Mayor David Alvord - utah.gov · Councilman Rogers made a motion to approve the April 1, 2014 Study Meeting and April 1, ... She and her dad golf there. He taught her how to golf

SOUTH JORDAN CITY CITY COUNCIL MEETING

April 15, 2014

Present: Mayor Dave Alvord, Councilman Mark Seethaler, Councilman Chuck Newton,

Councilman Don Shelton, Councilman Steve Barnes, Councilman Chris Rogers, Interim CM Gary Whatcott, City Attorney Rob Wall, IS Director Jon Day, Police Chief Lindsay Shepherd, City Engineer Brad Klavano, City Council Secretary MaryAnn Dean

Others: See Attached (Attachment A). REGULAR MEETING – 6:00 PM

A. Welcome and Roll Call – Mayor David Alvord Mayor Alvord welcomed everyone present. All members of the City Council were present.

B. Invocation – By Councilman Steve Barnes Councilman Barnes offered the invocation.

C. Pledge of Allegiance Daniel Cannon, scout, led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Alvord recognized the scouts that were present at the meeting.

D. Minute Approval

1. April 1, 2014 Study Meeting

2. April 1, 2014 Regular Meeting Councilman Rogers made a motion to approve the April 1, 2014 Study Meeting and April 1, 2014 Regular Meeting minutes, as printed. Councilman Shelton seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. E. Presentations – Mulligans Financial Report – By Sunil Naidu Mayor Alvord indicated that the report is missing some data. The issue will be discussed at the May 6th City Council meeting. Councilman Barnes made a motion to move this item to the May 6th City Council meeting. Councilman Newton seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor.

South Jordan City 2 City Council Meeting April 15, 2014

Mayor Alvord noted that regarding Mulligans, the City is not making a decision on that property. They have no developer and no agreement to ponder at this time. The City ordered a study and that is being considered. The City Council moved to item G on the agenda.

G. Presentation Item: Proclamation presented to Anne Carpenter for her heroic save of a choking student at Monte Vista Elementary. (By Mayor David Alvord)

Mayor Alvord reviewed an incident where Anne Carpenter saved a choking student at Monte Vista Elementary. He read a proclamation in her honor. He presented Ms. Carpenter with the proclamation.

F. Public Comment: Julie Holbrook, 717 Mystic Creek Way, read a prepared statement opposing the Jordan Gateway apartments (Attachment B). Robert Paxton, 1073 W. 10250 S., concurred with the previous comments to vote no on the proposed rezone. The City has adequate apartment space that detracts from the rural atmosphere. He said South Jordan City has the highest vacancy rate in all of Salt Lake Valley and has for 3 years (Attachment C). He recommended that they postpone additional high density. There are a lot of apartments in the works. He noted a project on Gateway and 10600 South. He said it is a HUD rental project. They have plenty. Melanie Jones, 11023 Ridgeside Dr., was shocked when she looked at the study. She has seen no public hearing or forums on the Mulligans property. This week, she was told by a fireman that city calls are up 50 percent in the last 2 years entirely because of condos and apartments. She noted a member of the Jordan School District Board said commercial tax base is more vital to schools than an apartment tax base. She said the original family owners are heartsick and dismayed over the proposal. She has talked to many people. Not one person wants more high density and no one wants Mulligans destroyed. Carol Brown, 10221 S. 1040 W., read a prepared statement opposing the rezone for the high density tonight and the development of Mulligans (Attachment D). Sadie Alger, asked that the City Council not take Mulligans away. She and her dad golf there. He taught her how to golf. They don’t want to go somewhere else. If they want to make more money, they should do more with their marketing. Jolynn Alger, 10338 Alder Grove Cir., said her daughters held signs in protest because they were upset about the golf course being developed. A lot of cities have guilds. If they want to increase the profits, ask the citizens to form a guild to help with the marketing. She said TODs


are not doing as well as they think in other communities. This is the only place that is family friendly where families can move and get exercise while having fun. Erin Peterson, 10226 Mystic Falls Way, said the plan currently shows the apartment complex. What was not presented is the area to the west which is senior housing and other structures and buildings. The plan scares her because they are not informed on what is being voted on. The plan that was presented is not what is being proposed. Read through the plans. She is against high density. She would rather see commercial. They should make sure they know what they are voting on. Michael Peterson, 10226 Mystic Falls Way, read a prepared statement opposing high density rezones and preserving Mulligans (Attachment E). Melanie Buchert, 10209 S. Mystic Brook Way, said she does not support the rezone of land by the frontrunner station. They fear it will be the catalyst for the eventual development of the entire area including Mulligans. She is also concerned about the lack of consistent facts. She has heard rent could be as low as $800 per month. That does not sound luxury to her. The senior housing is also on an old plan. Why was it presented with the current owner? The end result could be entirely different from what has been presented. Are there standards in place that the developer will be held to? The proposed development is a large scale project that will affect them for generations. Why would a young professional, if they can afford it, want to live so close to the freeway and trains, with no open space and night life? She had the chance to live in a TOD in Colorado and chose not to for safety concerns. Why is a rezone of this property so critical at this time if a master plan for the area has not been done? Please vote no to the rezone. Ray Wheeler, 1115 Meat Ave (Salt Lake City), Jordan River Restoration Network, read a prepared statement in opposition to the development of Mulligans (Attachment F). Max Young, said he lives on the west side of Mulligans golf course on top of the hill. He is worried about traffic. The traffic is already blocked from the west side of the hill to the freeway at 5 pm. Public safety vehicles can’t get their vehicles through. It is a UDOT road. 11400 South is also busy. Stephen Kaufman, 10293 S. Jordan Creek Dr., read a prepared statement opposing the development of Mulligans (Attachment G). Dale Watson, 5489 Cyclaman Ct. said he works as construction manager for the Jordan Station apartments. She showed a map of those that have signed a flyer in favor of this project (Attachment H). The neighborhood where the apartment community is proposed is centered around businesses that have shown support for this project. He noted support of the owners of the Altius building. He reviewed the flyer given to people to sign for support and submitted signatures of support (Attachment I). Anyone who understands retail sales knows this is a positive for the city. Many have disparaged the design, and that comes from emotion. Each unit will have their own balcony, high end finishes and amenities. They would love to see the green space preserved in the river bottoms. None of this land is in the river bottoms. The only project


they have in mind is the initial parcels on the northeast corner of the land owned by the developer. Deanna Kaufman, 10293 S. Jordan Creek Dr., read a prepared statement opposing the proposed rezone and the development of Mulligans (Attachment J). Janalee Tobias, 1238 Jordan River Drive, said last month, the City Council repealed the VMU, VMR, and RM-8 because of residents concern about high density residential and high mixed use infiltrating the city. Yet, less than 30 days later, they have a request for another high density project. In this case, it is the most intense multi family zone. The same issues are in play as they were 30 days ago. This is the gateway to the city. The land is better suited for office or a cultural arts building. She asked that the rezoning be denied and to let the citizens come up with a plan for the gateway. She said they are putting apartments on a hill and that could create a mudslide hazard. There is a Councilman that has received campaign donations from a TOD developer. She said this is their Beverly Hills property and they are giving it to a developer with no experience. The gateway is beautiful. She asked are they going to vote against everyone here? The City Council represents them. David Findlay, 1125 Country Creek Dr., read a prepared statement opposing the development of Mulligans (Attachment K). He also spoke out against UTA. He said he does not want South Jordan to get stuck with the bill that UTA can’t afford. Jeff Salt, 723 E. Lisinbee, said he has been helping to preserve the Jordan River for 15 years. He started in the fight with the development of the Riverpark Corporate Center. He said the Gateway plan conflicts with the city’s general plan. If they approve the rezone and the gateway plan, they will be violating the general plan. He referred to Resolution 2009-02 where the City adopted the blue print Jordan River goals and initiatives (Attachment L). The city committed to preserve open space land with the Jordan River corridor which is currently zoned as open space. He also referred to Resolution R2011-15 (Attachment M) adopted by the city adopting the South Jordan City Jordan River Corridor open space and habitat conservation master plan and management guidelines. This property proposed doesn’t have a transition or buffer to the Audubon restoration project, which is a violation of the general plan. He said ¼ to 1/3 of Mulligans is in the “no build” zone. In 1984, 1/4-1/3 of Mulligans was flooded. This rezone is in conflict with the general plan and they could be liable for a lawsuit if they adopt this. They need high density that will make the mass transit work. They need to do development smart, without sacrificing the environment, and following the general plan. Bonnie Bowen, 1591 Moonstone St., read a prepared statement opposing the closing of Mulligans (Attachment N). Bo Maxon, said in LA, people pay top dollar to be next to a park. They are not making more land. It is not just the birds, the land is beneficial to youth and a place to play and stay away from drugs and alcohol. He said the City Council is here because of the residents. To degrade their points is ridiculous.


Brian Sontag, 10382 S. Jordan Gateway, said he owns property adjacent to the proposed apartment complex and is associated with many of the business owners. All of the immediate neighbors to this project want phase 1 to go through. Mulligans is a great place and he is a fan of open space. Phase 1 had a designation for high density housing, but that plan expired. Many of them invested millions with the hopes that they would have people to accommodate their business ventures. The location across from the front runner station is ideal for this project. They can either do urban sprawl or smart development that uses transit and decreases issues with air quality and traffic. More people will help the struggling businesses in the area. Phase 1 has nothing to do with Mulligans. The property is currently blighted. The adjacent businesses have struggled. He was just informed that he is not charging high enough rent on his building. The area has struggled. What they need is people to bring a vitality to the businesses that have invested along the corridor. He said they should separate the two issues and vote yes to phase 1 of the proposed apartments. Jim Smith, 1638 W. Cornerstone Dr., said he is representing the senior golf league. He said on a weekend, the golf course is enjoyed by all ages. The place is very busy. There is a small 9 hole golf course, batting cages, and miniature golf course. It is a city playground. 5 years ago, the golf course was not in such great shape. It has improved and the membership has improved. The men’s league membership has increased. The last two years at Mulligans has been profitable. Richard Bytendorp, 1062 W. 10125 S., said he is concerned about the tax base and what is best for the city. He does not feel the proposal is a great fit for the community. In the end, it is just an apartment with no commercial. He said it is a mixed use development again. It is mixed because of the proposed elderly housing and condos. This is just another high density development touted to be luxury. He said it will impact schools, taxes, crime, roads, fire, sewer, and water. It will bring some building fees, but will ultimately have little financial benefit. The new residents will go to Sandy to shop. The business support for this development does not have the residents in mind, just their pocketbooks. The commercial to the north seems to be working well. He said they should preserve Mulligans for open space to have an impact and preserve the community. Councilman Barnes made a motion to extend the public comment period for 30 min. Councilman Newton seconded the motion. Councilman Newton made a substitute motion to allow for 4 more people to speak. Councilman Rogers seconded the motion. Councilman Barnes made a motion to extend the hearing to everyone currently in line to speak. Councilman Rogers seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. Mark Maxon, 11316 S. Brown Summit Cir., said last time he was here, it was regarding 11400 South. They have skepticism with the various government agencies. They were told 11400 South would be kept at 35 mph; it is now 45 mph. People go 60 mph on the street. He has interviewed many people on KTALK radio. He said he drove to South Jordan 5 days a week and he fell in love with the community. The gateway is the golf course. The park makes the city money. The numbers of people here is a small reflection of the wave that will come forth if the park is


developed. They will make sure that everything done is transparent and there are no ties to developers. They have watched corruption from a federal to local level. They will have no more. They value quality of life before financial gain. If a development goes in there, people will notice. Their opinion will go a long way in the next election process. They should do the right thing for the general population for the city. Merlynn Newbold, 10454 S. 1440 W., said their city slogan is life just off the fast lane. They wanted some commercial. They wanted it in balance with other things. They also established a parks master plan. Committees spent years developing that plan so there was green throughout the city. The city symbol is green with a tree. They want to maintain a balance. This is not in her back yard, but is in her city. They want to have a great city and want it to have life just off the fast lane. Brad Marlor, 2360 Burley Cir., said he served the City for 12 years, and it takes time and energy. It is issues like this rezoning that will define them. He hopes they will realize that when it comes time to vote. There are many areas that remain undeveloped. This will likely be developed in some way. The study makes sense to give them options. More mixed use than high density only makes more sense. High density only detracts from the taxes and city services. Mixed use on the corridor makes sense. He said when they bought Mulligans, they had to sell a portion of the property to prevent a facility from being built there. All of the money from the proceeds went to parks and green space. He said they could table the rezone and determine which areas make sense for mixed use and which areas are appropriate to maintain as open space. He hopes Mulligans and open space areas are considered untouchable. Dave Robison, 10912 Fern Ridge, said he loves seeing people here for Mulligans. He reviewed the statistics outlining the need for walkable communities (Attachment O). They need to consider approving the rezone to meet the demand that is out there. Jeff Novac, 1148 Windy Ridge (Sandy), said they have a jewel with Mulligans. He comes here many times a week. Many people at Mulligans are not from South Jordan. There are people there of all ages. It is a unique facility. He said part of the attraction of RiverPark is the view of the golf course. It is unfathomable to destroy this. Every town has high density housing; it is something they won’t get back. There are people coming to Mulligans from all over to spend their money there. They should expand that. Note: Written comments were submitted on behalf of Angelo Kallas (Attachment P) and Anna Florin (Attachment Q). Mayor Alvord closed the public hearing. He thanked everyone for their comments. He said the allegations of corruption on the Council are false. The men on the City Council have character. Councilman Barnes recommended that they switch items J. and I. on the agenda. The City Council concurred.


H. Public Hearing: Resolution R2014-30, approval of the 2014 Annual Action Plan and authorizing the City to enter into agreements for the use of Community Development Block Grant funds for the 2014 Program Year. (By CDBG Coordinator, Jake Warner)

CDBG Coordinator Warner reviewed a presentation on the CDBG funding requests (Attachment R). He indicated that they are turning away more requests than ever. It is difficult to not fund everyone. Each request is evaluated by the committee, based on its merits. Councilman Barnes asked if they are counting on CDBG funds that may not be available in future years? Mr. Warner said they are not dependent on the funding. Mr. Warner reviewed the proposed projects for the Senior Center. Mayor Alvord opened the public hearing. Sal Janson, Salt Lake Community Action Program, thanked the city for their continued support. She reviewed the statistics for the food pantry and said they would not be able to do their work without volunteers. She said they also refer people to other needed services. Ellen Parish, Community Health Centers, 220 W. 7200 S., said they provide low cost health care for low income people. Last year, they served 155 South Jordan residents. They expect the patients to participate. They delivered 6 babies for South Jordan residents. To treat them in the beginning saves money in the end. They treat people that need primary care, vaccines, etc. They appreciate the city’s support. Carla Arroyo, 2789 W. 9760 S. said she is a resident of the city, and the Executive Director of the South Valley sanctuary. They help fund the shelter and help prevent domestic violence from happening to the point that people have to leave their homes. She reviewed the statistics for service to South Jordan residents. Jessica Burnam, Road Home Homeless Shelter, expressed gratitude at the current funding request. She reviewed their mission. She said their money would be donated to serve the downtown shelter. They appreciate being a partner of the city again. Mariah Griffith, Family Support Center, 1760 W. 4805 S., reviewed what their service entails. They help 2000 kids a year; 300 were South Jordan residents. They offer mental health care and counseling. They also have an in home parenting support program. They can provide 300-350 hours of service with the proposed $5,000 donation. Stewart Ross, 205 N. 400 W. (Salt Lake City) Legal Aide, said based on past experience, the City Council is not a rubber stamp body. They take the responsibility deliberately. Their request is funding for their victim assistance program. They provide services to the two court houses in the valley and the family justice center. Last year, they represented 50 South Jordan residents.


Luane Jensen, 11186 S. 2700 W., thanked the City Council for their support for the scouting for food drive. They filled two 48 ft. trailers. They are impressed with the city, the citizens, and scouts. Their food is going to the pantry on 11800 South. Mayor Alvord closed the public hearing. Councilman Newton made a motion to approve Resolution R2014-30. Councilman Rogers seconded the motion. Councilman Seethaler indicated that he would abstain from the vote because he serves on the Board of Trustees for the South Valley Sanctuary who is receiving funding. He noted that he has nothing to do with this CDBG funding process or anything related to this. The South Valley Sanctuary is a long time recipient of these funds. Roll call vote. The vote was 4-0 in favor, with Councilman Seethaler abstaining.

I. Public Hearing: Ordinance 2014-08, Council Agenda Rules of Procedure. (By Mayor David Alvord)

This item was done later in the meeting.

J. Action Item: Jordan Station Mixed Use Rezone, Resolution R2014-07 authorizing the Mayor to sign the Development Agreement; and Rezone Ordinance 2014-01-Z, approving an amendment to the Zoning Map rezoning property from (C-F) to TOD-MU on property generally located at 10464 South Jordan Gateway. (Note: The Public Hearing on this Item was held 03/17/2014) By Community Development Director, George Shaw)

Councilman Barnes said his uncle is Kem Gardner. John Gust is Mr. Gardner’s partner. They both made contributions to his campaign. He asked if the developers had any intentions of partnering with Arbor, Kem Gardner, or John Gust? Mr. Wells, property owner, said no. He does not know any of those individuals. It was also noted that the developer has given no money to Councilman Barnes. Community Development Director Shaw reviewed the background information on this item. There has been some confusion about the plan that is being proposed. He reviewed the original plan proposed March 17th. The applicant has since met with staff and made some changes. He reviewed the new plan (Attachment S). Staff prefers the new plan. There have been discussions about rezoning only part of the property or needing a more detailed plan. Any additional requirements can be stipulated in the development agreement. If the entitlement is given, they have to go through the site plan process. Councilman Rogers said there is an issue with the names on the development agreement identifying the ownership of the property. Mr. Shaw concurred. City Attorney Wall said there is a third property owner shown on the county records. They have been told that is an error.


Councilman Rogers said he is concerned about moving forward with the development agreement when there is an error with the title to the property. Can they remedy that tonight? Mr. Shaw said they can stipulate that the issue be resolved before the agreement is signed. Councilman Barnes asked if they are asking for enough homework to be done ahead of time before a rezone, such as soil samples, studies, etc. Mr. Shaw said there are concerns with the property to the west with the unconsolidated soil. The engineers will be adamant about those being taken care of as part of the site plan review process, and they will check again before building permits are issued. That would have to be done regardless of the zone. That is not part of the rezone process. The lower portion is not part of phase 1. Councilman Newton said they discussed a geological survey in the corridor by the Deseret Engineering building. Are they considering that? Mr. Shaw said geo tech reports are required on all major projects in the city. The engineering department signs off on it before it moves forward. That requirement can be added to the development agreement, if desired. Councilman Barnes asked if apartments have been built in the city in the C-F zone in the past? If so, how many? Mr. Shaw said part of Sterling Village or the Pinnacles could be on C-F zoned property. Councilman Barnes asked why not allow apartments on C-F in this case? Mr. Shaw said the TOD zone gives them structure. The last apartments were approved under a performance development which is nebulous. The TOD identifies specific requirements. This plan could be accomplished in the C-F zone, but not as easily accomplished. Mr. Shaw said they have the tools in place to do it this way. Councilman Barnes asked about the Resolutions R2009-02 and R2011-15 that were mentioned in the public hearing? Councilman Newton said the 2009 Resolution is regarding the flood plain in Mulligans, which has nothing to do with this property. Councilman Barnes asked if they are in violation of prior Resolutions? City Attorney Wall said Resolutions are not binding, if the City Council chooses to take another action. The attachments and language of the documents indicate that this development is not part of either Resolution or the no build zone. Those Resolutions do not affect this property. Mr. Shaw said the general plan has goals and policies for a TOD in this area. He said the general plan is a guideline and is not mandatory to follow. The TOD was not part of the general plan before 2010. Councilman Newton said in section 7 of the development agreement, it talks about encouraging walkability and access. It does not mention a bridge specifically. As long as the developer provides access to the sidewalk along Jordan Gateway, the contract has been fulfilled. Mr. Shaw concurred. That will be part of the site plan review. Councilman Barnes asked if there will be a bridge cross the Jordan River? Mr. Shaw said there is a recommendation to connect a pedestrian access across the river. They do not know where that would happen. The platform of the frontrunner station is slightly further north. They have no


authority over that property. Interim CM Whatcott said the city has been told that they will never get an easement over that federal land. Councilman Newton said there is some easement because 10600 South goes across the Jordan River. He noted some proposals for sidewalks in the area to provide the desired access. Councilman Newton said the city suggested underground parking, and the developer proposed 40 percent underground parking. That frees up an area for green space. Councilman Newton asked about the landscaping requirement with the green space? Mr. Shaw said that would be addressed with the site plan review to determine if the proposal is adequate. They have discussed burmed landscaping so they don’t see the parking lot. That is subject to site plan review. Councilman Shelton asked how they would specify the amount of green space and landscaping desired? Mr. Shaw recommended putting a minimum percentage in the development agreement. They can address the specifics as part of the site plan review. Make it clear in the development agreement that more could be required. Councilman Shelton asked if they can specify the timing of the installation of the green space and club house? Mr. Shaw said they can. It is typically done with the first phase. The developer will want the amenities up front to market their project. Councilman Shelton asked if they can specify finishes to ensure they are luxury apartments? Mr. Shaw said yes. They can put percentages of stone or brick facades; minimal stucco should be incorporated. Councilman Newton clarified the area included in the 5 acres. He noted the low vacancy rates in South Jordan. He said those rates fluctuate. Vacancy rates for office also fluctuate. Mr. Shaw concurred. Those rates are down presently. They are encouraged that the parcel to the south could have office if this trend continues. Jeff Wells, 2020 Pebble Creek Dr., (Springville), is one owner of subject property at 10464 S. Jordan Gateway. He said this property is not Mulligans. It is 5.5 acres, away from the floodplain. He has dedicated thousands of acres to the nature conservancy and believes in protecting their environment. He said he moved to Springville because there was housing to accommodate him, his kids, and his mother. He said this land is currently trashy. He said animals don’t live on this property. There are beautiful views from the property. He has developed and refurbished hundreds of miles of river at his own cost. He said he thinks the 300 tenants will want to golf and walk along the parkway. He would like to see the area developed smart. He said this development will give vibrancy to a dead area. They are not on the golf course. They don’t want to develop the golf course. They are not in the flood plain. Their project will cause every A Class project in the area to go to a B. He reviewed the amenities they will offer. They designed the project to highlight or take advantage of the parameters in the TOD development. This project will increase property values for everyone. This project is high end with keyed access and 24 hour security. The residents will have to pass credit checks. They have agreed to all improvements and additional expenses to making the project acceptable to the city including increased brick and rock façade, underground parking, and pedestrian access. He said they have upwards to 20,000 sq. ft. that can be utilized immediately or converted to commercial. The issue


with the title was a typo at the title company. He said one of their partners, Joe Luder, bought the western parcel to protect their view of the golf course. Whatever is done, the property will be more beautiful than it is today. The western parcel is a hazard and is expensive to develop. He said personally, he would rather see a nicely landscaped lower profile project rather than an ugly glass commercial office building. They could have done higher density on this parcel. They have no plans for the other parcels at this time. If the city wants commercial on the southern site, they will consider that at that time. Their studies show that their proposal is the highest and best use for the property. Mulligan’s is a separate issue. He said he and his partners formed a company to invest in this property. They are proud of the project and feel it will improve the community. Councilman Seethaler asked if there is a fixed amount of acres needed for phase 1? Mr. Wells said approximately 5.6 acres, plus or minus an acre to allow for parking. He noted that the LLC that he is involved in has ownership rights to 7.6 acres. The western parcel was purchased by his partner, which he addressed earlier. The total acreage is 11.6. Councilman Seethaler asked if they only took action on the 5.6 acres, would that be disadvantageous to the overall build out of the project? Mr. Wells said no. They have 2 phases. They have no other plans for the other acreage. They will wait and see what their studies show is the highest and best use for that property. Councilman Seethaler said he feels the city is better protected to not rezone twice as much property as what is currently planned. They should preserve future options. Councilman Seethaler asked about a firm number on the commercial square feet? Mr. Wells estimated, within 5 percent, that they have 16,000 sq. ft. within the buildings that can become commercial. 6000 sq. ft. is dedicated as commercial now; 10,000 sq. ft. could be dedicated in the future. Councilman Seethaler asked if the city’s land use and zoning process is typical or abnormal? Mr. Wells said the city is known to be an excellent growing community. They have a good planning staff that is well vetted and knowledgeable. They study the issue in detail. They felt their long term investment is protected because of the quality that would be required by this city. Their improvements have been significant and expensive, but have added value. Councilman Seethaler asked about citizen committees, oversight boards, and additional steps. Is that atypical? Mr. Wells said he has never heard of that. He feels most people were referencing that relating to the development of Mulligans. Their proposal is a simple project. It is on the higher quality end for the standards written in the city policy. Mr. Wells said they are in a position to help set a standard for curb appeal that others would have to follow. Councilman Seethaler asked how do they create a finished product so it feels like a destination, rather than diverse properties that feel like they don’t belong together? Mr. Wells said they are willing to do that with setbacks, landscaping, sidewalks, and the amount of asphalt. They can set the precedent for future development.


Councilman Seethaler asked why should they trust Mr. Wells to set that standard as opposed to a 2 year moratorium while the city sets the standards? Mr. Wells said they take the risk if a developer would be willing to develop in 2 years. He said he does not feel other projects will pencil out. They anticipate interest rates to increase. They will help set the standard and the standard is high. Councilman Shelton asked to look at boards and drawings of the project. Mr. Wells showed the Council the elevation drawings. He noted that they are planning over 20 percent of the property dedicated to open space. Because of the power lines, they needed to make their development look more park like. Councilman Barnes asked about the discrepancy in rent prices? Mr. Wells said that ranges between $890 - $1360 based on the view, the size of units, what floor it is on, if they have underground parking, etc. Councilman Barnes asked if they have any intention of selling the project? Mr. Wells said they expect to be the owner of the project for 15 years or longer. Councilman Rogers asked about the names of the legal owners of the property? Mr. Wells said SJ Utah LLC has 5 owners, of which he is one. He pulled in Joe Luder (Chairman of Smithfield Foods), Joe Luder the 4th is a partner, Richard Jailniac, and Chris Sims. He said Chris Sims knows the apartment business well. The LLC is on the title. Councilman Rogers asked about the JL Utah LLC? Mr. Wells said that is Joe Luder that bought the property to the west to protect their view of Mulligans. Councilman Rogers noted that none of them are listed in the articles of incorporations. He noted that Leonard Oats is listed. Mr. Wells said Leonard Oats is their attorney that set up the entity. Councilman Rogers asked for an example of projects previously done. Mr. Wells said Bryce Mountain in Virginia, the Inn at the Entrada development in St. George is his project. They are passive investments, but they have done it for years. Councilman Rogers asked if he would be amenable to additional requirements in the development agreement? It was noted that of the 5.5 acres (48,531 sq. ft. is green area. That equates to just over an acre). That equates to almost 20 percent. Councilman Rogers said he does not feel the open space is enough. Would they be willing to increase that to 30-40 percent? Mr. Wells said it does not pencil out. Councilman Rogers asked if they could do 50 percent of their parking underground? Mr. Wells said no because of the expense. Councilman Rogers asked if they can do 2 parking stalls for every unit? Mr. Wells said they have 1.5 stalls per unit. To increase that would have to be done underground. They currently have 40 percent of their stalls underground which is 20 percent more than any other project. Mr. Wells reviewed the features and amenities that will be proposed including a pool, lap spas, dog park, bbq pits, underground parking, club house with theatre, exercise room, office area, etc.


They will also have electric charge stations in some parking stalls. There are 9-10 ft. ceilings in all units. Councilman Rogers asked what is the plan for the commercial part of this, and in the other phases? Mr. Wells said he would love for the corner section of the building to be a sandwich/coffee shop. Councilman Newton asked when they expect to start building? Mr. Wells said as soon as possible. They would love to have tenants move in in January. It might have to move to February or March. It will take 9 months for the first building, and 9 months for the second building. Councilman Newton noted that the city has 474 acres of green space in the city and 42 parks in the city. Councilman Newton indicated that the property owner has property rights. He said if the residents wanted to purchase the 11.6 acres to prevent development, how much is it worth? Mr. Wells estimated $5.5-$6 million. Councilman Newton said 302 apartments are proposed. He noted the low pupil rate. They estimate 20 possible school children in the development. Councilman Newton said along the Jordan River, the city has done $1.8 million in projects. Mayor Alvord asked what if the market changes after the first building is done? Would they still build building 2? Mr. Wells said there is pent up demand for this project. He said they will finish both buildings. On future phases, they would likely sell the property if it was proposed to be commercial. Their construction standards will not change with the second apartment building. They are locked into their prices now. Councilman Seethaler said there is concern about Mulligans and wetland preservation. With this project, they are not talking about Mulligans or wetlands. He is interested in the revitalizing of Mulligans. There is much that can be done. That is a discussion for another time; they need to be respectful to one another. He asked is this the Beverly Hills or a place that no one would want to live because it is by the train and freeway? There are people willing to answer that question with their own money. He said he is in favor of approving the Resolution for the approximately 5 acres needed for the 2 apartment buildings. This is not Mulligans and the property owners have rights. The proposal is for Class A luxury units and will be an addition to the city. There is a need for both people and places for the TOD area. There is no more logical place for higher density Class A apartments than across from the train stop. They need a mix and this is a good starting point. Businesses in the area and the community will benefit from it. The city will engage in due diligence. The TOD requirements will set the standards. It is not fair to subject this development to an extensive separate list of requirements that they would not impose on another like landowner. He feels it is unethical and perhaps illegal. They have an opportunity to improve the property. He said they work for the city; elected representatives have certain responsibilities. They have more access to information than residents through their study. It is not that they are withholding information. They are in a different position to make the judgment. Good public


debate is healthy. They expect elected officials to study and have a perspective on all issues. They need to have a balance in all things. He is not pro development or pro conservation. He said he does not think they can continue to consume the resources and have everyone live in large homes and large properties. There are some that want people to be able to live by family. There are young professionals and retirees that prefer apartment living. These apartments will look over a beautiful part of the Salt Lake County. Councilman Seethaler made a motion to approve Resolution R2014-07. Mayor Alvord said there are good arguments on both sides of the issue. They have had two applications in the same area for commercial/office buildings. That signals that there is profit to be made with commercial in the area. It is not right to say residential is the only option for profit. Currently in this area is industrial, commercial/office, and light retail. Residential is not a perfect fit. Mike Allegra with UTA said a TOD does not have to be a mixture of uses to be successful. He said people in the city have said they experienced enough high density growth. He feels if they surveyed the residents on this application, it would probably lose. He said he does not favor any more high density residential, but if there is one place left in the city that an apartment would be acceptable, he would say this is the spot. He said denying the rezone will not injure the developer because they can develop this land commercial. Councilman Newton seconded the motion. Councilman Newton said he proposed raising the speed limit on 11400 South. He said he was willing to bring the speed limit back down, but the neighbors opposed the change. They represent all residents in the city. He said in the last 2 years, there has only been 1 high density project approved and that was senior housing on Redwood Road. There were 7 other attempts. He said as a city, they do have a requirement to have some moderate income housing. This proposal is for a mix of residential and commercial. They can build up to 16,000 sq. ft. of commercial retail with this proposal. He said the commercial in this area is currently dying. He said Mr. Allegra with UTA told him that a residential component helps. Others have confirmed that opinion. In the TOD areas he has seen, the ones that are vibrant and growing had a residential component. He supports this proposal. Councilman Barnes said even though they approved one high density development, the Council still voted to repeal zones where a high density housing proposal would be unlikely and they left the zones most likely to have high density housing. Now they are talking about it again. They need to be careful about the message that is sent. He said they are not meeting with any developers regarding Mulligans right now. He said all 58,000 of them are the owners of Mulligans. He said they want to involve the residents and have the dialog about the options for the area. The Forest City study is an opinion about their options. It does not replace citizen input. He hopes the residents will engage them in open houses. He thanked the developers for their patience as this issue got mixed with the Mulligans issue. He said he is not sure that the residents would vote against this apartment complex. There is a reason they have a representative form of government. He noted that there were extensive open houses in 2010 conducted about the


general plan. If they are concerned about other zones in the city, before they have an owner ask to develop the land, they should campaign for those changes now. Councilman Shelton said his feelings regarding Mulligans are on his blog. He concurred with Councilman Seethaler’s comments. Because of the location of the proposed development, it presents a unique opportunity to reduce the pollution because people will be able to ride the train. He said he does not link this project to Mulligans in any way. Councilman Rogers said he was the architect of eliminating the VMU, VMR, and RM8 zones. He has been in opposition of excessive high density development in the city. He excluded the TOD MU zone because there are appropriate locations for high density development, and that is near transit locations. His concern with the VMU, VMR, and RM8 zones were that they were infiltrating residential areas. Although he considers TOD areas as appropriate for high density development, it is important to get this right because of its location. He does not feel they have it right yet. He illustrated his concerns in earlier comments. That is why he will vote against the project. Councilman Rogers said there is a spectrum of property rights. There are limitations to what property owners can do because the city has decided to enact zoning laws. The decision for the Council is what are the limitations? The developers can’t develop it however they want. It has to be consistent with the zone and the vision of the City Council. He feels this is a unique parcel and that is why additional requirements can be placed on the property. City Attorney Wall said the motion should include getting verification as to who the legal title holders are. In paragraph 3, it is entitled commercial, but they should also include retail. They need to make sure the legal description only includes 5.6 acres. They also need to amend the master development plan to outline that they are only talking about the red portion of the plan. Councilman Seethaler incorporated City Attorney Wall’s provisions in his motion to approve. Councilman Newton seconded the motion. Roll call vote. The vote was 4-1 in favor, with Councilman Rogers opposed. Councilman Seethaler made a motion to approve Rezone Ordinance 2014-01-Z, limited to the 5.6 plus acres. Councilman Barnes seconded the motion. Roll call vote. The vote was 4-1 in favor, with Councilman Rogers opposed.

I. Public Hearing: Ordinance 2014-08, Council Agenda Rules of Procedure. (By Mayor David Alvord)

Mayor Alvord said this makes official the practices that they have been following. He reviewed highlights of the Ordinance. Mayor Alvord said he has been trying to work with Interim CM Whatcott to make sure the meetings don’t go too late. Originally, he asked that it take 3 Council Members to place an item on the agenda the day of. This Ordinance only requires 2 Council Members. If the agendas start going long, he may ask that it be changed back to 3 Council Members. He does not foresee that being a problem.


Mayor Alvord opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. He closed the public hearing. Councilman Rogers made a grammatical correction to section II., paragraph D. The City Council determined to edit the section under meetings to state that if a meeting date falls on a legal holiday, the meeting may be held on the following day. Councilman Barnes made a motion to approve Ordinance 2014-08, as amended. Councilman Rogers seconded the motion. Roll call vote. The vote was unanimous in favor. Councilman Barnes made a motion to extend the City Council meeting past 11:00 p.m. to accommodate item K. Councilman Shelton seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor. Councilman Barnes made a motion to go into an Executive Closed Session to discuss the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual. Councilman Shelton seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote 4-0; Councilman Seethaler was absent. Interim City Manager Gary Whatcott asked that the closed meeting be held in Conference Room #7. Mayor and Council were in agreement.

K. Executive Closed Session: Discuss the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual.

Separate set of minutes Councilman Shelton made a motion to come out of the Executive Closed Session. Councilman Rogers seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote 4-0; Councilman Seethaler was absent. ADJOURNMENT Councilman Rogers made a motion to adjourn. Councilman Barnes seconded the motion. Vote was unanimous to adjourn. The April 15, 2014 City Council regular meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m. This is a true and correct copy of the April 15, 2014 Council meeting minutes, which were approved on May 6, 2014.

South Jordan City Recorder

awest

Text Box

04-15-2014 CC Meeting (Attachment S)

Documents

Mayor David Alvord - utah.gov · Councilman Rogers made a motion to approve the April 1, 2014 Study Meeting and April 1, ... She and her dad golf there. He taught her how to golf