03/01/2022 - Work Session - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
WORK SESSION
March 1,2022 Tuesday 2:00 PM
Council Work Room
451 South State Street Room 326
Salt Lake City,UT 84111
SLCCouncil.com
7:00 pm Formal Meeting
Room 326
(See separate agenda)
Welcome and public meeting rules
In accordance with State Statute and City Ordinance,the meeting may be held electronically.After 5:00 p.m.,please enter the City &
County Building through the main east entrance.
The Work Session is a discussion among Council Members and select presenters.The public is welcome to listen.Items scheduled on
the Work Session or Formal Meeting may be moved and /or discussed during a different portion of the Meeting based on circumstance
or availability of speakers.
Please note:Dates not identified in the FYI -Project Timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined.Item start times and
durations are approximate and are subject to change at the Chair’s discretion.
Generated:10:34:19
The Council has returned to a hybrid meeting approach.Hybrid Council meetings
allow people to join online through Webex or in person at the City &County Building.
Public Comments:The public can give comments to the Council during their 7 p.m.
formal meetings online through Webex and in-person in Room 326 of the City and
County Building.For more information,including Webex connection information,
please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings.(A phone line will also be available
for people whose only option is to call in.)
What to Expect:The hybrid format allows in-person participation and remains
mindful of existing COVID-19 protocols and gathering limits.A maximum of 24
people,including Council members and City staff,will be permitted in a meeting room.
If the capacity has been reached in the primary meeting room,overflow space will be
provided.Social distancing will be maintained.
Per an executive order signed by Mayor Mendenhall,face coverings are required for
vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals inside Salt Lake City facilities.
Work Session Items
1.Informational:Updates from the Administration ~2:00 p.m.
30 min.
The Council will receive an update from the Administration on major items or projects,
including but not limited to:
•COVID-19,the March 2020 Earthquake,and the September 2020 Windstorm;
•Updates on relieving the condition of people experiencing homelessness;
•Police Department work,projects,and staffing,etc.;and
•Other projects or updates.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Recurring Briefing
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
2.Informational:Equity Update TENTATIVE
-
The Council will hold a discussion about various initiatives led by the City's Office of Equity and
Inclusion.These initiatives include,but are not limited to,improving racial equity and justice
in policing.Discussion may also include updates on the City's other work to achieve equitable
service delivery,decision-making,and community engagement through the Citywide Equity
Plan,increased ADA resources,language access,and other topics addressed in the ongoing
work of the Human Rights Commission and the Racial Equity in Policing Commission.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Recurring Briefing
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
3.Ordinance:Assessment for the Central Business Improvement Area –22
(CBIA-22)~2:30 p.m.
15 min
The Council will receive a briefing regarding the Assessment Ordinance for the Central Business
Improvement Area 2022 (CBIA-22).The City established the Central Business Improvement
Area (CBIA)in 1991 as a mechanism to fund marketing,promotions,advocacy,and other
initiatives in Downtown Salt Lake City through a special assessment on commercial property
within a designated area.This approval would re-establish a special assessment on properties
within the same boundaries as 2019 for a three-year period and it breaks out a second
assessment for holiday lighting (same boundaries as 2019,maps attached).This process is the
final action by the City Council to establish the CBIA-22 which would begin on April 22,2022.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 1,2022
4.Ordinance:Amendment to Require Notice for Permits to Work in the
Public Way Follow-up ~2:45 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a follow-up briefing on proposed amendments to City code that would
require notice for permits to work in the public way.The Council has requested that Engineering
codify and expand the policy that adjacent property owners are notified of work being performed
in the right of way.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,January 12,2021;Tuesday,February 9,2021;Tuesday,January 11,2022;and
Tuesday,March 1,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,December 8,2020
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,January 19,2021 and Tuesday,February 1,
2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
5.Ordinance:Special Event Permits of Less than 31 Days ~3:05 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal for two identical ordinance amendments to
two existing sections of Salt Lake City Code (Section 2.58.040 and Section 2.90.070).The
objective is to extend the maximum length of a special event permit for park use from 20 to 31
days,but only in exceptional cases.These permits would be made available only if the Mayor
approves any such special event for a reason identified in writing.Note that although these
amendments would affect sections of Code titled “Sale of Significant Parcels of Real
Property”(Section 2.58.040),and “Removal of Lands from the Open Space Lands
Inventory”(Section 2.90.070),the proposed amendments would make no changes to the
processes of sale or removal of open space lands.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 22,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
6.Ordinance:Amendment to Rename the Housing and Neighborhood
Development Division (HAND)as the Housing Stability Division ~3:25 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about an ordinance amendment that would rename the Housing
and Neighborhood Development Division as the Housing Stability Division.The Directors of
Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)Department and Housing and Neighborhood Development
Division (HAND)have decided to rename the Housing Stability Division to better reflect the mission
of the division.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 22,2022
7.Ordinance:Rezone at approximately 2333 West North Temple Street ~3:45 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the zoning map
pertaining to a parcel at approximately 2333 W North Temple Street to remove the Airport
Flight Path Protection (AFPP)Overlay District Influence Zone A.The property is currently
occupied by a commercial building,the Airport Inn,and associated parking.This proposal
would allow the Airport Inn to operate a new model of extended-stay hotels as transitional
housing to advance the City’s overall goals related to homelessness.Consideration may be given
to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 22,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,April 5,2022
8.Tentative Break ~4:05 p.m.
20 min.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -n/a
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
9.Ordinance -Street Vacation at 601 South 900 East ~4:25 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would partially vacate the public right
of way on 600 South and on 900 East adjacent to the corner property located at 601 South 900
East.This request would not impact the adjacent sidewalk or streets.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 22,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,April 5,2022
10.Informational:20 MPH Default Speed Limit on City Streets ~4:45 p.m.
30 min
The Council will receive a briefing from a local nonprofit,Sweet Streets SLC,about a proposal
to change the City default speed limit from 25 mph to 20 mph on all streets not posted
otherwise.The City's default speed limit is set in City Code.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
11.Informational:State Legislative Briefing ~5:15 p.m.
30 min
The Council will be briefed about issues affecting the City that may arise during the 2022 Utah
State Legislative Session.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,February 1,2022;Tuesday,February 8,2022;and Tuesday,March 1,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
12.Board Appointment:Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board –Katie
Darter ~5:45 p.m.
5 min
The Council will interview Katie Darter prior to considering appointment to the Housing Trust
Fund Advisory Board for a term ending December 29,2025.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 1,2022
13.Board Appointment:Business Advisory Board –Kristina Olivas ~5:50 p.m.
5 min
The Council will interview Kristina Olivas prior to considering appointment to the Business
Advisory Board for a term ending December 28,2026.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 1,2022
14.Board Appointment:Airport Board –John Bradshaw ~5:55 p.m.
5 min
The Council will interview John Bradshaw prior to considering appointment to the Airport
Board for a term ending June 30,2025.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 1,2022
15.Board Appointment:Library Board –Sarah Reale ~6:00 p.m.
5 min
The Council will interview Sarah Reale prior to considering appointment to the Library Board
for a term ending June 30,2025.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Standing Items
16.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair
Report of Chair and Vice Chair.
17.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director -
-
Report of the Executive Director,including a review of Council information items and
announcements.The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to City
Council business,including but not limited to;
•St.Patrick’s Day Parade;and
•Scheduling Items.
18.Tentative Closed Session
The Council will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session.A closed meeting described under
Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including,but not limited to:
a.discussion of the character,professional competence,or physical or mental health of an
individual;
b.strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining;
c.strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation;
d.strategy sessions to discuss the purchase,exchange,or lease of real property,including
any form of a water right or water shares,if public discussion of the transaction would:
(i)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration;or
(ii)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible
terms;
e.strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property,including any form of a water right
or water shares,if:
(i)public discussion of the transaction would:
(A)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under
consideration;or
(B)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best
possible terms;
(ii)the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered
for sale;and
(iii)the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the
sale;
f.discussion regarding deployment of security personnel,devices,or systems;and
g.investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct.
A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah
Code §78B-1-137,and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the
Utah Open and Public Meetings Act.
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
On or before 5:00 p.m.on _____________________,the undersigned,duly appointed City Recorder,
does hereby certify that the above notice and agenda was (1)posted on the Utah Public Notice Website
created under Utah Code Section 63F-1-701,and (2)a copy of the foregoing provided to The Salt Lake
Tribune and/or the Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any others who have indicated
interest.
CINDY LOU TRISHMAN
SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER
Final action may be taken in relation to any topic listed on the agenda,including but not
limited to adoption,rejection,amendment,addition of conditions and variations of options
discussed.
The City &County Building is an accessible facility.People with disabilities may make requests for
reasonable accommodation,which may include alternate formats,interpreters,and other auxiliary aids
and services.Please make requests at least two business days in advance.To make a request,please
contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com,801-535-7600,or relay service 711.
Use -of -Force Report –City Council Brief
March 1, 2020
Use -of-Force Report
•The Salt Lake City Police Department (SLCPD)
is constantly striving to take a data-driven
approach to policing.
•I asked Deputy Chief Scott Mourtgos to
undertake an analysis of our use-of -force
from 2020 and 2021.
•SLCPD Policy states use-of -force is “applying
physical techniques or tactics, chemical
agents or weapons to another person.”
It is not considered use-of -force…
When someone allows
themselves to be searched,
escorted, handcuffed or
restrained, this is not a use-of -
force incident.
Use -of-Force Report
The Salt Lake City Police Department used force in less
than 1% of all calls handled in 2021.
Force was only used in 0.57%
of all calls in 2021.
Use -of-Force Report
In 2021, SLCPD UOF was 13.52% below what we would
expect when considering the increase in other relevant
variables:
Calls handled.
Arrests.
Resisting Arrest cases.
Assault on Police Officer cases.
2020 2021 Percent Change
Arrests 4,940 5,171 +4.68%
Calls Handled 169,131 172,536 +2.01%
Resisting
Arrest/Assault
on Police Officer
Cases
447 520 +16.33%
Use -of-Force Report
The average subject involved in a use of force incident in
2021 was:
White, male Age
34
Use -of-Force Report
In nearly half (43%) of the use-of -
force incidents in 2021, SLCPD
officers experienced active
aggression from the subject.
Defensive resistance (fleeing,
resisting handcuffing,
barricading, etc.) was the highest
experienced resistance level in
another 43% of cases.
Questions
•Full Use-of-Force Report available on SLCPD’s
website
•http://www.slcpd.com/2022/02/25/slcpd-releases-
use-of-force -report -for -2021/
•Social Media –Twitter: @SLCPD
Administrative
updates
March 1, 2022
COVID 19
update
Current status
The CDC has adjusted the indoor mask recommendations. The focus now
is on hospitalizations, not infections.
Salt Lake County is now in the "medium" transmission category and
hosptilizations are declining.
SLCo HD has updated its mask recommendations. People who are high-
risk or in close contact with a high-risk person should still mask indoors.
If you have COVID symptoms, get tested, mask, and stay home if possible.
In SLCo, 30.4% of kids aged 5-11 are fully vaccinated, up from 26.7% on
Feb. 1.
In SLCo, 66.74% of kids aged 12-17 are fully vaccinated, up from 65.5% on
Feb. 1.
Citywide
vaccination
average =
68.68%
(68.33% on Feb. 15)
Zip % fully vaccinated
1.18 1.25 2.1 2.8 2.15 3.1
84101 80.24 80.28 80.70 81.27 81.69 82.40
84102 61.82 61.86 62.08 62.27 62.56 62.74
84103 72.90 72.95 73.14 73.32 73.60 73.80
84104 51.78 51.87 52.23 52.68 53.15 53.71
84105 72.56 72.63 72.81 73.01 73.19 73.34
84106 66.38 66.53 66.81 67.06 67.40 67.67
84108 73.17 73.23 73.38 73.51 73.68 73.83
84109 74.19 74.34 74.65 74.89 75.11 75.34
84111 71.34 71.44 71.91 72.34 72.93 73.42
84115 61.28 61.43 61.82 62.17 62.49 62.92
84116 54.46 54.55 54.90 55.36 55.78 56.29
Homelessness Update:
HRC and Overflow Occupancy
February 21st –February 25th
STH -1000 West
Men's HRC
STH -King
Women's HRC
STH -Miller
Mixed HRC Total
St Vincent de
Paul/ Weigand
Center
Shelter Capacity 300 200 200 700
Avg number of beds occupied/night 291 197 199 686 74
Avg number of beds unoccupied/night 9 3 3 14
Avg % of beds occupied/night 97%98.3%99.3%98%
Avg % of beds unoccupied/night 3%1.7%0.7%2%
Cleaning and Abatement
-Jordan River will be the priority due to increased needs
Resources
-801-990-9999-HRC's
-Weigand Center-Day Services
-St. Vincent de Paul-Lunch/ Dinner
-A Place for Your Stuff (free storage)
•Extended Hours Wed -Thur 1-6pm
-St. Vincent de Paul overnight shelter
-Former Ramada overnight shelter
-Transportation to alternative options from camps
Homelessness
update
Homelessness
Overflow
Shelter
status
801-990-9999
•St. Vincent de Paul-open nightly 93 people
•Scattered Motel Rooms -24/7-referral only from
HRC's
•High Needs Temporary Housing Program
(formerly the Ramada Inn motel rooms)-referral-
only hotel rooms for elderly and medically
vulnerable people -open 24/7 122 people
•Redwood Overflow Beds (formerly the Ramada
Inn common areas) -
open nightly from 7pm –6:30am 127 people
•The best way to access emergency shelter beds
is:801-990-9999
MVP Housing Program
-Current Ramada program is template for this proposal
-200+ beds
-Purchase & Renovate an existing motel/ hotel
property
-Focus on individual rooms for those who are:
•Aging
•Medically frail
•Needing recuperative care
•Experiencing underlying health condition, or with a
compromised immune system
Medically
Vulnerable
People
Housing
Program
HB 440: Homeless Services Amendments
•Updated formula to distribute mitigation funding for cities that host shelters; $5 million in
ongoing state funding added to the existing fund that cities already pay into each
year.Projected total would be ~$10 million/yr.
Part 1: State Homelessness Mitigation Fund
•Cities in S.L. County and the SLVCEH must together develop overflow plans by Sept. 1 each
winter and April 1 each summer (July 1 in 2022). Those plans are reviewed by the state
Office of Homeless Services (OHS).
•If an agreed upon plan is not submitted, or it is rejected by OHS, the Mens' Resource
Center, the Gail Miller Resource Center, and the Geraldine King Resource Center will be
permitted to raise their capacity limits in pre -emption of city ordinance.
•The state may also contract with a private provider to open an overflow shelter on state
property anywhere in S.L. County.
Part 2: S.L. County cities seasonal overflow plan requirement
Love Your Block
Jordan River Neighborhood Initiative
Who are we?
●Love Your Block is a grant-
funded program based in the
Mayor’s Office made up of a City
Lead, two AmeriCorps VISTAS,
and a Fellow.
●Some of our major partners are:
○Public Lands Department
○Homeless Engagement and
Response Team
Darely Flores (she/ her)
Fellow, Love Your Block
darely.flores@slcgov.com
Ravi Sharma (he/ him)
AmeriCorps VISTA,
Love Your Block
ravi.sharma@slcgov.com
●Love Your Block (LYB) is a Johns Hopkins Cities of Service grant program that funds community-led projects to combat blight.
●Love Your Block views blight as anything that displaces neighbors and sense of community.
●For this cycle, we are focused on public assets on the West Side such as the Jordan River.
●LYB is committed to activating communities along the Jordan River Corridor through community-led projects that will:
○Revitalize public spaces
○Instill community ownership○Forge relationships
○Inspire community-sustained infrastructure
How does it work?
Projects Begin
May 2022: Phase One
Projects begin
September 2022: Phase One
Projects end
Upon the completion of
Phase One, two more phases
of grant distribution will
follow
Community Engagement
Work with trusted community
leaders and partners to:
-Introduce Love Your Block
and grant opportunity
-Listen to needs expressed
by West Side communities
-Consciously work to
connect with historically
ignored populations
Grant Application
Phase One: $5,000 total
Early April: Micro-grant
Application (~$500/each)
opens
Spring 2022: Host grant
application workshops and
work with partners to
ensure the process be as
accessible and equitable as
possible.
March 5, 2023 -
October 4, 2023Phase
03 $15,000
September 10, 2022
-March 9, 2023
Phase
02 $10,000
March 9, 2022 -
September 9, 2022
Phase
01 $5,000
What does it look like?
Richmond, CA -Love Your Block Past Projects
Before and After in Boston,
MA
The Shangri-La Rock
Garden in Mattapan
Before and After in Milwaukee, WI
Keefe Ave Pocket Park
Potential Projects for Our City:
-Painting park benches/ tables
-Creating community gardens and little
food pantries
-Community Tool Lending Shed
-Community cleanups
-Painting murals
-Environmental remediation
-Beautifying neighborhood entrances
How can you help?
-Share information with stakeholders
and community members
-Recommend an area to remediate
-Apply for a micro -grant
-Collaborate at outreach events
-Host an event
-Volunteer at an event
-Send community referrals
Can we apply for more than one grant?
You may apply for one grant per Phase (Phase
One, Phase Two, Phase Three).
What sites are available for projects?
Projects must take place along the Jordan River
Corridor.
Can individuals outside of the West Side apply?
Yes, but we are prioritizing applications from
West Side community members and projects must
take place along the Jordan River Corridor.
FAQ Reach out at LYB@slcgov.com with any
questions
Thank you for your time.
We will send you these slides in a follow up email and urge you to
share this program and our contact information with members of
the community.
Salt Lake City Drought and
Water Supply Forecast
Conditions
March 1, 2022
•US Drought Monitor –nearly 97% of Utah in severe and extreme drought Near or above average runoff projection
•Increased soil moisture (more efficient runoff)
•Snowpack at or just below average*
•Three-month (March, April, May) precipitation outlook below normal
•Three-month (March, April, May) temperature outlook above normal
•Seasonal drought projection through May 31-persistent drought
•Stage 2 Drought Response
Item F1
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Ben Luedtke
Budget and Policy Analyst
DATE:March 1, 2022
RE: Board of Equalization Report and Ordinance Adopting Central Business Improvement
Assessment Area (April 21, 2022, to April 21, 2025)
MOTION 1 – ADOPT ORDINANCE
I move that the Council accept and adopt the findings and recommendations of the Board of
Equalization for the Central Business Improvement Assessment Area Number DA-CBIA-22. I further
move that the Council adopt an ordinance confirming the equalized assessment list, levying the
assessment, and related matters.
MOTION 2 – NOT ADOPT
I move that the Council proceed to the next agenda item.
MEMORANDUM TO CITY COUNCIL
____________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council
DATE: February 24, 2022
FROM: Cindy Lou Trishman, City Recorder
SUBJECT: CBIA-22 Comment following BOE Determination/Appeal
OVERVIEW:
The CBIA-22 Board of Equalization (BOE) Findings report was distributed on January
21, 2022 to property owners who attended the BOE meetings with concerns. The report
identified the findings on specific parcels of property owned by individuals disputing the
assessment calculations and cited benefits.
Following the distribution of the report, on Thursday, January 27, 2022 Mr. Tom Bunce
(representing SK Hart Properties at 44 West 300 South) sent an email to the City
Recorder requesting the communication be forwarded to the “Equalization Board
and/or City Council as appropriate.” (Exhibit A)
The City Recorder did not forward the comment to the Council at that time, and as the
Board of Equalization after having made its findings is essentially not in existence was
evaluating next steps. Mr. Bunce’s email doesn’t use the word “appeal” however,
evaluation with the Attorney’s team concluded that because Mr. Bunce’s email
mentioned the City Council, it is best to consider it an appeal submitted within the 15-
day appeal period identified in the Notice of Assessment and Board of Equalization
Hearings. (Exhibit B)
Minutes were completed for the BOE hearings and have been included with this memo
for your review. (Exhibit C)
In preparation for the City Council’s March 1 meeting, wherein the ordinance to confirm
the assessment list and levy an assessment against certain properties for the CBIA-22 is
being considered, Mr. Bunce’s email and related information is being provided for your
review with the acknowledgement that this was an oversight by the City Recorder’s
office to not provide the content sooner. Under the circumstances, I recommend the
Council consider and decide the appeal based on the written information provided to
you by Mr. Bunce and the Administration in the following pages.
CLT
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION RE PROCESS AND STATUTES
The Central Business Investment Area (CBIA) is a mechanism to fund marketing,
promotion, advocacy, and other initiatives to encourage and maximize vibrancy and
activity in the City’s Central Business District.
• Relevant Statutes and Ordinances
The definition of "economic promotion activities" in the SAA statute, Utah Code
Section 11-42-102(18) is as follows:
(18) "Economic promotion activities" means activities that promote
economic growth in a commercial area of a local entity, including:
(a) sponsoring festivals and markets;
(b) promoting business investment or activities;
(c) helping to coordinate public and private actions; and
(d) developing and issuing publications designed to improve the
economic
well-being of the commercial area.
• All properties within the boundaries are assessed at .00142 taxable value
assessment rate, unless the property is designated as residential, ecclesiastical,
government owned or under $20,000 in valuation.
• Although a percentage of the funding goes towards advocacy, such as the
Ambassadors Program, it does not cover costs of law enforcement and policing
within the area or for specific properties.
EXHIBIT A: Email from Mr. Tom Bunce via email to City Recorder
EXHIBIT B: Notice of Board of Equalization Hearing, Outline of Appeal Process
EXHIBIT C: Board of Equalization Minutes
From:Trishman, Cindy Lou
To:Tom Bunce
Cc:Doug White
Subject:RE: (EXTERNAL) RE: Board of Equalization Hearings: Utah Central Business Improvement Assessment Area N.
DA-CBIA-22
Date:Friday, January 28, 2022 5:08:00 PM
Mr. Bunce,
Thank you. I have received your email. Thank you. I am evaluating the process for sending
this along. I will be in touch on Monday.
Thank you for your patience.
CIndy Lou TrIshMan
Salt Lake City Recorder
reCorder’s offICe
saLT Lake CITy CorporaTIon
801.535.6223
801.859.8873 (cell)
From: Tom Bunce
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2022 2:56 PM
To: Trishman, Cindy Lou <Cindy.Trishman@slcgov.com>
Cc: Doug White
Subject: (EXTERNAL) RE: Board of Equalization Hearings: Utah Central Business Improvement
Assessment Area N. DA-CBIA-22
Hi Cindy,
Will you please confirm receipt? Have a nice weekend.
Thanks,
Tom
From: Tom Bunce
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 11:29 AM
To: Cindy Trishman <cindy.trishman@slcgov.com>
Cc: Doug White
Subject: Board of Equalization Hearings: Utah Central Business Improvement Assessment Area N.
DA-CBIA-22
Dear Cindy,
I am writing you as a follow-up to the Board of Equalization Hearing that I participated in on January
11, 2022, which you hosted virtually. I represent SK Hart Properties at 44 W 300 S, Salt Lake City. I
request that you please forward this communication to the Equalization Board and/or City Council as
appropriate. If we need to record something or make some sort of official submission, please
advise.
There are several issues I addressed in the meeting. The first is our disagreement with the
assessment rate we are being charged for certain downtown services and amenities. The unit cost in
the assessment notice we received is $0.00142 for properties DA 1183 15 01 283 003 0000, DA 183
15 01 283 002 0000 and DA 1183 15 01 283 004 0000. We are disputing this rate and requesting a
rate reduction for the following reasons.
1. Our property is mostly non-street facing office space, except for the approximate 2,000
square foot salon tenant, which is on the street. Given our office and salon tenants generally
vacate the property by 6:00 pm, we believe our business only marginally benefits from the
Central Business Improvement Assessment. We do not own bars, restaurants or other street
level business that might benefit from night festivities and other related night activities
supported by the Assessment.
2. Homelessness has negatively affected our business. It is our understanding that that a
portion of the assessment provides for homeless services, however, our experience is that
homelessness is not being addressed and that the homeless are harassing businesses and
patrons. Please allow me to provide you with several examples of how the homeless situation
has negatively affected our business.
On December 17, 2021, a suspected homeless man was conducting himself indecently
in front of our salon during business hours for all employees and patrons to see. Police
were called and the man reacted in a further spectacle by screaming and what we
consider to be assaulting, if not seriously disrespecting the responding officer. The
police ushered the man down the street, but he has since returned to conduct other
mischief.
On December 18, 2021, a suspected homeless man was found sleeping in the entry of
the salon. I have this recorded on video and can send it to you upon request.
On December 19, 2021, a human defecated in the entry of the salon
On December 20, 2021, the salon owner found a shiv near the entrance (photo
attached)
On January 15, 2022, an individual, obviously high on drugs, and suspected homeless,
gained access to the roof of American Towers. The man proceeded to toss metal patio
furniture from the 300 foot high roof nearly striking, and possibly killing, a salon
employee and damaging the sidewalk awning over the entrance (photos attached).
On January 17, 2022, the same man who was suspected of throwing furniture from the
roof on the 15th returned again, but was fortunately arrested by the police.
We are open to further discussion and are willing and able to provide additional incident reports
with documentation if requested. We are appreciative to Salt Lake City and supportive of effective
Downtown services such as holiday lighting, however, based on our view of the situation and the
issues presented, we do not believe the Central Business Improvement Assessment largely benefits
our business. Therefore, we are requesting that the assessment unit rate be reduced by 90%.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Please contact me with any questions or
comments.
Tom Bunce
CFO
S.K. Hart Family of Companies
630 E. South Temple
Salt Lake City, UT 84102
NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT AND BOARD OF EQUALIZATION HEARINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the assessment list for the Salt Lake City, Utah
Central Business Improvement Assessment Area No. DA-CBIA-22 (the “Assessment
Area”) has now been completed and is available for examination at the Salt Lake City
Recorder’s office located at 451 South State Street, Room 415, Salt Lake City, Utah. The
City Council has appointed a Board of Equalization to hear and consider arguments from
any person who claims to be aggrieved by the proposed assessments to be levied within
the Assessment Area, including arguments relating to (a) the amount of benefits accruing
to the property proposed to be assessed or (b) the amount of the proposed assessment.
The assessments levied are for the purpose paying for the proposed activities, which
include, but are not limited to, advertising, marketing, special events, festivals,
transportation, newsletters, publications, banners, Christmas lighting, security, special
projects, housing, town meetings, government policy, cultural promotion, reports, surveys,
homeless services and other promotional activities (the “Economic Promotion Activities”)
in the downtown area (for the benefit of the properties within the Assessment Area). The
total amount of the assessments to be levied against benefitted property within Assessment
Area is expected to be $5,251,285.00, and will be based upon (i) 2021 taxable property
values (the “Base Assessment”), plus (ii) linear feet (except that corner lots will not be
assessed for both frontages as applicable, only one) on certain properties with frontage on
certain streets for special holiday lights (the “Holiday Light Assessment” and together with
the Base Assessment, the “Assessment”). The unit cost is each property’s proportionate
share of the Economic Promotion Activities applicable to the property as described in this
notice. Funding from assessments provides only a portion of the total budget for the
Assessment Area’s programs and activities. Salt Lake City, Utah (the “City”) will not
contribute any of its own funds for the Economic Promotion Activities; however, the City
anticipates that the manager of the Assessment Area will secure non-assessment funds from
other sources such as grants, foundations, promotions, contributions, earned income, and
sponsorships.
As required by law, three persons have been duly appointed to act as the Board of
Equalization on the assessments proposed to be levied on the property benefited within the
Assessment Area. The Board of Equalization for assessments proposed to be levied on the
affected property within the Assessment Area will meet via electronic means or in person
at the City & County Building, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah, on January 11, 2022,
between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m.; on January 12, 2022, between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m.; and on January 13, 2022, between the hours of 1:00 p.m. and
2:00 p.m. to hear and consider any objections to and make any corrections of any proposed
assessments that the Board may deem necessary to meet the requirements of the
Assessment Area Act, Title 11, Chapter 42, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended. To
participate in the meeting, please visit the website www.slc.gov/attorney/public-notices/.
The assessment list and amounts of the proposed assessment against each parcel of
property have been completed and are available for public examination from 8:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m. at the Office of the City Recorder, 451 South State Street, Room 415, Salt Lake
City, Utah.
2
4875-3168-9220, v. 1
After the Board has held all hearings and has made all corrections the Board
considers necessary to comply with the law, the Board will report its findings to the City
Council of the City. Appeal from a decision of the Board of Equalization may be taken to
the City Council of the City by filing with the City Council a written notice of appeal in
the office of the City Recorder within fifteen (15) days after the date the Board’s final
report to the City Council is mailed to the affected property owners.
By resolution of the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this November 16, 2021.
(SEAL)
CITY RECORDER
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT (CBIA)
Tuesday, January 11, 2022
The Board of Equalization of Salt Lake City, Utah, met on Tuesday, January 11, 2022, in a Hybrid
Meeting format.
The following Board Members were present:
Nick Tarbet, Chris Norlem, Brandon Bagley
Present City Staff:
Jolynn Walz - Economic Development Office Manager, William Wright - Economic Development
Project Manager, Boyd Ferguson - Senior City Attorney, Cindy Lou Trishman – City Recorder, Thais
Stewart – Deputy City Recorder Operations
Consultant:
Jonathan Springmeyer - Bonneville Research
Board Member Brandon Bagley conducted the meeting.
The meeting began at 9 am.
Minutes:
Parcel #: 15-02-279-001-0000 Address: 751 W 300 S
Parcel #: 15-02-280-001-0000 Address: 735 W 300 S
Parcel #: 15-02-427-001-0000 Address: 760 W 400 S
Parcel #: 15-02-427-002-0000 Address: 735 W 300 S
Bruce Markosian explained that his family owns four parcels within the assessment area and an appeal
was presented to the Utah State Tax Commission regarding the 2020 assessment, the Judge ruled in favor
of the 2020 appeal and recommended another appeal be made for the 2021 assessment. Mr. Markosian
explained that he sent in the appeal when the notice was received but has not received confirmation that it
was received by the County, and further explained that the assessments made by the engineering
department do not reflect the appealed assessment. Mr. Markosian would like Engineering to recalculate
the assessment in accordance with the Judge’s ruling.
Jonathan Springmeyer explained that the assessments used cannot be edited and are directly
downloaded from Salt Lake County to the software used to generate assessment information.
Mr. Markosian expressed frustration regarding the timeline of the assessment and appeal process.
Mr. Springmeyer reiterated Mr. Markosian’s remarks concerning the 2020 and 2021 requests for
adjustments.
Mr. Markosian responded by adding that the Utah State Tax Commission came to an agreement to a
specific adjustment that would then use made for the years 2020 and 2021.
Mr. Springmeyer explained that the information had yet to be presented by the County and recommended
that the Board evaluate the matter once Mr. Markosian receives the official adjustment. It was noted if the
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT (CBIA)
Tuesday, January 11, 2022
information does not arrive before April, 2022, it cannot be completed prior to the 2021 assessment. In
that event, any adjustments would have to be made retroactively.
Mr. Markosian indicated he would submit the information to the Engineering Department upon receipt.
Mr. Springmeyer commented the adjustments can be made, if determined by the Board with the added
context that the proposed adjustments would not negatively impact the CBIA budget.
Boyd Ferguson asked Mr. Markosian if he had any physical documentation from the court.
Mr. Markosian did not have the documentation and expressed willingness to obtain them from the court if
necessary. Copies of the appeal have been sent to the City regarding the adjustment.
No formal actions were taken noting individual determinations will be made at a later meeting.
328 Ventures LLC
Parcel #: 16-06-301-041 Address: 328 S State St
Parcel #: 16-06-301-040 Address: 338 S State St
Andy Tran requested an appeal of the assessments regarding holiday lighting. Mr. Tran explained that
the current holiday lighting does not work, it has been verified that the outlets are damaged and unable to
connect with the lighting. He expressed willingness to provide funds to get the outlets fixed.
A discussion was held regarding the holiday lighting. Public Utilities have been notified and are looking
into the issues.
SKR Properties
American Towers Condo Highrise
Parcel #: 15-01-283-002-0000 Address: 44 W 300 S
Parcel #: 15-01-283-003-0000 Address: 44 W 300 S
Parcel #: 15-01-283-004-0000 Address: 44 W 300 S
Tom Bunce commented that an assessment was made and that his business would not benefit from the
items listed in the assessment notice.
Nick Tarbet requested clarification on the areas where support is lacking.
Mr. Bunce explained the office, as a workspace, does not benefit from advertisements for festivals,
events, and that there has not been security assistance. He continued that the businesses have had a
difficult time with security, with little help from law enforcement. Situations regarding people without
homes harassing, conducting themselves indecently, and damaging property.
A discussion was held regarding Mr. Bunce’s comments and if they were presented to the correct group.
It was determined that Mr. Bunce’s comments were correctly made to the Board.
Mr. Ferguson made a recommendation for the Board to encourage the property owner visit with the
Alliance to find out what is done for security.
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT (CBIA)
Tuesday, January 11, 2022
Jolyn Walz asked if Mr. Bunce had been directed to the Ambassador Program.
Mr. Bunce had not been directed to them in the past; contact information was shared.
Mr. Bunce reiterated his concern regarding the benefits his business would receive from the assessment
and explained that he would like to get the amount of his assessment decreased from $7,000.
A discussion was held regarding the process and how changes are made. Mr. Springmeyer explained that
the Board will meet and provide a report to the Council regarding what they recommend. Mr. Bunce
offered to submit information regarding his concerns. The report to the Council will be sent by the 18th of
January.
There were no further comments.
The Board meeting adjourned at 10 am.
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT (CBIA)
Tuesday, January 11, 2022
Minutes Approved:
_______________________________
Board Member
_______________________________
Board Member
_______________________________
Board Member
_______________________________
City Recorder
This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as other items may have been discussed; please
refer to the audio or video for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52-4-203(2)(b).
To listen to the audio recording of the meeting or view meeting materials, please visit Salt Lake City
Public Body Minutes library, available at www.data.slc.gov, selecting the Public Body Minutes
hyperlink. If you are viewing this file in the Minutes library, use the links on the right of your screen
within the ‘Document Relationships’ information to listen to the audio or view meeting materials.
This document along with the digital recording constitutes the official minutes of the Board of
Equalization Central Business Improvement District meeting held Tuesday, January 11, 2022.
Brandon Bagley (Jan 21, 2022 14:56 MST)
Brandon Bagley
Nick Tarbet (Jan 25, 2022 16:37 MST)
Chris Norlem (Jan 25, 2022 16:39 MST)
Chris Norlem
Cindy Trishman (Jan 25, 2022 17:06 MST)
CBIA 1-11-2022 Minutes
Final Audit Report 2022-01-26
Created:2022-01-21
By:Thais Stewart (thais.stewart@slcgov.com)
Status:Signed
Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAAsX828VV0rNjDvjVyTLTeHivjLmGHD7a5
"CBIA 1-11-2022 Minutes" History
Document created by Thais Stewart (thais.stewart@slcgov.com)
2022-01-21 - 9:53:14 PM GMT
Document emailed to Brandon Bagley (steven.bagley@slcgov.com) for signature
2022-01-21 - 9:54:18 PM GMT
Email viewed by Brandon Bagley (steven.bagley@slcgov.com)
2022-01-21 - 9:55:53 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Brandon Bagley (steven.bagley@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2022-01-21 - 9:56:34 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Document emailed to Nick Tarbet (nick.tarbet@slcgov.com) for signature
2022-01-21 - 9:56:36 PM GMT
Email viewed by Nick Tarbet (nick.tarbet@slcgov.com)
2022-01-22 - 1:54:59 AM GMT
Email viewed by Nick Tarbet (nick.tarbet@slcgov.com)
2022-01-25 - 10:48:34 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Nick Tarbet (nick.tarbet@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2022-01-25 - 11:37:45 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Document emailed to Chris Norlem (chris.norlem@slcgov.com) for signature
2022-01-25 - 11:37:47 PM GMT
Email viewed by Chris Norlem (chris.norlem@slcgov.com)
2022-01-25 - 11:38:40 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Chris Norlem (chris.norlem@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2022-01-25 - 11:39:40 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Document emailed to Cindy Trishman (cindy.trishman@slcgov.com) for signature
2022-01-25 - 11:39:41 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Cindy Trishman (cindy.trishman@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2022-01-26 - 0:06:50 AM GMT - Time Source: server
Agreement completed.
2022-01-26 - 0:06:50 AM GMT
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT (CBIA)
Wednesday, January 12, 2022
12
The Board of Equalization of Salt Lake City, Utah, met on Wednesday, January 12, 2022, in a Hybrid
Meeting format.
The following Board Members were present:
Chris Norlem, Brandon Bagley, Ben Luedtke
Present City Staff:
Joylynn Walz - Economic Development Office Manage, William Wright - Economic Development
Project Manager, Boyd Ferguson - Senior City Attorney, Cindy Lou Trishman – City Recorder, Thais
Stewart – Deputy City Recorder Operations
Consultant:
Jonathan Springmeyer - Bonneville Research
Board Member Brandon Bagley conducted the meeting.
The meeting began at 10 am.
Minutes:
Board Members introduced themselves.
LEXI LLC
Parcel #: 15-01-103-013-000 Address: 660 W 100 S
Parcel #: 15-01-103-006-000 Address: 654 W 100 S
Brett Palmer explained that he does not see direct benefits equal to the assessment cost on his property;
adding an inquiry about plans to improve the area that would justify the expense of the assessment.
A discussion was held regarding the location of the business and the lot. No questions were asked. More
information will be presented once a report is provided to the City Council. The Board will be informing
Mr. Palmer of the next actions.
A discussion was held regarding the map of
economic promotion activities. Chris Norlem provided maps such as the CBIA boundary and properties
within the holiday lighting map. The board also discussed the base rates. Clarification regarding the final
assessment levy being determined by the City Council was made, with statements regarding the edges and
border property owners of the designated area. Mr. Springmeyer stated there was desire by the Council to
include the section cited by Mr. Palmer in order to avoid an island of area not included in improvement
evaluations.
Jolynn Walz asked a clarifying question regarding when determinations will be made by the board.
Cindy Lou Trishman explained that the Board’s recommendations will be compiled in a report, with the
plan to discuss the final recommendations at Thursday’s meeting following any public comment.
Board Members discussed the opportunity to visit during the meeting or to complete recommendations
after the public opportunity was concluded on Thursday. The Board resolved (due to varied attendance
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT (CBIA)
Wednesday, January 12, 2022
12
and representation) to discuss recommendations on Thursday following public comment to allow the City
Council staff time to discuss collectively the information.
Ben Luedtke asked if there was information available concerning the three-year reauthorization and
what economic promotional activities Mr. Palmer’s property area may benefit from. Discussion of the
board regarding the question included potential benefits including property value, attractive downtown –
drawing in economic opportunity, and other indirect assessment benefits.
There were no further comments.
The Board meeting adjourned at 11 am.
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT (CBIA)
Wednesday, January 12, 2022
12
Minutes Approved:
_______________________________
Board Member
_______________________________
Board Member
_______________________________
Board Member
_______________________________
City Recorder
This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as other items may have been discussed; please
refer to the audio or video for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52-4-203(2)(b).
To listen to the audio recording of the meeting or view meeting materials, please visit Salt Lake City
Public Body Minutes library, available at www.data.slc.gov, selecting the Public Body Minutes
hyperlink. If you are viewing this file in the Minutes library, use the links on the right of your screen
within the ‘Document Relationships’ information to listen to the audio or view meeting materi als.
This document along with the digital recording constitutes the official minutes of the Board of
Equalization Central Business Improvement District meeting held Wednesday, January 12, 2022.
Brandon Bagley (Jan 21, 2022 15:18 MST)
Brandon Bagley
Benjamin Luedtke (Jan 24, 2022 13:59 MST)
Chris Norlem (Jan 24, 2022 14:00 MST)
Chris Norlem
Cindy Trishman (Jan 25, 2022 17:08 MST)
CBIA 1-12-2022 Minutes
Final Audit Report 2022-01-26
Created:2022-01-21
By:Thais Stewart (thais.stewart@slcgov.com)
Status:Signed
Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAAwlWpmPMrIV7-IBzh3x_Q9vaIGdE5UWLr
"CBIA 1-12-2022 Minutes" History
Document created by Thais Stewart (thais.stewart@slcgov.com)
2022-01-21 - 9:54:44 PM GMT
Document emailed to Brandon Bagley (steven.bagley@slcgov.com) for signature
2022-01-21 - 9:55:16 PM GMT
Email viewed by Brandon Bagley (steven.bagley@slcgov.com)
2022-01-21 - 10:17:59 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Brandon Bagley (steven.bagley@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2022-01-21 - 10:18:30 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Document emailed to Benjamin Luedtke (benjamin.luedtke@slcgov.com) for signature
2022-01-21 - 10:18:32 PM GMT
Email viewed by Benjamin Luedtke (benjamin.luedtke@slcgov.com)
2022-01-24 - 8:58:57 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Benjamin Luedtke (benjamin.luedtke@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2022-01-24 - 8:59:40 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Document emailed to Chris Norlem (chris.norlem@slcgov.com) for signature
2022-01-24 - 8:59:42 PM GMT
Email viewed by Chris Norlem (chris.norlem@slcgov.com)
2022-01-24 - 8:59:58 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Chris Norlem (chris.norlem@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2022-01-24 - 9:00:38 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Document emailed to Cindy Trishman (cindy.trishman@slcgov.com) for signature
2022-01-24 - 9:00:39 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Cindy Trishman (cindy.trishman@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2022-01-26 - 0:08:50 AM GMT - Time Source: server
Agreement completed.
2022-01-26 - 0:08:50 AM GMT
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT (CBIA)
Thursday, January 13, 2022
The Board of Equalization of Salt Lake City, Utah, met on Thursday, January 13, 2022, in a Hybrid
Meeting format.
The following Board Members were present:
Chris Norlem, Brandon Bagley, Ben Luedtke
Present City Staff:
Jolynn Walz - Economic Development Office Manager, William Wright - Economic Development
Project Manager, Boyd Ferguson - Senior City Attorney, Cindy Lou Trishman – City Recorder, Thais
Stewart – Deputy City Recorder Operations
Consultant:
Jonathan Springmeyer – Bonneville Research
Board Member Brandon Bagley conducted the meeting.
The meeting began at 1 pm.
Minutes:
Board Members introduced themselves.
A discussion was held regarding the meeting on January 11, 2022. Board Members discussed Bruce
Markosian’s requests.
Chris Norlem commented that documents regarding the information presented by Mr. Markosian were
not presented to the Board, and said a decision cannot be made until the documents are presented.
Jonathan Springmeyer explained that Mr. Markosian is waiting for documentation from the County to
arrive regarding the adjustments.
Board Members discussed the options regarding Mr. Markosian’s request such as: City Council’s
decision to retroactively adjust the assessment, and the City Treasurer’s ability to work with Economic
Development to reduce the assessment.
Mr. Norlem pointed out the assessment information taken from the County was done in July of 2021. If
adjustments were made for 2020 before July for Mr. Markosian, then they will be included in the 2021
assessment.
Mr. Springmeyer clarified that the adjustments would not have been made for the 2021 assessment, due to
the timeline. He explained that the requests made would not impact or be a burden to the budget.
Boyd Ferguson provided an example regarding Exhibit C from 2019, and how no names were included.
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT (CBIA)
Thursday, January 13, 2022
Board’s recommendation to the City Council: support the inclusion in the assessment ordinance of the
delegating to the City Treasurer of authority to make housekeeping adjustments as outlined by Mr.
Ferguson.
A discussion was held regarding Andy Tran’s request, related to holiday lighting. The CBD maintenance
group has been aware of the issue, a proposal has been sent to CIP that has not yet been funded. This
project would fall under the general fund. Holiday lighting funding goes to the Downtown Alliance,
which hires a contractor. However, it is up to the City to maintain the outlets and power.
Mr. Ferguson explained that as a legal matter, there cannot be an assessment for more than the benefit
received. He went on to say that since Mr. Tran is not receiving the light benefit, it would not be legal to
continue assessing him for holiday lighting. Mr. Tran is the only one that can receive the adjustment since
he came before the Board, even though there may be other properties without the lighting benefit.
Board’s recommendation to the City Council: removing the holiday lighting assessment for both of Mr.
Tran’s parcels for the three-year period.
A discussion was held regarding Tom Bunce’s comment that his business did not benefit from the
assessment.
Brandon Bagley explained that it was agreed that all commercial businesses would be assessed. He also
stated that businesses may not benefit directly, but the assessment improves the downtown area.
Mr. Ferguson commented that not all properties will benefit from all the items listed as benefits to the
assessment.
Ben Luedtke commented that a distinction must be made between security at events and challenges with
people experiencing homelessness.
Board’s recommendation to the City Council: the assessment was properly executed, and an adjustment
should not be made at this time.
A discussion was held regarding Brett Palmer’s comment that his business did not receive enough
benefits to justify the cost of the assessment.
Mr. Luedtke asked the board what their thoughts were on asking the city council to discuss with the
downtown alliance and provide information to the property owners in west downtown (who haven’t been
in the assessment area as long) regarding the events and benefits of the assessment area. He went on to
say that there isn’t an argument at this time to justify adjusting or reducing the assessment.
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT (CBIA)
Thursday, January 13, 2022
Mr. Norlem commented that it would be beneficial to evaluate the area regarding the benefits received
from the assessment. Mr. Bagley agrees that an evaluation of the area is necessary to justify its addition to
the assessment area.
Board’s recommendation to the City Council: further discussions should be held regarding the west
downtown assessment to provide property owners with more information regarding the benefits of the
assessment area.
There were no further comments.
The Board meeting adjourned at 2 pm.
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT (CBIA)
Thursday, January 13, 2022
Minutes Approved:
_______________________________
Board Member
_______________________________
Board Member
_______________________________
Board Member
_______________________________
City Recorder
This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as other items may have been discussed; please
refer to the audio or video for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52-4-203(2)(b).
To listen to the audio recording of the meeting or view meeting materials, please visit Salt Lake City
Public Body Minutes library, available at www.data.slc.gov, selecting the Public Body Minutes
hyperlink. If you are viewing this file in the Minutes library, use the links on the right of your screen
within the ‘Document Relationships’ information to listen to the audio or view meeting materials.
This document along with the digital recording constitutes the official minutes of the Board of
Equalization Central Business Improvement District meeting held Thursday, January 13, 2022.
Brandon Bagley (Jan 21, 2022 15:19 MST)
Brandon Bagley
Benjamin Luedtke (Jan 24, 2022 14:38 MST)
Chris Norlem (Jan 24, 2022 14:48 MST)
Chris Norlem
Cindy Trishman (Jan 25, 2022 17:07 MST)
CBIA 1-13-2022 Minutes
Final Audit Report 2022-01-26
Created:2022-01-21
By:Thais Stewart (thais.stewart@slcgov.com)
Status:Signed
Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAAN0_OunJdYeFWyw6NfAJMXS3z6bCb-fcA
"CBIA 1-13-2022 Minutes" History
Document created by Thais Stewart (thais.stewart@slcgov.com)
2022-01-21 - 9:55:39 PM GMT
Document emailed to Brandon Bagley (steven.bagley@slcgov.com) for signature
2022-01-21 - 9:56:31 PM GMT
Email viewed by Brandon Bagley (steven.bagley@slcgov.com)
2022-01-21 - 10:19:07 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Brandon Bagley (steven.bagley@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2022-01-21 - 10:19:30 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Document emailed to Benjamin Luedtke (benjamin.luedtke@slcgov.com) for signature
2022-01-21 - 10:19:32 PM GMT
Email viewed by Benjamin Luedtke (benjamin.luedtke@slcgov.com)
2022-01-24 - 8:59:49 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Benjamin Luedtke (benjamin.luedtke@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2022-01-24 - 9:38:27 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Document emailed to Chris Norlem (chris.norlem@slcgov.com) for signature
2022-01-24 - 9:38:29 PM GMT
Email viewed by Chris Norlem (chris.norlem@slcgov.com)
2022-01-24 - 9:48:21 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Chris Norlem (chris.norlem@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2022-01-24 - 9:48:55 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Document emailed to Cindy Trishman (cindy.trishman@slcgov.com) for signature
2022-01-24 - 9:48:56 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Cindy Trishman (cindy.trishman@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2022-01-26 - 0:07:13 AM GMT - Time Source: server
Agreement completed.
2022-01-26 - 0:07:13 AM GMT
Cindy Trishman (Feb 24, 2022 18:21 MST)
BOE Appeal Memo_COMPLETE
Final Audit Report 2022-02-25
Created:2022-02-25
By:Cindy Trishman (cindy.trishman@slcgov.com)
Status:Signed
Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAAHjBq1R2HJpATlYpLsN0wTR0Z33NXpfOR
"BOE Appeal Memo_COMPLETE" History
Document created by Cindy Trishman (cindy.trishman@slcgov.com)
2022-02-25 - 1:17:52 AM GMT
Document e-signed by Cindy Trishman (cindy.trishman@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2022-02-25 - 1:21:11 AM GMT - Time Source: server
Agreement completed.
2022-02-25 - 1:21:11 AM GMT
DEPARTMENT of ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ERIN MENDENHALL
MAYOR
BEN KOLENDAR
DIRECTOR
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
_____________________________ Date Received: ___________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: ___________
___________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: February 2, 2022
Dan Dugan, Chair
FROM: Ben Kolendar, Director of Economic Development
SUBJECT: Assessment Ordinance for the Central Business Improvement Area – 22 (CBIA-22)
STAFF CONTACT: Ben Kolendar, Director, benjamin.kolendar@slcgov.com
Lorena Riffo Jenson, Deputy Director, lorena.riffojenson@slcgov.com
Jolynn Walz, Executive Manager, jolynn.walz@slcgov.com
William Wright, Project Manager, william.wright@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the City Council adopt the Assessment
Ordinance for the Central Business Improvement Area 2022 (CBIA-22).
BUDGET IMPACT: The CBIA-22 would be funded through Special Assessment. The budget
summary for the City is detailed starting on page 3 under the section “Financial Summary for
CBIA – 22.” Possible changes as recommended by the Board of Equalization have been added in
red.
COORDINATION: Economic Development, Treasurer’s Office, Engineering Division,
Recorder’s Office, City Council’s Office, Attorney’s Office, Board of Equalization, Bonneville
Research Consultant, and Gilmore & Bell (bond counsel).
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Salt Lake City established the Central Business Improvement
Area (CBIA) in 1991 as a mechanism to fund marketing, promotions, advocacy, and other
Lisa Shaffer (Feb 3, 2022 12:12 MST)02/03/2022
02/03/2022
initiatives in Downtown Salt Lake City through a special assessment on property within a
designated area. This approval would re-establish a special assessment on properties within the
same boundaries as 2019 for a three-year period and it breaks out a second assessment for holiday
lighting (same boundaries as 2019, maps attached). This process is the final action by the City
Council to establish the CBIA-22 which would begin on April 22, 2022.
Board of Equalization: As required by law, a Board of Equalization (BOE) for the Assessment
Area was appointed by the City Council on November 16, 2021. The BOE consisted of
representatives from the Salt Lake City Council’s Office, the City Treasurer’s Office, and the City
Engineer’s Office.
The BOE met three times in January 2022, to hear and consider any arguments from individuals or
property owners who claim to be aggrieved. The role of the BOE is to consider all facts and
arguments presented at the hearings and provide recommendations to the City Council.
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION RECOMMENDATIONS: The Board of Equalization (BOE)
has recommended removing the holiday lighting assessment on two properties, owned by a single
owner, which would reduce the CBIA-22 total revenue by $1,048.78.
The BOE has also recommended possibly reducing the assessment of four (4) other properties,
owned by a single owner, who is in the process of disputing Salt Lake County’s valuation for those
properties. The properties undergoing a valuation dispute are currently being assessed $4,519.87.
The BOE recommends to the City Council that the reduction of the assessments on any of the four
properties only be made after the property owner provides the City with the appropriate
documentation from the County showing the property valuation reductions, and then the requested
assessment adjustments can be made administratively by the City Treasurer’s Office. The numbers
listed in red in the updated budget reflect an unlikely scenario in which the two properties and the
last four properties mentioned above would contribute $0 to the CBIA-22. The City Council can
accept, reject, or modify the BOE’s recommendations.
It is unlikely that the budget will be insufficient, even if all the properties listed above are given a
lower assessment. However, if the budget is insufficient, other funds that may be used to fulfill the
budget include: 1) any surplus remaining in existing accounts, 2) the reserve withheld, and/or; 3)
reduced contractor fees.
Financial Summary for CBIA-22
Revenue for CBIA-22
2021 Updated Taxable Property Valuation $3,635,816,258
Proposed Taxable Value Assessment Rate .00142
Taxable Value Assessment Subtotal $5,140,630
2021 Linear Footage for Holiday Lights $13,870
Proposed Holiday Light Rate per Foot $12.79
Holiday Light Assessment Subtotal $177,378
Total Assessment Revenue $5,318,008
Board of Equalization Recommended Adjustments -$5,569
(maximum possible adjustments)
Total Adjusted Assessment Revenue $5,312,439
(reflects largest possible adjustment)
Budget for CBIA-22
Salt Lake City Expenses
DED Management $ 120,000
Reserve withheld (3%) $ 157,539
Professional and Technical $ 30,000
Legal Fees $ 20,000
Printing $ 5,000
Postage Fees $ 3,000
Contingency $ 18,5000
Salt Lake City Subtotal $ 354,039
RFP Recipient Budget
Economic Development Activities (27%) $ 1,293,000
Marketing and Events (16%) $ 776,000
Administration (24%) $ 1,164,000
Ambassador Program Homeless Services (33%) $ 1,512,000
RFP Recipient Subtotal $ 4,745,000
Total Use of Funds $ 5,099,039
Special Stipulations
Parcels under $20,000 in valuation as well as residential, ecclesiastical, and government-owned
properties are exempt from the assessment, except those whose owners agree in writing to be
assessed. By Utah law, properties that are not included in the initial Notice of Intent cannot be
added later unless the property owner consents. However, properties may be removed from the
CBIA-22 at the City Council’s discretion before assessment. Property owners are assessed the full
amount but may pay the assessment in three (3) annual installments. No more than 30% of the
assessment funds can be spent on administrative expenses.
Remaining Proposed Council Actions:
● March 1, 2022 – The City Council accepts or modifies the BOE recommendations and
adopts or rejects the Assessment Ordinance
Previous Action/discussions by the Council concerning the CBIA-22:
● April 20, 2021 – Informational: Central Business Improvement Area 2022
● July 13, 2021 – Resolution: Intention to Designate Central Business Improvement Area
2022
● July 20, 2021 – Adoption: Resolution of Intention to Designate Central Business
Improvement Area 2022
● November 16, 2021 – The City Council announced the protest tally and determined that it
did not exceeds the protest threshold; City Council adopted the Resolution to Designate the
Assessment Area and appointed the BOE
Attachments:
● BOE Report
● Assessment Ordinance
● Boundary Map
● Holiday Lighting Parcel Map
● CBIA-22 Timeline
REPORT OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREA
CENTRAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREA CBIA 22
Board of Equalization Hearings for Special Assessment Area CBIA 22 were held on January 11, 12, and
13, 2022 at 451 South State Street, Room 326, and online, in accordance with the statute governing
special assessment areas. The Board of Equalization discussed and presented its findings at a meeting
held on January 13, 2022.
Board of Equalization members
City Council Nick Tarbet and Ben Luedtke, Signature: _______________ Signature: ________________
Treasurers Office Brandon Bagley, Signature: _______________
Engineering Chris Norlem, Signature: _______________
Advisory Panel to the Board
CBIA Consultant Jonathan Springmeyer
DED Jolyn Walz and Will Wright
City Attorneys Office Boyd Ferguson
City Recorders Office Cindy Lou Trishman and Thais Stewart
The following are the concerns of property owners regarding the special assessment area, and the
recommendations of the Board of Equalization.
Bruce Markosian
AAM Investments, LTD
Address: 751 W 300 S
Parcel #: 15 02 279 001 0000
Proposed Assessment: (as originally mailed for the BOE)
Rate
Code
Description Method of
Assessment
Cost/Unit Total Quantity Excluded
Quantity
Assessed
Quantity
Estimated
Assessment
1 base rate Value $0.00142 575,300.00 0.00 260,400.00 $816.93
$816.93
Address: 735 W 300 S
Parcel #: 15 02 280 001 0000
Proposed Assessment: (as originally mailed for the BOE)
Rate
Code
Description Method of
Assessment
Cost/Unit Total Quantity Excluded
Quantity
Assessed
Quantity
Estimated
Assessment
1 base rate Value $0.00142 423,300.00 0.00 423,300.00 $601.09
$601.09
Address: 760 W 400 S
Parcel #: 15 02 427 001 0000
Proposed Assessment:(as originally mailed for the BOE)
Rate
Code
Description Method of
Assessment
Cost/Unit Total Quantity Excluded
Quantity
Assessed
Quantity
Estimated
Assessment
1 base rate Value $0.00142 210,600.00 0.00 210,600.00 $299.05
$299.05
Address: 735 W 300 S
Parcel #: 15 02 427 002 0000
Proposed Assessment: (as originally mailed for the BOE)
Rate
Code
Description Method of
Assessment
Cost/Unit Total Quantity Excluded
Quantity
Assessed
Quantity
Estimated
Assessment
1 base rate Value $0.00142 1,973,800.00 0.00 1,973,800.00 $2,802.80
$2,802.80
Property Owner Concerns:
Mr. Markosian is concerned that Salt Lake Countys valuation of his properties are inaccurate and
protested their valuations to the County board of equalization. Mr. Markosian indicated during the BOE
Hearing that he received verbal confirmation from the County that adjustments to the valuation need to
be made. To date, Salt Lake County has yet to finalize any changes in valuation or provide
documentation of any approved changes.
Board of Equalization Recommendation:
Board recommends the assessment was appropriate but that if Salt Lake County changes the property
valuations, the City should consider an adjustment of the assessment if it is practical.
Andy Tran
328 Ventures LLC
Address: 338 S State St.
Parcel #: 16 06 301 041 0000
Proposed Assessment: (as originally mailed for the BOE)
Rate
Code
Description Method of
Assessment
Cost/Unit Total Quantity Excluded
Quantity
Assessed
Quantity
Estimated
Assessment
1 base rate Value $0.00142 260,400.00 0.00 260,400.00 $369.77
2 holiday lighting Linear Footage $12.79 33.00 0.00 33.00 $422.07
$791.84
Address: 328 S State St.
Parcel #: 16 06 301 040 0000
Proposed Assessment: (as originally mailed for the BOE)
Rate
Code
Description Method of
Assessment
Cost/Unit Total Quantity Excluded
Quantity
Assessed
Quantity
Estimated
Assessment
1 base rate Value $0.00142 405,2000.00 0.00 405,2000.00 $575.38
2 holiday lighting Linear Footage $12.79 49.00 0.00 49.00 $626.71
$1202.09
Property Owner Concerns:
Mr. Tran is concerned that his properties are being assessed for holiday lighting and currently and for
the past two years holiday lighting has not been available due to an infrastructure deficiency.
Board of Equalization Recommendation:
The Board was able to determine that indeed these properties have not received holiday lighting the
past two years and recommends that these two properties not be assessed for holiday lighting.
Tom Buntz
SKR Properties
American Towers Highrise
Address: 44 W 300 S
Parcel #: 15 01 283 002 0000
Proposed Assessment: (as originally mailed for the BOE)
Rate
Code
Description Method of
Assessment
Cost/Unit Total Quantity Excluded
Quantity
Assessed
Quantity
Estimated
Assessment
1 base rate Value $0.00142 473,100.00 0.00 473,100.00 $671.80
$671.80
Address: 44 W 300 S
Parcel #: 15 01 283 003 0000
Proposed Assessment: (as originally mailed for the BOE)
Rate
Code
Description Method of
Assessment
Cost/Unit Total Quantity Excluded
Quantity
Assessed
Quantity
Estimated
Assessment
1 base rate Value $0.00142 5,597,500.00 0.00 5,597,500.00 $7,948.45
$7,948.45
Address: 44 W 300 S
Parcel #: 15 01 283 004 0000
Proposed Assessment: (as originally mailed for the BOE)
Rate
Code
Description Method of
Assessment
Cost/Unit Total Quantity Excluded
Quantity
Assessed
Quantity
Estimated
Assessment
1 base rate Value $0.00142 4,669,600.00 0.00 4,669,600.00 $6,630.83
$6,630.83
Property Owner Concerns:
Mr. Buntz is concerned that that his properties do not benefit from economic promotion of the Central
Business District, or if they do, they are proportionately less benefited than other types of property.
Specifically, Mr. Buntz believes that his properties do not benefit from security services from the CBIA.
Board of Equalization Recommendation:
The Board recommends the assessment is appropriate.
Brett Palmer
LEXI, LLC
Address: 100 S 654 W
Parcel: 15 01 103 006 000
Proposed Assessment: (as originally mailed for the BOE)
Rate
Code
Description Method of
Assessment
Cost/Unit Total Quantity Excluded
Quantity
Assessed
Quantity
Estimated
Assessment
1 base rate Value $0.00142 168,900.00 0.00 168,900.00 $239.84
$239.84
Address: 100 S 660 W
Parcel: 15 01 103 013 000
Proposed Assessment: (as originally mailed for the BOE)
Rate
Code
Description Method of
Assessment
Cost/Unit Total Quantity Excluded
Quantity
Assessed
Quantity
Estimated
Assessment
1 base rate Value $0.00142 81,000.00 0.00 81,000.00 $115.02
$115.02
Property Owner Concerns:
Mr. Palmer is concerned that his properties, which are located on the western edge of the assessment
area, and especially the parking lot, do not directly benefit from the assessment, or if they do, it is
proportionately less benefited than properties more centrally located in the Central Business District.
Board of Equalization Recommendation:
The Board recommends the assessment is appropriate. The Board also discussed recommending that
the recipient of the contract for economic promotion services reach out to businesses along the western
edge that was added to the assessment area in 2016 at the suggestion of the City Council, to describe
the services provided in that area.
The Board of Equalization finds that, under Utah Code Section 11 42 403(5):
o each assessed property within the assessment area will be assessed in a manner that
meets the requirements of Utah Code Section 11 42 409; and
o except as provided in Utah Code Subsection 11 42 409(5), no parcel of property on the
assessment list will bear more than its equitable portion of the actual costs that are
reasonable of the improvements benefitting the property in accordance with Utah Code
Section 11 42 409.
A-1
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
Salt Lake City, Utah
March 1, 2022
A regular meeting of the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, was held on Tuesday,
March 1, 2022, at 7:00 p.m. [via electronic means] [at the offices of the City Council at
451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah,] at which meeting there were present and
answering to roll call the following members who constituted a quorum:
Dan Dugan Chair
Darin Mano Vice-Chair
Amy Fowler Councilmember
Victoria Petro-Eschler Councilmember
Alejandro Puy Councilmember
Ana Valdemoros Councilmember
Chris Wharton Councilmember
Also present:
Erin Mendenhall Mayor
Katherine Lewis City Attorney
Cindy Lou Trishman City Recorder
Absent:
After the meeting had been duly called to order and after other matters not pertinent
to this ordinance had been discussed, the City Recorder presented to the City Council a
Certificate of Compliance with Open Meeting Law with respect to this March 1, 2022,
meeting, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
The Board of Equalization (the Board) for the Salt Lake City, Utah Central
Business Improvement Assessment Area No. DA-CBIA-22 (the Assessment Area)
presented to the City Council its report and stated that it had reviewed statements,
comments and complaints on each property in the Assessment Area as listed in the minutes
of the hearings of the Board held on January 11, 12 and 13, 2022.
The following Findings, Recommendation and Decision were then presented to the
City Council by the Board:
FINDINGS
It is the finding of the Board that each assessed property within the Assessment
Area will be assessed in a manner that meets the requirements of Section 11-42-409 of the
A-2
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
Assessment Area Act, Title 11, Chapter 42, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended (the
Act). Furthermore, no parcel of property listed in the assessment list, as adjusted herein,
will bear more than its equitable portion of the actual costs that are reasonable of the
economic promotion activities in the Assessment Area, in accordance with Section 11-42-
409 of the Act.
RECOMMENDATION AND DECISION
It is the decision of the Board that the proposed assessment list, as adjusted by the
modifications shown in Exhibit C, is equitable and that the economic promotion activities
being financed thereby constitute a benefit to the properties to be assessed. The assessment
list is approved subject to the modifications shown on Exhibit C attached hereto.
The Board respectfully recommends that the City Council approve and confirm the
assessment list, as adjusted, and adopt an ordinance levying the assessment set out in the
assessment list, as adjusted.
The City Recorder then noted that the City Council is now convened in this meeting
for the purpose, among other things, of accepting the Findings, Recommendation and
Decision of the Board regarding the proposed assessments to be levied within the
Assessment Area and adopting an Assessment Ordinance (the Ordinance) for the
Assessment Area. The following Ordinance was then introduced in writing, was fully
discussed, and pursuant to motion duly made by Councilmember __________ and
seconded by Councilmember _____________, was adopted by the following vote:
AYE:
NAY:
The Ordinance was then signed by the Chair, presented to and approved by the
Mayor, and recorded by the City Recorder in the official records of Salt Lake City, Utah.
The Ordinance is as follows:
A-3
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
ORDINANCE NO. ___ of 2022
An ordinance confirming the equalized assessment list and levying an
assessment against certain properties in the Salt Lake City, Utah Central
Business Improvement Assessment Area No. DA-CBIA-22 (the
Assessment Area), for the purpose of financing certain economic
promotion activities in the downtown area; establishing the effective date
of the ordinance; and related matters.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH,
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Determination of Costs. All costs and expenses to finance the
proposed activities, which include advertising, marketing, special events, festivals,
transportation, newsletters, publications, banners, Christmas lighting, security, special
projects, housing, town meetings, government policy, cultural promotion, reports, surveys,
homeless services and other promotional activities (the Economic Promotion Activities)
within the Assessment Area, together with related costs, have been determined.
Section 2. Approval of Assessment List; Findings. The City Council (the
Council) of Salt Lake City, Utah (the City), hereby accep ts and adopts the Findings,
Recommendation and Decision of the Board of Equalization. The Council confirms and
adopts the equalized and adjusted assessment list for the Assessment Area, a copy of which
is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference (the Assessment
List). The Council has determined that the Assessment List, as adjusted and equalized, is
just and equitable; that each assessed property within the Assessment Area will be assessed
in a manner that meets the requirements of Section 11-42-409 of the Assessment Area Act,
Title 11, Chapter 42, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended (the Act); and that no
parcel of property listed in the Assessment List will bear more than its equitable portion of
the actual costs that are reasonable of the Economic Promotion Activities.
The City Treasurer may, in his or her sole discretion, make adjustments to the
Assessment List in the future if the contesting property owner described in Exhibit C
presents to the City Treasurer sufficient evidence to demonstrate that their 2021 taxable
property value has been reduced by Salt Lake County.
Section 3. Levy of Assessments. The Council hereby levies an assessment
upon the real property identified in the Assessment List. The assessments levied upon each
parcel of property therein described shall be in the amount set forth in the Assessment List.
The assessments hereby levied are to promote business, economic, and community
development activities in the central business area of downtown Salt Lake City by
financing the Economic Promotion Activities described herein.
The assessments are hereby levied and assessed upon each of the parcels of real
property described in the Assessment List in accordance with the benefit received from the
Economic Promotion Activities within the Assessment Area. The assessments are levied
upon the parcels of land in the Assessment Area at equal and uniform rates.
A-4
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
Section 4. Cost of Economic Promotion Activities; Amount of Total
Assessments. The total cost of the Economic Promotion Activities in the Assessment Area
is $5,318,008, including allowable related expenses. The amount to be assessed against
property affected or benefited by the Economic Promotion Activities in the Assessment
Area is $5,318,008. These amounts do not exceed in the aggregate the sum of: (a) the total
contract price or prices for the Economic Promotion Activities (which contract has been
duly let to the lowest and best responsible bidder therefor); (b) the acquisition price of
improvements, if any; (c) the reasonable cost of economic promotion activities; (d) the
price of purchasing property, if any; (e) connection fees, if any; (f) the interest on interim
warrants issued against the Assessment Area, if any; and (g) overhead costs not to exceed
fifteen percent (15%) of the sum of (a), (b), (c) and (e).
Section 5. Method and Rate. The assessment is a one-time assessment for a
three-year period on property in the Assessment Area to pay all or a portion of the estimated
costs of the Economic Promotion Activities. The total assessment for the Assessment Area
is levied based upon (i) 2021 taxable property values plus (ii) linear feet on certain
properties with frontage on certain streets for special holiday lights, as set out in the Notice
of Intention to Designate Assessment Area pertaining to the Assessment Area. The
assessment for each property was determined based on costs as set out in Section 4.
Section 6. Payment of Assessments. Assessments shall be payable in full or in
three (3) annual installments (the Assessment Installment or Installments). If payable
in three (3) annual installments, the first Installment will fall due May 6, 2022. The second
and third Installments will fall on the first and second anniversary dates of the first
Installment. If any Installment is not paid by the due date, the unpaid Installment(s) will
accumulate delinquent interest and/or charges in accordance with this Assessment
Ordinance and State law.
Section 7. Default in Payment. If a default occurs in the payment of any
assessment installment when due, the City may (a) declare the delinquent amount to be
immediately due and subject to collection, or (b) accelerate payment of the total unpaid
balance of the assessment and declare the whole of the unpaid principal and interest then
due to be immediately due and payable. Additional interest shall accrue and be paid on all
amounts declared to be delinquent or accelerated and immediately due and payable at the
same rate as is applied to delinquent real property taxes for the year in which the assessment
installment becomes delinquent (the Delinquent Rate). In addition to interest charges at
the Delinquent Rate, costs of collection, including attorneys fees and court costs
(Collection Costs), as determined by the City Treasurer or as required by law, may be
charged and paid on all amounts declared to be delinquent or accelerated and immediately
due and payable. In lieu of accelerating the total assessment balance when one or more
assessment installments become delinquent, the City may elect to bring an action to collect
only the delinquent portion of the assessment plus interest at the Delinquent Rate and
Collection Costs.
Upon any default, the City Treasurer shall give notice in writing of the default to
the owner of the property in default as shown by the last available completed real property
assessment rolls. Notice shall be effective upon deposit of the notice in the U.S. Mail,
A-5
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
postage prepaid, and addressed to the owner as shown on the last equalized assessment
rolls for the City or on the official ownership records of Salt Lake County. The notice shall
provide for a period of thirty (30) days in which the owner shall pay the installments then
due and owing plus costs as determined by the City Treasurer. If the City elects to use the
enforcement remedy involving acceleration, the Notice shall also declare that after the
thirty (30) day period the City shall accelerate the then unpaid balance of the principal of
the assessment to be immediately due and payable together with Collection Costs and
interest on the entire unpaid balance to accrue from the date of delinquency at the
Delinquent Rate. Thereafter, the City may immediately initiate a sale of the property as
provided in Title 59, Chapter 2, Part 13, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, or sell
the property pursuant to Section 11-42-502.1(2) and related pertinent provisions of the Act
in the manner provided for judicial foreclosures, or utilize any other remedy permitted by
law. If at the sale no person or entity shall bid and pay the City the amount due on the
assessment plus interest and costs, the property shall be deemed sold to the City for these
amounts. The City shall be permitted to bid at the sale. So long as the City retains
ownership of the property, it shall pay all delinquent assessment installments and all
assessment installments that become due.
The remedies provided herein for the collection of assessments and the enforcement
of liens shall be deemed and construed to be cumulative and the use of any one method or
means of collection or enforcement shall not deprive the City of the use of any other method
or means. The amounts of accrued interest and all Collection Costs, attorneys fees and
costs shall be added to the amount of the assessment up to, and including, the date of
foreclosure sale.
Section 8. Remedy of Default. If prior to the final date that payment may be
legally made under a final sale or foreclosure of property to collect delinquent assessment
installments, the property owner pays the full amount of all unpaid installments that are
past due and delinquent with interest at the Delinquent Rate, plus all approved or required
costs and attorneys fees, the assessment of said owner shall be restored so that the owner
will have the right to make the payments in installments as if the default had not occurred.
Any payment made to cure a default shall be applied first, to the payment of attorneys fees
and other costs incurred as a result of such default; second, to interest charged on past due
installments, as set forth above; third, to the interest portion of all past due assessments, if
any; and last, to the payment of outstanding principal.
Section 9. Lien of Assessment. Upon the recordation of the required
documents and notices, an assessment or any part or installment of it, any interest accruing,
and the penalties, attorneys fees and costs of collection shall constitute a political
subdivision lien against the property upon which the assessment is levied on the effective
date of this Ordinance. Said lien shall be superior to the lien of any trust deed, mortgage,
mechanics or materialmans lien, or other encumbrance, shall be equal to and on a parity
with the lien for general property taxes, and shall apply without interruption, change of
priority, or alteration in any manner to any reduced payment obligations. The lien shall
continue until the assessment, reduced payment obligations, and any interest, penalties, and
costs on it are paid, notwithstanding any sale of the property for or on account of a
A-6
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
delinquent general property tax, special tax, or other assessment, the issuance of a tax deed,
an assignment of interest by Salt Lake County, or a sheriff's certificate of sale or deed.
Section 10. Contestability. No assessment shall be declared invalid or set aside
in whole or in part in consequence of any error or irregularity that does not go to the equity
or justice of the assessment or proceeding. Any party who has not waived his/her
objections to same as provided by statute may commence a civil action in the district court
with jurisdiction in Salt Lake County against the City to enjoin the levy or collection of the
assessment or to set aside and declare unlawful this Ordinance.
Such action must be commenced and summons must be served on the City not later
than sixty (60) days after the effective date of this Ordinance. This action shall be the
exclusive remedy of any aggrieved party. No court shall entertain any complaint that the
party was authorized to make by statute but did not timely make or any complaint that does
not go to the equity or justice of the assessment or proceeding.
After the expiration of the 60-day period provided in this section:
(a) The assessments levied in the Assessment Area shall become
incontestable as to all persons who have not commenced an action and served a
summons as provided for in this section; and
(b) A suit to enjoin the levy, collection, or enforcement of the
assessment, or to attack or question the legality of the assessment may not be
commenced in this state, and a court may not inquire into those matters.
Section 11. All Necessary Action Approved. The officials of the City are hereby
authorized and directed to take all action necessary and appropriate to effectuate the
provisions of this Ordinance, including the mailing of invoices to property owners in the
Assessment Area.
Section 12. Repeal of Conflicting Provisions. All ordinances or parts thereof in
conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
Section 13. Posting of Ordinance. Following its approval, this Ordinance shall
be signed by the Mayor and the City Recorder and shall be recorded in the ordinance book
kept for that purpose. Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted in at least three public
places within the Citys boundaries for at least 21 days and a copy of this Ordinance shall
also be posted on the Utah Public Notice Website (http://pmn.utah.gov) for at least 21 days.
This Ordinance shall take effect on April 21, 2022.
Section 14. Notice of Assessment Interest. The City Recorder is hereby
authorized and directed to file a Notice of Assessment Interest with the Salt Lake County
Recorder within five days of the effective date of this Ordinance. Such Notice shall (1)
state that the City has an assessment interest in the assessed property, (2) state the
maximum number of years over which the assessment will be payable, and (3) describe the
property assessed by legal description and tax identification number.
A-7
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this
March 1, 2022.
(SEAL)
By:_________________________________
Chair
ATTEST:
By:
City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________________
Boyd Ferguson
Senior City Attorney
A-8
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
After the transaction of other business not pertinent to the foregoing matter, the
meeting was on motion duly made, seconded, and carried, adjourned.
(SEAL)
By:_________________________________
Chair
ATTEST:
By:
City Recorder
A-9
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
PRESENTATION TO THE MAYOR
The foregoing ordinance was presented to the Mayor for her approval or
disapproval on this March ___, 2022.
By:_________________________________
Chair
MAYOR'S APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL
The foregoing ordinance is hereby approved this March ___, 2022.
____________________________________
Erin Mendenhall
Mayor
A-10
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
STATE OF UTAH )
: ss.
COUNTY OF SALT LAKE )
I, Cindy Lou Trishman, the duly appointed and qualified City Recorder of Salt Lake
City, Utah, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a full, true and correct copy
of the record of proceedings had by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, at its meeting
held on March 1, 2022, insofar as the same relates to or concerns the Salt Lake City, Utah
Central Business Improvement Assessment Area No. DA-CBIA-22, as the same appears
of record in my office.
I further certify that the Ordinance levying the assessments was recorded by me in
the official records of Salt Lake City on ___________, 2022.
I further certify that copies of the Ordinance were posted in at least three public
places within the Citys boundaries for at least 21 days and a copy of the Ordinance was
posted on the Utah Public Notice Website (http://pmn.utah.gov) for at least 21 days.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the corporate
seal of Salt Lake City this ___________, 2022.
(SEAL)
By:
City Recorder
A-11
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
EXHIBIT A
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH OPEN MEETING LAW
I, Cindy Lou Trishman, the undersigned City Recorder of Salt Lake City, Utah (the
City), do hereby certify, according to the records of the City in my official possession,
and upon my own knowledge and belief, that in accordance with the requirements of
Section 52-4-202, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, I gave not less than twenty-
four (24) hours public notice of the agenda, date, time, and place of the March 1, 2022,
public meeting held by the City as follows:
(a) [By causing a Notice, in the form attached hereto as Schedule 1, to
be posted at the Citys offices at 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah, on
_________, 2022, at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the convening of the
meeting, said Notice having continuously remained so posted and available for
public inspection until the completion of the meeting;]
(b) By causing a copy of such Notice, in the form attached hereto as
Schedule 1, to be delivered to the Salt Lake Tribune on __________, 2022, at least
twenty-four (24) hours prior to the convening of the meeting; and
(c) By causing a copy of such Notice, in the form attached hereto as
Schedule 1, to be posted on the Utah Public Notice Website (http://pmn.utah.gov)
at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the convening of the meeting.
In addition, the Notice of 2022 Annual Meeting Schedule for the City Council
(attached hereto as Schedule 2) was given specifying the date, time, and place of the regular
meetings of the City Council to be held during the year, by causing said Notice to be (a)
posted on _______________, at the principal office of the City Council, (b) provided to at
least one newspaper of general circulation within the City on ___________, and (c)
published on the Utah Public Notice Website (http://pmn.utah.gov) during the current
calendar year.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my official signature this
March 1, 2022.
(SEAL)
By:
City Recorder
A-12
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
SCHEDULE 1
NOTICE OF MEETING
A-13
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
SCHEDULE 2
NOTICE OF 2022 ANNUAL MEETING SCHEDULE
B-1
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
EXHIBIT B
ASSESSMENT LIST
(Available for review at the offices of the
City Recorder or City Engineer)
C-1
4879-1584-5896, v. 2
EXHIBIT C
MODIFICATIONS RECOMMENDED
BY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
INTERSTATE 15REGENT STEDISON STRICHARDS STVIN
E
A
L
M
O
N
DQUINCE STALMOND30 0 N
CANYONALAME DA
STANTON
BELD ON
GALE STPACIF ICAVE700 WWASHINGTONLACONIAHOYT PL
QUINCECOTTAGE
STRINGFELLOWGR EGORYWAYNEDELMARPOPLAR A R N O L D
DUBEICHATMANCANYON SIDE LNOR PHEUM ROADSPENCER CTJACK SON AV
EMERIL AVE
ELDER CTPIERP ON T
TEMPLE
PACIF IC AVPACIFIC
600 S MOFFATT CTNORT H TEMPLE
PLUM ALLEYPIERP ON T
MA RKET S T
SHELMERDINEBLAIR STIVERSONCONWAYSOCIAL H ALL
WOODBINEBUTTERWORTHMARGUERITEFLORALPLEASANTTEMPLESOUTH
EAST200EDMONDSARGYLEBLISS CTRENDON CTSEWARD
JACKSON AV
ECCLE S
EXCHANGE PL
GA LL IVAN AVLOMAGRAY EASTHILLSIDE AV CAPITOL STRIO GRANDECTOR CHARD P L
MORTENSENCTWALL50 N
SQUARE SQUARE
LIBRARYWASHINGTON
PIONEER
PARKGATEWAYTHEDANSIE DR
40 0 S400 S
500 S500 S
200 W400 W500 W300 W200 W600 S600 S600 WMAIN ST300 E400 E40 0 S
10 0 S
30 0 S 300 S300 S
200 S MAIN ST300 N
20 0 N
200 E300 E400 E700 W600 W500 W400 W(HWY 89)3RD AVE
B STC STD STA ST1ST AVE
600 W500 W200 N
300 N
(HWY 186 )
30 0 S
200 S
10 0 S
700 WINTERSTATE 15WESTTEMPLESTATE STSTATE STWEST TEMPLE300 W200 W400 WWEST TEMPLESal t La ke CityCBIABoundary Ma p 4
50 51
299
375
80
255
131
222206
324
215
380
220
60
61
128
175
111
7
310 8
136
15
9
132
201
316
77
185
36
120
360
102
75
161
170
15
375
15
307
0
10
248
306
122
311
10
10
110
69
239
335
100
111
175
26
250
311
143
48 334322
341 342
360
79
360
51
185
10
163
150
144
334
320
149
321326
135
160165
75
262
149
330
357
319
155
328
260
163151
145
158156
159
323
155
268
159
338
327 331
225
18
149
124
160
325
122 118
270
120116
315
370
317
30
50
55
50
55
55
30
55
50
50
30
99
50
50
555550
5550
5045
55
50
44
44 44
99
9945
55
45
50
994450 65
505065
515151
51
5050
51
50
50
50
51 65
50
50
51
50
51
50
51 50
21
51
51 50
50 655051
200 S200 S
400 S400 S
300 S300 S 200 E200 E400 W400 W300 W300 W200 W200 W100 S100 SMain St Main St State St State St So u th Templ e St South Te m p le S t West Temple St West Temple St Rio Grande St Rio Grande St Edison St Edison St Regent St Regent St Exc hange Pl E xc h an ge Pl
Pi e r pont Ave Pier po n t Ave Plum Aly Plum Aly Floral St Floral St Soc ial H all Ave Soci al Hall Ave
Gal livan Av e Gal liva n Ave Poplar Ct Poplar Ct Wayne Ct Wayne Ct Moffatt Ct Moffatt Ct Marguerite Ct Marguerite Ct Shelmerdine Ct Shelmerdine Ct 100 S100 S
Pi e rpont Ave Pie r po n t Av e
CBIA 16: Holiday Lighting Parcels (Preliminary)July 29, 2015Salt Lake City Geographic Information Systems OHoliday Lighting Streets Included Parcels
CBIA ‐ 22 Tentative Timeline
Step Action Description Group/Lead Deadlines
1 Consultant Contract Contract with a consultant to provide guidance
throughout process.DED 2/1/21 ‐ 4/30/2021
2 Technical Description of the CBIA
Technical Description of the CBIA provided to
Engineering. Engineering prepares tax roll based on this
data.
Consultant 3/12/2021
3 Develop assessment methodology that conforms to
Assessment Area Act.
Develop assessment methodology concerning
Economic Promotion & Lighting Assessment.DED 3/24/2021
4 Salt Lake County Property Tax Information. Numbers should be available by May 22, 2021. Consultant 5/28/2021
5 Bond Counsel Description & Improvement Review Bond Counsel reviews the description of Improvements
and Areas to be Improved.DED 6/1/2021
6 Resolution of intent to designate. Bond Counsel drafts resolution of Intent to Designate. Bond Counsel 6/15/2021
7 Resolution of Intent to Designate and Justification
transmittal. (Mayor)
Resolution of Intent to Designate and justification
documentation transmitted to Mayor’s Office. DED 6/22/2021
8 Resolution of Intent to Designate and Justification
transmittal. (Council Office)
Resolution of Intent to Designate and justification
documentation transmitted to Council Office. Mayor’s Office 6/29/2021
9 City Council Meeting DED will brief the City Council on CBIA‐22 Information. DED 7/13/2021
10 Property Owner Letter
Property Owner letter includes verbiage of preliminary
estimate, rate, notice of intent to designate, common
question and map finalized.
DED 7/17/2021
11 Tax roll prepared for DED approval. Assess County Data. Engineering 7/17/2021
12 DED approval of tax roll. DED approves county data. DED 7/17/2021
13 City Council Meeting City Council adopts the resolution of Intent to
Designate the assessment area.City Council 7/20/2021
14 Draft/Create Notice of Intent to Designate Letter Engineering 7/22/2021
15 Post Notice of Intent to Designate Post notice of intent to designate in at least three
public places within boundaries of jurisdiction DED 8/16/2021
16 Mail out Notice of Intent to Designate Mail out Notice of Intent to Designate to go out within
10 days of notice posting.
DED sends via State
Mail 8/19/2021
17 Minutes prepared for use at protest hearing Distribute to team SAA. Bond Counsel 8/30/2021
18 City Council Meeting City Council Protest Hearing City Council 9/7/2021
19 Draft Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area and
appoint the Board of Equalization (BOE).Bond Counsel 9/14/2021
20
Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area and
appoint the Board of Equalization Transmittal (Mayor’s
Office)
Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area and
appoint the Board of Equalization Transmited to
Mayor’s Office.
DED 9/21/2021
21 Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area and
appoint the Board of Equalization (City Council).
Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area and
appoint the Board of Equalization Transmited to the
Council Office.
Mayor’s Office 9/28/2021
22 Publish Notice of Intent to Designate Publish Notice of Intent to Designate on the Utah Public
Notice Website DED 10/4/2021
23 Property Owners Written Protests Filing Deadline Property owners who are protesting the assessment
area. Also, the end of 60‐day written protest period.Engineering 11/8/2021
24 Compile Written Protests.Engineering 11/9/2021
25 RFP: Center Business Improvement Assessment Area
Management Request For Propsal (RFP)
Solisitation to find a vendor to manage the assessment
area once approved. DED 11/9/2022
26 Delivery of Compilation of Protests Compilation of protests sent to City Council. Engineering 11/9/2021
27 Publishing of Written Protests Publishing of Written Protests on City & State public
notice website.DED 11/9/2021
28 City Council Meeting City Council announces the protest tally and if it
exceeds 40% threshold.City Council 11/16/2021
29 City Council Meeting
City Council adopts the Resolution to Designate the
Assessment Area and appoints the Board of
Equalization.
City Council 11/16/2021
30 Recording of the Resolution to Designate the
Assessment Area & Notice of Proposed Assesment
Record Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area
and Notice of Proposed Assessment with Salt Lake
County Recorder, within 15 days of adoption.
Salt Lake City
Recorders 11/16/2021 ‐ 12/1/2021
31 BOE Notice and Dates of BOE Meetings.Finalize Verbiage for BOE notice and dates of BOE
meetings.Bond Counsel 11/24/2021
32 Mailing process for the BOE notice. Begins 2 weeks before mailing date. Engineering 12/3/2021
33 RFP: Center Business Improvement Assessment Area
Management submissions Proposals/submission due from interested vendors DED 12/7/2021
34 Publication of the BOE hearings.
Publication and posting of time and location of the 3
consecutive meetings. Posted in at least 3 public places
at least 20 days, but not more than 35 days from the
first BOE hearings dates. Published on the Utah Public
Notice Website.
DED 12/7/2021
35 Mailing due to Recorder’s Office for review. Due 1 week before mailing date. Engineering 12/10/2021
36 Mailing of preliminary assessment & notice of BOE
hearings
Mailing sent to each property owner and each street
address. DED 12/17/2021
37 BOE hearings 9:00 am to 10:00 am (public meeting). Held on consecutive days by statute.Salt Lake City
Recorders 1/11/2022
38 BOE hearings 10:00 am to 11:00 am (public meeting). Held on consecutive days by statute.Salt Lake City
Recorders 1/12/2022
39 BOE hearings 1:00 pm to 2:00 pm (public meeting). Held on consecutive days by statute.Salt Lake City
Recorders 1/13/2022
40 Finalization of BOE Hearings Finalize the report DED 1/18/2022
41 RFP: Center Business Improvement Assessment Area
Management Selection Selection is made from the proposals submitted DED 1/21/2022
42 BOE Report Completion BOE report completed, signed, and forwarded to City
Council and Bond Counsel.DED 1/21/2022
43 Mailing of BOE Final Report BOE report mailed to objecting property owners. Begins
15 day appeal period. Engineering 1/21/2022
44 Assessment Ordinance Bond Counsel Draft Assessment Ordinance Bond Counsel 1/28/2022
45 Assessment Ordinance Transmittal (Mayor’s Office).Assessment Ordinance transmitted to the Mayor's
Office. DED 2/1/2022
46 Assessment Ordinance Transmittal (Council Office).Assessment Ordinance transmitted to the Council
Office. Mayor’s Office 2/8/2022
47 City Council Meeting City Council accepts or modifies BOE recommendations
and adopts or rejects Assessment Ordinance.City Council 3/1/2022
48 RFP: Center Business Improvement Assessment Area
Management Contract drafting and Execution
Agreement between Salt Lake City and the vendor to
manage the assesment area. DED 3/4/2022
49 Budget or budget amendment submittion for CBIA Submit budget to SLC Finance Department DED 3/17/2022
50 Transfer properties into billing status.Engineering 3/17/2022
51 Assessment Invoices and Billing Mail assessment notices and invoices to Property
Owners by April 5, 2022 the latest.Treasurer 3/18/2022
52 Publication & Posting of the Assessment Ordinance
1. Publication of the Assessment Ordinance on the Utah
Public Notice Website.
2. Post a copy of the Assessment Ordinance in at least
three public places within the jurisdiction boundaries.
For at least 21 days
Bond Council 3/20/2022
53 Certificate of Project Engineer Certificate of Project Engineer Signed by DED DED 3/25/2022
54 Record Notice of Assessment Interest with Salt Lake
County Recorder.
I note that Utah Code 11‐42‐404(4)(b)(iii) requires the
notice of assessment interest to “describe the property
assessed by legal description and tax identification
number.” Metes and Bounds legal description provided
by Recorder’s Office.
Salt Lake City
Recorders 4/21/2022
55 Effective start date of the Assessment Ordinance Must be specified in the Assessment Ordinance DED 4/21/2022
56 Assessment Payments Due Invoice Payments due from property owners [15 days
after effective date of Assessment Ordinance]Treasurer 5/6/2022
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Nick Tarbet, Policy Analyst
DATE: March 1, 2022
RE:Text Amendment:
Public Notice for Permits to Work in the
Public Right of Way
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Written Briefing: Jan 12, 2021
Briefing 1: Feb 9, 2021
Briefing 2 January 11, 2022
Briefing 3; March 1, 2022
Set Date: December 8, 2020
Public Hearing 1: Jan 19, 2021
Public Hearing 2: Feb 1, 2022
Potential Action: TBD
New Information
At the February 1st public hearing, many expressed support for the changes because it will notify
residents when work will be done adjacent to their properties.
Others expressed concerns about the timing of the notice and confusion it may cause if it is delivered
too soon. The Council received written feedback in addition to the public hearing comments. All the
feedback and concerns are addressed in the section below.
The Council closed the public hearing and deferred action to a future Council meeting.
Based on public comments heard at the hearing and received in writing, staff drafted a summary of
requested changes below for the Council to consider. Staff proposes the Council review each item and
determine whether or not the changes should be included in the final ordinance. Based on the
Council’s direction, staff will work with the Attorney’s Office to update the ordinance and bring it back
for potential adoption at a future Council meeting.
Potential Changes for Consideration
Clarifying – the definition of adjacent property owners.
Some comments requested the City clarify the definition of “Adjacent.” The concern is
it could be too broad. An example has been given that when a contractor is pulling fiber
through conduit, the only impact to property owners is to those properties adjacent to
Page | 2
the locations where the fiber goes in and comes out of the conduit. The properties along
the route (other than the beginning and end) would not be impacted at all by the work.
However, they are concerned that every property along the route would have to be
notified.
On the other hand, the Council could clarify that any property who is impacted by
parking restrictions, construction equipment, or traffic detours could be considered
“adjacent”.
Does the Council wish to clarify the definition of “Adjacent?” Does it mean the
properties adjacent to the location where the applicant is either installing an
aboveground facility or breaking the ground to place an underground facility? Or
does it mean properties that are near to or affected by impacts?
Questions have been raised about who is responsible for providing and paying for
the notification.
The current ordinance states:
Prior to the city issuing a Work in the ROW permit, notice of the proposed work
shall be delivered to the occupant at the adjacent properties except as otherwise
provided herein. Notice will be delivered by applicant unless otherwise
determined by the City Engineer.
Potential changes for greater clarity:
Prior to the city issuing a Work in the ROW permit, notice of the proposed work
shall be delivered by the applicant to the occupant at the adjacent properties
except as otherwise provided herein. Notice will be paid for and delivered by
applicant unless otherwise determined by the City Engineer
Does the Council support this change?
Lumen/Century Link Comments
o Lumen requested the following exemption be included from the notification
requirement.
The installation of fiber optic cables to existing utility infrastructure, including
existing poles, wires or conduit.
Staff was concerned this was too broad and many projects would not be required to
provide the public notice. Based on this concern, staff is proposing the following
change:
The installation of overhead fiber optic cables to existing poles and wires or
installation of buried fiber optic cables in existing conduit where excavation is
not required.”
Does the Council support this change?
Page | 3
Verizon’s Comments
o A1 – Request for clarification on who is responsible to do the notification
and recommended City staff handle the notification process.
The intent of the council was for the franchise holder/applicant to be
responsible for notifying property owners about the work that will be done.
Staff recommends keeping this language in the ordinance
o A2 – Concerns about requiring additional permits
This is existing language currently in the ordinance. No changes from staff have
been proposed.
The Attorney’s Office said this is a generally applicable provision that is
included to make sure all related permits and approvals are secured by the
applicant so that the City knows the applicant has the right to install the facility
related to the permit request.
Staff recommends keeping this language in the ordinance
o A3 – Amend section that allows City Engineer to require any other
reasonable information
This is existing language currently in the ordinance. No changes from staff have
been proposed.
This existing language gives Administrate staff flexibility to require additional
information for the application if it becomes apparent it is needed to help
process the application.
Staff recommends keeping this language in the ordinance
o B1 - Request to change the timing of when public notice must be provided.
The proposed ordinance would require public notice be provided before the
permit is issued, so that staff can confirm delivery of the notice. If notice is
provided after the permit is issued, there is no way for the City to verify and
ensure it has been provided.
Staff recommends keeping this language in the ordinance as is currently
drafted.
The Council may wish to discuss adding a requirement to require a second
notice 48-72 hours before construction starts
o B2 - Request to not require notice for work located below ground.
The Council specifically requested changes to the ordinance that would require
notice for work below ground in the public right of way.
Staff recommends keeping this language in the ordinance as is currently
drafted.
The following information was provided for the February 1, 2022 public hearing. It is
provided again for background purposes.
January 11 Work Session Summary
Page | 4
During the January 11, 2022 work session briefing, the Council didn’t raise any significant concerns or
questions about the updated draft ordinance. Staff said they would reach out to stakeholders and
residents who have expressed interested in these changes.
Additionally, staff met with some stake holders who wanted to better understand the proposed
changes. They expressed concerns about the following:
Would this exclude work that is being done on existing infrastructure?
o An example is hanging wires on existing poles
Does notice only have to go to the adjacent property owners where the work is being done, i.e.
the ground is being disturbed?
o An example is if fiber is being pushed through existing conduit, does everyone along
the route have to be notified, or only the adjacent properties where the work is
disturbing the ground.
In order to address these concerns, they submitted the following change for consideration to the
exemption list:
14.32.036(4)(f):
f. The installation of fiber optic cables to existing utility infrastructure,
including existing poles, wires or conduit.
If this Council is supportive of this change, staff will include in the final draft.
The public hearing will be held on February 1, 2022.
The following information was provide for the January 11, 2022 work session briefing.
It is provided again for background purposes.
The Council will be briefed on proposed amendments to City Code requiring permit applicants for
construction work in the public right of way to provide notice to property owners whose properties are
adjacent to the work that will be performed.
The proposed changes were requested in response to numerous constituent inquiries about the lack of
notice on certain nearby utility construction projects. Much of the right-of-way work that is
performed is governed by State statute and limits the amount of interaction the City has with the
work. However, in balancing the work that is performed and the impact to residents, some additional
noticing steps are proposed to be added to the ordinance.
Originally, the petition was intended to only apply to above-ground work in the public right of way.
However, based on a public hearing on January 12, 2021 and a follow-up work session on February 9,
2021, the Council directed staff to work with the Administration to make the following changes to the
draft ordinance:
Include under-ground work as part of the notification requirements
Notification should be provided before obtaining the permit
o Proof must be part of the permit application
The applicant is responsible to give proof that notice was provided
Outline specific requirements that should be included in notice
o Purpose of construction, contact info, date of construction, etc.
Page | 5
The Administration has forwarded the attached ordinance for the Council to consider. The following
table shows where the requested changes are included in the draft ordinance. Please see the legislative
draft.
Requested Change Page and Line(s)
Include underground work as part of the
notification requirements Page 4, lines 148-150
Notification should be provided before obtaining
the permit. Proof must be part of the permit
application
Page 4, lines 141-143
The applicant is responsible to give proof that
notice was provided
Page 4, lines 141-143
Specific requirements that should be included in
notice: purpose of construction, contact info,
date of construction, etc.
Page 5, lines 159-175
During the February 9 public hearing, representatives from Verizon spoke, in addition to submitting a
letter outlining their concerns. They stated the current process is efficient and they would prefer to
provide notice to property owners after the permit has been received. The new ordinance would
require them to provide notice before they obtain a permit. Their concerns are outlined below on
pages 3-4.
The revised draft has not been distributed for public comment yet. Staff wanted to check in with the
Council Members to make sure the updated version meets the Council’s intent. If it does, staff
recommends setting a public hearing for February. Staff will then send the revised ordinance to
stakeholders for comment.
Policy Questions
1. The draft ordinance requires notification for work located below ground and behind the curb
to adjacent properties on the same side of the public right of way, while notice for work below
ground and in the paved section of the public way will be required for both sides of the public
right of way.
The Council may wish to ask the administration why this difference is
needed. Would it be appropriate to notice both sides of the street, even
when work is done behind the curb and gutter?
2. The draft ordinance says the applicant is responsible for delivering the public notice unless
otherwise determined by the City Engineer.
The Council may wish to ask the Administration what situation are
envisioned that the applicant may not be the one responsible for
delivering the public notice.
Page | 6
The following information was provide for the February 9, 2021 work session briefing.
It is provided again for background purposes.
PUBLIC HEARING SUMMARY
During the public hearing members of the public spoke about the proposed changes and asked some
questions, Additionally, a letter from Verizon was submitted pertaining to the proposed change.
A few individuals requested the Council require public notice for below ground work as well. Some
also said current contractors are not doing a good job of restoring property to the way it was before the
work happened.
Verizon representatives spoke during the public hearing and also submitted a letter, outlining their
concerns. They stated the current process is efficient and they would prefer to provide notice to
property owners after the permit has been received. The new ordinance would require them to provide
notice before they obtain a permit.
Council staff met with staff from CAN and the Attorney’s Office to go over the comments and
formulate the following responses.
1. Request to apply the notification requirement to work “below ground” as well.
Administrative staff said this is obviously possible, but it will likely require an increase
in staff and costs for the city to monitor and / or respond to concerns about projects.
The proposed change before the Council would only require public notice to adjacent
property owners for above ground work – typically, this type of work is limited to a few
properties that are near the above ground poles/facilities.
Underground work can go for hundreds of yards (larger/longer projects would be
miles). It would take more staff to verify and ensure the public notices were properly
provided.
Administrative staff have prepared some very preliminary estimates for cost/staffing
impact to the City.
They will be available during the briefing to respond to questions the Council may have
about potential cost of notifying for below ground work.
2. Reponses to Verizon’s Letter
Verizon’s request: Allow permit holders to post notice after the permit is obtained.
Prefer to submit template with permit application and actual notice is provided 48-72
hours before work commences.
Administration response:
o CAN staff said the current process has not been working and that is the reason
for the proposed changes. The goal is to get the notifications out sooner, so the
public is aware of the work before the permit is issued.
o The new process would require the permit holder to submit evidence that the
notice was provided to adjacent property owners. They then submit that as part
of their permit application. The work would typically commence about 2-3
weeks later.
Page | 7
Verizon’s request: Clarify type of evidence that is required to demonstrate applicant
has satisfied notification requirement.
Administration response:
o CAN staff said notice such as a door hangar, with timestamped photos is one
way to satisfy this requirement.
o The goal is to avoid situations where a piece of paper is placed on a doorstep
that can easily be blown away.
Verizon’s request: Adopt definition of adjacent owner currently in notification
process.
Administration response:
o CAN staff stated this could be clarified.
Verizon’s request: Clarify purpose of the notice and what is to be included in the
description of the purpose of construction.
Administration response:
o CAN staff has stated they can help provide examples of the type of language
they that should be on the notice.
o They can do this to help ensure consistency for all permit holders.
Verizon’s request: Clarify definition of above ground work; does it include
excavation to run conduit or lay fiber.
Administration response:
o CAN staff has stated this type of work applies to facilities that are permanently
above ground or on poles or anything that would fall under the master license
agreement for small cells.
o Typically, this type of work would also include trenching for conduit.
Verizon’s request: Any other info reasonably required by City engineer is too broad
Administration response:
o CAN staff stated this is meant to be specific to notice requirements. They can
provide some language to clarify that.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. Some Council Members have expressed interest to require more public notice for below
ground work.
Does the Council want to adopt these proposed changes and also adopt a legislative
action asking the Administration to come back with a proposal for increased public
outreach for underground work in the public right of way?
o This may include identifying options to require contractors to do the outreach
and an option for the city to be responsible for providing the public notice
2. The Council may want to ask about the description of information that would be suggested /
requested for the notice. For example, location, description, duration of type of work; contact
information for the contractor and City, etc.?
3. The Council may wish to ask what the change in the timeline for permit holders would be and
how the Administration can notify potential applicants of the changes.
Page | 8
The following information was provide for the January 19 public hearing. It is
provided again for background purposes.
WORK SESSION SUMMARY
This item was on the January 12 agenda as a written briefing. Council Members did not raise any
concerns or ask staff questions about the proposed changes.
The public hearing is scheduled for January 19.
The following information was provide for the January 12 work session briefing. It is
provided again for background purposes.
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will be briefed on proposed amendments to City code requiring permit holders to provide
notice to property owners whose properties are adjacent to the above groundwork that will be
performed in the public way.
The proposed changes were requested in response to numerous constituent inquiries about the lack of
notice to adjacent property owners. Much of the right-of-way work that is performed is governed by
State statute and limits the amount of interaction the City has with the work. However, in balancing
the work that is performed and the impact to residents, some additional noticing steps are being
added to the ordinance.
The key changes would require the franchise holder/applicant to provide the following:
Evidence that they provided notice to all property owners whose properties are adjacent to the
portion of the public way where the work is being performed.
Notice that includes the name of the permit holder performing the construction, the purpose of
the construction, and a contact phone number and email for the permit holder.
Evidence shall be satisfactory to the City Engineer that all adjacent property owners have
received notice.
Related text cleanups to match current practice.
Since work in the public right of way is overseen by the City’s Engineering Division, they have
reviewed the ordinance in collaboration with the Attorney’s Office. Engineering has expressed their
support for these proposed changes.
Administrative staff have noted the contractor will have to give notice of the construction prior to
submitting an application for a permit to Engineering. Once Engineering approves the permit, the
contractor may move forward with construction.
PUBLIC PROCESS
Engineering provided Council Staff a list of the companies who do much of the work in the public right
of way. Council staff emailed this group to let them know about the proposed changes, and the dates of
the briefing and public hearing.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. For the properties that would be included in the notification, the Council may wish to consider
expanding the requirement beyond the proposal of adjacent property owners.
Page | 9
2. If the Council has questions about the timing of the when the notice must be given to when the
permit is granted, the Council may wish to ask the administration to explain the process for
when the notice must be given before receiving the permit for construction.
3. If it would be helpful, the Council may wish to ask the Attorney’s office or Administration
representative to provide a quick review on the types of things the City is able to require or
request versus items that are monitored or regulated by the State.
4. The Council may also ask Engineering to provide a description of their typical interaction with
the permit holders.
5. The Council may wish to raise any other issues that have been raised by constituents.
6. The Council may wish to ask about options to address issues when the noticing requirements
are not followed.
Lisa Shaffer (Dec 14, 2021 13:14 MST)
12/14/2021
12/14/2021
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Allison Rowland
Budget & Policy Analyst
DATE:February 15, 2022
RE: ORDINANCE: SPECIAL EVENT PERMITS OF LESS THAN 31 DAYS
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will consider a proposal to make identical ordinance changes to two existing sections of City Code.
The objective is to extend the maximum length of a special event permit for park use from 20 to 31 days, but
only in exceptional cases. These permits would be made available only if the Mayor approves any such special
event for a reason identified in writing. Note that although these amendments would affect sections of Code
titled the “Sale of Significant Parcels of Real Property” (Section 2.58.040), and “Removal of Lands from the
Open Space Lands Inventory” (Section 2.90.070), the proposed amendments would make no changes to the
existing processes of sale or removal of open space lands from the City’s inventory.
Advantages and disadvantages to this change, as identified by the Public Lands Department include the
following:
-Park gatherings attract new users, bring regular users back repeatedly and, by increasing positive
activity, reduce negative park uses.
-Special events can also restrict public use of space, generate trash and litter, stress lawns, and damage
park infrastructure.
-The mayor would determine if the public benefit of an event is of great enough value to allow for up to a
ten-day extension as an exception to the usual process.
Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed amendments to City code and consider adopting them.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: March 1, 2022
Set Date: March 1, 2022
Public Hearing: n/a
Potential Action: March 22, 2022
Page | 2
POLICY QUESTIONS
Council staff note: Responses were requested from the Administration and the Attorney’s Office on the
following questions. If these are not available before the time of the briefing, Council Members may wish to
ask them then.
1. The transmittal mentions that this ordinance change would also extend the length of special event permits
for other City-owned properties.
a. What kinds of properties would this potentially affect, and in what ways?
For example, could filming for movies or other productions on City-owned
properties (like the City-County Building or in the Foothill Trails Open
Space) extend 31 days?
b. Must those 31 days be consecutive, or could they be strung out over several
months?
c. Is there a renewal process if a permit-holder would like to extend the time
granted?
2.What would be the process for the Council and the public to be informed of a Mayor’s
decision? What would be the recourse should there be concerns about a Mayor’s rationale
for extending a special event permit to 31 days?
PUBLIC LANDS DEPARTMENT
1965 W 500 S
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84104
www.slc.gov/parks/
PHONE 801-972-7800
FAX 801-972-7847
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
Date Received:
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council:
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: February 1, 2022
Dan Dugan, Chair
FROM: Kristin Riker, Director, Public Lands
SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendment – Section 2.58.040 and Section 2.90.070
STAFF CONTACTS: Kristin Riker, Director, Public Lands Department kristin.riker@slcgov.com;
Boyd Ferguson, Attorney, boyd.ferguson@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance Amendment
RECOMMENDATION: Amend Ordinance
BUDGET IMPACT: $0.00
OVERVIEW: Salt Lake City Public Lands is requesting identical ordinance amendments to City Code
Section 2.58.040, relating to the sale of significant parcels of real property, and Section 2.90.070, relating
to the removal of lands from the open space lands inventory.
Proposed changes to these two ordinances would allow special events lasting less than 31 days to occur
on City property with the approval of the Mayor for a reason identified by the Mayor in writing.
Most requests for special event permits are for events in City parks, but special events are also frequently
held on other City-owned property. The proposed ordinance amendments will apply both to parks and to
those other City-owned properties, but this transmittal will focus on parks, though many of its concepts
also apply more broadly.
Special events are a wonderful way to bring together people of all cultures, backgrounds, and income
levels - local residents as well as visitors. Park gatherings attract new users, bring regular users back
repeatedly and, by increasing positive activity, reduce negative park uses.
Although special events bring many benefits to our park visitors and the residents of Salt Lake City, they
can also restrict public use of space, generate trash and litter, stress lawns, and damage park
infrastructure. The ordinance helps protect our public spaces and the access to those spaces. It allows for
only the Mayor to determine if the public benefit of an event is of great enough value to allow for up to a
ten day extension. A park’s programming should strike a balance between the benefits provided by
Lisa Shaffer (Feb 3, 2022 12:51 MST)
02/03/2022
02/03/2022
PUBLIC LANDS DEPARTMENT
1965 W 500 S
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84104
www.slc.gov/parks/
PHONE 801-972-7800
FAX 801-972-7847
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
special events and the long-term sustainability of the park. An example may be when the event brings
national or international visitors, attention, and economic value to Salt Lake City.
In the past five years, Salt Lake City received a minimal number of requests (approximately 10) to allow
a special event to occur longer than the current allowed 20 days.
Notes:
Individuals who are available to present to City Council at Work Session:
- Ryen Schlegel, Special Events Permit Manager
- Kristin Riker, Director, Department of Public Lands
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Red Lined Ordinance Section 2.58.040 and Section 2.90.070
B. Clean Ordinance Section 2.58.040 and Section 2.90.070
ATTACHMENT A
Red Lined Ordinance Section 2.58.040 and Section 2.90.070
1
1
2 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
3 No. of 2022
4
5 (Sale of significant parcels of real property and removal of lands from the open space lands
6 inventory)
7
8 An ordinance amending Section 2.58.040 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the sale
9 of significant parcels of real property, and Section 2.90.070 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating
10 to the removal of lands from the open space lands inventory.
11 WHEREAS, the city desires to make certain changes relating to an exemption, for certain
12 special events, from the mandatory procedures of those sections; and
13 WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, desires to amend Section 2.58.040
14 and Section 2.90.070 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to such changes.
15 NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah that:
16 SECTION 1. Section 2.58.040 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the sale of
17 significant parcels of real property, is amended as follows:
18 2.58.040: SALE OF SIGNIFICANT PARCELS OF REAL PROPERTY; NOTICE AND
19 HEARING:
20
21 A. A significant parcel of real property owned by the City or any significant legal interest
22 therein shall not be sold, traded, leased or otherwise conveyed or encumbered until the City has
23 provided reasonable notice to all interested parties and held at least one public hearing on the
24 proposed conveyance as set forth herein.
25 B. Reasonable notice of the proposed conveyance shall include the following:
26 1. Notice of the proposed conveyance shall be mailed to all abutting property owners.
27 2. Notice of the proposed conveyance shall be delivered to the Office of the City Council,
28 posted in the Office of the City Recorder, delivered to a local media representative, and posted
2
29 on the City's website.
30 C. No significant parcel of City owned real property identified in section 2.58.035, including
31 table 2.58.035C, of this chapter may be conveyed until after a public hearing has been held
32 before one or more of the following as may be applicable: the Planning Commission, the Airport
33 Board, the Public Utilities Advisory Committee, the Golf Enterprise Fund Advisory Board, or
34 the Parks, Natural Lands, Trails, and Urban Forestry Advisory Board.
35 D. In addition to the public hearing required above, the City Council may also request a
36 public hearing before the conveyance of the property. Any request for a hearing before the City
37 Council must be delivered to the Office of the Mayor no less than fifteen (15) days after delivery
38 of the notice to the Office of the City Council pursuant to subsection B2 of this section. If no
39 request for a hearing is made within that time period, the City Council shall be deemed to have
40 waived any right to request a hearing.
41 If a written call for hearing has been made by the City Council, the Mayor or his or her designee
42 shall attend the hearing to hear and consider comments upon proposals to convey the property
43 specified in the notice. The hearing shall take place before, after or in conjunction with a
44 regularly scheduled City Council meeting, as determined by the Mayor.
45 E. Any notice of a proposed conveyance of a significant parcel of City owned real property
46 shall specify the following:
47 1. A description of the property to be conveyed or encumbered;
48 2. The nature of the proposed conveyance or encumbrance, whether the property is to be
49 sold, traded or encumbered, including the nature of the conveyance if the property is to be sold,
50 or if a trade or lease of property is contemplated, a brief summary of the proposed transaction;
51 3. Persons to whom interests are to be conveyed;
3
52 4. Any consideration tendered;
53 5. The name of the person, department or entity requesting such action;
54 6. The basis upon which the value of the interest has been determined by the City;
55 7. The date, time and location of the public hearing to be held before the Planning
56 Commission, Airport Board, Public Utilities Advisory Committee, Golf Enterprise Fund
57 Advisory Board, or Parks, Natural Lands, Trails, and Urban Forestry Advisory Board, as
58 applicable. The notice shall further state that interested persons may appear and comment upon
59 the proposal.
60 F. The conveyance or encumbrance of a significant parcel of real property of the City may be
61 finalized:
62 1. By the Mayor, at his/her discretion following notice and any public hearings required by
63 this section; or
64 2. By the Mayor, if the transfer is revocable and the Mayor has determined that an
65 unanticipated combination of facts and conditions of pressing necessity has emerged that
66 requires that action be taken before a City Council hearing. Such conditions shall not be deemed
67 to arise unless it appears that delay from the notice or a City Council hearing would produce:
68 a. Great or irreparable injury to persons seeking the conveyance or encumbrance, with
69 negligible impact upon City interests;
70 b. Serious detriment to the social or economic interest of the community as whole; or
71 3. Substantial economic loss to the City.
72 G. Any decision by the Mayor to forego the City Council hearing provisions of this section
73 shall be made in writing to the City Council, stating the specific reasons upon which the decision
74 was based.
4
75 H. The following shall be exempt from the mandatory procedures of this section:
76 1. The leasing of existing buildings, infrastructure, or facilities;
77 2. Special events lasting (a) less than twenty-one (21) days or (b), with the approval of the
78 Mayor for a reason identified by the Mayor in writing, less than thirty-one (31) days;
79 3. The leasing of recreation areas in accordance with their intended use;
80 4. The selling of burial rights in the Salt Lake City Cemetery; and
81 5. The granting of easements or other rights that service the property, including grants in
82 connection with utilities or safety equipment such as traffic signal poles. Any such easement or
83 use right must be primarily for the benefit of the City. With respect to open space land under
84 chapter 2.90 of this title, such easement or use right may be granted only with the approval of the
85 City's Open Space Lands Manager.
86 SECTION 2. Section 2.90.070 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the removal of
87 lands from the open space lands inventory, is amended as follows:
88 2.90.070: REMOVAL OF LANDS FROM THE OPEN SPACE LANDS INVENTORY:
89
90 A. Open space lands, conservation easements or other interests in open space land placed in the
91 open space lands inventory shall remain in the inventory in perpetuity unless: 1) they are
92 transferred to a qualified public or nonprofit land conservation entity; or 2) a sale, conversion
93 from undeveloped open space land to developed open space land, exchange, or other transfer of
94 the land, conservation easement or other interest in land is approved by the mayor, subsequent to
95 the following mandatory procedures:
96 1. Any proposal to sell or transfer open space land must be in writing, signed by the mayor,
97 and must include a description of the land to be sold or transferred, the purpose of the proposed
98 sale or transfer, the proposed purchaser of the land, the amount of the proposed purchase price,
5
4
99 the anticipated future use of the land, any anticipated change in zoning that would be required to
100 implement that proposed future use, and a statement by the mayor explaining why the proposed
101 sale or transfer of the open space land is in the best interest of the city.
102 2. Holding a public hearing before the mayor and the city council.
103 3. Providing notice of the proposed sale or transfer and the public hearing by:
104 a. Publication of a notice for two (2) successive weeks, beginning at least thirty (30) days
105 in advance of the hearing, in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, no less than one-
106 fourth (1/ ) page in size, with type no smaller than 18-point, surrounded by a one-fourth inch
107 (1/4") border, in a portion of the newspaper other than where the legal notices and classified
108 advertisements appear, containing the information set forth in the form below;
109 b. Posting two (2) signs measuring at least two feet by three feet (2' x 3') each, on the land
110 proposed for sale or transfer at least thirty (30) days in advance of the hearing, containing the
111 information set forth in the form below; and
112 c. Mailing notice, at least thirty (30) days in advance of the hearing, to all property owners
113 of record within one thousand feet (1,000') of the land proposed for sale or transfer, containing
114 the information set forth in the form below.
115 d. Any notice published, posted or mailed pursuant to this section shall state substantially
116 as follows:
117 NOTICE OF PROPOSED SALE OR TRANSFER OF PUBLICLY OWNED OPEN SPACE
118 LAND
119 The Mayor of Salt Lake City is proposing to sell or transfer certain Open Space Lands
120 owned by Salt Lake City located at [street location] for $[proposed amount of sale] to [proposed
121 buyer] for future use as [proposed future use].
6
122 A public hearing on this proposal will be held before the Mayor and the City Council on
123 [date of hearing] at the Salt Lake City & County Building, 451 South State Street, room 315, Salt
124 Lake City, Utah, at [time of hearing] p.m.
125 Any individual wishing to address this proposal is invited to attend and to express their
126 views to the Mayor and the City Council at that hearing.
127 4. Following the public hearing, the city council may elect to conduct an advisory vote as to
128 the proposed sale or transfer of the open space land.
129 5. No sale or transfer of open space land may occur until at least six (6) months after the
130 conclusion of the public hearing in order to provide an opportunity to explore other alternatives
131 to the proposed sale or transfer of the open space land.
132 B. Any open space lands, conservation easements or other interests in open space land: 1)
133 acquired by the city in partnership with other entities, units of government, or other parties; or 2)
134 received by donation, bequest, devise, or dedication, may only be authorized for sale, conversion
135 from undeveloped open space land to developed open space land, exchange or other transfer if
136 such action is allowed for in the instrument under which the open space land, conservation
137 easement or other interest in open space land was conveyed to, or acquired by, the city.
138 C. The following shall be exempt from the mandatory procedures of this section:
139 1. The leasing of existing buildings, infrastructure, or facilities;
140 2. Special events lasting (a) less than twenty-one (21) days or (b), with the approval of the
141 mayor for a reason identified by the mayor in writing, less than thirty-one (31) days;
142 3. The leasing of recreation areas in accordance with their intended use;
143 4. The selling of burial rights in the Salt Lake City Cemetery.
7
144 5. The granting of easements or other rights that service the property, including grants in
145 connection with utilities or safety equipment such as traffic signal poles. Any such easement or
146 use right must be primarily for the benefit of the city. With respect to open space land under this
147 chapter, such easement or use right may be granted only with the approval of the city's open
148 space lands manager.
149 SECTION 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately after it has been published or
150 posted in accordance with Utah Code section 10-3-711 and recorded in accordance with Utah
151 Code section 10-3-713.
152 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of ,
153 2022.
154
155
156
157
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
CHAIRPERSON
158
159 CITY RECORDER
160
161 Transmitted to Mayor on .
162
163 Mayor’s Action: Approved. _ Vetoed.
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
MAYOR
171
172 CITY RECORDER
173
174
175 (SEAL)
176
177
178 Bill No. of 2022.
179 Published: .
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved As To Form
By:
Boyd Ferguson
Date:
8
180
181
182
183
Clean Ordinance Section 2.58.040 and Section 2.90.070
ATTACHMENT B
1
1
2 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
3 No. of 2022
4
5 (Sale of significant parcels of real property and removal of lands from the open space lands
6 inventory)
7
8 An ordinance amending Section 2.58.040 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the sale
9 of significant parcels of real property, and Section 2.90.070 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating
10 to the removal of lands from the open space lands inventory.
11 WHEREAS, the city desires to make certain changes relating to an exemption, for certain
12 special events, from the mandatory procedures of those sections; and
13 WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, desires to amend Section 2.58.040
14 and Section 2.90.070 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to such changes.
15 NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah that:
16 SECTION 1. Section 2.58.040 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the sale of
17 significant parcels of real property, is amended as follows:
18 2.58.040: SALE OF SIGNIFICANT PARCELS OF REAL PROPERTY; NOTICE AND
19 HEARING:
20
21 A. A significant parcel of real property owned by the City or any significant legal interest
22 therein shall not be sold, traded, leased or otherwise conveyed or encumbered until the City has
23 provided reasonable notice to all interested parties and held at least one public hearing on the
24 proposed conveyance as set forth herein.
25 B. Reasonable notice of the proposed conveyance shall include the following:
26 1. Notice of the proposed conveyance shall be mailed to all abutting property owners.
27 2. Notice of the proposed conveyance shall be delivered to the Office of the City Council,
28 posted in the Office of the City Recorder, delivered to a local media representative, and posted
2
29 on the City's website.
30 C. No significant parcel of City owned real property identified in section 2.58.035, including
31 table 2.58.035C, of this chapter may be conveyed until after a public hearing has been held
32 before one or more of the following as may be applicable: the Planning Commission, the Airport
33 Board, the Public Utilities Advisory Committee, the Golf Enterprise Fund Advisory Board, or
34 the Parks, Natural Lands, Trails, and Urban Forestry Advisory Board.
35 D. In addition to the public hearing required above, the City Council may also request a
36 public hearing before the conveyance of the property. Any request for a hearing before the City
37 Council must be delivered to the Office of the Mayor no less than fifteen (15) days after delivery
38 of the notice to the Office of the City Council pursuant to subsection B2 of this section. If no
39 request for a hearing is made within that time period, the City Council shall be deemed to have
40 waived any right to request a hearing.
41 If a written call for hearing has been made by the City Council, the Mayor or his or her designee
42 shall attend the hearing to hear and consider comments upon proposals to convey the property
43 specified in the notice. The hearing shall take place before, after or in conjunction with a
44 regularly scheduled City Council meeting, as determined by the Mayor.
45 E. Any notice of a proposed conveyance of a significant parcel of City owned real property
46 shall specify the following:
47 1. A description of the property to be conveyed or encumbered;
48 2. The nature of the proposed conveyance or encumbrance, whether the property is to be
49 sold, traded or encumbered, including the nature of the conveyance if the property is to be sold,
50 or if a trade or lease of property is contemplated, a brief summary of the proposed transaction;
51 3. Persons to whom interests are to be conveyed;
3
52 4. Any consideration tendered;
53 5. The name of the person, department or entity requesting such action;
54 6. The basis upon which the value of the interest has been determined by the City;
55 7. The date, time and location of the public hearing to be held before the Planning
56 Commission, Airport Board, Public Utilities Advisory Committee, Golf Enterprise Fund
57 Advisory Board, or Parks, Natural Lands, Trails, and Urban Forestry Advisory Board, as
58 applicable. The notice shall further state that interested persons may appear and comment upon
59 the proposal.
60 F. The conveyance or encumbrance of a significant parcel of real property of the City may be
61 finalized:
62 1. By the Mayor, at his/her discretion following notice and any public hearings required by
63 this section; or
64 2. By the Mayor, if the transfer is revocable and the Mayor has determined that an
65 unanticipated combination of facts and conditions of pressing necessity has emerged that
66 requires that action be taken before a City Council hearing. Such conditions shall not be deemed
67 to arise unless it appears that delay from the notice or a City Council hearing would produce:
68 a. Great or irreparable injury to persons seeking the conveyance or encumbrance, with
69 negligible impact upon City interests;
70 b. Serious detriment to the social or economic interest of the community as whole; or
71 3. Substantial economic loss to the City.
72 G. Any decision by the Mayor to forego the City Council hearing provisions of this section
73 shall be made in writing to the City Council, stating the specific reasons upon which the decision
74 was based.
4
75 H. The following shall be exempt from the mandatory procedures of this section:
76 1. The leasing of existing buildings, infrastructure, or facilities;
77 2. Special events lasting (a) less than twenty-one (21) days or (b), with the approval of the
78 Mayor for a reason identified by the Mayor in writing, less than thirty-one (31) days;
79 3. The leasing of recreation areas in accordance with their intended use;
80 4. The selling of burial rights in the Salt Lake City Cemetery; and
81 5. The granting of easements or other rights that service the property, including grants in
82 connection with utilities or safety equipment such as traffic signal poles. Any such easement or
83 use right must be primarily for the benefit of the City. With respect to open space land under
84 chapter 2.90 of this title, such easement or use right may be granted only with the approval of the
85 City's Open Space Lands Manager.
86 SECTION 2. Section 2.90.070 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the removal of
87 lands from the open space lands inventory, is amended as follows:
88 2.90.070: REMOVAL OF LANDS FROM THE OPEN SPACE LANDS INVENTORY:
89
90 A. Open space lands, conservation easements or other interests in open space land placed in the
91 open space lands inventory shall remain in the inventory in perpetuity unless: 1) they are
92 transferred to a qualified public or nonprofit land conservation entity; or 2) a sale, conversion
93 from undeveloped open space land to developed open space land, exchange, or other transfer of
94 the land, conservation easement or other interest in land is approved by the mayor, subsequent to
95 the following mandatory procedures:
96 1. Any proposal to sell or transfer open space land must be in writing, signed by the mayor,
97 and must include a description of the land to be sold or transferred, the purpose of the proposed
98 sale or transfer, the proposed purchaser of the land, the amount of the proposed purchase price,
5
99 the anticipated future use of the land, any anticipated change in zoning that would be required to
100 implement that proposed future use, and a statement by the mayor explaining why the proposed
101 sale or transfer of the open space land is in the best interest of the city.
102 2. Holding a public hearing before the mayor and the city council.
103 3. Providing notice of the proposed sale or transfer and the public hearing by:
104 a. Publication of a notice for two (2) successive weeks, beginning at least thirty (30) days
105 in advance of the hearing, in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, no less than one-
106 fourth (1/4) page in size, with type no smaller than 18-point, surrounded by a one-fourth inch
107 (1/4") border, in a portion of the newspaper other than where the legal notices and classified
108 advertisements appear, containing the information set forth in the form below;
109 b. Posting two (2) signs measuring at least two feet by three feet (2' x 3') each, on the land
110 proposed for sale or transfer at least thirty (30) days in advance of the hearing, containing the
111 information set forth in the form below; and
112 c. Mailing notice, at least thirty (30) days in advance of the hearing, to all property owners
113 of record within one thousand feet (1,000') of the land proposed for sale or transfer, containing
114 the information set forth in the form below.
115 d. Any notice published, posted or mailed pursuant to this section shall state substantially
116 as follows:
117 NOTICE OF PROPOSED SALE OR TRANSFER OF PUBLICLY OWNED OPEN SPACE
118 LAND
119 The Mayor of Salt Lake City is proposing to sell or transfer certain Open Space Lands
120 owned by Salt Lake City located at [street location] for $[proposed amount of sale] to [proposed
121 buyer] for future use as [proposed future use].
6
122 A public hearing on this proposal will be held before the Mayor and the City Council on
123 [date of hearing] at the Salt Lake City & County Building, 451 South State Street, room 315, Salt
124 Lake City, Utah, at [time of hearing] p.m.
125 Any individual wishing to address this proposal is invited to attend and to express their
126 views to the Mayor and the City Council at that hearing.
127 4. Following the public hearing, the city council may elect to conduct an advisory vote as to
128 the proposed sale or transfer of the open space land.
129 5. No sale or transfer of open space land may occur until at least six (6) months after the
130 conclusion of the public hearing in order to provide an opportunity to explore other alternatives
131 to the proposed sale or transfer of the open space land.
132 B. Any open space lands, conservation easements or other interests in open space land: 1)
133 acquired by the city in partnership with other entities, units of government, or other parties; or 2)
134 received by donation, bequest, devise, or dedication, may only be authorized for sale, conversion
135 from undeveloped open space land to developed open space land, exchange or other transfer if
136 such action is allowed for in the instrument under which the open space land, conservation
137 easement or other interest in open space land was conveyed to, or acquired by, the city.
138 C. The following shall be exempt from the mandatory procedures of this section:
139 1. The leasing of existing buildings, infrastructure, or facilities;
140 2. Special events lasting (a) less than twenty-one (21) days or (b), with the approval of the
141 mayor for a reason identified by the mayor in writing, less than thirty-one (31) days;
142 3. The leasing of recreation areas in accordance with their intended use;
143 4. The selling of burial rights in the Salt Lake City Cemetery.
7
144 5. The granting of easements or other rights that service the property, including grants in
145 connection with utilities or safety equipment such as traffic signal poles. Any such easement or
146 use right must be primarily for the benefit of the city. With respect to open space land under this
147 chapter, such easement or use right may be granted only with the approval of the city's open
148 space lands manager.
149 SECTION 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately after it has been published or
150 posted in accordance with Utah Code section 10-3-711 and recorded in accordance with Utah
151 Code section 10-3-713.
152 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of ,
153 2022.
154
155
156
157
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
CHAIRPERSON
158
159 CITY RECORDER
160
161 Transmitted to Mayor on .
162
163 Mayor’s Action: Approved. _ Vetoed.
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
MAYOR
171
172 CITY RECORDER
173
174
175 (SEAL)
176
177
178 Bill No. of 2022.
179 Published: .
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved As To Form
By:
Boyd Ferguson
Date: 2-1-22
8
180
181
182
183
Hello Council Members,
An item entitled Amendment to Rename the Housing and Neighborhood Development Division
(HAND) as the Housing Stability Division is scheduled to appear on the March 1 agenda. There will not
be a staff report, since this is a straightforward change. Still, during the review of the relevant amendment, staff
did notice three potential policy questions related to existing language in these sections of City Code that may be
worth the Council’s consideration. This will be a written-only item, but during the Council Work Session,
Council Members might wish to discuss one or more of the following items:
A.Salt Lake City Code Section 4, Chapter 2.80 defines the Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board (HTFAB),
and outlines it powers and duties. With the proposed amendment, these would remain the same as they
have been since 2013, with only the title of the Division changing. Considering that the Council has
enacted significant changes in the roles and responsibilities of the HTFAB since 2017, when it began the
process of shifting responsibility for housing development to the Redevelopment Agency (RDA), Would
the Council like to schedule an opportunity for the Administration to provide an update
on its plans for the future of the HTFAB?
Currently, the code defines the HTFAB’s powers and duties as the following:
“[To s]erve as a coordination body and resource for organizations interested in
affordable and special needs housing issues affecting the city including, but not
limited to, the housing authority of Salt Lake City, the Salt Lake City
redevelopment agency, the housing stability [housing and neighborhood
development] division, and other city departments as appropriate, as well as
nonprofit and for profit housing developers. (Ord. 67-13, 2013)”
B.Salt Lake City Code Section 4, Chapter 2.80 also describes a process of annual reporting on the
Division’s work. Would the Council like to request that the Administration begin to
institutionalize this process for future years? The relevant sections of Code are reproduced
below.
“2. An annual report shall be prepared by the board and housing stability [HAND]
which shall contain information concerning the implementation of this chapter.
The report shall include, but is not limited to, information regarding the location
and numbers of units developed or preserved, the numbers and incomes of
households served, and detailing the income to and assets in the fund, and the
expenditures and uses of fund monies and assets.
3. The annual report shall include the board's and housing stability’s [HAND's]
assessment of housing needs in the city, barriers to affordable and special needs
housing development and reservation, and barriers to the implementation of this
chapter.
4. The annual report shall be submitted to the mayor and the council for review by
March 31 of each calendar year.”
C.Salt Lake City Code Section 5, Chapter 18.99, indicates that a non-profit corporation appointed by the
Division should administer a Housing Relocation Assistance Program for the City. Given that this
program is not known to have existed under previous Administrations, Would the Council like to
request the consultants who are currently working on the City’s Thriving in Place
(gentrification and displacement) study also recommend whether and how this section
of code could be modified?
“NONCITY AGENCY RESPONSIBLE FOR PROGRAM:
The housing stability [housing and neighborhood development] division of the city shall
annually designate the agency to administer the program and shall review annually all
relocation assistance amounts provided pursuant to the program.”
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
Date Received:
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Office Date sent to Council:
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: February 16, 2022
Dan Dugan, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)
SUBJECT: Ordinance adopting the amendment to rename the Housing and Neighborhood
Development Division (HAND) as the Housing Stability Division.
The Directors of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN) Department and Housing and
Neighborhood Development Division (HAND) have decided to rename the Housing Stability
Division to better reflect the mission of the division. The proposal to change the name of the
division was included in the Fiscal Year 2021-22 budget.
STAFF CONTACT: Tony Milner, Director, Housing Stability Division
801-535-6168, tony.milner@slcgov.com
Heather Royall, Deputy Director, Housing Stability Division
385-977-0935, heather.royall@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the included ordinance to rename the Housing and
Neighborhood Development (HAND) Division to the Housing Stability Division.
BUDGET IMPACT: No impact to City General Fund.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On May 18, 2021, Blake Thomas, Director of Community and Neighborhoods informed Council
of the Administration’s direction to rename the Housing and Neighborhood Development
(HAND) Division to the Housing Stability Division – CAN Budget Briefing, Future Vision:
Nimble and Adaptive, Division of Housing Stability; Rebrand HAND to focus on community
stabilization, assisting residents at risk of involuntary displacement, providing support services
for individuals experiencing homelessness, preservation of naturally occurring affordable
Lisa Shaffer (Feb 18, 2022 11:49 MST)
02/18/2022
02/18/2022
housing, and administration of federal programs. Following the Council briefing there was no
discussion or questions regarding this rename.
PUBLIC PROCESS: The public process was sustained in the Council’s public process for the
FY 2021-22 budget review and approval.
EXHIBIT:
A. Ordinance Amendment to rename the Housing and Neighborhood Development Division
as the Housing Stability Division
EXHIBIT A
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. _____ of 2021
(Amendment to rename the Housing and Neighborhood Development Division
as the Housing Stability Division)
An ordinance amending Title 2 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining the name of the
Housing and Neighborhood Development division.
WHEREAS, the Directors of Community and Neighborhoods and Housing and
Neighborhood Development have decided to rename the division as Housing Stability to better
reflect the mission of the division; and
WHEREAS, the proposal to change the name of the division was included in the Fiscal
Year 2021-22 budget; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to amend this the City Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this ordinance is in the best interest of the public.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Title 2. That the index of Title 2 of the Salt
Lake City Code (Administration and Personnel) shall be and hereby is amended as follows:
Title 2:
Housing Stability 2.61
SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 2.33.090. That Section 2.33.090 of
the Salt Lake City Code (Community Development and Capital Improvement Programs and Advisory Board,
Responsibilities) shall be and hereby is amended as follows:
2.33.080: RESPONSIBILITIES:
The board shall have the following responsibilities:
A. To serve solely in an advisory role on decisions relating to the city's community development
grants and capital improvement programs;
2
B. To coordinate with the housing stability division of the city on review and evaluation of current
strategic plans, goals and policies of the community development and capital improvement programs;
C. To review all eligible annual project proposals submitted by various individuals, neighborhood
groups, community organizations and city departments, and make recommendations to the mayor on such
request for funds;
D. To discuss program and project monitoring information prepared by the city to ensure that the
projects are implemented as planned;
E. To assure that the community development grants and capital improvement program goals are
consistent with the strategic plans and goals of the city;
F. To evaluate the overall effectiveness of the community development and capital improvement
program activities;
G. To be responsible for establishing and maintaining communications with the Salt Lake City
community councils.
SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Chapter 2.61. That Chapter 2.61 of the Salt
Lake City Code (Housing and Neighborhood Development) shall be and hereby is amended as follows:
Chapter 2.61
HOUSING STABILITY
2.61.010: PURPOSE:
The division of housing stability works to preserve the existing housing stock in Salt Lake City
neighborhoods and to also provide decent and safe affordable housing for owners of existing houses and for
first time homebuyers who fall within the low and moderate income guidelines established by the United
States department of housing and urban development.
2.61.020: ADOPTION OF POLICIES AND PROCEDURES:
The director of the division of housing stability may adopt policies and procedures, approved by the
mayor, that advance the purposes and proper functioning of the division. Such policies and procedures shall
not be in conflict with this chapter or other law.
2.61.030: FEES:
The director of the division of housing stability, with approval of the mayor, shall propose to the city
council fees that correspond to services the division performs for members of the public. The proposed fees
shall not exceed the costs the city incurs in performing the corresponding services. The city council may
consider including such fees on the Salt Lake City consolidated fee schedule.
SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Chapter 2.80. That Chapter 2.80 of the
Salt Lake City Code (Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board) shall be and hereby is amended as follows:
3
2.80.030: DEFINITIONS
HOUSING STABILITY: The division of housing stability, or its successor.
2.80.080: POWERS AND DUTIES
H. The board and housing stability shall review and monitor the activities of recipients of grants
and loans issued under this chapter on an annual basis, or more often as may be deemed necessary, to
ensure compliance with the terms and conditions imposed on the recipient by the mayor and the council
under this chapter and under any and all instruments and documents entered into between the city and the
recipient pursuant to this chapter.
1. Entities receiving grants or loans shall provide to the board and housing stability an annual
accounting of how the monies or assets received from the fund have been used.
2. An annual report shall be prepared by the board and housing stability which shall contain
information concerning the implementation of this chapter. The report shall include, but is not limited to,
information regarding the location and numbers of units developed or preserved, the numbers and
incomes of households served, and detailing the income to and assets in the fund, and the expenditures
and uses of fund monies and assets.
3. The annual report shall include the board's and housing stability’s assessment of housing
needs in the city, barriers to affordable and special needs housing development and reservation, and
barriers to the implementation of this chapter.
4. The annual report shall be submitted to the mayor and the council for review by March 31 of
each calendar year.
5. Appropriations by the council to the fund shall be considered as part of the budget process.
I. Serve as a coordination body and resource for organizations interested in affordable and special
needs housing issues affecting the city including, but not limited to, the housing authority of Salt Lake
City, the Salt Lake City redevelopment agency, the housing stability division, and other city departments
as appropriate, as well as nonprofit and for profit housing developers.
SECTION 5. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Chapter 18.99. That Chapter 18.99 of the
Salt Lake City Code (Housing Relocation Assistance Program) shall be and hereby is amended as follows:
18.99.020: DEFINITIONS:
AGENCY: A nonprofit corporation appointed by the housing stability division of the city to
administer the program.
18.99.030: NONCITY AGENCY RESPONSIBLE FOR PROGRAM:
A. The housing stability division of the city shall annually designate the agency to
administer the program and shall review annually all relocation assistance amounts provided
pursuant to the program.
SECTION 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
passage.
4
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ____ day of _________, 2021.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 2021.
Published: ______________.
Approved As To Form
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
By: _________________________
Kimberly K. Chytraus
Date: ______________________ January 21, 2021
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE 1
No. _____ of 2021 2
(Amendment to rename the Housing and Neighborhood Development Division 3
as the Housing Stability Division) 4
An ordinance amending Title 2 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining the name of the 5
Housing and Neighborhood Development division. 6
WHEREAS, the Directors of Community and Neighborhoods and Housing and 7
Neighborhood Development have decided to rename the division as Housing Stability to better 8
reflect the mission of the division; and 9
WHEREAS, the proposal to change the name of the division was included in the Fiscal 10
Year 2021-22 budget; and 11
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to amend this the City Code; and 12
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this ordinance is in the best interest of the public. 13
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 14
SECTION 1. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Title 2. That the index of Title 2 of the Salt 15
Lake City Code (Administration and Personnel) shall be and hereby is amended as follows: 16
Title 2: 17
Housing Stability Housing And Neighborhood Development 2.61 18
19
SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 2.33.090. That Section 2.33.090 of 20
the Salt Lake City Code (Community Development and Capital Improvement Programs and Advisory Board, 21
Responsibilities) shall be and hereby is amended as follows: 22
2.33.080: RESPONSIBILITIES: 23
The board shall have the following responsibilities: 24
A. To serve solely in an advisory role on decisions relating to the city's community development 25
grants and capital improvement programs; 26
2
B. To coordinate with the housing stability housing and neighborhood development division of the 27
city on review and evaluation of current strategic plans, goals and policies of the community development and 28
capital improvement programs; 29
C. To review all eligible annual project proposals submitted by various individuals, neighborhood 30
groups, community organizations and city departments, and make recommendations to the mayor on such 31
request for funds; 32
D. To discuss program and project monitoring information prepared by the city to ensure that the 33
projects are implemented as planned; 34
E. To assure that the community development grants and capital improvement program goals are 35
consistent with the strategic plans and goals of the city; 36
F. To evaluate the overall effectiveness of the community development and capital improvement 37
program activities; 38
G. To be responsible for establishing and maintaining communications with the Salt Lake City 39
community councils. (Ord. 67-13, 2013) 40
41
SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Chapter 2.61. That Chapter 2.61 of the Salt 42
Lake City Code (Housing and Neighborhood Development) shall be and hereby is amended as follows: 43
Chapter 2.61 44
HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENTHOUSING STABILITY 45
2.61.010: PURPOSE: 46
The division of housing stability housing and neighborhood development works to preserve the 47
existing housing stock in Salt Lake City neighborhoods and to also provide decent and safe affordable 48
housing for owners of existing houses and for first time homebuyers who fall within the low and moderate 49
income guidelines established by the United States department of housing and urban development. (Ord. 41-50
16, 2016) 51
2.61.020: ADOPTION OF POLICIES AND PROCEDURES: 52
The director of the division of housing stability housing and neighborhood development may adopt 53
policies and procedures, approved by the mayor, that advance the purposes and proper functioning of the 54
division. Such policies and procedures shall not be in conflict with this chapter or other law. (Ord. 41-16, 55
2016) 56
2.61.030: FEES: 57
The director of the division of housing stabilityhousing and neighborhood development, with 58
approval of the mayor, shall propose to the city council fees that correspond to services the division performs 59
for members of the public. The proposed fees shall not exceed the costs the city incurs in performing the 60
corresponding services. The city council may consider including such fees on the Salt Lake City consolidated 61
fee schedule. (Ord. 41-16, 2016) 62
63
64
3
SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Chapter 2.80. That Chapter 2.80 of the 65
Salt Lake City Code (Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board) shall be and hereby is amended as follows: 66
2.80.030: DEFINITIONS 67
HOUSING STABILITYHAND: The division of housing stabilityhousing and neighborhood 68
development, or its successor. 69
70
2.80.080: POWERS AND DUTIES 71
72
H. The board and housing stabilityHAND shall review and monitor the activities of recipients of 73
grants and loans issued under this chapter on an annual basis, or more often as may be deemed necessary, 74
to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions imposed on the recipient by the mayor and the 75
council under this chapter and under any and all instruments and documents entered into between the city 76
and the recipient pursuant to this chapter. 77
1. Entities receiving grants or loans shall provide to the board and housing stabilityHAND an 78
annual accounting of how the monies or assets received from the fund have been used. 79
2. An annual report shall be prepared by the board and housing stabilityHAND which shall 80
contain information concerning the implementation of this chapter. The report shall include, but is not 81
limited to, information regarding the location and numbers of units developed or preserved, the numbers 82
and incomes of households served, and detailing the income to and assets in the fund, and the 83
expenditures and uses of fund monies and assets. 84
3. The annual report shall include the board's and housing stability’sHAND's assessment of 85
housing needs in the city, barriers to affordable and special needs housing development and reservation, 86
and barriers to the implementation of this chapter. 87
4. The annual report shall be submitted to the mayor and the council for review by March 31 of 88
each calendar year. 89
5. Appropriations by the council to the fund shall be considered as part of the budget process. 90
91
I. Serve as a coordination body and resource for organizations interested in affordable and special 92
needs housing issues affecting the city including, but not limited to, the housing authority of Salt Lake 93
City, the Salt Lake City redevelopment agency, the housing stabilityhousing and neighborhood 94
development division, and other city departments as appropriate, as well as nonprofit and for profit 95
housing developers. (Ord. 67-13, 2013) 96
97
98
SECTION 5. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Chapter 18.99. That Chapter 18.99 of the 99
Salt Lake City Code (Housing Relocation Assistance Program) shall be and hereby is amended as follows: 100
18.99.020: DEFINITIONS: 101
AGENCY: A nonprofit corporation appointed by the housing stabilityhousing and 102
neighborhood development division of the city to administer the program. 103
18.99.030: NONCITY AGENCY RESPONSIBLE FOR PROGRAM: 104
A. The housing stabilityhousing and neighborhood development division of the city shall 105
annually designate the agency to administer the program and shall review annually all relocation 106
assistance amounts provided pursuant to the program. 107
108
4
SECTION 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its 109
passage. 110
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ____ day of _________, 2021. 111
112
113
______________________________ 114
CHAIRPERSON 115
116
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: 117
118
119
______________________________ 120
CITY RECORDER 121
122
123
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. 124
Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. 125
126
______________________________ 127
MAYOR 128
129
______________________________ 130
CITY RECORDER 131
132
133
(SEAL) 134
135
136
Bill No. ________ of 2021. 137
Published: ______________. 138
Approved As To Form
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
By: _________________________
Kimberly K. Chytraus
Date: ______________________
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Brian Fullmer
Policy Analyst
DATE: March 1, 2022
RE: Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A (2333 West North Temple)
PLNPCM2021-00915
The Council will be briefed about an Administration initiated petition amending the zoning map to remove
property at 2333 West North Temple from the Airport Flight Path Protection (AFPP) Influence Zone A in
Chapter 21A.34.040 Salt Lake City Code. The Airport Inn is currently located on the property and is
operating as a hotel. The proposal’s intent is to allow transitional housing in this extended-stay hotel as
part of the City’s goals related to homelessness.
Hotels and motels are allowed in the TSA-MUEC-C (Transit station Area District Mixed-Use Employment
Center-Core) and within the AFPP Influence Zone A. Under City Code rooms/dwelling units available for
rent or lease for less than 30 days are considered hotels or motels. Lease or rental periods of more than 30
days are typically considered residential use which is not allowed under the AFPP Influence Zone A. The
Department of Airports’ preferred method of addressing this issue is to modify the influence zone
boundary so it does not apply to the subject property. The Council adopted a temporary land use
regulation to allow it to operate an emergency winter overflow shelter in December 2020 (motion
attached). After the winter overflow period, the operator shifted to a hotel model focused on seniors and
veterans.
If adopted by the Council, the operator of the facility would be able to adjust its business model at this
location from a hotel to multi-family housing with stays longer than 30 days. A longer-term goal is to
accept housing vouchers for providing a more stable option for people transitioning out of homelessness.
Such uses are allowed within the TSA-MUEC-C zoning district. Other social services benefitting the
residents are also allowed under the zoning district.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: March 1, 2022
Set Date: March 1, 2022
Public Hearing: March 22, 2022
Potential Action: April 5, 2022
Page | 2
Planning staff found the proposal meets standards, objectives, and policy considerations for zoning map
amendments. They recommended the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation to the
City Council with the following condition:
A development agreement shall be recorded on the property that requires any new
development or substantial remodel of existing development to be constructed with air
circulation systems of at least thirty (30) dBs of sound attenuation in sleeping areas and
at least twenty-five (25) dBs of sound attenuation elsewhere.
The recommended sound attenuation is to help mitigate noise from nearby airport operations.
The Planning Commission reviewed this proposal at its December 15, 2021 meeting and held a public
hearing. There were no comments at the hearing and the Commission forwarded a unanimous positive
recommendation to the City Council for the proposal.
Aerial image with Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Overlay shaded red.
Subject property is in the red hashed area.
Image credit: Salt Lake City Department of Airports
Page | 3
Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed master plan and zoning map amendments, determine if the
Council supports moving forward with the proposal.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. The proposed zoning map amendment would “carve out” the subject property creating an irregular
boundary line. Does the Council have concerns with this?
2. Removing the AFPP Influence Zone A overlay from the subject property would permit uses in the
TSA-MUEC-C zoning district listed in Key Consideration 1. Does the Council have concerns with
this?
3. The Council may wish to have a broader policy discussion as it relates to using hotels as transitional
housing for those exiting homelessness.
4. Is the Council supportive of the proposed zoning map amendment?
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Planning staff identified two key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 3-4 of the
Planning Commission staff report. They are summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the
staff report.
Consideration 1-Development Potential
Removing the subject property from the AFPP Influence Zone A would allow any use permitted in the TSA-
MUEC-C zoning district. The zoning map amendment intent is not to allow any other type of residential
use than the transitional housing discussed above, removal of the influence zone overlay would allow
prohibited uses listed below:
• Residential uses (note: single-family detached housing is not allowed in the TSA-MUEC-C zoning
district).
• Commercial uses, except those constructed with air circulation systems and at least twenty-five
(25) dBs of sound attenuation.
• Institutional uses such as schools, hospitals, churches, and rest homes.
• Hotels and motels, except those constructed with air circulation systems and at least thirty (30)
dBs of sound attenuation in sleeping areas and at last twenty-five (25) dBs of sound attenuation
elsewhere.
Planning staff noted some institutional uses are allowed in the TSA-MUEC-C zoning district, but the
location and constraints associated with the zone are barriers to those standalone uses. Removal of the
Influence Zone A allows for onsite community serving uses associated with the Airport Inn such as a
community clinic.
Removal of the Influence Zone A would not impact setbacks or lot coverage, required under the zoning
designation. The base zone standards of the TSA-MUEC-C zoning district would still apply. Planning staff
suggested Influence Zone A sound attenuation requirements on future development as a condition of
approval. As noted above, the Planning Commission included this in its recommendation to the City
Council.
Consideration 2-Compatibility with Adjacent Properties
Adjacent parcels to the east, south and west are zoned TSA-MUEC-C, and across North Temple Street to
the north, parcels have Airport (A) zoning designation as shown in the image below.
Page | 4
Current development is predominantly commercial and light industrial as well as the airport. A large
commercial and research facility with associated parking areas is to the south and east of the subject parcel,
with car rental facilities to the west.
Area zoning map with subject parcel outlined in red
No new buildings are planned as part of the proposed zoning map amendment to remove the subject parcel
from the AFPP Influence Zone A. Existing rooms in the hotel are being remodeled during the transition to
an extended stay motel. Planning staff believes there would be minimal impact to the surrounding
community if the proposal is approved by the Council as occupancy numbers would not change. After
reviewing the proposal, it is Planning staff’s opinion the zoning change to remove the subject parcel from
the AFPP Influence Zone A is appropriate.
ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS
Attachment E (pages 11-12) of the Planning Commission staff report outlines zoning map amendment
standards that should be considered as the Council reviews this proposal. The standards and findings are
summarized below. Please see the Planning Commission staff report for additional information.
Factor Finding
Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent
with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of
the city as stated through its various adopted planning
documents.
The proposed
amendment is
generally
consistent with the
goals and policies
of applicable
master plans.
Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the
specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance.
The proposal
generally furthers
the specific purpose
statements of the
zoning ordinance.
The extent to which a proposed map amendment will
affect adjacent properties
The change in
zoning is not
Page | 5
anticipated to
create any
substantial new
negative impacts
that wouldn’t be
anticipated with
the current zoning.
Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent
with the purposes and provisions of any applicable
overlay zoning districts which may impose additional
standards.
There is no
applicable overlay
district that
imposes additional
development
standards on this
property.
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, stormwater
drainage systems, water supplies, and wastewater and
refuse collection.
The proposal does
not increase the
need for
improvements
beyond that
required by
existing zoning
allowances.
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
• September 2, 2021-Application submitted
• September 28, 2021-Petition assigned to Krissy Gilmore, Senior Planner
• October 5, 2021-Information about petition sent to the Poplar Grove and Jordan Meadows
Community Council Chairs. The Jordan Meadows Community Council sent a letter expressing
concern about a precedent being set to remove other parcels from the influence zone.
• October 5, 2021-Early notification sent to property owners and residents within 300’ of the subject
parcel.
• October 18, 2021-Proposal posted for online open house through November 30, 2021.
• December 3, 2021-Planning Commission public hearing notice emailed to interested parties and
residents/property owners who requested notice. Planning Commission agenda posted to the
Planning Commission website and the State of Utah Public Notice webpage. Public hearing notice
posted on property.
• December 9, 2021-Sent to Planning Commission
• December 15, 2021-Planning Commission public hearing. There were no comments at the public
hearing and the Commission voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the City
Council.
• December 20, 2021-Sent to Attorney’s Office
• February 11, 2022-Transmitted to City Council
Item E1
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Council Staff
DATE:December 11, 2020
RE:Ordinance: Enacting a Temporary Zoning Regulation to Allow a Temporary Overflow Homeless Shelter
Use at Approximately 2333 West North Temple.
MOTION 1
I move that the Council adopt an ordinance enacting a temporary zoning regulation authorizing an
overflow homeless shelter use at Approximately 2333 West North Temple.
MOTION 2
I move the Council reject the ordinance
Attachment A -
Potential Legislative Intents:
1. It is the Council’s intent to continue working with Salt Lake County and the State of Utah to
address the needs of westside communities and the disproportionate impact that homelessness
has on those areas. We want to make our partners aware that adding a homeless population in
this area, in such close proximity to places where problems currently exist, like the Jordan
River trail and North Temple, makes the challenges this community already faces even harder.
We look forward to help from our partners with mitigation efforts.
2. It is the Council’s intent to request the State and County support for increased investment in
westside neighborhoods generally. For example, County participation in the 9-Line RDA area
that is currently under consideration.
3. It is the Council’s intent to request State and County participation in developing a public
market at the Fairpark to increase access to fresh food on the west side and provide a space for
westside food businesses to grow.
4. It is the intent of the Council to encourage stakeholders to prioritize implementing the
recommendations of the Gardner Policy Institute report on Utah Homeless Services, including
providing sufficient funding to ensure homeless services are funded at the levels needed to
ensure a functioning system to avoid the yearly scramble to have adequate space through the
winter. The council believes that the public and partners need increased clarity about the roles
and responsibilities of the various entities.
5. It is the Council’s intent to ask the Salt Lake Valley Coalition to End Homelessness, the entity
in charge of identifying and providing services, to have a public-facing website clearly sharing
program bed capacity each day and ensuring that service providers and law enforcement have
clear means for referring individuals into emergency shelter. We urge the coalition to provide
increased public education about the link between an adequate number of beds to house
individuals without shelter, and the legal ability of local governments to enforce the no-
camping ordinances that exist in most cities.
CITY COUNCIL BREIFING // March 1, 2022
AIRPORT FLIGHT PATH PROTECTION INFLUENCE ZONE A MAP AMENDMENT
PLNPCM2021-00915
Remove the property at 2333 W North Temple from the
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A.
•Allows the Airport Inn to operate a new model of extended-
stay hotels as transitional housing to advance the City’s
overall goals related to homelessness.
•Use would be considered Multi-Family rather than
Motel/Hotel
PROJECT REQUEST
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
•Development Potential:
•Would allow for full TSA-MEUC-C permitted and
conditional land uses.
•Current uses prohibited under Influence Zone A:
•Residential uses;
•Commercial uses, except those constructed with air
circulation systems and at least twenty five (25) dBs of
sound attenuation;
•Institutional uses such as schools, hospitals,
churches and rest homes;
•Hotels and motels, except those constructed with air
circulation systems and at least thirty (30) dBs of
sound attenuation in sleeping areas and at least
twenty five (25) dBs of sound attenuation elsewhere.
•Not incompatible with neighboring properties
•Suggested condition of approval for sound attenuation
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
KEY CONSIDERATIONS
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
The Planning Commission forwarded a positive recommendation
to the City Council with the following condition:
1.A development agreement shall be recorded on the property that
requires any new development or substantial remodel of existing
development to be constructed with air circulation systems of at least
thirty (30) dBs of sound attenuation in sleeping areas and at least
twenty five (25) dBs of sound attenuation elsewhere.
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 406 www.slcgov.com
PO BOX 145480 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5480 TEL 801-535-7757 FAX 801-535-6174
PLANNING DIVISION
COMMUNITY & NEIGHORHOOD DEVELOPMENT
Staff Report
To: Salt Lake City Planning Commission
From: Krissy Gilmore, 801-535-7780, kristina.gilmore@slcgov.com
Date: December 15, 2021
Re: PLNPCM2021-00915 Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A
Zoning Map Amendment
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2333 W North Temple
PARCEL ID: 08-33-452-004-0000
MASTER PLAN: Airport Master Plan
ZONING DISTRICT: Current – Base zone of TSA-MUEC-C and Airport Flight Path
Protection Zone A Overlay
Proposed – Remove Airport Flight Path Protection Zone A Overlay,
retain base zone of TSA-MUEC-C
REQUEST:
Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall initiated a petition to amend the zoning map to remove
the property at 2333 W North Temple from the Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone
A, described under City Code 21A.34.040. The property is currently occupied by a commercial
building, the Airport Inn, and associated parking. The desired result is to allow the Airport Inn
to operate a new model of extended-stay hotels as transitional housing to advance the City’s
overall goals related to homelessness.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the analysis and findings of fact in this staff report, planning staff finds that the zoning
map amendment petition meets the standards, objectives and policy considerations of the city
for a zoning map amendment and recommends that the Planning Commission forward a
positive recommendation to the City Council with the following condition:
1. A development agreement shall be recorded on the property that requires any new
development or substantial remodel of existing development to be constructed with air
circulation systems of at least thirty (30) dBs of sound attenuation in sleeping areas and
at least twenty five (25) dBs of sound attenuation elsewhere.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Proposed Overlay Boundary
B. Memo to Initiate Petition
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Map Amendment
C. Property & Vicinity Photographs
D. City Master Plan Policies
E. Analysis of Standards – Zoning Map Amendment
F. Public Process and Comments
G. Department Review Comments
Petition Description
The proposal includes a zoning map
amendment to remove the property located at
2333 W North Temple from the Airport Flight
Path Protection Influence Zone A, described
under City Code 21A.34.040. The Department
of Airports has been working to accommodate
the development of a new model of transitional
housing for people experiencing homelessness
by working with nonprofit organizations to
refurbish and utilize existing extended-stay
hotels. The petition would update an area of the
Airport Influence Zone to support the
implementation of the city's adopted policies
related to assisting people experiencing homelessness.
The current hotel/motel use is permitted in the TSA-MUEC-C zoning district and within the
Airport Influence Zone A. The longer-term goal is to be able to accept housing vouchers for
transitional housing to provide a more predictable and stable option for those people
transitioning out of homelessness. An extended stay motel is not eligible to accept vouchers.
The preferred path forward indicated by the Department of Airports is to modify the boundary
of the Airport Overlay so that it would not apply to this property. If adopted, the nonprofit will
switch their business model and the hotel will be considered multi-family housing, which is a
permitted use in the TSA-MUEC-C zoning district. It would also allow them to offer other
sorts of social services because most social services that benefit the residents of the facility are
also permitted uses in the TSA zoning district.
The result would allow the Airport Inn to accommodate stays greater than 30 days as
transitional housing. The zoning code does not include a land use that directly matches this
kind of supportive housing, whether permanent, short term, or any time frame in between
those two. Under City Code, units/rooms that are available for rental or lease for periods of
less than one month are considered a hotel/motel, while dwellings that are rented for periods
of longer than one month generally fall into a residential land use and would prohibit the
Airport Inn from operating this model of transitional housing if under the Airport Influence
Zone A.
Applicable Review Processes and Standards
Review Processes: Zoning Map Amendment
Zoning map amendment proposals are reviewed against a set of considerations from the Zoning
Code. The considerations are listed in Attachment E. Planning staff is required by ordinance to
North Temple
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Map Amendment
analyze proposed zoning map amendments against existing adopted City policies and other
related adopted City regulations, as well as consider how a zoning map amendment will affect
adjacent properties. However, ultimately, a decision to amend the zoning map is up to the
discretion of the City Council.
KEY CONSIDERATIONS:
The below considerations were identified through the analysis of the proposal and the zoning
amendment consideration standards:
1. Development Potential
2. Compatibility with Adjacent Properties
Consideration 1: Development Potential
The primary development potential difference is that the map amendment would allow for any
permitted use in the Transit Service Area Mixed Employment Center Core (TSA-MUEC-C)
zoning district. Under current AFPP Influence Zone A, residential uses are incompatible and
prohibited. While the intent of the map amendment is not to allow any other type of residential
use than the transitional housing described earlier in this report and the Department of Airports
has indicated that traditional single-family detached residential uses are not appropriate,
removing the influence zone would allow the prohibited uses from the list below. Of note, single-
family detached residential is not a permitted land use in the TSA-MUEC-C zoning district.
However, the Department of Airports supports removing the small section of Influence Zone A
to meet the city’s goals to provide transitional housing for those experiencing homelessness.
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Prohibited Uses
1. Airport Influence Zone A: The following uses are incompatible in this zone and
are prohibited:
a. Residential uses;
b. Commercial uses, except those constructed with air circulation systems and at
least twenty five (25) dBs of sound attenuation;
c. Institutional uses such as schools, hospitals, churches and rest homes;
d. Hotels and motels, except those constructed with air circulation systems and at
least thirty (30) dBs of sound attenuation in sleeping areas and at least twenty five
(25) dBs of sound attenuation elsewhere.
Some institutional uses are permitted in the TSA-MEUC-C zoning district, but the general
location, zoning constraints, such as the TSA Scorecard, Design Guidelines, parking, setbacks,
and the size of site are barriers to those standalone land uses. The removal of the Influence Zone
A does allow for onsite community serving uses to be associated with the Airport Inn, such as a
community clinic.
No other zoning code changes, such as setbacks or lot coverage, would be impacted by the
removal of the Influence Zone A. The base zone standards of the TSA-MUEC-C zoning district
would still apply. A suggested condition of approval is to include the sound attenuation
requirement of the current Influence Zone A on any future development to limit noise impacts.
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Map Amendment
Consideration 2: Compatibility with Adjacent Properties
As part of a zoning amendment request, staff is
directed to analyze how adjacent properties may be
affected by a change in zoning to the property. In
this case, the property is directly adjacent to
properties zoned TSA-MUEC-C (Transit Service
Area Mixed Employment Center Station Core) to
the east, west, and south and A (Airport) zoning
across the street to the north. All adjacent
properties are within the either Airport Influence
Zone A or B.
The overall development pattern of the area is
dominated by commercial and light industrial uses,
as well as the airport. The surrounding land uses
include a large-scale development and research
building to the west, as well as rental car facilities
to the west. As such, from an aerial photograph
perspective, much of the adjacent land appears to
be dedicated to parking.
The Airport Inn is not planning any new building
associated with the zoning map amendment and
would utilize their current rooms. They are
currently remodeling existing rooms to facilitate
an extended stay model hotel. Therefore, there
should be minimal impact to the surrounding
properties, as the occupancy numbers will not
change. Additionally, other permitted uses would be compatible given the development
potential of the site and condition of approval for sound attenuation.
DISCUSSION:
The proposal has been reviewed against the Zoning Amendment consideration criteria in
Attachment E, including criteria regarding the proposed zoning’s impact and compatibility on
adjacent properties, and compatibility with the associated master plan.
The applicant has proposed a map amendment to the property to remove the Airport Flight Path
Protection Influence Zone A. It is staff’s opinion that the change in zoning for these properties
would not negatively impact the character of the area. As such, staff finds that the requested
zone change is appropriate when considered in the context of the area and is recommending
that the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation to the City Council.
NEXT STEPS:
The Planning Commission can provide a positive or negative recommendation for the proposed
map amendment. The recommendation will be sent to the City Council, who will hold a briefing
and additional public hearing on the proposed zoning map amendment. The City Council may
Map showing adjacent base zoning
Map showing adjacent properties
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Map Amendment
make modifications to the proposal and approve or decline to approve the proposed zoning map
amendment.
If the zoning map amendment is approved by the City Council, the property owner could
propose development and/or land uses that meet the standards of the TSA-MUEC-C zoning for
the entire property. If denied, the property owner could continue to operate as an extended stay
motel, but would be prohibited from accepting housing vouchers. The property could also
develop in a manner that meets the existing zoning standards and Influence Zone A.
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Map Amendment
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Map Amendment
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Map Amendment
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Map Amendment
Photo of site
Airport property across the street
Adjacent properties to the west and east
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Map Amendment
Plan Salt Lake Elements and Considerations
Plan Salt Lake (December 2015) outlines an overall vision of sustainable growth and
development in the city. This includes the development of a diverse mix of uses which is
essential to accommodate responsible growth. At the sa me time, compatibility, which is how
new development fits into the scale and character of existing neighborhoods is an important
consideration. New development should be sensitive to the context of surrounding development
while also providing opportunities for new growth.
Guiding Principles outlined in Plan Salt Lake that would relate to the proposed change include
the following:
1) Neighborhoods that provide a safe environment, opportunities for social interaction,
and services needed for the wellbeing of the community therein.
3) Access to a wide variety of housing types for all income levels throughout the City,
providing the basic human need for safety and responding to changing demographics.
11) Ensure access to all City amenities for all citizens while treating everyone equitably
with fairness, justice and respect.
The Housing chapter of Plan Salt Lake includes a number of initiatives intended to help
implement the Plan. The initiative to “Support homeless services” is specifically identified. The
Plan also references “collaboration with community partners…” in terms of access and equity
to City services and amenities.
The proposed change is in concert with the general principles and strategies identified in Plan
Salt Lake.
Growing SLC: A Five Year Housing Plan – 2018-2022 (2017)
Growing SLC: A Five Year Housing Plan – 2018-2022 (the Salt Lake City Housing Plan) was
adopted in late 2017 as the City’s first housing plan since 2000. The Housing Plan is intended
to advance the vision that Salt Lake City is a place for a growing div erse population to find
housing opportunities that are safe, secure, and enrich lives and communities. A big focus of
the Plan is the protection and development of housing opportunities throughout the City , as
well as supporting vulnerable populations. The plan describes the linkages and interaction
between a lack of housing to very low-income renters and the City’s most vulnerable citizens.
This lack of affordable housing can push some citizens into homelessness as they are priced out
of the market.
The Housing Plan was developed using existing housing policy, primarily Plan Salt Lake and the
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Housing Policy. The guiding principles of Plan Salt Lake are
incorporated by reference including the initiative to “Support homeless services”.
The proposed change is in concert with the principles and strategies identified in Growing SLC.
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Map Amendment
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT
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. In making a decision to amend the zoning map, the City Council should consider
the following:
FACTOR FINDING RATIONALE
1. Whether a proposed
map amendment is
consistent with the
purposes, goals,
objectives, and
policies of the city as
stated through its
various adopted
planning documents;
The proposed
amendment is
generally
consistent with
the goals and
policies of the
applicable
master plans.
Various purposes, goals, objectives, and policies
identified in City documents including Plan Salt
Lake and Growing SLC are consistent with the
proposed changes.
This is further articulated and discussed in the Key
Considerations section of this report.
2. Whether a proposed
map amendment
furthers the specific
purpose statements of
the zoning ordinance.
The proposal
generally
furthers the
specific
purpose
statements of
the zoning
ordinance.
The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to promote
the health, safety, morals, convenience, order,
prosperity and welfare of the present and future
inhabitants of Salt Lake City, to implement the
adopted plans of the city, and, in addition:
A. Lessen congestion in the streets or roads;
B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers;
C. Provide adequate light and air;
D. Classify land uses and distribute land
development and utilization;
E. Protect the tax base;
F. Secure economy in governmental
expenditures;
G. Foster the city's industrial, business and
residential development; and
H. Protect the environment. (Ord. 26-95 § 2(1-
3), 1995)
The proposed zone change to remove the Airport
Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A from the
subject property would support the purposes of the
zoning ordinance found in Chapter 21A.02.0303:
Purpose and Intent as outlined above. It would
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Map Amendment
promote the health, safety and welfare of some of
the City’s most vulnerable residents, those
experiencing homelessness.
It would also help support the purpose statement of
the proposed TSA-MEUC-C zoning district.
3. The extent to which
a proposed map
amendment will affect
adjacent properties;
The change in
zoning is not
anticipated to
create any
substantial
new negative
impacts that
wouldn’t be
anticipated
with the
current zoning.
The proposed adjustment to the Airport Flight Path
Protection Influence Zone A would allow the Airport
Inn to utilizing extended stays as transitional
housing which is not currently allowed by the
overlay zone. The Airport Inn will utilize their
current rooms and is not planning to increase
capacity. The overall scale and allowed uses in the
proposed zone would not be out of scale with the
surrounding TSA zoning. The proposal is not
anticipated to create new negative impacts on
neighboring properties.
4. Whether a
proposed map
amendment is
consistent with the
purposes and
provisions of any
applicable overlay
zoning districts which
may impose additional
standards
There is no
applicable
overlay district
that imposes
additional
development
standards on
this property.
Removing the property from the Airport Flight Path
Protection Influence Zone A is the intent of the map
amendment. The Airport has been involved in the
map amendment process and this project creates no
observed impacts to airport operations.
The subject property is also located within the
Inland Port Overlay Zone. The impacts of the
proposed change are minimal, as hotel and motel
stays are already allowed, and should not conflict
with the Inland Port Overlay Zone.
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,
stormwater drainage
systems, water
supplies, and
wastewater and refuse
collection.
The proposal
does not
increase the
need for
improvements
beyond that
required by
existing zoning
allowances.
The proposal was reviewed by the various city
departments tasked with administering public
facilities and services. The use change of the
property will have minimal impacts, as it will
continue to operate as a hotel, but will allow some
rooms to be used as transitional housing. The
impact to city utilities and services is not anticipated
to change.
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Map Amendment
Public Notice, Meetings, Comments
The following is a list of public meetings that have been held, and other public input
opportunities, related to the proposed project:
• Early notification notices mailed out October 5, 2021
o Notices were mailed to property owners/residents within ~300 feet of the
proposal
o Two inquiries were received regarding more details on the map amendment
request.
o A revised notification was mailed out on November 3, 2021 with an updated
project area map
• The Planning Division provided a 45-day comment period notice to the associated
community councils for the property, Poplar Grove and Jordan Meadows. The
Westpointe Community Council requested that the city attend one of their meetings to
discuss the proposal.
o The Westpointe Community Council provided a letter stating concern that the
proposed map amendment would set a precedence for future map amendments.
o No letter or other input was received from the Poplar Grove or Jordan Meadows
Community Council.
• An online open house was held on the proposal from October 18th to November 30th.
Staff received two comments with concern regarding the proposal. See attached.
Notice of the public hearing for the proposal included:
• Public hearing notice mailed on December 3, 2021
• Public hearing notice posted on December 3, 2020
• Public notice posted on City and State websites and Planning Division list serve on
December 3, 2020
From:Dorothy Owen
To:Gilmore, Kristina
Subject:(EXTERNAL) Comments from Westpointe Community Council regarding: PLNPCM2021-00915 Proposed
amendment to Airport "Influence Zone" as it related to Airport Inn
Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 5:24:54 PM
Attachments:Nov 10 Westpointe CC agenda final with rev link.doc
We want to thank you and Brady Fredrickson of the Airport for attending our Nov 10th Community
Council mtg. We are sending you a copy of the agenda and minutes to include in the official file
along with the following comments. Initially, there was concern that the proposed changed
covered an area much larger than just the Airport Inn and that this would allow the development of
apartments and other facilities not compatible with the airport zoning. Furthermore, we were
concerned that such an opening, even if never used, would provide a precedent for further waivers
in other parts of the Airport’s “influence zone.” We have already witnessed the aggressive efforts of
developers of the Misty Rivers residential project to push the bounds of what is appropriate
development adjacent to an airport. Therefore, we were most pleased that others within the City
had expressed similar concerns and that the amendment had been changed to only apply to the
current Airport Inn Building.
It is critical that the final ruling on this matter include specific language clearly explaining the
unique set of circumstances that led up to this change and why this change is NOT a precedent
for other exceptions to the Airport “Influence Zone.” We ask that the final ruling provides
safeguards that protect the airport and the community from a patchwork of future holes in the
“influence zone.” Many cities have suffered this fate and are envious of our success in the past of
protecting the buffer between the community and the airport. Thank you.
Sent from Mail for Windows
From:george chapman
To:Gilmore, Kristina
Subject:(EXTERNAL) Airport Influence Zone decrease should be Citywide not for just one small lot
Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 8:43:49 PM
The other side of the Airport has the International Center which could and should have
housing to decrease the 50,000 plus employees from having to drive far to their residences and
pollute the valley more. Don't worry about the Inland Port. Worry about no housing allowed in
the International Center.
Again the City should not do onesy twosy lot changes of zoning. It should be Citywide. Didn't
Nick Norris once say that?
George Chapman SLC
From:george chapman
To:Gilmore, Kristina; Norris, Nick
Subject:(EXTERNAL) I object to a text amendment for one property in the Airport Influence Zone A
Date:Tuesday, November 2, 2021 11:04:39 AM
I believe that text amendments should be general and citywide (although I reserve the right to
object to further projects). If this property gets the text amendment, others on this side and on
the other side of the Airport, should get to use the text amendment and zoning change to
increase housing near work centers.
George Chapman SLC
The proposal is below:
The proposal includes a text amendment and zoning map amendment to remove a small area
adjacent to 2400 West and south of North Temple from the Airport Influence Zone A,
described under City Code 21A.34.040. The result would allow for residential land uses,
which are not permitted under the overlay zone.
Petition Number: PLNPCM2021-00915
Zoning District: TSA-MUEC-C
Council District: District 1
Staff Planner: Krissy Gilmore
Email: kristina.gilmore@slcgov.com
Phone Number: 385-214-9714
Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A Map Amendment
Planning Staff Note: As this map amendment does not substantially change the development
potential of the site and no immediate development has been proposed with the application,
City departments, including Building Services, Engineering, Transportation, and Public
Utilities did not provide any concerns with the map amendment.
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 445 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145487, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5487 TEL 801.535.7712 FAX 801.535.6269
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
________________________ Date Received: _________________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: February 10, 2022
Dan Dugan, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
__________________________
SUBJECT: Zoning Map Amendment at approximately 2333 W North Temple Street, Petition
PLNPCM2021-00915
STAFF CONTACT: Krissy Gilmore, Senior Planner, Kristina.Gilmore@slcgov.com, 385-535-
7780
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council follow the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to amend the zoning map to remove the property at 2333 W North Temple from the
Airport Flight Path Protection Overlay District Influence Zone A, described under City Code
21A.34.040.
BUDGET IMPACT: None.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall initiated a petition to amend the zoning map to remove
the property at 2333 W North Temple from the Airport Flight Path Protection Overlay District
Influence Zone A, described under City Code 21A.34.040. The property is currently occupied by
a commercial building, the Airport Inn, and associated parking. The desired result is to allow the
Airport Inn to operate a new model of extended-stay hotels as transitional housing to advance the
City’s overall goals related to homelessness. For specific information regarding the proposal,
please refer to the Planning Commission Staff Report.
The current hotel/motel use is permitted in the base TSA-MUEC-C zoning district and within the
Airport Influence Zone A. The longer-term goal is to be able to accept housing vouchers for
Lisa Shaffer (Feb 11, 2022 12:03 MST)02/11/2022
02/11/2022
transitional housing to provide a more
predictable and stable option for those people
transitioning out of homelessness. An
extended stay motel is not eligible to accept
vouchers. The preferred path forward indicated
by the Department of Airports is to modify the
boundary of the Airport Overlay so that it
would not apply to this property. If adopted,
the nonprofit will switch their business model
and the hotel will be considered multi-family
housing, which is a permitted use in the TSA-
MUEC-C zoning district. It would also allow
them to offer other sorts of social services
because most social services that benefit the
residents of the facility are also permitted uses
in the TSA zoning district.
The result would allow the Airport Inn to
accommodate stays greater than 30 days as
transitional housing. The zoning code does not
include a land use that directly matches this
kind of supportive housing, whether
permanent, short term, or any time frame in
between those two. Under City Code,
units/rooms that are available for rental or
lease for periods of less than one month are
considered a hotel/motel, while dwellings that
are rented for periods of longer than one
month generally fall into a residential land use
and would prohibit the Airport Inn from
operating this model of transitional housing if
under the Airport Influence Zone A.
PUBLIC PROCESS:
• The Planning Division provided a 45-day comment period notice to the associated
community councils for the property, Poplar Grove and Jordan Meadows. The Westpointe
Community Council requested that the city attend one of their meetings to discuss the
proposal.
o The Westpointe Community Council provided a letter stating concern that the
proposed map amendment would set a precedence for future map amendments.
o No letter or other input was received from the Poplar Grove or Jordan Meadows
Community Council.
• Staff sent an early notification announcement of the project to all residents and property
owners living within 300 feet of the project site providing notice about the proposal and
information on how to give public input on the project on October 5, 2021.
• An online open house was held on the proposal from October 18th to November 30th.
Planning Commission (PC) Records
PC Agenda for December 15, 2021 (Click to Access)
PC Minutes of December 15, 2021 (Click to Access)
PC Staff Report for December 15, 2021 (Click to Access Staff Report)
EXHIBITS
1. Chronology
2. Notice of City Council Hearing
3. Petition Application
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. _____ of 2022
(Amending the zoning map pertaining to a parcel located at
approximately 2333 W North Temple Street to remove the AFPP Airport Flight Path Protection
Overlay District Influence Zone A))
An ordinance amending the zoning map pertaining to parcels located at approximately
2333 W North Temple Street to amend the zoning map to remove the AFPP Airport Flight Path
Protection Overlay District Influence Zone A pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00915.
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a public hearing on December
15, 2021 to consider a request by Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall remove the AFPP
Airport Flight Path Protection Overlay District Influence Zone A from the subject parcel
pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00915; and
WHEREAS, at its date meeting, the planning commission voted in favor of forwarding a
positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council on said application; and
WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the city council has determined that
adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Amending the 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 to reflect that one (1) parcel located at approximately 2333 W North Temple
Street (Parcel ID 08-33-452-004-0000), and as more particularly described on Exhibit “A”
attached hereto, shall be and hereby are rezoned to remove the AFPP Airport Flight Path
Protection Overlay District Influence Zone A from the parcel.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
first publication.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ______________,
2022.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 2022.
Published: ______________.
Ordinance Removing Airport Influence Zone 2333 W North Temple
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date:__________________________________
By: ___________________________________
Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney
January 31, 2022
Exhibit “A”
Legal Descriptions of
Parcels to be rezoned to remove the AFPP Zone A
Parcel No. 08-33-452-004-0000
0707 BEG 183 FT E & 523.4 FT N FR S 1/4 COR SEC 33, T 1N, R 1W, S L M; N 0^02'13" W 150 FT;
N 89^58'38" E 294 FT TO CEN OF CANAL; S 0^02'13" E ALG SD CANAL 342.78 FT; S 89^58'38" W
212 FT*
1) CHRONOLOGY
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Petition: PLNPCM2021-00915
September 2, 2021 Application for a Zoning Map Amendment.
September 28, 2021 Petition PLNPCM2021-00915 was assigned to Krissy
Gilmore, Senior Planner, for staff analysis and processing.
October 5, 2021 Notice sent to Recognized Community Organizations
informing them of the petition. Early notification of the
project was also sent to property owners and residents
within 300 feet of the proposal.
October 18, 2021 The proposal was posted for an online open house through
November 30, 2021.
December 3, 2021 Planning Commission public hearing notices emailed to
interested parties and residents/property owners who
requested notice. Agenda posted to the Planning
Commission website and the State of Utah Public Notice
webpage.
December 9, 2021 Planning Commission Staff Report posted.
December 15, 2021 Planning Commission held a public hearing and made a
positive recommendation to the City Council to approve the
proposed map amendment.
2) NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2021-00915 – Mayor Erin
Mendenhall has initiated a petition to amend the zoning map to remove the property located at
approximately 2333 W North Temple from the Airport Flight Path Protection Overlay District
Influence Zone A, described under City Code 21A.34.040. The property is currently occupied by
a commercial building, the Airport Inn, and is zoned TSA-MEUC-C (Transit Station Area Mixed
Employment Center Station Core). The desired result is to allow the Airport Inn to operate a new
model of extended-stay hotels as transitional housing to advance the City's overall housing goals.
Information on this proposal can be found in the staff report prepared for the Planning
Commission accessible from this link -
http://www.slcdocs.com/Planning/Planning%20Commission/2021/12.%20December/00915.Staff
Report.pdf
As part of their study, the City Council is holding two advertised public hearings to receive
comments regarding the petition. During these hearings, anyone desiring to address the City
Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The Council may consider
adopting the ordinance on the same night of the second public hearing. The hearing will be held
electronically:
DATE: Date #1 and Date #2
TIME: 7:00 p.m.
PLACE: **This meeting will not have a physical location.
**This will be an electronic meeting pursuant to the Salt Lake City Emergency
Proclamation. If you are interested in participating in the Public Hearing, please visit our
website at https://www.slc.gov/council/ to learn how you can share your comments during
the meeting. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at
(801)535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments
received through any source are shared with the Council and added to the public record.
If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call
Krissy Gilmore at 385-535-7780 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday or via e-mail at Kristina.gilmore@slcgov.com.
People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours
in advance in order to participate in this hearing. Please make requests at least two business days
in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at
council.comments@slcgov.com , 801-535-7600, or relay service 711.
3) PETITION APPLICATION
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 406 WWW.SLC.GOV
PO BOX 145480 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5480 TEL 801-535-7757 FAX 801-535-6174
PLANNING DIVISION
DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor Erin Mendenhall
Cc: Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer; Blake Thomas, Department of Community
and Neighborhoods Director; Michaela Oktay, Deputy Planning Director; Bill Wyatt,
Executive Director Department of Airports; Brady Fredrickson, Planning Director,
Department of Airports
From: Nick Norris, Planning Director
Date: August 23, 2021
Re: Initiating a zoning amendment to amend the Airport Influence Zone Map.
The Planning Division would like to request that a zoning map amendment be initiated to update an
area of the Airport Influence Zone to support the implementation of the City’s adopted policies
related to assisting people experiencing homelessness. The Department of Airports has been
working with Planning to accommodate the development of a new model of transitional housing for
people experiencing homelessness by working with nonprofit organizations to refurbish and utilize
existing extended-stay hotels. The proposal would include amending the Airport Overlay Map to
remove a limited area from the Airport Influence Zone A. The desired result is to facilitate the
feasibility of sustaining the new model of extended-stay hotels as transitional housing, work within
the existing coordinated-entry program, and create the ability for operators of such extended-stay
hotels the ability to utilize additional funding to advance the City’s overall goals related to
homelessness. The facility will still meet all current sound attenuation requirements.
The process will include an engagement process recommended by Planning and led by the
Department of Airports, which will include the community and other interested parties. The
Planning Division will help coordinate outreach through the city’s Recognized Organizations. After
the proposal is vetted through the engagement process, the proposal will be presented to the
Planning Commission for a public hearing and transmitted to the City Council. The anticipated
timeline is approximately 60 days for the public engagement process and 30 days for the Planning
Commission. The timeline is subject to available workloads of staff participating on the project,
planning commission agenda process, and if any unforeseen issues arise as part of the engagement
process.
The proposal includes a text amendment and zoning map amendment to remove a small area
adjacent to 2400 West and south of North Temple from the Airport Influence Zone A, described
under City Code 21A.34.040 and as depicted in in the maps attached.
This memo includes a signature block to initiate the petition if that is the decided course of action. If
the decided course of action is to not initiate the application, the signature block should remain
l Page 2
blank. Please notify the Planning Division when the memo is signed or if the decision is made to not
initiate the petition.
Please contact me at ext. 6173 or nick.norris@slcgov.com if you have any questions. Thank you.
Concurrence to initiate the zoning text and map amendment petition as noted above.
_____________________________________ ______________
Erin Mendenhall, Mayor Date
09/02/2021
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM:Brian Fullmer, Policy Analyst
DATE:March 1, 2022
RE: STREET VACATION AT 601 SOUTH 900 EAST
(PLNPCM2021-00614)
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will be briefed about a proposal to vacate the public right-of-way between the sidewalk and property
line at 601 South 900 East. The subject parcel is on the southeast corner of 600 South and 900 East. The
property in question is a strip approximately 5.5’ wide which runs along the 120-foot 600 South side, and 50-
foot 900 East side of the parcel (approximately 985 square feet total) as shown in the image below. If approved
by the City Council, the property would be sold to the homeowners at market value (amount TBD). It should be
noted no physical changes to the sidewalk or street are included in this proposal. Pedestrian and vehicular traffic
on the sidewalk and streets would not be impacted if the property is vacated and sold.
Owners of the subject parcel received notice from City Civil Enforcement stating their fence encroaches on the
public right-of-way. Three options were presented to resolve the encroachment:
Remove the fence
Enter a lease with the City for the area
Apply for a vacation of the subject property and purchase if approved by the City Council
The property owners opted to pursue purchasing the property being encroached upon. A wood fence on the
north property line is in poor condition and needs to be replaced. The owners are unable to do so until the
encroachment is resolved.
It is Planning staff’s belief if the proposed street vacation is approved by the Council, vacating the section of
right-of-way would likely create an irregular right-of-way pattern on both block faces. In other words, the subject
property lines would approximately 5.5 feet closer to the sidewalks compared to other properties on the block.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: March 1, 2022
Set Date: March 1, 2022
Public Hearing: March 22, 2022
Potential Action: April 5, 2022
Page | 2
In the department review process, Engineering expressed opposition to the proposed street vacation because
they believe it would not be in the City’s best interest to set a precedent of vacating rights-of-way “to match fence
lines or backs of sidewalk.”
The Planning Commission reviewed this at its December 15, 2021 meeting. The applicant spoke saying he
believes a survey error was made many years ago resulting in the lot lines approximately six feet from the
sidewalk. No one spoke at the Planning Commission public hearing. Planning staff recommended and the
Planning Commission voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council.
Aerial view of subject parcel outlined in red, and encroachment area shaded in yellow.
(Note: map is for informational purposes and is not exact. Property lines and aerial images do not align precisely.)
Image courtesy Salt Lake City Planning Division
Goal of the briefing: To review the proposed street closure, address questions Council Members may
have and prepare for a public hearing.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. The Council may wish to ask the Administration if other properties on the block have similar
encroachments. The Council may also wish to ask planning if this would create an uneven block face
appearance and if that would be counter to general City urban design goals.
2. Is the Council supportive of closing and vacating the subject property?
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Planning staff identified four key considerations during analysis of this proposal. They are summarized below.
Please refer to pages 3-4 of the Administration’s Planning Commission staff report for the full analysis.
Consideration 1-Utah State Code
Section 10-9a-609.5 Utah State Code Annotated (included on pages 4-5 of this report) allows municipal
Page | 3
legislative bodies to vacate streets. The Council must determine good cause exists for the vacation, and neither
public interest nor any person will be materially injured by the vacation. Planning staff found the proposed
vacation would not be detrimental to the public interest, especially since the City would be compensated for the
property.
Consideration 2-City Council Policies
Planning staff found the proposed street vacation meets City Council policies for street vacations discussed in
Consideration 4 below.
Consideration 3-Master Plan Considerations
Planning staff determined the proposed street vacation is not in conflict with the Central Community Master
Plan, Salt Lake City Urban Design Element, or Major Street Plan. They found the proposed street closure does
not have a stated public benefit, but the property is not needed for a public purpose and the City will benefit
from selling the land, the proceeds of which would go to the General Fund.
Consideration 4-Street Design Standards
Planning staff found the proposed street vacation does not violate the City’s street design standards found in
section 20.12 of the City’s Subdivision Ordinance. However, they noted the yet-to-be-adopted update to the
Streets and Intersection Typologies Design Guide may impact future street vacation requests.
Attachment D to the Administration’s Planning Commission staff report (pages 13-14) is an analysis of factors
related to the City’s street closure policy. A summary is provided below. For the complete analysis, please refer
to the Planning Commission staff report.
It is the policy of the City Council to close public streets and sell the underlying property.
The Council does not close streets when the action would deny all access to other
property.
o Finding: The proposed vacation would not deny vehicular or pedestrian access to any adjacent
properties.
The general policy when closing a street is to obtain fair market value for the land,
whether the abutting property is residential, commercial or industrial.
o Finding: The City would give up ownership of this property and obtain fair market value for
the sale of the right-of-way to the abutting property owners.
There should be sufficient public policy reason that justify the sale and/or closure of a
public street and it should be sufficiently demonstrated by the applicant that the sale
and/or closure of the street will accomplish the stated public policy reasons.
o Finding: The proposed right-of-way vacation does not conflict with the Central City Master
Plan but does not result in a direct public benefit as outlined in the Salt Lake City Urban Design
Element. However, the Administration stated the property isn’t needed for a public purpose and
the City would benefit from the land sale, with proceeds going to the General Fund.
The City Council should determine whether the stated public policy reasons outweigh
alternatives to the closure of the street.
o Finding: Alternatives to the requested vacation maintain City ownership of the 985 square foot
portion of public right-of-way and require the applicant to enter into a lease agreement for the
encroachment or relocate the fence and re-landscape the park strip. From a Planning
perspective, staff finds that the right-of-way is wider than what is needed for the relevant street
design standard. Aerial imagery shows that the improvements have encroached unto the public
right-of-way for at least 15 years. The City now has an opportunity to benefit financially from
this occupation.
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
June 11, 2021-Petition submitted.
July 1, 2021-Petition assigned to Aaron Barlow, Principal Planner.
Page | 4
October 7, 2021-notice of the petition and request for review was provided to the East Central
Community Council Chair. The Chair shared the request with the Council and indicated they are in favor
of Planning staff’s recommendation.
October 7, 2021-Letters were mailed to property owners and residents within a 300’ radius of the site.
December 3, 2021-Planning Commission public hearing notices mailed. Notice posted on City and State
websites and emailed to the Planning Division listserv. Public hearing notice posted at the subject
property.
December 8, 2021-Planning staff report sent to Planning Commission.
December 15, 2021-The Planning Commission was briefed on the proposal and a public hearing was
held. No public comments were provided at the hearing and the Commission voted unanimously to
forward a positive recommendation for the proposed street closure.
January 27, 2022-Draft ordinance sent to Attorney’s Office.
February 11, 2022-Transmitted to City Council Office.
STREET CLOSURE PROCESS
Street closure process is dictated by Section 10-9a-609.5 Utah State Code which is included below for reference.
10-9a-609.5. Petition to vacate a public street.
(1)In lieu of vacating some or all of a public street through a plat or amended plat in accordance with
Sections 10-9a-603 through 10-9a-609, a legislative body may approve a petition to vacate a public street in
accordance with this section.
(2)A petition to vacate some or all of a public street or municipal utility easement shall include:
(a)the name and address of each owner of record of land that is:
(i)adjacent to the public street or municipal utility easement between the two nearest public street
intersections; or
(ii)accessed exclusively by or within 300 feet of the public street or municipal utility easement;
(b)proof of written notice to operators of utilities located within the bounds of the public street or
municipal utility easement sought to be vacated; and
(c)the signature of each owner under Subsection (2)(a) who consents to the vacation.
(3)If a petition is submitted containing a request to vacate some or all of a public street or municipal utility
easement, the legislative body shall hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 10-9a-208 and
determine whether:
(a)good cause exists for the vacation; and
(b)the public interest or any person will be materially injured by the proposed vacation.
(4)The legislative body may adopt an ordinance granting a petition to vacate some or all of a public street or
municipal utility easement if the legislative body finds that:
(a)good cause exists for the vacation; and
(b)neither the public interest nor any person will be materially injured by the vacation.
(5)If the legislative body adopts an ordinance vacating some or all of a public street or municipal utility
easement, the legislative body shall ensure that one or both of the following is recorded in the office of the
recorder of the county in which the land is located:
(a)a plat reflecting the vacation; or
(b)(i)an ordinance described in Subsection (4); and
(ii)a legal description of the public street to be vacated.
(6)The action of the legislative body vacating some or all of a public street or municipal utility easement that
has been dedicated to public use:
(a)operates to the extent to which it is vacated, upon the effective date of the recorded plat or ordinance, as
a revocation of the acceptance of and the relinquishment of the municipality's fee in the vacated public
street or municipal utility easement; and
(b)may not be construed to impair:
(i)any right-of-way or easement of any lot owner; or
Page | 5
(ii)the rights of any public utility.
(7)(a)A municipality may submit a petition, in accordance with Subsection (2), and initiate and complete a
process to vacate some or all of a public street.
(b)If a municipality submits a petition and initiates a process under Subsection (7)(a):
(i)the legislative body shall hold a public hearing;
(ii)the petition and process may not apply to or affect a public utility easement, except to the extent:
(A)the easement is not a protected utility easement as defined in Section 54-3-27;
(B)the easement is included within the public street; and
(C)the notice to vacate the public street also contains a notice to vacate the easement; and
(iii)a recorded ordinance to vacate a public street has the same legal effect as vacating a public street
through a recorded plat or amended plat.
CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING // MARCH 1, 2022
PARTIAL STREET VACATION:601 SOUTH 900 EAST
PLNPCM2021-00614
A request for Salt Lake City to
vacate (give up public ownership)
and sell the portion of public right-
of-way between the subject
property and the sidewalk.
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission provided
a positive recommendation.
REQUEST
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
900 EAST
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
600 SOUTH
Aaron Barlow // Principal Planner
aaron.barlow@slcgov.com
PLNPCM2021-00614 December 15, 2021
PLANNING DIVISION
DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS
Staff Report
To: Salt Lake City Planning Commission
From: Aaron Barlow, Principal Planner, aaron.barlow@slcgov.com, 385-386-2764
Date: December 15, 2021
Re: PLNPCM2021-00614 – Partial Street Vacation at 601 South 900 East
STREET VACATION
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 601 South 900 East
MASTER PLAN: Central Community
ZONING DISTRICT: R-2 Single- and Two-Family Residential
COUNCIL DISTRICT: District 4, Analia Valdemoros
REQUEST:
On behalf of the owners of 601 South 900 East, Justin Matkin of Parr Brown Gee & Loveless has
requested Salt Lake City vacate (or give up public ownership of) the 875 square-foot portion of public
right-of-way along 600 South and 900 east that sits between the public sidewalk and the subject
property.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the information in this staff report, Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
forwards a favorable recommendation to the City Council for the request to vacate this portion of right-of-
way adjacent to 601 South 900 East.
ATTACHMENTS:
A.Maps & Illustrations
B.Site Visit Photographs
C.Application Materials
D.Analysis of Standards
E.Public Process and Comments
F.Department Review Comments
1
PLNPCM2021-00614 December 15, 2021
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Background
According to the letter submitted by the applicant (included with Attachment C), the owners of the subject
property (Michael and Amy Kennedy) received a letter from the Civil Enforcement Division asserting that
the fence in the front yard encroached on the public right-of-way. In that letter, the enforcement official
provided them with three possible options that would resolve the encroachment:
1.Remove the fence,
2.Enter into a lease with the City for the area, or
3.Apply for a vacation of the relevant portion and purchase the encroached area.
The property owners have directed the applicant to pursue the third option and work toward purchasing the
area of encroachment. According to the applicant, the fence in question “has been in place for several years.”
The wood fence along the north property line is currently in disrepair and needs to be replaced. According
to the applicant, the property owners cannot make the necessary repairs until they own the encroachment
area.
Scope of Request
The area in question is an L-shaped strip of public right-of-way between the subject property at 601 South
900 East and the existing public sidewalk. This request would not impact the adjacent sidewalk. The
encroachment area is about five feet wide and runs along the 120-foot long north property line facing 600
South and the 50-foot long property line that faces 900 East (see Attachment A). According to the applicant,
the encroaching fence has been in the same location for over 30 years. Aerial Imagery and Google Street
View both confirm that the fence has been at its current location since at least 2006. If approved by Council,
the abutting property owners would be required to pay fair market value for the land. The Real Estate
Services Division requires that the applicant get an appraisal for the area in question before the sale.
Street Context
600 South
The subject property sits at the corner of 600 South and 900 East. East of 900 East, 600 South is classified
as a Local Street by the Transportation Master Plan’s Major Street Plan (Included with Attachment A). The
right-of-way is approximately 132 feet wide, measured from front property line to front property line—the
street itself (curb to curb) is about 50 feet wide. There are wide park strips with continuous sidewalks on
both sides of the road; both sides are over 30 feet wide. Neither the subject property nor the 600 East right-
of-way is part of a subdivision.
900 East
The Transportation Master Plan’s Major Street Plan classifies 900 East as a City Arterial Street. There are
three lanes of traffic, one in each direction with a center turning lane. The right-of-way is approximately 135
feet wide, measured from property line to property line, while the street itself (curb to curb)is 50 feet wide.
Wide park strips with continuous sidewalks are also a feature of 900 East—there is 45 feet between the
subject property’s front line and the curb. The street is also not part of any subdivision.
Applicable Review Processes and Standards
Review Process: Street Vacation
Street Vacation requests are ultimately up to the City Council’s discretion and are not controlled by any one
standard. If approved by the City Council, the area in question would be vacated, declared surplus property,
and sold to the adjacent property owners for a fair market value.
2
PLNPCM2021-00614 December 15, 2021
KEY CONSIDERATIONS:
The key considerations and concerns below have been identified through the analysis of the project, neighbor
& community input, and department reviews:
1. Utah State Code
2. City Council Policies
3. Master Plan Considerations
4. Street Design Standards
Consideration 1 – Utah State Code
Section 10-9a-609.5 of the Utah Code Annotated establishes the power for cities to vacate streets upon the
request of the governing body or a property owner. The City Council must determine that good cause exists
for the vacation, and neither the public interest nor any person will be materially injured by the vacation.
Aerial imagery shows that encroachments consisting of accessory structures and fencing have existed in this
portion of right-of-way since at least 2006. The fence in question has been in place for at least 15 years. Staff
finds that a transfer to private ownership would not be detrimental to the public interest, especially since it
would result in the adjacent property owners compensating the City for the property at market rate.
Consideration 2 – Housing Goals
In 1999, the City Council adopted a street closure policy, which applies to street vacations. A complete
analysis can be found in Attachment D.
Consideration 3 – Master Plan Considerations
The Central Community Master Plan (2005) does not include any specific policies or action items related
to street vacations or the sale of City-owned property to private property owners. Staff finds that the street
vacation request neither supports nor violates any policy or goal found in the Central Community Master
Plan.
The Salt Lake City Urban Design Element (1990) includes a section titled Street as Elements of Open Space,
with a Policy Concept that states, “Decline to vacate streets, alleys, and other public rights-of-way unless it
is demonstrated that the vacation will result in a public benefit.” Though this proposal does not violate public
policies, it does not have a stated public benefit. However, the property isn’t needed for a public purpose,
and the City would benefit financially from the sale of the land—proceeds would be placed in the General
Fund.
The Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan’s Major Street Plan (2018) designates 900 East as an
Arterial Street. While the master plan does not give specific dimensions, it does describe these streets as
“generally multi-lane streets carrying high traffic volumes at relatively high speeds.” The area in question
sits between the existing sidewalk and the subject property. Vacating it will not impact the stated purpose of
arterial streets.
Consideration 4 – Street Design Standards
Section 20.12 of the City’s Subdivision Ordinance provides design standards for new City streets and
modifications of City streets through vacation or closure. The Street Design standards (found in 20.12.030)
require that streets conform to street and right-of-way cross-section typologies (20.12.030.A.2). These
typologies are found in the Street Design Regulations (included with Attachment A). For arterial streets,
they call for a street section between 84 and 110 feet wide from the outside of the sidewalk on each end, and
for local streets serving single-family residential neighborhoods, they call for a 50-foot-wide street section
(see illustration on the next page). However, the portion of the right-of-way on the property side of a
3
PLNPCM2021-00614 December 15, 2021
sidewalk is not included in the cross-sections.
Therefore, because the encroachment area is not
within the cross-section typology of an arterial street,
it does not violate the City’s street design standards in
section 20.12.130 of the Salt Lake City Subdivision
Ordinance.
The Planning Commission should be aware that the
Transportation Division is currently updating the
Streets and Intersection Typologies Design Guide,
which may impact future street vacation requests.
However, they have not yet been adopted.
DISCUSSION:
Planning Staff has reviewed the proposal against Utah State Code, the City Council policies regarding street
closures (Attachment D), applicable city master plans, and design guidelines. Based on this analysis, Staff
finds that although no public policies would be explicitly accomplished with the requested partial street
vacation, it also would not violate any public policies or design standards. Further, the City will benefit
financially from the property sale to the adjacent property owners.
NEXT STEPS:
Once the Planning Commission has reviewed the request, their recommendation is forwarded to the City
Council for consideration. The City Council has final decision authority regarding street vacations and
closures.
4
PLNPCM2021-00614 December 15, 2021
ATTACHMENT A – MAPS & ILLUSTRATIONS
*Map is for informational use only and is not exact. Property lines and aerial
photography do not line up perfectly. The official Survey can be found in
Attachment C.
*
5
Aerial from Google Earth dated 12/2006
Street View from Google Maps dated 7/2007
6
5'
walk
5
1/2'
5'
walk
4
1/2'
5'
walk
5'
walk
3
1/2'
9'
11'
4'
walk
5
1/2'
5
1/2'
11'
5'
walk
5
1/2'
11'
4'
walk
5
1/2'
5'
walk
11'
4'
walk
4
1/2'
10'
4'
walk
4
1/2'
10'
4'
walk
4
1/2'
10'
4
1/2'
4'
walk
10'
5'
walk
9'
pking3
1/2'pking
5
1/2'
9'
5'
walkmedian3
1/2'
3
1/2'or pkingpking or
9'
or pkingpking or
11'11'
110' R/W
5'
walk
1'
56' R/W
5'
walk
5'
walkpking2
1/2'
8'8'
pking
pkingpking1'
66' R/W
pkingpking
10'10'
4
1/2'
5'
walk
84' R/W
1'10'
50' R/W
Major Arterial
(Continuous Left
Turn Version)
Major Arterial
(Raised Median Version)
Minor Arterial
(No Parking Version)
Minor Arterial
(Parking Version)
Multi-Family Local
Residential Collector
Commercial/Industrial Local
Commercial/Industrial/Bus Collector
Industrial Cul-De-Sac
Local Residential
Multi-Family Cul-De-Sac
Single Family Cul-De-Sac
10'10'
10' 12'
12'16'
12'
12'14'
10'
14'
14'
14'
14'12'
12'
12'
30'
36'
40'
44'
48'
10'
64'
12'
88'
92'
16'
12'
12'
16'
12'
12'
11'
12'
12'12'
12'
11'
14'
12'
10'
12'
11' 11' 10'
12'
Date Revisions
8/12/91 changed layout/assigned #
Section E1.a1Standard
Typical Street & R/W Cross Sections
page 1 of1
of the Division of Transportation
Salt Lake City Community Developmentslctrans.comSaltLakeCityDivisionofTransportati
o
nslctrans.com
Salt Lake C i t y ,Ut ah
7
Closed
Pioneer Landfill
Landfill
City/County
Landfill
Closed
North Temple
Landfill
§¨¦I-15
§¨¦I-80
§¨¦I-80
§¨¦I-215
1000 NLega
cy
H
ighw
a
y
1820 S
700 S7200 W7600 W8000 W700 N
1200 N
1400 N
1700 N
8400 W6600 W500 N
Rail Intermodal Facility (Under Consideration)
µ
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
DIVISION OF TRANSPORTATION
349 SOUTH 200 EAST, SUITE 150Approved November 13, 2018
SALT LAKE CITY TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN
MAJOR STREET PLAN: ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION
Legend
PROPOSED ARTERIAL STREETS
PROPOSED COLLECTOR STREETS
PROPOSED FREEWAY/INTERCHANGE
PROPOSED MOUNTAIN VIEW CORRIDOR OPTION
LOCAL STREETS:Local streets provide direct access to and from abutting property. Local streets are usually one lane
in each direction meant to carry traffic over short distances and at low speeds.
FREEWAYS/EXPRESSWAYS- STATE ROUTESA roadway which typicall has higher speeds, medians, grade separations at all railroads and grade
separations or interchanges at selected crossroads. Freeways are intended to provide high levels
of safety and efficiency in moving high volumes of traffic at high speeds.
COLLECTOR STREETS:Collector streets provide the connection between Arterial and Local streets. Collectors can be Multi-
Lane, but are meant to carry less traffic at lower speeds and for shorter distances than Arterials.
They provide direct access to abutting property and carry a mix of local traffic and commuter traffic
headed for nearby destinations.
ARTERIALS: CITY STREETSArterial Streets facilitate through traffic movement over relatively long distances such as from one end
of the city to the other and from neighborhood to neighborhood. Arterials are generally Multi-Lane
streets carrying high traffic volumes at relatively high speed limits. These are commuter streets and
typically offer controlled access to abutting property.
ARTERIALS: STATE ROUTESThese are State Highways operated and maintained by the Utah Department of Transportation.
Routes typically operate as Arterial streets.
City Limits
Light Rail
Railroad
PROPOSED STATE ROUTES
Note: This street network will be followed if theRail Intermodal Facility is not developed by December 31, 2028.
8
PLNPCM2021-00614 December 15, 2021
ATTACHMENT B – SITE VISIT PHOTOGRAPHS
9
PLNPCM2021-00614 December 15, 2021
10
PLNPCM2021-00614 December 15, 2021
11
PLNPCM2021-00614 December 15, 2021
ATTACHMENT C – APPLICATION MATERIALS
12
PLNPCM2021-00614 December 15, 2021
ATTACHMENT D – ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS
Salt Lake City Council Street Closure Policy
In 1999, the City Council adopted a street closure policy that includes the following provisions:
1. It is the policy of the City Council to close public streets and sell the underlying
property. The Council does not close streets when the action would deny all access
to other property.
Analysis: The portion of right-of-way that the applicant has requested the City vacate does not
contain any vehicular or pedestrian right-of-way—it is a strip of land between the sidewalk and
the subject property. The existing fence has been at this location for at least 15 years.
Finding: The proposed vacation would not deny vehicular or pedestrian access to any adjacent
properties.
2. The general policy when closing a street is to obtain fair market value for the land,
whether the abutting property is residential, commercial, or industrial.
Analysis: If approved by the City Council, approximately 875 square feet of right-of-way would
be declared surplus and sold at a fair market value to the property owners.
Finding: The City would give up ownership of this property and obtain fair market value for the
sale of the right-of-way to the abutting property owners.
3. There should be sufficient public policy reasons that justify the sale and/or closure
of a public street and it should be sufficiently demonstrated by the applicant that
the sale and/or closure of the street will accomplish the stated public policy
reasons.
Analysis: As outlined in the ‘Key Considerations’ section above, the Central Community Master
Plan (2005) does not include any specific policy direction for the vacation of City-owned rights-
of-way. Staff finds that this request does not violate this master plan.
The Salt Lake City Urban Design Element (1990) indicates that the City should decline to vacate
rights-of-way unless it results in a public benefit. While there is no apparent direct public benefit,
the City would benefit financially from the property sale to the adjacent property owners.
Finding: The proposed right-of-way vacation does not conflict with the Central City Master
Plan but does not result in a direct public benefit per the Salt Lake City Urban Design Element.
However, the property isn’t needed for a public purpose, and the City would benefit from the
sale of the land, with proceeds going into the General Fund.
4. The City Council should determine whether the stated public policy reasons
outweigh alternatives to the closure of the street.
Analysis: As an alternative to the proposal, the City and property owners could enter into a
lease agreement for the land occupied by the fencing and landscaping. All maintenance of the
subject property would be by the lessee (the adjacent property owners) subject to required
permits for any work. In exchange for the exclusive use of the subject property, the lessee would
be required to pay annual rent based on fair market value.
A second alternative is for the property owners to remove the fencing and landscaping from the
public right-of-way. This would involve relocating the fence so that it is entirely on private
property and landscaping the park strip in a way that complies with the Zoning Ordinance.
13
PLNPCM2021-00614 December 15, 2021
Finding: Alternatives to the requested vacation maintain City ownership of the 875-square-foot
portion of public right-of-way and require the property owners to either enter into a lease
agreement for the encroachment or relocate the fence and re-landscape the park strip. From a
Planning perspective, Staff finds that the right-of-way is wider than what is needed for the
relevant street design standard. Aerial imagery shows that the improvements have encroached
into the public right-of-way for at least 15 years. The City now has an opportunity to benefit
financially from this occupation.
14
PLNPCM2021-00614 December 15, 2021
ATTACHMENT E – PUBLIC PROCESS
Public Notice & Comments:
October 7, 2021 – Notice of the project was provided to the East Central Community Council Chair. The
Chair shared the request with the Council and has indicated that they are in favor of Planning Staff’s
recommendation. Letters were also mailed to property owners and residents within a 300-foot radius of the
site.
December 3, 2021 – Public hearing notices were mailed for the Planning Commission meeting. Notice was
also posted on City & State websites and emailed to the Planning Division listserv.
December 3, 2021 – A public hearing notice sign was posted at the subject property.
At the time that this report was published, Planning Staff has received two comments regarding this
proposal; they are included with this attachment. If any more are submitted after this date, they will be
forwarded to the Commission and included in the public record.
15
1
Barlow, Aaron
From:Mike Egan
Sent:Tuesday, November 2, 2021 4:35 PM
To:Barlow, Aaron
Subject:(EXTERNAL) Street vacation at 601 south
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Hi,
I received the notice of street vacation at 601 south 900 east slc ut 84102. The applicant property lines on the map are
into my property at 609 south 900 east by at least three to four feet and include part of my front yard, backyard, parking
area and house. This is incorrect. Also this map shows part of my part property as requested area to be vacated. Also
incorrect. There is a fence that runs on the north side of my property at 609 south and the south side of 601. This
should represent the property line since that fence has been there for over 50 years. I want to confirm the approximate
area requested to be vacated is only in front of 601 so 900 east and north of the fence line that runs between 601 and
609 south 900 east making the north/south boundary.
Thanks!
‐‐
Michael Egan
The One Group Utah
Keller Williams SLC
M m m
Each Keller Williams office is an independently owned and operated franchise of Keller Williams
Realty International and is an Equal Opportunity Employer and supports the Fair Housing Act.
All information provided, is obtained from various sources and has not been, and will not be,
verified by broker or MLS. All information should be independently reviewed and verified for
accuracy. WARNING – FRAUDULENT FUNDING INSTRUCTIONS
Online banking fraud is on the rise. If you receive an email containing WIRE TRANSFER
INSTRUCTIONS call your Realtor or the title company who's contact information you know
is reliable immediately to verify the information prior to sending funds.
1
Barlow, Aaron
From:
Sent:Thursday, December 2, 2021 5:47 PM
To:Barlow, Aaron
Subject:(EXTERNAL) 601 s 900 east
i have contacted the housing enforcement to ascertain if too could build a retaining wall like the one locat
ed at the above address. Housing enforcement has indicated i may not
and that this property
is under enforcement and has no knowledge of the above action although i saw it in a previous email.
housing enforcement that noone may build anything on parking strips due to the utility right away etc
what is the story
i own the property directly across the street on the north west corner of 600 south and 900 east
i attempted to scroll through old emails from planning but could not find the notice .
thanks
carolwicks aka blakely summerfield
PLNPCM2021-00614 December 15, 2021
ATTACHMENT F – DEPARTMENT REVIEW
Real Estate Services
The only comment RES has is the fee. Since this process takes a while to complete, we will be selling the
land at current market value at the time of disposition
Public Utilities
Public Utilities has no concerns with vacating the 875-square-foot area described in this staff report.
Fire/Building (James McCormack at james.mccormack@slcgov.com or 801-535-76605)
No comments received.
Transportation (Michael Barry at michael.barry@slcgov.com or 801-535-7147)
No comments received.
Engineering
Engineering opposes the vacation of public rights-of-way.
16
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
________________________ Date Received: _________________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: February 10, 2022
Dan Dugan, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
__________________________
SUBJECT: PLNPCM2021-00614 – Street Vacation at 601 South 900 East
STAFF CONTACT: Aaron Barlow, Principal Planner
aaron.barlow@slcgov.com or 801-535-6182
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council
approve the ordinance to Vacate the described portion of public street that sits in front of the
property located at approximately 601 South 900 East.
BUDGET IMPACT: If the ordinance is approved, the area in question would be sold to the
applicant at fair-market value, negotiated by the Real Estate Services Division.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On behalf of the owners of 601 South 900 East, Justin Matkin of Parr Brown Gee & Loveless has
submitted a request for Salt Lake City to vacate (or give up public ownership of) an approximately
875 square-foot portion of public right-of-way along 600 South and 900 east that sits between the
public sidewalk and the subject property.
The area in question is an L-shaped strip of public right-of-way between the property at 601 South
900 East and the existing public sidewalk. This request would not impact the adjacent sidewalk.
The encroachment area is about five and a half feet wide and runs along the 120-foot-long north
property line facing 600 South and the 50-foot-long property line that faces 900 East. According
to the letter submitted by the applicant (included with staff’s report to the Planning Commission),
the owners of the subject property (Michael and Amy Kennedy) received a letter from the Civil
Enforcement Division asserting that the fence in the front yard encroached on the public right-of-
Lisa Shaffer (Feb 11, 2022 12:03 MST)02/11/2022
02/11/2022
Page 2 of 3
way. In that letter, the enforcement official provided them with three possible options that would
resolve the encroachment:
1. Remove the fence,
2. Enter into a lease with the City for the area, or
3. Apply for a vacation of the relevant portion and purchase the encroached area.
The property owners have directed the applicant to pursue the third option and work toward
purchasing the area of encroachment. According to the applicant, the fence in question “has been
in place for several years.” The wood fence along the north property line is currently in disrepair
and needs to be replaced. According to the applicant, the property owners cannot make the
necessary repairs until they own the encroachment area.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 15, 2021, and voted unanimously
to send a favorable recommendation to the City Council regarding this request. Street Vacations
are ultimately up to the City Council’s discretion and are not controlled by any single standard.
However, in 1999, the City Council adopted a street closure policy that staff and the Planning
Commission considered when determining their recommendations. If the City Council approves
this Street Vacation petition, the area in question would be vacated, declared surplus property, and
sold to the adjacent property owners for a fair market value.
Page 3 of 3
PUBLIC PROCESS:
• Staff sent an early notification of the project to all residents and property owners located
within 300 feet of 601 South 900 East on October 7, 2021.
• Notice was also sent to the East Central Community Council Chair on October 7, 2021. Staff
did not receive an official letter, but the Chair indicated via phone that the Community Council
was supportive of Staff’s recommendation.
• Staff received three public comments. Two are included with staff’s report for the Planning
Commission. The other was received after the report was published and is included with
Exhibit 5.
• A public hearing notice was posted on City & State websites and mailed to all residents and
property owners on December 3, 2021.
• A notice sign for the public hearing was also posted at 601 South 900 East on December 3,
2021.
• The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing for this request on December 15, 2021. By
a vote of 7-0, they forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council for the proposed
Partial Street Vacation.
PLANNING COMMISSION (PC) RECORDS
a) PC Agenda of December 15, 2021 (Click to Access)
b) PC Minutes of December 15, 2021 (Click to Access)
c) Planning Commission Staff Report of December 15, 2021 (Click to Access Report)
EXHIBITS:
1) Project Chronology
2) Notice of City Council Public Hearing
3) Original Petition
4) Comments not included with PC Staff Report
5) Mailing List
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ________ of 20___
(Partial street vacation of the public right-of-way on
600 South and 900 East adjacent to the property located at 601 South 900 East)
An ordinance partially vacating the public right of way on 600 South Street and on 900
East Street adjacent to the corner property located at 601 South 900 East pursuant to Petition No.
PLNPCM2021-00614.
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a public hearing on December
15, 2021, to consider a request made by Justin P. Matkins (the “Applicant”) (Petition No.
PLNPCM2021-00413) on behalf of the adjacent parcel property owners, Michael P. and Amy
Kennedy (the “Owners”), to partially vacate a portion of 600 South Street and a portion of 900
East Street where they border the Owners’ property located at 601 South 900 East; and
WHEREAS, at its December 15, 2021, hearing, the planning commission voted in favor
of forwarding a positive recommendation on said petition to the Salt Lake City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council (the “city council”) held a legally notified public
hearing as per section 10-9a-208 of the Utah Code on _____________;
WHEREAS, the city council finds after holding a public hearing on this matter, that the
city’s interest in the portion of city-owned public right-of-way more particularly described on
“Exhibit A,” attached hereto and incorporated by reference, is not presently necessary for use by
the public.
WHEREAS, the city council finds that there is good cause for the vacation of the alley
and neither the public interest nor any person will be materially injured by the proposed
vacation; and
WHEREAS, the city council finds that the vacation of the alley upon the conditions set
forth herein are in the best interest of Salt Lake City.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Vacating City-Owned Right-of-Way. That a portion of 600 South Street
and a portion of 900 East Street adjacent to the property located at 601 South 900 East, which is
the subject of Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00614, and which is more particularly described in
Exhibit “A” attached hereto, hereby is, vacated.
SECTION 2. Reservations and Disclaimers. The vacation is expressly made subject to
all existing rights-of-way and easements of all public utilities of any and every description now
located on and under or over the confines of this property, and also subject to the rights of entry
thereon for the purposes of maintaining, altering, repairing, removing or rerouting said utilities,
including the city’s water and sewer facilities. Said vacation is also subject to any existing
rights-of-way or easements of private third parties.
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
first publication and shall be recorded with the Salt Lake County Recorder.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this ________ day of ___________, 20___.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 20___
Published: ______________.
EXHIBIT “A”
Legal description of property to be vacated on 600 South Street and on 900 East Street adjacent
to a corner property located at 601 South 900 East:
A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATE IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 5,
TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 1 EAST, SALT LAKE BASE AND MERIDIAN, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 5, PLAT B, SALT LAKE
CITY SURVEY SAID POINT BEING SOUTH 0°01’05” EAST 68.36 FEET AND EAST 69.89
FEET FROM A STREET MONUMENT AT THE INTERSECTION OF 600 SOUTH STREET
AND 900 EAST STREET AND RUNNING;
THENCE SOUTH 0°00’56” EAST 48.30 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF 900
EAST STREET TO AN EXISTING EAST/WEST FENCE LINE;
THENCE SOUTH 89°46’24” WEST 5.86 FEET ALONG SAID EAST/WEST FENCE
LINE TO AN EXISTING NORTH/SOUTH FENCE LINE;
THENCE NORTH 0°07’26” WEST 22.91 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH/SOUTH
FENCE LINE;
THENCE NORTH 0°53’24” EAST 30.77 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH/SOUTH
FENCE LINE TO AN EXISTING EASTERLY RUNNING FENCE LINE;
THENCE NORTH 89°48’08” EAST 127.42 FEET ALONG AND BEYOND SAID
EASTERLY RUNNING FENCE LINE;
THENCE SOUTH 0°00’56” EAST 5.71 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF 600 SOUTH
STREET;
THENCE SOUTH 89°57’31” WEST 122.00 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF
SAID 600 SOUTH STREET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINS 985 SQUARE FEET. 0.023 ACRES.
THENCE N00⁰10’33”E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF BLOCK 2 A DISTANCE OF 11.00
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINS 0.18 ACRES.
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date:__________________________________
By: ___________________________________
Hannah Vickery, Senior City Attorney
2/3/2022
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
3. ORIGINAL PETITION
4. COMMENTS NOT INCLUDED WITH PC STAFF REPORT
5. MAILING LIST
1. CHRONOLOGY
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Petition: PLNPCM2021-00614 – Street Vacation at 601 South 900 East
June 11, 2021 Petition for Alley Vacation received by the Planning Division.
July 1, 2021 Petition assigned to Aaron Barlow, Principal Planner, for staff analysis and processing.
October 8, 2021 Notice of the project and request for comments sent to the Chairs of the East Liberty
Neighborhood Organization and the Wasatch Hollow Community Council. Notice was
also sent to owners and occupants of properties within 300 feet of the project.
December 2, 2021 Public Hearing Notice posted on City and State websites and sent via the Planning
listserv for the July 28, 2021, Planning Commission meeting. Public hearing notice
mailed to owners and tenants of property within 300 feet of the alley.
December 3, 2021 Public hearing notice sign with project information posted at the right-of-way in front of
601 South 900 East.
December 15, 2021 Planning Commission reviewed the petition and conducted a public hearing. The
Commission then voted to send a positive recommendation to the City Council.
2. HEARING NOTICE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2021-00614 – Street
Vacation at 601 South 900 East – On behalf of the owners of 601 South 900 East,
Justin Matkin of Parr Brown Gee & Loveless has requested Salt Lake City vacate (or give
up public ownership of) the 875 square-foot portion of public right-of-way along 600
South and 900 east that sits between the public sidewalk and the subject property. The
adjacent property is located within the R-2 Single- and Two-Family Residential District
and is within Council District 4, represented by Analia Valdemoros. (Staff contact: Aaron
Barlow at 801-535-6182 or aaron.barlow@slcgov.com).
As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive
comments regarding the petition. During this hearing, anyone desiring to address the City
Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be
held:
DATE:
TIME: 7:00 p.m.
PLACE: This will be an electronic meeting pursuant to Salt Lake City Emergency
Proclamation No.2 of 2020(2)(b). Please visit slc.gov/council/news/featured-
news/virtually-attend-city-council-meetings-2/ to learn how you can share
your comments live during electronic City Council meetings. If you would like
to provide feedback or comments via email or phone, please contact us
through our 24-hour comment line at 801-535-7654 or by email at
council.comments@slcgov.com.
If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please
call Aaron Barlow at 801-535-6182 between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday or via e-mail at aaron.barlow@slcgov.com.
The City & County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make
requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats,
interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least two
business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at
council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535- 7600, or relay service 711.
3. ORIGINAL PETITION
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS
1
Barlow, Aaron
From:
Sent:Thursday, December 2, 2021 5:47 PM
To:Barlow, Aaron
Subject:(EXTERNAL) 601 s 900 east
i have contacted the housing enforcement to ascertain if too could build a retaining wall like the one locat
ed at the above address. Housing enforcement has indicated i may not
and that this property
is under enforcement and has no knowledge of the above action although i saw it in a previous email.
housing enforcement that noone may build anything on parking strips due to the utility right away etc
what is the story
i own the property directly across the street on the north west corner of 600 south and 900 east
i attempted to scroll through old emails from planning but could not find the notice .
thanks
carolwicks aka blakely summerfield
5. MAILING LIST
1
FIRST NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
GAGE WILLIAMS 621 S GRAND ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
LEER ZHANG; XIANZHENG ZHON 875 LURLINE DR FOSTER CITY CA 94404
CHIEN HWANG 2713 S CHADWICK ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
RYAN HEATH 605 S GRAND ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
KARL BAUTNER 639 S BRIXEN CT SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
MICHAEL POLI 633 S GRAND ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
MICHAEL POLI 633 S GRAND ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
MICHAEL G MARTIN PO BOX 58602 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84158
MICHAEL G MARTIN PO BOX 58602 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84158
NEVERSWEAT LC 1568 E LAIRD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
ZACHARY LAZARE; COTI S HUD 639 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
MATTHEW S GRAY 367 TIMBER LAKES ESTATES HEBER UT 84032
STEVEN T ROENS; CHERYL HAR 627 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
EARL M DIXON; DOROTHY J AK 623 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
HILLBILLY HIGHROLLER INVES PO BOX 4559 PARK CITY UT 84060
SIOBHAN CARLILE 615 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
WHITEHOUSE PROPERTIES, LLC 674 N HAYSTACK MOUNTAIN HEBER CITY UT 84032
BRENT HARROW 6550 N HWY 38 BRIGHAM CITY UT 84302
ELLIS SPERRY SCHARFENAKER; 920 E 600 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
MICHAEL P KENNEDY; AMY KEN 601 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
R GARY LARSEN FAMILY INTER 7952 S WILLOWCREST RD COTTONWOOD HTS UT 84121
TAMARA DENNING 870 E WILSHIRE PL SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
ROBERT "YORK" EKSTROM 624 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
D FAM TRUST 9 WATERLOO CIR PARK CITY UT 84060
ROBERT "YORK" EKSTROM 624 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
CHRISTOPHER AQUINO 12631 CAMINITO RADIANTE SAN DIEGO CA 92130
KAITLIN MAROUSIS 614 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
RYAN MCCARTY; RACHEL DAVIS 606 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
GRIFFITHS REVOCABLE TRUST 1021 E SOUTH TEMPLE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
LISA ABEGGLEN; JON ABEGGLE 862 E 600 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
SPENDLOVE PROPERTIES IV LL 2769 E WATER VISTA WY SANDY UT 84093
600 SOUTH APARTMENTS, LLC C/ PO BOX 743 CLEARFIELD UT 84089
DAVID I DALTON; GEORGIA P 923 E 600 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
JEFFERY NIELSON 1022 E PLATINUM WY WHITE CITY UT 84094
CLAYTON SCRIVNER 947 E 600 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
DAVID I DALTON; GEORGIA DA 923 E 600 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
MARIAN SHIOZAKI TRUST 07/0 854 E 600 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
CHRISTINE V NIELSON 913 E 600 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
900 EAST LLC C/O DARIN PICCOLI 939 S DIESTEL RD SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
MCDONALD AMY S 567 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
WHITE CAP PROPERTY MANAGEM563 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
555 SOUTH SLC 8161 S BUENO VISTA DR WEST JORDAN UT 84088
CAROL ANN WICKS TRUST 04/1 6693 S CANDLE CV COTTONWOOD HTS UT 84121
JTD ENTERPRISES LLC 9458 S CROSSWOOD CIR SANDY UT 84092
MATTHEW S BOARDMAN; JESSIC 224 N CANYON RD SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
CHELSEA PETERSON; CLAYTON 566 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
DEAN K BAER; KATHY K BAER 863 E 600 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102
CURRENT OCCUPANT 619 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
CURRENT OCCUPANT 609 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
CURRENT OCCUPANT 926 E 600 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
CURRENT OCCUPANT 640 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
CURRENT OCCUPANT 863 E WILSHIRE PL SALT LAKE CITY UT 84107
CURRENT OCCUPANT 620 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84108
CURRENT OCCUPANT 614-618 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109
CURRENT OCCUPANT 604 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84110
CURRENT OCCUPANT 933 E 600 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111
CURRENT OCCUPANT 935 E 600 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84112
CURRENT OCCUPANT 913 E 600 S # 3 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84113
CURRENT OCCUPANT 915 E 600 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114
CURRENT OCCUPANT 917 E 600 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
CURRENT OCCUPANT 575 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT OCCUPANT 555 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84117
CURRENT OCCUPANT 576 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84118
PLNPCM2021-00614 - Public Notice Addressses
2
CURRENT OCCUPANT 570 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84119
CURRENT OCCUPANT 568 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84120
PLNPCM2021-00614 - Public Notice Addressses
Safety: Risk of serious injury and death is
dramatically lower at slower speeds.
Access: Increased access and mobility for
vulnerable populations like children, seniors and
people with disabilities.
Equity: Residents in every neighborhood deserve
the right to interact with safe streets.
THE IMPORTANCE
OF SLOWER SPEEDS
SPEED SPEEDRISK OF FATALITYRISK OF FATALITY
U.S. Department of Transportation
It’s equitable: People of color, children, people with
disabilities and people with low incomes are
disproportionately the victims of traffic crashes. — AARP
WHY MAKE IT
A PRIORITY?
It’s popular: High speeds in neighborhoods is one of the
top complaints from residents. — Transportation Division
Paradigm shift: Set speed limits at a safe level,
raise it when people are protected on the street.
SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC VIOLENCE
2021 Fatality 2021 Injury Sweet Streets Traffic Violence Map
WOULD
IT WORK?
Fast Action: While the preference is to design streets that encourage slower speeds,
that will take decades to accomplish citywide.
Already Used: Several Salt Lake City neighborhoods have already implemented it.
Backed by Research: Peer-reviewed research has shown that reducing posted speeds
does successfully lower driving speeds.
Research shows 20 mph is effective
Traffic speed has reduced on 74% of roads, collision numbers are down, as are
casualty numbers and there have been no fatalities from traffic collisions in the
area. (Brighton and Hove, UK)
Drivers were almost half as likely to travel >35 mph and more likely to slow
speeds after Portland’s default speed changed to 20 mph. (Portland, Oregon)
Bristol, UK, found a general trend of injury reductions following the intervention,
both city-wide and in 20 mph roads only, and strong evidence of a city-wide
reduction of fatal injuries of around 63%. (Bristol, UK)
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Seattle, Washington
St. Paul, Minnesota
Portland, Oregon
WHO ELSE IS
DOING THIS?
Cities across the U.S. are following the guidance from the World Health Organization
and the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO).
Eugene, Oregon
Fayetteville, Arkansas
Madison, Wisconsin
Denver, Colorado
HOW DOES
IT CHANGE?
Salt Lake City residents are asking for safer streets. It will take decades to provide streets
designed for safe speeds. You have the power to make an impact now.
A 20 mph default posted speed limit is an effective way to provide fast, equitable and
meaningful action for every resident in this city while it works on longer-term design changes.
The City Council has the authority to make this change by revising the current ordinance.
THANK YOU
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
P.O. BOX 145474
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474
WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM
TEL 801-535-7704
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
______________________________ Date Received: 1/26/2022
Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff
Date Sent to Council: 1/26/2022
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: 1/26/2022
Dan Dugan, Chair
FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff
Office of the Mayor
SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board.
STAFF CONTACT: Jessi Eagan
jessi.eagan@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Housing Trust Fund
Advisory Board.
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the
recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Katie Darter as a member of the
Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board.
/
( )
,,,,,,,11111 ,,.,,,'
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
P.O. BOX 145474
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474
WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM
TEL 801-535-7704
January 26, 2022
Salt Lake City Council
451 S State Street Room 304
PO Box 145476
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114
Dear Councilmember Dugan,
Listed below is my recommendation for membership appointment to the Housing Trust Fund
Advisory Board.
Katie Darter - to be appointed for a three year term ending Monday, December 29, 2025, starting
from the date of City Council advice and consent.
I respectfully ask your consideration and support for this appointment.
Respectfully,
Erin Mendenhall, Mayor
Cc: File
.. Ji. ..
'•
/ ;\
trfj
\ .. l
,,,,, u111 ,v·'
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
P.O. BOX 145474
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM
TEL 801-535-7704
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
______________________________ Date Received: 1/28/2022
Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff
Date Sent to Council: 1/28/2022
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: 1/28/2022
Dan Dugan, Chair
FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff
Office of the Mayor
SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Business Advisory Board.
STAFF CONTACT: Jessi Eagan
jessi.eagan@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Business Advisory Board
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the
recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Kristina Olivas as a member of
the Business Advisory Board
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
P.O. BOX 145474
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM
TEL 801-535-7704
January 28, 2022
Salt Lake City Council
451 S State Street Room 304
PO Box 145476
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114
Dear Councilmember Dugan,
Listed below is my recommendation for membership appointment to the Business Advisory Board
Kristina Olivas - to be appointed for a four year term ending December 28, 2026, starting from the
date of City Council advice and consent.
I respectfully ask your consideration and support for this appointment.
Respectfully,
Erin Mendenhall, Mayor
Cc: File
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
P.O. BOX 145474
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM
TEL 801-535-7704
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
______________________________ Date Received: 1/31/2022
Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff
Date Sent to Council: 1/31/2022
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: 1/31/2022
Dan Dugan, Chair
FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff
Office of the Mayor
SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Airport Board.
STAFF CONTACT: Jessi Eagan
jessi.eagan@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment: Airport Board
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the
recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint John Bradshaw as a member of
the Airport Board
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
P.O. BOX 145474
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474
WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM
TEL 801-535-7704
January 31, 2022
Salt Lake City Council
451 S State Street Room 304
PO Box 145476
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114
Dear Councilmember Dugan,
Listed below is my recommendation for membership appointment to the Airport Board
John Bradshaw - to be appointed for a four year term ending June 30, 2025, starting from the date
of City Council advice and consent.
I respectfully ask your consideration and support for this appointment.
Respectfully,
Erin Mendenhall, Mayor
Cc: File
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
P.O. BOX 145474
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM
TEL 801-535-7704
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
______________________________ Date Received: 1/28/2022
Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff
Date Sent to Council: 1/28/2022
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: 1/28/2022
Dan Dugan, Chair
FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff
Office of the Mayor
SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Library Board.
STAFF CONTACT: Jessi Eagan
jessi.eagan@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Library Board
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the
recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Sarah Reale as a member of the
Library Board
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
P.O. BOX 145474
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM
TEL 801-535-7704
January 28, 2022
Salt Lake City Council
451 S State Street Room 304
PO Box 145476
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114
Dear Councilmember Dugan,
Listed below is my recommendation for membership appointment to the Library Board
Sarah Reale - to be appointed for a four year term ending June 30, 2025, starting from the date
of City Council advice and consent.
I respectfully ask your consideration and support for this appointment.
Respectfully,
Erin Mendenhall, Mayor
Cc: File
City Council Announcements
March 1, 2022
For Your Information
A. St. Patrick’s Day Parade & Siamsa
The parade takes place Saturday, March 12th from 11 a.m. to approximately noon.
Council Members will all be travelling for the National league of Cities conference
and unfortunately the travel conflicts with the parade and Council Members will not
be able to participate this year. Staff will pass along the Council’s regrets to the
event staff.