03/22/2022 - Formal Meeting - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
REVISED AGENDA
FORMAL MEETING
March 22,2022 Tuesday 7:00 PM
Council Chambers
451 South State Street Room 326
Salt Lake City,UT 84111
SLCCouncil.com
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Dan Dugan,Chair
District 6
Darin Mano,Vice Chair
District 5
Victoria Petro-Eschler
District 1
Alejandro Puy
District 2
Chris Wharton
District 3
Ana Valdemoros
District 4
Amy Fowler
District 7
Generated:10:17:52
The Council has returned to a hybrid meeting approach.The hybrid meeting
enables people joining remotely or in-person to listen to the Council meeting and
participate during public comment items.
Public Comments:The public can give comments to the Council during the
meetings online through Webex or in-person in Room 326 of the City and County
Building.In-person attendees can fill out a comment card and online participants
will register through Webex in order to be added to the comment queue.
Agenda &Registration Information: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.)
Public Health Information:Masks are no longer required in City Facilities,
but are welcome for any attendees who prefer to continue using them.We will
continue to monitor the situation take any reasonable precautions for the public
and staff.
Please note:Dates not identified in the FYI -Project Timeline are either not applicable or not yet
determined.
WELCOME AND PUBLIC MEETING RULES
A.OPENING CEREMONY:
1.Council Member Dan Dugan will conduct the formal meeting.
2.Pledge of Allegiance.
3.Welcome and Public Meeting Rules.
4.The Council will approve the work session meeting minutes of February 15,2022
and February 16,2022 as well as the formal meeting minutes of May 4,2021;May
18,2021;and June 21,2021.
B.PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Items B1 –B6 will be heard as one public hearing.
1.Grant Application:Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Grant –East
Downtown 200 South Mobility Hub
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Division of Transportation to the Wasatch Front Regional Council administering
U.S.Department of Transportation funds.If awarded,this grant would fund the
design and construction of an East Downtown mobility hub for bus rapid transit
and core routes that serve Frontrunner,the Salt Lake Valley,and University of
Utah.
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 -Tuesday,March 22,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda.
2.Grant Application:Surface Transportation Program Grant -900 West
Reconstruction:North Temple to 600 North
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Division of Engineering to the Wasatch Front Regional Council administering U.S.
Department of Transportation funds.If awarded,this grant would fund the
reconstruction of 900 West between North Temple and 600 North to improve
road conditions,improve vehicular mobility to the North Temple urban center,
and enhance transit,pedestrian,and bicycle access for residents in this area.
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 -Tuesday,March 22,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda.
3.Grant Application:WaterSMART:Water and Energy Efficiency Grant
2022 –Rose Park Golf Course Irrigation Efficiency
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Departments of Public Utilities and Public Lands to the U.S.Department of the
Interior,Bureau of Reclamation.If awarded,this grant would fund the landscape
irrigation measures and indoor water conservation strategies for the Rose Park
Golf Course that will result in an anticipated water savings of 188.87 acre-feet
annually.
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 -Tuesday,March 22,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda.
4.Grant Application:Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Grant -2023-28
Salt Lake City Bike Share Expansion West of Interstate-15
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Division of Transportation to the Wasatch Front Regional Council administering
U.S.Department of Transportation Funds.If awarded,this grant would
fund increase in the concentration of bike share stations west of Interstate-15 as
part of an effort to expand a robust bike share system that links commuters to
regional transit and local destinations.
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 -Tuesday,March 22,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda.
5.Grant Application:Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)2024
Grant -Foothill Drive Pedestrian/Bike Safety Improvements Design
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Division of Transportation to the Wasatch Front Regional Council administering
U.S.Department of Transportation funds.If awarded,this grant would fund the
Foothill Drive Ped/Bike Safety Improvements Design.The project will complete
40%of the design and cost estimates to improve multiple pedestrian and bike
crossings across Foothill Drive between 1300 East and Parley’s Interchange.
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 -Tuesday,March 22,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda.
6.Grant Application:Transportation and Land Use Connections 2023
Grant –1300 East/University District Circulation Study
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Division of Transportation to the Salt Lake County,Utah Department of
Transportation,Utah Transit Authority,Wasatch Front Regional Council.If
awarded,this grant would fund consultant services for the 1300 East/University
District Circulation Study.The project aims to recommend transportation changes
for the area to complement land uses;improve connections to the University of
Utah;consider transit,walking,and biking improvements on 1300 East and
University streets;strengthen the local business restaurant/retail district;and
update strategies for managing parking and motor vehicle traffic.
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 -Tuesday,March 22,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda.
7.Ordinance:Rezone at approximately 2333 West North Temple Street
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance 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.Petition No.:PLNPCM2021-00915
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
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
8.Ordinance:Street Vacation at 601 South 900 East
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance 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.Petition No.:PLNPCM2021-00614
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
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
9.Ordinance:Homeless Resource Center and Homeless Shelter Text
Amendments
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting one or more
ordinances amending the Salt Lake City Zoning Code related to Homeless
Resource Centers and Homeless Shelters.Such proposals include amending the
land use tables in Chapter 21.33,Section 21A.33.010,Section of 21A.36.350,and
Chapter 21A.62.The consideration is related to Petition No.:
PLNPCM2021-01033.
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that
would amend the Salt Lake City Zoning Code by removing Homeless Resource
Centers and Homeless Shelters as conditional uses from the land use tables for the
CG General Commercial,D-2 Downtown Support,and D-3 Downtown
Warehouse/Residential Zoning Districts,modify 21A.33.010 to clarify when listed
land uses are prohibited,modify the applicability section of 21A.36.350 Qualifying
Provisions for Homeless Resource Centers and Homeless Shelters,and modify the
definitions of homeless resource centers and homeless shelters in 21A.62.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 8,2022 and Tuesday,March 22,2022
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,March 22,2022
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
10.One-year Action Plan for Community Development Block Grant &
Other Federal Grants for Fiscal Year 2022-23
The Council will accept public comment and consider a resolution adopting the
Mayor’s funding recommendations and an appropriations resolution that would
adopt the One-Year Annual Action Plan for Fiscal Year 2022-23.The plan
includes Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)funding,HOME
Investment Partnership Program funding,Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG)
funding,Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)funding.The
resolution would approve an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt
Lake City and the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 15,2022
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 22,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,April 19,2022
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
C.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS:
1.Ordinance:Amendment to Require Notice for Permits to Work in the
Public Way
The Council will consider adopting an ordinance 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 -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
2.Ordinance:Budget Amendment No.6 for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the final
budget of Salt Lake City,including the employment staffing document,for Fiscal
Year 2021-22.Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect
adjustments to the City’s budgets,including proposed project additions and
modifications.The proposed amendment includes funding for new Arts Council
employees,adding a second sergeant to the Special Victims Unit,and additional
Emergency Rental Assistance Program funding from the Federal Government,
among other items.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,February 1,2022;Tuesday,February 8,2022;Tuesday,
February 15,2022;and March 22,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 1,2022
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,February 15,2022 and Tuesday
March 1,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 1,2022 and Tuesday March 22,
2022
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
D.COMMENTS:
1.Questions to the Mayor from the City Council.
2.Comments to the City Council.(Comments are taken on any item not scheduled
for a public hearing,as well as on any other City business.Comments are limited
to two minutes.)
E.NEW BUSINESS:
NONE.
F.UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1.Ordinance:Special Event Permits of Less than 31 Days
The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would amend Section
2.58.040 of the Salt Lake City Code,relating to the sale of significant parcels of
real property,and Section 2.90.070 of the Salt Lake City Code,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.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 -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
G.CONSENT:
1.Ordinance:Stealth Towers Text Amendments
The Council will set the date of Tuesday,April 5,2022 at 7 p.m.to accept public
comment about a proposal that would amend the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance
to allow Stealth Wireless Telecommunication Facilities taller than 35 feet (up to 75
feet)in height within the Public Lands (PL)Zoning District.Stealth facilities are
currently limited to 35 feet in height.This request is specifically related to a
proposal by the applicant to construct a stealth cellular tower at the Pioneer Police
Precinct at 1040 West 700 South,but the proposed text amendment would apply
to properties within the PL district citywide.Petition No.:PLNPCM2020-00284
The Planning Commission forwarded a negative recommendation,therefore an
ordinance has not been drafted.If the Council decides to approve the zone
amendment,an ordinance would be drafted and considered for approval.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,April 5,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,April 19,2022
Staff Recommendation -Set date.
2.Ordinance:Zoning Map Amendment at Western Gardens 550 South
600 East
The Council will set the date of Tuesday,April 5,2022 at 7 p.m.to accept public
comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning of the
property located at 550 South 600 East Street from CN (Neighborhood
Commercial District)to FB-UN2 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood District).The
parcel is currently occupied by the Western Gardens commercial center.This
proposal would facilitate redevelopment of this parcel into a multifamily
residential project.The zoning map amendment does not require an amendment
to the Central Community Master Plan.Consideration may be given to rezoning
the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics.Petition
No.:PLNPCM2021-00420
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,April 5,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,April 19,2022
Staff Recommendation -Set date.
3.Board Appointment:Planning Commission –Rich Tuttle
The Council will consider approving the appointment of Rich Tuttle to the
Planning Commission for a term ending March 22,2026.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Staff Recommendation -Approve.
4.Board Appointment:City and County Building Conservation and Use
Committee –Catherine Tucker
The Council will consider approving the appointment of Catherine Tucker to
the City and County Building Conservation and Use Committee for a term ending
July 20,2026.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Staff Recommendation -Approve.
5.Board Appointment:Bicycle Advisory Committee –Sarah Johnson
The Council will consider approving the appointment of Sarah Johnson to the
Bicycle Advisory Committee for a term ending September 29,2025.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Staff Recommendation -Approve.
6.Board Appointment:Transportation Advisory Board –Tyler Schmidt
The Council will consider approving the appointment of Tyler Schmidt to the
Transportation Advisory Board for a term ending September 29,2025.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Staff Recommendation -Approve.
7.Confirm Corrected Name –Board Appointment:Housing Trust Fund
Advisory Board –Katie Bennett
Confirm Corrected Name –The Council will confirm the appointment of Katie
Bennett 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 -n/a
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Staff Recommendation -Approve.
H.ADJOURNMENT:
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
On or before 2:30 p.m.on Monday,March 21,2022,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.
PENDING MINUTES –NOT APPROVED
The City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah,met in hybrid Work Session on Tuesday,February 15,
2022.
The following Council Members were present:
Ana Valdemoros,Amy Fowler,Darin Mano,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Victoria Petro-Eschler,
Alejandro Puy
Present Legislative leadership:
Cindy Gust-Jenson,Executive Director;Jennifer Bruno,Deputy Director;Lehua
Weaver,Associate Deputy Director
Present Administrative leadership:
Mayor Erin Mendenhall;Rachel Otto,Chief of Staff;Lisa Shaffer,Chief Administrative Officer
Present City Staff:
Ben Luedtke –Senior Public Policy Analyst,Brian Fullmer –Constituent Liaison,Policy Analyst,
Katherine Lewis –City Attorney,Chief Karl Lieb –Fire Chief,Chief Mike Brown –Police Chief,
Cindy Lou Trishman –Salt Lake City Recorder,Andrew Johnston –Director of Homelessness
Policy and Outreach,Michelle Barney –Minutes &Records Clerk,Nannette Larsen –Principal
Planner,Taylor Hill –City Council Staff,Mary Beth Thompson –Chief Financial Officer,Kristin
Riker –Public Lands Department Director,Allison Rowland –Public Policy Analyst,Thais
Stewart –Deputy City Recorder,Paul Nielson –Senior City Attorney,Katherine Maus –Public
Lands Planner,Lorena Riffo Jenson –Deputy Director Economic Development,Clark Cahoon
–Economic Development,Stephen Meyer –911 Dispatch Director
Council Member Dan Dugan presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 2:00 p.m
Work Session Items
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
1
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
Minutes:
Rachel Otto provided information regarding:
COVID-19 Updates:
•Positivity rate was down to 31.1%and ICU utilization was down to 84%
•In Salt Lake County 66.21%of kids aged 12-17 were fully vaccinated (up 0.5%from last
week)
•In Salt Lake County 29.16%of kids aged 5-11 were fully vaccinated (up 2%since last
week)
•Last week’s update from the County showed hospitalizations decreasing from 48 per
day to 40 per day
Community Engagement:
•Survey information regarding the 1100 East Reconstruction,Pioneer Park Vision,
Urban Forest Action Plan,Affordable Housing Overlay,Thriving in Place,Connect
SLC (Transportation Master Plan),Glendale Water Park,Ballpark Station Area Plan,
Shelter Zoning,Northpoint Small Area Plan Update,and Downtown Plan
Implementation
•Public could visit www.slc.gov/feedback for ways to be involved
Andrew Johnston presented information regarding:
Homelessness Update
•Current Homeless Resource Center (HRC)and Overflow occupancy;shelter
capacity/bed availability
•Resource fairs;next one held on February 11,2022 (North Temple will assist with a
high needs motel)
•Cleaning and abatement;two large abatements were planned to be conducted in the
next two weeks and other sites to be evaluated
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
2
•Overflow status:St.Vincent DePaul (open nightly),Weigand Center (open nightly),
scattered motel rooms (24/7 referral only from HRC’s),High Needs Temporary
Housing (referral only for elderly and medically vulnerable beginning today),with
overflow Beds (open nightly beginning at the end of January 2022),access line for
emergency shelter beds:801-990-9999
•Overflow shelter at Weigand Center to close February 16,2022,additional beds to be
available at the former Ramada Inn
Council discussed the reasoning for closing the Weigand Center.Mr.Johnston stated it was
closing due to the lack of staffing and adding additional beds at the former Ramada Inn
providing another option.
Council Member Valdemoros asked if there was an update from Legislature regarding
homeless issues,if there was a way to track individuals who did not prefer to use homeless
resources,and expressed concern over the lack of mental health services in the State for
people experiencing homelessness.Mr.Johnston stated there was a by-name list of
homeless individuals who refused to stay in shelters as well as high utilizers that tended to
go through the court system and jails.He stated the list was critical to track individual needs
as many individuals had a wide variety of issues.Mr.Johnston stated there were
always issues with housing as there was never enough.
Mr.Johnston stated there was work being done on the State level to address mental health
issues regarding an assessment of need and getting people into the proper housing for their
needs.He reviewed the $128 million in funding the State Legislature was seeking for deeply
affordable housing that was flexible housing to support the overall needs including those
with mental illness.Mr.Johnston reviewed interactions of homeless individuals with police
which had helped to determine what services these individuals needed most.
Council Member Valdemoros expressed her willingness to advocate for mental health
support/services for the City.
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
3
2.Informational:Equity Update ~2:30 p.m.
15 min
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
Minutes:
Item not held.
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
4
3.Ordinance:Rezone and Master Plan Amendment at 1583 East
Stratford Avenue ~2:45 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the zoning of property
located at approximately 1583 East Stratford Avenue from RMF-35 (Moderate Density Multi-
Family Residential District)to CN (Neighborhood Commercial District)and would amend the
Sugar House Master Plan Future Land Use Map.No specific site development proposal has
been submitted at this time.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,February 15,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 15,2022
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 1,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 22,2022
Minutes:
Council Member Mano recused himself from the discussion due to a conflict of interest.
Brian Fullmer introduced/reviewed the proposed ordinance.
Nanette Larsen introduced/reviewedthe proposed ordinance.She stated the Planning
Commission denied the proposal due to the elimination of the six residential units however;
following that determination the project was updated to include the six residential units and
office spaces,therefore staff’s opinion was that the proposal met the standards of the
ordinance and area Master Plan.
Council Member Dugan asked for clarification on the plans and how to ensure the six units
would remain a part of the development.Ms.Larsen stated a development agreement would
be recorded with the property,ensuring the six residential units remained onsite.
Council Member Wharton inquired if the proposal should be returned to the Planning
Commission for further comment prior to an approval by the Council.
Cindy Gust-Jenson stated if the proposal was becoming more compliant,generally the
Council could consider taking action,with the acknowledgement the Council has the option
to return it to the Planning Commission.
Paul Nielson stated it was appropriate for the Council to consider the proposal in spite of
the negative recommendation and amendments.
Council Member Wharton inquired about the Planning Commission’s discussion regarding
the six residential units and if they would approve the proposal if those units existed.Ms.
Larsen stated there were no comments on the proposal from the Planning Commission
during their review process.
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
5
Council Member Puy expressed concern over the development not meeting the intent of the
Master Plan.
Council Member Fowler asked if the existing condos were considered affordable
housing.Ms.Larsen confirmed the units were affordable/obtainable housing.Council
Member Fowler questioned whether the new structure would change the status of the units
from affordable to unaffordable.Ms.Larsen stated the developer would have the option to
demo the current structure and replace it however,the proposal was to keep the existing
condos and build an office structure to the rear of the property.
Brian Scott (Stratford Investment Properties,developer)stated the property owner was
looking to expand his business which was located across the street from the subject
property.He reviewed the history of the proposal,how the Planning Commission’s concerns
could be addressed and still allow the property owner’s business to expand.Mr.Scott stated
the six units would remain with a separate office building constructed to the rear of the
property.
Council Member Fowler asked if the units were currently occupied and would the existing
condos remain.Mr.Scott stated some of the units were occupied and the intent was to keep
the units as is with only the access to the building changing to add an elevator.Council
Member Fowler inquired about the parking mitigation plan for the property and the
proposed office building.Mr.Scott stated moving the parking to underground would add
more spaces that would be shared between the residents and the office building.
Council Member Wharton called for a straw poll to return the application to
the Planning Commission for further review and public comment.The Straw
Poll was unanimously supported by those in attendance.
Council Member Mano returned to the meeting.
4.Informational:Pioneer Park Improvements Project Update and
Conceptual Design ~3:05 p.m.
45 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about the conceptual design project,known as Your
Downtown Park,that is intended to guide future investments in Pioneer Park improvements.
The design was developed from analysis of past City actions,recent changes in the nearby
Downtown area,and feedback from robust public engagement.The total budget impact of the
improvements outlined in the conceptual design is estimated preliminarily at $20 million.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,February 15,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
6
Minutes:
Allison Rowland introduced the conceptual design to guide investment in Pioneer Park
improvements (titled Your Downtown Park)and said work on this project was being led by
the Public Lands Department,assisted by the Engineering Division,and Design Workshop
consultants.She introduced the individuals that were involved in the process and reviewed
the funding possibilities.
Kristin Riker reviewed the plans for Pioneer Park,the park’s history,and the limited
square footage of park space available throughout the City.Ms.Riker reported on the
challenge of obtaining additional park space in downtown due to the cost of property and
the Re-imagine Nature survey that looked at the uses Pioneer Park would need to
accommodate to make it viable.
Katherine Maus reviewed the vision plan for Pioneer park,public engagement process,
and the public/online survey.She stated conserving tree and plant life was very important
to the people who took the survey.Ms.Maus reported the results of the park audit which
indicated the greatest uses of the park specifically the Farmers Market,playground,and
walking paths.She stated updates were made but not cohesively and individuals who
attended the Farmers Market were asking for more seating and shade.
Anna Layborn (Design Workshop,consultant)presented the visual aspects of the vision
plan,inspirations for the updates to the park such as past improvements,plans and
studies;cultural landscape report,site assessments,and 2021 public input process.She
reviewed the guiding principles effecting the park,the need to keep the park welcoming and
safe for everyone.Ms.Layborn reviewed the design and layout of the park,trees,plants,
pavilion,interactive mist feature,working with the Farmers Market to maintain or allow
additional booth space;activities in the park needed to be considered carefully to draw the
most people to the park year round and be inclusionary for all users of the park including
those experiencing homelessness.
Sean Fyfe (Design Workshop,consultant)discussed next steps,public outreach,and cost
estimate for the proposal.He reviewed current and potential funding for the park design.
Council Member Petro-Eschler reviewed the previous attempt of adjusting the design of the
park –particularly while she was serving on the Historic Landmark Commission,noting
that the proposed plan presented today does not respect the historicity of the
park.Ms.Laybourn &Ms.Maus responded to add the plan would be presented to the
Historic Landmark Commission for their review prior to bringing it to the Council for final
approval,adding a culture landscape report was conducted and presented to the Historic
Landmark Commission previously and received well.Ms.Layborn added that additional
trees would invite more people which assisted with crime prevention,the Park Ranger
Program and overall activities of the park would help deter crime,and studies had shown
when places were kept inviting and clean,crime reduction was supported.
Council Member Mano clarified this project was started in 2021 by Parks
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
7
administration;reviewed the process the plan had gone through and asked if the plan was to
be seen as a Master Plan or the actual plan for park construction.Ms.Riker stated the
proposal was a site plan and not a Master Plan;the construction of the park would be
determined by the amount of funding available,public comment period was still open,once
the priorities and funding were determined the plans and construction would be
discussed.Council Member Mano inquired about the Council’s role in approving the plan (if
it was for funding or the design).Ms.Riker stated the Council would be reviewing additional
funding and CIP funding.Council Member Mano questioned if the Council should
be recommending the requested amount of funds for this park or for park space in areas
such as the Fleet Block.
Council Member Valdemoros stated this was very compelling and she had high hopes for the
park but also thought there were other groups willing to invest in the park.She stated the
park could be used for future Olympic activities and thanked those involved in the project.
Council Member Puy stated he wanted to see the project as a whole to understand how
all park improvements throughout the City were addressed.
Council Member Dugan asked how State and City funding were outlined in the vision
statement.Ms.Riker stated State funding was not approved and reviewed potential funding
for the project.
Council Member Fowler inquired if the maintenance costs would increase and what the
maintenance plan would be for the park long term.She asked how far the $3.6 million had
taken the project,if there was remaining money that could be put toward the redesign,and
what would happen if funds were not available for an extended amount of time.Ms.Riker
reviewed the current park maintenance;stated the concessions and water feature might take
more maintenance but had not been addressed,the playground and sports courts
were already being maintained but the facilities would be upgraded therefore taking less
time to maintain the property.Ms.Layborn reviewed the public survey asking the
community what they would like to see updated in the park.
Council Member Dugan asked if street calming features would be added to the area.Ms.
Layborn confirmed traffic calming had been added with mid-block crossings and a transit
stop.
Cindy Gust-Jenson included the definition and review of Master Plans and the Council
role in the guidance of plan development was being reviewed.
Ms.Rowland stated the Parks Department was planning to bring the Open Space Master
Plan to the Council in March 2022.
Minutes:
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
8
5.Ordinance:Budget Amendment No.4 for Fiscal Year 2021-22 Follow-
up ~3:50 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a follow-up briefing about an ordinance that would amend the final
budget of Salt Lake City,including the employment staffing document,for Fiscal Year
2021-22.Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the
City’s budgets,including proposed project additions and modifications.The Council will
discuss potential funding related to the emergency winter overflow shelter,among other
items.The Council adopted most items in this amendment at previous public meetings.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,November 9,2021;Tuesday,November 16,2021;Tuesday,December 7,
2021;Tuesday,December 14,2021;and Tuesday,February 15,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,November 9,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,November 16,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,December 14,2021 and Tuesday,February 15,2022
Minutes:
Ben Luedtke stated this was the fifth briefing for the budget amendment,the Council
voted on most items in this budget amendment on November 16 and December 14 of 2021.
For item E-2:Emergency Winter Overflow Shelter Support,the Council took a unanimous
straw poll that the remaining $600,000 from ARPA would be considered for community
activities and potential business assistance in the area around the temporary overflow
shelter pending further discussions.Mr.Luedtke provided a budget breakdown and gap
analysis for funding the overflow shelter through April 15,2022,showing the total available
funding was $602,912 less than total estimated expenses.He stated staff along with the
State Homelessness Council was scheduled to discuss possible funding to Shelter the
Homeless to cover half of the $602,912 funding gap however,staff recommended splitting
the costs between the State and City from ARPA funding.
Mr.Luedtke reported the Council identified three items to be held until next calendar year
for more information and discussions.The items were:
•To what extent voluntary overtime shifts were being filled for law enforcement at and
around the shelter (hoped to be covered by multiple jurisdictions),
•Potential funding for community activities and business assistance,
•If the proposed uses had been confirmed as ARPA eligible activities under the U.S.
Treasury’s final guidance,and
•Whether additional resources were needed at and around the overflow shelter,
including after the scheduled closing date of April 15,2022
Andrew Johnston reviewed the gap in funding for Shelter the Homeless,stated
contingencies would be put on the funding stipulating the money could only be used
for leasing of the building.
Council Member Mano asked if there was a need for additional funding for police overtime
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
9
to support the shelter.Mr.Johnston stated he would return with that information.
Council Member Petro-Eschler stated funds should have been allocated long before there
was ever a need and the City should not be the only provider to continually fund the
resources provided to the homeless.
Council Member Wharton asked if there had been a determination on where the funds that
were set aside for business would be spent.Cindy Gust-Jenson stated Economic
Development had presented the proposal to Council Staff and staff would be bringing it to
Council shortly.
6.Tentative Break ~4:10 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
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
10
7.Ordinance:Budget Amendment No.6 for Fiscal Year 2021-22 Follow-
up ~4:30 p.m.
45 min.
The Council will receive a follow-up briefing about an ordinance that would amend the final
budget of Salt Lake City,including the employment staffing document,for Fiscal Year
2021-22.Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the
City’s budgets,including proposed project additions and modifications.The proposed
amendment includes funding for new Arts Council employees,adding a second sergeant to
the Special Victims Unit,and additional Emergency Rental Assistance Program funding
from the Federal Government,among other items.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,February 1,2022;Tuesday,February 8,2022;and Tuesday,February 15,
2022
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 1,2022
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,February 15,2022 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 1,2022
Minutes:
Ben Luedtke stated this was the third briefing,the discussion included potentially adding
requests for new full time employees to the upcoming FY2023 annual budget deliberations
so all the City’s competing needs could be considered in context.
As Mr.Luedtke reviewed the funding requests for the following items Council took action or
discussed each item:
A-1:Suazo Business Center:
A Straw Poll to fund the remaining portion of this fiscal year cycle for the Suazo
Business Center and add it to the general budget for future funding was
unanimously supported by those present.
A-3:Healthcare Innovation Branding (aka Biohive)
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
11
Council discussed if the funding for the current fiscal year should be continued and added to
the general budget going forward,and if services would be discontinued if the funding was
not available.Mr.Luedtke reviewed the services provided by Biohive and the CARES Act
dollars that were used for the original funding.
Lorena Riffo Jenson stated Biohive was dependent on funding from the City,working to
ensure training was obtained for many members of the community mainly on the Westside.
Cindy Gust-Jenson stated the departments were trying to recognize funding issues early,
make adjustments to get the items into the annual budget or to request for funding.
Clark Cahoon reviewed the operation and nature of Biohive was to introduce Stem
education/industry to the work force.
Council Member Puy stated Utah had one of the fastest growing Stem industries in the
country and should be supported.He asked if some of the programs could wait for funding
until the budget was approved in a few months.
A-4:Fix the Bricks
This proposal was budget neutral and did not require additional funding.
A-6:Public Safety Building Access Control Upgrade and Support
Council Member Puy asked if there were risks to the Public Safety building if upgrades were
not made immediately.Mr.Luedtke stated the purpose of funding the proposal now would
be to accommodate supply chain issues.
A-7:Restore July Fireworks Shows Funding
Council Member Puy stated the funding could be used to promote fire safety and other ways
could be created to celebrate the holiday.
Council Member Mano stated he was conflicted because of the importance of the holiday
and nostalgia.
Lisa Shaffer stated the request was to allow for lead time to order the firework show
and there might not be time to develop a different type of celebration this year;the question
was to have a firework show or not have a firework show.
A Straw Poll to not fund the July Fireworks Show passed with a 4/3 vote.
Commissioners Fowler,Puy,Petro-Eschler and Valedmoros voted “aye”.
Commissioners Mano,Dugan and Wharton voted “nay”.
A-9:Arts Council Staff Increase of 3 Full Time Employees
No discussion was held.
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
12
A:12 Citywide Equity Study
No discussion was held.
B1:ARPA Authorized HUD Home Grant Funding for Admin and Planning Funds
Mary Beth Thompson explained the study itself would be a reimbursement to the City if
it was completed,the staff funding was an 8-year expense and explained how those expenses
could be offset.
Ms.Gust-Jenson clarified the Division was not being reimbursed -the general fund was
being made whole.Ms.Thompson confirmed that was a correct understanding.
E4:State of Utah,Governor’s Office of Economic Opportunity,Bonneville Shoreline Trail
Grant
Council Member Wharton asked if this funding would relate to the pause in new
construction of the trails as it was important to complete the process correctly.Mr.Luedtke
stated the funding could be made subject to the annual budget contingency.
Ms.Gust Jenson stated a briefing could be scheduled regarding the proposal and funds held
until a full understanding was achieved.
Council Member Fowler asked if there was a timeline for the Grant funding.Mr.Luedtke
stated the timing for grant submission would be researched.
A straw poll to restrict the grant funding from any new trail construction,in
the event that grant funding needed to be accepted immediately was
unanimously supported by those present.
Council Member Wharton requested Staff provide an update on the status of the Trail Plans
development and planning.
A8:Violent Crimes Unit COPS Hiring Grant City Match ($1,184,460 from General Fund
Balance)
Council Member Fowler asked if the new full time employees would be shifted to the general
budget in the future.Mr.Luedtke confirmed that was correct.
Council Member Mano requested the feedback from the REP Commission.
Council Member Petro-Eschler asked for the timeframe for hiring new officers and when
they would see results of the program.
Council Member Puy asked how this fit with the overall budget and the hiring of new
officers.
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
13
Chief Mike Brown reviewed information regarding the Violent Criminal Apprehension
Team (V-CAT):
•SLCPD had received a grant award from the COPS Hiring program to fund 10 new
police officers
•if approved and funded,SLCPD would create the Violent Criminal Apprehension Team
(V-CAT)
•This team would specifically address emerging violent crime patterns and repeat
violent crime offenders in Salt Lake City
•It was known that a small number of repeat violent individuals were responsible for a
disproportionate number of crimes in the City
•identifying and apprehending the most violent offenders could have a significant
impact on crime trends
•Funding agency:U.S.DOJ Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS)Office
•Grant Program 2020 COPS Hiring Program
•Length of award:performance period was 36 months -available for 60 months to
facilitate hiring etc.,which would allow the grant to run until 6/30/2025
•amount awarded $1,250,000
•Required match from the City:$1,181,460
•12-month retention requirement for each office position funded
•V-CAT would be comprised of nine detectives and one sergeant
•Funds would be used to create two Intelligence-led Policing (ILP)squads specifically
addressing emerging violent crime patterns and repeat violent crime offenders in Salt
lake City
•The team would be housed within the Investigations Unit and use intelligence led
policing strategies and performance
•V-CAT would work directly with Patrol,Homicide Squad,Robbery Unit,Special
Victims Unit and other investigation divisions
•V-CAT would seek to locate and safely apprehend violent offenders and those who
committed crimes using weapons
•V-CAT was intended to leverage existing department-wide resources for more effective
problem solving
Council Member Mano asked how adding more full time employees would solve the current
need for officers when hiring officers was difficult.Chief Brown stated there were officers
working through the hiring process right now but would take time,and the V-CAT program
would be staffed with current officers and then new officers would be moved into open
positions.
Council Member Puy asked if the current approved funding could be used to fund the
program.Ms.Thompson stated the funding for the program would be budget neutral,
providing budget savings.
Council Member Mano asked if this was the best practice to promote officers,was it
necessary to have the grant,and was the proposal needed immediately.Chief Brown stated
the proposal was a goal of the revised crime plan,deadlines were approaching for using the
funding and the proposal would allow officers to continue their current job without taking
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
14
away from the safety of the City.
Council Member Mano asked if the hiring process took too long,why current funding
couldn't not be used.Chief Brown stated they would be willing to get additional answers for
the Council.
Kristin Riker reviewed the Salt Lake City Public Lands Park Ranger Program.
Chief Karl Lieb reviewed the Community Health Access Team program (CHAT).
Council Member Valdemoros stated she was excited for the CHAT program and to see the
results of the program .
Stephen Meyer reviewed the Mobile Crisis Outreach Team (MCOT).
Council commended the Emergency Services Department on their presentations and the
work they were doing to provide services to the City.
Council Member Valdemoros asked if the Council discussed the Allen Park item.Mr.
Luedtke stated it was a budget neutral item and was discussed a in a prior briefing.
8.Informational:Redistricting Update ~5:15 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive an update on the City's redistricting process to update Council
District boundaries based on the 2020 Census results.A resident Redistricting Advisory
Commission will recommend maps to the Council.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,February 1,2022;Tuesday,February 8,2022;and Tuesday,February 15,
2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Minutes:
Ben Luedtke reviewed the number of applicants for the Redistricting Committee and
presented the names of nine staff recommended applicants.He stated the overall goal was
to have a diverse committee with one member from each district and two at-large members.
Council Members commended the subcommittee on the work they did to select members of
the Redistricting Committee.
Mr.Luedtke read the names and district for each member of the committee:
•Erik Lopez,District 1
•Marti Woolford,District 2
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
15
•Mallory Bateman,District 3
•Neil Vander,District 4
•Eric Kenney,District 5
•Anne Cannon,District 6
•Elisabeth Morrey,District 7
•Diya Oommen –at large
•Daniel Cario -at large
A unanimous Straw Poll was supported by those present to approve the
members of the Redistricting Committee as selected by the Council’s
Subcommittee.
9.Informational:State Legislative Briefing ~5:35 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,February 15,
2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Minutes:
Item moved to a future meeting.
10.Board Appointment:Public Utilities Advisory Committee (PUAC):
Alexander Lovell ~6:05 p.m.
5 min.
The Council will interview Alexander Lovell prior to considering appointment to the PUAC
for a term ending January 19,2026.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,February 15,2022
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
16
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,February 15,2022
Minutes:
Interview held.Council Member Dugan said Alexander Lovell’s name was on the Consent
Agenda for formal consideration.
11.Board Appointment:Public Utilities Advisory Committee (PUAC):
Kathryn Floor ~6:10 p.m.
5 min.
The Council will interview Kathryn Floor prior to considering appointment to the PUAC for a
term ending January 19,2026.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,February 15,2022
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,February 15,2022
Minutes:
Interview held.Council Member Dugan said Kathryn Floor’s name was on the Consent
Agenda for formal consideration.
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
17
Standing Items
12.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair
Report of Chair and Vice Chair.
Minutes:
Item not held.
13.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 scheduling items.
Minutes:
Item not held.
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
18
14.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
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
19
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.
Motion:
Moved by Councilmember Fowler,seconded by Councilmember Puy to enter into
Closed Session for the purposes of strategy sessions to discuss pending or
reasonably imminent litigation and attorney-client matters that are
privileged.
AYE:Ana Valdemoros,Amy Fowler,Darin Mano,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Victoria
Petro-Eschler,Alejandro Puy
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
Minutes:
Closed Session started at 6:03 pm
Held via Webex and in Work Session Room
Council Members in Attendance:Council Members Dugan,Fowler,Petro-Eschler,Puy,
Mano,Wharton and Valdemoros
City Staff in Attendance:Mayor Erin Mendenhall,Katherine Lewis,Rachel Otto,Lisa
Shaffer,Mary Beth Thompson,Cindy Gust-Jenson,Jennifer Bruno,Lehua Weaver,Cindy
Lou Trishman,Beatrix Sieger,Allison Rowland,Ben Luedtke,Taylor Hill,John Vuyk,Nick
Tarbet,Sam Owen,Scott Corpany,Dustin Parks,and Waiyapan (Tucky)Kantaphat.
Motion by Council Member Fowler,seconded by Council Member Wharton to exit the
Closed Session.Roll Call vote was held and all present voted Aye.
Closed Session ended at 7:20 pm
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
20
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
21
Meeting adjourned at [INSERT END TIME]
Minutes Approved:
_______________________________
City Council Chair
_______________________________
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 City Council
Work Session meeting held Tuesday,February 15,2022.
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday,February 15,2022
22
PENDING MINUTES –NOT APPROVED
The City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah,met in a Special Work Session on Wednesday,February
16,2022.
The following Council Members were present:
Ana Valdemoros,Amy Fowler,Darin Mano,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Victoria Petro-
Eschler,Alejandro Puy
Present Legislative leadership:
Cindy Gust-Jenson,Executive Director;Jennifer Bruno,Deputy Director;Lehua
Weaver,Associate Deputy Director
Present Administrative leadership:
Mayor Erin Mendenhall;Rachel Otto,Chief of Staff
Present City Staff:
Ben Luedtke –Senior Public Policy Analyst,Katherine Lewis –City Attorney,Nick Tarbet
–Senior Public Policy Analyst,Sam Owen –Public Policy Analyst,Taylor Hill –City Council
Staff,Mary Beth Thompson –Chief Financial Officer,Allison Rowland –Public Policy Analyst
Council Member Dugan presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 4:10 pm
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Wednesday,February 16,2022
1
Work Session Items
NONE.
Minutes:
Council Chair Dugan welcomed everyone to the Special Work Session Meeting.
Standing Items
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Wednesday,February 16,2022
2
1.Closed Session ~4:00 p.m.
-
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.
Minutes:
Closed Session start time:4:15 pm
Held via Webex and in the Work Session Room
Council Members in Attendance:Council Members Dugan,Fowler,Petro-Eschler,Puy,
Mano,Wharton and Valdemoros
City Staff in Attendance:Mayor Mendenhall,Rachel Otto,Katherine Lewis,Mary Beth
Thompson,Cindy Gust-Jenson,Jennifer Bruno,Lehua Weaver,Nick Tarbet,Felicity
Henderson,Allison Rowland,Ben Luedtke,Taylor Hill,Sam Owen,Scott Corpany,Kate
Bradshaw (consultant),and Cindy Lou Trishman
Closed Session end time:5:19 pm
Motion:
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Wednesday,February 16,2022
3
Moved by Council Member Fowler,seconded by Council Member Wharton to
enter into Closed Session for the purposes of strategy sessions to discuss
pending or reasonably imminent litigation and attorney-client matters that
are privileged pursuant to Utah Code §78B-1-137.
AYE:Ana Valdemoros,Amy Fowler,Darin Mano,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Victoria
Petro-Eschler,Alejandro Puy
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Fowler,seconded by Council Member Wharton to
exit the Closed Session.
AYE:Ana Valdemoros,Amy Fowler,Darin Mano,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Victoria
Petro-Eschler,Alejandro Puy
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Wednesday,February 16,2022
4
Meeting adjourned at 5:19 pm
Minutes Approved:
_______________________________
City Council Chair
_______________________________
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 City
Council Work Session meeting held Wednesday,February 16,2022.
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Wednesday,February 16,2022
5
PENDING MINUTES –NOT APPROVED
The The Local Building Authority,the Redevelopment Agency,and the Salt Lake City Council of
Salt Lake City,Utah met in Formal Session on Tuesday,May 4,2021 in an Electronic Meeting,
pursuant to the Redevelopment Agency and City Council Chairs’determination and Salt Lake
City Emergency Proclamation No.2 of 2020(2)(b).
The following Board Directors/Council Members were present:
Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Present Legislative leadership:
Cindy Gust-Jenson,Executive Director;Jennifer Bruno,Deputy Director;Lehua
Weaver,Associate Deputy Director
Present Administrative leadership:
Mayor Erin Mendenhall;Rachel Otto,Chief of Staff;Lisa Shaffer,Chief Administrative Officer;
Danny Walz,Redevelopment Agency Chief Operating Officer
Present City Staff:
Katherine Lewis –City Attorney,Cindy Lou Trishman –City Recorder,Ben Luedtke –Senior
Public Policy Analyst,Robert Nutzman –Administrative Assistant,Sylvia Richards –Public
Policy Analyst,Thais Stewart –Minutes &Records Clerk,Michelle Barney –Minutes &Records
Clerk,Taylor Hill –Council Staff
Council Member Fowler presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm
A.LBA OPENING CEREMONY:
1.Council/Board Member Amy Fowler Ana Valdemoros will conduct the formal
meetings.
Council Member Fowler welcomed everyone in attendance to the meeting.
2.Pledge of Allegiance.
A moment of silence was held while the American Flag and Pledge text was
displayed on the screen
3.Welcome and Public Meeting Rules.
Council Member Fowler stated the meeting rules would be reviewed during the
public comment portion of the meetng,as the Local Building Authority was not
accepting public comment.
The Local Building Authority convened.
B.LBA UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1.Resolution:Tentative Budget for the Capital Projects Fund of the Local
Building Authority for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Board will consider approving a resolution adopting the tentative budget for
the Capital Projects Fund of the Local Building Authority of Salt Lake City,Utah for
Fiscal Year 2021-22.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Action -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Board Member Rogers,seconded by Board Member Dugan to
approve Resolution 1 of 2021,adopting the tentative budget for the Capital
Projects Fund of the Local Building Authority of Salt Lake City,Utah for Fiscal
Year 2021-22.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
C.LBA ADJOURNMENT:
Motion:
Moved by Board Member Rogers,seconded by Board Member Dugan to adjourn as
the Local Building Authority and convene as the Redevelopment Agency.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of
SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH MEETING
Please note:Dates not identified in the FYI -Project Timeline are either not applicable or not yet
determined.
D.RDA UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1.Resolution:Tentative Budget for the Redevelopment Agency of Salt
Lake City for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Board will consider approving a resolution adopting the tentative budget for
the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Action -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Board Member Rogers,seconded by Board Member Dugan to
approve Resolution R-9 of 2021,to adopt the tentative budget for the
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City,Utah for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
The Redevelopment Agency convened.
E.RDA ADJOURNMENT:
Motion:
Moved by Board Member Rogers,seconded by Board Member Wharton to adjourn
as Redevelopment Agency and convene as the Salt Lake City Council.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Please note:Dates not identified in the FYI -Project Timeline are either not applicable or not yet
determined.
F.OPENING CEREMONY:
1.The Council will approve the work session meeting minutes of Tuesday,September
1,2020 and Tuesday,October 6,2020.
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Wharton to
approve the work session meeting minutes of Tuesday,September 1,2020
and Tuesday,October 6,2020.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
2.Mayor Mendenhall will present the proposed Salt Lake City budget,including the
Library Fund,for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
Mayor Mendenhall outlined the budget plan including topics of homeless
services,commitment to affordable housing,road improvement programs,social
workers employeed by the Police Department,and the implementation of the
Community Reinvestment Plan.
The City Council of Salt Lake City met in Formal Session.
G.PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Items G1-G6 will be heard as one public hearing
1.Grant Application:200 South Transit Priority Signal System –Transit
Transportation Investment Fund Grant
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Division of Transportation to the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT).If
awarded,this grant would fund the installation of a transit signal priority (TSP)
system,traffic signal upgrades,and transit-focused technology to allow the 200
South transit corridor to accommodate twelve bus routes with 1,100 bus trips per
day.
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 -Tuesday,May 4,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda.
2.Grant Application:200 South Transit Hub End-of-Line Facilities -
Transit Transportation Investment Fund Grant
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Division of Transportation to the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT).If
awarded,this grant would fund the construction of bus parking and layover
infrastructure for the 200 South East Downtown Transit Hub.These amenities will
allow drivers to leave their vehicles and take a break between routes.The
Administration indicates the leasing,operating,and maintenance agreements
between the City and the Utah Transit Authority (UTA)are not yet determined.
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 -Tuesday,May 4,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda.
3.Grant Application:North Temple Active Transportation –Transit
Transportation Investment Fund –First and Last Mile Grant
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Division of Transportation to the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT).If
awarded,this grant would fund the construction of a paved trail,improve and
shorten pedestrian crossings,widen sidewalks,and add trees and shading
elements for the five-block stretch of North Temple from the North Temple
Frontrunner stop to downtown Salt Lake City.
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 -Tuesday,May 4,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda.
4.Grant Application:West Temple Walk Bike Transit Connections -
Transit Transportation Investment Fund-First and Last Mile Grant
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Division of Transportation to the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT).If
awarded,this grant would fund the addition of physically separated bike lanes,
pedestrian crossing improvements,and narrow pedestrian crossing distances with
curb extensions and refuge islands.These improvements will be made as part of
the West Temple Street Reconstruction scheduled for 2024.
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 -Tuesday,May 4,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda.
5.Grant Application:Westpointe/Jordan Meadows Neighborhood Byway
Grant -Transit Transportation Investment Fund-First and Last Mile
Grant
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Division of Transportation to the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT).If
awarded,this grant would fund the construction of a north-south transportation
route through the Westpointe and Jordan Meadows neighborhoods running west
of and parallel to Redwood Road.Amenities planned for this location include mini-
roundabouts at larger street intersections,curb extension,bike ramps,bike lane
striping,speed humps,and wayfinding signage.
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 -Tuesday,May 4,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda.
6.Grant Application:Parley’s Trail Gap in Sugar House –Transportation
Investment Fund-Active Transportation Grant
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Division of Transportation to the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT).If
awarded,this grant would fund the construction of a two-way bike facility in the
public right-of-way on the west side of Highland Drive,and the construction of
200 feet of a trail along Sugarmont Drive just west of Highland Drive.This work
will be completed as part of the reconstruction of Highland Drive planned for
2023.
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 -Tuesday,May 4,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a
Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda.
Council Member Fowler outlined the Public Meeting Guidelines.
Sylvia Richards presented the grant applicatons for:
1.200 South Transit Priority Signal Sysytem –Transit Transportation
Investment Fund.
2.200 South Transit Hub End-of-Line Facilities –Transit Transportation
Investment Fund Grant
3.North Temple Active Transportation –Transit Transportation Investment
Fund –First and Last Mile Grant
4.West Temple Walk Bike Transit Connections –Transit Transportation
Investment Fund First and Last Mile Grant
5.Westpointe/Jordan Meadows Neightborhood Byway Grant –Transit
Transportation Investment fund –First and Last Mile Grant
6.Parley’s Trail Gap in Sugar House –Transportation Investment Fund –Active
Transportation Grant
George Chapman spoke to applications 1 and 3 regarding traffic issues and
vehicle pollution,limiting traffic on Capitol Hill was a must;application 2 –a
transit hub was useless for bus routes on 200 South,the money should be used for
street maintenance rather than for parking buses;application 4 regarding bike
lanes was not necessary;separated bike lanes were not a benefit to the City.
Emily Alworth spoke in support of application 1 for the transit priority signal
system,stating it might limit emissions through shared commuting.
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Dugan,seconded by Council Member Wharton to
close the public hearing and defer action to a future Consent agenda.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
7.Ordinance:Budget Amendment No.8 for Fiscal Year 2020-21
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance
amending the final budget of Salt Lake City,including the employment staffing
document,for Fiscal Year 2020-21.The proposed amendment includes funding for
Crisis Intervention Team (CIT)training certifications and re-certifications,hiring a
class of lateral police officers,and a donation to Switchpoint to create a shelter for
low-income seniors and veterans,among other changes.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 4,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,May 18,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Ben Luedtke presented the Budget Amendment 8 for Fiscal Year 2020-2021
which included:
1.Hiring a lateral class of police officers
2.Critical response training police officers
3.$2M donation to create low-income housing for seniors and vets
4.Public Awareness Campaign funding for the City election method of Ranked
Choice Voting
Beverly Hawkins,Nigel Swaby,and George Champan expressed support,
including comments regarding lateral hires,increased critical response training,
supporting recommendations of the Racial Equity in Policing Commission,with
increased crime came an increased need for officers,low number of officers at
present with a concern for service,and to increase diversity in the police force.
Anne Charles spoke in opposition of the amendment for funding the police,
suggested money could go toward housing and mental health initiatives.
Emily Alworth spoke in opposition to the amendment,requested consideration
of community policing,and addressing the systematic issues causing the problems
Katie Mulligan spoke in opposition to the amendment,specifically the continual
increase to police funding despite a committment to re-evaluate services provided.
Council and Staff discussed the timeframe for approval of the budget specifically
the Overflow shelter and Police classes.
Council Member Rogers made a motion to close the public hearing and
adopt the ordinance amending the FY 2020-21 final budget,except for
Item I-1 which is the ranked choice voting awareness campaign
funding.
Speaking to the motion,Council Member Rogers indicated he disagreed with the
ranked choice voting approach and did not want to proceed with funding the item.
Council Member Fowler stated there was no second to the motion,so the motion
proposed failed.
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Wharton,seconded by Council Member Dugan to
close the public hearing and refer the item to a future date for action.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
H.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS:
NONE.
I.COMMENTS:
1.Questions to the Mayor from the City Council.
Council Member Rogers requested input from Mayor Mendenhall regarding her
opinion on the ranked choice voting method and funding.
Mayor Mendenhall stated that her belated caution was in direct relation to the
elimination of a Primary election.Mayor Mendenhall included,the Primary
election could be used a measuring guide for the candidates in their campaign
efforts.She additionally added that including the timeline of a campaign being
“shortened”by the timeline through the use of ranked choice voting did not
adequately convey the necessary time campaigning takes with the community.
Council Member Wharton expressed interest in the development process for the
Tiny Home Village,inquiring if public donation opportunities and engagement
had been considered.
Mayor Mendenhall shared that the Other Side Academy (contracted entity for the
Tiny Home Village)had an individual specifically designated for the coordination
and her office would provide information to the Council.
Council Member Fowler stated an FAQ regrading the Tiny Home Village was being
developed for the Council and City’s website.
2.Comments to the City Council.(Comments are taken on any item not scheduled for
a public hearing,as well as on any other City business.Comments are limited to
two minutes.)
Council Member Fowler summarized the Public Meeting Guidelines.
Cindy Cromer thanked Council Member Johnston for his service on the Council.
Emily Alworth spoke in support of Ranked Choice Voting,encouraged all
candidates to put their best foot forward on every single election and allow lower-
income individuals to participate as candidates;creating a better Salt Lake City.
Anne Charles spoke in support of Ranked Choice Voting,stating it helped people
be able to vote for the candidate they generally supported instead of choosing
between the top two candidates;did not support the Tiny Home Village,
particularly serviced by the Other Side Academy because they did not provide
needed services;should provide doctors and help with mental health issues.
Katie Mulliken expressed concern about the City’s partnership with The Other
Side Academy for the Tiny House Village;that the housing materials would be
substandard and have a constant security presence;(security presence was a
traumatizing aspect for people in this circumstance);supported affordable housing
with a supportive community aspect and in doing so it should be comprehensive
plan involving each part of the person and not just their ability to work.
George Chapman expressed agreement with the Mayor and Council
Member Rogers regarding Ranked Choice Voting;City should not be approving
skinny sidewalks (as the RDA did)–as the approved project violated complete
streets standards;COVID funds should be used for an after-hours child care
service at Bennion School;pocket libraries or a park (Fleet Block),and RDA should
not be expanding TRAX when the money was needed for other things.
J.NEW BUSINESS:
1.Motion:Meeting Remotely Without an Anchor Location
The Council will consider a motion to ratify the determination that the Council will
continue to meet remotely and without an anchor location under HB5002.
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 -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Wharton,seconded by Council Member Rogers to
Council ratify the Council Chair’s decision to meet remotely without an anchor location
due to the City’s local emergency.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
Council Member Fowler read the statement stating meeting at the anchor location
was a risk to the health and safety of those attending the meetings.
2.Resolution:Local Emergency Declaration Extension –COVID-19
The Council will consider adopting a resolution that would extend the Mayor’s
March 10,2020 proclamation declaring a local emergency relating to COVID-19
(coronavirus).The Council’s most recent extension of the local emergency relating
to COVID-19 terminates May 5,2021.
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 -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Item not held due to information provided on the meeting day.
3.Ordinance:Permitting Certain Outdoor Business Activities and Use of
Certain Temporary Structures
The Council will consider adopting a temporary land use ordinance
that would allow restaurants and retail establishments that hold a
current business license to conduct temporary outdoor restaurant
dining and retail activities on private property and utilize temporary
structures to facilitate outdoor dining and retail activities.The
proposed ordinance would allow the land use aspects of the Mayor’s
emergency proclamations related to outdoor dining and retail to
continue once the emergency proclamation allowed under H.B.294
expires.The temporary ordinance would be in effect for six months.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Dugan,seconded by Council Member Rogers to
adopt a temporary land use ordinance that would allow restaurants and retail
establishments that hold a current business license to conduct temporary
outdoor restaurant dining and retail activities on private property and utilize
temporary structures to facilitate outdoor dining and retail activities.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
Council,Attorney and Recorder clarified the ordinance language included
businesses with existing City licenses.
K.UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1.Resolution:Tentative Budget of Salt Lake City,including the Tentative
Budget of the Library Fund,for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council will consider approving a resolution adopting the tentative budgets of
Salt Lake City,Utah,including the tentative budget of the Library Fund,for Fiscal
Year 2021-22.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Dugan,seconded by Council Member Rogers to
adopt Resolution 15 of 2021,adopting the tentative budget for Salt Lake City,
Utah,including the tentative budget of the Library Fund,for Fiscal Year
2021-22.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
2.Ordinance:Zoning Map Amendment located at approximately 706 to
740 West 900 South 710 to 739 West Genesee Avenue
The Council will reconsider*adopting ordinances that would rezone properties at
706 to 740 West 900 South and 710 to 739 West Genesee Avenue,including
portions of two alleys,from M-1 (Light Manufacturing)to R-MU (Residential
Mixed Use).The applicant intends to develop the remaining portion of the site
with multi-family residential housing that is not currently permitted under the
existing zoning designation.The developer has not proposed a specific
development plan as part of the rezone application.The applicant also intends to
renovate two vacant commercial buildings on the site for commercial uses.
Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district
with similar characteristics.Other sections of Title 21A –Zoning may also be
amended as part of this petition.Petition Nos.:PLNPCM2019-01137 and
PLN2020-00442
*The Council is reconsidering this item to clarify for the public record which of the
two proposed ordinances is being considered.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,February 16,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 16,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 2,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,April 20,2021 and Tuesday,May 4,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Dugan,seconded by Council Member Rogers to to
reconsider the vote made at the April 20,2021 Formal meeting.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Dugan to
adopt Ordinance 10 of 2021,rezoning the properties from M-1 to R-MU
subject to the developers entering into a development agreement with the
City with the following conditions recommended by the Planning
Commission:
1.the applicant enters into a purchase agreement with the City to acquire
the vacated portions of the alleys that are the subjects of petition
numbers PLNPCM2019-00813 and PLNPCM2020-00268;and
2.Design standards currently applicable in the D-2 zone shall be applied to
any new development on the properties subject to this zoning map
amendment.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
Council held a discussion on the order of necessary motions,provided this item
was considered at the April 20,2021 Formal meeting.The reason identified by City
Council staff requiring the reconsideration was that the transmittal had included
two ordinances for consideration for the Council,and the motion on April 20,2021
did not provide specificity of which ordinance was adopted.
L.CONSENT:
1.Ordinance:Budget Amendment No.9 for Fiscal Year 2020-21
The Council will set the date of Tuesday,May 18,2021 at 7 p.m.to accept public
comment and consider adopting an ordinance amending the final budget of Salt
Lake City,including the employment staffing document,for Fiscal Year 2020-21.
The proposed amendment includes funding for building office space to
accommodate expansion of the Emergency Management Division,technology
upgrades for the 911 Department,and reimbursements to the Fire Department,
among other changes.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,June 1,2021
Staff Recommendation -Set date.
2.Grant Holding Account Item (Batch No.5)Associated with Budget
Amendment No.9 for Fiscal Year 2020-21
The Council will consider approving Grant Holding Account Item (Batch No.5)for
Fiscal Year 2020-21 Associated with Budget Amendment No.9.
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 -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Staff Recommendation -Approve.
3.Board Appointment:Public Utilities Advisory Committee (PUAC)
–Dani Cepernich
The Council will consider approving the appointment of Dani Cepernich to the
PUAC for a term ending January 20,2025.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Staff Recommendation -Approve.
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Wharton to
approve the Consent agenda.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
M.ADJOURNMENT:
Meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
Minutes Approved
_______________________________
Local Building Authority
_______________________________
Redevelopment Agency Chair
_______________________________
City Council Chair
_______________________________
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 City
Council Formal Session meeting held Tuesday,May 4,2021.
PENDING MINUTES –NOT APPROVED
The Local Building Authority,the Redevelopment Agency,and the Salt Lake City Council of Salt
Lake City,Utah met in Formal Session on Tuesday,May 18,2021 in an Electronic Meeting,
pursuant to the Redevelopment Agency and City Council Chairs’determination.
The following Board Directors/Council Members were present:
Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,
Dennis Faris
Present Legislative leadership:
Cindy Gust-Jenson,Executive Director;Jennifer Bruno,Deputy Director;Lehua
Weaver,Associate Deputy Director
Present Administrative leadership:
Mayor Erin Mendenhall;Rachel Otto,Chief of Staff;Lisa Shaffer,Chief Administrative Officer;
Danny Walz,Redevelopment Agency Chief Operating Officer
Present City Staff:
Katherine Lewis –City Attorney,Cindy Lou Trishman –City Recorder,Ben Luedtke –Senior
Public Policy Analyst,Brian Fullmer –Constituent Liaison,Policy Analyst,Robert Nutzman
–Administrative Assistant,Taylor Hill –Council Office
Council Member Amy Fowler presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm
A.LBA OPENING CEREMONY:
1.Council/Board Member Amy Fowler will conduct the formal meetings.
Minutes:
Council Member Fowler welcomed everyone in attendance to the meeting.
2.Pledge of Allegiance.
Minutes:
A moment of silence was held while the American Flag and Pledge text was displayed on
the screen.
3.Welcome and Public Meeting Rules.
Minutes:
Councilmember Fowler reviewed the rules of decorum.
B.LBA PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1.Resolution:Budget for the Capital Projects Fund of the Local Building
Authority for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Board will accept public comment and consider approving a resolution
adopting the final budget for the Capital Projects Fund of the Local Building
Authority of Salt Lake City for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Close hearing and refer to public hearing
on June 1,2021
Minutes:
Jennifer Bruno clarified that the Local Building Authority budget was related to the
Glendale and Marmalade Libraries as Capital Projects by the Local Building Authority for
Fiscal Year 2021-22.
Deborah Chaltron spoke to the need to keep the tennis courts at Liberty Park;it kept
her connected to her community and requested support for the funding for the tennis
facilities.
Motion:
Moved by Board Member Rogers,seconded by Board Member Dugan to close
this public hearing and refer to the public hearing on June 1,2021.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,
Dennis Faris
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
C.LBA NEW BUSINESS
1.Resolution:Electronic Meetings
The Board will consider adopting a resolution which permits the Local Building
Authority Board of Directors to meet electronically pursuant to the Utah Open and
Public Meetings Act.
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 Action -Tuesday,May 18,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Board Member Rogers,seconded by Board Member Dugan to adopt
Resolution 2 of 2021,which permits the Local Building Authority Board of
Directors to meet electronically pursuant to the Utah Open Public Meetings
Act
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,
Dennis Faris
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
D.LBA ADJOURNMENT:
Motion:
Moved by Board Member Rogers,seconded by Board Member Wharton to adjourn
and reconvene as the Redevelopment Agency Board.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,Dennis
Faris
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of
SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH MEETING
Please note:Dates not identified in the FYI -Project Timeline are either not applicable or not yet
determined.
E.RDA PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1.Resolution:Budget for the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City for
Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Board will accept public comment and consider approving a resolution
adopting the final budget for the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City for Fiscal
Year 2021-22.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,May 18,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Close hearing and refer to public hearing
on June 1,2021
Minutes:
Jennifer Bruno presented the Budget for the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
George Chapman spoke to the Redevelopment Agency and the implementation of their
goals,the need for funding for parks and affordable housing,smaller sidewalks should not
be allowed in the City.
Motion:
Moved by Board Member Dugan,seconded by Board Member Valdemoros to
close the public hearing and refer to the public hearing on June 1,2021
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,
Dennis Faris
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
F.RDA ADJOURNMENT:
Motion:
Moved by Board Member Rogers,seconded by Board Member Wharton to adjourn
the Redevelopment Agency and reconvene as the City Council.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,Dennis
Faris
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Please note:Dates not identified in the FYI -Project Timeline are either not applicable or not yet
determined.
G.OPENING CEREMONY:
1.The Council will approve the work session meeting minutes of Tuesday,January
12,2021;February 2,2021;and Tuesday,February 9,2021.
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Dugan to
approve the Work Session meeting minutes of Tuesday,January 12,2021;
February 2,2021 and February 9,2021.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,
Dennis Faris
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
H.PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1.Ordinance:Learned Alley Vacation (1025 West North Temple and 1022,
1028,1030,and 1032 West Learned Avenue)
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that
would vacate a City-owned alley adjacent to properties at 1025 West North Temple
and 1022,1028,1030 and 1032 West Learned Avenue.The applicant petitioned to
vacate the 180-foot long section of public alley to consolidate the properties
immediately abutting the alley.If approved,the applicant plans to consolidate the
lots adjacent to the alley and construct a multi-family residential structure.The
proposed project would still need to meet relevant zoning requirements and the
applicant would need to submit a separate petition.The closure will not impact
traffic or access.Petition No.:PLNPCM2020-00572.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,April 6,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 6,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,June 1,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Minutes:
Brian Fullmer presented the Learned Alley Vacation (1025 West North Temple and
1022,1028,1030 and 1032 West Learned Avenue).
Carolyn Fleming spoke in favor of the proposal.
Morgan Call spoke in opposition to the ordinance.
Pachuco Lautaro requested the Council deny the ordinance.
John Kivlovitz stated the development was destroying a community that had been there
for years.
Devin O’Donnell asked the Council to find a better solution for the property,affordable
housing was not promised,the projects kept moving residents and not finding solutions.
Taylor Monney stated the ordinance would allow further gentrification of the
community and urged the Council to vote no on the ordinance.
Anne Charles stated this was not wanted by members of the community and would
further hurt the community.
Riley Rogers stated he understood the concerns of the community,residents were paid
for the properties,assisted with moving and everyone was able to find better housing than
what they were currently living in.
Emily Alworth spoke in opposition to the ordinance and alley vacation and said people
in the community were speaking out against this ordinance and did not want the
development.
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Mano to
close the Public Hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,
Dennis Faris
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
2.Ordinance:Fern Subdivision Alley Vacation
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that
would vacate a City-owned alley known as the Fern Subdivision Alley,located
between 1000 East and 1100 East and between Wood Avenue and Logan Avenue.
The east-west portion of the alley runs behind eight homes between 1019 East and
1053 East Logan Avenue.Petition No.:PLNPCM2018-0046
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,April 6,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 6,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,June 1,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Minutes:
Brian Fullmer presented the Fern Subdivision Alley Vacation.
Devin O’Donnell asked why the alley needed to be vacated and what the alley would be
used for.
Kathleen A.Bratcher reviewed the reasoning for vacating the alley and using it for
access to adjacent properties.
Rachel Bicknell spoke in support of vacating the alley as it would create a quiet and
secure location.
Joshua Lenhart spoke in support of the ordinance,asked that once the alley was
vacated the property lines did not get moved.
Janet Cortez suggested that the alley be maintained to help traffic congestion.
Roni Danish spoke in favor of vacating the alley,said it would be good for the City
and help control the crime in the area.
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Dugan to
close the Public Hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,Dennis Faris
ABSENT:Ana Valdemoros
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
3.Ordinance:Budget Amendment No.9 for Fiscal Year 2020-21
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance
amending the final budget of Salt Lake City,including the employment staffing
document,for Fiscal Year 2020-21.The proposed amendment includes funding for
building office space to accommodate expansion of the Emergency Management
Division,technology upgrades for the 911 Department,and reimbursements to the
Fire Department,among other changes.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,May 4,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,June 1,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Ordinances listed below (H4-H15)are associated with the
implementation of the Mayor’s Recommended Budget for Salt Lake
City,including the Library Fund,for the Fiscal Year (FY)2021-22.All
ordinances will be heard as one public hearing item during the May
18th and June 1st public hearings.
Minutes:
Ben Luedtke presented Budget Amendment No.9 for Fiscal Year 2020-21.
Anne Charles spoke to the Raise Up SLC funds that were not allocated and urged the
Council to allocate the funding to individuals that needed it;expressed opposition to
the Convention hotel tax incentives.
George Chapman stated refunding police impact fees to developers was not the answer,
providing the east side police precinct should be a higher priority.
Emily Alworth stated impact fees were mismanaged and police funds needed to be
reviewed.
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Dugan to
continue the public hearing to June 1,2021.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,Dennis Faris
ABSENT:Ana Valdemoros
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
4.Ordinance:Appropriating Necessary Funds to Implement Provisions
of an MOU between Salt Lake City and AFSCME for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance
appropriating necessary funds to implement,for Fiscal Year 2021-22,the
provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)between Salt Lake City
Corporation and the American Federation of State,County,and Municipal
Employees (AFSCME)Local 1004,representing eligible employees.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Close hearing and refer to public hearing
on June 1,2021
5.Ordinance:Approving an MOU between Salt Lake City and the
International Association of Firefighters for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance
approving a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)between Salt Lake City
Corporation and the International Association of Firefighters Local 81,
representing eligible employees pursuant to the Collective Bargaining and
Employee Representation Joint Resolution dated March 22,2011,which shall
become effective on proper ratification and signature.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Close hearing and refer to public hearing
on June 1,2021
6.Ordinance:Appropriating Necessary Funds to Implement Provisions
of the MOU between Salt Lake City and the International Association of
Firefighters for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance
appropriating the necessary funds to implement,for Fiscal Year 2021-22,the
provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)between Salt Lake City
Corporation and the International Association of Firefighters Local 81,
representing eligible employees.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Close hearing and refer to public hearing
on June 1,2021
7.Ordinance:Compensation Plan for All Non-represented employees of
Salt Lake City for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance
approving a compensation plan for all non-represented employees of Salt Lake
City.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Close hearing and refer to public hearing
on June 1,2021
8.Ordinance:Appropriating Necessary Funds to Implement Provisions
of the MOU between Salt Lake City and the Salt Lake City Police
Association for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance
appropriating necessary funds to implement,for Fiscal Year 2021-22,the
provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)between Salt Lake City
Corporation and the Salt Lake Police Association,representing eligible employees.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Close hearing and refer to public hearing
on June 1,2021
9.Ordinance:Approving an MOU between Salt Lake City and the Salt
Lake City Police Association
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance
approving a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)between Salt Lake City and
the Salt Lake City Police Association,representing eligible employees for Fiscal
Year 2021-22.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Close hearing and refer to public hearing
on June 1,2021
10.Ordinance:Adopting the rate of tax levy,including the levy for the
Library Fund,for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council will accept public comment and consider approving an ordinance
adopting the rate of tax levy,including the levy for the Library Fund,upon all real
and personal property within Salt Lake City made taxable by law for Fiscal Year
2021-22.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Close hearing and refer to public
hearing on June 1,2021
11.Ordinance:Adopting the Budget for the Library Fund of Salt Lake City,
Utah for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council will accept public comment and consider approving an ordinance
adopting the budget for the Library Fund of Salt Lake City,Utah for Fiscal Year
2021-22.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Close hearing and refer to public hearing
on June 1,2021
12.Ordinance:Amendments to the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee
Schedule for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council will accept public comment and consider approving an ordinance
amending various fees and fee information set forth in the Salt Lake City
Consolidated Fee Schedule.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Close hearing and refer to public
hearing on June 1,2021
13.Ordinance:Work in the Public Way Fees
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance
amending sections of the Salt Lake City Code relating to definitions and fees of
work in the public way.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
14.Ordinance:City Departments Organizational Changes
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance
amending sections of the Salt Lake City Code relating to the organizational
changes with the Department of Public Services,the proposed Department of
Public Lands,and the Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN).The
Mayor's proposed budget would transfer the Engineering Division and Youth and
Family Division between the CAN and Public Services Departments.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
15.Ordinances relating to the Fiscal Year 2021-22 City Budget,excluding
the budget for the Library Fund
The Council will accept public comment and consider approving an ordinance
adopting the budget for Salt Lake City,Utah,excluding the budget for the Library
Fund which is separately adopted,and the employment staffing document of Salt
Lake City,Utah for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 18,2021 and Tuesday,
June 1,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Close hearing and refer to public
hearing on June 1,2021
This concludes the public hearings for the Mayor's Recommended
Budget for Salt Lake City,including the Library Fund,for FY 2021-22.
All ordinances will be heard as one public hearing item during the
May 18th and June 1st public hearings.
Minutes:
Jennifer Bruno presented the following items:
4.Appropriating Necessary Funds to Implement Provisions of an MOU between Salt
Lake City and AFSCME for Fiscal Year 2021-22
5.Approving an MOU between Salt Lake City and the International Association of
Firefighters for Fiscal Year 2021-22
6.Appropriating Necessary Funds to Implement Provisions of the MOU between Salt
Lake City and the International Association of Firefighters for Fiscal Year 2021-22
7.Compensation Plan for All Non-represented employees of Salt Lake City for Fiscal
Year 2021-22
8.Appropriating Necessary Funds to Implement Provisions of the MOU between Salt
Lake City and the Salt Lake City Police Association for Fiscal Year 2021-22
9.Approving an MOU between Salt Lake City and the Salt Lake City Police Association
10.Adopting the rate of tax levy,including the levy for the Library Fund,for Fiscal Year
2021-22
11.Adopting the Budget for the Library Fund of Salt Lake City,Utah for Fiscal Year
2021-22
12.Amendments to the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year
2021-22
13.Work in the Public Way Fees
14.City Departments Organizational Changes
15.Ordinances relating to the Fiscal Year 2021-22 City Budget,excluding the budget for
the Library Fund
Council Member Fowler stated additional work session meetings in 2021 would be held
for the budget on:May 25,June 1,June 3,and one additional in June (TBD)before the
budget was adopted.
George Chapman spoke to the need to increase funding for police officers;City should
stop using consultants;pocket libraries were needed;suggested separating budget items
to allow the public to comment on each item.
Tyeer Houser asked the Council to support the budget for the Liberty Hills tennis
courts.
Kali Mower spoke to the CIP budget recommendation for Odyssey House that was
underfunded by $200k and expressed concern about the general safety of the people that
used the services due to the buildings condition.
Ainsley Moench spoke to de-funding the police.
Anne Charles stated the Odyssey House needed additional funding and increasing the
police budget did not reconstruct the system.
Emily Alworth spoke in opposition to the increase of funding for the police
department.
Deborah Chaltron stated tennis centers were in need of attention and it was time for
the City to invest in their amenities.
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Mano to
close the Public Hearings for items H4-H15 and refer to the public Hearings
on June 1,2021.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,
Dennis Faris
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
I.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS:
1.Ordinance:Budget Amendment No.8 for Fiscal Year 2020-21
The Council will consider adopting an ordinance amending the final budget of Salt
Lake City,including the employment staffing document,for Fiscal Year 2020-21.
The proposed amendment includes funding for Crisis Intervention Team (CIT)
training certifications and re-certifications,hiring a class of lateral police officers,
and a donation to Switchpoint to create a shelter for low-income seniors and
veterans,among other changes.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,April 20,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,May 4,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,May 18,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Mano to
adopt Ordinance 15 of 2021,amending the FY 2020-21 final budget of Salt
Lake City including the employment staffing document.
•A-1:Hire Lateral Class of Police Officers –($314,899 –Fund Balance)
•A-2:Crisis Intervention Team (CIT)Training for Police Department –
($117,400 –General Fund
•$322,800 Training Holding Account)
•A-3:Donation to Switchpoint to Create Shelter for Low-Income Seniors
and Veterans –($2 million;–
•$1 million each from General Fund’s Fund Balance and Funding Our
Future’s Fund Balance
•I-1:(Tentative)Ranked Choice Voting (RCV)($100,000 –$50,000 from
Fund Balance and $50,000 budget created to accept external funding)
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
ABSTAIN:Dennis Faris
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
2.Ordinance:2058 North 2200 West Zoning Map Amendment
The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would rezone property at
2058 North 2200 West from Agricultural District (AG-2)to Light Manufacturing
(M-1).The amendment would accommodate future commercial land uses such as
retail and service type businesses not permitted under the current zoning.No
specific site development proposal has been submitted at this time.Although the
applicant has requested that the property be rezoned to M-1,consideration may be
given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar
characteristics.Petition No.PLNPCM2018-00657.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,March 26,2019 and Tuesday,May 4,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,June 11,2019
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,July 9,2019 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,May 18,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Dugan to
adopt Ordinance 16 of 2021,amending the zoning map pertaining to the
parcel at approximately 2058 North 2200 West from AG-2,Agricultural to
M-1,Manufacturing.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
ABSTAIN:Dennis Faris
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
J.COMMENTS:
1.Questions to the Mayor from the City Council.
Minutes:
There were no questions.
2.Comments to the City Council.(Comments are taken on any item not scheduled for
a public hearing,as well as on any other City business.Comments are limited to
two minutes.)
Minutes:
Beverly Cooper,Hilary Jacobs,Daniel Schelling,Steven Stepanek,Debbie
Feder,and Scott Williams spoke about the Foothills trails projects,trails needing to be
done correctly and accountability emphasized,requested the Council halt construction for
further assessments and proper discovery,to reconsider the plan,protect the area and
revegetate what had been removed.
Natalia Southham,Anne Charles,Chris Butler,Alexandra Paretta,and Josh
Campbell spoke to de-funding police and using the funds to subsidize housing for the
unsheltered community,lack of usefulness of the police presence,and funding adjusted to
employ social workers.
Mark Barrett spoke to the issues with animal control services,tethering animals should
not be regulated when an animal was on its own property and enjoyed being outside.
George Chapman spoke in support of funding the police,social workers were not
appropriate for homeless issues where drugs were involved;needed properly trained
police officers that know how to address mental health issues.
Council and Staff discussed access to the police documents and the current pause for
assessment regarding the Foothills trail plan.
K.NEW BUSINESS:
1.Advice and Consent:Debbie Lyons –Director of Sustainability
The Council will consider approving the appointment of Debbie Lyons as the
Director of the Sustainability Department.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,May 18,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,May 18,2021
Staff Recommendation -Suspend the rules and consider motions.
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Wharton,seconded by Council Member Dugan to
approve advice and consent of Debbie Lyons as the Director of Sustainability.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,
Dennis Faris
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
L.UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1.Ordinance:SQF,LLC Master License Agreement for Small Cell
Installation in the Right-of-Way
The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would grant a master license
agreement for wireless facilities in the public way to SQF,LLC,a Delaware limited
liability company.The agreement would allow this small cell provider to install and
maintain small cell infrastructure within the City rights-of-way,subject to
conditions in the agreement and after securing specific site approvals.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,May 11,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,May 18,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Wharton,seconded by Council Member Rogers to
adopt Ordinance 17 of 2021,granting a Master License Agreement to SQF,
LLC.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
ABSTAIN:Dennis Faris
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
2.Ordinance:SQF,LLC Telecommunications Franchise Agreement
The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would grant a
telecommunication franchise agreement to SQF,LLC.The agreement would allow
the company to place its facilities within the City rights-of-way,governed by
certain conditions and after securing permits,and provides for the payment of the
telecommunications tax pursuant to State statute.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,May 11,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,May 18,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Mano to
adopt Ordinance 18 of 2021,granting a Telecommunication Franchise
Agreement to SQF,LLC.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
ABSTAIN:Dennis Faris
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
3.Ordinance:Google Fiber Utah Amended and Restated Broadband
Services Franchise
The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would approve an amended
and restated broadband services franchise agreement to Google Fiber Utah,LLC.
Google Fiber intends to discontinue video services to its customer base.The
amended and restated franchise agreement has been negotiated to omit video
services,change the fee structure and authorize broadband for a 15-year term.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,May 11,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,May 18,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Mano to
adopt Ordinance 19 of 2021,approving the Amended and Restated Broadband
Services Franchise agreement with Google Fiber Utah,LLC.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
ABSTAIN:Dennis Faris
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
4.Resolution:Housing Trust Fund Loan Amendment to Garden Lofts
Holdings,LP,at 154 West 600 South
The Council will consider adopting a resolution that would authorize two changes
to the original loan agreement between the City’s Housing Trust Fund and Garden
Lofts Holding,LP.The loan was originally granted in December 2017 to help fund
an affordable multi-family development that consists of 272 units,all at or below
60%of the Area Median Income (AMI).The proposed amendments would change
future rental rates to reflect an “income-averaging”approach,as well as the City’s
loan position,which would shift to third,behind a new private loan to the
developers to cover increased construction charges.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,May 11,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,May 18,2021
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Mano to
adopt Resolution 18 of 2021,authorizing the loan amendment from the
Housing Trust Fund to Garden Lofts Holdings,LP.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,
Dennis Faris
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
M.CONSENT:
1.Ordinance:Library Budget Amendment No.2 for Fiscal Year 2020-21
The Council will set the date of Tuesday,June 8,2021 to accept public comment
and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the budget for the Library
Fund for Fiscal Year 2020-21.Budget amendments happen several times each year
to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets,including proposed project additions
and modifications.The proposed amendment includes a request to increase the
Library’s General Fund budget to account for pass-through property tax revenue
collected by Salt Lake County which goes directly to the Utah Inland Port Authority
and the Convention Facility.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -Tuesday,May 18,2021
Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,May 18,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,June 8,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD
Staff Recommendation -Set date.
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Rogers,seconded by Council Member Wharton to
approve the consent agenda.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,Dennis
Faris
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
N.ADJOURNMENT:
Meeting adjourned at 9:15 pm
Minutes Approved
_______________________________
Local Building Authority
_______________________________
Redevelopment Agency Chair
_______________________________
City Council Chair
_______________________________
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 City
Council Formal Session meeting held Tuesday,May 18,2021.
PENDING MINUTES –NOT APPROVED
The City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah,met in Formal Session on Monday,June 21,2021 in an
Electronic Meeting,pursuant to the Chair’s determination.
The following Council Members were present:
Dennis Faris,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris
Wharton
Present Legislative leadership:
Cindy Gust-Jenson,Executive Director;Jennifer Bruno,Deputy Director;Lehua
Weaver,Associate Deputy Director
Present Administrative leadership:
Mayor Erin Mendenhall;Rachel Otto,Chief of Staff;Lisa Shaffer,Chief Administrative Officer
Present City Staff:
Katherine Lewis –City Attorney,Cindy Lou Trishman –City Recorder,Robert Nutzman
–Administrative Assistant
Council Member Amy Fowler presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 1:00 pm
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Monday,June 21,2021
1
A.OPENING CEREMONY:
1.Council Member Amy Fowler will conduct the formal meeting.
Minutes:
Council Member Fowler welcomed everyone in attendance,reviewed the item of
business and rules for a limited meeting.
B.PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Minutes:
None
C.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS:
Minutes:
None
D.COMMENTS:
Minutes:
None
E.NEW BUSINESS:
Minutes:
None
F.UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Monday,June 21,2021
2
1.(TENTATIVE)Ordinance:Appropriating Necessary Funds to
Implement Provisions of an MOU between Salt Lake City and AFSCME
for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council may reconsider*adopting an ordinance appropriating necessary funds
to implement,for Fiscal Year 2021-22,the provisions of the Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU)between Salt Lake City Corporation and the American
Federation of State,County,and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)Local 1004,
representing eligible employees.
*The Council may reconsider the action taken on June 15,2021 for this item.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -
Hold hearing to accept public comment -
TENTATIVE Council Action -
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
2.(TENTATIVE)Ordinance:Approving an MOU between Salt Lake City
and the International Association of Firefighters for Fiscal Year
2021-22
The Council may consider adopting an ordinance approving a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU)between Salt Lake City Corporation and the International
Association of Firefighters Local 81,representing eligible employees pursuant to
the Collective Bargaining and Employee Representation Joint Resolution dated
March 22,2011,which shall become effective on proper ratification and signature.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -
Hold hearing to accept public comment -
TENTATIVE Council Action -
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Monday,June 21,2021
3
3.(TENTATIVE)Ordinance:Appropriating Necessary Funds to
Implement Provisions of the MOU between Salt Lake City and the
International Association of Firefighters for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council may reconsider*adopting an ordinance appropriating the necessary
funds to implement,for Fiscal Year 2021-22,the provisions of the Memorandum
of Understanding (MOU)between Salt Lake City Corporation and the
International Association of Firefighters Local 81,representing eligible employees.
*The Council may reconsider the action taken on June 15,2021 for this item.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -
Hold hearing to accept public comment -
TENTATIVE Council Action -
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
4.(TENTATIVE)Ordinance:Compensation Plan for All Non-represented
employees of Salt Lake City for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council may reconsider*adopting an ordinance approving a compensation
plan for all non-represented employees of Salt Lake City.
*The Council may reconsider the action taken on June 15,2021 for this item.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -
Hold hearing to accept public comment -
TENTATIVE Council Action -
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Monday,June 21,2021
4
5.(TENTATIVE)Ordinance:Appropriating Necessary Funds to
Implement Provisions of the MOU between Salt Lake City and the Salt
Lake City Police Association for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council may reconsider*adopting an ordinance appropriating necessary
funds to implement,for Fiscal Year 2021-22,the provisions of the Memorandum
of Understanding (MOU)between Salt Lake City Corporation and the Salt Lake
Police Association,representing eligible employees.
*The Council may reconsider the action taken on June 15,2021 for this item.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -
Hold hearing to accept public comment -
TENTATIVE Council Action -
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
6.(TENTATIVE)Ordinance:Approving an MOU between Salt Lake City
and the Salt Lake City Police Association
The Council may consider adopting an ordinance approving a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU)between Salt Lake City and the Salt Lake City Police
Association,representing eligible employees for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -
Hold hearing to accept public comment -
TENTATIVE Council Action -
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Monday,June 21,2021
5
7.(TENTATIVE)Ordinance:Adopting the rate of tax levy,including the
levy for the Library Fund,for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council may reconsider*approving an ordinance adopting the rate of tax levy,
including the levy for the Library Fund,upon all real and personal property within
Salt Lake City made taxable by law for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
*The Council may reconsider the action taken on June 15,2021 for this item.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -
Hold hearing to accept public comment -
TENTATIVE Council Action -
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
8.(TENTATIVE)Ordinance:Adopting the Budget for the Library Fund of
Salt Lake City,Utah for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council may reconsider*approving an ordinance adopting the budget for the
Library Fund of Salt Lake City,Utah for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
*The Council may reconsider the action taken on June 15,2021 for this item.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -
Hold hearing to accept public comment -
TENTATIVE Council Action -
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Monday,June 21,2021
6
9.(TENTATIVE)Ordinance:Amendments to the Salt Lake City
Consolidated Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council may consider adopting an ordinance amending various fees and fee
information set forth in the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -
Hold hearing to accept public comment -
TENTATIVE Council Action -
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
10.(TENTATIVE)Ordinance:Work in the Public Way Fees
The Council may reconsider*adopting an ordinance amending sections of the
Salt Lake City Code relating to definitions and fees of work in the public way.
*The Council may reconsider the action taken on June 15,2021 for this item.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -
Hold hearing to accept public comment -
TENTATIVE Council Action -
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Monday,June 21,2021
7
11.(TENTATIVE)Ordinance:City Departments Organizational Changes
The Council may reconsider*adopting an ordinance amending sections of the
Salt Lake City Code relating to the organizational changes with the Department of
Public Services,the proposed Department of Public Lands,and the Department of
Community and Neighborhoods (CAN).The Mayor's proposed budget would
transfer the Engineering Division and Youth and Family Division between the
CAN and Public Services Departments.
*The Council may reconsider the action taken on June 15,2021 for this item.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -
Hold hearing to accept public comment -
TENTATIVE Council Action -
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Monday,June 21,2021
8
12.(TENTATIVE)Ordinances relating to the Fiscal Year 2021-22 City
Budget,excluding the budget for the Library Fund
The Council may reconsider*approving an ordinance adopting the budget for
Salt Lake City,Utah,excluding the budget for the Library Fund which is
separately adopted,and the employment staffing document of Salt Lake City,
Utah for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
*The Council may reconsider the action taken on June 15,2021 for this item.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -
Hold hearing to accept public comment -
TENTATIVE Council Action -
Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s).
Motion:
Moved by Councilmember Rogers,seconded by Councilmember
Dugan to reconsider actions from June 15,including Ordinances 26,
27,28 and 32 of 2021:
26:Appropriating necessary funds to implement,FY 22,MOU
between SLC Corp and AFSCME
27:Appropriating necessary funds to implement,FY 22,MOU
between SLC Corp and IAF (Firefighters)Local 81
28:Appropriating necessary funds to implement,FY 22,MOU
between SLC and SLPA (Police)
32:Approving SLC FY22 Budget,excluding the schedule for Capital
Projects and debt,and the Library Fund
AYE:Dennis Faris,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,
Chris Wharton
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
Motion:
Moved by Councilmember Wharton,seconded by Councilmember
Dugan to adopt Ordinances A through C as shown on the motion sheet
relating to the Fiscal Year 2021-22 budget.
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Monday,June 21,2021
9
A.Appropriating necessary funds to implement,for Fiscal Year 2022,
the provisions of the memorandum of understanding between Salt
Lake City Corporation and the American Federation of State,County,
and Municipal Employees Local 1004,representing eligible
employees in City departments.[Revised Ordinance 26 of 2021]
B.Appropriating necessary funds to implement,for Fiscal Year 2022
the provisions of the memorandum of understanding between Salt
Lake City Corporation and the International Association of
Firefighters Local 81,representing eligible employees in the Fire
Department.[Revised Ordinance 27 of 2021]
C.Appropriating necessary funds to implement,for Fiscal Year 2022,
the provisions of the memorandum of understanding between Salt
Lake City Corporation and the Salt Lake Police Association,
representing eligible employees in the Police Department.[Revised
Ordinance 28 of 2021]
AYE:Dennis Faris,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,
Chris Wharton
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
Motion:
Moved by Councilmember Rogers,seconded by Councilmember
Dugan to adopt a revised Ordinance 32 of 2021 approving Salt Lake
City’s Fiscal Year 2021-22 budget as outlined and revised in the
attached key changes spreadsheets and staffing document,excluding
the schedule for capital projects and debt and the Library Fund.
AYE:Dennis Faris,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers,Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,
Chris Wharton
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Monday,June 21,2021
10
G.CONSENT:
1.Ordinance:Budget Amendment No.1 for Fiscal Year 2021-22
The Council will set the date of Tuesday,July 13,2021 to accept public comment
and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the final budget of Salt
Lake City,including the employment staffing document,among many other
changes for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing -
Set Public Hearing Date -Monday,June 21,2021
Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,July 13,2021 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action -
Staff Recommendation -Set date.
Minutes:
Item not held.
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Monday,June 21,2021
11
H.ADJOURNMENT:
Minutes:
Adjourned at 1:11 pm
Minutes Approved:
_______________________________
City Council Chair
_______________________________
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 City
Council Formal Meeting meeting held Monday,June 21,2021.
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Monday,June 21,2021
12
Page 1
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Policy Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: MOTION SHEET FOR PUBLIC HEARING
The Council will conduct a Public Hearing and may consider the following motion:
Motion 1 – Close and Refer
I move that the Council close the Public Hearing and refer Items B-1 through B-6 to a
future Consent Agenda for action.
Project Timeline:
Public Hearing: Mar. 22, 2022
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
www.slccouncil.com/city-budget
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Budget Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: PUBLIC HEARING FOR GRANT
APPLICATION SUBMISSION
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Briefing: Not required.
Set Date: Not required.
Public Hearing: Mar. 22, 2022
Potential Action: TBD
_________________________________________________________________
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Administration has submitted six grant applications. In an effort to ensure that the City
Council, Council staff and the public has adequate opportunity to see and comment on them, the
grant application notifications will be included in the Council meeting agendas under Public
Hearings. There won’t be a set date since this is not a required hearing.
1.Congestion Mitigation Air Quality 2023-28 East Downtown 200 South Mobility
Hub Grant
Purpose/Goal of the Grant: If awarded, the grant monies will be used to fund the
design and construction of an East Downtown 200 South Mobility Hub for bus rapid transit
and core routes serving Frontrunner, the Salt Lake Valley, and the University of Utah. The
hub would provide operator/end of line facilities, electric bus charging and passenger
amenities at a transfer point in the downtown area. Potential locations include 200 South
right-of-way, and the city-owned Northwest Pipeline Building on 200 South and 300 East.
Grant Amount: $3,994,375
Requested by: Department of Community & Neighborhoods – Transportation Division
Funding Agency: Wasatch Front Regional Council administering U.S. Department of
Transportation funds.
Match Requirement: $286,425 – Source: Future request to Fund Our Future Transit
If awarded, these funds should be available in in FY2028.
Page | 2
Questions from Council staff and responses from the Administration:
a.If Funding Our Future Transit funds are not available in FY2028, is there another funding
source available/identified for the match?
The Transportation Division could instead request General fund CIP dollars or Quarter
Cent dollars.
b.Would this grant funding plus the match requirement fully fund the project?
No. We are seeking funding from multiple sources and using a 'modular' approach to
program transit hub elements. This request includes fund sufficient to remodel the ground
floor (9,000 sq ft) of the Northwest Pipeline Building, including restrooms, bus operator
rest facilities, and potential for restaurant or other retail presence. Additional funds will be
required for exterior upgrades (e.g. windows, doors, and awnings).
This request also includes partial funding (approx. 50%) for electric bus charging
infrastructure.
c.If the funding is not awarded, then are related projects negatively impacted such as the 200
South frequent transit route, redevelopment of the Northwest Pipeline Building,
reconstruction of 200 South, etc.?
The most critical project that would be affected is the 200 South transit corridor – which
serves multiple frequent transit routes. The reconstruction of 200 South would not be
affected. The redevelopment of the rest of the Northwest Pipeline Building is currently
under discussion; the mobility hub would use only a small portion of the downstairs floor
of this building. If the mobility hub does not use that space, it could be used for other retail.
d.Could you please elaborate on how this project would benefit Frontrunner passengers since
the nearest Frontrunner station is 10 blocks away?
Many people who ride Frontrunner transfer to local buses to reach their final destinations,
or conversely take a local bus to the Frontrunner station. This is particularly true along
200 South, where multiple frequent transit routes provide faster service to parts of
downtown than does TRAX. Sections of 200 South currently have 7 minute service,
compared to TRAX's more circuitous 15 minute service.
e.The City has submitted multiple CMAQ applications. Are these applications in competition
with each other? To ask another way, could the City be awarded all of these CMAQ
applications or would the City need to prioritize the applications?
The city could receive both CMAQ awards, however, it is likely that one or more would be
partial awards. WFRC asks applicants to prioritize applications for all funding sources.
This was #2 out of 4. The bikeshare CMAQ application was #4 of 4.
Staff Recommendation: Please refer to motion sheet.
Grant Application Submission Notification Memo
TO: Jennifer Bruno, Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson
CC: Sarah Behrens, Orion Goff, Jon Larsen, Sandee Moore, Jaysen Oldroyd, Melyn Osmond, Sylvia Richards,
SLCRecorder@slcgov.com, Linda Sanchez, Jordan Smith, Blake Thomas, John Vuyk, Lehua Weaver
FROM: Elizabeth Gerhart eg
DATE: December 10, 2021
SUBJECT: Congestion Mitigation Air Quality 2023-2028 | East Downtown 200 South Mobility Hub
FUNDING AGENCY: Wasatch Front Regional Council administering U.S. Department of Transportation Funds
GRANT PROGRAM: Congestion Mitigation Air Quality 2023-2028
REQUESTED GRANT AMOUNT: $3,944,375
DEPARTMENT: Department of Community and Neighborhoods | Transportation Division
COLLABORATING AGENCIES: None
DATE SUBMITTED: December 9, 2021
SPECIFICS:
□ Equipment/Supplies Only
□ Technical Assistance
□ Provides FTE
□ Existing □ New □ Overtime □ Requires Funding After Grant
Explanation:
Match Required $286,425 In-Kind Services and Cash
GRANT DETAILS:
Transportation Division requested $3,944,375 for the East Downtown 200 South Mobility Hub.
The project proposes to design and construct an east downtown mobility hub for bus rapid transit and core
routes that serve Frontrunner, the Salt Lake valley, and University of Utah.
The aim is for the mobility hub to provide operator/end of line facilities, electric bus charging, and passenger
amenities at a key transfer point in downtown Salt Lake City.
Possible locations under consideration are the 200 South right-of-way and the city-owned Northwest Pipeline
Building on 200 South 300 East.
The $286,425 match source is anticipated as a future request to Funding Our Future Transit.
The Congestion Mitigation Air Quality funds are anticipated to be available in fiscal year 2028 in the event of a
grant award.
Page 1
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Policy Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: MOTION SHEET FOR PUBLIC HEARING
The Council will conduct a Public Hearing and may consider the following motion:
Motion 1 – Close and Refer
I move that the Council close the Public Hearing and refer Items B-1 through B-6 to a
future Consent Agenda for action.
Project Timeline:
Public Hearing: Mar. 22, 2022
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
www.slccouncil.com/city-budget
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Budget Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: PUBLIC HEARING FOR GRANT
APPLICATION SUBMISSION
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Briefing: Not required.
Set Date: Not required.
Public Hearing: Mar. 22, 2022
Potential Action: TBD
_________________________________________________________________
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Administration has submitted six grant applications. In an effort to ensure that the City
Council, Council staff and the public has adequate opportunity to see and comment on them,
the grant application notifications will be included in the Council meeting agendas under
Public Hearings. There won’t be a set date since this is not a required hearing.
2.Surface Transportation Program 2023-2028 – 900 West Reconstruction:
North Temple to 600 North
Purpose/Goal of the Grant: If awarded, the grant monies will be used to fund the
reconstruction of 900 West from North Temple to 600 North. This project would improve
road conditions, increase vehicular movement to the North Temple urban center, and
enhance transit, pedestrian, and bicycle access.
Grant Amount: $3,500,000
Requested by: Department of Public Services, Engineering Division
Funding Agency: Wasatch Front Regional Council administering U.S. Department of
Transportation funds.
Match Requirement: $4,188,865 – Source: Class C Funds, Impact Fees, and/or Salt
Lake County ¼ cent sales tax funds in FY2028.
Questions from Council staff and responses from the Administration:
a.Please provide cost detail for the $3,500,000.
The project includes the following elements:
Page | 2
Engineering design - $468,100
Construction - $6,343,400
Construction management - $468,100
Contingency - $575,200
UDOT Cost - $345,000
b.Would this grant funding plus the match requirement fully fund the project?
As shown, the earmarked funding for the project is less than the total estimate of the project.
Staff recognizes the shortfall and will address it by:
Adjusting the scope of the project to fit the allocated funding, and
Over the next five years, identify other possible funding sources to keep the scope of the
project as close to the original scope as possible.
Staff Recommendation: Please refer to motion sheet.
Grant Application Submission Notification Memo
TO: Jennifer Bruno, Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson
CC: Sarah Behrens, Matt Cassel, Jorge Chamorro, Sandee Moore, Jaysen Oldroyd, Melyn Osmond, Sylvia
Richards, SLCRecorder@slcgov.com, Linda Sanchez, Jordan Smith, Lorna Vogt, John Vuyk, Lehua Weaver
FROM: Elizabeth Gerhart eg
DATE: December 10, 2021
SUBJECT: Surface Transportation Program 2023-2028 | 900 West Reconstruction: North Temple to 600 North
FUNDING AGENCY: Wasatch Front Regional Council administering U.S. Department of Transportation
Funds
GRANT PROGRAM: Surface Transportation Program 2023-2028
REQUESTED GRANT AMOUNT: $3,500,000
DEPARTMENT: Department of Public Services | Engineering Division
COLLABORATING AGENCIES: None
DATE SUBMITTED: December 9, 2021
SPECIFICS:
□ Equipment/Supplies Only
□ Technical Assistance
□ Provides FTE
□ Existing □ New □ Overtime □ Requires Funding After Grant
Explanation:
Match Required $4,188,865 In-Kind Services and Cash
GRANT DETAILS:
The Engineering Division requested $3,500,000 for the 900 West Reconstruction: North Temple to 600 North.
The project proposes to reconstruct 900 West between North Temple and 600 North to improve vehicular
mobility to the North Temple urban center; enhance transit, pedestrian, and bicycle access to opportunity for
residents in this lower-income area; and address the deteriorated road condition.
The $4,188,865 match is anticipated to be sourced from Class C funds, Impact Fees, and/or Salt Lake County ¼
cent sales tax funds in fiscal year 2028.
The Surface Transportation Program funds are anticipated to be available in fiscal year 2028 in the event of a
grant award.
Page 1
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Policy Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: MOTION SHEET FOR PUBLIC HEARING
The Council will conduct a Public Hearing and may consider the following motion:
Motion 1 – Close and Refer
I move that the Council close the Public Hearing and refer Items B-1 through B-6 to a
future Consent Agenda for action.
Project Timeline:
Public Hearing: Mar. 22, 2022
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
www.slccouncil.com/city-budget
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Budget Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: PUBLIC HEARING FOR GRANT
APPLICATION SUBMISSION
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Briefing: Not required.
Set Date: Not required.
Public Hearing: Mar. 22, 2022
Potential Action: TBD
_________________________________________________________________
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Administration has submitted six grant applications. In an effort to ensure that the City
Council, Council staff and the public has adequate opportunity to see and comment on them,
the grant application notifications will be included in the Council meeting agendas under
Public Hearings. There won’t be a set date since this is not a required hearing.
3.WaterSMART: Water Energy and Efficiency Grant 2022 – Rose Park Golf
Course Irrigation Efficiency and Turf Reduction
Purpose/Goal of the Grant: If awarded, the grant monies will be used to fund the
landscape irrigation and indoor water conservation strategies for the Rose Park Golf Course
resulting in an anticipated water savings of 188.87 acre-feet annually.
Grant Amount: $1,792,033
Requested by: Department of Public Services, Engineering Division
Funding Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, in
collaboration with Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake and Sandy (MWDSL&S), Utah
State University (USU) Center for Water Efficient Landscaping (CWEL), U.S. Department
of Agriculture Forage and Ranch Research Laboratory at USU
Match Requirement: $1,893,851– Source: Class C Funds, Impact Fees, and/or Salt Lake
County ¼ cent sales tax funds in FY2028.
Note that the Council approved the City’s match in Budget Amendment #4 earlier this fiscal
Page | 2
year.
The Administration indicates that the $1,893,851 committed match is structured as follows:
Match Salt Lake City
Committed Match
Third Party
Committed Match
Total
Public Lands Public Utilities MWDSL&S USU/CWEL Committed
Match
Cash $1,800,000* $0 $0 $0 $1,800,000
City Staff
Labor
$61,023 $21,348 $0 $0 $82,371
Third-Party
Labor
$0 $0 $2,000 $2,480 $4,480
Contracted
Services
$0 $7,000 $0 $0 $7,000
Total $1,861,023 $28,348 $2,000 $2,480 $1,893,851
*Included in FY2021-2022 Budget Amendment #4
A summary of the proposed project budget is provided below.
Budget Category Total
Salaries and Wages $57,645
Fringe Benefits $24,726
Travel $0
Equipment $68,620
Supplies and Materials $15,450
Contractual/Constructi
on
$3,514,963
Other (Third-Party
Services)
$4,480
Total $3,685,884
Staff Recommendation: Please refer to motion sheet.
Page 1 of 2
Grant Application Submission Notification Memo
TO: Jennifer Bruno, Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson
CC: Sarah Behrens, Laura Briefer, Jennifer Covino, Sandee Moore, Jaysen Oldroyd, Melyn Osmond, Sylvia
Richards, Kristin Riker, SLCRecorder@slcgov.com, Linda Sanchez, Jordan Smith, Jesse Stewart, John Vuyk,
Lehua Weaver
FROM: Elizabeth Gerhart eg
DATE: December 10, 2021
SUBJECT: WaterSMART: Water and Energy Efficiency Grant FY2022 - Rose Park Golf Course Irrigation Efficiency and
Turf Reduction
FUNDING AGENCY: U. S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation
GRANT PROGRAM: WaterSMART: Water and Energy Efficiency Grant FY2022
REQUESTED GRANT AMOUNT: $1,792,033
DEPARTMENT: Department of Public Utilities and Department of Public Lands
COLLABORATING AGENCIES: Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake and Sandy (MWDSL&S)
Utah State University (USU) Center for Water Efficient Landscaping (CWEL)
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forage and Ranch Research Laboratory at USU
DATE SUBMITTED: November 3, 2021
SPECIFICS:
□ Equipment/Supplies Only
□ Technical Assistance
□ Provides FTE
□ Existing □ New □ Overtime □ Requires Funding After Grant
Explanation:
Match Required $1,893,851 In-Kind Services and Cash
GRANT DETAILS:
The Department of Public Utilities requested $1,792,033 to undertake landscape irrigation measures and indoor
water conservation strategies for the Rose Park Golf Course that will result in an anticipated water savings of
188.87 acre-feet annually.
The total cost of the proposed project is $3,685,884 based on the funding package represented below.
SOURCE AMOUNT
Costs to be reimbursed with the requested Federal funding $1,792,033
Costs to be paid by the applicant $1,889,371
Value of third-party contributions $4,480
TOTAL PROJECT COST $3,685,884
Page 2 of 2
The $1,893,851 committed match is structured as follow:
Match Salt Lake City Committed Match Third Party Committed Match Total
Public Lands Public Utilities MWDSL&S USU/CWEL Committed Match
Cash $1,800,000* $0 $0 $0 $1,800,000
City Staff Labor $61,023 $21,348 $0 $0 $82,371
Third-Party Labor $0 $0 $2,000 $2,480 $4,480
Contracted Services $0 $7,000 $0 $0 $7,000
Total $1,861,023 $28,348 $2,000 $2,480 $1,893,851
*Included in FY2021-2022 Budget
Amendment #4
A summary of the proposed project budget is provided below.
Budget Category Total
Salaries and Wages $57,645
Fringe Benefits $24,726
Travel $0
Equipment $68,620
Supplies and Materials $15,450
Contractual/Construction $3,514,963
Other (Third-Party Services) $4,480 Total $3,685,884
Page 1
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Policy Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: MOTION SHEET FOR PUBLIC HEARING
The Council will conduct a Public Hearing and may consider the following motion:
Motion 1 – Close and Refer
I move that the Council close the Public Hearing and refer Items B-1 through B-6 to a
future Consent Agenda for action.
Project Timeline:
Public Hearing: Mar. 22, 2022
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
www.slccouncil.com/city-budget
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Budget Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: PUBLIC HEARING FOR GRANT
APPLICATION SUBMISSION
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Briefing: Not required.
Set Date: Not required.
Public Hearing: Mar. 22, 2022
Potential Action: TBD
_________________________________________________________________
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Administration has submitted eight grant applications. In an effort to ensure that the City
Council, Council staff and the public has adequate opportunity to see and comment on them,
the grant application notifications will be included in the Council meeting agendas under
Public Hearings. There won’t be a set date since this is not a required hearing.
4.Congestion Mitigation Air Quality 2023-28 Salt Lake City Bike Share Grant -
Expansion West of Interstate-15
Purpose/Goal of the Grant: If awarded, the grant monies will be used to fund bike share
stations west of Interstate-15 as part of an effort to expand a strong bike share system that
links commuters to regional transit and local destinations.
Grant Amount: $600,000
Requested by: Department of Community & Neighborhoods, Transportation Division
Funding Agency: Wasatch Front Regional Council administering U.S. Department of
Transportation Funds
Match Requirement: $43,570
Questions from Council staff and responses from the Administration:
a.How many existing bike share stations are currently located west of I-15?
None yet, but there are active discussions about west side expansion.
b.How many bike share stations will be funded by the grant?
Page | 2
Two new stations including 34 electric bicycles, kiosks, solar panels, cement pads, and
three years of operational costs required to adequately run each new bike share station.
c.Are these Green Bike stations? Does the City need to do an RFP to select a bike share
provider or is there an existing partnership with Green Bike?
This request is to expand the GREENbike system and falls under the existing partnership
the program has with the City.
Staff Recommendation: Please refer to motion sheet.
Grant Application Submission Notification Memo
TO: Jennifer Bruno, Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson
CC: Sarah Behrens, Orion Goff, Jon Larsen, Sandee Moore, Jaysen Oldroyd, Melyn Osmond, Sylvia Richards,
SLCRecorder@slcgov.com, Linda Sanchez, Jordan Smith, Blake Thomas, John Vuyk, Lehua Weaver
FROM: Elizabeth Gerhart eg
DATE: December 13, 2021
SUBJECT: Congestion Mitigation Air Quality 2023-2028 | Salt Lake City Bike Share Expansion
FUNDING AGENCY: Wasatch Front Regional Council administering U.S. Department of Transportation
Funds
GRANT PROGRAM: Congestion Mitigation Air Quality 2023-2028
REQUESTED GRANT AMOUNT: $600,000
DEPARTMENT: Department of Community and Neighborhoods | Transportation Division
COLLABORATING AGENCIES: GREENbike
DATE SUBMITTED: December 9, 2021
SPECIFICS:
□ Equipment/Supplies Only
□ Technical Assistance
□ Provides FTE
□ Existing □ New □ Overtime □ Requires Funding After Grant
Explanation:
Match Required $43,570 In-Kind Services and Cash
GRANT DETAILS:
Transportation Division requested $600,000 for the Salt Lake City Bike Share Expansion.
The project proposes to increase the concentration of bike share stations west of Interstate-15 as part of an
effort to expand a robust bike share system that links commuters to regional transit and local destinations.
The $43,570 match source is proposed as part of a future Complete Streets request made by Transportation
Division to the Capital Improvement Program.
The Congestion Mitigation Air Quality funds are anticipated to be available in fiscal year 2028 in the event of a
grant award.
Page 1
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Policy Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: MOTION SHEET FOR PUBLIC HEARING
The Council will conduct a Public Hearing and may consider the following motion:
Motion 1 – Close and Refer
I move that the Council close the Public Hearing and refer Items B-1 through B-6 to a
future Consent Agenda for action.
Project Timeline:
Public Hearing: Mar. 22, 2022
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
www.slccouncil.com/city-budget
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Budget Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: PUBLIC HEARING FOR GRANT
APPLICATION SUBMISSION
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Briefing: Not required.
Set Date: Not required.
Public Hearing: Mar. 22, 2022
Potential Action: TBD
_________________________________________________________________
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Administration has submitted six grant applications. In an effort to ensure that the City
Council, Council staff and the public has adequate opportunity to see and comment on them,
the grant application notifications will be included in the Council meeting agendas under
Public Hearings. There won’t be a set date since this is not a required hearing.
5.Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) 2024: Foothill Drive
Pedestrian/Bike Safety Improvements Design
Purpose/Goal of the Grant: If awarded, the grant monies will be used to fund 40% of
the design and cost estimates to improve multiple pedestrian and bike crossings across
Foothill Drive between 1300 East and Parley’s Interchange. (Clarification: The
Administration will study the length of Foothill Drive. There’s some debate about where
Foothill ends and where 500 South begins on the north end. UDOT calls it all SR-186. Some
think of the north end of Foothill as being 1300 East, even though it probably officially
transitions between Guardsman Way and Mario Capecchi Drive. It could be rephrased as “State
Route 186 from 500 South/1300 East to Foothill Drive/Parleys Way”.)
Grant Amount: $544,463
Requested by: Department of Community & Neighborhoods, Transportation Division
Funding Agency: Wasatch Front Regional Council administering U.S. Department of
Transportation Funds, in collaboration with University of Utah and Research Park and
Utah Transit Authority
Page | 2
Match Requirement: $39,537 – Source: Capital Improvement Program FY2023 request
submitted by Transportation Division as part of Future Transformations: Corridor and Area
Studies. If awarded the funds would be available during FY2024.
Questions from Council staff and responses from the Administration:
a.How are the remaining 60% of the design and costs being funded? Grants or other source? If it’s
the City’s responsibility, from which fund will the remaining costs come?
"40% design" is a stage in the design process – and it is a good place to pause in the evolution
of moving a project from a dot on the map to a project ready to be constructed. A "40%
design" is sufficient for providing enough of a concept to give us a solid budget for the
remainder of the design and construction. Based on this work, the full design and construction
costs would be funded through a future grant or CIP requests. The individual crossings may
move from 40% design to full design / construction in different years.
b.What is UDOT’s role in this project since the State owns and maintains Foothill Drive?
UDOT has been and would continue to be a key partner and stakeholder in this effort. We
would involve them throughout the design process as well as consider them a partner at the
completion of this 40% design to find the next stage of funding to complete the design and fund
the construction.
Staff Recommendation: Please refer to motion sheet.
Grant Application Submission Notification Memo
TO: Jennifer Bruno, Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson
CC: Sarah Behrens, Orion Goff, Jon Larsen, Sandee Moore, Jaysen Oldroyd, Melyn Osmond, Sylvia Richards,
SLCRecorder@slcgov.com, Linda Sanchez, Jordan Smith, Blake Thomas, John Vuyk, Lehua Weaver
FROM: Elizabeth Gerhart eg
DATE: December 13, 2021
SUBJECT: Transportation Alternatives Program 2024 | Foothill Drive Ped/Bike Safety Improvements Design
FUNDING AGENCY: Wasatch Front Regional Council administering U.S. Department of Transportation
Funds
GRANT PROGRAM: Transportation Alternatives Program 2024
REQUESTED GRANT AMOUNT: $544,463
DEPARTMENT: Department of Community and Neighborhoods | Transportation Division
COLLABORATING AGENCIES: University of Utah and Research Park
Utah Transit Authority
DATE SUBMITTED: December 9, 2021
SPECIFICS:
□ Equipment/Supplies Only
□ Technical Assistance
□ Provides FTE
□ Existing □ New □ Overtime □ Requires Funding After Grant
Explanation:
Match Required $39,537 In-Kind Services and Cash
GRANT DETAILS:
Transportation Division requested $544,463 for the Foothill Drive Ped/Bike Safety Improvements Design.
The project will complete 40% design and cost estimates to improve multiple pedestrian and bike crossings
across Foothill Drive between 1300 East and Parley’s Interchange.
The $39,537 match will be included in a Capital Improvement Program FY2023 request submitted by
Transportation Division as part of Future Transformations: Corridor and Area Studies.
The Transportation Alternatives Program funds are anticipated to be available in fiscal year 2024 in the event of
a grant award.
Page 1
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Policy Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: MOTION SHEET FOR PUBLIC HEARING
The Council will conduct a Public Hearing and may consider the following motion:
Motion 1 – Close and Refer
I move that the Council close the Public Hearing and refer Items B-1 through B-6 to a
future Consent Agenda for action.
Project Timeline:
Public Hearing: Mar. 22, 2022
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
www.slccouncil.com/city-budget
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Budget Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: PUBLIC HEARING FOR GRANT
APPLICATION SUBMISSION
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Briefing: Not required.
Set Date: Not required.
Public Hearing: Mar. 22, 2022
Potential Action: TBD
_________________________________________________________________
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Administration has submitted six grant applications. In an effort to ensure that the City
Council, Council staff and the public has adequate opportunity to see and comment on them,
the grant application notifications will be included in the Council meeting agendas under
Public Hearings. There won’t be a set date since this is not a required hearing.
6.Transportation and Land Use Connections 2023 – 1300 East/University
District Circulation Study
Purpose/Goal of the Grant: If awarded, the grant monies will be used to fund
consulting fees for the 1300 East/University District Circulation Study, which would
provide corridor recommendations for 1300 East and University Streets; strategies to
include a new 200 South/University Street Mobility Hub, and designs for pedestrian/bike
improvements.
Grant Amount: Consultant Services Valued at $110,000
Requested by: Department of Community & Neighborhoods, Transportation Division
Funding Agency: Salt Lake County, Utah Department of Transportation, Utah Transit
Authority, and Wasatch Front Regional Council, in collaboration with the University of
Utah
Match Requirement: $15,000 – Source: Capital Improvement Program FY2023 request
submitted by Transportation Division as part of Future Transformations: Corridor and Area
Studies.
Page | 2
Questions from Council staff and responses from the Administration:
a.Could you please clarify the area that would be studied? Would this include non-City streets on
the University of Utah campus?
The core study area is the same as the 1300 East / University District plan from 1991.
Crossings and circulation to/from adjacent streets, notably President's Circle (University),
South Campus Drive (UDOT), and 500 South (UDOT) will be considered.
Staff Recommendation: Please refer to motion sheet.
Grant Application Submission Notification Memo
TO: Jennifer Bruno, Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson
CC: Sarah Behrens, Orion Goff, Jon Larsen, Sandee Moore, Jaysen Oldroyd, Melyn Osmond, Sylvia Richards,
SLCRecorder@slcgov.com, Linda Sanchez, Jordan Smith, Blake Thomas, John Vuyk, Lehua Weaver
FROM: Elizabeth Gerhart eg
DATE: December 14, 2021
SUBJECT: Transportation and Land Use Connections 2023 | 1300 East/University District Circulation Study
FUNDING AGENCIES: Salt Lake County, Utah Department of Transportation, Utah Transit Authority,
Wasatch Front Regional Council
GRANT PROGRAM: Transportation and Land Use Connections 2023
REQUESTED GRANT AMOUNT: Consultant services valued at $110,000
DEPARTMENT: Department of Community and Neighborhoods | Transportation Division
COLLABORATING AGENCIES: University of Utah
Utah Transit Authority
DATE SUBMITTED: December 9, 2021
SPECIFICS:
□ Equipment/Supplies Only
□ Technical Assistance
□ Provides FTE
□ Existing □ New □ Overtime □ Requires Funding After Grant
Explanation:
Match Required $15,000 In-Kind Services and Cash
GRANT DETAILS:
Transportation Division requested consultant services for the 1300 East/University District Circulation Study.
The project aims to recommend transportation changes for the area to complement land uses; improve
connections to the University of Utah; consider transit, walking, and biking improvements on 1300 East and
University streets; strengthen the local business restaurant/retail district; and update strategies for managing
parking and motor vehicle traffic.
The study will result in: 1) corridor recommendations for 1300 East and University streets; 2) strategies to
incorporate a new 200 South/University Street Mobility Hub, and 3) conceptual designs for ped/bike
improvements.
The $15,000 match will be included in a Capital Improvement Program FY2023 request submitted by
Transportation Division as part of Future Transformations: Corridor and Area Studies.
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: Brian Fullmer
Policy Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: Rezone: Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A (2333 West North Temple)
PLNPCM2021-00915
MOTION 1 (close and defer)
I move that the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting.
MOTION 2 (continue hearing)
I move that the Council continue the public hearing to a future Council meeting.
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 22, 2022
RE: Airport Flight Path Protection Influence Zone A (2333 West North Temple)
PLNPCM2021-00915
BRIEFING UPDATE
At the March 1 briefing the Council expressed some concerns with the proposal including changing the
building’s use to one with which the Council might not agree.
In Fiscal Year 2021, the building was used as a temporary winter overflow shelter and the City provided
$750,000 of one-time Federal grant funds to help pay for operations. In Fiscal Year 2022, $3 million of
State grant funding to help the winter overflow shelter operator (the nonprofit Switchpoint) purchase and
renovate the property was processed through the City and approved by the City Council. The City also
provided $2 million from the General Fund and Funding Our Future to assist Switchpoint and make the
grant application more competitive.
It is now proposed to be permanent supportive housing for older adults experiencing homelessness. The
Council voiced a desire to not create a pattern of converting temporary shelters into permanent ones.
Others noted the process is similar to other property owners who are under contract or purchased property
and want to change the zoning designation allowing a different use.
A Council Member shared concern about nearby businesses that are struggling to stay open. While it was
acknowledged the population being served at this shelter would not likely have a negative impact, there
won’t be a significant benefit to the businesses.
Another Council Member stated the City is not being equitable in decisions about locations for this type of
housing. It was also expressed the influence zone designed to protect people from airport noise is being
removed to allow people to live there. It may give an impression the City cares less about the population
being served at this location.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: March 1, 2022
Set Date: March 1, 2022
Public Hearing: March 22, 2022
Potential Action: April 5, 2022
Page | 2
A suggestion was made to have further discussion on differences between standalone deeply affordable
housing and homeless resource centers that provide wrap around services to residents.
A Council Member asked if sound attenuation improvements were made at the facility to mitigate airport
noise, or if the City could require it. Planning contacted the property owner and was told improvements
were made to the building for noise attenuation following City requirements. It appears conditions
recommended for a development agreement have been met, but the Council may still wish to consider a
development agreement so future building improvements maintain the noise attenuation. Airport staff also
suggested the Council include a development agreement requiring noise attenuation for this reason.
The following information was provided for the March 1, briefing. It is provided again
for background purposes.
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.
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.
Page | 3
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
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?
Page | 4
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.
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.
Page | 5
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
anticipated to
create any
substantial new
negative impacts
that wouldn’t be
Page | 6
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
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
Item B8
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: Brian Fullmer
Policy Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: Street Vacation at 601 South 900 East
PLNPCM2021-00614
MOTION 1 (close and defer)
I move that the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting.
MOTION 2 (continue hearing)
I move that the Council continue the public hearing to a future Council meeting.
The following motions are included if the Council would like to take action tonight
MOTION 3 (close and adopt)
I move that the Council close the public hearing and adopt the ordinance.
MOTION 4 (close and reject)
I move that the Council close the public hearing and reject the ordinance.
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 22, 2022
RE: STREET VACATION AT 601 SOUTH 900 EAST
(PLNPCM2021-00614)
BRIEFING UPDATE
At the March 1 briefing, the Council voiced some concerns about the proposal due to the impacts to the
streetscape, vacating public right-of-way, and the Engineering Division’s opposition to the vacation.
During the discussion, Planning staff stated they followed previous Council decisions on street vacations,
however the Council indicated that previous Council decisions were not necessarily a standing precedent or
reason to approve future applications with unique facts. Planning reviewed ways the application generally
meets standards that are in place.
Planning staff noted uneven block faces would be created on both streets if the request is approved. It is
unknown if other properties on the block have similar encroachments. A survey of the properties would be
required to determine that.
Council staff asked whether a lease program is still available to property owners in situations such as this,
noting it is in the City’s best interest to preserve its options by leasing rather than selling property.
Planning staff said leases are still an option, but residents often prefer to go through the street vacation
process as it is perceived as a better long-term solution for them. Planning also said the Administration is
working on updates to policies of what is allowed in City rights-of-way.
During the briefing, Planning staff mentioned that currently new fences cannot be constructed within the
City’s right-of-way (for example, if the property owner needed to re-build or repair the fence), which may
also affect the property if leased. Staff asked to confirm the details pertaining to lease options with the City
Attorney’s Office. The options for leasing the property prove to be complicated, and a clear definition was
not available at the time staff reports were completed.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: March 1, 2022
Set Date: March 1, 2022
Public Hearing: March 22, 2022
Potential Action: April 5, 2022
Page | 2
The applicant would need to apply and be approved for a building permit to construct a new fence. The
analysis of whether that would be allowed would be completed under that application. The City has not
conducted that analysis yet because the applicant has not applied. If the Council would like to ask for more
information about impacts of the leasing option, the Attorney’s Office could do additional research. The
information may not be readily available and could take additional time.
The Council may wish to have a policy discussion on whether to continue vacating City rights-of-way.
The following information was provided for the March 1, briefing. It is provided again
for background purposes.
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.
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.
Page | 3
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
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
Page | 4
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.
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.
Page | 5
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
(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.
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
Item A9
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: Nick Tarbet
Policy Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022 3:00PM
RE:Text Amendment: Prohibition on Homeless Resource Centers and Homeless Shelters
PLNPCM2021-01033
MOTION 1 – continue
I move the council continue the public hearing to a future Council meeting.
MOTION 2 – close and defer
I move the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting.
MOTION 3 – close and reject
I move the Council close the public hearing and reject the ordinance.
MOTION 4 – close and adopt
I move the City Council close the public hearing and adopt ordinances 15A and 15B to amend the Salt
Lake City Code pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-01033.
I further move the Council approve a Legislative Intent, urging the Administration to include
in their review process for Parts 2 and 3 of the HRC/Shelter text amendment petition,
recommendations to promote geographic equity of HRCs/Shelters by expanding the zoning
districts where they are allowed in the City.
COUNCIL STAFF
REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Nick Tarbet, Policy Analyst
DATE: March 22, 2022
RE:Text Amendment: Prohibition on Homeless
Resource Centers and Homeless Shelters
PLNPCM2021-01033
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Briefing: March 8, 2022
Set Date: March 1, 2022
Public Hearing: March 22, 2022
Potential Action: March 22, 2022
March 8 Work Session Summary
During the work session meeting, Council and Planning staff provided an overview of the proposed
text amendment and of HB 440-Homeless Services Amendment, recently adopted legislation by the
State.
Some Council Members expressed that while they recognize the current Homeless Resource Center
(HRC) and Shelter approval process isn’t working and must be improved, they have concerns about
removing HRCs and Shelters from the land use tables without a guarantee they will be allowed again
with a better process. The Council asked whether options are available to guarantee the HRC/Shelter
use would be put back in the ordinance by a certain time.
The Attorney’s Office and Planning staff proposed an option for the Council to adopt two ordinances:
The first ordinance would remove HRCs/Shelters from the Land Use Tables.
The second ordinance would implement a future date certain that HRC/Shelters would again
be allowed in in the zones they are currently located (CG, D2 and D3), unless it is repealed due
to the preferred changes that are being reviewed by the Planning Staff are adopted.
Page | 2
The Council expressed support for this plan and asked staff to draft the second ordinance to be
considered at the time of potential adoption. The second ordinance is included in the packet.
Planning staff outlined the potential changes and public engagement process for the next steps of the
zoning amendment. The next steps will seek to modify conditional use standards for HRCs and
shelters and distinguish between temporary overflow shelters and permanent shelters. Planning staff
also explained how the updated zoning changes could work either through an overlay zone and
improved conditions and standards that would have to be satisfied to be approved.
Planning staff also discussed the Council’s legislative intent requesting “recommendations for
prohibiting temporary shelters until other jurisdictions in Salt Lake County permit them” and how it
will be included in the review process.
Based on the Council’s discussion, staff drafted a legislative intent encouraging the Administration to
include in their research and review for Parts 2 and 3 of this petition, an analysis and recommendation
to expand areas of the city where HRCs and Shelters are allowed, with a goal to promote geographic
equity. Here is the Legislative Intent that will be included in the motion sheet:
I further move the Council approve a Legislative Intent, urging the Administration to include
in their review process for Parts 2 and 3 of the HRC/Shelter text amendment petition,
recommendations to promote geographic equity of HRCs/Shelters by expanding the zoning
districts where they are allowed in the City.
Policy Questions
The Draft ordinance that would reinstate HRCs and Shelters as an allowed use has an effective
date of January 1, 2023, unless otherwise repealed. This would allow the City nine months to
process the other amendments.
o Does the Council support this effective date?
Next Steps
The Council will hold a public hearing on March 22, 2022. During this time the public will be able to
provide feedback on the prosed zoning amendments. After the hearing, the Council can consider any
of the following options:
Continue the public hearing to a future Council meeting.
Close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting.
Close the public hearing and reject the ordinance.
Close the public hearing and adopt the ordinances.
o Two ordinances would be included – one would at future date certain, allow
HRC/Shelters in in the zones they are currently allowed (CG, D2 and D3)
o Include legislative intent promoting geographic equity by expanding the zones where
HRC/Shelters are allowed
The following information was provided for the March 8 work session. It is provided
again for background purposes.
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
Page | 3
The City Council will be briefed on a proposal that would prohibit homeless resource centers and
homeless shelters in the city by removing the uses from land use tables in the CG, D2 and D3 zoning
districts. According to Planning staff, this is not meant to be a permanent prohibition. It’s the first of
three planned phases to help the City establish an updated process for locating shelters and HRCs.
Mayor Mendenhall initiated the pending ordinance rule with this petition on October 4, 2021. The
pending ordinance rule allows the City to hold any application for a homeless resource center or
homeless shelter for a period of 180 days pending a change in City code. This applies to any
application that is submitted starting on the day the petition is initiated. The 180-day period expires
April 2, 2022.
Last week the Utah Legislature approved HB 440 Homeless Services Amendments. One component of
this bill requires cities in Salt Lake County, through the Conference of Mayors, to come up with a
winter overflow plan by September 1, 2022.
The ordinance that is now before the Council was forwarded before that legislation was adopted by the
State and has been going through the standard planning process for the last few months. The Council
hasn’t had opportunity to have a discussion since legislative session ended. This briefing will provide
the Council an opportunity to consider this text amendment in context of the recently adopted
legislation. This is discussed further below, item #4 in Potential Options / Outcomes.
When the Mayor initiated the pending ordinance, it included three parts.
Part 1 - Prohibit new, future homeless shelters or homeless resources centers in all zoning
districts in the city - Current Transmittal
Part 2 - Modify the conditional use standards for homeless shelters or homeless resource
centers.
Part 3 - Distinguish between temporary overflow shelters and permanent shelters and
homeless resources centers that operate year-round and potentially allow temporary overflow
homeless shelters in certain zones.
Parts 2 and 3 are in the engagement process and will be going to the Planning Commission in the
coming months.
This zoning amendment (Part 1) would do the following:
Remove Homeless Resource Centers and Homeless Shelters as conditional uses from the land
use tables for the CG General Commercial, D-2 Downtown Support, and D-3 Downtown
Warehouse/Residential Zoning Districts.
Clarify when listed land uses are prohibited.
Modify the applicability section of 21A.36.350 Qualifying Provisions for Homeless Resource
Centers and Homeless Shelters.
Modify the definitions of homeless resource centers and homeless shelters in 21A.62.
Planning staff recommended removing homeless resource centers and homeless shelters from the
land use tables because they found it was “has ad
The Planning Commission forwarded a negative recommendation for Part 1 of this petition primarily
because they were concerned there was no timeline established to replace the conditional use process
(Parts 2 and 3). See page 5 for more information on public comments received in the process so far.
Page | 4
Potential Options / Outcomes
1. If the City Council adopts the ordinance.
a. Homeless Shelters and Homeless Resources Centers will not be permitted in the city.
b. Parts 2 and 3 will come to the Council for consideration in the coming months. The
Council could have a public process and consider or adjust any proposal for Parts 2 and
3 as part of the regular Council process.
2. If the Council rejects the ordinance.
a. Homeless Shelters and Homeless Resources Centers will again be permitted in the city
as a conditional use in the CG, D2 and D3 zoning districts (see attached map).
b. Someone could apply to build/operate a shelter or HRC
i. The City would have to process the conditional use application under the
current standards, which is a planning commission review process.
3. Let the pending ordinance expire without acting.
a. Homeless Shelters and Homeless Resources Centers will again be permitted in the city
as a conditional use in the CG, D2 and D3 zoning districts.
b. Someone could apply to build/operate a shelter or HRC
i. The City would have to process the conditional use application under the
current standards, which is a planning commission review process.
4. Ask the Planning Staff / Attorney’s Office if there are other options that could be considered to
help preserve the City’s options.
a. Work with the Administration to determine if the Council could adopt an ordinance
that would prohibit Shelters and HRCs and include a provision that would expire on a
date to be determined and must come back to the Council to renew it and reconsider to
make permanent.
i. This would allow for a true pause in any additional shelters in Salt Lake City
while the conversation with other Mayors in the County takes place.
b. In addition to this ordinance, the Council could consider adopting a resolution
expressing support for the process outlined in the recently adopted State legislation
that requires Salt Lake County cities to come up with a plan to address temporary
overflow during the winter months by September 1.
Policy Questions
The Council may wish to ask how the legislative action adopted by the Council in November
2021 will be included in the research and review process for Parts 2 and 3 of this issue. (see
paragraph below)
The Council may wish to ask what the anticipated timeline is for Parts 2 and 3 to be processed
and forwarded to the Council for consideration.
The Council may wish to ask for the administration to provide an overview of potential
changes to the conditional use process that Parts 2 of the petition will address.
Page | 5
The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration if recent state legislation impacts this
proposal.
Council Initiated Legislative Action
On November 16, 2021, the Council adopted the following legislative intent, when adopting the
ordinance that permitted the temporary shelter on North Temple and Redwood Road.
I further move the Council initiate a legislative action asking the Administration review and
come back with recommendations for prohibiting temporary shelters until other jurisdictions in
Salt Lake County permit them.
On page 2 of the Transmittal Letter, Planning staff noted this amendment relates directly to the
section of City code being revised with these petitions. Additionally, on page 6 on the Planning
Commission staff report, staff noted this would require “identifying some criteria for evaluating when
other jurisdictions have accomplished this. This likely requires the gathering of data and researching
other jurisdiction zoning regulations so that information can be used to establish the criteria. This also
requires creating some sort of process to determine when the criteria have been satisfied…”
The Council’s legislative action can be factored into the research and drafting process for Parts 2 and 3
of the petition.
Parts 2 and 3 of the Petition
According to the Planning Commission staff report, Mayor Mendenhall initiated a petition to amend
the zoning ordinance as it relates to Homeless Resource Centers and Homeless Shelters, and it was
divided up into three parts. Staff felt Parts 2 and 3 would need a more thorough discussion with
stakeholders and therefore they did not process them with Part 1, currently before the Council.
Pages 5-6 of the Planning Commission’s report provides the following discussion pertaining to the
next stages of work that will be done for this issue.
Part 2 - Modify the conditional use standards for homeless shelters or homeless
resource centers.
Part 3 - Distinguish between temporary overflow shelters and permanent
shelters and homeless resources centers that operate year-round and potentially
allow temporary overflow homeless shelters in certain zones.
o Updating the conditional use standards may not be sufficient to address the full range
of impacts, needs, and considerations that are associated with siting, operating, and
responding to the variety of needs for these uses.
o It is possible that a different process will be used that puts the final decision-making
authority on new homeless resource centers and homeless shelters with the City
Council.
Page | 6
o Options being considered include the use of development agreements and an overlay
zone that would be mapped (zoning map amendment) as part of the approval process
for future homeless resource centers.
As these would be new regulations and processes, it likely requires fairly well
researched regulations and discussions with a wider variety of stakeholders.
It would be necessary to include not just residents and business owners, but
also service providers and other government agencies, including the State of
Utah.
Key Considerations
The planning commission staff reported noted four key considerations. Below is a short summary of
those consideration.
1. The Conditional Use Process
State code dictates the conditional use process. The conditional use process is intended
to identify impacts to surrounding properties and provide a process to mitigation them,
according to standards outlined in City ordinance.
The Planning Commission reviews conditional uses in the city. Concerns have been
raised that the Planning Commission is not able to consider other factors that have an
impact on City services such as public safety, fire, EMS.
Therefore, Part 2 of this petition will consider modifications to the conditional use
standards for homeless shelters or homeless resource centers.
2. Impact to Existing Homeless Resource Centers and Homeless Shelters
Existing homeless resource centers and homeless shelters would technically become
nonconforming uses with this change. This does not mean that the conditional
approval goes away, it would still apply.
A technical change will be made that ensures they are still identified as a conditional
use.
3. When will Items 2 and 3 be discussed?
Planning Staff has begun researching and drafting Parts 2 and 3 of this petition.
It is possible that a different process will be used that puts the final decision-making
authority on new homeless resource centers and homeless shelters with the City
Council.
Options being considered include the use of development agreements and an overlay
zone that would be mapped (zoning map amendment) as part of the approval process
for future homeless resource centers.
These changes will require well researched regulations and discussions with a wider
variety of stakeholders. It would be necessary to include not just residents and business
owners, but also service providers and other government agencies, including the State
of Utah.
The Councill’s Legislative Intent, which will require identifying criteria and a process
for when that criterion has been satisfied, will also be part of this process.
Page | 7
4. Community Engagement Please see pages 4-8 of the Planning Commission staff
report for full analysis
See public process section below
The 180-day pending ordinance doctrine and time of year were impediments to good
community engagement. This is a major factor in the Planning Division in dividing the
proposal into different parts.
The Planning Commission reviewed and forwarded a negative recommendation for
Part 1 of the petition
Parts 2 and 3 of the petition will be considered in the coming months.
Public Process
A summary of the public process is outlined on pages 2-3 of the Transmittal Letter.
The text amendment went through the required 45-day notice to all recognized organizations.
A virtual public forum was held with community councils.
Planning staff met with homeless service providers to discuss the proposal on January 4, 2022
On January 6th a community forum in Spanish was conducted.
The Planning Commission held the public hearing on January 12, 2022.
Comments have generally been a mix of support and opposition to the proposal. See Attachment E of
the Planning Commission staff report to review the submitted comments.
The transmittal letter notes an underlying theme of the public comment was the need to act quickly to
have an updated process to allow homeless resource centers in the city. Some have said that removing
Shelters/HRCs as an allowed use, even for a short time, will have an impact on planning and
fundraising for service providers. Some encouraged the process to spread the uses throughout the city,
while others supported the uses to be proximate to needed services. Others expressed concerns about
nuisance impacts shelters can have on a neighborhood where they are located.
The Planning Commission adopted a motion to reject Part 1 of this petition, primarily because they
were concerned there was no timeline established to replace the conditional use process.
Council Public Engagement
A project website for the public to follow this issue has been posted on the Council Website. It will be
updated as new information becomes available.
Staff included information on this petition in the email updates and social media and sent out an
email blast to stakeholders, with the days and times for the work session briefing and public hearing
and links to the website.
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
2 No.15B of 2022
3
4 (An ordinance amending Chapter 21A.33 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to homeless resource
5 center and homeless shelter uses)
6
7 An ordinance amending Chapter 21A.33 (Land Use Tables) of the Salt Lake City Code
8 pertaining homeless resource center and homeless shelter uses related to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-
9 01033 and pursuant to Ordinance No. 15A of 2022.
10 WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 15A of 2022 amended the land use tables prohibiting homeless
11 shelters and homeless resource centers within the city with the intention of further studying how to
12 thoughtfully, responsibly, and compassionately regulate the land uses;
13 WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council (the “City Council”) has requested that the Mayor
14 engage her professional staff to conduct outreach, study means and methods for regulating uses
15 similar to homeless shelters and homeless resource centers, and bring back to the City Council at a
16 future date a recommended proposal on how to regulate homeless shelters and homeless resource
17 centers;
18 WHEREAS, in accordance with Utah Code §10-9a-502 the Planning Commission held a
19 public hearing on January 12, 2022 to consider the Mayor’s petition, Petition No. PLNPCM2021-
20 01033 and other considerations related to the regulations of homeless resource centers and homeless
21 shelter land uses, and throughout the course of those discussions expressed concern over an outright
22 prohibition of homeless shelters and homeless resources for an indefinite period of time and ultimately,
23 elected to vote in favor of forwarding a negative recommendation because the Planning Commission was
24 concerned there was no timetable established to replace the conditional use process;
25 WHEREAS, the City Council shares the concern with the Planning Commission that a
26 citywide prohibition on homeless resource centers and homeless shelters is not a desired outcome for
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
27 the city long term but appreciates the need for the city to identify alternative means and methods for
28 regulating the land uses and acknowledges the issue is complex and will take additional time;
29 WHEREAS, the City Council desires to implement at a future date a regulatory scheme that
30 allows for land uses similar to homeless shelters and homeless resource centers within the City
31 subject to thoughtful, responsible, and compassionate regulation;
32 WHEREAS, the City Council desires to receive from the city’s professional staff a
33 recommended proposal on how to best regulate homeless shelters and homeless resource centers
34 and/or similar uses;
35 WHEREAS, the City Council requests that periodic updates regarding the proposal be
36 presented to the City Council and that the city staff’s recommended proposal, accompanied by the
37 Planning Commission’s recommendation on the proposal, be presented to the City Council no later
38 than January 31, 2023.
39 WHEREAS, prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 15A of 2022, homeless shelters and
40 homeless resource centers were allowed in the CG General Commercial, D-2 Downtown Support,
41 and D-3 Downtown Warehouse/Residential districts;
42 WHEREAS, in order to further the goal that homeless resource centers and homeless shelters
43 be allowed in the city by some future date, the City Council desires to approve this ordinance that
44 would again allow for homeless resource centers and homeless shelters in the CG General
45 Commercial, D-2 Downtown Support, and D-3 Downtown Warehouse/Residential districts;
46 WHEREAS, in the event that the City Council identifies a preferred regulatory scheme that
47 allows for homeless shelters and/or homeless resource centers prior to the effective date of this
48 ordinance it intends to repeal this ordinance;
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
49 WHEREAS, Ordinance 15A was considered by the Salt Lake City Council (the “City
50 Council”) in conjunction with this Ordinance (No. 15B of 2022) and the City Council finds that
51 the two ordinances should be adopted simultaneously having differing effective dates and act as
52 a single transaction; and
53 WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after holding a public hearing on this matter, that
54 adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests.
55 NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
56 SECTION 1. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That Section
57 21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional
58 Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the following rows in the
59 table which shall read and appear in that table as follows:
60 21A.33.030: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR
61 COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS:
USE CN CB CS1 CC CSHBD1 CG SNB
Homeless Resource Center C21
Homeless Shelter C21
62
63 SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That the
64 “Qualifying Provisions:” of Section 21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables:
65 Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to add
66 the following text as qualifying provision “21” [Reserved] as follows:
67 Qualifying Provisions:
68 21. [Reserved] .Subject to conformance with the provisions of section 21A.36.350 of this title.
69 SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That Section
70 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional
71 Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the following rows in the
72 table which shall read and appear in that table as follows:
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
73 21A.33.050: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR DOWNTOWN
74 DISTRICTS:
USE D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4
Homeless Resource Center C15 C15
Homeless Shelter C15 C15
75
76 SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That the
77 “Qualifying Provisions:” of Section 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use
78 Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is
79 amended to add the following text as qualifying provision “15” [Reserved] as follows:
80
81 Qualifying Provisions:
82
83 15. [Reserved]. Subject to conformance with the provisions of section 21A.36.350 of this title.
84
85 SECTION 5. Effective Date. Unless otherwise repealed, this Ordinance shall take effect on May
86 3, 2023.
87
88 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _______ day of
89 ______________, 2022.
90 ______________________________
91 CHAIRPERSON
92
93 ATTEST:
94
95 ______________________________
96 CITY RECORDER
97
98
99 Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
100
101
102 Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
103
104
105
106 ______________________________
107 MAYOR
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
108
109 ______________________________
110 CITY RECORDER
111
112 (SEAL)
113
114 Bill No. ________ of 2022.
115 Published: ______________.
116
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No.15B of 2022
(An ordinance amending Chapter 21A.33 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to homeless resource
center and homeless shelter uses)
An ordinance amending Chapter 21A.33 (Land Use Tables) of the Salt Lake City Code
pertaining homeless resource center and homeless shelter uses related to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-
01033 and pursuant to Ordinance No. 15A of 2022.
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 15A of 2022 amended the land use tables prohibiting
homeless shelters and homeless resource centers within the city with the intention of further
studying how to thoughtfully, responsibly, and compassionately regulate the land uses;
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council (the “City Council”) has requested that the Mayor
engage her professional staff to conduct outreach, study means and methods for regulating uses
similar to homeless shelters and homeless resource centers, and bring back to the City Council at a
future date a recommended proposal on how to regulate homeless shelters and homeless resource
centers;
WHEREAS, in accordance with Utah Code §10-9a-502 the Planning Commission held a
public hearing on January 12, 2022 to consider the Mayor’s petition, Petition No. PLNPCM2021-
01033 and other considerations related to the regulations of homeless resource centers and homeless
shelter land uses, and throughout the course of those discussions expressed concern over an outright
prohibition of homeless shelters and homeless resources for an indefinite period of time and ultimately,
elected to vote in favor of forwarding a negative recommendation because the Planning Commission was
concerned there was no timetable established to replace the conditional use process;
WHEREAS, the City Council shares the concern with the Planning Commission that a
citywide prohibition on homeless resource centers and homeless shelters is not a desired outcome for
the city long term but appreciates the need for the city to identify alternative means and methods for
regulating the land uses and acknowledges the issue is complex and will take additional time;
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to implement at a future date a regulatory scheme that
allows for land uses similar to homeless shelters and homeless resource centers within the City
subject to thoughtful, responsible, and compassionate regulation;
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to receive from the city’s professional staff a
recommended proposal on how to best regulate homeless shelters and homeless resource centers
and/or similar uses;
WHEREAS, the City Council requests that periodic updates regarding the proposal be
presented to the City Council and that the city staff’s recommended proposal, accompanied by the
Planning Commission’s recommendation on the proposal, be presented to the City Council no later
than January 31, 2023.
WHEREAS, prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 15A of 2022, homeless shelters and
homeless resource centers were allowed in the CG General Commercial, D-2 Downtown Support,
and D-3 Downtown Warehouse/Residential districts;
WHEREAS, in order to further the goal that homeless resource centers and homeless shelters
be allowed in the city by some future date, the City Council desires to approve this ordinance that
would again allow for homeless resource centers and homeless shelters in the CG General
Commercial, D-2 Downtown Support, and D-3 Downtown Warehouse/Residential districts;
WHEREAS, in the event that the City Council identifies a preferred regulatory scheme that
allows for homeless shelters and/or homeless resource centers prior to the effective date of this
ordinance it intends to repeal this ordinance;
WHEREAS, Ordinance 15A was considered by the Salt Lake City Council (the “City
Council”) in conjunction with this Ordinance (No. 15B of 2022) and the City Council finds that
the two ordinances should be adopted simultaneously having differing effective dates and act as
a single transaction; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after holding a public hearing on this matter, 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 Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That Section 21A.33.030 of
the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for
Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the following rows in the table
which shall read and appear in that table as follows:
21A.33.030: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR
COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS:
USE CN CB CS1 CC CSHBD1 CG SNB
Homeless Resource Center C21
Homeless Shelter C21
SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That the
“Qualifying Provisions:” of Section 21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables:
Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to add
the following text as qualifying provision “21” [Reserved] as follows:
Qualifying Provisions:
21. Subject to conformance with the provisions of section 21A.36.350 of this title.
SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That Section
21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional
Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the following rows in the
table which shall read and appear in that table as follows:
21A.33.050: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR DOWNTOWN
DISTRICTS:
USE D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4
Homeless Resource Center C15 C15
Homeless Shelter C15 C15
SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That the
“Qualifying Provisions:” of Section 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use
Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is
amended to add the following text as qualifying provision “15” [Reserved] as follows:
Qualifying Provisions:
15. Subject to conformance with the provisions of section 21A.36.350 of this title.
SECTION 5. Effective Date. Unless otherwise repealed, this Ordinance shall take effect on May
3, 2023.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _______ day of
______________, 2022.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 2022.
Published: ______________.
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date:__________________________________
By: ___________________________________
Hannah Vickery, Senior City Attorney
3/22/22
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. 15A of 2022
(An ordinance amending various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to
homeless resource center and homeless shelter text amendments)
An ordinance amending various Sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to
homeless resource center and homeless shelter text amendments pursuant to Petition No.
PLNPCM2021-01033.
WHEREAS, on October 4, 2021, Mayor Erin Mendenhall (the “Mayor”) initiated a
petition, Petition No. PLNPCM2021-01033, to consider, among other things, a text amendment to
the Salt Lake City Code to prohibit new future homeless shelters or homeless resources centers in all
zoning districts in the city;
WHEREAS, the Mayor initiated the petition pursuant to City ordinance, thereby, invoking
the pending ordinance doctrine recognized by Utah Code Section 10-9a-509 to prohibit new
homeless shelters and homeless resource centers in the city;
WHEREAS, in accordance with Utah Code §10-9a-502, the Salt Lake City Planning
Commission (the “Planning Commission”) held a public hearing on January 12, 2022 to consider the
request initiated by the Mayor to amend the Salt Lake City Code to prohibit new homeless shelters
and homeless resource centers within the city;
WHEREAS, at the January 12th public hearing, the Planning Commission discussed
amendments to the City’s land use regulations related to the homeless resource centers and homeless
shelters, including whether to discontinue the allowance of homeless resource centers and homeless
shelters as a conditional use in the city and the duration of such action, among other considerations;
WHEREAS, at its January 12, 2022 hearing, the Planning Commission, expressing
concern that there was no future plan for allowing homeless resource centers and homeless shelters in
the city, voted to forward a negative recommendation on the proposal related to the petition before it;
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council (the “City Council”) desires, for the time being,
to prohibit new homeless shelters and homeless resource centers while the city conducts outreach
necessary to inform the City Council in its desire to allow the use in the future pursuant to new
regulations and allow additional time for the city’s professional staff to study and discuss
alternative means for regulating the historically challenging land uses;
WHEREAS, the City Council expresses its intent to allow homeless resource centers and
homeless shelters in the city in the future, and to further demonstrate the City Council’s intent
the City Council finds that in the absence of a future new regulatory scheme that the City should
amend Salt Lake City Code in a manner that would again allow homeless shelters and homeless
resources in the CG General Commercial, D-2 Downtown Support, and D-3 Downtown
Warehouse/Residential districts;
WHEREAS, in order to authorize homeless shelters and homeless resources in the
aforementioned zones the City Council would need to make various changes to the city code as
further detailed in Ordinance No. 15B of 2022;
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that adopting Ordinance No. 15B in conjunction with
this Ordinance alleviates the concern that homeless resource centers and homeless shelters will
be prohibited city wide for an indefinite period of time and provides for changes necessary to
allow the land uses in the City in the absence of the creation of a new regulatory scheme;
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that Ordinances No. 15A of 2022 and 15B of 2022
should be adopted simultaneously with differing effective dates and act as a single transaction;
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby requests that the Mayor engage her professional staff to
conduct outreach, study means and methods for regulating uses similar to homeless shelters and
homeless resource centers, and propose to the City Council at a future date a recommendation on
regulatory scheme for homeless shelters and homeless resource centers; and
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council finds, after holding a public hearing on this
matter, 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 Text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.33.010.C.
That Subsection 21A.33.010.C of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to
read as follows:
C. Uses Not Permitted: Any use not specifically permitted or conditionally permitted in the table
of permitted and conditional uses for the specific zoning district is prohibited. Only uses listed as
a “P” or a “C” in the table of permitted and conditional uses for a district shall be allowed where
designated.
SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That Section
21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional
Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the following rows in the
table which shall read and appear in that table as follows:
21A.33.030: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR
COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS:
USE CN CB CS1 CC CSHBD1 CG SNB
Homeless Resource Center
Homeless Shelter
SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That the
“Qualifying Provisions:” of Section 21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables:
Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to
remove qualifying provision number “21” and designate qualifying provision 21 as “reserved” as follows:
Qualifying Provisions:
21.[Reserved.]
SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That Section
21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional
Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the following rows in the
table which shall read and appear in that table as follows:
21A.33.050: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR DOWNTOWN
DISTRICTS:
USE D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4
Homeless Resource Center
Homeless Shelter
SECTION 5. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That the
“Qualifying Provisions:” of Section 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables:
Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to
remove qualifying provision number “15” and designate qualifying provision 15 as “reserved” as follows:
Qualifying Provisions:
15. [Reserved].
SECTION 6. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.36.350 shall be
and hereby is amended to read as follows:
21A.36.350 REGULATIONS FOR HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTERS AND
HOMELESS SHELTERS:
A. A homeless resource center or homeless shelter located within the city shall comply with the
following regulations. Any homeless resource center or homeless shelter approved as a
conditional use shall comply with these regulations and the requirements of the approved
conditional use.
1. Limit the number of homeless persons who may occupy a homeless resource center for
overnight accommodations to a maximum of two hundred (200) homeless persons.
a. Service provider staff shall not be included in this occupancy limit.
b. No homeless resource center shall exceed the maximum occupancy for overnight
accommodations for any reason, including on an overflow basis.
2. A security and operations plan shall be prepared by the applicant, and approved by the
Salt Lake City Police Department and Community and Neighborhoods Department, prior to
conditional use approval, and filed with the Recorder's Office. A security and operations plan
shall include:
a. A community relations and complaint response program that identifies specific
strategies and methods designed to maintain the premises in a clean and orderly condition,
minimize potential conflicts with the owners/operators and uses of neighboring property, and
prohibit unlawful behavior by occupants of the homeless resource center or homeless shelter on
the site or adjacent public right-of-way. The community relations and complaint response
program shall include at least the following elements:
(1) Identify a representative of the homeless resource center or homeless shelter,
including the representative's name, telephone number, and email, who will meet with neighbors
upon request to attempt to resolve any neighborhood complaints regarding operation of the
center;
(2) A dedicated twenty four (24) hour telephone line for the purpose of receiving
complaints;
(3) Quarterly meetings with a community coordinating group, which shall be open to the
public, to discuss and address concerns and issues that may be occurring as a result of the
homeless resource center or homeless shelter operation. The meetings shall be advertised at least
ten (10) days in advance by posting notice on the operator's website and a sign posted along the
public street;
(4) Representatives from each of the following shall be included in the community
coordinating group:
(A) The homeless resource center or homeless shelter,
(B) A business located within one-fourth (1/4) mile of the site,
(C) A resident who lives within one-fourth (1/4) mile of the site,
(D) A school, if any, located within one-fourth (1/4) mile of the site;
(E) Chair of the community council, or designee, whose boundary encompasses the
site;
(F) An individual who has previously received or is currently receiving services (i.e.,
client) from a homeless resource center or homeless shelter; and
(5) A written annual report, provided on or before February 15th of each year, from the
operator of the homeless resource center or homeless shelter, provided to the City Planning
Director and to the City Council member in whose district the homeless resource center or
homeless shelter is located, which includes the following information:
(A) List of individuals who have participated in the community coordinating group
meetings;
(B) A summary of each community coordinating group meeting;
(C) A summary of complaints received from the community by the operator of the
homeless resource center or homeless shelter; and
(D) An explanation of how complaints have been addressed/resolved.
b. A complaint response community relations program that includes strategies and
methods designed to maintain the premises in a clean and orderly condition, minimize potential
conflicts with the owners/operators and uses of neighboring property, and prohibit unlawful
behavior by occupants of the homeless resource center or homeless shelter on the site or adjacent
public right- of-way.
c. A provision requiring a representative of the homeless resource center or homeless
shelter to meet with neighbors upon request to attempt to resolve any neighborhood complaints
regarding operation of the center;
d. A provision requiring continuous on-site security and emergency services, which
includes professional security personnel, monitored security cameras, trained emergency
responders, and emergency alert systems.
e. A plan to maintain noise levels in compliance with title 9, chapter 9.28 of this Code;
f. Design requirements that ensure any areas for queuing take place within the footprint of
the principal building and will not occur on any public street or sidewalk;
g. Designation of a location for smoking tobacco outdoors in conformance with State
laws;
h. A provision stating that any trash strewn on the premises be collected and deposited in
a trash receptacle by six o'clock (6:00) A.M. the following day, including any smoking and
parking lot areas;
i. A provision stating that portable trash receptacles on the premises be emptied daily and
that other receptacles be emptied at a minimum of once per week or as needed.
The owner of property on which a homeless resource center or homeless shelter is located shall
ensure that the operator complies with the requirements of this subsection A2.
3. The applicant shall demonstrate how the building and site is designed to prevent crime
based on the following principles. However, the Planning Commission may require modification
of the proposed building and site plans if it determines that the plans do not sufficiently address
each of these principles:
a. Natural Surveillance:
(1) The building includes windows and doors in sufficient quantities and locations that
allow people inside the building to see all exterior areas of the site;
(2) Lighting is sufficient to illuminate building site, entrances, and access points from
public streets and sidewalks to the building;
(A) Exterior public and private areas shall be illuminated at a minimum rating of one
foot-candle, and parking lots shall be illuminated at a minimum rating of three (3) foot-candles.
(B) Exterior lighting shall be shielded to control light pollution and prevent glare, and
utilize light emitting diodes or metal-halide filaments.
(3) Landscaping is arranged on the site in a manner that does not create hidden spaces or
block sight lines between the building, public spaces, parking areas and landscaped areas.
b. Natural Access Control:
(1) Buildings include direct walkways from the public sidewalk to the primary building
entrances;
(2) Walkways are provided to guide people from the parking areas to primary building
entrances;
(3) Low growing landscape, low walls, curbing, or other means are used to guide
pedestrians along walkways;
(4) All walkways are properly illuminated and all illumination on the site is shielded to
direct light down and away from neighboring properties;
(5) Building entrances are clearly identified with universally accessible signs.
c. Territorial Reinforcement:
(1) Landscaped areas along the perimeter of the site, which are not visible from the
building or public spaces, shall include mechanisms to restrict access outside daylight hours;
(2) Parking areas are secured outside of daylight hours;
(3) A decorative masonry wall that is a minimum of six feet (6') high shall be provided
along all interior side and rear lot lines and that complies with all required site distance triangles
at driveways and walkways. Walls in excess of six feet (6') may be required as a condition of
approval of a conditional use if it determines a taller wall is necessary to mitigate a detrimental
impact created by the homeless resource center or homeless shelter;
(4) A fence no taller than three feet (3') high, and does not create a visible barrier, shall
be placed near the front property line to mark the transition from public space to private space;
(5) If the zoning district does not require a landscape buffer, the Planning Commission
may nevertheless establish appropriate landscape buffering requirements as a condition of
approval to mitigate reasonably anticipated detrimental effects of the proposed use.
d. Maintenance:
(1) The building and site are maintained free from graffiti, litter, garbage, and other
items that constitute a nuisance;
(2) The building is maintained in good repair and all property damage is repaired in a
timely manner;
(3) All fencing, walls, paving, walkways and other site features are maintained in good
repair, and free from obstruction.
e. Building And Zoning Compliance: A homeless resource center or homeless shelter shall comply
with all applicable building and zoning regulations.
SECTION 7. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.62.040. That Section
21A.62.040 of the Salt Lake City Code (Definitions of Terms) shall be and hereby is amended to modify
the definition of “homeless resource center” and “homeless shelter” which shall read and appear as
follows:
HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTER: An establishment in which co-located supportive services
such as sleeping, bathing, eating, laundry facilities, and housing case management is provided
on an emergency basis for individuals experiencing homelessness. Additional services may
include preparation and distribution of food; medical care and treatment; behavioral and
mental health counseling; employment counseling; educational instruction, and vocational
training.
HOMELESS SHELTER: An establishment in which sleeping accommodations are provided on
an emergency basis for individuals experiencing homelessness.
SECTION 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect April 1, 2022.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _______ day of
______________, 2022.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 2022.
Published: ______________.
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date:__________________________________
By: ___________________________________
Hannah Vickery, Senior City Attorney
3/22/22
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: PLNPCM2021-01033 Homeless Resource Center and Homeless Shelter Text
Amendments
STAFF CONTACT: Nick Norris, Planning Director, nick.norris@slcgov.com or 801-535-6173
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council consider the recommendation from the
Planning Commission to deny the proposal to prohibit homeless resource centers and homeless
shelters by removing the uses from the land use tables in the CG, D2, and D3 zoning districts.
BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This proposal was initiated by Mayor Erin Mendenhall in
October 2021. The initiation included three parts:
1. Prohibit new, future homeless shelters or homeless resources centers in all zoning
districts in the city.
2. Modify the conditional use standards for homeless shelters or homeless resource centers,
and
3. Distinguish between temporary overflow shelters and permanent shelters and homeless
resources centers that operate year-round and potentially allow temporary overflow
homeless shelters in certain zones.
This transmittal only includes part 1. Parts 2 and 3 are in the engagement process and will be
going to the Planning Commission in the coming months. They are not part of this proposal.
Lisa Shaffer (Feb 11, 2022 12:02 MST)02/11/2022
02/11/2022
Part 1 would remove homeless resource centers and homeless shelters from the land use tables
by deleting the “C” (indicating a use is a conditional use) in the land use tables for the CG
General Commercial, D2 Downtown Support, and D3 Downtown/Warehouse Residential Zoning
Districts. If approved, homeless resource centers and homeless shelters would not be allowed in
any zoning districts in the city. The uses also include a footnote to a qualifying provision that
follows each land use table. The footnote references a provision in Utah Code that has been
removed from Utah Code by the Utah Legislature. The footnote would be deleted as part of this
proposal.
This proposal includes some changes to Zoning Ordinance section 21A.36.350. The purpose of
these changes is to ensure that the existing regulations would apply to existing homeless resource
centers. The current language says that it applies to conditional uses. If the conditional use is
removed, then this wording needs to change so it would still apply. This section is likely to be
modified during part 2 of this proposal.
The City initiated the pending ordinance rule with this petition. The pending ordinance rule
allows a city to hold any application for a homeless resource center or homeless shelter for a
period of 180 days pending a change in city code. This applies to any application that is
submitted starting on the day the petition is initiated. The petition was initiated on October 4,
2021. The 180-day period expires on April 2, 2022. If the proposal or a modified version of the
proposal is adopted by April 2, 2022, any application that is submitted during the 180 period
would be denied because a homeless resource center and homeless shelter would no longer be
allowed. Alternatively, if a modified version is adopted, an application that complied with the
modified version may be processed and an application that did not comply would be denied. If
no changes are adopted by the 180-day deadline, the existing regulations go back into effect, and
any open applications would be processed under the current regulations.
In November 2021 the City Council adopted a motion that initiated a petition that asked the
administration to review and come back with recommendations for “prohibiting temporary
shelters until other jurisdictions in Salt Lake County permit them.” The initiation request from
Mayor Mendenhall and this one from the City Council are directly related to what would be the
same provisions in city code. Therefore, it is challenging to separate each request into a different
proposal. This proposal (to remove the uses from the land use table) does accomplish the City
Council request because it would prohibit any future shelter or resource center until such time as
the City Council adopts new regulations for either permanent or temporary shelters. If this
proposal is adopted, it does not prohibit the City Council from initiating temporary land use
regulations but would prevent any other entity from submitting a conditional use for either a
permanent or temporary/season shelter.
PUBLIC PROCESS: The proposed changes were outlined in a public information document
and made available to the public on November 16, 2021. A notice was sent to all registered,
recognized community organizations via email on the same date. This started the 45-day public
engagement period required by city code. The 45-day public engagement period ended on
January 1, 2022. This date only identifies the end date of the 45-day engagement period and
public input is still being accepted.
During the 45-day period a group of community councils hosted a virtual public forum where the
proposal was discussed, and people had the opportunity to ask questions. Information about the
number of attendees has not been provided to the Planning Division as of the date of this
transmittal. A transcript of the questions that were submitted through the Q/A function of the
virtual meeting platform has also not been provided. The questions and comments submitted
indicated a mixed level of support. Some people were in support of part 1 of the proposal, while
others felt that removing the uses without a more solid proposal to allow the uses in the future
was harmful to those experiencing homelessness. In the opinion of the Planning Division, most
people supported the idea of updating the process and the regulations, but they don’t want to
harm the people without homes, the service providers, or the surrounding community.
Two written comments were submitted to the Planning Division prior to the production date of
the staff report. The comments came from a group of community councils and from The Road
Home. Those comments can be found in the Planning Commission staff report.
The Planning Division also met with homeless service providers to discuss the proposal on
January 4, 2022. The service providers are concerned that removing the uses jeopardizes their
ability to take advantage of available resources that can help provide services and are concerned
that changes to the regulations will make it more difficult for the providers to shelter the
homeless. A summary of that meeting is also discussed in the Planning Commission staff report.
On January 6th, the community hosted a similar community forum in Spanish. This forum was
essentially the same as the one held on December 16th. The forum was moderated, and questions
and answers were provided by a Spanish speaking staff member of the Community and
Neighborhoods Department. A transcript has not been provided to the Planning Division, but
similar questions and issues were raised during this forum as were raised in the December 16th
forum.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 12, 2022. The public hearing was
posted on the Planning Division website, the Utah Public Notice website, and shared through the
Planning Division email listserv. No entities have requested mailed notice of this proposal and
no mailed notice was provided. Service providers were provided with an email notice of the
hearing. Written comments were provided to the Planning Commission and several people spoke
during the public hearing. The comments were mixed and ranged from support for the proposal
to opposition to the proposal. The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting are linked in
this document and provide a summary of the comments made. One underlying theme of the
public comment was the need to act quickly to have an updated process to allow homeless
resource centers in the city. Some encouraged the process to spread the uses throughout the city,
while others supported the uses to be proximate to needed services. After the public hearing, the
Planning Commission was also mixed on the proposal and debated the right direction to go. The
Commission ended up adopting a motion to reject part one of the proposal, primarily because
they were concerned there was no timeline established to replace the conditional use process.
Planning Commission (PC) Records
a) PC Agenda of January 12, 2022 (Click to Access)
b) PC Minutes of January 12, 2022 (Click to Access)
c) Planning Commission Staff Report of January 12, 2022 (Click to Access Report)
EXHIBITS:
1) Project Chronology
2) Notice of City Council Public Hearing
3) Original Petition
4) Public Comment Received after Planning Commission Staff Report was Published
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. _____ of 2022
(An ordinance amending various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to
homeless resource center and homeless shelter text amendments)
An ordinance amending various Sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to
homeless resource center and homeless shelter text amendments pursuant to Petition No.
PLNPCM2021-01033.
WHEREAS, on October 4, 2021, Mayor Erin Mendenhall (the “Mayor”) initiated a
petition, Petition No. PLNPCM2021-01033, to consider, among other things, a text amendment to
the Salt Lake City Code to prohibit new future homeless shelters or homeless resources centers in all
zoning districts in the city;
WHEREAS, the Mayor initiated the petition pursuant to City ordinance, thereby, invoking
the pending ordinance doctrine recognized by Utah Code Section 10-9a-509 to prohibit new
homeless shelters and homeless resource centers in the city;
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (the “Planning Commission”) held a
public hearing on January 12, 2022 to consider the aforementioned portion of the request initiated by
the Mayor to amend the Salt Lake City Code to prohibit new homeless shelters and homeless
resource centers within the city; and
WHEREAS, at its January 12, 2022 hearing, the Planning Commission voted to forward a
negative recommendation on the proposal related to the petition before it; and
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council desires, for the time being, to prohibit new
homeless shelters and homeless resource centers; and
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council finds, after holding a public hearing on this
matter, 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 Text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.33.010.C.
That Subsection 21A.33.010.C of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to
read as follows:
C. Uses Not Permitted: Any use not specifically permitted or conditionally permitted in the table
of permitted and conditional uses for the specific zoning district is prohibited. Only uses listed as
a “P” or a “C” in the table of permitted and conditional uses for a district shall be allowed where
designated.
SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That Section
21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional
Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the following rows in the
table which shall read and appear in that table as follows:
21A.33.030: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR
COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS:
USE CN CB CS1 CC CSHBD1 CG SNB
Homeless Resource Center
Homeless Shelter
SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That the
“Qualifying Provisions:” of Section 21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables:
Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to
remove qualifying provision number “21” and designate qualifying provision 21 as “reserved” as follows:
Qualifying Provisions:
21.[Reserved.]
SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That Section
21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional
Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the following rows in the
table which shall read and appear in that table as follows:
21A.33.050: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR DOWNTOWN
DISTRICTS:
USE D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4
Homeless Resource Center
Homeless Shelter
SECTION 5. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That the
“Qualifying Provisions:” of Section 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables:
Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to
remove qualifying provision number “15” and designate qualifying provision 15 as “reserved” as follows:
Qualifying Provisions:
15. [Reserved].
SECTION 6. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.36.350.A
and the title of section 21A.36.350. That Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.36.350.A and
the title of Section 21A.36.30 shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows:
21A.36.350: REGULATIONS FOR HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTERS AND
HOMELESS SHELTERS:
A. A homeless resource center or homeless shelter located within the city shall comply with the
following regulations. Any homeless resource center or homeless shelter approved as a
conditional use shall comply with these regulations and the requirements of the approved
conditional use.
SECTION 7. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.62.040. That Section
21A.62.040 of the Salt Lake City Code (Definitions of Terms) shall be and hereby is amended to modify
the definition of “homeless resource center” and “homeless shelter” which shall read and appear as
follows:
HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTER: An establishment in which co-located supportive services
such as sleeping, bathing, eating, laundry facilities, and housing case management is provided
on an emergency basis for individuals experiencing homelessness. Additional services may
include preparation and distribution of food; medical care and treatment; behavioral and
mental health counseling; employment counseling; educational instruction, and vocational
training.
HOMELESS SHELTER: An establishment in which sleeping accommodations are provided on
an emergency basis for individuals experiencing homelessness.
SECTION 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately after it has been
published in accordance with Utah Code §10-3-711 and recorded in accordance with Utah Code §10-3-
713.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _______ day of
______________, 2022.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 2022.
Published: ______________.
1/31/2022
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE 1
No. _____ of 2022 2
3
(An ordinance amending various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to 4
homeless resource center and homeless shelter text amendments) 5
6
An ordinance amending various Sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to 7
homeless resource center and homeless shelter text amendments pursuant to Petition No. 8
PLNPCM2021-01033. 9
WHEREAS, on October 4, 2021, Mayor Erin Mendenhall (the “Mayor”) initiated a 10
petition, Petition No. PLNPCM2021-01033, to consider, among other things, a text amendment to 11
the Salt Lake City Code to prohibit new future homeless shelters or homeless resources centers in all 12
zoning districts in the city; 13
WHEREAS, the Mayor initiated the petition pursuant to City ordinance, thereby, invoking 14
the pending ordinance doctrine recognized by Utah Code Section 10-9a-509 to prohibit new 15
homeless shelters and homeless resource centers in the city; 16
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (the “Planning Commission”) held a 17
public hearing on January 12, 2022 to consider the aforementioned portion of the request initiated by 18
the Mayor to amend the Salt Lake City Code to prohibit new homeless shelters and homeless 19
resource centers within the city; and 20
WHEREAS, at its January 12, 2022 hearing, the Planning Commission voted to forward a 21
negative recommendation on the proposal related to the petition before it; and 22
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council desires, for the time being, to prohibit new 23
homeless shelters and homeless resource centers; and 24
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council finds, after holding a public hearing on this 25
matter, that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. 26
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 27
SECTION 1. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.33.010.C. 28
That Subsection 21A.33.010.C of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to 29
read as follows: 30
C. Uses Not Permitted: Any use specifically listed without a "P" or a "C" designated in the table 31
of permitted and conditional uses for a district shall not be allowed in that zoning district. Any 32
use not specifically permitted or conditionally permitted in the table of permitted and conditional 33
uses for the specific zoning district is prohibited. Only uses listed as a “P” or a “C” in the table of 34
permitted and conditional uses for a district shall be allowed where designated. 35
SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That Section 36
21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional 37
Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the following rows in the 38
table which shall read and appear in that table as follows: 39
21A.33.030: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR 40
COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS: 41
USE CN CB CS1 CC CSHBD1 CG SNB
Homeless Resource Center C21
Homeless Shelter C21
42
SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That the 43
“Qualifying Provisions:” of Section 21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: 44
Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to 45
remove qualifying provision number “21” and designate qualifying provision 21 as “reserved” as follows: 46
Qualifying Provisions: 47
21. Subject to conformance with the provisions of section 21A.36.350 of this title, the City may 48
not prohibit construction of a homeless resource center or homeless shelter if the site is 49
approved by and receives funding through the State Homeless Coordinating Committee, with 50
the concurrence of the Housing and Community Development Division within the Department 51
of Workforce Services, in accordance with section 35A-8-604 of the Utah Code. 52
53
21.[Reserved.] 54
55
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That Section 56
21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional 57
Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the following rows in the 58
table which shall read and appear in that table as follows: 59
21A.33.050: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR DOWNTOWN 60
DISTRICTS: 61
USE D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4
Homeless Resource Center C15 C15
Homeless Shelter C15 C15
62
SECTION 5. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That the 63
“Qualifying Provisions:” of Section 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: 64
Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to 65
remove qualifying provision number “15” and designate qualifying provision 15 as “reserved” as follows: 66
Qualifying Provisions: 67
15. Subject to conformance with the provisions of section 21A.36.350 of this title, the City may 68
not prohibit construction of a homeless resource center or homeless shelter if the site is 69
approved by and receives funding through the State Homeless Coordinating Committee, with 70
the concurrence of the Housing and Community Development Division within the Department 71
of Workforce Services, in accordance with section 35A-8-604 of the Utah Code. 72
73
15. [Reserved]. 74
75
SECTION 6. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.36.350.A 76
and the title of section 21A.36.350. That Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.36.350.A and 77
the title of Section 21A.36.30 shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 78
21A.36.350: QUALIFYING PROVISIONS REGULATIONS FOR HOMELESS 79
RESOURCE CENTERS OR AND HOMELESS SHELTERS: 80
A. A homeless resource center or homeless shelter located within the city shall comply with the 81
following regulations. Any homeless resource center or homeless shelter approved as a 82
conditional use shall comply with these regulations and the requirements of the approved 83
conditional use. may be allowed as a conditional use, as identified in chapter 21A.33, "Land Use 84
Tables", of this title pursuant to the provisions of chapter 21A.54, "Conditional Uses", of this title 85
and the requirements of this section 86
87
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
SECTION 7. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.62.040. That Section 88
21A.62.040 of the Salt Lake City Code (Definitions of Terms) shall be and hereby is amended to modify 89
the definition of “homeless resource center” and “homeless shelter” which shall read and appear as 90
follows: 91
HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTER: An establishment building or portion thereof in which co-92
located supportive services such as sleeping, bathing, eating, laundry facilities, and housing case 93
management is provided on an emergency basis for individuals experiencing homelessness. 94
Additional services may include preparation and distribution of food; medical care and 95
treatment; behavioral and mental health counseling; employment counseling; educational 96
instruction, and vocational training. 97
98
HOMELESS SHELTER: An establishment in which sleeping accommodations are provided on 99
an emergency basis for individuals experiencing homelessness. Any homeless shelter that began 100
operation on or before January 1, 2016, may operate year round in accordance with section 10-101
9a-526 of the Utah Code. 102
103
SECTION 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately after it has been 104
published in accordance with Utah Code §10-3-711 and recorded in accordance with Utah Code §10-3-105
713. 106
107
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _______ day of 108
______________, 2022. 109
______________________________ 110
CHAIRPERSON 111
112
ATTEST: 113
114
______________________________ 115
CITY RECORDER 116
117
118
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. 119
120
121
Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. 122
123
124
125
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
______________________________ 126
MAYOR 127
128
______________________________ 129
CITY RECORDER 130
131
(SEAL) 132
Bill No. ________ of 2022. 134
Published: ______________. 135
136
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
3. ORIGINAL PETITION
4. MAILING LIST
1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Petition: PLNPCM2021-01033
October 4, 2021 Petition initiated by Mayor Erin Mendenhall. Notice of pending ordinance
invoked by the city, starting 180-day decision making period.
October 6, 2021 Internal meeting to discuss how to proceed with the proposal and what
sections of the zoning code may be impacted.
October 21, 2021 Internal meeting to discuss community engagement.
October 26, 2021 Internal meeting to discuss expectations for this project.
November 2, 2021 Internal meeting to review draft proposal.
November 4, 2021 Internal meeting to discuss potential legal issues with the proposal.
November 16, 2021 Notice and information sent to all recognized organizations starting the
45-day public engagement period.
December 13, 2021 Presentation to Sugar House Community Council Land Use Committee
December 16, 2021 Virtual community forum hosted by recognized organizations.
December 29, 2021 Public notice for January 12, 2022 Planning Commission public hearing
sent to Division list serve, posted on city website, and posted on Utah
Public Meeting website. Property posted with sign advertising public
hearing.
January 3, 2022 Meeting with service providers to discuss the proposal.
January 6, 2022 Virtual community forum hosted by recognized organizations held in
Spanish.
January 12, 2022 Planning Commission public hearing.
2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition P:NPCM2021-01033 – A petition initiated by Mayor
Erin Mendenhall to amend the Salt Lake City Zoning Code by removing Homeless Resource Centers and
Homeless Shelters as conditional uses from the land use tables for the CG General Commercial, D-2
Downtown Support, and D-3 Downtown Warehouse/Residential Zoning Districts, modifying 21A.33.010
to clarify when listed land uses are prohibited, modifying the applicability section of 21A.36.350
Qualifying Provisions for Homeless Resource Centers and Homeless Shelters, and modifying the
definitions of homeless resource centers and homeless shelters in 21A.62. The City Council may consider
modifications to other related sections of the code as part of this proposal.
DATE: Date #1 and Date #2
TIME: 7:00 p.m.
All persons interested and present will be given an opportunity to be heard in this matter.
This meeting will be held via electronic means, while potentially also providing for an in-
person opportunity to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building,
located at 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. If you are interested in
participating during the Public Hearing portion of the meeting, please visit the website
www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings/ or call 801-535-7654 to obtain connection
information.
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
Nick Norris at 801-535-6173 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday or via e-mail at nick.norris@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. ORIGINAL PETITION
4. PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED AFTER PLANNING
COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PUBLISHED
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
2 No. 15A of 2022
3
4 (An ordinance amending various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to
5 homeless resource center and homeless shelter text amendments)
6
7 An ordinance amending various Sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to
8 homeless resource center and homeless shelter text amendments pursuant to Petition No.
9 PLNPCM2021-01033.
10 WHEREAS, on October 4, 2021, Mayor Erin Mendenhall (the “Mayor”) initiated a
11 petition, Petition No. PLNPCM2021-01033, to consider, among other things, a text amendment to
12 the Salt Lake City Code to prohibit new future homeless shelters or homeless resources centers in all
13 zoning districts in the city;
14 WHEREAS, the Mayor initiated the petition pursuant to City ordinance, thereby, invoking
15 the pending ordinance doctrine recognized by Utah Code Section 10-9a-509 to prohibit new
16 homeless shelters and homeless resource centers in the city;
17 WHEREAS, in accordance with Utah Code §10-9a-502, the Salt Lake City Planning
18 Commission (the “Planning Commission”) held a public hearing on January 12, 2022 to consider the
19 request initiated by the Mayor to amend the Salt Lake City Code to prohibit new homeless shelters
20 and homeless resource centers within the city;
21 WHEREAS, at the January 12th public hearing, the Planning Commission discussed
22 amendments to the City’s land use regulations related to the homeless resource centers and homeless
23 shelters, including whether to discontinue the allowance of homeless resource centers and homeless
24 shelters as a conditional use in the city and the duration of such action, among other considerations;
25
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
26 WHEREAS, at its January 12, 2022 hearing, the Planning Commission, expressing
27 concern that there was no future plan for allowing homeless resource centers and homeless shelters in
28 the city, voted to forward a negative recommendation on the proposal related to the petition before it;
29 WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council (the “City Council”) desires, for the time being,
30 to prohibit new homeless shelters and homeless resource centers while the city conducts outreach
31 necessary to inform the City Council in its desire to allow the use in the future pursuant to new
32 regulations and allow additional time for the city’s professional staff to study and discuss
33 alternative means for regulating the historically challenging land uses;
34 WHEREAS, the City Council expresses its intent to allow homeless resource centers and
35 homeless shelters in the city in the future, and to further demonstrate the City Council’s intent
36 the City Council finds that in the absence of a future new regulatory scheme that the City should
37 amend Salt Lake City Code in a manner that would again allow homeless shelters and homeless
38 resources in the CG General Commercial, D-2 Downtown Support, and D-3 Downtown
39 Warehouse/Residential districts;
40 WHEREAS, in order to authorize homeless shelters and homeless resources in the
41 aforementioned zones the City Council would need to make various changes to the city code as
42 further detailed in Ordinance No. 15B of 2022;
43 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that adopting Ordinance No. 15B in conjunction with
44 this Ordinance alleviates the concern that homeless resource centers and homeless shelters will
45 be prohibited city wide for an indefinite period of time and provides for changes necessary to
46 allow the land uses in the City in the absence of the creation of a new regulatory scheme;
47 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that Ordinances No. 15A of 2022 and 15B of 2022
48 should be adopted simultaneously with differing effective dates and act as a single transaction;
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
49 WHEREAS, the City Council hereby requests that the Mayor engage her professional staff to
50 conduct outreach, study means and methods for regulating uses similar to homeless shelters and
51 homeless resource centers, and propose to the City Council at a future date a recommendation on
52 regulatory scheme for homeless shelters and homeless resource centers; and
53 WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council finds, after holding a public hearing on this
54 matter, that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests.
55 NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
56 SECTION 1. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.33.010.C.
57 That Subsection 21A.33.010.C of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to
58 read as follows:
59 C. Uses Not Permitted: Any use specifically listed without a "P" or a "C" designated in the table
60 of permitted and conditional uses for a district shall not be allowed in that zoning district. Any
61 use not specifically permitted or conditionally permitted in the table of permitted and conditional
62 uses for the specific zoning district is prohibited. Only uses listed as a “P” or a “C” in the table of
63 permitted and conditional uses for a district shall be allowed where designated.
64 SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That Section
65 21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional
66 Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the following rows in the
67 table which shall read and appear in that table as follows:
68 21A.33.030: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR
69 COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS:
USE CN CB CS1 CC CSHBD1 CG SNB
Homeless Resource Center C21
Homeless Shelter C21
70
71 SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That the
72 “Qualifying Provisions:” of Section 21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables:
73 Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to
74 remove qualifying provision number “21” and designate qualifying provision 21 as “reserved” as follows:
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
75 Qualifying Provisions:
76 21. Subject to conformance with the provisions of section 21A.36.350 of this title, the City may
77 not prohibit construction of a homeless resource center or homeless shelter if the site is
78 approved by and receives funding through the State Homeless Coordinating Committee, with
79 the concurrence of the Housing and Community Development Division within the Department
80 of Workforce Services, in accordance with section 35A-8-604 of the Utah Code.
81
82 21.[Reserved.]
83
84 SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That Section
85 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional
86 Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the following rows in the
87 table which shall read and appear in that table as follows:
88 21A.33.050: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR DOWNTOWN
89 DISTRICTS:
USE D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4
Homeless Resource Center C15 C15
Homeless Shelter C15 C15
90
91 SECTION 5. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That the
92 “Qualifying Provisions:” of Section 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables:
93 Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to
94 remove qualifying provision number “15” and designate qualifying provision 15 as “reserved” as follows:
95 Qualifying Provisions:
96 15. Subject to conformance with the provisions of section 21A.36.350 of this title, the City may
97 not prohibit construction of a homeless resource center or homeless shelter if the site is
98 approved by and receives funding through the State Homeless Coordinating Committee, with
99 the concurrence of the Housing and Community Development Division within the Department
100 of Workforce Services, in accordance with section 35A-8-604 of the Utah Code.
101
102 15. [Reserved].
103
104 SECTION 6. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.36.350. That
105 Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.36.350 shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows:
106 21A.36.350: QUALIFYING PROVISIONS REGULATIONS FOR HOMELESS
107 RESOURCE CENTERS OR AND HOMELESS SHELTERS:
108 A. A homeless resource center or homeless shelter located within the city shall comply with the
109 following regulations. Any homeless resource center or homeless shelter approved as a
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
110 conditional use shall comply with these regulations and the requirements of the approved
111 conditional use. may be allowed as a conditional use, as identified in chapter 21A.33, "Land Use
112 Tables", of this title pursuant to the provisions of chapter 21A.54, "Conditional Uses", of this title
113 and the requirements of this section
114 1. Limit the number of homeless persons who may occupy a homeless resource center for
115 overnight accommodations to a maximum of two hundred (200) homeless persons.
116 a. Service provider staff shall not be included in this occupancy limit.
117 b. No homeless resource center shall exceed the maximum occupancy for overnight
118 accommodations for any reason, including on an overflow basis.
119 2. A security and operations plan shall be prepared by the applicant, and approved by the
120 Salt Lake City Police Department and Community and Neighborhoods Department, prior to
121 conditional use approval, and filed with the Recorder's Office. A security and operations plan
122 shall include:
123 a. A community relations and complaint response program that identifies specific
124 strategies and methods designed to maintain the premises in a clean and orderly condition,
125 minimize potential conflicts with the owners/operators and uses of neighboring property, and
126 prohibit unlawful behavior by occupants of the homeless resource center or homeless shelter on
127 the site or adjacent public right-of-way. The community relations and complaint response
128 program shall include at least the following elements:
129 (1) Identify a representative of the homeless resource center or homeless shelter,
130 including the representative's name, telephone number, and email, who will meet with neighbors
131 upon request to attempt to resolve any neighborhood complaints regarding operation of the
132 center;
133 (2) A dedicated twenty four (24) hour telephone line for the purpose of receiving
134 complaints;
135 (3) Quarterly meetings with a community coordinating group, which shall be open to the
136 public, to discuss and address concerns and issues that may be occurring as a result of the
137 homeless resource center or homeless shelter operation. The meetings shall be advertised at least
138 ten (10) days in advance by posting notice on the operator's website and a sign posted along the
139 public street;
140 (4) Representatives from each of the following shall be included in the community
141 coordinating group:
142 (A) The homeless resource center or homeless shelter,
143 (B) A business located within one-fourth (1/4) mile of the site,
144 (C) A resident who lives within one-fourth (1/4) mile of the site,
145 (D) A school, if any, located within one-fourth (1/4) mile of the site;
146 (E) Chair of the community council, or designee, whose boundary encompasses the
147 site;
148 (F) An individual who has previously received or is currently receiving services (i.e.,
149 client) from a homeless resource center or homeless shelter; and
150 (5) A written annual report, provided on or before February 15th of each year, from the
151 operator of the homeless resource center or homeless shelter, provided to the City Planning
152 Director and to the City Council member in whose district the homeless resource center or
153 homeless shelter is located, which includes the following information:
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
154 (A) List of individuals who have participated in the community coordinating group
155 meetings;
156 (B) A summary of each community coordinating group meeting;
157 (C) A summary of complaints received from the community by the operator of the
158 homeless resource center or homeless shelter; and
159 (D) An explanation of how complaints have been addressed/resolved.
160 b. A complaint response community relations program that includes strategies and
161 methods designed to maintain the premises in a clean and orderly condition, minimize potential
162 conflicts with the owners/operators and uses of neighboring property, and prohibit unlawful
163 behavior by occupants of the homeless resource center or homeless shelter on the site or adjacent
164 public right- of-way.
165 c. A provision requiring a representative of the homeless resource center or homeless
166 shelter to meet with neighbors upon request to attempt to resolve any neighborhood complaints
167 regarding operation of the center;
168 d. A provision requiring continuous on-site security and emergency services, which
169 includes professional security personnel, monitored security cameras, trained emergency
170 responders, and emergency alert systems.
171 e. A plan to maintain noise levels in compliance with title 9, chapter 9.28 of this Code;
172 f. Design requirements that ensure any areas for queuing take place within the footprint of
173 the principal building and will not occur on any public street or sidewalk;
174 g. Designation of a location for smoking tobacco outdoors in conformance with State
175 laws;
176 h. A provision stating that any trash strewn on the premises be collected and deposited in
177 a trash receptacle by six o'clock (6:00) A.M. the following day, including any smoking and
178 parking lot areas;
179 i. A provision stating that portable trash receptacles on the premises be emptied daily and
180 that other receptacles be emptied at a minimum of once per week or as needed.
181 The owner of property on which a homeless resource center or homeless shelter is located shall
182 ensure that the operator complies with the requirements of this subsection A2.
183 3. The applicant shall demonstrate how the building and site is designed to prevent crime
184 based on the following principles. However, the Planning Commission may require modification
185 of the proposed building and site plans if it determines that the plans do not sufficiently address
186 each of these principles:
187 a. Natural Surveillance:
188 (1) The building includes windows and doors in sufficient quantities and locations that
189 allow people inside the building to see all exterior areas of the site;
190 (2) Lighting is sufficient to illuminate building site, entrances, and access points from
191 public streets and sidewalks to the building;
192 (A) Exterior public and private areas shall be illuminated at a minimum rating of one
193 foot-candle, and parking lots shall be illuminated at a minimum rating of three (3) foot-candles.
194 (B) Exterior lighting shall be shielded to control light pollution and prevent glare, and
195 utilize light emitting diodes or metal-halide filaments.
196 (3) Landscaping is arranged on the site in a manner that does not create hidden spaces or
197 block sight lines between the building, public spaces, parking areas and landscaped areas.
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
198 b. Natural Access Control:
199 (1) Buildings include direct walkways from the public sidewalk to the primary building
200 entrances;
201 (2) Walkways are provided to guide people from the parking areas to primary building
202 entrances;
203 (3) Low growing landscape, low walls, curbing, or other means are used to guide
204 pedestrians along walkways;
205 (4) All walkways are properly illuminated and all illumination on the site is shielded to
206 direct light down and away from neighboring properties;
207 (5) Building entrances are clearly identified with universally accessible signs.
208 c. Territorial Reinforcement:
209 (1) Landscaped areas along the perimeter of the site, which are not visible from the
210 building or public spaces, shall include mechanisms to restrict access outside daylight hours;
211 (2) Parking areas are secured outside of daylight hours;
212 (3) A decorative masonry wall that is a minimum of six feet (6') high shall be provided
213 along all interior side and rear lot lines and that complies with all required site distance triangles
214 at driveways and walkways. Walls in excess of six feet (6') may be required as a condition of
215 approval of a conditional use if it determines a taller wall is necessary to mitigate a detrimental
216 impact created by the homeless resource center or homeless shelter;
217 (4) A fence no taller than three feet (3') high, and does not create a visible barrier, shall
218 be placed near the front property line to mark the transition from public space to private space;
219 (5) If the zoning district does not require a landscape buffer, the Planning Commission
220 may nevertheless establish appropriate landscape buffering requirements as a condition of
221 approval to mitigate reasonably anticipated detrimental effects of the proposed use.
222 d. Maintenance:
223 (1) The building and site are maintained free from graffiti, litter, garbage, and other
224 items that constitute a nuisance;
225 (2) The building is maintained in good repair and all property damage is repaired in a
226 timely manner;
227 (3) All fencing, walls, paving, walkways and other site features are maintained in good
228 repair, and free from obstruction.
229 e. Building And Zoning Compliance: A homeless resource center or homeless shelter shall comply
230 with all applicable building and zoning regulations.
231 SECTION 7. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.62.040. That Section
232 21A.62.040 of the Salt Lake City Code (Definitions of Terms) shall be and hereby is amended to modify
233 the definition of “homeless resource center” and “homeless shelter” which shall read and appear as
234 follows:
235 HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTER: An establishment building or portion thereof in which co-
236 located supportive services such as sleeping, bathing, eating, laundry facilities, and housing case
237 management is provided on an emergency basis for individuals experiencing homelessness.
238 Additional services may include preparation and distribution of food; medical care and
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
239 treatment; behavioral and mental health counseling; employment counseling; educational
240 instruction, and vocational training.
241
242 HOMELESS SHELTER: An establishment building or portion thereof in which sleeping
243 accommodations are provided on an emergency basis for individuals experiencing
244 homelessness. Any homeless shelter that began operation on or before January 1, 2016, may
245 operate year round in accordance with section 10-9a-526 of the Utah Code.
246
247 SECTION 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on April 1, 2022.
248
249 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _______ day of
250 ______________, 2022.
251 ______________________________
252 CHAIRPERSON
253
254 ATTEST:
255
256 ______________________________
257 CITY RECORDER
258
259
260 Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
261
262
263 Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
264
265
266
267 ______________________________
268 MAYOR
269
270 ______________________________
271 CITY RECORDER
272
273 (SEAL)
274
275 Bill No. ________ of 2022.
276 Published: ______________.
277
Item B10
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
PUBLIC HEARING
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Ben Luedtke
Budget and Policy Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: Federal HUD Grant Appropriations 2022-2023: Community Development Block Grants
(CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG), HOME Investment Partnership, and
Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA)
MOTION 1 – CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
I move that the Council close the public hearing and refer the item to a future date for action.
MOTION 2 – CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING
I move that the Council continue the public hearing to a future date.
Staff Note: All public comments received through any communication channel will be included in the
City’s report to HUD.
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: Ben Luedtke
Budget & Public Policy Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: Federal HUD Grant Appropriations 2022-2023: Community Development Block Grants
(CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG), HOME Investment Partnership and
Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA)
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Department’s annual grant programs are one of the most
significant ongoing funding sources the City receives from the Federal Government. Fiscal Year 2023 is subject
to the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan which introduced new funding goals, strategies, and a targeted area for
spending CDBG dollars on public infrastructure and economic development. See the additional info section for
the goals and strategies applications must advance to qualify for these grant funds and Attachment 3 for a map
of the target area. The Council is scheduled to hold a hybrid public hearing on Tuesday, March 22 to hear from
the public and grant applicants regarding community needs for the 2022-2023 funding cycle.
As seen in most years, the requested funding from applicants is significantly greater than available funds.
Requests are 162% of available funding: $11,389,939 is requested compared to $7,028,013 in available funding.
HUD has not provided Salt Lake City’s final grant award amounts. The available funding could change based on
HUD’s pending confirmation of the amounts. The resident advisory boards provided recommendations in case
funding is more or less than estimated. The board’s recommendations are shown on the Funding Log at the end
of each grant and a summary table in the additional info section below. The table below summarizes requested
and available funding by grant. Note that the HOPWA grant has more funding available than requested.
HOPWA grant awards to the City have more than doubled in the last seven years. Funding awards for the other
three grants have not seen similar increases.
Gran t Re q u e st A v ai l ab l e Re q u e s t s as % o f
Fu n din g A v ai lab l e
CDBG 7 ,0 0 6 ,2 3 7$ 4 ,6 7 0 ,5 1 7$ 1 5 0 %
ESG 1 ,2 7 5 ,82 7$ $ 3 2 6 ,2 6 7 3 9 1 %
HOME 2 ,3 0 3 ,4 85$ 1 ,1 2 1 ,1 0 3$ 2 0 5 %
HOPWA 80 4 ,3 9 0$ 9 1 0 ,1 2 6$ 88%
TOTA L 1 1 ,3 89 ,9 3 9$ 7 ,0 2 8,0 1 3$ 1 6 2 %
Goal of the briefing: Discuss the Council’s federal grant priorities, ask questions about specific applications
and allocate funding across eligible programs and projects.
Project Timeline:
Set Date: February 15, 2022
1st Briefing: March 22, 2022
Public Hearing: March 22, 2022
2nd Briefing: April 5, 2022
3rd Briefing: April 12, 2022 (if needed)
Potential Action: April 19, 2022
Page | 2
Minimum Funding Level
Five years ago, the City established a minimum funding level for grant awards. HUD recommends a $35,000
minimum award for projects. Housing and Neighborhood Development (HAND) recommends $30,000 after
consultations with applicants. The minimum award is aimed at maximizing community benefits from grant
awards. The intent of this policy is to balance the burden for the Administration and recipient organizations to
manage grant funds with the goal of having positive impacts in the community. This year, no applications were
disqualified for requesting less than the minimum funding requirement.
Scoring Applications and Funding Recommendations
CDBG and ESG projects receive scores and funding recommendations from the CDCIP Board. HOME and
HOPWA projects receive funding recommendations from the Housing Trust Fund (HTF) Advisory Board. The
advisory board funding recommendations are provided to the Mayor and City Council. The Council receives
another set of funding recommendations from the Mayor. The final decision is made by the Council for grant
award amounts. Attachment 1 shows projects ranked by the combined score within each grant category.
Attachment 2 is the funding log for all four federal grants which has more details than Attachment 1 such as
project and program descriptions and prior year award amounts for returning applications. The funding log
combines advisory board and Administration scores as shown in the far-right column where maximum potential
scores are also shown.
Funding Log Trends
Council staff noticed the following trends after reviewing the funding logs:
- Identical Recommendations – The advisory board and mayoral funding recommendations are identical
for all four grants
- New Applications – This year there are 14 new applications for CDBG, five for ESG, two for HOME and
no new applications for HOPWA. New applications with funding recommendations are:
o CDBG Housing #2 First Step House Recovery Residence Rehabilitation
o CDBG Housing #3 International Center for Appropriate and Sustainable Technology (ICAST)
Decarbonizing Supportive Housing
o CDBG Housing #6 Neighborworks of Salt Lake Home Rehabilitation and Improvement
o CDBG Neighborhood Improvements #1 City Transportation Division Ballpark TRAX Accessible
Pedestrian Crossing
o CDBG Public Services #2 Catholic Community Services Case Manager at Weigand Homeless
Resource Center
o CDBG Public Services #17 The Children’s Center Therapeutic Preschool Program
o CDBG Public Services #20 The Road Home Housing Staffing
o ESG Part 1 #2 Family Promise Salt Lake Community Family Shelter
o ESG Part 2 #4 The Road Home Homelessness Prevention
o HOME #4 South Valley Sanctuary Domestic Violence Survivor Housing Assistance
- Disqualified Applications – No applications were disqualified across the four grants this year
- Returning Applications without Funding Recommendations – There are seven returning applications
that received grant awards in recent years but did not receive funding recommendations this year:
o CDBG Public Services #3 Community Development Corporation Housing Counseling
o CDBG Public Services #18 The Inn Between End of Life Care and Medical Respite
o CDBG Public Services #19 The Road Home Gail Miller Resource Center
o CDBG Public Services #25 YWCA Utah Women in Jeopardy Program
o ESG Part 1 #1 Catholic Community Services Weigand Homeless Resource Center Client Intake
and Operations
o ESG Part 1 #7 The Road Home Gail Miller Resource Center
o ESG Part 2 #1 Utah Community Action Diversion Program
Page | 3
Increasing CDBG Housing Category Funding
The chart below compares the annual funding in the housing category of CDBG over seven fiscal years. The
Council identified affordable housing as a priority several years ago. The chart shows that a greater amount of
CDBG funding has gone to housing in recent years. It’s important to note that the Council’s policy guidance is
aligned with increasing CDBG housing funding.
The funding over seven fiscal years is $11,799,167 in total assuming the FY2023 recommended amounts are
approved by the Council. The funding has gone to several housing assistance programs during this time and
some applications have been included every year. Examples of how this funding was used are first time
homebuyer assistance, rehabilitation of existing housing, emergency home repairs (large and small), and
accessibility improvements.
$1,130,000
$1,415,000
$1,050,900
$2,263,557
$1,855,073
$2,035,800 $2,048,837
$-
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
Total CDBG Housing Funding
Comparing Annual Housing Category CDBG Funding
FY2017 to FY2023
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Note: FY2023 is funding recommended by the advisory board and Mayor
POLICY QUESTIONS
1.Differences between Application Scores and Funding Recommendations – The Council may
wish to ask the Administration why the four applications list below with relatively high scores are not
recommended for funding. The Council may also wish to ask why ESG Part 1 #2 is recommended for funding
while the score is the third lowest in the category.
- CDBG Public Services The Road Home applications #19 Gail Miller Resource Center and #22 St. Vincent
de Paul Overflow
- CDBG Public Services #23 Utah AIDS Foundation Clinical Mental Health (note the applicant also
submitted HOPWA #3 for the same program which is recommended for double funding)
- ESG Part 1 #7 The Road Home Gail Miller Resource Center (note this is the highest scoring ESG
application this year)
2.HAND’s HOME Development Fund (HOME #3) – The Council may wish to discuss with the
Administration how the HOME Development Fund fits into the Council’s policy goal of the RDA having a
“one-stop shop” for affordable housing developers. The HOME Development Fund can be used for property
acquisition, new construction, and rehabilitation of existing housing. The Council may also wish to discuss
how the HOME Development Fund could better align with the Council’s policy goal and potential changes
for the FY2023 funding cycle.
3.Multiple Funding Sources for Ballpark Redevelopment – The Council may wish to discuss with the
Administration the City’s overall strategy for funding redevelopment of the Ballpark and surrounding area.
Multiple funding requests have been or are planned to be presented to the Council for this effort. The total
funding of the five requested listed below is $5,781,183. The Administration is currently evaluating public
input on the draft Ballpark Station Area Plan and it will be presented to the Planning Commission. The City
Council would ultimately review and adopt the plan.
Page | 4
- $100,000 RDA Budget Amendment #2 charges and services for consultant work on Ballpark
redevelopment efforts
- $500,000 pending FY2023 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) application for Ballpark Station Area
Plan Implementation Phase 1 could include technical analyses, public engagement, designs, pedestrian
and bicycle connections / crossings, lane redesign of 1300 South, improved alleyways and parking
management efforts
- $550,000 CDBG Neighborhood Improvements #1 City Transportation Division Ballpark TRAX
Accessible Pedestrian Crossing
- $1,631,183 RDA Budget Amendment #2 State Street project area Ballpark strategic development holding
account
- $3 million for improvements to the Ballpark stadium and facilities in capital improvements bond (note
the Administration is reviewing the projects in the bond and may forward a new proposal for FY2023)
4.Encouraging Behavioral Health and Mental Health Applications – The Council may wish to ask
the Administration how more organizations can be encouraged to and assisted with submitting applications
for the new behavioral health goal. This was a new goal under the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan that focuses
on providing treatment and support for persons experiencing mental health challenges and substance abuse
particularly the ongoing opioid crisis. Four behavioral health applications were submitted this year:
- CDBG Public Services #6 First Step House Peer Support Services which is recommended for partial
funding
- CDBG Public Services Odyssey House applications #9 Residential Treatment Transportation and #10
Transitional Living Program which are not recommended for funding, and
- HOPWA #3 Utah AIDS Foundation Mental Health Services which is recommended for double funding
5.Fix the Bricks and HAND’s Housing Rehabilitation and Homebuyer Program (CDBG Housing
#4) – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if these funds could provide some or all the 25%
match for homeowners to participate in the City’s Fix the Bricks seismic improvements program. It was
recently transferred from the Fire Department to HAND. Reviews of applications and completed projects
indicate less participation for low- and moderate-income homeowners including on the Westside.
ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Funding Contingencies
The advisory boards provided recommendations in case final grant funding amounts from HUD or more or less
than the estimated amounts. These funding contingencies are summarized in the table below. The Council may
wish to identify which funding contingencies are supported in the event HUD’s confirmation of final funding
amounts isn’t available by the scheduled vote on April 19.
Grant If MORE Funding Available If LESS Funding Available
CDBG
Maximize Administration category at 20%
and add funding to #15 Shelter the Homeless
Resource Center Meals up to the 15% Public
Service cap then if funding remains add to
Neighborhood Improvements #2 City
Transportation Bus Stop Improvements
Keep Administration category maximized at 20%
and reduce Neighborhood Improvements #2 City
Transportation Bus Stop Improvements and
Public Services #1 Advantage Services
Supportive Employment Program but keep
Public Services category at the 15% cap
ESG
Maximize #1 Administration at 7.5% and add
funding equally between #2 Family Promise
Salt Lake Community Family Shelter, #3 First
Step House Homeless Resource Center
Program, #10 Volunteers of America (VOA)
Women’s Resource Center, and #11 VOA
Youth Resource Center
Keep #1 Administration maximized at 7.5% and
spread reductions across agencies but maintain
$30,000 minimum award
HOME Maximize #7 Administration at 10% and add
funding to # HOME Development Fund
Keep #7 Administration maximized at 10% and
reduce #3 HOME Development Fund
HOPWA
Maximize #5 Administration at 3% and add
funding to #4 Utah Community Action
Housing Supportive Services up to $235,000,
then any remaining funds to #1 Housing
Connect Tenant Based Rental Assistance
Keep #5 Administration maximized at 3% and
reduce #4 Utah Community Action down to
$165,000
Page | 5
2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Goals and Strategies
The City must report progress to HUD on how funding awards advance the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan goals.
In past years, some applicants that received funding were not aligned with the five-year plan. As a result, the
services provided by those organizations could not be reported to HUD. If a city does not adequately fund
applications advancing the five-year plan then HUD could view the program as underperforming, lower future
grant award amounts, and/or audit the city’s program. The below table summarizes the goals and strategies of
the current consolidated plan.
Goals Strategies
Housing: Provide expanded housing options
for all economic and demographic segments of
Salt Lake City’s population while diversifying
housing stock within neighborhoods
1. Support housing programs that address the needs of
aging housing stock through targeted rehabilitation
efforts and diversifying the housing stock within the
neighborhoods
2. Support affordable housing development that increases
the number and types of units available for qualified
residents
3. Support programs that provide access to home
ownership
4. Support rent assistance programs to emphasize stable
housing as a primary strategy to prevent and/or end
homelessness
5. Support programs that provide connection to
permanent housing upon exiting behavioral health
programs
6. Provide housing and essential supportive services to
persons with HIV/AIDS
Transportation: Promote accessibility and
affordability of multimodal transportation
options
1. Within eligible target areas, improve bus stop
amenities as a way to encourage the accessibility of
public transit and enhance the experience of public
transit
2. Within eligible target areas, expand and support the
installation of bike racks, stations, and amenities as a
way to encourage use of alternative modes of
transportation
3. Support access to transportation, prioritizing very low-
income and vulnerable populations
Community Resiliency: Provide tools to
increase economic and/or housing stability
1. Support job training and vocational rehabilitation
programs that increase economic mobility
2. Improve visual and physical appearance of
deteriorating commercial buildings - limited to CDBG
Target Area
3. Provide economic development support for
microenterprise businesses
4. Direct financial assistance to for-profit businesses
5. Expand access to early childhood education to set the
stage for academic achievement, social development,
and change the cycle of poverty
6. Promote digital inclusion through access to digital
communication technologies and the internet
7. Provide support for programs that reduce food
insecurity for vulnerable population
Homeless Services: Expand access to
supportive programs that help ensure
homelessness is rare, brief and non-
reoccurring
1. Expand support for medical and dental care options for
those experiencing homelessness
2. Provide support for homeless services including
Homeless Resource Center Operations and Emergency
Overflow Operations
Page | 6
Goals Strategies
3. Provide support for programs undertaking outreach
services to address the needs of those living an
unsheltered life
4. Expand case management support as a way to connect
those experiencing homelessness with permanent
housing and supportive services
Behavioral Health: Provide support for low
income and vulnerable populations
experiencing behavioral health concerns such
as substance abuse disorders and mental
health challenges
1. Expand treatment options, counseling support, and
case management for those experiencing behavioral
health crisis
CDBG Public Infrastructure and Economic Development Target Area in 2020-2024 Consolidated
Plan (Attachment 3)
The target area creates geographic boundaries for spending CDBG funding on economic development and public
infrastructure improvements. These applications are included in the CDBG Neighborhood Improvements
category on the funding log. Examples of these project types includes business façade improvement grants,
public transit improvements and creation of ADA ramps. The geographic target areas do not apply to housing or
public services category applications. Focusing federal grants in these target areas is intended to maximize
community impact and stimulate investments from other entities into the neighborhoods. The Council chose the
current boundaries to align with Census tracts with relatively higher concentrations of poverty and to overlap
with three RDA project areas: North Temple, 9-Line and State Street.
Summary of Available Funding by Grant
The table below shows funding sources by grant. Note that only the HOME grant program sees some funds
returned as program income from loans. When prior year grant awards are recaptured, it means the program or
project was unable to use the funding as intended which happens for various reasons.
Grant Source Amount
HUD Award $ 3,570,517Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)Recaptured Funding $ 1,100,000
HUD Award $ 299,267Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG)Recaptured Funding $ 27,000
HUD Award $974,863
Recaptured Funding $ 146,240HOME Investment Partnership
Program Income $ 0
HUD Award $840,196Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS
(HOPWA) Recaptured Funding $ 69,930
Community Development and Block Grant (CDBG)
Total CDBG Funding Requests: $7,006,237 (150% of available)
Total Available for Allocation: $4,670,517
CDBG funds focus on community development with an emphasis on physical improvements. The Community
Development & Capital Improvement Programs Advisory Board (CDCIP) submits funding recommendations for
this grant. CDBG funds are allocated to organizations in four categories:
- City Administration (limited to 20% of the annual grant award)
- Housing
Page | 7
- Neighborhood Improvements: transportation and economic development infrastructure
- Public Services (limited to 15% of the annual grant award)
Public Services
This category is directed to services for individuals in need and not necessarily to physical improvements. This is
typically the most competitive category. Funding is awarded to non-profits and governmental entities that
provide programming to meet the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan’s goals. This category is limited to 15% of the
annual CDBG award. The Mayor has recommended funding requests that add up to the 15% maximum. If the
Council would like to allocate money to any application beyond the Mayor’s recommended funding in this
category, then those funds must be shifted from another public services application.
Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG)
Total ESG Funding Requests: $1,275,827 (391% of available)
Total Available for Allocation: $326,267
ESG funds focus on preventing homelessness and providing services to persons experiencing homelessness. The
Community Development & Capital Improvement Programs Advisory Board (CDCIP) submits funding
recommendations for this grant. ESG funds are allocated to organizations providing services in two categories:
- Street Outreach and Emergency Shelter (Part 1)
- Homelessness Prevention, Rapid Re-Housing, Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS)
(Part 2)
HOME Investment Partnership
Total HOME Funding Requests: $2,303,485 (205% of available)
Total Available for Allocation: $1,121,103
HOME Investment Partnership focuses on expanding the supply of quality affordable housing for moderate- and
low-income residents. The Housing Trust Fund (HTF) Advisory Board submits funding recommendations for
this grant.
This year every applicant received full or partial funding for their request.
Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA)
Total HOPWA Funding Requests: $804,390 (88% of available)
Total Available for Allocation: $910,126
HOPWA is the only federal program dedicated entirely to the housing needs of people living with HIV/AIDS.
The Housing Trust Fund (HTFAB) Advisory Board submits funding recommendations for this grant.
ATTACHMENTS
1. FY 2021-22 Grant Recommendations by Combined Score
2. FY 2021-22 Funding Log
3. CDBG Public Infrastructure and Economic Development Target Area Map for 2020-2024 Consolidated
Plan
ACRONYMS
AMI – Area Median Income
CDBG – Community Development Block Grant
CDCIP – Community Development and Capital Improvement Programs Advisory Board
CIP – Capital Improvement Program
ESG – Emergency Solutions Grant
FY – Fiscal Year
HAND – Housing and Neighborhood Development
HOME – HOME Investment Partnership
HOPWA – Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS
HTFAB – Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board
HUD – Housing and Urban Development
VOA – Volunteers of America
YWCA – Young Women’s Christian Association
APPLICANTPROJECT/PROGRAMSCORE REQUEST CDCIP BOARD FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS MAYOR FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS ASSIST Inc. ‐ Community Design Center Emergency Home Repair & Accessibility102.17 700,000$ 700,000$ 700,000$ First Step HouseRecovery Residence Rehabilitation99.17 322,000$ 322,000$ 322,000$ Salt Lake City Housing Stability DivisionSmall Repair Program90.50 30,000$ 30,000$30,000$ Salt Lake City Housing Stability DivisionHousing Rehabilitation and HomeBuyer Programs89.83 600,000$ 500,000$ 500,000$ International Center for Appropriate and Sustainable Technology Decarbonizing Supportive Housing86.50474,976$ 300,000$ 300,000$ NeighborworksHome Rehabilitation & Improvement86.20200,000$ 196,837$ 196,837$ 2,326,976$ 2,048,837$ 2,048,837$ Salt Lake City Housing Stability DivisionEconomic Development Façade Program (NBIP)97.67 650,000$ 650,000$ 650,000$ Salt Lake City Transportation DivisionTarget Area Bus Stop Improvements93.67 750,000$ 172,000$ 172,000$ Salt Lake City Transportation DivisionBallpark TRAX Accessible Pedestrian Crossing90.17 550,000$ 550,000$ 550,000$ 1,950,000$ 1,372,000$ 1,372,000$ Donated DentalCommunity Dental Project104.17 50,000$ 42,500$42,500$ Advantage ServicesProvisional Supportive Employment Program100.67 85,000$ 55,000$55,000$ Catholic Community Services of UtahCase Manager ‐ Weigand Resource Center98.33 50,000$ 35,000$35,000$ Shelter the HomelessHomeless Resource Center Meals 97.50 136,130$ 57,778$57,778$ First Step HouseEmployment Preparation and Placement 97.33 45,000$ 30,299$30,299$ Transportation DivisionLow Income Transit Passes97.17 45,000$ 30,000$30,000$ Utah AIDS FoundationClinical Mental Health for People with HIV95.17 45,000$ ‐$ ‐$English Skills Learning CenterJob Readiness and Life Skills English Courses 94.50 38,500$ 30,000$30,000$ The Road HomeHousing Staffing94.00 45,950$ 40,000$40,000$ First Step HousePeer Support Services93.83 58,115$ 30,000$30,000$ The Road HomeGail Miller Resource Center89.5080,000$ ‐$ ‐$The Road HomeSt. Vincent de Paul Overflow 89.33 70,000$ ‐$ ‐$International Rescue CommitteeJob Readiness for Refugees 88.00 63,407$ 40,000$40,000$ The Children's Center UtahTherapeutic Preschool Program87.83 110,000$ 55,000$55,000$ Neighborhood House AssociationNeighborhood House Early Education86.67 52,009$ 40,000$40,000$ South Valley SanctuaryDV Case Manager and Housing Assistance85.67 100,000$ 50,000$50,000$ The Road HomeMagnolia Apartments84.33222,000$ ‐$ ‐$Odyssey HouseTransitional Living Program 84.00 84,000$ ‐$ ‐$YWCADV Residential Services83.67172,161$ ‐$ ‐$The INN BetweenEnd of Life Care 81.6796,600$ ‐$ ‐$SLC Bicycle CollectiveBikes for Goodwill80.83 100,000$ ‐$ ‐$CDCUHousing Counseling79.3347,766$ ‐$ ‐$Odyssey HouseResidential Treatment Transportation67.83 60,000$ ‐$ ‐$Wasatch Community GardensGreen Team Program64.83 58,520$ ‐$ ‐$The GERA Refugee Community Self Help 53.33 100,000$ ‐$ ‐$2,015,159$ 535,577$ 535,577$CDBG PUBLIC SERVICES2022-23 Federal Grant Funding Board RecommendationsCATEGORYESTIMATED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT - $4,670,517 (CDBG Public Services cannot exceed $535,577)CDBG HOUSINGCDBG NEIGH IMPROVEMENTAttachment 1 Grant Recommendations by Combined ScorePage 1
Salt Lake City Attorney's OfficeReview of Legal Documentsn/a 28,564$ 28,564$ 28,564$ Salt Lake City Finance DepartmentProcessing of Payments, Financial Trackingn/a 64,270$ 64,270$ 64,270$ Salt Lake City Housing Stability DivisionAdministration of Grant Programsn/a 621,269$ 621,269$ 621,269$ 714,103$ 714,103$ 714,103$ 7,006,238$ 4,670,517$ 4,670,517$ APPLICANTPROJECT/PROGRAMSCORE REQUEST CDCIP BOARD FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS MAYOR FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS The Road Home TRH St. Vincent de Paul Overflow ‐ ESG98.50 30,000$ ‐$ ‐$ Volunteers of America, Utah Youth Resource Center98.17 75,000$ 45,047$ 45,047$ Volunteers of America, Utah Geraldine E. King Women's Resource Center98.17 108,000$ 64,846$ 64,846$ First Step House First Step House Resource Center Program (RCP)97.33 60,000$ 36,046$ 36,046$ Catholic Community Services of Utah Client Intake‐Weigand Homeless Resource Center96.67 50,000$ ‐$ ‐$ The Road Home Street Outreach ‐ ESG93.83 50,000$ ‐$ ‐$ The Road Home Gail Miller Homeless Resource Center ‐ ESG93.67 80,000$ ‐$ ‐$ Shelter The HomelessHomeless Resource Centers Utilities ‐ ESG93.00 88,000$ ‐$ ‐$ Family Promise Salt Lake Community Family Shelter86.00 56,984$ 30,046$ 30,046$ Soap2Hope Street Outreach Program84.00 295,280$ ‐$ ‐$ Valley Behavioral HealthStorefront/SafeHaven Case Manager84.00 62,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 955,264$ 175,985$ 175,985$ The Road HomeRapid Re‐housing 103.17 86,360$ 51,816$ 51,816$ The Road HomeHomelessness Prevention101.83 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Utah Community ActionRapid‐Rehousing 95.00 121,974$ 46,021$ 46,021$ Utah Community Action Diversion Program94.50 59,784$ ‐$ ‐$ Salt Lake City Housing Stability DivisionESG Administrationn/a 22,445$ 22,445$ 22,445$ 320,563$ 150,282$ 150,282$ 1,275,827$ 326,267$ 326,267$ CDBG ADMINCATEGORYEMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT - $326,267(Shelter Operations cannot exceed $179,560)PART 2: HOMELESS PREVENTION RAPID REHOUSING & ADMINPART 1:SHELTER OPERATIONSAttachment 1 Grant Recommendations by Combined ScorePage 2
APPLICANTPROJECT/PROGRAMSCORE REQUEST HTF BOARD FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS MAYOR FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS The Road Home Tenant Based Rental Assistance Program101.00 300,000$ 200,000$ 200,000$ Utah Community Action Tenant Based Rental Assistance Program97.40 177,699$ 167,669$ 167,669$ South Valley SanctuaryDV Survivor Housing Assistance89.60 138,500$ 138,500$ 138,500$ Salt Lake City Housing Stability DivisionHOME Development Fund95.80 900,000$ 317,448$ 317,448$ Community Development Corporation of UtahDown Payment Assistance86.60 374,800$ 200,000$ 200,000$ NeighborWorks Affordable Home Buydown Program69.00 315,000$ ‐$ ‐$ Salt Lake City Housing Stability DivisionHOME Administrationn/a 97,486$ 97,486$ 97,486$ 2,303,485$ 1,121,103$ 1,121,103$ APPLICANTPROJECT/PROGRAMSCORE REQUEST HTF BOARD FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS MAYOR FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Utah Community Action Housing Info/STRMU/PHP/Supportive Services102.20 165,000$ 195,736$ 195,736$ Housing ConnectTenant Based Rental Assistance102.20 519,185$ 519,185$ 519,185$ Utah Aids Foundation Supportive Services98.00 45,000$ 70,000$ 70,000$ Utah Aids Foundation Mental Health Services97.80 50,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ Salt Lake City Housing Stability DivisionHOPWA Administrationn/a 21,000$ 25,205$ 25,205$ 800,185$ 910,126$ 910,126$ HOMECATEGORYHOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS - $910,126HOPWACATEGORYHOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM - $1,121,103Attachment 1 Grant Recommendations by Combined ScorePage 3
Estimated 2022-2023 Funding Available: 4,670,517$
Category Maximum Allocated Balance
2022-2023 Admin (20%):714,103$ 714,103$ -$
2022-2023 Public Services (15%):535,577$ 535,577$ -$
1 Attorney's Office FY21-22 29,827$ REQUEST:28,564$
FY20-21 29,869$ CDCIP:28,564$
FY19-20 24,427$ MAYOR:28,564$
FY18-19 25,090$ COUNCIL:28,564$
FY17-18 24,369$
5 YR TOTAL 133,582$
2 Finance Department FY21-22 60,989$ REQUEST:64,270$
FY20-21 61,035$ CDCIP:64,270$
FY19-20 54,565$ MAYOR:64,270$
FY18-19 56,047$ COUNCIL:64,270$
FY17-18 56,047$
5 YR TOTAL 288,683$
3 FY21-22 611,016$ REQUEST:621,269$
FY20-21 610,929$ CDCIP:621,269$
FY19-20 607,799$ MAYOR:621,269$
FY18-19 624,299$ COUNCIL:621,269$
FY17-18 566,616$
5 YR TOTAL 3,020,659$
REQUEST:714,103$
CDCIP:714,103$
MAYOR:714,103$
COUNCIL:714,103$ 20.0%
Funding for salaries and operational expenses of Housing Stability to
administer and monitor the federal grants and to conduct the community
processes.
SALT LAKE CITY CDBG PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2022/2023
APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN% OF GRANT AWARD
FUNDING CAPS AS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL REGULATION
CITY ADMINISTRATION
Partial funding for staff salary to provide contract administration for federal
grants.
Partial funding for staff salary to provide financial administration and
accounting services for federal grants.
Housing Stability Division
Note: 20% is the maximum amount allowed. Will auto adjust to 20% when SLC receives HUD award
CITY ADMINISTRATION TOTAL
20.0%
20.0%
20.0%
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 1
1 ASSIST, Inc. FY21-22 700,000$ REQUEST:700,000$
FY20-21 391,373$ CDCIP:700,000$
FY19-20 391,000$ MAYOR:700,000$
FY18-19 320,000$ COUNCIL:700,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 330,000$
5 YR TOTAL 2,132,373$
2 First Step House New REQUEST:322,000$
Recovery Residence Rehabilitation CDCIP:322,000$
MAYOR:322,000$
COUNCIL:322,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
3 New REQUEST:474,976$
CDCIP:300,000$
MAYOR:300,000$
COUNCIL:300,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
4 FY21-22 600,000$ REQUEST:600,000$
FY20-21 485,600$ CDCIP:500,000$
FY19-20 439,873$ MAYOR:500,000$
FY18-19 577,542$ COUNCIL:500,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 565,000$
5 YR TOTAL 2,668,015$
5 Salt Lake City - Housing Stability Division FY21-22 60,000$ REQUEST:30,000$
FY20-21 60,000$ CDCIP:30,000$
Salt Lake City Small Repair Program FY19-20 -$ MAYOR:30,000$
FY18-19 -$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 60,000$
5 YR TOTAL 180,000$
6 Neighborworks of Salt Lake New REQUEST:200,000$
CDCIP:196,837$
Home Rehabilitation & Improvement MAYOR:196,837$
COUNCIL:196,837$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
REQUEST:2,326,976$
CDCIP:2,048,837$
MAYOR:2,048,837$
COUNCIL:2,048,837$
PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN% OF GRANT AWARD
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Supporting salaries, operational, and rehabilitation activities including
plumbing, heating & electrical, radon testing/mitigation, roof repair,
accessibility ramps, and accessibility design projects, etc.
102.17
Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging
housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and
diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods.
Funds for critical rehabilitation at 4 recovery residences (transitional
housing) for sober living.
86.50
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114 99.17
Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging
housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and
diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
HOUSING
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114 89.83
Housing: Support programs that provide access to home
ownership via down payment assistance, and/or housing subsidy,
and/or financing.
Emergency Home Repair & Accessibility and
Community Design
APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME
International Center for Appropriate and
Sustainable Technology (ICAST)
Rehabilitate Safe Haven supportive housing apartment complex, by replacing
gas heating with very high-efficiency heating and hot water systems.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Decarbonizing Supportive Housing
Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging
housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and
diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods.
Salt Lake City Housing Rehabilitation and
Homebuyer Program
Salt Lake City - Housing Stability Division Salaries and operational support for the Housing Rehab, Welcome Home
SLC Homebuyer, Handyman, and West Side Node Improvement projects.
Organization also submitted a similar application for HOME #3
90.50
86.20
Housing: Expand housing support for aging resident that ensure
access to continued stable housing.
Home Rehabilitation & Improvement (NHRI) will provide grants and loans to
low-to-moderate income Salt Lake City homeowners to fund necessary
repairs and improvements to their home. Grants will be issued up to
$10,000 and loans up to $25,000.
Organization also submitted a similar application for HOME #2 which
includes rehabilitation and housing development
Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging
housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and
diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods.
HOUSING TOTAL
49.8%
43.9%
43.9%
43.87%
Targeting qualifying seniors and persons with disabilities to provide small
dollar value services for home improvement and service or repair.
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 2
1 New REQUEST:550,000$
CDCIP:550,000$
MAYOR:550,000$
COUNCIL:550,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
2 FY21-22 322,000$ REQUEST:750,000$
FY20-21 -$ CDCIP:172,000$
FY19-20 -$ MAYOR:172,000$
FY18-19 -$ COUNCIL:172,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 -$
5 YR TOTAL 322,000$
3 Salt Lake City - Housing Stability Division FY21-22 502,000$ REQUEST:650,000$
FY20-21 425,883$ CDCIP:650,000$
FY19-20 319,642$ MAYOR:650,000$
FY18-19 425,000$ COUNCIL:650,000$
FY17-18 200,000$
5 YR TOTAL 1,872,525$
REQUEST:1,950,000$
CDCIP:1,372,000$
MAYOR:1,372,000$
COUNCIL:1,372,000$
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Transportation: Improve bus stop amenities as a way to encourage
the accessibility of public transit and enhance the experience of
public transit in target areas.
41.8%
29.4%
Construction of 2 ADA-compliant crosswalks on 1300 South, in either
direction, to the Ballpark TRAX transit stop.
93.67Construction of multiple ADA-compliant bus stops and/or transit-critical
crosswalks in the Consolidated Plan target areas, to include bus shelters,
benches, trash cans, and bike racks as appropriate.
Ballpark TRAX Accessible Pedestrian Crossing
Community Resiliency: Economic Development efforts via
supporting the improvement and visibility of small businesses
through façade improvement programs.
REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN% OF GRANT AWARD
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114 90.17
Transportation: Expand and support the installation of bike racks,
stations, and amenities as a way to encourage use of alternative
modes of transportation.
29.4%
29.4%
APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS
Salt Lake City - Transportation Division
Salt Lake City - Transportation Division
Target Area Bus Stop Improvements
Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS: TRANSPORTATION & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INFASTRUCTURE - SUBJECT TO TARGET AREA - SEE ATTACHMENT 3 OF STAFF REPORT FOR MAP
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114 97.67Neighborhood Business Improvement
Program (NBIP)
Provide grant money to businesses for facade improvements, focusing on
small businesses and target areas.
Small local businesses may receive up to $25,000 in grants for building
façade improvements visible from the street
NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS: TRANSPORTATION & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INFASTRUCTURE TOTAL
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 3
1 FY21-22 60,250$ REQUEST:85,000$
FY20-21 64,809$ CDCIP:55,000$
FY19-20 68,884$ MAYOR:55,000$
FY18-19 55,000$ COUNCIL:55,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 30,000$
5 YR TOTAL 278,943$
2 Catholic Community Services of Utah New REQUEST:50,000$
CDCIP:35,000$
MAYOR:35,000$
COUNCIL:35,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
3 Community Development Corporation FY21-22 74,800$ REQUEST:$47,766
Housing Counseling FY20-21 68,100$ CDCIP:-$
FY19-20 67,447$ MAYOR:-$
FY18-19 70,500$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 70,000$
5 YR TOTAL 350,847$
4 English Skills Learning Center FY21-22 -$ REQUEST:38,500$
FY20-21 -$ CDCIP:30,000$
FY19-20 30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$
FY18-19 30,000$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 -$
5 YR TOTAL 60,000$
5 First Step House FY21-22 41,700$ REQUEST:45,000$
FY20-21 47,000$ CDCIP:30,299$
FY19-20 30,000$ MAYOR:30,299$
FY18-19 COUNCIL:30,299$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18
5 YR TOTAL 118,700$
6 First Step House FY21-22 48,000$ REQUEST:58,115$
FY20-21 50,000$ CDCIP:30,000$
FY19-20 38,806$ MAYOR:30,000$
FY18-19 30,000$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 36,833$
5 YR TOTAL 203,639$
7 International Rescue Committee FY21-22 54,400$ REQUEST:63,407$
FY20-21 -$ CDCIP:40,000$
FY19-20 44,629$ MAYOR:40,000$
FY18-19 COUNCIL:40,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18
5 YR TOTAL 99,029$
Provide case management services to individuals experiencing homelessness
at the Weigand Homeless Resource Center.
Organization also submitted a similar application for ESG Part 1 #1
Peer Support Services
Digital Skills & Education Access to Build
Resiliency Refugees and New Americans
Funds will facilitate Digital Inclusion staff to support refugee and other new
Americans access/learn digital technology skills, critical to improving their
economic and housing stability.
Employment Preparation and Placement
(EPP) Program
Salaries and administrative costs for Peer Support Services (PSS) Program
which provides peer-based supportive services, delivered by certified Peer
Support Specialists.
Community Resiliency: Expand access to early childhood
education to set the stage for academic achievement, social
development, and change the cycle of poverty.
Community Resiliency: Provide job training/vocational training
programs targeting low-income and vulnerable populations.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114 88.00
97.33
Housing: Support programs that provide access to home
ownership
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Provisional Supportive Employment
Program
98.33
100.67Provide employment opportunities to homeless individuals or formerly
homeless.
Community Resiliency: Provide job training/vocational training
programs targeting low-income and vulnerable populations.
93.83
Case Manager-Weigand Homeless
Resource Center
APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED
% OF GRANT AWARDPROJECT DESCRIPTION 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN
PUBLIC SERVICES
Provide housing counseling classes and help connect individuals and families
with public resources and information on fair housing, fair lending and
accessibility rights.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Bring free and accessible content-based English language instruction to adult
immigrants and refugees living at or below the poverty line.
Provide supportive employment services to high-risk, high-need individuals
in our community caught in the cycles of relapse, mental illness,
incarceration, homelessness, and unemployment.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
94.50
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Empowering Parents with English, Digital,
Financial, and Family Literacy
79.33
Homeless Services: Expand case management support as a way to
connect those experiencing homelessness with
permanent housing and supportive services
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Advantage Services, Inc Formerly Valley
Services
Behavioral Health: Expand treatment options, counseling support,
and case management for those experiencing behavioral health
crisis.
Community Resiliency: Promote digital inclusion through access to
digital communication technologies and the internet.
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 4
8 Neighborhood House Association FY21-22 38,449$ REQUEST:52,009$
FY20-21 -$ CDCIP:40,000$
FY19-20 36,867$ MAYOR:40,000$
FY18-19 33,858$ COUNCIL:40,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 30,000$
5 YR TOTAL 139,174$
9 Odyssey House New REQUEST:60,000
CDCIP:-$
MAYOR:-$
COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
10 Odyssey House
New REQUEST:84,000
CDCIP:-$
MAYOR:-$
COUNCIL:-$
11 New REQUEST:100,000$
CDCIP:-$
MAYOR:-$
COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
12 Salt Lake City Bicycle Collective New REQUEST:100,000$
CDCIP:-$
MAYOR:-$
COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
13 Salt Lake City Division of Transportation FY21-22 34,700$ REQUEST:45,000$
FY20-21 45,000$ CDCIP:30,000$
FY19-20 -$ MAYOR:30,000$
FY18-19 45,000$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 30,000$
5 YR TOTAL 154,700$
14 Salt Lake Donated Dental Services FY21-22 44,400$ REQUEST:50,000$
FY20-21 44,000$ CDCIP:42,500$
FY19-20 48,510$ MAYOR:42,500$
FY18-19 30,000$ COUNCIL:42,500$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 30,000$
5 YR TOTAL 196,910$
Homelessness Prevention & Employment
Assistance Program
Provide free bicycle transportation to low-income communities, offer
technical training to become a skilled bicycle mechanic, and creates a safe
space for marginalized and underrepresented people to comfortably work
on their own bicycles.
86.67
67.83
84.00
53.33
97.17
104.17
Bikes for Goodwill
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Neighborhood House Early Education
Transitional Living Program
Assistance for families with childcare as they search for and maintain
employment. Funds will support early education teacher salaries and
benefits.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Low Income Transit Passes
Transportation: Support access to transportation prioritizing very
low-income and vulnerable populations.
Greater Equatoria Region Association
(GERA)
Provide affordable transportation to individuals experiencing homelessness
in Salt Lake City. The program partners with local social service providers to
provide transit passes to their clients at no cost to overcome transportation
barriers.
Procurement of three vehicles for staff to assist clients with the following
appointments: Odyssey House primarily provides transportation for
medical, legal, Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) appointments,
school, grocery shopping, recreational therapy, etc.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Salaries, supplies, and lab fees for Community Dental Project, to support
homeless and low-income individuals with dental services.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114Community Dental Project
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Assist refugee and immigrant clients with the following services: negotiating
with a landlord, supporting opportunities for housing, providing emergency
rent assistance, and utilities support.
80.83
Residential Treatment Transportation
Staff increase for Odyssey House’s Transitional Living program which
provides affordable, temporary housing for low to moderate-income families
who recently graduated from Odyssey House or other treatment programs.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Transportation: Support access to transportation prioritizing very
low-income and vulnerable populations.
Homeless Services: Expand support for medical and dental care
options for those experiencing homelessness.
Community Resiliency: Expand access to early childhood
education to set the stage for academic achievement, social
development, and change the cycle of poverty.
Behavioral Health: Expand treatment options, counseling support,
and case management for those experiencing behavioral health
crisis.
Behavioral Health: Expand treatment options, counseling support,
and case management for those experiencing behavioral health
crisis.
Community Resiliency: Provide support for programs that reduce
food insecurity for vulnerable population.
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 5
15 Shelter The Homeless Committee Inc FY21-22 -$ REQUEST:136,130$
FY20-21 -$ CDCIP:57,778$
FY19-20 MAYOR:57,778$
FY18-19 COUNCIL:57,778$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18
5 YR TOTAL -$
16 South Valley Sanctuary FY21-22 100,000$ REQUEST:100,000$
FY20-21 30,000$ CDCIP:50,000$
FY19-20 -MAYOR:50,000$
FY18-19 -COUNCIL:50,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 -
5 YR TOTAL 130,000$
17 The Children's Center New REQUEST:110,000$
Therapeutic Preschool Program CDCIP:55,000$
MAYOR:55,000$
COUNCIL:55,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
18 The Inn Between FY21-22 -$ REQUEST:96,600$
End of Life Care and Medical Respite FY20-21 -$ CDCIP:-$
FY19-20 45,599$ MAYOR:-$
FY18-19 45,543$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 33,125$
5 YR TOTAL 124,267$
19 The Road Home FY21-22 72,000$ REQUEST:80,000$
FY20-21 CDCIP:-$
FY19-20 MAYOR:-$
FY18-19 COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18
5 YR TOTAL 72,000$
20 The Road Home New REQUEST:45,950$
CDCIP:40,000$
MAYOR:40,000$
COUNCIL:40,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
21 The Road Home New REQUEST:222,000$
CDCIP:-$
MAYOR:-$
COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
Community Resiliency: Expand access to early childhood
education to set the stage for academic achievement, social
development, and change the cycle of poverty.
Homeless Services: Provide support for homeless services
including Homeless Resource Center Operations and Emergency
overflow operations.
97.50
85.67Domestic Violence Case Manager and
Housing Assistance
Magnolia Apartments
94.00
84.33
Housing Staffing
Homeless Resource Centers Meals
Homeless Services: Expand case management support as a way to
connect those experiencing homelessness with permanent
housing and supportive services.
87.83
Homeless Services: Provide support for homeless services
including Homeless Resource Center Operations and Emergency
overflow operations.
This program provides treatment for preschool-aged children, who have
been the victims of assault or trauma, and who are struggling to succeed in
childcare or preschool. Follow up with intensive group therapy to gain
resilience and learn essential skills.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Pay for partial meal costs of the two Salt Lake City Homeless Resource
Centers. Costs will cover lunch and dinner costs for meal prep and delivery.
While this application is focused on meals it overlaps with several other
applications for operations and essential services at the Women's Resource
Center and Gail Miller Resource Center
Domestic Violence Case Manager salary, benefits, mileage and client rental
assistance.
Organization also submitted a similar application for HOME #4
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Onsite case managers provide supportive services to individuals to help
them maintain their housing and avoid exiting to homelessness.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
81.67
89.50
The housing navigation staff work at four of the resource centers and
coordinate with other service providers to serve households referred into
the program.
While this application is focused on housing assistance staffing it overlaps
with several other applications for operations and essential services at
homeless resource centers
Gail Miller Resource Center
Provides homeless individuals who need hospice or other end of life care
and temporary medical respite housing for homeless individuals
experiencing a medical crisis.
Homeless Services: Provide support for homeless services
including Homeless Resource Center Operations and Emergency
overflow operations.
Homeless Services: Expand case management support as a way to
connect those experiencing homelessness with permanent
housing and supportive services.
The Gail Miller Resource Center provides emergency shelter to men and
women experiencing homelessness in Salt Lake County. Shelter is available
24/7, 365 days each year.
Organization also submitted a similar application for ESG Part 1 #7
Homeless Services: Expand case management support as a way to
connect those experiencing homelessness with permanent
housing and supportive services.
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 6
22 The Road Home FY21-22 -$ REQUEST:70,000$
FY20-21 -$ CDCIP:-$
FY19-20 -$ MAYOR:-$
FY18-19 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 -$
5 YR TOTAL -$
23 Utah AIDS Foundation New REQUEST:45,000$
CDCIP:-$
MAYOR:-$
COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
24 Wasatch Community Gardens New REQUEST:58,520$
CDCIP:-$
MAYOR:-$
COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
25 YWCA Utah FY21-22 33,900$ REQUEST:172,161$
FY20-21 58,285$ CDCIP:-$
FY19-20 58,285$ MAYOR:-$
FY18-19 51,260$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:
FY17-18 34,971$
5 YR TOTAL 236,701$
REQUEST:2,015,158$
CDCIP:535,577$
MAYOR:535,577$
COUNCIL:535,577$
Provides farm-based employment, work readiness training, job placement
assistance, and mentoring for women facing and/or experiencing
homelessness. Request for One-time expenses related to farm move
including partial soil removal and disposal, Geotextile layer, Importing clean
soil, and palletizing and moving supplies.
The City's General Fund previously contributed approximately $125,000
annually to this program. Several RDA-owned properties are expected to be
part of an upcoming redevelopment Request for Proposals
Community Resiliency: Provide job training/vocational training
programs targeting low-income and vulnerable populations.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114Women in Jeopardy Program
Homeless Services: Provide support for homeless services
including Homeless Resource Center Operations and Emergency
overflow operations.
89.33
95.17
64.83
83.67
Housing: Provide housing and essential supportive services to
persons with HIV/AIDS
15.0%
15.0%
56.4%
Note: 15% is the maximum amount allowed per HUD regulations PUBLIC SERVICES TOTAL
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114St. Vincent de Paul Overflow
Respond to a persistent need among clients living with HIV and AIDS for
increased access to behavioral health counseling that specifically targets the
needs of their population.
Organization also submitted a similar application for HOPWA #3
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
The winter shelter provides overflow services during the coldest months of
the year to individuals who are unlikely to seek traditional shelter, due to
barriers.
Organization also submitted a similar application for ESG Part 1 #6
Green Team Program
Clinical Mental Health
Homeless Services: Provide support for homeless services
including Homeless Resource Center Operations and Emergency
overflow operations.
15.0%
YWCA’s secure, emergency shelter offers 36 onsite and 4 overflow units to
victims left homeless due to domestic violence. Provide salary and benefits
for essential shelter staffing infrastructure.
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 7
FUND REQUEST
Housing 2,326,976$
Neighborhood Improvements: Transp & ED 1,950,000$
Public Services 2,015,158$
Administration 714,103$
TOTAL FUNDS REQUESTED:7,006,237$
If a decrease in funding:
Administration Staff Analysis:
71-46099 $391,846.69
71-45099 $708,153.31
Total:$1,100,000.00
Total:-$
PROGRAM INCOME:
For Finance Purposes Only:
-$
Maximize admin at 20%, then allocate additional funding to Shelter The Homeless Homeless
Center Resource Meals up to 15% Public Services Cap, allocate remaining funds to
Transportation Bus Stop Improvements
COUNCIL:
4,670,517$
FUND AVAILABILITY
ESTIMATED GRANT AWARD:3,570,517$
REALLOCATION:
-$ MAYOR:
4,670,517$ CDCIP:
CDCIP:
Community Development & Capital Improvement Program (CDCIP ) Board Recommendation:
1,100,000$
TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE:4,670,517$
REALLOCATION FUNDING:
-$
TOTALS
4,670,517$
AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATIONMaximize admin at 20%, reduce funding from Transportation Bus Stop Improvements, reduce
funding in Public Services from Advantage Services, but keep PS at 15% cap
FUNDS ALLOCATED
MAYOR:
If an increase in funding:
COUNCIL:
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 8
175,985$ Max Allowed for Part 1:179,560$
127,837$
326,267$
1 Catholic Community Services FY21-22 41,000$ REQUEST:50,000$
FY20-21 -$ CDCIP:-$
FY19-20 30,000$ MAYOR:-$
FY18-19 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
FY17-18 30,000$
5 YR TOTAL 101,000$
2 Family Promise Salt Lake New REQUEST:56,984$
Community Family Shelter CDCIP:30,046$
MAYOR:30,046$
COUNCIL:30,046$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
3 First Step House FY21-22 49,250$ REQUEST:60,000$
FY20-21 60,000$ CDCIP:36,046$
FY19-20 50,000$ MAYOR:36,046$
COUNCIL:36,046$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
5 YR TOTAL 159,250$
4 Shelter the Homeless FY21-22 -$ REQUEST:88,000$
FY20-21 -$ CDCIP:-$
MAYOR:-$
COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
5 YR TOTAL -$
5 Soap2Hope New REQUEST:295,280$
CDCIP:-$
MAYOR:-$
COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
5 YR TOTAL -$
6 The Road Home FY21-22 -$ REQUEST:30,000$
FY20-21 -$ CDCIP:-$
FY19-20 -$ MAYOR:-$
FY18-19 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
FY17-18 -$
5 YR TOTAL -$
7 The Road Home FY21-22 -$ REQUEST:80,000$
FY20-21 -$ CDCIP:-$
FY19-20 40,000$ MAYOR:-$
FY18-19 66,384$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
FY17-18 58,123$
5 YR TOTAL 164,507$
8 The Road Home New REQUEST:50,000$
CDCIP:-$
MAYOR:-$
COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
98.50
Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource
center, or overflow operations
Street Outreach
Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource
center, or overflow operations
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114 93.83Provide outreach services to families experiencing homelessness across
Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County. Outreach workers will locate
homeless families and connect them to school systems for their children,
benefits, and housing.Homeless Services: Homeless outreach programs
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114 93.00Homeless Resource Center Utilities
First Step House will provide on-site behavioral health assessment,
referral, and peer support services to individuals at the Men's Homeless
Resource Center.
SALT LAKE CITY ESG PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2022/2023
APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME REQUEST/RECOMMENDED
% OF GRANT AWARD
Part 1 Funding: Street Outreach and Emergency Shelter:
Part 2 Funding: Homelessness Prevention, RRH, HMIS, and Admin:
2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN
96.67
Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource
center, or overflow operations
2022-2023 Funding Available:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS
PART 1: STREET OUTREACH AND EMERGENCY SHELTER
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Operational support for the Weigand Homeless Resource Center, a day
shelter for individuals experiencing homelessness.
Organization also submitted a similar application for CDBG Public Services
#2
The FPSL family shelter program utilizes 12 Salt Lake Valley buildings to
shelter homeless families. Each shelter location houses 3-4 families at a
time for one week at a time.
Homeless Resource Center Program
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource
center, or overflow operations
Operational expenses for St. Vincent's de Paul Dining Hall as overflow
winter emergency shelter.
Organization also submitted a similar application for CDBG Public Services
#22
Shelter the Homeless (STH) is requesting ESG funding to assist with the
utilities for the two new Homeless Resource Centers (HRCs) in SLC.
The program’s primary goal is to provide street-based services to people
living on the street. By providing outreach services to high risk
individuals.
93.67
84.00
Emergency Shelter - St. Vincent's Overflow
Shelter
Gail Miller Resource Center
Soap2Hope Street Outreach Program
Homeless Services: Homeless outreach programs
Provide support for essential shelter services, including case management
and transportation. Also supporting shelter operations, maintenance,
rent, supplies, utilities, insurance, security, fuel, and equipment.
Organization also submitted a similar application for CDBG Public Services
#19
97.33
Weigand Homeless Resource Center Client
Intake/Operations
Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource
center, or overflow operations
86.00
Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource
center, or overflow operations
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 9
9 Valley Behavioral Health New REQUEST:62,000$
CDCIP:-$
MAYOR:-$
COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
10 Volunteers of America, Utah FY21-22 30,000$ REQUEST:108,000$
FY20-21 38,000$ CDCIP:64,846$
MAYOR:64,846$
COUNCIL:64,846$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
5 YR TOTAL 38,000$
11 Volunteers of America, Utah FY21-22 44,000$ REQUEST:75,000$
FY20-21 46,000$ CDCIP:45,047$
FY19-20 44,115$ MAYOR:45,047$
FY18-19 60,000$ COUNCIL:45,047$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
FY17-18 45,992$
5 YR TOTAL 240,107$
REQUEST:955,264$ 319.20%
CDCIP:175,985$ 58.81%Max 60%
MAYOR:175,985$ 58.81%Max 60%
COUNCIL:175,985$ 58.81%Max 60%
1 FY21-22 40,000$ REQUEST:59,784$
FY20-21 30,000$ CDCIP:-$
FY19-20 53,000$ MAYOR:-$
FY18-19 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Objective:
FY17-18 -$
5 YR TOTAL 123,000$
2 FY21-22 82,022$ REQUEST:121,974$
FY20-21 30,000$ CDCIP:46,021$
FY19-20 -$ MAYOR:46,021$
FY18-19 30,000$ COUNCIL:46,021$ Consolidated Plan Objective:
FY17-18 32,000$
5 YR TOTAL 174,022$
3 The Road Home FY21-22 -$ REQUEST:86,360$
FY20-21 40,765$ CDCIP:51,816$
FY19-20 84,077$ MAYOR:51,816$
FY18-19 85,382$ COUNCIL:51,816$ Consolidated Plan Objective:
FY17-18 85,508$
5 YR TOTAL 295,732$
4 The Road Home New REQUEST:30,000$
CDCIP:30,000$
MAYOR:30,000$
COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Objective:
REQUEST:298,118$
CDCIP:127,837$
MAYOR:127,837$
COUNCIL:127,837$
Operational and essential services of the Volunteers of America (VOA)
Youth Resource Center, which serves homeless and at risk teens age 15-
22.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114 98.17Homeless Youth Resource Center
Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource
center, or overflow operations
Operational and service expenses for the Geraldine E. King Women's
Resource Center.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114 98.17Geraldine King Women's Resource Center
Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource
center, or overflow operations
Case management support for homeless and formerly homeless persons,
who have mental and behavioral health needs.
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114 84.00Storefront/SafeHaven Case Manager
Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource
center, or overflow operations
Provide assistance with housing costs for families facing financial
burderns and temporary loss of income, to prevent re-entry into
homelessness, and maintain their housing.
STREET OUTREACH AND EMERGENCY SHELTER TOTAL
Rapid Re-housing Program
Salt Lake Community Action dba Utah
Community Action
Salt Lake Community Action dba Utah
Community Action
*FUNDING FOR PART 1 CANNOT EXCEED $179,560
PART 2: HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION, RAPID RE-HOUSING, AND HMIS
Diversion Program
Diversion program support in the form of salaries and operational
support. Diversion is a light-touch approach working to find safe,
alternatives for clients to remain in housing rather than entering into
shelter. Housing Programs: Rent assistance in the form of rapid
rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization
assistance
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Combined Admin & CDCIP Score:
Maximum score: 114
Rapid Re-Housing Program
Housing Programs: Rent assistance in the form of rapid
rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization
assistance
Provide case management support for individuals experiencing
homelessness through deposit and rental assistance and holistic case
management.
Organization also submitted a similar application for HOME #6
94.50
95.00
101.83
Housing Programs: Rent assistance in the form of rapid
rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization
assistance
Salary support for case managers in The Road Home’s Rapid Re-housing
Program working with participants, combined with short-term rental
assistance.
Organization also submitted a similar application for HOME #5
103.17
Housing Programs: Rent assistance in the form of rapid
rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization
assistance
HOMELESS PREVENTION & RAPID REHOUSING & HOMELESS MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM (HMIS) TOTAL
Homelessness Prevention
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 10
1 Salt Lake City Corporation FY21-22 22,630$ REQUEST:22,445$
FY20-21 22,446$ CDCIP:22,445$
FY19-20 21,843$ MAYOR:22,445$
FY18-19 21,659$ COUNCIL:22,445$
FY17-18 18,666$
5 YR TOTAL 107,244$
REQUEST:1,275,827$
CDCIP:326,267$
MAYOR:326,267$
COUNCIL:326,267$
1,275,827$
AVAILABLE TO ALLOCATE:
Estimated 22-23 GRANT AWARD:299,267$ CDCIP BOARD:326,267$ -$
REALLOCATION:27,000$ MAYOR:326,267$ -$
TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE: $ 326,267 COUNCIL:326,267$ -$
If an increase in funding
Maximize admin at 7.5%, and give ESG Part 1 agencies (VOA Youth
Resource Center, VOA Women's Resource Center, First Step House
Resource Center, and Family Promise Community Family Shelter) funding
spread out equally amongst the selected four agencies, up to the ESG
Part 1 cap.
If a decrease in funding
Maximize admin at 7.5%, and spread the decrease across the agencies as
long as it doesn't go under $30,000 per award.
72-62197 27,000.00$
Total:27,000.00$
Community Development & Capital Improvement Program (CDCIP ) Board Recommendation:
AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION:FUNDS ALLOCATED:
Requested Funds
7.5%
7.5%
7.5%
7.5%
For Finance Purposes Only:Administration Staff Analysis:
ADMINISTRATION
REALLOCATION FUNDING:
HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION, RAPID RE-HOUSING, HMIS, AND ADMINISTRATION
Program Administration
To provide management, oversight, and monitoring of the ESG program.
Administration: 7.5% of ESG allocation.
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 11
Estimated 2022-2023 Funding Available:1,121,103$ Available to Allocate -$
1 FY21-22 200,000$ REQUEST:374,800$
FY20-21 200,000$ HTFAB:200,000$
Down Payment Assistance FY19-20 200,000$ MAYOR:200,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
FY18-19 200,000$ COUNCIL:200,000$
FY17-18 150,000$
5 YR TOTAL 950,000$
2 Neighborworks New REQUEST:315,000$
Affordable Home Buydown Program HTFAB:-$
MAYOR:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
COUNCIL:-$
3 Salt Lake City Corporation FY21-22 984,634$ REQUEST:900,000$
Home Development Fund FY20-21 1,066,667$ HTFAB:317,448$
FY19-20 939,266$ MAYOR:317,448$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
FY18-19 1,061,368$ COUNCIL:317,448$
FY17-18 798,221$
5 YR TOTAL 4,850,156$
4 South Valley Sanctuary New REQUEST:138,500$ Combined Admin & HTFAB Score:
HTFAB:138,500$
DV Survivor Housing Assistance MAYOR:138,500$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
COUNCIL:138,500$
5 The Road Home FY21-22 200,000$ REQUEST:300,000$
TBRA program FY20-21 200,000$ HTFAB:200,000$
FY19-20 200,000$ MAYOR:200,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
FY18-19 200,000$ COUNCIL:200,000$
FY17-18 200,000$
5 YR TOTAL 1,000,000$
6 Utah Community Action FY21-22 167,669$ REQUEST:177,699$
TBRA Program FY20-21 70,000$ HTFAB:167,669$
FY19-20 70,000$ MAYOR:167,669$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
FY18-19 70,000$ COUNCIL:167,669$
FY17-18 70,000$
5 YR TOTAL 447,669$
Direct aid in the form of grants/loans not to exceed each to first-time low-
and-moderate-income (LMI) home buyers in Salt Lake City for down
payment assistance.
Funds will be used for development activities including acquisition, new
construction, and rehabilitation of existing housing.
Organization also submitted a similar application for CDBG Housing #6
which is limited to rehabilitation
Combined Admin & HTFAB Score:
Maximum Score: 114 86.60
69.00
Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide access
to home ownership via down paiyment assistance and/or
housing subsidy and/or financing.
Housing Programs: Housing development that increases
the nummber of units available for income eligible
residents (Acquistion, New Construction).
Funds will be used for development activities including acquisition, new
construction, and rehabilitation of existing housing.
Organization also submitted a similar application for CDBG Housing #4
89.60
Housing Programs: Housing development that increases
the nummber of units available for income eligible
residents (Acquistion, New Construction).
95.80Combined Admin & HTFAB Score:
Maximum Score: 114
97.40
Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide
applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing,
homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance.
2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN
SALT LAKE CITY HOME PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2022/2023
REQUEST/
RECOMMENDEDAPPLICANT/PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT
AWARDS
Community Development Corporation of
Utah
Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide
applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing,
homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance.
Combined Admin & HTFAB Score:
Maximum Score: 114 101.00
Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide
applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing,
homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance.
Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) for eligible clients in The Road
Home's Rapid Re-housing Program.
Organization also submitted a similar application for ESG Part 2 #3
Tenant Based Rental Assistance for survivors of domestic violence (DV).
Organization also submitted a similar application for CDBG Public Services
#16
Combined Admin & HTFAB Score:
Maximum Score: 114
Operational support, direct client rental assistance through Tenant Based
Rental Assistance (TBRA).
Organization also submitted a similar application for ESG Part 2 #2
Combined Admin & HTFAB Score:
Maximum Score: 114
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 12
7 Salt Lake City Corporation FY21-22 97,486$ REQUEST:97,486$
Program Administration FY20-21 95,750$ HTFAB:97,486$
FY19-20 88,507$ MAYOR:97,486$
FY18-19 99,994$ COUNCIL:97,486$
FY17-18 71,357$
10% of Home Allocation 5 YR TOTAL 453,094$ 10% of HOME Award:97,486$
REQUEST:2,303,485$
HTFAB:1,121,103$
MAYOR:1,121,103$
COUNCIL:1,121,103$
Estimated 22-23 GRANT AWARD:974,863$
PROGRAM INCOME:-$
REALLOCATION:146,240.00$
TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE:1,121,103$
If an increase in funding
Maximize admin at 10%, then award the additional funds to SLC HOME
Development Fund
If a decrease in funding
Maximize admin at 10% and reduce funds from SLC HOME Development
Fund 72-62198 146,240.00$
Total:146,240.00$
Total:-$
COUNCIL:
For Finance Purposes Only:
REALLOCATION FUNDING:
HOUSING TRUST FUND ADVISORY BOARD (HTFAB):
-$
-$
-$
PROGRAM INCOME:
MAYOR:
FUND AVAILABILITY:AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION:
Funding to administer the HOME program (10% of the total HOME
allocation).
TOTAL
HTF Board Recommendation: Fund the agencies at the above Final Funding Recommendation
Administration Staff Analysis:
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 13
Estimated 2022-2023 Funding Available: 910,126$ Available to Allocate -$
1 Housing Connect FY21-22 489,332$ REQUEST:519,185$
Tenant Based Rental Assistance FY20-21 510,797$ HTFAB:519,185$
FY19-20 438,020$ MAYOR:519,185$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
FY18-19 321,015$ COUNCIL:519,185$
FY17-18 297,102$
5 YR TOTAL 2,056,266$
2 Utah AIDS Foundation FY21-22 30,000.00$ REQUEST:45,000$
HOPWA Supportive Services FY20-21 30,000$ HTFAB:70,000$
FY19-20 30,000$ MAYOR:70,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
FY18-19 30,000$ COUNCIL:70,000$
FY17-18 30,000$
5 YR TOTAL 150,000$
3 Utah AIDS Foundation FY21-22 50,000$ REQUEST:50,000$
Mental Health Services FY20-21 -$ HTFAB:100,000$
FY19-20 -$ MAYOR:100,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
FY18-19 -$ COUNCIL:100,000$
FY17-18 -$
5 YR TOTAL 50,000.00$
4 Utah Community Action FY21-22 85,099$ REQUEST:165,000$
STRMU/PHP/Supportive Services FY20-21 162,044$ HTFAB:195,736$
FY19-20 127,099$ MAYOR:195,736$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy:
FY18-19 142,501$ COUNCIL:195,736$
FY17-18 104,388$
5 YR TOTAL
5 Salt Lake City Corporation FY21-22 20,240$ REQUEST:25,205$
Program Administration FY20-21 18,026$ HTFAB:25,205$
FY19-20 16,003$ MAYOR:25,205$
FY18-19 14,166$ COUNCIL:25,205$
Administration: 3% of HOPWA allocation.FY17-18 12,505$
5 YR TOTAL 80,940$ 3% of HOPWA Award:25,205.88$
804,390$
910,126$
910,126$
910,126$
Estimated 2022-2023 GRANT AWARD: $ 840,196 -$
REALLOCATION:69,930$ -$
TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE:910,126$ -$
If a decrease Maximize admin at 3%, then reduce funds from UCA down to $165,000 72-61999 48,026.78$
72-62099 21,903.22$
Total:69,930.00$
Housing Programs: Support rent assistance programs to
emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and
end homelessness.
Housing Programs: Support rent assistance programs to
emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and
end homelessness.
102.20
102.20
98.00
97.80
Behavioral Health: Support programs that provide connection to
permanent housing upon exiting behavioral health programs.
COUNCIL:
MAYOR:
MAYOR:
COUNCIL:
REQUEST:
HOUSING TRUST FUND ADVISORY BRD:
Combined Admin & HTFAB Score:
Maximum Score: 114
Combined Admin & HTFAB Score:
Maximum Score: 114
FUND AVAILABILITY:AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION:
HOUSING TRUST FUND ADVISORY BOARD (HTFAB):
TOTAL
Combined Admin & HTFAB Score:
Maximum Score: 114
Combined Admin & HTFAB Score:
Maximum Score: 114
Provides Mental Health Services to persons with HIV/AIDS
Organization also submitted a similar application for CDBG Public Services
#23
SALT LAKE CITY HOPWA PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2022/2023
AWARDS
Provides Supportive Services to persons with HIV/AIDS
APPLICANT/PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION REQUEST/
RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLANPREVIOUS GRANT
To provide management, oversight, and monitoring of the HOPWA program.
Provides Tenant Based Rental Assistance to persons with HIV/AIDS
HTF Board Recommendation: The funds be awarded in the following manner as seen in the HTFAB Final Funding
Recommendation
Housing Programs: Support rent assistance programs to
emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and
end homelessness.
Provides short term rental, mortgage, and/or utilities (STRMU)assistance,
permanent housing placement (PHP), and supportive services to persons with
HIV/AIDS
Administration Staff Analysis:
If an increase
Maximize admin at 3%, then award additional funds to UCA up to $235,000,
award any additional funds to Housing Connect
For Finance Purposes Only:
REALLOCATION FUNDING:
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 14
Goals Strategies
Housing: Provide expanded housing options for all economic and
demographic segments of Salt Lake City’s population while diversifying
housing stock within neighborhoods
1. Support housing programs that address the needs of aging housing stock through targeted rehabilitation efforts
and diversifying the housing stock within the neighborhoods
2. Support affordable housing development that increases the number and types of units available for qualified
residents
3. Support programs that provide access to home ownership
4. Support rent assistance programs to emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and/or end
homelessness
5. Support programs that provide connection to permanent housing upon exiting behavioral health programs
6. Provide housing and essential supportive services to persons with HIV/AIDS
Transportation: Promote accessibility and affordability of multimodal
transportation options
1. Within eligible target areas, improve bus stop amenities as a way to encourage the accessibility of public transit
and enhance the experience of public transit
2. Within eligible target areas, expand and support the installation of bike racks, stations, and amenities as a way
to encourage use of alternative modes of transportation
3. Support access to transportation, prioritizing very low-income and vulnerable populations
Community Resiliency: Provide tools to increase economic and/or
housing stability
1. Support job training and vocational rehabilitation programs that increase economic mobility
2. Improve visual and physical appearance of deteriorating commercial buildings - limited to CDBG Target Area
3. Provide economic development support for microenterprise businesses
4. Direct financial assistance to for-profit businesses
5. Expand access to early childhood education to set the stage for academic achievement, social development,
and change the cycle of poverty
6. Promote digital inclusion through access to digital communication technologies and the internet
7. Provide support for programs that reduce food insecurity for vulnerable population
Homeless Services: Expand access to supportive programs that help
ensure homelessness is rare, brief and non-reoccurring
1. Expand support for medical and dental care options for those experiencing homelessness
2. Provide support for homeless services including Homeless Resource Center Operations and Emergency
Overflow Operations
3. Provide support for programs undertaking outreach services to address the needs of those living an
unsheltered life
4. Expand case management support as a way to connect those experiencing homelessness with permanent
housing and supportive services
Behavioral Health: Provide support for low income and vulnerable
populations experiencing behavioral health concerns such as substance
abuse disorders and mental health challenges
1. Expand treatment options, counseling support, and case management for those experiencing behavioral health
crisis
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Goals and Strategies
Note: language in BLUE is additional information added by Council staff
Last Updated March 16, 2022 Attachment 2 - Annual HUD Grants Funding Log Page 15
Item C1
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: Nick Tarbet
Policy Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: Text Amendment: Notice of Work in the Public Right of Way
MOTION 1
I move that the Council adopt the ordinance.
MOTION 2
I move that the Council reject the ordinance.
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Nick Tarbet, Policy Analyst
DATE: March 22, 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: March 22, 2022
March 1 Work Session Summary
During the March 1 work session briefing, the Council told staff if a permit for work in the public right
of way must be obtained, properties all along the construction route should receive notice of the work.
The Council did not support making an exemption for installation of overhead fiber optic cables to
existing poles because this will require work and equipment that may disrupt residents; therefore,
they should be provided notice when the work will occur.
Additionally, the following changes are included in the final draft the Council will consider adopting
on March 22.
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
Notice shall be provided to every adjacent property contiguous to the work location,
regardless of whether the work is below ground or above ground.
If a multi-unit building is located on an adjacent property, notice must be mailed to the
owner of the building and occupant of each unit, and to the record owner of each unit if
a separate address.
Page | 2
The following information was provided for the March 1, 2022 work session. It is
provided again for background purposes.
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
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
Page | 3
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?
Verizon 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.
Page | 4
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
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
Page | 5
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.
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
Page | 6
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.
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.
Page | 7
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.
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.
Page | 8
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.
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.
Page | 9
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.
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.
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
2 No. _____ of 2022
3 (Amendment to Require Notice for Permits to Work in the Public Way)
4 An ordinance amending sections 14.32.030 and 14.32.035 and inserting a new section
5 14.32.036 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to notice of permits to work in the public way.
6 WHEREAS, the City Engineer has by policy requested that holders of a permit to work in
7 the public way provide notice of such work to adjacent property owners prior to commencing
8 such work; and
9 WHEREAS, the City Council desires that where there is construction in the public way,
10 the City will require that notice is given to adjacent property owners as a requirement to obtain a
11 permit to work in the public way; and
12 WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to amend this ordinance; and
13 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this ordinance is in the best interest of the public.
14 NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
15 SECTION 1. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 14.32.030. That Section 14.32.030
16 of the Salt Lake City Code (Permit Application Requirements) shall be and hereby is amended as follows:
17 14.32.030: PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS:
18 A.The permit applicationApplications for a permit shall be filed with the City Engineer on a
19 form or forms to be furnished by the City Engineer, and shall contain, as applicable:
20
21 1. The name, address, telephone number, and facsimile numberemail of the applicant.
22 Where an applicant is not the owner or in sole control of the facility to be installed,
23 maintained or repaired in the public way, the application also shall include the name, address,
24 telephone number, and facsimile numberemail of the owner;
25
26 2. A description of the location, purpose, method of the proposed work, and surface and
27 subsurface area to be affected;
28
29 3. Where required by the City Engineer, aA plan showing the proposed location of the
30 work and the dimensions of any excavation and the facilities to be installed, maintained, or
2
31 repaired in connection with the work, and such other details, existing utilities, and drawing
32 standards as the City Engineer may require;
33
34 4. A copy or other documentation of the use permit authorizing the applicant or owner to
35 use or occupy the public way for the purpose described in the application, including the
36 appropriate franchise agreement or master license agreement. Where the applicant is not the
37 owner of the facility or facilities to be installed, maintained, or repaired, the applicant must
38 demonstrate in a form and manner specified by the City Engineer that the applicant is
39 authorized to act on behalf of the owner;
40 5.4.
41 The proposed start date of the work;
42
43 6.5. The proposed duration of the work, which shall includeincluding the duration of
44 the restoration of the public way physically disturbed by the work;
45
46 7.6. The applicant’s signature, certifyingWritten certification that all material to be
47 used in the work and restoration of the public way, will be on hand and ready for use so as
48 not to delay the work and the prompt restoration of the public way;
49
50 8.7. The applicant’s signature, committing Written certification that the applicant and
51 owner are will perform the work in compliance with all terms and conditions of this chapter,
52 the orders, and all applicable rules and engineering regulations of the City Engineer, and that
53 the applicant and owner are not subject to any outstanding assessments, fees or penalties that
54 have been finally determined by the City;
55
56 9.8. Evidence that applicant carries of insurance as required by either
57 section 14.32.065 of this chapter or the applicable agreement with the City;
58
59 10.9. A performance deposit security device as required by section 14.32.070 of this
60 chapter;
61
62 11.10. A scaled site plan, rendering or photo simulation, scaled elevation view and
63 other supporting drawings and calculations, showing the location and dimension of all
64 improvements. The submittal must include sufficient information to determine compliance
65 with the standards and requirements of this chapter, specifically including information
66 concerning structure height and location within the public way, compliance with the City's
67 intersection and driveway sight distance standards, and compliance with the ADA;
68
69 12.11. Evidence of all regulatory approvals, permits, authorizations or licenses for the
70 offering of such services from the appropriate Federal, State, and local authorities (whether
71 the services are being offered by the permit provider or another person), upon request of
72 City;
3
73
74 13.12. Evidence that the owner franchise holder (if not the applicant) has provided
75 permission to perform the work on behalf of the owner franchise holder and, if applicable,
76 permission to use or attach to owner's franchise holder’s property in the public way; and
77
78 14.13. Any other information that may reasonably be required by the City Engineer.
79
80 SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 14.32.035. That Section 14.32.035
81 of the Salt Lake City Code (Permit Application Approval Criteria) shall be and hereby is amended as follows:
82 14.32.035: PERMIT APPLICATION APPROVAL CRITERIA:
83 A.Factors to be considered by the City in In reviewing the permit application for approval,
84 and the scope and timing of approved work, shall includethe City Engineer shall consider, among
85 other things, the following:
86 1. The capacity of the public way to accommodate the facilities proposed to be constructed
87 and installed, and the compatibility of such new facilities with existing facilities;
88
89 2. Any damage to or disruption of public or private facilities, improvements, or
90 landscaping then existing in the public way;
91
92 3. The capacity of the public way to accommodate multiple work in the public way
93 projects or other conflicting uses of the public way;
94 3. The public interest in minimizing the cost and disruption of construction from numerous
95 excavations in the public way;
96
97 4. Any then existing excavation restrictions imposed by the City Engineer pursuant to
98 section 14.32.085 of this chapter;
99
100 5. The availability of alternatives to excavation, including, without limitation, the
101 existence of excess capacity in the public way, or the feasibility of using tunneling, boring, or
102 other trenchless technology;
103
104 6. The qualifications and reputation of the applicant;
105
106 7. The financial strength of the applicant, including the applicant's ability to provide the
107 required bonding and security; and
108
109 7.8.Notice to adjacent properties has been accomplished as described in 14.32.036.and
110
111 8. Potential conflicts with other uses of the public way.
4
112
113 B. The City Engineer may deny the issuance of permits to persons who have shown by past
114 performance that they will not consistently conform to the engineering regulations, construction
115 specifications, design standards or the requirements of this chapter; provided that prior to any
116 such denial, such person shall be given written notice of the basis for such denial, and shall be
117 given a reasonable opportunity to be heard in connection therewith.
118
119 C. When necessary, in the judgment of the City Engineer, to fully determine the relationship
120 of the work proposed to existing or proposed facilities within the public ways, or to determine
121 whether the work proposed complies with the engineering regulations, construction
122 specifications and design standards, the City Engineer may require the filing of engineering
123 plans, specifications and sketches showing the proposed work in sufficient detail to permit
124 determination of such relationship or compliance, or both, and the application shall be deemed
125 suspended until such plans and sketches are filed and approved.
126
127 D. The disapproval or denial of an application by the City Engineer may be appealed by the
128 applicant to the Director of Public Services, by the filing of a written notice of appeal within ten
129 (10) days of denial. The Director of Public Services shall hear such appeal and render his/her
130 decision, within fifteen (15) days following notice of such appeal.
131
132 E. In approving or disapproving work within the public way, or permits therefor; in the
133 inspection of such work; in reviewing plans, sketches or specifications; and generally in the
134 exercise of the authority conferred upon him/her by this chapter, the City Engineer shall act in
135 such manner as to preserve and protect the public way and the use thereof.
136
137 SECTION 3. Inserting a new Salt Lake City Code Section 14.32.036. That Section
138 14.32.036 of the Salt Lake City Code (Notice Requirements) shall be and hereby is inserted as
139 follows:
140 A. Prior to the City issuing a Work in the ROW permit, notice of the proposed work shall be
141 delivered by the applicant to the adjacent properties, except as otherwise provided herein. Notice
142 will be paid for and delivered by applicant unless otherwise determined by the City Engineer.
143 1. “Adjacent properties” means (a) the property(ies) with a boundary contiguous to the
144 portion of the public way where the work is proposed, and (b) one property on each side of
145 the contiguous property(ies).
146
147 a. With respect to proposed work located below ground and behind the curb and
148 gutter, notice shall be delivered to the adjacent properties on the same side of the public
149 way as the proposed work.
150
5
151 b. With respect to proposed work located below ground and in the paved section of
152 the public way, notice shall be delivered to the adjacent properties on both side of the
153 public way.
154
155 c. With respect to proposed work located above ground, notice shall be delivered to
156 the adjacent properties on both sides of the public way.
157
158 d. Notice shall be provided to every adjacent property contiguous to the work
159 location, regardless of whether the work is below ground or above ground.
160
161 2. The notice shall meet the following requirements:
162
163 a. Notice shall be given by either:
164
165 (i) placing a door hanger or flyer on the building on each adjacent property in
166 a conspicuous location and affixed in a manner that it won’t easily be dislodged by
167 weather, or
168
169 (ii) mailing notice to the occupant and, if a separate address, the record owner
170 of the adjacent property. The notice must be mailed if the adjacent property is a vacant
171 lot.
172 (iii) If a multi-unit building is located on an adjacent property, notice must be
173 mailed to the owner of the building and occupant of each unit, and to the record owner of
174 each unit if a separate address.
175
176 b. Each notice shall contain the name of the permit applicant and a local contact
177 phone number and email address for the permit applicant.
178
179 c. Each notice shall describe the reason for the construction, the anticipated date(s)
180 of construction, and whether the street will be closed due to construction.
181
182 3. If notice is delivered by the applicant, evidence of satisfactory notice means a
183 construction drawing showing which properties were noticed, a copy of the provided notice,
184 and any of the following: an affidavit from the permit applicant confirming delivery of notice
185 and the date notice was delivered, a photo showing the notice on the building and property
186 address, a certificate of mailing, or a signed receipt for certified mail delivery. If the City
187 provides the notice, it shall keep a record of how and where the notice was delivered.
188
189 4. No notice shall be required in the following situations:
190
191 a. Any work where a permit is not required.
192
193 b. Emergency situations.
6
194
195 c. Certain maintenance type activities where the street remains passable and
196 unrestricted, such as snow plowing, street sweeping, street patching activities, and
197 pothole repairs.
198
199 d. Replacement work where the work is replacing like for like (example -replacing a
200 section of sidewalk with the same width sidewalk).
201
202 e. Placement of a dumpster, POD, or other obstruction for less than 8 days.
203 SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
204 passage.
205 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ____ day of _________, 2022.
206
207
208
209 CHAIRPERSON
210
211 ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
212
213
214
215 CITY RECORDER
216
217
218 Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
219 Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
220
221 ______________________________
222 MAYOR
223
224 ______________________________
225 CITY RECORDER
226
227
228 (SEAL)
229
230
231 Bill No. ________ of 2022.
232 Published: ______________.
233
Approved As To Form
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
By: _________________________
Kimberly K. Chytraus
Date: ______________________
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. _____ of 2022
(Amendment to Require Notice for Permits to Work in the Public Way)
An ordinance amending sections 14.32.030 and 14.32.035 and inserting a new section
14.32.036 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to notice of permits to work in the public way.
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has by policy requested that holders of a permit to work in
the public way provide notice of such work to adjacent property owners prior to commencing
such work; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires that where there is construction in the public way,
the City will require that notice is given to adjacent property owners as a requirement to obtain a
permit to work in the public way; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to amend this ordinance; 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 Section 14.32.030. That Section 14.32.030
of the Salt Lake City Code (Permit Application Requirements) shall be and hereby is amended as follows:
14.32.030: PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS:
A. The permit application shall contain, as applicable:
1. The name, address, telephone number, and email of the applicant. Where an applicant is
not the owner or in sole control of the facility to be installed, maintained or repaired in the
public way, the application also shall include the name, address, telephone number, and
email of the owner;
2. A description of the location, purpose, method of the proposed work, and surface and
subsurface area to be affected;
3. Where required by the City Engineer, a plan showing the proposed location of the work
and the dimensions of any excavation and the facilities to be installed, maintained, or
2
repaired in connection with the work, and such other details, existing utilities, and drawing
standards as the City Engineer may require;
4. The proposed start date of the work;
5. The proposed duration of the work, including the duration of the restoration of the
public way physically disturbed by the work;
6. The applicant’s signature, certifying that all material to be used in the work and
restoration of the public way, will be on hand and ready for use so as not to delay the work
and the prompt restoration of the public way;
7. The applicant’s signature, committing that the applicant will perform the work in
compliance with all terms and conditions of this chapter, and all applicable engineering
regulations;
8. Evidence that applicant carries insurance as required by either section 14.32.065 or the
applicable agreement with the City;
9. A security device as required by section 14.32.070;
10. A scaled site plan, rendering or photo simulation, scaled elevation view and other
supporting drawings and calculations, showing the location and dimension of all
improvements. The submittal must include sufficient information to determine compliance
with the standards and requirements of this chapter, specifically including information
concerning structure height and location within the public way, compliance with the City's
intersection and driveway sight distance standards, and compliance with the ADA;
11. Evidence of all regulatory approvals, permits, authorizations or licenses for the offering
of such services from the appropriate Federal, State, and local authorities (whether the
services are being offered by the permit provider or another person), upon request of City;
12. Evidence that the franchise holder (if not the applicant) has provided permission to
perform the work on behalf of the franchise holder and, if applicable, permission to use or
attach to franchise holder’s property in the public way; and
13. Any other information that may reasonably be required by the City Engineer.
SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 14.32.035. That Section 14.32.035
of the Salt Lake City Code (Permit Application Approval Criteria) shall be and hereby is amended as follows:
3
14.32.035: PERMIT APPLICATION APPROVAL CRITERIA:
A. In reviewing the permit application for approval, the City Engineer shall consider, among
other things, the following:
1. The capacity of the public way to accommodate the facilities proposed to be constructed
and installed, and the compatibility of such new facilities with existing facilities;
2. Any damage to or disruption of public or private facilities, improvements, or
landscaping in the public way;
3. The capacity of the public way to accommodate multiple work in the public way
projects or other conflicting uses of the public way;
4. Any existing excavation restrictions imposed by the City Engineer pursuant to section
14.32.085;
5. The availability of alternatives to excavation, including, without limitation, the
existence of excess capacity in the public way, or the feasibility of using tunneling, boring, or
other trenchless technology;
6. The qualifications and reputation of the applicant;
7. The financial strength of the applicant, including the applicant's ability to provide the
required security; and
8. Notice to adjacent properties has been accomplished as described in 14.32.036.
B. The City Engineer may deny the issuance of permits to persons who have shown by past
performance that they will not consistently conform to the engineering regulations, construction
specifications, design standards or the requirements of this chapter; provided that prior to any
such denial, such person shall be given written notice of the basis for such denial and shall be
given a reasonable opportunity to be heard in connection therewith.
C. When necessary, in the judgment of the City Engineer, to fully determine the relationship
of the work proposed to existing or proposed facilities within the public ways, or to determine
whether the work proposed complies with the engineering regulations, construction
specifications and design standards, the City Engineer may require the filing of engineering
plans, specifications and sketches showing the proposed work in sufficient detail to permit
determination of such relationship or compliance, or both, and the application shall be deemed
suspended until such plans and sketches are filed and approved.
D. The disapproval or denial of an application by the City Engineer may be appealed by the
applicant to the Director of Public Services, by the filing of a written notice of appeal within ten
4
(10) days of denial. The Director of Public Services shall hear such appeal and render his/her
decision, within fifteen (15) days following notice of such appeal.
E. In approving or disapproving work within the public way, or permits therefor; in the
inspection of such work; in reviewing plans, sketches or specifications; and generally in the
exercise of the authority conferred upon him/her by this chapter, the City Engineer shall act in
such manner as to preserve and protect the public way and the use thereof.
SECTION 3. Inserting a new Salt Lake City Code Section 14.32.036. That Section
14.32.036 of the Salt Lake City Code (Notice Requirements) shall be and hereby is inserted as
follows:
A. Prior to the City issuing a Work in the ROW permit, notice of the proposed work shall be
delivered by the applicant to the adjacent properties, except as otherwise provided herein. Notice
will be paid for and delivered by applicant unless otherwise determined by the City Engineer.
1. “Adjacent properties” means (a) the property(ies) with a boundary contiguous to the
portion of the public way where the work is proposed, and (b) one property on each side of
the contiguous property(ies).
a. With respect to proposed work located below ground and behind the curb and
gutter, notice shall be delivered to the adjacent properties on the same side of the public
way as the proposed work.
b. With respect to proposed work located below ground and in the paved section of
the public way, notice shall be delivered to the adjacent properties on both sides of the
public way.
c. With respect to proposed work located above ground, notice shall be delivered to
the adjacent properties on both sides of the public way.
d. Notice shall be provided to every adjacent property contiguous to the work
location, regardless of whether the work is below ground or above ground.
2. The notice shall meet the following requirements:
a. Notice shall be given by either:
(i) placing a door hanger or flyer on the building on each adjacent property in
a conspicuous location and affixed in a manner that it won’t easily be dislodged by
weather, or
5
(ii) mailing notice to the occupant and, if a separate address, the record owner
of the adjacent property. The notice must be mailed if the adjacent property is a vacant
lot.
(iii) If a multi-unit building is located on an adjacent property, notice must be
mailed to the owner of the building and occupant of each unit, and to the record owner of
each unit if a separate address.
b. Each notice shall contain the name of the permit applicant and a local contact
phone number and email address for the permit applicant.
c. Each notice shall describe the reason for the construction, the anticipated date(s)
of construction, and whether the street will be closed due to construction.
3. If notice is delivered by the applicant, evidence of satisfactory notice means a
construction drawing showing which properties were noticed, a copy of the provided notice,
and any of the following: an affidavit from the permit applicant confirming delivery of notice
and the date notice was delivered, a photo showing the notice on the building and property
address, a certificate of mailing, or a signed receipt for certified mail delivery. If the City
provides the notice, it shall keep a record of how and where the notice was delivered.
4. No notice shall be required in the following situations:
a. Any work where a permit is not required.
b. Emergency situations.
c. Certain maintenance type activities where the street remains passable and
unrestricted, such as snow plowing, street sweeping, street patching activities, and
pothole repairs.
d. Replacement work where the work is replacing like for like (example -replacing a
section of sidewalk with the same width sidewalk).
e. Placement of a dumpster, POD, or other obstruction for less than 8 days.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
passage.
6
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: ______________.
Approved As To Form
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
By: _________________________
Kimberly K. Chytraus
Date: ______________________ March 16, 2022
Lisa Shaffer (Dec 14, 2021 13:14 MST)
12/14/2021
12/14/2021
C2
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
tinyurl.com/SLCFY22Budget
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Ben Luedtke and Sylvia Richards
Budget Analysts
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: Budget Amendment Number Six FY2022
MOTION 1 – PARTIALLY ADOPT
I move that the Council adopt an ordinance amending the Fiscal Year 2021-22 final budget of Salt Lake
City including the employment staffing document only for items as shown on the motion sheet.
Staff note: Council Members do not need to read the individual items being approved below; they are
listed for reference. The budget amendment is still open.
A-3: Healthcare Innovation – Biohive ($25,000 from General Fund Balance)
-Note this would be six-months funding to cover services provided since the City’s membership
expired in September; the Council requests that the Mayor’s Recommended Budget for FY2023
include full year funding
A-8: Violent Crimes Unit COPS Hiring Grant City Match (Budget Neutral using $1,181,460 of Vacancy
Savings in Police Department)
Items Not Adopted
A-7: Restore July Fireworks Budget ($25,000 one-time from General Fund Balance)
E-4: State of Utah, Governor’s Office of Economic Opportunity, Bonneville Shoreline Trail Grant ($1.3
million)
I-2: Rescope $1.3 Million of Parks Impact Fees as Match to State Grant for Five New Foothills
Trailheads (Budget Neutral)
MOTION 2 – NOT ADOPT
I move that the Council proceed to the next agenda item.
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
tinyurl.com/SLCFY22Budget
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Ben Luedtke, Sylvia Richards, and Allison Rowland
Budget and Policy Analysts
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: Budget Amendment Number Six FY2022
________________________________________________________________________________
NEW INFORMATION
At the February 15 briefing the Council reviewed updated information, responses from the Administration to the
Council questions and held an initial discussion about item A-8: requesting 10 new police officers for a Violent
Crimes Unit and the City’s growing number of programs to diversify public safety response options. The Council
took a unanimous straw poll to support nine months of funding for item A-1: Suazo Business Center to align the
ongoing membership with the City’s annual budget cycle. The Council discussed potential partial funding for item
A-2: Biohive or adding it to the upcoming annual budget.
On March 1, the Council closed the public hearing and adopted most of the items in this budget amendment. Five
items were held for more information and discussion as listed below.
A-3: Healthcare Innovation – Biohive ($50,000 from General Fund Balance)
Four options the Council could consider for this item are:
a) Decline to approve any funding and request that this item be added to the Mayor’s Recommended Budget
for FY2023.
b) Approve $25,000 for services provided since the contract expired in September and then ask that further
funding requests be added to the Mayor’s Recommended Budget for FY2023.
c) Approve $37,500 which includes item b) above plus an additional three months of services to reach the end
of the current fiscal year. The next annual budget would then determine whether or not the City continues
paying for the services.
d) Approve the full funding request of $50,000, which would likely result in a FY2023 mid-year budget
amendment request.
A-7: Restore July Fireworks Budget ($25,000 one-time from General Fund Balance)
Potential options the Council could consider for this item are:
a) Decline to approve funding for July holiday celebrations this calendar year
b) Approve $25,000 for alternative celebrations this coming July that do not include fireworks.
c) Put $25,000 into a holding account to be carried forward into next fiscal year and combined with $25,000
in the FY2023 annual budget for a larger alternative celebration of July holidays in calendar year 2023.
This would provide a total budget of $50,000.
Project Timeline:
Set Date: February 1, 2022
1st Briefing: February 1, 2022
2nd Briefing: February 8, 2022
3rd Briefing: February 15, 2022
Public Hearing: February 15, 2022
Partial Adoption: March 1, 2022
4th Briefing: March 22, 2022
Potential Action: March 22, 2022
Page | 2
d) Approve the full funding request of $25,000 for fireworks shows this coming July with the understanding
that the event would be cancelled if AQI is 100 or greater or if the U.S. drought monitor exceeds 1.2.
A-8: Violent Crimes Unit COPS Hiring Grant City Match (Budget Neutral using $1,181,460 of
Vacancy Savings in Police Department)
See Attachment 3 for a one-page summary from the Department
Letter of support from Racial Equity in Policing (REP) Commission
The Police Department sent a letter (Attachment 2) from the Chair and Vice Chair of the REP Commission
expressing support for three proposals to increase police officer staffing listed below. The letter links the REP
Commission leadership support to the full Commission’s training recommendation last year that the officers be
“specifically trained in bias, de-escalation, and histories of our city’s neighborhoods and that these officers regularly
connect with the in-house mental health services.” The letter also indicates all officers should be Crisis Intervention
Training or CIT certified. The Department is working to get all officers CIT certified including a requirement that
the certification be maintained over time.
-10 police officers for a Violent Crimes Unit using DOJ COPS Grant funding (item A-8 in Budget
Amendment #6)
-One additional sergeant for the Special Victims Unit using General Fund dollars (item A-5 in Budget
Amendment #6 which the Council approved on March 1)
-15 patrol officers and three sergeants for issues at and around the two homeless resource centers in the City
using the State FY22 Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation Grant funding
o This is pending the Legislature’s decision on potential law changes and the State’s decision on grant
award amounts and allowable uses
Budget and Vacancy Savings Clarification
The Police Department estimates vacancy savings will be $1.8 million when FY2022 ends on June 30, 2022. The
Department clarified the required match must be appropriated by the Council to meet the grant conditions and
avoid creating a supplanting issue.
Grant Deadline
The current conditions of the grant require the Council to approve the local matching funds by March 31, 2022. It’s
unclear whether an extension could be requested for a longer grant period and later funding deadline.
Minimizing Disruption to Patrol and Community Policing Functions
At the February 15 briefing, Council Members raised questions about sequencing options that would launch the
Violent Crimes Unit without causing significant disruptions from experienced patrol officers transferring out of
community policing and into the new Unit. The Department is exploring multiple staffing scenarios to identify a
preferred option.
One option to avoid temporary service level reductions in community policing and patrol could be one squad of the
two in the Violent Crimes Unit being filled, waiting for the Department to be closer to full staffing of police officers,
and then the second squad being filled. The Department also notes the Unit would conduct proactive enforcement
complementing existing community policing efforts such as potentially freeing up time for patrol officers.
The grant requires the Violent Crime Unit be staffed once the officers complete all training. A police officer typically
requires 10 months from basic academy training to completed field trainings.
Reaching Full Staffing of Police Officers
The Department plans to reach, or be close to, full staffing of sworn police officers by July 2023. However, 60
officers would still have several months of field training remaining before being available for regular patrol duties.
This timeline includes:
-Basic academies with 30 cadets each in May 2022, January 2023 and May 2023
-Continual hiring of lateral officers as available
-Continual efforts to re-hire officers that left the Department
Page | 3
E-4: State of Utah, Governor’s Office of Economic Opportunity, Bonneville Shoreline Trail Grant
($1.3 million), and,
I-2: Rescope $1.3 Million of Parks Impact Fees as Match to State Grant for Five New Foothills
Trailheads (Budget Neutral)
The deadline for the City to use the grant funding for item E-4 if June 30, 2023. The Department is requesting an
extension from the State since the timeline for the capital improvements will likely exceed the current deadline. The
Council requested a briefing on the Foothill Trails System Plan implementation status from the Parks and Public
Lands Department before considering votes on items E-4 and I-2, in which case, the Council may wish to continue
holding this item open until further discussion can take place. Some specific topics Council Members mentioned for
the briefing include:
-Plan implementation work completed or paused to date
-Overview of the funds and projects that are on hold per the FY2022 annual budget contingency
-Status of the independent audit / professional review of trails and timeline for the resulting written
evaluation report
-Additional public engagement conducted or planned
-How the five new trailheads requesting funding in Budget Amendment #6 relates to the pause in work from
the annual budget contingency
Information below was provided to the Council at earlier briefings
At the February 8 briefing, the Council finished reviewing remaining items that weren’t discussed during the
February 1 briefing. The discussion included potentially adding requests for new fulltime employees to the
upcoming FY2023 annual budget deliberations so all the City’s competing needs could be considered in context
together. Summarized below are Administration responses to the Council’s follow up questions.
A-1: Suazo Business Center
The Council asked when the City’s current membership expires, how much funding would be needed to continue
the membership until the annual budget (to align the membership and annual funding cycles), and if other
membership levels are available. The Administration indicated the City’s membership expired in September 2021.
The Department reports services have been voluntarily continued while the funding request goes through the City’s
budget process. Funding nine months at a cost of $18,750 would cover October 2021 through June 2022. Then, the
full annual cost of $25,000 would need to be included in the next annual budget to continue membership.
There is no higher or lower-level membership for governments. However, the State and County have chosen to
provide funding above the $25,000 membership level. The County provides $130,000 annually towards the
Center’s work supporting minority-owned businesses located within county limits, and the State through the
Governor’s Office of Economic Development (GOED) provides $267,500 annually for services offered statewide.
A-3: Healthcare Innovation Branding aka Biohive
The Council asked when the City’s current membership expires, how much funding would be needed to continue
the membership until the annual budget (to align the membership and annual funding cycles), if this is an ongoing
or one-time expense, and how the first $50,000 appropriation was spent. The Administration indicated the City’s
membership expired in September 2021. The Department reports services have been voluntarily continued while
the funding request goes through the City’s budget process. Funding nine months at a cost of $37,500 would cover
October 2021 through June 2022.
This expense was originally identified as one-time. However, the Department states the expense should be
considered ongoing and would need to be included in the next annual budget. The first $50,000 appropriation was
used for the Utah Life Science Summit pandemic recovery information and services. The funds also contributed to a
Biohive newsletter, branding and marketing.
A-4: Fix the Bricks
The Council asked what additional resources and program changes could decrease wait times for residents, if FEMA
has any timeliness requirements or expectations for use of grant funding information on the program’s geographic
Page | 4
equity. The Administration responded greater involvement of existing employees in the Housing Stability Division
may be able to decrease wait times for program participants. In addition, the City is applying for State funding to
increase the number of single-family homes participating in the program and potentially expand the program to
multifamily and commercial properties. The City requested and received grant agreement extensions related to the
pandemic and the March 2020 earthquake. Applications will be submitted for additional rounds of Fix the Bricks
grant funding from FEMA.
The Administration is exploring funding options to assist low- and moderate-income homeowners with covering the
25% match requirement but has not identified preferred funding options at this time. Other federal funds such as
CDBG dollars are ineligible for covering the 25% match. The IMS Department is working with the Housing Stability
Division to map program recipients and those on the waiting list. This information would allow the City to see
relative participation rates between neighborhoods. A 2019 analysis showed most program applicants on the
waiting list were from high- and middle-income areas.
A-6: Public Safety Building Access Control Upgrade and Support
The Council asked if there is a State or Federal deadline for meeting security compliance rules and whether there
are any other time sensitivities the Council should know. The Administration responded there is no specific
deadline date, but the risk of a security failure increases the longer the original system is used. The City is
experiencing four to six month delays in server and network infrastructure orders which are needed for the system
upgrade. Similar delays are expected for parts needed to repair the current system in case of failure.
A-7: Restore July Fireworks Shows Funding
The Council asked for any data showing that personal fireworks use increases when large public fireworks shows are
unavailable. No such data currently exists to identify the impact, if any, of large public fireworks shows on personal
fireworks usage. The Fire Department suggests community level risks may anecdotally be lower when large public
fireworks shows are available.
The Administration reiterated that the fireworks shows would be cancelled if the Air Quality Index or AQI exceeds
100 or if the U.S. Drought Monitor exceeds level 1.2. The City would receive a full refund if the show is cancelled
more than 10 days in advance.
A-9: Arts Council Staff Increase of 3 FTES
The Council asked for clarification about to what extent, if any, the three additional FTEs requested would perform
work for the nonprofit vs. the City. At the time of publishing this staff report, a small group meeting was being
scheduled with the Administration to discuss this request.
A-12: Citywide Equity Study
The Council asked for a status update on the equity study. The study is expected to be completed August 2022
assuming additional funding is approved as requested in this budget amendment. The additional study tasks are
focused on outreach to and findings related to the City’s Westside. The best place for the public to learn more as the
study proceeds is the project webpage: www.keenindependent.com/saltlakecityequity2021/ Note that the webpage
is currently being updated to show completed work and tasks in progress.
The Administration provided the follow status update:
“In 2021, Keen Independent Research Team administered equity surveys to employees, community
members, residents, focus groups with strong ties to SLC, and HRC/REP/AAC commissions. They have
analyzed all virtual workshop responses from external and internal participants. Also, Keen created and
collected completed equity matrices that track the equity, inclusion, and belonging efforts of all City
departments. They received all of this information at the end of 2021 and are currently collaborating with
the Chief Equity Officer to meet with departments and analyze completed matrices. The findings from
these matrices and analysis will be included in the final equity report. Drafting of the EI&B plan is still in
progress but at least 90% complete.”
B-1: ARPA Authorized HUD HOME Grant Funding for Admin and Planning Funds
Page | 5
The Council asked is the 5% requested the maximum allowed by HUD for administration of the grant, will new
employees be hired, will the funds pay for existing employees and additional info on the consultant contract.
Council staff met with Housing Stability Division staff who shared the following details.
- The HOME-ARPA grant has a 15% maximum for the costs of administering it. HUD is allowing early access
to 5% (the amount of funding requested in this budget amendment) for staff to create the community
assessment and allocation plan. The remainder of the grant funds may not be used until HUD approves the
plan and the Council authorizes the budget.
- The Division is not hiring new employees to administer the HOME-ARPA grant.
- Most of the $176,660 will be used to pay existing employees for time working on administration of the
HOME-ARPA grant this fiscal year and over the next few years. Staff have attended trainings, webinars, and
weekly meetings with consultants to work on developing the HUD required community assessment and
allocation plan. Some positions in the Division are funded by multiple grants proportional to the amount of
work spent on eligible activities administering each grant and are not entirely covered by General Fund
budget.
- The Division has an existing contract with Zions Public Finance which runs concurrently with the 2020-
2024 Consolidated Plan. HUD requires the City have the plan and update it to reflect allowable reuses,
Council-identified spending priorities, grant funds received and many other details. $25,000 was
encumbered under the contract from last fiscal year and is being used this fiscal year for developing the
community assessment and allocation plan. The County and City are partnering on the effort to split these
costs and streamline engagement with community stakeholders. HUD does not allow the use of HOME-
ARPA grant funds on consultants until the community assessment and allocation plan are approved. The
Division decided to use encumbered funds for the consultant to speed up development of those documents
instead of adding to existing staff’s workload. Approximately $15,000 of the $176,660 could be used to
reimburse the Division for use of the encumbered City funds.
E-4: State of Utah, Governor’s Office of Economic Opportunity, Bonneville Shoreline Trail Grant
The Council asked the Parks and Public Lands Department how this project relates to the pause in work from the
FY2022 annual budget contingency for implementing the Foothills Trails Plan. At the time of publishing this staff
report a response from the Department was pending.
Potential Council-added item: I-2: Rescope $1.3 Million of Parks Impact Fees as Match to State
Grant for Five New Foothills Trailheads (Budget Neutral)
At the February 8 briefing, the Council discussed the potential need to rescope funding approved as part of FY2022
CIP for two new trailheads in the Foothills. Item E-4 in this budget amendment is a $1.3 million State grant for five
new trailheads in the Foothills. The Public Lands Department wants to use the CIP funding as a match to the State
grant funding. This would require rescoping the CIP funding to be allowed to use on the five trailhead locations
identified in the State grant application instead of the two specifically approved by the Council. The two trailheads
using the CIP funding are also included in the five trailheads receiving the grant funding.
10 New Police Officers and Diversifying Public Safety Response Options
The below item has not been discussed at earlier budget amendment briefings. This is part of a larger discussion
about the City’s efforts to diversify public safety response options to better match the variety of situations
experienced by people contacting the City for help.
A-8: Violent Crimes Unit COPS Hiring Grant City Match ($1,181,460 from General Fund Balance)
(Staff Note: The Council has requested additional information about other staffing and response model changes
that the Police Department has put into place so that this request can be evaluated in the context of overall
Department services and public safety. A briefing on this broader conversation will be scheduled once the
information is available. The Council has requested that this budget amendment item be held until after that
briefing, but this information is included for the purposes of the public hearing.)
In 2019, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) awarded a $1.25 million COPS Hiring Grant to the City for 10 new
police officers. The grant requires the City to match funding and maintain employment of the new officers for three
years. Over the grant period, the federal funding covers approximately 25% of the total cost and the City pays the
other 75%. This funding request covers the FY2022 City match including new vehicles, computers and other
Page | 6
equipment. The City match for ongoing personnel costs would be included in the FY2023 and FY2024 annual
budgets and is estimated at $1.1 million.
The 10 new patrol officers would form a new Violent Crimes Unit. Note that this would be in addition to Project Safe
Neighborhoods which is a partnership between local, state and federal law enforcement agencies to reduce gun
violence. The new officers would also participate in investigations and patrols.
The Police Department is requesting DOJ approval for one of the 10 new officers to be a sergeant overseeing the
Violent Crimes Unit. The City received COPS hiring grants several times before. The new police officers partially
funded by the grant were retained and moved to be fully funded by the General Fund when the grant period ended.
At the time of publishing this staff report, the Administration was preparing information about how this request fits
into the City’s efforts to diversity public safety response options. In addition, Council staff is working with the
Administration on creating a Council-requested infographic summarizing the several alternative response options.
Policy Questions:
29 New Police Officers from Three Requests – The Council may wish to ask the Administration to brief the
Council about plans to hire 29 new police officers which is composed of three separate requests listed
below. The briefing could also include civilian staffing updates and efforts to diversify civilian-led public
safety responses such as social workers, old police reports and traffic enforcement.
o 10 patrol police officers for Violent Crimes Unit using DOJ COPS Grant funding (this item A-8)
o 15 patrol officers and three sergeants for issues at and around the two homeless resource centers in
the City using the State FY22 Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation Grant funding (pending
Legislature decision on grant award amount and Council approval)
o One additional sergeant for the Special Victims Unit using General Fund dollars (item A-5 above)
Consider Request in Annual Budget Context – The Council may wish to consider if the new FTEs would be
better evaluated in context of the annual budget and all the City’s competing needs.
REP Commission Review – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if the additional staffing
proposals have been presented to the Racial Equity in Policing Commission for review and feedback.
Information below was provided to the Council at earlier briefings
Budget Amendment Number Six includes thirty-five proposed amendments and requested changes to seven funds.
Total expenditures coming from fund balance are $2,701,648. The Council may wish to note that the
Administration is proposing to add sixteen ongoing FTE’s using Fund Balance, and those positions would need to
be added to the upcoming annual budget. If all the items are adopted as proposed, then Fund Balance would be
$29,721,935 or 21.29% above the 13% minimum target established by the Council in FY2020.
State law was updated and set a maximum General Fund Balance limit of 35%. The increase is a result of higher-
than-expected revenues and unspent funds dropping to Fund Balance at the end of FY2021. The Finance
Department will be available at the briefing to provide a more detailed revenues update as summarized in the table
later in this report.
Inflation Impacts for Upcoming FY2023 Annual Budget
Although there are positive revenue and fund balance reports, staff wanted to mention that there will likely be
several inflationary impacts that may offset that positive news. Some departments have mentioned they expect
significant cost increases for existing services and contract renewals as part of the upcoming FY2023 annual budget.
For example, item A-13 in this budget amendment represents a 36% budget increase for fuel purchases. In addition,
the CIP Cost Overrun Account is less able to offset project cost increases in response to pandemic-related
construction supplies inflation so either project scopes are reduced, or additional funding may be needed. The
FY2022 annual budget included significant use of one-time funding for ongoing expenses which will need to have
ongoing revenue identified in future fiscal years to continue. The Council may wish to consider if some
proposed items in this budget amendment would be better evaluated during the annual budget
with the full context of the City’s competing needs.
Page | 7
Revenue for FY2022 Budget Adjustments
The following chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for Fiscal Year 2022. The Finance
Department will be available at the briefing to review individual revenue line-item changes.
According to the Administration, projections for fiscal year 2021 were better than expected, while projections for
fiscal year 2022 continue to trend above budget. Sales tax for the first quarter was well above budget and the prior
year. Franchise tax is lagging below budget from a decrease in water franchise ($250,000) and telephone
Page | 8
($150,000) franchise taxes.
Other notable increases include licenses which are above budget driven by increases in airport parking taxes and
innkeepers’ tax. Permits remain very strong with increases in plan check fees and building permits. Field
reservations, land leases and building leases are leading to an increase in Charges, Fees and Rentals. Notable
decreases include a decrease in moving violations and justice court fines. Fire reimbursement from the airport is
also below budget.
Fund Balance
The Administration’s chart below shows the current General Fund Balance figures.
The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) has confirmed amounts that lapsed to General Fund Balance
at the end of Fiscal Year 2021. If all items are approved as proposed by the Administration, then combined General
Fund Balance would be 21.29% or $29,721,935 above the 13% minimum target.
Impact Fees Update
The Administration provided a summary of impact fee tracking, details on refunding amounts and dates and lists of
unfinished projects with impact fee funding. The information is current as of December 13, 2021. As a result, the
City is on-track with impact fee budgeting to have no refunds during all FY2022. The Administration reports work
Page | 9
is nearing completion to update the fire and parks sections of the impact fee plan. The transportation section was
updated last year. Eligible projects for police impact fees are being identified.
Type Unallocated Cash
“Available to Spend”Next Refund Trigger Date Amount of Expiring
Impact Fees
Fire $1,644,113 More than a year away -
Parks $11,709,246 More than a year away -
Police $471,211 More than a year away -
Transportation $6,585,173 More than a year away -
Note: Encumbrances are an administrative function when impact fees are held under a contract
Section A: New Items
(note: to expedite the processing of this staff report, staff has included the Administration’s descriptions from the
transmittal for some of these items)
A-1: Suazo Business Center Membership ($25,000 from General Fund Balance)
This $25,000 would fund an annual membership for the Suazo Business Center, resulting in an ongoing
partnership with an organization that provides technical support for businesses owned by Latinx residents and
members of other underrepresented groups. The Center's location on the West Side facilitates access for area
residents, and it was able to expand its services last year because of $25,000 that the Council approved in FY2021
Budget Amendment #2. At the time, one-time federal CARES Act funding was available to cover this amount for
one year, but this request is for ongoing City general fund support.
Policy Questions:
Membership Level – The Council may wish to ask the Administration is there are other membership levels
available for the City.
Evaluate During Upcoming Annual Budget – The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration
whether this item could be addressed in the upcoming annual budget rather than in a budget
amendment. Would the Council prefer to address this in the annual budget?
A-2: Move Grants Manager from ARPA to General Fund ($66,000 from General Fund Balance)
In the FY2022 annual budget the Council approved one Grants Manager FTE in the Finance Department using
ARPA funding assuming the final guidance from the U.S. Treasury allowed such a use. The Finance Department has
determined the position is not a qualified use and requests the Council shift the position to the General Fund. The
position will continue to assist with tracking, reporting and compliance of ARPA funding as well as other grants.
The City has seen an increase in grant applications to approximately 100 in the last two fiscal years. The City is on
track for a similar number of grants in FY2022. The bipartisan infrastructure bill recently passed in Congress and
signed by the President increases funding opportunities over the next several years and could also result in more
grant applications.
A-3: Healthcare Innovation Branding Biohive ($50,000 from General Fund Balance)
Council staff asked DED why another $50,000 was needed after the same amount, also identified as one-time, was
approved in Budget Amendment #4 of FY2021, and what deliverables would result from this amount of spending.
The Department’s response did not address this specific question about the additional funding. The Department has
provided general information about the goals of the program (see Attachment 1).
Policy Questions:
Ongoing or One-time Need – The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration if this is in fact more
of an ongoing need, and if so whether it should be addressed in the upcoming annual budget rather than as
sequential budget amendment requests.
Page | 10
Status of Earlier $50,000 – The Council may wish to ask the Department if funds from FY2021 are fully
spent or encumbered, and what data was collected because of the previous expenditure.
A-4: Fix the Bricks Program and FTE Transfer from Fire Department to Community and
Neighborhoods Department (Budget Neutral)
This item would transfer an Office Technician II FTE and an hourly Office Technician from the Emergency Division
within the Fire Department to the Housing Stability Division within the CAN Department. No budget impact would
be incurred as the positions already exist. Note that both positions are currently vacant. Ongoing administration of
the FEMA grant which funds Fix the Bricks and the two positions would also transfer to the CAN Department.
The Housing Stability Division administers several other ongoing Federal grants, many from the U.S. HUD
Department, and could apply those existing skillsets to this FEMA grant. The Division’s housing rehabilitation
employees have also assisted Fix the Bricks operations in the past such as environmental reviews, floodplains,
historic preservation, noise abatement and control, etc. There may be benefits of combining Fix the Bricks with the
housing rehabilitation programs that offer small and medium sized repairs to qualified low- and moderate-income
homeowners. The two Fix the Bricks employees would be supervised by the Housing Project Manager that also
oversees the housing rehabilitation program.
Demand has exceeded program capacity since launching several years ago. Last year an engineering firm was
contracted with for home inspection and repair approvals which is speeding up that step of the process. Contractors
must be on the approved list to submit seismic improvement project bids. A training program for contractors is
being developed to try and get more added to the approved list. Issues related to supply chains and job vacancies
are also reported to be slowing the pace of contractor’s work.
The multiple emergencies of the past two years and ongoing pandemic have reduced Emergency Management
staff’s ability to work on Fix the Bricks.
Policy Questions:
Resources to Increase Pace of Seismic Improvements – The Council may wish to ask the Administration
what additional resources, staffing and/or program changes could decrease wait times for residents.
FEMA’s Use of Funding Timeliness Expectations – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if
FEMA has any timeliness requirements or expectations about the use of grant funds awarded to the City.
The program recently completed using funding from 2017.
Geographic Equity – The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration potential changes to improve
geographic equity of program participants such as helping low- and moderate-income residents cover the
25% cost share, using a sliding scale based on income, and assistance navigating funding options (historic
tax credits, grants, local community organizations, etc.). The Council may also wish to ask if information is
available on the current distribution of participants for completed projects and those on the waiting list.
A-5: Additional Police Sergeant for Special Victims Unit ($135,971 from General Fund Balance)
This request would create a second sergeant for the Special Victims Units (SVU) in the Police Department and
provide funding for a vehicle, computer, and other equipment. The current sergeant supervises 12 detectives which
is more than best practice and raises span of control issues. The SVU caseload has increased in recent years. A
major driver of the growing caseload is sexual assault evidence kit DNA matches in the national database. A DNA
match can provide suspect identification and other new information for investigation. In 2014 and 2015 over 700
sexual assault evidence kits from cold cases were submitted to the State Crime Lab for processing. The Police
Department reports over 400 DNA matches have been identified which provides new leads to investigate.
If the second sergeant is approved, then the SVU would designate a team focused on sex crimes investigations
including the new DNA leads from the older sexual assault evidence kits. This is expected to improve case
investigations and the Department’s ability to process the cold cases.
The Department reports similar workload and span of control issues are being experienced for victim advocates
working with the SVU. A grant funded advocate was embedded in the SVU to directly work with detectives
investigating cold cases. However, the grant funding ends September 2022. Continuing the position by using
Page | 11
General Fund dollars could be a request in the FY2023 annual budget. The Department reports one or two more
SVU detectives may also be requested given the high number of DNA matches from sexual assault evidence kits.
Policy Question:
Resources to Increase Pace of Cold Case Investigations – The Council may wish to ask the Administration
what resources in addition to SVU police officers could improve the pace of cold case investigations. For
example, are there upstream or downstream resources that could help crime lab evidence processing,
victim advocates, the justice court or prosecutor’s office?
Evaluate During Upcoming Annual Budget – The Council may wish to ask if this position should be
considered in the context of the annual budget, or if the need is more immediate/urgent because of the
caseload?
A-6: Police Access Control Upgrade and Support ($214,538 from General Fund Balance)
This request would replace the original security access control system at the Public Safety Building which was
installed nine years ago. The funding includes $113,198 for hardware (controllers, readers, and server), $56,340 for
installation and ongoing maintenance and support estimated at $45,000 annually. The new system allows the
building to continue meeting Federal and State security compliance rules.
The hardware includes a new server that could act as the backbone for a new standard security system across all city
facilities. The approach was developed by IMS, Facilities and Engineering. The Police Department would be the first
to move to the new system. Additional funding may be needed to transfer other departments and facilities into the
new system
A-7: Fireworks Budget ($25,000 from General Fund Balance)
This request would fund two fireworks shows in July 2022: one at Jordan Park on Independence Day, July 4th, and
another at Liberty Park on Pioneer Day, July 24th. Funding and contracts for the two shows are typically needed in
the spring to ensure vendor availability. The Administration states the shows could be cancelled based on certain
conditions such as an air quality index of 100+ and severe drought. The Council removed funding for the shows in
the FY2022 annual budget because of the ongoing drought. At the time some Council Members expressed concern
about fireworks in general, that they are always bad for air quality. Some current Council Members have expressed
similar concerns.
Policy Question:
Alternative Celebration Options – The Council may wish to discuss alternative options to celebrate the two
July holidays such as festivals, laser & light shows, drone shows, etc.
A-8: This item will be held as a future briefing about the City’s efforts to diversify public safety
response options
A-9: Arts Council Staff Increase of 3 FTEs ($175,000 from General Fund Balance)
The Administration indicates that the Arts Council needs additional staff support to handle current workload as
well as the duties/role of the Mayor’s Advisor on Arts and Culture which was shifted from the Mayor’s Office to the
Arts Council. A total of three (3) FTEs are being requested: two (2) Arts Council Program Coordinators and one (1)
Arts Council Program Manager. The Council may wish to note that these same positions were initially proposed in
the last annual budget process requesting the use of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) monies to fund the
positions, however, these positions did not qualify for ARPA funds, and the Council did not prioritize them for
funding with General Fund dollars when balancing the budget before adoption. The Administration is requesting
that these positions be funded now using fund balance – six months each for two program coordinators and six
months for one program manager.
The job descriptions are as follows:
Arts Council Program Coordinators (Annual salary and benefits $94,383 – Six months is $47,192)
The incumbents would coordinate, organize, and implement Arts Council & Economic Development-related
programs and services; implement marketing efforts, collaborate on grant writing and reporting; provide
information and technical assistance as needed to artists, arts organizations, and the public; and track income and
expenses.
Page | 12
Arts Council Program Manager (Annual salary and benefits $121,116 – Six months is $60,558)
The incumbent would direct one or more major program and initiative(s) within the City’s Department of Economic
Development, including arts and culture programming, small business and entrepreneurship support, and
recruitment and retention activities. Activities would include being responsible for the department programs,
working with community members, advisory boards, and project management with the end goal to support the
City’s arts, economic and equity master plan goals.
Policy Questions:
Work for the Non-profit and/or the City – The Council may wish to ask whether the new staff members will
perform work that relates to the non-profit organization, or whether the work will be directly for Salt Lake
City.
Evaluate During Upcoming Annual Budget – The Council may wish to discuss if this proposal would be
better evaluated during the annual budget with the full context of the City’s competing needs. The FY2022
annual budget tentatively included using ARPA funding for three new Arts Council FTEs, but U.S. Treasury
guidance determined those positions were an ineligible use. The Administration shared the following
context regarding this policy question:
1. “ZAP Grant Funding: Since 2016, the Arts Council’s award from Salt Lake County Zoo, Arts, and Parks
(ZAP) Tier I grant funding has averaged $360,000 annually, based on qualifying programming and
operating expenses. This prestigious grant, of which the Arts Council is the only local Arts Agency within
among only 22 organizations countywide, is a continuing opportunity to leverage funds outside the City.
Due to strategic shifts in programming in 2018, the Arts Council no longer incurs the $1.5 to 2 million
dollars cost of in-house expenses to the Twilight Concert Series. A natural consequence of this shift is that
the annual ZAP award is calculated based on three years of qualifying expenditures; thus, the
organization’s qualifying expenditures have been significantly decreasing with compounding effects. The
Arts Council projects over $175,000 in losses by 2022. The additional staffing costs will qualify as
expenditures to begin to mitigate and stabilize this award in the next three years (although it will not
reach its previous levels due to lower expenditures). So, less expenditures lead to a lesser grant award. It
should be noted that the ZAP grant revenue losses will still occur and compound despite new staffing
expenditures mitigating the stabilization of this critical funding. In preparation for FY23 the staff and
board are currently considering tiered approaches and scenarios to programmatic cuts while mitigating
service losses to the arts community during one of the hardest hit industries through the COVID-19
pandemic.
2. Programmatic & Mayoral goal execution and staffing capacity: Since 2013, the Arts Council has been
a staff of six full-time City employees (5 in 2011). Since that time significant changes to programming
scope, budget, and priorities/values-and a rapidly growing city-have occurred with no increases to full-
time support. Over the years, there have been increases to program funds and the grants budget without
additional staffing support. Major impacts include our ability to deliver program services namely in
Public Art and the new maintenance fund, all public programs such as Living Traditions Presents, City
Arts Grants; and new initiatives of the City, and the Mayor’s Plan-all outside the scope of baseline
programs and functions of our Local Arts Agency designation.
Additionally, in 2020 the full-time policy role of Mayor’s Advisor on Arts & Culture was eliminated from
the Mayor’s Office and that role condensed to the Arts Division Executive Director. This has resulted in
expanded Citywide and external communications, projects, policy, and consultation (internal and
external) asked of the Executive Director as a result, and the incorporation of the management of the
Cultural Core project into the Arts Council. For the Arts Council to continue its development efforts (which
have shown measurable increases in recent years) to begin to mitigate the ZAP losses, and leverage value
to the City, capacity needs to exist to staff the above efforts.
[If the Council were to wait to fund the positions during the annual budget process], the above
considerations would just be further postponed and continue the strains mentioned. The Arts Council has
requested staffing at the Department since FY21 to mitigate these challenges. It has been in the Mayors
Plan to “Stabilize the Structure and Funding of the Arts Council” in Plans 2020-2022. While our team is
Page | 13
passionate and committed, we have experienced staff retention and morale issues related to high volumes
of work. Retaining the incredible talent that we currently have is of the utmost importance for service
continuity to the arts community.”
A-10: Allen Park CIP Rescope (Budget Neutral to Swap Funding Sources)
In FY2021 CIP, the Council approved $450,000 of recaptured bond funds to create an Adaptive Reuse and
Activation Plan for Allen Park. In FY2022 CIP, the Council approved $420,000 of parks impact fees for historic
preservation and renovation work at 11 structures in the park and capital improvements like pedestrian stairway
connections and new amenities. The funding includes analysis, cost estimates and construction ready designs.
Additional funding requests for construction would come to the Council in future budget openings.
This request is to rescope the FY2022 CIP funding of $420,000 to be used on the Adaptive Reuse and Activation
Plan instead of the pre-construction work for structure renovations and capital improvements. This change
accommodates legal limitations that bond funds may not be spent on the plan. The FY2021 CIP funding of
$450,000 would be used for the pre-construction work instead of developing the Reuse Plan. The total funding
available for Allen Park would not change.
The Parks and Public Lands Department provided the below breakdown of how the bond funds have been spent so
far. $284,253 of bond funds remain and need to be spent quickly to comply with spending deadlines. The remaining
bond funds are anticipated to be fully spent on waterline replacements, water meter replacements and roof
upgrades. Construction schedules estimate the work could be completed over the coming summer months.
-$75,000 for Assets & Structures Inventory & Documentation/Assessments of Historic Features
-$33,993 for Roof Stabilization & Leak Repair, George Allen Home
-$31,433 for Construction Documents for Water Line / Water Meter Replacement & Irrigation Upgrade
-$11,560 for Installation of Power Boxes for Site Power / Event Infrastructure
-$11,505 for Waste and Hazardous Materials Removal from Historic Residences
-$2,256 for Engineering fees charged for review of construction documents
A-11: Executive Assistant in the Mayor’s Office ($39,792 from General Fund Balance)
This item would add one executive assistant FTE to the Mayor’s Office. The requested funding is for five months.
The fully loaded annual cost is estimated at $95,501 and would be added to the FY2023 annual budget.
A-12: Citywide Equity Study ($90,000 from General Fund Balance)
The Council approved $100,000 for this study in Budget Amendment #4 of FY2020. This additional funding adds
several tasks to the study scope:
-Task 1. Additional project coordination and management for 2022.
-Task 2. Documentation and mapping of current community engagement processes at the City, including
those spearheaded by the Civic Engagement Team and those led by departments.
-Task 3. Review of current City data on how/whether constituents receive information or provide feedback.
-Task 4. Review of representation of different constituencies on City advisory boards and other groups.
-Task 4. Interviews, virtual workshops, focus groups and other discussions with City staff and community
leaders.
-Task 5. Review of the literature concerning good practices for public sector communication and
engagement with hard-to-reach populations.
-Task 6. Case studies of good practices employed by state or local governments.
-Task 7. Recommendations for solidifying and strengthening current efforts and creating new avenues for
outreach and engagement.
-Task 8. Piloting new community engagement strategies.
-Task 9. Report and three presentations.
A-13: Fuel Cost Increases ($938,076 to Fleet Fund from Several Sources)
Fuel inflation in the market has caused costs to exceed the FY2022 Fleet Fund budget for fuel. This item will
increase the fuel budget to be enough to reach the end of the fiscal year. The FY2022 budget has $2.6 for fuel
Page | 14
purchases which would be increased 36% to $3.5 million. Council staff requested a funding source breakdown for
the additional budget. The information was not available at the time of publishing this staff report.
A-14: COVID Personal Protective Equipment ($200,000 from General Fund Balance)
The City’s supply of masks and other PPE to combat COVID is depleting. This request is for an additional $200,000
to purchase additional supplies to keep citizens, visitors, and employees safe in City owned buildings. The new
masks will be medical grade and tests will also be procured.
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Section
B-1: ARPA Authorized HUD HOME Grant Funding for Admin and Planning Funds ($176,660 from
HOME-ARPA Grant)
HUD has authorized the City to access 5% ($176,659.75) of admin and planning funds of the City's 2021 HUD
HOME-ARPA award (total award, $3,533.195). HOME-ARPA funds are designated for housing opportunities for
individuals experiencing homelessness. These admin and planning funds will facilitate existing City staff and
expenses related to the HUD-required HOME-ARPA Community Assessment. The Community Assessment will
identify needs and opportunities to help direct the HOME-ARPA funds.
It’s important to note that the total award is one-time additional grant funding from HUD. This is separate from the
annual HOME grant funding the City receives. After HUD reviews and approves the Community Assessment, the
Council would need to adopt a substantial amendment to the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan for the City to accept
and be able to use the funding.
Housing Stability staff will provide the Council with a quick overview of this one-time funding, the process and
timeline.
Policy Question:
Community Needs for this Funding – The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration what
community needs should be prioritized for this funding and any recommendations for stakeholders to be
included in developing the Community Assessment.
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section
(None)
Section D: Housekeeping
D-1: Interest Income on Bonding ($64,140 and $80,977 from CIP Fund)
The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2019A, were issued in October 2019 for the purpose of funding the
reconstruction of City streets. The total par amount of the bonds issued were $17,540,000. At the time the bonds
were issued the proceeds were deposited with the Trustee. Since then, the unspent bond proceeds have been
earning interest. This amendment will adjust the budget to reflect the actual proceeds available including
accumulated interest from October 2020 through August 2021. The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020, were
issued in September 2020 for the purpose of funding the reconstruction of City streets. The total par amount of the
bonds issued were $17,745,000. At the time the bonds were issued the proceeds were deposited with the Trustee.
Since then, the unspent bond proceeds have been earning interest. This amendment will adjust the budget to reflect
the actual proceeds available including accumulated interest from February 2021 through August 2021.
D-2: WITHDRAWN
D-3: Reimburse Misc. Grants for Unreimbursed HUD HOPWA Funds ($32,495 from Bank Pool
Clearing Account)
Finance discovered that $32,494.55 was paid out to a subgrantee in 2017, but never reimbursed from HUD for
HOPWA Cost Center 7261611. The HUD reimbursement deadline of three years has passed for these funds. Housing
Stability has identified unrestricted funds from 7800404 Bank Pool Clearing to make the City whole. This budget
amendment will facilitate the transfer of funds from a 78 Fund Class to a 72 Fund Class.
Page | 15
The Bank Pool Clearing account is used for housing related expenses like credit and title reports, mortgage
insurance premiums, and loan fees. The Finance Department worked with the Housing Stability Division to change
policies, procedures and staff training to avoid the City losing out on missed reimbursements in the future.
D-4: Treasury ERAP 1 Reallocated Funds ($3 million from Miscellaneous Grant Fund)
The Treasury has reallocated unspent Emergency Rent Assistance Program (ERAP) 1 funds set-aside for the State of
Utah by low-performing cities and made these funds available to apply for by high-performing cities, such as Salt
Lake City. These reallocated funds are for direct client assistance only. To administer Salt Lake City’s initial ERAP 1
award, the City contracted with the State of Utah, Department of Workforce Services’ (DWS) online Utah Rent
Relief application portal, https://rentrelief.utah.gov/. Coordinating with DWS, Housing Stability staff have
determined that Salt Lake City could apply for $3,000,000 in reallocated ERAP 1. These funds will further assist
Salt Lake City residents with deposit, rent, utilities, rent arrears, and utility arrears, again utilizing the Utah Rent
Relief application portal. Note: This new request is separate from, and does not affect, the City’s other Treasury
ERAP 1 ($6,067,033) and ERAP 2 ($4,800,559.40) awards. See attached funding agreement. (Note: 7262150-
Treasury ERA Direct Financial Assistance, is the current Cost Center for ERAP 1 Direct Client Assistance)
Nearly all of the $6 million from ERAP 1 has been spent with some outstanding invoices pending processing. The
deadline to spend ERAP 1 funds is September 30, 2022. The deadline to spend ERAP 2 funds is September 30,
2025. If D-4 and D-5 are approved as requested, then the City’s total funding from ERAP would be $13,867,632.
D-5: Treasury ERAP 2 Reallocated Funds ($2,880,366 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund)
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's second allocation of the American Rescue Plan Act, Treasury
Emergency Rent Assistance (ERAP) 2 funds, in the amount of $2,880,335.64, for the purpose of addressing
housing stability for Salt Lake City residents. See attached funding agreement. The City approved the first allocation
of the ERAP 2 funds in BA1 of FY 21-22, in the amount of $1,920,233.76. The City's total ERAP 2 award is
$4,800,599.40. BA1 included the following budget items for those funds: Direct Client Assistance $1,632,199, and
Community Partner Admin $288,034.76. To administer Salt Lake City’s first and second allocations of ERAP 2, the
City will contract with the State of Utah, Department of Workforce Services’ (DWS) online Utah Rent Relief
application portal, https://rentrelief.utah.gov/.
The City has previously and successfully contracted with DWS for the City’s ERAP 1 funds. This budget amendment
aligns with Treasury guidance on eligible activities and allowable percentage amounts for ERPA 2. In addition to
further supporting Direct Client Assistance (deposits, rent, utilities, rent arrears, and utility arrears), and the
associated Community Partner Admin to facilitate the proper distribution of these funds, Housing Stability is
requesting City Admin to support one (1) FTE, and funds to support Housing Stability services. Re: the one (1) FTE:
Currently, the City’s ERAP 1 and 2 funds are being administered by 1 PTE. This position is necessary to facilitate the
City administration, coordination, and compliance monitoring. This position was pervious approved by Council
with ERAP 1 funding. Since then, the administration of these funds has demonstrated that a FTE is required. This
one (1) requested position would be Grade 26, Community Development Grant Specialist, fully loaded for 39
months. (April 2022 - Jun 2025, at $34.50 an hour [$215,280], plus benefits [$53,820]. Total $269,100.) This
position would be fully funded by ERAP funding and would sunset when funding expires. Re: Housing Stability
services: According to the Treasury, eligible “Housing Stability” services include: Case management, Eviction
prevention, Eviction diversion programs, Mediation between landlords and tenants, Housing counseling, Fair
housing counseling, Housing navigators or promotors that help households access ERA programs or find housing,
Housing-related services for survivors of domestic abuse or human trafficking, Legal services or attorney’s fees
related to eviction proceedings and maintaining housing stability, Specialized services for individuals with
disabilities or seniors that support their ability to access or maintain housing. A public competitive process would
receive applications from providers for eligible Housing Stability services.
Staff note: after transmittal updated numbers confirmed the total amount should actually be $41 less than the
originally requested budget. This will be adjusted for the Council’s final adoption vote.
D-6: Annex Building Renovation – Moving Funds from Misc. Grants to CIP Fund ($500,000 from
Miscellaneous Grant Fund)
In Budget Amendment #2, the Council added an item totaling $500,000 in grant funding to be used for Annex
Building Renovations. This amount was approved within the Miscellaneous Grants Fund. Since the associated
annex building renovation should be done through CIP, the budget needs to be moved.
Page | 16
D-7: State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) Loan ($7 million from Debt Service Fund)
On December 6, 2021, the City and the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) entered into a loan agreement
which will be used to finance a portion of a neighborhood parking structure between 400 West and 500 West and
600 South and 700 South. The loan is expected to be repaid with funds allocated to the City by H.B. 244 (2021). The
City has received funds for the State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) Loan. This amendment creates the revenue budget
for the receipt of loan proceeds and the expenditure budget to disburse the proceeds for the project.
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
E-1: UDOT Railroad Safety Grant ($86,750 from CIP Fund)
The Dept. of Community & Neighborhood, Division of Engineering applied for and received $86,750 for the Utah
Railroad Safety Grant 2021 (round 1) for safety improvements to the railroad crossing at 4900 West 700 South.
Planned safety improvements include widening the roadway, improving sight distance by raising the street grade
approach, adding sidewalk on the south side of the crossing, adding bike lanes, and replacing the railroad crossing
signals. The funding plan is to request an additional $260,250 in the Utah Railroad Safety Grant 2021 Round 2
competition to complete the funding package for the project. A Public hearing was held 7/5/21.
E-2: UDOT Railroad Safety Grant, Round 2 ($93,750 from CIP Fund)
The Dept. of Community & Neighborhood, Division of Engineering applied for and received $93,750 for the Utah
Railroad Safety Grant 2021 (round 2) for safety improvements to the railroad crossing at 4900 West 700 South.
Planned safety improvements include widening the roadway, improving sight distance by raising the street grade
approach, adding sidewalk on the south side of the crossing, adding bike lanes, and replacing the railroad crossing
signals. This grant has no match requirement. A public hearing was held 12/7/21.
E-3: Utah Department of Transportation, 600/700 N Frequent Transit Network Improvement Grant
($228,000 from CIP Fund)
The Dept. of Community & Neighborhood, Division of Engineering applied for and received $93,750 for the Utah
Railroad Safety Grant 2021 (round 2) for safety improvements to the railroad crossing at 4900 West 700 South.
Planned safety improvements include widening the roadway, improving sight distance by raising the street grade
approach, adding sidewalk on the south side of the crossing, adding bike lanes, and replacing the railroad crossing
signals. This grant has no match requirement. A public hearing was held 12/7/21 for the original grant application
for this award.
E-4: State of Utah, Governor’s Office of Economic Opportunity, Bonneville Shoreline Trail Grant
The Salt Lake City Department of Public Lands received $1,300,000 for the Foothills Natural Area & Bonneville
Shoreline Trailhead Infrastructure Improvements. The project proposes to construct five public access trailheads
along the stretch of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail that runs through the Salt Lake City foothills between Emigration
Canyon and Davis County. Proposed trailhead locations are: 1) Bonneville Boulevard near City Creek Canyon and
Utah State Capitol, 2) Emigration Canyon near This Is The Place Heritage Park, 3) Popperton Park near the
University of Utah, 4) 18th Avenue in the upper Avenues neighborhood, and 5) Victory Road northwest of the Utah
State Capitol. This grant has a match requirement of $1,300,000. Parks & Public Lands has committed matching
funds is from parks impact fees adopted in FY 2022 Capital Improvement Program for the Foothills Trailhead
Development Phase II.
The $2.6 million total project funding will fully cover construction costs at all five locations based on current plans
and estimates. Note: This funding is not subject to the FY2022 annual budget adoption ordinance contingency on
all Foothill trails funding because this project is constructing trailhead infrastructure.
Policy Question:
Pausing Trail Construction and Building Trailhead Infrastructure – The Council may wish to ask the
Administration how this relates to the pause in work relating to the Foothills Trails Plan.
Section F: Donations
(None)
Section G: Council Consent Agenda No. 3
G-1: State of Utah, The Utah Highway Safety Office, Distracted Driving Prevention Program Grant
($13,000 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund)
The Police Department applied for and received a $13,000 grant from the Utah Highway Safety Office for the 2022
Page | 17
Distracted Driving Prevention Program. The grant funding is for overtime to conduct distracted driving
enforcement/education shifts. A Public Hearing was held on 4/20/21 for the grant application on this award.
G-2: State of Utah, The Utah Highway Safety Office, Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program Grant
($9,690 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund)
The Police Department applied for and received a $9,690 grant from the Utah Highway Safety Office for the 2022
Salt Lake City Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program. This award is to fund crosswalk enforcement/education
overtime and Youth bicycle rodeo overtime. A Public Hearing was held on 4/20/21.
G-3: U S Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), FY21 De-Escalation
Training Solicitation Grant ($92,230 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund)
The Police Department applied for and received a $92,320 grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, Community
Oriented Policing Services through the FY21 Community Policing Development De-Escalation Training Program.
The grant will fund the Apex Officer Interactive Crisis Intervention, De-Escalation and Force Options Virtual
Reality Training Simulator. It will also provide funding for up to 20 officers to attend an ICAT (Integrating
Communications, Assessment, and Tactics) de-escalation train-the-trainer course as well as training staff
overtime/supplies to implement the ICAT and virtual reality curriculums. The Apex Officer Virtual Reality Training
System is a comprehensive solution that is designed to allow trainers the ability to give presentations and classes,
conduct interactive testing and assessment, and provide immersive, hands-on scenario-based exercises with
detailed debriefing and after-action review. ICAT is a training program that provides first responding police officers
with the tools, skills, and options they need to successfully and safely defuse a range of critical incidents. The only
costs being funded are for per diem. Remaining travel costs will be covered by other funding sources. A Public
Hearing was held on 10/5/21.
G-4: U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), FY21 Law
Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Grant ($59,360 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund)
The Police Department applied for and received a $59,360 grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, Community
Oriented Policing Services through the FY21 Community Policing Development Law Enforcement Mental Health
and Wellness Act. The grant will fund training for Employee Wellness and Peer Support Teams, Wellness Initiative,
chaplain uniforms, program education and marketing materials, supplies, program evaluation, instructor fees for
Family Wellness Workshops, and overtime. A Public Hearing was held on 9/7/21.
G-5: US Department of Justice, 2021 Bureau of Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Grant ($340,246
from Miscellaneous Grant Fund)
The Police Department applied for and received a grant award from the U.S. Department of Justice under the 2021
Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program. The total grant award is $340,246. Of that total
the City will subaward $57,055 to the Unified Police Department and $57,054 to Salt Lake County (Sheriff's Office).
The subaward amounts are determined by a federal funding allocation formula. The Police Department will use its
award to provide training for sworn and civilian personnel, to support directed community policing overtime, and
to purchase the following: a tactical robot, less lethal shotguns and ammo, tactical operation center throw phone
capability enhancements, a laptop for Crime Lab FARO software, vest carriers and plates for Crime Lab personnel,
LEAPS (Law Enforcement Automated Personnel Software), and camera systems for the Internal Affairs Unit and
the HOP physical training facility. No Match is required. A Public Hearing was held on 10/5/21.
G-6: Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), State Asset Forfeiture Grant
(SAFG) ($10,000 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund)
The Salt Lake City Police Department applied for additional grant funding and was awarded $10,000 from the State
of Utah, Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), under the State Asset Forfeiture Grant (SAFG)
program. The State is combining these new funds with the previously funded amount of $1,500. The funds will be
used for an overt pole camera kit, Narcan nasal spray, and drug prevention resource cards. A public hearing was
held 9/7/21.
Section G: Council Consent Agenda No. 4
G-1: Utah State Office of Education, Child and Adult Care Food Program - Youth After School
Programs Grant ($46,000 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund)
The Youth & Family Division of Public Services applied for and received a continuation grant offered annually by
the Utah State Office of Education, under the Child and Adult Care Food Program. These funds are available to
Page | 18
youth service providers as part of the At-Risk Snack Program to reimburse the costs of snacks served to children
participating in the after-school programs. Central City Rec. Center, Fairmont Park, Glendale Library, Liberty Park,
Northwest Rec. Center, Ottinger Hall, the Youth and Family Division Office, and Sorenson Campus will receive
reimbursement directly through the State Office of Education and will receive up to $46,000, based on qualified
snack expenses. SLC is reimbursed on a monthly basis and only qualified healthy snacks and meals served to
children participating in the after-school enrichment/education activities during the afterschool program hours are
eligible for reimbursement. A public hearing was held 10/5/21.
G-2: Marathon Petroleum Thriving Communities Grant Program, Marathon Petroleum Foundation
Grant ($100,000 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund)
The Division of Youth & Family Services applied for and received $100,000 in grant funding for the Marathon
Petroleum Thriving Communities Program. The funding will be used to purchase two 14-passenger vans that will be
used by program staff to transport youth participants from neighborhood elementary schools to the YouthCity
Northwest Recreation center site for afterschool programming. No match is required. A public hearing was held
1/18/22.
G-3: Mental Health First Responders, Utah Department of Human Services Grant ($80,010 from
Miscellaneous Grant Fund)
The Human Resource Dept. applied for and received $80,010 in grant funding for the Mental Health First
Responders grant program from Utah Dept. of Human Services. The funding will be used to increase the capacity of
the City's existing EAP (Employee Assistance Program), targeting first responders. The two clinicians currently
under contract with ComPsych will increase their hours of availability to provide onsite, in person, telephone, and
virtual counselling particularly emergency services for individuals who may be in crisis. The total hours will
increase by 815 over the course of the pilot projecting. No match is required. A public hearing was held 1/18/22.
Section I: Council Added Items
I-1: PLACEHOLDER: Additional Funding for Planning Division Mailings ($90,000 – General Fund
Balance)
The Planning Division needs additional funding to complete mailings for several projects between now and the end
of the fiscal year. The Council Chair has suggested using fund balance to supplement the cost of Planning Division
mailings as detailed below. The additional $3,980 would be flexible funding in case the number of land use
applications and/or the citywide mailing costs come in higher than expected.
-$78,120 for two citywide mailings
-$1,600 for land use application mailings
-$6,300 for Ballpark Station Area Plan and Downtown Building Height code amendments mailings
-$86,020 Total
ATTACHMENTS
1. Item A-3: Healthcare Innovation Branding Biohive
Response from Department of Economic Development to Council Staff’s Questions
2. Racial Equity in Policing Commission Leadership Letter of Support for Hiring Additional Police Officers
3. Violent Crimes Unit One-pager
ACRONYMS
ADA – Americans with Disabilities Act
ARPA – American Rescue Plan Act
CAFR – Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
CAN – Community and Neighborhoods Department
CCJJ – Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice
CIP – Capital Improvement Program
COPS – Community Oriented Policing Services
COVID – Name for the disease caused by the 2019 Novel Coronavirus
DOJ – United States Department of Justice
ERAP – Emergency Rental Assistance Program
FTE – Full Time Equivalent Position
FY – Fiscal Year
Page | 19
GF – General Fund
HOPWA – Housing Opportunities For People With Aids
HUD – United States Housing and Urban Development Department
JAG – Justice Assistance Grant
PPE – Personal Protective Equipment
RDA – Redevelopment Agency
REP – Racial Equity in Policing Commission
SAFG – Utah State Asset Forfeiture Grant Program
SIB – State Infrastructure Bank
UDOT – Utah Department of Transportation
Attachment 1. Department of Economic Development’s "Response" to Council Staff
Questions about Item A-3, Healthcare Innovation Branding Biohive
Council Staff Questions:
The Council approved $50,000 in Budget Amendment #4 of FY21 for this same use and it was
identified as one-time. Could you please discuss why additional funding is needed and what
deliverables are expected?
Department of Economic Development Response:
In 2020, the Mayor convened stakeholders in the life science industry to help shape the City’s
economic development approach around health care innovation. The goal of this was to
harness the impact and growth of this industry and to connect companies and organizations to
workforce development, STEM education, and other programs and policies that will help
provide economic opportunity to underserved communities in the City. The partnerships
created between Salt Lake City, GoUtah, WTC Utah, BioUtah, EDC Utah, University of Utah, as
well as companies representing various sub-sectors of health care innovation are focused on
elevating the awareness of this industry with a focus on branding and marketing it through the
new entity known as Biohive.
This partnership is in alignment to not duplicate efforts, but to harness the collective goals of
key organizations and the City to retain and help grow this industry together for the benefit of
City residents. This will be accomplished through the following deliverables and activities:
i.Marketing and branding of the industry that has the City at the central hub of activity
to connect residents to an industry that creates high wage jobs (multiple entry points
for careers and jobs), pipeline of new talent through new technologies being created
at the University of Utah, and an already strong yet not well-known history of
diagnostic and medical device companies.
ii.Workforce development programing in partnership with the Salt Lake School District,
Salt Lake Community College, and higher education by providing new opportunities
for communities who have not participated before in the life science industry.
iii.Programming and activities to ensure the momentum of this industry continues to be
retention and growth.
Page | 20
iv.A report that updates on these fronts within Salt Lake City.
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 238
PO BOX 145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455 TEL 801-535-6394
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
MARY BETH THOMPSON
Chief Financial Officer
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
___________________________________ Date Received: ________________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: ___________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: January 14,2022
Dan Dugan, Chair
FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer
SUBJECT: Budget Amendment #6
SPONSOR: NA
STAFF CONTACT: John Vuyk, Budget Director (801) 535-6394 or
Mary Beth Thompson (801) 535-6403
DOCUMENT TYPE: Budget Amendment Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that, subsequent to a public hearing,
the City Council adopt the following amendments to the FY 2021-22 adopted budget.
BUDGET IMPACT:
REVENUE EXPENSE
GENERAL FUND $ 0.00 $ 2,701,648.00
FLEET FUND 1,482,576.00 1,482,576.00
IMS FUND 259,338.00 259,338.00
MISCELLANEOUS GRANT FUND 6,840,147.00 7,227652.00
HOUSING FUND 1,100,000.00 1,132,495.00
DEBT SERVICE FUND 7,000,000.00 7,000,000.00
CIP FUND 3,658,298.75 3,658,298.75
TOTAL $ 20,340,359.75 $ 23,462,007.75
Lisa Shaffer (Jan 14, 2022 12:34 MST)
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Revenue for FY 2021-22 Budget Adjustments
The following chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for fiscal year 2022.
Projections for fiscal year 2021 were better than expected, while projections for fiscal year 2022
continue to trend above budget. Sales tax for the first quarter was well above budget and the
prior year. Franchise tax is lagging below budget from a decrease in water franchise ($250,000)
and telephone ($150,000) franchise taxes.
Other notable increases are licenses are above budget driven by increases in airport parking taxes
and innkeepers tax. Permits remain very strong with increases in plan check fees and building
permits. Field reservations, land leases and building leases are leading to an increase in Charges,
Fees and Rentals.
Notable decreases include a decrease in moving violations and justice court fines and fire
reimbursement from the airport is also below budget.
FY21-22 Variance
Annual Revised Favorable
Revenue Budget Forecast (Unfavorable)
Property Taxes 112,726,044 112,726,044 -
Sales and Use Tax 89,556,472 93,436,473 3,880,001
Franchise Tax 12,102,129 11,700,054 (402,075)
PILOT Taxes 1,562,041 1,562,041 -
TOTAL TAXES 215,946,686 219,424,612 3,477,926
License and Permits 29,904,360 34,561,893 4,657,533
Intergovernmental 4,644,018 5,166,761 522,743
Interest Income 1,271,153 1,271,153 -
Fines & Forfeiture 3,474,455 3,425,328 (49,127)
Parking Meter Collection 2,693,555 2,693,555 -
Charges and Services 3,934,570 4,252,996 318,426
Miscellaneous Revenue 3,372,272 3,329,733 (42,539)
Interfund Reimbursement 22,032,892 21,523,465 (509,427)
Transfers 21,079,600 21,079,601 1
TOTAL W/OUT SPECIAL TAX 308,353,561 316,729,097 8,375,536
Sales and Use Tax - 1/2 cent 35,600,001 38,000,000 2,399,999
Sales and Use Tax - County Option - - -
TOTAL GENERAL FUND 343,953,562 354,729,097 10,775,535
With the completion of the CAFR fund balance would be projected as follows for FY2021 and FY2022:
With the use of fund balance from this budget amendment fund balance is projected to be at 21.29%.
FOF GF Only TOTAL FOF GF Only TOTAL
Beginning Fund Balance 6,625,050 82,617,126 89,242,176 12,114,190 104,171,780 116,285,970
Budgeted Change in Fund Balance 2,924,682 (7,810,302) (4,885,620) (2,879,483) (15,335,334) (18,214,817)
Prior Year Encumbrances (3,733,743) (6,165,453) (9,899,196) (1,879,654) (10,259,789) (12,139,443)
Estimated Beginning Fund Balance 5,815,989 68,641,371 74,457,360 7,355,053 78,576,657 85,931,710
Beginning Fund Balance Percent 14.51%23.16%22.13%18.22%24.71%23.98%
Year End CAFR Adjustments
Revenue Changes - - - - - -
Expense Changes (Prepaids, Receivable, Etc.) - (5,676,583) (5,676,583) - (7,535,897) (7,535,897)
Fund Balance w/ CAFR Changes 5,815,989 62,964,788 68,780,777 7,355,053 71,040,760 78,395,813
Final Fund Balance Percent 14.51%21.24%20.44%18.22%22.34%21.88%
Budget Amendment Use of Fund Balance (1,000,000) (15,858,313) (16,858,313)
BA#1 Revenue Adjustment - - - -
BA#1 Expense Adjustment - - 5,138,235 5,138,235
BA#2 Revenue Adjustment - - 490,847 490,847
BA#2 Expense Adjustment - - (986,298) (986,298)
BA#3 Revenue Adjustment - - - -
BA#3 Expense Adjustment - (1,000,000) (1,000,000) (2,000,000)
BA#4 Revenue Adjustment - - 1,508,044 1,508,044
BA#4 Expense Adjustment - - (4,242,779) (4,242,779)
BA#5 Revenue Adjustment - - 400,000 400,000
BA#5 Expense Adjustment - - (400,000) (400,000)
BA#6 Revenue Adjustment - - - -
BA#6 Expense Adjustment - - (1,997,761) (1,997,761)
BA#7 Revenue Adjustment - - - -
BA#7 Expense Adjustment - - - -
Change in Revenue 7,298,201 10,388,598 17,686,799 - - -
Fund Balance Budgeted Increase - - - - - -
- - Adjusted Fund Balance 12,114,190 57,495,073 69,609,263 6,355,053 69,951,048 76,306,101
Adjusted Fund Balance Percent 30.21%19.40%20.69%15.75%22.00%21.29%
Projected Revenue 40,095,707 296,422,894 336,518,601 40,359,137 317,980,599 358,339,736
2021 Projection 2022 Projection
The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $20,340,359.75 of revenue and
expense of $23,462,007.75. The amendment proposes changes in seven funds, including the
addition of 16 new FTEs. The amendment also includes the use of $2,701,648.00 from the
General Fund fund balance. The proposal includes 35 initiatives for Council review.
A summary spreadsheet document, outlining proposed budget changes is attached. The
Administration requests this document be modified based on the decisions of the Council.
The budget opening is separated in eight different categories:
A. New Budget Items
B. Grants for Existing Staff Resources
C. Grants for New Staff Resources
D. Housekeeping Items
E. Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
F. Donations
G. Council Consent Agenda Grant Awards
I. Council Added Items
PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ______ of 2022
Sixth amendment to the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including
the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2021-2022
In June of 2021, the Salt Lake City Council adopted the final budget of Salt Lake City,
Utah, including the employment staffing document, effective for the fiscal year beginning July 1,
2021 and ending June 30, 2022, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-118 of the
Utah Code.
The City’s Budget Director, acting as the City’s Budget Officer, prepared and filed with
the City Recorder proposed amendments to said duly adopted budget, including the amendments
to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes specifically
stated herein, copies of which are attached hereto, for consideration by the City Council and
inspection by the public.
All conditions precedent to amend said budget, including the employment staffing
document as provided above, have been accomplished.
Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the final budget of
Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, as approved, ratified and finalized
by Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 32 of 2021.
SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The budget amendments, including
amendments to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes
specifically stated herein, attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance shall be, and the
same hereby are adopted and incorporated into the budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the
amendments to the employment staffing document described above, for the fiscal year beginning
2
July 1, 2021 and ending June 30, 2022, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-128
of the Utah Code.
SECTION 3. Filing of copies of the Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is
authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said budget amendments, including
amendments to the employment staffing document, in the office of said Budget Officer and in
the office of the City Recorder which amendments shall be available for public inspection.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon adoption.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of __________, 2022.
________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to the Mayor on __________________
Mayor’s Action: ____ Approved ____ Vetoed
_________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. _________ of 2022.
Published: ___________________.
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved As To Form
Senior City Attorney
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
1 Suazo Membership GF - 25,000.00 - - Ongoing -
2 Move Grants Manager from ARPA to GF
Funding
GF - 66,000.00 - - Ongoing 1.00
2 Move Grants Manager from ARPA to GF
Funding
Misc Grants - (80,000.00) - - Ongoing (1.00)
3 Healthcare Innovation - Biohive GF - 50,000.00 - - One-time -
4 Fix the Bricks Grant - Transfer Grant
Funded PCN
GF - - - - Ongoing -
5 Additional Sergeant for Special Victims
Unit
GF - 81,671.00 - - Ongoing 1.00
5 Additional Sergeant for Special Victims
Unit
GF - 54,300.00 - - One-time -
5 Additional Sergeant for Special Victims
Unit
Fleet 49,500.00 49,500.00 - - One-time -
5 Additional Sergeant for Special Victims
Unit
IMS 4,800.00 4,800.00 - - One-time -
6 Police Access Control Upgrade and Support GF - 214,538.00 - - One-time -
6 Police Access Control Upgrade and Support IMS 214,538.00 214,538.00 - - One-time -
7 Fireworks Budget GF - 25,000.00 - - One-time -
8 Violent Crimes Cops Hiring Grant City
Match
GF - 364,030.00 - - Ongoing 10.00
8 Violent Crimes Cops Hiring Grant City
Match
GF - 282,430.00 - - Ongoing -
8 Violent Crimes Cops Hiring Grant City
Match
GF - 535,000.00 - - One-time -
8 Violent Crimes Cops Hiring Grant City
Match
Fleet 495,000.00 495,000.00 - - One-time -
8 Violent Crimes Cops Hiring Grant City
Match
IMS 40,000.00 40,000.00 - - One-time -
9 Arts Council Staff GF - 175,000.00 - - Ongoing 3.00
10 Allen Part Plan CIP [Project Rescope]CIP - - One-time -
11 Executive Assistant in Mayors Office GF - 39,792.00 Ongoing 1.00
12 Citywide Equity Study GF - 90,000.00 One-time -
13 Fuel Cost Increases GF - 498,887.00 Ongoing -
13 Fuel Cost Increases Fleet 938,076.00 938,076.00 Ongoing -
14 COVID PPE GF - 200,000.00 One-time -
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Council ApprovedAdministration Proposed
Section A: New Items
1
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
1 ARPA HOME Admin and Planning Funds Misc Grants 176,660.00 176,660.00 - - One-time -
1 Interest Income on Bonding CIP 64,139.78 64,139.78 - - One-time -
1 Interest Income on Bonding CIP 80,976.97 80,976.97 - - One-time -
2 Housing Program Construction Costs Housing 1,100,000.00 1,100,000.00 - - One-time -
3 Reimburse Misc Grants for Unreimbursed
HUD HOPWA Funds
Misc Grants 32,495.00 - - - One-time -
3 Reimburse Misc Grants for Unreimbursed
HUD HOPWA Funds
Housing - 32,495.00 - - One-time -
4 Treasury ERAP 1 Reallocated Funds Misc Grants 3,000,000.00 3,000,000.00 - - One-time -
5 Treasury ERAP 2 Reallocated Funds Misc Grants 2,880,366.00 2,880,366.00 - - One-time
6 Annex Building Renovation - Moving Funds
from Misc Grants to CIP
Misc Grants - 500,000.00 - - One-time -
6 Annex Building Renovation - Moving Funds
from Misc Grants to CIP
CIP 500,000.00 500,000.00 - - One-time -
7 State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) Loan Debt Service 7,000,000.00 7,000,000.00 - - One-time -
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
1 UDOT Railroad Safety Grant CIP 86,750.00 86,750.00 - - One-time -
2 UDOT Railroad Safety Grant, Round 2 CIP 93,750.00 93,750.00 - - One-time -
3 Utah Dept. of Transportation, 600/700 N
FREQUENT TRANSIT NETWORK IMP
CIP 228,000.00 228,000.00 - - One-time -
3 Utah Dept. of Transportation, 600/700 N
FREQUENT TRANSIT NETWORK IMP
CIP (152,000.00) (152,000.00) - - One-time -
3 Utah Dept. of Transportation, 600/700 N
FREQUENT TRANSIT NETWORK IMP
CIP 152,000.00 152,000.00 - - One-time -
4 State of Utah, Governor's Office of
Economic Opportunity, Bonneville
Shoreline Trail
CIP 1,300,000.00 1,300,000.00 - - One-time -
4 State of Utah, Governor's Office of
Economic Opportunity, Bonneville
Shoreline Trail
CIP 1,304,682.00 1,304,682.00 - - One-time -
-
Council Approved
Section D: Housekeeping
Section F: Donations
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
Administration Proposed Council Approved
Administration Proposed
2
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
Consent Agenda #3
1 State of Utah, The Utah Highway Safety
Office, Distracted Driving Prevention
Program
Misc Grants 13,000.00 13,000.00 - - One-time -
2 State of Utah, The Utah Highway Safety
Office, Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety
Program
Misc Grants 9,690.00 9,690.00 - - One-time -
3 US Department of Justice, Community
Oriented Policing Services (COPS), FY21 De-
Escalation Training Solicitation
Misc Grants 92,320.00 92,320.00 - - One-time -
4 US Department of Justice, Community
Oriented Policing Services (COPS), FY21
Law Enforcement Mental Health and
Wellness
Misc Grants 59,360.00 59,360.00 - - One-time -
5 US Department of Justice, 2021 Bureau of
Justice Assistance Grant (JAG)
Misc Grants 340,246.00 340,246.00 - - One-time -
6 Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile
Justice (CCJJ) , State Asset Forfeiture
Grant (SAFG)
Misc Grants 10,000.00 10,000.00 - - One-time -
1 Utah State Office of Education, Child and
Adult Care Food Program - Youth After
School Programs
Misc Grants 46,000.00 46,000.00 - - One-time -
2 Marathon Petroleum Thriving
Communities Grant Program, Marathon
Petroleum Foundation
Misc Grants 100,000.00 100,000.00 - - One-time -
3 Mental Health First Responders, Utah
Department of Human
Services
Misc Grants 80,010.00 80,010.00 - - One-time -
Total of Budget Amendment Items 20,340,359.75 23,462,007.75 - - 15.00
Administration Proposed Council Approved
Section I: Council Added Items
Section G: Council Consent Agenda -- Grant Awards
Consent Agenda #4
3
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Revenue
Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
Total by Fund Class, Budget Amendment #6:
General Fund GF - 2,701,648.00 - - 16.00
Fleet Fund Fleet 1,482,576.00 1,482,576.00 - - -
IMS Fund IMS 259,338.00 259,338.00 - - -
Miscellaneous Grants Fund Misc Grants 6,840,147.00 7,227,652.00 - - (1.00)
Housing Fund Housing 1,100,000.00 1,132,495.00 - - -
Debt Service Fund Debt Service 7,000,000.00 7,000,000.00 - - -
CIP Fund CIP 3,658,298.75 3,658,298.75 - - -
- - -
Total of Budget Amendment Items 20,340,359.75 23,462,007.75 - - 15.00
Administration Proposed Council Approved
4
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Current Year Budget Summary, provided for information only
FY 2021-22 Budget, Including Budget Amendments
FY 2021-22
Adopted Budget BA #1 Total BA #2 Total BA #3 Total BA #4 Total BA #5 Total
^^ Total Through
BA#5 ^^
General Fund (FC 10)367,582,070 (5,138,235.00) 986,298.00 2,000,000.00 4,242,779.00 400,000.00 370,072,912.00
Curb and Gutter (FC 20)3,000 3,000.00
DEA Task Force Fund (FC 41)2,033,573 2,033,573.00
Misc Special Service Districts (FC 46)1,550,000 1,550,000.00
Street Lighting Enterprise (FC 48)5,699,663 7,098.00 5,706,761.00
Water Fund (FC 51)127,365,555 460,716.00 18,118.00 127,844,389.00
Sewer Fund (FC 52)268,213,796 221,826.00 7,941.00 268,443,563.00
Storm Water Fund (FC 53)19,201,013 19,705.00 2,278.00 19,222,996.00
Airport Fund (FC 54,55,56)706,792,500 1,350,949.00 39,790.00 708,183,239.00
Refuse Fund (FC 57)24,713,505 36,538.00 4,109.00 24,754,152.00
Golf Fund (FC 59)9,697,417 19,649.00 88,749.00 1,802,257.00 11,608,072.00
E-911 Fund (FC 60)4,056,856 4,056,856.00
Fleet Fund (FC 61)28,090,576 18,999.00 112,646.00 423,258.00 28,645,479.00
IMS Fund (FC 65)24,302,487 219,193.00 135,492.00 24,657,172.00
County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for
Transportation (FC 69)
5,307,142 5,307,142.00
CDBG Operating Fund (FC 71)5,341,332 5,341,332.00
Miscellaneous Grants (FC 72)18,684,617 10,427,551.76 1,522,743.00 11,151,215.48 3,447,000.00 45,233,127.24
Other Special Revenue (FC 73)273,797 273,797.00
Donation Fund (FC 77)2,752,565 2,752,565.00
Housing Loans & Trust (FC 78)16,121,000 16,121,000.00
Debt Service Fund (FC 81)31,850,423 26,165,000.00 58,015,423.00
CIP Fund (FC 83, 84 & 86)29,503,216 (150,753.00) 23,400,000.00 52,752,463.00
Governmental Immunity (FC 85)2,933,913 24,843.00 2,958,756.00
Risk Fund (FC 87)52,939,489 19,705.00 212,897.00 53,172,091.00
Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,755,009,505 7,688,537.76 2,559,683.00 2,000,000.00 67,605,134.48 3,847,000.00 1,838,709,860.24
5
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
^^ Total Through
BA#5 ^^ BA #6 Total
^^ Total Through
BA#6^^
General Fund (FC 10)370,072,912.00 2,701,648.00 372,774,560.00
Curb and Gutter (FC 20)3,000.00 3,000.00
DEA Task Force Fund (FC 41)2,033,573.00 2,033,573.00
Misc Special Service Districts (FC 46)1,550,000.00 1,550,000.00
Street Lighting Enterprise (FC 48)5,706,761.00 5,706,761.00
Water Fund (FC 51)127,844,389.00 127,844,389.00
Sewer Fund (FC 52)268,443,563.00 268,443,563.00
Storm Water Fund (FC 53)19,222,996.00 19,222,996.00
Airport Fund (FC 54,55,56)708,183,239.00 708,183,239.00
Refuse Fund (FC 57)24,754,152.00 24,754,152.00
Golf Fund (FC 59)11,608,072.00 11,608,072.00
E-911 Fund (FC 60)4,056,856.00 4,056,856.00
Fleet Fund (FC 61)28,645,479.00 1,482,576.00 30,128,055.00
IMS Fund (FC 65)24,657,172.00 259,338.00 24,916,510.00
County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for 5,307,142.00 5,307,142.00
CDBG Operating Fund (FC 71)5,341,332.00 5,341,332.00
Miscellaneous Grants (FC 72)45,233,127.24 7,227,652.00 52,460,779.24
Other Special Revenue (FC 73)273,797.00 273,797.00
Donation Fund (FC 77)2,752,565.00 2,752,565.00
Housing Loans & Trust (FC 78)16,121,000.00 1,132,495.00 17,253,495.00
Debt Service Fund (FC 81)58,015,423.00 7,000,000.00 65,015,423.00
CIP Fund (FC 83, 84 & 86)52,752,463.00 3,658,298.75 56,410,761.75
Governmental Immunity (FC 85)2,958,756.00 2,958,756.00
Risk Fund (FC 87)53,172,091.00 53,172,091.00
-
Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,838,709,860.24 23,462,007.75 - - - - 1,862,171,867.99
BA#4 and BA#5 remain open with the City Council.
Budget Manager
Analyst, City Council
Contingent Appropriation
6
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
1
Section A: New Items
A-1: Suazo Membership GF $25,000.00
Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Jolynn Walz, Ben Kolendar
For Questions Please Include: Jolynn Walz, Ben Kolendar, Randy Hillier
This funding would continue to allow Salt Lake City to be represented on the Suazo Board. According to the organization’s
website, “The Suazo Business Center is a business Resource committed to the development and empowerment of the
Latino/Hispanic and other underserved communities. We provide assistance to help existing and potential minority
entrepreneurs succeed and build wealth.” The Administration stated Economic Development would identify a staff person
to serve on the Board.
A-2: Move Grants Manager from ARPA to GF Funding GF $66,000.00
Misc Grants -$80,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Mary Beth Thompson
For Questions Please Include: Mary Beth Thompson , John Vuyk
The position associated with this move will be managing all grants, including ARPA. Since ARPA funds need to be
specifically dedicated, this position doesn’t qualify for ARPA funding and will need to be moved to and funded by the
General Fund.
A-3: Healthcare Innovation - Biohive GF $50,000.00
Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Jolynn Walz, Ben Kolendar
For Questions Please Include: Jolynn Walz, Ben Kolendar, Randy Hillier
Salt Lake City has focused a substantial amount of economic recovery efforts on the healthcare innovation industry as a
part of the Tech Lake City initiative. This industry has a strong presence in the City and has high growth potential. This
industry is particularly strategic for the City as these jobs are anchor ed with research and development and have high
potential for upward mobility. This funding will go towards a collaborative effort alongside industry partners to brand the
industry, highlight opportunities within it for underserved communities, and elevate apprenticeships, internships, and
upward career mobility.
A-4: Fix the Bricks Grant – Transfer Grant Funded
PCN GF $0.00
Department: Fire Prepared By: Clint Rasmussen
For Questions Please Include: Clint Rasmussen, Randy Hillier
Emergency Management recently integrated into the Fire Department. Its existing programs have improved, and new
projects are in the works. Emergency Management has several federal grants that it manages including "Fix the Bricks".
Part of this specific grant funds the salary/benefits of one FTE to help administer the program. It was determined that the
'Fix the Bricks' grant would be more appropriately administered in the Department of Community and Neighborhood's
Housing Stability.
This budget amendment would amend the staffing document to reflect the move of 1 PCN/FTE from Fire to Community
and Neighborhoods. As the FTE is funded through the grant, no transfer of budget needs to occur.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
2
A-5: Additional Sergeant for Special Victims Unit GF $81,671.00
GF $54,300.00
Fleet $49,500.00
IMS $4,800.00
Department: Police Prepared By: Shellie Dietrich, Jordan Smith
For Questions Please Include: Shellie Dietrich, Jordan Smith, Sandee Moore
Currently, the SVU Sergeant is supervising 12 detectives which is not manageable. SVU caseloads have continued to
increase and additional detectives have been assigned to the squad over the past few years in an effort to manage the
caseload. Also, over 700 Sexual Assault Kit Initiative (SAKI) kits were submitted a few years ago and the state lab has been
making good progress, now returning Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) hits at an increasingly rapid rate. Due to the
response of the State lab, we currently have over 400 CODIS hits from the SAKI kits producing cold case leads. These cases
need follow up and investigation in a timely manner which we cannot facilitate without additional resources.
The benefit of an additional Sergeant, outside rectifying the immense span of control currently handled by a single
Sergeant, is the ability to focus efforts on the SAKI and cold case queue. Separating the functions of the squad, overseen by
a second Sergeant, to investigate sex crimes committed against adults and children from cold cases, SAK cases, and lesser,
but still serious sex crimes (voyeurism, sexual battery, gross lewdness, etc.) would reduce individual caseloads and allow
for better case investigation of these crimes as well as increase our ability to make progress on the SAKI cases with CODIS
hits.
This request for an additional Sgt includes funding for fleet and IMS.
This request facilitates an immediate need and future budget requests may be considered for two additional SAKI cold case
detectives, overtime, or other resources to facilitate investigation of these cases in a timely manner.
A-6: Police Access Control Upgrade and Support GF $214,538.00
IMS $214,538.00
Department: Police Prepared By: Shellie Dietrich, Captain Teerlink
For Questions Please Include: Shellie Dietrich, Captain Teerlink, Sandee Moore, Aaron Bentley
Budget request for an update of the security access control system at PSB and ancillary PD facilities. The current system
needs to be replaced to prevent a critical failure of building security required for state compliance. PD has worked with
facilities to identify a state contracted vendor that will provide the hardware, software and support for access control. The
server that is specified in this system has capacity to add other city access control systems as the city system expands.
Ongoing cost for support is $45,000 per year and is included in the initial cost for the first yea r.
The Police Department has coordinated on this request with Facilities IMS and public works to ensure functionality for all
departments as the system is expanded throughout the city. This request is for the first phase of the implementation that
covers the police department system.
A-7: Fireworks Budget GF $25,000.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Gregg Evans
For Questions Please Include: Gregg Evans, Kristin Riker, John Vuyk
The Public Lands Department Community Events group is requesting $25,000 from General Funds to cover the annual
July firework shows that would occur during calendar year 2022. Due to the severe drought, we experienced this past
summer the City Council cut the firework funding "one -time" from the FY22 budget. Due to the firework show contract
requirements the FY22 show was already prepaid in March of FY21 to reserve the fireworks show in July of FY22. Cutting
the funding in FY22 actually impacts the FY23 firework shows.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
3
This budget amendment request would reinstate those funds and provide spending authority to purchase the firework
display in advance for the following fiscal year.
A-8: Violent Crimes Cops Hiring Grant City Match GF $364,030.00
GF $282,430.00
GF $535,000.00
Fleet $495,000.00
IMS $40,000.00
Department: Police Prepared By: Shellie Dietrich, Jordan Smith
For Questions Please Include: Shellie Dietrich, Jordan Smith, Sandee Moore
The COPS Hiring Grant was funded by DOJ in 2019 and accepted by the City and approved by City Council. A condition o f
the grant is that the 3-year project must be completed within a 5-year project period as extensions allow. This will require
hiring in January or February of 2022 to facilitate the 3-year project period within the 5 years allowed. The requested
budget would be the city portion of the hiring costs for FY 22. Funding would also be required in FY 23 and FY 24 . In FY
25, 6 months of funding would be the city portion and then the city would take on full budget for these 10 positions. The
total grant funding is $1,250,000 which will equate to approximately 25% of the cost over 3 years. The 10 officer positions
were identified to create a squad dedicated to addressing Violent Crime in the community. These positions, in conjunction
with the cooperative Project Safe Neighborhoods program, will have a major impact on the ability to proactively work to
reduce violent crime in the city by enforcement and prosecution.
A-9: Arts Council Staff GF $175,000.00
Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Jolynn Walz, Ben Kolendar
For Questions Please Include: Ben Kolendar, Lorena Riffo Jensen, Jolynn Walz, Randy Hillier
The Arts Council is in need of additional staffing support to accommodate duties shifted from the Mayor’s Advisor on Arts
& Culture role. In addition, challenges remain to keep up with current workload, fundraising needs due to ZAP loss of
qualifying expenditures, and new initiatives requested of the Arts Council. Attrition has been a challenge at the Arts
Council due to workload. The request is for 3.0 FTEs which is approximately $350,000 in ongoing expenses and
approximately $175,000 in FY22 if funded mid-year. The Arts Council currently has 6.5 FTE to run the full operations of a
non-profit, the City’s growing public art program (including maintenance), the city’s arts grants program, programming
such as Living Traditions and the Twilight Concert Series and serve as an ombudsman to the arts community.
A-10: Allen Park Plan CIP Project Rescope CIP $0.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Gregg Evans
For Questions Please Include: Kristin Riker, Lewis Kogan, Katherine Maus, Gregg Evans
Public Lands is requesting a budget amendment to revise the scope of submitted CIP application for FY 2021 -2022. The
original scope for Historic Structure Renovation and Activation at Allen Park included funding for structural and
occupancy analysis of historic structures; drawings, plans and cost estimates for reconstruction of the George Allen Home,
the "Rooster House," septic system removal, sewer line construction, water infrastructure, stabilization of exterior art
pieces, and pedestrian stairway connections; and reconstruction of lighting and driveways. The current scope also lists
reconstruction of the George Allen Home and "Rooster House" to serve as a small cafe with dining opportunities. Due to
initial public engagement and feedback, Public Lands is requesting a scope change to engage in robust community and
stakeholder engagement to create an Adaptive Reuse and Activation Plan for Allen Park which will determine the future
use of the structures. In order to preserve the strong community investment in the site, Public Lands believes it would be
necessary to engage in extensive public engagement to inform a plan that will guide future management decisions and
capital improvement projects in the Park. Public Lands is currently engaging with a consultant to complete a Cultural
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
4
Landscape Report, which will also influence the Adaptive Reuse and Activation Plan and be completed in a timely manner,
in conjunction with public engagement for the plan.
Funding for an Adaptive Reuse and Activation Plan for Allen Park was awarded in 2020 with reallocated emergency bond
funding. However, it was ultimately discovered that it was not legally permit ted for bond funding to be utilized for a non-
capital expense. Public Lands is currently utilizing the emergency bond funding for emergency repairs to minimize damage
to the structures and the property, including but not limited to roof repair, restoring e xternal power to select structures,
investigation and construction documentation for sewer and water line installation, failing appliance removal, septic
infrastructure removal, etc.
Project tasks within the new scope may include but are not limited to:
- Robust community engagement with key stakeholders, the Sugarhouse community, and the broader public
- Development of an Adaptive Reuse and Activation Plan, informed by the Cultural Landscape Report and public
engagement, to guide future management of the site including over-arching goals, specific projects, objectives and
prioritization
- Structural and occupancy analysis of the historic structures
- Development of conceptual and construction documents, and cost estimates for adaptive reuse and activation
projects listed in the Plan
- Investigation into the feasibility of Allen Park becoming a Historic Landmark Site
A-11: Executive Assistant in the Mayor’s Office GF $39,792.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: Dawn Valente, John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk
The budget proposes to increase staffing in the Mayor’s Office by one additional executive assistant. The budget is for five
month’s salary and costs for computers and other supplies.
A-12: Citywide Equity Study GF $90,000.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Kaletta Lynch, Mary Beth Thompson, John
Vuyk
The City has been working with Keen Independent Research to review equity practices in the City. The Administration is
seeking funding to continue to work with Keen in developing plans to bring equity to Salt Lake City. Funding will allow the
City to work with the vendor through this fiscal year to complete the plans.
A-13: Fuel Cost Increases GF $498,887.00
Fleet $938,076.00
Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dawn Valente, John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Lorna Vogt, Dawn Valente, Nancy Bean, Denise Sorensen, Mary Beth
Thompson, John Vuyk
The City has seen an increase in fuel cost. The budget will provide Fleet funding to purchase the required fuel for the
remainder of the fiscal year. The budget also proposes to transfer funding from personnel within the Police [$300,000]
and CAN [$12,622] Department to cover fuel increases. The budget also proposes additional funding from Non-
Departmental to cover the costs not covered by general fund department budgets.
The fuel increase has also impacted the Public Utilities, Sustainability, and Golf funds.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
5
A-14: COVID PPE GF $200,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: John Vuyk
For Questions Please Include: Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk, Lorna Vogt
The City’s supply of masks and other PPE to combat COVID is depleting. This request is for an additional $200,000 to
purchase additional supplies to keep citizens, visitors and employees safe in City owned buildings.
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
B-1: ARPA HOME Admin and Planning Funds Misc Grants $176,660.00
Department: CAN Prepared By: Tony Milner
For Questions Please Include: Tony Milner, Brent Beck, Randy Hillier, Melyn Osmond
HUD has authorized the City to access 5% ($176,659.75) of admin and planning funds of the City's 2021 HUD HOME -
ARPA award (total award, $3,533.195). HOME-ARPA funds are designated for housing opportunities for individuals
experiencing homelessness. These admin and planning funds will facilitate admin for existing City staff and expenses
related to the HUD-required HOME-ARPA Community Assessment. The Community Assessment will identify needs and
opportunities to help direct the HOME-ARPA funds. Please see attached funding agreement.
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
Section D: Housekeeping
D-1: Interest Income on Bonding CIP $64,139.78
CIP $80,976.97
Department: Finance Prepared By: Jared Jenkins
For Questions Please Include: Jared Jenkins, Brandon Bagley, Marina Scott, Mary Beth Thompson
The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2019A, were issued in October 2019 for the purpose of funding the reconstruction of
City streets. The total par amount of the bonds issued were $17,540,000. At the time the bonds were issued the proceeds
were deposited with the Trustee. Since then, the unspent bond proceeds have been earning interest. This amendment will
adjust the budget to reflect the actual proceeds available including accumulated interest from October 2020 through
August 2021.
The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020, were issued in September 2020 for the purpose of funding the reconstruction
of City streets. The total par amount of the bonds issued were $17,745,000. At the time the bonds were issued the proceeds
were deposited with the Trustee. Since then, the unspent bond proceeds have been earning interest. This amendment will
adjust the budget to reflect the actual proceeds available including accumulat ed interest from February 2021 through
August 2021.
D-2: Housing Program Construction Costs Housing $1,100,000.00
Department: CAN Prepared By: Tony Milner
For Questions Please Include: Tony Milner, Brent Beck, Randy Hillier, Suzanne Swanson
Recognize $1,100,000 in unbudgeted revenue for the purpose of offsetting increases in constructions costs for three
affordable single-family homes currently in development. This revenue was not included in the initial budget due to the
timing of other home sales in the Housing Program that generated the revenue.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
6
D-3: Reimburse Misc Grants for Unreimbursed HUD
HOPWA Funds Misc Grants $0.00
Housing $32,495.00
Department: CAN Prepared By: Tony Milner
For Questions Please Include: Tony Milner, Brent Beck, Randy Hillier, Suzanne Swanson
Finance discovered that $32,494.55 was paid out to a subgrantee in 2017, but never reimbursed from HUD for HOPWA
Cost Center 7261611. The HUD reimbursement deadline of three years has passed for these funds. Housing Stability has
identified unrestricted funds from 7800404 Bank Pool Clearing to make the City whole. This budget amendment will
facilitate the transfer of funds from a 78 Fund Class to a 72 Fund Class.
D-4: Treasury ERAP 1 Reallocated Funds Misc Grants $3,000,000.00
Department: CAN Prepared By: Tony Milner
For Questions Please Include: Tony Milner, Brent Beck, Randy Hillier, Suzanne Swanson
The Treasury has reallocated unspent Emergency Rent Assistance Program (ERAP) 1 funds set -aside for the State of Utah
by low-performing cities and made these funds available to apply for by high-performing cities, such as Salt Lake City.
These reallocated funds are for direct client assistance only.
To administer Salt Lake City’s initial ERAP 1 award, the City contracted with the State of Utah, Department of Workforce
Services’ (DWS) online Utah Rent Relief application portal, https://rentrelief.utah.gov/.
Coordinating with DWS, Housing Stability staff have determined that Salt Lake City could apply for $3,000,000 in
reallocated ERAP 1. These funds will further assist Salt Lake City residents with deposit, rent, utilities, rent arrears, and
utility arrears, again utilizing the Utah Rent Relief application portal.
Note: This new request is separate from, and does not affect, the City’s other Treasury ERAP 1 ($6,067,033) and ERAP 2
($4,800,559.40) awards.
See attached funding agreement.
(Note: 7262150-Treasury ERA Direct Financial Assistance, is the current Cost Center for ERAP 1 Direct Client Assistance)
D-5: Treasury ERAP 2 Reallocated Funds Misc Grants $2,880,366.00
Department: CAN Prepared By: Tony Milner
For Questions Please Include: Tony Milner, Brent Beck, Randy Hillier, Suzanne Swanson
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's second allocation of the American Rescue Plan Act, Treasury Emergency
Rent Assistance (ERAP) 2 funds, in the amount of $2,880,335.64, for the purpose of addressing housing stability for Salt
Lake City residents. See attached funding agreement. The City approved the first allocatio n of the ERAP 2 funds in BA1 of
FY 21-22, in the amount of $1,920,233.76. The City's total ERAP 2 award is $4,800,599.40.
BA1 included the following budget items for those funds: Direct Client Assistance $1,632,199, and Community Partner
Admin $288,034.76.
To administer Salt Lake City’s first and second allocations of ERAP 2, the City will contract with the State of Utah,
Department of Workforce Services’ (DWS) online Utah Rent Relief application portal, https://rentrelief.utah.gov/. The
City has previously and successfully contracted with DWS for the City’s ERAP 1 funds.
This budget amendment aligns with Treasury guidance on eligible activities and allowable percentage amounts for ERPA 2.
In addition to further supporting Direct Client Assistance (deposits, rent, utilities, rent arrears, and utility arrears), an d the
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
7
associated Community Partner Admin to facilitate the prop er distribution of these funds, Housing Stability is requesting
City Admin to support one (1) FTE, and funds to support Housing Stability services.
Re: the one (1) FTE: Currently, the City’s ERAP 1 and 2 funds are being administered by 1 PTE. This positio n is necessary
to facilitate the City administration, coordination, and compliance monitoring. This position was pervious approved by
Council with ERAP 1 funding. Since then, the administration of these funds has demonstrated that a FTE is required. This
one (1) requested position would be Grade 26, Community Development Grant Specialist, fully loaded for 39 months.
(April 2022 - Jun 2025, at $34.50 an hour [$215,280], plus benefits [$53,820].Total $269,100.) This position would be
fully funded by ERAP funding and would sunset when funding expires.
Re: Housing Stability services: According to the Treasury, eligible “Housing Stability” services include: Case management,
Eviction prevention, Eviction diversion programs, Mediation between landlords and tenants , Housing counseling, Fair
housing counseling, Housing navigators or promotors that help households access ERA programs or find housing,
Housing-related services for survivors of domestic abuse or human trafficking, Legal services or attorney’s fees related to
eviction proceedings and maintaining housing stability, Specialized services for individuals with disabilities or seniors tha t
support their ability to access or maintain housing. A public competitive process would receive applications from providers
for eligible Housing Stability services.
D-6: Annex Building Renovation – Moving Funds
from Misc Grants to CIP Misc Grants $500,000.00
CIP $500,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Randy Hillier
For Questions Please Include: Teresa Beckstrand, John Vuyk, Randy Hillier
In Budget Amendment #2, the Council added an item totaling $500,000 in grant funding to be used for Annex Building
Renovations. This amount was approved within the Miscellaneous Grants Fund. Since the associated annex building
renovation should be done through CIP, the budget needs to be moved.
D-7: State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) Loan Debt Service $7,000,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Brandon Bagley
For Questions Please Include: Marina Scott, Brandon Bagley, Jared Jenkins, Mary Beth Thompson
On December 6, 2021, the City and the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) entered into a loan agreement which
will be used to finance a portion of a neighborhood parking structure between 400 West and 500 West and 600 South and
700 South. The loan is expected to be repaid with funds allocated to the City by H.B. 244 (2021). The City has received
funds for the State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) Loan. This amendment creates the revenue budget for the receipt of loan
proceeds and the expenditure budget to disburse the proceeds for the project.
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
E-1: UDOT Railroad Safety Grant CIP $86,750.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Mary Beth Thompson, Jon Larsen, Orion Goff
The Dept. of Community & Neighborhood, Division of Engineering applied for and received $86,750 for the Utah Railroad
Safety Grant 2021 (round 1) for safety improvements to the railroad crossing at 4900 West 700 South.
Planned safety improvements include widening the roadway, improving sight distance by raising the street grade
approach, adding sidewalk on the south side of the crossing, adding bike lanes, and replacing the railroad crossing signals .
The funding plan is to request an additional $260,250 in the Utah Railroad Safety Grant 2021 Round 2 competition to
complete the funding package for the project.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
8
This grant has no match requirement. A public hearing was held 4/6/21 for the original grant application for this award.
E-2: UDOT Railroad Safety Grant, Round 2 CIP $93,750.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Mary Beth Thompson, Jon Larsen, Orion Goff
The Dept. of Community & Neighborhood, Division of Engineering applied for and received $93,750 for the Utah Railroad
Safety Grant 2021 (round 2) for safety improvements to the railroad crossing at 4900 West 700 South.
Planned safety improvements include widening the roadway, improving sight distance by raising the street grade
approach, adding sidewalk on the south side of the crossing, adding bike lanes, and replacing the railroad crossing signals.
This grant has no match requirement. A public hearing was held 12/7/21 for the original grant application for this award.
E-3: Utah Department of Transportation, 600/700 N
Frequent Transit Network Improvement CIP $228,000.00
CIP -$152,000.00
CIP $152,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Mary Beth Thompson, Jon Larsen, Orion Goff
Salt Lake City Division of Transportation nominated 600/700 North Frequent Transit Network Improvements (Near
Term) for $228,000 from the TTIF: Transit Projects funding.
The project installs approximately 20 new Level III transit shelters along 600/700 North from 2200 West to 300 West.
This grant has a match requirement of $152,000 coming from the Funding Our Futures sales tax transit funding. A public
hearing was held 4/7/20 for the original grant application for this award.
E-4: State of Utah, Governor’s Office of Economic
Opportunity, Bonneville Shoreline Trail CIP $1,300,000.00
Impact Fee $1,304,682.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Melyn Osmond
For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Mary Beth Thompson, Kristin Riker
The Salt Lake City Department of Public Lands received $1,300,000 for the Foothills Natural Area & Bonneville Shoreline
Trailhead Infrastructure Improvements.
The project proposes to construct five public access trailheads along the stretch of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail that runs
through the Salt Lake City foothills between Emigration Canyon and Davis County.
Proposed trailhead locations are: 1) Bonneville Boulevard near City Creek Canyon and U tah State Capitol, 2) Emigration
Canyon near This Is The Place Heritage Park, 3) Popperton Park near the University of Utah, 4) 18th Avenue in the upper
Avenues neighborhood, and 5) Victory Road northwest of the Utah State Capitol.
This grant has a match requirement of $1,300,000. Parks & Public Lands has committed matching funds is from parks
impact fees adopted in FY 2022 Capital Improvement Program for the Foothills Trailhead Development Phase II.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
9
A public hearing was held on 12/7/21 on the grant appl ication for this award.
Section F: Donations
Section G: Consent Agenda
Consent Agenda #3
G-1: State of Utah, The Utah Highway Safety Office, Distracted Driving
Prevention Program
Misc.
Grants $13,000.00
Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith / Melyn Osmond
The Police Department applied for and received a $13,000 grant from the Utah Highway Safety Office for the 2022
Distracted Driving Prevention Program.
The grant funding for overtime to conduct distracted driving enforcement/education shifts.
A Public Hearing was held on 4/20/21 for the grant application on this award.
G-2: State of Utah, The Utah Highway Safety Office, Bicycle and
Pedestrian Safety Program
Misc.
Grants $9,690.00
Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith/ Melyn Osmond
The Police Department applied for and received a $9,690 grant from the Utah Highway Safety Office for the 2022 Salt
Lake City Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program.
This award is to fund Crosswalk enforcement/education overtime and Youth bicycle rodeo overtime.
A Public Hearing was held on 4/20/21 for the grant application on this award.
G-3: U S Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services
(COPS), FY21 De-Escalation Training Solicitation
Misc.
Grants $92,320.00
Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith / Melyn Osmond
The Police Department applied for and received a $92,320 grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, Community
Oriented Policing Services through the FY21 Community Policing Development De-Escalation Training Program.
The grant will fund the Apex Officer Interactive Crisis Intervention, De-Escalation and Force Options Virtual Reality
Training Simulator. It will also provide funding for up to 20 officers to attend an ICAT (Integrating Communications,
Assessment, and Tactics) de-escalation train-the-trainer course as well as training staff overtime/supplies to implement
the ICAT and virtual reality curriculums.
The Apex Officer Virtual Reality Training System is a comprehensive solution that is designed to allow trainers the ability
to give presentations and classes, conduct interactive testing and assessment, and provide immersive, hands -on scenario-
based exercises with detailed debriefing and after-action review.
ICAT is a training program that provides first responding police officers with the tools, skills, and options they need to
successfully and safely defuse a range of critical incidents. The only costs b eing funded are for per diem, remaining travel
costs will be covered by other funding sources.
A Public Hearing was held on 10/5/21 for the grant application on this award.
G-4: U S Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services
(COPS), FY21 Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness
Misc.
Grants $59,360.00
Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith/ Melyn Osmond
The Police Department applied for and received a $59,360 grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, Community
Oriented Policing Services through the FY21 Community Policing Development Law Enforcement Mental Health and
Wellness Act.
The grant will fund: Training for Employee Wellness and Peer Support Teams, Wellness Initiative and Chaplain Program
Uniforms, Program Education and Marketing Materials, Class Supplies, Program Evaluation, Instructor Fees for Family
Wellness Workshops, and Overtime.
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
10
A Public Hearing was held on 9/7/21 for the grant application on this award.
G-5: US Department of Justice, 2021 Bureau of Justice Assistance Grant
(JAG)
Misc.
Grants $340,246.00
Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith / Melyn Osmond
The Police Department applied for and received a grant award from the U.S. Department of Justice under the 2021 Edward
Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program. The total grant award is $340,246. Of that total the City will
subaward $57,054.50 to the Unified Police Department and $57,054.50 to Salt Lake County (Sheriff's Office). The
subaward amounts are determined by a federal funding allocation formula.
The Police Department will use its award to provide training for sworn and civilian personnel, to support directed
community policing overtime, and to purchase the following: a tactical robot, less lethal shotguns and ammo, tactical
operation center throw phone capability enhancements, a laptop for Crime Lab FARO software, vest carriers and plates for
Crime Lab personnel, LEAPS (Law Enforcement Automated Personnel Software), and camera systems for the Internal
Affairs Unit and the HOP physical training facility.
No Match is required.
A Public Hearing was held on 10/5/21 for the grant application on this award.
G-6: Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), State
Asset Forfeiture Grant (SAFG)
Misc.
Grants $10,000.00
Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith / Melyn Osmond
The Salt Lake City Police Department applied for additional grant funding and was awarded $10,000 from the State of
Utah, Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), under the State Asset Forfeiture Grant (SAFG) program. The
State is combining these new funds with the previously funded amount of $1,500.
The funds will be used for an overt pole camera kit, Narcan nasal spray, and drug prevention/resource cards
A public hearing was held 9/7/21 for this grant application.
Consent Agenda #4
G-1: Utah State Office of Education, Child and Adult Care Food
Program - Youth After School Programs
Misc
Grants $46,000.00
Department: CAN (Youth & Family) Prepared By: Kim Thomas / Melyn Osmond
The Youth & Family Division of Public Services applied for and received a continuation grant offered annually by the Utah
State Office of Education, under the Child and Adult Care Food Program. These funds are available to youth service
providers as part of the At-Risk Snack Program to reimburse for the costs of snacks served to children participating in the
after-school programs. Central City Rec. Center, Fairmont Park, Glendale Library, Liberty Park, Northwest Rec. Center,
Ottinger Hall, the Youth and Family Division Office, and Sorenson Campus will receive reimbursement directly through
the State Office of Education and will receive up to $46,000, based on qualified snack expenses. SLC is reimbursed on a
monthly basis and only qualified healthy snacks and meals served to children participating in the after-school
enrichment/education activities during the afterschool program hours are eligible for reimbursement. A public hearing will
be held for the grant application.
G-2: Marathon Petroleum Thriving Communities Grant Program,
Marathon Petroleum Foundation
Misc
Grants $100,000.00
Department: CAN (Youth & Family) Prepared By: Ken Perko / Melyn Osmond
The Division of Youth & Family Services applied for and received $100,000 in grant funding for the Marathon Petroleum
Thriving Communities Program. The funding will be used to purchase two 14 -passenger vans that will be used by program
staff to transport youth participants from a variety of neighborhood elementary schools to the YouthCity Northwest
Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
11
Recreation center site for afterschool programming. No match is required. A public hearing will be held for this grant
application.
G-3: Mental Health First Responders, Utah Department of Human
Services
Misc
Grants $80,010.00
Department: Human Resources Prepared By: Trent Steele / Melyn Osmond
The Human Resource Dept. applied for and received $80,010 in grant funding for the Mental Health First Responders
grant program from Utah Dept. of Human Services. The funding will be used to increase the capacity of the City's existing
EAP (Employee Assistance Program), targeting first responders. The two clinicians currently under contract with
ComPsych will increase their hours of availability to provide onsite, in person, telephone, and virtual counselling
particularly emergency services for individuals who may be in crisis. The total hours will increase by 815 over the course of
the pilot projecting. No match is required. A public hearing will be held for this grant application.
Section I: Council Added Items
Impact Fees ‐ Summary Confidential
Data pulled 12/13/2021
Unallocated Budget Amounts: by Major Area
Area Cost Center UnAllocated
Cash Notes:
Impact fee - Police 8484001 471,211$ A
Impact fee - Fire 8484002 1,644,113$ B
Impact fee - Parks 8484003 11,709,246$ C
Impact fee - Streets 8484005 6,585,173$ D
20,409,744$
Expiring Amounts: by Major Area, by Month
202107 (Jul2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202108 (Aug2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202109 (Sep2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202110 (Oct2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Current Month
202111 (Nov2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202112 (Dec2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202201 (Jan2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202202 (Feb2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202203 (Mar2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202204 (Apr2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202205 (May2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202206 (Jun2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202207 (Jul2022)2023Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202208 (Aug2022)2023Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202209 (Sep2022)2023Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202210 (Oct2022)2023Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202211 (Nov2022)2023Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202212 (Dec2022)2023Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202301 (Jan2023)2023Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202302 (Feb2023)2023Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202303 (Mar2023)2023Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202304 (Apr2023)2023Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202305 (May2023)2023Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202306 (Jun2023)2023Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202307 (Jul2023)2024Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202308 (Aug2023)2024Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202309 (Sep2023)2024Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202310 (Oct2023)2024Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202311 (Nov2023)2024Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202312 (Dec2023)2024Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202401 (Jan2024)2024Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202402 (Feb2024)2024Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202403 (Mar2024)2024Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202404 (Apr2024)2024Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202405 (May2024)2024Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202406 (Jun2024)2024Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total, Currently Expiring through June 2021 0$ -$ -$ -$ 0$
Fiscal
Quarter
E = A + B + C + D
Police Fire Parks Streets
Total
FY 2023Calendar
Month
FY 2022FY 2024
Impact Fees Confidential
Data pulled 12/13/2021 AAA BBB CCC DDD = AAA - BBB - CCC
Police Allocation Budget
Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances
YTD
Expenditures
Allocation Remaining
Appropriation
Values
Description Cost Center
Sum of Police Allocation
Budget Amended
Sum of Police Allocation
Encumbrances Sum of Police Allocation YTD
Sum of Police Allocation Remaining
Appropriation
ReimbExcessPoliceCapacity IF 8422800 1,898,497$ -$ 1,898,497$ -$
Police'sConsultant'sContract 8419205 3,565$ -$ 3,565$ -$
Sugarhouse Police Precinct 8417016 10,331$ 10,331$ -$ -$
PolicePrecinctLandAquisition 8419011 239,836$ 239,836$ -$ -$
Eastside Precint 8419201 21,639$ 21,639$ -$ -$ A
Public Safety Building Replcmn 8405005 14,068$ 14,068$ -$ 0$
Police Refunds 8418013 -$ -$ (3,588)$ 3,588.33$
Police Impact Fee Refunds 8421102 338,448$ -$ 68,100$ 270,348$
Grand Total 2,526,385$ 285,875$ 1,966,574$ 273,937$
Fire Allocation Budget
Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Allocation Remaining
Appropriation
Values
Description Cost Center
Sum of Fire Allocation
Budget Amended
Sum of Fire Allocation
Encumbrances Sum of Fire Allocation YTD E
Sum of Fire Allocation Remaining
Appropriation
Fire refunds 8416007 82,831$ -$ -$ 82,830.52$
Fire Station #14 8415001 6,083$ 6,083$ -$ -$
Fire Station #14 8416006 44,612$ -$ -$ 44,612$
Fire Station #3 8415002 1,568$ -$ -$ 1,568.09$
Fire Station #3 8416009 565$ 96$ -$ 469$
Study for Fire House #3 8413001 15,700$ -$ -$ 15,700$
Fire'sConsultant'sContract 8419202 4,941$ 3,021$ 1,862$ 58$
FY20 FireTrainingFac. 8420431 56,031$ -$ -$ 56,031$ B
Grand Total 212,331$ 9,200$ 1,862$ 201,268$
Parks Allocation Budget
Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Allocation Remaining
Appropriation
Values
Description Cost Center
Sum of Parks Allocation
Budget Amended
Sum of Parks Allocation
Encumbrances Sum of Parks Allocation YTD
Sum of Parks Allocation Remaining
Appropriation
Cnty #2 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420426 88$ -$ 88$ -$
Parks and Public Lands Compreh 8417008 7,500$ -$ 7,500$ -$
Fairmont Park Lighting Impr 8418004 49,752$ 12,155$ 37,597$ -$
Fisher Carriage House 8420130 1,098,764$ 1,038,968$ 59,796$ -$
FY Warm Springs Off Leash 8420132 20,411$ -$ 20,411$ -$
Park'sConsultant'sContract 8419204 4,857$ 2,596$ 2,219$ 42$
Folsom Trail/City Creek Daylig 8417010 146$ -$ -$ 146$
Cwide Dog Lease Imp 8418002 23,530$ 23,000$ -$ 530$
Rosewood Dog Park 8417013 1,110$ -$ -$ 1,110$
Jordan R 3 Creeks Confluence 8417018 1,570$ -$ -$ 1,570$
Waterpark Redevelopment Plan 8421402 224,247$ 188,467$ 34,134$ 1,646$ C
9line park 8416005 21,958$ 19,702$ -$ 2,256$
Jordan R Trail Land Acquisitn 8417017 2,946$ -$ -$ 2,946$
JR Boat Ram 8420144 15,561$ -$ 7,763$ 7,798$
Rich Prk Comm Garden 8420138 12,795$ 4,328$ -$ 8,467$
Redwood Meadows Park Dev 8417014 9,350$ -$ -$ 9,350$
ImperialParkShadeAcct'g 8419103 10,830$ -$ -$ 10,830$
Park refunds 8416008 11,796$ -$ -$ 11,796.28$
IF Prop Acquisition 3 Creeks 8420406 58,014$ -$ 1,905$ 56,109$
Parks Impact Fee Refunds 8418015 101,381$ -$ -$ 101,381.06
UTGov Ph2 Foothill Trails 8420420 135,084$ 21,169$ 1,355$ 112,560$
FY20 Bridge to Backman 8420430 722,920$ 571,809$ 3,343$ 147,769$
Three Creeks West Bank NewPark 8422403 150,736$ -$ -$ 150,736$
9Line Orchard 8420136 195,045$ 32,650$ -$ 162,395$
RAC Playground with ShadeSails 8422415 180,032$ -$ -$ 180,032$
Fisher House Exploration Ctr 8421401 523,889$ 284,846$ 11,297$ 227,746$
Cnty #1 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420424 388,477$ 59,106$ 64,495$ 264,877$
Trailhead Prop Acquisition 8421403 275,000$ -$ -$ 275,000$
Bridge to Backman 8418005 290,276$ 10,285$ 4,515$ 275,475$
Parley's Trail Design & Constr 8417012 327,678$ -$ -$ 327,678$
Historic Renovation AllenParK 8422410 420,000$ -$ -$ 420,000$
SLC Foothills Land Acquisition 8422413 425,000$ -$ -$ 425,000$
Wasatch Hollow Improvements 8420142 489,688$ 64,333$ -$ 425,355$
Jordan Prk Event Grounds 8420134 431,000$ -$ -$ 431,000$
Jordan Park Pedestrian Pathway 8422414 510,000$ -$ -$ 510,000$
Green loop 200 E Design 8422408 610,000$ -$ -$ 610,000$
Marmalade Park Block Phase II 8417011 1,094,430$ 8,302$ 25,921$ 1,060,208$
SLCFoothillsTrailheadDevelpmnt 8422412 1,304,682$ -$ -$ 1,304,682$
Pioneer Park 8419150 3,343,904$ 107,850$ 121,172$ 3,114,882$
GlendaleWtrprk MstrPln&Rehab 8422406 3,200,000$ 21,800$ -$ 3,178,200$
Grand Total 16,694,447$ 2,471,367$ 403,507$ 13,819,573$
Streets Allocation Budget
Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Allocation Remaining
Appropriation
Values
Description Cost Center
Sum of Street Allocation
Budget Amended
Sum of Street Allocation
Encumbrances Sum of Street Allocation YTD
Sum of Street Allocation Remaining
Appropriation
700 South Reconstruction 8415004 2,449$ -$ 2,449$ -$
9 Line Central Ninth 8418011 152,500$ 139,280$ 13,220$ -$
Trans Master Plan 8419006 13,000$ 13,000$ -$ -$
500/700 S Street Reconstructio 8412001 32,718$ 16,691$ 16,027$ -$
Trans Safety Improvements 8419007 95,653$ 20,953$ 73,999$ 700$ D
Transportation Safety Improvem 8417007 1,444$ -$ -$ 1,444$
Gladiola Street 8406001 16,109$ 13,865$ -$ 2,244$
Urban Trails FY22 IF 8422619 6,500$ -$ -$ 6,500$
Street'sConsultant'sContract 8419203 29,817$ 17,442$ -$ 12,374$
Corridor Transformations IF 8422608 25,398$ -$ -$ 25,398$
900 South 9Line RR Cross IF 8422604 28,000$ -$ -$ 28,000$
1700S Corridor Transfrmtn IF 8422622 35,300$ -$ -$ 35,300$
Complete Street Enhancements 8420120 35,392$ -$ -$ 35,392$
200S TransitCmpltStrtSuppl IF 8422602 37,422$ -$ -$ 37,422$
Transp Safety Improvements 8420110 58,780$ 20,697$ -$ 38,083$
1300 S Bicycle Bypass (pedestr 8416004 42,833$ -$ -$ 42,833$
Transportatn Safety Imprvmt IF 8422620 44,400$ -$ -$ 44,400$
Local Link Construction IF 8422606 50,000$ -$ -$ 50,000$
900 S Signal Improvements IF 8422615 70,000$ -$ -$ 70,000$
400 South Viaduct Trail IF 8422611 90,000$ -$ -$ 90,000$
Neighborhood Byways IF 8422614 104,500$ -$ -$ 104,500$
Indiana Ave/900 S Rehab Design 8412002 124,593$ -$ -$ 124,593$
Bikeway Urban Trails 8418003 200,000$ -$ 12,484$ 187,516$
TransportationSafetyImprov IF 8421500 302,053$ -$ -$ 302,053$
IF Complete Street Enhancement 8421502 625,000$ -$ -$ 625,000$
Street Improve Reconstruc 20 8420125 2,250,220$ 290,460$ 1,216,451$ 743,309$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8419008 221,688$ 213,483$ 8,205$ -$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8420105 300,000$ 300,000$ -$ -$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8421501 875,000$ 87,063$ -$ 787,937$
Grand Total 5,967,404$ 1,155,677$ 1,416,728$ 3,394,999$
Total 25,400,567$ 3,922,119$ 3,788,672$ 17,689,776$
E = A + B + C + D
TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE
UnAllocated
Budget
Amount
8484001
471,211$
$1,644,113
20,409,744$
8484002
8484003
8484005
11,709,246$
6,585,173$
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: Allison Rowland
Budget and Policy Analyst
DATE:March 22, 2022
RE: ORDINANCE: SPECIAL EVENT PERMITS OF LESS THAN 31 DAYS
MOTION 1 – ADOPT ORDINANCE
I move that the Council adopt the ordinance amendments that would extend the maximum length of a
special event permit for park use from 20 to 31 days, provided the mayor approves the event for a
reason identified in writing.
MOTION 2 – NOT ADOPT
I move that the Council not adopt the ordinance amendments that would extend the maximum length
of a special event permit for park use from 20 to 31 days, and proceed to the next agenda item.
1
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ______ of 2022
(Sale of significant parcels of real property and removal of lands
from the open space lands inventory)
An ordinance amending Section 2.58.040 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the sale
of significant parcels of real property, and Section 2.90.070 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating
to the removal of lands from the open space lands inventory.
WHEREAS, the city desires to make certain changes relating to an exemption, for certain
special events, from the mandatory procedures of those sections; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, desires to amend Section 2.58.040
and Section 2.90.070 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to such changes.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah that:
SECTION 1. Section 2.58.040 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the sale of
significant parcels of real property, is amended as follows:
2.58.040: SALE OF SIGNIFICANT PARCELS OF REAL PROPERTY; NOTICE AND
HEARING:
A. A significant parcel of real property owned by the City or any significant legal interest
therein shall not be sold, traded, leased or otherwise conveyed or encumbered until the
City has provided reasonable notice to all interested parties and held at least one public
hearing on the proposed conveyance as set forth herein.
B. Reasonable notice of the proposed conveyance shall include the following:
1. Notice of the proposed conveyance shall be mailed to all abutting property owners.
2. Notice of the proposed conveyance shall be delivered to the Office of the City Council,
posted in the Office of the City Recorder, delivered to a local media representative, and
posted on the City's website.
C. No significant parcel of City owned real property identified in section 2.58.035, including
table 2.58.035C, of this chapter may be conveyed until after a public hearing has been held
before one or more of the following as may be applicable: the Planning Commission, the
Airport Board, the Public Utilities Advisory Committee, the Golf Enterprise Fund
2
Advisory Board, or the Parks, Natural Lands, Trails, and Urban Forestry Advisory Board.
D. In addition to the public hearing required above, the City Council may also request a
public hearing before the conveyance of the property. Any request for a hearing before the
City Council must be delivered to the Office of the Mayor no less than fifteen (15) days
after delivery of the notice to the Office of the City Council pursuant to subsection B2 of
this section. If no request for a hearing is made within that time period, the City Council
shall be deemed to have waived any right to request a hearing.
If a written call for hearing has been made by the City Council, the Mayor or his or her
designee shall attend the hearing to hear and consider comments upon proposals to convey
the property specified in the notice. The hearing shall take place before, after or in
conjunction with a regularly scheduled City Council meeting, as determined by the Mayor.
E. Any notice of a proposed conveyance of a significant parcel of City owned real property
shall specify the following:
1. A description of the property to be conveyed or encumbered;
2. The nature of the proposed conveyance or encumbrance, whether the property is to be
sold, traded or encumbered, including the nature of the conveyance if the property is to
be sold, or if a trade or lease of property is contemplated, a brief summary of the
proposed transaction;
3. Persons to whom interests are to be conveyed;
4. Any consideration tendered;
5. The name of the person, department or entity requesting such action;
6. The basis upon which the value of the interest has been determined by the City;
7. The date, time and location of the public hearing to be held before the Planning
Commission, Airport Board, Public Utilities Advisory Committee, Golf Enterprise
Fund Advisory Board, or Parks, Natural Lands, Trails, and Urban Forestry Advisory
Board, as applicable. The notice shall further state that interested persons may appear
and comment upon the proposal.
F. The conveyance or encumbrance of a significant parcel of real property of the City may be
finalized:
1. By the Mayor, at his/her discretion following notice and any public hearings required
by this section; or
2. By the Mayor, if the transfer is revocable and the Mayor has determined that an
unanticipated combination of facts and conditions of pressing necessity has emerged
3
that requires that action be taken before a City Council hearing. Such conditions shall
not be deemed to arise unless it appears that delay from the notice or a City Council
hearing would produce:
a. Great or irreparable injury to persons seeking the conveyance or encumbrance, with
negligible impact upon City interests;
b. Serious detriment to the social or economic interest of the community as whole; or
3. Substantial economic loss to the City.
G. Any decision by the Mayor to forego the City Council hearing provisions of this section
shall be made in writing to the City Council, stating the specific reasons upon which the
decision was based.
H. The following shall be exempt from the mandatory procedures of this section:
1. The leasing of existing buildings, infrastructure, or facilities;
2. Special events lasting (a) less than twenty-one (21) days or (b), with the approval of the
Mayor for a reason identified by the Mayor in writing, more than twenty (20) days but
less than thirty-one (31) days;
3. The leasing of recreation areas in accordance with their intended use;
4. The selling of burial rights in the Salt Lake City Cemetery; and
5. The granting of easements or other rights that service the property, including grants in
connection with utilities or safety equipment such as traffic signal poles. Any such
easement or use right must be primarily for the benefit of the City. With respect to open
space land under chapter 2.90 of this title, such easement or use right may be granted
only with the approval of the City's Open Space Lands Manager.
SECTION 2. Section 2.90.070 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the removal of lands
from the open space lands inventory, is amended as follows:
2.90.070: REMOVAL OF LANDS FROM THE OPEN SPACE LANDS INVENTORY:
A. Open space lands, conservation easements or other interests in open space land placed in
the open space lands inventory shall remain in the inventory in perpetuity unless: 1) they
are transferred to a qualified public or nonprofit land conservation entity; or 2) a sale,
conversion from undeveloped open space land to developed open space land, exchange, or
other transfer of the land, conservation easement or other interest in land is approved by
the mayor, subsequent to the following mandatory procedures:
4
1. Any proposal to sell or transfer open space land must be in writing, signed by the
mayor, and must include a description of the land to be sold or transferred, the purpose
of the proposed sale or transfer, the proposed purchaser of the land, the amount of the
proposed purchase price, the anticipated future use of the land, any anticipated change
in zoning that would be required to implement that proposed future use, and a statement
by the mayor explaining why the proposed sale or transfer of the open space land is in
the best interest of the city.
2. Holding a public hearing before the mayor and the city council.
3. Providing notice of the proposed sale or transfer and the public hearing by:
a. Publication of a notice for two (2) successive weeks, beginning at least thirty (30)
days in advance of the hearing, in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, no
less than one- fourth (1/4) page in size, with type no smaller than 18-point,
surrounded by a one-fourth inch (1/4") border, in a portion of the newspaper other
than where the legal notices and classified advertisements appear, containing the
information set forth in the form below;
b. Posting two (2) signs measuring at least two feet by three feet (2' x 3') each, on the
land proposed for sale or transfer at least thirty (30) days in advance of the hearing,
containing the information set forth in the form below; and
c. Mailing notice, at least thirty (30) days in advance of the hearing, to all property
owners of record within one thousand feet (1,000') of the land proposed for sale or
transfer, containing the information set forth in the form below.
d. Any notice published, posted or mailed pursuant to this section shall state
substantially as follows:
NOTICE OF PROPOSED SALE OR TRANSFER OF PUBLICLY OWNED
OPEN SPACE LAND
The Mayor of Salt Lake City is proposing to sell or transfer certain Open
Space Lands owned by Salt Lake City located at [street location] for $[proposed
amount of sale] to [proposed buyer] for future use as [proposed future use].
A public hearing on this proposal will be held before the Mayor and the City
Council on [date of hearing] at the Salt Lake City & County Building, 451 South
State Street, room 315, Salt Lake City, Utah, at [time of hearing] p.m.
Any individual wishing to address this proposal is invited to attend and to
express their views to the Mayor and the City Council at that hearing.
4. Following the public hearing, the city council may elect to conduct an advisory vote as
to the proposed sale or transfer of the open space land.
5. No sale or transfer of open space land may occur until at least six (6) months after the
conclusion of the public hearing in order to provide an opportunity to explore other
alternatives to the proposed sale or transfer of the open space land.
5
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved as to Form
Date: ___________________
By: _________________________
Boyd Ferguson, Senior City Attorney
B. Any open space lands, conservation easements or other interests in open space land: 1)
acquired by the city in partnership with other entities, units of government, or other parties;
or 2) received by donation, bequest, devise, or dedication, may only be authorized for sale,
conversion from undeveloped open space land to developed open space land, exchange or
other transfer if such action is allowed for in the instrument under which the open space
land, conservation easement or other interest in open space land was conveyed to, or
acquired by, the city.
C. The following shall be exempt from the mandatory procedures of this section:
1. The leasing of existing buildings, infrastructure, or facilities;
2. Special events lasting (a) less than twenty-one (21) days or (b), with the approval of the
mayor for a reason identified by the mayor in writing, more than twenty (20) days but
less than thirty-one (31) days;
3. The leasing of recreation areas in accordance with their intended use;
4. The selling of burial rights in the Salt Lake City Cemetery.
5. The granting of easements or other rights that service the property, including grants in
connection with utilities or safety equipment such as traffic signal poles. Any such
easement or use right must be primarily for the benefit of the city. With respect to open
space land under this chapter, such easement or use right may be granted only with the
approval of the city's open space lands manager.
SECTION 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately after it has been published or
posted in accordance with Utah Code section 10-3-711 and recorded in accordance with Utah
Code section 10-3-713.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ____________,
2022.
____________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
___________________________
CITY RECORDER
3-1-22
6
Transmitted to Mayor on ______________________.
Mayor’s Action: __________ Approved. ___________ Vetoed.
____________________________
MAYOR
___________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ______ of 2022.
Published: _____________________.
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
1
1
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE 2
No. ______ of 2022 3
4
(Sale of significant parcels of real property and removal of lands 5
from the open space lands inventory) 6
7
An ordinance amending Section 2.58.040 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the sale 8
of significant parcels of real property, and Section 2.90.070 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating 9
to the removal of lands from the open space lands inventory. 10
WHEREAS, the city desires to make certain changes relating to an exemption, for certain 11
special events, from the mandatory procedures of those sections; and 12
WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, desires to amend Section 2.58.040 13
and Section 2.90.070 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to such changes. 14
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah that: 15
SECTION 1. Section 2.58.040 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the sale of 16
significant parcels of real property, is amended as follows: 17
2.58.040: SALE OF SIGNIFICANT PARCELS OF REAL PROPERTY; NOTICE AND 18
HEARING: 19
20
A. A significant parcel of real property owned by the City or any significant legal interest 21
therein shall not be sold, traded, leased or otherwise conveyed or encumbered until the 22
City has provided reasonable notice to all interested parties and held at least one public 23
hearing on the proposed conveyance as set forth herein. 24
25
B. Reasonable notice of the proposed conveyance shall include the following: 26
27
1. Notice of the proposed conveyance shall be mailed to all abutting property owners. 28
29
2. Notice of the proposed conveyance shall be delivered to the Office of the City Council, 30
posted in the Office of the City Recorder, delivered to a local media representative, and 31
posted on the City's website. 32
33
C. No significant parcel of City owned real property identified in section 2.58.035, including 34
table 2.58.035C, of this chapter may be conveyed until after a public hearing has been held 35
before one or more of the following as may be applicable: the Planning Commission, the 36
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
2
Airport Board, the Public Utilities Advisory Committee, the Golf Enterprise Fund 37
Advisory Board, or the Parks, Natural Lands, Trails, and Urban Forestry Advisory Board. 38
39
D. In addition to the public hearing required above, the City Council may also request a 40
public hearing before the conveyance of the property. Any request for a hearing before the 41
City Council must be delivered to the Office of the Mayor no less than fifteen (15) days 42
after delivery of the notice to the Office of the City Council pursuant to subsection B2 of 43
this section. If no request for a hearing is made within that time period, the City Council 44
shall be deemed to have waived any right to request a hearing. 45
46
If a written call for hearing has been made by the City Council, the Mayor or his or her 47
designee shall attend the hearing to hear and consider comments upon proposals to convey 48
the property specified in the notice. The hearing shall take place before, after or in 49
conjunction with a regularly scheduled City Council meeting, as determined by the Mayor. 50
51
E. Any notice of a proposed conveyance of a significant parcel of City owned real property 52
shall specify the following: 53
54
1. A description of the property to be conveyed or encumbered; 55
56
2. The nature of the proposed conveyance or encumbrance, whether the property is to be 57
sold, traded or encumbered, including the nature of the conveyance if the property is to 58
be sold, or if a trade or lease of property is contemplated, a brief summary of the 59
proposed transaction; 60
61
3. Persons to whom interests are to be conveyed; 62
63
4. Any consideration tendered; 64
65
5. The name of the person, department or entity requesting such action; 66
67
6. The basis upon which the value of the interest has been determined by the City; 68
69
7. The date, time and location of the public hearing to be held before the Planning 70
Commission, Airport Board, Public Utilities Advisory Committee, Golf Enterprise 71
Fund Advisory Board, or Parks, Natural Lands, Trails, and Urban Forestry Advisory 72
Board, as applicable. The notice shall further state that interested persons may appear 73
and comment upon the proposal. 74
75
F. The conveyance or encumbrance of a significant parcel of real property of the City may be 76
finalized: 77
78
1. By the Mayor, at his/her discretion following notice and any public hearings required 79
by this section; or 80
81
2. By the Mayor, if the transfer is revocable and the Mayor has determined that an 82
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
3
unanticipated combination of facts and conditions of pressing necessity has emerged 83
that requires that action be taken before a City Council hearing. Such conditions shall 84
not be deemed to arise unless it appears that delay from the notice or a City Council 85
hearing would produce: 86
87
a. Great or irreparable injury to persons seeking the conveyance or encumbrance, with 88
negligible impact upon City interests; 89
90
b. Serious detriment to the social or economic interest of the community as whole; or 91
92
3. Substantial economic loss to the City. 93
94
G. Any decision by the Mayor to forego the City Council hearing provisions of this section 95
shall be made in writing to the City Council, stating the specific reasons upon which the 96
decision was based. 97
98
H. The following shall be exempt from the mandatory procedures of this section: 99
100
1. The leasing of existing buildings, infrastructure, or facilities; 101
102
2. Special events lasting (a) less than twenty-one (21) days or (b), with the approval of the 103
Mayor for a reason identified by the Mayor in writing, more than twenty (20) days but 104
less than thirty-one (31) days; 105
106
3. The leasing of recreation areas in accordance with their intended use; 107
108
4. The selling of burial rights in the Salt Lake City Cemetery; and 109
110
5. The granting of easements or other rights that service the property, including grants in 111
connection with utilities or safety equipment such as traffic signal poles. Any such 112
easement or use right must be primarily for the benefit of the City. With respect to open 113
space land under chapter 2.90 of this title, such easement or use right may be granted 114
only with the approval of the City's Open Space Lands Manager. 115
116
SECTION 2. Section 2.90.070 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the removal of lands 117
from the open space lands inventory, is amended as follows: 118
2.90.070: REMOVAL OF LANDS FROM THE OPEN SPACE LANDS INVENTORY: 119 120
A. Open space lands, conservation easements or other interests in open space land placed in 121
the open space lands inventory shall remain in the inventory in perpetuity unless: 1) they 122
are transferred to a qualified public or nonprofit land conservation entity; or 2) a sale, 123
conversion from undeveloped open space land to developed open space land, exchange, or 124
other transfer of the land, conservation easement or other interest in land is approved by 125
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
4
the mayor, subsequent to the following mandatory procedures: 126
127
1. Any proposal to sell or transfer open space land must be in writing, signed by the 128
mayor, and must include a description of the land to be sold or transferred, the purpose 129
of the proposed sale or transfer, the proposed purchaser of the land, the amount of the 130
proposed purchase price, the anticipated future use of the land, any anticipated change 131
in zoning that would be required to implement that proposed future use, and a statement 132
by the mayor explaining why the proposed sale or transfer of the open space land is in 133
the best interest of the city. 134
135
2. Holding a public hearing before the mayor and the city council. 136
137
3. Providing notice of the proposed sale or transfer and the public hearing by: 138
139
a. Publication of a notice for two (2) successive weeks, beginning at least thirty (30) 140
days in advance of the hearing, in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, no 141
less than one- fourth (1/4) page in size, with type no smaller than 18-point, 142
surrounded by a one-fourth inch (1/4") border, in a portion of the newspaper other 143
than where the legal notices and classified advertisements appear, containing the 144
information set forth in the form below; 145
146
b. Posting two (2) signs measuring at least two feet by three feet (2' x 3') each, on the 147
land proposed for sale or transfer at least thirty (30) days in advance of the hearing, 148
containing the information set forth in the form below; and 149
150
c. Mailing notice, at least thirty (30) days in advance of the hearing, to all property 151
owners of record within one thousand feet (1,000') of the land proposed for sale or 152
transfer, containing the information set forth in the form below. 153
154
d. Any notice published, posted or mailed pursuant to this section shall state 155
substantially as follows: 156
157
NOTICE OF PROPOSED SALE OR TRANSFER OF PUBLICLY OWNED 158
OPEN SPACE LAND 159
The Mayor of Salt Lake City is proposing to sell or transfer certain Open 160
Space Lands owned by Salt Lake City located at [street location] for $[proposed 161
amount of sale] to [proposed buyer] for future use as [proposed future use]. 162
A public hearing on this proposal will be held before the Mayor and the City 163
Council on [date of hearing] at the Salt Lake City & County Building, 451 South 164
State Street, room 315, Salt Lake City, Utah, at [time of hearing] p.m. 165
Any individual wishing to address this proposal is invited to attend and to 166
express their views to the Mayor and the City Council at that hearing. 167
4. Following the public hearing, the city council may elect to conduct an advisory vote as 168
to the proposed sale or transfer of the open space land. 169
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
5
5. No sale or transfer of open space land may occur until at least six (6) months after the 170
conclusion of the public hearing in order to provide an opportunity to explore other 171
alternatives to the proposed sale or transfer of the open space land. 172
173
B. Any open space lands, conservation easements or other interests in open space land: 1) 174
acquired by the city in partnership with other entities, units of government, or other parties; 175
or 2) received by donation, bequest, devise, or dedication, may only be authorized for sale, 176
conversion from undeveloped open space land to developed open space land, exchange or 177
other transfer if such action is allowed for in the instrument under which the open space 178
land, conservation easement or other interest in open space land was conveyed to, or 179
acquired by, the city. 180
181
C. The following shall be exempt from the mandatory procedures of this section: 182
183
1. The leasing of existing buildings, infrastructure, or facilities; 184
185
2. Special events lasting (a) less than twenty-one (21) days or (b), with the approval of the 186
mayor for a reason identified by the mayor in writing, more than twenty (20) days but 187
less than thirty-one (31) days; 188
189
3. The leasing of recreation areas in accordance with their intended use; 190
191
4. The selling of burial rights in the Salt Lake City Cemetery. 192
193
5. The granting of easements or other rights that service the property, including grants in 194
connection with utilities or safety equipment such as traffic signal poles. Any such 195
easement or use right must be primarily for the benefit of the city. With respect to open 196
space land under this chapter, such easement or use right may be granted only with the 197
approval of the city's open space lands manager. 198
199
200
SECTION 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately after it has been published or 201
posted in accordance with Utah Code section 10-3-711 and recorded in accordance with Utah 202
Code section 10-3-713. 203
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ____________, 204
2022. 205
____________________________ 206
CHAIRPERSON 207
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: 208
209
___________________________ 210
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
6
CITY RECORDER 211
212
Transmitted to Mayor on ______________________. 213
214
Mayor’s Action: __________ Approved. ___________ Vetoed. 215
216
217
____________________________ 218
MAYOR 219
220
221
222
___________________________ 223
CITY RECORDER 224
225
226
(SEAL) 227
228
229
Bill No. ______ of 2022. 230
Published: _____________________. 231
232
233
234
235
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved As To Form
By: _______________________
Boyd Ferguson
Date: __________________
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
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 22, 2022
RE: Stealth Wireless Facilities Zoning Text Amendment
PLNPCM2020-00284
The Council will be briefed about a request from Cellco Partnership (dba Verizon Wireless) to amend the
Salt Lake City zoning ordinance to allow stealth cellular towers up to 75 feet tall as a conditional use in the
Public Lands (PL) zoning district citywide. Stealth towers are currently limited to 35 feet in height and are
allowed in all zoning districts provided they are “completely disguised as another object concealed from
view thereby concealing the intended use and appearance of the facility” (Chapter 21A.40.090.E Salt Lake
City Code).
To qualify as a stealth facility, a tower needs to meet the following requirements:
1. “Conform with the dimensions of the object it is being disguised as,”
2. “Be in concert with its surroundings,” and
3. Meet “the provisions contained in section 21A.36.020, [including] tables 21A.36.020.B
and 21A.36.020.C.”
Chapter 21A.36.020.C regulates lot and bulk controls requiring lots and structures meet “the lot area, lot
width, yards, building height and other requirements established in the applicable district regulations.”
Exceptions are allowed for height, and certain obstructions in a required yard. Height exceptions for
church steeples, elevator/stairwell bulkheads, flagpoles, and light poles for sports fields are allowed.
Wireless facilities disguised as trees, or another object not listed in the height exception table are not
permitted obstructions beyond the maximum height of a zoning district.
The request is associated with the applicant’s proposal to construct a stealth cell tower at the Pioneer Police
Precinct located at 1040 West 700 South, but the requested text amendment would apply to all properties
within the PL zoning designation citywide.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: March 22, 2022
Set Date: March 22, 2022
Public Hearing: April 5, 2022
Potential Action: April 19, 2022
Page | 2
The applicant first proposed constructing an 80-foot stealth wireless facility disguised as an evergreen tree
(known as a “monopine”) at the Pioneer Police Precinct. Planning staff told the applicant non-government
structures in the PL zone were limited to 35 feet and the request for an 80-foot tower would be denied. The
proposal was then modified to allow stealth cell towers up to 60 feet tall in all zoning districts within the
city. After reviewing the Planning staff report and receiving community feedback, the applicant asked for
additional time to review their proposal, as well as Planning staff and community concerns. The current
proposal is to allow stealth wireless facilities up to 75 feet in the PL zoning district.
PL properties are located throughout the city and are often located near smaller-scale neighborhoods
consisting of single- and two-family, or small commercial districts such as Neighborhood Commercial
shown in the image below. Uses in the PL zone are typically government owned or operated facilities
including schools, libraries, and fire stations. These zoning districts generally limit building height to 30
feet or less.
Image courtesy Salt Lake City Planning Division
Page | 3
Planning staff provided the following image comparing the proposed 75-foot height of stealth towers in the
PL zoning district to building heights in a variety of adjacent zoning districts.
Image courtesy Salt Lake City Planning Division
The Planning Commission reviewed this proposal at its December 8, 2021 meeting and held a public
hearing. There was one comment at the hearing expressing concern about potential radiation near schools,
and stated the proposed tower was not in concert with the area. Planning staff noted there were letters to
the Commission from the East Liberty Park Community Organization and Yalecrest Community Council
(both opposed). The Commission voted 5-0 to forward a negative recommendation to the City Council. One
Commissioner abstained but did not say why.
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 Council may wish to discuss more how a tower is determined to be “in concert with the
surroundings.”
2. The Council may wish to ask the Administration whether there would be requirements such as
setbacks or step backs to mitigate impact to adjacent properties.
3. The Council may wish to consider whether there is interest in limiting stealth towers in small
neighborhood pocket-parks, and if so, ask whether there could be some minimal parcel size
associated with applications.
4. Is the Council supportive of the proposed zoning map amendment?
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Planning staff provided the following comparison of existing and proposed stealth wireless facility
standards.
EXISTING REGULATIONS PROPOSED CHANGES
Definition of “Stealth Antenna”: An antenna completely
disguised as another object, or otherwise concealed from
view, thereby concealing the intended use and appearance
No change
Page | 4
of the facility. Examples of stealth facilities include, but are
not limited to, flagpoles, light pole standards, or
architectural elements such as dormers, steeples, and
chimneys.
Criteria for determining if an antenna is “stealth”:
The antenna must conform to the dimensions of
the object it is being disguised as.
The location of the stealth facility must be in
concert with its surroundings
No change
The height of stealth antennas is limited to the maximum
building height of the underlying zoning district unless they
are disguised as the following:
Chimney-can extend above the maximum height
limit of the zone only the amount that is required
to meet building regulations.
Church steeples or spires - no height limit
Elevator/stairway tower or bulkhead - can
extend up to 16 feet above the maximum height
limit in the commercial, manufacturing,
downtown, FB-UN2, RO, R-MU, RMF-45, RMF-
75, RP, BP, I, UI A, PL, and PL-2 districts.
Flagpole - may apply for conditional use approval
to exceed the maximum building height of the
zone.
Light poles for sports fields - allowed up to 90 feet
or higher with special exception approval.
Stealth antennas in the PL Public Lands Zoning District
taller than 35 feet (up to 75 feet in height) would require
Conditional Use approval from the Planning Commission.
All other stealth towers that meet the existing dimension
regulations would still be allowed by-right.
Stealth Antennas are allowed in all zoning districts, subject
to the dimensions mentioned above.
Conditional Use approval would be required for stealth
antennas taller than 35 feet (up to 75 feet in height) in the
PL Public Lands District.
Planning staff identified six key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 5-7 of the
Planning Commission staff report. They are summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the
staff report.
Consideration 1-Rationale for Denial Recommendation
The following issues regarding the proposed ordinance were found by Planning staff:
1. Standards would not result in predictable outcomes. The regulations would allow any type of
stealth facility, not only “monopines.” An applicant could request a stealth facility out of character
with the surrounding area such as an elevator bulkhead (see consideration 2 below).
2. The PL District is generally located within neighborhoods with shorter maximum heights. Towers
as tall as 75 feet could be out of scale with the neighborhoods.
3. Requiring conditional use approval for these towers would require additional Planning staff and
Planning Commission time and resources. Utah State Code makes denying conditional use
applications challenging.
4. Proposed language is difficult to interpret (see consideration 6 below).
Planning staff noted the following:
The ordinance already allows stealth cellular facilities in many other contexts in every zoning
district, and State Code requires the city to approve small cell facilities in the public right of way.
The proposed text amendment is a response to the denial of the proposed facility at the Pioneer
Police Precinct. It does not include a thorough analysis of community needs, potential adverse
impacts, or unintended consequences.
Page | 5
Consideration 2-Compatibility with Current City Plans, Policies, and Zoning Standards
Current City Code allows stealth wireless facilities taller than the maximum height in a zoning district if
they are disguised as a structure or object already allowed to do so (e.g., church steeple, chimney, elevator
or stairway or bulkhead). Planning staff found reliance on conditional use standards to mitigate potential
impacts of stealth facilities in the PL Zone may not offer protections to residents from adverse effects of
future stealth towers. They further found the proposal does not further objectives within the City’s adopted
plans and policies.
Planning staff noted three factors to evaluate when analyzing stealth wireless facilities’ compatibility with
current City plans, policies, and zoning standards.
1. Neighborhood Character – most neighborhood plans focus on neighborhood character and impact
of future development. Stealth towers can be a desirable alternative to traditional wireless antennas
within established neighborhoods. Limiting stealth towers to the PL zoning district may be a
method of installing necessary wireless infrastructure consistent with neighborhood plans.
However, the proposal relies on conditional use standards when considering neighborhood
character.
2. Views of Landscapes and Distinctive Urban Features – Plan Salt Lake, the Central City and East
Bench neighborhood plans, along with the Capitol Hill Protective Area Overlay all discuss
preservation of viewsheds within the city. Impact to viewsheds should be considered when new
wireless facilities are being established. Under the proposed amendment, it is unclear to what
extent the requirement to “be in concert with its surroundings” would enable prevention of a
stealth tower installation within an established view corridor.
3. Equitable Access to Cellular Services – Plan Salt Lake discusses the necessity of cell service access.
The Planning Commission staff report states:
If a cell provider is unable to get coverage in a low-income neighborhood because current
regulations prevent it, does the City have a responsibility to provide opportunities to
expand that coverage into marginalized communities? This is an important question
when reviewing zoning regulations for privately provided infrastructure.
Planning staff notes the applicant’s maps (found on pages 63-65 of the Planning Commission staff
report) demonstrates a need for improved cell service near the proposed tower at the Pioneer Police
Precinct. However, Planning found the applicant did not indicate how allowing towers up to the
proposed height will improve equitable cellular access in other parts of the city.
The Planning Commission staff report stated:
Because the applicant has not provided an analysis to support this request, staff cannot
determine if the proposed amendment is compatible with the adopted plans and policies of
the City. The above discussion and the analysis in Attachment D [pages 36-41] show that
the applicant has not provided enough information to determine the long-term impacts of
their proposal.
Consideration 3–Best Practices for Zoning Ordinance Revisions
It is Planning staff’s opinion best practices for zoning ordinance revisions include a holistic approach and
response to community needs and concerns. They found the proposed text amendment is responding to
standards preventing one project at one location. An analysis of long-term effects of the proposal was not
provided by the applicant. Planning stated:
With this piecemeal approach that lacks at least a surface-level analysis of impacts, Staff cannot
provide any information on any potential long-term effects this proposal may have on stealth
Page | 6
facilities within the City. Attempting to circumvent existing regulations by modifying them
without appropriate analysis of impacts is not the best practice for revising a zoning ordinance.
Consideration 4 – Conditional Uses
Utah State Code requires conditional use approval if reasonable conditions mitigate anticipated
detrimental impacts. Planning staff noted under the proposed text amendment, each case would need to be
presented to the Planning Commission and would utilize additional Planning staff and Planning
Commission resources. They also discussed the potential of establishing false community expectations a
stealth antenna application could be denied based on neighborhood input.
Consideration 5 – Federal Regulations Regarding Wireless Communication Facilities
Federal rules limit the City’s ability to regulate wireless facilities to only location, aesthetics, and structural
safety. Decisions cannot be made based on health concerns or environmental effects of radio frequency
emissions.
Consideration 6 – Clarity of Proposed Amendment Language
Planning staff noted existing language in City Code is vague and there have been issues interpreting it.
They believe the proposed language would be more challenging to interpret without additional
clarification.
ZONING STANDARDS ANALYSIS
Attachment D (pages 36-41) 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 text amendment is consistent
with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of
the city as stated through its various adopted planning
documents.
Mixed finding.
The proposed
amendment is
either partially, or
not consistent with
the goals and
policies of
applicable master
plans.
Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the
specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance.
Mixed finding.
The proposal either
furthers or
partially furthers
the applicable
purpose statements
of the zoning
ordinance.
Whether a proposed text amendment is consistent
with the purposes and provisions of any applicable
overlay zoning districts which may impose additional
standards.
The proposed
amendment is
consistent with the
purposes and
provisions of all
relevant overlay
districts.
Page | 7
The extent to which a proposed text amendment
implements the best current, professional practices of
urban planning and design.
The proposed
amendment does
not implement the
best current urban
planning and
design practices.
CITY DEPARTMENT REVIEW
Attachment G (page 136 of the Planning Commission staff report) contains a list of City departments that
reviewed the proposed text amendment and associated comments, which are included below.
Engineering: “My understanding is that the proposed stealth towers are not small cell wireless
facilities and would only occur on private property.”
The Attorney’s Office “does not recommend considering changes to the height of stealth antenna
section of City Code without a more comprehensive look at all of the Chapter 21A zoning sections.”
Zoning: “Current code allows for flag poles to reach 60’ in height with a conditional use. Church
steeples/spires have no height limit. Light poles for sports fields can reach 90’ by right and taller with a
Special Exception. Any stealth antenna facility disguised as one of those three could exceed the height
limit of the underlying zoning district. The assertation that the code as currently written does not allow for
stealth poles to exceed the maximum height of the underlying zoning district is inaccurate.
The proposed text amendment would allow all stealth facilities (not just the monopines) to exceed the
height limit of the underlying zoning district. If the intent is to allow just monopines to be 60’, then the text
amendments concerning height should be specifically for monopines rather than all stealth facilities.”
Urban Forestry: “Salt Lake City does have trees that are greater than 60’ tall, and some even
pushing 100’. However, the average tree height in our City is probably closer to 30’ than 60’.
Perhaps even more concerning (to me) is where these towers will be located. If the intention is to place
them within City R.O.W. (on City park strips) then we have the added issue of the towers taking away
valuable tree planting space. It would be worse still if somehow it was permissible to actually remove
(or drastically prune) existing city trees to accommodate these towers.
But please note that (in the interest of maximizing the potential of Salt Lake City to grow trees, on its
public property) the Urban Forestry Division is very opposed to the loss of existing tree ‘planting
locations’ just as we are opposed to the loss of existing trees.”
Other responding City departments (Transportation, Public Utilities, Building Services/Building Services
(Fire)) had no concerns with the proposal.
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
• September 2, 2021-Application submitted in current form.
• May 14, 2020-Petition assigned to Aaron Barlow, Principal Planner (note: previous version of the
application was assigned to the planner this date).
• October 5, 2021-Information about petition sent to all Salt Lake City recognized community
organizations. The Sugar House, Greater Avenues, and Yalecrest Councils invited the applicant
and Planning staff to attend their meetings. The Sugar House, East Liberty Park, Yalecrest and
Page | 8
Greater Avenues councils sent letters to Planning opposing the proposal.
• October 5, 2021- Proposal posted for online open house through December 1, 2021.
• November 22, 2021-Sent to Planning Commission.
• December 8, 2021-Planning Commission public hearing. There was one comment at the public
hearing in opposition to proposal. The Commission voted 5-0 to forward a negative
recommendation to the City Council, with one Commissioner abstaining.
• February 8, 2022-Transmitted to City Council.
• Note-Because the proposal was forwarded to the Council with a negative recommendation it was
not sent to the Attorney’s Office for an ordinance to be drafted.
CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING // MARCH 22, 2022
STEALTH WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES
PLNPCM2020-00284
A Zoning Text Amendment request to allow
Stealth Wireless Telecommunication Facilities
between 35 and 75 feet tall in the PL Public
Lands Zoning District by Conditional Use.
•On December 8,2021,the Planning Commission
forwarded a negative recommendation to the
City Council.
•Planning staff also recommended denial
PROJECT REQUEST
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
Definition:An antenna completely disguised as
another object,or otherwise concealed from
view,to hide the intended use and appearance
of the facility.
A stealth tower must:
1.Conform with the dimensions of the intended
disguise
2.Be in concert with its surroundings
*Stealth Towers are currently permitted in all
districts if they meet the standards for a given
district (i.e.,setback and height).
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
STEALTH TOWERS
•Individual lots or small clusters
•Integrated with other districts
•Uses generally limited to public
facilities
•Schools,Libraries,Fire Stations
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
PL PUBLIC LANDS ZONING DISTRICT
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
HEIGHT COMPARISON
*This monopine example is for illustrative purposes only.Under this request,other
types of stealth towers (like those illustrated in this presentation)could be permitted.
*
•On December 8,2021,the Planning Commission
forwarded a negative recommendation to the
City Council.
•Planning staff also recommended denial
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
RECOMMENDATIONS
•Unpredictable Outcomes
•Out of scale with surrounding development
•Challenges with Conditional Uses
•Community expectation of denial
•Confusing proposal language
•Proposal is not comprehensive
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
STAFF RATIONALE FOR DENIAL
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
Aaron Barlow // Principal Planner
aaron.barlow@slcgov.com
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 1, 2022
Dan Dugan, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
__________________________
SUBJECT: Petition PLNPCM2020-00284 - Request to Allow Stealth Wireless
Telecommunication Facilities taller than 35 feet (up to 75 feet) in height within
the PL – Public Lands Zoning District
STAFF CONTACT: Aaron Barlow, Principal Planner
801-535-6182, aaron.barlow@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission has recommended that the City Council
deny the request to amend the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance to allow Stealth Wireless
Telecommunication Facilities taller than 35 feet (up to 75 feet) in height within the PL – Public
Lands Zoning District.
BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Pete Simmons of Cellco Partnership (dba Verizon Wireless)
submitted a request to amend the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance to allow Stealth cellular towers
up to 75 feet in height as a Conditional Use in the PL Public Lands Zoning District. Stealth
facilities are currently limited to 35 feet in height. This request is specifically related to a proposal
by the applicant to construct a stealth cellular tower at the Pioneer Police Precinct at 1040 West
700 South, but the proposed text amendment would apply to properties within the PL district
citywide.
Under current regulations in Section 21A.40.090.E of the Zoning Ordinance, stealth wireless
facilities are permitted in all zoning districts provided they are “completely disguised as another
object concealed from view thereby concealing the intended use and appearance of the facility.”
To qualify as a stealth facility, a tower needs to do the following:
1. “Conform with the dimensions of the object it is being disguised as,”
2. “Be in concert with its surroundings,” and
Lisa Shaffer (Feb 2, 2022 14:42 MST)02/02/2022
02/02/2022
Page 2 of 3
3. Meet “the provisions contained in section 21A.36.020, [including] tables 21A.36.020.B
and 21A.36.020.C.”
Section 21A.36.020 of the Zoning Ordinance regulates lot and bulk controls. It requires that all
lots and structures must meet “the lot area, lot width, yards, building height and other requirements
established in the applicable district regulations.” Exceptions are allowed for certain obstructions
in a required yard (table 21A.36.020.B) and height (table 21A.36.020.C). Allowed height
exceptions include church steeples, elevator/stairwell bulkheads, flagpoles, and light poles for
sports fields. Wireless facilities disguised as trees (or anything else not listed in the height
exceptions table) are not a permitted obstruction beyond the maximum height of a zoning district.
In response to the perceived limitations that the Zoning Ordinance placed on stealth wireless
communication facilities, the applicant submitted a text amendment application to modify sections
21A.32.070 (PL Public Lands District) and 21A.40.090.E (Wireless Telecommunication
Facilities) of the City’s zoning regulations to allow stand-alone stealth cell towers up to 75 feet
tall as a Conditional Use in only the PL Public Lands Zoning District.
At their meeting on December 8, 2021, the Planning Commission voted to send a negative
recommendation to the City Council regarding this proposal because it did not meet the standards
for a zoning text amendment. Specifically, they provided a negative recommendation because the
proposal would also impact residential districts adjacent to properties within the PL district, and
the proposal was a response to a single issue in the ordinance and did not address stealth facilities
more broadly. Additional information regarding this request can be found in Staff’s report for the
Commission. Draft ordinances are not provided with requests that have received a negative
recommendation from the Planning Commission.
PUBLIC PROCESS:
Community Council Notice: A notice of application was sent to all Salt Lake City Recognized
Community Organizations on October 5, 2021, regarding the proposed text amendment. The
Recognized Organizations were given 45 days to respond with any concerns or to ask the applicant
to discuss the proposed amendment at one of their meetings. Three Community Councils
(Sugarhouse, Greater Avenues, and Yalecrest) invited the applicant and Staff to their meetings.
The Sugar House and Greater Avenues Community Councils sent official responses that are
included with Staff’s report to the Planning Commission.
Public Open House: The petition was posted to the Planning Division’s Online Open House
webpage from October 5 to December 1, 2021. Staff received 58 comments from the public, two
of which were in support of the request and the rest opposed. They are included with Staff’s report
to the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission Meeting: On December 8, 2021, the Planning Commission held a public
hearing regarding the proposed zoning text amendment. The only comment was from Judi Short,
representing the Sugar House Community Council, who brought up concerns that she had received
from the neighborhood. The commission voted to provide a negative recommendation to the City
Council with a unanimous vote of 5-0, with one commissioner abstaining.
Planning Commission (PC) Records
a) PC Agenda of December 8, 2021 (Click to Access)
b) PC Minutes of December 8, 2021 (Click to Access, item begins on page 7)
c) Planning Commission Staff Report of December 8, 2021 (Click to Access Report)
Page 3 of 3
EXHIBITS:
1) Project Chronology
2) Notice of City Council Hearing
3) Comments not included with PC Staff Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
3. COMMENTS NOT INCLUDED WITH PC STAFF REPORT
1.Project Chronology
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Petition: PLNPCM2020-00284
September 2, 2021 Mr. Simmons submits petition in its current form
October 4, 2021 Petition posted to the Planning Division’s Online Open House
webpage; The public comment period ended November 18, 2021
November 23, 2021 Planning Commission hearing notice posted on City and State
websites.
December 8, 2021 Planning Commission reviewed the petition and conducted a public
hearing. The commission then voted 5-0 to send a negative
recommendation to the City Council.
January 12, 2022 Planning Commission ratified the minutes of the December 8, 2021
meeting
2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2020-00284 - Request to
Allow Stealth Wireless Telecommunication Facilities in the PL – Public
Lands Zoning District – Pete Simmons, representing Cellco Partnership (dba Verizon
Wireless), is requesting to amend section(s) of title 21A.32.070 PL Public Lands District
and 21A.40.090.E Wireless Telecommunication Facilities to increase the allowed height
of stealth wireless telecommunication facilities to 75 feet in the PL Public Lands Zoning
District. Specifically, this request would allow stealth wireless telecommunication
facilities taller than 35 feet in the PL district as a conditional use. The PL district is located
city-wide, so this request would affect all Council Districts. (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. Comments not included with PC Staff Report
ELPCO (East Liberty Park Community Organization) elpcoslc@gmail.com www.facebook/com/ELPCO
December 7, 2021
Dear Salt Lake City Planning Commissioners:
I am writing to oppose the Stealth Towers Text Amendment (PLNPCM2020-00284) on the agenda for the
December 8 meeting.
ELPCO is the East Liberty Park Community Organization, a recognized community organization in Salt Lake City
representing the 4,000 households between Liberty Park and East High School.
ELPCO has been tracking this issue since the initial proposal in 2020 (PLNPCM2020-00284) by Verizon
Wireless to allow stealth towers up to 60 feet tall as conditional uses (i.e., allowable) in all zoning districts.
Along with the Planning Department and several other community councils, we opposed the initial proposal in a
letter dated May 19, 2021, writing, “We believe this proposal goes too far in revising the zoning code and
raising height restrictions to exceed local limits. We believe height limits are one of the most important design
elements of local zoning.”
Now, Verizon has returned with a curtailed proposal to allow taller (75 feet) antennas in more limited areas
(Public Lands-PL districts).
The first thing ELPCO did was seek input from our community. The majority of responses we received have
been favorable or ambivalent to the proposal.
• “Let them install towers so all of us can have service in the area!” wrote BL.
• MH wrote: “Can I put one in my back yard? I can’t get a signal in my house.”
• LB opposes the amendment, writing “We already have their ugly brown cell towers along our
park strips, notably here on the East Bench. This proposal is another step in the wrong
direction.”
• DS replied: “That's the price of technology. If you oppose this don't complain about poor
signal.”
• On Nextdoor.com, DD replied: “I don’t see what the issue is. I don’t see anyone objecting to
electrical poles, and I even tried to rally people to push the city to bury all electrical (which
received a collective groan).”
Improving wireless connectivity and reliability is important to many of our community members. And unlike
utilities, proximity to infrastructure matters when it comes to better cellular service.
Next, we looked at the impact within ELPCO.
There are three major Public Lands-PL districts in ELPCO: East High School, Emerson Elementary, and the SLC
Fire Station #5 on 900 South. Nearby PL districts include Hawthorne Elementary on 700 East and the USPS
Post office on 1100 East. The PL parcel with the densest residential setting is Emerson Elementary, although
any antenna there would likely be sited in the athletic area east of the school and adjacent to the RB zoning
along 1100 East. As a result, the immediate residential impacts of this amendment appear to be limited in
ELPCO… except for the visual impact of a 75-foot metallic brown pine tree with antenna-like foliage jutting
above the 30-foot rooftops of houses so that we can download that 4K Hallmark holiday movie a little bit faster.
ELPCO (East Liberty Park Community Organization) elpcoslc@gmail.com www.facebook/com/ELPCO
Because the potential stealth antennas would be so much taller than any other existing structure in the
neighborhood, this visual impact cannot be ignored.
Lastly, we considered the impact of this amendment on the overall zoning code and application. And based on
this review, we decided to oppose this amendment.
First, the motivation for this amendment appears to be the city’s denial to Verizon to build an 80-foot stealth
antenna at the Pioneer Police Precinct (zoned PL). We don’t think it is wise to change zoning for the entire city
based on the circumstances of one application in a single parcel. Raising the local height restriction for cellular
antennas might work for the Pioneer Police Precinct, but it doesn’t mean that similar zoning changes will
conform with conditions in ELPCO or other neighborhoods with dense, low-scale residential housing.
Second, the scope of the amendment is broad enough to allow Verizon or other wireless carriers to construct
antennas in multiple formats that are not in line with the local height limits and building conditions of
neighborhoods. The juxtaposition of a 75-foot antenna looming above a row of 30-foot rooflines is entirely
plausible under this amendment.
Third, we all know that “conditional use” actually means “this train has already left the station.” Conditional use
applications are not an efficient or truthful approach to zoning decisions. As a result, the wireless carriers
should collaborate with the SLC Planning Department to craft a new zoning code that provides clear,
unconditional height limits based on existing and adjacent zoning without the trapdoor of conditional use to
allow for unforeseen and harmful impacts.
Salt Lake City is facing wireless infrastructure development on multiple fronts. From the proliferation of 5G
monopoles to the demand for self-driving cars and better, faster wireless service, these complex pressures
require a broad, collaborative process to address wireless infrastructure in the city. This is what we called for
in our May 19 letter about the first proposal by Verizon:
“We would also like to see a broader coalition—beyond just wireless carriers—engaged in efforts to
address equity issues between wireline (i.e., wired Internet access) and wireless connectivity. We know
that many residents of ELPCO and other city neighborhoods rely on wireless networks for Internet access
in their homes. We also know this need has increased during the pandemic. But resolving this issue should
engage more actors than wireless carriers, including city agencies, local nonprofits, and the Salt Lake City
Schools. And real and lasting change must involve additional reforms beyond easing zoning and height
limits for cell towers.”
As a result, I request the SLC Planning Commission deny the Stealth Towers Text Amendment (PLNPCM2020-
00284) until it can be considered in context with all of the wireless infrastructure decisions within the city.
Sincerely,
Jason Stevenson
ELPCO, co-chair
1
Barlow, Aaron
From:Margo <becker.margo@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, December 6, 2021 10:20 PM
To:Barlow, Aaron
Subject:(EXTERNAL) Oppose stealth towers
Hi.
Please add me to the list of those opposed to Verizon’s proposal for taller stealth towers on public lands.
Thanks!
Margo Becker
December 8, 2021
Dear Salt Lake Planning Commissioners:
I am writing to oppose the Stealth Towers Text Amendment (PLNPCM2020-00284) which you
will discuss tonight at your Commission meeting.
In May, when Verizon requested permitted uses to install 60-foot stealth towers in all zoning
across Salt Lake except residential zones, I sent an opposition letter to both the Planning
Commission and City Council. This was my argument: “The 60-foot height is unprecedented in
most low-density commercial zones like CN-Neighborhood Commercial and CB - Community
Business. If the Commission is a pushover for this 60-foot stealth monopole request, then surely
they will give Verizon carte blanche to build a 5G tower forest throughout Salt Lake City.”
Verizon withdrew that request but is back with another – a “conditional use” proposal to place
75-foot stealth (disguised) wireless towers in PL (Public Lands) zones –anywhere in the city.
I urge you to deny the request on these grounds:
1. Conditional use means Verizon has free reign to place their towers indiscriminately in PL
zones throughout the city. It’s the proverbial “keys to the car.” Once granted, Verizon
can pretty much do what they want, which is troubling. This will tie the city’s hands and
hold back residents from determining, or having a say in precisely how many, where and
when these towering behemoths will be placed.
2. Don’t buy the argument that PL zones are in non-descript corners of the city that are
hidden and that no one cares about. We have three PL zones in the beautiful, residential
neighborhood of Yalecrest -- Unitah Elementary School on 1300 South and 1500 East,
Bonneville Elementary School on 1900 East and Harvard Avenue, and the East High
School baseball park at the Southwest corner of Yalecrest on 900 South. Both schools
are surrounded on four sides by single-family homes. There is a neighborhood near the
ball park. We are opposed to 75-foot wireless towers in our beautiful neighborhood.
3. Property devaluation. Have you seen comparative photos of what a 75-foot tower looks
after construction? (See photos below) A 2014 survey by the National Institute for
Science, Law and Public Policy supported the idea that cell towers hurt interest in real
estate properties and value, according to the institute’s website. If you approve this,
you will have to justify your reasoning to 2,750+ homeowners in Yalecrest who live near
Unitah Elementary, Bonneville Elementary and the East High School baseball park.
4. These stealth towers are UGLY. (See pictures below) There is no way to “disguise” a 75-
foot-tall wireless tower and make it look beautiful. They pierce the horizon and scream
“I don’t fit in.”
5. Our understanding is if Verizon is granted conditional use, it opens the door for other
carriers to have the same privileges. There are at least four other major carriers – AT&T,
T-Mobile, US Cellular, and Sprint Nextel. Could we see a veritable forest of these 75-
foot towers? Please think carefully about the consequences.
We support the recommendation from our community council colleague Jason Stevenson, chair
of ELPCO: “Wireless carriers should collaborate with the SLC Planning Department to craft a
new zoning code that provides clear, unconditional height limits based on existing and adjacent
zoning without the trapdoor of conditional use to allow for harmful impacts.” We strongly urge
you to deny this conditional use request.
Respectfully,
Janet (Jan) Hemming
Chair
Yalecrest Neighborhood Council
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 22, 2022
RE: Western Gardens Zoning Map Amendment
PLNPCM2021-00420
The Council will be briefed about a proposal to amend the zoning map for property located at 550 South
600 East from its current Neighborhood Commercial (CN) to Form Based Urban Neighborhood District
(FB-UN2). This request would facilitate the redevelopment of the parcel into a multifamily project
consistent with the goals of the urban neighborhood development zones and proximity to transit. Western
Garden Center has been located on this property for many years. The property owner and developer are
working together on the proposed redevelopment project, though no specific development plans have been
submitted.
Multifamily developments are not permitted under the existing CN zoning designation but are a permitted
use in the FB-UN2 zoning district. The applicant originally proposed changing the zoning designation to
Residential Office (RO) at a presentation to the Central City Neighborhood Council but modified the
proposal to FB-UN2 following community and Planning staff comments at the meeting.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing at its December 8, 2021 meeting. Planning staff
recommended and the Planning Commission forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council.
The applicant requested Historic Landmark Commission review of the proposal because this property is
within the Central City Local Historic District. The Commission reviewed the proposal at its January 6,
2022 meeting. At that meeting the developer stated they would not remove any historic structures or
housing on the property. The Commission provided little direction to the applicant other than an
expectation they would be respectful of surrounding neighbors. No recommendation was provided to the
City Council.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: March 22, 2022
Set Date: March 22, 2022
Public Hearing: April 5, 2022
Potential Action: April 19, 2022
Page | 2
Area zoning map with subject property outlined in red.
Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed zoning map amendment, determine if the Council supports
moving forward with the proposal.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. The applicant stated they would not remove any historic structures on the property. Would the
Council like to ask the applicant if they would consider including that condition in a development
agreement?
2. Based on the feedback provided by the Historic Landmark Commission, the Council may wish to
ask what neighborhood impacts may be expected by the future development.
3. Is the Council supportive of the proposed zoning map amendment?
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The Council is only being asked to consider the rezoning of the property. No plans have been submitted to
the City nor is it within the scope of the Council’s authority to review the plans. Because the zoning of a
property can outlast the life of a building, any rezoning application should be considered on the merits of
changing the zoning of that property, not simply based on a potential project.
Planning staff identified three key issues related to the proposal which are found on pages 7-8 of the
Planning Commission staff report. They are summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the
staff report.
Issue 1-The redevelopment of the subject property is a multi-step and complex project. The
rezone of the property is only the first step in the overall redevelopment.
A series of applications associated with the proposed redevelopment would need to be filed for City
consideration. The property is in the Central City Local Historic District and would be required to meet
standards of the Historic Preservation Overlay Zone. New construction on the property would require
Historic Landmark Commission approval. Planned development approval is a possibility depending on
design of new construction.
Issue 2-Why the FB-UN2 Zone and why would it be appropriate?
The FB-UN2 district aims to create an urban neighborhood providing the following:
Page | 3
Options for housing types
Options in terms of shopping, dining, and fulfilling daily needs within walking distance or
conveniently located near mass transit
Transportation options
Access to employment opportunities within walking distance or close to mass transit
Appropriately scaled buildings that respect the existing character of the neighborhood
Safe, accessible, and interconnected networks for people to move around in
Increased desirability as a place to work, live, play, and invest through higher quality form and
design
In the Planning Commission staff report staff stated “To summarize, the FB-UN2 zone is appropriate at
this location because there is the potential to realize all of the criteria specifically envisioned for creating an
attractive urban neighborhood. It allows for the mix of uses if desired, it allows for future development
flexibility, promotes creative solutions in design, and most importantly is located within close proximity to
mass transit. The request for a rezone to FB-UN2 is also consistent with Central Community Master Plan
policy.” They also found the property’s proximity to the Trolley Square Trax station is a primary reason FB-
UN2 zoning is appropriate.
Issue 3-The property proposed for rezoning is subject to the standards of the H – Historic
Preservation Overlay Zone.
As noted above, the subject property is in the Central City Historic District and subject to the H – Historic
Preservation Overlay District development standards. These standards are intended to ensure development
is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and preserve historic neighborhood resources. The
Historic Preservation Overlay District standards for new development require compatibility with
surrounding structures and streetscapes. This may limit new structure height to less than the FB-UN2
zoning designation would typically allow. Planning staff noted development will need to be sensitive to the
variety of mass and scale on surrounding properties, including less dense residential development to the
south and west. Future development plans will be reviewed by the Historic Landmark Commission for
applicable development standards within the Historic Preservation Overlay District.
Planning staff concluded the zoning map amendment meets or can meet standards summarized in the
analysis of standards below.
MASTER PLAN CONSIDERATIONS
Attachment C (pages 15-17 of the Planning Commission staff report) includes master plan considerations
which are summarized below. Please see Planning’s staff report for the full analysis.
Central Community Master Plan
The Central Community Master Plan identifies the subject property as part of the Trolley Station Area due
to its proximity to Trax. The Trolley Station is part of an Urban Neighborhood Station Area which has
established development with a mixture of uses and can support increased residential density and
supporting commercial uses. New development typically occurs on underdeveloped or underutilized
properties. Compact developments are desired to focus new growth at the station while respecting existing
neighborhood scale and intensity.
Planning staff is supportive of the rezone and found it is consistent with the Trolley Station area goals in
the Master Plan.
H-Historic Preservation Overlay District
Planning staff included the Historic Preservation Overlay District purpose statement, which says:
Page | 4
In order to contribute to the welfare, prosperity and education of the people of Salt Lake City,
the purpose of the H- historic preservation overlay district is to:
1.Provide the means to protect and preserve areas of the city and individual structures
and sites having historic, architectural or cultural significance;
2.Encourage new development, redevelopment and the subdivision of lots in historic
districts that is compatible with the character of existing development of historic
districts or individual landmarks;
3.Abate the destruction and demolition of historic structures;
4.Implement adopted plans of the city related to historic preservation;
5.Foster civic pride in the history of Salt Lake City;
6.Protect and enhance the attraction of the city's historic landmarks and districts for tourists
and visitors;
7.Foster economic development consistent with historic preservation; and
8.Encourage social, economic and environmental sustainability.
Planning wanted to “put all interested parties on notice that the standards associated with the Overlay will
play a significant role in the future development of the subject property.”
Plan Salt Lake
Planning staff noted the following guiding principles outlined in Plan Salt Lake and found the proposed
rezone aligns with these along with policies and strategies in the Plan.
Growing responsibly while providing people with choices about where they live, how they live, and
how they get around.
A beautiful city that is people focused.
A balanced economy that produces quality jobs and foster an environment for commerce, local
business, and industry to thrive.
ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS
Attachment D (pages 18-19) 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.
Complies
Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the
specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance.
Complies
The extent to which a proposed map amendment will
affect adjacent properties
Complies
Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent
with the purposes and provisions of any applicable
overlay zoning districts which may impose additional
standards.
Future
development will
need to meet
standards of
Historic
Preservation
Overlay
Page | 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.
Complies
(Infrastructure
may need to be
upgraded at
owner’s expense to
meet City
requirements.)
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
• April 26, 2021-Application submitted.
• May 17, 2021-Petition assigned to Lex Traughber, Senior Planner.
• May 19, 2021-Notification sent to the Central Community Neighborhood Council (CCNC).
• Mat 28, 2021-Early notification sent to property owners and residents within 300’ of the subject
parcel.
• June 24, 2021-Application presentation at CCNC monthly meeting on rezone from CN to RO.
Following the meeting, in response to community and Planning staff feedback the applicant
decided to consider modifying their proposal.
• September 1, 2021-Application submitted to Planning to rezone property from CN to FB-UN2.
• November 23, 2021-applicant presentation to CCNC to change zoning from CN to FB-UN2.
• November 24, 2021-Property posted with signs for the December 8, 2021 Planning Commission
hearing. Listserv notification of Planning Commission agenda emailed. Agenda posted on the
Planning Division and State websites.
• December 8, 2021-Planning Commission public hearing. Six people spoke or had their comments
read at the hearing. All were opposed to the FB-UN2 zoning designation. The Commission voted
4-2 in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the City Council.
• December 9, 2021-Sent to Attorney’s Office.
• January 6, 2022-Applicant met with Historic Landmark Commission to review the proposal in a
work session. The Commission provided little feedback to the applicant.
• January 10, 2022-Planning Division received ordinance from Attorney’s Office.
• February 18, 2022-Transmittal received by City Council Office.
WESTERN GARDENS ZONING MAP AMENDMEMT
PLNPCM2021-00420
Request to amend the zoning map to change
the zoning for the 2.3 acre parcel located at
550 S. 600 East from CN –Neighborhood
Commercial to FB-UN2 –Form Based Urban
Neighborhood District.
PROJECT REQUEST
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
Request to amend the zoning map to change
the zoning for the 2.3 acre parcel located at
550 S. 600 East from CN –Neighborhood
Commercial to FB-UN2 –Form Based Urban
Neighborhood District.
PROJECT REQUEST
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
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: Petition PLNPCM2021-00420
Western Gardens Zoning Map Amendment
550 S. 600 East
STAFF CONTACT: Lex Traughber, Senior Planner
(801) 5356184 or lex.traughber@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council amend the zoning map as recommended by the
Planning Commission.
BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Tyler Morris, Cottonwood Residential, proposes to
amendment the zoning map to change the zoning for the 2.3 acre parcel noted above from CN –
Neighborhood Commercial to FB-UN2 – Form Based Urban Neighborhood District in its
entirety. The parcel is currently occupied by the Western Gardens commercial center. This
zoning map amendment change will facilitate the redevelopment of this parcel into a multifamily
residential project. The zoning map amendment does not require an amendment to the Central
Community Master Plan.
PUBLIC PROCESS:
●Early Notification – Notification of the proposal was sent to all property owners and
Lisa Shaffer (Feb 18, 2022 11:50 MST)02/18/2022
02/18/2022
tenants located within 300 feet of the subject parcels on December May 28, 2021. In
addition, the Central Community Neighborhood Council (CCNC) was also provided
notification on May 19, 2021.
● Central Community Neighborhood Council – The applicant presented and discussed
the proposal to rezone the property from CN to RO at the CCNC meeting on June 24,
2021. Planning Staff was in attendance. The applicant subsequently revised their request
to rezone the property from CN to FB-UN2. The applicant presented and discussed the
revised proposal with the CCNC on November 18, 2021. A letter from the CCNC is
attached in the Planning Commission Staff Report dated December 8, 2021.
● Planning Commission Meeting – On December 8, 2021, the Planning Commission held
a public hearing regarding the proposed zoning map amendment. The Planning
Commission voted to forward a positive recommendation regarding the proposal on to the
City Council for decision.
● Historic Landmark Commission Meeting – On January 6, 2022, the Historic
Landmark Commission held a work session regarding the proposed zoning map
amendment. The HLC provided little feedback to the applicant.
PLANNING AND HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION RECORDS:
a) PC Agenda of December 8, 2021 (Click to Access)
b) PC Minutes of December 8, 2021 (Click to Access)
c) PC Staff Report of December 8, 2021 (Click to Access)
d) HLC Agenda of January 6, 2022 (Click to Access)
e) HLC Minutes of January 6, 2022 (Click to Access)
f) HLC Staff Memorandum of January 6, 2022 (Click to Access)
EXHIBITS:
1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
3. ORIGINAL PETITION
4. MAILING LIST
5. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. _____ of 2022
(Amending the zoning of the property located at 550 South 600 East Street
from CN Neighborhood Commercial District to FB-UN2 Form Based Urban
Neighborhood District)
An ordinance amending the zoning map pertaining to the property located at 550 South
600 East Street from CN Neighborhood Commercial District to FB-UN2 Form Based Urban
Neighborhood District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00420.
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a public hearing on December
8, 2021 on an application submitted by Tyler Morris, Cottonwood Residential, to rezone the
property located at 550 South 600 East Street (Tax ID No. 16-06-476-029) from CN
Neighborhood Commercial District to FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood District
pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00420; and
WHEREAS, at its December 8, 2021 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 the Property identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto shall be
and hereby is rezoned from CN Neighborhood Commercial District to FB-UN2 Form Based
Urban Neighborhood District.
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: ______________.
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date:__________________________________
By: ___________________________________
Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney
January 10, 2022
EXHIBIT “A”
Legal Description for the Property to be Rezoned:
Address: 550 S.600 East
Tax ID No. 16-06-476-029
1011 S 6.5 RDS OF LOT 7 & ALL LOT 8 BLK 24 PLAT B SLC SUR ALSO COM AT NW COR SD LOT 7 E 10 RDS S 3.5 RDS W 10 RDS N 3.5 RDS 5429-2544 5520-0002 8498-3111
8498-3108 THRU 3110 9524-5493
Contains 99,317 sq feet or 2.28 acres more or less.
' Date/Time Opened Popular Topic Contact Name
ii!'3/11/202212:50 ADU's Diane Whittaker Hi Dan,We are very concerned about ADUs in our neighborhood.We have experienced ADUs in Portland,Oregon and Vancouver,BC and it
leads to junky,crowded,dangerous neighborhoods.Our streets are too narrow for the additional car parking;we do not want higher density
housing in our area and how do we know if our sewer and water systems can handle this?How do we go about excluding our neighborhood
from additional GDII nnrmit0 Diann Whittaker
3/14/2022 15:29 Traffic Calming Laura Page Wants traffic calming sign
3/14/2022 16:02 Homelessness Bradley Korth Can we just get some more affordable housing in Salt Lake City?High-density housing can help with that.Even middle-density housing.That
would help house the homeless.I don't like being approached by panhandlers almost every time I walk from Harmons back to the TRAX.I don't
ever know what to do,because some are legitimate,some are not;and I don't have a lot of income to spare for this anyway.But the homeless
are in a more difficult situation than I am.I wouldn't really call for people to be pushed away,because there are people who genuinely need
help.And so,to help solve this,I really would want more high-density housing in SLC.Bradley Korth A PhD music student at the U of U living in
3/15/2022 13:17 bike park Ian Mccubbin Concerned that his family's quality of life is impacted from bike park.Jan sent an email to ask if there are park hours signed,and he would like
to talk to Chris about his interest in having funds identified to have a ranger in this area.Jan emailed Chris and told him he could bring this up
_ when oark raneer tonic is discussed with his colleagues,Attachment included
3/15/2022 15:08 Traffic Calming Margaret G Morin She lives at_and would like a traffic calming sign.Jan emailed her to confirm she received a sign.
3/15/2022 16:05 Pioneer Park Tyler Clancy Good Morning Councilwoman Valdemoros-This is Tyler here from the Pioneer Park Coalition.I just wanted to drop you an invitation for an
Coalition event we would like to plan for April-We are calling it"Community Connections"and through a partnership with the Utah Center for Civic
Improvement,we would like to host a laid back,town hall-style forum with you in your district either at a restaurant/bar/library(or something
like that).Basically,our hope is to give you a moderated discussion/platform to discuss your vision for the city,connect with constituents,and
answer a few audience questions.Our hope is that this event would be somewhat informal,not very high pressure,but an opportunity to help
connect you with citizens in your community.Let me know what you think-Thanks again,Tyler Clancy--Tyler Clancy Executive Director
3/16/2022 15:18 Homelessness Gary Tedesco Claims enforcement and abatement policies are capriciously and inconsistently applied with no long-term effect.Is there a policy codified,
published and available for public view or is it more of an evolving adhoc set of policies?Property owner in the 2nd E and 2nd S downtown
CBD--observation of increasing homelessness on the streets,and illegal open air drug dealing and use.Creates a negataive impact on
huc
3/17/2022 9:29 Astro truf Kimberly Peterson Kimberly called wanted to know if there had been a change in any laws that would allow her to keep her astro turf in her lawn.She mentioned
she was currently working with Civil Enforcement to bring her yard into compliance.She stated she understands she needs to follow the law
and lamented that the city requires grass.I explained that she would need to speak to her Inspector Carlos and they could come to an
agreement on how to best complete her project.She said she was happy to discuss it with him further and that he had be responsive to this
point.She thanked me and wanted to express the need for the city to change ordinance to allow for less or no vegetation on lawns.I also let
her know if she has any issues she can contact me directly for any more support or questions.
3/17/2022 16:12 Affordable Housing Annamarie Pluhar Hi Because of a google alert I found out about the recent hearing.(https://www.kuer.org/business-economy/2022-03-14/community-
members-push-against-housing-project-they-say-takes-away-renters-dignity)As you can see by the links below we're all about shared housing.
I'm concerned about how these houses will be managed.Do you have a plan for making sure that those sharing will be compatible?If not,I'm
100%sure that there will be big trouble with it.I have some ideas for how to mange the human side.Would be happy to talk to someone about
this)Thanks Annamarie Annamarie Pluhar,President Sharing Housing,Inc.Information for individuals Author:Sharing Housing,A Guidebook
for Finding and Keeping Good Housemates
3/17/2022 16:16 Homelessness Rich Spence Dear Salt Lake City Council,I am contacting you concerning the proposal to remove all permitted and conditional use codes for homeless
shelters in Salt Lake City.I have been involved with the Rescue Mission of Salt Lake City for 10 years and currently serve on the Board of
Directors.As you are well aware the homeless population in Salt Lake City has continued to increase over the past several years.Studies are
clear that the number of homeless increases proportionately to increases in population and density.They will remain in the city regardless of
the presence of homeless services.The Mission has been instrumental in mitigating the potential harmful impacts this has on Salt Lake City.By
providing food,shelter,showers,job support,recovery programs,transitional housing,clothing and a safe place for the homeless the Mission
is an opportunity for these people to live productive lives.The mission has more demand for its services than ever and needs to expand to
meet the increasing demand.The need for these services is greatest in Salt Lake City and being able to develop the facilities adequate to the
demand is crucial.The current proposal would make this development impossible.I am in support of leaving permitted and conditional use in
the current code until the new code is developed and implemented in order to continue to provide and improve life-saving services to the
homeless.Thank you for considering our homeless residents as you evaluate these issues.Richard Spence,M.D.
3/18/2022 16:50 Homelessness Glenn Bailey Crossroads Urban Center is writing to oppose the proposal by the Mayor to ban the siting of future homeless shelters in Salt Lake City.This an
unnecessary change to existing codes.No homeless shelter,temporary or permanent,can be sited in Salt Lake City without the approval of the
City.Why announce a ban on shelters when you already control if and where they can be established?If you don't want more shelters,you
simply don't need to approve them.If you need to change the rules for conditional use or winter overflow shelter,you can do so without this
symbolic and hostile prohibition.By codifying a complete ban on shelters,you are sending a message,but not the one you may be intending.
This prohibition will have zero effect on the willingness of other municipalities to host such services.Furthermore,it will have no impact on the
number of unsheltered people on our streets.You would be sending the message that while Salt Lake City knows the shelter system is
inadequate,especially in the winter,our response is to prevent any useful response in our city,while engaging in aggressive camp clearing
activities on an ongoing basis.Is this really who we are?Is this really the message you intend to send?Please consider this carefully.
Subsequent policy discussions can be held without taking this drastic step.There is simply no need to take this action at all.Executive Director
Date/Time Opened Popular Topic Contact Name Description
3/21/2022 9:20 Kuulei Jakubczak RE:SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA,March 22,2022 C.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS:1.Ordinance:Amendment to Require Notice for Permits
to Work in the Public Way Dear Councilmember Fowler,Salt Lake City residents have requested notification for work being done in the Right of
Way.Citizens express wanting more transparent,accurate information about construction work that can be seen out the window of their
house or that affect parking on the street near their home.Verizon supports these goals,but requests the City Council take additional input
rather than adopting the ordinance in its current form.In order to address the needs described above,the information must be timely,correct
and relevant.The notification process should align with the needs of City Staff in order for implementation and integration into the permitting
process.The current draft of the proposed ordinance to require notification of construction in the right of way may not meet these criteria.
Adoption of a quality ordinance cannot be rushed;a few weeks of additional insight and discussion could result in a more seamless adoption
and implementation by City Staff and an accurate,timely notice for residents for years to come.We encourage the City Council to take time to
consider the language and processes that will provide SLC citizens with well-timed,clear,accurate information about upcoming construction in
the ROW.The current draft of the ordinance may benefit from more consideration of the timing,description of the residents who receive
notice,the types of proof of notification required,and from further City Staff input.Below is a summary of considerations for the City Council
in its continued deliberation of this proposed ordinance.By refraining from adopting the Notice Ordinance as currently proposed on Tuesday,
we can discuss further these issues.To be clear,Verizon does not object to providing notification of construction in the right-of-way.As a
matter of fact,Verizon already voluntarily provides construction notification.Rather,Verizon seeks to assist in optimal regulations that are
beneficial to its residents,regulated industry and the City.CONSIDERATIONS FOR SALT LAKE CITY'S PROPOSED NOTICE ORDINANCE•The
ordinance is proposed to broadly apply to all ROW users.This presents challenges given the various occupants of the ROW,how they use it,
how they are regulated,and how they perform their installations[timeframe,method,etc.].•As a wireless carrier,Verizon Wireless notes two
primary areas that present challenges for the City,the public,and wireless carriers:1.Notice provided too far in advance of construction.•
Public confusion:•Accurately Identifying construction start and end dates in the notice is more difficult the earlier in the process it is.
Inaccurate or broad ranges of construction dates cause confusion-especially if the ROW needs to be cleared for construction.'Pre-application
notification may give recipients the impression that there is more ability for public input on the location of wireless facilities than is provided
for under federal law.•Not all applications are ultimately permitted and constructed..Fatigue:•The City has noted that constituents feel
construction fatigue.If broad construction time frames or notice of sites that are not ultimately constructed are provided,this could increase,
not reduce,construction fatigue.2.Notice requirements for work being performed underground is too broad.*Public confusion:•The number
of notice recipients is unduly extensive and will lead to confusion by notifying owners of properties that are not adjacent to ROW property that
will be disturbed.While the notice is limited to"Adjacent Properties",the definition is vague,referring to properties that are impacted.It's not
clear if impacted properties are adjacent to the above ground work site or to underground facilities being placed from the work site.Sincerely,
Kuulei lakubczak Director-Government and Community Affairs Utah,Nevada&Tribal Nations
3/21/2022 11:37 Shelters Michael Bryant Has the council discussed what would happen if an existing resource center does not own the building they operate out of and their landlord
decides not to renew their lease?What would happen if a resource center or shelter is forced to move out of the building they currently
operate?Would they be able to find a new location within SLC,or would they be forced to move out of the city?
3/21/2022 15:59 Homelessness Jackson Heuer Hello,I am currently looking to relocate to Denver for training,and a sister.I have otherwise read that it costs about eleven thousand dollars in
Salt Lake case management to house a homeless person.As it so happens,with my social security check and work,even at my current level of
competence I have eleven thousand dollars.I make more money being homeless,and I don't like taking advantage.I am very willing to pay the
fee.I have no criminal history,and I am semi-competent at Hospitality and Factory day labor.Given proper housing,I am willing to pretend to
be Mormon and wear magic underwear.I do not think they will actually want me,but underwear is a compromise that I am willing to make.I
am also willing to do some nonprofit work.I like to give back on occasion.
3/21/2022 16:03 Homelessness Melanie Spence Council,I am contacting you concerning the proposal to remove all permitted and conditional use codes for homeless shelters in Salt Lake City.
My father,Richard Spence,has been involved with the Rescue Mission of Salt Lake City for 10 years and currently serves on the Board of
Directors.As you are well aware,the homeless population in Salt Lake City has continued to increase over the past several years.Studies are
clear that the number of homeless increases proportionately to increases in population and density.They will remain in the city regardless of
the presence of homeless services.The Mission has been instrumental in mitigating the potentially harmful impacts homelessness has on Salt
Lake City.By providing food,shelter,showers,job support,recovery programs,transitional housing,clothing and a safe place for the homeless
to stay,the Mission is an opportunity for these people to live productive lives.The mission has more demand for its services than ever and
needs to expand to meet the increasing demand.The need for these services is greatest in Salt Lake City and being able to develop the facilities
adequate to the demand is crucial.The current proposal would make this development impossible.I am in support of leaving permitted and
conditional use in the current code until the new code is developed and implemented in order to continue to provide and improve life-saving
services to the homeless.Thank you for considering our homeless residents as you evaluate these issues.
3/21/2022 16:04 Homelessness Katie Grahlfs Dear City Council,I am contacting you concerning the proposal to remove all permitted and conditional use codes for homeless shelters in Salt
Lake City.My father has been involved with the Rescue Mission of Salt Lake City for 10 years and currently serves on the Board of Directors.As
you are well aware the homeless population in Salt Lake City has continued to increase over the past several years.Studies are clear that the
number of homeless increases proportionately to increases in population and density.They will remain in the city regardless of the presence of
homeless services.The Mission has been instrumental in mitigating the potential harmful impacts this has on Salt Lake City.By providing food,
shelter,showers,job support,a recovery program,transitional housing,clothing and a safe place for the homeless the Mission is an
opportunity for these people to live productive lives.The mission has more demand for its services than ever and needs to expand to meet the
increasing demand.The need for these services is greatest in Salt Lake City and being able to develop the facilities adequate to the demand is
crucial.The current proposal would make this development impossible.I am in support of leaving permitted and conditional use in the current
code until the new code is developed and implemented in order to continue to provide and improve life-saving services to the homeless.Thank
you for considering our homeless residents as you evaluate these issues.Katie Grahlfs
3/21/2022 16:05 Homelessness Pete Spence Dear city council memebers,I am contacting you concerning the proposal to remove all permitted and conditional use codes for homeless
shelters in Salt Lake City.As you are well aware the homeless population in Salt Lake City has continued to increase over the past several years.
Studies are clear that the number of homeless increases proportionately to increases in population and density.They will remain in the city
regardless of the presence of homeless services.The Rescue Mission has been instrumental in mitigating the potential harmful impacts this has
on Salt Lake City.By providing food,shelter,showers,job support,recovery program,transitional housing,clothing and a safe place for the
homeless the Mission is an opportunity for these people to live productive lives.The mission has more demand for its services than ever and
needs to expand to meet the increasing demand.The need for these services is greatest in Salt Lake City and being able to develop the facilities
adequate to the demand is crucial.The current proposal would make this development impossible.I am in support of leaving permitted and
conditional use in the current code until the new code is developed and implemented in order to continue to provide and improve life-saving
services to the homeless.Thank you for considering our homeless residents as you evaluate these issues.Peter Spence
Date/Time Opened Popular Topic Contact Name Description
3/21/2022 16:10 Jan Hemming Dan:I want to once again express my opposition to any amendments to the SLC Zoning Ordinance that would allow stealth wireless
telecommunication facilities up to 75 feet in PL.zones.I have spoken about this extensively,and shared my thoughts with the Planning
Commission in December,2022.(See attached letter).My letter summarizes my concerns.Please vote"no."However,I wish to express my
support for two grant applications:"One that would consider transit,walking,and biking improvements on 1300 East and University streets;
strengthen the local business restaurant/retail district;and update strategies for managing parking and motor vehicle traffic.This is long
overdue.Traffic is only getting more intense as car volumes increase on the 1300 East corridor from the University of Utah.The U keeps
growing and expanding,so there is no time in the foreseeable future when car volumes will decrease.Yalecrest borders 1300 East and feels the
negative effects from the motor vehicle traffic.*One that would fund the Foothill Drive Ped/Bike Safety Improvements Design.The project will
complete 40%of the design and cost estimates to improve multiple pedestrian and bike crossings across Foothill Drive between 1300 East and
Parley's Interchange.This is beyond a"no brainer."If the city is truly committed to transitioning to alternative modes of transportation bikes,
mass transit,walking,etc.,or encouraging and protecting what we already have as well as reducing the volume of cars on Foothill—then it is
time to put its money where its mouth is and fund these alternatives.Best,Janet(Jan)Hemming Chair Yalecrest Neighborhood Council
3/21/2022 16:11 Jan Hemming Dan:I am in favor of two zoning amendments(see below)that the City Council will vote on during tomorrow's(March 22)City Council meeting
to:(1)remove Homeless Resource Center and Shelters as conditional uses in designated zones;and(2)extend the shelter/HRC moratorium for
another nine months to re-evaluate and revise the zoning policy for homeless resource centers.Current regulations place an unfair and
inequitable burden on three zones—which are all nearly exclusively located on the west side of the city.This issue of homeless shelter
distribution was finally addressed by the 2022 State legislature—which also sought for a more equitable distribution of homeless facilities
throughout the county.Between the efforts of the legislature and the City Council this human issue deserves to have equitable attention across
our county.If I understand the amendments,they will grant authority to the City Council to determine where and when homeless shelters are
located in Salt Lake.This is preferable,rather than placing it solely in the hands of the Planning Department,Planning Commission or Mayor.
Respectfully,Janet(Jan)Hemming Chair Yalecrest Neighborhood Council
3/22/2022 10:40 Kathleen Kelly fyi From:Jan Hemming<hemmingjan@gmail.com>Sent:Monday,March 21,2022 6:35 PM To:kathleenkellyutah@gmail.com;
anniepayne@comcast.net;Dugan,Dan<Daniel.Dugan@slcgov.com>;Donald Emerson<donaldjemerson@yahoo.com>Cc:Barlow,Aaron
<Aaron.Barlow@slcgov.com>;LYNN Pershing<Ikpershing@gmail.com>;Virginia Hylton<virginiahylton@gmail.com>;Lisette
<dmgib@xmission.com>;James Webster<jwalandscape@gmail.com>;Josh Stewart<jms.ut.us@gmail.com>;Central City 3
<3cinslc@live.com>;Esther Hunter<estherehunter@gmail.com>;Bonneville Hills<ellenred@comcast.net>Subject:(EXTERNAL)Fwd:ADU
Emigration Kathleen:I'm heart broken for you.This is not progress.But it's what happens when government has simplistic solutions for serious
problems.ADU's aren't going to fix our housing crisis,but they are certainly going to make neighbors more angry.Either our neighborhoods
stand for something in Salt Lake or the city's utopian notion of"one size fits all—shut up and sit down"is going to prevail.The more I see
what's happening to what used to be a pretty great city,the more I realize the only way things are going to change is at the ballot box.No one
elected the Planning Department,but with 26,000+new apartments(and more on the way)that have few families and fewer children(is
anyone still wondering why we're thinking about closing 14 schools?),with a Sugar House that used to be charming but is now a disaster,with
the prospect of more tasteless ADU's and the constant erosion of historic districts with projects like the Western Garden and Bueno
Apartments debacles,maybe the ballot box is the answer.Sorry for spouting off,but this really hits a nerve ending.Wait until the 22-foot ADU
on top of a two-car garage on 1300 South that backs up against a beautiful home on Laird Ave in Yalecrest is constructed.The Yalecrest Infill
Overlay—which was carefully crafted with the Planning Department in the days when the Planning Department was neighborhood friendly—
was completely ignored and kicked to the side of the road.It would have prevented the 22-foot tower.Just as I'm sorry for you and the
helplessness you must feel,I also feel sorry for Stephanie Thomas who owns the Laird home and has no idea what's about to hit her.If she ever
wanted to sell her home who would want to buy a house with a beautiful spacious backyard and a 22-foot tower staring down?It defies
common sense—just as the"giant dumpster"you have to stare at every day defies common sense.Kathleen:What are your choices?You just
moved into the beautiful Wasatch Hollow neighborhood.Talk about buyers remorse.I'm in agreement with you.It's not equitable.You've
been harmed.But the city doesn't care.If it did,there would be provisions requiring those who install these ugly domiciles not to harm
neighboring properties or pay for expensive landscaping to hide them.I think we need to start educating people and making our preferences
known to potential candidates and elected officials who will see the folly of this.Best,Jan Begin forwarded message:From:
<kathleenkellyutah@gmail.com<mailto:kathleenkellyutah@gmail.com»Subject:ADU Emigration Date:March 21,2022 at 4:59:34 PM MDT
To:"'ANNE CANNON"'<anne.cannon@utah.eddaniu<mailto:anne.cannon@utah.eddaniu»,"'Jan Hemming"<hemmingjan@gmail.com
<mailto:hemmingjan@gmail.com>>,<Daniel.Dugan@slcgov.com<mailto:Daniel.Dugan@slcgov.com»Cc:"'Barlow,Aaron'"
<Aaron.Barlow@slcgov.com<mailto:Aaron.Barlow@slcgov.com>>Good afternoon,As you know,I had been in touch with you all about the
ADU requested for our neighborhood.It was installed on Friday,and we are heart broken.While the front of the Modal pre-fabs look nice
online,the back is downright ugly.Our surroundings neighbors are appalled and have called it the"railroad car";the"shipping container"and
the"giant dumpster".It is visible from 1700 East and looks grossly out of place in the neighborhood.Please see the photos of our previous
3/22/2022 10:46 Homelessness Tracy Spence Chris,I am contacting you concerning the proposal to remove all permitted and conditional use codes for homeless shelters in Salt Lake City.
My husband,Richard Spence,has been involved with the Rescue Mission of Salt Lake City for 10 years and currently serves on the Board of
Directors.As you are well aware the homeless population in Salt Lake City has continued to increase over the past several years.Studies are
clear that the number of homeless increases proportionately to increases in population and density.They will remain in the city regardless of
the presence of homeless services.The Mission has been instrumental in mitigating the potential harmful impacts this has on Salt Lake City.By
providing food,shelter,showers,job support,recovery program,transitional housing,clothing and a safe place for the homeless the Mission is
an opportunity for these people to live productive lives.The mission has more demand for its services than ever and needs to expand to meet
the increasing demand.The need for these services is greatest in Salt Lake City and being able to develop the facilities adequate to the demand
is crucial.The current proposal would make this development impossible.I am in support of leaving permitted and conditional use in the
current code until the new code is developed and implemented in order to continue to provide and improve life-saving services to the
homeless.Thank you for considering our homeless residents as you evaluate these issues.Tracy Spence
3/22/2022 10:48 Airbnb Heidi Middleton Mr Wharton,Airbnb's are strangling our neighborhood:we've had almost no single family homes for sale over the last two years,long term
renters are being evicted,and Washington Elementary is being evaluated for closure because what used to be a neighborhood full of kids is
now a ghost town.This article nails all the ways I feel about this:https://www.outsideonline.com/culture/opinion/airbnb-rental-housing-prices-
ethics/?embedded_webview=true.In the last month I have seen three properties that were once all long term apartments be turned into
blocks of 4 or 6 Airbnb's.I want to buy a bigger home in my neighborhood for my growing family.I want to live here and send my kids to
Washington Elementary.Investors who don't live here are making that impossible for those of us who live in and love this special
neighborhood.We need common sense laws to prevent the overabundance of properties being used in this way,while still allowing the every
day homeowner to make a little cash on their extra bedroom.And if we already have those laws,we need enforcement powerful enough to
dissuade this predatory practice.The fines must be greater than the profit.Please let me know how I can help make this happen before my
neighborhood,and all of our beautiful city,becomes just a tourist trap.Thanks Heidi Middleton
' Date/Time Opened ' _••' Description
'3/22/2022 10:50 Homelessness Melanie Spence Chris,I am contacting you concerning the proposal to remove all permitted and conditional use codes for homeless shelters in Salt Lake City.
My father,Richard Spence,has been involved with the Rescue Mission of Salt Lake City for 10 years and currently serves on the Board of
Directors.As you are well aware,the homeless population in Salt Lake City has continued to increase over the past several years.Studies are
clear that the number of homeless increases proportionately to increases in population and density.They will remain in the city regardless of
the presence of homeless services.The Mission has been instrumental in mitigating the potentially harmful impacts homelessness has on Salt
Lake City.By providing food,shelter,showers,job support,recovery programs,transitional housing,clothing and a safe place for the homeless
to stay,the Mission is an opportunity for these people to live productive lives.The mission has more demand for its services than ever and
needs to expand to meet the increasing demand.The need for these services is greatest in Salt Lake City and being able to develop the facilities
adequate to the demand is crucial.The current proposal would make this development impossible.I am in support of leaving permitted and
conditional use in the current code until the new code is developed and implemented in order to continue to provide and improve life-saving
services to the homeless.Thank you for considering our homeless residents as you evaluate these issues.Melanie Spence Software
Development Student I Grand Canyon University
3/22/2022 10:52 Proclamation Ron Barness Dear Councilmen Dugan and Many:Councilman Wharton encouraged me to write you regarding a Proclamation we are seeking for the
Cathedral Church of Saint Mark's 150th anniversary.I serve on the Vestry(board)at St Mark's.For more than 150 years,St.Mark's—the seat
of the Episcopal Church in Utah and member of the 85 million member worldwide Anglican Communion—has provided worship,leadership
and vision to meet the community's educational,healthcare,civic,cultural,and spiritual needs(St Mark's Hospital and Roland Hall-St Mark's
School were founded by our first bishop).St Mark's was designed by architect Richard Upjohn whose commissions also include Trinity Church
Wall Street,the Connecticut State Capitol and St Paul's Church in Selma,Alabama.Hildegarde's Food Pantry(established in 1986)feeds more
than 35,000 people annually and,in 2021,we provided a$250,000 gift to The Point,a tiny home community in a converted hotel near the Salt
Lake City Int'l Airport.St Mark's is a diverse and welcoming community of faith and outreach where everyone has a place at the table and the
dignity of every human person is respected regardless of race,gender,status or sexual orientation.St Mark's was the first non-Latter-day Saint
church established in Salt Lake—the cornerstone was set in 1870,the first mass in 1871 and was consecrated in 1874.It is the second oldest
house of worship in Utah after the Tabernacle on Temple Square.Over these many years,we have opened our doors for numerous secular
groups such as the Utah Tibetan Community,Salt Lake County Health Department,Westminster College Nursing Program,Solstice Jazz Vespers
and at least five 12-step programs.Due to covid,we postponed our sesquicentennial.We plan to celebrate our 150th on the Feast of Saint
Mark—our patron—on Monday,April 25,2022.On Friday,April 29,the Episcopal Church in Utah will convene our 155th annual convention at
St Mark's where we will elected the 12th bishop of Utah.We humbly hope and pray that the Salt Lake City Council will honor our request for
Proclamation of the 150th Celebration of the Cathedral Church of Saint Mark in our City on April 25,2022.Warm regards,Ron Barness St
Mark's Vestryman RON BARNESS
3/22/2022 16:19 Homelessness Laura Spence Dear SLC City council,I am contacting you concerning the proposal to remove all permitted and conditional use codes for sheltering the
unhoused in Salt Lake City.As you are well aware the unhoused population in Salt Lake City has continued to increase over the past several
years.Studies are clear that the number of unhoused increases proportionately to increases in population and density.They will remain in the
city regardless of the presence of homeless services.The Rescue Mission has been instrumental in mitigating the potential harmful impacts this
has on Salt Lake City.By providing food,shelter,showers,job support,recovery program,transitional housing,clothing and a safe place for the
unhoused the Rescue Mission is an opportunity for these people to live productive lives.The mission has more demand for its services than
ever and needs to expand to meet the increasing demand.The need for these services is greatest in Salt Lake City and being able to develop the
facilities adequate to the demand is crucial.The current proposal would make this development impossible.I am in support of leaving
permitted and conditional use in the current code until the new code is developed and implemented in order to continue to provide and
improve life-saving services to the unhoused.Thank you for considering our unhoused residents as you evaluate these issues.Laura Spence
Notes from Jan's—comments from Ian McCubbin on March 15, 2022.
Traffic—I street bike park that's up in addition to the Morris Meadow trailhead—BMX completely
unregulated unmanaged, no formal agreement. Active jump through the entire winter—extreme fire
zoned areas.
At this point, we have seen the increase usage, great getting outside,the lack of any foresight or
planning of the foothill trail unknown challenge. Seeing an increase usage with no parking and traffic
mgt, compounding the challenge with an unmanaged extreme bike park that is exploding with use at the
same time.
Because it's in D3 gone to community council and Chris W is familiar with challenge. Not really going
anywhere we saw last fall a bike festival there. Since there we are seeing more usage in the winter
which leads me to believe that there will be an increase in usage for the springtime.
Austin laid it out that City Council has no jurisdiction -- no permit
From what I understood from public lands advisory brd Christian they are having a new ranger program,
but the council did not approve rangers at the Morris Meadows, if I understand the governance
City Council decided against funding rangers in the Morris trail area, all they can put is place rangers in
parks where there are already SLC police patrol. He is surprised with lack of any oversight any oversight
with all the issues taking place at 18th Street trailhead.
He was talking with Austin and Dustin—sent an email to Laura and Kristen, council email
City fiasco smack in the middle of his district.
We will have Chris give him a call. I think it's time to consider a resolution for I-street bike park.
He is worried about more kids showing up, more jumping taking place, shovels with wheelbarrows
working on this all winter. High level of pro-bikers up there. They are posting on Instagram and
attracting more bikers--there is a cornered I-street bike park below reservoir public utilities managed
property, below is a big bike park, separate from the trail network.
Excavating land—managed by the public lands. Kids are up there drinking staying up late at night and
Ian is worried some kid is going to get killed on the property. If unregulated it will be risk to children. His
viewpoint two risks, wildfire in the SLC fire dept identified that the usage of Bike park puts their house at
risk for fire, and he also sees people are getting hurt the number of 911 calls anecdotally that are not
designed.
His home life is being disturbed throughout the year. He talked with Neighbor officer nordgard, public
lands and public utilities.
555 Northmont way SLC 84103
He expressed frustration lack of action from the City. Tired of hearing that's not my department --
It would alleviate his concerns if there was a ranger in the area. I-street bike park has some formal
agreement. There aren't any regulations with public lands and public utilities.
This is known problem: 970-819-2842 cell
Keep in mind for ranger discussion, established hours could be a possibility.