Planning Commission designated to represent the Planning Commission. In the event that a Designated Member resides or owns roperty within an historic district, the. Desigted Member shall also be counted as one of the members allowed from that historic district. In no event shall the appointment of a Designated Member be allowed to . iricrease the number of members residing or ownin ro ert in an historic district to more than two; • • ` y - y • 1] (d) • Ex Officio. The directors of the-Plannin Division of the Building and Housing Division (or their designees) shall both serve as members ex officio without vote[;]_ v 1 . 3 SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect upon the date of its first publication. _. -2- . . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989 . CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: • CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: • CITY RECORDER BRB:pp -3- LEGISLATIVE ACTION • ACTION PROPOSED BY: Council Member Alan Pardman • PROPOSED ACTION: Amend Section 21.74.030 creating additional residency limitations on the Historic Landmark Committee. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This proposed change is in keeping with Council Member Yardman's discussion of the issue at the Council's February 25, 1989 • retreat. • -Bruce Baird, Assistant City Attorney, has indicated that there is some justification for requiring that the Planning Commission issue a recommendation on the proposal, but that the Statute itself is unclear. In deference to the Planning Commission and in order to avoid any appearance of attempting to subvert the regular process, Council Member Hardman is requesting that the proposed ordinance change be referred to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation. Upon receipt of the Planning Commission's recommendation, the City Council will hold a public hearing concerning the proposal prior to final action. REFERRED TO: Department of Development Services for scheduling on the Planning Commission agenda. ,„ CRAIG E. PETERSON "� ` r^` a� r OvP )4,.e I,© Y( DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7777 T0: Salt Lake City Council July 28, 1989 Re: Proposed Ordinance Amendment to Section 21.78.130 Recreational Facilities in Residential Districts Recorrrnendations: That the City Council hold a public hearing on September 5, 1989 at 6:20 p.m. to discuss a proposed ordinance amendment to Section 21.78.130 Recreational Facilities in Residential. The proposed amendment was requested by the Council to regulate liquor at these facilities. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Discussion and Background: The Planning Commission has recommend that the existing ordinance be amended to state that accessory uses shall not be considered to be uses which require licenses for the sale or consumption of alcohol. Legislative Action: The City Attorney's Office has prepared the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. Submitted by: CRAIG E./PErERSCN Directo¢ If/ ROGER F. CUTLER S___LALT, V` I rir VJ PV/ Dle (1,0 `d��v� ASSISTANT ATTORNEYS CITY ATTORNEY RAY L. MONTGOMERY STEVEN W. ALLRED LAW DEPARTMENT GREG R. HAWKINS CEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING LARRY V. SPENDLOVE 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, SUITE 505 BRUCE R. BAIRD CHERYL D. LUKE CITY PROSECUTOR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 FRANK M. NAKAMURA (801) 535-7788 ASSISTANT PROSECUTORS FAX (801) 535-7640 DONALD L. GEORGE CECELIA M. ESPENOZA July 13, 1989 RICHARD G. HAMP GLEN A. COOK Craig E. Peterson, Director Community & Economic Development 451 South State Street, Room 218 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Proposed Ordinance Amendment on Section 21 . 78. 130 Petition No. 400-708-89 Dear Craig: In response to Bill Wright' s letter of June 30, 1989, I have redrafted the proposed amendment to Section 21 .78 . 130 in response to the DeSantis petition to modify the prohibition on alcohol pursuant to the Planning Commission recommendation. I have discussed this modification with Allen and we both note that even the modified language creates a problem for such recreational uses as the Salt Lake Country Club and, possibly, other golf courses and similar uses. My understanding is that Allen intends to be present at the Council hearing on this petition and so inform the Council of the potential problems . If you have any questions, please call. Sincer y, 1// - / £ EBAIRD Assistant City Attorney BRB:pp Enclosures ALLEN C. JOHNSON, AICP PLANNING AND ZONING PLANNING DIRECTOR COMMISSION MEMBERS: WILLIAM T. WRIGHT, AICP COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RALPH BECKER DEPUTY DIRECTOR PLANNING DIVISION DAN BETHEL SUPERVISOR LONG RANGE PLANNING Planning and Zoning Commission CINDY CROMER AND URBAN DESIGN THOMAS A. ELLISON 451 SOUTH STATE STREET LAVONE LIDDLE-GAMONAL SANDRA MARLER RICHARD J. HOWA SECRETARY ROOM 406, CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING RALPH P. NEILSON SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 GEORGE NICOLATUS TELEPHONE 535-7757 JOHN M. SCHUMANN June 30, 1989 Mr. Craig E. Peterson, Director Community & Economic Development �~ 451 South State Street, Room 218 RECV Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Re: Proposed Ordinance Amendment on Section 21.78.130 Dear Craig: On Thursday, June 22, 1989, the Planning Commission reviewed a proposed ordinance change amending Section 21.78.130 allowing recreational facilities in residential districts as a conditional use. The petition was submitted by David DeSantis specifically to allow "for profit" organizations to provide these recreational facilities. Cn June 6, 1989, the City Council referred the proposed ordinance change back to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation regarding regulation of liquor at these facilities. The Planning Commission discussed the proposed language in Paragraph H2 on page 5 and felt it to be of a "criminal" nature rather than a land use regulatory nature. The Planning Commission believes this language may be difficult to administer and unreasonable for the owner of the property to enforce. The Planning Commission recommends an alternative approach. They,suggest replacing the language in Paragraph H2 on page 5 with the following: H2. Accessory uses shall not be considered to be uses which require licenses for the sale or consumption of alcohol. The Planning Commission recommends approval of this ordinance and supports a control on the sale and consumption of alcohol. Mr. Craig E. Peterson June 30, 1989 Page Two Please call if you have any questions on this matter. Respectfully submitted, 1, William T. Wright, AICP Deputy Planning Director Wlw:skm attachments R.: 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: 21.78.130 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 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. Applications for conditional uses under this section shall be filed with the Planning and Zoning Commission. Such applications 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. E. Approval criteria. -2 • • 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 patter 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 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- ` 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 and other uses. 1. 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' Commission. Any such accessory use shall be solely for the benefit and convenience of the patrons of the proposed establishment. -4- 2. Accessory uses for which licenses for the sale or consumption of alcohol are required shall not be permitted as part of any conditional use permitted pursuant to this section. 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. J. Appeals. Any person aggrieved by the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission may appeal the decision to the City Council . Appeals must be filed within fifteen days from the date of the Planning and Zoning Commission' s final decision. The Council shall hold a public hearing on the appeal. Notice of the appeal and hearing shall be provided to all residents and property owners within six hundred feet of the proposed conditional use ' no later than seven days prior to the hearing. 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: t. > CITY RECORDER -5- 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: 21.78.130 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 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. Applications for conditional uses under this section shall be filed with the Planning and Zoning Commission. Such applications 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 patternfor 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- 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 and other uses. 1 . 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 Commission. Any such accessory use shall be solely for the benefit and convenience of the patrons of the proposed establishment. -4- 2 . Accessory uses for which licenses for the sale or consumption of alcohol are required shall not be permitted as part of any conditional use permitted pursuant to this section. 3 . Any use under this section involving alcohol which is, or becomes , non-conforming shall retain its non-conforming status the provisions of Sections 21 . 90 . 030 or 21 . 90 . 060 notwithstanding . 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 . J. Appeals . Any person aggrieved by the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission may appeal the decision to the City Council . Appeals must be filed within fifteen days from the date of the Planning and Zoning Commission' s final decision. The Council shall hold a public hearing on the appeal . Notice of the appeal and hearing shall be provided to all residents and property owners within six hundred feet of the proposed conditional use no later than seven days prior to the hearing. SECTION 3 . EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication . -5- Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989 . CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: 97 CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s action: Approved Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No . of 1989 . Published: . BRB:rc -6- to) CRAIG E. PETERSON1�= a���1'r C,,� ,P� s i 1�� DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7777 To: Salt Lake City Council July 27, 1989 Re: Proposed Amendment to Section 21.52.010 "B-3" Business District Recommendation: That the City Council hold a public hearing on, September 12, 1989 at 6:20 p.m. to discuss a proposed amendment to Section 21.52.010 "B-3" business district. The amendment is to prohibit mechanical repairs and speciality-type service centers for automobiles and light trucks. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Discussion and Background: In February of this year, the Board of Adjustment considered and concluded that a Goodyear Service Center, proposed for the Foothill Village Shopping Center, met the test of a "shop for retail business" which is allowed in the present "B-3" district. This decision was largely based on evidence presented by Goodyear that over 50% of their gross income was from "sales" (principally tires) with the remainder from "service". Prior to this decision these types of activities, specialty-type service centers, were considered to be a conditional use in the Commercial "C-1" zone. The decision of the Board is somewhat precedent setting in that for an "B-3", or other less restrictive zone, a Goodyear Service Center that can establish facts similar to those in this case, can now be considered as a permitted use. This could also open the door for other similar activities that can establish that more than 50% of their income is from "sales". The Planning staff is concerned that the master plan goals and intent of the Business "B-3" district is at jeopardy. In many neighborhood areas, there exists the potential for the establishment of an auto service center as a permitted use not as a conditional use. An auto service center have a much larger customer area than the immediate residential vicinity and would be a disruptive influence in any neighborhood. The Planning Commission has reviewed the amendment and recommends approval of the amendment. . Legislative Action: The City Attorney's Office has prepared the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. Submitted by: CRAIG aPhILR5LAN\, _______ Director ;s LIB SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Permitted uses in the B-3 zoning districtl AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 21.52.010(8) OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE RELATING TO PERMITTED USES IN THE BUSINESS B-3 ZONING DISTRICT. WHEREAS, The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah has held public hearings before its own body and before the Planning Commission and has taken into account citizen testimony; and WHEREAS, the Council believes it appropriate to prohibit certain mechanical repair and specialty-type automobile service centers from the Business B-3 zoning district and has concluded that the proposed amendment to Section 21. 52.010( 8 ) is in the best interest of the City; • THEREFORE, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, hereby adopts the following amendment to Section 21.52.010( 8) . Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Section 21. 52.010( 8) be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 21.52.010 Permitted uses. A. In a B-3 business district, no building or premises shall be used and no building shall be erected which is , arranged, intended or designed to be used for other than one or more of the following uses: 1. *** 2. *** • 3. *** 4. *** 5. *** 6. *** 7. *** 8. Shops for retail business; For the purposes of this Title businesses performing mechanical repair for automobiles and trucks, including engine and engine part repairs and drive train repairs and specialty- type services centers primarily providing repair and maintenance for automobiles and trucks, including brakes, mufflers, upholstery, automobile glass, tire installation and repair, tune-ups and lubrication are prohibited in this district even as accessory uses. These uses are subject to the provisions of Section 21. 56.040. 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 ATTEST: CITY RECORDER -2- Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s action: Approved Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER ( SEAL) Bill No. of 1989 . Published: BRB:rc- - -3- M ALLEN C. JOHNSON SALE'BAKE, :1'lµ1V VyW- I '�11ri1:luiO' ill NANCY KE PACE,SCHAIRMAN PLANNING DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ROBERT LEWIS GEORGINA DuFGUR - DOROTHY PLESHE SECRETARY Board of Adjustment on Zoning PETER VAN ALSTYNE BRENT B. WILDE 324 SOUTH STATE STREET. ROOM 200 I. J. WAGNER SUPERVISOR of SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111 ALTERNATE: CURRENT PLANNING 535-7757 W. KENT MONEY June 23 , 1989 RECEIVED Mr . Craig Peterson, Director JJ 2 7 REn Community and Economic Development 451 So. State Street • Salt Lake City , UTAH 84111 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Re: Amendment to Sec. 21 . 52. 010 of the Zoning Ordinance. Dear Craig, On June 22 , 1989 the Salt Lake City Planning Commission considered an amendment to Sec. 21 . 52 . 010 of the Zoning Ordinance of Salt Lake City . The effect of this amendment would be to prohibit mechanical repairs and specialty-type service centers for automobiles and light trucks in the "B-3 Business" district . The Planning Commission moved to recommend approval of this amendment to the City Council. Therefore, it is now appropriate to have this item scheduled on the first available City Council agenda . The planning staff will work with the City Attorney' s Office to prepare the necessary ordinance revision. Respectfully , Allep C. ohnson , AICP Planni.n irector . ACJ : bp cc. File SALT LAKE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SEC.21.52. 010 BUSINESS "B-3" OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OVERVIEW Planning staff is proposing an amendment to Sec. 21. 52. 010 Business "B-3" of the zoning ordinance. This amendment is necessary to remove the possibility of encroachment of specialty- type service centers into neighborhood convenience business areas . BACKGROUND On February 22 , 1989 the Salt Lake City Board of Adjustment considered and concluded that a Goodyear Service Center , proposed for the Foothill Village Shopping Center , met the -test of a "shop for retail business. " This decision was in response to a request for an interpretation of Sec. 21. 52. 010 .A8 of the zoning ordinance. The decision rendered in this case (Case No. 983-B) was largely based on the evidence presented by Goodyear that over 50% of their gross income was from "sales" (principally tires) with the remainder from "service" . Prior to this decision these types of activities , specialty-type service centers, were considered to be a conditional use in the Commercial "C-1" zone (Sec. 21. 56 . 040) . . The zoning for Foothill Village Shopping Center is B-3 Business . Thus , the decision of the Board is somewhat precedent setting in that for any "B-3" , or other less restrictive zone, a Goodyear Service Center that can establish facts similar to those in Case 983-B can now be considered as a permitted use. Further , any other similar activity that can establish that more than 50% of their income is from "sales" has a strong likelihood to be considered a "shop for retail business" . Indeed, the city is already facing pressure to allow a Goodyear Service Center at another location without proceeding through the conditional use process . Therefore, in many neighborhood areas there exists the potential for the establishment of an auto service center as a permitted use. Recognizing this, and the nature of the interpretative decision made by the Board of Adjustment, the planning staff is concerned that the master plan goals and intent of the Business "B-3" district is at jeopardy. Clearly, an auto service center has a much larger catchment. area than the immediate residential vicinity. These activities can draw from a wide area and as such can be a disruptive influence in any neighborhood . Additionally, a review process has been established (conditional use process) that considers and evaluates the appropriateness of the use for a specific site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To remove the possible establishment of "auto service centers" in neighborhood oriented business areas , the planning staff would propose an amendment to Sec. 21 . 52. 010 Business "B-3" of the Zoning Ordinance of Salt Lake City. It is proposed that the form of this amendment would clearly prohibit mechanical repairs and specialty-type service centers for automobiles and light trucks as a permitted use in the "B-3" zoning district. Rather , these types of activities would still remain as •a conditional use in the Commercial "C-1" zone under the provisions of Sec. 21 . 56 . 040 . The exact amendment proposed to Sec. 21 . 52. 010 follows; SEC. 21.52.010 AMENDMENT 8 . Shops for retail business; for the purpose of this Title mechanical repairs and specialty-type service centers for the ordinary repair and servicing of automobiles and light trucks are not permitted , even as an accessory use. These uses are conditional uses under Sec. 21 . 56 . 040. DEFINITIONS Mechanical Repairs: An establishment primarily providing for the repair and maintenance of automobiles and trucks including engine, engine part repair , and drive-train repair . Specialty-Type Service: An establishment primarily providing repair and maintenance for automobiles and trucks including brake, muffler, upholstery work, auto glass, tire repair and change, tune-ups and lubrication. June, 1989 Bruce Parker . PC MINUTES 6/22 Page 9 Planning Staff Initiative to amend Section 21.52 Business "B-3" to clarify permitted uses, prohibited uses and conditional uses with regards to shops for mechanical repairs and specialty type service centers. Mr. Parker presented the staff report and stated that the Planning Staff is proposing an amendment to Section 21.52.010 Business "B-3" of the Zoning Ordinance. This amendment is necessary to remove the possibility of encroachment of specialty-type service centers into neighborhood convenience business areas. • On February 22, 1989 the Salt Lake City Board of Adjustment considered and concluded that a Good Year Service Center, proposed for the Foothill Village Shopping Center, met the test of a "shop for retail business." This decision was in response to a request for an interpretation of Sec. 21.52.010.A8 of the Zoning Ordinance. The decision rendered in this case (Case No. 983-B) was larcely based on the evidence presented by Good Year that over 500 of their gross income was from "sales" (principally tires) with the remainder from "service." Prior to this decision these types of activities, specialty-type service centers, were considered to be a conditional use in the Commercial "C-1" zone (Sec. 21.56.040) . The zoning for Foothill Village Shopping Center is B-3 Business. Thus, the decision of the Board is somewhat precedent setting in that for any "B-3" or other less restrictive zone, a Good Year Service Center that can establish facts similar to those in Case 983-B can now be considered as a permitted use. Further, any other similar activity that can establish that more than 500 of their income is from "sales" has a strong likelihood to be considered a "shop for retail business." Indeed, the city is already facing pressure to allow a Good Year Service Center at another location without proceeding through the conditional use process. Therefore, in many neighborhood areas there exists the potential for the establishment of an auto service center as a permitted use. Recognizing this, and the nature of the interpretative decision made by the Board of Adjustment, the Planning Staff is concerned that the master plan goals and intent of the Business "B-3" district is at jeopardy. Clearly, an auto service center has a much larger catchment area than the immediate residential vicinity. These activities can draw from a wide area and can be a disruptive influence in any neighborhood. Additionally, a review process has been established (conditional use process) that considers and evaluates the appropriateness of the use for a specific site. To remove the possible establishment of "auto service centers" in neighborhood oriented business areas, the Planning Staff would propose an amendment to Sec. 21.52.010 Business "B-3" of the Zoning Ordinance of Salt Lake City. It is proposed that the form of this amendment would clearly prohibit mechanical PC MINUTES Page 2 June 22, 1989 repairs and specialty-type service centers for automobiles and light trucks as a permitted use in the •"B-3" zoning district. Rather, these types of activities would still remain as a conditional use in the Commercial "C-1" zone under the provisions of Sec.21.56.040. The exact amendment proposed to Sec.21.52.010 follows: SEC.21.52.010 AMENEMENT 8. Shops for retail business; for the purpose of this Title mechanical repairs and specialty-type service centers for the ordinary repair and servicing of automobiles and light trucks are not permitted, even as an accessory use. These uses are conditional uses under Sec. 21.56.040. DEFINITIONS Mechanical Repairs: An establishment primarily providing for the repair and maintenance of automobiles and trucks including-engine, engine part repair, and drive-train repair. Specialty-Type Service: • An establishment primarily providing repair and maintenance for automobiles and trucks including brake, muffler, upholstery work, auto glass, tire repair and change, tune-ups and lubrication. Mr. Ellison asked what the difference was between a convenience store that sells gasoline and an automobile repair shop which would create less traffic. Mr. Parker responded that the convenience store draws from the neighborhood while the repair shop draws from a much larger base. Mr. Johnson stated that the Planning Staff recognizes the fine line between definitions and is examining the entire B-3 zoning. Mr. Ellison moved to approve the recommendation to amend Section 21.52 of the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Liddle-Gamonal seconded the motion; all voted "Aye." CORPORATION' a CRAIG E. PETERSON SA„ i r •, a I n ` .-a.: tr. -- ?•..c-•a c--r..•.-a.� - DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7777 To: Salt Lake City Council September 1, 1989 Re: Petition No. 400-741 submitted by Zions First National Bank Recommendation: That the City Council hold a non-advertised public hearing on September 12, 1989 at 6:30 p.m. to discuss closing "old 700 North" within the Salt Lake International Center. Availability of Ends: Not applicable. Discussion and Background: The appropriate City Departments have reviewed and recommended approval of the closure of "Old 700 North". The "road" has been replaced with dedicated streets within Plat 16 and Plat 11, and therefore, there is not public purpose in maintaining the "Old 700 North" east of John Glenn Road. Legislative Documents: The City Attorney's Office has prepared the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. Submitted by: CRAIG E. PE 'FRSON Director lf/ SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. cf 1989 (Closing a portion of old 700 North between John Glenn Road and Eddie Rickenbacker Road pursuant to Petition No . 400-741-89 ) AN ORDINANCE CLOSING A PORTION OF OLD 700 NORTH BETWEEN JOHN GLENN ROAD AND EDDIE RICKENBACKER ROAD PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. 400-741-89 . WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, finds after public hearing that the City' s interest in the public street described below is not necessary for use by the public as a street and that closure of said street will not be adverse to the general public ' s interest nor divest the City of title to the property without subsequent documents of transfer . NOW, THEREFOREe be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That a portion of old 700 North between John Glenn Road and Eddie Rickenbacker Road which is the subject of Petition No. 400-741--89 and which is more particularly described below, be, and the same hereby is, CLOSED and declared no longer to be needed or available for use as a public street, with the title remaining with the City until subsequent sale for market value recognizing the prescriptive nature of the City' s acquisition of the street . Said street is more particularly described as follows : BEGINNING at a point being South 89°58 ' 28" West 56 . 00 feet and South 0°02 ' 54" West 33 . 00 feet from the Salt Lake County monument marking the Northeast corner of said Section 35 , said point also being on the west Right-of-Way line of Eddie Rickenbacker Drive ( 5600 West Street ) ; basis of bearing being North 89°58 ' 28" East from the monuments marking the North quarter ( 1/4 ) corner and the Northeast corner of said Section 35 ; thence South 0°02 ' 54" West 66 . 00 feet along said west right-of-way line; thence leaving said west right-of-way line South 89°58 ' 28" West 2580 . 97 feet along a line being parallel to and South 0°01 ' 32" East 99 . 00 feet from the North line of the Northeast quarter ( 1/4 ) of said Section 35; thence South 89°58 ' 51" West 425 . 03 feet along a line being parallel to and South 0°01 ' 09" East 99 . 00 feet from the North line of the Northwest quarter ( 1/4 ) of said Section 35 to the East right-of-way line of John Glenn Road ( 6070 West Street) ; thence North 0°02 ' 54" East 66 . 00 feet along said east right-of-way line; thence leaving said right of way line North 89°58 ' 51" East 424 . 27 feet along a line being parallel to and South 0°01 ' 09" East 33 . 00 feet from the north line of the Northwest quarter ( 1/4 ) of said Section 35 ; thence North 89°58 ' 28" East 2581 . 73 feet along a line being parallel to and South 0°01 ' 32" East 33 . 00 feet from the North line or the Northeast quarter ( 1/4 ) of said Section 35 to the point of beginning, containing 4 . 555 Acres . • SECTION 2 . RESERVATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS . The above enclosure is expressly made SUBJECT TO all existing rights-of-way and easements of all public utilities of any and every description now located on and under or over the confines of the property and also SUBJECT TO the rights of entry thereon for the purposes of maintaining, altering, repairing, removing or rerouting said utilities , including the City' s water and sewer facilities , and all of them. Said closure is also SUBJECT TO any existing rights-of-way or easements of private third parties . SECTION 3 . EFFECTIVE DATE . This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication . -2-• sAti, CITY CORPOR TJON. ALLHN C JOHNSON. AICP PLANNING AND ZONING 1...,I DIRE(-'OR COMMISSION MELIDERS [Am T. WRIGEIT, AICP COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RALPH BECKER DEPOT, DOREC(O11 PLANNING DIVISION DAN BETHEL r:I LOR LONG RANGE PLANNING Planning and Zoning Commission CINDY CROMER Ar,D URBAN DESIGN THOMAS A. ELLISON SANDRA MARLER 451 SOUTH STATE S MEET LAVONE LIDDLE-GAMONAL SECRETARY ROOM 406, CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING RICHARD J. HOWA RALPH P. NEIL SON SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 GEORGE NICOLATUS TELEPHONE 535-7757 JOHN M. SCHUMANN August 18 , 1989 Mr. Craig Peterson, Director of Community & Economic Development Dept . City & County Building Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Petition 400-741 of 1989 Dear Mr . Peterson: This is to request the transmittal of Petition 400-417. from the Planning Commission to the City Council for consideration . This petition was heard and a motion for approval was adopted at the August 10th Planning Commission meeting. The petitioner , Mr. Charles Bradford, representing the land owner , Zion's First National Bank , wants the City to close a prescriptive use right- of-way located at 700 North between John Glenn Road and Eddie Rickenbacker Road in the Salt Lake International Center. This portion of 700 North has been closed off since 1983 . The parcels upon which this right-of-way exists were platted and subdivided in February 1983 as part of the International Center subdivision, Plat l6 . The road system installed since that time, specifically Harold Gatty Drive , has obviated the need for this right-of-way. The owner has an electronics firm waiting to build a plant on one of these parcels and they need to clear the use of this right-of-way before investing in the plant , as a measure to insure that their investment will not be tainted by claims to the use of the right-of-way . • The Planning Commission unanimously approved the petition to be recommended to the Council for consideration and adoption of this street closure . If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Bruce Eggleston. Respectfully Yours , Z2)/A — '()).."4r.-k William T. Wright , AICP, Deputy Director of Planning WTW/BPE/bpe cc: file r SALT e' On- CORPORATION' N' ALL EN C JOHNSON, AICP - -- - PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEMBERS : II LIAM T WRIGHT, AICP COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RALPH BECKER EoL-E_TT TOP PLANNING DIVISION DAN BETHEL ;oR LOW I i GE PLANNING Planning and Zoning Commission CINDY CRUMER A•lo JRSAI,of SIGN THOMAS A. ELLISON F,ANDRA MARLER 451 SOUTH STATE STREET LAVONE LIDDLE-GAMONAL ROOM 406, CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING RICHARD J. HOWA RALPH P. NEILSON SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 04111 GEORGE NICOLATIJS TELEPHONE 535-77b7 JOHN M SCHUMANN July 17, 1989 Mr . Bruce Baird Assistant City Attorney 506 City & County Building 451 S . State Street Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Re : Petition 400-741 , Zions Bank request for a Quit Claim Deed from Salt Lake City for "Old 700 North" Street within Salt Lake International Center Subdivision Plat #16 . Dear Bruce : Attached please find a copy of Plat 16 and the petition from Zions Bank . An attorney for Zions Bank , Jim Elegante at 532- 1234 , called today on this issue. He indicated that he had discussed with Roger Cutler some abbreviated process for this petition which would not require a public "closure" hearing before the City Council and which would result in the City issuing a Quit Claim Deed for the old Dirt Road . I have reviewed the petition through the July 11 , 1989 Development Coordination Team (DCT) Meeting, and the Traffic , Engineering , Public Utilities and Planning Departments all recommend that the City relinquish whatever claims it may have to the "Road" through Plat 16 . The need for the Dirt Road has been totally replaced by the dedicated streets within Plat 16 and Plat 11 and , therefore, there is no public purpose in trying to preserve " 700 North" east of John Glenn Road . Bruce Baird July 17 , 1989 Page 2 Zions is anxious to close the deal_ on the sale of this property to Compeq Computer Company from Taiwan. If we could consider that the City ' s interest were replaced by the dedications of the new streets at the time the subdivision was recorded (Plat 16 ) , the Quit Claim Deed now requested would merely be for purpose of comfort to the property sales participants . If you concur , please prepare the Quit Claim Deed , submit it for Palmer ' s signature , and forward the petition through LuAnn to the City Recorder . If a hearing must he held , please return the petition to me to begin the street closure hearing process . Thank you for your consideration . Sincerely , z>• /½' 4 yL Douglas L. Wheelwright Supervisor , DCT DLW:ml 1 • QG. R F. CUTLER SALT'LAKE. `VORPO SCIO ASSISTANT ATTORNEYS C ATTORNEY RAY L. MONTGOMERY W. ALLRED LAW DEPARTMENT GP.EG R. HAWKINS LARRY V. SPENDI_OVE TY crrY ATTORNEI CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING BRUCE R. BAIF:D -RYL D. I_u K� 451 SOUTH STATE STREET. SUITE 505C.H FRANK M. NAKAMURA Ro=e .TOR SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 34111 (801) 535-7788 ASSISTANT PROSEcUTO:25 FAX (801) 535-7640 DONALD L. GEORGE CECELIA M. ESPENO7A RICHARD G. NAME July 18, 1989 GLEN A. COOK TO: Doug Wheelwright Planning & Zoning Linda Cordova Real Property OW FROM: Bruce R. Baird Assistant City Attorney RE: Closure or vacation of unused prescriptive rights of way I have discussed this issue with Roger Cutler and it is our office' s opinion that once the City acquires the right to use a public thoroughfare by ten years continuous use pursuant to Section 27 -12-89, Utah Code Annotated only the statutory procedures for disposing of that property are permissible. Thus, a closure or vacation hearing would be necessary. The second question becomes how the old no longer used prescriptive right of way should be valued and thus whether or not the property needs to be closed and sold or can simply be vacated. Concerning the International Center property it is our opinion that, given the use of 575 North as the main street and the other factors involved, there is no requirement that we assess any value to the property. Tnus a vacation procedure is appropriate. Concerning the alleys for Rick Warner again their long history of non-use and the acquisition by prescription as opposed to dedication is sufficient grounds to use a vacation procedure. The one that is still being used should be closed and sold. If you have any question please call. BRB:cc Salt Lake City Planning and Zoning Commission Petition 400-741 by Zion's First National Bank/Charles Bradford OVERVIEW The petitioner wants the City to vacate a prescriptive use right-of-way located at 700 North between John Glenn Road and Eddie Rickenbacker Road in the Salt Lake International Center. This portion of 700 North has been closed off since 1983. The last use of the right-of-way was for the contiguous property owners as a farm road. There is now an alternative road system to supplant the use of the right-of-way, including the above mentioned roads and Harold Gatty Drive. Petition Area PLAT 16 ""'�`-"'• AN INDUSTRIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN SECTION 35 TOWNSHIP I NORTH, RANGE 2'WEST, SALT LAKE BASE &MERIDIAN BATE-DECEMBER,1982 SCALE- "200' VupL3rT ED STATE RAM 0,0RO'NPLE.5 MIN WR..SEC 35 - 091M+9a OB y �yQ TIK.R2W,SL684 ND9"A'2fE —l3 Sa 1a15T R 1 --.,L h �W: 10 1„..hT ,S 0 LOT 3 LOT 0 1 yg SW6 ny m . 2598 4c .; 921/c W1i Y I 'i L—J --r.n---�285222 -�s89+ai�0av-Be522'1�JW� J/ BACKGROUND The parcels upon which this right-of-way exists were platted and subdivided in February 1983 as part of the International Center subdivision, Plat 16. The road system installed since that time has obviated the need for this right-of-way. The owner has an electronics firm waiting to build a plant on one of these parcels and they need to clear the use of this right-of-way before investing in the plant, as a measure to insure that their investment will not be tainted by claims to the use of the right-of-way. ANALYSIS All existing records show that the petitioner is the owner of the parcels in question where the right-of-way exists. The need for this right-of-way has been supplanted by dedicated and paved roads in the immediate vicinity, as named above. The City Attorney has reviewed the situation and recommends that we process this matter as a street closing or vacat-ivrr. RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends that the Planning Commission move to grant the va4-a-t-i-o-19- of the 700 North right-of-way (by prescriptive use) on Plat 16 of the Salt Lake International Center. Bruce Eggleston, Planner iI August 3, 1989 PC MINUTES Page 3 August 10, 1989 Mr. Becker moved to recommend approval of Petition No. 500-69 subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Mr. Howa seconded the motion; all voted "Aye. " The motion passes. Petition No. 400-741 by Zions First National Bank requesting the City to vacate a prescriptive use right-of-way located at 700 North between John Glenn Road and Eddie Rickenbacker Road in the Salt Lake International Center. Mr. Bruce Eggleston presented the staff report and stated that the petitioner wants the City to vacate a prescriptive use right-of-way located at 700 North between John Glenn Road and Eddie Rickenbacker Road in the Salt Lake International Center. This portion of 700 North has been closed off since 1983. The last use of the right-of-way was for the contiguous property owners as a farm road. There is now an alternative road system to supplant the use of the right-of-way, including the above mentioned roads and Harold Gatty Drive. The parcels upon which this right-of-way exists were platted and subdivided in February 1983 as part of the International Center subdivision, Plat 16. The road system installed since that time has obviated the need for this right-of- way. The owners have an electronics firm waiting to build a plant on one of these parcels and they need to clear the use of this right-of-way before investing in the plant, as a measure to insure their investment will not be tainted by claims to the use of the right-of-way. All existing records show the petitioner is the owner of the parcels in question where the right-of-way exists. The need for this right-of-way has been supplanted by dedicated and paved roads in the immediate vicinity, as named above. The City Attorney has reviewed the situation and recommends we process this matter as a street closing or vacation. The staff recommends the Planning Commission move to grant the vacation of the 700 North right-of-way (by prescriptive use) on Plat 16 of the Salt Lake International Center. Mr. Charles E. Bradford, Assistant Corporate Counsel for Zions Bank, stated that they are interested in selling a portion of some property they own that is affected by this right-of-way and they _ like to get this matter Lossible. He requested the Planning Conanission approve this petition. Ms. Cromer asked why staff's reconanendation was for a vacation rather than a closure of the right-of-way. Mr. Eggleston responded that in a vacation, the City extricates any question of ownership, regardless of who may own the property. In a closure, the title passes to a particular land owner. Mr. Howa moved to recoirurend approval of the petition to the City Council. Mr. Nicolatus seconded the motion; all voted "Aye." The motion passes. PC MINUTES Page 4 August 10, 1989 Petition No. 400-754 by U.S. West for a permit to place concrete in the landscape park strip on City property at 250 East 200 South. Mr. Doug Dansie presented the staff report and stated that this is a request by U.S. West for a permit to place concrete in the park strip on City property at 250 East 200 South in a C-3 district. The C-3 zone does not require on- site landscaping. The site presently has tile in the park strip which is breaking up and needs to be replaced. The project has been reviewed by the City's One-Stop Committee and the Engineering and Transportation departments have approved the plan. Transportation normally requires an eight foot clear area for pedestrian traffic in the Downtown core and six feet in other conuercial areas. This proposal exceeds the standard. The Plaza creates a large amount of pedestrian traffic which would make maintenance of grass difficult. The majority of properties between 200 and 300 East have concrete park strips. As a general rule, properties outside the Central Business District should not have concrete paving in the park strip, but the Bell Plaza would be considered the eastern most edge of the CBD. The staff recommends this petition be approved because there is sufficient pedestrian activity to warrant a wider sidewalk for Bell Plaza and the adjacent properties have concrete park strips. This approval is subject to the following conditions; 1. Existing trees are kept and properly maintained. 2. All work meets Salt Lake City Engineering specifications. Ms. Stacey Jones, representing U.S. West, 250 Bell Plaza, stated that the existing tile is difficult to maintain and a hazard for the pedestrians. She requested the Planning Conunission approve this petition. Mr. Nicolatus moved to approve Petition No. 400-754 subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Mr. Howa seconded the motion; all voted "Aye." • The motion passes. INFORMAL HEAR] - Petition No. 400-710 by Gilbert and Thelma Iker requesting Sint zUk` Cit7 to rezone property at 1307 South 900 e: __ =_._ . . . "R-2" to a Business "B-3" zoning district. Also, to rezone the northwest corner of 1300 South and 900 West from a Business "B-3" district to a Residential "R-2" zoning district as initiated by the Planning Conunlssion. Mr. Wright stated that the Planning Commission had heard this matter in the format of an informal hearing in April, 1989. At that time, a property owner in the area expressed great concern about the staffs recommendation to rezone a larger area than the petitioner had requested. The Planning Commission made the recommendation to rezone only that portion of the area requested by the petitioner and directed the Planning Staff to research this matter. Since that hearing, the petitioners, Gilbert and Thelma Iker, have purchased the property directly south of their former property, specifically, the property • Charles E. Bradford ZIONS ASSis:ant Corporate Counsel vATIONAL BANK Zions � `" -first National Bank =;Kennecott Building �.C.Box 30709 ake City, Utah 84130 (801)524-4968 Assistant Corporate Counsel LJ-e South Main, Suite 340 ? Q. Box 30709 Lake City,Utah 84130 :524-4968 June 5, 1989 Roger Cutler Salt Lake City Attorney City & County Building, Suite 505A Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Vacating of remaining portion of 700 North at International Center Dear Mr. Cutler: Confirming our telephone conversation, enclosed is the legal description of a remaining portion of 700 North at the Salt Lake International Center for which Zions First National Bank requests a Quit-Claim Deed from Salt Lake City. Portions of 700 North were previously quit-claimed by the city in 1977 in a similar situation. A copy of the earlier deed is enclosed for your information. Also enclosed are copies of plats of Plat 16 which show the general plan and the section of 700 North as it crosses Plat 16 for which we require the deed. An electronics firm is planning to build a plant on a parcel shown in the - plats and because of this, we need to be able to close the transaction by the . middle of July. This plant will be beneficial to the community as it will provide _ jobs and additional income to the city. Please advise us if there is anything further needed from this office to assist in resolving the matter. Thank you for your cooperation. Respectfully, ii /2. Charles E. Bradrbrd Assistant Corporate Counse CEB:bkm E n cs. / -L2)