The URL can be used to link to this page

09/12/2006 - Minutes (2) PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12 , 2006 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah met in Work Session on Tuesday, September 12, 2006, at 5 : 30 p.m. in Room 326, Committee Room, City County Building, 451 South State Street. In Attendance : Council Members Carlton Christensen, Van Turner, Eric Jergensen, Nancy Saxton, Jill Remington Love, Dave Buhler and Soren Simonsen. Also In Attendance : Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; Mayor Ross C. "Rocky" Anderson; Edwin Rutan, City Attorney; Lynn Pace, Deputy City Attorney; Jennifer Bruno, Council Policy Analyst; Vicki Pacheco, Council Staff Assistant; Janice Jardine, Council Land Use Policy Analyst; Alexander Ikefuna, Planning Director; Orion Goff, Building Official; Sam Guevara, Mayor' s Chief of Staff; Max Peterson, City Engineer; Rick Graham, Public Services Director; LuAnn Clark, Housing and Neighborhood Development Director; Sherrie Collins, Special Project Grants Monitoring Specialist; Joel Paterson, Planning Program Supervisor; Everett Joyce, Senior Planner; Timothy Harpst, Transportation Director; John Naser, Engineering Senior Project Manager; Gaylord Smith, Engineering Project Manager Consultant; Daniel Mule, Treasurer; D. J. Baxter, Mayor' s Senior Advisor; Dell Cook, Engineering Landscape and Architect Project Manager; Jim Short, 639 West North Temple, LLC and Scott Crandall, Deputy Recorder. Councilmember Buhler presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5 : 33 p.m. AGENDA ITEMS #1 . 5:33:38 PM INTERVIEW MELANIE MESTAS AND DAN CABLE PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF THEIR APPOINTMENTS TO THE SUGAR HOUSE PARK AUTHORITY. View Attachments Councilmember Buhler said the appointments would be placed on the Consent Agenda for approval . #2 . 5:40:11 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING A REQUEST TO EXTEND THE TIME PERIOD FOR SATISFYING REZONING CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN ORDINANCE NO. 11 OF 2003 . (SALT LAKE APARTMENT BUILDERS, LLC-EMIGRATION COURT HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 556 EAST 300 SOUTH - PETITION NO. 400- 01-37) (ITEM Fl) View Attachments Joel Paterson briefed the Council with the attached handouts . Councilmember Simonsen was recused due to a personal conflict on this issue . Councilmember Saxton said if the petitioner came back to the Council with a request to extend beyond September 2008, she wanted the Council to require landscaping along 300 South. She asked the Planning Department to ensure the proposed pedestrian crossing between 400-500 06 - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12 , 2006 East was located away from traffic to provide secure passage and accommodate wheelchairs . She said grass needed to be incorporated in the courtyard area. #3 . 5:50:23 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING A REQUEST TO REZONE PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT 644 WEST NORTH TEMPLE STREET FROM COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR (CC) AND SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN RESIDENTIAL (SR-3) ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS TO RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY (RMF-45) ZONING DISTRICT AND AMEND THE CAPITOL HILL COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP. (PETITION NO. 400-06-06) View Attachments Everett Joyce, Janice Jardine and Tim Short briefed the Council with the attached handouts . Ms . Jardine said an updated ordinance was provided to the Council . Councilmember Buhler said a public hearing was scheduled for October 3, 2006 . #4 . 5:59:34PM RECEIVE A FOLLOW-UP BRIEFING REGARDING AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING LEED COMPLIANCE FOR CITY FUNDED BUILDING PROJECTS . (PETITION NO. 400-05-38) View Attachments Jennifer Bruno, Edwin Rutan and Orion Goff briefed the Council with the attached handouts . Discussion was held on Item 1 : removing the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) and Library fund exemption. The Council asked the Attorney' s Office to address whether the Library could be incorporated in the ordinance . Councilmember Buhler said if that action was too problematic, the Council could ask them to comply. Mr. Rutan said he would review the issue and get back to the Council by the end of the week. Discussion was held on Item 2 : creating a High Performance Building Board or utilizing an existing board to address LEED issues . A majority of the Council was in favor of utilizing the Board of Appeals and Examiners and requiring one board member to be LEED certified. Discussion was held on Item 3: adding specific time or construction cost thresholds for exemption/waiver factors . Councilmember Saxton asked what additional costs would have been incurred, had LEED criteria been used to construct City funded projects . Councilmember Jergensen said he wanted information from the City of Portland regarding thresholds . Councilmember Simonsen said the City could analyze other municipalities which had adopted LEED standards to see how they handled exemptions and what impacts they had experienced. Councilmember Buhler asked Mr. Goff to come back to the Council with recommendations . 06 - 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12 , 2006 Discussion was held on Item 4 : reducing/altering the $10,000 deposit requirement for non-profit developers. A majority of the Council was in favor of incorporating the deposit in the performance bond and requiring registration of proof of LEED certification within 30-days but not later than submission for plan checks/building permits . Councilmember Buhler said discussion on Items 5, 6 and 7 would be held when the department brought back criteria recommendations . Councilmember Jergensen said duel certification issues involving private/public funded projects needed additional discussion/review. Councilmember Buhler said that would be included in the follow-up discussion which would be scheduled when Mr. Goff was ready to present recommendations to the Council . #5 . 6:32:29PM CONSIDER A MOTION TO ENTER INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF STRATEGY SESSIONS TO DISCUSS THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, OR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY WHEN PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE TRANSACTION WOULD DISCLOSE THE APPRAISAL OR ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION OR PREVENT THE PUBLIC BODY FROM COMPLETING THE TRANSACTION ON THE BEST POSSIBLE TERMS, AND TO DISCUSS PENDING OR REASONABLY IMMINENT LITIGATION; PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE ANN. § § 52-4- 204 , 52-4-205 (1) (c) (d) , AND ATTORNEY-CLIENT MATTERS THAT ARE PRIVILEGED, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE ANN. § 78-24-8 . Councilmember Turner moved and Councilmember Jergensen seconded to enter into Executive Session, which motion carried, all members present voted aye, except Councilmember Christensen, who was absent for the item. See file M 06-2 for Sworn Statement and tape. #6 . 7:46:36 PM HOLD A FOLLOW-UP DISCUSSION REGARDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) . View Attachments LuAnn Clark, Jennifer Bruno, Tim Harpst, Max Peterson, Rick Graham, Dell Cook, Mayor Anderson and D .J. Baxter briefed the Council with the attached handouts . See attached document for proposed funding levels and follow-up requests . View funding levels/requests #7 . 10:21:12PM REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING A REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS . See file M 06-5 for announcements . The meeting adjourned at 10 : 22 p.m. 06 - 3 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12 , 2006 COUNCIL CHAIR CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the City Council Work Session meeting held September 12, 2006 . sc 06 - 4 SALT !�!LA m GAORPO ., iIOE imorma OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Salt Lake City Council AGENDA City Council Chambers City& County Building 451 South State Street,Room 315 Salt Lake City,Utah Tuesday, September 12, 2006 7:00 p.m. 5:00 p.m., some Council Members may dine together in Room 125 at the City &County Building. (The room is open to the public.) A. WORK SESSION: 5:30 p.m.,Room 326, City& County Building, 451 South State Street (Items from the following list that Council is unable to complete in Work Session from 5:30-6:55 p.m. will be addressed in,a Work Session setting following the Consent Agenda.) 1. The Council will interview Melanie Mestas and Dan Cable prior to consideration of their appointments to the Sugar House Park Authority. 2. The Council will receive a briefing regarding a request to extend the time period for satisfying rezoning conditions set forth in Ordinance No. 11 of 2003. (Salt Lake Apartment Builders, LLC— Emigration Court Housing Development located at 556 East 300 South—Petition No.400-01-37) (Item F 1) 3. The Council will receive a briefing regarding a request to rezone property generally located at 644 West North Temple Street from Commercial Corridor(CC) and Special Development Pattern Residential(SR-3)zoning classifications to Residential Multi-Family(RMF-45)zoning district and amend the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map. (Petition No. 400-06-06) 4. The Council will receive a follow-up briefmg regarding an ordinance requiring LEED compliance for City funded building projects. (Petition No. 400-05-38) 5. The Council will consider a motion to enter into Executive Session for the purpose of strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange,or lease of real property when public discussion of the transaction would disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration or prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms,and to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation;pursuant to Utah Code Ann: § § 52-4-204,52-4- 205(1)(c)(d),and attorney-client matters that are privileged,pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 78-24-8. 6. The Council will hold a follow-up discussion regarding the Capital Improvement Program. (CIP) 7. Report of the Executive Director, including a review of Council information items and announcements. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-535-7600 FAX: 80 1-535-7651 WWW.SLCGOV.COM/COUNCIL EMAIL: COUNCIL.COMMENTS@SLCGOV.COM Salt Lake City Council Agenda Tuesday September 12,2006 B. OPENING CEREMONY: Councilmember Eric Jergensen will conduct the Formal Council Meetings during the month of September. 1. Pledge of Allegiance. 2. The Council will approve the minutes of September 5, 2006. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Ordinance—Modify and add language to zoning ordinance 21A.62.040 definitions and 21A.40.120 regulations of fences, walls and hedges Accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance amending Section 21A62.040,Salt Lake City Code, relating to definitions, and Section 21A.40.120,Salt Lake City Code, relating to regulations of fences, walls and hedges; (Petition Nos. 400-04-20 and 400-04-26) (P 04-27) Staff Recommendation: Close and consider options. D. COMMENTS: 1. Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. 2. Comments to the City Council. (Comments are taken on any item not scheduled for a public hearing, as well as on any other City business. Comments are limited to two minutes.) E. NEW BUSINESS: (None) F. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 1. Resolution—Extend the time period for satisfying rezoning conditions set forth in Ordinance No. 11 of 2003 (Salt Lake Apartment Builders, LLC—Emigration Court Housing Development located at 556 East 300 South) Consider adopting a resolution extending the time period for satisfying conditions set forth in Ordinance No. 11 of 2003. (24 months from September 20, 2006 to September 20, 2008—Petition No.400-01-37) (P 03-6) Staff Recommendation: Adopt. 2. Resolution—Adopt reimbursement from a bond for purchase of the Garfield School site if the City ultimately decides to use the Garfield School site for the Public Safety Facilities Consider adopting a resolution expressing official intent regarding certain capital expenditures to be reimbursed from proceeds of an obligation to be issued by the City, and related matters. (Q 06-9) Staff Recommendation: Adopt. 2 Salt Lake City Council Agenda Tuesday September 12,2006 3. Resolution—Authorize the Sale of Special Assessment Bonds,Series 2006,for 900 South, Main Street to 900 West, Street Improvements Special Improvement District No. 102004 Consider adopting a resolution authorizing the sale of the Salt Lake City, Special Assessment Bonds, Series 2006 (900 South, Main Street to 900 West, Street Improvements Special Improvement District No. 102004) (The"Series 2006 Bonds")providing for pricing and terms of the Series 2006 Bonds, prescribing the form of bonds,the maturity and denomination of said bonds;providing for the continuance of a guaranty fund; authorizing and approving a bond purchase agreement; and related matters. (Q 05-1) Staff Recommendation: Adopt. 4. Resolution—Appoint a Board of Equalization and Set Dates for the Board of Equalization to Hear and Consider Objections and Corrections to Proposed Assessments for the 2004 Concrete Replacement Special Improvement District(SID), Job.No. 102112, and the Quayle Avenue Reconstruction SID, Job No. 102113 Consider adopting a resolution of the City Council of Salt Lake City, appointing a Board of Equalization and review for the Salt Lake City 2004 sidewalk replacement and Quayle Avenue reconstruction Special Improvement District(The"District"); setting the dates for the Board of Equalization to hear and consider objections and corrections to any proposed assessments; authorizing the City Recorder to publish and mail a notice of meetings of the Board of Equalization and review; and related matters. (Q 04-10) Staff Recommendation: Adopt. 5. Legislative Action—Initiated by Council Members Love and Saxton- Administration to research possible amendments to the Salt Lake City Code relating to handling and procedures for methamphetamine or other chemically-contaminated houses Consider adopting a legislative action initiated by Council Members Love and Saxton requesting the Administration to research possible amendments to the Salt Lake City Code relating to handling and procedures for methamphetamine or other chemically-contaminated houses. (G 06-12) Staff Recommendation: Adopt. G. CONSENT: 1. Ordinance—Set date—Amend a text section of the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance to allow certain Conditional Uses to be approved by an Administrative Hearing Officer Set the date of October 3, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance amending Chapter 21A.54,Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to Conditional Uses. (Petition No. 400-05-17) (0 05-29) Staff Recommendation: Set date. 3 Salt Lake City Council Agenda Tuesday September 12,2006 H. ADJOURNMENT: Dated: September 8, 2006 • By: Deputy City Recorder STATE OF UTAH ) : ss. COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) On the 8th day of September, 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 & 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 315. Deputy City Recorder Subscribedra►d sworn t ef9t met s 8th day of September, 2006. NOTARY PUBLIC ..�,y- �-�' «. STATE OF UTRH , / x e my e0mmissiDU Expire& Pi '1: tut t0,2007 Notary Public residing in the State of Utar ww SCA't,J JIOALL ` ... 451 South State Shed Rm.415 -/ Salt t.aka C ty,Utah 84111 Approval: tt f Exective irector 1 Access agendas at http://www.slcgov.com/council/agendas/defauit.htm. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance of council meetings. We make every effort to honor these requests, and they should be made as early as possible. Accommodations may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids. The City and County Building is an accessible facility. For questions or additional information,please contact the City Council Office at 535-7600, or TDD 535-6021. Assistive listening devices are available on Channel I; upon four hours advance notice. Please allow 72 hours advance notice for sign language interpreters; large type and #2 Braille agendas. After 5:00 p.m., please enter the City & County Building through the east entrance. Accessible route is located on the east side of the building. In accordance with State Statute, City Ordinance and Council Policy, one or more Council Members may be connected via speakerphone. 4 SUGAR HOUSE PARK AUTHORITY APPOINTMENT — MELANIE MESTAS AND DANIEL R. CABLE INTRODUCTION: Sugar House Park Authority is requesting the appointment of Melanie Mestas and Daniel R. Cable to the Sugar House Par--k Authority. Melanie Mestas, is a resident of District 1, she would serve a term extending through August 17, 2010 and will be replacing Juan Arce-Larreta whose term has expired; Mr. Daniel R. Cable, is a county resident he will serve a term extending through August 17, 2010 and will be replacing Shane Franz whose term has expired. APPLICANT INFORMATION: Ms. Mestas is a Conference Coordinator at the American Academy of Professional Coders and has above average organizational and event planning skills which would be useful to this board. Ms. Mestas has enjoyed helping in different events in the Sugarhouse area. Daniel R. Cable is a Landscape Architect at Earthscape Design Associates and has worked on park design and master planning, recreation facilities, streetscapes and other projects that would benefit the board in managing the parks future. Mr. Cable would like to be on this board to maintain its integrity and improve on its character and appeal to the community. RESPONSE DEADLINE: If you have any objection to these appointments, please let Vicki know by 5:00 p.m. on Friday August 25, 2006. COMPOSITION OF SUGAR HOUSE PARK AUTHORITY BOARD: Current trustees of the Sugar House Park Authority Board are James Agutter, District 6; Mark Danenhauer, County; Sandra Fagergren District 7; Lex Hemphill, District 5; Rita Lund, County; . BOARD STRUCTURE: The Sugar House Park Authority Board is comprised of seven trustees who are appointed to five-year terms. Two of the seven trustees include the Mayor and a County Commissioner. Appointments and elections to the Board are made in accordance with the Park Authority's Articles of Incorporation. The Articles allow each trustee to be elected by the Board. Following the election, Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County have the authority to confirm or reject the election AUG 0 7 2006 SUGAR HOUSE PARK AUTHORITY Lex Hemphill, President 1236 Roosevelt Ave. Salt Lake City, Utah 84105 801-466-6648 David Buhler, Chair Salt Lake City Council City and County Building, Room 304 451 South State St. Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 August 4, 2006 Dear Mr. Buhler, At our next meeting on August 17, the Sugar House Park Authority Board of Trustees will greet two new members, Melanie Mestas and Dan Cable. They have been selected by the board to fill four-year terms, beginning with the Aug. 17 meeting and extending to Aug. 17, 2010. The Park Authority board asks for the City Council's consideration and approval of these two board appointments. Ms. Mestas, who was elected to the board at our March meeting, brings a background in event planning that will be especially useful to the board for its annual Fourth of July celebration and other park events. Mr. Cable, who was elected at our April meeting, is a landscape architect by profession and will lend valuable expertise during our master-plan process in the next year. Ms. Mestas and Mr. Cable are replacing Juan Arce-Larreta and Shane Franz, whose five-year terms expired this month. We have slotted Ms. Mestas and Mr. Cable into four-year terms to prevent the situation we have had this year, in which we have filled four vacancies (as you may recall, the City Council approved Mark Danenhauer and Jim Agutter in July to fill two earlier openings). We anticipate no more than two board openings in any given year after this. Thank you for your attention to this matter and for Salt Lake City's continued generous support of Sugar House Park. r tefully, Nito, lotriciq ex Hemphill cc: Jordan Gates, Lehua Weaver, Vicki Pacheco, Wayne Johnson Alin 1 5 200E A. LOUIS ZUNGUZE .4 . 'A\� k gat C.r►aLV"',A.IO � RO5S C. "ROCKY" ANDERSON DIRECTOR DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MAYOR BRENT B. WILDE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL TRANSMI TAL TO: Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administrative Officer's `DA E: August 11, 2006 FROM: Louis Zunguze, Community Development Dir•ctor vivo RE: Petition 400-01-37 by Salt Lake Apartment Builders, LLC r-questing an extension of time for a rezoning approval for Phase II of the Emigration Court Housing Development located at approximately 556 East 300 South STAFF CONTACTS: Doug Dansie, Principal Planner, at 535-6182 or doug.dansie@slcgov.com RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council review and approve a second extension of time for Ordinance 11 of 2003 DOCUMENT TYPE: Resolution BUDGET IMPACT: None DISCUSSION: Issue Origin: In a letter to the Planning Director dated July 6, 2006, Salt Lake Apartment Builders, LLC outlined their progress on the development of the Emigration Court apartments and requested an extension of the Ordinance 11 of 2003. The project was originally approved for Overland Development but was subsequently transferred to Salt Lake Apartment Builders, LLC. Analysis: The original project was approved in three phases. There are three separate ordinances for zoning changes adopted by the City Council on March 20, 2003, with three separate expiration dates. The first phase is for a mixed-use building facing 500 East;the zoning change has taken effect and the building is near completion. The second phase is for an apartment building facing 300 South; the original ordinance for zoning change(Ordinance 11 of 2003) was extended to September 20, 2006 (Resolution 14, 2005). The third phase is for a condominium building facing 600 East; the original ordinance for zoning change(Ordinance 12 of 2003) was extended to March 20 2008 (Resolution 15, 2005). There are also three phases of Planned Development approval and Historic Landmark Commission approval, The first phase of the Planned Development has been approved by the Planning Commission and the Historic Landmark Commission for the'buildiing presently under 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801.535-7105 FAX: B01-535.6005 WWW.SLCGOV.COM =rcvcFo vnPew construction. The second and third phases of the Planned Development were conceptually approved by the Planning Commission but are required to be returned the Planning Commission for fmal approval. Historic Landmark Commission approval is also required for the second and third phases. All three phases share a common parking garage and/or amenities. Phase three is intended to be condominiums and phase two is intended to be apartments, however, in lieu of existing market conditions the developer wishes to reverse the order of their construction. Because of this and other issues outlined in the attached letter, Salt Lake Apartment Builders, LLC is asking that the City Council provide an extension of the time period allowed for the rezone for phase two. Ordinances for both phases(Ordinance 11 and 12 of 2003) were originally approved by the City Council on March 20, 2003 and specifically state: SECTION 5 "The City Council may for good cause shown, extend the time period for satisfying the conditions identified above." Because construction will begin on shortly on phase three,no time extension is necessary for that phase. The existing approval for the zone change for phase two (Ordinance 11 of 2003) is due to expire on September 20,2006. The approval for phase three (Ordinance 12 of 2003) is due to expire on March 20, 2008. Salt Lake Apartment Builders, LLC is asking that phase two be extended 24 months to September 20, 2008 so they can construct phase three next, then return to construct phase two at a later date. The rationale for their request is outlined in their letter. Issues include financing and construction schedules. Salt Lake Apartment Builders, LLC fully intends to complete the project. The Planning Commission has previously recommended approval of the proposed rezone and will continue to be involved in the Planned Development approvals for phases two and three. The Historic Landmark Commission will also continue to be involved in phases two and three. Therefore the Planning staff recommends to the City Council that the time frame for the rezone ordinance for phase two be extended as requested. Master Plan Considerations: Not applicable PUBLIC PROCESS: Not applicable RELEVANT ORDINANCES: An ordinance related to the request for an extension of time for a rezoning approval for is attached. Petition 400-01-37 Emigration Court Second Time Extension Page 2 of 2 Table of contents 1. Original ordinances 2. Petitioner letter 3. New ordinance 1. Original ordinances • R 05-1 P 03-6 RESOLUTION NO. 14 OF 2005 A RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE TIME PERIOD FOR SATISFYING THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN ORDINANCE NO. 11 OF 2003 WHEREAS, the City Council enacted Ordinance No. 11 of 2003 on March 20, 2003; and WHEREAS, that ordinance imposed certain conditions and required that those conditions be met within two years from the date that the ordinance was signed; and WHEREAS, the ordinance also provided that the City Council may extend the time period for satisfying the conditions set forth in the ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there is good cause to extend the deadline for satisfying the conditions set forth in the ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. The deadline for satisfying the conditions set forth in Ordinance No. 11 of 2003 shall be and hereby is extended_for a period of 18 months, from March 20, 2005 to September 20, 2006. DATED this 15th day of March , 2005. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this 15thday of March , 2005. SALT r CITY UNCIL By: /46 /ktitilti APr RO'i ED r_S,TO FORM . CHA.IRPER ON Salt Lake City Attorneys Office Date ,j--(/-oY-.� Eye,2�,f,4.� :/,�/ ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: CHIEF DEPUTY CI RECO ER APPROVED AS TO FORM: y' C.1 \�,, lit: . ...1$.\• SALT LAKE CITY ATTORNEY ? ' ` t G\RESOLUTf\Ext ending time for satisfying conditions in Ordinance i i.'03-March 11,2005.doc 2 P 03-6 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. i 1 of 2003 (Rezoning property located at 550-558 East 300 South) AN ORDINANCE REZONING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 550-558 EAST 300 SOUTH, FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE (RO) TO RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE (R-MU), PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. 400-01-37. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council have held public hearings and have taken into consideration citizen testimony, filing, and demographic details of the area,the long range general plans of the City, and any local master plan as part of their deliberations. Pursuant to these deliberations, the City Council has concluded that the proposed change of zoning for the property identified herein is appropriate for the development of the community in that area. NOW, THEREFORE,be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Rezoning. The property located at 550-558 East 300 South, which is more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto, shall be and hereby is rezoned from Residential Office (RO) to Residential Mixed Use (R-MU). SECTION 2. Amendment of zoning map. The Salt Lake City zoning map, as adopted by Salt Lake City Code,relating to the fixing of boundaries and zoning districts, shall be, and hereby is amended consistent with the rezoning identified above. SECTION 3. Conditions. The rezoning approved herein is conditioned upon the following: a. The zoning for this property shall not take effect until a building permit has been issued by the City for that property. b. The mid-block walkway between 500 and 600 East shall be improved with landscaping and pedestrian oriented amenities. The final landscaping plan must be approved by the Salt Lake City Planning Director. c. The development of this property must be processed as a planned development with approval obtained from the Salt Lake City Planning Commission. d. Approval of the final design of the buildings must be obtained from the Salt Lake City Planning Director and the Historic Landmark Commission. SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication and shall be recorded with the Salt Lake County Recorder. The City Recorder is instructed not to publish or record this ordinance until the conditions identified above have been met, as certified by the Salt Lake City Planning Director. SECTION 5. Time. If the conditions identified above have not been met within two years from the date that this ordinance is signed, this ordinance shall become null and void. The City Council may, for good cause shown, extend the time period for satisfying the conditions identified above. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this 20th day of March , 2003. CHAIRPERSO 2 ATTEST: 001/V;t:J)(:)/X:edle,__ CH l h F DEPUTY CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on 3/21/03 Mayor's Action: K Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR �' ATTEST: C4/140 Olt i'4. .A Ji \- :-.7-'7 7:::''T.: : -: --- - C,, DEPUTY TY RLCORDER . cr'--C4 t.,, ,-3. EAL).,01,4 ) t.0, `'Bill No. 11 : '' of 2003. Published: . G.\Ordinance 03\Rezoning propeny at 550-558 E 300 Sc.do 3 PHASE 1 BOUNDARY \ 560 F4'5'f" BEGINNING AT THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF OT 4,BLOCK 38,PLAT"B", SALT LAKE -CITY SURVEY,SAID POINT ALSO LYING ON EAST LINE OF 500 EAST STREET;THENCE N89°57'40"E 361.114 FEET ALONG THE N �2fH LINE OF SAID LOT 4,AND LOT 7 OF SAID ( _ 3,I BLOCK 38;THENCE SOUTH 24.585 FEET E ENCE EAST 153.750 FEET;THENCE SOUTH Sov> 181.083 FEET;THENCE WEST 153.750 F,ET; CE SOUTH 17.736 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 7;THEN(F S89°51A7W 361.028 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE • F,r AND ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF/SAID LOT 4 O THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF LOT 4, SAID POINT ALSO LYING ON THE EAST LINE O 00 EAST STREET;THENCE NO°01'19"W 223.404 FEET ALONG SAID EASE'LINE TO THE PO OF BEGINNING. CONTAINS 2.491 ACRES. I L revised 11/12/02 cb PHASE 2 BOUNDARY SO -55' r_- 2 BEGINNING AT THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF LOT 6,BLOCK 38,PLAT"B", SALT LAKE _ CITY SURVEY,SAID POINT ALSO LYING ON THE SOUTH LINE OF 300 SOUTH STREET; THENCE N89°57'38"E 181.496 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE;THENCE SO°01'22"E 190.346 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF PHASE 1;THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PHASE l THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES:WEST 151.056 FEET; THENCE NORTH 24.585 FEET;THENCE S89°57'40"W 30.450 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 6;THENCE NO°01'22"W 165.657 FEET ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINS 0.776 ACRES. PHASE 3 BOUNDARY a 5 BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH EAS T'CORNER OF LOT , LOCK 38,PLAT`B",SALT LAKE CITY SURVEY,SAID POINT ALSO LYING CAN THE WES INE OF 600 EAST STREET; THENCE /2_A,'Ir - 3J So°01'25"E 290.061 FEET ALONG SAID REST L TO A SET REBAR AND CAP# 158397; _ THENCE S89°57'38"W 330.667 FEET TO THE E.AXST LINE OF LOT 3 OF SAID BLOCK 38;THENCE NO°01'22"W 66.664 FEET ALONG SAID EAS)1 LINE TO THE NORTH EAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 3, SAID POINT ALSO LYING ON THE'SbUTH LINE OF PHASE 1;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY AND EASTERLY BOUNDARY 0`k SAID PHASE 1 THE FOLLOWING FIVE COURSES:N89°57'40"E 30.361 FEET;THENCE NORTH 17.736 FEET;THENCE EAST 153.750 FEET;THENCE NORTH 181.083 FF.FT;THENCE VEST 2.694 FEET TO THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF PHASE 2; THENCE NO°01'22"W 24.68X FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID PHASE 2 TO A POINT ON THE.SOUTH LINE OF THE,AFOREMENTIONED LOT 6;THENCE N89°57'38"E 149.167 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH L TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINS 1.321 ACRES. file: V:'863OI I48 Emmigration Court\designylcealsPHASE 1-2-3 BOUNDA\1'-doc Affected Sidwell Numbers 16-06-427-036 16-06-427-013 16-06-426-008 16-06-283-001 16-06-283-006 , 2. Petitioner letter Salt Lake Apartment Builders, LLC July 6, 2006 Alex Ikefuna Planning Director, Salt Lake City 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 RE: Emigration Court, Block 38 Development Dear Mr. Ikefuna: With completion of the first phase of the Emigration Court Apartments and with construction beginning on the plaza level of the parking structure, we are ready to move forward to the next phase of this exciting project. The original plan was to begin phase II on 300 South following the completion of phase I, however, after evaluating the market and building costs phase II does not make sense at this time and it will be better for all involved to move forward with the property on 600 East, which in the past has been phase III. However, the re-zone on Phase II property along 300 South will be expiring September 2006. As the project makes most sense to move ahead with the development of the 600 East parcel, we would like to respectfully request an extension on the zoning for the 300 South property. Following completion of the building along 600 East, we will then develop this remaining piece. We have begun development and entitlements for the 600 East parcel and have retained the services of Cooper Roberts Simonsen Architects to design the building and go through the Landmarks and Planning Commissions for final building approvals. It is anticipated that construction will begin on this project in early Spring 2007. The 600 East parcel will take approximately 18 months to build. That puts us into approximately into Fall 2008 to move forward on the 300 South property. Sincerely yours, . /" raig i sen Managing Partner Salt Lake Apartment Builders, LLC CC: Mr. Doug Dansie, Community Planning / Land Use and Transportation Ms. Elizabeth Giraud, Senior Planner, Preservation & Urban Design Mr. Soren Simonsen, Cooper Roberts Simonsen Architects Mr. Paul Ellsworth, PEG Development 3. New ordinance RESOLUTION NO. OF 2006 A RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE TIME PERIOD FOR SATISFYING THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN ORDINANCE NO. 11 OF 2003 WHEREAS, the City Council enacted Ordinance No. 11 of 2003 on March 20, 2003; and WHEREAS, that ordinance imposed certain conditions and required that those conditions be met within two years from the date that the ordinance was signed; and WHEREAS, the ordinance also provided that the City Council may extend the time period for satisfying the conditions set forth in the ordinance; and WHEREAS, on March 15, 2005, the City Council passed Resolution No. 14 of 2005, which extended the time for satisfying the conditions set forth in the ordinance from March 20, 2005 to September 20, 2006; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there is good cause to extend the deadline for satisfying the conditions set forth in the ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. The deadline for satisfying the conditions set forth in Ordinance No. 11 of 2003 shall be and hereby is extended for a period of 24 months, from September 20, 2006 to September 20, 2008. b DATED this day of , 2006. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 2006. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By: CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake Ci Attorne s Office Date BY APPROVED AS TO FORM: SALT LAKE CITY ATTORNEY I:\RESOLUTI\Extending time for satisfying conditions in Ordinance 11,'03-July 25,2006.doc 2 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL,STAFF REPORT DATE: September 8;,2006 SUBJECT: Petition 400-06-06—639 W.North Temple,LLC—request to: • Rezone property located at 644 West North Temple from Commercial Corridor CC and Special Development Pattern Residential SR-3 to Moderate/High Density Residential Multi- Family RMF-45 • Amend the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map AFFECTED COUNCIL DISTRICTS: If the ordinance is adopted the rezoning and master plan amendment will affect Council District 3 and abutting Council Districts 1 and 2 STAFF REPORT BY: Janice Jardine,Land Use Policy Analyst ADMINISTRATIVE DEPT. Community Development Department,Planning Division AND CONTACT PERSON: Everett Joyce, Senior Planner NOTICE REQUIREMENTS: Newspaper advertisement and written notification to surrounding property owners 14 days prior to the Public Hearing Council staff has identified the following schedule should the Council choose to move this item forward to a public hearing after the briefing from the Administration. • September 19 Set hearing date • October 3 Council hearing KEY ELEMENTS: A. An ordinance has been prepared for Council consideration to: 1. Rezone property at 644 West North Temple from Commercial Corridor CC and Special Development Pattern Residential SR-3 to Moderate/High Density Residential Multi-Family RMF- 45. 2. Amend the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map designation for the property from low-density residential to medium-density residential land use. 3. Subject to the following conditions: a. Submission of the proposed development site plan(Exhibit B in the ordinance) b. Filing a complete building permit application to build the proposed development(Exhibit B in the ordinance) 4. The ordinance will become effective on the date of its first publication. 5. The City Recorder is instructed not to publish the ordinance until the Planning Director certifies that the conditions have been met. B. The rezoning and master plan amendment would facilitate construction of a 72-unit condominium residential development with three stories of dwelling units above one level of parking on a vacant 1 parcel. (Please see the Planning staff report and Planning Commission minutes for details.)The Administration's transmittal and Planning staff report note: 1. The applicant's original development proposal located the condominium structure on the eastern portion of the lot. 2. The revised site plan locates the condominium structure on the western portion of the lot. This is in response to concerns raised in the Fairpark Community Council meetings regarding the building location and its impacts on the adjacent low-density residential properties to the east. 3. Amending the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use map from Commercial and Low-Density Residential to Medium-Density Residential is necessary to accommodate the proposed development's density. 4. The proposed condominium development will comply with the requirements of the RMF-45 zoning district. 5. The property was previously used for commercial use. A motel occupied the site until the property was acquired for reconstruction of Interstate 15. The subject parcel is the remainder of the original parcel acquired by the Utah Department of Transportation. 6. In 1999 to 2001, during the development of the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan the property was used as a staging area for the reconstruction of Interstate 15. It was unknown at that time how much of the property would be used for freeway purposes. The Future Land Use Plan for the area identified transportation and commercial land uses along the North Temple Street frontage and the interior block for residential land use. 7. Preliminary condominium approval of the proposed development should be reviewed by the Planning Commission with specific consideration to adequately address building setbacks from adjacent low-density properties and development. 8. In the mid 1990's a concerted effort was made by the City to ensure that new multi-family development would be located on major arterials along the edges of neighborhoods rather than within low-density neighborhoods. In addition, light rail is slated to be developed along North Temple Street. 9. Development of this property,which was once commercial, as medium/high density residential land use is appropriate. C. The Planning staff report notes that the overall character of the area contains a variety of land uses ranging from single-family residential uses to commercial land uses. Surrounding residential uses include single-family dwelling units, duplexes, 3-4 unit apaitinents and high-density apartments. Immediately east of the subject parcel are commercial uses on the North Temple Street frontage and low- density residential uses to the east. Single-family and duplex residential uses are located to the north. The development character south of the subject property includes high-density residential and a mix of non-residential uses. Commercial land uses are located west of Interstate 15 along the North Temple street frontage. (Please see attached map for details). D. The purpose of the Special Development Pattern Residential SR-3 zoning district is to provide lot,bulk and use regulations in scale with the character of development located within the interior portions of City blocks. Off-site parking facilities in this district to supply required parking for new development may be approved as part of the conditional use process.Maximum building height in the zone is 30 feet or 2 V2 stories, whichever is less. Maximum density in the SR-3 zone is 29 units/acre for single-family attached dwellings and multi-family developments. E. The purpose of the Commercial Corridor CC zoning district is to provide an environment for efficient and attractive automobile oriented commercial development along arterial and major collector streets. Maximum building height in the zone is 30 feet or 2 '/2 stories,whichever is less. Multi-family residential uses in addition to a broad range of commercial uses are permitted in this zone. 2 F. The purpose of the Moderate/High Density Multi Family Residential RMF-45 zoning district is to provide for an environment suitable for multi-family dwellings of a moderate/high density. Commercial ire and office types of uses are not permitted in this zone. Maximum building height in the zone is 45 feet. Maximum density in the RMF-45 zone is: • 14.5 units/acre for single-family attached dwellings • 30.5 units/acre for multi-family developments with less than 15 units • 43.2 units/acre for multi-family developments over 15 units with 1 acre • 43.0 units/acre for multi-family developments over 15 units and above 1 acre G. The City's Fire,Police,and Public Utilities Departments and Transportation and Engineering Divisions have reviewed the request. The development proposal will be required to comply with City standards and regulations and demonstrate that there are adequate services to meet the needs of the project. In addition,North Temple is a State road and the proposed development will require review by the Utah Department of Transportation(UDOT)for access and driveway location approval. The Planning staff report and Department/Division comments note: 1. The Public Utilities Department stated that high groundwater is typical in this area. If below grade buildings or structures are proposed,a stamped geotechnical report identifying the highest expected groundwater must be submitted to Public Utilities for review and approval. 2. The Police Department identified that this property has been an area of concern for residents for many years. This project would be a positive addition to the neighborhood and a good use of that space. Steps should be taken to implement as many"crime prevention"strategies in the design of the structure and site configuration as possible to minimize potential needs for increased Police Services. 3. The Transportation Division reviewed the traffic data identifying additional trips generated and that the property has direct access to an arterial street. Street lighting upgrades may be required to comply with the City's street lighting master plan. 4. Public way improvements may be required to comply with City Engineering standards. 5. The Permits Department noted the RMF-45 zone requires a 10 ft.landscaped buffer along single or two family districts that abut the property. This property abuts an SR-1 zone to the north and east, therefore,the project will need to provide the landscape buffer.The submitted site plan shows a 10 ft. setback and some trees but does not clearly define the buffer area or plantings. Also,it appears that some playground equipment may encroach into the buffer area. H. The public process included presentation of the proposed development to the Fairpark and Poplar Grove Community Councils and written notification of the Planning Commission hearing to surrounding property owners and affected Community Councils. The Administration's transmittal and Planning staff report note: 1. The proposed development was presented to the Fairpark Community Council on March 23 and April 27 of 2006. Issues raised related to traffic impacts on North Temple and impacts on adjacent properties. The applicant addressed the traffic impact issues related to traffic being able to transition onto the property without creating conflicts with North Temple traffic movement. The applicant modified the site plan showing a visitor parking lot at the front portion of the parcel and has located the vehicle access gate to the remainder of the property well back from the North Temple Street frontage. Another concern was the impact on adjacent properties if the zoning is changed to allow 45-foot high buildings adjacent to single family residential uses. (The revised site plan locates the condominium structure on the western portion of the lot.) 2. After discussion of the issues, the Community Council voted not to support the requested zoning change 11-7 for the proposed condominium project. Those in favor of the plan saw an upscale economic boost to the area,while those opposed, felt it was too dense of a population for the lot size, did not like having such a tall building go in right next to them and worried about who it might bring r into the neighborhood. It was recommended by adjacent residents that higher density should be 3 placed on the commercial zoned portion of the property and lower density on the SR-3 back portion of the parcel. 3. The Planning Division received comments on the proposed rezoning amendment petition. These responses are in opposition to the proposal and are included in the Planning staff report, Exhibit 5— Other Public Comments. (For ease of reference the items have been brought forward from the Administration's transmittal and attached at the end of this staff report.) I. The Planning staff report provides the following findings for the Zoning Ordinance Section 21A.50.050 - Standards for General Amendments.The standards were evaluated in the Planning staff report and considered by the Planning Commission. (Discussion and findings for these standards are found on pages 5-8 of the Planning staff report.) 1. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the purposes,goals,objectives, and policies of the adopted general plan of Salt Lake City. Findings: Although the proposed amendment is not consistent with the future land use map an amendment to the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan to a medium-density land use designation would be required. The proposed amendment supports the provision of housing opportunity that is consistent with policies of the Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan and the Salt Lake City Community Housing Plan with respect to the North Temple transit corridor. 2. Whether the proposed amendment is harmonious with the overall character of existing development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Findings: With appropriate setbacks the proposed development will be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. The proposed development plan is harmonious with the overall character of existing development. The proposed amendment is harmonious with the land use character desired along a major arterial and transit corridor. 3. The extent to which the proposed amendment will adversely affect adjacent properties. Findings: With appropriate design and site configuration of development on the subject property to meet RMF-45 landscape buffer requirements and setback standards, the proposed amendment will not adversely affect adjacent properties. 4. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts that may impose additional standards. Findings: The property is not within any overlay districts. 5. The adequacy of public facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, including but not limited to roadways,parks and recreational facilities,police and fire protection, schools, storm water drainage systems,water supplies,and waste water and refuse collection. Findings:The public facility services and utilities are in place to serve the subject parcel. If specific development demands exceed service capacity,the developer would be required to make system improvements as part of obtaining a building permit. The adjacent arterial streets can absorb the traffic generated by the proposed uses. 6. In addition,the Planning staff report notes the following findings regarding the proposed Capitol Hill Community Master Plan amendment: Findings: Amendment of the Capitol Hill Master Plan Future Land Use map for the subject property supports the Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan by providing for the accommodation of higher residential density along the North Temple transit corridor and supports the Salt Lake City Community Housing Plan policy regarding transit oriented development. Amendment of the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map from commercial and low-density residential to medium-density residential does not detract from the desirability of maintaining the Guadalupe neighborhood as a low-density residential community. 4 • RECOMMENDATION(Planning staff): - ve • Based on the fmdings of fact,staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to the City Council to approve the request of Petition 400-06-06,to amend the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map for medium density residential land uses and rezone the property from CC and SR-3 to an RMF-45 zoning classification. J. On June 14,2006,the Planning Commission voted to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council to rezone the property and amend the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map subject to the rezoning being contingent upon the site plan showing the building location on the western portion of the property. (Please see the Planning staff report and Planning Commission minutes for details.) K. Issues and public comment discussed at the Planning Commission meetings(summarized below) included: 1. Density concerns regarding the potential for additional high-density housing in the area(future multi-family developments proposed for this site and on surrounding properties)and the impact on adjacent neighborhoods. 2. The North Temple corridor is currently being considered as a potential transit oriented corridor including mixed-use and high-density development. 3. Potential traffic and parking impacts on the surrounding area. 4. Design issues relating to height,mass, scale,buffering,lighting, landscaping and neighborhood character compatibility of the proposed development. 5. Potential impacts of a larger structure on surrounding low-density single-family structures. 6. Options available to develop the project and address compatibility such as granting approval based raw, on the site plan presented at the Commission meeting or issuance of a building permit. Planning staff identified this option. They noted that ensuring that the plan return to the Commission is not appropriate to the present request and the buildings are presently defined as condominiums and not as a planned development. MATTERS AT ISSUE /POTENTIAL QUESTIONS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION: A. The Council may wish to request more information from the Planning Division on the issues considered at the Planning Commission meeting and noted in written comments in relation to this petition. For example,density concerns regarding the potential for additional high-density housing in the area(future multi-family developments proposed for this site and on surrounding properties)and the impact on adjacent neighborhoods. Does the Planning staff feel that this issue has been adequately addressed? What options or tools may be available to address this issue in the future? B. In discussing the density ranges for the different land use classifications identified in the Plan with Planning staff,it was recognized that the Future Land Use Map actually should be changed to a medium-HIGH density classification. This action is necessary to ensure consistency with the land use map in the master plan and the density of the proposed development.The City Attorney's office recommends that the Council modify the recommendation of the Planning Commission to address this issue. A new ordinance will be provided prior to the Council's public hearing. • The final site plan presented and recommended by the Planning Commission proposes 72 units.The site is a 2.07-acre parcel which equates to a density of 34.8 dwelling units/acre. • Density ranges in the Plan specify Medium Density= 15-30 units/acre and Medium-High Density= ++� 30-45 units. 5 MASTER PLAN AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS: A. The Capitol Hill Community Master Plan(November 2001)is the adopted land-use policy document that guides new development in the area surrounding the proposed rezoning and master plan amendment. The Future Land Use Map identifies this area fo Commercial and Low Density residential uses. (As previously noted, amending the Future Land Use Map in the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan is part of this petition.) B. The Planning staff report notes: 1. The site is located in the Guadalupe Neighborhood. 2. The Capitol Hill Community Master Plan states that over the past several decades,Guadalupe has become less desirable as a low-density residential neighborhood due to a high concentration of rental units and neglected properties in combination with,and partially due to,the isolation and noise impacts associated with the transportation corridors that surround it. 3. Several adjacent policy plans and actions affect the surrounding neighborhood and have potential impact on the subject parcel. Particular policy issues related to North Temple Street and adjacent areas are identified below: a. The Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan identifies North Temple Street as a major arterial(State roadway)and future transit corridor. b. The Gateway Master Plan has identified commercial and residential land uses along the south side of North Temple Street between Interstate-15 and 300 West Street. c. The Northwest Community Master Plan identifies as an implementation strategy to develop a plan for the North Temple Street corridor. d. The Salt Lake City Community Housing Plan goal is to enhance,maintain and sustain a livable community that includes a vibrant downtown integrated with surrounding neighborhoods that offer a wide range of housing choices,mixed uses,and transit oriented design. The Salt Lake City Housing Plan further identifies City Council policy statements supporting transit oriented development and design through the provision of: • Housing densities and mixed uses that support the use of alternative and public transportation, depending on the characteristics of each area. • Appropriate housing densities in areas where public transit and local services are conveniently available or can be provided and area accessible on foot. • Reinvestment in existing urban and inner suburban areas. C. The City's Comprehensive Housing Plan policy statements address a variety of housing issues including quality design, architectural designs compatible with neighborhoods,public and neighborhood participation and interaction, accommodating different types and intensities of residential developments, transit-oriented development, encouraging mixed-income and mixed-use developments,housing preservation,rehabilitation and replacement,zoning policies and programs that preserve housing opportunities as well as business opportunities. D. The Transportation Master Plan contains policy statements that include support of alternative forms of transportation, considering impacts on neighborhoods on at least an equal basis with impacts on transportation systems and giving all neighborhoods equal consideration in transportation decisions. The Plan recognizes the benefits of locating high density housing along major transit systems and reducing dependency on the automobile as a primary mode of transportation. E. The City's Strategic Plan and the Futures Commission Report express concepts such as maintaining a prominent sustainable city,ensuring the City is designed to the highest aesthetic standards and is pedestrian friendly, convenient, and inviting,but not at the expense of minimizing environmental 6 stewardship or neighborhood vitality. The Plans emphasize placing a high priority on maintaining and developing new affordable residential housing in attractive, friendly, safe environments. F. The'Council's growth policy notes that growth in Salt Lake City will be deemed the most desirable if it meets the following criteria: 1. Is aesthetically pleasing; 2. Contributes to a livable community environment; 3. Yields no negative net fiscal impact unless an overriding public purpose is served;and 4. Forestalls negative impacts associated with inactivity. G. The City's 1990 Urban Design Element includes statements that emphasize preserving the City's image, neighborhood character and maintaining livability while being sensitive to social and economic realities. CHRONOLOGY: The Administration's transmittal provides a chronology of events relating to the proposed rezoning and master plan amendment. Key dates are listed below. Please refer to the Administration's chronology for details. • March 22,2006 Poplar Grove Community Council meeting • March 23 &April 27,2006 Fairpark Community Council meetings • June 14,2006 Planning Commission hearing • June 15,2006 Ordinance requested from City Attorney's office cc: Sam Guevara,Rocky Fluhart,DJ Baxter,Ed Rutan,Lynn Pace,Melanie Reif,Louis Zunguze,Brent Wilde,Alex Ikefuna,Doug Wheelwright,Cheri Coffey,Everett Joyce,Marge Harvey,Jennifer Bruno,Barry Esham File Location: Community Development Dept.,Planning Division,Rezoning and Master Plan Amendment, 639 West North Temple,LLC., 644 West North Temple wit 7 n c{. ;s Na 4 :'`'',s" .p fa ;...fs ., •vet,'`((�,:ce f w P,Y^"...,,,, :.,a„_ �. • .:rt�, ,,h :.'ds°.. ,• r �' IL. S >`�`.:'y:. 4: • 3IS` ''�acf M1',:. �.➢v^'ak��.a:. 'P �,�' ry�.�n ,t .S Y i . � :!, ,.4:t +!' t � 9 �r.A'�r, i +) 'k t, ..'3,.-z � `a�l V. ' c`}}�„Fa..v:"F• .p ram, Jz4 +, „` t 4£ N. P;:W.1.. . • ' cam qr ( ' p; . ". T� • '. 'far i Ca,.E.. , :.' 'Mr3-_.'. E_ ^ _: `. - a`',,"\'c 1r:2: ' liiTi - 7 CZ',.>_Si,�c�.1'E'.:'.;{.; e'• • `£'s'r '- 5 x,'' • `,z,::t !; • ::a....... .sf sw . 4Y`C°.;:"i '- , • ' '(-.; •°fir,.i .. # t' ;': �,:.- � a� €, x ,rs: r'' sr^-., ,LJpS Aj. �"._„'. < � '.i, ..,. t aa�� .4 _'gn Fi � 3. f, '�. � :.� e.:�;' �; X J z � a ,z.'r^ }:` #: �ems„ -�f�.^"" -:,:•>: �� '� � . . :�, :: • ':' -.1,,�",.:""� -'... ..,.. A m tY. ki =fig• .. r x,' _ - .� q} :3�.x ",�. .'`'��"-,:;1>.t �*j,u, - - 'm ` { ro. • c. 2'3 >'t '' w- a '.:^ -+.�2Va �: r{.:P,'•>.'iS't''.e"''!"."ie,`i,^:t-. «. a eaTxv yw y,t ';i:u , a +P•, rp. i•,•.. .'roe..:. _. a • 'b .7., =.h ."x:: .L.>`ih°:'. ,Y,9kVr%Yy,,) _ - ' , u .sz, ate, . 5 ..,_ �� -'r.� ,.•�=''.day°�`V �' �aaia�:ir _e . T _ y ..- :•::_.,...;•Y:: .,. 3 W-S, '�N„'.a2 :� ,�"�t ''x.Tr"; . • :f; i6 �,k :. W.} ..�"° dew M•»:.`..»a....^s ..,,,,,,,,„.„....,..... - : _A � / ,s ,: i.' .�...�.�"'"max g��•:kd`,,:',ti.. .�,�. *z-.s.:.'�.w.. �.n : • .re f. _ w¢ �; '.gin `.;rya. <5l' �., �uhl,a„� a•, .fir,; s,. 4>461 M1.5- 'c. r i: ' >lsls( $""'T„ [ m t ill -x • , iK 'fNh -, >. ��yyyy W Vij{,eC y N r , j t 5 �:r" ,t may; yY4-�..' "t- '�!•' (/I�/�)S " s' .�' ;at 'r,' f {F°'�.< ..,,,�. �,-E 4 1' 2. • i. x>p...: <n�, «_ ; I•�. .d ,gyp- '°` `a,«., m_�.a.�.r 'r fe' ��yy �.1 ,ca+g„n h e�,` ,..�' ��t(�.'.x �_'��'' �3 _ la. • :5 a4 .;A-`N,'�"�'� � ,' •Z�: 'sf£iw , "a;7 ,, a'' I .in Ord'.` uv sax.��c -. „T a,r 'l,w.. ( 4 il N F' S '�''d n'�`f'- •1 i 'i` ;-^ f d .4d r, t,:�:',: "r"a# " > <: � a rE'ac:.. ,.. z v; s' �_t.:"f'� O ,'I3 _•,;S"•'-' 1. Ar `^'kit i `. 33 -,,s1;?... '-, •f."? - 1 -x ,,, � .fa' d as:-'4,- ,' ,,,.. , sa,4�'= •:•,,,,.t.,c?„,4:::.. __,•........,,,,,t1:•i•-tt f:;'''..--••-,--'. -- -7 ..,..,::. 0. :.,•.•ii•,„...,...,,;. . .,,, .4. x, �i3b ., 410,44 , ,i , ..,„.,tti ,„7„..„.. /. .,,,,.3. .,.•.•,:,,,,,,i, i . �, p - .11111111A! ° s:e.ia' , & y , -�:� w t;„' ti` -..i , :. - 4° Page 1 of 1 Joyce, Everett From: vickyorme@utah-inter.net Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 10:15 PM To: Joyce, Everett Subject: 639 West North Temple I am the Chair of the Fairpark community council. Mike Embley and others from the proposed development on North Temple came to our community council meeting in April to present the planned 74 unit development at 650 West and North Temple. After seeing the plans and much discussion, a vote was taken in which the zoning change necessary to allow such development was voted down 11-7. Those in favor of the plan saw an upscale economic boost to the area, while those opposed, which included those who lived directly to the North and East of the development, felt it was too dense of population for the lot size,did not like having such a tall building go in right next to them, and worried about who it might bring into the neighborhood. The development is for the North side of North Temple, and I think,therefore that it must end in an even number,so I put 650 W for an example. It may not be the exact address, but is between the I-15 freeway and the plasma center. r Victoria Orme,Chair, FPCC 801 706- 8691 If you have any questions please feel free to ask. VO rr 6/6/2006 To: Salt Lake City Planning Commission & City Council From: Jon Robinson • Home Owner at 129 North 600 West RE: Developers request to up-zone the old Se Rancho Motel site at 640 West North Temple. Commission and Council members: I am writing this letter in opposition of the rezoning of the property referenced above. The property in question is currently zoned CC along the North Temple frontage with the balance being SR-3. My opposition is with the SR-3 being up-zoned to RMF-45. When the Capital Hill Master Plan was created a few years ago one of its goals was to maintain the Guadalupe neighborhood as a quiet, low density, owner occupied neighborhood. Most of the properties in the area were actually down-zoned to meet this goal. My property was down-zoned from R6 to SR-1. I believe all of the property on my block is now SR-1 except the CC along North Temple and this site, which is SR-3. I think it is contrary to the intent of the Master Plan to allow this property to be up-zoned. The existing SR-3 is already higher than the adjoining residential properties. The Planning Commission recently approved zoning changes to limit "Monster" homes in my neighborhood. It seems contradictory to do this but then allow other property in the neighborhood to be up-zoned to allow large, high density housing. I don't fault the developers wanting to maximize their profit on this development, that's their business. But I don't think it's fair for the neighbors/neighborhood to bear the burden of having an excessively large condo project in our backyards to facilitate that goal. This property was SR-3 when they purchased it and should be developed under that zoning. There is current planning underway to build 300 to 1000 residential units within 1 block of this project. Those developments would not take any zoning changes. I don't believe we need to specifically up-zone this property to add even more residential density to the Guadalupe neighborhood. The specific design of the 70+ condos is even more questionable. They have aligned the buildings along the eastern edge of their property, which is the closest to the SR-1 property. If the buildings were moved to the west, with their parking lot on the east side, this would at least provide a buffer for the SR-1 neighbors. Thank your consideration, Jon Robinson rage i of Joyce, Everett Ise From: Maria Garciaz [maria©slnhs.org] Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 5:13 PM To: Joyce, Everett Subject: Petition 400-06-08 Hi Everett, hope all is well, Regarding Petition 400-06-06, 639 West North Temple to amend from 5R3 to RMF 45. NHS attended the Fairpark community council where the proposed development was presented to the community. NHS certainly supports owner occupied housing and excited that the vacant land will be developed, but we are concerned with the density specific to the surrounding residential area that is R2. I believe it is important that Planning Department take into consideration the comments by the residents adjacent to the proposed development. Their recommendations were higher density on the commercial zoned property and lower density on the 5R3. Citifront Phase II will build 300 units of condos and Richard Miles (developer) is proposing an additional 500 units on the pallet property. NHS is proposing 66 units of multifamily senior on the demolished senior center. Given all the proposed multifamily we are reconsidering redesigning the senior development for lower density/owner occupied town homes for seniors and NHS would take a substantial loss on the development because of land costs. No one ever wants to take a loss on development and we seldom do, but we also realize that all the multifamily development being built over the next five years will have high traffic impact in Guadalupe and North Temple. Please call me if you have any questions. Thanks Maria Garciaz Executive Director Salt Lake Neighborhood Housing Services 622 West 500 North SLC, Utah 84.1.1.6 • S01.539.1590 ext 102 MISSION:Salt Lake Neighborhood Housing Services (NHS) builds on the strengths of neighborhoods, creating opportunities through housing, resident leadership, youth and economic development. We work in partnership with our residents,government and business to build and sustain neighborhoods of choice. wzvw.slnks.org 6/6/2006 AUG 1 7 2006 A. LOUTS ZUNGUZE S .` '�� \aWMI Jr k 1 �.i� "J� a►.tL�.+ ri! ROSS C. "ROCKY" ANDERSON DIRECTOR DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MAYOR BRENT B. WILDE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR TRANSMITTED A U G 2 5 2006 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMIT AL TO CI Ty C pU N F L TO: Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administrative Office ` $A ' - 006 FROM: Louis Zunguze, Community Development Director �i, y W 0 RE: Petition 400-06-06 by 639 W North Temple, LLC, requesting to rezone property located at 644 West North Temple Street to a Residential Multi-Family RMF-45 zoning classification from the existing Commercial Corridor CC and Special Residential SR-3 zoning. This action requires amendment of the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map designation from Low Density Residential and Commercial designations to a Medium Density Residential land use designation. STAFF CONTACTS: Everett L. Joyce, Senior Planner, at 535-7930 or everett.joyce@slcgov.com RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council hold a briefing and schedule a Public Hearing regarding the proposed zoning text and Master Plan amendment DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance BUDGET IMPACT: None DISCUSSION: Issue Origin: Petition 400-06-06, initiated by Mike Embley of 639 W North Temple, LLC, is a request to rezone the property located at 644 West North Temple Street from Commercial Corridor CC and Special Residential SR-3 zoning to Residential Multi-Family RMF-45 zoning to facilitate the development of a future residential condominium project. Analysis: The request to rezone the property to Residential Multi-Family RMF-45 will allow higher density development than is permitted by current zoning. The existing site is vacant; the initial site plan depicted a 74-unit condominium development with the structure located on the east portion of the lot. Concerns were raised in the Fairpark Community Council meetings regarding the building location and its impact on adjacent low density residential properties to the east. The revised site plan submitted to the Planning Commission depicts the building location on the western portion of the property,thereby reducing the impact upon adjacent properties. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-535-71 05 FAX: 80 1-535-6005 WWW.SLCGOV.COM Master Plan Considerations: The Capitol Hill Community Master Plan designates the property as low density residential and general commercial land uses. The zoning was set in place in 1995 and corresponded with the uses at that time(Se Rancho Motel), and the property was split zoned commercial and residential. Particular policy issues related to North Temple Street and adjacent areas are identified below: • The Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan identifies North Temple Street as a major arterial (State roadway)and future transit corridor. • The Gateway Master Plan has identified commercial and high density residential mixed land uses along the south side of North Temple Street between I-15 and 300 West Street. • The Northwest Community Master Plan identifies, as an implementation strategy, development of a North Temple Street Corridor Plan. • The Salt Lake City Community Housing Plan goal is to enhance,maintain, and sustain a livable community that includes a vibrant Downtown integrated with surrounding neighborhoods that offer a wide range of housing choices, mixed uses, and transit-oriented design. The Salt Lake City Housing Plan further identifies City Council policy statements supporting transit-oriented development and design through the provision of: i. Housing densities and mixed uses that support the use of alternative and public transportation, depending on the characteristics of each area. ii. Appropriate housing densities in areas where public transit and local services are conveniently available or can be provided, and are accessible on foot. iii. Reinvestment in existing urban and inner suburban areas. PUBLIC PROCESS: The petition was presented to the Poplar Grove Community Council on March 22, 2006, which gave support to the proposed rezone and development. The proposed development was presented to the Fairpark Community Council on March 23 and April 27 of 2006. Issues raised by the Fairpark Community Council related to the impact on traffic on North Temple Street and impacts on adjacent properties. The applicant addressed the traffic impact issues related to traffic being able to transition onto the property without creating conflicts with North Temple traffic movement. The applicant modified the site plan showing a visitor parking lot located in front of the access control gate. Another concern was the impact on adjacent properties if a 45-foot high building were adjacent to the single family structures. Based on these issues, the Fairpark Community Council voted 11-7 not to support the requested zoning change. Those in favor of the plan saw an upscale economic boost to the area, while Petition 400-06-06: Rezoning and Master Plan Amendment for 644 W North Temple St. Page 2 of 3 those opposed felt it was too dense of a population for the lot size, did not like having such a tall building right next to lower density homes, and worried about who it might bring into the neighborhood. It was recommended by adjacent residents that higher density should be placed on the commercial zoned portion of the property and lower density on the SR-3 back portion of the parcel. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on June 14, 2006, and passed a motion to transmit a favorable recommendation to the City Council to: 1. Amend the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map identifying the property as medium-density residential land use; 2. Rezone the property from Commercial Corridor(CC)and Special Residential(SR-3)to Residential Multi-Family(RMF-45)zoning classification;and 3. That the rezone be contingent upon the site plan showing the building location on the western portion of the property. RELEVANT ORDINANCES: Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and Maps are authorized under Section 21A.50 of the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance, as detailed in Section 21A.50.050: "A decision to amend the text of this title or the zoning map by general amendment is a matter committed to the legislative discretion of the City Council and is not controlled by any one standard." It does, however, list five standards, which should be analyzed prior to rezoning property (Section 21A.50.050 A-E). The five standards are discussed in detail starting on page 5 of the Planning Commission Staff Report(see Attachment 4iv). State standards for zoning and Master Plan amendment are Utah State Code Section 10-9a-503 Zoning Map Amendment, Section 10-9a-404 General Plan Amendment, and Section 10-9a-201 Required Notice. The petition for zoning and Master Plan amendment was published in the newspaper on May 31, 2006 meeting State Law requirements for Master Plan amendments. Petition 400-06-06:Rezoning and Master Plan Amendment for 644 W North Temple St. Page 3 of 3 c ,T&1bkj gy Chronology February 15, 2006 Petition delivered to the Planning office February 17, 2006 Petition assigned to Everett Joyce February 27, 2006 Requested City departmental review of proposed master plan amendment and rezoning of the subject property March 22, 2006 Petition presented to the Poplar Grove Community Council March 23, 2006 Petition presented to the Fairpark Community Council April 27, 2006 Petition presented for second time to the Fairpark Community Council May 26, 2006 Posted property May 30, 2006 Mailed notices for Planning Commission public hearing May 31, 2006 Newspaper notice published June 3, 2006 E-mail comments sent from the Fairpark Community Council chair June 14, 2006 Planning Commission public hearing June 15, 2006 Ordinance request sent to City Attorney June 28, 2006 Planning Commission ratified minutes of June 14, 2006 meeting I��h�lhg n?asterl'faO / 1bk2R �'ngProAhCC SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2006 (Rezoning Property Generally Located at 644 West North Temple Street and Amending the Capitol Hill Master Plan) REZONING PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT 644 WEST 'LE STREET, FROM CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (CC) A' T � S DEVELOPMENT PATTERN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT ' Ct/() DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Die w PETITION NO. 400-06-06. O ) WHEREAS, the Planr= have held public hearings u g ` demographic details of the are.. plan as part of their deliberations. concluded that the proposed amendmc .,ning for the property generally located at 644 West Nc ,priate for the development of the community in that area and in the best int% NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. REZONING OF PROPERTY. The property generally located at 644 West North Temple Street, which is more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto, shall be and hereby is rezoned from Corridor Commercial District (CC) and Special Development Pattern Residential District (SR-3) to Moderate/High Density Multi-Family Residential District (RMF-45). SECTION 2. AMENDMENT TO ZONING MAP. The Salt Lake City Zoning Map, as adopted by the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries and zoning districts, shall be, and hereby is amended consistent with the rezoning of properties identified above. SECTION 3. AMENDMENT OF MASTER PLAN. The Capitol Hill Master Plan, as previously adopted by the Salt Lake City Council, shall be, and hereby is amended consistent with the rezoning set forth herein and shall be further amended to reflect "medium density residential land use" rather than "low density residential" and "commercial." SECTION 4. CONDITIONS. This Ordinance shall not become effective until the following conditions have been met: A. Submission of the proposed development site plan, which is more particularly described on Exhibit `B" attached hereto; and B. Filing a complete application for a building permit to build the proposed development, which is more particularly described on Exhibit "B"attached hereto. SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. The City Recorder is instructed not to publish this Ordinance until the Salt Lake City Planning Director certifies that the conditions identified above have been met. 2 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of 2006. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake Attorneys Offic: Date 64 (SEAL) TOB G! , Olira Bill No. of 2006. Published: I.\Ordinance 06\Rezoning 644 West North Temple Street-06-28-06 draft.doc 3 Exhibit "A" Sidwell Parcel Number: 08-36-351-033 Boundary Description A Parcel of land being in the southwest Quarter of Section 36, Township 1 North, Range 1 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian being a portion of Block 61, Plat C, Salt Lake City Survey, and described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of Lot 3, Block 61, Plat C, Salt Lake City Survey; N 89°53'41" W 51.32 feet; thence N 40°15'53" W 29.91 feet; thence northerly along the arc of a 4871.92 feet radius curve to left 153.61 feet; thence N 50°11'47" E 70.34 feet; thence N 00°06'52" E 109.39 feet; thence S 89°53'41" E 12.50 feet; thence N 00°06'52" E 180 feet; thence S 89°53'41" E 70 feet; thence S 00°06'52" W 1 feet; thence S 89°53'41" E et/0 78.90 feet; thence S 00°06'52" W 7.50 feet; thence S 89°53'41" E 19.20 feet; thence S /f ,.01" 00°15'37" E 137.60 feet; thence S 89°53'41" E 14.30 feet; thence S 00°17'28" E 74.90 (i feet; thence N 89°53'41" W 43.70 feet; thence S 00°01'19" W 124 feet; thence S �� y 89°53'41" E 12.20 feet; thence S 00°06'52" W 38 feet; thence N 89°53'41" W 52 feet; thence S 00°06'52" W 127 feet; thence N 89°53'41" W 113 feet to the point of beginning. 2.07 Acres • Exhibit "B" ,\�/� m ~1 f' V 1 m i ¢Z m s Z y �� G S 28 a r e = v~—in a • _ I gI 'r f • 3^ a' x j re ■■? '''' ,-! '-',,. ' ' 'Title:1:1:V:41;14 .: i ' - ;. I. ; O , r • . 1 } a i J}� "1 K ,� 1 1 • AI :1-_,.:,-4,' gi- g i,,.,.1.„'..:..,-.i.i.,,-1,'' !i'41:1. .$ 0 ' ':' ---.::''''-`c.:;,!:"1:-.''''2w--7.',-! . . . i 11 -w -; ' . Exhibit 4iii Minutes Salt Lake City Planning Commission June 14, 2006 SALT LAKE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING In Room 326 of the City & County Building 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah Wednesday, June 14, 2006 PUBLIC HEARINGS Petition 400-06-06 —A request by 639 W North Temple, LLC to amend the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map from Low Density Residential and Commercial to Medium Density Residential Land Use and to rezone the property located at approximately 644 West North Temple Street from Commercial Corridor (CC) and Special Residential (SR-3) Zoning to Residential Multifamily (RMF-45). The rezone and plan amendment is to allow for the development of a 74-unit condominium project. (This item was heard at 6:09 p.m.) Chairperson Noda recognized Everett Joyce as Staff Representative. Mr. Joyce presented a brief background of the project. He stated that the Capitol Hill Master Plan Future Land Use Map designates the property in a conflicting manner when consideration of other city policies is supported; namely, the Community Housing Policy, Transit Development and the Transportation Master Plan relating to Transit Corridors. He stated that the North Temple Corridor is a proposed future transit corridor, providing high-density residential structures—supporting the proposal. Mr. Joyce included that the impact of high-density housing will affect the surrounding area; however, the developer has proposed an alternate site plan than the one provided in the Staff Report to better suite the neighborhood requests. The new site plan places the building along the freeway instead of near the backyards of the existing residents. Mr. Joyce reinforced the request for a rezone and an amendment to a master plan. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council to approve the requested amendments. The Commissioners expressed concern regarding noise, lighting, landscaping and the permitted uses in the area if the rezone is approved. Staff referred noise concerns to the applicant and clarified that landscape buffering is required when site approval is requested. Mr. Joyce reiterated that the current request is for a rezone to allow multi-family residential dwellings at 45 feet in height. Staff clarified that 1.7 acres of the property would be re-zoned from SR-3 to RMF-45, given approval. At 6:20 p.m., Chairperson Noda recognized the applicants. Mike Embley, representing the developer (Ken Shirley), Tim Short, and Architect Mark de Bry represented the applicant. Mr. Embley commended the Commissioners for their public service. He stated that the site is awkward in its design because of the commercial and street frontage. He indicated that there are privacy and security concerns for the area, but that he intends to work with the neighbors regarding the development. Tim Short provided a brief description of the setting, the neighborhood, and the background of the project. He noted that the goal is to pattern the project after the 1 Salt Lake City Planning Commission June 14, 2006 Gateway Park Condominiums in developing a classy, business clientele. Mr. Short also included that the new site plan is being proposed to help mitigate the concerns of the neighborhood. Commissioner De Lay expressed concern regarding Mr. Embley's comment about isolation from the neighborhood. Mr. Embley stated that his intention is not to isolate the building, but rather to provide a safe, secure environment for the owners. Mr. Short mentioned that a wrought-iron gate would be constructed to provide an open, yet secure area. He noted that the goal was to be courteous to the surrounding residential neighbors. Mr. Short indicated that an alleyway (or right-of-way) is located on the northern end of the property, with potential for walkable access, and will be considered upon site plan approval. Commissioner De Lay raised attention to the letter from Maria Garcia, Neighborhood Housing Executive Director, regarding the potential for high density housing in the area and the impact it will have on adjacent neighborhoods. Chairperson Noda requested comments from Community Council Chairs and from the public. Jon Robinson, 129 North 600 West, expressed concern regarding the size of the proposed building in relation to the size of the parcel. He raised concern regarding the rezone approval and the potential for an inappropriate structure to be placed on the property if it is sold or redesigned. Mr. Robinson suggested that a condition be placed on the motion to include the current site plan. Commissioner De Lay expressed concern regarding the impact to the neighborhoods to high-density housing, as Citifront is also proposing to build in the area. Commissioner Scott requested additional information regarding the soil on the property. Mr. Embley stated that they would do all things possible to satisfy the neighbors, as far as their property is concerned. He also stated that an environmental engineering study has been conducted for the whole project and is satisfactory. He noted that 172 story of underground parking will be constructed. Chairperson Noda closed the public hearing. The Commissioners discussed the proposed rezone and requested that the site plan be a condition of the approval. Mr. Joyce stated that if the Commissioners wanted site plan approval, the motion could include that the rezoning would not be in place until a building permit had been issued with site plan approval of the Planning Commission. He noted that the buildings are presently defined as condominiums and not as a planned development, due to their upper level connection. Mr. Ikefuna suggested that the Planning Commission add that the approval be conditioned upon the building permit; however, ensuring that the plan return to the Planning Commission is not appropriate to the present request. He also addressed the density concerns of the Planning Commission by stating that the North Temple Corridor 2 Salt Lake City Planning Commission June 14, 2006 is being considered as a potential Transit Oriented Corridor including mixed use and high density development towards the Interstate 80 area. Mr. Ikefuna recommended that the petition request be approved. The Commissioners discussed the option of(a) adding a condition to return to the Commission with a site plan, (b) deny the petition, or (c) to grant approval based on the presented site plan. The uniqueness of the parcel and its location was raised to support the rezone request. Some of the Commissioners agreed that safeguards exist in order to mitigate the adjacency of RMF-45 buildings and residential housing; therefore, placing trust in the applicants to work with the neighbors to create a satisfactory result for all parties involved. Ms. Coffey suggested the rezoning request be conditioned upon the site plan distributed at the meeting, given the fact that a condition cannot be required to return to the Planning Commission. Based upon the findings of fact in the Staff report, Commissioner Muir made a motion for the Planning Commission to transmit a favorable recommendation to the City Council to amend the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map for medium-density residential land use and to rezone the property from CC (Commercial Corridor) and SR-3 (Special Development Pattern Residential District) to RMF-45 zoning classification, contingent upon the latest site plan submitted as part of the record. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Scott. All vote "Aye". The motion passed. Commissioner De Lay clarified that her intent in requesting the applicant to return to the Planning Commission was not to micro-manage the project, but to rather be more aware of the upcoming density to the North Temple and 300 West areas. 3 Exhibit 4iv Staff Report DATE: June 8, 2006 TO: Salt Lake City Planning Commission ` FROM: Everett L. Joyce, AICP RE: STAFF REPORT FOR THE JUNE 14, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CASE #: 400-06-06 Master Plan and Zoning Amendment APPLICANT: 639 W North Temple LLC PROJECT LOCATION: 644 W North Temple Street PROJECT/PROPERTY SIZE: 2.07 acres COUNCIL DISTRICT: District 3, Councilmember Jergensen REQUESTED ACTION: Amend the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map from Low Density Residential and Commercial to Medium Density Residential land use and rezone the subject property RMF-45. ..° II SEWA.RDAVE Y imp L _ f _ { 200 N 200 N 1.4.. , ' J ' ACKSONAV ' Ei , v • . 1i # , r I , u� - fW xl I . ; 1 j.At , ' ' !:Iit, 7 .. Z NORTH;TEMPLE ST .__.. ,--. v-3 r . ram-7-� .. ,,,,, ..,, , , I , k fp ' .1,` , { .—; ' �:s '1. r f, Vicinity Map . Planning Commission Staff Report 644 W North Temple St Petitions 400-06-06 1 Master Plan and Zoning Amendment PROPOSED USE(S): Development of a 74 unit residential condominium project. SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS: North SR-1 Single Family/Duplex South GMU Gateway Mixed Use East SR-1 Single Family/Duplex West SR-1 west of I-15 SURROUNDING LAND USES: North Single family, duplex, 3-4 unit apartments South High density apartments West Interstate 15 and low density residential East Single family, duplex, apartment and commercial APPLICABLE LAND USE REGULATIONS: 21A.50.050 Standards for general amendments. Utah Code 10-9a-404 General Plan amendment MASTER PLAN SPECIFICATIONS: The Capitol Hill Community Master Plan designates the subject property for low density residential and commercial land uses. ACCESS: The subject parcel fronts on North Temple Street. PROJECT DISCRIPTION: Applicant is requesting master plan amendment and zoning classification amendment to accommodate the development of a condominium project with three stories of dwelling units on top of one level of parking on a vacant parcel. COMMENTS, ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS: COMMENTS City Department Comments. Transportation - The Transportation Division reviewed the petition proposal and recommended approval based on the following. North Temple is an arterial roadway and needs to be reviewed for access approvals by the Utah Department of Transportation. Planning Commission Staff Report 644 W North Temple St Petitions 400-06-06 2 Master Plan and Zoning Amendment We require that the existing public way be reviewed for improvements upgrades as required per engineering, along with street lighting upgrades per the City's lighting master plan. The site development requires standard plan review per city compliance. The plan submitted indicates 120 stalls required and notes 138 provided, but the parking layout only shows 136 stalls. One of the (5) ADA stalls needs to be revised for van accessible use which will reduce the number to 135 stalls. The gated entry needs to indicate a 17.5 foot setback from the back of walk for vehicle staging not to impact the pedestrian sidewalk. Final approvals are subject to full plan set reviews. Public Utilities - The Public Utilities Department reviewed the proposed request for zoning and plan amendment and provided the following comments related to the construction of the proposed residential development. The Department's detailed responses are located in Exhibit 3 Department Comments. • All design and construction must conform to State, County, City and Public Utilities standards and ordinances. • Use of the existing sewer laterals and water services are subject to the condition and capacity of each. • A Master Grading and Drainage Plan must be submitted for this development. The development will be required to provide on-site detention of the storm water. • High groundwater is typical in this area. If below grade buildings or structures are proposed, a stamped geotechnical report identifying the highest expected groundwater must be submitted to Public Utilities for review and approval. Fire Department—The Fire Department has no objection to the zoning change request. Site plan approval for development (fire hydrant number and location, fire access roads)will require review and approval by the Fire Department prior to building permit issuance. The footprint of the building and access as shown on the preliminary drawing shows inadequate access for fire apparatus. Police Department—The Police Department identified that this property has been an area of concern for residents for many years now. This project would be a positive addition to the neighborhood and a good use of that space. However, steps should be taken to implement as many "crime prevention" strategies as possible. Police services have already increased to that area due to another multi-unit project. Building and Permits Department—The Permits Department had the following comments regarding the petition request. The RMF-45 zone requires 10 feet of landscaped buffer along single or two family districts that abut the property. This property abuts an SR-1 zone to the north and east, therefore the project will need to provide the landscape buffer. The submitted site plan shows a 10' setback and some trees but does not well define the buffer area or the plantings. Also, it appears that some playground equipment may encroach into the buffer area. Planning Commission Staff Report 644 W North Temple St Petitions 400-06-06 3 Master Plan and Zoning Amendment Engineering Department—The key Salt Lake City Engineering Department review comments are summarized below, the full detailed comments are shown in Exhibit 3 Department Comments. • Salt Lake City Engineering has no objection to the proposed rezone. ■ Curb, gutter and sidewalk exist in North Temple along the frontage of the proposed development. Since North Temple is a State road, UDOT controls the access onto it. The applicant must obtain approval from UDOT for the proposed drive approach. • A certified address is required prior to applying for a building permit. Community Council Comments The proposed development was presented to the Fairpark Community Council on March 23 and April 27 of 2006. Issues raised related to the impact on traffic on North Temple Street and impacts on adjacent properties. The applicant addressed the traffic impact issues related to traffic being able to transition onto the property without creating conflicts with North Temple traffic movement. The applicant modified the site plan showing a visitor parking lot at the front portion of the parcel and has located the vehicle access gate to the remainder of the property well back from the North Temple Street front. Another concern was the impact on adjacent properties if the zoning is changed to allow 45 foot high buildings adjacent to single family residential uses. After discussion of the issues, the Community Council voted not to support the requested zoning change 11-7 for the proposed condominium project. Those in favor of the plan saw an upscale economic boost to the area, while those opposed, felt it was too dense of a population for the lot size, did not like having such a tall building go in right next to them and worried about who it might bring into the neighborhood. It was recommended by adjacent residents that higher density should be placed on the commercial zoned portion of the property and lower density on the SR-3 back portion of the parcel. Other Public Comments -The Planning Division received comments on the proposed rezoning amendment petition. These responses are in opposition to the proposal and are included in Exhibit 5 —Other Public Comments. Planning Commission Staff Report 644 W North Temple St Petitions 400-06-06 4 Master Plan and Zoning Amendment ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ZONING AMENDMENT Section 21A.50.050 Standards for General Amendments. A. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the adopted general plan of Salt Lake City. Discussion: The Capitol Hill Master Plan's Future Land Use Map designates the subject property for commercial and low density residential land use. The site is located in the Guadalupe Neighborhood. The Capitol Hill Community Master Plan states that over the past several decades, Guadalupe has become less desirable as a low density residential neighborhood due to a high concentration of rental units and neglected properties in combination with, and partially due to, the isolation and noise impacts associated with the transportation corridors which surround it. Several adjacent policy plans and actions affect the surrounding neighborhood and have potential impact on the subject parcel. Particular policy issues related to North Temple Street and adjacent areas are identified below: • The Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan identifies North Temple Street as a major arterial (State roadway) and future transit corridor. • The Gateway Mater Plan has identified commercial and residential land uses along the south side of North Temple Street between Interstate -15 and 300 West Street. • The Northwest Community Master Plan identifies as an implementation strategy to develop a plan for the North Temple Street corridor. • The Salt Lake City Community Housing Plan goal is to enhance,maintain and sustain a livable community that includes a vibrant downtown integrated with surrounding neighborhoods that offer a wide range of housing choices, mixed uses, and transit oriented design. The Salt Lake City Housing Plan further identifies City Council policy statements supporting transit oriented development and design through the provision of: i. Housing densities and mixed uses that support the use of alternative and public transportation, depending on the characteristics of each area. ii. Appropriate housing densities in areas where public transit and local services are conveniently available or can be provided and area accessible on foot. iii. Reinvestment in existing urban and inner suburban areas. During the development of the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan the property was used as a staging area for the reconstruction of Interstate 15. The Utah Department of Transportation acquired the property for interstate widening purposes. It was unknown at Planning Commission Staff Report 644 W North Temple St Petitions 400-06-06 5 Master Plan and Zoning Amendment that time how much of the property would be used for freeway purposes. The use of the property before it was acquired by UDOT was for commercial use, a motel. The Future Land Use Plan for the area depicted transportation land use, commercial land use along the North Temple Street frontage and interior block residential land use. Findings: Although the proposed amendment is not consistent with the future land use map and amendment to the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan to a medium density land use designation would be required. The proposed amendment supports the provision of housing opportunity that is consistent with policies of the Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan and the Salt Lake City Community Housing Plan with respect to the North Temple transit corridor. B. Whether the proposed amendment is harmonious with the overall character of existing development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Discussion: Previous use of the property was for commercial use. A motel occupied the site until the property was acquired for reconstruction of Interstate 15. The subject parcel is the remainder of the original parcel acquired by Utah Department of Transportation. The overall character of the area contains a variety of land uses ranging from single family residential uses to commercial land uses. Immediately east of the subject parcel are commercial uses on the North Temple Street frontage and low density residential uses to the east. Single family and duplex residential uses are located to the north. The development character south of the subject property is high density residential and a mix of nonresidential uses. West of Interstate 15 the street front uses on North Temple are commercial uses. A policy of the master plan for infill development within the Guadalupe Neighborhood is to require that new development be compatible in scale, design, site configuration and character within the historical development patterns present in Guadalupe, to strengthen the stability of the neighborhood. Findings: With appropriate setbacks the proposed development will be compatible in scale and character of the neighborhood. The proposed development plan is harmonious with the overall character of existing development. The proposed amendment is harmonious with the land use character desired along a major arterial and transit corridor. C. The extent to which the proposed amendment will adversely affect adjacent properties. Discussion: Adjacent low density residential properties are impacted by structures with additional building height. The existing zoning has a 30 foot building height while the requested zoning allows a 45 foot building height. Impacts from additional building height can also be affected by setback standards. The SR-3 Zoning District allows a 4- foot interior side yard and the RMF-45 allows an 8-foot interior side yard. The rear yard Planning Commission Staff Report 644 W North Temple St Petitions 400-06-06 6 Master Plan and Zoning Amendment setback requirement is the same for both zoning district. The rear yard setback for the property would be 30 foot. It is recommended by the staff, that the preliminary condominium approval of the proposed development be reviewed by the Planning Commission with specific consideration of adequate building setbacks from adjacent low density properties and development. Findings: With appropriate design and site configuration of development on the subject property to meet RMF-45 landscape buffer requirements and setback standrds, the proposed amendment will not adversely affect adjacent properties. D. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts,which may impose additional standards. Discussion: The subject property is not within any overlay district boundaries. Findings: This standard does not apply to the subject site. E. The adequacy of public facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, including but not limited to roadways, parks and recreational facilities, police and fire protection, schools, storm water drainage systems, water supplies, and waste water and refuse collection. Discussion: Applicable City Departments were requested to review and comment on the proposed amendments and identify whether existing facilities and services are adequate to accommodate the development associated with the proposed amendments. The Public Utilities Department stated that a high groundwater is typical in this area. If below grade buildings or structures are proposed, a stamped geotechnical report identifying the highest expected groundwater must be submitted to Public Utilities for review and approval. The Police Department identified that this property has been an area of concern for residents for many years now. This project would be a positive addition to the neighborhood and a good use of that space. However, steps should be taken to implement as many"crime prevention" strategies in the design of the structure and site configuration as possible to minimize potential needs for increased Police Services. The Transportation Division reviewed the traffic data identifying additional trips generated and that the property has direct access to an arterial street. The Division recommended approval. Findings: The public facility services and utilities are in place to serve the subject parcel. If specific development demands exceed service capacity, then the developer would be Planning Commission Staff Report 644 W North Temple St Petitions 400-06-06 7 Master Plan and Zoning Amendment required to make system improvements as part of obtaining a building permit. The adjacent arterial streets can absorb the traffic generated by the proposed uses. MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT Discussion: The Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use map designates the property for commercial and low density residential uses. Land use designations in master plans identify the City's policy for future land uses. To accommodate the proposed development requires amending the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan land use designation for the subject property for medium density residential land uses. The Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan identifies North Temple Street as a major arterial (State roadway) and future transit corridor. The Salt Lake City Community Housing Plan goal is to enhance, maintain and sustain a livable community that includes a vibrant downtown integrated with surrounding neighborhoods that offer a wide range of housing choices, mixed uses, and transit oriented design. The Salt Lake City Housing Plan further identifies City Council policy statements supporting transit oriented development and design through the provision of housing densities and mixed uses that support the use of alternative and public transportation, depending on the characteristics of each area. In the mid 1990's a concerted effort was made by the City to ensure that new multifamily development be located on major arterials on the edges of neighborhoods rather than within low density neighborhoods. In addition, light rail is slated to be developed along North Temple Street. Therefore, development of this property, which was once commercial development as medium high density residential land use is appropriate. Findings: Amendment of the Capitol Hill Master Plan Future Land Use map for the subject property supports the Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan by providing for the accommodation of higher residential density along the North Temple transit corridor and supports the Salt Lake City Community Housing Plan policy regarding transit oriented development. Amendment of the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map from commercial and low density residential to medium density residential does not detract from the desirability of maintaining the Guadalupe neighborhood as a low density residential community. Notice Requirement. A notice for the Master Plan amendment was published in the Salt Lake City Tribune and Deseret News on May 31, 2006 meeting State Law requirements for Master Plan amendments. Planning Commission Staff Report 644 W North Temple St Petitions 400-06-06 8 Master Plan and Zoning Amendment RECOMMENDATION: Based on the findings of fact, staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to the City Council to approve the request of Petition 400-06-06, to amend the Capitol Hill Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map for medium density residential land uses and rezone the property from CC and SR-3 to an RMF-45 zoning classification Exhibits Exhibit 1: Site Plan Exhibit 2: Elevations Exhibit 3: Department Comments Exhibit 4: Community Council Comments Exhibit 5: Other Public Comments Planning Commission Staff Report 644 W North Temple St Petitions 400-06-06 9 Master Plan and Zoning Amendment Exhibit 1 Site Plan ass L =o e 2 00 1m$ ZU v WZ t a ' Ca n 31dN31 NLHON o AM 40 ow...,,,,, , r*-- -* jek.. 'IrA-.1111111111111� II I: �:. I•IIIIIIC//r I — I ,, I Ilk 1 I j I —L_____L-_i1— •1 I 1 if itgl , • ...._ ,, . 0-- - - ' I _ I 1 F 6 MI=Iir —- 0 .. a . {1 1 I I-! ,�. 1111111111 , r �` i.loll%' ��.� 1 1 i if j Iii; II 1 Iiy�•�•, at/ a ; ; , I �i mkt '::: 4614 1111 .-<--II 'il 1 ' :- i i f _.---.,c9 t Milo. iti. ®® t b C ��o! - - --- . n a I Lm '' l J II. e I � i� I , IN I I I 0 IL si 1si•• - omiwa,g�M- • LO•.—I Q . ., a A., Exhibit 2 Elevations IIIMMMINIIMIIIIIIIIIIMID. rib iamb luilliri rill111111 o' rz-- .,s 1 1---r,....---,___ .....-, 'ft'•-f • ; , :7i Ili! 0 _ ,1 , • int I)t { , I I , . . .- w _ ir__•-•=_.— ___. 1 . ,i 1 ..1 /i , r I , f I — _ . I 0 . . \... . . .. . .._ 1 I i I 4 1......,_....1 '41 .1-- is• .,. '• _ i 7 I ,--4- •' ' : I,-'1..T1,---1-:-7 -7.-- ,----4. .,----1:ti:t. , t•-,-:/- 0 i if ; - - ----1 Ifiq__ -e- rg, ti ii 4, ,. .._,._.._ 6. '= it, /1-----------1.;----- II Ilf ii/ . 1 :------.7r7=7.01. iil v i ktiA Q. if 442A,t • L " 4- 1 • • . . , LI i . : 1, _ . :i b • • 40 6 •• It, , ' '1I owt-r "If# I • i# • Sti • • • Exhibit 3 Department Comments Page 1 of 1 Joyce, Everett From: Walsh, Barry Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 5:31 PM To: Joyce, Everett Cc: Young, Kevin; Smith, Craig; Butcher, Larry; Larson, Bradley; Stewart, Brad Subject: Pet 400-06-06 Categories: Program/Policy March 8, 2006 Everett Joyce, Planning Re: Petition 400-06-06, By 639 North Temple LLC —request to rezone a parcel at 644 West North Temple Street for development of the North Temple Condominiums. The transportation division review comments and recommendations are for approval of the proposed zone change for a 66 unit condo. North Temple is an arterial roadway and needs to be reviewed for access approvals by UDOT. We require that the existing public way be reviewed for improvements upgrades as required per engineering, along with street lighting up grades per the City's lighting master plan compliance. The site development requires standards plan review per city compliance. The plan submitted indicates 120 stalls required and notes 138 provided, but the parking layout only shows 136 stalls. One of the (5) ADA stalls needs to be revised for van accessible use which will reduce the number to 135 stalls. The gated entry needs to indicate a 17.5 foot setback from the back of walk for vehicle staging not to impact the pedestrian sidewalk. Final approvals are subject to full plan set reviews. Sincerely, Barry Walsh Cc Kevin Young, P.E. Craig Smith, Engineering Larry Butcher, Permits Brad Larson, Fire Brad Stewart, Utilities File 5/25/2006 Page 1 of 1 Joyce, Everett From: Larson, Bradley Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 2:26 PM To: Joyce, Everett Subject: Petition#400-06-06/639 North Temple LLC Everett, The Fire Department has no objections to the above named Petition in general. However, the footprint of the building and access as shown on the proposed preliminary drawing presents inadequate access for fire apparatus. The petitioners may call or meet with me to discuss solutions prior to final submittal for a building permit. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions or need further assistance. Brad Larson Deputy Fire Marshal Salt Lake City Fire Deptartment 801-799-4162 office 801-550-0147 bradley.larson@slcgov.com 5/25/2006 TO: EVERETT JOYCE, PLANNING FROM: SCOTT WEILER, P.E., ENGINEERING DATE: MARCH 13, 2006 SUBJECT: Rezone for the North Temple Condominiums Petition #400-06-06 639 W. North Temple SLC Engineering's review comments are as follows: 1. SLC Engineering has no objection to the proposed rezone. 2. Curb, gutter and sidewalk exist in North Temple along the frontage of the proposed development. Since North Temple is a State road, UDOT controls the access onto it. The applicant must obtain approval from UDOT for the proposed drive approach. 3. The developer must enter into a subdivision improvement construction agreement. This agreement requires the payment of a 5% fee based on the estimated cost of constructing the street/driveway improvements. A copy of the agreement is available in my office. The developer should contact Joel Harrison(535-6234)to discuss insurance requirements for the project. 4. Improvement plans will be required for the private driveway. A standard SLC Subdivision cover sheet is required on the plans. The following approval signatures are required on the cover sheet: SLC Transportation for approval of street geometrics. SLC Fire Department SLC Public Utility Department(sewer, water& drainage improvements) SLC Engineering Division(street design) SLC Planning Department Mylar drawings must be submitted by the developer to each of these SLC divisions for signature approval. 5. A certified address is required prior to applying for a building permit. cc: Brad Stewart Barry Walsh Vault Page 1 of 2 Joyce, Everett From: Brown, Jason Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 11:26 AM To: Joyce, Everett Cc: Garcia, Peggy; Niermeyer, Jeff Subject: Petition #400-06-06 to rezone a parcel at 644 West North Temple for North Temple Condominiums Categories: Program/Policy Dear Joyce, Salt Lake City Public Utilities has reviewed the above referenced Zoning Map Amendment application request and offers the following comments: All design and construction must conform to State, County, City and Public Utilities standards and ordinances. Design and construction must conform to Salt Lake City Public Utilities General Notes. A master meter and sewer utility plan must be submitted for this development. The plan must show all proposed pipe routings. Sizes, types, boxes, meters, detector checks, fire lines and hydrant locations. Culinary and fire connection must be separate connections at the main. The engineer must provide calculations for expected peak sewer flows from this development. With this information Public Utilities will verify if the sanitary sewer system downstream for this development can handle these additional flows. If not, the developer will be responsible to provide offsite improvements as necessary to accommodate these additional flows. All offsite improvements must be approved by Salt Lake City Traffic and Engineering. For all culinary services larger than 3-inches, the water meter size must be justified by submitting AV VVA M- 22 method calculations or by an approved equivalent method. Numerous water services are currently connected to this property. Only one of these services may be used as and irrigations service. All other services must be killed at the main per Salt Lake Public Utilities requirements. Use of the existing sewer laterals and water services are subject to the condition and capacity of each. If they are not used, it is the responsibility of the developer to insure that a licensed and bonded plumbing contractor disconnect each water service at the main line and cap each sewer lateral at the property line. All of the above-mentioned work must be inspected and approved by Public Utilities. A Master Grading and Drainage Plan must be submitted for this development. Storm water flows are not allowed to sheet flow onto adjacent lots. The development will be required to provide on-site detention of the storm water. All detention must be above the highest expected groundwater for this site or one foot above the top of the existing 84-inch storm drain in North Temple. High groundwater is typical in this area. If below grade buildings or structures are proposed, a stamped geotechnical report identifying the highest expected groundwater must be submitted to Public Utilities for review and approval. This assessment must be based upon historical well records, borings, etc. All finished floor elevations must be above the highest groundwater 4/20/2006 Page 2 of 2 elevation. Fire Department approval will be required. Fire flow requirements, hydrant spacing and access issues will need to be resolved with the Fire Department. All existing easements must be provided before final plat recordation. If a sewer lateral or a water lateral service crosses through an adjacent property, an easement for that utility must be provided. All sewer, water and storm drain connection agreements must be completed and fees paid in full prior to any approvals from our Department. A $343 per quarter acre drainage impact fee will be accessed for any new impervious surface added to this property. If offsite improvements are required, all construction must be bonded by the developer. Please call Peggy Garcia or myself if you have any questions. Jason Brown, PE Development review Salt Lake City Pubic Utilities (801) 483-6727 4/20/2006 Page 1 of 1 Joyce, Everett From: Johnson, Linda Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 4:01 PM To: Joyce, Everett Subject: Petition Number 400-06-06"North Temple Condominiums" Categories: Program/Policy Hi Everett, I'm sorry that this is a day late. I have been off work due to surgery, and I have been trying to get caught up with all the work that has accumulated in my absence! I reviewed the proposal for the rezone of this property for the intended condominium project. I know that this property has been an area of concern for residents for many years now. I think that this project would be a positive addition to the neighborhood and a good use of that space. However, steps should be taken to implement as many "crime prevention"strategies as possible. Police services have already increased to that area due to another multi-unit project. Has, or will this proposal be presented at the Fairpark(or Capitol Hill) Community Council? I know the Fairpark community is very vocal about some of the "new additions"to that particular area of North Temple. 3/19/2006 Exhibit 4 Community Council Comments Page 1 of 1 Joyce, Everett From: vickyorme@utah-inter.net Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 10:15 PM To: Joyce, Everett Subject: 639 West North Temple I am the Chair of the Fairpark community council. Mike Embley and others from the proposed development on North Temple came to our community council meeting in April to present the planned 74 unit development at 650 West and North Temple. After seeing the plans and much discussion, a vote was taken in which the zoning change necessary to allow such development was voted down 11-7. Those in favor of the plan saw an upscale economic boost to the area, while those opposed, which included those who lived directly to the North and East of the development, felt it was too dense of population for the lot size, did not like having such a tall building go in right next to them, and worried about who it might bring into the neighborhood. The development is for the North side of North Temple, and I think, therefore that it must end in an even number, so I put 650 W for an example. It may not be the exact address, but is between the I-15 freeway and the plasma center. Victoria Orme, Chair, FPCC 801 706- 8691 If you have any questions please feel free to ask. VO 6/6/2006 Exhibit 5 Other Public Comments To: Salt Lake City Planning Commission & City Council From: Jon Robinson Home Owner at 129 North 600 West RE: Developers request to up-zone the old Se Rancho Motel site at 640 West North Temple. Commission and Council members: I am writing this letter in opposition of the rezoning of the property referenced above. The property in question is currently zoned CC along the North Temple frontage with the balance being SR-3. My opposition is with the SR-3 being up-zoned to RMF-45. When the Capital Hill Master Plan was created a few years ago one of its goals was to maintain the Guadalupe neighborhood as a quiet, low density, owner occupied neighborhood. Most of the properties in the area were actually down-zoned to meet this goal. My property was down-zoned from R6 to SR-1. I believe all of the property on my block is now SR-1 except the CC along North Temple and this site, which is SR-3. I think it is contrary to the intent of the Master Plan to allow this property to be up-zoned. The existing SR-3 is already higher than the adjoining residential properties. The Planning Commission recently approved zoning changes to limit "Monster" homes in my neighborhood. It seems contradictory to do this but then allow other property in the neighborhood to be up-zoned to allow large, high density housing. I don't fault the developers wanting to maximize their profit on this development, that's their business. But I don't think it's fair for the neighbors/neighborhood to bear the burden of having an excessively large condo project in our backyards to facilitate that goal. This property was SR-3 when they purchased it and should be developed under that zoning. There is current planning underway to build 300 to 1000 residential units within 1 block of this project. Those developments would not take any zoning changes. I don't believe we need to specifically up-zone this property to add even more residential density to the Guadalupe neighborhood. The specific design of the 70+ condos is even more questionable. They have aligned the buildings along the eastern edge of their property, which is the closest to the SR-1 property. If the buildings were moved to the west, with their parking lot on the east side, this would at least provide a buffer for the SR-1 neighbors. Thank your consideration, Jon Robinson Page 1 01 1 Joyce, Everett From: Maria Garciaz [maria©slnhs.org] Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 5:13 PM To: Joyce, Everett Subject: Petition 400-06-08 Hi Everett, hope all is well, Regarding Petition 400-06-06, 639 West North Temple to amend from SR3 to RMF 45. NHS attended the Fairpark community council where the proposed development was presented to the community. NHS certainly supports owner occupied housing and excited that the vacant land will be developed, but we are concerned with the density specific to the surrounding residential area that is R2. I believe it is important that Planning Department take into consideration the comments by the residents adjacent to the proposed development. Their recommendations were higher density on the commercial zoned property and lower density on the SR3. Citifront Phase II will build 300 units of condos and Richard Miles (developer) is proposing an additional 500 units on the pallet property. NHS is proposing 66 units of multifamily senior on the demolished senior center. Given all the proposed multifamily we are reconsidering redesigning the senior development for lower density/owner occupied town homes for seniors and NHS would take a substantial loss on the development because of land costs. No one ever wants to take a loss on development and we seldom do, but we also realize that all the multifamily development being built over the next five years will have high traffic impact in Guadalupe and North Temple. Please call me if you have any questions. Thanks Maria Garciaz Executive Director Salt Lake Neighborhood Housing Services 622 West 500 North SLC, Utah 84116 801..539.1590 ext 102 MISSION:Salt Lake Neighborhood Dousing Services (NHS) builds on the strengths of neighborhoods, creating opportunities through housing; resident leadership, youth and economic development. We work in partnership with our residents,government and business to build and sustain neighborhoods of choice. www.slnlrs.org 6/6/2006 Exhibit 4v Additional Information Submitted to Planning Commission Revised Site Plan Vi\ r'-`•--- '... ; I < , .: ,...... , , 1 - I i kli - ,...) c.., o 2 •, f.i 1 " 1 - - b .,,E 2 i .., , S. .c! /-\ , „;,,,';''', 5 14 ct Z i 41 , o 0 cp 14 \... 2 ' 'e,.,! f" '4,-0 g ?i Z c•-' t ci ': A c r) ,, 5 .-'Y 1101""n ' ' 404 4,,,k, -, • _ 1.,, t, ,7),,:if'', --,-4,--0-,'•,..-v-•"''' Sr ' 4 • •,,,....,iw-,,,,,,,-----.^Jt'""'' , 'Or f, 1-64 , :7!,,,., 1 '1 i% ' •st is ',..' ;ill 4! ,111A%tioli ,IfFigt 4 t 46 4 _,, 4,i1 4.11 4 I. . t — sia` 147 I 4 lo N Al - .ri s. 4' / ,kk . •• • 4 i,'.., , - • _ # 'L'444' ,141 1; ' >"' 's,' ,-•,-.., J.1.,,,.,,,,J„. '_f.': i3r- it: rip 4 ifr ,,_pv, i,-,, ii' r ,. ' ; *••,;‘ i'''' •Ait, .i lila ':i 10 0 '''''t ' ''.!..[ ', = 4 1 4''t av--- it#S•' 'it•-.40 .t.'4''' ' 7''' ittil ,t2F--. ,...,. 4, oti ••,; ., ,•4"' • i. , ..arfr. 4 ',1 r ^ '•,. -- ,,,,,c, . ib; , , leA 1 7 • ' „ '1 tS.,,i Si ,, ,'"• e'll '4g:' l•-i '`. '' ' .,•'''‘,4 4 .;,"", ..4`"•• t•itti '. }4, ,'"' ,,,..,. ; i 't: • k ' ,. '''5'''' ''44'' i V•it. •,•4''' - " 1 ,, , ' ' -4 t II - V - / e ,ow/71. Ai! , '. , . •4 ,',,1 t':tii. a„,,.- , . '', ;.••. - ', ' q 4) ,' ,1 , . , I - , , .4' . ;:" ' ,-,1 ! S\*7*7 IC ' '." )1:0-'4' SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: September 12,2006 SUBJECT: Petition No. 400-05-38-Initiated by the Salt Lake City Mayor to approve an Ordinance Adopting Title 18,Chapter 95 of the Salt Lake City Code requiring Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design(LEED)Compliance and Certification for City-funded building projects of 10,000 square feet or larger STAFF REPORT BY: Jennifer Bruno,Policy Analyst AFFECTED COUNCIL DISTRICTS: City-wide ADMINISTRATIVE DEPT: Mayor's Office AND CONTACT PERSON: Orion Goff,City Building Official NOTICE REQUIREMENTS: Newspaper advertisement and written notification to surrounding property owners 14 days prior to the Public Hearing FOLLOW-UP ITEMS The Council discussed the proposed ordinance at the September 7,2006 work session.The following items were raised by the Council that could potentially alter the language of the ordinance and/or affect the policy direction for the City in conjunction with the proposed ordinance: 1. Consider removing the RDA and Library Fund exemption,requesting that they also comply with the proposed ordinance. 2. Consider eliminating the creation of the High Performance Building Board,and specify that an existing City board would address LEED issues. • Note:In the work session discussion,Administrative staff indicated that they have had preliminary discussion with the Board of Appeals and Examiners,which contains architects and construction professionals and meets a couple of times per year,and that this board is willing to act in the capacity that the ordinance sets forth for the High Performance Building Board. 3. Consider adding specific time or construction cost thresholds for exemption/waiver factors • Note:Administrative staff communicated that the Attorney's office advised against specific time/percentage thresholds due to the varying scopes of projects. • Council Staff suggested specific thresholds (can be altered) > Construction cost threshold-costs increase by 30% > Time delay threshold-construction is delayed by 6 months 4. Consider reducing/altering the$10,000 deposit requirement for non-profit developers 5. Establish LEED incentives for non-City-funded projects 6. Establish LEED incentives for residential construction-make it a priority to be adopted before the master plan for the Northwest Quadrant 7. Establish an effective date-considering current projects that may have already been through the design process Council Staff recommends that the Council review and straw poll the above items so that alterations can be made to the ordinance,if necessary. 1 The following information was provided previously for the Council Work Session on September 7,2006. It is provided again for your reference. KEY ELEMENTS: A. The Administration's transmittal contains an ordinance for Council consideration to amend the Zoning Ordinance to require certain City-funded building projects to comply with and be certified within the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design(LEED) rating system prepared by the United Stated Green Building Council (USGBC). B. The stated purpose of the proposed ordinance"...is to promote development consistent with sound environmental practices..." The proposed ordinance: 1. Requires all commercial or multi-family residential buildings,new construction or major renovation, that receive City funds, that are more than 10,000 square feet to be designated as "Certified" according to the USGBC's LEED standards. 2. Requires all municipal buildings,new construction or major renovation, to be designated "Silver" according to the USGBC's LEED standards. • "Major Renovation" is defined as affecting more than 25% of a building's square footage,and/or demolishing the space down to the shell of the structure. 3. Excludes Library and Redevelopment Agency-funded projects from the"Applicable building project" definition. Projects funded by the Library or the Redevelopment Agency are not subject to the proposed ordinance. 4. Creates a "High Performance Building Board" consisting of five members,appointed by advice of the Mayor and consent by the Council, serving two years each,that will hear appeals and approve exceptions or findings of"substantial compliance." Each member shall either be a LEED certified professional,or shall have substantial knowledge of other,related fields. 5. Creates the following"outs" for a City-funded project-the Building Official (Director of the Building Services Division or designee),and either the Chief Procurement Officer or the City Engineer jointly determine,in writing, that any of the following circumstances exist: a) The project will serve a specialized,limited function(such as a pump station, garage,storage building,equipment area,etc); b) The project is intended to be"temporary" (defined in the ordinance as intended to be in existence for 5 years or less, or any existing building that was,at the time of construction,intended to be in existence for 5 years or less); c) The useful life of the project or other factors do not justify whatever additional expense would be incurred to increase the long-term efficiency; d) The application of LEED standard factors will increase construction costs beyond the funding capacity for the project, or will require that the project's scope of work or programmatic needs be diminished to meet budget constraints; e) The use of LEED standard factors will create an impediment to construction because of conflicts of laws,building code requirements, federal or state grant funding requirements, or other similar requirements; 2 f) LEED factors are not reasonably attainable due to the nature of facilities or the schedule for construction; g) LEED certification will violate any other federal,state or local‘416.0‘ 6. Provides for an appeal of the Building Official's decision to not grant an exception. An applicant may submit an appeal in writing to the board within 30 days of the Building Official's written determinations. 7. Provides for the option of a waiver (similar to an exception). The High Performance Building Board will have the authority to grant a waiver from the proposed LEED requirements, to any project if it makes any of the following findings in writing: a) Literal enforcement of the requirements will create an unnecessary hardship for the applicant that is not necessary to carry out the general purpose of the ordinance; b) There are special circumstances attached to the project that do not generally apply to other projects subject to this chapter; c) The waiver would not have a substantially negative affect on the Master Plans,policies,and resolutions of the City; d) Any asserted economic hardship is not self-imposed; e) The spirit of the ordinance will be observed. 8. Allows for the High Performance Building Board's decisions to be appealed,in writing, to the Mayor or the Mayor's designee,within 30 days of the decision. 9. Requires that all private sector developers who receive City funds for these applicable building projects submit a$10,000"good faith" deposit to the City,to be refunded upon the building project receiving the applicable level of LEED certification. 10. Requires that within 30 days from receiving notice that the City will fund an applicable building project,the private sector developer will submit written proof that said project is registered with the USGBC. City funds will not be dispersed until the required deposit and proof of registration are received by the City. (Council Staff note:Basic project information is needed to complete the USGBC registration process, but not detailed building plans. There is a$600 non-refundable charge for registration-$450 for members of the USGBC. Salt Lake City Corporation is currently a member of the USGBC. Please see attached LEED Registration form for further details on what kind of information is required). 11. Provides for an option if the USGBC does not issue the certified level required for this chapter. A private sector developer may request that the City issue a determination of"substantial compliance." The Building Official,and either the Chief Procurement Officer or the City Engineer must jointly determine that the developer has established the following: a) That reasonable, appropriate, and on-going efforts to comply with this chapter were taken; b) That compliance would otherwise have been obtained but for the practical or economic infeasibility of the LEED standards or construction techniques; • The ordinance notes that cost increases due solely to aesthetic elements shall not constitute"unreasonable burden." 12. Provides that if a private sector developer does not receive the required LEED certification,and does not receive the finding of"substantial compliance" described above,the developer than forfeits their$10,000 good faith deposit,and may be assessed a penalty,up to the original amount loaned by the City. The penalty may `ti mo, be assessed based on a direct analysis of the 26 possible LEED design credits,on the following schedule: 3 Design credits the City determines the Percentage of original City project"could have reasonable received" funds to be paid back (up to) 21 -25 credits 25% 16-20 credits 50% 6-15 credits 75% 0-5 credits 100% 13. The ordinance is effective 90 days after the date of its publication. However the ordinance leaves the Council the option of filling in a"start date" for a defined "applicable building project." C. Key points from the Administration's transmittal are as follows: 1. The petition was initiated by Mayor Anderson following his signing of an Executive Order (issued July 8, 2005,amended January 19,2006) requiring that City-owned new buildings and major renovation projects be built using LEED standards. (Council Staff note: the original Executive Order required that City-owned buildings be built to the "Certified" standard. On January 19,2006,the Executive Order was amended to increase the requirement to the"Silver" standard). 2. The primary purpose is to ensure that projects utilizing City funds are built to high performance building standards with respect to energy,water,and material resource conservation. 3. The LEED rating system is a point-based certification process for high-performance, environmentally responsible building design and operation. Points are awarded by the USGBC,based on various factors, such as proximity to public transportation, energy efficiency, erosion control,building innovation and design,indoor environmental quality,reducing construction waste,water efficiency and use of recycled materials. The number of points awarded determine the level of LEED achieved, as follows: LEED Level Points Needed Certified 26-32 Silver 33-38 Gold 39-51 Platinum 52-69 4. There are separate LEED certification standards for new construction(LEED-NC), commercial interiors (LEED-CI), and existing building upgrades (LEED-EB). 5. As of May 2005,2,000 buildings have been registered with the USGBC for certification. An additional 216 buildings have completed certification and are rated as Platinum,Gold,Silver,or Certified. 6. The following are select LEED Certified or registered buildings in Utah: • Olympic Speed Skating Oval- Kearns (LEED,Certified) • OSHA Salt Lake Technical Center-Sandy (LEED,Silver) • Scowcroft Building-Ogden(LEED,Silver) • Big-D Construction corporate office-Salt Lake City (LEED,registered) • Intermodal Hub-Salt Lake City (LEED,registered) • Broadway Office Building-Salt Lake City (LEED,registered) 4 • University of Utah Health Sciences Education Building-Salt Lake City (LEED,registered) Sky, 7. Exhibit#2 in the Administration's Transmittal(in the Planning Commission's packet section),details the technical review of costs of LEED certification. It notes that upfront costs can vary depending on the project and the site(with some aspects achieved at no cost-solar orientation,south facing windows,etc). It also notes that the stage at which the LEED concepts are introduced into the design can drastically affect costs (if LEED is considered at the outset,re-design costs are minimized). "The Cost and Financial Benefits of Green Buildings:A Report to California's Sustainable Building Task Force" (Exhibit 3) issued in October 2003 provided a now nationally recognized cost analysis: Level of LEED Certification No. of Buildings Average Premium Platinum 1 6.50% Gold 6 1.82% Silver 18 2.11% Certified 8 0.66% Average 33 1.84% • Council Staff Note:in the recent discussions involving the costs of a proposed Public Safety Building,the consultants estimated a premium of 13% to build to a"Gold" Standard of LEED. Admittedly the consultants were cautious in their estimate,and have communicated to the Police Department that the premium will likely be much lower. No cost premium analysis has been done for other City buildings proposed in the next few years (Fleet Facility,Fire Stations,etc). • The Administration notes that in the case of the Intermodal Hub,which will eventually be a LEED Certified building,saves 20-25% per year in energy costs. The engineers of the Hub estimated a 10 year payback for the extra cost of construction using the LEED rating system. It should be noted that the Utah Transit Authority,pursuant to the recent Council decision,will be the owner/operator of the Intermodal Hub. D. The following chart shows the various costs,charged to a developer by the USGBC, associated with LEED project certification: Design Review Members $1,250.00 $0.025/Square Ft. $12,500.00 Non-Members $1,500.00 $0.03/Square Ft. $15,000.00 Construction Review Members $500.00 $0.01/Square Ft. $5,000.00 Non Members $750.00 $0.015/ I uare Ft. $7,500 00 Combined Design&Construction Review Members $1,750.00 $0.035/Square Ft. $17,500.00 `Ali Non-Members $2,250.00 $0.045/Square Ft. $22,500.00 5 Initial Certification Review Members $1,250.00 $0.025/Square Ft. $12,500.00 Non-Members $1,500.00 $0.030/Square Ft. $15,000.00 Source:www.usgbc.org E. City Departments and Divisions provided comments: 1. Building Services-identified the need for staff training in order to provide specialized plan reviews associated with LEED certification. 2. Management Services-would need to include the LEED certification fee and additional building costs as a line item. 3. Economic Development-small business owners applying for the Revolving Loan Fund would need to identify the benefits of LEED and would likely need assistance with the certification process. 4. Airport-The Department of Airports supports the general ordinance and the importance of sustainability,but encourages exceptions to allow for flexibility, should the situation arise that additional expense and time for construction are not in the best interest of the City. The Airport is concerned that LEED certification may be very difficult to obtain for airport buildings because of the unique nature of airports. The costs of certification seem to be prohibitive as well. Based on the Airport's current master plan,it would cost in excess of$40,000 in fees to the USGBC to pursue the certification process,and the upfront development costs would be$59 to$109 million more than the previously planned costs. The Airport contacted the project manager for the new Delta terminal and concourse in Boston,which was constructed with the sole intent of having a LEED"Certified" rating (and has received much national and international media attention as the first LEED certified airport terminal). As of July, the project manager indicated that they had still not received certifications, and because of the criteria are geared towards standard commercial buildings. Because the certification committee adheres to a strict interpretation of these criteria,it has been difficult to convey to them the unique aspects related to airport facilities. • Note: The Administration responded to the Airport's response, indicating that the USGBC is now working on guidelines specific to airport construction, and that will ideally address these concerns. 5. Fire-The Fire Department supports this ordinance and communicates that it will be a positive feature of the City. 6. Transportation-The Transportation Division supports the ordinance. 7. Public Services F. On November 16,2005 the petition was presented at an open house. 19 people attended, with limited representation from Community Councils and non-profit groups (the majority of attendees were architects and engineers). Twelve were in support of the ordinance,one inquired about alternatives, and six left no comments. G. The Planning Commission discussed the petition on two occasions. 1. On December 14, 2005,the Planning Commission voted unanimously to transmit a favorable recommendation with the following modifications: • Add a requirement for a$10,000 good faith deposit • Add standards for review of requests for exceptions • Determine whether exceptions should be decided and granted by the Procurement Officer or the Board 6 • Require City buildings to be"Silver" rather than"Certified" • Develop incentives for the private sector to obtain LEED certification,such as an expedited permitting process ___ a) Discussions included a desire to see incentives for the private sector to building LEED Certified buildings (expedited permitting),public education and awareness of LEED. 2. On January 25,2006,the Planning Commission discussed the Administration's revisions as a result of the original Commission meeting. The Administration included all of the above revisions with the exception of creating incentives for private sector developers to obtain LEED certification. • Staff clarified that incentives were not included as a part of the ordinance because of the comprehensive budget and staffing considerations that need to be addressed. Administration Staff notes in the transmittal memo to the City Council that this will be addressed as a separate but related issue. • The Planning Commission voted to forward a positive recommendation regarding the revised ordinance,but also voted to reaffirm that incentives for private sector LEED certification should be developed by the City. a) Discussions included concern that incentives for the private sector were not included as a part of the ordinance. b) The Planning Director informed the Planning Commission that an incentive program would be worked on,and the Commission would be informed of the City's progress. MATTERS AT ISSUE: A. The Council may wish to re-visit two of the factors that can be used as a justification for an exemption from the proposed ordinance (B.5.d and f,above,and re-listed below). While it is prudent for the City to give the option of exemption for developers facing funding or construction challenges, the language in the proposed ordinance is fairly vague. The Council may wish to ask the Administration if there is any more specific and objective way to judge these factors (possibly a percentage threshold-if construction costs increase beyond 25%,than the exemption is granted;or a time threshold-if construction would need to be delayed for more than 6 months to attain LEED certification,than the exemption is granted). It should be noted that Administrative Staff contacted the Attorney's Office regarding specific number thresholds. The Attorney's Office advised against specific numbers because projects vary so considerably. The following are the factors that the Council may wish to revisit,that can be used to grant an exemption: • The application of LEED standard factors will increase construction costs beyond the funding capacity for the project,or will require that the project's scope of work or programmatic needs be diminished to meet budget constraints; • LEED factors are not reasonably attainable due to the nature of facilities or the schedule for construction; B. The Council may wish to consider if and how the$10,000"good faith" deposit may negatively impact non-profit developers,who routinely seek City funding,and who generally do not have additional working capital available. The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration if the intent of the ordinance was to include non-profit developers as a "private sector" developer. 44110, C. The Council may wish to ask the administration if any financial analysis has been conducted to determine the additional costs/benefits to build the recently-approved new Fleet Facility, to Silver LEED standard. D. The Council may wish to revisit the policy basis for exempting Redevelopment Agency and Library Fund projects from the LEED Certification requirement. While there may need to be more specific exeritption procedures, due to the number and various scales of Redevelopment Agency projects, the Council may wish to ask that these be revisited. MASTER PLAN AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS: A. On May 8,2001, the Council adopted a Resolution entitled"Regarding Reducing the Demand for Electrical Power and other Forms of Energy." The resolution states: "NOW BE IT THERFORE RESOLVED, that it is the policy of the City Council that Salt Lake City Corporation should set an example to the residents and businesses it represents to conserve electrical power and other forms of energy. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council requests that the City Administration review its current policies and implement additional policies as necessary to conserve all forms of energy within its departments, divisions, and agencies,particularly during peak hours of energy use and to schedule an update for the City Council by July 1,2001." B. While no adopted City Master Plans address LEED certification specifically,the following details references to energy efficiency in the various plans: 1. East Bench Master Plan(1987) -"Advertise and support energy conservation techniques such as car-pooling,home insulation,site design,etc...Require energy efficiency in new and rehabilitated housing which employs public funds...Work with residents interested in constructing greenhouses,solar panels,and other energy efficiency systems." (p. 7) 2. Northwest Jordan River/Airport Master Plan (1992) -"Many energy saving techniques have been published in recent years identifying ways to improve energy efficiency,but they have not been widely applied to existing structures. The perceived cost/benefit for retrofitting for energy conservation limits its application. The City should investigate strategies supporting increased use of energy conservation techniques on a citywide basis...Energy conservation should be addressed comprehensively as a city-wide issue." (p. 8) 3. West Salt Lake Community Master Plan (1995) - "Provide for energy efficiency and conservation within the existing infrastructure of the community. Encourage energy efficiency improvements in existing structures;promote the use of energy conservation techniques in all new construction..." (p. 15) 4. Capitol Hill Master Plan(1999) - "Improve transportation circulation and encourage transportation alternatives that reduce vehicle emissions,such as mass transit, flexible work schedules,and telecommuting." (p. 22) 5. Sugar House Master Plan(2001) -"Reducing urban heat is of particular importance because of it affects the overall health,comfort and livability for citizens within every community. Urban heating has a direct affect on energy consumption, regional climate,air and water quality,storm water management and urban wildlife. Cool communities strategies should be incorporated into the design of new development wherever possible." (p. 65) 8 C. The Salt Lake City Vision and Strategic Plan states the following goal relating to the proposed amendment: "Develop'business friendly' licensing and regulatory practices." D. The City's 1990 Urban Design Element includes statements that emphasize preserving the City's image,neighborhood character and maintaining livability while being sensitive to social and economic realities. CHRONOLOGY: Please refer to the Administration's transmittal for a complete chronology of events relating to the proposed text amendment. • July 8,2005 Mayor issues Executive Order relating to City buildings. • October 17,2005 Petition received in the Community Development Dept. • November 16,2005 Open House • December 14,2005 Planning Commission public hearing • December 21,2005 Revised Ordinance request from the City Attorney • January 25,2006 Planning Commission considers revised ordinance • January 26,2006 Transmittal completed by project planner • April 27,2006 Transmittal received in Council Office cc: Rocky Fluhart,Sam Guevara,Lisa Romney, Rick Graham,Kevin Bergstrom,Tim Harpst, Louis Zunguze,LuAnn Clark, Alexander Ikefuna,Brent Wilde,Doug Wheelwright, Cheri Coffey,Kurt Larson,Val Pope, Barry Esham,Marge Harvey,Janice Jardine,Dave Oka,Valda Tarbet File Location:Community Development Dept.,Requiring LEED Compliance and Certification for City-funded building projects of 10,000 Square Feet or larger,Mayor initiated request 9 0 n C C/) :1"; O aL-14 n 4), r-t- E • erg � r N •eN • r5N CAa �: P K • a n 1-1 P I " n � O O -Z n n Z o ,--, C� O." � •-•• 0 clA Rt ;1)2_A IL 0 Ph cnCDCA ri, a O 0f? 17")-t '-c' rto Pn 2-1 ,P (1) . ri)" r-t-);L) • 0 eq• r+ 0 e-I(C5?) ' r- cr, 75 F c CD rt )-t n cip P P . 0 , ),-,--, • ri) 0- 4 E . ,_ , 2 • __: rq 5 . 5 . n � z C r^ �f C CD F� y eD t..14 n) 'I , t�I_ a FCD ly x* 1 J Ctilll y C UI '''`V Q s Y ',"-- -4.4 n ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, , ..,,,,,,,L,,,,,„ CDW ' # N �l O Ul C31 Cal ter; p p O 01 �" • O CD O O CD O O O O 0 Ind t.* -ER -Eft -Eft - } kn. jow • O O O� � O O O Off' W N rP W O •O N C O Ul Cal C31 cn \ \ ui 1 . \ \ \ \ \ Cfi Cl. _ Cn cn CD CD CD (7/, Cilli) rD CD O VI o rn " w ..d 4 k ice. • O O O p O O O 01 , 4 " O O O O O © O O O O -. 7 0 0 O CD O O fit, O O O O a 9 ... - • • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ r-f rPa' Cl- H n H P H H H ? O Q-' n a ,.� C0G a a . � n O O On P p o rt p r rrt rt .,_, CD0 k w (-I- -7:1 0\9 '-1-) a a, a a P .1. (7) )._, .S-__,). 7-.t,- c n 4. 0.,• n n O ' ' Cl an f-t L n rrt N icici C'D Mom+ " n r+ I n n a X o ,� rrt ►-*, P � CD Cr'�' �,, O �' Cr 41 a cp CD F , a 5 OF ‘' ri-, e-t- 0 a a 1 rD a r 1 a a P --1) R P • .-t P ra. (9 g r—I- a 1-t '' O CD �h n a ( a aP • O sy) B-: O n a n 0 rrt O -. P a a r-h r+ 1-t r-F cn - O Cr r-r P ° P O n � �' . i-hn CD n i-t O OQ n p O O 0 OPP n n n 5. ('-'D O rnri El; g • ■ ■ 0 a-, IT,L, oh ;‘, n) " rii n ;,, (-,2_, IF,' E 4 cl. ,..,'--&. 2-: c5) ,.... 5-gF ra.4 ,0 c ). Rt -i-",. l'-t' • ,A „ . - a a'71 a = � Cl) C) CI) a 7-t cAC) 1-c') 0 `4‘j (' -C.DD e9-: ° • *.0 E oo 5' o a iFi ;9, g 0-$.1 a ., r --, int r-F ,.., 0--4 y_,) '(-1 • Ci) 0 ad a (1) O'l e9 ca. eD (2 • p-: 2 a ,T,F )c7) . cfc? 2 r -a 'ill 0 -1,1-". E ?-1 ac? ra. R o t-t a cA r-F cr n r--113,2. ,,ria rD ,-, )-t CD . rD rli 1-14 cn :)--, cl) a . P 2-: Cp Cr 0 (-- g c-, (I) 4) 0 ac5?) )mrCt ri) , g 0 c., " R R p-t • . r-t- ,-, ,, . gyp , 0 n . Cl) . ors r•� r �--� 1-411 P ►- - Cfc 0 O ►-+, cp" R 0- x L i © ,,, 5L _.; i.--_-i 0 0 C) rmS LN OF N e ).., LJ,;' a . )-• O 0 \ • 0 0 • • n NI) ,c4 )-,;)& . c-.) c) O � n � O W � • O rt „, r+ g n fit• `i) ra' p 'j' • 0 0 q) % 0 --t-, ri, ..A P n t. i9 k. CT CDC) 11 671 n (19-' ?.D 0 )-t 0 m a: c4 P n 0 . Ll _) . n•• Cn tri o O O3 }-t ac? R) mot' a r-t- 1.%-' Z z g N- p a ra., C.) :I.) Ow 00 00 rn 1.-' C7 r+ � • a O ,-- i.... . (..) 1...L• aO r bq 4 r* 5 o P n O i Cl)!� O N.) ►-� 5 CM V/ Co N Oo CFI ► -• • 44 N N O Cl) P c o 0 0 0 � I P.) r P f-t- rli a ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ x )'h "' g•-, n � c) a `C N tot-) ' O* a a " gOO O CD n ► t , �„ . ,-dO' 5. z .-, r:.-t . ra. _, ":11.1 P. a R , gO , Q", a CD ~hH p. 0. n . o -.1 )thL 0 C4 ht �. )-t CI a ) O c r-t- a' n ' p� CD. ra '-+ n a. n PI: a Cin cog " n i ,-F,,, ,,, C g. creQ° PI r+ '- n (-p- i....) ci) O �. r'p Qa. a 0 a P O O Cl) a �-• O rt t-f CT' OrG �t -t `� p' P 51 p rrt ,, ° )-(g ,-1) "'-' al � cig o ' aa aHt a • • • ■ n rD n `71 Er" 0 EA 8 r, .11A g p-t rD cip ia.s& 9: 0 ►� o • cA a O r O ""d (1) 0 � O n (1) (7) 61-1 r -a 7-D" 0 (-) )-6 r4i ci) FL" . 0— (4. ri) h-t-) crc? 0- Ft) �, "-An v� F--t ►•-� cat• ) n 0 ph' O n � • ' O r O CrQ c4. 15t E.-. 2 CD )th (r7: cr‘ g. (1) rD � v ClD O • 0 ORGINIAL PAPERWORK WAS IN YOUR SEPTEMBER 5, 2006 AGENDA PACKET ITEM A6 M I=M MIIIIIMM ' to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v_N .. m a .- .. P .. .- a Q Q - o �' w O ° 3 y '�' A. n E w m o a m'O f �T O()N fnp r O N O N' m2N S Or 3 Or g'°n 3 03 O ?O N -2 0 0 0 0 N d 'O N A fp O g .0 a -' O 9 D! 0 ID t�D 9 C 0I N Q A ry N tT 0 Q O O Q N O Q R Q i C P a Q m T o m o o n.° ° x m m D m to _ H �" O N Z B �� Qo ° -' O 5-mw 3o,mm(nn3,.k m2. 0 2,'' (2kmogi2.K m2.0 020 Z.0 3R.y V mo matea° m ?r ' 22 O m� Dm ' vE.`� ' moO a' o380O oo > >_2' m o o K P 2 04.g o .o a o o O Q +O y^ D —a O' N 0 vai.. y< a Wy en a-en Fp3a 33 3 3 33c 'op 3 'Gf�r,2?�o m ^ f01i °a2 m�oc`°.?No •0^P 3Q c?7 a.ai H 3 Gl W ry O O N O A o O t.y O W 6 C O O —wO W Fo fff D N0 -- co N s D.�_.� N A a 0-g ; O°'p ^ -• �' o goB o"i rT mo O aG1 om a m o 2 ° 2 ma m c. N = 3P co x m e.T a s N CO CO N O d C • . • R q F, O a o 3 0 x x fp N N N N ID § jC ow° O ti 0) �6 a0 o 0 N a: ai af1 O°- N ° m..ni"-iO a K m Dco `•n 8. aCD s 00 O o, 7 0 92. .. ° O m 0 m m o o 3 Q N Q+ o -° P!G 0 r°n C r o `- N °C N C . O G] 0 Q m d i < . C O-Q i O O a o 3 _a F�' N O N C N 4 3 2.ay d f m T. D C° 0 ° 0- �° N oo<i . O N 6 a N 3 N O O co co o ,�o ^ 9 K fD In N N N o > > O° O° fU 3 a 91 4 fy1 P 2 T1 G C N a a a F F C 41 3 W.-0.a N Q N O J a S 9a A a-p N ° Q ofD3O w y m 3 > c m m (� C. c o 'o (n 3 > Sc,, n B 0 0 o D S I' 1p > >_f w CO m y o o 0 1 Q0 1 • h po a 0 D m C o 0 z iii o_ ii: i_I_ -- _ -_ Board--_- _ Mayor �B T { A T a II a Ha3 I M 6. N A N N C p1fn + N N V + W jN _+ qV0 O V N o CO ti 0N 01 O m 01 CO JV d OOo N 0 O co N D V A fA — — N N a N (M 3 4 V I O ° W m V (NT 1,3 W m C = N v O N - Co O A J N m °' ^a 2 m N m W lo m m -co 0 V 0 0 N J CO 0 A 01 D v j1 . to o1 v1 .. N N A N I Q 0`< O mN + m V- � ND O iv A JJ N W0m (V y 2. m —d N _ O O CWN A N V CO J 0 O g4+ - M P. E. P. N M 0 9 C 0 O A V N ;o m co o^p-vi OmN i+ Ov 0 0 QO 0)A CO 005 fD a O z z z z z z z z z z ug 0I 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O ° : 1p 'n m m m m 'm 'm f'e m 3 m La 0 III Sp1 1 o m-n d �S z E.p o 0 ° a.m 7 • fo N A W N + I. - Oo m Dalwl TT Vl 1 �T 4 1 D N ^ 7N T d O W y 0y =0 a m m O m m o m m o i FT,' m O m m tp t;, g 0 m N N -r T r T . y a' 3 a N 0 A 95 N n W -o? a D O S a a n ' . o m T_ ^d0 a o.m� o v_ '� ,0 c a go A °-'n ca J ` 3aN .� ° o m 3 0 o y m' y d o y N g-o u m o m ° n 3 w d o Dp n w o o m o m— °d a a I' a-D Flt 7, y `_1.V Ia> 's.a- a Ip ry C a a g C W-° D ti' O^_.Q C C y 7 - o'm $ m co o m i g. .3 o m m a.3 co 7 HI : c i mo dym 33 d x .d mc o afl°F ? a°a n ^ ,w, com c ? ql m m ° a `^m '.� 0 cg ''T a,a omy 0 ° m m B a o .cy..a 9 0 m y — ° 3� ry :I g 3. ..tp F PEat O N O j.n m Q. m G 5 0 3 4 i. 3 m 7 n 8 2.'0 O n 0 y v 0� Q ��m y 7 m� 'y ° 3 d o°, a, D a 45 a d a O y 3"f m a 0 3 y =p a 5 N y CE d N i F N W NO O E. N t_ N N °-0 '0 > >y 4o fp 7 C.N c 0 n y • n 9. x O0 ° D� IIIt #0 H111 I !4a IIV ° c°i.8tD3 cao o°• >> w g 4, ° m m p) 3 =v 6 `2 y 0 a 0 N N a N T O. ° y 3 N O 8 n 'Q .0 o A o N 0 c'' ?vE o 'm x 3 n a o m ° Oc`o D>' 'p a� n Fay n .m. m n p m I' I o oT 7 ,7 o�= Dm ,.y. mm >> c_? � mkcod 2 Vm'v+�'a� ! y a o ' * 3.m 3 a, of y 6 m T d m o �c`°'�o 3 0 m o n P, m - zn � ° c -o ca c o .m N W m 3 co o a ,z N a n Tp. m a ...338. _p 2? w 5-0, m 0 O a?.o N d OO y O j ° N n° O J a y C c'g . H* 2 .y-.N C ° 6 ° N 2oyn' e m mo al w' a y p 1 'm N ° N y N d N 0 j ? 0, N a -f0= _ a o N o VOi d(O.) o y, °o°Oi w ON o(OJI a w ON- 0 T c ER y"o 0 o y 0 '0 0 0 y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m - 052 A -N -OI A W -O N A W N a O .40 V A N f5 40. E5 f5 f5 di A A 0 W W 4* = N o N O O 0 N O O N N❑, WO 0 0 0 N N 0 N o N A 0 0 0 0 N W y o ° 0 0 0 N 00 0000 01 0 0 0 0 Io O O W 0 0 0 -0-0, 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0. ° N N 0 0 0 0 00 O 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 O `G W W O 0 0 O O O O M f5 .0. ' A y to. A W N - Board N A W N - Mayor T < T a N M N C N W N n ° O A N 5 tw A N In0 C Q m N ° 0 O O N O 0 O O y. O o O 0 0 0 O O O V O O O O O O O O D v n 3 O T a 0 o u, 0), N 0 °m 0 0 0 0 o -.a s O O O O 0 to 0 co O O 0 O T +w In w 3 0 3 E5 f5 W W N O T° O O O N 0 0 O O .'.Qy O 0 0 O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O D T 0 + 34 C b N 007 O 0 (O 4 0 y _ 'n y O O A b 0 0 0 0. 01 O O z l y z 2 a 3 C 3 3 5 53 j0A n C m3 m 3 z0 z zcaa o Nmg' o °Tm OTm U2 m m o.a a, m z y ° m y N N O io 01 J . D-DD- -o O D0'v O<n>3 5 Og vet a i'U�vr a CO) 1 O N a.o O 3 ; o^m : m o n m ^y m m d N m O . Q d w m m 0, y _ 0 . T o<yDm x <oyx m3 -.� ° �3mm ,Z. > > ° ° m � a> > c> > < 'm i, a N 5 N > N (] 3 O„ N ,O m O< W-< N a li I ry N < N yi]A Ol N a 2 Z c 0 A,T y W O N -0, of _,m V—N r� N m a N O O E<`2 G1 N - y] OO < W OO : ^NDxx A 'V Od - `Z m . 0 O m 0 Z 0t n? N m , OE y 2' a ° a ° D w, m o` ° fw' 0°m 3 o Dp y 29 3 0* m T o m m o y 3 a v o m m(o o 5 m° g m(^^o 0 (= ay.n a o - m m o'l 5 3 I. .°n a.`° m a o••m a m 0° n 3 3 4 o 3 m y 3 0 0n'0 m ,3-2 m an d .7,s3am yw � g ..,, m o ° a w0 ccg 30 ymac m� $ y N o ° (D of ° uyi m m m =a r • 3 0 m ; o miir g.F n m m O go N m <m o W •a Z w W a < 9 at p rciNOG a? po'm9 ° mma a - dx (0 3g-8 x5�a d m -omf° - A N ° D 2 3 0 'o d `2 Ll.N. y y W 0 0 O 3 N j C 3 E m g-O g o m c � d ° (0 4.O(°i 0 x p,o m o N Q ...2 a ».3 m F.(°'i (a0 a s»m a m 2 'm a 0 m • m 0 D m D c z Q0 O go ° o o c m o'm » m a 5.m ° . �' n"'m m n 1.1 y • , O C n N D 0(Op 0 < = p!n y A "`3 y =0 3 'y J N.C N N N D i O- C o• a N O O t/N N `G J J C 9 0 d T G N x n 5 O HI ..(? _.A.. G O� (Old m 0 0 0 o-0 3 .,Q ,1 n a 3 m o o a o 9 o m .y d =o o T o a .< c-o a o• m `o a 05 a s ^ o w > ° .H. m i`° 3 0> > g o°i % !n m w Z o m < T o o m 5 x N g c 0 a ° 0 W 3' w - ge'o a o R.0 y n? of c w O a o c o y 3.m au m e 3 — as n° o a• 0 m m °�°n a R' o Q0'day m.y yc 91 3 �'� P i 35°23 A a-'Qmm 05. Sp y c N?-oOna , °v d < N N t0 - �.a d N Q° ' ? N 7 C 3.N n.0..m m N 0°O w N '(p 5.F 3 O2 C'l n 3 m i m'a o c m c �°m y -o m o m Oa y° o 0 0`> >9 m c ,°2 m z,e 2 m *..c ° yo " ^o: o oniy amv 39 m amm o,'om m asm Amm ma y o(a(cn a Ei m 3 v c al', .,,,,o.; 4o o y o vs-,, f o f o a° 3 y c .D.a 00.� 3 ?- �.m .. 0 . 9w'(n N m a ww a=-Ooy - c m of 0 a o 0 O. m O m� ow o N W e o • 0 3- m o 9 a D(D x' m o F. m- °c p° o - o -.m m o fD 3 c N m e+ m a a° ' 0 3 m 5 o (Fp ;y cfDi m N c N m h N o N 0 3 a o m 2 .s2 . a 2 m a A a ? ° `g. m 3 w io CT(n 3 m �m as., mmQ° al Wig.' m5O ? 0 aoo0(a(n a O m o 3 'm tm a O C O O 3 3• O 9t ? <.C MST.. A_O< m ry O o 0 0 0 3'2 x _ ., O m O ro y `1 a 3 ,n o a o 0 0 °aaT°M m co j d m m e �" i j u°i'FL'i°o 0 ca o ° n Z(3Dp a ya f m a a co c o a, to tD o ° o F N y O m _ O oo▪AT` o 00,A N-` O N O (0l1 A(0J N 7'O O A(0J N O 0 (0P A N c C 612,2 y 0 0 0 0 y 0 y 0 0 0 0 0 0 y O O O O y o 0 0 0 0 3 —O)A W N _O -m Vt A W N -N A W -O)(P A W N _a 0 O wN. OU7 .. Ol. Malt EA... ..M.. M.fAW.. .. .... O N N N N J� N N O O-+ O' O' A O o O' O. O 0 0 0�,. A.A.N W o O O m 0 O O Q O O O O Q Oo 0 0 0 V V W V O(O N N J 0 0 0 V O p 00 O O O O_ O. N O O O O O N 00.00 N O O O N O 0 0 0 O O O O O N O O O O O V O O O O O 0 0 0 0 .< "V O O O O O N 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O N O O o o 0 O m O O O O O W O O o O o w o 0 0 W o a o 4, H w d _. co J O1 Board w o o m J en Mayor n o T,N "a . o o a a +n o N M (O Vt of '' n (WO O O o o O Off.(O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O J O O O O O O O D a n 4(3 O a a O O C�i� OOO fall O j N O O O O O a b 0 49 O O 0 O O O O O O O D.03 6±9 3 y o N 0 ((ii 0 (ail p O O o a a a bi a a O O O O O O O D,0 3 °° c w u«i o I'01 H C o 0 o c _a. c ^a y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z z z z o a a O p1 Z 3 a z Z (oi a Z 0, 2120 Z 8 a Z o a 3 0 m a o o 3 n 0 a o 0 g o :°0 m m o m A ° A w ° m A m Q A 3 3 w CD 'm CD 'm 3 (D tD m'n (T V o CT4, ^ D O O no , d i(o < x= O y J =] O O O O�.J O 0 Ci w p� 1- D a g i u O G)C N O o>w m 0-0"0 0) -I T N T m S p{o N s q m ? N 4{5',.- F ^J . o O 1 m m ° w n 10 m ° 0 ^ _,-1 m ° m .0 „.. v_A _, - D rn m -0 p 0 3 a S a- n 3 y 0 N - Z fn I nd 1D {o 0 0 { a°� fu v' ° m ° 8 fo-8 w • m o o v o 0 3 o• = m ••Z - t .z c)m 3 ?i 0 aj N fA31 Z2oy (V N p TT ?-' 3 go 1 o nfa w3 m -•= a°i Sd F A '0 3 an o� n0oCn a' O N N 3, o A . C n a' N G - ^.a ' o S 3'o y cn za- = c 0= m a o O m . y m W a ° ' Wx0o. n • y, N N .' a 3 o OZ7H0^ 5. mo a O d C C S g y d F0 ? • 050o35.OddT 0L.(2 y 0 am mp _ Z'. O c o' > d 3 z S. p1 = aQ'. fn ttOv n m0 -2mom if tO o° . N °of a -� Z. a-mm 3il W t. 0t70 om 7og ° m - n3c . Nsm O oa D ° Q m . moo 2 v ° ' 3 o 03 RI, ° a Oogg ,CA oT O i N' . R of 1O.�.o O N m y.O d o m N N G 2. s» 3.a r»0 m * o '3-oo 3 S U 3.7 ^v ' m om o »fo o o ' B. o � 3 em - - , 0.�»C t°p m o 0 d .ry o m C C 'N' tO O O m N 0 0 m V -- fJ. 3.5 K N Z (0a. t0 m - N° -O o g o �� o c o u o 5 3 n m O S n S z y 0 N o 0 ° t° 0 N n °. J O a O 7 m m o yfom� N End3 nm N O N N 7 N O k =o '< oC 3 00g, P. 2 a 3 � b 03 o .'< m n zoi" ° = ° ? o o S oct° r.DST ' v 5. ff N P. 0 S O a' A 1 Z 3- ai Dinmm5 m o _o ° o a Q, a . o° = G O N 0 ,-,O T C Y (oT N n O M00 A000 0 = 0 N 0 0 000 O 0 0 O O O O O Of N A W N Board J A e A al Mayor T { T 0 C e N b. f# + +C O_pf 3 O O f- cr, en O O.N»fa o O O O O G V 0 o O o 0 T f) 3 ° T v 0 at 0 0 _CT o o' °1 o 0 0 0 0»°"°- 0 0 0 0 0 D o 3 3 0 0 0 0 o o'a. 0 00 0 0 00 O o O O o D v C 3 a c P P P 0' o.w o o row 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 co ° z Z Z o a Z C w 3 m O 0 > o 0. o m d m fo m m �0 n _ o' m 0 a 3 ° ° 3 0 o a n m » 3o ° c omcc -o o Cn 0 g E(O m o .CD » -1 y Z 9 m CD 3 0 o fT 3 a' u1D, ° ? s m t° ' a n n e IJ N N W . + O O. co 0ooxo D ' v@ W mp-Do mcp(n O N y o m = °8 o 9 ^m m o y o v N_ 0 m O 0 o 0 a m 53 m 0 m r.3 m ^m m 3 a,n ' rn p o y' a o A('-m o m n _ c m< y V° 9g1 N N-0 M -J 0 p`G O 3 .".N 0 > a 0 0 w rn n?m 'm c o 0 0° o 0 0 0 o a o cWi R o l m , o 0 1 d y m o oEi �a II o II<' ^ N y ti N `C ran N a 0 O gm d A 0 -A as S p § O c FD rn9=0 Tc cmmo 0— o =0 0 rc 90 f.- om m,II2 < 5 > c ° H m y 2 c y w.c c a m p ; m 'O 5,c m m A 0o fD g T 3 m F o o. o•x i °.o o m a iO m 'o. m .o y o m 0 y ompo..a'— a g'=-8p0a m(9 co°iOc scm .tea o3a3 ^ 'm �.m o j,N o sa a xo-" .N aOn o m odro E m ; R E 2 :-g II o N ° O 'N 00 o rp O= o o = o 2,.< °o o a g °a 3 5 3 m a 3 g 3 N o F1_N 1. o F° i' 28 Iv a.=N..m m o E-m �p05 m a . > "tD o -� m o °' ag po •e c -2 m . c y o.c°.m 2 3 N f N?, . o m N-<2 j a a 7 j [: m 2 F. 2 a fj rZ o N 0 o. 'o a `� o ° c a o - rn o c » 2 d m m n N 8 N V Vw 9 N ?N^. "3°0 3 n . 4- m !1 ? N W^Oy 5 . » m a o 3 0 m 3 a x o a N a o o o W o c 2. ° f.° A o 4,0 0 0 0 2. o 3 o 0 m.�m 3 3 y o . m o m QO a n o a w p a °.A c 3 5 a o.3 E S m n. n 4 0 01? o ° m o O x N j 0 =m O 40 7 m .o 7 3 Vl 7 0 ^] 3 c O o `" x_° w 4 a,, o 'o o 0 1. o o 'm a p>O� ° 3 0 C)• m 5 ro 0 S rO o °.>''m 3 0 _0 go 9' ' m O n 9 n m o cf m m m O II 7 p -,.° pj Ip N C) (p O a 3 C N II p0 .�. F,ro.ro <,f ymm ° om0FA 3° o g �3.ct S ui c, z m a m a D o m II m w° a n�.N 0 ° j.�.°'y 0 (0 IY N N O m .C y 3 n > > mwo T. t°co•`D:_oa ym `no a amNo3m Sm ma3 0 `. c3 3.o vac y m Pa 3 3 o o opOw� m c c .2 O m od o a� � m �.tp oD m ac°°O oa pe 3 02 ° o 0 ° c_ m 0 m ° o o c o wm p0R2 m "-p° 0 .0P. i m o m a G o 73 m C i m° a In a 4,4,40 _ 10 c0 O N N N 0 0 000 Q O O O O O O LI O tp a J Board . - o ,0 m Mayor It A m -ac c o N A M M O- a w 10 to = N 0 00 0 0 0_,. . O ONO O O O v O to O O O D V 2 IT O 0 II A 00, (0 0 O ° 0 0 0 0 a a o, 0 0 0 0 V 00 00 0 D v m 3 ° w o 0 0 rn o 0 o.c.avi Iv w a O O O O V O O O nII(1 3-RC M M M V[ ° __ q O O O^N pp av N o O O W O O O a O a ° Z t3 a a Z Z Z o m ° O O O ° I l R r p N N a N i R N 3 3. c c c II a N N 9 11 NnaV II om .°.O N V Z ,.-0--, 0 N a O O O n - N ti W w m m N o . NO J CA N A W ' P. D� v 0�-1,p 1 D V v O-'D� D D v v O N D v O D� 9 y o 0 m m y d w 0 n ,„g.o g A w y o^m ; =o^m d y'o .. R.o^m m ^o^m m v_o 2? 4<o•N x 4> > C) O C<o m x <p w F O.<o m �• { m 4<o x 97 {a 0 x°1 a a A ° w � w a A > w ci A w A ] w .s A A `A ° m w A o w e m wp1 - o I. o m 'O�7 w� �� m �A m �^ Nm �A m �A 00 a- Od A N {y 0 NOm A A C)d . aC 0 w rnC) m C)d O o m 8 O A A a° 8 w Aa m 928 -v0o " v° v v° �0 ' d <A > m ° <A m <m `m <A 3 m Z a O o 0 i - m m 0 0 0 c o v o m c 0 0 0 0 0 3 a d,@ -' r-• TO y JN 2m 1 ocn g T vm 8 §ora <V A i72,31 . O°NN T 05.g7,_ m og � ra& � m ° oa � 2ao oar ax8 mw SNN a � NA3 , m a N a A x o �' 91 � cwi m=O n >>.� a � a c01i � ��a 3"a : m 5.`'°`� » o�6 A �`2' �'c`o N. , F C F`m C m n •m -. ; I.' p <O a 5 W d 4" N C1 m 5 , o a g TO 79. N m N 3 m A ;v 3 g w m ° a f m 3 1 c>>m 3 m o Q e 2-8 2 y p c D' m A A W (O N 'A. D) N.wi — < x - C)7 0. Y E.cg.n N O^ 0 0 r0 w (D a CD O N N p.Z. U 0 £ �, a°_ .,m 3 in A m 'o 3 N A m S ' a A A n c o A " ,� y y c A A m � m m � 'o o N m A �m .O A -�+N A m o:o o° .. m w n 3 A m m o N m °: o P 0 a N . 3 m o 0�. . d ' N y .9“ :: g',74 ° ro °: �`� g d,° c ' 3 A O a " m c -o = m a 8 �'m a A o ma 2 C. O D g'' A ra 0,- o o biO O. o o'-, 0 a 00 °< n-0ao'`ai y°m ° 3'° m 0ntn00 00^0 n o0 0 O. u O N jr a 0 0_0 a 0 o°' p1 `< 2 0-co p o .o w 5. _.pu o 0 °c o m 3 oa _2 3 f_. •m ° a m, 3 �c,,H 5 2, 3. a st,,'3° m a m> 2' a d `� �'a O° c Z p c N y CA ° O a 5' O N 2, N a d S7^0 0 m 3 5'O N O. o y to O o o a N c 0,0 o ,-y . cmm' O o= N <C A m ofc ^ m3 - A,s, c ^Oi S 'w'N ,,C W 7 Q. N G j a P. m a Q A 1. F. m �D ° .w. N A N Cr 7 N rD E. S Q a aa' W o.2_m m c d 3 ao o mo•o y� d< o' flLa m c d o a > o.°o 5-0 " g El- 3 o o- 3 O c•o f0 3 A a a 0`2 r A = A• o.0 'D o f",o 3.m s 7, n' a m N o d 8 0 c o ° a�, o a 0 3 A A a 5 3 m n m y o O c» a = 4..o 0 0 I.0 N T O A N n° 'j m y ^t-a N N g O 8 a ran O^ n 0 gig N C A 3.Z A y T.A O N a.. A N O o A 0 O C N N N N o. F S o m a Co 3.m F 40 o D N A N a y 5.0 o r0 m w 0 y 3 o ro-2 c ^-o0 o w9am o N cm 3 Ag oN O o'=m Oo =O] ° .i 3 2.p1.`a r o m< 4 m m 9 -0 o A G-) ^ a a=x o 3 m m m N v a o T.N o m O 0 ° a o-N A _° y x a o f 'm 2 A .9 e,v Q ' m o�< t° o o s� H 3 o N 3 N O rp? �,0 O m N 2, . > > y a 8.N g y^ ? PD m s m o Q m o m o m A a ,i 9' a FP 6 o N� y oro N an Er d 3,D� m �_C5 - o.a, a n.3 o m N 3 a 0,a o 0 O t. .o o D y 5 4 a a m o y o o c c ^' ° m v'O, o N A N„ -A�A m m o 'N y N o O 0 o a A o m m y m N •m oA c D A 38 m ^ ur m 3 a n c m ora o`� o a0m o Ntn3 0 o c a o a P° O a a r0 ° r'D a o o m O_W-I..- O rr a OW O� T C A N d 8 8 A N a 3 0 A c0 4,..N O O] 0 0 -4 0,O N-+ N O N O O O o 0 coO°0 0 0 `< e� M HiN 0 fA EA re ONO J ONI O A W ro Board o m m J a ra r.4 w Mayor T .i7 T N a a' o A M IR N H . M. 3 m 0 O o O O O O O-= o O O O O O O O O O J O O O O O O O O D O V C) T 3.o o F.a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v D 3 5 0 o a w v, w w w v, �, w w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v 3 c a o 0 3 N 0 0 c 0 3 ^a N 0 0 0 z Z a cD -.05 0 av a"o 3 aO m n o o y a 0 S a o 0 oQ o m o o A g f o ra m R. A ? A N y? A NA A ? iNN N W 4 N U N o o ^ z 9. N O) ap V CI N A W N — q-oom 0-n cn -/(7 0) (4 O o D v 9 OD V '• mO-V(n -1 4v-2^ y 1 omN y o N v Q�N n oCdoCNnNN `4 n 2. d d0 yd d ,.9. • 3_ 0=3 a c.3 a m -0Ah �-Dx y -• ry O Jr-9 p C- 9 .o»m y^=QN v Q a o 0.(a a;a O v a 01 N —UN N N N 0. a s 0 S a.-... .- a W n 0 O R < N O' J .< » o' -J O J 8 n.< 0 .n..< ^y < .dam J N =K TJ < Q`G N N NNE AOJ .^Na02 3 --^ o m m m 3 N l0 3 m m Z 0 0 o O N V g -1 < -1 b a°o m y m m n y N 3 y D lilt" y D tali' y N D m a y m '^ 0-° 0 ro M i l o m 0 s 0 n y m a G c ()n m c i o m t a l i' '5 0 m o » (n O N % N o 0 3 m o , 3 f» Ol y ]. n N N a 0 J N J_N m° m o 3 y y� o N ��o co a o � .° a'= _ m N N 3 = .2 m m o8 n - y N» 5.0 -20 3 .a s N C J N .i Q 5'N O 2 3? r ,J m r FO }r 7'-2 N,41_,9 ^ m w m T d o m N y°- of-o m y R0 a s I. 10 m n c O o 3 2 N E' y N o = g E» o m .a m y D ^m p o m 8 »; y N m A n N n (] N O A Q N F c 0 ^= n 3 o 7 a m m W- 2 w N 00"No 2 s 3• N O O•3 A N tp _ g N IG J N N a fa t° 8 fD N A w 0 Cl 0 'O 0= R Q 5 O 2 X J C J G m R n 0 2 T, 0 • O 0 a .J p 0 ,m t0 d S 0 o D •o J J m m Q° 7 • w N O flo A O"O ,D N N J w 0 m d N R °N N 4 w 40 2 6 O-' O.V N O N_ n o- N'O- 8 N n N E. 2^S O .Z N`G A N' O n Q O toil w 3' N O d <° N O y ry 2 ° m 9a N 0 < n O-o i N N 2 ' o 7 » J N O s '-^ J olo� 8 0 < 3N 3 ohm < � 3 J — d oo - ui= a om_ 2 » ^N J y J'j N o 'O 0 0 ? N o S CI EA N ..-- N N 41 y l • t0 R^N (^N T, a N N O m¢°,7 10 a d i b f0 < 73. ° O N O 2 y N n V o=a- 3= n`° m 3 2 3 `9,-ac ° '3= 3 0co.-co aP 0 F. 3 0z n 03-'11,o 5 m o s g N ° O F "2 7 N <d,00 7 Nto .Cml o 3 CO m y O � S D m N a f9 ?E. N �p a = ui J'c n A a m m o » o J CC o J B J w 0 J N Ci 9�1 0 p1 N m 7 J §. S N p ‘°.o G '0 0 2 m m N N CO • tC a 0 N y' A-NO y N y O 3 0. N o LI^ (09 0 0 3 A =3 a n ur O`< - go- Re F N J ^=W 0 3_vi oona o N. > >a 0 0 N N �O-30- '30 o n* N A'6 o0 a s a � �n ro L'�A� o- A m m• m o m m 4'i.F »s. p 2 0 0 m m , o ti o o D 0 3 z m o n .m c y o a° ° o 7 C 53 w J_ m `• < G0i n O 77 p c^ p J O 2.Q0 0 4> • J O N N y N z 02?. A ? 7 co J =N 2 w OOl d T1 N pO N O 003�_N .Z C (A o S 0 �-o gym fro o o= c ? n am' . — 411, rn z y o 5 J C o a >J O o o m m o m ^'.D a J m o J = N a �° a a old.^ C1 m�° m y m D J a o a m o -o z -o 0 0 0.o 7 D §. 9 o `o Fo 5. 3 0 o <o0 2 0 y 0 J N J 7 N N a N Ci S. RN0 o S j N f O 3 3 S. N C i O y 0 G1 0 J n J U3 ... N. A A 69 2 0 0 ON O D O N 2 O 33.0 00 00 30000 0 0 O N6g0 M 49 CWo V on' N A W N O Board SS m V cc, N A W Nco Mayor S V , S 9 < n 0 o G1 w d J c a a ur a a J -4 01 M 0 . 01 N N 01 O J J Cr, V O 0 01 O1 91 N» O N O OI O O N O N 00 o ytD Iv O A o 0 0 o O O O A D v n o v 9° C a0 0 O J R 2, w n n N O O O O O O O 0 Da d a 3 O LiN °f •�a N O O O O O O O O D 72 a 3 °° SoO ° J ut J n n Q V N z J A J W °z z z ° az o0 z Ca 3 Cm 3 Cy 3 zga o 7 ] N d g s. 2 2 a 3 �O a 3 <O a 3 3 J o 01 <o iii 0 10 J 1° l0 m N to w 0 -o 2 '0 3 3 m f F f $ m m z 0 fg v . Oo m D8 nor m Oo » c DoC �o C '.-r, o< a� of .^< ° o{ { a o{ a r. N a( n V n a ^na of n a n D { 9.-ON - 7 O -co i m g. ND vy -0 WciT . N N m R Cum oN m b''a,o� o oy° Dpdo aria §-n°° m-o '-' 3i° 00 Et°-6. m2o c� N y ° a s a t0 D°-o a O's a-Si, ,m m a A a ^g a m}(O ° a,I', s o F.m m o o n,6 m m o, w Q .^.N a o m N. n .°. o-2 . `< m m, N n ° '.0)i o�9°a C C 7� m 3 6 N v T O f m j 7 -a a ^N a N m OJ, ONl m m m m -'o ' . m o a of c D i" A-apl 3 Ag°m'-. y 2'n '° n5- ' 9°o 0 1° oo ° m a'm :: n Qm^.d. Sma^m ng m,.� j m Dm 0 ma m p m O �C,W N K m ° -m g m 3 .< a A -. w 3'o-o ° m 1°o ..5 5 a O g C.N m m e z. m c�mod m^ �O� c 2��,o cr 7 a y'� m� 'm co o a m 0. a_=a a y 3 o m ,m»- �,3 c m f0 Dry o o > > -o m5. ,0 f Q °+w j' o°23 4 a 0 1 m ^m m'c m cmi �^„ a N o o { O.?cm §o�'a m� <� 3.m,2! 'm Oa.vN V) 3 cno c m y 3?0 0 • FO W m N N O = 2 a N N.3 co = m ° C: a. C ^ m I. m c g. 3 °- f a m m -, E. W O y d w'o »v m o 0 01 0 o a^•a Q. m . ,'a a a moo m 7 . u) o Z. w' . _o R.. 0 a o m = 3.m a o 0 2. (^'-, N 2 fr."; olNA O.O WN ca,° ° g, :Do. B.,° a N ` a�a�a,In. () d mT O ° o�y» o mom A(' ° z' m 1° mmmo ma g°m m (rg 9O 3.cam DX 0 3a H 5' a. yy0 m 0a y vo mp°» Nm{ p 111 '0 my m -°m 2 2 mm N ° 3m< • m -am a w(.,m a y m• -- A o oO X'-m a3 .4�o 0 NO3 m mmm�oN om o g o am a30 O a 0)ma° 0 o1 m� o� °3 m o`� 3,� a o�w 0—0 o�'2 g "o w m o C � Nfp T1< 1 O- 3km O . �a � p`°'C ^ j a� n �N NN tp 2.ila'F n W ye C 7 N-° j »(p 3 m W T N�.m (n a(°S`< w N`o fl wgt° mm 2 {°1- oHa ° °^' ! 3 ^-Og E.g N o ^O, y 2 a OO 2.N 0 0 _ w .O d <p O 3 a..o ° a,o ^ W p a- a 3 m m 3.a 5 �m 0' m 5 N N N O a m m C T3..N 3 5 R p. w a w 0 C ( o m, co m m 9 m N a m C 3 a ° 0 O Board Mayor m j u A m{ a N - N O n j 0 o. O o N co C a m J N N N N N m O o V A o W +o. o O 0 O 0 0 O V O O O O O O o O 0 O O O D-or, 3 ° a 0 o W c Y.' ° —3aa a a c D a' 3 0 o a.� � o 0 J a N O O 0 D v o 3 0 o 3 0 c m a N W m a0ov om a a m y m 3 w A'w m" m am m a . aA m a 3 Ft m L3 . 3BIn3=•C 2,n•d3C = 2o ; 32 = -orC3O a6Y 6 a tl v owCO 3 »a ° ?° 3i5 a y ?a z 3 an d 3'o n a ^m0 . m p pj. 7mSm _ . m 55 .a f m o m "e - ^ { a a w • D_f7 oro o Po Q9NT AT m• i u y a O N .°.N V. .°..y• '^ . J o, x n 01 0 n ,..70 O -n° < • _ Oco ^ N A W 3 T -13 -0 ,o m to W N O z p =o o m S a 8,o d m o a co m g f.3.Q 2§ ° o • H o n m o,n a 2.-m m i▪ w 3 O 43 m m c I 0 �3 O O N COS m aG)^ate a ym o o.ao, ° T m 01 m= m m a m n° -3 y coo 2.m'0D° °• o. o o 3 , m ° ° m 2 2. y° o a -o p.° a° n .. o ° ° a' 3o<. ° m3 ° ommSam w3 ° a.om • oo. g g iT.=- c» ad 01 " , O a J tt O o,..,N 7 -N o O O co c=c Po° rG n. _, 9 7 OO N. , N n N da tp Q m N <.° O N d W ^ o ° m o w° m 3 D I m o 0 3. a a N ° -o C O- (C R N. 3.3 d O m' v a ^aaoc > o y ^.° a m� ca 0wQ 2 xt ° m o=.po" T^Fpc o mad - pQ:• u). '?0 5'0. o° as w c°^o ,n n 0 a m as m a Sr' o 3 � N°a P0Huh c o3a E .yN o3. -0 0' 5"'a g,4 E o x o T o s. < 3 , m o • d, m m`a o o.o c d �-'2 g Q 0 a m ca= w o' w 3 0 Sam o.t, n d m 3 fD 'c a O a dio m ° a-• a v E 3 ° No 5.91 a j 3 ° ° N o o-' 3 m 0 a D^D o2 a.N a S m C a.'` m y d q ..N N g OO C N o, 3 O N n 3 ° n n a Z -'' o m o- o O o c'o' o m d ; Ci om o f. ad3.T3 0 -10 m w^0- o m a o -m m o 0o m i 9° t,, o .3 ^°. _aa °a° °^ m ^° f t,, ui S -m S d f° y a m T C 3 n a 2 O `< . + Board N - Mayor T T C O C D N N W C n co 0 j o O O O+= O o o O O V O o O 0 D v(7 3 ° = a nn, o o m N C O O a a D O O ^° n o O O O D a3 0 a o ° ° ° 0 a n' E. m p O oo a y O O O O D °n 3 °° c ° o 3 ° m a O z 7 Z O Z 0-0O O O 0 0 2.2 o 0 03 Ol<2 3' T ^ Imo o a H 3 m m o t Y FL 0 q 0 3 D o i D o' 3 -0 3 F 0 3 q O 3 P o;i 3,,,?' v ra� c .°.N O m O N n d n m n ,n+m n .n..J N A A J OV oa " s N a a y m N , N , N , N(� m a J O.j � y .. N ^� y 95 H V N � N Sr O y \. ° J Gt V 61 O N N N A N W N N +^. -' N J J J J 3 -O ' N 3 a O d 78 0 I- rt Q 7 2 O 213 N E.' ?I ' O Q O ?I n p� • O T g N 3 0 C O N N S9._N O V? C R P G N Q a C=.a<O• N 5-2. P.N. 3 A *=3 N -,3 c N y N --Ci.O °O y a N y N o5coo 3 3 w8g.-1-5 -, '•° u'.< m� Hm�.*m a ••° a. ova --a". s o=3N MQ ry N ry a 2 D m O J to .d. A a [o A O 00 J° 7 O j o qo- ° 2 o a 3 ,o 2 �- N a A o w a. 0 °< g al m ° '' 'a O y.W m 0)m a o 3 a m m' D o n y y.2,a a y ma Z N.m .a N < N o S O O 0 _.° N O N O O A a s O� ?2, 2 a "d a N ° 3. n g =Zs ° N o N o d'c N A m o'o.CM n a u m - d ca. `,.A.. o m J O m y3am = y aaQog �n- a E2'mm a2,2,m � 7 oJar, o`mH.a� 2 . a�yra Inm o.ru o� J(p y y � J � m� c ,� +'. O E,= m n 9 co a s 'o o ° TI o g i o J N'm L d N J X J O N O 2 N C J'N {O,N Ip N E O T o' W O a Q 7 a° N ff `] ft 0 Imo A N„N A ,9 N N .di 6 C ? ,c..1 a Li', N 5 4 a N a N O 3 OO a. A j a_a ft c " on �. 2 ..•-.0� 0 tom °-' m3.`° O 03. aa. N 3 •2J � oa9'o < J CC O N N O• > O O O M N J y G N_O° w F ,J N N O* N_(U 3 \ O A N <J (D O 3 A Q S O C, �.N N N O J N O _ y� O6 NO a .�.(� N o5Ng Na' pj N JSO E N2 ° -'m,-N ;•4� ..n. O co W _ d N J N V A Q a a a, C) 6 a J S-_ f o J o g y d J O 9 OO N . o d° W .O.a N y OOe ry T a 9 O J OA C N O 21 7 ryCj W a N ` O. a`G O 3m Qa $ n 3^ aaw.°o o° a Orn�m m : oo ooa 3 0�2 : 40 na N ° m =j N A2 ry O?OgO - ?E,6N =aN O ='mow a is`-2am mm o.0 a 00`� m a 59 Nmmo o u• ?o <o a'm o• 2mam cJ, 3 o aOOo ov'm' O F °•..J 3N a bom m� H'a=2. mom. J O tD O N N G • ' 3 S O (D n ^ G n -�N ry J C N 3 N 0 N 0 N -f' ? aN .3N. NK N OG O OII jNry Qo a' oN .N c AF O Q.'. m a po �' D n a A m m J c O o' o° B o a d o ;n a3�F`mm rvb''� 3.�mo A. a oa'nom °„amaci a- PQoo a Cy m Ow:o o y o n w`N a a. a -o.2, 3 C)a a N - oa3 o d 0 O o a 2 a a° M m-° a v`D, m 3 o 0 m N o a J a of 3 m J N '"3 N = o" �'a N »a� o L y S».� m m o -'c 3 3 S T go m '- m '''a 5 3 S T 3Q1 -i a c8ii 2 ^G m' O� •0.g. 9 O'i°° N N 00 d o =o m m �c - 3 0. C� N a o T y 3 m 3.• w P 3 m q 6 pe o y a 7 0 R e N• 6 J T .°i O N a ID A J O m m � a m o cn Ago c m N N o_ J to-+W a a = O J N N O O N ImbO W N N 0 0 0, O 0 0 0 N 0 Cr, O O a a a n) -. Board n' .. Mayor a A'rN a a a A C O A II 3 m C m too. tao' N m W C 2°i m -4 O o , W V O 0 .N.O N O N O O O O N O O v N O O O O to O O D v C) t. bi 3 O a II O O O . 0 0 P O O J N D ^o-a o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 v s 3° 3 i o 0 0 So ^ N a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dan 3 ° a,g°o c N g J ry ^aN D-a a v a o v a o 2 a a 0 z 0 °a 0 c -. °a o ' % `� mm m 'o a m c A `�° w c 3 3. F. m mm °ioo� 01 a2 a2. m 01 (^a� -A 4'a -00 as vv vv 71v o O II N CD 0,0 B A O.o.2 O N 0 y y^O 2_a N n a a (Ar'.°-.a a a Q a a VO o O m O ' N O al N N o O - o oNoCOO CO nN ^ a a CM cn d a o a ° m 0 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT BUDGET ANALYSIS - FISCAL YEAR 2006-07 DATE: September 5, 2006 BUDGET FOR: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FUND STAFF REPORT BY: Jennifer Bruno, Policy Analyst cc: Rocky Fluhart, Sam Guevara, Louis Zunguze, Luann Clark, Sherrie Collins, Steve Fawcett UPDATE ON MAYOR'S RECOMMENDED FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS The Mayor has provided the Council with a letter (dated August 20, 2006, see attached), detailing a shift in the funding recommendations for the FY 2007-2008 CIP Budget. The Mayor is recommending shifting the $500,000 that he had previously recommended for Liberty Park, to augment the $400,000 that he had previously recommended for renovations in Pioneer Park. The following are key points regarding this shift: • This funding shift is requested because it was recently communicated to the Administration that the City would not be receiving a $900,000 grant from HUD. The City had planned to use this grant, along with $400,000 in CIP funds, along with $600,000 in private donations, to fund Stage 2 of the Park. The total cost of ,,p Stage 2 is estimated at$1.85 million. • The $500,000 that had been recommended for Liberty Park would have funded improvements in the Children s Adventure Playground. In his letter the. Mayor states that delaying these improvements for one year will not "...adversely affect the needs of the park..." • Attached to this staff report is a phasing plan for Pioneer Park, provided to Council Staff by the Administration earlier this spring. Stage 1 will be complete (with existing funding) prior to the opening of the 2007 Farmer's Market season. Outstanding Questions: • If the Council chose to allocate the $500,000 recommended for Liberty Park, to Pioneer Park, there would still be a Stage 2 funding gap of approximately $350,000. How does the Administration plan to fill this gap? Is the recommendation to scale back the scope of Stage 2? • Have the $600,000 in "private partnership donations" been secured? If no, how does the Administration plan to address any gap left by a shortfall of private donations? • What is the Administration's funding plan for Stage 3? 1 UPDATE ON PREVIOUS COUNCIL DECISION The Council held a briefing on June 1, 2006 to tentatively decide how to proceed with regard to the Mayor's proposal for issuing a sales tax bond for various projects. The following are what the Council tentatively decided: • Fleet Facility - Bond for the full cost of the construction of the new Fleet Facility, but do not bond for the original land cost. The surplus land account will not be paid back out of bond proceeds. Therefore the total amount to be bonded for this project is $21.6 Million. • Grant Tower - Bond only for RDA portion (assuming RDA does not receive a Federal Railroad Administration loan). Council Staff paperwork indicates this amount is$3.1 Million. • Daylighting City Creek @ Folsom Street Corridor and 900 South Rail line right-of-way improvements - The Council tentatively decided to bond for $300,000 worth of soil improvement/erosion control, to qualify the project for bonding as a part of the Grant Tower Railroad Realignment bond. Some Council Members expressed an interest in this project in the future, with continued planning and community involvement. The Euclid Small Area Master Plan (currently under way in the Planning Division), addresses this corridor, and has involved community members and property owners along the corridor. Staff note: At this point these decisions can still be revised as actual bond proceeds have not yet been issued. Pages 6 - 12 have a detailed analysis of the remainder of the projects proposed in the CIP fund for this fiscal year. Council Staff will have the spreadsheet of CIP requests projected for Council Members to discuss in the work session. The following information was provided previously for the Council Work Session on June 1, 2006. It is provided again for your reference. PROPOSED BOND ISSUES IN THE MAYOR'S RECOMMENDED BUDGET FOR CIP The Mayor is recommending a new sales tax bond issue that would have three project components, for a total of$36,380,000: 1. Fleet Facility - ($24.3 million) construct a new fleet facility on land previously purchased and for which the bond will reimburse the cost of the land. (note: $3.1 million of this $24.3 million total, is to reimburse the surplus land account. If the Council decided not to reimburse this account, and decrease the total bond amount, or dedicate this $3.1 million towards one of the other projects in the bond, there would be approximately $X left in the surplus land account). Staff 2 note - this cost estimate has been revised. The new facility is expected to cost approximately$24.7 million. 2. Grant Tower - ($7.07 million) complete the Grant Tower project (The RDA will contribute payments to the City for their share of the debt service). 3. Daylighting City Creek @ Folsom Street Corridor and 900 South Rail line t ight-of- way improvements - ($5.05 million) development/daylighting of the Folsom Street/City Creek Parkway, landscaping along the 900 South track line when it is abandoned by UTA A. Debt Service - The total FY 2007 debt service payment would be approximately $1 million, of which the RDA would pay $330,000 (their share of the Grant Tower funding). However, this does not represent the total annual debt service payment as it would technically be a "partial year" by the time the bond was issued. The debt service payment for the remainder of the 20 year loan is anticipated to be an average of$2.77 million per year (see table below for breakdown). Debt Service Total (average) Interest Paid Fleet Facility $ 24,255,000 $ 1,850,000 $ 12,855,130 Grant Tower $ 7,070,000 $ 540,000 $ 3,748,835 Park Trail Project $ 5,055,000 $ 387,000 $ 2,681,653 Total $ 36,380,000 $ 2,777,000 $ 19,285,618 note:this does not factor the RDA's contribution to debt service payments,which would likely be$330,000 but for only 15 years,rather than the full 20 life year of the bond(the district expires then). B. Amount Available for other projects - The following chart breaks down the amount of money available for other, non-debt projects, under the Mayor's proposed budget. If the Council were to bond for all three proposed projects, next fiscal year there would be $3.8 million available for "other projects" compared to the $5.14 available this year (a $1.34 million difference - assuming CIP was funded at the same $21.5 million level). 3 $25,000,000 tt f $20,000,000 , o Other Projects N Other Debt(scheduled) $15,000,000 �\ ❑Daylighting City Creek/Park Trail Bond (proposed) ■Grant Tower Bond (proposed) $10,000,000 ®Fleet Facility Bond (proposed) •General Obligation Bond Debt $5,000,000 --IMF $0 FY 2007 FY 2008 C. 10 Year Plan- All of these projects are contemplated in the 10 Year Plan. Daylighting City Creek is the only one that is not contemplated to be paid for with debt service. The plan slates this project for FY 2010 ($1 million from general fund, and S4 million from"other sources"). 1. The proposed bond would shift yearly money away from parks, streets, and transportation projects toward the "debt service" category. However, the 10 Year Plan does contemplate some shift in this manner for bonding for the Fleet Facility and Grant-tower related projects - in the amount of $29.6 million (a $6.8 million difference). 2. The Park Trail project (Daylighting City Creek), is planned for in the 10 Year Plan, but with a funding source of $1 million from the general fund, and S4 million from"other sources," not necessarily identified as bonding. This could potentially offset the 10 year 7.95% funding"balance." D. Cost reduction options for City Creek 900 South/Folsom Ave Park Projects - The Administration has given council staff the following breakdown of project components for both 900 South and Folsom Avenue (see attachment 1). At a minimum, in order for this land trade with Union Pacific to be "bondable," the land 4 needs to be improved for public use (i.e. soil erosion seeding). This is estimated to cost $200,000 for 900 South and $100,000 for the Folsom Trailway. The Council could elect to fund any of the project components for 900 South and Folsom in any combination (though they are grouped into the Administration's recommended Phase I and Phase II for each). Currently the bond proposal would pay for Phases I and II for the Folsom corridor, and only the basic landscaping for the 900 South corridor (listed as "Basic Native Erosion Control Seeding" on the breakdown). Council Staff has prepared the following chart showing options of funding various phases for the Folsom and 900 South Corridors: City Creek Park Options Debt Service Payment Debt Service savings from proposed Payments(Council budget(Council Staff Cost Staff Estimate) Estimate) Option 1-Proposed 900 South-Basic Landscaping Only $ 200,000 Folsom Corridor-Full Development (Phases I&II) $ 5,012,500 Total $ 5,212,500 $ 387,000 $ - Option 2 900 South-Basic Landscaping Only $ 200,000 Folsom Corridor-Basic Landscaping Only (no stream development) $ 100,000 Total $ 300,000 $ 23,000 $ 364,000 Option 3 900 South-Basic Landscaping Only $ 200,000 Folsom Corridor-Phase I Only $ 2,512,500 Total $ 2,712,500 $ 208,000 $ 179,000 Option 4 900 South-Phase 1 Only $ 1,887,500 Folsom Corridor-Phase 1 Only $ 2,512,500 Total $ 4,400,000 $ 337,000 $ 50,000 Option 2 would present the greatest savings in terms of bonding costs, and includes the minimum landscaping required for the bond. However, this option does not include stream or trail development. Option 3 includes the very minimum landscaping for 900 South, and includes stream opening and trailway development for Folsom Corridor (though not the full, Phase II park development). Option 4 includes trailway development for both. It is important to note that security lighting costs are included in Phase II of both projects ($1 million for 900 South, $500,000 for Folsom), not Phase I. E. Cost reduction options for the Fleet Facility - there are a variety of cost "offsets" that could be used in order to reduce the total amount needed to be bonded for to pay for the new Fleet Facility. If the Council is interested they may wish to ask the %ewe Administration to investigate these options further. 5 1. The total amount includes $3.215 million to pay back the surplus land account. The Council could choose not to pay this amount back, thereby reducing the total bond. 2. The estimated value of the current Fleet Facility site is between $3 and $5 million, and would cost approximately $1.8 million to demolish and environmentally mitigate the site. In the best case, the net revenue from selling the site would be $3.2 million, which could also offset the total amount needed to be bonded for. ■ A complication with this strategy would be the timing. This money would not be available until the following fiscal year. A possibility could be that the Council could "balloon payment options" into the debt service schedule for that year - thereby reducing the debt service payments for the years remaining on the bond - or the Council could use the proceeds from the sale of the land to make the debt service payment for that particular year, instead of using the general fund for that particular year. 3. Currently fleet vehicles and the Police motorcycles are stored at a warehouse at the international center. The Administration has indicated that there is sufficient room at the new Fleet Facility to house these vehicles. If that is the case, the warehouse at the international center could be sold. Property management has estimated the value at $3 million. The Council would run into a similar problem with timing described in item #2 above, but could handle the situation in the same fashion. ➢ The current cost estimate for the Fleet Facility is $24.7 million. If all of the above cost reduction items are undertaken, the net "cost" could be reduced by almost $10 million, to $15.3 million. This would leave yearly bond payments at around $1.1 million (with around $300,000 of that amount to be paid for by the Refuse and Fleet funds). The following information was provided previously for the Council Work Session on May 18, 2006. It is provided again for your reference. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET RECOMMENDATION The Mayor presented his budget for Fiscal Year 2006-2007 on Tuesday, May 2. The following staff report details the proposed Capital Improvement Budget. The Administration recommends funding CIP from the general fund in the amount of $21,452,138, a $1.9 million increase over last year's CIP funding allocation (9% increase). Of this, approximately $8.9 million is general obligation bond debt (dedicated property 6 taxes). Therefore, a total of $12,502,682, or 7.11% of general fund revenue, is proposed for Capital projects. Of this amount, $7,306,425 million is allocated for debt service projects (including the new debt service proposal for the Fleet Facility and other projects, discussed later), leaving a remaining balance of$5,136,257 for other projects. The recently-adopted CIP 10 Year Plan indicates that in order for the capital projects to ,, be fully funded over the 10 year cycle of the plan, an average of 7.95% of general fund revenues should be dedicated to capital projects. In order to reach the 7.95% number, the Council would have to increase CIP funding by $1,473,924 over the Mayor's recommended budget. The CIP 10 Year Plan acknowledges that 7.95% of general fund balance will not be sufficient to fund all projects in every year, but rather - over the 10 year period, if 7.95% is consistently dedicated every year, this will eventually cover all of the projects. In the past, the Council had a stated policy of dedicating a minimum of 9% of general fund revenues for Capital projects. In Fiscal Year 2007, the plan identifies $10.5 million in non-debt service projects, well over the current funding proposal of $5.14 million. The following are specific projects the administration has identified as "major projects" to fund in FY 2006-2007: o A General Obligation bond approved by the voters for The Leonardo and purchase of open space land (recognized property tax increase) (staff note: any additional funding to the Leonardo has not been incorporated into the CIP 10 Year Plan. This could affect the 10 year "balancing" of the plan at 7.95%), o The Mayor is also recommending a new sales tax bond issue: o A Sales Tax bond of$36,380,000: 4. Fleet Facility - construct a new fleet facility on land previously purchased and for which the bond will reimburse the cost of the land. 5. Grant Tower - complete the Grant Tower project (The RDA will contribute payments to the City for their share of the debt service). 6. Daylighting City Creek @ Folsom Street Corridor and 900 South Rail line right-of- way improvements - development/daylighting of the Folsom Street/City Creek Parkway, landscaping along the 900 South track line when it is abandoned by UTA ➢ All of these projects are contemplated in the 10 Year Plan. Daylighting City Creek is the only one that is not contemplated to be paid for with debt service. The plan slates this project for FY 2010 ($1 million from general fund, and $4 million from "other sources"). The total FY 2007 debt service payment would be approximately $1 million, of which the RDA would pay $330,000 (their share of the Grant Tower funding). However, this does not represent the total annual debt service payment as it would technically be a "partial year" by the time the bond was issued. The debt service payment for the remainder of the 20 year loan is anticipated to be an average of$2.77 million per year. 7 Debt Service Total (average) Interest Paid Fleet Facility $ 24,255,000 $ 1,850,000 $ 12,855,130 Grant Tower $ 7,070,000 $ 540,000 •4 3,748,835 Park Trail Project $ 5,055,000 $ 387,000 $ 2,681,653 Total $ 36,380,000 $ 2,777,000 $ 19,285,618 note: this does not factor the RDA's contribution to debt service payments, which would likely be$330,000 but for only 15 years, rather than the full 20 life year of the bond (the district expires then). ➢ The proposed bond would shift yearly money away from parks, streets, and transportation projects toward the "debt service" category. However, the 10 Year Plan does contemplate some shift in this manner for bonding for the Fleet Facility and Grant-tower related projects - in the amount of $29.6 million (a $6.8 million difference). ➢ The Park Trail project (Daylighting City Creek), is planned for in the 10 Year Plan, but with a funding source of $1 million from the general fund, and $4 million from "other sources," not necessarily identified as bonding. This could potentially offset the 10 year 7.95% funding "balance." ➢ The following chart breaks down the amount of money available for other, non-debt projects, under the Mayor's proposed budget. If the Council were to bond for all three proposed projects, next fiscal year there would be $3.8 million available for "other projects" compared to the $5.14 available this year (a $1.34 million difference - assuming CIP was funded at the same $21.5 million level). 8 $25,000,000 ---_..._.............___...._...__._..__._ ..__._____._.__...___......�__..._.___...—.___._ $20,000,000 ;;; l ;i l iti 0 Other Projects 0 Other Debt(scheduled) $15,000,000 Daylighting City Creek/Park Trail Bond(proposed) ■Grant Tower Bond (proposed) $10,000,000 O Fleet Facility Bond (proposed) •General Obligation Bond Debt $5,000,000 $0 FY 2007 FY 2008 o The Mayor is recommending $500,000 towards Liberty Park renovations (Concessions and Children's Garden Landscaping), and $400,000 for Stage 2 of Pioneer Park Renovations (Stage II total cost is estimated at $1.85 million. The Administration indicates they would seek outside funding sources for the balance. They have applied for a $900,000 federal grant, but have not indicated other funding sources that would be likely). Further details regarding these park improvements will be provided in the Council's briefing session. o In addition to the 7.11% of general fund revenue slated for CIP projects, the Mayor is proposing using a total of $3.5 million from fund balance for Land Acquisition and to help expand the Leonardo facility at Library Square. This use of fund balance for this project is not contemplated in the CIP 10 Year Plan. The Council may wish to weigh this project with the various other uses for one-time money (police vehicles, equipment expenses, Grant Tower, etc). Twenty-two (22) non debt-related projects have been recommended for funding from general fund CIP by the Administration, for a total of $5,136,257. The following chart shows a breakdown of funding totals, by type of project, and compares the various recommendations to what is called for in the 10 Year Plan: 41460, Non-Debt Service CIP Projects Amount CIP Board Mayor's Requested Recommendation Recommendation CIP 10 Year Plan Streets $4,379,284 $3,035,000 $2,715,000 $3,644,750 Transportation $1,853,750 $985,000 $985,000 $2,205,000 Parks $5,792,285 $1,100,557 $1,436,257 $3,708,285 Public Facilities $0 $0 $0 $930,000 Total $12,025,319 $5,120,557 $5,136,257 $10,488,035 Attached is a complete log of all CIP project applications for the Council's discussion on Thursday May 5th. KEY ELEMENTS The following are key points in relation to the FY 2007 CIP Applications and funding rankings: A. Of the 38 CIP funding applications, 4 projects are not specifically listed in the CIP 10 year plan. • #9 Pioneer Park could fall into the "to be determined" line item in the more general Parks category "Park Facilities Reconstruction" in the 10 Year Plan. However, this is not a specifically listed project. • Three of these four project requests were submitted by constituents (#15 750 North 2200 West Street Improvements, #19 800 South 1100 East Barrier Beautification, and #38 Yale/Herbert Safety Project), for a total of $213,750. The CIP 10 Year Plan incorporates $250,000 each year for to-be-determined "Community Projects." B. Though the 10 Year Plan calls for various Public Facilities improvements in Fiscal Year 2007, there were no applications made for Public Facilities improvements in the FY 2007 CIP. The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration if there are plans to handle these following improvements elsewhere in the general fund. The following is a list of projects that are included in FY 2007 in the 10 Year Plan, but did not receive funding requests for this upcoming fiscal year: • $350,000 - Plaza 349 - replace/install fire suppression system (Public Facilities) • $330,000 - City & County Building - replace carpet throughout building (Public Facilities) (staff note: this is one year of a two-year funding plan) • $250,000 - City & County Building - exterior stone strengthener/upkeep (Public Facilities) • $250,000 - Acquisition of Open Space for future development (Parks) 10 C. The following are projects that are scheduled in the 10 Year Plan that were requested but not funded (the total amount unfunded for projects otherwise planned for FY 2007 in the 10 Year Plan is approximately $2.6 million): • $580,000- #22- Rotary Glen Park Improvements (Parks) • $60,000- #23 -4th, 8th,9th Avenue Stairway Analysis (Parks) • $315,000 - #24 - Jordan River Trail Safety Lighting, State Ag Building to Redwood Road (Parks) (Staff note: The CIP 10 Year Plan anticipates that this would be a project funded in FY 2012, and would be partially offset by CDBG funds) • $50,000 - #25 - Residential concrete street rehab, 1700 to 1900 East, 900 & 1300 South(Streets) • $200,000-#26 -Sprinkler Irrigation Central System Interface (Parks) • $100,000 - #27 - Memory Grove Trails Improvements, East Side to A Street & 9th Ave (Parks) • $50,000- #28 -Jordan Park Power Pedestals, 900 West 1000 South(Parks) • $50,000- #29 -Traffic Camera Installation, 5 traffic signals (Transportation) • $400,000 - #30 - Lindsey Garden Park Tennis Court (Parks) (Staff note: The CIP 10 Year Plan does not anticipate funding this project until FY 2009) • $568,000-#31 -East Capitol Street Reconstruction (Streets) • $275,000 - #32 - Arterial Lighting, Redwood Road - North Temple to 2100 South(Transportation) • $260,000 - #33 - Arterial Lighting, 700 East, S. Temple to 700 South (Transportation) • $65,000 - #34 - Arterial Lighting, California Ave - 900 West to Redwood Rd (Transportation) • $50,000 - #35 - McClelland Trail Corridor Master Plan -Jordan River Canal at 900 South to 2700 South (Parks) (Staff Note: These are matching funds to be met by Public Utilities) • $600,000 - #36 - Fairmont Park Tennis Courts (Parks) (Staff note: The CIP 10 Year Plan does not anticipate funding this project until FY 2012) D. The Mayor's recommended budget includes $400,000 in funding for Pioneer Park in order to complete renovations beyond Phase I, which the Council has already funded. The Administration has previously indicated to the Council that they are seeking $900,000 in federal funds. The addition of these amounts would not be sufficient to cover the total project costs of Phase II of the Pioneer Park renovations. Renovations to the park that would emphasize the historic origins (Heritage Gardens, Historic Walkway, Bell Tower) are not scheduled until Phase III. Aside from the $400,000 in requested funds, there are $3.2 million in proposed renovations that remain to be funded. All three phases are part of "Stage 1," the stage that has been vetted by the community stakeholders. Stages 2 and 3, the water wall and skating rink, are not considered an official part of the community-approved Pioneer Park Master Plan. The following is a breakdown of these last two phases, and the 11 specific components of each phase, (the attached design document shows these proposed changes in greater detail): a. Stage 1, Phase II - $1.85 million total cost • Great Lawn • Concession Area/Stage/Reconfigured Restrooms • Tables and Chairs • Circulation path around great lawn b. Stage 1, Phase III -$1.75 million total cost • Themed Playground (possibly historic themed) • Historic Bell Tower • Heritage Gardens • Historic Walkway • Volleyball Courts E. The Mayor's recommended budget includes $500,000 to construct concessions and a children's garden in Liberty Park. The followings lists the remaining projects "left" in Liberty Park renovations, according to the CIP 10 Year Plan ($3.25 million, including FY 2007): • $750,000 - Children's Playground Renovation (FY 2009) • $1,000,000 - Greenhouse reconstruction & Jordan Greenhouse demolition (FY 2011) (staff note: this will consolidate greenhouse operations at Liberty Park). • $1,000,000 - Maintenance Building&Yard Reconstruction (FY 2012) F. Attached, please find the Mayor's recommendations for CIP funding, the list of projects scheduled in FY 2007 in the CIP 10 Year Plan, as well as the master plan for Pioneer Park, including cost breakdown. Staff will have the CIP 10 Year Plan for reference at the briefing, and it is available upon request. POTENTIAL MATTERS AT ISSUE A. The Council may wish to revisit the City and County building re-carpeting project. It is listed in the 10 Year Plan for FY 2007, but was not a funding request this year. However, due to the possible reconfiguration of space for the proposed one-stop counter, it could make financial sense to do at least one quadrant of carpet for the building in the same year as this proposal, so as not to duplicate efforts. The estimated cost for one quadrant of the City and County building is $116,925. B. The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration, the status of the escalating costs of construction materials, and the increased difficulty in obtaining construction bids. C. The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration what the specific debt service payments would be for the proposed sales tax bond issue, component project by project. The Council may also wish to clarify with the Administration what exactly will be constructed along the Folsom Ave and 900 South Rail lines. 12 D. The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration what components of Phase II will be funded with the $400,000 request, and what, if any, outside sources will be sought to pay for the remaining$3.2 million in proposed renovations. E. The Council may wish to resume their discussion of whether to pay for the remaining Grant Tower costs with one-time fund balance, or through bonding (note: The Council may wish to consider that some bonding through the City would have to be arranged so that the RDA can pay their portion of the costs through more favorable interest rates). CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET PROCESS The Capital Improvement Program is a multiyear planning program that uses two main planning documents: a 10 Year Capital Improvement Plan, and each fiscal year's capital budget. The Council recently adopted a revised 10 Year Capital Improvement Plan, on January 17, 2006, after a lengthy process to identify the most critical and realistic projects that need to be funded over the next decade. It should be noted that the overall amount to of transfer from general fund in order to pay for this 10 Year Plan over the decade, is 7.95%. Note: 7.95% is the number to be allocated to balance over the 10 year period. If 7.95% of general fund revenue is allocated, there will be some years that will have a surplus and some years that have a deficit. Following the Mayor's presentation of his recommended budget on Tuesday May 4th, the Council received a schedule of the proposed capital projects for fiscal year 2006-07 with ranking information from the CIP Board, Administrative Staff and the Mayor. The schedule identifies all of the projects that were submitted for funding with the Mayor's recommendations and the priority rankings of the Citizens Advisory Board and Administrative staff. The City Council makes the final determination of projects to be funded. Council staff will project the schedule on the screen during the work session to facilitate discussion and funding decisions. The Administration accepts applications for capital projects from citizens and City departments each year for consideration for recommendation by the Mayor to the Council for funding. All applications are reviewed by the CIP Citizens Board and a team of City staffers from each department who specialize in capital projects. Copies of each project application can be made if Council Members desire. During the past two years, the Council has appropriated funds for debt service and time sensitive projects during the annual budget process and waited until later in the summer to make other appropriations. The Council may wish to determine whether it wants to pursue this same coarse of action or whether the Council wishes to appropriate the entire amount of CIP funding during the annual budget process. COUNCIL POLICIES REGARDING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 13 On April 6, 1999 the City Council adopted a resolution entitled "Council Policies Regarding Salt Lake City's General Fund Capital Improvement Program." This resolution specifically stated the Council's intentions that the Administration regard the resolution as the Council's policy objectives for the City's General Fund CIP Program. In December 1999 the Council adopted a resolution entitled "Salt Lake City Council Capital and Debt Management Policies" which set forth the capital and debt-management policies that were intended to guide the City in addressing the deferred and long-term infrastructure needs of the City. In December 1999, the Council also adopted an ordinance (which was amended in May 2000, and again in 2006 - see section on impact fees below) establishing impact fees on new development within the City. Revenue from these fees are dedicated to fund those capital projects which are directly attributable to growth. Some of the Council's capital improvement program policies are highlighted as follows: • Establish a formal multi-year capital program • Link the 10-year needs list and the annual capital budget • Identify the extent and cost of deferred maintenance • Utilize condition information to select and prioritize capital projects • Focus attention on the long-term implications of capital decisions • Identify full life cycle project costs • Prepare multi-year revenue and expenditure forecasts • Give priority to capital improvement projects that reduce current City maintenance requirements. • Continue taking advantage of one-time opportunities to supplement base budget CIP (i.e. one-time revenues, particularly from the sale of real property). • Maintain a capital improvement prioritization process that allows citizen and community input. • Provide ongoing funding to address capital improvement needs of the City. (Council's policy is that at least 9% of on-going General Fund revenue be allocated to the CIP Fund. Class C, federal funds, impact fees, and one-time monies are all in addition to the 9%. For fiscal year 2004-05, the Mayor proposed a one-time reduction to approximately 7%.) ➢ It should be noted however, that in October 2005, the Council made the decision to revise the 20 Year Inventory of Capital Needs and evaluate spending expectations as compared with recent budget realities. In January 2006, the Council adopted a fiscally constrained 10 Year Capital Facilities Plan, in which each department was asked to identify the most crucial and realistic projects, in order to arrive at a plan that was more likely to be executed to completion. ➢ The consultants hired to form the plan noted that in order to fully pay for the fiscally constrained 10 Year list of projects, the Council would need an average of 7.95% of the general fund per year allocation to CIP (see note on page 2). 14 "SPECIAL" ITEMS WITHIN THE CIP BUDGET Impact Fees Impact fees are a financing tool that enables the City to address some of the infrastructure necessitated by new growth without further deferring current infrastructure needs. Impact fees cannot be assessed to address issues of deferred capital infrastructure. Revenue collected from impact fees must be expended or encumbered within six years after receipt, unless the Council identifies, in writing, an extraordinary and compelling reason to hold the impact fees longer. Under such circumstances, the Council must establish an absolute date by which the impact fees will be expended. The Council may wish to ask the Administration whether some of the CIP applications qualify for partial funding from impact fees. An independent consultant conducted an analysis of impact fees in Salt Lake City and made recommendations regarding updating the City's impact fees to reflect the now- current, fiscally constrained 10 Year Capital Facilities Plan. The Council adopted this revised schedule of fees to reflect the current list of projects. Additionally, the ordinance was amended (at the recommendation of the consultants) to include a yearly inflationary adjustment to cover steadily-increasing construction costs (the standard identified is the Engineering News Record yearly construction cost index). 15 C7 11 .0. AUG 3 1 2006 • mi ROSS C."ROCCKYY" i ANDERSON � � I as eat NMI RV S`MAY OOFFFICCE�OFF THE MAYOR August 3o, zoo6 David Buhler, Chair Salt Lake City Council City & County Building, Room 304 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 RE: zoo6/zoo7 CIP Funding —Pioneer Park Dear Dave: My zoo6/zoo7 recommended CIP Budget included $400,00o to fund a portion of the Stage z revitalization plan for Pioneer Park. As you recall, the City Council appropriated $6o0,000 in thezoos/zoo6 CIP funds for Stage 1 improvements. Stage 1 construction will be completed next spring prior to the opening of the zoo7 Farmers Market season. The funding plan for Stage z included $400,00o in CIP funds, $900,00o in anticipated funds from a HUD economic initiative grant, and $600,000 in private partnership donations. I recently received word that the City will not receive the HUD grant this year. That unwelcome news leaves the project short of funding, and it does not make good design and economic sense to carve Stage z into smaller funding segments. In light of the Council's plan to discuss CIP funding during its September g meeting, and in an effort to keep the Pioneer Park project moving forward, I recommend that the $5o9,000 in 2006/2007 CIP funds targeted for Liberty Park be moved`to the Pioneer Park project. The funds for Liberty Park can be delayed one year without adversely affecting the needs of the park and the expectations of the community. The Liberty Park funding is needed to make improvements to the Children's Adventure Playground that is no longer open to the public, and to tie that improvement to the recently revitalized concession area. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 306,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE:801-535.7704 FAX:801-535-6331 www.slcgov.com 0 RECYCLED PAPER I respectfully request that the Council strongly consider this recommendation in your upcoming CIP discussions. The Pioneer Park project must continue to move forward in a thoughtful and consistent manner. Millions of dollars have been reinvested in the Pioneer Park/Rio Grande community by private property owners, private businesses and other community organizations. Furthermore, this community's residential population is steadily growing. The City must recognize this private investment and be a willing and consistent partner in the growth and improvement of this community. A major renovation of Pioneer Park was clearly contemplated when the City Council appropriated $6o,000 for the public process and planning for the renovation. That lengthy and comprehensive public process and initial design has been completed, after more than 3 years of hard work by staff, community members and the design consultant. Our strategy to divide the Pioneer Park project into three (3) funding/construction stages, and to blend private and grant funding with City funds, is a reasonable and appropriate course of action, consistent with what the City Council asked us to do when it appropriated funding for the public process and initial design work. I ask that you support this project and allow it to move forward without delay. Sincerel , oss "Rocky" Anderson Mayor Cc: Cindy Gust Jensen Rocky Fluhart Rick Graham S* a6 9Y,J<d �b �G C _ ad 0-ii Zz Y'!. 2' ONI/IL 4.2-Ze,,,-42. __,.._..4...' , 24 lill _J}— .--, '.. ,\ .., 2=1-2'4 Lit,,:,,,,,,,t,,,,,,,,,-. .-,-- !.0 a_< r:.,-' ce Ens ct0 wN P i x u)o z ', K £ 3 .^$ xo e y 2 Ll! m Y U p t N -:�2 1 w k f ^ P ?' 3 < o ''' __ r- ,.:sa cue LLto Z 0 a d##OII#4.s4 G„gYS^ C 6.C3#aA A 9.7 / 0-',,le A .642.._ 21 .45. 4,,,* .A ... ' w a p.F a, . 4. g. ••_3y k -" q'f C 000 za U r. s 1 ' . y . a 4 j.,,j z z QO �O co W°- ' ~O 70 Q} 0 cc) W ~ w N a) a) Y U 0 U U U ca) QYo —• < 2 EL V) Y 0 (l) WI- o - c U) " 10 -° WQo O N 2 0 (n W cO � U S.'. as Y Z ' OLOc a) a) 0 Ua E O D 0.7 - E' raOUcNc3 04 wwOOf- mco . D0 O C o(7o0O 6OOO6O' O0, 0oO Cz ,C,:. .; g..I4i-.-,,,b:.w. +:' ,1ia © O 1 O © _ 3 _. __ ; Q O 0 O E1 i. 0 a 000 0 00, 00 O 0 0 000 0 0 O 0 II: :41:":1:.',,, Ci 3 b d;O 0 0 O i ,. 0 0 0 0 00 0 a .. 0 0 o I. 0 0 O ....40!".„..,,,!, :..,`-',''' . 00 0 o ` . d 00 00 G 7 0 0 00 00 Cr i 1 0 000 000 0 0 & c 1 ,, ''3 0 0000 0 000 0 Pc 0 s 0 0 0 m o ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 a0- . rir7) - - • k! 0 01 _ -. u , . .7 a , l.? 'x..., E..i 4 0 0 1. . 0 J 0 . 0 ,., , 0 ,.:., O U ._ Z Z n-i` QO JE- N XO (0W n (0O <00 E0 co .. v3 C p YUp Co i' Q O 4 °' 'E -r � U CeJo oQ JilhI�COU 0Ui ism. \ _ Q r oo0oo- 4' o c aaao 004 �oo07- nc c c 0c� oa 0-0 i d s : .1 ,::,.. at ":„;::::.,:;1 T\., 0)::104I, .1 '.y ` ga1. 0 a • \01\ \ C.,.... ..,r..,,,,„*.•„4-.',,,,.., ,...:,...,• , -,, :1'�•) , , t, a iv, ... "' w �'as s Y i© i ai , t ; ..k . � � �� fi z �� i nx •yu a 34:4 • .gi l-•< K x . 4" %• :1 d -'h x f 1 , iL O 2 #am b f: :sx �w#' L.i .hr,- ;*'11'•'• cipio) hisomattAiiiitig 0.. •,,,-",9,:at=1:•-•:-7, 4-: ,:.„-,. ..:4::=2.?! ...,:%,,,,y,„,,,,,:t.i4,..E 1 0 0 O ' 0 0 0 a: Y O = . 5 C. 0 0 t .' •jA .*X.0 .,40,.n.•.r;5,',4A -.,4'.c a 0. ts - ,?, •0 4,, ::- il,0 x zz :. JI- — E J Q0a 0 0 ,r , L a) Y0a .. , U Q O 0 -p C c c�II a Q s _ O EH -2 Y CC I- 11,3 rm0 > (a WU) fn v H co a) �• To Z � OV Q) U U p) U Q Q .o o- . ao ! o a.) ▪ co z (n = _ c_ >Uco _ t:ti` k•Vi:J \ . O irT ,ra�►c.. w zp�' �x ..y'P .".��:. � •. togig a • 111. ; o ,O e s -ry. L a w i1 S ' b 3�' 4�'p' rye' 3�< � y� "g � E aV 'R I•Ftf**:4 '.:',,':!•!..- 1-.'c'' ': ',:::;1':'$,Z,:','"'1 l':?'"-,::V.iti.,;-V--- ,,,:l.i,f,,:-:',g.',0Pi?,,, ,,,,:' ,.!,,',-. ,---.• :','L',-,'E;•;,,,-,...,6:', ,-I O <� ' ` , 1 0 � i I �. , 0 < r> i 8 m ." :O r 0 oiperi:„,::,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, , ° 0 0 , t 0, ,:,' t,„.:,,, I a � ~awO . -711,E-4- i p rT` 'O l"" --- ., ,L., - .. ,.:,, U ' ' 0. 0 C..; 4 CO CO) .0 0 ' • 0 - 0 4-.. ..:,. 0 - - 0 -4,144 a a c ea Z Z T+ 0 c a a Q� o $ ate ... ua n 01. w �'O c88 �oa$ 88 88 QO �.7 Fes- C CVi�� 0 co c o aN F— m LL ffAA 69 69 b9 F9 to Y U F cCw „ 0 11. t W a CO so 0 COZ e m toc ¢i w 0c Q. -- , � cro s oaV � o oro m OmCOroEgi8 Ec . - c c "oE +a 5'a 10 o to N�W0 V� 01 m ` c ". � yj • Cm w0 �, .. Mas tiegtit a c ov' cec $ Eg E � u5C $ � Ea w g0w- 0 $. » i»- a +n w . � c ° � n L i etmcam em m � . m � m mm � m cqrmdmcSom0r ct5 > m , m .c'� 46avac= ccc ; oo ` v E�t ' E oa. >� ttry t° u UQ�amma0wwui u Q.DaUawu aa a cg_ ea 0 13 0C 13 7. gia'U 14mm "a w u c.c Do A G W N aE ° c ▪ B8d N'n. c $ v Na E cx m o 'm o m s _ co 'j 3 — 9C'p c U m f- D ..3 � om " ' ` w n c a v . mma u a As rE 8 1uai� ft mc Q . er . c • flE vQ - p Ol 4£>Q o m az, cr P. a. 2 SO0 Y0E ib (7J1— E U it «0 2OUCse4 .3 i: 0 — HD0. _ m 0 a0. lU- li o is 3 E E E 8 0 0 .0 ° a _ - _ ° cn w w w 00CD co co { as _ S -a s '� f t., , ,t ,,,:i 0 g a - 1 ., wa--,,;:T . z Ffr . 1 ' ,0 2-✓..ham cC k4r 0�9 A. LOUTS ZUNGUZE \AJI ti'_A)aJ g ,YI "R eRP"',�,�'� �� V� ROSS C. "ROCKY" ANDERSON DIRECTOR DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MAYOR BRENT B. WILDE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITT• TO: Rocky J. Fluhart, Chief Administrative Officer ! May 2, 2006 ,1► i FROM: Louis Zunguze, Community Development Dire tor i iii SUBJECT: Mayor's FY 2006-07 Capital Improvem:i 'r•g. STAFF CONTACTS: LuAnn Clark,Housing&Neighborhood Development Director, at 535- 6136 or luann.clark@slc.gov ACTION REQUIRED: Transmittal to City Council DOCUMENT TYPE: Briefing BUDGET IMPACT: $12,502,682 DISCUSSION: Issue Origin: Salt Lake City's Capital Improvement Program(CIP)is a multi-year planning program of capital expenditures needed to replace or expand the City's public infrastructure. The construction and/or rehabilitation of streets, sidewalks, bridges,parks, and public buildings are typical projects funded within the general fund portion of the CIP. The Mayor will present his recommendations for CIP projects in his annual budget. Attached please find copies of the CIP log that includes a brief description of all projects submitted for funding, funding history, amount requested, and the operating budget impact. The log also includes recommendations for funding from the Mayor and the Capital Improvement Board. Analysis: The Mayor's FY2006-07 budget proposes an amount equivalent to 7.14%or$12,502,682 of general fund revenue to CIP. Of this amount, $7,306,425 is allocated for debt service, leaving a remaining balance of$5,180,557 for allocation to CIP Projects. Of the $5,180,557 allocated to CIP, the Mayor's budget proposes $1,420,557 for Park Improvements, $2,715,000 for Street Improvements, $985,000 for Transportation Improvements, and $60,000 for Percent for Art. The Mayor's budget includes the proposal of a sales tax bond for acquisition/construction of a new Fleet facility, Grant Tower, Folsom Street/City Creek Park, and 900 South Track Line. If the sales tax bond is approved for the Fleet Facility, the Administration is requesting the Council to amend the use of the Impact Fee funds awarded in fiscal year 2005 from design renovations of the current fleet facility to the design of the new facility. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH B41 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-535-7105 FAX: 801-535-6005 WWW.S LCGDV.COM Recommendations: That the City Council review and adopt the annual Capital Improvement Program. PUBLIC PROCESS: The Capital Improvement Program requires no other public process. It is formally adopted by the City Council by Resolution and Public Hearing and is included within the Salt Lake City annual budget process. RELEVANT ORDINANCES: None Mayor's FY2006-2007 Capital Improvement Program Page 2 of 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Attachment A: FY 2006-07 Capital Improvement Project Log Attachment A FY 2006-07 Capital Improvement Project Log N D O Z U In a c E C a° z z z z z z z z z z rr O 3 m a-E.° c •U v7 O C a O O O` E 0 a¢ 0 n 0 rn CO m 0 0) N. m 0 0 V7'O 0 0 0 O CO 0 LU 0 0 0 O • O C 0 O) N N Ni. O 0 N N' O O N 3 0 0 CO Co LO n I. 0 v) 0 ID • O n CO n N N 0 EO 0 N f9 .9 • O E ` ` 66 . H3 f9 f9 O. " v> )D V O a n N 0 °) n � O O -0v co 0 o co a L rn C)_ w 0 0 CO y C CO- O) N n V O 0 h C] O' o O c 0 co CO co N n N. m IO CO CO m O n CO N. N N 0 -. CO N 69 t9 O. p E di N V N N 6 Vi 6S f9 f9 . Uf in 69 Via¢ on• rn , I o N a O O) n CO0 0 0 o rT w m e 0 o r�i _ I' a e7 0 0 N G" 0 m r 1-7 H CO rn W tD rp 0� 0 a J r C) n N I0 )O N M C) C Q• �9 . W 47 • }IL w N H w W W w �) Jo/Sew c z., pieo8 T `o m vx rn c a c LL -o O• a N Q y o .5 O 0 0 °) m d ae 3 cm m O F 2 F m °- m= 0 U ° E Esa u Y ae m m m m F � � 9 Z a E 0 o • rn m 'c E o. d o a e to w U L > m maEi E c N N C7E u 3 _ •C o = E O m E D m 2 m• 0 1 06 « a y CO m '�g.2 g a) O `m o N y N y J O . 5 p >, 7, d U 0 C LL U y Ip N J r) c C C O a) to LL _ m� ° o > CO> E o TO-0 ma -2a .0'. mom m m m d o m a a`) LL= a s E 0 • c g Z c n o m2 2 a a E 0 rod 0 mN N y O 6 N 00. c01-o o w y c N aU}¢a N c EE Ot `a Nam O So was mo 7 yELLO 0 JNJN0 ta 9ca EnO¢ N dT• 9Ici-W C UOO • c d O oa a z } cm °d- 0o o ' E c -a; 0 . y4) L, olL •Oc. a, 03 ON N O O mLL ON • 7 ?. jN ? E .O- C 23 cc NC a):4 Oi O ` 2 a C V'9 L0 o co Om dOo .,o . OCN c0 Umy Nm �0O OQJfOayO j ' dam a E ea " ¢ ` N u O u ,� ° ° yOp � 7m oo b 16 � qE c eJ O c°� a ai oo2a8 0 uo9 15 $� OM7 r•C d � j 9 d O 0 N O m rn N G0ONN1g o a m-ON O N U 7,F.; o O 2 '5 m • E E 2E5 oora NEc _NED wN c CRCm0 O o5d .ama� 8` CC m jO . L w c aN z- maaN NamNm¢' Od D. Nma3d7 tm m m c o ao c O d m Ours m'c .2 m ° .d Si ° d T w 9 m ` oYy C..) �'.ZE ° Zm 0ZNOOA > QArnm 9 � aAangs °•E , 3o - ma) vOTZ'a0 Zi0 ~rna• °FN.- 5N co 0,wmED-'coo o WE ° a cadGNCc wm Ep LL a a raO -of dyZmaoa day 0 a 0 m a a,' m a 0 0 o aa d Oa t3. r,...z 20 UOU JO E J❑.O CAOm a6 CO NO NJ OO CO UOLL F a la aF O O ,i,aJ . C Oc' it Nw U 7•L ) V V rj N. C r N co V )O rD n 0 - m V) .O 2. a 2 [� N a L) d d a a a a m ^I LL Q 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 O D. ll Cn Cn A W + N N + O N o FO .y. DpN Do Cl) H DO C» -1 �+ rn O N m kr N W O i m O i m N 0 g m N 0- m r.. V N'*1. C7 N CO o A w(7 W m n a o c 5, -- ` ^ 3 u D IF V 73 "O 10 10 O "...P.-0 ' O =J > > 07 > > A (OJ Wiir - N nG `G r = Sb C,Oi t:zDcn»-i r 'lrnm ybZ. E.<o N 8.N N a d a O d a N f. m a J Z 8 a m <D .ly m N N C a m. O m Q.v x O D o 3 a O 0,= 0 �iy, rmi, 00=i -m § a 3m1=o°£1 mc � »°m = c= Nm0 » -0 DC z gCDa 'm w aD �.o o c 3 c f j Rom A o w m m z o o s v 3 m C)=w y v •C o^m o c o a �+ a Dam 0 ^ '" -m »a8=^a ySy g-5T o�3c o.�c m xg3cn� w ••.. ' u g • 8 vmiN �g g� . oim�' 1O P."'-w' m oa-oad ot+_ a Pm o� ry ° O= o m Q. 0 =O y N; j O 13=D C.N .di - CD m OW 0. = c gD A O= < 3 o H w ?,m m C 7 S"'m °-' gfpyew �rio^' dfloa52- mmo9c a . O mmm »aD �J^ rm a w 9 w y = N O g 1D 0) m O.g V O O o w 11 g = o C D 43 r♦ OM o.V = m �- ^ Pcm aom •vmo ma9yo c � �m w wpm^ w wpzooF� °' O No H �g do� A < !o.3o3flD< �-=y�umi � �'m rmnE3.mQ wm aQ� ay OD n ov m 5 m m p o m m W �'m'�' m o o s N c�y g'c13 m .�i m ro a m y 2 • o m m m o I. a�o o w a ;1 o lod S m m-i o3.�.cE ocacHm ow ° m4 5 6'ao�d w . c o=Cp OOao Q cdy3�o 03 »� -'» m w m = v m <2. H �n a�= ZF E. C� a 0 ._ 5 oO o. a41. < O 2.(Q�Ow m 'i • w EA j N 9, N N O Tl�.»_ , (O 3 �, `G a N O C A _ inwA* rimy ^ a , a�o� S0 ' -2 myc � ryrya o .333 om o. '3 00 W 01 23_.a m N m -O W m a0 5 __ O aO.1D r O 5°-3p (m7i a w m k O 2 y'O 11 'f O a 0 G 000.00' = »_7 ,. Qao m3pIom x' c0 o § 3 =0 i 'w� _ @^'' a m Om b C 551,E ras9m.D» oC3c m = ° 3 $ = Ocom, m wT 5 as.(D u3 C �y'ET w `z�»y " N ? ^m' .2. w o m.N o_C. o mmo�no� m�ya 3 .3oy mmp 3§ 0 � 2''T, o °-' >: m N O`er ' m ac� c 'cm x .f oama8 a ao y O o -o-o O=-p1 y W arn.o aO. a< fD ' m6mam oc'ma O moolo �� q F.m1o3m �g 0'_'3 G O N =i y -.2= `a O 8 ranyN m + m = d st m N gi Q'D m a D) pO V m O.O' 1 N CD C O O » O S m -1 o o O o O 1 0 o o O -1 O -1 o c o 1 0 0 0 O O o O N A.N ay, O Cn A C. O Ot w Cn E.N 0 11j1 of W N+o ?1 p 1 O O 666 ff'O . 00c, y o Cn a Ca 0 0 :j -O wA W N d 0 -0 N A -0 -0)A w -O0A W N+ 117 :1 V EA EA EA N EA N 01 EA M EA EA EA 69 H EA EA EA N EA EA EA Efl EA EA :C W(n 0 0(D O ow V A + 01(n O1 Cn O 0, A A O)A w W W V O O O V O tD-co O O O O 0 0 O O O O DD O O o o a,O MO W CC 0 0 G O C O o O O O O(n O N N 0 0 0 0 N O O O N O W w p 0 0 0 O O O O O O A O O O O A O w o 0 o w o O O o o+o m 1r A CO N + Board 01 o A W N + Mayor : P. 0, fA N 401 M N .7 .J ~ 3 0 P. o O o t«i1 o. A o o O C O O O 0, O O O O 1j 73. ;1 0 O o O 00 O O O O O O O� O O 0 O O o a 6' EA COCp o l so o o o P. p ' w u 0 o § O Ce9 a n p o e9 69 En Z:, 3 CO O 01 01 V CO CO pO pO C� O O O O O P. O „O 801 O =: O w 8 O O O O CO CO CO ^ C w O O CO CO CO O CO CO p T 'o O O 0 C_: O = v, n =s = C N oI' 0-o d d �'. ' O O O W p m N 0 1D m o m N Q d 0 O 0 _; 3 f E ;to m m .. ci F.; N M • U C m A hb DDWO m 25, _ 3 c rn 1° c m o m m m `° °' o m 2 m E E a' m [ `• m c 222 c 9 E E N m co a 2. 10 C D a m 0 9 d O 274 Z N C m Z 0 U . 0z Z R U Z C 2 O ,..15 m ° OOO C Z._ Z._ Z C Z J Z m u C N J •C 4.O J O E O U R Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O 0 0 0 Uf N C 0 O 0 O N La a O 0 O 0 0 0 oA o + 00 0 0 as 0 0 0 0 0 p y c o O h O^ m° °v.'o v 0 1 » 4) » _a °Q 69 T. c o 0 0 r O O 0 0 ,1 0 0 0 gm...,0 0 0 c c uooi d N O N O M o n rn M , w w in Qp M47. w u. O N. aoRew n re °' .m p,eog n m n a, N 00000 M00000. 00 00000 000 000 00000 00000016, 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ?-'0 0 0 0 0 0 i-O O O O O N 66 0 0 0 0 0 )[l O�()O O N O O O C ON Odd yj 0 o. mom y m10 m O r W n r 0 0 0 N M N a N a N a (O N 0 0 0' 6 N p N O t00 N N N N Myi yiM�y meat. MMM MMMMM MMMMMMM M19 0) CO M a O- .-N M a LL 0- O Co M 00 000 r N 8- N)!) y 3 200000 ., O... ONM4O 0 01oO NO OgO LU- OOOOH OOOooOF OF' pOF 001- 0OF a 0 m m• 3 C >) a N O 3 52 U O S > Jc nE O O o am °aM Zco0. . v (0 U O - Z` o Z= a Oo C9 ( ENVO a •m ma mv2M 0C > ° m NOMN 16 ) n amO !n0 4,M ym@M , rnyLEgEa mac ° ui � m y =Mo K �aa` om LC m LQC n cUGd - d .c : 4a� C ° 0-p_NC 62 V -0 yC Omy• Qt • U 3 m caEm` c Em ° > c .�nmmw h 0m ma °E 50m o0, 0E _ mo ° m o-E xmU Eocw EEoL8 ' ° mc 3 °"mc YmZ`m 0d8 a oE 95m° N"OC > rnw 02e co oo NC °_W aN C fz .LO. MmEa9m 05 23 0 L .)6 mb -cd ' c'S8oN ° 0 moaj . ° N°W p m E >m cW mU00E= @ m f>OM 00 000a .4 Vn d J Y tg o ) )p • > 0aca 0cf m and-8mEo 322 om Q ` pO OOmEcO202 n CT7E CNUU'M W0j6 00nhO •OU O = o N m O C wwLCo ▪ 0= E aC @ CE6 Q O " TU N aC0-LE pN �� d£ Oc ° > 3 ? $ b m °)_ M E � 2 3d c0L'-om o '5 ,Dm cYOo °2' U m H [o c , my 3O d m d wZ m ~wU 0NCNON0. - 8,7a M E - ,,.- da m0�U OCO NEOC °W s0LCCO EO >`y - m0 ° m dCE.5 m 0 OCUJ 2E0 ONWO Cm»m O L. mL- aU . L _ O Ca; } Tm'OpU0 ] N ^a O `rJU0 NN0 OHC a m�°a N47 UmE mN -2 c7JpE . Cm _CpOL OE o J Cd O -Tc EC0a C ayp N <L<mCO M aN0 IS pnO m LC Ew a aC 99@ ` EmU ' d NiO O U3N j NNgOOC m5= NNYo . ° U OCLLOd gs J = E > N mny0ona N y tos9i Ed - NC amaE OOy .❑ EOm 2NmJ"OC Tvz O°d mp,rmG OLC °w ` LO° UiYCp «°6Cm E . Cc0.0 UmLLUN sY oc 0 t o- J'c 6 m m 4 g m ° m 0 O c Oo o ° ornoo m v i voUT -c 3 E _OL006OCEN ygcCuZ, qo -a c > 2mmU � Ew r m m.o c ;Too N0 y .> E0 m >L E EU« mgwr8 ° wm U .�',o� LCO3o m Ea- Uo 06,5E.. .- °Qa' UT9m .4., 0 NmN9 . ' 8 ° aNn7;1 s a N m) -8 - + mm Uo 'a o) a4ocn - 0, i� Exm U Q F mm � O�� m g2 ;EMJ ~no.cW MO CO U dY Y dQ C O �-C D a wo' O1 05 � oEC m o m c m UT a"' �N Nc 20 r wwoa c a o o m a a m ,. ' ` omp > � o16T a w oc c w ay y m ocaUmaom a" m a >v cY `o ,naaZU a gc ma - °rmUu O °m-U^ C0mU- =a z0- a Za,= � 8mNZ ` !) F' y0 m 7-5 . Cq F 2 07Yc yONm NYCm NN NmV N. , - N .E 0 T.>}0 YO}` ,Q )0 ` URV 0 laVN yOaC JCGN Ad6U0 m ,,UU0mOO- 0mU0 N mm0¢O- J-aoa a¢O F naao aJax-5 mLLaQ❑ H2Q,-_ ma..)(-0 aa¢ �Qrna n ao m IV Pu N N O Co a V p a Oo�17'O D�'O[p g27 F8 DF v nfn .y.m o o w a o m vi o g m m o c �o .a. O� � D�D� � �G)C Ca J N Jc 0{J C m as » %'Zi -o m W m y 'a » v c n N `� m »m [[pp'a m N j N ± ._.3 W g m 0 0 A o'N is m ."0 7 o y o,-' 0 A y a o V N i,' 13.� C r N amt.. »l v i. J W ^a W :D V^_. 0 -4 V O _ J m N Doi m Pa=10-J 0 o- o N TI m n w 52 o E n" . Z U. :' a< ET m I N N S m `Z m ° J N `z J N .(.4, J J 3. J J J m y m :,- A .3 c 4o T 17m•m7° S 1A t»e as^ fu W 31� m -1�1 'm -{ a en-^am ii, m W 3.m 0 =° ° V[CO o o O o [[8 m ° W m 0 0 W m 0 0o A 3 ° m %,o y� C DI -1 N to--I 7.1 C-.N y j'° P. O N -, N tmi, 0.Z O a 3 N W m a N m Q c'O_W J. m y U! N n O m O J m O m W m - O N 0 S 0 O 5.=f O O J OJ O 5.ti) O y ^Ao N=F .....[D O m W m[O C O"'a O J O 8 3'y N �, O A O ,m-.N �. C)J m o m m • ^ s• m ^m m E.m c a J rs o 4 J m ° a= J c 9 m o [mi -Wo ^J o = c 'D J O o vo a a^m _O m o a'o c W m » m d c (gym Z c 0 3 N 7 m'Dm "v y m m O F N m [p m s ? f»m P. m m -, W m [p 01 �.o < N O coo O W y %, m ^m m 5 'W O a.. 3Fo W 2JFmn .o Ja m 1m o Faoo W vJ '3 ^» of a390 sg *-oa, - c�,g-[' ?ym3.0o mG Z.dw `Dro. m c°m[' 4.m �� Eg m o2 m d »Emvo W o A m 5.y O 3 o m F�2 W n_ =cJi Io 01 . , 3 J W 1D' o a» 'm o C 5 o a =_c m o m E.0 =O Q 9 J m d. _..O Q a W J m-d 0 [D " m T.[»U N. .W. m 0 - J m C O 3 [' [7� y a m y 0 »< tsn a a m F m N m -N - N- p5. d r F j W m n O O O S N m W m J'O ro g[° . 'm J§ � W a2f.9ma 8' 3 ° i,JOm rnf° a, .q agmm o 7' aJ -I ig' [n °'1 -cli v, 3 o. n g j an d-.3 ^m J'O X N n j y O y'. ° [� m J Q0[� o m m T. O _ an d a m 2 m 0 O y O F F J W m 0 °m y m m a N •'' .C.O <A»m J a J. 3 6 N O[D �? n d 3 a Z O Co m O^ J 7 V oO __O a d C"J C'j DDO O S y ' A O D.[D- d o 3 m a .a,,'° 0 m ,O J S7^^ 3 N f0 »- [� T.m W 2T.9 W J y a .a1 -0 J O j ^m QD m p tm a ' W 3 R a< N o 0 a 6 ', 3 W o.O 00 co- -..O.. Goy 2 p[' 2 N Z", m0.3 J O a N m�_ m a J 3 C C a N p a p@ Ol ° N m . O J W d N N . .--,..a . ,„,, m N[> 3m cm 3 D'�aam cv3 a.° o n A2 my, .^. 3 a-..J . m m ° a o S[D a'.S°_ 5'ao•O c2.m a m J m ('d 05. A -a7- �'< ias a 0'-7 N m a ry %.J W m° N C m 2 J[p N e' J y 3 ^°- o .ry tl'.p. n CI 0 O m N G J a p m » m • Jm 5a ycm y c.�'^D T. m3 Nm a F ' ccd *oao 2? mg NtO,Fg -Iwr' .[o *•�o °o .o y 3 u, a c 3 m� m J n ^fO m y i.m w um, v+-S a o cl, � -J' < 5. OD 3 m W 6 9 H .n.._j' N N O E. O a° O N» C^ S m Z 00 o c� ,, o,a o g g ;J n 3 Soo , o[o J ea m c 8 3 0 0 o m Ao o o_.m c o= m m m_[o o J p[m�pp. o S m a-m E.m p c o 3 o:P. <'m O J S J y a.J-.[° 3 N, ' m a 0 Q°a W O 0 0`G D Q c 2-a m•m m m ?Z m m o a ^ c mEmxF c.[o 'm � � w JmS 3v o S go�c� QO my c 3aa. O y y m a,_,3 =,m S V°^, m v 0 Ip m'o 0 5' (7 11°2 -m g.a n m o J,O - 49m `m m C 0 O O J O.J �:tai, a W N O d m O a V m �° m H C m m m o O J _ [� o m�_.3 a D 5.O >•c� w Jm o .CD R.-o 0 3 = CD j w a w.D'.mc m CD W ? 0. N Lb N O j m //ml .Wi•�O^ N N S p, o my3 �[� mm J W p N H o TI d C 9, O 6 O °i 3 N 3. (A 69 fAo H fA _ two o O 0 0 O O O ID lo 0 O-0 O O Oo O O O N 0 [o a - a u'i o Board N M o aa a :, o, o,Mayor Cwm w- 0 - N H aa J- o -o o a 0 0 0- 2 =O To o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 D 9 n ts O o V c O N a co [T p 01 a O W O O O O O O O,•5NuC 0 O 9 [, O O O o^ a CO O O CD OV fq a OOO O O O O p Ni O O O O O -jJ a tl., O O OO V O oi D 92 3 3 0 o"1 c a 3 n 3_vi Z Z Zcz _.d S° S° 2. D n a 0 0 0.Z O T. z ° z z z z z O 3 m a J N 3 3 y a 3 N = O O O O �W.i3 J 7 J W W ? W p W W W W [OD a 'a m n n 3Si _til u ^ E. a 0 ti v z T w C p o W O W V+ w Ca A Lc N m 0 z v m p m 0 m • m _ m 0 m C O1 O G m a G T. m M m d G d a A ill N C C C G ° Si 9 d o O 92 2.122 .4 `m o a`� z p z o Q. m z m c z i m` z z m c O o n a a 0 z 0 t o Z D_Q O CO (0 C C a o a, o E c°a`a 0 64 65 64 .9 .9 64 .9 64 Sit -0 O Qa• ` 0 0 0 o 0 06 4 0 64 0 v m_di o T. N C O a 84 v a O 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N C,..' ,- O O 0 0 IOd O S� N H w C `e.+♦ A0R2W N N Ln N N N CO N N 0 wogH N N N N N N 00000 0 000 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 T 000 CO 0? `o ON-" 0010 12 O N O<O O 6< = ..... 4Hi W 0 C 04d'10 aJ N7 R C 0 0 '0 0 0 0 0 IL 0 0 0 0 E O O F o $ 0 o N L_ m c 6' 0 • NEa' - N _9 L 0 N N N C N 0 0 O)� • 0 co a ) 1° al O 0 0 m o J E '° "� ° o ° c > ^ E= N m m w o Q Y m9. • m ° 2 U E-o $ m m a C 2 01 mi o mj m.G9 a? • m N" m o vi d� c ro • $ ` d Ol T aa 8 c o °` m N V d! Its 1 m C d a N C C O C oro2roy p53 nao tea, mi» aimo y d'E '° a mmE .c o 0 d ai c « C- T �' O N O)C N m O °0 V 0 a E N a V 9 d o U ° 000 4) wF yj N C 'y 0-0 02 0o n Nro 9, 1- T.- ro N m n o 0 0 eD cop 0 0 • N o -y o m m O J ?.C - 2.c as 4 d 0 C 0 0 0 6 C c a�C E d o Goio 5. - F=o- 0 Q m -o E E=a E Q E � o� a y nmv-.2 m mop F. vmmEm i .2NV « cw❑ .paa;rp.5 2., 2m NL nh W = ova m c0V N m7,2a� Nv 0 $ cai U N VTi `mac d Eoi o m Pf cE 0 3omS. yvc � c o d m 5 0 0't'`o o $o c°b o v o E - m N m F - - ° m °a o o c`m E G ai: E f0 d G O1 c s G in = ai'O o G ro o m m m t o F m o a N n'- O m Q t m 0 C O N n f°0 O O is 0- N C�C ro O A m 0 0 O U 0 0 ° '° 7g C . u°i Q :°.88. o=ro `' of E c c ° o m d m e ai a c w m '0 G m E= n ' G°.0 t 3 5 o d y ? m N GO m N ° r o d E C E GOJ 3"C , •c-o° R C E °- U C O! g c, O dl C m m 0:U N m 8 .N- y C N 0 N O O .0 N 0 m C o o. f0 l�Tii c U o a U O.d m m ro N d m E ? C - N O L 2 0 C g 8 n d A'7 S m« n O W N .dr y `'v T N p V O)d'/) O] 5 0 0 3 d E ro E N C C d ,7, E « E C 3 N p 9 M E 2 V 00 V E L D a 00 C�i Q C L m.0 0 . >.m E fn N,,-g C C > N y G0 o m N 4? • 7 U u N N C m L Sie E'i O O c E. 0 0 N y 2 E U w 0 O 2-2'- d A >� c C m m` o� 'E 'O m .c A c m c�S • o. G m 8 m'o o c c m-u d m "mE `m.2 1 m•-m N • c - c .x mY aio E ' c a �°nodo .`Nm°am F ydc m m c c 17. >,o . _o°3 U m 3 `m c-. N a� N o a m E--`5 gym,m w mob of 6 R 3 c� d >v EU CO c 2 m m c$ co mroiI Ti a$U m o o t o� =g�« _E am m cw m w cGi m 2« T c = c `m •. E.m m d y an d f01 if 3 0 d o ` p L`m c m ro 0 .o N d c m a0 o m 3 0'U U m 0 rn a•E o 3 d ` d E n .` 0:a 0 S d o .§°.rn n �>m p o O o.0-0 C � y 0 d C E m - 'Q o a V)0 (7 ° E o a 'mO Q ia'w w O N E m $w �, N 0 O Co aT m-c nN7 °' -a-0 G ? `m m oc `o cmo2mE EEmm vnm v�2 �o.- o E•° cd.'0 � 2, G >.E 0 c m p 0 0 ,_,E 0 m d 0'C O O- O N> m 0 m O O a M m O O N m O 16. m Q w L> $❑ 2 F m g Y R' F O)O N f E Q n 2 r(n O F es vs n t-a I- m c$si J 4- .` tO o ro G C C G G C G C fd C d C N v m Z, m Z. m m Z. m Z. m Z. m o 1-5 0 .4. m a - E m a d a a > a m a > a o ro > aiyo OCa Ca Q. $ CdN $ cd $ Ca 0 O.} M $ 'SU Y•O= m''")M m E - 'A O U N , mCU - N mav") r a.O.0 N O A0 N - 1Xa M •r,>rp C d a m 0 , C o,'`$- y y` N ; C N H f0 , C y` 0 N c N` en ~^ C N C m N O m Y 1 2 - Y _T j Y« `) >N Y Y O}Q Y Y O}«n Y O}« C (� c C ` O}« 0-N a@ m o p N 10 m 00 H O.- 10 to U o- o o 00- l0 (a 0 p N a a¢-o a a¢.-0 co -0 a a¢--¢ a a¢.-o a a¢.-o H co as a¢ o M e CO CO N 0 o+ o N N N N N N N M CO• O N .., 00 V W N A IO —O C Q O to 0 y '2..O C El C c a, O Cy T W O yaW y y O O. Ocr O .._. d da - v W w oNm -D 'm m� WQ. - 0 2r0� -mr J v N W� -0 0 rn.m c W + A 'hi O A p W r TO a1WaO CW < og0q0.0 z3 a c n b of o ' o ° ' 20-» - J 2- ,9O W C oc'c < S S oN w 5- ._.ti - TI 7.2. i z � O 0 V-0tO O -aO 0 W 2. oJ El OJ O J y Ct 44 EC TD O J J J0 0 yon,o _ Vt `OG `OG `OG 13 Sk a 12, 3 1 'O�• Z W + i W 1 �`Q %-a vU �N.°oo .oc Ho m_, o gs �Fom Fa. 3o 3 coo 3. oop ce"ilAdmo m W W -0 g. f1 d W O m O_.3 8 < N »S„w(D 9'5 O l7 (O Q m c 3 0 O a N W O O to a, N » 2�3csN 21 Jox . -0ID < e m 2 W *' o *'3<- )3 .738i my3 m dHgaioo o8 o W m NEE °' �om.m. f?,d W2 �3J •• 2m 2c01i ». o?.n� m 3j r " < < r 3too oo"BJ m 8. V 0 fA N 0 °8 5e. 0 W j 5 IOD c w J -O..5 O o Co 0.Op, 1p 8-,W fC ? O Rl N 2, 'O 9 W W TI m N y W a N W p O m O y S J N ^n N 1 C .Si W m�VS� ,,,,, as.. (p n n f/)ID W 3 l W 5,,. m {. O 6 m W �° c y O m 3 m 7 W c3 J OOII y —Q•<,< W n W m 2 c] 8 8'80 n S 5 W O N 8-8—N a'4 y— O N�° 'a,, m f N m m `-d 0 -, D 0 O < C N O O �'m 2 N W C< -w 5.c N X,7 fC J.W.O 3.W C) -O,.W N V. O W x j N o -W' ,W. n a.8 *- _" tO 'W.J 01 ,p y p'a 0 G 8 y y^y W p° a N a y .O o 0 6 a O J < a, H e m N- N o G 3 W m.< O. i 5 n m e a <o C 2.o m p0l�. F m n m.o W W y.(08 2 8 W,o 8 W S- N a W *J,-.5- O n Q O W W W O» 01 W W W 8 3 O !� lD S M.,;-1 m J 1 6.5 S].O ` Ol a 0.. . N j y W S d N N p1 n C O 3'- a N a J_•-•2 W y)0 W CD Q,3 5 m W'm W 0 0 7 J P J o W W D g) p A `o •o N O W_. y n O) O < t9_.N ' 9 N O B •» -. W O' 2 01022 c� a0 "3.W y m Q,OW m�e58 3 - : ym 1p • W 1 - api oo4Pr= »a nrnCm �'(nnd Jo3 �amm W oQ°co ?� ro ra m �E, 3 J`o a • mmm 8 CC 0 i a W cOF Oo JtoO-.am o W pno rA oJ i . W CJW 'O N AApWd O0 J FAW^ O5' ON.S. Go16qao y NCtipNp1yp.O; O rn /�iO e w OCD W J W o W .Z .c 5 w6, C4, 0.=N0 ONi <� m y m o m^.JO) N 8 o o 8 8 N F O80S2=°n »c!aa ^.cag n. dN .o.v^ 0o-003 o a o8 ,W, rov 08 . woycW =:o .� W � o,;m °' >•� 9W ca o m 3 o Wo 3 3 oa°mmJ�:t0 p O= a W -0 p .O—.8 Nq OW W W > j mT. Aa. 0 mN J.O 'O J .W..F O y8O < Wj 0 O A'J S a A fp." W fW. o fp W m y p WWV O rp f nfD 3 j O C m w FOo(7 ' `, WO `nJ J' m m (W^f Q C N Wo m J 'maJ WFgWoofAsW o 0 01 c,, o 0o OON=C .W 4," S6 F'� `O a O.W. `O 3 o J3Q0-, Otq ` J O)_.p O2 O f0 .W. 4 Po 01 m J. m tD m rl) W t0)p W 2A ,W.. 06J J W J W OF 'OW Cl O WW W O m .C..��o 00 0.p, W O W W C w q W T.• W N _r ye1An W O j O W W F O�W �� t0 0 Ei a J ahOtO fP 3 WWN OO o SaN GNG WF o aaJ' O;W NS NlO V 2y - O (a W O O o Ol.. O J 3 O N O C) L1.0 12, < ` 0 8 J C O Oo O a O`O O N J y O 0 al CD 'a F,.W.O _ 3 O O _S .Z co El5 J 55 .z W S O W C O 01 N 0o TI b C W A W O O b —0,N-+ O. Co N N .,to M t* 9 0 = ION 0 0 O O 0 0 0 N O 0 lob `C O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O mV rn u w o Board A hi 01 CO Wm V 01 A CO Mayor C on o O o 3• z Ti 00 N O.n tp M .I. - M 2 CD a YNi F w O�J J O N u T V q n �N J O co C` O O O co co M N O J V N O O O p O to O O t0 O A AD � O o 0 0 p n O V O tg O C O to J O O co QO O O OO O O O O H >O Na W C O ~ W ki V O co O O O O O O D-.n 3 a c O O J c rn n . "Q y O O O 5 O CO 0 oz z z n W z o z cy 3 coWi 3 �m 3 a o S `CD o O O ry d 0 `Wn O 8 W J y N m O.O. IL '�m N m N = 'fl J a n 3 t0 `. 3 to O. 3 J ii W J N j W J W W O W W O 0! W O y W 3 m o m m m ,. o 5 m Da 5 v v oc co.aoo-H C a m c y 3 i a 25 gO T Jj ° { s m a 0) V ii -a , 9 ,.... } C C } r d ToOCLL U C V• C OC 9) O OC O OCOC O .. m C m m m.a+ m mO -0 -a m o N.sp.. �o E • 0,Em o 4137ZN aE m cy Eoo >>o m a oo O o o c m m o,00 EE Qm oo° E �_ a mm aaEQe�0 w = nQo LLc lyca ,Es. 0 pl" m m m c C E m .0 m :n m .0 8 a' Or a olZ o Z w0 Z wo z p O v a 03 m O N V C N C a O °0 ° 0 0 N y C >.O 3 O a o aTJ T w °9 "9 '9 j m C ° O O m C ._Q c 0 0 ✓ 0 O r o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 N o w 0- o 0 0 a s o N n n om N f1 .W ° IA W 0.C w W r. r, t " Amen' Fueog T 2. _ OI C "a'C a LL 3 O a3 U c O N C O Ol m 1`a@ C ° c 8 oL . o 5 E E d E.' o c 0r 0 ,5 mN d Q p C0mNo.02,10 0 / 5mCNmV E " N o CnC O m m C mco HDcm'c C � o� > E°o N E_, E to . 0 ' ' 0 wU � ' O d m aN - a a E a C m•C P. C U p O YU C>'- m1N7 � O IL c''' z T C E00o E N m °adC > mJo m C i_ a'Ili upN ' N `OO'Co dN g NN ti C O cLL dmay CF, CO C.po) 2 y o,C v ▪ c d iii L y 0 ° ; m.2 ; E "' N yO `, E = "' 9 dc m'c o o o w o 8m ` m > m ,: omasEEQo'o o . mo tan� w ' 2mm cc E w aa orn "r = on= e 11N /78 O❑ dmwC mea.�O ONQ mUC col- mUwdohCm o Cop ° 1-- mQ m y m 0w °f L° c N �o�s= mmrm�v a E2 oyQoo c >9ayLorn . a F_ mcm�mA w(A Na Nu_mO Q °N >.o C N ° aUm d. m ° ,, navmspa dm O0� O , (5N. .Q§ E9`A8 01 m y ` m FtentwCC t V GGRaeN N — — $ o" T . ° °u. a - o a, c 'c o' C °a m V92 O :! y'.".- • c > `w o fc$U: te r m o i» c �..o !? .E 3 ,mmIv aw . m- svm0a D. 10 ~ w.5 c Ooboma cv2 0 'odam — m ° >t t E N 2maca ia s" LL mx To- ymao jr mLL tE ma E .op cw ` s Emm O g50:o N it' mjofy3 m m >°pmf o m mmcma 2 J°: c°o f;oao' Ic'-owgo °- 2m`r.cii oLL tj 3a"Ei' a°io dy.c � 2m'mLL amiE'u�i= C, '5 g N O p m C 6 0.2 r A *O . T N G EL O > O'. V R C N O Q d a&°O O Ogm0.• a QQ cop, tm ahaT o 80.Zm 53N dr3'- NE m� 0 .4- c al.5 �L U E ti.,m2 m o:,< 1-0 o t m m N a'm . E m-o o m a , 6. mc8rno c O'oy3° mao V-2 aaE)Q >o 39aop=0 olcw n° Q� Em -. c� ai'' - F13.uR l.,m o °'8OE ° 'o cmi"'3m to � 5v_ Ed � .,_ m n� CD�ao m aa`illr9 do Oa ac F,\ c N 01c c -c `8aN� 8g 4 O..- 'OE, �' O a@ O N 1 yy O m U Ip 0 0 s,883 C C1 O pp N m V t... m 0 J 1-w 3 NN LE 1-0 ,- 01A aLL Q H C O U CI H N—. H U XF N J O ap C y C C C C a m .V m m N=' E N g N cl- E 5-in m C O1 0_ N O1 w ,- a N 0_0 cl w_ J."m6 C 9 U U 9 U ~(� Ti O V U a V U N m C m N V N o C 2 d N 2 N` vti Y 0 N }C N },� 7.5 LL N a o▪ Q a } a °Q a.' °o 4L8 °¢ o ,2o 5 °o D o i g 0 3 R 0 3 O yo3 �nm 3 ^'J D C'7 po p O sii � 2 [adi c1 y tads y I c>>y l9•! 'n O m tp N a o m n N n W [7 T �I co •fT .O-.d . 5 OV o m (7 m d H C' ut A :s m . - A y 55 N J N y \� ^ N 95 A :1 9 0 J j d w d N `� -` -0 j K i J J \ ? y j N 0 • O O a v a 3 1 -0 c�o 1 -n -n O R.O-i T n v -i _n < 0a odo c 000 m ouao 30 00 • dym00 o- �3•>>10 d3Jv -lnnl + m p 0 .2 0 .o m 0 m y =m 0. 0 a J 'm a 00 m n Q m 0 as m 3 C1 m O 0 »»3c>• toir 0:-c4, of `o '2,3 d T2 ac y cmg,Es m � = V o'202 a J =cmi2ESo'y m 0 00• _d d 3 o 0 .0 m J S Ti d d " m 8 —3 " A.. •o of- y c m p1 £ m 3 ro• m 3 ^ 'D N m A m Op V O ID j m Po W 7 m J�' ma 0 w?j CC^1 Z. j 3 a m 0) O C•c, 5 0 Q J w a :o d N O• o • m m �.3 a u o n m y ci 0 a o n o f 4 m 33 •a d T ,0om J Do J m n m 3- ' d Outoo A `.o o,aoy m 13:-0 Emo a y3 • 2 1^. >•mam m Q� d !Rm� m T�.,� m '_'. , m m —d cmo-m °�0-F 'm_� 8 ,n2 in r"cQ°^��a m O CD y O w m a N 0 =0 3 2 * T J 2 a L r.m CO.•dG f ti' t0 m ^ z n 3,a g L) Q m 0S.o� c.c„cmrn 0 ..a2 o'v+—•< omm.mc d � ail - m dmm`—' 3 -m .cm. m•y2▪ Q p m _n ° m W3.'y ° - VI 2°2° n`mn 00S •< mg8 y Tg?3.� % o Si m =m FO Off! w CO0°°- d f» x Q fJ 0J Mx- - J o y T.O R. T m o J . m O d 0 3 G• J N o m CD 3 l` �C Q' N d J J 3 O _v-.oo3 <a �v' .-^,.,a•a y.m o O.0an z1-+302.0 `o C�.n2 *m 0.s01 � o 1D m Js= �3`o ^ta 1° 3 a1 m 3PaJ <mag 6o3 / om9Q ?; 2`on3`m ci"'w y f,O m O a O 0 N m J m N 0 S o O W ti .0 a_. G 0 m J d O O P -o Omm n"i m'o'y4" oy0Q3* 5 yo5m moP3m CD *. m°''ro = ? C a.'�m om a.m m`i o<n�m '" mad a s'm g `084. 'aim=m = � $3 �'g 0 o p = Smwm 3 '; o n o o r, O a f»J f c J F �+� O d 'm 1 0 m m m o ..v J O_. 3 Nj 0 y t0 Amm C A fq.m...� d 05 d n Et O m J Q 0 C :' 5. aooa y w�.�_. •< aga�c c a'� d y.< m �o o c� om3 mo3: d caPmm C om?J 9Sm m Go lot 2Rag c m`gomwy m = p o' cm?!am 2•`Da mo20 a 000y3: m`° S.3) 801 HF^ mm mwJ �w^rx� N `- O. 3 'n O O m O • 0= m 22 - o9 C O 15'mm- m F W','°3w 0. co mm5 m.2 mo `-date• yQom jo5i g°ommm o �. J m e m c y 0 o`2•CD m 82.2. ,' S y o ± > o o_'n 8 o o y 1 o is F 0 5. ✓ N 3 m O C a fN tCD S°m o m N H N C A F ON g y 0 j m 0 0.y m`p O �• Go(P J d 3 1 O 9 'a O a O m 0. a 04, S'' 3.J m 3 O'go d y rJ� 0 0 3 a T tC a 3 O �m C a y O O N d d m S y y-§ c'O 0 j fy `< J pf j a O [m O m O'O O -.`�m 2 4o C J d t0 a ?fn A y a ^t. 0 O m n J V o'"' 3 0 2:a O o o • t*¢0, x 3 • 0O2C m m 000 mm5 -0000. y J3 'vFr), m 'm AOy »�O Om �' m� �.m Jm O C. Npy ayna w Oa C to.0.fAn m m 2... O ^ rn. C d wm 3 m 0J g.a N d O OJ S d H g i 2 m d y m c O—J O a • 0' J ,B.- N tpya am C N N CJ y n< 0 OJ a !/. G OD.No �ID mO 3 in'o0 0 o3-m m ^4.m 3mdC� o9000.• y3 01 tt3.< yo0 � omC) w�`o Jmoe, a•09., Q a n. g W O m J G y Q m ° o G° 1 0 0 0 0 o 0i A O C f I o N N-. J C. 'Co b1 fA fH 61 CA.J 0 NNO COCJ d N 0 0 Co 01 0 N O O V t 0 CC O CC0 0 0 O O O O -a N +B.and N -M:yor 0 A di 49 41 NJO C A Y N 0 0 O N N O 0,N V O O O O O O O C C O 0 0^ O N 00© O O O 0 n CO O O O D'CI n flJ i N to 3 a 0 S O O O C O O O O O O O S O O C•.• CG O D 0 yto i N N O D'< O O 00 0 0 y 0 O J bi bi f9 to O 0 �O 0•• a N O O O O 8 O O 0 _.V n S.o c O O c ,� n J �'n y D- 0 a c v O a s f ; a 0 c o 0 `m' c o m O C oz C o 0 2 c coc c dCm ywof m A `o m y <D 0 m m ° 00 J a om 0 via -0-0 -0-0 -0C .. -A C.my mm m'y 01g t?a- a 2v • v o ' to c (Ti co O A y 0 O O IAO O 1co d n a a CO )/\\ 0C, all CO z o] \/k .fl } } 20 o / �\ o } # ; fili/� k } mm , Pem N Em 3 e 00 \ ! ! Eo ! [ §/o \)\ . \ - f £ C)<••, 112 \}}\ &tkw;=a °- 2g ( E )a*± § ;7- o Eolic /(/ ()is)§ � 53\\kkk 75 .5\ k ) §\/{\k �{ ■ ;2( ±)z/ kk ■ l8,= 12, N | § d � \73\{)) �\ { �.2.Eke «« \ C tNO2sWE 0 )f) 63)0068 ! a §3) 0 -SS. 2{ \\\© ) _ /! %f \, �().S /\j O Z f m m m m Cm 0 m :. E 0 C C O O O 2 2 Z Z Z 2 Z Z Z Z O� m oqp N N.O T n h ' '0 NI. b S h b Ot pp N N N Oa o N. N N N K ... M y C U a Q N m h N �. m h O 0 A tm O t&1 N N O O,. 4 O O N h O y d•• N. W N. N N W h (00 N NM M n N, 0 0 p to NK N b g a. ts m 'R m h ro N s h w o E y r0 m w o a s m m p o a e m M N N 6 N H p y0 ' 0 M3 FA b a Q Q U O. H W ON q 4 1 Ei m N O p m« <D g N M p Ti N WMy N oC3WNM N W WN W gi,T.,2 OAeW Z peO 02 x rn LL m m 'o Oo . 2 Q Oa W`=C . H 'p f c m m .__' ; . m m Y U m v= U o E t a m Q • 9 °� 0 I ~ m T�'9 0 o U c0 9 (n N C . ' S EL' ."- 0O N - C U m i m y E o 0 m C7 E u Y 3 ... - u or c 2 d 'm m m o,N y 0 0� a ayi,2 0 0 "§9 cN L m U t d Ta t 0$ y m m m� 12 m i �j a 2 2 O m ` C N - ; O C .2112. 0 3 F Q m. m N n laO.1 N Z' 7 C 2 . 0 N_ N 5 A C O m a A O m 5 i'S LL Q a C ? Oc �L Nam O Insp. O . ('J y �0 m� U' d N, y N O m y Q Ali . - 111 K O oO Q uo O .O wm. 'C� O Oa A O'n W y DOE p O E 9 . N m 'Z m c7,3 N 5 0 O ,I m O N 9 i 1 o o 7 6 N 0 m EE 9 C m C s C.m.01 p m �. 1,22 C U c . U C U_C 9 O 11 m a .. O y h O N Lm a d Z �t"G 11811 O d a�'Y Y � _ i da° 02N B , $mo m y2Q m w N Q � o ``4'O m m y m°o as No • 1oya ,m_' 2 m °Now do E Om s,o e � a S ES S.@ = 5. 2 o d i m N d N . y 1S L i,w 1 O eN O m � m0 m y0n C y0mmd m ao . LA0mnVooai. C.0 ti �nqyF+ .8S Ogm 03� � Vzy §g; r.. O R8 m1. tea« Q2m . V NI ? i C7d,9 (9 . c 4m> nr2m “y aVFpm,ym0- , .-. 1� .s'o tl g' Z'm? EN,, m 5 y2 Qm yti y wham o `63 p LL y ¢ L d= a a« a sy£ m ayy o a d.cryry.� n v o oayy m d :m o 0 0 o a m t 1'oE Uom Jag JOONUm'ONO8iNUNJ O o NUcLLH3Gm 0( O cz ' C V O .t m t o _ v V 1 'E'"' 1p a a a a a a a a a Y N a Li, ' q o" 0 0 0 0 0 0" m" 8 i a, (a A W N - N o{m Ft m b o a g - o om, w a 2N° ! a A If ay Hdl Rigs 2 ; N Nn A an., nS7 n 0 r _'b m V_ o = b 2 f� <aV 2 a 8 2 8 ? 3 ti > > O O W _ +1 5 D. nv 'r j a 8 a ry m R 8 a j m 0 0. m m G pa 0 O N z80 . pGF,N 8 0 g > C t ,3 • m-1�••4" O w Z C�N�� G Si f� 6�. �N�'.a N j.a;],6� 6 N N p rn m D ' �a 0 61 � .o� “ . PrEg '8d ii2ln n� 4. F'm °'mom § A b VI o.-, 3 = m n m 2 2, , , E H f0.1 p w o,3 m .9 m.9. S ryary o- l 6'= m�i E.a oar,o a.o z, O% = 3 m m 7 m ...a 8 w a m a 6 E m d W c = 6 25 C r/1 E i S 1 j e F H a 4��2n H � +a m y r�T Mt o ao m C> v; __ or$ ^^ mm n m� � S,l Vm 3 gg z A . �. g 2 <o �?o D F I w m N N m 3 s o 8 m w s .gi w m d a ,� m N m> c m )1 w w o O m g Vl r v Z G r3'd 8 0 lO S ^QQ 1 2 y m V a3 8.x i � a=..I Iomvdo7 "13E ^gym : �m'm w Wil 8i• $ a .=v 3 m �- �� o_m3 as 8R w aw Tle'er m1 m o -f o2 gg 22 Ri wmT R f°i agi Cci oa i m T qq E 88 N�N`2�� o c2 m000'o Mar 3�zm Fa�� y�2m� w ow o m w$ . o m 5. V _ o.o f a g H Q i m S m a .'wZ2dn n m1t400 5EgF ma 3 .,o fwwy m �.�zi d o _ h � o y a N m ;� � c o.. c i!n i m' :Q o '2 l A°,C_7 °'f 3 4Z a v° a. ! n v p m m �o.g'un uim?ao m an d m co o 9 ti' N k_, l i �g o 63 o wm^ w•zo d' 2m Sgg4.S ;�c g R'6 w 4 Ili w y �a 08 a Nm._ :i 22a§ Ea - Na m8o- w' o o m 8 9 n 5 m Q V a u,8 i N - m 'roi� :II .°~,rn m o yQb� d o((oJ�s V ogQp 46o1 oN�ppp 2,282 - N 5=O� U A Lbf N A W N+ d N G VfAfAfAfAfA Mfg VAN. N00 .H°'-HMI EA 888- gNAmAW : '28888 48gg 8 ww 8s8 8g 8888 888g-o fA M f N EA ' N A W N Board o, v' A w N + Mayor .71 M A T r. M Myp N g C 8 S H 8 t t 8 O O 8 8 0 8 O § ^ w n, a 0 A W W O D m $ 8 b § 0 8 0 .''na 8 H 0 a 3 w w ± fA 3 a 8 8 $ g g o 8 8 8 8 8 a § am n a r) N 3 0 0 0 . O o g a.u 0 8 3 R m 0�z z 0az cd 3 y d i z z z o.o BQ> > m8z oa '. N3 0 0 0 m m n o 0 m m m man a u m m . 3 3 0 R m c z 0 0 E 8 0 z mo=.- c� »w0 0 a a y o N a, o5, - aom y F Ivc c - c c cA- cog Eim c 9y v o o . d o$E o o. E o c T 0 z z z z z .,,, ". z m p o c - Z Z Z Z _ Z 3 .0 o a c o 'o U n 0 0 0 § 0 o go =^m e ug 0 < o oN h 2a¢ o 8 o § 8 FOR h o 2 h p O v § w p� o o w w w » » a o E a¢ o § o 0 0 0 0 $ § o MI rn? m w w N N N LL N } �oFeW r w m pieog r m m r in N N N ""0 n00000r 0 0NNN oN go Z N 8 m 0 0 0 0 0 ai o' 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 0 0 0 mv' v0'o 2H o 000 pp eao4 v'p�p o = ..NNV, NNf9MM�M Nb d3 0(l diN M fA W O O O C qq O O 3 qq N A O m N 0 N N O O w LL Ss $� S000S8� � NM oo,2 s$12 c °m A 7 >Q E N _o m v o a E Z c y 9 m “a..8 m c� z c _ c .- w E Noo Z. d m ., $o o - m W L d c _ c'' ? 'o L E w �a 8E, , K o o p 5 o « € ° c a1 c' `�N' 25w .gym$ Sao o `od „ 2 c 0, d ^ E022.9 E E m s 2y2 v.� H- c m t o N i E; .-o,1 _ A c c£c m fj - N w y L i LL 0 l r ? A g c8 Y G '9 O a6 O x C ' E °C W = aEo ' 'S E 3 cS0 ! FT aA....m is, m y 'oo 3o c p 2 0i `° 2 'U. it mEa c' w �ya ET LCUo ui . 00»o 2. . . ccow " w,20 d m i ury t W ;3 aR .-4'c O1�S' m°P>12- aozT yn5 midmo 3 v EcU °t72 5., ua W 19y9ttayc ' ?. LE '2�,°5R E22Rw8 41- H mt .e:1 O" 0 o bed;am o > mi,`o_ o `oa,0m U ..w v a�g'`A ...m y z w W o t9Zm a c m Z3 aW-�' E" c l' r ° Savim,3 2 a' o u m5 FU : 0 p`,o "yt Eo'o^r—coo y 2EQo-4 ac' � c Er vIs ,v_ E?oV o 0w G•�oE3o4 H emE,Hit23_,N 3 5ry n2 m-Q°w mE ai-W > ' N c o .. m ``o G'� � o a. '" 0c EE oca Oo a wEZ� i cm v, ¢ doi$o° V a `�v o_@o V°.3 E °u m °' " A a m A v C 2 a 2 t" ! ) , 4 O M1 z,, w cv 2 PTB m, `^o 2 0 E.4 o. `-0 � -'? c ��'d� `-y° `'? - o,�� '_m�mdo. a ea��, =a'o i`om � 0Zman1AE g0 ` . x m2vo ucmo adro � c co- eyo c Vow n$ g2c `oc I'o.. ".aroE` a E m ct0it U i . Ig m N m o ¢c c` rnas J d (5;22 oUE EF,' iCg a neE.E 4°, a o m mt'og' c a2 m9 ? in w: FA-a0000 o 3 E a`°.s§ u c � c n.mac- E o 0 9 02 0 € i`A'c o3.g o r3 q a'3 m I N—0,7 m o m N y 09 a o f c u c o o m y �i' Q 2 d o m �' O o o N m ',w 2 �- r- A o � �n°_w ar_ �:n 'm �._.:`o_ 3� Emcg a �E " A � � m ��LL�� e m c `m ¢ o �O ga "2 ac '0 = c °FJ�n-aaN vg"' P n2 .SE r ofEa v a o a gU a A ` tgm a ¢a A oa ucUn mwoU"" ' jUTa_ T ,�aU. n daa nT '2 a,2a N- t5wo2o Cr �a �c =ur U .. CEAc � � C > �}c 145 C 14¢ Ni o � ccx soiS LLnam U 1�.' 2 aC ¢o i aOo 22 .28 aNaOa aoa ' .OV n 0 m N mm' O 1'Y g J A T O C D ems, 0 m C o m O o D.. ei o C N O N O'0 y D v 9 p C wi m- ma mg2 `8gV O,m o 1na N- ! N-(p]o gg-mAG -d�$" F- V -p l i o : g 8 .�.. O V m i a,%J Z N> 1 C m m N °-' N T g O.c v g a v m S - 3 D j A + j F m ° a1 N°°ggg , W m00? � o°"E3 °Qa�'xo a N"c c �c P1dH2o of F-m o2 2fIf M"ryHwm ovE N. E 8 c Em533 a' `8'11 84 T• = CiEt 1 O a w K S 2 A p1 Z m'3 k,o m_ n G1 , V g c g, n N 1 I. i s s.f 3 D-m' o' mm: NN 0; ' 8a $ m amc i 01 > q : 8 , m e=i j= =. $ m , _ TSm'o;. omvz 2 . 0 g HEIflJIU _ II*Uhi "30 ,8m - 'N,p.m m'F.c5. ?4. m c 1. 2p Q,o £a_'c'L� so t, a §2 E°i 47il A�s Sm I "'NEAF: 0, 17ma` i2§ golV ow2. <'o'o RtaRa $ ~ 19 m aim „ � S oIm § °_>> >mogm1mnN o8m� s§ m To�.m�v_g 3gm * nn Aam m Zv o- �m � o�rom "? �gli o d o � � c oZ b � p ,n19- 3.Ni w gg E33 2r a $ 5 olaia4,. � m f-a 3g m aili * m �' acffo3o a dRo�yaov _d N mo_No_g "o -,1 2.p& H 3 5§-8 elgo Z N N d a N O ' 5 _ N m N ,,N ; y m. g ;z. F,a U T a J� W n � 'm'aoq¢, cw _�c3 H � Q ^?. ga =m FFom y, h. � v�i +-o mfio E c 7 m`3F.m�. n �. n . m 1par•S:1 mm wm fn g•0;F N i m aN g 3S3�'oa gm ,. mm g m ' o. g omf+°FF wm mc - _d�mmn .: a m3 _ f v— Mil O T a tp N S O Ism N 9 »m � Q oo 6 6 pO S'(G [�Qo w b a F ;...u 5 O 2 b < (a ml f, m m R N A o m g Qi m J , m O m^-I�. +u7 A y m �'N r o J O j= s EN N a r e l W m 2.845 8d '^ N n� o m ao. �� mm a n =c 3 $9e n m 3- rn o m ? �1 §, t iao aa. ^��' - o-0 m m »' G^ m N m g C R. m m$' ar»w °_ uNoi oo � N O Of oso o z O N pp V O, 'p Bo rd j N O ID pp V - �,Mayor i, Z 'n N A O N M Q g q 5O� OQ O m S S 3 3 S gN ' O N D _n fq M 6, C N ((,,� .- i O O O o O o O U a y O. 8 8 8 8 8 8 0 i 3 °0 3 O O o o 8 t'n N. 8 § 8 § 8 8 D p 0 B ° c o 0 o N Z Z Z ga2 oZ ni pzp 2 z z z Z A '? vD m m G] y ,- ] �' > > > 'gag �^ o'' m m m m co 3= a a v N m m A?,m,v g$c [i F. T O m mgis. m . a " l N w A C 0 5 O z 8 , N 1mN - lw c O cmm Zm i ro Z 2 m mc. E o L.. o� 1 °` Zp z18 Z at arnz zOa f ¢a tea„ 2 ,18 8 0E U a¢ w 0 0 O» 0 0 0 0 N a N C Q O O 3 T ° O a w w 0 8 2 a na_ 8 Boom c E ci a¢ o § o o8 'o 0 8 0 0 0 o m-o o e S 5.ria w w » w w w c ¢ JORCLI9 N N N N N N N M pJ40Q N N N ^ N N N N 0...8 ,O 8 8 w ° Q 8 0 0 0 O 8 S :,-,mo",14 w o- a o801° pF,812 o m 2 O S O pO O H OW 'p y O ° O, N p y -0 O� '� °8 3 O �'v� N y 4 c O> ;a N° W N N �O V . c� ;o; and VIA o�mco ¢rr�,, ° ' '°own o U „o og ; FHA y §.0 otl -A HIP S,ad Vo�`m vi -ma c d 2 o m._ U�ws°5" �� m � >"L°U�w °tl >o vtE� o. Cf � �a r. 9aO aU m d 3 ° o 2 y E ;o ° E m :gg m PLL : C m G m N x° ca` N rCo 0 ,a° r >.nCpy 3 % - s'a A roz $ `_o a4EmRm amro o ca y tdUo d3md ._ 1 V . 9 L o °2 N m a k a g �' u VJ o.5 „N < A « C° 0 • r M « .-E.C N = G 13 C A Q N N O C ad,0 12-1: .a, ° o$ F.. .80 a cct.3._c4 08,, c °a+c Noc !° no `u O 2. $m ¢ _`'`o c m E m 1'-.pep o. n a c wJ 'o c '°'o- e _ o al L ,n¢ Yomm P. y. ° co a ac v c w u `°c m°pN5 M �-'"y m 3 mE ''' am` y c. ,'9_ o - m %E $a"a s « cao 2 � E fn ¢No c-- o an d u d m °�, a, rn ep 2 q .. o,'� w -a o 3 o tip 0 'e L E U y L° c U O s o O N C N a J= V o a t ., V N cy S'.wy ._ ot c `m 0 0 Wwe Eon a @>d? = -gym d w� i Pi. A g22' ` �5° o :`dac«n n a«g o !3c , ccgl°� aNcm c �cmoo F yo5 5 3'5.E °' i .� d a m ; c' o :�`c2o a o�= cr ycg i 4 m � - oad' c7 k 8.cx Loa! wro W n oa,m K = m u, c o� , c� 3 "ec,, c"o mw c Ue= , r m '4 T,°p o,o i.F*,t q, v,, E9 a of o c m E°_°1' E ro m .B a'ogg c , ON i d co$ LEND o 0 0 o m oo,°u o. y. m ^' o... $ o u, o o ,b 5 -,rcr sa rc r y � m a f rw$' r°w. F-Nr m�w ;.J F��`�w� ro c o e o a 9 m m m c ° N�= E z a v a a d a d a m a o c , a a 3 0 O ,, a 80. a �,a " o ca W-5 " 8.B M 'oo d >a yam d2 a �� N „ �� JN ti > �� - m5a e, �a N m y 'cta 2 era M rfa _ a fo " �a _ >o > >5 Y 5 "-Na A of o`-' b - o - . ow ` om a aao a aa, o N � C dQ�¢ d dQ-� a d¢-� r tnaa 0 6. d Q � 2 2 N N N N t0, t0" A N P W N ��c b m�C�o y q�ODgy ODD N y i AyO a O_ - O y ti p 2O ' 9a'a 't _y 2m N a ; NR y .- 0J' am N1>a.-Ds - p "gill. o? p +pga 1m?!_<O 8•V=..pG < g T ,V gNuu g 3-0 TIJ N z OVO Im 0. O�oE > > OV . p 7Qp g , 01 m o o 7.W u c o £o m m o o; 8 0 2 0 3 o D m a o m g8 oa.38 a� mma3 wmvyn� ri J am' ?,r -g g III ttc' O 8 .8 "6" �- y p m 2 N w W Q gg o m m ..�'n• o .° o jan� tAN w�,Cl ,a a off' C.o x, $ m a" $n<4 m N 8 .m a'm D;Tg m oa^m , v o Q V; m ra'�'n t P 8'V 0 8. a g m t5 3'E'n _��i a E_-' m :i o�' am+ v+_ �• �' _�Q v. N I m G y m < 'f»9. . ' l d m N < ^.r3' G N^ U H m 1—C v „m'rio ffvny m,g'p3 Nt28g 82 % m m mm m $aP. 2E EyqR2g. N A E c N A 3 C O_.N d .g.,r��r� m H �'��J V .„,z 2 S'•m+a'.� .. C m S d o d V to ai O. a•35 N 25 A 0 —' g O y p • 02 R y �i l <m i a m mgsp�m. m a '5.o f `a PO o ryry'o -o E s� v"i y �n N N� ^�j ��.A C V � m 4 w �•g V 0 3 �-�m�3 .„R nm;a • g 0.7,a �a2. a ' 3sz ummim g `8g m w� " ''X° a .12@ y w4m oci i 'll fl -V mQ E P V°?! �1 b .w w D -" S g 'a'c c $ o'er % Fi aPg D �g m' o v EN N z . uo m ., 3 Z m 3 g o 0 o. A A+ba OMe a« N N uyCN 30 O o $C 2 $« « mJ t Y A . N O 8o d m t' LiidMayor J OWl N D 1 ^a « ad � o N f00 , o «Q « « - 14 N o e 8 § $ & $ 8 H t 3 c; 2 o m N C -.a V W 6q W 69 N (q « « O O O O O O O O i m IA [t 1 H O o O O O o O O' D- n a= o 0 .o c I m mo 0 z Raz m Q wm5 dN3 , ; mg2. o li i m gory 4 m mvm i 'vm m V d o 3!: z w m C m a O ' c O LLGa. O m p C ,- O m C S G Z n"- i ?^ "- h _^ a , w vM1 mv"° m as v€ m i E m .N. 2 44 ,3 a o c g 0 c o ?o . _c °°o u o 0 0 ? G 8 m E m E o_a5 ¢�= aa= ¢ �U ao`5 ¢ d._ LLB¢ LLSa Ti EA a m o m m 121 arn $ z $a za z ao o pm a c o 'o 'o o pa`a a a a `o 0 '°,E gE. o w a o a a N c 0 0 0 m E a U a Q 8 8 8 8 8 8 v o a r .6 • N N N A o L a C W N N 'LL K N N N N pJeog 0 2 'o c u ri yei OIO M!E c O a2 LO a U: m c ONm LLC a mg4� �=c rn2 m m3t N Toa � em ° mmn cm mE�mH g m 2 a ao w5 e c ea,y Tin' 2 M " '''" , n Q � E aug o c 8 .LLmop a a'Dg d c' S. • g E. ' o°m §w uww - c$vm L,Z coyo6 mLLg c o y gN06 "g a� W n 1 Ea �. mG ! mco .288.5H '.ro Om °Wv • °2mwrn = Lcv a `i oQ5$m 'LL NSc2 Joae!e tiF c °' a om1. cvC C m.L W Ud U UW N C O,——oOC LL m a nc c °E ° • r dogyo c .oma tHSm ` Q.°i o °dm 9Fa �yd puym o?. °q eh OE,- p oM.5 , 0o i.•cFio 9 op LLp rn 2 o EL maaw� ppa `8;0 2£ d ° @i _ r °3 aamaz,cw 2macn m Vrv '" ° myc • .2.11.11 ` a " POI t ° mEg. ml p = 2r rite � z , imDu�ymi lto �u •_ 2221 " UN a $ tFmL oy �. q .f aoNt' no wn_o o 3S2a.8 . oa. mmE ofa . � 0 ndmT7,tr= On .g E sl 0 5 o v E 'm 2122 •YO ro ° �. O l « y c " LC aac ona y a a« E a o o ..ga" Vt Vd E., U" VUe ur= m 8'« -.F. LL N a n}O a T a T m '� }o } 6 Q c. F Q 2 ,28 4.U .2 Q U .O 1 1 N n Cl '; '1? 6< ^ N A -1, wogo 1 V V y Ei 7 j W T Zgrol4,00 g ,§? mom 4n$ 2 oRi 0 o$;i-ma mgs§ o m =gN5sgSnc waA TRo lffm ola vd3,s' fig; "13 y2-3 A OmsiH . 5 . `' m ui m SRn8i 2 ! "' 2 `s d mw o a mg4 °cwig„ z g m yc rsw..9-y g a i o, ? 1 9r 4,3 i°la:4 0 1 �' w.a31�� y o'='as brad s '• �m5 g aoa.�9o.agro ° ggBga 3.Rtav H mN a'y ao 0 , o-g-a. a �'N• 0 R5 o Noy^ °.g4 `, n 1° a-1d5'w" N $6� "a0' w- O g n *H O. O y m p 7 la J c m N m u0+, r3 a q o a- R m 1 S `._7,-7m ors m$o. ec rm °1W5. o N c.'I O N 0 5 w y 8 8 a 3 . i.°5_m. a ro 0 o, + Board N + Mayor A < . N N yp� pO E S QO O S S ' C Dv O yp� a.o 8 NN N O ¢d § A O O p µp 9 O D v L N111D �, f pO Sp C O 8 O 0 ! 3 00 0 o a nv,- m E.O c = g Z a y o 0 a o A a m a 2 2. m c n ,aw w n y g 7 f i , e 0 5 Ng a !; ;I aTi !; I un o L 2a o oOa A ,. cvo m g 0E Eag, m ,, 2 o a z zm a` z2 " Q z ao pio ao a. asm w -_ c o0 U a Q a a a a a a o a Na« o 00. a 0 `o o c'o oa w a a Li a a a 8 a aa� o 0 0 a m a o Q $ o n o w O O OO N S O S E. Om" S S O NW 2. W M aW a NC W ._LL °Repy N p eog N w 0 0 w`A O N O O h O Z O�G C N O N = va nmm N F O a N N LL O r Ez° L . a E 6 n c E . m a o '- 0 3 ' • °i c6 c U o E - a a oI�"-. E Ti o� ui o s�o N_ �10 e'qE U c oLqpp°+� °' 9 .a ° c ��S - L�5m a €72 ro-I = a HIE vim Co °noio u 061 .522 ..v�S. - �q o a 2pa`o coo [0:Ra- u3i a wccU `m9 a cv� n e - E v ° 'NN � E ;a" .@ 'ooan 9 �a` aS-Ne .QNa 2g..a U s j� Qo'o I- S. oc tom CC.0'-'2 U¢' rnN � oo'.4�Eo `� og'"c �' 3in aio a"�°'�o m 2�°i � vim �+ o.a 3 'o vIyv;a o .�c m �'.N. r'..w M ii a c'o w N 0 r c ' n $ a S LL e 21 w@ 1 3 c73 := m $ iow Y O o1' �' 1ne 3 ,2 N -5W' 055�� gULL � o no, h<a d oo c 0' . F oOmroa o m j, n'cE Hr`p!E E e' c� a,'e :: d�p a con ° o. �rn y w c o� o,� a o N r9 th lL O N r^ & Z 0 6 Z N c (n a N 'O O W I. 0 N_w li - m y C m L.• a '� V ti 2 - c t V d c ,y A O •� N IL� O 3'C,` E O N` d ,,,R 2211 a0 w a c d o a U w 8 of€ mo C- C -En• > S-O c n.Q�' a a.i Opn 00 O Oa 2.st. O s o 2a � �o��E N r Eg E y m 01om _ o c n„c E9o�c boon Ce 2g31 a yd.t 3.'20 n ndme c nN'i°'� `°6� , � d 6o�a S �...ys N � N T S O N C N� r f.c N '' y Y .1 _;, n c. c V O LL-5 O i t. O N O L h O .U. a A N vEi n T N �' H M O N � O1 yOj N O C L' �O,W N L c J V N 'v,n d N N N M3 0,4-9 ar a c N o. ao owgm .LL Fa 4 a : u,w ` 3:4•q ii c m . nc.P= u¢ ca ' gowOU' ,m , °'o. nr "q t 3 o,t1„ 3 m 'ate-. 2 E='" t a m Ea$a c ro aLa o m`nod w ma9 �m L$ o- A 2?:9�G.,2 g E 2 gg, � �m ,rn '` rn. •rn minas v7 �u 1 .2 .m,E 8 o,P d'c 9 =vas PO„.E` 9.401 ~ c y n� y T, 12 3" a rg a 2 n 2 �'a 1 !N° n o o y -- o w o C�LL C. o u `�P. Loa D -o o'- 'E o n; �E ._ >u`. �sa iI rO�c4LL C. ro�� a' �aa�F� �- uw,2 i� rmN a c ` m"� E N p, N ato, -t a "n a e a n a "o m u � ,,, a w a_ da EL- . a_ y >9= LL N ,f U N LL U N IL U 11 U Li o U"j d U - �a� r .. r N � C LL `'c t.- ,,,,:'. �N ` ,'; t a,,,-5 t m u t y'G Ti y m T. 2.2 u n ,L2u relay a>= a>s a - a>o aro a -$ E a a o € �o E d o E d o E S Q E o Q E o N t