Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03/07/2023 - Formal Meeting - Meeting Materials
r �% • s r0000 two SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FORMAL MEETING March 7, 2023 Tuesday 7:00 PM Council Work Room 451 South State Street Room 326 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Z.CCouncil,con- CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS: Darin Mano, Chair Victoria Petro,Vice Chair District 5 District 1 Alejandro Puy Chris Wharton Ana Valdemoros District 2 District 3 District 4 Dan Dugan Amy Fowler District 6 District 7 Generated: 09:39:37 Please note: Dates not identified in the FYI-Project Timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined. WELCOME,AND PUBLIC 114ETTING RULES A. OPENING CEREMONY: 1. Council Member Amy Fowler 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 January 10, 2023, as well as the formal meeting minutes of January 17, 2023. B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Ordinance: Budget Amendment No.5 for Fiscal Year 2022-23 The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the final budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2022-23. 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 more repairs to City Hall from the March 202o, Earthquake, upgrades to public safety radio systems, Police Officer recruitment and retention bonuses, and additional emergency rental assistance among other items. For more information on this item visit https-//tinyur1,com/SLCFY23 FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday, February 21, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment-Tuesday, March 7, 2023 at 7 P.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 21, 2023 Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s). 2. Ordinance: Amending the Zoning Text Pertaining to the use of Landscape Materials The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would make zoning changes allowing the City to be listed as eligible by entities that provide rebates for property owners who replace lawn grass with more water- wise landscaping. These landscape zoning amendments are limited to the program requirements for these rebate programs. The transmittal to the Council states that additional landscape changes are underway and being studied,but not included in this petition. The current proposal includes placing limits on the amount of lawn grass that can be planted based on use, size of landscaped area, and slope. It also makes other changes. The proposal would amend the zoning text of Section 21A.48.05o and definitions in Title 21A associated with the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to the use of landscape materials. The Council may amend other related chapters and sections of Title 21A Zoning as part of this proposal. Petition No.: PLNPCM2022-01055 FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, March 21, 2023 Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s). 3. Ordinance: Right of Way Permit Notification Fee The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend notice requirements for work in the public way permits and impose a fee related to such notices. If adopted, the fee associated with the pre- notification postcards would be in the existing Consolidated Fee Schedule so that the appropriate fees can be assessed to the public way permit applicant along with the other required public way permit fees prior to approval and issuance of the permit. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, February 7, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, February 7, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD Staff Recommendation- Refer to motion sheet(s). 4. Ordinance: Glendale Regional Park Plan The Council will accept public comment and consider an ordinance that would adopt the Glendale Regional Park Plan to be part of the City's general plan as a specific plan found in the Westside Master Plan. Public Lands Department has been working with a consultant, Design Workshop, to develop a plan to guide development of the 17-acre Glendale Regional Park site, formerly known as Raging Waters. For more information on this item visit https://tinyurl.com/GlendaleRegionaIPark FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday, February 21, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment-Tuesday, March 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 21, 2023 Staff Recommendation- Refer to motion sheet(s). 5. Ordinance: Northpoint Small Area Plan The Council will accept public comment and consider an ordinance that would adopt the Northpoint Small Area Plan. The Northpoint Small Area Plan is a land use plan for the land that is located between the Salt Lake City International Airport and the northern boundary of the city along the 2200 West corridor. The updated plan will provide guidance on existing and anticipated development in the area, as well as annexation-related issues.As part of the plan update, the Salt Lake City Major Streets Plan will be amended to reflect recommended roadway alignments. Petition No.: PLNPCM2022-00687 For more information on this item visit https:lJtinyuri.com/NorthpointSmallAreaPlan FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing-Tuesday, February 21, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday, February 21, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, March 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, March 21, 2023 Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s). C. POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS: NONE. D. COMMENTS: 1. Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. 2. Comments to the City Council. (Comments are taken on any item not scheduled for a public hearing, as well as on any other City business. Comments are limited to two minutes.) E. NEW BUSINESS: NONE. F. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 1. Resolution: Ranked Choice Voting The Council will consider approving a resolution to participate in the State- authorized Municipal Alternative Voting Method Pilot Program project, otherwise known as ranked choice voting or instant runoff voting. Under ranked choice voting, voters rank the candidates in order of preference. Election equipment counts the preference numbers for each ballot. If none of the candidates receive more than 50% of the overall vote after the first round, the candidate with the least number of votes is eliminated. The voters who had selected the eliminated candidate as their first choice would then have their votes counted for their second-choice candidate. This process of elimination continues until a candidate crosses the 50% threshold and is declared the winner. For more information on this item visit https://tinyurl.com/RankedChoiceSLC FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, January 10, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment- n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s). 2. Ordinance: Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Awards The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would approve the disbursement of local business assistance grant awards from the City's American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) fiscal recovery funds.A business needs to show an economic hardship caused by the pandemic and meet other federal requirements to be eligible for these ARPA grants. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, February 21, 2023 and Tuesday March 7, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 or Tuesday, March 21, 2023 Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s). 3. Resolution: Authorizing Execution of an Interlocal Agreement to Transfer a MITS Vehicle to West Valley City The Council will consider approving a resolution that would authorize the approval of an interlocal cooperation agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and West Valley City regarding the transfer of ownership of a tactical vehicle (MITS) from Salt Lake City Corporation to West Valley City.As part of the Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) grant, funds were allocated to Salt Lake City to purchase and operate several Mobile Interoperable Tactical Solution Vehicles ("MITS Vehicle") for use in emergencies and other operations throughout the Wasatch Front urban area and the State of Utah. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, February 21, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Staff Recommendation- Refer to motion sheet(s). G. CONSENT: 1. One-year Action Plan for Community Development Block Grant& Other Federal Grants for Fiscal Year 2023-24 The Council will set the date of Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment and consider an appropriations resolution that would authorize grant funding to selected applicants and adopt the One-Year Annual Action Plan for Fiscal Year 2023-24. The plan includes Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding, HOME Investment Partnership Program funding, Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funding, and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) funding. The resolution would also 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 21, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment-Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday,April 18, 2023 Staff Recommendation - Set date. 2. Ordinance: Rezone and Master Plan Amendment at 865 South Soo East The Council will set the date of Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning of property at 865 South 50o East Street from RMF-30 (Low Density Multi-Family Residential District) to CN (Neighborhood Commercial District), this would also amend the Central Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map. The intent of the rezone request is to allow for the conversion of the existing single-family dwelling on the property to a commercial use. Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics. The property is located within Council District 5. Petitioner: Rick Service, Petition No.: PLNPCM2o22-00301 &PLNPCM2022-00302 FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,April 4, 2023 Staff Recommendation - Set date. 3. Ordinance: Electric Vehicle Readiness Off-Street Parking Stalls Amendment The Council will set the date of Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend and update City code requirements for parking on some new construction projects. New multi- family housing projects like condos and apartments would be required to add electrical capacity on twenty percent of their off-street parking stalls. The electrical capacity would allow the future addition of electric vehicle charging stations at the stalls constructed for them. The proposal would amend the City's land use code at 21A.44.040. The requirement would also apply to major reconstructions of qualifying properties in multi-family zones. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, January 3, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,April 4, 2023 Staff Recommendation - Set date. 4. Ordinance: Homeless Resource Center Text Amendment The Council will set the date of Tuesday,April 4, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would establish a process for approving future Homeless Resource Centers (HRCs) in the City and modify existing standards for homeless resource centers and homeless shelters. The Council may amend other related chapters and sections of Title 21A Zoning as part of this proposal. The proposal includes: • A Homeless Resource Center Overlay Zoning District; • Modifications to city ordinance 21A.36.350 Standards for Homeless Resource Centers; • Provisions for temporary/seasonal homeless resource centers that incorporate recent changes to Utah Code; • Modifications to city ordinance 21A.50 to include additional considerations when mapping the HRC overlay and other related changes; and • Updated defined terms. This petition was initiated by the City Council through Ordinance 15B of 2022. Petition No.: PLNPCM2022-01068 FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, March 21, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment-Tuesday,April 4, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday,April 18, 2023 Staff Recommendation- Set date. 5. Ordinance: Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Text Amendment The Council will confirm the date of Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend various sections of the Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) regulations. The proposed code revisions would eliminate the conditional use requirement for detached ADUs in single-family residential zones. They would also aim to lower zoning barriers to construction of ADUs in general. The proposed changes would seek to strike a better balance between encouraging construction of ADUs and mitigating impacts to neighboring properties. Petition No.: PLNPCM2022-000475 FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, January 17, 2023; Tuesday, February 7, 2023; and Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 and Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, February 7, 2023 and Tuesday, March 21,2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, March 21, 2023 Staff Recommendation - Confirm Public Hearing date. 6. Grant Holding Account Items (Batch No.5) for Fiscal Year 2022-23 The Council will reconsider approving Grant Holding Account Items (Batch No. 5) for Fiscal Year 2022-23. 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 7, 2023 Staff Recommendation -Approve. 7. Board Appointment: Arts Council — Hannah Nielsen The Council will consider approving the appointment of Hannah Nielsen to the Arts Council for a term ending March 7, 2026.. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment- n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Staff Recommendation -Approve. 8. Board Appointment: Human Rights Commission - Pamela Silberman The Council will consider approving the appointment of Pamela Silberman to the Human Rights Commission for a term ending December 27, 2027. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment- n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Staff Recommendation -Approve. 9. Board Appointment: Human Rights Commission —Will Terry The Council will consider approving the appointment of Will Terry to the Human Rights Commission for a term ending December 27, 2027. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Staff Recommendation -Approve. H. ADJOURNMENT: CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 5:00 P.m. on Tursday,March 2, 2023,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. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 17, 2023 PENDING MINUTES — NOT APPROVED The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in Formal Session on Tuesday,January 17, 2023. The following Council Members were present: Victoria Petro, Daniel Dugan,Amy Fowler, Chris Wharton,Alejandro Puy, Darin Mano The following Council Members were absent: Ana Valdemoros Present Legislative Leadership: Cindy Gust-Jenson — Executive Director,Jennifer Bruno— Deputy Director, Lehua Weaver— Associate Deputy Director Present Administrative Leadership: Rachel Otto— Chief of Staff, Lisa Shaffer— Chief Administrative Officer Present City Staff: Katherine Lewis — City Attorney, Cindy Lou Trishman— City Recorder, Michelle Barney— Minutes &Records Clerk,Thais Stewart — Deputy City Recorder, Isaac Canedo — Public Engagement Communication Specialist,Taylor Hill — Constituent Liaison/Policy Analyst, Scott Corpany— Staff Assistant The meeting was called to order at 7:10 Pm MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 17, 2023 A. OPENING CEREMONY: 1. Council Member Darin Mano 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 June 1, 2021; June 15, 2021; and July 13, 2021 as well as the formal meeting minutes of October 4, 2022 and December 13, 2022. Motion: Moved by Council Member Fowler, seconded by Council Member Wharton to approve work session minutes of June 1, 2021; June 15, 2021; and July 13, 2021 as well as the formal meeting minutes of October 4, 2022 and December 13, 2022.. AYE:Victoria Petro, Daniel Dugan,Amy Fowler, Chris Wharton,Alejandro Puy, Darin Mano ABSENT:Ana Valdemoros Final Result: 6 — o Pass 5• Introduction of YouthCity Government Students Council Member Mano welcomed the YouthCity Government students and asked them to introduce themselves. Juana Escareno reviewed the purpose of the YouthCity program. Diya Oommen, Hazel Bacon, Hamda Ibrahim and Wild-Violet Badger(YouthCity Representatives) introduced themselves and gave reasons why they chose to get involved with the program. Council Member Puy encouraged the YouthCity students to join the City Council in the future. B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. C. POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS: NONE. 2 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 17, 2023 D. COMMENTS: 1. Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. Council Member Petro asked when the State of the City address would be delivered. Rachel Otto stated the State of the City address would be on Tuesday,January 23, 2023, at Woodbine Foodhall and asked the Council to RSVP. 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 Mano read the rules of decorum. Tecuani Oliver spoke to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) discussed in the Work Session, concerned how quickly Council Members were willing to push the proposal through as more review and input was needed in regard to mitigating the affects of ADU's in the City. Brian Moench spoke to using pesticides in the Northwest Quadrant and the harmful affects of the chemicals on humans and wildlife. Kristma Robb spoke to enforcement issues within the City including illegal ADU's and how new community councils were trying to address problems in their areas. Cindy Cromer spoke in regard to the Thriving in Place report and the privilege of being part of the working group,topics in the news regarding Utah including this report,the tools the report would provide(adoption/implementation of the plan) and the need to address housing loss mitigation with the tools in the report,introducing new expectations for housing being difficult and the City could not keep giving away land values. Katie Pappas expressed disappointment in the development of the warehouse district in Northpointe and emphasized the need to preserve the natural spaces in Utah. Kathy Scott spoke regarding the relocation of Judge Memorial and Lady of Lords Church and the need to preserve the Church when the property was redeveloped as it was a historical building. Dorothy Owen spoke on the difficulty in creating the Northpointe Small Area Master Plan and asked the Council to reconsider the planning process so other communities didn't have to go through the same process this plan went through. 3 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Margaret Holloway spoke to the move of the Bee's Baseball team moving to Daybreak, and the need to give incentives to the existing businesses to remain in Salt Lake City. Ann O'Connell spoke on the Northpointe Small Area Master Plan and the need for a larger plan to address preservation of the natural lands surrounding the Great Salt Lake. E. NEW BUSINESS• 1. Resolution: Local Emergency Declaration Extension-Shelter Bed Caps The Council will consider adopting a resolution that would extend the Mayor's December 20, 2022 proclamation declaring a local emergency relating to Shelter Bed Caps. Icustomfields.Trailing—Briefing—DirectivelI Motion: Moved by Council Member Fowler, seconded by Council Member Puy to adopt Resolution 01 Of 2023 an extension of Declaration of Local Emergency: Winter Overflow Shelter Overnight Occupancy Caps. AYE:Victoria Petro, Daniel Dugan,Amy Fowler, Chris Wharton,Alejandro Puy, Darin Mano ABSENT:Ana Valdemoros Final Result: 6 — o Pass F. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 1. Ordinance: Economic Development Loan Fund-Forty Three Bakery/Streusel LLC The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would approve a $1oo,000 loan to Forty Three Bakery/Streusel LLC, at 713 Genesee Avenue from the Economic Development Loan Fund(EDLF.) Forty Three Bakery is a retail and wholesale bakery and caf6.The loan will assist in the creation Of 20 new jobs in the next year and retention Of 7 current jobs. Icustomfields.Trailing—Briefing—DirectivelI Motion: Moved by Council Member Puy, seconded by Council Member Fowler to adopt Ordinance 02 Of 2023 approving a$ioo,000 loan for Forty Three Bakery/Streusel, LLC, from Economic Development Loan Fund. 4 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 17, 2023 AYE: Victoria Petro, Daniel Dugan,Amy Fowler, Chris Wharton,Alejandro Puy, Darin Mano ABSENT:Ana Valdemoros Final Result: 6 — o Pass G. CONSENT: 1. Ordinance: Zoning Map Amendment at Approximately'704 East goo South The Council will set the date of Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning map for the property at approximately 704 East goo South from R-2 (Single- and Two-Family Residential) to SNB (Small Neighborhood Business). The subject property is 0.24 acres.Although a specific development is not being proposed at this time, the rezone is in anticipation of bringing illegally added dwelling units up to code. Petitioner: Ale Gicqueau, Petition No.: PLNPCM2022- 00251. 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, January 17, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment-Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, February 21, 2023 Staff Recommendation - Set date. 2. Ordinance: Rocky Mountain Power Rezone The Council will set the date of Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning of the property at 1223 West North Temple and portions of properties located at 1219 West, 1275 West, and 1407 West North Temple Street from M-1 Light Manufacturing and TSA-SP-C Transit Station Area-Special Purpose-Core to TSA-Urban Center-Core. The purpose of the amendment is to accommodate new office headquarters for Rocky Mountain Power. Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics. 5 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Petitioner: Rocky Mountain Power, Petition No.: PLNPCM2022-00450. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, February 21, 2023 Staff Recommendation - Set date. 3• Ordinance: Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Text Amendment The Council will set the date of Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) regulations. The proposed code revisions would eliminate the conditional use requirement for detached ADUs in single-family residential zones. They would also aim to lower zoning barriers to the construction of ADUs in general. The proposed changes would seek to strike a better balance between encouraging the construction of ADUs and mitigating impacts to neighboring properties. Petition No.: PLNPCM2022-000475 FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, February 21, 2023 Staff Recommendation - Set date. 4• Ordinance: Adopting Urban Forest Action Plan The Council will set the date of Tuesday, February 21, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would adopt the final version of the Urban Forest Action Plan. The plan is intended to provide guidance and concrete steps for Salt Lake City to align its resources and actions in the built environment with its goals for sustainability and equity. It would also inform a future zoning code amendment that supports the preservation and promotion of trees on public and private lands and within the public right-of-way. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council 6 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 17, 2023 discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment-Tuesday, February 21, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 7, 2023 Staff Recommendation- Set date. 5• Land Exchange to Facilitate the Bridge to Backman Project The Council will set the date of Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment about a transfer of certain Open Space Lands owned by Salt Lake City located at 592 N. Riverside Drive for $o to Riverwood Cove, LLC in exchange for another open space parcel of equal size. This exchange will facilitate the development of a new public park, a community outdoor classroom, and a new walking and bicycling connection to/from Backman Elementary School for Backman Elementary School students, and will resolve a current encroachment issue. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, February 7, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD Staff Recommendation - Set date. 6. Ordinance: Amending the Zoning Text Pertaining to the use of Landscape Materials The Council will set the date of Tuesday, March 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning text of Section 21A.48.05o and definitions in Title 21A associated with the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to the use of landscape materials. The proposal includes placing limits on the amount of turf grass that can be planted based on use, size of landscaped area, and slope and makes other similar changes. The proposed modifications are being requested in order for the City to be listed as an "eligible city"by entities that provide rebates for property owners who replace turf with more water-wise landscaping. The Council may amend other related chapters and sections of Title 21A Zoning as part of this proposal. Petition No.: PLNPCM2022- 7 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 17, 2023 01055 FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment-Tuesday, March 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, March 21, 2023 Staff Recommendation - Set date. 7• Board Appointment: Accessibility and Disability Commission - Kristy Chambers The Council will consider approving the appointment of Kristy Chambers to the Accessibility and Disability Commission for a term ending December 28, 2026. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment- n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Staff Recommendation -Approve. 8. Board Appointment-Accessibility and Disability Commission - Ivana Powell The Council will consider approving the appointment of Ivana Powell to the Accessibility and Disability Commission for a term ending December 28, 2026. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment- n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Staff Recommendation -Approve. 8 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 17, 2023 9• Board Appointment -Accessibility and Disability Commission - Damon Talbot The Council will consider approving the appointment of Damon Talbot to the Accessibility and Disability Commission for a term ending December 28, 2026. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment- n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Staff Recommendation -Approve. 10. Board Appointment - Racial Equity in Policing Commission - U1iva Guadarrama The Council will consider approving the appointment of Uliva Guadarrama to the Racial Equity in Policing Commission for a term ending December 30, 2024. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment- n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Staff Recommendation -Approve. 11. Board Appointment- Racial Equity in Policing Commission - Olivia Joylani Kavapalu The Council will consider approving the appointment of Olivia Joylani Kavapalu to the Racial Equity in Policing Commission for a term ending December 30, 2024. FYI — Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday, January 17, 2023 9 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Staff Recommendation -Approve. Motion: Moved by Council Member Fowler, seconded by Council Member Wharton to approve the Consent agenda. AYE:Victoria Petro, Daniel Dugan,Amy Fowler, Chris Wharton,Alejandro Puy, Darin Mano ABSENT:Ana Valdemoros Final Result: 6 - o Pass H. ADJOURNMENT: 10 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 17, 2023 Meeting adjourned at 7:42 PM Minutes Approved: City Council Chair City Recorder Please refer to Meeting Materials (available at wi/vw.data.slc.gov by selecting Public Body Minutes)for supportive content including electronic recordings and comments submitted prior to or during the meeting.Websites listed within the body of the Minutes may not remain active indefinitely. This document along with the digital recording constitutes the official minutes of the City Council Formal meeting held Tuesday,January 17, 2023 and is not intended to serve as a full transcript. Please refer to the electronic recording for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52- 4-203. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 10, 2023 PENDING MINUTES — NOT APPROVED The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in Work Session on Tuesday,January 10, 2023. The following Council Members were present: Ana Valdemoros,Victoria Petro, Daniel Dugan,Amy Fowler, Alejandro Puy, Darin Mano The following Council Members were absent: 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, DeeDee Robinson — Minutes &Records Clerk,Thais Stewart — Deputy City Recorder,Taylor Hill — Constituent Liaison/Policy Analyst, Scott Corpany— Staff Assistant, Andrew Johnston— Director of Homelessness Policy and Outreach, Ben Luedtke — Senior Public Policy Analyst, Sam Owen— Public Policy Analyst, Olivia Hoge — Elections Management Coordinator, Laura Briefer— Public Utilities Director,Jonathan Larsen —Transportation Director, Richard Boden — Fire Battalion Chief, Chief Karl Lich — Fire Chief,Teresa Gray— Public Utilities Water Quality&Treatment Administrator, Dustin White— Public Utilities Regulatory Program Manager, Lindsey Nikola— Deputy Chief of Staff, Joshua Rebollo — Community Liaison The meeting was called to order at 3:47 Pm. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 10, 2023 Work Session Items 1. Informational: Updates from the Administration —4:00 p.m. 30 min. The Council will receive information from the Administration on major items or projects in progress. Topics may relate to major events or emergencies (if needed), services and resources related to people experiencing homelessness, active public engagement efforts, and projects or staffing updates from City Departments, or other items as appropriate. 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 Lindsey Nikola provided information regarding: COVID-ig Updates • Cases in the US up 2% and down 23%in Utah in the last two weeks • Vaccination/booster information and locations Josh Rebollo provided information regarding: Community Engagement Highlights • Ways to engage with the City found at www.sle.gov/feedback/ • Transportation projects/events: Comment period now closed for West Temple and Virginia Street reconstruction projects, UDOT I-15 environmental impact statement (EIS) alternatives comment period ending January 13, 2022 • Mayor's Office: Community Office Hour locations and details Andrew Johnston provided information regarding: Homelessness Update • Homeless Resource Center occupancy/bed availability • Encampment Impact Mitigation (EIM) efforts focusing around I-8o 130o East and 200 South Redwood Road • Rapid Intervention Team (RIT)locations: 18 recurring cleanings,five new locations cleaned, and seven encampments reached through VOA engagement • Resource Fair to be held January 13, 2022, in the Rio Grande Area from 9:3o am to 12:30 pm 2. Informational: SLC Emergency Management Update 2023 4:30 P.M. 30 min. The Council will receive an annual report of the City's emergency procedures,the Council's role in an emergency, and an overview of Emergency Management's current programs and efforts. 2 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 10, 2023 Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing-Tuesday,January 10, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date- n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment-n/a TENTATIVE Council Action-n/a Karl Lich (Fire Chief) and Richard Boden (Emergency Management Division Chief) provided information regarding: • Department accomplishments, goals and projects in progress • Emergency Management staffing update • Activation levels and notifications • 2022 examples of Emergency Operations Center(EOC) activations (incidents, levels and actions taken) • EOC provided materials for Council Members (helmet, grey vest with name and district— identification for EOC sites) 3. Informational: UTA Westside On-Demand Pilot Program 5:00 P.m. Update 30 min. The Council will receive an update about the Utah Transit Authority's or UTA's Westside On-Demand Pilot Program. Salt Lake City, in collaboration with UTA,launched the new service in December 2021 to improve connections to other transit services and the downtown for residential areas of Council Districts 1 and 2. For more information on this item visit-,viN,�v.tiiivui,l.coin/transportatioi-islc Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing-Tuesday,January 10, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date- n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment-n/a TENTATIVE Council Action-n/a Benjamin Luedtke provided a brief introduction. Carlton Christensen (Chair of UTA Board of Trustees),Jay Fox (UTA Executive Director), and Jon Larsen provided information regarding: Utah Transit Authority(UTA) Update • Update to On Demand for Westside of Salt Lake City: • Service updates year-to-date; 2,648 unique riders, average monthly growth at 28%, average cost per rider $18.00 • Vehicle updates: up-fitted wheelchair accessible vehicles to side-loading vans,bike racks installed on all vehicles, increased accessible fleet to 50% 3 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 10, 2023 • Monthly ridership growth: 52,438 total ridership, 1,350%total growth, 28% average monthly growth • On Demand added to South Davis County, Tooele County, south end of Salt Lake County(Riverton, Bluffdale, Draper, etc.) • Ridership metrics and most common destinations • 2023 ridership projections • Identifying other areas in Salt Lake City where On Demand service was planned for,how the locations were determined, and when the service might begin 4. Informational: Zero Fare Transit Study 5:30 P.m. 30 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a study by Wasatch Front Regional Council, Utah Transit Authority(UTA), Utah Department of Transportation and the Mountainland Association of Governments. It evaluates potential impacts of expanding reduced fare or zero fare policies to different modes of public transit.This could be done in certain areas or the entire UTA service system. Salt Lake City participated in a zero fare pilot program February 2022. Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing-Tuesday,January 10, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date- n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment-n/a TENTATIVE Council Action-n/a Julie 13jornstad (Wasatch Front Regional Council Senior Transportation Planner), Alex Beim(UTA Acting Manager of Long-Range and Strategic Planning), Jay Fox (UTA Executive Director), and Jon Larsen provided information regarding: Regional Zero Fare Presentation • Study context: 2022 Free Fare February resulting in positive outcomes, regional interest in longer-term impacts of Zero Fare, examine other fare-based incentives to increase ridership,lower or zero-fares causing existing riders to ride more/attracts new riders, data-informed process on impacts of options • Fares representing a small part of UTA's revenue • Salt Lake City having actively supported UTA with fare policy and service (financial support and leadership,funding more frequent and later services, etc.) • Information on eligible fare discounts (about 44% of UTA's riders system-wide pay full fare) • Study goals: evaluate the operational, financial, and community effects of Zero Fare transit, gauge transit values of stakeholders across the service area, provide guidance around replacement funding for lost fare revenue, objectively inform decision-making processes around the future of Zero Fare transit • Study alternatives: full system-wide Zero Fare,Zero Fare on the bus only,Zero Fare for low-income riders,lower fares on all services (reduce base fare to $1.00) 4 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 10, 2023 • Zero-fare effects: operation efficiency,financial health, community benefits • Understanding impacts of alternatives: projected ridership increases on bus/TRAX/Front Runner and paratransit, projected savings to UTA, projected cost increases (including a scenario impacts summary) • Possible paths forward: keep existing fare structure,partial implementations (bus- only zero-fare,low-income zero-fare, or $1.00 base fare), system-wide zero-fare (permanent or one-year pilot) 5. Informational: Utah Transit Authority Long-range Transit — 6:oo p.m. Planning 30 min. The Council will receive a briefing about the Utah Transit Authority's (UTA)long range transit plans. UTA has a five year service plan identifying needs and priorities over 2023 — 2028. UTA is also developing a 3o-year transit plan with a comprehensive vision, assessing system wide needs, and strategies to improve transit. Salt Lake City partners with UTA on frequent west-east bus routes (service every 15 minutes),bus stop amenities, mobility hubs,transit passes for K-12 public school students, grant applications to fund capital projects, and the Sugar House S-Line Streetcar among many others. Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing-Tuesday,January 10, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date- n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment-n/a TENTATIVE Council Action-n/a Alex Beim (UTA Acting Manager of Long-Range and Strategic Planning), Jay Fox (UTA Executive Director), Eric Callison (UTA Service Planning Manager), and Jon Larsen provided information regarding UTA 3o-year Long-range Planning Presentation • Planning process: strategic planning, service planning, operations planning, implementation • How long-range transportation plan(LRTP) and regional transportation plan (RTO)were complementary and different • Goals of the LRTP process: strengthen partnerships with communities served, assess long-term transit needs, develop a system wide vision for the future, establish strategies for implementation • Timeline: * 2021 —preliminary data collection and analysis * 2022 —consultant selection, phase I of community engagement, needs assessment * 2023 — draft plan,phase 11 of community engagement,plan revisions, finalize 2023-205o LRTP, UTA Board Approval of LRTP 5 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 10, 2023 Salt Lake City Bus Service Updates • Fixed route service map (displaying SLC-sponsored and UTA baseline services) • Fixed route ridership information(route, frequency, average weekday ridership, percentage of growth) 2023-2037 Final Draft Five-Year Service Plan • April (possibly August) 2023 — discontinuing routes gol and 902 (routes to Park City) • August 2023 — Open full OGX line in Ogden,TRAX 15-minute Saturday service, contingency service (restoring service on some routes and extending UVX to Provo Airport) • December 2023 — contingency service (restoring ski service on routes 953, 972, 994) • August 2024 — improvements to Ogden Local and South Utah County services, improved frequency on route 205 • August 2025 —improved service on 200 South in Salt Lake City • August 2026 — Midvalley Connector(affecting Murray,Taylorsville, and West Valley),improvements to Ogden/Salt Lake regional service • August 2027— 5600 West service, new Saratoga Spring/Eagle Mountain service • Timeline for adoption of the plan 6. Dinner Break 6:30 P.m. 30 min. 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 7. Informational: Safe Drinking Water Act Lead and Copper 7:00 P.m. Rule Changes 20 min. The Council will receive an update about upcoming changes to the Salt Lake City Lead and Copper Program for drinking water.The goal of this update is to provide information and receive feedback regarding the future implementation of changes to the Federal and State Safe Drinking Water Act(SDWA) Lead&Copper Rule, associated regulatory requirements, and the resulting changes to Salt Lake City's Lead and Copper Program. Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing-Tuesday,January 10, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date- n/a 6 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 10, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment-n/a TENTATIVE Council Action- n/a Sam Owen provided a brief introduction to the update. Laura Briefer,Teresa Gray and Dustin White provided information regarding: Lead and Copper Program and the EPA's Lead and Copper Rule Revisions (LCRR) • Includes all of Salt Lake City Dept of Public Utilities (SLCDPU) culinary water system • Public Utility's Staff leading the Lead and Copper Program • How lead and copper gets into drinking water • Health effects of lead • Historical key dates for lead in drinking water • Contents of the Lead and Copper Rule • New requirements of the LCRR; lead service line inventory,lead service line replacement, enhanced lead and copper sampling sites and plans, monitoring in schools and childcare facilities, corrosion control treatment,public communication and outreach • Timeline of the rollout • SLCDPU's historical efforts to reduce lead in drinking water • SLCDPU's current status for risks for lead • Sampling and inspection pilot study details • Details of what a service line was • Current status for inventory(customer and SLCDPU owned) • Lead service line identification • Public engagement and education for Salt Lake City residents • Program priorities: children, environmental justice, older homes • Funding availability for lead service line identification and replacement • Cost estimates for enacting the Lead and Copper Program • Lead reduction examples from other cities in the U.S. • Funding for this program was not yet detailed— options were currently being reviewed Council Member Puy suggested offering information about SLCDPU's Lead and Copper Program via Council Member newsletters to help further distribute information to residents. Informational: Ranked Choice Voting Overview 7:20 P.M. 30 min. The Council will have an internal discussion about an option for the 2023 municipal election to participate in the State-authorized Municipal Alternative Voting Method Pilot Program project, otherwise known as ranked choice voting or instant runoff voting. Under ranked choice voting,voters rank the candidates in order of preference. Election equipment counts the preference numbers for each ballot. If none of the candidates 7 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 10, 2023 receive more than 50% of the overall vote after the first round,the candidate with the least number of votes is eliminated.The voters who had selected the eliminated candidate as their first choice would then have their votes counted for their second- choice candidate.This process of elimination continues until a candidate crosses the 50% threshold and is declared the winner. For more information on this item visit�nivw.tinyurl.com/couiicilRCV Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing-Tuesday,January 10, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date- n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment-n/a TENTATIVE Council Action-n/a Benjamin Luedtke provided a brief introduction and indicated the deadline for a decision for Ranked Choice Voting (RCV)was May 2023. Olivia Hoge and Cindy Trishman provided information regarding: • RCV would continue to be an option offered by Salt Lake County for this upcoming election • Cost estimates for RCV were not yet available from Salt Lake County • State Legislation could impact the City's opportunity to participate in RCV Council Members Puy and Petro expressed support for using RCV without a primary election. Straw Poll: Support for using Ranked Choice Voting for the 2023 municipal election with no primary election (tentatively based on Legislative direction).All Council Members present were in favor; Council Members Wharton and Valdemoros were absent for the poll. Standing Items y. Report of the Chair and Vice Chair Report of Chair and Vice Chair. Council Member Mano mentioned the Council's Retreat event was to be held on January 31, 2023 and directed Council Members to start thinking of their goals/priorities. lo. 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 8 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 10, 2023 City Council business, including but not limited to scheduling items. Information Needed by Staff • National League of Cities (NLC) Congressional City Conference 2023 • NLC Congressional City Conference 2023 will take place from Sunday, March 26th to Tuesday, March 28th in Washington, D.C. at the Marriott Marquis, with pre-conference activities from Friday, March 24-25. • Some Council Members have expressed interest in a tour of the White House. ■ White House tour requests must be submitted a minimum Of 21 days in advance and no more than go days in advance of the requested tour date(s). Reservations cannot be accepted for tour dates outside this 21 — go-day window. ■ Public tours are typically available from 8:0o AM to 12:30 PM Tuesday,Wednesday,Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, excluding Federal holidays or unless otherwise noted. Please let staff know as soon as possible if you would like to tour the White House and or the names of all guests who may be attending with you. There was no discussion regarding the NLC-sponsored White House tours. Cindy Gust-Jenson mentioned Council Staff was recently notified of an upcoming event— National Day of Racial Healing event to be held on January 17&18 in Washington,DC(sponsored by the NLC)and inquired if Council Members would be interested in attending. Council Member Mano noted the short notice for the event and the importance of recognizing the day for next year. 11. 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 9 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 10, 2023 (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. Closed Session A Started at 4:53 pm Held via Webex and in the Work Session Room (location) Council Members in Attendance: Council Members Dugan, Fowler, Petro, Puy, Mano, and Valdemoros (online) City Staff in Attendance: Mayor Mendenhall, Katherine Lewis, Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Andrew Johnston, Lorena Riffo-Jenson, Lindsey Nikola, Cindy Gust-Jenson,Jennifer Bruno, Lehua Weaver,Allison Rowland, Ben Luedtke,Taylor Hill, Scott Corpany, Sam Owen,Tracey Fletcher, Nick Tarbet, and Cindy Lou Trishman. Closed Session ended at 5:03 pm Motion: Moved by Council Member Fowler, seconded by Council Member Valdemoros to enter into Closed Session A for the purposes of strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property and attorney-client matters. AYE:Ana Valdemoros,Victoria Petro, Daniel Dugan,Amy Fowler,Alejandro Puy, Darin Mano ABSENT: Chris Wharton Final Result: 6 — o Pass Motion: Moved by Council Member Fowler, seconded by Council Member Dugan to exit Closed Session A AYE:Victoria Petro, Daniel Dugan,Amy Fowler,Alejandro Puy, Darin Mano ABSTAIN: Ana Valdemoros ABSENT: Chris Wharton Final Result: 5 — o Pass Motion: Moved by Council Member Puy, seconded by Council Member Petro to enter into Closed Session B for the purposes of discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems. AYE: Victoria Petro, Daniel Dugan,Amy Fowler,Alejandro Puy, Darin Mano 10 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 10, 2023 ABSENT:Ana Valdemoros, Chris Wharton Final Result: 5 — o Pass Motion: Moved by Council Member Fowler, seconded by Council Member Dugan to exit Closed Session B AYE: Ana Valdernoros,Victoria Petro, Daniel Dugan,Amy Fowler,Alejandro Puy, Darin Mano ABSENT: Chris Wharton Final Result: 6 — o Pass Closed Session B Started at 7:33 pm, ending at 8:27 Pol. Minutes and Recording not created pursuant to UCA 52-4-2o6(6)(b) I I MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 10, 2023 Meeting adjourned at: 8:27 Pm. Minutes Approved: City Council Chair City Recorder Please refer to Meeting Materials (available at wi/vw.data.slc.gov by selecting Public Body Minutes)for supportive content including electronic recordings and comments submitted prior to or during the meeting.Websites listed within the body of the Minutes may not remain active indefinitely. This document along with the digital recording constitutes the official minutes of the City Council Work Session meeting held Tuesday,January 10, 2023 and is not intended to serve as a full transcript. Please refer to the electronic recording for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52-4-203. 12 (Insert Agenda Item# Here) ,,,..��''� •••••..,,, MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY r tinyurl.com/SLCFY23 TO: City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke and Sylvia Richards Budget Analysts DATE: March 7,2023 MMMIMMM RE: Budget Amendment Number Five FY2023 MOTION 1—CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPT SINGLE ITEM I move that the Council continue the public hearing and adopt an ordinance amending the Fiscal Year 2023 final budget of Salt Lake City including the employment staffing document only for item E-1 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.Also, the continued public hearing will have new advertising. The budget amendment remains open. The Council will consider other items at a future date. E-1:Treasury Emergency Rental Assistance Program Additional Resources($2 Million Grant Fund) - $2 Million for Salt Lake City tenant rental assistance through the Utah Rent Relief Program CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 SLCCOUNCIL.COM P.O.FOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 i COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ,, f' CITY COUNCIL Of SALT LAKE CITY 111 tinyurl.com/SLCFY23 tow s•''' TO: City Council Members Project Timeline: Set Date: February ,2023 FROM: Ben Luedtke Sylvia Richards S Y i Briefing: March 7, 2023023 Budget and Policy Analysts Public Hearing:March 7,2023 2nd Briefing:TBD DATE: March 7,2023 Potential Action:March 21, 2023 RE: Budget Amendment Number Five FY2023 Budget Amendment Number Five includes 24 proposed amendments, $33,321,895 of expenditures of which $6,240,349 is from Fund Balance,requested changes to six funds. If all the items are adopted as proposed,then Fund Balance would be 22.9%which is $40,507,938 above the 13%minimum target. Two items are urgent with straw poll requests: Item A-5 $2.4 million additional funding for the radios upgrade, (was expected and builds on funding in the Sales Tax Bond)and Item A-3,an increase in the cost for fiber upgrades to City facilities to over$250,000 (unexpected and urgent because it needs to be done during a street reconstruction project).As noted in the staff report,the Administration is requesting straw polls for both items. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 COUNCIL.SLCCOV.COM L P.O.BOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 Council Request: Tracking New Ongoing General Fund Costs Approved in Midyear Budget Amendments Council staff has provided the following list of new ongoing costs to the General Fund.Many of these are new FTE's approved during this fiscal year's budget amendments,noting that each new FTE increases the City's annual budget if positions are added to the staffing document. Budget Estimated Cost Amendment Item Increase to Next New City F rEs Notes Annual Budget Homeless Shelter Cities 13 new FTEs which Admin expects to apply for grant funding Mitigation Grant Award includes: annually to cover these costs.General Fund #1 $2.2 Million 12 police officers and would not need to cover costs if the State grant is one business and awarded to the City to fully cover the costs. community liaison Utah League of Cities N/A Total annual membership cost is$221,563 #3 and Town Membership $38,000 Cost Increase Two Contract Two new FTEs Development $207,800 Specialists in Finance Senior Project Manager One new I TE The $85 Million Parks Bond could pay for this in Public Services $168,000 FI'E in future fiscal years.The General Fund fronted the cost in FY2023.The position sunsets with the bond funding. Two Planners in Public Two new FTEs The$85 Million Parks Bond could pay for these Lands F rEs in future fiscal years.The General Fund $�41'44o fronted the cost in FY2023.The positions sunset #4 with the bond funding. Volunteers of America N/A Separate from VOA's countywide outreach team. (VOA)Salt Lake City $2�74,000 Specific Outreach Team Four existing VOA workers: Two case managers and two coordinators Police Substation on N/A North Temple and Downtown Central $130,000 Precinct Leases and Utilities 3 of the new FTEs sunset with the GO Bond TOTALS $39259,240 18 funding,and some are covered with potential fiuture state grant awards Disclaimer:For the chart above,staff didn't include a couple Youth&Family and Police Department multi-year grants since they would not create cost increases for the next annual budget. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 COUNCIL.SLCCOV.COM L P.O.BOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 REVISED TRANSMITTAL AND REVISED REVENUE AND FUND BALANCE CHARTS Amended Variance Favorable Revenue FY22-FY23 Annual Budget -23Amended Budget Revised Forecast (unfavorable) Property Taxes 125,012,927 125,012,927 125,012,927 - Sale and Use Taxes 105,050,018 105,050,018 10 ,269,378 3,219,360 Franchise Taxes 11,657,128 11,657,128 11,640,553 (16,575) Paynomt in Lien of Taxes 1,638,222 1,638,222 1,638,222 - TotalTaxes 243,3SB,295 243,3S8,29S 246,S61,080 3,202,795 Licenses and Permits 40,736,114 40,736,114 41,114,687 378,S73 Intergovernmental Revenue 4,644, 22 4,6 ,622 4,722,377 77,755 Interest Income 2,071,154 2,071,154 4,771,154 2,700,000 Fines 3,765,174 3,7 5,174 3,817,666 52,492 Parking Meter Collections 2,635,475 2,635,475 2,635,475 - Char es,Fees,and Rentals 4,432,794 4,432,794 4,887,307 454,513 Miscellaneous Revenue 3,439,710 3,438,710 3,857,347 418,637 1 mart und Reimbursement 24,431,717 24,431,717 24,422,422 (9,295) Transfers 28,821,993 34, 21,993 34,829,993 (92,000 Total W/O Special Tax 3S8,336, 371,619,SO8 7,183,460 Additional Sales Tax(1/2%) 44,364,490 44,364,490 45,614,490 1,250,000, Total General Fund — i 402,700,538 408,8W,S38 417,233,998 1 9,433,4601 Revenue for FY2023 Budget Adjustments According to the Administration,the current projections for fiscal year 2023 projections continue to be positive.Actual sales tax revenue received is currently projected to exceed budget by$3.2 million while the sales tax associated with Funding Our Future is projected to exceed budget by$1.25 million. Building permits continue to stay strong projecting to be over budget by $378,573• Charges and services is projecting to be over budget because of strong numbers from police service revenues, while miscellaneous revenue shows an increase over budget due to an increase in fuel reimbursement costs.The City is also projecting a large surplus due to the rising interest rates. Staff Note Clarification: Other Police Services Revenue includes contractual agreements for the following:Jordan River Patrol,Task force UHP Crosswalk and Speed control,South Salt Lake,North Salt Lake.The agreement reimburses overtime for police officers who assist in the areas.There is an offsetting PD overtime expenditure. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 COUNCIL.SLCCOV.COM L P.O.BOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 Fund Balance The Administration's chart below shows the current General Fund Balance figures. Beginning Fund Balance Budgeted Change in Fund Balance Prior Year Encumbrances Estimated Beginning Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Percent Year End CAER Adjustments Revenue Changes Expense Changes(crepaids,Resavable,Etc.) Fund Balance w/CAER Changes Final Fund Balance Percent Budget Amendment Use of Fund Balance BA#1 Revenue Adjustment BA#1 Expense Adjustment BA#2 Revenue Adjustment BA#2 Expense Adjustment BA#3 Revenue Adjustment BA#3 Expense Adjustment BA#4 Revenue Adjustment BA#4 Expense Adjustment BA#5 Revenue Adjustment BA#5 Expense Adjustment BA#6 Revenue Adjustment BA#6 Expense Adjustment BA#7 Revenue Adjustment BA#7 Expense Adjustment Change in Revenue Change in Expense Fund Balance Budgeted Increase Adjusted Fund Balance Adjusted Fund Balance Percent Proposed/Adopted Revenue CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM P.O.BOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 Impact Fees Update The Administration's transmittal does not provide an updated summary of impact fee tracking.The information from Budget Amendment No. 5 is copied below and is current as of 12/28/22.As a result,the City is on-track with impact fee budgeting to have no refunds during all of FY2023 and FY2024.The Administration reports work is nearing completion to update the fire and parks sections of the impact fee plan.The transportation section was updated in October 202o. Eligible projects for police impact fees are being identified.Note that the below balances were updated based on the Council's Capital Improvement Program(CIP)project funding decisions. Type « Unallocated Cash Next Refund Trigger Date Amount of Expiring Available to Spend Impact Fees Fire $1,479,222 More than a year away - Parks $12,150,505 More than a year away - Police $989,579 More than a year away - Transportation $4,182,237 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: Rapid Intervention Team Trailer($25,000 from General Fund Balance to the Fleet Fund) The Administration is requesting one-time funding to purchase a second outfitted trailer for the Rapid Intervention Team.The additional trailer is expected to enable the team to spend less time waiting in line at the landfill by the team taking full trailer loads to the landfill when wait times are shorter. A-2: City Hall Earthquake Repairs($2.65 Million from General Fund Balance to the CIP Fund) These funds would be in addition to$9.2 million previously approved by the Council to repair damage from the 5.7 magnitude earthquake in March 2020. If approved as requested,then the project is expected to be fully funded.All of the expenses are expected to be reimbursed by insurance.The true cost would not be known until the project goes out to bid and receives proposals.The funding also includes ancillary costs such as protection of artworks, temporary office moves,and consultants. Repairs could take a year to be completed from the date of selecting a contractor bid. The Engineering Division has worked with the City's property insurance company(FM Global)on the full extent of needed repairs and associated cost estimates.Attachment 1 to the transmittal includes a breakout of these expenses. Note that the cost of inflation experienced since the earthquake will be covered by insurance. A-3: Fiber Conduit to Improve Connections between City Facilities as part of the 200 South Reconstruction Project($242,285 from the IMS Fund) The project would improve connections between City facilities downtown and on the Westside including the Airport, Pioneer Park,and multiple offices,and increase capacity for future needs.The Council approved$150,000 in the annual budget of which$1oo,000 is continuing the City Connect program and the remaining$50,000 is going to the fiber conduit improvements.There are potential benefits such as cost savings and reduced disruption to the neighborhood by including this project in the reconstruction of 200 South when underground utilities are more easily accessible to upgrade. ➢ The Administration has requested a straw poll for this item to avoid an upcoming price increase and to fit the project within the reconstruction schedule. A-4:Withdrawn Prior to Transmittal A-5: Public Safety Radio Replacements Cost Increases($2.4 Million from the IMS Fund) These are in addition to the$3.7 million from the IMS Fund approved as part of FY2023 CIP.The$6.1 million is for public safety handheld and mobile radio replacements,control stations,some special accessories for certain work CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 COUNCIL.SLCCOV.COM L P.O.BOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 groups,removal of the old and installation of new equipment. IMS reports another$2 million is anticipated to be needed for similar replacements of non-public safety radios.Enterprise funds like the Airport and Public Utilities are budgeting to cover their radio equipment replacements. The Council separately funded$7.5 million for radio towers and related infrastructure in the 2022 sales tax revenue bond approved in Budget Amendment#4 last December. ➢ The Administration has requested a straw poll for this item to avoid a price increase later in March. A-6: Consulting to Create Enterprise Bill System Replacement for Public Utilities Billing System (PUBS) ($250,000 from the IMS Fund) PUBS was developed and expanded by IMS over the past two decades.The system is reaching end of life and needs to be replaced. Some General Fund departments use the system like Sustainability and Community and Neighborhoods in addition to Public Utilities(which is an enterprise fund).This funding is to hire a consultant evaluating the City's needs and recommending options to replace PUBS.Microsoft support for the current system is expected to end as soon as July 2024. A-7: Lindsey Gardens CIP Project Rescope($459,36o in the CIP Fund) The Public Lands Department is requesting a rescope of remaining funds to complete a reduced scope of work in response to cost increases.The primary scope change is renovating the concession stand instead of a full rebuild at a new location with new utility lines.The Department evaluated rebuilding a smaller and simpler concession stand at the current location but inflation resulted in cost estimates even higher than the original scope.The Avenues Baseball League previously donated$1o,000 towards the project. The revised scope of work includes the following items in order of priority.The rescope may not be enough to fully fund all items.The Department would construct these items as far as the funding allows. - Concession stand renovation - Pedestrian path to middle field - Batting cage renovation - Covering dugouts with shade canopies - Trail from middle field to lower field The Council approved$557,000 in FY2019 and FY2020 CIP for improvements to Lindsey Gardens baseball fields and pedestrian access. $97,640 was spent on design fees and engineering.The remaining balance would be rescoped. The following note was provided by the league President in support of the rescope request: This note is to confirm that the Board of Directors of the Avenues Baseball League(ABL)has been informed of and approved the changes to the scope of work at Lindsey Gardens.As president of the league,I have been involved with you,Dat,Preston,and others to change the scope of work and establish new priorities given the anticipated cost overruns after getting the bids for the original scope of work.I have communicated the revised scope of work and the priority of the projects to the ABL board. The board agrees with the priorities that we have discussed and is eager to get on with the project. Bart Cocke President,Avenues Baseball League A-8:Anonymous Donation for the Avenues City Cemetery($1 Million Donation) This item would recognize an anonymous donation to the City for cemetery maintenance and improvements. A-9: One-time Retention Bonuses and Ongoing Hiring Bonuses for Police Officers($4.3 Million from ARPA and$1,201,976 from General Fund Balance) The Police Department estimates three to seven years to reach full staffing based on current hiring and retention rates.This item would fund a new bonus program to incentivize longer retention of officers and faster hiring of new Page 16 officers.The bonus program is intended to stabilize staffing and help the Department reach full staffing within two years.Note that there are many unknowns outside the City's control when projecting when the Police Department could reach full staffing such as the number of qualified candidates applying,the state of the Wasatch Front metropolitan and national economies,officers on leave,crime rates,etc. The Police Department is seeking funding to provide one-time retention bonuses to existing police officers.The retention bonus would be $5,000 for officers who agree to continue employment for one-year or$8,00o for a two year commitment.The retention bonuses would be staggered by timing them to an employee's hiring date anniversary.Approximately$1 million would be needed in the next annual budget to continue the bonus program because of the design to stagger bonuses based on hiring date anniversaries. Retention bonuses would be paid to all existing sworn officers. The Department is also seeking funding to provide ongoing hiring bonuses of$10,00o for lateral officers with a one year commitment and$5,000 for self-sponsored candidates of a qualifying POST-certified police academy.The self- sponsored candidates would still need to complete additional training specifically required by the Department. Hiring bonuses would require a one-year commitment to continue employment with the Department. If an officer leaves before their commitment period is completed,then a prorated amount of the bonus would need to be repaid.Employment separations for any reasons have occurred at all staffing levels.There does not appear to be a higher rate of vacancies at certain years of services or ranks. Funding for the bonuses includes pensionable costs that the Utah Retirement System requires municipalities contribute to public safety officers'retirement accounts.For example,the$10,00o hiring bonus for a lateral officer also requires a$4,68o pension contribution for a total one-year cost to the City of$14,680. The Department reports there are currently 34 police officer vacancies and 26 civilian vacancies.At full staffing there would be 582 sworn officers and 148 civilian staff.The Department provided the below chart showing police officer separations over the past five years.It shows elevated separations from June 2020 to August 2021 and then a return to the five year trend in the past 18 months. Separations 60 Month Trendlioe Mar 2018 to Feb 2023 20 1s 16 14 v 12 n 10 8 6 .. . ..... .. ...... ..... .......... ? .. ... .... .... .. .. 4 0 x 00x a c a c, c c c o 0 0 0 0 o H H N N n N N m 2 2v If this item is approved,then the City's remaining ARPA funds would be$21,269,039.The City used over$31 million from ARPA for General Fund revenue loss in the last two annual budgets.The next annual budget for FY2024 is also expected to be eligible for$10 million or more revenue loss using ARPA. Other ongoing ARPA eligible expenses previously discussed by the Council that could be in the next annual budget are $792,195 for park rangers salary restoration and$252,150 for Grant Administrator and Economic Development FTEs.The Grant Administrator would be eligible for$207,167 in FY2025—FY2026.If ARPA funded all these items,then the remaining balance of ARPA would be$10,017,527.There may also be ARPA funds budgeted in prior years that were not spent and could be recaptured for new uses. (See policy question below). Page 17 Policy Questions: ➢ Larger Bonus and Shorter Commitment for Lateral Officers than Current Officers—The Council may wish to ask the Administration why lateral officers would be required to make a shorter commitment of one-year while receiving a larger bonus of$io,000 compared to the retention bonus for existing officers which is $5,000 for a one-year commitment or$8,00o for a two-year commitment. ➢ Lateral Officer Retention and Resignation—Some Council Members asked are laterals more likely to stay in the department longer than new hires?And how long do laterals stay in the department?The Council may wish to ask the Administration to research these questions.At the time of publishing this staff report an answer was not readily available. ➢ Status of City ARPA Funds—The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration,or schedule a future briefing about,the City's remaining ARPA funds,needs in the next annual budget,and how much,if any, ARPA appropriations from past fiscal years were unused and available for recapture.The U.S.Treasury set a deadline of December 31, 2024 for ARPA funds to be committed(such as budgeted and under a contract), and to be fully spent by the end of 2026. A-io: Real Property Purchase($825,000 from General Fund Balance to the CIP Fund) The item would facilitate acquisition of real property. Per state law this is eligible to be discussed in a closed session. Discussions are ongoing and the Council may hold additional deliberations before considering whether to approve this funding. A-ii: Study to Create Downtown Main Street Pedestrian Mall Additional Funding($ioo,000 from General Fund Balance) In the FY2023 annual budget,the Council approved$150,000 from the RDA Central Business District project area for a study to create a pedestrian mall on Main Street between South Temple and 400 South.The Economic Development Department is requesting additional funding based on the final scope of work.Note that this is separate from actual implementation of the"open streets"concept.The study will look at options to close the street permanently or partially including potentially based on seasons,day of the week,and time of day. The scope of work includes examining the current street conditions,creating planning and design recommendations(including emergency vehicle access,maintenance,utilities access,accessibility considerations, operations and maintenance needs,landscaping,and drainage,etc.),visualizing concept designs,public outreach, and calculating a cost analysis for each future phase of the project. The Department indicates that they anticipate selecting the contractor in the late spring,with deliverables identified in the fail of 2023. Policy Questions: ➢ Scope of Work—The Council may wish to discuss whether the scope of work meets the Council's goals for the study. ➢ 2023 Activation and Programming on Main Street Downtown—The Council approved funding the last few years to partially close Main Street from South Temple to 400 South on weekends between Memorial Day and Labor Day.There is currently no funding available to continue the program this coming summer.The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration what would be needed to continue the program this summer.Pandemic-related changes to state and city regulations are no longer in effect which previously help facilitate the program.See Council Added item I-Y for a placeholder to achieve some of these policy goals in the coming year. Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Section (None) Page 18 Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section (None) Section D: Housekeeping D-1: Interest on General Obligation Series 2o19A,Series 202o and Series 2021 General Obligation Bond Series 2019A,was issued in October 2019 to fund reconstruction of City streets. Par value of the issued bonds was $22,840,00o.At the time the bonds were issued the proceeds were deposited with the Trustee.Since then,unspent bond proceeds have earned interest.This amendment will adjust the budget to reflect actual proceeds available including interest earned from September 2021 through November 2022. General Obligation Bond Series 2020,was issued in September 2020 to fund reconstruction of City streets. Par value of the issued bonds was $17,745,000.At the time the bonds were issued the proceeds were deposited with the Trustee.Since then,unspent bond proceeds have earned interest.This amendment will adjust the budget to reflect actual proceeds available including interest earned from September 2021 through November 2022. General Obligation Bonds Series 2021,was issued in November 2021 to fund reconstruction of City streets.Par value of the issued bonds was $2o,600,000.At the time the bonds were issued the proceeds were deposited with the Trustee.Since then,unspent bond proceeds have earned interest.This amendment will adjust the budget to reflect actual proceeds available including accumulated interest from December 2021 through November 2022. D-2: Steiner Roof Replacement—County and CIP Portions WITHDRAWN BY THE ADMINISTRATION D-3: 300 West Roadway Bond Adjustments Public Services Engineering Division is requesting to revise the second tranche of bond funds.The 300 West project —Cost Center 83-21201 is coming in under budget in the amount of$2,150,000.To ensure we utilize all of the bond funds before they expire,it is in our best interest to move these funds to Cost Center 83-21203 which is a Bond Contingency Cost Center.This will provide flexibility to use these funds on other approved bond projects within the bond's scope as funding is needed.The potential funding uses includes local street reconstruction candidates as listed below. • 600 S from goo W to Boo W at an initial estimated cost of$746,984 • 800 W from ARAPAHOE AV to 600 S at an initial estimated cost of$191,476 • 800 W from ARAPAHOE AV to 700 S at an initial estimated cost of$218,1og • goo S from 11oo E to 12oo E at an initial estimated cost of$501,825 • BRYAN AVE from 800 E to goo E at an initial estimated cost of$310,153 • INDUSTRIAL RD from 2100 S to ASSOCIATED AV at an initial estimated cost of$401,643 • JEFFERSON ST from TERMINUS END to 1400 S at an initial estimated cost of$80,300 • KENSINGTON AVE from 800 E to goo E at an initial estimated cost of$308,933 • LIBERTY AVE from LAKE ST to 800 E at an initial estimated cost of$81,454 • ROOSEVELT AVE from 600 E to 70o E at an initial estimated cost of$239,128 D-4: Insurance Funds for City and County Building/Earthquake Damage Public Services'Engineering division has been working with the City's Insurance carrier(FM Global)to receive funding for earthquake damages to the City and County building.The amount has been agreed to and is currently being processed.This amendment allows for the revenue to be recorded and the corresponding expense budget of $7,252,300. D-5: IMS Budget for New General Fund Positions Budget was approved for a$207,000 general fund transfer to IMS for the cost of hardware for newly funded general fund positions,but the budget for the revenue coming in from the general fund and the expenditure on the hardware was inadvertently left out of the IMS budget.This amendment will rectify that mistake. D-6: Real Property Purchase—CIP Budget Associated with BA#4 Council-Added Initiative In budget amendment#4 the Council added a general fund budget of$3,567,564 for a real property purchase. Typically,real property purchases are budgeted in a CIP cost center in order for the asset to be capitalized.This amendment will add the necessary CIP budget for the purchase. Page 19 D-7: Move Cost of Bond Issuance Costs from CIP to Debt Service Fund Class Per GASB 65,the cost of issuance for bonds is a non-capital expense.The cost of issuance budgets for General Obligation Bonds,Series 2022,and Sales and Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2022 C Federally Taxable were recorded in Fund Class 83 CIP. Fund Class 83 CIP is reserved for capital expense.The proper accounting treatment for cost of issuance expense budgets is to record them in Fund Class 81 Debt Service.This budget amendment proposes to move the approved cost of issuance non-capital budgets from Fund Class 83 CIP to Fund Class 81 Debt Service. Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources E-i:Treasury Emergency Rental Assistance Program 2 Additional Resources($4 Million Grant) This budget amendment is to recognize the City's additional allocation of the American Rescue Plan Act,Treasury Emergency Rent Assistance Program 2(ERAP 2)funds,in the amount of$4,000,000,for the purpose of assisting in the stabilization and recovery of COVID-affected,low-income renters in Salt Lake City.All ERAP 2 funds must be obligated by September 30,2025. The Administration is proposing to split the funds into two uses: - $2 million for rental assistance including security deposits,utilities,and past due amounts,and - $2 million for a public competitive application process to fund eligible housing stability services provided by community-based organizations which include: o Case management, o Eviction prevention and diversion programs, o Mediation between landlords and tenants, o Housing counseling including Fair Housing Act protections and requirements, o Housing navigators or promotors that help households access emergency rental assistance programs or find housing, o Housing related services for survivors of domestic abuse or human trafficking, o Legal services or attorney's fees related to eviction proceedings and maintaining housing stability, and o Specialized services for individuals with disabilities or seniors that support their ability to access or maintain housing. The Utah Rent Relief program and website rentrelief.utah.gov stopped accepting applications on February 5,2023. The$2 million proposed for rental assistance would go through the Utah Rent Relief program to fund applications submitted before the deadline. This budget amendment is separate from previous Council-approved City ERAP allocations: ERAP 1 Initial Award ($6,067,033),ERAP 1 Additional Allocation($3,000,000),ERAP 1 Additional Allocation($5,000,000),and ERAP 2 Initial Award($4,800,559.40). $1,031,336 from the earlier ERAP 2 award are still available and expected to be spent this year.All ERAP 1 funds had a spending deadline of December 29,2022. Policy Questions: ➢ Prioritizing between Rent Assistance and Housing Stability Services—The Council may wish to discuss how to prioritize the $4 million of additional funding among the eligible uses listed above. ➢ Delegating Authority for Final Funding Decision—Does the Council want to delegate authority for the Administration to make final funding decisions on awards to providers of eligible housing stability services or retain final funding decision making authority after receiving funding recommendations from an advisory board and Mayor? Section F: Donations (None) Page I to Section G: Council Consent Agenda No. 5 G-1: Know Your Neighbor Grant Program, Open Society Foundation-Salt Lake County($61,000 from Miscellaneous Grants) The Mayor's Office of Equity&Inclusion received$61,000 in grant funding from Salt Lake County as a pass through from the County's application to the Operation Afghan Resettlement Support(OARS)program.The County was awarded$150,000 and is requesting to partner with Salt Lake City's Know Your Neighbor Program to assist the County in assimilating and welcoming the Afghan Refugees.The funding will be used to hire a new part-time program coordinator and not more than$1,000 for the program coordinator to travel for program related purposes. No match is required.A public hearing will be held for this grant application on 1o/18/2022. G-2: Utah State Office of Education, Child and Adult Care Food Program-Youth After School Programs($46,000 from Miscellaneous Grants) 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 Recreation 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 for the grant application on 10/4/2022. Section G: Council Consent Agenda No. 6 G-i: U S Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services(COPS),FY22 Community Police Development(CPD)Grant The Police department applied for and received a$24,170 grant from the U.S.Department of Justice,Community Oriented Policing Services through the FY22 Community Policing Development Grant.The grant will fund an evaluation for the Promising Youth Project.The project will fund training and curriculum recommended by the evaluation contractor.The Police Department will develop an evaluation that will provide four major services: Evaluation of Program Fidelity,Evaluation of Program Outcomes,Training and Technical Assistance,and development of a Final Report.A Public Hearing was held on 07/19/2022 for the grant application on this award. Section I: Council Added Items Placeholder I-1: Downtown Streets Enhanced Activation($500,000*from General Fund Balance) Some Council Members expressed interest in funding enhanced street activation in the downtown area particularly during the summer.Additional discussion and work would be needed to determine what types of activation activities would be eligible for this funding and feasible within the months before the summer. (*$500,000 is a placeholder and actual amount needed will depend on identifying activities and times) I-2:Technology Upgrades in the Committee of the Whole and Formal Chamber Rooms($8o,000 from General Fund Balance) These one-time funds would be for additional technology improvements to the two rooms the Council uses for open and public meetings.Many of the upgrades are related to communication and network equipment needed to successfully run hybrid meetings.The funds may also be used for removable ADA accessibility ramps in the Formal Chamber. I-3: Physical Security Improvements to City Hall($1-3 Million from General Fund Balance to CIP Fund Holding Account) These one-time funds would be used for additional physical security improvements to City Hall.The funds would be placed into a holding account pending specific project proposals to use the funds.The amount is a placeholder based on previous Council discussions/estimates and is not based on cost estimates for specific projects. I-4: "Lockhart Alley"Reconstructing Three Sections($208,373 from General Fund Balance to CIP Fund) Page 1 11 These one-time funds would be used to reconstruct three sections of the alley from 1300 South to Kensington.The alley is located between Major Street and State Street.The funds would address drainage issues and repaving.The funding does not include fencing,lighting,or other enhancements. Policy Questions: ➢ Status of Alley Programs and Funding—The Council may wish to ask the Administration how much funding remains from the special pilot program funded two years ago,and the alley maintenance funding from FY2023 CIP. Both prior appropriations could also be used for this project. ➢ Fencing, Lighting and Other Potential Needs—The Council may wish to ask the Administration whether additional funding is needed beyond addressing pavement and drainage issues along this alley,and whether Public Utilities has funding that could be contributed to the project. ATTACHMENTS (none) ACRONYMS ABL—Avenues Baseball League BA—Budget Amendment CIP—Capital Improvement Program COPS—Community Oriented Policing Services CPD—Community Police Development Grant ERAP—Emergency Rental Assistance Program FY—Fiscal Year FOF—Funding Our Future GASB—Governmental Accounting Standards Board GF—General Fund IMS—Information Management Services OARS—Operation Afghan Resettlement Support Program POST—Police Officer Standards and Training PUBS—Public Utilities Bulling System RDA—Redevelopment Agency Page 12 ERIN MENDENHALL MARY BETH THOMPSON Mayor Chief Financial Officer DEPART=or FIXANCE CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL Date Received: 02/14/2023 Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: 02/14/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: February 1411, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer N.7 a.ex a SUBJECT: Budget Amendment#5 - Revised 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 FY2022-23 adopted budget. BUDGET IMPACT: REVENUE EXPENSE GENERAL FUND 0.00 4,451,976.00 CIP FUND 14,216,233.99 14,216,233.99 IMS FUND 3,099,185.00 3,099,185.00 MISCELLANEOUS GRANTS FUND 4,131,170.00 8,431,170.00 DONATION FUND 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 DEBT SERVICE FUND 334,957.90 334,957.90 TOTAL $22,781,546.89 $31,533,522.89 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 BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Revenue for FY 2022-23 Budget Adiustments The following chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for fiscal year 2023. Amended Variance Favorable Revenue FY22-FY23 Annual Budget FY22-23 Amended Budget Revised Forecast (Unfavorable) Property Taxes 125,012,927 125,012,927 125,012,927 - Sale and Use Taxes 105,050,018 105,050,018 108,269,378 3,219,360 Franchise Taxes 11,657,128 11,657,128 11,640,553 (16,575) Payment in Lieu of Taxes 1,638,222 1,638,222 1,638,222 - Total Taxes 243,358,295 243,358,295 246,561,080 3,202,785 Licenses and Permits 40,736,114 40,736,114 41,114,687 378,573 Intergovernmental Revenue 4,644,622 4,644,622 4,722,377 77,755 Interest Income 2,071,154 2,071,154 4,771,154 2,700,000 Fines 3,765,174 3,765,174 3,817,666 52,492 Parking Meter Collections 2,635,475 2,635,475 2,635,475 - Charges,Fees,and Rentals 4,432,794 4,432,794 4,887,307 454,513 Miscellaneous Revenue 3,438,710 3,438,710 3,857,347 418,637 Interfund Reimbursement 24,431,717 24,431,717 24,422,422 (9,295) Transfers 28,821,993 34,921,993 34,829,993 (92,000 Total W/O Special Tax 358,336,048 364,436,048 371,619,508 7,183,460 Additional Sales Tax(1/2%) 44,364,490 44,364,490 45,614,490 1,250,000 Total General Fund 402,700,538 408,800,538 417,233,998 8,433,460 The current projections for fiscal year 2023 projections continue to be positive. Sales tax is currently projected to exceed budget by $3.2 million while the sales tax associated with Funding Our Future is projected to exceed budget by $1.25 million. Building permits continue to stay strong projecting to be over budget by $378,573. Charges and services is projecting to be over budget because of strong numbers from police service revenues, while miscellaneous revenue shows an increase over budget due to an increase in fuel reimbursement costs. The City is also projecting a large surplus due to the rising interest rates. Fund balance has been updated with information from the 2022 ACFR, including proposed changes for BA#5 fund balance would be projected as follows for FY2023: Beginning Fund Balance Budgeted Change in Fund Balance ' Prior Year Encumbrances gi ' Estimated Beginning Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Percent Year End CAFR Adjustments I I Revenue Changes j Expense Changes(Prepaids,Receivable,Etc.) I I Fund Balance w/CAFR Changes Final Fund Balance Percent I I Budget Amendment Use of Fund Balance I I BA#1 Revenue Adjustment BA#1 Expense Adjustment BA#2 Revenue Adjustment BA#2 Expense Adjustment BA#3 Revenue Adjustment BA#3 Expense Adjustment I I BA#4 Revenue Adjustment BA#4 Expense Adjustment BA#5 Revenue Adjustment # BA#5 Expense Adjustment f BA#6 Revenue Adjustment BA#6 Expense Adjustment I I BA#7 Revenue Adjustment BA#7 Expense Adjustment I I Change in Revenue Change in Expense Fund Balance Budgeted Increase I I Adjusted Fund Balance ® � Adjusted Fund Balance Percent I I Proposed/Adopted Revenue Adjusted fund balance is projected to be at 23.34%. The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $22,781,546.89 of revenue and expense of$31,533,522.89. The amendment proposes changes in six funds, with one FTE. The amendment also includes the use of$4,451,976.00 from the General Fund fund balance. The proposal includes twenty-one 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 2023 (Fifth amendment to the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2022-2023) An Ordinance Amending Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 32 of 2022 which adopted the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2022, and Ending June 30, 2023. In June of 2022, 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, 2022, and ending June 30, 2023, 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 any 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 2022. SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The budget amendments, including any 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 any amendments to the employment staffing document described above, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2022 and ending June 30, 2023, 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 any 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 , 2023. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved Vetoed MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Salt Lake City Attorney's Office Approved As To Form (SEAL) � Qa� Jaysen Oldroyd Bill No. of 2023. Published: 2 FY 2023 Budget Amendment#5 Administration Proposed Council Approved AmountExpenditure Expenditure Ongoing or One- Section A: New Items 1 Rapid Intervention Team Trailer GF - 25,000.00 One-time - 2 City and County Building Earthquake GF 2,300,000.00 One-time Repairs-General Fund Supplement 2 City and County Building Earthquake CIP 2,300,000.00 2,300,000.00 One-time Repairs-General Fund Supplement 3 Fiber Conduit Phase 2-200 S. IMS 242,185.00 242,185.0o One-time 4 Withdrawn Prior to Transmittal 5 Public Safety Radio Cost Increase IMS 2,400,000.00 2,400,000.00 One-time 6 Consulting for the Enterprise Billing IMS 250,000.00 250,000.00 One-time Systems 7 Lindsey Gardens CIP Project Rescope CIP - (402,938.57) One-time 7 Lindsey Gardens CIP Project Rescope CIP (56,421.90) One-time 7 Lindsey Gardens CIP Project Rescope CIP 459,360.47 One-time 8 Donation for the Cemetery Donation 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 One-time 9 Bonuses for Police POST Training, Misc Grants 4,300,000.00 One-time Recruitment and Retention 9 Bonuses for Police POST Training, GF 1,201,976.0o Ongoing Recruitment and Retention io Real Property Purchase GF - 825,000.00 One-time io Real Property Purchase CIP 825,000.00 825,000.00 One-time 11 Main Street Pedestrian Mall Conceptual GF - 100,000.00 One-time Design Study Section B:Grants for Existing Staff Resources Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources 1 FY 2023 Budget Amendment#5 Section D: Housekeeping 1 Interest on General Obligation Series 2o19A, CIP 62,203.69 62,203.69 One-time Series 202o and Series 2021 1 Interest on General Obligation Series 2o19A, CIP 222,627.19 222,627.19 One-time Series 202o and Series 2021 1 Interest on General Obligation Series 2o19A, CIP 321,497.01 321,497.01 One-time Series 202o and Series 2021 2 Withdrawn Prior to Transmittal 3 300 West Roadway Bond Adjustments CIP - (2,150,000.00) One-time 3 300 West Roadway Bond Adjustments CIP 2,150,000.00 One-time Insurance Funds for City and County 4 Building CIP 7,252,300.00 7,252,300.00 One-time 5 IMS Budget for New GF Positions IMS 207,000.00 207,000.00 One-time Real Property Purchase-CIP Budget 6 Associated with BA#4 Council-Added CIP 3,567,564-00 3,567,564.00 One-time Initiative Move Cost of Issuance Costs from CIP to CIP 1 0 1 One-time 7 Debt Service Fund Class ( 94>957.9 ) ( 94>957.90) Move Cost of Issuance Costs from CIP to Debt Service 1 0 One-time 7 Debt Service Fund Class 94,957.90 1 94,957.9 7 Move Cost of Issuance Costs from CIP to CIP (140,000.00) (140,000.00) One-time Debt Service Fund Class 7 Move Cost of Issuance Costs from CIP to Debt Service 140,000.00 140,000.00 One-time Debt Service Fund Class Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources 1 Treasury ERAP 2 Additional Resources Misc Grants 4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 One-time Section F: Donations 2 FY 2023 Budget Amendment#5 Section G: Council Consent Agenda--Grant Awards Consent Agenda#5 1 Know Your Neighbor Grant Program,Open Misc Grants 61,000.00 61,000.0o One-time Society Foundation-Salt Lake County Utah State Office of Education,Child and 2 Adult Care Food Program-Youth After Misc Grants 46,000.00 46,000.0o One-time School Programs Consent Agenda#6 1 U S Department of Justice,Community Misc Grants 24,170.00 24,170.00 One-time Oriented Policing Services(COPS),FY22 Community Police Development(CPD) Grant Section I: Council Added Items Total of Budget Amendment Items 22,781,546.89 31,533,522.89 - Administration Proposed Council Approved OngoingExpenditure Expenditure Number/Name Total by Fund Class,BudgetAmendment#4: General Fund GF 4,451,976.00 CIP Fund CIP 14,216,233.99 14,216,233.99 IMS Fund IMS 3,099,185.00 3,099,185.00 Miscellaneous Grant Fund Misc Grants 4,131,170.00 8,431,170.00 - Donation Fund Donation 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Debt Service Fund Debt Service 334,957.90 334,957.90 - Total of Budget Amendment Items 22,781 6.8 1 z2.8 3 FY 2023 Budget Amendment#5 Current Year Budget Summary,provided for information only FY2o22-23 Budget,Including Budget Amendments ITY 2022-23 BA#1 Total BA#2 Total BA#3 Total BA#4 Total BA#5 Total Total Revenue Adopted General Fund(FC 10) 425,537,408 100,000 6,000,000 194,600 431,832,008 Curb and Gutter(FC 20) 3,000 3,000 DEA Task Force Fund(FC 41) 1,762,560 1,762,560 Misc Special Service Districts(FC 46) 1,700,000 1,700,000 Street Lighting Enterprise(FC 48) 4,302,222 4,302,222 Water Fund(FC 51) 108,196,368 36,680,000 260,687 145,137,055 Sewer Fund(FC 52) 196,630,907 196,630,907 Storm Water Fund(FC 53) 13,476,733 13,476,733 Airport Fund(FC 54,55,56) 302,268,600 302,268,600 Refuse Fund(FC 57) 21,458,105 21,458,105 Golf Fund(FC 59) 11,560,676 25,700 11,586,376 E-911 Fund(FC 60) 3,925,000 3,925,000 Fleet Fund(FC 61) 28,826,992 120,000 1,119,900 30,066,892 IMS Fund(FC 65) 30,523,167 2,627,420 3,099,185 36,249,772 County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for Transportation(FC 69) 9,600,000 9,600,000 CDBG Operating Fund(FC 71) 4,670,517 4,670,517 Miscellaneous Grants(FC 72) 34,158,918 2,749,584 2,517,995 8,103,151 4,131,170 51,66o,8i8 Other Special Revenue(FC 73) 300,000 300,000 Donation Fund(FC 77) 2,920,250 20,000 44,668 1,000,000 3,984,918 Housing Loans&Trust(FC 78) 16,217,000 16,217,000 Debt Service Fund(FC 81) 32,037,989 (2,951,727) 334,958 29,421,220 CIP Fund(FC 83,84&86) 35,460,387 6,603,019 5,267,217 91,967,958 14,216,234 153,514,815 Governmental Immunity(FC 85) 3,964,523 2,000,000 500,000 6,464,523 Risk Fund(FC 87) 54,679,000 54,679,000 Total of Budget Amendment items 1,344,180,322 11,592,603 51,009,880 101,347,689 22,781,547 1,530,912,041 4 FY 2023 Budget Amendment#5 Current Year Budget Summary,provided for information only FY2o22-23 Budget,Including Budget Amendments Total Expense BA#1 Total BA#2 Total BA#3 Total BA#4 Total BA#5 Total Total Expense General Fund(FC 10) 425,537,408 847,540 6,538,000 7,584,328 4,451,976 444,959,252 Curb and Gutter(FC 20) 3,000 3,000 DEA Task Force Fund(FC 41) 1,762,560 1,762,560 Misc Special Service Districts(FC 46) 1,700,000 1,700,000 Street Lighting Enterprise(FC 48) 5,757,825 5,757,825 Water Fund(FC 51) 132,752,815 36,680,000 260,687 169,693,502 Sewer Fund(FC 52) 255,914,580 255,914,580 Storm Water Fund(FC 53) 18,699,722 18,699,722 Airport Fund(FC 54,55,56) 384,681,671 688,818,000 1,073,499,671 Refuse Fund(FC 57) 24,952,672 3,035,700 27,988,372 Golf Fund(FC 59) 14,726,016 46,800 14,772,816 E-911 Fund(FC 60) 3,800,385 3,800,385 Fleet Fund(FC 61) 30,426,032 4,011,360 10,678,500 45,115,892 IMS Fund(FC 65) 30,523,i67 2,782,449 3,099,185 36,404,801 County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for Transportation(FC 69) 9,458,748 9,458,748 CDBG Operating Fund(FC 71) 4,958,433 4,958,433 Miscellaneous Grants(FC 72) 26,614,153 2,749,584 2,517,995 8,481,711 8,431,170 48,794,613 Other Special Revenue(FC 73) 300,000 300,000 Donation Fund(FC 77) 287,250 20,000 44,668 1,000,000 1,351,918 Housing Loans&Trust(FC 78) 25,779,253 100,000 25,879,253 Debt Service Fund(FC 81) 33,658,558 (2,951,727) 334,958 31,041,789 CIP Fund(FC 83,84&86) 35,460,387 11,713,917 12,267,217 96,317,958 14,216,234 169,975,713 Governmental Immunity(FC 85) 3,169,767 2,000,000 500,000 5,669,767 Risk Fund(FC 87) 54,679,000 54,679,000 Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,525,603,402 21,442,401 688,818,000 61,583,580 123,200,706 31,533,523 2,452,181,612 Budget Manager Analyst,City Council Contingent Appropriation Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative Section A:New Items A-1: Rapid Intervention Team Trailer GF $25,000.00 Department:Public Services Prepared By:Jim Cleland For questions please include:Jim Cleland,Jorge Chammoro The Rapid Intervention Team has been in operation since July, 2022. Improvements in the processes and procedures had led to the need for one more trailer. The team begins at 6:ooam and immediately go to the landfill. They begin their remediations at around 7:3oam and usually fill one trailer by 11:ooam. By this time the wait at the SLC Landfill is approximately 2 hours. There is not enough time in the day for two trips to the landfill. With a second trailer they can fill both trailers by 2:00 PM and be ready to dump again in the morning.A second trailer outfitted is estimated at $25,000. A-2: City and County Building Earthquake Repairs — GF $2,300,000.00 General Fund Supplement CIP $2,300,000.00 Department:Public Services Prepared By:Dustin Petersen For questions please include: Dustin Petersen,Jorge Chammoro,City Engineer Public Services Engineering has been working with the City's insurance company(FM Global)on being fronted funding for repairs to the City and County Building.The Insurance company will only reimburse loss items as assessed on date of loss(March 2020).As with many city contracts the expenses have increased from the time of the event. Budget Amendment is requesting supplemental funds from the General Fund,to ensure contracts can be executed according to the full extent of repairs needed.Upon project completion,any unused funds will be returned to the General Fund. A current list of earthquake expenses is included as an attachment at the end of the document(Attachment#1) A-3: Fiber Conduit Phase 2-200 S IMS $242,185.00 Department:IMS Prepared By:Joseph Anthony For questions please include:Aaron Bentley,Joseph Anthony This is part of the 200 south roadway project.The projected costs are more than anticipated and budgeted.The council approved$5ok as part of the FY23 budget,but the actual costs based on the current engineering estimate are $292,185. Therefore,we are requesting an increase to the budget for the difference of$242,185.This will allow the city to improve our connection between city offices and the airport as well as pioneer park. A-4:Withdrawn Prior to Transmittal A-5: Public Safety Radio Cost Increases IMS $2,400,000.00 Department:IMS Prepared By:Joseph Anthony For questions please include:Aaron Bentley,Joseph Anthony Due to an updated quote from Motorola we are requesting an increase in the budget for the radios in the amount of 2.4 Million.This money will come from the IMS Fund balance.Please see the attached quote for the details (Attachment #2). Administration would like to request a straw poll on this item.The straw poll is being requested because it's imperative the Administration move forward on the contract process to avoid a further 8%increase in the cost of the radios. 1 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative A-6: Consulting for the Enterprise Billing Systems IMS $250,000.00 Department:IMS Prepared By:Joseph Anthony For questions please include:Aaron Bentley,Joseph Anthony This request is for consulting services for Enterprise Billing systems for PUBS which is primarily used by Sustainability and Public Utilities.PUBS Needs to be replaced and the consultant will do an analysis of the City's needs and compare that to best practices and make a recommendation on where the city should be moving with regards to future decisions. Microsoft's current roadmap has our current solution mapped at the end of life by FY 2025.As such,we need to start finding a solution in this fiscal year to be able to have it in place by the beginning of FY 2025. The cost is based on an estimated 1,000 that will be needed for the consultation at$250 per hour. It is estimated to be a total of$250,000. A-7: Lindsey Gardens CIP Project Rescope CIP -$402,93g•57 CIP -$56,421.90 CIP $459,36o•47 Department:Public Lands Prepared By:Kyle Shields For questions please include: Kristin Riker,Kyle Shields, Gregg Evans The Public Lands Department is requesting a Budget Amendment to revise the scope of work for existing CIP funded projects. The original scope of work for Lindsey Gardens Concessions had two projects(83-204o8,86-19408)that supported baseball concessions and public access. The department has struggled with estimates that would come in under budget for either project.The first project involved new construction as well as a new location for an aging concession stand and the second,a new path to link parking lot access to the middle field.As cost estimates rose,it was decided to keep the standing location,but remove it to build a new,smaller,and simpler version. Rapidly rising building costs brought this new construction bid in even higher than the original plan,and the second idea had to be rejected. With these concerns,Engineering,Parks,and the Avenues Baseball League decided that a facelift to the existing stand would be sufficient and ask that the scope of work be adjusted for both projects to spend the remaining funds as outlined below: - Concession stand renovation - Pedestrian path to middle field - Batting cage renovation - Covering dugouts with shade canopies - Trail from middle field to lower field The Avenues Baseball League supports the scope change as they are the ones that submitted the application in 2018. They have seen the costs associated with the building and path and asked if we could rescope the project to better use the funds that we have to improve all of the baseball fields at Lindsey Gardens. The following is a note from the league President: This note is to confirm that the Board of Directors of the Avenues Baseball League(ABL)has been informed of and approved the changes to the scope of work at Lindsey Gardens.As president of the league,I have been involved with you,Dat,Preston,and others to change the scope of work and establish new priorities given the anticipated cost overruns after getting the bids for the original scope of work.I have communicated the revised scope of work and the priority of the projects to the ABL board. The board agrees with the priorities that we have discussed and is eager to get on with the project. 2 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative Bart Cocke President,Avenues Baseball League According to the cost estimate for the scope of work above there isn't enough funding to do all of the items,but the list is prioritized and Public Lands will work through and make the funding go as far as possible. A-8: Donation for the Cemetery Donation $1,000,000.00 Department:Public Lands Prepared By:Gregg Evans For questions please include: Gregg Evans,Kristin Riker This amendment recognizes a donation to the City for cemetery maintenance. A-9: Bonuses for Police POST Training,Recruitment Misc Grants $4,300,000.00 and Retention GF $1,201,976.00 Department:Police Prepared By: Chief Mike Brown For questions please include: Chief Brown,Shellie Dietrich,Mary Beth Thompson The Salt Lake City Police Department(SLCPD)is committed to recruiting the best and brightest individuals to join its team to help provide a safe and thriving community.Today,law enforcement agencies across the country continue experiencing challenges recruiting and hiring qualified police candidates.To that end,the department is seeking funding to provide a hiring bonus of$1o,000 to lateral officers with a two-year commitment to employment with the department.Additionally,the department is seeking funding to provide a$5,000 bonus to qualified new SLCPD officers who have graduated from a self-sponsored,state-certified Utah Peace Officer Standards and Training(POST)academy. Finally,the department is seeking funding to provide a one-time retention bonus for current sworn members. The funding being requested for the above-mentioned bonuses this fiscal year includes $4.3 million from ARPA funds and$1.2 million from the general fund. A more detailed breakdown is contained in the table below. Total Retention and Hiring Program Cost Total Cost Program Estimate ARPA GF-23 GF- 24 Lateral Hiring $ 367,000 $ 200,000 $ 83,500 $ 83,500 Academy Hiring $ 36,700 $ 36,700 $ - $ - Retention $ 6,142,112 $4,o63,300 $ 1,118,476 $ 96o,336 Total 1 $ 6,545,812 1 SOON I NUNN $ 1,043,836 Further information is contained in the memo from Chief Brown that is attached at the end of the transmittal (Attachment#3) 3 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative A-io: Real Property Purchase GF $825,000.00 CIP $825,000.00 Department:Finance Prepared By:Mary Beth Thompson For questions please include:Mary Beth Thompson Funds are being requested in conjunction with the$3.56 million included as a Council-added item for property acquisition on budget amendment#4. A-ii:Main Street Pedestrian Mall Conceptual Design GF $100,000.00 Study Department:Economic Development Prepared By:Lorena Riffo-Jenson For questions please include: Lorena Riffo-Jenson,Mary Beth Thompson,Lisa Shaffer Salt Lake City's Department of Economic Development is seeking consultant services to develop a conceptual design study that will provide a vision,high level recommendations,and a path toward implementing the Main Street pedestrian mall.The consultant selected will be responsible for managing all aspects of the project outlined in this scope of work,including examining the current street conditions,creating planning and design recommendations(including emergency vehicle access,maintenance,utilities access,accessibility considerations,operations and maintenance needs, landscaping,and drainage,etc.),visualizing concept designs,public outreach,and calculating a cost analysis for each future phase of the project. Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section D: Housekeeping D-i: Interest on General Obligation Series 2oi9A,Series CIP $62,203.69 202o and Series 2021 CIP $222,627.19 CIP $321,497.01 Department:Finance Prepared By:Brandon Bagley For questions please include:Brandon Bagley,Marina Scott,Mary Beth Thompson General Obligation Bond Series 2019A,was issued in October 2019 to fund reconstruction of City streets. Par value of the issued bonds was $22,840,000.At the time the bonds were issued the proceeds were deposited with the Trustee.Since then,unspent bond proceeds have earned interest.This amendment will adjust the budget to reflect actual proceeds available including interest earned from September 2021 through November 2022. General Obligation Bond Series 2020,was issued in September 2020 to fund reconstruction of City streets.Par value of the issued bonds was $17,745,000.At the time the bonds were issued the proceeds were deposited with the Trustee.Since then,unspent bond proceeds have earned interest.This amendment will adjust the budget to reflect actual proceeds available including interest earned from September 2021 through November 2022. 4 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative General Obligation Bonds Series 2021,was issued in November 2021 to fund reconstruction of City streets.Par value of the issued bonds was $20,600,000.At the time the bonds were issued the proceeds were deposited with the Trustee.Since then,unspent bond proceeds have earned interest.This amendment will adjust the budget to reflect actual proceeds available including accumulated interest from December 2021 through November 2022. 5 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative D-2:Withdrawn Prior to Transmittal D-3: 300 West Roadway Bond Adjustments CIP -$2,15O,OOO.00 CIP $2,15O,OOO.00 Department:Public Services Prepared By:Joshua Willie For question please include: Joshua Willie, Jorge Chamorro, Brandon Bagley,Mike Atkinson, Dustin Petersen Public Services Engineering Division is requesting to revise the second tranche of bond funds.The 300 West project-Cost Center 83-21201 is coming in under budget in the amount of$2,150,000.00.To ensure we utilize all of the bond funds before they expire,it is in our best interest to move these funds to Cost Center 83-21203 which is a Bond Contingency Cost Center.This will provide flexibility to use these funds on other approved bond projects within the bond's scope as funding is needed.The potential funding uses includes local street reconstruction candidates as listed below. • 60o S from goo W to 800 W at an initial estimated cost of$746,984 • 800 W from ARAPAHOE AV to 600 S at an initial estimated cost of$191,476 • 800 W from ARAPAHOE AV to 700 S at an initial estimated cost of$218,109 • goo S from iloo E to 120o E at an initial estimated cost of$501,825 • BRYAN AVE from 800 E to goo E at an initial estimated cost of$310,153 • INDUSTRIAL RD from 2100 S to ASSOCIATED AV at an initial estimated cost of$401,643 • JEFFERSON ST from TERMINUS END to 1400 S at an initial estimated cost of$80,300 • KENSINGTON AVE from 800 E to goo E at an initial estimated cost of$308,933 • LIBERTY AVE from LAKE ST to 800 E at an initial estimated cost of$81,454 • ROOSEVELT AVE from 600 E to 70o E at an initial estimated cost of$239,128 6 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative D-4: Insurance Funds for City and County Building CIP $7,252,300.00 Department:Public Services Prepared By:Dustin Petersen For questions please include:Jorge Chamorro,Jim Cleland, City Engineer,Mary Beth Thompson,Dustin Petersen Public Services'Engineering division has been working with the City's Insurance carrier(FM Global)to receive funding for earthquake damages to the City and County building.The amount has been agreed to and is currently being processed. This amendment allows for the revenue to be recorded and the corresponding expense budget of$7,252,300. D-5: IMS Budget for New GF Positions IMS $207,000.00 Department:IMS Prepared By:Randy Hillier For questions please include:Joseph Anthony,Aaron Bentley,Randy Hillier,John Vuyk Budget was approved for a $207,000 general fund transfer to IMS for the cost of hardware for newly funded general fund positions,but the budget for the revenue coming in from the general fund and the expenditure on the hardware was inadvertently left out of the IMS budget. This amendment will rectify that mistake. D-6: Real Property Purchase-CIP Budget Associated CIP $3,567,564.00 with BA#4 Council-Added Initiative Department:Finance Prepared By:Randy Hillier For questions please include: Randy Hillier,John Vuyk In budget amendment#4 the Council added a general fund budget of$3,567,564 for a real property purchase. Typically, real property purchases are budgeted in a CIP cost center in order for the asset to be capitalized. This amendment will add the necessary CIP budget for the purchase. D-7: Move Cost of Issuance Costs from CIP to Debt CIP -$194,957.90 Service Fund Class Debt Service $194,957.90 CIP -$140,000.00 Debt Service $140,000.00 Department:Finance Prepared By:Brandon Bagley For questions please include: Brandon Bagley,Nancy Sanders,Mike Atkinson Per GASB 65,the cost of issuance for bonds is a non-capital expense.The cost of issuance budgets for General Obligation Bonds,Series 2022,and Sales and Excise Tax Revenue Bonds,Series 2022 C Federally Taxable were recorded in Fund Class 83 CIP. Fund Class 83 CIP is reserved for capital expense.The proper accounting treatment for cost of issuance expense budgets is to record them in Fund Class 81 Debt Service.This budget amendment proposes to move the approved cost of issuance non-capital budgets from Fund Class 83 CIP to Fund Class 81 Debt Service. Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources E-1:Treasury ERAP 2 Additional Resources Misc Grants $4,000,000.00 Department:CAN Prepared By:Tony Milner For questions please include:Tony Milner,Brent Beck,Ann Garcia This budget amendment is to recognize the City's additional allocation of the American Rescue Plan Act,Treasury Emergency Rent Assistance Program 2(ERAP 2)funds,in the amount of$4,000,000,for the purpose of assisting in the stabilization and recovery of COVID-affected,low-income residential renters in Salt Lake City. 7 Salt Lake City FY2O22-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative This budget amendment is separate from previous Council-approved City ERAP allocations: ERAP 1 Initial Award ($6,067,033),ERAP 1 Additional Allocation($3,000,000),ERAP 1 Additional Allocation($5,000,000),and ERAP 2 Initial Award($4,800,559.40)• To administer this additional ERAP 2 allocation 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 and 2 funds. This budget amendment aligns with Treasury guidance on eligible activities and allowable percentage amounts for ERAP 2. Direct Client Assistance: Deposits,rent,utilities,rent arrears,and utility arrears. Housing Stability Services:Treasury guidance for 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 promotoras 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. All ERAP 2 funds must be obligated by September 30, 2025. Section F: Donations Section G: Consent Agenda Consent Agenda*5 G-i: Know Your Neighbor Grant Program, Open Misc Grants $61,000.00 Society Foundation-Salt Lake County Department:Mayor's Office Prepared By: Kaletta Lynch/Ann Garcia The Mayor's Office of Equity&Inclusion received$61,00o in grant funding from Salt Lake County as a pass through from the County's application to the Operation Afghan Resettlement Support(OARS)program.The County was awarded $150,00o and is requesting to partner with Salt Lake City's Know Your Neighbor Program to assist the County in assimilating and welcoming the Afghan Refugees. The funding will be used to hire a new part-time program coordinator and not more than$I,000 for the program coordinator to travel for program related purposes. No match is required. A public hearing was held for this grant application on 10/18/2022. 8 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative G-2: Utah State Office of Education, Child and Adult Misc Grants $46,000.00 Care Food Program-Youth After School Programs Department:CAN Prepared By:Kim Thomas/Ann Garcia 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 was held for the grant application on 10/4/2022. AgendaConsent G-i: U S Department of Justice, Community Oriented Misc Grants $24,170.00 Policing Services (COPS),FY22 Community Police Development(CPD)Grant Department:Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith/Ann Garcia The police department applied for and received a$24,170 grant from the U.S. Department of Justice,Community Oriented Policing Services through the FY22 Community Policing Development Grant. The grant will fund an evaluation for the Promising Youth Project.The project will fund training and curriculum recommended by the evaluation contractor. The Police Department will develop an evaluation that will provide four major services: Evaluation of Program Fidelity,Evaluation of Program Outcomes,Training and Technical Assistance,and development of a Final Report. A Public Hearing was held on 07/19/2022 for the grant application on this award. Section I: Council Added Items 9 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative Attachment #1 MKA MKA Not Obj—Code primary 5econaa Vendor TNRRR,—ion posting Inv. Description Pro)eR Achv" Ref. rV Ref. 1D Yentlor Name Description Se[ID Check# Date Debi[ Substantiate 5opportetl Location Vendor Inv.No. Date Description a Totat rotas 1:11 rotessional&TAN/A..N/A 10/0/2C TD530]9 CP2126130D684 TERRACON CONSULTANTS INC TERRAC0NC0NSUCPIDO]20 50011253 R9/30/20 $2,396.50 $2,3SCIR SaRL k,CUy&Te—P,, TR530]9 04/20/20 EQdamage assessment. OtherProiessional&TAN/A..N/A 11121120300520 09128 SALT LAKE ARTS COUNCIL 1111 SALT LAKE ARTS Sis0HNS1019201.11121 10/21/20 $HLGPO 5160.0E SLC Arts C-61 Sill-Ity 10/05/20 Ocher Exp90se1 N/A.NJA OS/20/21 J E05192021 NV17796 N/A,N/A BLD2021-NZ49 JE05192021H 051OV21 $8,949.51 ITTT EXPENOITURE20APREq 117 20338 CP20232943629 MODERNROOFING&IONSTRUM0DERNR00DLIF081920 50009925 08/19/20 $12,864.00 $12,864-00 Sait Lake City&Modern Constn ll 11A 08/07/20 Temp-egress. NOITURE N/A..N/A 09/09/20 38100A 9109204628 GS B SPC OBA GSBSARCHITECGSBSPC DBA CAFCP090920 50010484 08/31/20 $15,080.00 51508E-00 Sait Lake Cley&6585 Aichlee<t 3810E 04/30/20 Eq damage assessment. REN/A..N/A 09/09/21 38111A OS/31/20 $13,554.00 $I3554.00 Sait Lake GUY&GSBS Arc1Z, OS/31/20 Exteriors,air design. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE N/A_N/A .111120 38152A CPI9109204628 GSBSPC DBA 6S BS ARCHITE(6S B S PC DBA CAI CP090920 50010484 O8/31/20 52,820.0E $2,870.00 Saie take CltY&GSBS Arcbltecc 38152 O5/31120 Selective demolition. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE N/A_N/A 09 ILA 3820EA CPI9109204628 GSBSPCDBAGSBSARCHITE(G S 8 I PC DBA CAI CR090920 500104B4 08/31/20 I14,231." 514,231.70 Sait take ClryIS GSBS Architects 38206 O6/30J20 Exterior state design. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE N/A..N/A D9/09120 38207A CP19109204628 PAR PC PC DBA G S B S ARCHITE(G S B S PC DBA CAI CP090920 KBERMAR4 08/31/20 $3,148.OD $3,148,00 Sait Lake Clty&GSBS Architect 38207 06/30/20 Selectivedemoft— CAPITALIXPENDITUREN/A..N/A D9/09/20 38342A CP19109204628 6 S B S PC DBAGSBSARCHITE(GSBSPC DBA CAL CP090920 SODI0484 08/31/20 $4,066.21 $4,066.20 Sait Lake Clry&GSBS Nchlterts 38342 01/31/20 Exterior stoir design. CAPITALEXPENDITUREN/—A, D9/09/2038343A CPI910020REIR GSBSPC DBA G S B S ARCHITE(G S H S PC CIA CAI CP090920 5MI0484 08/31/20 53,148.0E $3.14R00 Slit lake Clry&GSBS Architects 3834307/31/20 Selective demolition. CAPITAL EXPENOITURENG—DA WWII I CP21270543779 STALlINGS CONSTRUCTION INCSTAILINGS C0XIST CP011321 50013642 12/31/20 139,190.0E $39990.00 Seit Lake Clty&Stallings Constr 112/16/20 Selectiv,demolitlon. CAPITAL EXPENDITTT URE N/A-N/A 01/20/21 10052 43176 ENVIROCAREINC ENVIRO CARE INC 0HNI.119211-16041 11/21/21 $2,168.00 $2,168-00 ILL Corp eld&4 EP—Care,Inc 10052 06/12/20 M.11.Decontamination Materials&SIPPii EN/A.N/A 02/10/21 lAA1 CPI9109204628 GS BSPCDBAGSBSARCHITECGSBSPC DBA CAI CP021021 1.-29 11-121 $1,57400 $1,5 - S11,Lake City&GSBS Architect 38916 01/31/215e1eceNedemolltionsurvey- PREQ NG&CANSTRU MODERN R00FIN(CF'041421A 04/14/21 $31, $311 9Piaza Partin Modern Constn 20385 02/12/21 EQ damage repairz.OOFI CAPITAL EXPENDITUREN/A..N/A O7120/21 0D000108_CP21316241223 MOCA SYSTEMS M0CASYSTEMS CLCP022021 SOOI8825 O6/30/21 52850.0E $2,850.0E Sai[Lake City&MOCA Systems 10815 O6/09/21 Protect managemenC CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 20APREQ 677 11141 CP20232943629 MODERN ROOFING&CANSTRU MODERN R00FINC CAR 2011 500188>6 06/30/21 $8'106.80 $8,J06.80 349 Pura Parkin Modern COrlatn 20.418 06/11/21 EQ damage repatrs. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 20APRW A FAC20045,CP20232943621 MODERN ROOFING&C0NSTRU MODERN FRE HE M72021 SN18876 06/30/21 $3,883.20 11GA320 349 Ill—Parkin Modern Constn 20417 O6/11/21 EQ damage repatrs. OTHER MATERIAL&SL 20ERTHQUAK 085 JE0NCO202JER0W"IN/—I 1PMMAR20 JEC-2021H O1ICI OTHER MATERIAL&SL 20ERTNQUAK O85 JE0205202 T1011""2N/A.N/A JPMMAR20 IEO2052021H Dl/01/21 $313.48 OTHER MATERIAL&51,20ERTHQUA1 100 1E020C ZRSEAL—I:N/A.N/A JPMMAR20 IE02052021H 01/OS/21 1112:14 OTHER MATERIAL&SU 20ERTHQOAK RED 1E0205202 MEAL-5 N/A_N/A 'PM MAR20 IE02052021H 01J01/21 $J6.26 OTHER MATERIAL&SL 20ERTHQUAK 1.205202 CP1907035"1 9484,72762 IE02052021H 50006628 01/OI/11 $1150 5155E acilleies-2299 GRAINGER 27103/24/22 Reel corner braces. IAL&SL 20ERTHQUAK ODERN ROOFING&C0NSTRu 2004311 DJ061 01/01/21 51,3260E $1325.00 Saie Lake CltY&Modern Cl-,2060431104/06/205eal damaged plaster. OTHER MATERIAL&1120ERTHQUAK 100 J'1011202RBIRD"GN/A.N/A M JPM APR20 IE020,ROUT SW O1I012I 5525.0E OTHER MATERIAL&SL 20ERTHQUAK 100 JE0205202 RBIRD"`6:PLI-N/A JPM APR20 JE02052021H El/01/21 $985.00 OTHER MATERIAL&AL 20ERTHQUAK 100 JE0205202 RBIRO"`6:N/A..N/A JPM APR20 JE02052021H EllL/21 $945.OD OTHER MATERIAL&SIG 20ERTHQUAK IIIJE0205202 PR0CK""8 N/A..N/A JPM APR20 JE02052021H 01/01/21 $5.21 OTHER MATERIAL&SL 20ERTHQUAK 100 JE0205202 PR S 0CK""N/A.N/A JPM AP120 JE02052021H Ol/01/21 58.5E OTHER MATERIAL&SL 20ERTHQUAK S00 1E020520310106120IN/A.N/A JE05112020ADP 1E02052021H S0006809 01/01/21 111.3E 5113E Commercial LEE 1010632-0O3/25/20 E,-Quartz Socket&SOW FL36Halogen ERMATERIAL&SLIOERTHQUAK 100 JE0205202CPI15189 N/A.N/A SH17215001 JE02052021H S0002236 01/01/21 $'X20.00 51,7200E Public Service ei OTIS SH122150103/25/20 Elevatorr,p,,,,. AA IAL&SL 20ERTHgUAK N/A.N/A 13551 IA, 21 AS,00 $81.0E —Al Lig 1010496103/24/20 Acrylic Lenses. Other Professional&T�2BERTHQUAK IRA 1E02052E25IGNI 1111 N/A..N/A 1E05112020OHA JE02052021H SW O1J01/21 $356.71 Other Professional&D 20ERTHQUAK S00 1 E0205202 SIGNS RISE N/A.,SEA 1E051120MONA JE02052021H O1J01/21 $650.]9 Other Processional SE D 20ERTHQUAK 100 11-1201 SARRICAD N/A.N/A 1E05112020OHA 111212011H O1J01/21 $1,522.91 0 herProtessional&U 20ERTHQUAK 100 1 E020S202 BARRICAD N/A..N/A 1E05112020OHA JE205202111 O111/21 $4,330.06 OLherProtessional&TAN/A..N/A 05/12/2120250101 CP39096336336 ARCHIPLEX GROUP LLC ARCHIPLEX6R0UP CFO 1211 1.1.41 05/12/21 $1,593.55 $1,593,55 Flres[ati0n NO.!ARCHIPLEXGR12025.D1-003/08/21 ArchiteRuralservlces. O[herProiessional&TAN/A..N/A 05/12/2120250102 CP19096336336 ARCHIPLEXGROUP LLC ARCHIPLEX GR0UPCP051221 50016842 05/12/21 $1,639.08 $1,639.08 Firestation No.'ARCHIPLEXGR(2025.D1-IXOS/04/21 Architectural services. HLDG&N11A NGREP/20ERTHQUAK IOU 1E0205202 CP19136936200 KONE INC 11529T/042 IEO205202IN 5000J389 01/01/" $50&52 $SOBS] Slit Lake Cty&Kona Elevator 1.16E11 11/16/20 Elevatorrepairs. BLDG&HOUSINGREPl20ERTNQUAK 1E0205202CP191369 N/A,N/A 115 29 8156 6 JEQ20$3E11H 5000J552 11/Ill 21 $62691 5625-91 Slit Lake Cty&Kona Elevator 1.16E+0904/28/21 Ele,atorrepairs. Other Expenses PBEq TERSTATE BARRICADES LL 01/01/21 $110. 1110- Building ate barrio OS/31/20 Sdewalk barricades due to EQdamage,. OtherExperues PREq 9N/A,N% 01/01/21 $3,8 $3837 Saie Lake CltY&Modern Ill stn2003030903/20/20 Re ve loose plaster. Other Expenses 20APREQ I60 1E0205202 CP202329 N/A..N/A 200433E IE02052021H 50009813 01/01/21 5275.0E $L>5.00 Multiple(SLC&Motlorn Constr 200A3100A/02/20 Seal damaged plaster. Other Expenses 20APREQ 100 JE0205202 CP202,P N/A..N/A 1314 IE02E520 1150009813 01/01/21 $6-ER 5690.0E Sait Lake Clty&Modern C—B20-04-31404/16/20 Respond to aftershock CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 20APRED 617 21144 CP20232143621 MODERN ROOFING&111IT11 MODERN R001INC CP091120 1111114 09/16/21 Ell112.O1 $20$G2.00 Fischer BAR UP,Modern C—B 20344 09/03/20 EQ damage repairs. CAPITAL EXPENDITU 11 PI.N/A DS/04/21 325796 CP180A7 150063 KPF F INC K P F F I N C CAPITAL CP050421 60018535 OS/04/21 $]p6D.OD $J,4XC.0 SIX Eng Pa eking kpff 325,796,05/20/20 Engineering services. PrintingPublic Notices N/A..N/A D9/OB/212021CI-12 52672 SALT LAKE TRIBUNEINC,THE SALT LAKE TRIBU C0HDP090J2060021812 09/OS/21 $688.1D Printing-Public Notices N/AN/A 09/011112021CI-14 12671 SALT LAKE TRIBUNEINC,THE SALT LAKETRIBU F0HDP0907ZO 60021812 09/OS/21 $381.2E $381-20 Sait Lake City&The Salt Lake T.2021Ci-11106/27/21 Notice[p bidders. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 20ERTHU Al 100 3921JPER CPI910920462% GS B S PC DBA G S e S ARCHII E(G58 S PC DBA CAF CP080421 50019245 OJ/31121 $2,031 IR 52,0331E Sait Lake Ciry&GSBS Architect 39212 141 0/21 Exterior Stair Repairs. RTHIUIF DJ/31/21 52,2590E $;259.OE Sait Lake City&GS85 Architect 39352 OS/31/21 Ertedor S,air Repairs. RTHgUAK B S ARCHI m/31/z1 11,so2.20 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE N/A..N/A 09/OS/21 NV50600C LP21316241»3 MOCA SYSTEMS S TEC M0CASYSTEMS CLCP090821 5002026E 08/31/21 51,985.0E 51,985.0E Sait Lake Clty&MOCA Systems 1093E 0]/19/21 Protect managemenC CAPITAL EXPENDITURE N/A..N/A 09/O8/21 INV-ODOOCCP21316241773 MOCA SYSTEMS M0CASYSTEMS CLCP090821 5002026E 08/31/21 51,350.0E $135E.00 Salt Lake OF,A,MGCA Systems ll044 08/20/21 ProteC[managemenC CAPITALEXPENOITUREN/A..N/A 09/29/212D-431-PR CP213411 A3G29 MODERN ROOFING&C0NSTRU MODERN R00HEL CP092921 5002084E 09/29/21 SIX CVD.00 $"'E..PC Snit Lek,TV&Modem Constn 20431 07/12/21 Stair repairs. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE20ERTHQUAK 100 3953E CP39109114121 GSBSPCDBAGSBSARCHITEC,11111 OBACATCP312321 50022422 - S1121 $1,80J.20 $1,807,20 Sait Lake GUY&GSBS Architect 3953907/31/21 Exterior State Repairs. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 20ERTHQUAK IRS 3968E CP19109204628 GSBSPCDBAGSBSARCHTTE<GS BSPC OBACAF C1111311 Ill 1112 11/23/21 51,807.2E $1,80J.20 Salt Lake City&GSBS Arc R-R 396W C/31/21 Ex[edor5[air Repairs. CAPTTALEXPENDITURE20ERTHQUAK 100 39929 CP19IU9204628 GIB DBA G S B S ARCHITEC G 585 PC DBA CAF CPIl2321 50022422 11/23/21 $1,80].20 $1,801-20 Slit Lake Cty&6585 Arch-B 3992910/31/21 Extenor5[air Repairs. CAPITAL EXPENDITUREN/A..N/A I11 21 INV-OOOOC CP21316141113 MOCAS[STEMS M0CASYSTEMSCFCP120121 1.2111 11/30/21 $ 2250.0E $2,250A0 1111 FAke Cty&MOCA Systems 17 09/08/21 Project management. TU REN/A..N/A 12/01/21 IN LI/30/21 $ 1,900.0E 5190a00 Saie Lake Cley&M0C AGE seems 10/13/21 Project management. REN/A..N/A 12/01/21 IN OOOOC CPP2131624L]J3 .CA",I'M, M0CA SYSTEMS CL CP120121 50022638 TD1121 51,150.0E 11,150.0E Sait Lake CltY&MOCA Systems 1243411/12/21 PrOjecemanagemenc CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 20ERTHQUAK 100 20-454-111121111143111 MODERN ROOFING&C0NSTRU MODERN R00FIN(C1120121 ISAISA0 I1/10121 ST.,400.Al CA ITALEIIINIITU1121ERTHQUAK 100 40015 CP39109204611 GSBS PC RBA G S R S ARCHITE(GSBS PC OBA CAP C110122 IW21111 12/1'111 $901 1 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE FAC20045 IDO JE02142021 NV 1829E N/A.,N/A BL02021-07447 FE JE02142022H Ol/OI22 $1,429.13 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE FAC20044 683 40107 CP22376204621 GSBS PC DBA G S B S ARCHITE(G S B S PC DBA CAP CP020922 50024511 01/31/22 511,130.0E CAPITAL EXPENDITURE FAC20044 683 40204 CP22376204628 GSBSPCDBAGSBSARCHITE(GS BSPC DBA CAP CP020922 50024511 0T/31/22 :38,573.57 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 20ERTHQUAK 100 20-484-PR CP21341343629 MODERN ROOFING&C0NSTRU MODERN R00FINC CM30822 50025385 O2/28/22 89,200.00 CAPITALEXPENDITURE20ERTHQUAK 100 00000 HCP22403241773 MOCASYSTEMS MIKE SYSTEMS CL CM33022 5002602E EGGS1/32 $1,771 AD CA PITAL EXPENDITURE 20ERTHQUAK 100 00000AW:CP224E3241773 MOCA SYSTEMS M0CASYSTEMSCLCP0DE22 5002602E 03/30/22 $1,025.AT CAPITAL EXPENDITURE20ERTHQUAK 100 40244 CP19109204629 GSBSPCDBA AS BSARCHITEC G S B S PC DBA CIF CP040622 SM26179 03J31/22 113, CAPITAL EXPENDITU RE 20ERTHQUAK 100 0600040FECP22403241773 MOCASYSTEMS M0CA SYSTEMS CL CP041322A ISTA 6446 03/31/22 $950.00 CAPITAL EXPENDITU RE FAC20044 683 40332 IP121112 t14128 GSBS PC DBA G S B S ARCHITEC G S B S PC RBA CAFCP041322A 5002640J 03J31/22 551,550.6E CAPITAL EXPENDITURE HARE-44 683 A0441 CP223]620Afi28 G S B S PC OHAGS B SARCHITECGSBSPC DBA CAF CP0A1322A ITS&RE7 03/31/22 $S'.BI' CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 20ERTHQUAK 100 20-484-PR CP21341343fi29 MODERN ROOFING&C0NSTRU MODERN R00FIN(CP050422A 50327055 04/30/22 $113,381.25 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 1111//44 683 4053E 1122326204628 GSBSPCDSAGSBSARCHTTE(GSBSPCDBA CAFCP070622A 1.21.1 CA/30/22 $8,995.UP $A99600 Sait Lake City&GSBS IDRIPecs 4053003/31/225eismic repairs. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE FACZOD44 683 4062E 1121371114111 GS B 111 DBA 6585 ARCHfTECGSBSPC OSACAFCPDII12A 1.21.1 06/30/22 $16,643.50 $IG,11350 Sait Lake Cty&GSBS ArchR,,B —104130/22 S,-I repairs. CAPITAL EXPENOITUREFAC20044 683 1E091922A N/A N/A Unrecorded Liabift1E091922MW 06/30/22 $30,380.98 :30,380-98 1111 Lake Cty&GSBS Architect 402B805/31/225eismic repairs. .44 N/A-N/A recorded Llabll'n1E091922MW 06/30/22 522,242.5E $27'24750 Sait Lake Clty&GSBS Aic1 1P ' 06/30/225eismic repairs. Other ProfePssloDnal&TEN/AZN/A 61111212025.El 0 CPI909633A'. GROUP LLC LEX GR0UFCP110321 50021711 11131121 $163.91 A163,91 RC 202111-117/02/21 Cons,.Does Other Professlonal&T�N/A_N/A Il/03/21 2025.01-P CPL9096336336 ARCHIPLEX GROUP LLC ARIZLIACE FCP110321 50021>]6 10/31/21 $18.21 $I8.21 Fires--No.:ARCHIPLEX GPC202I 01-O 09/IS/21 CAns[.DOcs Other Professional&TIN/A..N/A 01/05122 GETS .0IB CPI9096336336 AR CHIPLEXGROUPLLC IAIPUALEXGR0UF CP010522 50023506 ll/31/21 1113.31 $113.83 Firestatlon No.'ARCHIPLEX All 2025,01-Q12/06/2181ddmg/Permitting Other Professional&TAN/A..N/A D2/09/222025.01-0CP19096336336 ARCHIPLEX6R0UPLL< ARCHIPLEXGR0UFCP020922 500244]1 01/31/22 $102.44 $102.44 Firestetlon No.'ARCHIPLEX6Rt 2025.01-0,01/10/2281dding/Permitting Printing-PnbIk Notices FAC20045 100 2022059 52677 SALT LAKE TRIBUNEINC,THE SALT LAKE TRIBU h0H0]052022I60O3005] BE/,"'R S549.5D 1549.5E Fire Station N9 The Salt Lake D 20216SIR 06/13/22 NOHce ro bidders. CAP ITALEXPENOITUREN/A.N/A 09/14/2111TURE202180 FIRI N/A.N/A 810202L IEA41 PI.1EO9092021A1 OB/25/2I $919.2A CAPITAL EXPENDITUREN/A.N/A 0W29/211176PR1 CP39109204628 GS BSPC DBA G S B S ARCHITEC G S H S PC DBA CAI CP092921 50020814 09/29/21 $3�280.00 $3,780-00 Brine Shrimp W.GSBS ArchRect 1911608/31/21 Archilec[services. CAPITALEXPENDITURE20ERTH0DAl 110 39802 CPI9109204628 GSBSPC DBA GSBSARCHITE(GSBSPC DBA CAFCF111221 500 15 11/1]/21 53,0240E $3,0240E ne Shrimp W,6585 ArchRect 3980T O9/30/21 Archilec[serviAZ CALITAL REN/A.N/A 03/08/22 15 02/28/2, 117,2600 $12,226.0E ""Lake Acting Maddox CO lute 15 1129/21 El repairs. CAI R'—FUFHgUAK 40320� CPL9109204628 GSBS CDBAGSBCSARCHITEC G S RDS PC DBASCAF CMA3022 50025983 03/30/22 $256 $256.00 ne5hdmp Wa 6585 Architect, 40F'R E2/28/22 Architect services. CAPITALEXPENDITURE N/A-PRA 04/13/22 66E314-6 CP2019M 36299 HOGAN&ASSOCIATES CONSTRI HOGAN&ASSOCIA CP041322A 6002J505 03/31(22 $6,52400 Sorenson MCC Hogan Constru,SMCCNB.04/07/22 Provided fnttally,paid within SMCC project CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 20ERTHQUAK 100 4SE21 CPI9109204628 G S B S PC DBA G S B S ARCHITEC G S B S PC OBA CAI C-12122 5002J>i6 CS/25/22 $3,505.00 $8,505.00 Brine Shrimp YI GSBS ArchRect 4062104/30/22 AzcTU-se.NCes. EN GI NEER&ARCHITCIFAC20D44 "I 1E08D420201015DP-fN/A..N/A Engineering Fees LJE08042022A'. D7/31/22 $3,122.94 ENGINEER&ARCHITCI FAC20DA4 925 1E101A202 PP220101'.N/A..N/A Englneerng Fees PI IE 10142022AI 09/30/22 54,109.2E CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 20ERTHQUAK 100 D0000405:CP22403241773 MOCASYSTEMS M0CASYSTEMSCFCP082422 5003060E OE/24122 $Ill 85.I 51,685.0E Sait Lake City&MOCA Systems 4"1405/11/22 ProteR management. CAPITAL EXPENDITU RE 20ERTHQUAK 100 REURED0CC2403241773 M0C45YSTEM5 M0CA SYSTEMS C4 CP082422 5003060E OS/24/22 $1,060.00 51,06E-00 Sait Lake Cty&MOCA Systems 4063506J07/22 ProleRmanagement. CAPITAL EXPENOITURE20ERTNQUAK 0000017-22403241771 M0CA SYSTEMS DID A SYSTEMS CFCP082422 5003060E 08/24/22 12,600.0E 52,60E-11 Sai[Lake Cty&At CA 11111, 40252 02/12/22 Project management. RTHQUAK - OS/24/22 52,900.0E $290E.00 Saie Lake ClPy&MOCA Systems Oe/04/22 Pe0jec[management. C45YSTEMS OF CP082422 E FAC20044 683 40980R C 326204628 G S B SPCDeAG S B S ARCHITE(GSBS PC DBA CAF CP090822 50031125 08/31/22 $6,816.27 $8,816.2J Saie take CltY&GSBS Arcbltect40980ft O8/16/225eismic repairs. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE FAC20044 683 41I65 CP22376204628 GSBSPCDBAGSBSARCHITECGSBSPCDBACAFCP110222A 50032602 10/31/22 58,380.5E $8}80.50 Sait take Ctty&GSBS Archttecc 41165 OBI""Seismic repairs. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE FAC2004A 683 41312 111237120121 GSBSPCDBAIIIIARCHITEE G S B S PC DBA CAI CP110222A 5W32602 10/31/22 $1,932.00 $1,932.OE Sait Lake OIL IS 6585 Architect 413.209/30J22 Sekmtc repairs. ENGINEER&ARCHITCi FALMUMS All JE080 11010111P IN/A..N/A Engineering Fees2:1EEEGI C12AI 07/31/22 $1,634,11 ENGINEER&ARCHITER FAC20045 975 JE1014202PP220101,N/A..N/A Engineering Fees PI1E10142022AI 09/30/22 $3,081.55 PORFAIRS,Notices FAC20045 100 2022CI-61 12671 SALT LAKE TRIBUNE INC,THE SALT LAKE TRIBU h OHO8012022r60D30833 08/03/22 $119.50 $549.5E Fire Station N9 The 5,It Lake T.20216RE!06/13/22 Notice to bidder,-rebid. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 20ERTHQUAK S00 41092 CP19101204628 G S B S PC DBA G 5 H 5 ARCHITEC G 5 H 5 PC DBA CAI CP092822 SOD31549 09/28/22 $2835.OR $2,835-00 Brine Shrimp VA G565 ArchRect 4109708/31/22 Architectservices. #95),312.94 $429,331.35 10 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative Attachment #$ Quote Number:�QUOTE!1957361 Quote Name:Salt Lake City-Public Safety Radio Billing Address: Equipment Quote Created By: SALT LAKE CITY CORP Quote Date:2022-11-17 Walter Whately 451 S STATE ST RM 235 Expiration Date:2022-12-09 Area Sales Manager Contract Name:18015-STATE OF UTAH 800 MHZ AR- SALT LAKE CITY UT,84111 3941 wafter.whately@motorolasolutions.com (520)457-8604 Customer:SALT LAKE CITY CORP Currency:USD 4 9 B 6 Fire Mobiles(Utah Bundle Package,$900 APXT'6500/Enh Series Trade-in Included) 1 M25URS9PW1BN APX6500 ENHANCED 7/800 MHZ MOBILE. 122 $3,253.00 $396,866.00 74.67% $2,428.91 $824.09 $100,538.9 la G832AD ADD:SPKR 7.5W WTR RST APEX. 122 $67.00 $8,174.00 27.00% $18.09 $48.91 $5,967.02 1b GA00580AA ADD:TDMA OPERATION. 122 $495.00 $60,390.00 47,00% $232r65 $262.35 $32,006.7 lc G51AU ENT:SMARTZONE OPERATION APX6500. 122 $1,320.00 $161,040.00 47.00% $620AC $699.60 $85,351.2 Sd G67DT ADD:REMOTE MOUNT E5 APXM. 122 $327.00 $39,894.0 47.00% $153.69 $173.31 $21,143.82 Se IG78AT ENH:3 YEAR ESSENTIAL SVC. 122 $176.00 $21,472.00 0.00% $0.0 $176.00 $21,472.0 if GA01606AA ADD:NO GPS/WI-FI ANTENNA NEEDED. 122 $0.00 $0.0 0.00% $0.0 $0.00 $0.0 lg G444AH ADD:APX CONTROL HEAD SOFTWARE. 122 $0.00 $0.0 0.00% $0.0 $0.00 $0.0 lh G335AW ADD:ANT 1/4 WAVE 762-870MHZ. 122 $15.00 $1,830.00 47.00% $7.0 $7.95 $969.9 li G806BL ENH:ASTRO DIGITAL CAI OP APX. 122 $567.00 $69,174.0 47,00% $266.4 $300.51 $36,662.22 1j GA01670AA ADD:APX ES CONTROL HEAD. 122 $717.00 $87,474.0 47.00% $336.9 $380.01 $46,361.22 1k W22BA ADD:STD PALM MICROPHONE APX. 122 $79.00 $9,638.00 47.00% $37.1 $41.871 $5,108.1 lI Q629AK ENH:AES ENCRYPTION AND ADP. 122 $523.00 $63,806.00 43,00% $22,L89 $298.11 $36,369.42 lm G361AH ENH:P25 TRUNKING SOFTWARE APX. 122 $330.00 $40,260.00 47.00% $155.1C $174.90 $21,337.8 Fire Mobiles for FSA(Utah Bundle APX'"6500/Enh Series Package,$900 Trade-In Included) 2 M25URS9PW18N APX6500 ENHANCED 7/800 MHZ MOBILE. 15 $3,253.00 $48,795.00 74.67% $2,428.91 $824.09 $12,361.35 2a G832AD ADD:SPKR 7.5W WTR RST APEX. 15 $67.00 $1,005.00 27.00% $18.09 $48.91 $733.65 2b G66BF ADD:DASH MOUNT 02 APXM. 15 $138.00 $2,070.00 27.00% $37.26 $100.74 $1,511.1 2c GA00580AA ADD:TDMA OPERATION. 15 $495.00 $7,425.0 47.00% $232.6 $262.35 $3,935.25 2d G51AU ENH:SMARTZONE OPERATION APX6500. 15 $1,320.00 $19,800.0 47,00% $620AC $699.60 $10,494.0 2e G78AT ENH:3 YEAR ESSENTIAL SVC. 15 $176.00 $2,640.0 0.00% $0.0 $176.00 $2,640.0 2f GA01606AA ADD:NO GPS/WI-FI ANTENNA NEEDED. 15 $0.00 $0.0 0.00% $0.0C $0.00 $0.0 2g GA00804AA ADD:APX 02 CH(GREY). 15 $541.00 $8,11S.0c 27.00% $146.07 $394.93 $5,923.95 2h G444AH ADD:APX CONTROL HEAD SOFTWARE. 15 $0.00 $0.0 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 $0.0 2i G335AW ADD:ANT 1/4 WAVE 762-870MHZ. 15 $15.00 $225.00 47.00% $7.05 $7.95 $119.25 2j G806BL ENH:ASTRO DIGITAL CAI OP APX. 15 $567.00 $8,505.0 47.00% $266.4 $300.51 $4,507.65 2k W226A ADD:STD PALM MICROPHONE APX. 15 $79.00 $1,185.0 47.00% $37A3 $41.87 $628.05 11 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative 21 G843AH ADD:AES ENCRYPTION AND ADP. 15 $523.0 $7,845.0 47.00% $245.8 $277.1 $4,157.85 2m G361AH ENH:P25 TRUNKING SOFTWARE APX. 15 $330,0 $4,950.0 47,00% $155.1 $174.9 $2,623.5C Fire Portables with AES Encryption(Utah APXT"6000 Series Bundle Package,$700 Trade-In Included) 3 H98UCD9PW5BN APX60007/800 MHZ MODEL 1.5 13 $3,213.0 $41,769. 64.79° $2,081.5 $1,131.4 $14,708.33 3a QA05570AA ALT:LI-ION IMPRES 2 IP68 3400 MAH. 13 $110.0 $1,430.0 27,00% $29.7 $80.3 $1,043.9C 3b Q361AR ADD:P259600 BAUD TRUNKING. 13 $330.0 $4,290.0 43.00% $141.9 $188.1 $2,445.3C 3c H38BT ADD:SMARTZONE OPERATION. 13 $1,320.0 $17,160. 43.00% $567.6 $752.4 $9,781.2C 3d Q58AL ADD:3Y ESSENTIAL SERVICE. 13 $121.0 $1,573.0 0.00% $0.0 $121.0 $1,573.00 3e QA00580AC ADD:TDMA OPERATION. 13 $495.0 $6,435.0 43.00% $212.8 $282.1 $3,667.95 3f QA01768AA ENH:ENHANCED ZONE BANK. 13 $83.0 $1,079.0 27.00% $22.4 $60.5 $787.67 3g Q806BM ADD:ASTRO DIGITAL CAI OPERATION. 13 $567.0 $7,371.0 43.00% $243.8 $323.1 $4,201.4i 3h Q629AK ENH:AES ENCRYPTION AND ADP. 13 $523.0 $6,799.0 43.00° $224.8 $298.1 $3,875.43 4 NNTN8863A CHARGER,SINGLE-UNIT,IMPRES 2,3A,100 13 $169.5 $2,204.2 26.81% $45.4 $124.1 $1,613.3C Standalone Items 5 PMNN4486A BATT IMPRES 2 LOON R IP67 3400T. 13 $179.3 $2,330.9 27.00% $48.41 $130.8S $1,701.57 6 PMMN4099CL AUDIO ACCESSORY-REMOTE SPEAKER 13 $142,56 $1,853.2E 27,00% $38,49 $104.0 $1,352.97 Fire Portables Non-XE(Utah Bundle APX'"6000 Series Package,$700 Trade-In Included) 7 H98UCD9PW5BN APX60007/800 MHZ MODEL 1.5 131 $3,213.0 $420,903.0 64.79% $2,081.5 $1,131.41 $148,214.71 7a G843AH ADD:AES ENCRYPTION AND ADP. 131 $5210C $68,513.0C 47.00% $245.8 $277AS $36,311.85 7b QA05570AA ALT:LI-ION IMPRES 2 IP68 3400 MAH. 131 $110,OC $14,410. 27,00% $29.7 $803C $10,519.3C 7c Q361AR ADD:P259600 BAUD TRUNKING. 131 $330.0 $43,230. 43.00% $141.9 $188.1c $24,641.1C 7d H38BT ADD:SMARTZONE OPERATION. 131 $1,320.0 $172,920.0 43.00% $567.6 $752.4C $98,564.4C 7e Q58AL ADD:3Y ESSENTIAL SERVICE. 131 $121.0c $IS,851.00 0.00% $0.0 $121.00 $15,851.00 7f QA00580AC ADD:TDMA OPERATION. 131 $495.0 $64,845. 43.00% $212.8 $282.IE $36,961.65 7g QA01768AA ENH:ENHANCED ZONE BANK. 131 $83.00 $10,873. 27.00% $22.41 $60.5s $7,937.25 7h IQ806BM ADD:ASTRO DIGITAL CAI OPERATION. 131 $567.0 $74,277. 43.00% $243.8 $323AS $42,337.85 8 NNTN8863A CHARGER,SINGLE-UNIT,IMPRES 2,3A,100 131 $169.5f $22,212.3E 26,81% $45.4 $124.IC $16,2WAC Standalone Items 9 PMNN4486A BATT IMPRES 2 LIION R IP67 3400T. 131 $179.3C $23,488.3 27.00% $48.41 $130,8S $17,1463S 10 PMMN4099CL AUDIO ACCESSORY-REMOTE SPEAKER 131 $142.56 $18,675.3E 27.00% $38.49 $104.0 $13,633.17 Fire Portables XE for W ild Fire Ops.(Utah APXT"6000 Series Bundle Package,$700 Trade-In Included) 11 H98UCD9PW5BN APX60007/800 MHZ MODEL 1.5 36 $3,2130 $115,668.0 62.79% $2,017.3 $1,195.6 $43,044.12 lla G843AH ADD:AES ENCRYPTION AND ADP. 36 $523.00 $18,828.0C 47.00% $245.8 $277AS $9,978.84 11b Q361AR ADD:P259600 BAUD TRUNKING. 36 $330.00 $11,880.0c 41,00% $1353C $194.7C $7,009.2C llc QA02006AA ENH:APX6000XE RUGGED RADIO. 36 $880.0 $31,680.0C 41.00% $360.8C $519.2C $18,691.2C 11d Q58AL ADD:3Y ESSENTIAL SERVICE. 36 $121.0 $4,356.0 0.00% $0.0 $121,OC $4,356.00 Ile QA00580AC ADD:TDMA OPERATION. 36 $495.0 $17,820.CIC 41.00% $202.9 $292.0 $10,513.8C llf QA01768AA ENH:ENHANCED ZONE BANK. 36 $83.00 $2,988.0 27.00% $22.41 $60.5C $2,181.24 11g H38BT ADD:SMARTZONE OPERATION. 36 $1,320.0 $47,520.CIC 41.00% $541.2 $778.8 $28,036.8C llh QA01427AB ALT:IMPACT GREEN HOUSING. 36 $28.0 $1,008.0 27.009/ $7,5q $20.4z $735.84 11i Q806BM ADD:ASTRO DIGITAL CAI OPERATION. 36 $567.0 $20,412,OC 41.00% $232.4 $334.5 $12,043.0E 12 PMNN4547A BATT IMPRES 2 LIION TIA4950 R IP68 36 $203.0 $7,308.0 27.00% $54.8 $148.IC $5,334.84 13 NNTN8863A CHARGER,SINGLE-UNIT,IMPRES 2,3A,100 36 $169.51 $6,10TIE 26.81% $45.4q $124.1 $4,467.6C Standalone Items 14 jPMMN4107C AUDIO ACCESSORY-REMOTE SPEAKER 36 $594,Oq $21,384.DC 27,00% $160,3 $433.6 $15,610.32 12 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative FLASHport Series Flashesfor Fire 15 T8010A ANALOG 3600 TRUNKING. 1 §$$721.00 $0.0 0.00% $0.0 $0.0 $0.00 15a GA00894AB ENH:ANALOG 3600 TRUNKING TO 9600 1 $721.0 27.00% $194.6 $526.3 $526.33 15b UA00083AA ADD:SOFTWARE LICENSE ONLINE 1 $0.0 0.00% $0.0 $0.0 $0.00 15c GA00580AC ENH:UPGRADE TO TDMA. 1 $569.0 27.00% $153.6 $415.3 $415.37 FLASHport Series Flashesfor Fire 16 T7905A ANALOG 3600 TRUNKING. 1 $0.0 0.00% $0.0 $0.0 $0.00 16a QA03216AB ENH:ANALOG 3600 TRUNKING TO 9600 1 $721.0 $721.0 27.00% $194.6 $526.3 $526.33 16b JUA00083AA ADD:SOFTWARE LICENSE ONLINE 1 $0.0 $0.0 0.00% $0.oc $0.0 $0.00 16c QA00580AE ENH:TDMA OPERATION. 1 $569.0 $569.0 27.00% $153.6 $415.3 $415.37 FLASHport Series Flashesfor Fire 17 T7697A DIGITAL SMARTZONE. 1 $0.0c $0.00 0.00% $0.0c $0.0c $0.00 17a UA00083AA ADD:SOFTWARE LICENSE ONLINE 1 $0.0 $0,00 0.00° $O,OC $0.0c $0.00 17b GA00580AC ENH:UPGRADE TO TDMA. 4 $569.0 $2,276.0 27.00% $153.6 $415.3 $1,661.4E FLASHport Series Flashesfor Fire 18 T7664A DIGITAL SMARTZONE. 1 $O.0 $0.00 0.00% $0.0 $Owoc $0.00 18a QA01768AD ENH:ENHANCED ZONE BANK. 13 $95.0c $1,235.0 27.00% $25.65 $69.3 $901.5E 18b UA00083AA ADD:SOFTWARE LICENSE ONLINE 1 $0.0 $0.00 0.00`Y $0.00 $0.0c $0.00 18c QA00580AE ENH:TDMA OPERATION. 13 $569.0 $7,397.0 27.00% $153.6 $415.3 $5,399.81 FLASHport Series Flashesfor Fire 19 T7664A DIGITAL SMARTZONE. 1 $0.0 $0.00 0.00% $0.00 $0.0c $0.00 19a QA01768AD ENH:ENHANCED ZONE BANK. 20 $95.00 $1,900.0c 27.00% $2S.65 $69.3 $1,387.00 19b UA00083AA ADD:SOFTWARE LICENSE ONLINE 1 $0.0 $0,00 0.00% $0.00 $0.0c $0.00 19c QA00580AE ENH:TDMA OPERATION. 20 $569w(K $11,380,OC 27.00% $153.6 $415.3 $8,307.4 FLASHport Series Flashesfor Fire 20 T7664A DIGITAL SMARTZONE. 1 $0.0c $0.00 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 20a QA01768AD ENH:ENHANCED ZONE BANK. 8 $95.0c $760.0 27.00% $25.65 $69.3E $554.8C 20b jQA00580AE ENH:TDMA OPERATION. 8 $569.0 $4,552.00 27.00% $153.6 $415.3 $3,322.9E FLASHport Series Flashesfor Fire 21 T7664A DIGITAL SMARTZONE. 1 $0.0c $0.00 0.00% $0.00 $0.0c $0.00 21a QA01768AD ENH:ENHANCED ZONE BANK. 10 $95.0c $950.0 27.00% $25w65 $69.3E $693.5C 21b UA00083AA ADD:SOFTWARE LICENSE ONLINE 1 $0.0c $0.00 0.00% $0.00 $0.0c $0.00 21c CA00580AE ENH:TDMA OPERATION. 10 $569.0 $5,690.0 27D0% $153.6 $415.3 $4,153.7C FLASHport Series Flashesfor Fire 22 T8012A 9600 OR 3600 SINGLE SYSTEM DIGITAL 1 $O,OC $0.00 0,00% $0.00 $O,OC $0,00 22a UA00083AA ADD:SOFTWARE LICENSE ONLINE 1 $0.0 $0.00 0.00% $0.00 $0.0c $0.00 22b GA00S80AC ENH:UPGRADE TO TDMA. 8 $569.00 $4,552.0 27.00% $153.6 $415.3 53,322.9E KVL 5000 Encryption Keyloader for Police 23 T8476B KVL 5000. 1 $6,000.0 $6,000.0 27.00% $1,620.0 $4,380.0 $4,380.00 23a CA00182AW ADD:AES ENCRYPTION SOFTWARE. 1 $0.0 $0.00 0.00% $0.0c $0.0c $0.00 23b CA03467AA ADD:NORTH AMERICA MICRO USB 1 $0.0c $0,00 0.00% $0.0c $0.0c $0.00 23c CA03358AA ADD:ASTRO 25 MODE. 1 $Owoc $0.00 0.00% $0.0c $0.0c $0.00 24 HKN6182B CABLE KEYLOADING ADAPTER CGAI. 2 $196.0 $392.00 20.00% $39.2 $156.8 $313.6C 25 WPLN6904A ASSY:KIT,KEYLOAD CABLE. 2 $118.8 $237.6C 27.00% $32.0 $86.71 $173.44 26 PMNN4549A BATT IMPRES 2 LIION 2925T. 2 $80.0c $160.0 27.00% $21.6C $58.4 $116.8C 27 TKN8531C CABLE,KEYLOAD. 2 $311.4 $622.8 20.00% $62.2 $249.1 $498.3C After Market Encryption Upgrades AES for Police 28 T7936A JAPX UCM UPGRADE CD. 1 $57.5C $57.5 26.991 $15.5 $41.9 $41.9E 28a CA00182AR ADD:AES ENCRYPTION SOFTWARE. 100 $696.0 $69,600,Gq 27.001 $187.94 $508.0 $50,808.0C 13 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative After Market Encryption Upgrades AES for Police 29 T7936A APX UCM UPGRADE CO. 1 $57.50 $57.50 26.99% $15.52 $41.9E $41.9E 29a CA00182AR ADD:AES ENCRYPTION SOFTWARE. 100 $696.00 $69,600.GC 27.00% $187.92 $508.0E $50,808.0C After Market Encryption Upgrades AES for Police 30 T7936A APX UCM UPGRADE CD. 1 $57.50 $57.50 26,99% $15r52 $41.9E $41.9E 30a CA00182AR ADD:AES ENCRYPTION SOFTWARE. 65 $696.00 $45,240.GC 27.00% $197.92 $508.OE $33,025.2C Standalone Items 31 RMNS070A DESKTOP MIC(GCAI). 15 $185.76 $2,786.4 27.00% $50.16 $135.6C $2,034.00 32 7012074001 BRACKET,BRACKET,WORKSTATION. 30 $3.6 $108.0 20.00% $0.72 $2.88 $86.4C 33 NNTN8844A CHARGER,MULTI-UNIT,IMPRES 2,6-DISP, 43 $1,420.2 $61,068.6 27.00% $383.4 $1,036.7 $44,580.25 Police Mobileswith AES(Utah Bundle APX' 6500/Enh Series Package,$900 Trade-In Included) 34 M25URS9PWIBN APX6500 ENHANCED 7/800 MHZ MOBILE. 568 $3,253.0 $1,847,704.0 74.67% $2,428.93 $824.0C $468,083.12 34a G66BF ADD:DASH MOUNT O2 APXM. 568 $13&0C $78,384.GC 27.00% $37.26 $100.74 $57,220.32 34b GA00S80AA ADD:TDMA OPERATION. 568 $495.00 $281,160.0 47.00% $232.61 $262.31 $149,014.8C 34c G51AU ENH:SMARTZONE OPERATION APX6500. 568 $1,320.0 $749,760.0 47.00% $620.4 $699.6 $397,372.8C 34d G78AT ENH:3 YEAR ESSENTIAL SVC. 568 $176.Oq $99,968.CIC 0.00% $0.0 $176.0 $99,968.00 34e GA01606AA ADD:NO GPS/WI-FI ANTENNA NEEDED. 568R$3 0 $0.0 0.00% $0.0 $0.0 $0.00 34f B18CR ADD:AUXILIARY SPKR 7.5 WATTAPX. 5680 $37,488. 47.00% $31.0 $34.9 $19,868.64 34g G843AH ADD:AES ENCRYPTION AND ADP. 5680 $297,064.0 47.00% $245.8 $277.1 $157,443.92 34h GA00804AA ADD:APX 02 CH(GREY). 568 .0 $307,288.0 27.00% $146.0 $394.9 $224,320.24 34i G444AH ADD:APX CONTROL HEAD SOFTWARE. 568 .0 $0.0 0.00% $0.0 $0.0 $0.00 34j G335AW ADD:ANT 1/4 WAVE 762-870MHZ. 568 .0 $8,520.0 47.00° $7.05 $7.95 $4,515.6C 34k G806BL ENH:ASTRO DIGITAL CAI OP APX. 568 .0 $322,056.0 47,00% $266.4 $300.5 $170,689.6E 341 W22BA ADD:STD PALM MICROPHONE APX. 5680 $44,872. 47.00% $37.1 $41.8 $23,782.1E 34m G361AH ENH:P25 TRUNKING SOFTWARE APX. 568 .0 $187,440.0 47.00% $155.1 $174.9 $99,343.2C Police Mobileswith AES(Utah Bundle APX11 6500/En Series Package,$900 Trade-In Included) 35 M25URS9PW16N APX6500 ENHANCED 7/800 MHZ MOBILE. 44 .0 $143,132.0 74.67% $2,428.9 $824.0 $36,259.9E 35a G90AC ADD:NO MICROPHONE NEEDED APX. 44 .0 $0.0 0.00% $0.0 $0.0 $0.00 35b G72AD ADD:APX 03 HANDHELD CH. 44 .0 $45,804. 27.00% $281.0 $759.9 $33,436.92 35c GA00580AA ADD:TDMA OPERATION. 44 .0 $21,780. 4700% $2316E $262.3 $11,543.4C 35d G51AU ENH:SMARTZONE OPERATION APX6500. 44 $1,320.0 $58,080,GC 47.00% $620AC $699.6t $30,782.4C 35e G67DR ADD:REMOTE MOUNT O3 APXM. 44 $327.0 $14,388.0C 27.00% $88.29 $238.7 $10,503.24 35f G78AT ENH:3 YEAR ESSENTIAL SVC. 44 $176.0 $7,744.0 0.00% $0.0 $176.0 $7,744.00 35g GA01606AA ADD:NO GPS/WI-FI ANTENNA NEEDED. 44 $0.0 $0.00 0.00% $0.00 $0.0 $0.00 35h B18CR ADD:AUXILIARY SPKR 7.5 WATTAPX. 44 $66.00 $2,904.0 47.00% $31.02 $34.9 $1,539.12 35i G843AH ADD:AES ENCRYPTION AND ADP. 44 $523.0 $23,012.GC 47.00% $245.83 $277.1 $12,196.3E 35j G444AH ADD:APX CONTROL HEAD SOFTWARE. 44 $0.0 $0.0 0.00% $0.00 $0.0c $0,00 35k G335AW ADD:ANT 1/4 WAVE 762-870MHZ. 44 $15,OC $660.0 47.00% $7.05 $7.9 $349.8C 351 G806BL ENH:ASTRO DIGITAL CAI OP APX. 44 $567.00 $24,948. 47.00% $266.4S $300.51 $13,222.44 35m G361AH ENH:P25 TRUNKING SOFTWARE APX. 44 $330.00 $14,520.CIC 47.00% $155.1 $174.9C $7,695.6C Police Portables with AES(Utah Bundle APXT'6000 Series Package,$700 Trade-In Included) 36 H98UCF9PW6BN APX6000700/800 MODEL 2.5 PORTABLE. 628 $3,595.0 $2,257,660.0 63.47% $2,281.8C $1,313.2C $824,689.6C 36a QA05570AA ALT:LI-ION IMPRES 2 IP68 3400 MAH. 628 $110.0 $69,080.GC 27,00% $29.7 $803C $50,428.4C 36b Q361AR ADD:P259600 BAUD TRUNKING. 628 $330.0 $207,240.0 44.00% $145.2 $184.8 $116,054.4C 36c H38BT ADD:SMARTZONE OPERATION. 628 $1,320.0 $828,960.0 44.00% $580.8 $739.2 $464,217.6C 36d Q58AL ADD:3Y ESSENTIAL SERVICE. 1 628 1 $121.Oq $75,988. 0.005, $0.0 $121.Oq $75,988.00 14 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative 36e QA00580AC ADD:TDMA OPERATION. 628 $495.0 $310,860.0 44.00% $217.8 $277.20 $174,081.6C 361' Q806BM ADD:ASTRO DIGITAL CAI OPERATION. 628 $567,CK $356,076.0 44,00% $249AE $317.54 $199,402.5E 369 H122BR ALT:1/4 WAVE 7/8 STUBBY(NAR6595). 628 $26.00 $16,328.0C 27.00% $7.02 $18.9 $11,919.44 36h Q629AK ENH:AES ENCRYPTION AND ADP. 628 $523.00 $328,444.0 44.00% $230.1 $292.8 $183,928.64 37 NNTN8863A CHARGER,SINGLE-UNIT,IMPRES 2,3A,100 628 $169.5 $106,483.6E 26.81% $45.46 $124.1 $77,934.8C Standalone Items 38 PMNN4486A BATT IMPRES 2 ILION R IP673400T. 628 $179.3 $112,600.4 27.00% $48.4 $130.81 $82,198.92 39 NTN2570C ASSEMBLY ACCESSORY WIRELESS ACCY KIT 628 $350.4E $220,088.8E 27.00% $94.6 $255.81 $160,667.52 40 PMMN4099CL AUDIO ACCESSORY-REMOTE SPEAKER 628 $142.56 $89,527.6E 27.00% $38.4 $104.0 $65,355.9E 41 HLN6875A BELT CLIP 3INCH, 628 $14.04 $8,817.1 26,99% $3.71 $10.2 $6,437.00 After Market Encryption Upgrades AES for legacy Fire Radios 42 T7936A APX UCM UPGRADE CD. 1 $57.50 $57.5C 26.99% $15.52 $41.9 $41.9£ 42a CA00182AR ADD:AES ENCRYPTION SOFTWARE. 42 $696.00 $29,232. 27.00% $187.9 $508.0 $21,339.3E Radio Management for loading flashes APX`"Radio Management and programming radios(tethered) 43 T7914A RADIO MANAGEMENT ONLINE. 1 $0.0 $0.0 0.00% $0.0 $0.0 $0.00 43a UA00049AA ADD:RADIO MANAGEMENT LICENSES 1622 $110.0 $178,420.0 27.00% $29.7 $O.0 $0.00 44 PSVO1S01987A RADIO MANAGEMENT(RM)TRAINING 2 $1,500.0 $3,000.0 0.00% $0.0 $0.0 $0.00 45 Incentive .Additional trade-in incentive of 1 -$311,400.0 -$311,400.0 D.DO% $0.0 -$311,400.0 -$311,400.00 Net Total $5,598,775.01 The Utah BUNDLE PACKAGE PRICING includes$900 Trade-In for Mobile Radios and$700 Trade-In for Portable Radios and is including in the Estimated Tax $0.00 pricing discount line item.We have given an extra$200,1000+Volume Trade-In as well(Item 43). Estimated Freight $0.00 Quote and Pricing valid until December 30,2022 and contingent on$5,000,000.00 or more purchased by this date Grand Total $5,598,775.01 Pricing includes all discounts and trade-in incentives on a one for one trade in basis and trade in concession Motorola Contact: Walter Whately,Area Sales Manager,520-457-8604,walter.whately@motorolasolutions.com 15 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative Attachment *3 CONFIDENTIAL From: Chief Mike Brown To: City Council Re: Hiring Bonuses and Retention Bonuses —Salt Lake City Police Department Summary: The Salt Lake City Police Department(SLCPD) is committed to recruiting the best and brightest individuals to join its team to help provide a safe and thriving community.Today,law enforcement agencies across the country continue experiencing challenges recruiting and hiring qualified police candidates.To that end,the department is seeking funding to provide a hiring bonus of$1o,000 to lateral officers with a two-year commitment to employment with the department.Additionally,the department is seeking funding to provide a $5,000 bonus to qualified new SLCPD officers who have graduated from a self-sponsored, state-certified Utah Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) academy. Finally,the department is seeking funding to provide a one-time retention bonus for current sworn members. Current Staffing: The police department currently has 47 sworn vacancies out of its authorized staffing level of 597.The total number of resignations and retirements for FY 23 is currently at 23. If that current pace 46 employees per month) continues through the end of the fiscal year,the department predicts losing 55 total sworn employees by June 30, 2023. The department is proposing a multifaceted approach to improving sworn staffing utilizing overtime funding to ensure the department can provide, maintain and improve call responsiveness to community needs. While many other law enforcement jurisdictions have offered new hiring or lateral hiring bonuses greater than $15,000,the Salt Lake City Police Department is approaching funding this bonus using ARPA funding to reduce impact on the city's general fund. The department recognizes the competition that exists nationally to recruit officers with hiring bonuses and may need to reevaluate its approach. 16 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative Hiring Bonus: The lateral hiring bonus would provide greater incentive for a person who is law enforcement certified to leave their current department and to seek employment with the SLCPD. Hiring lateral officers will allow the department to reduce its sworn vacant positions faster than relying on a new hire recruit class.A lateral officer can be patrolling solo within approximately io-12 weeks of hire.Whereas, a new hire,with no law enforcement certification,will be patrolling solo at least 40-42 weeks from the start of their recruit class start date. Lateral Hiring bonus -Tiered rate based on length of commitment *year commitment 2 Bonus year 1 $ 10,000 Pensionable cost $ 4,680 * of officers estimated to hire 25 Total Cost $ 367,000 ARPA Funded $ 200,000 General Fund FY 23 $ 83,500 General Fund FY 24-if approved for ongoing funding $ 83,500 If a lateral officer leaves employment with the SLCPD prior to the end of the employment commitment,there would be a requirement to repay the bonus prorated for time of commitment that was met.A proposal for repayment would be worked on jointly with the City's Human Resources and City Attorney's Office. For each new lateral hire,the department could likely save $1682 per week,which is currently being spent to backfill those patrol shifts using overtime. The department is also proposing providing a hiring bonus to qualified candidates who graduate from a self- sponsored, state certified satellite police academy.These candidates must meet all SLCPD hiring standards. This would provide $5000 to the qualified applicant. Post Academy Recruit Bonus Hiring Bonus $ 5,000 Pensionable Cost $ 2,340 Estimated number of hires 5 17 Salt Lake City FY 2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount Total Cost $ 36,700 ARPA Funded $ 36,700 General Fund $ - The department is currently accelerating and prioritizing hiring but key to maintaining staffing stability is to slow the department's separation rate. Providing a retention bonus would provide further incentive to current sworn employees so the department could keep sworn FTE at a higher level than is currently being experienced.A retention bonus would be offered to most sworn employee excluding any officers who was hired and accepted a bonus and long-term military until those employees return to their regular duties within the department, if within the retention period.The retention bonus would be offered to the employee on their hiring date anniversary.This would stagger retention periods over the course of a calendar year, splitting it over two fiscal years and thereby preventing the potential of a mass calendar year retirement. Retention bonus-Tiered rate based on length of commitment #year commitment 1 2 Total Bonus $ 5,000 $ 8,000 Pensionable Cost $ 2,340 $ 3,744 # of officers estimated 16 513 529 Total Cost $ 117,440 $ 6,024,672 $ 6,142,112 ARPA Funded $ 117,440 $ 4,104,000 $ 4,221,440 General Fund FY 23 $ - $ 96o,336 $ 960,336 General Fund FY 24-if approved as an ongoing program $ $ 96o,336 $ 960,336 Total Retention and Hiring Program Cost Program Total Cost Estimate ARPA GF- 23 GF- 24 Lateral Hiring $ 367,000 $ 200,000 $ 83,500 $ 83,500 18 Salt Lake City FY2022-23 Budget Amendment *5 Number/NameInitiative Academy Pairing $ 36,700 $ 36,700 $ - $ - Retention $ 6,142,112 $ 4,221,440 $ 960,336 $ 96o,336 Total $ 6,545,812 $ 4,458,140 $ 1,043,836 $ 1,043,836 The department has carefully evaluated these proposals using our best educated judgement to predict future hiring.There is no guarantee to the estimated number of new hires. I look forward to further discussion with you about these matters. Respectfully submitted, Chief Mike Brown Salt Lake City Police Department 19 Impact Fees - Summary Data pulled 12/28/2022 Unallocated Budget Amounts:by Major Area Area Cost Center Un Cash ted Notes: Cash Impact fee-Police 8484001 $ 989,579 A Impact fee-Fire 8484002 $ 1,479,222 0 Impact fee-Parks 8484003 $ 12,150,505 c Impact fee-Streets 8484005 $ 4,182,237 D $ 18,801,543 F=A+S+c+D Expiring Amounts:by Major Area,by Month QuarterCalendar Fiscal Total Month 202207(Ju12022) 2023Q1 $ $ $ $ $ 202208(Aug2022) 2023Q1 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202209(Sep2022) 2023Q1 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202210(Oct2o22) 2023Q2 $ $ $ - $ - $ M N 202212(Dec2022) 2023Q2 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202301(Jan2023) 2023Q3 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202302(Feb2023) 2023Q3 $ $ $ $ $ 202303(Mar2023) 2023Q3 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 202304(Apr2023) 2023Q4 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202305(May2023) 2023Q4 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202306(Jun2023) 2023Q4 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202307(Ju12023) 2024Q1 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202308(Aug2023) 2024Q1 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202309(Sep2023) 2024Q1 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202310(Oct2023) 2024Q2 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - N 202311(Nov2023) 2024Q2 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ C) 202312(Dec2023) 2024Q2 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202401(Jan2024) 2024Q3 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202402(Feb2024) 2024Q3 $ $ $ $ $ 202403(Mar2024) 2024Q3 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202404(Apr2024) 2024Q4 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202405(May2024) 2024Q4 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202406(Jun2024) 2024Q4 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202407(Ju12024) 2025Q1 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 202408(Aug2024) 2025Q1 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202409(Sep2024) 2025Q1 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202410(Oct2024) 2025Q2 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - u1 202411(Nov2024) 2025Q2 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ N 202412(Dec2024) 2025Q2 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202501(Jan2025) 2025Q3 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 202502(Feb2025) 2025Q3 $ $ $ $ 132,793 $ 132,793 202503(Mar2025) 2025Q3 $ - $ - $ - $ 24,194 $ 24,194 202504(Apr2025) 2025Q4 $ - $ - $ - $ 260,338 $ 260,338 202505(May2025) 2025Q4 $ - $ - $ - $ 277,473 $ 277,473 202506(Jun2025) 2025Q4 $ - $ - $ - $ 28,350 $ 28,350 202507(Ju12025) 2026Q1 $ $ $ $ 121,823 $ 121,823 202508(Aug2025) 2026Q1 $ $ $ $ 194,127 $ 194,127 C) 202509(Sep2025) 2026Q1 $ - $ - $ - $ 215,520 $ 215,520 N 202510(Oct2025) 2026Q2 $ $ $ 679,086 $ 135,760 $ 814,847 LL 202511(Nov2025) 2026Q2 $ $ $ 987,055 $ 1,256,504 $ 2,243,559 202512(Dec2025) 2026Q2 $ $ $ 26,719 $ 113,748 $ 140,467 Total,Currently Expiring through Dec 2025 $ 0 $ - $ 1,692,860 $ 2,760,629 $ 4,453,490 Impact Fees Data pulled 12/28/2022 AAA BBB CCC DDD=W-BBB-CCC UnAllocated Allocation Budget Allocation YTD Allocation Remaining Budget Police Amended Encumbrances Expenditures Appropriation Amount Sum of Police Allocation Sum of Police Allocation Sum of Police Allocation Remaining Description Cost Cen Budget Amended Encumbrances Sum of Police Allocation YTD I Appropriation 9 Line Central Ninth 8418011 $ - Imp aa fee-Police 8484001 $ - Bridge W Backman 8418005 $ - $ - $ - Impact fee-StreetsWestside 8484005 $ - $ - $ Impact fee-Fire 8484002 $ Bikeway Urban Trails 8418003 $ - Gladiola Street W6001 $ - $ - $ Public Safety Building Repicmn 8405005 $ 14,068 $ 14,068 $ - $ 0 Eastside Precint 6419201 $ 21,639 $ - $ - $ 21,639 Police Im act Fee Refunds 8421102 $ 237,606 $ $ - $ 237,606.45 Grand Total $ 273 314 14 O68 259,246 Allocation Budget Allocation Allocation Remaining Fire Amended Encumbrances YTD Expenditures A r0 riation Fire Im act Fee ACM' y Sum of Fire Allocation Sum of Fire Allocation Sum of Fire Allocation Remaining Description Co.Con Budget Amended Encumbrances Sum of Fire Allocation YTD E. Appropria[ion Fire'sConaultant'sContmot 184192021$ 3,079 $ 3,021 $ - 58.00 FY20 FireTminingFac. 8420431 $ - $ - $ Grand Total 3,079 3 021 - 58.00 s4aaooz e Allocation Budget Allocation Allocation Remaining Parks Amended Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Appropriation Parks Im aci Fee A,tMry7 y Sum of Parks Allocation Sum of Parks Allocation Sum of Parks Allocation Remaining Description Cost Coo Budget Amended Encumbrances Sum of Parks Allocation YID 1 Appropriation Emigration Open Space ACQ 8422423 $ 700,000 $ - $ 707,192 $ (7,192) JR Boat Ram 8420144 $ 3,33J $ - $ 3,33] $ - FisherCarnageHouse 8420130 $ 261,18; $ - $ 261,187 $ - Fork'sConsultant'sContract 8419204 $ 2,638 $ 2,596 $ - $ 42 [wide Dog Lease Imp 8418002 $ 23,262 $ 23,000 $ - $ 262 Waterpark Redevelopment Plan 8421402 $ 16,959 $ 1,705 $ 14,8]3 $ 381 Rosewood Dog Park 8417013 $ 1,056 $ - $ - $ 1,056 Jordan R 3 Creeks Confluence 8417018 $ 1,570 $ - $ - $ 1,n° 12,150,505 Jordan R Trail Land Acquisitn 8417017 $ 2,946 $ - $ - $ 2,946 ImperialParkShadeAcct'g 8419103 $ 6,398 $ - $ - $ 6,398 91ine park 8416005 $ 16,411 $ 855 $ 7,745 $ 7,895 8484003 C Rich Prk Comm Garden 8420138 $ 12,431 $ 4,328 $ - $ 8,103 Redwood Meadows Park Des 8417014 $ 9,350 $ - $ - $ 9,35ii Trail head Prop Acquisition M21403 $ 2]5,0I 253,170 $ 21,830 Fisher House Espanola,Ctr .21401 $ 415,030 $ 365,156 $ 64,525 $ 25,348 IF Prop Acquisition 3 Creeks 8420406 $ 56,109 $ - $ 1,302 $ 54,808 Marmalade Park Block Phase II 8417011 $ 1,042,694 $ 135,6]9 $ 24,8]4 $ 82,141 Cnty#1 Match 3 Creek Confluen M20424 $ 259,159 $ 133,125 $ 5,716 $ 115,318 FY20 Bridge to Backman .2.30 $ 156,565 $ 16,346 $ 22,490 $ 117,J28 UTGov Ph2 Foothill Trails 8420420 $ 122,281 $ - $ 60 $ 122,222 9Lme Orchard 8420136 $ 156,827 $ 10,265 1 3,950 $ 142,612 Three Creaks West Bank N-Park 8422403 $ 150,736 $ - $ - $ 150,736 Historic Renovation AIIenParK 8422410 $ 420,000 $ 260,376 $ - $ 159,624 Rose Park Neighborhood Center 8423403 $ 160,819 $ - $ - $ 1. 1, RAC Playground with ShadeSails .21415 $ 179,323 $ - $ 17 $ 179,266 Bridge to Backman 8418005 $ 266,306 $ 10,285 $ 4,051 $ 211,969 900 S River Park Soccer Field 8423406 $ 28J,848 $ - $ - $ 287,848 Lighting NE Baseball Field 8423409 $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ 300'wo SLC Foothills Land Acquisition 8422413 $ 319,139 $ - $ - $ 319,139 Parley's Trail Design M17012 $ 327,678 $ - $ - $ 327,678 Jordan Prk Event Grounds 8420134 $ 428,074 $ 19,J19 $ ],448 $ 400,916 Wasatch Hollow Improvements 8420142 $ 446,825 $ 21,823 $ 10,771 $ 411,230 Jordan Park Pedestrian Pathway 8422414 $ 510,00' $ 34,234 $ 10,127 $ 465,638 Gateway Triangle Property Park 8423408 $ 499,563 $ - $ - $ 499,563 RAC Playground Phase II 8423405 $ '21,564 $ - $ - $ 521,564 Green loop 200 E Design 8422408 $ 608,490 $ - $ 2,452 $ 606,038 Mem.Tree Grove Design&Infra 8423407 $ '67,962 $ - $ - $ 867,962 SLCFoohillsTrailheadDeveipmnt M22412 $ 1,304,682 $ 88,382 $ - $ 1,216,300 GlendaleWtrprk MstrPin&Rehab 8422406 $ 3:177141 $ 267,681 $ 163,900 $ 2,746,268 Pioneer Park 8419150 $ 3,149:123 $ 6J,450 $ 22,109 $ 3,059,564 Glendale Regional Park Phase 1 8423450 $ 4,350,000 $ - $ - $ 4,350,000 Grand Total $ 21,852,274 2,263,009 1,591,335 17,997,931 Sum of Street Allocation Sum of Street Allocation Sum of Street Allocation Description Co.Con Budget Amended Encumbrances Sum of Street Allocation YTD Remaining Appropriation Trans Master Plan 8419006 $ 13,000 $ 13,000 $ - $ - 9 Line Central Ninth 8418011 $ 63,915 $ - $ 63,955 $ - :00S Signal ImprovementsIF 8422615 $ 70,000 $ - $ 70,000 $ - 00/700SStm tReconstructio 8412001 $ 15,026 $ 11,703 $ 3,323 $ d 4 182 237 Transportation Safety Improvem 841]007 $ 1,292 $ - $ - $ 1,292 Gladiol.Street 8406001 $ 16,1. $ 13,865 $ - $ 2,244 Urban Trails FY22 IF 8422619 $ 6,500 $ - $ - $ 6,500 6484o0s D Transportatn Safety Imprvmt IF 8422620 $ 44,411 $ 3,939 $ 28,319 $ 12,142 Street'sConsultant'sContract 8419203 $ 29,817 $ 17,492 $ - $ 12,374 Trans Safety Improvements 8419007 $ 13,473 $ - $ - $ 13,473 Soo to 700 S 8418016 $ 22,744 $ - $ - $ 22,]44 Corridor Transformations IF 8422608 $ 25,398 $ - $ - $ 25,398 900 South 9Lme RR Cross IF 8422604 $ 213 M $ - $ - $ 28,000 170OS Corridor Tram frm[n IF 8422622 $ 35,300 $ 35,311 Complete Street Enhancements 8420120 $ 35,393 $ - $ - $ 35,392 200S TransitCmpl1StrtSuppl IF 8422602 $ 37,4202 $ - $ - $ 37,422 Transp Safety Improvements 8420110 $ 58,780 $ 20,697 $ - $ 38,083 300 N Complete Street Recons I 8423606 $ 40,000 $ $ 40,Ooo 1300 S Bicycle Bypass(pedestr 8416004 $ 42,833 $ - $ - $ 42,833 Local Link Construction IF 8422606 $ 50,000 $ - $ - $ 50,000 400 South Viaduct Trail IF 8422611 $ 90,000 $ - $ - $ 90,000 Neighborhood Byways IF 8422614 $ 1.4,500 $ - $ - $ 104,500 Transit Cap-Frei Trans Routes 8423608 $ 110,"' $ 110,000 Indiana Ave/900 S Rehab Design 8412002 $ 124,593 $ - $ - $ 124,593 Virginia Street Reconstruction 8423624 $ 191,663 $ - $ - $ 141,663 300 North Reconstruction 8423622 $ 154,]39 $ - $ - $ 114,739 1700 East Reconstruction 8423628 $ 158,570 $ - $ - $ 158,570 9005outh Reconstruction 842362] $ 171,944 $ 171,944 Bikeway Urban Trails 8418003 $ 181,846 $ - $ - $ 181,896 TransportationSafetyImprov IF 8421500 $ 211,111 $ 10,340 $ 34,2J2 $ 2":174 200 S Recon Trans Corridor IF 8423602 $ 252,000 $ - $ - $ 252000 West Temple Reconstruction 8423626 $ 338,633 $ - $ - $ 338,633 Street Improve Recenstruc 20 8420125 $ 780,182 $ 147,983 $ 248,890 $ 383,309 1100 East/Highland Drive 8423623 $ 500,]28 $ - $ - $ 500,728 IF Complete Street Enhancement 8421502 $ 125,000 $ 625,- 2100 South Reconstruction 8423629 $ 660,410 $ - $ - $ 660,910 Traffic Signal Upgrades 8419008 $ 450 $ - $ - $ 450 Traffic Signal Upgrades 8421501 $ 836,736 $ 65,846 $ 92,075 $ 728,815 1300 East Reconstruction 8423625 $ 812,805 $ - $ 9JI $ 811,834 200 South Reconstruction 8423621 $ 915,151 $ - $ - $ 115,151 700 South Phase 7IF 8423305 $ 1,121,111 $ - $ - $ 1,120,000 Grand Total 9 010 976 304,815 491,804 8,214,356 Sum of Budget-Amended Sum of Enc..-brances Sum of YFD Expenditures Sum of Remaining Appropriation $18,801,543 rgtal 31,139,643 2,584,913 2,083,139 26,4 591 E=A+B+c+D TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE Item B2 too, MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY to. TO: City Council Members FROM: Sam Owen, Policy Analyst DATE: March 7,2023 RE: Ordinance:Amending the Zoning Text Pertaining to the use of Landscape Materials MOTION i I move the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a future meeting. MOTION 2 1 move the Council continue the public hearing. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 SLCCOUNCIL.COM P.O. BOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 ERIN MENDENHALL L DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor �` ' and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas ng k1ti c/1= Director CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL 5 t,c zz. �1 ii r Msn Date Received: 12/22/2022 Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: 12/22/2022 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: December 22, 2022 Dan Dugan, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community &Neighborhoods SUBJECT: PLNPCM2022-01055 Landscaping Modifications Required to be an Eligible City to Qualify for Rebates. STAFF CONTACT: Nick Norris, Planning Director at nick.norris6a'sicaov.com or 801-535- 6173 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the Planning Commission recommendation to approve the proposal. BUDGET IMPACT: none BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This proposal modifies 21A.48 Landscaping of the zoning code in order for Salt Lake City to become an eligible city for grant programs related to replacing turf with more appropriate water wise landscaping. There are currently two rebate programs offered, one through the Utah Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and one through the Central Utah Water Conservancy District(CUWCD). The DNR rebate program was a pilot program in 2021 that was funded by an allocation from the Utah Legislature. The DNR program requires rebate applicants to own property in a qualifying city. A qualifying city is one that has adopted landscaping provisions that prohibit turf in park strips or other areas that are less than eight feet in width and that limit the total amount of turf to no more than 35% of the landscaped area in a front or side yard. More information can be found here: https://croservewater.utah. ov�«rays-remova]-rebates/ 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 The CUWCD rebate program has similar requirements,but also requires certain provisions related to sprinkler valve controllers, turf for non-residential uses, and turf on steep slopes. This rebate program requires cities to include in their landscaping regulations provisions that include: • Limits turf in residential uses to no more than 35% of the landscaped area; • Limits turf in multi-family, commercial, industrial, and institutional uses to no more than 20% of the landscaped area. • Prohibits turf in areas that have a minimum dimension of less than eight feet • Prohibits turf on slopes greater than 25% • Prohibits the use of aerial sprinkler heads in areas with turf that are less than eight feet • Requires a smartsense sprinkler controller The proposed ordinance includes a complete list of changes. This rebate program is requiring that landscape codes be updated by March 1, 2023 for residents of the city to be eligible for the rebates. CUWCD indicated that Salt Lake City residents are the largest recipient of their rebate programs. The landscape regulations are going through a comprehensive update. However, these modifications were pulled out of the proposal to try to have the proposal adopted before the March 1, 2023 deadline or at least reduce the time that the city is not listed as an eligible city. These changes will be incorporated into the more comprehensive proposal. PUBLIC PROCESS: This proposal is subject to the required 45-day engagement period that is required prior to the first public hearing. The 45-day notice period began in late October and ran through December 13, 2022. Notice of the proposal was sent to all recognized organizations and emailed to the Planning Division list serve. Comments that were received are included in the Planning Commission staff report. Comments received after the Planning Commission public hearing are attached to this transmittal. There was one comment submitted that indicated that turf can be watered with an underground system that eliminates water waste. However, the requirements that need to be adopted do not include this type of exception. Planning Commission (PC) Records a) PC Agenda of December 14, 2022 (Click to Access) b) PC' Minutes of December 14 2022 (Click to Access) c) 022 (Click to Access Report) EXHIBITS: 1) Project Chronology 2) Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3) Original Petition 4) Public Comment Received After Publishing of Planning Commission Staff Report SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2023 (Amending the zoning text of Section 21A.48.050 and definitions in Title 2 1 A associated therewith of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to the use of landscape materials) An ordinance amending the text of Section 21A.48.050 and definitions in Title 2 1 A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to the use of landscape materials pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-01050. WHEREAS, on December 14, 2022, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission("Planning Commission") held a public hearing on a petition submitted by Salt Lake City Mayor, Erin Mendenhall to amend land use regulations pertaining to water wise landscaping materials for new development(Petition No. PLNPCM2022-01050); and WHEREAS, at its December 14, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council ("City Council") on said petition; 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 Text of Section 21A.48.050. That Section 21A.48.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Landscaping and Buffers), shall be and hereby is amended read as follows: 21A.48.050: DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: Landscape plans shall be prepared based on the following design standards and guidelines. The standards and guidelines apply to all new development and redevelopment of a residential, commercial, institutional, or manufacturing use and all associated landscaped areas as identified by this chapter. The standards and guidelines also apply when a landscaping plan is required to be submitted by this chapter. Design standards are numerically measurable design requirements that can be definitively evaluated for compliance. Design guidelines are not precisely measurable, but 1 compliance can be determined through the evaluation process of landscape plan review. The evaluation and approval of landscape plans shall be based on compliance with both the design standards and guidelines. A. Design Standards At Time Of Planting: 1. Deciduous Trees: All deciduous trees shall have a minimum trunk size of two inches (2") in caliper, unless otherwise specified. 2. Evergreen Trees: All evergreen trees shall have a minimum size of five feet(5') in height, unless otherwise specified. 3. Ornamental Trees: All ornamental trees shall have a minimum trunk size of one and one-half inches (11/2") in caliper, unless otherwise specified. 4. Shrubs: All shrubs shall have a minimum height or spread of eighteen inches (18") depending on the plant's natural growth habit, unless otherwise specified. Plants in five (5) gallon containers will generally comply with this standard. 5. Drought Tolerant Species: Site conditions in Salt Lake City are generally arid, and the selection of plant species suited to dry conditions is appropriate. To promote water conservation, not less than eighty percent(80%) of the trees and eighty percent(80%) of the shrubs used on a site shall be drought tolerant species that can withstand dry conditions once established. The city has compiled a list titled "Water Conserving Plants For Salt Lake City", that may be locally available. 6. Street Trees: Trees located within the public right of way are subject to the following provisions: a. The pruning or removal of trees is prohibited without the approval of the urban forester or designee. b. Cutting, Removal, Or Damage Prohibited: Trees shall not be cut, removed, pushed over, killed, or otherwise damaged without the approval of the urban forester or designee. c. The root zone of all street trees shall be protected when impacted by any construction work on the abutting property or any work within the right of way when a street tree is present. Root zone protection is subject to approval from the urban forester or designee. d. All street trees shall be provided with an irrigation system that has the capability of providing adequate and efficient water to each street tree as determined by the urban forester or designee. 7. Limitations on Turf: a. For single family and two-family uses turf shall not exceed 35%, of the area to be covered with vegetation. For yards and areas required to include 2 vegetation where the 35% calculation would result in a number less than 250 square feet, the property may have a maximum of 250 square feet of turf. Active recreation areas are exempt from this provision. b. For multi-family uses turf shall not exceed 20% of the area to be covered with vegetation. Active recreation areas are exempt from this provision. c. For commercial, industrial, and institutional uses, turf shall not exceed 20% of the area to be covered with vegetation. Active recreation areas are exempt from this provision. d. Areas planted with turf shall not be less than eight feet wide at the narrowest point. This applies to any required yard, landscaped yard, landscape buffer,park strip, and parking lot landscaping. e. Turf shall not be installed on any slope greater than 25% or where the rise of the slope is more than one vertical foot for every four horizontal feet. 8. Mulch: At least 3-4 inches of mulch, permeable to air and water, shall be used in planting beds and in landscaped areas that are not covered with vegetation or other allowed inorganic surfaces to control weeds and improve the appearance of the landscaping. Fiber barriers and plastic sheeting that are not porous to air and water are prohibited. 9. Automatic Irrigation Controller Required. Irrigation systems are required to use an irrigation controller that includes a Watersense label that can automatically adjust the frequency and/or duration of irrigation in response to changing weather conditions and be equipped with an automatic rain delay or rain shut-off capabilities. B. Design Guidelines: l. Scale And Nature Of Landscaping Material: The scale and nature of landscaping materials shall be appropriate to the size of the structures. Large scale buildings, for example, should generally be complemented by larger scale plants. 2. Selection Of Plants: Plants shall be selected for form,texture, color, pattern of growth and adaptability to local conditions. 3. Evergreens: Evergreens should be incorporated into the landscape treatment of a site, particularly in those areas where screening and buffer is required. 4. Softening Of Walls And Fences: Plants shall be placed intermittently against long expanses of building walls, fences, and other barriers to create a softening effect. 3 5. Detention/Retention Basins And Ponds: Detention/retention basins and ponds shall be landscaped. Such landscaping may include shade and ornamental trees, evergreens, shrubbery,hedges, ground cover and/or other plant materials. 6. Irrigation Systems: All irrigation systems shall comply with the following requirements: a. All irrigation shall be appropriate for the designated plant material and achieves the highest water efficiency. b. Drip irrigation or bubblers shall be used except in turf areas. Drip irrigation systems shall be equipped with a pressure regulator, filter, flush-end assembly, and any other appropriate components. c. Each irrigation valve shall irrigate landscaping with similar site, slope and soil conditions, and plant materials with similar watering needs. Turf and planting beds shall be irrigated on separate irrigation valves. In addition, drip emitters and sprinklers shall be placed on separate irrigation valves. 7. Energy Conservation: Plant placement shall be designed to reduce the energy consumption needs of the development. a. Deciduous trees should be placed on the south and west sides of buildings to provide shade from the summer sun. b. Evergreens and other plant materials should be concentrated on the north side of buildings to dissipate the effect of winter winds. 8. Berming: Earthen berms and existing topographic features should be, whenever determined practical by the zoning administrator, incorporated into the landscape treatment of a site,particularly when combined with plant material to facilitate screening. SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Section 21A.62.040. That the definition of Turf in Section 21A.62.040 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended read as follows: TURF: Grasses planted as a ground cover that may be mowed and maintained to be used as a lawn area of landscaping_Does not include decorative grasses, grasses that are native to the local environment or grasses that do not generally require supplemental water, or inorganic substitutes commonly referred to as artificial turf. SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Section 21A.60.020. That Section 21A.60.020 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended to include the following two (2) terms: Active Recreation Areas 4 Mulch SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Section 21A.60.040. That definitions of the terms "Active Recreation Areas" and "Mulch"be added to Section 21A.62.040 of the Salt Lake City Code as follows: ACTIVE RECREATION AREAS: Areas of the landscape dedicated to active play where turf may be used as the playing surface. This may include sports fields, play areas, golf courses, and other similar areas where turf is commonly used as the surface for outdoor activities. MULCH: Any material such as rock,bark, compost, wood chips or other materials left loose and applied to the soil. SECTION 5. 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 , 2023. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR 5 CITY RECORDER (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM Bill No. of 2023. Salt Lake City Attorney's Office Published: December 16, 2022 Ordinance Amending Section 21 A.48.050 Landscape Materials Date: _ By: Katherine D.Pasker,senior City Attorney 6 L CHRONOLOGY October 27, 2022 Petition initiated by Mayor Erin Mendenhall. October 28, 2022 45-day engagement period started; notice emailed to all recognized community organizations along with draft proposal. November 14, 2022 Online open house information posted. December 1,2022 Public notice mailed, emailed, and posted on State Public Notice website for Planning Commission Public Hearing on December 14, 2022. December 7,2022 Staff report posted on Planning Commission Agenda webpage. December 13, 2022 45-day public engagement period ended. December 14,2022 Planning Commission Public Hearing held. 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2022-01055 On December 14, 2022, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted to recommend approval of the proposed modifications to 21 A.48 Landscaping of the Salt Lake City Zoning Code. The proposed modifications are being requested in order for the City to be listed as an "eligible city" by entities that provide rebates for property owners who replace turf with more water-wise landscaping. If the changes are not adopted, property owners would not be eligible to receive the rebates. The proposal includes placing limits on the amount of turf that can be planted based on use, size of landscaped area, and slope and makes other similar changes required to be considered an eligible city. The City Council may amend other related chapters and sections of Title 21A Zoning as part of this proposal. As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments regarding the petitions. During the hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The Council may consider adopting the ordinance the same night of the public hearing. The hearing will be held: DATE: TBD TIME: 7:00 PM PLACE: Electronic and in-person options. 451 South State Street,Room 326, Salt Lake City,Utah ** This meeting will be held via electronic means,while 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. For more information,including WebEx connection information,please visit wwwaslcaovlcouncillvirtual® coins. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801)535-7654 or sending an email to cour�cilmcommcnts(�z lc ovmcom.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 (801) 535-6173 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m, Monday through Friday, or via email at nick.norris@slcgov.com. The application details can be accessed at https:Hcitizenportal.slcgov.com/,by selecting the"planning"tab and entering the petition number PLNPCM2022-01055 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 make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.coinnients(d;slc(ov.coni, (801)535-7600, or relay service711. 3. Original Petition MEMORANDUM wgi PLANNING DIVISION LIEF' ofOOMMUNM and NEIGHBORHOODS t To: Mayor Erin Mendenhall ce: Lisa Shaffer,Chief Achninistratht Officer,BlakeThonnas,Deparonent ofCcarantinity and Neighborhoods Director,Michaela Okay,Deputy Planning Director From: Nick None,.Planning Director Date: Occaser 20,2(Y22 Re: Updates to landscape regulations In March 2023 the Utah Water Consercuncy District will launch new requirements for their Rebate programs that provide reimbursement for property owners who remove sod and replace it with more appropriate landscaping for our local climate, One of the requirements for the reimbursement program is that cities within their service area,including Salt Lake City,must have adopted landscaping regulations that include specific requirements,The Salt Lake City zoning ordinance includes most of these requirements,however the are two key provisions that need to be added to our code for property oreners to be eligible to utilize the incentives: • A prohibition of using sod or aerial sprinkler heads on are that are less than eight feet in any dimension. • Limiting the amount of sod for nonresidential uses to no more than 25%of a required landscape area. U`WCD instructed its that these two provisions are required to be adopted prior to March 1,2023, If they are not,then our property owners would not be Eligible for the incentives. UWCD informed us that Salt Lake City'property menace are the largest users of their rebate programs. To ensure that there is not a gap in eligibility,the Planning Division would like to request that you initiate a petition to start the process as soon as Possible. Please note that this pill be a separate action from updating the entire landscaping regulation chapter.That work is in progress and our goal is to have that to the council in time to adopt prior to the 2023 grorring season.There is potential risk that if we relied on that process to add these precisions that it will not be adopted prior to March 1,2023. Running this in a condensed time frame allows us to get something to the council so they can act prior to March i. 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 can remain 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 east.6G73 or njLLjhj[EjLta slc or.cocn if you have any,questions,Thank you. Concurrence to initiate the zoning text amendment petition as noted above. Erin Men enhall,Mayor [late v. SALT LAKE City CoRpoRATK)N 451 SOUTH STATE STREET soon 406 Royal SLC,GOV Re BOX 14548D SALT LAKE CITY LIT 84114.A400 TEL 001-53'r7757 FAX 801-53"174 4. Public Comment Received After Publishing Planning Commission Staff Report VW Sugar Hous COMMUNITY COUNCIL December 9, 2022 TO: Salt Lake City Planning Commission FROM: Judi Short, First Vice Chair and Land Use Chair Sugar House Community Council RE: PLNPCM20202-01050 Landscape Regulation Modifications Needed to Quality for Rebates We have read this proposal and have no problems with it. Salt Lake City residents should be able to qualify for rebates provided by other entities for replacing turf with water wise landscaping. We understand the main changes being proposed are: • Prohibiting turf in areas that are less than eight feet in width at the narrowest point; • Limiting turf to no more than 35%of the total landscaped area for residential uses, with a carve out for small lots where the yard areas required to be landscaped are less than 250 square feet; • Prohibiting turf on slopes greater than 25%•Limiting turf to no more than 25% of the total landscaped area for commercial, industrial, instituti onal, and multi-family development common areas. • Limitations on types of sprinklers used in narrow landscaped areas. All of us who worry about having enough water ought to be looking to convert our lawns and gardens into waterwise irrigation and plants, if we haven't already done so. We look forward to reading the complete chapter of the landscape code. In the meantime,we approve this revision so that we can continue to be eligible for rebates. Letter to PC from SHCC 2900 S 900 E ADU www.su,,arhousecouncil.or 1 From: tames Webster To: Norris Nick Subject: (EXTERNAL)Credit underground drip for sod Date: Monday,December 12,2022 6:12:37 PM The 85 ac District commercial project in S.Jordan is entirely irrigated with Netafim drip under sod. Water consumption is comparable,or less than SLC's proposed irrigation concepts for non-sodded areas pending design and equipment. I was the landscape architect for the District. Jim Webster,RLA Sent from my iPhone titti rigs MOTION SHEET Z CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO: City Council Members Project Timeline: Set Date: Feb. 7,2023 Briefing: Feb.7, 2023 FROM: Sylvia Richards, Policy Analyst Public Hearing: March 7,2023 Action:TBD DATE: March 7, 2023 RE: NNOM MOTION SHEET FOR PUBLIC HEARING The Council will conduct a Public Hearing and may consider the following motion: Motion 1 — Continue the Hearing I move that the Council Page 1 ERIN MENDENHALL Jorge Chamorro Mayor Public Services Director S M CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL Date Received: 01/26/2023 Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: 01/26/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE- nua t)26, 2023 Darrin Mano, Chair FROM: Jorge Chamorro,Public Services Director SUBJECT: Right of Way Permit Notification Fee STAFF CONTACT: Mark Stephens, City Engineer, 801-535-6355 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance Amendment to Consolidated Fee Schedule RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that, after a public hearing,the City Council adopt the following amendments to the City Ordinance and the Consolidated Fee Schedule. BUDGET IMPACT: NA BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Pursuant to the proposed ordinance amendment for Salt Lake City Code Section 14.32.036 to include clarifying language on pre-notification notices for work to take place in the Public Way,this transmittal addresses the associated proposed cost per notification that is to be passed along to the Public Way Permit applicant. The corresponding fee analysis for the cost associated for each pre-notification postcard mailed out by the City on the applicant's behalf has been performed by City Finance and is attached herewith. It is proposed that the fee associated with these pre-notification postcards be adopted into the existing Consolidated Fee Schedule so that the appropriate fees can be assessed to the Public Way permit applicant along with the other required Public Way permit fees prior to approval and issuance of the Public Way Permit. PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing EXHIBITS: A. Red Lined Ordinance B. Clean Ordinance C. Red Lined Consolidated Fee Schedule D. Clean Consolidated Fee Schedule E. September 2022 Cost Analysis for ROW Permit Notification Fee PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET #135 www.slcgov.com PO BOX 145470 FAX 801-535-7116 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111-5470 ATTACHMENT A Red Lined Ordinance SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2023 (Amendment Related to Notice Requirements for Work in the Public Way Permits and Imposing a Fee Related to Such Notices) An ordinance amending Salt Lake City Code Section 14.32.036, and also amending those portions of the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule related to notice regarding work in the public way permits. WHEREAS, on May 17, 2011 the City Council adopted Ordinances 2011-23, 2011-24 and 2011-25 to authorize and create the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule; and WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City("City Council") desires to update portions of the Salt Lake City Code related to notice regarding work in the public way permits, and to also update the corresponding portions of the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule; WHEREAS, it is now proposed that the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule be amended to update fees related to notice regarding work in the public way permits as shown in the attached Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds (i) the fees and fee information set forth in Exhibit A is necessary, reasonable, and equitable in relation to regulatory and service costs incurred by the City; and (ii) adoption of this ordinance reasonably furthers the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Salt Lake City. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1 SECTION 1. That Salt Lake City Code Section 14.32.036 shall be, and hereby is, amended to read as follows: 14.32.036: NOTICE REQUIREMENTS: 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 by the applicant and delivered[ r}ppiica III-titil s determined by the City Engineer in the manner described in subsection 14.32.036B.1.b. A. "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). 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. With respect to proposed work located above ground, notice shall be delivered to the adjacent properties on both sides of the public way. 4. Notice shall be provided to every adjacent property contiguous to the work location, regardless of whether the work is below ground or above ground. B. The notice shall meet the following requirements: 1. Notice shall be given by either: a. I f apla-o ed by the c ity, Pplacing a door hanger or flyer,_ba-scd on a cite-�stipplic�i cs�ic��i>]c and collianiinn, the astir r3��ati���t cic�sc�il, f in sUbSc:C6011 1432.03613.2 and 3, 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 b. I the city VJniailing a postcard 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. The city will include as part ot'thc:_pernlit application Ice., and the applicant shall pay ro the city, the cost ol'suailitIt! each postcard notice in the amount speciiied ill the Salt hake City consolidated fee schedule. c. 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. 2. Each notice shall arc that it is_given-pta'sn ni it) Salt Lake City Code section 1-L,2,03) � and shall contain the name of the permit applicant and a local contact phone number and email address for the permit applicant. 3. 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. C. 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 2 for certified mail delivery. If the City provides the notice, it shall keep a record of how and where the notice was delivered. D. No notice shall be required in the following situations: 1. Any work where a permit is not required. 2. Emergency situations. 3. Certain maintenance type activities where the street remains passable and unrestricted, such as snow plowing, street sweeping, street patching activities, and pothole repairs. 4. Replacement work where the work is replacing like for like(example: replacing a section of sidewalk with the same width sidewalk). 5. Placement of a dumpster, POD, or other obstruction for less than eight (8)days. SECTION 2. That the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule shall be, and hereby is, amended, in pertinent part, to reflect the fees set forth in the attached Exhibit A, and that a copy of the amended Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule shall be published on the official Salt Lake City website. SECTION 3. That a revised copy of the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule that reflects the amendments set forth in the attached Exhibit"A" shall be published on the official Salt Lake City website. SECTION 4. That this ordinance shall become effective upon publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of 2023. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER 3 Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR (SEAL) Bill No. of 2023. Published: Salt Lake City Attorneys Office Approved As To Form By: Boyd Ferguson Date: 4 EXHIBIT A 5 ATTACHMENT B Clean Ordinance SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2023 (Amendment Related to Notice Requirements for Work in the Public Way Permits and Imposing a Fee Related to Such Notices) An ordinance amending Salt Lake City Code Section 14.32.036, and also amending those portions of the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule related to notice regarding work in the public way permits. WHEREAS, on May 17, 2011 the City Council adopted Ordinances 2011-23, 2011-24 and 2011-25 to authorize and create the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule; and WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City("City Council") desires to update portions of the Salt Lake City Code related to notice regarding work in the public way permits, and to also update the corresponding portions of the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule; WHEREAS, it is now proposed that the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule be amended to update fees related to notice regarding work in the public way permits as shown in the attached Exhibit A; and WHEREAS,the City Council finds (i)the fees and fee information set forth in Exhibit A is necessary, reasonable, and equitable in relation to regulatory and service costs incurred by the City; and (ii) adoption of this ordinance reasonably furthers the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Salt Lake City. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1 SECTION 1. That Salt Lake City Code Section 14.32.036 shall be, and hereby is, amended to read as follows: 14.32.036: NOTICE REQUIREMENTS: Prior to the City issuing a Work in the ROW pen-nit,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 by the applicant and delivered as determined by the City Engineer in the manner described in subsection 14.32.036B.1.b. A. "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). 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. With respect to proposed work located above ground,notice shall be delivered to the adjacent properties on both sides of the public way. 4. Notice shall be provided to every adjacent property contiguous to the work location, regardless of whether the work is below ground or above ground. B. The notice shall meet the following requirements: 1. Notice shall be given by either: a. If approved by the city, placing a door hanger or flyer,based on a city-supplied example and containing the information described in subsection 14.32.03613.2 and 3, 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 b. The city mailing a postcard 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. The city will include as part of the pen-nit application fee, and the applicant shall pay to the city,the cost of mailing each postcard notice in the amount specified in the Salt Lake City consolidated fee schedule. c. 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. 2. Each notice shall state that it is given pursuant to Salt Lake City Code section 14.32.036 and shall contain the name of the permit applicant and a local contact phone number and email address for the permit applicant. 3. 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. C. 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 2 for certified mail delivery. If the City provides the notice, it shall keep a record of how and where the notice was delivered. D. No notice shall be required in the following situations: 1. Any work where a permit is not required. 2. Emergency situations. 3. Certain maintenance type activities where the street remains passable and unrestricted,such as snow plowing,street sweeping, street patching activities, and pothole repairs. 4. Replacement work where the work is replacing like for like(example:replacing a section of sidewalk with the same width sidewalk). 5. Placement of a dumpster, POD,or other obstruction for less than eight(8)days. SECTION 2. That the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule shall be, and hereby is, amended, in pertinent part,to reflect the fees set forth in the attached Exhibit A, and that a copy of the amended Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule shall be published on the official Salt Lake City website. SECTION 3. That a revised copy of the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule that reflects the amendments set forth in the attached Exhibit"A" shall be published on the official Salt Lake City website. SECTION 4. That this ordinance shall become effective upon publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of 2023. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER 3 Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR (SEAL) Bill No. of 2023. Published: Salt Lake City Attorney's Office Approved As To Form By; � ri Boyd Fer son Date: 4 EXHIBIT A 5 ATTACHMENT C Red Lined Consolidated Fee Schedule ENGINEERING For questions regarding Engineering Fees Contact: 801.535.6159 _ Service Fee Additional Information Section i Excavation Permits Shallow Trenching $0.29 Per linear foot 14.32.4Q0 Minimum charge $2,900 1 jQQ Hard surfaced $0.39 Per sq.foot _ _ _ 14.32.400 Minimum charge $225 April 1-November 15 444 1 Minimum charge ( $300 November 16-March 31 14.32A0Q Soft Surfaced $0.26 Per sq.foot Minimum charge $150 April 1-November 15 14.32.400 Minimum charge $175 November 16-March 31 Permit within a restricted area Fees double See Section 14.32.400 A3 — 14.3240Q Landscaping Permit for Public Right of Way I $19 I Per job,or$80,66 Per year ¢ Multiple Utility Excavation Permits — Hard surfaced f I Per multiple I $157 I April 1-November 15 I 14,92.4QQ Per multiple $232 I November 16-March 31 �4QQ Pothole/excavation < 10 sq.ft.(per each) $37 !April 1-November 15 i 14.32.400 Pothole/excavation.5 10 sq.ft,(per each) $47 November 16-March 31 Test_holes(per each) $2 _-- —— 14,32,400 Soft Surface I Per multiple $96 =April 1-November 15 14.32.400 Per multiple $106 November 16-March 31 1 . 0 4.3 Pothole/excavation < 10 sq.ft.(per each) $19 i April 1-November 15 14.32.400 Pothole/excavation<10 sq.ft.(per each) $28 November 16-March 31 Test holes(per each) $1 1132.40Q Poles and Anchors $54 {Each pole,concrete pedestal or anchor 14.324 o EPublic Survey Monuments Monument(per each) $77 — To be determined upon Pre-Notification Bailer adoption C5ee section 14.32.036 36 Public Way Improvements Curb and gutter i $2 Per linear foot Sidewalk,driveway approach $0.39 'Per sq.foot 14.32A05 Minimum charge $212 j April 1-November 15 Q5 Minimum charge $266 November 16-March 31 14.32.405 In kind i No charge I See section 14.32.405 D 4> 4 Public Way Obstruction Permits j j Short term(One Week) I Sidewalk Canopy $18 (Per Week(Construction barricades) i 14.32A10 Dum ster/pod P _ $47 ;Each,per Week(Construction barricades) Lane or sidewalk closure $92 Per Week(Construction barricades) 14.32.410 Long term:(1 Month Increments) Sidewalk Canopy $74 Each,per month(Construction barricades) 14.32.410 Dumpster/pod $186 (Construction barricades) 4.32.�jz0 Lane or sidewalk closure j $371 Each,per month(Construction barricades) jA,32A10 Small Wireless Facility Fees j Application fees 14.56.060 Small cell facility to collocate a small wireless facility on $100 Per wireless facility 460 an existing or replacement utility pole Install,modify or replace a utility pole associated with a small wireless facility,where permitted under Utah Code $250 14.5`.060 Section 54-21-204,or its successor ( Per wireless facility Install,modify or replace a utility pole associated with a ! small wireless facility,where NOT permitted under Utah $1,000 Code Section 54-21-204,or its successor Per wireless facility Collation Rate As set forth in Utah Code 14.5'.070 Section 54-21-504 'Application outside of boundaries of a coordinated Street Banners on Utility Poles $53 street banner program 21A.46.170 Amended 06/15/2022 by Ord. 2022—37 Page 19 ATTACHMENT D Clean Consolidated Fee Schedule _ ENGINEERING For questions regarding Engineering Fees Contact: 801.535.6159 Service Fee Additional Information Section Excavation Permits f — � Shallow Trenching $0,29 Per linear foot 14.32,400 I Minimum charge 1. $2,900 1 0 Hard surfaced $0.39 Per sq.foot 14.32.400 Minimum charge $225 April 1-November 15 i4,'3 4 Minimum charge $300 'November 16-March 31 14.32.400 E Soft Surfaced j _ $0.26 [Per sq.foot J4J2A0Q Minimum charge $150 April 1-November 15 14.31400 Minimum charge { $175 November 16-March 31 14 Permit within a restricted area Fees double See Section 14.32.400 A3 14.32.400 Landscaping Permit for Public Right of Way $19 Per job,or$80.66 Per year Multiple Utility Excavation Permits Hard surfaced Per multiple $157 April 1-November 15 14.32.400 Per multiple $232 I November 16-March 31 I 14.32.4QQ Pothole/excavation<10 sq.ft.(per each) $37 April 1 November 15 I 4. 4U Pothole/excavation<10 sq.ft.(per each) $47 i November 16-March 31 1 14�2.4QQ Test holes(per each) i $2 ; 14.32.4 0 Soft Surface _ Per multiple $96 April 1-November 15 14,32.400 Per multiple $106 November 16-March 31 1 2®40 Pothole/excavation<10 sq.ft.(per each) $19 April 1-November 15 14 32.400 ! NPothole/excavation<30 sq.ft.(per each) $28 November 16-March 31 est holes(per each) $1 14.32.400 Poles and Anchors $54 Each pole,concrete pedestal or anchor 14.32.4A0 Public Survey Monuments — I Monument(per each) $77 1 0 i4p Public Way Improvements Curb and gutter $2 Per linear foot J IIJ2,405 Sidewalk,driveway approach $0.39 Per sq.foot 14.32.405 Minimum charge $212 April 1-November 15 I 14.32.4t}5 — - - — — Minimum charge $266 November 16-March 31 14.32.405 i In kind_ No charge _ See section 14.32.405 D_ 14.32.40 Public Way Obstruction Permits — Short term(One Week) 1 Sidewalk Canopy $18 Per Week(Construction barricades) j 14.31410 Dumpster/pod $47 'Each,per Week(Construction barricades) 4 2 41Q Lane or sidewalk closure $92 Per Week(Construction barricades) 14.32.410 Long term:(1 Month Increments) —I Sidewalk Canopy $74 Each,per month(Construction barricades) j 14.32.410 Dumpster/pod $186 (Construction barricades) I 14 32,410 Lane or sidewalk closure $371 Each,per month(Construction barricades) 14.32.410 Small Wireless Facility Fees Application fees 14.56.06Q Small cell facility to collocate a small wireless facility on $100 Per wireless facility 4. 6 660 an existing or replacement utility pole Install,modify or replace a utility pole associated with a small wireless facility,where permitted under Utah Code $250 Per wireless facility 14.56.060 Section 54-21-204,or its successor Install,modify or replace a utility pole associated with a small wireless facility,where NOT permitted under Utah $1,000 14.56.060 Code Section 54-22-2 Per wireless facility 04,or its successor ' Collation Rate As set forth in Utah Code y ' 14.56 070 Section 54-21-504 'Street Banners on Utility Poles $53 Application outside of boundaries of a coordinated jg .46170 street banner program I Amended 06/15/2022 by Ord.2022-37 Page 19 ATTACHMENT E September 2022 Cost Analysis for ROW Permit Notification Fee SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION Public Services Department/Engineering Division Right of Way Permit Notification Fee 1 ! COST ANALYSIS �` l4 rr;'Yr� September 2022 'to: ':'+7 c� Summary Note 1: Direct Labor and Unbilled Building Costs $ 8.49 Note 2: Direct Materials 0,57 Direct Cost S 9.06 Note 3: Unbilled Engineering Division Administrative Costs 10,797 Note 4: Unbilled Department Public Services Administrative Costs 5,346 16,143 Per Postcard-Unbilled Div/Dept Overhead Costs $ 10.67 Note 5: Unbilled City Administrative Fees 9,092 Per Postcard-Fully Loaded Cost S 11 58 Note 1: Direct Labor and Unbilled Building Costs Job Title FTE Annual Cost pro rated share Costs Engineering Information and Records Specialist 10 $ 78,638 100% 5 78,638 Total Direct Salaries $ 78,638 Unbilled Building Costs est.260 square feet per employee S24 per square feet costs(per Prop Mgt) $6,240 1.0 6,240 Total Direct Labor and Unbilled Building Costs $ 84,878 Estimated annual notifications 10,000 Cost per notification $ 8.49 Note 2: Direct Materials $to be Materials Costs Mr Notification allocated # ear $$ Postage S 044 S 0,44 Post card 006 0.06 Labels 005 0.03 0.5 Materials Costs-annual Printer 250.00 10,000 0,03 Ink cartridges 8000 6,000 10,000 0.00000133 0,03 $ 0,57 Note 3: UnbRled Engineering Division Administrative Costs $to be Derived "2022 NonPersonal Services Operating Costs allocated Percentage $S Cost Center 0312400 Engineering S 263,738 2% S 5,382 Deputy City I ngmeer 171,608 1,60% 2,747 EngineerVil 166,600 1,60% 2,667 $ 10 797 SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION Public Services Department/Engineering Division Right of Way Permit Notification Fee COST ANALYSIS September 2022 .fir s Note 4: Unbillerl Department Public services Administrative Costs $Allocated Derived to Departments Percentage $$ Public Services Administrative Costs-FY2022 $ 1,641,260 033% 5 5,346 Total Administrative Costs $ 1,641,260 5,346 Note 5: Untailled City Administrative Fees Allocated Derived to Departments Percentage GF Admin Fees-All City Depts[FY 19 allocation) S 1,051,857 0,38% 4,030 IMS Admin(FY19 allocation) 1,321,196 038% 5,062 Risk Management(FY22) 0 38% Claims Paid(FC 85) 038% total Admin Fees 2,373,053 9092 Note 6: Depreciation Expense on Fleet Vehicles Depreciation Annual Vehicle Period Depreciation Count Est.Cost ears Costs 0 vehicles Sit 4 Annual maintenace costs ,(Cost data per Denise Sorenson-Hcut) Note 7: Full Time Equivalent(FTE)Information Public Services FTE's(FY2023 MRB Staffing Document) 30700 Public Services General Fund FTE's(FY2023 MRB Staffing Document) 26100 Engineering FTE's(per FY2023 MRB Staffing Document) 4900 1 1 Note 8: Hours:1,624 annual base hours was computed as follows: Total Hours Available Annually(40 hours x 52 weeks) 2,080 Less:Vacation(2 77 hours X 52 weeks or 3 weeks per year) 144 Less:Sick(0 77 hours x 52 weeks or I week per year) 40 Less:Breaks(260 days per year x 0 50 hours) 130 Less:Holidays(8 0 hours x 12 days per year) 96 Less:Meetings/Training(estimate) 46 Annual Work Hours 1,624 Note 9: Estimated Notifications Estimated Annual Right of Way Permits issued 2,500 Anticipated notifications per permit issued 4 Total Anticipated Notifications 10,000 Item 134 "oss too, MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO: City Council Members FROM: Allison Rowland Budget and Policy Analyst DATE: March 7,2023 RE: ORDINANCE:THE GLENDALE REGIONAL PARK PLAN MOTION i — CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING I move that the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a later date. MOTION 2 — CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING I move that the Council continue the public hearing on a future date. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 SLCCOUNCIL.COM P.O. BOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 t COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO: City Council Members Item Schedule: Briefing: February 21,2023, FROM: Allison Rowland March 7,202E Budget&Policy Analyst Public Hearing: March 7, 202E Potential Action:March 21, 2023 DATE: March 7,2023 RE: ORDINANCE:THE GLENDALE REGIONAL PARK PLAN ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will review,and consider adopting,the draft Glendale Regional Park Plan,which aims to provide the guiding vision and design for the future park,as well as establishing a framework for development and programming at the 17-acre site.At full build-out,the project is meant to"represent the unique and diverse culture of the Glendale Community,"serving as a neighborhood park while also providing amenities that create a regional attraction. Like all plans,the Glendale Regional Park Plan sets out aspirations,and the funds for many of the features and activities have not yet been identified.This means that full implementation of the Plan will be contingent on funding availability in the coming years. The Department of Public Lands led the multi-year efforts to prepare the Plan for repurposing the former site of the Glendale Water Park.The Department received Council approval to begin work last summer on"Phase 1" implementation,before the full draft Plan was completed and adopted,because a portion of the park must open by April 2024.This is a requirement of the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund,which originally funded the City's purchase of the site.The Fund requires that active recreation be publicly accessible on-site within three years of beginning to remove existing amenities(see section L below). The full draft of the Glendale Regional Park Plan includes a variety of special considerations because of the complexity of the site.The Plan proposed for Council adoption includes the following items,which are described in more detail in the sections below: • Major park elements at full build-out such as an outdoor pool,splash pad,dog park,and roller skating ribbon,among other features,to be considered in phases as budget becomes available. • Site ecology and restoration. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 SLCCOUNCIL.COM P.O.BOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 • Budget estimates for full build-out,which total$30 million to $50 million,with the acknowledgement this may change given inflation and phasing • Maintenance and management recommendations as well as cost estimates(~$620,000 per year). • Recommendations on future Park programming. • Diversity,equity,and inclusion at the Park. • Proposed improvements to site access. • Goals and metrics for the Park. Previously completed steps in the planning process include site analysis,conceptual planning,extensive public engagement,and reviews by the Council on May 3,and October 4, 2022.Both the Parks,Natural Lands,Urban Forestry and Trails Advisory Board(PNUT)and the Transportation Advisory Board(TAB)reviewed the Plan and provided letters of support.The Community Advisory Committee formed specifically to guide the development of the Plan,also reviewed the full draft Plan and supports it,as does the Glendale Neighborhood Council. The Plan was also unanimously recommended for approval by the Planning Commission,with"the proviso that the City Council pay special attention to operations,maintenance,security,and staffing for the park as it goes into use." Goal of the briefing:Review the final draft of the Glendale Regional Park Plan and potentially consider adopting it. Page 1 2 ADDITIONAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. Key Park Elements at Full Build-Out.The key elements of Glendale Regional Park are described and illustrated in pages 41 and 42 of the draft Plan.They include: 1. Community Gathering and Event Spaces: a promenade/community plaza spanning the north central gateway,an event stage and lawn,smaller pavilions and picnic lawns and a riverside beach and boardwalk. 2. Play Places for Everyone:hiking,walking and paved trails,an all-ages and-abilities playground,climbing features,multi-use sport courts,dog park,and sledding hill. 3. Places to Enjoy the Water: a splash pad,kayak rental,access to the Jordan River for recreation, boat dock and ramp,and an outdoor pool. 4. Places to Wheel Around: an ice/roller skating ribbon,skateboarding area,and bike trails. B. Site Ecology and Restoration.The specific location of the Glendale Regional Park site,along the Jordan River,contributes to the complexity of this project but also offers significant opportunities for ecological restoration.This was evident in the demolition and site preparation phases,which took longer,and cost more,than initially anticipated.In addition,the site had"a high level of impervious surfaces,with 54%of the site being covered in asphalt and concrete."The proposed design would reduce this amount by half through low-impact development practices,using green infrastructure to absorb stormwater and creating additional ecological benefits. To protect critical riparian habitat within the floodplain,improvements proposed in the Plan which fall within ioo feet of the annual high-water line of the Jordan River will follow guidelines outlined in the City's Riparian Corridor Overlay District(RCO): "Development near the river corridor will seek to enhance floodplain functions through riparian restoration. Structures,such as boat ramps or docks,will be built in accordance with RCO zoning ordinances." The Plan's goals include improving wildlife habitat,and it notes that phasing the project's construction will reduce potential impacts to the site's current wildlife population,particularly migratory song birds. Specifically,the many invasive Russian olive trees,which currently serve as habitat for many bird species, will be removed in phases rather than all at once,and new riparian plants will be established among the remaining Russian olives for a number of years before those are removed to allow the new plants to develop into a more sustainable forest. As was noted in previous steps of the Glendale Regional Park planning process,the Department recommends pursuing certification through the Sustainable Sites Initiative(known as SITES),or a similar sustainability program,to support goals for ecological restoration and sustainable park development.The Plan notes that"During the master planning process,a SITES prescore assessment confirmed that the Glendale Park project meets the qualifications to pursue SITES certification.As the project consultant moves into the next design phase,this consideration should be integrated into the process to ensure that sustainable practices are adhered to and that the proper documentation is collected to pursue certification." Projects pursuing certification often incur higher costs in design and construction,however,they consistently return significant long term cost savings related to ongoing operations and maintenance costs. The Plan's Appendix A includes the full SITES prescore worksheet and assessment for Glendale Regional Park. Page 13 C. Budget Estimates.The Glendale Regional Park Plan has been developed using$225,000 approved in a Fiscal Year 2021(FY21)budget amendment.Additional funds became available through the 2022 General Obligation(GO)bond,which was approved by voters last November along with an allocation from CIP in FY 22 and Budget Amendments in FY 21 and 23(see chart below).The Department of Public Lands is working to identify additional funding opportunities,as well. 1. Current Cost Estimates for Full Plan Implementation.Current estimates of the cost for full build-out of Glendale Regional Park as envisioned in the Plan range from$30 million to$5o million.The figures are necessarily imprecise,especially in the current context of relatively high inflation in the construction industry.Funding availability and Department logistics will be key determinants for the speed at which Park construction can proceed.More precise estimates will be possible as detailed construction designs proceed. 2. Project Phasing.The total number of phases needed for build-out will increase overall costs,even if inflation returns to more typical recent levels.This is because cost-efficiency suffers with each new construction phase added.The Phasing Diagram on page 6o of the Plan includes the Department's recommended phasing approach,and includes additional information on phasing considerations, like hazards and safety.This diagram also indicates which of the planned features are most costly. 3. Phase i Costs.The initial estimates for Phase 1 construction ranged from$3.5 million to$5.5 million dollars.The Plan states that this phase"was designed to maximize usable park features and efficiently utilize funding,as it comprises only approximately 1o%of the total park cost yet completes 30%of the full park buildout."(Additional information on Phase 1 can be found in section K below.) 4. Previous Budget Allocations.In recent years,the Council has approved funding for site preparation and Phase 1 implementation through budget amendments and as part of CIP,as follows. FY21 Budget Demolition of the waterpark and related $855,000 Amendment#5 infrastructure.Site preparation for redevelopment. FY21 Budget Preparation of the Glendale Regional Park $225,000 Amendment#6 Plan FY22 CIP Initially for Phase 1 implementation,but most $3.20 Million of this amount had to be used for unexpected demolition and site preparation. FY23 Budget Phase 1 Implementation. $4.35 Million Amendment#4 5. Other Funding Sources.The General Obligation(GO)bond that was approved by City voters in November 2022 is currently slated to provide$27 million for capital improvements for Glendale Regional Park.The Department intends to continue to explore relevant grant,donation,and partnership opportunities. Page 14 6. Ongoing Management and Maintenance Costs. Expected ongoing expenses for full management and maintenance are not provided in the Plan,aside from the Ongoing Programming &Activation Costs noted below.For FY23,the Council agreed to the Administration's request that parks maintenance become eligible for some of the annual Funding Our Future sales tax revenue,with a$2 million dollar allocation for that year. ➢ The Council may wish to ask the Administration for details about how the Funding Our Future allocation was spent in FY23, and whether significant changes in the total amount are expected for coming years. ➢ The Council may wish to discuss the historical subsidy of activation/maintenance at other regional City parks such as Liberty Park(see item D below for additional information on this topic). 7. Ongoing Programming&Activation Cost Estimates.Total annual ongoing costs for the programming and activation of Glendale Regional Park,as designed in the Plan,would be a recommended minimum of$613,000,and inflation will likely affect these costs,as well as the others. See chart below,from page 74 of the Plan. Table 2 Progra erring&Activation Budget Recommended Minimum &8 On site programming manager $76.000 Base starting salary of$60,000 annually-Budget includes fringe benefits. Park attendants $18,200 16 hrs/wkyear round,$17.50wage plus 25%fully loaded. Overtime allowance $4,550 May also be used for discretionary bonuses Administration/insurance - Assumes covered by City Defuses Equipment lsupplies $10.000 Laptop for Manager.suiartphones/tab lets for attendant use,general supplies Arts&culture $80.000 Two-thirds of this cost is annual,cutting edge interactive art installations Fitness $30,000 Mostly provided by free businesses seeking to market their classes Hobbies&niche interests $45.000 Includes outdoor dancing,which is about one- third of the total budget Live entertainment $100,000 Does not include Production costs,which will be minimal Markets&festivals $100.000 Allowance for self produced events Marketing $50.000 Limited to promotion surrounding public space programs and events Holiday decorations $100,000 Allowance UNNEMEMENNEEMENEEM 8. Additional Staffing.As alluded to above,the Plan anticipates that additional Public Lands staff will be needed to"support and activate the park to enhance safety and enjoyment of the space."In addition to recommending one new full-time on-site programming manager, and two part-time,seasonal park"attendants"(see above),in several sections of the Plan there are references to other new tasks recommended for Public Lands staff. It is not clear whether these would require full-time commitment to Glendale Regional Park or could be shared among multiple sites. Examples include: Page 15 a. an operations manager,to oversee capital projects,major repairs,landscape maintenance,and all third-party contractors. b. a dedicated employee for specialized maintenance and repair needs such as fixing plumbing issues,repairing broken stairs,electrical repairs,building maintenance,etc. This employee could oversee multiple parks with appropriate support staff. c. a marketing employee to maintain a dedicated website and social media accounts that are frequently updated with news and happenings.This website would also be a tool for customer service, a guide for private event permitting,and a place to receive inquiries, comments,and complaints. d. a leasing agent who would focus on partnership agreements,either through the relevant City agency or through a park management entity,and would select the appropriate tenants for any kiosks,cafe space,river concessions,and any other commercially operable spaces within the park. 9. A Different Park Budgeting Model? Salt Lake City has traditionally funded its parks system primarily through general fund allocations which department spends according to its own priorities.The proposed Glendale Regional Park Plan recommends a different model for this park, "with a dedicated and predictable budget that grows over time through revenue development. The park should be viewed as a business, with profits and losses,except that all profits should be made with the public interest in mind and, thus, reinvested back into the park for the benefit of local residents and visitors."The Plan includes a graphic and a brief discussion of public/private partnership structure on page 75. ➢ This would be a departure from the City's current park maintenance model, as it is not likely that any park could generate i00%of the revenue needed to staff, program and maintain the space. The Council may wish to discuss the benefits and disadvantages of different funding models,and request information from the Administration about its views on the subject. D. Maintenance and Management Recommendations. Regardless of the funding model,many of the maintenance and management recommendations for Glendale Regional Park,as well as those for its programming(see section D),are predicated on the City's commitment to building a park that serves the neighborhood as well as acting as a regional draw—on par with Liberty Park,for example,though on a much smaller scale."To achieve this high standard, the City will need to make special considerations for Glendale Park's operations staffing required to support the appropriate levels of security,sanitation, public realm maintenance, landscaping,programmatic operations,event needs,park concession leasing, and marketing..."Along with additional Department of Public Lands staff to help meet programming and partnership needs,specific management recommendations include working with key community partners and stakeholders,including organizations that promote inclusivity,equity,and partnerships, and hiring local and minority-owned businesses to program elements of the site(see section D). Recommendations for programming, operations and management in the draft Plan can be found beginning on page 71. A key principle behind this approach is that a park that is well-maintained and clean encourages visitors to treat the park with respect. Park cleanliness will also impact perceptions of safety,which in turn attracts visitors,including families,and increases the overall sense of civic pride and support for the park. Community partnerships are also considered essential to activating the park.Staff note: this may require additional budget considerations beyond typical park maintenance funding. Page 16 The plan also includes some detailed recommendations for Park management and maintenance that might be generalizable to other Public Lands properties as well,like staffing for park sanitation responsibilities or marketing individual parks. ➢ The Council may wish to ask the Administration whether it plans to revamp some of its practices for maintenance for other parks and public lands based on the recommendations in the Glendale Regional Park Plan. E. Recommendations for Future Park Programming.The Plan states that programming and management will be essential to creating a safe community asset.It points out that Salt Lake City residents and visitors are not necessarily accustomed to"robust programming of public spaces,"similar to what is seen in many larger cities,where open space is at a greater premium.It also suggests that"Many parks and plazas have failed to maintain a positive visitor experience because they have not programmed and managed their public realm to exceed local precedents." To achieve better results at Glendale Regional Park,the Plan recommends establishing a Park programming budget to provide equipment,marketing,outreach,and supplies.The proposed on-site programming manager would need to use this budget to leverage programming partners and interested groups to provide donations of time and materials,sponsorships,and other resources.The Plan also suggests that a baseline programming budget from the Department could improve planning and fund- raising for this purpose, and help it grow over time, as a variety of potential revenue sources are developed from philanthropy, sponsorships, event rentals,food and beverage, programming, and government support. (See section B,above for additional information on the proposed budget.) According to the Plan,successful programming of arts,culture,fitness,entertainment,markets,and community festival events has the power to: • define how the park feels. • differentiate it from other parks and destinations. • provide an active and appealing neighborhood anchor. • provide a safe and clean place. • capitalize on Glendale's rich and diverse multicultural environment. • capitalize on Salt Lake City's outdoors orientation. The types of programming the community prefers were pinpointed through the public engagement process (see section J below),and the Plan includes a long list of potential activities that could begin once Phase z is complete.Ideas for additional future programming are also included in the Plan on pages 45 to 47. Potential Phase 1 Programming Children/family Outdoor/environmental Arts/culture/community Family fitness activities Nature/meditative walks Audience area Ail-ability movement Birding/wildlife workshops Outdoor movies Music/literary education Gardens/horticulture Lawn games Organized play activities Public art Animal education events River Programming Arts/culture/community Fitness/recreation/events Safety and awareness Art cart Low impact fitness Skills workshops Arts and crafts Organized recreation/workshops Habitat education Small music/performance Community cultural events Volunteer events Literary events Outdoor hobbyist activities Lectures Board games Sports courts Clinics/lessons All-ability skills training Page 7 The Plan notes that based on its market studies,Glendale Regional Park will best serve users in nearby neighborhoods through low or no cost activities for both adults and children. It emphasizes that forming and maintaining relationships with key community stakeholders,engaging with community organizations that promote inclusivity,equity,and partnerships,and working with local and minority-owned businesses will be the most enduring strategies to supporting programming of the site. F. Diversity, Equity,and Inclusion.The Plan identifies three aspects for an overall program for Glendale Regional Park that would help the City promote equity and ensure the new park is inclusive of all residents: 1. growing minority-owned businesses through concessions and contracts; 2. supporting existing organizations that promote inclusivity and equity through programming partnerships; and 3. partnering with local organizations through internships and job training. Examples of how this program could be implemented can be found on pages 49 to 51 of the Plan. ➢ To better understand the benefits and budget needs of these kinds of programs, the Council may wish to request the Administration provide examples from other cities of how these partnerships unfold in practice. G. Proposed Improvements to Site Access and Connections.The proposed Plan includes recommendations for new connections to trails,better public transportation access,and improved pedestrian crossings at 1700 South.The Park's design deliberately aims to strengthen connections within the neighborhood,including to the 1700 South Park and Glendale Neighborhood Park. It also would facilitate connections to the broader regional park system,with a proposed bridge to the Jordan River Parkway Trail,Glendale Golf Course,and the future Surplus Canal Trail. 1. Transit.The Plan highlights a gap in public transportation access to both Glendale Regional Park and for the broader Glendale neighborhood.The closest rail connection to Glendale Regional Park is the River Trail Station along the Green Line(2340 South 1070 West),which is a 1.3 mile walk. Nearby bus routes do not have stops that are within comfortable walking distance,either.The importance of closing this gap is greater still because the Plan reports that the share of Glendale households without personal vehicles is three to four times higher than it is in the City as a whole. The draft Plan also suggests improving public transportation connections to enhance park access, increase sustainable transportation options,and facilitate park activities and events. 2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Access.The Plan suggests that 1700 South could be narrowed to create safer access to Glendale Regional Park,since vehicle traffic along it is"very low for its width,"and says the Transportation Division is currently evaluating the potential for improvements there related to active transportation.The Plan also proposes an additional crosswalk between the existing ones near 1300 West and at the Jordan River Parkway Trail,which are over 1/4 mile apart. Also,the proposed Surplus Canal Trail would provide a direct connection between the park and residents of western Glendale who currently live beyond a 10-minute walk from a park. ➢ The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration whether or not the proposed site access improvements are included in the Plan's cost estimates for full build-out. ➢ The Council may wish to ask the Administration how work among departments and with organizations outside the City could be facilitated to help resolve some of the barriers to connection for this area of the City. Page 18 H. Goals and metrics for the Park.The section of the draft Plan titled"Goals and Metrics"(pages 53 to 56) focuses on assessing the success of the planning process in meeting the public's goals but does not explicitly address how the fully built-out Park itself might be assessed. It states,"The draft plan also looks at specific metrics,based on the original park goals,that measure the plan's success in addressing improvements in ecological function of the site,improvements in access to and within the site,and in creating community spaces for gathering and events.Gauging elements of the final concept plan,through performance-based evaluation,provides a measure to determine if goals set during the beginning of the park planning process are being attained." ➢ Asa next step, the Council may wish to request that the Administration work to adapt these goals set in the planning process into a distinct list that can be used to measure progress toward full-build out of the Park and assessing its ongoing performance. I. Park Mission.The mission of Glendale Regional Park,is defined in the Plan as follows: "Glendale Regional Park will be an iconic neighborhood park that celebrates and preserves community,culture,and diversity.It will also be a regional destination connecting to the Jordan River and Salt Lake City's park network.Making nature and recreation within an arm's reach, the park will improve the natural resources and quality of lives for current and future generations of Westside residents." This mission coincides with the Salt Lake City Public Lands Master Plan,adopted by the Council last year, which identified a need for investment in Westside parks,and for enhancing park spaces along the Jordan River. It specifically calls for the Glendale Regional Park to be improved to create a regional attraction and event space that celebrates and preserves community culture and diversity,along with making water recreation accessible to more people.The Glendale neighborhood was identified by the previous Public Lands Needs Assessment as being a high-needs area for park investment whose residents visit parks less frequently than residents of the east side of the city. J. Community Engagement.Community engagement for the master plan process and for the development of the preferred plan began in October 2021. It included youth and stakeholder engagement,development of a Community Advisory Committee(CAC,organized for this project and composed of leaders in the Glendale community to represent a variety of organizations,businesses and affiliations),an online survey and public open house,and in-person engagement events.A detailed description of the public engagement efforts can be found at https://www.slc.gov/parks/parks-division/glendale-waterparkZ. The final preferred plan and final draft plan for the site was reviewed by the Parks,Natural Lands,Urban Forestry and Trails Advisory Board(PNUT Board),the Community Advisory Committee,and the Glendale Neighborhood Council.The final preferred plan was made available to the public in July 2022,and the draft plan document became available August 25, 2022,initiating the 45 day-public noticing period required for Planning Commission. K. Site Development Phasing.Implementation of the full Glendale Regional Park Plan will be phased to reflect funding and strategic opportunities,as well as staff capacity and logistics.The Department has stated, "detailed design of each phase will refine the design,construction materials,site character,maintenance requirements,and construction costs.Additionally, specific proposed improvements(such as an outdoor pool)will require additional feasibility studies as well as collaboration with community partners and other City departments and divisions." Page ( 9 1. Deadline for Phase i.The Public Lands Department adopted an aggressive planning,design,and construction schedule for this site because it was originally funded by the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund(https://www.nps.gov/subjectsZlwcf/index.htm).This Fund requires that active recreation be publicly accessible on-site within three years of removing existing amenities.This means the first phase of the project must be complete by April 2024. As noted in previous staff reports,to meet this timeline the project team advanced with the detailed design of Phase 1 park elements before the Master Plan has been adopted.This allowed adequate time for the development of construction documents,contracting a construction firm,site preparation,and public notice before construction begins. 2. Phase i Strategy.Elements and amenities were selected for Phase 1 based on the following criteria: e. Inclusion of recreational elements that meet the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund requirements; f. Features that can be constructed within the expedited timeline and fit within current budget allocations; g. Connecting Phase 1 to the existing Glendale Neighborhood Park and its amenities(such as the restroom)to maximize park use and access; h. Inclusion of improvements that will not be affected or closed during construction of future phasing;and i. Community support amenities that are typical of a regional park and are eligible for impact fees. 3. Phase i Elements and Amenities. Elements and amenities typical of a neighborhood park were identified by the project team for funding using$3.2 million dollars of parks-specific impact fees,which were allocated by the Council in FY22.The team will prioritize design and construction of these items,but because of quickly rising costs the Department may need to request additional impact fee funding to complete the list.The list,in priority order,is as follows: a. Playground with accessible design and assistive technologies for all ages b. Pavilion c. Looped pathways d. Community plaza and gathering space e. Landscaping and site restoration(which is scalable,based on budget) f. Multipurpose sport court g. Parking(existing parking is available if this must be removed from Phase 1) Site restoration,including addressing and managing noxious weeds and invasive vegetation,will begin during Phase 1 construction.In addition,the Department will strive to preserve the health of onsite ecological and environmental assets,including existing trees and canopy.The Glendale Regional Park Master Plan will provide additional recommendations for site management and restoration during and after construction. L. Site Background.The Glendale Regional Park site was known previously as Raging Waters, Seven Peaks, and other names over the years.The water park site was closed in 2o18,after the City declined to renew the contract with the most recent vendor.The site has remained closed but was subject to recurrent vandalism and theft of some remaining assets,in spite of fencing and private security contracted by the Department of Public Lands. M. Plan Leadership. Due to the site's size,location along the Jordan River,and complexity,the Department of Public Lands formed an internal City leadership group,which includes representatives of Public Lands, Page 110 Engineering,Public Services,Transportation and Sustainability.The City's consultant on this project, Design Workshop,also collaborates with this group.Design Workshop's team includes specialized subconsultants, including River Restoration for environmental health and restoration recommendations, David Evans and Associates for public engagement, and Agora Partners for programming and partnerships. Design Workshop was also the consultant for Reimagine Nature,the Twenty-Year Public Lands Master Plan. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. Several potential future budget items are mentioned in this update,including one-time costs for construction that are bond-eligible,and ongoing costs for additional staffing and programming that are not bond eligible.Given that not all of these items are not eligible for impactfee funding or the GO bond approved by voters last year,would the Council like to request the Administration provide information about the strategies it is considering to fund these items?(Note: in the FY23 budget the Mayor proposed and the Council agreed to add"Parks Maintenance"to the Funding our Future sales tax funding. $2 million was allocated in FY23 and was deployed in various parks around the City.) 2. The Council may wish to request additional information on the role planned for the Community Advisory Committee once the final version of the Plan is adopted.Does the Administration foresee a continuing role for this group of local community leaders and organizations based in Glendale?Would the Council like to suggest some potential roles to explore? 3. The Plan notes that transit and walking connections are currently inadequate. Given this situation, the Council may wish to are there enough parking spaces to serve users in the shorter term, and how the number of spaces compares to other parks of similar size and function. 4. The Council may wish to ask whether the Administration intends to expand the Park Ranger program to provide coverage to Glendale Regional Park, and whether the recommended seasonal Park "attendants"are intended to take on some of the duties of the Park Rangers. 5. Recommendations on future programming opportunities at Glendale Regional Park would expand the Public Lands Department into some areas of service with which it has relatively little experience. Would the Council like to ask the Administration how it plans to help the Department succeed in this area? Page ( it ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC LANDS MAYOR KRISTIN RIKER DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL Date Received: 01/09/2023 Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council:01/09/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: January 4, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Kristin Riker,Director,Department of Public Lands SUBJECT: Adoption of Glendale Regional Park Plan STAFF CONTACTS: Kat Maus Public Lands Planner Katherine.mans(��slc�;ov,cote DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the Glendale Regional Park Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission. BUDGET IMPACT: N/A BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Salt Lake City Public Lands Department has been working with a consultant, Design Workshop,to develop a plan to guide development of the 17-acre Glendale Regional Park site, formerly known as Raging Waters. Demolition is substantially complete, and a portion of the park must be open to public recreation by April 2024 to meet the requirements of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (hops./www.nps. �ovl:�ub'ects,bvcflindcx.html). The project team has been working to develop the Glendale Regional Park Plan since Summer of 2021, which will provide the guiding vision and design for the future of the old water park site and establish a framework to guide development and programming of the site into the future. The plan relies heavily on Glendale community input and is aimed at representing the unique and diverse culture of the Glendale Community while also including amenities that will create a regional draw SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION WWkV.SLCGOV.COM 1965 WEST 500 SOUTH TEL:801-972-7800 SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84104 FAX:801-972-7847 PAOL 1 of 2 for residents of Salt Lake City. The project team has worked closely with project stakeholders, neighborhood residents, community partners and students at Glendale Middle and Mountain View Elementary Schools to create goals and objectives for the site, and a community-supported vision that reflects the Glendale neighborhood's rich heritage and identity. Over 1,300 people responded to an online city-wide survey, bringing the total participant count for the project to nearly 1,700. Key elements of the plan were informed by public input and at full build out include: • Community Gathering and Event Spaces—a promenade/community plaza spanning the north central gateway, an event stage and lawn, smaller pavilions and picnic lawns and a riverside beach and boardwalk. • Play Places for Everyone-hiking,walking and paved trails, an all-ages and abilities playground, climbing features, multi-use sport courts, dog park, and sledding hill. • Places to Enjoy the Water—a kayak rental, access to the Jordan River for recreation,boat dock and ramp, and an outdoor pool. • Places to Wheel Around - an ice/roller skating ribbon, skateboarding area, and bike trails. The draft plan also looks at specific metrics,based on the original park goals, that measure the plan's success in addressing improvements in ecological function of the site,improvements in access to and within the site, and in creating community spaces for gathering and events. Gauging elements of the final concept plan, through performance-based evaluation,provides a measure to determine if goals set during the beginning of the park planning process are being attained. The Glendale Regional Park Plan draft provides recommendations for site management and restoration during construction, and after, including programming and partnership needs, operations, maintenance, and staffing are also included in the plan draft document. Programming and management will be key to fulfill the park goal of creating a safe community asset. Potential opportunities for addressing management needs include expanding internal Public Lands staff by recommending additional staff to support and activate the park to enhance safety and enjoyment of the space. The plan recommends a full time, on-site programming manager,two part time, seasonal park attendants and allocating associated budget to ensure programming on the site is robust and effective, consisting of programming funds for arts, culture, fitness, entertainment, markets and community festival events. The plan also emphasizes continuing to create and build upon key community partners and stakeholders, engaging with community organizations that promote inclusivity, equity, and partnerships, and working with local and minority-owned businesses to program elements of the site. More information about programming, operations and management recommendations within the plan can be found on page 71 of the draft Master Plan document. PUBLIC PROCESS: Community engagement for the plan process and for the development of the preferred plan used a multi-pronged approach including youth and stakeholder engagement, development of a community advisory committee, online survey and public open house, along with in-person engagement events. The public process began with robust engagement with the Glendale Community and then broadened to a citywide engagement effort. A detailed description of the public engagement efforts can be found at https:,`wwxv.slc. parks`park s-division/<Gendale-waterpark/. In brief, the engagement process consisted of three engagement windows: Page 2 of 4 Public Engagement Window 1: The first public engagement window prioritized neighborhood and community stakeholder engagement to ensure the community voice was the guide in establishing the initial vision. Considering the predominately younger population in this area,the project team focused on Glendale Middle School and Mountain View Elementary School students and families,while also engaging community leaders and the Glendale Neighborhood Council. The project team met multiple times with the students, engaged in design charettes and used the direction we received from these 130 students to guide initial plan alternative design. The project team also attended and held several in- person events with the Glendale community and created a Community Advisory Committee(CAC) specifically for this plan creation. The CAC was comprised of members who are considered leaders in the Glendale community and represented a variety of community organizations, businesses and affiliations specifically in the Glendale community. The members of the CAC provided key feedback on the project mission, goals, engagement process and vision for the park and shared information about the planning process with their community. The engagement from Window 1 drove the development of two concept alternatives. Public Engagement Window 2: The two concept alternatives were shared with the public and with City Council. The project team kicked-off broad, citywide public engagement with an open house hosted at the Glendale and Parkview Community Learning Center to open a survey. Residents of Glendale, members of the CAC and the city at large attended the event to orient themselves to the plans. Over 1360 people citywide participated in the survey which informed the development of the final preferred plan for the site. The preferred plan includes community-prioritized features from each of the two concept plans. The project team met again with the CAC to review engagement results and get feedback before moving forward with the final preferred plan. Public Engagement Window 3: The third and final window included sharing out of the final preferred plan and final draft plan for the site with the Parks, Natural Lands, Urban Forestry and Trails Advisory Board(PNUT Board), the CAC and Glendale Neighborhood Council. The final preferred plan was available to the public in July 2022, with the draft plan document becoming available August 25, 2022, initiating the 45 day public noticing period required for Planning Commission. Please see Exhibit B for additional details on engagement events, descriptions, and participation. Additional public comments and responses can be found in the Planning Commission Stal`f Rcport of Novernber 9. 2022. Please see Exhibit D for letters of support from the Parks,Natural Lands, Urban Forestry and Trails Advisory Board and Transportation Advisory Board. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Following the presentation of the Glendale Regional Park Plan to the Planning Commission, the public hearing was opened where the following comments were made: After discussion of the plan and public comments by the Planning Commission and staff, Planning Commissioner Brenda Scheer moved to recommend approval of the plan with the following statement: "Based on the information presented and discussion,I move that the Commission forward a POSITIVE recommendation to the City Council on the fabulous Glendale Regional Park Master Page 3 of 4 Plan with the PROVISO that the City Council pay special attention to operations, maintenance, security, and staffing for the park as it goes into use."The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission (PC) Records a) 131C Agenda of November 9, 2022 (Click to Access) b) PC :Minutes of November 9. 2022 (Click to Access) c) Plarinin Commission Staff Report of November 9, 2022 (Click to Access Report) EXHIBITS: A. Salt Lake City Ordinance B. Public Engagement Chronology C. Glendale Regional Park Plan D. Public Comments Received& Letters of Support Page 4 of 4 EXHIBIT A Salt Lake City Ordinance SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2023 (Adopting the Glendale Regional Park Plan to be part of the city's general plan as a specific plan found in the Westside Master Plan) An ordinance adopting the Glendale Regional Park Plan pertaining to property located at 1131 West 1700 South, 1181 West 1700 South, and portions of properties with a certified address of 1375 West 1700 South and 1220 West 2100 South. The Glendale Regional Park Plan will be part of the Westside Master Plan, which is a component of the city's general plan. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission ("Planning Commission")held a public hearing on November 9, 2022 on the proposal prepared by the Salt Lake City Parks and Public Lands Department to adopt a new Glendale Regional Park Plan as part of the city's Westside Master Plan; and WHEREAS, at its November 9, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council ("City Council") to adopt the Glendale Regional Park Plan, 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. Adopting the Glendale Park Regional Park Plan. The Glendale Regional Park Plan(Exhibit A) shall be and hereby is adopted to be part of the Westside Master Plan, a component of the city's general plan as required by Chapter 10-9a of the Utah Code. 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 , 2023. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM (SEAL) Salt Lake City Attomey's Office Date: November 21, 2022 Bill No. of 2023. By: Published: P I C.Aelso Senior City Attorney EXHIBIT B Public Engagement Chronology ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor _ x= Project Event Notes Time Period Community and Neighborhood 3,500 Respondents--Public Survey through the department of 2020 Department Survey Community and Neighborhoods to gauge public interest in the future of the park hups:i�vik�v.slc.ttov can care,,�, aterpask; SLC Waterpark Commemoration 3841 Respondents—Public Survey to gauge interest in demolition 2020 Survey Report and re-development of the park. haps: uploads 2021 01 NNater_Park= Surti c Report Nm, 2020.pol' Glendale Community Council I Participants and 3 Community Council Members visioning a 2021 Visioning Exercise potential future for the site Initiation of Formal Planning Public Lands initiates a formal city engagement and planning Spring/ Process by Public Lands department process for the Glendale Regional Park Master Plan supported by Summer Design Workshop as project consultant. 2021 External Stakeholder Engagement: Parents and students were asked at three community events which Fall 2021 Community Events elements from past surveys should be included in the park.Events included:Morning Coffee with 20 respondents;Glendale Scare Fair with around 50 respondents;Hartland 4 Youth and Family Event with 40 respondents External Stakeholder Engagement: Design exercises were led with 88 middle school and 40 fifth grade Fall 2021 Glendale Middle School and students to gather feedback and input on the future design of the Mountain View Elementary site.The process included on-site meetings with 88 Glendale Middle School,"Place-It"activity with University Neighborhood Partners,and collage creation. https:i multicu]tural:utah.*off Glendale vouth-as-placemalccry/ Community Advisory Committee A CAC was created to ensure neighborhood representation in the January 2022 Meeting 1 preferred plan and final master plan documents.These stakeholder meetings ensured engagement with westside communities. The first meeting oriented participants to the project and asked for general impressions on the project. Community Advisory Committee This meeting presented two conceptual ideas for the park and February Engagement Meeting 2 sought specific feedback on the ideas and amenities for the future 2022 site. "Plan Your Park"in-person Open Project team worked with Glendale Community Council to host an March 16, House and engagement event at event with over 100 attendees to share with the community the 2022 Community Learning Center concepts that have been generated so far and to launch a public survey. Online Survey Public survey to gather broader feedback on amenities and concept March 16, alternatives receiving 1361 responses. 2022-April 16,2022 PUBLIC LANDS DEPARTMENT www.slc.gov/parks/ 1965 W 500 S PHONE 801-972-7800 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84104 FAX 801-972-7847 ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor _ x= Community Advisory Committee This meeting shared the results of the broader survey with the April 12, Engagement Meeting 3 Committee and solicit feedback and impressions on the data. 2022 Community Advisory Committee Final preferred plan sharing and feedback from the CAC,as well as May 31,2022 Engagement Meeting 4 explanation of Phase 1 Presentation to Glendale Sharing of public process and phase I implementation projects, Jun 15,2022 Neighborhood Council timeline,and budget Preferred Plan Confirmation Confirm final preferred plan and share with the public. August- October 2022 Presentation of final plan draft to Share final plan document and phasing plan to PNUT Board and September 1, PNUT Board request endorsement 2022 Presentation of final plan to Glendale Share final plan document,preferred plan and phasing strategy to September Neighborhood Council and public the Glendale Community Council and Public;solicit public 21,2022 comment and question Presentation of final plan to Share final plan document and phasing plan to TAB and request October 1, Transportation Advisory Board endorsement 2022 City Council Plan Briefing and Share final plan document,preferred plan and phasing strategy to October 4, Process Summary City Council as a briefing,and to address comments or questions 2022 Public Hearing and Planning Presentation to Planning Commission for plan recommendation to November 9, Commission Presentation and City Council for formal adoption 2022 Recommendation FUTURE ENGAGEMENT:Master Presentation of preferred plan and Master Plan document to City Projected: Plan presentation and adoption Council for adoption. Late 2022- Early 2023 PUBLIC LANDS DEPARTMENT www.slc.gov/parks/ 1965 W 500 S PHONE 801-972-7800 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84104 FAX 801-972-7847 EXHIBIT C Glendale Regional Park Plan MEMMOlendale Regional Park Master Plan ,w .,�' -{ w �<,;.: �' � "# �,` 's�; i..•,,�<{ ,�,c tttKK ��1�{ 14!'� „�� e�''s r���i,�a'Y s°"`a•.; {": '•9,,4'; . � a•,:•#,� a .r �," 1��. f i �� � 3r 4 " �4 r e M1 { A y r a ya. nrtv^ t y f. t . AGORA IVB Public Lands p DESIGM�(}RK�iI-I{)P DASSO IATES Pq RTNE?,$ +%r^"� Paq�uanaa+N iuma+raxty� n..aAS SOCIAT ES'^= �` I I ' Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................VI INTRODUCTION.................................................... I SITE CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS eeee„e„......ee,ee„e„......ee,ee„ COMMUNITY EN A EMENTeeo,eooeooeo..........................25 THEVISI Nee„e„ee,ee,ee,ee„e„ee,ee,ee,ee„......ee,ee„.......39 IMPLEMENTATION,ee„e„ee,ee,ee,ee„............ee„............57 APPENDICES veo,eo,eooeoovooveo,eo,eooeoov........................77 t q _ David Evans&Associates: Agora Partners. River Restoration: b�. r-d q: -`- T E'TOt1f1)G EEN BAY, `I :YO. K rf _ t t„a- L Glendale i I Park Process Overview Project r Salt Lake City Public Lands(SLC Public Lands)has been presented with the opportunity to redevelop the former Raging Waters/Seven Peaks water park site to better serve the community by providing needed park space and amenities.The water park,defunct and in a state of decay,has no prospective operators and it has become unfeasible to revitalize the once-loved space.Public Lands needs to fulfill a directive,established by the requirements of the Land and Water Conservation Fund,to provide publicly accessible outdoor recreation to the community by 2024. The chance to develop the park is significant as the Salt Lake City Public Land's Master Plan identifies a need for investment in Westside parks and enhancing park spaces along the Jordan River.The master plan specifically calls for the Glendale Regional Park to be improved to create a regional attraction with characteristics that celebrate and preserve community culture and diversity and make water recreation accessible to more people. This document,the Glendale Regional Park Master Plan,shares the planning process, research and analysis,community engagement and resulting recommendations to achieve these goals. Site xfi Glendale Regional Park is a part of Salt Lake City's Westside neighborhoods.The park is a major link in a long chain of parks and open space which are all connected by the Jordan River Parkway,which positions the park to become a key recreation destination along the Jordan River Parkway Trail along with the nearby Glendale Golf Course,1700 S Park and Glendale Neighborhood Park.The park location also presents an opportunity to increase access to water recreation and improve essential riparian habitat along the Jordan River. vi I Executive Summary Engagement inclusive play features that all ages and all Implementation SITES pre-score assessment,confirmed abilities can enjoy.Community gathering that the Glendale Park project meets the A top goal for SLC Public Lands was to with opportunities for food and local The park will be constructed in a series of qualifications to pursue SITES certification. create a park that is a community park performances was also important feedback phases.According to the requirements set Details of the SITES prescore can be found first,and a regional destination as well. that was shared. by the Land and Water Conservation Fund, on pages 69-70 and in Appendix A. - •- ° The planning team wanted to be sure they outdoor recreation amenities in the park received robust input on community needs The Vision must be available to the public by spring Park Mission and desires from members of the local of 2024.This expedited schedule requires ° neighborhood and also gather insights on The Glendale Park Master Plan was that Phase I park features are easily Goals park needs from the larger pool of city-wide created through a process of verifying implemented,meet a rapid construction Throughout the process,a Community gi residents.A series of engagement activities park features and design concepts with timeline and fit within the current budget Advisory Committee comprised of local were conducted from October 2021 to May the community.Park ideas were refined allocated for the park.Park features that community members and leaders helped , 2022 including: from initial ideas down to two concept plan are most desired by the community and guide the plan to align with the needs alternatives,which were then refined into a can meet this criteria are being given top ° • Neighborhood and Stakeholder and desires of the Glendale community. _ g Engagement: final park plan. priority for inclusion in Phase I. This committee helped to form a mission Glendale Neighborhood Events:3 The final design strategy seeks to create an Next Steps statement and goals for the park.For full events,110 participants park that celebrates community gathering goal statements,see page 4. gi Youth Engagement:Glendale and active recreation with programs and To meet the rapid timeline required to open Middle School and Mountain View activities that are community-driven.The the park with publicly accessible recreation, Elementary School,128 participants park will be a hub for sharing local food, Phase I design will proceed concurrent Community Advisory Committee to Master Plan adoption.Programming art and culture with family,friends and Meetings:3 meetings including 14 opportunities with community partners will participating members neighbors. continue to be developed to ensure that the "Plan Sharing"Glendale Community The park will also be a place to explore park remains an active space upon opening. Council:15 participants nature through hillside trails,along the to Citywide Engagement: restored riparian landscapes and through The project team will also begin. rehabilitate the site with ripariann and enhanced access to the Jordan River. "Plan Your Park"Open House:100 native vegetation to fulfill the park goals attendees The park design strengthens regional of enhancing environmental quality and Public Online Survey:1361 connectivity,connecting Glendale Park to improving environmental justice for the participants the larger park system with a proposed Glendale neighborhood.To support these Key takeaways from public input included bridge connection to the Jordan River goals,it is recommended that the project the need for a neighborhood park-like Parkway Trail,improved connections to team pursue certification in a sustainability experience with lots of amenities,the need 1700 South Park such as road narrowing program such as SITES or another for increased safety,and opportunities for and an at-grade pedestrian crossing,and a comparable program.This would ensure free and affordable activities.Other themes recommended multi-use trail connection to sustainable practices are adhered to and included the desire to have water play in the future Surplus Canal Trail. would highlight the City's investment in the park in the form of a water feature or restorative landscapes,climate resiliency outdoor pool,a preference for bright and To view the final park plan and park features and equitable environmental investment. colorful park features and a desire for see pages 42-43. During the master planning process,a Executive Summary I vii Introduction Introduction 1 2 _T A New Park for the Glendale Neighborhood Salt Lake City Public Lands has been presented with the opportunity to redevelop the former Raging Waters/Seven Peaks water park site to better serve the community by providing needed park space and amenities.The water park,defunct and in a state of decay, has no prospective operators and it has become unfeasible to revitalize the once-loved space.Public Lands needs to fulfill a directive,established by the site funding requirements of the Land and Water Conservation Fund,to provide publicly accessible outdoor recreation to the community by 2024. The chance to develop the park is significant for several reasons.The Salt Lake City Public Land's Master Plan identifies a need for investment in Westside parks and enhancing park spaces along the Jordan River.The master plan specifically calls for the Glendale Regional Park to be improved to create a regional attraction and event space with characteristics that celebrate and preserve community culture and diversity and make water recreation accessible to more people.The Glendale neighborhood is also identified by the Public Lands Needs Assessment as being a high needs area for park investment with a lower frequency of park visitation than parks on the east side of the city. The park site is also significant as it presents an opportunity to increase access to water recreation and improve essential riparian habitat along the Jordan River,one of the city's greatest natural assets in need of restoration efforts and care.In addition,activating the park will enhance regional connectivity by creating a key recreation destination along the Jordan River Parkway Trail along with the nearby Glendale Golf Course,1700 S Park and Glendale Neighborhood Park. e Goals for the new park include creating a safe,active and communal space that embodies natural elements of the Jordan River and provides new opportunities for recreation, activities and events.This document,the Glendale Regional Park Master Plan shares e ! e ! ! the planning process,research and analysis,community engagement and resulting recommendations to achieve these goals.It outlines the Master Plan for the development ! ! e ! e ! ~ of the former Glendale Water Park;a 17-acre site,to guide capital improvements,site ` programming,and operations and maintenance recommendations. ! 1 I e ! 3 Introduction Park Mission Statement ffiCommunity-Led came to Nature # The vision is community led and reflects The park is a space to build a meaningful backyard will co Glendale's culture and history.The park will relationship with nature.Attractive and E offer space for social connections,features, accessible features and free recreational and services that interest the Westside activities provided in the neighborhood's community. mbat Nature Deficit Disorder in the community. L Community Services j�.` ,bEnvironmental lit Programming 1 � The park builds upon existing natural assets The park provides equitable access to and enhances the ecological health of the ®� t nature and outdoor recreation.The Westside.Features of the park will work to community can enjoy free and affordable improve the Jordan River's water quality # classes,events,and entertainment at the and Salt Lake City's air pollution for the neighborhood's central park. community. ark Activation&Safety Environmental Justice The park is a dynamic destination activated The park celebrates the Jordan River, by daily use.What happens in the park is integral to the community's identity,and an organic expression of Westside culture. enhances local environmental quality.The Local community members,organizations, community-led vision will prioritize the -ry and businesses together will create a safe quality of life for the Glendale neighborhood ® f and welcoming environment. and Westside community. « Regional Connection The park is a regional destination combining and connecting to multiple f m # neighboring parks.As a gathering place along the Jordan River,the park serves as a recreational gateway between Westside :. and the larger park systems. Introduction ( 4 Site Context&Analysis 1 6 Project Context City-Regional Jordan � River Jordan Glendale River Water Park Neighborhood hood Lake SaltLakeal 80 Moos l Glendale Water Park 201 Utah Lake Glendale Water Park 7 1 Site Context&Analysis Project � r iwii , r FOFt R � ,t GR EFARN ,° y e� 'i Watershed and improve water quality in the river.The Fd m ••r`= park is a major link in a long chain of parks R•,; Glendale Regional Park is a centerpiece and open space which are all connected by ' .' along the Jordan River,a culmination of R 1 _ the Jordan River Parkway,This network of seven major tributaries flowing out of public spaces positions the park to become _ k the Wasatch Mountain Range to the east Rxnr�x the centerpiece of an oasis of trees in an La_ FEacEanaoex and the final conduit in the Jordan River and urban environment,absorbing carbon, y II { FARa IL Watershed.The Jordan River is the city's mitigating Salt Lake City's challenging air - largest river and flows south to north, g pollution,and reducing urban heat island for 51 miles beginning at Utah Lake and - effect.When park improvements and draining into the Great Salt Lake.The river's ° features are complete,the park will be a 1 1 , riparian habitat is a rarity in the high desert 1 THREE (•�� major recreational node in the city's park @ExonrTxE 9 CREEKS- _ environment of the Salt Lake valley and R>vER coRR�ucxcE. x: system. supports a variety of wildlife as well as many t• + ' migratory birds along the Pacific Flyway. Neighborhood I N CULTUR City-Regional Glendale Regional Park will immediately ' i .lor an 'AN E� serve the Glendale neighborhood.Park The park is a part of Salt Lake City's enhancements will create direct and Rlv Westside neighborhoods.Despite i''t significant access to the nature that ER b proximity to the natural spaces along the b exists directly in the neighborhood's Jordan River,these neighborhoods are x0 Sir =- backyard,providing opportunities for free sandwiched between the congested I-15 •J 5 �rR®oE i g recreational activities that are nearby °I Vflt �Q r" corridor and the cit 's industrial districts. -_ y and accessible to all.The ark resents r ' According to the 2014 Westside Master an opportunity to strengthen connections " a c <' I' QPark rx _ d Plan,"compared to other communities between the adjacent 1700 South Park to -. within the city(excepting the industrial In the north,Glendale Neighborhood Park R The rv' xm A° i"l districts west of I-215),the Westside carries to the west,and Jordan River Parkway 'C".OLFC oese Future R an inequitable share of land dedicated to to the east.The addition of an enhanced Regional - i manufacturing uses"As measured by crosswalk across 1700 South,bridge Park .e ° ® jY the EPA's environmental justice indexes, connections to the parkway and potential R * `` - s IIIIt the neighborhoods surrounding Glendale x _4 future trail connections to the proposed Prle , Regional Park are disproportionately Surplus Canal Trail will be key to providing ' 21°sowl exposed to environmental hazards such }�. i ' �ti.t it 4enhanced park access for the Glendale _ _ as air pollution that settles in the valley and neighborhood. increases risk of health complications. However,the park's proximity to the I t.Y ` l .. moss -..„ + Jordan River offers an opportunity to build ( � -a 11. upon existing natural assets,creating an r ecological park of vegetation and green infrastructure to mitigate local pollutants Site Context&Analysis 8 Glendale Regional Park m Neighborhood Context .m &it 80RENSONp O C[ttTURA� lown� e a.a „4 „a a a. .� x ��'° orR� ICENTER , tt V-a � a e 1 1 +sS w .a am�g;'e a a° '�a 4 H �. I�E,�CE�TIREE v a a e sr° s mm � m � m•° � i ,,, •y , a B• 1' e°a a°e as .4; �ti'a�a8.a�4ffia. 8 ',.a a aw ., ie a 7 ro �� B d �ffi a ga a s 1700;SR'IVER '{ own � � a t R D � � �� � � � ° a PARK I > '� moml -" romp a a a J , i am n ( � I � The mil :. GOCLLE LFCOURSE Futu 4 Regional . t g Perk B 1. 2100.SOU Pei O , Perl y�o S+DUTFf ook � ~ - -_ , 11r� , 9 Site Context&Analysis .w x � f w � ,1 i I S � , r r. y� Site Context&Analysis 10 Views City Set in Nature ' ,Salt Lake City is known for its spectacular i • mountain setting.Being surrounded by r nature is a point of pride that contributes TO STANSBURY ISL to the City's quality of life. r A hike to the top of the hill built to support the former water park's slides offers views of the surrounding golf course, West Views Northeast Views downtown SLC,the emerald ribbon of . , • , the Jordan River and the Wasatch and Oquirrh Mountains beyond. ^> . .. ° x S E• • , • Southwest Views Southeast Views f m1 11 1 Site Context&Analysis Park Views FARNSWORTH PEAK STANSBURY ISLAND ENSIGN PEAK GRANDVIEW PEAK GRANDEUR PEAK NELSON PEAK KESTLER PEAK DOWNTOWN SEC LOOKOUT PEAK u LOWE PEAK NELSON PEAK GRANDEUR PEAK GOBBLER'S(KNOB O'SULUVAN PEAK FLAT TOP MTN CLIPPER PEAK FARNSWORTH PEAK MT.OLYMPUS LONE PEAK � Site Context&Analysis ( 12 Transportaflon ass Regional Rail&Bus Connections ' There is a lack of regional public transit connectivity between Glendale Park and other parts of the City.The closest rail ¢ a > a connection to Glendale Regional Park is SqE COD y.y the River Trail Station along the Green PARK Line(2340 South 1070 West),which is a 1.3 mile walk away. r; e Nearby bus routes include the 9 and 217 o o AR which run every 15 minutes,and the 509 ro AFfi which runs every 30 minutes.The 513 has w ' limited service and only runs during rush JaRo K hour.Yet,as shown on the following page, these routes do not have stops that are within a comfortable walking distance of c +,pR's Glendale Park. n 1700 U'N Rt ,. .ARK 9 Additional connections to Trax and bus e 1K �� .K lines,as well as other modes of public ARK transportation should be explored in order to enhance park access and sustainable transportation options. Increased public transit connectivity is also an important consideration for RIVER TRAIL facilitating park activities and events. STATION PUBLIC TRANSIT NEAR PARK .i 15 Minute UTA Bus Routes 15 min.service n e 30 Minute UTA Bus Routes 1.3 Mile Walks Park Limited Service UTA Bus Routes a ., _• 5 :ur _.. a_,,,. : . ,R>.r, 15 Minute UTATRAX Line LEGEND Study Area UTA FrontRunner Water Park 0 UTA TRAX Stations UTA Bus Routes Glendale Regional Park UTA TRAX Parks and Natural Lands UTA FrontRunner Stations Public Golf Courses A p 025 05 1 Mies 13 ( Site Context&Analysis dY � Transportation ASS Neighborhood 0 z � Neighborhood Transit cuss There is a gap in public transportation access for both the Glendale neighborhood and Glendale Regional Park. 4 E oJo "_ R 0 ARK 0 ,:. 71 In contrast to most other Westside parks which are within walking distance of public transit,the majority a rn s% of the area is not within a 1/4 mile walk of a bus stop or transit station. � e The nearest bus stops are located 1/3 to 1/2 a mile away soPOP x VF from park entrances.A bus stop along the 509 sits near F 1iA oR° ` the golf course entrance. VAAa � It will be important to support enhanced public transit JoRoAN connectivity between the park and surrounding � RK 'K neighborhoods.While the majority of the population -A commutes by private vehicle,8.5%of households in the Glendale neighborhood and up to 13.2%of households " in the study area do not own a personal vehicle.This is significant,as only 3%of households in Salt Lake City do „ sA= 0-O s SOREN not own a personal vehicle' a MULTI,CWTURAL CENTER rtcrNti E 1 (� * 170Q s RIVER 6 1 United States Census Bureau,2020 American Communitysurvey UTABuSRoUtes {PARK is UTA Bus Stops UTA FrontRunner Route 211 cuss •� - i• 0 UTA FrontRunner Stations i a 15 min.service :1 UTA TRAX 1/3 mile walk 0 UTA TRAX Stations 2 Study Area a Salt Lake City Boundary Quarter Mile Walk from TRAX Stations ` Adjacent. Quarter Mile Walk from Bus Stops Golf Existing Multipurpose Trail Entrance Proposed Multipurpose Trail , 1 Water Park 1 Public Golf Courses y Parks and Natural Lands , Glendale Regional Park 60 0 fi 25 1 Miles r r t = s • • t r � C � _ a' ti Walkabimlity Site Analysis ark • •• qt. { 4 . .. - r 8 r i 2018:12,172 2018:34,566 • 8 � � 2017:12,000 2017:35,000 2014:9,980 2014:27,600 #Source:2022Kalibrate Technologies(Q12022), FSRI Business Analyst LEGEND Water Park 0 5F�,„)Feed 15 ( Site Context&Analysis Trails and Recreation Regional Recreation Connectivity Glendale Regional Park is the southern anchor along the SLC portion of the Jordan River Parkway.Trailhead 511 E MR 0 D access and parking is currently located at the 1700 S PARK id River park. The proposed Surplus Canal Trail will be an important addition,providing a direct connection between the park and residents of western Glendale who currently 'E FOFLA rE0 F do not live within a 10 minute walk from a park. RR ftAN 'A 7 ORENS MULTI CULTURAL CENTER t .EGEND R'V Existing Multipurpose Trail RARE A Proposed Multipurpose Trail On-Road Bike Lanes Water Park co Parks and Natural Lands At Public Golf Courses Glendale Regional Park Trailhead C) Trail Access Study Area E Salt Lake City Boundary o 0 025 05 1 Miles BOATER ACCESS ion Gainsay Trailhead Boot Romp Watervasbased Recreat CATER ACCESS The Jordan River Water :'Fisher Mansion Trail Boat Romp The Jordan River flows from South BOATER ACCESS SHERWOOD •oj Aftheimers Fork,P to North,beginning at Utah Lake and Id PARK north side. emptying into the Great Salt Lake.The boat ramp at Glendale Regional Park is a Id PAK'D Top I] Boat Access Restrooms Parking FID 'REA major access point along the Jordan River 1700 South- 1700 South River Limited at Ramp. Water Trail.This section of river allows Exchange Club Park paddlers access to 3.3 miles of beginner- Marina(Glendale Additional 3 POP A vp level flatwater floating(about 1-2 hours). Parking at 1700 Regional Park) For a quicker trip,boaters can take out South River Park. at the Modesto Park ramp,1.2 miles Modesto Park At Nearby Jordan Limited Parking EPA a- io, downstream.Paddlers who are willing Park 3 %RR t obstacles can continue on for another 3.8 ! 'BOATER o brave a short section of intermediate Alzheimers Park No Limited Parking Fisher Mansion No On-street ACCESS miles of beginner floating until reaching ,M.d.,t.Park, Parking &West side the Riverview takeout at 1800 N. L River access can be enhanced by creating aReti I r easier entry for canoes and kayaks.The AJITI CUMM CENTER 3 water quality is an issue,so swimming should be discouraged,but as the water so GUNDA,k ACCESS-1700 quality may improve in the future,water OOLF Exchange Club K access should not be completely cut off. Tside Additional small boat access locations should be evaluated to create a more local scale river recreation circulation pattern. The Jordan River also has potential for LEGEND urban fishing.According to the Utah Salt Lake City Boundary Department of Natural Resources,the K A, Boat Access river"provides great opportunities for RE Study Area COMMENDED TAKE catfish,bullhead,carp,white bass and OUT-Jordan River walleye.1 However,according to the Parks and Natural Lands Redwood Trailhead report Fishes of the Jordan River,"recent Public Golf Courses Park,west side findings of various pollutants common to Water Park highly urbanized areas like the Salt Lake Glendale Regional Park Valley suggest that it may not be safe to eat any fish from the river,especially in Surplus Canal Dam Hazard downstream areas."' I https://wildlife.utah,gov/news/utah-wildlife- R news/743-4-utah-rivers-that-offer-great- fishingnin-august.mml 2 http://jordanrivercommission.com/wp-content/ 0 025 Ob I ulles uploads/2011/04/Fish-Species-of-the-Jordan- River-2011bdf 17 Site Context&Analysis BOATERACCESS-A, BOATER ACCESS-James James Madison A Madison Park Natural Park,North side River Bank Boat Access Smite Ecology Local an i 1 Migratory BirdsPacific 1 Connections The Glendale Regional Park is in a central %Xe tkeadDuck eu Cremes is o s r part of Salt Lake City but is also centrally located along the riparian corridor "4 of the Jordan River,which provides a key connection of riparian habitats for resident and migratory birds.The site is located along the flyway between Utah "+ Lake and Great Salt Lake and provides 0a potential stopover location for resting migratory birds. I i There is potential for increased areas of higher quality riparian habitat along the Jordan River with the creation of an enhanced multi-canopy layer structure. Robust riparian habitats consist of canopies that could have several layers Existing SiteTrees of complexity including large trees,small trees and shrubs,grasses,and forbs Iry cast [flowers].This multi-layer structure � � 5�an �1� is beneficial for creating a diverse �� �S � ecosystem that will be more resilient to future changes in climate and ecosystem ' . processes.Surrounding regional areas tr that are owned by SLC adjacent to the golf course and in other open areas offer ; great opportunity to be enhanced for riparian functioning and flood capacity. See Appendix B for a full site ecological assessment. Site Context&Analysis ( 18 Climate Considerations Weather Averages Average High=July 90 degrees Average Low=January 26 degrees Salt Lake City is comfortable of the year.... .... %too hot and %too cold. 88 days per year with precipitation 3059 hours of sunshine 8.57 inches precipitation 47 inches annual snowfall' � i Additional Site Considerations North to South moderate winds Overall weather patterns moving in from West to East I Little shade/tree cover Shade/ice in winter due to aspect v " Cooler temps by Jordan River Drought n itl n Glendale Park lies within a high desert environment,receiving only 8.5 inches of water each year.Water is becoming increasingly scarce, f i with Utah's Governor declaring a i State of Emergency due to extreme drought.Recommendations from E Utah's Department of Natural ' Resources to reduce water usage include implementing water-wise f landscaping,a practice that should be applied at Glendale Regional Park to i the greatest extent possible.' 1 https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/salt- Take-city/utah/united-states/usut0226 `' "` 2 https://nhmu.utah.edu/sites/ default/files/attachments/ SaltLakeValleyWeatherPatterns.pdf 3 https://water.utah.gov/water-data/drought/ d rou g ht-dec I aratio n/#:-:text=o n%20 Apri I%2021%2 C%202022%2C%20 Spencer,to%20state%20or%20fed e ral%20 resources. 19 1 Site Context&Analysis Site Impervious Surfaces 111111V a _U I t t x' 1� fit 5 Site Surfaces Asphalt-24% d Concrete:249/6 Pool Features:6% Total Impervious Surfaces:54% 4 _ Pervious Landscape:46% s Water Park Pervious Landsape 333,167 SF Asphalt 176,472 SF Concrete 176,3S0 SF Pool Features 46,053 SF 0 50 100 200 Feet F y�J 4236 �• � � — � � `OSZ� � ., v �2Eo - i 424p A230 • A200'_ '_ 1� �e �� 6£Ztr i Floodplain Site Scale LEGEND 0 50 1uf 200 Feet 2 foot Contours — 2 Water Park 100 year Floodplain Building Footprints *Bulldingson site have been demolished 21 ( Site Contexts,Analysis Floodplain Regional Scale 3=.... Resilient Communities SHERWOOD FEMA Floodmaps highlight areas that are more likely to _ ARx i experience flooding.The 100 year floodplain shows areas s that are likely to flood at least one out of every 100 years ,, (a 1%D or higher chance of flooding)while the 500 year floodplain shows areas likely to flood at least once every 500 years= POPLA" PA RX Floodplain maps help to create resilient communities by ,k highlighting which areas are higher and safer ground _ � � � for structures.Restoration of the floodplain along the Pear Jordan River at Glendale Regional park will remove a few storage and office buildings from the 100 year floodplain, which will mitigate costs that would have been associated s 4 if current structures were damaged.It will also prevent impairments to water quality that would be caused by a fi. SORENSO ,PCU.TUR� 0 compromised structure in the event of a flood.Floodplain CENTER A restoration including planting along the river's edge will P l . also slow stormwater runoff,reducing water pollutants g Y trapped in runoff from flowing into the Jordan River, _ awE ' reducing erosion and improving groundwater retention G NOALs eaR % � , Y 1 on the site. GtENCALE j S$ GOLF COURSE, .Y 4a LEGEND ar RiparianAreas r/.' 100 year Floodplain M 500 year Floodplain 5+ Parks and Natural Lands Public Golf Courses f; Study Area t Salt Lake City Boundary C i, Water Park 1 Glendale Regional Park 0 020 i.5 Miles J Community Demographics Population r t Population and Projected Population Growth Percent 0f Primary Market Under 19`bars Old The planning team analyzed demographics traits of likely park users.This assessment Primary Market Population was broken down into a local assessment,called the primary market area,shown on page Secondary Market/SLC Population 24,and a city-wide assessment,called the secondary market area.See Appendix D for the 222,029 21.77916in SLC full demographic and market study. 204,38Q-�'�� Over the next five years(2021-2026)population in the primary market area is expected to +5.610 2Z85%in County grow by 3.54 percent,reaching a total population of 30,571 in 2026.The population in the 186,399 0 +9.61_30,571 63.48 secondary market area is expected to see slightly higher growth over the next five years, over 19 years old �—36,52% growing by 8.65 percent to reach a total population of 222,029 in 2026. under 19 years old Level of service measures the amount of parkland available to the community and is often measured by park acreage per population.As the population grows,Glendale Regional Park will be an important addition to the City's park system,ensuring that the current 28,369 level of service is maintained and that the community has adequate access to outdoor +4.07% + .54% recreation and open space. Age 2010 2021 2026 The high ratio of children in the primary market area indicates a high concentration of families in the region.The largest age cohort in the secondary market area is between 20 and 29,indicating that there is an overall younger demographic in this region that may Age Group Demographics 0f Primary Market enter family formation years(30-39)within the next decade. 19.78% While park features and activities seek to accommodate all ages,Glendale Regional Park 20 Primary Market Ages will feature a variety of activities that are targeted to families and young people such as an all-ages playground,a swimming pool,a water play feature and a skating ribbon. Secondary Market/SLC Ages ------- ------ Salt Lake County Ages 15 ------ ------- c 0 4, ----- 0 0 10 a ------- 0 0 0 0-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 Age Group 23 Site Context&Analysis Community Demographics Household Income and WealthPrimary Market Study Area ES1 health Index Score t105 The 2021 median household income in the primary market area is$50,508,which is less : 100 county -. ®• than that of the secondary market area($63,364)and that of Salt Lake County($80,897). 85 SLC/SecondaryMarket 85 The primary market area is also expected to see less growth in median household income _4'T ` >f 50 (12.18 percent)than in the secondary market area(19.14 percent)and Salt Lake Countywoo y c ° � (13.59 percent)between 2021 and 2026. 25 PrimaryMarket 4��w� The Wealth Index is a metric used to compare overall wealth of communities to the Score of 100-National Average national level.The index compares the wealth calculated for selected areas to the average �' $�,a s #' national wealth levels.Wealth indexes above 100 indicate wealth levels above the national average.The wealth index in the primary market area is 47,indicating that the area has lower amounts of wealth when compared to the national average. ax a Income distributions for both median and disposable income levels are skewed towards ` lower income levels in the primary market area while those in the secondary market , area and Salt Lake County form a more normal distribution around the median income c level.This,in addition to a lower primary market Wealth Index,indicates that income levels are lower in the primary market area than the secondary market area or the county.Given this distinction,the park will best serve the primary market through low or no cost activities for both adults and children.There is a need for the implementation of PrimaryMarkef programming such as free fitness classes or facilities that can supplement recreational Median Household Income of Primary Market demands of the community for little to no cost.If concessions are implemented,then they should be priced appropriately. 20 1= Primary Market Median Income Secondary Market/SLC Median Income ------ Salt Lake County Median Income 15 m : c 0 c� 0 0- 4- 0 m d010 5 - - � � m 0 <15,000 15,000- 25,000- 35,000- 50,000- 75,000- 100,000- 150,000- 200,000+ 24,999 34,999 49,999 74,999 99,999 149,999 199,999 Median Income ($) Community Engagement 1 26 Engagement Overview Atop goal for SLC Public Lands was to create a park that is a community park first,and a regional destination as well.The planning team wanted to be sure they received robust input on community needs and desires from members of the local neighborhood and also gather insights on park needs from the larger pool of city-wide residents.A series of engagement activities were conducted from October 2021 to May 2022 including: » Neighborhood and Stakeholder Engagement: Glendale Neighborhood Events:3 events,110 participants Youth Engagement:Glendale Middle School and Mountain View Elementary School, 128 participants Community Advisory Committee Meetings:3 meetings including 14 participating members — - » Citywide Engagement: "Plan Your Park"Open House:100 attendees Public Online Survey:1361 participants "Plan Sharing"Glendale Community Council:15 participants Engagement for the park site began prior to this project's planning process.Previous public engagement included a City survey and a visioning process led by the Glendale Community Council in 2020-2021,which generated initial ideas about possible amenities and programming options to consider for the site.These ideas were used as a starting point for the engagement activities described in the following pages. Glendale1 r vents The Glendale Regional Park engagement team participated in three community events in early October 2021.The goals for these engagements were to: 1. Share the public feedback being incorporated by the project team to date; r 2. Engage the community in adding ideas for amenities and programming not already shown; t 3. Engage the community in thinking about the site in relation to existing adjacent open space;and } 4. Envision ideas about how existing site features could be repurposed. Participants were invited to share where they go to recreate,in or outside the neighborhood and to consider how the old water park site could interface with the larger open space network around it. 27 Community Engagement I f ling K yTak aways Include lots ofamenities Glendale Across all three engagements,people felt Neighborhood Need for a Neighborhood park-like that adding any public amenity would be experience better than what exists currently.While ° most identified preferences from the Ci toner 2221 Most participants acknowledged that boards,and added a few,most suggested there were not a lot of amenities in the that any or all of the amenities would be a immediate area and that they were benefit. leaving the neighborhood to recreate with Youth families.Some said they use the Jordan River Trail,playground(s)at neighboring Free and affordable schools and the soccer fields at 1700 S Park. Cost is important.Some participants - Predominantly,people use other existing were surprised to learn that there would SEC Parks,including the International be no entrance fee to use the site.Others ' Peace Gardens,Jordan Park and Liberty 1 suggested that boat/equipment rental Park for an outside"park experience."For and acafe/concessions would need to be $ ' Il 11 play amenities like splash pads,playgrounds accessibly priced. and dog parks respondents noted they would drive as far as Kearns,Sandy and 7 Varc 2tiil)2222 Bountiful to use those amenities. Preferred Amenities , The amenities provided on the boards were Safety is a fop priority very popular and are listed in priority order from all three events. Safety was a priority for most of the adults we spoke with.Many mentioned better Splash Pad/Water feature street crossings,lighting at the site and Playground other improvements designed to make Public Art it an attractive place for people to spend Green Open Space/Trail time.This extended to recreation along Sports courts 'an Your r k Open the Jordan River and the cleanliness of the Community Gathering Space water.Many people expressed interest in Skate/Bike park House water activities,but not necessarily from Boat rental the Jordan River in its current state.Even Fishing(pond) people who mentioned fishing thought a Performance Venue March 2022 separate pond would be more desirable than the river. Glendale Commuit Council Community Members at the Plan Your Park Open House(top and bottom) and a Glendale Neighborhod Event(middle). Community Engagement 28 StudentYouth Engagement t Students participated in a variety of engagement activities,including an asset mapping workshops with Saia Langi(City Library)and with Jarred Martinez who runs Truth Cypher, a storytelling/arts collective. Students also furthered their knowledge of city planning ' by participating in Placelt!Activities with Claudia Loayza who is a graduate student at the University of Utah in City&Metropolitan Planning and the Community Engagement ` ¢ Coordinator with the Utah Division of Multicultural Affairs.As part of Placelt!activities, students built environments from found objects that reflect their life-experiences.Students also participated in a soundscape exercise where they listened to park sounds from around j the world.Then,they imagined themselves at the new park and wrote poems on leaves which formed collages,displayed in the image to the left.These activities captured a lot r of the sounds,sights,smells,tastes,feelings,thoughts and community experiences the students would like to have at the new park. As one of the central engagement activities,students put collages together individually using images of parks.The individual collages were deconstructed and categorized into y themes identified by the students.The deconstructed collages were then reorganized into a collective collage.Character images of amenities and features to be used in the park were fit`' Po$ counted and helped to determine the types of amenities to include in the preferred plan. 4 Students gathered data about what values should be most present in the park.As a result, 38%of the students prioritized safety,23%said creating a welcoming feeling at the park a was most important,and 9%felt like fun was their top value.Other top values mentioned include good vibes,home,loving and open.These values were numerically represented in the collage tree with orange leaves representing safety,purple symbolizing welcoming, yellow symbolizing fun,pink being good vibes,green being home and blue being loving and open. K yTakeaways The collective collage represents the importance of inclusion,unity,diversity and creativity when thinking of park design.We hope the design of the park fosters these values.Black Jand white photos mixed with color ask us to consider the importance of history(both of the space and the people with roots in the neighborhood)while looking forward with fresh ideas for the future.Creativity in addressing the desires/needs of a wide variety of ages, abilities,interests,species is also represented by the multi-layered project.Put into the a shape of a tree,the collage asks us to consider the natural assets that are present such as the Jordan River,birds,insects,mammals and existing trees.Nature is emphasized • • • • •• throughout with flowers and stenciled images of butterflies and aquatic animals, f B •` B.`'•8• . highlighting students'desires to have water and pollinator friendly spaces be major parts of the park.The tree design also communicates the desire for staying true to the roots of 29 ( Community Engagement Youth Engagement OQRP R�F�p(URES a our neighborhood while being willing to water-112 images:Students were �� 38% grow into new forms in the future.This strong in their opinion that some water of Students rated also suggests that priority for input for the elements need to be maintained at the safety new design should be given to those who park while also increasing access to water as the have established roots in the neighborhood activities on the Jordan River.They prefer and have helped/are helping to build it. to have a pool and made the argument number 1 value ' e� Stenciled flowers are of a tropical variety, that a pool is much more inclusive and suggesting that honoring the knowledge, accessible to a wider variety of abilities and Need experiences and cultures who come from ages than a splashpad.They contend that lighting and around the globe is important as well.The splashpads will only be used by young kids better street multi-layered approach of the process also while a pool will be used by their younger crossings asks planners to take their time to listen to siblings,themselves,their parents and a variety of voices.The unique handcrafted grandparents.They would like to have at 3D structures underline some of the least a couple slides in the pool. Natu":Plly elements that students find most important to have in the park design.The sculpture of 23�� the pair of glasses requests the audience Nature-74 images:Students would like to observe deeply and take unconventional the landscaping to provide shade,picnic p v said having the perspectives into account with the planning space and natural play areas.They would park fee) '} process. also prefer a pollinator friendly design to welcoming attract butterflies(especially monarchs), we g Students tallied the numbers of collage bees and birds.Spaces for animals was their number 1 images that represent the themes they (domestic and wild)are important to foster. value identified to be included in the park. They also find it important to have trees than { Sports/games-112 images:Emphasis provide food for humans. was on variety in order to offer something of interest to everyone. Students also Adventure-66 images:Student ideas highlighted the desire to have activities for adventure included bike and skate parks, available in each season with perhaps ropes courses,zip lines,and a trampoline a space that could be converted to ice park. skating rink in the winter while functioning as something else in warmer months. Gathering(seating,picnics etc.)-49 Students found it important to have images:Students had a lot of ideas about �� r activities available at all times of day so food trucks being a regular presence at the lighting at night is important to them. Bike park.They mentioned that food will bring park,basketball courts,skate park,petting more people to the park and a food truck zoo and dog park seem to be popular ideas. presence can highlight global foods that are said fu n A running/walking loop around the park is representative of our neighborhood. was their top Sports& also valued. value. Games Community Engagement ( 30 Community Open House Community House The Glendale Regional Park Master Plan Team held an in-person open house at the Glendale Community Learning Center.The purpose of the event was to share park concept plans, which had been created through previous public input.The Glendale community was invited to provide their feedback on different programming elements,amenities and style characteristics while learning more about the project.Concept plans shared at the meeting are shown on pages 37-38. Approximately 150 people participated in the open house,the majority of whom live and/ or work in the Glendale community.Attendees were able to move freely around the event space to talk with their neighbors,the project team,and view concepts plans for the site. Attendees were given stickers as they entered the room which allowed them to identify their preferences on activities,amenities and stylistic themes they would enjoy. KyTakaways The concept plan with the most votes was the"The Glendale Green",a concept alternative that was filled with many park features facilitating active recreation and community gathering.The most popular amenities included a water feature such as a pool,a hiking hill/overlook,river access with a kayak rental and boat launch,biking,skating,and skateboarding areas,and a food truck court. Public OnlineSurvey The public online survey was promoted city-wide and was available from March 16 to April 16.It was offered in both English and Spanish and widely advertised.Approximately 1361 people responded to the survey. Who W Heard Fr m Most survey participants(1,102 out of 1,361 participants,or 81%)live or work near Glendale Regional Park.Responses from the Glendale neighborhood were much higher(30%of participants)than any other neighborhood,indicating that we truly are hearing the voice of the local community.The second-largest group of participants(4%of responses)came from the Northwest Salt Lake/Rose Park neighborhood,a community that was also in the primary market area. The largest percentage of responses were from participants between the ages of 31-40 (28%of participants).This was followed by a large number of responses from youth ages 18 and under(22%of participants).This likely reflects substantial participation Glendale Middle School students,who had participated in previous engagement activities and were encouraged to take the survey.The greatest percentage of feedback came from the white,Latino and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander communities,which aligns with the demographic makeup of the Glendale neighborhood. 31 ( Community Engagement Public Survey Feedback 30% Who We Heard From Of survey respondents live in the 7-How close do you live or work to Glendale Glendale Park? Neigborhood O-A1, 117 84119 rt � (84104) 8412384105 4081 8410284116 8411184104 0000084103 81/0 840958410684115 Of 411 survey respondents t ! � 8410184108 - live 2 -what is your ethnicity? Or work nearby >' . ( 23mwhat is your age? -) Majority of Feedback from white,Hispanic/ _ Latino&Pacific Islander communities _ Lots of Youth Feedback - 30%=18 and younger. Glendale Middle School participation! Community Engagement 32 OnlinePublic Survey Feedback KeyTakaways fit-How satisfied are you with the Overall Support for the Park also less interest in natural water features over bright and active elements,with only draft project mission statement? Overall,there was support for the park 17%choosing water play with sand and Mission statement(68%of participants moveable features,and a natural water were satisfied and 25%were very satisfied). feature being lower on the list of preferred Survey participants were also happy with park elements. rsc the project goals(64%were satisfied and 30%were very satisfied). Adaptive and Inclusive Play Top themes and preferred features from Inclusive Playgrounds accessible to all survey participants reflected the desire for skill levels and abilities were important to a park space that offers a large variety of survey respondents,with an"adaptive and options for active and passive recreation inclusive playground"being the number two and places to host community gathering choice for playgrounds.Playgrounds at the and local events. park should incorporate accessible design with assistive technologies. Enright and Playful While many participants expressed Gathering&Local Events disappointment that the water park could not be revived,there was a desire to include There was a strong desire to create places park features and thematic styles that that would provide opportunities for are reminiscent of the former water park. community gathering,events,and local Bright,colorful and playful park features performances.Amenities such as food 3-How satisfied are you with these were consistently top choices.Water trucks or concessions were also deemed elements such as an outdoor pool and a an important component to draw the draft goals? p community in and activate the park.It was water-play plaza or fountain were deemed _ essential to include in the park design. important to the local community that the scale of events be appropriate for the A"colorful and industrial playground"was neighborhood.Most survey respondents the number two playground choice,behind wanted event sizes to host between 500- the number one choice"play for all ages" 5,000 people and did not want to host (which also has playful imagery)and the larger-scale events such as regional most popular water feature was a colorful, concerts. _ artful fountain.There was less interest in nature play or playgrounds with a natural theme,with less than 12%of respondents choosing either of these features.There is 33 Community Engagement Themes: Online All-ages activities are popular All ages activities were also very popular and were some of the most-selected items. "Play for all ages,including grown-ups"was i the top choice for playground types and "Climbing and bouldering features for all sr r{�T ME C A ages"was the second choice for fitness x. _ features,just behind multi-use sports ` courts,which also serve a variety of age ' 7 groups. i Community Engagement ( 34 High *Top Choice in Roth Public Online Survey and Engagement Events Hiking&Biking Trails* Swimming/Outdoor Pool Food Truck Court Ice IS Roller Skating Ribbon Hiking IS Hilltop Overlook Flex Lawn,Community Event Community Plaza with Concessions* Water Play Feature JS Plaza* Riverside Features Skateboarding Features* &Performance Space 1101 ,Ot a Multi-Use Sports Court* Sledding Hill Community Pavilion* Enhanced Boat Dock/Kayak Rental* Dog Park 35 Community Engagement Park Feature Feedback Top Features Hiking&biking trails with a hill- top overlook,swimming and an outdoor pool were consistently top choices of survey respondents. Skateboarding features,sledding, } riverside features(boardwalk, • Rio enhanced boat dock,kayak rental) and a community plaza with concessions or food trucks were popular as well.Another top feature was a multi-use sports court and a water play feature. r Middle-ground and mixed feedback features Climbing features had mixed Enhanced Boat Dock feedback.Images of children's s g climbing features and interest in Flex Lawn,Community Event& rock climbing were lower on the list Performance Space of selected choices,however the all- Riverside Beach ages bouldering feature received a very high number of selections Kayak Rental Station (728). Dog Park Kid's drawings of desired park features from the Plan Your Park Open House Ice and roller skating features also Playgrounds had mixed feedback.A skating Bouldering Features ribbon was the number two choice out of 10 in Concept A but the seventh choice out of 12 in Concept q a B.Both ice and roller skating were rated in the center of activity d . interests on a scale of one to seven. ,, is 01 aFA Isof Low-Interest Features 60 *sic 0. go, -mlo� _ Least-selected park features ..a'. included a community garden, bird hides,a fitness station ands ' community clubhouse. Community members voted for their preferred park features using stickers and comments at the Plan Your Park Open House Community Engagement 36 The Great Outdoors Park Concept A Nature in your backyard ;Park Features Building on the natural assets 0 Parking Lot of the Jordan River,this option celebrates nature through restoration,education and play community Gardens while bringing the adventure of the great outdoors to the 0 Entry Gateway neighborhood's backyard. +4 m £ _ Nature Play - - 0 Skating Ribbon Walking/Biking Tower&Trails Shade Pergola 0 Picnic&Seating Lawn c Kayak Rental and Boat Launch 0"Meadow"Lawn and Natural Planting r Naturalistic Water Feature Riverside Boardwalk Water Play Feature r Bridge - t ,n r s b �P 4L Q 1 s t.. 37 Chapter Two The Glendale Green Park Concept B 'Concept with the highest amount of popular features in both public online survey and engagement events Community connections �- � � Park Features The hub of the community,this Parkin option creates gathering spaces g to connect with neighbors Food Truck Court and generates vibrant play, exploration and activity for adults and kids alike. Entry/Main Pavilion I t Playgrounds _ '. 0 Adventure Playgrounds 0 Fitness Features ar0 Skating Ribbon t a Climbing Features Picnic Pavilion and Plaza Overlook&Sledding Hill, Hiking&Biking Paths Skate Area Flex Lawn&Small Performance Stage Outdoor Pool �l d ffi g Dock 9 rk';', phi f h Riverside Beach 9 Dog Park .�f d f Bridge GhapterTwo ( 38 T h e Vi'sio n The Vision 40 Design Keeping the memory of the water park alive,the park design is bright,colorful and active.It celebrates community gathering and active recreation with an array of park features that generate vibrant play,exploration and activity for adults and kids alike.Bright playground, plaza spaces and pavilions feature art,lighting and styles both reminiscent of the former water park and reflecting the cultures of the local community. The park is active and community-driven.The many park plazas,picnic areas,pavilions and event lawns offer opportunities for local performances and festivals,family gatherings and community classes.The park is a hub for sharing local food,art and culture with family, friends and neighbors. Glendale Regional Park is first a neighborhood park,creating spaces for community r — .• ': 4 �' gatherings and daily park experiences.A water play feature and outdoor pool create spaces r for splashing,swimming and cooling off in the summer heat.Daily trips to the park can bring a game of basketball,family time at the all-ages and abilities playground,or activities with furry friends at the dog park.The park also offers new regional attractions unique to the Cit s arks stem such as a skating ribbon,kayak rental,riverside beach and an event � Y' p Y 9 Y •Mr e lawn and plaza for local festivals. The park is a place to explore nature through hillside trails and along the restored riparian landscapes of the Jordan River.A circuit of multi-use trails lead to hilltop views of the city or F to shaded riverside seating.A kayak rental station and enhanced access to the Jordan River r creates a gateway to paddling adventures. .w w Restoration and planting improves the local environment,creating an urban oasis that shades the park with newly planted trees,restores riverside habitat,and blankets the park r }E •,:$ '. F, with a garden of native and climate resilient plants. p • The park design strengthens regional connectivity,connecting Glendale Park to the larger park system with a proposed bridge connection to the Jordan River Parkway Trail,a P recommended pedestrian crossing to 1700 South Park and a recommended multi-use trail `. •., 4.=z connection to the future Surplus Canal Trail. ire m r 41 The Vision Glendale Regional Park Master Plan q t !, t Park Features rail connection r t t Picnic Lawn AIIAges&Abilities Playground P y' 0 Pavilion/Shade Structure _ 0 Full-Court Basketball Ice&Roller Skating Ribbon to � • 0 Kid's Climbing Feature 0 All Ages Climbing Feature _ Pavilion Community Plaza/Promendade Parking Lot v P •�• rR� Hiking&Sledding Hill ADA Accessible,Multi-Use Trail Hilltop Overlook Skateboarding Area • Water Feature/Plaza Outdoor Pool 0 Flex Lawn&Performance Space Flex Stage/Plaza Bridge Connection to Jordan River . � • Parkway Dog Park #{ m Picnic Areas Riparian Restoration Riverside R' 'd Boardwalk a Riverside Beach&Sand Volleyball r Kayak Rental Station �# Boat Dock " + �, ' • Boat Ramp tom# m k. 1 Boat Drop-off �r 0 Pickleball Courts TheVision 42 a f �°F x* 7F + Park Features ® �im. oil b � 7 1}. dt t f wC :: 43 The Vision Glendale Regional Park Vision-Playground for All Ages&Abilities • , 'r� - Programming&Activation: a Creating Memorable Community Experiences " Programming and activation at Glendale Regional Parkwill seek to capitalize not t _ � � • only on the scale and amenity mix in the d new park,but most importantly on the 8 s: kg%• surrounding neighborhood's character W t$ �s g' and in-place assets.Glendale is a culturally 201 "rt rich neighborhood with a variety of stories to tell and experiences to share with each { other and with Salt Lake City as a whole. While the park's design and landscape will define the"look,"outdoor programming will define how it feels.Public programming will differentiate it from parks throughout q Salt Lake City by providing an environment where residents and visitors want to spend time,and will use amenities and activities �� s to create memorable experiences and , � _a• , emotional connections to Glendale. • d Today,Salt Lake City residents and visitors don't necessarily expect robust programming of public spaces.Many parks and plazas have failed to maintain a positive visitor experience because they have not programmed and managed their public realm to exceed local precedents. Visitors to Glendale Regional Park will have expectations for a safe and clean place that provides some sort of basic amenities.Our aim should be to exceed those expectations and surprise them with offerings they can't find anywhere else in Salt Lake City.There is an innate human desire for a feeling of community,and programming should provide some of this,especially in a rich and diverse multicultural environment like Glendale. The Vision 44 Phase I Programming Opportunities Children/family *See Phasing Strategies Pg x for full Phase 1 description, elm Family fitness activities All-ability movement The diagram highlights possibilities for park programming,activities and events. Music/literary education Community partnerships along with City programming will be essential to Organized play activities activating the park. Animal education events River Programming Safety and awareness a, Skillsworkshops Habitat education ~' — ffiwe ° volunteer events Outdoor/environmental Nature/meditative walks y 4 Birding/wildlife workshops A b - Gardenshorticulture • - Public art Arts/culture j community Audiencearea r ' Outdoormovies a J n Fmed t c Lawn games Restoration Area - k` a — Sports courts Clinics/lessons a ,Restbratmn Qe x. r All-ability skills training Arts/culture/community Art cart f r` Arts and crafts Small music/performance a Literaryevents Lectures - -` �N Board games Fitness/recreation/events Low impact fitness P 11� r Organized recreation/workshops * % t Community cultural events Outdoor hobbyist activities 45 The Vision Future Phasing Opportunities for Programming Arts/culture/community The diagram highlights possibilities for park programming, Expanded arts programming activities and events.Community partnerships along with City Artist talks and performance programming will be essential to activating the park. Artists in residence Concession Aquatic Programming Swim lessons Safety/CPR Parent/child program Senior fitness classes = Skate park t Lessons Demonstration • Skateboard repair y r# - M1pM �� � ,• ^f $ Deck art workshops a - r River Ri Programming �,.. � �;�� 9 �: �'g_� tr � �. b•� v , p;p Boating recreation (i sue-,' . L $• r �' ,' .-"' X ' " � �' r r Boatskills fi , Bait and tackle 01 a 4 k pv ,• " Concession River recreation Swim lessons/safety `� h.At tty JF �. Tubing Restoration/cleanup ' ?6 GigRiver education events qtDog Park x � ' 6. 'AW a . Owner socials . AP, Training workshops . Mobilegrooming Programming Will: a Bark bar concession » Define how the park feels Differentiate it from other parks and destinations-"the Performance/events competition" Concerts Provide and active and appealing neighborhood anchor Theater and dance �> Provide a safe and clean place Community festivals Capitalize on Glendale's rich and diverse multicultural Workshops(stage) environment Capitalize on Salt Lake City's outdoors orientation Fitness(Stage) The Vision 46 Programming/Activation Park Activationr All Seasons and Times of Day Park Programming Calendar of Events Matrix Example Programming,such as depicted in the hypothetical matrices,is broadly categorized as: , r Arts&Culture,Fitness,Hobbies&Niche Interests,and Live Entertainment.Each category provides a range of options that vary by time of day,seasons,intensity of activity,and,of Art supplies/art cart x x x x Both All Daily course,demographic cohort.We consider programming categories across the zones of Dance lessons X X Night Peak Weekly Glendale Regional Park,establishing a coherent pedestrian experience as one moves from Figure drawing classes x x Night Peak Weekly one area to another,while creating distinct environments throughout the park,coordinated Folk art/crafts x x x Day off-Peak Weekly with the landscape architecture.The over arching goal is for Glendale Regional Park to feel Instrument petting zoo x x x Day Weekend Monthly busy and active and to give all user groups a multitude of reasons to visit at different times Local author readings X Day Peak Weekly through the year,a season,and even their day.While Glendale Regional Park can't be all Toddler art program x x x Day Off-Peak Monthly things to all people,it can certainly provide a range of experiences. e Market Potential Study:Visitation Potential Board games cart X X X Daily Bookclub X X Monthly Bird-watching club X X X X Weekly Kayak/river education X X X Monthly activities Cooking classes X X Monthly Salsa dancing X X Weekly Makers workshops X X X Monthly Weekday Visitation Potential Lunch Hour Biking club X X X Weekly 77 People Capoeira X Weekly Familyyoga X X X Weekly Mid-Morning Mid-Afternoon Walking club X X X X Weekly Lower Use Lower Use Hula hoop X Weekly Momilig Alfemoon Kickboxing X Weekly Zumba X Weekly Young adults without Youngfamilieswith kids small children Seniorsandolder Preteens and teens Acappella X X X Weekly adults without kids Brass bands X X Monthly Before Work After Work Dance performance X X X Monthly 138People 138People Emerging musician series X X Weekly Evett�tg Outdoor movies X Weekly Young adults without Theater X X Monthly kids Silentdisco X X Monthly The diagrams above display estimated park visitation collected from the planning team's market analysis. 47 The Vision RegionalGlendale iiHillside Sledding Mountaini a * i 11 ��• a t.. �7 "� t " t �"�{�� � �"� \� � a � A��, ��' � r" �� .4l'ia'�,�� aye t'S_• '" ii[�I�Ii�t�illi��';1$C� q���a'�''•.lit' b°'T.�IF dr:�°f�i�liF-`°�i�;• r z d � a • R S , _ p .a, � .� � `t �r •a � 4i '�� 'z`' �� _ ,tom ,' sf d = , Y-fit • ,» ti ,9 �'•,�, *r as_ �: k4..y „�• {, ..,.. 'Y, r ` ¢ •� �' ���:�}`� •±a;�?b �. o"� � " Pa.�:fa xl''{ IL }�,,... t ,q.:,.. *�l•. t ti ,s�'t 5 •; -Ir }tV -�'",l ?S•: sa 'S ' t� ,x •�0 ,fit' t �°' s+ �F 'za:"� ..t •k. ie• a4u h.. i p ¢',r 5 ¢ y `:r'* e dt Y e rg, g t4• 1. "{ i _o y ,�.�"fit��e, «°� •,�' � �L �. � 4 b i t t i •tr TheViSion 48 Partnerships/Activation Partnerships:Diversity,Equity and Inclusion Opportunities Glendale Regional Park is poised to become the Westside's"central park,"with the goal of building a loyal base of regular visitors from all corners of the city.While Glendale Regional Park will be a public park that gets used by nearby residents for everyday recreation,it will Market&Festival j also become a citywide amenity and driver of tourism and economic development. ® 10 x 10 Market Tent FThedl gram below shows a possible layout for The efforts to create a new Glendale Regional Park coincides with a national trend market and event teats a�er� �le community plaza. 20x20MarketTent where downtowns and neighborhoods are seen as competing over a scarce pool of - resources after the economic benefits from downtown development did not reach those Space for food tracks is stationed along the plaza Food Truck Court neighborhoods in many cities;whereas the political consensus in the 1990s and 2000s was edgethat strong downtowns helped create strong neighborhoods,today it is far more common ' to hear elected officials emphasize their commitment to neighborhood-based community development and lament that too many public resources have been spent in central business districts. Given the sensitivities of the neighborhood relative to gentrification and public resources, the discussion around park equity must be reframed.The planning team has identified gi three planks of an overall program for Glendale Regional Park to help the City promote equity and ensure the new park is inclusive of all residents:growing minority-owned f" businesses through concessions and contracts,supporting existing organizations that promote inclusivity and equity through programming partnerships,and partnering with local organizations through internships andjob training. Growing Minority-Owned Businesses Food&BeverageEntrepreneurship �. Proposed future food and beverage opportunities are an opportunity to support budding entrepreneurs with limited access to capital.An entire program can be formulated with movable structures that come equipped with sinks,small refrigerators,and countertops, ye p so concessionaires only need to purchase electrical appliances,signage,and whatever supplemental FF&E they desire(subject to City approval).This would make the concessions x r affordable opportunities for new food businesses.A park-or City-focused director of hospitality,or community partner organization,would be qualified to guide these concessionaires with respect to menu design,kitchen operations,merchandising,signage, w v and the other aspects of running a successful food business that are usually learned through a lot of experience.The City should provide,or work with a community partner to provide,this service/consulting for free. Glendale Regional Park(via the City)would need to establish an application process that would identify the entrepreneurs who would be likely to succeed in the park based on their proposals.Applicants would need to be new business owners.The applicant pool could also r include women-owned and immigrant-owned businesses. 49 ( The Vision v , v w•.. w' n 1 kw I. w w , 4 � _ i - d , Lim v The commumt vibrant pr"omeade and festivals as W611'as food trucks, ,a, market booths and community-led activities. [� Concession Contracting programming at Glendale Regional Park to take on new full-time staff to help grow Occupational Training and that can eventually be sponsored.To their businesses or service offerings. Employment A mobile concession program(which is launch these programs,the park will need different than the food program above) to partner with cultural institutions,small The City can identify which organizations Glendale Regional Park can also work should also be addressed.While such program are positioned to take advantage of the with a workforce development businesses,and nonprofit service providers. p p 9 a program would not involve the City The most desirable and reliable partners for possible benefits of a programming to provide work experience for program offering any financial assistance to these Glendale Regional Park will be established partnership.Many partners will enter into participants and employment for graduates concessionaires,the scoring system in an organizations with existing constituencies. a discussion at Glendale Regional Park of their program.For out-of-school youth, application or request for proposal(RFP) The loyal followers of these businesses and already cognizant of how the partnership Glendale can offer occupational training process could take into account whether nonprofits will show up to activities they 9 fits into their strategic plans,and this in rounds maintenance and skilled a business is minority-or woman-owned. produce in the park,diminishing the need should be part of the criteria used when landscaping and gardening.This could Recommendations include adding this to promote them and helping to seed a base selecting partners. create mutually beneficial opportunities for component to scoring proposals as part of level of activity. Glendale,the City,and citywide residents, a larger change that would seek to qualify Workforce Development providing Glendale Regional Park with extra concessionaires prior to their launch in the The City can specifically target help at a reduced cost and creating a new park and institute minimum standards for organizations who primarily work The third part of a strategy for Glendale Regional Park to succeed in community source of education and job opportunities operation. with constituencies that are usually for emerging gardeners. underrepresented at parks,specifically engagement goals of partnering with the in Glendale.A successful strategy will City to combat park inequity and advance Whether or not occupational training is a Programming Vendor Contracting park inclusivity,is to partner explicitly with possibility, y pathways build these relationships systematically p y,the City can create athwa s to There are a variety of types of programming and incrementally;it's important to be a workforce development program and employment for workforce development partnerships,but the most straightforward realistic about how many of and how often leverage the program as a resource for program graduates,such as prioritizing partnership involves the City hiring an their audience will travel to the park,and Glendale. graduates in the hiring process.An individual or business to perform a service for partnerships to develop organically.A exclusive hiring window should be created (as opposed to a partner providing in-kind programming partnership might start with Paid internships for prospective employees referred by services or the City and the partner having one or a few events each year,and grow a workforce development partner with a cost-sharing relationship).Common through successful participation. Glendale Regional Park can offer paid a commitment on the City's part to hire examples are fitness classes,art classes, internships for in-school youth in a variety qualified applicants from the pool of of areas.Programming and marketing graduates.Prioritized job opportunities and the vendors who provide equipment or Building Capacity in Partner g pp furnishings for larger events. are two likely sectors where there will be could include positions in sanitation, Organizations a need for interns and reciprocal interest maintenance,landscaping,hospitality,and Similar to the mobile concessions RFP on the part of students.Work in these two customer service.Graduates of workforce process,the Citycan make an explicit Programming partnerships can also areas can often be broken into discrete, p benefit third-party organizations by development programs typically perform commitment to prioritizing people of color seasonal efforts(i.e.,helping to launch better and are retained by employers at when it hires artists to teach a watercolor helping them better fulfill their missions or managerams specific programs,creating(in the case of nonprofits),exposing them p p g g a higher rate than people recruited from class,fitness instructors to lead classes and to new audiences,and building their content for specific social media campaigns publicjob postings. other vendors. in-house capacity.By working with the or events,etc.).In addition,internships City at Glendale Regional Park,nonprofit could focus on special projects such as Programming Partnerships y g p organizations may be more likely to building an historic photo archive of Raging Targeting Underrepresented secure grants or be able to pursue grant Waters that could get incorporated into a opportunities that they may not have future augmented reality component of a Audiences otherwise been eligible for.Cost-sharing mobile app,targeted donor/grant research, In addition to establishing and expanding arrangements make it affordable for some or administering and helping to analyze a fee-based programming,the City survey of park visitors. should create a wide variety of new free 51 ( The Vision THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK The Vision 52 Measuring r r s Gauging elements of the final concept plan through performance-based evaluation provides a measure to determine if goals set during the beginning of the park planning process are being attained.The following metrics evaluate the park design according to original park goals. e oga9 A499ak48 low gaaagqqqxliaaalx n aaa AM— To f. Y ,� qqa qxq Axgi4g6gx qg eggs r 9 u •Y� .. E ir, 53 The Vision Trails ti i g . I 'A 4 Public Lands spaces connected after all associated trail and crossing recommendations are . b _ x« implemented. a New Connections:A new crossing linking to 1700 Seth Park and a bridge linking to the Jordan River r.p. t Parkway will connect with the future - Surplus Canal Trail and a proposed multi-use path along 170 South t g_ f create a Glendale Trail Triangle. :•G �F Trails 1700 street access Jordan river parkway trail mi i i Glendale Park trails Hiking Trail New Connections The Vision 54 Community Spaces- Plan Metrics 1,713 Community members involved in the planning process, � aair Al .�. �. s Activities amenities , v r& k added to the site. 1 of Individual elements in the _k park are AA accessible gi g new and unique recreation opportunities introduced to the citywide Public Lands'systema Community Spaces Active Play-High Programming Community Gathering-High Programming 55 The Vision Environmental®Plan Metrics • e, - ° • - r r t } Acres of natural areas added Y ! that provide public access • r r Y • v ,: qy w_ IJ Acres riparian habitat restored t Impervious surfaces reduced by %,improving water quality and v replenishing groundwater* • t � 10.9 Acres of native&waterwise a + planting reduces water use Soft&Hardscape EM Native/Water Wise Planting& *See page 20 for previous site surface Turf calculations EM Riparian **Hardscape includes some Native Grass&Shrubland impervious crushed granite pathways Hardscape** milli The Vision 1 56 Implementation 1 58 Implementation The park will be implemented in a series of phases.Many factors are contributing to the decision-making process examining which elements will be included in phase one of park implementation.Most notably,according to the requirements set by the Land and Water Conservation Fund,outdoor recreation amenities in the park must be available to the public by spring of 2024.This expedited schedule requires consideration for park features that are easily implementable,can meet a rapid construction timeline and that fit within the current budget allocated for the park. Other phase one considerations include the need to group park features and improvements into a consolidated area,creating a fully functioning park with a variety of activities and amenities prior to the completion of future phases.Consolidating developed areas of the park allows the remaining undeveloped areas to be strategically fenced,limiting access to hazards left from previous water park infrastructure.The fencing plan also facilitates phasing strategies for vegetative restoration,weed abatement and site preparation for future phases while mitigating exposure to visually unattractive,undeveloped areas. Public input is another consideration shaping phase one features.Some of the top park features that are desired by the neighborhood,such as an outdoor pool,cannot be accommodated in the first phase due to cost,a lengthier construction time frame,and the p time required to work through possible partnership logistics. However,park features that are most desired by the community and can meet the criteria mentioned above are being given top priority for inclusion in phase one.This includes a + multi-uses sports court and an all-ages and abilities playground.Other desired features will p 9 p Yg be filled by interim elements,such as food trucks being stationed in the parking lot before a formal community plaza is fully built out,access to hiking on the hill before formal trails A. are installed,and a kayak rental locker included next to the existing boat ramp prior to full enhancements being completed along the Jordan River. • Future phases of the park will be implemented as quickly as funding and logistics can be navigated.Grant,donation and partnership opportunities which align with park goals and proposed features and programming will be expeditiously explored to realize the full site design and potential for a regional-quality park in the Westside. 59 ( Implementation Phasming Maigram Segmented Phasing 11 The diagram highlights phase one elements, which will be completed by spring of 2024.All other portions of the park will be completed in future phases. Anticipated future phase elements are segmented into parkfeature zones for flexible implementation.These smaller zones may be implemented simultaneously } g or phased incrementally as park funding y_.m u ;� .• �7� and partnerships become feasible. _ + Outdoor Swimming The diagram suggests a possible phasing Pool! sequenceto prioritize park features that a Ramp, Parkingt&Y - M Bo Dock, are popular with the community while also omm t Dro off,' utilizing' �Phase'1 .' - _ p- g park space to the greatest possible a' Plaza } f x Stafionl extent.This phasing order should be flexible Qr,> Watereatur`b` _ in response to partnership and funding '� n Plaza;Flex opportunities as well as available funding P Performance v f p' and the cost to develop each phasing zone. _ Space fps I 4,a ,0 >' A t Ae i s Hill with Overlook& Skateboarding :.. Skatin �. Trails/Dog Area ; g Par fiieae4-4 rsi • - l ` Ribbon�r +� � Pavilion _a �, m` f 'Board Je _ 21 r ` I Implementation 60 Phase I Park Features Park Amenities iAccessible Areas r _ 1 Phase 1 Elements Trail Connection g Picnic Lawn , All Ages&Abilities Playground 4' _ 0 Pavilion/Shade Structure 0 Full-Court Basketball " p Community Plaza I v� Parking Lot ®' 0 Parking/Interim Food Truck Area ® Undeveloped Hill with: a o�. Native Landscape Restoration Informal Hiking Opportunities ff: Possible Art Installations Existing Parking Lot Kayak Rental Locker Existing Boat Ramp d ' d , , t f 61 1 Implementation Phase I Programming Opportunities Children/family Family fitness activities Y ' All-ability movement Music/literary education Organized play activities Animal education events River Programming Safety and awareness a, Skillsworkshops Y4 Habitat education volunteer events Outdoor/environmental ot,14s Nature/meditative walks 4 Birding/wildlife workshops Gardenshorticulture t } Public art Arts/culture/community Audiencearea Outdoormovies s is�,. .. °�.�d•;�9 �;�`,,, � „;`~ �. f, tAw. ` J n Fmed (}' Lawngames r Restoration Area Sports courts a i Clinics/lessons -. Feney+d ' _ Rstbratmn A e a , All-ability skills training Arts/culture/community Art cart r` Arts and crafts Small music/performance Literaryevents Lectures Board games Fitness/recreation/events Low impact fitness r Organized recreation/workshops Community cultural events Outdoor hobbyist activities Implementation 1 62 Opinion of Probable Cost Phase I Phase 7 Costs The project team developed phase one to propose a set of amenities that could be implemented,pending contractor bids,with current funding.These elements include an I ambitious set of improvements that can be accomplished for 3.5 to 5.5 million dollars. Phase one was designed to maximize usable park features and efficiently utilize funding as it comprises only approximately g 10%of the total park cost yet completes 30%of the full park buildout. Further design and cost estimating is ;o needed to understand the true costs of 1 the proposed amenities.This proposal is g, based on current construction costs and contracting pricing is likely to be much higher two years from now. = r Phasing sts As detailed design is completed for each phase,a true understanding of cost will be established.Some park elements have Full Park Build Out B t much higher costs associated with them such as the pool and the skating ribbon and will vary in range of cost depending on the length of time it takes to implement them. y , « See the phasing diagram on page 60 for the r recommended phasing approach. „ Ea 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 F11 Park Build !. Full build out of all park elements could range in cost from 30 to 50 million dollars depending on how long it takes to fully I implement all park features.The sooner the site is redeveloped and the fewer the phases of development,the more cost efficient it is to construct the park. -t ; _ err.~�• 63 ( Implementation V, -144, Phase I Restoration Strategy Recommend ions t e �' Phase one ecological improvements include riparian and planting enhancement g. _ _ along the riverside.With exception of consideration for future riverside improvements such as a new boat ramp ' and boardwalk,these areas will remain p largely undeveloped and initial efforts toward a permanent,long-term restoration plan should take place.Public Lands will prioritize restoration efforts based on recommendations to the greatest extent possible,but will also evaluate capacity, management and staffing considerations . for prioritization of areas. In the western,developed portions of the ( h park,ornamental plants will be included as part of the park design.The planting selection should consist of native,water- wise and climate adaptive plants that will t � �' r utilize less water,tolerate heat in a changing climate and provide ecological benefits for • �- birds and pollinators.�W The remaining portions of the site will be prepared for future phases with � r transitional restoration efforts.These areas will be seeded with native grasses and wildflowers as an intermediate restoration step,providing a solution for weed mitigation,soil retention,and providing ecological benefits until further ° site development and restoration efforts are completed.•e ri. See the full restoration strategy m on the following pages for further _ recommendations on preserving tree canopy. Implementation 64 Ecological i The planning team's ecological expert,River Restoration,conducted a site visit of the Glendale Regional Park on August 23,2021,to evaluate the current ecological conditions of tr the project area and to determine what features should be retained for ecological reasons. .fi This assessment,included in Appendix B,resulted in the identification of trees and habitats that should be retained as possible.Areas for potential enhancement were also identified and include all existing riparian forest and a buffer of 50-300'from the river.See the restoration diagrams on the following page for recommended restoration areas. Riparian Restoration and Tree Canopy The current state of the riparian forest in and around the project area is in a degraded condition.Some of the existing large trees within the project area have a high value,since they are well established and seem to be healthy.The sycamore trees are of high value and should be considered to protect in place,since they are mature,well-established,and healthy.The existing trees along the park strip at the north of the project area should also be preserved to maintain this important buffer from 1700 South.The remaining groves of trees can be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for phased removal or replacement with planted and irrigated multi-layer riparian areas.The diagram on the next page shows areas p 9 Y p g p 9 1• �}�! of existing riparian trees that could be retained. Habitat improvements are a key goal of the Project and phasing the project's construction will reduce potential impacts to the site's current wildlife population by limiting the amount of area that will be disturbed at any one time while leaving undisturbed portions to provide habitat.This applies particularly to habitat for migratory song birds.Partners working e1 along the Jordan River Corridor have recommended a phased approach for removal of Russian olives,which serve as habitat for migratory and resident bird species.Russian olive ' should be left on portions of the site that are not part of the initial phases and riparian plants should be planted into Russian olive stands,where the shade from the existing invasive trees will help with establishment of new forests.Areas where Russian olive was removed should be the top priority for restoration of riparian forests to return the multi-layer canopy for nesting and migratory birds. e e eke a Site Restoration Treatments e e e e See the Phase I Restoration Diagram on page 64 for restoration treatment priority areas. Full recommendations can be found in Appendix C,Restoration Plan. e e • Treatments proposed for summer and fall of 2022 include: e e m Aggressive chemical control of noxious weeds to follow up on areas treated in 2021. Aggressive chemical treatment of hoary cress and phragmites in areas along the e e e e e riverbanks where Russian olive was cut down. Chemical control of noxious weeds in all disturbance areas. e e Seeding of all disturbed areas with an inexpensive grass/forb mix. 65 ( Implementation Smite Restoration Strategy Site Preparation . 0 t r rI I ", y --�- t ® �.4 Rip Aggressive chemical control of noxious n p ` x r� ® d weeds adjacent to all disturbance areas p�. . is> jV� should be a high priority.These are theAir most likely places for spread of noxious and invasive plants.These areas should ' also be seeded soon after the disturbance ceases(generally within 2 weeks anytime of the year)with an inexpensive grass and forb mix.This should be done any time disturbances occur throughout the project 'r lifecycle to reduce the opportunity for -- noxious plants to dominate.This is cheap : insurance and will reduce the potential - need for chemicals to be used on the site in the future. 12"of topsoil for the disturbed area will Ii I be needed for grasses to establish while f "planting pockets"that have soil depths up to " 36"will be needed to allow small trees and r ' shrubs to be established.It would be good to add terraces on the hill with up to 3'of topsoil,allowing for larger shrubs and trees to establish. Ecological Stewardship .' ^+.,•.s., 4•, to The local and regional context was evaluated to discover opportunities for ` gi ecological enhancement and stewardship. Students from Glendale Middle School have a previously provided stewardship for areas m�•t a ". } 4 F just downstream of the project and Jordan g - " River Park.The future stewardship of the `_ •ar +� natural areas in the vicinity of the project should involve local schools and community partners. 1 ,d There are also opportunities fora broader connection to the river both up and downstream.Development of on- �" s ,�4-r ,6 water recreation opportunities is one ~ of the highest values of the site from a stewardship perspective. Implementation ( 66 Planting Palette drLj$ Oithii ala i Water-Wise Planting [The planting palettef,��a _ i rsi lets sows examples of � ,� �;1 �, possible plants for q 1 � Saltgrass,Inland Glendale Park.The plant Distichlisspicata selection should include Western wheatgrass native,Water-wise and Pascopyrumsmithii climate adaptive species Sand Dropseed Westernheat rasa InlandSalt rss which use less water Fesc FesLuca uca ovina and provide habitat for pollinators and wildlife. A��s�a#a ���lata Freemont Cottonwood � ��� lip'w Populus fremontii Apache Plume Hillside/MeadowPlants Fallugia paradoxa Sand Dropseed Rosa woodsii Sporobolus cryptandrus Skunkbush sumac Rhus trilobata Blanket Flower Wood's rose Gaillardia Aristata Lewis Blue Flax j" Li is le Fla Blanket Flower c Mountain Golden currant r mont Bee It Ribes aureum Cottonwood Western Wheatgrass rush Pascopyrumsmithii SP �. ccittea Green Crysoham thamrabbitbnu sviscidiflorus O a � �� Rocky Mountain Bee Plants +� Marsh milkweed Cleomeserrulata �? F 1 Asclepsia incarnata Bluegrass,Sandberg Poa Sandbergii Solidago canadensis Canada goldenrod Scarlet Globemallow Sphaeraicea coccinea Wooly sedge Carex pellita Alkali sacaton Sporobolusairoides Lewis BlueI Scarlet Globemallow ApachePlume 67 ( Implementation Climate fi Trees Nativeof r® i t ;. Japanese Tree Lilac rya al IafS Syringa reticulata Ivory Tower Yucca Shademaster Honeylocust Yucca flacida'Ivory Tower' '' Gleditsia triacanthos inermis 'o-^ Japanese Tree Desert Four O'Clock Desert Four Shenandoah Switch Gambel Oak Mirabilis multiflora Quercusgambelii Lilac ®Clock Grass Fire Chalice Catalpa , ttthos i... Zauschneria(Epilobium)californica �1et 5��q �tS'S Catalpa speciosa �s 0 Palmer's Penstemon Fairmount Ginkgo Penstemon palmeri Ginkgo biloba'Fairmount' Prairie Winecups Golden Candle Rain Tree Callirhoe involucrata Koelreuteria paniculata 'Golden Candle' Coneflower Bristlecone Pine Echinacea Pinus aristata Hummingbird Mint Pinyon Pine Shadernaster Agastache'Desert Sunrise' Palmer's Pinusedulis Honeylocust Pensternion Graziella Maiden Little Bluestem Utah Juniper lii Schizachyrium scoparium Grass stills Juniperusosteosperma � _ Blonde Ambition Blue Grama Grass Water-WiseShur s Bouteloua gracilis'Blonde Ambition' Alderleaf Mountain Mahogany Shenandoah Switch Grass Cercocarpus montanus $ Panicum virgatum'Shenandoah' ¢ Apache Plume Ravenna Grass Fallugia paradoxa Saccharum ravennae New Mexico Privet Graziella Maiden Grass , Forestieraneomexicana Garnbel Oak Miscanthussinensis'Graziella' Coneflower Blue Gramma Grass Implementation ( 68 SITES Certification site during the design and construction process to ensure that sustainable To support goals for ecological restoration practices are adhered to and that the and sustainable park development,it proper documentation is collected to is recommended that the project team pursue certification.The full SITES a pursue certification in a sustainability prescore worksheet for Glendale Regional program such as SITES or another Park in Appendix A. comparable program.The project team has been exploring certification Pursuing SITES certification at Glendale -� through the Sustainable Sites Initiative Regional Park would demonstrate a tangible (SITES)for the future Glendale Regional commitment to environmental quality and justice.With historic underinvestment, Park.SITES(sustainablesites.org/)is a sustainability-focused program based lower levels of service and evidence of on the understanding that any project environmental injustices present in this has the ability to protect,improve and community in the past,having a SITES even regenerate healthy ecosystems by certified landscape in the Glendale reducing water use,filtering stormwater neighborhood would not only highlight the runoff,providing wildlife habitat,and City's investment in restorative landscapes improving air quality and human health. and climate resiliency but would also set a The SITES certification is managed by standard for site development in the future the United States Green Building Council and begin to show tangible effort towards (USGBC),the same agency that manages equitable environmental investment across the LEED rating system for buildings. the City.With SITES certification,Glendale Where LEED addresses buildings and Regional Park would be a model of best vertical construction,the SITES rating practices and environmental achievement system is used for everything related to the both locally and nationwide. landscape.Projects pursuing certification often incur higher costs in design and construction,however,they consistently return significant long term cost savings related to ongoing operations and •f, maintenance costs. During the master planning process,a SITES pre-score assessment,shown in Table 1,confirmed that the Glendale Park project meets the qualifications to pursue SITES certification.Upon scoring the project,the Glendale Regional Park Site has the potential to certify on the Platinum • ,. ,. . .,, , , level if the City elects to pursue certification • • • • • • • to the greatest extent.The project team recommends pre-certifying the entire park master plan for the 17-acre 69 ChapterTvo Table 1:SITES Certification Pre-Score SITES Scorecard Summary YES NO YES r NO Y CONTEXTPI.I Limit development on farmland HHWB C6.1 Protect and maintain cultural and historic places 2to3 Y CONTEXT PL2 Protect floodplain functions HHWB C6.2 Provide optimum site accessibility,safety,and wayfinding 2 Y CONTEXT PIC Conserve aquatic ecosystems HHWBC6.3 Promote equitable site use 2 Y CONTEXT Ph 4 Conserve habitats forthreatened and endangered species HHWBC6.4 Support mental restoration 2 CONTEXT C1.5 Redevelop degraded sites 3to6 HHWB C6.5 Support physical activity 2 CONTEXT CI.6 Locate projects within existing developed areas 4 HHWB C6.6 Support social connection 2 CONTEXTCI.7 Connectto multi-modal transit networks 2to3 HHWB C6.7 Provide on-site food production 3to4 HHWBC6.8 Reduce light pollution 4 r HHWB C6.9 Encourage fuel efficient and multi-modal transportation 4 Y PRE-DESIGN P2.1 Use an integrative design process HHWB C6.10 Minimize exposure to environmental tobacco smoke 1to2 Y PRE-DESIGN P2.2 Conduct apre-design site assessment HHWBC6.11 Support local economy 3 Y PRE-DESIGN P2.3 Designate and communicate VSPZs PRE-DESIGN C2.4 Engage users and stakeholders 3 c a Y CONSTRUCTION P7.1 Communicate and verify sustainable construction practices r Y CONSTRUCTION P72 Control and retain construction pollutants Y WATER P3.1 Manage precipitation on site Y CONSTRUCTION P7.3 Restore soils disturbed during construction Y WATER P3.2 Reduce water use for landscape irrigation CONSTRUCTION G7.4 Restore soils disturbed by previous development 3to5 WATER C3.3 Manage precipitation beyond baseline 4to6 CONSTRUCTION C75 Divert construction and demolition materials from disposal 3to4 WATER C3.4 Reduce outdoor.ater use 4to6 CONSTRUCTION C7.6 Divert reusable vegetation,rocks,and soil from disposal 3to4 WATERC3.5 Design functional stormwater features as amenities 4to5 CONSTRUCTION C7.7 Protect air quality during construction 2to4 WATER 03.6 Restore aquatic ecosystems 4to6 Y '.. 0+M P8.1 '..Plan for sustainable site maintenance Y SOIL+VEG P4.1 Create and communicate a soil management plan Y O+M P8.2 Provide for storage and collection of reeyclables Y SOIL+VEG P4.2 Control and manage invasive plants O+M C8.3 Recycle organic matter 3to5 Y SOIL+VEG P4.3 Use appropriate plants O+M 08.4 Minimize pesticide and fertilizer use 4to5 SOIL+VEG 04,4 Conserve healthy soils and appropriate vegetation 4to6 O+M 08.5 Reduce outdoor energy consumption 2to4 SOIL+VEGC4,5 Conserve special status vegetation 4 O+MC8.6 Use renewable sources for landscape electricity needs 3to4 SOIL+VEG C4,6 Conserve and use native plants 13to6 O+M C8.7 Protect air quality during landscape maintenance 2to4 SOIL+VEG C4.7 Conserve and restore native plant communities 4to6 SOIL+VEG C4.8 Optimize biomass 1to6 SOIL+VEG C4,9 Reduce urban heat island effects 4 EDUCATION C9,1 Promote sustainability awareness and education 3to4 SOIL+VEG C4,10 Use vegetation to minimize building energy use 1to4 EDUCATION C92 Develop and communicate a case study 3 SOIL+VEG 04.11 Reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire 4 EDUCATION C9.3 Plan to monitor and report site performance 4 Y MATERIALS EEL Eliminate the use ofwood from threatened tree species INNOVATION CIO.1 Innovation orexemplary performance 3to9 MATERIALS C5.2 Maintain on-site structures and paving 2to4 MATERIALS C5.3 Design for adaptability and disassembly 3to4 YES NO MATERIALS C5.4 Use salvaged materials and plants 3to4 e r •a - MATERIALSC5.5 Use recycled content materials 3to4 MATERIALS C5.6 Use regional materials 3to5 KEY ( SITES Certification levels Points MATERIALS C5.7 Support responsible extraction of raw materials 1to5 YES Project confident points are achievable CERTIFIED 70 MATERIALS CH I Support transparency and safer chemistry 1to5 ? Project striving to achieve points,not 100%confident SILVER 85 MATERIALS G5.9 Support sustainability,In materials manufacturing 5 NO Project is unable to achlevethese credit points GOLD 100 MATERIALS 05.10 Support sustainability in plant production 1to5 ( PLATINUM 135 Chapter Two ( 70 Policies,Operations&Maintenance In order to ensure the new Glendale Regional Park stays clean,active,safe and well-loved by the greater Salt Lake City community,it must be maintained and staffed accordingly along with the many amenities,natural features,and programming elements being designed.To achieve this high standard,the City will need to make special considerations for Glendale Park's operations staffing required to support the appropriate levels of security,sanitation, public realm maintenance,landscaping,programmatic operations,event needs,park concession leasing,and marketing as described below. Security A strong perception and reality of safety in the park will greatly enhance the park's ability to attract visitors,particularly families,and increase an overall sense of civic pride and support for the park.In keeping with many long established precedents for increasing the"eyes and ears"in the park,it will be important to create many positive reasons for the public to be active in the park throughout the day to dispel any would be antisocial behavior, and actively patrol the park with appropriate levels of official park staff-whether they be City park rangers or,when necessary,police.The"right"levels and types of staff will depend greatly on several design decisions including potential building/concession uses,recreation and aquatic uses,degrees of programming and events,and real time security concerns/ conditions in the neighborhood when the park opens. Many decisions around types and levels of security(and other operations)staff will depend on the ultimate physical plan and associated decisions around park management and governance-i.e.,whether the City alone will manage and program the park or whether that it will happen in partnership or coordination with a private management entity(or several). Park rules Because of the many unique features and activities planned,a set of rules should be specifically developed for Glendale Park,incorporating the City's existing rules and regulations for all public parks.An abbreviated version of those rules should be posted visibly around the park to help regulate the public use and provide clear expectations as to which activities and behaviors are acceptable and which are not.Setting these expectations and messaging them the right way will add to the public's perception of safety in the park and help park staff to enforce appropriate behavior. 71 ( Implementation During larger events(festivals,musical attention,which should be provided by Large events may incur the need for performances,larger markets)the event the concession workers.These types of additional janitorial staff to clean producer,park management entity,or services can often be negotiated as part of restrooms,pick up trash,and empty trash the City may need to employ additional, the operator agreements depending on the and recycling. contracted security staff and parking specific concession.Giving an operator the attendants. option to custom brand the tables,seats, Repairs fMaintenance trash cans,or umbrellas within the vicinity Janitorial of their space(and charging them for the There should be a streamlined process to ¢ right to do so)will motivate them to keep address maintenance issues,one that is Janitorial and sanitation issues in the public these areas and the associated furnishings not burdened with moving through many realm are often caused by a shortage of clean. chains of command or requiring excess staff,having only one shift of staff,lack of paperwork whenever possible.Staff [ Trash and recycling cans should be located 1 resources/staff that are spread too thin specifically assigned to Glendale Park, over multiple parks,or a cumbersome and at regular intervals throughout the park, either from the City or contracted through ) �d bureaucratic process for addressing issues and especially at areas of anticipated heavy a park management entity,should be as they arise.By appropriately staffing the traffic such as play areas and picnic areas, empowered to fix smaller problems under a janitorial crew and having more than one so that visitors do not have any trouble pre determined threshold promptly without shift in the day as necessary(fewer shifts finding the receptacle.Trash and recycling the need for higher levels of approval. on slow days and more/overlapping shifts should be emptied from cans multiple times on peak days),restrooms can be checked, a day and taken to a designated collection Furnishings and other items need to be cleaned,and resupplied often,trash cans point,and trash and recycling should be checked frequently and repaired upon can be emptied multiple times a day,litter moved off-site at least once a day.Trash and the first sign of an issue.This will ensure can be picked up regularly by hand,graffiti recycling cans should be paired and kept broken items do not get worse and more can be removed immediately,and other together(or split between one receptacle difficult to fix and avoid potential injury/ small issues can be addressed a timely but clearly distinguished),otherwise park liability concerns.Fixing them right away manner before snowballing into more patrons will throw whatever they are also shows the public that furnishings significant,more costly problems.If the disposing into whichever receptacle is and facilities in the park are cared for and park is maintained with a high standard closest,regardless of its intended contents. looked after.If visitors observe a well- maintained park,they are more likely of cleanliness,expectations will be raised Thejanitorial staff should take care of minor to follow suit and take good care of the and perceptions of care will spread to the repairs such as repainting over graffiti, public ark with furnishings and facilities themselves. p p tightening a leaky faucet,or patching a hole respect.Park cleanliness will also impact in the concrete.Larger maintenance and Thejanitorial staff will address smaller perceptions of safety to the community. repair projects will be tasked to the capital issues such as replacing broken trash Concession staff,if applicable,should projects staff and contractors.Janitorial cans,cleaning out the drains of drinking augment janitorial staff in the immediate staff should also be tasked with everyday fountains,screwing in a door hinge, area of the concessions.When there is a landscape upkeep including weeding, replacing light bulbs,and painting over slower moment,concession staff should sweeping up excess leaf litter and plant graffiti.An Operations Manager or similar regularly wipe tables,pick up trash,empty debris,and reporting irrigation leaks, position should oversee capital projects, trash cans,straighten tables and chairs, irrigation malfunction,or poor plant health major repairs,and landscape maintenance. 1 and even service restrooms.Concession to a supervisor. This manager will also oversee third-party areas have heavy use and require special contractors who would take care of larger Implementation 72 and more specialized maintenance and site.Tree root ball moisture and shrub and within the park.The leasing agents should repair needs such as fixing plumbing issues, groundcover surrounding soil moisture focus on an operator mix that supports repairing broken stairs,electrical repairs, should be checked weekly and watering Glendale Park's overall programming/ building maintenance,etc.Ideallythis would cycles adjusted accordingly.Watering activity goals,focuses on local businesses, be a dedicated person to Glendale Park,or records should be kept for all site trees and has a quality/healthful product,delivers someone who oversees multiple parks with a yearly water audit should be performed to on financial objectives,and supports the appropriate support staff. track the amount of water applied.With this needs of the surrounding neighborhood. information,Public Lands can determine Partnerships or City programs that work During major repairs,trees and plant appropriate water application for site trees independently and/or with leasing agents materials should be protected with fences after the three-year establishment period to support no or low-cost activities will be or other barriers to prevent damage.Heavy meet should not be left or stored equipment ends,in consultation with Urban Forestry's important to include as regular options for q p review of tree health on the site.Irrigation Glendale Park programming. under the branches of trees,as this can systems will need frequent inspection and cause root damage,or for extended periods cleaning ensure the system is running Marketing for Glendale Park offerings on lawn. properly. should start with a dedicated website and social media accounts(primarily Instagram Landscape/Tree Landscape/Tree Crews should weed planted areas and Facebook)that are frequently updated Maintenancefrequently,maintain the depth of mulch with news and happenings.A dedicated Management to reduce evaporation and inhibit weed online presence is the best way for visitors growth,and apply fertilizers as needed. to find out about programs and events Trees and understory require attention Crews will employ principles of Integrated happening in the park and nearby public/ on a consistent and on-going basis.The Pest Management to prevent plant pests City affairs.The website will also serve landscape maintenance crew should have and diseases.Landscape maintenance as a tool for customer service,a guide for demonstrated experience in maintenance should be performed during regular work private event permitting,a place to receive of public landscape projects of similar size hours to not disturb the nearby residents inquiries,comments,and complaints. and scope with owner references,and with noise. It's important for these outlets to be demonstrated experience with integrated An important part of a maintenance plan the dedicated responsibility of one staff pest management,pest control,soils, member or contractor,rather than spread p g p for Glendale Park will be a landscape to several undefined staff so this important fertilizers,and plant identification. feature/materials inventory with suggested ' element doesn't become neglected in favor Assuming proper installation,trees and maintenance and a working checklist of staff's primary responsibilities. understory will need regular inspection than can provided as for the landscape by Public Land's Urban Forestry Division maintenance crew. to ensure proper growth.Pruning weak branches and shaping tree crowns will Leasing/Marketing help sustain long-term health,growth,and Leasing and partnership agreements, appearance. either through the relevant City agency As trees and plant material are put in the or through a park management entity, ground,flow meters should be installed will select the appropriate tenants for any that monitor all irrigation hydrazones for kiosks,cafe space,river concessions,and appropriate water application across the any other commercially operable spaces 73 Implementation Programmingi ti Programming Budgt and budgets fall short,the park programming Table 2:Programming&Activation Budget Recommended Minimum Staffing manager will be able to leverage m ' programming partners and interested On site programming manager $76,000 Base starting salary of$60,OOO annually,Budget To support a vibrant and dynamic groups to provide in-kind donations of includes fringe benefits. Glendale Regional Park,a dedicated time and materials,sponsorships,and Park attendants $18,200 16 hrs/wkyear round,$17.50 wage plus 25%fully loaded. park programming manager should be other sources that reduce capital outlays. Overtime allowance $4,550 May also be used for discretionary bonuses put in place,as well as a dedicated and Providing a baseline budget of some Administration/insurance - Assumes covered by City poliices predictable budget that grows over time amount allows the programming manager Equipment/supplies $10,000 Laptop for manager,smartphones/tablets for through revenue development.The park to plan accordingly and approach potential attendant use,general supplies should be viewed as a business,with profits partners more efficiently.Over time,the and losses,except that all profits should be budget hopefully grows,with revenue made with the public interest in mind and, sources coming from a variety of potential thus,reinvested back into the park for the sources:philanthropy,sponsorships,event gi benefit of local residents and visitors. rentals,food and beverage,programming, Arts&culture $80,000 Two-thirds of this cost is annual,cutting edge and government support. interactive art installations The park programming manager would Fitness $30,000 Mostly provided by free businesses seeking to be an on-site Public Lands employee, markettheir classes but assigned specifically to Glendale Hobbies&niche interests $45,000 Includes outdoor dancing,which is about one- Regional Park on a day-to-day basis with third of the total budget Live entertainment $100,000 Does not include production costs,which will be a flexible schedule that likely includes a minimal five-day,Wednesday to Sunday schedule to Markets&festivals $100,000 Allowance for self-produced events complement active times in the park.The programming manager will be dedicated to coordinating with programming partners, interacting with park visitors,overseeing day-to-day management of facilities Marketing $50,000 Limited to promotion surrounding public space maintenance,and managing vendors programs and events and contractors.The park programming Holiday decorations $100,000 Allowance manager is the pork's"mayor."The UNNMEMENMENEEM ideal manager will have experience in events management,and/or marketing, communications,urban planning,and business.The programming manager should also have access to park attendants on a part-time,as needed basis during busier times in the park and special events. As a baseline,the park should also have a dedicated programming budget that allows for a varied experience.Programming budgets are used to provide equipment, marketing,outreach,and supplies.Where Implementation ( 74 SiFectrurn of Private/Public Partnership Governing Partnership Management Activation and programming strategies, • ; _ ; ' specifically around revenue development and sponsorship opportunities,benefit greatly by the management structure that is in place.Public agencies will be able to do things the private sector can't,and vice versa.Exploring existing frameworks and establishing programming and activation guidelines within those constraints will inform optimal programming strategies. 75 ( Implementation Next Steps To meet the rapid timeline required to open the park with publicly accessible recreation, detailed design and construction of Phase I elements will begin in August of 2022, concurrent to the adoption of the master plan.This process will entail refining specific park features and styles,as well as forming a strategy to re-purpose the old water slides into park features or artwork.Programming opportunities with community partners will continue to be developed to ensure that the park remains an active space upon opening and throughout the development and construction process. 4' The project team will also begin to rehabilitate the site with riparian and native vegetation to fulfill the park goals of enhancing environmental quality and improving environmental justice for the Glendale neighborhood.To support this goal,it is recommended that the project team pursue certification in a sustainability program such as SITES or another comparable program.During the master planning process,a SITES prescore assessment p confirmed that the Glendale Park project meets the qualifications to pursue SITES certification.As the project consultant moves into the next design phase,this consideration should be integrated into the process to ensure that sustainable practices are adhered to and that the proper documentation is collected to pursue certification.The full SITES prescore worksheet for Glendale Regional Park is in Appendix A. Implementation 1 76 Contents APPENDIX A Sites pr •scr APPENDIX B Ecological Assessment APPENDIX C Restoration Play Appendices APPENDIX D Market Study Appendix) 78 Appendix A SITES Pre-Score SITES Certification& r Glendale Regional Park goals include enhancing environmental quality and improving environmental justice for the Glendale neighborhood.To support this goal,it is recommended that the project team pursue certification in a sustainability program such as SITES or another comparable program.SITES,the landscape equivalent of LEED certification,is a sustainability framework and program that ensures best practices are adhered to during land development projects,resulting in enhanced ecosystems and landscape benefits such as"climate regulation,carbon storage and flood mitigation."' During the master planning process,a SITES prescore assessment confirmed that the Glendale Park project meets the qualifications to pursue SITES certification.As the project consultant moves into the next design phase,this consideration should be integrated into the process to ensure that sustainable practices are adhered to and that the proper documentation is collected to pursue certification.Appendix A includes the full SITES prescore worksheet and assessment for Glendale Regional Park. I https://sustainablesites.org/certification-guide MMC4endaleMEMEM MEN Regkxml Park MENEM Master PlanIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIS YES ? NO YES ? NO 0 0 0 1:SITE CONTEXT Possible Points: 13 0 0 0 6:SITE DESIGN-HUMAN HEALTH+WELL-BEING Possible Points: 30 Y CONTEXT P1.1 Limit development on farmland M HHWB C6.1 Protect and maintain cultural and historic places 2 to 3 Y CONTEXT P1.2 Protect floodplain functions HHWB C6.2 Provide optimum site accessibility,safety,and wayfinding 2 Y CONTEXT P1.3 Conserve aquatic ecosystems HHWB C6.3 Promote equitable site use 2 Y CONTEXT P1.4 Conserve habitats for threatened and endangered species � HHWB C6.4 Support mental restoration 2 CONTEXT C1.5 Redevelop degraded sites 3 to 6 HHWB C6.5 Support physical activity 2 CONTEXT C1.6 Locate projects within existing developed areas 4 HHWB C6.6 Support social connection 2 CONTEXT C1.7 Connect to multi-modal transit networks 2 to 3 HHWB C6.7 Provide on-site food production 3 to 4 HHWB C6.8 Reduce light pollution 4 0 0 0 2:PRE-DESIGN ASSESSMENT+PLANNING Possible Points: 3 HHWB C6.9 Encourage fuel efficient and multi-modal transportation 4 Y PRE-DESIGN P2.1 Use an integrative design process HHWB C6.10 Minimize exposure to environmental tobacco smoke 1 to 2 Y PRE-DESIGN P2.2 Conduct a pre-design site assessment HHWB C6.11 Support local economy 3 Y PRE-DESIGN P2.3 Designate and communicate VSPZs PRE-DESIGN C2.4 Engage users and stakeholders 3 0 0 0 7:CONSTRUCTION Possible Points: 17 Y CONSTRUCTION P7.1 Communicate and verify sustainable construction practices 0 0 0 3:SITE DESIGN-WATER Possible Points: 23 Y CONSTRUCTION P7.2 Control and retain construction pollutants Y WATER P3.1 Manage precipitation on site j Y CONSTRUCTION P7.3 Restore soils disturbed during construction Y WATER P3.2 Reduce water use for landscape irrigation CONSTRUCTION C7.4 Restore soils disturbed by previous development 3 to 5 WATER C3.3 Manage precipitation beyond baseline 4 to 6 CONSTRUCTION C7.5 Divert construction and demolition materials from disposal 3 to 4 WATER C3.4 Reduce outdoor water use 4 to 6 CONSTRUCTION C7.6 Divert reusable vegetation,rocks,and soil from disposal 3 to 4 WATER C3.5 Design functional stormwater features as amenities 4 to 5 CONSTRUCTION C7.7 Protect air quality during construction 2 to 4 WATER C3.6 Restore aquatic ecosystems 4 to 6 0 0 0 8.OPERATIONS+MAINTENANCE Possible Points: 22 0 0 0 4:SITE DESIGN-SOIL+VEGETATION Possible Points: 40 Y O+M P8.1 Plan for sustainable site maintenance Y SOIL+VEG P4.1 Create and communicate a soil management plan Y O+M P8.2 Provide for storage and collection of recyclables Y SOIL+VEG P4.2 Control and manage invasive plants O+M C8.3 Recycle organic matter 3 to 5 Y SOIL+VEG P4.3 Use appropriate plants O+M C8.4 Minimize pesticide and fertilizer use 4 to 5 SOIL+VEG C4.4 Conserve healthy soils and appropriate vegetation 4 to 6 O+M C8.5 Reduce outdoor energy consumption 2 to 4 SOIL+VEG C4.5 Conserve special status vegetation 4 O+M C8.6 Use renewable sources for landscape electricity needs 3 to 4 SOIL+VEG C4.6 Conserve and use native plants 3 to 6 O+M C8.7 Protect air quality during landscape maintenance 2 to 4 SOIL+VEG C4.7 Conserve and restore native plant communities 4 to 6 SOIL+VEG C4.8 Optimize biomass 1 to 6 0 0 0 9.EDUCATION+PERFORMANCE MONITORING Possible Points: 11 SOIL+VEG C4.9 Reduce urban heat island effects 4 EDUCATION C9.1 Promote sustainability awareness and education 3 to 4 SOIL+VEG C4.10 Use vegetation to minimize building energy use 1 to 4 EDUCATION C9.2 Develop and communicate a case study 3 SOIL+VEG C4.11 Reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire 4 EDUCATION C9.3 Plan to monitor and report site performance 4 0 0 0 5:SITE DESIGN-MATERIALS SELECTION Possible Points: 41 0 0 0 10.INNOVATION OR EXEMPLARY PERFORMANCE Bonus Points: 9 Y MATERIALS P5.1 Eliminate the use of wood from threatened tree species WE INNOVATION C10.1 Innovation or exemplary performance 3 to 9 MATERIALS C5.2 Maintain on-site structures and paving 2 to 4 MATERIALS C5.3 Design for adaptability and disassembly 3 to 4 YES ? NO MATERIALS C5.4 Use salvaged materials and plants 3 to 4 MATERIALS C5.5 Use recycled content materials 3 to 4 MATERIALS C5.6 Use regional materials 3 to 5 KEY SITES Certification levels Points MATERIALS C5.7 Support responsible extraction of raw materials 1 to 5 YES Project confident points are achievable CERTIFIED 70 MATERIALS C5.8 Support transparency and safer chemistry 1 to 5 ? Project striving to achieve points,not 100%confident SILVER 85 Page 1 of 7 7/27/2022 Copyright©2014 Project Name: Project ID#: Date: MATERIALS C5.9 Support sustainability in materials manufacturing 5 NO Project is unable to achieve these credit points GOLD 100 MATERIALS C5.10 Support sustainability in plant production 1 to 5 PLATINUM 135 Page 2 of 7 7/27/2022 Copyright©2014 Glendale EM Regional Park Master Plan r Estimate points z below(key at a r bottom) PREREQUISITE OR z YES ? NO CREDIT# TITLE CASE/OPTION/THRESHOLD d a a 7 3 0 1:SITE CONTEXT Possible Points: 13 POPE Case 1:Sites without farmland soils Y CONTEXT P1.1 Limit development on farmland Case 2:Sites with farmland soils-VSPZ Case 3:Sites with farmland soils-Mitigation Case 1:Sites without floodplain Y CONTEXT P1.2 Protect floodplain functions Case 2:Previously developed and brownfield sites within floodplain Case 3:Greenfield sites within floodplain Case 1:Sites without aquatic ecosystems Y CONTEXT P1.3 Conserve aquatic ecosystems Case 2:Sites with naturally occurring aquatic ecosystems Case 3:Sites with naturally occurring poor quality aquatic ecosystems Y CONTEXT P1.4 Conserve habitats for threatened and Case 1:Brownfields and previously developed sites endangered species Case 2:Greenfield sites Case 1:Previously developed sites 3 3 CONTEXT C3.5 Redevelop degraded sites 3 to 6 Case 2:Brownfield sites 6 4 CONTEXT C3.6 Locate projects within existing developed 4 4 areas Option 1:Pedestrian and bicycle network 2 3 CONTEXT C1.7 Connect to multi-modal transit networks 2 to 3 Option 2:Transit network 3 3 0 0 2:PRE-DESIGN ASSESSMENT+PLANNING Possible Points: 3 Y PRE-DESIGN P2.1 Use an integrative design process Y PRE-DESIGN P2.2 Conduct a pre-design site assessment Y PRE-DESIGN P2.3 Designate and communicate Vegetation and Soil Protection Zones 3 PRE-DESIGN C2.4 Engage users and stakeholders 3 3 0 12 11 3:SITE DESIGN-WATER Possible Points: 23 Y WATER P3.1 Manage precipitation on site Y M 01, WATER P3.2 Reduce water use for landscape irrigation 80th percentile precipitation event 4 6 WATER C3.3 Manage precipitation beyond baseline 90th percentile precipitation event 5 4 to 6 95th percentile precipitation event 6 Option 1:Reduce outdoor water use 4 6 WATER C3.4 Reduce outdoor water use Option 2:Significantly reduce outdoor water use 5 4 to 6 Option 3:Eliminate outdoor water use 6 Design functional stormwater features as 50%of stormwater features 4 5 WATER C3.5 4 to 5 amenities 100%of stormwater features 5 No aquatic ecosystems present on site Emm 6 WATER C3.6 Restore aquatic ecosystems 30%of the geographic extent 4 (project must have existing feature) 60%of the geographic extent 5 4 to 6 Page 3 of 7 7/27/2022 ©Sustainable Sites Initiative— Project Name: Project ID#: Date: r Estimate points Z below(key at a r bottom) PREREQUISITE OR z YES ? NO CREDIT# TITLE CASE/OPTION/THRESHOLD d a a 90%of the geographic extent 6 0 1 34 6 4:SITE DESIGN-SOIL+VEGETATION Possible Points: 40 Y SOIL+VEG P4.1 Create and communicate a soil management plan Case 1:No invasive plants found on site Y SOIL+VEG P4.2 Control and manage invasive plants Case 2:Invasive plants identified on site Y SOIL+VEG P4.3 Use appropriate plants =I No healthy soils and/or appropriate vegetation present on site Conserve healthy soils and appropriate 50%of the site's existing vegetated area 4 6 SOIL+VEG C4.4 vegetation (project must have existing feature) 75%of the site's existing vegetated area 5 4 to 6 95%of the site's existing vegetated area 6 Conserve special status vegetation 4 SOIL+VEG C4.5 4 4 (project must have existing feature) 20%total native plant score 3 6 SOIL+VEG C4.6 Conserve and use native plants 40%total native plant score 4 3 to 6 60%total native plant score 6 20%total native plant community score 4 Conserve and restore native plant 6 SOIL+VEG C4.7 40%total native plant community score 5 4 to 6 communities 60%total native plant community score 6 minimal point score 1 low point score 3 6 SOIL+VEG C4.8 Optimize biomass 1 to 6 mid point score 5 high point score 6 4 SOIL+VEG C4.9 Reduce urban heat island effects 4 4 No buildings present on site Option 1:Reduce energy use-5%reduction 2 Option 1:Reduce energy use-7%reduction 4 Use vegetation to minimize building energy 4 SOIL+VEG C4.10 use Option 2:Provide shade structures-30%shaded 1 (project must have building on site) 1 to 4 Option 2:Provide shade structures-60%shaded 2 Option 3:Provide a windbreak-one row 1 Option 3:Provide a windbreak-two or more rows 2 4 SOIL+VEG C4.11 Reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire Project not in a fire-prone area (project must be located in fire-prone area) Project is in a fire-prone area 4 4 0 41 0 S:SITE DESIGN-MATERIALS SELECTION Possible Points: 41 Y MATERIALS P5.1 Eliminate the use of wood from threatened tree species No structures or paving present on site 4 MATERIALS C5.2 Maintain on-site structures and paving 10%of the total existing built surface area 2 (project must have existing feature) 20%of the total existing built surface area 3 2 to 4 30%of the total existing built surface area 4 Page 4 of 7 7/27/2022 ©Sustainable Sites Initiative— Project Name: Project ID#: Date: r Estimate points Z below(key at a r bottom) PREREQUISITE OR z YES ? NO CREDIT# TITLE CASE/OPTION/THRESHOLD d a a 30%of total materials cost,excluding plants,rocks,and soils 3 4 MATERIALS C5.3 Design for adaptability and disassembly 3 to 4 60%of total materials cost,excluding plants,rocks,and soils 4 10%of total materials cost,excluding soils 3 4 MATERIALS C5.4 Use salvaged materials and plants 3 to 4 20%of total materials cost,excluding soils 4 20%of total materials cost,excluding plants and soils 3 4 MATERIALS C5.5 Use recycled content materials 3 to 4 40%of total materials cost,excluding plants and soils 4 30%of total materials cost 3 5 MATERIALS C5.6 Use regional materials 60%of total materials cost 4 3 to 5 90%of total materials cost 5 Option 1:Advocate for sustainable extraction of raw materials 1 Support responsible extraction of raw 5 MATERIALS C5.7 Option 2:Support suppliers that disclose environmental data 3 1 to 5 materials Option 3:Support suppliers that meet extraction standards 5 Option 1:Advocate for transparency and safer chemistry 1 5 MATERIALS C5.8 Support transparency and safer chemistry Option 2:Support manufacturers that disclose chemical data 3 1 to 5 Option 3:Support manufacturers with chemical hazard assessments 5 Option 1:Advocate for sustainable materials manufacturing 1 Support sustainability in materials 5 MATERIALS C5.9 Option 2:Support manufacturers that disclose data on sustainable practices 3 1 to 5 manufacturing Option 3:Support manufacturers that achieve sustainable practices 5 Option 1:Advocate for sustainable plant production 1 5 MATERIALS C5.10 Support sustainability in plant production Option 2:Support producers that disclose data on sustainable practices 3 1 to 5 Option 3:Support producers that achieve sustainable practices 5 2 23 4 6:SITE DESIGN-HUMAN HEALTH+WELL-BEING Possible Points: 30 No cultural or historic places present on site Protect and maintain cultural and historic 2 HHWB C6.1 places Option 1:Historic buildings,structures,or objects 2 (project must have existing feature) 2 to 3 Option 2:Historic or cultural landscapes 3 2 HHWB C6.2 Provide optimum site accessibility,safety,and 2 2 wayfinding 2 HHWB C6.3 Promote equitable site use 2 2 2 HHWB C6.4 Support mental restoration 2 2 2 HHWB C6.5 Support physical activity 2 2 2 HHWB C6.6 Support social connection 2 2 Option 1:Food production 3 0 4 HHWB C6.7 Provide on-site food production 3 to 4 Option 2:Food production and regular distribution 4 4 HHWB C6.8 Reduce light pollution 4 4 4 HHWB C6.9 Encourage fuel efficient and multi-modal 4 4 transportation Minimize exposure to environmental tobacco Option 1:Designate smoke free zones 1 2 HHWB C6.10 1 to 2 smoke Option 2:Prohibit smoking on site 2 3 HHWB C6.11 Support local economy 3 3 Page 5 of 7 7/27/2022 ©Sustainable Sites Initiative" Project Name: Project ID#: Date: r Estimate points Z below(key at a r bottom) PREREQUISITE OR z YES ? NO CREDIT# TITLE CASE/OPTION/THRESHOLD d a a 0 1 17 0 7:CONSTRUCTION Possible Points: 17 Y CONSTRUCTION P7.1 Communicate and verify sustainable construction practices Y CONSTRUCTION P7.2 Control and retain construction pollutants Y CONSTRUCTION P7.3 Restore soils disturbed during construction low point score 3 5 CONSTRUCTION C7.4 Restore soils disturbed by previous mid point score 4 3 to 5 development high point score 5 Divert construction and demolition materials 50%of structural materials+95%of roads/infrastructure materials 3 4 CONSTRUCTION C7.5 3 to 4 from disposal 75%of structural materials+95%of roads/infrastructure materials 4 Divert reusable vegetation,rocks,and soil 100%of land clearing materials retained for use within 50 miles 3 4 CONSTRUCTION C7.6 3 to 4 from disposal 100%of land-clearing materials retained on site 4 50%total run-time hours from Tier 2 or higher engines 2 4 CONSTRUCTION C7.7 Protect air quality during construction 50%total run-time hours from Tier 3 or higher engines 3 2 to 4 50%total run-time hours from Tier 4 or higher engines 4 0 1 22 0 8.OPERATIONS+MAINTENANCE Possible Points: 22 Y O+M P8.1 Plan for sustainable site maintenance Y O+M P8.2 Provide for storage and collection of recyclables 100%of vegetation trimmings recycled/composted off site within 50 miles 3 5 O+M C8.3 Recycle organic matter 100%of vegetation trimmings recycled/composted on site 4 3 to 5 100%of vegetation trimmings+food waste recycled/composted on site 5 Option 1:Plant health care plan 4 5 O+M C8.4 Minimize pesticide and fertilizer use 4 to 5 Option 2:Best management practices for plant health care 5 30%reduction from baseline energy use for outdoor equipment 2 4 O+M C8.5 Reduce outdoor energy consumption 60%reduction from baseline energy use for outdoor equipment 3 2 to 4 90%reduction from baseline energy use for outdoor equipment 4 Option 1:On-site-50%annual outdoor site electricity 3 Use renewable sources for landscape Option 1:On-site-100%annual outdoor site electricity 4 4 O+M C8.6 3 to 4 electricity needs Option 2:Green power-50%annual outdoor site electricity 3 Option 2:Green power-100%annual outdoor site electricity 4 Option 1:Scheduled maintenance 2 Protect air quality during landscape 4 O+M C8.7 Option 2:Low-emitting equipment 3 2 to 4 maintenance Option 3:Manual or electric powered maintenance equipment 4 0 11 0 9.EDUCATION+PERFORMANCE MONITORING Possible Points: 11 Promote sustainability awareness and Option 1:Educational and interpretive elements 3 4 EDUCATION C9.1 3 to 4 education Option 2:Additional education 4 3 EDUCATION C9.2 Develop and communicate a case study 3 3 Page 6 of 7 7/27/2022 ©Sustainable Sites Initiative— Project Name: Project ID#: Date: r Estimate points z below(key at a r bottom) PREREQUISITE OR z YES ? NO CREDIT# TITLE CASE/OPTION/THRESHOLD d a a 4 EDUCATION C9.3 Plan to monitor and report site performance ] 4 4 0 1 9 1 0 10.INNOVATION OR EXEMPLARY PERFORMANCE Possible Bonus Points: 9 9 INNOVATION C10.1 Innovation or exemplary performance Option 1:Exemplary performance 3 3 to 9 (BONUS POINTS) Option 2:Innovation outside the SITES v2 Rating System 3 YES ? NO 172 21 ® : =- KEY SITES Certification levels Points YES Project confident points are achievable CERTIFIED 70 ? Project striving to achieve points,not 100%confident SILVER 85 NO Project is unable to achieve these credit points GOLD 100 PLATINUM 135 Page 7 of 7 7/27/2022 ©Sustainable Sites Initiative— Appendix B Ecological Assessment Olendale MWWRegional Park IIIIIIIIIIINEIRMaste Plan Glendale Regional Park Master Plan Ecological Assessment September 21, 2021 RiverRestoration conducted a site visit of the Glendale Regional Park on August 23,2021,to evaluate the current ecological conditions of the project area and to determine what features should be retained for ecological reasons. This inventory resulted in the identification of mature sycamore within the park,other mature trees along 1700 South,and river edge habitats that should be retained.Areas for potential enhancement were also identified and include all existing riparian forest and a buffer of 50-300' from the river.Areas closer to the river are likely to be closer to the groundwater,thus representing opportunities for riparian enhancement with less long-term need for irrigation. The irrigation system was tested and determined to be mostly out of commission and in need of replacement. The connection to service was identified in the northeast corner of the project area for future irrigation infrastructure. City staff will evaluate and install a temporary system to existing trees along the park strip on 1700 South.The sycamores and river edge trees are likely to be in contact with the shallow groundwater and it is recommended that a few shallow groundwater monitoring wells be installed when machinery is on site. The local and regional context was evaluated to determine if there are any adjacent City properties that would enhance the ecological functioning of this area and several local enhancement projects were identified. Additionally, students from Glendale Middle School have previously provided stewardship for areas just downstream of the project and Jordan River Park.The future stewardship of the natural areas in the vicinity of the project should involve local schools and community partners. The Jordan River upstream of the project was also observed to identify opportunities for a broader connection to the river both up and downstream.Development of on-water opportunities is one of the highest values of the site from a stewardship perspective. Locations up and downstream of the project were mapped and are provided as a KML file. Photos were taken of the site and noxious weeds were identified for treatment and control. City Natural Open Space staff committed to aggressive treatment of puncturevine across the site and stated they would deploy these resources in August. Plans for the trimming of vegetation and removal of garbage and debris stuck in the Russian olive along the river edge were also discussed and will be completed over the winter by City staff. 1 1 1' ag Glendale Regional Park—Ecological Assessment I PVER 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City,LIT 84150 1970.947.9568 Current Ecological Conditions The current state of the riparian forest in and around the project area is in a degraded condition. Some of the existing large trees within the project area have a high value, since they are well established and seem to be healthy. The trees along the Jordan River are mostly pioneer invasive trees and shrubs,primarily Russian olives.While these trees are considered invasive,complete removal of these trees would adversely impact riparian birds in the area due to loss of habitat and cover. We propose that the Russian olives along the riverbank be retained until an irrigation system and native riparian forest can be planned and implemented.Any removal of trees should occur outside the nesting season for resident and migratory birds [preferably September through February]. Map 1 shows areas of existing riparian tress that could be retained. Only the sycamore trees should be considered to absolutely protect in place,since they are mature,well-established,and healthy.The remaining groves of trees can be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for phased removal or replacement with planted and irrigated multi-layer riparian areas. The demo of existing infrastructure provides opportunity to repurpose the low-lying areas with riparian vegetation,improving the riparian buffer and enhancing ecological education opportunities. We propose that the old wave pool(east side of the project) be repurposed into a wetland/riparian zone. Further opportunities exist to connect the east of the wave pool to the current boat launch/take out with native plant species and interactive and educational signs. The existing trees along the park strip at the north of the project area should be preserved,with the irrigation system re-established to maintain this important buffer from 1700 south. g e Map 1. Local ecological areas of importance. 2 1' agc Glendale Regional Park—Ecological Assessment I PVER 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City,LIT 84150 1970.947.9568 Zeal and Regional Connections The Glendale Regional Park is in a central part of Salt Lake City but is also centrally located along the riparian corridor of the Jordan River,which provides a key connection of riparian habitats for resident and migratory birds. The site is located along the flyway between Utah Lake and Great Salt Lake and provides a potential stopover location for resting migratory birds.There is also potential for increased areas of higher quality riparian habitat with a multi-canopy layer structure. Robust riparian habitats consist of canopy's that could have several layers of complexity including large trees, small trees and shrubs,grasses,and forbs [flowers].This multi-layer structure is beneficial for creating a diverse ecosystem that will be more resilient to future changes in climate and ecosystem processes. Surrounding regional areas that are owned by SLC adjacent to the golf course and in other open areas offer great opportunity to be enhanced for riparian functioning and flood capacity. .7 1 r11 r a, � o rP- wr 7 Map 2. Regional ecologically important areas 3 1' agc Glendale Regional Park—Ecological Assessment I PVER 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City,LIT 84150 1970.947.9568 Site Preparation We recommend that treatments are conducted on invasive species in preparation for future disturbances.The main focal species for control include puncturevine and Russian olive. Use the proper herbicide to control puncturevine across the hillside.Much of the puncturevine is located up on the hill with the slides.Treatments should occur 2-3 times a year, starting in August 2021 [stated verbally on site with meeting],follow up treatments should be conducted starting in June/July 2022,depending on the weather and phenology of the plants. An initial trimming of the Russian olive along the river should be conducted from a boat in fall2021 to free up garbage and debris that have become stuck in the low-hanging branches.A floating oil boom or turbidity curtain can be installed across the river at the existing boat ramp to gather and remove floating garbage and debris. Potential Access Areas River access can be developed by creating easier entry for canoes and kayaks.The water quality is an issue, so swimming should be discouraged,but as the water quality may be better in the future,water access should not be completely cut off.Additional small boat access locations should be evaluated to create a more local scale river recreation circulation pattern.The figures below provide some ideas for river access that does not encourage swimming. Figure 1. Jordan River access steps at Big Bend Habitat in West Jordan, UT 4 1' agc Glendale Regional Park—Ecological Assessment I PVER 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City,LIT 84150 1970.947.9568 Figure 2. Jordan River Big Bend Habitat canoe access in West Jordan, UT k Figure 3. Price River in Helper, UT river access beach 5 l' agc Glendale Regional Park—Ecological Assessment I PVER 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City,LIT 84150 1970.947.9568 a Figure 4. Price River access steps in Helper, UT r < � � 1 w r Figure S. Ogden River ADA fishing access pier in Ogden, UT 6 l' agc Glendale Regional Park—Ecological Assessment I PVER 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City,LIT 84150 1970.947.9568 AN f r , Figure 6. Ogden River ADA access ramp in Ogden, UT t , iti' F a ab' Figure 6. River overlook in the Pacific Northwest 7 l' agc Glendale Regional Park—Ecological Assessment IVER 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City,LIT 84150 1970.947.9568 r kr il r Figure 7. Colorado River overlook in Glendale Springs,CO Conclusion The main conclusions of the site visit provide direction for the near-term management of invasive species on the site in preparation for future disturbance of the project site for development of the regional park. Managing invasive species on the site for 2-3 years before the site disturbance will reduce the number and pervasiveness of invasive species and will also begin to develop a human presence in the area doing maintenance,thus reducing the perception of the area as abandoned. The Glendale Regional Park offers great opportunity to improve and expand the ecological function of the riparian habitat along the Jordan River.Mature vegetation should be protected,irrigation throughout the site reinitiated,and a process to phase out nonnative trees should be implemented in conjunction with planting native riparian plants. The central location of the project site offers great opportunity to connect with the surrounding environment, provide the community areas to recreate in nature,and provide high quality habitat for resident and migratory birds. 8 1 1' agc Glendale Regional Park—Ecological Assessment Appendix C Restortatmion Plan IMMEMINIMIGIlendale MMMMIkegitmal Park MEMEMMINIMMaste Plan 2022 Glendale Regional Park Restoration Noxious Weed Management a n Developed as part of the Jordan River Commission Best Practices for Riverfront Communities Primary Focus Area Glendale Regional Park Project PURPOSE: This document was created to provide guidance for an Adaptive Management Strategy to control noxious and invasive plant species at the Glendale Regional Park Project in Salt Lake City, Utah. This document represents a template that can be used on other sites along the Jordan River in Salt Lake City, where site specific data on noxious weed locations can be used to develop site specific action plans. Overall, our goal is to improve the management of these lands for the benefit of people and wildlife by reducing the cover of noxious and invasive plants and increasing the cover of native and desirable plants.The following recommendations may need to be changed based upon site specific needs and resources that are available. Any and all use of herbicides must be done by licensed applicators and those applicators must read, understand, and follow label requirements for the use of herbicides. Weed Control Instructions and Best Practices: 1. Always use the proper methods to deal with the plant species on your project; 2. Always read the label for any herbicides that will be used and follow specific requirements; 3. Be familiar with the target species, control methods, and appropriate follow up methods to ensure success; 4. Take proper precautions in protecting your personal health and safety and the health of the environment; S. Ensure weather conditions are appropriate for the use of any herbicides; 6. Post signs were appropriate to alert the public about the use of any herbicides; 7. Collect as much information as possible on treatment areas such as: location of treatments, timing of treatments, follow up actions required to ensure success; 8. AND only use herbicides where you have obtained express consent from the land owner to conduct treatments. HOW TO - Five Step Approach: Prevention • Prioritize invasive species control where recent or future land disturbance is anticipated • Identify pathways or "vectors" of invasive species introduction and spread and try to understand the potential impact of those species on native ecosystems • Work with surrounding land owners to reduce spread from surrounding properties Early detection and rapid response • Use this guidance document to improve detection and identification of invasive plant species • Document occurrence of new species not included in this plan yearly using EDDMaps • Coordinate response efforts to eradicate species before establishment and spread with all stakeholders working within and adjacent to the Big Bend Control and management • Follow both short- and long-term recommendations in this Big Bend Restoration Plan to restore and enhance native and desirable plants that will withstand future changes in weather and climate • Limit spread of existing infestations by targeted eradication or population suppression (using mechanical, biological, and chemical methods) • Implement a variety of methods to improve the outcomes of treatments (i.e. Integrated Pest Management Approach) • Work with surrounding land owners to control surrounding invasive species populations Revegetation • Select site adapted species of plants that can compete against invasive weeds once established • Develop site specific plans for installation of"habitat patches" of riparian plants based upon local soils and access to surface and groundwater • Seed any disturbed areas soon after disturbance has ceased and make sure to properly prepare soils for seeding • Follow up on any revegetation actions for at least five years to ensure establishment of new plants Monitoring • Monitor before and after control methods to ensure progress is being made on controlling existing infestations and new infestations are not becoming established Site Specific Indications for the Glendale Regional Park Based upon site assessments completed in the late summer of 2021 and spring of 2022, it appears that there are only a few areas that need aggressive weed control for hoary cress, Scotch thistle, and puncturevine. The treatments that occurred in 2021 appear to have been effective at reducing the cover and seed production of the puncturevine on the big hill. Additional work was done along the riverbanks to reduce the cover of Russian olives. Treatments proposed for summer and fall of 2022 include follow up on the work completed in 2021 and aggressive treatment of secondary invasion of hoary cress and phragmites in areas along the riverbanks where Russian olive was cut down. The remaining material left from the Russian olive cutting should be retained on site to protect any new plants from wind and sun. The branches remaining can be piled into small windrows and hoary cress and phragmites should be treated as soon as possible. Areas identified for future riparian forests should be planted with container plants with drip irrigation this fall (November 2022). Areas where Russian olive was removed should be the top priority for restoration of riparian forests to return the multi-layer canopy for nesting and migratory birds, while considering issues with transient camps in the area. Aggressive chemical control of noxious weeds adjacent to all disturbance areas should also be a high priority. These are the most likely places for spread of noxious and invasive plants. These areas should also be seeded soon after the disturbance ceases (generally within 2 weeks any time of the year). Seeding with an inexpensive grass and forb mix should be done any time disturbances occur throughout the project lifecycle to reduce the opportunity for noxious and invasive plants to take over and dominate. This is cheap insurance and will reduce the potential need for chemicals to be used on the site in the future. Habitat improvements are a key goal of the Project and phasing the project's construction will reduce potential impacts to the site's current wildlife population. Phasing the project will limit the amount of area that will be disturbed at any one time. Portions of the site will be left undisturbed during the initial phases of construction to provide habitat. This applies particularly to habitat for migratory song birds. Partners working along the Jordan River Corridor have recommended a phased approach for removal of Russian olives, which serve as habitat for migratory and resident bird species. Russian olive should be left on portions of the site that are not part of the initial phases and riparian plants should be planted into Russian olive stands, where the shade from the existing invasive trees will help with establishment of new forests. As native plants mature, the remainder of the Russian olives can be removed and replaced with the appropriate native species. There will be an ongoing need for maintenance of the site to prevent Russian olives (and other noxious species) from re-establishing in areas where they have been removed. Secondary invasion of hoary cress and phragmites should also be monitored and treated in these areas. The following noxious and invasive weed species have been observed on or adjacent to the Glendale Regional Park: • Hoary cress • Perennial pepperweed • Scotch thistle • Dalmatian toadflax • Poison hemlock • Common reed • Houndstongue • Tamarisk • Russian olive • Russian knapweed • Dyer's woad • Puncturevine The primary objective of noxious weed control is to selectively reduce the cover and abundance of noxious and invasive plants across the site. This work is being accomplished mostly by mechanical and chemical control of herbaceous plants and through physical removal of invasive Russian olive and tamarisk trees. Site management should focus on phasing the removal of these trees over several years and installation of native and desirable plant species to retain the beneficial aspects of the riparian cover, i.e. a multi-story canopy. The main objective of this Plan is to reduce the cover of invasive species over time so that the entire site does not have to be treated at the time of major construction. Removal of invasive trees can be conducted at the same time as crews and volunteers are installing native riparian trees, shrubs, fortis, and grasses in small patches.The installation of new plants will reduce the "temporal loss" of riparian habitat in the area during major construction activity phases. The major challenge with this phase is providing sufficient water to the plants to make sure they become established. Another objective of this Plan is to reduce the number of seeds and propagules of noxious plants such as thistle, whitetop, Russian olive, and puncturevine. The following matrix provides some guidance for treatments and timing for each noxious and invasive weed species found on the Glendale Regional Park or along the Jordan River corridor close to the site. Glendale Regional Park Action Plan Surrma 2022-2023 2022 2023 Status Responsibility 3 c m -a a _ = v ° on s d 7 3 a = c m a ° 0 NIMEMIN Monitor weedy upland areas X X X X Monitor riparian areas X X X X Count planting success I X X in Initial watering of plants X X X X X Irrigation of plants X X X X X X X Fencin and Protecting installed vegetation X X X X X Installation of Habitat Patches X X X X X Seeding of areas adjacent to disturbances X X X X X X X X X X Mow annual weeds and thistles X X X X X X X X X X Field meeting with herbicide applicator X X X X X Herbicide use in upland areas I X X X X X X X X Herbicide use in riparian areas X X X X X X X X Chemical control hoarycress X X X X X I X Chemical control poison hemlock X X I I X X XI I X Chemical control thistle X X I I X X X X I I X X Chemical control phragrites X X X X Chemical control perennial pepperweed X X IN 1110 Bill No removal of trees to protect nesting birds X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Herbivory check on any planted vegetation X X IIIX X ly X Restoration Plants The following species have been selected for seeding or planting in small patches. These species were derived from observations of native riparian habitats by Ty Harrison over the last half- century. Irrigation is needed regularly for successful establishment of these plants. Common Name I Scientific Name RIPARIAN TREES AND SHRUBS Fremont Cottonwood Populus fremontii Box Elder Acre negundo Peachleaf Willow Saliix amigdaloides Black Hawthorn Crataegus douglasi Coyote Willow Salix exigua Woods Rose Rosa woodsii Oakleaf Sumac Rhus aromatics var. trilobata Golden Currant Ribes aureum UPLAND SHRUBS Big Sagebrush Artemisia tridentate var. tridentate Rubber Rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus nauseosus Greasewood Sarcobatus vermiculatus Fourwing Saltbush Atriplex canescens Gardner's Saltbush Atriplex gardneri Recommended Seed Mixes I Species Scientific Name Species Common Name Percent desired cover at maturity Emergent Wetland Mix Typha latifolia Common cattail 40 Scirpus acutis Hardstem or Roundstern bullrush 40 S. americanus American threesquare 10 S. pungens Common threesquare 10 S. maritimus Alkali bullrush 5 Senecio hydrophilus Water groundsel 2 Triglochin sp jArrowgrass 2 Wet Meadow Eleocharis palustris Creeping spikerush 20 Juncus torreyi Torrey rush 20 Carex nebrascensi.s Nebraska sedge 20 C. lanuginosa Wooly sedge 20 Distichlis spicata Inland saltgrass 10 Mesic Meadow Juncus arcticus Wiregrass or Arctic rush 30 Distichlis spicata Inland saltgrass 10 Pascopyrum smithii Western wheatgrass 30 Sporobolus airoides Alkali saccaton 10 Puccinellia nuttalliana Nuttall's alkaligrass 10 C. praegracilis Black creeper sedge 10 Solidago occidentalis Western goldenrod 10 Upland Mix Pascopyrum smithii Western wheatgrass 30 Leymus cl'nereus Great Basin wildrye 20 Distichlis spicata Inland saltgrass 10 Poa secunda (sandbergii) Sandberg bluegrass 10 Festuca ovina 'Covar' Sheep fescue 10 Cleome serrulata Rocky Mountain beeweed 5 Sphaeralcea coccinea Scarlet globernallow 5 Linium lewi.si.J. Lewis blue flax 5 Weed treatment tracking form: OBSERVER LOCATION DATE TREATMENT FOLLOW UP NEEDED WEATHER ACRES DENSITY PHENOLOGY NOTES Appendix D Market Study Glendale MMMMRegional Park NEENEEMERMaste Plan Glendale Regional Park Demographic and Market Study September, 2021 This study assesses and analyzes demographic characteristics ofthe areas surrounding the Glendale Regional Park project site.As part ofthe process,primary and secondary market areas were defined and confirmed with project stakeholders.These market areas served as the geographic focus area ofthe analysis and were compared to demographic trends at the County level.Key questions answered through the analysis include: • What is the primary and secondary market area that the Park could expect to draw visitor from? • What are the demographic and populations trends within the primary and secondary market areas? • What is the population that the Park could be serving? • What does recreational trends data inform regarding potential gaps or opportunities? Primary and Secondary Nbrket Area Primary Nbrket Area The primary market area,depicted in Figure 1,is where 60 to 80 percent of all park users are anticipated to be drawn from and includes users who will frequent the Park on a near weekly basis.The primary market area identified for this analysis lies between Interstate 215 and Interstate 15 and extends south of West South Temple Street and north of West 2900 Street.Neighborhoods that fall in the primary market area include Chesterfield,Western Pacific Addition, Redwood Gardens,Klenkes Addition,Wenco Acres,Albert Place,%aldons Addition,Poplar Grove and Wright Circle. Other parks and public outdoor spaces located in the primary market area include Decker Lake Park,Redwood Nature Area,Redwood Tmiihead Park, 17th South River Park,Weseman Parr Nbdesto Park,91h South River Park,Post Street Tot Lot,Bend-In-The-River,Jordan Park and Peace Gardens,Jordan River Parkway,Poplar Grove Park and Sher,wod Park _8 Scz LaW a W1000N $1.. f i A,q—t �ON s .nir xrrt W 500N E tirtt Ave IN North 1.m n •"`.=w: r ._ E S outh Tern p1.St ,. Salt 4 Lake City. E 4111_.. W 5005 --« b8 E-500$.. W WS WOODS E600 a'. WindianitAo .—;.. . �Vd 005 � E 900 s' E 800 S E S .,. ys«de A a m V 14005 ati forn«a Ava ^to _... %6 j00S E13005 w A __t7008 W2100$ - 3i 1�� '.. � E2100S SoUth Salt E 27005 F � w W 3100S y W 3300 W3500S West Valley city I�yp45 YJ 3 60S E 3000 S� Figure 1: Prirnary 1Nhrket Area.Source:ESR1 Business Analyst Secondary Nhrket Area The secondary market area,illustrated in Figure 2,is where 20 to 40 percent of all park users are anticipated to be drawn from and includes users who treat the Park as a destination,going there for a specific purpose or activities. Salt Lake City was identified as the secondary market area and was analyzed as a buffer zone to encompass a broader reach ofthe region and capture residents who may visit the Park less frequently than those in the primary market area. The area north of 2100 South Freeway within the primary market area lies within the Salt Lake City boundary.As a result,data extracted for the secondary market area also includes data within the section ofthe primary market area north of2100 South Freeway.The primary and secondary markets were compared to Salt Lake County to better understand the relative demographic differences ofthe market area in the context ofthe region. 1 x North SaltLake i.'.. m a Vd 70#S :500 IN 6ell ... 4.`II E'17008 :.. E:2100 3... W 2400 a on on Salt E2P0QS- S W"1 O S c» "+� Lake Magna=, 3500 S R,E3300S .n W n est Valle E 34003 ry u, m o }�� 7 0 W 4100S city Figure 2:Secondary NErketArea.Source ESRI Business Analyst Population and Households Table 1 shows the total population estimates for each area of study in 2010,2021,and 2026 extracted from ESRI Business Analyst.The 2021 total population in the primary market area is 29,525 and the population in the secondary market area is 204,380.Between 2010 and 2021,the population within the primary market area has grown by 4.07 percent while the population in the secondary market area grew by 9.65 percent. Growth within both primary and secondary market areas was less than that ofthe County,which grewby 17.3 percent since 2010.Over the next five years (2021-2026)population in the primary market area is expected to grow by 3.54 percent,reaching a total population of30,571 in 2026.The population in the secondary market area is expected to see slightly higher growth over the next five years,growing by 8.65 percent to reach a total population of222,029 in 2026. Population Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County,UT 2010 Tota I Population 28,369 186,399 1,029,655 2021 Total Population 29,525 204,380 1,207,807 2026 Total Population 30,571 222,029 1298,444 Table 1.Total Population Estimates.Source:ESRI Business Analyst. Total household estimates,household size,and family statistics are depicted in Table 2.Between 2010 and 2021 households in the primary market area have grown by 3.7 percent,increasing from 7,982 to 8,277.The growth in households in the primary market area is less than that ofthe secondary market area(11.68 percent)and that of Salt Lake County(17.1 percent).Household growth between 2021 and 2026 is expected to slow to 3.2 percent in the primary market area,9.51 percent in the secondary market area and 7.5 percent in Salt Lake County.In 2026 there is projected to be 8,542 total households in the primary market area and 91,106 households in the secondary market area. Current average household size in the primary market area(3.54 persons)is larger than that in the secondary market area(2.4 persons)and that of Salt Lake County(2.97 persons).This is consistent with a higher number of family household within the primary market area(70.63 percent)than in both the secondary market area(49.47 percent)and Page 2 in Salt Lake County(69.66 percent).Of the families within each area of study,average family sizes are larger in the primary market area(4.1 persons)than the secondary market area(3.27 persons)and Salt Lake County(3.55 persons).The primary market area's high concentration of families has severalimpfications the future of Glendale Regional Park,including ensuring that park programming,both physical and event,is appropriate for children of varying ages. Households&Families Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County,U17 Total Households 2010 Total Households 7,982 74,493 342,622 2021 Total Households 8,277 83,197 401,195 2026 Total Households 8,542 91,106 431,279 Household Size 2021 gage Household Sim 3.54 2.40 2.97 Families 2021 Total FamilyHouseholds 5,846 41,157 279,462 2021 Total FamilyHouseholds(%) 70.63% 49.47% 69.66% 2021 Aerage FamilySize 4.10 3.27 3.55 Table 2.Household and Family Estimates.Source:ESRI Business Analyst. Age The 2021 median age and the distribution of ages for the prirnary market area,secondar market area,and Salt Lake County is depicted in Table 3.The median age in the primary market area is 29,slightly younger than that ofthe secondary market area(33)and that of Salt Lake County(33).Adian ages in 2026 are expected to be roughly the same as 2021 across all areas of study.The primary market area is significantly younger than the secondary market area and Salt Lake County,with residents 19 and under comprising 36.52 percent ofthe population.The proportion of the total population that is under 19 in the secondary market area is 21.77 percent,which is lower than the primary market area and Salt Lake County(27.85 percent).The largest age group in the primary market area is between 0 and 9,which consists of 19.78 percent ofthe total population,followed by age groups between 10 and 19 and between 30 and 39,which consist of 16.74 percent and 16.33 percent ofthe population,respectively.The high ratio ofchildren in the primary market area indicates a high concentration of families in the region.The largest age cohort in the secondary market area is between 20 and 29,indicating that there is an overall younger demographic in this region that may enter family formation years (30-39)within the next decade. Total Population Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County,Ur 0-9 19.78% 12.93% 16.17% 10-19 16.74% 11.91% 14.40% 20-29 15.29% 19.05% 14.45% 30-39 16.33% 17.60% 16.72% 40-49 11.40% 11.63% 12.47% 50-59 8.81% 9.80% 9.72% 60-69 8.84% 8.60% 70-79 80+ Median Age 28.9 33.1 32.9 Table 3.Population by Age Group.Source:ESRl Business Analyst. I-busehold Income and Wealth The 2021 median household income,projected median household income growth,and concentration of specific household income brackets are shown in Table 4.The 2021 median household income in the primary market area is $50,508,which is less than that ofthe secondary market area($63,364)and that of Salt Lake County($80,897).The primary market area is also expected to see less growth in median household income(12.18 percent)than in the secondary market area(19.14 percent)and Salt Lake County(13.59 percent)bet\wen 2021 and 2026.Table 5 delineates the median disposable income and the percent ofthe total households in each area of study corresponding to specific disposable income ranges as of2021.The median disposable income in the primary market area is Page 3 $42,262,which less than that ofthe secondary market area($52,690)and that of Salt Lake County($63,344).Income distributions for both median and disposable income levels are skewed towards lower income levels in the primary market area while those in the secondary market area and Salt Lake County form a more normal distribution around the median income level.This indicates that income levels are lower in the primary market area than the secondary market area or the county.Given this distinction,the Park will better suit the primary market through low or no cost activities for both adults and children.There is a need for the implementation ofprogramnillg such as free fitness classes or facilities that can supplement recreational demands ofthe conunllnity for little to no cost.Ifconcessions are implemented,then they should be priced appropriately. 2021 Household Income Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County,Ur Median Household Income $50,508 $63,364 $80,897 2021 to 2026 Median Household Income Growth 12.18% 19.14% 13.59% $200,000 or greater 8.49% $150,000-$199,999 low 10.09% $100,0004149,999 9.70% 15.94% 20.91% $75,000499,999 15.05% 12.51% 1492% $50,000474,999 20.67% 16.500/. 17.58% $35,000-$49,999 15.43% 11.11% 9.96% $25,000-$34,999 11.33% $15,000-$24,999 11.31% Less than$15,000 11.271/o 12.29% Table 4.Household Income Concentrations.Source:ESRI Business Analyst 2021 Disposable Income Primary Market Area SecondaryNh ket Area Salt Lake County,Ur Median Disposable Income $42,262 $52,690 $63,344 $200,000 or greater $150,000-$199,999 NEENEM NN $100,000-$149,999 13.30% 18.24% $75,000-$99,999 8.13% 11.51% 15.04% $50,000-$74,999 24.80% 20.00% 22.57% $35,000449,999 18A6% 14.23% 14.04% $25,000-$34,999 12.50% 1 9100/0 7.37% $15,000-$24,999 13.64% 9.88% 6.82% Less than$15,000 13.27% 13.64% 1 7.44% Table 5.Disposable Income Concentrations.Source:ESRIBasiness Analyst Depicted in Table 5 is the Wealth Index for the primary market area,secondary market area,and Salt Lake County. The Wealth Index is a metric used to compare overall wealth ofcommunities to the national level Esri Business Analyst measures wealth by compiling a variety ofinetries that contribute to affluence,including income,average net worth,and material possessions and resources.The index compares the wealth calculated for selected areas to the average national wealth levels.Wealth indexes above 100 indicate wealth levels above the national average,while those below 100 indicate wealth levels below the national average.The wealth index in the primary market area is 47, indicating that the area has lower amounts ofwealth when compared to the national average.The secondary market area has a wealth index of 85,which is slightly lower than the national average,while Salt Lake County has a wealth index of 105,which is higher than the national average. This indicates that in terms of income and personal assets,the primary market area holds the lowest level ofwealth out ofthe three areas studied.Given the lowwealth index ofthe primary market area,it is likely that the majority ofthe population in this region do not have adequate resources to pay for,or use,the same recreational facilities as those ofa higher wealth index community.For this reason,programs should not be priced at a level suitable to the other areas of study,instead low cost or free programs should be offered so that those with lower incomes have access to desired recreational facilities and programs. wealth Index I Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County,ITT 2021 wealth Index 1 47 1 85 105 Table 5.wealth Index.Source:ESRI Business Analyst. Page 4 1-busing Table 6 illustrates the composition ofhousing units that are either renter or owner occupied as of2021.Currently there are 8,277 occupied housing units in the primary market area,ofwhich 4,560(55.09 percent)are owner occupied and 3,717(44.91 percent)are renter occupied.Compared to the primary market area,there is a higher concentration of renter occupied units in the secondary market area(54.08 percent)and a smaller concentration ofrenter occupied units in Salt Lake County(33.78 percent).Table 7 depicts the concentration ofhousing type and number ofunits in the housing structure within each area of study as of2019. The majority ofhousing units in all areas of study are single unit detached structures.Unlike the that ofthe primary market area and Salt Lake County,the second largest concentration ofhousing types,malting up 14.05 percent oftotal housing in the secondary market area,consists of buildings that hold 50 or more units. Tenure 2021 Primary Market Area Secondary Nbrket Area Salt Lake County,UP Total Occupied 8,277 83,197 401,195 Owner Occupied Housing Units 4,560 38,203 265,687 Renter Occupied Housing Units 3,717 44,994 135,508 20210wner Occupied Housing Units(%) 55.09% 45.92% 66.22% 2021 Renter Occupied Housing Units(%) 44.91% 54.08% 33.78% Table 6.Tenure of occupied housing.Source:ESRI Business Analyst. 2019 Housing Type(Percent) Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County,Ur 1 Detached Unit inStructure 60.42% 46.42% 62.62% 1 Atached Unit in Structure 5.55% 3.24% 7.19% 2 Units in Structure 7.16% 6.57% 2.94% 3 or 4 Units in Structure 5.19% 6.62% 3.91% 5 to 9 Units in Structure 4.35% 5.06% 4.23% 10 to 19 Units in Structure 8.10% 6.90% 5.81% 20 to 49 Units in Structure 4.01% 9.91% 5.31% 50 or More Units in Structure 1.59% 14.05% 5.99% Housing:Mobile Homes 3.63% 0.95% 1.94% Housing:Boat/RV/Van/etc. 0.00% 0.28% 0.07% Table 7.Tenure ofoccupied housing.Source:ESRI Business Analyst. Table 8 delineates the proportion of all housing units as of2019 by year built.The median year built ofhousing units within the primary market area is 1968,which is newer than the median home age in the secondary market and older than that of Salt Lake County. The majority ofhousing units in the primary market(16.89 percent)were built between 1950 and 1959 while the majority ofthe households within the secondary market(29.08 percent)were built in 1939 or earlier. Salt Lake County holds a higher concentration ofbuildings built in 1970 or later. Housing Unit Development Year Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area4,1 ty,Ur Median Year Structure was Built 1968 1959 2014 or later 2010-2013 2000-2009 10.93% 6.65% 1990-1999 12.57% 7.36% . 1980-1989 10.39% 7.69% 12.95% 1970-1979 13.04% 12.0696 18.90% 1960-1969 12.96% 9.97% 8.98% 1950-1959 16.89% 13.22% 8.88% 1940-1949 8.15% 8.70% 1939 or Earl ier 14.36% 29.08% 8.01% Table 8.Tenure of occupied housing.Source:ESRI Business Analyst. Illustrated in Table 9,the median contract rent in the primary market area is $900,which is greater than that ofthe secondary market area($889),and less than that of Sah Lake County($993).Nbnd*ownership costs as of2019 for households that pay a mortgage are depicted in Table 10.Ofthe households with a mortgage,most ownership costs typically he within 10 to 30 percent ofhousehold income. Ownership costs that exceed 50 percent ofhousehold income within the primary market area consist of 8.38 percent of total households with a mortgage,which is greater than that Page 5 ofthe secondary market area(5.56 percent)and that of Salt Lake County(5.75 percent). This indicates that the primary market area is faced with higher housing cost burdens than other areas.Glendale Park can assist households in the primary market area by offering low cost or free programming,thereby eliminating,or reducing recreation related expenses. Contract Rent Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County,Ur 2019 Median Contract Rent $900 $889 $993 Table 9.Nkdian Contract Rent.Source:ESR1Business Analyst_ 2019 Nbnthly Ownership Costs ofHouseholds with a Nbrtgage(Percent) Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County,Ur NbnthlyOwnerCosts<10%ofHHIncome 4.89% 6.34% 5.32% Nbnthly0wnerCosts 10-14.9%ofHHIncome 11.40% 12.61% 12.69% NbnthlyOmcrCosts 15-19.9%ofHHlncome 11.51% 14.57% 16.18% NbnthlyOwner Costs 20-249%ofHHIncome I1.81% 11.54% 12.39% NbnthlyOwnerCosts 25-29.9%ofHH Income 9.42% 6.56% 8.49% Nbnthly0wnerCosts 30-34.9%ofHHlncome 4.48% 4.27% 4.87% NbnthlyOwnerCosts 35-39.9%ofHHIncome 6.11% 3.92% 3.34% NbnthlyOwnerCosts 40-49.9%ofHH Income 3.470/. NbnthlyOwnerCosts 50+%ofHHlncome Nbnthly0wnerCosts%ofHHJoe Not Computed Table 10.Housing Costs for Households Owning Property.Source:ESRI Bus iness Analyst. Table 11 displays the 2021 and 2026 median home values for the areas studied.The 2021 median home value in the primary market area is $282,245,which is 34 percent less than that ofthe secondary market area and 30.6 percent less than that of Salt Lake County.Nbdian home values are expected to growby 53 percent in the primary market area,30 percent in the secondary market area and 25 percent in Salt Lake County. Median Home Values Primary Market Area Secondary Nlarket Area Salt Lake County,UT 2021 Median Home Value $282,245 $427,693 $406,810 2026 Median Home Value $431,591 $554,870 $509,442 Table 11.NtdianHome Values.Source:ESR1Business Analyst. Race&Ethnicity The distribution oft-ace and ethnicity within the selected areas of study are delineated in Table 12. The highest concentration ofrace within the primary market area is white,consisting of48.2 percent ofthe population.The fEspanic population makes up 53.44 percent ofthe primary market area population,24.3 percent ofthe secondary market area population and 18.36 percent ofthe Salt Lake County population. Race(2021) Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County,Ur White Population 48.20% 70.58% 78.16% B1ackAfican American Population 4.64% 3.67% 2.06% American Indian/Alaska Native Population 1.86% 1.35% 0.93% Asian Population 4.92% 6.05% 4.51% Pacific Islander Population 6.34% 2.14% 1.61% Other Race Population 28.45% 11.86% 8.97% Population ofTwo or More Races 5.59% 4.36% 3.76% Ethnicity(2021) Hspanic Population 53.44% 24.30% 18.36% Non-Hispanic Population 46.56% 75.70% 81.64% Table 12.Race Concentrations.Source:ESRI Business Analyst.Hispanic and'Ahite population numbers are not mutually exclusive. Spending Habits Entertainment and recreational spending in 2021 is depicted in Table 13. Spending per household on entertainment and recreation is approximately$2,084,which is 33.57 percent less than that ofthe secondary market area($3,137) and 40.34 percent less than that of Salt Lake County($3,493).The primary market area spends 39.65 percent less on membership fees for social,recreational and health clubs than the secondary market area and 46.57 percent less on Page 6 those services than Salt Lake County.Given the lower spending habits ofindividuals within the primary market area on entertainment and recreation,there is an implied lower willingness to pay for this category ofproducts and services.As a result,facilities and programs within the Glendale Regional Park will likely see higher use ifprogramnnuig prices are reduced or eliminated Household Expenditures(2021) Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County,Ur Entertainment/Recreation $2,084 $3,137 $3,493 Fees for Participant Sports Excluding Trips $72 $111 $134 Fees for Recreational Lessons $87 $131 $160 Sports/Rec/Exercise Equipment $127 $182 $202 Ntrubership Fees for Social/Recreation/Health Clubs 1 $148 1 $246 1 $278 Table 13.Household Expenditures.Source:ESRI Business Analyst.Per household spending data was calculated from dividing aggregate spending values by the total number ofhouseholds. Conclusion With a population of29,525 in the primary market area and 204,380 in the secondary market area,Glendale Regional Park services an urban community which requires outdoor space and recreational opportunities for all residents.The population in the surrounding region is also growing at a rapid rate,which furthers the need for additional park and recreation opportunities. Many ofthe households within the primary market are families with an average family size that is greater than the surrounding regions.Late to the large family demographic,there is likely a desire for safe public spaces with a variety ofprograms that can accommodate both the demands of children and adults.As 19.78 percent ofthe population in the primary market area is children,facilities in the park should tailor to the types of activities that youth desire. Since both the median household income and median disposable income within the primary market area is lower than that of Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County,the primary market maybe less capable of spending on recreation as other areas ofhigher affluence.Housing costs also present a larger financial burden for the primary market than other areas of study.For this reason,recreational programs in the park should be offered free of charge or at low or no-cost rates to accommodate the primary market's population,and to provide outdoor opportunities for those that may not have access to those opportunities elsewhere. Page 7 EXHIBIT D Public Comments Received&Letters of Support ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor Public Comments, meeting minutes and responses can be found in the Planning Commission staff Deport of November 9, 2022 and in the Plannino- Commission IVMeetino Minutes of November 9. 2021 Please see below for relevant letters of support, which have also been sent directly to the Planning Commission and City Council. PUBLIC LANDS DEPARTMENT www.slc.gov/parks/ 1965 W 500 S PHONE 801-972-7800 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84104 FAX 801-972-7847 November 4, 2022 Mayor Erin Mendenhall Salt Lake City Council 451 S. State Street Salt Lake City, UT 84111 SUBJECT: PNUT Letter of Support for the Glendale Regional Park Master Plan Mayor Erin Mendenhall and City Council Members, Please allow this letter to serve as a resounding endorsement for the adoption of the Glendale Regional Park Master Plan.As population growth along the Wasatch Front continues to accelerate, the importance of equitable investment in quality, community-integrated public spaces like this is vital to quality of life for all community members. We applaud the successful community engagement efforts and the proactive adjustments based on that engagement. Key master plan elements we strongly support include creating community gathering and event spaces, providing play places for all abilities users, creating places to enjoy water within the park and in the Jordan River, and developing places to engage in active movement supported by the landscape. The adoption and implementation of this plan will benefit the community by: • Providing an iconic neighborhood park that celebrates and preserves community, culture, and diversity. It will also be a regional destination connecting to the Jordan River and Salt Lake City's park network. • Prioritizing accessible nature and recreation will improve quality of life for current and future generations of west side residents. • Multifaceted, successful outreach efforts and the implementation of community feedback encourages trust and connection among stakeholders and community entities. • Adoption of the Master Plan sets the stage for funding approvals for current and future capital improvements connected to the Glendale Regional Park community We urge Mayor Mendenhall, City Council Members, and parks staff to continue engagement and implementation of Transportation Advisory Board's (TAB) recommendations as well, such as: • Continued assessment of transportation needs including access to the park by families, bicyclists, community members. • Strong consideration to safety structures along 1700 South like pedestrian activated stop signs, traffic calming measures, on-street and off-street parking options, and any other opportunity to negate harm. • Park planners must coordinate with UTA on providing improved transit services to the park. This is a plan that will not sit on a shelf. We expect active, established programming partnerships and continued community engagement to facilitate consistent utilization of the space at every phase of this multi-year project. We look forward to this park serving our community toward a healthy, livable and equitable future. Yours sincerely, �2A21ZyLCL C�aryn.¢rtbd2 Brianna Binnebose, Interim Chair Ginger Cannon Samantha Finch Jenny Hewson Phil Carroll CJ Whittaker Melanie Pehrson-Noyce Clayton Scrivner Aaron Wiley Meridith Benally TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD Salt Lake City Transportation Division Office-349 South Zoo East, Suite 150 - P.O. Box 145502 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-5502 October 28, 2022 Salt Lake City Planning Commission&Salt Lake City Council RE: Letter of Support— Glendale Regional Park Master Plan On behalf of the Salt Lake City Transportation Advisory Board, I write in support of Salt Lake City's initiative to construct a regional park in the location of the old Raging Waters site. Detailed plans of the proposed park were presented to the Transportation Advisory Board at their October meeting with a great deal of discussion and unquestionable support and enthusiasm, including the proposed three crosswalks along 1700 South. The discussion stressed that planners should work with the SLC Transportation Division to ensure the safety of all visitors and users. Issues to be addressed regarding 1700 South included access by family bicyclists, pedestrian activated stop signs at crosswalks,traffic calming to reduce speed and the issue of on-street parking in case there are not sufficient off-street stalls. The Transportation Division is aware of the proposed plan and already has a project manager assigned to look at 1700 South and has allocated some funds to start a low-cost project to address some these concerns. The park planners should also coordinate with UTA on providing transit service to the park.As the project progresses,the Transportation Advisory Board will provide comments and feedback to ensure that these issues and concerns are addressed. This park would provide a place to recreate for residents of the Glendale community, as well as other westside neighborhoods. It will be constructed in a location that has long been an eyesore for the community,which will improve the neighborhood quality and allow for more access to healthy recreation.The current plans show that the regional park can be accessed using many modes of transportations.This allows for all types of users to be able to enjoy the amenities that this park would provide. The Transportation Advisory Board supports the recommendations in the Glendale Regional Park Master Plan with commitment to addressing the safety issues and concerns presented with the development of this new park. This plan is an opportunity to provide a more equitable distribution of recreation to the residents of Salt Lake City. Sincerely, Greg Sanchez, Chair Transportation Advisory Board Item BS .•••`�" " ``• MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO: City Council Members FROM: Nick Tarbet Policy Analyst DATE: March 7,2023 RE: Northpoint Small Area Master Plan PLNPCM2022-Oo687 MOTION r — 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. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 SLCCOUNCIL.COM P.O.FOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 i COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY tzfl TO: City Council Members PROJECT TIMELINE: Briefing: February 21,2023 Briefing: I FROM: Nick Tarbet t t Set Date: February 21, 2023 DATE: March 7,2023 Public Hearing:March 7, 2023 Potential Action:March 21, 2023 RE: Northpoint Small Area Master Plan PLNPCM2022-Oo687 Work Session Summary At the February 21 work session briefing, Council Members raised questions about the impact future development may have on the residents in the area due to increased traffic, as well as impacts to air quality, and the environment. Some felt the Plan was a good attempt at balancing and protecting the current residents and the environment,while providing the growth and development that is likely to come. Some expressed concerns the plan was too flexible and asked Planning staff to consider making changes that require the type of development the city wants to see in this area. , Other ideas raised included creating a fund to help residents pay for impacts and damage to their homes and property that may occur due to construction and looking further into the potential to use transfer of development rights in this area. On a related note, in recent weeks the Council office has received many questions and complaints about the traffic impact on 22oowest due to the development in the area and 2900 west not being completed. 'rhe Council also discussed some of the implementation strategies they would like to see prioritized such as removing the BP zone, mapping, and increasing the buffers between the wetlands and river, and including stricter language that would keep 3200 west a gravel road, CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET ROOM 304 COUNCIL,SLCGOV,COM P.O. BOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 Council members indicated they would like to have a follow-up work session after the public bearing to go over any potential changes they would like to see included in the draft plan. The public bearing is scheduled for March 7 The following information was provided for the February 21 briefing.It is provided again for background purposes. ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will receive a briefing about an ordinance that would adopt the Northpoint Small Area Plan.The Northpoint Small Area Plan is a land use plan for the land that is located between the Salt Lake City International Airport and the northern boundary of the city along the 2200 West corridor. In 2020 the Council allocated$1oo,000 to update the master plan for this area to help plan for the increased development pressures going on in this area of the city. The updated plan will provide guidance on existing and anticipated development in the area, as well as annexation-related issues.As part of the plan update,the Salt Lake City Major Streets Plan will be amended to reflect recommended roadway alignments. The Planning Commission voted to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council (7-2) with the following modifications: • The limit on distribution land uses be removed. • The wetland buffer is expanded to up to 300 feet instead of up to 200 feet. Mayor Mendenhall submitted a letter with the transmittal that recommend the City Council consider Planning Staffs recommendation to limit distribution land uses to prevent the area from becoming primarily a warehouse and distribution center. The mayor noted in her letter"this could be achieved by limiting the development of such uses [distribution] where they are not currently allowed by zoning.This is a vital step to implementing the city's vision — one that respects the existing residential and agriculture properties,the environment, and wildlife,while allowing for appropriate light-manufacturing development" (Transmittal letter pages 5-6). Key Concepts Identified in the Plan Pages 2-3 of the transmittal letter outlines the key concepts of the plan and potential action items the City can take to implement the plan. • Identifies appropriate future land use and development characteristics for the area that can coexist with the wildlife habitat and natural environment of the Great Salt Lake, and the operations of the Salt Lake City International Airport. • Identifies appropriate buffering,building design, and development characteristics to reduce the impacts on residential and agricultural uses,important wildlife habitats, and other uses within the area. Page 1 2 • Recommends design standards to reduce the negative impacts that future land uses may have on air quality,water quality,noise, and light. • Updates future annexation potential for unincorporated land within Salt Lake County. • Amends the Major Streets Plan for the area to include a new north-south collector(2900 W), a future airport road going east to west connecting to 210o North, and to indicate that 3200 West is to remain an unimproved roadway. • Recommends a Northpoint-specific development code that codifies the recommended design standards and includes incentive-based tools for open space preservation. Changes to Plan noted by Planning Staff. Page 4 of the transmittal letter notes planning staff recommends making a few modifications to the draft forwarded by the Planning Commission. • Page 10: "The Plan Area...is nestled between wetland spillover from the Great Salt Lake..." - Deleted the word"spillover"as it implies excess,wasted,low value, and is not an ecological term. • Page 24:Added "and other contrast mitigation building and landscape features"to the sentence addressing building color and materials.While colors that blend in with the natural surroundings are essential,there may be additional contrast mitigation techniques that are necessary and appropriate in specific areas such as the land close to 3200 West. • Page 32: Evaluate the Feasibility of Acquiring Sensitive Lands as City-Owned Open Space - In addition to lands adjacent to the Jordan River mentioned in the text, open land and wetlands along 3200 W was also added as an area for priority open space preservation. • Included the notation on the vision map regarding wetland applicability(jurisdictional and non jurisdictional) on page 35 as well. Does the Council support include these changes in the final draft of the small area plan? Policy Questions Below are some policy questions the Council may wish to consider as you review the draft plan and bring up during the briefing with the Administration. 1. Implementation a. Are there specific implementation steps outlined in the small area plan the Council would like to initiate?See Implementation section below (page g)for outline of key items and pages 2-3 of the draft plan for details. b. Does the Council wish to take steps to ensure future development will abide by development recommendations outlined in the plan,if any petitions come to the city before the zoning changes are adopted? L Consider using development agreements for zoning petitions in the process Page 3 Does the council wish to support initiating any of the key implementation actions recommended in the master plan? 2. Development Standards The Plan identifies design standards that could help reduce the negative impacts development may have (Pages 20-29). a. Some CMs have mentioned conditions included in the Northwest Quadrant Overlay District(- A. 4. o) may be a good template to consider for development in this area of the city. b. Some of those standards include: i. Lighting— all lighting shall be shielded to direct light down and away from edges of the property. ii. Roof color—light reflective roofing with minim solar reflective index iii. Landscape— shall consist of native plants, remove noxious weeds, iv. Glass Requirements —use glass design elements to reduce bird collisions. v. Fencing— see through fence that is 50%open. c. Some have asked about the possibility for the city to require solar panels be included in a future development. d. Additionally,in the NWQ overlay, certain permitted uses are limited. Do the development standards outlined in the plan successfully address the council's concerns about mitigating the impact of development in this area of the city? 3. The mayor recommend that the City Council consider Planning Staff s recommendation to limit distribution land uses to prevent the area from becoming primarily a warehouse and distribution center. This could be achieved by limiting the development of such uses where they are not currently allowed by zoning. Does the council Mayor's and Planning staff recommendation recommendation to limit distribution uses in this area? Outline of the Draft Small Area Plan Land Use Categories The future land use map includes the categories outlined and shown on the map below. • Natural Open Space • Transitional • Business Park/ Industrial • Airport Page 4 i . a , . . st ' A, AR sea y b -'ter a , &, lie mom Land 1 Uses Water Designated Wetlands Natural Op Space Business Park t Industrial Wit- Transitional e ., Aire ' -oksoods irioude bon}se a!and nsi-winictsing weraros,the Vizon raw is mtenced as a Torrieral guide ,bi.•a Grapoic 2 2 f rasAtipent Visor)Map Design Standards The Plan identifies design standards that could help reduce the negative impacts development may have (pages 20-29).These standards include: • Buffering and setbacks for existing residential uses and wildlife and wetland habitat • Standards for new development o Grading limitation, Fencing/Walls, Dark Sky Lighting, • Water Conscious Development Page 5 o landscaping, stormwater management, • Airport Conflict Mitigation o Noise,land use compatibility • Visual Design • Standards for Transitional Areas o Industrial land use mitigation-noise, odor air quality,traffic, and loading • Standards for Natural Open Space o Wetland Design Standards —planting,trails/boardwalks, Implementation (Chapter 3) The implementation plan identifies three time sensitive actions that should be prioritized(pages 2-3). • Services and Infrastructure o Evaluate funding solutions to redesign 2200 west and Construct 2900 West • Natural Environmental/ Preservation o Evaluate the Feasibility of Acquiring Sensitive Lands as City-Owned Open Space • Built Environment/Design o Adopt Development Code Updates Additional implementation actions are identified on pages 34-35•These include items such as creating a local utility plan, updating the major streets plan, environmental impact standards, annexation, etc. Tool Kit The plan includes a variety of tools that will help implement the small area plan(pages 38-53)• Some of those tools include: land preservation, regulatory,incentive based,land acquisition, and financial. Public Process The public process started in summer of 2021 up to the planning commission public hearing on December 14, 2022. During that time the outreach included numerous steering committees, community council meetings, online questionnaire, Council update and Planning Commission briefings. The full details are outlined on pages three of the transmittal letter and the chronology is on page 11. Page 16 Erin Mendenhall Z DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor �' `�� f'' and NEIGHBORHOODS �' -x Blake Thomas �<«not �1�� Director XT CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL Date Received: 01-31-2023 Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: 01-31-2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: January 17, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community &Neighborhoods � ( L _ SUBJECT: PLNPCM2022-00687—Northpoint Small Area Plan STAFF CONTACT: Krissy Gilmore, Senior Planner, ktistina. ilmorcr�slcov.com 801-535-7780 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the Council adopt the Northpoint Small Area Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Northpoint Small Area Plan is a land use plan for the land that is generally located between the Salt Lake City International Airport and the northern boundary of the city along the 2200 West corridor. The Northpoint Small Area Plan was adopted in April 2000. The update of the plan was funded to provide guidance on anticipated development in the area and to address annexation-related issues in the area. The Northpoint Small Area Plan adopted in 2000 includes the following goal: The purpose of the Northpoint Small Area Plan is to eliminate potential land use conflicts with the Salt Lake International Airport while preserving and enhancing the existing agricultural lifestyle. The original plan identifies land use issues related to the airport, agriculture, business park development,the environment, and infrastructure. The plan includes a land use map that identifies most of the land west of 2200 West as Business Park and the majority of the land east of 2200 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 West as Agriculture. The plan includes land that is located v_ outside of the city boundaries for the purpose of future MORTHPOINT annexations. A 2019 development proposal to develop land int unincorporated portions of Salt Lake County along 2200 West for residential purposes was submitted to Salt Lake County. This proposal triggered an annexation proposal for the = � h land to be annexed into North Image 1:Northpoint general vicinity Salt Lake City because both the county and city land use regulations prohibited residential development so close in proximity to the airport. In response to the proposed annexation,the City Council funded an update to the Northpoint Small Area Plan. The purpose of funding the update was to address development pressure in the plan area and to address potential annexations of unincorporated land. The RFP process started in December 2019. The RFP was scheduled to be published at the end of March 2020. Due to uncertainty related to the pandemic,the RFP was paused and not released to the public. The money was reallocated to the 2020-2021 budget cycle. The RFP process was relaunched in January 2021 utilizing the same RFP document that was produced in 2020. The RFP selection team included representatives from the Planning Division, the Airport, Transportation Division, Engineering Division, and a member of the Westpointe Community Council. After interviews, the selection committee chose Logan Simpson. The contract with the consultant was finalized in May 2021. A transmittal was sent to the City Council in July 2021, to satisfy the process identified in Resolution 14 of 2020. That briefing included the scope of work,timeline, and public engagement plan. SMALL AREA PLAN KEY CONCEPTS: The Northpoint Small Area Plan will guide the future development of the area by presenting a vision map, design standards and guidelines for private development throughout the area. The plan provides action steps the city can implement to mitigate the impact of new development on the surrounding natural habitat and existing residential properties. Key concepts of the draft plan include: • Identifies appropriate future land use and development characteristics for the area that can coexist with the wildlife habitat and natural environment of the Great Salt Lake, and the operations of the Salt Lake City International Airport. • Identifies appropriate buffering, building design, and development characteristics to reduce the impacts on residential and agricultural uses, important wildlife habitats, and other uses within the area. • Recommends design standards to reduce the negative impacts that future land uses may have on air quality, water quality, noise, and light. • Updates future annexation potential for unincorporated land within Salt Lake County. • Amends the Major Streets Plan for the area to include a new north-south collector(2900 W), a future airport road going east to west connecting to 2100 North, and to indicate that 3200 West is to remain an unimproved roadway. • Recommends a Northpoint-specific development code that codifies the recommended design standards and includes incentive-based tools for open space preservation. PROCESS: The plan update process began in 2021 with a series of one-on-one engagement sessions with residents, developers, environmental groups, and city and county-specific staff. The goal of these engagement sessions was to provide attendees with a forum to identify the assets and weaknesses of the plan area and to explore the future of the area. A Steering Committee was also formed to provide specific guidance on the area and to review draft recommendations for the plan. The Steering Committee was comprised of representatives from government agencies, landowners, environmental groups, etc. In addition, the engagement process included a public open house, two community event pop-up tables, Westpointe Community Council presentations, two public questionnaires, and a property owner-specific questionnaire. The Planning Commission met to review the small area plan first through a work session on July 27, 2022, and then again on October 26th, 2022 for a recommendation to the City Council. The Planning Commission tabled the draft plan at that meeting with direction to allow additional time for public input and to consider revisions to the recommended wetland buffer. In response, Planning Staff met with the Westpointe Community Council at their November 9th meeting and engaged with stakeholders through email and one-on-one meetings. Modifications were made to the draft in response to the direction received from the Planning Commission and additional public input. Key changes included the addition of an action item to develop a Northpoint-specific development code, revisions to the wetland buffers that would allow some flexibility in buffer width in exchange for mitigation measures, and the addition of language that would limit distribution and logistical land use and promote manufacturing land uses. The Planning Commission reopened the Public Hearing at their December 14, 2022 meeting. During the meeting, the Planning Commission discussed the proposed limit on distribution land uses, if this limitation was necessary, and if there is a market for the area to be primarily manufacturing land uses. While there was some disagreement among members on this subject, they ultimately voted to remove the limitation on distribution land uses. The Commission also discussed wetland buffers and emphasized that open space preservation around wetlands is of high priority and recommended a 300-foot buffer rather than 200 feet.Planning Staff also recommended some minor changes to the draft in the Staff Report that were brought up in public comments. The Commission did not report concern with these changes, and the conversation generally indicated support. The Commission voted to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council (7-2) with the following modifications: - The limit on distribution land uses be removed. - The wetland buffer is expanded to up to 300 feet instead of up to 200 feet. Based on the conversation, the Commissioners who voted no did so because one would like to see more open space preserved and does not support the vision for light-industrial development, and the other indicated that they were not in support of removing the limitation on distribution uses. PROPOSED DRAFT: The draft forwarded to the City Council includes modifications to the draft plan that address the conditions of approval by the Planning Commission, as well as the recommended changes proposed by Planning Staff based on public comment: - Page 10: "The Plan Area...is nestled between wetland spillover from the Great Salt Lake..." o Deleted the word "spillover" as it implies excess, wasted, low value, and is not an ecological term. - Page 24: Added "and other contrast mitigation building and landscape features" to the sentence addressing building color and materials. While colors that blend in with the natural surroundings are essential, there may be additional contrast mitigation techniques that are necessary and appropriate in specific areas such as the land close to 3200 West. - Page 32: Evaluate the Feasibility of Acquiring Sensitive Lands as City-Owned Open Space o In addition to lands adjacent to the Jordan River mentioned in the text, open land and wetlands along 3200 W was also added as an area for priority open space preservation. - Included the notation on the vision map regarding wetland applicability(jurisdictional and non jurisdictional) on page 35 as well. Planning Commission (PC) Records a) PC A enda for Jul 27, 2022 (Click to Access} b) PC; Minutes for July 27, 2022 Click to Access} C) PC; Staff Deport for Jul 27 2022 C;hck to Access) d) PC; Agenda for October 26. 2022 Click to Access} e) PC; Minutes for October 26 2022 Click to Access} f) PC' Staff Report for October 2Ei, 2022 Click to Access} g) PC' A Cnda f'or DCCCmbcr 14, 2022 {Click to Ac c Css} h) PC' Minutes for December 14, 2022 (Click to Access} i) PC' Staff`Report for lCcember 14, 2022 (C'lick to Acccss} EXHIBITS: 1) Chronology 2) City Council Public I learim,Notice 3) Northpoint Sm,ll Arca 'Ian Draft 4) Public Comments Received ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor January 30, 2022 Dear City Councilmembers: As you consider adoption of the Northpoint Small Area Plan, per City Code section 2.o6.035.C.2, I am submitting a letter for your consideration. Section2.o6.035 allows the city administration to provide a different recommendation than the Planning Commission by submitting a letter outlining the mayor's position as part of the administrative transmittal. The Northpoint Small Area Plan is such a case. On December 14, 2022,the Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve the Northpoint Small Area Plan with two modifications. First,to remove Planning Staffs recommendation to limit distribution land uses in the plan area; and second,to increase the development buffer from wetlands from 200 feet to 300 feet. I applaud the Planning Commission for their dedication to preserving and protecting wetland areas by increasing the buffer width;however, I am concerned that removing the limit on distribution land uses will negatively impact the existing rural characteristics of the area,potentially increase the amount of air pollution generated by the future use of land in the area, and expand the amount of land in the City that is available for warehouse and distribution uses. The Northpoint plan boundary is unique within Salt Lake City and any future planning should be sensitive to the existing context and rural nature of the area.While development of the area is ongoing and that pressure will likely continue in the future,planning should promote an appropriate transition of land uses that can coexist with the existing rural residential and agricultural uses, as well as minimize impacts to the environment and natural habitat. Planning must also consider appropriate land uses to reduce exposure to air pollution created by airplanes taking off and landing from the Salt Lake City International Airport, especially as the airport considers lengthening existing runways that will further impact the Northpoint area. There are nearly 17,000 acres of land in Salt Lake City that are currently zoned M-1 Light Industrial Zoning District. It is the largest zoning district in the city in terms of acreage,while also one of the least restrictive in permitted and conditional land uses.There are no limitations on warehousing or distribution uses. If more area is allowed to develop with these uses it likely increases the amount of air pollution generated in the city through an increase in semi-truck traffic and requires more resources to maintain city streets. I recommend that the City Council consider Planning Staffs recommendation to limit distribution land uses to prevent the area from becoming primarily a warehouse and distribution center.This could be achieved by limiting the development of such uses where they are not currently allowed by zoning.This is a vital step to implementing the city's vision—one that respects the existing residential and agriculture properties,the environment, and wildlife, while allowing for appropriate light-manufacturing development. This vision can be achieved through prioritizing and expanding the recommended Northpoint specific development code,which is identified as a critical action item in the plan. Expansion of P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor the code recommendation could include limiting building footprints,lot coverage, and building height to encourage a greater mix of land uses and prevent large scale buildings that are only suitable for distribution.Additionally,the Council could consider restricting or limiting the uses in the land use tables within the Northpoint development code. In addition to my recommendation above,please consider the Northpoint Small Area Plan guidance for zoning assignment of annexation in the area. In future review of annexation petitions, I request that the Council also consider the recommended Northpoint Small Area Plan policies and development code in any development agreement to ensure the vision for the area is respected and realized. Thank you for your consideration, Erin Mendenhall Mayor P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2023 (Adopting the Northpoint Small Area Plan) An ordinance adopting the Northpoint Small Area Plan as part of Salt Lake City's general plan. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a hearing on December 14, 2022 on a petition by the City Council to adopt an update to the Northpoint Small Area Plan as a geographically-specific part of Salt Lake City's general plan required by Part 4 of Utah Code Chapter 10-9a; and WHEREAS, at its December 14, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council ("City Council") on said petition; and WHEREAS, after holding 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. Adopting the Northpoint Small Area Plan. That the Northpoint Small Area Plan provided in Exhibit "A" attached hereto is adopted as part of Salt Lake City's general plan as required by Part 4 of Utah Code Chapter 10-9a. 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 , 2023. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney's Office (SEAL) Date: December 16, 2022 By: J50 � . Bill No. of 2023. Katherine D.Pasl.er,Senior City Attorney Published: Ordinance adopting the Northpoint Small Area Plan EXHIBIT "A" Northpoint Small Area Plan 1. CHRONOLOGY Northpoint Small Area Plan Project Chronology PLNPCM2022-00687 May 2021: Contract with the consultant, Logan Simpson, finalized July 22, 2021: City Council briefing August 2021: An informational postcard was mailed to property owners within the study area informing them of the project and stakeholder interview opportunities August 2021: Logan Simpson (consultant) held one-on-one meetings August 2021: Logan Simpson and Salt Lake City Planning Staff attended the Westpointe Night Out event. August 12, 2021: Steering Committee meeting November 10, 2021: Westpointe Community Council presentation February 17, 2022: Steering Committee meeting April 4, 2022: Steering Committee meeting April 29, 2022: An informational postcard was mailed to property owners within the study area informing them of the upcoming workshop and providing them with a QR code to obtain more information and take a property owner questionnaire. March 2—30, 2022: Property Owner Questionnaire March 9, 2022: Westpointe Community Council presentation May 16, 2022: Draft Concepts public workshop May 17—June 30: Draft Concepts Online Questionnaire was available to the public June 27, 2022: Steering Committee meeting July 22, 2022: Draft Plan published and noticed for public review July 27, 2022: Planning Commission briefing August 2, 2022: Logan Simpson and Salt Lake City Planning Staff attended the Westpointe Night Out event. September 20, 2022: City Council briefing on the draft plan October 18, 2022: Revised Draft Plan published for Planning Commission public hearing October 26, 2022: Planning Commission Public Hearing November 9, 2022: Westpointe Community Council presentation November 16, 2022: Revised Draft Plan published for Planning Commission public hearing December 14, 2022: Planning Commission Public Hearing and Recommendation December 15, 2022: Ordinance request sent to City Attorney's Office December 16, 2022: Signed ordinance received from City Attorney's Office 2. CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2022-00687 — Northpoint Small Area Plan — A request by the City Council to revise and complete an update to the Northpoint Small Area Plan. The Northpoint Small Area Plan is a land use plan for the land that is generally located between the Salt Lake City International Airport and the northern boundary of the city along the 2200 West corridor. The Northpoint Small Area Plan was adopted in April 2000. The updated plan will provide guidance on existing and anticipated development in the area, as well as annexation-related issues. As part of the plan update, the Salt Lake City Major Streets Plan will be amended to reflect recommended roadway alignments. Information on the proposal can found on the City's webpage for the proposal at the following link: hops: ��GG .slc. o�lplat�uit� 120221101131nortllpoint-small-area-plan' As part of their review, 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 electronically: DATE: TIME: 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Electronic and in-person options. 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah ** This meeting will be held via electronic means, while 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. For more information, including WebEx connection information, please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings. 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 801-535-7780 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. The application details can be accessed at httpsarcitizcnportal.slc<,ov.coni ,by selecting the"Planning"tab and entering the petition number PLNPCM2022-00687. 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.cominent4(cr;slc(lov.com, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. (P 19-19) 4. NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN DRAFT t E j � f J � � � � � � � � � ® � n � � � � — m _,�� e e — ;�e r CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................... 4 Location..............................................................................$.................................. Plan Content and Purpose ......................................................®®............................. Guideto this Plan..m®m®m..m®m®m..m®m®m..m®m®m..m®m®m..m®m®m..m®m®m..m®m®..........m................................. 10 Executive Summry ..m..m...m..m...m..m...m..m...m......m..m...m..m...m.........m............................... Chapter 2 The Vision .................................................... 12 Constraints to the Vision ®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®®.®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®....................14 LandUseCategories ®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®...................®®..®®®®1 DesignStandards .®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®.............1 Chapter 3 Implementation ........................................... 30 Critical Path Implementation Its ....m......m......m......m......m......m............................32 Additional Implementation Its .....m......m......m......m......m......m...............................3 Chapter 4 The Toolkit.................................................... 36 Using Toolkit®.®®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®®.®®®®®®.®®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®............®®..®®®®®..®®® 38 Land Preservation Tools®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®®.®®®®®®.®®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®......®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®4 Financial Implementation Tools ®®®®®®.®®®®®®.®®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®..®®®®®............®®..®®®®®..®®®4 Appendix A Existing Conditions Appendix B Public Input Appendix C Constraints Analysis Appendix D Full Financial Analysis Appendix E Major Streets Plan Amendment � ' ■ � _ t . . . . .\ 3 ~ 71 - z « . . . e w A e ' Location The Northpoint Plan Area is located just north of Directly south of Northpoint is Salt Lake City Downtown Salt Lake City, near Farmington Bay International Airport,which provides opportunities and the Great Salt Lake.The Plan Area is bounded for and constraints to the potential development to the east by Interstate 215 and is comprised within Northpoint.The airport continuesto expand of mainly agricultural, industrial and residential through ongoing renovations and is currently uses. being guided by the 2022 Salt Lake International Northpoint lies within the northwest quadrant Airport Master Plan. Its proximity is a defining of Salt Lake City, adjacent to vital environmental factor of the Plan Area. resources including the Jordan River and playas Northpoint is also adjacent to several recreational and wetlands associated with the Great Salt Lake. areas including the Wasatch Mountain Range, Over half of the property in Northpoint is currently with its many trails, the Jordan River OHV State under the jurisdiction of Salt Lake County and Recreation Area, and the Salt Lake City Regional consists of agricultural uses, business park Athletic Complex. development, industrial and commercial zoning. Environmental considerations greatly influence the future growth and development of the area. 114T 7 Graphic I A I Northpoint Plan Area 6 Ptan Context and Purpose In 2000, a Northpoint Small Area Plan was The Northpoint Small Area Plan Update is a adopted with goals to eliminate potential land response to the rapid pace of growth and change use conflicts between the Salt Lake International in the northwest portion of Salt Lake City and the Airport, future development, and the existing anticipated new business park and light industrial agricultural lifestyle. Other notable planning uses in the area. The key goals of this Plan are to: efforts for this region include the 1992 Northwest and the Jordan River/Airport Plan which address Identify appropriate future land use and the Northpoint Plan Area, the Great Salt Lake development characteristics for the area wetlands and Jordan River, the Salt Lake Airport, that can coexist with the wildlife habitat and surrounding land; the 2020 Blueprint Jordan and natural environment of the Great Salt River Plan which illustrates a cohesive vision Lake, and the operations of the Salt Lake for the River as it stretches through multiple City International Airport. jurisdictions; the 2021 Salt Lal?e City International » Update future annexation potential for Airport Moster Plan; and the2o21 SaltLal?e County unincorporated land within Salt Lake West General Plan. County. The northwest portion of Salt Lake City is Identify appropriate infrastructure limited by multiple layers of constraints, mostly requirements, including utilities and environmental, but also due to airport activity, roadways, to support the future land use in connectivity, and social equity issues. It is one the area. of the largest growth areas for the City, but quite possibly, the most difficult to develop. This » Identify appropriate buffering, building Plan addresses the natural environment, built design, and development characteristics environment, and community attributes. Many to reduce the impacts to residential and factors contribute to constraints facing the area, agricultural uses, important wildlife habitat, however many attributes act as opportunities. and other uses within the plan area. Recommend methods to reduce the negative impacts that future land uses may 1 Satt Lace County have on air quality, water quality, noise, and 1 light. 1 � 1 ' t Graphic 1.2 1 Northpoint Jurisdictions SALT LAKE CITY NORTHIPOINT Guide to This PLan This document is intended to support Salt Lake City's overarching vision established in Plan Salt Lake while also providing tailored tools to help the Plan Area grow appropriately. Once the Northpoint Small Area Plan is adopted, its supplemental recommendations will guide applicants to develop within the scope of the Community's Vision. This plan should be referenced when discretionary land use decisions are being made. These recommendations include, design standards, land acquisition tools, regulatory tools, and incentive based tools. Master plans detail the vision, policy, and framework of the community that will guide growth and development over time. As the plan area transitions from greenfield and rural residential to industrial and business park,this plan outlines specific design standards and action steps the City can implement to mitigate the impact of new development on the surrounding natural habitat and existing residential properties. Amak F Design Incentives Too s an F Standards • L- 8 Public Process This planning process included one- on-one interviews with residents, 3 Of*** developers, environmental groups, and City and ounty staff, a public open house, two public 14 Oat-ors- -820 DMft Plaft questionnaires, and a property owner- CW0 specific questionnaire. With several applications active in the Plan Area at the time this project started, Public it became apparent early on that habitat preservation and residential Outreach 195 Dmft Plan quality of life were primary concerns. This shaped the Plan, shifting focus from land use recommendations to Alor tools available to the City to preserve habitat, mitigate impacts of new 2 Sooft of development on residents, water and kbk t""Ift air quality, and wildlife, and determine appropriate improvements to existing infrastructure. SALT LAKE CITY NORTHIPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN Executive The Northpoint Small Area Plan is a detailed master plan for the Northwestern Community of Salt Lake City. The Plan Area contains large amounts of underdeveloped land, nestled between wetlands from the Great Salt Lake to the west and urban growth to the east. Additionally, parts of the Plan Area are fragmented with unincorporated County land and airport-owned property. A clear plan is needed to address the development pressures in the Plan Area, which continue to increase despite natural constraints.The Northpoint Small Area Plan aims to guide future development based on the previously adopted community plans and future land uses that the City has identified as appropriate to the area. While many property owners intend to retain their property as agricultural land, redevelopment and new development is anticipated to be primarily light industrial and manufacturing. The Plan contains three elements to guide growth into the future: Vision Map The Northpoint area has experienced growth that can conflict; industrial development adjacent to agriculture and residential uses, and developments adjacent to or abutting critical habitat areas (i.e. wetlands and upland). Industrial development has begun, and is expected to continue, to creep into this area of Salt Lake City. Understanding this reality, the Northpoint Vision is to balance the anticipated r th of light industrial and manufacturinguses with the existing J2 continued residential and agricultural uses of the area. This will be accomplished through outlining mitigation strategies for high-impact development directed at preserving quality of life for residents and the natural environment. Design Standards The design standards are directly connected to the anticipated future development in the area. Building and site design have the ability to affect built environments in impactful ways. When applied with a clear vision in mind, design standards can shape development that reduces visual and physical land use conflicts. The standards touch on each land use designation and provide clear direction as to how the area should be built. Although the standards are separately outlined in the plan, they are implied to be implemented with the other action items. Implementation What separates the plan from a design standards manual, is the comprehensive action items that are addressed in the implementation chapter. The action items range from strategies to best preserve open space and critical habitats, recommends further study for service and infrastructure needs, annexation of unincorporated properties within the Plan Area, and funding tools that will help the Plan Area grow responsibly. These elements can be applied to the area as a whole and provide different initiatives aside from traditional zoning regulation guidance. There are three action items identified as "critical path", being the most critical to complete once this plan is adopted. These action items are: Services and Infrastructure 1 Evaluate Funding Solutions to Redesign 2200 W and Construct 2900 W Built Environment and Design 1 Adopt Development Code Updates and Codify the Design Standards Herein Natural Environment and Preservation 1 Evaluate the Feasibility of Acquiring Sensitive Lands as City-Owned Open Space Goals iPlan » Identify appropriate future land use and development characteristics for the area that can coexist with the wildlife habitat and natural environment of the Great Salt Lake, and the operations of the Salt Lake City International Airport. >> Update future annexation potential for unincorporated land within Salt Lake County. Identify appropriate infrastructure requirements, including utilities and roadways, to support the future land use in the area. Identify appropriate buffering, building design, and development characteristics to reduce the impacts to residential and agricultural uses, important wildlife habitat, and other uses within the corridor. » Recommend methods to reduce the negative impacts that future land uses may have on air quality, water quality, noise, and light. How Will We Get There? Vision .p Categories � . See more on page 16 NATURAL O. SPACE . . . . . ` Areas where development is limited to passive recreational amenities TRANSITIONAL Areas that are currently residential. New . . . . development impact mitiqation measures . . BUSINESS FARKIINDUSTRIAL . . ` . . anticipatedAreas . . . Business Park and Light Industrial AIRPORT Areas International Airport . . . SALT LAKE CITY NORTHIPOINT � _ _ m �:®w � t i•) � .. � __� � -� ~ 5 t �4 � � � � p b e � e p ^ Constraints to the VisionNO THPOINT CONSTRAINTS MAP As discussed in Chapter 1, the Plan Area consists of several development gas constraints ranging from sensitive wetland habitat to airport influence zone regulations. Mapping these constraints is a crucial first step in I; determining the areas most suitable for new development and identifying areas that should be preserved as habitat and open space. The Constraints Map illustrates the results of this analysis and may be used to prioritize sensitive lands for preservation or acquisition. For a detailed analysis of development constraints and opportunities used in this analysis, see Appendix C. Constraints reviewed in this analysis . included: Designated Wetlands Salt Lake City International Airport-Owned Properties » Utility and Open Space Easements » Airport Influence Zones (A, B, C) Most suitable for development » Viable Agriculture N » Airport Noise Contours Least suitable for development Using the Vision Graphic 2.1 1 Constraints Analysis for Northpoint StandardsDesign The Vision Map in this chapter is intended to show where additional standards are necessary to ensure future development is compatible with existing residential, agricultural, and sensitive habitats. To use this chapter, review the Vision Map and accompanying Design Standards. It is intended that the following design standards be incorporated into Salt Lake City Zoning and Development Code to apply to new development in the Plan Area. Natural Open Space Purpose- Natural Open Space areas are those that should be preserved as natural open space and prohibit development. The Natural Open Space district aims to connect critical habitats in the least fragmented way possible considering development trends in the Plan Area. Applicability. These areas include designated wetlands, uplands,existing recreational amenities, and areas connecting them. All designated wetlands, uplands, and other sensitive lands fall under the Natural Open Space district. Use standards-Development in these areas should be limited to passive recreational opportunities, trailheads,and small parking areas to serve recreational uses. Adjacent land uses will be subject to mitigation. Transitional purpose- The purpose of this zone is to mitigate the impacts of Business Park/industrial development on residential and agricultural properties. Applicability. New development is anticipated to be primarily light industrial with a focus on manufacturing land uses. There are no properties in the Plan Area that are identified for new residential development. Use standards- Residential properties shall be subject to natural habitat impact mitigation standards such as buffering critical areas from all development. Should any residential properties transition to BP/Industrial, all BP/Industrial standards will apply. Business ParldindustriaL Purpose, Business and light industrial development is anticipated in the Plan Area. The majority of the Plan Area will convert to light industrial, manufacturing, or business properties. Applicability. The BP/I district applies to properties that do not contain significant constraints such as wetlands, uplands, existing residential, or other major limitations. Use standards- Development in these areas will be reviewed closely for impact to existing residents and sensitive lands and may require additional mitigation designs focused on protecting the natural environment and quality of life of existing residents. Airport Purpose-These areas are owned by the Salt Lake International Airport,though there are no plans currently to develop these areas. Applicability.TheAirport district applies to propertiesthat are owned bythe Salt Lake International Airport. Use Standards-Development in these areas should be limited to passive recreational opportunities, natural open space, and utility and infrastructure needed for the Salt Lake International Airport. SALT LAKE CITY NORTHIPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 15 a G o+ � a -J en`ter6St ` rs 00 00 30 a , ® e :p ( kzc0000 - �. , W Land Uses Water Designated Wetland* Natural Open space Business Park/ Industrial Transitional Airport 2 04" la *Wetlands include both jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetlands.The Vision �� far �� a$,i F Map is intended as a general guide for wetland areas,but specific wetland es a re �« delineation should be done when land is developed.Identification of wetlands t a �® ' �c ,primarily involves the determination of three factors:the predominance of a�� �r c m F wetland vegetation,h dric wetland soils,and signs of hydrology. °"' 9 Y ) 9g �� $. a♦ ♦a��� Cens® 1 Graphic 2.2 1 Northpoint Vision Map Without Design Standards With Design Standards Minimum lot sizes and Allow clustering • open e requirements of buildings in • s force buildings to be favor of preserving res erving •• oriented in an inefficient • connected habitat way, taking up more native and critical open • land than needed. space. * Typical industrial development 0 styles can disturb natural • • 0 habitat with disruptive materials, Greater attention to building lighting, hazardous landscaping design (i.e. building materials, • and fencing, etc. lighting, landscaping, etc.). 0 Smaller buildings facing existing • - residential and major roadways, largest No restrictions on building size - buildings in the middle of development. near/facing existing residential. SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 17 Setbacks and Buffers Buffers and setbacks are intended to reduce the adverse impacts of adjacent land uses and provide important habitats for wildlife that utilize buffer areas. While setbacks shown in this document are intended to extend from the natural feature (i.e., designated wetland or canal) to any impervious built surface of new development (i.e., sidewalks, parking lots), specific details will be determined when the setback is adopted into code. Setbacks from natural features may include landscaping and stormwater management. Required setbacks for new development adjacent to existing residential are intended to extend from new structure to existing residential structure(s). Setbacks from residential structures may include sidewalks, parking lots, etc. A maximum building length along 2200 West is recommended to reduce the impact of large-scale industrial development on longstanding agricultural and residential uses, as well as maintain habitat connections. Smaller setbacks in the transition area are intended to allow flexibility for residential development under the existing zoning. As development intensity increases with the development of business park or light industrial land uses, the greater setbacks apply. Designated Wetlands up to 300 ft, 2 75 ft 1,2 Canals and Drains 75 ft 75 ft Jordan River 100 ft 1,2 75 ft 1,2 Existing Residential 65 ft 65 ft No= Maximum Continuous 400 ft 250 ft Building Frontage on 2200 W I I Should preserve uninterrupted connection between wetlands and uplands 2 1 Should include and maintain a planted stormwater mitigation element such as a bioswale 18 Preferred Buffer for Development Adjacent to Wetlands/Uplands J Snad,al bu*r with lorrhed uvetpa Unwale and Na Indunnal Vegetation natural mtenwW- Developownt rmd,%f4e) Welaftrull it OL-AMILL) NAI URAL Vt(AIAIFVL Sit}MMILRMANAGO&NIARLA UILVILLI"M ARLA M It ANO HIM I I R EN NEEM11= * When buffer is applied during development of a property the City must consider the potential for a regulatory taking of property. SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 19 Standards for All New Development 11 Habitat Mitigation Standards 1 .1 1 Grading Limitations 1 .2 1 Fencing and Walls Considering limitations to grading can help Fences and walls can be barriers to wildlife and minimize impacts to native vegetation. It is impede the movement of wildlife between habitat important for only areas planned for development areas. Although fencing can be used to exclude to be cleared and graded as it can allow for natural wildlife, it should be applied in very specific areas drainage courses to be maintained and reduces that do not restrict larger wildlife movement the need to manage stormwater flows. and migration patterns or access to food, water, 0 Soil cover or ramps shall be included to shelter, or potential mates. allow for movement of wildlife through the 0 Fencing shall be permeable to allow for the drainages. safe passage of animals and facilitate wildlife 0 Excavation methods such as installation of movement through existing or constructed underdrains should be considered. wildlife corridors. 0 Vertical drop structures and concrete lined 0 Natural barriers for privacy purposes shall channels should be avoided. consist of natural materials where possible, 0 Use of large angular rip-rap for erosion control such as boulders, densely-planted vegetation, should be limited. or rip-rap. 0 Decorative fencing features that could be 0 Non-structural features that also provide riparian habitat should be considered. hazardous to wildlife shall be prohibited including: 0 Where possible, development should relate >> Pointed or narrow extensions at the top of the building to the natural site by stepping fences. buildings and avoiding mass leveling of the site. >> Wires that may entangle animals. >> Hollow fence posts that are open at the top when birds or other small animals may become entrapped in an open cavity. Graphic 2.3 1 Native Landscaping 20 1 .3 1 Dark Sky Lighting Lighting is an important element in built environments that allows for a perceived sense of safety at night. However, without appropriate design and placement, outdoor light fixtures can sometimes be inefficient. Outdoor lighting in the Plan Area should be designed in a way that benefits the built environment without negatively impacting the natural environment. Artificial lighting can disrupt wildlife's natural patterns and behaviors. 0 Light fixtures shall be selectively placed and 0 Lighting in non-functional spaces is prohibited fully shielded (i.e. light shall only be emitted (i.e. architectural and landscape lighting is not downward and not above an imaginary necessary for function of built environments). horizontal plane passing through the light 0 Light fixtures with motion or heat sensor may source). be used to keep lights off when lighting is not 0 Lights shall be directed away from natural required. areas. 0 Lighting should consist of International Dark 0 Lighting shall use timers to automatically Sky Association (IDA) approved fixtures. turnoff outside of hours of operation. 0 Electronic message centers (EIVIC) shall 0 Outdoor lighting shall be a color temperature be switched off completely after 11 pm (or of 3,000 kelvin or less. 30 minutes after the close of business for on-premises signs, whichever is later), and remain off until one hour before sunrise. 0 EIVICs applications for traffic and safety information shall be exempt from curfew. Graphic 2.4 1 Dark Sky Friendly Lighting SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 21 2 1 Water Conscious DeveLopment 2.2 1 Sfor mwater Management 2.1 1 Landscaping As undeveloped land becomes developed with Regulating native species in landscape design hard surface materials, loss of permeable can lead to low-maintenance and water-wise surfaces will have a direct affect on stormwater environments that reflect the natural environment runoff. It is essential to avoid stormwater contact in the built environment. Additionally, habitat with industrial materials and activities and to value can be increased when landscaping isn't avoid point-source pollution and degradation of overly manicured. However, weeds and invasive the wetlands, uplands, and other natural habitat. species should be controlled so that they do not There are comprehensive best management compete with native species for necessary water practice guides that can help applicant navigate and nutrients. the best solution for the specific use. 0 Landscaped areas shall follow Low Impact 0 Significant new development resulting Develpoment (LID) principles. in a change of land use shall include 0 Landscaping shall consist of native, adaptive, environmental impact mitigation measures and drought-tolerant plantings. and align them with current executive orders 0 New construction shall follow the Salt Lake and master plans. City Tree Protection and Preservation Policy. 0 Embankments and spillways shall be 0 Landscaping shall not require modifications to designed and approved by engineers that the native soil. specialize in stormwater management and ecologically friendly design. 0 Minimize irrigated landscape areas and utilize 0 Stormwater systems shall not diminish water naturalized swales. flow to wetlands. 0 Fertilizers and herbicides shall be prohibited. 0 Sedimentation systems may be used. 0 Development adjacent to wetlands >> Sediment systems are more efficient with and uplands shall adhere to the buffer pollutants associated with metals, organic requirements herein and include on-site compounds, and other oxygen-demanding stormwater management. substances. There are limitations with sediment systems as small particles do not always settle therefore the substances in the industrial stormwater discharge should be evaluated prior to implementation. 0 Detention ponds may be utilized with an underdrain to outlet to allow water to slowly release into proper stormwater systems. 0 Retention ponds may be utilized to regularly contain water on site and via infiltration. 0 Infiltration systems may be utilized to capture and infiltrate runoff in order to reduce runoff volume. i.e. Infiltration Trenches,basins,bio-retention Graphic 2.5 stormwater Runoff Design systems and underground infiltration tanks. 22 3 1 Airport Conflict Mitigation Aviation adjacent to the Plan Area has been around for many years. Similarly to the rest of Salt Lake Valley, the Airport, too, has grown and anticipates further growth into the future. It is important to account for current and future impacts. 3.1 1 Noise Regulation programs like Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 150 Noise,should be implemented on airport owned properties as to mitigate the impacts of noise. This program was established Graphic 2.61 Bioswale by the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 and sets forth the measure that a specific airport operator has taken to reduce the impacts of noise. 3.2 1 Land Use Compatibility Local land use planning such as this plan can better prepare for the implications of planning around airports, and other airport- related development. Land use decisions around the airport properties should account for the impacts and determine whether the proposed use is appropriate. This can be hindered when multiple jurisdictions regulate the surrounding lands, Graphic 2.71 Bioswale however, there are tools such as annexation to consolidate regulatory authority and ensure that only appropriate land use decisions are made. Graphic 2.8 1 Native Landscaping Graphic 2.9 1 Porous Surface Street Edge SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 23 4 1 VisuaL Design Conscious design can help enhance compatibility between various uses and ensure that development fits in with the surrounding natural environment as best as possible. 0 Units (and open space required by code) shall be organized or "clustered" in an efficient manner on properties where doing so will allow for larger habitat buffers. 0 Building frontages along 2200 W shall not exceed Graphic 2.10 1 Natural Design Elements 400 ft in length. 0 Uninterrupted horizontal expanses of 100 ft in length of any opaque material, including opaque glass, shall be prohibited on building frontages visible from public streets. 0 Natural building materials, colors, and other contrast mitigation building and landscape features shall be included in the exterior of buildings to mitigate the contrast of the built and natural environment. 0 Mirrored or highly reflective glass is prohibited. Graphic 2.111 Natural Building Materials 0 Mechanical systems/equipment shall be shielded with barriers such as foliage and fences. 0 Common design elements shall be included in Business Park-zoned development. >> Designs should have a variety of unit sizes to accommodate different uses and the structural layout should also allow for flexibility. Graphic 2.12 Interior Courtyard 24 Standards for Transitional Areas Development within Transitional Areas will be held to the standards previously mentioned with the following additional standards. 11 IndustriaL Land Use Mitigation As industrial developments increase in the Plan Area, it is essential to recognize the compatibility issues associated with industrial land uses and be able to mitigate issues through building and site design. Industrial developments intrinsically contain issues with noise,odor,dust,traffic,light, air quality, and visual/design elements, therefore mitigation is necessary. 1 .1 1 Noise Industrial uses can have implications on noise that can affect adjacent land uses and also the natural environment. Noise can be classified into two different types: airborne and structure borne. Airborne is from the source to the receiver and can travel in all directions whereas structure-borne is vibrations through materials. Regardless of noise type, mitigation efforts should be in place prior, during, and after Graphic 2.13 1 Existing Residential in the Plan Area development. The following strategies are ways to mitigate the unwanted and unnecessary noise impacts due to industrial development. 0 Noise impacts shall be mitigated by absorption, barriers, and/or damping. Absorption works towards dissipating airborne acoustic sound waves. The best sound-absorbing materials are acoustic foam, fabric panels, or underlayment. Common building materials do not absorb most sound whereas softer materials, such as carpet, foam padding, and fiberglass insulation are more efficient in dissipating noise. >> Physical barriers such as a berm or spatial separation that account for height,distance,thickness, and material type can contribute to the extent of mitigation. >> Damping reduces acoustic vibration within a structure or wall. 0 Building masses such as U or L shaped forms are preferred as they can contribute to noise mitigation through spatial separation. 0 Interior courtyards or garden spaces should be incorporated as they can be an effective noise mitigation strategy by providing quiet and light-filled spaces. 0 Vegetation should be high and dense when used for noise mitigation for significant effectiveness. 0 Air-conditioning units should be substituted for pressurized plenum space where possible. A plenum is a separate interior space provided for air circulation for heating, ventilation, and air- conditioning. SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 25 1 .2 1 Odor Unlike other externalities of industrial uses, odor can be difficult to measure due to its subjective nature. However, there are some measures that can be taken to address the duration, frequency, intensity, and location of noxious odors. 0 Mitigating odor should start at the source of the emitter, such as food operations, traffic emissions, chemical facilities, mechanical equipment pollution, and material handling. Operational and engineering best practices can mitigate odors prior to being released in the environment. 0 If emissions cannot be prevented, various solutions can be applied such as: Plantings and trees to absorb and mask unpleasant smells as well as act as visual screening. Additionally, plantings can act as ozone generator which eliminates odorous substances through oxidation and are low maintenance. (Odor mitigation foliage include field maples, peace lily, serviceberry, sansevieria). )> Dispersion to reduce consolidated emissions. Dispersion can look like increased separation between odor source and receivers to allow for dilution or contain the dispersion in an enclosure to prevent odors dispersing. )> Location of open tanks and storage piles. Limit the presence of smells such as locating open tanks and storage piles away from residential and high-occupancy areas. >> Structure design elements. The operability and placement of windows and doors can also prevent intrusion of odors. 1 .3 1 it Quality Encouraging and supporting occupants that engage in sustainable processes and produce minimal emissions is the most effective way to mitigate air quality issues. In circumstances where this is unavoidable, exhausting air with ventilation can be effective and dilution can be used to mitigate the impacts ventilation can have on the surroundings. 0 Apply in-room air cleaners and vegetation barriers to help mitigate localized air pollution. 0 Use air filters and electronic air cleaners such as ionizers in duct-mounted and portable cleaners. )> i.e. activated carbon is an adsorbent media air filter. 0 Green roofs may be incorporated to address on-site and off-site disturbances. 0 Extensive venting should be used when possible. 0 Operable windows should be used to provide direct ventilation where they do not conflict with noise mitigation strategies. 26 1 .4 1 Traffic and Loading Industrial development brings different vehicular traffic expectations. The challenge lies in balancing street level, building, and occupant needs. It is essential that industrial land uses contain loading and unloading infrastructure as the traffic associated with the use can have compatibility issues with adjacent non-industrial uses. Certain elements such as parking, loading bays, elevators, access points, noise, and aesthetic can have implications on the area. Establishing design standards can allow for the mitigation Graphic 2.14 1 SLC Air Quality of incompatibilities between the movement of people, vehicles, and goods. 0 Spatial Separation: Land uses that produce heavier traffic scenarios shall be placed away from residential units. 0 Vertical Stacking: Flat-roof style structures may be implemented for upper-floor parking and loading. 0 Access: Access shall be allowed from more than one side of a site to allow for better separation of pedestrian, cycling, and vehicle access to reduce the risk of collisions and large distribution vehicles. 0 Laneways: Laneways shall be sensitive to pedestrian spaces by carving out walkable space in the building mass. This includes vegetation, dark sky-friendly lighting, and amenities for pedestrian use. 0 Shared lobbies: Mixed-use buildings (including industrial and/or office spaces) may require shared lobbies to foster community and interaction among tenants. >> It is important to ensure that there are not substantial conflicts between uses that have safety implications. 0 Location: Additional considerations for industrial and non-industrial compatibilities includes proximity to future public transit which can reduce parking demands and activate streets for more complete neighborhoods. These locations should be evaluated if public transit plans are implemented in the Plan Area. SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 27 Standards for Natural Open Space Natural open space consists of critical habitat, regionally significant agriculture, and connecting open spaces. Development in these areas is restricted to passive recreational amenities. 11 Wettand Design Standards Graphic 2.15 1 Outdoor Pavilion 1 .1 1 Planting Wetlands are home to very beneficial habitats that can support carbon sequestration and improve water quality. As development increases, mitigating the impacts on wetlands is essential for the area. Plant species is an example of a simple design standard that can be incorporated into properties in a close proximity to this critical habitat. 0 Encouraging and/or requiring native plant species can promote healthy wetland habitat in the face of increasing development. Graphic 2.161 Natural Landscaping 0 Non-native/invasive species mitigation: Upkeep of vegetated areas should be a continuous effort of property owners. This includes proper management of invasive and non-native plant species that may have a negative impact on the natural wetland habitat. >> Utilizing natural mitigation techniques should be encouraged as to avoid run-off from herbicide and pesticide product. Graphic 2.17 1 Nature-Inspired Design NMI on Graphic 2.18 1 Birds at the Great Salt Lake Graphic 2.19 1 Education Center 28 1 .2 1 Trails and Boardwalks Integrating boardwalks and trails adjacent and into wetlands can provide educational and leisure activities for the community in and beyond the Plan Area. Access to these critical areas must be designed in a way that protects the natural habitat while also providing experiences that are otherwise experienced by only a few individuals. It is important to take inventory of the wetland and partner with ecologists before implementing a trail system. 0 Working group: Educational and recreational programming is a welcomed amenity, however, start up can be difficult without Graphic 2.20 1 Natural Multiuse Trail willing partners and active volunteers. Establishing a working group can help implement a well-rounded, comprehensive wetland program. 0 Trail Kiosk and Parking: Integrating educational and recreational opportunities with the wetlands can benefit those beyond the Plan Area. Therefore, establishing a trail kiosk and parking area will provide more convenient access to this amenity area. 0 Connectivity: Connecting the wetlands to the upland environment can help the user experience the relationship Graphic 2.21 1 Boardwalk Style Trail between the two environments. 0 Signage: Creating a recognizable sign program can help users identify the trails and remain on trail. The program can also include interpretive signage that indicates points of interest, or educational information about the wetlands and uplands. 0 Trail type: It is important to evaluate what type of trails are appropriate in and around the wetland to mitigate the impacts on the natural environment. Purposeful design can also help mitigate unnecessary costs for development and maintenance. >> Trails rather than boardwalks are appropriate in areas where Graphic 2.221 Informational Signage there is raised ground through the wetland or around the wetland. Soft-surface trails require little investment. >> Boardwalks are needed where adjacent lands are flat (vegetation is tall) and allows for the ground beneath to remain somewhat natural. Graphic 2.23 1 Wildlife Viewing and Fishing Access SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 29 ,Sop a t CHAPTER 3 IMPLEMENTATION a� ImpLementing Implementation refers to the actions Salt Lake City should take to ensure the Plan Area develops in a way that is consistent with the community's vision. The most time-sensitive implementation actions are included as critical path items. Following the critical path items is a list of additional action items recommended to achieve the vision of this Plan. A critical element in planning for any area is considering water sources and needs. Any development in this area must adhere to Salt Lake City water-related plans and policies. Critical, t Items Critical path items are actions that should be abided by the City prior to and as development occurs. Each critical path item will fall into at least one of the following categories: built environment/design, services and infrastructure, and natural environment/preservation. These categories were identified throughout the planning process and are integrated into the various sections of the Plan.The following items are classified as an immediate need, as development pressures area already present in the Plan Area. Services and Infrastructure Evaluate Funding Solutions to Redesign 2200 W and Construct 2900 W Titnefr mea Immediate Responsibility. Various City Departments 2900 W is intended to be developed with the Scannell-Swaner Subdivision and will serve as an additional major arterial road in this Plan Area. The redevelopment of 2200 W and the construction of 2900 W should consider increased vehicle volumes and incorporate pedestrian and biking infrastructure. Below is a list of potential funding opportunities for this action. For a detailed analysis of these tools and their applicability in the Plan Area, see the Financial Implementation Analysis in Appendix D. Tax Increment Areas Public Infrastructure Districts (PIDs) Special Assessment Areas (SAAs) Impact Fees Municipal Energy Tax Natural Environment/Preservation Evaluate the Feasibility of Acquiring Sensitive Lands as City-Owned Open Space Tinieframes Immediate Responsibility. Salt Lake City Council There has been a large amount of support for the preservation of open space in the Plan Area, as it serves as a cultural and historical landmark for the region and critical habitat for wildlife. Acquiring and preserving available open space in this area for passive recreation is a high priority. Land adjacent to the Jordan River and open land and wetlands adjacent to 3200 West should be a high priority for preservation. For a list of recommended land acquisition tools, see Chapter 4. Built Environment/Design Adopt Development Code Updates Tirnefrarne- Immediate Responsibility. Salt Lake City Council There are several zoning designations within the Plan Area including Light Manufacturing (M- 1), Business Park (BP), and Agricultural/Rural Residential (AG-2, AG-5, and Salt Lake County A-2). Although some properties will likely remain agricultural or rural residential, it is anticipated that this area will slowly redevelop into primarily light manufacturing with some preserved open space areas. General Development Code Updates The simplest way to encourage development consistent with the City's vision for the Plan Area is to adopt minor edits to these zoning categories. While the City Council may eventually adopt an overlay for the Plan Area, the following Zoning Code updates are "low-hanging fruit" the City can quickly implement. Review landscape requirements to prohibit turf lawns and encourage native plantings in keeping with wetland preservation, particularly in interface areas. Consider a reduction in minimum lot size if clustering for preservation areas. Reconsider setbacks in the zoning code if preserving native habitat, allow more flexibility of the building envelope. In the BP zone, eliminate the requirement of an agricultural buffer in favor of an environmental buffer (keep residential proximity protections when agriculture is a residential use). )> Amend the Riparian Corridor Overlay zone to include wetland protection buffers. >> Amend the Lowland Conservancy Overlay zone to include canals and drains in the Plan Area. Northpoint Specific Development Code The preferred approach to implement the vision for the Plan Area is a Northpoint-specific development code. A North poi nt-specific code should include: >> Adoptingthe Design Standardsfrom Chapter2of this document,which includes the recommended setbacks and buffer areas, landscape requirements, building materials and design standards, etc. >> Incentive-based tools for preserving open and sensitive lands, such as allowing an increase in the maximum building faqade length if preserving a larger amount of open space or buffer area than required. SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 33 AdditionaL Implementation Items The following list includes recommended key action items to achieve the vision for the Northpoint Plan Area. Create a local area utility plan Tirneframe- Immediate Responsibility. Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities Require a local area utility plan to determine future Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities (SLCDPU) service availability and to ensure utility services can be provided based on the anticipated future land use associated with new development. City policy is that upon the development of a property, the developer will be required to identify and provide all utilities necessary to serve their development, including water, sewer, and stormwater. A local area utility plan shall be provided to SLCDPU for review to support any development application, to ensure adequate service availability, and to identify impacts on existing systems. Amend the Major Streets Plan Timebrame- Immediate Responsibility. Salt Lake City Planning Department and Transportation Division Amend the Major Streets Plan to reflect the removal of 3200 W as a major road. While shown as a local road on the proposed amended map, it is anticipated that 3200 W will remain an unimproved dirt road and barrier for adjacent wetlands to the west. New development should be prohibited from facing 3200 West. Additionally, the amended map includes the proposed roadway alignment of 2900 W and the realignment of 2100 North to access the airport. See Appendix E for the recommended amendments. Develop environmental impact standards and align the with current executive orders and master plans. Tirneframe- Short Term Responsibility. Salt Lake City Planning Department Create standards for new development that mitigate the impact of said development on nearby habitat and sensitive areas. These standards may include elements such as water saving best practices, dark sky ordinances, landscaping requirements, etc. 34 Require a buffer of at least 75 feet between wetlands/uplands and any site development (e.g. buildings, parking, site features, and amenities) within the Northpoint Plan Area. Tirneframe- Short Term Responsibility. Salt Lake City Planning Department The Great Salt Lake is a complex and delicate ecosystem and impact to this habitat area by new development should be carefully mitigated. A critical part of this mitigation is ensuring there is an adequate buffer between development and the wetland/upland ecosystem. Wetlands include both jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetlands. The Plan identifies up to a 300 foot buffer from wetland areas. This should be implemented through either an update to the City's existing Riparian Overlay Zone or a new Northpoint specific development code. In developing the updated code,the City should consider identifying priority wetland areas and applying the maximum buffer to the highest priority wetlands. Reduced buffer widths may be appropriate based on the condition, function, and goal of the specific wetland buffer. Additionally, the City should allow flexibility of wetland buffers through incentive based tools. For example, the buffer width could be reduced through mitigation measures that include native vegetation restoration. Coordinate with Salt Lake County to provide efficient police and fire services in the Plan Area. Tirneframe- Short Term Responsibility. City Council To provide adequate emergency services to this area, the development of a joint Police/Fire station may be required in the Plan Area. Coordinate with the Police and Fire Department to acquire funding and land in the Plan Area for a new shared facility. Support the annexation of contiguous parcels within the Plan Area. Thneframe- Ongoing Responsibility. Salt Lake City Planning Department The City supports the annexation of contiguous parcels in this Plan Area for future development and redevelopment. SALT LAKE CITY NORTHIPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 35 ����� j ICHAPTER 4 TOOLKIT Using the Toohdt The Northpoint Small Area Master Plan process spanned fifteen months and included one-on-one interviews, workshops,and other public events.As expressed by project participants, key desired outcomes for the future of the Plan Area include: >> Create a program to support a variety of incentives to maintain or improve property values while preserving open space. >> Identify a future land use plan that allows industrial and business development while maintaining quality of life for existing residential areas and preserving natural habitat. >> Locate future development in a manner that can support the efficient provision of city services. >> Identify appropriate buffering, building design, and development characteristics to reduce impacts to the environmental features and wildlife habitat associated with the Great Salt Lake. >> Recommend methods to reduce the negative impacts that future land uses may have on air quality, water quality, noise, and light. >> Recommend tools to acquire and/or preserve open space. >> Recommend strategies to improve traffic flow and safety on 2200 W. These desired outcomes suggest that while development in the Plan Area is in high demand, policies and strategies need to ensure that development is designed and arranged in a manner that respects the area's sensitive landscape. 38 A variety of tools have been developed to protect natural open space and locate, configure, and design new development in a manner that protects both existing habitat and natural open spaces. The preservation tools described and analyzed in this Chapter represent existing and potential strategies for the protection of habitat and open space in the Plan Area. Tools have been categorized as regulatory, incentive, or land acquisition. This is not an all-inclusive listing of tools, but an inventory that details each potential tool, and provides examples. In addition to land preservation tools, this chapter covers financial tools available to fund improvements to or reconstruction of 2900 W. The benefits and limitations of each tool have been compiled from a number of sources including university research, other localities experiences, practical knowledge, and reports by individuals who have made their own evaluations. The implementation tools presented in this Chapter constitute a menu of options that can be considered to achieve the objectives of this Plan. ad SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 39 Regulatory based tools may be used to protect sensitive lands and agricultural areas within the Plan Area. These tools could be implemented by Salt Lake City through adoption of new zoning and subdivision ordinances. Clustering of Lots and Open Space/CLuster Development Clustering is defined as a development pattern typically for residential use,in which homes are grouped together rather than evenly dispersed over the land as in a conventional development. >> Protects the natural resources of an area >> Additional zoning requirements >> Creates wider wildlife buffers >> Not a permanent solution to protect land from >> Creates opportunity for greater profits by development pressures consolidating required open space into larger, >> May not be a mandatory tool; thus there may more impactful sizes not be assurance that desired project designs >) Reduces impact of development on will be implemented by developers watersheds >> Reduces cost to provide municipal public services depending on how clustering is accomplished Development Code Updates Code updates establish supplemental land development requirements within a specific area requiring special attention, such as an environmentally sensitive area. >> Easily implemented )> Additional zoning requirements >> Allows flexibility in design for developers >> Not a permanent solution to protect land >> Can apply to multiple areas within a city from development pressures >> Time and cost effective 40 of participants were in support of participants were in support of clustering lots and open space of sensitive landscape studies of participants were in support of participants were in support of development code updates of special standards Sensitive Landscape Studies Studies can determine additional steps that should be taken to mitigate impact of new development to existing habitat. » Helps mitigate impacts of new development >> Additional zoning requirements on sting habitat and wildlife >> Can be difficult for local officials to enforce >) Easily implemented because requirements and study results may >> Offers insight into specific site requirements vary based on specific sites for mitigation Special Standards and Design GuideLines Additional regulations in new development or redevelopment projects can include standards for elements like lighting, landscaping, building materials, noise, and landscape buffers. » Helps mitigate impacts of new development >> Additional zoning requirements on sting habitat and wildlife >> May not be a mandatory tool; thus there may >> Easily implemented not be assurance that desired project designs >> Allows flexibility in site design while preserving will be implemented by developers area character and sensitive lands >> Can be difficult for local officials to enforce unless bonus criteria are clearly spelled out in an ordinance or policy document SALT LAKE CITY NORTHIPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 41 Incentive based tools are voluntary and mostly based on the willingness of the landowner to sell title or an easement on their property. Where public access and use are desired, fee- simple ownership control is preferred through donation, purchase, or bargain sale of land to a government entity, conservation organization, or public charity. Conservation Easements Conservation easements are voluntary and legally binding agreements between a landowner (public or private) and a qualifying organization (also public or private), in which permanent limitations are placed on a property's use and development. Conservation easements limit land to uses identified in the easement, and thus protect it from development. Permanently protects land from development >> Tax incentives may not provide enough Landowners may receive income, estate, and/ compensation for many landowners or property tax benefits >> Since program is voluntary, it can be >> Land remains in private ownership and on the challenging to preserve large tracts of tax rolls contiguous land or specific areas to be protected Transfer of Devetopment Rights (TDR) TDRs are tools that establish areas within a community for preservation (sending zones), and additional growth (receiving zones). Sending zones can be areas of agricultural land, open space, or other properties important to preserve. Receiving zones are areas that the community has designated as appropriate for additional or increased development. >> Permanently protects land from development >> Can be complex to administer pressures >> Receiving area must be willing to accept >> Landowner is paid to protect their land higher densities >> Local government can target locations >> Can be a difficult program to establish, effectively especially in areas without city zoning >> Utilizes free market mechanisms >> May require cooperative agreements among >> Land remains in private ownership and on tax several local governments to establish sending rolls and receiving zones 42 of participants were in support of participants were in support of conservation easements of PDR Programs of participants were in support of participants were in support of TDR Programs of Preferred Development Sites Purchase1 PDRs refer to the purchase of development rights on certain parcels of land by a unit of government or a non-profit entity. Once purchased, a conservation easement is placed on the property. c 'SSE » Permanently protects land from development Can be costly for local unit of government, Landowner is paid to protect their land, while therefore land is generally protected at a allowing for ongoing use slower rate Local government can target desirable locations » Land remains in private ownership,typically effectively with no public access » Land remains in private ownership and on the Because the program is voluntary, it can tax rolls be challenging to preserve large tracts of » Program is voluntary contiguous land Preferred Sites Also known as priority or target development areas, these are locations that have been identified by a local government as favored for residential, commercial, and office growth based on adopted growth management policies and plans. Development can involve new construction, redevelopment, and/or adaptive reuse of buildings. Local governments may offer incentives, such as reduced fees or increased housing density to developments in these areas in order to make them more attractive to developers. » Land remains in private ownership and on the » Can be a difficult program to establish and tax rolls administer Local government can target locations » Not a permanent solution, delays development effectively in sensitive areas Can be low cost to local unit of government » Tax incentives may not provide enough compensation for many landowners SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT Acquisition and management of open space can be combined with regulatory measures to broaden the effectiveness of a preservation program. These tools preserve open space and their functions in the long-term. Although typically the most expensive solution, acquisition is the strongest and surest means of protection. Lease A lease is an agreement between agency and landowner to rent the land in order to protect and manage sensitive resources. Low cost approach to site protection >> Short-term protection strategy Landowner receives income and retains >> Leases are not permanent control of property >> An alternative for preservation-minded landowners not ready to commit to sale of permanent easement >> Restrictions can be included in the lease to direct the activities of the conservation agency on the land Mutuat Covenant A mutual covenant is an agreement between adjoining landowners to control future land uses through mutually agreed upon restrictions. 7 ES'SSEM�� MEESE= > Perm anent covenants can be enforced by any >> Loss in market value from mutual covenants of the landowners or future landowners of the does not qualify as a charitable deduction for involved properties income tax purposes >> S if c i c m p I y r strict >> High cost >> Significant incentive to comply with restrictions, Significant 1 c t i tv to 0 w s i c all p ti s r of use co trols since all parties m are aware of use controls >> Can reduce property taxes 44 of participants were in support of participants were in support of Lease Agreements of Land Banking of participants were in support of participants were in support of Mutual Covenants of Land Exchange Land Banking/Land Purchase Land banking occurs when land is purchased and reserved for later use or development. Land could be leased for immediate use(e.g. agriculture or athletic fields)or held for eventual resale with restrictions. The local government functions as a land trust. Local government proactively identifies and >> High cost purchases resource land )> Requires large upfront expenditures >> Lowers future preservation costs by working >> Public agency must have staff to handle land as a defense against future increases in trust functions of acquisition, management, land prices, speculation, and inappropriate lease, or resale development Land Exchange Land exchange is the process by which land sought to be protected may be exchanged for another parcel that is more suitable for development » Lower acquisition costs >> Complicated process >> Scattered properties can be exchanged for a >> Not widely known and rarely used single, larger parcel >> Subject to IRS regulations >> Property owners must be willing to participate, and properties must be of equal value High cost SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 45 Overview Market Analysis Northpoint represents an opportunity for Salt Northpoint is suitable for industrial and Lake City to encourage economic development agricultural use,with limited residential. The area that is compatible with the unique natural and is proximate to the Salt Lake City International built environment of the area, including proximity Airport and,as such,experiences high noise levels to the Salt Lake City International Airport. This that make residential development difficult. area is best suited for business park and industrial The industrial market is strong in Salt Lake development yet is hampered by the lack of County, with a vacancy rate of only 2.2 percent significant infrastructure including transportation and rising lease rates which have increased from options and high-quality fiber broadband to the an average (NNN) rate of $0.53 in 4th quarter area. To realize its potential, the area requires 2020 to $0.63 in 4th quarter 2021 . Total Salt substantial infrastructure improvements. Lake County inventory approximates 135 million Funding options for these improvements are square feet, with 9 million square feet of space discussed in this section of the report. under construction. In the northwest quadrant of It is a challenging time to fund infrastructure as Salt Lake County,the vacancy rate is 2.65 percent, construction costs are rising rapidly, along with with year-to-date (YTID) absorption of 7.5 million interest rates. Infrastructure is generally needed square feet and an average asking rate of $0.60 before development can occur, which means (N N N). that revenues generated by the project are not Based on vacant acreage in the Plan Area that available for funding at the time they are most the Salt Lake County Assessor's Office currently needed. Rather, other funding means must be classifies as industrial, the area could absorb an identified, with revenue streams generated from additional 650,000 to 1,000,000 square feet of development used later as a payback mechanism. industrial space. This appears reasonable given Economic development is a key component current absorption patterns and the shortage of generating new revenue streams and is of industrial space in the market. The biggest addressed in the full Financial Implementation obstacles to industrial development appear to be Report in Appendix D. This chapter contains with supply chain shortages, rising construction costs the potential funding mechanisms that such and rapidly escalating interest rates. development could enable. 46 Financial. Tool. I Tax Increment Areas Through the creation of a tax increment area,tax revenues generated within the designated Plan Area are split into two components: >> (i)Base Revenues I The amount available before the tax increment area is established. Base revenues are shared among a mix of local governments that have the power to assess taxes such as schools, cities, counties, and special districts; and >> (ii)Incremental Revenues I These are tax revenues in excess of the base revenues that are generated by new growth in the Plan Area. If a Plan Area is created,the incremental tax revenues can flow to the Plan Area for a period of time to encourage economic development. Some states, including Utah, allow incremental local sales tax revenues, as well as property taxes, to flow to a Plan Area for a period of time. By giving exclusive use of incremental revenues to the Plan Area, the creation of a successful tax increment area generates a new revenue stream that can be used to pay for projects, provide incentives to developers, or collateralize tax increment bonds. The most common uses of tax increment have been for infrastructure such as roads, utilities, telecommunications, electrical upgrades and burying power lines, and parking structures. Tax increment has also been used for demolition, tenant improvements, land acquisitions, environmental cleanup, trails, lighting, signage, playgrounds, incentives to developers, economic development activities and housing. Utah currently allows for the enactment of three types of tax increment areas: >> Community Reinvestment Areas (CRAs) >> Transportation Reinvestment Zones (TRZs) >> Housing & Transit Reinvestment Zones (HTRZs) Of these three types of tax increment areas, CRAs and TRZs could be used as financing tools for the Plan Area. HTRZs rely on density of housing and this type of development is not suitable for Northpoint. SALT LAKE CITY NORTHIPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 47 Community Reinvestment Areas (CRA) In Utah,tax increment areas have been known by a wide variety of names overtime— RDAs,URAs,EDAs, CIDAs, and now as CRAs or Community Reinvestment Areas. As of 2016, the Legislature combined all types of Plan Areas—urban renewal, economic development, and community development into a new single "Community Reinvestment Plan Area" (CRA). Existing Plan Areas will be allowed to continue, but all new Plan Areas will be known as CRAs. The CRA Budget may either be approved by a Taxing Entity Committee (TEC) or through Interlocal Agreement with taxing entities, except where the Agency chooses to conduct a blight study to determine the existence of blight and to utilize limited eminent domain powers, which requires the approval of the TEC of both blight and the budget. If there is a finding of blight, 20 percent of the tax increment must be set aside for affordable housing. For all other projects, 10 percent of the tax increment is required to be set aside for affordable housing, if the annual increment is over$100,000. However, housing funds may be spent for affordable housing statewide and are not limited to being spent within a Plan Area. Noticing and hearing requirements apply with the CRA designation. After the tax increment collection period has expired,the tax increment dollars that previously flowed to the CRA will flow to the taxing entities that levy the property taxes within the Plan Area. In most cases, taxing entities receive more property tax revenues annually following expiration of the tax increment collection period than before, as property values are likely to have increased significantly through the redevelopment process. >> Creates a new revenue stream. >> Requires cooperation of other taxing entities. >> Relatively easy to create. 10% of revenues must be directed to affordable housing. >> Flexible uses of funds. >> Revenues may take years to build up as development occurs over time. 48 Transportation Reinvestment Zone (T Z) ATRZ is one type of area that can be formed where taxi ncrement can be used to accelerate development within the defined Plan Area. According to Utah Code §11-13-103(22), "Transportation Reinvestment Zone" means an area created by two or more public agencies by interlocal agreement to capture increased property or sales tax revenue generated by a transportation infrastructure project. TRZs are ideal for projects such as Frontrunner, light rail, or major arterials that span multiple jurisdictions. Any two or more public agencies may enter into an agreement to create a transportation reinvestment zone but one of these entities must have land use authority over the TRZ area — in other words, Salt Lake City must be a partner in this endeavor. Ta V LEEQ Fur s to Ta4q Ertit�s ° funds to. NEENCEIMEEM em® 00022MEM Creates a new revenue stream. » Revenue directed to transportation projects will not be available to provide other services. Relatively easy to create. » Requires cooperation between at least two entities. Projected to produce substantial revenue » Must find a nexus with transportation projects stream overtime. to justify use of the increment. No affordable housing requirement. » Revenues may take years to build up as development occurs over time. SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT Tax Increment Bonds Tax Increment Bonds were developed in California in 1952 as an innovative way of raising local matching funds for federal grants. They became increasingly popular in the 1980s and 1990s, when there were declines in subsidies for local economic development from federal grants, state grants, and federal tax subsidies (especially industrial development bonds). Tax Increment Bonds are collateralized by the incremental growth in property taxes within a given Plan Area. They capture the future tax benefits of real estate improvements to pay the present cost of those improvements. It is a financing strategy designed to make improvements to a targeted Plan Area or district without drawing on general fund revenue or creating a new tax. SEENSISSEENNEENEIMM >) Create a new revenue stream that can >> Tend to carry higher interest and costs of fund capital improvements and economic issuance. development. >> Creating entity does not have to bear financial >> Often require the cooperation and agreement burden alone but can share it with other taxing of multiple taxing entities to generate entities within a Plan Area. sufficient incremental revenues to finance the desired infrastructure. >> Tax increment revenues can be used to pay for >) Bonds can't be sold unless the tax increment administrative expenses. is already flowing or is imminent and nearly certain to flow or is enhanced by a government's credit or other mechanism. >> Financial and legal liability is limited by having >) Typically take longer from start to finish than a redevelopment agency. other financing types. >) Creating entity may gift tax revenues >) Critics of Tax Increment Bonds sometimes or property to provide incentives for assert that tax increment is just a reallocation development. of tax revenues by which some municipalities win, and others lose. >> Creating entity may be able to encourage or accelerate the timeframe of desired development types through offering tax increment incentives to the developer. >> Mortgage on the property can also be given as bond security under Utah law in addition to incremental revenue. 50 Financial. Tooll, I PubLic Infrastructure Districts (PiDs) PIDs are generally most successful in larger, undeveloped areas where there are significant infrastructure needs. Because the unanimous consent of all property owners is required forthe creation of a PID, it is difficult to establish PIDs in areas with numerous property owners. However, portions of the study area could be included — especially those areas with larger parcels, fewer property owners, and significant infrastructure needs. If created,a PID can be combined with other revenue sources such as tax increment and those revenues could be used to pay the PID bonds. These funding tools may further facilitate development and increase property values,which may in turn provide for more opportunities to fund basic infrastructure (through tax increment financing or general tax collection). The PID tool allows for creation of a separate taxing entity in order to fund public infrastructure. Ultimate users of the property pay for the improvements via the taxing entity through property assessments. These assessments permit for bonding, allowing for covering upfront infrastructure expenses that are repaid over periods typically near 30 years. This tool results in higher property taxes for property owners/users in the defined district. >> Create a new revenue stream that can )> Tend to carry higher interest and costs of fund capital improvements and economic issuance. development. >> Any debt issued is not on the books of the >> Cities may feel it limits public support for local government entity. future tax rate increases or bond elections due to the perception of already-high rates. >> Can raise a significant amount of revenue with >> Requires unanimous support of all taxing legally-allowed tax rates of up to 15 mils. entities to put in place. >> Accelerates development timeframe through >> Ongoing PID governance upfront funding for capital costs. )> Can reduce the need for impact fees. >) Competitiveness of site with other sites given higher tax rates >> Mortgage on the property can also be given as bond security under Utah law in addition to incremental revenue. >> Cost is much lower than other development financing. SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 51 Special Investment Areas (SAAs) Special Assessment Areas ("SAAs"), formerly known as Special Improvement Districts or "SID"s, are a financing mechanism that allows governmental entities to designate a specific area for the purpose of financing the costs of improvements,operation and maintenance,or economic promotion activities that benefit property within a specified area. Entities can then levy a special assessment, on parity with a tax lien, to pay for those improvements or ongoing maintenance. The special assessment can be pledged to retire bonds, known as Special Assessment Bonds, if issued to finance construction of a project. Utah Code §11-42 deals with the requirements of special assessment areas. The underlying rationale of an SAA is that only those property owners who benefit from the public improvements and ongoing maintenance of the properties will be assessed for the associated costs as opposed to other financing structures in which all City residents pay either through property taxes or increased service fees. While more information about SAAs is included below, it could be difficult politically for the City to obtain support from a large number of property owners. cME MEMMMEM Bonds are tax-exempt although the interest >> Forty percent of the assessed liability, be it one cost is not as low as a GO or revenue bond property owner or many could defeat the effort to create the SAA if they do not want to pay the assessment No requirement to hold a bond election but the >> Some increased administrative burden for the City must hold a meeting for property owners City although State law permits an additional to be assessed before the SAA can be created amount to be included in each assessment to either pay the City's increased administrative costs or permit the City to hire an outside SAA administrator Only benefited property owners pay for the >> The City cannot assess government-owned improvements or ongoing maintenance property within the SAA Limited risk to the City as there is no general tax or revenue pledge Flexibility since property owners may pre-pay their assessment prior to bond issuance or annually thereafter as the bond documents dictate — if bonds are issued Impact Fees Impact fees are one-time fees paid by new development to offset the capital costs associated with new development for basic utilities such as water, sewer, storm water, public safety, roads and parks/ trails. In order to collect impact fees, cities must carefully follow the requirements of Utah Code 11- 36a which includes the following major steps. >> Prepare and pass a resolution authorizing study of an impact fee >> Conduct an impact fee study to determine the appropriate amount of such a fee >> Provide public notice of the possible fee 14 days prior to the public hearing >> Hold a public hearing to take comment regarding the proposed fee Salt Lake City has already established impact fees that could be used to generate revenues on projects developed within its City boundaries. However, Salt Lake County would need to charge impact fees on the unincorporated areas of North Point. Impact fees collected would need to be spent on capital projects listed in each respective entity's Impact Fee Facilities Plans (IFFPs). Therefore, careful coordination would need to take place between Salt Lake City and the County to ensure that the costs of needed projects are fairly allocated between the two entities. ME NEEMMEM New development pays for its fair share of the >> Adds additional costs to development costs incurred by new development >> Impact fees are generally paid when building permits are issued; therefore, funds are often not available upfront when infrastructure needs are greatest >> Impact fees cannot be used to cure existing deficiencies SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 53 sad-:• �+. ,� a �L �. � "" -� t� y •< �, � e��' > r}:Y � '" e K�t4 ice..� r Q .�` }� m�� `¢ .'�`°*. b ., �. � �, 4 � ._ � , , �u f r �° a � m>a_ a e��°. _ _ � o _ n_ '�'8P' �� 0 a a a 4 4� 8 ® 1 b a as t' agw9 d LL 1 Water and Air OuaLity Air Quality Salt Lake City is often faced with some of the The Plan Area experiences these same seasonal worst air quality in the world. Major declines in air issues with air quality, as well as consistent quality typically occur during the surnmerorwinter impacts due to proximity of both the Salt Lake due to the Salt Lake Valley's unique geographical City International Airport, and 1-215. makeup and position. in the summer, wildfire smoke often travels east from California, Oregon, 1-215 limits connectivity to residential and the region's mountain ranges adding to neighborhoods and services in both Salt Lake City pollution from cars, industry, and other elements and North Salt Lake City. With few daily services, leading to harmful ozone levels. In the winter, such as grocery stores, within the expanded area, close proximity to the Wasatch Mountains leads residents contribute to higher trips and higher to temperature inversions in which cold air gets mile traveled, exacerbating air quality issues. trapped under a layer of warm air, acting like a lid keeping pollutants from escaping. During the winter, air pollution sources are transportation (50%); area sources (e.g. gas stations, auto-body shops, etc.) (35%); and industry (15%). Graphic 1.3 Regional Air Quality I Source:AirNow.Gov Graphic 1.41 SLC Air Quality I Source:Scott Winterton Deseret News 56 Water and Wetlands The presence of wetlands adjacent to the Jordan River A portion of these wetlands are Delta and at the edge of the Great Salt Lake is the most designated playas, categorized by pertinent environmental issue in the area. Roughly 75% of their dry, hollowed-out form that fill Utah's wetlands surround the Great Salt Lake, providing with water during rainstorms and by environmental and socioeconomic benefit. underlying aquifers. The Great Salt Lake is the largest saltwater lake in the The wetlands surrounding the Northpoint Subarea are part of an intricate and diverse ecosystem. Wetlands benefit Northern Hemisphere, meaning as the playas fill and eventually evaporate, the environment by acting as sponges to capture, store, they leave large salt deposits behind. and slowly release water, storm buffers, groundwater and Freshwater forested and shrub aquifer recharge, and sediment traps. Wetlands also serve as wetlands are found adjacent to the critical habitat areas by providing food, shelter, and resting area, and are typically associated with places. Wetland benefits extend to provide recreational and woody plants such as willows. agricultural opportunities. '161" The current historic high water elevation for the Great Salt Lake is 4,211 feet last reached in 1986, and causing dramatic flooding. As of November 2021, the Lake's water level has dropped to the lowest in recorded history at 4,190 feet, likely due to the extreme drought conditions the state is facing. In response to the unpredictability of the Lake, most planning agencies identify the 40 0 contour of 4,217 feet, as the limit of safe development. There are no sites within the Plan Area that fall below this elevation. sm Graphic 1.5 1 Wetlands Surrounding Northpoint I Source:National Wetlands Inventory SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 57 Soit Types The soil types within Northpoint vary and provide These high water table depths affect drainage and considerations for the types of development that compressibility which impact new development can be accommodated in the Plan Area. The soil types dominating the area are fine sandy loam, potential. In addition,the soil types that dominate the area can cause problems for septic systems silt loam and silty clay loam. Most of these soils have a water table depth between zero and fifty and filter fields,making it harder to maintain water inches and are subject to the effects of frost. quality. LEGEND I N""M BoundWy PM*Fwm SW AgOMMM SCA of st-de"pamww Graphic 1.6 Prime Agricultural Soil Source:National Resource Conservation Service 58 Hazards The greater Salt Lake City area faces natural Summer 2021 Drought Conditions hazards that impact rate and location of development. As climate change continues to Intensity exacerbate extreme weather events, planning with these common hazards in mind can help maintain the safety and comfort of the community. M Clean air and water supply are among the top concerns of Salt Lake residents. In August of 2021, Salt Lake City was ranked the worst air quality of any major city in the world by IQAir.com, prompting residents to take extra precautions. The Salt Lake County Health Department released tips to stay safe during extreme air conditions such as staying indoors with windows shut, avoiding exercise, and wearing masks outdoors. The area, along with many other parts of the state, is currently under exceptional drought Graphic 1.7 Utah Drought Conditions Source:National Drought conditions, with fire restrictions and irrigation Mitigation Center at University of Nebraska-Lincoln,2021. allotment reductions in place. Salt Lake City also experiences threats of extreme heat, wildfire,debris flows,flooding and earthquakes. WOUSTFIA"AM SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 59 WiLdLife and Habitat The Great Salt Lake and surrounding wetlands Although the Farmington Bay area is classified are a crucial habitat for many species of animals. as freshwater, the northern-most regions of the With 400,000 acres of wetlands, birds of regional Great Salt Lake can be composed of nearly 28% and national importance are drawn to the area as salt. This creates a wide diversity of habitats a sanctuary for breeding and eating. Every year, for many different plants, invertebrates, reptiles, millions of birds from 338 different species stop amphibians, mammals, birds, and insects such here to feed during migrations. Among the most as the Monarch Butterfly which is now on the common species observed in the Plan Area are endangered species list. the European Starling, Red-winged Blackbird, Yellow-headed Blackbird, Northern Pintail, and Canada Goose. loom ME= DWR Bird Habitat Boundaries Graphic 1.8 1 Dominant Bird Species in Northpoint Graphic 1.9 1 Bird Habitat Source:Department of Wildlife Resources GIS Data 60 Organizations AgricuLture There are many organizations with interest in the The top producing crops in Salt Lake City, Plan and surrounding areas, including the Duck according to the 2017 Census of Agriculture, are Clubs, Salt Lake City International Airport, and wheat,hay,vegetables,pumpkins,and sweet corn. Friends of the Great Salt Lake.The Friends of Great Within the Plan Area, current residents also own Salt Lake is a nonprofit organization founded in a variety of livestock. The majority of the housing 1994 to protect the Great Salt Lake ecosystem stock supports the agricultural uses surrounding and increase public awareness and appreciation. them. Within these lots there has been a pattern The Rudy Duck Club, founded in 1909 and named of subdividing larger lots into small lots for family after the original land owner Frank Rudy, acquired members.There is a rich history of the agricultural land and associated water rights in the early lifestyle within Northpoint that the community 1900s to preserve the ecosystem for private duck desires to be preserved. According to the State hunting. Soil Conservation Service, the Plan Area contains prime farmland located north of 2800 North on the eastern side of 2200 West. Water Related Land Uses IF 0 A&ML 4io LEGEND My AVxmfture 0 Ripm-An Urban Urbm WW Waw Graphic 1.10 Water-Related Land Uses Source:ESRI Living Atlas SALT LAKE CITY NORTHIPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 61 Airport The Salt Lake International Airport, located just The City has formally regulated the land uses south of the Plan Area,is one of the busiest airports surrounding the airport to protect the greater in North America. The airport is also a major hub community and reduce negative impact. In 1971, for Delta airlines and provides approximately 370 zoning ordinances were adopted allowed within flights per day from its location. As the airport Northpoint and in 1983, the zoning ordinances inherently produces high noise volumes and air were supplemented with regulations that quality issues, it has a significant impact on the prohibited incompatible uses like residential surrounding areas and determining appropriate housing. land uses in Northpoint. The Salt Lake Airport recently adopted a new Development Constraints Master Planing process, the first since 1998, to Existing development within Northpoint provide guidelines for future airport development experience consequences from their proximity to and to optimize existing facilities for future the airport and overhead flights. Some existing aviation demand and increase airport capacity. residences face increased risk for airplane The resulting strategic vision illustrates locations crashes and high noise levels from the consistent for a third parallel runway and Concourse C which flights. The Department of Airports recommends are not anticipated to be built within the next limiting the number of new residences allowed twenty years. in Northpoint to reduce harm for the community in the future. The Federal Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) does not provide any assistance, subsidy or insurance for projects located in Runway Clear Zones, Clear Zones and SAC Airport-Owned Parcels Accident Potential Zones. As a result, this Plan considers alternative uses within those zones. The Salt Lake International Airport and Salt Lake ---------- City own several parcels surrounding the airport that were purchased to preserve as undeveloped. NORTHPOIW This, along with noise contours and influence BOUNDARY zones limits development potential in the Plan Area. Northpoint lies within Influence Zone A/B meaning, the aircraft noise from overhead flights can interfere with daily living activities including MAY-L sleep, conversations and listening to media. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires that each airport study the noise impacts and WINd create a Noise Compatibility Program associated with alleviating noise issues. MEN MIN The Salt Lake City Noise Compatibility Program has implemented measures to increase Graphic 1.11 Parcels Owned by the Salt Lake City International compatibility with surrounding land uses Airport Source:Assessors Parcel Data 62 Economic Contribution including maximization of flight times between The Salt Lake City International Airport, is a key lam and 1 Opm. It has also implemented adjusted driver of the local and regional economy. Through flight routes in pursuit of reduced disruption. protecting airport infrastructure and facilities from adjacent land uses that reduce or eliminate As residential uses should be limited in Northpoint because of these constraints,there are other use its ability to function at the highest capacity, the s Salt Lake City International Airport can continue and opportunities for development that are more to act as an asset to the greater community. compatible with the airport. SLC Airport Noise Contours SLC Airport Protection Overlays ft *W"*cownwe son N� Graphic 1.12 1 SLC Airport Noise Contours I Source:SLC GIS Data Graphic 1.13 1 SLC Airport Overlays I Source:SLC GIS Data SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 63 Land Use industrial and Business Uses Within the Plan Area, there lies existing manufacturing zoning (M-1) that serves as a buffer between the airport and Interstate 215 (1-215). In July 2016, the City Council changed the zoning of properties located along 2200 W between 21 OON and North Temple Street to Light Manufacturing (M-1) to implement area master plans and maximize economic development potential. Light Manufacturing(M-1)allows for light industrial uses that produce littleto no impact on neighboring properties and results in a clean, attractive industrial setting. This use is compatible with the adjacent airport and is less impacted by the negative aspects of nearby 1-215 than residential uses. The M-1 designation allows more types of business than the Business Park (BP) designations. The more significant differences between the two zoning districts are related to open space and building location requirements.The BP designation requires 15%open space,while M-1 requires no open space. M-1 also has reduced setback requirements. Approximately half of the Plan Area is designated BR The intent of the BP designation is to provide an attractive environment for modern offices, light assembly and warehouse development, and to create employment and economic development opportunities in a campus-like setting. G~A"d Land M -T Graphic 1.14 1 SLC and SLCo Zoning Source:SLC,SLCo,and North Salt Lake GIS Data 64 Agricultural and Residential Uses Zone Minimum Front Primary Uses The Plan Area contains several agricultural Lot Area Setback zones under both City and County jurisdiction, M-1 10,000 Light including Salt Lake City's (SLC) AG-5 and AG-2, (SLC) s q.ft. 15 ft. Manufacturing and Salt Lake County's (SLCo) A-2 zone preserves BP 20,000 Business/ agricultural uses on lots no less than two acres (sic) sq.ft. 30 ft. Office and, similarly, AG-5 provides for agricultural uses on no less than five acres. The A-2 zone allows for AG-2 2 acres 30 ft. Agriculture/ low-density residential and supporting agriculture (sic) Single-Family as a conditional use, on a minimum lot size of one AG-5 5 acres 30 ft. Agriculture/ acre. (SLC) Single-Family A I acre 30 ft. Single-Family (SLCo) .A EMW ti Graphic 1.15 1 Residential in the Plan Area SALT LAKE CITY NORTHIPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 65 Active Building r is and Recent Development There are currently a few active building permits within Northpoint that congregate along the 2200 W roadway and fall under the M-1 and BP zoning designations. A new development called Moonlake Farms has an active engineering permit and is among one of ten active permits for growing cannabis in Utah. There is also a new Industrial Building being built just north of the Sherwin Williams. Along the 210ON roadway, ; two new multi-tenant warehouse building have active permits as well. A key development proposal currently is the Swaner l Subdivision, a 434-acre master planned development with about 5 million square feet of industrial on the 3 C shaped parcel shown to the right currently zoned ; BP. This development would likely be cause for improvements on 2200 West to account for new increase in traffic. Another development conversation in this area is an proposed annexation petition for the land in the ' northeast section of the plan area. This proposed annexation was initiated by the landowners who wish to annex their land into Salt Lake City for the purpose of light industrial. A prior annexation conversation contemplated residential, however, that annexation was not pursued since Salt Lake City has determined that new residential would not be supported in the Graphic 1.16 Active Applications Plan Area. UtHities Broadband The Plan Area is serviced by a mix of fixed wireless and wireline (cable, dsl and fiber)broadband internet.Within the census tract that Northpoint occupies, 10.60%of households are without internet access.The companies serving the area are Centurylink for local exchange, Rocky Mountain Power for electric utility territory and Dominion Energy for natural gas. The Utah Broadband Plan adopted in January 2020 set a goal to "Utilize best practices to encourage continued expansion of broadband deployment and increase speeds for everyone to 25 Mbps or better in communities throughout Utah". The Plan Area currently has network speeds of 90.47/28.05 Mbps and its max advertised consumer download speeds are 10,000.00 Mbps. Industrial Wastewater The Salt Lake City Corporation's pretreatment The initial capital improvement program for street program oversees industrial wastewater lighting in 2012 included a metric of converting discharged into the City's sanitary sewer system. the City's entire inventoryto high-energy efficiency Industrial wastewater treatment, to reduce or LED lamps by the end of 2021 . The continuous eliminate conventional and toxic pollutants, prior lighting maps do not extend into the Plan Area to discharge into to the POTW (publicly owned likely due to the lack of development in the area treatment works) is required and regulated under and the irregular Salt Lake City boundary. the Clean Water Act. Irrigation Canals Salt Lake City is also undergoing redevelopment There are several irrigation canals running through of its Water Reclamation Facility. The wastewater Northpoint that serve the greater Salt Lake City system will address new regulation from the area. The Rudy Drain runs diagonally across the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and study area from its connection to the Greater Salt Utah's Department of Water Quality to reduce Lake in the upper northwest quadrant to the lower pollution and transform aging infrastructures. southeast quadrant. Running along the western The Water Reclamation Center is located about a boundary is the Salt Lake City Canal Sewage. The mile to the east of Northpoint and is replacing the southern boundary has a Reclamation ditch just old structure, which was 55 years old. north of the international airport. Service Areas The Salt Lake City Public Utilities service area LEOENO covers most of Northpoint with the exception of a portion to the north, just south of the Jordan River and a portion on the southern boundary. The remaining area is considered unincorporated territory. Though there are few sewer lines to this area, development is encroaching from the southeast and slowly extending utilities with it. Many residential and agricultural properties in this area rely on septic sewer systems. Street Lighting Public Utilities within Salt Lake manages and maintains more than 15,000 street lights, including those in Northpoint. The few residences and commercial customers within the area support street lighting through a monthly user fee, included in the bill for drinking water, wastewater, n A stormwater and sanitation services. A 3__ Graphic 1.17 Utilities in Northpoint I Source:SAC GIS Data SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 67 Transportation The eastern edge of the Plan Area runs along 1-215, which Plan Area include 3200W, a gravel acts as the main transportation route for the larger area. road with minimal traffic that serves As Northpoint currently has little development beyond a as the western boundary of the Plan small portion of residential housing to the northwest and Area, 350ON at the northern boundary, light industrial to the south, the transportation routes 2100N at the southern boundary, and within the Plan Area consist mainly of gravel roads. 2200 several gravel and paved residential W divides the area into clear sections which suggest and commercial driveways. an informal development boundary along the roadway. The main entries to the Plan Area are Recent development in the area has almost exclusively the exit from 1-215 to 2100N from the been, between the roadway and 1-215. Other roads in the south, and Center Street13500N from the north. With increasing development pressure in the Plan Area, it will become increasingly important to make improvements to these interchanges and enhancements to 2200 W. Public Transportation The public transportation options that connect the Plan Area are limited. The 454 Green bus line extends to Airport Station on the south side of Salt Lake City International Airport but does not reach the Plan Area. The closest bus line to the area is the F522 Line running north/south on 2200 W. This bus line reaches the southern boundary and its final stop is near the Boeing warehouse. This bus line offers access to the light industrial and commercial businesses. - This accessibility suggests that LEGENO increasing the amount of industrial and commercial centers within the southern aWggi. t half of Northpoint would be supported by public transportation. 2019 Average Annual Daily Traffic Counts Route 200 extends along Redwood ` Road to the southeast of Northpoint. However, this adjacent route is not Graphic 1.18 Average Annual Daily Trips Source:UDOT accessible within a I 5-minute walk of current Economic Impact of Transportation homes of businesses within Northpoint. Limited access to public transportation and the Bike Accessibility barrier of 1-215 require households in the Plan Area The major bikeways extending through the Plan to rely on personal vehicles or rideshare options Area are the Jordan River Trail, Parkway Trail, to commute to and from work, errands, and and a bike lane along 2200 W and 21 OON. The schools.The Centerfor Neighborhood Technology bikeways along 2200 W and 21 DON are designated recommends a household spend no more than medium comfort by Bike SLC. The painted bike 15% of their annual income on transportation. lane disappears as the surroundings become For a regional-typical household in this area, that more rural moving northbound through the Plan means no more than $9,329. Households in this Area. These routes do not have high traffic but census block spend an average of $16,167- 175% bikers must share the roads with vehicles in the higher than this benchmark. This is also higher same lanes. than the Salt Lake City average of $13,211 . -Olt, Graphic 1.19 1 Annual Driving Costs per Household I Source:Center for Graphic 1.20 Utah Transit Authority Bus Neighborhood Technology SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 69 Demographics Economy Over the last decade, Salt Lake City has grown 105 people are employed within the Plan Area by roughly 14,000 new residents. Most of this but live elsewhere, and 74 Northpoint residents growth has been concentrated in downtown Salt commute out of the area for work. No residents Lake City, Central City, and Sugarhouse, each of both live and work within the Plan Area. which grew by over 2,000 residents between 2010 Of the jobs within the Plan Area boundary, and 2020. Northpoint falls within the Westpointe Wholesale Trade (30% of the jobs) and Community Council area, which saw a population Transportation and Warehousing (22%) are the decrease (1 .6%) over the last decade. most common industries. In 2018, about 54% of Approximately 140 people live within the Plan Area those jobs within the Plan Area boundary provided in roughly 60 households. City Council District 1, less than $40,000 per year in salary, roughly 63% which encompasses the Plan Area boasts the of the median household income for overall Salt largest share of Hispanic or Latino Population Lake City residents at $63,971 . (48%) of all Council Districts. 105 Pe *pie Commute IN for OU r work a wl::/.......... PopuLation by TAZ Less Residents More Residents I= IN= Graphic 1.21 1 Commuting Patterns and Population I Source:U.S.Census 2019 70 Within and immediately outside of the Plan The Center for Neighborhood Technology Area, major employers include the Salt Lake City estimates that households within the Plan Area International Airport, Amazon, and the Salt Lake are spending on average, 47% of their income on Mosquito Abatement Center. housing and transportation costs every month. Those who live in the Plan Area have a higher As Salt Lake County grows and expands west, combining housing and transportation costs median household income than the City as into one number offers an expanded view of a whole at $75,791 and tend to work in the affordability by showing the impacts of a longer service industry, transportation and utilities, or manufacturing. daily commute on the affordability of a community. The Center for Neighborhood Technology sets a Housing housing and transportation spending benchmark of no more than 45% of a household's income, There are about 60 homes within the Plan Area rather than using the traditional rule of no more and 1,487 housing units in the associated census than 30% on housing alone. tract. Housing is concentrated east of 2200 W due to environmental constraints and airport impacts. Funding the Future Housing within the Plan Area is comprised entirely Salt Lake City Council approved a 0.5% sales tax single-family housing units, some of which are increase in May 2018. This increase will typically agricultural properties. generate about $34 million a year in ongoing The Plan Area has a high rate of owner-occupied funding and is the first part of a funding strategy units at 85.4% and an average home value of to address street conditions, affordable housing, $438,000. This is higher than the median price for public transit, and neighborhood safety. The Plan the zip code as a whole at $346,900. The zip code Area could benefit from funding for an affordable saw a 24% increase in home prices between 2020 housing program and increased neighborhood and 2021 . safety. 47% Housing:23% Transportation: 24% ff a a . IIV all I a4l? Al � a i Graphic 1.22 Housing and Transportation Costs as Percent of Income Per Household I Source:Center for Neighborhood Technology SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 71 Community Amenities The Plan Area is bordered by the Jordan River Northstar Elementary School, and Northwest connecting Utah Lake to the Great Salt Lake, Middle School. Only one crossing of 1-215 allows and passing through three counties. Many for access to these areas. As shown below, 1-215 sections of the Jordan River have access trails severely limits access to community resources running parallel to the river and connect nearby like schools, religious organizations, recreation, parks. Although the Plan Area lies adjacent and other gathering areas. to the River, the formal trail stops to the to the east of 1-215. Directly east of the Plan Area are the Regional Athletic Complex, Jordan River OHV State Recreation Area, Westpointe Park, cc UJ FOXBORO ELEMENTARY rr SPECTRUM ACADEMY 19 9, COLISEUM FITNESS 1 9 1 19 CENTER STREET TRAILHEAD j �RDAN RIVER OHV q S E RECREATION AREA REGIONAL ATHLETIC COMPLEX NORTHWEST MIDDLE SCHOOL : 9 NORTHS GUADALUPE SCHOOL R ELEMENTARY ROSEWOOD PARK SCHOOL 190 4? 4?SALT LAKE CENTER FOR SCIENCE EDUCATION WESTPOINTt UNITY BAPTIST CHURCH CC PARK 9 CC Graphic 1.23 1 Amenities near the Plan Area 72 ,# • / f % . . � ! ! } - , . * . . _ . � w = _ . ! . � Graphic t21Tra12Q map 7 the Jordan River SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT sad-:• �+. ,� a �L �. � "" -� t� y •< �, � e��' > r}:Y � '" e K�t4 ice..� r Q .�` }� m�� `¢ .'�`°*. b ., �. � �, 4 � ._ � , , �u f r �° a � m>a_ a e��°. _ _ � o _ n_ '�'8P' �� 0 a a a 4 4� 8 ® 1 b a as t' agw9 d LL 1 Appendi)( B: Public Input The public input process included various opportunities for engagement. One-on-one interviews with residents, developers, environmental groups, and city and county staff were conducted throughout the summer of 2021. Over 30 people attended a public open house in the spring of 2022, and two public questionnaires and a property owner-specific questionnaire were distributed over the course of the Northpoint Small Area project. The following is a record of the engagement and materials from the open house and survey results. HouseOpen jai it eats A � A(ease(ns cate year vlsuat preferences by placing a sticker on the pictures' What amenities Would you like to see as this road redevelops? S rea wdh Sye, 3'c:c 8ikst..r Roun4_ SeRace Edge liar.Hiipn Wentz S i{tnba�4lSw Sbeats Gdsswdks with 5ki01nd Raxkways pllnkdlmtM1 Natv2 $UfPS wah f;at6,an Fan Fb9e antl planieis a,a tnn Wa;e,Snaxs What else? * e � t r try piecing a stl the ' t t Please+auicate your visual preferences by placing a sticker an the pictures' C What design elements are appropriate for new business and industrial space lnteraction elements woutd Wou like tosee devetopment in this area? •=':1 g.imNtc-mun:y g �o%edscape and Wiid tatrlerbiy Ugntinq Them is Sotinq Aenas 5 e�5a.�-daMens tree LantlscdG�nd 0lendedwthtantlswpe d.t rt .-..' _ F YbMt Jtdeb tti�+�iti+IRs'&nvis tY&�tsdvas U4b4'3t®ffi i 4 i a ""afro oo int,—.Natx..1.1"80tees Natutai8 id'nq MaieNats i � .. ,ausS:u�Rsxd�e t:ai {.e.t:eaen Raa:J ..`. ++ w+ What else? In " -_.. r Ir,o` t�,s' 06a, { grif t a MY'd {hlnyl ��N�Kn W'te-Fnendryfercmg No.sd Mdig ion Pesfgn Etement5 d,t,A�'�t r (eq texlUtEd nuke wash) y n'_; t - ti ,' u ;P,, ►�� LEGEND i •�." 1� t Northpoint Boundary 500ft Wetland Buffer t Y 100ft Wetland Buffer 50 ft Wetland Buffer Business Park Zoning `# Salt Lake County A-2 P AG-2 AG-5 ---Proposed Lot Lines Roads t Report for Northpoint Property Owner Questionnaire Response Counts Completion Rate: 85.7% MEMEMEMEMEMENIMM Complete 18 Partial 3 Totals: 21 1. What is your relationship with the Northpoint area? (select all that apply) 100 80 60 (D LL 40 20 0 I own property here I live here I own a business here I work here Value Percent Responses I own property here 100.0% 17 1 Live here 70.6% 12 1 own a business here 17.6% 3 1 work here 11.8% 2 2. In the Northpoint area how important is the conservation of habitat and ecosystems to you? 6%Somewhat Not Important 12%Neutral 6%Somewhat Important 77%Highly Important Value Percent Responses Highly Important 76.5% 13 Somewhat Important 5.9% 1 Neutral. 11.8% 2 Somewhat Not Important 5.9% 1 Totals: 17 3. In the Northpoint area how important is commercial and residential development to you? 35%Highly Not Important 41%Highly Important 18%Somewhat Not Important 6%Somewhat Important Value Percent Responses Highly Important 41.2% 7 Somewhat Important 5.9% 1 Somewhat Not Important 17.6% 3 Highly Not Important 35.3% 6 Totals: 17 4. Would you support conservation methods and tools that could provide financial compensation to Landowners for the preservation of natural Lands and habitats instead of development? 12%Highly Not Support 24%Neutral 59%Highly Support 6%Somewhat Support Value Percent Responses Highly Support 58.8% 10 Somewhat Support 5.9% 1 Neutral 23.5% 4 Highly Not Support 11.8% 2 Totals: 17 5. Would you support the continuation of existing Land uses such as grazing, agriculture, habitat conservation, rural residential, and wildlife? 6%Highly Not Support 12%Neutral 6%Somewhat Support 77%Highly Support Value Percent Responses Highly Support 76.5% 13 Somewhat Support 5.9% 1 Neutral 11.8% 2 Highly Not Support 5.9% 1 Totals: 17 6' IS there anything you'd Like tOadd? ReSponseUD Response 4 No. 7 1 am highLy against any further buiLding on the agricul-tural. Land out here. 8 The area is too cLose to the airport not to take advantage of this proximity to Lessen the burden on existing infrastructure and Lessen poLLution. This can be done preserving habitat cinserto the Great Sai± Lake. 10 We need cLean air and Less big heavy trucks in this tiny road. We can't handLe it. VVo pay our taxes just Like everyone eon the east side vve deserve more from the city. 13 Just because Land in the area has akways been zoned Business Park, itdoes not mean itshouid stay that way. | don't see how ii was ever zoned BPor anything other than conservation when it is directiy next to ecosystems that vviUbe negativeiyirnpacted bydeveLopnoent. | appreciate you asking for our opinions and for keeping the survey short, but I am somewhat disappointed in this survey asitfeeis Lacking. It's not ideal.to ask doubiebsrreied questions in surveys if you want honest answers. For exampLe, my answer to supporting residential. deveioprnentis different than nny answer tn commercial. deveiopnnent, but this survey can't refiectthat. 14 | operate a recording studio off of22OOvv and construction of anything vviii shut nne down during construction and pnssibiyforever. 15 Construction on22OOvvis dangerous without some sort ofaiternate construction road inpiacu before construction begins. 16 The area of22O0 west to32O0 west and 2lOO north to330O north isabird and vviidUfe refuge and one of the Last open spaces inSL county. |t needs to be preserved and not just overdeveioped Like the rest of the vaiieyis becoming. Thank you for your time. Robert Tayior 17 |tvvouidbe the advantage of the area and ecoiogyto think about NOT deveioping every iot inch nf open space. This isa sensitive area. There isa high saturation ofvviidUfe. migration and nesting areas here. It's avvetiand. |na meet the committee was surprised to hear about the existence of wiLdLife. We see and experience it everyday. The deLineation of preexisting residential. areas shouLd be recognized. This area was settLed by ranchers and farmers who understood the doom ofdeveLopnoent. This area isa treasure and shouidbe Left aioneOR very thoughtfuiiy and carefuiiy deveiuped. The rate with which it is occurring now is akways met with contempt and disagreement. There is another way and vvushouid make a pianof best outcomes. Respon6elD Response 20 | think the area can du both connnoerdai and have some open space' This area is not for rosidentiaD My opinion. | have seen rusidentioi next to airports and it's not nice atoU' 21 My fanoiiy has been here for over 100 years. 4 Lot of the oider homes were buiit byfanniiy. Now with the restrictions ofbuikjing and septic use. You can't Let your chiidrenbuiida house ona1/4 acre Lot. | have had to have chiidren move towood cross to have there own home. The current restrictions render the ground useLess for buiLding anything. Yet keeping some space stiLL for AG use. The bigger Lots have aii ready been soidtndeveiopers. the peopieLeft vviLLbe Left with your open space weed patch and no money to move any where. 7. Are you interested in recieving further information about this project and ways to get involved? 22%No,thank you %Yes please Value Percent Responses Yes please 77.8% 14 No, thank you 22.2% 4 Totals: 18 Report for Northpoint Small. Area Plan Questionnaire Response Counts Completion Rate: 54.7% MEMEMEMEMEMENIMM Complete MEMENEM 41 Partial NONE= 34 Totals: 75 .[' What is your affiliation with the NO[thpDiOt area? 35 30 25 20 -- 15 10 5 4 |umu resident |work mthe |own property |mn interested |uma business |visit the area Other Write In area in owning owner property Value Percent Responses | am a resident 29�79� 18 | work in the area 17296 11 � | own property 31396 28 � | arn interested in owning property � 18.896 12 U | am a business owner 949� 5 U � | visit the area 25.0% 15 N Other - VVh1e In 14.1% 8 2. What is your level of support for special standards and design guidelines as a regulatory conservation tool? 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 3. What is your level of support for requiring sensitive Landscape studies as a regulatory conservation tool? 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 4. What is your level of support for development code updates as a regulatory conservation tool? 40 35 30 25 c a� i 20 d 15 10 5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 5. What is your level of support for the clustering of lots and open space as a regulatory conservation tool? 35 30 25 } 20 c a� v L 15 10 5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 C. What is your level of support for conservation easements as an incentive-based conservation tool? 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 7. What is your level of support for purchase of development rights (PDR) as an incentive-based conservation tool? 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 8. What is your level of support for transfer of development rights as an incentive-based conservation tool? 35 30 25 20 15 OEM 10 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 9. What is your level of support for preferred development sites as an incentive-based conservation tool? 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 10. What is your level of support for Lease agreements as a Land acquisition conservation tool? 50 40 30 LL 20 10 IIA 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 11. What is your level of support for mutual covenants as a Land acquisition conservation tool? 50 40 30 LL 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 12. What is your level of support for Land banking as a Land acquisition conservation tool? 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 13. What is your level of support for Land exchange as a Land acquisition conservation tool? 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 14. What open space interaction elements would you Like fO see inthe KjOrthpOint Area? (select B[[ that BD[)k) 29%Bo mzommnxeaum2.| 27- �—Interpretive/Educational-- «ommum-, rpomomomm|TraUo Signage 22%Interpretive/Education Center 49%Trails ~' - oV%FishingAnnouxAlongdm Resource River n7mvvnWnnVie ingxrmas ' Value Percent Responses m men itizedtraiiheads2jpg NU 2I096 g Muiti PurposeNaturaLTraiLs 48.896 20 Fishing Access Aiong the River 58.596 24 U� VViidUfeViuvving Areas 35.696 15 Traiis4iong Natural. Resources 48.896 20 |ntorpretive/EducationCen1er 22.0% 9 � |ntorpreLive/EducationoiSignage 26.896 11 Bnardvvaiks 29396 12 15. What open space interaction e|enleOtsVVOU|d you Like fO see inthe KjOrthpOint Area? (Be[eCƒ B[[ that BDpk ) - comments ResponselD Response My emphasis on maintaining open-space naturaL area rather than cleveLoping m park-Like area. None Great ideas for the community. This is such m treasure that isSait Lake City. The Land needs tubepreserved for future generations, pLus peopLe are not having chiLdren there may not be the need for more cleveLopment such as empty commerciaL buiLdings. Once you destroy Land for deveioprnent' you cant reverse the damage. ALL of the above amenities are wonclerfuL. However, who maintains them and fronts the cleveLopment costs? The Land being discussed does not naturaLLy produce any of the above items pictured. VVe are oLdyoLtfLats that grow things with a Lot of encouragement. VVu have been trying to improve the ground for 5O years and have done a Lot of good. However, one year nfnot pLanting and working hard takes away 50 years of work. The farms out here vvouid not be successfui if aLL of the farmers did not have other Larger farms somewhere eLse or other businesses that heLp support the farm. I support whatever cleveLopments come to this area that give the Land owners the best benefits of their property. | know everyone wants what improves their community but don't forget the Land owners and the work they have done for Lifetimes and they need their rights reserved asvveU. This ground work for homes and businesses tarnik/ Like the Rudy's .DrechseL's.Swaner's HinkLey's famiLy farmed this ground but it's no Longer feasibLe for making a Living and the ground is there retirement you want to take it from them shame onyou None not appropriate inindustriaiareas. none not appropriate inindustriaiareas None. Not appUcabie for anindustrioiarea. Restruonns. Soiarpmneison roof. Art. Shade none, not appropriate for industriaLarea none, not appropriate for industriaiarea none not appropriate onrny Land no water or for induatriaiarea Most of these are not appropriate for anindustriaLarea. Respon6elD Response None, not appropriate for industriaiarea none-not appropriate for industriaiarea 16. When imagining the future of the Northpoint area, how do you want to see 2200 WEST improved or enhanced? Which do you think may be most appropriate to the Northpoint area? (select all that apply) 20%Typical Curb and GutterPainted Bike Lane Street 11 12%Buffered Bike Lane 5%Crosswalks with Striping and Planters 17%Roundabout with Integrated 29%Parkways Planted with Native Trail Alignments and Low-Water Species 22%Street with Flat Drain Pan Edge 49%Street with Porous Surface Edge Value Percent Responses Painted Bike Lane 14.6% 6 Buffered Bike Lane 12.2% 5 Roundabout with Integrated Trail Alignments 17.1% 7 Street with Flat Drain Pan Edge 22.0% 9 Street with Porous Surface Edge 48.8% 20 Parkways Planted with Native and Low-Water Species 29.3% 12 Crosswalks with Striping and Planters 4.9% 2 Typical Curb and Gutter Street 19.5% 8 17. When imagining the future of the NOrthpDiOt area, hOVV do VDU want to see 22OO WEST improved Or enhanced? Which []O you think may be most appropriate tO the KjOrth[3OiDt area? (5e[eCt a[| fhat aODk ) - comments ResponselD Response Most of these options do not seem appropriate for 2200 West. What ever the design needs to impLemented consistentLy rather than in piecemeal, bLocks. Such approach expensive and dangerous. We reaLLy don't need curb and gutter or sidewaLks unLess this area gets over deveiopnnentsby commercial. buiidings then vvevviii need more for the residents. | do not think traditional. curb and gutter are needed for the area, but some sort of drainage is needed. It is a popuLar biking path that needs more safety forcycUsts. 18. What design elements are appropriate for new business and industrial development in the Northpoint area? 24%Natural Building Materials f 22%Integration of Community 1J Solar or Solar Gardens 22%Thematic Sitting Areas Blended with Landscape 24%LID/LEED Elements(i.e. Green Roofs) 29%Noise Mitigation Design Elements(e.g.textured noise walls) 51%Wildlife-Friendly Lighting 34%Wildlife-Friendly Fencing 27%Two-Story Live/Work Industrial Residential 29%Increased habitat/Wildlife 76%Integrated Xeriscape and Buffers Native Landscaping Value Percent Responses Integration of Community Solar or Solar Gardens 22.0% 9 LID/LEED Elements (i.e. Green Roofs) 24.4% 10 Wildlife-Friendly Lighting 51.2% 21 Two-Story Live/Work Industrial Residential 26.8% 11 Increased habitat/Wildlife Buffers 29.3% 12 Integrated Xeriscape and Native Landscaping 75.6% 31 Wildlife-Friendly Fencing 34.1% 14 Noise Mitigation Design Elements (e.g. textured noise walls) 29.3% 12 Thematic Sitting Areas Blended with Landscape 22.0% 9 Natural Building Materials 24.4% 10 .[9. What design e[eDlenfsare appropriate for new business and iO[]UBtriB[ cleVe[OQDleOt in the NOrthQOiDt areB7 - CDD101eDtB ResponselD Response Empyhasis on keeping natural. habitat and impLementing "green" approaches VViidUfe and nature arefriendiy. dense and Limited cars/roads One of the major safety issues vvouid be for the migratory birds' because this area isvvetiands that is being destroyed. You vvouid have tu put the Lights and windows inconsideration. Again, aU very nice, aUof the ideas that have been presented over the Last several. years get voted down. It seems impossibLe to present something that peopkz vviii get on board with. | want the Land owners to be abie to deveLop their properties with the highest vaLue and reguLar farming is just not a viobie option econonnicaiiy. VVaikobie design. 5ustainabks design. No grass. 20. What e[se shOULd the NOrthpOiOt Sn1B[[ /lre@ P[aD address? ReSponseUD Response 5 Piace a moratorium on deveioprnent untiithe pian is in piace. 5 The construction of2DD0VVtnpuU traffic off of22OOVV 7 320O West shouid remain unpaved. There shouLdbeabuffer/naturaLarea aiong the eastern side of32DUWest. 10 AfforclabLe Housing. SaLt Lake City is missing a big opportunity to fiLL the gap inaffordab(e housing by using the acreage in this area. VVe are inahousing crisis, there is airnost no Land Left to buiid in Sai1 Lake. this is a HUGE opportunity that Bab Lake couid miss to buiid more units that are despersteiy needed. This is not the time for ustoconnpLain about open space. Look at the Governor's initiatives and pLay your part. The mayor and city counciL of SaLt Lake are aLL about heLping the homeLess, but if we don't buiLd more housing units the homeLess popuLation wiLL onLy rise. I think the direction that it appears we are heading with this questionnaire needs to be reconsidered to incLude more, dense residentiaL units for SaLt Lake City and Sai1 Lake County 12 Need to address annexation issues and rnui1i-jurisdictionaiservice coordination issues NEED TO SAVE CROSS E RANCH possibiyby having SL County purchase property with funding from a variety ofinstitutionai entities incLuding USU, LDS Church, SLCity, Davis County, NSLCity, and Open Lands foundationsi Need Snno. moratorium on new deveLopnountuntii NorthpointSnnaii Area PLanisconopketud. 13 PLan is a waste of tax payer cloLLars. The market wiLL decide the highest and best use of Land in the area. 15 Ive researched what has been going on out here over the Last few years, with some property owners expLoring being annexed into North SaLt Lake because of the reguiation barriers that Sait Lake City has shown. Find compromise with the Landowners or SL[ may Lose some of this unincorporated Land and deveiopnnent opportunity in this area. 19 This is an inclustriaL area and business park zoning aLready exists and makes sense for this project. There are aLready protections in pLace of wetLands and habitats of threatened and endangered species. 22OOVVisaireadymaster pLanned with a 90' ROW road section. DeveLopers who cleveLop with frontage aLong 220OW are aLready required to improve and widen the sections of 2200 VV that abut their property. Many of the singie fanniiy home-owners in this area are aineady under contract toseii their property 10 business park deveinpers. There isno reason topian this area with the preservation of existing singiufanoiiy homes asagoaL ResponselD Response 22 The vaLLey and particuLarLy the westside is aLready saturated with air quaLity issues. Any commercial. deveLopment shouLd excLude air poLLution inputs. Additionaik/, water suppiy and quaUty are major issues for the state and communities which csiiks for restrictions on water use and waste. 24 Update the community. 26 density and vvaikobiUty is best for vviidUfe 28 VVetiands and the fact that they are endangered. There is becoming Less space for vviidUfe. USDA has programs for Urban Agricuiture. 31 PLease don't forget about the residents! This survey was focused on business deveiupnnent and none of the questions focused onmisu preserving the residentiaL zoning in the area. We are aLready being buLLied by deveLopers to seU our Land so they can rezone for business. PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW REZONING FOR BUSINESSES |N THE VERY SMALL REMAINING RESIDENTIAL ZONED AREAS. There are pientyof open spaces for deveiopers1obuiidthat don't require forcing us out of our homes. 33 Setbacks and Landscape areas aiong major roads. 34 Three points: 1. Leave 32U0 West unimproved. 2. Restrictions onzoning changes until. master pLan is compLete 3. Set aside buffer/open space Lands c(ustered east of320OWest. 37 The srnaii area pian needs to think about both sides. There are a Lot of neighbors taiking about conservation of their Ufestyie but |'no pretty sure none of them is making their Living from farming. I Love this area more than the average person but, I aLso know the reaLities of farming and maintaining a farm and or open space. The county couLd maintain or devel-op some traiLs and require certain Landscaping. I know that those kinds of requirements exist in aii deveiopnnents. | prefer they aiiovvthe Land owners the right to seLL/deveLop their properties. There are many options for good devel-opment in this area. Residents (37ish houses) aiong22UO west have been against a business park deveinprnent, industriaL and residenLiaL They want itto remain the same osokways. However, that cannot happen nor shouidit. 39 The homeowner and peopie that own businesses out there 48 Zoning of specific areas LoBPorM1 52 Designate this Land ao Light industrial. in the future Land use map. 54 Designate this Land as Light industrial. in the future Land use map. ResponselD Response 58 This area shouLd be Light manufacturing/inclustriaL. With the 435 acres of BP, thisvvhoie area shouid foiiovv suit More tax basis for city, groat area for business, Less water usage than farmers, etc. 59 Water use. 50 Designate this Land as Light industriaiin the future Land use map 61 Designate this Land os Light industrioLin the future Land use map 63 Designate this Land as Light industriaiin the future Land use map 64 Designate this Land as Business Park and/or Light |ndustriai 67 With the business park areas that have been approved, i1 makes the most sense for SLC to defauittu Business Park zoning for this North Point area. 70 Designate this Land as Light industriaiin the future Land use nap 71 Designate this Land asLight 75 Do we have the water to buiid more? How vviK buiiding in this area further impact the Great Sait Lake?Very concerned about maintaining open space and not further taxing our diminishing water systems. 21. Would you Like to stay involved with this planning process? Please Leave your email below! sad-:• �+. ,� a �L �. � "" -� t� y •< �, � e��' > r}:Y � '" e K�t4 ice..� r Q .�` }� m�� `¢ .'�`°*. b ., �. � �, 4 � ._ � , , �u f r �° a � m>a_ a e��°. _ _ � o _ n_ '�'8P' �� 0 a a a 4 4� 8 ® 1 b a as t' agw9 d LL 1 Northpoint Opportunity Areas i a I f t i � a Legend QNorthPoint_Boundary -9 to-8 -7 to-6 -5 -4 to-3 -2 -1 0 1 to 2 N 3to4 5to7 Northpoint Constraint Areas Wetlands(-3) Airport Owned(-3) Easements(-2) gi jtl J+,e E r Airport Influence Zones(-2,-1) Noise Contours(-1) Prime Ag Soil(-1) 1 P{ t Legend xxx 9 8 6 5 4 2 ! N 0 Q NorthPoint_eoundary Northpoint Opportunity Areas Proximity to Services(+3) underutilized(+2) vacant(+1) i t r ,• t! ( I 1! !tt d� r ! ! f! Large Parcels(+1) Access to Transportation(+1) ! # t ! # # Legend 0 t 2 3 4 5 6 N 8 Q NorthPoint Boundary sad-:• �+. ,� a �L �. � "" -� t� y •< �, � e��' > r}:Y � '" e K�t4 ice..� r Q .�` }� m�� `¢ .'�`°*. b ., �. � �, 4 � ._ � , , �u f r �° a � m>a_ a e��°. _ _ � o _ n_ '�'8P' �� 0 a a a 4 4� 8 ® 1 b a as t' agw9 d LL 1 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan I DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND FUNDING OPTIONS Northpoint represents an opportunity for Salt Lake City to encourage economic development that is compatible with the unique natural and built environment of the area, including proximity to the Salt Lake City International Airport. This area is best suited for business park and industrial development yet is hampered by the lack of significant infrastructure including transportation options and high-quality fiber broadband to the area. To realize its potential,the area requires substantial infrastructure improvements. Funding options for these improvements are discussed in this section of the report. It is a challenging time to fund infrastructure as construction costs are rising rapidly, along with interest rates. Infrastructure is generally needed before development can occur, which means that revenues generated by the project are not available for funding at the time they are most needed. Rather, other funding means must be identified,with revenue streams generated from development used later as a payback mechanism. Economic development is a key component of generating new revenue streams and is addressed in this report,along with the potential funding mechanisms that such development could enable. MARKET ANALYSIS Northpoint is suitable for industrial and agricultural use,with limited residential. The area is proximate to the Salt Lake City International Airport and, as such, experiences high noise levels that make residential development difficult. The industrial market is strong in Salt Lake County,with a vacancy rate of only 2.2 percent and rising lease rates which have increased from an average(NNN) rate of$0.53 in 4t"quarter 2020 to$0.63 in 4t"quarter 2021. Total Salt Lake County inventory approximates 135 million square feet,with 9 million square feet of space under construction. In the northwest quadrant of Salt Lake County,the vacancy rate is 2.65 percent, with year-to-date (YTD) absorption of 7.5 million square feet and an average asking rate of$0.60(NNN).1 Based on vacant acreage in the Northpoint area that the Salt Lake County Assessor's Office currently classifies as industrial,the area could absorb an additional 650,000 to 1,000,000 square feet of industrial space. This appears reasonable given current absorption patterns and the shortage of industrial space in the market. The biggest obstacles to industrial development appear to be supply chain shortages, rising construction costs and rapidly escalating interest rates. 1 Source: Colliers,Salt Lake County Industrial Market Report 4Q 2021. 1 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I May 2022 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan ( DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options COMBINED COMPONENTS FOR FUNDING OPTIONS The available tools and issuing entities discussed in this report may be combined in a variety of viable options to arrive at the desired funding level for the Northpoint area. Possible funding mechanisms include the following, each of which is discussed in more detail in following sections. • Tax Increment Areas o Community Reinvestment Areas (CRAB) o Transportation Reinvestment Zones(TRZs) o Tax Increment Bonds • Public Infrastructure Districts (PIDs) • Special Assessment Areas(SAAs) • Impact Fees • Municipal Energy Tax TAX INCREM ENT AREAS Through the creation of a tax increment area,tax revenues generated within the designated project area are split into two components: (i) Base Revenues—The amount available before the tax increment area is established. Base revenues are shared among a mix of local governments that have the power to assess taxes such as schools,cities, counties, and special districts; and (ii) Incremental Revenues—These are tax revenues in excess of the base revenues that are generated by new growth in the project area. If a project area is created,the incremental tax revenues can flow to the project area for a period of time to encourage economic development. Some states, including Utah, allow incremental local sales tax revenues, as well as property taxes,to flow to a project area for a period of time. By giving exclusive use of incremental revenues to the project area,the creation of a successful tax increment area generates a new revenue stream that can be used to pay for projects, provide incentives to developers, or collateralize tax increment bonds. The most common uses of tax increment have been for infrastructure such as roads, utilities, telecommunications, electrical upgrades and burying power lines, and parking structures.Tax increment has also been used for demolition,tenant improvements, land acquisitions, environmental cleanup,trails, lighting,signage, playgrounds, incentives to developers, economic development activities and housing. Utah currently allows for the enactment of three types of tax increment areas: • Community Reinvestment Areas (CRAB) • Transportation Reinvestment Zones(TRZs) • Housing&Transit Reinvestment Zones (HTRZs) 2 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I May 2022 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan ( DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Of these three types of tax increment areas, CRAs and TRZs could be used as financing tools for the Northpoint area. HTRZs rely on density of housing and this type of development is not suitable for Northpoint. COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AREAS(CRAS) In Utah,tax increment areas have been known by a wide variety of names over time—RDAs, URAs, EDAs, CDAs, and now as CRAB or Community Reinvestment Areas.As of 2016,the Legislature combined all types of project areas—urban renewal, economic development, and community development into a new single "Community Reinvestment Project Area" (CRA). Existing project areas will be allowed to continue, but all new project areas will be known as CRAB. The CRA Budget may either be approved by a Taxing Entity Committee (TEC) or through Interlocal Agreement with taxing entities,except where the Agency chooses to conduct a blight study to determine the existence of blight and to utilize limited eminent domain powers,which requires the approval of the TEC of both blight and the budget. If there is a finding of blight, 20 percent of the tax increment must be set aside for affordable housing. For all other projects, 10 percent of the tax increment is required to be set aside for affordable housing, if the annual increment is over$100,000. However, housing funds may be spent for affordable housing statewide and are not limited to being spent within a project area. Noticing and hearing requirements apply with the CRA designation. After the tax increment collection period has expired,the tax increment dollars that previously flowed to the CRA will flow to the taxing entities that levy the property taxes within the project area. In most cases, taxing entities receive more property tax revenues annually following expiration of the tax increment collection period than before, as property values are likely to have increased significantly through the redevelopment process. TABLE 1:COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AREAS—ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES Advantages Disadvantages Community Reinvestment Areas Community Reinvestment Areas Creates a new revenue stream. Requires cooperation of other taxing entities. 10%of revenues must be directed to affordable Relatively easy to create. housing. Flexible uses of funds. Revenues may take years to build up as development occurs over time. The Northpoint area contains roughly 1,323 acres and five tax districts. All of the tax districts are within Salt Lake City,with the exception of Tax District ACT that is found within unincorporated Salt Lake County. 3 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I May 2022 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan I DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Txou2� NORTH POINT Ex|sr|mG MARKET VALUES AND ACREAGE Property Values #:fParcels Total Market Value Residential Market Value Acres Tax District 13 63 $74,752,600 $30,700,900 666.83 Tax District 13O 3 $7,927,300 17.37 Tax District 13 | 3 $51'954'200 27.26 Tax District l3R 14 $21'076'200 $I'529'600 27.01 Tax District ACT 47 $27'957'700 $12'251'900 584.37 TOTAL 130 $183,668,000 $44,482,400 1,322.84 Legend C-1,St Northpoint Boundary North Tax District ACT 13 ---------------- Ji "to- Figure 2: Northpoint Tax Districts Although there are five separate tax districts, districts 13 and 1][l include the same taxing entities; districts 131 and 13R also have the same taxing entities. The taxing entities and their tax rates are as follows: TABLE 3-1 TAX DISTRICTS AND Txx|wsENTITIES Tax Rate Tax District 13 and 13O 4 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I K8ay2O22 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan ( DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Tax Rate Salt Lake County 0.001777 Multi-County Assessing&Collecting Levy 0.000012 County Assessing&Collecting Levy 0.000196 Salt Lake City School District 0.004809 Salt Lake City 0.003424 Salt Lake City Library 0.000652 Metropolitan Water District Salt Lake 0.000253 Salt Lake City Mosquito Abatement 0.000115 Central Utah Water Conservancy District 0.0004 TOTAL 0.011638 Tax District 131 and 13R Salt Lake County 0.001777 Multi-County Assessing&Collecting Levy 0.000012 County Assessing&Collecting Levy 0.000196 Granite School District 0.007105 Salt Lake City 0.003424 Salt Lake City Library 0.000652 Metropolitan Water District Salt Lake 0.000253 Salt Lake City Mosquito Abatement 0.000115 Central Utah Water Conservancy District 0.0004 TOTAL 0.013934 Tax District-Unincorporated Salt Lake County 0.001777 Multi-County Assessing&Collecting Levy 0.000012 County Assessing&Collecting Levy 0.000196 Granite School District 0.007105 Central Utah Water Conservancy District 0.0004 Salt Lake County Municipal-Type Services 0.000051 Unified Fire Service Area 0.001594 Salt Lake Valley Law Enforcement Service Area 0.001973 Salt Lake County Library 0.000474 TOTAL 0.013582 The market value of the property is much higher than the taxable value in the area for several reasons. First, primary residential development is taxed at 55 percent of market value. Agricultural property is in greenbelt status and taxed at extremely low rates,and public properties are tax exempt. Therefore, while the market value is nearly$184 million,taxable value is estimated at roughly$67.9 million. 5 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I May 2022 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan I DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Txou4� ESTIMATED NoxT*po|wT TAXABLE VALUE Estimated Taxable Value Tax Districts I3and 13(l $37'500'000 Tax Districts 1]|and 1] R $20'400'000 Tax District ACT $IO'OUO'OOU Total Taxable Value $67,900,000 Taxable value will increase as development occurs in Northpoint. Of the 1,323 acres in Northpoint, approximately 437 acres are either vacant or held in agricultural use. TABLE 5: VACANT ACRES Tax Districts 13 and Tax Districts 13|and Vacant Acres Tax District ACT Total 13[l 18R Residential 8.34 19.81 28.15 Industrial I7.40 14.19 42.56 74.15 Agricultural 111.68 223.04 ]]4.72 TOTAL Acres 137.42 14.19 285.41 437.01 For purposes of estimating future tax revenues,this study assumes that the residential and industrial vacant acres are developed as residential and industrial respectively and makes no assumptions about future development of the agricultural property. T«msG� PROJECTIONS op FUTURE DEVELOPMENT Amount Residential Development Undeveloped acres 28.15 Units per Acre Z Units developed 56 Average market value per unit $600,000 Average taxable value per unit $330,000 Total residential taxable value $18,480,000 Industrial Development Undeveloped acres 74.15 Floor area ratio 0.2* Taxable value per sf $200 Estimated taxable value $129'193'733 *If the floor area ratio(FAR)can be increased to 0.3,then the estimated total taxable value would increase to nearly$l94million For purposes of analysis,this report assumes that the majority of the development takes place in the unincorporated County, asit has the largest amount of vacant acres. The table below shows projections uf roughly$2 million per year in additional property tax revenues from this area. 6 ZionsPub|ic Finance, Inc. I K8ay2O22 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan ( DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options TABLE 7; PROJECTIONS OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT Tax Rates-ACT Incremental Revenues Generated Salt Lake County 0.001777 $262,416 Multi-County Assessing&Collecting Levy 0.000012 $1,772 County Assessing&Collecting Levy 0.000196 $28,944 Granite School District 0.007105 $1,049,222 Central Utah Water Conservancy District 0.0004 $59,069 Salt Lake County Municipal-Type Services 0.000051 $7,531 Unified Fire Service Area 0.001594 $235,392 Salt Lake Valley Law Enforcement Service Area 0.001973 $291,360 Salt Lake County Library 0.000474 $69,997 TOTAL 0.013582 $2,005,705* *If the industrial development assumptions are increased to a FAR of 0.3, rather than 0.2,then annual incremental property tax revenues generated increase to nearly$2.9 million annually. A portion of these revenues could be allocated to a CRA for a period of time in order to pay for needed improvements and infrastructure in the area. TRANSPORTATION REINVESTMENT ZONE(TRZ) A TRZ is one type of area that can be formed where tax increment can be used to accelerate development within the defined project area.According to Utah Code§11-13-103(22), "Transportation Reinvestment Zone" means an area created by two or more public agencies by interlocal agreement to capture increased property or sales tax revenue generated by a transportation infrastructure project.TRZs are ideal for projects such as Frontrunner, light rail, or major arterials that span multiple jurisdictions. Any two or more public agencies may enter into an agreement to create a transportation reinvestment zone but one of these entities must have land use authority over the TRZ area—in other words,Salt Lake City must be a partner in this endeavor. Taxable Value($) LEGEND Funds to Taxing Entities Funds to RDA m 7 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I May 2022 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan ( DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options A TRZ is much like a Community Reinvestment Area (CRA) in that a portion of tax increment is pledged to the project for a specified period of time.The agreement between the two or more public entities must include the following, as specified in Utah Code §11-13-227(2): • Define the transportation need and proposed improvement • Define the boundaries of the zone • Establish terms for sharing sales tax revenue among the members of the agreement, if sales tax is to be included • Establish a base year to calculate the increase of property tax revenue within the zone • Establish terms for sharing any increase in property tax revenue within the zone • Hold a public hearing regarding the details of the TRZ Property tax revenues that are shared between members of the agreement are required to be incremental (Utah Code§11-13-227(2)(e). In order to identify incremental revenues, a "base year" needs to be established.The law clearly allows for the sharing of both sales tax and property tax revenue among the members of the agreement. There are advantages to governance with TRZs, as compared to CRAB,for projects that span multiple jurisdictions. In fact,there are only a few redevelopment areas in Utah that currently overlap multiple communities. While such are allowed by law,governance can be tricky. For example, in a CRA spanning two cities, each city would have its own redevelopment agency. Who then governs the project area?Joint RDA board meetings can be held, each agency board can meet separately, or there can be a MOU designating one of the RDA boards as the lead agency. Experience dictates that concerns often arise when more tax increment is generated in one jurisdiction of the project area than in another.There are often concerns about equity in spending funds in the same jurisdiction from which they come. Each redevelopment agency involved has to submit its annual report detailing the increment generated and how funds were spent, further exacerbating this concern. The TRZ overcomes many of these problems. First,with a TRZ,there is no requirement for RDA involvement, and therefore no need for RDA meetings.The TRZ is simply governed by an interlocal agreement signed by the parties.TRZs have proven effective in other states when projects cross multiple jurisdictions. With a TRZ there is no requirement to measure in which community increment is generated and where funds are spent.The purpose is simply to achieve an overall project.And only one annual report has to be filed for the TRZ—not separate reports for each participating entity. Another advantage to TRZs is the ability to obtain the commitment of transportation agencies,such as UDOT or UTA,for specific projects. Interlocal agreements between the public entity with the land-use authority and a transportation agency will identify the specific projects associated with the TRZ.This will add another level of certainty to local planning efforts and will give these public entities some additional leverage in prioritizing needed transportation projects. 8 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I May 2022 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan I DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Advantages and Disadvantages The following table lists the advantages and disadvantages of funding transportation projects with tax increment generated in Transportation Reinvestment Zones: TABLE 8-1 TRANSPORTATION REINVESTMENT ZONES ASA FUNDING SOURCE FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS, Advantages Disadvantages Transportation Reinvestment Zones Transportation Reinvestment Zones Creates new revenue stream. Revenue directed to transportation projects will not be available to provide other services. Relatively easy tocreate. Requires cooperation between at least two entities. Projected to produce substantial revenue stream over Must find a nexus with transportation projects tojustify time. use of the increment. No affordable housing requirement. Revenues may take years to build upasdevelopment occurs over time. TAX INCREMENT BONDS Tax increment Bonds were developed in California in 1952 as an innovative way ofraising local matching funds for federal grants.They became increasingly popular in the 1980s and 1990s,when there were declines in subsidies for local economic development from federal grants, state grants,and federal tax subsidies(especially industrial development bonds). Tax Increment Bonds are collateralized by the incremental growth in property taxes within a given project area.They capture the future tax benefits of real estate improvements to pay the present cost of those improvements. It is a financing strategy designed to make improvements to a targeted project area or district without drawing on general fund revenue or creating a new tax. Ratings on tax increment bonds are tied to the performance of the area or district, not to the creating government's general fund.As a result,the ratings differ from those of the creating entity's general obligation rating.The rating of tax increment bonds hinges on local economics,trends,and taxpayer diversity,with taxpayer diversity being the most highly correlated statistic. Rating agencies evaluate whether the tax increment revenues could survive the loss of one or more top taxpaying property owners, how debt service could be managed in the case of broad-based decline of assessed value, real estate trends and historical assessed values in the designated area, and the types n[ properties located or being developed in the tax increment area.The assessed value of hotels is the most volatile,followed by warehouses, commercial, condos, and last residential. Many issuers opt to offer tax increment bonds on a non-rated basis. It is virtually impossible to secure a rating for or sell a tax increment bond before the increment is actually flowing, unless there is recourse to the local government's credit or some other enhancement. 9 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I May 2O22 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan ( DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Typically,tax increment bonds carry longer terms(anywhere from 10 to 30 years) and are purchased at a fixed rate using larger denominations of$100,000.There is usually no recourse to either the issuer or the developers who may benefit from the bonds. Pledged revenues vary, but a typical pledge is a senior security interest in the tax increment revenues as well as any debt service reserve funds.The bonds are often offered via a limited public offering and most often sold to institutional buyers(primarily mutual funds and occasionally property/casualty insurers) using a limited offering memorandum. It is typical to see interest capitalized for at least two to three years to allow increment to begin flowing before debt service payments are required from that increment. Unspent proceeds, capitalized interest and reserve funds are held by a Trustee. Debt service coverage covenants vary based on type of tax increment revenue and other security features associated with the bonds, but minimum coverage requirements are almost always at least 1.25 times annual debt service. Advantages and Disadvantages The following table lists the advantages and disadvantages of funding with tax increment bonds: TABLE 9:TAX INCREMENT BONDS AS A FUNDING SOURCE Advantages Disadvantages Tax Increment Bonds Tax Increment Bonds Create a new revenue stream that can fund capital Tend to carry higher interest and costs of issuance. improvements and economic development. Creating entity does not have to bear financial burden Often require the cooperation and agreement of alone but can share it with other taxing entities within a multiple taxing entities to generate sufficient incremental revenues to finance the desired project area. infrastructure. Bonds can't be sold unless the tax increment is already Tax increment revenues can be used to pay for flowing or is imminent and nearly certain to flow or is administrative expenses. enhanced by a government's credit or other mechanism. Financial and legal liability is limited by having a Typically take longer from start to finish than other redevelopment agency.' financing types.' Critics of Tax Increment Bonds sometimes assert that Creating entity may gift tax revenues or property to tax increment is just a reallocation of tax revenues by provide incentives for development. which some municipalities win,and others lose.4 An RDA is a separate political subdivision which can enter into agreements with developers and issue the bonds. s It is difficult to estimate the time required for the"political"side of the process,which often requires significant information sharing between local government and developers,including a public hearing for approval of the Project Area Plan and Budget.Setting aside the political requirements,the bond issuance process usually takes three to five months. d Critics of Tax Increment Bonds sometimes assert that some or all the increment is not attributable to the creation of the tax increment area and that the new property value growth would have occurred anyway. 10 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I May 2022 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan ( DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Advantages Disadvantages Tax Increment Bonds Tax Increment Bonds Creating entity may be able to encourage or accelerate the timeframe of desired development types through offering tax increment incentives to the developer. Mortgage on the property can also be given as bond security under Utah law in addition to incremental revenue. PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE DISTRICTS (PIDS) PIDs are generally most successful in larger, undeveloped areas where there are significant infrastructure needs. Because the unanimous consent of all property owners is required for the creation of a PID, it is difficult to establish PIDS in areas with numerous property owners. However, portions of the study area could be included—especially those areas with larger parcels,fewer property owners, and significant infrastructure needs. If created, a PID can be combined with other revenue sources such as tax increment and those revenues could be used to pay the PID bonds.These funding tools may further facilitate development and increase property values,which may in turn provide for more opportunities to fund basic infrastructure(through tax increment financing or general tax collection).The PID tool allows for creation of a separate taxing entity in order to fund public infrastructure. Ultimate users of the property pay for the improvements via the taxing entity through property assessments.These assessments permit for bonding, allowing for covering upfront infrastructure expenses that are repaid over periods typically near 30 years.This tool results in higher property taxes for property owners/users in the defined district. Consequently, benefits beyond the improved infrastructure can be included in the area.This can be in the form of better landscaping, street lighting, public spaces, parks,trails,finishes,etc.These benefits aid in creating property appeal, property value increases and in attracting top quality businesses. The PID tool also represents a valuable option for cities who are reticent to bond with property tax revenues in a standard tax increment collection area. Bonding permits for upfront infrastructure costs to be covered, oftentimes expediting development that may not have otherwise occurred.A city may create a PID with no increase in the tax rate and use the PID as a conduit to issue bonds. In this approach,the city is not financially responsible for the bond payments, and the bonding does not affect the city's credit rating. The process for starting a Public Infrastructure District begins with a citywide policy.This represents a "30,000-foot"view of the tool for the municipality and merely outlines the guidelines as to how a developer should submit for a PID.The PID policy may incorporate specific goals and vision statements of the city. Once a policy is adopted, a developer may submit a letter of intent to create a PID.This is reviewed by the city, and if approved,governing documents are required to be submitted and approved 11 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I May 2022 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan ( DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options by the City Council.The simple passing of a general PID policy does not require the City Council to approve governing documents or letters of intent. Consequently,the PID policy represents another tool that can be used when appropriate.As of 2022, several cities throughout Utah have adopted PID policies and multiple public infrastructure districts have been formed. TABLE 10'PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE DISTRICTS AS A FUNDING SOURCE Advantages Disadvantages PIDs PIDs Create a new revenue stream that can fund capital Tend to carry higher interest and costs of issuance. improvements and economic development. Any debt issued is not on the books of the local Cities may feel it limits public support for future tax rate government entity. increases or bond elections due to the perception of already-high rates. Can raise a significant amount of revenue with legally- Requires unanimous support of all taxing entities to put allowed tax rates of up to 15 mils. in place. Accelerates development timeframe through upfront Ongoing PID governance funding for capital costs. Can reduce the need for impact fees. Competitiveness of site with other sites given higher tax rates Mortgage on the property can also be given as bond security under Utah law in addition to incremental revenue. Cost is much lower than other development financing. The current taxable value of North Point is approximately$68,000,000. The maximum mill rate allowed by Utah law is 0.015; however,districts are choosing to enact much lower rates. Politically, it would be nearly impossible to obtain the consent of the entire Northpoint area to create a PID. However, smaller sections that are wanting to encourage economic development could be developed as PIDs. The table below shows the amount of annual property tax revenues that could be generated for such a district given varying taxable values and varying tax rates up to the maximum of 0.015. TABLE 11'.PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE DISTRICT ANNUAL REVENUES BASED ON VARYING MILL RATES AND TAXABLE VALUES Property Taxable Values 0.015 Mill Rate .0075 Mill Rate .004 Mill Rate $10,000,000 $150,000 $75,000 $40,000 $20,000,000 $300,000 $150,000 $80,000 $30,000,000 $450,000 $225,000 $120,000 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREAS (SAAs) Special Assessment Areas("SAAs"),formerly known as Special Improvement Districts or"SID"s, are a financing mechanism that allows governmental entities to designate a specific area for the purpose of 12 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I May 2022 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan ( DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options financing the costs of improvements, operation and maintenance, or economic promotion activities that benefit property within a specified area. Entities can then levy a special assessment, on parity with a tax lien,to pay for those improvements or ongoing maintenance. The special assessment can be pledged to retire bonds, known as Special Assessment Bonds, if issued to finance construction of a project. Utah Code §11-42 deals with the requirements of special assessment areas. The underlying rationale of an SAA is that only those property owners who benefit from the public improvements and ongoing maintenance of the properties will be assessed for the associated costs as opposed to other financing structures in which all City residents pay either through property taxes or increased service fees. While more information about SAAs is included below, it could be difficult politically for the City to obtain support from a large number of property owners. While not subject to a bond election as is required for the issuance of General Obligation bonds,SAAs may not be created if 40 percent or more of those liable for the assessment payments protest its creation. Despite this legal threshold, most local government governing bodies tend to find it difficult to create an SAA if even 10-20 percent of property owners oppose the SAA. Once created, an SAA's ability to levy an assessment has similar collection priority/legal standing as a property tax assessment. However,since it is not a property tax, any financing secured by that levy would likely be done at higher interest rates than general obligation, sales tax revenue or utility revenue bonds. Interest rates will depend on a number of factors including the ratio of the market value to the assessment bond amount,the diversity of property ownership and the perceived willingness and ability of property owners to make the assessment payments as they come due. Even with the best of special assessment credit structure, if bonds are issued they are likely to be non-rated and therefore would be issued at rates quite a bit higher than similar General Obligation Bonds that would likely be rated. All improvements financed via an SAA must be owned by the City and the repayment period cannot exceed twenty(20)years. Whenever SAAs are created, entities have to select a method of assessment(i.e. per lot, per unit(ERU), per acre,taxable value, market value, by linear foot frontage, etc.)which is reasonable,fair and equitable to all property owners within the SAA. State law does not allow property owned by local government entities such as cities or school districts to be assessed. TABLE 12,SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREAS AS A FUNDING SOURCE Advantages Disadvantages SAAs SAAs Forty percent of the assessed liability, be it one Bonds are tax-exempt although the interest cost is not property owner or many could defeat the effort to as low as a GO or revenue bond create the SAA if they do not want to pay the assessment Some increased administrative burden for the City No requirement to hold a bond election but the City although State law permits an additional amount to be must hold a meeting for property owners to be included in each assessment to either pay the City's assessed before the SAA can be created increased administrative costs or permit the City to hire an outside SAA administrator 5 Based on the method of assessment selected,i.e.,acreage,front footage, per lot,etc. 13 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I May 2022 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan ( DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Advantages Disadvantages SAAs SAAs Only benefited property owners pay for the The City cannot assess government-owned property improvements or ongoing maintenance within the SAA Limited risk to the City as there is no general tax or revenue pledge Flexibility since property owners may pre-pay their assessment prior to bond issuance or annually thereafter as the bond documents dictate—if bonds are issued IMPACT FEES Impact fees are one-time fees paid by new development to offset the capital costs associated with new development for basic utilities such as water,sewer,storm water, public safety, roads and parks/trails. In order to collect impact fees, cities must carefully follow the requirements of Utah Code 11-36a which includes the following major steps. • Prepare and pass a resolution authorizing study of an impact fee • Conduct an impact fee study to determine the appropriate amount of such a fee • Provide public notice of the possible fee 14 days prior to the public hearing • Hold a public hearing to take comment regarding the proposed fee Salt Lake City has already established impact fees that could be used to generate revenues on projects developed within its City boundaries. However,Salt Lake County would need to charge impact fees on the unincorporated areas of North Point. Impact fees collected would need to be spent on capital projects listed in each respective entity's Impact Fee Facilities Plans(IFFPs). Therefore, careful coordination would need to take place between Salt Lake City and the County to ensure that the costs of needed projects are fairly allocated between the two entities. Advantages and Disadvantages The following table lists the advantages and disadvantages of funding projects with impact fees: TABLE 13: IMPACT FEES AS A FUNDING SOURCE Advantages Disadvantages Impact Fees Impact Fees New development pays for its fair share of the costs Adds additional costs to development incurred by new development Impact fees are generally paid when building permits are issued;therefore,funds are often not available upfront when infrastructure needs are greatest 14 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I May 2022 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan ( DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Advantages Disadvantages Impact Fees Impact Fees Impact fees cannot be used to cure existing deficiencies MUNICIPAL ENERGY TAX Salt Lake City has enacted the municipal energy tax to the full 6 percent allowed by law on all taxable portions of electric and gas bills. Therefore, any development that takes place in Salt Lake City would generate this additional revenue that could be used to assist with economic development and infrastructure costs in Northpoint. The municipal energy tax applies only to development that occurs in Salt Lake City and not in Salt Lake County. 15 Zions Public Finance, Inc. I May 2022 sad-:• �+. ,� a �L �. � "" -� t� y •< �, � e��' > r}:Y � '" e K�t4 ice..� r Q .�` }� m�� `¢ .'�`°*. b ., �. � �, 4 � ._ � , , �u f r �° a � m>a_ a e��°. _ _ � o _ n_ '�'8P' �� 0 a a a 4 4� 8 ® 1 b a as t' agw9 d LL 1 Salt Lake City Major Street Plan Amendment for Northpoint Area 3500 N Legend Designation Arterials 1 Local Streets 3300 N Proposed Arterial Streets 1 ' 2950 N 0 0 # o N CD , N M N / N Alp Alp Alp Ok i 1 1 1 1 1 2100 N N 0 320640 1,280 1,920 Feet Ak 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED The first public draft of the Northpoint Small Area Plan was online and available for public comment from July 26,2022—September 19,2022.The plan received 685 views and 195 total comments during this time.The majority of the comments were left directly on the draft using the software Konveio and can be viewed by visiting this link: 8 11W IC200 '�392__ All other written public comments are included in either the Staff Report published on October 26, 2022 or the Staff Report published for the December 14, 2022 meeting. Public comments that were received following the publishing of those staff reports are included on the following pages. From gnidy-cromer To: Norris-Nick;0ktayJ�coaela Cc: _Martinez Diana; Subject: (ExrExwmL)rw: request to recall: Northpoint Small Area Plan Date' Tuesday,January 10,2023/:39:08AM Please forward to members ofthe Planning Commission, via their e mail addresses if To Chairman Bachman and Members of the Salt Lake City Planning Commission From Cindy Cromer RE your vote on the Northpoint Small Area Plan, I2/14 | am asking the Commission to recall its vote on the Northpoint Small Area Plan on 12/14 (5-2) prior to approving the minutes at your meeting on I/11. | have made a similar request once before, in July 2021, but in that case, the Commission had failed to follow the adopted ordinance. | knew that you had to consider my request and you did. In the case of the Snna|| Area Plan, you have not violated any ordinances but have instead set the stage for consequences in the foreseeable future which | doubt that any of you would support and which | know the overwhelming majority of Salt Lake's voters would not support. There are two issues which have led rneto ask you to recall your vote. The first issue is the relationship between Northpoint and the Inland Port. Of greatest concern was the Commission's decision to ignore the staff recommendation regarding distribution centers. That change led rneto ask about the history nf Northpoint relative tothe Inland Port. According to people involved for decades, Northpoint was previously part of the Port. Former City Council Member James Rogers was also the City's representative on the Inland Port and had Northpoint removed. He then initiated the 3nna|| Area Plan with funding through the City Council. That must have been inJO19. Inserting distribution centers as an allowed use into the Srno|| Area Plan creates the potential for Northpoint to resemble the Inland Port as it redevelops and be annexed back into the Port by the State. Given what has already happened, this possibility isreal. Given the resources that the City has devoted over the past Z Administrations to protecting the City's interests in the Port, it is unconscionable that the Commission would do anything to facilitate the future expansion of the Port. Secondly, in the executive session a member of the Commission speculated that there was rampant cultivation of alfalfa and significant waste of water in current agricultural uses. So far, | have been able to identify 1 property owner growing alfalfa and the water being used is untreated, not water from Salt Lake City Public Utilities. My criticism of your recommendation began 1/3 at the City [ounci|'n meeting and is included below (last paragraph). You have failed to protect Northpoint from predictable overreach by the State government, if not now, then in the foreseeable future. You failed to seek information about the basis for the staff recommendation regarding distribution centers and instead dismissed the staff recommendation. You appeared to accept inflammatory, generic statements about the cultivation of a crop which as far as I can determine is not grown commonly in Northpoint. You failed to verify the relevance of those generic statements to a highly specific planning document. These are shortcomings from my perspective which are not prohibited by the City's ordinances. You can of course ignore my cautions, as you did my comments on 12/14, and persist with your recommendation to the City Council. I am writing to let you know that I too can persist in my objections and will continue to ask the members of the City Council to ignore your recommendation of 12/14. From: cindy cromer Sent:Tuesday,January 3, 2023 4:07 PM To: Petro-Eschler, Victoria <victoria.petro-eschler@slcgov.com>; alejandro.puy@slcgov.com <alejandro.puy@slcgov.com>; dan.dugan@slcgov.com <dan.dugan@slcgov.com>; Fowler, Amy <amy.fowler@slcgov.com>; Mano, Darin <darin.mano@slcgov.com>; Chris Wharton <chris.wharton@slcgov.com>; Valdemoros, Ana <ana.valdemoros@slcgov.com> Cc: Fullmer, Brian <Brian.Fullmer@slcgov.com>; Pantle, Brian <Brian.Pantle@slcgov.com>; Benson, Jenna <Jenna.Benson @slcgov.com>; Tuuao, Priscilla <priscilla.tuuao@slcgov.com>; Thomas, Blake <blake.thomas@slcgov.com>; Gilmore, Kristina <Kristina.GiI more @slcgov.com>; michaela.oktay@slcgov.com <michaela.oktay@slcgov.com>; cindy gust-jenson <cindy.gust- jenson@slcgov.com> Subject: Fw: Northpoint Small Area Plan: comment to the City Council 1/3/23 40 Years of Showing Up Late or Not at All: The Northwest Quadrant In the late 1980's, the Northwest Quadrant was the only part of the city without a master plan. At some point during the early 1990's, Doug Wheelwright on the Planning staff wrote a proposed plan with traditional single-family houses. Then, Genevieve Atwood presented the findings of her dissertation (published 2006). 1 was standing next to Doug at the back of the room during Genevieve's presentation. He only said, "This changes everything." Nothing else. Through the 1990's and early 2000's, Salt Lake City still did not have a plan for the Northwest Quadrant. Then the State started talking about relocating the prison. Once again Frank Gray came to the City's rescue and drafted a plan for the Northwest Quadrant adopted in 2016. The State proceeded with the relocation of the prison any way. And then the State decided to locate the Intermodal Hub near the airport. Once again the City mustered its best arguments after the fact. Then James Rogers got the funding for the small area plan, but the effort stalled with the RFP. I am still trying to piece together the City's response to a proposed annexation. My point is that the City has always failed to plan for this area in a timely manner. It shows up late over and over again. At times, it has had talented planners and attorneys assigned to the task. They have attempted to outmaneuver the State. The City has criticized the State for the Inland Port, but now the Planning Commission appears to put its blessing on a similar redevelopment of Northpoint. I am hoping that someone will explain to me how the development of distribution and manufacturing in Northpoint is different from the Inland Port in any way except that the City would retain, only for the immediate future, receipt of the property taxes. That of course assumes that the State doesn't swoop in and claim them, as it has with the Inland Port. I have no doubt that if Northpoint resembles the Inland Port in the future, the State will intervene main. I am asking you to ignore the recommendation from the Planning Commission. The Commissioners seem oblivious of the predictable outcome. DocuSign Envelope ID:568F1 AB3-E460-43A1-A68A-1 E452DE9445C NorthPoint Small Area Plan Salt Lake City PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN DATED OCTOBER 2022. The undersigned supports the amended NorthPoint Small Area Plan as presented to the Salt Lake City Planning Commission on October 26, 2022 and request that the Planning Commission approve such plan on the meeting to be held on December 14, 2022 with no additional limitations on distribution uses. The undersigned attests that they are residents of the NorthPoint Small Area located in Salt Lake City, have personally signed this petition on the date indicated, and reside or work at the stated address. :2n,ed by: Signature: Address: 2680 N 2200 w Salt Lake City, UT 84116 Date: 12/3/2022 4858-3336-8894 DocuSign Envelope ID:568F1 AB3-E460-43A1-A68A-1 E452DE9445C Krissy Gilmore Salt Lake City Senior Planner kristina.gilmore@slcgov.com Victoria Petro Eschler Salt Lake City District#1 Councilmember victoria.petro-eschler@slcgov.com RE:SUPPORT FOR THE NORHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN As a resident of the NorthPoint Small Area, I am writing to document my support for the Northpoint Small Area Plan as presented to the Salt Lake City Planning Commission on October 26, 2022. 1 would highly recommend the Planning Commission approve the plan with no additional limitations to distribution uses in its December 14`"meeting and that City Council adopt this plan as currently scheduled in January 2023.The Northpoint Small Area Plan outlines several reasons to transition the land use from agricultural to industrial while allowing landowners to participate in the economic growth of the area. Additionally,to ensure the greatest potential for economic growth in the area, we encourage the Planning Commission and/or City Council remove any limitations on the distribution uses allowed in the area. Not only would these limitations exclude the vast majority of small businesses seeking industrial space, but they would continue to drive rental rates higher for already struggling small businesses. Any limitation imposed on distribution uses would devalue the land, restrict economic growth, and increase rental rates for small businesses in the area. Thank you, DocuSi ned by: Signature L 9�—2ECMBBMMNDC... Address: 2680 N 2200 w Salt Lake City, uT 84116 Date: 12/3/2022 We the undersigned residents of North Point, respectfully oppose annexation, rezoning or Area Master Plan changes which in current zoning becoming M1 or BP. This includes opposing the master plan's proposed "transitional" land use category as well as recent changes which envision open space along the Jordan River becoming industrial areas. Such changes not only significantly impact North Point residents but the residents of surrounding westside neighborhoods. industrial zoning around existing homes condemns them to a lower quality of life,decreases their property values and will force residents to move. This directly goes against Salt Lake City's"Thriving in Place" initiative which seeks to reduce housing displacement and support"new housing at all income levels." This housing gap/shortage dwarfs the city's apparent desire for more warehouses and other commercial structures. It is the City's duty to protect residential housing from speculative industrial developers,especially when taxpayers are already paying for an Inland Port that is designed to house such industries. Other negative impacts to the entire westside include: Increased air pollution,noise pollution,light pollution Unsustainable traffic Watershed pollution and destruction of natural habitat Reduction of home ownership in the city instead,we are proposing the West side of 2200 West maintain its business park(BP)where it is currently zoned while the East side of 2200 West keep its current AG zoning which allow current residential/agricultural uses as well as future low density residential developments. Name Address M C:V � , � � � X L 0 C) tv 11 Y We, the undersigned residents of North Point, respectfully oppose annexation, rezoning, or Area Master Plan changes which result in current Toning becoming M1 (manufacturing) or BP. This includes opposing the master plan's proposed "transitional" land use category as well as recent changes which envisIr)n open space along the'ordan River becoming industrial areas. Such changes not only significantly impact North Point residents but the residents of surrounding westside neighborhoods, Industrial zoning around existing homes condemns there to a lower quaiiry of fr, decreases their property values, and will force residents to move. This d?rec iy gr,- against Salt take City's "Thriving in Place" initiative which seeks to reduce holi displacement and support"new housing at all income levels." This housing gap/shortage dwarfs the city's apparent desire for more warehouses and ot!e, commercial structures. It is the City's duty to protect residential housing from speculative industrial developers, especially when taxpayers are already paying , an Inland Port that is designed to house such industries. Other negative impacts to the entire westside include: • Increased Air pollution, Noise pollution, tight pollution • Unsustainable traffic • Watershed pollution and destruction of natural habitat • Reduction of home ownership in the city. Instead, we are proposing that the West side of 2200 West maintain its business park( ) development zoning while the East side of 2200 W keep its current AG zoning which would allow current residential/agricultural uses as well as future low density residential developments, t t U40 t i � • j f r From: Denise Pa ne To: Planning-Public Comments Subject: (EXTERNAL)Denise and John Payne 2848 North 2200 West Date: Wednesday,December 14,2022 2:34:50 PM My husband has lived on 2200 west for 45 years and I have lived here for 33 years. I oppose the transitional land use verbiage in the Master Plan and I oppose the annexation, rezoning or Area Master Plan changes which changes current zoning M I or BP. This would jeopardize open space along the Jordan River with agriculture becoming industrial areas. Such changes not only significantly impact North Point residents but the residents of surrounding westside neighborhoods. As stated in the Tribune the West side is the highest in air pollution in the area. Industrial zoning around our home condemns is to a lower quality of life, decreases our property value and will force is to move. This does not support new housing at all income levels." This housing gap/shortage dwarfs the city's apparent desire for more warehouses and other commercial structures. City Council just approved funding for affordable housing. Approving M I is going against new affordable housing. Other negative impacts to the entire westside include: Increased air pollution, noise pollution, light pollution Unsustainable traffic Watershed pollution and destruction of natural habitat Reduction of home ownership in the city Have an awesome day....... Denise Payne From: To: Planning-Public Comments Subject: (EXTERNAL)Northpoint Small Area Plan Comments for Dec. 14 Date: Wednesday,December 14,2022 3:26:06 PM Attachments: Northoaint SmaII Area Plan Comments 12-13-2022,docx Hello, FYI, Attached are the comments I submitted yesterday to Krissy Gilmore. I understand that comments will be read to the planning commission if they are under two minutes. Below are the comments I would like to have read at the meeting tonight. Dear Salt Lake City Planning Commission Members, My name is Wayne Martinson. I worked for National Audubon Society for 25 years, retiring in 2016. During this period, I worked extensively on issues regarding the Great Salt Lake, including the Gillmor Sanctuary, the northwest quadrant plan and the south shore of Great Salt Lake. Last night I submitted comments to Krissy Gilmore. I hope you consider those comments in full. The following provides three specific comments: 1. 1 support the Westpointe Board statement on the Proposed North Point Small Area Plan. In particular, I support their statement in the letter dated January 11, 2022, that the Planning Commission is urged "to continue to table action on the North Point Master Plan until such citizen input can be incorporated into the plan." 2. 1 support the comments made by Heidi Hoven, Conservation Specialist, Gillmor Sanctuary, National Audubon, in her letter to you, dated Dec. 2, 2022. The following comments in particular should be fully addressed: "The wetlands bordering the west side of Northpoint Small Area should be treated delicately and provided a minimum buffer of 300 eet which can be backed by studies that consider ecological preservation and the other functions that wetlands provide. Likewise, the Jordan River should also be treated as highest priority as it is a major source of water to Great Salt Lake and its wetlands with a 300 foot buffer (highest quality buffer recommended in BlueprintJordan River). 3. Regarding the minimum buffer of 300 feet, it could be useful to put together a committee that would fully address this buffer. This committee could work on the wetland buffer during the same time that citizen input is being incorporated into the plan. Thank you for considering these comments. Wayne Martinson Dec. 13, 2022 Kristina Gilmore, AICP Senior Planner Planning Division Department of Community and Neighborhoods Salt Lake City Corporation kristina.gillmore@slcgov.com Dear Kristina: Subject: Northpoint Small Area Plan Comments Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Northpoint Small Area Plan The following provides Personal Background and then General and Specific comments. Personal background: From 1991 to 2016, 1 worked for the National Audubon Society, first as Utah Wetlands Coordinator and then as Utah Important Bird Areas Coordinator. Much of my time was focused on the Great Salt Lake, including working with Ella Sorensen regarding the Gillmor Sanctuary as well as the wetlands on the south shore of Great Salt Lake. I have been a resident of Salt Lake City since 1978. General Comments: Some of the first meetings I attended when starting with National Audubon in the early 1990's were about the Northwest Quadrant Plan. Some of the last meetings I attended in 2016 were related to the completion of the Northwest Quadrant Plan. It can take a long time to complete a plan. One of the major components addressed in the Northwest Quadrant Plan was developing the Natural Areas. These Natural Areas provide a buffer for the wetlands of the Great Salt Lake, including the areas owned and managed by Kennecott Copper (Inland Sea Shorebird Reserve) National Audubon Society (Gillmor Sanctuary) and the duck clubs. Numerous meetings were held between landowners who wanted to develop and landowners who wanted to preserve the wildlife values before an agreement was reached regarding the Natural Areas. The value of natural areas in or adjacent to the Northpoint Small Area Plan is very high. Often when I was asked about the major issues regarding the Great Salt Lake, my response was (and still is) water quantity, water quality, and preserving wetland and upland buffers for the Great Salt Lake. The Northpoint Small Area Plan has similarities to the Northwest Quadrant Plan. One of them is that development is proposed right next to the wetland and upland areas that are managed for wildlife. Every attempt should be made to become familiar with and supportive of these wetland and upland buffers. Specific Comments: 1. I support the Westpointe Board statement on the Proposed North Point Small Area Plan. In particular, I support their statement in the letter dated January 11, 2022, that the Planning Commission is urged "to continue to table action on the North Point Master Plan until such citizen input can be incorporated into the plan." 2. I support the comments made by Heidi Hoven, Conservation Specialist, Gillmor Sanctuary, National Audubon Society, in her letter to you, dated Dec. 2, 2022. The following comments in particular should be fully addressed: "The wetlands bordering the west side of Northpoint Small Area should be treated delicately and provided a minimum buffer of 300 Lee t which can be backed by studies that consider ecological preservation and the other functions that wetlands provide (e.g., groundwater recharge, improved water quality, flood attenuation, dissipation of noise, motion, and light disturbances to wildlife, and many habitat benefits to wildlife). Likewise, the Jordan River should also be treated as highest priority as it is a major source of water to Great Salt Lake and its wetlands with a 300 foot buffer (highest quality buffer recommended in BlueprintJordan River). 3. Regarding the minimum buffer of 300 feet, it could be useful to put together a committee that would fully address this buffer. This committee could work on the wetland buffer during the same time that citizen input is being incorporated into the plan. In summary, the Northpoint Small Area Plan should be tabled until citizen input can be more fully considered and incorporated into the plan. Also, the wetland and upland areas that are part of and/or are adjacent to the Northpoint Small Area Plan are an important component of the Great Salt Lake wetlands. Every effort should be made to preserve and protect these areas. Thank you for the opportunity to comment: Sincerely, Wayne Martinson Cc: Heidi Hoven, Conservation Specialist National Audubon Society Ella Sorensen, Gillmor Sanctuary Manager, National Audubon Society Dorothy Owen, Westpointe Community Council Board of Directors Jack Ray, Rudy Duck Club Krissy Gilmore Salt Lake City Senior Planner kristina.&Iimore_@sIc ov.com Victoria Petro Eschler Salt Lake City District#1 Councilmember victoria.petro-_esch le rP sic ov.com RE:SUPPORT FOR THE NORHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN As an owner of property in the NorthPoint Small Area (we own 126 acres), I am writing to document my support for the Northpoint Small Area Plan as presented to the Salt Lake City Planning Commission on October 26,2022. 1 would highly recommend the Planning Commission approve the plan with no additional limitations to distribution uses in its December 14"meeting and that City Council adopt this plan as currently scheduled in January 2023.The Northpoint Small Area Plan outlines several reasons to transition the land use from agricultural to industrial while allowing landowners to participate in the economic growth of the area. Additionally,to ensure the greatest potential for economic growth in the area,we encourage the Planning Commission and/or City Council remove any limitations on the distribution uses allowed in the area. Not only would these limitations exclude the vast majority of small businesses seeking industrial space, but they would continue to drive rental rates higher for already struggling small businesses.Any limitation imposed on distribution uses would devalue the land, restrict economic growth,and increase rental rates for small businesses in the area. Thank you, David Tolman 3813 Highland Court Bountiful, LIT 84010 NorthPoint Small Area Plan Salt Lake City PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN DATED OCTOBER 2022. The undersigned supports the amended NorthPoint Small Area Plan as presented to the Salt Lake City Planning Commission on October 26, 2022 and request that the Planning Commission approve such plan on the meeting to be held on December 14, 2022 with no additional limitations on distribution uses. The undersigned attests that they are residents of the NorthPoint Small Area located in Salt Lake City, have personally signed this petition on the date indicated, and reside or work at the stated address. Signature: Address: Date: i8-3336-8894 NorthPoint all Area Plan Salt Lake City PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN DATED OCT013ER 2022. The undersigned supports the amended NorthPoint Small Area Plan as presented to the Salt Lake City Planning Commission on October 26, 2022 and request that the Planning Commission approve such plan on the meeting to be held on December 14, 2022 with no additional limitations on distribution uses. The undersigned attests that they are residents of the NorthPoint Small Area located in Salt Lake City, have personally signed this petition on the date indicated, and reside or work at the stated address. Signature: Address: Date: i8-3336-8894 NorthPoint all Area Plan Salt Lake City PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN DATED OCTOBER 2022. The undersigned supports the amended NorthPoint Small Area Plan as presented to the Salt Lake City Planning Comi-nission on October 26, 2022 and request that the Planning Commission approve such plan on the meeting to be held on December 14, 2022 with no additional limitations on distribution uses. The undersigned attests that they are residents of the NorthPoint Small Area located in Salt Lake City, have personally signed this petition on the date indicated, and reside or work at the stated address. Signature: Address: Date: i8-3336-8894 Clark, Aubrey From: Sent: Monday, December 12, 2022 10:49 AM To: Gilmore, Kristina Cc: Norris, Nick; Clark, Aubrey; Petro-Eschler, Victoria; Puy, Alejandro; Dugan, Dan; Otto, Rachel Subject: (EXTERNAL)WESTPOINTE BOARD STATEMENT ON PROPOSED NORTH POINT SMALL AREA PLAN-- for submission to Planning Commission for Dec 14 public hearing Attachments: Westpointe Board of Directors Statement regarding proposed North Point Small Area Master Plan .pdf, house with warehouse.JPG; Iovelyhome.JPG Importance: High The Westpointe Community Council Board of Directors has now completed their analysis of the residents' petition and unanimously voted to support their proposed changes to the current draft of the North Point Small Area Master Plan. The attached statement includes this analysis and our comments to the Planning Commission for their Dec 14 public hearing. This augments the Nov 30t"email comments previously sent. Since a picture is worth a thousand words,we are also including a few photos—one of a current house at risk and one of a home that reflects the reality of the proposed "transition." Additional photos are available but did not want to overwhelm people at this time. Thank you for your assistance and for forwarding this information to the Planning Commission members. While we regret that this review and vote could not be completed sooner,we are pleased with the resulting statement and photos. We hope this will clarify the major issues at stake. 1 WE STP O .. NTE A '-,A I I- I-A K I` CH Y C 0%]M UNI 1 Y January 11, 2022 Salt Lake City Planning Commission 451 S. State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Subject: Westpointe Board statement on North Point Small Area Planning effort We had hoped this planning effort would result in a number of planning scenarios generating serious community discussions and eventually, a workable vision for the area. This has yet to occur. Rather, the proposed "vision map" accepts outdated assumptions and planning limitations as a "given" that does not need justification. Planning efforts were instead devoted to developing mitigation strategies to counter this vision's negative impacts. We concur with Dr. Luke Garrott's assessment that the proposed plan , if implemented, will result in an "inherently unsustainable and unwalkable land use-a warehouse and trucking ghetto." ses-is-drivinci-a-truckina-nhnftn-infn- ). The draft plan seeks to soften this result by identifying "transitional" lands, implying that mitigation measures will allow current residents to stay in the area and that any change will be a gradual shift. This blatantly contradicts written developer comments that homes will be gone within five years and that many proposed mitigation efforts will be unnecessary as a result. It would be cruelly ironic for Salt Lake City to now adopt such a "demolition" approach after Councilman James Rogers convinced the Utah State Legislature to withdraw this unique area from the jurisdiction of the Utah Inland Port Authority (UIPA). This allowed North Point to avoid M1 rezoning unlike the remaining UIPA area. Recently, area residents circulated a petition proposing an alternative vision for North Point. After reviewing this proposal (see attachment) the Board of Directors voted to support it. We therefore urge the Planning Commission to continue to table action on the North Point Master Plan until such citizen input can be incorporated into the plan. Sincerely, Westpointe Community Council Board of Directors Dorothy P. Owen Sharon Pohlman Todd Hadden Lynn Skidmore Jessica Esparza Annette Richards ANALYSIS OF RESIDENT PROPOSAL FOR NORTH POINT MASTER PLAN The west side ofZ200 West maintain its business park/BP\ development zoning while the East side of2200VV keeps its current AGroning This allows current residential/agricultural uses aswell as future low density residential development. This proposal reflects a factual understanding of the area, and of the families who live there. • The North Point community has about 140 people living in about 60 homes which are entirely single-family housing units' 85 %ofthese units are owner occupied with an average home value of$438,000. This compares to the $ S46,900 median price for the zip code asawhole. ( Source: Existing Condition Report Dec 302I pg. 2l Logan Simpson Consulting) • People living in the area tend towork im the services industry,transportation and utilities or manufacturing.They have a higher median household income than the City asawhole. (Source: Current Conditions Report Dec 2O2l pg. 21. Logan Simpson Consulting) * Housing is "concentrated east of2200 West due tn environmental constraints and airport impacts. " The majority of the housing stock supports the agricultural uses surrounding them. Within the area there is a rich agricultural history that the community desires tm preserve. (Source: Current Conditions Report Dec 2O2l pg. 21Lmgan Simpson Consulting) • The Scannell properties in municipal Salt Lake City are zoned 8P (business park). The City has already approved upto2O warehouses in this area. This warehouse development west of 2200 Wwvi|| encompass approximately 40%mfNorth Point's total land area. (Source: Current Conditions Report Dec 2O2l pg. 10Logan Simpson Also City Planning) • All of Salt Lake Cmwmty's jurisdictional lands in this area are zoned A-2, low-density residential with supporting agriculture as a conditional use. Over 50% of North Point is within unincorporated Salt Lake County. ( Source: Current Conditions Report Dec 2O21 Logan Simpson. Pg. 5 & 15) The City should consider adopting the County"s zoning approach rather warehouses.than zoning for more This proposal supports the findings & recommendations of the City's "Thriving in Place" Displacement Study. Applicable recommendations in[lUde:_ w There are not enough housing units overall in Salt Lake City. It therefore recommends support for new housing at all income levels. w It further recommends efforts to minimize displacement from new development and discourage new development where it will do the most harm. w |t supports locally owned businesses, public spaces and cultural institutions that help communities thrive in place. All of these currently exist within North Point area and will be harmed by the proposed vision. This proposal is a workable compromise. It reflects commitments to existing residents and new developers. It allows for preservation and development. It is not based on outdated assumptions. • 2200 W divides the area into "clear sections which suggest an informal development boundary along the roadway. " (Source: Current Conditions Report Dec 2021 pg. Logan Simpson) The draft plan does not use this demarcation as a source for compromise. • Dr. Robert C. Leachman, professor of industrial engineering & operations research, University of California Berkeley, authored a recent (Sept 12, 2022) report analyzing the prospects for import and export business at the Utah Inland Port Authority (UIPA). His report indicates that a proposed logistics facility is "simply not a value proposition:' As a result, prior development assumptions have been called into question and the multi-million-dollar facility has been put on hold. Instead, he recommends consideration of regional distribution centers on the South side of 1-80 near Union Pacific facilities. North Point is located North of 1-80. • UIPA contains 16,000 acres of which 87% is within Salt Lake City's borders. Most of it is zoned M1. New building within this zoning is primarily warehouses which require less work, time, and money to develop. Recently, UIPA has made significant management and statutory changes as it re-evaluates past efforts and assumptions. A new UIPA Master Plan for the area is being developed. These new trends need to be considered by SLC as it plans for North Point. We the undersigned residents of North Point, respectfully oppose annexation, rezoning or Area Master Plan changes which in current zoning becoming M1 or BP. This includes opposing the master plan's proposed "transitional" land use category as well as recent changes which envision open space along the Jordan River becoming industrial areas. Such changes not only significantly impact North Point residents but the residents of surrounding westside neighborhoods. Industrial zoning around existing homes condemns them to a lower quality of life, decreases their property values and will force residents to move. This directly goes against Salt Lake City's"Thriving in Place" initiative which seeks to reduce housing displacement and support"new housing at all income levels." This housing gap/shortage dwarfs the city's apparent desire for more warehouses and other commercial structures. It is the City's duty to protect residential housing from speculative industrial developers, especially when taxpayers are already paying for an Inland Port that is designed to house such industries. Other negative impacts to the entire westside include: Increased air pollution, noise pollution, light pollution Unsustainable traffic Watershed pollution and destruction of natural habitat Reduction of home ownership in the city Instead,we are proposing the West side of 2200 West maintain its business park(BP)where it is currently zoned while the East side of 2200 West keep its current AG zoning which allow current residential/agricultural uses as well as future low density residential developments. Name Address s x� `f .,. ..- .... -w 1 C _ 9 a 4 a y .. t^ y •, v`,, t ..a _. �' 0 �p � e "=-y � ... � �� � �.. � � s �.. � � � a � Y -� h I �1 <, d �� d� { ',$ � . "` * " �� � � n� .t� � L�. i �`�� ���° ° Fw: Northpointe Small Area Plan cindy Cromer Wed 12J14J2022 3:30 PM To:cindy creamer To members of the SI.0 Planning Commission Re Northpointe Small Area plan 12/14/22 First,thank you for tabling the proposal at the hearing in October. The delay has been useful. Secondly,you have the authority to address the absurdity of a road beingdes gnnated as paved when it isn't paved and the property owner does not want it paved. You have the authority to address the issue of bird strikes which typically result in the death of birds. You can accomplish this through design guidelines. You can initiate the-zQlling changes s3iggested in the and they will happen faster than if a member Of the City Council initiated them. Petitions initiated by the City Council go to the bottom of the pile, and it is a big pile.,., Thirdly,small a a plans ol., I have worked on more small area plans that anyone because they.are—�corlce trace l n East Central and Central City. Unfortunately the City does not use them anymor*unlesseagti' d toy �i'cas�fythe pity Council. Here's when l have found them to be useful - " When the;plan add ith some success. , Success is often Telad tither issues w in,,- Articulate,I' as plan is the speed the Mayora. I on°t, it you ou µ . - • c!r # • t elet • a•! # R i • # 1 1 i• • • r�a. d !f 2 1 1 1 d ■ 1 �qE. Item FZ ,,,..��''� •••••..,,, MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY S '= =" tinyurl.com/SLCFY23 TO: City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke and Sylvia Richards Budget Analysts DATE: March 7,2023 RE: Ranked Choice Voting for the 2023 Municipal Election MOTION 1—ADOPT RESOLUTION I move that the Council adopt a resolution to participate in the municipal alternative voting methods pilot program for ranked choice voting in the 2023 municipal general election. Staff Note: The motion would use ranked choice voting for the Tuesday,November 7,2023 municipal general election. There would not be a primary election in August. The election includes Council Districts Two,Four,Six and the mayoral race. 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 SLCCOUNCIL.COM P.O.FOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 i RESOLUTION_OF 2023 Requesting inclusion of Salt Lake City,Utah in the Municipal Alternative Voting Methods Pilot Project. WHEREAS, the State of Utah, by its State Legislature, has made available a pilot project for participation in the alternate voting methods for municipal elections beginning January 1, 2019 and ending on January 1, 2026; and WHEREAS, House Bill 35 as passed during the 2018 General Session allows municipalities to conduct nonpartisan races using instant runoff voting in accordance with the requirements of Utah Code Title 20A, Chapter 4, Part 6 and all other applicable provisions of the law, during any odd-numbered year that the pilot project is in effect; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council, before May 10 of the odd-numbered year, must provide written notice to the Lieutenant Governor and the Salt Lake County Clerk stating that Salt Lake City intends to participate in the pilot project for the year specified in the notice; and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City intends to contract with Salt Lake County to conduct municipal elections and has the resources and capability necessary to participate in the pilot project; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council finds that it will be in the best interest of Salt Lake City and of its citizens to hold its 2023 municipal election by instant runoff voting; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Salt Lake City Council adopts instant runoff voting for the 2023 municipal election and that by this resolution, gives notice to the Lieutenant Governor and the Salt Lake County Clerk that Salt Lake City intends to enter the pilot project by use of instant runoff voting for its 2023 municipal election; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Recorder and City Attorney are hereby authorized and directed to do all things necessary to cause the 2023 Salt Lake City municipal election to be held in accordance with the instant runoff voting process. Adopted this day of , 2023. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior City Attorney F i 2023-02-03 2023-02-03 Olivia Hoge(olivia.hoge@slcgov.com) Status: Signed Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAv7vLISLGgFF2imirVNp_gP7wACcWxwGg "Resolution for (RCV Pilot Project) 2023" History Document created by Olivia Hoge (olivia.hoge@slcgov.com) 2023-02-03-9:20:16 PM GMT Document emailed to Boyd Ferguson (boyd.ferguson@slcgov.com)for signature 2023-02-03-9:20:58 PM GMT Email viewed by Boyd Ferguson (boyd.ferguson@slcgov.com) 2023-02-03-10:41:25 PM GMT Document e-signed by Boyd Ferguson (boyd.ferguson@slcgov.com) Signature Date:2023-02-03-10:41:37 PM GMT-Time Source:server Agreement completed. 2023-02-03-10:41:37 PM GMT Powered by Adobe Acrobat Sign Item F2 ,,,..��''� •••••..,,, MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY r tinyurl.com/SLCFY23 TO: City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke and Sylvia Richards Budget Analysts DATE: March 7,2023 MMUNNOW RE: American Rescue Plan Act(ARPA)Local Business Assistance Grant Awards MOTION i—FULL COUNCIL VOTE I move that the Council adopt an ordinance approving American Rescue Plan Act local business assistance grant awards as shown in the Funding Log except for items 2,5,7, 17, 27,35,37,and 41. Council Member Vuldemoros mazy txow be recused. MOTION 2—COUNCIL MEMBER VALDEMOROS RECUSED I move that the Council adopt an ordinance approving American Rescue Plan Act local business assistance grant awards as shown in the Funding Log for items 2,5,7, 17,35,37,and 41. Council Member Vulde ores mat now return. Council Member Petro muz now be recused. MOTION 3 —COUNCIL MEMBER PETRO RECUSED I move that the Council adopt an ordinance approving American Rescue Plan Act local business assistance grant awards as shown in the Funding Log for item 27. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 SLCCOUNCIL.COM P.O.FOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 i COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO: City Council Members Project Timeline: FROM: Ben Luedtke,Budget&Public Policy Analyst 1st Briefing: February 21,2023 2nd Briefing: March 7, 2023 DATE: March 7,2023 Potential Final Vote: March 7, 2023 RE: American Rescue Plan Act(ARPA)Local Business Assistance Grant Awards NEW INFORMATION At the February,21 briefing,the Council discussed the Committee's recommendation to award$755,718 for 31 applications as shown in the Attachment i Funding Log.The Council took a straw poll (Council Mernber Petro absent)to support the Committee's funding recommendations dependent upon receiving clarification for how Phase i applicants that scored 70 or higher would be prioritized in Phase 2, Council Members deliberated getting more funds out in Phase 1 vs allowing time for additional applications to be submitted in a proposed Phase 2, Some Council Members have received additional information since the briefing and would like to consider releasing all $2 million in Phase i.A proposed Phase could come to the for review in the summer depending on the Committee's meeting schedule and the Council agenda availability during the FY2024 annual budget deliberations. A summary of clarifications and considerations from the first briefing is listed below the four options provided by I the Administration.Note: the Council may elect to choose from these options,or discuss other options going forward. Four Options Provided by the Administration The Economic Development Department provided four options below(A through D)for the Council's consideration.The four options are listed below as a summary. See the next page for more details on each option that were provided by the Administration. Option A— $1,017,397 for 42 applications(S261,679 more than the Committee's original recommendation)and bonus points in Phase 2 for applicants that scored between 75—77.9 in Phase 1. Option B— S755,718 for 31 applications and bonus points in Phase 2 for applicants that scored 70 Or more in Phase I. Option C— $1,452,093 for 57 applications($696-375 more than the Committee's original recommendation); S547,907 remaining for passt,hrough nonprofit applications providing services to small and local businesses which the Committee is reviewing over the coming weeks.Note at the time of publishing this report the c-ruct dollar arnounts,for this option were being confirmed. Option D— $755,718 for 31 applications; note this is the Committee's original recommendation. Page I t OPTION A(Award 8261,679 more funding in Phase i and bonus points in Phase 2) $1,017,397 for 42 applications and bonus points in Phase 2 for applicants that scored between 75— 77.9 in Phase City Council can approve the Committee's recommended list Of 31 applicants to receive grant funding AND award an additional it applicants scoring between 78-79.5 as part of Phase One,Group One, funding distribution. Additionally,any applicants with an average score between 75,0 and 77.9 would receive bonus points on their Phase 2 application. • The number ol'bonus points awarded could be decided by Council or the administration. • Applicants with scores between 77.o and 77.9 would be notified of bonus points for a high Phase i score and would receive technical assistance from staff to entrance their Phase 2 applications further. • This would add 11 additional applicants to receive funding bringing the Phase(,)no group one request to $1,017,397. OPTION B(Committee's original recommendation and hones points in Phase 2) $7.35,718 for 31 applications and bonus points in PhaSC 2 for applicants that scored 70 or more in Phase i City Council can approve the Committee's recommended list Of 31 applicants to receive grant funding AND request staff to award bonus points to any applicant from Phase One,Group One, scoring an average score Of 70.0 or higher to receive bonus points on their Phase 2 application. • The number of bonus points awarded could be decided by Council or the administration. • Applicants in this category would be notified of bonus points for a high Phase 1 score and would receive technical assistance from staff to enhance their Phase 2 applications further. • This would not add any additional applicants past the initial 31 recommended,but would award bonus points to 5o,applicants, and potentially increase the amount of their award based on a higher average score in Phase 2. • The amount funded would remain S755,718.00.Note: the group receiving bonus points has a total ask of$1,452,093 (meaning not all applicants with a score in the 70's will receive funding). OPTION C(Award all funding to Phase 1 applicants? $1,452,093 for 57 applications; $547,907 remaining for pass-through nonprofit applications providing services to all and local businesses which the Committee is reviewing now City Council can decide to continue funding high-scoring applicants past the initial 31 recommended by the Committee until a total of$1,500,000 is exhausted. • This would exhaust all ARPA funds allocated towards the following ARPA expenditure categories: 1)Small Businesses, 2)'fravel,'fourism,&Hospitality,and 3)Artist-Artisan Businesses • There would not be a second phase for small businesses to apply, • This would add an additional 26 applicants with averaged scores Of 75% and above and require a funding request Of$1,452,093, OPTION 1)(Committee's original recommendation; no bonus points in Phase 2) $755,718 for 31 applications City Council can approve the Committee's recommended list Of 31 applicants to receive grant funding AND allow for Phase Two to proceed without any preference to applicants who have applied before. During Phase Two, to provide extra points to applicants who have already applied would make it unfair to new applicants.The bonus for businesses applying a second time is the more fact they can apply a second time and improve the quality of their application. Presumably,businesses applying for the first Lime in Phase Two will already be at a significant disadvantage to those who have had some experience. Clarifications and considerations during the first briefing included: - The Committee is currently reviewing 4o applications for pass-through nonprofit grants providing services to small local businesses.The Con-um Llee will forward funding recomrnendat ions to the Council in the coming Page 12 weeks.This would conclude Phase 1 of the program assuming funding remains depending on which option the Council prefers as listed below. - The Economic Development Department created a waiting list for businesses that did not apply during Phase 1.There are currently,iq businesses on the waitftj,(L list. - The ordinance governing the program identified geographic equity as a criterion for the prioritization process. The Committee interpreted this to mean there should be at least one applicant funded in each Council District, This is why two applications(#3o and #31) are recommended for funding despite scoring less than other applications which are not recommended for funding. - There were three applications unable to show a proven loss as required by federal ARPA guidelines.These applications do have listed scores but are disqualified. - The Committee's priority is to spread funds further to more applicants.A sliding scale approach also called a performance approach was used to advance this priority. Some Council Members expressed a preference for more information about,how local a business is and impacts to the City. For example,does the business only have a registered address in Salt Lake City but operates mostly in other jurisdictions? Is the business primarily serving clients in Salt Lake City? Some Council Members mentioned potentially adding more ARPA funding to the program for a future phase depending on how much of the City's ARPA fiscal recovery funding remains and bow much may be needed in the next annual budget. ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE In April 2022 as part of Budget Amendment#4 of FY2022,the Council approved one-time $2 million from ARPA for local business assistance grant awards managed by the Economic Development Department.if the 31 grants are awarded as recommended,then$1,244,282 would remain for future phases of local business assistance grant awards.Note the Council also approved a separate one-time$2 million from ARPA for nonprofit assistance grant awards managed by the Community and Neighborhood Department(CAN).The Committee is currently reviewing nonprofit applications submitted through CAN's process.The Community Recovery Committee is recommending$755,718 of ARPA grant awards to 31 local businesses as shown in Attachment 1-Funding Log.The Mayor made no changes to the Committee's funding recommendations.The Administration reviewed all applications for eligibility and compliance with federal ARPA guidance.The Council has final decision-making authority over the grant awards including the dollar amounts and uses. Please see"Additional Information"section for more on applications,award limits, scoring,and clarifications about the recommended funding log. Goal of the briefing:Review the recommended grant awards,identify questions and potential modifications to the awards and/or process,and determine whether the Council is comfortable scheduling an adoption vote. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. Questions about Recommended Grant Awards—Does the Council have any questions about the 31 recommended local business assistance grant awards? 2. Award Based on Sliding Scale or Full Eligible Amount—The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration why the Committee recommends awarding based on a sliding scale and not the full eligible amount.The difference between the two approaches is$125,475• 3. Requiring Unsuccessful Phase 1 Applications to Reapply in Phase 2—The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration why applicants not recommended for funding in Phase 1 would not be considered in Phase 2 unless they reapply.Would the Council like remaining Phase 1 applications to be considered in Phase 2? 4. Minimum Grant Amount—The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration identifying a minimum funding award for individual grants like the$30,00o minimum for annual HUD grants and$50,000 for CIP. Page 13 Setting a minimum amount is intended to balance the burden of administering the grants with creation of public benefits.Nine of the grant recommendations are less than $io,000 and the smallest*17 is $2,583• ADDITIONIAL&BACKGROUND INFORMATION Applications: 296 applications were submitted for Phase 1 during the month of September 2022. 157 applications were received from eligible local businesses and 40 from nonprofits.Note at the time of publishing staff was clarifying with the City Attorney's Office whether nonprofits could also be considered local businesses in the context of this funding.The other 99 applications were ineligible for reasons such as the applicant was located outside of city limits,did not begin operations within the federal time requirements,the application was incomplete,or late. Award Limits:The maximum award is $1oo,000 for any of the ARPA assistance grants per City Code Chapter 2.20.04o(A) (see Attachment 2).There is no minimum award set in ordinance.The City uses minimum awards for other programs such as annual grants from the U.S.Housing and Urban Development Department(HUD) and the Capital Improvement Program or CIP(See policy question #3).Grant recipients must submit documentation for reimbursements and file quarterly reports with the City. Some local businesses could be ineligible depending on the minimum award amount. Scoring: Eligible applications were scored on a scale of zero to too with higher scores being better.Identifying information such as names and addresses were removed from applications before the Community Recovery Committee reviewed and scored them.This was done to improve the integrity of the process.See Attachment 3 for a summary list of all 157 eligible local business applications ordered from highest to lowest combined score. The attachment shows average scores in the second to last column which is an average of all Committee member's scores who ranked the application. Funding Recommendations:The 31 local business applications are recommended to receive a grant award based on a sliding scale rather than the full eligible funding amount.The Administration provided this example: "if an applicant had an eligible funding amount of$1o,000 and received an average Committee score of 9o.o,then their final funding amount would be$9,000."The sliding scale approach results in less funding to applicants but spreads the limited ARPA dollars to more applicants. Future Phases:The Administration reports the 31 local business grant awards recommended to the Council are Phase 1 Group 1.Phase 1 Group 2 will be nonprofit grant award recommendations.Note at the time of publishing staff was clarifying with the City Attorney's Office whether nonprofits could also be considered local businesses in the context of this funding.Applications for Phase 2 are expected to be accepted during a 3o-day window beginning in March.The timing of funding recommendations for Phase 2 applicants will depend upon how many eligible applications are received.No Phase 3 is planned;the full$4 million is expected to be recommended for awards during the two phases.Applications not recommended for funding in Phase 1 would need to reapply in Phase 2(see policy question#4). Funding Log(Attachment 1):The log shows the 31 local businesses recommended for funding.Note that when an application is listed as"Received other assistance:None"this means the local business received zero financial assistance from any level of government.The columns moving from left to right are: recommended local business number one through 31,local business name,Council District,amount of funding the local business requested,amount of requested funding that is eligible(must shown proven loss and other ARPA requirements),the Community Recovery Committee's recommended funding,the Council's funding decisions (uses the Committee's amount as a starting point),and the category of AB—Arts and Artisan Businesses,SB— Small Business,and TTH—Tourism,Travel,or Hospitality.Several acronyms are spelled out at the end. Spending Deadlines: Under federal guidelines ARPA funds must be obligated by the end of calendar year 2024 and must be fully spent by the end of calendar year 2026.City Code Chapter 2.20.050 (see Attachment 2)sets an earlier spending deadline of December 31, 2024,to provide public benefits at a faster pace. Community Recovery Committee (See Attachment z for the ordinance) In April 2022,the Council enacted Chapter 2.20 of Salt Lake City Code creating the time-limited Community Recovery Committee as an official City board. Section 2.20.o6o of the ordinance identifies a sunset for the Page 14 Committee once all the ARPA program funds are expended or the federal spending deadline has passed.The Committee reviews applications and makes funding recommendations to the Mayor and City Council for the ARPA local business and nonprofit assistance grants.The Committee has seven or nine members who also serve on other City boards or committees. Grant Categories (See Attachment 2 for the ordinance) No specific categories are identified for the business assistance grants.These grants are focused on small and local businesses,tourism,travel,or hospitality,and support for artists and artisan businesses.A business must first demonstrate an economic and/or operational hardship caused by the pandemic,and then propose an ARPA eligible use for the grant funds. Specific categories are identified for the nonprofit assistance grants which are: "offering services to retrain displaced workers;providing legal or other assistance for evictions or rent relief; expanding educational opportunities;deploying resources to mitigate the digital divide; supporting parents or children affected by COVID-19 including childcare or after school programs; and providing access to healthcare services including mental health support."(2.20.040(A))Note nonprofits may submit applications for programs not listed above. ATTACHMENTS 1. Local Business Assistance ARPA Grants Funding Log 2. Community Recovery Committee Chapter 2.20 of Salt Lake City Code 3. Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Committee Score ACRONYMS(from this staff report and Attachment 1 Funding Log) AB—Arts and Artisan Businesses ARPA—American Rescue Plan Act BIPOC—Black,Indigenous,and People of Color CAN—Community and Neighborhoods Department CCL—Child Care Licensing CIP—Capital Improvement Program EIDL—Economic Injury Disaster Loan FY—Fiscal Year HUD—United States Housing and Urban Development Department IRC—International Rescue Committee LLC—Limited Liability Company PPP—Federal Paycheck Protection Program SB—Small Business SBDC—Utah Small Business Development Center TBD—To De Determined TTH—Tourism,Travel,or Hospitality Page 5 ARPA Community Grant Program Phase One Distribution, Group One - Community Recovery Committee Recommendation DEPARTMENT of ECONOMIC IT�� DEVELOPMENT Requested Op During the February 21 It presentation, Council requested funding options that would include expanding the list of applicants to receive funding during this Phase 1 Group 1 request. (Hybrift. • Approve the original request AND add 11 additional applicants (scores 78.0 -79.5) Continue with Phase 2 (without bonus points - CRC, or with bonus points -75.0+) Approve the current request AND add bonus points (scores 70.0+) Award all funds now to small business applicants until all $1 ,500,000 is exhausted 0 Option D (Original Request, CRC Recommendation): Approve the original request AND allow Phase 2 to proceed without any preference to applicants who have applied before DEPARTMENTot v u 't9ECONOMIC <: K r'T DEVELOPMENT t a rJ„ �t j 4k DEPARTMENTof ECONOMIC Quest'ions ?. Uc,„uti a� DEVELOPMENT I!IiYI,Vh � rt u Option A-Rounded 2022-2024 2022-2024 ELIGIBLE 2022-2024 CRC REQUESTED FUNDING RECOMMENDATION # BUSINESS APPLICANT DISTRICT FUNDING (Proven Loss) (%Based on Score) CATEGORY 1 IJunction Dance Company(63480) 5 $50,000.00 1 $49,000.00 $45,900.00 AB Business provides dance training,two dance companies,creative space and performance opportunities for youth and professional artists. They cultivate an artistically enriching community through performance and outreach. Type of Business: Dance Studio(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Rent,utilities,and operating costs(pay contracted artists) Received other assistance:None 2 Zahara,LLC(62879) 5 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $6,600.00 TTH Moroccan pop-up restaurant,that also offers catering services. Business holds community events that last between 2-3 hours where food is served. Owner plans to re-establish their events,and catering services,along with building to transition to a permanent physical location. Type of Business: Restaurant(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,venue rentals and staff costs. Received other assistance:Business received$2k from the International Rescue Committee for business expenses accrued during COVID-19. 3 Sugar Space,LLC(63372) 1 2 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 1 $46,300.00 SB Business is an arts,events and reception center. They provide space for artists of all disciplines to create and present work and a place for the community to celebrate, learn,share and engage. Type of Business: Event/Reception Center(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Salaries and wages for staff. Received other assistance:Yes,they received under$50k in other assistance with PPP and EIDL. 4 Dream Garden Press/dba Ken Sanders Rare Books(63434) 1 4 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 $46,102.00_____j AB This business sells used,new,and rare books and ephemera. Special focus for this business is Utah and regional history. This business all supports local artists and musicians with regular public events. Type of Business: Bookstore in the City Center(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent and payroll. Received other assistance:Received approx..$75k of other assistance with PPP and EIDL 5 1 Zaater and Zayton(62465) 1 2 1 $50,000.00 1 $38,000.00 1 $35,000.00 TTH Business is a full-service catering company offering a unique blend of traditional Middle Eastern Cuisine and American fusion. Type of Business: Catering Disproportionately Impacted:Women& 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Mortgage payment,operational costs and start-up costs Received other assistance:Yes. Received$20k in EIDL 6 Mestizo,LLC(63831) 1 3 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 $45,900.00 TTH Business is a coffee house created by community for community. The founders envisioned a place for civic engagement and sharing art to strengthen community. Type of Business: Coffeehouse(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,operating costs and wages. Received other assistance:None 7 Noor Al Sham LLC(63326) 5 $11,000.00 $10,758.00 $9,700.00 SB Catering business looking to complete start up and expand. Type of Business: Food-Catering(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC Owned Use of funds:Start up costs,rent,payroll and operational expenses. Received other assistance:Received under$3,000 in PPP funding. 8 Susie M's Gallery of Fine Tattooing(63355) 5 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $22,300.00 SB Business provides an art studio with retail space,along with tattooing education space. Type of Business: Tattoo Parlor-Retail Space(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent and payroll. Received other assistance:None 9 J Street Productions(60538) 1 7 1 $26,000.00 $25,000.00 $22,200.00 1 AB Writer who writes novels for young readers(middle grades and young adult). Writes nonfictions on the intersection of art and faith,and also consults freelance writers and provides editorial services for other writers. Type of Business: Writer(Home Based,Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Salary and Operating Expenses(will have to provide tax documents,etc.) Received other assistance:None 10 Arts of the World Gallery(63518) 1 5 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 1 $44,000.00 1 AB Business is the local home for global treasures.This business houses traditional(indigenous)arts and crafts and also traditional industries like ceramics in two historic buildings that have been maintained and preserved. Type of Business: Art Gallery(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Utilities,and operating expenses Received other assistance:Yes.Received less than$50k in Salt Lake County grant,and PPP funds I Premier Paralegal Solutions,LLC(59841) 1 5 1 $50,000.00 $9,000.00 $7,800.00 SB Business provides legal document preparation,tax preparation and some translation services. Services provided to clients with digital equity issues that require in person attention. Type of Business: Legal Services(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Rent,payroll,supplies and start-up costs. Received other assistance:Yes,less than$50k in BIDE and PPP 12 Cycling Utah,LLC(63477) 4 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 $43,200.00 SB Business produces a bicycling magazine and website. They are in their 30th year of business providing information,news,rips and event calendars. They distribute throughout Salt Lake City and the western United States. Type of Business: Magazine(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Operating costs and payroll. Received other assistance:Yes. Received less than$50k in PPP funds 13 Golden Gyros(63448) 1 5 $50,000.00 1 $47,000.00 $40,200.00 TTH Local restaurant in Salt Lake City. One of the first restaurants to close due to COVID-19 trying to keep doors open on their start up business that opened as the pandemic hit. Type of Business: Restaurant Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,wages,and equipment. Received other assistance:None 14 Amie Engberg(62853) 5 $38,000.00 $38,000.00 $32,200.00 SB Document preparation and financial education services for chiropractors. Type of Business: Financial Education Services(Home Based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Supplies and salary Received other assistance:None 15 1 Six Sailor Cider,LLC(63232) 1 4 1 $50,000.00 1 $11,000.00 1 $9,300.00 1 TTH Business makes a variety of flavored apple ciders,non-alcoholic and sparkling hard ciders to be sold in the future. Started their sales in farmer's markets and now expanding into online and retail sales. Type of Business: Brewery(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent,payroll and startup costs. Received other assistance:None 16 Bye Phoebe(59674) 3 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $4,200.00 AB Owner is a model,fashion stylist and also makes custom clothing for production companies. Type of Business: Stylist/Clothing(Home Based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women&100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Equipment,materials,payroll and startup costs. Received other assistance:Yes received$1,200 from Artist Emergency Fund 17 Sikkim Momo(59832) 1 2 $49,000.00 $3,100.00 $2,600.00 TTH Business is a catering food business. This entrepreneur is from the Spice Kitchen incubator program of the International Rescue Committee. Type of Business: Catering Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies and equipment. Received other assistance:Business received$2k from the International Rescue Committee. 18 Christina's Barber Shop(60332) 1 5 $13,500.00 $14,000.00 $11,600.00 SB Business is a barber shop specializing in gentlemen haircuts located on 300 West. Type of Business: Barber shop(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent,utilities,and operating expenses. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k from EIDL. 19 Flamenco del Lago(63429) 1 5 $50,000.00 $13,000.00 $10,800.00 AB Business is a nonprofit under the direction of Katie Sheen-Abbott she's studied Flamenco for many years. She teaches and performs flamenco in Salt Lake City and throughout Utah for all ages and abilities. Type of Business: Dance teacher(Sole Proprietor&Nonprofit) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent,and equipment costs. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k in EIDL funding. 20 Dayhouse Studio(61894) 1 7 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 1 $41,400.00 1 SB Business is a biophilic interior design studio specializing in residential and commercial spaces. Improving health,well-being and sustainable practices are at the heart of their work. Type of Business: Interior Design Studio(Home based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Operating costs and payroll. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k from EIDL. 21 ISeth Ian Photography(62887) 1 3 $15,000.00 $7,000.00 $5,800.00 AB Photographer for the performing arts,small businesses,and real estate.Business is also undertaking documentary projects. Type of Business: Photographer(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Equipment upgrades and project development costs Received other assistance:None 22 Worthfull Media,LLC(60612) 3 $25,000.00 1 $25,000.00 $20,700.00 AB Boutique media production house that records,edits,produces,and manages audio and video for small business owners and personal brands.The bulk of business is for podcasters and YouTubers,but includes making related media as well. Type of Business:Media production(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds:Website upgrades,rent,contract costs Received other assistance:PPP and EIDL funds around$5k. 23 iDesign to Grow,LLC(63108) 77J 4 $32,000.00 1 $32,000.00 $26,200.00 AB Business is a designibuild studio that does in house fabrication focused on public art,teaching/workshops,events,and commercial furniture. Type of Business:Design studio(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent,retaining employees Received other assistance:PPP$8.7K,Small Business Impact Grant$9.9k 24 Suzanne May(60330) 1 7 $10,000.00 1 $10,000.00 $8,100.00 AB Singer/songwriter that also teaches voice and songwriting lessons from home studio. Type of Business:Musician(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds:Tour and equipment costs. Received other assistance:EIDL$12k,Unemployment$8k 25 1 The Twist(Kirk's Ship,LLC)(60520) 4 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $40,000.00 TTH Business is a Restaurant,Bar&Nightclub Type of Business:Bar/Restaurant Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Wages,retain employees Received other assistance:PPP&Employee Retention Credit over$50k 26 Elegant Tailoring,LLC(61865) 4 $50,000.00 $21,335.00 $17,100.00 SB Business is a tailoring shop in the heart of downtown. Type of Business:Tailoring Shop(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Payroll and operational expenses. Received other assistance:Business received less than$6,000.00 in PPP funding. 27 Utah Hispanic Chamber of Commerce(62544) 2 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,900.00 SB Chamber of Commerce serving Hispanic businesses. Type of Business:Chamber of Commerce Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Wages Received other assistance:None 28 Utah Fitness Institute(62189) 5 $21,502.00 $22,000.00 $17,600.00 SB Personal training and wellness retreat business. Type of Business:Fitness Studio(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent costs Received other assistance:Salt Lake County grant$22k 29 Match and Farnsworth,PC(62089) 4 $49,000.00 $49,000.00 $39,000.00 SB Business is a small private law firm that provides representation to individuals who are unable to work due to physical or mental disabilities. Type of Business:Law Firm(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds:Payroll Received other assistance:Business received more than$50k from PPP. 30 Antidote Cosmeceuticals,LLC(60991) 6 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $6,400.00 SB Business manufactures bottles and sells skin care products. Type of Business:Skin care(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Facility upgrades and payroll Received other assistance:None 31 lFirst Steps,Inc.(60261) 1 $50,000.00 $12,000.00 $9,200.00 SB Business is a child care center. Type of Business:Daycare Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Facility upgrades and payroll Received other assistance:PPP,EIDL,&CCL Stabilization Grant-over$200k 32 CathPro Technologies(62544) 1 7 $28,000.00 $28,000.00 $22,300.00 SB Business owns intellectual property and is associated with technology platforms in the medical device sector. Type of Business: R&D Medical Devices Disproportionately Impacted:BIPOC Use of funds:Rent,start up,operating expenses Received other assistance:EIDL,Small Business Catalyst Grant-less than$50k 33 10skar&Julia Music LLC(59713) 3 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 AB Musicians who record,perform and sell merchandise. Type of Business: Recording Music Disproportionately Impacted: None Use of funds:Operating expenses,supplies. Received other assistance:None 34 Mago LLC dba Diggity Dog Resort(61569) 2 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,500.00 SB Dog boarding and daycare facility. Type of Business: Dog care resort Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds: Wages Received other assistance: Received PPP-over$50k 35 Namash Swahili Cuisine(63291) 2 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $7,900.00 TTH African cuisine food truck which sells authentic food from Africa using unique family recipes. Type of Business: Food Truck Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds: Equipment and operating expenses Received other assistance: Spice Kitchen-$2k 36 Salt Lake Capoeira&Brazilian Jiu Jitsu(61693) 7 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,500.00 AB Afro-Brazilian Capoeira and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu education and performance business. Type of Business: Capoeira&Brazilian Jiu Jitsu Education Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Operating expenses Received other assistance: EIDL,Artists Emergency Funds,SLC Chamber Grant,PPP-less than$50k 37 Kate Mamai LLC(60765) 2 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,200.00 TTH Catering and food truck business. Type of Business: Catering and Food Truck Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds: Operating costs Received other assistance: SBA-under$50k 38 Total Body Pilates(63317) 6 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $15,700.00 SB Salt Lake City business since 1999,teaching pilates and physical wellness. Type of Business: Pilates studio Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds: Rent and utilities Received other assistance: None 39 Tippetts Builders LLC(63559) 4 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $6,300.00 SB General contractor residential construction. Type of Business: Construction Disproportionately Impacted: None Use of funds: Operating expenses and equipment Received other assistance: None 40 Les Madeleines LLC(63537) 1 4 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 $39,100.00 TTH French pastry shop that has been part of the downtown community since 2003. Also an e-commerce shop since 2008. Type of Business: Pastry Shop Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds: Wages,rent and operating expenses Received other assistance: Received PPP-over$50k 41 Halab's Jasmine Kitchen(61158) 2 $6,050.00 $6,050.00 $4,800.00 TTH Food truck that offers Syrian and Eastern Mediterranean cuisine throughout Salt Lake City. Type of Business: Food truck Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds: Operating expenses Received other assistance: Spice Kitchen grant,Neighborworks grant-less than$50k 42 Utah Brewers Guild(63442) 1 4 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,000.00 SB Business supports Utah craft brewing manufacturers and small businesses with direct programming,education and advocacy. Type of Business:Business alliance Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Wages and operating costs Received other assistance:EIDL-$19,000 2/13/23,2:29 PM https://export.am legal.com/api/export-requests/eaa5fce7-9601-4be0-8a48-9cb553893360/download/ CHAPTER 2.20 COMMUNITY RECOVERY COMMITTEE SECTION: 2.20.010: Purpose 2.20.020: Responsibilities 2.20.030: Membership 2.20.040: Community Grant Program 2.20.050: Minimum Requirements For Community Grant Program Applications 2.20.060: Sunset 2.20.010: PURPOSE: The Community Recovery Committee will assist with and oversee the distribution of certain Rescue Plan funds under the City's community grant program. Consistent with this Chapter, the Community Recovery Committee will review applications for community grant program funding and make funding recommendations to the Mayor. The Mayor shall review the Community Recovery Committee's recommendations and make a final recommendation on the use of funds to the City Council. (Ord. 17-22, 2022) 2.20.020: RESPONSIBILITIES: The Community Recovery Committee will: A. Advise and make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council on decisions related to the City's community grant program. B. Coordinate with relevant City departments on the review and evaluation of current strategic plans, goals, and policies of the departments' grant programs. C. Review all eligible project proposals submitted by various business, and nonprofit organizations for the community grant program and to make recommendations to the Mayor on such requests for funds. D. Monitor the community grant program and ensure that the program is being implemented as planned and the funds from the program are utilized as recommended and approved by the Council. E. Help ensure that the community grant program goals are consistent with the strategic plans and goals of the City and are consistent with the federal requirements for utilization of Rescue Plan funds. F. Evaluate the overall effectiveness of the community grant program. G. Consider geographic equity in the overall funding recommendations to the Mayor and Council under the community grant program. (Ord. 17-22, 2022) 2.20.030: MEMBERSHIP: A. The Community Recovery Committee shall be made up of a total of seven (7) or nine (9) members, with at least three (3) members from the Human Rights Commission, one (1) member from the Business Advisory Board, up to three (3) members from the Racial Equity in Policing Commission, one (1) member from the Economic Development Loan Fund Committee and one (1) member from the Salt Lake Arts Council. B. Members of the Community Recovery Committee will be appointed by the Salt Lake City Mayor with the advice and consent of the City Council. Individuals appointed to the Community Recovery Committee will be authorized under City Code to serve on two (2) City boards. (Ord. 50-22, 2022: Ord. 17-22, 2022) 2.20.040: COMMUNITY GRANT PROGRAM: The Administration will create the community grant program to efficiently deploy the Rescue Plan community grant program funds utilizing the following policies and objectives: https://export.amIegal.com/api/export-req uests/eaa5fce7-9601-4be0-8a48-9cb553893360/download/ 1/2 2/13/23,2:29 PM https://export.amlegal.com/api/export-requests/eaa5fce7-9601-4be0-8a48-9cb553893360/download/ A. No single application for a community grant will exceed one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). B. Any application for a community grant to a nonprofit organization will focus on supporting communities disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, including, but not limited to, by offering services to retrain displaced workers; providing legal or other assistance for evictions or rent relief; expanding educational opportunities; deploying resources to mitigate the digital divide; supporting parents or children affected by COVID-19 including childcare or after school programs; and providing access to healthcare services, including mental health support. C. Any application for a community grant for local business will focus on supporting the business's operations or employees who have been economically affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. (Ord. 17-22, 2022) 2.20.050: MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMUNITY GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATIONS: Community grant program applications for either nonprofit organizations or local businesses will include, at a minimum, the following information to be considered by the Community Recovery Committee: A. The amount of community grant funds the organization is seeking and how the nonprofit organization or local businesses intends to use the proposed funds. B. Affirmation, after consultation with the City's Finance Department, that the proposed use is eligible under the federal Rescue Plan guidelines and that the applicant will be able to spend the funds by December 31, 2024. C. Identification of how the proposed grant will meet the City's objectives of supporting underserved communities, mitigating economic impacts on local businesses or arts organizations, or mitigating the effects of COVID-19 on the community. (Ord. 17-22, 2022) 2.20.060: SUNSET: Upon either full expenditure of the Rescue Plan funds, or expiration of the deadline to expend such funds, the Community Recovery Committee shall cease to exist under City Code, unless the City Council expands the scope of the Community Recovery Committee's responsibilities, in which case the Community Recovery Committee will remain in effect. (Ord. 17-22, 2022) https://export.amIegal.com/api/export-req uests/eaa5fce7-9601-4be0-8a48-9cb553893360/download/ 2/2 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 100%female-owned; 1 Arts&Culture business Junction Dance Co 60 36 102 110 103 60 60 30 561 93.5 6 (arts,musicians,etc.) 100%minority owned; 2 Travel,Tourism,or Zahara LLC 41 47 84 87 88 50 50 20 467 93.4 5 Hos italit 3 100%female-owned Sugar Space LLC 36 44 102 114 109 60 60 30 555 92.5 6 Business in the City Center(between North Temple and 400 South, and 200 East to I-15); Dream Garden 4 Arts&Culture business Press: DBA Ken 13 37 96 95 95 50 50 25 461 92.2 5 (arts,musicians,etc.); Sanders Rare Books Travel,Tourism,or Hospitality 100%female-owned; 5 100%minority owned; Zaater and Zayton 41 41 93 104 103 60 60 50 552 92.0 6 Travel,Tourism,or Hospitality Business in the City Center(between North 6 Temple and 400 South, Mestizo LLC 50 36 96 73 79 50 50 25 459 91.8 5 and 200 East to I-15); Travel,Tourism,or 100%minofity 7 owned;Travel,Tourism Noor Al Sham,LLC 44 54 79 106 101 60 60 35 539 89.8 6 or Hospitality 8 100%female-owned Susie M's Gallery of 60 50 94 99 96 60 60 15 534 89.0 6 Fine Tattooing 100%female-owned; 9 Arts&Culture business J Street Productions 70 50 127 107 115 60 60 30 619 88.4 7 (arts,musicians,etc.) Inc. Page 1 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 100%female-owned; Arts&Culture business 10 (arts,musicians,etc.); Arts of the World 29 54 92 97 86 60 60 50 528 88.0 6 Travel,Tourism,or Gallery Hospitality 11 100%female-owned; Premier Paralegal 36 40 107 98 89 60 60 30 520 86.7 6 100%minority owned Solutions LLC r14 NONE of these C clin Utah,Inc. 39 44 112 101 102 60 60 0 518 86.3 6 100%minority owned; Travel,Tourism,or Golden Gyros 60 56 88 69 84 60 60 35 512 85.3 6 Hos italic 100%female-owned Amie Engberg 60 47 99 88 93 60 60 0 507 84.5 6 15 Travel,Tourism,or Six Sailor Cider 50 39 76 68 66 50 50 20 419 83.8 5 Hospitality LLC 100%female-owned; 100%minority owned; 16 Arts&Culture business Phoebe Davenport 40 50 86 81 79 60 60 45 501 83.5 6 (arts,musicians,etc.) 100%female-owned; 17 100%minority owned; Sikkim Memo 50 52 83 83 92 30 60 50 500 83.3 6 Travel,Tourism,or Hospitality 18 100%female-owned Christina's Barber 27 35 101 100 84 60 60 30 497 82.8 6 op 100%female-owned; Arts&Culture business 19 Flamenco del Lago 55 34 88 86 84 60 60 30 497 82.8 6 (arts,musicians,etc.) 20 100%female-owned www.DayhouseStudi 35 43 106 83 94 60 60 15 496 82.7 6 o.com Arts&Culture business Seth Ian 21 (arts,musicians,etc.) Photography 60 46 91 84 80 60 60 15 496 82.7 6 Page 2 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 100%female-owned; Arts&Culture business Worthfull Media 22 43 39 91 85 87 60 60 30 495 82.5 6 (arts,musicians,etc.) LLC Arts&Culture business Design to Grow 23 (arts,musicians,etc.) LLC 39 26 95 99 96 60 60 15 490 81.7 6 100%female-owned; Arts&Culture business 24 Suzanne May 40 49 88 76 79 60 60 30 482 80.3 6 (arts,musicians,etc.) Business in the City Center(between North 25 Temple and 400 South, Kirk's Ship,LLC 8 47 109 90 95 60 60 10 479 79.8 6 and 200 East to 1-15); Travel,Tourism,or Hospitality 26 100%minority owned Eleganit Tailoring 46 42 96 64 81 60 60 30 479 79.8 6 LC 100%minority owned Utah Hispanic 27 Chamber of 60 58 106 87 92 0 60 15 478 79.7 6 Commerce 28 NONE of these Utah Fitness 36 53 92 86 91 60 60 0 478 79.7 6 Institute 29 100%female-owned Match and 4 60 79 91 93 60 60 30 477 79.5 6 Farnsworth,PC 30 NONE of these Antidote 60 41 91 84 77 60 60 0 473 78.8 6 Cosmeceuticals 31 First Steps Inc 4 39 97 83 99 60 60 15 457 76.2 6 100%minority owned; 32 Travel,Tourism,or Salaama 60 56 79 88 81 60 60 35 519 86.5 6 Hos italit Page 3 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 100%female-owned; 33 Arts&Culture business Salt&Honey 25 44 104 109 105 30 60 30 507 84.5 6 (arts,musicians,etc.) Market LLC Business is at least 50% 34 minority owned;Travel, HK Brewing 39 32 103 99 93 40 60 20 486 81.0 6 Tourism,or Hospitality Collective 100%minority owned; Arts&Culture business 35 Michael Pugh 70 60 101 89 93 60 60 30 563 80.4 7 (arts,musicians,etc.) 36 100%minority owned CathPro 45 21 99 87 90 60 60 15 477 79.5 6 Technologies Arts&Culture business 37 (arts,musicians,etc.) Sri Whipple 37 41 81 84 83 60 60 30 476 79.3 6 Arts&Culture business Oskar&Julia Music 38 (arts,musicians,etc.) LLC 60 41 91 92 87 30 60 15 476 79.3 6 100%female-owned MAGO LLC DBA 39 7 50 92 85 90 60 60 30 474 79.0 6 Diggity Dog Resort 100%minority owned; Namash Swahili 40 Travel,Tourism,or Cuisine 51 43 74 82 69 60 60 35 474 79.0 6 Hospitality 41 NONE of these Antidote 60 41 91 84 77 60 60 0 473 78.8 6 Cosmeceuticals 42 Salt Lake Capoeira 34 40 81 88 91 0 60 0 394 78.8 5 &Brazilian Jiu Jitsu 100%minority owned; 43 Travel,Tourism,or kafe mamai 11c 32 40 75 81 87 60 60 35 470 78.3 6 Hospitality 44 100%female-owned Total Body Pilates 60 30 78 84 83 60 60 15 470 78.3 6 Page 4 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score NONE of these Tippetts Builders 45 LLC 60 58 94 94 89 60 0 15 470 78.3 6 F47 100%female-owned; Travel,Tourism,or Les Madeleines LLC 2 44 93 84 91 60 60 35 469 78.2 6 Hos italit100%minority owned; Halab's Jasmine Travel,Tourism,or Kitchen 48 38 86 91 80 30 60 35 468 78.0 6 Hospitality 48 NONE of these Utah Brewers Guild 33 35 76 85 86 0 60 15 390 78.0 5 100%female-owned; Utah Arts&Cultural Arts&Culture business Coalition dba Utah 49 (arts,musicians,etc.) Cultural Alliance 43 31 93 99 96 0 60 45 467 77.8 6 Foundation 100%minority owned; Arts&Culture business 50 Jaguar Occult 60 17 78 77 70 60 60 45 467 77.8 6 (arts,musicians,etc.) 100%female-owned; Business in the City Center(between North 51 Temple and 400 South, Eighteen Percent 3 33 76 90 95 60 60 50 467 77.8 6 and 200 East to 1-15); Gray Arts&Culture business (arts,musicians,etc.) 100%minority owned; 52 Travel,Tourism,or Delicius 49 52 93 84 92 60 0 35 465 77.5 6 Hospitality 100%minority owned; Villalba&Rikli 53 Travel,Tourism,or LLC 8 47 96 79 78 60 60 35 463 77.2 6 Hospitality Page 5 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 100%minority owned; Business in the City U.S. Translation 54 Center(between North Company 0 39 100 84 84 60 60 35 462 77.0 6 Temple and 400 South, and 200 East to I-15 100%minority owned; Jamaica's Kitchen 55 Travel,Tourism,or LLC 45 17 78 82 84 60 60 35 461 76.8 6 Hos italit Arts&Culture business Wasatch Theatre 56 (arts,musicians,etc.) Company of Salt 60 35 65 71 78 60 60 30 459 76.5 6 Lake Count TANKINZ 57 NOODLE MFG. 2 57 85 100 96 60 60 0 460 76.7 6 LLC 100%female-owned; 58 Travel,Tourism,or Custom Travel,LLC 22 32 96 99 96 30 60 20 455 75.8 6 Hos italit Business in the City Center(between North Temple and 400 South, and 200 East to I-15); Lyman&Brown 59 Arts&Culture business LLC 60 23 70 75 71 60 60 35 454 75.7 6 (arts,musicians,etc.) Arts&Culture business Rhythms of Life, 60 (arts,musicians,etc.) LLC 52 26 104 91 90 0 60 30 453 75.5 6 100%female-owned; 61 Travel,Tourism,or CytyByrd 2 45 104 77 84 60 60 20 452 75.3 6 Hospitality Business in the City 62 Center(between North Rocky Mountain 60 26 101 101 98 0 60 5 451 75.2 6 Temple and 400 South, Innocence Center and 200 East to I-15 Page 6 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 63 100%female-owned STAY Design LLC 34 36 87 71 73 60 60 30 451 75.2 6 64 NONE of these Jeremiah Kephart 60 31 76 84 74 60 60 0 445 74.2 6 100%minority owned; 65 Travel,Tourism,or Sapa LLC 1 47 90 85 81 60 60 20 444 74.0 6 Hospitality 100%minority owned; 66 Travel,Tourism,or Balabe LLC 45 37 70 65 72 60 60 35 444 74.0 6 Hospitality Arts&Culture business Salt Lake Music 67 (arts,musicians,etc.) School Foundation 2 53 94 97 107 0 60 30 443 73.8 6 DBA Gifted Music School 100%female-owned; 68 Arts&Culture business Art Haus 34 42 89 88 83 60 0 45 441 73.5 6 (arts,musicians,etc.) 69 100%female-owned L.L. Hair&Beauty 40 37 77 78 74 60 60 15 441 73.5 6 Elizabeth Lavoie 100%minority owned; 70 Travel,Tourism,or Nohm,LLC 3 46 101 83 83 30 60 35 441 73.5 6 Hospitality 71 Travel,Tourism,or Olio Products Co. 60 40 66 75 75 60 60 5 441 73.5 6 Hospitality 72 100%female-owned troubadour 11c 33 40 76 73 66 60 60 30 438 73.0 6 73 Travel,Tourism,or Soul Traveler LLC 3 39 98 98 90 30 60 20 438 73.0 6 Hospitality 74 NONE of these Torrent Cycle LLC 35 38 73 94 92 30 60 15 437 72.8 6 Arts&Culture business 75 (arts,musicians,etc.) John Schaefer 38 35 76 73 79 60 60 15 436 72.7 6 100%minority owned; Arts&Culture business 76 Lazy Llama Ecowear 33 38 78 67 69 60 60 30 435 72.5 6 (arts,musicians,etc.) 77 CUPRO 47 12 75 93 88 60 60 0 435 1 72.5 6 TECHNOLOGIES Page 7 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 100%minority owned; African Mini Mart 78 Travel,Tourism,or LLC 58 39 95 87 91 30 0 35 435 72.5 6 Hos italit 100%minority owned; Business in the City Center(between North Alamarie Twisted 79 Temple and 400 South, Roots 17 30 81 81 81 60 60 25 435 72.5 6 and 200 East to I-15); Travel,Tourism,or 80 100%minority owned Shrimp Shak LLC 60 37 58 63 67 60 60 30 435 72.5 6 100%female-owned Kyle George 81 Photography Inc. 30 33 95 75 74 30 60 30 427 71.2 6 DBA Rev Physical Therapy 100%minority owned The Salt Lake 82 Barber Company 2 37 91 77 84 60 60 15 426 71.0 6 LLC 83 Travel,Tourism,or Pago LLC 0 44 75 80 86 60 60 20 425 70.8 6 Hospitality Business in the City Center(between North Temple and 400 South, Copperfield 84 and 200 East to I-15); Publishing 0 45 73 88 90 30 60 35 421 70.2 6 Arts&Culture business (arts,musicians,etc.) Arts&Culture business 85 (arts,musicians,etc.) The Leonardo 0 48 93 91 99 0 60 30 421 70.2 6 100%minority owned; 86 Travel,Tourism,or Overseas Grocery 27 41 57 73 67 60 60 35 420 70.0 6 Hospitality Page 8 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 100%female-owned; Business in the City Center(between North 87 Temple and 400 South, Torrey House Press 7 47 81 100 90 0 60 35 420 70.0 6 and 200 East to 1-15); Arts&Culture business (arts,musicians,etc.) Business in the City Center(between North Temple and 400 South, and 200 East to 1-15); Wiseguys Comedy, 88 Arts&Culture business Inc. 0 23 45 69 72 50 50 40 349 69.8 5 (arts,musicians,etc.); Travel,Tourism,or Hospitality 89 100%minority owned Joshua Lucero,LLC 34 14 79 72 70 60 60 30 419 69.8 6 100%minority owned; MAIZE FOOD 90 Travel,Tourism,or TRUCK LLC 11 41 71 96 89 30 60 20 418 69.7 6 Hospitality 91 NONE of these Express CCleaners 19 43 78 73 70 60 60 15 418 69.7 6 Travel Tourism or The Chocolate 92 50 48 78 71 78 0 0 20 345 69.0 5 lHospitality Cons irac 100%female-owned; Arts&Culture business Reflective Art 93 43 43 76 84 76 60 0 30 412 68.7 6 (arts,musicians,etc.) Studio Arts&Culture business Salt Lake Film 94 (arts,musicians,etc.) Society 1 38 94 103 99 0 60 15 410 68.3 6 1000 female-owned; 95 Travel,Tourism,or Sugar House Coffee 2 39 86 86 87 30 60 20 410 68.3 6 Hospitality Page 9 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 100%female-owned; Business in the City Center(between North Iguana LLC DBA 96 Temple and 400 South, Blue Iguana 0 48 69 83 84 60 40 25 409 68.2 6 and 200 East to 1-15); Travel,Tourism,or Arts&Culture business Pygmalion 97 (arts,musicians,etc.) Productions Inc. dba 59 24 93 94 92 0 15 30 407 67.8 6 Pygmalion Theatre Company 100%female-owned; Alexander Cole Arts&Culture business 98 Investment Group, 3 37 90 87 99 60 0 30 406 67.7 6 (arts,musicians,etc.) LLC 100%minority owned; 99 Travel,Tourism,or GLOBAL PLACE 38 16 64 69 64 60 60 35 406 67.7 6 Hospitality Business in the City Center(between North 100 Temple and 400 South, Salt Lake Bicycle 38 37 68 57 59 60 60 25 404 67.3 6 and 200 East to 1-15); Tours LLC Travel,Tourism,or Travel,Tourism,or McDonough 101 Hospitality Enterprises,Inc. 34 28 81 72 64 60 60 5 404 67.3 6 dba brio COFFEE Arts&Culture business Salt Lake Acting 102 (arts,musicians,etc.) Company 0 47 88 95 97 0 60 15 402 67.0 6 103 Travel,Tourism,or Fice LLC 31 38 82 81 74 30 60 5 401 66.8 6 lHospitality Page to Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 100%female-owned Utah Gay&Lesbian Chamber of 104 Commerce DBA 37 4 90 98 97 0 60 15 401 66.8 6 Utah LGBTQ+ Chamber of Commerce Business in the City Center(between North Temple and 400 South, 105 and 200 East to 1-15); Utah Arts Alliance 0 29 87 88 98 0 60 35 397 66.2 6 Arts&Culture business (arts,musicians,etc.) Arts&Culture business 106 (arts,musicians,etc.) Art Access 10 24 87 93 91 0 60 30 395 65.8 6 Business in the City 107 Center(between North Array Salon LLC 14 46 72 67 70 60 60 5 394 65.7 6 Temple and 400 South, and 200 East to 1-15) 100%female-owned Someday Society LLC(currently, changed from 108 previous CC 38 31 72 78 78 30 50 15 392 65.3 6 Collective LLC; before that CC&the Coiffarists 109 NONE of these Inkyn 30 32 77 76 78 55 40 0 388 64.7 6 100%female-owned; Business in the City Center(between North Blind Pig,LLC. 110 Temple and 400 South, DBA The Rest 0 30 57 76 78 60 60 25 386 64.3 6 and 200 East to 1-15); Travel,Tourism,or 111 100%female-owned Sparkle On,LLC 10 15 72 65 73 60 60 30 385 64.2 6 Page 11 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score NONE of these Trailside 112 Professional Dry 11 50 98 81 84 0 60 0 384 64.0 6 Cleaners 100%female-owned; Arts&Culture business Madison Briggs Fine 113 43 24 50 51 51 60 60 45 384 64.0 6 (arts,musicians,etc.) Art 114 Pathway Associates 60 0 80 89 93 0 60 0 382 63.7 6 115 Travel,Tourism,or LUX Events,Inc 0 54 88 82 77 0 60 20 381 63.5 6 Hospitality 100%female-owned; Business in the City Center(between North 116 Temple and 400 South, Craft Lake City 1 12 82 79 96 0 60 50 380 63.3 6 and 200 East to I-15); Arts&Culture business (arts,musicians,etc.) Travel,Tourism,or Urban Edge Event 117 Hospitality Center DBA Venue 57 10 91 81 76 0 60 5 380 63.3 6 6SIX9 Business in the City I C D C, 118 Center(between North Incorporated DBA 3 45 64 86 85 30 60 5 378 63.0 6 Temple and 400 South, and 200 East to I-15) Dexterity Salon 119 100%female-owned Matrixx Massage Inc 3 46 82 78 79 60 0 30 378 63.0 6 100%minority owned; East West 120 Travel,Tourism,or Connection,LLC 16 56 94 97 92 0 0 20 375 62.5 6 Hospitality Travel,Tourism,or Utah Ski Rental 121 Hospitality Inc./dba Utah Ski& 0 45 75 73 55 60 60 5 373 62.2 6 Golf Page 12 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 100%minority owned; 122 Travel,Tourism,or Noor Restaurant 39 33 70 67 69 60 0 35 373 62.2 6 Hos italit Travel,Tourism,or Church& State 123 Hospitality Spirits LLC DBA 3 37 93 78 80 0 60 20 371 61.8 6 Water Witch Bar Travel,Tourism,or BONA PARTE LLC 124 Hospitality HEMINGWAY 29 12 67 59 59 60 60 20 366 61.0 6 CAFE Arts&Culture business 125 (arts,musicians,etc.) dear new. orleans lie 1 25 66 60 63 60 60 30 365 60.8 6 126 100%female-owned h2blow Salt Lake 27 41 75 72 70 0 0 15 300 60.0 5 City,LLC Arts&Culture business 127 (arts,musicians,etc.) Luminaria SLC 48 11 43 84 83 60 0 30 359 59.8 6 100%minority owned; Business in the City Center(between North 128 Temple and 400 South, Helloo! Digital 16 17 40 56 58 60 60 50 357 59.5 6 and 200 East to 1-15); Media LLC Arts&Culture business (arts,musicians,etc.) Arts&Culture business 129 (arts,musicians,etc.) Visual Art Institute 41 35 93 87 86 0 0 15 357 59.5 6 Arts&Culture business 130 (arts,musicians,etc.) BD Howes 36 25 49 19 52 50 50 15 296 59.2 5 131 Travel,Tourism,or Huber Bros 5 34 77 82 77 60 0 20 355 59.2 6 Hospitality Inc/Ottowear Page 13 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 100%female-owned; Condie's Candy Co 132 Travel,Tourism,or Inc 39 22 65 68 66 0 60 35 355 59.2 6 Hos italit 133 Travel,Tourism,or Blue Copper Coffee 11 58 76 88 96 0 0 20 349 58.2 6 Hospitality Room LLC 134 Travel,Tourism,or RoHa Brewing 3 24 80 84 78 0 60 20 349 58.2 6 Hosoitalitv Project,LLC 135 NONE of these Glide Paddllesports 31 46 66 73 70 0 60 0 346 57.7 6 1 LLC 136 Travel,Tourism,or ORIGINAL UTAH 1 26 87 87 79 0 60 5 345 57.5 6 HosDitalitv WOOLEN MILLS Business in the City Center(between North Temple and 400 South, 137 and 200 East to I-15); Plan-B Theatre 6 35 68 76 65 0 60 35 345 57.5 6 Arts&Culture business (arts,musicians,etc.) 138 Travel,Tourism,or Topless Tours 33 21 63 50 35 60 60 20 342 57.0 6 Hospitality 100%minority owned; 139 Travel,Tourism,or Purgatory Bar,LLC 2 32 69 85 74 60 0 20 342 57.0 6 .Hospitality 100%minority owned; Pacific Seas 140 Travel,Tourism,or Restaurant 0 39 73 64 69 60 0 35 340 56.7 6 Hos italit Business in the City 141 Center(between North Higher Ground 0 35 58 85 81 60 0 20 339 56.5 6 Temple and 400 South, Learning SLC LLC tHospitality 00 East to I-15 14l,Tourism,or Logos Coffee 42 28 68 71 65 0 60 5 339 56.5 6 Company LLC Page 14 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 100%minority owned; Business in the City Center(between North TURMERIK LLC 143 Temple and 400 South, (DBA ZIMBU) 6 21 75 74 70 0 60 25 331 55.2 6 and 200 East to 1-15); Travel,Tourism,or Business in the City Center(between North 144 Temple and 400 South, Beerhive Pub 13 25 53 63 56 50 60 10 330 55.0 6 and 200 East to 1-15); Travel,Tourism,or r145 NONE of these Utah Pride Center 1 46 90 80 94 0 0 15 326 54.3 6 146 Travel,Tourism,or LUX Hospitality 2 21 82 82 72 0 60 5 324 54.0 6 Hos italit Grou Inc 147 Travel,Tourism,or Hospitality Z NECTAR LLC 37 20 59 65 74 0 60 5 320 53.3 6 Business in the City Center(between North 148 Temple and 400 South, Colt Cooper 30 20 77 52 54 60 0 25 318 53.0 6 and 200 East to 1-15); Consulting LLC Travel,Tourism,or Arts&Culture business select sound 149 (arts,musicians,etc.) entertainment LLC 0 24 46 53 58 60 60 15 316 52.7 6 150 Northst r Builders 1 12 72 60 64 30 60 15 314 52.3 6 Inc Business in the City Center(between North 151 Temple and 400 South, Edgeworks Events, 2 25 87 94 85 0 0 10 303 50.5 6 and 200 East to 1-15); LLC Travel,Tourism,or Hospitality Page 15 Attachment 3 - Summary List of Eligible Local Business Assistance ARPA Grant Applications by Average Score Sum of Have Sum of Sum of Please Sum of Sum of Demographic Group Legal Business you received Change in briefly explain Sum of Please Sum of Use Multiple Recieved Sum ofTOTAL AVG. Record # Membership T Name T any other Number of how you were briefly explain of Grant Technical Bonus Owners SCORE SCORE Count assistance Employees impacted your business Funds Score Assistance Score Score 152 Travel,Tourism,or Fisher Brewing 0 40 72 58 70 0 0 5 245 49.0 5 lHospitality Company LLC 153 INONE of these Pivot RnD,LLC 60 9 0 46 48 60 60 0 283 47.2 6 Business in the City Center(between North Ruben James LLC 154 Temple and 400 South, dba Maxwell's East 0 30 14 71 64 60 0 40 279 46.5 6 and 200 East to I-15); Coast Eatery Travel,Tourism,or Hospitality Travel,Tourism,or Temple Grounds 155 Hospitality Coffee Roasters 60 0 0 62 58 30 60 5 275 45.8 6 DBA The Bean Whole Business in the City 156 Center(between North Borboleta Beauty 0 43 45 64 71 0 20 20 263 43.8 6 Temple and 400 South, Inc and 200 East to I-15 157 Travel,Tourism,or Epic Brewing 0 45 72 60 56 0 0 20 253 42.2 6 Hosgitalitx Com an ,LLC Page 16 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2023 (Ordinance approving the disbursement of American Rescue Plan Act Community Grant Program Funds for Phase 1) WHEREAS, the global COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the world and local economy at an unprecedented level, and Salt Lake City's nonprofit organizations, local businesses, and residents have been negatively impacted by the economic uncertainty caused by the pandemic. WHEREAS, on March 11, 2021, the U.S. Government signed into law a COVID-19 recovery bill, the American Rescue Plan Act("ARPA") and allocated federal funding to Salt Lake City Corporation ("City") to use for certain COVID-related uses, including to support disproportionately impacted communities and to mitigate negative economic impacts within the community. WHEREAS, on April 19, 2022, the City Council passed Salt Lake City Ordinance 17 of 2022, enacting Salt Lake City Code Chapter 2.20 and establishing a new community grant program to govern the distribution of certain ARPA funds, including the creation of a Community Recovery Committee that is tasked with reviewing grant applications and making recommendations on the disbursement of community recovery grant funds. WHEREAS,beginning in November 2022 and continuing through January 2023, the Community Recovery Committee held ten meetings to review and consider applications from approximately 157 small businesses and 39 nonprofit organizations seeking grant funding for direct economic assistance, in accordance with Salt Lake City Code 2.20.040. WHEREAS, the Community Recovery Committee evaluated the applications in accordance with Salt Lake City Code Chapter 2.20, including consideration of the applicant's proposed use of funds, geographic equity, the policies and objectives of the community grant program, and the federal requirements pursuant to ARPA. WHEREAS, the Community Recovery Committee has completed review of the applications and has recommended funding allocations as further described in Exhibit A. WHEREAS, pursuant to Salt Lake City Code 2.20.010, the Mayor has reviewed the Community Recovery Committee's recommendations set forth in Exhibit A. WHEREAS,based on the Review Committee's recommendations, the Mayor recommends that the City Council approve the funding allocations as described in Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, that: SECTION 1. Funding Approval. The City Council approves the funding allocations as further described in Exhibit B. The City Council authorizes the Mayor to negotiate and execute the grant agreements and any other relevant documents required, consistent with Exhibit B and Salt Lake City Code Chapter 2.20, and incorporating such other terms and agreements as recommended by the City Attorney's office. 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 52023. Darin Mano, Council Chair ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. of 2023. Published: APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney's Office Date: March 7, 2023 ,�s7a4,e,- �� Sara Montoya, City Xttorney EXHIIBIT A 2022-2024 2022-2024 CRC REQUESTED 2022-2024 ELIGIBLE RECOMMENDATION # BUSINESS APPLICANT DISTRICT FUNDING FUNDING(Proven Loss) (%Based on Score) CATEGORY 1 Junction Dance Company(63480) 5 $50,000.00 $49,000.00 $45,815.00 AB Business provides dance training,two dance companies,creative space and performance opportunities for youth and professional artists. They cultivate an artistically enriching community through performance and outreach. Type of Business: Dance Studio(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Rent,utilities,and operating costs(pay contracted artists) Received other assistance:None 2 Zahara,LLC(62879) 5 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $6,538.00 TTH Moroccan pop-up restaurant,that also offers catering services. Business holds community events that last between 2-3 hours where food is served. Owner plans to re-establish their events,and catering services,along with building to transition to a permanent physical location. Type of Business: Restaurant(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,venue rentals and staff costs. Received other assistance:Business received$2k from the International Rescue Committee for business expenses accrued during COVID-19. 3 Sugar Space,LLC(63372) 1 2 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 $46,250.00 SB Business is an arts,events and reception center. They provide space for artists of all disciplines to create and present work and a place for the community to celebrate,learn,share and engage. Type of Business: Event/Reception Center(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Salaries and wages for staff. Received other assistance:Yes,they received under$50k in other assistance with PPP and EIDL. 41 Dream Garden Press/dba Ken Sanders Rare Books(63434) 1 4 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 1 $46,100.00 AB This business sells used,new,and rare books and ephemera. Special focus for this business is Utah and regional history. This business all supports local artists and musicians with regular public events. Type of Business: Bookstore in the City Center(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent and payroll. Received other assistance:Received approx..$75k of other assistance with PPP and EIDL 5 Zaater and Zayton(62465) 2 $50,000.00 $38,000.00 $34,960.00 TTH Business is a full-service catering company offering a unique blend of traditional Middle Eastern Cuisine and American fusion. Type of Business: Catering Disproportionately Impacted:Women& 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Mortgage payment,operational costs and start-up costs Received other assistance:Yes. Received$20k in EIDL 61 Mestizo,LLC(63831) 3 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $45,900.00 TTH r2„ei' ;o�ff A 1--,', tAA h.,,»,,4—jr—,,,,,,,,,4— Th.f,,, l IF—';-; A onA A t / her; .f t� ,,,,,,,,,,;t.. 2022-2024 2022-2024 CRC REQUESTED 2022-2024 ELIGIBLE RECOMMENDATION # BUSINESS APPLICANT DISTRICT FUNDING FUNDING(Proven Loss) (%Based on Score) CATEGORY .. 1—v..,u.w.x vy w......u. .' — ....,.vws.,.o u y.uv.,..,.v.v..,....�u�..........u.s o..u....�u. .,�..,..�..�.....,.....,.....y. Type of Business: Coffeehouse(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,operating costs and wages. Received other assistance:None 7 Noor AI Sham LLC(63326) 5 $11,000.00 $10,758.00 $9,660.68 SB Catering business looking to complete start up and expand. Type of Business: Food-Catering(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:100%BIPOC Owned Use of funds:Start up costs,rent,payroll and operational expenses. Received other assistance:Received under$3,000 in PPP funding. 8 Susie M's Gallery of Fine Tattooing(63355) 5 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $22,250.00 SB Business provides an art studio with retail space,along with tattooing education space. Type of Business: Tattoo Parlor-Retail Space(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent and payroll. Received other assistance:None 9 J Street Productions(60538) 7 $26,000.00 $25,000.00 $22,107.14 AB Writer who writes novels for young readers(middle grades and young adult). Writes nonfictions on the intersection of art and faith,and also consults freelance writers and provides editorial services for other writers. Type of Business: Writer(Home Based,Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Salary and Operating Expenses(will have to provide tax documents,etc.) Received other assistance:None 10 Arts of the World Gallery(63518) 5 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $44,000.00 AB Business is the local home for global treasures.This business houses traditional(indigenous)arts and crafts and also traditional industries like ceramics in two historic buildings that have been maintained and preserved. Type of Business: Art Gallery(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Utilities,and operating expenses Received other assistance:Yes.Received less than$50k in Salt Lake County grant,and PPP funds 11 Premier Paralegal Solutions,LLC(59841) 1 5 1 $50,000.00 $9,000.00 $7,800.00 SB Business provides legal document preparation,tax preparation and some translation services. Services provided to clients with digital equity issues that require in person attention. Type of Business: Legal Services(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Rent,payroll,supplies and start-up costs. 2022-2024 2022-2024 CRC REQUESTED 2022-2024 ELIGIBLE RECOMMENDATION # BUSINESS APPLICANT DISTRICT FUNDING FUNDING(Proven Loss) (%Based on Score) CATEGORY Received other assistance:Yes,less than$50k in EIDL and PPP 12 Cycling Utah,LLC(63477) 4 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $43,166.67 SB Business produces a bicycling magazine and website. They are in their 30th year of business providing information,news,tips and event calendars. They distribute throughout Salt Lake City and the western United States. Type of Business: Magazine(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Operating costs and payroll. Received other assistance:Yes. Received less than$50k in PPP funds 13 Golden Gyros(63448) 5 $50,000.00 $47,000.00 $40,106.67 TTH Local restaurant in Salt Lake City. One of the first restaurants to close due to COVID-19 trying to keep doors open on their startup business that opened as the pandemic hit. Type of Business: Restaurant Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,wages,and equipment. Received other assistance:None 14 Amie Engberg(62853) 5 $38,000.00 $38,000.00 $32,110.00 SB Document preparation and financial education services for chiropractors. Type of Business: Financial Education Services(Home Based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Supplies and salary Received other assistance:None 15 Six Sailor Cider,LLC(63232) 4 $50,000.00 $11,000.00 $9,218.00 TTH Business makes a variety of flavored apple ciders,non-alcoholic and sparkling hard ciders to be sold in the future. Started their sales in farmer's markets and now expanding into online and retail sales. Type of Business: Brewery(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent,payroll and startup costs. Received other assistance:None 161 Bye Phoebe(59674) 3 1 $5,000.00 1 $5,000.00 1 $4,175.00 AB Owner is a model,fashion stylist and also makes custom clothing for production companies. Type of Business: Styli stlClothing(Home Based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women&100%BIPOC owned 2022-2024 2022-2024 CRC REQUESTED 2022-2024 ELIGIBLE RECOMMENDATION # BUSINESS APPLICANT DISTRICT FUNDING FUNDING(Proven Loss) (%Based on Score) CATEGORY Use of funds:Equipment,materials,payroll and startup costs. Received other assistance:Yes received$1,200 from Artist Emergency Fund 17 Sikkim Momo(59832) 1 2 $49,000.00 $3,100.00 $2,583.33 TTH Business is a catering food business. This entrepreneur is from the Spice Kitchen incubator program of the International Rescue Committee. Type of Business: Catering Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies and equipment. Received other assistance:Business received$2k from the International Rescue Committee. 18 Christina's Barber Shop(60332) 1 5 $13,500.00 $14,000.00 $11,596.67 SB Business is a barber shop specializing in gentlemen haircuts located on 300 West. Type of Business: Barber shop(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent,utilities,and operating expenses. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k from EIDL. 19 Flamenco del Lago(63429) 1 5 $50,000.00 $13,000.00 $10,768.33 AB Business is a nonprofit under the direction of Katie Sheen-Abbott she's studied Flamenco for many years. She teaches and performs flamenco in Salt Lake City and throughout Utah for all ages and abilities. Type of Business: Dance teacher(Sole Proprietor&Nonprofit) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent,and equipment costs. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k in EIDL funding. 20 Dayhouse Studio(61894) 7 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $41,333.33 SB Business is a biophilic interior design studio specializing in residential and commercial spaces. Improving health,well-being and sustainable practices are at the heart of their work. Type of Business: Interior Design Studio(Home based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Operating costs and payroll. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k from EIDL. 21 1 Seth Ian Photography(62887) 1 3 $15,000.00 $7,000.00 $5,786.67 AB Photographer for the performing arts,small businesses,and real estate.Business is also undertaking documentary projects. Type of Business: Photographer(home-based&sole proprietor) 2022-2024 2022-2024 CRC REQUESTED 2022-2024 ELIGIBLE RECOMMENDATION # BUSINESS APPLICANT DISTRICT FUNDING FUNDING(Proven Loss) (%Based on Score) CATEGORY Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Equipment upgrades and project development costs Received other assistance:None 22 Worthfull Media,LLC(60612) 3 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $20,625.00 AB Boutique media production house that records,edits,produces,and manages audio and video for small business owners and personal brands.The bulk of business is for podcasters and YouTubers,but includes making related media as well. Type of Business:Media production(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds:Website upgrades,rent,contract costs Received other assistance:PPP and EIDL funds around$5k. 23 IDesign to Grow,LLC(63108) 4 $32,000.00 $32,000.00 $26,133.33 AB Business is a designibuild studio that does in house fabrication focused on public art,teaching/workshops,events,and commercial furniture. Type of Business:Design studio(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent,retaining employees Received other assistance:PPP$8.7K,Small Business Impact Grant$9.9k 24 Suzanne May(60330) 1 7 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,033.33 AB Singer/songwriter that also teaches voice and songwriting lessons from home studio. Type of Business:Musician(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds:Tour and equipment costs. Received other assistance:EIDL$12k,Unemployment$8k 25 The Twist(Kirk's Ship,LLC)(60520) 4 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,916.67 TTH Business is a Restaurant,Bar&Nightclub Type of Business:Bar/Restaurant Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Wages,retain employees Received other assistance:PPP&Employee Retention Credit over$50k 26 Elegant Tailoring,LLC(61865) 4 $50,000.00 $21,335.00 $17,025.33 SB Business is a tailoring shop in the heart of downtown. Type of Business:Tailoring Shop(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Payroll and operational expenses. Received other assistance:Business received less than$6,000.00 in PPP funding. EXHIBIT A 2022-2024 2022-2024 CRC REQUESTED 2022-2024 ELIGIBLE RECOMMENDATION # BUSINESS APPLICANT DISTRICT FUNDING FUNDING(Proven Loss) (%Based on Score) CATEGORY 27 Utah Hispanic Chamber of Commerce(62544) 2 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,833.33 SB Chamber of Commerce serving Hispanic businesses. Type of Business:Chamber of Commerce Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Wages Received other assistance:None 28 Utah Fitness Institute(62189) 5 $21,502.00 $22,000.00 $17,526.67 SB Personal training and wellness retreat business. Type of Business:Fitness Studio(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent costs Received other assistance:Salt Lake County grant$22k 29 Match and Farnsworth,PC(62089) 4 $49,000.00 $49,000.00 $38,955.00 SB Business is a small private law firm that provides representation to individuals who are unable to work due to physical or mental disabilities. Type of Business:Law Firm(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds:Payroll Received other assistance:Business received more than$50k from PPP. 30 Antidote Cosmeceuticals,LLC(60991) 6 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $6,304.00 SB Business manufactures bottles and sells skin care products. Type of Business:Skin care(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Facility upgrades and payroll Received other assistance:None 31 First Steps,Inc.(60261) 1 $50,000.00 $12,000.00 $9,140.00 SB Business is a child care center. Type of Business:Daycare Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Facility upgrades and payroll Received other assistance:PPP,EIDL,&CCL Stabilization Grant-over$200k EXHIBIT B SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED FUNDING ALLOCATIONS FOR PHASE 1 COMMUNITY RECOVERY GRANTS The following funding allocations are approved as provided herein. The 2022-2024 CRC Recommendation has been adjusted to reflect the Community Recovery Committee's recommended funding amount rounded up to the nearest hundredth value. The funding allocations are approved with the condition that no bonus points may be awarded to repeat applicants during Phase 2 of the Community Recovery Grant review process. EXHIBIT B 2022-2024 2022-2024 ELIGIBLE 2022-2024 CRC REQUESTED FUNDING RECOMMENDATION # BUSINESS APPLICANT DISTRICT FUNDING (Proven Loss) (%Based on Score) CATEGORY 1 IJunction Dance Company(63480) 5 $50,000.00 1 $49,000.00 $45,900.00 AB Business provides dance training,two dance companies,creative space and performance opportunities for youth and professional artists. They cultivate an artistically enriching community through performance and outreach. Type of Business: Dance Studio(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Rent,utilities,and operating costs(pay contracted artists) Received other assistance:None 2 Zahara,LLC(62879) 5 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $6,600.00 TTH Moroccan pop-up restaurant,that also offers catering services. Business holds community events that last between 2-3 hours where food is served. Owner plans to re-establish their events,and catering services,along with building to transition to a permanent physical location. Type of Business: Restaurant(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,venue rentals and staff costs. Received other assistance:Business received$2k from the International Rescue Committee for business expenses accrued during COVID-19. 3 Sugar Space,LLC(63372) 1 2 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 1 $46,300.00 SB Business is an arts,events and reception center. They provide space for artists of all disciplines to create and present work and a place for the community to celebrate, learn,share and engage. Type of Business: Event/Reception Center(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Salaries and wages for staff. Received other assistance:Yes,they received under$50k in other assistance with PPP and EIDL. 4 Dream Garden Press/dba Ken Sanders Rare Books(63434) 1 4 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 $46,100.00 AB This business sells used,new,and rare books and ephemera. Special focus for this business is Utah and regional history. This business all supports local artists and musicians with regular public events. Type of Business: Bookstore in the City Center(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent and payroll. Received other assistance:Received approx..$75k of other assistance with PPP and EIDL 5 1 Zaater and Zayton(62465) 1 2 1 $50,000.00 1 $38,000.00 1 $35,000.00 TTH Business is a full-service catering company offering a unique blend of traditional Middle Eastern Cuisine and American fusion. Type of Business: Catering Disproportionately Impacted:Women& 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Mortgage payment,operational costs and start-up costs Received other assistance:Yes. Received$20k in EIDL 6 Mestizo,LLC(63831) 1 3 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 $45,900.00 TTH Business is a coffee house created by community for community. The founders envisioned a place for civic engagement and sharing art to strengthen community. Type of Business: Coffeehouse(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,operating costs and wages. Received other assistance:None 7 Noor Al Sham LLC(63326) 5 $11,000.00 $10,758.00 $9,700.00 SB Catering business looking to complete start up and expand. Type of Business: Food-Catering(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC Owned Use of funds:Start up costs,rent,payroll and operational expenses. Received other assistance:Received under$3,000 in PPP funding. 8 Susie M's Gallery of Fine Tattooing(63355) 5 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $22,300.00 SB Business provides an art studio with retail space,along with tattooing education space. Type of Business: Tattoo Parlor-Retail Space(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent and payroll. Received other assistance:None 9 J Street Productions(60538) 1 7 1 $26,000.00 $25,000.00 $22,200.00 1 AB Writer who writes novels for young readers(middle grades and young adult). Writes nonfictions on the intersection of art and faith,and also consults freelance writers and provides editorial services for other writers. Type of Business: Writer(Home Based,Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Salary and Operating Expenses(will have to provide tax documents,etc.) Received other assistance:None 10 Arts of the World Gallery(63518) 1 5 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 1 $44,000.00 1 AB Business is the local home for global treasures.This business houses traditional(indigenous)arts and crafts and also traditional industries like ceramics in two historic buildings that have been maintained and preserved. Type of Business: Art Gallery(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Utilities,and operating expenses Received other assistance:Yes.Received less than$50k in Salt Lake County grant,and PPP funds I Premier Paralegal Solutions,LLC(59841) 1 5 1 $50,000.00 $9,000.00 $7,800.00 SB Business provides legal document preparation,tax preparation and some translation services. Services provided to clients with digital equity issues that require in person attention. Type of Business: Legal Services(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Rent,payroll,supplies and start-up costs. Received other assistance:Yes,less than$50k in BIDE and PPP 12 Cycling Utah,LLC(63477) 4 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 $43,200.00 SB Business produces a bicycling magazine and website. They are in their 30th year of business providing information,news,rips and event calendars. They distribute throughout Salt Lake City and the western United States. Type of Business: Magazine(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Operating costs and payroll. Received other assistance:Yes. Received less than$50k in PPP funds 13 Golden Gyros(63448) 1 5 $50,000.00 1 $47,000.00 $40,200.00 TTH Local restaurant in Salt Lake City. One of the first restaurants to close due to COVID-19 trying to keep doors open on their start up business that opened as the pandemic hit. Type of Business: Restaurant Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,wages,and equipment. Received other assistance:None 14 Amie Engberg(62853) 5 $38,000.00 $38,000.00 $32,200.00 SB Document preparation and financial education services for chiropractors. Type of Business: Financial Education Services(Home Based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Supplies and salary Received other assistance:None 15 1 Six Sailor Cider,LLC(63232) 1 4 1 $50,000.00 1 $11,000.00 1 $9,300.00 1 TTH Business makes a variety of flavored apple ciders,non-alcoholic and sparkling hard ciders to be sold in the future. Started their sales in farmer's markets and now expanding into online and retail sales. Type of Business: Brewery(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent,payroll and startup costs. Received other assistance:None 16 Bye Phoebe(59674) 3 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $4,200.00 AB Owner is a model,fashion stylist and also makes custom clothing for production companies. Type of Business: Stylist/Clothing(Home Based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women&100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Equipment,materials,payroll and startup costs. Received other assistance:Yes received$1,200 from Artist Emergency Fund 17 Sikkim Momo(59832) 1 2 $49,000.00 $3,100.00 $2,600.00 TTH Business is a catering food business. This entrepreneur is from the Spice Kitchen incubator program of the International Rescue Committee. Type of Business: Catering Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies and equipment. Received other assistance:Business received$2k from the International Rescue Committee. 18 Christina's Barber Shop(60332) 1 5 $13,500.00 $14,000.00 $11,600.00 SB Business is a barber shop specializing in gentlemen haircuts located on 300 West. Type of Business: Barber shop(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent,utilities,and operating expenses. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k from EIDL. 19 Flamenco del Lago(63429) 1 5 $50,000.00 $13,000.00 $10,800.00 AB Business is a nonprofit under the direction of Katie Sheen-Abbott she's studied Flamenco for many years. She teaches and performs flamenco in Salt Lake City and throughout Utah for all ages and abilities. Type of Business: Dance teacher(Sole Proprietor&Nonprofit) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent,and equipment costs. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k in EIDL funding. 20 Dayhouse Studio(61894) 1 7 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 1 $41,400.00 1 SB Business is a biophilic interior design studio specializing in residential and commercial spaces. Improving health,well-being and sustainable practices are at the heart of their work. Type of Business: Interior Design Studio(Home based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Operating costs and payroll. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k from EIDL. 21 ISeth Ian Photography(62887) 1 3 $15,000.00 $7,000.00 $5,800.00 AB Photographer for the performing arts,small businesses,and real estate.Business is also undertaking documentary projects. Type of Business: Photographer(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Equipment upgrades and project development costs Received other assistance:None 22 Worthfull Media,LLC(60612) 3 $25,000.00 1 $25,000.00 $20,700.00 AB Boutique media production house that records,edits,produces,and manages audio and video for small business owners and personal brands.The bulk of business is for podcasters and YouTubers,but includes making related media as well. Type of Business:Media production(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds:Website upgrades,rent,contract costs Received other assistance:PPP and EIDL funds around$5k. 23 iDesign to Grow,LLC(63108) 77J 4 $32,000.00 1 $32,000.00 $26,200.00 AB Business is a designibuild studio that does in house fabrication focused on public art,teaching/workshops,events,and commercial furniture. Type of Business:Design studio(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent,retaining employees Received other assistance:PPP$8.7K,Small Business Impact Grant$9.9k 24 Suzanne May(60330) 1 7 $10,000.00 1 $10,000.00 $8,100.00 AB Singer/songwriter that also teaches voice and songwriting lessons from home studio. Type of Business:Musician(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds:Tour and equipment costs. Received other assistance:EIDL$12k,Unemployment$8k 25 1 The Twist(Kirk's Ship,LLC)(60520) 4 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $40,000.00 TTH Business is a Restaurant,Bar&Nightclub Type of Business:Bar/Restaurant Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Wages,retain employees Received other assistance:PPP&Employee Retention Credit over$50k 26 Elegant Tailoring,LLC(61865) 4 $50,000.00 $21,335.00 $17,100.00 SB Business is a tailoring shop in the heart of downtown. Type of Business:Tailoring Shop(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Payroll and operational expenses. Received other assistance:Business received less than$6,000.00 in PPP funding. 27 Utah Hispanic Chamber of Commerce(62544) 2 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,900.00 SB Chamber of Commerce serving Hispanic businesses. Type of Business:Chamber of Commerce Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Wages Received other assistance:None 28 Utah Fitness Institute(62189) 5 $21,502.00 $22,000.00 $17,600.00 SB Personal training and wellness retreat business. Type of Business:Fitness Studio(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent costs Received other assistance:Salt Lake County grant$22k 29 Match and Farnsworth,PC(62089) 4 $49,000.00 $49,000.00 $39,000.00 SB Business is a small private law firm that provides representation to individuals who are unable to work due to physical or mental disabilities. Type of Business:Law Firm(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds:Payroll Received other assistance:Business received more than$50k from PPP. 30 Antidote Cosmeceuticals,LLC(60991) 6 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $6,400.00 SB Business manufactures bottles and sells skin care products. Type of Business:Skin care(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Facility upgrades and payroll Received other assistance:None 31 lFirst Steps,Inc.(60261) 1 $50,000.00 $12,000.00 $9,200.00 SB Business is a child care center. Type of Business:Daycare Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Facility upgrades and payroll Received other assistance:PPP,EIDL,&CCL Stabilization Grant-over$200k 32 CathPro Technologies(62544) 1 7 $28,000.00 $28,000.00 $22,300.00 SB Business owns intellectual property and is associated with technology platforms in the medical device sector. Type of Business: R&D Medical Devices Disproportionately Impacted:BIPOC Use of funds:Rent,start up,operating expenses Received other assistance:EIDL,Small Business Catalyst Grant-less than$50k 33 10skar&Julia Music LLC(59713) 3 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 AB Musicians who record,perform and sell merchandise. Type of Business: Recording Music Disproportionately Impacted: None Use of funds:Operating expenses,supplies. Received other assistance:None 34 Mago LLC dba Diggity Dog Resort(61569) 2 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,500.00 SB Dog boarding and daycare facility. Type of Business: Dog care resort Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds: Wages Received other assistance: Received PPP-over$50k 35 Namash Swahili Cuisine(63291) 2 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $7,900.00 TTH African cuisine food truck which sells authentic food from Africa using unique family recipes. Type of Business: Food Truck Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds: Equipment and operating expenses Received other assistance: Spice Kitchen-$2k 36 Salt Lake Capoeira&Brazilian Jiu Jitsu(61693) 7 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,500.00 AB Afro-Brazilian Capoeira and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu education and performance business. Type of Business: Capoeira&Brazilian Jiu Jitsu Education Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Operating expenses Received other assistance: EIDL,Artists Emergency Funds,SLC Chamber Grant,PPP-less than$50k 37 Kate Mamai LLC(60765) 2 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,200.00 TTH Catering and food truck business. Type of Business: Catering and Food Truck Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds: Operating costs Received other assistance: SBA-under$50k 38 Total Body Pilates(63317) 6 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $15,700.00 SB Salt Lake City business since 1999,teaching pilates and physical wellness. Type of Business: Pilates studio Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds: Rent and utilities Received other assistance: None 39 Tippetts Builders LLC(63559) 4 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $6,300.00 SB General contractor residential construction. Type of Business: Construction Disproportionately Impacted: None Use of funds: Operating expenses and equipment Received other assistance: None 40 Les Madeleines LLC(63537) 1 4 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 $39,100.00 TTH French pastry shop that has been part of the downtown community since 2003. Also an e-commerce shop since 2008. Type of Business: Pastry Shop Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds: Wages,rent and operating expenses Received other assistance: Received PPP-over$50k 41 Halab's Jasmine Kitchen(61158) 2 $6,050.00 $6,050.00 $4,800.00 TTH Food truck that offers Syrian and Eastern Mediterranean cuisine throughout Salt Lake City. Type of Business: Food truck Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds: Operating expenses Received other assistance: Spice Kitchen grant,Neighborworks grant-less than$50k 42 Utah Brewers Guild(63442) 1 4 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,000.00 SB Business supports Utah craft brewing manufacturers and small businesses with direct programming,education and advocacy. Type of Business:Business alliance Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Wages and operating costs Received other assistance:EIDL-$19,000 ER IN III:NI7I;NI AI;I, LORLNARIFF0JFNSON MAYOR ,„1WTwt ` 1)I;PAR"I'11I,N'1'tu I;C'ON011ICDI'VELOPIIFNT CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL Date Received: 02/03/2023 Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: 02/03/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: February 3, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Lorena Riffo Jenson, Director, Department of Economic Development SUBJECT: ARPA Community Grant Program Funds-Phase One Distribution-Community Recovery Committee (CRC) Recommendation for Distribution STAFF CONTACTS: Cathie Rigby,ARPA Program Manager, Cathie.Riy �slc�ov.com Todd Andersen,ARPA Project Coordinator, Todd.Andersen(O`slc,,ov.coin DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: Review and Approve the$755,71$disbursement ofAmerican Rescue Plan Act(ARPA)Community Grant Program Funds for Phase 1. BUDGET IMPACT: Distribution of$755,71$ of the $2 million ARPA funding allocated in FY22, BA5. COORDINATION: Community and Neighborhoods (CAN), Mayor's Office, SLC Finance Department, and other outside organizations. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: On March 11, 2021,the U.S. Government signed into law, a COVID-19 recovery bill, the American Rescue Plan Act("ARPA"). ARPA was intended to support State and Local recovery from the COVID-19 public health emergency("COVID-19 Pandemic") or the negative economic impacts experienced as a result of the pandemic. The U.S. Department of the Treasury released materials associated with the release of funds to Cities and States,known as the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ("SLFRF") Salt Lake City received approximately$85.4 million in federal funding,which must be committed by December 31, 2024 and spent by December 31, 2026. After extensive community engagement,the Mayor and City Council approved the creation of the Community Grant Program to help small businesses and nonprofits recover from the negative economic impacts of the pandemic. In April of 2022, Salt Lake City code 2.20.04o established the Community Grant Program to be administered by both The Department of Economic Development ("DED") and Community and Neighborhoods ("CAN"). Both departments were tasked with deploying $2M each of the $85.4 million federal funds granted to the City. Below is an overview of the policies and objectives for these funds that guided the program and application process. Program Overview • No single application for a community grant will exceed $1oo,000.00 • Any application for a community grant to a nonprofit organization will focus on supporting communities disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, including,but not limited to, offering services to retrain displaced workers: providing legal or other assistance for evictions or rent relief: expanding educational opportunities; deploying resources to mitigate the digital divide; supporting parents or children affected by COVID-19 including childcare or after school program; and providing access to healthcare services,including mental health support. • Any application for a community grant for a local business will focus on supporting the business's operation or employees who have been economically affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. To aid in the process and establish criteria quickly,transparently, and fairly deploy the fund's City Council created the Community Recovery Committee ("CRC")to oversee the process, review the applications and make recommendations for the deployment of funds. The committee is comprised of seven(7) members that serve on the following other boards: Economic Development Loan Fund Racial Equity in Policing(2 members from this board) Human Rights Commission (2 members from this board) Salt Lake Arts Council Business Advisory Board Qualifying Use of Funds To meet the qualifying criteria established by the Department of Treasury and to align our grants with SLFRF expenditure categories DED staff categorized applications into one of the four categories below: • Small business economic assistance • Aid to Tourism,Travel or Hospitality • Aid to Arts and Artisan businesses • Aid to Nonprofit organizations with programming specific to small businesses or arts and artisan businesses. All four of these expenditure categories are small business-related, eligible for funding through the Community Grant Program and aid Salt Lake City's Department of Finance ("Finance")to administer the program. The application process is set up in two phases. Phase 1 was open from September 1st through 30th, 2022 and Phase 2 will begin sometime in March 2023. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion To ensure the grant program is available to all potential applicants, DED has instituted the following measures to ensure the program is equitable,transparent, and inclusive: • Application materials,training videos, and presentations are provided in multiple languages. • Online and paper applications are accepted. • Training and Technical Assistance appointments are offered on both the East and West sides of Salt Lake City. • Individual application assistance is provided by DED,The International Rescue Committee, and SBDC as needed. In Phase 1 a total of 296 applications were received, and of those 157 were eligible for further review in the small business category,and 40 were eligible for review as a qualifying nonprofit. The information below shows additional demographic data of the applications reviewed by the committee: • 45 applicants were from a business that identified as I00% Female owned business. • 51 applicants were from a business which identified as I00% owned by a member of the BIPOC community • 61 applicants listed themselves as an arts business • 55 applicants listed themselves as a small business • 77 applicants were from the travel,tourism, or hospitality sector • 4o applicants are from the nonprofit community(applications to be reviewed in the next phase of funding) Applications were reviewed by staff, including a member of the Finance Department, and sorted into lists of 15-20 to be presented for review and scoring by the members of the CRC during its weekly meetings. Scoring Applicants were eligible for too base points with the following breakdown: • 6o% of the points are based on narratives the businesses provided sharing how COVID-19 impacted their business(past,present, and future) • 30% of points are based on how a business was able to navigate through the pandemic. • Io% of the points are based on if the applicant takes advantage of the technical assistance offered to prepare applicants to submit their application, understand the questions, and have a review of their narratives. In addition to the base points, staff awarded up to 7o bonus points to impacted and disproportionately impacted communities including: • 100%Minority Owned Business (15 points) • 100% Female-Owned Business (15 points) • Artist-Artisan Business(15 points) • Business located in Qualified Census Tract location(QCT) (15 points) • Business in the Travel,Tourism, &Hospitality sector(5 points) • Business in the City Center(5 points) A total of 10 meetings were held in phase 1 to allow the CRC members to review applications, submit scoring, make recommendations about the process, and ask questions. Attached to this transmittal, you will find The Community Recovery Committee's list of recommended businesses applications for approval by the City Council. Attachments: • List of Recommended Businesses for Grant Approval • Ordinance • Letter from the Community Recovery Committee 2022-2024 2022-2024 2022-2024 CRC REQUESTED ELIGIBLE FUNDING RECOMMENDATION(% BUSINESS APPLICANT DISTRICT FUNDING (Proven Loss) Based on Score) CATEGORY 1 I Junction Dance Company(63480) 5 $50,000.00 $49,000.00 $45,815.00 1 AB Business provides dance training,two dance companies,creative space and performance opportunities for youth and professional artists. They cultivate an artistically enriching community thorugh performance and outreach. Type of Business: Dance Studio(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Rent,utilities,and operating costs(pay contracted artists) Received other assistance:None 2 Zahara,LLC(62879) 5 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $6,538.00 TTH Moroccan pop-up restaurant,that also offers catering services. Business holds community events that last between 2-3 hours where food is served. Owner plans to re-establish their events, and catering services,along with building to transition to a permanent physical location. Type of Business: Restaurant(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,venue rentals and staff costs. Received other assistance:Business received$2k from the Internation Rescue Committee for business expenses accrued during COVID-19. 3 Sugar Space,LLC(63372) 1 2 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 $46,250.00 SB Business is an arts,events and reception center. They provide space for artists of all disciplines to create and present work and a place for the community to celebrate,learn,share and engage. Type of Business: Event/Reception Center(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Salaries and wages for staff. Received other assistance:Yes,they received under$50k in other assistance with PPP and EIDL. 4 Dream Garden Press/dba Ken Sanders Rare Books(63434) 1 4 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $46,100.00 AB This business sells used,new,and rare books and ephemera. Special focus for this business is Utah and regional history. This business all supports local artista and musicians with regular public events. Type of Business: Bookstore in the City Center(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent and payroll. Received other assistance:Received aprox.$75k of other assistance with PPPand EIDL 5 Zaater and Zayton(62465) 2 $50,000.00 $38,000.00 $34,960.00 TTH Business is a full-service catering company offering a unique blend of traditional Middle Eastern Cuisine and American fusion. Type of Business: Catering Disproportionately Impacted:Women&100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Mortgage payment,operational costs and start-up costs Received other assistance:Yes. Received$20k in EIDL 6 Mestizo,LLC(63831) 3 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $45,900.00 TTH Business is a coffee house created by community for community. The founders envisioned a place for civic engagement and sharing art to strengthen community. Type of Business: Coffeehouse(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,operating costs and wages. Received other assistance:None 7 Noor Al Sham LLC(63326) 5 $11,000.00 $10,758.00 $9,660.68 SB Catering business looking to complete start up and expand. Type of Business: Food-Catering(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC Owned Use of funds:Start up costs,rent,payroll and operational expenses. Received other assistance:Received under$3,000 in PPP funding. 8 Susie M's Gallery of Fine Tattooing(63355) 5 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $22,250.00 SB Business provides an art studio with retail space,along with tattooing education space. Type of Business: Tattoo Parlor-Retail Space(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent and payroll. Received other assistance:None 9 3 Street Productions(60538) 7 $26,000.00 $25,000.00 $22,107.14 AB Writer who writes novels for young readers(middle grades and young adult). Writes nonfictions on the intersection of art and faith,and also consults freelance writers and provides editorial services for other writers. Type of Business: Writer(Home Based,Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Salary and Operating Expenses(will have to provide tax documents,etc.) Received other assistance:None 10 Arts of the World Gallery(63518) 5 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $44,000.00 AB Business is the local home for global treasures.This business houses traditional(indigenous)arts and crafts and also traditional industries like ceramics in two historic buildings that have been maintained and preserved. Type of Business: Art Gallery(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Utilities,and operating expenses Received other assistance:Yes.Received less than$50k in Salt Lake County grant,and PPP funds III Premier Paralegal Solutions,LLC(59841) 1 5 1 $50,000.00 $9,000.00 $7,800.00 SB Business provides legal document preparation,tax preparation and some translation services. Services provided to clients with digital equity issues that require in person attention. Type of Business: Legal Services(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Rent,payroll,supplies and start-up costs. Received other assistance:Yes,less than$50k in EIDL and PPP 12 1 Cycling Utah,LLC(63477) 4 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $43,166.67 SB Business produces a bicycling magazine and website. They are in their 30th year of business providing information,news,tips and event calendars. They distribute throughout Salt Lake City and the western United States. Type of Business: Magazine(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Operating costs and payroll. Received other assistance:Yes. Received less thatn$50k in PPP funds 13 Golden Gyros(63448) 5 $50,000.00 $47,000.00 $40,106.67 TTH Local restaurant in Salt Lake City. One of the first restaurants to close due to COVID-19 trying to keep doors open on their startup business that opened as the pandemic hit. Type of Business: Restaurant Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,wages,and equipment. Received other assistance:None 14 Amie Engberg(62853) 5 $38,000.00 $38,000.00 $32,110.00 SB Document preparation and financial education services for chiropractors. Type of Business: Financial Education Services(Home Based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Supplies and salary Received other assistance:None 15 Six Sailor Cider,LLC(63232) 4 $50,000.00 $11,000.00 $9,218.00 TTH Business makes a variety of flavored apple ciders,non-alcoholic and sparkling hard ciders to be sold in the future. Started their sales in farmer's markets and now expanding into online and retail sales. Type of Business: Brewery(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent,payroll and startup costs. Received other assistance:None 16 Bye Phoebe(59674) 3 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $4,175.00 AB Owner is a model,fashion stylist and also makes custom clothing for production companies. Type of Business: Stylist/Clothing(Home Based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women& 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Equipment,materials,payroll and startup costs. Received other assistance:Yes received$1,200 from Artist Emergency Fund 17 Sikkim Momo(59832) 1 2 $49,000.00 $3,100.00 $2,583.33 TTH Business is a catering food business. This entrepreneur is from the Spice Kitchen incubator program of the International Rescue Committee. Type of Business: Catering Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies and equipment. Received other assistance:Business received$2k from the Internation Rescue Committee. 18 I Christina's Barber Shop(60332) 5 $13,500.00 $14,000.00 $11,596.67 SB Business is a barber shop specializing in gentlemen haircuts located on 300 West. Type of Business: Barber shop(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent,utilities,and operating expenses. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k from EIDL. 19 Flamenco del Lago(63429) 5 $50,000.00 $13,000.00 $10,768.33 AB Business is a nonprofit under the direction of Katie Sheen-Abbott she's studied Flamenco for many years. She teaches and performs flamenco in Salt Lake City and throughout Utah for all ages and abilities. Type of Business: Dance teacher(Sole Proprietor&Nonprofit) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent,and equpment costs. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k in EIDL funding. 20 Dayhouse Studio(61894) 1 7 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $41,333.33 SB Business is a biophilic interior design studio specializing in residential and commercial spaces. Improving health,well-being and sustainable practices are at the heart of their work. Type of Business: Interior Design Studio(Home based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Operating costs and payroll. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k from EIDL. 21 Seth Ian Photography(62887) 1 3 $15,000.00 $7,000.00 $5,786.67 AB Photographer for the performing arts,small businesses,and real estate.Business is also undertaking documentary projects. Type of Business: Photographer(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Equipment upgrades and project development costs Received other assistance:None 22 Worthfull Media,LLC(60612) 3 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $20,625.00 AB Boutique media production house that records,edits,produces,and manages audio and video for small business owners and personal brands.The bulk of business is for podcasters and YouTubers,but includes making related media as well. Type of Business:Media production(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds:Website upgrades,rent,contract costs Received other assistance:PPP and EIDL funds around$5k. 23 Design to Grow,LLC(63108) 4 $32,000.00 $32,000.00 $26,133.33 AB Business is a designibuild studio that does in house fabrication focused on public art,teaching/workshops,events,and commercial furniture. Type of Business:Design studio(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent,retaining employees Received other assistance:PPP$8.7K,Small Business Impact Grant$9.9k 24 1 Suzanne May(60330) 1 7 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,033.33 AB Singer/songwriter that also teaches voice and songwriting lessons from home studio. Type of Business:Musician(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds:Tour and equipment costs. Received other assistance:EIDL$12k,Unemployment$8k 25 The Twist(Kirk's Ship,LLC)(60520) 4 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,916.67 TTH Busines is a Restaurant,Bar&Nightclub Type of Business:Bar/Restaurant Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Wages,retain employees Received other assistance:PPP&Employee Rention Credit over$50k 26 Elegant Tailoring,LLC(61865) 4 $50,000.00 $21,335.00 $17,025.33 SB Business is a tailoring shop in the heart of downtown. Type of Business:Tailoring Shop(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Payroll and operational expenses. Received other assistance:Business received less than$6,000.00 in PPP funding. 27 Utah Hispanic Chamber of Commerce(62544) 2 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,833.33 SB Chamber of Commerce serving Hispanic businesses. Type of Business:Chamber of Commerce Disproportionately Impacted: 100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Wages 28 1 Utah Fitness Institute(62189) 5 $21,502.00 $22,000.00 $17,526.67 SB Personal training and wellness retreat business. Type of Business:Fitness Studio(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent costs Received other assistance:Salt Lake County grant$22k 29 Match and Farnsworth,PC(62089) 4 $49,000.00 $49,000.00 $38,955.00 SB Business is a small private law firm that provides representation to individuals who are unable to work due to physical or mental disabilities. Type of Business:Law Firm(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted: 100%female owned Use of funds:Payroll Received other assistance:Business received more than$50k from PPP. 30 Antidote Cosmeceuticals,LLC(60991) 6 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $6,304.00 SB Business manufactures bottles and sells skin care products. Type of Business:Skin care(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Facility upgrades and payroll Received other assistance:PPP,EIDL,&CCL Stabilization Grant-over$200k 31 First Steps,Inc.(60261) 1 $50,000.00 $12,000.00 $9,140.00 SB Business is a child care center. Type of Business:Daycare Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Facility upgrades and payroll Received other assistance:PPP,EIDL,&CCL Stabilization Grant-over$200k SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2023 (Ordinance approving the disbursement of American Rescue Plan Act Community Grant Program Funds for Phase 1) WHEREAS, the global COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the world and local economy at an unprecedented level, and Salt Lake City's nonprofit organizations, local businesses, and residents have been negatively impacted by the economic uncertainty caused by the pandemic. WHEREAS, on March 11, 2021, the U.S. Government signed into law a COVID-19 recovery bill, the American Rescue Plan Act("ARPA") and allocated federal funding to Salt Lake City Corporation("City")to use for certain COVID-related uses, including to support disproportionately impacted communities and to mitigate negative economic impacts within the community. WHEREAS, on April 19, 2022, the City Council passed Salt Lake City Ordinance 17 of 2022 , enacting Salt Lake City Code Chapter 2.20 and establishing a new community grant program govern the distribution of certain ARPA funds, including the creation of the Community Recovery Committee tasked with reviewing grant applications and making recommendations on the disbursement of community recovery grant funds. WHEREAS, beginning in November 2022 and continuing through January 2023, the Community Recovery Committee held ten meetings to review and consider applications from approximately 157 small businesses and 39 nonprofit organizations seeking grant funding for direct economic assistance, in accordance with Salt Lake City Code 2.20.040. WHEREAS, the Community Recovery Committee evaluated the applications in accordance with Salt Lake City Code Chapter 2.20, including considering the applicant's proposed use of funds, geographic equity, the policies and objectives of the community grant program, and the federal requirements pursuant to ARPA. WHEREAS, the Community Recovery Committee has completed review of the applications and has recommended funding allocations as further described in Exhibit A. WHEREAS,pursuant to Salt Lake City Code 2.20.010, the Mayor has reviewed the Community Recovery Committee's recommendations set forth in Exhibit A. WHEREAS, based on the Review Committee's recommendations, the Mayor recommends that the City Council approve the funding allocations as described in Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, that: SECTION 1. Funding Approval. The City Council approves the funding allocations as further described in Exhibit B. The City Council authorizes the Mayor to negotiate and execute the grant agreements and any other relevant documents required, consistent with Exhibit B and Salt Lake City Code Chapter 2.20, and incorporating such other terms and agreements as recommended by the City Attorney's office. 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 2023. Darin Mano, Council Chair ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. of 2023. Published: APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney's Office Date: February 3, 2023 Sara Montoya, City Attorney EXHIBIT A 2022-2024 2022-2024 2022-2024 CRC REQUESTED ELIGIBLE FUNDING RECOMMENDATION BUSINESS APPLICANT DISTRICT FUNDING Proven Loss) (%Based on Score) CATEGORY l IJunction Dance Company(63480) 5 $50,000.00 $49,000.00 $45,815.00 AB Business provides dance training,two dance companies,creative space and performance opportunities for youth and professional artists. They cultivate an artistically enriching community thorugh performance and outreach. Type of Business: Dance Studio(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Rent,utilities,and operating costs(pay contracted artists) Received other assistance:None 2 Zahara,LLC(62879) 5 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $6,538.00 TTH Moroccan pop-up restaurant,that also offers catering services. Business holds community events that last between 2-3 hours where food is served. Owner plans to re-establisb their events, and catering services,along with building to transition to a permanent physical location. Type of Business: Restaurant(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,venue rentals and staff costs. Received other assistance:Business received$2k from the Internation Rescue Committee for business expenses accrued during COVID-19. 3 Sugar Space,LLC 63372 2 1 $50,000.00 1 $50,000.00 $46,250.00 SB Business is an arts,events and reception center. They provide space for artists of all disciplines to create and present work and a place for the community to celebrate,learn,share and engage. Type of Business: Event/Reception Center(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Salaries and wages for staff. Received other assistance:Yes,they received under$50k in other assistance with PPP and EIDL. 4 Dream Garden Press/dba Ken Sanders Rare Books 63434 4 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $46,100.00 AB This business sells used,new,and rare books and ephemera. Special focus for this business is Utah and regional history. This business all supports local artism and musicians with regular public events. Type of Business: Bookstore in the City Center(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent and payroll. Received other assistance:Received aprox.$75k of other assistance with PPPand EIDL 5 Zaater and Za•ton 62465) 2 $50,000.00 $38,000.00 $34,960.00 TTH Business is a full-service catering company offering a unique blend of traditional Middle Eastern Cuisine and American fusion. Type of Business: Catering Disproportionately Impacted:Women&100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Mortgage payment,operational costs and start-up costs Received other assistance:Yes. Received$20k in EIDL 6 Mestizo,LLC 63831 3 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $45,900.00 TTH Business is a coffee house created by community for community. The founders envisioned a place for civic engagement and sharing art to strengthen community. Type of Business: Coffeehouse(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,operating costs and wages. Received other assistance:None 7NoorAl Sham LLC 63326 5 1 $11,000.00 $10,758.00 $9,660.68 SB Catering business looking to complete start up and expand. Type of Business: Food-Catering(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:100%BIPOC Owned Use of funds:Start up costs,rent,payroll and operational expenses. Received other assistance:Received under$3,000 in PPP funding. 8 Susie M's Gallery of Fine Tattooing 63355 5 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $22,250.00 SB Business provides an art studio with retail space,along with tattooing education space. Type of Business: Tattoo Parlor-Retail Space(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent and payroll. Received other assistance:None 91.1 Street Productions 60538 7 $26,000.00 $25,000.00 $22,107.14 AB Writer who writes novels for young readers(middle grades and young adult). Writes nonfiction on the intersection of art and faith,and also consults freelance writers and provides editorial services for other writers. Type of Business: Writer(Home Based,Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Salary and Operating Expenses(will have to provide tax documents,etc.) Received other assistance:None 10 Arts of the World Gallery(63518) 5 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $44,000.00 AB Business is the Local home for global treasures.This business houses traditional(indigenous)arts and crafts and also traditional industries like ceramics in two historic buildings that have been uauuau�ci.auu P111 v .. Type of Business: Art Gallery(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women Owned Use of funds:Utilities,and operating expenses Received other assistance:Yes.Received less than$50k in Salt Lake County grant,and PPP funds 11 Premier Paralegal Solutions,LLC 59841 5 1 $50,000.00 $9,000.00 $7,800.00 SB Business provides legal document preparation,tax preparation and some translation services. Services provided to clients with digital equity issues that require in person attention. Type of Business: Legal Services(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Rent,payroll,supplies and start-up costs. Received other assistance:Yes,less than$50k in EIDL and PPP 12 Cycling Utah,LLC 63477 4 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $43,166.67 SB Business produces a bicycling magazine and websitc. They are in their 30th year of business providing information,news,tips and event calendars. They distribute throughout Salt Lake City and the western United States. Type of Business: Magazine(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Operating costs and payroll. Received other assistance:Yes. Received less them$50k in PPP funds 13 Golden Gyros 63448) 1 5 $50,000.00 $47,000.00 $40,106.67 TTH Local restaurant in Salt Lake City. One of the first restaurants to close due to COVID-19 trying to keep doors open on their startup business that opened as the pandemic hit. Type of Business: Restaurant Disproportionately Impacted:100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies,wages,and equipment. Received other assistance:None 14 AmieEn ber 62853 5 1 $38,000.00 1 $38,000.00 1 $32,110.00 SB Document preparation and financial education services for chiropractors. Type of Business: Financial Education Services(Home Based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Supplies and salary Received other assistance:None 15 Six Sailor Cider,LLC 63232) 4 $50,000.00 $11,000.00 $9,218.00 TTH Business makes a variety of flavored apple ciders,non-alcoholic and sparkling hard ciders to be sold in the future. Started their sales in farmer's markets and now expanding into online and retail sales. Type of Business: Brewery(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent,payroll and startup costs. Received other assistance:None 16 Bve Phoebe(59674) 1 3 1 $5,000.00 1 $5,000.00 $4,175.00 AB Owner is a model,fashion stylist and also makes custom clothing for production companies. Type of Business: Stylist/Clothing(Home Based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women&100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Equipment,materials,payroll and startup costs. Received other assistance:Yes received$1,200 from Artist Emergency Fund 17 Sikkim Moran(59832) 1 2 $49,000.00 $3,100,00 $2,583.33 TTH Business is a catering food business. This entrepreneur is from the Spice Kitchen incubator program of the International Rescue Committee. Type of Business: Catering Disproportionately Impacted:100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Purchase of supplies and equipment. Received other assistance:Business received$2k from the Internation Rescue Committee. 18 Christina's Barber Shop 60332 5 $13,500.00 $14,000.00 $11,596.67 SB Business is a barber shop specializing in gentlemen haircuts located on 300 West. Type of Business: Barber shop(Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent,utilities,and operating expenses. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k from EIDL. 19 Flamenco del Lao(63429) 1 5 $50,000.00 1 $13,000.00 $10,768.33 AB Business is a nonprofit under the direction of Katie Sheen-Abbott she's studied Flamenco for many years. She teaches and performs flamenco in Salt Lake City and throughout Utah for all ages and abilities. Type of Business: Dance teacher(Sole Proprietor&Nonprofit) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Rent,and equpment costs. Received other assistance:Business received less than$50k in EIDL funding. 201 Da house Studio 61894) 7 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $41,333.33 SB Business is a biophilic interior design studio specializing in residential and commercial spaces. Improving health,well-being and sustainable practices are at the heart of their work. Type of Business: Interior Design Studio(Home based&Sole Proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:Women owned Use of funds:Operating costs and payroll. Received other assistance:Business received less than S50k from EIDL. 211 Seth Ian Photography(62887) 1 3 $15,000.00 $7,000.00 $5,786.67 AB Photographer for the performing arts,small businesses,and real estate.Business is also undertaking documentary projects. Type of Business: Photographer(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Equipment upgrades and project development costs Received other assistance:None 22 Worthfull Media,LLC(60612) 3 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $20,625.00 AB Boutique media production house that records,edits,produces,and manages audio and video for small business owners and personal brands.The bulk of business is for podcasters and YouTubers,but includes making related media as well. Type of Business:Media production(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:100%female owned Use of funds:Website upgrades,rent,contract costs Received other assistance:PPP and EIDL funds around$5k. 23 Design to Grow,LLC(63108) 4 $32,000.00 532,000.00 $26,133.33 AB Business is a design/build studio that does in house fabrication focused on public art,teaching/workshops,events,and commercial furniture. Type of Business:Design studio(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent,retaining employees Received other assistance:PPP$8.7K,Small Business Impact Grant$9.9k 24 Suzanne May(60330) 1 7 $10,000.00 510,000.00 $8,033.33 AB Singer/songwriter that also teaches voice and songwriting lessons from home studio. Type of Business:Musician(home-based&sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:100%female owned Use of funds:Tour and equipment costs. Received other assistance:EIDL S12k,Unemployment$8k 25 The Twist(Kirk's Ship,LLC)(60520) 4 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,916.67 TTH Busines is a Restaurant,Bar&Nightclub Type of Business:Bar/Restaurant Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Wages,retain employees Received other assistance:PPP&Employee Rention Credit over$50k 26 Elegant Tailoring,LLC(61865) 4 $50,000.00 521,335.00 $17,025.33 SB Business is a tailoring shop in the heart of downtown. Type of Business:Tailoring Shop(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Payroll and operational expenses. Received other assistance:Business received less than 56,000.00 in PPP funding. 27 Utah Hispanic Chamber of Commerce(62544) 2 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,833.33 SB Chamber of Commerce serving Hispanic businesses. Type of Business:Chamber of Commerce Disproportionately Impacted:100%BIPOC owned Use of funds:Wages Received other assistance:None 28 Utah Fitness Institute(62189) 5 $21,502.00 522,000.00 $17,526.67 SB Personal training and wellness retreat business. Type of Business:Fitness Studio(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Rent costs Received other assistance:Salt Lake County grant S22k 29 Match and Farnsworth,PC(62089) 4 $49,000.00 $49,000,00 $38,955.00 SB Business is a small private law firm that provides representation to individuals who are unable to work due to physical or mental disabilities. Type of Business:Law Firm(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:100°%female owned Use of funds:Payroll Received other assistance:Business received more than$50k from PPP. 30 Antidote Cosmeceuticals,LLC(60991) 6 $8,000.00 58,000.00 $6,304.00 SB Business manufactures bottles and sells skin care products. Type of Business:Skin care(sole proprietor) Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Facility upgrades and payroll Received other assistance:PPP,EIDL,&CCL Stabilization Grant-over$200k 31 First Steps,Inc.(60261) 1 1 $50,000.00 512,000.00 $9,140.00 SB Business is a child care center. Type of Business:Daycare Disproportionately Impacted:None Use of funds:Facility upgrades and payroll Received other assistance:PPP,EIDL,&CCL Stabilization Grant-over$200k EXHIBIT B SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED FUNDING ALLOCATIONS FOR PHASE 1 COMMUNITY RECOVERY GRANTS (To add following City Council meeting and vote) Dear Mayor and City Council, The Community Recovery Committee (CRC) knows that the COVID-19 pandemic and related shutdowns were devastating to many small businesses in Salt Lake City, and many have struggled to financially recover from the effects of the pandemic. The Committee also understands the difficulties that small businesses face. We put a great deal of care and effort into conducting a fair and equitable process that would award as much money to as many businesses as possible. With that said,this is a competitive grant program and the Committee agonized for many hours over difficult decisions to award limited funding. Thank you for your patience as we ensure we serve as many businesses as we can. Sincerely, Jake Maxwell Chair—Community Recovery Committee Item F3 titti rigs (fy -LOTION SHEET CPrY COUNCIL Of SALT LAKE CITY f 11!{t{t TO: City Council Members Project Timeline: Briefing: Feb.21,2023 FROM: Sylvia Richards, Policy Analyst Potential Action: March 7, 2023 DATE: March 7, 2023 RE: MOTION SHEET FOR PUBLIC HEARING The Council may consider the following motions: Motion 1 —Adopt Resolution I move that the Council adopt a Resolution Authorizing the approval of an interlocal cooperation agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and West Valley City regarding the transfer of ownership of a tactical vehicle from Salt Lake City Corporation to West Valley City. Motion 2 —Not Adopt. I move that the Council not adopt the Resolution and move to the next item. Page 1 a�la�aa ogre ee xa la still SALT LAIZE CITY MAYOR OFFICE of the FIRE CHIEF Erin Mendenhall Karl Lieb CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL Date Received: 01-31-23 Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: 01-31-23 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: January 24, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Karl Lich - Chief of the Salt Lake City Fire Department (signature) SUBJECT: Authorizing Execution of an Interlocal Agreement to Transfer a MITS Vehicle to West Valley City STAFF CONTACTS: Gary Carter, Fire Captain,gary.carter_ )slcgov,co Jaysen Oldroyd, Senior City Attorney,jaysen.oldrovd a,slcgov.com Michael Fox,Assistant Fire Chief, Michac1.fox6Ps1caov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Resolution RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council pass this resolution authorizing the execution of an interlocal agreement that would implement the transfer of a MITS vehicle, including all responsibilities for maintenance and operation of such vehicle, from Salt Lake City ("SLC") to West Valley City ("WVC"). BUDGET IMPACT: There will be no material budget impact associated with authorizing the execution of the interlocal agreement at issue. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Both SLC and WVC were participants in the Urban Areas Security Initiative grant program for the Wasatch Front urban area as established by the United States Department of Homeland Security (the "UASI"). As part of the UASI, grant funds were allocated to Salt Lake City to purchase and operate several Mobile Interoperable Tactical Solution Vehicles (individually, a"MITS Vehicle") for use in emergencies and other operations throughout the Wasatch Front urban area and the State of Utah. The vehicles were titled and held in the name of Salt Lake City Corporation as it was the entity primarily responsible for their creation, staffing, and maintenance. However, the grant funds were allocated for the benefit of all participants in the UASI and WVC has participated in the MITS Vehicle program. The UASI grant funding for the Wasatch Front has since been terminated. As a result, individual members of the UASI have now become responsible for the maintenance of the assets acquired with grant funds. SALT LAKE CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT 475 South 300 East www.SLCFIRE.com P.O.BOX 145520,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5520 TEL 801-799-FIRE FAX 801-799-3038 +"� The SLC and WVC fire departments believe it is in the best interests of the citizens served by such fire departments, and the State of Utah as a whole, to have the MITS Vehicles staged at separate locations throughout the Wasatch Front and maintained by separate entities. The Parties wish to enter into an agreement for the disposition of one of the MITS Vehicles so that it may be owned and maintained by WVC and be staged in a manner to best meet the emergency and other needs of the citizens of the Wasatch Front and State of Utah. Michael Fox, Gary Carter, and Jaysen Oldroyd would be available to be at the table during the work session. A clean copy (approved as to form) of the proposed ordinance is included with this transmittal. SALT LAKE CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT 475 South 300 East www.SLCFIRE.com P.O.BOX 145520,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5520 TEL 801-799-FIRE FAX 801-799-3038 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR THE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF MOBILE INTEROPERABLE TACTICAL SOLUTION VEHICLE This Agreement is made and entered into as of by and between Salt Lake City Corporation, a municipal corporation of the State of Utah (the "SLC"), and the West Valley City, a political subdivision of the State of Utah(the "WVC"), each individually referred to as a"Party" and collectively referred to as the"Parties." RECITALS A. Both SLC and WVC were participants in the Urban Areas Security Initiative grant program for the Wasatch Front urban area as established by the United States Department of Homeland Security (the "UASI"). B. As part of the UASI, grant funds were allocated to Salt Lake City to construct and maintain several Mobile Interoperable Tactical Solution Vehicles (individually, a"MITS Vehicle") for use in emergencies and other operations throughout the Wasatch Front urban area and the State of Utah. C. The vehicles were titled and held in the name of Salt Lake City Corporation as it was the entity primarily responsible for their creation, staffing, and maintenance. However, the grant funds were allocated for the benefit of all participants in the UASI and WVC has participated in the MITS Vehicle program. D. The UASI grant funding for the Wasatch Front has since been terminated. As a result, individual members of the UASI will now become responsible for the maintenance of the assets acquired with grant funds. E. The Parties believe it is in the best interests of the citizens served by both Parties, and the State of Utah as a whole, to have the MITS Vehicles staged at separate locations throughout the Wasatch Front and maintained by separate entities. F. The Parties wish to enter into an agreement for the disposition of one of the MITS Vehicles so that it may be owned and maintained by WVC and be staged in a manner to best meet the emergency and other needs of the citizens of the Wasatch Front and State of Utah. G. The Utah Interlocal Cooperation Act(Utah Code Chapter 11-13)provides a means by which Utah governmental entities can enter into cooperative agreements with other Utah governmental entities. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, the parties to this agreement hereby agree as follows: 1. GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE AGREEMENT. The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the terms and conditions under which the Parties will transfer ownership interest in 1 a MITS Vehicle from SLC to WVC with the expectation that WVC will deploy such MITS vehicle in a manner that benefits the Wasatch Front urban area and the State of Utah. 2. TERM OF THIS AGREEMENT. The term of this Agreement will continue for a period of one year from the effective date of this Agreement unless extended by mutual written agreement between the Parties. 3. INTERLOCAL REQUIREMENTS. A. This Agreement does not create an interlocal entity. B. To the extent any administrative actions are required under this Agreement with respect to the use of the Vehicle, WVC will serve as the administrator of this Agreement and in that role will have sole discretion regarding such actions. C. Each Party will be responsible for acquiring,holding and disposing of any real or personal property that such Party using in facilitating the joint or cooperative purposes of this Agreement. D. Each Party will be responsible for their own costs and expenses incurred under this Agreement and for any corresponding budgeting activities. 4. TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP. SLC hereby agrees to transfer ownership, free of liens or any lawful claims, of one MITS Vehicle, specifically VIN# 1HTMMAANIAH206018 (the "Vehicle"), to WVC in consideration of WVC's promise to continue staffing, maintaining, and staging of the Vehicle for emergency response purposes. All equipment installed and associated with the Vehicle shall also be transferred with the Vehicle. Appendix "A," attached hereto, is a good faith attempt to list the equipment currently installed and associated with the Vehicle and that will be transferred therewith. Any equipment physically on the Vehicle at the time of transfer will also be transferred to WVC regardless of whether it is listed in Appendix "A". Upon the termination of this Agreement, WVC will retain ownership of the Vehicle and any associated equipment. 2. USE OF VEHICLE. Subsequent to the transfer of ownership, the use of the Vehicle will be at the sole discretion of WVC, and SLC will have no oversight over the use of the Vehicle once ownership is transferred. However, SLC and WVC mutually agree to coordinate their efforts with respect to the use of all MITS Vehicles so as to best serve the emergency needs of the area and beyond. 3. NO ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION. As the funds for the creation of the Vehicle were grant funds to benefit the entire UASI, no additional consideration will be paid from WVC to SLC for the Vehicle. The Parties acknowledge the sufficiency of the consideration contained herein. WVC will be responsible for costs or expenses associated with the Vehicle that are incurred after the transfer of ownership takes place. 2 4. VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT AS-IS. SLC makes no warranties as to the present or future condition of the Vehicle or the equipment contained therein, or their suitability for a particular purpose and is transferring the Vehicle and its attached equipment to WVC "As- Is." WVC represents and agrees that it has inspected the Vehicle and equipment and takes ownership of the Vehicle and its equipment"As-Is,"without warranty. 5. DOCUMENTATION. Upon full execution of this Agreement, SLC agrees to execute a Bill of Sale in the form of Utah State Tax Commission Form TC-843 and provide the Certificate of Title for the Vehicle. 6. REGISTRATION. Upon receipt of the Bill of Sale and Certificate of Title, WVC agrees to register the Vehicle in its own name and assume full responsibility for the ownership of the Vehicle, including any and all liability for its operations and use. 7. INDEMNIFICATION. WVC agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold SLC harmless for any claims arising out of or related to WVC's ownership or use of the Vehicle. SLC and WVC are both government entities under the Utah Governmental Immunity Act and neither waives any rights or defenses provided for therein. 8. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement represents the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. 9. AUTHORITY. By his or her signature below, each signatory represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of his or her respective Party. 10. EXECUTION. This Agreement may be executed by electronic means (such as fax or .pdf signatures) and in counterparts. 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have signed this agreement effective as of the date first written above. SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION By: Erin Mendenhall Mayor, Salt Lake City ATTEST: City Recorder APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: Senior City Attorney WEST VALLEY CITY By: Mayor, West Valley City APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ATTEST: Cit Atto e City Recorder Y Y 4 APPENDIX "A" Equipment Inventory Cab Map Book Tire Pressure Gauge Accident Packet Fire Extinguisher Binoculars Left 1 Sledge Hammer Emergency Compressor Kit Reflective Triangles Chock Blocks - 2 Wilburt Mast oil Shore-line electrical cord Cones - 5 Hi-Vis Yellow Bolt Cutters Crow Bar Left 2 Generator- 15Kw fixed mount Right 1 (Working area) Front Wall LCD TV TV Remote Right 1 (Working area) CS counter Computer (w/mouse, keyboard, dual monitors) Blackout window cover CS Cabinet DeWalt Vacuum w/battery Whiteboard Markers Dry-Erase Eraser Flashlight (AA) ACU Handset VHF Ground-plane radials (3) 5 Undercounters 3 Office chairs with bungee cords trash can Tool Box* Rolling Tool Box** 5 Cisco Network Phones (w/cat5 in case) Blue Tub (manuals and software) SS Cabinet Operation Manuals Technical Manuals Printer Paper SS counter Computer (w/mouse, keyboard, dual monitors) Radio/Battery gang charger HP 8500 Pro Printer Blackout window cover DeWalt Battery Chargers - 2 Cisco Wi-Fi phone gang charger (w/4 phones and 4 extra batteries) Right 2 (Packout area) Packout Boxes - 2 *** Outrigger Blue Sky Mast kit Cargo Straps - 6 Fire Extinguisher BigBeam Flashlight - yellow Cisco AP Node w/box Fiber-optic reel - 1000' Right 3 (Battery Comp) Jumper Cables -4 Ga 8 Ton hydraulic jack 6 *Tool Box Top - small level, Teflon tape, keychain screwdriver, angle screwdriver, cable cutters, drill driver set(DeWalt drill bit set(DeWalt), 4 inch driver set (westward), Wrench set (2 -westward, open/box SAE and Metric First- Awl, screwdriver set (slotted x11, phillips x8) Second - claw hammer (16oz), crescent wrench set (3pc), ratchet set (proto 5pc metric) Third - Channel lock wrench set (5pc- 2 channel lock, needle nose, dykes, standard), Ratcheting Box wrench set (Westward, 5pc SAE) ** Rolling Tool Box RJ11 and RJ45 ends Velcro straps Crimper (coax and cat5) COAX cable ends Frequency sniffer w/ ac adapt Keys for wall phones corded telephone adapter kit (30 pc) Gaffers tape (Hi-Vis) Flashlight (DeWalt rechargeable) Solder iron kit (butane) Multimeter kit (Extech) Flashlight (Mag AA) Rubber mallet *** Packout Boxes Box 1 MREs (1 box) Antennas (3; 800, UHF, VHF) Extension cord - 25' yellow (2) on reels Box 2 Westward Socket Set Tel-Com tool Kit Cat5e Box DeWalt Drill and Impact Driver (case) Heat gun 7 RESOLUTION NO. OF 2023 Authorizing the approval of an interlocal cooperation agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and West Valley City regarding the transfer of ownership of a tactical vehicle from Salt Lake City Corporation to West Valley City. WHEREAS, Utah Code Title 11, Chapter 13 allows public entities to enter into cooperative agreements regarding the use of government equipment and corresponding allocation of responsibilities for such equipment; and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation ("SLC") and West Valley City ("WVC") were participants in the Urban Areas Security Initiative grant program ("UASI") under which a Mobile Interoperable Tactical Solution ("MITS") vehicle was obtained using grant funds; and WHEREAS, Title for a MITS vehicle has previously been held by SLC; and WHEREAS, SLC now desires to transfer title and responsible of such MITS vehicle to SLC; and WHEREAS, WVC now desires to accept title to and responsibility for such MITS vehicle; and WHEREAS, SLC and WVC have prepared a proposed interlocal agreement ("Interlocal Agreement") providing for the transfer title to the MITS vehicle, along with all responsibilities related to the maintenance and operation of such MITS vehicle, to WVC; and WHEREAS, the City Council for WVC has executed a resolution approving the execution of the Interlocal Agreement and the Mayor for WVC has signed the Interlocal Agreement; and WHEREAS, the City Council of SLC has determined that transferring title to the MITS vehicle, along with the responsibilities related to the maintenance and operation of such MITS vehicle, to WVC is in the best interest of SLC; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah as follows: 1. It does hereby approve the execution and delivery of the attached Agreement (attached hereto as Exhibit "A") regarding the transfer of the MITS vehicle, along with all responsibilities related to the maintenance operation of such MITS vehicle, to WVC: INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR THE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF MOBILE INTEROPERABLE TACTICAL SOLUTION VEHICLE 2. The effective date of the Agreement shall be the date on which an executed copy of the Agreement has been filed with the keeper of records of each of the parties to the Agreement. 3. Erin Mendenhall, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah or her designee is hereby authorized to approve, execute, and deliver said Agreement on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation, in substantially the same form as now before the City Council and attached hereto, subject to such minor changes I that do not materially affect the rights and obligations of the City thereunder and as shall be approved by the Mayor, her execution thereof to constitute conclusive evidence of such approval. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 2023 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By: CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM: h!�' ua� Jaysen Oldroyd, Salt Lake City Attorney's Office 2 EXHIBIT A COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ������ ��•i��i CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CPTY rn= "Briefing: ch 7,2023 TO: City Council Members rch�7, 2023 ng: March 21,2023 FROM• Brian Fullmer ion:April 4, 2023 Policy Analyst DATE: March 7,2023 RE: 865 South Soo East Zoning Map and Master Plan Amendment PLNPCM2022-003ol and PLNPCM2022-000302 The Council will be briefed about a proposal to amend the zoning map for a parcel at 865 South Soo East in City Council District Five from its current RMF-30 (Residential Multi-family)zoning designation to CN (Neighborhood Commercial).Additionally,the proposal calls for amending the Central Community Master Plan future land use map from Low Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial.The petitioner's stated objective is to convert the single-family residence to an unspecified commercial use. The property is located in the Central City Local Historic District and the house is listed as a contributing structure,which protects it from demolition without Historic Landmark Commission approval. Furthermore, a certificate of appropriateness would be required for any modifications whether the zoning designation is changed or remains the same.The house is currently used as a rental property. If approved by the Council,the amendments would result in the loss of one housing unit.A housing loss mitigation report for this property is found on pages 46-50 of the Planning Commission staff report.The petitioner opted to pay the approximately$62,000 difference between current market value of the house and replacement housing costs,provided the Council approves his requests. It should be noted the City Attorney's Office mentioned the status of the City's housing loss mitigation program is pending adoption of the City's new Thriving in Place housing initiatives. The Historic Landmark Commission reviewed the proposal at its October 6, 2022 meeting.The Commission felt conversion to a commercial use could be acceptable depending on modifications to the building. Commissioners also expressed concern about setting a precedent of converting low-density residential to commercial uses in the Central City Historic District. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 SLCCOUNCIL.COM P.O.BOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY.UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 i�a Comments about the proposal received by Planning staff were mixed.Those expressing support cited increased walkability and neighborhood vibrancy from a new commercial business.Those opposed were primarily concerned with increased on-street parking,privacy, noise, and preserving the historic integrity of the building. The Planning Commission reviewed these proposals at its October 26, 2022 meeting and held a public hearing. Four people spoke at the hearing or had their comments read into the record.Three were opposed citing resident displacement,housing shortage,preservation of the historic district and neighborhood character, and parking issues. One person shared concern about additional commercial parking in the area but did not express strong support or opposition. Planning staff recommended the Planning Commission forward a negative recommendation to the City Council stating their opinion the request does not meet applicable standards of approval.The Commission voted 5-3 to forward a positive recommendation.Those opposed did not state why the voted against the motion. RMF-3 0 SR-3 RMF-30 RMF-30 RMF-30 RMF-30 RMF-30 RMF-45 Rg CN CN RMF-45 CN RMF-30 CB CN RB CN OS R-1-5000 R-1-5000 R-1-5000 Area zoning map with subject parcel outlined in blue.Note-the green area to the south is Liberty Park. Goal of the briefing:Review the proposed zoning and future land use map amendments, determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. Does the Council wish to discuss the tradeoff of creating additional commercial space in this area at the expense of losing a residential unit? 2. Does the Council feel additional commercial space in this area of the city could benefit the community? 3. The Council may wish to ask more about the Housing Loss Mitigation fee and the status of collecting the fees while the ordinance amendments are pending. Page 1 2 4. The Council may wish to ask if current residents of the property will be assisted with relocation. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The City zoning ordinance(21A.26.020.E)limits the maximum area of a continuously mapped CN (Neighborhood Commercial)district to go,000 square feet. Combining the abutting parcels currently zoned CN with the subject parcel would total less than 30,000 square feet,roughly one third of the maximum allowed area. The Council is only being asked to consider rezoning the property and amending the Central Community Master Plan future land use map.No formal site plan has been submitted to the City nor is it within the scope of the Council's authority to review the plans. Because 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. KEY CONSIDERATIONS Planning staff identified four key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 6-14 of the Planning Commission staff report and summarized below. For the complete analysis,please see the staff report. Consideration i-Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning The subject parcel is near the northeast corner of 500 East and goo South.Abutting properties to the south are a restaurant, and butcher shop, also owned by the petitioner.A single-family dwelling is also abutting to the south.All three of these parcels are zoned CN. Liberty Park is located nearby to the south, across goo South. One of the largest structures in the area,a 70-unit apartment building,is directly west across 50o East. That property is zoned RMF-45(Moderate/High Density Multi-Family Residential). Properties to the east, north, and northwest are zoned RMF-30 (Low Density Multi-Family Residential) as shown in the area zoning map above.Those structures are primarily single-or two-family, and small multi-family dwellings. The goo South corridor in this area includes properties zoned CN, RB(Residential Business), and RMF-30. Most land uses are low-scale commercial and residential. Planning staff noted if approved by the Council, the subject property would be the first interior of a block intersecting goo South to be zoned as a non- residential district. Consideration 2-Contributing Status of Existing Building As noted above,the existing home on this property is listed as a contributing structure in the Central City Local Historic District. Because of this it is unlikely demolition would be approved. Exterior modifications or additions would need to be approved by the Historic Landmark Commission or Planning staff.The petitioner stated he plans to adaptively reuse the building for commercial use,though no specifics have been provided as of the writing of this report. Consideration 3-How the Proposal Helps Implement City Goals and Policies Identified in Adopted Plans Planning staff reviewed how the proposed zoning map and future land use map amendments align with the following City plans: • Plan Salt Lake(2015) • Central Community Master Plan(2005) • Salt Lake City Community Preservation Plan(2012) Page 13 • Growing SLC(2017) They determined the proposals are consistent with the following found in the plans. • Encourage and support local businesses and neighborhood business districts. • Reduce automobile dependency and single occupancy vehicle trips. • Support the growth of small businesses,entrepreneurship,and neighborhood business nodes. • Support modification of existing historic resources to allow for changes in use that will encourage the use of the structure for housing or other appropriate uses in historic districts to ensure preservation of the structure. • Adaptive reuse of historic structures should be allowed for a variety of uses in appropriate locations where it is found that the negative impacts can be mitigated and where the uses do not require significant alterations to the historic integrity of the interior of the structure. • Provide for small-scale commercial uses that can be located within residential neighborhoods without having significant impact upon residential uses. • Support modification of existing historic resources to allow for changes in use that will encourage the use of the structure for housing or other appropriate uses in historic districts in an effort to ensure preservation of the structure. • Adaptive reuse of historic structures should be allowed for a variety of uses in appropriate locations where it is found that the negative impacts can be mitigated and where the uses do not require significant alterations to the historic integrity of the interior of the structure. Planning staff determined the proposals are not consistent with the following elements of the plans. • Ensure access to affordable housing citywide(including rental and very low income). • Provide accessible parks and recreation spaces within 1/2 mile of all residents. • Preserve low-density residential areas and keep them from being replaced by higher density residential and commercial uses. • Review and modify land-use and zoning regulations to reflect the affordability needs of a growing, pioneering city. • Lead in the construction of innovative housing solutions. • Support diverse and vibrant neighborhoods by aligning land use policies that promote a housing market capable of accommodating residents throughout all stages of life. Planning staff noted the proposals would change the property's zoning from one that primarily permits residential units to a zone that primarily permits commercial uses and does not allow residential uses. If the property is rezoned and changed to commercial use,it cannot be converted back to single-family residential use without another zoning change. Planning stated the following: Given the age and size of the home, it is likely a "naturally occurring"affordable unit of housing, or a housing unit that is affordable because of its characteristics rather than being restricted by covenant as affordable to households of a certain income level. Therefore, the loss of this home would also represent a loss in the city's stock of affordable housing,which is already very limited. This property is roughly Zoo feet(1125 mile)away from Liberty Park.If it were converted to commercial use, that would mean one fewer household would have close access to the park... Consideration 4-Comparison of RMF-3o and CN Zoning As discussed above,the proposal is to change the zoning designation and future land use map from its current RMF-30 (Residential Multi-Family)to CN(Neighborhood Business).The primary differences between the zones are what uses are allowed. RMF-3o allows a variety of housing types including single-, two-, and multi-family dwellings, along with uses typically associated with residential neighborhoods, such as gardens,parks, and places of worship. Page 14 CN zoning does not allow most types of housing except mixed-use,which is a combination of residential and other uses.Most uses in the CN zone are commercial. The following tables comparing RMF-3o and CN zoning designations are found on pages 12-14 of the Planning Commission staff report.They are replicated here for convenience. RMF-30(Existing) CN(Proposed) Maximum Building Height 30 feet 25 feet Front Setback 20 feet 15 feet Side Setback Corner side yard: 10 feet Corner side yard:15 feet Interior: Interior:None a.Single-family and two-family dwellings: Interior lots:4 feet on one side and 10 feet on the other Corner lots:4 feet b.Single-family attached:No yard is required,however if one is provided it shall not be less than 4 feet. c.Twin home dwelling:No yard required along one side lot line.A 10- foot yard is required on the other. d.Multi-family dwelling:10 feet on each side. e.All other permitted and conditional uses:10 feet Rear Setback 25 percent of the lot depth,but not 10 feet less than 20 feet and need not exceed 25 feet Lot Size Single-family detached:5,000 SF No minimum required.Maximum lot Twin home:4,000 SF per unit size of 16,500 SF. Two-family dwelling:8,000 SF Multi-family dwelling:g,000 SF (additional lot area required for buildings with more than three units) Other permitted or conditional uses: 5,000 SF Permitted Uses Single-,two-,and multi-family Retail,offices,restaurants,other dwellings;uses associated with commercial uses,mixed use residential neighborhoods. development. NEW PERMITTED USES IN CN NEW CONDITIONAL USES IN CN Page 5 Uses not permitted in RMF=3o but would be newly Uses not allowed in RMF-3o but would be allowed permitted under the proposal change to CN as a conditional use under the proposed CN zoning •Adaptive reuse of landmark site •Alcohol,bar establishment(2,500 square feet or less in •Art gallery floor area) •Artisan food production(2,500 square feet or less in floor •Animal,veterinary office area) •Bed and breakfast manor •Bed and breakfast •Parking,off site •Bed and breakfast inn •Furniture repair shop •Clinic(medical,dental) •Vehicle,automobile repair(minor) •Commercial food preparation •Daycare center,adult •Daycare center,child •Dwelling,living quarter for caretaker or security guard •Financial institution •Governmental facility requiring special design features for security purposes •Library •Mixed use development •Mobile food business(operation on private property) •Museum •Office •Place of worship on lot less than 4 acres in size •Recreation(indoor) •Recycling collection station •Restaurant •Retail goods establishment •Plant and garden shop with outdoor sales area •Retail services establishment •Reverse vending machine •Sales and display(outdoor) •Seasonal farm stand •Studio,art PERMITTED USES IN RMF-3o CONDITIONAL USES IN RMF-3o NO LONGER ALLOWED IN CN NO LONGER ALLOWED IN CN Uses currently permitted in RMF-3o but would no Uses currently allowed in RMF-3o as a longer be allowed under the proposed change to conditional use but would no longer be allowed CN under the proposed change to CN •Dwelling,accessory unit •Dwelling,assisted living facility(limited •Dwelling,manufactured home capacity) •Dwelling,multi-family •Dwelling,congregate care facility(small) •Dwelling,single-family(attached) •Dwelling,group home(large) •Dwelling,single-family(detached) •Municipal service use,including City utility use Page 6 •Dwelling,twin home and two-family and police and fire station •Parking,park and ride lot shared with existing use •School,seminary and religious institute •Temporary use of closed schools and churches PERMITTED USES IN BOTH RMF-3o AND CN CONDITIONAL USES IN RMF-3o Uses that are currently permitted in RMF-3o and ALSO ALLOWED IN CN would continue Uses that are currently allowed in RMF-3o as a conditional use and would continue to be allowed as a permitted or conditional use under the proposed change to CN •Accessory use,except those otherwise •Adaptive reuse of landmark site—Becomes permitted regulated in the zoning ordinance. •Daycare center,child—Becomes permitted •Community garden •Governmental facility—Becomes permitted •Daycare,nonregistered home daycare •Place of worship on lots less •Daycare,registered home daycare or preschool •Dwelling,group home(small) •Home occupation •Open space •Park •Urban farm •Utility,building or structure •Utility,transmission wire,line,pipe,or pole Analysis of Factors Pages 35-36 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. 4 � Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent Does not comply with the purposes,goals,objectives,and policies of the city as stated through its various adopted planning documents. Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the Complies specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. The extent to which a proposed map amendment will Complies affect adjacent properties Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent Complies with the purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards. The adequacy of public facilities and services Complies intended to serve the subject property,including,but not limited to,roadways,parks and recreational facilities,police and fire protection,schools, Page ( 7 stormwater drainage systems,water supplies,and wastewater and refuse collection. City Department Review During City department and division review of the petitions,the Housing Stability Division noted the potential loss of one residential unit for non-residential use of the property and referenced housing loss mitigation. Other responding departments and divisions did not express concerns with the proposal,but stated additional review would be needed if changes are made to the property. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY • March 24, 2022-Petition for zoning map and accompanying text amendment received by Planning Division. • April 7, 2022-Petition assigned to Michael McNamee, Principal Planner. • February 9, 2022-Information about petitions sent to Central City and Liberty Wells Community Council Chairs. o The community councils did not provide formal comments. • April 28, 2022-Early notification mailed to property owners and residents within 300'of the subject property. • April-October 2022-Project posted to the Online Open House webpage. • October 6, 2022-Historic Landmark Commission briefing. • October 12, 2022-Public hearing notice posted on property. • October 13, 2022-Public hearing notice mailed to property owners and residents within 300'of the subject property. Public hearing notice posted on City and State websites and Planning Division listserv. • October 26, 2022-Planning Commission public hearing.The Planning Commission voted to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for the proposed master plan and zoning map amendments. • October 27, 2022-Ordinance requested from Attorney's Office. • December 8, 2022-Planning received signed ordinance from the Attorney's Office. • December 22, 2022-Transmittal received in City Council Office. Page 18 i j e T Mendenhall Architecture ! & Design, Ilc 4635 South Highland Holladay, UT 84117 '.. 801.277.293 I � EXISTING F10USE �� NEW ADU r7 C) I: Uj `t f � f dr J t Q � Q 0 _j o' L J81TE PLAN DATE IN ors Project....'..Project N—be Date 1',"Oat, D,,,,,'o A.tho ''.... Checked'oy Checker SITE PVaN O PROJFCf TRUE m NORTH NORTH AO . I i T M, A3 0 Mendenhall Architecture & Design, 1Ic 20'-O" 10,-O" 4635 South Highlond SETBACK Holladay, UT 84117 801.277.293 oU Q PROPERLY LINE -' N ----------- --------- ®m®_®_®_®m®.®m®m®_®m®.®m®m®_®_®_®m®.®m®_®_®.--------------- -®_®_®_� I 1 j I 1 I I 1 ADA PARKING STALL - 1 PARKING 5TALL I E EXISTING HOUSE I o 0 I I m J g I I I T _._._._-_._ _ _ I REMOVE FXISTNG ADDITION - �--'"— Y I O U s ............. ....................... ........................................................... PROPERTY L INE W \� 3 V1 U PRIVATE DRIVE � A3.0 o Q = W Q O .®m®_®_®_®m®_®_®_®m®m®m®_®_®_®.®m®_®_®_®_®m®.®.®m®m®m®.®m®_®_®_®m®.®.®_®_®m®m®m®_®_®_®_®m®_®_®_®m®.®m®m®_®_®.®m®_®_®_®_®m®.®m®m®m®m®m®m®_®_®_®m®m®m®_®_®m®.®m®_®_®_ J MAIN LIVING = 550 561. ft. 73, MAIN �.J 1/4"=C-e° DATE —0 Project--Project Number Date Issue Oat" D,,,,,Ev Autho ''.... Checked'oy Checker FLOOR PLAN5 '.. N A �//'J� //'J\ o 1�1 1�1 ■ ORMONIS Mendenhall Architecture & Design, Ilc 4635 South Highland pnnF pnnp H011801 Y. UT 8943117 10_0_0„— — — — 0_0„— — — — — — — — — — — — 8d., U s MAIN MAIN — — — — — — n NORTH EAST r, 1/4"=1'-0' 1/4"=1'-0" ILI V Ip,_pF,— — — — — — — �J 10O0,� 771 I o L �AIN _ n MAIN DATE Protect....'..Project Number Date I_',[)ate D,,,,,'o Autho ''.... Checked'oy Checker �n 5OUTH `- I WE5T 2 m A3 . 0 0 ERIN MENDENHALL L DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor �` ' and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas ng k1t7 c/1= Director CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL Date Received: 12/22/2022 Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: 12/22/2022 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: December 22, 2022 Dan Dugan, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community &Neighborhoods SUBJECT: 865 S 500 E Zoning Map and Master Plan Amendment (PLNPCM2022-00301 &PLNPCM2022-00302) STAFF CONTACT: Michael McNamee, Principal Planner michael.rncnamce(als�ov.com or 801-535-7226 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the proposed Zoning Map and Master Plan amendment. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Rick Service, the property owner of 865 South 500 East, initiated a petition to amend the Zoning Map and Central Community Master Plan in March of 2022. The request is to rezone the subject property from RMF-30 (Low Density Multi-Family Residential) to CN (Neighborhood Commercial), and redesignate the property on the future land use map in the Central Community Master Plan from Low Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial. On October 26, 2022, the Planning Commission heard the petition and forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council to amend the Zoning Map and Central Community Master Plan. If approved, the property owner intends to change the use of the existing single- family home to a commercial use. The specific commercial use would be determined after the amendments were approved. The property is located in the Central City Local Historic District, and the house is listed as a contributing structure to the district, which protects it from demolition without the approval of the Historic Landmark Commission. 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 ViCinity Map u • • ff a� i q4 Subject Pnapedy Zoning Districts Cis Open Space RS Resi tiatl&mess CN At,ighO cod Com m emial R-115, Shgte-F ily Residential RMF-30 Low Density Muftl-Fam iy Residential RMF-45 Moderatelytigh Density Adults-Family Resdentiat Salt Lake City Planning Division 4/28/2022 The CN zone is a commercial zoning district that is intended to be compatible with residential neighborhoods. The permitted size and scale of development is similar to RMF-30,but the number and type of land uses allowed in CN is quite different from RMF-30. RMF-30 permits single-, two-, and multi-family dwellings, as well as uses that are incidental to residential neighborhoods such as parks and daycares. By contrast, CN permits primarily commercial uses such as retail, offices, and restaurants. Residential is only allowed as part of a mixed-use development. The proposed change would facilitate the replacement of a single-family dwelling use with a commercial use. HOUSING LOSS MITIGATION: The applicant was required to submit a housing loss mitigation plan as part of this request,per Chapter 18.97 of the Zoning Ordinance, which requires that a housing loss mitigation plan is approved by the city before any petition is approved for a zoning change that would permit a nonresidential use of land, that includes within its boundaries residential dwelling units. A housing loss mitigation plan is required for this petition because the CN zone allows nonresidential uses. Options for mitigating residential housing loss include providing replacement housing, paying a fee to the City's housing trust fund based on the difference between the housing value and replacement cost of building new units, and, where deteriorated housing exists and is not caused by deliberate indifference of the landowner, the petitioner may pay a flat fee to the City's housing trust fund. These options were considered, and paying a fee based on the difference between housing value and replacement cost was determined to be the most feasible. The applicant is not proposing to build any new housing to replace the single-family dwelling that would be lost, and he is not claiming that the existing dwelling is deteriorated. The fee amount was determined in the October 18, 2022 housing loss mitigation plan to be $61,967.76. The applicant has been made aware of this requirement under the ordinance. The City Attorney's Office has advised against enforcing housing loss mitigation plans pending adoption of the City's new Thriving in Place housing initiatives. PUBLIC PROCESS: • Petition for the zoning map and master plan amendment was accepted by the Salt Lake Planning Division on March 24, 2022. • The petition was assigned to Michael McNamee, Principal Planner, for staff analysis and processing on April 7, 2022. • The petition was deemed complete on April 20, 2022. • Information concerning this petition was sent to the chairs of the Central City and Liberty Wells Community Councils on April 28, 2022. o The Community Councils did not provide formal comments. • The surrounding property owners and residents within 300' of the subject properties received an early notification by mail on April 28, 2022. • Public notification for the Planning Commission hearing was mailed October 13, 2022 to all neighbors within 300' of the Zoning Map and Master Plan amendment site. The public notice was also posted on City and State websites and sent via the Planning list serve. • The petition was heard by the Planning Commission on October 26, 2022. The Planning Commission voted 5-3 to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed zoning map and master plan amendment. o There were three public comments received prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission (PC) Records a) R(LA&,enda of October 26,2022 (Click to Access) b) PC Minutes of October 26. 2022 (Click to Access) C) Planning CommissiontalfRcport of October 26, 2022 (Click to Access Report) EXHIBITS: 1) Project Chronology 2) Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3) Ordinance 4) Original Petition 5) Mailing List TABLE OF CONTENTS: L CHRONOLOGY 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING 3. ORDINANCE 4. ORIGINAL PETITION 5. MAILING LIST L CHRONOLOGY ERIN MENDENHALL L DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor �` ' and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas ng k1t7 c/1= Director PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Petition: PLNPCM2022-00301 &302 March 24,2022 Petition for the zoning map and master plan amendment received by the Salt Lake City Planning Division. April 7,2022 Petition assigned to Michael McNamee,Principal Planner. April 28,2022 Information about the proposal was sent to the Chair of the Central City and Liberty Wells Community Councils in order to solicit public comments and start the 45-day Recognized Organization input and comment period. April 28,2022 Staff hosted an online Open House to solicit public comments on the proposal.The Online Open House period started on April 28, 2022 and ended June 15, 2022. April 28,2022 Staff sent an early notification announcement of the project to all residents and property owners living within 300 feet of the project site providing information about the proposal and how to give public input on the project. June 15,2022 The 45-day public comment period for Recognized Organizations ended. No formal comments were submitted to staff by the recognized organizations to date related to this proposal. October 12,2022 Public hearing notice sign with project information and notice of the Planning Commission public hearing physically posted on the property. October 13,2022 Public notice posted on City and State websites and sent via the Planning list serve for the Planning Commission meeting of October 26,2022. Public hearing notice mailed. October 26,2022 The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 26, 2022. By a majority vote of 5-3, the Planning Commission forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council for the proposed zoning map and master plan amendment. 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 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petitions PLNPCM2022-0301 and PLNPCM2022- 00302 —865 S 500 E Zoning Map and Master Plan Amendment—Salt Lake City has received a request from Rick Service,the property owner,to amend the zoning map for the property located at 865 South 500 East from RMF-30 (Low Density Multi-Family Residential District) to CN (Neighborhood Commercial District), and to amend the Central Community Master Plan so that the property would be redesignated on the future land use map from Low Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial. The lot is approximately .08 acres (3,628 square feet). The intent of the rezone request is to allow for the conversion of the existing single-family dwelling on the property to a commercial use. The property is located within Council District 5, represented by Darin Mano. As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments regarding the petition.During the hearing,anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The Council may consider adopting the ordinance the same night of the public hearing. The hearing will be held: DATE: PLACE: Electronic and in-person options. 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah This meeting will be held via electronic means,while 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. For more information, including WebEx connection information,please visit www.sic.gov/councillvirtual-mectinas. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments(ii slc ov.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 Michael McNamee at 801-535-7226 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.,Monday through Friday, or via e-mail at michae].nlcnanlee(a/"slcLov.conl. The application details can be accessed at https:"citi/enportal.slc�-lov.com,', by selecting the "Planning" tab and entering the petition number PLNPCM2022-00301 or PLNPCM2022-00302. 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 couiicil.comincntsrrx;s�ov.com, (801)535-7600, or relay service 711. 3. ORDINANCE SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2023 (Amending the zoning of property located at 865 South 500 East Street from RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District to CN Neighborhood Commercial District, and amending the Central Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map) An ordinance amending the zoning map pertaining to property located at 865 South 500 East Street from RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District to CN Neighborhood Commercial District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00301, and amending the Central Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00302. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission ("Planning Commission") held a public hearing on October 26, 2022 on an application submitted by Rick Service ("Applicant") to rezone property located at 865 South 500 East Street(Tax ID No. 16-07-276-024) (the "Property") from RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District to CN Neighborhood Commercial District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00301, and to amend the Central Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map with respect to that parcel from Low Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00302; and WHEREAS, at its October 26, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council ("City Council") on said applications; 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 RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District to CN Neighborhood Commercial District. SECTION 2. Amending the Central Community Master Plan. The Future Land Use Map of the Central Community Master Plan shall be and hereby is amended to change the future land use designation of the Property identified in Exhibit"A" from Low Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial. 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 , 2023. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM (SEAL) Salt Lake City Attorney's Office Date.Dec mber 8, 2022 Bill No. of 2023. By: _ Published: P I C.Xielso Senior City Attorney Ordinance amending zoning and MP 865 S 500 E EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description of Property to be Rezoned and Subject to Central Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment: 865 South 500 East Tax ID No. 16-07-276-024 BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3, BLOCK 2, EHRICHS SUBDIVISION, OF BLOCK 5, PLAT B, SALT LAKE CITY SURVEY, AND RUNNING THENCE SOUTH 33 FEET; THENCE EAST 110 FEET; THENCE NORTH 33 FEET; THENCE WEST 110 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH A PERPETUAL RIGHT OF WAY OVER THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED STRIP OF LAND, TO-WIT: BEGINNING 33 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 3, THENCE EAST 140 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 10 FEET; THENCE WEST 140 FEET; THENCE NORTH 10 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. 4. ORIGINAL PETITION 4oning Amendment Amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance 0 Amend the Zoning Map 01PPICE USE MY Rec Date Receive eived By: d: Project Name or Sections of Zoning Amendment: PLEASE t4 INK"WATION Address of Subject Property(or Area): 865 South 500 East Name of Applicant: Phone: Rick Service .:801-680-6735 Address of Applicant: P.O. Box 71899, Salt Lake City, LIT 84171 E-mail of Applicant: Cell/Fax: rick service679yahoo.com 801-680-6735 Applicant's interest in Subject Property: 0 Owner [3 Contractor 1] Architect 0 Other,,- Name of Property Owner(if different from applicant): 5 & 9 LLC E-mail of Property Owner: Phone: rickservice679yahoo.com 01-680-6735 Pleaw note that additional information may be required by the project planner to ensure adequate information is provided for staff analysis. All information required for staff analysis will be copied and made public, Including professional architectural or engineering dravurigs,for the purposes of public review by any interested party, A CCROULTATWIN If you have any questions regarding the requirements of this application,please contact Salt Lake City Planning Counter at zoning@sl�-_ civcor�n prior to submitting the application. Map Amendment:filing fee of$1,075 plus$121 per acre in excess of one acre Text Amendment:filing fee of$1,075,plus fees for newspaper notice. Plus,additional fee for mailed public notices. Noticing fees will be assessed after the application is submitted, + If applicable,a notarized statement of consent authorizing applicant to act as an agent will the required, Signature of Owner or Agent: Date: Rick Service 3/24/22 Uodated 8/2VM2,1 i< project Description iplease electronically attach additional sheets, See Seclion 21A.50 for the Amendments ordinance.} A statement declaring the purpose for the arnencimem- E LA description of the proposed use of the property being rezoned, List the reasons why the present zoning may not be appropriate for the area, is the request amending the Zoning Map? If so, please list the parcel numbers to be changed, E7is the request amending the text of the Zoning Ordinance? If so, please Include language and the reference to the Zoning Ordinance to be changed, jmwwTEirUTHEC0AVWEAPPUiCATWN Apply online through the Citizen_Access Portal,There is a to learn how to submit online. V"XMWLETIE APPUCATW4 WILL NOT'BE ACCEPTED R S I acknowledge that Salt Lake City requires the items above to be submitted before my application can be processed.I understand that Planning will not accept MY application unless all of the following items are included in the submittal package, UpisardWa/7021 Zoning Amendment Requirements The reason for changing the zoning from RMF-30 to CN Neighborhood Commercial are many. The existing residential building at 865 South 500 East is placed on the lot in such a way that it lends itself more to the two neighboring propefties to the south zoned N. The two neighboring properties to the south are 501 & 511 East 900 South. 511 East 900 South and 865 South 500 East share a driveway. 511 East 900 South has their Handicap Parking space at the rear of the property that is accessed from the shared driveway. Their deliveries are also received by use of the shared driveway. There is no alleyway access so all deliveries must back down the shared driveway. 865 South 500 East does not have covered parking, it just has two parking spaces at the rear of the building. There is no back yard to this house, which is why it is impossible to rent the house to a family. UDOT, along with Salt Lake City, are in the process of improving bus travel along 500 East. They have put a large cement pad directly in front of the house along with a bench. A large lighted enclosure with a garbage can will be installed soon. That makes the property feel like a commercial property with no front yard. Last but not least I truly want the challenge of improving and transforming the residential building to a small commercial building. When I purchased the neighboring two properties to the south, one was an abandoned gas station for 32 years with graffiti on the walls and a make- shift homeless persons shelter. I turned 501 East 900 South into the restaurant "Tradition". It was quite a challenge but I feel it turned out well, The property at 511 East 900 South when I purchased it was a 100 year old house being used as a residential rental. I remodeled it and today it is a very thriving commercial building as Settex Meats, a very successful butcher shop. Both properties employ local people bringing revenue into the area. Knowing that this houses in the Historic District, as it was built in 1908, 1 will be able to work with the Historic District to improve the use of the building while staying within the parameters set by the Historic District. The adjoining properties zoned ON have a total square footage of 14,808 square feet. The CN zoning allows for up to 90,000 square feet. With the addition of 865 South 500 East being only 3,484 square feet the will be a total of only 18,292 square feet for the entirety of the new proposed CN zone. This is much smaller than the allowed 90,000 square feet, Allowing this property to be added to the existing Chi zoning will create a more balanced and useable commercial comer. The CN zoning calls for "small scale low intensity commercial use". I believe that changing the zoning of this property too Chi will to do just that. Please give me the opportunity to improve the property. At this time I do not have a specific use in mind for the property. I have spoken with several people who might be interested in the space. One such person wants to put a dog grooming and supply store, another person who runs a very successful sandwich shop wants to open a new location there. I anticipate remodeling the building and making it a shining example of what is possible in the ON zoning. Parcel Number 16-07-276-024-0000 Master Plan Amendment L Amend the text ®f the Master Plan Amend the Land Use Map WKI UR ONLY Received By., Date Received: Project#: Name of Master Plan Amendment: PLEASE PROVIM THE fOUJOWMG INFOMWATWN Address of Subject Property for Area): 865 South 500 East Name of Applicant- Phone: Rick Service 801-680-6735 Address of Applicant: P.O. Box 71899, It Lake City, UT 84171 E-mail of Applicant: Cell/Fax: rick service674yahoo.com 1801-68"735 Applicant's Interest in Subject Property: Owner Contractor Architect Other: Name of Property Owner(if different from applicant): E-mail of Property Owner: Phone: rickservice672yahoo.conn 801-680-6735 Please note that additional information may be required by the project planner to ensure adequate information is provided for staff analysis. All information required for staff analysis will be copied and made public,including professional architectural or engineering drawings,for the purposes of public woo review by any interested party. AVARASILE CONSUMI"ON Planners are available for consultation prior to submitting this application. Please email Kgn!g,$ sl ov. carry�if you have any questions regarding the requirements of this application. RED Filing fee of$1008 plus$M per acre in excess of one acre. 11C*for newspaper notice, Plus,additional fee for mailed public notices.Mailing fees will be assessed after application is submitted, If applicable,a notarized statement of consent authorizing applicant to act as an agent will be required. Signature of Owner or Agent: Date: Rick Service 3/24/22 Updated 9/16/2021 SUOMMALOWNtEMENTS 1. Project Description(please attach additional sheets electronically.) Describe the proposed master plan amendment, E— A statement declaring the purpose for the amendment- Declare why the present master plan requires amending. Is the request amending the Land Use Map? If so, please list the parcel numbers to be changed. E--1 is the request amending the text of the master plan? if so,please include exact language to be changed, MMUTO FRETHIF COMPLMAPPUCATION Apply online through the gjjZ n s rt 1.There is a 9i2:ky:EttR1m!!;!g to learn how to submit online. 94COA64-M APPL"TMM WAIL Wr K ACCEPTED R S I acknowledge that Salt Lake City requires the items above to be submitted before my application can be processed. I understand that Planning will not accept my application unless all of the following Items are included in the submittal package. Updatede/W2021 Master Plan Amendment I wish to change a all portion of the Central Community Master Plan. The plan change would be to amend the zoning of a single family residence zoned RMF-30 to a CN Neighborhood Commercial zone. The property is at 865 South 500 East. The property is bordered by two properties can ON. With a zoning change of this property, all three properties on the corner of 500 East and 900 South will have the same zoning. This will create a balance to the comer and will pro to more commercial services to the ongoing vibrant Liberty Park Neighborhood. It will create a gathering place in such a walkable neighborhood. The infrastructure is already in place to support the change. Part of the Central Community Master Plan is to promote more Commercial Services in the area. The amendment change will allow me the flexibility to select a tenant that will add to the vibrant area. Parcel Number 16-07-276-024-0000 } { ) £ \ \ / / k / § . \ � i £ � . { � , / / • { ,� � , 5. MAILING LIST geometry Occupant PARCEL—A[NEW_UNIT CITY STATE ZIPCODE Geocortex.Current Oc 828 S 500 E Salt Lake Ci UT 84102 Geocortex.Current Oc 836 S 500 E Salt Lake Ci UT 84102 Geocortex.Current Oc 475 E 900! Salt Lake Ci UT 84102 Geocortex.Current Oc 906 S 500 E Salt Lake Ci UT 84105 Geocortex.Current Oc 827 S 500 E Salt Lake Ci UT 84102 Geocortex.Current Oc 841 S 500 E Salt Lake Ci UT 84102 Geocortex.Current Oc 857 S 500 E Salt Lake Ci UT 84102 Geocortex.Current Oc 840 S PARIk Salt Lake Ci UT 84102 Geocortex.Current Oc 844 S PARIk Salt Lake Ci UT 84102 Geocortex.Current Oc 848 S PARIk#NFF1 Salt Lake Ci UT 84102 Geocortex.Current Oc 846 S PARIk Salt Lake Ci UT 84102 Geocortex.Current Oc 865 S 500 E Salt Lake Ci UT 84102 Geocortex.Current Oc 501 E 900 Salt Lake Ci UT 84105 Geocortex.Current Oc 511 E 900! Salt Lake Ci UT 84105 Geocortex.Current Oc 533 E 900! Salt Lake Ci UT 84105 Geocortex.Current Oc 853 S PARIk Salt Lake Ci UT 84102 geometry OWN_FULL_NAME OWN_ADD own—unit OWN_CITY OWN_STA1 OWN_ZIP Geocortex.LIBERTY 9 LLC 1126 E GILI SALT LAKE UT 84105 Geocortex.HARRIS APARTMENTS SLC LLC 1012 CHAK OGDEN UT 84403 Geocortex.ROBERT A EVANS 844 S 500 E SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.JOSE R LEAL;ARMANDO VALLE(TC) 854 S 500 E SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.HOUSING AUTHORITY OF SALT LAKE 1776 S WE' SALT LAKE UT 84115 Geocortex.SARAH GENE JOLLEY 848 S 500 E SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.TRUST NOT IDENTIFIED 883 E 4900 MURRAY UT 84107 Geocortex.GERALD&LISA OTTO TRUST 8/28/2017 460 CREST` PARK CITY UT 84098 Geocortex.DUANE E CRABTREE;ELISSA CRABTREE(JT) 833 S 500 E SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.MICHAEL W BAKER;ERIN BAKER CAPOBIANCO 672 LARCH DALY CITY CA 94015 Geocortex.ROBERTJ WYNNE 851 S 500 E SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.AMM TRUST PO BOX 5& SALT LAKE UT 84158 Geocortex.BRYCE R WHITAKER 828 S PARk SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.TRUST NOT IDENTIFIED 4605 S BO) MURRAY UT 84107 Geocortex.844 S PARK ST,A SERIES OF PREF GROUP,LLC 939 W HEA PHOENIX AZ 85013 Geocortex.MICHAEL W BAKER;ERIN BAKER CAPOBIANCO 672 LARCH DALY CITY CA 94015 Geocortex.TRUST NOT IDENTIFIED 2864 E PIN COTTONW UT 84121 Geocortex.JOHN SEARLE;BENJAMIN TOLMAN(1T) 852 S PARk SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.CHRISTINE REYES 856 S PARk SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.KDC TRUST 860 S PARk SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.5&9,LLC 3201 E CHI. COTTONW UT 84121 Geocortex.STEVEN R SEARE 517 E 900 #NFF1 SALT LAKE UT 84105 Geocortex.CHRISTINA S HANNAN-CANETE HERITAGE TRUST 6/30/2017 521 E 900 #NFF1 SALT LAKE UT 84105 Geocortex.DEBRA FRAZIER LIVING TRUST 12/07/2018 864 S PARk SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.5&9,LLC 3201 E CHI. COTTONW UT 84121 Geocortex.5&9,LLC 3201 E CHI. COTTONW UT 84121 Geocortex.STEVEN R SEARE 517 E 900 SALT LAKE UT 84105 Geocortex.CHRISTINA S HANNAN-CANETE HERITAGE TRUST 6/30/2017 521 E 900 SALT LAKE UT 84105 Geocortex.JBELA LLC 1241 E POP MILLCREEK UT 84117 Geocortex.JAMES SULLIVAN 537 E 900 SALT LAKE UT 84105 Geocortex.CHELSEA SIMMONS 539 E 900 SALT LAKE UT 84105 Geocortex.SIAOSI P VAENUKU;SIAOSI P AKA:VAENUKU VAENUKU;KATALINA F VAENU 849 S PARk SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.MAC R CURTIS;SUSAN L CURTIS 851 S PARk SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.PARK STREET PROPERTIES LLC 6737 S HUE SALT LAKE UT 84121 Geocortex.SELDOM SCENE HOLDINGS,LLC 857 S PARk SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.JEANETTE NEWHOUSE;CALE NEWHOUSE 859 S PARk SALT LAKE UT 84102 Geocortex.MARK ANDREW LOEWEN;NATALIE KAY LOEWEN(JT) 545 E 900! SALT LAKE UT 84105 •``" COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY Item Schedule: TO: City Council Members Briefing:January 3,2023 Public Hearing: February 7,2023 FROM: Sam Owen, Policy Analyst Potential Action:TBD DATE: January 3, 2023 RE: Electric Vehicle Readiness Off-Street Parking Stalls Amendment ISSUE AT A GLANCE The Administration's proposal asks the Council to change the zoning code, and require an increased amount of electric infrastructure at twenty percent of the parking spaces in multi-family construction and major reconstruction projects.The infrastructure would support new installation of electric charging stations for electric vehicles.This proposal does not newly require the installation of charging stations. The Council may want to discuss whether to require more electric vehicle charging infrastructure in off-street parking at multi-family construction and major reconstruction projects. KEY ITEMS The existing code requires these same types of projects to install fully-equipped parking spaces reserved for electric vehicle charging, at the ratio of one electric vehicle space per 25 conventional spaces. Site plans for qualifying projects would be screened for meeting these new requirements through the city's permitting process. The same 20 percent requirement would apply to spaces designated for use of people qualifying under Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA).The requirement does not apply to projects with four or less off-street parking spaces. In response to the proposal, one developer provided feedback the cost per space could be as high as $10,000, and this comment is included in the transmittal. Other information, available on the department's website, indicates cost per space could be under $1,000.The lower figure is consistent CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 SLCCOUNCIL.COM P.O.BOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY.UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 i�a with anecdotal comparisons made to online examples of cost. Market conditions at the time of construction would be a factor.The cost to retrofit these electric spaces is several times more than some estimates to include them as part of new construction. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The transmittal includes a range of public feedback. Cost concerns are a theme. Council Members might wish to ask the department about cost increases expected as a result of adopting this ordinance, or something like it. Is the cost likely to burden renters, slow necessary construction or deter investment in the city? 2. Considering the cost could be passed on to the consumer, in this case residents,will people who do not have access to new cars or new electric vehicles end up bearing the burden of that cost? 3. Another theme in the feedback is concern about rates of actual electric vehicle use in the general public. Do Council Members think the ratio of twenty percent is appropriate, in light of information listed above on market share? ADDITIONAL&BACKGROUND INFORMATION A state report presents these findings: 1,016 electric vehicles were newly registered in 2015; 5,401 were newly registered in 2019; and 10,569 were newly registered in 2021. These Tax Commission figures document how electric vehicle registration goes from one tenth of a percent of total new registrations in 2015,to four tenths of one percent in 2019.Total vehicle registrations have increased by about half a million during the same period. Hybrid vehicles were five times more common than strict electric in 2022 registrations. Some estimates put current electric vehicle adoption nationwide around five percent. Page 1 2 a iq�I s � i %. 4 a I Gus Polk i .. r i . 11 y � � d s a T gg a , n1w _ a •, i , ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS ORDINANCE t cc_ SALT LAKE CITY SUSTAINABILITY DEPARTMENT lU1i4414 PRESENTATION AGENDA BACKGROUND + CONTEXT An 1 An introduction to electric vehicle readiness and current SLC policy 02 LOCAL BENEFITS How EV readiness provides economic benefits and improves Salt Lake City's air quality 0 PROPOSED REQUIREMENTS 3 An overview of the proposed ordinance additions and property types impacted a What does electric vehicle readiness mean? Three levels 11 I ctric vehicle supplyequipment" infrastructure are oftenregulated ici l zoning ordinances'. CMMMMIMM INSTALLEDCMMMMMMMM EVSE What does electric vehicle readiness mean? , Transformer �S� Utility Distribution Network Utility Panel CMMMMMMM Installed eI uric I panel capacity with a dedicatedbranch circuit and a continuous c from I to the future EV parkingspace. , . What does electric vehicle readiness mean? Charging Outlet Transformer at Parking Space 191 Utility Distribution Network Utility Panel MEMEMEME= Installed eI ctric I panel capacity and raceway it conduit t terminate in Junctionr It charging tl t. , . ('t I IS, What does electric vehicle readiness mean? Charging Outlet Transformer at Parking Space Utility Distribution Network Utility Panel EV Charger MENOMONEE= 1 ' Installed I 2 charging station. What does electric vehicle readiness mean? Charging Outlet Transformer 1 at Parking Space 1 1 1 � 1 1 1 1 1 i i 1 RI 1 t t 1 1 1 1 Utility Distribution Network Utility Panel EV Charger r �' � 1 $ 1 s t i � � • �� ' t � . . � . � ' ' � ' � 1 • • � . • �1. �. �Y ��. d M � =ate >� b. �' 1 »i« � • a ti. �' ;> • • ii i � i i/ iI II iu II I/ II r eo�- �n r o- " ay `' 107 ` b `fix i.i' r� Market a �?rtti i44i t; MARKET SIZE & DEMAND z � SALT LAKE CITY 11043 EVS registered in 2020 ..... ..... 250 200 ISO 100 SO 0 8zi01 84102 84108 84104 84105 84108 84111 84112 84115 Data Source: Utah State Tax Commission Market a �?rtti i44i t; MARKET SIZE & DEMAND z � UTAH 61947 EVS as of Q2 2020 (icy thousands) 7 5 5 4 2 2 0 2012 2012 2014 2015 2015 2017 2018 2010 2020 Data Source: Utah State Tax Commission New vs ,, Retrofit Co sts �= AN ECONOMIC COMPARISON A study of EV-ready construction costs shows that installing infrastructure during the new construction phase is the most cost-efficient. EMM M= $610 Balance of Circuit $1 ,210 $180 Raceway $1 ,070 $70 Permitting & Inspection $650 $60 Construction Management $620 $920 Total (per space) $3,550 Doty Source"SWEEP(South west Energy Efficiency Project), Trucking the Code on EV-Ready Building Codes,"2018, Charg'ing a �?rtti i44i t; PEACE - BASED CHARGING DEMANDS z � 4 000 US, drivers assessed Ln U1 2 Ili ® None ,Away 0 s l800 U,S, drivers assessed u ii None ®Away Data Source:Idaho Notional Loboratoryr 2015. Charg'ing a �?rtti i44i t; PEACE - BASED CHARGING DEMANDS z � 3% Co 4qT o('fig C pia t Nave ®Away ® Nome ®Work ® Other Subgroups 4% with access to workplace charging /""1t�. i Name ® Away ® Nome ®Work ® Other Data Source:Idaho Notional Loboratoryr 2015. Econom 'lc Benefits PREPARING FOR TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION Future-Proof Development 0 � w Building code standards are moving quickly to keep up with EV technology. Oil Oil L } Avoidtl Retrofits I We W 1 - - 1 . Retrofits cons are significantly higher than new construction for EV-ready. Market Competitiveness Nun w�M Properties without installed EV-ready oil infrastructure will become less viable to specific residents that require hone- based charging options. I AML 1 ! 1 ! i ` 1 4 Proposed Ordinance EV READINESS LANGUAGE Each multifamily use shall provide a minimum of 20% electric vehicle ready parking spaces of total required parking on-site. ✓ EV-ready parking spaces shall have electrical conduit and sufficient electrical capacity for future use of 200 volt charging station. ✓ Proposed EV-ready parking spaces shall be submitted on site plans. ✓ For new multi-family uses, a minimum of 20% of ADA spaces shall be constructed as EV-ready. ! • • ! r i ! r • a � • i ! • i •! ' ! '• ! it ! �> OOP� � E 00 Tii�r 00 1 1 1 4e its poll ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor •t 7i t _ CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL z5 z,r,z7.", 9 sz" s r; Date Received: 01/17 f 2023 Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date Sent to Council: 01/17/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: January 13, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Debbie Lyons, Sustainability Director SUBJECT: Council-Requested Revision;Electric Vehicle Readiness Off-Street Parking Stalls Amendment STAFF CONTACTS: Peter Nelson Sustainable Business Program Manager Pctcr.1,c1son(q>1cgo -,com 1 801-535-6477 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the ordinance amending and updating Sections of the Salt Lake City Code for Off-Street Parking, 21A.44.040, relating to electric vehicle readiness parking stall requirements, as revised BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This transmittal is supplementary to the ordinance proposal Electric Vehicle Readiness Off-Street Parking Stalls Amendment discussed during the City Council work session on Tuesday, January 3rd, 2023.At that work session,Council members noted that it is not uncommon for multifamily development projects to construct more off-street parking stalls than are required, and that it is the Council's desire that the proposed ordinance's EV-Ready threshold of 2o% apply to the number of parking stalls ultimately provided, rather than those that are merely required.Attached to this transmittal is revised ordinance language— specifically language found on lines 42-43 of the Legislative Version—which reflect this change to the proposed ordinance. P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE 2 No. of 2023 3 4 (Ordinance amending Section 21A.44.040 of the Salt Lake City Code 5 pertaining to EV-readiness for required off street parking) 6 7 WHEREAS,Chapter 21A.44 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: Off Street Parking,Mobility, 8 and Loading) sets forth minimum and maximum requirements for off-street parking spaces for 9 different zoning districts within Salt Lake City; and 10 WHEREAS, Section 21A.44.040(B) of the Salt Lake City Code currently mandates the 11 inclusion of one(1)parking spaces dedicated to electric vehicles and equipped with an electric vehicle 12 (EV") charging station for every twenty-five (25) parking spaces for all multi-family use buildings 13 (the "EV Parking Ordinance"); and 14 WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation ("City") is committed to carbon emissions 15 reduction, and pursuant to Resolution No. 33 of 2016, a joint resolution of the Slat Lake City 16 Council and Mayor establishing renewable energy and carbon emissions reduction goals for Salt 17 Lake City, adopted a goal of reducing carbon emissions by 50%by 2030; and 18 WHEREAS, on December 8th, 2020 the City Council and the Mayor adopted Resolution 19 No. 45 of 2020, a joint resolution of Salt Lake City Council and Mayor establishing electrified 20 transportation goals for Salt Lake City, establishing a commitment to support the development of 21 electric vehicle charging infrastructure,plus other programs, policies, and projects that encourage 22 the purchase and use of electric vehicles by local residents; and 23 WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council finds that updates to the EV Parking Ordinance are 24 necessary to require new multi-family use developments or major reconstruction projects of multi- 25 family buildings to include electric vehicle readiness infrastructure to support electric vehicle use for 26 Salt Lake City residents in advancement of the City's carbon emissions reduction goals. LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 27 NOW, THEREFORE,be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 28 SECTION 1. Amending Section 21A.44.040. Section 21A.44.040(B) of the Salt Lake City 29 Code shall be, and hereby is, amended to read as follows: 30 21A.44.040: REQUIRED OFF STREET PARKING: 31 B. Electric Vehicle Parking: 32 1. Each multi-family use shall provide a minimum of one (1) parking space dedicated to electric 33 vehicles for every twenty-five (25) parking spaces provided on-site. Electric vehicle parking spaces 34 shall count toward the minimum required number of parking spaces. The electric vehicle parking 35 space shall be: 36 Via. Located in the same lot as the principal use; 37 fib. Located as close to a primary entrance of the principal building as possible; 38 Vic. Signed in a clear and conspicuous manner, such as special pavement marking or signage, 39 indicating exclusive availability to electric vehicles; and 40 4d. Outfitted with a standard electric vehicle charging station. 41 2. In addition to Electric Vehicle Parking requirements, each multi-family use shall provide a 42 minimum of 20% electric vehicle ready (EV-ready)parking spaces of parking spaces 43 provided on-site. EV-ready parlung spaces are parking spaces that are equipped with electrical 44 conduit and sufficient electrical capacity for the future use of a minimum 200-volt electric vehicle 45 charging station. The location of proposed EV-ready parking spaces shall be indicated on submitted 46 site plans. 47 a. EV-ready parking requirements shall count toward the minimum required and maximum 48 allowed number of parking spaces. LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 49 b. Parking areas with four or fewer vehicle parking spaces are not required to identify an EV- 50 ready parking space. 51 c. Where no minimum parkin is s required, the 20% EV-ready parking space requirement will 52 be based on provided parking. 53 d. For new multi-family uses, a minimum of 20% of required Accessible(ADA)parking 54 spaces shall be constructed as EV-ready. 55 e. Electric vehicle parking spaces provided in accordance with Subsection B.1 that exceed 56 the minimum number of required spaces established in that subsection shall count towards the 57 required number of EV-ready parking spaces required in this Subsection B.2. 58 SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first 59 publication. 60 61 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of , 2023. 62 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 63 64 65 CHAIRPERSON 66 ATTEST: 67 68 69 CITY RECORDER 70 71 72 Transmitted to Mayor on 73 Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. 74 75 76 77 MAYOR 78 79 80 CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM 81 (SEAL) Salt Lake City Attorney's Office 82 83 Date: 84 Bill No. of 2023 85 Published: 86 Sara Montoya, Senior City Attorney 87 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2023 (Ordinance amending Section 21A.44.040 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to EV-readiness for required off street parking) WHEREAS,Chapter21A.44 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: Off Street Parking,Mobility, and Loading) sets forth minimum and maximum requirements for off-street parking spaces for different zoning districts within Salt Lake City; and WHEREAS, Section 21A.44.040(B) of the Salt Lake City Code currently mandates the inclusion of one (1)parking spaces dedicated to electric vehicles and equipped with an electric vehicle ("EV") charging station for every twenty-five(25) parking spaces for all multi-family use buildings (the"EV Parking Ordinance"); and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation ("City") is committed to carbon emissions reduction, and pursuant to Resolution No. 33 of 2016, a joint resolution of the Salt Lake City Council and Mayor establishing renewable energy and carbon emissions reduction goals for Salt Lake City, adopted a goal of reducing carbon emissions by 50%by 2030; and WHEREAS,on December 8th, 2020 the City Council and the Mayor adopted Resolution No. 45 of 2020, a joint resolution of Salt Lake City Council and Mayor establishing electrified transportation goals for Salt Lake City, establishing a commitment to support the development of electric vehicle charging infrastructure, plus other programs, policies, and projects that encourage the purchase and use of electric vehicles by local residents; and WHEREAS,the Salt Lake City Council finds that updates to the EV Parking Ordinance are necessary to require new multi-family use developments or major reconstruction projects of multi- family buildings to include electric vehicle readiness infrastructure to support electric vehicle use for Salt Lake City residents in advancement of the City's carbon emissions reduction goals. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1.Amending Section 21A.44.040. Section 2 1 A.44.040(B) of the Salt Lake City Code shall be, and hereby is, amended to read as follows: 21A.44.040: REQUIRED OFF STREET PARKING: B. Electric Vehicle Parking: 1. Each multi-family use shall provide a minimum of one(1)parking space dedicated to electric vehicles for every twenty-five (25)parking spaces provided on-site. Electric vehicle parking spaces shall count toward the minimum required number of parking spaces. The electric vehicle parking space shall be: a. Located in the same lot as the principal use; b. Located as close to a primary entrance of the principal building as possible; c. Signed in a clear and conspicuous manner, such as special pavement marking or signage, indicating exclusive availability to electric vehicles; and d. Outfitted with a standard electric vehicle charging station. 2. In addition to Electric Vehicle Parking requirements, each multi-family use shall provide a minimum of 20% electric vehicle ready(EV-ready)parking spaces of parking spaces provided on- site. EV-ready parking spaces are parking spaces that are equipped with electrical conduit and sufficient electrical capacity for the future use of a minimum 200-volt electric vehicle charging station. The location of proposed EV-ready parking spaces shall be indicated on submitted site plans. a. EV-ready parking requirements shall count toward the minimum required and maximum allowed number of parking spaces. b. Parking areas with four or fewer vehicle parking spaces are not required to identify an EV- ready parking space. c. Where no minimum parking is required, the 20%EV-ready parking space requirement will be based on provided parking. d. For new multi-family uses, a minimum of 20% of required Accessible (ADA)parking spaces shall be constructed as EV-ready. e. Electric vehicle parking spaces provided in accordance with Subsection B.1 that exceed the minimum number of required spaces established in that subsection shall count towards the required number of EV-ready parking spaces required in this Subsection B.2. 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 12023. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM (SEAL) Salt Lake City Attorney's Office Date: January 13, 2023 Bill No. of 2023 Published: I �- a4- -' Sara Montoya,Senior C�'y Attorney ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL Date Received: 12/06/2022 Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date Sent to Council: 12/06/2022 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: December 6, 2022 Dan Dugan, Chair FROM: Debbie Lyons, Sustainabitity Director SUBJECT: Electric Vehicle Readiness Off-Street Parking Stalls Amendment STAFF CONTACTS: Peter Nelson Sustainable Business Program Manager Peter.Nelson@slcgov.com ( 801-535-6477 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the ordinance amending and updating Sections of the Salt Lake City Code for Off-Street Parking, 21A.44.040, relating to electric vehicle readiness parking stall requirements BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Mayor Erin Mendenhall and the Salt Lake City Sustainability Department propose to amend the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection Chapter 21A.44.040.B.2 (Zoning: Off Street Parking, Mobility and Loading; Required Off Street Parking; Electric Vehicle Parking)to require properties with a multi-family use to implement electric vehicle (EV) readiness infrastructure for 20% of required parking spaces, at the time of new construction or major reconstruction. Policy background In November 2016,the City Council and Mayor adopted a Joint Resolution establishing renewable energy and carbon emissions reduction goals for Salt Lake City. Included in the resolution is a community carbon emissions reduction goal of 8o%by 2040,with an interim goal of 50%reduction in greenhouse gases by 2030. Reductions in emissions from energy use and transportation are specifically cited in the resolution,which includes on-road emissions from private vehicles. P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r In May 2017,the Salt Lake City Council approved an ordinance amendment requiring one EV parking space, equipped with an EV charging station,for every 25 required parking spaces for all multi-family use properties. On December 81h, 2020, City Council and Mayor Mendenhall adopted the joint Electrified Transportation Resolution, establishing a commitment to incorporate and promote clean energy transportation technologies as an important solution to reduce carbon emissions and pollutants that impact air quality.The proposed ordinance aligns directly with the resolution by expanding greater adoption of electric vehicle technology, expanding EV charging infrastructure, accelerating EV adoption rates, and supporting the inclusive development of clean transportation options for community members. In April 2022, Mayor Mendenhall signed a petition initiation request(PLNPCM2022- 00374) for the Sustainability Department to begin the process of amending the zoning ordinance to add requirements that a minimum of 20% of on-site parking spaces in new multifamily construction projects be built electric vehicle-ready(EV-ready). In July 2022,the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding PLNPCM2022-00374 and reviewed the corresponding staff report from the Sustainability Department.At the hearing,the Planning Commission unanimously passed a motion to forward a recommendation to the City Council to approve the request to amend the zoning ordinance for Electric Vehicle Readiness (PLNPCM2o22-00374)• Electric Vehicles and Air Quality The on-road transportation sector accounts for nearly 20% of greenhouse gas emissions in Salt Lake City, contributing to air pollution and climate change and threatening the health and wellbeing of residents and visitors of Salt Lake City. Petroleum-fueled on-road transportation contributes significantly to the air pollution in the Wasatch Front airshed through criteria pollutants emissions. Electric vehicles present a net benefit to the community in terms of air quality improvements. Compared to a gasoline vehicle, electric vehicles offer the following percent reduction in emissions (estimated): 99.7%for volatile organic compounds(VOCs); 76.1%for NOx; 49.3%for PM1o; 64.8%for PM2.5; 95.7%for SO,; 99.8%for CO; and 1.8%for GHG(greenhouse gases). EV readiness infrastructure supports the increased adoption of EVs by multi-family tenants,which in turn will lead to reduction in local air quality pollutants,helping Salt Lake City maintain its attainment status for compliance with federal health-based standards for fine particulate matter and ozone. Equitable Access to Charging Opportunities Salt Lake City currently incentivizes electric vehicles by providing accessible public charging at 20 dual-port public EV charging stations at 15 sites within Salt Lake City,with more located at the airport.The charging stations,which are owned and operated by the City, are currently free to use for the posted time limit. Most of these stations were installed in 2017 and help serve short-term charging needs, accessibly and conveniently, across the city. Since the installation of these stations and the adoption of the first EV charging station ordinance requirement in Salt Lake City in 2017, EV registrations have increased statewide by 152%, according to a data request from the Utah State Tax Commission.As of quarter 3 of 2022, P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r electric vehicles represent 5.7%of all vehicle purchases statewide for the year.As of February 2022, 1,665 EVs were registered in Salt Lake City across all applicable zip codes. Furthermore, electric vehicle ownership continues to increase. Many car manufacturers have publicized their goals of making only all-electric vehicles over the next decade. For example, General Motors has committed to only producing all-electric vehicles by 2035. With the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, ownership of these vehicles is expected to grow dramatically over the next decade and beyond. The Inflation Reduction Act offers expanded $7,500 tax credits, available at the point-of-sale, for certain new electric vehicles, as well as up to a $4,000 tax credit for the purchase of a used EV. These trends make it all the more important that Salt Lake City's infrastructure is ready to serve residents across the City, including those who rent, giving them the ability to charge their vehicles. This is important because EV charging most commonly takes places at home. In a study by the Idaho National Laboratory(2015 study and press release), it was found that approximately 85% of charging events take place at home; with access to workplace charging,the at-home charging events accounted for approximately 61%on average. The proposed EV readiness ordinance helps to create home-based charging opportunities to residents that live in multi-family dwellings,where EV charging is often less accessible.Adoption of an EV-ready requirement for new construction ensures lower EV charging installation costs in the future, as well as provides residents with increased certainty that charging opportunities will be available when the need arises. The proposed EV readiness ordinance applies to any property with a multi-family use,including mixed-use developments, at the time of new construction or major reconstruction.Twenty percent(20%) of required or provided parking spaces shall be constructed as electric vehicle ready(EV-ready). EV-ready infrastructure includes installed electrical panel capacity and raceway with conduit to terminate in a junction box or 208-or 240-volt charging outlet. The ordinance does not require an installed charging station to comply with regulations; the intention of the proposed ordinance is to prepare parking spaces for the future use of a Level 2 EV charging station. P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r Public Process The following timeline lists key events in the public process: Meetings with internal City stakeholders 2019-2020 Posted on Departmental project webpage Sept 2020—Present Public Comment Period 1 Oct 2020 —January 2021 Salt Lake City Sustainability Public EV Presentation October 2020 Presentation to Utah Commercial Real Estate(UCRE)working group December 2020 Presented at Utah Commercial Real Estate Task Force EV Workshop February 2021 Public Comment Period 2 June 2021—August 2021 Public Comment Period 3 April 2022 —June 2022 Presentation to the Salt Lake City Planning Commission July 2022 P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. ORDINANCE 2. COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM PROJECT PAGE FORM SUBMISSION 3. LETTER RECEIVED FROM SWEEP,UTAH CLEAN ENERGY,AND WRA 4. LETTER RECEIVED FROM TESLA 5. EMAIL MESSAGES SENT TO SUSTAINABILITY DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r ATTACHMENT 1 Ordinance—Red Lined Ordinance—Final P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE 2 No. of 2022 3 4 (Ordinance amending Section 21A.44.040 of the Salt Lake City Code 5 pertaining to EV-readiness for required off street parking) 6 7 WHEREAS,Chapter 21A.44 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: Off Street Parking,Mobility, 8 and Loading) sets forth minimum and maximum requirements for off-street parking spaces for 9 different zoning districts within Salt Lake City; and 10 WHEREAS, Section 21A.44.040(B) of the Salt Lake City Code currently mandates the 11 inclusion of one(1)parking spaces dedicated to electric vehicles and equipped with an electric vehicle 12 (EV") charging station for every twenty-five (25) parking spaces for all multi-family use buildings 13 (the "EV Parking Ordinance"); and 14 WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation ("City") is committed to carbon emissions 15 reduction, and pursuant to Resolution No. 33 of 2016, a joint resolution of the Salt Lake City 16 Council and Mayor establishing renewable energy and carbon emissions reduction goals for Salt 17 Lake City, adopted a goal of reducing carbon emissions by 50%by 2030; and 18 WHEREAS, on December 8th, 2020 the City Council and the Mayor adopted Resolution 19 No. 45 of 2020, a joint resolution of Salt Lake City Council and Mayor establishing electrified 20 transportation goals for Salt Lake City, establishing a commitment to support the development of 21 electric vehicle charging infrastructure,plus other programs, policies, and projects that encourage 22 the purchase and use of electric vehicles by local residents; and 23 WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council finds that updates to the EV Parking Ordinance are 24 necessary to require new multi-family use developments or major reconstruction projects of multi- 25 family buildings to include electric vehicle readiness infrastructure to support electric vehicle use for 26 Salt Lake City residents in advancement of the City's carbon emissions reduction goals. LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 27 NOW, THEREFORE,be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 28 SECTION 1. Amending Section 21A.44.040. Section 21A.44.040(B) of the Salt Lake City 29 Code shall be, and hereby is, amended to read as follows: 30 21A.44.040: REQUIRED OFF STREET PARKING: 31 B. Electric Vehicle Parking: 32 1. Each multi-family use shall provide a minimum of one (1) parking space dedicated to electric 33 vehicles for every twenty-five (25) parking spaces provided on-site. Electric vehicle parking spaces 34 shall count toward the minimum required number of parking spaces. The electric vehicle parking 35 space shall be: 36 Via. Located in the same lot as the principal use; 37 fib. Located as close to a primary entrance of the principal building as possible; 38 Vic. Signed in a clear and conspicuous manner, such as special pavement marking or signage, 39 indicating exclusive availability to electric vehicles; and 40 4d. Outfitted with a standard electric vehicle charging station. 41 2. In addition to Electric Vehicle Parking requirements, each multi-family use shall provide a 42 minimum of 20% electric vehicle ready (EV-ready) parking spaces of required parking spaces 43 provided on-site. EV-ready parking spaces are parking spaces that are equipped with electrical 44 conduit and sufficient electrical capacity for the future use of a minimum 200-volt electric vehicle 45 charging station. The location of proposed EV-ready parking spaces shall be indicated on submitted 46 site plans. 47 a. EV-ready parking requirements shall count toward the minimum required and maximum 48 allowed number of parking spaces. LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 49 b. Parking areas with four or fewer vehicle parking spaces are not required to identify an EV- 50 ready parking space. 51 c. Where no minimum parkin is s required, the 20% EV-ready parking space requirement will 52 be based on provided parking. 53 d. For new multi-family uses, a minimum of 20% of required Accessible(ADA)parking 54 spaces shall be constructed as EV-ready. 55 e. Electric vehicle parking spaces provided in accordance with Subsection B.1 that exceed 56 the minimum number of required spaces established in that subsection shall count towards the 57 required number of EV-ready parking spaces required in this Subsection B.2. 58 SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first 59 publication. 60 61 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this_day of , 2022. 62 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 63 64 65 CHAIRPERSON 66 ATTEST: 67 68 69 CITY RECORDER 70 71 72 Transmitted to Mayor on 73 Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. 74 75 76 77 MAYOR 78 79 80 CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM 81 (SEAL) Salt Lake City Attorney's Office 82 83 Date: 84 Bill No. of 2022 85 Published: 86 Sara Montoya, Senior City Attorney 87 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2022 (Ordinance amending Section 21A.44.040 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to EV-readiness for required off street parking) WHEREAS,Chapter 21A.44 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: Off Street Parking,Mobility, and Loading) sets forth minimum and maximum requirements for off-street parking spaces for different zoning districts within Salt Lake City; and WHEREAS, Section 21A.44.040(B) of the Salt Lake City Code currently mandates the inclusion of one(1)parking spaces dedicated to electric vehicles and equipped with an electric vehicle (EV") charging station for every twenty-five (25) parking spaces for all multi-family use buildings (the "EV Parking Ordinance"); and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation ("City") is committed to carbon emissions reduction, and pursuant to Resolution No. 33 of 2016, a joint resolution of the Salt Lake City Council and Mayor establishing renewable energy and carbon emissions reduction goals for Salt Lake City, adopted a goal of reducing carbon emissions by 50%by 2030; and WHEREAS, on December 81h, 2020 the City Council and the Mayor adopted Resolution No. 45 of 2020, a joint resolution of Salt Lake City Council and Mayor establishing electrified transportation goals for Salt Lake City, establishing a commitment to support the development of electric vehicle charging infrastructure, plus other programs, policies, and projects that encourage the purchase and use of electric vehicles by local residents; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council finds that updates to the EV Parking Ordinance are necessary to require new multi-family use developments or major reconstruction projects of multi- family buildings to include electric vehicle readiness infrastructure to support electric vehicle use for Salt Lake City residents in advancement of the City's carbon emissions reduction goals. NOW, THEREFORE,be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Amending Section 21A.44.040. Section 21A.44.040(B) of the Salt Lake City Code shall be, and hereby is, amended to read as follows: 21A.44.040: REQUIRED OFF STREET PARKING: B. Electric Vehicle Parking: 1. Each multi-family use shall provide a minimum of one (1) parking space dedicated to electric vehicles for every twenty-five (25) parking spaces provided on-site. Electric vehicle parking spaces shall count toward the minimum required number of parking spaces. The electric vehicle parking space shall be: a. Located in the same lot as the principal use; b. Located as close to a primary entrance of the principal building as possible; c. Signed in a clear and conspicuous manner, such as special pavement marking or signage, indicating exclusive availability to electric vehicles; and d. Outfitted with a standard electric vehicle charging station. 2. In addition to Electric Vehicle Parking requirements, each multi-family use shall provide a minimum of 20% electric vehicle ready (EV-ready)parking spaces of required parking spaces provided on-site. EV-ready parking spaces are parking spaces that are equipped with electrical conduit and sufficient electrical capacity for the future use of a minimum 200-volt electric vehicle charging station. The location of proposed EV-ready parking spaces shall be indicated on submitted site plans. a. EV-ready parking requirements shall count toward the minimum required and maximum allowed number of parking spaces. b. Parking areas with four or fewer vehicle parking spaces are not required to identify an EV- ready parking space. c. Where no minimum parking is required, the 20% EV-ready parking space requirement will be based on provided parking. d. For new multi-family uses, a minimum of 20% of required Accessible(ADA)parking spaces shall be constructed as EV-ready. e. Electric vehicle parking spaces provided in accordance with Subsection B.1 that exceed the minimum number of required spaces established in that subsection shall count towards the required number of EV-ready parking spaces required in this Subsection B.2. 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: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM (SEAL) Salt Lake City Attorney's Office Date: December 6, 2022 Bill No. of 2022 Published: Sara Montoya, Senior CiK Attorney ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r ATTACHMENT 2 COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM PROJECT PAGE FORM SUBMISSION P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 Feedback,Comments,and Questions Date 1 This ordinance is a bit pre mature,especially for multi family projects. Most apartment owners cannot 9/23/2020 afford an electric vehicle and the EV stations installed don't get used. While I like the concept,the 21:05 ordinance will increase costs for housing at a time when we need to make housing more affordable. 2 1 certainly appreciate the need to move things in a clean energy direction,however,I cannot support 1/6/2021 pushing such a high percentage of required EV stalls.Electric vehicles are not a fully viable means of 21:25 transportation at this point,and won't be for some time. Until owning an electric vehicle makes practical and economic sense,20%of the population will not be driving these types of vehicles. Implementing reasonable EV station requirements,providing incentives for developers that go beyond the requirements,and/or stepping up requirements over time,all prove that the city is thoughtful on both sides of the situation. It is important to stay ahead of demand,however,having managed properties with EV stations,we are very far from a 20%use of these stations. 3 We appreciate the City working to push forward sustainability ordinances,as we all are stewards of our 1/7/2021 cities. However,requiring 20%of residential parking to cater to electric vehicles appears quite high in 19:26 relation to the actual users. We do live in an area where ownership of an electric vehicle is a luxury. In addition to being economically prohibitive,residents live in Utah in order to enjoy a state full of natural wonders,in which the current electric vehicle options are not viable. We recognize that this need is forthcoming,however,recommend an incentive program,rather than a%requirement,be initiated. If an EV station requirement ordinance is inevitable,we suggest that the%is substantially reduced and applied to only specific types/sizes of multi-family,matching the actual needs of the potential residents/general public. These requirements could then step as demand increases. 4 Hello,I have a question about this ordinance. Is this only applicable to new build? Or does it apply to 1/22/2021 existing multi-family dwellings? I live in an existing building and would love to push our HOA to install 16:03 charging stations,two of us own electric vehicles. ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r ATTACHMENT 3 LETTER FROM SWEEP,UTAH CLEAN ENERGY,AND WRA P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 Williams, Shannon From: Matt Frommer <mfrommer@swenergy.org> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 12:04 PM To: Williams, Shannon Cc: aaron.kressig@westernresources.org;Josh Craft;Travis Madsen Subject: (EXTERNAL) Feedback on Electric Vehicle Readiness Ordinance Attachments: SLC EV Infrastructure Building Codes Letter.docx Hi Shannon, Please find our attached support letter for Salt Lake City's proposed EV Readiness Ordinance.As you'll see, our letter includes 3 recommendations to improve the proposed Ordinance: 1. Clarify the 'EV-Capable parking space' and 'EV-Ready parking space' definitions and infrastructure specifications. 2. Add EV infrastructure requirements for single-family residential and commercial buildings. 3. Make sure the EV infrastructure requirements apply to both new and renovated buildings. I'd suggest reviewing SWEEP's EV Infrastructure Building Codes Adoption Toolkit for more information on infrastructure costs and sample code language. Let us know if you have any questions. Thanks and have a good weekend! Matt Matt Frommer Senior Transportation Associate Southwest Energy Efficiency Project(SWEEP) M: 908-432-1556 mfrommer@swener .or Follow us at: @SouthwestEE Sign for SWEEP news 1 Abkd&!:�� UU���� WESTERN ~� "�=" " �������� �� �� U�8�D- RESOURCE ��U ������ ----- -- - SOUTHWEST ENERGY � ��� ������������ EFFICIENCY PROJECT �~"�=~�^�� � November 20, 2O2O Subject:Support the Adoption of Salt Lake City's Proposed Electric Vehicle Readiness Ordinance Dear Salt Lake City Sustainabi|ityDepartment, The signatories of this letter submit the following comments for consideration by the Salt Lake City Sustainability Department in the development of the City's Electric Vehicle Readiness Ordinance. We strongly support the City'o proposed Ordinance, which will lower critical barriers to EVadoption by reducing the cost of installing EV charging stations. We also believe the Ordinance could be clarified, strengthened,and expanded to better align with the charging needs of Salt Lake City residents and businesses.To improve the proposed Ordinance,the City should: 1. Clarify the'EV-Capable parking space'and 'EV-Ready parking space'definitions and infrastructure specifications. Thepropoyed0rdinanceca||sfnr2U%nfnewparkin8spacestnbe "e|ectricvehic|eready(EV'ready)", butthendescribesEV'readyparkin0spacestuinc|ude"e|ectrica| conduitandsuffidente|ectrica| capacity for the future use of a minimum 200V EV charging station".This definition better resembles the language for"EV-Capable parking spaces"from the Sustainability Department's EV Readiness Ordinance ple��UlonOctober14, 2020.TheDepartmentshou|ddarifvtheserequirementsandaddthe following technical specifications,which were vetted by the ICC as part of the 2021 IECC code development process and have been adopted by a number of municipalities across the country: EV Capable Space. Electrical panel capacity and space to support a minimum 40-ampere, 208/348'vo8bronchcirxu/t/breochEVporkingspoce\ ondthe/n»tu8otionufnncewmys, both underground and surface mounted, tosupport theEV3E EtyReady Space.A designated parking space which is provided with one 40'ompene, J08/Z40' vu/tdedicotedbnonchcirruitforEKSEscnvidngElectricVch/ckes. Thecircu/tsho8tenn/note/no suitable termination point such usureceptacle,junction box, oronEVSE, and be located/nclose proximity to the proposed location of the EY parking spaces. VVereoumnmendmaintainin0theEV'Readyparkin0requirements, whichindudesafu|| Z40V/40Acircuit terminating in a receptacle,junction box, or EV charging station.A fully operational receptacle will allow residents to quickly and easily charge their EVs with an affordable and portable EV charging cable,which are typically included in the purchase or lease of a new EV. 2. Add EV infrastructure requirements for single-family residential and commercial buildings. The City's justification for EV infrastructure requirements in multifamily buildings is well-reasoned and the same logic should be extended to single-family residential and commercial buildings.The Sustainability Department's October 14th presentation includes data showing that well over 80%of EV charging takes place in the home with most of the remaining charging at the workplace. Like charger installations in multifamily buildings,the cost to install EV infrastructure at single-family homes and commercial buildings is significantly more expensive to complete during a stand-alone retrofit versus new construction (See SWEEP's 2020 EV Infrastructure Building Codes Adoption Toolkit for most information on costs.) EV-Ready infrastructure in commercial buildings drastically improves charging access, especially for residents of existing multifamily residential buildings, where the installation of a home-charger is often cost-prohibitive or logistically unfeasible.According to the U.S. DOE's Workplace Char�in Challenge, employees are six times more likely to drive an EV if their workplace offers EV charging.To better support residential and commercial EV adoption,the Ordinance should include the following requirements: • One-and two-family dwellings: At least one EV-Ready parking space per dwelling unit. • Commercial buildings(Groups A, B, E, I, M,S-2): Provide a minimum of 20% EV-ready parking spaces.* The City might also consider a DC Fast-charger provision to allow developers to substitute up to five Level 2 charging spaces with one DC fast-charging space (minimum 20kW). 3. EV infrastructure requirements must apply to both new and renovated buildings. Governments and automakers around the world have signaled a total market transformation to electric transportation over the next 2-3 decades and we're going to need millions of new plugs in our homes and businesses to charge all these new EVs. EV infrastructure requirements for new buildings is an important first step, but according to a recent study from UC-Berkeley,just 6%of all homes in the U.S. were built in the last 10 years. As a result, the Sustainability Department should consider lowering the threshold for EV infrastructure requirements.The City and County of Denver applies their EV infrastructure requirements to 'Level 3 Alterations', "where the work area exceeds 50 percent of the original building area or more than 10 parking spaces are substantially modified are subject to the EV infrastructure requirements listed above." In conclusion,we applaud Salt Lake City for advancing policies that support greater EV adoption and we recommend extending these important EV infrastructure requirements to new and renovated residential and commercial buildings.Thank you very much for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Matt Frommer Senior Transportation Associate Southwest Energy Efficiency Project mfrommer@swener y.org Aaron Kressig Transportation Electrification Manager Western Resource Advocates Aaron.kressi @westernresources.org Josh Craft Government Relations Manager Utah Clean Energy josh@utahcleanene2r org ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r ATTACHMENT 4 LETTER FROM TESLA P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 Williams, Shannon From: Noelani Derrickson <nderrickson@tesla.com> Sent: Monday, January 25, 2021 10:53 AM To: Council Comments; Williams, Shannon Cc: Craig Hulse; Francesca Wahl Subject: (EXTERNAL) Salt Lake City EV Ready Ordinance -Tesla Letter of Support Attachments: Salt Lake City EV Ready Ordinance -Tesla Letter of Support 1.25.pdf Salt Lake City Council, Please find attached a letter of support from Tesla on Salt Lake City's proposed Electric Vehicle Ready Parking ordinance for multi-family units. Passage of the proposed ordinance is an important step in supporting higher levels of electric vehicles. Thank you, Noelani Derrickson I Public Policy and Business Development 3500 Deer Creek Rd, Palo Alto, CA 94304 m. (808) 220-8990 1 nderrickson@tesla.com 1 January 25, 2021 Salt Lake City Council 451 South State Street, Room 304 Salt Lake City, LIT 84111 council.comments{c slcgov.com RE: Salt Lake City EV Readiness Ordinance—21.A.44.050.B.3 Salt Lake City Council, I am writing on behalf of Tesla to express our support for Salt Lake City's proposed electric vehicle (EV) readiness ordinance, which requires that multi-family developments provide a minimum of 20% EV-ready' parking spaces. Tesla's mission is to accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy, and we are proud to be helping Salt Lake City meet our shared goals. As both a manufacturer of EVs and a provider of charging infrastructure for our customers, Tesla brings a unique perspective to the discussion on EV readiness measures for new buildings and construction on existing buildings. Access to EV charging represents one of the more fundamental challenges impairing demand for electric vehicles. Without easy and convenient access to EV charging, drivers will be less inclined to choose an EV over a conventional vehicle. Since most charging occurs at home or at work (80%), ensuring that Level-2 charging is generally available in residential and workplace parking structures provides an additional sense of reliability and convenience for current and future EV drivers. We commend Salt Lake City for its leadership in accelerating transportation electrification and proposing EV-readiness requirements for multifamily buildings. Salt Lake City will join a growing EV-ready is defined by Salt Lake City as meaning a parking space that is designed and constructed to include an electrical panel capacity with a dedicated branch circuit,a continuous raceway from the panel to the future EV parking space,and conduit to terminate in a junction box or 240-volt charging outlet.Available at htt ://www.slcdocs.com/sicareen/Proposed°lQ20EV°1o20Readiness°1a200rdinance`/`20Presentation°Ia20SIides°Io20-`/`200ct`/`2014`/`202020.pdf ® Tesla, Inc. 3500 Deer Creek Road, Palo Alto, CA 94304 p+650 681 5100 f+650 681 5101 list of cities across North America including Atlanta, Chicago, and Vancouver, that are adopting EV readiness requirements at 20% or higher for new parking spaces. Given the important role EV charging infrastructure will play in helping Salt Lake City meet its pollution and emission reduction goals, we urge the adoption of this EV-readiness ordinance. Sincerely, Noelani Derrickson Policy and Business Development Advisor nderrickson{ctesla.com ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r ATTACHMENT 5 COMMENTS EMAILED TO SUSTAINABILITY DIVISION P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r Williams, Shannon From: Dustin Holt Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 9:05 AM To: Williams, Shannon Subject: (EXTERNAL) EV Stall Readiness Ordinance- Ms.Williams, As both a Salt Lake City resident and someone who develops multi-family projects in SLC, let me start by saying I am a huge proponent of SLC, and Electric Vehicles. 1 absolutely support Electric Vehicles and I support the Cities current requirements for projects to provide 1 EV stall per 25 Stalls the project provides (required or not). However, I have concerns about this new proposed ordinance. While it may not seem like a big deal, in a recent 100 unit Multi-Family project,we priced running conduit, upsizing power panels and up-sizing transformers/generators,so that each parking stall could accommodate an EV stall in the future. I can share with you that our findings were in excess of$3,000 per stall just in infrastructure cost.The exact infrastructure this ordinance is proposing. By the time you purchase the EV charging station itself,this could add $6-101K per STALL-depending on which EV station one goes with. Ultimately in a time when affordability is of major concern, having a required burden of an additional $6,000 per unit will force someone looking for a 5-6% return on investment(ROI)to increase rents by$250-300/yr. While this "MIGHT" promote more EV cars/ EV usage in the City, it "WILL" impact affordability. 1 am not in support of this change as a requirement. Thanks. Dustin E. Holt, Co-FounderdbURBAN Communities 801.573.9054 Williams, Shannon From: Peter Corroon P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 9:36 AM To: Williams, Shannon Subject: (EXTERNAL) RE: Reminder: SLC Electric Vehicle Readiness Ordinance Presentation -October 14th Shannon, Thanks for sending this over. I sent a comment previously but thought I should correspond directly. As someone who builds affordable housing, I have never seen anyone use our EV charging stations that we have installed. I have never actually seen any electric vehicles at our buildings. While I am a big fan of the conversion to electric vehicles, I think requiring additional infrastructure for EV charging stations is probably premature for affordable housing projects. I thinkthat they should be exempted from the proposed ordinance.This adds an additional cost when it is already difficult to make these projects pencil financially. Sincerely, Peter Corroon Peal Estate Division Sentry Financial 201 S. Main St. Suite 1400 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 mobile+1.801.597.7471 office +1.801.303.1114 From:Williams,Shannon<Shannon.Williams@slcgov.com> Sent:Wednesday, November 18, 2020 8:21 AM Subject: RE: Reminder:SLC Electric Vehicle Readiness Ordinance Presentation-October 14th Hello all, P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r I am writing to let you know that the presentation materials for Salt Lake City's proposed Electric Vehicle Readiness Ordinance are now available. Thank you all who attended the presentation live. Feel free to viewthe presentation recording or presentation slides at your convenience. There is still an opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed changes! ' Visit www.slcgreen.comlEVready or email directly shannon.williams@slcaov.com to submit your feedback,comments, and questions. If you are interested in Salt Lake City Sustainability presenting at your organization, please email ShannonWilliams at the email above. We are happy to answer questions, collect your feedback, and provide additional information. We hope to hear your feedback on the proposed EV Readiness ordinance. Your voice and ideas areimportant to us and will help create a stronger and more resilient ' ordinance. Find more at www.slccireen.comlEVready- Best regards, Shannon Williams SHANNON WILLIAMS Special Projects Assistant DEPARTMENT of SUSTAINABILITY SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION I From:Williams, Shannon Subject: Reminder: SLC Electric Vehicle Readiness Ordinance Presentation-October 14th P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r Developers and Building Professionals, Reminder:join Salt Lake City's Sustainability Department on Wednesday, October 14 to learn about the City'sproposed Electric Vehicle (EV) Readiness Ordinance. Learn how the ordinance helps to avoid costly retrofits, promotes clean air in Salt Lake City, and meets increasing EV charging demand. The EV Readiness Ordinance is a proposed addition to the City zoning ordinance chapter for Off Street Parking, Mobility, and Loading (ZI .44 and applies to properties with a multifamily use, including mixed-use developments. In this presentation, Sustainability staff will cover: Economic and air quality benefits of the ordinance Proposed ordinance requirements How to provide feedback to Salt Lake City ' Find additional information at www,slcareen.com/EVreadir. Presentation Details We hope to see you next week. The presentation will be made available as a recording for anyone unable toattend the live event. Presentation: Electric Vehicle Readiness Ordinance Date: Wednesday, October 14 from 2 PM - 3 PM Who Should Attend: Developers and stakeholders of multifamily developments How to join the Presentation: 1. Click the WebEx link below to join the presentation at the specified time and date: https:JJsaltlakecity.webex.comJsaltlal<ecitYlonstageJg php?�TID=ec94I96cbf9470d5 eaa53dea6c202480 Password: wgMCvBPY589 2. Choose one of the following audio options: Video Address: 1462090718@saltlakecity.webex.com You can also dial 173.243.2.68 and enter your meeting number. Audio Conference: +1-408-418-9388 (United States Toll) P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r Access code: 146 209 0718 DEPARTMENT of SUSTAINABILITY green SLC SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 801-535.7761 Williams, Shannon From: Paul Smith Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 11:02 AM To: Williams, Shannon Cc: Otto, Rachel Subject: (EXTERNAL) RE: Salt Lake City Proposed EV Readiness Ordinance Shannon— Thank you so much for reaching out. I missed your first email in November, Our position on this issue will be similarto the legislature's position several years ago when a similar thing was tried by Salt Lake City: It is inappropriate for any municipality to mandate this(the market should guide if there is demand andfeasibility for electric charging stations in multi-family) In an affordable housing crisis it is a particularly bad time to mandate anything that increases cost of housing Even if there is political will in the city,I think the legislature might overrule such a policy, should you put it in effect.What is your timeline here? Thanks again for including us as a stakeholder. We really appreciate it and to the extent we could work together to educate owners about environmentally friendly policies and electric vehicle charging station issues,we would love to help. Perhaps through education and persuasion we could effect more change than a doomed ordinance would bring. Paul Smith Executive Director Utah Apartment Association P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r 230 W Towne Ridge Pkwy#175, Sandy, UT 84070Phone: 801-487- 5619 1 www,uaahcl,orq From:Williams,Shannon<Shannon.Williams@slcgov.com> Sent:Wednesday, December 9,2020 8:17 AM To: Paul Smith Subject: RE: Salt Lake City Proposed EV Readiness Ordinance Hi Paul, I'm writing to follow-up on the information I provided below. Do you have any questions about the proposed ordinance?Would you or the organizations you work with wish to provide feedback? Please let me know if you're interested in having further discussion. Best, Shannon Williams SHANNON WILLIAMS Special Projects Assistant DEPARTMENT of SUSTAINABILITY SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION o.801.535.7761 c.541.740.5915 I 4 From:Williams, Shannon Sent:Wednesday, November 18, 2020 8:39 AM To: Paul Smith P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r Subject:Salt Lake City Proposed EV Readiness OrdinanceHi Paul, I'm writing to let you know about a proposed Salt Lake City ordinance change for electric vehicle readiness.The Salt EakeCity Sustainability Department is in the process of collecting feedback from stakeholder groups and would greatly appreciate your review of the proposed language, as well as any comments, questions, and other feedback you have. To provide some context,the EV Readiness Ordinance is a proposed addition to the City zoning ordinance chapter for Off Street Parking, Mobility, and Loading ( LL44-J and applies to properties with a multifamily use, including mixed-use developments. For new applicable developments, 20%of required parking spaces will be required to be built to "electricvehicle ready" specifications, in order to prepare for future installation of charging stations. More information, includingthe ' proposed language, can be found at www.slc reen.com/EVready. We presented the proposed ordinance in October, but I am unsure if you or your partners were able to make the event.The recorded presentation and presentation materials are available online. There are a couple of ways for you to submit feedback.You can provide feedback(anonymously, if preferred) at the project page at www.slcEreen.comJEVready. Alternatively you can email your feedback to me directly, at shannon.williams@slc ov.com. If you feel that a presentation or Q&A session might be useful for your organization, I ammore that willing to present,field questions, and collect feedback.Your input is important to us and will create a more resilient and informed ordinance. Please reach out with any questions.Best regards, Shannon Williams SHANNON WILLIAMS Special Projects Assistant DEPARTMENT of SUSTAINABILITY SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION o.801.535.7761 c.541.740.5915 P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r Williams, Shannon From: Tiffany Morris Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 12:10 PM To: Williams, Shannon Subject: (EXTERNAL)Question about EV Ordinance Hi Shannon, I attended the UCRE workshop yesterday about the proposed EV ordinance. I had to leave the call early, but I was wondering if this ordinance will just apply to Salt Lake City or beyond that? I think it is a great initiative and excited to do my part to help. Thank you, Tiffany Morris Asset Manager Triton Investments Inc. vuw ,apartmentsinuta.com wmw.apartmentsinidaho.con Nelson, Peter August 23, 2021 TO: Salt Lake City Planning Commission FROM: Judi Short, First Vice Chair and Land Use Chair Sugar House Community Council RE: 21A.44.050.13.3 Electric Vehicle Ready Parking Text Amendment We received notification of this proposed Text Amendment, and it was put on our website and in the Sugar House Community Council Newsletter for August. It is also in the newsletter going out tomorrow for September. We have received no written comments, but everyone seems to agree with this concept. If electric vehicles are the wave of the future, we need to make sure that our parking garages are welcoming, and there is no better way to do that than to have charging stations available. We approve of the idea that requiring a minimum of 20%of on-site parking spaces be constructed EV ready, including electrical conduit and sufficient electrical capacity for the future use of a minimum 200- P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor l° r volt electric vehicle charging station. And, that the requirement is in addition to the existing EVSE- related requirement of one electric vehicle charging station per 25 required parking spaces for multi- family properties. The only negative comment came from a developer who complained about the huge expense this would add to the cost of his buildings, but then said it was the right thing to do. Nelson, Peter From: george chapman To: Nelson, Peter Subject: (EXTERNAL) I am against increasing cost of housing for EV charging Date:Thursday, May 19, 2022 3:41:29 PM The text amendment PLNPCM2022-00374 will significantly increase costs of housing in SLC. EV penetration is not close to 5%and Utah is not getting many more EV.The cost almost requires so much money that they buy a home. Don't increase housing costs for a questionable dream of having everyone drive EVs. Nelson, Peter From: george chapman To: Nelson, Peter Subject: (EXTERNAL) Comment against 20% EV infrastructure Date: Monday, June 13, 2022 12:20:15 PM PLNPCM2022-00374 Since EVs in Utah are still around 4%, adding this requirement now will significantly increase the cost of housing without benefits. Maybe in 10 years it may make sense but we can't even buy an EV in Utah (easily). P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL L DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor � ' and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas ng k1ti c/1= Director CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL 7111, ,.,2>,,0 � 116 K SI Date Received: 01/23/2023 Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: 01/23/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: January 17, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community &Neighborhoods SUBJECT: Homeless Resource Center Text Amendment STAFF CONTACT: Nick Norris, nick.norrrs{r�sicLov.coin DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: The City Council adopt the Homeless Resource Center Overlay Text Amendment and consider the modifications recommended by Planning Commission. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The proposed Homeless Resource Center(HRC) Overlay text amendment is in response to the moratorium adopted by the City Council in April of 2022, ordinance 15A of 2022. The moratorium removed HRCs and homeless shelters from the land use tables. Prior to the moratorium, HRCs were allowed as conditional uses in the D-2 (Downtown Support), D-3 (Downtown Warehouse) and CG (General Commercial) zoning districts. To ensure clear guidance on developing a new process, the council provided the following project goals: • The safety and welfare of those experiencing homelessness in the city. • The impact to communities when HRCs and related services are concentrated. • The impact that future HRCs have on city services. • The financial ability of service providers to comply with regulations and still provide necessary shelter and/or services. • Identifying the impacts that are the responsibility of the operator of an HRC and those impacts that should be the responsibility of others. 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 • Avoiding inequities in the locations of HRCs and homeless shelters. In response to the established goals, staff sought a solution with the primary purpose to protect the safety and welfare of those experiencing homelessness within Salt Lake City. The developed proposal is the Homeless Resource Center Overlay Zoning District. The proposed HRC Overlay establishes regulations for future homeless resource centers and homeless shelters. Any future HRC or emergency shelter would require a zoning map amendment to apply the overlay. Once the HRC Overlay is mapped, a new HRC would be a permitted use. In order to address many of the comments and concerns provided by the public and city departments, the request to map the proposed HRC Overlay requires a great deal of information provided by the service provider, impacted city departments and the Director of Homeless Policy and Outreach associated with the Administration. The following information outlines the requirements and the process associated with the proposed HRC Overlay. The service provider is required to provide the listed information upon submittal to apply the HRC Overlay to a specific property. 1. Development plans must meet the requirements of chapter 21A.58 and the following additional detail: a. The plans shall include all labels for the function of each room or space,both indoor and outdoor,proposed for the facility. b. All information that demonstrates compliance with the requirements in 21A.36.350. 2. The maximum total human occupancy the proposed facility is intended to serve. 3. A detailed list of all anticipated supportive services to be offered on the property, including a description of each service, where the service will be on the property and the square footage of the area designated for each service. 4. Any anticipated funding requests made to the city to operate the facility. As part of the application process, staff and applicable city departments are required to compile the following information within 30 days of the application submittal. 1. Information regarding the impact to the police department which may include any data that demonstrates the services to existing homeless resource centers located in the city, the estimated cost of providing service by the police department to existing homeless resource centers and the impact that a new homeless resource center has on the ability of the police department to provide services to other parts of the city. 2. Information regarding the impact to the fire department which may include any data that demonstrates the services to existing homeless resource centers located in the city and the estimated cost of providing service by the fire department to existing homeless resource centers and the impact that a new homeless resource center has on the ability of the fire department to provide services to other parts of the city. 3. Information regarding the number of civil enforcement cases associated with existing homeless resource centers, including the types of complaints, and the estimated impact to civil enforcement workloads and ability to provide services to other parts of the city. 4. Information regarding accessibility of the site and its impact on Public Services. 5. The city provides an updated website to provide any and all city departments to contact for various complaints such as graffiti, encampment clean up, enforcement issues, and any other identified city service that may address impacts on the neighborhood from HRCs. 6. Data provided by the State Homeless Management Information System and the SL Valley Coalition to end homelessness regarding similar uses in Salt Lake County, including the total number of facilities, the total number of people who use the facilities, the number of individuals served with overnight tenancy in each facility, the average percentage of occupancy of the facilities, and the number of nights per year that the other facilities are at capacity to the extent that the information is available. 7. Data regarding the total number of beds available to people experiencing homelessness and the estimated number of people experiencing homelessness to the extent that the information is available. To address many of the impacts and the concerns raised by city departments, as well as the public, staff created specific factors for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider when applying the proposed overlay, which include the following: 1. The anticipated benefits to people experiencing homelessness provided by the facility in the proposed location. 2. The proximity of support services that benefit people who may use the facility and the ability of people to access services from the proposed location. If services are not within walking distance of the proposed facility, consideration of a transportation plan connecting support services to the facility. 3. The ratio of homeless related services provided in Salt Lake City compared to other jurisdictions in Salt Lake County. 4. The anticipated impact to city services, including fire,police, and any other city department that would be involved in providing services to the facility and the impact, if any, to the city providing services in other parts of the city. 5. The proximity to other homeless resource centers. 6. The effectiveness of the security and operations plan provided by the petitioner to address impacts created by the homeless resource center. 7. Equity between different neighborhoods in providing HRCs and other locations of impactful land uses. High impact land uses are those land uses that produce higher levels of pollution than the permitted uses in the underlying zone, and uses that attract crime or produce public nuisances, and land uses that located by a government entity or authorized by a government entity, that is not subject to the land use regulations of the city. 8. Demonstrated compliance with the requirements of 21A.36.350. A request to map the HRC Overlay, the service provider would be required to submit a zoning map amendment application. This process requires a 45-day public input period, and at least one public hearing with the Planning Commission and a public hearing with the City Council. This proposal includes a mandatory timeline associated with scheduling of public hearings with the Planning Commission to streamline the approval process. In addition to the condensed timeline, staff integrated a requirement that the service provider must conduct engagement with individuals experiencing homelessness. Additionally, staff increased the public notification to property owners and tenants from 300' to 450' to ensure that the broader community is informed of future HRC requests. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission provided a positive recommendation on the proposed HRC Overlay with two additional recommendations, which are included in the attached ordinance. The Planning Commission recommends the following language be adopted by the City Council: • Homeless Resource Centers with up to 40 beds be approved through the conditional use process in any zoning district with residential uses. • The City Council expedite the review and approval of a requested HRC Overlay within 90 days of the recommendation of Planning Commission. Regarding the first recommendation, staff has not had the opportunity to research any anticipated impacts related to HRCs with an occupancy of 40 people. This may have unintended consequences that are unknown at this time. PUBLIC PROCESS: Planning Staff conducted a series of stakeholder meetings, in order to gain valuable input on current impacts and a future amendment. The series of stakeholder meetings informed the HRC Overlay proposal. • June 16, 2022—Focus Group: Community Council Chairs • July 5, 2022—Focus Group: Advocates for People Experiencing Homelessness • July 6, 2022—Focus Group: Service Providers • July 25, 2022—Focus Group: Business Community • July and August—Allison Dupler(Homeless Strategies and Outreach Coordinator in Mayor's Office) met with people experiencing homelessness at both HRCs, the Rescue Mission, and Nomad Alliance supply drive. A total of 68 people (54 sheltered, 14 unsheltered) provided input. • Facebook Live Event: November 1, 2022 • Open House: November 10, 2022 • Online Open House: October 15th -November 301h.The required 45-day public input period was noticed on October 14th and ended on November 30th, 2022. Input and comments received during the public process were used to draft the proposal. Input has also been received during the 45-day engagement period. Most input was provided through comments entered through the project website. There were 16 comments submitted online. Three commenters indicated that they support the proposal, four indicated that they do not support the proposal, and eight indicated that they could support the proposal with modifications. These comments are included in the PC staff report for December 14, 2022. Any comments provided after the publication of the PC staff report are included in Exhibit 4. Planning Commission (PC) Records a) Penda December f 4 2022 (Click to Access) b) PC Minutes December 14. 2022 (Click to Access) c) PC Staff Report December 14, 2022 (Click to Access) d) PC A&1cnda November 9, 2022 (Click to Access) e) PC Minutes November 9. 2022 (Click to Access) f) PC Staff Report November 9, 2022(Click to Access Report) EXHIBITS: 1) Project Chronology 2) Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3) Original Petition 4) Comments Received After Publication of PC Staff Report I SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE 2 No. of 2023 3 4 (Adopting the Homeless Resource Center Overlay District, Adopting standards pertaining to 5 Temporary Homeless Resource Centers, Amending the zoning text of Section 21A.36.350 and 6 Chapter 21A.50 pertaining to Homeless Resource Centers and Development Agreements, and 7 Amending definitions in Title 21A associated with the foregoing) 8 9 An ordinance adopting the Homeless Resource Center Overlay District, adopting 10 standards pertaining to Temporary Homeless Resource Centers, amending the zoning text of 11 Section 21A.36.350 and Chapter 21A.50 pertaining to Homeless Resource Centers and 12 Development Agreements, and amending definitions in Title 2 1 A associated with the foregoing 13 all pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-01068. 14 WHEREAS, on December 14, 2022, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission ("Planning 15 Commission")held a public hearing on a petition submitted by the Salt Lake City Council("City 16 Council") to amend land use regulations pertaining to homeless resource centers (Petition No. 17 PLNPCM2022-01068); and 18 WHEREAS, at its December 14, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor 19 of forwarding a positive recommendation to the City Council on said petition; and 20 WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the City Council has determined that 21 adopting this ordinance is in the city's best interests. 22 NOW, THEREFORE,be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 23 SECTION I. Adopting Section 21A.34.160. That Section 21A.34.160 of the Salt Lake 24 City Code shall be and hereby is adopted as follows: 25 21A.34.160: HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTER OVERLAY DISTRICT 26 Purpose: The intent of the overlay is to consider the safety and welfare of those experiencing 27 homelessness while considering the impact to city services and adjacent neighborhoods and 28 minimize the effects on neighborhoods and populations that have traditionally been marginalized 29 when considering locations for future homeless resource centers. 30 A. Applicability: The process and regulations found in this chapter apply to all homeless 31 resource centers existing prior to January 1, 2023 and any proposed homeless resource 32 centers mapped within the city. This overlay is prohibited in the M-1 and M-2 zoning 33 districts. 34 35 B. Applying to Zoning Map: A petition to apply this overlay shall be subject to the 36 applicable provisions of 21A.50. 37 1. A homeless resource center shall only be allowed if located within the homeless 38 resource center overlay or as otherwise allowed by this title. 39 2. City Council Action: In deciding to apply this overlay, the city council may 40 consider a development agreement to address any benefit or impact that a 41 proposed homeless resource center may have on the surroundings of the proposed 42 location of the overlay. Upon receiving a recommendation from the planning 43 commission on a petition to apply this overlay the city council shall render a 44 decision on the petition within 90 days. 45 3. Permitted Use: If approved by the city council, a homeless resource center shall 46 be a permitted use within the boundary of the homeless resource center overlay 47 district. 48 49 C. A homeless resource center with an occupancy of up to 40 individuals experiencing 50 homelessness is not required to be located within the homeless resource center overlay 51 district,provided that such center is (1) located within a zoning district that permits 52 residential uses, and(2) approved pursuant to Chapter 21A.54. 53 54 D. Previously Approved Homeless Resource Centers and Homeless Shelters: An existing 55 homeless resource center or homeless shelter that was approved as a conditional use prior 56 to January 1, 2023 shall be subject to the specifics of the conditional use approval, and 57 any subsequent modification to the approval, that were placed on the use at the time of 58 approval, and subject to the following modification limitations: 59 1. Modifications to prior conditional use approval. A modification to a prior 60 conditional use shall be subject to 21A.54.135. 61 2. Any modification beyond 21A.54.135 is subject to a zoning map amendment to 62 apply this overlay. 63 64 E. Applicability to Places of Worship. A place of worship is not required to petition for a 65 zoning map amendment to apply this overlay provided any emergency shelter provided is 66 part of the ecclesiastic function of the place of worship. A place of worship that provides 67 emergency shelter to people experiencing homelessness shall comply with the provisions 68 of 21A.36.350. 69 70 F. Complying with standards. Any existing or proposed homeless resource center or 71 homeless shelter shall comply with the applicable provisions of this title, including but 72 not limited to the requirements of the underlying zoning district and section 21A.36.350. 73 SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Section 21A.36.350. That Section 21A.36.350 of 74 the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 75 21A.36.350: STANDARDS FOR HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTERS 76 A. A homeless resource center or homeless shelter maybe allowed pursuant to 21 A.34 of 77 this title and the requirements of this section. A homeless resource center or homeless shelter 78 located within the city shall comply with the following regulations. Any homeless resource 79 center or homeless shelter approved as a conditional use shall comply with these regulations and 80 the requirements of the approved conditional use. The owner of the property where a homeless 81 resource center or homeless shelter is located shall ensure that the operator complies with the 82 requirements of this chapter. 83 1. Capacity Limit: a maximum of two hundred(200) unsheltered persons. 84 2. Security and operations plan. A plan shall be prepared by the applicant, and 85 approved by the Salt Lake City Police Department and Community and Neighborhoods 86 Department, and filed with the Recorder's Office. A security and operations plan shall include: 87 a. A community relations and complaint response program that identifies specific 88 strategies and methods designed to maintain the premises in a clean and orderly condition, 89 minimize potential conflicts with the owners/operators and uses of neighboring properties, and 90 prohibit unlawful behavior by occupants of the homeless resource center or homeless shelter on 91 the site. The community relations and complaint response program shall include at least the 92 following elements: 93 (1) Identify a representative of the homeless resource center or homeless 94 shelter, including the representative's name, telephone number, and email, who will meet with 95 neighbors upon request to attempt to resolve any complaints regarding operation of the center; 96 (2) A dedicated 24 hour telephone line for the purpose of receiving 97 complaints; 98 (3) Quarterly meetings with a community coordinating group, which shall be 99 open to the public, to discuss and address concerns and issues that may be occurring as a result 100 of the homeless resource center or homeless shelter operation. The operator may establish 101 policies and procedures for the meetings, including rules of decorum. The meetings shall be 102 advertised at least 10 days in advance by posting notice on the operator's website and a sign 103 posted along the public street; 104 (4) Representatives from each of the following shall be included in the 105 community coordinating group: 106 (A)The homeless resource center or homeless shelter; 107 (B)A business located within 1/4 mile of the site; 108 (C)A resident who lives within 1/4 mile of the site; 109 (D)A school, if any, located within 1/4 mile of the site; 110 (E) Chair of the community council, or designee, whose boundary 111 encompasses the site; 112 (F) An individual who has previously received or is currently receiving 113 services (i.e., client) from a homeless resource center or homeless shelter; and 114 (5) A written annual report, provided on or before February 15th of each year, 115 from the operator of the homeless resource center or homeless shelter, provided to the City 116 Planning Director, which shall be posted to the Planning Division website and which shall 117 include the following information: 118 (A)List of individuals who have participated in the community coordinating 119 group meetings; 120 (B)A summary of each community coordinating group meeting; 121 (C)A summary of complaints received from the community by the operator of 122 the homeless resource center or homeless shelter; and 123 (D)An explanation of how complaints have been addressed/resolved. 124 b. A complaint response community relations program that includes strategies and 125 methods designed to maintain the premises in a clean and orderly condition, minimize potential 126 conflicts with the owners/operators and uses of neighboring property, and prohibit unlawful 127 behavior by occupants of the homeless resource center or homeless shelter on the site or adjacent 128 public right-of-way. 129 c. A provision requiring a representative of the homeless resource center or 130 homeless shelter to meet with neighbors upon request to attempt to resolve any neighborhood 131 complaints regarding operation of the center; 132 d. A requirement for continuous on-site security, which includes professional 133 security personnel, monitored security cameras, trained emergency responders, and emergency 134 alert systems. 135 e. A plan to maintain noise levels in compliance with chapter 9.28 of this Code; 136 f. Design requirements that ensure any areas for client queuing take place strictly 137 within an enclosed building; 138 g. Designation of a location for smoking tobacco outdoors in conformance with 139 State laws; 140 h. A provision stating that any trash on the premises be collected and deposited in a 141 trash receptacle by 6:00 A.M. the following day; 142 i. A provision stating that portable trash receptacles on the premises be emptied 143 daily and that other receptacles be emptied at a minimum of once per week or as needed. 144 j. Designation of an indoor location within the site where emergency services can 145 easily and privately provide necessary services to clients. 146 k. Visible signage at all public entrances indicating that firearms are not permitted 147 inside the homeless shelter. A means of detecting firearms at all public entrances and the plan to 148 ensure an individual is physically present at all entrances when the public entrance is in use. A 149 secure storage area for a firearm for clients of the shelter but also clear policies to not collect 150 information on the firearm while in storage at shelter. An abandonment plan if a firearm is left at 151 the shelter for more than 7 days, process to relinquish to a law enforcement agency for disposal. 152 3. The applicant shall provide building and site plans that have been reviewed by a 153 certified CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design)professional credentialed 154 by the International Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Association or similar 155 organization. The CPTED professional shall indicate that the plans comply with CPTED 156 principles and be approved by the Salt Lake City Police Department. The police department may 157 recommend modification to the plans to improve the safety of the site to the zoning 158 administrator. The zoning administrator is authorized to allow modifications to the zoning 159 regulations listed in this section in order to improve the safety of the site when the recommended 160 modification is not permitted by the zoning ordinance. Modifications shall be limited to the 161 following: 162 a. Fence height and fence design; 163 b. Landscaping; 164 c. Clear view distances at driveways; 165 d. Design standards when necessary to provide privacy for the operation of the 166 homeless resource center. 167 4. Maintenance: 168 a. The building and site must be maintained free from graffiti, litter, garbage, and 169 other items that constitute a nuisance; 170 b. The building must be maintained in good repair and all property damage is 171 repaired in a timely manner; 172 c. All fencing, walls,paving, walkways and other site features must be maintained 173 in good repair, and free from obstruction. 174 5. Building And Zoning Compliance: A homeless resource center or homeless 175 shelter shall comply with all applicable building and zoning regulations. 176 B. Standards for Homeless Resource Centers (Temporary) 177 1. When Allowed: A homeless resource center(temporary) is allowed if the 178 following situations are present in the city: 179 a. The existing homeless resource centers and homeless shelters in the city are at full 180 capacity or are likely to be at full capacity due to temperatures dropping below 32 degrees or 181 heat index above 95 degrees Fahrenheit is reasonably expected; and 182 b. The city is required to provide emergency shelter by applicable state laws. 183 2. Location: A homeless resource center(temporary) may be located in existing 184 buildings within the city if: 185 a. The building proposed for a homeless resource center(temporary) complies with 186 one of the following: 187 (1) is located in a zoning district that allows hotels,motels, or multi-family 188 dwellings; 189 (2) is owned by a government entity regardless of underlying zoning; or 190 (3) was constructed as a hotel, motel, or other temporary lodging purpose. 191 b. The site contains permanent or temporary restrooms adequate for the determined 192 occupancy load. 193 c. The building complies with or can comply with applicable building and fire codes 194 deemed necessary by city officials who are qualified to make such a determination. 195 d. The building complies with the spacing requirements in Utah Code 35A-16-502 196 (11)regulating separation requirements or its successor. The separation requirement in 35A-16- 197 502 (11)(c) is waived upon adoption of this section by the Salt Lake City Council. The 198 requirement in 35A-16-502(11)(c) pertaining to community locations may be waived or reduced 199 by the director of community and neighborhoods department. The director of community and 200 neighborhoods department may also waive any future separation requirement that is added to 201 35A-16-502. 202 3. Security and Operations Plan: The operator of the facility provides the city with a 203 security and operations plan that includes: 204 a. Contact information for a 24 hour property manager who has responsibility for 205 administering the security and operations plan and addressing nuisances or compliance issues 206 required by applicable laws. The contact info must be clearly posted on the site and legible to 207 passers-by. 208 b. A description of the intake process for those that may be using the facility that can 209 occur entirely within the building or on the property in a manner that does not impact public 210 sidewalks. 211 c. Designated smoking areas on the property that are located in areas that comply 212 with applicable laws and are at least 30 feet from a property line. 213 d. A property maintenance plan to ensure that the property is maintained free of 214 litter and any waste. 215 e. A vicinity maintenance plan to ensure that the properties and public space within 216 660 feet of the property where the facility is located are free from any litter or waste and that 217 requires the facility operator to respond to requests from property owners or occupants of the 218 properties within 660 feet to remove any waste, including sanitization when necessary, that can 219 be attributed to the occupants of the facility. 220 f. Visible signage at all public entrances indicating that firearms are not permitted 221 inside the homeless shelter. A means of detecting firearms at all public entrances and the plan to 222 ensure an individual is physically present at all entrances when the public entrance is in use. A 223 secure storage area for a firearm for clients of the shelter but also clear policies to not collect 224 information on the firearm while in storage at shelter. An abandonment plan if a firearm is left at 225 the shelter for more than 7 days, process to relinquish to a law enforcement agency for disposal. 226 g. Provisions that address ingress and egress to the site. The zoning administrator 227 may require features such as fences to regulate egress and ingress to the site. 228 h. A requirement for continuous on-site security which includes professional 229 security personnel, monitored security cameras, trained emergency responders, and emergency 230 alert systems. 231 4. Limitations. A homeless resource center(temporary) approved under these 232 regulations may only occupy a site once every four years. 233 5. Temporary Land Use Regulations: The city council may approve any homeless 234 resource center(temporary) utilizing temporary land use approval authority prescribed under 235 current laws. 236 SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Section 21A.50.030. That Section 21A.50.350 of 237 the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 238 21A.50.030: INITIATION: 239 Amendments to the text of this title or to the zoning map may be initiated by filing an application 240 for an amendment addressed to the planning commission. Applications for amendments may be 241 initiated by the mayor, the city council, the planning commission, or the owner of the property 242 included in the application, or the property owner's authorized agent. Applications related to H 243 historic preservation overlay districts or landmark sites or the Homeless Resource Center 244 Overlay shall be initiated as provided in chapter 21A.34 of this title. 245 SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Section 21A.50.040. That Section 21A.50.040 of 246 the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 247 21A.50.040: PROCEDURE: 248 An amendment to the text of this title or to the zoning map initiated by any of the methods 249 described in section 21A.50.030 of this chapter shall be processed in accordance with the 250 following procedures: 251 A. Application: An application shall be made to the zoning administrator on a form 252 or forms provided by the office of the zoning administrator, which shall include at least the 253 following information: 254 1. A statement of the text amendment or map amendment describing the purpose for 255 the amendment and the exact language,boundaries and zoning district; 256 2. Street address and legal description of the property; 257 3. A complete description of the proposed use of the property where appropriate; 258 4. Site plans drawn to scale (where applicable); and 259 5. Related materials or data supporting the application as may be determined by the 260 applicant and the zoning administrator. 261 B. Fees: The application shall be accompanied by the applicable fees shown on the 262 Salt Lake City consolidated fee schedule. The applicant shall also be responsible for payment of 263 all fees established for providing the public notice required by chapter 21A.10 of this title. 264 Application and noticing fees filed by the city council,planning commission or the mayor shall 265 not be required. Application and noticing fees filed for designation within an H historic 266 preservation overlay district or to establish a character conservation district shall not be required. 267 C. Determination Of Completeness: Upon receipt of an application for an 268 amendment, the zoning administrator shall make a determination of completeness pursuant to 269 section 21 A.10.010, "General Application Procedures", of this title. 270 D. Staff Report: A staff report evaluating the amendment application shall be 271 prepared by the planning director and shall contain at least the following information: 272 1. An analysis of any factors to be considered found in this title. 273 2. A discussion regarding input received from the public. 274 3. Input from other city departments or entities who have provided comments related 275 to the proposal. 276 E. Planning Commission Public Hearing: The planning commission shall schedule 277 and hold a public hearing on the completed application in accordance with the standards and 278 procedures for conduct of the public hearing set forth in chapter 21A.10, "General Application 279 And Public Hearing Procedures", of this title. The following provisions apply for petitions to 280 amend the zoning map that are requesting to applying the homeless resource center overlay 281 district: 282 1. Zoning Map Amendments to locate the homeless resource center overlay can hold 283 a public hearing with the planning commission during the required 45-day public notification 284 period, as required in Section 2.60.050 of the Salt Lake City Code. No recommendation shall be 285 made by the planning commission during the 45-day notification period. 286 2. During the 45-day public notification period, the petitioner shall arrange an 287 opportunity for people who are experiencing homelessness to provide input on the proposed 288 location of the homeless resource center overlay district. 289 3. Notice of the public hearing shall be sent via first class mail to property owners 290 and tenants within 450 feet of the proposed boundaries of the petition to map the homeless 291 resource center overlay. 292 4. The petition shall be scheduled for a recommendation from the planning 293 commission at the first regularly scheduled commission meeting following the end of the 45-day 294 notification period. 295 F. Planning Commission Decision: Following the public hearing, the planning 296 commission shall recommend approval or denial of the proposed amendment or the approval of 297 some modification of the amendment and shall then submit its recommendation to the city 298 council. 299 G. City Council Hearing: The city council shall schedule and hold a public hearing to 300 consider the proposed amendment in accordance with the standards and procedures for conduct 301 of the public hearing set forth in chapter 21A.10, "General Application And Public Hearing 302 Procedures", of this title. 303 H. City Council Decision: Following the hearing, the city council may adopt the 304 proposed amendment, adopt the proposed amendment with modifications, or deny the proposed 305 amendment. However, no additional land may be zoned to a different classification than was 306 contained in the public notice, and no land may be rezoned to a less restricted classification, 307 without new notice and hearing. 308 SECTION 5. Adopting Section 21A.50.060. That Section 21A.50.060 of the Salt Lake 309 City Code shall be and hereby is adopted as follows: 310 21A.50.060: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS APPLYING THE HOMELESS 311 RESOURCE CENTER OVERLAY DISTRICT. 312 A. Applicability. Any proposal to consider a petition that involves a zoning map 313 amendment to apply the homeless resource center overlay district shall be subject to the 314 additional requirements of this section in addition to any other requirement of this title. 315 316 B. Additional Submittal Requirements. In addition to the application requirements of this 317 chapter, the following information shall be provided by the person submitting a zoning 318 amendment petition that includes applying the homeless resource center overlay district. 319 1. Development plans meeting the requirements of chapter 21A.58 and the following 320 additional detail: 321 a. The plans shall include all labels for the function of each room or space, both 322 indoor and outdoor,proposed for the facility. 323 b. All information that demonstrates compliance with the requirements in 324 21A.36.350. 325 2. The maximum total human occupancy the proposed facility is intended to serve. 326 3. A detailed list of all the anticipated supportive services to be offered on the 327 property, including a description of each service, where the service will be on the property and 328 the square footage of the area designated for each service. 329 4. Any anticipated funding requests made to the city to operate the facility. 330 C. Information Provided by the City. After a complete application has been submitted to 331 apply this overlay to property within the boundaries of the city, applicable city departments shall 332 provide the Planning Division with the following information within 30 days: 333 1. Information regarding the impact to the police department which may include any 334 data that demonstrates the services to existing homeless resources centers located in the city, the 335 estimated cost of providing service by the police department to existing homeless resource 336 centers and the impact that a new homeless resource center has on the ability of the police 337 department to provide services to other parts of the city. 338 339 2. Information regarding the impact to the fire department which may include any 340 data that demonstrates the services to existing homeless resources centers located in the city and 341 the estimated cost of providing service by the fire department to existing homeless resource 342 centers and the impact that a new homeless resource center has on the ability of the fire 343 department to provide services to other parts of the city. 344 345 3. Information regarding the number of civil enforcement cases associated with 346 existing homeless resource centers, including the types of complaints, and the estimated impact 347 to civil enforcement workloads and ability to provide services to other parts of the city. 348 349 4. Information regarding accessibility of the site and its impact on public services. 350 351 5. The city provides an updated website to provide any and all city departments to 352 contact for various complaints such as graffiti, encampment clean up, enforcement issues, and 353 any other identified city service that may address impacts on the neighborhood from homeless 354 resource centers. 355 356 6. Data provided by the State Homeless Management Information System and the 357 SL Valley Coalition to end homelessness regarding similar uses in Salt Lake County, including 358 the total number of facilities, the total number of people who use the facilities, the number of 359 individuals served with overnight tenancy in each facility, the average percentage of occupancy 360 of the facilities, and the number of nights per year that the other facilities are at capacity to the 361 extent that the information is available. 362 363 7. Data regarding the total number of beds available to people experiencing 364 homelessness and the estimated number of people currently experiencing homelessness to the 365 extent that the information is available. 366 D. Additional Factors to Consider: In making a decision regarding a petition to map the 367 homeless resource center overlay district, the planning commission and city council shall 368 consider the following factors, in addition to those factors identified elsewhere in 2 IA.50: 369 370 1. The anticipated benefits to people experiencing homelessness provided by the 371 facility in the proposed location. 372 2. The proximity of support services that benefit people who may use the facility 373 and the ability of people to access services from the proposed location. If services are not within 374 walking distance of the proposed facility, consideration of a transportation plan connecting 375 support services to the facility. 376 3. The ratio of homeless related services provided in Salt Lake City compared to 377 other jurisdictions in Salt Lake County. 378 4. The anticipated impact to city services, including fire,police, and any other city 379 department that would be involved in providing services to the facility and the impact, if any, to 380 the city providing services in other parts of the city. 381 5. The proximity to other homeless resource centers. 382 6. The effectiveness of the security and operations plan provided by the petitioner to 383 address impacts created by the homeless resource center. 384 7. Equity between different neighborhoods in providing homeless resource centers 385 and other locations of impactful land uses. High impact land uses are those land uses that 386 produce higher levels of pollution than the permitted uses in the underlying zone, land uses that 387 attract crime or produce public nuisances, and land uses that are located by a government entity 388 or authorized by a government entity and that are not subject to the land use regulations of the 389 city. 390 8. Demonstrated compliance with the requirements of 21A.36.350. 391 SECTION 6. Renumbering Section 21A.50.060. That Section 21A.50.060 "Limitation 392 on Amendments"is hereby renumbered to Section 2 IA.50.070 of the Salt Lake City Code. 393 SECTION 7. Adopting Section 21A.50.080. That Section 21A.50.080 of the Salt Lake 394 City Code shall be and hereby is adopted as follows: 395 21A.50.080: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. 396 The city council may consider applying requirements through an appropriate legal agreement 397 with a petition for a zoning amendment when the city council determines that such an agreement 398 is necessary to increase the benefit of the proposed zoning amendment and/or to address 399 potential impacts to city services, surrounding land uses,public safety, and the health of current 400 and future residents, business owners, and visitors to the city. The agreement may modify any 401 applicable requirement of this Title provided the modification was proposed to and considered 402 by the planning commission as required for any zoning amendment. Agreements that constrain 403 the development potential or land uses of the subject property compared to what is authorized in 404 the proposed zoning district are not required to be reviewed by the planning commission prior to 405 consideration of the agreement. 406 SECTION 8. Renumbering Section 21A.50.070. That Section 21A.50.070 "Appeal of 407 Decision" is hereby renumbered to Section 21 A.50.090 of the Salt Lake City Code. 408 SECTION 9. Amending the Text of Section 21A.60.020. That Section 21A.60.020 of 409 the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended to include the following term: 410 Homeless Resource Center(Temporary) 411 SECTION 10. Amending the Text of Section 21A.60.040. That definitions of the terms 412 "Homeless Resource Center" and"Homeless Shelter"be amended as set forth below and the 413 term"Homeless Resource Center(Temporary)"be added to Section 2IA.62.040 of the Salt Lake 414 City Code as follows: 415 HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTER: A building or portion thereof which contains sleeping 416 facilities for those experiencing homeless and operates year round. The facility may contain 417 related services such as bathing, eating, laundry facilities, housing case management, medical 418 care and treatment; behavioral and mental health counseling; employment counseling; 419 educational instruction, and/or vocational training as defined in Utah State Code or its successor. 420 HOMELESS SHELTER: See the definition of Homeless Resource Center. 421 HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTER(Temporary): A building or portion thereof which contains 422 sleeping facilities for no more than 150 people per night experiencing homelessness and operates 423 for no more than 180 consecutive days or a total of 180 days in a calendar year between October 424 1 and April 30th of the following year. The facility may contain related services such as bathing, 425 eating, laundry facilities, housing case management, medical care and treatment; behavioral and 426 mental health counseling; employment counseling; educational instruction, and/or vocational 427 training as defined in Utah State Code or its successor. 428 SECTION 11. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its 429 first publication. 430 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this_day of 431 2023. 432 433 CHAIRPERSON 434 435 ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: 436 437 438 CITY RECORDER 439 440 Transmitted to Mayor oil 441 442 443 Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. 444 445 446 MAYOR 447 448 CITY RECORDER 449 (SEAL) 450 APPROVED AS TO FORM 451 Bill No. of2023. Salt Lake City Attorney's Office 452 Published: Date: January 11, 2023 453 Ordinance Adopting Homeless Resource Overlay District By: 454 Katherine D.Pasker,Senior City Attorney 455 456 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1) Project Chronology 2) Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3) Original Petition 4) Comments Received After Publication of PC Staff Report 1. Project Chronology PROJECT CHRONOLGY PETITIONS: PLNPCM2022-01068 June 16, 2022 Community Council Focus Group July 5, 2022 Advocates for People Experiencing Homelessness Focus Group July 6, 2022 Service Provider Focus Group July 25, 2022 Business Community Focus Group July/August 2022 Allison Dupler(Homeless Strategies and Outreach Coordinator) met with people experiencing homelessness at both HRCs, the Rescue Mission, and Nomad Alliance supply drive. A total of 68 people provided input. October 15, 2022 Online Open House from October 151h-November 30th, 2022 November 1, 2022 Facebook Live Event November 10, 2022 Open House November 9, 2022 Planning Commission Briefing December 14, 2022 Planning Commission Public Hearing 2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2022-01068 On December 14, 2022, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted to recommend approval of the proposed Homeless Resource Center Overlay Zoning District by the City Council. A petition initiated by the City Council through Ordinance 15B of 2022 to establish a process for approving future homeless resource centers in the city,modifies existing standards for homeless resource centers and homeless shelters, and make other necessary and related modifications to Title 21A Zoning. The proposal includes adopting the Homeless Resource Center Overlay Zoning District, modifying section 21A.36.350 Standards for Homeless Resource Centers, adding provisions for temporary/seasonal homeless resource centers that incorporate recent changes to Utah Code,modifying chapter 21A.50 to add factors to consider when mapping the homeless resource center overlay and other related changes, and modifying defined terms. The City Council may amend other related chapters and sections of Title 2 1 A Zoning as part of this proposal. As part of their study,the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments regarding the petitions. During the hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak.The Council may consider adopting the ordinance the same night of the public hearing. The hearing will be held: DATE: TBD TIME: 7:00 PM PLACE: Electronic and in-person options. 451 South State Street,Room 326, Salt Lake City,Utah ** This meeting will be held via electronic means,while 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.For more information,including WebEx connection information,please visit www.slc. ov/council/virtual-meetings.Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801)535-7654 or sending an email to councilmcommcrnts(e�slcovmcom.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 Kelsey Lindquist (385) 226-7227 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m, Monday through Friday, or via email at kelsey.lindquist@slcgov.com. The application details can be accessed at https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/,by selecting the"planning"tab and entering the petition number PLNPCM2022-01068 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 make a request, please contact the City Council Office at counci].comrilents(a/'s1 Yov.coni, (801)535-7600, or relay service 711. 3. Original Petition 4. Public Comments After Publication of PC Staff Report _ ^ December 14, JO22 ^^^~us~^ | IEUR�UNITYcnvpcu~ TO: Salt Lake City Planning Commission FROM: Judi 5hn¢ First Vice Chair and Land Use Chair, Sugar House Community Council /\ ) RE: PLNP[K42O2Z-OlO68 Homeless Resource Center Code Amendments | am sorry that|cannot be|n attendance at the meeting December I4. VVe have moved our regular Sugar House Community Council meeting to December I4 because Mayor Mendenhall is able to-be present. VVe agree that the use shall be suspended for 18Udays. And we agree that Option 2 Equity,and Option 3 Options,should betaken through the public process. This can be resolved during the 180 days. Part of the public process should include engaging with the unsheltered residents in the city. Finances need to be a consideration when determining site and a provider.What if you said that noHK[canbe|ncatedm/\1hinl.6mi|escdanotherHR[insteadcd`aneasthatcontainanHR[^ |tmaynota|waysbepossib|etoequine that they don't exist in areas where these type of uses already exist. |s that one per Zoning code,one per block? You could define an a/ea(s)where an HR[cou|d not bemapped. You could stipulate that a zoning map amendment take no longer than 6 months from date of application to approval.You need to come up with a list of all things the HRC is responsible for,spell them out,and include things that all the other agencies are doing. Come up with a list of all the things the various agencies and HRCs are responsible for,and make them all responsible for all of it. There isa pretty good list in this staff report.This might eliminate the silos,where staff are doing their exact job description, not looking out for the whole community.Make them all responsible. Everyone b responsible for all mf it,or the whole team fails.Try to locate services where the people who need it will be,to avoid extra travel time,which may be difficult to schedule and still keep the regular work schedule nf that individual. Find out why some providers work, like the YWCA,while others fail. Have the good ones work io train the others. Set this up so they are all on the same team. We know with different pots of gold to fund this,that may be more difficult,but maybe all the gold goes into the same pot,and the GOLD QUEEN doles it out based onresults.Then, make a list of everything people experiencing homelessness need. Decide how that will be determined,and who will monitor the success.Quarterly,get the team together tn assess how iiisworking. |think what bothers me the most about this,is that you are arranging the deck chairs, and when you get through,you might have another ship or two,but you still haven't solved the problem. The problem is that surrounding every HR[there ischaos. People hang out outside the building. Others show up to hang out with those who are hanging out.Still more come because there might be someone|n the crowd who needs afix. And maybe some|n the crowd are looking for afix. And people throw their trash oothe ground,whether it is in front of the HRS,or two blocks away, because no one is showing them that is not the expected way to behave. And the neighborhood around the HRSis not happy. Have someone assigned to talk tuthe neighbors. My recommendation to you is that as part of your approval process for this tonight,or next week,you come up with a deadline for when all of these various teams and providers all over the city(medical,social workers,cooks, launderers,job trainers,job providers, janitors,etc.)have a clear-cut plan in place to make this happen,with criteria to tell them if they are winning or losing. And,these criteria must be|n place BEFORE the Certificate of Occupancy isissued. And then each HRC reports to the city quarterly,ur twice a year. Hold people accountable, And you,as a Planning Commission,ask for reports from time to time,to find out how things are working,or not working. /Sa|t Lake City/Huusing/Home|eas/SHC[Letter toP[Homeless 2O22 COMMENTS FROM SHCC REGARDING HOMELESS SHELTER TEXT AMENDMENTS I may be reading this proposal wrong,as I did it fairly quickly, but here are my thoughts: The Overlay District proposal seems to be a way to get any request for a Resource Center or Shelter to require a Zoning Text Amendment. It would not allow new Resource Centers or Shelters in any district any more as a conditional use so therefore not at all any more. I like the new requirements for any new Resource Center or Shelter as it includes all the stuff we wanted 5(or more) years ago when they were first proposed. The Overflow proposal also seems OK except for the use of an unused government building,with no limits on location, that I could discern.That might be problematic,though I think the Capitol when the Legislature is not in session is a great solution. Hope this makes sense.We can't continue to have floating overflow shelters thrown together at the last second. Lynn Schwartz Judi, I am in support of item 1, prohibiting new homeless resource centers or shelters in Salt Lake City. It will provide the city with the ability to have more control over where these facilities are located in the city. I look forward to learning more about items 2 and 3.Thanks, Becky Davis 1 guess I agree with the mayor's prohibition of new permanent shelters,since apparently there wasn't a way to require adequate screening of all issues before the big hubbub about the one proposed near the VOA site. But can you have homeless shelters with total elimination of problems rather than reduction? With regard to 2&3, 1 have a lot of questions. Think its a great idea to have Andrew J come to address the issue. With regard to the temporary shelter requirements,they would seem quite stringent and expensive depending. I wonder if there were really a lot of problems when there was the temporary shelter in the old DI building. If there were, I certainly wasn't aware,and I went to the area all the time. I daresay you know if there were problems. Thea Brannon It is too complicated for me as I am not acquainted with all the issues of the current rules or changes requested, etc. I have to trust that those on the city council have carefully studied the issue and this is the best current solution and that the rules if adopted are reversible in the future if the situation changes. I would like to know Amy Fowler's views. I can voice my philosophy about the issue of homelessness. Resources should be provided by all shelters. Shelters should be dispersed in the city. Maybe Sugar House should have a shelter to spread the problem and wake people up to being a bit kinder and more human and willing to help. Other cities should provide shelters.West Valley is larger than SLC and yet they don't have one. It is a county and state issue and not just a city issue. State and county funds should come to SLC if other cities are not willing to proportionately share in the cost. Every winter we have a crisis of getting people inside. There should be a plan in place as to where this will be and it should be done in the summer and just planned for. What to do about those who don't want to come into a shelter in any weather. Many of these people are with mental health issues,fear of robbing what they have,abuse, ptsd,drugs etc. I am talking about those in the encampments in parks like Sugar House or the Jordan River Parkway. These people want to be outside with their community of neighbor camper;who share a meal or protect their things. 1 think the city should have a sponsored campground which is much cheaper than a structure. It can have requirements for admittance, resident hosts, resources, Toilet and shower facilities, dish washing,student health clinic, policing and a place to build a wane fire. All much cheaper and acceptable than the current situation of encampments..Community Volunteers can help, residents can clean and there can be green areas, trees, picnic tables. This is where some people feel safe and we should admit it. Homeless is a medical, social, poverty issue and there are many ways to help. Many will disagree with me but we know there are those who will not go to shelters, permanent or temporary.This issue should be addressed by those planning and developing rules for the homeless. Suzanne S.Stensaas Judi, I just have one concern about the Homeless Resource Center Amendments and maybe it's because I am unaware of how the new facilities will be paid for from the point of acquiring the land on which to build a new facility or to remodel an existing facility. I know the state legislature has appropriated money to address the homeless problem in the state, but its not enough money. So entities who want to open and operate a new Homeless Resource Center could apply for federal, state or city/county funds to accomplish this as well as use donations if the entity is a non-profit organization. Under the submittal requirements, one requirement is "Identified funding sources to operate the facility and any anticipated funding requests made to the city to operate the facility" I assume some of the new resource centers will be run by government entities, so taxpayers will foot the bill. I'm concerned about private entities running into financial difficulties trying to operate homeless resource centers if they don't get grants or governmental funding that they may need to cover their financial obligations. BECKY DAMS Homeless Resource Center Zoning cindy cromer Wed 1211412022 4:52 PM To:cindy cromer To members of the SLC Planning Commission Re Homeless Resource Centers-Zoning December 14, 2022 First I want to point out that my neighborhoods...Central City and Bryant....are not receiving equitable treatment. The staff report does mention the East Downtown but Central City hosts the Geraldine King FIRC and both Central City and Bryant have abundant group homes,transitional housing, drug treatment facilities, and so forth. One of the many iterations of Odyssey House is next to one of my 4-plexes. The residents at the House of Hope walk past my commercial building every day. Secondly, I look at the proposed timeline for establishing possible sites with dismay. Dealing with real estate in Salt Lake is like being Captain Hook with the crocodile haunting you with tick-took,tick-tack. I cannot imagine a seller holding his or her breath while the potential buyer goes through the process of finding out if the site will work. And the ambiguity will drain the resources of the well-intentioned organization hoping to get permission. And some of you may remember the proposal for a HRC on Simpson Avenue and the upheaval it caused in that Sugar House neighborhood. I don't see the proposed timeline working for any of the parties involved. As someone who worried about whether one of the HRCs would be located near one of my own investments, seriously worried, I cannot support the ambiguity in the location of facilities. I completed the questionnaire on-line and indicated that I didn't see the proposed timeframe working for anyone, not the seller, not the purchaser, and certainly not the residents and business owners. Listening for the tick-toc of costly time slipping away is not helpful for anyone; worrying that the biggest investment you've ever made could be undermined is very stressful. COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ������ ��•i��i CITY COUNCIL Of SALT LAKE CPTY t = rn= Item Schedule: Briefing:January 1�7,2023, TO: City Council Members February�7,2023 Set Date:January 1�7, 2023, FROM: Brian Fullmer March 7,2023 Policy Analyst Public Hearing: February�7,2023, March 21,2023 Potential Action:March 21. 202� DATE: March 7,2023 RE: Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Amendment PLNPCM2022-00475 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION After the public hearing on February 7th, some Council Members expressed interest in having additional work session discussion time to consider other options, and potentially reconsider some of the straw polls which were taken at the February 71h work session. As a reminder,the following straw polls were taken: • Supported keeping one off-street parking space. • Supported keeping the following exceptions to required off-street parking: o If the property is within 1/2 mile of a designated bicycle lane or path. o If the property is within 1/4 mile of transit. • Supported removing an exception to the off-street parking requirement if sufficient space for on- street parking is available in front of the house. • Supported increasing the maximum size of a detached ADU to 1,000 square feet. • Did not support the Planning staffs recommended 1,200 square foot maximum size of a detached ADU on lots 12,000 square feet or larger. • Supported retaining the owner occupancy requirement. • Supported amending corner side yard setbacks to 20%of the lot width or 10 feet,whichever is less. This would allow an ADUs on corner lots to be located closer to the street than to an adjacent property. • Supported removing the conditional use requirement for ADUs. • Did not support limiting ADU height to the principal structure's height. The following is a list of additional ideas that have been raised by Council Members since the last discussion,grouped by topic area: i. Ideas relating to the owner occupancy requirement: CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 304 SLCCOUNCIL.COM P.O.BOX 145476,SALT LAKE CITY.UTAH 84114-5476 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 i�a a. Option to remove the requirement altogether. b. Option to require construction of ADUs to be owner occupied for 1 year,with the option to remove the restriction after one year of no substantiated zoning or civil enforcement complaints. c. (could be combined with a or b)Require a business license and institute a fee to offset costs of enforcement, and require commitment to not use as a short term rental • For any landlord using an ADU as a rental.Two different fees have been suggested (subject to cost justification), $1,000 per year or $2,400 per year($200 per month) • Allow owner occupied properties to have this fee waived • The fee cannot be waived by the Good Landlord program d. Add a sunset clause for the owner occupancy requirement citywide. If there is no additional Council action,this requirement would sunset in 24 months (or some other period). e. Potential ideas that may be related to owner-occupancy reconsideration: • reconsider straw poll relating to parking requirements for lots within 1/2 mile of designated bicycle lane • reconsider straw poll to increase the size from 720 to l000 square feet 2. Enforcement a. Add 1 or more employees(FTEs)in Civil Enforcement specifically to address ADU related violations including noise, illegal Short-Term Rentals,etc. Costs could be offset by fees (idea raised in item i.e.). Consider allocating funds in Budget Amendment#5 as a Council- added item. 3. Incentives a. Use a legislative intent or allocate funds in Budget Amendment #5, or an upcoming RDA budget amendment,to make creation of affordable ADU programs a higher priority.The funding could address staffing costs to develop and administer programs as well as direct program costs such as incentives. Ideas raised include pre-approved development plans, subsidy for utility connection fees,direct financial support in form of grants or loans, examine other way's ADUs have shown to be expensive(fire sprinklers, etc.). 4. Other questions Council Members asked staff(this section may be updated prior to the March 7 discussion. It reflects questions as of March 1. Council staff is working on gathering additional information). * To what extent has comment from the public and community councils addressed owner occupancy? * To what extent did the Planning Commission discuss owner occupancy? * To the extent that studies are cited in relation to the impacts of owner occupancy requirements, can Council staff thoroughly review those studies to provide Council Members specific information about whether any owner occupancy conclusions are objectively verifiable and applicable to different markets?Is owner occupancy isolated as a specific variable,or is it grouped with a list of other possible variables? * Are there stronger enforcement tools such as restrictive covenants that can help mitigate neighborhood impacts? Next steps: The Chair and Vice Chair are planning on a work session discussion March 71b, with a second public hearing and potential considerations for action March 21s', which is the next formal Council Meeting. FOLLOW-UP BRIEFING AND PUBLIC HEARING UPDATES Follow-up Briefing At the February 7, 2023 follow-up briefing,the Council reviewed five Accessory Dwelling Unit(ADU)topics discussed at the previous briefing.These topics were parking requirements,maximum ADU size, owner occupancy requirement, setback, and a conditional use requirement. Page 1 2 The Council held a series of straw polls indicating their positions on these various topics.The Council Chair reminded the public that these straw polls are not the final votes and Council Members may feel differently following the public bearing. (Refer to straw polls above.) Public Hearing Update Seventeen people spoke at the February 7, 2023 Public hearing expressing support for, or opposition to, ADUs.Those in favor cited the need for additional quality, affordable housing in the city,ADUs provide a way to add moderate density to neighborhoods, and potential benefits to property owners. Suggestions were made to incentivize micro units,review fees and other permitting requirements, and require ADU compatibility with the lot's original structure. Those who expressed opposition to the proposal noted the difficulty enforcing on illegal short-term rentals, ADUs blocking light from neighbors'gardens and solar collectors, and potential negative impacts to neighborhoods. The Council closed the public hearing and deferred action to a future Council Meeting. The following information was provided for the February 7, 2023 Council briefing.It is included again for background purposes. BRIEFING UPDATE At the January 17, 2023 briefing, Council Members focused their discussion on five topics related to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs): parking requirements,maximum ADU size, owner occupancy,required setbacks, and conditional use requirements.A summary of each topic is included below, as well as potential straw polls for Council consideration. Potential Straw Polls Staff is including the following potential straw polls to help clarify the Council's wishes regarding five main topics discussed during the briefing. 1. Is the Council supportive of maintaining the existing requirement for a minimum of one off-street parking space for ADUs where the proposed exceptions do not apply? If so, does the Council support the following exceptions in the draft ordinance? a. The property is in a zoning district with no minimum off-street parking requirement. b. The property already contains at least one accessible stall above the minimum parking requirement. c. The property is within one-half mile of a designated bicycle lane or path. 2. Does the Council wish to increase the maximum size of a detached ADU to: a. 720 square feet as proposed by Planning staff? b. 1,00o square feet as proposed by the Planning Commission? C. 1,200 square feet on lots 12,000 square feet or larger? 3. Does the Council wish to maintain the current owner occupancy requirement? 4. Is the Council supportive of the proposed setback requirements shown below? a. A suggestion was made for corner side yard setbacks Of 20%of the lot width or lo feet, whichever is less. Is the Council supportive of this? 5. Does the Council wish to remove the conditional use requirement for ADUs? Parking Requirements The proposed ordinance maintains the requirement for one on-site parking space for an ADU. Under the proposal,the following circumstances allow this requirement to be waived: • The property is in a zoning district with no minimum off-street parking requirement. Page 3 • The property already includes at least one accessible stall beyond the minimum parking requirement. • The property is within one-half mile of a designated bicycle lane or path. Council Members discussed advantages and disadvantages of this requirement. It was noted the off-street parking requirement could be a barrier to some who would like to construct an ADU. Eliminating the requirement for off-street parking would potentially create additional issues for areas that have limited on- street parking or are near venues that draw large crowds and attendees often park in the nearby neighborhoods. Maximum ADU Size Planning staff recommended increasing the maximum size of a detached ADU from the current 650 square feet to 720 square feet. (The proposal allows detached AUDs up to 1,200 square feet on lots 12,000 square feet or larger.) During the Planning Commission briefing, Commissioners included a recommendation of increasing the maximum size to i,000 square feet. The Council discussed potential neighborhood impacts if the maximum size is increased to 1,00o square feet. It was noted a compact two-bedroom ADU would be feasible if the maximum size was increased to 720 square feet. Owner Occupancy A robust discussion was held about the requirement for a property owner to reside on the property.A suggestion was made to remove this requirement, noting a reduction of the pool of potential buyers if the property is listed for sale. Other points raised were removing the owner occupancy requirement could exacerbate issues with absentee landlords, and requiring owner occupancy may lead to higher quality ADU materials and construction. A majority of Council Members expressed support for retaining the owner occupancy requirement. Required Setbacks Planning staff reviewed current and proposed setbacks for detached ADUs with the following table: Standard Current Requirement Proposed Requirement Minimum New accessory buildings and additions to 3 feet from interior side or rear lot lines. Setback existing accessory buildings: 4 feet from any side 10 feet from corner side lot line. or rear lot line. If accessory building is taller than 17 feet,setback must Second story additions: 10 feet from any side or be increased by I foot for every additional foot in height rear lot line,unless abutting an alley,in which case above 17" setback can be reduced to 4 feet. If accessory building is taller than 17 feet,setback must be increased to 10 feet, unless abutting an alley, in which case setback can be reduced to 4 feet. Council Members discussed whether a io-foot setback from a corner side yard is appropriate. Planning staff stated the current ordinance does not specify setback requirements for detached ADUs on corner lots. Rather, it defers to general accessory building setbacks,which are not allowed less than 20 feet from the side yard property line on corner lots.They noted moving a detached ADU closer to the street would have less of an impact on abutting property. On narrower lots, a 20400t setback in corner side yards may require an ADU close enough to the opposite property line that it prohibits the abutting property owner from adding an ADU to their property due to spacing requirements between dwelling units. A discussion was also held about potential impacts reducing the minimum side or rear yard setback from four feet to three feet. Page 14 Under the proposal balconies would be allowed on the second story of a detached ADU and face any direction.They may not encroach into the required setback areas, contain HVAC equipment, or be used for storage. Conditional Use Requirements Planning staff reviewed the conditional use requirement origin.They noted the Council's request for a process allowing public input on ADU petitions.Making ADUs a conditional use was the only option identified to meet this request. Planning said the Planning Commission has not denied any ADU applications.They stated detrimental neighborhood impacts related to ADUs that are not addressed in City Code are not happening.The Planning Commission added few conditions to ADU applications in more than three years. Planning staff calculated the time required to process 25 ADU applications per year equals one full time staff person. Some Council Members expressed concern about removing the conditional use process.They noted the public was told this would be part of the ADU process and now that may change. The following information was provided for the January 17, 2023 Council briefing.It is included again for background purposes. The Council will be briefed about a proposal to amend the City ordinance related to Accessory Dwelling Units(ADUs) making external units a permitted rather than conditional use, expand locations in the city where they can be built,simplify standards, and encourage their construction. At its February 9, 2022 meeting,the Planning Commission voted to initiate a petition making ADUs a permitted use in any zoning district where residential units are permitted.This includes ADUs that are internal, attached to a main structure,or in a detached building. Current code only allows ADUs in owner- occupied properties in the City that currently have single family homes(as a conditional use in single- family districts), although internal ADUs are allowed by right due to state code.The Planning Commission expressed a stated desire to expand opportunities for ADUs. City Council and Administrative staff input was also provided resulting in proposed changes summarized in the Additional Information section below. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal during its September 14, 2022 meeting and held a public hearing at which three people spoke. Comments focused on making ADUs affordable, support for owner occupancy of the main house, and a suggestion for City funding to assist homeowners to construct ADUs. Concerns cited include removing the conditional use could impact adjacent neighbor privacy,a lack of public comments when ADUs are constructed,and neighborhood impacts from additional on-street parking. Commissioners discussed increasing the maximum size of a detached ADU from the proposed 720 square feet to 1,000 square feet.A motion was made to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council that includes a modification to increase the maximum size of a detached ADU to 1,00o square feet.That motion passed 6-2.Those voting against the motion were not supportive of the i,000 square foot maximum. It should be noted the draft ordinance allows detached ADUs up to 1,200 square feet if the lot size exceeds 12,000 square feet,is outside a residential zoning district, or is part of a planned development that includes a minimum of four dwelling units. In response to a Council Member question,Planning staff clarified there is no minimum space between a detached ADU and the primary residence other than required fire code separation. Page 15 The draft ordinance includes a requirement that the owner reside on the property.This requirement may be met by a person related to the property owner or a trustor of a family trust that owns the property living on the property. Exceptions of up to three years are provided for property owners who are on temporary work assignments,serve in the military,are on sabbaticals,or participating in voluntary service.An additional exception is included for property owners who are placed in a hospital, nursing home, assisted living facility or other similar facility that provides medical care. Goal of the briefing:Review the proposed zoning and future land use map amendments, determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to discuss maximum ADU square footage of 720 square feet, 1,000 square feet, or larger based on lot size. 2. The proposed ordinance includes a requirement that the owner reside on the property as noted above.The Council may wish to discuss whether to keep this requirement. 3. The Council may wish to discuss incentive options for homeowners constructing ADUs to be rented at affordable rates,and potential sources of that funding. a. The Council, acting as the RDA board, allocated funding in the g line project area to assist in funding construction of ADUs,although this funding was limited to that project area. b. The Council has also directed funds from"Funding Our Future"sales tax revenue towards incentivizing development of affordable housing units and programs. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION As previously noted,there are several proposed changes to the ADU ordinance.These are summarized below. For the complete analysis,please see pages 2-10 of the Planning Commission staff report. Remove Conditional Use Requirement ADUs are currently permitted in two-family and multi-family zoning districts by-right when associated with a single-family dwelling. Detached ADUs in a single-family residential district are required to go through the conditional use process. It is worth noting House Bill 82 went into effect in October 2021 making internal ADUs permitted uses in single-family residential zones.The proposed ordinance aligns with that legislation. The proposal removes a conditional use requirement for detached ADUs in single-family residential districts.This would streamline the process for applicants and reduce staff and Planning Commission time needed to review ADU applications. Planning staff noted"Potential negative impacts of ADUs would continue to be managed by the development standards in the ADU Ordinance." Expand Where ADUs Can Be Built One goal of the proposed ADU amendments is to expand where they are allowed.Tables summarizing impacts to zoning districts under the proposed ADU amendments are included on pages 3-4 of the Planning Commission staff report.They are replicated in Attachment A to this report for convenience. Currently ADUs are allowed as a conditional use on properties used for single-family residential in residential zoning districts. In summary,the proposed changes would allow ADUs as a permitted rather than conditional use in single-family residential zoning districts,allow them as a permitted use in several lower intensity commercial zoning districts,transit station districts,form-based,and downtown zoning districts.ADUs would continue to be prohibited in manufacturing districts, and special purpose districts. Page 6 Planning staff included the following maps on page 5 of the Planning Commission staff report showing current locations where ADUs are allowed and where they would be allowed under the proposal.The maps are included here for convenience. Map showing where ADUs are currently allowed e raa••�. 7��. ...e .s�arrsau -.a® -Lek...., �■®�rr.r . --- 4.. la Legend U Permitted(Detached or Intemel) Detached ADU Requies Conditional Use tJ Not Permitted Map showing where ADUs would be allowed under proposed changes Images Courtesy Salt Lake City Planning Division Ak r _ Inv II IIII i� Legend �! ®AD PefTn,tted(Detached or Intemal; ADU Not Permitted Page ( 7 Adjust Size, Bulk, and Yard Requirements The proposed amendment modifies size,bulk,and yard requirements to generally make them less restrictive.These are summarized in the following tables provided by the Planning Division. (Images depicting various standards are found on pages 7-8 of the Planning Commission staff report.) Internal ADUs Standard Current Requirements Proposed Requirement Maximum Size 50%of gross square footage of No maximum.Aligns with HB82. principal structure. Detached ADUs Standard Current Requirement Proposed Requirement Maximum Size 50%of principal structure's In residential zoning districts: footprint or 650 square feet, 720 square feet maximum. whichever is less Can be increased to 1,200 square feet if lot is 12,000 square feet or larger. Maximum Height 17 feet. 17 feet. If principal structure is taller Can be increased up to 24 feet than 17 feet,ADU can be the with an increased setback. same height as the principal structure,up to 24 feet. Minimum Setback New accessory buildings g feet from interior side or rear and additions to existing lot lines. accessory buildings: 4 feet from any side or rear lot line. io feet from corner side lot line. Second story additions: 10 If accessory building is feet from any side or rear lot line, taller than 17 feet,setback unless abutting an alley,in which must be increased by 1 foot for case the setback can be reduced every additional foot in height to 4 feet. above 17 feet. If accessory building is taller than 17 feet,setback must be increased to 10 feet, unless abutting an alley,in which case setback can be reduced to 4 feet. Page 8 Introduce Alley Activation Requirements Detached ADUs are often constructed adjacent to public alleys,which provides an opportunity to activate the alleys.The proposed amendment adds requirements for ADUs abutting alleys to include lighting on the ADU to illuminate the abutting alley segment, and a path between the ADU and alley. Keep Short-Term Rental Restrictions The proposed amendment maintains the current ordinance prohibition on short-term rentals.A definition of"short-term rental"as a dwelling unit offered for rent or lease for less than 3o days would be added. Adjust Other Requirements The proposal adjusts and clarifies requirements for decks,patios,and outdoor space. Rooftop patios continue to be prohibited,but balconies are permitted provided they meet setback requirements. Parking requirements for ADUs would be maintained much as they are if the proposed amendments are adopted. Proposed additions to parking requirements include circumstances under which the required off- street parking stall may be waived.These are: • The property is in a zoning district with no minimum off-street parking requirement. • The property already contains at least one accessible stall above the minimum parking requirement. • The property is within one-half mile of a designated bicycle lane or path. KEY CONSIDERATION Planning staff identified one key consideration related to the proposal which is found on pages 10-12 of the Planning Commission staff report and summarized below. For the complete analysis,please see the staff report. Consideration 1-How the proposal helps implement city goals and policies identified in adopted plans Planning staff reviewed how the proposed amendments align with goals and policies found in Plan Salt Lake(2015)and Growing SLC:A Five-Year Housing Plan 2018-2022(2017).They determined the proposal is consistent with several items found in the Growth, Housing,Transportation&Mobility,and Preservation chapters of Plan Salt Lake.Among the initiatives proposed changes align with are the following: • Locate new development in areas with existing infrastructure and amenities, such as transit and transportation corridors. • Encourage a mix of land uses. • Promote infill and redevelopment of underutilized land. • Accommodate and promote an increase in the city's population. • Encourage housing options that accommodate aging in place. • Enable moderate density increases within existing neighborhoods where appropriate. Planning also found the proposal is consistent with goals and objectives in Growing SLC.These include: • Review and modify land-use and zoning regulations to reflect the affordability needs of a growing, pioneering city. • Develop infill ordinances that promote a diverse housing stock, increase housing options,create redevelopment opportunities, and allow additional units within existing structures,while maintaining neighborhood impacts. Page 19 • Revise the Accessory Dwelling Unit ordinance to expand its application and develop measures to promote its use. • Support diverse and vibrant neighborhoods by aligning land use policies that promote a housing market capable of accommodating residents throughout all stages of life. ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS Attachment C(pages 32-34)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 Complies purposes,goals,objectives,and policies of the city as stated through its various adopted planning documents. Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the specific Complies purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with the Proposed regulations would purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay zoning take precedence over districts which may impose additional standards. overlay zoning districts, except for the Historic Preservation Overlay District.Amendments would be limited by additional standards in this district. The extent to which a proposed text amendment implements Complies best current,professional practices of urban planning and design. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY • February 9, 2022-Petition initiated by Planning Commission. • May 12, 2022-Petition assigned to Michael McNamee, Principal Planner. • May 17, 2022-Application posted for online open house. • May 18, 2022-Notice mailed to all community councils. • March 30, 2022-45-day public comment period for recognized organizations ended. • September 2, 2022-Planning Commission agenda posted to the website and emailed to the listserv. • September 8, 2022-Staff report posted to Planning's website. • September 14, 2022-Planning Commission meeting and public hearing. Positive recommendation forwarded to the City Council. Page I to • September 29, 2022-Ordinance requested from Attorney's Office. • November 28, 2022-Planning received signed ordinance from the Attorney's Office. • December 12, 2022-Transmittal received in City Council Office. Page 1 ATTACHMENT A: Proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit Use Change from Conditional to Permitted Use in Residential Zoning Districts Zoning District District Name FR-1 Foothills Estate Residential FR-2 Foothills Residential FR-3 Foothills Residential R-1/12,000 Single-Family Residential R-1/7,000 Single-Family Residential R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential Continue to Be Permitted Residential Zoning Districts Zoning District Name of District SR-1&SR-IA Special Development Pattern Residential SR-3 Special Development Pattern Residential R-2 Single-and Two-Family Residential RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential RMF-35 Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential RMF-45 Moderate/High-Density Multi-Family Residential RMF-75 High-Density Multi-Family Residential RB Residential/Business R-MU-35 Residential/Mixed Use R-MU-45 Residential/Mixed Use R-MU Residential/Mixed Use RO Residential/Office Special Purpose Districts Zoning District Name of District FP Foothills Protection AG Agricultural AG-2 Agricultural AG-5 Agricultural AG-20 Agricultural MU Mixed Use Page 12 Change From Prohibited to Permitted Use Commercial Zoning Districts Zoning District Name of District CN Neighborhood Commercial SNB Small Neighborhood Business CB Commercial Business CS Community Shopping CC Corridor Commercial CSHBD Sugar House Business District CG General Commercial Transit Station Zoning Districts Zoning District Name of District TSA-UC Urban Core TSA-UN Urban Neighborhood TSA-MUEC Mixed Use Employment Center TSA-SP Special Purpose Form-Based Zoning Districts Zoning District Name of District FB-SC Special Purpose Corridor Core Subdistrict FB-SE Special Purpose Corridor Edge Subdistrict FB-UN1* Urban Neighborhood FB-UN2* Urban Neighborhood *Detached dwelling units currently permitted and will be removed from code Downtown Zoning Districts Zoning District Name of District D-1 Central Business District D-2 Downtown Support District D-3 Downtown Warehouse/Residential District D-4 Downtown Secondary Central Business District Gateway Zoning Districts Zoning District Name of District G-MU Gateway Mixed-Use Page ( 13 Continue to be Prohibited Manufacturing Zoning Districts Zoning District Name of District M-1 Light Manufacturing M-2 Heavy Manufacturing Residential Zoning Districts Zoning District Name of District SR-2 (Reserved) Special Purpose Zoning Districts Zoning District Name of District RP Research Park BP Business Park A Airport PL Public Lands PL-2 Public Lands I Institutional UI Urban Institutional OS Open Space NOS Natural Open Space MH Mobile Home Park EI Extractive Industries Page 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2023 (Amending chapter 21A.33, sections 21A.40.200, 21A.40.050, and 21A.27.030 related to Accessory Dwelling Units, and Amending definitions in Title 21 A associated with the foregoing) An ordinance amending sections 21A.40.200, 21A.40.050, and 21A.27.030 related to Accessory Dwelling Unit creation, size and form, amending Chapter 21A.33 to make Accessory Dwelling Units a permitted use across several zoning districts, and amending definitions in Title 2 1 A associated with the foregoing all pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00475. WHEREAS, on September 14, 2022, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission ("Planning Commission")held a public hearing on a petition submitted by the Planning Commission to amend land use regulations pertaining to accessory dwelling units (Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00475); and WHEREAS, at its September 14, 2022, meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council("City Council") on said petition; 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 Section 21A.40.200. That Section 21A.40.200 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is adopted as follows: 21A.40.200: ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS: A. Purpose. The regulatory purpose of this section is to promote an increase in the housing stock within the city and promote housing choices by allowing and regulating accessory dwelling units (ADUs). B. Conflicting Regulations. If a regulation found in this section is in conflict with an applicable regulation in the base zoning district, overlay district, or provision of general applicability, the regulation in this chapter shall take precedence, with the following exceptions: 1. The regulations set forth in the H Historic Preservation Overlay District; and 2. The Special Foothills Regulations set forth in section 21A.24.010.P of this Title. C. Owner Occupancy Required. The owner of the property, as defined in this section, shall reside on the property. For the purposes of this title, "owner occupant" shall mean the following: 1. An individual who is listed on a recorded deed as an owner of the property; 2. Any person who is related by blood, marriage, or adoption to an individual who is listed on recorded deed as an owner of the property; or 3. An individual who is a trustor of a family trust who possesses legal ownership of the property. 4. Exceptions a. Owner occupancy is not required for an ADU located on a property with a principal use as a duplex, multi-family dwelling, or non-residential land use. A single-family dwelling with an attached ADU does not constitute a duplex. b. The owner has a bona fide, temporary absence of three (3)years or less for activities such as military service, temporary job assignments, sabbaticals, or voluntary service (indefinite periods of absence from the dwelling shall not qualify for this exception); or c. The owner is placed in a hospital, nursing home, assisted living facility or other similar facility that provides regular medical care, excluding retirement living facilities or communities. D. Number Of Allowed ADUs: A single ADU is allowed on a property where permitted in chapter 21A.33 of this Title. E. Location on Property. An ADU is allowed in the following locations on a property as indicated below: 1. Internal ADUs shall be located within the buildable area of the property. 2. A detached ADU shall be allowed as indicated in the table below: Front yard Not permitted Corner Side yard Permitted if the ADU complies with the required setbacks in the table below and is no closer to the corner side property line than the principal structure. If the property is less than 50' in width, the ADU may be closer to the corner side property line than the principal structure. Interior Side yard Permitted if the ADU complies with the required setbacks in the table below and is located behind the rear facade of the principal building. Rear yard Permitted if the ADU complies with the required setbacks in the table below. Buildable area Permitted Notes 1. The use of the term "yard"in this section shall be interpreted to mean a required yard as indicated in the underlying zoning district. 3. A detached ADU shall be placed at a minimum distance from property lines as indicated below: Rear property line 3' Side property line 3' Corner Side property line 20% of the lot width, or 10', whichever is less Notes: 1. Additions to an existing accessory building shall comply with the setbacks in this table. This includes additions that add a second story. 2. An existing accessory building that is being converted to an ADU may maintain the existing setbacks of the accessory building. If a conversion includes an expansion (including adding a second story)the expansion shall comply with all applicable setback requirements in this table and in subsection 21A.40.200.F. F. ADU Building Height 1. The maximum building height for a detached ADU is 17 feet, subject to the following exceptions: a. Height may be increased up to 24 feet for a pitched roof or 20 feet for a flat roof provided the side and rear yard setbacks are increased one foot for each additional foot in building height above 17 feet. The setback does not need to be increased above the minimum indicated in Section E on the side of an ADU that abuts an alley or on the side of an ADU that abuts a property that is in a zoning district other than those listed in section 21A.24 of this Title. b. Converting a legally existing accessory building is permitted when the existing accessory building exceeds the permitted height of this section. c. When an ADU is located fully within the buildable area of the property, the height of the ADU is allowed up to the permitted height of the principal building in the underlying zoning district. d. Solar panels attached to the roof of an ADU are permitted to exceed the maximum height of the structure up to four feet. 2. Building height for a detached ADU shall be measured in the same manner as the height for the principal building. 3. An internal ADU is subject to the same height requirements as the principal building. G. ADU Parking 1. The number of parking stalls provided for the principal use shall not be reduced below the minimum identified in Chapter 21 A.44 of this Title in order to accommodate an ADU. One parking stall is required for the ADU, except as indicated below: a. The property is in a zoning district with no minimum off street parking requirement; b. The property already contains at least one accessible stall above the minimum parking requirement for the principal use; c. The property is within a 1/4 mile radius of a public transit stop; or d. The property is within '/z mile of a city-designated bicycle lane or path. H. Regulation of decks,patios, and outdoor space for detached ADUs 1. Decks more than 2 feet above the existing grade are prohibited unless the ADU is located within the buildable area of the lot in which case the deck shall be subject to the same regulations for decks that apply to the principal building. 2. Rooftop patios on a detached ADU are prohibited. 3. Patios are permitted. A patio may be covered with a roof provided the square footage of the roof is no larger than 120 square feet and the covered patio complies with the setbacks required of the ADU. A covered patio shall not count towards the maximum square footage requirement of the ADU, but does count towards the total building coverage of the lot. 4. Balconies on ADUs: a balcony is permitted on a building containing an ADU provided the balcony does not extend into a required ADU setback and extends no further than 5 feet from an exterior wall of the ADU. Balconies shall not contain HVAC equipment nor be used as storage areas. 5. Internal ADUs shall be subject to the same standards for decks,patios, and other encroachments that apply to the principal building and use. I. ADUs located along a public alley. A detached ADU that is located within 15 feet of a public alley shall include the following: I. An exterior light shall be located on the exterior wall of the ADU to illuminate portions of the alley adjacent to the ADU. The lighting fixture shall be shielded, oriented and designed to direct light down and avoid light pollution onto adjacent properties. All uplighting is prohibited. 2. A 4' wide path from the alley to the entrance of the ADU shall be provided. If there is a fence between the ADU and the alley, a gate shall be provided, and the path shall lead to the gate. If the ADU is located within 15 feet of two or more public alleys, this requirement shall only apply to one of the alleys. 3. An ADU located on an alley that exists on the recorded plat maps or Atlas Plats of the city but has not been used for vehicular access or is otherwise blocked by encroachments such as fences or vegetation are exempt from this requirement. J. ADU Gross Floor Area: I. Detached ADU. None may exceed 1,000 square feet in gross floor area. 2. Internal ADU. There is no maximum gross floor area provided the building complies with all applicable standards in the underlying zoning district. 3. Gross floor area for a detached ADU shall be calculated as follows: a. When the building includes other allowed accessory uses, only the square footage dedicated to the ADU shall be counted. b. When the ADU is on a second level, stairs and required landings providing access to the ADU shall not be counted. c. Loft space with a ceiling height lower than 7 feet within an ADU shall not be counted towards the total square footage of the ADU. d. Basements shall not count towards the maximum gross floor area of the ADU, so long as: i. The basement is only used for storage or a use permitted by section 21A.40.040.E of this chapter; and ii. There is no internal circulation between the ADU and the basement. K. Second Story Windows. Windows on the second story of a detached ADU are prohibited on an exterior wall that is adjacent to a side or rear property line unless: 1. The window is a clerestory window where the bottom of the window is at least 6 feet above the finished floor of the second story; 2. The window is on a wall that faces an elevation of the principal building; 3. The window faces and is at least 10 feet from a side or rear property line; 4. The exterior wall is adjacent to an alley; or 5. The window faces a side or rear property line that is adjacent to a property in a zoning district that permits commercial uses or a property that contains a nonresidential use. L. Maximum Building Coverage. Accessory dwelling units are subject to the maximum building and yard coverage requirements of the applicable zoning and overlay districts. M. Building Permit Required. A building permit is required to establish any ADU in the city. All ADUs are required to comply with all adopted applicable codes including but not limited to building, fire, and public utilities. N. Administrative Regulations: the following administrative regulations are intended to provide direction on applying and interpreting the regulations of this chapter. 1. There is no minimum lot size required for an ADU. 2. An ADU does not count towards the density allowed in the underlying zoning district. 3. ADUs that have been approved prior to (effective date), as part of a conditional use are considered legal conforming uses and may be modified if the modification complies with the requirements of this section and any other applicable standard of this Title. O. Zoning Certificate and Good Landlord Program: 1. A certificate of occupancy for the ADU shall not be issued until a zoning certificate is issued. A zoning certificate may be issued at the same time as the certificate of occupancy. If a certificate of occupancy is not required, the zoning certificate shall be issued prior to the ADU being occupied. 2. If a business license is required for the rental of the ADU, the owner shall be enrolled in the landlord/tenant initiative program as defined in title 5, `Business Taxes, Licenses And Regulations", of this Code prior to issuing a zoning certificate. P. Restrictive Covenant: An ADU that is required to be owner occupied shall have a restrictive covenant filed against the property on which the ADU is located, which restrictive covenant shall include the following information: 1. A description of the primary dwelling and the ADU, including whether the ADU is within the principal structure or a detached structure, the square footage of both the primary dwelling and the ADU, and how off-street parking is allocated between the primary dwelling and the ADU. 2. A statement that the ADU may only be used and occupied in accordance with the applicable regulations adopted in the Salt Lake City Code. 3. The restrictive covenant shall be recorded with the Salt Lake County Recorder's Office against the subject property. A copy of the recorded covenant shall be provided to the Planning Division and attached to the building permit record prior to final inspection of the ADU. If no final inspection is required, the copy of the recorded covenant shall be provided prior to occupying the ADU. Q. Use Regulations 1. An ADU shall not be rented as a short term rental as defined in 21.A.62.040. 2. An ADU may include any home occupation authorized by this title. 3. An ADU may be converted to any other accessory use that is allowed in the zoning district. 4. An ADU cannot be converted to another principal use. SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Section 21A.40.050.13.2. That Section 21 A.40.050.13.2 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 2. Building Coverage: a. In the FR, R-1, R-2 and SR residential districts the maximum footprint of any accessory buildings shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the building footprint of the principal structure except as follows: (1) Notwithstanding the size of the footprint of the principal building, at least four hundred eighty (480) square feet of accessory building coverage shall be allowed subject to the compliance with all other requirements in section 21 A.40.050. (2) Accessory buildings constructed within the buildable area that are located between the rear facade of the principal building and the rear yard setback may exceed 720 square feet provided the building is located entirely within the buildable area and the property complies with the maximum building coverage requirements of the underlying zoning district. (3) The building coverage for a detached accessory dwelling unit shall be subject to the standards in 21 A.40.200, regardless of the building coverage requirement in this section. (4) An accessory building that contains an accessory dwelling unit on the second level may exceed the maximum coverage up to the footprint of the accessory dwelling unit. b. The combined coverage for all hoop houses, greenhouses, and cold frames shall not exceed thirty five percent(35%) of the building footprint of the principal structure. SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Section 21A.33.020. That Section 21A.33.020 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended as follows: 21A.33.020: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS: Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District F F F R- R- R- S S S R- R M R R R R- R- R- R R- R- R- 1j 1/ 1j R- R- R- 2 M F- M M B M M M O 1j 2j 3/ 1 2 3 F- F- F- U- U- U 12 7, 5, 35 4 21 12 ,0 0 0 3 45 75 35 45 3, ,7 ,0 0 0 0 0 56 8 o o o o 0 0 0 Dwelling, P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P accessory unit SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Section 21A.33.030. That Section 21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended as follows: 21A.33.030: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS: Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District CN CB CS' CC CSHBDI CG SNB Dwelling: Accessory unit P P P P P P P SECTION 5. Amending the Text of Section 21A.33.035. That Section 21A.33.035 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended as follows: 21A•33.035: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR TRANSIT STATION AREA DISTRICTS: Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District TSA-UC TSA-UN TSA-MUEC TSA-SP Core Transition Cor Transition Cor Transition Cor Transition e e e Dwelling: Accessory P P P P P P P P unit SECTION 6. Amending the Text of Section 21A.33.050. That Section 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended as follows: 21A•33•050: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS: Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4 Dwelling: Accessory unit P P P P SECTION T Amending the Text of Section 21A.33.060. That Section 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended as follows: 21A.33.o6o: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES IN THE GATEWAY DISTRICT: Use G-MU Dwelling: Accessory unit P SECTION & Amending the Text of Section 21A.33.070. That Section 21A.33.070 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended as follows: 21A•33•070: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES IN FORM BASED DISTRICTS: Use I Permitted Uses By District FB FB-UN2 FB-SC FB-SE UN1 Dwelling: Accessory unit P P P P SECTION 9. Amending the Text of Section 21A.27.030.D.3. That Section 21 A.27.030.D.3 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: D. Other Applicable Development Standards: 3. Accessory Uses, Buildings And Structures: All accessory uses,buildings and structures shall comply with the applicable standards in chapter 21A.40 of this title. a. Form Based Special Purpose Corridor District specific standards for detached or accessory parking garages or structures: (1) Detached or accessory multilevel parking garages or structures shall have the same setback requirements for principal structures. (2) The minimum setback required shall be landscaped to provide a buffer to the abutting Residential District. No structure (primary or accessory) shall be permitted within this landscaped buffer. SECTION 10. Amending the Text of Section 21 A.60.020. That Section 21 A.60.020 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended to include the following terms: Atlas, 5-Acre, And 10-Acre Plats Balcony Bike Lane Bike Path Deck Dwelling, Accessory Unit(Internal) Footprint Non-residential Use Porch Rooftop Patio Short Term Rental Transit Route Uplighting SECTION 11. Amending the Text of Section 21A.62.040. That definitions of the terms "Atlas, 5-Acre and 10-Acre Plats", "Balcony", "Bike Lane", "Bike Path", "Deck", "Dwelling, Accessory Unit (Detached)", "Dwelling, Accessory Unit(Internal)", "Footprint", "Non- Residential Use", "Porch", "Rooftop Patio", "Short Term Rental", "Transit Route", and "Uplighting"be added to Section 21A.62.040 and amending the terms "Dwelling, Accessory Unit (ADU)", and"Building Coverage" in Section 21A.62.040 of the Salt Lake City Code as follows: ATLAS, 5-ACRE, AND 10-ACRE PLATS: A map depicting the subdivisions of land within the City. These plats are a scheme of how the City was originally laid out. The City started with plats A through L, Salt Lake City Survey. As the City expanded its boundaries, 5 acre and 10 acre Big Field Survey Plats were added and then the numbered plats I through 76. They show information about streets,public right of ways and, some private right of ways. BALCONY: An elevated floor space projecting beyond the exterior walls of a building that is not supported on the ground by posts, columns, or similar supporting structural elements. A balcony shall not be used as a means for entry into a building. BIKE LANE: A division of a road for use by cyclists marked off with painted lines or other means. BIKE PATH: A path or road for bicycles and not motor vehicles. May include paths that also allow pedestrian or equestrian access. DECK: A platform sitting above finished grade and supported on the ground. DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (ADU): A type of accessory use that includes a residential unit located on the same lot as a separate principal use, either within the principal structure or within a separate accessory structure. The accessory dwelling unit shall be a complete housekeeping unit with a shared or separate entrance, and separate kitchen, sleeping area, closet space, and bathroom facilities. DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (DETACHED): An accessory dwelling unit located wholly within a structure that is accessory to the principal use and buildings on a lot or parcel. DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (INTERNAL): An accessory dwelling unit created: 4. within a primary building; and 5. for the purpose of offering a long-term rental of 30 consecutive days or longer. BUILDING COVERAGE: That percentage of the lot covered by principal or accessory buildings, including cantilevered portions of the building. FOOTPRINT: The measurement of lot area covered by a building, including cantilevered portions of the building. NON-RESIDENTIAL USE: Lands, buildings or structures or portions thereof used or designed or intended for uses other than a residential use, including, but not limited to, commercial, industrial and institutional uses. PORCH: An unenclosed structure attached to a building, covered by a separate roof, and providing access to an entrance to a building. Similar structures providing access to an entrance other than the primary entrance shall be considered a covered deck when located on a platform that is more than two feet(2') above finished grade. ROOFTOP PATIO: A portion of a flat roof that is dedicated to occupiable space, or a deck sitting atop a roof. SHORT TERM RENTAL: The use of a dwelling unit or units that are offered for rent or lease for a period less than 30 days. TRANSIT ROUTE: A route over which a public transit vehicle travels and that is specifically labeled or numbered for the purpose of picking up and dropping off passengers at regularly scheduled stops and intervals. UPLIGHTING: Lights that have been designed to throw illumination upward. SECTION 12. 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 , 2023. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CITY RECORDER (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM Bill No. of 2023. Salt Lake CityAttorney's Office Published: Date: February 15, 2023 Ordinance Amending Accessory Dwelling Units By: Katherine D.Pasker,Senior City Attorney I SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE 2 No. of 2023 3 4 (Amending chapter 21A.33, sections 21A.40.200, 21A.40.050, and 21A.27.030 related to 5 Accessory Dwelling Units, and Amending definitions in Title 21 A associated with the foregoing) 6 7 An ordinance amending sections 21A.40.200, 21A.40.050, and 21A.27.030 related to 8 Accessory Dwelling Unit creation, size and form, amending Chapter 21A.33 to make Accessory 9 Dwelling Units a permitted use across several zoning districts, and amending definitions in Title 10 2 1 A associated with the foregoing all pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00475. 1 I WHEREAS, on September 14, 2022, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission 12 ("Planning Commission") held a public hearing on a petition submitted by the Planning 13 Commission to amend land use regulations pertaining to accessory dwelling units (Petition No. 14 PLNPCM2022-00475); and 15 WHEREAS, at its September 14, 2022, meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor 16 of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council("City Council") on said 17 petition; and 18 WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the City Council has determined that 19 adopting this ordinance is in the city's best interests. 20 NOW, THEREFORE,be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 21 SECTION 1. Amending Section 21A.40.200. That Section 21A.40.200 of the Salt Lake 22 City Code shall be and hereby is adopted as follows: 23 21A.40.200: ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS: 24 A. Pu e ctateme h gtilator-intention f this � do *�arc -crs�7rZrrr��ccrrvrczcr�co. 25 1. Create new housing units while respecting the appearance and scale of single famil 26 residential deyel.,,-.,ti,ent 27 2. Provide-more housing ehoiees in residential , LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 28 , an 29 embodied energy contained within existing stf et,,.os• 30 , and families 31 seeking smaller households; 32 , and families with gr-ow 33 , 35 6. R,-oade,, the range of"f— d"b1®housing tl„-,,,,nl,o t the City; 36 , 37 ; 38 Q. Cupport transit oriented development and reduce auto usage by increasing de..,*'., 39 transit; and 40 ' 41 . 42 " shall mean t 43 following: 44 1. An individual who is listed ste r-ecoFded deed asowner- f the r ert y; 45 is 47 'I. A -ttstor- of a family tFust who possess s legal owner-ship of the- 48 pr-o 49 , 50 " , of this title and subject to oompliance with the applicable PFON'iSionS Of thiS 51 tithe- 52 , but not limited 53 to the F following,„otl,o4s 54 1. Conver-ting existing living ar-eawithin a single family dwelling as an addition to an 55 existing single family dwelling, or within a single family dwelling OFeated as neW e ; 56 of 57 , as an addition to an existing 58 . 59 : 60 1. GeneralRequirements Applicable To rm11 TEEeSs3r Dwelling axr,xr;te s 61 : City may permit one aeeessory &,elling unit for-eaeb lot that eontains -a 62 single family dy oll; n LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 63 b. Not A Unit Of Density: 64 . 65 e. Ownef:ship: An accessof-y,dwelling unit shall not be sold separ-ately or subdivided from 66 . 67 -J. Owner Oeeupancy: The City shall only permit an aceessory dwelling tinit when a 68 . 70 , tempofafy absenee of three (3) years of less for-aetivities 71 , 72exeeption)-, Of 73 , assisted living facility of othe 74 , 75 i*'- . 76 e. Number Of Residents: The total number- of residents that reside in an accessory aa__ 77 dwelling unit may of e-xeee-u the icirmber allowed fO " "family" as defined lii 78 or@ccc-rt;vrr-�� x.:crz..�, , �znxnrvirs TL-'�'li���vr irr 79 T. YA)30 iTC this . Le—. 81 g. Parking: An accessory dwelling tinit shall Fequire a minimum of one on site par-king 82 spaee. if the property has an existing dr-iveway, the drive-way area located between the pr-opert 83 line with an adjaeent stfeet and a legally located off street parking area ean satisfy the pafking 84 .ineipal tise is complied with and the driveway 85 (8') wide. The par-ki 86 requirement may be waived if--. 87 (1) Legal ly loeated on street paFking is available along the street ffontage of the subj ee 88 of of tran,;it 90 2. Additional Requirements FoF Aecessoiy Dwelling Units Located Within A Single Family 91 Dwelling: AccessoFy dwelling units located within a single family dwelling shall comply with 92 the following standaFdR 93 a. Any addition shall eomply with the building height, yar-d r-eqttiFements, and building 94 95 97 b. Size Re-quir-emems: No aecessofy dwelling unit shall oectipy mofe thim fifty per-cen 98 (500%o) Of the gFOSS sqttar-e footage of the single family dwelling. The square footage 99 attaebed gaFage shall not be included in the gross sqtiafe footage-unless the aeeessofy dwelling 100 . LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 101within 102 single family dwelling shall only be,,®nuitt^.l in the F llo win l ^.,tions• 103 (1) An existing o„t,-.nee t the single family dwelling; 104 (2) When located on a building facade that faces a corner side yafd, the entfance shall bee 105 set hair a minimum of twenty f of (20') f om the fort building facade; 106 (3) Extefior- staifs leading to an emr-anee above the first level of the pfi-neipal sttuetur-ee 107 shall only be l..`.at^rl on the Fear elevation of the building. 108 109 • 110 (5) Located on the reaf facade of the dwelling; ill ' ' 112 . 113 3. Additional Requirements For An Accessor-y Dwelling Unit Located in A Detached 114 Accessory Building: An accessoty dwelling u-nit located in a detaehed aecessofy building of as 115 an addition to an existing accessofy building shall eomply with the following standafds, 116 that an), of the standards in this section may be modifie" t,y the Historic; Landmark C 117 f pei4y located in an 14 u;sty„ic Prosen,.,tion O eflay District): 118 , bulk, and height 119 limitations fund m o^tie "?l R 4 f _ of this ehapto,- a„-1 a accessory building r-egulati 120 found in the underlying zoning district or any applicable overlay zoning district unless otherwise- 121 regulated by this section. An accessoty dwelling unit. located in an additional accessory building 122 may be constructed and shall not count towafds the maximum square footage of all accessor� 123 buildings as stated in subsection 21A.40.050132 of this chapteF. The accessor-y building 124 eontaining an aeeessoi=y dwelling unit shall not have a footpfint that is gFeater-than fift�y pereen 125 ° , and shall not exceed six htindfed fifty (650) 126 square feet. An aeeessor-y building that eomains an aeeessoFy dwelling unit and any other 127 128 2 A 4 nS(�•n ^>,,rto 129 b. Maximum Govefage: Shall eomply with the build* ovefage Fequiremems 130 , whichever-is 131 132 0. Setbacks. All accessory dwelling units located in an accessory building shall be loeated- 133 between the reaf wall of the single family dwelling and the rear-pfoper-ty line and be subject to 134 the following setback 135 (10') ffom the single family dwelling loeated 136 or the same pa Feel and any single family dwelling on a arl;. eent property-. 137 (2) ciao anfear-yaFd sotbaeks: 138 ' from a.n.y 139 ;ao rear lot lino LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 140 (B)— Additions-4E rg,keeesse >Buildings: The addition shall be l,,e to 141 . if an existing aeeessofy Wilding 142 ineltides an addition, all of of pot4ions of the existing stmetiir-e may be used as an aeeessof� 143 144 ean be alteFed to comply with the applieable seetions of the adopted Fire Code of the City. 145k ) Seeond Stofy Additions: A second stofy addition to an existing aeeessofy building 146 ' 147 side of rear property line and the seeond story addition eomplies with all applieable Fegulations 148 . if the 149 ' 150 A. —Building ueigh1 151 (4) The maximum height of an aeeessor-y building :i aeoessofy dwelling unit 152 shall not exeeed the height of the single family &,elling on the pr-opeFty OF exceed seventeen fee 153 (17) in height ,h;eheyef is less 154 , an 155 ---------bulldi——t—iming an aecessoi�, dwelling unit may be equal to the height of-the—sin& 156 (24') for an accessory 157 (20') for an aeeessory building with a flat 158 ' 159 (4') if the side or reaf 160 lot line ; add e„t t an .,lley. 161 (2) AccessoFy building height shall be measured to the ridge of the roof for buildings 162 with a pitched r-oof and t the top of the , of line for- a flat F ,f 163 e. Size Requifements: An aceessor-y building that contains an aeoessor-y dwelling uni 164 shall be subjeet to the building eovefage fequir-ements for aeoessefy buildings found in 165 seeti 166 ` Foss f400F area of s;v h„ndfe,a fifty (ticm square foot 167 .. — trance Locations. The ntr-anee to an aecessory dwelling unit in an aceessory buildin 168 shall he located: 169 (1) Faeing an alley, publie street of f4eing the rear-faeade of the single family dwelling 170 on the saine property. 171 172 foot (l 0') f,,,,-, the side oF rear pfope,-ty line 173 ' 174 firoom. a side or r-eaf pr-operty line unless the applicable side of rear pfopet4y line is adjacent to an 175 alley in which case th i i etback for-the aeeessoiy building applies to the s 176 177 a^^ess y dwelling unit shall eomply with the following stanch ds: 178 (1) Windows shall be no lafgeF than neoessar-y to oomply with the minimum Building 179 , eluestor-y windows, of:obseur-ed glazing LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 180 with 181 _ ' 182 ,„ope-ty line unless the sider-eaf pfoper-ty line ;s adjacent t an cello. 183 , lows shall maintain 184 simila dimension and design as the windows found on the principal stfuetwe. 185 , 186 , 187 if compliant with Building and Fire Codes. Existing windows located on a second level within a 188 . 189 h. Balconies And Deek�loonies and deeks-sha11b designed as-follows 190 (1) Shall not exceect eighty (90) square feet in size when located above the gfound level 191 of the building• 192 ' 193 b,le side or fear and lot line ; adjacent to a alley; 194 (3) Roof op `leeks are prohibited. 195 F. Registration Process: PropeFty owners seeking to establish an accessoty dwelling-nnit-,hA 196 eomply with the f ll wi g: 197 l n ppli..,tio : 198 199 this title. 200 201 isstied until a 7-oning eer-tificate is issued. A 7oning cei4ifleate may be issued at the same time as 202 , the zoning certificate 203 . 204 (2) Good Landlord Program. if a business lieense is required for-the rental of eithef the 205 , the owner shall be enfolled in the landlord/tenant initiative 206 Regulations",, 207 issuing a zoning oer-tificate. 208 b. Building Pennit: Apply fof and obtain a building pumit for the pfoposed aooessof� 209 dwelling unit regardless of method of e-e t;o,, 210 c. Proof Of Owner-Occupancy: An applioation for an accessory dwelling unit shall 211 inelude doctimentation that demonstrates an owner oeetipant resides on the property. The 212 documentation shall include any legal document that demonstfates complianeewith subsection 213 B, "Owner Oeo„r rt" of this se t; 214 2. Deed Restr-ietion. A lot appr-oved fof development with an aeoessofy dwelling tmit shall 215 , and shall be 216 . The form shall state that the owner- ooeupant mus LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 217 oeoupy the pfopefty as r-e"ifed within this section. Stieh deed restriction shall nin with the land 218 . 219 220 oecupancy or be ocetipied until the property owner completes the regi aass outlined M' 221 this section. RegistFation is not Fequifed if the ADU is oectipied by fel s of the pr-opeAy 222 owner: 223 G. Abandonment: if a property ble or unwillint-, too -fiH the requirements of this 224 section, the owner shall remove those features of the a ....... d_e4ing unit that make it 225 dwelling unit. Failure to do so will'. constitute a violation of this section. 226 14. Repoi4ing: The Plaflning Division shall pf:o;,,ide an annual r-epoft to the City couneil 227 detailing the number of applications, addFess of eaeh unit for-which an applieation was 228 submitted, a brief explanation of reasons why an applioationvvas denied, and a map shovving 229 . The Fepoi4 shall be transmitted to the City Counei4-by 230 FebFiiafy l 5th the prev ear, (0f:d. 53 'Q—�8) 231 232 A. Purpose. The re u latorypurpose of this section is to Promote an increase in the housings tock 233 within the city and Promote housing choices by allowingand nd regulating accessory dwelling units 234 ADUs . 235 B. Conflicting Regulations. If a regulation found in this section is in conflict with an applicable 236 regulation in the base zoning district, overlay district, or provision of general applicability, the 237 regulation in this chapter shall take precedence, with the following xceptions: 238 1. The regulations set forth in the H Historic Preservation Overlay District; and 239 2. The Special Foothills Regulations set forth in section 21A.24.010.P of this Title. 240 C. Owner Occupancy Required. The owner of the property, as defined in this section, shall 241 reside on the property. For the purposes of this title, "owner occupant" shall mean the following_ 242 1. An individual who is listed on a recorded deed as an owner of the property 243 2. AU person who is related by blood, marriage, or adoption to an individual who is listed 244 on recorded deed as an owner of the property; or 245 3. An individual who is a trustor of a family trust who possesses legal ownership of the 246 prol2el:ly. 247 4. Exceptions 248 a. Owner occupancy is not required for an ADU located on a property with a 249 principal use as a duplex, multi-family dwelling, or non-residential land use. A 250 single-family dwelling with an attached ADU does not constitute a duplex. 251 b. The owner has a bona fide, temporary absence of three (3) years or less for 252 activities such as military service, temporary job assignments, sabbaticals, or 253 voluntary service (indefinite periods of absence from the dwelling shall not 254 qualify for this exception); or LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 255 c. The owner is placed in a hospital, nursing home, assisted livingfacility acility or other 256 similar facility that provides regular medical care, excluding retirement living 257 facilities or communities. 258 D. Number Of Allowed ADUs: A single ADU is allowed on a property where permitted in 259 chapter 21A.33 of this Title. 260 261 E. Location on Property. An ADU is allowed in the following locations on a property as 262 indicated below: 263 1. Internal ADUs shall be located within the buildable area of the property. 264 2. A detached ADU shall be allowed as indicated in the table below: Front yard Not permitted Corner Sided Permitted if the ADU complies with the required setbacks in the table below and is no closer to the corner side property line than the principal structure. If the property is less than 50' in width, the ADU may be closer to the corner side property line than the principal structure. Interior Sided Permitted if the ADU complies with the required setbacks in the table below and is located behind the rear fa ade of the principal building. Rearms Permitted if the ADU complies with the required setbacks in the table below. Buildable area Permitted Notes 1. The use of the term"yard" in this section shall be interpreted to mean a required as indicated in the underlying zoning district. 265 266 3. A detached ADU shall be placed at a minimum distance from property lines as indicated 267 below: Rear property line 3' Side propgKtyjiUq 3' Corner Side property line 20% of the lot width, or 10', whichever is less Notes: 1. Additions to an existing accessory building shall comply with the setbacks in this table. This includes additions that add a second story. 2. An existing accessory building that is being converted to an ADU may maintain the existing setbacks of the accessory building. If a conversion includes an expansion (including adding a second story) the expansion shall comply with all applicable setback requirements in this table and in subsection 21A.40.200.F. 268 269 F. ADU Building Height LEGISLATIVE DRAF F 270 1. The maximum building height for a detached ADU is 17 feet, subject to the following 271 exceptions: 272 a. Height may be increased up to 24 feet for a pitched roof or 20 feet for a flat roof 273 provided the side and rear yard setbacks are increased one foot for each additional 274 foot in building height above 17 feet. The setback does not need to be increased 275 above the minimum indicated in Section E on the side of an ADU that abuts an 276 alley or on the side of an ADU that abuts a property that is in a zoning district 277 other than those listed in section 21 A.24 of this Title. 278 b. Converting a legally existing accessory building is permitted when the existing 279 accessory building exceeds the permitted height of this section. 280 c. When an ADU is located fully within the buildable area of the property, the 281 height of the ADU is allowed 0 to the permitted height of the principal building 282 in the underlyingzoning oning district. 283 d. Solar panels attached to the roof of an ADU are permitted to exceed the maximum 284 height of the structure up to four feet. 285 2. Building height for a detached ADU shall be measured in the same manner as the height 286 for the principal building. 287 3. An internal ADU is subject to the same height requirements as the principal building. 288 G. ADU Parking 289 1. The number of parking stalls provided for the principal use shall not be reduced below 290 the minimum identified in Chapter 21A.44 of this Title in order to accommodate an 291 ADU. One parking stall is required for the ADU, except as indicated below: 292 a. The property is in a zoning district with no minimum off street parking 293 requirement; 294 b. The property already contains at least one accessible stall above the minimum 295 parking requirement for the principal use; 296 c. The property is within a 1/4 mile radius of a public transit stop; or 297 d. The property is within % mile of a city-designated bicycle lane or path. 298 H. Regulation of decks,patios, and outdoor space for detached ADUs 299 1. Decks more than 2 feet above the existing grade are prohibited unless the ADU is 300 located within the buildable area of the lot in which case the deck shall be subject to 301 the same regulations for decks that apply to the principal building. 302 2. Rooftop patios on a detached ADU are prohibited. 303 3. Patios are permitted. A patio may be covered with a roof provided the square footage 304 of the roof is no larger than 120 square feet and the covered patio complies with the 305 setbacks required of the ADU. A covered patio shall not count towards the maximum 306 square footage requirement of the ADU, but does count towards the total building 307 coverage of the lot. 308 4. Balconies on ADUs: a balcony is permitted on a building containing an ADU 309 provided the balcony does not extend into a required ADU setback and extends no LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 310 further than 5 feet from an exterior wall of the ADU. Balconies shall not contain 311 HVAC equipment nor be used as storage areas. 312 5. Internal ADUs shall be subject to the same standards for decks,patios, and other 313 encroachments that apply to the principal building and use. 314 I. ADUs located along a public alley. A detached ADU that is located within 15 feet of a public 315 alley shall include the following_ 316 1. An exterior light shall be located on the exterior wall of the ADU to illuminate 317 portions of the alley adjacent to the ADU. The lighting fixture shall be shielded, 318 oriented and designed to direct light down and avoid light pollution onto adjacent 319 properties. All upli hating is prohibited. 320 2. A 4' wide path from the alley to the entrance of the ADU shall be provided. If there is 321 a fence between the ADU and the alley, a gate shall be provided, and the path shall 322 lead to the gate. If the ADU is located within 15 feet of two or more public alley 323 requirement shall only pply to one of the alleys. 324 3. An ADU located on an alley that exists on the recorded plat maps or Atlas Plats of the 325 city but has not been used for vehicular access or is otherwise blocked by 326 encroachments such as fences or vegetation are exempt from this requirement. 327 328 J. ADU Gross Floor Area: 329 1. Detached ADU. None may exceed 1,000 square feet in gross floor area. 330 2. Internal ADU. There is no maximum gross floor area provided the building complies 331 with all applicable standards in the underlying zoning oning district. 332 3. Gross floor area for a detached ADU shall be calculated as follows: 333 a. When the building includes other allowed accessory uses, only the square footage 334 dedicated to the ADU shall be counted. 335 b. When the ADU is on a second level, stairs and required landings providing access 336 to the ADU shall not be counted. 337 c. Loft space with a ceiling height lower than 7 feet within an ADU shall not be 338 counted towards the total square footage of the ADU. 339 d. Basements shall not count towards the maximum gross floor area of the ADU, so 340 long as: 341 i. The basement is only used for storage or a use permitted by section 342 21A.40.040.E of this chapter; and 343 ii. There is no internal circulation between the ADU and the basement. 344 K. Second Story Windows. Windows on the second story of a detached ADU are prohibited on 345 an exterior wall that is adjacent to a side or rear property line unless: 346 1. The window is a clerestory window where the bottom of the window is at least 6 feet 347 above the finished floor of the second story 348 2. The window is on a wall that faces an elevation of the principal building;. 349 3. The window faces and is at least 10 feet from a side or rear property line; LEGISLATIVE DRAF F 350 4. The exterior wall is adjacent to an alley; or 351 5. The window faces a side or rear property line that is adjacent to a property in a zoning 352 district that permits commercial uses or a property that contains a nonresidential use. 353 L. Maximum Building Coverage. Accessory dwelling units are subject to the maximum building 354 and yard coverage requirements of the applicable zoning and overlay districts. 355 M. Building Permit Required. A building permit is required to establish any ADU in the city. 356 All ADUs are required to comply with all adopted applicable codes including but not limited to 357 building, fire, and public utilities. 358 N. Administrative Regulations: the following administrative regulations are intended to provide 359 direction on applying and interpretingthe he regulations of this chapter. 360 1. There is no minimum lot size required for an ADU. 361 2. An ADU does not count towards the density allowed in the underlyingzoning oning district. 362 3. ADUs that have been approved prior to (effective date), as part of a conditional use are 363 considered legal conforming uses and may be modified if the modification complies with 364 the requirements of this section and any other applicable standard of this Title. 365 O. Zoning Certificate and Good Landlord Program: 366 1. A certificate of occupancy for the ADU shall not be issued until a zoning certificate is 367 issued. A zoning certificate may be issued at the same time as the certificate of 368 occupancy. If a certificate of occupancy is not required, the zoning certificate shall be 369 issued prior to the ADU being occupied. 370 2. If a business license is required for the rental of the ADU, the owner shall be enrolled in 371 the landlord/tenant initiative program as defined in title 5, "Business Taxes, Licenses And 372 Regulations", of this Code prior to issuing a zoning certificate. 373 P. Restrictive Covenant: An ADU that is required to be owner occupied shall have a restrictive 374 covenant filed against the property on which the ADU is located, which restrictive covenant shall 375 include the following information: 376 1. A description of the primary dwelling and the ADU, including whether the ADU is 377 within the principal structure or a detached structure, the square footage of both the 378 primary dwelling and the ADU, and how off-street parking is allocated between the 379 primary dwelling and the ADU. 380 2. A statement that the ADU may only be used and occupied in accordance with the 381 applicable regulations adopted in the Salt Lake Ci . Code. 382 3. The restrictive covenant shall be recorded with the Salt Lake County Recorder's Office 383 against the subject property. A copy of the recorded covenant shall be provided to the 384 Planning Division and attached to the building permit record prior to final inspection of 385 the ADU. If no final inspection is required, the copy of the recorded covenant shall be 386 provided prior to occupying the ADU. 387 Q. Use Regulations LEGISLATIVE DRAF F 388 1. An ADU shall not be rented as a short term rental as defined in 21.A.62.040. 389 2. An ADU may include any home occupation authorized by this title. 390 3. An ADU may be converted to any other accessory use that is allowed in the zoning 391 district. 392 4. An ADU cannot be converted to another principal use. 393 SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Section 21A.40.050.B.2. That Section 394 21A.40.050.B.2 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 395 2. Building Coverage: 396 a. In the FR, R-1, R-2 and SR residential districts the max;,,,,,,,, building coverage of al 397 maximum footprint of any accessory buildings, excluding hoop house greenhouse 398 , shall not exceed fifty 399 percent (50%) of the building footprint of the principal structure„p to a m.,v;m,,m o 400 seven hundred twenty (720) square feet for a single family dwelling and one thousand 401 except as follows: 402 403 limited to fouF hund+ed eighty (4 80) squafe feet with an additional one hundred 404 . 405 Notwithstanding the size of the footprint of the principal building, at least four 406 hundred eighty (480) square feet of accessory building coverage shall be allowed 407 subject to the compliance with subjection B 1 of this section with all other 408 requirements in section 21A.40.050. 409 (22,) Accessory buildings constructed within the buildable area that are located between 410 the rear facade of the principal building and the rear yard setback may exceed 720 411 square feet provided the building is located entirely within the buildable area and the 412 property complies with the maximum building coverage requirements of the 413 underlyingzoning oning district. 414 QJ The building coverage for a detached accessory dwelling unit shall be subject to the 415 standards in 21A.40.200, regardless of the building coverage requirement in this 416 section. 417 (4) An accessory building that contains an accessory dwelling unit on the second level 418 may exceed the maximum coverage up to the footprint of the accessory dwelling 419 unit. 420 b. The combined coverage for all hoop houses, greenhouses, and cold frames shall not 421 exceed thirty five percent(35%) of the building footprint of the principal structure. 422 SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Section 21A.33.020. That Section 21A.33.020 of 423 the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended as follows: 424 21A.33.020: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR 425 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS: LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District F F F R- R- R- S S S R- R M R R R R- R- R- R R- R- R- i/ R- R- R- 2 M F- M M B M M M 0 1/ 2/ 3/ 1 2 3 F- F- F- U- U- U 12 7, 5, 35 4 21 12 0 0 0 3 45 75 35 45 3, 7 0 0 0 0 0 56 8 o o o o 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Dwelling, Cil' CP CP CP CP CP p p p p p p p p p p p p accessory unit 426 427 SECTION4. Amending the Text of Section 21A.33.030. That Section 21A.33.030 of 428 the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended as follows: 429 21A.33-030: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR 430 COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS: Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District CN CB CS' cc CSHBD1 CG SNB Dwelling: Accessory unit p p p p p p p 431 432 SECTION5. Amending the Text of Section 21A.33.035. That Section 21A.33.035 of 433 the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended as follows: 434 21A.33-035: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR TRANSIT 435 STATION AREA DISTRICTS: Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District TSA-UC TSA-UN TSA-MUEC TSA-SP Core Transition Cor Transition Cor Transition Cor Transition e e e Dwelling: Accessory P p p p p p p p unit 436 437 SECTION6. Amending the Text of Section 21A.33.050. That Section 21A.33.050 of 438 the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended as follows: LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 439 21A.33.050: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR DOWNTOWN 440 DISTRICTS: Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4 Dwelling: Accessory unit P P P_ P_ 441 442 SECTION T Amending the Text of Section 21A.33.060. That Section 21A.33.050 of 443 the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended as follows: 444 21A.33.o6o: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES IN THE 445 GATEWAY DISTRICT: Use G-MU Dwelling: Accessory unit P_ 446 447 SECTION 8. Amending the Text of Section 21A.33.070. That Section 21A.33.070 of 448 the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended as follows: 449 21A.33.070: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES IN FORM BASED 450 DISTRICTS: Permitted Uses By District Use FB- FB-UN2 FB-SC FB-SE UN1 Dwelling: Accessory unit I P P P P 451 452 SECTION 9. Amending the Text of Section 21A.27.030.D.3. That Section 453 21A.27.030.D.3 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 454 D. Other Applicable Development Standards: 455 3. Accessory Uses, Buildings And Structures: All accessory uses, buildings and 456 structures shall comply with the applicable standards in chapter 21A.40 of this title.; 457 except as noted below. 458 a. Form based urban neighborhood district specific standards for detached dwelling zn 459 units: LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 460 (1) Detached dwelling units tna�,be built in a required yard as a stand alone unit. 462 , twe family 464 465 t.s,e ty rive feet (25') in height 466 , 467 from property lino shall be a minimum of four- f of (4 468 (5) All building eonfigor-ation standards that apply to the pfimmy bttilding form 469 sliall also apply to the detaehed dwelling unit, with the exceptions 470 below: 471 (A)The detaelied dwelling unit shall have an entfy featofe-that faees or-is 472 aecessib o f m a publ e alley when r e t. 473 (B)The entry featufe may be a stoop that has a minimum dimension of 474 feet by f feet (4' x n'). and 475 (G)The ground floor-tFanspar-eney i:equir-ement does not apply to detaebed 476 dwelling tinits loeated on the seeond Poof of an aeoessofy stniettife. 477 ba. Form Based Special Purpose Corridor District specific standards for 478 detached or accessory parking garages or structures: 479 (1) Detached or accessory multilevel parking garages or structures shall have the 480 same setback requirements for principal structures. 481 (2) The minimum setback required shall be landscaped to provide a buffer to the 482 abutting Residential District. No structure (primary or accessory) shall be 483 permitted within this landscaped buffer. 484 SECTION 10. Amending the Text of Section 21A.60.020. That Section 21A.60.020 of 485 the Salt Lake City Code shall be amended to include the following terms: 486 Atlas, 5-Acre, And 10-Acre Plats 487 Balcony 488 Bike Lane 489 Bike Path 490 Deck 491 Dwelling, Accessory Unit (Internal) 492 Footprint 493 Non-residential Use 494 Porch 495 Rooftop Patio LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 496 Short Term Rental 497 Transit Route 498 Uplighting 499 SECTION 11. Amending the Text of Section 21A.62.040. That definitions of the terms 500 "Atlas, 5-Acre and 10-Acre Plats", "Balcony", "Bike Lane", "Bike Path", "Deck", "Dwelling, 501 Accessory Unit (Detached)", "Dwelling, Accessory Unit(Internal)", "Footprint", "Non- 502 Residential Use", "Porch", "Rooftop Patio", "Short Term Rental", "Transit Route", and 503 "Uplighting"be added to Section 21A.62.040 and amending the terms "Dwelling, Accessory 504 Unit (ADU)", and"Building Coverage" in Section 2 IA.62.040 of the Salt Lake City Code as 505 follows: 506 ATLAS, 5-ACRE, AND 10-ACRE PLATS: A map depicting the subdivisions of land within the 507 City. These plats are a scheme of how the City was originally laid out. The City started with plats 508 A through L, Salt Lake City Survey. As the City expanded its boundaries, 5 acre and 10 acre Big 509 Field Survey Plats were added and then the numbered plats 1 through 76. They show information 510 about streets,public right of ways and, some private right of wad 511 BALCONY: An elevated floor space projecting beyond the exterior walls of a buildingthat h 512 not supported on the ground by posts, columns, or similar supporting structural elements. A 513 balcony shall not be used as a means for entry into a building. 514 BIKE LANE: A division of a road for use by yclists marked off with painted lines or other 515 means. 516 BIKE PATH: A path or road for bicycles and not motor vehicles. May include paths that also 517 allow pedestrian or equestrian access. 518 DECK: A platform sitting above finished grade and supported on the ground. 519 DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (ADU): ^ type- of accessory e thin ; eludes . sidential 520 , eithe 521single 522 523 kitehen, sleeping area, eloset space, and bathroom f4eiliti€s. 524 A type of accessory use that includes a residential unit located on the same lot as a separate 525 principal use, either within the principal structure or within a separate accessory structure. The 526 accessory dwelling unit shall be a complete housekeeping unit with a shared or separate 527 entrance, and separate kitchen, sleeping area, closet space, and bathroom facilities. LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 528 DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (DETACHED): An accessory dwelling unit located wholly 529 within a structure that is accessory to the principal use and buildings on a lot or parcel. 530 DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (INTERNAL): 531 An accessory dwelling unit created: 532 4, within a primary building; and 533 5. for the purpose of offering a long-term rental of 30 consecutive days or longer. 534 BUILDING COVERAGE: That percentage of the lot covered by principal or accessory 535 buildings, including cantilevered portions of the building. 536 FOOTPRINT: The measurement of lot area covered by a building, including cantilevered 537 portions of the building. 538 NON-RESIDENTIAL USE: Lands, buildings or structures or portions thereof used or designed 539 or intended for uses other than a residential use, including, but not limited to, commercial, 540 industrial and institutional uses. 541 PORCH: An unenclosed structure attached to a building, covered by a separate roof, and 542 providing access to an entrance to a building. Similar structures providing access to an entrance 543 other than the primary entrance shall be considered a covered deck when located on a platform 544 that is more than two feet (2') above finished gEa& 545 ROOFTOP PATIO: A portion of a flat roof that is dedicated to occupiable space, or a deck 546 sitting atop a roof. 547 SHORT TERM RENTAL: The use of a dwelling unit or units that are offered for rent or lease 548 for a period less than 30 dqys. 549 TRANSIT ROUTE: A route over which a public transit vehicle travels and that is specifically 550 labeled or numbered for the purpose of picking up and dropping off passengers at regularly 551 scheduled stops and intervals. 552 UPLIGHTING: Lights that have been designed to throw illumination upward. 553 SECTION 12. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its 554 first publication. 555 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of 556 2023. 557 558 CHAIRPERSON 559 560 ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: LEGISLATIVE DRAF F 561 562 563 CITY RECORDER 564 565 Transmitted to Mayor on 566 567 568 Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. 569 570 571 MAYOR 572 573 CITY RECORDER 574 (SEAL) 575 APPROVED AS TO FORM 576 Bill No. of 2023. salt Lake City Attorney's Office 577 Published: Date: 578 Ordinance Amending Accessory Dwelling Units 579 By: 580 Katherine D.Pasker,Senior City Attorney ERIN MENDENHALL L DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor Q ` j'' and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas irl., Director �r Tel CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL its r 'D'c_2.> 7 7a.58 MST) Date Received: 12/12/2022 Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: 12/12/2022 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: 12/09/2022 Dan Dugan, Chair FROM: Orion Goff, Deputy Director, Department of Community &Neighborhoods D�70/? C70� Or on C��F Da?�20?)14:33[d ST! SUBJECT: Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Text Amendment (PLNPCM2022-00475) STAFF CONTACT: Michael McNamee, Principal Planner michael.rncnarnecra,slc2ov.com or 801-535-7226 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission and adopt the changes to the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Planning Commission voted to initiate a petition at their February 9, 2022 hearing to eliminate the conditional use requirement for detached accessory dwelling units(ADUs)in single-family residential zoning districts. Subsequently,the City Council discussed the amendment during the March 8,2022 work session and provided additional direction to staff. Staff expanded the proposal to include significant revisions of the requirements in the City's current ADU Ordinance, many of which have been identified as impediments to the construction of ADUs in Salt Lake City. In order to address impediments to ADU construction, make ADU requirements easier to understand,and improve the quality of ADU construction,staff revised or introduced the following requirements: 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 1 • Remove conditional use requirement for detached ADUs in single-family zoning districts. • Maximum allowable size of a detached ADU was increased from 650 square feet to 1,000 square feet for residential lots less than 12,000 square feet in size, or 1,200 square feet for other lots. The requirement that ADUs be no larger than 50 percent of the footprint of the principal structure was also removed. This allows for the development of ADUs that can accommodate larger households. • Setbacks from side and rear property lines for a single-story detached ADU were changed from 4 feet to 3 feet. For second-story and two-story ADUs above 17 feet in height, setbacks were changed so that the increase in setback is commensurate with the increase in height. This is a significant change from the existing 10 foot setback required for all two-story ADUs. • Introducing ADUs as a permitted accessory use to duplex, multi-family, and non- residential properties, expanding the number of properties where they could be built. Currently, ADUs are only permitted on properties with a single-family home as the principal use. • Where detached ADUs are located near public alleys, the proposal includes requirements to activate the alley, with the goal of making alleys more useful and safer public spaces. • In order to create consistency and ease of future reviews, staff included new definitions of short term rental, deck/porch/balcony,bike lane/path, non-residential use, and more. • The proposed amendment leaves a requirement for one parking stall to be provided for an ADU in place, and adds the following circumstances under which the requirement to provide an off-street stall can be waived: o The property is in a zoning district with no minimum off-street parking requirement. o The property already contains at least one accessible stall above the minimum parking requirement. o The property is within one-half mile of a designated bicycle lane or path. Staff also revised the land use tables to permit ADUs in zoning districts outside of the residential zones,but where other types of residential uses are allowed. Currently, ADUs are permitted in 19 zoning districts and allowed as a conditional use in 6 zoning districts. Under the proposal, ADUs would be permitted in 7 of the 7 commercial districts, 4 of the 4 Transit Station Area (TSA) districts, 4 of the 4 Form-Based (FB) districts, 4 of the 4 Downtown districts, and the Gateway Mixed-Use District. In total, ADUs would be permitted by right in 45 of the City's 54 zoning districts. They would continue to be prohibited in zones where no other residential uses are currently permitted. On pages 2-5 of the staff report, there is a discussion of how specific zoning districts would be affected, as well as maps comparing where ADUs are currently permitted to where they would be permitted under the changes. Staff also adjusted the limitation on accessory structure size in the FR, R-1, R-2 and SR zoning districts. The size limitation will no longer be 720 square feet or 1000 square feet for duplexes,but rather would be limited to 50% of the rear yard and the maximum lot coverage for the zoning district if located within the buildable area. The Planning Commission considered the request in a public hearing on September 14, 2022 and recommended the City Council approve the proposed amendment. As part of their 2 recommendation, they included a condition that the maximum allowable size of a detached ADU be increased from what was proposed by staff. The proposal originally had called for a maximum size of 720 square feet for a detached ADU, an increase from the currently adopted ordinance, which allows for up to 650 square feet. In order to accommodate more family-sized ADUs, the Planning Commission added a condition that the maximum allowable size be increased to 1,000 square feet. That maximum would apply to lots in residential zoning districts that are 12,000 square feet in size or less. On other lots, the maximum size would be 1,200 square feet, which is unchanged from the original proposal. PUBLIC PROCESS: Community Council Notice: A notice of application was sent to all recognized community organizations on May 18, 2022, per City Code Chapter 2.60 with a link to the online open house webpage. The recognized organizations were given 45 days to respond with any concerns or to request staff to meet with them and discuss the proposed zoning amendment. The 45-day public engagement period ended on July 5, 2022. Staff presented to the Sugar House and Yalecrest Community Councils at their request.After the Planning Commission hearing, staff also presented to the East Liberty Park Community Organization at their request. Public Open House: An online open house was held from May 17, 2022, to September 14, 2022. Fourteen written comments were submitted to the Planning Division after the publication of the staff report. Those comments have been included in Exhibit 5. Planning Commission Meeting: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 14,2022. 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. Written comments were provided to the Planning Commission. There three public comments made during the public hearing. The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting are linked in this document. The Commission voted 7-2 to forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council with the condition that the maximum allowable size of an ADU be increased from 720 square feet to 1,000 square feet. Planning Commission (PC) Records a) PC Agenda of September 14, 2022 (Click to Access) b) PC Minutes of September 14, 2022 (Click to Access) c) 2022 (Click to Access Report) EXHIBITS: 1) Project Chronology 2) Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3) Ordinance 4) Memorandum to the Planning Commission Serving as Record of Decision to Initiate Petition 3 5) Public Comment Received after Planning Commission Staff Report was Published 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS: L CHRONOLOGY 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING 3. ORDINANCE 4. MEMORANDUM TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5. PUBLIC COMMENT 5 L CHRONOLOGY 6 ERIN MENDENHALL L DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor Q ` j'' and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas irl., Director �r Tel PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Petition: PLNPCM2022-00475 February 9,2022 Petition initiated by the a vote of the Planning Commission. May 12,2022 Petition assigned to Michael McNamee,Principal Planner. May 17,2022 Application posted for the online open house. May 18,2022 Notice mailed to all Community Councils. September 2,2022 Planning Commission agenda posted to the website and emailed to the listserv. September 8,2022 Staff report posted to Planning's website. September 14,2022 Planning Commission Meeting and Public Hearing: A positive recommendation was forwarded to City Council with one condition. 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 7 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING 8 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2022-000475. The Planning Commission voted on February 9, 2022 to initiate a petition to amend the City's ADU Ordinance. The proposed code revisions would eliminate the conditional use requirement for detached ADUs in single-family residential zones. They would also aim to lower zoning barriers to construction of ADUs in general. The proposed changes would seek to strike a better balance between encouraging construction of ADUs and mitigating impacts to neighboring properties. (Staff Contact: Michael McNamee at 801-535-7226) As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments regarding the petition. During the hearing, anyone desiring to address the city Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak.The Council may consider adopting the ordinance the same night of the public hearing. The hearing will be held: DATE: TBD TIME: 7:00 PM PLACE: *Electronic and In-Person Options City and County Building Room 326 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah ** This meeting will be held via electronic means, while 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. For more information, including WebEx connection information, please visit www.sic.gov/council/vir°tual-mectings. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments(�,,,,slcgov.corn. 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 Michael McNamee at 801-535-7226 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, or via e-mail or micliael.mcnamee(cr)slc�-rov.com. The application details can be accessed at hops:llcitizenportal.slc-lov.coml, by selecting the "planning" tab and entering the petition number PLNPCM2022-00475. 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 colincil.comments(c%slc�,,ov.com, (801)535-7600, or relay service 711. 9 3. ORDINANCE 10 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE 2 No. of 202_ 3 4 (An ordinance amending various sections of the Title 2 1 A of the 5 Salt Lake City Code pertaining to accessory dwelling unit regulations) 6 7 An ordinance amending various sections of Title 21 A of the Salt Lake City Code pursuant 8 to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00475 pertaining to accessory dwelling unit regulations. 9 WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission ("Planning Commission")held a 10 public hearing on September 14, 2022 to consider a petition submitted by the Planning 11 Commission (Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00475) to amend various sections of Title 21 A of the 12 Salt Lake City Code pertaining to accessory dwelling unit regulations; and 13 WHEREAS, at its September 14, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor 14 of transmitting a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council ("City Council") on said 15 petition; and 16 WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the City Council has determined that 17 adopting this ordinance is in the city's best interests. 18 NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 19 20 SECTION 1. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.020. That Section 21 21A.33.020 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and 22 Conditional Uses for Residential Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the use 23 category "Dwelling, accessory unit"in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Residential 24 Districts, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: 25 11 � a' � a cC a M ►� a �. a fs, p., � � � �' p., A �i � � M at O � M O �" F�. C (�, O (� � N � `T � � M i a I� � N W a v� L� a A� l� � a o �i � � � � � o �� W � � � , � �,� C4 N � .-. O � �) w � O �i � �� � N � �� M d' hA � � � O .� � � � N ti, U •^� � Q � � � N N LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 28 SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That Section 29 21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and 30 Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add a new use 31 subcategory titled, "Accessory unit" in the Dwelling category in the Table of Permitted and 32 Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts, which use category shall be inserted into that table in 33 alphabetical order and shall read and appear in that table as follows: Use Permitted and Conditional Uses by District CN CB CS' CC CSHBD' CG SNB Dwelling: Accessory P P P P P P P 34 35 SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.035. That Section 36 21A.33.035 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and 37 Conditional Uses for Transit Station Area Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add a 38 new use subcategory titled, "Accessory unit"in the Dwelling category in the Table of Permitted and 39 Conditional Uses for Transit Station Area Districts, which use category shall be inserted into that 40 table in alphabetical order and shall read and appear in that table as follows: Use Permitted and Conditional Uses by District TSA-UC TSA-UN TSA-MUEC TSA-SP Core Transition Core Transition Core Transition Core Transition Dwelling: Accessory P P P P P P P P unit 41 42 SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Salt Lake CitE Code Section 21 A.33.050. That Section 43 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and 44 Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add a new use 13 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 45 subcategory titled, "Accessory unit" in the Dwelling category in the Table of Permitted and 46 Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts, which use category shall be inserted into that table in 47 alphabetical order and shall read and appear in that table as follows: Use Permitted and Conditional Uses by District D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4 Dwelling: Accessory unit P P PP 48 49 SECTION 5. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.060. That Section 50 21A.33.060 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and 51 Conditional Uses in the Gateway District) shall be and hereby is amended only to add a new use 52 subcategory titled, "Accessory unit" in the Dwelling category in the Table of Permitted and 53 Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts, which use category shall be inserted into that table in 54 alphabetical order and shall read and appear in that table as follows: 55 Use G-MU Dwelling: Accessory unit P 56 57 SECTION 6. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21 A.33.070. That Section 58 21A.33.070 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and 59 Conditional Uses for Special Purpose Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add a new 60 use subcategory titled, "Accessory unit"in the Dwelling category in the Table of Permitted and 61 Conditional Uses for Special Purpose Districts, which use category shall be inserted into that table in 62 alphabetical order and shall read and appear in that table as follows: 63 14 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Permitted Uses By District Use FB- FB-UN2 FB-SC FB-SE UN1 Dwelling: Accessory unit P P P P 64 65 SECTION 7. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.40.050.13.2. That 66 Subsection 21A.40.050.13.2 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Accessory Uses, Buildings and 67 Structures: General Yard, Bulk and Height Limitations) shall be and hereby is amended to read as 68 follows: 69 2. Building Coverage: 70 71 a. In the FR,R-1,R-2 and SR residential districts the vEi ff+,.,,building eovefage of all 72 maximum footprint of any accessory building, e�ielt a"„g hoop heiises n eftha,,ws ara 73 , shall not exceed fifty 74 percent(50%)of the building footprint of the principal structure ,,,,,m of 75 seven htHidr-ed vv�,enly(720) square feet fef a single family dwelling a*d one thettsand 76 The,,,,,v;,,,,,,,, f t,,,.:,,, for- 77 aeeessefy stndetttfe w4hiii 78 79 aeeessefy stndetttfe. except as follows: 80 81 LI) Notwithstanding the size of the footprint of the principal building,at least 480 square 82 feet of accessory buildingcoverage overage shall be allowed subject to the compliance with all 83 other requirements in Section 21A.40.050. 84 Accessory buildings constructed within the buildable area that are located between the 85 rear fagade of the principal building and the rear yard setback may exceed 720 square 86 feet provided the building is located entirely within the buildable area and the property 87 complies with the maximum buildingcge requirements of the underlying zoning oning 88 district. 89 (3) The buildingcge for a detached accessory dwelling unit shall be subject to the 90 standards in 21 A.40.200,regardless of the buildin cage requirement in this 91 section. 92 (4) An accessory building that contains an accessory dwelling unit on the second level 93 may exceed the maximum coverage up to the footprint of the accessory dwelling unit. 94 95 b. The combined coverage for all hoop houses, greenhouses, and cold frames shall not 96 exceed thirty five percent(35%)of the building footprint of the principal structure. 15 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 97 SECTION 8.Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.40.200. That Section 98 21A.40.200 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: Accessory Uses,Buildings and Structures: Accessory 99 Dwelling Units) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 100 21A.40.200: ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS: 101 102 . 103 104 105 fesidelitial deN,elopment-, 106 ; 107 , a"d the 109 , an 110 families seeking s a»or]4A11'4pJ40.ds; 111 , 112 gfown ehild. in theif homes and neighbefhoods, and obtain e 113 .11tifity, eempanionship, and se . 114 6. Weaden the fange of affordable hottsing thfotighout the City; 115 7. Sttppoi4 stistainability obj eetives by inefeasing hattsiiig elase to jobs, seheals, an 116 ; 117 118 �;�• ,, a 119 . 120 . 121 122 " shall mean the 123 fellewang 124 125 , 126 2. Any pefson who is felated by blood, maffiage, adoption to an individtiai who is listed 127 ; 128 3. An individual who is a tf+tstof of a family tfust who possesses legal ownef ship of t 129 p 130 131 , 132 " , of this title and subjeet to eamplianee with the applieable pfovisi 133 of this 134 D. Methods Of Cfeatiew An aeeessofy ",elling unit may be efeated thfough, but not 135 : 136 137 1. Convei4ing existing living afea within a single family &A,elling as an addition to a" 138 , 139 st,.uetief • 16 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 140building, 141 , 142 143 . 144 145 1. Genefal Requifeffients Applieable To All Aeeessefy Dwelling Units: 146 147 a. One Pef Lot: City ffia�,pefffiit one aeeessofy dwelling unit fof eaeh lot th-all 149 b. Not A Unit Of Density: Aeeessefy dwelling units afe not eonsidef ed a linit of 150 151 pfopei4y. 152 153 froffi the pfineipal dwelliog unit of lot unless eoffipliantwith subdivisi 154 fe-gu 155 d. Owiief Oeetipafley: 156 157 158 159 , 160 , 161 162 qtfalify f r this o rtio ,). , 163 , assisted living f4eility Of 164 165 living f,ditties nities 166 167 e. Ntiffibef Of Residents.: 168 dwellin liflit may not exeee the numvei allowed f ,. a "f niil " as defined in 169 seEtion 21A.62.040, "nefiffitioffs-Of Tef:ffis",of tls title. 170 172 173 174 between the pfopefty line with an adjaeent stfeet and a legally loeated og stfeet 175 176 177 feet (20') deep by eight feet (9') wide. The pafki 178 waived if--. 179 180 (1) Legally located on stfeet pai4ing is available along the street ffontage of the 181 subjeet pfopefty; of 182 183 17 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 184 2. Additional Requir-ements Fof Accessofy Dwelling Units Located Within A Single 185 Family Dwelling: Aeeessofy dwelling units loeatedwithin a single family dwelling 187 188 ,ftpA 189 190 191 . 192 193 (500%) of the gfess sqttafe footage of the single family dwelling. The 194 195 196 habitable spaee below the gafage' 19? 198 within a single family dwelling shall only be peffnitted in the following loeatiofis. 199 200 (1) An o ;s,;fig o,,, ..,fl o , the single family ,a.t.o>>;,,g; 201 , the en�fanee 202 ' 203 fae:de; 204 205 ; 206 20? entfy to the buildifig and afe exempt ffeffi stibseetiefi 21A.24.01014, "Side 208 Ertf,Buildings", of this title. , 210 (6) hoea4ed in a side yafd pfevided the side yafd is at least eight feet (82) ifl.. 211 212 intothe side. ,,.a 213 214 215 216 building of as an addition to an existing aeeessefy building shall eemply with the 21? 219 220 221 , bulk, and 222 223 224 oveflay zoning district unless other-wise fegulated by this seetion. An aeeessofy 225 226 22? 228 eentaining an aeeessefy dwelling unit shall not have a footpr-ifit that is gfeate 229 ° , and shall no 18 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 230 231 aeeessofy dwelling unit and an), othef peftnitted aeeessofy use shall eomply With 232 21A.40.050 of this ehapt 233 b. 234 235 distr; t „hieheye f ; mofe ostfi tiw 236 237 loea4ed between the feaf wall of the single family dwelling and the feaf pfopei4y 238 239 240 (1) Shall be loeated aFainimum often feet (10') ffofn the single family ",ell;,i,t 241 242 pfepei4y. 243 (2) Side and feaf ya.d setbaeks 244 245 ' 246 fofn any side , feaf lot line 247 248 . if an 249 existing aeeessofy building ineludes an addition, all of of poi4ions of the 250 251 252 be altefed to eomply with the applieable seetions of the adopted Fife code 253 of the City. 254 255 256 257 258 259 if the side of feaf lot line is adjaeent to an alley, the sethaek ffia�,be 260 261 262 a Building Height: 263 264 (1) The maxifntim height of a aeeessofy buildinge t.,; ;.. o 265 dwellifig ttt14 shall fiot exeeed the height of�he single fafflily dwelling Ofi 266 . 267 268 269 in 270 Faay be equal to the height-4 the single family dwelling +10 . 271 272 ' 273 274 side of Y-eaf pfopei4j, line. The setbaek fof additional height may be r-edttee 275 19 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 277 buildingswith a pitehed foof and to the top of the foof line f6f a fW foof, 278 279 e. 280 281 282 . 283 . The entfanee to an aeeessofy dwelling unit in an aeeessof� 284 bttilding shall be loeate& 285 286 287 288 289 . 290 (3) Extefiof staifs leading to an entfanee shall be loeated a minimum of ten feet 291 ' 292 pfopefly line is adjaeent to an alley in whieh ease the minifritim setbaek for-the 293 . 294 295 296 . 297 298 (1) Windows shall be no larger-than neeessafy to eomplywith the mi 299 Bttilding Code feqttifeffiefits f6f egfess whefe feqttifed. Skylights, elefestefy 300 , of obseiifed glaAng shall be used when f4eing a side of Y-ea 301 pfopefty line to eomply with minimum Building Code fequifements fef aif 302 ' 303 pfopefty line tifiless the side of feaf pfopefty line is adjaeent�o aft alley. (2) Rv � i oetion E3g(1\ f this do windows hall 304 ���Ee�t-�s-r��� s����-,�-g��Ts������,-� 305 306 .,l Stfuetiife 307 308 309 . 310 Existing windows loeated A-.n aasee-ond level withi.- --- existing aeeessofy 311 buildifig shall be bfatt& into eeffipiianee with this seetion. 312 313 : 314 315 316 level of the b,,,lain,; 317 ' 318 ; 319 (3) Rooftop ao vs . ,.,,hib toa 320 20 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 321 F. 322 shall eomply with the following: 323 324 1. Appliea4iaii: 325 326 a. Zoning Ceftifieate: Apply fof a zoning eeftifieate in aeeofdanee with ehapte 327 21A.08 of this title. 328 329 330 be issued until a zoning eeffifieate is issued. A zoning eei4ifieate .-., be 331 s, o,a .,t the same time as the � f to f,,,octane, if � f to � -iZ-rtirc�v'�-Q� -iZ-reuc�v-r 332 eeettpafiey is not feEltiifed, 333 n D r being , od 334 335 either-the n D T or the single family dwelling, the ov, Q-b,.11 be o ollv.l ; 336 "Business 337 Licenses And Regelations", . 338 339 b. Building Pefmit. Apply fef and obtain a building pefmit fef the pfop 340 aeeessofy dwelling unit, fegafdless of method of efeation, 341 342 343 pfopefly. The doetimentation shall include any legal doeument that demonstfates 344 . 345 346 2. Deed Restfietion: 347 shall have a deed f estfietion, the fofm of whiek shall be a-ppfeved by the" 348 Attofney, 349 . 350 351 abandoned of fevoked. 352 353 354 355 fel.,tiyes of the r o,.ty 356 357 G. 358 this seetion, the wwnef shall femove those feattifes of the aeeessofy dwelling tinit tha4 359 . 360 Division 361 , address of eaeh unit fof which an application 'was 362 , 363 showing appfoved aeeessofy dwelling units. The fepeft shall be tfansmitted to the City 364 f''.,,,,,e;1 by Febf afy l 5tt, f r the r 365 21 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 366 A. Purpose: the regulatory pgMose of this section is to Promote an increase in the housing 367 stock within the citypromote housing choices by allowingand nd regulating accessory 368 dwellingu (ADUs). 369 370 B. Conflicting Regulations. If a regulation found in this section is in conflict with an 371 gpplicable regulation in the base zoning district, overlay district, or provision of general 372 applicability, the regulation in this chapter shall take precedence, with the following 373 exceptions: 374 375 1. The regulations set forth in the H Historic Preservation Overlay District; and 376 2. The Special Foothills Regulations set forth in Subsection 21A.24.010.P of this title. 377 C. Owner Occupancy Required. The owner of the property, as defined in this section, shall 378 reside on the property. For the purposes of this title, "owner occupant" shall mean the 379 following: 380 381 1. An individual who is listed on a recorded deed as an owner of the property; 382 2. Any person who is related by blood,marriage,adoption to an individual who is listed on 383 recorded deed as an owner of the property; or 384 3. An individual who is a trustor of a family trust who possesses legal ownership of the 385 propeM. 386 4. Exceptions: 387 388 a. Owner occupancy is not required for an ADU located on a property with a principal 389 use as a duplex,multi-family dwelling,or non-residential land use.A single-family 390 dwelling with an attached ADU does not constitute a duplex. 391 b. The owner has a bona fide,temporary absence of three(3)years or less for activities 392 such as military service,temporary job assignments, sabbaticals,or voluntary service 393 (indefinite periods of absence from the dwelling shall not qualify for this exception 394 or 395 c. The owner is placed in a hospital,nursing home,assisted livingf acilily or other 396 similar facility that provides regular medical care, excluding retirement living facilities 397 or communities. 398 D. Number of Allowed ADUs: A single ADU is allowed on a property where permitted in 399 Chapter 21A.33 of this title. 400 401 E. Location on property. An ADU is allowed in the following locations on a property as 402 indicated below: 403 404 1. Internal ADUs shall be located within the buildable area of the property. 405 2. A detached ADU shall be allowed as indicated in the table below: 406 407 408 22 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Front yard Not ermitted Corner Side yard Permitted if the ADU complies with the required setbacks in the table below and is no closer to the corner side property line than the rind al structure. Interior Side yard Permitted if the ADU complies with the required setbacks in the table below and is located behind the rear fa ade of the principal buildin . Rearms Permitted if the ADU complies with the required setbacks in the table below. Buildable area Permitted Notes 1. The use of the term_yard in this section shall be interpreted to mean a required yard indicated in the underlying zoning district. 409 410 3. A detached ADU shall be placed at a minimum distance from property lines as indicated 411 below: Rear property line 3' Side propKqy line 3' Corner Side property line 10' Notes: 1. Additions to an existing accessory building shall comply with the setbacks in this table. This includes additions that add a second story. 2. An existing accessory building that is being converted to an ADU may maintain the existing setbacks of the accessory building. If a conversion includes an expansion (including_ adding dding a second story) the expansion shall comply with all applicable setback requirements in this table and in Subsection 21A.40.200.F. 412 413 414 F. ADU Building Height: 415 416 1. The maximum building height for a detached ADU is 17 feet, subject to the following 417 exceptions: 418 419 a. Heighty be increased up to 24 feet for a pitched roof or 20 feet for a flat roof 420 provided the side and rear yard setbacks are increased one foot for each additional foot 421 in building height above 17 feet. The setback does not need to be increased above the 422 minimum indicated in Section E on the side of an ADU that abuts an alley_ or on the 423 side of an ADU that abuts a property that is in a zoning district other than those listed 424 in Chapter 21A.24 of this title. 425 b. Converting ally existing accessory building is permitted when the existing 426 accessory building exceeds the permitted height of this section. 427 c. When an ADU is located fully within the buildable area of the property,the height of 428 the ADU is allowed up to the permitted height of the principal building in n the 429 underlyingzoning oning district. 23 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 430 d. Solar Panels attached to the roof of an ADU are Permitted to exceed the maximum 431 height of the structure uP to four feet. 432 433 2. Building height for a detached ADU shall be measured in the same manner as the height 434 for the Principal building. 435 3. An intemal ADU is subject to the same height_ requirements as the principal building. 436 G. ADU Parking: 437 438 1. The number of parkin stalls talls provided for the principal use shall not be reduced below the 439 minimum identified in Chapter 21A.44 of this Title in order to accommodate an ADU. 440 One parking stall is required for the ADU, except as indicated below: 441 442 a. The property is in a zoning district with no minimum off street parking requirement; 443 b. The prope . already contains at least one accessible stall above the minimum parking 444 requirement for the principal use; 445 c. The property is within a'/a mile radius of a public transit stogy 446 d. The property is within'/2 mile of a ci . -designated bicycle lane or path; or 447 e. The City allows on-street parking along the street frontage of the property and there is 448 a minimum,uninterrupted curb length which meets city requirements to accommodate 449 at least one on-street parkin stall. tall. 450 H. Regulation of Decks, Patios, and Outdoor Space for Detached ADUs: 451 452 1. Decks more than 2 feet above the existing grade are prohibited unless the ADU is located 453 within the buildable area of the lot in which case the deck shall be subject to the same 454 regulations for decks that apply to the principal building. 455 2. Rooftop patios on a detached ADU are prohibited. 456 3. Patios are permitted. A patio may be covered with a roof provided the square footage of 457 the roof is no larger than 120 square feet and the covered patio complies with the setbacks 458 required of the ADU. A covered patio shall not count towards the maximum square 459 footage requirement of the ADU,but does count towards the total buildingcoverage overa eg of the 460 lot. 461 4. Balconies on ADUs: a balcony is permitted on a building containing an ADU provided 462 the balcony does not extend into a required ADU setback and extends no further than 5 463 feet from an exterior wall of the ADU. Balconies shall not contain HVAC equipment no 464 be used as storage areas. 465 5. Intemal ADUs shall be subject to the same standards for decks,patios,and other 466 encroachments that apply to the principal building and use. 467 I. ADUs located alongaa public alley. A detached ADU that is located within 15 feet of a 468 public alley shall include the following 469 470 1. An exterior light shall be located on the exterior wall of the ADU to illuminate portions of 471 the alley adjacent to the ADU. The lighting fixture shall be shielded, oriented and 24 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 472 designed to direct light down and avoid light Pollution onto adjacent Properties. All 473 uplighting is prohibited. 474 2. A 4' wide path from the alley to the entrance of the ADU shall be provided. If there is a 475 fence between the ADU and the alley, a gate shall be provided,and the path shall lead to 476 the gate. If the ADU is located within 15 feet of two or more public alleys,this 477 requirement shall only oply to one of the alley 478 3. An ADU located on an alley that exists on the recorded plat maps or Atlas Plats of the city 479 but has not been used for vehicular access or is otherwise blocked by encroachments such 480 as fences or vegetation are exempt from this requirement. 481 482 J. ADU Gross Floor Area: 483 484 1. Detached ADU.None may exceed 1,000 square feet in gross floor area,except that a 485 maximum of 1,200 square feet in gross floor area shall be allowed when the subject 486 ro er : 487 488 a. Is in a zoning district other than those listed in Chapter 21A.24 of this title; 489 b. Exceeds 12,000 square feet in lot area; or 490 c. Is part of a planned development that includes a minimum of four dwelling 491 492 2. Internal ADU.There is no maximum gross floor area provided the building complies with 493 all applicable standards in the underlyingzoning oning district. 494 3. Gross floor area for a detached ADU shall be calculated as follows: 495 496 a. When the building includes other allowed accessory uses,only, t�quare footage 497 dedicated to the ADU shall be counted. 498 b. When the ADU is on a second level, stairs and required landings providing access to 499 the ADU shall not be counted. 500 c. Loft space with a ceiling height lower than 7 feet within an ADU shall not be counted 501 towards the total square footage of the ADU. 502 d. Basements shall not count towards the maximum gross floor area of the ADU, so long 503 as: 504 505 i. The basement is only used for storage or a use permitted by section 21A.40.040.E 506 of this chapter; and 507 ii. There is no internal circulation between the ADU and the basement. 508 K. Second Story Windows. Windows on the second story of a detached ADU are prohibited 509 on an exterior wall that is adjacent to a side or rear property line unless: 510 511 1. The window is a clerestory window where the bottom of the window is at least 6 feet 512 above the finished floor of the second story; 513 2. The window is on a wall that faces an elevation of the principal building; 514 3. The window faces and is at least 10 feet from a side or rear grope . line; 25 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 515 4. The exterior wall is adjacent to an alley; or 516 5. The window faces a side or rear Property line that is adjacent to a property in a zoning 517 district that permits commercial uses or a property that contains a nonresidential use. 518 L. Maximum Building Coverage. Accessory dwelling units are subject to the maximum 519 building and yard coverage requirements of the applicable zoning and overlay districts. 520 521 M. Building Permit Required. A building permit is required to establish any ADU in the 522 city. All ADUs are required to comply with all adopted applicable codes including 523 not limited to building, fire, and public utilities. 524 525 N. Administrative Regulations: the following administrative regulations are intended to 526 provide direction on applying and interpretin t�gulations of this chapter. 527 528 1. There is no minimum lot size required for an ADU. 529 2. An ADU does not count towards the density allowed in the underlyingzoning district. 530 3. ADUs that have been approved prior to Olmomm, as part of a conditional use are 531 considered legal conforming uses and may be modified if the modification complies with 532 the requirements of this section and any other applicable standard of this title. 533 O. Zoning Certificate and Good Landlord Pro r 534 535 1. A certificate of occupancy for the ADU shall not be issued until a zoning certificate is 536 issued.A zoning certificate may be issued at the same time as the certificate of occupanc. 537 If a certificate of occupancy is not required,the zoning certificate shall be issued prior to 538 the ADU being occupied. 539 2. If a business license is required for the rental of the ADU,the owner shall be enrolled in 540 the landlord/tenant initiative program as defined in Title 5, "Business Taxes,Licenses And 541 Regulations",of this code prior to issuing a zoning certificate. 542 P. Restrictive Covenant: An ADU that is required to be owner occupied shall have a 543 restrictive covenant filed against the property on which the ADU is located, which 544 restrictive covenant shall include the following information: 545 546 1. A description of the primary dwelling and the ADU,including whether the ADU is within 547 the principal structure or a detached structure,the square footage of both the primary 548 dwelling and the ADU, and how off-street parking is allocated between the primary 549 dwelling and the ADU. 550 2. A statement that the ADU may only be used and occupied in accordance with the 551 qpplicable regulations adopted in the Salt Lake Ci . Code. 552 3. The restrictive covenant shall be recorded with the Salt Lake County Recorder's Office 553 against the subject property. A copy of the recorded covenant shall be provided to the 554 planning division and attached to the building permit record prior to final inspection of the 555 ADU. If no final inspection is required,the copy of the recorded covenant shall be 556 provided prior to occupying the ADU. 26 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 557 Q. Use Regulations: 558 559 1. An ADU shall not be rented as a short term rental as defined in Section 21.A.62.040. 560 2. An ADU may include any home occupation authorized by this title. 561 3. An ADU may be converted to any other accessory use that is allowed in the zoning 562 district. 563 4. An ADU cannot be converted to another principal use. 564 565 SECTION 9.Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.60.020. That Section 566 21A.60.020 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: List of Terms: List of Defined Terms)shall be and 567 hereby is amended to add the following terms in the list of defined terms to be inserted into that list in 568 alphabetical order: 569 Atlas, 5-acre, and 10-acre plats. 570 Balcony. 571 Bike lane. 572 Bike path. 573 Deck. 574 Dwelling, accessory unit internal), 575 Footprint. 576 Non-residential use. 577 Porch. 578 Rooftop patio. 579 Short term rental. 580 Transit route. 581 Uplighting. 582 583 SECTION 10. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.62.040. That Section 584 21A.62.040 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Definitions: Definitions of Terms), shall be and 585 hereby is amended as follows: 586 a. Amending the definition of"DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (ADU)." That the 587 definition of"DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (ADU)" shall be amended to read 588 as follows: 27 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 589 DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (ADU): " type of,aces fy e that includes 590 fesidential 591 592 593 , 595 A type of accessory use that includes a residential unit located on the same lot as a 596 separate principal use, either within the principal structure or within a separate accessory 597 structure. The accessory dwelling unit shall be a complete housekeeping unit with a 598 shared or separate entrance, and separate kitchen, sleeping area, closet space, and 599 bathroom facilities. 600 601 602 b. Amending the definition of"BUILDING COVERAGE." That the definition of 603 `BUILDING COVERAGE" shall be amended to read as follows: 604 BUILDING COVERAGE: That percentage of the lot covered by principal or accessory 605 buildings, including cantilevered portions of the building_ 606 607 c. Adding the definition of"ATLAS, 5-ACRE, AND 10-ACRE PLATS." That the 608 definition of"ATLAS, 5-ACRE, AND 10-ACRE PLATS"be added and inserted into 609 the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 610 ATLAS, 5-ACRE, AND 10-ACRE PLATS: a map depicting the subdivisions of land 611 within the City. These plats are a scheme of how the City was on i nally laid out. The 612 City started with plats A through L, Salt Lake City Survey. As the City expanded its 613 boundaries, 5 acre and 10 acre Big;Field Survey Plats were added and then the numbered 614 plats 1 through 76. They show information about streets,public right of ways and, some 615 private right of ways. 616 617 618 d. Adding the definition of"BALCONY." That the definition of"BALCONY"be added 619 and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 620 BALCONY: An elevated floor space projecting beyond the exterior walls of a building 621 that is not supported on the ground by posts, columns, or similar supporting structural 622 elements. A balcony shall not be used as a means for entry into a building_ 623 624 28 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 625 e. Adding the definition of`BIKE LANE." That the definition of`BIKE LANE"be 626 added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 627 BIKE LANE: a division of a road for use by cyclists marked off with painted lines or 628 other means. 629 630 631 f. Adding the definition of"BIKE PATH." That the definition of`BIKE PATH"be 632 added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 633 BIKE PATH: a path or road for bicycles and not motor vehicles. May include paths that 634 also allow pedestrian or equestrian access. 635 636 637 g. Adding the definition of"DECK." That the definition of"DECK"be added and 638 inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 639 DECK: A platform sitting above finished grade and supported on the around. 640 641 642 h. Adding the definition of"DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (DETACHED)." That 643 the definition of"DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (DETACHED)"be added and 644 inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 645 DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (DETACHED): An accessory dwelling unit located 646 wholly within a structure that is accessory to the principal use and buildings on a lot or 647 parcel. 648 649 650 i. Adding the definition of"DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (INTERNAL)." That 651 the definition of"DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (INTERNAL)"be added and 652 inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 653 DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (INTERNAL 654 An accessory dwelling unit created: 655 1. within a primary dwelling; 656 2. within the footprint of a primary dwelling at the time the internal accessory dwelling 657 unit is created; and 658 3. for the purpose of offering a long-term rental of 30 consecutive days or longer. 29 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 659 660 j. Adding the definition of"FOOTPRINT." That the definition of"FOOTPRINT"be 661 added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 662 FOOTPRINT: The measurement of lot area covered by a building, including cantilevered 663 portions of the building 664 665 666 k. Adding the definition of"NON-RESIDENTIAL USE." That the definition of"NON- 667 RESIDENTIAL USE"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical 668 order to read as follows: 669 NON-RESIDENTIAL USE: lands, buildings or structures or portions thereof used or 670 designed or intended for uses other than a residential use, including, but not limited to, 671 commercial industrial and institutional uses. 672 673 674 1. Adding the definition of"PORCH." That the definition of"PORCH"be added and 675 inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 676 PORCH: An unenclosed structure attached to a building, covered by a separate roof, and 677 providing access to an entrance to a building. Similar structures providing access to an 678 entrance other than the primary entrance shall be considered a covered deck when located 679 on a platform that is more than two feet(2') above finished grade. 680 681 682 in. Adding the definition of"ROOFTOP PATIO." That the definition of"ROOFTOP 683 PATIO"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read 684 as follows: 685 ROOFTOP PATIO: A portion of a flat roof that is dedicated to occupiable space, or a 686 deck sitting atop a roof. 687 688 689 n. Adding the definition of"SHORT TERM RENTAL." That the definition of"SHORT 690 TERM RENTAL"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical 691 order to read as follows: 30 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 692 SHORT TERM RENTAL: The use of a dwelling unit or units that are offered for rent or 693 lease for a period less than 30 dam 694 695 696 o. Adding the definition of"TRANSIT ROUTE." That the definition of"TRANSIT 697 ROUTE"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to 698 read as follows: 699 TRANSIT ROUTE: a route over which a public transit vehicle travels and that is 700 specifically labeled or numbered for the purpose of picking up and dropping off 701 passengers at regularly scheduled stops and intervals. 702 703 704 p. Adding the definition of"UPLIGHTING." That the definition of"UPLIGHTING"be 705 added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 706 UPLIGHTING: Lights that have been designed to throw illumination upward. 707 708 SECTION 11. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first 709 publication. 710 711 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of 712 , 202. 713 714 CHAIRPERSON 715 716 ATTEST: 717 718 719 CITY RECORDER 720 721 722 Transmitted to Mayor on 723 724 725 Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. 726 31 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 727 728 729 MAYOR 730 731 732 CITY RECORDER 733 734 (SEAL) 735 736 Bill No. of 202 . 737 Published: 738 739 740 Ordinance amending ADU regulations 741 32 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 202_ (An ordinance amending various sections of the Title 2 1 A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to accessory dwelling unit regulations) An ordinance amending various sections of Title 2 1 A of the Salt Lake City Code pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00475 pertaining to accessory dwelling unit regulations. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission ("Planning Commission")held a public hearing on September 14, 2022 to consider a petition submitted by the Planning Commission (Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00475) to amend various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to accessory dwelling unit regulations; and WHEREAS, at its September 14, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of transmitting a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council("City Council") on said petition; 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 Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.020. That Section 21A.33.020 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Residential Districts) shall be and hereby is amended to modify only the use category "Dwelling, accessory unit" in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Residential Districts, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: 33 °a a z a c� M a oa �, x c� Ax M CK O G M O oa Cl) C � M ♦� N � o boa � o 0 � Oa N r. � O M O � O N 00 GS, N � M d' Q c 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 only to add a new use subcategory titled, "Accessory unit" in the Dwelling category in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts, which use category shall be inserted into that table in alphabetical order and shall read and appear in that table as follows: Use Permitted and Conditional Uses by District CN CB CS1 CC CSHBD1 CG SNB Dwelling: Accessory unit P P P P P P P SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.035. That Section 21A.33.035 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Transit Station Area Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add a new use subcategory titled, "Accessory unit" in the Dwelling category in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Transit Station Area Districts, which use category shall be inserted into that table in alphabetical order and shall read and appear in that table as follows: Use Permitted and Conditional Uses by District TSA-UC TSA-UN TSA-MUEC TSA-SP Core Transition Core Transition Core Transition Core Transition Dwelling: Accessory P P P P P P P P unit 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 only to add a new use 35 subcategory titled, "Accessory unit" in the Dwelling category in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts, which use category shall be inserted into that table in alphabetical order and shall read and appear in that table as follows: Use Permitted and Conditional Uses by District D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4 Dwelling: Accessory unit P P P P SECTION 5. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.060. That Section 21A.33.060 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses in the Gateway District) shall be and hereby is amended only to add a new use subcategory titled, "Accessory unit" in the Dwelling category in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts, which use category shall be inserted into that table in alphabetical order and shall read and appear in that table as follows: Use G-MU Dwelling: Accessory unit P SECTION 6. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.070. That Section 21A.33.070 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Special Purpose Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add a new use subcategory titled, "Accessory unit"in the Dwelling category in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Special Purpose Districts, which use category shall be inserted into that table in alphabetical order and shall read and appear in that table as follows: 36 Permitted Uses By District Use FB- FB-UN2 FB-SC FB-SE UN1 Dwelling: Accessory unit P P P P SECTION 7. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.40.050.13.2. That Subsection 21A.40.050.13.2 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Accessory Uses, Buildings and Structures: General Yard, Bulk and Height Limitations) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 2. Building Coverage: a. In the FR,R-1,R-2 and SR residential districts the maximum footprint of any accessory building, shall not exceed fifty percent(50%)of the building footprint of the principal structure except as follows: (1) Notwithstanding the size of the footprint of the principal building, at least 480 square feet of accessory building coverage shall be allowed subject to the compliance with all other requirements in Section 21A.40.050. (2) Accessory buildings constructed within the buildable area that are located between the rear fagade of the principal building and the rear yard setback may exceed 720 square feet provided the building is located entirely within the buildable area and the property complies with the maximum building coverage requirements of the underlying zoning district. (3) The building coverage for a detached accessory dwelling unit shall be subject to the standards in 21A.40.200,regardless of the building coverage requirement in this section. (4) An accessory building that contains an accessory dwelling unit on the second level may exceed the maximum coverage up to the footprint of the accessory dwelling unit. b. The combined coverage for all hoop houses,greenhouses, and cold frames shall not exceed thirty five percent(35%)of the building footprint of the principal structure. SECTION 8.Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.40.200. That Section 21 A.40.200 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: Accessory Uses,Buildings and Structures: Accessory Dwelling Units)shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 37 21A.40.200: ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS: A. Purpose: the regulatory purpose of this section is to promote an increase in the housing stock within the city and promote housing choices by allowing and regulating accessory dwelling units (ADUs). B. Conflicting Regulations. If a regulation found in this section is in conflict with an applicable regulation in the base zoning district, overlay district, or provision of general applicability, the regulation in this chapter shall take precedence, with the following exceptions: 1. The regulations set forth in the H Historic Preservation Overlay District; and 2. The Special Foothills Regulations set forth in Subsection 21A.24.010.P of this title. C. Owner Occupancy Required. The owner of the property, as defined in this section, shall reside on the property. For the purposes of this title, "owner occupant" shall mean the following: 1. An individual who is listed on a recorded deed as an owner of the property; 2. Any person who is related by blood,marriage,adoption to an individual who is listed on recorded deed as an owner of the property; or 3. An individual who is a trustor of a family trust who possesses legal ownership of the property. 4. Exceptions: a. Owner occupancy is not required for an ADU located on a property with a principal use as a duplex,multi-family dwelling, or non-residential land use. A single-family dwelling with an attached ADU does not constitute a duplex. b. The owner has a bona fide,temporary absence of three(3)years or less for activities such as military service,temporary job assignments, sabbaticals,or voluntary service (indefinite periods of absence from the dwelling shall not qualify for this exception); or c. The owner is placed in a hospital,nursing home,assisted living facility or other similar facility that provides regular medical care,excluding retirement living facilities or communities. D. Number of Allowed ADUs: A single ADU is allowed on a property where permitted in Chapter 21A.33 of this title. E. Location on property. An ADU is allowed in the following locations on a property as indicated below: 1. Internal ADUs shall be located within the buildable area of the property. 2. A detached ADU shall be allowed as indicated in the table below: 38 Front yard Not permitted Corner Side yard Permitted if the ADU complies with the required setbacks in the table below and is no closer to the corner side property line than the principal structure. Interior Side yard Permitted if the ADU complies with the required setbacks in the table below and is located behind the rear fa ade of the principal building. Rear yard Permitted if the ADU complies with the required setbacks in the table below. Buildable area Permitted Notes 1. The use of the term yard in this section shall be interpreted to mean a required yard as indicated in the underlying zoning district. 3. A detached ADU shall be placed at a minimum distance from property lines as indicated below: Rear property line 3' Side property line 3' Corner Side property line 10, Notes: 1. Additions to an existing accessory building shall comply with the setbacks in this table. This includes additions that add a second story. 2. An existing accessory building that is being converted to an ADU may maintain the existing setbacks of the accessory building. If a conversion includes an expansion (including adding a second story) the expansion shall comply with all applicable setback requirements in this table and in Subsection 21A.40.200.F. F. ADU Building Height: 1. The maximum building height for a detached ADU is 17 feet, subject to the following exceptions: a. Height may be increased up to 24 feet for a pitched roof or 20 feet for a flat roof provided the side and rear yard setbacks are increased one foot for each additional foot in building height above 17 feet. The setback does not need to be increased above the minimum indicated in Section E on the side of an ADU that abuts an alley or on the side of an ADU that abuts a property that is in a zoning district other than those listed in Chapter 21A.24 of this title. b. Converting a legally existing accessory building is permitted when the existing accessory building exceeds the permitted height of this section. 39 c. When an ADU is located fully within the buildable area of the property,the height of the ADU is allowed up to the permitted height of the principal building in the underlying zoning district. d. Solar panels attached to the roof of an ADU are permitted to exceed the maximum height of the structure up to four feet. 2. Building height for a detached ADU shall be measured in the same manner as the height for the principal building. 3. An internal ADU is subject to the same height requirements as the principal building. G. ADU Parking: l. The number of parking stalls provided for the principal use shall not be reduced below the minimum identified in Chapter 21A.44 of this Title in order to accommodate an ADU. One parking stall is required for the ADU, except as indicated below: a. The property is in a zoning district with no minimum off street parking requirement; b. The property already contains at least one accessible stall above the minimum parking requirement for the principal use; c. The property is within a%4 mile radius of a public transit stop; d. The property is within'/z mile of a city-designated bicycle lane or path; or e. The City allows on-street parking along the street frontage of the property and there is a minimum,uninterrupted curb length which meets city requirements to accommodate at least one on-street parking stall. H. Regulation of Decks, Patios, and Outdoor Space for Detached ADUs: I. Decks more than 2 feet above the existing grade are prohibited unless the ADU is located within the buildable area of the lot in which case the deck shall be subject to the same regulations for decks that apply to the principal building. 2. Rooftop patios on a detached ADU are prohibited. 3. Patios are permitted. A patio may be covered with a roof provided the square footage of the roof is no larger than 120 square feet and the covered patio complies with the setbacks required of the ADU. A covered patio shall not count towards the maximum square footage requirement of the ADU,but does count towards the total building coverage of the lot. 4. Balconies on ADUs: a balcony is permitted on a building containing an ADU provided the balcony does not extend into a required ADU setback and extends no further than 5 feet from an exterior wall of the ADU. Balconies shall not contain HVAC equipment nor be used as storage areas. 5. Internal ADUs shall be subject to the same standards for decks,patios, and other encroachments that apply to the principal building and use. I. ADUs located along a public alley. A detached ADU that is located within 15 feet of a public alley shall include the following: 40 1. An exterior light shall be located on the exterior wall of the ADU to illuminate portions of the alley adjacent to the ADU. The lighting fixture shall be shielded,oriented and designed to direct light down and avoid light pollution onto adjacent properties. All uplighting is prohibited. 2. A 4' wide path from the alley to the entrance of the ADU shall be provided. If there is a fence between the ADU and the alley, a gate shall be provided, and the path shall lead to the gate.If the ADU is located within 15 feet of two or more public alleys,this requirement shall only apply to one of the alleys. 3. An ADU located on an alley that exists on the recorded plat maps or Atlas Plats of the city but has not been used for vehicular access or is otherwise blocked by encroachments such as fences or vegetation are exempt from this requirement. J. ADU Gross Floor Area: 1. Detached ADU.None may exceed 1,000 square feet in gross floor area, except that a maximum of 1,200 square feet in gross floor area shall be allowed when the subject property: a. Is in a zoning district other than those listed in Chapter 21A.24 of this title; b. Exceeds 12,000 square feet in lot area; or c. Is part of a planned development that includes a minimum of four dwelling units. 2. Internal ADU. There is no maximum gross floor area provided the building complies with all applicable standards in the underlying zoning district. 3. Gross floor area for a detached ADU shall be calculated as follows: a. When the building includes other allowed accessory uses, only the square footage dedicated to the ADU shall be counted. b. When the ADU is on a second level,stairs and required landings providing access to the ADU shall not be counted. c. Loft space with a ceiling height lower than 7 feet within an ADU shall not be counted towards the total square footage of the ADU. d. Basements shall not count towards the maximum gross floor area of the ADU, so long as: i. The basement is only used for storage or a use permitted by section 21A.40.040.E of this chapter; and ii. There is no internal circulation between the ADU and the basement. K. Second Story Windows. Windows on the second story of a detached ADU are prohibited on an exterior wall that is adjacent to a side or rear property line unless: 41 1. The window is a clerestory window where the bottom of the window is at least 6 feet above the finished floor of the second story; 2. The window is on a wall that faces an elevation of the principal building; 3. The window faces and is at least 10 feet from a side or rear property line; 4. The exterior wall is adjacent to an alley; or 5. The window faces a side or rear property line that is adjacent to a property in a zoning district that permits commercial uses or a property that contains a nonresidential use. L. Maximum Building Coverage. Accessory dwelling units are subject to the maximum building and yard coverage requirements of the applicable zoning and overlay districts. M. Building Permit Required. A building permit is required to establish any ADU in the city. All ADUs are required to comply with all adopted applicable codes including but not limited to building, fire, and public utilities. N. Administrative Regulations: the following administrative regulations are intended to provide direction on applying and interpreting the regulations of this chapter. 1. There is no minimum lot size required for an ADU. 2. An ADU does not count towards the density allowed in the underlying zoning district. 3. ADUs that have been approved prior to ,as part of a conditional use are considered legal conforming uses and may be modified if the modification complies with the requirements of this section and any other applicable standard of this title. O. Zoning Certificate and Good Landlord Program: 1. A certificate of occupancy for the ADU shall not be issued until a zoning certificate is issued.A zoning certificate may be issued at the same time as the certificate of occupancy. If a certificate of occupancy is not required,the zoning certificate shall be issued prior to the ADU being occupied. 2. If a business license is required for the rental of the ADU,the owner shall be enrolled in the landlord/tenant initiative program as defined in Title 5, `Business Taxes,Licenses And Regulations", of this code prior to issuing a zoning certificate. P. Restrictive Covenant: An ADU that is required to be owner occupied shall have a restrictive covenant filed against the property on which the ADU is located, which restrictive covenant shall include the following information: l. A description of the primary dwelling and the ADU,including whether the ADU is within the principal structure or a detached structure,the square footage of both the primary dwelling and the ADU,and how off-street parking is allocated between the primary dwelling and the ADU. 2. A statement that the ADU may only be used and occupied in accordance with the applicable regulations adopted in the Salt Lake City Code. 42 3. The restrictive covenant shall be recorded with the Salt Lake County Recorder's Office against the subject property. A copy of the recorded covenant shall be provided to the planning division and attached to the building permit record prior to final inspection of the ADU. If no final inspection is required,the copy of the recorded covenant shall be provided prior to occupying the ADU. Q. Use Regulations: I. An ADU shall not be rented as a short term rental as defined in Section 21.A.62.040. 2. An ADU may include any home occupation authorized by this title. 3. An ADU may be converted to any other accessory use that is allowed in the zoning district. 4. An ADU cannot be converted to another principal use. SECTION 9.Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 2 I A.60.020.That Section 21 A.60.020 of the Salt Lake City Code(Zoning: List of Terms: List of Defined Terms)shall be and hereby is amended to add the following terms in the list of defined terms to be inserted into that list in alphabetical order: Atlas, 5-acre, and 10-acre plats. Balcony. Bike lane. Bike path. Deck. Dwelling, accessory unit(internal). Footprint. Non-residential use. Porch. Rooftop patio. Short term rental. Transit route. Uplighting. SECTION 10. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.62.040. That Section 21A.62.040 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Definitions: Definitions of Terms), shall be and hereby is amended as follows: 43 a. Amending the definition of"DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (ADU)." That the definition of"DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (ADU)" shall be amended to read as follows: DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (ADU): A type of accessory use that includes a residential unit located on the same lot as a separate principal use, either within the principal structure or within a separate accessory structure. The accessory dwelling unit shall be a complete housekeeping unit with a shared or separate entrance, and separate kitchen, sleeping area, closet space, and bathroom facilities. b. Amending the definition of"BUILDING COVERAGE." That the definition of "BUILDING COVERAGE" shall be amended to read as follows: BUILDING COVERAGE: That percentage of the lot covered by principal or accessory buildings, including cantilevered portions of the building. c. Adding the definition of"ATLAS, 5-ACRE, AND 10-ACRE PLATS." That the definition of"ATLAS, 5-ACRE, AND 10-ACRE PLATS"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: ATLAS, 5-ACRE, AND 10-ACRE PLATS: a map depicting the subdivisions of land within the City. These plats are a scheme of how the City was originally laid out. The City started with plats A through L, Salt Lake City Survey. As the City expanded its boundaries, 5 acre and 10 acre Big Field Survey Plats were added and then the numbered plats 1 through 76. They show information about streets, public right of ways and, some private right of ways. d. Adding the definition of"BALCONY." That the definition of"BALCONY"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: BALCONY: An elevated floor space projecting beyond the exterior walls of a building that is not supported on the ground by posts, columns, or similar supporting structural elements. A balcony shall not be used as a means for entry into a building. 44 e. Adding the definition of"BIKE LANE." That the definition of`BIKE LANE"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: BIKE LANE: a division of a road for use by cyclists marked off with painted lines or other means. f. Adding the definition of"BIKE PATH." That the definition of"BIKE PATH"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: BIKE PATH: a path or road for bicycles and not motor vehicles. May include paths that also allow pedestrian or equestrian access. g. Adding the definition of"DECK." That the definition of"DECK"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: DECK: A platform sitting above finished grade and supported on the ground. h. Adding the definition of"DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (DETACHED)." That the definition of"DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (DETACHED)" be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (DETACHED): An accessory dwelling unit located wholly within a structure that is accessory to the principal use and buildings on a lot or parcel. i. Adding the definition of"DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (INTERNAL)." That the definition of"DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (INTERNAL)"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: DWELLING, ACCESSORY UNIT (INTERNAL): An accessory dwelling unit created: 1. within a primary dwelling; 2. within the footprint of a primary dwelling at the time the internal accessory dwelling unit is created; and 3. for the purpose of offering a long-term rental of 30 consecutive days or longer. 45 j. Adding the definition of"FOOTPRINT." That the definition of"FOOTPRINT"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: FOOTPRINT: The measurement of lot area covered by a building, including cantilevered portions of the building. k. Adding the definition of"NON-RESIDENTIAL USE." That the definition of"NON- RESIDENTIAL USE" be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: NON-RESIDENTIAL USE: lands,buildings or structures or portions thereof used or designed or intended for uses other than a residential use, including, but not limited to, commercial, industrial and institutional uses. 1. Adding the definition of"PORCH." That the definition of"PORCH"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: PORCH: An unenclosed structure attached to a building, covered by a separate roof, and providing access to an entrance to a building. Similar structures providing access to an entrance other than the primary entrance shall be considered a covered deck when located on a platform that is more than two feet(2') above finished grade. in. Adding the definition of"ROOFTOP PATIO." That the definition of"ROOFTOP PATIO" be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: ROOFTOP PATIO: A portion of a flat roof that is dedicated to occupiable space, or a deck sitting atop a roof. n. Adding the definition of"SHORT TERM RENTAL." That the definition of"SHORT TERM RENTAL"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 46 SHORT TERM RENTAL: The use of a dwelling unit or units that are offered for rent or lease for a period less than 30 days. o. Adding the definition of"TRANSIT ROUTE." That the definition of"TRANSIT ROUTE"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: TRANSIT ROUTE: a route over which a public transit vehicle travels and that is specifically labeled or numbered for the purpose of picking up and dropping off passengers at regularly scheduled stops and intervals. p. Adding the definition of"UPLIGHTING." That the definition of"UPLIGHTING"be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: UPLIGHTING: Lights that have been designed to throw illumination upward. SECTION 11. 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 202. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. 47 MAYOR CITY RECORDER SEAL APPROVED AS TO FORM* Salt Lake City Attorney's Office Bill No. of 202 . Date: Nove ber 1 , 2022 Published: By - — — Paul C. ielson Senior City Attorney *Subject to the adoption date highlighted Ordinance amending ADU regulations(final) in Section 8 being updated before publication. 48 4. MEMORANDUM TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 49 MEMORANDUM PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT qfCOMMUNITY andNEIGHBORHOODS To: Amy Barry,Chair Salt Lake City Planning Commission Cc: Lisa Shaffer ChiefAdmirustrative Officer Blake Thomas,Department of Community and Neighborhoods Director;Mchaela Oktay,Deputy Planning Director From: Nick Norris,Planning Director Date: May 5,2022 Re: Planning Commission petition initiation to modify the Accessory Dwellmg Unit Regulations On February 9, 2022 the Salt Lake City Planning Division voted to initiate a zoning text amendment that would change the accessory dwelling units from conditional uses to permitted uses across all zoning districts where the use is allowed. The motion the Planning Commission adopted was stated as: I move that the Planning Commission initiate a petition to update the ADU regulations of the city in order to make all ADUs permitted uses and make other necessary changes to do so, including changes to comply with Utah Code changes adopted in 2021 and clarifying applicable standards so they can be administered as permitted uses This memo serves as a record of that decision and will be used to start the process of drafting a proposal that would accomplish the intent of this motion. By signing the document as the chair of the Planning Commission,you are acknowledging that the item was listed on the Feb 9,2022 Planning Commission agenda,that the commission discussed the proposal,and that a motion passed by the Planning Commission initiating the zoning text amendment. Please contact meat 8ol-535-6173 or Wniekk.�norri {atslc o�=.co if you have any questions.Thank you. � Cor� sioxl Chair Date 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 50 5. PUBLIC COMMENT 51 ERIC VALCHUIS 1587 S 1500 E,Salt Lake City,UT 84105 1 1 Michael McNamee Salt Lake City Planning 451 South State Street// Room 406 Salt Lake City,UT 84111-5480 mic�)acl.mcns�nicc�ct slcooti—com RE: Support of the revised Salt Lake City ADU Ordinance Dear Michael, My name is Eric Valchuis and I am writing to support the revised ADU Ordinance which will promote stable homeownership,increase the supply of reliable rental housing,and reduce automobile reliance.To amplify these outcomes,I further encourage the Planning Commission to strike the owner requirement and increase the maximum ADU square footage in the revised ordinance. ADUs are beneficial for cities,homeowners,and renters,an assertion backed up through work I have completed alongside the Terrier Center and the Center for Community Innovation (CCI) at UC Berkeley on ADU su opi ion,L/O nin , and fin)ncc.ADUs are an excellent way of adding density to cities,especially those like Salt Lake City that are dominated by single-family zoning. By increasing density in areas closer to amenities,vehicle miles traveled may be reduced. Many homeowners rent out their ADUs to generate a rental income stream to increase their financial stability. Others rent to family members,caretakers, or friends, increasing quality of life. In building ADUs,homeowners increase the supply of housing which,at the aggregate,can reduce the cost of housing—an important task given the findings of the City's recent'lli6 �in{, in Place study. ADUs are often built in higher wealth areas but more often rented at affordable levels,giving lower-income families the opportunity to live in wealthier areas which has been shown to improve childhood outcomes.' I applaud Salt Lake for having taken steps, and continuing to take steps, to reform codes to lower the barriers to ADU construction. Permitting ADUs on residential and non-residential properties,as would be allowed in the revised ordinance,is an especially forward-leaning provision.The absence of lot size minimums and lenient parking requirements are also hallmarks of an exemplary ADU code. However, there remain shortcomings in the revised ordinance that limit the potential positive impacts that ADUs can have on the city. Most importantly,the owner occupancy requirement increases renter instability;if a homeowner vacates the property,whether by choice or necessity, then the tenant will also be forced to move. Given the city's housing crisis,we know that there are "very limited,if any,housing options available to low-income households after they are displaced.As a result [displaced] families are likely to either leave the city,double up with other households,enter into homelessness, or move out of the region or even state."'Further,the owner occupancy requirement will limit the numbers of ADUs built. Per the .l 17 L' Scorecard, a study published by CCI,an owner occupancy requirement"hinders financial viability for homeowners who need the rental income, or have constraints that prohibit them from living on-site." Given the negative impacts 1 ADUs in wealthier areas.chapple,Karen,David Garcia,F�ric Yalchuis,and lulian'1 uckcr "Reaching California's ADU Potential:Progress to Date and the Need for ADU Finance"Center for Community Innovation and the Terner Center for]lousing Innovation:University of California, Berkeley,August 2020 A 2(2f) 1 ixf Unit affordability:Jake wegmann&Karen Chapple(2014) Hidden density in single family neighborhoods:Backyard cottages as an equitable smart growth strategy,Journal of Urbanism:International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability,7:3,307-329,DOI: 101080/17549175 2013 879453 See table 3 Opportunity for children:https://opportunityinsights org/neighborhoods/ '-"Phase One Summary Report;Thriving in Place:Salt Lake City's Anti-Displacement Strategy July 2022 a ur:)an cment2;r i.b n,_,dr_ is �e .t't lcl>ott% 52 ERIC VALCHUIS 1587 S 1500 E,Salt Lake City,UT 84105 1 1 on tenant stability and the number of potential ADUs that would be built, section C.4. of the revised ordinance should be removed. Secondly,maximum gross floor areas impede the utility of ADUs.The revised ordinance allows for a detached ADU of up to 720 square feet,with limited exceptions. Given typical apartment layouts,720 square feet can accommodate up to one bedroom. For many homeowners and many properties,this is an appropriate number of bedrooms. For other homeowners and properties,this square footage limitation is unnecessarily burdensome.Many homeowners use their ADU to house their grown children and their families or their aging parents and their caretakers. For these situations, a one-bedroom unit is insufficient. One-bedroom apartments are also not the unit-size most in need in Salt Lake City.3 To allow homeowners to construct apartments with at least two bedrooms,the detached ADU maximum gross floor area (Section K.1.) should be increased from 720 to 1,000 square feet. Salt Lake City is rising to the challenge to meet its housing crisis. Adopting the revised ordinance,with the owner occupancy and maximum square footage provisions removed and revised,respectively,is another bold step that the Commission can take. Best regards, Eric Valchuis 3 Ibid The housing crisis is most severe for families,including married couples with children and single parents with children 53 From: To: Planning Public Comments Subject: (EXTERNAL)ADU Amendment comments for the meeting tonight Date: Wednesday,September 14,2022 10:36:35 AM I support more ADU's and making it easier for residents to build them, I agree with most of the requirements but have some concerns about owner occupancy. I understand the issues with enforcement and also the financing issue but other cities have dealt with those issues in positive and creative ways, like working with financial institutions or subsidizing loans, one even allows a 2 year"break" in the requirement. Owner occupancy could be kept now and then re-addressed in a couple of years to allow time to see how it works. If owner occupancy is not approved then there should be resident occupancy rates (2 for a one bedroom and 3 non-related, 4 related for a 2 bedroom ADU). This needs to be enforced with fines for the landlords if they don't comply. Enforcement of maintenance both inside and outside the dwelling(s) must also be taken more seriously. The decline of properties, including landscaping, and too many residents packed into a rental, is detrimental to the neighborhood and our property values. Owners tend to take care of their properties where landlords and developers/investors are typically only concerned with collecting the rent. My experience is that code enforcement can decide whether or not to enforce code. I know that the cost of hiring enforcement officers may not be in the budget so residents need to step up and report issues in their neighborhood. Education and reminders about how to report issues could be done with regular participation from Code Enforcement in the Community Council meetings (much like we do with Police and Fire). This would allow residents to escalate issues if they don't see action on a problem they reported. I would like to see a requirement that the design of a detached ADU matches or complements the exterior of the existing home and not allow "raw" shipping containers or cheap materials. Again, this is to keep the culture of the neighborhoods intact and to maintain property values for homeowners. Yvonne Martinez 54 SLC NEIGHBORS FOR MORE NEIGHBORS September 14, 2022 Michael McNamee, Principal Planner Salt Lake City Planning Division Dear Michael, It is my pleasure to submit this letter on behalf of SLC Neighbors for More Neighbors. We're a newly formed network of SLC neighbors working for housing that is affordable for all income levels through policies that are pro-housing and pro-tenant. We support the proposed es-�q1- because ADUs are an important part of Salt Lake City's housing future. While they are not a silver bullet that can fully meet all of SLC's housing needs, they are a critical part of establishing neighborhood scale infill housing and affordable units. As a simple and affordable option for many people, these units can provide much needed workforce housing, housing for students, and for aging parents. ADUs are also a way to build wealth and opportunity in SLC's neighborhoods by providing every homeowner with the opportunity to participate in incremental development of their neighborhoods. The changes proposed by SLC will make ADUs easier to build. We support this policy as a necessary first step toward incremental density and increased housing in every neighborhood in SLC. Thank you, Turner Bitton, Executive Director SLC Neighbors for More Neighbors 55 Transmittal Full Packet Final Audit Report 2022-12-09 Created: 2022-12-06 By: Katherine Vuong(katherine.vuong@slcgov.com) Status: Signed Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAvHZvW6NmxKHSxJFB K1Kkr1d1-tc9nlM "PLNPCM2022-00475 - ADU Changes Transmittal Full Packet" History Document created by Katherine Vuong (katherine.vuong@slcgov.com) 2022-12-06-9:44:48 PM GMT Document emailed to Orion Goff(orion.goff@slcgov.com)for signature 2022-12-06-9:45:27 PM GMT Email viewed by Orion Goff(orion.goff@slcgov.com) 2022-12-07-4:13:05 AM GMT Email viewed by Orion Goff(orion.goff@slcgov.com) 2022-12-09-9:38:23 PM GMT Document e-signed by Orion Goff(orion.goff@slcgov.com) Signature Date:2022-12-09-9:38:40 PM GMT-Time Source:server Agreement completed. 2022-12-09-9:38:40 PM GMT t r, Powered by F Adobe Acrobat Sign ERIN MENDENHALL MARY BETH THOMPSON Mayor Chief Financial Officer CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ��54,"," ���2�M,>> Date Received: 02/14/23 Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: 02/14/23 TO: Salt Lake City Council Darin Mano, Chair DATE: February 14, 2023 FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: 11@NM-Council Consent Agenda#5 Items Fiscal Year 2022-23 STAFF CONTACTS: Mary Beth Thompson (801) 535-6403 or John Vuyk, Budget Director (801) 535-6394 DOCUMENTTYPE: Consent Agenda/Establish Grant Projects from Grant Holding Account RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that the City Council consent to the transfer of these grants and donations from the holding account and establish a project budget for them. BUDGET IMPACT: Grant Holding Account ($ 107,000.00) New Grant Project 107,000.00 BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The grant holding account was established to fund grants between budget amendments with the understanding that the grants would be submitted as part of the next budget opening. Items transmitted are placed on a Council Consent agenda and then formally approved during the following budget amendment. On occasion, a similar process is employed for donations to the City. Where necessary, resolutions were previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept these grants and donations. EXHIBITS: Consent Agenda Detail Consent Agenda Summary DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 245 SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114 TEL 801-535-6403 Section G: Council Consent Agenda - Grant Awards G-1: Know Your Neighbor Grant Program, Open Society Foundation- Misc. Grants $61,000.00 Salt Lake County Department:Mayors Office Prepared By: Kaletta Lynch/Ann Garcia The Mayor's Office of Equity&Inclusion received$61,000 in grant funding from Salt Lake County as a pass through from the County's application to the Operation Afghan Resettlement Support(OARS)program.The County was awarded$150,000 and is requesting to partner with Salt Lake City's Know Your Neighbor Program to assist the County in assimilating and welcoming the Afghan Refugees. The funding will be used to hire a new part-time program coordinator and not more than$1,000 for the program coordinator to travel for program related purposes. No match is required. A public hearing will be held for this grant application on lo/18/2022. G-2: Utah State Office of Education, Child and Adult Care Food Misc. Grants $46,000.00 Program-Youth After School Programs Department:CAN Prepared By: Kim Thomas/Ann Garcia 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 was held for the grant application on 10/4/2022. 1 Fiscal Year 2022-23 Consent Agenda#5 Initiative Number/Name Fund Expenditure Amount Revenue Amount Ongoing or One-time FrEs Section G: Council Consent Agenda-Grant Awards r Know Your Neighbor Grant Program,Open Society Foundation-Salt Lake County Misc Grants 61,000.00 One Time o 2 Utah State Office of Education,Child and Adult Care Food Program-Youth After Misc Grants 46,000.0o One Time o School Programs Section I: Council Added Items Total of Budget Amendment Items 0.00 10 7,000.00 0 Signature: Email: alejandro.sanchez@stcgov.com ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL { t Date Received: 2/6/2023 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 2/6/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 2/6/2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Arts Council Board STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Arts Council Board RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Hannah Nielsen as a member of the Arts Council Board. P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor February 6, 2023 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City,Utah 84114 Dear Councilmember Mano, Listed below is my recommendation for membership appointment to the Arts Council Board. Hannah Nielsen be appointed for a three year term, starting from the date of City Council advice and consent. I respectfully ask your consideration and support for this appointment. Respectfully, Erin Mendenhall,Mayor Cc: File P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 �v February 2, 2023 Dear Mayor Mendenhall, The Nominating Committee for the Arts Council Board has identified three strong candidates for the Salt Lake City Arts Council Foundation Board of Directors and Advisory Board to the City. We would like to bring these three candidates forward for your approval and the subsequent approval of the City Council. The candidates' names are Hannah Nielsen (District 6), Matthew Coles and Jeff Driggs (District 7). The candidates' applications and resumes are attached to this letter. Hannah brings with her a career working as both an arts administrator and an artist,presently working as the Create Program Manager for The Leonardo Museum. Matthew exemplifies an individual in Salt Lake City dedicated to community service with a commitment to the artistic and cultural vibrancy of our community. Finally,Jeff is a seasoned professional in the nonprofit fundraising industry and brings with him many experiences related to board and civic engagement. To say that we are elated with the quality and tenure of our recommendations to you would be an understatement. Based on our interviews with the candidates, we believe that they will be active and engaged contributors to the Arts Council Board. We appreciate your consideration in forwarding these Board applications to the City Council, and we will continue to bring strong candidates to your attention as we review them. Thank you, as always, for your ongoing support of the Arts Council. Sincerely, Susan Rickman Board Chair, Salt Lake City Arts Council Foundation Felicia Baca Executive Director,Arts Division/Salt Lake City Arts Council Foundation ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL { t Date Received: 2/21/2023 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 2/21/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 2/21/2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Human Rights Commission STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Human Rights Commission RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Pamela Silberman as a member of the Human Rights Commission. P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor February 21, 2023 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City,Utah 84114 Dear Councilmember Mano, Listed below is my recommendation for membership appointment to the Human Rights Commission. Pamela Silberman to be appointed for a four year term ending on Monday,December 27, 2027, starting from the date of City Council advice and consent. I respectfully ask your consideration and support for this appointment. Respectfully, Erin Mendenhall, Mayor Cc: File P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL { t Date Received: 2/21/2023 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 2/21/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 2/21/2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Human Rights Commission STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Human Rights Commission RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Will Terry as a member of the Human Rights Commission. P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor February 21, 2023 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City,Utah 84114 Dear Councilmember Mano, Listed below is my recommendation for membership appointment to the Human Rights Commission. Will Terry to be appointed for a four year term ending on Monday,December 27, 2027, starting from the date of City Council advice and consent. I respectfully ask your consideration and support for this appointment. Respectfully, Erin Mendenhall, Mayor Cc: File P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY, UT 841 14-5474 TEL 801-535-7704