Loading...
08/07/2002 - Minutes (2) PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, AUGUST 7 , 2002 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in a Work Session on Tuesday, August 7, 2002, at 5:30 p.m. in Room 326, City Council Office, City County Building, 451 South State Street. In Attendance: Council Members Carlton Christensen, Eric Jergensen, Nancy Saxton, Jill Remington Love, Dave Buhler, Dale Lambert and Van Turner. Also in Attendance: Mayor Ross C. "Rocky" Anderson; Steven Allred, Acting City Attorney; Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; David Nimkin, Mayor's Chief of Staff; Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administrative Officer; Steve Fawcett; Management Services Deputy Director; Archie Archuleta, Administrative Assistant for Minority & Community Affairs; Diana Karrenberg, Community Affairs Manager; Janet Wolf, Director of Youth Programs; Nancy Boskoff, Executive Director of the Arts Council; Janice Jardine, Council Planning & Policy Analyst; Russell Weeks, Council Policy Analyst; Michael Sears, Council Budget & Policy Analyst; Marge Harvey, Council Research and Policy Analyst/Constituent Liaison; Doug Wheelwright, Land Use & Transportation/Subdivisions Planner; Doug Dansie, Downtown/Special Projects Planner; Margaret Hunt, Community & Economic Development Director; Luann Clark, Housing & Neighborhood Development Director; Bob Gore, Economic Development/Initiative Grants Administrator; Dan Mule' , City Treasurer; Gordon Hoskins, City Controller; Kay Christensen, Budget Analyst; David Oka, Redevelopment Agency Executive Director; Kelly Murdock, Wells Fargo Bank; Fred Olsen, Ballard, Spahr, Andrews and Ingersoll; Robert Weyher, Weyher Construction and Pam Johnson, Deputy City Recorder were present. Councilmember Buhler presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5:33 p.m. AGENDA ITEMS #1. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. Cindy Gust-Jenson said additional information was needed prior to Council being briefed regarding the International Fire Code. Ms. Gust-Jenson said due to an advertising error, Council would need to continue the Truth in Taxation public hearing until August 15, 2002. She said due to several outstanding questions, Council could recess the regular Council meeting and continue the Budget Amendment discussion in the Work Session. See File M 02-5 for additional Council announcements. #2. INTERVIEW MELVA KRAVITZ PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HER APPOINTMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD. Ms. Kravitz said her background in clinical research and her volunteer work would be an asset in this position. She said when she moved back to Salt Lake City, her goal was to get involved in her community. #3. INTERVIEW FILIKEI LUTUI PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HIS APPOINTMENT TO THE MULTI- ETHIC COMMUNITY RESOURCE BOARD. Mr. Lutui said he moved to Salt Lake City after serving a mission here in 1982. He said it was time for him to step up and give back to his community. 02 - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, AUGUST 7 , 2002 #4. INTERVIEW CAROLE GOODE PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HER APPOINTMENT TO THE MULTI- ETHIC COMMUNITY RESOURCE BOARD. Ms. Goode said she was excited to serve in any capacity. She said each opportunity helped give her additional knowledge to help with her goal of encouraging diversity in Salt Lake City. #5. INTERVIEW JOHN THOMPSON PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HIS RE-APPOINTMENT TO THE ARTS COUNCIL. Mr. Thompson said the Arts Council worked very hard within their limited budget. He said they continually worked to bring cultural richness and experiences to the City. Councilmember Christensen asked what challenges the Arts had in Salt Lake City. Mr. Thompson said additional funding would help promote new projects and encourage artists and performers to come here. #6. INTERVIEW OKTAI PARVAZ PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HIS RE- APPOINTMENT TO THE HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION. Mr. Parvaz said he had been a resident of Salt Lake City for 17 years. He said he had served on the Commission for five years, three of those years as Chair. Councilmember Lambert asked what criterion was met for a building to be considered historic. Mr. Parvaz said style, detail, and the period the structure represents were all taken into account. #7. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING AN INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS APPLICATION FOR BASIC RESEARCH, LLC. View Attachment Dan Mule' , Luann Clark, Michael Sears, Kelly Murdock and Fred Olsen, briefed the Council. Mr. Mule' said if Basic Research's application was approved, the City would act as a conduit issuer of the bonds, to allow them to borrow at the City' s tax-exempt rate. He said the Council would need to adopt a reimbursement resolution acknowledging the City's conditions. He said a public hearing would also be required before the bonds could be issued. This item was taken out of order to allow continued discussion on Budget Amendment No. 8 from the Public Hearing portion of the regular City Council meeting. #D-3. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE NO. 32 OF 2001. (BUDGET AMENDMENT NO. 8. ) Janet Wolf and Robert Weyher briefed the Council on continuing City Youth Programs. Councilmember Christensen said the value of Youth Programs was not being questioned, but the Council was concerned about duplicating programs. He said he wanted to see some coordination with the School District. Ms. Wolf said research showed existing programs reached different kids. She said those currently involved in after school programs were already successful in school. She said these programs were designed for students struggling with their interest in school. Councilmember Buhler said the Coopers Roberts report recommended demolition of the boxing building in Liberty Park. Ms. Wolf said the adaptive reuse of park facilities would be an excellent place for young people to congregate. She said the boxing building was one of many that were being considered. Mr. Weyher said enlisting the public' s help, renovating an existing building would be far more economical than building new. Councilmember Saxton asked if the Master Plan for the Liberty Park area had been 02 - 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, AUGUST 7 , 2002 considered. She asked if youth programs funded by the grant could be conducted in existing public schools, rather than spending monies to renovate the boxing building. Ms. Wolf said schools charged for the use of their buildings. She said she wanted the opportunity to create their own space and use rent monies elsewhere. Mr. Weyher said studies showed those needing to be reached by these programs, did not associate fun with a school building, and would not attend the programs. Councilmember Lambert said grant monies such as youth programs, needed to stretch as far as possible. He said he would be interested in a report from each school as to existing programs, and the schools perceived was needed and what they wanted added. Councilmember Jergensen said grant monies used to enhance existing programs were different than duplication of services. He said part of the City's responsibility in providing services was to collaborate with other entities. Ms. Gust-Jenson said even though programs were already provided by another entity, many felt the services were inadequate, and requested the City to provide additional or back-up programs. Councilmember Love said she agreed that in many instances other entities should be providing these youth services, but they were not. She said if the City did not provide programs for the youth, they would not be available to City residents. Councilmember Turner said he questioned if the renovation of the boxing building could be done for the monies quoted. He said youth programs were beneficial City-wide, and the restoration of this building should be supported. Councilmember Buhler said several Salt Lake City School Board Members had contacted him. He said he felt this item should be tabled until a meeting could be scheduled with the City Administration and the School Board. Ms. Gust-Jenson said grant documents would outline the programs. She said the decision on how to spend grant monies needed to be done prior to accepting the grant. Councilmember Love suggested moving this item forward to start the proposed youth programs as soon as possible. Councilmember Buhler straw polled the Council. Council Members Love, Lambert, Turner and Jergensen were in favor of moving this item forward. Council Members Buhler, Saxton and Christensen were not in favor. This item was taken out of order to allow continued discussion on the Grant Award from the US Department of Education from the Unfinished Business portion of the regular City Council meeting. #F-1. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING THE ACCEPTANCE OF A GRANT AWARD FROM THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION: Councilmember Christensen said he had anticipated that the information Council had requested would have been addressed prior to accepting the grant monies. He said he could not support the resolution. Councilmember Saxton said there was no merit to the restoration of the boxing building. She said the Public process was being skirted and therefore she could not support the resolution. Councilmember Love said Central City needed a center. She said the boxing building would be a great anchor to Liberty Park. #8. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING SIDEWALK VENDING CARTS. View Attachment Doug Dansie and Russell Weeks briefed the Council on the proposed ordinance. Mr. Dansie said a preliminary plan was being worked on allowing vending in City Parks. He said issues with existing vendors and baseball leagues were still being discussed. Councilmember Saxton asked why vending carts were no longer allowed in strip malls. 02 - 3 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, AUGUST 7 , 2002 Mr. Dansie said most strip malls were located near residential areas. He said homeowners did not want the increased traffic. He said in the past, some carts were in those areas, because the prior ordinance was too vague. Councilmember Saxton asked if Snow Cone Huts fell under the vending cart ordinance. Mr. Dansie said these structures were considered temporary or seasonal. He asked if Council would be interested in having the hut addressed in a separate ordinance. Mr. Weeks asked Council if they wanted all City business owners to be notified of the public hearing. Council Members felt special announcements only needed to be sent to businesses in the areas where vending carts would now be allowed. Council Members wanted the notice sent to all vendors selling in the City. #9. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT RECAPTURE AND REALLOCATION. View Attachment Luann Clark and Michael Sears briefed the Council from the attached handout. Ms. Clark advised Council the Director of the Emergency Shelter had resigned. Councilmember Saxton said she still supported the Emergency Shelter grant. She said she wanted to inform CEDAC, the issuer of the grant, that the Director had resigned, before funds were given to the shelter. Councilmember Buhler asked if Ms. Clark knew when a new director would be in place. Ms. Clark said because the shelter had a hard time maintaining a director for long, it might merge with another entity. She said even if a merger happened these grant monies would go to the Emergency Shelter as intended. #10. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE AS PART OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE. View Attachment This item was pulled from the agenda. The meeting adjourned at 10:04 p.m. pj 02 - 4 r SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: August 2,2002 SUBJECT: INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BOND APPLICATION FROM BASIC RESEARCH,LLC STAFF REPORT BY: Gary Mumford CC: Rocky Fluhart,David Nimkin,Margaret Hunt,David Dobbins,LuAnn Clark,Bob Gore, Dan Mule Document Type Budget-Related Facts Policy-Related Facts Miscellaneous Facts Resolution The City charges an Allowing a private The City requires a direct- application fee of$1,000 entity to use the City's pay letter-of-credit to and an additional fee if the name for securing tax- insure and guarantee bonds are sold($16,000 in exempt bonds is a form repayment of the bonds. this case)to cover of development subsidy. Industrial revenue bonds administrative costs for are not considered acting as a conduit issuer. obligations of the City. ACTION REQUESTED: Basic Research, LLC is requesting that the City issue industrial revenue bonds to help the company finance a $7 million move and expansion of its manufacturing facility from Utah County to the International Center in Salt Lake City. The repayment of industrial revenue bonds relies upon revenue generated by the private entity and is not considered an obligation of the issuing local governmental entity. Basic Research, founded in 1992, currently employs 170 people and plans to increase the number of employees to 218 within one year. The company projects that it will employ about 480 within five years and over 1000 in ten years. POTENTIAL MOTION: On June 21, 2002, Basic Research purchased a vacant facility at the International Center and would like to use part of the bond proceeds to reimburse itself for the purchase. For this to occur, the Council would need to adopt a reimbursement resolution within 60 days of the date of purchase. The reimbursement resolution does not commit the City since a public hearing is required and because the company needs to obtain a direct-pay letter-of-credit prior to the Council's approval of the bonds. Following the briefing, the Council may wish to schedule consideration of a reimbursement resolution for the Council's August 13th meeting, which is probably the Council's last opportunity for consideration of the resolution within the 60-day limitation. The Council may wish to consider the following motion: [I move that the Council] Adopt a resolution expressing an intent to reimburse certain qualified expenditures with proceeds of an issue of revenue bonds to finance the acquisition,rehabilitation, construction and equipping of manufacturing facilities for Basic Research, LLC. MATTERS AT ISSUE: Salt Lake City requires applicants to secure a direct pay letter-of-credit from a financial institution with at least an AA rating. Under a direct pay letter-of-credit, a financial institution guarantees payments to the bondholders regardless of whether the conduit borrower makes payments to the bank. Basic Research is still in the process of obtaining a direct pay letter-of-credit for the bond issue. If Basic Research is not able to qualify for a direct pay letter-of-credit, it will withdraw its application and the City Council will not be requested to take any additional bond action on behalf of Basic Research. At the briefing, the Council may wish to ask about the status of the company's efforts to obtain a direct pay letter-of-credit. Nonprofit organizations are allowed by IRS regulations to apply directly to a local government, to act as a conduit issuer, for bonding relating to health care or educational purposes. The IRS has set a "volume cap" for each state ($150 million per year for Utah) for entities other than health care or education that are seeking to finance facilities or equipment through industrial revenue bonds. The Utah Legislature has established priorities for allocating the volume cap with most going to the Utah Housing Finance Agency for fist-time single-family homeowners or to college student loan programs. On July 10, 2002, the Utah Private Activity Bond Authority authorized up to $7 million for industrial revenue bonds subject to City Council approval and issuance. Resolution 91 of 2001 establishes review criteria for private activity bonds. In addition to the direct-pay letter-of-credit, the applicant is to respond to the follow: • Will the project have a positive economic impact on the community? • What social and physical benefits will be realized by the City? How many new jobs to be created, at what levels, and at what percentage of the applicant's total payroll will the they comprise? • Does the project contribute to the development of underutilized property in the City? • Does the project serve unmet needs of City residents? • Does the project generate synergies for the development of surrounding properties? What is the current vitality of the proposed applicant and what impact will the proposed expansion have in the applicant? • Does the direct pay letter-of-credit ensure terms and conditions that are acceptable to the City? Has the applicant's financial performance remained relatively stable for the past three years? • Has the applicant clearly identified the sources and uses of funds? • Does the applicant's finance plan identify how the bonds will be repaid? Basic Research did not address these questions in a concise approach, but answers were found in various sections of the company's application material. Council staff has summarized the answers beginning on the following page. The City's application form is being revised so that future applicants will know to address each of these questions. 2 If the City Council decides to issue industrial revenue bonds, the Council would need to adopt a reimbursement resolution, conduct a hearing under the Tax Equality and Fiscal Responsibility Act(TEFRA), and authorize issuance of the bonds. ANALYSIS/BACKGROUND: Industrial revenue bonds (also referred to as private activity bonds) are bonds issued by government and backed solely by the private entity for which the bonds are issued. No real or implied guarantee or obligation is assumed by the City for payment of the bonds. In 2001, the City Council adopted a resolution establishing review criteria for private activity bonds. The one absolute criterion is the guarantee of the bond repayment by a direct-pay letter-of-credit issued by a financial institution with at least an AA rating. The resolution also requested that the applicant respond to the following questions: (Council staff has summarized answers from the applicant's application in italics following each question.) Will the project have a positive economic impact on the community? Greater tax base since property values will increase. A large portion of the company's products are manufactured under contract with out-of-state subcontractors. Basic Research plans to bring all of the manufacturing to the Salt Lake City facility. The company projects that purchases from Utah suppliers will increase from $27 million to $34 million in one year and to$77 million in five years. • What social and physical benefits will be realized by the City? Provides local jobs; vacant facility will be occupied • How many new jobs to be created, at what levels, and at what percentage of the applicant's total payroll will the they comprise? Additional permanent jobs as follows: Additional Permanent Jobs Current Jobs Additional Jobs Additional Jobs Current Average in One Year in Five Years Annual Pay Executives 3 1 $80,000 Professionals 5 12 25 $60,000 Skilled craftsmen 111 32 142 $35,000 Unskilled laborers 48 134 $25,000 Clerical 1 2 4 $36,000 Services/sales 2 2 10 $45,000 Total jobs 170 48 316 Average wage $33,572 $35,250 $42,850 • Does the project contribute to the development of underutilized property in the City? The facility is now vacant. • Does the project serve unmet needs of City residents? Provides additional local jobs. 3 • Does the project generate synergies for the development of surrounding properties? Some of the company's suppliers are also located in the International Center. • What is the current vitality of the proposed applicant and what impact will the proposed expansion have in the applicant? The company estimates that current sales of$40 million will increase to $50 million in one year and to $112 million in five years. • Does the direct pay letter-of-credit ensure terms and conditions that are acceptable to the City? A direct pay letter-of-credit has not be finalized. The company will need to be meet this requirement before the Council will be asked to consider issuing the bonds. • Has the applicant's financial performance remained relatively stable for the past three years? Basic Research has almost doubled revenue in each of the last three years. Has the applicant clearly identified the sources and uses of funds? The company proposes that the expansion will be financed by the bond proceeds and approximately $2,500,000 over the next five years from its own resources. The proposed use of finds are: acquisition of building $4,220,000; renovation costs $350,000; new equipment $2,150,000, architect and engineering costs $30,000; permits $5,000; bond expenses $245,000;additional equipment within five years $2,500,000. Does the applicant's finance plan identify how the bonds will be repaid? Cash flow projections show significant amounts of net income in excess of bond debt service requirements. CHRONOLOGY: June 21,2002 - Basic Research purchased vacant manufacturing facility in Salt Lake City's Industrial Center (5742 W Harold Gatty Drive). July 10,2002 - The Utah Private Activity Bond Authority authorized up to $7 million for industrial revenue bonds subject to approval and issuance by a local government. July 16,2002 - Basic Research submitted an application requesting Salt Lake City to act as a conduit issuer of industrial revenue bonds. 4 J1)1 3 ) 'Mr)? MARGARET HUNT ROSS C. "ROCKY" ANDERSON DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MAYOR COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL . TO: Rocky J. Fluhart, Chief Administrative Officer DATE: July 23, 2002 FROM: Margaret Hunt,cED Director RE: Industrial Revenue Band Application from Basic Research, LLC STAFF CONTACT: LuAnn Clark, Director, HAND RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council schedule a briefing on August 7th and act on a Reimbursement Resolution on August 13tn DOCUMENT TYPE: Reimbursement Resolution BUDGET IMPACT: There is no budget impact. DISCUSSION: Basic Research, LLC, a manufacturer of health and cosmetic products, has applied to Salt Lake City for a $7 million industrial revenue bond to finance acquisition and renovation of a vacant manufacturing facility at the Salt Lake International Center and to purchase new equipment. Basic Research is presently located in Utah County,but has exceeded the manufacturing capacity of its facility and is outsourcing much of its production because of dramatic growth. At its new facility at the International Center, Basic Research will be able both to maintain production in-house and accommodate projected growth. Basic Research employs 170 people in Utah County. It expects 40% attrition when it relocates to Salt Lake City, but plans not only to replace the vacant positions but also to increase its manufacturing personnel to 230 employees during the coming year. It further anticipates the creation of more than 900 new jobs during the next ten years. Basic Research's total current payroll is $5.7 million, which it estimates will increase to $7.5 million during the coming year and $20.5 million within five years. Its total current property valuation is $5.1 million, which it projects, will increase to $9.7 million one year from now and $10.7 million in the next five years. And its current taxable sales are $39.8 million, which it estimates will increase to $49.8 million during the next year and $112 million within the next five years. The City's role, if it approves Basic Research's IRB application, is to act as a conduit issuer of the bonds as tax-exempt securities. Although the bonds will carry the name of Salt Lake City Corporation, the City will assume no real or implied guarantee or obligation for their repayment. Basic Research will be solely responsible for securing the bonds and paying the debt service. To further guarantee repayment of the bonds, the City also requires Basic Research to obtain direct-pay letter of credit prior to their issuance. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 601-535-5230 FAX: 801-535-6005 ®wEcVP PO PAPER To move ahead with the bond issue, the City needs to: (1) adopt a reimbursement resolution acknowledging its willingness to proceed as a conduit issuer for Basic Research providing it meets all of the City's conditions, (2) conduct a TEFRA (Tax Equality and Fiscal Responsibility Act) hearing required by the federal tax code to ensure public review of a tax- exempt financing project through which the federal government will forego the collection of taxes, and (3) issue the bonds. The TEFRA hearing and bond issuance will be scheduled later. Basic Research has paid a $1,000 application fee and will submit an additional $16,000 at closing to reimburse the City for expenses entailed in issuing the bonds including the time of City personnel, bond counsel, and related expenses incurred in the evaluation process. The City's Small Business Revolving Loan Fund Committee has reviewed the application and recommends favorable action by the City Council. Attachments: (1) IRB Application from Basic Research (2) Reimbursement Resolution RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION (THE "ISSUER") EXPRESSING AN INTENT TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN QUALIFIED EXPENDITURES WITH PROCEEDS OF AN ISSUE OF REVENUE BONDS TO FINANCE THE ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION, CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIPPING OF MANUFACTURING FACILITTFS FOR BASIC RESEARCH, LLC OR A RELATED COMPANY; AND RELATED MATTERS. WHEREAS, the Issuer is authorized by the Industrial Facilities and Development Act, Chapter 17, Title 11, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, (the "Act") to issue revenue bonds for the purpose of defraying the cost of financing, acquiring, rehabilitating, constructing and equipping land, buildings, facilities and improvements which are suitable for use for manufacturing or other business purposes; and WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Issuer at this meeting a request from Basic Research, LLC (the "Borrower"), asking the Issuer to adopt a resolution evidencing an intent to reimburse certain qualified expenditures with proceeds of an issue of revenue bonds, such expenditures to be incurred by the Borrower to finance the acquisition, rehabilitation, construction and equipping of the facilities more specifically described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, in order to provide funds for such reimbursement, it has been deemed appropriate and necessary that the Issuer express its intention to reimburse certain qualified expenditures incurred with respect to the acquisition, rehabilitation, construction equipping of the Project with proceeds of revenue bonds (the "Bonds"); and WHEREAS, the Bonds shall be special limited obligations of the Issuer payable solely from and secured by revenues, rights, interests and collections pledged by the Borrower and shall not constitute nor give rise to a general obligation or liability(legal or equitable) of the Issuer or of the State of Utah or of any subdivision thereof or a charge against its general credit or taxing power; and WHEREAS, the Act provides that a municipality or county may issue revenue bonds for the purpose of using substantially all of the proceeds thereof to pay or to reimburse a business for the costs of the acquisition, rehabilitation and construction of the facilities of a project and that title to or in such facilities may at all times remain in the company and in such case the bonds of the municipality or county shall be secured by a pledge of one or more notes, debentures, bonds or other secured or unsecured debt obligations of the company. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, AS FOLLOWS: UT_DOCS_A#1111972 v1 Section 1. All terms defined in the foregoing recitals hereto shall have the same meanings when used herein. Section 2. All action heretofore taken (not inconsistent with the provisions of this Resolution), by the Issuer and by the officers of the Issuer directed toward the issuance of the Bonds are hereby ratified, approved and confirmed. Section 3. In order to finance the acquisition, rehabilitation, construction and equipping of the Project with the resulting public benefits which will flow therefrom, the Issuer hereby expresses its intent to reimburse certain qualified expenditures incurred with respect thereto with proceeds of an issue of Bonds issued and sold pursuant to the provisions of the Act in a principal amount sufficient to pay the cost of financing the Project, together with costs incident to the authorization, sale and issuance of the Bonds (to the extent permitted by law), the aggregate cost of the Project, and the cost of authorization, sale and issuance of the Bonds being presently estimated not to exceed $9,800,000. Section 4. The Issuer will loan the proceeds of the Bonds to the Borrower pursuant to a loan agreement between the Issuer and the Borrower whereby the Borrower will be obligated, among other things, (i) to make payments to the Issuer in amounts and at times sufficient to pay the principal of and premium, if any, and interest on all of the Bonds and (ii) to provide, or cause to be provided, a direct-pay letter of credit from a financial institution with at least an AA rating to secure payment of the Bonds in such amounts as the Issuer deems appropriate. The Issuer has not, and will not, authorize the pledge of its credit for the payment of the Bonds or the financing of the Project. Section 5. Qualified Costs to be reimbursed shall be deteiinined in accordance with the provisions of Treasury Regulation Section 1.150-2. Notwithstanding anything herein contained to the contrary the Issuer shall have no liability to the Borrower for any costs or funds advanced if the Bonds are not issued. Section 6. If any provisions of this resolution should be held invalid, the invalidity of such provision shall not affect the validity of any of the other provisions of this resolution. Section 7. The appropriate officials of the Issuer, including without limitation the Mayor or City Recorder, are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver for and on behalf of the Issuer any or all additional certificates, documents and other papers and to perform all other acts they may deem necessary or appropriate in order to implement and carry out the matters authorized in this resolution. Section 8. No member of the City Council of the Issuer or employee of the Issuer has any interest, direct or indirect, in the transactions contemplated by the Issuer as described herein. Section 9. Pursuant to the request of the Borrower, the law firm of Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll, LLP is hereby appointed to serve as Bond Counsel to the Issuer with respect to the Bonds. UT_DOCS_A#1111972 v1 2 Section 10. An application for volume cap has been submitted to the Department of Community and Economic Development of the State of Utah for consideration by the Utah Industrial Development Bond Review Board. Although the Issuer will cooperate with the Borrower in an attempt to obtain an allocation of volume cap, no assurance can be given of the success of such efforts. Section 11. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its approval and adoption by the Council. UT DOCS A#1111972 v1 3 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of Salt Lake City Corporation this day of August, 2002. Chair ATTEST: Deputy City Recorder SEAL APPROVED: Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ---757/ "C fr,- a , -7"://-1..-.--a,-,,,,,c,--3,-----.._ Assistant City At �rney UT_DOCS_A#1111972 v1 4 EXHIBIT "A" Description of Project The Project to be acquired, renovated, constructed and equipped shall constitute a manufacturing facility for nutritional and dietary supplements and cosmetics and shall consist of a site of approximately 16.09 acres located at 5742 West Harold Gatty Drive in Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah; a structure of approximately 154,719 sq. ft.; and related necessary manufacturing equipment. UT DOCS A#1111972 v1 A-1 ("111(1111111 BASIC Research® ;d` INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BOND APPLICATION July 16, 2002 Salt Lake City Corporation ' _= 1='-`y.% INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BOND APPLICATION mnc�Furn�r. I.,,T PART A: APPLICANT AND ORGANIZATION INFORMATION Name of applicant: Basic Research, LLC Address of applicant: 401 West 5050 South Provo, Utah 84604 Attachment A: Include a brief history of your company. * * * * * Name and address of all other major business officers and investors supporting this application: (See Attachment A) Name and address of bond counsel (bond counsel must be retained before application is considered complete for processing): Frederick H. Olsen, Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll 201 South Main Street, Suite 600 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111-221 Name and address of proposed underwriter or purchaser of bonds: Paul T. Lamas, Sr. V.P., Roosevelt & Cross 20 Exchange Place New York, New York 10005 IRB Page 1 PART B: PROJECT INFORMATION/PROJECT SUMMARY* Name and description of the project (minimum of one page): (See Attachment D) *Please note City's credit enhancement requirements in Part C, "Financial Information." FRB Page 2 Location/address of project: 5742 West Harold Gatty Drive Salt Lake City, Utah Type of Industry: ❑ Hotel/Tourism ❑ Light Industry ❑ Heavy Industry ❑ Regional Scale Retail ❑ Community Scale Retail ❑ Neighborhood Scale Retail ❑ Commercial/Office ❑ Research and Development ❑ High Density Housing ❑ Low Density Housing/Infill ❑ Other (Specify) Rationale for seeking public support for Industrial Revenue Bond approval: Our projections estimate creation of over 900 new jobs in the next ten years. The facility is currently vacant. Within the next year we expect to employ approximately 230 people, which will create a greater tax base for Salt Lake City. Our plans include installing new lines for production over the next 1-2 years. These new lines will create even more skilled jobs and increase overall employment and economic well being for the City and county. Description of physical and social benefits or enhancements that implementation of this project will have on Salt Lake City: Basic Research, LLC does not compete with other local businesses. In fact, many of our vendors are located in the Salt Lake City International Center. Synergies should be created by our presence in the area. Our manufacturing processes are extremely clean. There will be no problems with sewage, and our water usage should be well within normal ranges. FRB Page 3 PART C: FINANCIAL INFORMATION Attachment B: Include audited financials of the applicant for the last three y_ars. Attachment C: Include operating statements. Amount of proposed Industrial Revenue Bond: $7,000,000 When will an application for the State allocation be made? Application to the State Volume Cap Allocation passed in the amount of$7,000,000 on 7/10/02. ❑ Upon approval of the inducement resolution. ❑ At some later date. When? ❑ Not required. Please be aware that the allocation expires 90 days after approval by the State, if the bonds are not sold. Please describe credit enhancement anticipated/secured for the bonds: ® Direct-Pay Bank Letter-of-Credit (see Attachment F) Provider: Currently negotiating with Key Bank and Wells Fargo Bank Ratings: AA - AAA ❑ Municipal Bond Insurance Provider: Please note: The City will require credit enhancement on the bonds (subject to the City's approval). Anticipated method and terms of bonding: We anticipate obtaining a Direct Pay Letter of Credit issued from Key Bank or Wells Fargo Bank, rated AA to AAA, on a 20-year Bond at approximately 4.625% annually. The 4.625% all-in rate is based on an average floating rate over a 10-15 period. The terms of the loan are attached as shown in Attachment F(10-year cash flow analysis). IRB Page 4 Estimated annual tax revenue generated by project: — Total Payroll Value Total Current Payroll Estimated in 1 Yr. Estimated in 5 Yrs. $5,707,225 $7,508,358 $20,534,526 Property Valuations Total Valuation Estimated in 1 Yr. Estimated in 5 Yrs. $5,131,000 $7,271,225 $9,771,225 Gross Taxable Sales Current Taxable Sales Estimated in 1 Yr. Estimated in 5 Yrs. _$39,850,793 $49,813,492 $112,080,356 Description of all collateral required to finance the project: Manufacturing facility located at: 5742 West Harold Gatty Drive Salt Lake City, Utah PART D: EMPLOYMENT INFORMATION Specify the classification and number of permanent jobs created: Present Proposed 5 Year 10 Year Classification Employment Employment Projected Projected Executives/Mgrs. 3 3 4 6 Professionals 5 17 30 54 Craftsmen (Skilled) 111 143 253 536 Laborers (Unskilled) 48 48 182 378 Office/Clerical 1 3 5 8 Services/Sales 2 4 12 24 Other (Specify) FRB Page 5 For each type of employment classification, specify the average annual wage: Classification Current Average Annual Wage Executives/Mgrs. $80,000 Professionals $60,000 Craftsmen (Skilled) $35,000 Laborers (Unskilled) $25,000 Office/Clerical $36,000 Services/Sales $45,000 Other (Specify) Specify the classification and number of temporary jobs created: (See Attachment E for further detail) PART E: SIGNATURE(S) L-7,4f ! r`<C J (Signature-6f Authorized Representative) /(Please Print Name) / By (Signature of Authorized Representative) (Please Print Name) Date: Please enclose a $1,000.00 nonrefundable application fee and send application package to: Bob Gore Salt Lake City Corporation Housing and Neighborhood Development 451 South State Street, Room 406 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 (If you have questions, please call 801/535-7122.) IRB Page 6 Basic Research, LLC Company History Company Information: Basic Research, LLC 402 West 5050 North Provo, UT 84604 (801) 234-7000 Founded in 1992 as a small business venture by an unlikely trio of disparate partners, Basic Research®, LLC ("BASIC")has revolutionized the health and dietary supplement, fitness, and weight-loss markets by consistently developing and manufacturing medically supported products addressing the specific health needs of consumers. BASIC grew from its inauspicious two- product beginnings to reach sales of over$2.5 million in just three years. Realizing the huge potential of their"side business"the founders turned their full time and energy to carving out market share. By capitalizing on their solid business plan and synergistic relationship and adding a savvy marketing department, BASIC has more than doubled revenues in each of the last 3 years and has beaten their quarterly projections without fail. From small but strongly rooted beginnings BASIC should realize gross revenues of 50 million dollars by the end of 2002. In 1992 three friends, a manufacturer, real estate developer, and a well know herbalist, Dr. Daniel Mowrey, began chatting about marketing two products Dr. Mowrey had developed. Within a three-year period these two products were generating sales of$2.5 million a year. During this time Dr. Mowrey, in conjunction with many of New England's leading academic researchers, continued to conduct extensive research on developing new products. The partners, realizing the huge potential of their little venture, increased their efforts full time and began to change the Nutraceuticals industry. Research and testing for new product development is conducted at Harvard University and Boston's famous Brigham and Women's hospital, among others. The positive study results of BASIC's efficacious and medically proven compounds back each and every product it sells. BASIC has changed the Nutraceutical landscape by establishing and enforcing its intellectual property rights. BASIC has patents or exclusive rights to use certain patents on many of its products. Our patented formulae products range from safe weight-loss for significantly overweight children to exclusively patented sports products such as OxydreneTM and ECA StackTM. ECA StackTM is the only patented formula for energy and weight loss using aspirin; all others use willow-bark. The willow bark—aspirin controversy has been the subject of numerous books and medical and clinical studies; all of which conclude that aspirin is much more effective than willow bark when used in energy and weight loss compounds. OxydreneTM is the only product in the United States today clinically proven to increase stamina and endurance for both athletes and non-atheletes. OxydreneTM was most recently spotlighted during the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah where most of the athletes used it to adjust to the altitude. Currently, several professional football and hockey teams use OxydreneTM as part of their conditioning and training programs. Although BASIC was creating fantastic, new, medically supported products, the biggest problem was getting the products to the marketplace. About three years ago BASIC developed a very savvy in-house marketing department. By establishing a team of energetic, bright, vision- oriented marketers BASIC has grown beyond its expectations. Powered by a great marketing team, BASIC's current business model is based on speed to market with its unique and creative products. Taking new concepts and ideas, developing them into products, and manufacturing these products is the core of our business strategy. It is the goal of BASIC management to operate its business using the same traditions and values reflected in management's personal lives. BASIC operates under a"low overhead"philosophy whereby a significant number of operating costs are outsourced. The outsourcing includes but is not limited to administrative, legal, and tax and accounting services. Through its outsourcing philosophy the company quickly realized two of its business core-values: 1) creating high profit margins to fund significant growth and expansion of R&D and manufacturing, and, 2) remaining debt free while providing significant benefits to its employees and the local community. The synergies created by the founders of BASIC continue today. By adhering to its core values, business plan and trend-bucking intellectual property protection BASIC has quickly become the preeminent leader in the Nutraceuticals industry. ATTACHMENT D Business Plan and Summary for Proposed Project Over the past several years Basic Research, LLC ("BASIC")has built a reputation as a leader in innovation of unique and efficacious health and cosmetic products. Basic has been a pioneer in aggressively protecting our patented formulae and other intellectual property rights. Product development and speed to market is at the core of our success. Growth and Demand for BASIC's Product Lines Basic's relentless pursuit of unique, efficacious and medically proven products creates enormous demand. Our sales have almost doubles over the past few years. Our product lines create a greater profit margin for General Nutrition Centers ("GNC")worldwide than any other product they sell. The result of this explosive growth is that we have dramatically exceeded our manufacturing capacity and have outsourced all of our liquid manufacturing and most of our dry-product manufacturing to out-of-state subcontractors in Wyoming, California, Nevada and New Jersey, to name a few. Our current facility manufactures only some of our dry product and is operating twenty-four hours a day, six to seven days a week. Subcontracting has proven successful,but slow. Manufacturing turn-around has been the bottleneck in our speed to market model. By manufacturing in house we should be able to decrease product turn-around time by a minimum of 30%. Due to recent developments in a few of our very large product lines we now have a greater need to manufacture"in-house." All of BASIC's products use patented formulae or trade secrets. Restricting access to trade secret information is the best means of protection.1 Bringing all of our manufacturing processes back to Utah through 'Note of interest:Only two Coca-Cola employees ever know the formula at the same time;their identities are never disclosed to the public and they are not allowed to fly on the same airplane. expanding our capabilities will enable us to restrict access to our patented formulae and trade secrets as well as bring more jobs to the State. Immediate Manufacturing Needs Dry product manufacturing involves mixing anywhere from 2-30 separate raw material components according to our patented formulas and encapsulating them. We manufacture approximately 125,000 500 ml capsules per hour. These capsules are then counted, bottled, labeled, and sealed. Because of current capacity limitations we can only box up to 20,000 bottles per day. Our current facility employs 170 Utah County residents. We anticipate approximately 40% attrition when we move to the facility in Salt Lake City. However,by expanding our manufacturing capabilities we expect to not only replace these vacant positions,but also hire many additional employees. This should raise our manufacturing staff to well over 200 employees in a very short time. Because of a recent acquisition of Total Nutrition Technologies ("TNT"), a New Jersey- based entity specializing in sports nutrition, we must greatly expand our manufacturing output over the next few months. The addition of TNT's six3 highly acclaimed products to our sports nutrition line will mean broadening our manufacturing capabilities in Utah. These sports-nutrition powders are supplied in large cans or sealed packets that will require different equipment as we take over production of these products. Powders involve a completely different process, requiring additional manufacturing skills, workers, and specialized equipment. New Manufacturing Needs One of our new product lines takes advantage of recent advancements in the field of gels and liquids. We have many patented formulae for lotions, liquids, gels, drinks, shampoos, 2 See attached news release. This news release ran in the Deseret News,CBS MarketWatch,CNET Investor News,The Dallas News,The Daily Deal,Finance Canada,NewsAlert and Yahoo's Biz news site. 3 The six products that will be manufactured in Utah are:Megatropin,Nitro ATP,Isolate-X,Metabolic Carb-Krush, 1-Test THP and LipoMax Gel. etc., that not only need patent and trade secret protection but also require completely different types of manufacturing equipment(giant 1000 gallon mixing tanks, transfer tubing, and liquid fill dosing/sealing equipment for bottles and tubes). Additionally, GMP (General Manufacturing Practices) certification requires uncontaminated, clean, reverse-osmotic sources of water for liquid products. The facility in Salt Lake City has a reverse osmosis system already in place. Relocating our manufacturing operations to this larger facility and investing heavily in manufacturing equipment will allow us not only to manufacture our products faster, but also to bring our currently out-of-state liquid manufacturing back to Utah. Therefore, all of our products currently subcontracted to out-of-state manufacturers will be made in Utah. An additional advantage to increasing our in-house manufacturing capabilities involves Tube manufacturing. Tubes (for topical cosmetics) are becoming a rare commodity in the United States. Because there are no U.S.-based tube manufacturers that do small runs (less than 100,000 tubes),most, if not all, smaller cosmetics companies must purchase tubes from European manufacturers. Currently, lead times from European suppliers are approximately 12 weeks. This is a significant disadvantage in the national/world market for us and other American manufacturers. Because of the space available in the new facility we plan to install a tube manufacturing facility(costing anywhere from $300,000 to $500,000), not only to accommodate our own products, but also to do contract manufacturing for out-of-state companies. We would not only be providing additional manufacturing jobs and specialized, high-demand skills to the residents of Utah, but we would be drawing revenue from out-of-state companies in need of rapid, high-quality tube availability. Project Planning We acquired a manufacturing facility in the International Center in Salt Lake City to meet our projected growth and immediate manufacturing needs. Refurbishing and equipping the Salt Lake City facility will dramatically increase our manufacturing capacity, increase manufacturing turn-around, and create literally hundreds of new jobs over the next few years. We expect to more than triple our manufacturing jobs in Salt Lake City over the next ten years. Our move to Salt Lake City will occur in several phases. The first phase is to relocate our existing manufacturing and production equipment to the Salt Lake facility. Once our current equipment is online,we plan to install three new lines of equipment. The first new line will expand our encapsulated production of 900 ml capsules products. The second line, made possible by the existing water purification treatment system at the new facility,will include manufacturing equipment to produce our liquids, gels, creams and lotions. The third line will be for Tubing. By relocating our current manufacturing operations and installing the additional lines in the larger Salt Lake City building we will be able manufacture all of our products (dry and liquid) at our own plant. We should also be able to meet our projected manufacturing requirements for TNT's products and our new lines of product. Manufacturing all of our products in house will ensure the containment of our intellectual property in the form of patents and trade secrets and should ultimately result in the repatriation of hundreds of manufacturing jobs currently outside the state. The increase in production will also meet the rising demand for our products. Our U.S. orders continue to escalate, and we are currently in negotiations with several distributors in the European Union as well as Asia and the Far East. Thousands of people living in foreign countries currently purchase our products over the Internet. Establishing worldwide sales and distribution channels should result in the continued exponential growth we have been experiencing. PROJECT COST BREAKDOWN P-RO CT Item Amount to be Paid Amount to be Paid from PAB Bonds from other sources 1. Land cost—new N/A - 2. Acquisition cost of buildings $ 4,220,000 - 3. Renovation costs $ 350,000 - 4. Construction Costs—new - - 5. Utilities connection cost - - 5. Equipment Cost a. New equipment cost a. 2,140,225 b. Used equipment cost b. - c. Installation cost c. 10,000 7. Architect and Engineer costs $ 30,000 - (acquisition and new) 8. Permits $ 5,000 - 9. Bond Expenses including $ 140,000 - Underwriter discount 10. Letter of credit and bond $ 105,000 - insurance fee 11. Interest during construction - - TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 7,000..225 - MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT COST BREAKDOWN Description of Machinery New or Used Costs a. Capsule filling &closing New $ 265,000.00 machine, type Bosch-DMW 2000 b. Bottling line and New $ 262,161.00 cartoning system c. Mixer, small batch or New $ 23,890.00 premix type d. Mixer, large type New $ 75,000.00 e. Forklift, type N30XWR New $ 28,850.00 f. High speed packaging line New $ 385,030.00 g. Liquid fill line New $ 165,720.00 h. Fisher Scientific HPLC New $ 59,574.00 (Chromatography identification) k. Longford Integrated 8- New $ 875,000.00 station Shanklin Shrink System Total $2,140,225.00 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 2, 2002 TO: City Council Members FROM: Russell Weeks RE: Sidewalk Vending Ordinance Amendments CC: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rocky Fluhart,David Nimkin, Margaret Hunt, Stephen Goldsmith, Lynn Pace, Doug Dansie,David Dobbins, Alison McFarlane,Gary Mumford,Janice Jardine This memorandum accompanies the Administration's transmittal regarding amendments to City Code Chapter 5.65.The chapter regulates sidewalk vending carts and their operation.The Administration is scheduled to brief the City Council about the amendments on August 7.The City Council tentatively is scheduled on August 13 to set a date for a public hearing on the proposed amendments. The proposed ordinance transmitted by the Administration contains the two changes suggested by the City Council on June 13 when it adopted a motion to reconsider Ordinance No. 23 of 2002.That ordinance also amended Chapter 5.65. The two changes are: 1. The proposed ordinance restores the original southern boundary of the"Expanded Central Business District"to 900 South Street between 200 East and West Temple streets in the definitions section of the ordinance. Between West Temple Street and 600 West Street the southern boundary would be 600 South Street under the proposed ordinance. 2. Language"to promote economic development in the City's expanded Central Business District"has been added to the proposed ordinance's prolog so that the second paragraph now reads: "WHEREAS, it is proposed that the regulations regarding such vending carts be modified to promote economic development in the City's expanded Central Business District,and to better reflect the needs of the City and of such vendors ..." The remaining issues appear to be: 1. If the City Council decides to move forward with the proposed ordinance and sets a date for a public hearing when the Council meets August 13, should the Administration notify all businesses, including vending cart operators,that the ordinance would affect within the defined Expanded Central Business District,or should notification be limited only to businesses, including vending cart operators,between 600 South,200 East, 900 South, and West Temple streets? 1 2. Has the Administration developed a policy or guidelines for the location of vending carts in City parks? BACKGROUND The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 23 of 2002 on May 14.The Council adopted the ordinance with an amendment that changed the definition of"Expanded Central Business District"from having a southern boundary at 900 South between State Street and 400 West streets to having a southern border on 600 South Street between 200 East and 600 West streets. The City Council then adopted a motion on June 13 to reconsider Ordinance No. 23 with the two amendments that now appear in the proposed ordinance. To recap,the proposed ordinance would regulate vending carts in the Expanded Central Business District,the Sugar House Business District, all City parks,and private property. The proposed ordinance requires vendors to obtain a base business license fee and a revocable land use permit from the City.The base business license fee is$70 and is collected by the Building Services and Licensing Division. The revocable land use permit fee is $175 and is collected by the Property Management Division. Cart vendors also are limited in where they can locate. According to Section 5.65.120: A. No more than one vending permit operating area shall be allowed for each three hundred thirty feet of block frontage on Main Street between South Temple and 400 South.On other blocks,one permit shall be allowed per block face except that if the block face exceeds six hundred sixty feet,one permit shall be allowed for each additional six hundred sixty feet of block frontage. B. Vending carts may be located on private plazas and private open space within the expanded central business district.No more than one sidewalk vending cart shall be allowed per every forty thousand square feet of private plazas and private open space.At least one vending permit may be awarded for any private open space larger than twenty-four square feet. The proposed ordinance also would amend the City's zoning ordinance to allow vending on private property"only in zoning districts that permit vending carts as a permitted use, as defined by individual zoning district land use tables."It also would limit the temporary use of a vending cart on private property"only ... in zones where vending carts are allowed as a permitted use and only where the vending carts are associated with an Outdoor Sales Event or Special Event." The zoning districts where vending carts would be allowed as a permitted use are M1 and M2 manufacturing zones, all Downtown zones,the Sugar House Business District, Research Park, Business Park and G-MU Gateway mixed-use zones. In addition, the proposed ordinance would: • Allow vending only on sites two acres or larger and only as a secondary use to another primary commercial, office or industrial use. — 2 4. • Prohibit vending carts on vacant or residentially used lots,regardless of zoning district. • Prohibit vending carts from occupying required parking stalls on private property. • Prohibit locating a vending cart from interfering with the internal circulation of a parking lot. • Require that vending carts next to residential zones be subject to site review to insure compatibility. The proposed ordinance would allow vendors also to sell"daily or monthly news publications"as well as food, flowers, or balloons or any combination of the four from one cart. 3 v SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE G� No. of 2002 ck: (Amending the Salt Lake City Code regarding Sidewalk Vending Carts) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE REGARDING SIDEWALK VENDING CARTS, PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. 400-00-41. WHEREAS,the Salt Lake City Code contains regulations concerning sidewalk vending carts; and WHEREAS, it is proposed that the regulations regarding such vending carts be modified to promote economic development in the City's expanded Central Business District, and to better reflect the needs of the City and of such venders; and WHEREAS,the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, finds after public hearings before its own body and before the Planning Commission,that portions of the Salt Lake City Code which relate to sidewalk vending carts should be amended and that such amendments are in the best interest of the City; NOW,THEREFORE,be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Chapter 5.65 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: Chapter 5.65 VENDING CARTS 5.65.010 Definitions: For the purpose of this Chapter, the following words shall have the meanings as defined in this Section: A. "Expanded Central Business District" means the following streets within the City and all areas bounded within such streets: 1. North Temple Street on the north, from Sixth West Street to Third West Street; 2. Third West Street on the east, from North Temple Street to South Temple Street; 3. South Temple Street on the north, from Third West Street to Second East Street,on the south side of South Temple Street only; 4. Second East Street on the east from South Temple Street to Ninth South Street; 5. Ninth South Street on the south from Second East Street to West Temple Street; 6. West Temple Street on the west from Ninth South Street to Sixth South Street,and Sixth West Street from Sixth South Street to North Temple Street. B. "Permit operating area,"means a portion of a sidewalk which has been designated by the City for the conduct of business. C. "Sidewalk vending cart" means a mobile device or push cart meeting all of the requirements of this Chapter for the conducting of business in a specified permit operating area approved by the City. D. "Sidewalk vendor" means a person meeting all of the requirements of this Chapter and being issued the appropriate business license and regulatory permit to conduct business in a specified permit operating area by the use of a sidewalk vending cart. E. "Special event" means the Days of'47 Parade, Christmas Parade, children's parades or other special events which the Mayor shall so designate. F. "Sugar House Business District" means those streets within Salt Lake City as follows: 1. Twenty First South Street from Ninth East Street to Thirteenth East Street; 2. Highland Drive Street between Ramona Avenue and the I-80 Freeway; 3. Wilmington Avenue from Highland Drive to Thirteenth East Street. 5.65.020 Sidewalk Vending Allowed: Vendors of products specified in this Chapter may conduct business by use of sidewalk vending carts within the Expanded Central Business District,the Sugar House Business District, city parks and Washington Square, in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter. It shall be unlawful for any person to sell any goods or services, for profit,on any sidewalk within the City, except as provided by this Chapter or by subsection 5.64.010C of this Division pertaining to sidewalk sales by abutting property owners or possessors. The provisions of this Chapter notwithstanding,nothing in this Chapter shall pertain to news racks, telephone or telex booths or stands,post boxes,nor to the sale by nonprofit organizations of merchandise which is inextricably intertwined with a statement carrying a religious,political,philosophical or ideological message. (Ord. 12-91 § 1, 1991) 5.65.030 Regulatory Permit,Revocable Land Use Permit,And Fees Required: No person shall conduct business on any City sidewalk, without first obtaining a valid base business license and entering into a revocable land use permit for the use of City property, and paying the required fees. In addition to the base business license fee,the annual revocable land use permit payment shall be one hundred seventy five dollars ($175.00). 5.65.040 Application For Regulatory Permit: Application for a regulatory permit to conduct business at a particular permit operating area shall be made with the permits and licensing office on forms prepared by the business license supervisor. Such application shall require the following information: A. The correct legal name and present residence address and telephone number of the 2 applicant. B. The expiration date of applicant's base business license, if any. C. Type of product to be sold. D. A copy of all permits required by State or local health authorities. E. A signed statement that the permitee shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from any and all liability and shall indenmify the City and its officers and employees for any claims for damage to property or injury to persons arising from any activity carried on under the terms of the permit. F. A description of the means to be used in conducting business including,but not limited to, a description of any mobile container or device, to be used for transport or to display products or services to be offered for sale. The description of the container or device may be in the form of detailed scale drawings of the device to be used, material specifications, and in isometric drawing in color of at least two(2)views showing all four(4) sides of the vending device and any logos,printing or signs which will be incorporated and utilized in the color scheme. Said description may include any additional items(e.g., color and material samples, layouts of signage and graphics, or photographs)which may reasonably be necessary to clearly visualize the proposed design. G. The proposed permit operating area for conducting applicant's business, including a diagram showing the proposed area in proximity to nearby streets, intersections and property owners and adjacent ground level tenants. 5.65.050 separate Applications: A separate application shall be required for each mobile container or device to be used for transportation or display. Individual applications shall be accepted for one primary permit operating area. In order to allow a single cart mobility to coincide with daily changes in activity,the City may authorize,per administrative policy, up to four additional secondary locations,based upon availability after awarding primary locations. Multiple operating areas may not be contiguous. A separate revocable permit must accompany each operating area. No application shall be accepted for a permit operating area for a term of which a current sidewalk vendor permit has been issued,remains unexpired or otherwise is not terminated or for which an application is pending. The permit operating area may be changed upon written application therefore accompanied by an additional application fee and upon approval of the planning official. 5.65.060 Insurance required. No sidewalk vending permit shall be issued or continued in operation, unless there is on file with the city recorder a certificate of insurance executed by an insurance company or association authorized to transact business in this state, approved as to form by the city attorney, that there is in full force and effect public liability, food products liability and property damage insurance covering the operation of applicant's business operations with minimum limits of two hundred fifty thousand dollars/five hundred thousand dollars for personal injury and one hundred thousand dollars for property damage or such greater amounts as set forth in Section 63-30-34,Utah Code Annotated, 1953, as amended, or its successor. A current certificate of insurance shall be kept on file with the city's recorder at all times that a sidewalk vending permit is held verifying such continuing coverage and 3 • naming the city as an additional insured. The certificate shall contain a statement that the city will be given written notification at least thirty days prior to cancellation or material change in the coverage without reservation of non-liability for failure to so notify the city. Cancellation shall constitute grounds for revocation of the sidewalk vending permit issued hereunder unless another insurance policy complying herewith is provided and is in effect at the time of the cancellation/termination. 5.65.070 License and permit-Issuance conditions. A. The city business license supervisor shall approve the issuance of a business license and a regulatory permit to the applicant, unless the supervisor finds one or more of the following: 1. The applicant has failed to provide the information on the application required by this chapter; 2. The applicant has falsely answered a material question or request for information as authorized by this chapter; 3. The applicant has failed to meet any of the provisions of this chapter; 4. There are grounds for denial as set forth in Section 5.02.250, or its successor section, or in any other city ordinance or state or federal law or regulation. B. Prior to December 1st of each year, the zoning administrator, in consultation with the city's planning division may set a maximum on the number of permits to be issued for the following year based upon the success of the vending program in prior years, including a review of(1) the percentage of applications received by the city which ultimately resulted in permits and business licenses actually obtained, (2) the percentage of licensed vendors which ultimately commenced operations at their permit operating areas, (3)the percentage of vendors which commenced operations and subsequently ceased operations because of market conditions. The city will issue permits first to vendors seeking renewal of existing permits. Additional permits shall be issued up to the maximum number set by the city. The additional permits may be awarded by chance drawing, if the number of applications warrant and it is deemed necessary by the Zoning Administrator. 5.65.080 Form and conditions of regulatory permit. The regulatory permit issued shall be on a form deemed suitable by the business license supervisor. In addition to naming the permitee, the permit shall contain the following conditions: A. Each permit issued shall expire at midnight on December 31st of the year so issued. B. The permit issued shall be personal only and not transferable in any manner. C. The permit shall be valid only when used at the permit operating area designated on the permit. D. The permit shall be openly displayed on the permitted vending cart during all times of operation. E. The permit is valid for one cart only. F. The permit operating area may be changed, either temporarily or permanently, by written notice from the traffic engineer to permitee, in the event of construction or remodeling of any nearby structure or of a force majeure which, in the opinion of the traffic engineer, renders permitee's continued operation at the original permit ' 4 operating area unsafe for any person. The term "force majeure," as used in this section, means acts of God, acts of public enemy, blockades, wars, insurrections or riots, epidemics, landslides, earthquakes, fires, storms, floods or washouts, civil disturbances, or explosions. G. The permit is subject to the further restrictions of this chapter. H. The permit as it applies to a given permit operating area may be suspended by the mayor for periods of not to exceed ten days for special events, as defined by Section 5.65.010. 5.65.090 Use,site and design review required. Prior to issuance of a sidewalk vending regulatory permit, all applications therefore shall be reviewed and approved by the planning official to assure the proposed vendor meets the use and design criteria and by the transportation engineer to assure compliance with the location criteria as set forth in this chapter. 5.65.100 Items for sale. A. Items approved for sale from sidewalk vending carts shall be limited to the following: 1. Food for immediate consumption, including beverages; 2. Inflated balloons; 3. Fresh cut flowers; and 4. Daily or monthly news publications. B. The performance of personal services for sale shall not be provided from a sidewalk vending cart except as such may be necessary in connection with the sale of items allowed for sale under this section. 5.65.110 Location review. A. The permit operating area must be located in non-residentially zoned areas within the Expanded Central Business District, the Sugar House Business District, city parks or Washington Square. B. The use of the permit operating area for sidewalk vending must be compatible with the free flow of pedestrian and other traffic and with public safety. In making such determination,the traffic engineer shall consider the width of sidewalk,the presence of bus stops,truck loading zones,taxi stands or hotel zones,the proximity of entrances to nearby business establishments,and the proximity and location of existing street furniture, including but not limited to: signposts, lamp posts, fire hydrants,parking meters,bus shelters,benches,phone booths, street trees and newsstands. C. In the event the applicant is dissatisfied with the traffic engineer's decision regarding a certain application, he/she may appeal the decision by filing a written request with the business license supervisor for a hearing before a hearing examiner appointed by the mayor in accordance with the procedures set forth in chapter 5.02, or its successor chapter. 5.65.120 Location requirements. A. No more than one vending permit operating area shall be allowed for each three dO 5 hundred thirty feet of block frontage on Main Street between South Temple and 400 South. On other blocks, one permit shall be allowed per block face except that if the block face exceeds six hundred sixty feet, one permit shall be allowed for each additional six hundred sixty feet of block frontage. B. The number of vendors in city parks and Washington Square shall be determined by administrative policy. C. Vending carts may be located on private plazas and private open space on non- residentially zoned property within the expanded central business district. No more than one sidewalk vending cart shall be allowed per every forty thousand square feet of private plazas and private open space. At least one vending permit may be awarded for any private open space larger than twenty-four square feet. Vending carts on private property are subject to all of the requirements of this chapter except for the requirement of a land lease with the city under Section 5.65.030 or its successor. Use of private property by sidewalk vendors hereunder shall be arranged with the real property owner. D. No person may conduct business from a sidewalk vending cart in any of the following places: 1. Within ten feet of the intersection of the sidewalk with any other sidewalk or mid- block crosswalk, except that the traffic engineer may waive this restriction in writing for any location upon finding that construction of extra-width sidewalks makes such use consistent with the standards established by Sections 5.65.110; 2. Any location which would reduce the clear, continuous sidewalk width to less than four feet; 3. Within five feet of an imaginary perpendicular line running from any building entrance or doorway to the curb line; 4. Within five feet of any handicapped parking space, or access ramp; 5. Within ten feet of any bus stop; or 6. Within five feet of any office or display window. E. No food vendor shall operate within 100 feet on the same linear block face of a door to a restaurant, City authorized Special Event selling food (outside public right-of- way), Gallivan Plaza(during events), or fruit or vegetable market,with direct access to the sidewalk. No flower or balloon vendor shall operate within 100 feet on the same linear block face of a door to a flower or balloon shop or City authorized Special Event selling flowers/balloons (outside public right-of-way), Gallivan Plaza (during events),with direct access to the sidewalk. No newspaper/magazine vendor shall operate within 100 feet on the same linear block face of a door to a newspaper/magazine shop or City authorized Special Event selling newspapers/magazines (outside public right-of-way), Gallivan Plaza(during events), with direct access to the sidewalk. In the event of multiple entries/spacing requirements, the above requirement does not invalidate a legally authorized vending permit area. The vendor will still be authorized to operate at a maximum available spacing from all affected entries The above requirement may be waived if the application is submitted with the written consent of the proprietor of such restaurant or shop. The consent shall be on forms deemed appropriate by the license supervisor. Payment of any consideration to a proprietor of such restaurant or shop or receipt of such consideration by a proprietor 110 for such written consent is prohibited. Such waiver shall not except the permitee from compliance with the other location and distance restrictions of this chapter. 5.65.130 Design review. The planning official shall examine the sidewalk vending application to determine if the proposed design meets the design requirements of Section 5.65.140 applying current urban planning standards. In addition, the planning official, shall consider whether or not the proposed design,materials, colors, signage and graphics are compatible with the immediate surroundings of the proposed installation. 5.65.140 Design requirements. A. The area occupied by the mobile device or pushcart,together with the operator and any trash receptacle, cooler or chair, shall not exceed thirty-six square feet of sidewalk space. B. The length of the mobile device or push cart shall not exceed three feet in width and eight feet in length including hitch. C. The height of the mobile device or push cart, excluding canopies, umbrellas, or transparent enclosures, shall not exceed five feet. D. Umbrellas or canopies shall be a minimum of seven feet above the sidewalk if they extend beyond the edge of the cart. E. Umbrellas or canopies shall not exceed sixty square feet in area and must be attached to the cart. F. The mobile device or push cart shall be on wheels and of sufficiently lightweight construction that it can be moved from place to place by one adult person without any auxiliary power. The device or cart shall not be motorized so as to move on its own power. G. The vendor shall be limited to three coolers (stacked), one water container, one trash receptacle, one chair/stool external to the cart and one water/drink container. Coolers shall not exceed 3.75 square feet each in size. 5.65.150 Fire marshal inspection. Prior to the issuance of any permit,the fire marshal shall inspect and approve any mobile device or push cart containing cooking or heating equipment to assure the conformance of any such equipment with the provisions of the city fire code. 5.65.160 Approved kitchen. If the vending cart includes an area for food preparation and/or sale, it must be approved by the Salt Lake City-County department of health. 5.65.170 Operational regulations. A. All persons operating under a sidewalk vendor regulatory permit issued by the city shall comply with the following regulations: 1. Display in a prominent and visible manner the business license issued by the city under the provisions of this chapter and conspicuously post the price of all items sold; 2. Pick up any paper, cardboard,wood or plastic containers, wrappers, or any litter in 410 any form which is deposited by any person on the sidewalk within twenty-five feet of the place of conducting business; and clean up all residue from any liquids spilled upon the sidewalk within said twenty-five-foot area. Each person conducting business on a public sidewalk under the provisions of this chapter shall carry a suitable container for the placement of such litter by customers or other persons; 3. Obey any lawful order of a police officer to move temporarily to a different location to avoid congestion or obstruction of the sidewalk or to remove the vending cart entirely from the sidewalk, if necessary, to avoid such congestion or obstruction; 4. Conduct no sidewalk vendor business at a location other than that designated on his/her permit; 5. Make no loud or unreasonable noise of any kind by vocalization or otherwise for the purpose of advertising or attracting attention to his/her wares; 6. Except for the day of the Days of'47 parade, leave no permitted cart or device unattended on a sidewalk nor remain on the sidewalk between midnight and six a.m. of any twenty-four-hour period; 7. Conduct no business in violation of the provisions of any ordinance or mayor's executive order providing for a special event, as defined by Section 5.65.010. 5.65.180 Special events. The restrictions of this chapter notwithstanding, nothing herein shall prohibit the city from authorizing vendors, other than those licensed under this chapter, to conduct concurrent sidewalk vending operations within the expanded central business district,or such other areas as the city may deem appropriate, during special events (special event vendors). The special event vendors shall not be governed by this chapter, but shall be governed by such other ordinance, city policy, or executive order as may be applicable. However, as long as the public right-of-way remains open to the general public, such authorization of special event vendors shall not require removal of a permitee under this chapter from operating within his/her designated permit operating area or a mutually acceptable adjacent alternative location during such special event, unless otherwise provided under the city's ordinances. If the City is closing a public right-of-way to general access, either partially or fully, in order to accommodate a special event, the City may relocate the vendor to an adjacent location outside the special event boundary, subject to the spacing requirements of Section 5.65.120.D. 5.65.190 Denial,suspension or revocation of business license and regulatory permit. A. The business license supervisor may revoke or suspend the business license and sidewalk vendor regulatory permit, or deny renewal thereof, of any person to conduct business on the sidewalks of Salt Lake City if he/she finds: 1. That such person has violated or failed to meet any of the provisions of this chapter; 2. That there are grounds for denial, suspension or revocation as set forth in Section 5.02.250, or its successor section, or in any other city ordinance or state or federal law or regulation. 3. Any required license or permit has been suspended,revoked or canceled; or 4. The permitee does not have a currently effective insurance policy in the minimum amount provided in this chapter; or 8 5. That the permitee has abandoned the use of the permit operating area for the conducting of business. The failure of a permitee to vend from a vending cart within • the permitee's permit operating area for thirty continuous calendar days or more, except during the period December,January, and February, shall constitute abandonment. B. Upon denial, suspension or revocation, the business license supervisor shall give notice of such action to the permit holder or applicant, as the case may be, in writing stating the action he/she has taken and the reasons therefore. Such notice shall contain the further provision that it shall become final and effective within ten days, unless such action is the result of a failure of the permitee to maintain liability insurance as required by this chapter, or is the result of a threat to the public health, safety or welfare in which case the action shall be effective immediately upon issuance of such notice. Any person receiving such notice, other than a notice effective upon issuance, shall have ten days from the date of receipt thereof to file a written request with the license supervisor for a hearing thereon before a hearing examiner appointed by the mayor. Upon receipt of such request the license supervisor shall schedule a hearing in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 5.02, or its successor chapter. If the notice of denial, suspension or revocation is effective upon issuance thereof, as provided in this section, a hearing shall be held within five business days of the date of issuance without any requirement of a request for such hearing from the permit holder. 5.65.200 Penalty for violation. • Any person convicted of violating any of the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of a class B misdemeanor, and shall be punished as provided by Section 1.12.050 of this code, or its successor section. 5.65.210 Violation a nuisance-Summary abatement. The placement of any cart or device on any sidewalk in violation of the provisions of this chapter is declared to be a public nuisance. The planning official may, as provided by law, cause the removal of any cart or device found on a sidewalk in violation of this chapter and is authorized to store such cart or device until the owner thereof shall redeem it by paying the removal and storage charges. 5.65.220. Vending Carts on Private Property Outside the Expanded Central Business District. A. Permits for vending carts on private property outside the expanded Central Business District may be approved pursuant to the applicable district regulations in Chapter 21A, Zoning,where they conform to the requirements below. 1. Vending Carts on private property are subject to all of the requirements of this chapter except for the requirement of a land lease with the city under Section 5.65.030; the requirement of a signed statement of liability and indemnity with the city under Section 5.65.040.E; the requirement of insurance under Section 5.65.060; the requirement of location review under Section 5.65.110; the • 9 suspension or revocation of business license due to a lack of use under Section 5.65.190 A. 5 and geographic location limits under Section 5.65.020; 2. Use of private property by vendors shall be arranged with the real property owner and proof of such property owner authorization shall be required prior to the issuance of a business license; 3. Allowed only in zoning districts that permit vending carts as a permitted use, as defined by individual zoning district land use tables; 4. Allowed only on sites 2 acres or larger and only as a secondary use to another primary commercial,office or industrial use. Vending carts on vacant or residentially used lots, regardless of zoning district, is prohibited; 5. No vending cart or device shall occupy required parking stalls; 6. No vending cart or device shall interfere with the internal parking lot circulation; and 7. Vending carts adjacent to residential zones shall be subject to site review to insure compatibility. SECTION 2. Chapter 21A.42.020 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.42.020 Applicability: This Chapter is intended to regulate all temporary uses conducted on private property. Temporary Uses of vending carts shall only be allowed in zones where vending carts are allowed as a permitted use and only where the vending carts are associated with an • Outdoor Sales Event or Special Event. Art festivals, neighborhood fairs and other similar activities, authorized by other City regulations to operate on public property or within the public way, are not subject to the provisions of this Chapter. SECTION 3. The table located at Section 21A.26.080 of the Salt Lake City Code, entitled"Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts,"shall be and hereby is amended to read as set forth on Exhibit"A"attached hereto. SECTION 4. The table located at Section 21A.28.040 of the Salt Lake City Code, entitled"Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Manufacturing Districts," shall be and hereby is amended to read as set forth on Exhibit"B" attached hereto. SECTION 5. The table located at Section 21A.30.050 of the Salt Lake City Code entitled "Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts," shall be and hereby is amended to read as set forth on Exhibit"C"attached hereto. 10 SECTION 6. The table located at Section 21A.31.050 of the Salt Lake City Code entitled"Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Gateway Districts," shall be and hereby is amended to read as set forth on Exhibit "D" attached hereto. SECTION 7. The table located at Section 21A.32.140 of the Salt Lake City Code entitled"Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Special Purpose Districts," shall be and hereby is amended to read as set forth on Exhibit"E" attached hereto. SECTION 8. Section 21A.62.040 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to include the following definition in alphabetical order: "Vending Cart"includes any non-motorized mobile device or push cart from which limited types of products, as listed in Chapter 5.65 of this Title, are sold or offered for sale directly to any consumer, where the point of sale is conducted at the cart, where the duration of the sale is longer than 14 days and where the vending cart meets the requirements of Chapter 5.65 for the conducting of business in a specified permit operating area approved by the City. SECTION 9. 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 , 2002. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER 110 11 Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. of 2002. Published: G:\Ordinance 02\Amending Code re vending carts-Clean-July 10,2002.doc i 12 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: August 2, 2002 SUBJECT: Emergency Shelter Grant Recapture and Reallocation STAFF REPORT BY: Michael Sears, Budget & Policy Analyst CC: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rocky Fluhart, Margaret Hunt, David Dobbins, and LuAnn Clark Document Type Budget-Related Facts Policy-Related Facts Miscellaneous Facts Resolution $5,913 in remaining This proposed reallocation Proposed resolution Emergency Shelter is consistent with past authorizes a recapture Grant(ESG) funds is Council actions and within and reallocation of available for recapture the federal guidelines for $5,913 in ESG funds and reallocation.The the Emergency Shelter to another eligible sub- Administration Funds. grantee. Reallocation recommends during next year's ESG reallocation to another process is not possible eligible sub-grantee. due federal guidelines. The Administration is proposing that the City Council approve a resolution amending the One-Year Action Plan for the Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) program of Resolution No. 21 of 2001. The amendment allows for the recapture of $5,913.51 in unspent funds granted to Our House Child Care & Family Education Center. The Administration is recommending that the recaptured funds be reallocated to The Road Home. The Road Home serves the same clientele as Our House Child & Family Education Center, meets the required eligibility criteria and will be able to expend the recaptured funds within the necessary time frame. Following the briefing, the Council may wish to consider the following options: • Schedule consideration of the resolution in a future Council Meeting. • Schedule another briefing for additional discussion. • Request additional written information from the Administration. BACKGROUND: In July of 2001, Our House Child Care & Family Education Center was awarded Emergency Shelter Grant funds for operational costs. As of June 30, 2002, $5,913.51 remains unspent from their allocation. The contract for expenditure of the remaining funds expired on June 30, 2002. Our House has asked that the City recapture the funds and allocate them to another agency that can spend the funds. The funds were allocated for operational costs and have to be expended in the same category to remain in compliance with federal guidelines. Another local agency, The Road Home serves the same clientele as Our House and is eligible to receive the funds. The Administration is recommending that the City Council recapture the remaining Our House allocation and reallocate the funds to The Road Home. Page 1 Additional information is contained in the Administration's transmittal. The transmittal also contains the full listing of applicants for ESG funds and the appropriation amount that each applicant received. Page 2 DAVID DOBBINS SALT' •--�`'t MY CORPORATION: = 'er- s � ' - -- � -=--= ROSS C. "ROCKY" ANDERSON DEPUTY DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MAYOR COUNCIL TRANSMI L )1 TO: Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administrative Of I ATE: June 19, 2002 FROM: Margaret Hunt, CED Director i.id(7 f I C (/( RE: Emergency Shelter Grant Recapture and Reallocation STAFF CONTACT: LuAnn Clark, HAND Director DOCUMENT TYPE: Resolution BUDGET IMPACT: The funds would be reallocated to another eligible sub-grantee DISCUSSION: Our House Child Care & Family Education Center was awarded $7,000 in Emergency Shelter Grant funds for operational costs in July 2001. Due to turn over in their accounting position, as well as the program director, the documentation required for this federal program was not being kept as accurately as necessary. Consequently, they have only been able to request reimbursement for$1,086.49 of their funds, leaving a balance of$5,913.51. The contract for these funds expires on June 30, 2002 and they will not be able to utilize the remaining funds. Our House did not apply for ESG funds in the last round of funding requests. They have requested we recapture these funds and allocate them to another agency that can spend the funds. The Emergency Shelter Grant has several types of activities that can be funded. These funds were approved for"Operational Costs." In order to ensure compliance with the federally mandated percentages for this program, the remaining balance of these funds should be allocated for the same type of activity. The other agencies that were awarded funds for this activity are the Road Home (utilities, repair/maintenance, operational expenses & insurance), Catholic Community Services for Marillac House (utilities, maintenance & supplies) and Odyssey House for the Women & Children's Program (rent). The Administration is recommending that the $5,913.51 of funding be reallocated to the Road Home since this agency's approved allocation most closely matches the approved allocation for Our House Day Care & Education Center. The eligible clientele served by Our House Day Care & Education Center are families referred from the Road Home. If the City Council approves the reallocation the Road Home would be able to spend these funds in a timely manner. The federal guidelines established for Emergency Shelter Funds require that the participating jurisdiction spend the funds within 24 months. The City is unable to recapture the funds and reallocate them as part of next year's process because it would be outside of the 24 month timeframe and HUD would recapture the funds. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 041 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-535.6230 FAX: BO1-535-6005 ,+cc.oco,APta RESOLUTION NO. OF 2002 AUTHORIZING SALT LAKE CITY TO AMEND RESOLUTION NO. 21 OF 2001 WHEREAS, Salt Lake City adopted Resolution No. 21 of 2001 to receive Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) funds,HOME Investment Partnership Program(HOME) funds, • Emergency Shelter Grant(ESG) funds, and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) funds, and now desires to amend said Resolution; and WHEREAS, Our House Child Care &Family Education Center was awarded$7,000.00 in July of 2001 and as of this date has a balance of$5,913.51 which it will not be able to utilize before expiration of their contract on June 30, 2002; and WHEREAS, ESG funds are required by the Department of Housing and Urban Development to be expended within a two year time frame or be returned to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, or the funds may be reallocated to another agency for the same type of activity that falls within the required percentages of"Operational Costs"; and WHEREAS, The Road Home, formerly Salt Lake Community Shelter and Resource Center serves the same clientele as Our House Child&Family Education Center,meets the required eligibility criteria and will be able to expend the $5,913.51 within the necessary time frame; NOW THEREFORE,be it resolved by the City Council of Salt Lake City that the One-Year Action Plan for the Emergency Shelter Grant(ESG)program of Resolution No. 21 of 2001, dated April 17, 2001 be, and is hereby amended, as set forth in Exhibit"A"attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference. With the exception of the amendments hereinabove, all other terms and conditions of Resolution No. 21 of 2001 remain in full force and effect without amendment. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah,this day of , 2002. By Chair ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake C' Attorneys .Office Date .)o o By EX,T "A" ' 6/19/02 SLC ESG Program 1 . Funding Recommendations 2001 -2002 PREVIOUS REQUEST RECOMMENDATIONS # ORGANIZATION DESCRIPTION AMT. YEAR AMOUNT CDAC MAYOR COUNCIL 1 Salt Lake Community Shelter and Funding for operational support for program 90,000 00/01 125,000 90,000 90,000 95,913.51 Resource Center that provides emergency shelter and supportive 88,000 99/00 The Road Home services to homeless families,women, and 94,000 98/99 210 South Rio Grande men. 90,000 97/98 100,000 96/97 135,500 95/96 2 Housing Outreach Rental Program Funding for program that provides rental and 21,000 00/01 30,000 18,500 18,000 18,000.00 Salt Lake Community Action Program mortgage assistance to families to prevent 24,000 99/00 764 South 200 West eviction or foreclosure caused by temporary 30,000 98/99 circumstances beyond their control. 30,000 97/98 27,000 96/97 35,000 95/96 3 Our House Child Care& Education Ctr. Funding for program which provides child care for 0 00/01 20,000 5,500 6,000 1,086.49 353 W 200 S children from one month to kindergarten. Provides 6,000 99/00 Homeless Children's Foundation health screenings and referrals to other services. 7,500 98/99 325 W Pierpont, Suite B 6,000 97/98 Salt Lake City, UT 84101 5,000 96/97 15,000 95/96 4 Weigand Homeless Day Center Funding for employee salaries 0 00/01 21,500 0 0 0.00 235 South Rio Grande for program that provides day shelter and 2,800 99/00 case management to homeless individuals 0 98/99 Catholic Community Services and families. 0 97/98 2570 W 1700 South *5000 96/97 Salt Lake City, UT 84104 *Funded same organization-different projects *7500 95/96 5 Marillac House Funding for salaries, utilities and maintenance for a 5,000 00/01 10,000 5,000 5,000 5,000.00 program that provides emergency shelter 99/00 Catholic Community Services to homeless women and their children. 98/99 2570 W 1700 South 97/98 Salt Lake City, UT 84104 96/97 95/96 i 6/19/02 SLC ESG Program 2 Funding Recommendations 2001 -2002 PREVIOUS REQUEST RECOMMENDATIONS # ORGANIZATION DESCRIPTION AMT. YEAR AMOUNT CDAC MAYOR COUNCIL 6 St. Mary's Home for Men Funding for utilities and maintenance for a 5,000 00/01 11,500 5,000 10,000 0.00 1206 West 200 South program that provides emergency shelter, 0 99/00 Catholic Community Services case management, and group therapy to adult 98/99 2570 W 1700 South men who have chronic substance abuse 97/98 Salt Lake City, UT 84104 problems. 96/97 95/96 7 Safe Haven Funding for program that provides services, 22,600 00/01 35,000 22,600 17,600 17,600.00 550 W 700 S shelter and transitional housing for 24,000 99/00 Valley Mental Health homeless and mentally ill individuals. 30,000 98/99 5965 South 900 East #240 97/98 96/97 95/96 8 Residential Self-sufficiency Program Funding for program which provides transitional 16,000 00/01 25,000 16,000 16,000 25,000.00 YWCA housing to low-income women in transition from 16,000 99/00 322 East 300 South homelessness or who are at risk of becoming 20,000 98/99 homeless. 97/98 96/97 95/96 9 Women and Children's Program Funding for building rent for program that 6,400 00/01 7,500 6,400 6,400 6,400.00 42 South 500 East provides treatment to single-parent mothers& 6,400 99/00 children who are severely dysfunctional due to 98/99 Odyssey House substance abuse, homelessness, criminal behavior 8,000 97/98 68 South 600 East and prostitution. 96/97 Salt Lake City, UT 84102 95/96 10 Co-Housing Facility for Single Women Funding for kitchen equipment in a project where 00/01 21,750 0 0 0.00 8221 S Allen St, Midvale 22 homeless single women and their children 99/00 Family Support Center will live, supervised by resident managers. 98/99 777 W.Center 97/98 Midvale, UT84047 96/97 95/96 TOTALS 307,250 169,000 169,000 169,000.00' TOTAL ESG GRANT AVAILABLE= $169,000 Our House Child Care & Family Ecucation June 2, 2002 Karen Wiley Capital Planning & Programming Administrator Community and Economic Development Division of Housing and Neighborhood Development 451 South State Street, Suite #406 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Dear Karen: I am submitting the reimbursement paperwork for February through June. This is a billing on the Our House ESG FY02 contract. The total specified on the worksheet is $1,086.49 for February through June 2002. I have attached the worksheet for your review. Please contact me if you have any questions or need further information. Many thanks for all your help! Sincerely, Caroline Alder Executive Director Our House Childcare & Family Education Center (801) 596-9366 calderxmission.com EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Caroline Alder TRUSTEES: Denise Achelis, Linda Alder, Karma Arnold, Suzanne Day, Stephen Denkers, Julia Houser, Paula Mahoney, Maxine Margaritis, John Milliken, Lauren Scholnick, Annabel Sheinberg, Mark Wolfe ADVISORY BOARD: David Jones, Paula Julander, Suzanne Goldsmith Funded Item Vendor Total 33% of 45 kids Cost served/2 Insurance Capital Premium Financing $322.00 $53.13 Commercial Underwriting Insurance Agency Liability Insurance _ Accounting Lake, Hill & Meyer $149.75 $24.71 Refrigerator Hobart $6,000.00 $990.00 Staff Training CDA Training (for Fernanda) $60.00 $0 License/Permits SL Valley Health Dept. $1 13.00 $18.65 Child Care Center Permit Fees Help Wanted SLC Newspaper Corporation $489.24 $0 Ads Ad for Program Manager Total $7,133.99 $1,086.49 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: August 2, 2002 SUBJECT: Ordinance adopting the 2000 edition of the International Fire Code as part of the Salt Lake City Code STAFF REPORT BY: Michael Sears, Budget & Policy Analyst CC: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rocky Fluhart, Chuck Querry, and Dan Andrus Document Policy-Related Facts Type Budget-Related Facts Miscellaneous Facts Ordinance There are no budget This change would replace This change will bring impacts resulting from The Uniform Fire Code with the Salt Lake City the adoption of The The International Fire Code Code in compliance International Fire Code as as part of the Salt Lake City with the state fire part of the Salt Lake City Code. code. Code. The Administration is proposing that the City Council approve an ordinance that deletes all references to the 1988 edition of The Uniform Fire Code and reference the 2000 edition of The International Fire Code as the city fire code. This ordinance is a housekeeping measure that will bring the City Code in line with the state approved fire code. Utah Code requires that the Utah State Fire Prevention Board adopt a nationally recognized code to be the minimum fire code for all political subdivisions of the state. The Utah State Fire Prevention Board adopted the 2000 edition of The International Fire Code on September 11, 2001 and it became effective on January 1, 2002. The Administration has been following this code, rather than the one reflected in City Ordinance. The Council Office has received inquiries from citizens confused by the inconsistency. The adoption of the proposed ordinance will bring the City into compliance with the state fire code. Additional information is contained in the transmittal from the Administration. Following the briefing, the Council may wish to consider the following options: • Schedule consideration of the ordinance in a future Council Meeting. • Schedule another briefing for additional discussion. • Request additional written information from the Administration, including _ whether there are any sections of the code that the City has the discretion to modify or not adopt. • Request that the Administration forward codes of this nature to the Council in a timelier manner in the future. Page 1 • [11A�I� ROCKY J. FLU HART S 1 II AI E jJjji 0 RRORA - -- ,�� _ .: ROSS C. ANDERSON •HIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER MAYOR COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL rn TO: Rocky J. Fluhart (2DATE: June 24, 2002 Chief Administrative Officer FROM: Dan Andrus, Fire Marshal SUBJECT: Ordinance adopting the 2000 edition of the International Fire Code, as part of the Salt Lake City Code STAFF CONTACT: Dan Andrus, 799-4163 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance DISCUSSION: Section 53-7-106, U.C.A.,requires the Utah State Fire Prevention Board to adopt a"nationally recognized fire code." That code subsequently becomes the minimum fire code for all political subdivisions of the state. On September 11, 2001, the Utah State Fire Prevention Board adopted this edition of The International Fire Code as the state fire code. The code went into effect on January 1, 2002. The proposed ordinance deletes all references to the 1988 edition of The Uniform Fire Code. It also clarifies some of the requirements on spill reporting. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 238, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: BO1-535-6426 FAX: 801.535-5190 ®aecvcco PnPew SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2002 (An Ordinance Amending Chapter 18.44 of the Salt Lake City Code Relating to Fire Prevention and the Uni€er-Fire Code) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18.44 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE, RELATING TO FIRE PREVENTION AND THE AFIRE CODE. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Chapter 18.44 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: Chapter 18.44 FIRE PREVENTION AND InternationalFIRE CODE Article 7 Uniform Fire Code 18.44.010 Uniform--International Fire Code and Standards adopted. That certain code and standards known as the Uniform Fire Code, 1988 Edition, including Appendix Chapters I A, I C, II E, III A, III B, III C, V A, VI A, VI_D and VI E and the Uniform Fire Code Standards, 1988 Edition, as promulgated and published by the Western 1988 Editions thereof. (Ord. 9 89 § 1 (pant),.1989: prior.code § 15 2 1)A. The edition of the Uniform-International Fire Code as adopted by § 53-7-106,U.C.A.;or its successor section is adopted by Salt Lake City as the Fire Code ordinance rules and regulations of the City. . Appendices A, B, C, D, E, F, G of the Uniform International Fire Code are specifically adopted by Salt Lake City as part of the Fire Code of the City. B. Section 27.03.3.1 of the Unnifor-m-International Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 27.03.3.1, Unauthorized Discharges. When hazardous materials are released in quantities reportable under federal, state, or local regulations, the Fire Department shall be notified without delay, and the following procedures are required in accordance with Section 27.03.3.1. 1 through 27.03.3.1.4. C. Hereafter, all references in this code to the Uniform Fire Code shall mean the edition adopted by the Utah Fire Prevention BoardSection 53-7-106, U.C.A., or its successor section, together with its appendices. One copy of the Uniform International Fire Code shall be filed for use and examination by the public in the office of the City Recorder. 18A4:020-14-niferm-Fire-Code-Deletiens B, II A, II B, II C, II D, IV A, VI B and VI C, which have no effect in this jurisdiction. (Ord. 9 89 § I (part), 1989: prior code § 15 2 2) 1444030 Unif T. ! d A d • set forth in this chapter: 4&4470-10-- Unifo m-Fire-Code-and-Staidards-adopted: 1& 4-.4 2 —U i F C a Deletien& 18.44.100 UFC Section 34.104 amended u Ming-agents. 18.44.110 UFC Section 78.102 d 78.103 a d Fi e- -rk- existing4 legs. 1-8.44,1-61-- FICA-r-tiele-80-amended--f[azM-darts-materials: (Ord. 9 89 § 1 (part), 1989: prior code § 15 2 3) re . . Sec. 2.303.Board of Appeals and Examiners as established under Title 18 of-thesedi Said eal must be heard-bey h fi n Board which shw?! be enlarged by including as a voting member feffesentative> > cy of the Code requirement in quality, strength, effectiveness, fire resistance, durability and safety. The Board has no power to waive requifement-s-where-equivaleney-is-net-ethefwise-aehieved, regulations--to-the-Chief as it deems appropriate • 9 89 § 1 (part), 1989) read as follows: Sec. 4.103.Pcrmit Application c nd-Fee`. required by this code, asamended herein, sh ll'l be made • • • • • must-be-renewed-one-an-nu-al is-The err t' a r � • .• (Ord. 9.89 § 1 {part), 1989:.prior code § 15 2 3.3). A. Section 45.207.2 of the Uniform Fire Code, relating to limited spraying areas, is amended-te-r-ead-as-fellews• Sec. 15.207.2.Thc size of job to be donesuch s does not o ed ^ e f et and is not of a continuous nature. Note: It is the intent of Item 2 to allow only small jobs which in their entirety do not exceed nine square feet and do not require more than thirty (30) minutes to complete. B. Section 45.209(c) of the Uniform Fire Code relating to spray booth fire protection equipment is amended to read as follows: Sec. 45.209.(c) Space within spray booth on the downstream and upstream sides of filters shall be otected with „ ed .,utom.,tic fire e inguisL,:,, s .stem oiiu�s v�+ Yrvc�.v - (Ord. 9 89 § 1 (part), 1989) Sec. 10.207. (m) Fire lanes. It shall be the duty and power of the Chief to designate, • to-enables frr -depart ent-personnel--a-nd-equ t e-nt-to-h we— -impaired-un -r ady «trel of the sub:ect « setting f rth: (a) The designation ofthe fire lane• (b) A general description of its location and necessary width; give notice to others of its existence and location; (d) The time within which said person shall comply. (2) , blocked o obstructed shall beg ilty of., m sdeme no, v�vva��.a, yr�,i,o�.uvcti. a89:amended .luring t/QQ � plem «+czzt; prior Section 11.201(b) of the Uniform Firc Code concerning containers and removal is , kept shall-he stored-in a 3-roved-eontalne1s-eqUlpped-with tight , • , . . hall be rer ed A. the bui di« „t le st o el,. rki g d.. u11K11 VV LV111V�V\i 11 V11I e e (Ord. 9 89 § 1 (part), 1989) 18A4449-1—UFC-Seetien-14,204-fd)-amended-Dumpatef-and-eentainerieeation. Sec. 11.201 (d)Dumpster and Container Location. Dumpsters and containers with an individual capacity of 1.5 cubic yards (40.5 cubic feet)or greater shall not be stored in buildings or placed outside within 5 feet of combustible walls, openings or combustible roof eaves lines. ved automatic sprinkler system. (Ord. 9 89 § 1 (part), 1989) Section 11.301 of the Uniform Fire Codc relating to reporting of fires is amended to read as-follows- Sec. 11.301.In the event a fire occurs or the discovery of a-€ire, smoke or the release of flammable or toxic materials on any property, the owner or occupant shall immediately report such condition to the fire department. • of : cidental to then al ..tions o f the property iiv� 111Vlu Vll�(il w ins, twin e (Ord C1-89--§--1-(-pact);-1-989) • Sectio 3 10 of�he Unif rm Fire rode relating t„burning „ rations : „ded t„ ' VVV41 Vll JT.1 VT.Vl L11V e e 1 ea . • • Sec. 34.104 The burning of wrecked or discarded motor vehicles-or of junk, or of any waste materials ; of p mittea (Ord. 9 89 § 1 (part), 1989) agents. A. Section 77.104 of the Uniform Fire Code is amended to add the following: cep 77 10 (f) Pe.-mits t„ , „l sives blasting onto 1. Application for Permit. Application f r po mit to ° plosives or blasting-agents charge ate f es „thorized by City ordina„ee "trolling blasting and other terms and conditions set forth in the permit. Such conditions may include, but not be limited to,traffic c , , 3. Permit Fees..The following fccs will be required at the time of filing for the permit. These are-in--additio-n-to-instrr-a-nce eer-tifi-eate and per-for- lance bond-costs (a) Single Event $50.00 • (b)Project Permit $125:00 . (c) Annual Permit :$500.00 9 5. General Standard Adopted. Except as , i regulations of the Secretary of Treasury issued in compliar.� th '7zz1 18 U.S.C. 4"7 and as contained in 27 C.F.R. Part 55. �� 77 1 nc *t r 1 i C od� u ()flows: Sec. 77.105. Bond and Insurance Required. Befo (b) A public liability insurance policy in the minim . . mt t--sae--g=i-verso Salto a1 e-City-fo eaneellation-of-the-polie- or-anv-reason. C. Section 77.301 of the Uniform Fire Code is amended to read as follows: • , th. ' ed oth by the c ief • • • . . . . . . . • in . (b) Tl1 e ha„dling and firing f explosives shall be peFf d o 1 b Fh `V� 1 1 1 18 years of age. explosives. vicinity thereof. (e) An open flame light shall not be used in the vicinity of explosives. ted in the vicinity of gas, electric, water, fire alarm, • I , Tobacco, and Firearms. (0i,d 16 88 §-1, 198$-) 18.44. -10-UFC Sectifons 7 42 d 78.103 amended ireworks • it bee nted . nder the r of public display . nder (b) below .,�.,.. gra.Il,.0 U (b) Public display permit. (I) It is unlawful to conduct any public display of fireworks chapter and these ordinances. The Fire Marsh-al, upon written application and the posting of required insurance, will coordinate the review of the permit by the Fire Department, City granted liezti• .,der shall he transf r blo be signed by the appli (ii) The date „d time of the d,.y at which the displ b h la �li f i llV 11GLl.li GLIlU LIII L{. {i ecatien-planned-for-t-he-d-ispiav • • 1� 1 Sec. 78.103. Requirements for display. (a) Nonhazardous manner. After a permit for public display of fireworks has been obtained, such display shall be of a character, and so any person, 1' tro otho h V V h t' 11Tf, �11�rVaU JL1 ULL one-handfed fifty (150) feet from the point at which the fireworks arc discharged. Only persons motive ..1,arge ,fthe display shall b .,ll a id •a l' iu avu vim. , prej chile will me the .,ir as n r1 ibl ert: l d' t' r_ �_ .., ..�,. g; +i.w �LLv uaL u.� LLvuL L� ua Yvoaivc-�r (e)--Maximum-wind-velocit -?do--fi ewor.ks-display-shall he-held-durin anv--wind-sterm-in • ; • (Ord. 15 93 § 3l, 1993;Ord. 9 QnH „a,t��_1 989: „rio code c m • t� • 14 AA 1 0 7TL!` C....*; iqui Article '79 of the T nif m Fire !`ode, relating to flarnmabl-e and cv"'mbustiblie liquid is amended by adding thereto a„e,., Section 79 117 relating to adulterated liquids which shall read as follows: Sec. 79.117. Adulterated liquid as flammable. Any manufactured liquid or fluid shall be classified according to flash point and/or boiling point as provided in this article. Also, (Ord. 9 89 § 1 (part), 1989; prior codc § 15 2 3.13) amended-by-adding-thereto new subparagraph (0, which reads as follows: Sec. 79.301 (e) Testing. Prior to being put into service, tanks shall be tested in grams capae-i-t-v-tof to k l+a-1 of exceed-ten thousand (40,000) a-allons--In-fife-resistive buildings . . • • • • • • 14 thousand (2 c 000) gallop (Prior code § 15 2 3.14) . Sec. 79.507. (c) Where protection of adjacent tanks, adjoining property or waterways is accomplished by ~ the liquid ^'round the-tanks—by--means of a diked area, such dikes shall be at least six inches higher than necess are-bekw«--the-heie,ht of-the-dike wit-hil he-diked-area (Ord. 9 89 § 1 (part), 1989: prior code § 15 2 3.15) • i5 YYr lliilU11 vZiIG nts f buil.lings o nded tero.,.a s f llows• aIV Appendix III A section 4 second exception: EXCEPTION: The required fire flow may be reduced up to 50 percent-when the building is provided with an approved automatic sprinkler system, but in no case less than 1500 gallons per mirtute: (Ord. 9 89 § 1 (part), 1989) f1ifi ! htt ti.. I A idle-Lift'Sflf-ety-requirements--fe-r e�F iSttRg�lEtt �it gs. Appendix Chapter I A of the Uniform Fire Code, 1988 Edition, relating to regulations applicable tea isting buildings ; dd to ., f lle, uYprl�+u on e o„d APPENDIX I A Life Safety Requirements to Existinggs - 0 1. General. (a)Purpose. The purpose of this appendix is to provide a reasonable degree of safety to • whiel de of a „f with the ♦ f th• .l •.aaavai uV [1VL VVaF+Va 111 v♦iLaa LiaV aaiiiaa ail Liaal 1 Vll Lail VIIa VaILJ Va LIIIJ VVLaV. EXC'1-:IP-T4CAN--Group-R-DiA4sif+if-=, ancd-GFoup-M- • 1.6 2. EXITS. building on the property makes the in have one exit. An exit ladder device when used in lieu of a fire ese ape shall conf rm with U B r 2.T-he building does not ceed thrcc stories in height. any building opening below the unit being served. eleetricaf- iris- • ' 17 . EXCEPTION: Fire escapes as provided for in this section. Exteriorh ll b b tibl + t' EXCEPTION: On buildings of Types III, IV , constructed f .1 t 1 th 2 1, l thi t as an exit for an occupant load of 30 or more shall have walls and ceilings of not less than one hour fire resistive construction as required by the Building Code. Exist wood lath and plaster in good condition or 1/2 inch gypsum wallboard or openings with fixed wired-glass set in steel frames are permitted for corridor wall shall comply with Section 3305(h) of the Building Code or shall be covered with a minimum of for--all-c-&rridors. stairs--exits a d other-c-o-mmon areas--Suelrspr+l-idet-systen-m-av-be supplied fr the do0 sti ato sto if i♦ a ado ato ol. ridonsuz.ram ti.. • (d) Fire Es (1)Ex sting fir ..hic n the of the chief comply with • 1R (2) Fi, o shall c ply. ,ith the f llowing: lL� 3 13 V VJVAt1VJ JllU J hour fire resistive construction. less than 29 inches. Such openings shall be openable from the inside without the use of a key or special knowledge or effort. The sill of an opening giving access shall be not more than 30 in-ohcs above the floor of the building or balcony. d load plus a live load of not less than-1-00-pouads-per-squafe-foot-and-shal4-1)e-pr-cwided-with-a-top-and-intefmediate-handrei4-en 50 p .,as r lineal f t efrailinn • Jv YvualtLJ Yan�z Balconies shall be not less than 44 inches in width with no floor opening other than the less than 22 inches by nA in;hes The balust ade of each balcon shall b t 1 th 36 ' h • • � as iai V a L 4V Vl VL1V11 V{ALVVII�' J11LL11 VV L1VG 1VJJ L11CL31 JV 111V 11VJ high with not .,, a than 9 ; ches bet . b 1 t • Fife—esea fees-sli all c t�nd-t-o-t-he roof oEpfovid e a li-al R ed-goosehecl: ladd-el et-v%'con • 19 inchesocated , n- 1-2-inc hes of the buil ding and shall be placed flatwisc relative to the a fen ' ches by 33 ; hem 111T7TTI-TIL[l1T-C{1I1[GII.7TV I1J VT ✓V lliV llVJ v,' ✓✓ •alvaay.�. The lowest balcony shall be not more than 18 feet from the ground. Fire escapes shall extend to the grotor be provided with counterbalanced stairs reaching to the ground. Fire escapes shall not take the place of stairwa bu-iding was constructed- imes and mail workingrd 0 Code. • chief. All doors or windows providing access to a fireided with fire escape signs. 3.ENCLOSURE OF VERTICAL SHAFTS and he-end ed-bv- -minimum of-one-hour-f re-resist-i-ve-eenstruction. All EXCEPTIONS: 1.In other than Group I Occupancies, an enclosure will net-be required 3.Vertical openings need not be protected if the entire building is protected by an approved automatic sprinkler system. n B n CEMENT ACCESS OR SPRINKLER PROTECTION. An-a gents or stories exceeding 1500 square feet in area any t h of 2n e feet of opening inches , 5. STANDPIPES. b. SMOKE DETECTORS. (a)-C-ieneral—Dwell ng riu its-arid-hotel--or todg,ing house-guest-rooms -hat arc used-for • �1 protection- ated in the corridor or area giving access to each separate c installed in the basement of clwellunits-liavi-ng-a---staifway-whic-h-o-pens-frem-t-he-basement-Into-t-he-d-wel4441-g,-Detecters t ll d l mrcLc'�ible-Trrml Cleo. ing . of the dwelling , ,:t i „1 ich th are locate not 111V1V t 15 f et a-„ .,l l L Lh11CLI1 I - (d) Location in Efficiency Dwelling Units and Hotels. In efficiency dwelling units, hotel suite are on an upper level, the detector shall be placed at the center of the ceiling directly above o f the d ell: g nit hotel :te 1 hi h •t ' 1 t ,l • EXCEPTION: In lieu of the smoke detectors in every dwelling unit,the smoke detectors may be-installed--imthe-co lij-dory-andallc-ommo-n areas sl aeed-a-ma\imt,HI-of 3 apa-tt--awd VL tL11V1e t 1 5 f et f „.,o „l1 � L1LLlh.,„l ., . 7. SEPARATION OF OCCUPANCIES 7/ only one dwelling unit. 8. EXIT ILLUMINATION Exit illuffi•, ;wshall--be-as required by the Uni o-rn*--BuildinGg Code, Section 3313, 1988 edition. (Ord. 9 89 § 1 (part), 1989) 18.4 4.•H-1U'Gtielle-,80-a m e sectio,s of rticl-e 8 of th fo re Cod , i fi a h read as follows: 1. Page 318,.Sec. 80.101, Scope: Add a new Exception 3.after Exception 2, as follows: 3. For retail disp hazardous materials in Group B, Division 2 retail sales occupancies, see Sec. 80.109. • 2 Also, page 323: Add a new S Sec-8-0--I09--The-a -5=9-e<gate qua ntiity-of-non-flammable-solid-and-non fl a m ma-ble-of noneembustib-le-1 . . . BABA 309-ABA-38-A89-3 - 88-314 d-88-315 n 7c t i . �� 1,500 square feet per control area. Hazard Classification Density Factor Physical Hazards Class 4 �1 DLQAA1TT D Class 3 0.075 Class 2 0.006 Class 1 0.003 Health Hazards All 0.0013 (a) Display of solids shall not exceed 200 pounds-per square foot-of-llaer--area actually occupied by the solid merchandise. (e) Disillay-height shall mot-exceeds feet • . . • • . 14 80.301(n). (i) Floors shall b ordance with the provisions of Sec. 80.301(z). :,a `:fi.ea • signs shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 80.101(e). 3. Also, page 337, Sec. 80.306(a) Indoor Storage, item I.: Add an exception-at-the-end-of the-paragraph as follows noncombustible liquid Class 1, 2 and 3 oxidizers, sec Scc. 80.109. • numbered 3 as follows:. . TABLE NO. 80.306 A LIQUID AND SO m OXIDIZE S i vVu� Vl1t LlLL EXEMPT AMOUNTS • offc-es-or--retail-sales-portions-of-CI-mop B occupancies- , �5 • manner approved by the Chief. 5. Also, page 347, Sec. 80.309(a) Indoor Storage, ite "1," and add • ` red in accordance with Article 77- 2 For ret-ail-d-i-sp-la-y- ,on-{naft+m-able solid and-non-Ii rbust-i-ble-l-iclu-id unstable(reactive) materials, see Section 80.109. 6. Also ge 34 -Sec 0(a) Indoor Storage, Item 1: Add an Exception after the paragraph as follows: EXCEPTION: For-reetail:di la of non flammablle solid and non flammable V VUJI.1VlV � µV VUV{.1 Yli 111G.G , • 7:-Also, page 351, Sec. 80. ion after the Yul EXCEPTION: For re+uit d' play ofr f b1 lid d fl bl 8-A4so, pace 3-51, See- -80-3-1-4(ir)-iitdoc- Stor e item 1 -add—e-eptlotn-aft-et-the paragraph as follows: • EXCEPTION• Forret.,il display of non' l..mm.:ble solid and n n flammable __ mb ,stible li d coreszrraterials, see Sc 4i--av-ivr. 76 paragraph as f llows• EXCEPTION• For retail d' 1 fI b1 lia a b tib1 va�vua a aVi i. a V♦ i viuii 11a Jl./i(4,' V1 llVil-IliIl III11LLLJI4�i DI flammable liquid or other health hazard materials, sec Sec. 80.109. Exception 2 as follows: e Liquid-hazardous materials permitted within a single cons 'vision 2 retail sales occupancy may exceed the exempt amounts spec-i€.ed in Division Ill, Tables 80.306 A, . , . wh' Hazard Classification Density Factor Physical Hazards . . Class 1 NOT PERMITTED C4ass3---- 0 0-75 Class 2 0.006 • Class 1 0.003 . • Health Hazards III • . . All 0.0013 . . The area of storage or display shall also comply with the f llowing r o nts:• occupied by the solid m rchandiso occupied by the liquid merchandise. .g t shall not exceed 6 feet. (-d) Individual containers less tha -S gallons or less than 25 pounds shall be stored on pallets, racks racks or-shelves. (e) Storage racks and shelves shall be in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 80.301(i). (4� shall be ed f the ,7, ntene �, C�ont rrczai 80.301(n). (j) ^�= t in width shall be maintained-en 3 sides of the disp-1-ay area. Sec. 80.101(e). may be permitted-in M-and-R oce--upaneies_ when such neater-iaas--afe-necessary-for-mai-ntenanee rs shall be stored in approved containers and in a • manner—approved—by—the—Chief: 11. Also, Table 80.306 A: Delete Class 3 oxidizers from Footnotes.1 and 2 as follows: (Ord. 9 89 § I (part), 1989) A rtiele i I G9 hl I ' ves 1-&.44.17S-Outs itle--ste' ttlis n,-o.st=4 fj-,itttt-s: The storage of fl nmable-or-combustible liquids i e gratt-nd--t-anks regulated by Article 79 of the Uniform Fire Code, as adopted in Section 18.44.010 of this chapter, or its Title 21 of the Salt Laity-Cede, which specifically Ton-Le-such . c h a such uses by right, the use shall conform with the technical requirements of said Article 79. (Prior code § 15 1 3) Code;-as adopted-in Section-IS-14 01-0-o-f leis-e-hapter or-lis-sueeessor. shall be-prohi&}ited--and • • • 79 such uses by right, the use shall ith th ch „i o ents of id-Ar+icic 82. (Prior code § 15 1 4) The storage of explosives and blasting age jurisdiction as a matter of right. Where the zoning provisions of Title 21 A of this Code do not Bch storage, the-storage may • ermit as a conditional use by the Fire-Marshal. Approval o rest+ie-ted-and-c -n-trolled-based upon-geographical---traffic, population-and-density--and--of-her relevant-eonsider--at1-considerations-and by the standards set forth in-art-i-ele 77 and ot}ie��applea-b-le provisions of the Uniform Fire Code as The Chief may, , of issues ,fir it appears the permit is issued in error or on the basis of incorrect information (Prior code § 15 3 .1) A - - Violations; Fines- Penalties ; . CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. of 2002. Published: G:\Ordinamce 02\Amend Fire Prevention and Uniform Fire Code(5-23-02 Draft).doe • noncompli.,n e t-during the time he/she fails to correct defective wa • es to exist. 3. The c uwict on-for-anv violation shall not excuse the violation oEpermiz i-t-t«tm nue.- aid-aIl-such persons shall-.be-required-to correct or reined-y-stye-h-v-iolat-ions or defect-s-wit-bin-a reasonable time. The maintenance of prohibited conditions shall constitute a separate offense. onditions. (Prior code § 15 3 2) SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of 2002. • CHAIRPERSON • ATTEST: .