Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
01/20/1990 - Minutes
PROCENINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met as the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, February 20, 1990, at 5:00 p.m. in Room 325, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Ronald Whitehead Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Don Hale Nancy Pace Council Chair Hardman presided at the meeting. Cindy Gust-Jenson, Council Regarding the league meeting Executive Director, reviewed the in conjunction with NAHRO, Ms. evening' s agenda noting that the Gust-Jenson indicated that each resolution on item B-4 would be conference was at a different read by Councilmember Whitehead. hotel and any member who requested different hotel accommodations She indicated the hearing should contact her. She further date for the budget amendment indicated there would be coordina- would have to be changed if any of tion with RDA on the payment. the members planned to attend the NAHRO conference which would be For the Washington confer- out of town. No member indicated ence, packets with tickets would they would be attending. be passed out at the district meeting. Regarding the Steiner Aquat- ics action, she indicated motions Finally, she indicated that had been included in the packets Sydney Fonnesbeck would be at the for this item. NAHRO conference to talk about Salt Lake City's housing policy. Regarding the hearing for the This was in draft form only and Block 42B Master Plan, she said Mrs. Fonnesbeck wanted the Council Bruce Parker and Bill Wright from to be aware that this would be the planning department would be occurring. present. Comments from the audi- ence would be limited to two The briefing session ad- minutes, with exceptions for journed. spokespersons of a group. Ms. Gust-Jenson then reviewed the Council ' s events calendar. She indicated that there would be a special agenda for the February 27th district meeting to take Council action regarding the airport revenue bonds. This needed to be handled because of the market. The Council agreed to convene for this at 6:45 prior to the district meeting so as not to interfere with the regular agenda. 90-45 PROCEIPINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in Regular Session on Tuesday, February 20, 1990, at 6:00 p.m. in Room 315, City Council Chambers, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Ronald Whitehead Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Don Hale Nancy Pace Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Roger Cutler, City Attorney, Kathryn Marshall, City Recorder, and Lynda Domino, Chief Deputy City Recorder, were present. Council Chair Hardman presided at and conducted the meeting. OPENING CEREMONIES city of Geislinger an der Steige to Mayor DePaulis. #1. There was no invocation. Councilmember Godfrey moved #2. The Council led the and Councilmember Kirk seconded to Pledge of Allegiance. adopt Resolution 23 of 1990, which motion carried, all members voted #3. Councilmember Godfrey aye except Councilmember Horrocks moved and Councilmember Kirk who was absent for the vote. seconded to approve the minutes of (R 90-1) the Salt Lake City Council for the regular meeting held Tuesday, CONSENT AGENDA February 13, 1990, which motion carried, all members voted aye Councilmember Godfrey moved except Councilmember Horrocks who and Councilmember Whitehead sec- was absent for the vote. onded to approve the consent (M 90-1) agenda, which motion carried, all members voted aye except #4. The Mayor and Council Councilmember Horrocks who was presented a resolution to the Utah absent for the vote. Air National Guard. #1. RE: Adopting Resolution Councilmember Whitehead read 19 of 1990 authorizing the execu- the resolution which recognized tion of an interlocal cooperation the extraordinary commitment to agreement between Salt Lake City duty, country and community dis- Corporation and the Utah Depart- played by the members of the 109th ment of Public Safety Driver Tactical Control Squadron, Salt License Division, allowing Salt Lake City' s own hometown Air Lake City Fire Department to Force. conduct Commercial Driver License (CDL) skill tests. Barry Esham, commander of the (C 90-83) 109th Squadron, thanked the Coun- cil and Mayor for this resolution. #2. RE: Setting a date to He presented a plate, which repre- hold a public hearing on March 13, sented friendship, from the German 1990, at 7:00 p.m. to consider 90-46 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY`, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 adopting a resolution approving on first reading adopt Resolution the 1988-1992 Community Develop- 20 of 1990, which motion carried, ment Plan. all members voted aye except (T 90-8) Councilmember Horrocks who was absent for the vote. #3. RE: Setting a date to (T 90-7) hold a public hearing on March 13, 1990, at 7:10 p.m. to receive #3. RE: Set a date for a comments concerning general hous- public hearing to receive comment ing and community development and consider adopting an ordinance needs which can be addressed by relating to street name change Community Development Block Grant fees. funds. (T 90-8) ACTION: Councilmember Pace moved and Councilmember Godfrey #4. RE: Ratifying the seconded to set the public hearing selection of Coopers and Lybrand for March 13, 1990, at 6:30 p.m. , as the city's financial audit firm which motion carried, all members for Fiscal Years 1990-91 through voted aye except Councilmember 1992-93. Horrocks who was absent for the (C 90-84) vote. (0 90-7) NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS #4. RE: Set a date for a #1. RE: A resolution ac- public hearing to receive comment cepting Annexation Petition 400- and consider adopting an ordinance 582-87 by John Schaar, as amended, rezoning property located at 409, for purposes of City Council 411 and 429 South 800 East, and review and setting a public hear- amending the East Central Neigh- ing date for March 20, 1990 at borhood Plan, pursuant to a Plan- 6:30 p.m. ning Commission initiative. ACTION: Councilmember Kirk ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to suspend the rules and seconded to set the public hearing on first reading adopt Resolution for March 13, 1990, at 6:50 p.m. , 24 of 1990 and set the date for which motion carried, all members the public hearing, which motion voted aye except Councilmember carried, all members voted aye Horrocks who was absent for the except Councilmember Horrocks who vote. was absent for the vote. (0 90-6) (P 90-45) #5. RE: An ordinance making #2. RE: A resolution autho- technical amendments to Title 5, rizing the execution of a grant Chapter 61 of the Salt Lake City agreement between Salt Lake City Code, regarding sexually oriented Corporation and the U.S. Depart- business licensing. ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment for an Emergency Shelter ACTION: Councilmember Kirk Grant. moved and Councilmember Whitehead seconded to suspend the rules and ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey on first reading adopt Ordinance 9 moved and Councilmember Hale of 1990, which motion carried, all seconded to suspend the rules and members voted aye except 90-47 PROCEPINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 Councilmember Horrocks who was Councilmember Godfrey moved absent for the vote. and Councilmember Whitehead sec- (0 90-8) onded to adopt Resolution 21 of 1990, which motion carried, all UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS members voted aye. #1. RE: An ordinance amend- Councilmember Godfrey moved ing the Fiscal Year 1989-90 bud- and Councilmember Whitehead sec- get. onded to adjourn as the Board of Trustees of the Municipal Building ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey Authority of Salt Lake City, which moved and Councilmember Hale motion carried, all members voted seconded to hold a public hearing aye. on March 20, 1990, at 6:00 p.m. , which motion carried, all members Councilmember Godfrey moved voted aye. and Councilmember Whitehead sec- (B 89-5) onded to reconvene as the Salt Lake City Council, which motion #2. RE: A resolution autho- carried, all members voted aye. rizing the issuance of not more (Q 90-3) than $2,000,000 Lease Revenue Bonds, (Steiner Aquatic Center #3. RE: A resolution of the Project), Series 1990 A, (the Municipal Council of Salt Lake "Bonds" ) , of the Municipal Build- City directing the Municipal ing Authority, on behalf of Salt Building Authority of Salt Lake Lake City, fixing the maximum City to undertake a certain aggregate principal amount of the project relating to a recreation Bonds, the maximum number of years facility located at approximately over which the Bonds may mature, 675 South Guardsman Way; approving the maximum interest rate which the plans, specifications and the Bonds may bear and the maximum estimate costs of such project to discount from par at which the be financed with the proceeds of Bonds may be sold; providing for sale of certain Lease Revenue the publication of a Notice of Bonds, (Steiner Aquatic Center Bonds to be issued with respect to Project), Series 1990 A, of said the Bonds; selecting an underwrit- Municipal Building Authority; er for the Bonds and appointing approving the selection of an bond counsel for the bonds; and underwriter and the appointment of providing for related matters. bond counsel for the Bonds; and providing for related matters. ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey moved and Councilmember Whitehead ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey seconded to recess as the Salt moved and Councilmember Kirk Lake City Council, which motion seconded to adopt Resolution 22 of carried, all members voted aye. 1990, which motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Godfrey moved (Q 90-3) and Councilmember Whitehead sec- onded to convene as the Board of PUBLIC HEARINGS Trustees of the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, which #1. RE: A public hearing at motion carried, all members voted 6:20 p.m. to receive comments and aye. consider adopting an ordinance approving the Block 42B Master 90-48 PROCEPINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 Plan as a part of the East Central clarity to the 984 East Central Neighborhood Plan. Neighborhood Plan and to give direction to the Salt Lake Clinic ACTION: Councilmember Godfrey in regards to their recent devel- moved and Councilmember Hardman opment request. He said the plan seconded to close the public presented a desirable future hearing, which motion carried, all character for Block 42B and ad- members voted aye. dressed the issues of land use, land use transitions, traffic Councilmember Hale moved and circulation, and design amenity. Councilmember Kirk seconded to delete recommendation D on page 9, He said this master plan was which motion failed, all members considered a supplement to and a voted nay except Councilmember companion document for the East Hale who voted aye. Central Neighborhood Plan of 984. He said the basis of the plan was Councilmember Hardman moved found in the East Central Neigh- and Councilmember Godfrey seconded borhood Plan which had a strong to adopt Ordinance 10 of 1990 and overriding principle of pre- approving the Block 42B Master serving residential amenities in Plan as part of the East Central this neighborhood. He said the Neighborhood Plan with the follow- Housing Element of Salt Lake City ing: 1 ) On page 9, recommendation and the Central Community Master E, add, "In the event the Phil- Plan of 974 were also the basis of lips' property is sold to the this plan. Clinic, that Baddley Place be closed or vacated and disposed of He then outlined the plan. and that the 10th East properties Starting with Page 3, he described be returned to residential uses. the present character and future 2) On page 4 under Townscape character of Block 42B. In re- Context, change the last sentence gards to the future character he to read, "300 South and 1000 East said Block 42B should primarily streets should be exclusively accommodate low-medium residential residential or Baddley Place development, although appropriate should be. . . " 3) On page 9, nonresidential activities should recommendation D, change the first be considered and directed toward sentence to "Any new construction, 400 South. He said Block 42B south of the existing facil- should also provide an area of ity. . . " , which motion carried, all transition in activities and scale members voted aye except from that allowed along 400 South, Councilmember Hale who voted nay. with a lesser scale and intensity residential environment towards DISCUSSION: Council Chair 300 South and 1000 East. Hardman turned the meeting over to Vice Chair Pace since this He then referred to Page 4 of issue affected his district. Vice the plan which outlined the use of Chair Pace then conducted the land and built form. He pointed public hearing. out that the primary use of land on Block 42B should be for resi- Bruce Parker, planning staff, dential activity. The maximum said the Block 42B master plan was height allowed should be four the result of a directive from the stories or 45 feet and all future Planning Commission. They asked development should achieve a the planning staff to give greater coherent, unified character, and 90-49 PROCEIPINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 attractive streetscapes. He riding principle was to preserve pointed out that the plan called and provide residential opportuni- for 300 South and 1000 East to be ties and strengthen residential exclusively residential and Badd- character. He also pointed out ley Place should be reestablished that the zoning ordinances pre- as a residential enclave. sented the approval criteria for any Salt Lake Clinic expansion. He said Page 5 discussed He referred to Page 8 of the movement: Vehicle access and plan which recommended the follow- parking, and pedestrian access. ing: He said the major traffic pattern should be directed towards the A) Clinic expansion be di- intersection of 9th East and 400 rected towards the southwest South and parking should be con- corner of Block 42B. structed behind main buildings. B) No clinic expansion result Page 6 discussed the envi- in the net loss of residential ronment and signage, and landscape floor space or residential units. open space. He said the plan required that all signs be compat- C) Any addition to the exist- ible with the residential charac- ing building recognize the scale ter of the block. He said land- of adjoining structures. Specifi- scaping was required to enhance cally, any addition to the exist- the residential setting and to ing building' s north, west or east buffer residential and nonresiden- facade should be designed and/or tial uses. terraced down to blend with ad- joining residential structures. He referred to Page 7 which The visual impact of all clinic outlined the directions for the buildings must be considered. expansion of the Salt Lake Clinic. He said presently the clinic had D) Any new building, south approximately 71,000 square feet of the existing facility, be re- on about 4.3 acres. He said Salt stricted to one level above grade. Lake Clinic was allowed on Block A basement level is appropriate. 42B as a conditional use in an "R- In total, a building and connect- 7" zone. He outlined the zoning ing walkway of approximately on the block which consisted of 27,000 square feet is appropriate. Commercial C-1 on the corner of 400 South and 900 East, Residen- E) As part of any increase tial "R-7" along the frontage of in clinic activity, Baddley Place 900 East and Commercial "B-3" on be returned to residential use. the corner of 300 South. The 300 Baddley Place should not provide South frontage was Residential "R- access to the Salt Lake Clinic. 5" and "R-3A" , which continued This is an ameliorative action to along 1000 East and became Resi- assist in achieving the residen- dential "R-6" at a certain proper- tial character of block 42B. Four ty line. He said the Salt Lake buildable lots are available on Clinic parking lot and the interi- Baddley Place and all four should or of the block was Residential be made available for residential "R-5" . uses. He said the master plan F) All clinic parking be recognized that the clinic was a provided at or below grade, mini- valuable amenity but the over- mizing the negative impacts of a 90-50 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 substantial parking demand in a Mr. Phillips seemed positive about residential area. Any above grade such an exchange and they would parking structure would be partic- continue the negotiation process. ularly detrimental to the desir- ability and stability of the Councilmember Whitehead said residential character sought for three homes in the area would be Block 42B. torn down in order to build two. He said this seemed contradictory G) Where possible, the to the plan. Councilmember Pace clinic should avoid creating said she understood that there "major gaps" in street frontages. were three building lots once To maintain continuity of the Baddley Place was vacated. Mr. street edge, all clinic parking Parker said if Baddley Place was should be located behind build- vacated there was a potential for ings, screening walls and land- three separate building lots with scaping. The 400 South street 150 feet of frontage on 1000 East. building edge should be maintained with clinic parking screened Councilmember Kirk said there behind building facades. was a small home behind another home and the neighborhood was not H) Extensive landscaping, adverse to losing it. She said setback and screening be estab- she understood that housing would lished surrounding the parking lot not be lost. Mr. Parker said and clinic buildings. This action viable residential stock would be will promote compatibility with maintained. The home to which adjoining structures and uses. Mrs. Kirk referred was in deterio- rated condition and he didn' t know I ) All building materials if it was of any value. and design be sensitive to the residential character of Block Councilmember Pace asked how 42B. the parking structure would be constructed relative to the slope In conclusion he said the of the terrain. Mr. Parker said master plan did not address all the grade ran from 300 South to the concerns of the Salt Lake 400 South with 400 South being Clinic nor the interests of the lower. He said the parking struc- neighborhood. But the Planning ture would be perceived as 15 Commission and planning staff feet above grade on 400 South and believed this was an appropriate would be screened behind a build- policy position for the city which ing facade. He said at the rear gave direction and security in the property line of the Lake City neighborhood, and provided an Motel, the structure would be at outline for future expansion grade. potential of the Salt Lake Clinic. Mrs. Pace asked why the Councilmember Pace asked Dr. driveway from 300 South was being Price, Salt Lake Clinic medical maintained. Mr. Parker said director, to comment about his this would be principally for negotiations regarding property on delivery and fire access. He Baddley Place. Dr. Price said he said there would be no parking had been in contact with Mr. available and 10 foot landscape Phillips (home owner on Baddley setbacks would be required on both Place) to discuss the possibility sides. of a property exchange. He said 90-51 PROCEE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 Councilmember Kirk asked how plan focused development toward many parking places would be the commercial strip on 400 South. available. Mr. Parker said pres- ently there were 357 spaces and Councilmember Hardman said the expansion would require one the clinic expressed concern space for every 200 square feet. regarding the "Baddley Place" With the expansion potential of recommendation. He asked if the the clinic and below grade park- plan was flexible enough to allow ing, they could have approximately 1000 East to be residential and 640 spaces. allow the clinic additional park- ing space if the clinic and Mr. Councilmember Horrocks Phillips worked out an agreement referred to the Built Form section regarding the Baddley Place prop- on Page 4 of the plan, which erty. Mr. Parker said the plan stated the maximum height allowed was flexible enough to allow that on the block would be 4 stories scenario to occur and he believed or 45 feet, and said another part it would be the best situation for of the plan stated that only one the clinic, the neighborhood and story would be allowed. Mr. Salt Lake City. He said the plan Parker explained that the clinic listed two alternatives in order would be allowed 45 feet as a to maintain options for the conditional use. He said because property owner who presently owned this was a conditional use, it was a home on Baddley Place. appropriate to put additional requirements or limitations on the Councilmember Kirk asked if height in order to maintain the the Planning Commission voted residential integrity of the area. unanimously to approve the plan. Bill Wright, deputy planning He said the existing facili- director, said one member ab- ty was 71, 000 square feet and the stained from voting based on a expansion potential provided an conflict of interest, two members additional 53, 000 square feet. He voted against the plan because of explained that the clinic proposed the Baddley Place issue, and the the following expansion: 14, 000 four remaining members voted in square feet to their existing favor of the plan. He said if the facility, 27, 000 square feet to Council supported an option on the south and 12,000 square feet Baddley Place, it might benefit on the 400 South frontage. He everyone to indicate that option said if the clinic was allowed to in a motion. He said the closure proceed as they planned, they of Baddley Place, with the issue would effectively double the scale of the Phillips property resolved, of the building on the block. was an appropriate solution for Limiting building to one level the block. above grade would increase the scale of buildings by only 50%. Councilmember Whitehead asked how many existing parking stalls Councilmember Horrocks re- were on Baddley Place. Mr. ferred to the corner which was Parker said he thought there were zoned "C-1" and said the clinic approximately 60 or 65. Mr. was not the landlord, so if they Whitehead asked if the clinic did expand they would have to would have enough parking if purchase two pieces of property. Baddley Place were not used. Mr. Mr. Parker said that was correct Wright said the appropriate and he reiterated that the master number of parking stalls could be 90-52 PROCEPINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 supplied in the parking structure could expand under the master on 400 South which would allow plan. Mr. Parker said the exist- 1000 East to be returned to a ing facility could be expanded by residential use. Mr. Wright said 14,000 square feet to the north- if two large buildings were con- west and northeast. The 27, 000 structed, parking would have to square-foot expansion would be a be accommodated in an underground two-level addition on the new structure on the interior of the building to the south plus a block. walkway. They could possibly expand on the 400 South frontage Mr. Whitehead referred to the by approximately 12,000 square 45 foot maximum height and asked feet. This would total 53,000 if the clinic could build a two- square feet of expansion potential story building on top of the under the proposed master plan and parking structure. Mr. Wright present conditions. said the planning staff believed the best way to balance the clinic Tony Reiter, Chair of the construction on the south end of East Central Community Council, the block was to keep the scale of said the two issues for the East new construction consistent with Central Community Council were the block, including the residen- traffic and preservation or loss tial structures. of housing stock. He said there was constant pressure on the Councilmember Hardman said neighborhood from commercial the only building space where the development on 400 South along 900 clinic could expand was zoned "R- East, on 900 South along 1300 7" and the expansion would be as a East, and along the east side of conditional use. He said since 700 East. He said traffic tray- the parking structure would be eled through their neighborhood to built on a portion of the block the University of Utah, University zoned "R-6" , additional construc- Hospital, Holy Cross Hospital, tion on the top of the parking Salt Lake Clinic and many other would not be allowed. medical offices. Mr. Parker confirmed that the He said in the last year the "R-6" zoning would control the use neighborhood had lost 240 dwelling of the property on 400 South. He units. He added that if they were said the clinic could not expand going to maintain a strong resi- their offices on 400 South without dential component with a popula- changing the zoning to at least an tion large enough to keep schools "R-7" zone. He said with the open, they needed to keep housing expansion proposed by the clinic, intact. He explained that the parking would increase from 357 to community council had been working 667 and the vehicle trips per day with the clinic since 1988 regard- to the clinic would increase from ing their expansion. He said 1, 600 to 3, 200. Councilmember after several meetings between a Pace suggested that the building neighborhood subcommittee and the height would also be limited by clinic, they were unable to agree the cost of providing additional on the type of development that parking. would be suitable to both the clinic and the neighborhood. Councilmember Hardman asked Mr. Parker to specify the total square footage that the clinic 90-53 PROCEIPINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 He said that throughout the which they owned along this area negotiation process the subcommit- and pledged to further divest as tee contacted clinic neighbors it became possible. who preferred limited or no expan- sion. He referred to the 1985 He said the clinic disagreed expansion plans which had called with three areas of the proposed for a 10,000 square foot surgical master plan. First, he said they center, and said they supported felt it was not in the best this original plan. He said the interest of the Salt Lake Clinic clinic' s current plan called for a nor Salt Lake City to mandate the 13,000 square foot expansion to restoration of Baddley Place to the present facility with future residential use. He said they expansion southward which would be proposed deleting any mention of limited to two levels of approxi- Baddley Place from the master plan mately 27,000 square feet. in favor of alternative solutions. He said they accepted and Second, he said they under- supported the master plan even stood that a master plan should though the compromised square outline general principles. He footage was closer to the clinic' s said they had not requested a position than the neighborhood' s. building to the south of their He said they thought it was impor- existing facility nor did they tant to have a master plan in have plans for a specific building place so everyone would know the in that location at this time. He direction and extent of expansion said they thought it was inappro- on the block. Also that the priate for the master plan to expansion would be of a scale address size limitations for a which would not discourage future nonexistent building. He said home buyers from considering this they proposed deleting these neighborhood. He said the message specifics from the general scheme needed to be that this was a of the plan. He said if a build- neighborhood clinic and not a ing was proposed on this site in clinic neighborhood. the future, they would expect it to comply with all building and He said another issue of zoning requirements at that time. great importance was the return of viable housing to 1000 East and Third, he quoted the state- they supported the master plan' s ment in paragraph three on page requirements. He said they pre- seven, "Indeed, to more fully ferred moving the two houses from serve area residents the Salt Lake 400 South to 1000 East. Clinic is proposing to expand its facility to approximately 133, 000 Dr. Price, Salt Lake Clinic, square feet on a 5.0 acre site. " supported the concept of master He said this was an incorrect planning in Salt Lake City and statement and asked that it be supported the need for a master deleted. plan on the block in question. Specifically in regard to the Councilmember Hardman asked proposed master plan for their Dr. Price if the clinic had satel- block, he said the clinic support- lite offices. Dr. Price said ed maintaining the residential they had offices at Foothill character of 300 South and return- Village and on 3300 South and ing 1000 East to residential use. Highland Drive, as well as in He said they had divested property Sandy, Draper, Taylorsville, and 90-54 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 Rose Park. Mr. Hardman asked if Councilmember Pace said she these locations were comparable in understood that master plans were size to the Salt Lake Clinic. Dr. designed to consider a whole plan Price said the Sandy facility was and not one property owner. She larger than the other satellite said to delay master planning clinics and the others were small, until the clinic decided future primary care general medical expansion plans was contrary to clinics with only one or two the concept. Dr. Price reiterated physicians. that there were already limita- tions imposed because of the Councilmember Hardman asked clinic's location and current if some of the proposed expansion zoning requirements. could occur at the satellite clinics. Dr. Price said some Councilmember Kirk said it expansion could occur at the other seemed that the only area of locations, but the mission of the disagreement was the building main Salt Lake Clinic, which was height since the Baddley Place tertiary care for complicated issue could be resolved with cases, could only be met in one alternative language. She asked facility where specialists could Dr. Price if he would be satisfied confer about complex medical if the height restriction was issues. He said this was differ- deleted from recommendation D. Dr. ent from primary medical care and Price said that was correct and said they couldn' t deliver complex reiterated that the statement on medical care if they were frag- page seven was incorrect since the mented. clinic had not applied for 133, 000 square feet of total space. He Councilmember Hardman asked said applying restrictions to a if there were plans to expand the building which the clinic had not satellite sites. Dr. Price said proposed, seemed unwarranted. there were plans for expansion as the need arose and demands in Councilmember Godfrey asked those areas increased. for clarification regarding the 133,000 square feet. Mr. Wright Councilmember Godfrey said said the clinic's original appli- Dr. Price supported the concept of cation submitted under the condi- master planning but was uncomfort- tional use process requested a able with a size limitation on four-story surgical center south future building. He suggested of the existing structure. He that such limitations would help said the reason for the master the clinic with future expansion planning process was because of plans. Dr. Price said there were the number of iterations that the already limitations because of clinic' s request went through. He parking requirements and the 45 said there were many different foot height restriction. He also expectations and a master plan for said the clinic had agreed in the block was the best way to principle to stay off 300 South balance all the issues. and 1000 East. He added that the commercial property on the corner He said the key was to make of 400 South and 900 East was an appropriate public policy under a 20 year lease and was not statement to the Salt Lake Clinic available for purchase by the Salt about their expansion and to the Lake Clinic. owners of residential property about their investments. He said 90-55 PROCEEINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 the plan was fair to both the Cindy Cromer, 816 East First neighborhood and the clinic and South, supported the master plan. set good policy. She said in 1985 she represented the neighborhood in an agreement Councilmember Godfrey asked with the Salt Lake Clinic regard- if the Planning Commission could ing its future expansion. The automatically allow a four-story agreement was for a one-story, building if the Council removed 10, 500 square foot surgical center recommendation D. Mr. Wright and that was all the expansion the said the clinic was a conditional clinic wanted. She said the use and had no rights in the "R-7" neighborhood didn't want any more zone in terms of scale, mass, expansion but they compromised so square footage, and height. He their downzoning petition could said limitations could be applied proceed. to scale, square footage, and height since this was a condi- She said four years later the tional use. clinic renewed its expansion plans but this time to ultimately double He said the Planning Commis- the size of the facility. She sion could address this issue said the residents in the East without a policy direction, but it Central Neighborhood had developed was better to have a policy direc- solutions to tough land use prob- tion in the plan as a clear signal lems with other businesses and it to the neighborhood and clinic was not because of the lack of about the parameters against which good ideas that they had failed to expansion would be judged. He reach an agreement with Salt Lake recommended that the Council keep Clinic. She supported the master a square footage requirement in plan so property owners could the plan since it sent a clearer improve their homes with confi- signal. He suggested they could dence. change the language to approximate the square footage if that was Councilmember Hardman said more desirable. He said they part of the 1985 agreement was to wanted to define the intensity of allow the clinic to build a one- expansion. story surgical center in return for an "R-7" zone. He asked what Councilmember Hale said the the previous zoning had been. Ms. clinic was not asking to expand Cromer said it had been zoned "R- northward and at this time was not 6" . Mr. Hardman reaffirmed that asking to expand to the south. He the neighborhood allowed the said he thought expansion hinged clinic to increase the zoning on upon the number of parking stalls the current site from "R-6" to "R- and said traffic was regulated by 7" in return for a 10, 500 foot the appointments. surgical center. He asked Ms. Cromer if she thought the neigh- Councilmember Kirk suggested borhood made a significant compro- that recommendation D could be mise at that time. She said they restated to allow expansion based did and they wouldn't have made on what could be accommodated by that compromise except that the parking on the block. Mr. Parker city told them the downzoning said with that wording they would petition would not proceed until then have to discuss limiting they reached an agreement with the parking. Salt Lake Clinic. 90-56 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 Allen Cole, 225 Iowa Street, been frustrating and difficult for expressed two major concerns. the Salt Lake Clinic as well as First, he said traffic on 900 the neighborhood. He said he East was already busy. He said thought they could live with the the surgical center which they master plan but appealed to the approved in 1985 was low impact Council to generate a process with only a few patients a day. whereby business and residential He said general purpose office needs could be met and negotiated space could generate many more equally. patients. Second, he said on 300 South 1000 East the Salt Lake Councilmember Godfrey asked Clinic had purchased properties on Dr. Cannon if he supported the those streets and let them deteri- master plan. Dr. Cannon said he orate. In regards to Salt Lake supported it with the removal of Clinic divesting the property, he the Baddley Place issue. He also said they had sold it IHC. He said he received the master plan said residents couldn' t feel good on January 2 to be discussed about investing in their property before the Planning Commission on under those circumstances and January 4. He said no one had hadn't felt good faith during the discussed this master plan with negotiations with Salt Lake Clin- the clinic. ic. Councilmember Kirk asked Dr. Theresa Piele, 363 South 1000 Cannon if he agreed with the East, said she was excited that concept of the height limitation. families were starting to move Dr. Cannon said in his opinion he into the neighborhood. She said thought the construction of a when homes were demolished the second building would fit better area lost families which caused if it were two levels with parking the elementary school to fall underground. below the 70% mandated enrollment. In regards to the height issue she Councilmember Hale asked if said there wasn't any transition the surgical center requested in because the clinic was out of 1985 was no longer needed. Dr. character and she said the neigh- Cannon said the original 1985 borhood had tried to work with the petition did not materialize. He clinic in good faith. expressed his opinion that at this time their needs could be met with Richard Cannon, Salt Lake their current petition which Clinic physician, said the clinic, requested expansion to the exist- in good faith, had spent ample ing facility. money in redesigning the block to meet the intensity criteria which Stephanie Harpst, community the city had given to them. He development planner for Salt Lake said they were not interested in City, said the East Central Commu- having their clinic in a slum and nity Council asked her to convey a were interested in a program that point about the impact that resi- would effectively put money into dential components made on future the restoration of decent housing. federal funding. She said the residential component related to He said the 1985 agreement the city' s population, and the addressed the needs at that time population which would be ascer- and in no way implicated future tained by the 1990 census would needs. He said the process had affect the community development 90-57 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 block grant funding level the city feet of landscape set back area would receive. with a masonry decorative screen- ing wall between the residential She said they had been re- properties on 1000 East and the ceiving around $4 million for the clinic parking. last 10 years but the adjusted population estimates for the last Nancy Saxton, 164 South 900 few years had gone down. She said East, said that according to house CDBG was based on a formula relat- movers, both properties on 400 ed to number and condition of South could be moved to 1000 East housing units, income of people, and Mr. Phillips ' property could minority population, and popula- also be moved. She then referred tion of the city. She said as the to a drawing of a 16-block city population dropped it was radius which showed the number of possible that Salt Lake City would medical facilities in the area. lose CDBG funding. She said there were several with space available to lease and two She also said a drop in were for sale. She said it was population would affect sales tax interesting that a conditional use distribution and class "C" gas property could expand when there tax. She said last fall the city were other facilities available in lost $100,000 in class "C" gas tax the area. because of a downward adjustment in population. She said the basis She said she had worked in for CDBG planning was vital neigh- the medical profession for 17 borhoods and a loss in population years and said it was not neces- would also affect Title 20 (social sary to have all services under services block grant) and communi- one roof. She said a building 1/2 ty services block grant. block from the Salt Lake Clinic was for rent which could house Robert Arbogast, 970 East 300 their eye clinic. She said it South, said this was a viable wasn't necessary for an eye clinic community and residential area. to be adjacent to other medical He expressed his concern about services. She said some medical increased traffic in the neighbor- services could be separate. hood. She reiterated that a condi- Jerry Miller, 322 South 1000 tional use did not guarantee the East, supported the master plan. clinic a right to build a four- He said he had purchased his story building which would be out property from IHC and the other of character. She said the neigh- two homes to the north had also borhood was viable and when the been purchased. He expressed his clinic divested, the houses sold concern with the set back require- quickly. She said major renova- ment behind his property and said tion and remodeling was taking he would prefer to have 15 or 20 place and old homes in this area feet and would prefer a solid wall were selling for between $70, 000 rather than a chainlink fence. and $90,000. Councilmember Pace asked if Ray Phillips, 954 Baddley the set back requirement could be Place, supported the master plan negotiated. Mr. Parker said it and said this was the first plan could but as established by the neighborhood had seen. He ordinance the requirement was 10 opposed Dr. Price' s statement 90-58 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 regarding the mandate on Baddley He said the neighborhood didn't Place. He said the Salt Lake want any growth but had compro- Clinic had made expansion requests mised from the beginning. He since the 1960s and traffic had supported the plan because it increased from 10, 000 cars per would define the boundaries and month to their current request limits. which would handle 3, 200 cars per day. He said his home on Baddley Councilmember Pace said that Place was not for sale although he Sara Hunt, 225 South Iowa Street, had met with Dr. Price about a didn't wish to speak but supported proposal for a property trade and the master plan. he was considering this option. Nedea Blumenthal, 326 South Councilmember Godfrey asked 1000 East, said her property was Mr. Phillips if Dr. Price's offer surrounded by the Salt Lake Clinic was a suggestion or a firm offer. parking lot. She supported the Mr. Phillips said Dr. Price master plan. offered a proposal and then asked him if he would be interested. Virginia Reiter, 842 East Mr. Phillips said he was checking 500 South, said Neighborhood into all the ramifications. Housing Services had indicated their interest in being involved Councilmember Godfrey asked with upgrading the houses in this Mr. Phillips when he would have a area. firm offer. Mr. Phillips said he was anxious to see what action the Robert Smith, Salt Lake Council would take regarding the Clinic, supported the master plan master plan. Mr. Parker said they with two objections: The Baddley could include either option for Place issue and the concept of Baddley Place in the master plan specifying a square footage limi- based on the disposition of the tation on building. He said he Phillips property. thought the issues should be what the building would be used for an Councilmember Pace asked how it would affect the neighbor- Roger Cutler, city attorney, if hood. In regards to Baddley the Council could make a master Place, he said there didn' t appear plan contingent upon a two-party to be a lot of latitude for com- buy/sell agreement. She didn't promise. He said if they restored want to give leverage to either Baddley Place to residential then party. Mr. Cutler said that a they would have to provide under- master plan was a planning docu- ground parking, the construction ment and the Council's policy of which would disrupt their objective could be met in several operation. He asked that the alternative ways depending on the Baddley Place language be flexi- wording. ble. Jan Bartlett, 164 South 900 Councilmember Whitehead said East, said the Salt Lake Clinic until there was a master plan doctors met with the residents in outlining expansion in this neigh- December of 1988 with a specific borhood, the clinic and the resi- plan. He said since then the plan dents would continue to battle had changed several times. He about this issue. He said he said his primary concern was not thought it would be better for the design but the traffic increase. clinic, the neighborhood and the 90-59 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 city to have guidelines regarding Place be closed and sold to the expansion in this area so everyone clinic and that the 10th East understood what to expect. Mr. properties be returned to residen- Smith said if there was a ceiling tial uses. " on their expansion and the clinic needed to expand more, then at Councilmember Hale wanted to some point they would have to further amend the master plan by relocate. He suggested allowing striking the following wording on for enough flexibility. page 4, last sentence: "and Badd- ley Place should be reestablished Councilmember Whitehead said as a residential enclave. " at some point the clinic may need the entire block which wasn't what Councilmember Hardman said the neighborhood wanted. He said Mr. Hale' s amendment would elimi- the purpose of the master plan was nate an option whereas his motion to specify how much expansion would provide two options. He could occur at this location and said he thought if the Council at that point the clinic would deleted the sentence on page 4, have to expand at a different they would have to delete recom- location. Mr. Smith indicated mendation E. that they were willing to live with the Council ' s decision wheth- Councilmember Pace said if er or not they thought the deci- the property exchange between the sion was based on correct crite- clinic and Mr. Phillips occurred, ria. then Baddley Place would not be a residential enclave. She suggest- Ms. Saxton said the neigh- ed at that point the language borhood and community council could changed. supported the master plan and encouraged the Council to make a Mr. Parker suggested that the decision. She said businesses Council change the word "and" to like the Salt Lake Clinic needed "or" so the sentence would read, to consider expanding into commer- "300 South and 1000 East streets cial property. She said none of should be exclusively residential their expansion had ever been into or Baddley Place should be rees- commercial property and they had tablished as a residential en- allowed commercial options to pass clave. " them by. She said they didn't look at expensive commercial The Council accepted the property but looked at cheap wording change from "and" to "or" . residential property. She said the neighborhood needed a firm Councilmember Hale referred statement for the Salt Lake Clinic to page 9, recommendation D and as well as other commercial condi- moved to delete this paragraph. tional uses that they must limit Mr. Hale said the clinic would growth in residential areas. have to go before the Board of Adjustment and Planning Commission Councilmember Hardman moved to get a permit so the square to adopt the ordinance approving footage issue could be negotiated the Block 42B Master Plan with the at that point. following addition as part of recommendation E (page 9 ) : "In the Councilmember Whitehead said event the Phillips' property is deleting this paragraph would sold to the clinic, that Baddley cause a conflict between the 90-60 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 neighborhood and the clinic. He piece of equipment may need a lot suggested that rather than delete of space but would have a low the entire paragraph, the Council intensity of use. She asked if delete the word "new" . He said the use of the structure would be the paragraph was not specific taken into consideration in re- about construction to the existing gards to the parking requirements. building; it only addressed new construction. Mr. Parker said one parking space was required for every 200 Councilmember Kirk said she square feet of expansion. Mrs. talked with people in the neigh- Pace reiterated that no one knew borhood and it appeared that the what future technology would bring neighborhood and clinic had and she wondered if the plan was negotiated to a point of impasse. flexible enough. Mr. Parker said She agreed with Councilmember they may have to go back to the Whitehead that it was time to make Planning Commission and the Board a decision. of Adjustment but staff believed they had identified the maximum Councilmember Whitehead said use the clinic could achieve based the clinic didn't know what their on doctors examination rooms. He future expansion would be. He added that they tried to achieve said if the Council left it open a balance between the neighbor- the issue would be before them hood' s desires as well as the again in a few years. He reiter- expansion potential of the clinic. ated that establishing a direction would be better for the clinic and Councilmember Kirk asked if the neighborhood. He said he the clinic would get 53,000 square thought the Council needed to feet with an addition to the restrict the amount of expansion present building plus the con- in this area. struction of a two-level building. Mr. Parker said the clinic would Councilmember Pace said she get 41,000 square feet. He said didn' t know if the wording in the master plan supported an recommendation D was appropriate additional facility on 400 South and asked if this would allow for of approximately 12, 000, which negotiation. Mr. Parker said the would total 53, 000 square feet. wording was "approximately 27,000 square feet" , which was based on Mrs. Kirk asked how much the design from the clinic' s square footage a four-story build- architect. He said staff estimat- ing, as originally proposed, would ed that 27, 000 square feet would allow the clinic. Mr. Parker said be the potential in a two-level that would give them 48, 000 square structure. He said the plan was feet. Mrs. Kirk pointed out that flexible if they limited the the clinic was actually getting building to one level above grade. more square footage potential under the master plan. Mr. Parker Councilmember Pace said the said this was correct because the Salt Lake Clinic' s needs had master plan focused expansion changed in the last 5 years. She toward 400 South whereas the said given the rapid rate of clinic was going to use that area change in this industry, it was as surface parking. Mr. Parker hard to guess what the technologi- also said the trade off was to cal advances would be in the next maintain the residential character 5 years. She said perhaps one on 1000 East and 300 South. 90-61 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIT , UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 Councilmember Hardman opposed asked if the clinic was planning Mr. Hale' s motion. He said the to expand this building. Mr. crux of the master plan hinged on Parker said the addition would be limiting the growth of the clinic, constructed outward from the Without limitations, the clinic existing roof line. could expand to the maximum al- lowed under the "R-7" zone. He Councilmember Hardman said suggested the only way to address the Planning Commission had ap- the limitation issue was to ad- proved the clinic' s petition for dress square footage or parking. this addition and he asked if that He said the 27, 000 square-foot was grandfathered. Mr. Parker requirement only referred to said the approval of the clinic' s adding a building to the south; conditional use was in harmony they could actually expand on the with the direction of the master site to 41,000 square feet and plan. He said their request had expansion beyond that would re- to go before the Board of Adjust- quire a zoning change. He said he ment, which actually approved the thought 41,000 square feet was a expansion of the building in an reasonable compromise between what "R-7" zone. He said the Planning the neighborhood wanted and what Commission dealt with the parking the clinic wanted. in a residential zone. Councilmember Whitehead Councilmember Whitehead said referenced the height and scale he didn't want to restrict their under Built Form on page 4. He addition to the south but wanted said this referred to a maximum the limitation to apply to future height of 45 feet or four stories, expansion. He said the only place they could build a structure that size was on Councilmember Pace asked what the corner of 400 South and 900 could be constructed that would be East and asked if this would cause 45 feet. Mr. Parker said con- an imbalance with the neighbor- struction on the northwest corner hood. He asked if the Council could be 45 feet, which would should restrict that corner now. allow for apartment buildings. Mr. Parker said it was restricted by the present zoning which was After a vote on Councilmember "C-1" . Hale' s motion, Councilmember Hardman restated his motion which Mr. Whitehead asked why the was to adopt the ordinance approv- master plan referenced 45 feet. ing the master plan with an amend- Mr. Parker said a 45-foot building ment to recommendation E regarding could be constructed directly the closure of Baddley Place. south of the existing building. Councilmember Whitehead suggested In reference to closing limiting construction to two Baddley Place, Councilmember Pace stories or 25 feet. asked if the property should be vacated. Councilmember Godfrey Councilmember Pace asked if suggested stating that Baddley expanding the existing building Place would be closed or vacated. would exceed the 25-foot limit. Mr. Parker said the existing Mr. Wright said there would facility approached 45 feet, which be two portions of Baddley Place was allowed as a conditional use if it were closed. The interior in the "R-7" zone. Mrs. Pace portion adjacent to the clinic, 90-62 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1990 and the east portion which would Phillips sold his property. He be vacated or closed and hopefully said he believed they were not returned to the residential prop- putting Mr. Phillips or the clinic erties on 1000 East. He said the in a more powerful position but city could keep the property were acknowledging alternatives. until all private transactions had (T 90-4) occurred at which time the city could dispose of Baddley Place. The meeting adjourned at 9: 10 Councilmember Hardman said he p.m. accepted the wording change on page 4 from "and" to "or" as part of his motion. NIA"' COUNCIL CHAIR Councilmember Whitehead asked about amending recommendation D. Councilmember Hardman suggested -� changing the word "building" to C TY RE RDER CHIEF DEPUTY "construction" so it would read, "Any new construction. . . " He said this would include construction to the existing facility as well as construction apart and separate from that building to the south. In regards to recommendation E, Councilmember Kirk asked if Baddley Place would be restored to a residential use in the event that Mr. Phillips decided to keep his property. She expressed con- cern that the Council would put Mr. Phillips in a powerful posi- tion. Mr. Wright said it was in the best interest of Salt Lake City to deal with Baddley Place. In reference to the clinic's expan- sion petition, he said the Plan- ning Commission required that the Baddley Place property currently used for parking be landscaped. He said the Planning Commission also wanted to ensure that houses would be constructed on this site. He said the home east of the Phillips' property would also need to be landscaped since the exist- ing parking could not be accessed. Mr. Wright said there would be an immediate change of use regardless of whether or not Mr. 90-63 The Salt Lake Clinic supports the concept of Master Planning in Salt Lake City. We further support the need for the development of a master plan for the block on which the Clinic owns property. Specifically in regard to the proposed master plan for our block, the Salt Lake Clinic supports maintaining the residential character of 3rd South. We also support the eventual return of 10th East to residential use. We have already demonstrated our intent to move in this direction by divesting property we owned along this area, and pledge to further divest as it becomes possible. The Salt Lake Clinic has three areas of disagreement with the proposed master plan. 1. We feel it is not in the best interest of the Salt Lake Clinic nor of Salt Lake City to mandate the restoration of Baddley Place to residential use. We would propose deleting any mention of Baddley Place from the currently proposed master plan. 2. It is our understanding that a master plan should outline general principles. We have not requested a building to be built south of the existing Clinic building at this time, nor do we have plans for a specific building in that locations at this time. We, therefore, feel it is inappropriate for the proposed master plan to address any size limitations for a building at this time. We propose deleting these specifics from the general scheme of a master plan. If a building should be proposed at this site in the future, we would expect it to comply with all building and zoning requirements in existence at that time. 3 . The statement in paragraph 3 , page 7, "Indeed, to more fully serve area residents the Salt Lake Clinic is proposing to expand its facility to approximately 133 ,000 square feet on a 5.0 acre site. " is an incorrect statement and should be deleted. BUILDING AUTHORITY LEASE REVENUE BONDS �' Another long-term financing method is issuance of State or Municipal Building Authority lease revenue bonds. A Building Authority is a non-profit corporation incorporated under "TB state law. As a non-profit corporation, the Building Authority has the power to issue debt and to hold property. The Building Authority is governed by a board of directors which is generally comprised of the legislative body of the state or municipality and possibly q other officials. Once created, the Building Authority is an ongoing entity which can be used for additional financings in the future. In the lease revenue bonding process, the Building Authority issues bonds in order to raise the needed funds for construction of the project. At the same time, the governmental entity enters into a lease purchase agreement with the Building Authority. This agreement `r' is an annually renewable lease agreement for the term of the bonds. In order for the _ governmental entity to renew the lease and continue use of the facility, it must annually appropriate for the lease payments. In the event of nonappropriation, the lease is -`n cancelled and the governmental entity has no further liability under the lease. Because �_ the lease is annually renewable, it is a short-term obligation and does not fit the legal ',.1 description of debt. For this reason, no bond election is necessary. As a practical matter, the governmental entity will not fail to appropriate for an essential purpose facility such •- as a jail or school, and annual appropriations will be made through the term of the lease la when title to the property will transfer to the governmental entity for a nominal amount. In return for the lease purchase agreement, the governmental entity will obtain a -4 construction agreement from the Building Authority directing the governmental entity to act as its agent in constructing the project. Therefore, even though the Building Authority • actually owns the facility, the governmental entity will be responsible to select contractors and direct construction of the project. Proceeds from the lease revenue bonds will be deposited with a Trustee who will be responsible to pay construction costs as incurred by the governmental entity. In addition to holding bond proceeds, the Trustee is assigned ` title to the property from the Building Authority including the right to receive from the lessee lease payments. As lease payments are made, the Trustee has the responsibility to make debt service payments to bondholders. In a bond issue of this type, it is often cost effective to obtain bond insurance. When insurance is obtained, the issue automatically receives a triple A rating from the rating agencies which lowers the effective borrowing costs. Bond insurance protects the 1.-"` bondholder in event of default by the issuer which results in lower risk to the investor and a lower coupon on the bonds. 1 1 `s D-5 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER ROOM 315 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING 451 SOUTH STATE STREET Tuesday, February 20, 1990 6:00 p.m. A. BRIEFING SESSION: 5:00 - 5:55 p.m. , Room 325 City and County Building, 451 South State. 1 . Report of the Executive Director. B. OPENING CEREMONIES: 1 . Invocation. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Approval of the Minutes. 4. The Council and Mayor will consider a resolution for the Utah Air National Guard. C. COMMENTS: 1 . Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. 2. Citizen Comments to the Council. D. CONSENT: 1 . Interlocal Agreement Re: Utah State Driver License Division Consider adopting a resolution authorizing the execution of an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the Utah Department of Public Safety Driver License Division allowing the City Fire Department to conduct Commercial Driver License (CDL) skill tests. (C 90-83) Staff recommendation: Adopt. 2. Resolution: 14th - 17th Year Community Development Plan Set date to hold a public hearing on March 13, 1990 at 7:00 p.m. , to receive public comment and consider adopting a resolution approving the 1988-1992 Community Development Plan. (T 90-8) Staff recommendation: Set date. 3. HUD Hearing: Community Development Housing Needs Set date to hold a public hearing on March 13, 1990 at 7: 10 p.m. , to receive public comment concerning general housing and community development needs which can be addressed by Community Development Block Grant funds. (T 90-8) Staff recommendation: Set date. 4. Ratification of Financial Audit Firm Selection Consider adopting a motion ratifying the selection of Coopers and Lybrand as the City's financial audit firm for Fiscal Years 1990-91 through 1992-93. (C 90-84) Staff recommendation: Adopt. E. NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS: 1 . Resolution: John Schaar Petition # 400-582 Re: Annexation Consider adopting a resolution accepting Annexation Petition #400-582-87 as amended, for purposes of City Council review, and consider setting a date to hold a public hearing on March 20, 1990 at 6:30 p.m. for said petition. (P 90-45) Staff recommendation: Suspend and adopt, and set date. 2. Grant Agreement Re: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Consider adopting a resolution authorizing the execution of a Grant Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban DevelopmentS for an E�ncyShelter Grant. (T 90-7) rioLJ app1,b • l.urr► Staff recommendation: Suspend and adopt. 3. Ordinance: Street Name Fee Changes Set date to hold a public hearing on March 13, 1990 at 6:30 p.m. , to receive public comment and consider adopting an ordinance relating to Street Name Change Fees. (0 90-7) Staff recommendation: Set date. 4. Rezoning: 409, 411 and 429 South 800 East Set date to hold a public hearing on March 13, 1990 at 6:50 p.m. , to receive public comment and consider adopting an ordinance rezoning property located at 409, 411 and 429 South 800 East, and amending the East Central Neighborhood Plan, pursuant to a Planning Commission Initiative. (0 90-6) Staff recommendation: Set date. 5. Ordinance Amendment: Sexually Oriented Business Licensing Consider adopting an ordinance making technical amendments to Title 5, Chapter 61 of the Salt Lake City Code, regarding sexually oriented business licensing. (0 90-8) Staff recommendation: Suspend and adopt. F. UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS: 1 . Budget Amendment No. 5 — if IVallul cb quo qo PCA ( f '.� ,`) Set date to hold a public hearing on March 20, 1990 at 6:00 p.m. , to receive public comment and consider adopting an ordinance amending the Fiscal Year 1989-90 Budget. (B 89-5) Staff recommendation: Set date. 2. Resolution: Steiner Aquatic Center Project Bonds Consider convening as the Board of Trustees of the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, to adopt a resolution authorizing the issuance of not more than $2,000,000 Lease Revenue Bonds, (Steiner Aquatic Center Project) , Series 1990 A, (the "Bonds") , of said Authority, on behalf of Salt Lake City, fixing the maximum aggregate principal amount of the Bonds, the maximum number of years over which the Bonds may mature, the maximum interest rate which the Bonds may bear and the maximum discount from par at which the Bonds may be sold; providing for the publication of a Notice of Bonds to be issued with respect to the Bonds; selecting an underwriter for the Bonds and appointing Bond counsel for the Bonds; and providing for related matters. (Q 90-3) Staff recommendation: Convene and adopt. 3. Resolution: Steiner Aquatic Center Project Consider adopting a resolution of the Municipal Council of Salt Lake City, directing the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City to undertake a certain project relating to a recreation facility located at approximately 675 South Guardsman Way; approving the plans, specifications and estimate costs of such project to be financed with the proceeds of sale of certain Lease Revenue Bonds, (Steiner Aquatic Center Project) , Series 1990A, of said Municipal Building Authority; approving the selection of an underwriter and the appointment of bond counsel for the Bonds; and providing for related matters. (Q 90-3) Staff recommendation: Adopt. G. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (& 6 1171A) - (I' 1 . 6:20 p.m. (LQY11 UJ Ordinance: Block 42B Master Plan Receive public comment and consider adopting an ordinance approving the Block 42B Master Plan as a part of the East Central Neighborhood Plan. (T 90-4) Staff recommendation: Close hearing and adopt. H. ADJOURNMENT. . ** FINAL ACTION MAY BE TAKEN AND/OR ORDINANCES ADOPTED CONCERNING ANY ITEM ON THIS AGENDA D (1)(Y\ \r- r\.\ 1?\'-i _& \(\\\\\v'V-4), 6,cc— DATED: /&} /9 90 BY: CITY ECO STATE OF UTAH ) COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) ss. On the 16th day of February, 1990 I personally delivered a copy of the foregoing notice to the Mayor and City Council and posted copies of the same in conspicuous view, at the following times and locations within the City and County Building, 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah: 1 . At 5:00 p.m. in the City Recorder's Office, Room 415; and 2. At 5:00 p.m. in the Newsroom, Room 343. CIT RR�COR ii Subscribed and sworn to before me this 16th day of Februar , 1990. .40 Notary Public rest..`.'. • the 7 State of Utah r-..... My Commission Expires: Imaw I pubes `� et Rm 415 1 -• My UWi 84102 Est 1 .. Stets o/Utah APPROVAL: 0 , EXECUTiV/E DIRE OR PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met as the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, February 13, 1990, at 5:00 p.m. in Room 325, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Ronald Whitehead Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Don Hale Nancy Pace Council Chair Hardman presided at the meeting. The Council interviewed Linda Councilmembers to contact Sena- Peterson prior to consideration of tors. her appointment to the Golf Advi- sory Board. She indicated that Cindy Gust-Jenson, Council she had been asked by Executive Director, reviewed the Councilmember Godfrey to consider evening' s agenda, noting the the appointment. She said she addendum to the agenda for the played the city golf courses Charles Bennett resolution. The almost exclusively and did have Council decided to have some concerns. Councilmember Hale read the reso- lution. Councilmember Whitehead asked what concerns she had. Ms. Ms. Gust-Jenson reminded the Peterson said the fee increases Council of the Executive Session concerned her as well as the immediately following the regular condition of the greens. council session. Councilmember Kirk asked Ms. She said the Redevelopment Peterson if she was aware of the Agency had provided information controversy with the golf issues about the national NAHRO confer- and whether she would be prepared ence and that Councilmembers to receive complaints. Ms. should notify the RDA as soon as Peterson indicated that she did possible if they were going to not know what to expect from attend. Councilmember Godfrey said serving on this board but she the League meeting would be two or wanted the opportunity to have a three days following the Utah voice in what was being done with NAHRO conference. Ms. Gust-Jenson the city courses. indicated that she would obtain further information from the RDA Councilmember Godfrey briefed as to their agenda. the other members on a "fuel tax for roads" bill that passed the Ms. Gust-Jenson noted that House of Representatives. The the monthly Mayor-Council general bill was not expected to pass as discussion meeting was scheduled easily in the Senate. The state for Thursday, February 15th. The did not spend its general fund for meeting would be held at 4:00 p.m. roads. He asked that staff obtain in the Mayor' s Office. She asked information from Joe Anderson, that Councilmembers submit any public works director, on city agenda requests to her by 3:00 on costs for roads, and encouraged Wednesday in order to meet the posting requirement. 90-41 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 She mentioned that the annual SLACC neighborhood conference would be held on May 5th this year and that this conference had historically been well attended. The briefing session was adjourned. 90-42 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in Regular Session on Tuesday, February 13, 1990, at 6:00 p.m. in Room 315, City Council Chambers, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Ronald Whitehead Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Don Hale Nancy Pace Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Roger Cutler, City Attorney, Lynda Domino, Chief Deputy City Recorder, and Doc Kivett, Deputy Recorder, were present. Council Chair Hardman presided at and conducted the meeting. OPENING CEREMONIES CONSENT AGENDA #1. The invocation was given Councilmember Godfrey moved by Police Chaplain Herbert Lilly. and Councilmember Whitehead sec- onded to approve the consent #2. The Council led the agenda, which motion carried, all Pledge of Allegiance. members voted aye. #3. Councilmember Godfrey #1. RE: Approving the ap- moved and Councilmember Kirk pointment of Curley C. Jones to seconded to approve the minutes of the Community Development Advisory the Salt Lake City Council for the Committee. regular meeting held Tuesday, (I 90-2) February 6, 1990, which motion carried, all members voted aye. #2. RE: Approving the ap- (M 90-1 ) pointment of Linda Peterson to the Golf Advisory Board. #4. The Mayor and Council (I 90-5) presented a resolution recognizing Charles Bennett. Councilmember #3. RE: Adopting Resolution Hale said Mr. Bennett had made a 16 of 1990 authorizing the execu- great contribution to Sugar House, tion of an interlocal cooperation Salt Lake City, and the State of agreement between Salt Lake City Utah. He read the resolution Corporation and the Utah Depart- honoring Mr. Bennett for devoting ment of Transportation to relocate his life to serving his family, the city's water and sewer facili- church, students and the communi- ties, Project No. HES-018(23). ty, and for giving compassionate (C 90-54) and unselfish service. #4. RE: Adopting Resolution Councilmember Hale moved and 17 of 1990 authorizing the execu- Councilmember Godfrey seconded to tion of an interlocal cooperation adopt Resolution 18 of 1990, which agreement between Salt Lake City motion carried, all members voted Corporation and Utah State Bureau aye. of Criminal Identification to (R 90-1) define the responsibilities of the 90-43 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 city in accessing information He said the ordinance would provided by the Utah State Bureau require all connection fees for of Criminal Identification. the water service meters to be (C 90-55) prepaid by the developer prior to installing the watermain. This #5. RE: Setting a date to would insure that they would use hold a public hearing on March 13, water appropriately through 1990, at 6:40 p.m. to receive meters. He said there would also public comment and consider an be a $10.00 charge for water used ordinance adopting the Block 57 during construction. This nominal Master Plan. fee would provide between 12,000 (T 90-6) and 16,000 gallons of water and would reduce the problem of water PUBLIC HEARING theft and borrowing water meters. He said the ordinance would pro- #1. RE: A public hearing at vide the same requirements for 6: 20 p.m. to receive comment sewer. concerning an ordinance amending Sections 17. 16.300, 17. 16. 120, He asked the Council to make 17.48.050 and enacting a new a wording change on the first line Section 17. 16.345 of the Salt Lake on Page 3. He said they should City Code, relating to water and add the word "applicable" in the sewer main connections. sentence "All service connection fees" so that it would read "All ACTION: Councilmember applicable service connection Whitehead moved and Councilmember fees. " He said this change could Godfrey seconded to close the reduce a developer' s up-front cost public hearing, which motion by $1, 000. carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Whitehead asked Councilmember Kirk moved and if this ordinance would discourage Councilmember Whitehead seconded development of large subdivisions. to adopt Ordinance 8 of 1990, as Mr. Doxey said it shouldn't be- amended to add the word "applic- cause they could phase the costs able" in the first sentence at the by streets or cul-de-sacs. top of Page 3, which motion car- ried, all members voted aye. No one from the audience spoke. DISCUSSION: Tim Doxey, public (0 90-2) utilities department, said the need for this ordinance arose because contractors had laid The meeting adjourned at 6:30 pipelines at the wrong eleva- p.m. tions prior to installing improve- ments and infrastructure. He said the ordinance would allow sub- grading of a development prior to Council Chair installing pipelines and would require developers to submit a bond for work in Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County. He men- City Recorder tioned that the county was cooper- ative in this issue. 90-44 41)'s :G:.k:.l.e.:S.A.Ve.d .1. J-_2 i.0 .L ixj�.s.'..-k:1's'..c'S.T.`al'""-"7C,•"alr1?.,.1,''T �'.-.0-,:.. 'm•T'x.t3�2E.2:-_7FaLr 71'n --i.4:r1( to �I SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION �' 11 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE 1 CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR OF E! ti SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH l • r' 1 . WHEREASir , the Utah National Guard and its 109th Tactical Squadron are located within Salt Lake City, Utah, and are a vital part of the community; and xi WHEREAS, the 109th Squadron, Salt Lake City's own hometown Air Force, has been a ,i strong and dedicated contributor to the community; and ¢! • WHEREAS, the members of the 109th Tactical Control Squadron have been repeatedly 4! ,g. recognized for their volunteer work in the community and for serving their tI country; and :E .o WHEREAS, the 109th Squadron has a long and distinguished history of military ;e• service, culminating in 1988 with recognition as the best non-flying iv unit in the U.S. Air National Guard and in 1989 as a recipient of the ` - U.S. Air Force's Outstanding Unit Award for exceptionally meritorious y service; and j• 1 WHEREAS, the individual personnel of the 109th have been deployed to strengthen 11 our nation's defenses in such faraway places as Korea, England, Panama, ] Puerto Rico, Iceland, Bolivia, the Bahamas and Saudi Arabia. , .' fi. :p NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Salt Lake City Council and Mayor that we hereby 'Pi _ g recognize the extraordinary commitment to duty, country and community I displayed by the members of the 109th Tactical Control Squadron. i \ Pi I L? Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor Alan G. Hardman, Chair Pi ..s,...:...:..,-....:::......... ..-.:... . -. . Ronald J. Whitehead L. Wayne Horrocks -41 F K .e. Nancy K. Pace Tom Godfrey 9 5 • ,E. Roselyn N. Kirk Don C. Hale I ! Dated this 20th day of February, 1990. IP 1 - II y . A -: .;,! 16 I 4li j 4J FIRE DEPARTMENT PETER O. PEDERSON 315 EAST 200 SOUTH CHIEF OF FIRE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111 799-4101 TO: Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor FROM: Dennis M. Sargent, Fire Chief 0 SUBJECT: Request for Council Action, Interlocal Agreement DATE: February 6, 1990 1. Subject: Agreement with Utah State Driver License Division, authorizing Salt Lake City Fire Department to conduct Commercial Driver License (CDL) skill tests. 2. Recommendation: Recommend approval. 3. Funding: No funding is necessary. 4. Background and Discussion: This contract authorizes Salt Lake City Fire Department to administer the CDL skill test (road test) and issue Certificates of Driver Competency. The same CDL skill test, if taken at the Driver License Division, would cost the employee $50.00 and would be scheduled at a time and place convenient to the Driver License Division. Although drivers of Fire Department vehicles are exempt from the CDL law, we have made the policy decision to test our drivers to the same standard within the Department, even though the license itself is not required. To that end, we have had one Fire Department member trained to give the skill test and certified by the Driver License Division. The Fire Department meets the standard required by the Driver License Division. There is no cost to enter into this contract. This official stamp of approval from the Driver License Division will increase the legitimacy and flexibility of our intra-department driver training program. 5. Legislative Document: Resolution authorizing this interlocal agreement is attached. 6. Contact Person: George A. Sumner, Battalion Chief. 799-4211 7 . Submitted by: Dennis M. Sargent, Fire Chief. 799-4101 . . , . . - . JAN 3CONTRACT ROUTING FORM I 1990 MAYOR'S op.,ri,,F REQUESTING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION DATE Fire Department November 30, 1989 DEPARTMENTAL CONTACT PHONE Battalion Chief George Sumner 799-4211 NAME OF CONTRACTING PARTY Utah Department of Public Safety, Driver License Division SUBJECT JREF #(if applicable) Commerical Driver License Third Party Tester Yes No Number of Copies 2 Insurance Required X Expected Completion Insurance Attached Account # Eklanation 1 ( If required and not attached) s-W. g.17.7, -; i:-:,7-t COMMENTS JP --"' - - - -- H I. ---ibC;ElN/LL RECORDER DE(, 1 1 hi89 DEC i 1 1989 FINANCE DIVISION PITY REC©RfIF'' fa FINANCE APPROVAL Funds Signature Date Not Needed % r� Available Encumbered ATTORNEY APPROVED AS TO FO i &i/(4,/)AceirjA j a 1 , v/dliki COPS' DISTRIfUTION' Date To RESOLUTION NO. OF 1990 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND UTAH DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, DRIVER LICENSE DIVISION WHEREAS, Title 11 Chapter 13 of the Utah Code Annotated 1953 as amended allows public entities to enter into cooperative agreements to provide joint undertakings and services; and WHEREAS, the attached agreement has been prepared to accomplish said purposes; THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1 . That it does hereby approve the attached agreement generally described as follows: Agreement with the Utah Department of Public Safety whereby the State authorizes the Salt Lake City Fire Department to administer drivers license test and issue Certificates of Driver Competency. 2 . Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah is hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation and to act in accordance with its terms . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City this day of , 1990 . SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: T(.F^1M sat Office Date /' CITY RECORDER FMN:cc c DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY DRIVER LICENSE DIVISION IA : Phil Himmelberger,Bureau Chief Norman IL Bangerter • Driver Services Bureau Governor • D.Douglas Bodrero 4501 South 2700 West,3rd floor. Commissioner P.O.Box 30560 Brant Johnson Salt Lake City,Utah 84130-0660 Deputy Commissioner (801)965-4437 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UTAH DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, DRIVER LICENSE DIVISION AND A COMMERCIAL DRIVER LICENSE THIRD PARTY TESTER THIS AGREEMENT is made effective the day of , 19_ BY AND BETWEEN the [UTAH DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, DRIVER LICENSE DIVISION] AND Salt Lake City Corporation [THIRD PARTY TESTER] LOCATED AT 315 East 200 South, 7th Floor, Salt Lake City, UT 84111 [THIRD PARTY TESTER ADDRESS] This agreement authorizes the above named Third Party Tester to administer Commercial Driver License skills tests on behalf of the State. NOW THEREFORE, the Utah Department of Public Safety, Driver License Division and the Commercial Driver License Third Party Tester named above, in consideration of their mutual duties and responsibilities set forth herein, agree to the following: I. THE THIRD PARTY TESTER AGREES TO: A. Statutory Conform with all applicable statutes and regulations of the State of Utah, and the Federal Higway Administration. B. Requirements Document Abide by and conform with all requirements stated in the Commercial Driver Third Party Testing Rules Document (Administrative Rule R712-021) -Attachment A. C. Random Examination/Inspections/Audits Allow the FHWA or its representative and the State to - conduct random examinations, inspections and audits without prior notice during normal business hours. f D. On-Site Inspections Permit the State to conduct on-site inspections at least annually or more often when deemed necessary by the Division. E. Sample Tests Allow at least on an annual basis, State Driver License Division employees to take the tests actually administered by the third party as if the employees were test applicants, or allow the State to test a sample of drivers selected by the Division who were examined by the third party to compare pass/fail results. F. Third Party Tester Requirements Abide by and conform with requirements as stated in the Commercial Driver Third Party Rules Document, Section C, of Attachment A. G. Third Party Examiner Requirements Allow only those individuals who have been approved by the State based on the requirements as stated in the Commercial Driver Third Party Rules Document, Section G, of Attachment A, to administer commercial driver license skills tests. H. Proof of Testing Provide the driver applicant who passes the skills tests, documented proof so he/she can provide evidence to the Utah Driver License Division that he/she has successfully passed the driving tests administered by the third party. I. Additional Provisions Abide by and conform to all requirements as stated in Commercial Driver Third Party Testing Rules Document, Sections D (Inspections and Audit Process) , E (Skill Test Administration) , and I (Advertising) , of Attachment A. II. THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, DRIVER LICENSE DIVISION AGREES TO: A. Testing Permit the above named Third Party Tester to Administer Commercial Driver License skill tests as specified in this agreement and the attached Third Party Testing Rules Document, as part of this agreement. B. Acceptance Accept Certificates of Driver Competency issued by Third Party Testers as evidence the driver has successfully completed the third party skills tests. C. Administration and Enforcement Administer and enforce the provisions of the Third Party Testing Rules Document as part of this agreement. III. TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT This agreement reserves unto the State the right to take prompt and appropriate remedial action against the named Third Party Tester in the event the Third Party Tester fails to comply with the terms of this agreement or with those requirements stated in the Third Party Rules Document. IV. COMMUNICATIONS Notices and communications in writing required or desired to be given pursuant to this agreement shall be mailed to the following address: Driver License Division 4501 So. 2700 W. P.O. Box 30560 Salt Lake City, Utah 84130-0560 Attention: Randy Campbell V. ENTIRE AGREEMENT a This document and the Third Party Testing Rule Document (Attachment A) , constitutes the sole and entire agreement between the Utah Department of Public Safety, Driver License Division and the Third Party Tester relating to the authority to administer the Commercial Driver License Skills Tests. No other terms or conditions shall form a part hereof, and this agreement shall not be modified except by subsequent • agreement in writing and attached as an addendum, duly signed by the authorized representatives of both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement as of the date first written above. (THIRD PARTY TESTER OFFICIAL) BY: TNAMITLE: P `MT"MAYd EP1'ULBs CITY RECORDER (DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, DRIVER LICENSE D VA c:WI_ VAL BY: Not Need NAME: rt:rds Available TITLE: /�.- e �D 3,7 Contract A ATTORNEY APPROVAL tit, State of Utah DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY DRIVER LICENSE DIVISION Fred C.Schwendiman,Director Norman H.Bangerter Governor for department use only D.Douglas Bodrero 4501 Sown 2700 West.3ra Hoot Comrei.eioner 1 P 0 Box 30560 Brant Johnson San Lake Cry.Ulan 84130-0560 approved Deputy Commissioner .1 (801(965-4437 disapproved assigned number APPLICATION FOR THIRD PARTY TESTER expiration RETURN COMPLETE APPLICATION TO: DRIVER LICENSE DIVISION 4501 SO. 2700 W. P.O. BOX 30560 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84130-0560 ATTENTION: RANDY CAMPBELL PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT SECTION t GENERAL NAME OF THIRD PARTY TESTER Salt Lake City Fire Department ADDRESS (STREET, CITY, STATE, ZIP) MAILING ADDRESS (IF DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE) CONTACT PERSON George A. Sumner TELEPHONE NUMBER 799-4211 SECTION 2 TYPE OF TESTER APPLICATION IS BEING SUBMITTED BY (CHECK ONE) BUSINESS PERS O N PUBLIC SCHOOLS X DEPARTMENT OR AGENCY PRIVATE SCHOOL OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENT CDL 24 SECTION 3 TESTING INFORMATION 1. FOR WHAT CLASS OF LICENSE WILL YOU BE TESTING? CLASS A 0 CLASS B ® CLASS C EXPLAIN SPECIFICALLY WHAT TYPES OF VEHICLES Salt Lake City operates all classes of vehicles. 2. LIST THE ADDRESSES OF ALL DRIVING SKILL TESTING LOCATIONS. 1560 Industrial Road Salt Lake City, UT 84104 3. DO YOU HAVE A SKILLS TESTING PROGRAM THAT MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS AS REQUIRED IN 49 C.F.R. PART 383 OF THE FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY STANDARDS? ❑ YES ❑ NO ATTACH COPIES OF ALL ROAD TEST ROUTES THAT WILL BE USED WHEN TESTING DRIVERS. 4. DO YOU PRESENTLY HAVE A PERSON OR PERSONS WHO ARE QUALIFIED TO CONDUCT SKILL TESTS WHICH MEET THE CRITERIA IN UTAH ADMINISTRATIVE CODE R712-021. (SEE ATTACHED RULE) ❑ YES ❑ NO EXAMINER NAME DRIVER LICENSE NUMBER LOCATION OF TESTING Jeffery K. Forrey 3682089 1560 Industrial Road I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED HEREIN IS ACCURATE AND FURTHER AGREE THAT FALSIFICATION OF THIS APPLICATION MAY BE GROUNDS FOR CANCELLATION OF CERTIFICATION. SIGNATURE DATE CDL 24 i n /nn . 4\it\J � O O cy • z r N + lV' "b eA1,ivg,t),A • Are— 7:ts (1\ r-xiT R it7vo - 17r Z. 's---- I . r rt� - 4)00 S rR1Nlpdr OY . RT 74,PAJ - L- 1 - - - b - C d b / O . p • G7 �. -- G n f / Ii � —i n hL 3 S'c e S -7z G, C1 ) 1d4`( � 1 AY • ,- P - -- - - - . tf z ryh► •, �-�,u.S Vic, S `-s�..! . RrNrH �� {� ( I - - 1 2.4-3 ROSEMARY DAVIS SALTa �;vITY G;ORPO RATION; DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Capital Planning and Programming CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 418 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7902 February 12, 1990 TO: Alan G. Hardman, Chair, Salt Lake City Council RE: HOLDING REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARINGS ON GENERAL HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS AND THE 14TH - 17TH YEAR CDBG PLAN RECOMMENDATION: That you to set a HUD required public hearing on general community development and housing needs as well as a hearing on the 14th - 17th Year CDBG Plan, on February 20 for Tuesday, March, 13, 1990 . FUNDING: The City' s CDBG allocation for July 1, 1990 is expected to be $3, 867, 000 . DISCUSSION: A public hearing is required by HUD to obtain citizen input on general housing and community development needs that can be addressed by CDBG funds . Comments regarding the overall performance of the City' s CDBG program are also solicited at this time. The hearing is held so that citizens' and community organizations ' comments can be considered before final recommendations are made for annual CDBG funding. To inform the Council of projects you will hear about, a log of 16th Year CDBG requests is attached. Also, since 1979 the City has prepared short term CD plans to guide its CDBG planning. These plans assess current community conditions and delineate target areas in which CDBG funds will be concentrated. The fourth CDBG plan ( 1988-92 ) has recently been completed which also schedules the phasing into and out of current and proposed CDBG target neighborhoods . The Community Development Advisory Committee and the Planning Commission have reviewed the draft Four Year Community Development Plan and approved it along with its scheduling of target areas . According to City plan adoption procedures, this plan should be submitted to the Council for its review and adoption by resolution. This would occur after the Council holds a public hearing to obtain further citizen input. We are requesting that this hearing be held on the same night as the related HUD required CDBG hearing. ACTION REQUIRED: That on February 20 the City Council set the date for holding the required public hearings . City ordinance states that plan adoption hearings be advertised for 20 days, therefore, it must be advertised by February 22 for a March 13th hearing. LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENTS: The resolution adopting the 1988-1992 Community Development Plan and the draft plan are attached. CONTACT PERSON: Stephanie Harpst, Capital Planning at 535-7115 . Submitted by: Lee Kin 2/1/ 1 /3 Deputy Director, Community and Economic Development LK/SLH CDHearing2/90 RESOLUTION NO. OF 1990 (Adopting the 1988-1992 Community Development Plan) WHEREAS, the Capital Planning and Programming Division of Salt Lake City, Utah, after extensive review involving a wide range of public hearings, meetings with staff personnel, citizen groups and interested neighborhood residents, has prepared a document entitled "Community Development Plan 1988-1992. " That plan details the goals, objectives and policies of the City' s CDBG program for the fiscal years 1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-91 and 1991-92 corresponding to the 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th funding years of the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) CDBG program. The plan includes a targeting of eligible neighborhoods, the establishing of neighborhood strategies, and sets guidelines for the City's future community development efforts and programming of funds to implement these efforts; and WHEREAS, the City's Community Development Advisory Committee has reviewed and approved the said "Community Development Plan 1988-1992" including the , scheduling of target neighborhood areas therein; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission has reviewed and approved the said plan; and WHEREAS, a public hearing on- the advisability of adopting the said plan has been duly advertised and conducted before the City Council and the City Council has reviewed said Community w Development Plan 1988-1992 and concurs that its recommendations are valuable to guide the City in allocating CDBG resources to address the needs of the City' s communities and neighborhoods and to provide a better urban environment, and it is in the best interests of the City to endorse and adopt such plan as the legislative policy of this city together with the City' s Capital Improvement Program and other publicly and privately funded programs to augment the City' s conservation and revitalization efforts. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, that the document entitled "Community Development Plan 1988-1992, " is hereby officially adopted by this legislative body as a general guide and framework for the application and allocation of the Community Development Block Grant program for the 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th funding years of the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development CDBG program for Salt Lake City, Utah. A copy of said plan is incorporated by reference and three (3) copies of said plan shall be retained on file at the office of the City Recorder and shall be made available for public review and inspection. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1990. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER LVS:rc 1•-4 jC J it •-•• -le U it Z LiJ iC = Ci K O it U IZ -C X •K K iC iC• C it O •K Y it 0 U)J 0 Z U.J M 0 CO U W C LU Q I- aC Cn jl K it * jl it * it iC U * < K 0 it U 9L O O O O O O O CIO O CDCIO O (CC CC LU O O COO CI O 0 O V) O O N. CO O O LC) C W O (O ()•) cc) ct N I\ 1 C or Cs1 64 44 44 44 44•O.•. W .--I Li_.--I C 44 CT CV) 1 rcDzo F- O rn r-i Y.--.CT L CO LC)-07 N =12) M N t0 LC)-,_4 N t0 Id)•:).CO N 0 LO cr. h N C CO C f)I• tO L U U I-.--1 >- r-I•-•1.--IH (...1•,-.1r-1. -1.- -•1•--1...I r I--1.--1 r-1 r-I .- -C r r-1 r-1 O C,...... 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 w J 0 N 0 0 CO CO O O O O O O O O O CO O O O O O O O O 0 CO Z C =4-, 0000 00 00 O 000 00 00 0000 00 O Gf-U) 0 C 0000 000LI) 0000 0000 0000 CO CO ...-1 = • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ft Z=>- r. 0 0 0 C•) 0 0 0 N O LI CO 0 0 0 C')CO 0 LI)0 tT 0 0 LJ.7 F-W O W E O O O N cr.O CO a) 0)N.CT CT CO)CO M CC) ct CO CO CO N N I-. J=U= C¢ I-.N.CO CO N N N.--I {.4444444 44 44 4 -4. 44444444 4444 44 C 0.L)I- CI_ 44444444 4.4444444 V)O C CO J I-1 W O >Z CO 0 CO Z 0 d > -O 4, U • F-LJ- 0.1-1 0 1,- V) >, CO I V) CC E 0)C U) 4- U-a C)"" I L 4, 41 CC U C a) Q) Z .0 C = Q 0)1- N 7 0 C • - N .Y 4- V) ••-•y EO S.- >4,-=-I 4- 7 E 7 7 O++4- • U 0.) •U a) U 4 •VI U CC V) O 4-• M 0 C O C O) L E 3 O N C V) C 'a • U O Cn L H a)4- E ••- L U G) •- a) C) CO•^ Cl) d IT•- V) d 7 U ++-C CC•a 0 0 7 V) L-a I - +• c a 5-) U • ++ C)•^ U 0 •^ .O= 4, 7•^ ,- 3.O CC•.- -0 -0C 4. V) 1- st° 4-1 S.- V)Z C V) C 4 O O Z V) U) CC O..-• L-0 CC IN CC CO 7 10 CC 0 0 O L U L O e0 a) U•- a) O L D.O >, C a) CI) 5-VDto 4- C1 0) • .0 a) 5- CC 4, d 5-. L I 0)L 4, -o 4I IC • = CC E C L'- L 0 • >)L ++ a) Co 0. C a) a) C)+-I 0 C a) 0. U' a) V a .0-a 4� ) 0 LU C)3 C L a) • C.0 4, a),- VI E co^• a) a) C L CC > U 4- 4-1 0 0 0.N ^4.1 4-,C n in 5-A CC----- 5- n.5- V) CC C CC a)4-I 3 a) a) >,,- (.0O CC •CC O a) U 7 CC•^ a) 3 0)0 7 -0•^•^ 4.3 • 'O.0 4J V) 5- a) E 01 Ln 0C4, 0).- 0 a) a) 0 • -I-1La) Cv) CC a) O.L •aL LL -C•^ •^ .- a) 0.E ) V) 7•.- •.-- 5- C +) U 0 )• ) V) CC C CC GIECI.—+-, -0 .O V a) d 0 • a) a) a) 'CS U^ • •a IC a) > C) Cv UC C ell 4, a)'a U a)< L ^ a).0 a) O•^•^ L • ^ a) a) a) 0.C 0•^ a) CC a)IC O C< 0 > "CI CC+)4, CC •> V) 0 > 3 5-4-1 a) "-• CsIL.J C a) 4- O.a'a•^ .0 5- L++ 0 a)•^ 0 ob 0 O.L > O'O.0 L C CO L • E • L•^ C) 3 0) a) a) L L E 3 S.- E C) 4- 0)•. •^•^0 a) 0 O 1::,1::, 0.O= L a 0.a) C.a) 0 O.a) a) ^ 0.a)CC U a) CC Vl U V< Ufa a) a)� 0 0-0 tU� UE 0 c VI ro•^ n7 FO-• OU ^ 3 c FO-a) c U I- 0.n•V) I-0 C U H ICC O I- O.E 7 O.LU CC.0 C U a) CC cm U C cc rcs)U CC J 1 1.1.1 C 4, V) J 4-)0 Lob}I 0) - C ¢•^ 4- C CC1 a) V) 0 U 0 a) \ V) 10 sr, I- E a) U)•,- U'0. •> 0 }I •C CU< o C I MI o > s- CCC a) L a) I,,- 0) La a) ca > (C+.1 E cC a) (.a a) C (C CC C E C) c z F-C C Z a) z•^ CC Z CO. Z 1-•^ Z O•^ CC •-• >•^ 1--1 V) a) .•.I C L L .-I O.0 r-.U L 0•a 5- 0 V) 0) VI V)..-. N•^ V) V) 7 a) V) VI V) 7 V) 1' 0) O) _- 7 =V) E CA =V) C = U 0 =V) 7 =V) U =V)••- 0 O C) 0 O V) O a) O= 7 0 a) L 0= L O= a) 0= 7 L CU _£=C 2 2¢20 =ZLi 2 V)Ct. 2 CO Cn 2CO V) =CO COO_ Z= N Z 0 I- r-1 N 0.7 MY LO t0 N. W CO O O O O O a) O +' ")J.-a O N O CO 0 .4.40 Li)O 400 C.0 CC O 0 O O O Cl CO 0 0 Cl O O O O O O O CZ 0 0 CD O 0 0 CO CV * J * M * C..) * Z W * _ C.7 * 0 Q * C..) 0. * * * * * * * * C * 0 LU W 0 Z W = f O U *La_ CC LL. Q I- * Cn * * it * * * * * * * U * < * C) * U * * * * OCs OCr OCs OCs O O O Cs C W O LC) O O O O O C7 I-- O (x) O Cr) O O) O O O C W LC) .-1 Cl) CV in O IC) d = 44 44 44 .N •-i Cr) •-4 •O C 44 44 44 44 LLI :U_.-1 C as .0 V) I >-CD ZO I-- O CT •••i]C I--1 CT L CO CO In a'Cl) 1.0 Ln CO LC).-1 CO CO LC) CO Ln 0 U U I-.-1 >• e..1 • 1•-.1 e-1•••1 •-1•..1 •- . •1 0 e .-1 •-1 e-1 e-1 O Q 1 1 1 1 1 1 11111 1 1 1 1 1 1N. ti 1 1 1 1 11111 1 1 1 I 1 1 11111 U)JCs CA O00 O 0O0 0 O CO Z C =.1•+ 000 0 4400 O O J I-�W 0 C O O O 0 O O 0 0 Z=>- C.to CT Cr)) 0 U) O O I-LLJ J=0U= CC•Z 644444 64 0�NJ CO CS CV 44 Cr) Q C1 W I- 0. 4444 44 U)0CC0 J •I W O Z W 1--i O 0 O CO Z O I • >0U 0•.- I C+1 In 0 >, ~ ` O LC IC•,-r. IC U C C C)411 in • C)^.0 CU EEE C) O•C L .0•0 p) Z f-••• 01 C)••• ^ T. ) 0 C) C) S...•0 C . ro+ r'7 ro C)1• ^ L.01+A N 41 C L = 0 > t-•.- >L ••• 0 0••• C L'O 0 C•.r 0 C) L C 0 $- S- G. ro O•r = 0 0 In 0++ 4- 0.17+a ro 0•� 3 0 3 )- •0 C) E 4- C) 0 3'-4-++ = U 4.1 1-••- 0 C L V 3 ••• d 4,...- 0 C) +1 Z O 0 O C In >,C.3 0 L 0 4) C) C 0 >, 41 4, CT ••- > S. C It)•C C 0 •-4-+1 4- U C)••-•- E +1 Ct.'0 0. U ro.0+1 C••- =41 4- 0 0...- CV C) Io N.0 0 = C) .0•-••• CT C 0 C 3•� 0'O••- C 0 f.. U) 00 C Li LC) ro O C Z 0 MI C >,+1 ro t ro >, U U•O U) 0 L CC) O •• Cl)O C) O C) O C 4- i-•0••- C) In.0 C1 C^ C) ro 0 O C. O. +1 0 .•-I MI (1)• 1 O •O^ U a 1-• ro O O C U) C C cc) C) S.^ > O S.. I .a) ro.0 44 4.1.0 Cr) • ro U) • I- +.1 IC 0 L.•� 17 +1 CU C. • 0.0 0 C •.- -CI 4,4,44 U)U) O ••• U) In C]. 0 C U 0 O Ia C) C1 • C•0 O C) 4-+1 ••- • O E+1 4- • C) O ro L 0 C) C 4, CD 1-+ U 0 C) MC ++ tT>4. In C) - o c da o c IV (A . 4- ro 3 s U••- 0 C)•- C••-++ C 4, ro ro ro ro • 0 C1.O E V) L C C) ro 4- C o•o • 0) U IO+1•r••-•O RI . L- 0) E •� • 0 CU cc) M.,- L 0) ro C) CD >, E'0 ••'7•,- Cn C c0_C Ls) 0.) U1 OL 5-170) +) CUUUO 0 T- T- .]c0C+1 > 40c+1OE U) 5- U +1•s- O C+1 O•� ro 0 O CU - U•• U. C ro Ln S.- IO U J cocoL ro ro 4, 0 O O ••-CO 5-O 4- 0 C_ 0 ro • ro•• . )S.. '0 4- C1^ ro••• C1CV )_ C .4I U ro •• • U 5- C1 U) 4- ++ ro.CL > -, 03 C) 0) • C1 C) • O. U) o C) .0 41 O L O . 0C) >, 0.U) O 4-, 'C U) +1•- > U) as yy 0 U)-0Q 4-1 . O.C)C7)+1^ 0••-r- o CI) L C C•L U 0^ L'O.0 0.•�'.••U- E N C) E Q 3 ' 0. 1.-i U) • 00 4O- G.=V C E -C ro ill C) 4-••- C) CA O.IV 0 O0 O 0--- I N•O E CT C. ••O U)4.1 i U) U In\ C) U 4.1 C) > -0••- a C U 0 0 3 0 0 0 C ••- U 0 41 t 0 •- L 0 O 3 I--41.-4- 0+�1 I-U 0 ICO W I- SO-.%- in .--4,cc) I--L w 4 LLI I--V))0 CO 0< >, I- 0.-I-1.Oc•O C) C C 4.1 O 0 01 T U C) • E NI C 0. C C . 3 La) 'CISIO L O U In O 0 41 •O J Co CT 0 I 7 U ^ 01- C I-_ Q ro 7 J O o = 0 I- U. Cas- s is- Cl C y =4-1 CO >, -I C7 on> C7 O Ca) C7 U C C7= U C.7 C.0 C.0 C7'O Z ro^ Z.O = = C C) Z ro Z C 0 Z 0 L =3 1--1++ 0 ►r.0 L 1-1•.r+.1 +I•0 O. rr ►r•.- so ••r O V)•^^ Le) C7)0 V) I C V) Cl U) V) E C) V)4-0-I-) U) >)C 0) = L •r+1> = = 3••- = x+1 = > = U c =41 3 0 0) 0) OC)4.1 004C1 0•.- S.. O00) 00) ro 0^ 0 C-i =�= =ZQ =JS ==< =U0 =V)U SUO Z= N Z O U C7 0 0 0-1 1-1 .-I .••1 14 .I, •70J CO Cs 0)0 00 .-10 N C3 CS 0 Cs O Cr)O 44.0 cocil 0 O O co O 0 0 0 CL. O 0 0 0 O O 0 C'M * J .K F.• * U * W * C.7 IC # U 11 K ,K * K O • E W W O U WLI- CC W Q F- K N iC *• U Q K C �C U K g iC Q C O O CC W O Ill C-7 I- O N O CC W O CO 1 .-1 LC) CC Cr 401. -O W CV W.-C 44 < 01 CC N 1 >-C>ZO 1- O O) C) I~C71 L CO U O Q >- •I 1 1 1 1 1 W J CI N Y O]Z0.4 J I-f W >- W O W O W Q O_W N OCCO U J 9-1 LLI Z Op W 1-4 LI OC CI CO 0 V) F-W U . 0 N U O I--• 4-3 N a) O G c CO N- ~ U • L N L O N Q) a) 7 C) 7.1-C _ CU O. N'0 C O CU On I- C 'O V) -0 •r N d MI U C 0. CC CO.0 C CU•� W N ON O O d O •0 L a dt•- O.- CU >14- CU-0 ae 0 ++ d 0 s_ al 4-3 is 0.C.) > ro a) c• . o 5-S-•C)CU =C )- 0-L d CO U.S C/1 J .1.1 H C C • CO )- L LI_ C7 0) C7^ C Z CO••- H C-.0 O N CU U O) 0 17+I Oa) 10 S La_ Z N Z O C) - U a) W O O CO OJ O O t1 O ✓ * J * •-r * U * 2 W * * U * * * * * * C * CO it C▪I W 0 2 W 2 2 O U W Lt- CLi. N * * * * * * * * * * * U * Q * C * U * * * * O O O O O O O 0 L Lt./ O CI CDO O O N O O O Ln O O W .-I .-1 I I .-1 .--I .-I d 64 64 4464 i464 W C N I I-(.720 1- O 0) 3,Y.--I 0) S.. 3.0 IC) LO LC) CO LLY CO In LO Lf) LO In CO LC)CO U Li F-9-4 >" 1'-1.-I .-i.-L .--1.-1 ..4.-1 .--I.-1 .-1.-1 -C.-I 3-1 O< 1 I I 1 I I 11 I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I W J C V) O CI CIO CD CI C)CD Q COW O qa' O_ C 44 44 44 44 N4 i4 V4 OO J 22>- ej 2 O N QdW1- a K N O Cl0 J .-1 U LLI CZ CC O W.--1 C7 L.L. O O CO I-=UO I V) 1-LA. C 1 Q C I- 2 .1-,C L O 2 = CO •0 Li I _.. .o O 0 i�-1 •0 0) 01 C) C71 C) 3-3 • - E C) C) •C)) C)i d •CC)i +N+ 1'+ '0 0 Z7 '0 'O Ut C •C .C- 3 •C •C ,C ,C •C 0•,- MS=v_ C (C ICn C b U C) O_ U•VI 0. 0. 0. O. Cl I— CO 1 VI . • C) •r• CU t^O 0) O)� 30 V) W 2 C)W Z U) 0 2 d 0 2 C C 0 2 VI 0 2 U) }1 2 3, 0 J C7 O C7 C)N C7 O N C7•^ 0)N C7 C)N C7 (1).0 VI C7-. O I- 1--1 CDCM0, .--.J•.- II O 0 4, Ib ►-. 10 •M -. N •O N O V)i-O 1/) N O V) O V) 7 W V)•,-4-1 I I- W a)CO W 4-3 0 W S.0 W 0 C)(' W •O W • 0 W C U)O C > 0 S-C.') O 7C) O C'0 M O CN CI C)N O O CO CO W< W 7 W 0 W CO C) W > W > O W > 0 N C ro O C 0 • CU •• C NC •• CQ •• C Q 0• 0 C�U • Y a)N Y W Y S.W Y C)Y W Y 0 W Y C)M 1 Y V C)W O UY U+/ U C) U > 0 U� U U1 1 0 Li C U 0) CO LO O U IC) O.)C O O d 00 O CO O 1000 O C 100 J 101C) ...) CM J ION J C).-O J dCr .-.1.0 co O J 0 Cr CV =2 CO2(NI co 3CO co--I CO cOC CO CO 02=CO co U C'J CO 0.0.01 C 2 N 2 O 1--• CV Li C.7 C CI C LC) CO C C) W O O O O O O O O 1▪0 C JON0 O O O 0 O C O C O O CO N. 0- 0 0 0 O 0 0 O In K J K Iti K U K 2 W K 0 ¢ K V C. K K K K K K K K C_ K O K K C E W 0 2 W 2 2 O U W I.L. C W F- K N K K K K K K K K K K U K K 0 K U K K K K O O O 0 O O O O O CC f W O O O O O O O O 0 O V) O O 0 O O O O O O C W Ln O O CO tT 1) .--I O Ln C a 44 : 44 �Cr) •s► as► 4.. 44 44 -o� W < `10 Ca 1 r t.72O I- o01 •-•Y•-1 O1 C. to to tO t0 10 Lt) CO It) tO CO CO to t0 u) U U I-.--1 >- .--1.•-I .--1 .-1 .•-1.-I .4.-I .--1 11 1.1.1 .-1•••1 0< 11 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 LU-IC N O O 0 Y C1)22 =4-1 4.4 0 44 44 CDJ 1-2 W OM y O I-W O r LC) C W I- 0. .-1 44 V)O C tD J ••-1 W CD 2 LU I•-.t9 a O Sn 2 0 • VI >•=U C)4-1 4--.La- . V) .0 D)d • a • a) 2 V- 0 IA�W •. C L Cr) '3 I L • O 0 V +1 0 I .0 C N U U a) O)-- U 4-1 -0 4-1 C) 2 G • 4-1 V S.- 0 0 .0 0- C > E V) C V) S- E i+ ro w . - • c 7 a C) L-- a) 0) ro .'" 3- C) >, C d 7 O VI iJ V) 0) V) In a) ro U V)t0 V 7 0. V 4- S- C) V V) 0).0 4-1 U .-.0 C S- ro 4-1 L. C) .- . 7 U 7 .0 ro.0 7 >00 7 In 1.. g a) C C C) ro ••-4- - C •--V 4� -0\ .- a) S-•-• 0 4- 2 C 7 i-•-- a)-1-1 C ••C ro 0 C) _ U C e1• V) 0 O) O 3 4-) a 0 U b3 4-) ro E+1.- In 0 3 C�C 10 C CO a) #C ro >, C) Il u > 7 s- CI) 7 ro V a) a ••-•- 1.. -•- 3 t0 a) C C 41 Ill.c I- - 0 D)V > 0)i C+)V C ro V .X a) 7 L a)•� C 41 0- 04-1 S. 0 V roro•,- O 03 O' c tn+) Oro > UC7) +1 C 0. .V S. • O)Cr)•- 4-1 a) +) 4-1 L. C C C a) E to c 0-1n V V). }I V E to '3 C) > 0) V ••-4-.•U)•.' U VIE • la to E_ac •,- S.-10 S- C•- 0 c CU.0 C 1n 0a) N 4-1 a) L ••- S. ro S- C 0 O N 4) 0 V+) 10•r 4-1 V S. V V LU C > .1-1 7 • 7 V••- ro 0. ••-• V) 4' C C 0 4) a) a) 0 (1) ro a) U N 4-. C.) V) .- .1... . I-) V) C C) C C) ro 4- C 1.-4-1 EE. 0 a) . a) .e OP 4.) 0 'ors U 4-1 ro EE a) U S- a).- O) C)•- 7 0 V) C 0 C 7 O • ro.-- A)E-Y 7 >4-) S- i.'V to 4-1 V ro .0 C S- a) S- U) S. S. L.• )V) a) 0. > L. C V) US- 0 (1) a V) 7 3 VI 7 3 a)••- a) U 1-) E O) i-) co V _S- S- a) O a) V! O 4-) 5- a)41 .- ro ^ a) S- 0.4-1 ro Vl a)i-) V) -4 ro•- U 1- S-iJ V a)•-• V) a.S-+) S- U V S- U V ro i.+•-) C >4•1 C+) ro 0.4-1 C In.0 C 0 ' O•' U0V .) O0� .- 0 C i10 -. Inn 0) 11 in L. V) I- V 1 I0 C) 0.0) C) ) wF.-. .--) ) t 10*0 U 3 N - • > • 4-1 1 V) CI) • a) O C)0 -V) SO..3 d C • C VI V 4-1a) a) 0 C)0 4.) CI) 0.0 S- .0 CO 4-1 y.0 V) C C S. 0 S- 0) S-.-1 In C 0 E a -1-, 4-1 •--V) E 4-1 C) ro Q W 4 i-)2 4-1 -1 a) O 1.-.0 V) S. 0- N S- L E _1 V) V) 0 V) 3 V Cr) .-1 0 L. > O at .0 VI >) I- O V)4-1 In C I • 1 In 3 a) C) O Z C S_ In S- .-, _ F- 4-1 ro 4-1 OO O -1 • � -) V -CO • N CO O) C .•% > 4-1 CO S-C 0 dO 1 C) V) 1 3 S. LC) S- a)O Intb <0 - o I- d2 E a cn c =a GC n < E.-I - .-I a M \C) -to in -NC Q a) C) O O V) a7 V) a) V) • N•O V) ro t13 N O) O N C N r- > I- O.t\O I-V > • I-V > 0 I- C • F- C) • I-U > 0 I- C+)O I- • 0 a) I- 10 S- C W ro C W•� 0 V) W••- 0 4-1 W ro W W C • W 0 4-1 W•)- ro IC W 3 4-I IV W gg C).--1 CO W U • I W� S- W.- S. W•.- W L2 W+) 1.. W E W +- W a)i' ` CC • 0.0 C U 0.0 C U 0.0 C V O Cro C U) 0.02 L 0)-0 C O O 4-) C V 4-,-0 E a i- 7 E o F- 7 E o I- a)0 I- a)0 I- ro E L') I- a) C C I-0 0 I--- 7 c N.-.1 ~ W 2 V)3. CO V) I- .--1 V)W 1-1 at V)f CO V)-ILWnr V) •--..- VI CO• 0 V)t 1)U V)VI C 10 + .. 10 17 2 0 N 2 O I- .-1 N I+) a' In to I-. CO 01 C.)CD O O O O O O O O O C) W O O O O O 0 O O O 0 41 ^)J.--1 O CV MO O LC)O CO nO CO CT ro o a a a a a 0 0 0 O 0 C O O O O o o O o 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO K J K •--• K U K Z W K 0 C7 K O < K U d K K K K K K K K C K O K 0 W 0 Z W = 0 O U LU U. CIL F K V)) K K K K K K K K K 4 U K < K 0 K U K K K K O O O O . 0 0 0 O E O O O O O 0 O O 0 O C 7 C U O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O V) 0 CO Lf) CO LC) U) O L1) CV C W 0 1-1 11) CV 44 N Lf) C+) cT F--CC^ W 44 4444 44 M44 64 1.4 01 9-1 LL Q~1 C 44 C V) 1 C CC ZO I- O as •-C Y F---CT L /D In CO CO CO LC) CO LO CO CO U U F-.-C ).• •••I 9--1 •- • 9.4••-I •--I • 1 •-I •-1 W O O V) I OI I I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 O1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 <COW< 0 C O 0 F- O r W E 44 CO W Q W I- O. .-1 V)O CC LO U WC7 C W•.. C. 0 0 0 C) Li 2 C) L L I V) .~F-•LJ-U 0 4,C 0)4k 0) 0 4-) 0 •C) - L < i-)+1 III •0 .c C•--• 44+) +1 In O) •O CO 0 F- Z 7 0) 42 CO U 7 ,C Cd 0) L LF- 0 0 V) 0) 0) L V) 0) V)7 C O.0 V L 1- = 4-7 07 3 ++ O.•'- i4 L 0. 4' IV•7- P.+3 0 In CO = C 0) 0) CO U C 0) 7 C 3 CO Cb +) L. Id a) 0 0)O CO 0'C 0 0)LI 4-, 00) L U V) 0 O) >, U W 7C .7- CO C00 C) 73 RI 05•6 < 10C) V) • •Oro.0 Z > U CO U U > U 0) L > N C- C C 0) V) 4-)1 O 0 L C 4-)) L • 0) 0 _C 0) 0 5-F IO L U d CO 4-,h.L •'C .- a ,-4-,'C L •C U V L 0 .0 0 U us 0)9-1 1= in.44 a) •U V)•� 0.4 tO a�4' • U CO 7 +7 O) C. E C E O L V) E C _C O E C V) V) 4- 22 0) L C )-. a) 1- ++++ CO_C C)y 0) L C) 0) 0+1 L 0) RI CY E 0 Vr L.c E O) CO O E C C 0)'C L++ V +) 1, • Ln +) ro U ++ 00C)) al >,.p • ++ N s_4- C a)+1 a) +, c V) U > V) en 4.4 4- U.0 al U > C in U > 0)r 0 L 4-, O. U C 0 W 7 CO a) c 0 7 U 0) 7 CO••- 0) 0) L 7 CO 44 ••-1.3 0) O. ••. 0 L 0. •0 C)E L••� L 0.Ill •C U N L 0.4-) L 47 In.0•.. C•r 4 Ian C).'- N c • H CC 0 N d v > CC0 3 Lin a) 0)+0+ U • 0) o• 'c. C*II CC/ » 0 C4- +C•CI 07 0 C•C CO L Cnt 0) V)) E L i7 0 7 3 L O E L 0 0 In 0 7 E V) L Ln 0 7 3 +) V).- 0••.•44 L U.- 0) 07 L +) U In U 0 II.•.- a) U'—.0 V) 0) >4-) 'II V) O) O C'e•b E b 0 0 C L 0 C+ 0 VN) 00 0 C 0 C 0 LU) L 7 0 O)0 L I-•� V) 3 •.4 0.U F- 0) 0) I-••- V).— F- CO.0 F-•r• U CO U CO O.'— F- CO U O. 4J .N • L 0)V) 0. 0) 3 C V) CO U CA • V) C • L 1 0 In d L.b 07 CO3 4700 CD"CS C) V) <0 0 L > •0 0) V)0 N. U C L 0) LU0.F-0 ++ U CO< 440 0 CT•-1 U b 440 J C-E co I L V)C7)< U 0 CO I < V) F- >, I U CO C I F- CC 0) N O +) O) 9.-1 +J O 0) •,.•+.1• r 0 0 0) L 4-)O '0 0) CO O) F- •••-•0 U V) V)C C U 0 7 . 7 • < C Cr) 0) CL) 0) CO 4.3 U Lf) (C- L CO f0 C • C)y O.L LC V)V).- V)C..- V) • 0 • L 0) a) a) E 0.+ `+4.. <•• V)_C 0 4- + '— 0)V)41 . ) V) > > V) F- L CO • I- CO • F- L V)•••• F-V) I- U) • C F-<< F- CO >CA V) CO I--4-, 1.. W O) L W LU CO 3 L W CO W W 0) W W•O 0 LU 0)LU W 0)0 O W >+) W_C 4-1 W.00 CO W d U Li)'CI.0 W C LO W•C+1 W O)\ CT C C CO CC 4-IC) L C U 10 U CY0 C 0) d C C) G.O C C COZ C L O. F- 0) 0)(C F- CO 0 I .•I-CM I- CO Lf) • I- 0) 0) F-— E C•') F- CO+,++ I- CO E � =�In D U cC V)<Lf)Z V)C••l oti VC....W)J N. V)CC V)C ..7•••I LA V)If) V) F-•••1 \ Z N Z O F— O '-I N Cv) Lf) CO N. U L7 ••1 •-1 e..1 r1 94 'y • I .--I O W O 0 0 O 0 0 O O 0 +) •7J 00 •--10 CV0 CA a'0 LC)0 COO 1�0 0 CC 0 0 O O. 0 O 0 0 0 r. # J it rr # CU # Z W # _ C1 # O Q # U C. # # # # # # C # O # ID 0 2 W = = 0 U W Ls- CC W Q I- # N # # # # # # it # U # Q # G # U # # # G O ILC) I--CC O•-• 1 bAA.R 4 '2 LL_1-4 C J Z O r OOl FYI--ACT L CO.n dI VI lb W�[[_I �• V) 1 OOO 111 1 1 1 Q co 0 C 0 0 O J I-=W n-1 Z E>- 0 000 V) <0-LLI CD C I- C 4N4KI.N9 C¢J.) J .-I Z CO W 1--4 C.7 U. 00tl] I-W CIN 1, Q Z v0CI 0 = o� U S.. f- 0 o C) CDs- w t) U C) .0 Y V.4) Y o 60 0 O fti • I- V�1 ea d Cam) 0. Y N • Z) 1- 4- 1 - (15 CC _ 0 VI •0 Io a) co N C_) 3 L- C) _ V) ++ 0 Id L 10' W yC•6 I C)•r 0 E COI CD C) «) N O.— U•O L.Q .1-, 0 f 0 ro••- CU I-) 0+1 0) 0).- CI. ro s.. c. ^C) c.- ro I C Cl....- C) I-C.) 1 .0 rn •0)Y y„'_ W Z CO -I I- .- d •--1 MI++ •-v++ H C) C C V) L- V)=V) 2 a m 03 34J0 co O W O)' W••".0•- b oa) O to 0 CV CV = V)I-C V)CU.0 CC 2= 0 Z O I- .--1 0.1 0 C) W CD CD I CD-IO O 0 0 0 C O O G 0 O CO # J # -I # C) # Z LU # 2 C7 # 0 # U C # # # # # # # # C # 0 # Y # 0 E #U 0 Z LU E 0 O U IiJ La- I)N# # # # # # # # # U # 0 # 0 # U # # # 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 C. C. C. (C7 LU CI C. 0 C) C. N CO 0 C. C!) 11) C W L[) CO N CO 0) IZ 2 .--1 N .-4 64 U) I-CL O 0 VS. 4/i W Z LL.-I C CT CN 1 C7 ZO r O_CT ID U U I- Y• ,-I,-I �.�•1 4 •1 0< 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I LU J 0 V) O 0 Q mLU¢ O C 44 0 J I-=U J .--. 7 G 6�.W F- C 1.•I J V)0 C CO C) J .--I Z 00 LU.--.C7 LL CI0Cb z 0 I C) V) • ..... >,I 3 o c (CO se)) I-- z to.--. o L•O o••-' o E O 2 CD O)++ E ci30 c•ip COO ~ U � •3 0 O)L • '0+0+0 Z ro .0 ro G.0 • (CU) 0 -00 •- 0 Cz 5•> I-CL 4-CO V •i C•0 O 4" LU 8-1 O e7$ •0••- EE0 In' C.C.) I).) c • CI) i-) C) C OI 4-, (CO V) 0 0 0. • U••- 0 0 U O(C_ LU z 0 0 7+++•0 7++ 0 +1 Z S- to I, L • O S- 4-) O 4-•i-• 0R)�▪ E 0 U1 O V)Z 3 O W r N O U co U CC 0 O U O O ti,4- I-N I- E C^M I-V- O. C i s Io 0 0 '� CI W WY 0) LUY CM Lai C) LLI E I- < ro'V In < roc <•- IC) < 0 z\ zamz- C -NI- ON .-.\C) . . %•• . . ¢ LcCC a C) 0.0 C 0.L Q +) (C� 0 0) 0^U 0 (CO O Li/ro U ro CD C'0 0)C CC'CI U CC C'4' E cW 0) 0,,, toOro+, 0, In 0 0O I— 7 C) 5. I- =•••• I- 0)4-I I-0 CV _ V)C9 Z 0 V)C7 0 V)3 V) V)et \ Z N Z 0 1- .-1 N I) et W co co co co co C) O 0 C. 0 0 4, •7 J.-I 0) CV MO IC 0 Cl21 CD CC 0 C CD0 0 0 C O 0 0 CO 0) 41 J 41 1,-• 41 CU 4C z W 41 2 * O 0. 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 * C it O 4< >- 0 W 0 z W f E CO U W L.L. C LL F- 41 V) 4C 4C ♦< 44 44 41 41 U 4C C) 41 U 4C 41 4C 41 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C W O O O O CD O O O C.7 I- - . . C W 01 CS) O CO up sr) Q) LC) 0. 2 64 424 .--1 .••4 424 N 44 64 CC 1--CO•-. d 64 64 44 z L.L_.� C CC 0) C V) 1 C7 Z C) O 0) I-4 Y•-1 01 L CD 1.0 0 N 1-1 O LC) LID LO sr)co CT CD CD CO CO Lf)'CP R) CO Ln Gl•R7 U U 1-.--1 >- .4-•--I.--I.--I.-1 .-1 .--1 .--1 1-1 1-4 O O .--1 .-4 .--1.-1.-1.-4 I--1.--1 1-1 1-1 CDQ 1 1 1 1 1 I 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I W J CM V O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Y nC ZC 2 4-, 00000 0000 000 000 --1 F-L W 0 0 00 00 O 0000 000 00 0 z E>- ' 0 LO O O CO O 000 LO 000 CD00 I-W O W E 0 CV CD.1 LC) .-1 C).-I Lo LC)p).-I Lf)sr)LO J 2 U 2 C¢ 6464 C')4444 44 N 64.-4 64444.4 644464 C 0.W I- 0. 64 4..). 64 U)CD CC LID J .-1 W C9 >Z W•-I C7 CO CO Z C) 0) .N V) >-0 U cc, 0 41 CT C 4, ro • N 1--.Ls- C C 0 C a) ••")E 0 2 00 N .- L 0 C 4� E L 1L0 •- 1N SO- O OO O 'O 0 0••- CO •C L O C N CU 0 a) ro a) C1 1- z • a) • L X C C 7•,- ro CT> 4-C >, L • Y C � 4� 4.141 IA4-1 CU 0 0 7 U L • • O a) Al4 1 0 - 4 N L C C C/) 10 cm •-- O O ro Q.L L V) >.Y a)•r..- C O ro•'- ro a) 03 U a) C 4' 0 S.. N > L 0. • E O C 4, C a) L C. •-4- S.- 5- 0 10 CI)4-1 4-1••- E Y 0 L C 7 L 10 Cl C C0 2 CU 0 >,a) C C •••- L O d•- I-'CS 4J L 10 4- C a)•I- 0 •4- L ro G)••- CO 0 10 L 'O L 7 0.1 O O L 4, 0 0 U >1 '-' E L 4J.- 0- 4, O Q) 4-1 ro o U > E L a) d V) 0 L^ 0. N a) L 7•- N 4- C C 0. 0 CU 10 •O CT 4-' Si U 3 U vL U ro 3 0 10-LS 41 L 100 0 4- a.• E'O 20 C U 3 a) a) 0)••- t0 $ • C.0 L•.- W 4- C -• 4-1 0 ^ 3 Cro -' C E cc" C.) U ..-.Y U O RS 0 E 4,•- L O p _ a) 0•- C 7 U".• L L C ••- a) N t0 a) •a)U 4.'4J U 0 4 N L L L t0 -C C1 .' O CZ.0 C V) VIC U N C 10 >, ro C N a) 0 L a) O •4•' a) >1 II. 0 •- ro•••W L V)•- 0 O 7 t0•,-41 4-1 0) 4J 4-, U N V)41 CC/ 0 4I 7 > a) 0 CU 0••- U L U CL4-> L N E >, • 0.V) L c 0••- a) 0.41 ro 0 O • > U N a)+✓ X C CU C II.4-1 U' E d ro W O L.0 X 0 ••• L O O N >,N L N 0 a) C) D. ." 0)Y L V) U Y 7 4-, a)_se L 4J O.2 L 4-1 0 ro a) C U 4-10 •7 4- L -C1 L U L U C 0.N L a) 0 0••• O O L 0 0 0 MI O 4- C C O ro a)4- 0 ro a) 0 0 C E MI 0 0.L I- U Cl I- C1 C1 I- a) N Cl I- 0 1-0••- I- Cl N 0 I- 0-L U 41 0•I-W I- N 4., E 1 • O L .% ' L a) CL OO O W W CO 0)z U� y W }La1-1 LAZ C CD 0 J C.0 O c VI C a) Y O LA0 0 CD .Cl 01 L 1- I V)O •' I--1 0 L T 0 D L CD 41 0 a) C •I-C F- L U C C '0 g 0. C C ro N• - ro CDN 10• t0 a) C >1 0 - Y 41 g t0 • 0.r-I I. s- o_ C • I- 7 4, .0••• • L.0 C C L-0 (.1'--• • 0 U O a) O••' C 4-' O ro Ch..- 0 X C ••• 0 Ls..0•I-Cl) >4, L U CO V) 0.'- 10 O W 4, V)U ro 0. ) V V)< a ) 0) V) CT V) J 2 V) Cp 10 V) a) a) V) C O 210 O Y a) Y >1C Y O Y N Y 3Y 3 Y•- NO Y ro 0) C L'O 0 C S L C ro O C•- L O C-Y'O • C 0 L'0 C.c C0 0 C.0 < 0 CO QI-4-I Gam••- < CO L V Q'- C O < a) C) a) <4..1L R) < L N-1 =z 0.'-) ro.-4 0.LC)V) 0.0.4, 0.LL••-I N 0.W IL/V) 0.C 0.C 0.G 0..-4 0.0 N z 0 N 0 0 F- .--1 N CO U CZ O O O O O O O co 4J •)OJ.•-1 O N O R)O Cr O Lf)O LD O N.O CO O 10 O O O O O O O O O 0 C O O O O O O Cr. O 0. O 0 O O O O O O O * N * .-1 * U * Z W * 0 CD * 0 * C.) n. * * * * * * * * CC * 0 * >- * 0 W 0 2 W E 0 0 U W Li- CC F- * N * * * * * * * * * * U * * CI * U * Sr * O O O O O O Oa. O O CC CD W 0 0 CD C) CI CD 0 Ln 0 V) Ln O u) 0 0 Ln .•I 0 el• G' W 4.4 N .-I .•I W) 4.4 V4 to 0) 0- 0 4.4 404 44). C') 44 44 cc cr 44 I-C)- 1.0 2 Li_0) C 2 0) .D 1 C720 44O0) V Y►+O) to in CO t0 in to to Ln sr)N CO 0 COU U I-•-1 >- .-1•-1 .-1 •-1.-1 .•1 .•I.--1 0•-1. .-1 .-i .--1 .•I W O 0 U) I Cs I I III I I 01 I I 11 1 I 01 I 1 I 0 01 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 <m W.2 CD C 44 V4 V4 V4 C J I-E W .-•. 7 Z f Y Q LC) ¢n.WI- 0. V4 V)O C CO J •-I W C7 U Z W•-•I, CI O CO Z O C >) I-Ls. v •-- ro 3 • CD 0 5- C) U I. = 10 C 3 C) to • S- .0 C) +1 S- 01 13 4.1 2 10 t0 S- 0 L C) C 0 C 17 5-. 0. • 0 0) O C 0.C.) 0 C) 4-1 C) ++ = C) O.4-, 0 0.- ++ to 4- IA 2 L S..•-- >,> Rf-I-.•r V) N .0 L...- E U 0 t0 -4,4 •� CO U S- S- S- 7 . 0.b N C) 0 0+3 N = EEE CD 1-4- 0 S- 1- 7 0.t0- U CD S- C.0 .0 C 4- C) U CDC CD O = C) . S-V) C _ 0 4-1 0+) .- X 0. C) tT C) +' 0.C) 4-1++ C) C) C) C) U .o'0-- C) 0 U 2 to C. O. S- U, Vt O VI C C In >,J 74- U 0 4-CD y S-i, • O C C S- C) 3 t0 S-.0 V) - t0 C) VI >, •-+ '0 C E O. N Z O to C) 10 E 3 O.0 C) U 7 4- > 0 S- F- C C C) 0) 4- C U S C OI m C) S. 3 N 0 -CI 0 0 0. 0O C Cl)0 0 C) C) V C C 7 0 -1-1 4- 0) I-. .CD +1 In C) 0 .0 S- Id+- ' 4-.4- Z U••- O.'00.)z o 3 C) C +1 >,0 C) IO .1 •0.1-3 >, # ••• E t.•U CC) C 0 to co +1 4-.0 •.- V) >,••- 0 4-C7 0.•r U U 0, 0) U N ^ C) 3 C) 0 7 0 O W 4-) S- C) to 7 U 0 7 4-1 0) fn 3 0.C) 4'4-1 0. 0 1- C) 0 U 10 Y '0 >, C) C) 0 S-. 0) C) N t0 0 4-1 CO V! C 0.•- 7CS_ i�+1U CC).O � C ••- S- t0 T ro> 0 4C 0 C >•• t0 CD.c 0 t• Ut o 0. .-U �= 0.CD 0.0 0 a-) c E 0. o U 10 C) 0)++ E 0 C C•1-1 Ed t0 C VI >,4- C) 0•.- I • S W C •-'- • 0 C i-, 00. C) C 0 7 2 U"•'- C0 0.S.- U O C) U C) U U. 7 0.C)i3 S. CO .0 0 C) C C) C) C) 0) 4-1 S-'0 VI S- S- S- C) C 1- 1-- 0.E co I- o 4-)4-) F-•*- Ian coC F- S- I- 0. I-4--- I. 0 Z I- LCO 0 H.-4-•• Vt ....1 .1..) Y ••- U Y .--. O W S__ • C) 1- • iE d 3 LU C•U F- •S- CC S- C 2 R Cs, 1- 0 0 0 N 0 0.1 C C) J •'- C 0 >,C0 C) C0 b.0 0 Li-.ti • tO 4-) CD •4-,N.- F- C 7 S-0 R O 0- 0 0 C 0.O I 0 0• U 0 •4- 0. .--. 0 C)0) 3.1-)in "C1 0) er C)^V) C).0 0 VI C E I- E U > C) C C) S- C)0.-4 V/•r N C) • VI 0 • +� 0 7 tO 0 N' t0•-N •7 F- .--- CC • •t0 E C)'7 �C 0 • 0 i O 3 • C U 0-i-) E 0 C7 O E 1 0 3 =1-et O • . U IO • CE =U) >Z 0 C V) 00 N 0 41 C) • < S- 0 V) 0 OC Ln co to. 0 N C C) N 0.N N L C I N 4-2 V) VI VI W N 0 V) O Y CU Y'0O Y4-1 LO Y+100 IL 4-, C 0 Y e0 a)CI 20 Y C) L Y-C 4-1 0) C C) C S-0 C S- 0.0 2 C) S-0 C Vt 0 0! 010 0 C. 0 CC S- 7 0 C S- V1 0 <'--V) < 00 < o EO <"- t00 < C) •0) < 7 S-N. ¢••-0 Q 0 00 < tO C) C C.) 2 0-C72 0.'•).-1 C •Z••11-•1 0.›,C . C C 7 -4 32.4 V10.- n C LL 1 22L .U0) 0.CC e0 C 2 0 N 2 O I- 0) O .--1 N I.) et Ln CO N. t..)C7 O .--I .r H .-1 .-1 .-1 0--1 .-1 C) W O O 0 O O 0 O 0 0 O 4-1 '7- 0)0 00 .-10 CV c.')O c-0 It)0 SO 0 r..0 ft) 0 O .•I .-I .-I •--I .-1 •-1 .--4 •--I 0 C O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 O C O 0 0 0 0 O 0 O O .-C * J .--) .K r. * C-> * Z W * 0 CO * 0 C * * * * * * C * O * r * C F W O Z Ca) F f O U W U- C'C C. Q ♦- * N * * * * * * ic *• U * * C * U * * * * LO O O O O 0 O N C. C. O O O) C La) •-C to O O et C 0 44 44 W .-1 Cf) C O' 44 I-O i-. Ca. .-. Q L. CC 4.4 CM C N ) CO Z O r O O) •-)Y.-4 CT s- CO CO tO 1.0 U UO I-¢v r I+ ) I 'I .- C . I C ) 'I ) ) W.J 0 N < W CO < O_ C J2Er 7 V) J f U= C N O CCO C C..) J '-I LLI CO Z CYO CI CO C C) C z Ci O N I-Li_L.) C O to N ea Vl I--- Z ••- $- CC 4- 0) O 0 'C C) L O ++ F- 0 - U . 0 S- ro 0 C CO g+) &) S-.0 � U C .-. O IA 4J b++ C cC )- 'O a) C C to C) a')0 0. t° 0 4-) CC CC V) 5-Cfl 0) O_'0 0 4- CCC U C) LA L 4-• O•.- to C) 0) C) C C. "CIs.. • U 0) •7 co s.. 0. c4-. 0 CC ).. • Cr .- a) 0 CC z .-+•r U • 0.+) s- ' .0 O. +, CC Y 0 a) O. 0.—C. 0 C 0 0 CC I- C CC I- 3 CO F CC Z I- Q. 0 • +• 3 C) - 2 0 V) C. EO. 0 • C Z ..0M CCC a) � Lt. w co f— 0 -- 0 a)°a C 0)4-. .0 0 .--. a) F O E CA 0) 0) I- .CN N L 33 a) +• 0) 4-I +• Z • C)•,- 0 0 CC) 0 d 0 >, V) VI+•Z V)Z C) NZ C)N V7 a) 0 Y C Y 3 Y 3 Y—Y CO CT CO CC 0 C CO+• C C.1-) 0 CC-0S-C. <C•-O <C 0) <0 0 C <'r CC CO C') _E .CO C N C CO.Q C CV.a fC C Z C CV Z 0 N Z O I- CO CT O .-C U CO .-. .-4 N CV 0 0 CI CI fa O OJ OO O 0)0 NO NO a O C. O 0 N it J .•4 it ►4 it C 1 it Z w it 0 (C it O G it U CL it it it it it it If it 0 it O it >- it g O w 0 Z w 0 O U w 11 C U- ♦— it N i< it it it it it it C..1 it Q it CI it U it it it it O O O O O O CO H O O C) C. 0 C W �O C N N CL 0 .--1 64 .N .--t I-O• � W Hh 4q IA Q 0) CC V) 1 C7 ZO r 0 CT •-•Y I-.01 L CO tO CO tO U OQ� 'I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I ~ L_1 C) V) SC p[ <COW< O LLI _ C J Z E N �l 7 V) Qd W I- C J V)00 LO C.) J .-1 w C9 C w.Z-.-.CCLI- CO O 0 CO I-U.L) ( •O U C C Z C0 •- C C1 - O >1 '0 I- = •N 0 4--.." 0 3 L > 0 G E 0 0•. 4- (Cf L • I- t6 0 t/1 U ++I-1 L. 0 L0 nn Cl) C .0 In C 0++ N O E+1 •0 0 0 0 0 0 L to CL Cr) C� 7 0_C�•C4-Iw .-4N 4-3 • 4- C)021 - ••-Y 0 r r. CC CO V 4- I) 4-3+ U U • 61 1Cyy i.d N O O_ CO • "CI 00-0 too w .0 XE6)•r0 •--. 4- 0 03 C 0-0Z V) +1 6) H N. C 0 U L N Ls X0•,-O .III I CU _ 0 7 N0 0) C0 n0L V) O)O N -0'CI C. 6) nY a' L CO 0 04-, 0 w 0 C 6)01 4-31 L CO 6) 6) 6).--1 0 L 4- L O CO O > RI-C 0 C 0 > C+/ 0)C_) 0 0)+3 • 0 ; • C.•r Y • C) >1•N U • C•� O C N U >) n L O '0 L•,-+1 t0 0 L .- Cl.V) S- IV.=- .-. nN L c r 4- o N L•^- 3O nO.- 4I N. 7 U 0 >0 0 6) 6)O 0 X 7 b 0 0 0 in 0 0 t0 1-'CS O U. U C 01 I- 0) n O) I-•--•+1 N I-J 4- n 0(U t1... 0 1 E 5- O. +1 >1 CN•3 C CN 7.7 6) 0 CZ 0 E 7 .M-1 CZ 7 I- O L N C>_+1 0 V)•r4-1 0 >1U I- J_0 4J _J y ; J_+1 L = J_.0 1. 0 C••- 0- 0 0 Vl 10 0 0 C CO¢CU CO = C CO CC 0.C) CO 7 ... IC 00 0) .-.-.•LO C .-4. N••- 4-0.--I0 0 J'0••-++ Jr.0 J+++1 C J 0) CO C C C Cn . 0 O] C C C Cn O-• 0 7 6) 6) 0.0+t 0 6) 6) 6) 0 L 7 NJ =Z 0.V)V)C..) CL L...)0 Cl I-U I- C.I--C.) Z 0 N Z O C.)co O C. 0 CO 4., •7 OJ•-10 N0 C+)O e-0 0 C Ca 0 O CL O 0 0 0 in it J .-I # I••. it U it Z W it 0 C7 it O it U 0- it it it it it it it it C K O cot F W cn W E O v W Lt- CC it N it it a it it k it it it Q it 0 it C.7 it it is it L O 01 O O O O O ...4 C) CO O 0 443 44, K 44. O O 44 64 LLI C V) 1 C7 Z O _ O_CT U lc U I- >- t0 1-1 .O. t0 LC).4't+)CV ICJ In eF CON N t0 It7 et t+,N .O. t0 ICI ct M N.•-1 O C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 LU J 0 N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O an Z CC 0+, 0000 0000 0000 00000 J 1--E W 07 • LC)0011) 0000. 0000 CD IC)CDLi)C 4-4 . . • . • . • • • • • • • • • • . Z E r L E u•1 01 O)to t0 ct eY.-4 .�CD ct t0 CO M tD 4-4 4-1f-W CDW -.ITMNNN NN NN O 0.0.0. MUD M 01CU Q O W I- d 64646444 iR64 4,444 44646464 44iA4444W V)O C tO J .-1 W C7 D.Z W C9 O C)CO Z C VI 1--L.• � c C4-. N� C I E L • 0 'CS •- 0) -1-) V) Z ++ •U, 0) .0 O •0++ 0)y C CO L 0 .0 7 VI 1--.. O G) C N E 3 0) O 0) O O\ = 0) • O N ZI .O 0) • 4-� 0 >, .4-)••-• L 4- 43 > ZO •� N . 00 tOLN L a UN •LY O4-1b • , C.) ^ 0) ^ . C - 0- 4- G) G) • LL 0000)C COI • •'.. g ++ t0++ 3 - oC) II 00N G) c 30 >c.) c+� ¢ 3 Z CA LI) C C 0 4- N 41••- C CO a-+ t0 0) 0) 'O•,-V) Li • - O_ C >> 0G) N4- t0•I-+ L > 00 tO •rO L0) 4. to\ 0) •" N ••'• > 0) CO 0) V) 0 0 4-+••'• -.1-)0 Q. N - N• 3 ' + •,- 0) "IDS I- ++ +I 0) >>N •,- S. 0 a S. 43 0) c .0 0 0'O S.- • C 0- t0 C L A+1 U t a 0 V) t0 C 4-, >i-1 t0 0)••- .0 E L 0) C N tO +-. 0) o va c C) d o Ea) CO 0) LL U L 4J co O 0)•O (0 10•^ 0 N U C U,- (0 U 7'0•L.- O¢ U >�++0 N G) t0 4-+ C••- 4- N'O•- •'- > N d 0) O U W 0)¢ tO C) 0 W 4)4 . C X N C • fa.= L .7C 0) -CC 0 VI 4-CC LL 0)••- 0 10•� 21L 00) +10)tO 4- 0) C 30) >3 10•O 4- 0 LC tO 0 1-41.=C 7 7 7 /0 C V) OC d� O)L ••N-= O 0) IEN O C C0)U 'CI CA U0) 0 •Cf0) N • C O) )•. 0) C 0) •N C C L 10 10•-- a) C C C-CI CD 1- S. V)V) C 4.3 N 0 0) > •'- N.- ••- a)I- 10 L CO CS)) L"I- 0 7 0).0 I- 0) L . 0 COI N-10 t0 N.IQ L 74,- L -CIC.1-) 4- > 0)a+1 a 0 4- 1- 0) "CSU 4-)7 7 r 7 E•10 C) 0 U yE 0 0)•r 0 4-11 0)CO 0) E O FO- tto H U Z-C- 1--O.00 C to to O dt0/) 0) 1--41 > I- do a) to E F..+L+..-1 ~ 03NI T L S. a Q _ 0) O 3 • t0 L L 0 C MI t0 • C I . UL/1 0) tN>- 0 V)•.- 0I N U N a V) L f W N 0 U) N 3 N E W W V) W U 0 W CC/ E W 'O W 17) W••- W••- 0 W J �4- U = L U G) C.)-0 0 U_ aa0 C-)4-) CD 7r U 3 N I- to t0 M O 0. •1 L L •-1 0 0 0•,-0 +•-1 = 0 I•-I 0) C > O C ›.+I 0) >. 0 3 .0 1,3 >' 0) > U 0) >Z I- C col C•r O) C 7 O C Li-•O C•O V).-4 C > C Q W C C W 0 W U. = W C) L W G) W C•O W 0) W 0 W = V)•r+1 V) -. V) a V) 0)C N tO C - V) L N 01 L•„• V) 0 3 N 4-I V) O).- 0) '0 0) • CL = 0 4-+ •,•• .S- C)_ CO CO U_ = 0) U_ C-i-. U_•� • U CA 0 _ L•r 0 C.) U_•,-4- tO U_i-+ >>0) O J 0W .-1 V) C -1 V)47: J.,Z ..J tO Lt. .J E J- C C J L••-- 0) O] C N CO 7 7 0- m 7 =0 CO V) CO a O CO•.- CO•I- 0 7 m 0) E 0) 0 0)(NJ 0 0 0< = 0 W= 0 G)LC) 0 0)4-0 0 L 0 7•r 0 0 CI.tOL =�0-C tr) 0- C-3U 0- C� 0L3 LC) aC 0 IC) CI.C.) am 44 U. aO U.V) Z 0 N Z C) F- .-+ N CO et LC) t0 N. CO W 0) O O O O C. O O O O t0 CD C) 0 0 C) OO ul 00 OO CD N. CO 0 0- CO C) 0 O C) CO CDO ct # J it U K Z W it 0 O # 0 i1 U O. it it it it it it K C i1 O i1 >- i1 Q O£ W 0 z W E >_ 0 U W LI_ C I- i1 N it it it it i1 it i1 it K U it O it U i1 O O a, O O I O CIO O CI L0C) N v+ 44 n I-O� W cC Cr 4" 44 Z W.--1 C G 01 C N I C.0 Z 0 I-- 001 Y.....CT L CO In et N O)17.4- tO LC)et en 1,0 tO tO CO U U I-.--I } .. .. 1.-1 O O 0 .•1. .1 1 •-1 .-1 .-1 .-1 O Q v I 1 I 1 ....1 1 1 1 1 1111 1 .- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 lull 1 1 1 1.1.1_10 N 000000 000 on c4 0+, 000000 000 JF-FW 0 7 LC)Lt-)OO OO OCTO Z£>- ^. 0 CO CO tO.--I 0 0 CO.-•1 0 V) ♦-W 0 W E CV N M CV.•I CVv..-1.-i V) J£U= C 44444R44 N 44 444444 N OCCO 44 -I -.1 .1 U W C1 C 1./.1•Z+t 7 C) 0 C:)co U. Z O •O O) V) SOU t0 I-W 0 0 C• al0 y to w 4-- rd ~ CD = .0.0 .0 4- L C)) 4-) 0) C C L 3 F- £ C 4-1 +.1•- ++- 10 C U O.t0 0 O 0 L C C yE C 0) C- 0 d 0 U 0 C .O t0 O t0 E 7 v .0 t0 Z 11.0 t C. >,ro H n 0 • CO C t(d++.) S U to 0 C) S- S.. 0 U Z I- U L.. 7 C 0.0 C)4-, OIL O. C) O)O 0.t0 ro • 4-4-, CL 0 O.VI N LC) L 0 >, • _ ••- 0 0 0) 4- 0•. ..1. MI C- 0) to VIZ t0 4- L 7 0 . )4- .-1 U 10 CL>,0) .0 t0 Q O a.S- t0 0. t0 )C- 10 0'O L.O 4) V) 0) 0) 0)ice W 0) C ) 0) CICO 10 C 0) i-1 0) 0•0 t0•O • ^ 10 •0 E•� C.. • • 0 0 O.1n C S..3 O.C-•- #• 0 .' t0 0 C E C .X••- L_ u) C. 0) .) 0.) 0. U ro s.. CLC-IC U • MS01+,N 04) >, CC f- en CL 0.0 17- 7 U) IO C•0 CO ID.1-) 0) O 3 U L U O 0•,-'7 7.-- 0).-I 0 0)••"' 0 O.L_ 0 0 MI 0 111 I- U C• LL_.0 U.-I I-- E C.) I- 0 CO. I-•- 0 01 I-4- Qs 0) N S- • C) O V) I ) >1 V) tU) C V)C 0 VIi0 L V 01 -) • • -W-1 U_m 3 CW.)44+O, U U U 0~ LW.) CO UZ U_ 7 1100 I- 44 .- C 0 0) .1= • 1-1. C)0 L 1. 7 V) O 7 7 0) 7 0)>1 7 0 ? fn•370 7 0 0) I- C O).00 CFU C U Ly L C CZ CC•- 0 C C W 3 0 CO W _ LU 0 4-) W 0 W U. C_ W V) C.) • V) CD 0.0V) fll 0 W CO V)4) • N• . •• C.") U 0) U 0 0 CU 0 CL • U L L.0. U•,-3 U U C 3 U /O•r ••-•4-1 U)Z I-.= 7.0 P. V) C) ' (3) ..41 0) 1. L.•0 O J••-'- J +, 10 J to+, 0 J C O J CO o N J 0).••• O) CO CL L-0 CO 3,-L CO 0 C 0 CO 100 CO U) L0 CO4)•.- O (0•^O = 0) 7 0) = L 0) O O L 0) 0 /0 0.-I 0•r 7 CNJ _£CL U CO C) CL Z C-)CC CL C.)U Li- O.I-.-I 0.3 C7•I CL...-I CM Z N Z O I- CT C. .4 N C/) cl- W 0) O 0 O 0 O 0 0 +, •7 J 0)0 0 0 .-4 0 N 0 C')O IC CO t0 0 CO .-+ .--1 .-1 .-1 .1 O C 0 O 0 0 O 0 O. 0 0 0 0 0 0 LC) k J .--. it .--. •K U * Z LU * 0 C 11 C-) 0. # K 91 i1 41 #'CL •k O it >- * O E W C Z W F O U WLL- I- * N 41 it i< it ic •11• V *• 0 * U f O O O O O O O O O O Q 0 O O tO tO t0 O O O O CO CC F ILU- CDO 404 Cc, O O LO 0 N.. CC W 4N4 N di CI 01 O CD CV LC) 0 C 0 44 N 44 44 44 M cc I-O•••••• d 44 44 Z Li.-1 C G O) cc en I •co Z CO I- O Cn •--1 Y.--.Cn f- co LC) CO LCl et' tO CO tO CO In tO tO 1.0 0 U U I-.-•I >- .--1•••I •-I•-i•-1 •-I 1--1 .-i •--I.-1 •--1 .-1•-.1 11 O¢ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 Y COZ� =+' 404 00 4400 J I-EW O = • O Z=›- LC)In =I-LiOU= C'< 4444N 44 1n V).� y QCWI--' C C V)O C= -I •--. V W C7 cd C) CO O L. Z O I 5- • '0 VI -U. I 3 E++3 wo• 0•- ++ C J co C) co N C. .0 U .0 O E ro I--. Z I C f- . U • C) E On ro t0 C s- >f 4, O 0 U C) • 4- >>++ 4I i-1 C) •r 0- .0••- CT+' Cl) I- = O C •N f-O 7 7 I- x E U Vl O•,- C) ?_ •O Ul C) W W.-1 0 0 0 i 7 L > 3 CD 5- f• U +- E f-+' S- • 0 C••- U 4- 0 0••- f- 7W 0 0 3C) .0 41 • •C 0 0 4- 117+' 0 41 ) g W V) > U Cl) U >) 4) O O) to 4- f- C 0 C••- 5-+• +, It 4-, et• ob 0 4' U 0 U O -' 0 C L c +' •• U to >, >,4-, ++ IC < v C I • +' C t l C .Y • RI U_4- U •O Cl)• N U ro 0 G- >p,, IC+1 7 0 W 0 C O U co Y L U — +�t••) Cm U Ccc, .0 Z ea .0 W .O t0 ro 0. L > 7.0 In • U •-2 U RI • ro•O ro ^ f- •U Li''-i-' C) V) S. • O 0•- CI U 0 0H 7 0 L IBC W 0 Cl) O f- U Ct.C) • C1 Cl) C10 el4- 7 ro 4-, 4' 4' U ' 0 0 4- W CO 0. o > 0 o 0 CO co .0 I. C • •--1 V)< 4-' .0 41 U 0 O 0)>, i4-)O1f.. 44 O Cl) U U Cl) U • U U ro f-. o-C•F' C >, c ro o L. > •.c > ro > f_•-- U 7 0.---- ro ). .4, 0 0 U U 4-4-, U W U LLJ 7 f.. r- 0- 7 f-'- C 4-,.0 4-, '0•'-CO 0 0 0.4-' U Cl In.0 ro 0 = E o.o Cam) o fC o O.0 Oo O••--- U U. 7 0.0 I-CU+' I-+' I-C.•) I-0 I- fa I-4, > FO-0, c ++ 0 I C ++ 4- a!E V) V) U V) V) VI VI C) V) V) 0 C V) L W W W N VI LU W LU W > •W-. IC W C W I- Ul .--1 IV M.. •--. v--. ►— -O 4) I-O w L I— ~ 5-0. I- f- I- f- I- ro I•-- I- Z 0 f.. = 0+'< Z = Z Z E 3 CO)< 3 COB Z•.- W.0 /t) W.0 C W.0 ggW.0 ggW.0 UgJ I-. W Y.0 W S. W= O yC O f-•- ro E eC Q 4 E.0 < O- <~ CO� <�+' Z.00 E Z.0 C7.O ZC C ZC Z O)S COZ Z C•'>- L Z+O' 0 0) CO O)U CO•.- a. CO Y CO Y CO Y CO 0 CO U Cl) CO > N 7 CO O.0 C U 0 C U U•- C•.- C•- C•r C • f- C 0 U C••- co O' C co S. E =Z 0 O ZSW CO0 CO0 CO0 03C 0 C.33 =-I U.V) DUC Z 0 N Z 0 I- •-1 N M ‘r IC) CO n CO co) C.)C7 O O O co O co 0 O co U W 0 O O 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 -1+ •-)J.--I 0 N 0 CC)0 ct 0 in 0 CO 0 n 0 CO 0 0)0 IC 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 CC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O. 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O CO K J •--1 K 1-1 K U K 3 W K 0 CO K O Q K U C K K K K K K K K C K O K !• K C W 0 Z W E E O U W 11_ C Li. C F- K V) K K K K K K K K K K U K Q K C K U K K K K g O O O O O CCC U.JI— O O CI O C. V) O CO 1.0 M C W L 4111. •-i N. C = b4 64 Vi CC Cr I-O.-•• W Z 1L• I C G CI CCN 1 C7 Z C OO) •"Y•-•CT L CO CO CO U U I-•-1 `r •--I 1--1 •-I O C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 W JO V) Y CO Z C 0 4-1 <I- W Li) O- 7 Z C> L O J N O41 C1~O C� U J •-I Z C W•--•C.0 LL. C)C CO Z C 0) V) c) cL Ts 10 I-U C Z C • ,- 0) CD O = 47- > 01 C 0 iL-1 10 ~ O 4- OL•C- .'RI 0� d.0 Of C.) 0 nv 1-1 E 0 a) C • z a)E i,- a) u'0 a) c� C) 1O 110 o 5- 0� C) ca ca CD1-�d O~�. 0 5- • 1 4-1 10 1�/1 C 00) ICO C II V) V)•••• VI tCp•1- CD Li C L 01 CC CUU IO V).00 O E 1A O CO'0 10•VI V) V)+1 L /d 3 • C 7 C C 0 C 4- 10 '00•--•- C) f0-. 0 Q'W 0 0.) 10 /0 1/30•0++ •>•N •> U•. V) +I 0) V) • O 7 V)-CI 0••••4.1 a) to+1 CD C..) 5-.G+1•_ L C C C a).0 3J nL O'00I CU VI 5- 01 V) 0 0 L•- 0 d 0 7 0.- 04- 1-4-4-W I-+1 0..0 I-.0= 0 1- 1- 0) F- Z Z U Z f CE VI /0 E U C 6) C V)+1 C CI)1-7 O E • J E OJ C•••• OJ •0 J W > C W••- VI W f-. I- O. O. O O W 7 C W F- CE10 Om_ OS- CO U_1-1 5- U >I 10 U /0••- {.1 4.1 F.+1 U 1--1 a) C E 0) V) U f•r••- E>- C CO Li QC 0) OL C) a C ) CJ1 CO U E•O O C U O••C-C U100) L U•- 0) U3a) C..1 =E W W C C WS I- W I-C-) Z 0 N Z O I- •-1 N M W a) O O 0 CO +-1 •7.J•-IO NO MO 1 0 O O O 0 0 CC a 0 0 0 N. Cc -II.-1 * 1•1 * U * Z LU * Z C7 * O * U D. * * * * * * * * C * O * 0 S * 0 Z W E S O U W LL. C U. . Q I•- * V) * * * * * * * * U * Q * CI * U * * * * O O cmet O CDC) C) O et C 7 C W L el•O O Cs O O) C W 0 .N•1 CO U) O� 44 N 000 0)) 0_C d 44 44 44 44 1.4 44 .•1 I-0 W 44 Z LI_.••1 C O) V) 1 C 7 Z O O 01 Y 1•1 01 L tO to 10 tO (Cu) 10 Ln 10 CO U U 1-.--1 >. e..1 1--1 .1 .1 11.1 .1 1••1 .1 .-1 W O Qo v V) I OI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 CS 1 1 CO 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 ]C[O=C4 O-I-' 44 0 Vt J I-f W 0 0 CI Z=>" O V) LO Q OZ.W I- GC. 4" -J V)CD C tO J -I1--1 () W C7 C 0 W.Z•i C7 L. 0 O Co Z O (4 • V) I--.LI_U V C) 4- 01 CO LU L I N Q C VI .••. C L. 0 U C) • ., C) L 4, F- Z CO V1 '0 7 4, 0 17 O O 10 0 CO O rt)+J O c 4) L 4) VI 0 N.CO +) C C) .0 C 1- f C) V)C.) L /O /O O O 4- N 0 I L O X L••- E N 0) 0 •,..O 4- 7 4-< .0 1O'-4 0••- )'V) OO O _ C 4.., C) C)4- V C) L 1O L C) 0.++ . L- S- C-1 •>••- .0•- +J • L N 4 4.> J C) VI O OS-. C) 7 C C) 0 C) C 4, CO CO V) L N C N N Y•-• .0 RI L•--•••• C O Z L 0 C++'0+1 0 C >10 CO••" • U 0 N CO V) C U 4- 0 C)•.-.- • ot)J U O1 C)V) 0 0 U) 4- 1-1 0 4-) C)•�4-••- >•N CO `� C . C 0. O O • I--• ++ C) r- C) L C)4-) S..•�•r 44 C)++ C)i-1 CIR) 4) N 0. '0 7t CD 4, CO 717+1••- U 0 C O L� >1 7 H ••- V)++ VI C'0 N C C U CO CO U L.••1 CO••-.0 C) VI VI C U C 110 0 C O CVO.V) CIS O N 4, CO O > C) C U C) 0 C) O••-• C) R) U 0 C) N >1 4- 1O L. L•r C) V1 •••')+) U 4, 4, E •-Y C)4, N .. O)4- 0. 7 L U LU 0•� • CO 0 CO FS 4, CM N CO C)L•.- 4, C • ••"• 0 N"CICI L O (C (C N C) 7 V) O C C)J U+) C C) (OW +1 C) C 0 0. U 0•.-•.- U 7•. L. •.- V) N 4, C) 7 01 C) C CO co O U C) 17 VS 4, 4-++ i 0.0.0 C) 01 VI 10 0 01 L•1-1 1O L >.0 L 1O L C 7 0•-- 4- L E gm > C cc) .0.1 CO•- C •.- C) L C)4, 0 0 CS CO 0 0 0 O'M C••- 3 • L (C $$ C) •"* .0 C) U. O V) O.U >1O-=U C).•-I •.- 0 = . >13'0 0 O)E >Y L 0. > = 0 3 4-) O++ L C) 0 C 7 000 N 'CtO O 0 M C O 7 4- 0 O 0 O•)- C O ••-• 0••• N L 0 I- (C V)U 5- E )-44 et•- LL V) 0 1-1. 4, I-1 4- tO I- U.0 3 U) 7 0 • C) 0) Li Y W 4- C V)VI •N > en O N '.') C J O CO C 7 L C i, CO L O 0 1-14-11 ..•CO CO =V) 4- 1O Q a 0+1 I- Cy 17 >_4)4- 4- E C3 0 10 C7 E 0 C7 r C) Q) C7.x 0 C7 4.s C7++ C7 0 C 0 C7 L••- Z 0. Z IOU E Z re••- ZV) Z C ZI- (O•r Z_ U 04-4) _ 0 era .-+ r C V) -1.J 4.) 1-1 1-1 •n 1- Z.- C Z 0 C VI Z Z U Z E Z C) C)7 Z.0 4-) C) CDZ C)•.- Z••� tO C) Z+.)'C Z U Qp Z C. C Z 13 iJ' Z O)C•1.) Of Q > C Q+4.0 Ul <,_ C Q Q <- C Q C) VN.- <- (1) 0 J C) O J CO L V J CO 0 J J J (C•- J 3 1O 0 J C)LS L C =Z 0_O Ni 0_Z 0< 0-V)U Ct.V) CI-L.C. C.V)Z G. 0.Z•--)C. Z 0 N Z C) W O O O O O O O 0 +1 '7 J.--(0 NO MO et C) U,O 00 t`O O C C) O O O O O O 0_ O O O 0 O 0 O CO * J * C) * 2 LU * 0 < * C..) C * * * * * * ic * CC * 0 * >- 41 g LU O 2 LU E 0 O C3 LU L).. C:LL < H * Cl) * * * * * * * * * * C.) * < * O * C.) * * * E CD O cm,o o O C. C0 CD 0. 0 0 0 0 CC W C. O C) 0 0 C) Ch Cr) CC W LO Cr) LO CI- LC) C� C4 CO O.C O' iA 44 44 44 4•4 44 44 Ci' I-0.. LUJ 1.9 2 La..-1 CC 01 N 1 C.700 0 0) .--.Y...0) L. CD IC) CD IC)et CD LC) CD Ln Cr CD LC)CI" CD Ln Cl- CD C.)U H.-I )- 1--1.-I.-1 .--1.--1.--1 .--I 1-4 4..1 4--1.--1.--I .--1.--I.-I .-C.ti.--1 4--1 0< I I 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 11 1 L1_I J 0 N 00 CD 00 CD C. 00 CD CI Y CO Z CC =+1 00 00 00 00 00 00 <F LU-LU<li.J O_ C 00 00 00 00 0 0 LC)LC) 2 0 O O LO 0 LC)If) CV CVLO LC) N.n Cl)I-L.L./C. E M.-I Cr)Cr) Ct CT ch ct In LC) 4444 = =< W C.< CV CV 4444 4444 4444 4444 4444 N CO CC CO C-1 C) LUC1 CC Wr2-IO 0 O00 U. >L=i..Cl J _ < Z V).0 VI.0 Cl). .0 V).0 V).0 V) V).0 0 f O_4, O4, 0_4, 0_4 O4, O4. O_ L. 4, I...O 4-) CL) 4) CC)) 4) CL) �-) CL) +1 N ++ L. +2 C) C.) IJ 44 0 41 0 4, 0 42 C)4-) C)+I C 41 C V) C V) C V) C o C 0 C V) C N 2 7..- 7•- 7•r_ 7.- 7•- 7.- 7•- 0 4- C 4. C 4- C 4- C 4- C 4- C_ 4- C 1 C m4 m4 m' m6 m' m"9 m4 O /o 0IC Oro Oro 0Io Oro CI ICI w C.4. S.44 0 4. 0 0 0 0 O 4... >, 4- > 4- L 4- > 4- L -4L - > 4 0)tC C)CC 0)co 0)IC 0)Io 0)co C)Co C V) • C V) • C V7 • C V) • C N • G 1/1 • C In • N+I N 4.) V)4-) V1 i-) V)i, - V)44 V)4-. -0 C) C C) C b C) C •0 C) C Y7 CU C '0 C) C 1:$ C) G C 0 10 C 0 Io c c) no G 0 IC c C) CC C 0 CC C O Co 7 C) L 7 C) L. 0 C) L. 0 C) L. 7 C) L. 7 a) i- 7 C) L U. C 0) L.L. C 0) L.L. C 0) L.L. C 0) L.L. 0 01 LL C 0) 1.1- 0 01 V) C) L C W 2•— 2 2••o 2 2 2 2 J 0 C 0_ 0 4- 0 C) 0 r•- O_ I'- <� < << < < < yC+)CC CC <�•r0. I- I- 1-- I- >) 1- 0) 11-- E C I 7 co V)^ N_ C) V)•- C/) C) Cl) C N = E N O C .--. Co 0 r-. C C o--.+- •.r 0 h .._•- 0 �� 2 ro � 0. 0 I c �� C) 2 '0 0) f 0. E C S E 4) f Co 2 > In E 4)) 0 ¢ ° w <. .)E <.C) ¢IL c << <n. < ¢ C..)C.) C 2= CV 2 C) LU 0 0 C. O O C. C. C. 41 r-).. -I0 CV M0 IC 0 LC)0 COO h.0 (CI O 0 0 0 O O C. C. O C_ CO 0 0 0 0 0 01 # J I-1 # # U # Z W # 0 # O c # # # # # it # CC it0 # 0 W 0 W 0 O U W La. CC LL. # # # Q # # U # # 0 CC C7 O 5 D oC F-O W Z LL '11 p' CC O) CC N I C7 Z O O_01 U 1- -4 >- CO� 1-4 W O QO v N I I 1 1 I I I I I <COW Q O_ C_ J LLI ZEDLLI a W Q I O. NO CC CO (, W C7 Z O W C7 Lc.C:) O D CO Z 0 >- U I-L. Z O 0 O U O_ I-- d LU LU 1-4 cc ce U 0 . ce 0 H O O'CJ O 0 V 0 0'O Li-d-1 0) Li-4-1 0) Z O•E Z U E Z C.) C 01 CC 04-, C-) O� CC O ��a CI. O.W.a'O d 0- Z CV N 2 UC7 0 0 0 0O 00 00 rn 00 # O O O * N * J * U * W * C7 * * U O * * * * * * * * Q * o * r 0 W W U W W CC W * N * *• U * * * Q 0 O I on H • O N N LO N CC W n CO O. 2 O B W Ce 64 01 Z W y {q Ol N C7 ZO H Olc CT U U• ¢ r .-I .I .-1 W O O Y CO Zcog C74J Lf1O Z E r 01N O. CC N O 2 kJ" a 444" .-_7 5 .-1 W CD CC M.W-C9 CD O O CO • U Ni J S_ Q Q z O O O_ O U C S )- O 7 4) L. U S- W > Z O > 0 N a ro fl CL N O o ▪ o C.) G) U G) U N d N 17 C W d Cis >> • ro O ac E a) roUOf f- d i- I- ro W J F- ♦- U C W d C7 01 C O H i-1 rn z c 0 N UU Z N U CD O -' WO 0 O ro O J O 0. O. 0 Community Development Plan 1988-1992 .1-' _-11,-.. .-. ,4 0.0\4\4:4\4\ \T .,•• ,. ..,... -•- -- � �a��a ,,,,ee / 11-.• M: -�- _Ftn . . . Off& •/////// •/.i•//I/////////: 7-1.1 E-1---1,4.--- - •i 411\414:6t A•Oeee eee •eee• eo• 0,0,001 •••••• ...:•1...' . 7...:.1******- i• •• VAV k \Za://,"111.7,11.://,..";%,%%;:•://,. :-.1.1 I A'-'-'"'". . tA‘ •)%e4.\.%. .4?•. . 4-(i%, aka& ' ' ' '-'-'-' I'-'-'-'-'-1- ..'4NNIC1/4\k‘a440 NSk 41k-W.W.'11,71/7.•11.1.7.',W.? •17.,-7•7•7•7• 7•7,..7..7.•7•11t.:7::::":7:7.•:7 7 \\ 11:.4:•2:e227/27)72...cei.wee/iv;.7".• 7:7:7:7:7:7:7:7:7:7:7:7:7:7:7 1•:•:•:•:•:•:* :.1%.S.\\‘‘\\V:N.t •• I I/////I I I I//I• /I I,,// •/,. Salt Lake City, Utah February, 1990 Acknowledgements MAYOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Palmer A. DePaulis Kim Anderson,Chair Rosemarie Rendon CITY COUNCIL Hermoine Jex Renae Pierce Alan Hardman,Chair Bernice Cook Nancy K. Pace, Vice-Chair Russel Allred Ronald J. Whitehead Nancy Saxton L. Wayne Horrocks Barbara Bennett Tom Godfrey Rosemary Grim Roselyn Kirk Paul P. Osborn Don C. Hale Rawlins Young Diana M. Smoot Marion Willey DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Michael Zuhl,Interim Direcor Lee King, Deputy Director CAPITAL PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING DIVISION Stephanie Loker,AICP,Community Development Planner John Riley,Policy Consultant PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION Allen C. Johnson, AICP,Director Ralph Becker William T. Wright, AICP, Deputy Dan Bethel Neil H. Olsen,AICP, Planner II Cindy Cromer Mike Gibelyou,Planning Intern Thomas A. Ellison Lavone Liddle-Gamonal TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Richard J. Howa Ralph P.Neilson Norman J.Weiss,Technician III George Nicolatus Salt Lake City Division of Transportation Victoria Palacios John M. Schumann Published on Apple Macintosh. •u1 i s = e a 0 u Table of Contents • PREFACE 1 INTRODUCTION 2 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 3 GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES 4 LOCAL POLICIES 4 GENERAL POLICIES FOR COMMUNITY PLANNING 5 PROGRAMMING POLICIES FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6 CDAC POLICIES 7 TARGETING OF CDBG FUNDS 8 SUMMARY OF THE TARGET AREAS 9 MAP OF TARGET AREAS 10 NEIGHBORHOOD STRATEGIES 11 TARGET AREA STRATEGIES 13 ANNUAL CDBG PROGRAMS 1988-90 24 14TH YEAR CDBG PROGRAM 25 15TH YEAR CDBG PROGRAM 28 16TH YEAR CDBG PROGRAM 31 17TH YEAR CDBG PROGRAM 31 IMPLEMENTATION 32 APPENDIX 33 ii Preface Since 1975 Salt Lake City has received therefore, includes the 14th year's Community Development Block Grant activities. As the 15th funding year funding from the U.S. Department of approached, the need to obtain accurate Housing and Urban Development information became ever more critical (HUD).The amount allocated to Salt Lake and problematic. Statistical data were City is based on a formula related to the gathered from several sources for the City's housing condition, population, purpose of comparing existing and number of low and moderate conditions. While not all information was income households. Of course, the directly comparable, it was helpful in appropriation made to the program clarifying some local trends and problem nationally by Congress also affects the areas. Some of the data used by city level of funding the City receives. Since decision-makers is included in the Plan 1981, the total CDBG funding level has (see Appendix). decreased by approximately 45 percent, as concentration on the plight of the The strategies and actions recommended nation's urban areas was de-emphasized. in this Plan represent the efforts of Salt Lake City to conduct the most efficient This Four-Year Plan was initiated in and cost effective program possible for February 1989 during the annual the continued revitalization and planning process for the 15th funding maintenance of our urban environment, year (1989-1990). The Plan identifies given the limitations of the available neighborhoods to be selected for CD information. activities with regard to the level of activity, phasing into and out of each area, and project timing and coordination. The identification process included a wide range of public hearings, meetings with staff personnel, citizen groups and interested neighborhood residents, in addition to the formal assessment, recommendation and approval process (outlined in the City's annual Community Development Block Grant Program Policy). The conventional planning process (which would have been initiated in 1988, the 14th CD yeawasr) not followed due to the lack of current, accurate data with which to identifythe most suitable ar eas of the ci ty f r CD acti vities.s. The - - - decision was then made to remain in the current (13th year) areas. This plan, 1 Introduction The Salt Lake City Four-Year Community master plans as well as by its goals, Development Plan, 1988-92, will serve to objectives, general policies and direct the City's Community Development programming policies. The Community program for the fiscal years 1988-89, 1989- Development Plan, properly prepared and 90, 1990-91 and 1991-92. These fiscal years implemented, augments the city's correspond to the 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th conservation and revitalization efforts. funding years of the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant The Federal Community Development (CDBG) program. The Plan is designed to Program provide a framework for the application and allocation of the CDBG program in In 1974 the U.S. Congress passed the fiscal years 1988-89 and 1989-90, and Housing and Community Development planning for the subsequent two years . Act, which consolidated several categorical This Plan details the goals, objectives and grant programs into one directed at policies; the targeting of eligible improving the condition of the nation's neighborhoods; the neighborhood urban environments. The Community strategies; and sets guidelines for the city's Development Block Grant allows local future community development efforts and governments the flexibility to design the programming of funds to implement programs which will meet the unique these efforts. needs of their communities. The Act's primary objective is the development and The Salt Lake City Council, with the advice maintenance of viable urban areas, by and assistance of the Mayor, city staff and providing decent housing and suitable citizens, adopts an annual Community living environments, and by expanding Development Block Grant program based economic opportunities, principally for upon a three year plan. The program persons of low and moderate income. consists of projects and activities eligible for assistance and which will revitalize the Salt Lake City is a CDBG entitlement city city's declining neighborhoods and and receives federal funds annually to provide a better urban environment. perform community development activities. The CDBG program allows the City to establish its own plan for the Purpose of the Plan physical improvement of its neighborhoods. Money is appropriated by The purpose of this plan is to direct a HUD to local governments for program which best allocates resources to implementing community development address the needs of the city's communities plans. The City is required to prepare and and neighborhoods.The program is submit to HUD an annual application integrated with the city's Capital listing the projects and activities that will Improvement Program and other publicly be undertaken. and privately funded programs. The plan is guided by the city's neighborhood 2 Citizen Participation in Community Development Advisory Committee Development Planning (CDAC) was formed and ratified by ordinance. CDAC functions as a liaison among the City Council, the Mayor and The revitalizing, rebuilding and his staff, and city residents. Utilizing such preserving of urban communties requires a citizen group with advisory capacity to the advice and committment of those who the Mayor and staff on community will be affected. Involvement of residents development concerns provides the and other citizens in the planning and planning process with continuity. CDAC implementing of community is composed of 15 neighborhood development representatives projects is an "Citizen input is considered an important appointed by the essential part of factor in structuring the [CD] plan. Mayor and creating a city Expressions of citizen priorities and initiative approved by the that meets the can be the deciding influence when the City Council. needs of statistics, data and technical evaluation residents, who identify several areas or projects eligible for As a part of their depend on the ceding." responsibilities city for basic (Salt Lake City Community Development CDAC reviewed services. Citizen Participation Plan, p.9) the policies for the four-year In the past, HUD's citizen participation plan as well as all annual proposals 0 requirements encouraged cooperative submitted for Community Development working relations between city officials (CD) funding. They also interviewed all and citizens. Although revised applicants and participated in meetings regulations reduced the citizen with representatives of involved City participation requirements in the departments and agencies to select planning process, local policies adopted projects and target areas. by the Salt Lake City Council assure that citizen participation will continue. This Because the relevant demographic data plan calls for citizen participation at the available to city decision-makers is city level in the overall application and considered to be out-of-date (and program preparation, and at the therefore unreliable), the continued neighborhood level, where significant inclusion of citizen participation is activity is being proposed or especially crucial to the decision-making implemented. process. Fortunately, the level of participation in the design of CD Individuals need sufficient information activities in the City has grown steadily and assistance in order to understand the since the inception of the CD Program. complexity of the important decisions the Continued success in the city's city faces. At the same time, participating revitalizaton efforts are due in large part private citizens must be able to retain to the willingness of city residents to enough independence that they may truly contribute their time and efforts to the reflect private, rather than city, points of process. view. To accomplish this a Community 3 Goals, Objectives and Policies Salt Lake City will be guided in the ❑ - to concentrate the use of funds through administration of the Community the targeting of neighborhoods, especially Development Block Grant (CDBG) where their use will result in improvements program through this Four Year in several neighborhoods; Community Development Plan. The Plan formulates goals, policies and objectives ❑ - to offer housing rehabilitation programs for the CDBG program. to owners of single - and multi - family homes; The primary goal of the Community Development Plan is to revitalize, ❑ - to provide sidewalk, curb and gutter, redevelop and preserve neighborhoods. and street improvements in target Specific goals of Salt Lake City are: neighborhoods; ❑ - the prevention of slums and blight and ❑ - to provide and improve parks, the elimination of the causes of blighting; community centers and other recreational facilities; ❑ - the elimination of conditions detrimental to health, safety and public ❑ - to stimulate private investment and welfare; community revitalization by improving existing infrastructure; ❑ - the conservation and expansion of housing stock; ❑- to improve patterns of residential, commercial, industrial and recreational land ❑ - the expansion and improvement of the use;and quality and quantity of vital community services; ❑ - to provide limited public service programs for low - and moderate - income ❑ - the most effective and efficient residents where no alternative funding utilization of available resources; and sources are available (priority will be given to public service programs which ❑ - the alleviation of physical and complement physical development activities). economic distress by stimulating private investment and community revitalization. The City has identified a number of objectives to be accomplished for the Local Policies achievement of the goals of the Community Development program. These On September 15, 1981, the Salt Lake City are: Council adopted the following general and programming policies, which supplement the Federal requirements, to help guide local officials through the decision-making process. The policies were formulated by the City's 4 Community Development Advisory will be realized through a concentration of Committee, the CD planning staff and the funds in those neighborhoods. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Team. 7. Funds will be involved at two levels of activity: a) comprehensive activities with a full General Policies for Community range of eligible projects,and Development b) specific levels of activity addressing one 1. The Community Development program or more needs. will be administered under the original intent as outlined by the Housing and 8. Specific criteria for target area selection Community Development Act of 1974. will be observed, with a proposed area containing most or all of the following 2. A short-range plan will be developed characteristics: for programming funds aimed at eliminating blight; preventing ❑ - a strong residential component, either neighborhood deterioration by providing existing or proposed; decent housing and a suitable living environment; and expanding economic ❑ - identifiable deterioration in public or oportunities, principally for persons of private properties; 0 low and moderate income. ❑ - an area of manageable size- larger than 3. CD planning will be carried out in a single project, yet small enough to accordance with existing community, perceive change; neighborhood and capital improvement master plans. ❑ - an area where CD "seed" money will serve as an impetus for continued 4. The citizen participation element will be improvement including the return or carried out in accordance with existing expansion of private investment;and community, neighborhood and capital improvement master plans. ❑ - a neighborhood identity, with recognizable boundaries and significant 5. For the revitalization and needs of low and moderate income redevelopment of neighborhoods to be residents. effective and for the for the programs which are funded by Community 9. Neighborhoods should not be targeted Development funds to be successful, there indefinitely. Targeting of an area will be must be compatible land use planning and considered "successful" when most or all zoning to stabilize the residential aspects of the following criteria are met: of the areas involved. ❑ -The targeted neighborhood is accepted by 6. The goal of stabilization and/or the neighborhood itself and the community at revitalization of residential neighborhoods large is a viable,revitalized area; 5 ❑ -Private investment activity is evident; 5. Existing sidewalk rehabilitation will be available in selected target areas and other ❑ -Basic services have been made available areas approved by the City Council, and to the area; and will be funded 100 percent with CD money. ❑ -Recognizable goals are achieved. 6. Community Development project programming shall be coordinated with the capital improvement planning program. Programming Policies for Community Development 7. Whenever practical, CD projects will be phased so that planning, design, 1. CDBG funds will be used as one of acquisition and development proceed in several tools to implement the Housing the most efficient manner. Furthermore, Element of the Salt Lake Master Plan. The development plans will be written and plan outlines the city's financial policy to published for each full-scale target area. promote housing. Included in the policy is the use of CDBG funds for land write- 8. In those target areas where down, construction of parking areas in comprehensive activities are planned, support of housing, construction of parks projects aimed at making the greatest and other neighborhood amenities and the impact wil be phased in first. For example, improvement of infrastructure necessary infrastructure improvements will be for housing projects. precede housing rehabilitation. 2. The housing rehabilitation program, 9. In general, a majority of annual CD administered through the Redevelopment allocations will be spent to benefit target Agency, will be available primarily in CD areas. target areas or as specifically authorized by the Redevelopment Agency Board of 10. Annual projects to be considered for Directors. Rehabilitation outside of a target funding subsequent years' programs will area should be approved only if the fit the goals of the 3-year plan, but will be Redevelopment Agency Board of Directors flexible throughout the time frame, in determines that significant benefit in the order to meet changing needs. neighborhood shall be achieved. 11. Projects scoring highest on the 3. CD funds will be used in conjunction evaluation criteria will be given priority with other capital improvement funds, as for CD funding; of the evaluation criteria, they become available, for infrastructure the cost-benefit appraisal will receive high improvements. consideration. 4. CD funds will be used to provide new 12. City targeting of CD areas and programs curb, gutter, sidewalk and street should also take into consideration improvements in eligible target areas with resources available in the private sector demonstrated need. and attempt to leverage them. 6 13. Steps should be taken to promote joint 3. CDBG funds for street improvements CD programs and economic development and parks should only be used for projects with the business and other neighborhood-level services. It should be community groups. the responsibility of the City's general fund to construct community parks and 14. Realistic programming of funds shall collector streets. CDAC recommended be initiated in order to improve the some community level parks [in 1989] in implementation of CD projects . Enough order to complete them, but will not time must be allocated to allow each recommend them in the future. department involved to carry out its individual responsibilities, such as 4. Planning Division proposals that are not obtaining citizen input, conceptual neighborhood oriented should be funded planning, design, bidding, construction from general fund. and inspection. 5. CDBG funds are intended to benefit 15. Timely and efficient implementation of lower income people and should not be projects should be required. used to fund projects that benefit the City as a whole. These should be funded by all 16. The Community Development citizens who benefit. Advisory Committee can adopt their own rules of administration for policy formulation and target area designation. (l Community Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) Policies In early 1989, the Community Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) developed a set of policies for the guidance of their decisions and actions. These are: 1. As a general rule, all slippage funds will roll over to the next [funding] year. However, CDAC will consider all requests for slippage and may recommend granting of funds on an emergency basis. +';; 2. Funding of contingency requests will be limited to construction cost overruns or gs b ;;;:;;;;: ; ;; emergencies (as defined by CDAC) only. • •• k\\A k + These will be reviewed and granted on a case by case basis. 7 Targeting of CDBG Funds "Targeting" is a process of concentrating of the areas' demographics, housing and public resources in a limited number of other physical conditions, and prospects neighborhoods. The targeting of for future development. Community Development Block Grant funds was initiated in the Salt Lake City Data compiled from the decennial U.S. Three Year Community Development Plan, Census has been a central source of 1978-81, in which several Neighborhood demographic data used to identify target Strategy Areas (NSAs) were identified and areas. In 1982 and 1985 (years in which selected to receive a concentration of previous Three-Year Community Devel- CDBG funding. The selection process was opment Plans were written) the census intended to delineate those areas of the data were current enough to be considered city having the greatest promise for accurate and representative; because the stabilization and to identify data is now 10 years old, it is important neighborhoods that have begun to decline that they be supplemented with other, but, with a concentrated effort, could more recent, information. Difficulties continue as viable residential arise, though, due to inconsistencies in the neighborhoods. The targeting concept was methods of data collection and continued in the 1982-85 and 1985-88 formulation, and in the different ways Three Year Community Development Plan. various agencies and organizations subdivide the city for their needs. As a The designation of NSAs was result, it has been essential to include the discontinued in 1981 for administrative participation of residents, city employees reasons, resulting in less Federal and other individuals and groups familiar regulation and a greater degree of local with the neighborhoods and their flexibility; however, Salt Lake City dynamics in the targeting process. continues the process of concentrating block grant funds in a limited number of In response to these difficulties a special neighborhoods. Today, community areas in meeting was held in May. Representatives which CD funds and efforts are of community groups and city agencies concentrated are designated as "target were invited to come together to discuss areas." and assess their perceptions of the city's neighborhoods and their problems. Much Four of the "General Policies for of the discussion focused on the Central Community Development" listed City and Westside neighborhoods, previously address the issue of selecting especially concerning a widespread view areas for CD funding. These policies that problems persist in the areas despite provide a framework for target area past efforts to revitalize the selection. Selecting neighborhoods in neighborhoods. Comments received at the which the use of CDBG funds might have meeting were influential in later the greatest impact requires a knowledge considerations of future target areas. 8 Summary of Target Areas for the 1988-92 Four Year Plan Changes to target area boundaries and selection of new target area communities are based upon analysis of existing neighborhood needs, accomplishments and future plans. During the next three years, some previously targeted areas will be re-opened; some currently active neighborhoods will be closed. Two communities,not targeted previously, will be opened. A comprehensive list appears below. Target Year Year Anticipated Activity Plan Area Opened Closed Activities Level Status Jackson 1979 1985 Re-Open in 1990 Limited Written1 Peoples' Freeway 1979 — Close in 1991 Full Scale Written1 Westside 1979 — Continue Full Scale Written1 Central City 1979 1985 Re-Open in 1990 Limited Written1 E. Central 1979 — Close in 1991 Full Scale Written1 W. Capitol Hill 1979 — Continue Full Scale Written1 Guadalupe 1982 — Continue Full Scale Written1 So. Central-A 1982 1986 Monitor Limited N/A2 0 1 So. Central-B 1982 1987 Monitor Limited N/A2 So. Central -C 1983 — Close in 1990 Limited N/A2 SugarHouse 1984 — Close in 1990 Full Scale Written1 Euclid 1986 — Continue Full Scale Written1 N.E. Central 1986 — Continue Limited N/A3 Fairmont 1986 — Continue Limited N/A2 ; Westminster 1986 — Continue Limited N/A2 Emerson 1987 — Continue Limited N/A2 East Downtown -- — Study By Project4 Written3 Glendale -- — Open 1989 Full Scale Written3 Onequa -- — Open 1990 Limited N/A2 1. Completed Target Area Plan. 2. Limited Target Areas - small area plan not initiated. 3. Plan is a part of a larger area plan completed or being completed. 4. This high-density residential area is being studied to determine how to stabilize it and solve problems particular to the neighborhood. 9 ...!;,.....;..;:..,: .;;;...,;,...-::.y.:;;,::.7.-.:•... :-.,::: ::!. . ::: ...,:::;:r••,..':::' ::: ::!..!.• ::•.!!:•:!,;!!•:••••, • . • • PROPOSED CDBG TARGET AREAS• (., . ,....,„ --- July, 1939 to June-i:.?-1-992 / ,:..__, ..== ,.•:_•,. 2t--...-..-:=_-7;..=-_,_-.:,.: --, -,--,..\---„. ;:t:_.od, I .7.:--.- - i 1 - .- .‘-.:-.7,:•'':-':_ :-------=_,'*•' !'"*. :•:_•:\•‘....' :•-iirif '-. i -: -'t ; -:•- - .-----. , ,,,-•:-..--, ,• •,. i; . .___ _____:.:)...„...-,:-.,:____..___,,...; ..„...„....„,_-_..„-•,-...„.-......._. .......„, •., ,s.-- . - _..,.„...„...„.„,„.._____,.__,:,,,.,., _•,:. .. •,.,......:,„:_ :„,7 .I? ;r: .: . '.-7' '.-...- '-'-.r N-, 7:,-_-_, .:'• ':sg;=••'•=" -=...1i• !i',•••••.- ::::-_•;-".-...-.!'; t . "-* . •..—-,.,..__.. __- ‘,., T-..,-'3-._-• .-...... - _.,...._—-=_ _ .... E; 7..? ;--:.: -- - - ---- -----. ---• . • 1.4 .,-...:,..--- _'•. " - —,.....-. `!.... i..--. Capitol Hill . .: -... . ...".":.== =f:L.-S.:'. .,! --1:117 ''•'.. :: .7,-'j-11 ';'....e7.,.--°..,,,-7,\-,.,\..\\k"\\ - :..,-.--- OP :.. ...-,.. .-.7:..,.. .----,._•:_ p 0 ' ;-... 7,; 7 . ' :' . - . . ,—.1-- ::::,7............. r--t- . - - • • : :';7'4'-%.•' ,-.! ; -- :=•:' sz...-',..,,, ••••• i ' -,....‘.! : li, . ---- •-= _. I..- ." rof Al uPe- — —. .---,„-E-f••:= • : • . - ----• •• --'-- - ;,---71 .•-7 • .. •-.•••••!”. •' % -.2, Ar g ,•= ' ; -- . . . . • ; i-!-•••,-•-• -___ .___'_1 ,-z-='—' ''•:'--,- • ,. . . - . 1.q.....Z..;:. ••-/e;,Tf!_.-.A--Z :77.1:±17 • , 1 i' I ..-, _... ; ;— - It -,-< i.• -,-'71-----„.-.-,. . '.:.--.--z---7--- : .;I., ' . .1.=-- • /: . , ' -'-,,,/At: '..•p---t-Z. ;,..,.... ..:..., . '---'-- -`---.....--cr7.— ..-.7'....--, - 1 ' " ` . - •• ' • ' . - - ' A 'tb..e. -t z.___:..1:--- -. ,..--,-.1,---, - -: ; -v.‘."_,,e--..: , • _ ....,_ ___1...,.1 _._ ___ ,__ ___ ___ _,._ ---_-. ____ II II 7. -•":"---='...g-A . - ,-' :5 2-',iF !. '' "..,2%,:' L- .....:.. '' /I: • % ':-"-;LI= Dovmkown ' - •• Ar '-'-- --,.-::-.-- -,'; _!.• _:=-2".'. =.-- _ - • -; , I i,,-:::::.:k ,,-.---_, .-.4 — -' ' .7/7./ .— — ''-'-• -: •-•; . F.1 II i'___•'---L'_...- '., ,:(.../' •••"•:' , ' " F-- ' '...1•:;-!:,-' , = .'::../''' • . A =.- -.-- • •-• Y.V.- \,7---• , —,•,•„—; • ., ,---;:---, 7.--: 7.,- 7,-- • ! ——7-- :4/ •;.!.\--=• 1 i= 1! I. •.''•• • :. . ••, _ 7_._,•_t:-___.:•.___;; ___: _.__._,; •-_ --. . .. ,'.t...-::.----.,1-----__ ___,_ __ ___..__ _- Le 7 1 ' ,,, ..7.._,_,_ -'=-.'*-.2... . r- ' i ''..-.741--C.;:: ..3], 'fl•';:.:.-•;..: ---•••:_,_ =_::..1 •." - -' t; •-.0 ••-: g:!:'!;•-E-- ! - '" (.7-1—' 1,16-• --cy. -7•1 -•••••- ...7;7 . . ! .,_• •-: - ---,.!, •!•••-•'L:-.;:f',.‘:"...".:-'."'. ll1 • •__L•—.i.-...--1 ' - -Vi-E 0 cent-ril.,t- _7___,.. •ii It T.:-.==--±±.-=-::,--:-- - - . ••- "----1-1 Peoples-." — \ - "r-Dr:- = =•::.I:g ;;" .__IL E=-- -4`. ..-tili '. .1 3; Is I, 1 .1-; ' -- s••••• • t '' • ' ' ' .. ..__._,____, • j,J.1"....11,...--.....=--,,.;12..:_ ' '. . . ”.-.1•:.:j:-1,••••:•-11•.: - •r:t-0=-IC MI...:.•-.=1.:,, : '''''. • ‘-',r7t:77''Fr e?Yalr 7 I ;E...\\iiN. '• ...\:-.\_:\- ' ' :171.„.0_:7.1.1-.--7-;. '-7":.--........---...--.;'-a.':- -,---=_::: _-_.=.:.7 - • '•^ : ' --.1._1_..; ' .__..b.yj_ -,2 1.1-.1\--\.A. -.--14 '-\-: -;'- -- —---_,- .---,- ------=— .- --_ =-:-•--=----- -,---- ' - . \—` ;:,7. , .....,,, ,,,IDI 1-f•'"-'-'"1-'-''--= P4: i i.(7-..:-7:--n-b:±:iTs._• •itf.:7-•.';' '' ''''--• II '-- s ' ' ''s ' ' '''' . 7'.: r,f;--g•;:. 1 ..:.!. -.-r,.. Ll....--., _ _,.....-,.. • ••••••••, 1 i I.. :`"=- 'ir,- ",..,!--•---.... , !-!.- -" ..1;..! , .,4:1 rt.:.-a= ,=77.-_ *I 'Ka R.q!!q 0--1-,LonE. i•"":1• ••'7.- i'i I.! -_..,... _.- L---L", "'":.....i. "..,,,,ILI.-==-...--- ..-,r,; 417,14,1i'l ihm,+,./..7::-7-,1,,,,,,_.:.•:::".-'1.-- ----,:- • i. I. 3' I ilIr'-'::::• ' 's.! •":. ', 4 •. ••7-9-•-4 -7' 1:i:. D i =.-m-- .. F..-1,_'-',. .1-''-'''' ' ',-..,--,;,:,. _;LL:.j:L ,,.... • • • .2,• ,. _ ...„1 ::-, ; • ,li. Glenda/a..1 .1,-•:-.:=--'--:=;;I. ly,, - ..• !I .'7.7-.. -D: - -----,c::-'21-,-,--a,...I i 1 , . ----•‘-_,-...:-,- .,_.--_f--7=-..,-,_.:- ff--iif=j-- a-_-.. 'o•.-.-,_:_,--,_ -:5.:.F5,11:trfl ii.. ;It--•=7,---7; ..7.7,-7,----='-' 5;•.1:3......--- -.:E • • I.•:..,,',,:,,4, , ,„; • • • .._ ,z.,..: .:!; ii V.1,,.:=-"=--‘-•-*.., A -s. ........„2..,-.,_,,,..., _, ,, , r,,.--, !•:.7...,._-,_--__..:_, _ .„...A., '•', ' P.:i :',, -,• i i i....":.--••:-:., ‘,1 c • •'...._. --,..- 7-.1 ----=.1_-. ' '--'.. .--, '''.-721 .-,.. .. ......•• -.-,..- -..... ,.-_ .. -,.-__....' ' i•e.2. -__,---=4.. 4.411, ,.. ._. , -:;,f-7 —.p lit,.=-.-.7:7:--,.7.-_-_, ,. ;4,, ,•• .,..-.1-=-•.--;t .;..,...; ,p•-=:74/2/1--• _...„..,_. - - II 1 1,;!.!?,!•-----,••- -, ''' ••• •...•-,.=4.0.ro-F.T......:=471-ri-S:-&,i7.-"-- sr- "----- =•,- :1•=7"; . ..; 2•:::--”, 1 '1-'4-----: •.oz•:. =•..-. __,;.-,- .. LI,--,r_ --,..VZ ;t ;1...W..-z: - 1 •t •1 ...,. !1,-,1 _,----i I 1 tt::17!_7:7,....,/Mt;..,,::;it ,.•• ,II.,,..1,,..----,...,.rart.L.,... ... uttr•e-i V. . -71;21.::. = 1.1; CI.Of I i 1[ i If II .11011 i=...'q'r- 1'7,ttti. `.=a.. '..tt.......'!T;i1e.41.7:.'.5....,::....'-.--`-',;.'",-,-,,-.. ideili - . . ,.%--......-.:=.', *.f1U-F,T, ..,1PIl'! !.•?:. '..i =• • - ..'1,1:-..:,1•4_-.r,reP'",- ---,i_--=.-- • i i - --='-'--r-'-:iFiR7;r?''- q " 91-- 1; ii .,• 7...,—4 1=• • ,.,:k.4.g.s,c-- ..,--rz-r... .C....-.:,k,.. .....—-‘•- •r.,,-_...._.,-,=•:_-_,:•;--_- :-:,-:-,•,-,...,: , 1- ' 1;r .. 7,-.. .°=; ...=.-=_ g.:_.!'?.-.....:;.-....:-.7..vit,,,•-.....-:-... ..: .,j--l-•Ai: ....,..,:.--.7.-.1 - -, i li . ..---__- • i-o-- • !i__... ILI -I -_-_-: .r. :1 '' , •i:• ......„:,.. ...,,.....,._:._,.../1"ri__. _ 7-- sr&_,,: i•:____,::z._.._._, .1.,.1 ,• -= .,_. _L-=,-f.1 _____r==,:--.= :I-11 ••• :1,„ =I !I.r! ..:,i;Ill' Our •'. -- -'..- A' '1K .V ..4... !"'-'5.';,, ' 1:.;'=-:',- -h:, ii f-' .....N...__ •...,:_:_:`:::- - , IV i1,5. li ;l•r z gr,-. *--=-....- •-•-- -14...,.- _ ... ;71_'__,'• ..1.-ty-.•-_- r-' : 1--,;,-....-/, 4, ..,....., .., _ --,,„;,_.1 ,11 .„..-.• . ;Ii, 11 :i. ' 7-:_ -.-.7' .i I ea.. . •' i:-..-":-.." •=1 ..-=-1-.. ....... I 11111 i I 1 r5:-.---.,.•. ..?.!--..1, ' 04*.±.4,„.7.•1,1 ic •n, . AfAIIIL . • t , ."--o,-,..,---- ..',.il 1 ell, I, 177--'------.1'.---, • -:*z- &-7-4.:' - • -- .,;.k I ;t 17=7,-.' „I 1""-,7- e; ... -/ '-. • •-r7--..... ..-:6.. o m. 41 - , . ,r;.•;:-77= Target Area Activities -11p-- ---- - •_.=. y, - )1. . - '‘: ---:.---77--- 1988-1992 -,•,.. . ._,,,•---- -,...,:1:-:. prtrAr ilk . y ,.."iii-.17., . :1,i::= •-•-z.,..1-7.--!I-.77- 7:17::: -*- - ''' -r. - 96 .' --=7::-.----r:'' ''•:-.--.... _61111- 7- 77r" • ! - or; vei- ---'- le. • , - / .," /A 7:._77;••.'•-•::::.-•- •F Continued . , -- ---7- -',=.-=,,,ti:".k. ' • ,.__. ,A0',77,. F=....41. 1)7), r jt...\„ d t--=-,..1,-:. 1 - •2 _,_ V - -T. ----__ '''• I i:.: , ,,(---t,1 -..ca„ ir -*Vii ,••• :-1.-Li.-75.-:!ih•..I, :.': :i Open in 1989 ..........- • • . _ • :.-----:=,----, ,.. „ •,,,,,zL.--.., ._-.....75. .....:i vt,.t.-.410,, __-_,0; r:::1 .. Open in 1990 n... I ;----- L--...--- 7••-• .. _..1• •' • . —!------7.---- ' '' VA, V V4:417,f.' 0 US e _i-Fi..k:!.s....i,:u...: •—-, -- :.: H.--..--r -•,':.-=..7.-: . --- -.1.-t._,..:-. -41.4107f,--=-:. 1::.,..-'- '' 1•14 '''''''' a ..„. .,. • ---;..r---.= ;i-,=-• —,.E:-.4t•-;;,7'-z-_-__..,-:.L-L-_—. ---;-:AVAVi_.,_7'7'•;L-7-,t::„,....-..- .1 trrt.r•tt r.. N Re-Open in 1990 - . —.-- ---•-. 7 • 7: r ':',. .-:•-• ;:.----.--'--::..:'- ':'!:: --• ::::i--.;.....„,.....'''—'',.. '_= ..,— .;.4.! ; . I I: --- -7- r! .1 • .:—,-7.-=:=r... "=".I''.- .7----‘=.. .. - ...AO! Close in 1990 ,•! ! : !I ii! ;.• -.-÷"- --.'="-÷--:...-',-,-"-":-- = 1- ----:...-----.- ,..z•—:.-4Z.•:'-'--:.---.'*--- -,==;-7 4 L -: •,1 ...., ::.=-.L._.-.77,,,,_-_- t ,: , ..,....t.::=.... .....5. ..... .....:_ Lrlip 1 . Close in 1991 ..• - ...'-' ;. 17 ....---,.-_-_.- ..,' l•-=----:."-'7.7::.:±1'29 ! 't. .1- /-----" _'.... . ........,:l: , --._ [77) Study P 1 .-.• •;••r --,,- 0 , 11 Monitor 10 , s • • .• ...At: , ...--..;.--,,,, ...., .12'y : --=.-- - -. -\\„',,e) PROPOSED, CDBG TARGET AREAS 1.6 ... •11-. - : -• :. ;.i. ;1,.:!, ..;•••••-- .. •- ,‘ , „, --..,..-.2. • ____,,...,_-_,.....--„..., .. _,.:•,,,___,...__,..„. ,‘, Jul-y, . 1939 to 1 unq, 92 , .7..:.-...... :••••:...., .-... •-1.: • • • •• _. , ••,, . , •-•:-.....:-..--•. . •- • .....4. .. I I; II :i 11 .- ;=,..;1• i 1,,, • ‘‘,....-.• \...,,, , --2.-J:-7-:&- -.- - • ;-'--..., ,./ I. =i-i\r‘...j.....i..), : 1 ..... ‘_ ..... ,___ .. \ _ __.„__ ___........_,,c;I • • •-•=,N l',. •••_.".._,-.., ; ,.>, ',‘ - I ' ':" C.: •• -•. ""---- -,tt.z.:.. . , -••-•", •-• "='47-71.--", .="rt...u"7"-•1 As : •"0.-- I. "7't',•:. '• . i. - i 1--- t:._-..7,,=. 1 ., d , t. .• "••••::= 1 • :••:7' •'---•••••••..4. ••.'...›,..... -•-• .....::!••j; •---I• •-"L'-":'[..-...l.1..3;• •' '1 ;;::1:•..-=-;.7:=--- -Z ..r.,=.• I .• :-•••:•-::•:`>'7.--•'' ‘.....•••;-";•-..^. •'' •• • ..% ..' .. : . • • • !! ; ,•-;;;: •!....4_;-;;;;',...,- . ; I :.: I .. ; \‘ • •-•.--,-r-.,•'',-1.=-..-••_•_;-=:',..-=-- • .7!...• - • . • --- - -7,2...7_ :_->..• .4.• -..........7----....,.;1. - _-- ....;.1 1 .., ..t j:- .j'. •-i..; : . ! _;_..7.=....".......---...sz 4..W1."....1.,•-,.-...-----7.4L . 1 • ,-,- 7. ' :. ;.1 n'!.... ",:-.. -6-..:'..:'. ..:1-:: • ir..-,...i. • , . t.----'.:,..••.: . .,.. •::;7•• •••---t ••• -1 '.::.. • 72.t., - ....... , • ••••- .-=..._:-.7.....i, ];--1,i:j••,„.. / ...,,L- .._ __.,__,.m•-__z_ .... ..•.. .. k-=_-•.. ... --' -- -- ••• •'• 'VW ' 7 - ,.-..-,_....- --' _-. - .. • ' , . . ',...1i 0 et --0• •-0: .Q, 1 'I"' "dh- • ; , ' : --Fr . ..._...... ,,..., •,.; .,0 ... ......,\.• s: - - -- •• st Capitol Hill ......_ ____:_..,... „.,..„.,.,„ I: : ---- ,..z::_- --.- _, _ _ ..._._ or •„.- - •J :. • : ••.•,•• . ._. •........1: I I i ..I.,-43 ti oUnrallil 0.ii 0:!..:: • ''S 0 • .-F .----'."7 ,! ---•--:•--7 7!--•7::::Q. ..' ; ,-.•- -.Z.::;, • ..., . i : • .1 ' ..;,7.17. --:-.!-,7':;e•••••ot• '• •. . -- ..; '.__. ..--..--.•-•.=--,--..-I C......... : :'•ii• -•;,......:... -•1 •- • . _ .....,__ _ ...._ •--,-,--•••-,,--,,-7-7. ., .• z,;,. ,, ,•.• -.--...- ..::::77.•-• --'-''''' ••••-.7-• 4-.-. 7.,•• -• • ''-.....-3-T...--r I-1.-......- -r ZZSt....,-...., -741:.,-..1 i-- •:.;,.:f',........ • ' N\,....• . ! ;,s,: •I ••••• • : T., \''' .% .• •_ • 7....1-.• ' 1'7. !i .--::NI-`1. t--...-4,•-• --•- •'.• _ .,r•:-•-.:0:--._ _..•--•---• - '-•._ 4-_-:' •-1 1 --*-:•-• S••••••,- ' .'"''' ' 1. -.•\ tkse --m r, ,---:.7---•-,..1 7:-.7-7'--•••-•.t. • 1,1.1;:' --,,, ... ; v__ ."•••••7' . Iff 1 upe , _ _ ,,,..-- , -_,„ . ,. ... •-.• • , i 7---- ,..,-=---- - ,--• ......___. ';7 . . / : \\T., =•----11/4 hi - .• ie 1 t.. ,----: ! 77'-'• . • ; - : - -•,...'_.1__.•._.2__•-:.• • ; • - •• • -;c ,_.=•'_.-_-: ir--1 nr _0-1,-; ---- .---- - -- --- -_____,.__,_.,--,•--,,-• , ,.. •-.7 :-7, r-7 . ..•_ . ,, --..=.•-• - IT!.•:_,..,''';:-.31: -..../e r-ar:r. "1 ::. _ .......zLi-1 7----3 .1 • 1-7,.,....: ...2.:r IT!. 7-7 r,--- .._,..,___ ._,--7: -., . • . •- ..--,<.-1 • •--, . -......, ..7- . .-4r,---.. ___... 1,„__,____. _ ------ _ _ , - - Cr- 4..a.. ......- 7-••••• 4 ---. ---- .---7 7::7. I • 4,_.:_ . , . I = i , , .....r... ... 1,..• d/• .......• -_-,-.. 1:;-`.., •._ _ . ( _ . ,. r ; . r ...:•-•.,,,, r-- 1 •/Et 1/• z• n...r.1-••••Th•;; .... .-...ai :....: '. ; .4; i V•;. ; 0. ! Fr.,- ; .e:'. • - i • • „...,„, __,, , :1'..•.1 e-c-•,, „ • _ ____ - • ----...:_--- r, .___ „,...,_,,,, ,4_._, ,._ , .• „__-_i:' __._______„... .-•-..-::...of•••-•,',L! •• 4.,„.. ..„," .'_.‘,.._-., -..11,_...... ,____, ,-...,- ;.7, ,---, r-,= 7--r--: --7. , . „3, 7-1!• --/-/ 7-AT,/... 1 -'--7,•• ' :1•• •1) -, -11 % ; : i: •;:I . ; I I 7- • - ..,,:Lai_ '-1Tortne -::-_-- F-4----_ ,,Q-- i:::.• „F:-.:-.4..„,.,,d .,,,, ..: ,_.,_ -.11,...`...Y, ,._'_ :-.- 1- L.- ,-,- --, East - ___42 ,,w,,,- ,/ _ ----_-_-,--24P,7---------- . • ___:;, ___,-_••-•,-,,,,,,--n. - •----1 ,--,... r---. :--:---, ;--- :---, 1- -•-Arse.-i...'r•-..-7;-11!,,----....-,.. :-..•-....-:- . . , , ,. _ .11.: t 7••-" 7 : ..7.7..- f; ' :-„, %:,:-.:,,, '•-f . '__ .....° •;••:',•r•.:• ::: :;; I. 'I • 14 ^4" • ;•' ‘ :.-•• II I Li 1 1=-7 •'217. = •-i1 I.t,--. I-•7-- •Downtown --'-__-...1-. /7 .....:: • •"•ii::t ,i 7._7;..,_,....• . 1.11,.A7, , 11....1 , •'.. II; ' .ii/r,,n , .,...t,.•••••••••‘ I=..II;,r-. ,-- - --_-. .rj: 7-, 7-7 r,.; .., _.:. ...,... ,..,, , .-,... .....__,..2a :. , =. 4.- ..._- . . ......__ 1:1 it -.:---"-,,....>.-1;4.1-,' ..,...:", .11 y../.I. 7;.7r!..• ‘ 1 i A'-• •.- j .,4 11 ••••••." - 7= • ; ^:. -,:, " : 7. ___/r_-_u_ 11 ••:- •I:-77 7-7. , -- '\,.,',.; ••.. lIZCLU,---..,.. .1:1......U.4fr--,I. III=---,,-•-•-,----. `---- -77 .. ,-. -,- r•--- 77 77- F-7 ;7) =7---i •--nr- 11 -,,, -:-.--•-,,-.7. -- ,r1r--, •--• Fr..= 7-r-, 7,--,- I • 7 ; , • . :..-.. •_. • i, • •• ••• --,: I :,t• . ,; ,• ' \--7-7. --I,7-.77 --: -..:forT 1.4--‘• _...:: 1:- ": -.. •it.: • •:,,-: ,--- • • , 2 ! 't .... ___ .---, .4..- : ••- • . - ,- , ''': ' ..1!•L=.--1.--.=1.-3 l'. __.___•• 4•-.1•/:. 4:__.: '''`'‘.'. -----...._.:..!_-------L.._ a -_ = -.- - --.---, -_:_-_-- --,:r -J-7- - IT.c., 71.7, -Thi ;; ;•.; • .., I ,-- •-•-•1.----r--7";. _,•,---=--r.77• ..1 st..:...--e .. 7 --•ar .-- , . -..-_...:. .. , .._...- •-1 7---; :e• .--'I, 7 7,-- Liii; !1-7-1n.ri Fit'?,..'-':. --1.7-'''-'"-1 .lei''I ''''. •E 4 ; -i 1 I IA!-;:I .,71 • •: • : i 1 j- -' - ,-,7.,. !,1.:__I =__,-, - • .. ___ ____I:i::___:I_:.'..... L.!!i: ,....: ,i! \j._;••.---:-!---1!--•1-7 7-- '. i..,C,C1--"."....,.. .-:1.- - .,- I.:II' --i: --- --- '-. -1' '-.-7 _ . ...,,__.. .____, ____..... ,. , 77.77. -- --., .. I--7 r r--.:7- , ..•,......- -,.--,2__.• - A ,,: _-.-2,-- ••-•.- .- .---q - :4• ',-.- i .•. •if,.., ic-,.1,.. : __. , . __ ,.t.1/4i.. :,..., - _ ...__•._•.•..: _,i _.______ 1 .•___,.,..._,•_.=_._ ..._2/2. :I 1.....-"2-.'-'''''- ' --';---; ‘-'-'; ';'t-: ; ' ‘7, '• __L.:. •_' 4•27L.1111 ' "• '11.:.1 '77-' L -: I-- Central 4r---.4-)E ----=--••-S---1,,:..'1,,'.'..-..-..-r;-,--......:-,'._.•,li1i_..Lit.1-,,..,.-,'a--s-1•4,c:,.1•-.=-4.--.2:-_;..-,-..:•••-r.-.-7t=_•-..-7:-.---.7'---..:.•'...-..-,-:-..:_----S-1-.--_5---.-.._''.;t._•--,7..:..-..---',-.3.--_g-•-,i1,...,.,._,.,-.=:._1.,.;..•n,I-1,•---.-2---,7:I!'a- X-::-,k',i:r=.;.r.!.4.e17,.L-_:,4_„--,s._/„-..0_7,./.._,.:t•,L.67..1,.,7.:-7-Z,.-,7r.e-ii,,,/lTd7-.„•i•,e..,'ieil;'l(,1-_-_.i:.11dL-1-!-IL 1-,••r411.d,1-•.,.-•_•_•,A•.41I i7.i,P e!.,V"o„pi.,l,,L.,.e•e,',s-l-I-•-7I 7• *,-,.:-_: 7i,•-_7-:•:,..,:. i:i r.T7:.7.-7-.,;1 i.7.7.. ......,_ V_',I..L,_‘...,,'7,4,.•.,7,.-,,u+,,-r•.-•i•.7-.-u."%i70:.-C.:'-.- .i, -1 - City . - -firreeway = T; T - . • ;ze 1zA_3, L _ 2 L_: _ : _ en--:!.-'.:-_-t-I;.,-.-•.-•.-r.-,..:!.a.---:.=-:.:..---l.7:-.-,-•::.•.7-.•'-:,--•;7!;:-,577---.-:_.:-,.---„7-,:-=:._-,„.,. - . N, .,,,* ....:,,,-,7 7-'471`-'II-IIe i.7-7.1.• • P.FFIII...."...! ....-i -!,,r;-=r 7, .. .••. . . i ••• •. . ....•-o .'..r/.-tt,_.---:7 7•-•-• I • ' • ,_.••••" _7"--'••7c II.-II .-.11"''''.."I I__,...-,_'.'..-...'1-•.--L- '-''-'-' ; ' -----•=-.f.• I:::.;-77-,r i ce 1-7_7,i,,-...-1,.51,E,it, . .i-C".•.J1='7•:„...)14.`il--,"'.i ',' '..-7.; II, , ; .4_:,--_.,,,,...!•'---[...;.1._. V 1,--"-- '-' r•-:_-..-_,77. .="..L.-;; :-...;_-:.1?-_,1 ,,,..e,-,,'4,.,,1. ;:.," ; •• :: ::IL-. :7--.!:i:%.....,-;,...,...,,,..:_z_. i 1.r.v.7,'.7.9•*''-__•..- /,'-1•;-,<,..-Xii, 4.•osm....=,• :,; h --,----.,„ ---- -----2.-- ," -r,.. : ,..;,.1..; ,-, :=""-..,-;',7:,.-I I. ": '--,.I i Ll Darts.:7-=1 E.!•• •-:'-::' id ! I --•.:-..',I •I ‘'). ItAll..1: Fri,Tin*:___.' ,......, ,•„.„, E.7-I. I 7;1 11 / 777'<;•..71--.4. .7- 71 ;: 0 7 ; = 77-7".=::.-27!g;•.7.-77-71:;1:-:4.477.l• 4 „Ai .„/„.,. ._ ".:,2,r.--:=,,:::----___.,-.:•,=::.-,.-_--.-.-- ::- 1 r-ti-,....., ..:: •"o..%-••, •c-.: •••"" F.:, - !I 11 II ...rf'.. r--'-.-i i i N.:- 1,-_-:1,-.:: -...a: 2:: -..;c.„,.A.,,•t,,4 -,,,_,, .., ..-.2.1-,--r,..,;[A.....»:"_.,t..-77...,,,....,,,,-.-_,'",-L--:r.r.;:,..:=Fe._:.14. .,-7-1--,.;-.---.,:,..-_,,;I 0, ,Y.,,; I. %; . - " ----.••'....' "'. - ,-• =_ !At-r c=me.',...,1 •nr.-.1..`.••1...e-r 4,". • .........•1.-:.: .......-, .,. . _..a_.•'...'''.-•r••t•-•-- !:..,•.;..0.,;.•.e.,..,,.\ .r•-ct Yr,''•-- -741.•••• •••4-7 1 1•::i "; 71.7.••! lif i',.4t.'•1,it•;r, -.-'7-:,--1:,-,-,7.. =• ''',`-' ;;..7--:=7..1._,EI-taa.-11!lit>k,,-.46"; 7 7 r-• ----'"• ;:r 1:••-• -•--------••=.•:=7::-:•;•774:--' :',..;7 ....-'-'..,, " k, r •• : II--"'- ' li ; iig•••-•. ' ''' =- 'a!.• i -.4'--. 0=4; •-...11. ---,. --;;1. ;: a )r.:41,N., Ji-a +'...,ilk;.!Att. • • • •%‘ j 1 -'i;,„_: i•••••1 • ;•1:-- -. ' ;-,.1. !: •. --. '-'•=•-•• =_-•••• .--; . -----'----•- ----;..-'"•••-•• 1 -7--..--• •-- •• •ri : .• , .' . ••L., ..„..,.•.a. .••••.. .. •44'.; •r .f.....-=“'--•. •;.-t...-=--, ••• ‘ ' L,:_i;jit. 1 :1; r ..,-..-...... .. ;i, .:;.,1 n 7 II---77i i....1T;-=7 _,.1.,.1,-I 1..:-! 2,,...: ,iim,41...i.i.„,,,,„_...7.,,_=7„...,t7,71,g121:F-_•.,;,.,..,...-?il/LP,;,,,..--,-;•,-.,ii(--,,, `k .!;,-- •-• ...__. ,• ,, • -, ----- - :'''''-"---I.;*; 11 1 i;•,!/..ri!:.'7:a.;7 i -,•-,;••.,_-!:•--_•-7: ;-'-- ,••'•••1-•••••'r ,:.'1,.17..`•,.`744-t..,,-Lk15,771J-04-rr-.• !-•r_f_;C/7 .,--- /••=.,--._-•: -,..-,• -•; 'I 3:1 'I -7:7- :, I 1,'•-• ',-7=----;1 :'-,IL' • :•:1 : '- ' '-•1- L r r - l•-i, 1•,•-,-._ :•.---..cl,•.:,•`-'="".-1,--1,i..1,::. . x.-2:74-- ?----•:F --:,-!„,.•i7,,, t.i! 1: •:',i :.:,,, ..., ,, , _ '.--=----1 ii 1,...ill!,-,...,-, .../ ..F.-_,.=.7;.ii- .-....,,77 ...•g:.,,,_,,.:2 •.;_ ..i.,,.,..-=--,,,,-,-i;„,-4-42 7 7 / , • •......‘".‘ )1 .:1*-..--,17 .••• ••••.,..•11:i ir..,1•1 ii li ; 1 11 id!I 1.='•': 1 .:..t'LL-.', -'-'1-1-• '.• •--*-:7- •::•;:1-;-••.r.'''',-'7, '-'4..., ._./ . •" •rr-••••:,-••;1!.:1 .•;•• I [ 1,.0!:1 •11 • a••••3•• 1.1:1-.1ii•./ • . I 11 !ipli, ....,-,-:,.! .. . " r •-.7-i-pb---•• ''.:- --:-- - •...”,:-..../ret s „,:,,-..V.-L,r.,7"-.::,-,.-:=:'.•-'- '...i• V".....-. I l. 2•IiIrtgr•-• . -'.4 2 .• .7.1• ..-.._..••,-,-. ‘,_--. )......._ _77u...17.75e./ T ,: LI ',011' ••.-5:-. ., ii n ,.1.,. 7---,__2""_- .'•=11, 2 7-- - I.J'1,•:::7..7 7--=•-.--,-,s-tril .!,y•-•, . _„../, ___,___,..,=,,,,a.,,_,=,....r.,.....,,.„,________, • • ,,,,•,,,, --,__2_,-- :1.1•]!lir-1-,--:;;--=""': I . li i .;,-;L .1, .-.-2-: -7 :- ,_.-- ,- ' ' ' ,_.--.,..'--' .,_-..,',/' .,,,,F, "!=7-77,77i:7-7,- ,--;--, ri=4-s•r-4 ,..--- 1: ill I I! : _•.,_;,.:::L.'''.1:--ii=i17-7,=., ,-7 'soutn....c...:en,,L„, ', ;:. •,------,=,,f---;=-. -5., _27) --2,-,7.--.:--7 Y •,,i 1, -...\\ ..-,..,..., 11.1 e ...,..„.., 1 i 1 1 ----,-,-;• I I .u, ,! , , ,•", i, u.,•‘.,.....--- .I Il.1_11____1.1_,,...iit___: ..--_. • ____. ...... ...,,••, 9. .1...! ,7 r-•,--1.-g-,-1Li,,-,..,____.;.-_-,..,,j,E, :iy.,, ,. ...-v......-.....,-,,____„,.., , ...,....-_,.,-.-77: 11.- -1.---______,4-z______ 2 E.11-11---II 77.i--NII , • .. ! f.! 1 i;i I • 1 ii. ;.4"..t• Li.--..,'.. .-•:= =Z..---..L.%.,-..,:.......z.,,, / >4 .......L:_-fii.i. ., FLJ tv.,...- f .-., - .•:-:-.--",-•- ".• '.(•• y .q11: 7,. II!!' :i'-:-I ;' •,, ,,r._:.-,...-.4.-----.0..-=•• ..=7.-zi-v--:'-rr-,---=----.....---:,-,------7 ' 1....-7.......,1„1:74Th; ".-...... :-• • •• '-.....!r" '''-"-- I if-• ••••....N._.... ...Is°-----IL4a-a•=7 ,,. 11 I I i I j;'•I1 1 I I •I•• '' "r•"'l• 7===v^•-•-•----1'.----,,.._.-.7'.77.•-t,i.,...., • '-t '!^..,- .r..s.Zi.t 7-0sn .:•-•-'-.-- r•-• :. 1,, i 1 I r I I ' "X„,;''.;,t.7.:7-1.t•••• -• -"-r,•-4"-•"".'."\c'..7-.r w " /4 1 t,7 i. EII0IILL ‘Ph .1 ,.: •1 .,; , , •...... .4.rs,,___,_..-r-•, ,2.-..,,,_,;„, , ci , x . - • , !II,1\ :•,.L.s...,-.....-,:-.f.., ,_.. : r7.-7,r IL....-..r-,:i,`-----..,,.1,1r=4/1/ ,s•-•, /.:1 -r..-...u.-----:, & \' •‘.• . 11....1. II ' II -11 \ !, 1:-.. •r-,, i•. ;y,.....,.,. ..,...,..... ...-___.,, * .v.....,,_. v,,, / -,,J__4._/,.._/-../L,.._ 6,„...../-,.,a-,......,„. _ ,• 1,:.f.-.._•--:.,.,- .. -- _....-:---.47--.--1, ,.......k.--- „..,,,,,,7_,,4 7r.r -.7--r---n• . --.7-=--- 1: r I, k II ilj I •••• I 1.!11-717;* --,---r7••••=--t•-.7---!•4:02.IX ,•••• •:-:./1.4..t.7 ile .vt•••. -. =. Scheduled . 3./Nr.,..-=,; , 1 r: . ,...z.L...-‘ C fr----- ----..i---.--'''..-'--=;--- .‘., ,:. ..!.ri ru/7,-;-r-rcz,, 7 -• .,.,I rm,-•-•-- . i;11„.fr; .1 '":41=-,1.-Ir-: ••• •• 4. .1 07-.7,6.ZW..‘-:.--I •••d•----I...---;•-d.,:y ,./1,::.,e Iv i, /.. .. .i. To,_. -,L=__ ..0.,-..A r., !'!.-- -1,-77!, - r e * D:'.n-.7-.4---7-7---;•77,7K N. 3:- ;• l'I'lii• .' . ' r•-• .ZC:2--•---- Target Area Activities - -________ _____________ " 1988-1992 .„--2. ---••-•-•-•' - . tf•-•;;IT11.; ;.L •---.... I-7.-.17.7:-.c " „...,,...- ... . 11- - - ..•T ___. 2,1;y , i • -. _.---7.....i.7.1.1'• 77,, A:• - l I I- , _-.. -- -:- - •• ....-- .z.---....-----.. ..- itt Hi-------r--- • • , ' :; .':** • .. .--:-=:-. .. :,•• •..; •• .-1 1 i :i !'--,••:,- • .. 1_-_-,:-: ,_ „ , ..../ .r , • , -,..._=,........- , ,.. .,..i- --..-.7"" •.,-c4:: ;• -- • • ,-• : ,.i. \ ; ! •.7.-:7 LU-... .-.2.,:•- - '•,:7• • ,.1'.- ,i„.,..4/1, ;•-•-• A.--__: -7,__...,__ .-__-----__. .. ---.23 Continued • ____,-_,_.,..., .=_..,: :;:r.- -.2___ - Ili- \,.!I : ;,..,--;L:-.,_ =,-,..,,.... -.:.. . , ..7-_-. ;.......,-- -10 • ..:-.:_ • `=---='7-=',1"-irt,rtrr-:, ;;. -- .L-1.- _.I._-----=-_:--t=---.f_77= ..."1".„-- -._:,-\-•_..%r '77,41...-'i.:-a .: " ,I ; - 7--.--z--.I • I...-.1:'7-71-7'2.=7.= 1,---. -'.: ..I I i• :•.'I. ;. • ,11;11.re_. „„ , . :','...r--1.',.=.; 41. • I, ,i . I.• • • . . I Open in 19 8 9 • . • .., • . '.: :7 I • I '1- '• ?:-L..".--. - : 'ie . ;* . _c....frj , 10.- •••••••.,..",._..'•- , D....,,...; :._._ ,,.. •_-.=., _ 7:,..:,1'1.--'1 r-;,--.:-•....•'• _ I . to,irAfi ,.._..„;.,: --•, -.:,-F-_;;;11.i.!..1.-,,,, • • .'.; III= - .:-.-n :.....---:.--•=:_. • -2;;H--;.3. •4 i 4,.orep> '---- . . :. -.... LY:.., io .1•La 1.7.--'s- ••`=1--•'":1. •==.1.' : •••• -.,_. ..- ' --..,--1,...r.---:0,--,,---: * * Open in 1990 I ;, ..,_ _:,..___.___ ,-,..._.___- - •.,......_,.... ..--1•:crrgP; - --------r--i r"------=-=- I-7.7-z--:-----;---=.,-- . 3.,(.., . .vr ,„-,_4_2......,-....._:....._ It. . •;.5„...-.,_.;,,,... -,I. - ,.. - --'• "'.--: 1.-_.:.•2 ,---. •:.7,__; ::• .4 • i •-. 7--•-•.--.... •4 a_-._-.:.. !:t.-_7•_:-..--. ••j• ,17 L,.. Re-Open in 1990 , I. -.; 1-.7- : ;_--.,!-_-!-=• :. ....= ,•• - •=--::5--•••• - '-?-r-t-:-...-1-,,-__-_, .4=. 1------ ;;. • : ;. ' = :1-----• . .'---.7=-.:'.. :. •---Ir- v. : :1 ;; •,.---'- • ::._-.=,----..=:.: ; .; , • .,.=_-_-.._...:-.•• :,' :...,.:. ,,.:.:-..-- -_-_-_-:=0......„, r: i • 1 I i r--- ,.. ..„..-.•. . :, .- _:,.., .--.:_:__..1:t. ',., _•-••••-,_,:---,---••-: ••;7P4,. . 1 i :i . ! --,,-----_-. .:...-..---. ....:,.=-•....7•---•••••••••-,-.. ,.r77,-..-.-. ••••• Close in 1990 •ii -••....• 1 ! II ;:i '''', . . t,--.---:----.I, L: ' .1.2..-. •.' =''' -- 7:77- z- L-= 1 I____•0••--1.••••••--=! :-.:,-.-.-.-”.,..:------: : .-:.-•=-*--- . 1.- E- --- ---••••••:-.."-:-. :... --- 7--•• I "t... • ••"' - 7.,-....\ s -.-- • Close in 1991 • iii ,•: ___::::•,..:-....„7.....±...._-_,..-, •.: •-•• I ./.7,----•••• ,....„\1 '...;--- •';' ' : . L------=-1.---------.-.---7,-- ..; •s o • . i i; :_ - -.7N ... .-..., ..•-..•",,••• . , - s'. FT) Study 1% \ ,:, .,"T -"i 1.. •. • :71 2 7. ..7.7 . ;'; .I--I; ---: •••-•; -:;;-• ---7,,-,--- .:7:_....... _-. . -7,-•.. -L--...7_7.- -.-, -----,-- W6 Monitor • Neighborhood Strategies ❑ -recommended best solutions;and In an effort to make the greatest possitive impact within CD target areas, specific ❑ - an evaluation of those solutions' "neighborhood level" strategies, in viability. addition to the more general community- wide programs have been recommended For areas requiring lower levels of CD for the designated target areas. General activity, written master plans are not programs available within the target areas required. These neighborhoods, classified include: as "limited' target areas, are eligible for the curb, sidewalk and gutter ❑ - construction of sidewalks, curbs and repair/replacement program and the gutters where currently none exist; Redevelopment Agency (RDA) housing rehabilitation loans, as well as those ❑ - replacement of deteriorated or programs available to all qualified City substandard sidewalks, curbs and gutters; residents. and If these strategies are successful a ❑ - the CD-funded housing rehabilitation neighborhood will not be targeted program. indefinitely. Pressure to continue current activities in existing target areas while Target area residents may also benefit from adding more neighborhoods can dilute the services available to qualified residents of effectiveness of targeting. Some present all areas of the City, such as the ASSIST target areas are ready to be closed; others emergency repair program and Operation will be continued for a few years. A Paintbrush (specific neighborhood limited number of new or previously strategies are discussed below). closed neighborhoods will be targeted for CDBG funding in the next few years. Each target area requires a different level or type of improvement. A comprehensive, or full-scale, target area that receives numerous types of projects should have a published target area development plan. The plan should include the following components: ❑ -the identification of issues and needs; ❑ - determined goals, objectives and policies; ❑ -pertinent data and data analysis; ❑ - a presentation of alternative solutions 11 NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING In the recent past the.price of housing in many of Salt Lake City's neighborhoods has fallen far below national averages (see graph), while property taxes have continued to rise. The effect of this loss of value has been that owners, unable to rent their apartment units or to sell their homes, stop maintaining their property. This results in neighborhoods in which considerable CD activities and funds were concentrated only a few years ago, that are again deteriorating. This is one reason that it has become necessary to re-open previously targeted (and closed) neighborhoods. 0 AVERAGE EXISTING HOUSING SALE PRICE 120000~-.-�......wn...:w�.:�.. ...�....nw...�..:.........w.:.......k._:._...�..._.�...�..:::::..::.....k...:.�...:.....: W III National E 100000 �.................. a • W 121 SL area ct 80000 .„ ' ft gol fit al 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 U YEAR 12 1 Target Areas JACKSON This neighborhood is one of two previous target areas that have been recommended for re-opening. It was originally chosen as a target area in 1979 and was phased out in June, 1985. During the six years it had full target area status many projects were completed, including the following: land writedown and new housing development on 500 North, 700 West; the Jackson mini-park; reconstruction of Jackson and Dexter Avenues and 1000 West between 500 and 600 North; $175,000 of sidewalk repair; 125 units of housing rehabilitation; and new water mains 7 ;r and fire hydrants where needed. Also, with the (� 4 support of City officials and neighborhood residents, j , f the School Board rebuilt Jackson Elementary School at f its original site on 800 West, 200 North. All this public _ involvement did spur private investment in housing ; rehabilitation, landscaping, and some business expansion. However, in the three years since its closure as a target area there has been a weakening in private investment and the neighborhood's capacity to strengthen itself. This is due, in part, to the soft residential real estate market, a higher percentage of rental units, and a general weakening of the local economy. The Northwest Community Council has requested that this area be re-opened to allow for additional City resources be used for sidewalk repairs, median island reconstruction on 800 West, and voluntary housing rehab programs. The previous target area plan, published in 1979 will be reviewed for other possible projects including block redesigns. PEOPLES FREEWAY The People's Free Way was the original name of this neighborhood organized by the Community Action Program in the 60's. It consists of a residential strip sandwiched between natural boundaries of busy Main Street, 2100 South, an industrial area and an on ramp for I-15. A comprehensive and coordinated program of community development activity has been carried out since Peoples Freeway was designated a target area in 1979. All residential streets have been reconstructed with needed storm drains and sidewalks repaired, approximately 150 housing units have been renovated, two neighborhood parks have been developed. The City's general funds were used to build a new fire station, the Salt Lake Housing Authority constructed 22 units of subsidized family housing, and Salt Lake County Flood Control participated in the placement of two flood retention ponds. Street lighting has been upgraded and fire hydrants added as needed. 13 The Community Council in this area has AU, „ h {, I been very active in diseminating information ' 1, "I _I� EC as to what programs are available in the ilc „ : * ';' neighborhood and encouraging residents to -I— �` - - take advantage of them. They recently ; , ; 1 ]'_ sponsored a successful tree planting project ' "' �®'F fir' . �: `r E ;1 through the CD funded Neighborhood Self- [,. Help Grant program. The southern part of` ;�� _ the area (13th to 21st South) was phased out 05,9 , 24 i� as a target area in 1986. It is proposed that =� _' �, g P P �mj the rest of the area be closed July 1, 1991 - „� J_ after implementing certain projects in the ,�„ north half of the target area. The Salt Lake ' Redevelopment Agency has designated part r r- - of the area as an area for business t el • - P.L el n, redevelopment. This will probably preclude 7 the additional use of CDBG funds for streetmow .NM _C and sidewalk repairs in the area between 700 ,.�., & 900 South. Peoples' Freeway has been a I °;I successful target area and will be monitored after its closure in 1991 to prevent signs of , ..... l -;41. decline. 0 i w- 1 1 a h� WESTSIDE The Westside Target Area, designated as part of the first Three-Year CDBG plan in 1979, is bounded by I-15, I-80, the Jordan River, and California Avenue (1350 South). At that time curb, gutter and sidewalk were in generally good condition since they were constructed through a special improvement district in the mid 70's. The neighborhood i '"1- was originally chosen for targeting to guide its growth and conserve housing. Approximately 200 housing units have been rehabilitated i through the Redevelopment Agency, the Salt f �� Lake Housing Development Corporation .L.,t I ' ` ,; constructed 44 units of subsidized elderly _I] .. 1 Vs ' ;I���} housing, new curb, gutter and sidewalks have -? '> been reconstructed on 900 West, the area's � �D :_ 13 `,,-/ busiest street, and a block redesign on Bothwell I Icy AM ill,}} ' - Court at 1040 West and 300 North was ilEz.-�I , .; ><>; „ accomplished through the coordination of the 13 h_� �, • #+__� City, School Board, and Neighborhood Housing ` In Services (NHS) resources. NHS, a nationally w,F -n .. r „ _...- i -• ;._\ sponsored non-profit housing and 14 neighborhood revitalization program, has been working in this area, as well as the adjacent neighborhood to the west since 1983. The combined efforts of the CDBG program and other NHS programs and organizing strategies have also resulted in demonstration block improvements, moving houses onto vacant lots ,Jordan Parkway improvements and neighborhood fairs This target area has a higher percentage of minority residents, renters, and substandard houses than other areas. That has meant a concerted effort has been needed to stabilize and renew the neighborhood. It is anticipated that the current programs will continue through 1991. As the NHS program will be moving its program sometime in 1990 or 91, the City will re-evaluate the target area for continued participation in the next CDBG plan. CENTRAL CITY Although it had received much of the City's attention from the CDBG program since 1974, the Central City area was actually opened as a target area in 1979 when HUD first required them. During this time approximately $10 million has been spent on the following projects: 8 inner block redesigns, major street improvements to 600, 700, 800 South , 300, and 400 East, over 450 units of housing rehabilitation, the development of Tauffer mini-park on 300 E, 700 South, Mary Richmond neighborhood park on 600 South, 450 East and City Well mini-park on 500 East and 800 South Other projects include land acquisition for three senior citizen housing developments, expansion of the Central City Multi-Purpose Center, sidewalk repairs as needed, and code enforcement to spur the revitalization of run down private properties. Of these projects, the block redesigns have probably had the most impact. These consisted of improving narrow inner block streets and courts by installing curb, gutter and sidewalk where possible, drainage improvements, mini-parks and neighborhood parking lots to provide off-street parking. The improvements made to these eight blocks has dramatically improved the quality of life for residents. Since this area was phased out as a target area in 1985, a combination of factors have caused first an upsurge in private reinvestment with a positive co4o visual improvement, then a gradual decline. Homes •- that were painted and rehabilitated 5 to 10 years agot. are now in need of additional maintenance. The o E,gve{, 1 z ` Community Council sponsored by the Community {,4.,•{ Action Program has evolved into a volunteer group - = t` with fewer hours to spend on neighborhood 3°r problems. And the fluctuating economy has left .goo 50. investor-owners as well as owner-occupants with fewer resources to put back into the area. 15 Because of this it is proposed that this area be re-opened as a full scale target area in July, 1990. This should bring needed services such as housing rehab back to the community and raise the level of awareness of fighting to keep this viable, close-in neighborhood as a livable community in the future. The City can then protect the previous investment it has made in the infrastrucure, housing, and people of this area. EAST CENTRAL The East Central target area grew out of the Central City area. When Central City was closed as a target area in 1985, the eastern part of it bounded by 700 and 900 East, between 500 and 900 South was retained so that needed street improvements could be completed. Major street reconstruction including new sewer and water lines and storm drains have been installed on 700 South, 700 to 900 East; 800 East, 500 to 900 South; Lake Street, 600 to 800 South; with 500 South between 700 and 900 East to be completed in 1990. Housing rehab and sidewalk ' repair have been done as requested. There has been much evidence of private investment in houses and • ' E- AS landscaping. Neighborhood businesses have also "_— ENIRA benefitted from the street projcts and revitalized their Q j - �;A ill??Li1 exteriors. 4 PI II Ir As the 500 South and Lake Street (800 to 900 South) 6100 7o . improvements are completed, it is proposed that this area be phased out as a target area in June, 1991. A final push will be made to interest people in Redevelopment Agency (RDA) housing rehab programs before the area is closed. At this time the area seems to be in a successful transition to a vital and stabilized neighborhood. WEST CAPITOL HILL The present West Capitol Hill target area is made up of the original neighborhood bounded by 300 to 800 North between 300 and 400 West (opened in 1982) and a remnant of the prior Capitol Hill area between 200 and 300 West. The neighborhood, with its present boundaries, was opened in 1985. Implementation of major parts of the West Capitol Hill target area plan has occurred since then. Projects to accomplish this have included reconstruction of 400 and 500 North Streets between 300 and 400 West, the development of the Pugsley mini-park on the southwest corner of 350 (0) West and 500 North,street improvements on Pugsley,450 to 600 North, and Ouray Street, 16 Arctic Court sidewalks, other sidewalk repair, housing rehabilitation through RDA and selective code enforcement. It is proposed that this area remain a full scale target i 4 area through 17th year (June, 1992). Rezoning of � � commercial and manufacturing parcels which have Y_Y u _been developed as residential land should be ,- zF y pursued. This would allow street improvements to be ' !I =WEST made on 700 and 800 North between 300 and 400 I 9 C :- O L West. ,_- ki1Lt 'lll = c !1-36f ----) Because this area is also adjacent to the planned new ,, -,- Utah Jazz basketball arena it will be affected by related development and increased traffic. Careful planning and development must occur to protect West High School's investment in the neighborhood and the residential fabric that now exists. GUADALUPE The Guadalupe neighborhood has been a full-scale CD target area since 1982. During that time a small scale plan was completed, outlining a specific plan of action for revitalization. Projects to accomplish this have included a mini-park on 600 West 500 North, construction of the Capitol West Boys and Girls Club (plus operational support), building improvements for the Guadalupe Early Learning Center, upgrading of street lighting and traffic control signing, sidewalk repair, and housing rehabilitation. Argyle Court, running �01 North from 300 North at 650 West, is scheduled for "`"`���"' reconstruction during Spring, 1990. fi F City t _ The will continue its committment to this area _ tx ` through June, 1992. It is hoped that ten years of public ilL - -. j • support in the neighborhood will result in a level of j - private investment adequate to stabilize the area for 3 I - the long term. However, other government-sponsored e, 36 g P o �_ = actions such as the new Jazz arena or the proposed,but r , _ ; not committed, North Temple interchange to I-15 T 1 _ i would probably negatively affect the area and must be Ccarefully considered by planners and decision-makers. _ ® _ I sT 1 The City should monitor the neighborhood for .'i N• "^ — L1 changing conditions and consider its long-range future C while the area is open. Strategies include: working --c P g with local minority agencies to educate 17 residents about clean neighborhoods, continuing the anti-graffiti program, supporting the Boys and Girls Club in its activities designed to decrease juvenile delinquency, encouraging voluntary housing rehabilitation, sidewalk repairs as needed, and covering the drainage ditch on 550 West. SOUTH CENTRAL— A/B/C The South Central target area bounded by 900 and 2100 South between State Street and 700 East was phased in during 1982 & 1983. Since this is a large geographic area it was divided into sub-areas which were closed out as improvement became evident. Projects completed in section A (between 900 and 1300 South), which was phased out in 1986, included a block redesign of Grace and James Courts with new water and sewer lines, 450 units of housing rehabilitation, $100,000 in sidewalk repairs, and street improvements on Belmont Avenue and Harvard Avenue. Projects in Section B (1300 to 1700 South) `� j I GI , `- consisted mainly of 250 units of housing itT ! L 1 �� rehabilitation, $150,000 in sidewalk repairs i� I I] I p i ..... � L and code enforcement. This area was � LMEG,Y L=, I PARK phased out in June, 1987. but continues to be i — 1I i , an area served by the Redevelopment =='! •- 1 � y1inl housing rehab program for income-eligible ISoQ n applicants. �. j—i LJHI r.......i, . Section C (1700 to 2100 South) remains open -- but is scheduled to be closed in July,, 1990. A ul ��� ' J1„_ f— i .._ �i .. i final year of concentrated housing �? ° i •- �I rehabilitation and sidewalk repair will occur m= i aL!E in 1989-90. A pre-planned mini-park on 300 11� 'SO I�'• East and Downington (1800 South) has been 'i•-�- I 9' _ ! delayed due to difficulty in buying the land C7ILIr— j`,� : but should be completed, after the area _i 8� li....."I, is closed, if necessary. : o ' =�T TI— I� i� These three areas are homogeneous in nature �, and are characterized by brick bungalows and pleasant tree-lined streets. However, signs of deterioration noticed in the early '80's were a catalyst to offer City programs designed to stem decline. The entire area, was designated a target area in order to stabilize the existing housing and neighborhood conditions, and will be monitored after closure so that any deterioration and private disinvestment can be detected and stopped. 18 SUGARHOUSE The original Sugarhouse target area, which has been a comprehensive CD activity area since 1982, is proposed to be phased out in July, 1990. Its final year (1989-90) as a target area will allow the completion of curb and gutter improvements on Roberts and Warnock Avenues, additional sidewalk repair, and the phasing out of the RDA housing _— rehabilitation program. i Li*� i _i Past projects include: completion of a target area master plan, $125,000 in sidewalk repairs, ti T and the Elizabeth Sherman Pedestrian o n` a s . Connection from Elizabeth Street under I-80 to 1p . the Sugarhouse business area. Private — investment in the area is evidenced in part by "JI i °� °. � `""r....I _: • new commercial development, which resulted in the donation of a building lot to the city and ii general housing repairs, cleaning and painting. 8[Fit 3 i= . s W -r • As with other target areas that have been .A71dt� Q phased out, the neighborhood will be oa„�o-.°E monitored and evaluated to determine j changing conditions. The target area plan, 1—. ' which coincides with the recent Sugarhouse Community Master Plan, will be restudied to ensure that implementation will take place using other City resources. EUCLID This neighborhood, which developed primarily as residential uses originally, was rezoned in the mid 1960's to commercial and manufacturing to allow for transition to those uses. After the freeway (I-80) was constructed through the area, that, along with other natural boundaries of railroad tracks and major streets created negative impacts on the residential quality. However, the neighborhood did not redevelop naturally into commercial uses but was gnawed at by N°' '`e vvyke. the establishment of a few non-compatible a-, ,, 0 E , i -, uses and the location of Mountain Fuel's plant. ,; 'n 0 R* �f 1.Li Residents and community activists requested ° *-im that the area be given target area status as 1 _ early as 1980 but it was thought that the y aeO 5D• negative impacts on the neighborhood could not be overcome. Although the 19 Redevelopment Agency designated the area for housing rehabilitation in 1983, not much activity occurred. Due to the patience and perserverance of the residents, the area was given a chance at further reveitalization through full scale targeting in 1986. At that time, the area was rezoned to a residential use to protect the housing stock. A detailed target area plan was prepared, spelling out appropriate actions, both public and private, necessary to revitalize the neighborhood. Since that time, major street reconstruction has taken place on Euclid Avenue, 900 to 1100 West; on Jeremy Street (850 West) between 100 and 200 South; Chicago Avenue, North to South Temple and 1000 West, North to South Temple (which will be completed in summer, 1990). Some additional street improvements on 900 West adjacent to the two sets of railroad tracks have been made by the Union Pacific railroad and Utah Department of Transportation. Sidewalk repairs have been made on other streets and approximately 20 units of housing have been rehabilitated. The area is still an isolated residential pocket but is making a comeback with City CDBG funding as a catalyst. Implementation of the target area plan will continue. Euclid will remain a target area through June, 1992 at which time it will be reevaluated for progress and status. NORTH EAST CENTRAL 0 The North East Central neighborhood originally received the benefits of a limited target area, consisting of RDA's housing rehab program and sidewalk repair, when it was opened in 1986. Therefore, a target area plan was not prepared. Due to citizens' requests, continued community support, and the success of previously constructed block redesigns, the Windsor-Dooley Block (800 to 900 East between 100 and 200 South) ORTHL has been selected for reconstruction of inner block street, sidewalk, and drainage. This project, funded in 1988, was delayed ENTRaL - because of difficulty in obtaining needed easements but will be completed in mid 1990. A storm drain project linking 900 East _ _^ with South Temple will also be completed at that time. Although most of the area's infrastructure is in place, it is deteriorating. — - In the future, the 800 East medians will be rebuilt and rebuilding of existing curb and gutter will be pursued as CDBG funding allows. This area will remain a target area through June, 1992 when it will be evaluated for confined target area status. 20 Households with Schoolchildren Housing Age (Year Built) % Minority % Elderly % children receiving % female-head Pre-1940/1940-69/1970-80 Residents Residents free /reduced-cost lunch households 3.1 68.8 28.1 6.1 10.9 17 34 5.7 87.6 6.7 2.7 19.9 6 30 11.8 84.2 4.0 1.7 16.7 4 9 47.1 47.3 5.6 10.4 15.3 37 33 27.8 59.7 12.5 4.7 19.2 14 26 22.4 69.4 8.2 4.1 20.9 16 27 39.2 50.0 10.8 8.9 16.8 40 49 Avg. Household In- % Substandard % Substandard % Ow Census Tract Traffic Zone come, 1980/1987 Buildings Housing Units OccupiE 43 All 29475/31867 0.0 0.0 47 44 All 54047/58437 0.0 0.0 86 45 All 34822/35817 0.0 0.0 80 46 All 16892/17383 13.8 17.3 41 223 17014/17500 4.2 0.1 224 12710/13073 15.4 26.6 225 14383/14794 2.9 2.0 232 19894/20463 37.1 30.2 233 16476/16947 2.6 8.1 234 20007/20579 13.3 18.5 47 All 26792/27564 3.6 3.2 71 235 26098/26844 11.0 11.3 236 28349/29159 11.2 5.8 249 26273/27042 1.4 1.4 251 27117/27891 0.0 0.0 0 252 24773/25481 0.0 0.0 48 All 25739/26477 2.5 2.3 75 245 26790/27555 3.4 3.2 246 23588/24263 7.5 7.6 247 25376/26101 3.5 1.8 248 29107/29938 0.0 0.0 250 21266/21874 0.0 0.0 49 All 19248/19796 18.5 16.7 50 226 17597/18100 14.9 22.0 231 16750/17229 25.5 21.9 237 19669/20231 20.4 15.3 238 20993/21593 13.8 12.9 243 -----/------ -- -- Households with Schoolchildren Housing Age (Year Built) % Minority % Elderly % children receiving % female-head Pre-1940/1940-69/1970-80 Residents Residents free /reduced-cost lunch households 3.1 68.8 28.1 6.1 10.9 17 34 5.7 87.6 6.7 2.7 19.9 6 30 11.8 84.2 4.0 1.7 16.7 4 9 47.1 47.3 5.6 10.4 15.3 37 33 27.8 59.7 12.5 4.7 19.2 14 26 22.4 69.4 8.2 4.1 20.9 16 27 39.2 50.0 10.8 8.9 16.8 40 49 Avg. Household In- % Substandard % Substandard % Owl._ Census Tract Traffic Zone come, 1980/1987 Buildings Housing Units OccupiE 43 All 29475/31867 0.0 0.0 47 44 All 54047/58437 0.0 0.0 86 45 All 34822/35817 0.0 0.0 80 46 All 16892/17383 13.8 17.3 41 223 17014/17500 4.2 0.1 224 12710/13073 15.4 26.6 225 14383/14794 2.9 2.0 232 19894/20463 37.1 30.2 233 16476/16947 2.6 8.1 234 20007/20579 13.3 18.5 47 All 26792/27564 3.6 3.2 71 235 26098/26844 11.0 11.3 236 28349/29159 11.2 5.8 249 26273/27042 1.4 1.4 251 27117/27891 0.0 0.0 252 24773/25481 0.0 0.0 48 All 25739/26477 2.5 2.3 75 245 26790/27555 3.4 3.2 246 23588/24263 7.5 7.6 247 25376/26101 3.5 1.8 248 29107/29938 0.0 0.0 250 21266/21874 0.0 0.0 49 All 19248/19796 18.5 16.7 50 226 17597/18100 14.9 22.0 231 16750/17229 25.5 21.9 237 19669/20231 20.4 15.3 238 20993/21593 13.8 12.9 243 -----/------ -- -- 0 Households with Schoolchildren Housing Age (Year Built) % Minority % Elderly % children receiving % female-head Pre-1940/1940-69/1970-80 Residents Residents free /reduced-cost lunch households 51.1 45.6 3.3 21.7 18.3 65 45 61.2 33.1 5.7 9.6 17.9 31 34 72.4 23.0 4.6 7.9 15.5 28 28 72.9 17.1 0.0 3.2 17.9 5 23 68.4 30.3 1.3 4.2 23.3 3 26 ? ? ? 4.6 19.6 14 27 13.3 85.2 1.5 5.0 18.5 13 25 3.0 93.9 3.1 3.8 18.1 7 15 27.3 60.1 12.6 2.6 18.4 4 15 0.5 69.2 30.3 3.7 13.2 1 9 Avg. Household In- % Substandard % Substandard % Own, Census Tract Traffic Zone come, 1980/1987 Buildings Housing Units Occupi( 33 All 21311/22635 24.1 22.3 41 116 26069/22182 25.3 29.2 117 21934/23297 30.5 30.2 118 21928/23291 17.4 11.0 119 20939/22241 25.8 22.0 120 21073/22382 12.3 5.8 34 All 21062/22397 8.5 8.3 54 107 22405/23798 2.2 2.2 108 19403/20609 109 21617/22960 17.1 17.4 35 All 27268/28971 19.0 18.7 59 093 20896/22195 33.0 29.8 094 24511/26034 14.5 15.0 095 41164/43722 7.0 7.2 36 All 37962/40621 0.0 0.0 75 0 096 40984/43531 0.0 0.0 097 34524/37307 0.0 0.0 37 All 29699/31816 0.0 0.0 76 105 33089/35756 0.0 0.0 106 26983/28660 0.0 0.0 38 All 27305/29263 2.8 3.2 -- 121 27031/28711 5.1 5.5 122 27566/29788 0.1 0.1 39 All 29713/32108 0.1 0.8 75 123 30219/32655 0.1 0.8 124 29438/31810 1.6 1.7 125 29444/31817 0.0 0.0 40 All 43241/46719 0.0 0.0 86 41 All 35528/38390 0.0 0.0 72 42 All 69023/74557 0.0 0.0 84 Households with Schoolchildren ,sing Age (Year Built) % Minority % Elderly % children receiving % female-head 1940/1940-69/1970-80 Residents Residents free /reduced-cost lunch households 1.8 72.7 15.5 28.7 7.8 56 34 1.1 45.6 3.3 21.7 18.3 65 45 4.7 32.4 2.9 20.5 18.5 69 48 4.3 34.4 11.3 16.0 15.9 46 51 Avg. Household In- % Substandard % Substandard % Ow. Census Tract Traffic Zone come, 1980/1987 Buildings Housing Units Occupi( 28 All 25259/26956 14.6 15.7 77 196 26375/27848 4.9 6.5 198 23611/24603 26.3 26.5 201 22920/23883 18.9 20.1 208 30902/32202 5.0 3.4 209 25300/26364 * * 210 22335/23275 17.3 26.5 211 27475/28630 11.5 * 212 -------/26364 -- -- 29 All 19043/20067 14.7 22.4 41 191 13454/15374 19.4 37.0 192 -----/21547 * -- 193 * /21603 * * 194 17319/17970 37.0 46.8 195 13456/15479 12.8 33.3 213 21716/22303 6.0 16.2 214 25282/25965 2.6 3.8 215 21546/22127 31.1 33.9 216 19062/19577 6.7 4.5 217 14110/14490 12.8 30.0 218 14874/15275 7.4 27.1 30 All 18691/20403 13.9 13.3 55 090 16297/17811 15.8 15.0 091 20871/22809 12.1 11.8 092 -----/20490 • -- 31 All 22286/23124 16.5 15.5 53 110 21918/23280 9.1 8.8 111 23661/24300 27.0 26.3 112 20997/21564 10.6 8.9 32 All 17776/18449 12.2 9.5 113 13818/14191 17.9 9.7 114 20632/21189 14.4 13.6 115 20462/21734 4.8 4.4 Households with Schoolchildren using Age (Year Built) % Minority % Elderly % children receiving % female-head -1940/1940-69/1970-80 Residents Residents free /reduced-cost lunch households 6.5 32.4 31.1 34.4 26.7 67 51 6.3 11.7 2.0 38.5 15.6 82 71 2.0 6.0 2.0 33.7 16.0 59 31 9.4 34.7 5.9 33.0 16.3 67 43 3.7 52.6 23.7 23.5 11.1 60 41 Avg. Household In- % Substandard % Substandard % Ow'.. Census Tract Traffic Zone come, 1980/1987 Buildings Housing Units OccupiE 23 All 11997/13192 33.7 18.9 15 087 -----/12850 0.0 -- 086 7606/ 8313 11.1 6.3 089 13648/14915 44.3 23.7 24 All 14163/16299 15.0 34.6 21 185 7976/ 9114 8.8 37.5 186 7536/ 8611 4.3 * 187 17742/20274 12.4 42.1 188 15201/17370 21.5 35.6 189 11206/12805 1.9 * 190 13701/15656 44.2 * 25 All 16476/18846 14.9 52.3 5 164 -----/16162 0.0 -- 165 17309/19779 6.7 36.0 166 -----/ 1900 4.1 -- 167 13305/15203 34.8 75.0 178 14144/16162 23.8 80.0 179 7303/ 8345 10.0 * 180 17087/19525 19.6 77.6 26 All 16565/17262 60.3 65.2 58 168 16023/16697 24.4 35.2 177 16512/17206 80.0 58.6 197 16904/17615 71.1 68.7 27 All 22643/23596 25.5 19.6 56 169 35763/37266 • • 176 20267/21119 17.9 17.7 199 22932/23896 33.7 33.2 200 24759/25800 26.1 13.8 0 Households with Schoolchildren using Age (Year Built) % Minority % Elderly % children receiving % female-head 1940/1940-69/1970-80 Residents Residents free /reduced-cost lunch households 9 46.9 12.2 24.5 8.9 60 38 5 24.3 39.2 8.8 25.6 30 28 47.2 50.8 5.0 15.3 10 10 37.4 3.7 5.5 15.7 58 31 7 29.3 13.3 10.2 17.3 29 30 7 38.3 9.0 6.8 13.6 14 27 8 23.4 15.8 3.8 9.1 0 3 Avg. Household In- % Substandard % Substandard % Owl,. Census Tract Traffic Zone come, 1980/1987 Buildings Housing Units OccupiE 14 All 14703/13497 7.3 0.0 1 052 15485/14196 3.9 0.0 077 -----/13214 16.1 -- 078 14031/12863 0.0 0.0 079 9496/ 8705 0.0 -- 15 All 17450/18501 37.0 28.6 21 065 17946/19008 37.2 20.3 066 20598/21817 49.7 30.3 075 16699/17687 36.8 27.4 076 13592/14396 30.8 39.4 16 All 15761/16693 40.3 32.9 16 080 18960/20082 28.9 11.9 081 21657/22939 4.4 3.4 17 All 15761/16693 40.3 32.9 16 067 15748/16680 34.8 30.7 Q 074 15771/16705 45.8 34.8 i 18 All 16000/16953 62.7 49.3 26 1 082 15341/16249 51.9 38.3 083 16368/17336 68.3 55.3 1 19 All 13294/14080 14.8 19.9 4 068 13285/14071 10.2 10.9 , 073 13306/14094 19.7 33.4 20 All 14860/15813 28.7 34.0 24 084 10881/11891 18.7 61.3 085 15936/16879 34.8 26.6 21 All 12034/13153 3.8 9.1 1 069 11439/12501 2.5 15.4 22 All 6440/ 7038 -- -- - 072 12713/13894 4.8 1.9 U Households with Schoolchildren using Age (Year Built) % Minority % Elderly % children receiving % female-head 1940/1940-69/1970-80 Residents Residents free /reduced-cost lunch households 7.7 47.1 45.2 18.7 1.3 50 31 8.6 45.0 6.4 11.9 10.2 22 22 0.7 41.2 18.1 13.8 16.3 56 47 0.7 41.2 18.1 13.8 16.3 56 47 6.5 39.3 14.2 18.9 13.0 60 48 1.6 25.7 2.7 17.8 20.2 58 46 0.8 26.3 12.9 30.6 10.4 77 48 1.4 27.2 1.4 19.6 23.7 63 63 3.4 12.7 3.9 13.0 22.4 20 40 Avg. Household In- % Substandard % Substandard % Ow. Census Tract Traffic Zone come, 1980/1987 Buildings Housing Units OccupiE 7 All 18741/20893 37.7 26.1 28 058 -----/20429 0.0 -- 149 20483/22829 48.7 34.6 150 17895/19945 32.4 21.4 8 All 17698/19273 14.1 7.1 20 059 22295/24848 18.3 13.9 158 15540/17320 16.0 3.9 159 -----/19935 0.0 -- 160 -----/19935 0.0 -- 161 ------/14531 0.0 -- 9 All 83937/93549 0.0 0.0 95 044 83937/93549 0.0 0.0 051 83937/93549 0.7 0.0 10 All 31532/35154 16.0 15.5 59 0 048 32334/36037 20.1 20.3 049 27860/31050 15.3 14.5 050 36078/40209 15.2 15.0 11 All 20977/23392 34.9 24.7 21 056 23635/26362 35.3 27.5 057 21416/23869 35.4 20.1 060 21258/23693 29.3 16.3 061 17493/19497 43.5 45.??? 12 All 22272/24816 40.9 31.8 37 054 22383/24946 0.0 0.0 055 21230/23661 46.5 31.9 062 20366/22698 42.4 28.8 063 23438/26122 38.2 34.4 064 25395/28304 36.2 33.7 13 All 76285/85021 6.0 7.4 8 0 I Households with Schoolchildren Housing Age (Year Built) % Minority % Elderly % children receiving % female-head Pre-1940/1940-69/1970-80 Residents Residents free /reduced-cost lunch households 62.9 48.9 1.8 44.7 11.1 83 38 11.4 71.5 17.1 5.8 12.5 1 8 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 1.1 19.6 79.3 25.5 25.5 N.A. N.A. 0.2 97.4 2.4 11.4 5.2 28 27 2.2 72.9 24.9 14.1 9.5 39 31 34.8 42.9 22.3 27.7 11.6 61 34 Avg. Household In- % Substandard % Substandard % Ow, Census Tract Traffic Zone come, 1980/1987 Buildings Housing Units OccupiE 1 All 14667/15162 39.1 64.8 34 141 13818/14191 35.7 84.6 148 20102/20645 41.0 74.8 151 20102/20645 41.0 74.8 157 10628/10915 39.1 64.8 2 All 33810/37716 2.1 2.5 58 045 56911/63429 0.7 0.6 047 23339/26021 3.6 2.4 3.03 All 32519/41678 3.1 21.9 55 133 40582/41678 30.8 28.0 134 24197/24851 0.0 0.0 135 ------/ 8303 0.0 -- 136 -----/ 8303 0.0 -- 137 -----/ 8303 3.7 -- 171 ------/ 7607 7.7 -- 531 -------/ 5759 0.0 -- 3.04 All 25490/26279 3.6 2.0 52 138 30615/31441 2.1 1.2 139 6235/ 6403 2.7 0.7 145 16836/17290 22.5 8.9 154 24788/25457 2.9 1.5 170 25928/26628 0.0 0.0 4 All 32749/33634 2.4 2.8 91 143 32966/33856 1.9 2.7 144 32603/33483 2.8 2.8 5 All 24379/25036 12.0 7.3 64 146 26199/26906 8.0 7.2 147 23376/24007 12.0 7.3 6 All 21104/21688 29.0 23.2 66 152 19496/20022 28.8 27.9 156 17007/17466 38.4 46.5 153 25211/25891 24.5 26.0 155 22093/22690 20.6 2.4 EAST DowNTowN East Downtown has not been granted target area status partially because it is a mixed- use area with high density housing impacted by commercial uses encroaching on the east and south sides. It is adjacent to the Central Business District as well as the previous Central City and current North East Central target areas. It is included in this plan because it may be beneficial �(;) /mP� to use CDBG funding on a project by _ project basis to stabilize the residential �1 -, components of the neighborhood. It isSO _ -R" suggested that the area be studied, :-.7 .,si.--, coordinating with the Planning 111 '- "i- tlt Department `� :17'. Department, to assess the community's a , 1. . h�� �� o needs in relation ` Pro ects Asthe Planning De art ent " ^ t „ _ further develops its proposals for i EE„ �� ,I action in the area it is possible that the - Community Development program 5co 470, may be able to participate in projects such as street parks, infill housing or facade renovations for historic buildings. GLENDALE This neighborhood is slated to be a limited target area during the 15th CD year (1989-90) and a full-scale area for the following two years. The area, south of the present Westside target area, is bounded by 900 and 1300 South between the Jordan River and Redwood — I y .. ! Road. Part of the area was involved in -1.-- FT---j, cii —0 ,,...„ 7"--- the Federally Assisted Code 1 ni, 1 Enforcement (FACE) and RDA {l�/ it:,Il 7 ,, i ;,I —n -��°�- \. �'t:� , housing rehab programs as 15 years � ,r \ I`'•I N 21 � iI "- / JORDON•; . ' - -j . , a t I e IL..,„... t- DA H K3 ago. During that time approximately i 0 )"( ..‹, ,, ,, ( ,,;'=.d..� �� c-gE ~ _ 125 units were rehabilitated. 'tr ›g':\�°J f f i �``'-- ~ Although the area has most of of its ,r��"` '� r , \� ; �,I i' NI curb and gutter in place, several small �I 1 , •- ‘�`d\*-� c l r_ ) ,-. blocks (1200 West and, Lexington) do j ° ��.: �� ' i ! `_ .,, ,not have the needed infrastructure. �? ��(j= �� ] ( (� Also, much of the sidewalk has been displaced as a result of tree roots, and drainage problems are occurring because of the rolled style of gutter used. Most housing is of post-WW II construction. Housing conditions vary but tend to show a need for general maintenance 22 FAIRMONT/WESTMINSI'ER These neighborhoods, including Fairmont Park, were opened as CD target areas on a limited basis in July, 1986. Housing rehabilitation (75 units), sidewalk MOO 'jp• replacement, and a mini-park on 1000 East ►,. 1 <J -- �� bs..1 and 1700 South have been the principal �— � �, -'„ ,.n activities. — = "`"" Although the original plan included the blocks from 700 to 1100 East, the areas O —] were extended to 1300 East due to their o0 CD eligibility. The Sugarhouse C' 1 = SUGA Community Council has worked to do a - . _ AW survey of substandard sidewalk and 1J� G-� .....,.. - �I increase residents' awareness of other • CDBG funded programs like ASSIST - Emergency Home Repair and Operation ^ 134) Paintbrush. The residents were also very involved in designing and implementing the Westminster mini-park which continues to be a focal point for neighborhood activities. This area was prevented from residential decline through CDBG targeting. It is recommended that both areas continue as limited activity target areas through June, 1992. At that time they will most likely be closed. EMERSON The Emerson neighborhood,bounded by 700 and1300 East,between 1300 and 1700 South is the third area in the southeast part of the CDBG eligible area that were phased in as a limited target area in 1986-87. The area retains the name of the elementary school which 1100 ‘Io . was rebuilt on its site at 1050 East Harrison about seven years ago. This is another neighborhood characterized by small brick ® !. ®� I.a... I bungalows and tree-lined streets. It is these w I!!A!I�! I.°ok-.�- I same tree-lined streets which contribute to o o ! 0 decline in the area as tree roots push up 1' "Ir,--] "-~ !C and break concrete sidewalks thereby L— I MEM MI creating tripping hazards. Emerson was 1100 ho. originally slated as a specific services target area to maintain its vital status and prevent decline. Approximately 35 housing units have been rehabbed and $60,000 in sidewalk repairs have been accomplished so far. It is anticipated that this community should remain as a limited-services target area through June, 1992. It will then be re-evaluated for continuing target status or phasing out. 21 Annual CDBG Programs, 1988-90 Proposals submitted for CD funding are interviews all applicants for CD funding screened for eligibility and evaluated by before submitting a recommended CD city staff and the Community project list to the Mayor. Development Advisory Committee. For easier comparison, the projects are City staff members evaluate the proposals grouped into the following categories: by using five criteria (see box). Each housing, block redesigns, new criterion is assigned a weight between 1 construction of streets and sidewalks, and 10, which represents its importance street and sidewalk rehabilitation, storm relative to the other criteria. drainage, parks, urban amenities, public buildings, public services, economic From their evaluations, CDAC and city development, administration and staff each compile a list of project planning. recommendations. The recommendations are sent to the Mayor. CDAC reviews all proposals and The Mayor reviews the Proposal Evaluation Criteria CD funding proposals Criterion Definition Weight and submits his list of recommended projects to CD Program/ Benefit to low and moderate 9 the City Council. Project Benefit income,elderly,minority, or Members of the Council, handicapped individuals; as representatives of their prevents blight;improves constituents' priorities housing or upgrades neighbor- and concerns, may hoods; and is coordinated recommend changes to with projects in the target area. the Mayor's list. Pre-Planned Continued feasibility of pro- 8 Citizen groups and Status ject related to sound planning individuals have the and project phasing. opportunity to respond Citizen Input Extent to which project has 7 to the Council's a broad base of community recommendations at a support. public hearing, usually held in early May. The Cost-Benefit Consider efficiency,leveraging, 7 Council continues to benefits exceeding cost,and receive written availability of other funds. comments for a two- Economic How well the project directly 5 week period following benefits the city's economic base the public hearing. In by attracting business,increasing May, the Salt Lake City the tax base, or providing site Council adopts the improvements. program for the projected use of the CDBG funds. 24 and compliance with code. Strategies include: construction of new curb, gutter, and pavement tie-ins where needed, improved drainage control through redesign of rolled curbs, marketing of current housing rehab programs, and possibly construction of a mini-park. The City's Urban Homestead Program has also been initiated in this area to support home ownership for low and moderate income residents. ONEQUA This neighborhood lies between 1050 and 1700 West, 300 to 600 North, just east of the previous Jackson target area. It is currently a stable area but showing some signs of aging infrastructure and housing. Basically, the needs in this area are for sidewalk repair and some housing rehabilitation. If the City shows a committment to the neighborhood through initiating projects o l Loco N°. like the no cost sidewalk replacement o n Li] program, residents' interest in maintaining their homes and yards may Lto Q increase. Also, by offering the RDA [ housing rehab program, code problems not currently apparent from exterior Soo No. 0 conditions may be identifed and corrected. The Onequa neighborhood will be opened as a limited target area in July, 1990 so that housing rehab and sidewalk repair programs may begin. Certain other CDBG programs like Operation Paintbrush will be marketed in the community at the same time. It is anticipated that this area may utilize CDBG services for two years and will be re- evaluated for income eligibility after the 1990 census information becomes available. 23 Project Title Funding Amount Storm Drainage N.E. Central Storm Drainage (So. Temple, M to 0 Streets) -Design 10,000 Sidewalk Rehabilitation Sidewalk Repair in Target Areas 200,000 Parks South Central Mini-Park Development 90,000 Jordan Park Irrigation- Design 20,000 Athletic Park Improvements 90,000 Urban Amenities Urban Forestry Management &Planning 50,000 Public Buildings Art Barn (100 So. University St.) 130,000 Alliance House (1950 S. State St.) Renovation Phase I 30,000 New Womens Shelter Acquisition or Renovation 175,000 Rape Crisis Center (2035 So. 1300 E.) Rehabilitation 25,000 YWCA (300 So. 300 E.) Mechanical System Improvements 15,000 New Hope Multi-Cultural Center (1102 W. 400 No.) Rehabilitation 11,900 Public Services Housing Outreach Rental Program 29,000 Westside Emergency Food Pantry (55 No. Redwood Rd.) 24,000 Crime Prevention Education Program 70,000 City Housing Resource Board (CHRB) 3,000 Womens Shelter Operation (100 So., 800 W.) 25,000 New Men's/Family Shelter Operation (210 So. Rio Grande) 38,500 Capitol West Boys &Girls Club (300 No. 600 W.) Operation 28,500 Neighborhood Self-Help Grants 25,000 Planning Environmental Assessments 7,800 Salt Lake Historic Areas Survey 26,000 Salt Lake Community Progress Survey—Citywide 7,000 Salt Lake Community Progress Survey—Publication 4,500 Administration Attorney, Community Affairs,Planning, Finance,Capital Planning 382,000 26 14th YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM On July 1, 1988 Salt Lake City received $3,795,000 in Community Development Block Grant Funds for the implementation of the 14th year CD program (1988-89). Because of difficulties encountered in obtaining reliable, recent demographic data, the decision was made to remain in the target areas selected for concentrated CD activity during the 13th funding year (1987-88). Al• U` � ggpp pp_pp_ NJ.\tl� i+ vii �p{ \: \. \ �?:::::'::i'ji;:i;:ii<ivi?i<-'}i}iiiiii:iii}.'i:•. :::..................:............ :::.::::::.::::............:.. ........... + \ ,4+ , Selected Projects The following is a list of the projects and funding adopted by the City Council for the 14th CDBG year (1988-89). 0 Project Title Funding Amount Housing ASSIST Emergency Home Repair $200,000 Redevelopment Housing Rehabilitaton Loans 700,000 Neighborhood Housing Services Rehabilitation Loans 75,000 Cleaning and Securing Vacant Properties 20,000 Operation Paint Brush 35,000 Security Lock Program 30,000 Neighborhood Attorney Program 5,000 Block Redesign Windsor St.-Dooley Court Block Redesign Construction 150,000 1000 E. Senior Center Block Redesign Planning 7,500 Streets 800 E., 700-900 So. Street Improvements 525,000 Peoples' Freeway Area Street Improvements 300,000 W. Capitol Hill (700 &800 No.) Street Improvements 20,000 500 So., 700 - 900 E. Street Improvements - Design 25,000 25 15th YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM The City received $3,947,000 in CDBG funds for its 15th year community development program, which began on July 1, 1989. This, combined with $200,000 of funds reprogrammed from slippage, resulted in a total of $4,147,000 for the 15th CD program year \"v \ �p�p t.v.....♦7 ` \:�ir''.}:vvvii::k�:'<:�iii�iiiiiii'.?Y:. �� v.�- 'F;}iii `vi.'v:rriii'ri:`viiiii:?:'::i•. T\+?�.��; �K';i}i}i:-iii:::•}iiiiiiii:??4ii}}:>:ii:?•:.:.::?4:•. \C gifflellaaniiiinie .. . ....... :> : ;�:n;t,.4\l:�'ti R::;?y`far;:::-___:,:::::.:'i::::SiSiSiiS:S::::::;: , .\ ♦is Selected Projects The following projects and funding levels were adopted by the City Council for 15th year CDBG funding: Project Title Funding Amount Housing ASSIST Emergency Home Repair $240,000 Redevelopment Housing Rehabilitaton Loans 700,000 Neighborhood Housing Services Rehab Loans 90,000 Cleaning and Securing Vacant Properties 20,000 Operation Paint Brush 40,000 Security Lock Program 30,000 Neighborhood Attorney Program 7,000 BHS Boarded/At Risk Building Assist Program 75,000 Low-Income Housing Maintenance 13,000 Community Development Corporation 80,000 Streets 500 So., 700-900 E. Street Improvements- Construction 480,000 Argyle-Edmonds Block (300 No.,640 W.) Construction 85,000 Median Island Rehabilitation Design 25,000 Future CD-Eligible Streets Design 15,000 Lake St. (800-900 So.) Design 8,000 Roberts &Warnock (2400 So.,500 E.) Street Improvements 35,000 Denver St. (500-600 So.) Improvement Design 5,000 28 Art Allocation Percent for Art 3,100 Contingency Contingency Fund 182,200 TOTAL ENTITLEMENT $3,795,000 Percent for Art Allocation The Percent for Art Allocation for the 14th CDBG funding year is as follows: Funding Percent Project Amount for Art So. Central Mini-Park Development $90,000 $900 Athletic Park Improvements 90,000 900 Art Barn Renovation 130,000 1,300 TOTAL $310,000 $3,100 0 U 27 ... ...... . . s... ..E Project Title Funding Amount Art Allocation Percent for Art 2,150 Contingency Contingency Fund 139,250 TOTAL ENTITLEMENT $4,147,000 Per Cent for Art Allocation The following projects were selected to receive the one percent public arts allocation for the 15th funding year. Project Funding Amount Percent for Art Jordan Park $95,000 $950 Poplar Grove Park 73,000 730 Marmalade Hill Center 47,000 470 TOTAL $215,000 $2,150 30 • Project Title Funding Amount /) Storm Drainage Guadalupe/Jackson Ditch Cover Design (500 &600 W. to I-15) 9,000 N.E. Central Storm Drainage (So. Temple, M to 0 Streets) -Construction 250,000 Sidewalk Rehabilitation Sidewalk Repair in Target Areas 200,000 Parks Jordan Park Irrigation Installation 95,000 Fairmont Park Improvements Design 10,000 Athletic Park Improvements 50,000 Urban Amenities Urban Forestry Management &Planning 50,000 Bicycle Paths 8,100 Public Buildings Marmalade Hill Center (500 No.,150 W.) Renovation 47,000 Glendale Youth Center (PAL) Expansion Planning 25,000 Alliance House (1750 S. State St.) Renovation 11,000 0 Crisis Nursery (2020 Lake St.) Renovation 18,000 First Step House (750 W. 400 No.) Renovation 52,000 New Hope Multi-Cultural Center (1102 W. 400 No.) Rehab 16,000 Public Services Housing Outreach Rental Program 35,500 Westside Emergency Food Pantry (55 No. Redwood Rd.) 26,000 Crime Prevention Education Program 81,000 Womens Shelter Operation (100 So.,800 W.) 25,000 New Men's/Family Shelter Operation (210 So. Rio Grande) 58,000 Capitol West Boys &Girls Club (300 No. 600 W.) Operation 28,500 Neighborhood Self-Help Grants 15,000 Living Traditions Festival 15,000 Planning Salt Lake Assn. of Community Councils (SLACC) Staff 50,000 Downtown Plan Strategies 35,000 Administration Attorney,Community Affairs, Finance, Capital Planning, Environmental Assessments,Planning 414,500 • 29 IMPLEMENTATION The diversity of projects funded by the For the revitalization of neighborhoods to block grant requires ongoing coordination be effective the provision of soft projects is with several departments of the city. as necessary as capital improvement Implementation, therefore, necessitates projects.In the 14th year CDBG program 52 competent administration and monitoring percent of the funds, minus administrative of the CD program. The Capital Planning and contingency amounts, were allocated and Programming Division (CPPD) of Salt for capital improvements while 48 percent Lake City is responsible for providing of the funds were for soft projects. And in these functions. the 15th year CDBG program 48 percent of the funds are allocated for capital Relationship to Capital Improvements improvement projects while 52 percent of Program the funds are for soft projects. The Community Development Block Grant Project Implementation program allocates some funds for capital improvements projects. The Community Once projects have been approved for Development Four Year Plan will be part funding CPPD is responsible for project of the Capital Improvements Program (1989- implementation. This division assigns the 90 to 1993-94). Like the Capital appropriate city department the Improvements Plan (CIP), the Plan responsibility of administering individual identifies specific budgeting of projects for projects. fiscal years 1988-89 and 1989-90 and will recommend general planning of funds for In instances where implementation of a fiscal years1990-91 and 1991-92. The CIP is project requires the attention of more than guided by general policies and CDBG one city department, communication and related policies. CDBG funded projects cooperation among all parties is essential. within the CIP are identified in the Salt Due to the number of participants Lake City Capital Improvements Program. involved in such projects it is important to The CIP document is maintained and ensure that the original intent of the updated by the City's Capital Planning proposal remains unchanged throughout and Programming Division. the design and construction stages of implementation. Soft Projects Citizen involvement is another important Projects that are non-capital in nature are aspect of project implementation. An effort called "soft" projects. These are projects should be made throughout the such as housing rehabilitation loans, implementation period to keep residents emergency home repair, and public informed about community development services. Examples of public services activities in their neighborhood. Citizen include crime prevention, education and participation can result in continuous lock installation, providing shelters for the improvement of the Community homeless, and building renovations for Development Program. social service agencies. 32 16th and 17th YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM Specific proposals were not submitted for the 16th and 17th (1990 and 1991) program years. However, the Community Development planning program will guide the funding of projects for these years by setting forth target areas to be opened or phased out and by identifying projects for,planning, design and construction. Many projects require funding for more than one year for reasons of scheduling design and then construction. Also, projects may require more than one year of construction funding to proceed with ongoing phases. Planning and programming of projects for succeeding years allows the city to visualize the impact of prior year funding decisions upon the extended CDBG program. Projects initially proposed or funded in 14th or 15th years (1988 and 1989) that may require funding during 16th and 17th years include: Existing Street Median Island Rebuilding New Median Island Construction Lake Street (800-900 South) Improvements Denver Street (500-600 South) Improvements 700 and 800 North (300-400 West) Street Improvements Guadalupe/Jackson Drainage Ditch Covering (500 West,250 to 500 North) Additional Bike Paths In addition, a few projects will warrant continued funding since they have become the basis for target area revitalization. These projects include: Sidewalk Repair Various Housing Rehabilitation and Maintenance Programs Urban Forestry Management and Planting Operation Paintbrush There continues to be a high demand for CDBG funds for public service projects,both building renovation and administration. HUD allows up to 15% of the City's grant amount to be used in this category. It is anticipated that agencies previously funded through CDBG, as well as new organizations, will depend on this source of funding for their budgets. For example, the city's support of the Homeless Shelter will be needed in future years to insure its continued operastion. As projects are accomplished in target areas and throughout the City during the timeframe of this plan,better living conditions for City residents will occur. 31 WF. 1 VP i rn z _J r I; c �, � e 70 > 1r r r'•----- =-i F. < ,J so > 03 oco © m I' i ii 0 rn save.[.. �. f a 1444 dal."[.r c,r.[r.r. / to . g F Fla -....----... f• L -- w NO I. CI ow000 9.0Na ja0.043 - ' ILls fa N O' enm J300 .014 43 N O O `0 i. a 1 O 5 .o.E. F m I a W W W '•' e. W Y N r r N 3 .a a,[[. °..ar 44 W W W I • 0° J e. 1 0 a. J i y A N " 0o E. 0 W O e Y + f E 0 1. .. .o If W O1-�- N: Appendix 0 In an effort to obtain as accurate and representative a view of current neighborhood conditions as possible, data were gathered from several sources and presented to decision-makers in columnar form (see Appendix A) for the purpose of comparing conditions among the city's neighborhoods. This, along with citizen input, analyses of past activities in the neighborhoods, along with many discussions, meetings, hearings and recommendations, formed a basis for the planning of the 15th, 16th and 17th year target area programs. Sources 1. 'Average Household Income' data are taken from the Wasatch Front Regional Council's Surveillence of Land Use and Socio-Economic Characteristics, 1980 edition and 1986 Supplement. 2. The statistics for 'Percent Substandard Buildings' and 'Percent Substandard Housing' are from SLC Planning and Zoning Division's Land Use Inventory,most recently revised in January, 1987. 3. 'Housing Age', 'Percent Minority Residents' and 'Percent Elderly Residents' data are from the 1980 U.S. Census (STF 3A2,Table 109). 4. Households With Schoolchildren' data were supplied by the Salt Lake City Board of Education (1989). 33 CRAIG E. PETERSON AE. r��a� I �YI 0 o./.1 ,OJ1 DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7777 To: Salt Lake City Council February 5, 1990 RE: Petition No. 400-582 submitted by John A. Schaar Recommendation: That the City Council accept the attached resolution for review of Petition No. 400-582 submitted by John A. Schaar and L. Mark Neff. The petitioner is requesting the annexation of 3.42 acres of property into Salt Lake City in order to develop a six-lot single-family residential subdivision. It is further recommended that the City Council set a public hearing on March 20, 1990 at 6:30 p.m. for said petition. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Discussion and Background: The appropriate City Department have reviewed this request and have recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed sixth lot be traded to Salt Lake City Public Utilities in exchange for a small portion of City owned property needed for the development of Lot 4. This trade provides improved access for the Water Department to its existing twin reservoirs, and mccts the needs identified in the East Bench Community Master Plan for a neighborhood park site and also provides an improved access point for pedestrian use of the foothill trail network. 2. The buildable area on proposed Lot 1 be limited to the nature pregraded topography of the property. 3. A holding lot be established on portions of Lots 1 and 5 to insure access to potential buildable areas on land owned by others not associated with Mr. Schaar and to insure access to the water line easement by the City. 4. Off-site infrastructure improvements be installed which may be identified by City Departments before final approval of the subdivision, as being reasonably associated with the impact of this development upon existing City infrastructure. 5. The developer complete follow-up geotechnical field work to the City staff's satisfaction, necessary to determine the maximum depth of moisture sensitive soil layers for all lots in the subdivision prior to final plat approval. 6. The developer dedicate to Salt Lake City an open-space and vegetation preservation easement over all portions of the lots with slopes classified as undevelopable due to slopes in excess of forty percent as a part of the final subdivision approval. 7. The developer enter into an agreement for a special service rate contract with the City Public Utilities Department to allow sewer service rates to be higher than the general rates, if necessary, due to sewer service costing more to provide than normal, as a result of the use of a sewer force, main pumping system. 8. Fire hydrant locations are to be within 150 fret maximum of any building lot in the subdivision and be acceptable to the City Fire Department. 9. All roofing materials for any building in the subdivision be limited to Class A or Class B materials in order to limit fire hazards from brush fires. 10. The portion of Lakeline Drive, constructed in the subdivision, be restricted to no parking at anytime. 11. The petitioners install, at their cost, the standardized watershed protection area signage and gate structure at the stubbed end of the cul- de-sac where the future street would connect, and also on the access road to the reservoir site itself, as a part of the subdivision improvements. 12. The petitioner agrees to dedicate to the City a 20' wide pedestrian easement located above the city water line. The staff has been working with the petitioner during the past year and all items identified have either been addressed as part of the final subdivision plat or are contained within the Annexation Agreement which has been signed by the Developer. The Planning Commission has recommended that the property be zoned "R-1" with a "F-1" Overlay District. Legislative Documents: The City Attorney's Office has prepared the necessary resolution and the ordinance for the public hearing date and is ready for your action. Submitted by: MI B. Z Di ector Community and Economic Development lf/ ALLEN C. JOHNSON, AICP ter ' A} aJ alit � �.Dc410,,,.1r PALMER DEPAULIS PLANNING DIRECTOR s MAYOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET ROOM 406, CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7757 December 28, 1989 W. Mike Zuhl, Acting Director Community and Economic Development Salt Lake City Corporation 451 South State, Utah 84111 RE: Petition 400-582 by John A. Schaar and L. Mark Neff requesting annexation and zoning of a 3.42 acre parcel of property they own, which will comprise the future Phase 1, Carrigan View Subdivision, located at the present North end of Lakeline Drive at approximately 1880 South Lakeline Drive. Dear Mike: Attached please find Petition 400-582 requesting annexation of 3.42 acres of property owned by the petitioners who desire to develop it as a six-lot single-family residential subdivision. The property abuts on the South and the East, property presently in Salt Lake City's Corporate Boundary in the area of the Carrigan Cove Subdivision, located North and West from the present intersection of Lakeline Drive and Carrigan Cove Drive in the Southeast Bench Area of the City. Included in the area requested for annexation, is a 0.574 acre parcel of City Water Department Property which is part of the Carrigan Canyon twin reservoirs site. Under the proposed subdivision plan, only five of the six lots would be for building purposes with the sixth lot being set aside for City Public Utility Department ownership and use as the access to the reservoir bite and possible public pedestrian access to the foothills. This petition has been reviewed by the appropriate City Depart-ment's and all recommend annexation subject to conditions. The Fire Department has recommended requirements necessary to mitigate the expected slow response time for emergency fire service. All conditions recommended by the reviewing departments have been incorporated into the Planning Commissions recommended Annexation Agreement. The Planning Commission reviewed the matter and the amendment to the Annexation Policy Declaration, prepared for this area, at its meeting held January 28, 1988 and recommended annexation and zoning "R-1" with the "F-1" Overlay District, subject to the petitioners entering into a Annexation Agreement with the City addressing the following matters: Mr. Mike Zuhl December 28, 1989 Page 2 1. The proposed sixth lot be traded to Salt Lake City Public Utilities in exchange for a small portion of City Owned property needed for the • development of Lot 4. This trade provides improved access for the Water Department to its existing twin reservoirs, and meets the needs identified in the East Bench Cowmunity Master Plan for a neighborhood park site and also provides an improved access point for pedestrian use of the foothill trail network. • 2. The buildable area on proposed Lot 1 be limited to the natural pregraded topography of the property. 3. A holding lot be established on portions of Lots 1 and 5 to insure access to potential buildable areas on land owned by others not associated with Mr. Schaar and to insure access to the water line easement by the City. 4. Off-site infrastructure improvements be installed which may be identified by City Departments before final approval of the subdivision, as being reasonably associated with the impact of this development upon existing City infrastructure. 5. The developer complete follow-up geotechnical field work to the City staff's satisfaction, necessary to determine the maximum depth of moisture sensitive soil layers for all lots in the subdivision prior to final plat approval. 6. The developer dedicate to Salt Lake City an open-space and vegetation • preservation easement over all portions of the lots with slopes • classified as undevelopable due to slopes in excess of forty percent as a • part of the final subdivision approval. 7. The developer enter into an agreement for a special service rate contract with the City Public Utilities Department to allow sewer service rates to be higher than the general rates, if necessary, due to sewer service costing more to provide than normal, as a result of the use of a sewer force main pumping system. 8. Fire hydrant locations are to be within 150 feet maximum of any building lot in the subdivision and be acceptable to the City Fire Department. 9. All roofing materials for any building in the subdivision be limited to Class A or Class B materials in order to limit fire hazards from brush fires. 10. The portion of Lakeline Drive, constructed in the subdivision, be restricted to no parking at anytime. Mr. Mike Zuhl December 28, 1989 Page 3 11. The petitioners install, at their cost, the standardized watershed protection area signage and gate structure at the stubbed end of the cul- de-sac where the future street would connect, and also on the access road to the reservoir site itself, as a part of the subdivision improvements. 12. The petitioners agree to dedicate to the City a 20' wide pedestrian easement located above the City water line. During the past year since preliminary approval of the annexation by the Planning Conunission, the staff and developer have been working through the terms of the Annexation Agreement and final Subdivision Plat. As a result, all items identified by the Planning Conu<ission have either been addressed as part of the final Subdivision Plat or are contained within the attached Annexation Agreement which has been signed by the developers. The way is now clear for the Petition and Annexation Agreement to be forwarded to the City Council for the scheduling of the necessary public hearing to consider the annexation and zoning. The following documents concerning this issue are attached to this letter: 1. A legal description for the proposed annexation. 2. The Master Annexation Policy Declaration amendment to area 14. f 3. The Planning Conunission Staff Report and minutes of the January 28, 1988 Planning Conunission meeting. 4. The Annexation Agreement. The Planning staff will provide the City Recorder a hearing mailing list and the annexation plat map as soon as possible. Thank you for your considerations. Respectfully submitted, Allen C, Jo son, AICP Plannin rector ACJ:DLW:GRH Attachments RESOLUTION NO. OF 1990 (Accepting Annexation Petition No. 400-582-87 , as amended, for purposes of City Council review) WHEREAS, Salt Lake City has received Petition No . 400-582-87 relating to the annexation of approximately 3 . 42 acres of unincorporated territory located at the present north end of Lakeline Drive at approximately 1880 South Lakeline Drive in Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, State of Utah. The annexation proposed would become Phase 1 of the Carrigan View Subdivision; and WHEREAS, petitioners also constitute the owners of at least one-third in value of the assessed real property in the subject area, as shown by the latest assessment role; and WHEREAS, petitioners have submitted maps of the territory desired to be annexed to the City; and WHEREAS, the territory in question lies contiguous to the corporate limits of Salt Lake City and is within Study Area No . 14 projected for municipal expansion under Salt Lake City' s Master Policy Declaration of 1979 , as amended from time to time; and WHEREAS, it has been proposed that the City adopt an amendment to Area No. 14 of the Master Annexation Policy Declaration by adopting Amendment 14-B relating to this proposed annexation . NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, that it does hereby: 1 . Accept the petitioners ' petition for annexation for the purpose of considering said annexation for the expansion of the City' s municipal limits by way of reviewing existing policy declarations relating to Study Area No. 14, as previously adopted by the City; and for considering the proposed annexation in light of the proposed Amendment 14-B to the Master Policy Declaration; and 2 . Direct the City Recorder: (a ) To set a public hearing before the City Council to review the Planning Commission recommendation favoring: (i ) The adoption of proposed Amendment No. 14-B as an official supplement to the City' s Master Annexation Policy Declaration; (ii) The proposed annexation of the petitioned property pursuant to Amendment No. 14-B; and (iii) The Residential "R-1" Use District classification and inclusion in the Foothill Development "F-1" Overlay Zone proposed for the property; (b) To provide newspaper and mailed notices to petitioners and affected entities at least twenty ( 20 ) days before such hearing. Be it further resolved that nothing hereunder shall be construed to vest petitioners with rights to require annexation of said property; to bind the City Council to finally approve said annexation; to vest the petitioners with rights to develop under any particular zoning, subdivision or site development -2- �W- 1 . the purpose Accept the petitioners ' Petition for annex declarations municipal limits by wannexat1On for the expansion for relat y of re of and fo ng to Study Area N°, viewing existing Pol y; a r nsi 14, as icy °f the Proposed Amendment dering the proposed ro o Previously ado te� and ment 14-B to the t sed annexation in I by the City; 2. Direct the Master policy Declarati fight e City Recorder: °n: (a) To set a public before pub hearing be re (i) Thethe City Council to review the Planning Commission recomme 14-B as an off ' adoption of Propose ndation favoring: Annexation icial supplement to d Amendment No. (ii) T Po/icy Declaration the City's Master Property our he proposed annexation of the (11i) The Residential Amendment No. 14-B• Petitioned classification and inclusiondential „R-1" Use Di and Development „F-1 �� �v in the Foot strict Property Overlay Zone hill (b) To proposed for the provide petitioners newspaper before s rs and affected entities r and mailed notices ec Be it further such hearing• ties at least twentyto construed rther resolved that (20) days of said to vest Petitioners nothing hereunder with shall Said annexation;property; to bind the rights to require be xat ' Citye a ion: to vest Council annexation under any Particular st the petitioners to finally approve zoning, subdivision o with rights to develop ordinance; or to require Salt Lake City to exercise jurisdiction over the area, until such time as a decision has been finally made to annex and extend the corporate limits and all annexation formalities have been completed, including the preparation of the final plat according to City Engineer specifications, appropriate ordinances, annexation agreements and documents verifying sufficiency of the compliance with all applicable rules , ordinances and regulations . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1990 . SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER BRB:ap -3- SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1990 (Carrigan View Phase 1 Annexation and Zoning pursuant to Petition No . 400-582-87 ) AN ORDINANCE RECOGNIZING THE ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT 14-B TO THE MASTER ANNEXATION POLICY DECLARATIONS; EXTENDING THE LIMITS OF SALT LAKE CITY TO INCLUDE THE CARRIGAN VIEW PHASE 1 ANNEXATION, ZONING THE SAME RESIDENTIAL "R-1" WITH FOOTHILL DEVELOPMENT "F-1" OVERLAY ZONE, BY AMENDING THE USE DISTRICT MAP AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 21 . 14 . 020 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE; AMENDING SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT AND SCHOOL PRECINCT BOUNDARY MAPS; AND SPECIFYING CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO SAID ANNEXATION. WHEREAS, Petition No . 400-582-87 was filed with the City Recorder of Salt Lake City, together with a plat showing the tract of land to be annexed hereafter to be known as the "Carrigan View Phase 1 Annexation" , requesting that the contiguous , irregularly shaped parcel of approximately 3 . 42 acres of unincorporated territory lying at the present north end of Lakeline Drive at approximately 1880 South Lakeline Drive of Salt Lake County be taken within the city limits of Salt Lake City Corporation to extend the City' s limits; and WHEREAS, the petition was signed by a majority of the owners of real property and the owners of more than one-third in value of all real property, as shown by the last assessment roles , situated in the tract hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, in order to facilitate the orderly expansion of the City' s boundaries, the City has previously adopted a Master annexation lies within Study Area No. 14 of said Declaration and is the specific subject of Amendment No. 14-B of aid Declaration which was approved after favorable Planning Commission review; and WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City, after examining the petition and having the petition favorably reviewed by the various departments of the City and the Planning Commission, and having accepted the petition by Resolution No . of 1990 , and having considered the petition at a publicly advertised hearing held , 1990 , and after finding the proposed annexation to be consistent and in keeping with the City' s Master Annexation Policy Declaration for Study Area No . 1.4 and Amendment No . 14-B, the Council voted by two-thirds or greater vote of its membership, in favor of the annexation, and WHEREAS, no objection or contest to such annexation or amendment has been filed as required by law or is presently pending; NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . Area. That the city limits of Salt Lake City be, and the same hereby are, enlarged and extended so as to include the following irregularly shaped approximately 3 . 42 acre parcel of land located at the present north end of Lakeline Drive at approximately 1880 South Lakeline Drive in Salt Lake County, Utah : -2- Beginning at a point which is N 00° 07 ' 45" W 886 . 12 feet from the South Quarter Corner of Section 14 , Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Salt Lake Base and Meridian, and running thence N 00° 07 ' 45" W 448 . 93 feet; thence N 89° 51 ' 06" W 122 . 03 feet; thence S 30° 32 ' W 165 . 47 feet; thence Westerly on a 50 . 0 foot radius curve to the left, chord bears S 46° 01 ' 30" W 77 . 412 feet, a distance of 7,'5 88 . 53 feet; thence N 64° 42 ' W 21 . 10 feet; thence Northwesterly on a 220 . 885 foot radius curve to the left, chord bears N 70° 39 ' 28" W 45 . 853 feet, a distance of 45 . 94 feet; thence S 24° 30 ' W 142 . 00 feet; thence Southeasterly on a 478 . 34 foot radius curve to the right, chord bears S 52° 27 ' 25" E 162 . 333 feet, a distance of 163 . 12 feet; thence S 46° 45 ' 05" W 139 . 22 feet; thence S 47° 54 ' E 32 . 50 feet' thence S 42° 06 ' W 16 . 00 feet; thence S 69° 30 ' E 183 . 55 feet; thence N 06° 00 ' 00" W 39 . 36 feet; thence N 84° 00 ' 00" E 51 . 00 feet; thence N 06° 00 ' 00" W 11 . 95 feet; thence N 55° 06 ' 32" E 153 . 70 feet to the point of beginning. Contains 3 . 42 acres . SECTION 2 . Zoning. Be it further obtained and declared that the above Carrigan View Phase 1 Annexation is hereby zoned Residential "R-1" and included in the Foothill Development "F-1" Overlay Zone and the Use District Map as adopted by Section 21 . 14 . 020 of the Salt Lake City Code relating to the boundaries of use districts shall be, and the same hereby is amended by the addition of the Carrigan View Phase 1 Annexation zoned Residential "R-1" . SECTION 3 . City Council and School District Maps. The Salt Lake City Council District and School Precinct Boundary Maps are hereby amended to include the Carrigan View Phase 1 Annexation in Council District 7 and School Precinct 6 as specified on such maps . SECTION 4 . General Jurisdiction. Be it further ordained and declared that the tract of land described above in Section 1 shall henceforth be within the corporate limits of Salt Lake City Corporation. All ordinances , jurisdictions , rules and -3- obligations of, or pertaining to, Salt Lake City are extended over and made applicable and pertinent to this tract of land; and the streets , blocks, alleys and public ways of said tract shall be controlled and governed by the ordinances, rules and regulations of Salt Lake City in that behalf . The monuments of the City Engineer shall henceforth be taken therein as the standards of location and distances of said land. SECTION 5 . Conditions Precedent. Prior to the acceptance of this annexation and the publication of this Ordinance, the petitioners shall enter into an Annexation Agreement with the City requiring such terms and conditions as have been recommended by the Planning Commission in a form approved by the City Attorney, which Annexation Agreement is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 6 . Filings and Notice. Upon the passage and publication of this Ordinance, the Recorder of Salt Lake City is hereby directed to file with the County Recorder of Salt Lake County a copy of the approved annexation plan or map, duly certified and acknowledged, together with a certified copy of this Ordinance. The City Recorder is further directed to provide notice to the Utah State Tax Commission pursuant to applicable state law. SECTION 7 . Publication and Effect. This Ordinance shall take effect upon the date of its first publication. The City Recorder is instructed not to publish this Ordinance until an annexation plat prepared by a registered professional engineer or surveyor at the developer' s expense has been submitted to the -4- City meeting all City standards for such a document and has been signed by the Mayor. Further, this Ordinance and the Carrigan View Phase 1 Annexation may be repealed by the City if the petitioners or the petitioners ' heirs, successors or assigns fail to comply with the provisions of the Annexation Agreement . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1990 . CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: K / CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s Action: Approved Vetoed MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER BRB:ap -5- SALT LAKE CITY PLANNING COMAISSICN STAFF REPORT CAI THE PROPOSED ANNEXAT 1 CAI PEI I T I Chi NO. 4 0 0-5 8 2 BY JQ-IN SCHAAR AND ERN I E FE.DCR, APPROXIMATELY 1900 SOUTH LAKELINE DRIVE, AND PROPOSED PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISICN APPROVAL FCC CARRIGAN VIEW SUBDIVISION AND RELATED ACI'ICNS • OVERVIEW OF ISSUES This is a request for annexation, zoning and preliminary subdivision approval for 15 lots to be known as Carrigan View Subdivision, which is proposed to be developed in three phases , only the first of which is proposed for annexation at this time. The annexation and zoning actions are a recommendation to the City Council which must hold a public hearing prior to final approval . The subdivision approval is under the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission and the Mayor. BACKGROUND This property is part of an approximate 40 acre parcel of unincorporated Salt Lake County jurisdiction which has existed as a peninsula, extending into the boundary of Salt Lake City for many years. The staff has been working with Mr . Schaar off and on for the past five years to get this parcel annexed and the peninsula eliminated. The proposed Carrigan View Subdivision consists of 6 lots in the city and 9 lots in unincorporated Salt Lake County. The lots in the city are to be zoned "R-l" and he developed on extensions of Lakeline Drive as a dedicated public street . Future subdivision and private street development of the remaining property to the South and West is anticipated by Mr. Schaar and would tie into the cul-de-sac on Lakeline drive and also to the stubbed street off of 2100 South street , east of Scenic Drive. The staff has been able to come to an agreement with the petitioner regarding annexation and subdivision development except for .one item, which the Planning Commission will need to decide. The developer desires to have the Salt Lake Planning Commission grant preliminary approval to the entire 15 lot subdivision, thereby locking-in lot sizes for an 18 month period. This desire is designed to exempt the second and third phases of the subdivision frame changes in minimum lot sizes which have been discussed in the past and are anticipated for consideration in the near future. Because of this , the staff cannot recommend that the Planning Caiuiission grant preliminary approval to the subdivision beyond Phase 1 which consists of six lots . The developer is asking the Planning Commission to grant preliminary approval to the entire 15 lots, even though only the first phase can be annexed at this time due to problems with developability and zoning of the remainder of the 40 acres of property composing the peninsula. Under the State Annexation Law, the City does have the extraterritorial authority to grant subdivision approval in areas located within one half mile of the City' s boundary in areas declared for annexation. Page 2 - Petition No. 400-582 (cont . ) RECOMMENDATICN 1 . The staff reccmnends that the Planning Carmission grant preliminary subdivision approval for the first phase area only, with the question of lot sizes in the second and third phases being held to whatever sizes the ordinances in effect at the time of annexation would allow. • 2. The staff recommends approval of the basic configuration of the extension of Lakelirie Drive, ending in a cul-de-sac and not connecting with any other public street , including Devonshire Drive consistent with the past policy of the Planning Ccrrmission. 3 . The staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the annexation area contained in petition 400-582 be zoned Residential R-1 with a Foothill Development Overlay Zone F- 1 . • 4 . The staff recommends that a pre-annexation agreement between the City and the developers be a requirement of annexation. This agreement should address the following points : a. Proposed Lot No. 15 be traded to Salt Lake' City Public Utilities in exchange for a small portion of city owned property needed for Lot No. 4. This trade would provide improved access for the Water Department to its existing twin reservoirs , as well as meet the need identified in the master plan update for a neighborhood park site and also provide an improved access point for pedestrian use of the foothill trail network. b. The buildable area on proposed Lot No. 1 be limited to the pre- grading topography of the property. c. Holding lots be required on portions of Lots No. 1 , 5, and 6 to insure access to potential buildable areas on land owned by others not associated with Mr . Schaar. d. Installation of any off-site infrastructure iiiprovements which may be indentified by City Departments as being reasonably associated with the impact of this development . e. Performance of follow-up geotechnical field work as necessary to determine the maximum depth of moisture sensitive soil layers for all lots in the subdivision prior to final plat approval . f . Dedication to Salt Lake City of an open-space and vegetation preservation easement over all portions of the lots with slopes • classified as undevelopable due to slopes in excess of forty percent . g. Agreement to enter into a special service rate contract with the City Public Utility Department to allow sewer service rates to be higher than the general rates , because the sewer service will cost more to provide due to the use of a sewer force main purred system. January 20, 198 DLW/mh :02) 1 i; \ A� n`M gq CIR A n aKm� I p N0TTINGHAM 'HAY p p /�-� „ . r n n n / 0 4 n - 0 a i` • INOIAN HILLS n_, ci n SCHOOL n tt a n� n INOIAN HIL,S \ 2 n A 1 C!R 9y� �Pn n 1 A n A SSADOR T r n n nt1I ;I RO APACHE n n A CILMILY01110t HIAwAT',A' CIR. SK` •\\Q SKYLINE CHERO EE CIR. DFi. 11\ !-�/n A n i r c OAKBR00 K I ATM,LLi ,R S u COMANCHE /Ik. n n C� • 'A% v CIR._±..LZ _ ......____..posse IMP goo agimmimil o �� �n A VI VI :NE \9�0 t� � IR c^ pmil )77\ A A n am . `r..- .,1 oroe --� � ! N®• n P; Y i �� P 1 iIwo: � �,,c .. , BEaCON SCHAL /` n ��v ,>!� , 0 , P `` e*%a I -.E.G.ITS 117./E1 \ n 11 \V7Z IIIn 0 0 A • n 0 SCHOOL a ,. ., 0 n C 0 n 0 A .-—1 II • \,,,,.... _ _ __ — — -- yG.0 �c i—'' P 0 n 0 n o \ :( ' ° ° ; ° • \ \ini, --,1 P P P Pa n ( 1 AJ�c F ` 1 o s n O O O O -0 ' SAG WAY 0O000''0a S `� '� 7 . 000A \ . p $TRINGHA n 0 • .,� • C •. i n A/IO 0OO •---- a ..� 40 00 A : .I \rn A BaEvTwCc P- CIR n n n n N 'mow \ . .I.;. s t m K A'w00D ••I:I A Q CIR. ' QPgP'NP 7 . ,wAY -, \�•\c- PC Minutes January 28, 1988 Page 13 EL -IURST PARK SUBDIVISION at 450 North 1550 West - for preliminary approval . Mr. Wheelwright indicated Mr . Tam Perrero, the petitioner , is present . This. subdivision was previously given preliminary approval in July, 1984. It was approved as a 13 lot duplex subdivision with a cul-de-sac off of Walnut Drive. It is redesigned as a 14 lot single family subdivision. The street design and lot layout has remained the same. Mr . Schumann made a motion that the Planning Carmission give preliminary approval to the subdivision with the understanding that there will he a restriction on the plat limiting the property to single family dwelling only and that the Planning Director have final plat approval . Mr. Stepan seconded the =r>Ution; all voted "Aye" except Mr. Neilson who opposed. CARRIGAN VIEW SUBDIVISION at approximately 1800 South Skyline Drive - for preliminary approval and Petition No. 582 by John Schaar for annexation of the plat . Mr . Wheelwright indicated Mr . John Schaar and Mr . Ernie Fedor, the petitioners , are present . This is a request for annexation, zoning and preliminary subdivision approval for 15 lots to be known as Carrigan View Subdivision, which is proposed to be developed in three phases , only the first phase is proposed for annexation at this time. The annexation and zoning actions are a reccxrrnendation to the Cite Council which must hold a public hearing prior to final approval . The subdivision approval is under the jurisdiction of the Planning Carmission and the Mayor. This property is part of an approximate 40 acre parcel of unincorporated property which has existed as a peninsula, extending into the eastern boundary of Salt Lake City for many years . The staff has been working with Mr . Schaar off and on for the past five years to get this parcel annexed and the peninsula eliminated. The proposed Carrigan View Subdivision consists of 6 lots in the City and 9 lots in the unincorporated county. The lots in the City are to be zoned "R -1" and be developed on an extension of Lakeline Drive as a dedicated public street . Future subdivision and private street development of the remaining property to the South and West is anticipated by Mr . Schaar and would tie into the cul-de-sac on Lakeline drive and also to the stubbed street off of 2100 South street , east of Scenic Drive. The staff has been able to ccine to an agreement with the petitioner regarding annexation and subdivision development except for one item, which the Planning Ccxrmission will need to decide. The developer desires to have the Planning Commission grant preliminary approval to the entire 15 lot subdivision, thereby locking- in lot sizes for an 18 month period. This will exempt the second and third phases of the subdivision from changes in minimum lot sizes which have been discussed in the past and are anticipated for consideration in the very near future. Because of this , the staff cannot recommend that tine Planning Carrnission grant preliminary approval to the subdivision beyond Phase 1 which consists of the six lots . Under the State Annexation Law, the City does have the extraterritorial authority to grant subdivision approval in areas located within one half mile of the City's boundary in areas declared for annexation. PC Minutes Page 14 January 28, 1988 ///////'-' Mr. Ellison asked why phases two and three are not ready to plat . Mr. Wheelwright stated that if anything is done on phases two or three it closes the neck on the peninsula to the point where the attorney's would not allow annexation because it would violate the state annexation law. Mr. John Schaar stated there has been an exceptionally good relationship with Mr. Wheelwright and the Planning Staff on this piece of property. Mr. Schaar stated that he is in agreement with this, we were asking for the whole piece of property to be annexed but Mr. Wheelwright has asked us to withdraw that . We are willing to work with Mr. Wheelwright any way possible. However, we would like the Planning Commission to make this a project that will be worth while. Mrs. Wacker asked, concerning the nine additional lots, if the ordinance were to change to have bigger lots what would the Planning Commission he looking at? Mr. Wheelwright stated that at least one-third of the nine lots would be lost . Ms. Cramer stated that this is obviously an extremely complex issue that has been going on for quite sane time. This is a very fragile and . vulnerable piece of hillside that will be creating a potential island of development on the hillside with the land below and around it not being developed. It seems the Planning Commission would be condoning putting houses on every possible piece of hillside. Mr . Ellison asked how this subdivision relates to the points of access and logical buildable areas . Wlere would other buildable lots be r located and where the access might came from to reach them. Mr . Wheelwright stated that the only other developable land is located to the West and to the South and it is Mr. Schaar 's intent to try to get zoning and density to allow him to do a private street development servicing this property. Mr. Neilson asked how many lots require sewage pumping? Mr . Wheelwright stated that there are two lots that require sewage pumping. Mr. VanAlstyne made a motion that the Planning Commission recuniend that staff prepare for the public hearing of the annexation of the entire Schaar, Knowlton and Harrison properties . If there are any issues that remain on the table with staff, that they be resolved so that the borders can bessquared off . W. Schumann seconded the notion; all voted "Aye" . Mr. Schumann made a motion that the Planning Camiission approve Phase I of this subdivision and zoning with the understanding that there would be a 20 foot wide holding lot on Lots 1 and 5 and that the balance of the subdivision, Phases II and III , be held and not developed until a nrasterplan is brought back before the Planning Commission as to the development of sane of the adjacent properties subject to the following staff recommendations : /.// PC Minutes January 28, 1988 Page 15 1. The staff recuniends that the Planning Cmrnission grant preliminary subdivision approval for the first phase area only, with the question of lot sizes in the second and third phases being held to whatever sizes the ordinances in effect at the time of annexation would allow. 2. The staff recommends approval of the basic configuration of the extension of Lakeline Drive, ending in a cul-de -sac and not connecting with any other public street , including Devonshire Drive consistent with the past policy of the Planning Carrnission. 3 . The staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the annexation area contained in petition 400-582 be zoned Residential "R-1" with a Foothill Development Overlay Zone "P-1" . 4. The staff recommends that a pre-annexation agreement between the City and the developers be a requirement of annexation. This agreement should address the following points : a. Proposed Lot No. 15 be traded to Salt Lake City Public Utilities in exchange for a small portion of city owned property needed for Lot No. 4 . This trade would provide improved access for the Water Department to its existing twin reservoirs , as well as meet the need identified in the master plan update for a neighborhood park site and also provide an improved access point for pedestrian use of the foothill trail network . b. The buildable area on proposed Lot No. 1 be limited to the pre- grading topography of the property. c. Holding lots be required on portions of Lots No. 1, 5, and 6 to insure access to potential buildable areas on land owned by others not associated with Mr. Schaar . d. Installation of any off-site infrastructure improvements which may be identified by City Departments as being reasonably associated with the impact of this development . e. Performance of follow-up geotechnical field work as necessary to deterrnine the maximum depth of moisture sensitive soil lavers for all lots in the subdivision prior to final plat approval . f. Dedication to Salt Lake City of an open-space and vegetation preservation easement over all portions of the lots with slopes classified as undevelopable due to slopes in excess of forty percent . g. Agreement to enter into a special service rate contract with the City Public Utility Department to allow sewer service rates to be higher than the general rates , because the sewer service will cost more to provide due to the use of a sewer force main pumped system. :///7 PC Minutes Page 16 January 28, 1988 Mr. VanAlstyne seconded the motion; all voted "Aye" except Ms . Cromer who was opposed. Mr . Neilson stated that he would like to go on record as being opposed to pumped sewage, private streets (except in PUD' s and condominium projects) and any increase in the density from what has been seen here and would favor lower density for the remaining area. Mr . Schumann stated that he would like to ccupliment the staff on preparation of the various subdivisions . They were clean, precise, and they answered all the questions . PLANNING ISSUES Presentation by Doug Hattery. Wasatch Front Regional Council of Governments, concerning the proposed 20 Year Highway Improvement Plan Mr. .Doug Hattery, fran the Wasatch Front Regional Council of Goverrxnents, stated that one of the Regional Council 's responsibilities is to prepare a long range transportation plan for the region. A plan was just approved last summer and presentations are being made so that people are aware of it . Basically. the plan recommends that bus services are expanded as the area grows and a major improvement to the 1-15 corridor by using a Light Rail System and freeway inurovernents . Mr . Hattery discussed the proposed highway improvements within Salt Lake City. Mr. Hattery explained that the top priority projects are I-15, north/south streets in Sandy and streets in the West Valley area. Ms. Cramer asked what percent of the new road construction would require right-of-way acquisition? • • Mr . Hattery stated that much of the new construction will require property acquisition. Continue discussion concerning the Planning Carmission' s strategy for the Downtown Plan Mr . Johnson stL`ed that Planning Staff has put together a reccxrnended work program and strategy showing how the Planning Commission can input information f r an the R/UDAT, Ch anib e r of Ccxrme r c e s ' Downtown Corm i t t e e and the Mayor's Downtown Executive Committee . • The following handout was discussed: The Salt Lake City Planning & Zoning Staff recuiniends a strategic program with benchmarks for caYpletion, adoption, and implementation of the "Downtown Master Plan" . E ROSEMARY DAVIS SA !t T= RY(�,, �. tI M DIRECTOR _ DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Capital Planning and Programming CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 418 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7902 February 12, 1990 TO: Alan G. Hardman, Chair Salt Lake City Council RE: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR AND EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY AND THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR AN EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council execute the attached resolution authorizing the Mayor to apply for and enter into a grant agreement between Salt Lake City and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for an Emergency Shelter Grant. FUNDING: HUD has allotted Salt Lake City $98,000 in the form of an Emergency Shelter Grant. No city funds are required. The necessary matching funds will be provided by progTaii subgrantees . BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: Although HUD has allocated $98,000 to Salt Lake City as an Emergency Shelter Grant, to receive the funds Salt Lake City must submit an application outlining how the funds will be used and then execute a grant agreement with HUD. Salt Lake City mailed notices to organizations assisting homeless people within the city announcing the ESG allocation and requesting applications from any group that wanted to be considered to receive ESG funding. The City appointed a committee to review the applications and determine the allocation of the funds among the applicants based on their meeting ESG requirements and providing essential services to the homeless and/or homeless prevention activities . The proposed use of those funds is for disbursement to two homeless provider subgrantees as follows: $88,000 to the Salt Lake Community Shelter and Resource Center for operation and maintenance; and $10,000 to the Salt Lake Community Action Program for its Housing Outreach Rental Program. CONTACT PERSON: Bob Gore, 535-7122. Sincerely, Lee King P" Deputy Director, Department of Community and Economic Development RESOLUTION NO. OF 1990 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY AND THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, Title 11, Chapter 13, U.C.A. , 1953 as amended, allows public entities to enter into cooperative agreements to provide joint undertakings and services; and WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development allocated $98,000 to Salt Lake City through its Emergency Shelter Grant Program; and WHEREAS, the attached application has been prepared to receive this allocation; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1 . It does hereby approve the attached application generally described as follows: An application by Salt Lake City to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for an Emergency Shelter Grant in the amount of $98,000. Through this grant the city will providing funding to two subrecipients: (1) $88,000 for operation and maintenace of the Salt Lake Community Shelter and Resource Center, and (2) $10,000 to the Salt Lake Community Action Program for its Housing Outreach Rental Program. 2. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, is hereby authorized to execute said application and subsegnent documents including a grant agreement with HUD on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation and to act in accordance with its terms . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1990 . SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By ATTEST: CITY • APPLICATION�7 CM3 Approval:to.0348 Me' i—�I�PA�1T10 FOR 2.07E;;EMITTED AO tcanf 1onhfgf FEDERAL ASSISTANCE February 12, 1990 4 1. TYPE OF 3UDAtISSICet 3.DATE n CzIVZD CV STATE Slate AGClrc.7hpf Id8rlhttaf Application Preao /icet,on ❑ C.nstructron ❑ Constructcn 4.GATE RECETYED CY FEDERAL AGENCY Fiaberal Idenhti3f Non-Canstructicn ❑ Ncn-C.onstructtcn 5. APPLICANT INFORMATION Local Name: — — . _ Salt Lake City Corporation TYpitar anning and Programming Division Address(give city.county.state. and zip codel• Name and toteohone numfx.r of the perm to be contacted on matters invOfvir* this application (give area code) 451 South State Street, Room 406 Lee King, Deputy Director Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Dept. of Community and Economic Development (801)535-7902 S. EMPLOYER IDEiTT1F1CATION NUMBER(EIN): 7. TYPE OF APPLICA,YT: (enter erproonate letter in box) LJ 8 7 — 6 0 0 0 2 7 9 A. State H Independent&hoof Dist. 0 County I. State Controlled Institution cf Higher Learnrnq Z. TYPE OF APPLICATION C Munc:pal • J Privatery Umversi • D Township K Indian Tribe ( New ❑ Continuation ❑ Revision E. Interstate ' L. Individual F Into-municipal AA Profit Orpenitation It Revistcn,enter appropriate Letter(s)m box(es): � G Special District N. Other(Soectfy) A Increase Award B Decease Award C Increase Duration 0.Decrease Duration Other(soocrly): • y, NAME OF FEDERAL AGENCY Community Planning and Development Ia. CATALOG O°FEDERAL DOMESTIC ( 11. DESCRIPTIVE TITLE OF APPLICANTS PROJECT: ASSISTANCE NUMBER TITLE. Emergency Shelter Grant Greater Salt Lake City Emergency Shelter Program C. 12. AREAS AFFECTED or PROJECT(cites. count,os, Vales. etc.): (See Attachment 1 for Project Description) Salt Lake City Salt Lake County Utah 13. PROPOSED PROJECT: 14. CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS OF. Start Date Ending Date a. Applicant b Protect 3/90 2nd 2nd 15.ESTIMATED FUNDING: 11i.IS APPLICATION SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY STATE EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372 PROCESS? a Federal 3 98,000 a. YEs THIS PREAPPtICATION/APPLICATION WAS UADE AVAILABLE TO THESTATE EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372 PROCESS FOR REVIEW ON b Applicant 3 '� DATE c State 3 .00 b NO ® PROGRAM tS NOT COVERED BY E 0 12372 d Local 8 00 93,000 OR PROGRAM HAS NOT BEEN SELECTED BY STATE FOR REVIEW • e Other 3 .00 f Program Income S .130 17. 15'THE APPLICANT DELINQUENT ON AHY FEDERAL DEBT? El Yes If 'Yes.• attach en explanation it No q TOTAL 3 .00 196,000 is. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF.ALL DATA IN THIS APPLICATION PREAPPtICAT)CN ARE TRUE AND CORRECT.THE DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DULY AUTHORIZED BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE APPLICANT AND THE APPLICANT WILL COMPLY WITH THE ATTACHED ASSURANCES IF THE ASSISTANCE rS AWARDED a Typed Name of Authorized Representative b Titte • c Telephone nt moo, Palmer A, DPPaillis Mayor (801)535 7704 e Date Signed d Signature of Authorized Representative Attachment 1 : Elaboration of Item ( 11 ) , Standard Form 424 BUDGET DATA AND VERIFICATION OF PROGRAM CONSISTENCY The Emergency Shelter Grant fund allocation to Salt Lake City under this application is $98,000 . Salt Lake City mailed notices to organizations assisting homeless people within the city announcing the ESG allocation and requesting applications from any group that wanted to be considered to receive ESG funding. The City appointed a committee to review the applications and determine the allocation of the funds among the applicants based on their meeting ESG requirements and providing essential services to the homeless and/or homeless prevention activities . The proposed use of those funds is for disbursement to two homeless provider subgrantees as follows: Salt Lake Community Shelter and Reosurce Center, $88, 000; Salt Lake Community Action Program, $10, 000 . Name of Subgrantee: Salt Lake Community Shelter and Resource Center. Description of Activity: In November 1988 the Salt Lake Community Shelter and Resource Center was completed. This facility was designed to provide for up to 31 families and 240 single men each night . Services available at the center include access to medical, education, counseling, employment and housing assistance. Case management personnel assist in developing strategies for families and individuals to become independent and move back into the community. Since the shelter has been open, the demand on its resources has been near capacity. 25 to 30 families are accommodated each night along with up to 350 men. In addition, over 40 women per night are also being provided for in a separate temporary women's shelter. Amount and Source of Matching Funds : The Salt Lake Community Shelter and Resource Center receives over $400, 000 annually from a variety of public and private sources not including ESG participation. An amount equal to the proposed allotment of $88, 000 has been committed by the Community Shelter and Resource Center for the required ESG match. Eligibility of Activity: The allocation of $88,000 by Salt Lake City to the Community Shelter and Resource Center for operational activities is eligible under 24 CFR 576 . 21(a) ( 3 ) -- "Payment of maintenance, operation (including rent, but excluding staff ) , insurance, utilities, and furnishings . " Name of Subgrantee: Salt Lake Community Action Program. Description of Activity: The Salt Lake Housing Outreach Rental Program provides rent and mortage assistance to low-income families who are at risk of eviction or foreclosure. Approximately 375 families per month are in desperate need of rental assistance. The Housing Outreach Rental Program expects to consult with over 2, 300 families in the current program year and 80 percent of those clients have emergency housing needs . 90 percent of the clients are referrals from the State Division of Social Services or from other social programs . The limited financial resources used to respond to the homeless prevention need are provided through the Federal Emergency Management Agency, religious organizations and Social Services Discretionary Funds, but are seldom sufficient to meet demand. Salt Lake City proposes to allocate $10,000 to the Community Action Program to be used for short-term subsidies toward rent and mortgage payments for families in peril of evication or foreclosure, or to provide security deposits or first month's rent enabling families to secure long-term housing. Amount and Source of Matching Funds: The Community Action Program receives funding for rent/mortgage assistance from FEMA and other social service providers . An amount equal to the proposed allotment of $10,000 has been committed from the FEMA funds as the required ESG match. Eligibility of Activity: The allocation of $10,000 by Salt Lake City to the Community Action Program for assistance in homeless prevention is eligible under 24 CFR 576 . 21(a) ( 2) -- "Provision of essential services. . . " where "not more than 20 percent of the total of each grant amount provided to a unit of general local government is used for these services (whether or not the unit of local government provides some or all of these grant funds to a non-profit recipient) . " ATTACHMENT 7 LOCAL GOVERNMENT GRANTEE EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANTS PROGRAM CERTIFICATIONS BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER I Palmer A fl Pailts , Maror Chief Executive Officer of Salt Lake City Utah , certify that that the local government will ensure the provision of the matching supplemental funds required by the regulation at 24 CFR 576 .71 . I have attached to this certification a description of the sources and amounts of such supplemental funds . I further certify that the local government will comply with: 1 . The requirements of 24 CFR 576 .21(a ) ( ii ) providing that the funding of homeless prevention activities for families that have received eviction notices or notices of termination of utility services will not supplant funding for pre-existing homeless ,prevention activities from any other source. 2. The requirements of 24 CFR 576.51(b) ( 2) (v) concerning the funding of emergency shelter in the hotels or motels or commercial facilities providing transient housing. - 3 . The requirements of 24 CFR 576 .73 concerning the continued use of buildings for which emergency shelter grants are used for rehabilitation or conversion of buildings for use as emergency shelters for the homeless; or when funds are used solely for operating costs or essential services , concerning the population • to be served. 4 . The building standards requirement of 24 CFR 576 .75; 5 . The requirements of 24 CFR 576 .77 , concerning assistance to the homeless; and 6 . The requirements of 24 CFR 576 .79 , other appropriate provisions of 24 CFR Part 576 , and other applicable Federal laws concerning nondiscrimination and equal opportunity. 7 . The requirements of 24 CFR 576 .80 concerning the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 . a 2 8 The requirement of 24 CFR 576 .80 concerning minimizing the displacement of persons as a result of a project assisted with these funds . 9 . The requirements of 24 CFR Part 24 concerning the Drug Free Workplace Act of 1988 . I further certify that the local government will comply with the provisions of, and regulations and procedures applicable under, section 104(g ) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 with respect to the environmental review responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and related authorities as specified in 24 CFR Part 58 . I further certify that the submission of an application for an emergency shelter grant is authorized under State and/or local law and that the local government possesses legal authority to carry out emergency shelter grant activities in accordance with applicable law and regulations of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Palmer A. DePaulis , -Mayor, Salt Lake City, Utah (Name and Title) (Signature of Chief Executive Officer) (Date) /Qn ATTACHMENT 6 CERTIFICATION OF CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE HOMELESS ASSISTANCE PLAN I , Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of SLC , (name and title ) authorized to act on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation (State, City, County or Territory) certify that the activities proposed by Housing Outreach Rental Program (name of applicant or recipient) are consistent with the Comprehensive Homeless Assistance Plan submitted by Salt Lake City Corporation (State, City, County or Territory) on February 10, 19J3 to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, having addressed the need for assistance and the manner in which such assistance will enhance and complement available services as referenced in such plan. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor, Salt Lake City, Utah (Name and Title) (Signature ) (Date) • • 1/90 ATTACHMENT 6 CERTIFICATION OF CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE HOMELESS ASSISTANCE PLAN I , Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of SLC , (name and title) authorized to act on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation (State, City, County or Territory) certify that the activities proposed by S.L. Community Shelter.& Resource Ctr. (name of applicant or recipient) are consistent with the Comprehensive Homeless Assistance Plan submitted by Salt Lake City Corporation (State, City, County or Territory) on February 10, 19a, to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, having addressed the need for assistance and the manner in which such assistance will enhance and complement available services as referenced in such plan. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor, Salt Lake City, Utah (Name and Title) (Signature ) (Date) • 1/90 6-3 CRP.IG E. PETERSON e, � °. °Q Cr�T�Y�ifi " '� DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7777 To: Salt Lake City Council February 1, 1990 Re: Street Name Change Fees Recommendation: That the City Council hold a public hearing on March 13, 1990 at 6:30 p.m. to discuss collecting a fee of $250.00 for Street Name Change Petitions. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Discussion and Background: During the last year, Salt Lake City has cooperated with the Salt Lake County Council of Governments moratorium that no street names be changed, unless absolutely necessary, in order to complete and implement the 911 system data base. The moratorium will end during the month of February. Most of the street name changes we receive are of the "honorary" or "preference" nature where only certain blocks of the street are given an honorary name such as the request we recently received from West High to have 300 North between 200 West and 400 West be given the honorary name of "Panther Way". The honorary name street sign appears above the regular street sign in another color. Strcct name changes are received by the Department of Community and Economic Development and are reviewed by Planning, Transportation, Engineering, Attorney and the City Recorder's Office. The fee we are recommending is $250.00 and is less than the actual cost of processing a request. The staff time costs are approximately $450.00 per request (this does not include 'the costs incurred by the County Address Coordinator) . • The petitioner is responsible for the construction cost of the sign and the installation cost. The petitioner is also responsible for any replacement costs due to vandalism or theft. The signs for high schools are a target for rivalries and as mementos and have been removed from the street pole. The fee will not be collected for street name changes that are determined by the City to be necessary in order to eliminate duplication of names or to avoid other confusion which would have a negative impact upon providing emergency service if the street remains unchanged. These requests will be handled by the City Engineer's Office. Several street name change requests have been received during the moratorium and will not be charged the fcc but will be evaluated based upon the criteria outlined in the Street Name Changes Policy of Salt Lake City's Policies and Procedures Manual. The policy will be adopted by the Mayor after this ordinance has boon acted upon. A copy of the proposed information handout, outlining the requirements is attached for the your information. Legislative Action: The City Attorney's Office has prepared the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. Submitted by: M CHAEL B. Z Director • Community and Economic Development lf/ PRE PPENCE OR HONORARY SPREES NAME (MANGE D• ia. GENERAL INFORMATION It is the policy of Salt Lake City Corporation to name and number the streets of Salt Lake City in a way that eliminates duplication and other confusion which would impact the provision of emergency services. It is further the policy of Salt Lake City Corporation to evaluate requests for street name changes systematically and objectively. Street name changes requested to clarify location to more efficiently provide services must be submitted to the Office of the City Engineer. Such street name changes will change the legal designation of the street. Street name changes requested as a matter of preference must be submitted to the Office of the Director of the Department of Community and Economic Development. Departmental review for Street Name Change requests include Community and Economic Development, Public Works, Fire, Salt Lake County Administrative Services and, if the street is owned by the State, the Utah Department of Transportation. A preference or honorary street name change does not change the legal designation of the street. Upon approval of any preference request for an honorary or official name change, the petitioner will be responsible for reimbursing the City for: • - the actual cost of implementing the changes including any costs of updating official documents which exceed the petition fee of $250.00; - the cost of construction and installation of all applicable street signs. In cases when the new street name signs are a target for rivalries or mementos, for example high school mascot designations, the petitioner will be responsible for reimbursing the City for the replacement of missing or damaged street signs. WHERE TO FILE Preference or Honorary Request: Eliminate Duplication or Clarify Location: Salt Lake City Community and Economic Development Office City Engineer Room 218 City and County Building 444 South State St. 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, Ur 84111 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Phone: (801) 535-7961 Phone: (801) 535-7777 FILING PIE FILING r1 $250.00 no charge PRF:I'172FNCE OR HONORARY RARY STREET NAME QMANC E ' • D. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS It is the policy of Salt Lake City Corporation to receive the necessary information from the applicant in order to review "Preference" Street Name Change requests. Please submit the following information with this application: Date: / / Petitioner's Name: Petitioner's Address: Zip Petitioner's Phone: Contact Person: 1. An explanation of how the requested street name will be compatible with adjacent streets and location, historical character or theme. 2. Written proof of notification of the utility companies, the State Department of Transportation, the Salt Lake County Address Coordinator, and the U.S. Post Office of the petition. 3. Signatures of at least 75 percent of the abutting property owners and, when the property is not owner occupied, occupants in addition to property. owners. 4. Names and addresses of all adjacent property owners (available at the Salt Lake County Recorder) , typed on gummed mailing labels. A separate check from filing fee, payable to Salt Lake City Corporation, to cover all postage for mailing notices to adjacent property owners. 5. A non-refundable application fee for processing the preference request of $250.00 payable upon submission of the request. SIGNATURE OF PETITIONER DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Street Name Change Fees ) AN ORDINANCE ENACTING SECTION 14.08.015, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, RELATING TO STREET NAME CHANGE FEES. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That section 14.08.015, Salt Lake City Code, be, and the same hereby is, enacted pertaining to Street Name Change Fees, to read as follows: 14.08.015 Street name change fees. A non-refundable fee of two hundred fifty dollars shall be paid by any person requesting consideration by the city of a change of the name of any city street. Said fee shall not be payable where such street name change is determined by the city to be necessary in order to eliminate duplication of names or to avoid other confusion which would have a negative impact upon the providing of emergency services if such street remains unchanged. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on its first publication. Passed by -the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1990. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s action: Approved Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER ( SEAL) Bill No. OF 1990. Published: LVS:rc -2- CRAIG E. PETERSON SARI _QJ • ' T�Y�CU DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7777 To: Salt Lake City Council February 7, 1990 RE: Rezoning Property located at 409, 411 and 429 South 800 East Strcct Recommendation: That the City Council hold a public hearing on March 13, 1990 at 6:50 p.m. to discuss rezoning property located at 409, 411 and 429 South 800 East Street from "C-1" and "R-7" classification to a "R-5" classification and that the East Central Neighborhood Plan be amended to reflect "Medium Density Residential" use for 409 South and 411 South 800 East. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Discussion and Background: This proposed rezone action was initiated by the Planning Commission following earlier Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment approvals for a development on the southeast corner of 400 South and 800 East. The Planning Commission recommends rezoning the adjoining properties to promote a desirable land use pattern for this area of the East Central Neighborhood. Legislative Action: The City Attorney's Office has prepared the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. Submitted by: Zt-(41/4 ICHAEL B. Z Interim Direc or Community and Economic Development lf/ SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1990 (Rezoning property located at 409, 411 and 429 South 800 East pursuant to a Planning Commission Initiative ) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 21 . 14 .020 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE RELATING TO ZONING AND FIXING OF BOUNDARIES OF USE DISTRICTS. WHEREAS, in response to a Planning Commission initiative, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, has held public hearings before its own body and before the Planning Commission, and has taken into consideration citizen testimony, filing and demographic details of the area and the Master Plan as part of its deliberation. Pursuant to these deliberations, the Council has concluded that the proposed change of zoning for the property located at 409, 411 and 429 South 800 East, Salt Lake City, Utah, is appropriate for the development of the community in that area; THEREFORE, The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, hereby adopts the following amendments to the Use District provisions of Title 21 . Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That the Use District Map, as adopted by Section 21 . 14 . 020 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries of Use Districts, be, and the same hereby is AMENDED to read as follows: Sec. 21. 14.020. Boundaries of Districts - Use District Map Adopted. That the following-described parcel of real property in Salt Lake City, Utah, presently zoned Commercial "C-1 " and Residential "R-7" , is hereby rezoned Residential "R-5" and the Use District Map is amended accordingly: COMMENCING at a point 76 . 8 feet South of NW corner of Lot 5, Block 30, Plat B, SLC Survey; thence East 132 - . feet; thence South 88. 2 feet; thence East 403 feet; thence South 239 feet; thence West 205 feet; thence v':- ;v South 74. 5 feet; thence West 178 feet; thence North ;�� 8 . 25 feet; thence West 152 feet; thence North approx . •\;-N 393 . 45 feet, to the point of BEGINNING. SECTION 2 . EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall become effective upon publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1990. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor ' s Action: Approved Vetoed . MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER -2- ALLEN C. JOHNSON, AICP w.r�.i'v.��k �vP® oale�l�141 PALMER DE:PAULIS PLANNING DIRECTOR MAYOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET ROOM 406, CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7757 January 25 , 1990 Mr . Mike Zuhl , Director Community and Economic Development Room 235 City-County Building 451 South State Street Salt Lake City , UTAH 84111 Re : Rezone initiative for properties at 409 , 411 and 429 So . 800E Dear Mike , On January 18 , 1990 the Salt Lake City Planning Commission moved to recommend to the City Council a rezone from C-1 Commercial and R-7 Residential to R-5 Residential for properties at 409 South and 411 South 800 East ( 2 single family residences ) and 429 South 800 East ( Bennion Elementary School ) . The Planning Commission also moved to recommend to the City Council an amendment to the East Central Neighborhood Plan ( 1984 ) to reflect "Medium Density Residential " use for 409 So . and 411 So . 800 East Street . This proposed rezone action is Planning Commission initiated and follows earlier Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment approvals for a development on the South-East corner of 400 South 800 East . The Planning Commission is now recommending the rezone of the adjoining properties to promote a desirable land use pattern for this area of the East Central neighborhood . It is now appropriate that this item be scheduled for City Council consideration . Re t ul , Alle C . Johnso , AICP Pla ping Director attachments ACJ : bp ROGER F. CUTLER 4 , `�S a� ORMVj ASSISTANT ATTORNEYS CITY ATTORNEY RAY L. MONTGOMERY STEVEN W. ALLRED LAW DEPARTMENT GREG R. HAWKINS LARRY V. SPENDLOVE DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING BRUCE R. BAIRD CHERYL D. LUKE 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 505 FRANK M. NAKAMURA CITY PROSECUTOR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 ASSISTANT PROSECUTORS TELEPHONE (801) 535-7788 CECELIA M. ESPENOZA GLEN A. COOK FAX (801) 535-7640 JANICE L. FROST February 12, 1990 Cindy Gust-Jenson Executive Director Salt Lake City Council 304 City & County Building Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Amendments to SOB Ordinance Dear Cindy: Accompanying this letter is an ordinance proposed by our office to correct certain parts of the Sexually Oriented Business Licensing Ordinance, Chapter 5 . 61, in response to various court decisions including a recent case from the United States Supreme Court. The changes require an established time for license approval and remove certain disclosure requirements from First Amendment type SOB' s . It is the position of the City Attorney' s office that these changes are necessary to comply with recent court rulings. They have been discussed with all relevant administrative departments including the Police, Building and Housing, City-County Health and others . The affect of the changes is negligible and does not involve any additional funding. The matter should be placed on the Council' s agenda as soon as possible in order to bring our ordinance into compliance with federal constitutional rulings . Cindy Gust-Jenson February 12, 1990 Page -2- If you have any questions please feel free to call . Sincere y E . BAIRD Assistant City Attorney BRB:cc DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (An Ordinance Making Technical Amendments to Chapter 61 of Title 5 ) AN ORDINANCE MAKING CERTAIN TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 61 OF TITLE 5, SALE LAKE CITY CODE. WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, in its continuing effort to make certain that the City' s regulation of sexually oriented businesses is done in a constitutional fashion with full respects due to the United States and Utah Constitutions hereby determines that the following amendments to Chapter 61 of Title 5, Salt Lake City Code, are in the best interests of the City; NOW, THEREFORE, Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Section 5. 61. 150.E. , Salt Lake City Code, be amended to read as follows: 5.61.150 License--Issuance conditions. The City business license official shall approve the issuance of a license to the applicant within thirty days after receipt of an application, unless the official finds one or more of the following: A. through D. * * * E. The premises to be used for the business have [not been approved] been disapproved by the city-county health department, the city fire department, the city police department, the city building officials or the city zoning officials as not being in compliance with applicable laws and ordinances of the city. If any of the foregoing reviewing agencies cannot complete their review within the thirty day approval or denial period the agency or department may obtain from the city business licence official an extension of time for their review of no more than fifteen days. The total time fort f• the city to approve or deny a license shall not exceed forty five days from the receipt of an application. Businesses located outside of the corporate boundaries of the city, but requiring a license under this chapter, may be denied a license pursuant to this chapter if the business does not have a valid business license to conduct business at the business location from the appropriate jurisdiction for that location; 1. Upon receipt of an application all departments required to review the application shall determine within seven days whether or not the application is incomplete in items needed for processing. Incomplete applications shall immediately be returned to the applicant with a specifica- tion of the items which are incomplete. 2. The time for processing applications specified in this section shall begin to run from the receipt of a complete application. 3. In the event that a license for nude entertain- ment, semi nude dancing bar, nude and semi nude dancing agencies, adult businesses, or nude entertainment businesses, has not been disapproved within thirty days or the forty-five days allowed after an extension the City -2- shall issue the license pending completion of the City's review. 4. Any license issued pursuant to subsection 3. above may be revoked by the City pursuant to the revocation procedures of section 5. 61.360 through 380 if the completed review determines that the license should have been denied. SECTION 2. That Section 5. 61 .380, Salt Lake City Code, be amended to read as follows: 5. 61.380 Appeal procedures. A. through G. * * * H. An applicant aggrieved by the Mayor' s decision shall have judicial review of such decision pursuant to Rule 65.B. , Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, or any other applicable ordinance, statute or rule providing for such review. SECTION 3. That Section 5. 61.110.B. be amended to read as follows: 5.61.110 Licence--Application--Disclosures required. Before any applicant may be licensed to operate a sexually oriented business or as a sexually oriented business employee pursuant to this chapter, the applicant shall submit, on a form to be supplied by the city license authority, the following: A. * * * B. If the applicant is a corporation, partnership or limited partnership, or individual or entity doing business under an assumed name, the information required below for individual applicants shall be submitted for each partner and each principal of an applicant, and for each officer, director and any -3- shareholder (corporate or personal ) of more than ten percent of the stock of any applicant. Any holding company, or any entity holding more than ten percent of an applicant, shall be considered an applicant for purposes of disclosure under this chapter; 1. The shareholder disclosure requirements above shall only be applicable for out-call service licenses. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1990. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor's action: Approved Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER -4- Kba (SEAL) Bill No. of 1990. Published: BRB:rc • -5- LINDA HAMILTON » ,' A) Q vT,�Y, �Vl��OD e�,Vj PALMER DEPAULIS DIRECTOR OF FINANCE - - - � � MAYOR FINANCE DEPARTMENT Policy and Budget Division -• 451 SOUTH-STATE-STREET, ROOM 248 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE (801) 535-7810 February 12, 1990 TO: Salt Lake City Council RE: BUDGET AMENDMENT #5 - PUBLIC HEARING Recommendation: That on February 20, 1990 the City Council set a date to hold a public hearing on March 20, 1990 to discuss Budget Amendment #5. Availability of Funds: Not applicable. Discussion and Background: Due to scheduling difficulties, it is necessary to set the date for the hearing much earlier than usual. Therefore, all work necessary for the amendment packets has not been finalized. Council staff has indicated, however, that it would be acceptable to transmit the amendment packets to the Council office on March 13, 1990, one week prior to the scheduled public hearing date. Legislative Action: The City Attorney' s office will prepare the necessary ordinance and it will also be distributed with the entire amendment packet on March 13, 1990. Submitted by: --- Linda Hamilton Director of Finance LH/SF: lc STAFF RECOMMENDATION RESOLUTIONS REGARDING STEINER AQUATIC: CENTER F EBRUARY 13, 1990 STAFF RECOMMENDATION BY: Janne Nielson ACTION REQUESTED OF COtJNCIL: Convene as the Municipal Building Authority to - - -- - - - - adopt a resolution authorizing the issuance of lease revenue bonds; and reconvene as the City Council l to adopt a resolution directing the Municipal Building Authority to undertake the project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This is a t.echn i ca l, legal reqi ii rement. The City Council is the Board of Trustees for. the Municipal Building Authority. STAFF ANALYSIS: None. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Convene as Municipal Building Authority, approve, and adjourn. 2) Convene as City Council, and approve. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: For agenda item F-2 1. I move we recess as the City Council. 2. I move we convene as the Municipal Building Authority. 3. I move we adopt the resolution authorizing the issuance and terms of the Lease Revenue Bonds, and related matters. �i. I move we adjourn as the Municipal Building Authority. 5. I move we reconvene as the City Council. For agenda item F-3: 6. I move we adopt the resolution directing the Municipal Building Authority to undertake this project and approving the plans, specifications and related matters. ANTICIPATED OPPOSITION: None. The attached document is a revised draft from Chapman and Cutler regarding the Lease Revenue Bonds for the Steiner Aquatic Center Project. The changes made from the original draft you received: to the Municipal Council Resolution are: 1) The correction of the name of West One Trust Company. (Pg. 6) 2) The reference to the snack bar has been deleted. (Pg. 6) 3) The estimated cost of the project to be financed was added. (Pg 7) to the Municipal Building Authority Resolution 4) The naming of Shearson Lehman Hutton as the underwriter. (Pg 11) and 5) In various places in both documents, "Steiner Aquatic Center" has been inserted in front of the mention of "Ground Lease". /\ Denotes Deletion Chapman and Cutler Black Underline Denotes anges eft of February /\16, 1990 Salt Lake City, Utah February 20, 1990 The Board of Trustees (the "Board") of the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "Authority") pursuant to due notice met in regular public session on February 20, 1990, at the hour of 6:00 P.M., at its regular meeting place at Room 315 in the City and County Building, 451 South State Street, in Salt Lake City, Utah. On roll call, the following members of the Board were determined present: Alan G. Hardman President Nancy K. Pace Vice President Thomas M. Godfrey Trustee L. Wayne Horrocks Trustee Roselyn Kirk Trustee Don C. Hale Trustee Ronald J. Whitehead Trustee Absent: None. There were also present: Kathryn Marshall Secretary Roger F. Cutler Attorney for the Authority After the meeting had been duly called to order, the Secretary presented to the Board an affidavit evidencing the giving of not less than twenty-four (24) hours public notice of the agenda, date, time and place of the February 20, 1990, meeting of the Board in compliance with the requirements of Section 52-4-6(2), Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, by (1) posting written notice of the meeting at the principal office of the Board, and (2) providing notice to at least one newspaper of general circulation within the geographic jurisdiction of the Authority and of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, or to a local media correspondent. The affidavit was ordered recorded in the minutes of the meeting and is as follows: • STATE OF UTAH ) SALT LAKE COUNTY ) I, the undersigned, the duly qualified and acting Secretary of the Board of Trustees (the "Board") of the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "Authority") do hereby certify, according to the records of the Board in my official possession, and upon my own knowledge and belief, that in accordance with the requirements of Section 52-4-6(2), Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, I gave not less than twenty-four (24) hours public notice of the agenda, date, time and place of the February 20, 1990, public meeting held by the Board/\ by: (a) causing a Notice of Public Meeting to be posted at the principal office of the Board at Room 315 in the City and County Building, 451 South State Street, in Salt Lake City, Utah, on February _, 1990, at least twenty-four (24) hours before the convening of the meeting, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A; said Notice of Public Meeting having continuously remained so posted and available for public inspection during the regular office hours of the Board until the convening of the meeting; and (b) causing a copy of the Notice of Public Meeting in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A to be provided on February _, 1990, at least twenty-four (24) hours before the convening of the meeting, to The Salt Lake Tribune and the Deseret News, newspapers of general circulation within the geographic jurisdiction of the Authority and of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, and to each local media correspondent, newspaper, radio station or television station that has requested notification of meetings of.the Board. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my official signature and impressed hereon the official seal of the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, this 20th day of February, 1990. Kathryn Marshall, Secretary Municipal Building Authority of [SEAL] Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah I U -2- ._-,�a.-..,...,....+ar-.r..-.-ar, .�ea�.e--.r-aa..•!v3.:resnvxr:+a+svr+r.--c•.c..,�aa.Wr..arx»'srt� n-:rae�+n*ne aaarwur-a• rne.sslnr..w.aruwr�eeec.waaso..enw,.,wa:rr-ev.:aw. _:aaas�.�mc+.rre.. . - . EXHIBIT A [Attach Notice of Public Meeting] -3- • + Thereupon, the following resolution was introduced in written form by Trustee and, pursuant to motion duly made by Trustee and seconded by Trustee , was adopted and approved by the following vote: Aye: Nay: The resolution was thereupon signed by the President and was attested and recorded by the Secretary in the official records of the Authority. The resolution is as follows: - 'i RESOLUTION NO. OF 1990 J A RESOLUTION of the Board of Trustees of the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, authorizing the issuance of not more than $2,000,000 Lease Revenue Bonds (Steiner Aquatic Center Project), Series 1990A, (the "Bonds") of said Authority, on behalf of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, fixing the maximum aggregate principal amount of the Bonds, the maximum • number of years over which the Bonds may mature, the maximum interest rate which the Bonds may bear and the maximum discount from par at which the Bonds may be sold; providing for the publication of a Notice of Bonds to be Issued with respect to the Bonds; selecting an underwriter for the Bonds and appointing bond counsel for the Bonds; and providing for related matters. *** *** *** WHEREAS Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "City") has organized the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "Authority") solely for the purpose of (a) accomplishing the public purposes for which the City exists by acquiring, improving or extending any improvements, facilities or properties i ( i -4- (whether real or personal) and appurtenances to them which the City is authorized or permitted by law to acquire, including, but not limited to, public buildings or other structures of every nature or any joint or partial interest in the same, and (b) financing the costs of such projects on behalf of the City in accordance with the procedures and subject to the limitations of the Utah Municipal Building Authority Act, Sections 11-29-1 et seq. of the Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended (the "Act"); and WHEREAS the City desires the Authority, on behalf of the City, to undertake the acquisition, improvement and extension of a certain project pursuant to the Act consisting of the acquisition, construction and improvement on certain land located at approximately 675 South Guardsman Way in Salt Lake City, Utah, (the "Site") of (a) certain structures, facilities and other improvements for a recreation facility, including but not limited to an indoor swimming pool with associated facilities (such as locker rooms, mechanical equipment rooms, administration spaces, entry lobby /\and storage), an outdoor swimming pool with decks and all related facilities, (b) equipment related to the operations to be conducted with respect to such recreation facili4/\ and (c) related improvements, facilities, properties and appurtenances thereto, including but not limited to certain road improvements, parking lot improvements and landscaping (all of the foregoing properties described in (a), (b) and (c) being herein collectively referred to as the "Steiner Aquatic Center Facilities"), all for the benefit of the inhabitants of the City and members of the general public for recreation purposes and for other purposes that are desirable in connection with the development of the area adjoining the Steiner Aquatic Center Facilities, but does not have on hand moneys sufficient to pay the costs for such acquisition, construction and improvement; and WHEREAS the Authority is willing, on behalf of the City, to undertake the acquisition, construction and improvement of the Steiner Aquatic Center Facilities on the Site (the "Project"); and -5- WHEREAS the Authority desires to issue its Lease Revenue Bonds (Steiner Aquatic Center Project), Series 1990A (the "Bonds") pursuant to the Act and the Indenture (as such term is hereinafter defined) to finance the Project, to provide for a deposit to a debt service reserve fund under the Indenture with respect to the Bonds, to provide certain capitalized interest for the Bonds and to pay costs relating to the issuance and sale of the Bonds; and WHEREAS Section 11-29-15, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, provides for the publication of a Notice of Bonds to be Issued, and the Board of Trustees of the Authority desires to cause the publication of such a Notice at this time in compliance with said Section regarding the Bonds; and WHEREAS the Board of Trustees of the Authority desires to select an underwriter and appoint bond counsel, both to act in connection with the offering, issuance, sale and delivery by the Authority of the Bonds; NOW, THEREFORE, Be It Resolved by the Board of Trustees of the Municipal Iti Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, as follows: Section 1. The Board of Trustees (the "Board") of the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "Authority") hereby finds and determines that it is in the best interests of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "City"), its inhabitants and members of the general public for the Authority to issue its Lease Revenue Bonds (Steiner Aquatic Center Project), Series 1990A (the "Bonds") in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $2,000,000, to bear interest at a rate or rates not to exceed eight percent (8.00%) per annum, to mature in not more than eleven (11) years from their date or dates, to be sold at a discount from par (expressed as a percentage of principal amount) of not to exceed two percent (2.0%) and with a good faith deposit up to two percent (2.0%) of the principal amount of the Bonds that may be required in connection with the sale of the Bonds, all pursuant to the Utah Municipal Building Authority Act, -6- Chapter 29 of Title 11, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended (the "Act") and that certain Indenture of Trust, Assignment of Master Lease Agreement and Security Agreement, dated as of February 1, 19881 as supplemented and amended by that certain First Supplemental Indenture of Trust, dated as of November 1, 1988 (collectively, the "Original Indenture"), as further supplemented and amended by a Second Supplemental Indenture of Trust, to be dated as of March 1, 1990 (the "Second Supplement", a form of which in substantially final form is attached hereto as Exhibit B; the Original Indenture and the Second Supplement are herein collectively referred to as the "Indenture"), (b) to lease from the City the Site described in the preambles hereto (the "Site") pursuant to a Steiner Aquatic Center Ground Lease (the "Ground Lease", a form of which in substantially final form is attached hereto as Exhibit C) for the purpose of the Project (as such term is defined in the preambles hereto) and (c) to sublease the Site and lease the Facilities described in the Second Supplement to the City pursuant to a Master Lease Agreement, dated as of February 1, 1988, as amended and supplemented by that certain First Amendment, dated as of November 1, 1988 (collectively, the "Original Lease"), as further amended and supplemented by a Second Amendment, to be dated as of March 1, 1990 (the "Second Amendment", a form of which in substantially final form is attached hereto as Exhibit D; the Original Lease and the Second Amendment are herein collectively referred to as the "Lease"), and the Board hereby declares its intention to issue the Bonds according to the provisions of this Section; provided, however, that the Bonds shall only be issued by the Authority after adoption of a final bond resolution by the Board (the "Final Bond Resolution", a form of which in substantially final form is attached hereto as Exhibit E) setting forth the specific terms of the Bonds within the maximum terms herein provided and adoption of a resolution of the Municipal Council of the City approving the issuance of the Bonds and the terms thereof as required by Section 11-29-9 of the Act. -7- Section 2. The Board hereby authorizes and approves the issuance of the Bonds pursuant to the provisions of this Resolution, the Final Bond Resolution, the Indenture and J the Act, with such changes thereto and to the form of the Second Supplement, the Ground Lease and the Second Amendment as shall be approved by the Board pursuant to the Final Bond Resolution, provided that the principal amount, interest rate or rates, maturity and discount shall not exceed the maximum terms set forth in Section 1 hereof, and the Bonds shall only be issued after the adoption of a resolution of the Municipal Council of the City approving the issuance of the Bonds and the terms thereof as required by Section 11-29-9 of the Act. Section 3. In accordance with the provisions of Section 11-29-15, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, the Secretary of the Authority shall cause a "Notice of Bonds i to be Issued" to be published one time in The Salt Lake Tribune, a newspaper having general circulation in the City, and cause a copy of this Resolution (including the Exhibits attached hereto) to be kept on file in her office for public examination during regular business hours I ) until at least thirty (30) days from and after the date of publication thereof. The "Notice of Bonds to be Issued" shall be in substantially the following form: NOTICE OF BONDS TO BE ISSUED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the provisions of Section 11-29-15, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, that on February 20, 1990, the Board of Trustees of the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "Authority") adopted a resolution in which it authorized and approved the issuance of its Lease Revenue Bonds (Steiner Aquatic Center Project), Series 1990A (the "Bonds"), in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $2,000,000, to bear interest at a rate or rates not to exceed eight percent (8.00%) per annum, to mature in not more than eleven (11) 9 years from their date or dates, to be sold at a discount from par (expressed as a percentage of principal amount) of not to exceed two percent (2.0%) and with a good faith deposit up to two percent (2.0%) of the principal amount of the Bonds that may be required in connection with the sale of the Bonds. The Bonds, pursuant to said resolution of the Board of Trustees of the Authority duly adopted on February 20, 1990, and pursuant to the provisions of the Utah Municipal Building Authority Act, Chapter 29 of Title 11 of the Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended (the "Act"), are to be issued for the purpose -8- of financing the acquisition, construction, improvement and extension of a certain project under the Act consisting of the acquisition, construction and improvement on certain land located at approximately 675 South Guardsman Way in Salt Lake City, Utah, of (a) certain structures, facilities and other improvements for a recreation facility, including but not limited to an indoor swimming pool with associated facilities (such as locker rooms, mechanical equipment rooms, administration spaces, entry lobby /\and storage), an outdoor swimming pool with decks and all related facilities, (b) equipment related to the operations to be conducted with respect to such recreation facility and (c) related improvements, facilities, properties and appurtenances thereto, including but not limited to certain road improvements, parking lot improvements and landscaping, all for the benefit of the inhabitants of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "City") and members of the general public for recreation and other purposes, and for the purpose of providing for a deposit to a debt service reserve fund under the Indenture with respect to the Bonds, providing an amount to pay capitalized interest on the Bonds during the period of acquisition and construction of the foregoing project and up to 12 months thereafter and paying all costs incident thereto and to the authorization and issuance of the Bonds. The Bonds are to be issued and sold by the Board of Trustees of the Authority pursuant to the Act and said resolution, including as part of said resolution the form of the Second Supplemental Indenture of Trust, to be dated as of March 1, 1990, (the "Second Supplement") to an Indenture of Trust, Assignment of Master Lease Agreement and Security Agreement, dated as of February 1, 1988, as amended and supplemented by that certain First Supplemental Indenture of Trust, dated as of November 1, 1988, the form of the Steiner Aquatic Center Ground Lease, to be dated as of March 1, 1990, (the "Ground Lease") and the form of the Second Amendment, to be dated as of March 1, 1990, (the "Second Amendment") to a Master Lease Agreement, dated as of February 1, 1988, as amended and supplemented by that certain First Amendment, dated as of November 1, 1988, each in substantially final form and which were before the Board of Trustees of the Authority and attached to said resolution at the time of the adoption of said resolution, provided that the Bonds will only be issued by the Authority after adoption of a final bond resolution (the "Final Bond Resolution", the substantially final form of which was before the Board of Trustees of the Authority and attached to said resolution at the time of its adoption) by the Board of Trustees of the Authority setting forth the specific terms of the Bonds within the maximum terms described above and adoption of a resolution of the Municipal Council of the City approving the issuance of the Bonds and the terms thereof as required by Section 11-29-9 of the Act. The Bonds are to be issued and the Second Supplement, the Ground Lease and the Second Amendment are to be executed and delivered substantially in such form as approved by such resolution adopted by the Board of Trustees of the Authority on February 20, 1990, with such changes thereto as shall be approved by the Board of Trustees of the Authority pursuant to the Final Bond Resolution, provided that the principal amount, interest rate or rates, maturity and discount will not exceed the maximum terms described above, and the Bonds shall only be issued after the adoption of a resolution of the Municipal Council of the City approving the issuance of the Bonds and the terms thereof as required by Section 11-29-9 of the Act. -9- A copy of said resolution (including the form of the Final Bond Resolution, the form of the Second Supplement, the form of the Ground Lease 0 and the form of the Second Amendment attached thereto) is on file in the office of the Secretary of the Authority, City Recorder's Office, Room 415 of the City and County Building, 451 South State Street, in Salt Lake City, Utah, where said resolution (including the exhibits attached thereto) may be examined during regular business hours of the Authority from 8:30 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Said resolution shall be so available for inspection for a period of at least thirty (30) days from and after the date of the publication of this notice. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that pursuant to law for a period of thirty (30) days from and after the date of the publication of this notice, any person in interest shall have the right to contest the legality of the above-described resolution (including the Final Bond Resolution, the Second Supplement, the Ground Lease and the Second Amendment attached thereto and the transactions contemplated thereby) of the Board of Trustees of the Authority adopted on February 20, 1990, or the Lease Revenue Bonds (Steiner Aquatic Center Project), Series 1990A, of the Authority authorized thereby, or the Ground Lease or the Second Amendment or any provisions made for the security and payment of the Bonds or for the security and payment of the Second Amendment, including but not limited to the Second Supplement, and that after such time, no one shall have any cause of action to contest the regularity, formality or legality of same for any cause whatsoever. DATED this 20th day of February, 1990. Is/ Kathryn Marshall Secretary Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah [SEAL] For a period of thirty (30) days from and after publication of the Notice of Bonds to be Issued, any person in interest shall have the right to contest the legality of this Resolution (including the Final Bond Resolution, the Second Supplement, the Ground Lease and the Second Amendment attached hereto and the transactions contemplated thereby) or the Bonds hereby authorized or the Ground Lease or the Second Amendment or any provisions made for the security and payment of the Bonds or for the security and payment of the Second Amendment, including but not limited to the Second Supplement. After such time, no one shall have any cause of action to contest the regularity, formality or legality of this -10- Resolution, the Final Bond Resolution, the Bonds, the Ground Lease, the Second Amendment or the Second Supplement for any cause whatsoever. Section 4. (a) Shearson Lehman Hutton Inc. is hereby selected to act as underwriter in connection with the offering, sale and delivery of the Bonds by the Authority for the purpose of financing the Project on behalf of the City as authorized by the Act. (b) The law firm of Chapman and Cutler is hereby appointed to act as bond counsel in connection with the issuance of the Bonds, and the President is hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver, and the Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to attest, an engagement letter between the Authority and Chapman and Cutler in form and content acceptable to the President of the Authority. Section 5. The Authority hereby acknowledges receipt of the filing of a resolution of the Municipal Council of the City constituting the direction of the City to the Authority to issue a series of additional parity bonds pursuant to Section 213 of the Original Indenture and containing the estimate of costs to be incurred for the purposes for which the Bonds are to be issued as provided in said Section 213. Section 6. All resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are, to the extent of such conflict, hereby repealed, and this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption. -11- ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the Board of Trustees of the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, this 20th day of February, 1990. MUNICIPAL BUILDING AUTHORITY OF SALT LAKE CITY, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH [SEAL] By Alan G. Hardman President ATTEST: Kathryn Marshall Secretary (Other business not pertinent to the above appears in the minutes of the meeting.) Upon the conclusion of all business and upon motion duly made and carried, the meeting of the Board of Trustees was adjourned. ATTEST: Alan G. Hardman President Kathryn Marshall Secretary [SEAL] -12- EXHIBIT B [Attach Form of Second Supplement Here] • -13- EXHIBIT C [Attach Form of Ground Lease Here] ` J -14- EXHIBIT D [Attach Form of Second Amendment Here] -15- EXHIBIT E w f ) [Attach Form of Final Bond Resolution Here] E pI -1 6' STATE OF UTAH ) SALT LAKE COUNTY ) I, Kathryn Marshall, the duly qualified and acting Secretary of the Board of Trustees of the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, do hereby certify, according to the records of said Board in my official possession, that the above and foregoing constitutes a true and correct copy of excerpts from the minutes of a regular public meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, held on February 20, 1990, including a resolution adopted at said meeting, as said minutes and resolution are officially of record in my possession. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my official signature and impressed hereon the official seal of the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, this 20th day of February, 1990. Kathryn Marshall, Secretary Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah [SEAL] DRL/cha/859447-pr -17- /\ Denotes Deletion t,napman uCI Black Underline Denotes Ganges Draft of February A16, 1990 Salt Lake City, Utah February 20, 1990 0 The Municipal Council of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "Municipal Council") pursuant to due notice met in regular public session on February 20, 1990, at the hour of 6:00 P.M., at its regular meeting place at Room 315 in the City and County Building, 451 South State Street, in Salt Lake City, Utah. The meeting was duly called to order by the Chair of the Municipal Council with the following members of the Municipal Council being present, constituting a quorum of the Municipal Council: Alan G. Hardman Chair Nancy K. Pace Vice Chair Thomas M. Godfrey Councilmember L. Wayne Horrocks Councilmember Roselyn Kirk Councilmember I Don C. Hale Councilmember Ronald J. Whitehead Councilmember Absent: None. There were also present: Palmer A. DePaulis Mayor Kathryn Marshall City Recorder Roger F. Cutler City Attorney After the minutes of the preceding meeting had been read and approved, the City Recorder presented to the Municipal Council an affidavit evidencing the giving of not less than twenty-four (24) hours public notice of the agenda, date, time and place of the February 20, 1990, meeting of the Municipal Council in compliance with the requirements of Section 52-4-6(2), Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, by (1) posting written notice V -1: :�*s_. •?�"*;. .:sx'.'.?`.'L,1... .:° ...3'r �::'f}�s,: %.'+r^' `F. ¢`a..F'±sG�F!.:^r, ', i. ].dJs ,u.,:ti:..-:',•?"':5�.'.."':.;: :%F;.` STATE OF UTAH ) SALT LAKE COUNTY ) I, the undersigned, the duly qualified and acting City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "City"), do hereby certify, according to the records of the City in my official possession, and upon my own knowledge and belief, that in accordance with the requirements of Section 52-4-6(2), Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, I gave not less than twenty-four (24) hours public notice of the agenda, date, time and place of the regular public meeting held by the Municipal Council of the City (the "Municipal Council") on February 20, 1990, by: (a) causing a Notice of Public Meeting to be posted at the principal office of the Municipal Council at Room 315 in the City and County Building, 451 South State Street, in Salt Lake City, Utah, on February _, 1990, at least twenty-four (24) hours before the convening of the meeting, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A; said Notice of Public Meeting having continuously remained so posted and available for public inspection during the regular office hours of the Municipal Council until the convening of the meeting; and (b) causing a copy of the Notice of Public Meeting in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A to be provided on February _, 1990, at least twenty-four (24) hours before the convening of the meeting, to The Salt Lake Tribune and the Deseret News, newspapers of general circulation within the geographic jurisdiction of the City, and to each local media correspondent, newspaper, radio station or television station which has requested notification of meetings of the Municipal Council. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my official signature and impressed hereon the official seal of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, this 20th day of February, 1990. [SEAL] Kathryn Marshall City Recorder, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah -3- • of the meeting at the principal office of the Municipal Council, and (2) providing notice to at least one newspaper of general circulation within the geographic jurisdiction of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, or to a local media correspondent. The affidavit was ordered recorded in the minutes of the meeting and is as follows: • -2- s m.c+rxm tT,,A9T++...w..P9.9.,^VNCT,.*t13R319G9/:C....1..a�NCP.= •R[L: L\S`�.3saw.V9AMS1,4Yf9.slL'.13,W2'M1,,,-.sse¢4"-XL M"hrsI vLu..si...nmaM13n A+6aile4"vt�1%+w �+-e.•JI:SR EXHIBIT A [Attach Notice of Public Meeting] -4- Thereupon, after the conduct of other business not pertinent to the following, the following resolution was introduced by the Chair in written form and, pursuant to motion duly made by Councilmember and seconded by Couneilmember ,.the resolution was adopted and approved by the following vote: Aye: Nay: The resolution was thereupon presented to and approved and signed by the Mayor in open meeting, was approved as to form and signed by the City Attorney, was signed by the Chair of the Municipal Council and was attested and recorded by the City Recorder in the official records of the City. The resolution is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. OF 1990 A RESOLUTION OF THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH, DIRECTING THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING AUTHORITY OF SALT LAKE CITY, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH, TO UNDERTAKE A CERTAIN PROJECT RELATING TO A RECREATION FACILITY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 675 SOUTH GUARDSMAN WAY IN THE CITY; APPROVING THE PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATED COSTS OF SUCH PROJECT TO BE FINANCED WITH THE PROCEEDS OF SALE OF CERTAIN LEASE REVENUE BONDS (STEINER AQUATIC CENTER PROJECT), SERIES 1990A, OF SAID MUNICIPAL BUILDING AUTHORITY; APPROVING THE SELECTION OF AN UNDERWRITER AND THE APPOINTMENT OF BOND COUNSEL FOR THE BONDS; AND PROVIDING FOR RELATED MATTERS. WHEREAS, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "City") has organized the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "Authority") solely for the purpose of (a) accomplishing the public purposes for which the -5- City exists by acquiring, improving or extending any improvements, facilities or properties (whether real or personal) and appurtenances to them which the City is authorized or permitted by law to acquire, including, but not limited to, public buildings or other structures of every nature or any joint or partial interest in the same, and (b) financing the costs of such projects on behalf of the City in accordance with the procedures and subject to the limitations of the Utah Municipal Building Authority Act, Sections 11-29-1 et seq. of the Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended (the "Act"); and WHEREAS, the City desires the Authority to undertake the acquisition, improvement and extension of a certain project pursuant to the Act consisting of the acquisition, construction and improvement on certain land located at approximately 675 South Guardsman Way in Salt Lake City, Utah, (the "Site") of (a) certain structures, facilities and other improvements for a recreation facility, including but not limited to an indoor swimming pool with associated facilities (such as locker rooms, mechanical equipment rooms, administration spaces, entry lobby /\and storage), an outdoor swimming pool with decks and all related facilities, (b) equipment related to the operations to be conducted with respect to such recreation facility and (c) related improvements, facilities, properties and appurtenances thereto, including but not limited to certain road improvements, parking lot improvements and landscaping (all of the foregoing properties described in (a), (b) and (c) being herein collectively referred to as the "Steiner Aquatic Center Facilities"), all for the benefit of the inhabitants of the City and members of the general public for recreation purposes and for other purposes that the Municipal Council of the City deems and considers desirable in connection with the development of the area adjoining the Steiner Aquatic Center Facilities, but does not have on hand moneys sufficient to pay the costs for such acquisition, construction and improvement; and WHEREAS, the Authority has indicated its willingness, on behalf of the City, to undertake the acquisition, construction and improvement of the Facilities on the Site (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the City has heretofore reviewed and considered the plans and specifications relating to the Steiner Aquatic Center Facilities; and WHEREAS, the City in its capacity as the Lessee under that certain Master Lease Agreement, dated as of February 1, 1988, as amended and supplemented by that certain First Amendment, dated as of November 1, 1988, each between the City and the Authority, desires that the Authority issue on behalf of the City a series of additional parity bonds in accordance with the terms and provisions of that certain Indenture of Trust, Assignment of Master Lease Agreement and Security Agreement, dated as of February 1, 1988, between the Authority and Moore Trust Company/ (now West One /Trust Company), as Trustee, as amended and supplemented by that certain First Supplemental Indenture of Trust, dated as of November 1, 1988, and the filing of this Resolution with the Authority following its adoption shall constitute the filing contemplated by Section 213 of such Indenture of Trust, as amended and supplemented; and WHEREAS, in connection with the financing of the Project from the proceeds of sale of the Authority's Lease Revenue Bonds (Steiner Aquatic Center Project), Series 1990A (the "Bonds"), which constitutes such a series of additional parity bonds, the Authority has submitted the plans and specifications described above relating to the Project to the City for the purpose of complying with Section 11-29-4 of the Act, which provides that the "plans, specifications, and estimated costs [of the project] shall be approved by the governing body prior to the execution of any leasing contract with respect to the project and before the building authority begins to acquire, improve, or extend the project"; and -6- '?.:_a.a.s�'.^_F:fr,.'.:.'E:..ti,�`".�"i�`�_.i.t....-:±r_.L�r."rr.-7,?-a.:,.::-a^.'4':.-- :.t';9ii1^�c'��.<�:�}T.r..:::L'Ad#.'4'.':92'^,:efiF!.`?���i?o�Y�i3ss�^.!+?+men.:r.��...j.sir,�--•xm.r��rxa.a-..-.,..a.,._.. _. WHEREAS, the Authority has estimated to the City that the cost of the Project to be financed will be approximately $/\2,515,000, of which $1,300,000 is to be financed from the proceeds of sale of the Bonds, plus the costs for capitalized interest for a certain period on the Bonds, providing for a deposit to a debt service reserve fund to secure the Bonds and paying costs of issuance relating to the Bonds; and WHEREAS, Section 11-29-4 of the Act requires that the plans and specifications relating to the Project include a certificate of the architect or engineer responsible for planning and designing the Project which sets forth the estimated useful life of the Facilities, the form of which certificate for the Project is attached hereto as Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, based on the form of the certificate attached hereto, the estimated useful life of the Facilities is expected to be no less than eleven (11) years; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Authority has selected an underwriter and appointed bond counsel, both to act in connection with the offering, issuance, sale and delivery by the Authority of the Bonds, and the Municipal Council desires to approve and consent to such selection of an underwriter and appointment of bond counsel; NOW, THEREFORE, Be It Resolved by the Municipal Council of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, as follows: Section 1. Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "City") hereby directs the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (the "Authority") to undertake the acquisition, construction and improvement of the Steiner Aquatic Center Facilities on the Site (as each such term is defined in the preambles hereto). In connection with the Project (as such term is defined in the preambles hereto) and the financing thereof, the City hereby evidences its intent (a) to lease the Site to the Authority pursuant to a Steiner Aquatic Center Ground Lease, to be entered into between the Authority and the City, (b) to lease back from the Authority the Site together with the Steiner Aquatic Center Facilities to be acquired, constructed, improved and extended thereon pursuant to a Master Lease Agreement, dated as of February 1, 1988, between the City and the Authority, as amended and supplemented by a First Amendment, dated as of November 1, 1988, between the City and the Authority, and as further amended and supplemented by a Second Amendment, to be dated as of March 1, 1990, and to be entered into between the City and the Authority, and (c) to approve the issuance by the Authority of its Lease Revenue Bonds (Steiner Aquatic Center Project), Series 1990A (the "Bonds"), to finance the Project, pursuant to a resolution to be hereafter considered by this Municipal Council, provided that the Bonds (i) shall have terms acceptable to this Municipal Council and (ii) shall not constitute an indebtedness of the City, the Authority, the State of Utah or any political subdivision of such State within the meaning of any State constitutional provision or limitation nor give rise to or be a general obligation or liability of nor a charge against the general credit or taxing powers of the State of Utah or any political subdivision of the State of Utah. A copy of this Resolution shall be filed with the Authority to constitute a direction to the Authority to proceed with the issuance of a series of additional parity bonds (which are the Bonds) under that certain Indenture of Trust, Assignment of Master Lease Agreement and Security Agreement, dated as of February 1, 1988, between the Authority and Moore Trust Company/\ (now West One /\Trust Company), as Trustee, which filing shall evidence the City's estimate of the amount of costs to be incurred for the purposes for which the Bonds are to be issued as provided in Section 213 of such Indenture of Trust. Cr) -7- Section 2. The plans, specifications and estimated costs of the Steiner Aquatic Center Facilities, including the form of the certificate attached hereto as Exhibit B, as described in the preambles to this Resolution, have been reviewed and considered by the Municipal Council of the City and are hereby approved for all purposes of Section 11-29-4 of the Utah Municipal Building Authority Act, Chapter 29 of Title 11, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended (the "Act"). Section 3. (a) This Municipal Council hereby approves the selection by the Authority of Shearson Lehman Hutton Inc. to act as underwriter in connection with the offering, sale and delivery of the Bonds by the Authority for the purpose of financing the Project on behalf of the City as authorized by the Act. (b) The Municipal Council hereby further approves and consents, for purposes of Section 11-29-3(4)(b) of the Act, to the appointment of Chapman and Cutler to act as bond counsel in connection with the issuance of the Bonds, subject to the consent of the Salt Lake City Attorney as required by Section 11-29-3(4)(b) of the Act. The Finance Director of the City is hereby authorized and directed to evidence such approval and consent on behalf of the Municipal Council by executing and delivering a consent to an engagement letter between the Authority and Chapman and Cutler, which shall be in form and content acceptable to the Finance Director of the City and the City Treasurer. Section 4. That all resolutions and orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are, to the extent of such conflict, hereby repealed, and this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its passage. ADOPTED and APPROVED this 20th day of February, 1990. SALT LAKE CITY, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH • [SEAL] By Alan G. Hardman Chair of the Municipal Council, ATTEST: Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah Kathryn Marshall City Recorder, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah APPROVED: By Palmer A. DePaulis Mayor, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah -8- (I!) APPROVED as to form: By Roger F. Cutler City Attorney, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah (Other business not pertinent to the above appears in the minutes of the meeting.) Upon the conclusion of all business and upon motion duly made and carried, the meeting was adjourned. Alan G. Hardman Chair of the Municipal Council, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah ATTEST: Kathryn Marshall City Recorder, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah [SEAL] -9- STATE OF UTAH ) SALT LAKE COUNTY I, Kathryn Marshall, do hereby certify that I am the duly qualified and acting City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah. I further certify that the above and foregoing constitutes a full, true and correct copy of the minutes of a regular public meeting of the Municipal Council of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, held on February 20, 1990, and of a resolution adopted at said meeting insofar as said minutes pertain to the matters above set forth, as said minutes and resolution are officially of record in my possession. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my official signature and impressed hereon the official seal of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, this 20th day of February, 1990. Kathryn Marshall City Recorder, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah [SEAL] DRL/cha/859447-pr2 -10- EXHIBITS February 20, 1990 Municipal Council of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah 451 South State Street, Room 315 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah 451 South State Street, Room 315 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Steiner Aquatic Center Project Ladies and Gentlemen: In response to the requirement of Section 11-29-4, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, that the plans and specifications submitted by a municipal building authority to the governing body of a city in connection with the acquisition, improvement or extension of a project under the Utah Municipal Building Authority Act, Sections 11-29-1 et seq., Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, include a certificate of the architect or engineer responsible for planning and designing such project which sets forth the estimated useful life of such project, the undersigned hereby represents in connection with the above- captioned Project and the financing thereof through the issuance of those certain Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah, Lease Revenue Bonds (Steiner Aquatic Center Project), Series 1990A, that: 1. Gillies Stransky Brems Smith Architects, P.C. is the architect responsible for planning and designing a certain project consisting of the acquisition, construction and improvement on certain land located at approximately 675 South Guardsman Way in Salt Lake City, Utah, of (a) certain structures, facilities and other improvements for a recreation facility, including but not limited to an indoor swimming pool with associated facilities (such as locker rooms, mechanical equipment rooms, administration spaces, entry lobby and storage), an outdoor swimming pool with decks and all other related facilities, (b) equipment related to the operations to be conducted with respect to such recreation facility and (c) related improvements, facilities properties and appurtenances thereto, including but not limited to certain road improvements, parking lot improvements and landscaping (all of the foregoing properties in (a), (b) and (c) being herein collectively referred to as the "Steiner Aquatic Center Facilities"). 2. Based on our prior experience, the estimated useful life of the Steiner Aquatic Center Facilities is, as of the date of the final acquisition, construction, improvement and extension thereof, reasonably expected to be not less than eleven (11) years, subject to proper maintenance. Sincerely, GILLIES STRANSKY BREMS SMITH ARCHITECTS, P. C. By U David P. Brems, IA, Vice President f _ ALT CRAIG E. PETERSON .S....�.i _ \2a..4 �++:'►��d et . D4s1�.:�'_"' 1 DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7777 To: Salt Lake City Council January 19, 1990 Re: Block 42B Master Plan Recommendation: That the City Council hold a public hearing on February 20, 1990 at 6:20 p.m. to discuss adopting the Block 42B Master Plan as part of the East Central Neighborhood Plan. Availability of Funds: Not applicable. Discussion and Background: Block 42B is located between 300 South and 400 South and 900 East and 1000 East Street. This Master Plan established a , desired land use pattern and guides growth and development on this Block. This plan addresses the pending developments proposed by the Salt Lake Clinic. The Planning Commission has reviewed and approved this master plan. The plan will become part of the East Central Neighborhood Plan, if adopted. Legislative Action: The City Attorney's Office has prepared the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. Su. itted by: .CHAEL B. Z £cting Director Community and Economic Development lf/ SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1990 (Adopting the Block 42B Master Plan as part of the East Central Neighborhood Plan) AN ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO SECTION 10-9-21, UTAH CODE ANNOTATED, 1953 ADOPTING THE BLOCK 42B MASTER PLAN AS PART OF THE EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, has held public hearings before its own body and before the Planning Commission and received input from the affected community councils and others and believes it appropriate to adopt the Block 42B Master Plan as part of the East Central Neighborhood Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of • Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That the Block 42B Master Plan Update recommended for adoption by the Salt Lake City Planning Commission on January 4 , 1990 is hereby adopted pursuant to Section 10-9-21, Utah Code Annotated, 1953 as amended. The City Recorder is hereby directed to retain a certified copy of the Block 42B Master Plan which is hereby incorporated by reference. SECTION 2 . This Ordinance shall take effect upon its first publication. U Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1990 . CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved Vetoed MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER BRB:cc -2- r . 0 I r A\ GORPO : iI,ONT ALLEN C. JOHNSON, AICP ...� +��� + ` o`����` `� PALMER DEPAULIS PLANNING DIRECTOR MAYOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET ROOM 406, CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7757 January 7 , 1990 Mr . Mike Zuhl , Chief of Staff Acting Director , Department of Community and Economic Development Room 235 , City-County Building 451 South State Street Salt Lake City , Utah 84111 Re : Block 42B Master Plan Dear Mike , On January 4 , 1990 the Salt Lake City Planning Commission moved to recommend adoption of a master plan for Block 42B , the city block bounded by 900 East 300 South 1000 East and 400 South . This recommendation followed an informal hearing conducted by the Planning Commission . It is now appropriate that the Block 42B Master Plan be considered by the City Council and a public hearing be scheduled . In essence , this master plan is a document that establishes a desired land use pattern and guides growth and development on Block 42B . If adopted by the City Council , the Block 42B Master Plan will become part of the East Central Neighborhood Plan , 1984 . Sincere , Allen IC . Jo nson , AICP Planning Di ector ACJ : bp Enclosure Master Plan for Block 42 (Salt Lake City Survey Plat B) .'7fi:0..:i'.t.0 :3'. h 3r f ' ---:'«:'.»`. a i♦ ih:•.••.•�+�:+7t'�'++i'+ �'A'�'s♦i�r+'i'i""-'i'S'i'#'1.�+L+.=.♦+».;.+..i i'i�♦ ♦':'i+ii':.':'.^':'.`:+:Z♦i s +� i�i i+t''�it+�'�:++'�' a S+ ••••;i"+♦++iO+++++i+i+b+r:L:+'+:+1i .::.•:♦a++i♦.♦:�,4 .'::: :J.•Ip♦+b�++$.1: ::**4 +i + r..w yi--�`.:3: :�� wr..hr+ �.; !'+•;+;! .+..!♦;+�.;�.!..A�.♦+.♦..!.w..;+�`!+!:4!t i•:::!++�,ra�q.+ ♦:4♦+,!A,O++!:f+;�♦<i♦++.!y.:Ot�!'•y!1:!M. ✓ '.>';!s♦••!♦#i•:�w.♦,,♦;.+♦y♦ ++w+ w0 +++}+i♦ >++ ♦ �♦♦Ai•:a♦:i!i�.. • :�% iA+il:Aa♦ : ♦w;i.♦Od�ayh++��V w�:«««:i.:.v♦rA.�wr.,.Y++'AA K♦w + �.♦.1'1��' Yf:'#1:INf �;KA1M Y#WYV ✓.�-7!i Y�A:4 «i:�Cf�A:f 4�.✓ ,�tDY•' KOYi x,'�+f,'+�1.�.Y�y,.»kwY!y,�,�++...�yi,,, .........:is .....A. .� � .> r. .,. .. �..... Y. 7 ;✓.v,,✓�lil ;Vy7K!cifiy',✓,♦;..,rw;a:♦ .v-.aCwww+,'C<K �tr.. ,;:•&t2�•<2i:Kwcl!i::K;:.Y:.!;v:G�+;vi::<�:;rwJ:Gi:wrCK;��y,..,,.�c<.isG+.y�:nr.!::!3Q;`K;:"w,;::i��yc,>:•1.X%w�,{•:�ii;v"G,.w.Y�>�..�v� X .�yiy:(...iQ-v:,�... Vi.1.';K R•?•:h��"."34♦ t",�+iww•;a\+Ottc\\♦. .,\1:• + 3•4".:i�.n:?KS�o w Z% fw'ixw\♦x; :4,5,♦+ • fY,+"Ai r ./.:+E!. - .;i7�.•w�,r< '�.a��� �W� aNE.;••`. \..w.,,: • �\.�:,,!�s„ o,'^Q'<roJ�p..i'�,).rjxvrnrs.:•��'�H.•u,: �♦yp•...�r::'. .:��,9.,5+ " .i%:'y'�� v3a�yc'��s�,\':?»)•t»:vs3,000bi�Si:. _ .p. asn Ki '.9•it,•. ' ♦t Kii. +i •r.0.00ri+(%Ot:Cx• % /:'yx'`x»c.'`^•c�'.; %K. .41: 'iyi` wi(^pric4. roes `. vw v. ♦t0A4w a.r♦J�i. X:cXx XX .c�cX �iX .ck.`c:Ut:tXkY �c • .• c x ITT Xx A T'i ♦ • `i• ♦ T'i'T .cxxxxxkxX xScx.x x%x C% xxx.cxkx)cx x XkX X xk AX XXXxx XUXXX XXX X x XX x x %% xexxx x % <:: %:: • '9 *� 4. Salt Lake City Planning Commission A MASTER PLAN FOR SALT LAKE CITY SURVEY PLAT B BLOCK 42 900 EAST - 100.0 EAST, 300 SOUTH - 400 SOUTH INTRODUCTION IT IS THE INTENT OF THE MASTER PLAN FOR SALT LAKE CITY SURVEY PLAT B BLOCK 42 (BLOCK 42B) , BOUNDED BY 900 EAST, 300 SOUTH, 1000 EAST AND 400 SOUTH TO REFINE AND STRENGTHEN THE DIRECTION OF THE EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, 1984 FOR THIS BLOCK • THIS PLAN PRESENTS A DESIRABLE FUTURE CHARACTER FOR BLOCK 42B AND ADDRESSES THE ISSUES OF LAND USE , LAND USE TRANSITIONS , TRAFFIC CIRCULATION, AND DESIGN AMENITY • THEREFORE, THE BLOCK 42B MASTER PLAN SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A SUPPLEMENT TO, AND COMPANION DOCUMENT FOR THE EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, 1984• THIS PLAN ALSO ADDRESSES THE PENDING DEVELOPMENTS PROPOSED BY THE SALT LAKE CLINIC FOR BLOCK 42B AND EVALUATES THEM WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF BOTH THE EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN , 1984 AND THE BLOCK 42B MASTER PLAN • EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, 1984 - GUIDING PRINCIPLES IT IS THE CLEAR AND UNMISTAKABLE DIRECTION OF THE EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, 1984 TO "STABILIZE [THE EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD] AS AN ATTRACTIVE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD" (P • 4) • To ACHIEVE THIS GOAL THE EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IDENTIFIES SEVERAL APPROPRIATE ACTIONS AND STRATEGIES • THESE ARE : 1 • To CONSERVE THE LOW-MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE AREA, 2 • ENCOURAGE COMPATIBLE INFILL HOUSING ON VACANT LOTS , LOTS CONTAINING NONCONFORMING USES AND RESIDENTIAL USES IN DISREPAIR , rr 3 • ENCOURAGE LOW DENSITY DEVELOPMENT CONSISTENT WITH ♦,,,,� DENSITY AND DESIGN OF EXISTING HOUSING, AND 1 ':'._7.-- “-:-=x: .r},: .::::7w %• .i4r'VF'".. , Y.._ ` n a ..-...„. '.el `».Sda:.. ._ - pEb,;c• , _..a. ..;.m 4• ENCOURAGE PRESERVATION OF GOOD HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD __ ELEMENTS- (EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD -PLAN, 1984 PP • 17—. _ .. — 18) THE MASTER PLAN FOR BLOCK 42B WAS DEVELOPED WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK ESTABLISHED BY THE EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN , 1984 THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE SALT LAKE CITY MASTER PLAN , 1980 AND THE CENTRAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 1974 . THE BLOCK 42B MASTER PLAN SEEKS TO CLARIFY THE PRINCIPLES AND DIRECTION OF THESE PLANS FOR THIS BLOCK• BLOCK 42B VICINITY MAP 1 r_ li,:. 1 -1.---7- .4 7,-.-1!. I I' iyiL: Hill' . Jr_ '• ::J.ram_.. �-T;01 : = r r ..r...._.____.e._.�_.._:_,�r.. 300 S. ST. Men..— -.--: •• ..1:^+ .i (3`. T.S S.) j :el t 300 S . a6 'ram - U vj: ' 0 _ .� LI Elie T�I^ , ~ a II'd r . o o . J ! `_:r. j €' }:� lei ., El em`Q s — .. . l --- 2'1'12' '4- —_... -_..__ :;. 1 T 1' -fir 3' 1::1 71t -, . ' e.:4::p,v-i.:.-1-1------'--- ?. .; r,,rn --'ii 7 ...7, L. --7i•--------.--f- fI I.' . ,---trg.--.11] .:1;-: 1 , , ,. —. ._::,..... ___, t , ... 00 „ ST. 11 . ' I7'.' -1c, ' ,-.IL-711.1fV17.1- .... A v re-. rc... A uf,' — , ., c. .E-,-1,-,) Iiii:.;:ri . A MASTER PLAN FOR BLOCK 42B PRESENT CHARACTER BLOCK 42B IS A MIXTURE OF USES • THESE INCLUDE LOW-MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ACTIVITIES , COMMERCIAL USES ON THE CORNERS OF 300 SOUTH AND 400 SOUTH 900 EAST STREET, AND A MIX OF HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND OFFICE USES ALONG THE 400 SOUTH STREET FRONTAGE• THE 900 EAST BLOCK FACE CONTAINS RESIDENTIAL, MEDICAL OFFICE, SURFACE PARKING AND COMMERCIAL USES • THE MAIN OFFICE OF SALT LAKE CLINIC AND ITS ASSOCIATED PARKING IS A PRINCIPLE LAND USE • THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARES ADJOINING THE BLOCK ARE 400 SOUTH STREET AND 900 EAST STREET, EACH OF VITAL IMPORTANCE TO TRAFFIC MOVEMENT IN SALT LAKE CITY • BLOCK 42B DOES NOT POSSESS A SINGULAR ,•• UNIFYING CHARACTER • RATHER, THE CHARACTER OF BLOCK 42B VARIES FROM RESIDENTIAL USE AND ARCHITECTURE TO LARGE, INTENSIVELY DEVELOPED OFFICE USES • DEVELOPMENT ON BLOCK 42B HAS PROCEEDED IN A DISJOINTED MANNER WITH NO UNDERLYING THEME OR DIRECTION • FUTURE CHARACTER BLOCK 42B SHOULD PRIMARILY ACCOMMODATE LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, ALTHOUGH APPROPRIATE NONRESIDENTIAL ACTIVITIES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AND DIRECTED TOWARD 400 SOUTH STREET • HOWEVER , INCOMPATIBLE NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT MUST BE DENIED TO CONSERVE AND STABILIZE BLOCK 42B AS A RESIDENTIAL SETTING • BLOCK 42B SHOULD PROVIDE AN AREA OF TRANSITION IN ACTIVITIES AND SCALE FROM THAT ALLOWED ALONG 400 SOUTH STREET TO A LESSER SCALE AND INTENSITY RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT TOWARDS 300 SOUTH STREET AND 1000 EAST STREET •- IT IS IMPORTANT TO CONSERVE THE BLOCK ' S ARCHITECTURAL FLAVOR AND TREE-LINED STREETS • No DEVELOPMENT SHOULD RESULT IN THE NET LOSS OF RESIDENTIAL FLOOR SPACE OR RESIDENTIAL UNITS • 3 USE OF LAND THE PRIMARY USE OF LAND ON BLOCK 42B SHOULD BE FOR RESIDENTIAL ACTIVITY • ALL INFILL DEVELOPMENTS SHOULD ACKNOWLEDGE THE SCALE AND BUILT FORM OF ADJOINING AND SURROUNDING STRUCTURES TO MAGNIFY AND REINFORCE THE BLOCK' S DESIRED RESIDENTIAL ELEMENTS • THE INTENSIFICATION OF NONRESIDENTIAL USES SHOULD BE RESTRICTED TO THEIR EXISTING SITES AND SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH RESIDENTIAL USES IN TERMS OF INTENSITY , HOURS OF OPERATION AND BUILT FORM• BUILT FORM HEIGHT AND SCALE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWED ON THIS BLOCK SHOULD BE FOUR (4) STORIES, OR 45 FEET • NEW BUILDINGS SHOULD MAINTAIN THE RELATIVELY LOW-MEDIUM SCALE BUILT FORM BUT DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY ALONG THE 400 SOUTH FRONTAGE COULD BE A LITTLE GREATER THAN THE REMAINDER OF THE BLOCK, PROMOTING A DESIRABLE VISUAL EDGE ALONG 400 SOUTH STREET• NEW BUILDINGS SHOULD EXPRESS THE DESIRED RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE BLOCK IN FACADE DESIGN, ROOF FORMS AND CHOICE OF BUILDING MATERIALS • INFILL DEVELOPMENT SHOULD ACKNOWLEDGE SCALE , FORM, AND FACADE COMPOSITION IN ORDER TO REINFORCE THESE ELEMENTS OF BLOCK CHARACTER • TOWNSCAPE CONTEXT ALL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SHOULD ACHIEVE A COHERENT, UNIFIED CHARACTER AND ATTRACTIVE STREETSCAPES • THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE FRAGMENTED TOWNSCAPE AND AMENITY OF THIS BLOCK SHOULD BE ACHIEVED THROUGH REDEVELOPMENT OF VACANT, UNDER UTILIZED AND BLIGHTED SITES WITH RESIDENTIAL USES • THE CONTINUITY OF BUILDING FACADES ALONG STREET FRONTAGES SHOULD BE REESTABLISHED AND AN INCREASINGLY RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER CREATED TOWARD 300 SOUTH STREET AND 1000 EAST STREET • 300 SOUTH AND 1000 EAST STREETS SHOULD BE EXCLUSIVELY RESIDENTIAL AND BADDLEY PLACE SHOULD BE 4 • REESTABLISHED AS A RESIDENTIAL ENCLAVE • APPROPRIATE SCREENING AND BUFFER TREATMENTS SHOULD BE UTILIZED BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL ACTIVITIES AND ADJOINING NONRESIDENTIAL USES • NEW BUILDINGS ON THE BLOCK SHOULD BLEND WITH ADJOINING STRUCTURES AND EXPRESS THE DESIRED RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT IN DESIGN AND BUILDING MATERIALS • BUILDINGS ON LARGER SITES MAY EMPLOY MORE DIVERSE ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND MATERIALS BUT MUST MAKE A POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION TO THE DESIRED TOWNSCAPE CHARACTER • MOVEMENT VEHICLE ACCESS AND PARKING THE CAPACITY OF 400 SOUTH (A MAJOR ARTERIAL) AND 900 EAST (A MINOR ARTERIAL) TO MOVE TRAFFIC MUST BE MAINTAINED• THESE: STREETS SHOULD ALSO PROVIDE PRINCIPAL ACCESS TO THE BLOCK• TRAFFIC ON AND AROUND BLOCK 42B SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE DIRECTED TO 400 SOUTH STREET AND 900 EAST STREET • THE STREETS OF 300 SOUTH (:) AND 1000 EAST SHOULD PROVIDE LOCAL ACCESS TO PROPERTIES WITH SOME THROUGH TRAFFIC PROVISION • PARKING LOTS SHOULD BE DENIED ADJACENT TO STREET FRONTAGES • PARKING AREAS SHOULD BE SITED BEHIND MAIN BUILDINGS AND WHEREVER POSSIBLE DESIGNED AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF SITE DESIGN • GENERALLY , ABOVE GRADE PARKING STRUCTURES ARE OUT OF CONTEXT WITH THE CHARACTER OF BLOCK 42B. PEDESTRIAN ACCESS WHILE BLOCK 42B SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE HIGHLY ACCESSIBLE WITH A SIGNIFICANT VOLUME OF VEHICULAR TRAFFIC ON 400 SOUTH AND 900 EAST, A HIGH LEVEL OF PEDESTRIAN SAFETY , ACCESS , AND AMENITY MUST BE MAINTAINED• WELL MAINTAINED SIDEWALKS , APPROPRIATELY SITED DRIVEWAYS , AND STREET TREE PLANTINGS WILL ENCOURAGE THE DESIRED PEDESTRIAN AMENITY • 5 .Z,"'_ +rar`t. ...,..._* 'r-9 - -'•# - • ty^�a"E" _i9D_:"4.1":.�r. =? .x? BNB+,-.'.:'!r'.a ?k�;..�,-. ENVIRONMENT SIGNAGE ALL SIGNS SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE OVERALL RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER SOUGHT FOR THIS BLOCK. SIGNS AND THEIR IMPACT SHOULD DECREASE IN TERMS OF SIZE, COLOR, ILLUMINATION AND PROMINENCE • WITH INCREASING DISTANCE FROM 400 SOUTH STREET . LANDSCAPE OPEN SPACE ON-SITE LANDSCAPING IS REQUIRED TO ENHANCE THE RESIDENTIAL SETTING SOUGHT FOR THE BLOCK. EXTENSIVE LANDSCAPING AND BUFFER TREATMENTS SHOULD BE UTILIZED TO SOFTEN THE TRANSITION FROM NONRESIDENTIAL TO RESIDENTIAL USES . EXTENSIVE STREET TREE PLANTINGS ON ALL BLOCK 42B FRONTAGES WILL ADD TO BLOCK AMENITY . CONCLUSION BLOCK 42B SHOULD CONTINUE AS A VIABLE RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT . NONRESIDENTIAL USES MAY BE APPROPRIATE PROVIDED THEY BLEND WITH, AND DO NOT COMPROMISE THE RESIDENTIAL INTEGRITY OF THE BLOCK. SITE PLANNING, BUILDING SCALE AND DESIGN, AND TRANSITIONING TREATMENTS ARE ALL IMPORTANT ELEMENTS OF LAND USE COMPATIBILITY FOR BLOCK 42B. 6 f + c C) SALT LAKE CLINIC DIRECTIONS FOR- THE FUTURE THE MAIN OFFICE OF THE SALT LAKE CLINIC IS THE PRINCIPAL LAND USE ON BLOCK 42B• THIS MASTER PLAN WOULD BE REMISS IF IT DID NOT ADDRESS THE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF THE CLINIC FACILITIES AND ITS- INFLUENCE ON THE CHARACTER OF BLOCK 42B• THE EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN , 1984 RECOGNIZED THAT PAST ZONING REGULATIONS HAVE ACCOMMODATED CLINICS, CONVALESCENT HOMES AND OTHER NONRESIDENTIAL USES TO SUCH A DEGREE THAT THE LOW DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER AND DISTINCT FLAVOR OF THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE IS IN JEOPARDY (P • 17) • INDEED, THE EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN SUGGESTED THAT THE CITY ADOPT A POLICY THAT WOULD RESTRICT MEDICAL FACILITIES TO THE HOLY CROSS HOSPITAL BLOCK• "REZONING TO ACCOMMODATE ADDITIONAL MEDICAL FACILITIES IN THE EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD IS DISCOURAGED" (EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, 1984, P •28) • WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, 1984 SALT LAKE CITY INITIATED REZONING ACTIONS TO RESTRICT MEDICAL USES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD• SALT LAKE CLINIC IS NOW ALLOWED ON BLOCK 42B AS A CONDITIONAL USE • LOCATED AT 333 SOUTH 900 EAST AND ESTABLISHED IN 1958, THE MAIN OFFICE OF SALT LAKE CLINIC IS NOW A FACILITY OF APPROXIMATELY 71 ,000 SQUARE FEET LOCATED ON A 4 .3 ACRE SITE • THE SALT LAKE CLINIC IS AN EXTREMELY VALUABLE AMENITY FOR THE CITIZENS OF SALT LAKE CITY AS WELL AS VALLEY WIDE RESIDENTS • INDEED, TO MORE FULLY SERVE AREA RESIDENTS THE SALT LAKE CLINIC IS PROPOSING TO EXPAND ITS FACILITY TO APPROXIMATELY 133,000 SQUARE FEET ON A 5 . 0 ACRE SITE THEREFORE , IT IS THE GOAL OF THIS SECTION OF THE BLOCK 42B. MASTER PLAN TO EVALUATE THE EXPANSION PLANS OF THE SALT LAKE CLINIC AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF THIS PLAN AND EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS • THE OVERRIDING PRINCIPAL OF THE BLOCK 42B MASTER PLAN AND THE EAST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, 1984 IS TO PRESERVE AND PROVIDE 7 6 RESIDENTIAL OPPORTUNITY ON THE BLOCK AND TO STRENGTHEN RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER •. . ADDITIONALLY , THE SALT LAKE CITY-ZONING ORDINANCE PRESENTS THE APPROVAL CRITERIA FOR ANY SALT LAKE CLINIC EXPANSION• CONTAINED IN SECTION 21 .40 . 050C THESE CRITERIA ARE : 1 • THAT THE USE WILL BE IN KEEPING WITH NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER AND WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORHOOD STABILITY , 2• THAT THE STREET SYSTEM WILL NOT BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED, OR MEASURES CAN BE TAKEN TO MITIGATE TRAFFIC AND PARKING DEMANDS , 3• THERE EXISTS NO CONDITIONS THAT WOULD MAKE THE USE IMPROPER TO ESTABLISH, AND 4• THAT NO CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST THAT PRECLUDE APPROVAL OF THE CONTINUED USE (SALT LAKE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE, P• 858) • FURTHER, ANY EXPANSION OF THE SALT LAKE CLINIC FACILITY WILL REQUIRE ADDITIONAL PARKING • As THE SALT LAKE CLINIC PARKING LOT IS ALSO A CONDITIONAL USE , APPROPRIATE CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER (SEC •21 .78 .060A8 SALT LAKE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE P • 900) • FOR THE SALT LAKE CLINIC , THE BLOCK 42B MASTER PLAN RECOMMENDS ; A• THAT CLINIC EXPANSION BE DIRECTED TOWARDS THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF BLOCK 42B • B• THAT NO CLINIC EXPANSION RESULT IN THE NET LOSS OF RESIDENTIAL FLOOR SPACE OR RESIDENTIAL UNITS • C • THAT ANY ADDITION TO THE EXISTING BUILDING RECOGNIZE THE SCALE OF ADJOINING STRUCTURES • SPECIFICALLY , ANY ADDITION TO THE EXISTING BUILDING ' S NORTH, WEST OR EAST FACADE SHOULD BE DESIGNED AND/OR TERRACE DOWN TO BLEND WITH ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES • THE VISUAL IMPACT OF ALL CLINIC BUILDINGS MUST BE CONSIDERED• 8 • a 4 ' t a D• ANY NEW BUILDING, SOUTH OF THE EXISTING FACILITY , BE 44.I- RESTRICTED TO ONE (1 ) LEVEL ABOVE GRADE . A BASEMENT LEVEL IS doices APPROPRIATE • IN TOTAL , A BUILDING AND CONNECTING WALKWAY OF APPROXIMATELY 27,000 SQUARE FEET IS APPROPRIATE • E. As PART OF ANY INCREASE IN CLINIC ACTIVITY , BADDLEY PLACE BE RETURNED TO RESIDENTIAL USE• BADDLEY PLACE SHOULD NOT PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE SALT LAKE CLINIC • THIS IS AN AMELIORATIVE ACTION TO ASSIST IN ACHIEVING THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF BLOCK 42B . FOUR (4) BUILDABLE LOTS ARE AVAILABLE ON BADDLEY PLACE AND ALL FOUR (4) SHOULD BE MA E AVAILABLE FOR RESIDENTIAL USES . ML--1(1'1— ',12,0a- (-W.) (7f,, 51-61)(-) 4 5 itLi- C1- 6. 1a V ff, iotk ek! F . ALL CLINIC PARKING BE PROVIDED AT, OR BELOW GRADE, MINIMIZING THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF A SUBSTANTIAL PARKING DEMAND IN A '' RESIDENTIAL AREA. ANY ABOVE GRADE PARKING STRUCTURE WOULD BE PARTICULARLY DETRIMENTAL TO THE DESIRABILITY AND STABILITY OF THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER SOUGHT FOR BLOCK 42B. G . WHERE POSSIBLE, THE CLINIC SHOULD AVOID CREATING "MAJOR GAPS" IN STREET FRONTAGES . To MAINTAIN CONTINUITY OF THE STREET EDGE , ALL CLINIC PARKING SHOULD BE LOCATED BEHIND BUILDINGS, SCREENING WALLS AND LANDSCAPING • THE 400 SOUTH STREET BUILDING EDGE SHOULD BE MAINTAINED WITH CLINIC PARKING SCREENED BEHIND BUILDING FACADES . H • THAT EXTENSIVE LANDSCAPING , SETBACK AND SCREENING BE ESTABLISHED SURROUNDING THE PARKING LOT AND CLINIC BUILDINGS • THIS ACTION WILL PROMOTE COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJOINING STRUCTURES AND USES . I • THAT ALL BUILDING MATERIALS AND DESIGN BE SENSITIVE TO THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF BLOCK 42B. 9